CIVIL PROCEDURE NOTES – 02/12/22

ILLUSTRATIVE CASE:
Dick is wealthy and powerful and Dagul is his friend but is not as wealthy as Dick. In 2018, Dick helped Dagul in setting up
his business by lending him P500,000. Unfortunately, Dagul lost the money that was lent to him in an online sabong. In
2019, Dick demanded from Dagul the payment of P500,000 but the latter wasn’t able to pay since he lost all the money.
Upon the advice of his friends, Dick formally sent a demand letter to Dagul to settle the money within a period of 10
days upon receiving the demand letter and failure to do so, he will be constrained to file an appropriate case against
Dagul so that he can recover the P500,000. Because of their history of friendship, Dick gave Dagul a chance to set things
straight and didn’t file a case yet. However, in 2022, Dick found out that Dagul spread rumors about him to their friends
which led him to file a case on February 14, 2022.
QUESTION: Which court will have jurisdiction over the case?
ANSWER: MTC will have jurisdiction over the case since the jurisdictional amount which is P500,000 is within the
jurisdiction of the said court. Even though the cause of action happened in 2018, the case was filed in 2022 and the law
in effect that time was RA No. 11576 (Effectivity date: August 21, 2021). The said law expanded the jurisdictional amount
of the MTC which means that the amount of P500,000 is within the jurisdiction of the said court. The rule, therefore, is
that the law on jurisdiction that will be applied is the law in effect at the time the case was filed in court and not the
law at the time on the commission of the violation.

JURISDICTION BY ESTOPPEL or DOCTRINE OF ESTOPPEL

 A party to the case voluntarily submits a case to the jurisdiction of the court and thereafter, encounters an
adverse decision on the merits, can no longer question the jurisdiction of the court.
 A scenario wherein the party to the case submitted himself to the jurisdiction of the court and actively
participates in the proceedings but later on, was not able to secure a favorable judgment. After such encounter,
he can no longer question the jurisdiction of the court because again, he already submitted himself to the
jurisdiction of the said court.

ILLUSTRATIVE CASE:
In 2018-2019, there was already a cause of action for Dick against Dagul. In fact, there was already a demand letter to
pay the said amount. At the time, the amount was within the jurisdiction of the RTC but because of the advent of RA No.
11576, at present, the amount was within the jurisdiction of the MTC. However, by inadvertence, Dick filed the case
before the RTC. Unfortunately, the judge of the RTC was also not aware of RA No. 11576. In fact, the RTC entertained
the case filed by Dick and proceeded with the trial. After the trial, the RTC found that Dick doesn’t have any proof that
Dagul is indebted to him by P500,000 to which Dick lost the case.

QUESTION 1: Can Dick question the decision of the RTC arguing that it has no jurisdiction over the case in the first place?
Should doctrine of estoppel be applied in this case?
ANSWER: Yes, doctrine of estoppel should be applied in the case since Dick already submitted himself to the jurisdiction
of the RTC and also actively participated in the proceedings of the case, hence, he can no longer question the said
court’s jurisdiction over the case.

QUESTION 2: Will you not consider the fact that there is error of jurisdiction in this case?
ANSWER: Yes, error of jurisdiction could also be considered in this case because the jurisdictional amount of P500,000
belongs to MTC’s jurisdiction and not with the RTC. Therefore, it has no authority to hear or decide the case or later on
implement its decision as in fact, judgment by a court which has no jurisdiction over a case is considered void.

TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION - This concept is relevant only in criminal cases.

RESIDUAL JURISDICTION
 “pro hac vice” – for the time being only or for this particular occasion only; cannot be used to govern in future
cases but only on this particular instance only.
 There is still a residual jurisdiction for courts because of the so-called “transition period”. While records are still
transferred to a different court, there are immediate needs to issue orders (e.g. protective orders) in order to
ensure that the decision of that court is respected or is enacted. These are considered as a matter of exception
rather than the general rule.
 Transition period – period of the transfer of the records of the case to the appellate court.
 EXAMPLE:
o There are cases where there is a need to pay the appeal fee but the losing party is an indigent, hence,
he cannot exercise the remedy under the rules simply because he has no money. The court can exercise
its residual power and can allow the indigent to continue to appeal the case even without settling the
appeal fee.
o It can even issue order executions pending appeal because of its residual power.
 o It can even allow the withdrawal of the appeal because the records have not been transferred to the
next court (e.g. appellate court).
QUESTION: What if in a civil case (e.g. unlawful detainer), there is no amount that is involved – in other words, it is
incapable of pecuniary estimation – which court has jurisdiction over the case?
ANSWER: In the present case under unlawful detainer, the Rules of Court and also the provisions under BP 129 provides
that it is cognizable under MTC. While it is incapable of pecuniary estimation and that the general rule for such cases is
that the RTC has general jurisdiction over it, the only exception that can be considered is when it is otherwise stated by
the law.

ILLUSTRATIVE CASES:

Dick has a claim against Dagul in the amount of P3M (cognizable under RTC). A trial was then ensued under the RTC.
After the trial, Dick was only able to prove the amount of P500,000. Can the RTC render judgment for the amount of
P500,000 in favor of Dick? Will you not consider the jurisdictional amount covered by the RTC under RA No. 11576 which
expands the jurisdiction of the MTC?
ANSWER: Yes, the RTC can still render judgment since at the time when Dick filed his complaint, his valuation amounted
to P3M which is under the jurisdiction of the RTC. Also, the RTC is a court of general jurisdiction which is why it can still
render judgment even though the valuation was proven to be way below its jurisdictional amount.

Dick filed a claim against Dagul for the amount of P3M (which is cognizable under RTC). But during the trial, Dick was
able to prove that he is actually entitled to P15M. Can the RTC proceed to render its justice in favor of Dick?
ANSWER: Yes, the RTC can still render judgment but the additional filing fee will now be considered as a lien on this
P15M.

Dick files a complaint for a sum of money against Dagul for the amount of P575,000 (cognizable under MTC). But during
trial, Dick was able to prove that he is actually entitled to the amount of P12M. Can the MTC render judgment in favor of
Dick for the amount of P12M?
ANSWER: Since the MTC is the court of limited jurisdiction, it can only render judgment up to the extent of its
jurisdictional amount which is only below P2M, in this case, only P575,000 will be rendered judgment. Definitely, it
cannot render judgment for the entire amount of P12M.

The claim of Dick against Dagul is for the amount of P700,000 (cognizable by MTC) but apart from this amount, Dick
would like to ask for damages in the amount of P1.5M. Total claim is now P2.2M. Which court has jurisdiction over the
case?
ANSWER: MTC has jurisdiction over the case since damages is not included in the computation for the jurisdictional
amount.

Claim is still P700,000 but Dick would like to ensure that he will win against Dagul so he secured the services of the best
law firm in Negros Occidental but he was charged for P2.5M for legal services. Total claim is now P3.2M. Which court
has jurisdiction over the case?
ANSWER: MTC will have jurisdiction over the case since attorney’s fees are not included in the computation for the
jurisdictional amount.

Dick realized that the P700,000 was borrowed by Dagul way back in 1969 so he computed for the prevailing legal
interest and it amounted to P5M. Total claim is P5.7M. Which court has jurisdiction over the case?
ANSWER: MTC has jurisdiction since interest is not included in the computation for the jurisdictional amount.

The claim of Dick against Dagul is P700,000 but he is already computing the possible cost of litigation which amounts to
P6M. Because of that, the total claim is P6.7M. Which court has jurisdiction over the case?
ANSWER: MTC has jurisdiction since cost of litigation is not included in the computation for the jurisdictional amount.

GENERAL RULE: For purposes of computing the jurisdictional amount, damages, attorney’s fees, interest, and cost of
litigation ARE NOT included. These are only included for the determination of fees (filing fees).

NOTE: The Rules of Court are not self-executing. You can give life to its provisions by invoking them. You can invoke
these provisions of the Rules of Court by filing an initiatory pleading – act that gives life to the provisions of the Rule of
Court.
 For civil cases – file a complaint/petition
 For criminal cases – file a criminal complaint
 For special proceedings – file a petition

QUESTION: Are all cases governed by the Rules of Court?

ANSWER: No, there are cases by which the Rules of Court are not applicable in pursuance to Section 4, Rule 1 of the
Rules of Civil Procedure:
  Election cases – governed by Omnibus Election Code
 Insolvency proceedings
 Land registrations – PD No. 1529
 Naturalization cases
 Cadastral cases
 Labor cases – NLRC Rules of Procedure

QUESTION: Are the provisions of the Rules of Court applicable to all courts?
ANSWER: Yes, because the said provisions are specifically intended for all courts within the Philippines.

QUESTION: Can a court not apply said provisions?

ANSWER: No, as was discussed previously, all courts in the PH are expected to apply the Rules of Court in its
proceedings. Although, an exception is made for the Supreme Court since it is the only one that can decide not to apply
the provisions of the rules in cases where it feels that the application of the Rules would not serve justice to the case
itself.

GENERAL RULE: Application of the Rules of Court should be applied liberally – liberal construction.
 This means that the application of the laws shouldn’t be strict because what matters is that it would serve its
purpose.
EXCEPTION: On specific instances, provisions of the ROC should be STRICTLY APPLIED as an exception…
 Matters pertaining to appeal – to file within 15 days (Calendar days)
 Matters pertaining to special proceedings – to file within 30 days
 Matters pertaining to relief from judgment – under Rule 38: To file a petition for relief from judgment within 60
days from the knowledge about the judgment but not more than 60 months from entry of judgment.

PURPOSE OF REMEDIAL LAW – To ensure that substantive laws would be properly enforced.

3 PRINCIPAL ACTIONS UNDER THE ROC:

1. Civil action – one by which a party sues another for the enforcement or protection of a right, or a redress or
prevention from a wrong.
2. Criminal action – one by which the state prosecutes a person for an act or omission punishable by law (RPC).
3. Special proceedings – legal remedy by which one person would like to establish status, right, or a particular fact.

CAUSE OF ACTION – it is an act or omission by which a person or a party violates the right of another.

ELEMENTS OF CAUSE OF ACTION:

1. There must be a legal right on the part of the plaintiff.
2. There is obligation on the part of the defendant to respect the right of the plaintiff.
3. There must be an act or omission on the part of the defendant in violation of such legal right of the plaintiff.

If to be related to substantive law – Obligations and Contracts

 Sources of obligations:
1. Law
2. Contracts – agreement between parties
3. Quasi-contracts
4. Delicts
5. Quasi-delicts
 NOTE: Only 2 main sources of obligations – Law and Contracts

QUESTION: How to determine the existence of cause of action?

ANSWER: Determined by the allegations in the pleadings (i.e. initiatory pleading) submitted by the party. Prayer (relief
sought by the plaintiff) must be excluded.

RIGHT OF ACTION – right to file the case

FOUNDATION OF CIVIL ACTIONS – Cause of action

 RULE: Every civil action, whether it is an ordinary or special civil action, must always be founded upon the cause
of action otherwise, the case will be dismissed. Even if the cause of action accrues during the pendency of the
trial, it will not change the fact that the case is dismissible because the cause of action must be present at the
time of the filing of the civil case.
 EXCEPTIONS:
o Cases which don’t require cause of action:
1. Declaratory relief – purpose is to be clarified; filed even before there is breach.
 2. Interpleader – a scenario wherein the one who is in possession of a property, there are
various/multiple claimants.
3. Expropriation – the right of the state to eminent domain; property being taken by the government
because it will be utilized for public purpose; the one who files the case for expropriation can also
be the supposed intruder/violator.
QUESTION: What is the effect when there is a failure to state the cause of action in the civil case that was filed? And
when do you say that there is failure to state the cause of action?
ANSWER: In effect, the case will be dismissed. There is failure to state the cause of action when the elements of the
cause of action as stated before aren’t present in the pleadings.