0% found this document useful (0 votes)
12 views40 pages

GN 2024 Jurisdiction

Uploaded by

ghea lennette
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
12 views40 pages

GN 2024 Jurisdiction

Uploaded by

ghea lennette
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 40

REMEDIAL LAW

D. SUPPLETORY APPLICATION OF THE RULES II. JURISDICTION


OF COURT IN ADMINISTRATIVE BODIES

It is the power and authority of the court to hear, try,


Suppletory Application of the Rules of Court (E- and decide the case (Continental Micronesia, Inc., v.
L-C-I-N-)) Basco, G.R. Nos. 178382-83, 23 Sept. 2015; Barangay
Mayamot v. Antipolo City, G.R. No. 187349, 17 Aug.
GN: The Rules of Court shall not apply to: 2016)
1. Election cases;
2. Land registration cases; The power and authority of a court to try, hear,
3. Cadastral cases; decide a case and the power to enforce its
4. Insolvency proceedings; determination. (Echagaray v. Secretary of Justice,
5. Naturalization cases; and G.R. No. 132601, 19 Jan. 1999)
6. Other cases not herein provided for.
Jurisdiction is the power and authority conferred by
XPNs (A-S-P-C): the Constitution and by the statute to hear and
decide a case. (Esico v. Alphaland Corp., G.R. No.
1. By Analogy 216716, 17 Nov. 2021)
2. In Suppletory character
3. Whenever Practicable and Convenient. (Sec. 4, Jurisdiction is Conferred by Substantive Law
Rule 1, ROC, as amended)
Jurisdiction over the subject matter of a case is
Suppletory is defined as "supplying deficiencies”. It conferred by law. It cannot be acquired by waiver or
means that the provisions in the Rules of Court will acquiescence of any or all of the parties, by estoppel,
be made to apply only where there is an or by the erroneous belief of the court or any
insufficiency in the applicable rule. (Government adjudicative body that it exists. (Dela Cruz v. First
Service Insurance System v. Dinnah Villaviza et al., Bukidnon Electric Cooperative, Inc., G.R. No. 254830,
G.R. No. 180291, 27 Jul. 2010) 27 June 2022, as penned by J. M. V. Lopez)

When Jurisdiction may be Challenged


E. CONSTRUCTION OF THE RULES OF COURT
(Sec. 6, Rule 1, ROC) 1. In a motion to dismiss; or
2. It may be raised at any stage of the
proceeding, even for the first time on
appeal (Pangilinan vs. CA, G.R. No. 117363,
These Rules shall be liberally construed in order to
17 Dec. 1999)
promote their objective of securing a just, speedy,
and inexpensive disposition of every action and
proceeding. (Sec. 6, Rule 1, ROC, as amended)

7 U N I V E RS I T Y O F SA N TO TO M A S
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
Q: What if the defendant in an ejectment case
A. ASPECTS OF JURISDICTION raises the issue of tenancy in his answer, should
the court dismiss the case for lack of
jurisdiction?

Aspects of Jurisdiction (P-Su-I-P-R)


A: NO. While the MTC does not lose its jurisdiction
over an ejectment case by defendant’s alleging the
1. Jurisdiction over the Parties;
existence of tenancy relationship, yet, if after the
2. Jurisdiction over the Subject matter;
hearing, tenancy had in fact been shown, the court
3. Jurisdiction over the Issues;
should dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction. (De
4. Jurisdiction over the res or Property in
la Cruz v. CA, G.R. No. 139442, 06 Dec. 2006)
litigation; and
5. Jurisdiction over the Remedies.
Q: BP BLG. 129, as amended states that if the
assessed value of the real property subject
1. OVER THE SUBJECT MATTER matter of an action involving interest thereto is
P 20,000.00 and more, then the RTC can validly
GR: Jurisdiction over the subject matter cannot be take/assume jurisdiction over the case
waived, enlarged, or diminished by stipulation of otherwise it is the MeTC/MTC. The subject lot in
the parties. (Republic v. Estipular, G.R. No. 136588, 20 a Complaint for Recovery of Real Estate
Jul. 2000) Property and Recovery of Possession has a total
market assessed value of P 11,120.00.22 long
XPN: Estoppel by laches, by failure to object to the years after the complaint was filed, the
jurisdiction of the court for a long period of time and petitioners raised the ground of lack of
by invoking its jurisdiction in obtaining affirmative jurisdiction before the SC. Is the contention
relief. (Tijam v. Sibonghanoy, G.R. No. L-21450, 15 tenable?
Apr. 1968)
A: NO. The circumstances attendant in the instance
Jurisdiction over the Subject Matter case are actually graver than those present in Tijam.
Same as in Tijam, the petitioners utterly failed to
In order for the court or an adjudicative body to invoke the ground of lack of jurisdiction despite
have authority to dispose of the case on the merits, having full knowledge of this ground, considering
it must acquire jurisdiction over the subject matter. that the assessed value of the subject lot was plainly
It is axiomatic that jurisdiction over the subject indicated in the Complaint, a copy of which was fully
matter is conferred by law in force at the time the furnished to the petitioners. In fact, the petitioners
action was filed. Moreover, what determines the filed an Answer and an Amended Answer in
nature of an action are the allegations in the response to the categorical allegations in the
complaint and the character of the reliefs sought. Complaint. However, they totally ignored the issue
Thus, when a court or tribunal has no jurisdiction on jurisdiction in their responsive pleadings.
over the subject matter, the only power it has is to
dismiss the case. (Heirs of Bastida v. Heirs of Analogous to the factual circumstances in Tijam, the
Fernandez, G.R. No. 204420, 7 Oct. 2020, as penned petitioners were also able to file an appeal and
by J. M. V. Lopez) Motion for Reconsideration before the CA. Yet, even
before the CA, the ground for lack of jurisdiction was
never invoked. Therefore, the petitioners are
estopped from invoking the ground of lack of
jurisdiction. (Sps. Rebamonte v. Sps. Lucero, G.R. No.
237812, 02 Oct. 2019)

U N I V E RS I T Y O F S A N TO T O M A S 8
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
REMEDIAL LAW
Q: Dela Cruz was a line personnel, and was A: NO. Jurisdiction over the subject matter of a case
promoted as FIBECO’s general manager. An is conferred by law. It cannot be acquired by waiver
administrative complaint against him was filed or acquiescence of any or all of the parties, by
for nepotism, insubordination, misuse of estoppel, or by the erroneous belief of the court or
FIBECO properties/funds, and gross any adjudicative body that it exists. The failure of
incompetence. After investigation, Dela Cruz the parties to question the NLRC's ruling on the
was found guilty of the charges. FIBECO's Board jurisdictional issue in its Resolution dated April 29,
of Directors passed a Resolution dismissing Dela 2016, did not vest the labor tribunal with
Cruz from service. Eventually, the Board of jurisdiction to take cognizance of the claim.
Administrators approved and confirmed the
finding of guilt against Dela Cruz and his PD No. 269 or the “National Electrification
dismissal from service. The Court upheld NEA's Administration Decree,” as amended, clearly
jurisdiction over the termination dispute and provides that the NEA has the authority to supervise
the finality of NEA's Resolution. It became final the management and operations of all electric
and executory on May 3, 2017. cooperatives. Pursuant to the NEA's power of
supervision and control over the management and
During the pendency of the proceedings, Dela operations of all electric cooperatives and their
Cruz reached the compulsory retirement age on officers, its jurisdiction to promulgate and
August 28, 2013 pending finality of the implement rules on the retirement benefits of
termination dispute. Believing that he is entitled electric cooperative general managers cannot be
to the retirement package, he filed an denied. Settled is the rule that when a law confers
application for retirement benefits with FIBECO, jurisdiction, all the incidental powers necessary for
but to no avail. He pursued his claim before the its effective exercise are included in the conferment.
Labor Arbiter (LA), insisting that he is eligible to (Dela Cruz v. First Bukidnon Electric Cooperative, G.R.
receive retirement benefits as he had been No. 254830. June 27, 2022, as penned by J. M. V.
employed by FIBECO since 1979. However, Lopez)
FIBECO countered that Dela Cruz is not entitled
to retirement benefits since he was found guilty Error of Jurisdiction vs. Error of Judgment
of the administrative charges against him and
validly dismissed and that it is the NEA, not the ERROR OF ERROR OF
LA, which has jurisdiction over the retirement JURISDICTION JUDGMENT
benefits claim. The LA sustained FIBECO's Error of judgment on
jurisdictional argument and dismissed Dela There is error of the other hand
Cruz's claim for lack of jurisdiction. National jurisdiction when in pertains to the exercise
Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) ruled that the first place, the of the court of the
the LA has original and exclusive jurisdiction court rendering the power of jurisdiction
over claims for retirement benefits. LA stood by judgment or decision and that the judge has
its previous ruling. has no jurisdiction to validly acquired or has
issue such. Therefore jurisdiction over the
Dela Cruz sought remedy from the NLRC again. when the court renders case. It presupposes
The NLRC rebuked the LA for reversing its judgment or decision the fact that
earlier resolution on the jurisdictional issue, over and beyond its jurisdiction is validly
and reiterated that the labor tribunal has jurisdiction, such acquired and that only
exclusive jurisdiction over the retirement decision is considered the court made an
benefits claim. The CA however upheld the null and void. error in making the
jurisdiction of the labor tribunal over the case. judgment.
Does the labor tribunal have jurisdiction over
the claim?

9 U N I V E RS I T Y O F SA N TO TO M A S
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
2. OVER THE PARTIES Non-Payment of Filing Fees at the Time the
Complaint was Filed

Jurisdiction over the person is the legal power of the


Non-payment at the time of the filing of the
court to render a personal judgment against a party
to an action or proceeding. (Black’s, 5th Edition) complaint does not automatically cause the
dismissal of the case, provided the fees are paid
The manner by which the court acquires within a reasonable time. Even inadequate
jurisdiction over the parties depends on whether payment of filing will not divest the court of its
the party is the plaintiff or the defendant. jurisdiction. This rule is applicable even if the
How Jurisdiction over the Plaintiff and claim for damages of the plaintiffs is metered or
Defendant is acquired progressing as case the case is pending.
(Unicapital v. Consing, G.R. Nos. 175277 &
PLAINTIFF DEFENDANT
175285, 11 Sept. 2013)
1. By his or her
voluntary Jurisdiction over the Subject Matter vs.
appearance in court Jurisdiction over the Person
and his submission
to its authority; or JURISDICTION OVER JURISDICTION OVER
2. By valid service of THE SUBJECT THE PERSON
By the filing of the
summons. MATTER
complaint AND
payment of docket GR: Determined by the
NOTE: Jurisdiction over allegations of the
fees.
the defendant is not complaint. (Riano,
essential in actions in 2022)
rem or quasi in rem as
long as the court has XPN: Where the real
jurisdiction over the res. issues are evident from Acquired by the filing
(Herrera, 2007) the record of the case, of the petition in case
jurisdiction over the of the plaintiff (Rule
NOTE: To constitute voluntary appearance, it must subject matter cannot 113, ROC, as amended),
be the kind that amount to voluntary submission to be made to depend on by valid service of
the jurisdiction of the court. Submission to the how the parties word summons, or by
jurisdiction of the court takes the form of or phrase their voluntary submission
appearance that seeks affirmative relief except pleadings (Herrera, to the court’s authority
when the relief sought is for the purpose of 2007), e.g., in in case of the
objecting to the jurisdiction of the court over the ejectment cases in defendant. (Ibid.)
person of the defendant. (De Pedro v. Romasan which the defendant
Development, G.R. No. 194751, 26 Nov. 2014) averred the defense of
the existence of
See page 120 for further discussion on Voluntary tenancy relationship
Appearance between the parties.
(Ibid)
Conferred by law It is sometimes made
which may be either to depend, indirectly at
the Constitution or a least, on the party’s
statute. volition

U N I V E RS I T Y O F S A N TO T O M A S 10
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
REMEDIAL LAW
Q: Heirs of Ikang Paus represented by Elias Paus, to dismiss the same. (Republic v. Heirs of Paus, G.R.
filed a petition for identification, delineation, No. 201273, 14 Aug. 2019)
and issuance of a Certificate of Ancestral Land
Title (CALT) with respondent NCIP. They sought 3. OVER THE ISSUES
the confirmation of their right to the ancestral
land at Baguio City.
Jurisdiction over the issues refers to the power of
the court to try and decide the issues raised in the
The Heirs of Mateo Cariño opposed the petition,
pleadings of the parties. (Reyes v. Diaz, G.R. No. L-
and prayed for its dismissal, cancellation, and
48754, 26 Nov. 1941)
revocation.

How Jurisdiction over the Issues Conferred


The said protest was dismissed for lack of merit.
OCT No. 0-CALT-37 covering the said lot in
GR: It is conferred and determined by the pleadings
Baguio City, was issued in the name of the Heirs
of the parties that present the issues to be tried and
of Paus.
determined whether or not the issues are of fact or
of law. (Riano, 2022)
Republic, through the OSG, questioned OCT No.
0-CALT-37 in the name of private respondents,
XPNs: It may be conferred:
and filed a suit for Reversion, Annulment of
Documents and Cancellation of Title with Prayer
1. By stipulation of the parties, as when in the pre-
for Issuance of Temporary Restraining Order
trial, the parties enter into stipulations of facts
(TRO) and Writ of Preliminary Injunction. It
and documents or enter into an agreement
pointed out several irregularities in the
simplifying the issues of the case. (Sec. 2(b), Rule
issuance of CALT in favor of Heirs of Paus.
18, ROC, as amended);

Heirs of Paus answered the complaint denying


2. By express or implied consent of the parties,
all its material allegations. As special and
when issues not raised by the pleadings are
affirmative defenses, they averred lack of
tried, such issues shall be treated in all respects
jurisdiction and lack of cause of action. They
as if they had been raised in the pleadings. (Sec.
pointed out that the complaint assailed the CALT
5, Rule 10, ROC, as amended)
and the OCT issued on the basis of the CALT,
which under the IPRA, falls within the
It is proper for the court to render judgment on the
jurisdiction of the NCIP, and not the regular
pleadings if the answer fails to tender an issue,
courts. They asserted that the RTC has no
except in actions for declaration of nullity of
jurisdiction over the subject matter of the
annulment of marriage or legal separation. (Sec. 1,
complaint; hence, the complaint must be
Rule 34, ROC, as amended).
dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Is the
contention correct?

A: NO. RTC has jurisdiction over cases for reversion


and cancellation of certificates of title. It is axiomatic
that the nature of an action and whether the tribunal
has jurisdiction over such action are to be
determined from the material allegations of the
complaint, the law in force at the time the complaint
is filed, and the character of the relief sought
irrespective of whether the plaintiff is entitled to all
or some of the claims averred. Jurisdiction is not
affected by the pleas or the theories set up by the
defendant in an answer to the complaint or a motion

11 U N I V E RS I T Y O F SA N TO TO M A S
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
OVER THE RES OR THE PROPERTY IN
LITIGATION B. CLASSIFICATION OF JURISDICTION

Jurisdiction over the res refers to the court’s


jurisdiction over the thing or property which is the 1. ORIGINAL VS. APPELLATE
subject of the action. (Riano, 2022)

Original jurisdiction is the power of the Court to


Jurisdiction over the res or property in litigation is
take judicial cognizance of a case instituted for
acquired either by:
judicial action for the first time under conditions
provided by law. Appellate jurisdiction is the
1. Actual or constructive seizure of the property
authority of a Court higher in rank to re-examine the
under legal process, whereby it is brought into
final order or judgment of a lower Court which tried
the custody of the law; or
the case now elevated for judicial review. (Garcia v.
De Jesus, G.R. Nos. 88158 & 97108-09, 04 Mar. 1992)
2. As a result of the institution of legal
proceedings, in which the power of the court is
recognized and made effective. (Biaco v. 2. GENERAL VS. SPECIAL
Philippine Countryside Rural Bank, G.R. No.
161417, 08 Feb. 2007) Courts of general jurisdiction are those with
competence to decide on their own jurisdiction and
If the action is in rem or quasi in rem, jurisdiction take cognizance of all cases, civil and criminal, of a
over the person of the defendant is not required. particular nature, while courts of special
What is required is jurisdiction over the res, jurisdiction are those which have jurisdiction only
although summons must be served upon the for a particular purpose or are clothed with special
defendant in order to satisfy the requirements of powers for the performance of special duties
due process. (Gomez v. CA, G.R. No. 127692, 10 Mar. beyond which they have no authority of any kind.
2004) (Riano, 2022)

In cases where jurisdiction over the person of a 3. EXCLUSIVE VS. CONCURRENT


defendant cannot be acquired, the preliminary
seizure is to be considered necessary in order to
Exclusive jurisdiction is that possessed by a court
confer jurisdiction upon the court. In this case the
to the exclusion of others, while concurrent
lien on the property is acquired by the seizure; and
jurisdiction is the power of different courts to take
the purpose of the proceedings is to subject the
cognizance of the same subject matter. (Riano,
property to that lien. (El Banco Español-Filipino v.
2022)
Palanca, G.R. No. L-11390, 26 Mar. 1918) In this
instance, the action is converted from one in
personam to one in rem. (Villareal v. CA, G.R. No.
107314, 17 Sept. 1998)

U N I V E RS I T Y O F S A N TO T O M A S 12
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
REMEDIAL LAW

C. JURISDICTION OF THE PHILIPPINE COURTS


(B.P. Blg. 129, as amended)

RTCs are courts of general jurisdiction.

1. Boundary dispute NOTE: Since there is no legal provision specifically governing jurisdiction over
between boundary disputes between a municipality and an independent component city
municipalities of the same province, it follows that RTCs have the power and authority to hear
and determine such controversy. (Municipality of Kananga v. Madrona, G.R. No.
141375, 30 Apr. 2003)

RTC because it is incapable of pecuniary estimation. It does not involve the


recovery of sum of money. Rather, it deals with the exercise by the government
2. Expropriation
of its authority and right to take property for public use. (Brgy. San Roque v. Heirs
of Pastor, G.R. No. 138896, 20 June 2000)

GR: An action for damages for abuse of right as an incident to dismissal is within
the exclusive jurisdiction of the labor arbiter.

XPNs:
1. The labor arbiter has no jurisdiction for claims of damages based on quasi-
delict which has no reasonable connection with the employer-employee
3. Labor dispute relations claims under the Labor Code. (Ocheda v. CA, G.R. No. 85517, 16 Oct.
1992)

2. Jurisdiction over the dispute belongs to the regular courts where the claim is
in reference to the general civil law and not in either the Labor Code, other labor
relations statute, or a collective bargaining agreement. (Esico v. Alphaland Corp.,
G.R. No. 216716, 17 Nov. 2021)

The MTC has exclusive original jurisdiction. Under the Revised Rules on
Summary Procedure, MTCs, MTCCs, and MCTCs have jurisdiction over all cases
4. Forcible entry and
of forcible entry and unlawful detainer, irrespective of the amount of damages
unlawful detainer
or unpaid rentals sought to be recovered. (Sec. 1(A)(1), Revised Rules on Summary
Procedure)

5. Authority to conduct
administrative
investigations over It is entrusted to the Secretary of Local Government and concurrent with
local elective the Ombudsman upon enactment of R.A. No. 6770. There is nothing in the Local
officials and to Government Code of 1991 to indicate that it has repealed, whether expressly or
impose preventive impliedly, the pertinent provisions of the Ombudsman Act. (Hagad v. Dadole, G.R.
suspension over No. 108072, 12 Dec. 1995)
elective provincial or
city officials

13 U N I V E RS I T Y O F SA N TO TO M A S
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
2024 GOLDEN NOTES

The Ombudsman must yield to the Division School Superintendent in the


investigation of administrative charges against public school teachers.
6. Public school
teachers XPN: If the school superintendent is the complainant or an interested party, all
the members of the committee shall be appointed by the Secretary of Education.
(Ombudsman v. Galicia, G.R. No. 167711, 10 Oct. 2008)

COA has the primary jurisdiction to pass upon the money claim. It is within
the COA's domain to pass upon money claims against the government or any
subdivision thereof as provided for under Sec. 26 of the Government Auditing
7. Enforcement of a Code of the Philippines. Courts may raise the issue of primary jurisdiction sua
money claim against sponte (on its own will or motion; means to act spontaneously without
a local government prompting from another party) and its invocation cannot be waived by the
unit failure of the parties to argue it as the doctrine exists for the proper distribution
of power between judicial and administrative bodies and not for the convenience
of the parties. (Euro-Med Laboratories, Phil., Inc. v. Province of Batangas, G.R. No.
148106, 17 Jul. 2006)

Q: Can we also include registration of land under PD No. 1529?

A: YES. PD No. 1529 expressly vests upon the CFI, now the RTC, exclusive jurisdiction over all applications for
original registration of titles to lands and all petitions filed after original registration of title. (Sec. 2, PD No. 1529)

CFIs shall have exclusive jurisdiction over all applications for original registration of title to lands, including
improvements and interests therein, and over all petitions filed after original registration of title, with power to
hear and determine all questions arising upon such applications or petitions. The court through its clerk of court
shall furnish the Land Registration Commission with two certified copies of all pleadings, exhibits, orders, and
decisions filed or issued in applications or petitions for land registration, with the exception of stenographic
notes, within five days from the filing or issuance thereof.

In Patungan v. The Register of Deeds (G.R. No. 235520, 28 June 2021), the Supreme Court clarified that “the
jurisdiction of the RTC over all petitions for the issuance of a new duplicate certificate of title is exclusive.

Following the foregoing, we do not determine the assessed value of the property. It is not in the nature of an
action involving title to, or possession of real property.

U N I V E RS I T Y O F S A N TO T O M A S 14
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
REMEDIAL LAW
1. SUPREME COURT
(Sec. 5, Art. VIII, 1987 Constitution)

Cases to be decided by Supreme Court En Banc

1. All cases involving the constitutionality of a treaty, international or executive agreement, or law (Sec. 4(2),
Art. VIII, 1987 Constitution);
2. All other cases which under the Rules of Court are required to be heard en banc (Ibid.);
3. All cases involving the constitutionality, application or operation of presidential decrees, proclamations,
orders, instructions, ordinances and other regulations (Ibid.);
4. Cases where the required number of votes in a division is not obtained (Sec. 4(3), Art. VIII, 1987 Constitution);
5. Cases involving a modification or reversal of a doctrine or principle laid down previously in a decision
rendered en banc (Ibid.);
6. Cases involving the discipline of judges of lower courts (Sec. 11, Art. VIII, 1987 Constitution); and
7. Contests relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of the President or Vice-president. (Sec. 4, Art.
VII, 1987 Constitution)

CIVIL CASES CRIMINAL CASES


Exclusive Original
Petitions for issuance of writs of certiorari,
prohibition and mandamus against the following:

1. Court of Appeals;
2. Court of Tax Appeals;
3. Commission on Elections En Banc;
4. Commission on Audit;
Petitions for issuance of writs of certiorari,
5. Sandiganbayan.
prohibition and mandamus against the following:

NOTE: The certiorari jurisdiction of the SC has been


1. Court of Appeals;
rigorously streamlined, such as that Rule 65 admits
2. Sandiganbayan.
cases based on the specific grounds provided therein.
The Rule applies if there is no appeal or any other
plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary
course of law. The independent action for certiorari
will lie only if grave abuse of discretion is alleged and
proven to exist. (Lagua v. CA, G.R. No. 173390, 27 June
2012)
Appellate
1. In cases where the CA imposes reclusion
1. Petitions for review on certiorari against:
perpetua, life imprisonment or a lesser penalty,
the judgment may be appealed to the SC by notice
a. CA;
of appeal filed with the CA;
b. CTA en banc (Sec. 11, R.A. No. 9282) (2006
BAR);
2. Automatic review for cases of death penalty
c. Sandiganbayan;
rendered by the CA;
d. RTC, in cases involving:

NOTE: Where the judgment also imposes a lesser


penalty for offenses committed on the same
occasion or which arose out of the same

15 U N I V E RS I T Y O F SA N TO TO M A S
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
i. If no question of fact is involved and occurrence that gave rise to the more severe
the case involves: offense for which the penalty of death is imposed,
and the accused appeals, the automatic review
a) Constitutionality or validity of from the CA to the SC shall include such lesser
treaty, international or executive offense.
agreement, law, presidential
decree, proclamation, order, 3. Petition for review on certiorari (Rule 45) from
instruction, ordinance or the Sandiganbayan if penalty is less than death,
regulation; life imprisonment or reclusion perpetua in
criminal cases, and, in civil cases;
b) Legality of tax, impost,
assessments, or toll, or penalty in 4. Notice of appeal from the Sandiganbayan if it
relation thereto; or imposes life imprisonment or reclusion perpetua
or where a lesser penalty is imposed involving
c) Cases in which jurisdiction of offenses committed on the same occasion or
lower court is in issue; which arose out of the same occurrence that gave
rise to the more serious offense for which the
ii. All cases in which only errors or penalty of death, reclusion perpetua of life
questions of law are involved; imprisonment is imposed;

iii. Special civil action of certiorari – filed 5. Automatic review of death penalty imposed by
within 30 days against the the Sandiganbayan in the exercise of its original
COMELEC/COA. jurisdiction;

6. Criminal cases from the Ombudsman are


appealable to the Supreme Court (Sec. 14, R.A. No.
6770) (2006 BAR);

7. Automatic review whenever the Sandiganbayan,


in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction, finds
that the penalty of death, reclusion perpetua or
life imprisonment should be imposed; and

8.
Appeals from RTC in which only errors or
questions of law are involved.
Concurrent with CA
1. Petitions for issuance of writs of certiorari,
prohibition and mandamus against the following:

a. NLRC under the Labor Code;


Petitions for issuance of writs of certiorari,
NOTE: The petitions must first be filed with prohibition and mandamus against the RTC and lower
the CA; otherwise, they shall be dismissed courts.
(St. Martin Funeral Homes v. CA, G.R. No.
130866, 16 Sept. 1998).

b. Civil Service Commission;

U N I V E RS I T Y O F S A N TO T O M A S 16
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
REMEDIAL LAW
c. Quasi-judicial agencies (should be filed
with the CA first);
d. RTC and lower courts;

2. Petitions for issuance of writ of Kalikasan (Sec. 3,


Rule 7, A.M. No. 09-6-8-SC)
Concurrent with CA and RTC
Petitions for habeas corpus and quo warranto; and
Petitions for issuance of writs of certiorari,
Petitions for issuance of writs of certiorari,
prohibition and mandamus against the lower courts
prohibition and mandamus against the lower courts
or bodies.
or bodies.
Concurrent with CA, SB, and RTC
1. Petitions for the issuance of writ of amparo;
and
Petitions for the issuance of writ of amparo and writ
2. Petitions for writ of habeas data, where the
of habeas data.
action involves public data or government
office.
Concurrent with RTC
Actions affecting ambassadors and other public
-
ministers and consuls.
Concurrent with SB

Petitions for mandamus, prohibition, certiorari,


injunctions and ancillary writs in aid of its appellate
- jurisdiction including quo warranto arising or that
may arise in cases filed under E.O. Nos. 1, 2, 14 and
14-A.

17 U N I V E RS I T Y O F SA N TO TO M A S
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
2. COLLEGIATE COURTS

a. COURT OF APPEALS
(B.P. Blg. 129, as amended by R.A. No. 7902)

CIVIL CASES CRIMINAL CASES


Exclusive Original

1. Actions for annulment of judgments of RTC (Sec.


Actions for annulment of judgments of RTC based
9, B.P. No. 129);
upon extrinsic fraud or lack of jurisdiction. (Sec. 9, B.P.
2. Crimes of Terrorism under the Human Security
No. 129; Rule 47, ROC, as amended)
Act of 2007 (R.A. No. 9372).

Appellate

Judgments or decisions of RTC via notice of appeal


1. Final judgments, decisions, resolutions, orders, (except those appealable to the SC or
awards of: Sandiganbayan):

a. RTC (original or appellate jurisdiction); 1. Exercising its original jurisdiction;


b. Family Courts; RTC on the questions of 2. Exercising its appellate jurisdiction; and
constitutionality, validity of tax, jurisdiction 3. Where the imposable penalty is:
involving questions of fact, which should be
appealed first to the CA; a. Life imprisonment or reclusion perpetua; or
c. Appeals from RTC in cases appealed from b. A lesser penalty for offenses committed on
MTCs which are not a matter of right; the same occasion or which arose from the
same occurrence that gave rise to the offense
2. Appeal from MTC in the exercise of its delegated punishable reclusion perpetua or life
jurisdiction (R.A. No. 7691); imprisonment (Sec. 3, Rule 122, ROC, as
amended).
3. Appeals from Civil Service Commission;
Automatic review in cases of death penalty rendered
4. Appeals from quasi-judicial agencies under Rule by the RTC, in which case, it may decide on whether
43; or not to affirm the penalty of death. If it affirms the
penalty of death, it will render a decision but will not
5. Appeals from the National Commission on enter the judgment because it will then be forwarded
Indigenous Peoples (NCIP); and to the SC.

6. Appeals from the Office of the Ombudsman in NOTE: Death penalty imposed by the RTC is elevated
administrative disciplinary cases. (Mendoza-Arce to the CA by automatic review while death penalty
v. Office of the Ombudsman, G.R. No. 149148, 05 imposed by the Sandiganbayan whether in its original
Apr. 2002) (2006 BAR) or appellate jurisdiction is elevated to the SC for
automatic review.

U N I V E RS I T Y O F S A N TO T O M A S 18
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
REMEDIAL LAW
Concurrent with SC

1. Petitions for issuance of writs of certiorari,


prohibition and mandamus against the following:

a. NLRC under the Labor Code;


Petitions for issuance of writs of certiorari,
b. Civil Service Commission;
prohibition and mandamus against the RTCs and
c. Quasi-judicial agencies; and
lower courts
d. RTCs and other lower courts;

2. Petitions for issuance of writ of Kalikasan. (Sec. 3,


Rule 7, A.M. No. 09-6-8-SC)

Concurrent with SC and RTC

1. Petitions for habeas corpus and quo warranto;


and Petitions for issuance of writs of certiorari,
2. Petitions for the issuance of writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus against the lower courts
prohibition and mandamus against the lower or bodies
courts.

Concurrent with SC, SB and RTC

1. Petitions for the issuance of writ of amparo;


Petitions for the issuance of writ of amparo and writ
2. Petition for writ of habeas data, where the action
of habeas data
involves public data or government office.

19 U N I V E RS I T Y O F SA N TO TO M A S
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
b. SANDIGANBAYAN
(P.D. No. 1606, as amended by R.A. No. 7975, R.A. No. 8249 and R.A. No. 10660)

CRIMINAL CASES
Exclusive Original
A. Violations of Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (R.A. No. 3019), R.A. No. 1379, and Chapter II, Sec. 2,
Title VII, Book II of the RPC, 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. Officials of the executive branch occupying the positions of regional director and higher, otherwise
classified as Grade ‘27’ and higher, of the Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989 (R.A.
No. 6758), specifically including:

a. Provincial governors, vice-governors, members of the sangguniang panlalawigan, and provincial


treasurers, assessors, engineers, and other provincial department heads:
b. City mayors, vice-mayors, members of the sangguniang panlungsod, city treasurers, assessors,
engineers, and other city department heads;
c. Officials of the diplomatic service occupying the position of consul and higher;
d. Philippine Army and Air Force colonels, naval captains, and all officers of higher rank;
e. Officers of the Philippine National Police while occupying the position of provincial director and
those holding the rank of senior superintendent and higher;
f. City and provincial prosecutors and their assistants, and officials and prosecutors in the Office of
the Ombudsman and special prosecutor;
g. Presidents, directors or trustees, or managers of government-owned or controlled corporations,
state universities or educational institutions or foundations.

2. Members of Congress and officials thereof classified as Grade ‘27’ and higher under the Compensation
and Position Classification Act of 1989 (R.A. No. 6758);
3. Members of the judiciary without prejudice to the provisions of the Constitution;
4. Chairmen and members of the Constitutional Commissions, without prejudice to the provisions of the
Constitution; and
5. All other national and local officials classified as Grade ‘27’ and higher under the Compensation and
Position Classification Act of 1989.

NOTE: While the first part of Sec. 4(a) of P.D. No. 1606, as amended covers only officials with the salary
grade 27 and higher, the second part specifically includes other executive officials whose positions
may not be with salary grade 27 and higher but who are, by express provision of law, placed under
the jurisdiction of the said court. Thus, if the position is enumerated under Sandiganbayan’s
jurisdiction and as long as the offense was committed in relation to their office, regardless of salary
grade, Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction. (Geduspan v. People, G.R. No. 158187, 11 Feb. 2005)

B. Other offenses or felonies whether simple or complexed with other crimes committed by the public
officials and employees mentioned in subsection a. of this section in relation to their office.

C. Civil and criminal cases filed pursuant to and in connection with Executive Order Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A,
issued in 1986.

U N I V E RS I T Y O F S A N TO T O M A S 20
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
REMEDIAL LAW
NOTE: RTC shall have exclusive original jurisdiction where the information:
a. Does not allege any damage to the government or any bribery; or
b. Alleges damage to the government or bribery arising from the same or closely related transactions
or acts in an amount not exceeding P1,000,000. (Sec. 4, P.D. 1606, as amended by R.A. No. 10660)

Exclusive original jurisdiction thereof shall be vested in the proper RTC, MeTC, MTC and MCTC, as the case
may be, in cases where none of the accused are occupying positions corresponding to Salary Grade ‘27’ or
higher, or military and PNP officers mentioned above. (Sec. 4, P.D. 1606, as amended by R.A No. 10660)

Appellate
Final judgments, resolutions, or orders of regional trial courts whether in the exercise of their own original
jurisdiction or of their appellate jurisdiction as herein provided.

Concurrent with SC
Petitions for mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, injunctions and ancillary writs in aid of its appellate
jurisdiction including quo warranto arising or that may arise in cases filed under E.O. Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A.
Concurrent with SC, CA and RTC
Petitions for the issuance of writ of amparo and writ of habeas data.

An Offense is deemed to be Committed in relation to the Public Office upon showing of any of the
following:

1. When such office is an element of the crime charged; or


2. When the offense charged is intimately connected with the charge of the official functions of the accused.

Requisites for an Offense to fall under the Exclusive Original Jurisdiction of Sandiganbayan

1. The offense committed is a violation of:


a. R.A. No. 3019, as amended (the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act),
b. R.A. No. 1379 (the law on ill-gotten wealth),
c. Chapter II, Section 2, Title VII, Book II of the Revised Penal Code (the law on bribery),
d. Executive Order Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A, issued in 1986 (sequestration cases), or
e. Other offenses or felonies whether simple or complexed with other crimes.

2. The offender committing the offenses in items (a), (b), (c) and (e) is a public official or employee holding
any of the positions enumerated in par. A of Sec. 4 of R.A. No. 8249; and

3. The offense committed is in relation to the office. (Adaza v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 154886, 28 July 2005)

21 U N I V E RS I T Y O F SA N TO TO M A S
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
c. COURT OF TAX APPEALS
(R.A. No. 1125, as amended by R.A. No. 9282 and R.A. No. 9503)

TAX CASES CRIMINAL CASES


Exclusive Original

All criminal cases arising from violation of the NIRC,


of the Tariff and Customs Code and other laws, part
In tax collection cases involving final and executory of laws, or special laws administered by the BIR or
assessments for taxes, fees, charges, and penalties the BOC where the principal amount of taxes and
where the principal amount of taxes and fees, fees, exclusive of charges and penalties claimed is
exclusive of charges and penalties claimed is not less less that P1,000,000 or where there is no specified
than P1,000,000. amount claimed (the offenses or penalties shall be
tried by the regular courts and the jurisdiction of the
CTA shall be appellate).

Appellate
1. Over appeals from the judgment, resolutions
or orders of the RTC in tax cases originally
decided by them, in their respective
In tax collection cases involving final and executory territorial jurisdiction.
assessments for taxes, fees, charges and penalties
where the principal amount of taxes and fees, 2. Over petitions for review of the judgments,
exclusive of charges and penalties claimed is less than resolutions or orders of the RTC in the
P1,000,000 tried by the proper MTC, MeTC, and RTC. exercise of their appellate jurisdiction over
tax cases originally decided by the MeTCs,
MTCs, and MCTCs in their respective
jurisdiction.
Exclusive Appellate Jurisdiction to Review by Appeal from Commissioner of Internal Revenue

1. Decisions 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 BIR;

2. Inaction by CIR in cases involving disputed assessments, refunds of IR taxes, fees or other charges,
penalties in relation thereto, or other matters arising under the NIRC or other laws administered by BIR,
where the NIRC or other applicable law provides a specific period of action, in which case the inaction
shall be deemed an implied denial via Petition for Review under Rule 42.

Exclusive Appellate Jurisdiction to Review by Appeal from RTC

Decisions, orders, or resolutions in local tax cases originally decided or resolved by them in the exercise of
their original or appellate jurisdiction via Petition for Review under Rule 43.

Exclusive Appellate Jurisdiction to Review by Appeal from Commissioner of Customs


1. Decisions in cases involving liability for customs duties, fees or other charges, seizure, detention or release
of property affected, fines, forfeitures or other penalties in relation thereto; or

2. Other matters arising under the Customs Law or other laws, part of laws or special laws administered by
BOC (via Petition for Review under Rule 42, ROC, as amended).

U N I V E RS I T Y O F S A N TO T O M A S 22
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
REMEDIAL LAW
Exclusive Appellate Jurisdiction to Review by Appeal from Central Board of Assessment Appeals

Decisions in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction over cases involving the assessment and taxation of real
property originally decided by the provincial or city board of assessment appeals via Petition for Review
under Rule 43.

Exclusive Appellate Jurisdiction to Review by Appeal from Secretary of Finance

Decision on customs cases elevated to him automatically for review from decisions of the Commissioner of
Customs which are adverse to the government under Sec. 2315 of the TCC via Petition for Review under Rule
42.

Exclusive Appellate Jurisdiction to Review by Appeal from Secretary of Trade and Industry and the
Secretary of Agriculture

Decisions of Secretary of Trade and Industry in the case of non-agricultural product, commodity or article,
and the Secretary of Agriculture in the case of agricultural product, commodity or article, involving dumping
duties and countervailing duties under Secs. 301 and 302, respectively, of the TCC, and safeguard measures
under RA 8800, where either party may appeal the decision to impose or not to impose said duties (via Petition
for Review under Rule 42).

23 U N I V E RS I T Y O F SA N TO TO M A S
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
3. SECOND-LEVEL COURTS
(B.P. Blg. 129 as amended by R.A. No. 7691, R.A. No. 11576 and R.A. No. 8369; A.M. No. 22-04-06-SC, A.M. No.
03-03-03-SC)

REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS


CIVIL CASES CRIMINAL CASES
Exclusive Original
1. Criminal cases not within exclusive jurisdiction of
1. In all civil actions in which the subject of the
any court, tribunal or body (Sec. 20, B.P. No. 129):
litigation is incapable of pecuniary estimation;

a. Cases where the penalty provided by law


2. In all civil actions which involve the title to, or
exceeds 6 years imprisonment irrespective
possession of, real property, or any interest
of the fine (R.A. No. 7691); and
therein, where the assessed value of the
property involved exceeds P400,000 except
b. Cases not falling within the exclusive
actions for forcible entry into and unlawful
original jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan
detainer of lands or buildings, original
where the imposable penalty is
jurisdiction over which is conferred upon the
imprisonment more than 6 years and none
MeTCs, MTCs, and MCTCs; (B.P. 129, as amended
of the accused is occupying positions
by R.A. No. 11576)
classified as “Grade 27” and higher (Sec. 4,
P.D. No. 1606, as amended by R.A. No. 8249).
NOTE: An action "involving title to real
property" means that the plaintiffs cause of
2. Cases where the only penalty provided by law is a
action is based on a claim that he owns such
fine exceeding P4,000;
property or that he has the legal rights to have
exclusive control, possession, enjoyment, or
3. Other laws which specifically lodge jurisdiction in
disposition of the same. (Montero v. Montero,
the RTC:
G.R. 217755, 18 Sept. 2019)

a. Criminal and civil aspects of written


3. In all actions in admiralty and maritime
defamation; (Art. 360, RPC)
jurisdiction where the demand or claim exceeds
b. Decree on Intellectual Property; and
P2 Million; (B.P. No. 129, as amended by R.A. No.
c. Violations of R.A. No. 9165 regardless of the
11576)
imposable penalty.

4. In all matters of probate, both testate and


XPN: except when the offender is under 16
intestate, where the gross value of the estate
and there are Juvenile and Domestic
exceeds P2 Million; (B.P. No. 129, as amended by
Relations Court in the province;
R.A. No. 11576)

4. Cases falling under the Family Courts in areas


5. In all actions involving the contract of marriage
where there are no Family Courts (Sec. 24, B.P. No.
and marital relations;
129);

6. In all cases not within the exclusive jurisdiction


5. Election offenses (Omnibus Election Code) even if
of any court, tribunal, person or body exercising
committed by an official with salary grade of 27
jurisdiction of any court, tribunal, person or
or higher;
body exercising judicial or quasi-judicial
functions;

U N I V E RS I T Y O F S A N TO T O M A S 24
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
REMEDIAL LAW
7. In all civil actions and special proceedings 6. All cases on money laundering; and
falling within the exclusive original jurisdiction
of a Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court and XPN: However, those committed by public
of the Court of Agrarian Relations as now officers and private persons who are in
provided by law; and conspiracy with such public officers, shall be
under the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan. (Sec.
8. In all other cases in which the demand, exclusive 5, R.A. No. 9160)
of interest, damages of whatever kind,
attorney’s fees, litigation expenses, and costs or 7. Cases otherwise cognizable by the
the value of the property in controversy exceeds Sandiganbayan, where the information:
P2 million. (B.P. No. 129, as amended by R.A. No. a. Does not allege any damage to the
11576) government or any bribery; or
b. Alleges damage to the government or
bribery arising from the same or closely
related transactions or acts in an amount
not exceeding P1 million. (Sec. 4, PD No.
1606, as amended by R.A. No. 10660)
Appellate
GR: All cases decided by lower courts in their respective territorial jurisdictions.
XPN: Decisions of lower courts in the exercise of delegated jurisdiction. (Sec. 22, B.P. No. 129)
Concurrent with SC, SB and CA
1. Writ of amparo; Petitions for the issuance of writs of amparo and
2. Writ of habeas data. habeas data.
Concurrent with SC
Actions affecting ambassadors and other public
ministers and consuls. (Sec. 21(2), B.P. No. 129)
Concurrent with SC and CA

1. Certiorari, prohibition and mandamus against


lower courts and bodies;
2. Habeas corpus and quo warranto; and
3. Injunction. (Sec. 21(1), B.P. 129)

Concurrent with MTC

Cases involving enforcement or violations of


environmental and other related laws, rules and
regulations. (Sec. 2, Rule 1, A.M. No. 09-6-8-SC)

Special Jurisdiction

Supreme Court may designate certain branches of RTC to try exclusively:


1. Criminal cases;
2. Juvenile and domestic relations cases;
3. Agrarian cases;
4. Urban land reform cases not falling within the jurisdiction of any quasi-judicial body; and
5. Other special cases as the SC may determine in the interest of a speedy and efficient administration
of justice. (Sec. 23, B.P. No. 129)

25 U N I V E RS I T Y O F SA N TO TO M A S
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
4. FIRST-LEVEL COURTS
(B.P. Blg. 129 as amended by R.A. No. 7691 and R.A. No. 11576)

METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURTS, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS,


MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS IN CITIES, AND MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURTS

CIVIL CASES CRIMINAL CASES


Exclusive Original
1. All violations of city or municipal ordinances
1. Actions involving personal property where the committed within their respective territorial
value of the property does not exceed jurisdiction; (Sec. 32(1), B.P. 129, as amended by
P2,000,000; (B.P. 129, as amended by R.A. No. R.A. No. 7691)
11576)
2. All offenses punishable with imprisonment not
2. Actions for claim of money where the demand exceeding 6 years irrespective of the amount of
does not exceed P2,000,000; (B.P. 129, as fine and regardless of other imposable accessory
amended by R.A. No. 11576) or other penalties;

3. Probate proceedings, testate or intestate, where 3. Where the only penalty provided by law is a fine
the value of the estate does not exceed not exceeding P4,000 (A.C. No. 09-94, 14 June
P2,000,000 1994);

NOTE: In the foregoing, claim is exclusive of 4. Those covered by the Rules on Summary
interest, damages, attorney’s fees, litigation Procedure, i.e.:
expense, and cost. (B.P. 129, as amended by R.A.
No. 11576) a. Violations of traffic laws, rules and
regulations;
4. Actions involving title to or possession of real b. Violations of the rental law;
property or any interest therein where the value c. Violations of municipal or city ordinances;
or amount does not exceed P400,000 exclusive d. Violations of B.P. 22 (A.M. No. 00-11-01-SC);
of interest damages, attorney’s fees, litigation and
expense, and costs (2008 BAR); (B.P. 129, as
amended by R.A. No. 11576) e. All other criminal cases where the penalty
prescribed by law for the offense charged is
5. Maritime claims where the demand or claim imprisonment not exceeding one (1) year,
does not exceed P2,000,000 (B.P. 129, as or a fine not exceeding Php 50,000.00, or
amended by R.A. No. 11576); both, regardless of other imposable
6. Inclusion or exclusion of voters (Sec. 138, B.P. penalties, accessory or otherwise, or of the
881); civil liability arising therefrom. In offenses
7. Those covered by the Rules on Summary involving damage to property through
Procedure: criminal negligence under Article 365 of the
8. Forcible entry and unlawful detainer; Revised Penal Code, this Rule shall govern
9. Those covered by the Rules on Small Claims, i.e., where the imposable fine does not exceed
actions for payment of money where the claim Php 150,000.00; and (Sec. 1(B)(5), A.M. No.
does not exceed P1,000,000, exclusive of 08-8-7-SC, Rules on Expedited Procedures in
interest and costs. (A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC) the First Level Courts)

U N I V E RS I T Y O F S A N TO T O M A S 26
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
REMEDIAL LAW
f. In offenses involving damage to property
through criminal negligence where the
imposable fine does not exceed P10,000
(Sec. 32, B.P. 129 as amended by R.A. No.
7691)

5. All offenses committed by public officers and


employees in relation to their office, including
GOCCs, and by private individuals charged as co-
principals, accomplices or accessories,
punishable with imprisonment not more than 6
years or where none of the accused holds a
position classified as “Grade 27” and higher. (Sec.
4, P.D. No. 1606, as amended by R.A. No. 8249)
Delegated
Cadastral or land registration cases covering lots
where:

1. There is no controversy or opposition;


2. Contested, but the value does not exceed
P100,000 (Sec. 34, B.P. 129, as amended by R.A. No.
--
7691)

NOTE: The value shall be ascertained by the affidavit


of the claimant or agreement of the respective
claimants. (Sec. 34, B.P. 129 as amended by R.A. No.
7691)
Special

Petition for habeas corpus in the absence of all RTC Application for bail in the absence of all RTC judges in
judges in the province or city. (Sec. 35, B.P. 129) the province or city.

with RTC

Cases involving enforcement or violations of


environmental and other related laws, rules and --
regulations. (Sec. 2, Rule 1, A.M. No. 09-6-8-SC)

27 U N I V E RS I T Y O F SA N TO TO M A S
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
Means to Carry Jurisdiction Into Effect
5. INHERENT POWERS AND MEANS TO CARRY
JURISDICTION
When by law jurisdiction is conferred on a court or
(Sec. 5-6, Rule 135, ROC)
judicial officer, all auxiliary writs, processes and
other means necessary to carry it into effect may be
Inherent Powers of Court employed by such court or officer; and if the
procedure to be followed in the exercise of such
Every court shall have power: jurisdiction is not specifically pointed out by law or
a. To preserve and enforce order in its by these rules, any suitable process or mode of
immediate presence; proceeding may be adopted which appears
comfortable to the spirit of the said law or rules.
b. To enforce order in proceedings before it, (Sec. 6, Rule 135, ROC)
or before a person or persons empowered
to conduct a judicial investigation under its
authority;

c. To compel obedience to its judgments,


orders and processes, and to the lawful
orders of a judge out of court, in a case
pending therein;

d. To control, in furtherance of justice, the


conduct of its ministerial officers, and of all
other persons in any manner connected
with a case before it, in every manner
appertaining thereto;

e. To compel the attendance of persons to


testify in a case pending therein;

f. To administer or cause to be administered


oaths in a case pending therein, and in all
other cases where it may be necessary in
the exercise of its powers;

g. To amend and control its process and


orders so as to make them conformable to
law and justice;

h. To authorize a copy of a lost or destroyed


pleading or other paper to be filed and used
instead of the original, and to restore, and
supply deficiencies in its records and
proceedings. (Sec. 5, Rule 135, ROC)

U N I V E RS I T Y O F S A N TO T O M A S 28
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
REMEDIAL LAW
differences to amicable settlement by an
D. REVISED KATARUNGANG PAMBARANGAY LAW appropriate Lupon;
(R.A. No. 7160)
6. Offenses for which the law prescribes a
maximum penalty of imprisonment
exceeding one (1) year or a fine over
Cases Covered
P5,000.00;

All disputes are subject to Barangay conciliation


7. Offenses where there is no private offended
pursuant to the Revised Katarungang Pambarangay
party;
Law, and prior recourse thereto is a pre-condition
before filing a complaint in court or any government
8. Disputes where urgent legal action is
offices, except in certain cases provided for by law.
necessary to prevent injustice from being
(Circular No. 14-93, July 15, 1993)
committed or further continued,
specifically the following:
Subject Matter for Amicable Settlement

a. Criminal cases where accused is under


GR: The Lupon of each barangay shall have
police custody or detention (Sec.
authority to bring together the parties actually
412(b)(1), Revised Katarungang
residing in the same city or municipality for
Pambarangay Law);
amicable settlement of all disputes.

b. Petitions for habeas corpus by a person


XPNs:
illegally deprived of his rightful
1. Where one party is the government or any
custody over another or a person
subdivision or instrumentality thereof;
illegally deprived or on acting in his
behalf;
2. Where one party is a public officer or
employee, and the dispute relates to the
c. Actions coupled with provisional
performance of his official functions;
remedies, such as preliminary
injunction, attachment, delivery of
3. Where the dispute involves real properties
personal property and support during
located in different cities and
the pendency of the action; and
municipalities;

d. Actions which may be barred by the


XPN: Unless the parties thereto agree to
Statute of Limitations.
submit their difference to amicable
settlement by an appropriate Lupon;
9. Any class of disputes which the President
may determine in the interest of justice or
4. Any complaint by or against corporations,
upon the recommendation of the Secretary
partnership or juridical entities, since only
of Justice;
individuals shall be parties to Barangay
conciliation proceedings either as
10. Where the dispute arises from the
complainants or respondents (Sec. 1, Rule
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law
VI, Katarungang Pambarangay Rules);
(CARL) (Sec. 46 & 47, R.A. 6657);

5. Disputes involving parties who actually


11. Labor disputes or controversies arising
reside in barangays of different cities or
from employer-employee relations
municipalities, except where such
(Montoya v. Escayo, G.R. No. 82211-12, 21
barangay units adjoin each other, and the
Mar. 1989; Art. 226, LC, as amended); and
parties thereto agree to submit their

29 U N I V E RS I T Y O F SA N TO TO M A S
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
12. Actions to annul judgment upon a NOTE: Objections to venue shall be raised in the
compromise which may be filed directly in mediation proceedings before the Punong
court. (Sanchez vs. Tupaz, G.R. No. 76690, 29 Barangay; otherwise, the same shall be deemed
Feb. 29 1988) waived. (Sec. 409, RA No. 7160)

Effect of Refusal or Failure to Appear Before the Q: What if a promissory note has no venue
Lupon stipulation, but there is a mother loan
agreement. The amount appearing on the
Refusal or willful failure of any party or witness to promissory note was not paid when due so an
appear before the lupon in compliance with a action for collection for sum of money was
summons may be punished by the city or municipal instituted. What venue will have to be followed?
court as for indirect contempt of court and barred
from seeking judicial recourse for the complaint or A: The Supreme Court said that if the mother
counterclaim. (Sec. 515, LGC) contract was directly connected and intertwined
with the promissory note, then the promissory note
Personal Appearance of Parties and Prohibition will be bound by the venue stipulation. (Gito, 2023)
on Counsels
WHEN PARTIES MAY GO DIRECTLY TO COURT
VENUE
GR: Barangay Conciliation is a pre-condition to
The venue of the conciliation proceedings shall be: filing a complaint in court. No complaint, petition,
action, or proceeding involving any matter within
PARTIES/ the authority of the Lupon shall be filed or instituted
VENUE
SUBJECT MATTER directly in court or in any other government office.
The dispute shall be
Parties reside in the
brought in said XPNs:
same barangay
barangay
in the barangay where 1. Where the accused is under detention;
Parties reside in the respondent or any 2. Where a person has otherwise been
different barangays of the respondents deprived of personal liberty calling for
in the same city or actually resides, at the habeas corpus proceedings;
municipality choice of the 3. Where actions are coupled with provisional
complainant remedies such as preliminary injunction,
Disputes involving attachment, delivery of personal property
where the real and support pendente lite; and
real property shall be
property or larger 4. Where the action may otherwise be barred
brought for
portion thereof is by the statute of limitations. (Sec. 412(b),
settlement in the
situated; or RA No. 7160)
barangay
Disputes arising at
the workplace where EXECUTION
the contending In the barangay where
parties are employed such workplace or GR: Execution shall issue only upon the expiration
or at the institution institution is situated. of 10 days from date of settlement or receipt of
where such parties award. (Sec. 1, Rule VII, Katarungang Pambarangay
are enrolled for study Rules)
(Sec. 409, RA No. 7160; Sec. 3, Rule VI, Katarungang
Pambarangay Rules)

U N I V E RS I T Y O F S A N TO T O M A S 30
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
REMEDIAL LAW
XPNs: 2. Repudiation of Agreement to Arbitrate

1. When repudiation of the settlement has If the parties, instead of proceeding with the
been made or a petition to nullify the award conciliation, agreed to undergo arbitration
has been filed prior to the expiration of the before the Lupon chairman or Pangkat, but the
10-day period; and consent of any of the parties to the agreement to
arbitrate was secured through fraud, coercion or
2. Under special and exceptional intimidation, such party may repudiate the
circumstances, the imperatives of agreement to arbitrate within five (5) days from
substantial justice, or facts that may have the agreement by serving to the Lupon chairman
transpired after the finality of the judgment or Pangkat a sworn statement to that effect.
which would render its execution unjust.
(Quiros v. Arjona, G.R. No. 158901, March 9, 3. Repudiation/Nullification of the Arbitral
2004) Award

Remedies Available to a Party in Case of Failure If the parties have entered into a completely
of Refusal of the Other Party to Comply with the valid agreement to arbitrate, and an arbitration
Amicable Settlement or Arbitration Award award is rendered by the Lupon chairman or
Pangkat, the party aggrieved by the award
1. Enforcement by the Lupon within 6 months cannot repudiate the award by serving sworn
from the date of: repudiation with the Lupon chairman or the
a. the settlement agreement; Pangkat as in the case of the repudiation of an
b. receipt of the award; or amicable settlement or agreement to arbitrate.
c. when the obligation therein becomes Instead, the repudiation or nullification of the
due and demandable, whichever is arbitration award shall be addressed to the
later; proper city or municipal court through a petition
to nullify the arbitration award filed within 10
2. Execution by action in court after the lapse days from the date thereof. (Robeniol, 2020)
of the 6-month period; and

3. Rescission under Art. 2014 of the NCC in


the case of amicable settlements. (Robeniol,
2020)

REPUDIATION

Objects of Repudiation

1. Repudiation of Amicable Settlement

If the parties in a conciliation proceeding before


the Lupon or Pangkat entered into an amicable
settlement, but it turns out that the consent of
one of the parties to the amicable settlement was
vitiated by fraud, violence, or intimidation, such
party may repudiate the amicable settlement or
compromise agreement within ten (10) days
from the date thereof.

31 U N I V E RS I T Y O F SA N TO TO M A S
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
(l) Third-party complaints;
E. RULES ON EXPEDITED PROCEDURES IN THE (m) Motion for and Complaint in Interventions;
FIRST LEVEL COURTS
(A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC) (n) Motion to admit late judicial affidavit/s, position
papers, or other evidence except on the ground
of force majeure or acts of God; and

Objectives
(o) Motion for judicial determination of probable
cause in criminal cases. (Sec. 2, Rule II, A.M. No.
1. To protect and advance the constitutional right
08-8-7-SC)
of persons to a speedy disposition of their cases;
2. To provide a simplified and inexpensive
Filing of a Motion for Reconsideration will not
procedure for the disposition of small claims;
toll the running of the prescriptive period.
and
3. To introduce innovations and best practices for
The filing of a Motion for Reconsideration, being a
the benefit of the underprivileged.
prohibited pleading, will not toll the running of the
prescriptive period.
PROHIBITED PLEADINGS AND MOTIONS
It is obvious that a prohibited pleading cannot toll
(a) In civil cases, a Motion to Dismiss the complaint the running of the period to appeal since such
or the statement of claim, and in criminal cases, pleading cannot be given any legal effect precisely
a Motion to Quash the complaint or information because of its being prohibited. (Reyes v. People, G.R.
except on the ground of lack of jurisdiction over No. 193034, 20 July 2015)
the subject matter or failure to comply with the
requirement of barangay conciliation; CIVIL CASES

(b) Motion to hear and/or resolve affirmative


Scope
defenses
(c) Motion for a Bill of Particulars;
(a) Forcible entry and unlawful detainer cases,
(d) Motion for New Trial, or for Reconsideration of a
regardless of the amount of damages or unpaid
Judgment, or for Reopening of Trial;
rentals sought to be recovered. where attorney's
(e) Petition for Relief from Judgment;
fees are awarded, the same shall not exceed
(f) Motion for Extension of time to file pleadings,
P100,000.00.
affidavits, or any other paper;
(g) Memoranda
(b) All civil actions, except probate proceedings,
admiralty and maritime actions, and small
(h) Petition for Certiorari, Mandamus, or Prohibition
claims cases, where the total amount of the
against any interlocutory order issued by the
plaintiff's claim does not exceed P2, Million,
court;
exclusive of interest damages of whatever kind,
attorney's fees, litigation expenses and costs.
(i) Motion to Declare the Defendant in default;

(c) Complaints for damages where the claim does


(j) Dilatory Motions for postponement. Any motion
not exceed P2, Million, exclusive of interest and
for postponement shall be presumed dilatory
costs.
unless grounded on acts of God, force majeure, or
physical inability of a counselor witness to
(d) Cases for enforcement of barangay amicable
personally appear in court, as supported by the
settlement agreements and arbitration awards
requisite affidavit and medical proof;
where the money claim exceeds P1 Million,
provided that no execution has been enforced by
(k) Rejoinder;

U N I V E RS I T Y O F S A N TO T O M A S 32
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
REMEDIAL LAW
the barangay within six (6) months from the date SMALL CLAIMS
of the settlement or date of receipt of the award
or from the date the obligation stipulated or
Small Claims Cases
adjudged in the arbitration award becomes due
and demandable.
It is where the claim does not exceed Php 1 million
exclusive of interest and costs. (Rule I(A)(2), A.M. No.
(e) Cases solely for the revival of judgment of any
08-8-7-SC)
MeTcs, MTCCs, MTCs and MTCTs, pursuant to
Rule 39, Section 6 of the Rules of Court.
“Small Claim”

(f) The civil aspect of a violation of BP 22 (the


It is an action that is purely civil in nature where the
Bouncing Checks Law), if no criminal action has
claim or relief raised by the plaintiff is solely for the
been instituted therefor. Should a criminal
payment or reimbursement of a sum of money. It
action be later instituted for the same violation,
excludes actions seeking other claims or reliefs
the civil aspect shall be consolidated with the
aside from payment or reimbursement of a sum of
criminal action and shall be tried and decided
money and those coupled with provisional
jointly under the Rule on Summary Procedure.
remedies. (Rule I(A)(2), A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC)
(Rule I(A), A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC)

Scope of the Rules for Small Claims Cases


NOTE: All other cases not included herein shall be
governed by the regular rules of procedure. (Rule
These Rules shall govern expedited procedure in
I(A), A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC)
actions before the MeTCs, MTCCs, MTCs and MTCTs
for payment or reimbursement of a sum of money
CRIMINAL CASES where the value of the claim does not exceed Php 1
million, exclusive of interest and costs (Sec. 4, Rule
1. Violations of traffic laws, rules and IV, A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC)
regulations;
2. Violations of the rental law; NOTE: Where the plaintiff has a claim, the value
3. Violations of municipal or city ordinances; thereof exceeds the jurisdictional threshold of the
4. Violations of BP 22; and Rules for Small Claims Cases, and he or she files an
5. All other criminal cases where the penalty action under the same Rules, he or she waives any
prescribed by law for the offense charged is amount in excess of the jurisdictional threshold,
imprisonment not exceeding one (1) year, excluding interest and costs.
or a fine not exceeding P50,000, or both,
regardless of other imposable penalties, Cases covered by the Rule on Small Claims
accessory or otherwise, or of the civil
liability arising therefrom. In offenses Those which are purely civil in nature where the
involving damage to property through claim or relief prayed for by the plaintiff is solely for
criminal negligence under Art. 365 of the payment or reimbursement of sum of money. The
RPC, this Rule shall govern where the claim or demand may be:
imposable fine does not exceed P150,000.
(Rule I(B), A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC) 1. For money owed under any of the following:

NOTE: If the prescribed penalty consists of a. Contract of Lease;


imprisonment and or a fine, the prescribed b. Contract of Loan and other credit
imprisonment shall be the basis for determining the accommodations;
applicable procedure. c. Contract of Services; or
d. Contract of Sale of personal property,
excluding the recovery of the personal

33 U N I V E RS I T Y O F SA N TO TO M A S
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
property, unless it is made the subject of a
compromise agreement between the parties. When there are separate small claims

2. For the enforcement of a barangay amicable Plaintiff may join in a single statement of claim one
settlement and arbitration awards where the or more separate small claims against a defendant
money claim does not exceed P1 million, provided that the total amount claimed, exclusive of
provided that no execution has been enforced by interests and costs, does not exceed P1 million. (Sec.
the barangay within (6) months from the date of 6, Rule IV, A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC)
the settlement or date of receipt of the award or
from the date the obligation stipulated or Indigent party
adjudged in the arbitration award becomes due
and demandable, pursuant to Sec. 417 of the LGC If one is an indigent, he may apply to the small
of 1991. (Rule I(A)(2), A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC) claims court to qualify as an indigent, and once
qualified, he is exempt from payment of such fees.
COMMENCEMENT OF SMALL CLAIMS ACTION; (Sec. 8, ROC, as amended by A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC)
RESPONSE
NOTE: In no case shall a party, even if declared an
indigent, be exempt from the payment of P1,000.00
Commencement of action
fee for service of summons and processes in civil
cases. (Sec. 8, ROC, as amended by A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC)
A small claims action is commenced by filing with
the court an accomplished Statement of Claim/s
Filing of response
with Verification and Certification Against Forum
Shopping, Splitting a Single Cause of Action, and
The defendant shall file with the court and serve on
Multiplicity of Suits (Form 1-SCC) and duly certified
the plaintiff a duly accomplished and verified
photocopies of the actionable document/s subject of
Response (Form 3-SCC) within a non-extendible
the claim, affidavits of witnesses, and other
period of 10 calendar days from receipt of
evidence to support the claim, with as many copies
summons.
thereof as there are defendants.

The Response shall be accompanied by certified


No evidence shall be allowed during the hearing
photocopies of documents, as well as affidavits of
which was not attached to or submitted together
witnesses and other evidence in support thereof. No
with the Statement of Claim/s, unless good cause is
evidence shall be allowed during the hearing which
shown for the admission of additional evidence.
was not attached to or submitted together with the
Response, unless good cause is shown for the
The plaintiff must state in the Statement of Claim/s
admission of additional evidence. (Sec. 13, A.M. No.
if he/she/it is engaged in the business of lending,
08-8-7-SC)
banking and similar activities, and the number of
small claims cases filed within the calendar year
Effect of Failure to file a Response and Failure to
regardless of judicial station.
Appear on the Date of Hearing

For juridical entities, a board resolution or


Should the defendant fail to file his/her/its
secretary’s certificate authorizing the person to fi le
Response within the required period, and likewise
the claim must be attached to the Statement of
fail to appear on the date set for hearing, the court
Claim/s.
shall render judgment within 24 hours from the
termination of the hearing, as may be warranted by
No formal pleading, other than the Statement of
the facts alleged in the Statement of Claim/s and its
Claim/s described in this Rule, is necessary to
attachments. (Sec. 14(1), A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC)
initiate a small claims action. (Sec. 4, Rule IV, A.M. No.
08-8-7-SC)

U N I V E RS I T Y O F S A N TO T O M A S 34
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
REMEDIAL LAW
Effect of Failure to file a Response but Appeared 8-7-SC)
on the Date of Hearing
Failure to include a counterclaim in the
Should the defendant fail to file his/her/its response
Response within the required period but appear on
the date set for the hearing, the court shall ascertain If the counterclaim is compulsory, it must be raised
what defense he/she/it has to offer, which shall in the same case. Otherwise, it will be barred. (Sec.
constitute his/ her/its Response, proceed to hear 15, A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC)
the case on the same day as if a Response has been
filed and, thereafter, render judgment within 24 APPEARANCES
hours from the termination of the hearing. (Sec.
14(1), A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC)
Appearance of parties

If the defendant relies on documentary evidence to


The parties shall personally appear on the
support his/her/its defense, the court shall order
designated date of hearing. Appearance through a
him/her/it to submit original copies of such
representative must be for a valid cause. (Sec. 17,
documents within three (3) calendar days from the
A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC)
termination of the hearing and, upon receipt thereof
or expiration of the period to file, the court shall
NOTE: Appearance through a representative must
render judgment within 24 hours. (Sec. 14(2), A.M.
be for a valid cause. The representative of an
No. 08-8-7-SC)
individual-party must not be a lawyer. Juridical
entities shall not be represented by a lawyer in any
Counterclaims
capacity. (Sec. 17, A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC)

If at the time the action is commenced, the


The representative must be authorized under a
defendant possesses a claim against the plaintiff
Special Power of Attorney (SPA), board resolution
that:
or secretary’s certificate, as the case may be, to enter
into an amicable settlement of the dispute and to
1. is within the coverage of this Rule, exclusive of
enter into stipulations or admissions of facts and of
interest and costs;
documentary exhibits. (Sec. 17, A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC)
2. arises out of the same transaction or event that
is the subject matter of the plaintiff’s claim;
When SPA is required
3. does not require for its adjudication the joinder
of third parties; and
The representative must be authorized under a
4. is not the subject of another pending action, the
Special Power of Attorney:
claim shall be filed as a counterclaim in the
Response; otherwise, the defendant shall be
1. To enter into an amicable settlement of the
barred from suing on the counterclaim. (Sec. 15,
dispute; and
A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC)
2. To enter into stipulations or admissions of
facts and of documentary exhibits. (Sec. 17,
NOTE: The defendant may also elect to file a
A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC)
counterclaim against the plaintiff that does not arise
out of the same transaction or occurrence, provided
Prohibition against appearance of lawyers
that the amount and nature thereof are within the
coverage of this Rule and the prescribed docket and
No attorney shall appear in behalf of or represent a
other legal fees are paid.
party at the hearing, unless the attorney is the
plaintiff or defendant. (Sec. 18, A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC)
NOTE: Any amount pleaded in a counterclaim in
excess of Php 1 million, excluding interests and
costs shall be deemed waived. (Sec. 15, A.M. No. 08-

35 U N I V E RS I T Y O F SA N TO TO M A S
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
NOTE: If the court determines that a party cannot NOTE: There is no trial under the Rules on Small
properly present his/her/its claim or defense and Claim Cases. Under Sec. 22, if efforts at settlement
needs assistance, the court may, in its discretion, fail, the hearing shall proceed in an informal and
allow another individual who is not an attorney to expeditious manner and the judge must render
assist that party upon the latter’s consent. (Sec. 18, judgment within 24 hours from the termination of
A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC) the hearing.

Non-appearance of a party Postponement of a hearing

the claim shall be It may be granted only upon proof of the physical
dismissed without inability of the party to appear before the court on
If the plaintiff prejudice. The defendant the scheduled date and time. A party may avail of
does not appear who appears shall be only 1 postponement. (Sec. 20, A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC)
entitled to judgment on a
permissive counterclaim FINALITY OF JUDGMENT
the effect will be the same
as failure to file a Response.
After the hearing, the court shall render its decision
based on the facts established by the evidence,
NOTE: This shall not apply
within 24 hours from termination of the hearing.
If the defendant where one of two or more
The refund of the remaining balance from the
does not appear defendants who are sued
Sheriff ’s Trust Fund (STF), subject to accounting
under a common cause of
and auditing procedures, shall be included in the
action and have pleaded a
decision.
common defense appears
at the hearing.
The decision shall immediately be entered by the
the claim and counterclaim
If both parties do Clerk of Court in the court docket for civil cases and
shall be dismissed with
not appear a copy thereof forthwith served on the parties. (Sec.
prejudice.
24, A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC)
(Sec. 19, A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC)
NOTE: The decision shall be final, executory, and
HEARING; DUTY OF THE JUDGE unappealable. (Sec. 24(3), A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC)

Duty of the court at the beginning of the court Remedy of a party


session
The rule does not preclude a party from filing a
At the beginning of the court session, the judge shall Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 when there is
read aloud a short statement explaining the nature, grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or
purpose, and the rule of procedure of small claims excess of jurisdiction in relation to a judgment in a
cases. (Sec. 21, A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC) small claims action (such a petition is prohibited
with regard to interlocutory orders).
Duty of the judge at the hearing
Further, the aggrieved party can also file an action
The judge shall exert efforts to bring the parties to for annulment of judgment when the requirements
an amicable settlement of their dispute. Settlement under the Rules of Civil Procedure are complied
discussions must be conducted in strict with.
confidentiality. Any settlement or resolution of the
dispute shall be reduced into writing, signed by the
parties, and submitted to the court for approval.

U N I V E RS I T Y O F S A N TO T O M A S 36
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
REMEDIAL LAW
Q: AL Ang Network filed a complaint for sum of
money under the Rule of Procedure for Small
Claims Cases before the MTCC, seeking to collect
from Mondejar her unpaid water bills. The
MTCC ruled in favor of Mondejar and
disregarded AL Ang Network’s reliance on the
HLURB’s Decision as source of its authority to
impose new water consumption rates.
Aggrieved, AL Ang Network filed a petition for
certiorari under Rule 65 before the RTC
ascribing grave abuse of discretion on the part
of MTCC. Is the filing of the petition for ceriorari
correct?

A: YES. Considering the final nature of a small claims


case decision pursuant to Sec. 24 of the Revised
Rules of Procedure for Small Claims Cases, as
amended, the remedy of appeal is not allowed, and
the prevailing party may, thus, immediately move
for its execution. Nevertheless, the proscription on
appeals in small claims cases, similar to other
proceedings where appeal is not an available
remedy, does not preclude the aggrieved party from
filing a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of the
ROC. Considering that small claims cases are
exclusively within the jurisdiction of the MeTCs,
MTCCs, MTCs, and MCTCs, certiorari petitions
assailing its dispositions should be filed before their
corresponding RTCs. (A.L. Ang Network, Inc. v.
Mondejar, G.R. No. 200804, 22 Jan. 2014).

37 U N I V E RS I T Y O F SA N TO TO M A S
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
Katarungang Pambarangay vs. Rules on Small Claims Cases vs. Rules on Summary Procedure

RULES ON RULES ON
KATARUNGANG PAMBARANGAY LAW
SMALL CLAIMS CASES SUMMARY PROCEDURE
Purpose/Object

Provides for the amicable settlement of


disputes at the barangay level, as a To provide a simpler and more To achieve an expeditious and
compulsory alternative to the formal inexpensive and expeditious inexpensive determination of
adjudication of disputes. (Katarungang means of settling disputes the cases defined to be
Pambarangay Implementing Rules and involving purely money claims governed by the Rules on
Regulations, Katarungang Pambarangay than the regular civil process. Summary Procedure.
Circular No. 1, 01 June 1992). (1999 BAR)

Where to file

1. For disputes between residents of


the same barangay: the dispute
must be brought for settlement in
the said barangay;

2. For disputes between residents of


different but adjoining barangays
and the parties agree to submit
their differences to amicable
settlement: within the same city or
municipality where any of the
respondents reside at the election of
the complainant;
1. MeTC; 1. MeTC;
3. For disputes involving real 2. MTCC; 2. MTCC;
property or any interest when the 3. MTC; and 3. MTC; and
parties thereto agree to submit 4. MCTC. 4. MCTC.
their differences to amicable
settlement by an appropriate lupon
therein: shall be brought in the
barangay where the real property or
larger portion thereof is situated; and

4. For disputes arising at the


workplace where the contending
parties are employed or at the
institution where such parties are
enrolled for study: shall be brought
in the barangay where such
workplace or institution is located.

U N I V E RS I T Y O F S A N TO T O M A S 38
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
REMEDIAL LAW
Civil Cases Covered
a. All cases of forcible entry
All disputes involving parties who and unlawful detainer
actually reside in the same city or irrespective of the amount
municipality may be the subject of the of damages or unpaid
proceedings for amicable settlement in rentals sought to be
the barangay. recovered. Where
Purely civil in nature where the
claim or relief prayed for by the attorney’s fees are
The requirement of undergoing awarded, the same shall
plaintiff is for payment or
barangay conciliation proceedings not exceed P100,000;
reimbursement of a sum of
applies only to cases involving natural
money where the value of the
persons, and not where any of the parties
claim does not exceed Php 1 b. All civil actions, except
is a juridical person, such as a probate proceedings,
million exclusive of interest and
corporation, partnership, corporation admiralty and maritime
costs. (A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC)
sole, testate or intestate estate, etc. (Vda. actions, and small claims
De Borromeo v. Pogoy, G.R. No. L-63277, where the total amount of
a. For money owed under
29 Nov. 1983) the plaintiff’s claim does
any of the following:
i. Contract of Lease; not exceed P2 million
If the only contending party is the exclusive of interest
ii. Contract of Loan and
government or its instrumentality or damages of whatever kind,
other credit
subdivision the case is exempted from attorney’s fees, litigation
accommodations;
the requirement of barangay conciliation expenses and costs. (A.M.
iii. Contract of Services;
proceedings but when it (government or No. 08-8-7-SC)
iv. Contract of Sale of
its instrumentality or subdivision) is only
personal property,
one of the contending parties, a
excluding the recovery of
confrontation should still be undertaken c. Complaints for damages
the personal property,
among the other parties. (Gegare v. CA, where the claims do not
unless it is made the
G.R. No. 83907, 13 Sept. 1989) exceed P2 million;
subject of a compromise
agreement between the
NOTE: Barangay conciliation process is
parties; or
not a jurisdictional requirement, so that d. Cases for the enforcement
non-compliance therewith cannot affect of barangay amicable
v. Contract of Mortgage
the jurisdiction which the court has settlement agreements
otherwise acquired over the subject and arbitration award
matter or over the person of the where money claim
b. For liquidated damages
defendant. Such defense shall be raised exceeds P1 million,
arising from contracts; and
in the answer, otherwise, such objection provided that no execution
will be deemed waived. (Aquino v. Aure, has been enforced within 6
c. The enforcement of a
G.R. No. 153567, 18 Feb. 2008) months from the
barangay amicable
settlement date or receipt
settlement or an
of award or the date when
arbitration award
the obligation becos due
involving a money claim
and demandable;
which does not exceed P1
million.
e. Cases solely for the revival
of judgment of any first
level court; and

39 U N I V E RS I T Y O F SA N TO TO M A S
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
Cases not covered by Barangay f. The civil aspect of
Conciliation violations of BP 22, if no
criminal action has been
1. Where one party is the government instituted.
or any subdivision or
instrumentality thereof;
2. Where one party is a public officer or
employee, and the dispute relates to
the performance of his official
functions;
3. Offenses punishable by
imprisonment exceeding one (1)
year or a fine exceeding P5,000.00;

4. Offenses when there is no private


offended party;

5. Where the dispute involves real


properties located in different cities
or municipalities unless the parties
thereto agree to submit their
differences to amicable settlement
by an appropriate lupon;

6. Disputes involving parties who


actually reside in barangays of
different cities or municipalities,
except where such barangay units
adjoin each other and the parties
thereto agree to submit their
differences to amicable settlement
by an appropriate lupon;

7. Such other classes of disputes which


the President may determine in the
interest of justice or upon the
recommendation of the Secretary of
Justice (Sec. 408, Local Government
Code);

8. Any complaint by or against


corporations, partnerships, or
juridical entities, since only
individuals shall be parties to
barangay conciliation proceedings

U N I V E RS I T Y O F S A N TO T O M A S 40
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
REMEDIAL LAW
either as complainants or
respondents;

9. Disputes where urgent legal action is


necessary to prevent injustice from
being committed or further
continued, specifically:

a. A criminal case where the


accused is under police custody
or detention

b. A petition for habeas corpus by a


person illegally detained or
deprived of his liberty or one
acting on his behalf

c. Actions coupled with


provisional remedies, such as
preliminary injunction,
attachment, replevin, and
support pendent lite.

d. Where the action may be barred


by the Statute of Limitations.

10. Labor disputes or controversies


arising from employer-employee
relationship;
11. Where the dispute arises from the
CARL;
12. Actions to annul judgment upon a
compromise which may be directly
filed in court. (S.C. Administrative
Circular No. 14-93)
Criminal Cases covered
1. Violations of traffic laws,
rules and regulations;
2. Violations of the rental
When punishable by imprisonment of law;
not more than 1 year or fine of not more - 3. Violations of municipal or
than P5,000. (Sec. 408, LGC) city ordinances;
4. Violations of B.P. 22 (A.M.
No. 00-11-01-SC, April 15,
2003);

41 U N I V E RS I T Y O F SA N TO TO M A S
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
5. All other criminal cases
imvolving penalty of
imprisonment not
exceeding one (1) year or
a fine not exceeding
P50,000.00 or both, and a
fine not exceeding
P150,000.00 for offenses ;
involving damage to
property through criminal
negligence.

U N I V E RS I T Y O F S A N TO T O M A S 42
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
REMEDIAL LAW
5. When the proceedings in the court acquiring
jurisdiction is terminated, abandoned or
declared void;
F. DOCTRINE OF ADHERENCE TO JURISDICTION
AND RESIDUAL JURISDICTION
6. Once appeal has been perfected; and

7. Curative statutes. (Herrera, 2007)


Adherence of Jurisdiction
NOTE: The rule of adherence of jurisdiction
GR: Jurisdiction, once attached, cannot be ousted by until a cause is finally resolved or adjudicated
subsequent happenings or events although of a does not apply when the change in jurisdiction
character which would have prevented jurisdiction is curative in character. (Abad, et al. v. RTC, G.R.
from attaching in the first instance, and the court No. L-65505, 12 Oct. 1987)
retains jurisdiction until it finally disposes of the
case. (Aruego, Jr., v. CA, G.R. No. 112193, 13 Mar. Residual jurisdiction of the court
1996)
It refers to the authority of the trial court to issue
XPNs: orders for the protection and preservation of the
rights of the parties. The concept of residual
1. Where a subsequent statute expressly jurisdiction is available at a stage in which the court
prohibits the continued exercise of is normally deemed to have lost jurisdiction over
jurisdiction; the case or the subject matter involved in the appeal.
There is no residual jurisdiction to speak of where
2. Where the law penalizing an act which is no appeal or petition has even been filed.
punishable is repealed by a subsequent law; (Fernandez v. CA, G.R. No. 131094, May 16, 2005)

3. When accused is deprived of his constitutional Residual jurisdiction/powers exercised by the


right such as where the court fails to provide trial court
counsel for the accused who is unable to obtain
one and does not intelligently waive his 1. Issue orders for the protection and
constitutional right; preservation of the rights of the parties which
do not involve any matter litigated by the
NOTE: Where there is a violation of basic appeal;
constitutional rights, courts are ousted from 2. Approve compromise agreements by parties
their jurisdiction. The violation of a party’s due after judgment has been rendered;
process raises a serious jurisdictional issue
which cannot be glossed over or disregarded at NOTE: There is no rule that forbids litigants to
will. Where the denial of the fundamental right settle amicably even if a judgment has already
is apparent, a decision rendered in disregard of been made.
that right is void for lack of jurisdiction. (Apo
Cement Corporation v. Mingson Industries 3. Permit appeals of indigent litigants;
Corporation, G.R. No. 206728, 12 Nov. 2014) 4. Order execution pending appeal in accordance
with Sec. 2, Rule 39; and
4. Where the statute expressly provides, or is 5. Allow withdrawal of appeal.
construed to the effect that it is intended to
operate as to actions pending before its NOTE: Provided these are done prior to the
enactment; transmittal of the original record or the record on
appeal even if the appeals have already been
perfected or despite the approval of the record on
appeal. (Sec. 9, Rule 41)

43 U N I V E RS I T Y O F SA N TO TO M A S
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
Duration of the exercise of residual powers
H. PRIMARY JURISDICTION AND EXHAUSTION
1. Ordinary Appeal – until the records are OF ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES
transmitted to the appellate court; or
2. Petition for review – until the CA gives due
course to the petition.
DOCTRINE OF PRIMARY JURISDICTION

It is the power and authority vested by the


G. JURISDICTION VS. EXERCISE OF
Constitution or by statute upon an administrative
JURISDICTION
body to act upon a matter by virtue of its specific
competence. The doctrine of primary jurisdiction
prevents the court from arrogating unto itself the
EXERCISE authority to resolve a controversy which falls under
JURISDICTION
OF JURISDICTION the jurisdiction of a tribunal possessed with special
It is any act of the court competence. (Lim v. Gamosa, G.R. No. 193964, 02 Dec.
pursuant to such 2015)
It is the authority to
authority, which
hear and decide
includes making XPNs:
cases. It does not
decisions. If there is
depend upon the
jurisdiction over the 1. Where there is estoppel in the part of the
regularity of the
person and subject party invoking the doctrine;
exercise of that
matter, the resolution of 2. Where the challenged administrative act is
power or upon the
all other questions patently illegal, amounting to lack of
rightfulness of the
arising in the case is but jurisdiction;
decision made. (Lim,
an exercise of 3. Where there is unreasonable delay or official
et al. v. Hon. Felipe
jurisdiction. (Herrera v. inaction that will irretrievably prejudice the
Pacquing, et al., G.R.
Baretto, G.R. No. 8692, 10 complainant;
No. 115044, 01 Sept.
Sept. 1913; Palma v. Q&S, 4. Where the amount involved is relatively
1994)
Inc., G.R. No. L-20366, 16 small;
May 1966) 5. Where the question involved is purely legal
and will ultimately have to be decided by the
courts;
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,
adequate remedy; and
11. In quo warranto proceedings. (Ibid)

NOTE: The doctrine of primary jurisdiction


precludes the courts from resolving a controversy
over which jurisdiction has initially been lodged
with an administrative body of special competence.
For instance, in agrarian reform cases, jurisdiction

U N I V E RS I T Y O F S A N TO T O M A S 44
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
REMEDIAL LAW
is vested in the Department of Agrarian Reform; 5. When its application may cause great and
more specifically, in the Department of Agrarian irreparable damage;
Reform Adjudication Board (DARAB). (Spouses
Fajardo v. Flores, G.R. No. 167891, January 15, 2010) 6. When the respondent is a Department Secretary,
whose acts as an alter ego of the President bears
DOCTRINE OF EXHAUSTION OF the implied or assumed approval of the latter
ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES unless actually disapproved by him;

7. When to require administrative remedies would


It states that recourse through court action cannot
be unreasonable;
prosper until after all such administrative remedies
8. When the insistence in its observance would
have first been exhausted. The non-observance of
result in the nullification of the claim being
the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative
asserted;
remedies results in lack of cause of action. (National
9. When the subject matter is a private land in land
Electrification Administration v. Villanueva, G.R. No.
case proceedings;
168203, March 9, 2010)
10. When it does not provide a plain, speedy and
adequate remedy;
NOTE: The rule on exhaustion of administrative
remedies and doctrine of primary jurisdiction
11. Where there are circumstances indicating the
applies only when the administrative agency
urgency of judicial intervention (Paat v. CA, G.R.
exercises quasi-judicial or adjudicatory function.
No. 111107, January 10, 1997);
(Associate Communications and Wireless Services v.
Dumalao, G.R. No. 136762, November21, 2002)
12. Exhaustion of administrative remedies may also
be considered waived if there is a failure to
Rationale
assert it for an unreasonable length of time (Rep.
v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 112708-09, March 29,
Courts must allow administrative agencies to carry
1996);
out their functions and discharge their
responsibilities within the specialized areas of their
13. A civil action for damages may, however,
respective competence. (Caballes v. Perez-Sison, G.R.
proceed notwithstanding the pendency of an
No. 131759, 23 Mar. 2004) It entails lesser expenses
administrative action (Escuerte v. CA, G.R. No. L-
and provides for the speedier resolution of
53485, February 6, 1991);
controversies. Comity and convenience also impel
courts of justice to shy away from a dispute until the
14. When the claim involved is small;
system of administrative redress has been
15. When strong public interest is involved; and
completed. (Universal Robina Corporation v. Laguna
16. In quo warranto proceedings (Castro v. Gloria,
Lake Authority, G.R. No. 191427, May 30, 2011)
G.R. No. 132174, 20 Aug. 2001)

Exceptions to the Doctrine of Exhaustion of


Effect of failure to exhaust administrative
Administrative Remedies
remedies

1. When respondent official acted in utter


The ground should not be lack of jurisdiction but
disregard of due process;
lack of cause of action as it renders the action
2. When the questions involved are purely judicial
premature. (Carale v. Abarintos, G.R. No. 120704,
or legal;
March 3, 1997; Pestanas v. Dyogi, 81 SCRA 574)
3. When the controverted act is patently illegal or
was performed without jurisdiction or in excess
of jurisdiction;
4. When there is estoppel on the part of the
administrative agency concerned;

45 U N I V E RS I T Y O F SA N TO TO M A S
FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW
2024 GOLDEN NOTES
Doctrine of Primary Administrative Jurisdiction of a motion to dismiss
vs. Doctrine of Exhaustion of Administrative based on that ground
Remedies by way of laches.
(Republic v. Gallo, G.R. No. 207074, 17 Jan. 2018)
DOCTRINE OF DOCTRINE OF
PRIMARY EXHAUSTION OF
ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE
JURISDICTION REMEDIES
A party must first avail
Courts cannot or will of all administrative
not determine a processes available
controversy involving before seeking the
a question which is courts' intervention.
within the jurisdiction
of the administrative The administrative
tribunal prior to the officer concerned must
resolution of that be given every
question by the opportunity to decide
administrative on the matter within
tribunal, where the his or her jurisdiction.
question demands the Failing to exhaust
exercise of sound administrative
administrative remedies affects the
discretion requiring party's cause of action
the special knowledge, as these remedies refer
experience and to a precedent
services of the condition which must
administrative tribunal be complied with prior
to determine technical to filing a case in court.
and intricate matters of
fact. NOTE: Failure to
observe the doctrine of
NOTE: Refers to the exhaustion of
competence of a court administrative
to take cognizance of a remedies does not
case at first instance. affect the court's
jurisdiction.
GR: Doctrine cannot
be waived.

XPN: For reasons of


equity, failure to raise
the issue of non- This doctrine may be
compliance with the waived.
doctrine of primary
administrative
jurisdiction at an
opportune time may
bar a subsequent filing

U N I V E RS I T Y O F S A N TO T O M A S 46
2024 GOLDEN NOTES

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy