CHAPTER 12

KATARUNGANG PAMBARANGAY

ATHE BARANGAY JUSTICE SYSTEM

Justice System
Barangay
The
a n di t s O b j e c t i v e s

the barangay justice system is to "discourage

The purpose of
the
ate filing of cases in court in order to decongest itsS
i n d i s c r i m i n a t e

in the the quality of justice

process, enhance
slogged dockets and, of the barangay
by it." In Aquino Aure, the objective
v.
tispensed
was explained by the Supreme Court as
follows:
iustice system
The barangay justice system was established primarily
as a means of easing up the congestion of cases in the judicial
before
courts. This could be accomplished through proceeding
a

to the who conceived

the barangay courts which, according
one

Fred Ruiz Castro, is essen-

the system, the late Chief Justice
tially arbitration in character; and to make it truly effective, it
should also be compulsory. With this primary objective of the
barangay justice system in mind, it would be wholly in keeping
with the underlying philosophy of Presidential Decree No.
1508, otherwise known as the Katarungang Pambarangay

Quiros v. Arjona, 425 SCRA 57 (2004], p. 63; see also Morata v. Go,
125 SCRA 444; Galuba v. Laureta, 157 SCRA 627 [19981, p. 634.
546 SCRA 71 |2008], pp. 79-80, emphasis supplied; citing People v.
Caruncho, 212 Phil. 16, 127 SCRA 16 [1984); Galuba v. Laureta, supra.;
and Morata v. Go, supra.. See also: Wee v. Castro, 562 SCRA 695 [2008), p.
706 racpan v. Barraga-Haigi, G.R. No. 234499, June 6, 2018.

259
 ALTERNATIVE DISPL'TE KESOLUTION

260 KATARUNGANG
The
Barangay
PAMBAPANAY
Juslce System-
better serre. 261
policy
behind it would be
erved if an
1992.The repcal,
Law, and
of-court
the
settlement of the case is reached
oluntarily by the
volunta. out. I danuary
b a r a n g a y J u s t i c e

stem however, did

because not do
originally R.A. No. away with
parties.

The primordial
objective of Presidentint
n u m b e r of court litipat Decree
Same system

established under PD.7160 provided the

for the
reduce the
ations and By virtue
Section 421 of No. 1508.
No. 1508 is to
prevent the
d e t e r i o r a t i o n of
the quality of iust Justice was empowered R.A.No 7160, the
Owered to promulgate
filing
has been brought
by the
indiscriminate

objective, Section 6
of
of P Ses in
implementing the provjsie

rovisions the Local the rules and Secretary of

of
the courts. To
e n s u r e this
residential
undergo a conciliation the
tarungang
Pambarangay. Government Code
y. Likeur
regulations
Decree No. 1508
required the parties
to ur
on
and Regulations Imnle
mplementing Likewise, of 1991
the Local Article 201 of the
before the Lupon
Chairman or the
Pangkat ng ga Rules
the
Secretary of
process
precondition to iling a complaint in 1991
directed

Justice to Government Code

which promulgate the
of Pamburan,
pagkasundo as a

exceptions x X .
X. The said section has court rungang
K a t a r u

shall form rules

subject to certain
compulsory in
nature. been the
Rules a n d R e g u l a t i o n s .
part of the said
declared
1508 (Establishing Svst. Thus, on 1 Jun 1992,
June the
Presidential Decree No.
Rules and Regulations,Katarungang Pambarangay
a

Amicably Settling Disputes

at the Barangay Level) is no9 plementia

otherwise known as Im-

Act No. 7l60, otherwise known a Pambarangay Rules, was the Kata-
corporated in Republic rungar g
promulgated by the Department
Local Government Code,
which took e e c t on l
January 1999 and too effect upon its
of
Justice
publication in the
Official Ga-
zette.

Legislative History
DA No. 9285, otherwise known the as
Pesola
Act of 2004" (ADR Act) did not "Alternative Dispute
repeal, amend
modify
The barangay justice system had its roots with Presid
the irisdiction of the
Lupon under the Katarungang Pambaran-
or

Decree (P.D.) No. 1508 (11 June 1978). Recognizing the tim. Law and, nce, the provisions of the Local Government Code
say
at the thereon remain effective.
honored tradition of amicably settling disputes family and
barangay level, P.D. No. 1508 established a system therefor
officers of the barangay in order to help alleviate the courts by
of
docket congestion. In brief, P.D. No. l508 required for certain dis.
putes the conduct of conciliation at the barangay level before anv
y
complaint can be filed the with the regular courts.
The law directed the creation in the barangay of a Lupong
Tagapamayapa" composed of the Punong Barangay as chairman
and not less than ten (10) nor more than twenty (20) members
from
whom parties can chose the members of the Pangkat ng Ta
gapagkasundo' or the conciliation panel.
P.D. No. 1508 was repealed by R.A. No. 7160 otherwise
known as the Local Government Code of 1991 which took effect on

Section 1(a), P.D. No. 15008.

Section 1(f), P.D. No. 1508. Section 536, R.A. No. 7160.
Section 534(b), R.A. No. 7160 Section 53, ADR Act.
 At
TERNATINT
DISTUTE
KESOLUTION

Lupong
ATARURGANG PAMBAPAL AY
Tagnpamayapa
262
nndan,ial i
T,apawh.anundo 263
TAGAPAMAYAPA AND upon
members shall hold
ofice untul
LUPONG year
B.
P A N G K A T N G T A G A P A G K A S U N D o
the t h i r d
following new
ther
a
Lupon i
1erminaled hy
on

aled
res
nation, the appoint
transler nent unless onst-
theiwithdra
t hdrawal oi
l u t r

ot
their soner
residence place
nCurrence oltheT
the appointnent by ie
or
of
t o k , o r

Lupong Tagapamayapa and

in the majorily the
of Punong Barun
P a n g k a t n g T a g a p a g k a s u n d o

A v he Lupon shall be filed members of the Lu

of qual1ficd peby the Punong Baran
the body organized po rouEcice appointment
a
("Lupon") is
the ,

The Lupong
Tagapamayapa

Barangas only for the person. Such appointee

unexpircd portin
of t h e Punon&

in every
barangay
composed
(l0) nor
more
as
t h a n twenty (20. Chairm
memi
predecessor
of the
term of his

Tagapagkasubers
Toqc
than ten
and not less members of the Pangkat ng
the shall exercise Constitut of the angkat
from which exercise
chosen. T h e The Lupon
Pangkat")
shall be
over the Pangkat.
istra-
tive s u p e r v i s i o n
For each dispute brought before the Lupon, the
The Pangkat
is the conciliation panel
brought
constituted
constituted
before the
from thec.
(2) members thereof who parties shall
shall constitute the
membership for
every dispute Lupc
+OR and
c h o o s e

os fail to agree
agree on the
tail Pangkat.
Lupon members
chosen by agreement of Ifthe parties
f membership of the Pangkat, the
Lupon
consists of three (3) drawn by l dispu- shall determine
the the
ing lots. The members of the members
n

o r if no
such agreement
is reached,
the ehairm of the
Pang
tants,
kat Pangkat shall elect from
Punong Barangay. Dyhemselves
the chairman and
secretary of the
amo Pangkat shall convene not later than three (3) Pangkat."
Composition, Qualifications and
The
c o n s t i t u t i o n .
days from its

Term of office
to the Lupon, a person must he
Disqualification and Termination of Membership
To qualify for appointment have
work in the barangay for which #
his actual residence or place of the Any member of the Pangkat may be disqualified upon the
appointment is sought and must p0ssess personal characteristio
fotive of a party on the ground of relationship, bias, interest, or
ini
that indicate his suitability for the task of conciliating disputes such
any other similar grounds. The disqualification shall be resolved by
as his integrity, impartiality, independence of mind, sense of fair.
the affirmative vote of the majority of the Pangkat. The decision on
ness. reputation for probity and other relevant considerations like
this matter shall be final.
tact, patience, resourcefulness, flexibility and open mindedness.
Furthernmore, he nmust not be expressly prohibited by law from hold- Membership in the Pangkat shall terminate upon cessation of
ing public office.
11

membership with the Lupon by reason of the expiration of term, re-

Section 399(a), R.A. No. 7160; Rule II(a), Katarungang Pambaran- Section 400, R.A. No. 7160; Sections 4 and 7c), Rule IV, Kutarun
gay Rules. gang Pambarangay Rules.
Section 402, R.A. No. 7160; Section 7, Section 401, R.A. No. 7160; Sections 4 and 5, Rule IV, Kataru7
Katarungang Pambarangay
Rules gang Pambarangay Rules.
Section 404, R.A. No. 7160; Rule II(b), " Section 404, R.A. No. 7160; Section 1, Rule V, Katarungang Pumn
Rules.
Katarungang Pambarangay
barangay Rules.
Section 399(b), R.A. No. 7160; Section 1, Rule 15Section 410(d), R.A. No. 7160; Section 4, Rule V, Kotarungang
IV, Katarungang
Pambarangay Rules. Pambarangay Rules.
 ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE KESOLUTION

264
Lupong KATARUNGANGand PAMBARANGA
Tagapamayapa
Pangkat ng
place of work or withdrawal f Tagapagka-undo -
265
of
residence
or

the co Punong
Barangay,andthe Members
ncurrence of a
to the
With
transfer Barangay Barangay, or Kag
Kagawads, of the
members
signation. Punong
by the Any vacane re now
an occurring
cdapamayapa are now
appointment

jority of
the
members of
the

by
Lupon.
the Lupon
member
nted to the of, but as persons in authority" considered not Sangguniang
of the
Lupong
be filled,
not
membe at by merely Ta
the pace
shall as
Pangkat transferring
or
resigming

the remo agent

the
terminated.

chosen by the
parties
from a m o n g

ot the
parties to agree on
ao Lupon
ing membery The legal
ega a
implication of the
her of the
member.
foregoing
reof, Lupon, while principle is that
member
of failure a common
drawn
nult
upon

lot be there
In
performing
case
by
the Lupon.
choice, the vacancy
shall be filled
by the
Lun on o n
the
occasio

constitutes
enalized under Article the his as
felony of official duty
an

148 of
or

Direct
the Revised Penal Assault
define
t h e s a m e occa an
chairman the at will agent of the
assaulted,
also
consUTUtea the
Lupon member is Code"
of office of
Lupon
Members

Moreove,
on the same
occasion, felony himself
of Direct
Nature
406(a) of R.A. No.
7160 is agent is person who Assault.
comes to the aid
As provided
in Section
of their of
official upon "m LDOn wect Assault assaulted, that will of
bers, while in
the performance
of
in
duties or on m the
under Article
149 of the constitute the
ority, as the Revised
as persons auth C o d e .2

thereof, shall
be deemed Penal
occasion Similarly, Sectin
Revised Penal Code.
fined in the
of the Revised Pena Code, xthe
xx Lupon and
privileges of Pangkat Men abers
law states that
"lflor purposes
same
a
Tagapamayapa each barangay
in each
members of the Lupong
in their jurisdictions x . shall hobe
as persons
in author1ty
deemed Dorsons in authority. As above
it was held that, in ie discussed, members of
In the case of People Sion," including Pangkat members,
v.
ofRA,
H the Lupon,
the Lupon are now considered are
No. 7160, members of
not
ly as authority under the Revised Penal considered as
themselves person
in authority, but are
mance their duties on the occasionCode while in
p e r s o n s

agents of persons au the perform: of or

thority. Thus: thereof.
2. Hconomic benefits. Lupon
members shall generally serve
"X XX Section 388 of the Local Government Code of 1991 :4hout compensation but they shall be entitled to
xXX expressly provides, in part, that "t|or purposes of the Re. ted under the Local Government Code incentives
of 1991. When in the
vised Penal Code, the punong barangay, sangguniang baran- erformance of their duties, the Lupon
1991.
gay members, and members of the lupong tagapamayapa in
members, whether in public
each barangay shall be deemed as persons in authority in their
Drivate employment, shall be deemed to be on official time and
jurisdictions. This law expands the definition of a person in
authority under the Revised Penal Code wherein among the
barangay oficials, only the barangay captain or chairman, now
called Punong Barangay, is expressly considered a person in
authority, as provided in Article 152 thereof. Thus, in addition Article 148 [Revised Penal Code. Direct assaults,-Any person or
persons who x x x shall attack, employ force, or seriously intimidate or
resist any person in authority or any of his agents, while engaged in the
Section 400, R.A. No. 7160.
performance of official duties, or on occasion of such performance, xxx.
Section 405, R.A. No. 7160; Sections 1 and 2, Rule V, Article 149 [Revised Penal Code]. Indirect assaults.-x xx any per-
Pambarangay Rules.
Katarungang
son who shall make force or intimidation upon any person coming to
use of
See also
Section
8, Rule IV, Katarungang Pambarangay Rules. the aid of the authorities their agents on occasion of the commission
or
of
277 SCRA 127 |19971.
pp. 155-156; emphasis supplied. any of the crimes defined in the next preceding
article.
 KATARUNGANC PA
KESOLUTIO

Th
DISII

RN
ATINE
A
266 267

shall
from
noi
suffer

their enplovment
tom
any
diminutioln
n
compensa
on or
allo n C.
RISDiCTION OF THE
LUPON
also geIUTall
niembers.

PanAkat
members,

the incent
ncentives tha
furidiction o f
of the Lupon and
Being
Luppon
to
c o m p e n s a t i o n
except
for

C ode
of 1991, 3
he econon he
the /Lupon
Exclusions
entitled
shall have
C r o v e r n m e n t

not
by the De
g e n e r a l ,

provided
Local to be
them
under the
under a system
And
hen in the
In
olving purles rho are
who
actually residing jursdiution over all
disputes
C r o v e r n m e n t .

408 of
of Ra
i n e n t i v e s

municpulity. Se an 408
other Local
w. Secion
R.Á. No. in
7160 definedthe same cily
eemedwhether in puble
and
or
Interior members,
er inllity.
ment ofthe duties,
the
Pangkat
he Lupon as as follows
the
or
formance of their
employment,
shall
likewise

diminution
be
ution in
to be
in compensation al
on
official jurisdiction
or
private

not
suffer
from any SEC. 408.
Subject Matter for
time,
and shall
employment.
or ceptionsTh he
Therein.The
lupon of each Amiuable Settlement, E.x
allowance
from said
hority to bring together the barangay hal! have au-
municipality tor parties
Barangay, or an
The Punong actu ally
3 Legal
advice.
whenever
necessary
for the
for exercise
eor upon or same city
or
amicable residing in the
settlement of all dis-
their
putes x Xx."
member. Katarunda.
the
Pangkat
functions
seek legal
in the
administration

advice o n
matters
of
involving auo Pambara
ons of law The same Sec 408 excluded the
gay. may
legal officer,
legal officer o
orr
city legal officer
prosecutor. or t h ej u r i s d i c t i o n .
of the Lupon: following disputes from
from the provincial such ice on advi any of the
officer. Any
the municipal legal Rules may be l. provi (a) Where one party 1s the
sions of the Katarungang
Pambarangay

o r Pangkat member to
vated by or instrumentality thereof
government or any subdivi-
Lupon sion
the Punong Barangay, h)Where one party is a
for review. pubic officer or employee, and
tary Justice
of the dispute relates to the pertormance of his oficial f

(c Offenses punishable by imprisonment exceeding one

or a fine exceeding Five thousand
)yea pesos (P5,000.00
(d) Offenses where there is no private offended party:
(e) Where the dispute involves real properties located in
different cities or municipalities unless the parties thereto
agree to submit ther differences to amicable settlement by an
appropriate lupon;
(Disputes involving parties who actually reside in
harangays of different cities or municipalities, except where
such barangay units adjoin each other and the parties thereto
differences to amicable settlement by
agree to submit their
an

appropriate lupon;
(g) Such other classes of disputes which the President
Section 406(b), R.A. No. 7160; Section 9, Rule IV, Katarungang in the interest of justice or upon the r e c o m -
Pambarangay Rules. may determine
mendation of the Secretary of Justice.
Section 406tb), R.A. No. 7160; Section 5, Rule V, Katarungang
Court in which non-criminal cases not falling
Pambarangay Rules. The filed
under this Code are
Section 408, R.A. No. 7160; Sections 1 and 2, Rule X, Katarungang within the authority of the lupon
Pambarangay Rules.
 I V T I S I T I
li KAA A 'AA
A 7ERN
Jurhcti,h 1ies -
269
reter
trial,
mofu proprio the cae 13 the di-o
Where the di piu
before
s e t t e m e n t "

to Tnd o)yrel
nd
uniiaiie,
u
ime
CLes

may.
a t any
tor
anmicable
fferent
their prort
dilirenc uni th locacd
c o n c e r n e d
Bubmit th.

portii ther nto

to
the lupon exenm gree
nppropriale
ite Lup
Lupo amu
aw
further
the olloy
412 of
the
same

emet Uy an
cilatn ind mulaint
pre-litigation

of a Any complaint hy
Section
4 by or
requirement

the courts ral 7

disputes
from the
thereofwith
or juridical
cotitiea, sine
only ,frauns.
the
direct filing nhips
to Burangay
concliatIon 1d parinrr
hall
allows
XX in respondents frtLLOng
Sec. 1, Rul: eilher a
be
par
C o n c i l i a t i o n - N

or
VI, Complain-
Y.ilarung
u n t s

412 tn
SEC

b)Whene
the parties may
following
fo cour
gOdirectlv instanco.
in t h e
lThe par- a y Rules/;

15 Disput: nvolving parti

Pubaran
to
court
who
may go
directly eays ol
different citie.
or 2ctunlly reide
adjoin each muniapahiue,
ties in
the a c c u s e d is under detentic
tion; Such
units adjoin
barangay
units
other arnd xopt where
to s u b it. their
difterences to amicablethe parties thereto
(1)Where
agree

a person
otherwise been deprived
has o t h e r w i s e
appropriate Lupon; settlement by an
Where
(2 of personal liberty calling tor habeas corpus
[6 O enses for which the law
proceedings: prescribe:
nenalty of imprisonment exceeding one year or a
a
maximu
Where actions
are coupled with
with provisional
proi
five thousand pesos (P5,000.00
fine of over
3) remedies such as prelimin injunction,
or at 1
Offenses where there is no offended party
tachment, delivery persohal property, and
pendente lite; and ADisputes where urgent legal action is neces sary
support

otherwise be
iniustice
prevent injus from being committed if
further continued.
to

Where the action may

barre specifically the following:
(4) by
the statute of limitations
lal Criminal cases where the accused is under
XXX lice custody po-
XXX
XXX or detention See Sec. 412bi1),
Revised Katarungang Pambarangay
disputes excluded
Law
enumeration of the [bl Petitions for habeas corpus by
A comprehensive a
person ille-
made by the Supreme Coourt i gally deprived of his rightful custody over an-
the jurisdiction of the Lupon was
to wit: other or a person illegally deprived of his lib-
Agbayani vs. Court of Appeals," erty or one acting in his behalf

1 Where party
one is the government, or any subdivi Icl Actions coupled with provisional remedies such
Sion or instrumentality thereof, as preliminary injunction, attachment, delivery
of personal property and support during the
party is public officer or employee and
2 Where one a
pendency of the action; and
the dispute relates to the performance of his official functions;
d] Actions which may be barred by the Statute of
Limitations.
which the President may de-
674 SCRA 358 20121. pp. 373-374, citing Administrative Circular 9 Any class of disputes or upon the
recommendation
No. 14-93 issued by the Supreme Court on July 15, 1993 entitled: "Guide termine in the interest of justice
lines on the Katarungang Pambarangay Conciliation Procedure to Prevent of the Secretary of Justice;
arises from the Comprehensivve
Circumvention of the Revised Katarungang Pambarangay Law [Sections Where the dispute
10 (CARL) (Secs. 46 & 47, R.A. 6657);
399-442, VII, Title 1, Book III, RA. No. 7160, otherwise knouwn
Chapter as
Agrarian Reform Law
the Local Government Code of 1991."
 HESOLUTI
TON
D I S P U T Ë

AL
T E R N A T I N E

KATARUNGANG
Jurisdiction
PAMBANGAY
of the Lupon
270 -

271
ari
controversies

or

teanlyhich
s /Montova t'. Escayo, 171 SCRA 44 er, even in such
i t u a t e d , H o w e v e

disputes

L a b or e l a t i o n s / / o r
ployer-employee
11 which gra oute for
it their dispu
cases, the
original an Che case conciliation parties may Volu
iation by the voluntar1ly
a m e n d e d ,

er
as conciliation and ubm
T
Code, c o n c i l i n t i c

of
d e s i r e ,

shall
portiroughtappro
be appropriate
226,
Labor
over
certuin
offio
fices of the dis8 hey
s0

rty or l: brought
larger portion thereof
or in the Lupon i
art j u r i s d i c t i o n

problems
to
Depart real
property

the parties
of is barangay where
situated
e x c l u s i v e

or
the 18
availed

urt without first lose their right to Once con-

g r i e v a n c e s
Employment;

putes. and cilintion

pon a compromise
upon in
cou.

ment
ofLabor to
annul
judgment

(See Sanchez US. 1Judgel

c

t h e iirl i a t i o n
a s e s

ceedings before the terminating directly file

or
completing
proceedir
Actions court
in
121 directly
concilia

conciliation Lupon. The the

be filed
459)."
mination o f e
cthe action Dy proceedings completion
is ter- or

158 SCRA dismissa of by reason

reasings

ot
required to avoid the
of ministrative remedies. forum shopping and non-
Tupa:. ict.
Pangkat is, admin

jurisdiction of
the Lupon
namely: [il
and

i] the nature and therefore exhaustion

The
(2) factors,
n a t u r e and cire circum 3.
Actions coupled
prouLsional remedies." Because of with
termined by two
and li/ the
inCes of
the urgency involved
of
involved in the
resolution
of the dispute, w h e t h e r eivil o r criminal laint or petition, provisional remedies
stances
nature, e
in the compl:
actions
disputes, u n l e s S they are
uded therefall nedies are excluded from the coupled with provi-
p l e a d e d

parties. All
eva

of the Lupon sional remed

within the
authority
n a t u r e and
circumstances
the dispute the
Otherwise, the time spent tor jurisdiction of the Lupon.
basis of the conciliation proceedings
from on the
Lupon might render the
provisional remedies before the
and of the parties
nugatory
o r moot. prayed for ineffec-
tual,
and
Circumstances
Actions that may be barred
by the statute of
by Nature In order to avoid tthe prescription of civil or criminal limitations.
Exclusion

of the Dispute No. 7160 provides e0 orovides for the suspension of the actions, R.A
nature and
circumstances disputes of #h. offenses and
cause ofaction from the time ofprescriptive
the
periods of
Based on the
I... filing of the com-
are excluded from the jurisdiction of the pon:
nt with the Punong Barangay which will resume upon receipt
lowing disputes of the complaint or the certificate
the complaina of repudia-
imprisonment exceeding
Offenses punishable by on or certification file action issued by the Lupon or Pangkat
to
ona
1. (1,
year or a fine exceeding P5,000.00.°The gravity of the offense secretary. The interruption of the prescriptive period shall, how-
charged as determined by the imposable penalty therefor takes tho ever, not exceed sixty (60) days from the filing of the complaint
case out of the jurisdietion of the Lupon, and justifies the direct
with the Punong Barangay."
referral of the dispute to the proper prosecutor's office or the
Notwithstanding the interruption of the prescriptive periods,
courts.
there may be instances when the conciliation proceedings may go
2 Disputes involving real properties located in different cit. beyond the sixty (60) day period of interruption. If the sixty (60)
ies or municipalities, unless the parties voluntarily submit them interrupting the prescriptive period for offenses and
selves to conciliation before an appropriate day period
Lupon." The efficacy of
conciliation by the Lupon is significantly reduced when the
prop-
erty involved in the dispute lies outside the territorial limits of the Section 3(c), Rule VI, Katarungang Pambarangay Rules.
city or municipality where the barangay 9
Section 412(3), R.A. No. 7160. See also Blardony,
Jr. v. Coscul-
the is constituting Lupon Barraga-Haigi, supra.
luela, Jr., 182 SCRA 825 [1990], p. 829; Racpan v,
0S e c t i o n 412(4), R.A. No. 7160.

Section 408(c), R.A. No. 7160. 11, Rule VI, Katarungang

Section 410(c), R.A. No. 7160; Section
Section 408te), R.A. No.
7160. Pambarangay Rules.
 THESO
1IIT1ON
DISTTI

ATRNATINE

KATARISGA, PAMRARANA
be
JurdunheLaur
1
party
m ay
allowe
l
whieh is in to le i
lapSe,
to action
about Who may nifinte
dane prre vwrding
c r i m i n a l

is or
ofA
of
action Civil c o n s t i t u l o

an excepti the appropriate fihng fee, any

c w U s e s

mrt
the
appropriate

This
atio
s i t u a t o n
s h o u l d

should
r e m e d i e s
on o the
not only be
de he ocourts can
should
ction agairat anotherindividual why, has
CaUBe ofM a
individual
a

n y matter within the

be ovailed author of e i rioirz
prescribing.
admin1strative
resort
to the

taken ly or in WTiting.
plain, orally
conciliation
on before
betore
that
v the may om
harangay mphaain 3uppiu iir taurman of t r
principle completed pre-litigation

be
of
but
must

purpose
of abo
about to prescribe
which are
the
O t h e r w i s

barangay conciliati
e .

defeated ifactions the bar.

The Kutarung
ngang Pambarangay
complete

will be and
Pulea
Lupon the cas in
to
undergo
elevate to the court
thot only
individuala shali te
partie
spet.ca..y promdes
be
be
required

reThe partyd The party dan

the conciliatio seeking
to
first
termina

complainanta reapondeniA con..at.on

cither as complain or proeeding*
howeveill be
however,

nershipe or other jurndcalCOmplaunt ty or against

dismise:
process.

be dismissible for should,

will orations, partne
prescribing
fon
orum
complaint
of the entuties shall De filed
ger
If trative remedies not, administr. or acted upon by the
proceedings of non-exhaustion
r e c e i v e d

Lupor. tcdunz estates of de-

and a. ceased persons
shopping
from
Code, and
Code
Agrarian Re arising
the Conprehensive

5 Disputes
disputes
under the Labor
a l o n s to ictions Perforce., only individua.s are regired by law to undergo pre
Lau. labor disputes
disputes are These itigation
n
conciliation
conc1liation and cases
i0Gv.2 jundica. persons are
form

annuludgment special rules

upon
a compromtSe
their rac
for their
that provide for
governed
resolution exclude from the requirement hi prinapte was settled in the
laws or and case of Vda. De Borrome0 t Pogo a fol.ow
by special
the procedure thereof.
which the Presidond
6 Such other
classes of disputes tne recommendation
de xX x [Rleferral of a duspate to tDe Baranza Lupor is
termine in
the interest of justice
or upon of the required only WOere LCe parI toereto are iDddu-
als. An individual means 50gle uman being as
Secretary of Justuce.
contrasted with a soaal moup or stitution. Ob
ously, the law applies only to cases involving
Circumstances
Exclusion by Nature and natural persons, and not where any of the par
ties is a juridical person such as a corporatuon.
of the Parties
partnership. corporation sole. testate or intestate es-

The following circumstances attending any or all of the par tate, etc
ties to a dispute exempt the dispute from the requirement of prior
subditiston or in-
conciliation by the Lupon: 2 Where one part is the goternnmen, a

The Lupon is an instrumentality of the

strumentality thereof.
is a local government unit
and a subdivi-
Where
both parties is a juridical person. The pre-
one or barangay which. in turn,
will be in conflicet of inter-
itigation barangay conciliation presupposes that both parties are Sion of government. As such. the Lupon
the
hatural est to hear and conduct
conciliation Over disputes involving
host verbatim recitation of
persons.
Section 410a) of R.A. No. 7160, which is an a of which it is an instrumentality
Section 4(a) of P.D. 1503, reads: gOvernment

Pambarangay Rules.
Montane? Provincial Agrarian PARAD Section 1, Rule VT, Katarungang 200612. April 5.
2017.

egrs ude ntal, 0) SCRA 217, citing AsiaReform Adjudicator Estate of Vipa
Fernandez, GR No.
Uy r.
Furuy, Jr, 540 SCRA 536 International Auctionee 126 SCRA 217 [1983!. p.
221, emphasis supplied
12007 7160
Aptoyan Coturt of Appeals, Section 408ta), R.A No.
supra.
 ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION
KATARUNGANG
-Jurisdiction PAMBARANGAY
of
the Lupon-
275

one party
1s a
publie
or
officer or

official mployee and the until after

after the
termination or
Where

relates to
the
performance

conthict
of his

of interest if
ifit functions
ong
it will be tth
io
courts
enp r o c e e d i n g s

completion of the concilia-

will be in
performance made
dispute
larly,the Lupon,
conciliation
proceedings
involving the perf
of funo Conciliation is
conduct

tions of a public
officer or
employee.

offended party
the to the offer
Barangay

BaNot Jurisdictional Mandatory

4Where
there is no privateno fended nparty wit
offended
there 1s
case,
In this sett
committed.

be
conducted
or an
amicable
settlemen canhombe Mandatory
conciliation can

executed.
tion. Con
"
Compliance with
Pre-litigation
conciliation betore the Lupon is
on
under detention. falling within its mandatory for
raceeding involvingjurisdiction. No complaint,
is
the accused nce all disputes

5. Where conciliation ld dela

could
delay the action, or procee
any matter petition,
cused is under Tesolu
for barangay
be filed or instituted within the
directhy in court orauthority
the requirement the accuse shall of
for which
tion of the
criminal action
detention the
Lupon
nt offio
overnment office for adjudication, unless there has any other
or police custody. he
iliation before the been a prior
deprived of
has been
otherwse Lupon and
settlement
no
has been
Where person
6 calling for habeas corpus proceedings." Similarly ,bo
liberty a
personal
arangay
al settleme
has been reached but it has been reached,
or a
properly
hthe parties. The 1act of prior conciliation and that repudi-
proceedings could delay the release of a perso hei has been reached shall be certified to the no set-
conciliation
petition for habeas corpus is intended
being tlement has
by Lupon or
detained and for whom
a
to Dangkat secretary, and attested to by the Lupon or Pangkat chair-
be filed. man.
7. Where the parties actually reside in barangays of rent
It was held in Agbayani u. Court of Appeals" that the complaint
cities or municipalities, except where such barangay units od involving a dispute subject to pre-litigation conciliation before the
each other and the parties thereto voluntarily agree to submit the Lupon should be dismissed if i] it did not state that it is one of the
dispute to conciliation by an appropriate Lupon.. If the parties to excepted cases, or lil it did not allege prior availment of the said con
the dispute reside in different cities or munic1palities, the efficau
of the conciliation to be conducted by the Lupon is significantly
iliation process, or iil it did not have a certification that no concilia-
tion had been reached by the parties.
reduced considering that its members will have less moral ascen-
dancy over the parties. The parties, however, are not precluded
Not Jurisdictional
from voluntarily availing of barangay conc1liation. Thus, in this
situation, R.A. No. 7160 gives the parties the option to avail of
pre-litigation conciliation by the Lupon mandatory,
is
While a
barangay conciliation by the appropriate Lupon. Again, one fail to acquire or lose its
availed of, the parties are not at liberty to elevate their dispute to it is not jurisdictional." A court will not
within the jurisdiction of the
Jurisdiction over a dispute which falls

Section 408(b), R.A. No. 7160

Section 408id), R.A. No. 7160.
Section 412b1), R.A. No. 7160. 412, R.A. No.
Section 7160.
Section 412(b2), R.A. No. 7160. Supra., p. 374. 289 (1987);
Millare v.

Appeals, 151 SCRA

Section 408f), R.A. No. Gonzales U. Court of Cosculuela, Jr, supra.
No.211966, August 7, 2017.
7160. See also Abaga tnan v. Clarito, G.R (19871; Blardony,
Jr. v.
ernando, 151 SCRA 484
 ON
KATARUNGANG PAMBARANGAY
K E S O L U T I O N

D I S P U T E

TIVE
ALTERNA
Jurisdiction of
the Lupon 277
276
undergo
the pre-litigati concili Complaint is Prematu
not The
did
it held
that:

Lupon
although

Aure," it
was

not iur
o t aa jurisdic
The requ wement for
barangay conciliation is
In
Aquinov.
process
is n
onal juraltechnicali cality." Thhe
absence thereof merely proce a
liance therew ith cannot ofaction and renders the only affects the
c o n c i l i a t i o n

siueeroce
the
[T]he
sufficiency
n o n - c o m p l i a

du

the court has

that
c a u s e

otherwise
XX Comnls
w i t h e complaint
"X

irement, setion Whi

so o ft h e
und of failure
r e q u i r e m e n t ,
which

or or over the the ground

1comply
p l y with a dismissible on
person of the Rules condition
j u r i s d i c t i o n

Rule 16
precedent
matter
the of 1j), Kule
10), of Cprecedent
affect subject
over
the
to
Section

The pursu
pursu-
acquired ant action, whether civil or criminal, without complying
institution
ne institution
with theof
of
merely renders the action
the defendant.

andmark case of Rova t hq

eu i r e m e n t m.

in the lan
As
enunciated

mediate Appellate Court:

ministrative remedies." premature for failure to

with
Ordinarily, non-compliance with the condi- The proper ground to assert
against an action filed without
undergoing the requisite
r t has no junsdiction overbarangay
ect the suffi
by P.D. 1508
could
hio
the parties

conciliation is not
tion
precedent
of action and make
hat the court
the subject matter of
ciency of the plaintiff's
cause

dismissal on ground of laol

k
that
claim or
the ffense charged, but
over Dut that thec
the
the filing of the com-
matter of

to premo
complaint
vulnerable
but the sam information ion is
is premature since
of action or
prematurity; me
plaint
or a condition sine qua non
of cause
court of competent juris. complied with 5
a not been
would not prevent of adjudica.
has
exercising its power the failure to comply with the requisite barangay
diction from where the defen.
ce con-
case before it, ciliation is not jurisdiction but only renders the complaint prema
tion over the to object to such
case, failed
dants, as in this
in their answer and
11ch objection
may be waived and a party may be estopped
exercise of jurisdiction m challenging the complaint on that ground if he fails to file a
proceedings a quo.
even during the entire
While petitioners could
have prevented the trial
court from exercising jurisdiction
over the case by sea-
instead in
sonably taking exception thereto, they Catorce v. Court of Appeals, 129 SCRA 210 |1984; Gonzales u.

voked the very same jurisdiction by filing

an answer

seeking afirmative relief from it. What

is more, Court of Appeals, supra.
and Galuba v. Laureta, supra; Lansangan v. Caisip, G.R. No. 212987,
in the trial of the case by cross-
they participated
August 6, 2018; Sabay
v. People, G.R. No. 192150, October 1, 2014.
examining respondent Planas. Upon these prem- 325 (20081, p. 339, citing Berba
Villadar, Jr. v. Zabala, 545 SCRA
ises, petitioners cannot be allowed belat- now
u. Pablo, 474 SCRA 686 (2005]. civil action under
edly to adopt an inconsistent posture by attack- Among the grounds for a
motion to dismiss a

ing the jurisdiction of the court to which they the Rules of Court are:
Section 1, Rule 16 of
had submitted themselves voluntarily. x x * jurisdiction over the subject matter
"b) That the court has no
Emphasis supplied of the claim;
XXX X XX
XXX
546 SCRA 71 |2008|, pp. 82-83, emphasis supplied, citing Presco u. the claim has not
Court of Appeals, 192 SCRA 232 That a condition precedent for filing
[1990); and Royales v. Intermediate Ap" been complied with."
pellate Court, 212 Phil. 432, 127 SCRA 470
Liumbao, 519 SCRA 408
[1984]. See also Santos t
(2007); citing the cases of Royales v. Intermeau
Appellate Court, supra.; Sta. Rosa
Realty Development
Amante, 453 SCRA
432 [2005]; and Bañgres Il v. Balising.Corporattor
328 SCRA
2000)
 ALTERNATINE DISPLTE RESOLUTION

278
KATARUNGANG
-Jurisdiction PAMBARANGAY
of the
"
Lupon -

279
This
the
the
complaint.

held that
principle re
Was ex resulting
dismiss

it was that
to where
from
non-exhaustion of administrative
motion as
Lumbao
Lumbao
timely
in
Santos t:. same
remedies.
plained
to the fact that the petitioners
be gven
Emphasis
must
court from exerei rcising jurisdicti Ttis true that the
the
trial
precise
technical efect of
to Dismiss with
comply with tthe
requirement of Section 412 of the failure to
prevented Motion
have nled a
could
had they in- ernment Cod on
the case invoked
ery
the ver same jurisd
i i o n by by fil ernme.5of barangay conciliation (previously Local Gov-
Presidential Decree
over
they relief from 5 of P
stead ofdoing
so,
an
a f i r m a t i v e

Worse, th in
Section
No. 1508) is contained
seeking trial of tha case by pre- produc by non-exhaustion much the same
nlaint becomes afflictedof with
answer
in the effec
ing an
actively
participated

and by cross-examining the wit the complaint i administrative remedies -

petitioners
the
controversy there alleged vice of
witnesses

enting
their own
respondents mbao. It is
turity; and the prema
presented by
the
of a partu
arty iin a case
ele ol determination. The
is not
ripe
complaint becomes vulnerable
for
nesses active
partic1pation
pend- dismiss."
that the to motion to
tantamount to a
mentary
him betore a
court 1s
nition of
ing against and a willingness ide by the
resolu-
that court's jurisdiction
said party from latero
Options of the Court
bar
at thepugn
which will
tion of the
case
It is also well-settled
thot
court's jurisdiction. non
barangay conciliation when e.
ing the
referral of case for
a
j u r i s d i c t i o n a l in
natare. Considering that the absence of
pre-litigation conciliation is
law is not
quired under the
deemed waived if not raised seasonakl. shall
nd
irisdictional,
the
be without prejudice dismissal of re-filing
to the the complaint
of the on that
complaintground
that ground
after
mav therefore be
dismiss. Hence, herein petitioners can no with the requirement. Moreover, since the defect is not
in a motion to compliance
defense of non-compliance with th
longer raise the risdictional and can be waived, it is submitted that the court
proceedings to seek the dismiseo Juri
barangay conciliation eannot dismiss the complaint motu proprio but only upon motion of
filed by the respondents Spouses Lum.
of the complaint defendant. Thus, the options available to the court are:
waived the said defense when the
bao, because they already
Motion to Dismiss."
they failed to file a 1. Dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action
upon motion of the defendant:"

Failure to Exhaust Administrative Remedies 2. Suspend proceedings upon petition of any party for the
the
case to be referred to barangay
conciliation; and/or
As explained in Aquinou. Aure," the precise technical effect of conciliation, ap-
3. Refer the case motu proprio barangay
to
non-compliance with the pre-litigation conciliation process is the last paragraph, R.A. No.
plying by analogy Section 408(g),
that:"
7160, which provides
amicable settlement;
"Section 2. Subject matter for
Peñoflor u. Panis, 117 SCRA 953 [19821; Royales Intermediate v. exception thereto.-

Appellote
Court of
Court, supra.; Peregrina Panis, 133 SCRA 72 [1984); Corpus
u. u.

Appeals,
274 SCRA 275 [19971: Dui v. Court of Appeals, 201
SCRA 472 19951 34-35.
SCRA 13 (2012), pp. Court
"Uy v. Javellana, 680 Gonzales v.
pra., Pp. 421-423, emphasis supplied; citing the cases of Royales Intermediate Appellate
Court, supra.;
.Intermediate Appellate Court, supra.: Sta. Rosa Realty Develope Royales v.
Katarungang
Pam-
Corporation v. Amante, supra.; and Bañares 1I v. Balising, ofAppeals, supra. last paragraph),
Rule VI,
supra.257 SCRA
Supra., p. 82, emphasis supplied: citing Uv v. Contreras, S e e also Section 2
167 (1994) barangay Rules.
 RESOLUTION
DISPUTE
ALTERNATIVE

KATARUNGANG PAMBARANGAY
280 281
X XX
XXX
D. FORMS OF DISPUTE
VENUE AND PROCEDURE
RESOLUTION,
XXX

cases
cas
not
falling
non-criminal

in
whieh

the lupon
ofth.
under this Code
court
of
The
the
thority
a u t h o r i t y

befor trial motu proprio

rio refer of Dispute Resolution
time
for am
within

at any Carms
settle-
c o n c e r n e d

may.
filed
to
the lupon
case
the There are
a r two (2) torms of
ment
which Lupon chairman oralternative
the Lupon
e
the
dispute resolution
ADR)
be, can cond duct, namely: Panghat, as the case may

1. Conciliation I mediation. Generally, the

the Pangkat can conduct Lupon chairman
conciliation
or
mediation or
amicable settlement in order to resolve a leading to-
Is an amica

chairman or the Pangkat wul not decide the dispute. The

wa

em or render an award dispute

thereon. They are vested brought
1iation functions. They can only encourage the only withto
to
conc

e parties
untarily arrive at an amicable settlement.
2. Arbitration. At any stage of the proceedings, the parties
may agree to undergo arbItration by the Lupon chairman or the
Pangkat provided that the parties agree in writing that they shall
abide by the aware thereon. While the Lupon chairman, acting as
a
eale arbitrator, or the Pangkat acting as a panel of arbitrators,
can conduct arbitration, arbitration is not commonly undertaken
hecause of lack of awareness of the intricacies of the arbitral pro-
cedure and the apprehension of rendering an award that cannot
withstand legal challenge.
The agreement to arbitrate may be repudiated within five (5)
to
days from the date thereof. If no repudiation of the agreement
award
arbitrate is made within the said period, the arbitration
shall be made after the lapse of the said period.
the Pangkat cannot
chairman
As a general rule, the Lupon or

resolve the dispute through

exert compulsion upon the parties to
an amicable settlement. However, if the parties have entered into a
in writing to undergo arbi
settlement agreement, or have agreed
tration and an arbitration award
has been rendered, the Lupon

5
Gonzales v. Court of Appeals, supra.
Section 413, R.A. No. 7160.
 ALTERNATINE DISPUTE R
KATARUNGANG
Forms
PAMBARANGAY
of
Dispute
Venue and Resolution
Procedure 283

rity to compel
compliane
as the authorit
i eir jurisdiction, including disputes
has
the award within thei

involving real proper

s e t t l e m e

P ' a n g k a t

chairman
or
the
execution
of
the t i e s . T h u s :

pr
the

or
c a u s e

rChe Court gave the

following
Tagupamayapa inelucidation
with
ofthe Lupong the jurisdic-
on
Proceedings
tion Tauora Hon. Veloso:
u.

shall be. The foregoing provisions are quite

C o n c i l i a t i o n

Venue of proceedings

clear. Sec-
conciliation
conciliation sion 2 specifies the conditions
of the
the nof a barangay 'shall have under which the Lu
barangay, the authority to bring to
v e n u e

The in the
e same
ether the disputants for
dis
reside

the
parties
B e t

amicable settlement of
Where
said
barangay;
their dispute: The parties must be
1.
brought
in
different
ho.
ing in the same city or
'actually resid-
shall be reside in
ngays in municipality. At the same
pute
Where
the parties
the dispute
sh settled in the ba the tim Section 3 while
reiterating that the dispu-
2 tants must be actually residing
same city o r
municipality,

or
:
any
of the
off respondents actually re.
in the
gay or in 'different barangays' within the same city
same baran-
respondent
the
gay
where
of the
complainant;

or municipality unequivocably declares that the

-

the choice all be brought

sides. at
involving
real property
shall
brought for set LuDOn shall have 'no authority over
disputes 'in-
larger volving parties wh0 actually reside in barangays of
Disputes the real property or

tlement
3
in the
barangay
where
portion different cities or municipalities, except where such
situated; or barangays adjoin each other.
thereof is
the workplace
where the co
at
Disputes arising
r at the
institution where such parties are Thus, by express statutory inclusion and
4 or at the
institu
exclusion, the Lupon shall have no jurisdic
are employed
parties
shall be brought
he barangay where uch
in the
tion over disputes where the parties are not
enrolled for study
institution is located. actual residents of the same city or munici-
workplace or

pality, except where the barangays in which

during the mediatian
to the venue shall be raised they reside adjoin each other.
Objections
Barangay; otherwise, the samo
proceedings before the Punong It is true that immediately after specifying
shall be deemed waived. the barangay whose Lupon shall take cognizance of
In Torbela u. Rosario," the Supreme Court clarified that ac a given dispute, Sec. 3 of
PD 1508 adds:
tual residence of the parties in the same barangay, or in barangays real
However, all disputes which involve
of the same city or municipality, or in adjoining barangays in dif therein shall be brought in
property or any interest
ferent cities or municipalities, is a requirement for the exercise of the barangay where the real property or any part
jurisdiction by the Lupon chairman or Pangkat over all disputes thereof is situated"

sentence is just an ordi-

added
Actually, however, this
should operate as such.
nary proviso and
Section 417, R.A. No. 7160. as a rule,
should be limited to
The operation of a proviso, the operation of
Section 409, R.A. No. is to restrict or vary
7160; Section 3, Rule VI, Katarungang Pa its normal function, which
barangay Rules. rather than expand
its in thescope, ab
661 SCRA 633 the principal clause,
12011, pp. 656-657, emphasis supplied, iting of a clear indication to
the contrary.
fatora v. Hon.
Veloso, 202 Phil. 943, 117 SCRA 613 [19821. Seeaalso:
sence

Peñaflor Panis, supra.

v.
 K E S O L U T

A7INE
DIS
TË
KATARUNGANG
Forma
PAMBARANGAY
of
ALTHRN

DiputProuedur
Venue and Rasoluton. 285
appropriate
ate offico
office of a pro- Rules o f Procedure

natural
and
s o m e t h i n g
trom the
enacting
The
except qualify the statute
quali, in
sring is the
o
procedure
or
h e follo
r e s t r i c t ,

the
tho scope of th for
1780 1
clause,
to
limit,

or
to
e x c l u d e

otherwisewo
from

be within its
pon nnd P'anghat: conciliation before the Lu
or
in part,
whole which

statute
that
Jur
2d
467.)

.
Complatnt Upon payment of the
Upo
terms
73 Am simplv . e deemedto n party may
complain orally or in
wntung the appropriate filing fee
olaint lodged is verbal, it toshall
should

proviso

Tescribed in in the Lupon chairman

Therefore.
the quoted
on
v e n u e
p r e s c r i b e d

principal ot ary in the record book oi be recorded by the

the
rule
Section
of Se
of
3, thus: Althoue
gh Lup se Complaints in the order it
restrict
or
vary p a r a g r a p h

the residence of the

as recejv ing the
includin names of the
the nature of the case, and theparties,
first
of the determined by the date and time
clauses
generally properties shall be it was file
parties, is disputes involving

the real
prone

The respondent shali

disposition
thereof.
where

that
any 2.
Answer.
answer the
brought
in the
barangay
notwithst.
standing the par- in writing, by denying specihcally the
complaint also
is
situated,

same city/municipality orally or

material averments
thereof
in the complaint and/or d/or alleging any lawful
part e l s e w h e r e

the defense. He may

of
against the Complainant, a cross also
reside
ties i n t e r p o s e a counterclaim
Emphasissupplied in Civil Case No. U-4359 (the Tor.
Case No. claim
parties
in Civil
rio) do not reside in
against aa co-r co-respondent, or a third party complaint against one
The original the
Rosario
yet a party to the
siblings
and the
spouses

different
barangays
baran within the san
who is n o t
proceedings. Notwithstanding the
bela
o r in
the al character of an answer, 1ts contents shall be recorded by the
barangayys of
different
nt
barangay, different ities
same

or
municipality,
or in
ch
each other. Some of the ngkat secretary
nan or Pang as part of the minutes of the proceed-
city adjoining
outside of the co1nt
but are 69

or
municipalities
Pangasinan
and even
al ings.
reside outside Lupon had no jurisdiction
Resultantly, the
together. x x x
and barangay
conciliation was not a
over the dispute Case No. U-4359
for the filing of Civil
pre-condition 3Section 410(a), R.A. No. 7160; Section 4. Rule 1,. Katarungang
Pambarangay Rules.
Procedure for Conciliation Section 2(a), Rule Il, Katarungang Pambarangay Rules
65 A counterclaim is any claim which a defending party may have

general pub
shal be open to the (Section 6, Rule 6. Rules of Court)
an opposing party.
The settlement proceedings against
66 A cross-claim is any claim by one party against a co-party arising
informal but orderly manner, without re.
ic and conducted in an occurrence that is the subject
matter either of the
and as best calculated to effect of the transaction or
gard to technical rules of evidence,
out
therein. Such cross-claim may include
about harmonious original action or of a counterclaim
a fair settlement of the dispute
and bring a
asserted is or may be liable to
a claim that the party against whom it is
relationship between the parties. Upon the request of a party or the cross-claimant for all
or part of a claim
asserted in the action against

upon the initiative of the Punong Barangay or the Pangkat, the Rule 6, Rules of Court
the cross-claimant." (Section 8, a defending
pubic may be excluded in the interest of privacy, decency or publie "A third (fourth, etc.) party complaint is a claim that
not a party to the
morals. The proceedings shall be recorded by the Lupon or Pangkat a person
of court, file against
party may, with leave defendant, for contribution,
secretary as the case may be. (fourth, etc.) party
action, called the third his opponent's
or any other
relief, in respect of
ndemnity, subrogation
claim." (Section Rule 6, Rules of Court)
11, Rules.
Pambarangay
Section 5, Rule VI, KatarungangKatarungang Pambarangay Rules.
Section 7, Rule VI, Sections 2(b) and 4(b), Rule III,
Katarungang Pambarangay Rules.
 ALTERNATINE DISFUTE REsOLUT
TION

KATARUNGANG
Forms PAMBARANGAY
of
Venue Dispute Resolution,
280 and
Procedure -
287
UpDon
chairman.
Upon receipt of tho deemeda waiver isrer of the
hin tthe
ho
next right to
working COmday,
Lupon within

to challenge
by f the
M e d i a t i o n
shall,

to
to t h
the
repudiation of the agreement said on
grounds. The
chairman

3
Lupon With
notice
ce
complainant.y,
before him for a mediation issuance of the certificati arbitrate shall
be
the action insufficient basis
the respondentís), before he to file
plaint.

summon
the witnesses
to
appear

tails
in his
mediod
ion effort The arbitrati itration award shall be made court."
after the
If he
withihen
their

them
and i n t e r e s t s .

ot the
parties before
parti.

for
repudiat
and within ten lapse of the
(10)
conthicting

from the
first
meeting

of tho
of the Pangkat him, jod
loment days thereafter. pe-
their
(15) days
c o n s t i t u t i o n

or
resolution. It
Pangkat shall arrive at athere is no agreement to ar-
the
fifteen date for
set a
Pangkat shall
The bitrate, t h e
ithin fifteen 15) days fromsettlement or resolution of
forthwith
Pangkat.
shall
4Conciliation by the its itution,. on the daonvene
constitution the dispute with
the day it
be extended at the
discretion of the convenes. This
from

later than
three (3) days
chairman.
lt shall
hear
both partiesy and period

a fifteen (15) days unless in Pangkat but not

not
the Lupon and explore all and
all possibilitiesfor exceeding

clearly meritorious cases.

hour s e t by the
issues,

simplity ons for he nForm of settlement and award. All

their
witnesses,
It may
1ssue
sunmons

It shn
hall personal ap- "
by rence
ediation confere or
arbitration, shall besettlements, whether
settlement.

their
witnesses.

d
exert all ef in writing, and in a
and
ze or dialect known to the parties.
amicable

of the
parties within
fifteen (15)
days from their langua Settlements by mediation
pearance
the parties onciliation shall be signed by the
conciliate
may be
may be extended in the parties and attested by the
forts to
initial
confrontation,
which period

another period
not exceeding fift
fifteen (15 Pang
nore
Puno
Barangay or Pangkat chairman, as the case may be, that
discretion for 72
cases.
such was
e m e n t wa
agreedupon by the parties freely and volun-
kat's meritorious

tarily, after full understanding of its terms and

days, exceptin
clearly
the mediation
an intelligent
proceed time during awareness of the legal consequences thereof. The arbitration award
At any
ation nproceedings Oration award
5. Arbitration. and the
conciliation
chairman be signed by the Punong Barangay or all the members of the
before the Lupon in writing to gs hall
may be."
as the case
ings the parties may agree ndergo Pangkat,
fore Pangkat, tnieman or
before the Pangkat, the Pangkat,
or the as the case
may consent is vitiated by fraud, violence in-
bythe Lupon
chairman

award, Tha D
7 When a party's or
arbitration

to abide by
the
thog8
arbitration
Punon timidation, he may,
within ten (10) days from the date of the set
be, and agree as the case may
be, shall, after hear- the same by filing with the Punong Barangay a
or the Pangkat, tlement repudiate
Barangay than the Sixth day but not lat shall be sufficient
award not earlher statement to that eftect. Such repudiation
ing, render the the date of such agreement."
Sworn
the issuance of the certification
for filing a complaint in
than the fifteenth day following basis for
office for adjudication.
arbitrate may be repudiated
within five (5 court or any government
The agreement to the aforesaid period shall be
thereof. Repudiation
shall be made by filing Failure to repudiate within
days from the date effect sworn to before waiver of the right to challenge on said grounds."
statement to that deemed
with the Lupon chairman a
a
action in court. If
consent of the repudiating party was the filing of an
him on the ground that the 83. Certificate authorizing arrived at, a certi-
intimidation. The failure to repudiate compromise agreement
vitiated by fraud, violence or there is no
settlement or
aforesaid period shall be
the arbitration agreement within the Katarungang
7160; Section 12,
Sections 413 and 418, R.A. No.
Section 410(b), R.A. No. 7160; Section 10(a), Rule VI, Katarungang Pambarangay Rules.
No. 7160.
Pambarangay Rules. Section 413, R.A.
R.A. No. 7160. Rule VI,Katarun
Section 410d), R.A. No. 7160. "Section 410(e), Seetion 13,
413, R.A. No. 7160;
Section 101b), Rule VI, Katarungang Pambarangay Rules. 8
Sections 411
and
Rules.
Dection 413, RA. No. 7160; Section 9. Rule VI, Katarungang Pa gang Pambarangay Rules Pambarangay
Katarungang
barongoy Rules. Section 14, Rule VI,
ection 10/c), Rule lI1,
Katarungang Pambarangay Kuies
 ON
H E S O L U T I O N

KATARUNGANG PAMBARANGAY
D I S P U T E

T E R N A T I E

AL -Forms of
Venue Dispute Resolution,
and 289
38 Procedure -

the LLupon
the or

eftlect
shall
be
issued

or
by
Pangkat
cho
rman." Pangkat
The sec If
BarangayY
the
prove uns
mediation
onciliation efforts before
or
ve unsuccessful,
to
that
the
Lupon
parties
ties to tile
to their case certif there having the
he Punong
fication
to by the
ha o r where the been
retary,
attested

as
a u t h o r i t y
for
nrbitrate,
respondent fails to appear at
ings before the Punong
no no agreement to
serve ion proceed
the
the issuance atBarangay," the Punong media
wil
cation
the proper courts
complaint int in court or uld not cause
for filhng
a
any gov 4 a ys h o u l d

nstead, this stage Baran

The
c e r t i f i c a t i o n

1ssued by
the
followin
arangay authori action. Inst he should
constitute the
of a
certification to
oftice
must
be file
mediation,
tion or arbitration
conciliation
Pangkat before whom
conciliation,proceedings
e r n m e n t

iitt is
1s upon
n the failu
failure of shall be heid.
by the Lu mediation
nay be, before the
And,
ties attested
on airm
secretary
and
that a confrontatiTman
as the case

Pangkat that the

or
arbitration,
The Lupon
(Punong Barangay, certifying certifving be issued,
certification to file
ation or the
a. may
that a conciliat
and action
taken place
but the same has settle Transmittal of settlement or
parties
has
been
r e a c h e d , bu been subse ement or arbit arhitration
award shall be
arbitration
award. The set-
has
ment
to the
transmitted by the Lupon
q u e n t l yr e p u d i a t e d :

attested by th.
secretary to appropriate city or municipal court within five (5)
and the date of the award or from the
The Pangkat
b. chairman.
secretary
cert1tying that a confrontation of the parties Pangkat days from

day period forfor the lapse of the ten (10)

repudiation thereof, and shall furnish
took place but no conciliation/settlement has been thereof to each of the parties to the settlement and
to each copies
the Lupon
or that no person al confrontation took
co
place be- chairman.

reached;
through no fault of the complainans.s
fore the Pangkat The same periods tor transmittal to the
the proper
referring court will
apph for amicable settlements reached in a case referred by the
The Punong Barangay, party
as
reguested by
on the ground of falure of settlement where the disnute court motu proprio to the Lupon for amicable settlement although
the same 1ndigenous cultural not falling within the authority of the Lupon."
involves members of com
where one or more of the parties to the afora
munity, or
Said dispute belong to the minority and the parties mutu
Compulsory Processes and Contempt
ally agreed to submit their dispute to the indigenous svs
tem of amicable settlement, and there has been no set.
The Lupon and Pangkat have the power to issue summons
tlement as certified by the datu, tribal leader or elder to
the Punong Barangay of the place of settlement." against parties and to compel the attendance of the parties and
witnesses in their proceedings.

They, however, do not have the power to cite for contempt. If

a party or witness refuses to0 appear before the Lupon or Pangkat,
the be,may apply
the Lupon or Pangkat chairman, as case may
Section 412, RA. No. 7160. Municipal Circuit Trial
with the proper Metropolitan, Municipal or
As discussed in
Supreme Court Administrative Circular No. 14-93
entitled: "Guidelines the
cedure To Prevent the
on
Katarungang Pambarangay Conciliation Pro Rules.
Circumvention of the Revised Katarungang Pam Section 1(c), Rule III, Katarungang Pambarangay Pambarangay
barangay Law (Sections 399-422, Chapter Section 8(a), third paragraph,
Rule VI, Katarungang
Act No. 7160, VII. Title I, Book II1, Republe
otheruwise knoun as the Local Rules.
Section 2h), Rule I1, Government Code of 1ll Section 16, Rule VI, Katarungang
Katarungang Section 419, R.A. No. 7160;
Section 41, Rule III, Katarungang Pambarangay Rules.
Kules. Pambarangay Rules.
Sections 1, 4 and 5, Rule Pambarangay 8 Pambarangay Rules
IX,
Katarungang Pambarangdy Section 16, Rule VI, Katarungang
 ALTERNATINE DISPUTE RESOLUTI
TION

KATARUNGANG
-Forms of PAMBARANGAY
290
Dispute
Venue and Resolution,
Procedure- 291

party or
witness as for the
thermore, the
the
re
r ef
fuus 1 n g
is
is availab failure of the
to a ndi.
of
c i t a t i o n
of
same
remedy
e tion
mediatic ceedings before the respondent to
willfully refusesCon by the Punong Barangay wvill result in
the 1he
fails r
or
appear at the
Court
for
of
court.
w i t n e s s
who

herconstitution Punong
a
to refusal or willful failure ofBarangay of the Pang-
contempt

rect against the

he Pan
hat. The
phaernt y
appear w
tending
summoned.

pear b
efore the Pangkat, as determined by thetherespondent to ap-
ring, shall be latter after due
to A p p e a r
for filing the sufficient basis for the issuance of a
notice and

Refusal

Efects ofFatlure
or

failsto
rtilicati

complainant's
vernment agency or cause of action in court or
refuses
or willfully
t.
appear for with the proper,
office
complainant despite due noti wie
s. hd
If the
dismissed. Such dismthout
arbitration

conciliation or may
be dismissed
Personal.Appearance«of Parties
diation. complaint
his judicial
justifiable
reason,
from seeking
barar
for the andProhibition on Counsels
the
complainant
involved e
in the barangay conciliat
shall bar as
that
fa:1.ation
same
cause ofaction who
refuses or willfullv fails to appear .ll oroceedings before theLupon and Pangkat, the parties
Ifit is the respondent notice
due notice
and thout justifiable Ppear ired to appear
are r e q u
in
person Without the assistance of counsel
conciliation
despite
that arises
reason,
from
om or
or
is
necessar
or the intervention of anyone." Lawyers of parties are
for he bhas
made

appearing or
participatingin the precluded
any
counterclaim

the mplainant
complainant's
e.g., compulsory
s action,
counter
from appearin

are the parties or

proceedings" unless they
tnesses themselves, or they are the provincial,
connectedwithd i s m i s s e d . He shall also be barred from filin a g com- are
claim, may be in the judicial
action that may be filed
by the
municipal legal officer, or
prosecutor requested to render
pulsory
counterclaim
l advice to the Lupon. Representatives of parties are likewise
complainant. cluded from appearing in the proceedings except for minors and
which a defending no
is any claim who may be assisted
by their next of kin who are
A counterclaim
party.It is compulsory if. heine nay incompeten
an oppos1ng non-lawyers." Thus, a minor cannot be represented by a lawyer-
have against
courts of justice (or the Lupon or Panchot in
zable by the regular it arises out of or is parent
the case of barangay conciliation proceedings), In Ledesma v. Court of Appeals," the Supreme Court, quoting
connected with the
transaction or constituting the suh.
occurrence

Opinion No. 135, s. 1981, of the then Minister Justice, explained

of
party's claim and does not require for
ject matter of the opposing the reason for the requirement
of personal appearance by the par-
third parties of whom the court (or
its adjudication the presence of
ties, to wit:
the Lupon or Pangkat) cannot acquire jurisdiction. compulsorv A
counterclaim must be within the jurisdiction of the court (or the mandates personal confrontation
XXx Section 9 of P.D. 1508
Lupon or Pangkati both as to the amount and the nature thereof because:
of the parties
All other counterclaims are permissive in character.

Rules.
Pambarangay
Article 199. Rule XXVI, Administrative Order No. 270 (Rules and Section 8, Rule VI, Katarungang Rule VI, Katarungang Pam-
Section 6,
Implementing the Local Government Code of 1991); Section 415, R.A. No. 7160;
Section
Regulations barangay Rules.
8ia1, b23, and (b3.4) Rule VI, Katarungang Pambarangay
Section 8, Rule VI, Rules 95Section 415, R.A. No. 7160.

ld
Katarungang Pambarangay Rules. "Section 407, R.A. No. 7160.
Section 6, Rule 6, Rules of Section 415, R.A. No. 7160.
Court. 759; emphasis supplied.
Section 7, Rule 6, Rules of 211 SCRA 753 [19921, p.
Court.
 D I S P U T E
RESOLUTION
REsOL

KATARUNGANG PAMBARANGAY
TERNATINE

AL

292 293
X APpersonalconfron
frontation be ween the
vention of co unsel
r e p r e s e
w

n
i

t
t

a
h

t i
o

v
u

e
t
the
w o
interve

u l d g e n e r a
or E.
AMICABLE SETTLEMENT
parties

disposition
dispositi
to amicable sef.
f a v o r a b l e

disputants. n other Nature ofthe Amicable Settlement

a o f the
nd
and the part
t l e m e n t
on
p r o c e d u r e
isdeemed
de conducive to
sand
an of the disp
of the dispute at the cable
Wonds.
the r e s o l u t i o n
An amicable
settlement arrived at
the
b a r
successful
a n g a r l e v e l . *

tween the parties. It is during the

conciliation 1s
bition on the
b i n d i n g

ction prOvided it
it is not immediately
contrary to executor
ory upon its
Oublic policy. law,
good morals, pu
appearance
is not of
prohibit
p e r l e c t

strict order and pub It has the public

for the force
The
reason

proceedings edings
before
before the Lupon
to the proceedin
or .

Pangkat that if not

judicially ally approved. It is akinandto effect of res judicata
accordance with the Rulesjudgment
even a
the e x e c ution
t i o n in that is
in
or t h a t a
contribute
to
lanyers

lawyers
have
nothing
to
to the
c o n c i l i a t i o n effo their
but to mini
subject
enunciated in the case of of Court. This is
is
detrimental

of
proceduro
cedure and the
principle
Miguel v. Montañez where
participation

mize the
influence of
technical

negotiations
rules
evidence i
otiations for an amicable settlement,
for. it w a s
held that:

and the
thehearings have aheel Tt is true that an amicable settlement
This is not
to say,
however, that
Their
lawyers
crucial role absolutely no Lraneay conciliation proceedings, like the
Kasunduang
reached
the
Pag-
at

role in the conciliation

to actively
participate
proceedings.

ively parti in the encour

conciliat 1on aayos in this case,
s and,
is binding between
its
the contracting
par
their chents and upon perfection, is
immediately
age
and sincere
honest
desire to resolve resolve the
the dio
dispute inn an
an
insofar as it 1s not contrary to law, morals, good cus
executory
maintain an

amicable m a n n e r .
toms, public order and public policy. This is in accord with
the broad precept of Article 2037 of the Civil Code, ti:

A compromise has upon the parties the effect

and authority of res judicata; but there shall be no
execution except n compliance with a judicial com
promise.

Being a by-produet of mutual concessions and good faith

of the parties, an amicable settlement has the force and
It
effect of res judicata even if not judicially approved.
transcends being a binding upon the par.
mere contract

ties thereto, and is akin to a judgment that is subject to

execution in accordance with the Rules. Thus, under Sec
such amicable settle-
tion 417 of the Local Government Code,

citing Re-
emphasis supplied;
664 SCRA 345 120121, pp. 350-351,
100

SCRA 314 [19931; Quiros v. Arjona, supra;

public v. Sandiganbayan, 226 v. ALA
Industries
Authority (MLAA)
Manila International Airport Lauron, 696
and (2004]. See also
Catedrilla u.
Corporation, 422 SCRA 603 Chavez v. Court of Appeals, 453

34l |2013], pp. 353-354, citing

CSCRA 843 120051.
 KATARUNGANG
Amicable
-
PABARANGAY
Settlement -

295
may
bE
enforced

fom
br
xecution by the
the date of xIn Santos u. Judge
Xx

exceptional cirg1sidro, the

awaro
b m o n t h s

a r b i t r a t i o n

six
enforce such settlem
the special and
the
ourt observed that
ement in tial justice, or facts nstances, the imperativ
s p e c i a l
witnin
ar to
nent

beyond the six

a c t i o n

Lupon an if o fs u b s t a n
Barangay
by
iling court

after the finality of the

that may tives
have
m u n i a p a

or
settlement

ay
or

cution unjust may judgment which would

warrant the
transpired
render
a p p r o p r i a t e
e x e c u

the its
D o n t hperniod cution of a decision that has
tory. In he
the case at bar, the become final and exe
suspension
of exe
ends of
R e s c i s s i o n

writ of execution is issued justice would be xecu-

E r e c u t t o n
and
frustrated
oonsidering the uncertainty
theobjectof the agTeement. To do s0 ot
Enforcement, S e t t l e m e n t

would open the

A m i c a b l e

of error
and future litigations possibility
ofthe or
refusal
ofa party to
ply with ths
In the
e v e n t of failure
arbitration
a r b i t r a t i o n
a w a r d , the
award,
following areh the The settlement or arbitration
amicable
amicable
settlement
or

other p a r t y
the axecution by the Lupon within six 6)award may be en-
to the
force he months from the
available

date of settlement, the receipt of the

ated in the settlement or award, inthe date the
remedies
within six (6
(6) months from
mo
ation stipulated
or
by the Lupon the date the adjudged the arbitra-
or
arard becomes due and
1 E n f o r c e m e n t

date of the
settlement
agreement,

when the obligation

receipt of tion award
demandable. Thereafter, the settle-
the award. or
the date
is later
therein be ment or awar
award may be eniorced by action in the appropriate city or
demandable,
whichever
cou in accordance with
the Rules of Court.
comes due and municipal

in court
after the lapse of +h. The two-tiered execution of the amicable settlement or arbi-
2 Execution by action siz
month period; and i o n award was expla1ned in the case of Vidal u. Escueta
held that:
th where it was

Article 2014 of the Civil Code in

Rescission under
3 of amicable settlements. uSection 417 of the Local Government Code providesa
mechanism for the enforcement of a settlement of the parties
before the Lupon. It provides for a two-tiered mode of enforce-
Enforcement and Execution of the ment of an amicable settlement executed by the parties before
Amicable Settlement
the Lupon, namely, (a) execution of the Punong Barangay
which is quasi-judicial and summary in nature on
mere

The general rule is that, where no repudiation of the amicable entitled thereto; and (b) by
motion of the party/parties
settlement is made or no petition for the nullification of the arbi which remedy is judicial. Un-
a n action in regular form,
tration award is filed within ten (10) days from the date of the are covered by the LGC
der the first remedy, the proceedings
Implementing Rules and
settlement or the date of receipt of the award, the amicable settle- and the Katarungang Pambarangay
is called upon during the
ment or award attains the status of finality and it becomes the Regulations. The Punong Barangay of the
the fact of non-compliance
ministerial duty of the court to implement and enforce it." The hearing to determine solely defaulting party an-

rule, however, is terms of the settlement

and to give the
not inflexible and admits of exceptions which complying with his obligation un
were enumerated in the other chance at voluntarily
case of Quiros v. Arjona as
follows
Section 2, Rule VII, Katarungang
Scon Rule \TI, Kata rungang Pambarangay Rules; see ai 7160;
Chaez t. Court Section 417, R.A. No.
of Appeals, id., p. 849. Pambarangay Rules. supplied. See also
629-630, emphasis
Pb-4. emphasis supplied: citing Philippine veterd 412 SCRA 617 (2003), pp. v.
Montañe2, supra
851; and Miguel
BonkIntermediate Appellate Court, 178 SCRA 645 (19589. . Court of Appeals, supra., p.
 TON

T E R N A T V E
DISPLTE
R E S O ,

KATARUNGANG PAMBARANGAY
- Amicable Settlement-

AL 297

996 dy, the ceedings

s e c o n d
r e m e d u

tion i n
TC, in
derogation of the
U n d e r
the

C
Co ur t ,
ou
as d. The
a m e n d e d

ause of LGC.
The law ld be objective
construed of Section 417 of
o
off
jtself, which, by the
reflect the will of the and
operation of legislature andapplied
settlement.
Rules
R u l e s

itself as to reflect in such

the the
the s e t t l e m e nt a
by hnaljudgment: way
der ed by and not to cause an attain
are
governed

the
amicable

etfect
or a tive,
Holmes aptly
injustice. As its objec-
ntly said, 'courts are apt to Justice Oliver Wendell
is
and
action

the
force
is
reckoned ds of the law where these err by sticking too closely
has
from the to the
words
e x e c u t i o n

law, for
on u
under
nder the settler
th. nd them. The Court should support a policy that
month
h period g o e sb e y o n d .

illeth buttotthe spirit that vivifieth

not defer to the letter that
bhe settlement; herwise, due
o b l i g a t i o n

six (6) itt h e

sehe the six
The the.
of
s e t t l e m e n t

date of the toregoing

light
ofthe the fro da In

be construedcon8ideration, the time line in

be reckoaregoing principlee was
dated e m a n d a b l e on

amandabled be was disCu.

r e c k o n e d

ould
Section 417 shou to mean that
and

month
period

and
should

demandable.
The
as
follows: discussed tion
in the settlem
ble on the
to be
date of the
if the
enforced is due and obliga-
de
c o m e s
due
v.
Escueta
iod should be counted from
settlement, the six-month
case ofVidal party a d of six the date of the settle
in the LGC grants a per
ent; otherwise, ifthe obligation to be enforced is due
of the bv
Section
enforce
417
the
a m i c a b l e
settlement

such party
Lupon
may resort to
nd demanda dable on a date other than the date
of the
months
to Barangay
betore

the settlement. The

ettlement, the six-month period should
be counted
the Punong MTC to
enf
from the date the obligation becomes due and demand.
through with the
action afford the arties during the six.
parties
filing a n
of the
law is to
and less expensive
less exr able."(pp. 630-631; emphasis supplied)
raison d'etre time line, a simple, speedy en
period before the Lupon.
month
of their
settlement
An amicable settlement reached in a case referred by a court
forcement not.only of the benefit the Lupon shall be enforced through execution
line of six
months is for
piai for conciliation by
The time
but also of the respondent. Going by the the said
court.06

the complainant, the time line of six mont by

417 of the LGC,
words of Section of the settlement. However,
from the date
Rescission of the Amicable Settlement
should be
computed
case because uliar cires
of its peculiar circum-
a particular
if applied to time line from the date of the
stances, the
computation of the under Section
be arbitrary and unjust and contrary to the in.
The two-tiered mode of provided
enforcement
settlement may
illustrate: Under an
amicable settlement
No. 7160 does not preclude the remedy of rescission
of the law. To 417 of R.A.
the Lupon dated January 15, 2003
tent
of the Civil Code which provides:
made by the parties
before
under Article 2014
the respondents obliged to vacate the subject property on
were

before September 15, 2003. If the

time line of six months refuses to abide by the com-
"If one of the parties fails
or
or
or
to be stricthy literally followed, theand either enforce the compromise
under Section 417 were
promise, the other party may
demand."
complainant may enforce the settlement through the Lupon rescinded and insist upon his original
regard it as

only up to July 15, 2003. But under the settlement, the re-
spondent was not obliged to vacate the property on or before of failure or refusal of a party to comply
event
July 15, 2003; hence, the settlement cannot as yet be enforced. Hence, in the may also
avail the
of
amicable settlement, the other party of
with the
The settlement could be enforced only after September 15, settlement. This is the ruling
amicable
the
2003, when the respondent was obliged to vacate the property. remedy of rescinding of Chavez v. Court of Appeals
the case
By then, the six months under Section 417 shall have already the Supreme Court in
elapsed. The complainant can no longer enforce the settlement wherein it was held that:
through the Lupon, but had to enforce the through an Rules.
same a Pambarangay
106
Section 2, Rule VII, Katarungang
supplied.
851-852; emphasis
Supra. at pp.
630-631 Supra., pp.