Docsity
Log inSign up
Docsity
Prepare for your exams
Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity

Earn points to download
Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan

Guidelines and tips
Guidelines and tips
Sell on Docsity
Sell on Docsity
Log inSign up

Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity

Find documents

Prepare for your exams with the study notes shared by other students like you on Docsity

Search Store documents

The best documents sold by students who completed their studies

Search through all study resources
Docsity AINEW

Summarize your documents, ask them questions, convert them into quizzes and concept maps

Explore questions

Clear up your doubts by reading the answers to questions asked by your fellow students

Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan

Share documents
download point icon20 Points

For each uploaded document

Answer questions
download point icon5 Points

For each given answer (max 1 per day)

All the ways to get free points
Get points immediately

Choose a premium plan with all the points you need

Study Opportunities

Choose your next study program

Get in touch with the best universities in the world. Search through thousands of universities and official partners

Community

Ask the community

Ask the community for help and clear up your study doubts

University Rankings

Discover the best universities in your country according to Docsity users

Free resources

Our save-the-student-ebooks!

Download our free guides on studying techniques, anxiety management strategies, and thesis advice from Docsity tutors

From our blog

Exams and Study
Go to the blog

Jurisdiction in Philippine Law: A Comprehensive Overview, Study notes of Law

University of Santo Tomas (UST)Law

A detailed explanation of jurisdiction in philippine law, covering various aspects such as jurisdiction over the parties, issues, res, and remedy. It delves into the concept of subject matter jurisdiction, its sources, and how it is acquired. The document also explores different classifications of jurisdiction, including original, appellate, general, special, exclusive, concurrent, territorial, and extraterritorial jurisdiction. It further examines the inherent powers of courts and the supreme court's authority to adjust jurisdictional amounts. This comprehensive overview is valuable for students and legal professionals seeking a thorough understanding of jurisdiction in the philippine legal system.

Typology: Study notes

2023/2024

Available from 04/05/2025

clsthien
clsthien 🇵🇭

1 document

1 / 18

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
Civpro – General Principles & Jurisdiction of Courts I Remedial Law Review
*use at your own risk
NOTES ON REMEDIAL LAW REVIEW
GENERAL PRINCIPLES
BASIC CONCEPTS
REMEDIAL LAW
That branch of law which provides for the jurisdiction of courts
and the rules concerning pleading, practice, and procedure
before the courts
It prescribes the method of enforcing rights or obtain redress
for their invasions
REMEDIAL LAW VS. SUBSTANTIVE LAW
Remedial Law
Substantive Law
Prescribes the method of
enforcing rights or obtains
redress for their invasion
That part of the law which
creates, defines and
regulates rights, or which
regulates the rights and
duties which give rise to a
cause of action
No vested right may attach
to, nor arise from,
procedural laws
If it operates as a means of
implementing an existing
right then the rule deals
merely with procedure
Creates vested rights
If the rule takes away a
vested right, it is not
procedural. If the rule
creates a right, such as the
right to appeal, it may be
classified as a substantive
matter
Construed to be applicable
to actions pending and
undetermined at the time of
their passage and are
deemed retroactive in that
sense and to that extent
By its very nature and
essence, substantive law
operates prospectively
RETROACTIVE APPLICATION OF PROCEDURAL LAWS
As a general rule, the retroactive application of procedural
laws cannot be considered violative of any personal rights
because no vested right may attach to nor arise therefrom (In
the Matter to Declare in Contempt of Court Hon. Simeon
Datumanong)
APPICABILITY TO PENDING ACTIONS
The 2019 Amendments shall also govern all pending cases
commenced before they took effect on May 1, 2020, except to
the extent that in the opinion of the court, their application
would not be feasible or would work injustice, in which case,
the procedure under which the cases were filed shall govern
(Colmenar v. Colmenar)
The established rule is that the statute in force at the time of
the commencement of the action determines the jurisdiction
of the court (Cang v. Court of Appeals)
RULE-MAKING POWER OF THE SUPREME COURT
SCOPE OF THE RULE-MAKING POWER OF THE SUPREME
COURT
Promulgate rules concerning the protection and enforcement
of constitutional rights, pleading, practice, and procedure in all
courts, the admission to the practice of law, the integrated bar,
and legal assistance to the underprivileged (Art. VIII, Sec. 5,
par. (5), CONSTI)
Limitations on the Rule-Making Power of the SC
1. The rules shall provide a simplified and inexpensive
procedure for the speedy disposition of cases
2. The rules shall be uniform for all courts of the same grade
3. The rules shall not:
a. Diminish;
b. Increase; or
c. Modify substantive rights (Art. VIII, Sec. 5, par. (5),
CONSTI)
SCOPE OF THE JUDICIAL POWER OF THE SUPREME COURT
Includes the duty of the courts of justice to settle actual
controversies involving rights which are legally demandable
and enforceable, and to determine whether or not there has
been grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of
jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the
government (Art. VIII, Sec. 1, CONSTI)
POWER TO DISAPPROVE THE RULES OF PROCEDURE
Rules of procedure of special courts and quasi-judicial bodies
shall remain effective unless disapproved by the SC (Art. VIII,
Sec. 5, par. (5), CONSTI)
WHEN SC MAY SUSPEND ITS OWN RULES
1. Most persuasive and weighty reasons
2. To relieve a litigant from an injustice not commensurate
with his failure to comply with the prescribed procedure
3. The other party will not be unjustly prejudiced thereby
4. A lack of any showing that the review sought is merely
frivolous and dilatory
5. A cause not entirely attributable to the fault or
negligence of the party favored by the suspension of
rules
6. Merits of the case
7. Fraud, accident, mistake, or excusable negligence
without appellant’s fault
8. Existence of special and compelling circumstances
9. Exercise of sound discretion by the judge guided by all
the attendant circumstances
10. Peculiar legal and equitable circumstances to each case
11. Importance of the issues involved
pf3
pf4
pf5
pf8
pf9
pfa
pfd
pfe
pff
pf12

Partial preview of the text

Download Jurisdiction in Philippine Law: A Comprehensive Overview and more Study notes Law in PDF only on Docsity!

*use at your own risk

NOTES ON REMEDIAL LAW REVIEW

GENERAL PRINCIPLES

BASIC CONCEPTS

REMEDIAL LAW

That branch of law which provides for the jurisdiction of courts and the rules concerning pleading, practice, and procedure before the courts It prescribes the method of enforcing rights or obtain redress for their invasions REMEDIAL LAW VS. SUBSTANTIVE LAW Remedial Law Substantive Law Prescribes the method of enforcing rights or obtains redress for their invasion That part of the law which creates, defines and regulates rights, or which regulates the rights and duties which give rise to a cause of action No vested right may attach to, nor arise from, procedural laws If it operates as a means of implementing an existing right then the rule deals merely with procedure Creates vested rights If the rule takes away a vested right, it is not procedural. If the rule creates a right, such as the right to appeal, it may be classified as a substantive matter Construed to be applicable to actions pending and undetermined at the time of their passage and are deemed retroactive in that sense and to that extent By its very nature and essence, substantive law operates prospectively RETROACTIVE APPLICATION OF PROCEDURAL LAWS As a general rule, the retroactive application of procedural laws cannot be considered violative of any personal rights because no vested right may attach to nor arise therefrom ( In the Matter to Declare in Contempt of Court Hon. Simeon Datumanong ) APPICABILITY TO PENDING ACTIONS The 2019 Amendments shall also govern all pending cases commenced before they took effect on May 1, 2020, except to the extent that in the opinion of the court, their application would not be feasible or would work injustice, in which case, the procedure under which the cases were filed shall govern ( Colmenar v. Colmenar ) The established rule is that the statute in force at the time of the commencement of the action determines the jurisdiction of the court ( Cang v. Court of Appeals ) RULE-MAKING POWER OF THE SUPREME COURT SCOPE OF THE RULE-MAKING POWER OF THE SUPREME COURT Promulgate rules concerning the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights, pleading, practice, and procedure in all courts, the admission to the practice of law, the integrated bar, and legal assistance to the underprivileged ( Art. VIII, Sec. 5, par. (5), CONSTI ) Limitations on the Rule-Making Power of the SC

  1. The rules shall provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition of cases
  2. The rules shall be uniform for all courts of the same grade
  3. The rules shall not: a. Diminish; b. Increase; or c. Modify substantive rights ( Art. VIII, Sec. 5, par. (5), CONSTI ) SCOPE OF THE JUDICIAL POWER OF THE SUPREME COURT Includes the duty of the courts of justice to settle actual controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceable, and to determine whether or not there has been grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the government ( Art. VIII, Sec. 1, CONSTI ) POWER TO DISAPPROVE THE RULES OF PROCEDURE Rules of procedure of special courts and quasi-judicial bodies shall remain effective unless disapproved by the SC ( Art. VIII, Sec. 5, par. (5), CONSTI ) WHEN SC MAY SUSPEND ITS OWN RULES
  4. Most persuasive and weighty reasons
  5. To relieve a litigant from an injustice not commensurate with his failure to comply with the prescribed procedure
  6. The other party will not be unjustly prejudiced thereby
  7. A lack of any showing that the review sought is merely frivolous and dilatory
  8. A cause not entirely attributable to the fault or negligence of the party favored by the suspension of rules
  9. Merits of the case
  10. Fraud, accident, mistake, or excusable negligence without appellant’s fault
  11. Existence of special and compelling circumstances
  12. Exercise of sound discretion by the judge guided by all the attendant circumstances
  13. Peculiar legal and equitable circumstances to each case
  14. Importance of the issues involved

*use at your own risk

  1. Good faith of the defaulting party by immediately paying within a reasonable time from the time of the default
  2. In the name of substantial justice and fair play ( Labao v. Flores ) PRINCIPLES AND DOCTRINES DOCTRINE OF HIERARCHY OF COURTS The appropriate forum is the court lowest in the judicial hierarchy Rationale
  3. It would be an imposition upon the precious time of the higher courts
  4. It would cause an inevitable and resultant delay, intended or otherwise, in the adjudication of cases, that some of these cases may have to be remanded or referred to the lower court as the proper forum under the rules of procedure, or because these courts are better equipped to resolve the issues given that this Court is not a trier of facts EXCEPTIONS TO THE DOCTRINE OF HIERARCHY OF COURTS
  5. When petitioners rightly claim that they had no other plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law that could free them from the injurious effects of respondents’ acts in violation of their right to freedom of expression
  6. Cases of first impression
  7. Constitutional issues raised are better decided by the Court
  8. Exigency in certain situations
  9. Filed petition reviews act of constitutional organ
  10. When there are genuine issues of constitutionality that must be addressed at the most immediate time
  11. When the issues involved are of transcendental importance
  12. Petition includes questions that are dictated by public welfare and the advancement of public policy, or demanded by the broader interest of justice, or the orders complained of were found to be patent nullities, or the appeal was considered as clearly an inappropriate remedy ( Gios-Samar, Inc. v. Department of Transportation and Communications ) CONCURRENT JURISDICTION While the Rules provide for concurrent jurisdiction among the RTC, CA, and SC, the same is still subject to the Doctrine of Hierarchy of Courts DOCTRINE OF NON-INTERFERENCE OR JUDICIAL STABILITY No court has the power to interfere by injunction with the judgments or orders of another court of concurrent jurisdiction having the power to grant the relief sought by injunction ( Tan v. Cinco ) It also bars a court from reviewing or interfering with the judgment of a co-equal court over which it has no appellate jurisdiction or power of review Note: where the law provides for an appeal from the decisions of administrative bodies to the SC or to the CA, it means that such bodies are co-equal with the RTC in terms of rank and stature, and logically, beyond the court of the latter. Hence, the trial court cannot interfere with the decision of such administrative bodies ( Erice v. Sison ) Rationale A court that acquires jurisdiction over the case and renders judgment therein has jurisdiction over its judgment, to the exclusion of all other coordinate courts, for its execution and over all its incidents, and to control, in furtherance of justice, the conduct of ministerial officers acting in connection with this judgment DOCTRINE OF ADHERENCE OF JURISDICTION (CONTINUITY OF JURISDICTION) Once the jurisdiction of a court attaches, it continues until the case is finally terminated. The court cannot be ousted therefrom by subsequent happenings or events, although of a character that would have prevented jurisdiction from attaching in the first instance Gen. rule A law enacted during the pendency of a case which transfers jurisdiction to another court does not affect cases prior to its enactment Exceptions 1. When the new law expressly provides for a retroactive application
  13. When the change of jurisdiction is curative in character ( Vda. de Ballesteros v. Rural Bank of Canaman, Inc. ) EXCLUSIONARY PRINCIPLE The body or agency that first takes cognizance of the complaint shall exercise jurisdiction to the exclusion of the others DOCTRINE OF PRIMARY JURISDICITON Precludes the courts from resolving a controversy over which jurisdiction has initially been lodged with an administrative body of special competence Note: the exceptions to this doctrine is the same as that of the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies (see: Commission on Audit v. Ferrer ) EXHAUSTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES If a remedy within the administrative machinery can still be resorted to by giving the administrative officer concerned every opportunity to decide on a matter that comes within his jurisdiction, then such remedy should be exhausted first before the court’s judicial power can be sought

*use at your own risk If the facts are disputed or if the issues require an examination of the evidence Its resolution must not involve an examination of the probative value of the evidence presented by the litigants but must rely solely on what the law provides on the given set of facts ❖ Relevance of distinguishing question of fact and question of law The difference becomes material in appeals. In an appeal under R45, generally, only questions of law should be raised since factual questions are not the proper subject of an appeal by certiorari. Meanwhile, in ordinary appeals under R40/ and petition for review under R42, a litigant may raise mixed questions of law and fact in his/her appeal ❖ Test in determining whether a question is one of law or of fact For a question to be one of law, its resolution must not involve an examination of the probative value of the evidence presented by the litigants but must rely solely on what the law provides on the given set of facts. If the facts are disputed or if the issues require an examination of the evidence, the question posed is one of fact The test, therefore, is not the appellation give to a question by the party raising it, but whether the appellate court can resolve the issue without examining or evaluating the evidence, in which case, it is a question of law; otherwise, it is a question of fact ASPECTS OF JURISDICTION

  1. Jurisdiction over the subject matter
  2. Jurisdiction over the parties
  3. Jurisdiction over the issues
  4. Jurisdiction over the res
  5. Jurisdiction over the remedy JURISDICTION OVER THE SUBJECT MATTER Power to hear and determine cases of the general class to which the proceedings in question belong and is conferred by the sovereign authority which organizes the court and defines its powers ❖ How jurisdiction over the subject matter is conferred It is conferred by the Constitution or by law. The power is a matter of legislative enactment which none, but the legislature may change Jurisdiction over the subject matter CANNOT be conferred by:
  6. Court’s unilateral assumption of jurisdiction
  7. Contract
  8. Compromise
  9. Agreement of the parties
  10. Erroneous belief of the court that it exists
  11. Acquiescence of the court
  12. Silence, waiver, or failure to object
  13. Court issuances ❖ Effect of lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter of the action Any judgment, order or resolution issued without jurisdiction over the subject matter is void and cannot be given any effect. This rule applies even if the issues on jurisdiction was raised for the first time on appeal or even after final judgment ❖ Waiver of jurisdiction over the subject matter Gen. rule Lack of jurisdiction is a serious defect that may be raised anytime, even for the first time on appeal, since it is a defense that is not subject to waiver Exceptions 1. Estoppel by laches ( Tijam v. Sibonghanoy )
  14. Estoppel by deed or estoppel in pais Note: estoppel by laches, to bar a litigant from asserting the court’s absence or lack of jurisdiction, only supervenes in exceptional cases similar to factual milieu of Tijam In Tijam v. Sibonghanoy , lack of jurisdiction was raised for the first time only in a motion for reconsideration filed before the CA, 15 years after the commencement of the action. Prior thereto, the party that belatedly raised the jurisdictional issue had actively participated in the proceedings before the trial and appellate courts, seeking affirmative relief and, thereafter, submitting the case for adjudication on the merits ❖ How jurisdiction over the subject matter is determined The jurisdiction of the court is determined by the allegations in the complaint and the character of the relief sought It is not the title of the pleading but its allegations that must control. Once vested by the allegations in the complaint, jurisdiction also remains vested irrespective of whether or not the plaintiff is entitled to recover upon all or some of the claims asserted therein ( Radio Communications of the Philippines, Inc. v. Court of Appeals ) ❖ Motu proprio dismissal of the case by the court When it appears from the pleadings or the evidence on record that the court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter, the court shall dismiss the same ( R9 S1 ) JURISDICTION OVER THE PARTIES The power of a court to render a personal judgment or to subject the parties in a particular action to the judgment and other rulings rendered in the action

*use at your own risk ❖ How jurisdiction over the parties is acquired Jurisdiction over the plaintiff or petitioner Acquired by the filing of the complaint, petition or initiatory pleading before the court by the plaintiff or petitioner Jurisdiction over the defendant or respondent Acquired by the voluntary appearance or submission by the defendant or respondent to the court or by coercive process issued by the court to him, generally by the service of summons ❖ Jurisdiction over the defendant Gen. rule One who seeks an affirmative relief is deemed to have submitted to the jurisdiction of the court. Seeking an affirmative relief in court, whether in civil or criminal proceedings, constitutes voluntary appearance Exception Defendant does not submit himself to the jurisdiction of the court when he specially appears for the purpose of questioning the court’s jurisdiction over him/her Exception to exception If defendant raises other grounds other than lack of jurisdiction over his person, he shall be deemed to have voluntarily appeared in court and jurisdiction over his person is acquired ( R14 S23 ) Note: if a complaint is filed for and in behalf of the plaintiff [by one] who is not authorized to do so, the complaint is not deemed filed; hence, the court should dismiss the complaint on the ground that it has no jurisdiction over the complaint and the plaintiff ( Palmiano-Salvador v. Angeles ) JURISDICTION OVER ISSUES The power of the court to try and decide the issues raised in the pleadings of the parties Issue A disputed point or question to which parties to an action have narrowed down their several allegations, and upon which they are desirous of obtaining a decision Note: where there is no disputed point, there is no issue and it would be proper for the court to render judgment on the pleadings except in actions for declaration of nullity or annulment of marriage or legal separation ( R34 S1 ) ❖ How jurisdiction over the issues is conferred or determined

  1. By either express or implied consent of the parties;
  2. By stipulations of parties as when in pre-trial, the parties can enter into stipulation of facts and documents or enter into an agreement simplifying the issues of the case ( R18 S2 ); or
  3. By waiver or failure to object to the presentation of evidence on a matter not raised in the pleadings, in which case there is express or implied consent of the parties, and the pleadings are deemed amended and treated in all respects as if the issues had been raised in the pleadings ( R10 S5 ) Note: an issue is generally acquired in civil cases after the defendant files an answer, thereby joining the issues involved in the case JURISDICTION OVER THE RES The power of the court over an object or thing being litigated. The court may acquire jurisdiction over the thing by actually or constructively seizing or placing it under the court’s custody Note: this type of jurisdiction is necessary when the action is an action in rem or quasi in rem ❖ How jurisdiction over the res is acquired
  4. Actual seizing – done by the seizure of the property under legal process, whereby it is brought into actual custody of the law (e.g., attachment)
  5. Constructive seizing – result of the institution of legal proceedings, in which the power of the court is recognized and made effective (e.g., suits involving the status of parties or property of a non-resident defendant) Note: the court acquires jurisdiction to try the case, even if it has not acquired jurisdiction over the person of a nonresident defendant, as long as it has jurisdiction over the res, as when the action involves the personal status of the plaintiff or property in the Philippines in which the defendant claims an interest. In such cases, the service of summons by publication and notice to the defendant is merely to comply with due process requirements ( De Joya v. Marquez ) JURISDICTION OVER THE REMEDY It is the court’s competence over the process Note: this should not be confused with the relief, that which the party filing the case wants the court to declare, and which addresses the breach of the right or obligation ( PLDT Company v. Citi Appliance M.C. Corporation ) Jurisdiction over the remedy vs. Jurisdiction over the subject matter Jurisdiction over the remedy is different from jurisdiction over the subject matter. Jurisdiction over the remedy pertains to the court’s competence over the process Generally, jurisdiction over the remedy is provided by the Rules of Court. Thus, it is mainly a procedural matter which this Court — the authority that promulgates the Rules of Court — may change ad hoc, or clarify the application or interpretation of, in proper cases

*use at your own risk

  1. To enforce order in proceedings before it, or before a person/s empowered to conduct a judicial investigation under its authority
  2. To compel obedience to its judgments, orders and processes, and to the lawful orders of a judge out of court, in a case pending therein
  3. To control, in furtherance of justice, the conduct of its ministerial officers, and of all other persons in any manner connected with a case before it, in every manner appertaining thereto
  4. To compel the attendance of persons to testify in a case pending therein
  5. To administer or cause to be administered oaths in a case pending therein, and in all other cases where it may be necessary in the exercise of its powers
  6. To amend and control its process and orders so as to make them conformable to law and justice
  7. To authorize a copy of a lost or destroyed pleading or other paper to be filed and used instead of the original, and to restore, and supply deficiencies in its records and proceedings ( R135 S5 ) MEANS NECESSARY TO CARRY JURISDICTION INTO EFFECT When by law jurisdiction is conferred on a court or judicial officer, all auxiliary writs, processes and other means necessary to carry it into effect may be employed by such court or officer; and if the procedure to be followed in the exercise of such jurisdiction is not specifically pointed out by law or by these rules, any suitable process or mode of proceeding may be adopted which appears conformable to the spirit of the said law or rules ( R135 S6 ) SC’S AUTHORITY TO ADJUST JURISDICTIONAL AMOUNTS The SC has delegated authority to adjust the jurisdictional amounts of the first and second level courts The SC, unless otherwise provided by law, without prejudice, however, on the part of the Congress to adjust the amounts when the circumstances so warrant, may adjust the jurisdictional amount for first and second level courts to:
  8. Reflect the extraordinary supervening inflation or deflation of currency
  9. Reflect change in the land valuation
  10. Maintain the proportion of caseload between first and second level courts ( RA 11576, Sec. 3 )

*use at your own risk

JURISDICTION OF VARIOUS PHILIPPINE COURTS AND TRIBUNALS

SUPREME COURT

Supreme Court Exclusive Original Petitions for certiorari, prohibition, or mandamus against:

  1. Court of Appeals ( Judiciary Act of 1948, Sec. 17 )
  2. COMELEC ( Art. IX, Sec. 7, CONSTI )
  3. COA ( Art. IX, Sec. 7, CONSTI )
  4. Sandiganbayan ( PD 1606 )
  5. CTA (RA 9282)
  6. Disciplinary proceedings against members of the Bar and court personnel ( Art. VIII, Sec. 6, CONSTI; R56 ) Concurrent With the RTC
  7. Cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers, and consuls ( BP Blg. 129, Sec. 21, par. (2) ; Art. VIII, Sec. 5, par. (1), CONSTI ) With the CA
  8. Petitions for certiorari, prohibition, or mandamus against: a. RTC ( BP Blg. 129, Sec. 21, par. 1 ) b. Civil Service Commission ( RA 7902 ) c. Central Board of Assessment Appeals ( PD 464 ) d. NLRC e. Other quasi-judicial agencies
  9. Petitions for Writ of Kalikasan ( A.M. No. 09- 6 - 8 - SC, R7 S3 ) With the RTC and CA
  10. Petitions for Habeas Corpus ( BP Blg. 129, Sec. 9, par. (1) & Sec. 21, par. (1); Art. VIII, Sec. 5, par. (1), CONSTI )
  11. Petitions for Quo Warranto ( BP Blg. 129, Sec. 9, par. (1) & Sec. 21, par. (1); Art. VIII, Sec. 5, par. (1), CONSTI )
  12. Petitions for certiorari, prohibition, or mandamus against inferior courts and other bodies ( BP Blg. 129, Sec. 9, par. (1) & Sec. 21, par. (1); Art. VIII, Sec. 5, par. (1), CONSTI )
  13. Petitions for continuing mandamus ( A.M. No. 09- 6 - 8 - SC, R8 S1 ) With the RTC, CA and Sandiganbayan
  14. Petitions for Writ of Amparo ( A.M. No. 07- 9 - 12 - SC, Sec. 3 )
  15. Petitions for Writ of Habeas data ( A.M. No. 08- 1 - 16 - SC, Sec. 3 ) Appellate By way of appeal by certiorari under R45, against the:
  16. CA
  17. Sandiganbayan
  18. RTC on pure questions of law
  19. In cases involving the constitutionality or validity of a law or treaty, international agreement or executive agreement, law, presidential decree, proclamation, order, instruction, ordinance or regulation, legality of a tax, impost, assessment, toll or penalty, jurisdiction of a lower court ( Art. VIII, Sec. 5, CONSTI )
  20. CTA EB ( Sec. 19, RA 9282) COURT OF APPEALS Court of Appeals Exclusive Original Actions for annulment of judgments of the RTC ( BP Blg. 129, Sec. 9, par. 2 ) Note: the CA may act as a trial court in the following instances:
  21. In annulment of judgments ( R47 S5 & S6 )
  22. When a motion for new trial is granted by the CA ( R53 S4 )
  23. Petition for habeas corpus shall be set for hearing ( R102 S12 )
  24. To resolve factual issues in cases within its original and appellate jurisdiction ( R124 S12 )
  25. In cases of new trial based on newly discovered evidence ( R124 S14 )
  26. In cases involving claims for damages arising from provisional remedies

*use at your own risk

  1. Chairmen and members of the Constitutional Commissions, without prejudice to the provisions of the Constitution
  2. All other national and local officials classified as Grade 27 and higher under the Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989
  3. Other offenses or felonies whether simple or complexed with other crimes committed by the abovementioned public officials and employees in relation to their office
  4. Civil and criminal cases filed pursuant to and in connection with EO Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A, issued in 1986 Note: the RTC shall have exclusive original jurisdiction where the information: (a) does not allege any damage to the government or any bribery; or (b) alleges damage to the government or bribery arising from the same or closely related transactions or acts in an amount not exceeding P1,000,000.00 ( Sec. 2, RA 10660 ) Concurrent With the SC
  5. Petitions for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus whether or not in aid of its appellate jurisdiction ( AM No. 07 - 7 - 12 - SC )
  6. Petitions for Habeas Corpus, injunction and other ancillary writs in aid of its appellate jurisdiction, including Quo Warranto arising in cases falling under EO Nos. 1, 2, 14, and 14-A With the SC, CA and RTC
  7. Petitions for Writ of Amparo ( A.M. No. 07- 9 - 12 - SC, Sec. 3 )
  8. Petitions for Writ of Habeas data ( A.M. No. 08- 1 - 16 - SC, Sec. 3 ) COURT OF TAX APPEALS Court of Tax Appeals (En Banc) Exclusive Appellate
  9. Decisions or resolutions on MR or MNT of the Court in Divisions in the exercise of its exclusive appellate jurisdiction over: a. Cases arising from administrative agencies (BIR, BOC, DOF, DTI, DA) b. Local tax cases decided by the RTC in its original jurisdiction c. Tax collection cases decided by the RTC in the exercise of its original jurisdiction involving final and executory assessments for taxes, fees, charges and penalties, where the principal amount of taxes and penalties claimed is less than P1,000,000.
  10. Decisions, resolutions, or orders of RTCs in local tax cases resolved in the exercise of their appellate jurisdiction
  11. Decisions, resolutions, or orders of RTCs in tax collection cases decided or resolved by them in the exercise of their appellate jurisdiction
  12. Decisions, resolutions, or orders on MR or MNT of the Court in Division in the exercise of its exclusive original jurisdiction over tax collection cases
  13. Decisions of the CBAA in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction over cases involving the assessment and taxation of real property originally decided by the provincial or city board of assessment appeals ( AM No. 05- 11 - 07, R4 S2 ) Court of Tax Appeals (Court Division) Exclusive Original or Appellate
  14. Decisions of the CIR in cases involving disputed assessments, refunds of internal revenue taxes, fees or other charges, penalties in relation thereto, or other matters arising under the NIRC or other laws administered by the BIR
  15. Inaction by the CIR in cases involving disputed assessments, refunds of internal revenue taxes, fees or other charges, penalties in relation thereto, or other matters arising under the NIRC or other laws administered by the BIR, where the NIRC or other applicable law provides a specific period for action: Provided, that in case of disputed assessments, the inaction of the CIR within the 180 day-period under Sec. 228 of the NIRC shall be deemed a denial for purposes of allowing the taxpayer to appeal his case to the Court and does not necessarily constitute a formal decision of the CIR on the tax case; Provided, further, that should the taxpayer opt to await the final decision of the CIR on the disputed assessments beyond the 180 day-period abovementioned, the taxpayer may appeal such final decision to the Court under Sec. 3(a), Rule 8 of these Rules; and Provided, still further, that in the case of claims for refund of taxes erroneously or illegally collected, the taxpayer must file a petition for review with the Court within 30 days from receipt of denial or lapse of 180-day period under Section under Sec. 229 of the NIRC

*use at your own risk

  1. Decisions, resolutions or orders of RTCs in local tax cases decided or resolved by them in the exercise of their original jurisdiction
  2. Decisions of the Commissioner of Customs in cases involving liability for customs duties, fees or other money charges, seizure, detention or release of property affected, fines, forfeitures of other penalties in relation thereto, or other matters arising under the Customs Law or other laws administered by the Bureau of Customs
  3. Decisions of the Secretary of Finance on customs cases elevated to him automatically for review from decisions of the Commissioner of Customs adverse to the Government under Section 2315 of the Tariff and Customs Code
  4. Decisions of the Secretary of Trade and Industry, in the case of nonagricultural product, commodity or article, and the Secretary of Agriculture, in the case of agricultural product, commodity or article, involving dumping and countervailing duties under Section 301 and 302, respectively, of the Tariff and Customs Code, and safeguard measures under RA 8800, where either party may appeal the decision to impose or not to impose said duties ( A.M. 05- 11 - 07, R4 S2 ) Exclusive 1. Original jurisdiction in tax collection cases involving final and executory assessments for taxes, fees, charges and penalties, where the principal amount of taxes and fees, exclusive of charges and penalties, claimed is P1,000,000.00 or more
  5. Appellate jurisdiction over appeals from the judgments, resolutions, or orders of RTCs in tax collection cases originally decided by them within their respective territorial jurisdiction ( A.M. 05- 11 - 07, R4 S2 ) REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS Regional Trial Court Exclusive Original
  6. In all civil actions in which the subject of the litigation is incapable of pecuniary estimation Note: to determine whether or not its subject matter is incapable of pecuniary estimation, the nature of the principal action or relief sought must be ascertained. If the principal relief is for the recovery of a sum of money or real property, then the action is capable of pecuniary estimation. However, if the principal relief sought is not for the recovery of sum of money or real property, even if a claim over a sum of money or real property results as a consequence of the principal relief, the action is incapable of pecuniary estimation All actions which are incapable of pecuniary estimation are cognizable by the RTC unless otherwise provided by law, such as: a. Annulment of judgments of the RTC, which is cognizable by the CA b. Revival of judgment of the MTC, which falls within the jurisdiction of MTC under summary procedure c. Real actions are incapable of pecuniary estimation since it does not involve recovery of sum of money but by categorical provision of law, the jurisdiction depends on the assessed value of the real property involved
  7. In all civil actions which involve the title to, or possession of, real property, or any interest therein, where the assessed value exceeds P400,000.00 ( BP Blg. 129, Sec. 19, par. (2), as amended ) Note: this does not include forcible entry into and unlawful detainer of lands or buildings, since original jurisdiction over which is exclusively conferred upon the MeTC, MTCC, MTC, and MCTC In determining which court has jurisdiction, it is only the assessed value of the realty involved that should be computed. A failure to allege the assessed value of a real property in the complaint would result to a dismissal of the case. However, the failure to allege the real property’s assessed value in the complaint would not be fatal if, in the documents annexed to the complaint, an allegation of the assessed value could be found ( Foronda- Crystal v. Son )
  8. In all actions in admiralty and maritime jurisdiction where the demand or claim exceeds ( BP Blg. 129, Sec. 19, par. (3), as amended )
  9. In all matters of probate, both estate and intestate, where the gross value of the estate exceeds P2,000,000. ( BP Blg. 129, Sec. 19, par. (4), as amended )
  10. In all actions involving the contract of marriage and marital relations ( BP Blg. 129, Sec. 19, par. (5) )
  11. In all cases not within the exclusive jurisdiction of any court, tribunal, person or body exercising jurisdiction or any court, tribunal, person or body exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions ( BP Blg. 129, Sec. 19, par. (6) )

*use at your own risk causes of action, irrespective of whether the causes of action arose out of the same or different transactions ( BP Blg. 129, Sec. 33, par. (1), as amended ) Note: the gross value, claim, or demand is exclusive of interest, damages of whatever kind, attorney’s fees, litigation expenses, and costs (IDALEC), the amount of which must be specifically alleged; provided, that IDALEC shall be included in the determination of the filing fees ( BP Blg. 129, Sec. 33, par. (1), as amended ) The exclusion of the term “damages of whatever kind” applies to cases where the damages are merely incidental to or a consequence of the main cause of action. However, in cases where the claim for damages is the main cause of action, or one of the causes of action, the amount of such claim shall be considered in determining the jurisdiction of the court ( Administrative Circular 09-94, June 14, 1994 )

  1. In cases of forcible entry and unlawful detainer ( BP Blg. 129, Sec. 33, par. (2) ) Note: if the defendant raises the question of ownership in his pleadings and the question of possession cannot be resolved without deciding the issue of ownership, the issue of ownership shall be provisionally resolved only to determine the issue of possession
  2. In all civil actions which involve title to, or possession of, real property, or any interest therein where the assessed value of the property or any interest therein does not exceed P400,000.00 exclusive on interest, damages of whatever kind, attorney’s fees, litigation expenses and costs: Provided, that in cases of land not declared for taxation purposes, the value of such property shall be determined by the assessed value of the adjacent lots ( BP Blg. 129, Sec. 33, par. (3), as amended )
  3. In admiralty and maritime actions where the demand or claim does not exceed P2,000,000.00 ( BP Blg. 129, Sec. 33, par. (4), as amended )
  4. Inclusion and exclusion of voters ( BP Blg. 881, Sec. 138 ) Special Petition for Habeas Corpus or application for bail in criminal cases in the absence of all RTC judges in the province or city ( BP Blg. 129, Sec. 35 ) Delegated Cadastral and land registration cases assigned by the SC where:
  5. There is no controversy or opposition
  6. In contested lots valued at ore than P100,000 ( BP Blg. 129, Sec. 34, as amended ) FAMILY COURTS Family Courts Exclusive Original
  7. Petitions for guardianship, custody of children, habeas corpus involving children Note: the provisions of RA 8369 reveal no manifest intent to revoke the jurisdiction of the CA and SC to issue writs of habeas corpus relating to the custody of minors. Further, it cannot be said that the provisions of RA 8369, RA 7092 and BP Blg. 129 are absolutely incompatible since RA 8369 does not prohibit the CA and the SC from issuing writs of habeas corpus in cases involving the custody of minors. Thus, the provisions of RA 8369 must be read in harmony with RA 7092 and BP Blg. 129 – that family courts have concurrent jurisdiction with the CA and the SC in petitions for habeas corpus where the custody of minors is at issue
  8. Petitions for adoption of children and the revocation thereof that remain pending before the effectivity of RA 11642 (otherwise known as the Domestic Administrative Adoption and Alternative Child Care Act), which became effective on January 28, 2022, if not withdrawn by the petitioner and refiled instead with the National Authority for Child Care (NACC)
  9. Complaints for annulment, and declaration of nullity of marriage and matters relating to marital status and property relations of husband and wife or those living together under different status or agreement, and petitions for dissolution of conjugal partnership of gains
  10. Petitions for support and/or acknowledgment
  11. Summary judicial proceedings under the FC
  12. Petition for declaration of status of children as abandoned, dependent, or neglected; petitions for voluntary or involuntary commitment of children and matters relating to the suspension, termination, or restoration of

*use at your own risk parental authority and other cases cognizable under PD 603, EO 56 s. of 1996, and other related laws ( RA 8369, Sec. 5, pars. (b) – (g) ) Note: petitions for declarations of the status of children as abandoned and neglected and petitions for voluntary or involuntary commitment of children now fall under the jurisdiction of the NACC. The jurisdiction of the Family Court for said cases pertain to those filed or pending before effectivity of RA 11642 ( RA 11642, Sec. 11 and 13 ) Special Provisional Remedies

  1. In cases of violence among the family members living in the same domicile or household, the Family Court may issue a restraining order against the accused or defendant upon verified application by the complainant or the victim for relief from abuse
  2. The court may order the temporary custody of children in all civil actions for their custody, support pendente lite, including deduction from the salary, and use of conjugal home and other properties in all civil actions for support ( RA 8369, Sec. 7 ) Note: in areas where there are no Family Courts, the above-mentioned cases shall be adjudicated by the RTC ( RA 8369, Sec. 7 )

REVISED KATARUNGANG PAMBARANGAY LAW AND RULES ON EXPEDITED PROCEDURES IN THE FIRST LEVEL COURTS

BARANGAY CONCILIATION (ADMINISTRATIVE CIRCULAR 14-93)

Barangay Conciliation Civil Cases Covered All disputes involving parties who actually reside in the same city or municipality may be the subject of the proceedings for amicable settlement in the barangay, except:

  1. Where one party is the government, or any subdivision or instrumentality thereof
  2. Where one party is a public officer or employee, and the dispute relates to the performance of his official functions
  3. Offenses punishable by imprisonment exceeding 1 year or a fine exceeding P5,000.
  4. Offenses where there is no private offended party
  5. Where the dispute involves real properties located in different cities or municipalities unless the parties thereto agree to submit their differences to amicable settlement by an appropriate Lupon
  6. Disputes involving parties who actually reside in barangays of different cities or municipalities, except where such barangay units adjoin each other and the parties thereto agree to submit their differences to amicable settlement by an appropriate Lupon
  7. Such other classes of disputes which the President may determine in the interest of justice or upon the recommendation of the Secretary of Justice. The court in which non-criminal cases not falling within the authority of the lupon under this Code are filed may, at any time before trial, motu proprio refer the case to the lupon concerned for amicable settlement Note: the court in which a non-criminal case is filed may motu proprio refer the case, at any time before trial, to the Lupon concerned for amicable settlement, the foregoing Rules notwithstanding and even if the case does not fall within the authority of the Lupon ( Sec. 408, LGC ) Criminal Cases Covered Criminal cases punishable by imprisonment of not more than 1 year or fine of not more than P5,000. Note: a party’s failure to comply with this requirement (barangay conciliation) before filing a case in court would render his complaint dismissible on the ground of failure to comply with a condition precedent ( Lansangan v. Caisip ) NOT A JURISDICTIONAL REQUIREMENT Such conciliation process is not a jurisdictional requirement, such that non-compliance therewith cannot affect the jurisdiction which the court has otherwise acquired over the subject matter or over the person of the defendant ( Lansangan v. Caisip )

*use at your own risk complainant of the complaint or the certificate of repudiation or of the certification to file action issued by the Lupon or Pangkat secretary. Note: interruption shall not exceed 60 days from the filing of the complaint ( Sec. 410, par. (c), LGC )

  1. Issuance of summons and hearings – the Pangkat shall convene not later than 3 days from its constitution to hear both parties and their witnesses, simplify issues, and explore all possibilities for amicable settlement. For this purpose, the pangkat may issue summons ( Sec. 410, par. (d), LGC )
  2. Period to arrive at a settlement – the Pangkat shall arrive at a settlement or resolution of the dispute within 15 days from the day it convenes. This period shall be extendible, at the discretion of the pangkat, for another period, which shall not exceed 15 days, except in clearly meritorious cases ( Sec. 410, par. (e), LGC )
  3. Transmittal of settlement and arbitration award to the court – Lupon secretary shall transmit the settlement or award to the court within 5 days from the award or from the lapse of the 10-day period to repudiate and furnish copies to the parties and the lupon chairman ( Sec. 419, LGC ) ARBITRATION, REPUDIATION AND EXECUTION ARBITRATION At any stage of the proceedings, parties may agree in writing that they shall abide by the arbitration award of the Lupon chairman or Pangkat ( Sec. 413, par. (a), LGC ) AWARD Arbitration award shall be made after the lapse of the period of repudiation and within 10 days thereafter ( Sec. 413, par. (a), LGC ) AMICABLE SETTLEMENT Shall be:
  4. In writing
  5. In a language or dialect known to the parties
  6. Signed by them
  7. Attested to by the lupon or pangkat chairman, as the case may be EFFECT AMICABLE SETTLEMENT AND ARBITRATION AWARD Gen. rule The amicable settlement and arbitration award shall have the force and effect of a final judgment of a court upon the expiration of 10 days from the date thereof ( Sec. 416, LGC ) Exceptions 1. Repudiation of the settlement has been made
  8. Petition to nullify the arbitration award has been filed before the proper city or municipal court ( Sec. 416, LGC ) REPUDIATION Repudiation of Amicable Settlement Repudiation of Agreement to Arbitrate Repudiation/Nullification of Arbitral Award Any party to the dispute may, within 10 days from the date of the settlement, repudiate the same by filing with the Lupon chairman a statement to that effect sword to before him, where the consent is vitiated by fraud, violence, or intimidation Note: such repudiation shall be sufficient basis for the issuance of the certification for filing a complaint ( Sec. 418, LGC ) The agreement to arbitrate may be repudiated within 5 days from the date thereof for the same grounds ( Sec. 413, par. (a), LGC ) If the parties have entered into a completely valid agreement to arbitrate, and an arbitration award is rendered by the Lupon chairman or Pangkat, the party aggrieved by the award cannot repudiate the award by serving sworn repudiation with the Lupon chairman or the Pangkat as in the case of the repudiation of an amicable settlement or agreement to arbitrate. Instead, the repudiation or nullification of the arbitration award shall be addressed to the proper city or municipal court through a petition to nullify the arbitration award filed within 10 days from the date thereof EXECUTION Enforcement by the Lupon The amicable settlement or arbitration award may be enforced by execution within 6 months from date of settlement agreement ( Sec. 417, LGC ) or of the date of the receipt of

*use at your own risk the award, or the date when the obligation therein becomes due and demandable, whichever is later Execution by the court After the lapse of 6 months, the settlement may be enforced by action in the appropriate city or municipal court ( Sec. 417, LGC ) Rescission Rescission under Art. 2041, CC in the case of amicable settlements, and insist on the original demand/claim IMPORTANT RULES AND PRINCIPLES TO REMEMBER

  1. Barangay conciliation is mandatory but not jurisdictional
  2. Lawyers are precluded from appearing or participating in the proceedings unless they are the parties themselves
  3. Minors and incompetents may be assisted by their next-of-kin who are not lawyers ( Sec. 415, LGC )
  4. A compromise agreement has the effect and authority of res judicata even if not judicially approved, and cannot be lightly set aside or disturbed except for vices of consent and forgery ( Chavez v. Court of Appeals )
  5. The residence of the attorney-in-fact of a real party in interest is irrelevant in so far as the “actual residence” requirement under the LGC for prior barangay conciliation is concerned ( Abagatnan v. Clarito ) RULE ON SMALL CLAIMS CASES (AS AMENDED BY AM NO. 08- 8 - 7 - SC) Small Claims Cases Civil Cases Covered Cases for the payment of money where the value of the claim does not exceed P1,000,000.00, exclusive of interest and costs, and in which the claims are purely civil in nature where the claim or relief raised by the plaintiff is solely for the payment or reimbursement of sum of money The claim or demand may be:
  6. For money owed under any of the following: a. Contract of lease b. Contract of loan and other credit accommodations c. Contract of services d. Contract of sale of personal property, excluding the recovery of the personal property, unless it is made the subject of a compromise agreement between the parties
  7. The enforcement of barangay amicable settlement agreements and arbitration awards, where the money claim does not exceed P1,000,000.00, provided that no execution has been enforced by the barangay within 6 months from the date of the settlement or date of receipt of the award or from the date the obligation stipulated or adjudged in the arbitration award becomes due and demandable, pursuant to Sec. 417 of the LGC ( REPFLC, Rule I, Sec. 1(A)(2) ) Note: a “small claim” is an action that is purely civil in nature where the claim or relief raised by the plaintiff is solely for the payment or reimbursement of a sum of money. It excludes actions seeking other claims or reliefs aside from payment or reimbursement of a sum of money and those coupled with provisional remedies RULE ON SUMMARY PROCEDURE (AS AMENDED BY AM NO. 08- 8 - 7 - SC) Summary Procedure Civil Cases Covered
  8. Forcible entry and unlawful detainer cases, regardless of the amount of damages or unpaid rentals sought to be recovered. Where attorney’s fees are awarded, the same shall not exceed P100,000.
  9. All civil actions, except probate proceedings, admiralty and maritime actions, and small claims cases falling under Rule IV hereof, where the total amount of the plaintiff’s claim does not exceed P2,000,000.00, exclusive of interest, damages of whatever kind, attorney’s fees, litigation expenses and costs
  10. Complaints for damages where the claim does not exceed P2,000,000.00, exclusive of interest and costs
  11. Cases for enforcement of barangay amicable settlement agreements and arbitration awards where the money claim exceeds P1,000,000.00, provided that no execution has been enforced by the barangay within 6 months from the date of the settlement or date of receipt of the award or from the date the obligation stipulated or adjudged in the arbitration award becomes due and demandable, pursuant to Sec. 417, of the LGC
  12. Cases solely for the revival of judgment of any MeTC, MTCC, MCTC, pursuant to R39 S