LECTURE NOTES ON CIVIL PROCEDURE I

Introduction

 REMEDIAL LAW vs. SUBSTANTIVE LAW

Concept of Remedial Law:

- Branch of law that PRESCRIBES the METHODS of ENFORCINGS RIGHTS &

OBLIGATIONS created by SUBSTANTIVE LAW

- It PROVIDES for PROCEDURAL SYSTEM for obtaining REDRESS for the INVASION OF
RIGHTS and VIOLATION OF DUTIES.

- PRESCRIBES RULES as to HOW SUITS ARE FILED, TRIED and DECIDED upon by the
COURTS
(Bustos vs Lucero. G.R. No. L-2068, 1948)

- No vested rights may arise therefrom nor attach to Remedial Law (Go vs. Sunbanun,
G.R. No. 166240, 2011)

- It does not originate from the Legislature but has the force and effect of law if not in
conflict with Substantive Law. (Alvero vs. De La Rosa, G.R. No. L-266, 1946)

 SUBSTANTIVE LAW:

- It is that part of the law which:

i. CREATES, DEFINES AND regulates rights;

ii. REGULATES RIGHTS and DUTIES which GIVES RISE to a CAUSE OF
ACTION;
iii. COURTS are established to ADMINISTER

- Makes VESTED RIGHTS possible;

- PROSEPECTIVE IN APPLICATION
- ORIGINATES FROM LEGISLATURE

 CONSTITUTIONAL REQUIREMENT OF DUE PROCESS

- Definition:

rv
 The essence of DUE PROCESS is the OPORTUNITY to be HEARD or EXPLAIN his/her
SIDE.

- Requisites of Due Process

i. NOTICE - means that the PERSONS WITH INTEREST in

LITIGATION be INFORMED of the FACTS and LAW in which the ACTION is
BASED for them to ADEQUATELY DEFEND their respective INTERESTS.

ii. HEARING - means that the PARTIES be GIVEN an OPORTUNITY

to be HEARD or a CHANCE to DEFEND their respective INTERESTS.

- Constitutional Basis of Due Process Requirement:

ARTICLE III Section 1 of the 1987 Constitution, which provides that:

No person shall be deprived of LIFE, LIBERTY or PROPERTY without DUE PROCESS

of LAW, nor shall any person be denied EQUAL PROTECTION of the LAWS.

 RULE MAKING POWER of the SUPREME COURT

- Constitutional Basis:

Article VIII Section 5 of the 1987 Constitution which provides that:

Section 5. - The Supreme Court shall have the following POWERS:

XXXX

(5) promulgate RULES concerning the PROTECTION and ENFORCEMENT of

constitutional RIGHTS, PLEADINGS, PRACTICE and PROCEDURE in all
courts, the admission to the practice of law, the Integrate Bar and legal
assistance to the underprivileged.

Such RULES shall provide a SIMPLIFIED and INEXPENSIVE PROCEDURE for

the SPEEDY DISPOSITION of cases, shall be uniform for all courts of the
same grade, and shall NOT DIMINISH, INCREASE or MODIFY SUBSTANTIVE
RIGHTS.

rv
 Article VI, Section 30 of the 1987 Constitution, which provides that:

Section 30. No law shall be passed increasing the appellate jurisdiction of the
Supreme Court as provided in this Constitution without its advice and
concurrence.

- Limitation on the Rule Making Power of the Supreme Court

i. The rules shall provide a SIMPLIFIED and INEXPENSIVE PROCEDURE for the
SPEEDY DISPOSITION of CASES.
ii. The rules shall be UNIFORM for all courts of the same grade; and
iii. The rules shall NOT DIMINISH, INCREASE or MODIFY SUBSTANTIVE RIGHTS.

- PROSPECTIVE/RETROACTIVE APPLICATION OF THE RULES OF COURT and

APPLICABILITY TO PENDING CASES

i. General Rule is, Procedural Rules are prospective in application

ii. Procedural laws are construed to be applicable to actions pending and
undetermined at the time of their passage, and are deemed retroactive in
that sense and to that extent.
iii. The retroactive application OF PROCEDURAL LAWS cannot be considered as
violative of any personal rights because no vested right may attach to nor
arisen therefrom. (Calacala VS Republic, G.R. No. 154415, July 28, 2005)
iv. 2019 Amendments to the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure specifically provides
thus:

The 2019 proposed Amendments to the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure shall
govern ALL CASES FILED AFTER THEIR EFFECTIVITY on MAY 1, 2020, and ALSO
all PENDING PROCEEDINGS, except to the extent that in the opinion of the
court, their APPLCIATION WOULD NOT BE FEASIBLE OR WOULD WORK
INJUSTICE, in which case the procedure under which the cases were filed shall
govern.

 POWER OF THE SUPREME COURT TO RELAX/SUSPEND THE RULES OF COURT

General Rule:

- PROCEDURAL RULES do not exist for the convenience of the litigants;

- The rules were established primarily to provide ORDER to, and ENHANCE the
EFFICIENCY OF, our JUDICIAL SYSTEM;

rv
 - While procedural rules are liberally construed, the provisions on reglementary
periods are STRICTLY APPLIED, indispensable as they are to the PREVENTION OF
NEEDLESS DELAYS, and are NECESSARY to the ORDERLY and SPEEDY DISCHARGE of
judicial business
- TIMELINESS of filing of a pleading is a jurisdictional caveat that even the SC cannot
trifle with;
- PROCEDURAL RULES are NOT to be BELITTLED or DIMISSED simply because their
non-observance may have PREJUDICED a PARTY’S SUBSTANTIVE RIGHTS;
- ALL RULES are REQUIRED TO BE FOLLOWED;

EXCEPTIONS TO STRICT OBSERVANCE OF PROCEDURAL RULES:

i. Due to most PERSUASIVE and weighty reasons;

ii. TO relieve a litigant from an INJUSTICE NOT COMMENSURATE to his FAILURE
to comply with the prescribed procedure;
iii. Good faith of the defaulting party by immediately paying within a reasonable
time from the time of the default;
iv. The existence of special or compelling circumstances;
v. The merits of the case
vi. Cause not entirely attributable to the fault or negligence of the party favored
by the suspension of the rules
vii. Lack of any showing that the review sought is merely frivolous or dilatory;
viii. The other party will not be unjustly prejudiced thereby;
ix. Fraud, accident, mistake or excusable negligence (FAME) without
appellant/party’s fault;
x. Peculiar legal and equitable circumstances attendant to the case;
xi. In the name of substantial justice and fair play;
xii. Importance of the issues involved; and
xiii. Exercise of sound discretion by the judge guided by all the attendant
circumstances;
xiv. The party invoking liberality must show that he or she has reasonable or
meritorious explanation for his/her failure to comply with the rules

(Labao vs. Flores et al G.R. 187984, November 15, 2010)

 Distinguish Civil Action, Criminal Action and Special Civil Action

- Civil Action - an action by which a party sues another for the

enforcement or protection of a right, or the prevention or redress of a wrong.

rv
 - Criminal Action - an action by which the State prosecutes a person for an
act or omission punishable by law.

- Special Proceeding a remedy by which a party seeks to establish a status,

right or a particular fact.

General Principles/Fundamentals

 Classification of Actions/Proceedings

- According to Subject Matter

i. According to Subject Matter

a. Real Action - action which affects title to or possession of real

property or interest therein. Its venue depends upon the location of the
property in litigation.

Example:

a.i. action to recover ownership or possession of land

a.ii. foreclosure of real estate mortgage
a.iii. Partition
a.iv. Ejectment

b. Personal Action - action which does not affect title to or possession

of real property or interest therein. Its venue depends upon the
residence of the plaintiff or the defendant at the option of the plaintiff,
hence personal action is transitory.

Example:

b.i. action to recover possession or ownership of personal property

b.ii. action for specific performance
b.iii action for collection of sum of money

 Importance of distinguishing between real action and personal action:

To determine the venue of the action and the court that has subject matter
jurisdiction over the action
- According to Binding Effect

rv
 a. Action/proceeding in rem - an action which is not directed against a particular
person but on the thing or res itself and which asks the court to make a
declaration of or to dispose of or deal with the res.

- The thing or res may be personal or real property or it maybe a status, right, or
particular fact.
- Jurisdiction over the person of the defendant is not required; only jurisdiction over
the thing or res is required
- Judgment is binding upon the whole world.

Example:

a.i. Application for original registration of a parcel of land

a.ii. Special Proceedings i.e. Guardianship and custody of children, Adoption
Habeas Corpus, Change of Name.

b. Action in Personam - is a proceeding to enforce personal rights and

obligations brought against the a particular person, although it may involve his
right to, or the exercise of ownership of, specific property, or seek to compel
him to control or dispose of its in accordance with the mandate of the court,
some responsibility or liability directly upon the person of the defendant.

- Jurisdiction over the person of the defendant is required.

- Judgment is binding only upon the parties impleaded or their successors in interest
- Action is brought against a person on the basis of personal liability or responsibility

Example:

b.i. action for collection of sum of money and damages;

b.ii. specific performance
b.iii. breach of contract
b.iv. unlawful detainer and forcible entry

c. Action quasi in rem - an action which is directed against a particular

person the purpose of which is to subject the interest of the named defendant
over a particular property to an obligation or lien burdening it.

- Jurisdiction over the person of the defendant is not required as long as the
jurisdiction over the res or thing is acquired.
- Jurisdiction is binding only upon the particular persons impleaded;

rv
 Example:

c.i. Judicial Foreclosure of Mortgage

c.ii. Action for Partition and Accounting
c.iii. Action in personam in which the property of the defendant has been
attached. The attachment coverts the action to one quasi in rem.
c.iv. Action to quiet title over the land
c.v. Action for partition

 JURISDICTION

a. Definition

Jurisdiction refers to the power and authority of a court to hear, try and
decide a case.

b. Classification of Jurisdiction

b.i. Original Jurisdiction - exercised by a court in the first

instance or where the case originates

b.ii. Appellate Jurisdiction - exercised by a court over a case

elevated to it by way of review.

b.iii. General Jurisdiction - exercised by a court over all cases,

civil or criminal, of a particular nature.

b.iv. Special Jurisdiction - exercised by a court over cases of a

particular purpose.

Example: Cadastral cases, land registration cases, family relations cases,

drugs cases, commercial cases, environmental laws cases;

b.v. Exclusive Jurisdiction - exercised by a court over the subject

matter to the exclusion of other courts.

Example: Cases incapable of pecuniary estimation which is exclusive to

Regional Trial Court

rv
 b.vi. Concurrent Jurisdiction exercised over a case or subject
matter by two or more courts.

Example: Certiorari Under Rule 65 which is exercised by the RTC, CA and SC

 JURISDICTION OF VARIOUS PHILIPPINE COURTS

A. SUPREME COURT

Original and Exclusive Jurisdiction

1. Petitions for the issuance o0f Wri1.ets of CERTIORARI, PROHIBITION and

MANDAMUS against.

1.a. Court of Appeals

1.b. Commission on Election
1.c. Commission on Audit
1.d. Sandiganbayan
1.e. Court of Tax Appeals

2. Disciplinary proceedings against members of the Bar and Court Personnel

Original and Concurrent Jurisdiction

WITH THE COURT OF APPEALS Petitions for the Issuance of Writs of Certiorari, prohibition
and Mandamus against:

2.a. National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC)

2.b. Civil Service Commission (CSC)
2.c. Quasi-Judicial Agencies
2.d. Regional Trial Courts (RTC) and lower courts (MTC)

Petitions for Issuance of a Writ of Kalikasan

WITH THE COURT OF APPEALS
Sandigan Bayan and RTC Petition for Writ of Amparo
Petition for Writ of Habeas Data

rv
 Cases of Grave Abuse of Discretion against Officers of
Other Agencies and instrumentalities of the government

WITH THE COURT OF APPEALS

(CA) and RTC Petitions for Habeas Corpus and Quo Warranto
Petitions for the issuance of Writs of Certiorari, Prohibition
And Mandamus against lower courts or bodies
Petitions for the Issuance of Writ Continuing Mandamus
In Environmental Cases

WITH THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT Actions affecting Ambassadors and Consuls
(Note: Under RA 10660, Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction in criminal cases involving officials
involving diplomatic service occupying the position of consul and higher)

APPELLATE JURISDICTION OF THE SUPREME COURT

Appeal by Notice of Appeal Decision of the RTC or the Sandiganbayan in all
Criminal cases where the penalty imposed is RECLUSION
PERPETUA or higher, on question of law and fact

Decision on cases involving other offenses which, although

not so punished, arose out of the same occurrence or
which may have been committed by the accused on the
same occasion, as that giving rise to the more serious
offense, regardless of whether the accused are charged as
principals, accomplice or accessories, or whether they
have been tried jointly or separately

Appeal by Petition for Review on Appeal on purely Question of Law from the Decision of”
Certiorari under Rule 45
1. Court of Appeals (CA)

rv
 2. Sandiganbayan (except penalty imposed is
Reclusion Perpetua or Higher)
3. Court of Tax Appeals
4. Regional Trial Courts (RTC) exercising original
jurisdiction in the following cases:

4.a. If no question of fact is involved and the

cases pertains to:

4.a.1. Constitutionality or validity of any treaty,

internation or executive agreement, presidential
decree, proclamation, order, instruction, ordinance
or regulation
4.a.2. Legality of any tax, impost, assessment, or
toll, or any penalty imposed in relation thereto;
4.a.3. Jurisdiction of the lower courts;

4.b. All cases in which only errors of law are

involved;

SPECIAL CIVIL ACTION OF CERTIORARI

Under Rule 64 Decisions, Order or Ruling of Commission on
Election and Commission on Audit

JURISDICTION OF COURT OF APPEALS

1. Original and Exclusive Jurisdiction

Actions for Annulment of judgments of the RTC on

the grounds of extrinsic fraud and lack of
jurisdiction

2. Original and Concurrent Jurisdiction

With the Supreme Court Petitions for the Issuance of Writs of Certiorari,
Prohibition and Mandamus against:
2.a. NLRC
2.b. Civil Service Commission

rv

With the Supreme Court, Sandiganbayan,
And RTC
With the SC and RTC
3. Appellate Jurisdiction
Ordinary Appeal by Notice of
Appeal or Record on Appeal
Appeal by Petition for Review
rv
2.c. Quasi-Judicial Agencies
2.d. RTC and MTC/MeTC/MTCC/MCTC
Petition for Writ of Amparo
Petition for Writ of Habeas Data
Petition for Habeas Corpus and Quo Warranto
Petition for Issuance of Writ of Certiorari,
prohibition and Mandamus against lower courts or
bodies
Petition for the issuance of Writ of Continuing
Mandamus in environmental cases
Exclusive Appellate
Appeals from:
3.a. Decision of RTC in the exercise of its original
jurisdiction, except in all cases where only question
of law are raised or involved, which are appealable
to the SC by Petition for Review on Certiorari under
Rule 45
3.b. Decision of RTC on constitutional and
jurisdictional questions which involve questions of
fact. Family Courts.
An Appeal may be taken to the CA whether the
Appeal involves questions of fact and law, or
question of law, in the following cases:
3.c. Regular
Appeals from the decision of RTC in the
exercise of its appellate jurisdiction
 3.d. Special
3.d.1. Appeals from Civil Service
Commission
3.d.2. Appeals from the following Quasi-
Judicial Agencies under Rule 43
3.d.2.a. Securities & Exchange
Commission (SEC)
3.d.2.b. Office of the President
3.d.2.c. Land Registration Authority
3.d.2.d. Social Security System (SSS)
3.d.2.e. Civil and Aeronautics Board
3.d.2.f. Intellectual Property Office
3.d.2.g. National Electrification
Authority (NEA)
3.d.2.h. Energy Regulatory
Commission (ERC)
3.d.2.i. National Telecommunications
Commission (NTC)
3.d.2.j. Department of Agrarian
Reform (DAR) under RA 6657
3.d.2.k. Government Service
Insurance System (GSIS)
3.d.2.l. Employees’ Compensation
Commission (ECC)
3.d.2.m. Insurance Commission
3.d.2.n, Philippine Atomic Energy
Commission (PAEC)
3.d.2.o. Board of Investment (BOI)

rv
 3.d.2.p. Construction Industry
Arbitration Commission
3.d.2.q. Voluntary Arbitrators
authorized by law
3.d.2.r. Ombudsman (in
administrative disciplinary
cases)
3.d.2.s. National Commission on
Indigenous People (NCIP)
Notes:
A. From the Judgments or Final Orders or Resolution of the CA, the
aggrieved party may appeal by Petition for Review on Certiorari Under
Rule 45 to the SC;
B. Judgments and Final Orders of the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA) en banc
are now appealable to the SC through Petition for Review on
Certiorari under Rule 45 pursuant to RA 9282

JURISDICTION OF THE SANDIGANBAYAN

(section 4, RA 10660, April 16, 2015)
1. Exclusive Original Jurisdiction
1.a. Violation of:
1.a.1. RA 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act);
1.a.2. RA 1379 (An Act Declaring Forfeiture in favor of the State any Property
found to have been Unlawfully Acquired by any Public Officer or
Employee/Forfeiture of Ill Gotten Wealth)
1.a.3. Chapter 11 Section 2, Title VII, Book II of the Revised Penal Code
WHERE One or More of the Accused are Officials occupying the following
positions in the government, whether in a permanent, acting or interim capacity, at the
time of the commission of the offense:
1.a.A. Officials of the Executive Branch occupying the positions of Regional
Director and Higher, otherwise classified as Salary Grade 27 and higher,
specifically including:

rv
 * Provincial Governor, Vice Governor, Member of the Sangguniang
Panlalawigan, Provincial Treasurer, Provincial Assessor, Provincial
Engineer, and other Provincial Department Heads;
* City Mayors, Vice-Mayors, Members of the Sangguniang
Panglungsod, City Treasurers, City Assessors, City Engineer and
other City Department Heads;
* Officials of the Diplomatic Service Occupying the Position of
Consul and Higher;
* Philippine Army and Air Force Colonels, Naval Captains, and all
other Officers of Higher Rank;
* Officers of the Philippine National Park while occupying the
position of Provincial Director and holding the rank of Senior
Superintendent and Higher;
* City and Provincial Prosecutors and their Assistants, and Officials
and Prosecutors in the Office of the Ombudsman and Special
Prosecutor;
* Presidents, Directors or Trustees, or Managers of Government
Owned or Controlled Corporations, State Universities or
Educational Institutions or Foundations
1.a.B. Members of Congress and Officials thereof classified as Salary Grade 27
and Higher;
1.a.C. Members of the Judiciary without prejudice to the provisions of the
Constitution;
1.a.D. All Other National and Local Officials classified as Salary Grade 27 and
Higher
Notes:
a. In case private individuals are charged as CO-PRINCIPAL, ACCOMPLICE OR
ACCESSORIES with the PUBLIC OFFICERS OR EMPLOYEES, including those employed
in Government Owned and Controlled Corporation, they shall be tried jointly with
said Public Officers and Employees in the proper Courts which shall exercise
exclusive jurisdiction over them;
b. In cases where NONE of the accused is occupying positions corresponding to Salary
Grade 27 or Higher, or Military and PNP Officers mentioned above, exclusive original
jurisdiction thereof shall be vested in the proper Regional Trial Court, Metropolitan
Trial Court/Municipal Trial Court/Municipal Trial Court In Cities/Municipal Circuit

rv
 Trial Court pursuant to their respective jurisdiction under BP 129 as Amended by RA
11576;

1.b. Other Offenses or felonies whether simple or complexed with other crimes
committed by the Public Official and Employees mentioned in Subsection 1.a.A in
relation to their office;
1.c. Civil and Criminal Cases filed pursuant to and in connection with Executive Order
Nos. 1,2, 14 and -A, issued in 1986;
1.d. Petitions for the issuance of Writs of Mandamus, Prohibition, Certiorari, Habeas
Corpus, Injunctions, and other ancillary Writs and Processes in aid of its
appellate jurisdiction and over petitions of similar nature, including Quo
Warranto arising or that may arise in cases filed or which may be filed under
Executive Order NO. 1,2, 14 and 14-A.
2. EXCLUSIVE APPELLATE JURISDICTION OF THE SANDIGANBAYAN
2.a. Exclusive appellate jurisdiction over final judgments, resolutions or orders of the
RTC whether in the exercise of their own original jurisdiction or of their appellate
jurisdiction as provided in R.A. 10660

JURISIDICTION OF THE COURT OF TAX APPEALS

1. Exclusive Appellate Jurisdiction
By Appeal Decisions of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue (BIR)
In all cases involving disputed assessments, refunds of
internal revenue tases, fees or other charges, penalties in
relation thereto, or other matters arising under the
National Internal Revenue (NIRC) or other laws
administered by the BIR;
Inaction by the BIR Commissioner in cases involving
disputed assessments, refunds of Internal Revenue Taxes,
fees or other charges, penalties in relation thereto, or
other matters arising under the NIRC or other laws
administered by the BIR, where the NIRC provides a
specific period of action, in which case the inaction shall
be deemed a denial.

rv
 Decisions, Orders or Resolution of the RTC in Local Tax
Cases in the exercise of its original and/or appellate
jurisdiction;
Decision of the Commissioner of Customs in cases
involving liability for customs duties, fees or other money
charges, seizure, detention or release of property affected,
fines, forfeitures or other penalties in relation thereto or
other matters arising under the Customs Law or other
Laws administered by the Bureau of Customs
Decisions of the Central Board of Assessment Appeals in
the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction over involving the
assessment and taxation of real property originally decided
by the Provincial or City Board of Assessment Appeal;
Decision of the Secretary of Finance on Customs Cases
elevated to him/her automatically for review from the
Decision of the Customs Commissioner which are adverse
to the government
Decision of the Secretary of Trade and Industry in cases
involving non-agricultural products , commodity or article;
Decision of the Secretary of Agriculture in cases involving
dumping and Countervailing Duties of agricultural
products, commodity or article under Section 301 and 302
of the Tarriff and Customs Code and safeguard measures
under RA 8800;

2. Tax Collection Cases

Exclusive Appellate Jurisdiction
JURISDICTION OF THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
Decision rendered by the RTC and MTC in
Cases involving final and executory
assessment for taxes, fees, charges,
penalties;
Decisions/Judgment rendered by the RTC in
the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction over
the MTC over tax collection cases;

rv
 Original and Exclusive Jurisdiction Civil action in which the subject of litigation
is incapable of pecuniary estimation;

In all Civil Action which involve the title, or

possession of real property, or any interest
therein, where the assessed value of the
said real property EXCEEDS P400,000.00,
except for forcible entry and unlawful
detainer of land or building, the original
jurisdiction of which is conferred upon the
MeTC/MTC/MTCC/MCTC (as amended by
RA 11576)
In all actions in admiralty and maritime
jurisdiction where the demand or claims
EXCEED P2M (as amended by RA 11576);
In all matters of probate, both estate and
intestate, where the gross value of the
estate exceeds P2M (as amended by RA
11576)
In all other cases in which the demand,
exclusive of interest, damages of whatever
kind, attorney’s fees, litigation expenses
and costs or the value of the property in
controversy exceeds P2M (as amended by
RA 11576)
Cases NOT WITHIN THE EXCLUSIVE
JURISDICTION of ANY COURT, TRIBUNAL,
PERSON OR BODY EXERCISING JUDICIAL OR
QUASI JUDICIAL FUNCTION;
Doctrinal Rule laid down in Municipality of Kananga vs Madrona (GR 141375, April 30, 2003)
“RTC’s have general jurisdiction to adjudicate ALL CONTROVERSIES except those EXPRESSLY
WITHHELD from their plenary powers. They have the powers not only to take judicial
cognizance of a case instituted FOR JUDICIAL ACTION FOR THE FIRST TIME, BUT ALSO TO DO SO
TO THE EXCLUSION OF ALL OTHER COURTS at that stage. Indeed the power is not only original,
but also EXCLUSIVE.”

rv
 Actions involving contract of marriage and
marital relations;
Civil action and Special Proceedings falling
within the exclusive original jurisdiction of
the Family Courts;
Action for recognition and enforcement of
arbitral agreement or to vacate the same,
setting aside, correction or modification of
an arbitral award, and any application with
a court for arbitration assistance and
supervision (Rule 3 A.M. 07-11-08-SC or
Specific Rules of Court on Alternative
dispute Resolution)
Note: DISCUSS (Rule 3 A.M. 07-11-08-SC
or Specific Rules of Court on Alternative
dispute Resolution)
ORIGINAL and CONCURRENT JURISDICTION
With the SC Actions affecting ambassadors and other
public ministers and consuls;
With the SC and CA Issuance of Writs of Certiorari, Prohibition,
Mandamus, Quo Warranto, Habeas Corpus,
and Injunction which may be enforced in
any part of their respective regions;
Petition for issuance of Writ of Continuing
Mandamus in environmental cases;
With the SC, CA and Sandiganbayan Petition for Writ of Amparo
Petition for Writ of Habeas Data
APPELLATE JURISDICTION Decisions rendered by the
MeTC/MTC/MTCC/MCTC
SPECIAL JURISDICTION The SC may designate certain branch of the
RTC to handle exclusively criminal cases,
juvenile and domestic relations cases,
agrarian case, urban land reform cases
which do not fall under the jurisdiction of
the HLURB, and or such other special cases

rv
 as the SC may determine in the interest of
speedy, efficient administration of justice.

RTC FAMILY COURTS

Original and Exclusive Jurisdiction
Criminal Cases where ONE or MORE OF THE
ACCUSED is 15 yrs old but not over 18 yrs
old or where ONE or MORE of the VICTIMS
is a Minor at the time of the commission of
the offense, provided that if the minor is
found guilty, the court shall promulgate
sentence and ascertain any civil liability
which the accused may have incurred. The
sentence, however, shall be suspended
without need of application pursuant to the
Child and Youth Welfare Code (PD 603)
Petitions for guardianship, custody of
children, habeas corpus in relation to the
latter;
Petition for adoption of children and
revocation thereof;
Annulment of Marriage and declaration of
nullity of marriage
Marital status and property relations of
husband and wife or those living together
under different status and agreements
Dissolution of conjugal partnership or gains
Support and Acknowledgment of children
Declaration of status of children as
abandoned, dependent or neglected
children
Suspension, termination or restoration of
parental authority and other cases
cognizable under the Child and Youth
Welfare

rv

JURISDICTION OF MeTC/MTC/MTCC/MCTC
Original and Exclusive Jurisdiction
rv
Constitution of the Family Home
Cases against minor for Violation of RA 9165
(Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of
2005)
Violation of RA 7610 (Anti Child Abuse Act)
Cases of Domestic Violence under RA 9262
(VAWC)
Exclusive original jurisdiction over civil
damages of whatever kind, attorneysactions
and probate proceedings, testate and
intestate, including the grant of provisional
remedies in proper cases, where the value
of personal property, estate or amount of
the demand DOES NOT EXCEED P2M,
exclusive of interest, damages of whatever
kind, attorney’s fees, litigation expenses and
costs, the amount of which shall be
specifically alleged. Provided that interest,
damages of whatever kind, attorney’s fees,
litigation expenses and costs shall be
included in the determination of the filing
fees; Provided further that where there are
several claims or causes of actions between
the same or different parties, embodied in
the same complaint, the amount of the
demand shall be totality of the claims in all
the causes of action, irrespective of
whether the cause of action arouse out of
the same or different transactions;
Forcible entry or unlawful detainer cases
regardless of the value of the property
Involved;
 Exclusive original jurisdiction in all civil
actions which involve title to, or possession
of real property, or any interest therein
where the assessed value of the property
or any interest therein DOES NOT EXCEED
P400,000.00, exclusive of interest, damages
of whatever kind, attorney’s fees, litigation
expenses and costs. Provided that in cases
of land not declared for taxation purposes,
the value of such property shall be
determined by the assessed value of the
adjacent lots;
Exclusive original jurisdiction in admiralty
and maritime actions where the demand
or claim DOES NOT EXCEED P2M
Delegated Jurisdiction Cadastral or land registration cases covering
lots where there is no controversy or
opposition, or contested lots where the
value of the lot DOES NOT EXCEED
P100,000.00
Special Jurisdiction In the absence of all RTC Judges in a
province or city, MTC Judge shall hear and
decide petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
and application for bail in criminal cases.
Jurisdiction Over Small Claims Cases Actions for payment or reimbursement of
Sum of Money where the claim DOES NOT
EXCEED P1M
What is Small Claims Case?
“Small Claim” is an action that is purely civil in nature where the claim or relief
raised by the plaintiff is solely for the payment or reimbursement of a sum of
money. It excludes actions seeking other claims or relief aside from payment or
reimbursement of a sum of money and those coupled with provisional remedies
(under Rule 57 to 61 of the Rules of Court)
Claim or Demand may be:
a. For money owed under any of the following:
a.1. Contract of Lease
a.2. Contract of Loan and other credit accommodation

rv
 a.3. Contract of Services
a.4. Contract of Sale of Personal Property, excluding recovery of
personal property or Replevin under Rule 60 of the Rules of Court,
unless it is made the subject of a compromise agreement between
the parties
b. Enforcement of Baranggay Amicable Settlement agreements and Arbitration
Award, where the money claim does not exceed P1M

SUMMARY PROCEDURE
Civil Cases Covered by the Rule on Summary Procedure:
1. Forcible Entry and Unlawful Detainer Cases, regardless of the amount of
damage or unpaid rental sought to be recovered. Where Attorney’s fees are
awarded, the same shall not exceed P100,000.00
2. All Civil Actions, except probate proceedings, admiralty and maritime action,
and small claims cases, where the total amount of the plaintiff’s claim does
NOT EXCEED P2M, exclusive of interest, damages of whatever kind, attorney’s
fees, litigation expenses and cost;
3. Complaint for Damages where the claim DOES NOT EXCEED P2M, exclusive of
interest and cost;
4. Cases for enforcement of Baranggay amicable settlement agreements and
arbitration award where the money claim EXCEEDS P1M, provided that no
execution has been enforced by the Baranggay within 6 months from the
date of settlement or date of receipt of the award or from the date the
obligation stipulated or adjudged in the arbitration award becomes due and
demandable per Section 417 Chapter 7 of the Local Government Code
5. Cases solely for the revival of judgment of any MeTC/MTC?MTCC?MCTC
pursuant to Rule 39 of the 2019 Amended Rules of Court
6. The Civil aspects of a Violation of BP 22 (Bouncing Check Law), if no criminal
action has been filed/instituted therefore.

NOTE: CASES NOT INCLUDED IN THE ABOVE ENUMERATION SHALL BE

COVERED BY THE REGULAR PROCEDURES UNDER THE 2019 AMENDED RULES
OF COURT.

rv
CONCURRENT JURISDICTION OF THE SC, CA, SANDIGANBAYAN and RTC TO ISSUE SPECIAL
WRITS & DISTINCTION OF THESE SPECIAL WRITS
I. Writ of Habeas Corpus, Writ of Amparo and Writ of Habeas Data
A. ESSENCE
HABEAS CORPUS
Involves the right to liberty.
Extends to all cases of illegal
Confinement or detention by which
Any person is deprived of liberty, or
By which the RIGHTFUL CUSTODY
Of ANY PERSON is WITHHELD from
The PERSON ENTITLED to it.
B. AVAILABILITY
Directed to the PERSON DETAINING
Another, commanding him to
PRODUCE the BODY of the
PRISONER at the designated time
And place, with the day and CAUSE
Of his capture and detention, to do,
Submit to, and receive whatever
The court or Judge awarding the
WRIT shall consider
C. AVAILABLE AGAINST
Deprivation of LIBERTY;
rv
AMPARO
Involves the right to life,
Liberty and security
Available to one whose RIGHT
to LIFE, LIBERTY and SECURITY
are VIOLATED by an unlawful
act or omission of a PUBLIC
OFFICIAL or EMPLOYEE or
PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL or
ENTITY
The Writ covers extra-
Judicial and enforced
Disappearances or THREATS
Thereof
Violation or threatened
HABEAS DATA
involves the right to privacy
in life, liberty or security
It is a REMEDY available
to those whose RIGHT to
PRIVACY in LIFE, LIBERTY
or SECURITY is VIOLATED
or THREATENED by an
unlawful act or omission
of a PUBLIC OFFICIAL or
EMPLOYEE or PRIVATE
INDIVIDUAL or ENTITY
Engaged in the GATHERING,
COLLECTING or STORING
Of information regarding:
The person, family, home,
Correspondence of the
AGGRIEVED PARTY
Violation or threatened
Withholding of rightful custody
Of the person
D. WHO MAY FILE
Party for his relief it is intended,
Or by some person on his behalf
E. VENUE
RTC where the person is detained
rv
violation by an unlawful
act or omission of the:
Public Official or employee,
Private individual or entity
Aggrieved Party, or any
qualified person or entity
In the following order
1. Any member of the
Immediate family,
Namely: the spouse,
Children and parents
Of the aggrieved party
2. Any ascendant,
Descendant, or collateral
relative of the aggrieved
Party within the 4th
Civil degree of
Consanguinity of
Affinity, in default of
Those mentioned above
3. Any concerned citizen,
Organization, association
Or institution, if there is
No known member of the
Immediate family or
Relative of the aggrieved
Party
RTC of the place where the
violation of the RIGHT to
PRIVACY in LIFE, LIBERTY
or SECURITY by an unlawful
act or omission of:
Public Official
Public Employee
Private individual
Engaged in the gathering,
Collecting, or storing of
Data or information
Regarding the person,
Family, home and
Correspondence of the
Aggrieved party.
Gen. Rule: Aggrieved
party
EXCEPTION
in cases of extra legal
killing and enforced
disappearances, the
petition may be filed
By any member of the
Immediate family of the relative
aggrieved party, namely
Spouse, children and parents
RTC of the place where the
 Threat, act or omission was
Committed or any of its
Elements occurred
SANDIGANBAYAN SANDIGANBAYAN
COURT OF APPEALS COURT OF APPEALS
SUPREME COURT SUPREME COURT
F. ENFORCEABILITY
If issued by Sandiganbayan, CA If issued by Sandiganbyan
SC: CA, SC:
ANYWHERE in the Philippines Anywhere in the Philippines
If issued by RTC If issued by RTC
Within judicial district of RTC that within judicial district of RTC
Issued the Writ that issued the Writ
II. WRIT OF CERTIORARI, WRIT OF PROHIBITION and WRIT OF MANDAMUS
A. TO WHOM DIRECTED
Writ of Certiorari Writ of Prohibition
Directed against an entity or directed against a person or
Person exercising judicial or quasi entity exercising judicial or
Judicial function. Quasi judicial or ministerial
Functions
B. GROUNDS
Entity or person is alleged to have entity or person is alleged
Acted: to have acted or threatening
To act:
1. Without jurisdiction 1. Without jurisdiction 1.
2. In excess of jurisdiction 2, in excess of
Jurisdiction
3. With GRAVE ABUSE of 3. With GRAVE ABUSE
Discretion amounting to of discretion amounting
Lack or excess of jurisdiction to lack or excess of
jurisdiction
rv
petitioner or respondent
resides, or RTC which has
jurisdiction over the place
Where the data or information
Was gathered, collected or
Stored at the option of the
Petitioner
SANDIGANBAYAN
COURT OF APPEALS
SUPREME COURT
If issued by Sandiganbayan
CA, SC:
Anywhere in the Philippines
If issued by RTC
within judicial district of RTC
that issued the Writ
Writ of Mandamus
directed against a person or
entity exercising ministerial
functions
entity or person is alleged to
have:
Neglected ministerial
duty; or
2. Excluded another from
a right of office
 C. PURPOSE

To annul or nullify a proceeding
to have the respondent
DESIST from further
PROCEEDING from
Exercising jurisdiction/
Power
to have the respondent DO the
ACT REQUIRED as a DUTY and
pay damages

D. COVERAGE

Discretionary Acts Discretionary and ministerial Ministerial acts

Acts

E. NATURE OF REMEDY

To correct lack of or usurpation TO RESTRAIN or PREVENT If Positive: PERFORMANCE OF

Of jurisdiction usurpation of jurisdiction a duty is ordered

If Negative: Desistance from

Excluding another from a right
Or office is ordered.

F. WHERE TO FILE

SC, CA, SANDIGANBAYAN, RTC SC, CA, SANDIGANBAYAN, SC. CA, SANDIGANBAYAN, RTC
RTC

WRIT OF KALIKASAN

Subject Matter unlawful act or omission of a 1) public official or employee; or 2) private

individual or entity involving ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE of such magnitude as
to prejudice the LIFE, HEALTH, or PROPERTY of inhabitants in two or more cities
or provinces.

Respondent Private Individual or entity

VENUE SUPREME COURT

Any Station of the CA (Manila, Cebu or Cagayan de Oro)

Docket Fee EXEMPT

rv
DOCTRINES ON COURT’S JURISDICTION

 Principle of Judicial Hierarchy and Continuity of Jurisdiction

Fundamental Rules/principles to remember:

FIRST, The SC has concurrent jurisdiction with CA, RTC and Sandigabayan to issue Writs
of Certiorari, Prohibition, Mandamus, Habeas Data, Habeas Corpus, Amparo

SECOND, the SC is NOT TRIER OF FACTS

Hence:

In the case of GIOS-SAMAR, INC. VS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND

COMMUNICATIONS et al, (G.R. No. 217158, March 12, 2019), the SC ruled thus:

“As a matter of policy, direct recourse to the SC should not be allowed. The SC is a
COURT OF LAST RESORT, and must so remain if it is to satisfactorily perform the
functions assigned to it by the fundamental charter and immemorial tradition. It
CANNOT and SHOULD NOT BE BURDENED with the task of dealing with causes in the
first instance. Its original, jurisdiction to issue the so-called extraordinary writs should
be exercised only where absolutely necessary or where serious and important reasons
exist therefore. Hence, x x x Where the issuance of an extraordinary writ is also within
the competence of the CA or RTC, it is in either of this courts that the specific action
for the writ’s procurement must be presented. This is and should continue to be the
policy in this regard, a policy that courts and lawyers must strictly observe.

The concurrence of jurisdiction is not however to be taken as according to parties

seeking any of the writs an absolute, unrestrained freedom of choice of the court to
which application therefore will be directed. There is after all hierarchy of courts. That
hierarchy is determinative of the venue of appeals, and should also serve as
determinant of the appropriate forum for petitions of extraordinary writs. X x A direct
invocation of the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction to issue these writs should be
allowed ONLY WHEN there are SPECIAL AND IMPORTANT REASONS therefore, CLEARLY
and SPECIFICALLY SET OUT in the petition.

The Court feels the need to reaffirm that policy of judicial hierarchy x x x and to enjoin
strict adherence thereto in the light of what it perceives to be a growing tendency on the
part of litigants and lawyers to have their application for the so-called extraordinary
writs, and sometime even their appeals, passed upon directly and immediately by the
HIGHEST TRIBUNAL OF THE LAND. X x x

rv
 This doctrine of hierarchy of courts guides litigants as to the proper venue of appeals
and/or appropriate forum for the issuance of extraordinary writs. Thus, although this
Court (SC), the CA and the RTC have concurrent original jurisdiction over petitions for
certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto , and habeas corpus, parties are
DIRECTED, AS A RULE, TO FILE THEIR PETITIONS BEFORE THE LOWER RANKED COURT.
FAILURE TO COMPLY IS SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR THE DISMISSAL OF THE PETITION.”

Hierarchy of courts is a constitutional imperative given the (1) structure of our judicial
system and (2) the requirements of due process.

The doctrine of hierarchy of courts recognizes the various levels of courts in the country
as they are established under the Constitution and by law, their ranking and effect of
their rulings in relation with one another, and how these different levels of court interact
with one another. Xxx

The SC is not a trier of facts, hence by directly filing a case before the Court. Litigants
necessarily deprive themselves of the opportunity to completely pursue or defend their
causes of actions. Their right to due process if effectively undermined by their own
doing.

The doctrine of hierarchy of courts operates to:

a. Prevent inordinate demands upon the Court’s time and attention which are better
devoted to those matters within its exclusive jurisdiction;
b. Prevent further over crowding of the Court’s docket; and
c. Prevent the inevitable and resultant delay, intended or otherwise, in the adjudication
of cases which often have to be remanded or referred to the lower court as the
proper forum under the rules of procedure, or as the court better equipped to
resolve factual questions.

“The SC enforces the observance of the hierarchy of courts in order to free itself from
unnecessary, frivolous and impertinent cases and thus afford time for it to deal with the
more fundamental and more essential tasks that the Constitution has assigned to it.
There being no special, important or compelling reason, the petitioner thereby violated
the observance of the hierarchy of courts warranting the dismissal of the petition for
certiorari.” (Connie L. Servo vs. Philippine Deposit Insurance Corp., G.R. 234401,
December 5, 2019)
Exception to principle of Hierarchy of Courts

rv
 “The invocation of this Court’s original jurisdiction to issue writs of certiorari has been
allowed in certain instances on the ground of special and important reasons clearly
sated in petition, such as: 1) when dictated by the public welfare and the advancement
of public policy; 2) when demanded by the broader interest of justice; 3) when the
challenged orders were patent nullities; or 4) when analogous exceptional and
compelling circumstances called for and justified the immediate and direct handling of
the case.” (Ernesto Dy vs. Hon. Gina Bibat-Palamos, RTC Branch 64, Makati City and ORIX
METRO LEASING FINANCE CORP, G.R. 196200, Sept, 11, 2013, citing Republic vs Caguioa,
G.R. 174385, February 20, 2013)

DOCTRINE OF PRIMARY JURISDICTION

1. The Commission on Audit et al vs. Hon. Erwin Virgilio Ferrer, RTC Br 33, Pili,
Camarines Sur, and Luis Raymund Villafuerte, Jr. (GR No. 218870, November 24,
2020)

“The principle of primary jurisdiction holds that “ if a case is such that its determination
requires the EXPERTISE, SPECIALIZED TRAINING and KNOWLEDGE OF THE PROPER
ADMINISTRATIVE BODIES, RELIEF MUST FIRST be obtained in an ADMINSITRATIVE
proceeding before a remedy is supplied by the courts even if the matter may well be
within their proper jurisdiction. Courts cannot or will not determine a controversy
involving a question within the jurisdiction of an administrative tribunal prior to the
resolution of that question by the administrative tribunal, where the question demands
the exercise of sound discretion requiring its special knowledge, experience, and
services to determine technical and intricate matters of fact.

The objective of the doctrine of primary jurisdiction is to guide the court in determining
whether it should refrain from exercising its jurisdiction until after an administrative
agency has determined some question or some aspect of some question arising in the
proceeding before the court.

Exceptions to the doctrine of primary jurisdiction are as follows:

1. Where there is estoppel on the part of the party invoking the doctrine;
2. Where the challenged administrative act is patently illegal, amounting to lack of
jurisdiction;
3. Where there is unreasonable delay or official inaction that will irretrievably prejudice
the complainant;
4. Where the amount involved is relatively small so as to make the rule impractical and
oppressive;

rv
 5. Where the question involved is purely legal and will ultimately have to be decided by
the courts of justice;
6. Where judicial intervention is urgent
7. When its application may cause great and irreparable damage;
8. Where the controverted acts violate due process;
9. When the issue of non-exhaustion of administrative remedies has been rendered
moot;
10. When there is no other plain, speedy and adequate remedy; and
11. When strong public interest is involved;
12. In quo warranto proceedings.”
Doctrine of Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies
“Under the doctrine of administrative remedies, recourse thru court action cannot prosper until
after all such administrative remedies have first been exhausted. If remedy is available within
the administrative machinery, this should be resorted to before resort can be made to courts. It
is well-settled that non-observance of the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies
results to lack of cause of action, which is one of the ground in the Rules of Court justifying the
dismissal of the complaint. (Danilo A. Lihaylihay vs. The Treasurer of the Philippines et al GR. Jo.
192223, July 23, 2018)
“However, failure to observe the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies does not
affect the jurisdiction of the court. X x The only effect of non compliance with this rule is that it
will deprive the complainant of a cause of action, which is a ground for a motion to dismiss. If
not invoked at a proper time, this ground is DEEMED WAIVED and the court can then take
cognizance of the case and try it.” (GMA NETWORK et al vs. ABC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
(ABC) et al, G.R. 205986, January 11, 2023)
“ x x once an administrative agency has been empowered by Congress to undertake a sovereign
function, the agency should be allowed to perform its function to the full extent that the law
grants. This full extent covers the authority of superior officers in the administrative agencies to
correct the actions of subordinates, or for collegial bodies to reconsider their own decisions on
a motion for reconsideration. Premature judicial intervention would interfere with this
administrative mandate, leaving administrative action incomplete; if allowed, such premature
judicial action through a writ of certiorari, would be a usurpation that violates the separation of
powers principle under the Constitution.
In every case, remedies within the agency’s administrative process must be exhausted before
external remedies can be applied. Thus, even if a governmental entity may have committed a
grave abuse of discretion, litigants should, as a rule, first ask reconsideration from the body
itself, or a review thereof before the agency concerned x x x (Bureau of Customs Employees
Association (BOCEA) vs Hon. Rozzano Rufino Biazon et al (GR 205836, July 12, 202
Doctrine of Non Interference/Judicial Stability

rv
“Doctrine of Judicial stability or non interference states that the judgment of a court of
competent jurisdiction may not be interfered with by any court of concurrent jurisdiction. The
rationale for the same is founded on the concept of jurisdiction – verily, a court that acquires
jurisdiction over the case and renders judgment therein has jurisdiction over its judgment, to
the exclusion of all other coordinate courts, for its execution and over all its incidents, and to
control, in furtherance of justice, the conduct of ministerial officers acting in connection with
this judgment.”
Once a court acquires jurisdiction over a subject matter, the court retains authority over
the same until finality of judgment. Other courts of concurrent jurisdiction must respect and
not interfere with the court’s jurisdiction, lest there will be confusion and inconsistency in the
administration of justice.
The doctrine finds no application when another court with concurrent jurisdiction later
acquires jurisdiction pursuant to a sanctioned change of venue.
(PP vs Angelo Montilla, G.R. 241911, February 8, 2023)

The doctrine of judicial stability or non-interference in the regular orders or judgments

of a co-equal court is an elementary principle in the administration of justice: no court can
interfere by injunction with the judgments or orders of another court of concurrent jurisdiction
x x x x. The various branches of the RTC of a province or city, having as they do the same or
equal authority and exercising as the do concurrent and coordinate jurisdiction, should no,
cannot, and are not permitted to interfere with their respective cases, much less with their
orders or judgments. A contrary rule would obviously lead to confusion and seriously hamper
the administration of justice.” (Teresita Tan vs Jovencio Cinco et al GR 213054, June 15, 2016

 The question of whether the trial court has jurisdiction depends on the nature of the
action i.e. whether the action is in rem, in personam or quasi in rem.

 The rule on the service of Summons under Rule 14 of the Rules of Court applies
according to the nature of the action

rv
Cont. of Lecture Notes in Civil Proc 1
ASPECTS OF JURISDICTION
A. JURISDICTION OVER THE SUBJECT MATTER

MEANING OF JURISDICTION OVER SUBJECT MATTER:

It is the power of the court to deal with the general subject involved in the
action. It refers to jurisdiction of the class of cases to which the particular case belongs.
(Allied Domecq vs Villion, G. R. No. 156264, 2004)

SUBJECT MATTER are the items with respect to which the controversy has arisen, or
concerning which the wrong has been done, such as the right, the thing, or the contract
under dispute.

How jurisdiction is conferred?

Jurisdiction over the subject matter is conferred only by

1) the Constitution; or
2) the law

It cannot be contingent or dependent upon the action or inaction of the court (Republic
vs Bantigue, GR 162332, 2012)

Jurisdiction over the subject matter CANNOT BE CONFERRED by the following:

1. Administrative policy of any court;

2. Court’s unilateral assumption of jurisdiction
3. Contract
4. Compromise
5. Erroneous belief by the court that it has jurisdiction
6. Acquiescence by the court
Exceptions:
1. Estoppel by laches (Tijam vs. Sibonghanoy, GR L-21450, 1968)
2. Estoppel by deed or estoppel in pais (Soliven vs. Fastforms, GR 139031, 2004)

rv
 How to determine if the court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of the
case?/How is jurisdiction determined?

 “The nature of an action, as well as which court or body has jurisdiction over it, is
determined by the allegations contained in the complaint, irrespective of whether or
not the plaintiff is entitled to recover upon all or some of the claims asserted therein.
The averments in the complaint and the character of the relief sought are the
determining factors. Once vested, jurisdiction remains even if it is established at trial
that the plaintiff is not entitled to recover from all or some of the claims raised in the
complaint.” (Dominga Palacat vs. Heirs of Florentino Hontanosas, GR 237178, December
2, 2020)

 It is not determined by the defenses of the defendant or the pieces of evidence

presented in the trial of the case.

 In cases where the claim for the damages is the main case of action, or one of the causes
of action, the amount of such claim shall be considered in determining the jurisdiction of
the court. (Sante vs Claravall GR 173915, 2010)

B. Jurisdiction Over the Parties

Meaning of jurisdiction over the parties

Jurisdiction over the parties is the power if a court to render personal judgment or to
subject the parties in a particular action to the judgment or other rulings rendered in an
action. (Villagarcia vs Fifth Sharia Court, GR 18832, 2014)

How jurisdiction is acquired by the court over the:

a. Plaintiff - by plaintiff’s filing of complaint or petition or other

initiatory pleading.

b. Defendant - by valid service of summons upon the defendant or by his

voluntary appearance in court
When is there VALID SERVICE OF SUMMONS?
In case defendant is a natural person
1. Personal Service by handing a copy of the Summons to the DEFENDANT
IN PERSON; this is the preferred mode of service of Summons

rv
 2. Substituted Service of Summons by:

a) Leaving copies of the Summons at the defendant’s residence with

some person of SUITABLE AGE and DISCRETION then RESIDING
therein;
b) Leaving the copies of Summons at the defendant’s office or regular
place of business with some competent person in charge thereof.
A competent person in charge must be the one managing the office or
business of defendant, such as the president or manager, and such
individual must have sufficient knowledge to understand the
obligation of the defendant in the summons, its importance, and
prejudicial effect arising from such inaction on the summons.
Prerequisites for Valid Substituted Service of Summons:
a. Personal service of summons within a reasonable time was
impossible;
b. Efforts were exerted to locate the defendant such that there must be
several attempts by the Sheriff to serve the Summons personally to
the defendant, at least 3 attempts at least on 2 different dates;
c. The Sheriff’s Report must indicate that the “person who received the
summons was a person of suitable age and discretion residing in the
residence of the defendant and that such person understood the
significance of the receipt of the summons and the correlative duty to
immediately deliver the summons to the defendant, or at the very
least to notify the defendant immediately.”

In case defendant is a domestic private juridical person:

Service of Summons may be made ONLY upon the:
1. PRESIDENT
2. MANAGING PARTNER,
3. GENERAL MANAGER,
4. CORPORATE SECRETARY,
5. TREASURER,
6. IN-HOUSE COUNSEL
When is there VOLUNTARY APPEARANCE IN COURT by the DEFENDANT?
1. By filing of Answer or Motion to Dismiss

rv
 2. By filing pleadings seeking affirmative relief i.e. extension of time to file
answer, motion for reconsideration of Order of Default

HOWEVER, when the defendant explicitly and unequivocably raises

objections to the jurisdiction of the court over his person, such as due to
invalid service of Summons, in the Motion to Dismiss, such is only SPECIAL
APPEARANCE and DOES NOT OPERATE AS VOLUNTARY APPEARANCE.

Accordingly, objections to the jurisdiction of the court over the person of the
defendant must be explicitly made. i.e set forth in an unequivocal manner.

Failure to seasonably object to the jurisdiction of the court over the person of
the defendant constitutes voluntary submission to the jurisdiction of the
court.

What is the effect of VOLUNTARY APPEARANCE by the Defendant?

The court ACQUIRES JURISDICTION over the person of the defendant because
that is EQUIVALENT TO SERVICEWHAT I OF SUMMONS.

What is the effect of absence of Summons or Defective Service of Summons

upon the Defendant?

The court DOES NOT ACQUIRE JURISDICTION over the person of the
defendant, and the PROCEEDINGS and any JUDGMENT rendered are NULL
and VOID, being in VIOLATION of DUE PROCESS.

Source: United Coconut Planters Bank vs. SPS ALISON ANG-SY et al;
Bobie Rose Frias vs Rolando Alcayde G.R. 194262, February 28, 2018

C. JURISDICTION OVER THE ISSUES

Meaning of Jurisdiction over the ISSUES

It is the power of the court to try and decide the ISSUES RAISED in the pleadings of the
parties (Reyes vs Diaz, GR L-48754, Nov. 26, 1941) and DISPUTED by the parties or
simply under consideration (Helen Denila vs. Republic et al GR. 206077, July 15, 2020)

This aspect of jurisdiction (jurisdiction over the issues) is closely tied to jurisdiction over
remedy and over the jurisdiction over the subject matter, which in turn is generally

rv
 determined in the allegations of the initiatory pleading in the complaint or petition and
not the result of proof. (helen Denila vs Republic, GR 206077)

Jurisdiction over the remedy is the authority of the court to take cognizance and pass
upon the propriety of petitioner or complainant’s relief sought. (Ibid)

What is an ISSUE?

An ISSUE is a disputed point or question to which parties to an action have narrowed

down their several allegations and upon which they are desirous of obtaining a decision.

An ISSUE arises when the material allegations raised by a claiming party in his/her
pleading are specifically denied by the defending party.

How are ISSUES conferred and determined?

General rule: by the pleadings of the parties that present the ISSUES to be tried and
determine whether or not the ISSUES are of FACT or LAW

EXCEPTIONS:

Issues may be conferred by:

a. Stipulation of the parties such as during pre-trial conference, the parties enter into
stipulations of facts and documents or enter into agreement simplifying the issues of
the case;
b. Waiver or failure to object to the presentation of evidence on a matter NOT RAISED
in the pleadings
Effect of NO ISSUE in a case
It is proper for the court to render judgment on the pleadings, except for action on
declaration of nullity of marriage or legal separation (Rule 34 Section 1)
D. Jurisdiction over the Res or Property in Litigation

Meaning of jurisdiction over the Res:

It pertains to the authority of the court over the subject or thing subject of litigation as
well as its power to bind the thing with its judgment.
How is jurisdiction over the Res or Property in Litigation Acquired?

rv
 Either by:

a. Actual or constructive seizure of the property under legal process whereby it is

brought into the custody of law; or
b. As a result of the institution of a legal proceeding, in which the power of the court is
recognized and made effective i.e action for quieting of title, judicial foreclosure
proceeding(Biaco vs Philippine Countryside Rural Bank, GR 161417, 2007)
The action may be either:
a. In rem
b. In Personam
c. Quasi in Rem

 In action in rem or quasi in rem, jurisdiction over the person of the defendant is not a
prerequisite to confer jurisdiction over the court, provided that the latter has jurisdiction
over the res. The service of Summons on the defendant is for the purpose of satisfying
the requirement of due process.

E. Estoppel Jurisdiction

What is estoppel jurisdiction?

When a party raised the issue of jurisdiction over the subject matter after participating
in the proceedings before the courts and only after an adverse judgment against them
became final and executory, then that party invoking it is ESTOPPED by laches from
doing so.

General Rule:

Being conferred by law, the issue of lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter maybe
raised at any stage of the proceedings, during trial or on appeal, and is not lost by
WAIVER or by ESTOPPEL.

EXCEPTION:
ESTOPPEL jurisdiction applies to a party claiming lack of subject matter jurisdiction
when:
1. Party Claiming Lack of Subject Jurisdiction has statutory right;
2. The statutory right was not invoked;

rv
 3. An unreasonable length of time lapsed before the claimant raised the issue of
jurisdiction

4. The claimant actively participated in the case and sought affirmative relief from the
court without jurisdiction;

5. The claimant new or had constructive knowledge of which forum possesses subject
matter jurisdiction;

6. Irreparable damage will be caused to the other party who relied on the forum and
the claimant’s implicit WAIVER.

In summary, “lack of jurisdiction over subject matte may be raised at any time, and is a defense
that cannot be lost. However, by way of narrow exception, the doctrine of estoppel by laches,
which rests on consideration of PUBLIC POLICY, may effectively bar jurisdictional challenges. But
it must be emphasized that the doctrine finds application only where the jurisdictional issue is
so BELATEDLY RAISED at it may be presumed to have been WAIVED by the invoking party. “
(Victoria Manufacturing Corporation Employees’ Unio vs. Victoria Manufacturing Corporation,
GR 234446, July 24, 2019)
What is the doctrine of estoppel by laches?
It is a “failure or neglect for an unreasonable and unexplained length of time, to do that which,
by exercising due diligence, could or should have been done earlier.” (Regalado vs Go, 543 Phil.
578, 2007, cited in Victoria Manufacturing Corporation Employees’ Union vs. Victoria
Manufacturing Corp. GR. 234446, July 24, 2019)

RULE 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS

CASES GOVERNED BY THE RULES OF COURT
a. Civil action - one by which a party sues another for:
1. Enforcement of a right
2. Protection of a right
3. Prevention or redress of a wrong

b. Criminal Action one by which the State prosecutes a person for an ACT or
OMMISSION PUNISHABLE by LAW;

c. Special Civil Action a remedy by which a party seeks to establish a STATUS, RIGHT,
Or a PARTICULAR FACT.

rv
RULES OF COURT WHEN NOT APPLICABLE
1. ELECTION CASES
2. LAND REGISTRATION CASES
3. CADASTRAL CASES
4. NATURALIZATION CASES
5. INSOLVENCY PROCEEDINGS

COMMENCEMENT OF ACTION
Section 2. Rule 1: CIVIL ACTION COMMENCES upon FILING of COMPLAINT or PETITION in
court.

 When an additional defendant is impleaded in a later pleading, such as Amendment of

Complaint, or filing of Answer with Third Party Complaint, the action is COMMENCED
with regard to said defendant on the date of filing of such later pleading.

 The payment of DOCKET FEES is an ESSENTIAL requirement of due process and VESTS
JURISDICTION upon the court;

 Where the action is COMMENCED by REGISTERED MAIL, the DATE OF MAILING is

considered as the DATE of COMMENCEMDENT OF ACTION.

Section 6 Rule 1. CONSTRUCTION OF THE RULES OF COURT

General Rule:
The Rules shall be LIBERALLY CONSTRUED in order to PROMOTE their OBJECTIVES of securing:
i. JUST
ii. SPEEDY, and
iii. INEXPENSIVE
Disposition of every action and proceeding
Rationale/Settled Doctrine:
“The rules of procedure are mere tools aimed at facilitating the attainment of JUSTICE, rather
than its frustration. A strict and rigid application of the rules must always be eschewed when it
would SUBVERT the primary objective of the rules, that is to ENHANCE FAIR TRIALS and
EXPEDITE JUSTICE.
Technicalities should never be used to DEFEAT the SUBSTANTIVE RIGHTS of the other
party. Every party litigant MUST be AFFORDED the AMPLEST OPPORTUNITY for the PROPER

rv
and JUST determination of his cause, FREE from the constraints of TECHNICALITIES.” (Manila
Hotel Corp. vs Office of the Director of the Bureau of Legal Affairs, IPO, GR NO. 241034, August
3, 2022)

 Liberal application of the rules of procedures can be invoked only in proper cases and
under justifiable causes and circumstances. (Landbank of the Philippines vs. CA, 789
577, 2016 cited in SPS. Fernando and Amelia Cruz and Millians Shoe Inc. vs Onshore
Strategic Assets Inc. et al, GR NO. 212862, June 17, 2019)

 A liberal construction of the procedural rules is proper where the lapse in the literal
observance of a rule of procedure has not prejudiced the adverse party and has not
deprived the court of its authority. (Marylou Cabrera vs Felix Ng, GR No. 201601,
March 12, 2014)

EXCEPTION:
The following Rules are STRICTLY CONSTRUED:
1. Rule 14 (Service of Summons)
2. Rule 11 (Reglementary Period)
3. Rule 7 Section 5 (Certification Against Non Forum Shopping)
4. Payment of Docket Fees especially Appeals Fee

 Quasi-Judicial administrative bodies are NOT BOUND by the strict rules of procedures.

rv
 c)

rv
my

rv