Page |1

I. GENERAL PRINCIPLES

A. Distinguish Substantive Law and Remedial Law

Substantive law is that part of the law that creates, defines and regulates rights and duties
concerning life, liberty or property the violation of which gives rise to a cause of action. Remedial
law on the other hand prescribes method by which the rights and duties arising from the
substantive law are protected, enforced and given effect.

B. Rule-making power of the Supreme Court

Sec. 5 (5), Article VIII of the Constitutions provides that:
a. The Supreme Court shall have the Power to Promulgate rules concerning:
i. The protection and enforcement of the Constitutional rights;
ii. Pleading, practice and procedure in all courts;
iii. The admission to the practice of law;
iv. The Integrated Bar; and
v. Legal assistance to the underprivileged
b. Rules of procedure of special courts and quasi-judicial bodies shall remain effective unless
disapproved by the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has the sole prerogative to amend, repeal or even establish new rules
for a more simplified and inexpensive process, and the speedy disposition of cases. (Neypes
v. CA)

1. Limitations on the rule-making power of the Supreme Court

Rules of Procedure promulgated by the Supreme Court must:

a. Provide a speedy and inexpensive disposition of cases;
b. Be Uniform in all courts of the same grade; and
c. Not diminish, increase or modify substantive rights.
Sec. 5(5), Article VIII of the Constitution

2. Power of the Supreme Court to amend and suspend procedural rules

Amendment or suspension of procedural rules should only be done in the most exceptional
circumstances.

Basis for the Supreme Court’s power to amend or suspend its rules:
a. Rule-making power vested by the Constitution, and
b. Sec. 5(g), Rule 135 which states that every court shall have the power to amend and control its
process and orders so as to make them conformable to law and justice.

The power of the Supreme Court to suspend its own rules or to exempt a particular case from its
operation, whenever the purposes of justice requires it, cannot be questioned. Substantial rights must
reign supreme over technicalities.

1|Page
 Page |2

The overarching aim of procedure is to achieve substantial justice, hence, the power to suspend if
required in order to achieve the latter.

The constitutional power of the Supreme Court to promulgate rules of practice and procedure
necessarily carries with it the power to overturn judicial precedents on points of remedial law through the
amendment of the Rules of Court.

C. Nature of Philippine Courts

1. A court is an organ of government belonging to the judicial department, the function of which is
the application of the laws to controversies brought before it as well as the public administration of
justice. It is also the place where justice is administered.

2. Court vs. Judge

A court is a tribunal or an office officially assembled under the authority of law whereas a Judge is
an officer of such tribunal. A court is an entity possessing a personality separate and distinct from
the men who compose or sit on it. Jurisdiction does not attach to the judge but to the court.

3. Classification of Philippine Courts

Regular Courts:
a. Supreme Court
b. Court of Appeals
c. Regional Trial Court
d. Municipal Trial Court
e. Metropolitan Trial Court
f. Municipal Circuit Trial Court

Special Courts:
a. Court of Tax Appeals
b. Sandiganbayan

4. Courts of Original and Appellate Jurisdiction

A court is one with original jurisdiction when the action or proceeding is originally filed with it.

A court is one with appellate jurisdiction when it has the power to review decisions or orders of a
lower court.

Appellate jurisdiction refers to a process which is but a continuation of the original action and not a
commencement of a new action.

2|Page
 Page |3

5. Courts of General and Special Jurisdiction

Courts of general jurisdiction are those with competence to decide on their own jurisdiction and
take cognizance of all cases, civil and criminal, of a particular nature. Courts of special or limited
jurisdiction, on the other hand, are those which have jurisdiction only for a particular purpose or
clothed with special powers for the performance of specified duties beyond which they have no
authority of any kind.

6. Constitutional and Statutory Courts

A constitutional court is one created by a direct constitutional provision. Only the Supreme Court is
a constitutional court. A statutory court, on the other hand, is one created by law other than the
constitution. All other courts are statutory courts.

Sandiganbayan is a constitutionally mandated court the creation of which is by Congress mandated

by a constitutional provision. While its existence is mandated by the constitution, its creation was
through and by BP 1486, issued by President Marcos.

7. Courts of Law and Equity

Philippine courts are courts of both law and equity. Both legal and equitable jurisdictions are
dispensed with in the same tribunal. Equity jurisdiction is used to describe the power of the court
to resolve issues presented in a case, in accordance with the rules of fairness and justice, and in the
absence of a clear, positive law governing such issues.

8. Principle of Judicial Hierarchy also known as Doctrine of Hierarchy of Courts

This principle holds that a case must be filed with the lowest court possible having the appropriate
jurisdiction. A disregard of the doctrine of hierarchy of courts warrants as a rule an outright
dismissal of a petition.

9. Doctrine of non-interference or doctrine of judicial stability

The doctrine of non-interference or doctrine of judicial stability holds that courts of equal and
coordinate jurisdiction cannot interfere with each other’s orders. It also bars a court from
reviewing or interfering with the judgment of a co-equal court over which it has no appellate
jurisdiction or power of review. Such doctrine is also applicable to administrative bodies such that
when the law provides for an appeal to the Supreme Court or Court of Appeals from the decision of
the administrative body, it means that such body is co-equal with the RTC and is then beyond the
control of the latter.

The doctrine of judicial stability does not apply where a third-party claimant is involved. This is in
consonance with the well-established principle that no man shall be affected by any proceeding to
which he is a stranger.

3|Page
 Page |4

II. JURISDICTION

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

In its expanded concept, it includes the authority of the court to execute its decisions since such is
an essential aspect of jurisdiction and is the most important part of litigation.

A. Classification of Jurisdiction

1. Distinguish Original and Appellate Jurisdiction

A court is one with original jurisdiction when actions or proceedings are originally filed with it. A
court is one with appellate jurisdiction when it has the power of review over the decisions or orders
rendered by a lower court.

2. Distinguish General and Specific Jurisdiction

A court is one with general jurisdiction when it has the competence to decide on their own
jurisdiction and take cognizance of all cases, civil and criminal, of a particular nature. On the other
hand, a court is one with special jurisdiction when it has jurisdiction only for a particular purpose or
clothed with special powers for the performance of specified duties beyond which they have no
authority of any kind.

3. Distinguish Exclusive and Concurrent Jurisdiction

Exclusive jurisdiction precludes the idea of co-existence and refers to jurisdiction possessed to the
exclusion of the others. On the other hand, Concurrent jurisdiction, also known as Coordinate
Jurisdiction, is the power of different courts to take cognizance of the subject matter. Where such
jurisdiction exists, the court first taking cognizance of the case assumes jurisdiction to the exclusion
of the other courts.

B. Doctrines of Hierarchy of courts and continuity of jurisdiction

Doctrine of Hierarchy of Courts holds that in case of concurrence of jurisdiction, a case must be filed
first before the lowest court possible except if one can advance a special reason which would allow a
party to directly resort to a higher court.

Doctrine of Continuity of Jurisdiction, also known as Doctrine of Adherence of Jurisdiction, holds that
once a jurisdiction is vested, the same is retained up to the end of the litigation.

C. Jurisdiction of Various Philippine Courts

1. SUPREME COURT

Supreme Court is not a trier of Facts subject to exceptions.

Exclusive Original Jurisdiction:

Petitions for Certiorari, Prohibition and Mandamus against appellate courts namely:
a. Court of Appeals;
b. Commission on Elections
c. Commission on Audit;
d. Sandiganbayan; and
e. Court of Tax Appeals

4|Page
 Page |5

Concurrent Original Jurisdiction

I. With CA
A. Petitions for Certiorari, Prohibition and Mandamus against First-level courts and
bodies, namely:
1. RTCs;
2. Civil Service Commission;
3. Central Board of Assessment Appeals
4. NLRC; and
5. Other Quasi-judicial agencies

 Although there is concurrent jurisdiction as the Constitution grants this to

the SC, if the petition involves an act or omission of a quasi-judicial agency,
the petition shall only be cognizable by the CA and must be filed there. (SM
AM No. 07-7-12)
B. Quo Warranto petitions
C. Writ of Habeas Corpus
D. Writ of Amparo
E. Writ of Habeas Data; and
F. Writ of Kalikasan

II. With RTC

A. Cases affecting ambassadors, public ministers, and consuls
B. Petitions for Certiorari, Prohibition and Mandamus against lower courts.
C. Quo Warranto Petitions
D. Writ of Habeas Corpus
E. Writ of Amparo; and
F. Writ of Habeas Data

III. With Sandiganbayan

A. Writ of Amparo; and
B. Writ of Habeas Data

Appellate Jurisdiction
SC has appellate jurisdiction over petitions for review on certiorari (Rule 45) against the
1. CA;
2. Sandiganbayan
3. RTC with respect to:
a. Pure questions of Law; and
b. Cases falling under Sec. 5, Article VIII of the Constitution:
i. All cases in which the constitutionality or validity of any treaty, international or
executive agreement, law, presidential decree, proclamation, order, instruction,
ordinance, or regulation is in question.
ii. All cases involving the legality of any tax, impost, assessement, or toll, or any penalty
imposed in relation thererto.
iii. All cases in which the jurisdiction of any lower court is in issue;
iv. All criminal cases in which the penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua or higher; and
v. All cases in which only an error or question of law is involved;
4. CTA in its decisions rendered en banc;
5. MTC in the exercise of their delegated jurisdiction, where the decision had it been rendered by
RTC, would be appealable directly to the SC.

5|Page
 Page |6

2. COURT OF APPEALS

EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION :

Actions for annulment of judgments of the RTC

CONCURRENT ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

I. With SC
a. Petitions for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus against first-leve courts, namely:
i. RTC;
ii. Civil Service Commission;
iii. Central Board of Assessment Appeals;
iv. NLRC; and
v. Other quasi-judicial agencies
b. Quo Warranto
c. Writ of Habeas Corpus
d. Writ of Amparo
e. Writ of Habeas Data
f. Writ of Kalikasan

II. With RTC

a. Petitions for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus against lower courts and bodies;
b. Quo warranto
c. Writ of Habeas Corpus
d. Writ of Amparo
e. Writ of Habeas Data

III. With Sandiganbayan

a. Writ of Amparo
b. Writ of Habeas Data

APPELLATE JURISDICTION
1. By ordinary Appeal
a. From judgments of RTC and Family Courts;
b. Over decisions of the MTCs in cadastral or land registration cases pursuant to its delegated
jurisdiction.
2. By petition for review
a. From judgments of the RTC rendered in its appellate jurisdiction; and
b. From decisions, resolutions, orders or awards of the Civil Service Commission ad other quasi-
judicial bodies mentioned in Rule 43 which is not exclusive.
c. From decisions of the office of the ombudsman in administrative disciplinary cases.

6|Page
 Page |7

3. COURT OF TAX APPEALS

EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

Over tax collection cases involving final and executory assessments for taxes, fees, charges and penalties;
provided however, that collection cases where the principal amount of taxes and fees, exclusive of charges
and penalties claimed, is less than 1,000,000 shall be tried by the proper MTC, MeTC, and RTC.

APPELLATE JURISDICTION
1. Exclusive Appellate Jurisdiction in tax collection cases:
a. RTC Judgement, original jurisdiction
b. RTC Judgment, appellate jurisdiction
2. Exclusive appellate jurisdiction to review by appeal
a. CIR Decision
b. CIR inaction
c. RTC decisions, local tax cases
d. Commissioner of Customs decisions
e. CBAA Decisions
f. Secretary of Finance decisions
g. Secretary of Trade and Industry decisions

3. SANDIGANBAYAN
EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
1. Violations of RA 3019 or Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act
2. Violations of RA 1379 – Property unlawfully acquired by any public officer or employee
3. Bribery – where one of the accused is occupying position corresponding to Salary Grade 27 or higher,
or military and PNP officers
4. Other offenses and felonies committed by public officer and employees in relation to their office
5. Civil and Criminal cases (EO 1,2, 14-A)
6. Petitions for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, habeas corpus, injunctions, and other ancillary writs,
quo warranto ( EO 1,2,14-A)

CONCURRENT ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

I. With SC, CA and RTC
a. Writ of amparo; and
b. Writ of habeas data

APPELLATE JURISDICTION
The Sandiganbayan shall exercise exclusive appellate jurisdiction over final judgments, resolutions or orders of
RTC, whether in the exercise of original or appellate jurisdiction, as herein provided. (Sec4, PD 1606, as
amended)

7|Page
 Page |8

4. REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS

EXCLUSIVE APPELLATE JURISDICTION
I. All civil actions in which the subject of the litigation is incapable of pecuniary estimation.

 TEST : If it is primarily for a recovery of sum of money, the claim is considered

capable of pecuniary estimation. On the other hand, where the basic issue is
something other than the right to recover a sum of money and the money
claim is purely incidental to, or a consequence of, the principal relief sought,
such actions are cases where the subject of litigation is incapable of
pecuniary estimation.

 An action to nullify a deed of assignment and conveyance is not one involving

a subject matter incapable of pecuniary estimation if the plaintiff also seeks
for the transfer of possession and control of properties

 If the principal nature of an action to cancel a contract to sell, where the

defendant has already taken possession of the property, involves a
determination on whether a suspensive condition has been fulfilled – then
the subject matter involved is one that is incapable of pecuniary estimation.

 An action to redeem a land subject of a free patent was characterized by the

SC as one whose subject matter was incapable of pecuniary estimation since
the reacquisition of the land was merely incidental to and an offshoot of the
exercise of the right to redeem the land.

 An expropriation suit is incapable of pecuniary estimation

 An action for specific performance is one incapable of pecuniary estimation.

II. Civil actions involving title to, or possession, of real property, or any interest therein, where
assessed value exceeds :
- P20,000 outside Metro Manila;
- P50,000 in METRO MANILA
Except: Forcible entry and unlawful detainer cases (FEUD Cases)
– Exclusive Original Jurisdiction of MTC

 An action involving title to real property means that the plaintiff’s cause of
action is based on a claim that he owns such property or that he has the legal
rights to have exclusive control, possession, enjoyment, or disposition of the
same.
 Title is the legal link between the owner and the property.

III. Any action if the amount involved is 300,000, outside MM, or exceeds 300,000 in METRO MANILA in the
following cases:
c. Actions in admiralty and maritime jurisdiction
d. Matters of probate, testate or intestate
e. In ALL OTHER cases where the amount refers to the demand, EXCLUSIVE OF INTEREST,
DAMAGE,S of whatever kind, attorney’s fees, litigation expenses, and costs.

8|Page
 Page |9

IV. All actions involving the contract of marriage and family relations and all civil actions and
special proceedings falling within the exclusive original jurisdiction of Juvenile and Domestic
Relations Court. (where there is no FAMILY COURTS)

V. All civil actions and special proceedings falling within the exclusive original jurisdiction of
the Court of Agrarian Reform.

VI. All cases not within the exclusive original jurisdiction of any court, tribunal, person, or body
exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions.

 This jurisdiction is often described as the general jurisdiction of the RTC

making it a court of GENERAL JURISDICTION.

VII. Intra-Corporate Controversies

VIII. Petition for Declaratory Relief
IX. Cases originally falling under the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan where the information:
a. Does not allege damage to the government or any bribery; or
b. Alleges damage to the government or bribery in an amount NOT EXCEEEDING 1M.

CONCURRENT ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

I. With the SC
a. Cases affecting ambassadors, public ministers, and consuls
b. Petitions for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus against lower courts
c. Quo Warranto
d. Writ of Habeas Corpus
e. Writ of Amparo
f. Writ of Habeas Data

II. With the CA

a. Petitions for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus against lower courts
b. Quo Warranto
c. Writ of Habeas Corpus
d. Writ of Amparo
e. Writ of Habeas Data

III. With Sandiganbayan

a. Writ of Amparo; and
b. Writ of Habeas Data

APPELLATE JURISDICTION
-Over cases decide by the lower courts in their respective territorial jurisdiction except those made in the
exercise of delegated jurisdiction, which are appealable in the same manner as decisions of the RTC.

9|Page
 P a g e | 10

SPECIAL JURISDICTION
SC may designate certain branches of RTC to try exclusively criminal cases, juvenile and domestic relation
cases, agrarian cases, urban land reform cases not falling withi the jurisdiction of any quasi-judicial body and
other special cases in the interest of justice.

6. FAMILY COURTS

a. Criminal cases where one or more accused is below 18 but not less than 9 years old or where
one or more victims was a minor at time of commission of the offenses.
b. Petitions for guardianship, custody of children and habeas corpus in relation to children
c. Petitions for adoption of children and revocation thereof
d. Complaints for annulment of marriage, declaration of nullity of marriage and those relating to
status and property relations of husband and wife or those living together under different
status and agreements, and petitions for dissolution of conjugal partnership of gains.
e. Petitions for support and/or acknowledgment
f. Summary judicial proceedings brought under the provisions of Family Code
g. Petitions for declaration of status of children as abandoned, dependent or neglected children,
voluntary or involuntary commitment of children, suspension, termination or restoration of
parental authority, and other cases cognizable under PD 603 and other related laws
h. Petitions for constitution of family home
i. Case against minors cognizable under Dangerous Drugs Act
j. Violations of RA7610, Child Abuse Law; and
k. Cases of domestic violence against women and children

7. METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURTS

MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS
MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS IN CITIES
MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURTS

EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

A. Where the value of personal property, estate, or amount of demand DOES NOT EXCEED:
i. 300,000php outside MM;
ii. 400,000PHP in MTERO MANILA
Exclusive of interest, damages of whatever kind, attorney’s fees,
litigation expenses, and costs, in the following cases:
1. Civil actions,
2. Probate Proceedings; and
3. Provisional remedies in proper cases

 TOTALITY RULE: If several claims or causes of action are embodied in the

same complaint, the amount of all the demands shall be the basis in
computation of the amount involved, if
o Claims are in the same complaint
o Claims are against the same defendant
o No misjoinder of parties
B. Forcible Entry and Unlawful Detainer cases (FEUD)
C. All civil actions involving title to, or possession of, REAL PROPERTY, or any interest therein DOES
NOT EXCEED:
i. 20,000php outside MM;
ii. 50,000PHP in MTERO MANILA
D. Inclusion and exclusion of voters

10 | P a g e
 P a g e | 11

SPECIAL JURISDICTION
Over petition for writ of habeas corpus or application for bail in criminal cases in the absence of all RTC judges
in the province or city

DELEGATED JURISDICTION OF THE MTC

Delegated jurisdiction of 1st level courts assigned by SC to hear and decide cadastral and land registration
cases covering:
a. Lots where there is no controversy or opposition;
b. Contested Lots the value of which does not exceed 100,000php, the value is to be ascertained
by the:
i. Claimant’s affidavit;
ii. Agreement of the respective claimants, if there are more than one; or
iii. Corresponding tac declaration of real property

MTC decisions in cadastral and land registration cases are appealable in the same manner as RTC
decisions, since MTCs acting in their delegated capacity are treated under law like RTCs.

Difference between 1st level courts

1. Metropolitan Trial Court – in each metropolitan area established by law, particularly METRO
MANILA;
2. Municipal Trial Courts in Cities – in every city not in metropolitan area;
3. Municipal Circuit Trial Court – in each circuit comprising such cities and municipalities grouped
together pursuant to law;
4. Municipal Trial Courts – in municipalities not comprised within a metropolitan area and a municipal
circuit.

11 | P a g e
 P a g e | 12

D.ASPECTS OF JURISDICTION
1. Jurisdiction over the parties
Jurisdiction over the parties refers to the power of the court to make decisions that are binding on
persons. It is also called jurisdiction in personam which is the power required before a court can enter a
personal or an in personam judgment. It is an essential element of due process in all actions, civil and criminal,
except in actions in rem or quasi in rem.

A. How jurisdiction over the plaintiff is acquired

Courts acquire jurisdiction over the plaintiff upon the filing of a complaint. By the mere filing of the complaint,
the plaintiff, in a civil action, voluntarily submits himself to the jurisdiction of the court.

B. How jurisdiction over the defendant is acquired

Jurisdiction over the person of the defendant is acquired by voluntary appearance in court and his submission
to its authority or by service of summons. Voluntary appearance gives the court jurisdiction over his person
despite lack of service of summons or a defective service of summons since his voluntary appearance is
equivalent to service of summons.

2. Jurisdiction over the Subject Matter

a. Meaning of Jurisdiction over the subject matter
Jurisdiction over the subject matter is the power of a court to hear the type of case that is then before
it. It is the power to hear and determine cases of the general class to which the proceeding in question belong.

b. Distinguish: Jurisdiction and Exercise of Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction is the authority and power of the court to decide a case. Exercise of jurisdiction, on the
other hand, is the exercise of that power and authority. Where there is jurisdiction over the subject matter
and of the person, the decision on all other questions arising in the case is an exercise is an exercise of that
jurisdiction.

c. How jurisdiction is conferred and determined

Jurisdiction over the subject matter of a case is conferred by law and determined by the allegations in the
complaint which comprise a concise statement of the ultimate facts constituting the plaintiff’s cause of action.
The allegations in the body of the complaint define the cause of action. The caption or title is not controlling.

d. Distinguish Doctrine of Primary Administrative Jurisdiction and Doctrine of Exhaustion of Administrative

Remedies
The doctrine of primary jurisdiction holds that if a case is such that its determination requires the expertise,
specialized training and knowledge of the proper administrative bodies, relief must first be obtained in an
administrative proceeding before a remedy is supplied by the courts even if the matter may well be within
their proper jurisdiction.

The doctrine of primary jurisdiction is corollary to the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies in
which courts cannot determine a controversy involving a question which is within the jurisdiction of the
administrative tribunal prior to the resolution of that question by the administrative tribunal.

12 | P a g e
 P a g e | 13

e. Doctrine of Adherence of Jurisdiction

Doctrine of Adherence to Jurisdiction, also known as doctrine of continuity of jurisdiction, holds that
once the jurisdiction of the court attaches, it continues until the case is finally terminated. The trial court be
ousted therefrom by subsequent happenings or events, although of a character that would have prevented
jurisdiction from attaching in the first instance.

f. Objections to jurisdiction over the subject matter

When it appears from the pleadings or evidence on record that the court has no jurisdiction over the
subject matter, the court shall dismiss the claim. (Sec 1, Rule 9). The jurisdiction of a court over the subject
matter is a matter of law and may not be conferred by consent or agreement of the parties. The lack of
jurisdiction of a court may be raised at any stage of the proceedings, even on appeal.
Under the amended Rules, a motion to dismiss is now a prohibited motion, but of the exceptions
provided is the ground of lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter of the claim. Moreover, under the
amended rules, lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter is also an affirmative defense which can be raised in
a defendant’s answer.

e. Effect of Estoppel on objection to jurisdiction

The case of Tijam v. Sibonghanoy espoused the doctrine of estoppel by laches, which held that a party
may be barred from questioning a court’s jurisdiction after invoking the court’s authority in order to secure
affirmative relief against its opponent, when laches would prevent the issue of lack of jurisdiction from being
raised for the first time on appeal by a litigant whose purpose is to annul everything done in a trial in which he
actively participated.

3. Jurisdiction Over the Issues

Jurisdiction over the issues is the power and authority of the court to hear and decide the issues raised
in the pleadings of the parties.

4. Jurisdiction Over the Res or Property in Litigation

Jurisdiction over the res refers to the court’s jurisdiction over the thing or the property which is the
subject of the action.
Jurisprudence holds that if the action is in rem or quasi in rem, jurisdiction over the person of the
defendant is not required. What is required is the jurisdiction over the res, although summons must also be
served in order to satisfy the requirements of due process.

5. Jurisdiction over the Remedies

E. Distinguish Error of Jurisdiction and Error of Judgment

Error of jurisdiction is one which occurs when a court exercises a jurisdiction not conferred to it by law
or when the court acts in excess of its jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of
jurisdiction. Error of judgment, on the other hand, presupposes that the court is vested with jurisdiction over

13 | P a g e
 P a g e | 14

the subject matter but in the process of exercising such jurisdiction, it committed mistakes in the appreciation
of facts and the evidence leading to an erroneous judgment.

F. Distinguish Jurisdiction and Venue

Jurisdiction is the authority to hear and determine a case; it establishes a relation between the court
and the subject matter; it is fixed by law and cannot be conferred by the act or agreement of the parties.
Venue, on the other hand, is the place where the case is to be heard or tried; it establishes a relation between
the parties; venue may be changed by the written agreement of the parties or waived expressly or impliedly.

In case of lack of jurisdiction, the court may motu proprio dismiss an action; while in case of improper
venue, the court may not dismiss an action.

Jurisdiction over the subject matter may be raised at any stage of the proceedings since it is conferred
by law, although a part may be barred from raising it on the ground of estoppel; Objection to an improper
venue, on the other hand, must be raised in the answer as an affirmative defense; it is no longer a valid
ground for a motion to dismiss.

G. Jurisdiction over Small Claims, Cases covered on the Rules on Summary Procedure and
Barangay Conciliation

1. Small Claims
The Revised Rules shall govern the procedure in actions for payment of money where
the value of the claim does not exceed:
a. 300,000php outside MM; (MTC, MCTC, MTCC)
B. 400,000php in METRO MANILA (Metropolitan Trial Court)

2. Cases covered by the Rules on Summary Procedure

a. Forcible Entry and Unlawful Detainer (FEUD)
b. All other cases, except probate proceedings, where the total amount of claim,
exclusive of interest and costs does not exceed:
100,000php outside MM
200,000php in METRO MANILA,

3. Cases covered by Barangay Conciliation

The LUPON of each barangay shall have the authority to bring together the parties
actually residing in the same municipality or city for amicable settlement of all disputes, subject to exceptions.
Barangay Conciliation is condition precedent for filing a case. However, failure to comply with condition
precedent is no longer a ground for a motion to dismiss under the Amended Rules. It is now included in the
enumerated affirmative defenses that may be set out in the answer. Being a waivable defense, the failure to
raise non-compliance with condition precedent in the answer constitutes a bar from raising such defense later
in the proceedings.
14 | P a g e
 P a g e | 15

CIVIL PROCEDURE
I. GENERAL PROVISIONS
A. Applicability
The Rules of Court shall apply in all courts, except as otherwise provided by the Supreme Court. Sec 2,
Rule 1.

Actions or proceedings Governed by the Rules of Court

1. Civil actions;
2. Criminal actions; and
3. Special proceedings
Sec. 3, Rule 1

Actions or proceedings NOT governed by the Rules of Court (CELIN)

1. Election cases
2. Land registration cases
3. Cadastral cases
4. Naturalization cases
5. Insolvency proceedings

B. Commencement of Civil Action

The filing of the original complaint in court signifies the commencement of the civil action

C. Construction
The Rules shall be liberally construed in order to promote a just, speedy and inexpensive disposition of
every action and proceeding. Sec. 6, Rule 1

II. ACTIONS
An action is a formal demand of one’s right in a court of justice in the manner prescribed by the court
or by the law. It is the method of applying legal remedies according to definite established rules.
The determinative operative act, which converts a claim into an action, is its filing with a court of
justice.

a. Meaning of Ordinary Civil Action

An ordinary civil action is one which is governed by the rules for ordinary civil actions.
Rules for Ordinary Civil Actions refer to Rule 2 (Cause of Action) until Rule 61 (Provisional Remedies)

 General Rules on Ordinary Civil Action – Rule 2 to Rule 5

 Procedure in Trial Courts – Rule 6 to Rule 39
 Appeals – Rule 40 to Rule 43
15 | P a g e
 P a g e | 16

 Procedure in the Court of Appeals – Rule 44 to Rule 55

 Procedure in the Supreme Court – Rule 56
 Provisional Remedies – Rule 57 to Rule 61

b. Meaning of Criminal Actions

One by which the State prosecutes a person for an act or omission punishable by law.
Proceedings are to be regarded as criminal when the purpose is primarily punishment, and civil when
the purpose is primarily compensatory or remedial.

c. Meaning of Special Civil Actions

A special civil action is one which is subject to the specific rules prescribed for a special civil action but
also governed by the rules for ordinary civil actions.
Rule 62 to 71 provide for special civil actions. However, despite having particular rules for special civil
actions, the rules for ordinary civil action still apply.

d. Distinguish: Civil Actions and Special Proceedings

A civil action is one by which a party sues another for the enforcement or protection of a right, or
prevention or redress of a wrong, whereas a special proceeding is a remedy by which a party seeks to establish
a status, a right or a particular fact.

e. Personal actions and Real actions

Real action is an action affecting title to or possession of real property, or interest therein while
personal action refers to all other actions which are not real actions.
Not all actions involving a real property are real actions because the realty may only be incidental to
the subject matter of the suit. In cases where the conveyance of real property was only incidental to the
determination of matters incapable of pecuniary estimation, they shall be deemed personal actions because
the principal action or remedy sought does not involve title to or possession of real property.

f. Local and Transitory actions

A local action is one which has to be filed in the place where the property is located; it could be
instituted in one specific place.
A transitory action, on the other hand, is one which may be filed in the residence of the plaintiff or
defendant, at the option of the plaintiff; it could be prosecuted in any one of several places.

g. Actions in rem, in personam, and quasi in rem

Distinction is important:
- To determine the binding effect of a decision the court may render over a
party, whether impleaded or not.
- To determine whether or not jurisdiction over the person of the defendant is
required, and the type of summons to be employed.

16 | P a g e
 P a g e | 17

1. Action in Rem
Action in rem is an action against the thing or res itself.
Jurisdiction over the person is not a prerequisite to confer jurisdiction on the court
provided that the latter has jurisdiction over the res.
Jurisdiction over the res is acquired either
a. by the seizure of the property under legal process, whereby it is brought into
actual custody of the law, or
b. as a result of the institution of legal proceedings, in which the power of the
court is recognized and made effective
The decision is binding as against the whole world.
Examples:
- Petition for Adoption
- Annulment of Marriage
- Correction of entries in the birth certificate
2. Action in personam
Action in personam is one which seeks to enforce personal rights and obligations
brought against the person.
Jurisdiction over the person is necessary for the court to validly try and decide the case
which can be made through service of summons.
Jurisdiction is acquired through service of summons as provide in Rule14 or voluntary
appearance.
Any judgment therein shall be binding only to the parties who are properly impleaded.
Examples:
- Action for a sum of money
- Action for damages

3. Action quasi in rem

This action names a person as defendant but its object is to subject that person’s
interest in a property to a corresponding lien or obligation.
Jurisdiction over the person is not a pre-requisite to confer jurisdiction on the curt,
provided that the latter has jurisdiction over the res.
Jurisdiction over the res is acquired either:
a. by the seizure of the property under legal process where it is brought into
actual custody of the law;
b. as a result of the institution of the legal proceedings, in which the power of
the court is recognized and made effective.
Judgments therein is binding only upon the parties who joined the action.
Examples :
- Attachment
- Foreclosure of mortgage
- Action for partition
- Action for accounting

17 | P a g e
 P a g e | 18

III. CAUSE OF ACTION

A cause of action is an act or omission by which a party violates a right of another. Sec. 2, Rule 2
Every ordinary civil action must be based on a cause of action.
Cause of action must exist at the time of the filing of the complaint, else, the case shall be dismissible
for being a groundless suit.

Base of cause of action (sources of obligation)

1. Law
2. Contract
3. Quasi-contract
4. Acts and omissions punishable by law
5. Quasi-delict

Elements of Cause of Action: ROVID

1. Right of the plaintiff
2. Obligation of the defendant to respect such right
3. Violation of that right
4. Injury
5. Damage

Right of action v. Cause of action

Right of action is the remedial right to relief granted by law to a party to institute an action against a
person who has committed a delict or wrong against him. Cause of action, on the other hand, is the delict or
wrongful act or omission committed by the defendant in violation of the primary rights of the plaintiff.
There can be no right of action without a cause of action being first established.

Failure of the complaint to state a cause of action v. Lack of Cause of action

Failure to state cause of action refers to the insufficiency of the allegations in the pleading; the proper
remedy when there is failure to state cause of action is to allege the same as an affirmative defense in the
answer.
Lack of cause of action, on the other hand, refers to a situation where the evidence failed to prove the
cause of action; the proper remedy when the complaint is not based on a cause of action is to file a Demurrer
to Evidence.

The complaint must contain a concise statement of the ultimate or essential facts constituting the
plaintiff’s cause of action. The focus is on sufficiency, not veracity, of the material allegations.

18 | P a g e
 P a g e | 19

Test of Sufficiency of Cause of Action

The test of sufficiency of a cause of action rests on whether, hypothetically admitting the facts alleged
in the complaint to be true, the court can render a valid judgment upon the same, in accordance with the
prayer in the complaint.

19 | P a g e