MODULE 1: GENERAL PRINCIPLES
If the rule creates a right such as the right to appeal, it
REMEDIAL LAW
Concept – rules of procedure by which courts applying
laws of all kinds can properly administer justice. They
include rules of pleadings, practice and evidence.
- plays a vital role in the administration of
justice. It lies at the very core of PROCEDURAL DUE
PROCESS, which means a law which hears before it
condemns, one which proceeds upon inquiry and
renders judgment only after trial, and contemplates an
opportunity to be heard before judgment is rendered.
Nature – RULES OF COURT have the the force and effect
of law.
- Strict compliance with the rules has been held
mandatory and imperative.
REMEDIAL LAW vs. SUBSTANTIVE LAW
Substantive law – part of the law which creates, defines
or regulates rights concerning life, liberty or property or
the powers of agencies or instrumentalities for the
administration of public affairs, which when violated
gives rise to a cause of action.
Remedial law – prescribes the methods of enforcing
those rights and obligations created by substantive law.
(Primicias vs. Ocampo, 81 Phil 650)
Substantive law – creates vested rights
- generally prospective in application
- enacted by Congress
Remedial law – does not create vested rights
- GR: May be applied retroactively
Exceptions:
a. Statute expressly provides
b. Under circumstances when it would not be feasible
or would work injustice
c. if to do so would create intricate problems of due
process or impair independence of courts.
- SC empowered to promulgate rules
If the rule takes away a vested right, it is not procedural.
may be classified as substantive matter; but if it
operates as a means of implementing an existing right,
then the rule deals merely with procedure. (Fabian vs.
Desierto)
Statutes and rules regulating the procedure of courts
are considered applicable to actions pending and
unresolved at the time of their passage. This
retroactive application does not violate any right of a
person adversely affected (Panay Railways, Inc. vs. Heva
Management and Development Corp.)
RULE-MAKING POWER OF THE SUPREME COURT
“The Supreme Court shall promulgate the rules
concerning the protection and enforcement of
constitutional rights, pleading, practice, and procedure
in all court.” Art. VIII, Sec. 5 par 5
Limitations:
a.) must provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure
b.) rules shall be uniform for all courts of the same
grade
c.) rules shall not diminish, increase of modify
substantive rights
Sources of Remedial Law
1. CONSTITUTION
2. DIFFERENT LAWS CREATING THE JUDICIARY
3. PROCEDURAL LAWS AND RULES PROMULGATED
BY THE SC
4. CIRCULARS
5. ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS
6. INTERNAL RULES and
7. COURT DECISIONS
Remedial Law
OBJECT – not to cause undue protraction of the
litigation, but to facilitate the adjudication of conflicting
claims and to serve, rather than to defeat, the ends of
justice.
1
IMPLEMENTATION – through the judicial system,
including the prosecutor service of courts and quasi-
judicial agencies.
RULES OF COURT
INTERPRETATION – GR: rules shall be liberally construed
in order to promote their objective of securing a JUST,
SPEEDY and INEXPENSIVE disposition of every action
and proceeding. (Sec. 6, Rule 1)
EXCEPTIONS:
a.) Reglementary periods
b.) Rule on forum shopping; and
c.) Service of Summons
Note: Liberal interpretation may only be invoked where
there is an excusable formal error in a pleading
provided it does not subvert the essence of the
proceeding and there connotes a reasonable attempt at
compliance (Martos vs. New San Jose Builders, Inc.)
RULE ON UNIFORM INTERPRETATION – the principle
that every statute must be so construed and
harmonized with other statutes applies to interpreting
different sets of rules such as the Rules of Civil
Procedure and the Rule on Summary Procedure.
SC Power to Amend and Suspend Procedural Rules
Compliance is the Rule; abandonment should only be
done in the most exceptional circumstances. (Pilapil vs.
Heirs of Briones)
COURTS have the power to relax procedural rules when
compelling reasons so warrant or when the purpose of
justice requires it. (Commissioner of Internal Revenue
vs. Migrant Pagbilao Corp.)
The rules of procedure should be viewed as mere tools
designed to facilitate the attainment of justice. Their
strict and rigid application, which would result in
technicalities that tend to frustrate rather than promote
substantial justice, must always be avoided. (De
Guzman vs. Sandiganbayan)
Where strong considerations of substantial justice are
manifest on the petition, the strict application of the
rules of procedure may be relaxed, in the exercise of its
equity jurisdiction. A rigid application of the rules of
procedure will not be entertained if it will obstruct
rather than serve the broader interests of justice in the
light of the prevailing circumstances in the case under
consideration (CTMC Int’l vs. Bhagis Int’l Corp.)
Exception to the Exception:
Parties praying for liberal interpretation has the burden
of proving that they deserve an exceptional treatment
(Prieto vs. Alpadi Development Corp.)
Mere invocation of substantial justice is not a magical
incantation that will automatically compel the court to
suspend procedural rules (Co-Unjieng vs. CA)
Reasons that warrant the suspension of the Rules of
Procedure
1. The existence of special or compelling
circumstances
2. The merits of the case
3. A cause not entirely attributable to the fault or
negligence of the party favored by the
suspension of rules
4. A lack of any showing that the review sought is
merely frivolous and dilatory
5. The other party will not be unjustly prejudiced
thereby
6. Transcendental matters of life, liberty or state
security
Power to stay proceedings and control its processes
- is incidental to the power inherent in every court
to control the disposition of the cases on its
dockets, considering its time and effort, and that of
counsel and the litigants. But if the proceedings
may be stayed, it must be done in order to avoid
multiplicity of suits and prevent vexatious
litigations, conflicting judgments, and confusion
between litigants and courts (Security Bank Corp.
vs. Judge Victorio)
PHILIPPINE JUDICIAL SYSTEM
Courts
• A court is an entity or body vested with a
portion of the judicial power.
2
 • Bec. The judicial power shall be vested in one
Supreme Court and in such other lower courts
as may be established by law. (Art. VIII, Sec. 1 of
the Constitution
• Lower courts are created to divide the cases
• There is division of labor and this division is
done thru delineating jurisdiction among courts.
Function of Court
1.) Decide actual controversies and not to give opinions
upon abstract propositions
2.) Apply the law
3.) Interpret the law
Court as Distinguished form a Judge
Court:
• A tribunal officially assembled under authority
of law
• Disqualification of a judge does not affect the
court
• It is a being in imagination comparable to a
corporation.
Judge:
• Simply an officer of such tribunal
• May be disqualified
• Physical person
Classification of Courts
• Constitutional and Statutory Courts
• Superior Courts and First-Level courts (Inferior
courts)
• Courts of Original Jurisdiction and Courts of
Appellate jurisdiction
• Civil Courts and Criminal Courts
• Courts of law and Courts of equity
• Courts of record; probate courts; Land
Registration Courts; Ecclesiastical Courts;
Military Courts
1. Regular courts:
a.) Supreme Court
b.) Court of Appeals
c.) Regional Trial Courts; and
d.) Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial
Courts in Cities, Municipal Trial Courts, Municipal Circuit
Trial Courts
2. Special Courts
a.) Sandiganbayan
b.) Court of Tax Appeals
c.) Shari’a District Courts, Shari’a Circuit Courts
d.) Family Courts
3. Quasi-Courts or Quasi-Judicial Agencies
Courts-martial are agencies of executive character, and
one of the authorities ”for the ordering of courts-
martial has been held to be attached of the
constitutional functions of the President as
Commander-in-Chief, independently of legislation.
Unlike courts of law, they are not a portion of the
judiciary.
Military commissions or tribunals, by whatever name
they are called, are also not courts within the Philippine
Judicial System
Not belonging to the judicial branch of the government,
it follows that courts-martial and military commissions
or tribunals must pertain to the executive department.
They are, in fact, simply instrumentalities of the
executive power provided by Congress for the
President, as Commander-in-Chief, to aid him in
properly commanding the army and navy and enforcing
discipline therein, and utilized under his orders or those
of his authorized military representatives.
Policy of Judicial Heirarchy
A higher court will not entertain direct resort to
it unless the redress desired cannot be obtained in the
appropriate courts.
Inherent Powers of the Court
3
 • SEC 5 RULE 135 OF THE RULES OF COURT
provides
Every court shall have the power:
a.) preserve and enforce order
b.) enforce order in proceedings before it
c.) compel obedience to its judgments, orders and
processes
d.) to control the conduct of its ministerial officers
e.) to compel attendance of persons to testify in a case
pending therein
f.) to administer oaths
g.) to amend and control its processes and order so as
to conform to law and justice
h.) to authorize a copy of a lost or destroyed pleading or
other paper to be filed and used In lieu of original and
to supply deficiencies in its records and proceedings.
Brief History on Civil Procedure in the Philippines
The origin of our law on procedure is American.
Forget the law on procedure during the Spanish regime.
But the first known ancestor of the law on Civil
Procedure was the old Act 190, otherwise known as the
Code of Civil Procedure, which was enacted on August
7, 1901 by the United States and the Philippine
Commission.
And that was the law until 1940 because on July
1, 1940, SC enacted the Rules of Court which we now
call the Old Rules of Court. That continued for another
24 years until Jan 1, 1964 when the SC enacted the
Revised Rules of Court repealing the Old Rules of Court.
And that continued for another 33 years until July 1,
1997 where the SC enacted and which took effect on
that day (July 1, 1997) the New Rules on Civil Procedure.
Just recently, the 2019 Proposed Amendment
to the Rules on Civil Procedure took effect on May 1,
2020.
JURISDICTION
• It means authority or the power to hear, try and
decide a case.
• It also includes the power to enforce the
judgment as the judgment is the end for which
jurisdiction is exercised, and it is only through
the judgment and its execution that the power
of the court is made efficacious and its
jurisdiction complete.
• The power to control the execution of its
decision is an essential aspect of jurisdiction. It
cannot be subject of substantial subtraction and
the most important part of the litigation is the
process of execution of decisions. (
• (Test of Jurisdiction) whether the court has the
power to enter into the inquiry and not
whether the decision is right or wrong.
• Correctness or rightfulness of the decision
relates to the exercise of and not to the
authority itself.
Duty of the Court to Determine its Jurisdiction
• It is the duty of the court to consider the
question of jurisdiction before it looks at other
matters involved in the case.
• Courts are bound to take notice of the limits of
their authority and they may act accordingly by
dismissing the action even through the issue of
jurisdiction is not raised or not even suggested
by counsel.
• If it finds that it has no jurisdiction, the court’s
only recourse is to dismiss the case motu
proprio or upon motion for without authority it
cannot act.
• RULE 9 SEC. 1 – “x x x when it appears from the
pleadings x x x that the court has no jurisdiction
over the subject matter x x x, the court shall
dismiss the claim.
• When the court has jurisdiction, it is its duty to
exercise the same and to render a decision.
Failure to do so may be enforced by way of a
mandamus proceedings.
ERROR OF JURISDCITION vs ERROR OF JUDGEMENT
Error of Jurisdiction
4
 • When a court takes cognizance of a case over
the subject matter of which it has no
jurisdiction, or acts in excess of jurisdiction or
with grave abuse of discretion amounting to
lack of jurisdiction, the court commits an ERROR
OF JURISDICTION
• Such act would be null and void
• They are reviewable by the extraordinary writ
of certiorari
Error of Judgement
• When a court acquires jurisdiction, the decision
or order arising in the case is but an exercise of
jurisdiction. They are merely ERRORS OF
JUDGMENT.
• Such mistake will bind unless corrected
• Reviewable by appeal
TYPES OF JURISDICTION
1. BASED ON THE CASES TRIED
A.) GENERAL JURISDICTION
B.)SPECIAL OR LIMITED JURISDICTION
2. BASED ON THE NATURE OF THE CASE
A.) ORIGINAL
B.) APPELLATE
3. BASED ON THE NATURE AND EXTENT OF
EXERCISE
A.) EXCLUSIVE
B.) CONCURRENT OR COORDINATE
PRINCIPLES ON JURISDICTION
EXCLUSIONARY PRINCIPLE – The court first acquiring
jurisdiction excludes all others.
JUDICIAL STABILITY – No court has the authority to
interfere by injunction with the judgment of another
court of coordinate jurisdiction.
• JUDICIAL HEIRARCHY – direct resort to the
Supreme Court will cause the dismissal of the
recourse. This policy is designed to shield SC
from having to deal with causes that are also
well within the competence of the lower courts,
and thus leave time to the Court to deal with
the more fundamental and more essential tasks
that the Constitution has assigned to it.
• Rule 65 Sec. 4
ELEMENTS OF JURISDICTIONAL IN CIVIL CASES
1.) JURISDICTION OVER THE SUBJECT MATTER
2.) JURISDICTION OVER THE PERSON OF THE PARTIES
TO THE CASE
3.) JURISDICTION OVER THE RES; AND
4.) JURISDICTION OVER THE ISSUES.
JURISDICTION OVER SUBJECT MATTER
• Jurisdiction over the subject property is
conferred by law, which may be either the
Constitution or a statute.
• It is never acquired by consent or submission of
the parties or by their laches.
• This is a matter of legislative enactment which
none but the legislature can change.
• It cannot be acquired by an agreement of the
parties, waiver, or failure to object.
• The law that confers jurisdiction refers to
SUBSTANTIVE LAW, not a procedural law. It
likewise does not refer to an administrative
order or circular.
• IT IS A SETTLED RULE THAT JURISDICTION OVER
THE SUBJECT MATTER IS DETERMINED BY THE
ALLEGATIONS IN THE COMPLAINT regardless of
whether or not the plaintiff is entitled to his
claims.
JURISDTICON OVER THE SUBJECT MATTER
• IT IS A SETTLED RULE THAT JURISDICTION OVER
THE SUBJECT MATTER IS DETERMINED BY THE
ALLEGATIONS IN THE COMPLAINT regardless of
whether or not the plaintiff is entitled to his
claims.
• Exception: Ejectment cases within the
jurisdiction of MTC but if the defendant alleges
5
 tenancy to exist between him and plaintiff, the
court should receive evidence in support of
claim of tenancy. If after hearing, tenancy had
in fact been shown to be the real issue, the
court should dismiss the case for lack of
jurisdiction. The case is cognizable with Court
of Agrarian Reform (now DARAB) (Salmorin vs.
Zaldivar, G.R. No. 169691, July 23, 2008)
• It is a matter of substantive law, the established
rule is that statute in force at the time of the
commencement of the action determines
jurisdiction – has no retroactive effect.
• DOCTRINE OF PRIMARY JURISDICTION – courts
will not resolve a question which is within its
jurisdiction and also of an administrative
tribunal, esp. 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). The
judicial process is suspended pending referral of
such issues to the administrative body for its
view. (US vs. Western Pacific Co.; Industrial
Enterprises vs. CA, 184 SCRA 426)
- the reasons for the existence and the purpose is serves
are two-fold: the desire for the uniformity and the
reliance on administrative expertise.
DOCTRINE OF CONTINUITY OF JURISDICTION
(Adherence of Jurisdiction)
- Jurisdiction once it attaches cannot be ousted
by the happening of subsequent events although of
such a character which should have prevented
jurisdiction from attaching in the first instance.(Ramos
vs. Central Bank, 41 SCRA 586)
_ Jurisdiction is not affected by a new law placing
a proceeding under the jurisdiction of another tribunal
EXCEPT when otherwise provided in the statute or if the
statute is clearly intended to apply to actions pending
even before its enactment. (People vs. Cawaling, 293
SCRA 267)
- Even after the judgment has become final, the
court retains jurisdiction to enforce and execute it.
(Echegaray vs. Sec. of Justice, 301 SCRA 96; Republic vs.
Atlas Farms, 345 SCRA 296)
DOCTRINE OF CONTINUITY OF JURISDICTION
EXCEPTIONS:
1. When there is express provision in the statute
on retroactive application
2. When the statute is clearly intended to apply to
actions pending before its enactment; or
3. When the statute is curative. (Garcia vs.
Martinez, 90 SCRA 331 and Atlas Fertilizer vs.
Hon. Navarro, 149 SCRA 432)
How jurisdiction over the Subject Matter is acquired by
the Court
1.) It is conferred by law applicable at the time of the
commencement of the action; and
2.) Jurisdiction must be properly invoked by filing of
complaint or information.
OBJECTIONS TO JURISDICTION OVER THE SUBJECT
MATTER
• The court may on its own initiative object to an
erroneous jurisdiction.
• Through a motion to dismiss filed before the
filing or service of an answer. New Rules: it can
only be raised as an affirmative defense (Sec. 12
Rule 8) or through a Motion to dismiss (Sec.5
Rule 15)
• Even if a motion to dismiss was filed and the
issue of jurisdiction was not raised therein, a
party may, when he files an answer, raise the
lack of jurisdiction as an affirmative defense
because his defense is not barred under the
omnibus motion rule. (Sec 9 Rule 15)
• The objection may be raised at any stage of the
proceedings, even for the first time on appeal.
• If the party only raised the lack of jurisdiction
for the first time on appeal, did not render them
in estoppel. EXCEPTION: Tijam vs. Sibonghanoy
(23 SCRA 29) update: Velasquez vs. Lisondra
Land, G.R. 231290, August 27, 2020
JURISDICTION OVER THE PERSON (PARTIES)
6
 • It is the power to render a personal judgment
against a party to an action or proceeding
through service of process or by voluntary
appearance of a party during the progress of a
cause.
• The power of the court to bring before it
persons to be affected by the judgment so as to
give him an opportunity to be heard, and to
render a judgment binding upon his person.
• In criminal cases, court acquire jurisdiction over
the person of the accused by having him (1)
arrested; (2) by service of the warrant of arrest;
or (3) by his voluntary surrender
• IN CIVIL CASES, it depends on whether the party
is the plaintiff or defendant
As to plaintiff – his filing of the complaint or petition.
The filing of the complaint or petition is deemed his
invoking of the jurisdiction of the court over his person.
As to Defendant – through a valid service of summons
upon him or his voluntary submission to the court’s
authority. Thus, if he is not served with summons or if
there was improper service, any judgment rendered by
the court will not bind him.
– voluntary submission of the defendant to the
jurisdiction of the court can be by: a.) waiver; b.)
consent or c.) lack of objection by the defendant
- one who seeks an affirmative relief is deemed to have
submitted to the jurisdiction of the court
- however, if an appearance is specially to challenge the
jurisdiction over his Person, it cannot be considered to
have submitted to the court’s authority
Certain actions which could be construed as voluntary
appearance are:
1.) When the defendant’s counsel files the
corresponding pleading thereon;
2.)When the defendant files a motion for
reconsideration of the judgment by default
3.) When the defendant files a petition to set aside the
judgment by default
4.) When the defendant and plaintiff jointly submit a
compromise agreement for the approval of the court
5.) when the defendant files an answer to the contempt
charge
6.) When the defendant files a petition for certiorari
without questioning the court’s jurisdiction over his
person
Jurisdiction over the Person (Parties)
- How to raise objection to jurisdiction over the person
of the defendant
Either in a Motion to Dismiss or as an Affirmative
defense included in the answer. Otherwise it is
deemed waived.
- The inclusion in a motion to dismiss of other grounds
aside from lack of jurisdiction over the person of the
defendant shall not be deemed a voluntary appearance.
(La Naval Drug Corp. vs. CA, 236 SCRA 78)
JURISDICTION OVER THE RES (OR PROPERTY IN
LITIGATION)
-The power or authority of the court over the
thing or property under litigation. It is the power to
bind the “thing”
-How acquired: a) seizure whereby the property
is brought into actual or constructive custody of the
court or b) result of the institution of the legal
proceedings, in which the power of the court is
recognized and made effective.
-Importance: There are instances when the
court cannot acquire jurisdiction over the
defendant like when he is abroad. But if the
court acquires jurisdiction over the res, the case may
go on.
JURISDICTION OVER THE OSSUES
Meaning of issue: is a disputed point or question to
which parties to an action have narrowed down their
several allegations and upon which they are desirous of
obtaining a decision.
Jurisdiction over the issue is the authority to try and
decide the issues raised in the pleadings of the parties.
7
In order to determine whether or not a court has
jurisdiction over the issues, one must examine the
pleadings. Jurisdiction over the issue is conferred and
determined by the pleadings of the parties.
From the pleadings of the parties, the court will
determine what the issues are to be resolved. If it is not
raised in the pleadings, the court does not have
jurisdiction over matters not included therein.
However, even if not included in the pleadings but there
is waiver or failure to object in the presentation of
evidence, jurisdiction is now conferred.
Jurisdiction over the Subject Matter
• The power to hear and try a particular case
• Acquired upon the filing of the complaint
Jurisdiction over the Issues
• The power of the court to resolve questions involved
in the case
• Acquired upon filing of the answer which joins the
issues involved in the case.
THE SUPREME COURT
• Its jurisdiction is found in the fundamental law itself.
• Composed of the Chief Justice and 14 Associate
Justices
• Principal Functions: a) Adjudication (Judicial power);
b) Administration (Disciplinary power) and c) Rule
making
• It sits either en banc or in divisions of 3, 5 or 7
members. At present, it has 3 divisions of 5
members each.
• The court en banc is not an appellate court to which
decisions or resolutions of a division may be
appealed.
• No doctrine or principle of law laid down by the
court in a decision rendered en banc or in division
may be modified or reversed except by the court
sitting en banc.
EN BANC Cases
a.) constitutionality of a treaty, executive agreement, law,
ordinance or exec order or regulation
b.) criminal cases where death penalty is imposed
c.) cases raising novel questions of law
d.) affecting ambassadors, public ministers and consuls
e.) doctrine or principle laid down by the court en banc or
division may be modified or reversed
f.) cases assigned to division inc MR which in the opinion of at
least 3 members merit the attention of the Court en
banc
g.) cases wherein majority of the en banc membership may
deem of sufficient importance to merit its attention
h.) cases where penalty is the dismissal of a judge, officer, or
employee of the SC, disbarment of a lawyer, or
suspension of any of them for a period of more than one year
or a fine of P10,000
i.) cases involving decisions, resolutions or orders of the
Sandiganbayan, Comelec, COA or Military Tribunals
j.) Habeas corpus against government or military officials.
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION (ARTICLE VIII SEC 5 PAR 1)
1.) EXCLUSIVE
2.) CONCURRENT
A.) COURT OF APPEALS
B.) COURT OF APPEALS AND RTC
C.) COURT OF APPEALS, SANDIGANBAYAN AND RTC
D.) RTC
APPELLATE JURISDICTION (SEC. 5 PAR 2 ART VIII, Constitution)
Automatic review – from the CA, all criminal cases involving
offenses for which the penalty imposed is death.
Ordinary Appeal by Notice of Appeal - all criminal cases
involving offenses which the penalty imposed is reclusion
perpetua or life imprisonment
Petition for Review on Certiorari (Rule 45)
Special Civil Action of Certiorari
The Supreme Court, Appellate Jurisdiction
PETITION FOR REVIEW ON CERTIORARI (RULE 45) FROM
DECISIONS OF THE RTC
- If RTC declares a law as unconstitutional, the same has to be
appealed directly to the SC. It cannot pass throught the
CA because the SC has exclusive appellate jurisdiction
regarding the matter.
8
- If there is purely an issue of jurisdiction of RTC, the SC shall
have exclusive appellate jurisdiction. However, if the
jurisdictional issue is mixed with a factual issue, the appeal
should be in the CA w/o prejudice to the filing of the same
with the SC later.
- Also, if only question of law is at issue without any mix of
question of fact, go directly to SC, otherwise, appeal must be
made to CA first. This applies to both criminal and civil.
- QUESTION OF LAW vs. QUESTION OF FACT tip: if the review
requires a re-examination of the evidence, then it involves
a question of fact.
THE SUPREME COURT IS NOT A TRIER OF FACTS.
- passing upon a factual issue is not within the province of the
Court. The findings of facts of the Court of Appeals are not
generally reviewable by the SC. Also, factual findings of the
trial court, particularly when affirmed by the CA, are
generally binding on the Court.
- it is not SC’s function to determine the weight of the
evidence supporting the assailed decision.
EXCEPTIONS: Factual issues may be resolved by the SC
a.) When findings grounded entirely on speculation, surmises
or conjectures;
b.) When the inference made is manifestly mistaken, absurd
or impossible;
c.) When there is grave abuse of discretion;
d.) When the judgment is based on misapprehension of facts;
e.) When the findings of acts are conflicting;
f.) CA in making its findings, went beyond the issues of the
case or its findings are contrary to the admissions of both
appellant and appellee;
g.) When the findings are contrary to the trial court
h.) When the findings are conclusions without citation of
specific evidence on which they are based
i.) When the facts set forth in the petition, as well as in the
petitioner’s main and reply briefs, are not disputed by the
respondent
j.) When the findings of fact are premised on the supposed
absence of evidence and contradicted by the evidence on
record; and
k.) when the CA manifestly overlooked certain relevant facts
not disputed by the parties, which, if properly considered,
could not justify a different conclusion.
OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS DEALING WITH THE
JURISDICTION OF THE SUPREME COURT
• Art. IX, Decisions, Ruling or Oder of COMELEC, COA
and CSC may be brought to the Supreme Court on
certiorari by the aggrieved party within 30 days from
receipt of the copy thereof.
• However, based on the present law, CSC
decision is no longer directly appealable to
the SC. It should be appealed to the CA.
• SC as Presidential Electoral Tribunal (Art. VII, Sec. 4
last par.)
• Judicial Review of Presidential Proclamation of
Martial Law or Suspension of the Privilege of Habeas
Corpus (Art. VII, Section 18(3).
• The SC can inquire into the basis on why
martial law is declared.
• Congress and Jurisdiction of the SC
• Congress does not have the power to lessen
or deprive the SC of its jurisdiction (Sec 5
Art VIII). However, it can increase its
powers and jurisdiction, PROVIDED it is with
the latter’s advise and concurrence. (Art.
VI, Sec 30)
THE COURT OF APPEALS
• Jurisdiction of CA is governed by BP 129 or the
Judicial Reorganization Act of 1980
• CA is composed of 69 justices constituting 23
divisions. They decide cases by division of 3. They
sit en banc only for administrative matters and not
to decide a case.
• CA was formerly called Intermediate Appellate Court
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION OF THE COURT OF APPEALS
1.) Exclusive (BP 129, Sec. 9[2]; Rules of Civil Procedure – Rule
47) and (Rule 65 Sec. 4, as amended)
2.) Concurrent
a.) With the SC
b.) With the SC and RTC
c.) With the SC, Sandiganbayan and RTC
• There shall be no simultaneous filing of petitions for
writs of certiorari, etc. Thus, a violation of this shall
constitute contempt of court and dismissal of both
9
 petitions w/o prejudice to the taking of appropriate
action against the counsel or party concerned.
(Interim Rules Sec. 17)
APPELLATE JURISDICTION OF THE COURT OF APPEALS
1.) Ordinary Appeal by Notice of Appeal or with
Record on Appeal
2.) Special Civil Action of Certiorari (Rule 65)
3.) Automatic Review
4.) Petition for Review
• The appellate jurisdiction of the CA is EXCLUSIVE
except in criminal cases decided by the RTC when
the penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua, life
imprisonment or death.
• RA 7902, the appeal from the CSC has been
transferred to the CA, so what is left behind in the
Constitution are the COMELEC and the COA.
POWER TO TRY AND CONDUCT HEARINGS
- Sec. 9 last paragraph, BP 129
- Even if the CA is not a trial court, it has the power
to try cases and conduct hearings, receive evidence and
perform any and all acts necessary to resolve factual issues in
cases falling within its original and appellate jurisdiction
including the power to grant and conduct new trials or
further proceedings.
- Linger and Fisher vs. IAC, 125 SCRA 522 – the power
of the CA to receive evidence is limited to incidental facts
which were not 100 percent touched upon or matters
overlooked by the trial court.
REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS
• EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION – SEC. 19 BP 129
AS AMENDED BY R.A. 7691
• Additional original jurisdiction transferred
under Sec. 5.2 of the Securities Regulation
Code
• Application for issuance of writ of search
and seizure in civil actions for infringement
of intellectual property rights (Sec. 3, A.M.
No. 02-1-06-SC, effective February 12, 2002)
• Violations of Anti-Money Laundering Act of
2001
• CONCURRENT ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
1.) With the Supreme Court
2.) With the Supreme Court and the Court of
Appeals
3.) With the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, and
Sandiganbayan
4.) With the Metropolitan Trial Courts,
Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial
Courts
5.) With the Insurance Commission
IN CRIMINAL CASES – SEC. 20 OF BP 129 AS AMENDED BY RA.
7691
1.) Criminal Cases not within the exclusive jurisdiction of any
court, tribunal, or body
2.) Criminal cases where the penalty provided by law exceeds
six (6) years imprisonment irrespective of fine
3.) Criminal cases not falling within the exclusive orig
jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan, where none of the
accused are occupying positions corresponding to salary
grade 27 and higher
4.) Cases where the amount of fine to be imposed exceeds
P4,000.00
* In complex crimes, jurisdiction is lodged with the trial court
having jurisdiction to impose the maximum and most serious
penalty.
• IN ALL CIVIL ACTIONS IN WHICH THE SUBJECT OF
THE LITIGATION IS INCAPABLE OF PECUNIARY
ESTIMATION.
- How to determine if action is capable or incapable
of pecuniary estimation? SC adopted a criterion of first
ascertaining the nature of the principal action or remedy
sought.
Thus, if the basic issue is something other than the
right to recover a sum of money, where the money claim is
merely incidental.
Examples: Specific performance, support or foreclosure of
mortgage or annulment of judgment, also actions questioning
the validity of a mortgage, annulling a deed of sale or
conveyance and to recover the price paid and for
rescission which is a counterpart of specific performance.
(Russel vs. Vestil, 304 SCRA 739) But, this has been
modified in Go vs. UCPB wherein the court declared that
foreclosure of REM as well as actions to annul REM is a
real right. So an action to annul a REM necessarily affects
10
 title to the real property, where jurisdiction is
determined by the assessed value of the property.
• IN ALL CIVIL ACTIONS IN WHICH THE SUBJECT OF
THE LITIGATION IS INCAPABLE OF PECUNIARY
ESTIMATION.
- How to determine if action is capable or incapable
of pecuniary estimation? SC adopted a criterion of first
ascertaining the nature of the principal action or remedy
sought.
Thus, if the basic issue is something other than the
right to recover a sum of money, where the money claim is
merely incidental.
Examples: Specific performance, support or foreclosure of
mortgage or annulment of judgment, also actions
questioning the validity of a mortgage, annulling a deed of
sale or conveyance and to recover the price paid and for
rescission which is a counterpart of specific performance.
(Russel vs. Vestil, 304 SCRA 739) But, this has been
modified in Go vs. UCPB wherein the court declared that
foreclosure of REM as well as actions to annul REM is a
real right. So an action to annul a REM necessarily affects
title to the real property, where jurisdiction is
determined by the assessed value of the property.
• IN ALL CIVIL ACTIONS WHICH INVOLVE TITLE TO OR
POSSESSION OF, REAL PROPERTY OR ANY INTEREST
THEREIN
Real Actions- one affecting title to or possession of
real property or interest therein.
If the value exceeds 20,000 or 50,000 in Metro
manila, RTC has jurisdiction. If lesser, MTC has
jurisdiction
Forcible Entry and Unlawful Detainer cases,
jurisdiction lies with MTC regardless of the value of
the property.
Real actions may include Accion Publiciana, Accion
Reinvindicatoria, Quieting of Title
• ADMIRALTY AND MARITIME JURISDICTION
IF CLAIM EXCEEDS P300,000 OR P400,000 IN METRO
MANILA
IF LESS THAN THE AMOUNTS, jurisdiction is with
MTC
• IN ALL MATTERS OF PROBATE
IF THE GROSS VALUE OF ESTATE EXCEEDS P300,000 OR
P400,000 IN METRO MANILA
IF LESS THAN THE AMOUNT, jurisdiction is with MTC
• IN ALL ACTIONS INVOLVING THE CONTRACT OF
MARRIAGE AND MARITAL RELATIONS
Modified by RA 8369 (Sec. 5), The Family Courts Act
of 1997. Family Court have already been constituted,
therefore, these cases are with the jurisdiction of the
Family Courts.
• IN ALL CIVIL ACTIONS AND SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS
FALLING WITHIN THE EXCLUSIVE GENERAL
JURISDICTION OF A JUVENILE AND DOMESTIC
RELATIONS COURT AND OF THE COURT OF
AGRARIAN RELATIONS as now provided by law.
Also modified by RA 8369, Family Court has jurisdiction in
cases involving minors
And, with the enactment of the Comprehensive Agrarian
Reform Law, all agrarian disputes were transferred to
DAR particularly the DARAB Except in two cases:
a.) petitions for determination of just compensation to
landowners and
b.) prosecution of criminal offenses under said Act.
• IN ALL CASES IN WHICH THE DEMAND EXCEEDS
P300,000 OR P400,000 IN METRO MANILA
Money claims or action to collect sum of money.
If value of claim is more than P300,000 – RTC
If value of claim is = or less than P300,000 – MTC
In determining jurisdictional limit, do not include
interest, damages, attorney’s fees, etc.
HOWEVER, if damages is the main cause of action
(not incidental as meant by exclusive of damages in money
claims) the amount thereof must be included in determining
the jurisdictional limit of the MTC. (SC Circular No. 09-94:
Guidelines in the Implementation of RA 7691)
Note: If Damages is only incidental to the main case, it
should not be considered in determining which has
jurisdiction.
• IN ALL CASES NOT WITHIN THE EXCLUSIVE
JURISDICTION OF ANY COURT, TRIBUNAL, PERSON
OR BODY EXERCISING JUDICIAL OR QUASI-JUDICIAL
FUNCTIONS.
• ORIGINAL CONCURRENT JURISDICTION WITH THE
SUPREME COURT
11
 1.) Issuance of writs of certiorari, prohibition,
mandamus, quo warranto, habeas corpus, and injunction
which may be enforced in any part of their respective regions.
2.) In actions affecting ambassadors and other
public ministers and consuls. (Sec. 21, BP 129)
• APPELLATE JURISDICTION OF THE RTC (Sec. 22, BP
129)
- All cases decided by lower courts in their respective
territorial jurisdiction.
- Review the case based on the records of the
proceedings submitted by the court of origin.
- RTC ruling in exercise of its appellate jurisdiction
may be assailed or questioned in CA through
Petition for Review. CA may or may not entertain the petition
upon prima facie evidence that RTC has committed an error
fact or law that will warrant a reversal or modification of
the decision or judgment sought to be reviewed.
MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS
• AS TO ORIGINAL JURISDICTION – Sec. 33 BP 129
1.) Actions involving personal property valued at P300,000 or
P400,000 in MM
2.) Sum of money (jurisdictional limit)
3.) Actions involving title to or possession of real property
where the assessed value does not exceed the jurisdictional
limit
4.) Provisional remedies
5.) Forcible entry and unlawful detainer
6.) Probate proceedings whether testate or intestate where
the gross value of estate does not exceed the jurisdictional
limit
7.) Inclusion and exclusion of voters pursuant to Sec. 38 of
the Omnibus Election Code
• AS TO DELEGATED JURISDICTION – Sec. 34 BP 129
- Delegated Cadastral and land registration cases
assigned by the SC where there is no controversy or
opposition and in contested lots valued at more than
P100,000
• AS TO SPECIAL JURISDICTION – Sec. 35 BP 129
- Special Petition for habeas corpus in the absence of
all RTC Judges.
• IN CRIMINAL CASES – Sec. 32, BP 129
TOTALITY RULE
• “where there are several claims or causes of actions
between the same or different parties, embodied in
the same complaint, the amount of the demand shall
be the totality of the claims in all the causes of
action, irrespective of whether the causes of action
arose out of the same or different transactions.”
(Sec. 33 par 1 BP 129.)
• Rule subject to the rule on joinder of parties
- joinder of parties is only proper when there is a
common question of fact and law.
JURISDICTION AND PAYMENT OF DOCKET FEES
a • It is not the filing of the complaint or appropriate
initiatory pleading, but the payment of the
prescribed docket fee, that vests a trial court with
jurisdiction over the subject matter or nature of the
action.
• Even if the amount of damages and attorney’s fees
do not determine jurisdiction, they must still be
specifically alleged in the complaint for the purpose
of payment of docket fees. Thus, the higher the
amount one is claiming, the higher the filing fee.
SUMMARY PROCEDURE
• A.M. NO. 02-11-09-SC
• Cases covered: Civil cases
1.) Forcible entry and unlawful detainer; and
2.) Other claims, EXCEPT probate proceedings where the
total claim does not exceed P100,000 or P200,000 (Metro
Manila)
Under RA 7691, the limit is P300,000 or P400,000 for Metro
Manila
• A.M. NO. 02-11-09-SC
• Cases covered: Criminal cases
1.) Violations of traffic laws, rules and regulations
2.) Violations of the rental law
3.) Violations of municipal or city ordinance
4.) Violations of BP 22
5.) All other criminal cases where the penalty is
imprisonment not exceeding 6 months and/or fine of
P1,000 irrespective of other penalties or civil
liabilities arising therefrom; and
12
6.) Offenses involving damage to property through criminal in the barangay where the real property or larger portion
negligence where the imposable fine is not exceeding thereof is situated and
P10,000.
4.) Disputes arising at the workplace where the contending
SMALL CLAIMS CASES parties are employed or at the institution where such
parties are enrolled for study shall be brought in the
• A.M. NO. 08-8-7-SC – To be filed with the MeTC,
barangay where such workplace or institution is located.
MTCC, MTC, MCTC
Cases covered:
1.) Purely civil in nature where the claim or relief prayed for is
solely for the payment of sum of money Civil Cases

2.) Civil aspect of criminal actions either filed before the
institution of the criminal action or reserved upon the
filing of the criminal action in court
pursuant to Rule 111 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure.
These claims or demands may be:
For money owed under any of the following:
a.) Contract of Lease
b.) Contract of Loan
c.) Contract of Services
All disputes involving parties who actually reside in the same
city or municipality.
- If the only contending party is the govt or instrumentality, it
is exempt from barangay conciliation. However, if govt is
only one of the contending parties, barangay conciliation
should still be undertaken among other parties.
- An action for annulment of compromise agreement is
generally not required to undergo barangay conciliation
- only involves natural persons and not where any of the
parties is a juridical person

d.) Contract of Sale or - Barangay conciliation is a condition precedent for the filing
of a complaint in court and non-compliance is a ground for
e.) Contract of Mortgage dismissal of the complaint for lack of cause of action.
For damages arising from any of the following: - Failure to submit for barangay conciliation is not a
requirement for the court to acquire jurisdiction. Thus,
a.) Fault or negligence
failure to raise it in the Answer is considered a waiver.
b.) Quasi-contract
c.) Contract Criminal cases:
3.) The enforcement of a barangay amicable settlement or an When punishable by imprisonment of not more than one
arbitration award involving money claim. year or fine of not more than Php5,000
Limit – P300,000 or P400,000 Metro Manila

KATARUNGANG PAMBARANGAY LAW

Where to file:

Civil Cases

1.) Disputes between residents of the same barangay: must

be brought for settlement in the said barangay

2.) Disputes between residents of different but adjoining

barangays and the parties agree to submit their differences to
amicable settlement within the same city or municipality
where any of the respondents reside at the election of the
complainant.

3.) Disputes involving real property or any interest when the

parties agree to submit their differences to submit to
amicable settlement by an appropriate lupon shall be brought

13
14