Bayes REMEDIAL LAW 1. GENERAL PRINCIPLES Q: What is Remedial Law? ANS: Remedial law prescribes the method of enfercing rights or obtains redress for their invasion (People v. Moner, G.R. No. 202206, March 5, 2018). : VOL 2 Vf 2019 A. SUBSTANTIVE LAW YS. REMEDIAL LAW Q: What are the differences between Substantive Law and Remedial Law? ANS: The following are the differences: (DVA0) A) i dl ‘Substantive law is that part of the law | Remedial law prescribes the method of which efeates. defines and regulates | enforcing rights or obtaining redress for rights, or -fegulates the rights | their invasion (Id). and duties which give rise to a cause of action (Id). 2 _ As to creation of Vested rights Substantive lav? creates vested rights. | No vested rights may attach or arise from ; remedial law (Calacals v.!Republic, G.R. IWjhe Rule takes away a vasted right.| No. 154415, July 28, 2005). it''s not procedural. If the Rule creates. a right such as the tight to appeal, it may be classified as a substantive matter; but if it operates as a means of | implementing an existing right then the tule deals merely “with ‘procedure (Fabien v. Desierto, G.R. No 129742, September 16, 1998). Substantive law is prospective in| Remedial law is construed to be applicable application (Spouses Tirona v. Alejo. | to actions pending and undetermined at GR. No. 129313, October 10, 2001). | the time of their passage, and are deemed retroactive in that sense and to that extent (Calacala v. Republic. supra}, except if it impairs vested right. Cee 7 | Substantive tow originates from the} Remedial taw does not originate from the legistature. | tegislature, but has the force and effect of law (Alvaro v. De La Rosa, G.R. No. L- 286, March 29, 1946) if not in conflict with substantive law, They are not embraced by the rule- making power of the Supreme Court (Primicias v. Ocampo, G.R, No. L- 6120, June 30, 1953). The Supreme Court is expressly | empowered to promulgate procectural | _tules (CONST,, Art, Vill, Seg, 5, Par, 5). 48B. RULE-MAKING POWER OF THE SUPREME COURT : Vs 2013 Q: State the Rule-making power of the Supreme Cour. ANS: The Supreme Court has the constitulianal power to promulgaie rules concerning the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights, pleading, practice, and procedure in all courts, the admission to the practice of law, the Integrated Bar, and legal assistance to the underprivileged (CONST., Art. Vill, Sec. 5, Par. (5)). Q: Does the Supreme Court have the Power to Disapprove Rules of Proceduré of Special Courts and Quasi-Judicial bodies? ANS: Yes. Rules of procedure of special courts and quasi-judicial bodies shall remain effective unless disapproved by the Supreme Court (CONST,, Art. Vil, See.§, Par. (5)). Limitations in the Rule Making Power of the Supreme Court Q: Give the limitations on the Rule-making power of the Supreme Court, ANS: Tite following limitations are imposed by the Constitution on the Rule-making power of the Supreme Court: (SUN) 1. The Rules shall provide a Simplified and inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition of cases; : 2. The Rules shall be Uniform for courts c! the same grade: and 3. The Rules shall Not: (DIM) : 2. Diminish: b. Increase; or c. Modify substantive rights (CONST., Art. Vill, Sec. 5, Par. (5)) Power of the Supreme Court to Amend Ghd Suspend Procédural Rules : Does the Supreme Court have the sole power to amend procedural Rules? ANS: Yes. The Supreme Court has the'sole prerogative to amend, repeal, or even establish new Rules for @ more simplified, and inexpensive process, and the speedy disposition of cases (Neypes v. CA, G.R. No. 141524, Seplembér 14, 2005) Q: Does the Supreme Court have the power to suspend procedural Rules? ANS: Yes. The courts have the power to relax OF Suspend technical or procedural Rules or to except a case from their operation When’ compelling reasons so warrant or when the purpose of justice requires it. What constitutes good and sufficient cause is Giscretionary upon the courts (Heirs of Villagracia v. Equitable Banking Corporation, GR. No. 136972, March 28, 2008). (C PRINGIPLE OF JUDICIAL HIERARCHY ‘Q: Discuss the Principle of Judicial Hierarchy (Hierarchy of Courts) ANS: Where courts have concurrent jurisdiction over a subject matter, a case must be filed first belore the lowest court possible having the appropriate jurisdiction, except if ‘one can advance a special reason which would allow the party a direct resort to a higher court (1 RIANO, Civil Procedure: The Bar Lecture Series (2016), p 43 fhereinafter RIANO, Civil Procedurc}) Q; What is the rationale for the Principle of Judicial Hierarchy? ANS: The rationale is two-fold: (a) it would be an imposition upon the limited time of the court; and (b) it would inevitably result in a delay. intended or otherwise, in the adjudication of cases, which in some instances, had to be remanded or referred to the lower court as the proper forum under the rules of procedure, or as belter equipped to resolve the issues because the Supreme Court is nol a trier of facts (People v. Azarraga, G.R. Nos. 187117 and 187127, October 12, 2011).VOL 2 2019 Q: Is the Principle of Judicial Hierarchy absolute? ANS: No. ln Several cases, the court has allowed direct invocation of the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction on the following grounds: (C-SWINE) 1, When there are genuine issues of Constitutionality that must be addressed at the most immediate time (The Diocese of Bacolad v. Commission on Elostions, G.R. No. 205728, January 21, 2015); ‘When there are Special and important reasons clearly stated in the petition; ‘When dictated by public Welfare and the advancement of public policy; ‘When demanded by the broader Interest of justice; ‘When the challenged orders were patent Nullities; or When analogous Exceptional and compelling circumstances called for and justified the imrnediate and direct handling of the case (Republic v. Caguioa, GR. No. 174385; February 20, 2013). Pare D. DOCTRINE OF NON-INTERFERENCE/ JUDICIAL STABILITY Q: What Is the Doctrine of Non-Interference? ANS: Courts of co-equal and cooidinate jurisdiction may not interfere with or pass upon each other's orders or processes (Lepu-Lepu Development and Housing Corp. v. Group Management Corp., G.R. No. 141407. September 09, 2002). | also bars a court from reviewing or interfering with the judgment of a co-equal court over which it has no appeliate jurisdiction or power of review (Villamor v. Salas, G.P. No. L-101041, November 13, 1991), Q: Does the Doctrine of Non-Interference apply to administrative bodies? ANS: Yes. Settled is the rule that where the law provides for an’ appeal from the decisions of ariministrative bodies to the Supreme Court or the Court of Appeals, it means that such bodies are co-equal with the Regional Trial Cours in terms of rank end stature, and logically;, beyond the control of the latter. Hence, the trial court cannot interfere with the decision of such administrative bodies (Philippine Sinter Comp. v. Cagayan Electric Power & Light Co., Inc., G.R. No. 127371, April 25, 2062). - \. IRJURISDICTION.._ Q: Define Jurisdiction. ANS: Jurisdiction is the power and authority of the court to hear, try, and decide a case (Barangay Mayamot, Antipolo City v. Antipolo City, G.R. No. 187349, August 17, 2016), 28 well as lo enforce or execute its judgments or final orders (Echegaray v. Secretary af Justice, G.R, No. 132601, January 19, 1999) ‘Q: Is jurisdiction substantive or procedural? ANS: Both. Jurisdiction over the subject matter is substantive as it is conferred by the Constitution or by law; while jurisdiction over the person is acquired by his voluntary Submission to the authority of the court or through the exercise of ils coercive processes and is therefore, procedural. Jurisdiction over the res is obtained by actual of constructive seizure placing the property undr the orders cf the courl (Zamora v. CA, G.R. No. 78206, March 19, 1990), and is aiso procedural 420BEDAN RED.BOOK. Jan A. CLASSIFICATION OF JURISDICTION Original vs Appellate * Q: What are the differences between Original and Appellate jurisdiction? ANS: The following are the differences between Original and Appellate jurisdiction: eel L BCR 1 (C-] ee a, Original jurisdiction is the power of the court to take judicial cognizance of a case instituted for judicial action for the first time under the _ conditions prescribed by law (1 TAN, Civil Procedure: A Guide for the Bench and the Bar (2017), p.2 {hereinafter TANS: Civil Procedure). Appellate jurisdiction is the power and authority conferred upon w superior court to rehear and determine causes wich have been tried in lower courts, the cognizance which a superior court takes of a case removed to it, by appeal ‘or wril of error, from the decision of a lower court, or the review by @ superior |, court of the final judgment or order of |. some lower courts (1 TAN, supra at 4) A LCL ek ede tet A court is one with original jurisciction when actions or proceedings are originally filed with it (1 RIANO, supra af: 47) A court is one with appellate jurisdiction when it has the power of review over the decisions or orders of a lower court (7 RIANO, supra at 47) General vs Special 4 “i Q: What are the differences between Genéral and Special jurisdiction? ANS: The following are the differences between General and Special jurisdiction: UR asec i ces General jurisdiction is the power of the court to adjudicate all controversies except those expressly withheld from the plenary powers of the court. It extends to all controversies which may be brought before a court within the legal bounds of rights and remedies (7 TAN, supra at 3). Special or limited jurisdiction is one which restricts the court's jurisdiction only to particular cases and subject to such limitations as may be provided by the governing law. it is c.afined to particular causes, or which can be exercised only under the limitations and circumstances prescribed by the statute (1 TAN, supra at 3) Eek oer ae ead | Courts of general jurisdiction are those | Courts of special (limited) jurisdiction with competence to decide on their own | are those which have jurisdiction only jurisciction and take cognizance of all | for a particular purpose or are clothed cases, civil and criminal, of a particular | with special powers for the performance nature (f RIANO, supra at 47). of specified duties beyond which they have no authority of any kind (7 RIANO, | supra at 47)VOL 2. 2019 Courts which have the competence to exercise jurisdiction over cases nol falling within the jurisdiction of any court, tribunal, person, or body exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions (BP. Big. 129, Secs, 19 & 20) Exclusive vs Concurrent Q: What are the differences between Exclusive and Concurrent jurisdiction? ANS: The following are the differences between Exclusive and Concurrent jurisdiction: ei et ters) Cee arin - ey Exclusive jurisdiction is the power to adjudicate @ case or proceeding to the exclusion of all other courts at that stage (1 TAN, supra at 3), The following are examples of courts having exclusive original jurisdiction 1. MTC having “exclusive — original jurisdiction over cases of farcible | entry ang unlawful detainer (B.P. Big. 129, Sec. 33, Par. (2)) 2 RTC having exclusive original jurisdiction over all civil actions in | which the subject mailer of litigation is incapable of pecuniary estimation (BP. Big, 129, Sec. 19, Par. (1)p. 3.CA having exclusive original jurisdiction over actions for annulment of judgments of the RTC (BP, Big. 129. Sec. 9, Par (2)) Note: Exclusive original jurisdiction precludes the idea of co-existence and refers to jurisdiction possessed {0 the exclusion of others (Cubero v, Laguiia West Multi-Purpose Cooperatives. inc.. | GR. No. 166833, November 30. 2006) | f | Concurrent jurisdiction is the power conferred upon different courts, whether of the same or different ranks, to take cognizance at the same slage of the same case in the same or different judicial territories (1 TAN, supra at 4). Where there is concurrent jurisdiction, the court first taking cognizance of the case assumes jurisdiction to the exclusion of the other courts (7 RIANO, Supra al 49). As to the Courts Which Have Such Jurisdiction The following are examples of courts having concurrent original jurisdiction: 1.SC having concurrent original jurisdiction “with RTC in cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers, and consuls (COWST., ART. Vill, Sec. 5; B.P. Big. 129, Sec. Sec. 21, Par, (2)). 2.SC having ncurent original jurisdiction with the CA in petitions for Certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus against the RTCs (CONST... ART. Vil, Sec, 5: B.P. Bla. 129. Seu. 9. Par, (1)e 3.SC having concurrent origina? jurisdiction with the CA and tne RTC in petitions for certioran. prohibition and mandamus. against lower courts and bodies in petitions for quo warranto. and habeas corpus (CONST., ART. Vill. Sec. 8: BP Big. 129, Secs. 9, Par (1) & 21, Par. (1))‘BEDAN-REDBOOK Jer 8. DOCTRINES OF HIERARCHY OF COURTS AND CONTINUITY OF JURISDICTION Doctrine of Hierarchy of Courts Q: What is the Doctrine of Hierarchy of Courts? ANS: The court will not entertain direct resort to it unless the redress desired cannot be obtained in the appropriate courts or where exceptional and compelling circumstances justify availment of a remedy within and calling for the exercise of primary jurisdiction (1 TAN, supra at 37). Doctrine of Adherence of Jurisdiction Q: What does the Doctrine of Adherence of Jurisdiction (Continuity of Jurisdiction) mean? ANS: The doctrine provides that once a court has acquired jurisdiction, such jurisdiction cannot be ousted by subsequent events, although they be of a character which would have prevented jurisdiction from attaching in the first instance. Once iurisdiction has been acauired, it continues until the court finally disposes of ine case (Barrameda v. Rural Bank of Canaman, inc., G.R. No. 176260, November 24, 2010). C. JURISDICTION OF VARIOUS PHILIPPINE COURTS Q: Give an outline of the jurisdiction of courts in civil cases. ANS: The following are the jurisdiction of ccurts in civil cases: ker Eureka 5 B Petitions for certiorari, prohibition, or mandamus against: Court of Appeals (Judiciary Act of 1948, Sec. 17); Commission un Elections (CONST. Art. IX, Sec. 7): Commission on Audit (CONST. Artix, Sec. 7) Sandiganbayan (P.D. No. 1608, as amended); and Court of Tax Appeals (R.A, No. 9282, cthenwise known as The Law Creating the Court of Tax Appeals). red Berar gers Disciplinary proceedings against members of the Bar and court personnel (CONST. Art. Vili, Sec. 6; RULES OF COURT, Rule 56) With the RTC: Cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers, and consuls (BP. Big. 129, otherwise known as The Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980, See. 21, Par. (2): CONST., Art. Vill, Sec. 5, Par. (1)). DCC With the CA: CSI 7. Petitions for certiorari, prohibition, or mandamus against: Cr Shad a. RTC (B.P. Big. 129, Sec, 21, Par. (1)): Goncurrent b. Civil Service Commission (R.A. No. 7902. othenvise known = jurisdiction . as An Act Expanding the Jurisdiction of the Court of .amongthe Appeals) | _RIC,CA, c.Central Board of Assessment Appeals (P.0. No. 464. | Bales lee otherwise known as tie Real Property Tax Code): lta 4. National Labor Relations Commission (St. Martin Funeral Subject to Homes v. NLRC, G.R. No. 130866. September 16, 1998): SUT TOU ang ipoieriag e Other quasi-judicial agencies (Heirs of Hinog v. Melicor, ee G.R. No. 140954, April 12, 2005): and 2, Peitions for Writ of Kalikasan (A.M. No, 09-6-8-SC, Rule 7. Sec. | 3) _ od 423VOL 2. Vf 2019 With the RTC & CA: 1. Petitions for Habeas Corpus (B.P. 129, Sec. 9, Par. (1), & Sec. 21, Par. (1); CONST., Art. Vili, Sec. 5, Par. (1)}; Petitions for Quo Warranto (BP. 129, Sec. 9, Par. (1), & Sec. 21, Par. (1); CONST., Art. Vill, See. 5, Par. (1): Petitions for cavtioran, prohibition, or mandamus against inferior courts and other bodies (BP. 129, Sec. 9, Par. {1), & Sec. 24, Par. (1): CONST., Art. Vill, Sec. , Par, (1)); and . Petitions for continuing mandamus (A.M. No, 09-6-8-SC, Rule 8, Sec. 1) With the RTC, CA, & Sandiganbayan: 1. Petitions for Writ of Ainparo(A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC, Sec. 3); and 2. Petitions for Writ of Habeas data (A.M. No, 08-1-16-SC, Sec. y. By way of appeal by certiorari under Rule 45, against tne: 1. Court of Appeals; 2, Sangiganbayan; 3. RTC on pure questions of law; 4. in cases involving the constitutionality or validity of a law or treaty, international agreement or executive agreement, law, presidential decree, proclamation, order, instruction, ordinance or regulation, legality of a tax, imposi, assessment, toll or penalty, jurisdiction of a lower court (CONST. Art. Vill, Sec. 5): and ‘Court of Tax Appeals (71 Banc(R.A. No, 9282, Sec. 19). CM RE Actions for annulment of judgments of the RTC (B.P. Big. 129, Sec, i=! 9. Par. (2). With the Sc: 1. Petitions for certioran, prohibition, or mandamus against: a. RTC (BP. Big. 129, Sec. 21. Par. (1}) b. Civil Service Commission (R.A. No. 7902) . Central Board of Assessment Appeals (P.D. No, 464): 4. National Labor Relations Commission (St. Martir Funeral Homes v. NLRC, G.R. No. 130866, September 16, 1998): and @ Olher quasi-judicial agencies (Heirs of Hinog v. Melicor. G.R. No. 140954. April * 2, 2005) 2, Petitions for Writ of Kalikasan (A.M. 09-6-8-SC, Rule 7, Sec. 3) Wits the SC & RT 1. Petitions for Habeas Corpus (B.P. 129. Sec. 9, Par. (1), & Sec. 21, Par, (1); CONST., Art. Vill, See, 5, Par. (1): 2. Petitions for Quo Warrant (B.P. 129. Sec. 9. Par. (1), & Sec. 21, Par. (1), CONST., Art. Vill, Sec. 5, Par. (1)) 3. Petitions for certiorari, prohibition, or mandamus against inferior courts and other bodies (B.P. Big. 129, Sec. 9, Par. 1&Sec. 21 Par. (1): CONST., Art, Vill, Sec. 5, Par. (1)): and 424Hae eaekseiele Be 4. Petitions for continuing mandamus (A.M. No. 09-6-8-SC, Rute 8, See. 2) With the RTC, SC, & Sandiganbayan: 1. Petitions for Writ of Amparo (A.M. 07-9-12-SC, Sec. 3); and 2, Petitions for Writ of Habeas Data (A.M 08-1-16-SC, See. 3). 1. By way of ordinary appeal from the RTC and Family Courts (RULES OF COURT. Rule 41, Sec. 2, Par. (a)) & R.A. No. 8369, otherwise known as the Family Courts Act of 1997), Sec. 14}; 2. By way of petition for review fram the RTC rendered in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction (RULES OF COURT, Rute 42y, . my 63. By way of petition for review from the decisions, resolutions, erry orders, or avards of the: eres a. Civil Service Commission: b, Office of the Ombudsman in administrative disciplinary cases; and ©. Other bodies menticned in Rule 43 (RULES OF COURT, Rute 43). 4. By way of ordinary appeal over decisions of MTCs in cadastral or land registration cases pursuant to its delegated jurisdiction (B.P. 129, Sec. 34, as amended by R.A. No. 7691). Cases involving violations of: 1. E.0. No. # (Creating the PCGG); 2.£.0. No. 2 illegal Acquisition and Misappropriations of Ferdinand Marcos, Imelda Marcos their close relatives, subordinates. business associates. dummies. agents or nominees); 3.6.0. No. 14 (Cases involving the ill-gotten wealth of the immediately mentioned persons); and 4. E.0. No. 14-A (amendments to E.0. No. 14) (RA, No. 10660, otherwise known as An Act Strengthening Further the Functianal and Stazciural Organization of the Sandiganbayan, Sec. 2) Sr a Coeur) With the $C 1, Petitions for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus whether or not in aid of its appellate jurisdiction (A.M. No, O7-7-12-SC); and 2. Petitions for Habeas Corpus, injunction, and other ancillary writs 1m aid of its appellate jurisdiction. including Qua Warrant arising nm falling under E.0. Mos. t, 2, 14, and 14-A. Concurrent With the SC, CA & RTC: 1. Petitions for Writ of Amparo (A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC, otherwise known as The Rule on Writ of Amparo, Sec. 3): and 2. Petitions for Writ of Habeas Data (AM No, 08-1-16-SC, otherwise known as The Rule on Writ of Habeas Data, Sec. 3).VOL 2. 2019 BEDAN RED BOOK Ri ela UU Lees sae eRe) eT aU eel ad If the gross value, claim, or | If the gross value, claim or demand exceeds P300,000 demand does not exceed (outside Metro. Manila), or | 300,000.00 (outside Metro exceeds P400,000 (Metro }. or does not exceed Manila): P400,000 (Metro Manila): 1. Actions involving personal property depending on the value of the property; 2. Admiralty and maritime cases depending on the amount of demand or claim; 3 Probate proceedings (testate or intestate) depending on the gross value of the estate: and 4. Demand for money depending on the amount (8.P. Blg.129, Sec. 19, Par. (3), (4), & (8), & Sec. 33, Par. (1) as amended by R.A, No. 7691). Note: Exclusive of Damages of whatever kind, Interest, Attorney's fees, Litigation Exoenses. and Costs (DIALEC). the amount of which must be specifically alleged: but shall be included in the determination of the filing fees (B.P. Big. 129, Sec. 33, Par. (1), as amended) Note: The exclusion of the term “damages of whatever kind” applies to cases where the damages are merely incidental to or a consequence of the main cause of action. However, in cases where the claim for damages is the main cause of action, or one of the Eeenetremmm causes of action, the amount of such claim shall be considered in CRM ei determining the jurisdiction of the court (Administrative Circular 09- 94, June 14, 1994) if the assessed value or | If the assessed value or interest interest in the real property | in the real property does not exceeds P20,000 (outside | exceed P20,000 (outside Metro Metro Manila), or exceeds | Manila). or does not exceed 50,000 (Metro Manila 50,000 (Metro Manila) §. Actions involving title to or possession of real property, or any interest therein depending on the assessed value (B.P. Big. 129, S¢. 19, Par. (2) & Sec.33, Par. (3)) tions the subject matter } 6. Inclusion and exclusion of ‘of which is incapable of | voters (&.P. 881, Sec, 738); pecuniary estimation; 6 7. Those covered by the Rules Note: Where the basic issue | oq “Summary Procedure: | 's something ether than the | (FEUD) ! right to recover a sum of | a. Forcible Entry: and t money or the money claim is b. Unlawful Delainer purely incidental to, or a (1991 Revised Rules on consequence of, the principal Summary Procedure, relief, the action is incapable Sec. 1, Par. (a): BP. Big of pecuniary estimation 129, See. 33, Par. (2)). (Russel v. Vesti, G.R. No. 119347, March 17, 1999) 426Note: All actions which are incapable of pecuniary estimation is cognizable by the RTC except the annulment of judgments of the RTC, which is cognizable by the CA (BP. Big. 129). 7. Cases not within the exclusive jurisdiction of eny court, tribunal, person or body exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions (general jurisdiction of RTC); 8. Under Section 5.2 of the Securities and Regulations Code to hear and decide: a. Cases involving devices or schemes employed by or any acts of the board of directors, _ business associates, ils officers or partnership, amounting to fraud and misrepresentation; b. Intra-corporate controversies: c. Controversies in the elections: or appointments of directors, trustees, officers, or managers of corporations. partnerships, or associations; d. Petitions. of corporations, partnerships or associations to be declared in the state of suspension of payments. (Securities Regulations | Code, See. 5.2 and | PD. No. 902-A, Sec. 5). Note: Irrespective of the amount of damages or unpaid rentals sought !6 be recovered (1991 Revised Rules on Summary Procedure, Sec. 1, Par. (3)): Note: Where attomey’s fees are awarded, the same shall not exceed P20,000 (1991 Revised Rules on Summery Procedure, Sec. 1, Par. (a); Note: May resolve issue of ownership to determine only the issue of possession (Big. 129, Sec, 33, Par. (2)). 8. Other civil cases, except probate proceedings, where the total amount of the plaintif’s claim does not exceed P100,000 or does not exceed P200,000 in Metro Manila, exclusive of interests and costs (1991 Revised Rules. on ~~ Summary Procedure, as amended by AM. No. O2+11-09-SC, effective Novemiber 25, 2002) 9. Cases falling under the 2016 Revised Rules of Procedure For Small Claims Cases: Note: Applicable in all actions thal are purely civil in nature where the claim ar relief prayed for 1s solely for payment of sum of money. The claim may be! a. For money owed under: i. Contract of Lease, ii. Contract of Loan; ili, Contract of Services: iv. Contract of Sale iv. Contract of Mortgage b, For liquidated damages | arising from contraets: ¢ The enforcement of a barangay amicable settiement involving a money claim (A.M. No. 08-6-7-SC, February 1, 2016)SC may designate certain branches of RTC to handle exclusively criminal cases, juvenile and domestic relations cases, agrarian cases, urban land reform cases which do not fall under the jurisdiction of any quasi- judicial bodies and agencies, and other special cases as the SC may determine in the interest of speedy and efficient administration of justice (BP. Big. 129, Sec. 23). Special - ‘With the SC: Actions affecting ambassadors, public ministers, and consuls. the SC & CA: 1. Petitions for Habeas Corpus; 2. Petitions for Quo Warranto; 3. Petitions for cestiorari, prohibition, ar mandamus against inferior courts and other bodies; and 4, Pelitions for continuing mandamus, With the SG, ‘Sandiganbayan: 1. Petitions for Writ of Amparo; and 2. Petitions for Writ of Habeas Data, CA, & With the Insurance Commissioner: Single claim not exceeding P5,000,000 (RA. No. 10607, ‘otherwise known as An Act Strengthening The insurance Industry, Sec. 439) All cases decided by MeTCs, MTCs and MCTCs in their respective territorial jurisdiction except decisions of Jower courts in the exercise of delegated jurisdiction Evrae 428 the | Petition for Habeas Corpus or application for bail in criminal cases in the absence of all RTC judges in the province or city (BP. Big. 129, Sec. 35).VOL2 bf 2019 May be assigned by the SC to hear cadastral or land registration cases where: 1. There is no controversy or opposition over the land; or 2. In case of contested lands, the value does not exceed 400,000 (BP. Big. 129, Sec. 34, as amended by RA. No. 7691). | ee Family Courts have exclusive original jurisdiction to hear and decide the following civil case: 4. Petitions for guardianship, custody of children, habeas corpus involving children; Note; The SC and the CA have not been deprived of their ‘original jurisdiction of such petitions (Thornton v. Thosnton, GR. No, 154598, August.16, 2004), 2. Petitions for adoption of children and the revocation thereof; 3. Complaints for annulment, and declaration of nullity of marriage and matters relating to marital status and property relations of husband and wife ar those living together under different status or agreement, and petitions for dissolution of conjugal partnership of gains; 4. Petitions for support and/or acknowledgment, Summary judicial proceedings under the Family Code; and Patition for declaration of status of children as abandoned, dependent, or neglected: petitions for voluntary or involuntary | - . commitment of children and matters refating to the suspension, ha termination, or restoration of parental authority and other cases ea cognizable under P.D. No. 603, E.O. No. 56 series of 1996, and other related laws (R.A. No. 8369, Sec. 5, Pars. (b}, (C). (0), (0), (), & (a). : Under the Family Code, the family home is deemed tuted; hence, no need for its constitution. Special Provisional Remedies: 1. In cases of violence among the family members living in the same domicile or household, the Family Court may issue a restraining order against the accused or defendant upon verified application by the complainant or the victim for selief from abuse and 2. The court may cider the temporary custody of children in all civil | actions for their custody, support pendente ite, including deduction from the salary, and use of conjugal home and other propertes in all civil actions for support £R.A. No. 8369, Sec. 7) Note: In areas where there are mo Family Courts, the abovementioned cases shall be adjudicated by the RTC.Exclusive bet Try 3.All Special civil ea cer All cases involving custody, guardianship, legitimacy, paternity, and filiation arising under the Code of Muslim Personal Laws: All cases involving disposition, distribution, and settlement of estate of deceased Muslims, probate of wills, issuance of letters Of administration or appointment of administrators or ~— executors regardless of the nature of aggregate value of the property; Pelitions for the declaration of absence and death for the cancellation or correction of entries in the Muslim Registries mentioned in Tile Vi, Book Two of the Code Personal Laws -All actions arising from the customary contracts in which the parties are Muslims, if they have not specified which law shall govern their relations; and All petitions for mandamus, Prohibiion, injunction, certivrari, habeas corpus, and all other auxiliary writs and processes in ard of its appellate jurisdiction (P.D. No. 1083, otfrerwise known as the Gode of Mustim Personat Laws of the Philippines, Sec. 143, Par. (1). 1,Petitions by Muslim for the constitution of a family home, change of name and commitment of an insane person to an asylum: 2. All olher personal and legal actions not mentioned in paragraph 1 (d), Section 143 of P.D. No. 1083, (no. 4 of above) wherein the parties involved are Muslims except those for forcibie entry and unlawful detainer. which snail fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Municipal Circuit Court; and actions for interpleader or declaratory relief wherein the parties are Muslims or the property involved belongs exclusively to Muslims (P.D. No. 1083, An 143, Par. (2)). 430 VOL 2. p ifr 2019 Rea ed 1. Offenses defined and punished under P.O. No. 1083: 2. Ait civil’ actions and proceedings between parties who are Muslims or have been named in accordance with P.D. No. 1083, relating to: a. Marriage; b. Divorce; ¢. Betrothal or breach of contract to marry; Customary dower (ahr), e, Disposition and distribution of property upon divorce; {. Maintenance and support and consolatory gifts (muta) 9. Restitution ov marital rights; and 3. Disputes relative to communal properties (P.D. No. 1083, Ar. 155)VOL 2. p Tf 2019 The Shania District Courts shall have appellate jurisdiction over all cases tried in the Sharia Circuit Courts within their territorial jurisdiction. The Shar‘a District Court shall decide every case appealed to it on the basis of the evidence and records transmitted as well as — such A memoranda, briefs or oral arguments UCM as the parties may submit (PD. No. 1083, Art. 14d) Note: The decisions of the Shari'a District Courts whether on appeal from the Shari'a Circuit Court or not shall be final. Nothing in P.O, No, 1083 shall affect the original and appellate jurisdiction of the SC as \ Provides in the Constitution (P.D. No. 1083, Art. 145), Q: What is the Totality of Claims Principle? ANS: The Totality Rule states that, where there are several claims or causes of action between the same or different parties, embodied in the same complaint, the amount of the demand shall be the fotality-of the claims in all the causes of action, irrespective of whether the causes of action arose out of the same or different transactions (B.P. BIg. 129, Sec. 33, Par. (1). Q: When is the Totality of Claims Principle? ANS: The Tolality ule is applicable in the following cases. 4. In actions where the jurisdiction of the court is dependent on the amount involved, the test of jurisdiction shall be the aggregate sum of all the money demands, exclusive only of interest and costs, irrespective of whether or not the separate claims are owned by or due to different parties. If any demand is for damages in a civil action. the amount thereof must be specifically alleged: or 2. Cases where there are two or more plaintiffs having separale causes of action against two or more defendants joined in a complaint (Flores v. Mallare- Philipps. G.R. No. |-66620, September 24, 1986) Note: The Totality Rule applies under the condition that the causes of action in favor of the two or more plaintiffs or against the two or snore defendants should arise out of the same transaction cr series of transactions and there should be a common question of haw or fact (id ). D. ASPECTS OF JURISDICTION Jurisdiction over the Parties Q: What does jurisdiction over the parties mean? ANS; Jurisdiction over the parties is the legal power of the court to render personal judgment against a party to an action or proceeding (Black's Law Dictionary, 5” ed. 767). or the power of a court to render a personal judgment or to subject the parties in a Particular ection to the judgment and other rulings rendered in the action (Villagracia v Fifth Shania Court, G.&. No. 188832. April 237914) fBEDAN RED BOOK 2058 Q: How does the court acquire jurisdiction over the plaintiff? ANS: Jurisdiction over the plaintiff is acquired by the filing of the complaint, petition, or other initialory pleading before the court by the plaintiff or petitioner (1 TAN, supra at 93), By the mere filing of the complaint, the plaintiff, in. a civil action, voluntarily submits himself to the jurisdiction of the court (Guy v. Gacott, G.R. No. 206147, January 13, 2016) Q: How dees the court acquire jurisdiction over the defendant? ANS: Jurisciction over the defendant is obtained either: 1, By service of summons; or 2. By his voluntary appearance in courl(RULES OF COURT, Rule 14, Sec. 20). Q; What is the effect of the defendant's voluntary appearance in court? ANS: The defendant's voluntary appearance in the action shall be equivalent to service of summons. It is a waiver of the necessity of a formal notice. An appearance in whatever form, without explicitly objecting to the jurisdiction of the court over the person, is a submission to the jurisdiction of the court over the person (1 TAN, supra at 93) Examples are: 1. By filing an answer; or 2. By filing a motion to dismiss, except when the defendant also raises the issue of lack of jurisdiction over his person (RULES OF COURT. Rute 14, Sec. 20) Q: In what instances will the filing of a pleading seeking affirmative relief NOT constitute a submission of one's person to the jurisdiction of the court? ANS: In the ¢ase-of pleadings whese prayer is precisely for the avoidance of the jurisdiction of the court, which only leads to a special appearance. These pleadings are: 1. In civil cases, motions to dismiss on the ground of lack of jurisdiction over the person of the defendant, whether or not other grounds for dismissal are included, 2. In criminal cases, motions to quash a complaint on the ground of lack of jurisdiction over the person of the accused; and 3. Motions to quash a warrant of arrest Note: The first two are consequences of the fact that failure to file them would constitute a waiver of the defense of lack of jurisdiction over the person. The third is a consequence of the fact that it is the very legality of the court process forcing the submission of the person of the accusec that is the very issue in 2 motion to quash a warrant of arrest (Miranda v. Tuliao, G.R. No. 158763, March 3.. 2006) Jurisdiction over the Subject Matter Meaning of Jurisdiction over the Subject Matter @: Define jurisdiction over the subject matter. ANS: Jurisdiction over tie subject matter is the power to hear and determune cases of the genera! class to which the proceedings in question belong and 1s conferred by the sovereign authority which organizes the court and defines its powers (Mitsubishi Motors v, Bureau of Customs, GR. No, 269830, June 17, 2015)VOL 2 Vf 2019 Error of Jurisdiction. as Distinguished from Error in Judgment @; Distinguish between error of jurisdiction and error of judgment. ANS: The following are the distinctions: (ERR) rele ‘As to Existence of jurisdiction It occurs when the court exercises | It presupposes that the court is vested Jurisdiction not conferred upon it by | with jurisdiction but in the process of law. It may also occur when the court | exercising that jurisdiction it committed although with jurisdiction, acts in | mistakes in the appreciation of facts and excess of its jurisdiction or with grave | the evidence leading to an erroneous abuse of discretion amounting to lack | judgment (1 RIANO, Givil Procedure, ‘of jurisdiction (People —_—v. | supra at 58). Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 173396, September 22, 2010). As to Resulbof error. 5 ‘The judgment cannot be considered a Aulliiy, and therefore, cannot be collaterally impeached. Such is binding on the parties unless reversed or annulled (1 RIANO, Civil Procedure, supra at 59) Renders a judgment void or at least voidable (Jaro v. CA, G.R. No. 127536, February 19, 2002). Reviewable only by the extraordinary | Reviewable by appeal (td). writ of certiorari (Cabrera v. Laid, GR. No. 129098, December 6, 2006). How Juris ic Conrerred and Determined Q: How is jurisdiction conferred? oe ANS: Jurisdiction over the subject matter is Conferred by the Constitution or by law. Nothing can change the jurisdiction of the court over the subject matter. That Power is a matter of legislative enactment which none but the legislature may change (Zamora v. CA, G.R. No. 78206, March 19. 1990). It is NOT conferred by: (UCC-PEAS) 1. Court's Unilateral assumption of jurisdiction (Tolentino v. Social Security Commission, 6.R. No. L-28870, September 6, 1985) 2. Contract (Figueroa v. People, G.R. No. 147406, July 14, 2008); 3. Compromise (Olongapo City v. Subic Water and Sewerage Co., Inc., G.R. No. 171626, Augtist 6, 2014); 4. Agreement of the Parties (Metromedia Times Corporation v. Pastorin. G.R. No. 154295, July 29, 2005); 5. Erroneous belief of the cout that it exists (Id): 6. Acquiescence of the court (Republic v. Estigular, G.R. No. 136588, July 20. 2000); or 7. Silence, waiver, or failure to object (People v. Garfin, G.R. No. 153176, March 29, 2004). Ay isaea ate alten aDAN RED BOOK 3018 Q: How is jurisdiction determined? ANS: Jurisdiction over the subject matter is determined by the allegations of the complaint anc the character of the relief sought (Heirs of Bautista v. Lindo, G.R. No. 208232, March 10, 2014). Once vested, jurisdiction remains regardless whether or not the plaintiff is entitled to recover all or some of the claims asserted therein (Go v. Distinction Properties, G.R. No. 194024, April 25, 2012). Il is NOT determined by: 1. The defenses in the answer or motion to dismiss; Exception: If, after hearing, tenancy is shown to exist, it shall dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction since the Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board (DARAB) has exclusive jurisdiction to adjudicate agrarian disputes pursuant to R.A. No. 6657 (Velasquez v. Spouses Cruz, GR. No. 191479, September 21, 2015). The amount ultimately substantiated and awarded by the trial court; By the evidence in the Consent or agreement of the parties; or By estoppel (Tolentino v. GA, G.R. No, 123445, October 6, 1997) aaoOn Objections to Jurisaiction over the Subject Matter. Q: May the court, mote proprio, dismisS the case if it finds that it has no jurisdiction over the subject matter? ANS: Yes. The court may dismiss the case on its own initiative when it appears from the pleadings or the evidence on record that it has no jurisdiction over the sudject matter (RULES OF COURT, Rule 9, Sec. 1) Q; When may a party raise the issue of jurisdiction over the subject matter? ANS: A garty’may abject to the jurisdiction of the court as @ ground in a motion to dismiss (RULES OF COURT, Rufe 16, Sec, 1, Par. (b)) or as an affirmative defense in the answer (RULES OF GOURT, Rule 16, Sec. 6). It may be raised at any time during the proceedings, even for the first time on appeal, since jurisdictional issues cannot be waived (Boston Equity Resources v. CA, G.R. No. 173946, June 19, 2013) Effect of Estoppel on Objections to Jurisdiction Q: What is the effect of estoppel on objections to jurisdictions? ANS: While it is true that jurisdiction over the subject matter may be raised at any stage of the proceedings since it is conferred by law, it is nevertheless, seltled that a party may be barred from raising it on the ground of estoppel (La’o v. Republic, G.R. No. 160779. January 23, 2006) Note: The active participation of a party in a case is tantamount to recognition of thal cours jurisdiction and will bar a party from impugning the court's jurisdiction, This only applies to excepiional circumstances (Concepcion v. Regafado, G.R. No. 167988, February 6, 2007). Q: What is the doctrine of estoppel by Jaches? ANS: In the case of Tijam v. Sibonghanoy (G.R. No, L-21450. April 15, 1968). the Supreme Court barred a belated objection to jurisdiction that was raised onl, when an adverse decision was rendered by the lower court against it. It raised the issue only alter almost 15 years and after seeking affirmative relief from the court and actively participating in all stages of the proceedings. The doctrine, as ceclared by the Supreme Court, is based upon grounds of public policy x xx and is principally a question af the inequity or unfairness of permitting a right or claim to Le enforced or asserted (1 RIANO. supra at 74) AzaVOL 2. 2019 feas\ ay (hae: 1o le). Q: Is the doctrine of estoppel by laches the general rule? ANS: No. The general rule should be, as it has always been, that the issue of jurisdiction may be raised at any stage of the proceedings, even on appeal, and is not lost by waiver or by estoppel. Estoppel by laches, to bar a litigant from asserting the court's absence or lack of jurisdiction, only supervenes in exceptional cases similar to the factual milieu of the Tijam case (Figueroa v. People, G.R. No. 147406, July 14, 2008). Jurisdiction over the issucs Q: What does jurisdiction over the issues mean? ANS: This is the power of the court to try and decide the issues raised in the pleadings of the parties (Bernabe v. Vergara, G.R. No. L-48652, September 16, 1942). Q: How is jurisdiction over the issues conferred and determined? ANS: Jurisdiction over the issue is determined and conferred: 4. By the pleadings filed in the case by the parties (Lazo v. Republic Surety & Ins. Co., Inc., G.R. No. L-27365, January 30, 1979): or 2. By stipulations of parties as when in pre-trial, the parties can enter into stipulation of facts and documents or enter into an aareement simplifying the issues of the case (RULES OF COURT, Rule 18, Sec. 2): or 3. By waiver or failure to object to the presentation of evidence on a matter not raised in the pleadings (RULES OF COURT, Rule 10, Sec. 5). Jurisdiction over the Res or the Property in Litigation Q: What is jurisdiction over the res? ANS: Jvrisdiction over the res refers to the cour'’s jurisdiction over the thing or the property under litigation (1 RIANO, supra at 87). This is acquired by the actual or constructive seizure by the court of the thing in question, thus placing it in custodia fegis (De Joya v. Marquez. G.R. No. 162416, January 31, 2006). Q: How is jurisdiction over the res acquired? ANS: Jurisdiction over the res is acquired either: 1. By the actual or constructive seizure of the property under legal process, whereby itis brought into actual custody of the law (e.g. allachment); of 2. As a result of the institution of legal proceedings, in which the power of the court is recognized and made effective (e.g. suits involving the status of parties or property of a non-resident defendant) (Biaco v. PH Countryside Rural Bank, G.R No. 161417, February 08, 2007) E. JURISDICTION VS. EXERCISE OF JURISDICTION Q: Distinguish jurisdiction from the exercise of juri ANS: Jurisdiction is the authority to hear and determine 2 case. Il does not depend either upon the regularity of the exercise of thal power or upon the rightlulness of the decisions made. The authority to de case at all, and not the decision rendered therein, is what makes up junsdiction, Where there 1s jurisdiction. the decision of all questicns arising in the case is but an exercise of jurisdiction (Estate of Yujuico v. Republic. G.R. No. 168661, October 28, 2007) 435F. JURISDICTION VS. VENUE VOL 2 2019 Q: What is Venue? ANS: Venue is the defined as the piace where the case is to be instituted, heard, and tried. itis procedural in nature, waivable for failure to make a timely objection, either ina motion to dismiss, or raise it in the answer as an affirmative defense and can be subject to the stipulation of the parties (1 TAN, supra at 104). Q: Distinguish venue from jurisdiction. ANS: The following are the distinctions between venue and jurisdiction: Procedural Substantive Boe) Venue is the place where the cause of | Jurisdiction: is the power of the court to ction is instituted, heard or tried. hear and decide a case, Iis net a ground, except in summary | It may be a ground for moty proprio | procedure dismissal Venue may be changed by the written | Jurisdiction cannot be the subject of the agreement of the parties. agreement of the parties. As to whether it may be Waived or not It may be waived, Itis conferred by law and cannot be | waived. (1 TAN, supra at 105), 456VOL 2. 2019 » BEDAN RED BOOK G. JURISDICTION OVER CASES COVERED BY BARANGAY CONCILIATION, SMALL CLAIMS CASES, AND CASES COVERED BY SUMMARY PROCEDURE Q: What cases are covered by the Rules on Small Clainis, Summary Procedure, and Barangay Conciliation? ANS: The following are the cases covered: Pere mea) Saat eee) Rta aed fared (as amendedby + EN ake ce Cee nel ee ferrets) (A.M, No. 08-8-7-SC) Cases forthe | 1. All cases of forcible | All disputes involving parties payment of money entry and unlawiul | who actually reside in the where the value of Getainer irrespective | same city or municipality may the claim does not of the amount of | be the subject of the exceed P200,000. damages or unpaid | proceedings for amicable exclusive of interest rentals sought to be | settlement in the barangay and costs, and in fecovered. Where | except which the claims are atlorney's fees are | 1, Where one party is the purely civil in nature awarded, the same government, or ary where the claim or shall not exceed subdivision or relief prayed for by P20,000; and instrumentality thereof; the plaintiff is solely | 2. All other civil cases, | 2. Where one parly is a for payment or except probate public officer or reimbursement of proceedings, where employee, and — the sum of money’ the total amount of dispute relates to the plaintiffs claim does performance of his official | The claim or demand not_exceed P100,000 functions; may tt: or P200,000 in Metro | 3. Offenses punishable by 1. For money owed Manila, exclusive of | imprisonment exceeding under any of the interests and costs 1 year ora fine exceeding following: (1997 Revised Rules 5,000.00; a. Contract of on Summary | 4, Offenses where there is lease; Procedure, as no private offended party: b. Contract of amended by A.M.No. | 5.Where the dispute loan 02-11-09-SC, involves real properties ¢. Contract of effective November located in different cities services: 25, 2002). ‘or municipalities unless d. Contract of the parties thereto agree sale; or to submit their differences e. Contract of to amicable settlement by mortgage an appropriate Lupon; 2. For liquidated 6. Disputes involving parties | damages arising | who actually reside in i from contracts: | barangays of different | 3. The enforcement cities or municipalittes. of a barangay except where such | amicable barangay units adjoin selllement or an each other andthe | arbitration award | parties thereto agree 10 | involving a money submit their differences to | claim covered by amicable settlement by | this Rule pursuant | an appropriate Lupon, __ to Sec. 417 of the_| _ and \ 137BEDAN RED BOOK * VOL 2. if 2019 Local Government Code (AM. No. 08-8-7-SC, The 2016 Revised Rules of Procedure for Small Claims Cases). Note: The amendment increasing the threshold amount to £300,000 was enacted on July 10, 2018 and thus not | part_of the bar coverage. LUE ers on 1. Violations of traffic laws, Rules and regulations: 2. Violations of the rental law; | 3. Violations of municipal orcity ordinances: 4. Violations of B.P. Big. 22 (AM. No. 00-11- 01-SC. Aprit 15, 2003), | 5 AN other criminal cases where the penalty is imprisonment not exceeding 6 months andior a fine of P 1,000 irrespective of ‘other penalties or civil _liabilities arising 7. Such other classes of disputes. which the Presiden! may determine in the interest of justice or upon the recommendation of ithe Secretary of Ju: . The court in which —non- criminal cases not falling within the authority of the Jupon under this Code are filed may, at any time before trial, moti: proprio refer the case to the lupon concemed for amicable —_ settlement (KetarungangPambarang ay Rules, Rule Vi, Sec. 1; known as the Locat Government Code of 1991, Sec. 408) Note: The court in which 2 non-criminal case is filed may motu proprio refer the case, at any time before trial. to the’ Lugon, concerned for amicable settlement, the foregoing Rules notwithstanding and even if the case does not fall within the authority of the Lupon (LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, See. 408) When punishable by imprisonment of not more GOVERNMENT CODE, Sec. 408), ' RA. No. 7160, otherwise | than 1 year or fine of not | more than P5,000 (LOCAL |therefrom, and . Offenses involving damage to property through criminal negligence where the imposable fine is not exceeding _ P'10,000 (Revised Rule on Summary Procedure, Sec 1, Par. (b)).