Article VIII § 5, 1987 Constitution

SECTION 5. The Supreme Court shall have the following powers:

(1) Exercise original jurisdiction over cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and
consuls, and over petitions for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto, and habeas
corpus.
(2) Review, revise, reverse, modify, or affirm on appeal or certiorari, as the law or the Rules
of Court may provide, final judgments and orders of lower courts in:
(a) 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.
(b) All cases involving the legality of any tax, impost, assessment, or toll, or any
penalty imposed in relation thereto.
(c) All cases in which the jurisdiction of any lower court is in issue.
(d) All criminal cases in which the penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua or higher.
(e) All cases in which only an error or question of law is involved.

Basic Principles
The Supreme Court is not a trier of facts. Under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court, only questions
of law are reviewed by the Supreme Court. It is not the function of the Supreme Court to
analyze and weigh all over again evidence already considered in the proceedings below.

A question of law exists when the doubt or controversy concerns the correct application of
law or jurisprudence to a certain set of facts; or when the issue does not call for an
examination of the probative value of the evidence presented, the truth or falsehood of
facts being admitted.

Original & Exclusive Jurisdiction

The Supreme Court has exclusive original jurisdiction in petitions for certiorari, prohibition,
and mandamus against the:
1. Court of Appeals
2. COMELEC
3. COA
4. Court of Tax Appeals (CTA)
5.Sandiganbayan and disciplinary proceedings against members of the judiciary and
attorneys.

Original & Concurrent Jurisdiction

1. Court of Appeals
The Supreme Court has original & concurrent jurisdiction with the Court of Appeals
in petitions for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus against the:
a. RTC
b. CSC
c. NLRC (National Labor Relations Commission)
d. Other Quasi Judicial Agencies
2. Court of Tax Appeals
The Supreme Court has original & concurrent jurisdiction with the Court of Tax
Appeals in petitions for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus against the Central Board of
Assessment Appeals

3. Court of Appeals and Regional Trial Court

The Supreme Court has original & concurrent jurisdiction with the Court of Appeals
and Regional Trial Court in:
a. Certiorari, prohibition and mandamus against lower courts;
b. Quo Warranto and Habeas Corpus

4. Regional Trial Court

The Supreme Court has original & concurrent jurisdiction with the Regional Trial
Court in cases affecting ambassadors, public ministers and consuls.

Appellate & Exclusive Jurisdiction

The Supreme Court has appellate & exclusive jurisdiction by way of petition for review on
certiorari against the following:
1. CA
2. CTA
3. Sandiganbayan
4. RTC (on pure questions of law)

The Supreme Court has the power to review, revise, reverse, modify, or affirm on appeal or
certiorari, as the law or the Rules of Court may provide, final judgments and orders of the
above-mentioned lower courts in the following civil cases:
1. Constitutionality or Validity
2. Legality of any Tax
3. Jurisdiction of any lower court
4. Questions of Law

Jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals

§ 9, B.P. No. 129, as amended
Sec. 9. Jurisdiction. — The Court of Appeals shall exercise:
(1) Original jurisdiction to issue writs of mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, habeas corpus,
and quo warranto, and auxiliary writs or processes, whether or not in aid of its appellate
jurisdiction;
(2) Exclusive original jurisdiction over actions for annulment of judgment of Regional Trial
Courts; and
(3) Exclusive appellate jurisdiction over all final judgments, decisions, resolutions, orders or
awards of Regional Trial Courts and quasi-judicial agencies, instrumentalities, boards or
commissions, including the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Social Security
Commission, the Employees Compensation Commission and the Civil Service Commission,
except those falling within the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in accordance
with the Constitution, the Labor Code of the Philippines under Presidential Decree No. 442,
as amended, the provisions of this Act, and of subparagraph (1) of the third paragraph and
subparagraph (4) of the fourth paragraph of Section 17 of the Judiciary Act of 1948.
Jurisdiction of the Court of Tax Appeals
§§ 7 (a) & 18, R.A. No. 1125, as amended
Sec. 7. Jurisdiction. — The CTA shall exercise:
(a) Exclusive appellate jurisdiction to review by appeal, as herein provided:

(1) Decisions of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue in cases involving disputed

assessments, refunds of internal revenue taxes, fees or other charges, penalties in relation
thereto, or other matters arising under the National Internal Revenue or other laws
administered by the Bureau of Internal Revenue;

(2) Inaction by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue in cases involving disputed

assessments, refunds of internal revenue taxes, fees or other charges, penalties in relations
thereto, or other matters arising under the National Internal Revenue Code or other laws
administered by the Bureau of Internal Revenue, where the National Internal Revenue Code
provides a specific period of action, in which case the inaction shall be deemed a denial;

(3) Decisions, orders or resolutions of the Regional Trial Courts in local tax cases
originally decided or resolved by them in the exercise of their original or appellate
jurisdiction;

(4) Decisions of the Commissioner of Customs in cases involving liability for customs
duties, fees or other money charges, seizure, detention or release of property affected,
fines, forfeitures or other penalties in relation thereto, or other matters arising under the
Customs Law or other laws administered by the Bureau of Customs;

(5) Decisions of the Central Board of Assessment Appeals 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;

(6) Decisions of the Secretary of Finance on customs cases elevated to him

automatically for review from decisions of the Commissioner of Customs which are adverse
to the Government under Section 2315 of the Tariff and Customs Code;

(7) Decisions of the 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 and counter ailing duties under Section
301 and 302, respectively, of the Tariff and Customs Code, and safeguard measures under
Republic Act No. 8800, where either party may appeal the decision to impose or not to
impose said duties.

c. Jurisdiction over tax collection cases as herein provided:

1. Exclusive original jurisdiction in 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 One million pesos (P1,000,000.00) shall be tried by the proper Municipal Trial
Court, Metropolitan Trial Court and Regional Trial Court.
 2. Exclusive appellate jurisdiction in tax collection cases:

a. Over appeals from the judgments, resolutions or orders of the Regional

Trial Courts in tax collection cases originally decided by them, in their
respective territorial jurisdiction.

b. Over petitions for review of the judgments, resolutions or orders of the

Regional Trial Courts in the Exercise of their appellate jurisdiction over tax
collection cases originally decided by the Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal
Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts, in their respective
jurisdiction."

Jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Court

Sec. 19. Jurisdiction in civil cases. — Regional Trial Courts shall exercise exclusive original
jurisdiction.
(1) In all civil actions in which the subject of the litigation is incapable of pecuniary
estimation;

(2) In all civil actions which involve the title to, or possession of, real property, or any
interest therein, where the assessed value of the property involved exceeds Four
hundred thousand pesos (₱400,000.00) except actions for forcible entry into and
unlawful detainer of lands or buildings, original jurisdiction over which is conferred
upon the Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit
Trial Courts;

(3) In all actions in admiralty and maritime jurisdiction where the demand or claim
exceeds Two million pesos (₱2,000,000.00);

(4) In all matters of probate, both testate and intestate, where the gross value of the
estate exceeds Two million pesos (₱2,000,000.00);

(5) In all actions involving the contract of marriage and marital relations;

(6) In all cases not within the exclusive jurisdiction of any court, tribunal, person or
body exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions;

(7) In all civil actions and special proceedings falling within the exclusive original
jurisdiction of a Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court and of the Court of Agrarian
Relations as now provided by law; and

(8) In all other cases in which the demand, exclusive of interest, damages of
whatever kind, attorney's fees, litigation expenses, and costs or the value of the
property in controversy exceeds Two million pesos (₱2,000,000.00)."
SECTION 21. Original Jurisdiction in Other Cases. — Regional Trial Courts shall exercise
original jurisdiction:

(1) In the issuance of writs of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto,

habeas corpus and injunction which may be enforced in any part of their respective
regions; and

(2) In actions affecting ambassadors and other public ministers and consuls.

SECTION 22. Appellate Jurisdiction. — Regional Trial Courts shall exercise appellate
jurisdiction over all cases decided by Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts, and
Municipal Circuit Trial Courts in their respective territorial jurisdictions. Such cases shall be
decided on the basis of the entire record of the proceedings had in the court of origin and
such memoranda and/or briefs as may be submitted by the parties or required by the
Regional Trial Courts. The decision of the Regional Trial Courts in such cases shall be
appealable by petition for review to the Intermediate Appellate Court which may give it due
course only when the petition shows prima facie that the lower court has committed an
error of fact or law that will warrant a reversal or modification of the decision or judgment
sought to be reviewed.
SECTION 23. Special Jurisdiction to Try Special Cases. — The Supreme Court may designate
certain branches of the Regional Trial Courts to handle exclusively criminal cases, juvenile
and domestic relations cases, agrarian cases, urban land reform cases which do not fall
under the jurisdiction of quasi-judicial bodies and agencies, and/or such other special cases
as the Supreme Court may determine in the interest of a speedy and efficient administration
of justice.

Supreme Court Administrative Circular No. 09-04

TO : The Court of Appeals, Sandiganbayan, Regional Trial Courts, Metropolitan Trial Courts,
Municipal Trial Courts, Municipal Circuit Trial Courts, All Members of the Government
Prosecution Service and All Members of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines

SUBJECT : Guidelines in the Implementation of Republic Act No. 7691, Entitled "An Act
Expanding the Jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts and
Municipal Circuit Trial Courts, Amending for the Purpose Batas Pambansa Blg. 129,
otherwise known as the 'Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980'"

For the guidance of the Bench and the Bar, the following guidelines are to be followed in
the implementation of Republic Act No. 7691, entitled "An Act Expanding the Jurisdiction of
the Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts,
Amending for the Purpose Batas Pambansa Blg. 129, Otherwise Known as the 'Judiciary
Reorganization Act of 1980'":

1. The new jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Courts, Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal
Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts in civil and original cases, and in cadastral and
land registration cases, under Sections 19, 32, 33, and 34 of B.P. Blg. 129, as amended by
R.A. No. 7691, was effective on April 15, 1994, fifteen (15) days after publication in the
Malaya and in the Times Journal on March 30, 1994 pursuant to Section 8 of R.A. No. 7691.

2. The exclusion of the term "damages of whatever kind" in determining the jurisdictional
amount under Section 19 (8) and Section 33 (1) of B. P. Blg. 129, as amended by R.A. No.
7691, 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 causes of action, the amount of such claim shall be considered in
determining the jurisdiction of the court.

Admiralty & Maritime

Incapable of Pecuniary Estimation

The basic issue in an action incapable of pecuniary estimation is one other than the recovery
of money. In this kind of action, the money claim is merely incidental. If the action is one
primarily for the recovery of money, the claim is considered capable of pecuniary
estimation.

In determining whether an action is one the subject matter of which is not capable of
pecuniary estimation, the criterion of first ascertaining the nature of the principal action or
remedy sought is adopted. If the action is primarily for the recovery of a sum of money, the
claim is considered capable of pecuniary estimation. 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 action is incapable of
pecuniary estimation.

Some examples of actions incapable of pecuniary estimation are:

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.

Definition of Mode
Mode - the process of acquiring or transferring ownership.

Definition of Title
Title - that which is not ordinarily sufficient to convey ownership, but which gives a juridical
justification for the mode.
Distinction between Mode and Title

Definition of Possession
It is the holding or control of a thing; or the exercise of a right. (Art. 523, Civil Code)

Recovery of Ownership of Land

The jurisdiction of the court over an action involving title to or possession of land is now
determined by the assessed value of the said property and not the market value thereof.
The assessed value of real property is the fair market value of the real property multiplied
by the assessment level. It is synonymous to taxable value. The fair market value is the price
at which a property may be sold by a seller, who is not compelled to sell, and bought by a
buyer, who is not compelled to buy. (Hilario vs. Salvador, 457 SCRA 815)

Thus, under the old law, there was no substantial effect on jurisdiction whether a case is
one, the subject matter of which was incapable of pecuniary estimation, under Section 19(1)
of B.P. 129, or one involving title to property under Section 19(2). The distinction between
the two classes became crucial with the amendment introduced by R.A. No. 7691 in 1994,
which expanded the exclusive original jurisdiction of the first level courts to include “all civil
actions which involve title to, or possession of, real property, or any interest therein where
the assessed value of the property or interest therein does not exceed Two million pesos
(₱2,000,000.00) exclusive of interest, damages of whatever kind, attorney’s fees, litigation
expenses and costs.” Thus, under the present law, original jurisdiction over cases the subject
matter of which involves “title to, possession of, real property or any interest therein” under
Section 19(2) of B.P. 129 is divided between the first and second level courts, with the
assessed value of the real property involved as the benchmark. This amendment was
introduced to “unclog the overloaded dockets of the RTCs which would result in the
speedier administration of justice. (San Pedro vs. Asdala, 593 SCRA 397.)

Damages
In cases where the claim for damages is the main cause of action, or one of the causes of
action, the amount of such claim shall be considered in determining the jurisdiction of the
court. However, excluded from the computation, for purposes of jurisdiction, is the claim for
attorney's fees and costs.
Jurisdiction Formerly with the SEC
The Regional Trial Court shall have original and exclusive jurisdiction to hear and decide
cases involving:
a) Devices or schemes employed by or any acts, of the board of directors, business
associates, its officers or partners, amounting to fraud and misrepresentation which may be
detrimental to the interest of the public and/or of the stockholder, partners, members of
associations or organizations registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission;

b) Controversies arising out of intra-corporate or partnership relations, between and among

stockholders, members, or associates; between any or all of them and the corporation,
partnership or association of which they are stockholders, members or associates,
respectively; and between such corporation, partnership or association and the state insofar
as it concerns their individual franchise or right to exist as such entity;

c) Controversies in the election or appointments of directors, trustees, officers or managers

of such corporations, partnerships or associations.

d) Petitions of corporations, partnerships or associations to be declared in the state of

suspension of payments in cases where the corporation, partnership or association
possesses sufficient property to cover all its debts but foresees the impossibility of meeting
them when they respectively fall due or in cases where the corporation, partnership or
association has no sufficient assets to cover its liabilities, but is under the management of a
Rehabilitation Receiver or Management Committee created pursuant to P.D. No. 902-A in
relation to § 5.2 of R.A. No. 8799.
In determining whether a dispute constitutes an intra-corporate controversy, the Court uses
2 tests, namely, the ____________ test and the ________________ test.

An intra-corporate controversy is one which pertains to any of the following relationships:

(1) ____________________; (2) ______________________; (3)
____________________________________; and (4) ____________________________.
Thus, under the ___________ test, the existence of any of the above intra-corporate
relations makes the case intra-corporate.

Under the ________________ test, “the controversy must not only be rooted in the
existence of an intra-corporate relationship, but must as well pertain to the enforcement of
the parties’ correlative rights and obligations under the Corporation Code and the internal
and intra-corporate regulatory rules of the corporation. In other words, jurisdiction should
be determined by considering both the relationship of the parties as well as the nature of
the question involved. (Medical Plaza Makati vs. Cullen, 709 SCRA 110.)

Intellectual Property Infringement

R.A. No. 8293 and R.A. No. 166 are special laws conferring jurisdiction over violations of
intellectual property rights to the Regional Trial Court. They should therefore prevail over
R.A. No. 7691, which is a general law.

Jurisdiction of the Family Courts

§ 5 of R.A. No. 8369
SECTION 5. Jurisdiction of Family Courts. — The Family Courts shall have exclusive original
jurisdiction to hear and decide the following cases:

a) Criminal cases where one or more of the accused is below eighteen (18) years of age but
not less than nine (9) years of age but not less than nine (9) years of age or where one or
more of the victims is a minor at the time of the commission of the offense: Provided, That if
the minor is found guilty, the court shall promulgate sentence and ascertain any civil liability
which the accused may have incurred.

The sentence, however, shall be suspended without need of application pursuant to

Presidential Decree No. 603, otherwise known as the “Child and Youth Welfare Code”;

b) Petitions for guardianship, custody of children, habeas corpus in relation to the latter;

c) Petitions for adoption of children and the revocation thereof;

d) Complaints for annulment of marriage, declaration of nullity of marriage and those

relating to marital 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 Executive Order No. 209,
otherwise known as the "Family Code of the Philippines";

g) Petitions for declaration of status of children as abandoned, dependent or neglected

children, petitions for voluntary or involuntary commitment of children; the suspension,
termination, or restoration of parental authority and other cases cognizable under
Presidential Decree No. 603, Executive Order No. 56, (Series of 1986), and other related
laws;

h) Petitions for the constitution of the family home;

i) Cases against minors cognizable under the Dangerous Drugs Act, as amended;

j) Violations of Republic Act No. 7610, otherwise known as the “Special Protection of
Children Against Child Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act,” as amended by Republic
Act No. 7658; and

k) Cases of domestic violence against:

1) Women – which are acts of gender based violence that results, or are likely to
result in physical, sexual or psychological harm or suffering to women; and other
forms of physical abuse such as battering or threats and coercion which violate a
woman’s personhood, integrity and freedom movement; and
 2) Children – which include the commission of all forms of abuse, neglect, cruelty,
exploitation, violence, and discrimination and all other conditions prejudicial to their
development.

If an act constitutes a criminal offense, the accused or batterer shall be subject to criminal
proceedings and the corresponding penalties.

If any question involving any of the above matters should arise as an incident in any case
pending in the regular courts, said incident shall be determined in that court.

Jurisdiction of Labor Arbiters vs. Regular Courts

ARTICLE 217. Jurisdiction of Labor Arbiters and the Commission.

(a) Except as otherwise provided under this Code, the Labor Arbiters shall have original and
exclusive jurisdiction to hear and decide, within thirty (30) calendar days after the
submission of the case by the parties for decision without extension, even in the absence of
stenographic notes, the following cases involving all workers, whether agricultural or non-
agricultural:

(1) Unfair labor practice cases;

(2) Termination disputes;

(3) If accompanied with a claim for reinstatement, those cases that workers may file
involving wages, rates of pay, hours of work and other terms and conditions of
employment;

(4) Claims for actual, moral, exemplary and other forms of damages arising from the
employer-employee relations;

(5) Cases arising from any violation of Article 264 of this Code, including questions
involving the legality of strikes and lockouts; and

(6) Except claims for employees compensation, social security, medicare and
maternity benefits, all other claims arising from employer-employee relations,
including those of persons in domestic or household service, involving an amount
exceeding Five thousand pesos (P5,000.00), whether or not accompanied with a
claim for reinstatement.

(b) The Commission shall have exclusive appellate jurisdiction over all cases decided by
Labor Arbiters.

(c) Cases arising from the interpretation or implementation of collective bargaining

agreements and those arising from the interpretation or enforcement of company
personnel policies shall be disposed by the Labor Arbiter by referring the same to the
grievance machinery and voluntary arbitration as may be provided in said agreements."