Introduction

 
1. Concept of Remedial Law
1.1.             Remedial Law v. Substantive Law
1.2.             Application of Procedural Rules
1.3.             Scope of Civil Procedure
1. ordinary
2. provisional
3. special
 
2. Rule-Making Power of the Supreme Court
2.1.             Constitutional Limitations
2.2.             Policy of Liberal Construction
 
3. Nature of the Philippine Courts
3.1.             Classification of Philippine Courts
3.2.             Principle of Judicial Hierarchy
3.3.             Doctrine of Non-Interference or judicial stability
3.4.             Doctrine of Primary Jurisdiction
3.5.             Doctrine of Adherence of Jurisdiction or continuing jurisdiction
 
 
Pertinent Rules:  1987 Constitution, Rules 1 & 5, Rules of Court
 
Jurisprudence:
 
Singson v. Larrazabal, August 30, 2017
Mateo v. DAR, et.al., February 15, 2017
Jose v. Javellana, et.al., January 25, 2012
Ateneo v. Dela Rosa, March 28, 1946
Guyamin, et.al. v. Flores, April 25, 2017
Panay Railways, Inc. v. Heva Management, January 25, 2012
Martos, et.al., v. New San Jose Builders, Inc., October 24, 2012
Rivera-Pascual v. Sps. Lim, September 19, 2012
SM Land, Inc. v. City of Manila, October 22, 2012
Pinga v. Heirs of Santiago, June 30, 2006
B.P. Oil and Chemicals International v. Total Distribution, February 6, 2017 -NATURE OF
COURTS (SC may still try the facts)
De Lima v. Guerrero, October 10, 2017 (Judicial hierarchy) – No one is excused from
respecting judicial hierarchy except… 10 instances
Audi AG v. Mejia, July 27, 2007 – Heirarchy of courts (It is to prevent inordinate
demands upon courts precious time and attention which are better devoted to matters
within its exclusive jurisdiction - also, to prevent further clogging of court dockets)
COMELEC v. Quijano-Padilla, September 18, 2002 – hierarchy of courts (When the issue
of the case involves national interest of serious implication, it may be directly filed
with the SC without breaching the doctrine of hierarchy of courts)
De Castro v. Carlos, April 16, 2013- (Supreme court is a court of last resort and must
so remain if it is to satisfactorily perform its functions assigned to it by the
fundamental charter and immemorial tradition)
Sinter Corporation v. Cagayan Electric Power, April 25, 2002 – Doctrine of non-
interference is intended to ensure judicial stability in the administration of justice.
Co-equal courts cannot interfere with eachother
Omictin v. Court of Appeals, January 22, 2007 – Primary jurisdiction- the court cannot
and will not determine controversy involving a question which is within the jurisdiction
of an administrative tribunal prior to the same
Republic v. Lacap, 2007 – Doctrine of Exhaustion of administrative remedies cannot
apply if there is nothing of an administrative nature is to be done or can be done.
When there is no technical knowledge required to resolve an issue and it is purely a
question of law, exhaustion of administrative remedies can be dispensed with.
Abad, et.al. v. RTC of Manila, October 22, 2007 – the rule on adherence to jurisdiction
does not apply when the change in jurisdiction is curative in character.
 
 
Jurisdiction
 
1. Jurisdiction in General
2. Subject Matter Jurisdiction
2.1.             Definition of jurisdiction over subject matter
2.2.             Jurisdiction versus Exercise of Jurisdiction
2.3.             Error of Jurisdiction versus Error of Judgment
2.4.             Effect of Estoppel on objections to jurisdiction
 
3. Jurisdiction over the Issues
4. Jurisdiction over the Res  or property in litigation
5. Jurisdiction over the Parties
5.1.             How jurisdiction over the plaintiff is acquired
5.2.             How jurisdiction over the defendant is acquired
6. Jurisdiction of Courts
6.1.             Supreme Court
6.2.             Court of Appeals
6.3.             Sandiganbayan
6.4.             Court of Tax Appeals
6.5.             Regional Trial Court
 Drug Courts
 Special Commercial Courts
 Election Courts
 Environmental Courts
 Land Registration
6.6.             Family Courts
6.7.             Metropolitan Trial Courts/Municipal Trial Courts in Cities/Municipal Trial
Courts/ Municipal Circuit Trial Courts
6.8.             Shari’a Courts
 
7. Jurisdiction over Small Claims Cases
8. Rule on Summary Procedure
9. Barangay Conciliation
10. Totality Rule
 
 
Pertinent Laws and Rules: Batas Pambansa Blg. 129 as amended, Republic Act 7691,
Republic Act 8369,
2016 Revised Rules of Procedure for Small Claims Cases as amended, 1991 Revised Rule on
Summary Procedure
 
 
Jurisprudence:
 
Regalado v. Dela Rama vda. dela Peña, et.al., December 13, 2017
Union Bank of the Philippines v. The Honorable Regional Agrarian Reform Officer, March 1,
2017
Dee v. Harvest All Investment Limited, et.al.,  March 15, 2017
Rapsing v. Hon. Judge, October 15, 2012
Mendoza v. Germino & Germino, November 22, 2010
Unduran v. Aberarturi, et.al., April 18, 2017
Lasmis v. Dong-E, October 22, 2010
Tijam v. Sibonghanoy, 23 SCRA 29
Cudiamat v. Batangas Savings, March 9, 2010
First Corporation v. Former Sixth Division of Court of Appeals, July 4, 2007
TGN Realty Corp. v. Villa Teresa Homeowners Association, April 19, 2017
De Joya v. Marquez, January 31, 2006
Marcos, Jr. v. Republic, March 12, 2014
Supapo v. Sps. De Jesus, April 20, 2015
Diaz-Enriquez v. Director of Lands, September 6, 2017
Coombs v. Castañeda, et.al., March 15, 2017
Municipality of Tangkal, et.al., Hon. Rasad B. Balindong, January 11, 2017
A.L. Ang Network, Inc. v. Mondejar, January 22, 2014
Jose v. Alfuerto, et.al., November 26, 2012
 
Republic v. Espinosa, et.al., April 5, 2017
Abagatnan, et.al., v. Sps. Clarito, August 7, 2017
Aquino v. Aure, February 18, 2008
Miguel v. Montanez, January 25, 2012
Sante v. Hon. Claravall, February 22, 2010
Gomez v. Montalban, March 14, 2008