1. When is an action considered incapable of pecuniary estimation? 2.

When do you
avail of the remedy of annulment of judgment of a decision of the RTC and
distinguish it from the remedy of appeal from a decision of the RTC? 3. How is a
case before a Supreme Court Division referred to the Supreme Court Court en
banc? 4. Distinguish appellate jurisdiction from original jurisdiction? 5. Distinguish
question of fact from question of law.
Dfdfd
1. When an action is considered incapable of pecuniary estimation?
In the case of Singsong vs. Isabela Sawmill, the court said that, in determining whether an
action is one the subject matter of which is not capable of pecuniary estimation, the court has
adopted the criterion of first ascertaining the nature of the principal action or remedy sought. If it
is primarily for the recovery of a sum of money, the claim is considered capable of pecuniary
estimation, and whether jurisdiction is in the municipal courts or in the courts of first instance
would depend on the amount of the claim. However, where the basic issue is something other
than the right to recover a sum of money, where the money claim is purely incidental to, or a
consequence of, the principal relief sought, the court has considered such actions as cases
where the subject of the litigation may not be estimated in terms of money, and are cognizable
exclusively by courts of first instance.
2. When do you avail of the remedy of annulment of judgment of a decision of the RTC and
distinguish it from the remedy of appeal from a decision of the RTC?
A petition for annulment of judgment is a remedy in equity so exceptional in nature that it may
be availed of only when other remedies are wanting, and only if the judgment, final order or final
resolution sought to be annulled was rendered by a court lacking jurisdiction or through extrinsic
fraud. On the other hand, the remedy of appeal from a decision of the RTC can be availed by
filing a notice of appeal with the court which rendered the judgment or final order pursuant to
Sec. 2 Rule 41 of the Rules of Court.
3. How is a case before a Supreme Court Division referred to the Supreme Court Court en
banc?
A case is referred to the Supreme Court en banc when:
a. It involves the constitutionality of a treaty, international or executive agreement, or law;
b. It involves the constitutionality, application or operation of presidential decrees,
proclamations, orders, instructions, ordinances and other regulations;
c. A case where the required number of vote in a division is not obtained;
d. A doctrine or principle laid down in a decision rendered en banc or by division is modified, or
reversed;
e. All other cases required to be heard en banc under the Rules of Court (Sec. 5, Art. VIII, 1987
Constitution).
4. Distinguish appellate jurisdiction from original jurisdiction.
Courts of original jurisdiction are courts exercising jurisdiction in the first instance while courts of
appellate jurisdiction are the superior courts reviewing and deciding cases previously decided
by a lower court.
5. Distinguish question of fact from question of law.
A question of law arises when there is doubt as to what the law is on a certain state of facts,
while there is a question of fact when the doubt arises as to the truth or falsity of the alleged
facts.