Introduction | REMEDIAL LAW

GENERAL PRINCIPLES
Substantive Law Remedial Law
It is that part of the It refers to the rules
law which creates, prescribing methods
defines or regulates whereby causes of
rights concerning life, action may be
liberty or property effectuated, wrongs
which when violated redressed and reliefs
gives rise to a cause obtained (also known
of action. as Adjective Law).
It makes vested rights NO vested rights may
possible. attach to nor arise
therefrom.
It is prospective in It may be made
application. applicable to actions
pending and
undetermined at the
time of their passage
and are deemed
retroactive in that
sense and to that
extent.
It originates from the It does not originate
legislature. from the legislature
but has the force and
effect of law if not in
conflict with
substantive law.
It cannot be enacted The Supreme Court is
by the Supreme expressly empowered
Court. to promulgate
procedural rules.
REMEDIAL LAW prescribes the methods of
enforcing those rights and obligations created
by substantive law by providing a procedural
system for obtaining redress for the invasion
of rights and violations of duties and by
prescribing rules as to how suits are filed, tried
and decided upon by the courts.
The Rules of Court as a whole constitutes the
body of rules governing pleading, practice and
procedure. As they do not originate from the
legislature, they cannot be called laws in the
strict sense of the word. However, since they
are promulgated by authority of law, they have
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE:
MIKHAIL MAVERICK TUMACDER overall chairperson, ARTHUR JOHN ARONGAT chairperson for academics, JASSEN RALPH LEE
chairperson for hotel operations, KIMBERLY JOY BARAOIDAN vice-chairperson for operations, KATRINA AYN AYZA FALLORINA CUE
vice-chairperson for secretariat, IAN MICHEL GEONANGA vice-chairperson for finance, JOSE ANGELO DAVID vice-chairperson for
electronic data processing, IAN LUIS AGUILA vice-chairperson for logistics
the force and effect of law if not in conflict with
substantive law.
JUDICIAL POWER 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 (Section 1, Article VIII, 1987
Constitution).
The judicial power shall be vested in one
Supreme Court and in such other lower courts
as may be established by law (Sec. 1, Art. VIII,
1987 Constitution).
JURISDICTION
Jurisdiction is the power and authority of the
court to hear, try and decide a case as well as
to enforce or execute its judgments or final
orders.
The test of jurisdiction is whether the court has
the power to enter into the inquiry and not
whether the decision is right or wrong.
Four Concepts of Jurisdiction in Civil
Cases
1. Jurisdiction over the subject matter – a
matter of substantive law because it is
conferred by law.
2. Jurisdiction over the persons of the parties
– not a matter of substantive law. This is
covered by the rule on summons.
3. Jurisdiction over the issues – not a matter
of substantive law. This is governed by the
rule on pleadings.
4. Jurisdiction over the res – not a matter of
substantive law. This is also governed by
the rule on summons.
JURISDICTION OVER THE SUBJECT
MATTER
Concept: It is the power to deal with the
general subject involved in the action and is
not simply jurisdiction of the particular case
before the court, but jurisdiction of the class of
cases to which the particular case belongs. It

SUBJECT COMMITTEE:
PINKY D. VELOSO subject chair, KAMILLE DEANNE M. LAGASCA assistant subject chair, ALYSSA DAPHNE M. AVILA edp, GABRIEL P.
OLANDESCA & ALAN HUBERT P. CHU civil procedure, RITA THERESE F. SANTIAGO special civil actions, HANSEL P. MORAÑA special
proceedings, ANTONIO CEASAR R. MANILA criminal procedure, JANA MONICA Z. VALENZUELA evidence, MARIS DONNA G.
KWOK special laws

MEMBERS:
Johnber B. Afaga, Irene Y. Lipat, Ethel Joy F. Arriola, Joanna Katrina L. Ledda, Jonna C. Cabanilla, Maolen P. Reyes, Magher S. Baul
Aubrey Joy D. Brampio, Kristienne Kamille E. De Rivera, Janelyn I. Aquino, Jerick Anthony J. Sy***
 REMEDIAL LAW | Introduction
is the jurisdiction of the court over the nature
of the action.
This is the power of the court to hear and
determine cases of the general class to which
the proceedings in question belong. A case
should not be filed in the wrong court;
otherwise, it will be dismissed.
How Jurisdiction is Conferred
Jurisdiction over the subject matter is
conferred by substantive law which may either
be the Constitution or a statute. It is NOT
conferred by:
1. A court‟s unilateral assumption of
jurisdiction;
2. Agreement or submission of the parties; or
3. Parties‟ silence, acquiescence or consent
Exception: Estoppel by laches (Tijam v.
Sibonghanoy). The reason for this
exception is that a party who has invoked
the jurisdiction of the court over a
particular matter to secure affirmative
relief cannot be permitted to afterwards
deny that same jurisdiction to escape
liability. However, the Tijam ruling still
remains to be an exception to the General
Rule that a court‟s lack of jurisdiction may
be raised at any stage of the proceedings
even on appeal.
The application of this doctrine must be
carefully made such that in the case of
Figueroa v. People, G.R. 147406, July 14,
2008, after tracing a long line of case
about laches as applied to jurisdiction, the
Court, through Justice Nachura, gave a
definitive pronouncement:
“The general rule should, however, be, as
it has always been, that the issue of
jurisdiction may be raised at any stage of
the proceedings, even on appeal, and is
not lost by waiver or by estoppel.
Estoppel by laches, to bar a litigant from
asserting the court’s absence or lack of
jurisdiction, only supervenes in exceptional
cases similar to the factual milieu of Tijam
v. Sibonghanoy.”
Ratio: Estoppel, being in the nature of a
forfeiture, is not favored by law. It is to be
applied rarely—only from necessity, and
only in extraordinary circumstances. The
doctrine must be applied with great care
and the equity must be strong in its favor.
When misapplied, the doctrine of estoppel
may be a most effective weapon for the
accomplishment of injustice (Figueroa v.
People, supra.).
2 San Beda College of Law
2012 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS*
The jurisdiction of the court is determined by
the statute in force at the time of the
commencement of the action (People v.
Paderna, L-28518, Jan. 29, 1968) unless such
statute provides for its retroactive application,
as where it is a curative legislation (Atlas
Fertilizer Corp. v. Navarro, G.R. 72074, April
30, 1987).
How Jurisdiction is Determined
General Rule: Jurisdiction over the subject
matter is determined by the allegations in the
complaint regardless of whether or not the
plaintiff is entitled to the claims asserted
therein. It is NOT determined by:
1. The defenses in the answer or motion to
dismiss (Exception: Defense of tenancy –
The court does not automatically lose
jurisdiction over ejectment cases by the
mere allegation of the defense of tenancy.
There must first be a reception of
evidence and, if after hearing, tenancy
had in fact been shown to be the real
issue, the court should dismiss the case
for lack of jurisdiction); or
2. By the evidence in the trial.
Motu proprio dismissal of the case by the
court
Under Sec. 1 of Rule 9, when it appears from
the pleading or the evidence on record that the
court has no jurisdiction over the subject
matter, the court shall dismiss the same.
JURISDICTION OVER THE PERSONS OF
THE PARTIES
Jurisdiction over the parties is the power of the
court to render a personal judgment which will
bind the parties to the case. For a decision to
be valid, the court must obtain jurisdiction over
the person of the plaintiff and the defendant.
Otherwise, the decision will not bind the
parties over whom the court has not acquired
jurisdiction.
Jurisdiction over the Plaintiff is acquired by
the plaintiff‟s filing of the complaint or petition
or other initiatory pleading. By doing so, he
submits himself to the jurisdiction of the court.
Jurisdiction over the Defendant is acquired:
1. Upon service on him of coercive process
in the manner provided by law (service of
summons). If the defendant was never
served with summons, any judgment
rendered by the court will not bind him.; or
2. By his voluntary submission to the
jurisdiction of the court. The defendant‟s
voluntary appearance in the action shall
be equivalent to service of summons.
 Constitutional Law | POLITICAL LAW
Such voluntary appearance is one that required although summons must also be
seeks affirmative relief except when the served in order to satisfy the requirements of
relief sought is for the purpose of objecting due process.
to the jurisdiction of the court over the
person of the defendant. Jurisdiction Exercise of
Examples of voluntary appearance: Jurisdiction
a. By filing an answer; or The authority to hear Where there is
b. By filing a motion to dismiss, and decide a case. jurisdiction over the
except when the defendant also person and subject
raises the issue of lack of matter, the resolution
jurisdiction over his person (Sec. of all other questions
20, Rule 14). arising in the case is
but an exercise of
Jurisdiction over the Defendant can be jurisdiction.
acquired by: Error of Jurisdiciton Error of Judgment
1. Waiver; When a court takes When a court
2. Consent; or cognizance of a case acquires jurisdiction
3. Lack of objection by the defendant over the subject matter over the subject
of which it has no matter, the decision
JURISDICTION OVER THE ISSUES jurisdiction, the court or order on all other
Concept: An issue is a disputed point or commits an error of questions arising in
question to which parties to an action have jurisdiction. the case is but an
narrowed down their several allegations and exercise of
upon which they are desirous of obtaining a jurisdiction; errors
decision. which the court may
commit in the
An issue is generally acquired in civil cases exercise of such
after the defendant files an answer joining the jurisdiction are
issues involved in the case merely errors of
judgment
Jurisdiction over the issues is the power of the Reviewable by Reviewable by
court to try and decide the issues raised in the certiorari. appeal.
pleadings of the parties. It is generally If there is a total want When the court has
conferred and determined by the pleadings of jurisdiction, the jurisdiction, a wrong
of the parties. The pleadings present the proceeding is an decision is not void.
issues to be tried and determine whether absolute nullity, confer The judgment cannot
these are of fact or of law. Jurisdiction over the no right and afford no be considered a
issues may also be conferred by: protection and will be nullity and therefore
1. Stipulations of parties (e.g. in the pre-trial); pronounced void when cannot be collaterally
or collaterally attacked. impeached. Such is
2. By waiver or failure to object to the binding on the parties
presentation of evidence on a matter not unless reversed or
raised in the pleadings. annulled.
JURISDICTION OVER THE RES
Concept: It refers to the court‟s jurisdiction
over the thing or the property which is the CLASSIFICATION OF JURISDICTION
subject of the action. It may be acquired by the
court placing the property or thing under its 1. As to Cases Tried
custody (e.g. attachment). a. GENERAL jurisdiction – exercised
over all kinds of cases, except those
It is sometimes a substitute for jurisdiction over expressly withheld from them either by
the person. There are instances when the the Rules or by law. A court may also
court cannot acquire jurisdiction over the be considered „general‟ if it has the
defendant like when he is abroad. But if the competence to exercise jurisdiction
court acquires jurisdiction over the res, the over cases not falling within the
case may go on. jurisdiction of any court, tribunal,
person or body exercising judicial or
If the action is in rem or quasi in rem, quasi-judicial functions (e.g. RTC).
jurisdiction over the person of the defendant is
not necessary; jurisdiction over the res is

San Beda College of Law 3

*2012 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS
 REMEDIAL LAW | Introduction
b. LIMITED jurisdiction – exercised over
and extends only to particular or
specified cases.
2. As to Nature of the Cause
a. ORIGINAL jurisdiction – exercised by
courts in the first instance. This is the
power to take judicial cognizance of a
case instituted for judicial action for
the first time under the conditions set
by the law. In other words, it is where
a case is commenced.
b. APPELLATE jurisdiction – Exercised
by a superior court to review and
decide cases previously decided by a
lower court now elevated for judicial
review.
3. As to Nature and Extent of Exercise
a. EXCLUSIVE jurisdiction – confined to
a particular court to the exclusion of
other courts.
b. CONCURRENT jurisdiction – that
possessed by the court together with
another or other courts over the same
subject matter. The court obtaining
jurisdiction first retains it to the
exclusion of the others, but the choice
of the court is lodged in those persons
duly authorized to file the action (also
referred to as confluent or coordinate
jurisdiction).
4. As to Situs
a. TERRITORIAL jurisdiction – exercised
within the limits of the place where the
court is located.
b. EXTRA-TERRITORIAL jurisdiction –
exercised beyond the confines of the
territory where the court is located.
CLASSIFICATION OF COURTS
1. Courts of Law vs. Courts of Equity
A Court of Law decides a case according
to the existing laws or the laws of the land
while a Court of Equity adjudicates a
controversy according to the common
precepts of what is right and just without
inquiring into the terms of the statutes.
In the Philippines, every court, both
original and appellate, exercises both the
legal and equitable jurisdictions. (U.S. vs.
Tamparong, 31 Phil 321)
4 San Beda College of Law
2012 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS*
2. Constitutional Court vs. Statutory Court
Constitutional Statutory Courts
Court
Created by the Created by law.
Constitution.
Cannot be May be abolished
abolished by by Congress by
Congress without just simply
amending the repealing the law
Constitution. which created
those courts.
Ex. The Supreme Ex. The Court of
Court Tax Appeals
In the Philippines, the only one
Constitutional court is the Supreme Court.
The CA, RTC, & MTC are created by
Congress.
3. Superior Court vs. Inferior Court
Superior Courts refer to those courts which
have the power of review or supervision
over another lower court while Inferior
Courts are those which, in relation to
another are lower in rank and subject to
review and supervision of the latter.
4. Civil Court vs. Criminal Court
Civil Courts are those which take
cognizance of civil cases only while
Criminal Courts are those which take
cognizance of criminal cases only. All the
courts in the Philippines are both civil and
criminal courts
Courts of Record – those whose proceedings
are enrolled and which are bound to keep a
written record of all trials and proceedings
handled by them. R.A. No. 6031 mandates all
Municipal Trial Courts to be courts of record.
This finds significance when the case is
appealed whereby a superior court reviews the
case through the records.
OTHER PRINCIPLES
POLICY OF JUDICIAL HIERARCHY means
that a higher court will not entertain direct
resort to it unless the redress desired cannot
be obtained in the appropriate courts. In other
words, it is an ordained sequence of recourse
to courts with concurrent jurisdiction.
While it is true that the SC, CA, and the RTC
have concurrent original jurisdiction to issue
writs of Certiorari, Prohibition and Mandamus,
such concurrence does not accord litigants
unrestrained freedom of choice of the court to
which the application for the writ may be
directed. The application should be filed with
 Constitutional Law | POLITICAL LAW
the court of lower level unless the importance deposited in court in the course of the
of the issue involved deserves the action of proceedings, appoint a receiver and grant an
the court of higher level. injunction, attachment or garnishment.

DOCTRINE OF JUDICIAL STABILITY OR RESIDUAL JURISDICTION

NON-INTERFERENCE
General Rule: No court has the authority to
interfere by injunction with the judgment of
another court of coordinate jurisdiction or to
pass upon or scrutinize and much less declare
as unjust a judgment of another court
(Industrial Enterprises Inc. vs. CA, G.R. No.
88550, April 18, 1990).
Exception: The doctrine of judicial stability
does not apply where a third party claimant is
involved (Santos vs. Bayhon, G.R. No. 88643,
July 23, 1991).
DOCTRINE OF ADHERENCE TO
JURISDICTION (Continuity of Jurisdiction)
Once jurisdiction has been acquired, the court
retains it until the final termination of the case.
It is the jurisdiction left to be exercised by the
trial court after the case has been appealed to
a higher court (See Rules 41 and 42).
DELEGATED JURISDICTION OF INFERIOR
COURTS
Under Sec. 34 of BP 129, inferior courts can
try land registration and cadastral cases
regardless of value if the case is uncontested,
or if contested, the value of the lots should not
exceed, 100,000.
SPECIAL JURISDICTION OF INFERIOR
COURTS
Inferior court judges, in the absence of RTC
judges, may hear and decide petitions for a
writ of habeas corpus or applications for bail in
criminal cases.

General 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;
2. When the change of jurisdiction is curative
in character.

EXCLUSIONARY PRINCIPLE
The court first acquiring jurisdiction excludes
all others.

DOCTRINE OF PRIMARY JURISDICTION

Under this doctrine, courts will not resolve a
controversy involving a question which is
within the jurisdiction of an administrative
tribunal, especially where the question
demands the exercise of sound administrative
discretion requiring the special knowledge and
experience of said tribunal in determining
technical and intricate matters of fact (Villaflor
vs. CA, G.R. No. 95694, Oct. 8, 1997).

DOCTRINE OF ANCILLARY JURISDICTION

It involves the inherent or implied powers of
the court to determine issues incidental to the
exercise of its primary jurisdiction.

Under its ancillary jurisdiction, a court may

determine all questions relative to the matters
brought before it, regulate the manner in which
a trial shall be conducted, determine the hours
at which the witnesses and lawyers may be
heard, direct the disposition of money

San Beda College of Law 5

*2012 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS