BARANGAY CONCILIATION

Republic Act No. 7160 (RA 7160), or the Local Government Code of 1991, provides that
barangay conciliation proceedings is a pre-condition to filing a complaint in court between persons
actually residing in the same barangay to explore possible amicable settlement. The relevant
provisions of RA 7160 in the conduct of barangay conciliation are as follows:

Section 409. Venue.– (a) Disputes between persons actually residing in the same barangay
shall be brought for amicable settlement before the Lupon of said barangay.

(b) Those involving actual residents of different barangays within the same city or
municipality shall be brought in the barangay where the respondent or any of the respondents
actually resides, at the election of the complainant.

(c) All disputes involving real property or any interest therein shall be brought in the
barangay where the real property or the larger portion thereof is situated.

(d) Those arising at the workplace where the contending parties are employed or at the
institution where such parties are enrolled for study, shall be brought in the barangay where such
workplace or institution is located.

Objections to venue shall be raised in the mediation proceedings before the punong
barangay; otherwise, the same shall be deemed waived. Any legal question which may confront the
punong barangay in resolving objections to venue herein referred to may be submitted to the
Secretary of Justice or his duly designated representative, whose ruling thereon shall be binding.
[Emphasis Ours]

Section 412. Conciliation. — (a) Pre-condition to Filing of Complaint in Court. — No

complaint, petition, action, or proceeding involving any matter within the authority of the lupon shall
be filed or instituted directly in court or any other government office for adjudication, unless there
has been a confrontation between the parties before the lupon chairman or the pangkat, and that no
conciliation or settlement has been reached as certified by the lupon secretary or pangkat secretary
as attested to by the lupon or pangkat chairman or unless the settlement has been repudiated by the
parties thereto. [Emphasis Ours]

Administrative Circular No. 14-9330 enumerated the cases which are not covered by the
mandatory barangay conciliation, to wit:

1. Where one party is the government, or any subdivision or instrumentality thereof;

2. Where one party is a public officer or employee, and the dispute relates to the
performance of his official functions;

3. Where the dispute involves real properties located in different cities and municipalities,
unless the parties thereto agree to submit their difference to amicable settlement by an appropriate
Lupon;

4. Any complaint by or against corporations, partnership or juridical entities, since only

individuals shall be parties to Barangay conciliation proceedings either as complainants or
respondents (Sec. 1 , Rule VI, Katarungang Pambarangay Rules);

5. Disputes involving parties who actually reside in barangays of different cities or

municipalities, except where such barangay units adjoin each other and the parties thereto agree to
submit their differences to amicable settlement by an appropriate Lupon;

6. Offenses for which the law prescribes a maximum penalty of imprisonment exceeding one
(1) year or a fine over five thousand pesos (P5,000.00);

7. Offenses where there is no private offended party;

8. Disputes where urgent legal action is necessary to prevent injustice from being committed
or further continued, specifically the following:

a. Criminal cases where accused is under police custody or detention (see Sec. 412 (b) (1),
Revised Katarungang Pambarangay Law);
 b. Petitions for habeas corpus by a person illegally deprived of his rightful custody over
another or a person illegally deprived or on acting in his behalf;

c. Actions coupled with provisional remedies such as preliminary injunction, attachment,

delivery of personal property and support during the pendency of the action; and

d. Actions which may be barred by the Statute of Limitations.

9. Any class of disputes which the President may determine in the interest of justice or upon
the recommendation of the Secretary of Justice;

10. Where the dispute arises from the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL) (Sec. 46
& 47, R.A. 6657);

11. Labor disputes or controversies arising from employer-employee relations (Montoya vs.
Escayo, et al., 171 SCRA 442; Art. 226, Labor Code, as amended, which grants original and exclusive
jurisdiction over conciliation and mediation of disputes, grievances or problems to certain offices of
the Department of Labor and Employment);

12. Actions to annul judgment upon a compromise which may be filed directly in court (See
Sanchez vs. Tupaz, 158 SCRA 459).
 [ REPUBLIC ACT NO. 11576, July 30, 2021 ]
AN ACT FURTHER EXPANDING THE JURISDICTION OF THE METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURTS,
MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS IN CITIES, 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,” AS AMENDED

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress assembled:

Section 1. Section 19 of Batas Pambansa Blg. 129, otherwise known as “The Judiciary Reorganization
Act of 1980,” as amended, is hereby amended to read as follows:

“Section 19. Jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Courts in Civil Cases. – Regional Trial Courts
shall exercise exclusive original jurisdiction:

“x x x

“(2) In all civil actions which involve the title to, or possession of, real property, or any
interest therein, where the assessed value exceeds Four hundred thousand pesos
(P400,000.00), except for forcible entry into and unlawful detainer of lands or buildings,
original jurisdiction over which is conferred upon the Metropolitan Trial Courts, and
Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, Municipal Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts;

“(3) In all actions in admiralty and maritime jurisdiction where the demand or claims exceeds
Two million pesos (P2,000,000.00);

“(4) In all matters of probate, both estate and intestate, where the gross value of the estate
exceeds Two million pesos (P2,000,000.00)’

“x x x

“(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 (P2,000,000.00).”

Section 2. Section 33 of the same law is hereby amended to read as follows:

“Section 33. Jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts in Cities,
Municipal Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts in Civil Cases. – Metropolitan Trial
Courts, Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, Municipal Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial
Courts shall exercise:

“(1) Exclusive original jurisdiction over civil actions and probate proceedings, testate and
intestate, including the grant of provisional remedies in proper cases, where the value of the
personal property, estate, or amount of the demand does not exceed Two million pesos
(P2,000,000.00), exclusive of interest, damages of whatever kind, attorney’s fees, litigation
expenses, and costs, the amount of which must be specifically alleged: Provided, That interest,
damages of whatever kind, attorney’s fees, litigation expenses, and costs shall be included in the
determination of the filing fees: Provided, further, That where there are several claims or causes
of actions between the same or different parties, embodied in the same complaint, the amount of
the demand shall be totality of the claims in all the causes of action, irrespective of whether the
causes of action arose out of the same or different transactions;

“x x x

“(3) Exclusive original jurisdiction in all civil actions which involve title to, or possession of,
real property, or any interest therein where the assessed value of the property or any interest
therein does not exceed Four hundred thousand pesos (P400,000.00) exclusive on interest,
damages of whatever kind, attorney’s fees, litigation expenses and costs: Provided, That in
cases of land not declared for taxation purposes, the value of such property shall be determined
by the assessed value of the adjacent lots.
“(4) Exclusive original jurisdiction in admiralty and maritime actions where the demand or
claim does not exceed Two million pesos (P2,000,000.00).”

Section 3. Delegated Authority of the Supreme Court to Adjust the Jurisdictional Amounts for First
and Second Level Courts. – The Supreme Court, unless otherwise provided by law, without prejudice,
however, on the part of the Congress to adjust the amounts when the circumstances so warrant, may
be adjust the jurisdictional amount for first and second level courts to: (1) reflect the extraordinary
supervening inflation or deflation of currency; (2) reflect change in the land valuation; (3) maintain
the proportion of caseload between first and second level courts.

Section 4. The provisions of this Act shall apply prospectively to all civil cases filed in the second level
courts and first level courts from the date of its effectivity thereof.

Section 5. Separability Clause. – If any provision of this Act is declared unconstitutional, the same
shall not affect the validity and effectivity of the other provisions thereof.

Section 6. Repealing Clause. – All laws, decrees, and orders inconsistent with the provisions of this
Act shall be considered amended or modified accordingly.

Section 7. Effectivity. – This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days following its publication in the
Official Gazette or in two (2) newspapers of general circulation.

Approved,

(SGD.) LORD ALLAN JAY Q. VELASCO

Speaker of the House of Representatives (SGD.) VICENTE C. SOTTO III
Senate President

This Act was passed by the Senate of the Philippines as Senate Bill No. 1886 on February 8, 2021, and
adopted by the House of Representatives as an amendment to House Bill No. 6589 on May 19, 2021.

(SGD.) MARK LLANDRO L. MENDOZA

Secretary General
House of Representatives ( SGD.) MYRA MARIE D. VILLARICA
Secretary of Senate
Approved: JUL 30 2021

(SGD.) RODRIGO ROA DUTERTE

President of the Philippine
A.M. NO. 08-08-7-SC
RULE ON EXPEDITED
PROCEDURES IN THE
FIRST LEVEL COURTS