Philippine Legal System: Judicial Power: Judicial Power Is The Authority To Settle Justiciable Controversies

Thursday, 20 July 2017
Philippine Legal System

A. Courts
• Judicial power: Judicial power is the authority to settle justiciable controversies

or disputes involving rights that are enforceable and demandable before the
courts of justice or the redress of wrongs for violations of such rights.
- judicial power under our political system, and the entirety or “all” of said
power, except, only, so much a s the Constitution confers upon some other
agency, such as the power to “judge all contests relating to the election,
returns and qualifications” of members of the Senate and those of the House
of Representatives
• Separation and Blending of Power

The Electoral Commission, being the sole judge of all contests relating to the
election, returns and qualifications of members of the National Assembly, is an
independent constitutional creation with specific powers and functions to execute
and perform, closer for purposes of classification to the legislative
• Hierarchy of Courts
Procedural - In the present case, petitioners are not candidates seeking for public
office. (Diocese) | Transcendental Importance so excusable
Supreme Court
Firestone: SC divisions and appeal to Court En Banc
En Banc Cases
1. International shiz in question (re: constitutionality)
2. Cases involving ambassadors, public ministers, consuls
3. Cases involving ROD (resolutions, orders, decisions) of Constitutional

Commissions (Comelec, COA, Civil Service Commission)
4. Cases involving anyone in the judiciary (suspension > 1 year or fine > P10,000)
1
5. Death Penalty
6. Novel questions of law
7. Cases where en banc doctrines are to be modified or reversed
8. Cases where at least 3 members says it needs to be ruled on en banc
9. En Banc decides themselves they should take it
Rule-Making Power
Fabian vs Desierto
Sec 30 Article VI of the 1987 Constitution provides that "(n)o law shall be passed
increasing the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court as provided in this
Constitution without its advice and consent,"
Ratio: not placing a limit would unnecessarily burden the Court
Section 27 of Republic Act No. 6770 (unconstitutional)
cannot validly authorize an appeal to this Court from decisions of the Office of the
Ombudsman in administrative disciplinary cases
Rule 45 (Revised Rules of Civil Procedure)
The very provision cited by the petitioner does not include quasi-judicial agencies such
as the OMB  Go to the CA instead
Under the present Rule 45, appeals may be brought through a petition for review on
certiorari but only from judgments and final orders of the courts.
Secretary of National Defense vs Manalo
Section 5 (5) of Article 8 provides for the rule-making power of the SC
Promulgate rules concerning the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights.
Writ of Amparo serves both preventive and curative roles in addressing the problem of
extralegal killings and enforced disappearances.
Third Level Courts
1. Court of Appeals
Carpio Morales vs CA
2
motion for reconsideration must first be filed with the lower court prior to resorting
to the extraordinary remedy of certiorari or prohibition since a motion for
reconsideration may still be considered as a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in
the ordinary course of law
Exceptions to the Certiorari Rule
Generally: prior motion for recon needed
Exception: when and where the issue raised is one purely of law or where public
interest is involved
Sec 14 RA 6770 (Ombudsman Act)  Quasi-Judicial Agency
“No court shall hear any appeal or application for remedy against the decision or
findings of the Ombudsman, except the Supreme Court, on pure question of law.”
^ Similar with Sec 27 increasing the jurisdiction of the SC
Sec 45 of the 1997 Rules of Procedure (Certiorari)
applies only to a review of "judgments or final orders of the Court of Appeals, the
Sandiganbayan, the Court of Tax Appeals, the Regional Trial Court, or other courts
authorized by law;" and not of quasi-judicial agencies
CA's certiorari jurisdiction is not only original but also concurrent with the Regional
Trial Courts (Sec 9 BP 129) and the SC (under Consti)  BP 129 = The Judiciary
Reorganization Act of 1980
Thus: follow the hierarchy of courts
2. Court of Tax Appeals
RA 9282  RA 9503 (effective July 2008)
• Same level as CA
• 1 presiding justice and 8 associate justices
• En Banc + 3 divisions of 3 each
• Jurisdiction over these cases:
o NIRC and Tariff & Customs Code
o RTC decisions involving Tax Cases
3
o Central Board of Assessment Appeal Decisions
o Taxes and Custom Collection assessments that became final
3. Sandiganbayan
Art 11 Sec 4
The present anti-graft court known as the Sandiganbayan shall continue to function
and exercise its jurisdiction as now or hereafter may be provided by law.
RA 8249
All officials classified as Grade 27 or higher or:
Governor – Mayor – Consul – AFP (colonel / captain) – PNP (provincial director /

Senior superintendent) – Prosecutors – Pres/ Directors of GOCCs or State Univs –
Members of Consti Commissions
Other offenses or felonies whether simple or complexed with other crimes

committed in relation to their office by the public officials and employees mentioned
above
Sandiganbayan has concurrent jurisdiction with the SC in:
Petitions for issuance of Writ of mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, habeas corpus,

injunction and other ancillary writs and processes in aid of its appellate jurisdiction;
Provided, jurisdiction is not exclusive of the Supreme Court
Includes: Priv Person in conspiracy with Pub Officials
Sandiganbayan has appellate jurisdiction:
RTC cases involving public officers below Salary grade 27
Duncano vs Sandiganbayan: No jurisdiction for Salary grade 26 and below
Regional Director of the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) with Salary Grade 26
4. Regional Trial Court
BP Blg 129
Sec 18: The Supreme Court shall define the territory over which a branch of the
Regional Trial Court shall exercise its authority + Metropolitan Trial Courts,
Municipal Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts over the said branch may
exercise appellate jurisdiction.
4
Exclusive original jurisdiction:
[civil actions]
• Incapable of pecuniary estimation
• Titles of Real Property > P20,000 or P50,000 (in Manila)
[Metropolitan / Municipal Trial Courts Original jurisdiction]
• Forcible entry
• Unlawful detainer of lands (eviction from lands)
[Maritime stuff > P100,000 or P200,000 in Manila]
[Testamentary Stuff where estate’s gross value is P100,000 or P200,000]
[All cases where demand is > P100,000 or P200,000]
[Marriage]
[Juvenile or Agricultural Relations]
[All other cases wherein no one else has exclusive jurisdiction over]
Appellate Jurisdiction: Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts, and

Municipal Circuit Trial Courts in their respective territorial jurisdictions
• Only appealable to CA: when the petition shows prima facie that the lower
court has committed an error of fact or law
Special Jurisdiction (CUJA)
exclusively criminal cases, juvenile and domestic relations cases, agrarian cases,
urban land reform cases which do not fall under the jurisdiction of quasi-judicial
bodies and agencies, and/or such other special cases as the Supreme Court may
determine in the interest of a speedy and efficient administration of justice
5. First Level Courts (MTC, MeTC, MCTC, MTC in Cities)
RA 7691
Exclusive Original Jurisdiction
5
• violations of city or municipal ordinances
• imprisonment not exceeding six (6) years irrespective of the amount of fine
• Forcible entry
• Unlawful detainer of lands (eviction from lands)
• Titles of Real Property < or = to P20,000 or P50,000 (in Manila)
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
Echegaray vs Sec of Justice
By finality of judgment, the court loses its jurisdiction to amend the decision but
retains its power to execute and enforce it.
On reprieve and TRO parallelism done by respondents: Sec 19 Article 7 of Consti
o The provision, however, cannot be interpreted as denying the power of

courts to control the enforcement of their decisions after their finality.
o For the public respondents therefore to contend that only the Executive can
protect the right to life of an accused after his final conviction is to violate the
principle of co-equal and coordinate powers of the three branches of our
government
Why SC issued a TRO
• The present Congress (11th Congress) is different from the Congress that
enacted the Death Penalty Law (R.A. No. 7659) and the Lethal Injection Law
(R.A. No. 8177).
• There was hardly a time to verify petitioner's allegations as his execution

was set at 3 p.m.
• And verification from Congress was impossible as Congress was not in

session. Given these constraints, the Court's majority did not rush to
judgment but took an extremely cautious stance by temporarily restraining
the execution of petitioner.
Basis of Decisions: Oil and Natural Gas Commission vs CA & Pacific Cement
Company, Inc.
6
Minor Issue
According to the maxim noscitur a sociis, where a particular word or phrase is

ambiguous in itself or is equally susceptible of various meanings, its correct
construction may be made clear and specific by considering the company of the
words in which it is found or with which it is associated, or stated differently, its
obscurity or doubt may be reviewed by reference to associated words.
Relevant Issue
Section 14 Article 8: No decision shall be rendered by any court without expressing

therein clearly and distinctly the facts and the law on which it is based. No petition for
review or motion for reconsideration of a decision of the court shall be refused due
course or denied without stating the legal basis therefor.
The constitutional mandate that no decision shall be rendered by any court without
expressing therein dearly and distinctly the facts and the law on which it is based
does not preclude the validity of "memorandum decisions" which adopt by
reference the findings of fact and conclusions of law contained in the decisions of
inferior tribunals.
If the procedure in the foreign court mandates that an Order of the Court becomes
final and executory upon failure to pay the necessary docket fees, then the courts in
this jurisdiction cannot invalidate the order of the foreign court simply because our
rules provide otherwise.
6. The Judicial Bar Council
Section 15, Article VII (Executive Department) of the Constitution prohibits the
President or Acting President from making appointments within two months
immediately before the next presidential elections and up to the end of his term.
Practice of the JBC in filling up vacancies:
“automatically considers” for the position of Chief Justice the five most senior of the
Associate Justices of the Court
Section 4(1) Article VIII
any vacancy in the Supreme Court must be filled within 90 days from its occurrence
7
• The Supreme Court shall be composed of a Chief Justice and fourteen
Associate Justices. It may sit en banc or in its discretion, in division of three,
five, or seven Members.
Reconciliation between Sec 15 and Sec 4: had the framers intended the
prohibition to apply to Supreme Court appointments, they could have easily
expressly stated so in the Constitution, which explains why the prohibition found in
Article VII (Executive Department) was not written in Article VIII (Judicial
Department)
In this case
January 18, 2010 – the JBC voted to fill in the vacancy
May 17, 2010 – when the vacancy would actually happen
B. Judicial Review
1. Constitutional vs Unconstitutional
Marbury vs Madison [unconstitutional law]
• As with most aspects of the U.S. Constitution, the meaning of Article III was
left open to interpretation.
• In 1789, shortly after the Constitution was ratified, Congress passed the
Judiciary Act of 1789, which established the federal court system. Congress
created a Supreme Court, three circuit courts, and 13 district courts. There
was one district court for each of the 13 states.
• The Constitution did not specify the number of justices that could be
appointed to the Supreme Court.
• Through the Judiciary Act, though, Congress provided for a Chief Justice and
five Associate Justices. However, the Constitution and Congress left the scope
of the Court's power undefined.
• These powers would gradually be defined through the Court's interpretation

of the Constitution in particular cases
Decision: the Judiciary Act of 1789 was unconstitutional. In Marshall's opinion,

Congress could not give the Supreme Court the power to issue an order granting
Marbury his commission. Only the Constitution could, and the document said
nothing about the Supreme Court having the power to issue such an order.
8
• The Judiciary Act of 1789 clearly gives the Supreme Court judicial review
over writs of mandamus. However, Article III of the Constitution does not
give the Supreme Court authority to review the writs
Power of Judicial Review
Chief Justice Marshall's ruling interpreted the Constitution to mean that the
Supreme Court had the power of judicial review. That is, the Court had the right to
review acts of Congress and, by extension, actions of the President. If the Court
found that a law was unconstitutional, it could overrule the law. Marshall argued
that the Constitution is the “supreme law of the land” and that the Supreme Court
has the final say over the meaning of the Constitution. He wrote, “lt is emphatically
the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is.”
Francisco vs. Nagmamalasakit na mga Manananggol ng mga Manggagawang

Pilipino, Inc
Some Procedural Aspects
Section 5 of Article XI of the Constitution that "no impeachment proceedings shall

be initiated against the same official more than once within a period of one year."
The power of judicial review extends to those arising from impeachment

proceedings.
Article XI, section 3 states that:
(1) The House of Representatives shall have the exclusive power to initiate all cases
of impeachment
(2) A citizen can file provided he has the recommendation of a HoR member. This
will be included in the order of business within 10 session days. A committee will
look into it and submit a resolution to the House within 60 sessions days from the
referral. The House will decide on it within 10 session days from the day it receives
the resolution.
On Judicial Review
Sec 1 Article 8
There is no constitutional basis for the contention that the exercise of judicial
review over impeachment proceedings would upset the system of checks and
balances.
9
when the judiciary mediates to allocate constitutional boundaries, it does not
assert any superiority over the other departments.
Section 1, Article VIII was not intended to do away with "truly political questions."
two species of political questions:
(1) "truly political questions"
• Truly political questions are beyond judicial review, the reason for
respect of the doctrine of separation of powers to be maintained.
(2) those which "are not truly political questions."
• Can be reviewed by the courts
• judicial power is not only a power; it is also a duty, a duty which cannot
be abdicated by the mere specter of this creature called the political
question doctrine.
Note: the possibility of the occurrence of a constitutional crisis is not a reason

for this Court to refrain from upholding the Constitution in all impeachment cases
2. Political Question
Tanada vs Cuenco
• Political Question
It refers to those questions which, under the Constitution, are to be decided

by the people in their sovereign capacity; or in regard to which full
discretionary authority has been delegated to the legislative or executive
branch of the government.
It is concerned with issues dependent upon the wisdom, not legality, of a

particular measure
• Note: SET is a separate and independent body from the Senate which does
not perform legislative acts
o BUT remember: under the Constitution, "the legislative power" is

vested exclusively in the Congress of the Philippines. Yet, this does not
detract from the power of the courts to pass upon the
constitutionality of acts of Congress.
Judicial self-limitation (in re: power of judicial review)
10
The courts are called upon to say, on the one hand, by whom certain powers shall be
exercised, and on the other hand, to determine whether the powers possessed have
been validly exercised. In performing the latter function, they do not encroach upon
the powers of a coordinate branch of the, government, since the determination of
the validity of an act is not the same, thing as the performance of the act.
3. Effect of Unconstitutionality
Film Development Council vs Colon Heritage Realty
The Supreme Court held that RA 9167 has separability clause which section 23.
With this clause, even if sections 13 and 14 would be invalidated, the other
remaining provisions of the law can still stand.
Note: Power of Taxation is purely legislative in nature and it cannot be delegated to

the exec or judiciary
• Through the delegation of legislative powers: gives rise to authority of

provinces, cities, and municipalities to create their own sources of revenue
and to levy taxes  must be conferred through law
4. Grave Abuse of Discretion
Ocampo vs Enriquez (Marcos Case)
There is grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction when

an act is:
a. Done contrary to the Constitution, law, or jurisprudence
b. Executed whimsically, capriciously, or arbitrarily, out of malice, ill will or

personal bias
Court held: none of these are present in this case since Pres. Duterte acted within the
bounds of law and jurisprudence.
GMA vs People (GR 220598)
Normally: The special civil action for certiorari is generally not proper to assail the
denial of her demurrer to evidence, which is an interlocutory order, because of the
availability of another remedy in the ordinary course of law.
BUT: petitioners could avail themselves of the remedy of certiorari when the denial
was tainted with grave abuse of discretion
11
The Court has the bounden constitutional duty to strike down grave abuse of
discretion whenever and wherever it is committed.
• The Sandiganbayan as the trial court was guilty of grave abuse of discretion
when it capriciously denied the demurrers to evidence despite the absence of
competent and sufficient evidence to sustain the indictment for plunder, and
despite the absence of the factual bases to expect a guilty verdict.
C. Judges and their Conduct
1. Qualifications
Article 8 Sec 7
[Member of SC or Collegiate Court]
• natural-born citizen
• at least 40 y/o
• 15 years or more judge of a lower court or engaged in practice of law in the

Philippines
[Judges of lower courts]
• Congress can prescribe qualifs
• Minimum standard: citizen and member of the Bar
• Must be a person of proven competence, integrity, probity (strong moral

principles; honesty and decency), and independence.
Judicial Bar Council 009, Rule 2: Qualifications for Appointments
[+ SC, CA, Court of Tax Appeals]
• At least 40 y/o
• Judge of lower courts or has been engaged in the practice of law in the
Philippines
[+ Sandiganbayan]
• At least 40 y/o
12
• At least 10 years a judge of a court of record /engaged in prac of law / held office
that pre-requires one to be a member of the bar
[+ Ombudsman + their deputies]
• At least 40 y/o
• At least 10 years a judge of a court /engaged in prac of law/ must not have been
a candidate for any elective office in the immediately preceding election
[+ RTC]
• At least 35 y/o
• At least 10 years engaged in prac of law / held public office that pre-requires
one to be a member of the bar
[Sharia Courts]
• RTC qualif
• Learned in Islamic law and jurisprudence
[Sharia Circuit Court]
• At least 25 y/o
• Passed the Shari’a examination given by the SC for one’s admission to Shari’a
Courts
[+ First Level Court]
• At least 35 y/o
• At least 5 years engaged in prac of law
Kilosbayan vs Exec. Secretary
Gregory Ong was naturalized. Hence, he is not a natural born Filipino citizen.
Role and Standards of being a Judge
[Independence] = Democracy
In Re: Macasaet
• Independence of the Judiciary must be protected
13
o First, the criticism will prevent judges from remaining insulated from the
personal and political consequences of making an unpopular decision, thus
placing judicial independence at risk.
o Second, unjust criticism of the judiciary will erode the public’s trust and
confidence in the judiciary as an institution.
• Freedom of Speech is not absolute and must work in consonance with Democracy
such as Judicial Independence
• The Independence of the Judiciary is integral to the public’s faith in the justice
system
[Integrity] = Public Confidence
Office of the Court Admin vs Judge Floro
A judge should avoid being queer in his behavior, appearance and movements. He must
always keep in mind that he is the visible representative of the law.
Canon 2.01 of the Code of Judicial Conduct states: "A judge should so behave at all times as
to promote public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary."
• judge whose duty is to apply the law and dispense justice "should not only be
impartial, independent and honest but should be believed and perceived to be
impartial, independent and honest" as well
[Impartiality] = Due Process
People vs Court of Appeals
This Court has repeatedly and consistently demanded "the cold neutrality of an impartial
judge" as the indispensable imperative of due process.
• A judge must not only be impartial but must also appear to be impartial as an added
assurance to the parties that his decision will be just.
[Propriety]
Definition: the state or quality of conforming to conventionally accepted standards of

behavior or morals.
Canon 4 Code of Judicial Conduct states that "propriety and the appearance of propriety
are essential to the performance of all the activities of a judge."
14
• SECTION 1. Judges shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all
of their activities.
• SEC. 2. As a subject of constant public scrutiny, judges must accept personal

restrictions that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen and should
do so freely and willingly
[Competence & Diligence]
Ocampo case: judicial officers cannot be held liable for erroneous decisions when rendered
in good faith.
AM no. CA 09-47-J
• An administrative complaint is not the proper remedy when there are other judicial
remedies available, unless the challenged Decision is tainted with fraud or malice
• The principle of judicial immunity protects judges from being held criminally,
civilly or administratively liable for an erroneous decision rendered in good faith.
Liabilities of a Judge
[Civil Liability]
RA 386: Civil Code of the Philippines
Article 27. Any person suffering material or moral loss because a public servant or
employee refuses or neglects, without just cause, to perform his official duty
Article 32. Any public officer or employee, or any private individual, who directly or
indirectly obstructs, defeats, violates or in any manner impedes or impairs any of
the following rights and liberties
[Damages]
Article 2197. Damages may be: LET-MAN
(1) Actual or compensatory: compensation for the pecuniary loss; Unrealized

profits are included
(2) Moral: physical suffering, mental anguish, fright, serious anxiety, besmirched
reputation, wounded feelings, moral shock, social humiliation, and similar injury;
recoverable if they are the proximate result of the defendant’s wrongful act
15
(3) Nominal: not for indemnification per se but to merely to stress the vindication
of his right
(4) Temperate or moderate: more than nominal but less than actual damages –
when the amount of pecuniary loss cannot be proven with certainty
(5) Liquidated: damages agreed upon by the parties
(6) Exemplary or corrective: given in addition to those above (except Nominal) for
the purpose of setting an example for the public good – used as a deterrent
[Criminal Liability]
Act No. 3815: RPC
• Art. 204: judge knowingly rendering an unjust judgment
• Art. 205: Judgment rendered through negligence
• Art. 206: Unjust interlocutory order
Santiago III vs Enriquez, Jr.
That Cases cited to support a Decision are not applicable, and the appreciation of evidence
and facts is erroneous, do not necessarily warrant the filing of an administrative complaint
against a judge.
An administrative complaint is not an appropriate remedy where judicial recourse is still

available unless the assailed order or decision is tainted with fraud, malice, or dishonest.
The failure to interpret the law or to properly appreciate the evidence presented does not
necessarily render a judge administratively liable.
Further, that the filing of charges against a single member of a division of the appellate
court is inappropriate. The Decision was not rendered by respondent in his individual
capacity.
Judicial Immunity
• insulates judges, and even Justices of superior courts, from being held to account
criminally, civilly or administratively for an erroneous decision rendered in good
faith
• purpose being to preserve the integrity and independence of the judiciary
16
Anti-Graft & Corrupt Practices Act (RA 3019)
"Public officer": includes elective and appointive officials and employees, permanent or
temporary, whether in the classified or unclassified or exempt service receiving
compensation, even nominal, from the government as defined in the preceding
subparagraph.
"Receiving any gift": includes the act of accepting directly or indirectly a gift from a
person other than a member of the public officer's immediate family, in behalf of himself or
of any member of his family or relative within the fourth civil degree, either by
consanguinity or affinity, even on the occasion of a family celebration or national festivity
like Christmas, if the value of the gift is under the circumstances manifestly excessive.
"Person" includes natural and juridical persons, unless the context indicates otherwise.
Family relation shall include the spouse or relatives by consanguinity or affinity in the
third civil degree.
"close personal relation" shall include close personal friendship, social and fraternal
connections, and professional employment all giving rise to intimacy which assures free
access to such public officer.
• Note: family and close personal relations can’t get gifts by reason of their closeness
to the public officers as well
a. Persuading, inducing or influencing another public officer to perform an act

constituting a violation
b. Requesting or receiving a gift regarding any contract or transaction between

the Government and any other part, wherein the public officer in his official
capacity must intervene under the law.
c. Requesting or receiving a gift regarding any Government permit or license, in

consideration for the help given or to be given
d. Accepting or having any member of his family accept employment in a

private enterprise which has pending official business with him during the
pendency thereof or within one year after its termination.
e. Causing any undue injury to any party, including the Government, or giving
any private party any unwarranted benefits, advantage or preference in the
discharge of his official administrative or judicial functions through manifest
partiality, evident bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence.
17
f. Neglecting or refusing, after due demand or request, without sufficient
justification, to act within a reasonable time on any matter pending before
him to get gifts
g. Entering, on behalf of the Government, into any contract or transaction

manifestly and grossly disadvantageous to the same, whether or not the
public officer profited or will profit thereby.
h. financing or pecuniary interest in any business, contract or transaction in

connection with which he intervenes or takes part in his official capacity
i. Directly or indirectly becoming interested, for personal gain, or having a

material interest in any transaction or act requiring the approval of a board,
panel or group of which he is a member (that exercises discretion)
j. Knowingly approving or granting any license, permit, privilege or benefit in

favor of any person not qualified
k. Divulging valuable information of a confidential character
Note: the person giving the gifts will also be punishable under this Act
[member of Congress]
It shall be unlawful hereafter for any Member of the Congress during the term for which he
has been elected, to acquire or receive any personal pecuniary interest in any specific
business enterprise which will be directly and particularly favored or benefited by any law
or resolution authored by him previously approved or adopted by the Congress during the
same term.
Court: Until otherwise provided by law, all prosecutions under this Act shall be within the
original jurisdiction of the proper Court of First Instance.
RA 1379: Unexplained Wealth
• public official has been found to have acquired during his incumbency, whether in
his name or in the name of other persons, an amount of property and/or money
manifestly out of proportion to his salary and to his other lawful income, that fact
shall be a ground for dismissal or removal.
• Properties of Spouse or Children can be looked into if it its lawful acquisition cannot
be duly proven
• Bank deposits can be looked into despite the Bank Secrecy Law
18
[Administrative]
A.M. NO. 01-8-10-SC: Discipline of Judges
Proceedings Motu proprio SC or verified complaint with

the affidavits of the person with personal
(Private & Confidential | Record: Office of
knowledge of the facts alleged therein
the Court Admin.)
Complaint in writing and shall state clearly and

concisely the acts and omissions
constituting violations of standards of
conduct prescribed for Judges by law, the
Rules of Court, or the Code of Judicial
Conduct
Investigation Office of the Court Administrator
(for 90 days from commencement) • Retired member of the SC:

respondent is judge from CA or
Sandiganbayan
• CA Justice: judge of RTC or special

court of = rank
• RTC Judge: judge of an inferior court
Ex Parte Hearing Happens when respondent fails to appear

despite due notice
Serious Less Serious Light Charges
Anti-Graft Undue Delay in rendering Unbecoming Conduct

decision or transmission of
Bribery Gambling in public
records of a case
Gross Misconduct violating Fraternizing with other
Frequent Absences
Code of Judicial Conduct lawyers with cases in his
Unauthorized practice of court
Gross Ignorance of the Law
law
or Procedure Undue delay in monthly
False Statements in reports
Moral Turpitude
Certificate of Service
Immorality
19
Partisan Political Activities Violation of SC rules
Alcoholism/ Vicious Habits Additional compensation

unless allowed by law
Willful failure to pay a debt
Simple Misconduct
Borrowing form litigants
with case pending in his
court
Unjust Judgment
Penalties
Dismissal Suspension: 1 mo. - 3mos. Fine: P1k – P10k
DQ from reinstatement Fine: >P10k - 20k Censure
Suspension: > 3mos – 6mos. Reprimand
Fine: >P20k– 40k Warning
[Discipline of the Members of the Bench]
ART XI (accountability of public officers), SEC. 3 PAR. 8
(8) The Congress shall promulgate its rules on impeachment to effectively carry out the
purpose of this section.
ART VIII, SEC. 11
• Hold office until 75 y/o or become incapacitated
• Majority vote of SC en banc who took part in the delibs to dismiss a lower court
judge
62
OCA vs Judge Eliza Yu
http://lawyerly.ph/juris/view/cf5aa
http://attylaserna.blogspot.com/2017/01/sc-fires-judge-eliza-b-yu-of-pasay-city.html
• The administrative complaints against Yu stemmed from her refusal to comply with
the Supreme Court’s administrative order in 2011, which established “night courts”
20
to expedite the handling of criminal cases of foreign tourists arrested at nightttime
in Pasay and Makati cities.
• Yu was also found guilty of sending “inappropriate messages with sexual

undertones” to a fellow judge through Facebook and email when she was still a state
prosecutor.
• she was held responsible for unlawfully issuing show-cause orders on her
colleagues which, the court said, “revealed her utter disrespect towards and disdain
for them,” and for displaying “oppressive acts” on her subordinates.
Motion for Reconsideration
• In her motion, the respondent repeatedly denies committing all the

administrative offenses for which she was held guilty, and insists on the absence
of proof to support the findings against her.
• Ruling of Court: As the per curiam decision of November 22, 2016 indicated,
her explanations vis-a-vis the complaints often backfired against her, and all the
more incriminated her by systematically exposing her personal and professional
ineptitude and stilted logic. In short, the evidence against her was too compelling
to ignore, and sufficed to warrant the supreme action of her removal from the
Judiciary
She was more than aware that the quantum of evidence required in
administrative proceedings like these was substantial evidence, or that amount
of relevant evidence that a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support
a conclusion
According to Civil Service Commission v. Maala good faith as a defense in

administrative investigations:
Although this is something internal, we can ascertain a person's intention by

relying not on his own protestations of good faith, which is self-serving, but on
evidence of his conduct and outward acts
Judge Yu exhibited an unbecoming arrogance in committing insubordination and

gross misconduct. By her refusal to adhere to and abide by A.O. No. 19-2011, she
deliberately disregarded her duty to serve as the embodiment of the law at all
times. She thus held herself above the law by refusing to be bound by the
issuance of the Court as the duly constituted authority on court procedures and
the supervision of the lower courts
21
Ground for Disbarment: Under Section 27, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court, an attorney
may be disbarred on the ground of gross misconduct and willful disobedience of any
lawful order of a superior court.
CANON 1 A LAWYER SHALL UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION, OBEY THE LAWS OF THE
LAND AND PROMOTE RESPECT FOR LAW AND FOR LEGAL PROCESSES.
Rule 1.02 A lawyer shall not counsel or abet activities aimed at defiance of the law or at
lessening confidence in the legal system.
CANON 6 THESE CANONS SHALL APPLY TO LAWYERS IN GOVERNMENT SERVICE IN

THE DISCHARGE OF THEIR OFFICIAL TASKS.
Rule 6.02 A lawyer in the government service shall not use his public position to
promote or advance his private interests, nor allow the latter to interfere with his
public duties.
CANON 11 A LAWYER SHALL OBSERVE AND MAINTAIN THE RESPECT DUE TO THE
COURTS AND TO JUDICIAL OFFICERS AND SHOULD INSIST ON SIMILAR CONDUCT BY
OTHERS.
Rule 11.03 A lawyer shall abstain from scandalous, offensive or menacing language or
behavior before the Courts.
Purpose of Disbarment
Disbarment is intended to protect the administration of justice by ensuring that those

taking part in it as attorneys should be competent, honorable and reliable to enable the
courts and the clients they serve to rightly repose their confidence in them.
In re: Del Castillo Case
A judge writing to resolve a dispute, whether trial or appellate, is exempted from a

charge of plagiarism even if ideas, words or phrases from a law review article, novel
22
thoughts published in a legal periodical or language from a party’s brief are used
without giving attribution
Reasons: the judge is not writing a literary work and, more importantly, the purpose of
the writing is to resolve a dispute
Atty. Melvin Mane vs Judge Medel
A judge must address the merits of the case and not on the person of the counsel
By passing the bar, a lawyer is presumed to be competent to discharge his functions and
duties as, inter alia, an officer of the court, irrespective of where he obtained his law
degree
Lawyers and their Conduct
Nature & Scope of the Legal Profession
Cayetano vs Monsod
Qualifications to be Comelec Chair:
• Natural-born
• 35 y/o
• College degree holder
• Must not have been a candidate of any elective position in the immediately
preceding elections
• Must have been engaged in the practice of law for at least 10 years
Practice of law means any activity, in or out of court, which requires the application of
law, legal procedure, knowledge, training and experience
• Modern concept of law practice, and taking into consideration the liberal
construction intended by the framers of the Constitution
• It embraces all advice to clients and all actions taken for them in matters
connected with the law.
Ulep vs Legal Clinic
The standards of the legal profession condemn the lawyer’s advertisement of his talents. A
lawyer cannot, without violating the ethics of his profession, advertise his talents or skills
as in a manner similar to a merchant advertising his goods
23
• How to advertise then: earned well-merited reputation for professional capacity and
fidelity to trust
• Exceptions:
Publication in a reputable law list
Calling Cards
Listing name in a directory but not under a designation of a special branch of law
Admission to the Practice of Law
In Re: Cunanan
Grade requirement - general average of 75% in all subjects without a falling below 50% in
any subject
Unconstitutional law: It is an encroachment on the Court’s primary prerogative to

determine who may be admitted to practice of law and, therefore, in excess of legislative
power to repeal, alter and supplement the Rules of Court
Nature of the Lawyer’s Oath
1. A lawyer's relationship with others should be characterized by the highest

degree of good faith, fairness, and candor. This is the essence of the lawyer's
oath.
2. I, do solemnly swear that I will maintain allegiance to the Republic of the

Philippines,
3. I will support the Constitution and obey the laws as well as the legal orders of
the duly constituted authorities therein;
4. I will do no falsehood, nor consent to the doing of any in court;
5. I will not wittingly or willingly promote or sue any groundless, false or unlawful
suit, or give aid nor consent to the same;
6. I will delay no man for money or malice, and will conduct myself as a lawyer
according to the best of my knowledge and discretion, with all good fidelity as
well to the courts as to my clients;
7. and I impose upon myself these voluntary obligations without any mental
reservation or purpose of evasion. So help me God.
24
Qualifications
Cojuangco, jr. vs. Atty. Palma
• A gross immoral conduct, the Court said, is a conduct which is willful, flagrant, or
shameless, and which shows a moral indifference to the opinion of the good and
respectable members of the community
• clear case of betrayal of trust and abuse of confidence.
• There is no distinction as to whether the transgression is committed in the lawyer’s

professional capacity or in his private life.
• Rule 1.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility, is that they ”shall not
engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct.
• CANON 1 – A lawyer shall uphold the Constitution, obey the laws of the land and
promote respect for law and legal processes
The Lawyer and Society
Castaneda vs Ago
Atty. Luison has allowed himself to become an instigator of controversy and predator of a
conflict instead of a mediator for concord and a conciliation for compromise, a virtuoso of
technicality in the conduct of litigation instead of a true exponent of the primacy of truth
and moral justice.
If the lawyer finds his client’s case is defenseless, then it is his duty to advise the latter to
acquiesce and submit
The court said that it is the duty of the lawyer to guide his client’s responsibly and his duty
is first and foremost to the cause of justice and not to his client.
The Lawyer and the Legal Profession
In Re: Edillon
The court held that the IBP is a state-organized Bar as distinguished from bar associations
that are organized by individual lawyers themselves, where membership is voluntary.
25
• entering into the IBP is voluntary and therefore Edillon cannot complain against its
by-laws
Such compulsion is justified as an exercise of the police power of the State. The right to
practice law before the courts of this country should be and is a matter subject to
regulation and inquiry.
• according to Section 10 of the IBP by-laws if a member of the IBP does not pay his
dues for 1 year, he will be disbarred
the Court has jurisdiction over matters of admission, suspension, disbarment, and
reinstatement of lawyers and their regulation as part of its inherent judicial functions and
responsibilities thus the court may compel all members of the Integrated Bar to pay their
annual dues.
The Lawyer and the Courts
Canons 10, 11, and 13 and Rules 1.02 and 11.05 of the Code of Professional Responsibility
• Rule 1.02 – A lawyer shall not counsel or abet activities aimed at defiance of the law
or at lessening confidence in the legal system
• Canon 10 – A lawyer owes candor, fairness and good faith to the court
• Canon 11 – A lawyer shall observe and maintain the respect due to the courts and
to judicial officers and should insist on similar conduct by others.
• Rule 11.05 – A lawyer shall submit grievances against a Judge to the proper
authorities only.
• Canon 13 – A lawyer shall rely upon the merits of his cause and refrain from any
impropriety which tends to influence, or gives the appearance of influencing the
court.
in the case of Re: Kelly that any publication, pending a suit, reflecting upon the court, or
tending to influence the decision of controversy is contempt of the court and is punishable.
• The unjust criticism threatens the independence of the judiciary
• All the Court demands is the same respect and courtesy that one lawyer owes to
another under established ethical standards.
While the right to criticize the judiciary is critical to maintaining a free and democratic
society, there is also a general consensus that healthy criticism can only go so far.
26
The Lawyer and the Client
1. Atty. – Client Relationship
Burbe vs Magulta
If a person, in respect to business affairs or troubles of any kind, consults a lawyer

with a view to obtaining professional advice or assistance, and the attorney
voluntarily permits or acquiesces with the consultation, then the professional
employment is established.
a lawyer-client relationship exists notwithstanding the close personal relationship

between the lawyer and the complainant or the non-payment of the former’s fee.
As a lawyer, there is a responsibility to uphold towards justice that goes beyond the
need for payment
• Lawyering is not a business; it is a profession in which duty to public service,

not money
2. Conflict of Interest
Pacana vs Pascual-Lopez
Rule 15.03 – A lawyer shall not represent conflicting interests except by written
consent of all concerned given after full disclosure of the facts.
The determination of fidelity to the practice is not limited by the presence of written
agreements
Test: “whether or not in behalf of one client, it is the lawyer’s duty to fight for an
issue of claim, but it is his duty to oppose it for the other client.”
Penalty: disbarment
3. Atty. – Client Privilege
Regala vs Sandiganbayan
they are mandated as lawyers to uphold the at all times the confidentiality of the
information obtained from lawyer-client relationship.
27
General Rule:
• The court has the right to know that the client of the lawyer is alive
• Privilege exists only once an atty. – client relationship has been established
• Privilege pertains to the subject matter of the relationship
• Due Process allows the opposing party to know who the complainant adverse
party is
Exceptions:
• When revealing would implicate his client
• When revealing would lead to civil liabilities of his client
• When there is no case without the client’s name – revealing would convict an
individual
The prosecution’s case should be built upon evidence gathered from their own
sources and not from compelled testimony
Under section 24(b) of Rule 130 of the Rules of court, an attorney cannot, without
the consent of his client, be examined as to any communication made by the client to
him or his advice given thereon in the course of, or with a view to, professional
employment, can an attorney’s secretary, stenographer, or clerk be examined,
without the consent of the client and his employer, concerning any fact the
knowledge of which has been acquired in such capacity.
Further, sec. 20 of Rule 138 of the Rules of court provides that: it is the duty of an
attorney:
(e) to maintain inviolate the confidence, and at every peril to himself, to preserve
the secrets of his client, and to accept no compensation in connection with his
client’s business except from him or with his knowledge and approval.
Canon 17 of the Code of Professional Responsibility
• A lawyer owes fidelity to the cause of his client and he shall be mindful of the
trust and confidence reposed in him
Canon 15 of the Canons of Professional Ethics
• The lawyer owes "entire devotion to the interest of the client, warm zeal in
the maintenance and defense of his rights and the exertion of his utmost
28
learning and ability," to the end that nothing be taken or be withheld from
him, save by the rules of law, legally applied.
• No fear of judicial disfavor or public popularity should restrain him from the
full discharge of his duty. In the judicial forum, the client is entitled to the
benefit of any and every remedy and defense that is authorized by the law of
the land, and he may expect his lawyer to assert every such remedy or
defense.
• But it is steadfastly to be borne in mind that the great trust of the lawyer is to
be performed within and not without the bounds of the law. The office of
attorney does not permit, much less does it demand of him for any client,
violation of law or any manner of fraud or chicanery. He must obey his own
conscience and not that of his client.
4. Atty’s fees
Roxas v. de Zuzuarregui
a contract is the law between the parties.
Rule 20.01. of the Code of Professional Responsibility—A lawyer shall be guided

by the following factors in determining his fees:
(a) The time spent and the extent of the services rendered or required;
(b) The novelty and difficulty of the question involved;
(c) The importance of the subject matter;
(d) The skill demanded;
(e) The probability of losing other employment as a result of acceptance of the

proffered case;
(f) The customary charges for similar services and the schedule of fees of the
IBP chapter to which he belongs;
(g) The amount involved in the controversy and the benefits resulting to the
client from the service;
(h) The contingency or certainty of compensation;
(i) The character of the employment, whether occasional or established; and
(j) The professional standing of the lawyer
29
Contingent fees are not per se prohibited by law
Canon 13 of the Canons of Professional Ethics
Contingent Fees. - A contract for contingent fee, where sanctioned by law, should
be reasonable under all the circumstances of the case including the risk and
uncertainty of the compensation, but should always be subject to the supervision of
a court, as to its reasonableness.
CANON 20 - A LAWYER SHALL CHARGE ONLY FAIR AND REASONABLE FEES
Section 24, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court partly states:
SEC. 24. Compensation of attorneys; agreement as to fees. - An attorney shall be

entitled to have and recover from his client no more than a reasonable
compensation for his services, with a view to the importance of the subject matter of
the controversy, the extent of the services rendered, and the professional standing
of the attorney.
x x x. A written contract for services shall control the amount to be paid therefore
unless found by the court to be unconscionable or unreasonable
• This is a matter falling within the regulatory prerogative of the courts.
Executive & Legislative

D. Executive
Who Comprises the Executive
EO 292: Admin Code of 1987
• Executive Power  President
• VP: same qualifs as Pres can be appointed as a Member of the Cabinet
• Vacancy  Death, permanent disability, removal, resignation
o If both are vacant  Congress will choose between the Speaker of the
House or Senate President until a new one is elected
o If only VP is vacant  Pres. will choose
• Inhibitions  Pres. VP Members of Cabinet (+ deputies & assistants) shall

not hold any other office or employment during their tenure
30
o Pres  Relatives by consanguinity or affinity within the 4th civil
degree can’t be appointed as members of:
▪ Constitutional Commissions
▪ Office of the Ombudsman
▪ Secretaries
▪ Undersecretaries / Chairmen / Heads of government offices or

GOCCs
Scope of Executive Power
Marcos vs Manglapus
1. Express/ Implied Residual Power - Residual powers, according to Theodore

Roosevelt, dictate that the President can do anything which is not forbidden in the
Constitution
• residual unstated powers of the President which are implicit in and

correlative to the paramount duty residing in that office to safeguard and
protect general welfare
• The powers of the President are not limited to those that are enumerated in
the article on the Executive Department
• Among the duties of the President under the Constitution, in compliance with
her oath of office, is to protect and promote the interest and welfare of the
people (Article II Section 4-5)
• The President has residual & discretionary powers not stated in the
Constitution which include the power to protect the general welfare of the
people.
2. Executive’s Calling Out Power | Power to Declare Martial Law | Power to

Suspend the Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus
Lagman vs Medialdea
https://jlp-law.com/blog/supreme-court-decision-on-martial-law-in-mindanao-
lagman-vs-medialdea-g-r-nos-231658-g-r-no-231771-g-r-no-231774-full-text/
31
On the scope of Martial Law: the determination of the territorial scope of martial
law could only be drawn from arbitrary, not fixed, variables. Rebellion and public
safety have no fixed physical dimensions.
Moreover, the President's duty to maintain peace and public safety is not limited
only to the place where there is actual rebellion; it extends to other areas where the
present hostilities are in danger of spilling over
Why there is a wider range of Martial Law
It is not intended merely to prevent the escape of lawless elements from Marawi
City, but also to avoid enemy reinforcements and to cut their supply lines coming
from different parts of Mindanao. Thus, limiting the proclamation and/or
suspension to the place where there is actual rebellion would not only defeat the
purpose of declaring martial law, it will make the exercise thereof ineffective and
useless.
Steps Taken to Adhere to the Requirements of Law (Section 18, Article VII of
the Constitution)
After the submission of the Report and the briefings, the Senate issued a resolution
expressing full support to the martial law proclamation
Citizen Complaints: lack of factual basis for declaration
• Under the third paragraph of Section 18, Article VII, a petition filed pursuant
therewith will follow a different rule on standing as any citizen may file it
• limits the issue to the sufficiency of the factual basis of the exercise by the
Chief Executive of his emergency powers.
• “in an appropriate proceeding: could be denominated as a complaint, a

petition, or a matter to be resolved by the Court.”
Review Power
the Court's review power is passive; it is only initiated by the filing of a petition "in
an appropriate proceeding" by a citizen.
On the other hand, Congress' review mechanism is automatic in the sense that it
may be activated by Congress itself at any time after the proclamation or suspension
was made.
32
any act committed under the said orders in violation of the Constitution and the
laws, such as criminal acts or human rights violations, should be resolved in a
separate proceeding
• here is a risk that if the Court wades into these areas, it would be deemed a
trespassing into the sphere that is reserved exclusively for Congress in the
exercise of its power to revoke
Determination of Factual Basis
In determining the sufficiency of the factual basis of the declaration and/or the
suspension, the Court should look into the full complement or totality of the factual
basis.
To require precision in the President's appreciation of facts would unduly burden

him and therefore impede the process of his decision-making.
Decision must be based only on facts or information known by or available to the

President at the time he made the declaration or suspension which facts or
information are found in the proclamation as well as the written Report submitted
by him to Congress
• Those that happened after: must not form part of the determination of the
sufficiency of the factual basis of the President
• The SC is not allowed to “undertake an independent investigation beyond the

pleadings.”
• BUT Congress may take into consideration not only data available prior to,
but likewise events supervening the declaration
The power of judicial review does not extend to calibrating the President's decision
given a set of facts or conditions
Factual Basis Used
the President noted that the acts of violence perpetrated by the ASG and the Maute
Group were directed not only against government forces or establishment but
likewise against civilians and their properties
In addition and in relation to the armed hostilities, bomb threats were issued, road
blockades and checkpoints were set up, schools and churches were burned, civilian
hostages were taken and killed, non-Muslim or Christians were targeted, young
male Muslims were forced to join their group, medical services and delivery of basic
33
services were hampered, reinforcement of government troops and civilian
movement were hindered, and the security of the entire Mindanao Islands was
compromised
Marawi lies in the heart of Mindanao. In fact, the Kilometer Zero marker in
Mindanao is found in Marawi City thereby making Marawi City the point of
reference of all roads in Mindanao. Thus, there is reasonable basis to believe that
Marawi is only the staging point of the rebellion.
• "[l]awless armed groups have historically used provinces adjoining Marawi

City as escape routes, supply lines, and backdoor passages;"
• The report that prior to May 23, 2017, Abdullah Maute had already
dispatched some of his men to various places in Mindanao
On Declaring Martial Law
the recommendation of, or consultation with, the Secretary of National Defense, or

other high-ranking military officials, is not a condition for the President to declare
martial law.
• it would be contrary to common sense if the decision of the President is

made dependent on the recommendation of his mere alter ego.
Requirements in the Constitution  actual invasion or rebellion and that public

safety requires it
• Without the concurrence of the two conditions, the President's declaration of

martial law and/or suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus
must be struck down.
• what the President needs to satisfy is only the standard of probable cause for
a valid declaration
The discretion to determine the territorial scope of martial law lies with the
President. The Constitution grants him the prerogative whether to put the entire
Philippines or any part thereof under martial law.
• There is no constitutional edict that martial law should be confined only in

the particular place where the armed public uprising actually transpired.
Differentiating the 3 Powers
• Calling-out Power:
34
Among the three extraordinary powers, the calling out power is the most
benign and involves ordinary police action.
In fact, "the actual use to which the President puts the armed forces is xx x
not subject to judicial review.
may exercise the power to call out the Armed Forces independently of the
other two powers
• Declaration of Martial Law & Suspending the Privilege of the Writ of HC
Constitution imposed the following limits in the exercise of these powers:
o a time limit of sixty days
o review and possible revocation by Congress or the SC
The declaration of martial law serves as a warning to citizens that the

Executive Department has called upon the military to assist in the
maintenance of law and order, and while the emergency remains, the citizens
must, under pain of arrest and punishment, not act in a manner that will
render it more difficult to restore order and enforce the law.
o A state of martial law is peculiar because the President, at such a time,

exercises police power, which is normally a function of the Legislature
What precisely does martial law add to the power of the President to call on
the armed forces?
Not
o does not suspend the operation of the Constitution, nor supplant the
functioning of the civil courts or legislative assemblies – so doesn’t
suspend the separation of powers
o guarantees under the Bill of Rights remain in place during its

pendency
o During martial law, the President may have the powers of a

commanding general in a theatre of war. In actual war when there is
fighting in an area, the President as the commanding general has the
authority to issue orders which have the effect of law but strictly in a
theater of war, not in the situation we had during the period of martial
law.
35
o Theater of war: not brought about by a declaration of the
Commander-in-Chief.
Does
o arrests and seizures without judicial warrants;
o ban on public assemblies;
o [takeover] of news media and agencies and press censorship; and
o issuance of Presidential Decrees
• On imminent danger
The framers of the 1987 Constitution eliminated insurrection, and the phrase
"imminent danger thereof' as grounds for the suspension of the privilege of
the writ of habeas corpus or declaration of martial law.
The perceived the phrase "imminent danger" to be "fraught with possibilities

of abuse;" besides, the calling out power of the President "is sufficient for
handling imminent danger.
President as Commander-in-Chief & Graduation of Powers
Most to least benign: graduation refers only to hierarchy based on scope and effect.
a. calling out power
b. the power to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus
c. the power to declare martial law
The power to choose, initially, which among these extraordinary powers to wield in a
given set of conditions is a judgment call on the part of the President.
It is thus beyond doubt that the power of judicial review does not extend to calibrating
the President's decision pertaining to which extraordinary power to avail given a set of
facts or conditions.
Effect of Nullifying Proclamation No. 216
Under the “operative fact doctrine”, the unconstitutional statute is recognized as an

“operative fact” before it is declared unconstitutional.
36
• This may have consequences which cannot always be erased by a new
judicial declaration
Ruling: Verily, the Court upholds the validity of the declaration of martial law and
suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus in the entire Mindanao region.
Executive Privilege
US vs Nixon
Executive privilege is the power of the President to withhold certain types of information
the courts, the Congress, and ultimately the public. This is presumptively privileged but is
subject to rebuttal.
Absent a claim of need to protect military, diplomatic, or sensitive national security secrets,
this is hard to invoke.
Subpoena: command the person to whom it is directed to produce the books, papers,
documents or other objects designated therein. The court on motion made promptly may
quash or modify the subpoena if compliance would be unreasonable or oppressive.
The Court granted that there was a limited executive privilege in areas of military or
diplomatic affairs, but gave preference to "the fundamental demands of due process of law
in the fair administration of justice."
• executive privilege is not absolute and must be balanced against the right of
the accused in criminal proceedings
• legitimate need of the judicial process outweighs the Presidential privilege.
Neri vs Senate
Article II, Sec. 28. Subject to reasonable conditions prescribed by law, the State adopts and
implements a policy of full public disclosure of all its transactions involving public interest.
Executive Privilege
expectation of a President to the confidentiality of his conversations and correspondences,

like the claim of confidentiality of judicial deliberations.
The privilege is fundamental to the operation of government and inextricably rooted in the
separation of powers under the Constitution.
Right to Information
37
right to information does not extend to matters recognized as ‘privileged information’
under the separation of powers
quintessential and non-delegable presidential power
• “Quintessential” is defined as the most perfect embodiment of something, the

concentrated essence of substance.
• “Non-delegable” means that a power or duty cannot be delegated to another or,

even if delegated, the responsibility remains with the obligor.
Operational Proximity
Only communications at that level are close enough to the President to be revelatory of his
deliberations or to pose a risk to the candor of his advisers
Immunity of the President from Suit
Soliven vs. Makasiar
rationale for the privilege is to assure the exercise of Presidential duties and functions free
from any hindrance or distraction considering that being the chief executive is a full-time
job that demands undivided attention.
the privilege of immunity from suit may be invoked only by the President, not by any other
person in the President’s behalf. there is nothing in our laws that would prevent the
President from waiving the privilege.
David vs Arroyo
the President, during his tenure of office or actual incumbency, may not be sued in any civil
or criminal case.
it is important that he be freed from any form of harassment, hindrance or distraction to

enable him to fully attend to the performance of his official duties and functions.
Because the President = The Executive Branch (unlike the Legislative or the Judiciary)
38
Accountability of the President: he may only be removed from office through
impeachment
Impeachment of the President
Estrada vs Desierto (March 2001)
The Court denied this petition because he was considered to have resigned from office due
to the totality of his acts (totality test) + Congress already recognized Arroyo as President
Scope of Immunity of a non-sitting President
It will be anomalous to hold that immunity is an inoculation from liability for unlawful acts
and omissions.
unlawful acts of public officials are not acts of the State and the officer who acts illegally is
not acting as such but stands in the same footing as any other trespasser.
If at the time he resigns or retires, a public official is facing administrative or criminal

investigation or prosecution, such resignation or retirement will not cause the dismissal of
the criminal or administrative proceedings against him
Impeachment Proceeding as an Admin Investigation (constitutes a bar to Pres.

resignation)
But even assuming arguendo that it is an administrative proceeding, it cannot be

considered pending at the time petitioner resigned because the process already broke
down when a majority of the senator-judges voted against the opening of the second
envelope and walked out.
There was, in effect, no impeachment case pending against petitioner when he resigned.
Estrada vs Desierto (April 2001): MR
Term vs Tenure
• Term  the time during which the officer may claim to hold the office as of right,
and fixes the interval after which the several incumbents shall succeed one another
• Tenure  represents the term during which the incumbent actually holds office
(can be shorter than term)
39
• The immunity of the president from suit is concurrent only with his tenure and not
his term.
section 11, Article VII of the Constitution, the Congress has sole authority to determine
the question of whether or not there was incapacity on part of the President.
• it was a purely political question, a decision that the Court’s cannot review without
violating the separation of powers
There is nothing in section 11 of Article VII of the Constitution which states that the
declaration by Congress of the Presidents inability must always be a priori or before the
Vice-President assumes the presidency.
Legislature
Who comprises the legislature
Art. 6 Sec. 1: The legislative power shall be vested in the Congress of the Philippines which
shall consist of a Senate and a House of Representatives, except to the extent reserved to
the people by the provision on initiative and referendum.
Concept of Legislative Power and Principle of Undue Delegation of Legislative Power
1. Law-making vs Rule-making of Executive / Law execution
The power to legislate is limited to the Legislature
The discretion as to the execution of the law (rulemaking power) may be exercised
by the Executive
• Due delegation  when the statue making the delegation is complete by

itself
• This is to ensure that the power being passed by the legislative department is
just for law-execution.
• The Fisheries Law authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture and Natural

Resources to promulgate regulations
Eastern Shipping Lines vs POEA
Test for Non-delegation of Legislative Power
• the completeness test  the law must be complete in all its terms and
conditions (the only thing left is enforcement)
40
• the sufficient standard test  adequate guidelines or limitations in the law
to place boundaries for the delegated authority
Power of Subordinate Legislation
Because of the proliferation of specialized activities and their attendant peculiar problems,
the national legislature has found it more and more necessary to entrust to administrative
agencies the authority to issue rules to carry out the general provisions of the statute.
Undude Delegation of Legislative Power
Belgica vs Ochoa
Pork barrel refers to an appropriation of government spending meant for localized

projects and secured solely to bring money to a representative’s district.
The principle of separation of powers refers to the constitutional demarcation of the three
fundamental powers of government.
• Legislative branch of government, through Congress, belongs the power to make

laws
• Executive branch of government, through the President, belongs the power to

enforce laws;
• Judicial branch of government: belongs the power to interpret laws.
The enforcement of the national budget, as primarily contained in the GAA, is indisputably
a function both constitutionally assigned and properly entrusted to the Executive branch of
government.
• from the moment the law becomes effective, any provision of law that empowers
Congress or any of its members to play any role in the implementation or
enforcement of the law violates the principle of separation of powers and is thus
unconstitutional
Art 6 Section 29 (1): the power to appropriate must be exercised only through legislation
"No money shall be paid out of the Treasury except in pursuance of an appropriation made
by law”
Power of Appropriation
power of appropriation involves:
• the setting apart by law of a certain sum from the public revenue for
41
• a specified purpose.
Essentially, under the 2013 PDAF Article, individual legislators are given a personal lump-
sum fund from which they are able to dictate (a) how much from such fund would go to (b)
a specific project or beneficiary that they themselves also determine.
• insofar as it confers post-enactment identification authority to individual legislators,

violates the principle of non-delegability since said legislators are effectively
allowed to individually exercise the power of appropriation
Sources of Philippine Law

A. Municipal Law vs International law
Statcon
Laws include:
• statues enacted by the legislature
• presidential decrees and executive orders issued by the President in the exercise of
his legislative power
Executive Issuances: Martial law & Revolutionary Period
o Presidential Decrees
o Executive Orders
• other presidential issuances in the exercise of his ordinance power
o Presidential Issuances  executive orders, administrative orders,

proclamations, memorandum orders, memorandum circulars, and general or
special orders.
o Exec order  execution of laws
o Admin order  governmental operations
o Proclamations  fixing a date or declaring a statute or condition of public

moment or interest
o Memorandum Order  particular office of Gov’t
o Memorandum Circulars  internal admin where Pres wants to bring

attention to a specific dept.
42
o General/ Specific Orders  Commander-in-Chief Orders
• Rules and regulations promulgated by administrative or executive officers pursuant

to a delegated power are considered laws – also Sanggu rules and regulations of
LGUs
• rulings of the Supreme Court construing the law
• General vs Special Law
o applies to the whole state and operates throughout the state alike upon all
the people or all of a class
o ne which relates to particular persons or things of a class or to a particular

community, individual or thing
• Local Law
o one whose operation is confined to a specific place or locality
Statute
• It is an act of the legislature as an organized body
• Different Congress(es): Philippine Commission – Phil. Legislature – Batasang

Pambansa – Congress
• Public vs Private Statute
o affects the public at large or the whole community
o applies only to a specific person or subject
• Permanent vs Temporary Statute
o one whose operation is not limited in duration but continues until repealed
o statute whose duration is for a limited period of time fixed in the statute
itself or whose life ceases upon the happening of an event
Acts
• Public: Phil. Commision & Phil legislature (1901-1935)
• Commonwealth: duh (1936-1946)
• Republic: Congress (1946-1972 then 1987)
43
Batas Pambansa
Legislative Power: ARM
• Power to make, alter and repeal laws
• Plenary power  legislative power is plenary for all purposes of civil

government, subject only to such limitations as are found in the Constitution.
• Bill  Law: Constitutionally provided but Congress has their own detailed
procedure in the Rules of both Houses
• Bill: proposed legislative measure
These shall originate exclusively in the House of Representatives (LIP ART)
o bills of local application
o bills increasing public debt
o private bills
o Appropriation
Can’t include substantive provisions
o revenue
o tariff bills
When may a bill passed by Congress becomes a law?
(1) When the President signs it;
(2) When the President does not sign nor communicate his veto of the bill within thirty
days after his receipt thereof;
(3) When the vetoed bill is repassed by Congress by two-thirds vote of all its Members,
each House voting separately.
Journal: recording per House
• Enrolled Bill > Journal
Authenticated Bill = Enrolled Bill: signing by the Speaker and the Senate President of
the printed copy of the approved bill
44
• Conclusive  enrolled bill carries on its face a solemn assurance by the legislative
and executive departments of the government, charged respectively with the duty of
enacting and executing laws, that it was passed by the assembly.
• Withdrawal of authentication  serious & substantial discrepancy between text of

the bill deliberated as shown by the Journal and the enrolled bill (no longer enrolled
bill)
[1 Title 1 Subject Rule]—doesn’t apply to laws existing at the time the 1935 Consti took
effect
1. prevent hodgepodge or log-rolling legislation
2. prevent or surprise fraud upon the legislature
3. fairly apprise the people
4. guide in ascertaining legislative intent when body doesn’t clearly express purpose
Parts of a Statute
1. Enacting Clause – immediately after the title wherein it states under what authority
the act is enacted (i.e. 16th Congress)
2. Preamble – purpose
3. Purview – body of statute
4. Separability
SC: can’t promulgate rules that are substantive in nature – only procedural
Note: the rule-making power of a public administrative agency is a delegated legislative

power
• Complete + Standard
• Adequate Standards: SIP-JAP
(1) Simplicity and dignity
(2) Interests of law and order
(3) Public welfare
(4) Justice and equity and substantial merit of the case
(5) Adequate and efficient instruction
45
(6) Public interest
Law > IRR
[Admin Agency]
• Promulgation of Rules: makes a new law with the force and effect of a valid law
• Rendition of an Opinion: interprets a pre-existing law (advisory because it’s the

Courts that really determine what a law means)
Smallest legislative body: Sangguniang Barangay  reviewed by S. Bayan or Panlungsod
• municipal ordinance – with Sangguniang Bayan
• city ordinance – with Sangguniang Panlungsod
• provincial ordinance – with Sangguniang Panlalawigan
Bernas (Intro to PIL)
Definitions
• Traditional – body of rules and principles of action (relation of civilized states)
• Modern – conduct of states and of international organizations and with their

relations inter se + their relations with persons (natural or juridical)
Theories
• Command— international law is not law bec no sovereign
• Consensual— binding force form the consent of the states
• Natural Law— law is derived by reason from the nature of man
• Dualist/ Pluralist— international law and municipal law are essentially diff
o Municipal law: regulates relations between individual persons under the

state
o International law: regulates relations between states.
o Municipal > International
International  Municipal Law
• Transformation: appropriate constitutional machinery
46
• Incorporation: part of the law of the land
Domestic Court  municipal
International Court  duh
BUT Consti > International Law
• Monism— international law and domestic law belong to only one system of law
Private vs Public
• Private— domestic law which deals with cases where foreign law intrudes in the
domestic sphere
• Public— governs the relationships between and among states and also their
relations with international organizations and individual persons
Sources (Categories)
• Formal— various processes on how rules come into existence
• Material— substance and content of the obligation
Sources
• International conventions— established rules
• International custom— general practice
Customary International Law: general and consistent practice of states followed

by them from a sense of legal obligation.
o Material Factor: how States behave (G-CD)
▪ Generality of practice
▪ Consistency
▪ Duration
o Subjective Factor: why they behave that way
Opinio Juris: belief that a certain custom is obligatory (note: even dissenting
states are bound unless they objected at the time of its formation)
Instant Custom: spontaneous activity of a great number of states supporting a

specific line of action.
47
Custom can become jus cogens but they aren’t equal
• Jus Cogens: "compelling law” is a fundamental principle of international law

which is accepted by the international community of states as a norm from
which no derogation is ever permitted
Treaty > Custom (even if treaty comes later)
Jus Cogens Custom > Treaty (if treaty comes later)
Soft law: international agreement not concluded as a treaty
• General principles of law recognized by civilized nations
• Judicial decisions and teachings of the most highly qualified publicists of the various
nations
[Equity]
when accepted, is an instrument whereby conventional or customary law may be

supplemented or modified in order achieve justice.
Common Law vs Civil Law
Note: we are a mix of common and civil law!
Common  Judges as primary lawmakers (body of law comprised of precedents)
• Statutory interpretation
• Precedents
Civil  Codal and writings of Scholars
• Juris > Doctrine
• Fact Patterns
• Precise  means exact, accurate
• With definitions
Social objectives (LIP)
• Liberalism
• Individualism
• Personal Rights
48
Stare Decisis (stare decisis et quieta non movere)
• to stand by things decided and not disturb settled law
• commands judges to apply the law as it has been set out in a prior case when a
higher, or sometimes equal, court made the prior decision (used when judges fill in
gaps of the law)
• Requirements:
o new case is same or substantially same as precedent
o same question asked
• Present day common law systems rely on stare decisis to maintain consistency
when judges are filling in gaps in the law.
Civil Law
A legal tradition originating in Roman Law, as codified in the Corpus Juris Civilis of
Justinian, and subsequently developing on continental Europe.
• Legal Principles
• Shorter than Common law: 2-part (motif – reasons and dispositive – order)
• Concise  stating something succinctly, using as few words as possible yet still
conveying the full meaning
Sources
(1) Written constitutions
(2) Codes  stated concisely so no need for explanation
Scholarly Texts  doctrinally definitive and indispensable to the systematic and

comprehensive understanding of the code
• Commercial
• Civil  broad in nature
• Civ Pro
• Penal Code
• Crim Pro
49
(3) Specific statutes or decrees, and
(4) International treaties
Rulemaking method (Civil Judges)
o Gaps resolved: use SEM (social, economic, moral factor)
o Makes concrete a once general & abstract rule in the Code
o Does not become sources of law or stare decisis
o Judicial decisions are not considered as a source of law
Jurisprudence
refers to a series of decisions forming a constant stream of uniform and homogeneous

rulings that have the same reason
affords the cases considerable persuasive authority and justifies a like decision
Advocacy
process of trying to convince your audience through the technique of persuasion.
• Reduce case to the bare essence
• Central theme (FLIP) – facts, law, intent, policy
• Trifecta (PIC) – persuasive, interesting, clear
Oral Argument: persuasion and education
Mixed Jurisdiction
Definition
Classic: Romano-Germanic tradition has become suffused to some degree by Anglo-

American law (R-GAA)
• Mixed jurisdictions are really political units (countries or their political

subdivisions) which have mixed legal systems
Modern: civilian + English common law traditions
Walton – codified
Evan-Jones  Roman law adopted no code
Legal Order (synonymous with system)
50
• body of rules and institutions regulating a given society
Legal System
• legal institutions
• procedures
• Rules
Legal Tradition: puts the legal system into cultural perspective
• History
• Nature
• Role in society and policy
• Proper organization and operation of a legal system
• How to apply, study, teach
• 3 influential legal traditions: Civil – Common – Socialist
Civil Law
codified Roman law & uncodified Roman law (received and retained w/o codification)
common law is usually much more detailed in its prescriptions than the civil law. Common
law is the foundation of private law
Mixed Legal System: Egypt and Quebec
Doctrine > Juris
Legal Concepts
A. Stare Decisis
(Civ Code) ART. 8. Judicial decisions applying or interpreting the laws or the
Constitution shall form a part of the legal system of the Philippines.
Fermin vs People
it appears that petitioner wants this Court to follow the CA decision and adopt it as
judicial precedent under the principle of stare decisis.
51
decision attained finality at the level of the CA. This ruling cannot bind this Court unless
we purposely adopt the same.
YMCA vs Remington
The final Resolution of a previous case between the parties governs the right of the
parties in the present case under the principle of stare decisis because the facts and
issues of the present case and of the previous case are similar to one another.
The principle of stare decisis directs that, once a court has laid down a principle of law
as applicable to a certain state of facts, it will adhere to that principle, and apply it to all
future cases, where facts are substantially the same, regardless of whether the
parties and property are the same.
Once a case has been decided one way, any other case involving exactly the same point
at issue should be decided in the same manner.
Pepsi-Cola Products
facts and issues of the present case were already resolved in previous cases involving
the same facts and issues.
B. Res Judicata: conclusiveness of judgment
Antonio vs Sayman
• Definition: a matter adjudged – thing judicially acted upon or decided
• Applicable by
A. Bar by prior judgment happens when there is identity of: (PCS)
• Parties
• Causes of action
Test of Identity of Causes:
• Absence of inconsistency
whether the judgment sought will be inconsistent with the

prior judgment. If no inconsistency is shown, the prior
judgment shall not constitute a bar to subsequent actions.
• Same Evidence Test
52
would the same evidence support and establish both the
present and former causes of action? If the answer is in the
affirmative, then the prior judgment is a bar to the
subsequent action;
• Subject matter
Second case is sought to be barred
B. Conclusiveness of judgment – conclusive only at certain points
where there is identity of parties in the first and second cases, but no
identity of causes of action, the first judgment is conclusive only as to those
matters actually and directly controverted and determined and not as to
matters merely involved therein
Republic vs Yu
Elements of Res Judicata:
• judgement is final
• jurisdiction over the subject matter and parties
• judgement on the merits
• identity of the subject matter, parties and cause of action
“conclusiveness of judgement” which provides that the matters directly and actually
resolved in a prior case cannot again be brought up in a new case.
C. Lis Pendens
Lim vs Cruz
Lis pendens has been conceived to protect real rights of a party causing its
registration. Such notice would serve as a warning to a prospective purchaser or
incumbrancer that the property is in litigation
• In re: an action affecting the title or the right of possession of real property
• Party may record in the office of the registry of deeds of the province in
which the property is situated a notice of the pendency of the action.
Purpose: keep the properties in litigation within the power of the court until the
litigation is terminated (founded upon reasons of public policy and necessity)
53
Sec 14 Rule 13 of the Rules of Civil procedure only provide for two grounds to
cancel a notice of lis pendens before final judgment:
(1) the purpose being to molest the owner against which the notice is sought, and
(2) unnecessary in protecting the notice applicant’s rights.
• The law does not authorize a judge to cancel a notice of lis pendens pending
litigation upon the mere filing of sufficient bond by the party on whose title
said notice is annotated
There is no requirement that the party applying for the annotation of notice must
prove his right or interest over the property sought to be annotated.
• Hence, even on the basis of unregistered deed of sale, a notice of lis pendens
may be annotated on the title.
Atlantic Erectors
The SC affirmed the CA’s decision, on the ground that the complaint for sum of money
did not constitute a proper lien on the property as to justify the attachment of a notice
of lis pendens.  only for ownership or title not for money claims.
• it also applies to suits seeking to establish a right to, or an equitable estate or

interest in a specific real property, or to enforce a lien, a charge or an
encumbrance against it.
a notice of lis pendens may be availed of are:
(a) an action to recover possession of real estate
(b) an action for partition, and
(c) any other court proceedings that directly affect the title to the land or the
building thereon or the use or the occupation thereof.
D. Law of the Case
Villa vs Sandiganbayan
the doctrine of the law of the case only applies to the same parties of the same case.
whatever is once irrevocably established as the controlling legal rule of decision

between the same parties in the same case continues to be the law of the case so
54
long as the facts on which the decision was made continue to be the facts before the
court.
Padillo vs Court of Appeals
The doctrine of the law of the case dictates that the law of the case, whether correct
on general principles or not, may be applied to that one particular case.
while the requisites of res judicata are present, the law of the case dictates that
Padillo may claim for damages in the separate civil case because in the decision
made by the CA regarding the case for ownership, the CA merely suspended the civil
case for damages.
Case 2 already became final because no appeal was filed in the CA. Even if
erroneous, it has become the law of the case. Case 2 already became final because no
appeal was filed in the CA. Even if erroneous, it has become the law of the case.
E. Prospectivity of the Case
People vs Derilo
Prospective
ex post facto law has been defined as one which changes the punishment and inflicts
a greater punishment than the law annexed to the crime when it was committed.
It is settled that a penal law may have retroactive effect only when it is favorable to
the accused.
Co vs CA
Article 4 of the Civil Code which provides that "laws shall have no retroactive
effect unless the contrary is provided."
lex prospicit, non respicit, the law looks forward not backward.
F. Landmark Case
Case of First Impression
Example: psychological incapacity
• Santos vs CA
• Ochosa vs Alano
G. Leading Case and Abandonment of Doctrine
55
Overturned a landmark case
Molina case
Tong vs Velez-Ting
It is only when a prior ruling of this Court is overruled, and a different view is
adopted, that the new doctrine may have to be applied prospectively in favor of
parties who have relied on the old doctrine and have acted in good faith
Carpio-Morales vs CA
H. Dura Lex Sed Lex
In line with Article 5 of the RPC, the Court shall instead submit to the Chief
Executive, through the Department of Justice, such statement as may be deemed
proper, without suspending the execution of the sentence, when a strict
enforcement of the provisions of this Code would result in the imposition of a clearly
excessive penalty, taking into consideration:
• the degree of malice
• the injury caused by the offense
56

Philippine Legal System: Judicial Power: Judicial Power Is The Authority To Settle Justiciable Controversies

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Philippine Legal System: Judicial Power: Judicial Power Is The Authority To Settle Justiciable Controversies

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Thursday, 20 July 2017

Philippine Legal System

• Judicial power: Judicial power is the authority to settle justiciable controversies

• Separation and Blending of Power

Firestone: SC divisions and appeal to Court En Banc

1. International shiz in question (re: constitutionality)

2. Cases involving ambassadors, public ministers, consuls

3. Cases involving ROD (resolutions, orders, decisions) of Constitutional

6. Novel questions of law

7. Cases where en banc doctrines are to be modified or reversed

8. Cases where at least 3 members says it needs to be ruled on en banc

9. En Banc decides themselves they should take it

Ratio: not placing a limit would unnecessarily burden the Court

Section 27 of Republic Act No. 6770 (unconstitutional)

Rule 45 (Revised Rules of Civil Procedure)

Secretary of National Defense vs Manalo

Section 5 (5) of Article 8 provides for the rule-making power of the SC

Promulgate rules concerning the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights.

Third Level Courts

Exceptions to the Certiorari Rule

Generally: prior motion for recon needed

Sec 14 RA 6770 (Ombudsman Act)  Quasi-Judicial Agency

^ Similar with Sec 27 increasing the jurisdiction of the SC

Sec 45 of the 1997 Rules of Procedure (Certiorari)

Thus: follow the hierarchy of courts

2. Court of Tax Appeals

RA 9282  RA 9503 (effective July 2008)

• 1 presiding justice and 8 associate justices

• En Banc + 3 divisions of 3 each

• Jurisdiction over these cases:

o NIRC and Tariff & Customs Code

o RTC decisions involving Tax Cases

o Taxes and Custom Collection assessments that became final

All officials classified as Grade 27 or higher or:

Governor – Mayor – Consul – AFP (colonel / captain) – PNP (provincial director /

Other offenses or felonies whether simple or complexed with other crimes

Sandiganbayan has concurrent jurisdiction with the SC in:

Petitions for issuance of Writ of mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, habeas corpus,

Includes: Priv Person in conspiracy with Pub Officials

Sandiganbayan has appellate jurisdiction:

RTC cases involving public officers below Salary grade 27

Duncano vs Sandiganbayan: No jurisdiction for Salary grade 26 and below

4. Regional Trial Court

Exclusive original jurisdiction:

• Incapable of pecuniary estimation

• Titles of Real Property > P20,000 or P50,000 (in Manila)

[Metropolitan / Municipal Trial Courts Original jurisdiction]

• Unlawful detainer of lands (eviction from lands)

[Maritime stuff > P100,000 or P200,000 in Manila]

[Testamentary Stuff where estate’s gross value is P100,000 or P200,000]

[All cases where demand is > P100,000 or P200,000]

[Juvenile or Agricultural Relations]

Appellate Jurisdiction: Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts, and

Special Jurisdiction (CUJA)

5. First Level Courts (MTC, MeTC, MCTC, MTC in Cities)

Exclusive Original Jurisdiction

• Unlawful detainer of lands (eviction from lands)

• Titles of Real Property < or = to P20,000 or P50,000 (in Manila)

Echegaray vs Sec of Justice

On reprieve and TRO parallelism done by respondents: Sec 19 Article 7 of Consti

o The provision, however, cannot be interpreted as denying the power of

Why SC issued a TRO