lOMoARcPSD|21535835

Jurisdiction - Ateneo Reviewer

Law (Ateneo de Manila University)

Studocu is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university

Downloaded by Limberd Guese (limberdguese13@gmail.com)
 lOMoARcPSD|21535835

The following modes of acquisition of jurisdiction apply

II. JURISDICTION to BOTH ordinary and special civil actions like
mandamus or unlawful detainer cases:

A. JURISDICTION OVER THE PARTIES 1. HOW JURISDICTION OVER THE

1. How jurisdiction over the plaintiff is PLAINTIFF IS ACQUIRED:
acquired
2. How jurisdiction over the defendant is Jurisdiction over the plaintiff is acquired by his filing of
acquired the complaint or petition, even through his counsel.
B. JURISDICTION OVER THE
SUBJECT MATTER 2. HOW JURISDICTION OVER THE
1. Meaning of jurisdiction over the subject DEFENDANT IS ACQUIRED
matter
2. Jurisdiction versus the exercise of
jurisdiction Jurisdiction over the defendant is obtained either by a
3. Error of jurisdiction as distinguished valid service of summons upon him or by his voluntary
from error of judgment submission to the court’s authority. It is required only
4. How jurisdiction is conferred and in an action in personam.
determined
5. Doctrine of primary jurisdiction Submission to the court’s jurisdiction takes the form of
6. Doctrine of adherence of jurisdiction an appearance that seeks affirmative relief except
7. Objections to jurisdiction over the when the relief sought is for the purpose of objecting
subject matter to the jurisdiction of the court over the person of the
8. Effect of estoppel on objections to defendant.
jurisdiction
Lack of jurisdiction over the defendant may be raised
C. JURISDICTION OVER THE ISSUES as a ground for a motion to dismiss.
D. JURISDICTION OVER THE RES OR
PROPERTY IN LITIGATION If a motion has been filed and objection to the lack of
E. JURISDICTION OF COURTS jurisdiction, which ground was already available at the
1. Supreme Court time of filing, was not pleaded, it is DEEMED WAIVED
2. Court of Appeals pursuant to the omnibus motion rule. However when it
3. Court of Tax Appeals appears from the pleadings or the evidence on record
4. Sandiganbayan that the court has no jurisdiction over the subject
5. Regional Trial Courts matter, that there is another action pending between
6. Family Courts the same parties for the same cause, or that the action
7. Metropolitan Trial Courts/Municipal Trial is barred by a prior judgment or by stature of
Courts limitations, the COURT SHALL DISMISS THE CLAIM.
8. Shariah Courts
If no motion to dismiss has been filed at all, the
F. JURISDICTION OVER SMALL objection of lack of jurisdiction over the person may be
CLAIMS, CASES COVERED BY THE pleaded as an affirmative defense in the defendant’s
RULES ON SUMMARY PROCEDURE answer.
AND BARANGAY CONCILIATION
G. TOTALITY RULE B. JURISDICTION OVER THE
SUBJECT MATTER
JURISDICTION
The power and authority of the court to hear, try and
The item with respect to which the controversy has
decide a case. It is also the power to enforce its
arisen, or concerning which the wrong has been done,
determination as it is only through the judgment and
and it is ordinarily the right, the thing, or the contract
its execution that the power of the court is made
under dispute.
efficacious and its jurisdiction complete.

It is not the power of the judge but of the court. 1. MEANING OF JURISDICTION OVER
THE SUBJECT MATTER:
A. JURISDICTION OVER THE
It is the power to deal with the general subject involved
PARTIES in the action. It refers to jurisdiction of the class of
cases to which the particular case belongs.
The manner by which the court acquires jurisdiction
over the parties depends on whether the party is the
plaintiff or the defendant and is a matter of 2. JURISDICTION vs. EXERCISE OF
procedural law JURISDICTION

JURISDICTION is the power or authority of the court

Downloaded by Limberd Guese (limberdguese13@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|21535835

3. An erroneous belief by the court that it has

EXERCISE OF JURISDICTION refers to the exercise jurisdiction; and
of this power or authority. 4. The parties by agreement, silence, acquiescence
or consent.
Jurisdiction is the authority to decide a case and not
the decision rendered therein. (Republic of the How Jurisdiction is Determined
Philippines v. Asset Privatization Trust, G.R. No. Jurisdiction over the subject matter is determined by
141241, 2005) the allegations of the complaint. It is not determined
either by the defenses of by the pieces of evidence
Where there is jurisdiction over the subject matter, the presented in the trial.
decision on all other questions arising in the case is
but an exercise of jurisdiction. (Republic of the Jurisdiction is based on the allegations in the initiatory
Philippines v. Asset Privatization Trust, G.R. No. pleading and the defenses in the answer are deemed
141241, 2005) irrelevant and immaterial in its determination. De la
Cruz v. Court of Appeals, [G.R. No. 139442,
3. ERROR OF JURISDICTION AS December 6, 2006]
DISTINGUISHED FROM ERROR OF
Thus, if by the averments of the complaint, the court
JUDGMENT has jurisdiction, it does not lose that jurisdiction just
because the defendant makes a contrary allegation in
ERROR OF JUDGMENT his motion or answer or because the court believes
One which the court may commit in the exercise of its that the plaintiff’s claims are ridiculous and therefore,
jurisdiction. untrue. [Tomas Claudio Memorial College, Inc., v.
Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 124262, 1999]
As long as the court acts within its jurisdiction, any
alleged errors committed in the exercise of its
discretion will amount to nothing more than mere 5. DOCTRINE OF PRIMARY
errors of judgment which are correctible by appeal. JURISDICTION
(Cabrera v. Lapid, G.R. No. 129098, 2006); these
errors include errors of procedure or mistakes in the Under this doctrine, courts will not resolve a
court’s findings. (Banco Filipino Savings and Mortgage controversy involving a question which is within the
Bank v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 132703, 2000) jurisdiction of an administrative tribunal, especially
where the question demands the exercise of sound
ERROR OF JURISDICTION administrative discretion requiring the special
On the other hand, an error of jurisdiction is one where knowledge, experience and services of the
the act complained of was issued by the court without administrative tribunal to determine technical and
or in excess of jurisdiction. (Cabrera v. Lapid, G.R. No. intricate matters of fact. (Paloma v. Mora, G.R. No.
129098, 2006) 157783, 2005)

It may happen either when a court exercises a The doctrine of primary jurisdiction precludes the
jurisdiction not conferred upon it by law or when the courts from resolving a controversy over which
court, although with jurisdiction, acts in excess of its jurisdiction has initially been lodged in an
jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion administrative body of special competence.
amounting to lack of jurisdiction. (GSIS v. Olisa, G.R. (See also Sta. Ana v. Carpo, GR No. 164340, 2008)
No. 126874, 1999)
The practice is to refer specialized disputes to
Errors of jurisdiction are correctible only by the administrative agencies of specialized competence
extraordinary writ of certiorari. (Tolentino v. Leviste, and the courts will not determine a controversy prior to
G.R. No. 156118, 2004) the resolution of the question by the administrative
tribunal. (Fabia v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 132684,
4. HOW JURISDICTION IS CONFERRED 2002)
AND DETERMINED
6. DOCTRINE OF ADHERENCE OF
How Jurisdiction is conferred JURISDICTION (CONTINUITY OF
Jurisdiction over the subject matter is conferred by law JURISDICTION)
which may either be the Constitution or a statute.
Once jurisdiction has attached, it cannot be ousted by
The law that confers such jurisdiction refers to a subsequent happenings or events, although of a
substantive law, not a procedural law. character which would have prevented jurisdiction
from attaching in the first instance; the court, once
Such Jurisdiction CANNOT be conferred by the jurisdiction has been acquired, retains that jurisdiction
Following: until it finally disposes of the case. (Baritua v.
1. Administrative policy of any court; Mercader, G.R. No. 136048, 2001)
2. A court’s unilateral assumption of jurisdiction;

Downloaded by Limberd Guese (limberdguese13@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|21535835

7. OBJECTIONS TO JURISDICTION Courts are not only courts of law but also of equity.
OVER SUBJECT MATTER Thus, where the respondent did not vigorously
question the jurisdiction of the court and instead
actively participated for ten years, a motion to dismiss
The earliest opportunity of a party to raise the issue of based on lack of jurisdiction would render the effort,
jurisdiction is in a motion to dismiss filed before the time and expenses of the parties for naught. (Bernardo
filing or service of an answer. Failure to raise such v. Heirs of Villegas, G.R. No. 183357, 2010)
objection shall NOT be deemed as a waiver.

Unlike lack of jurisdiction over the person, failure to C. JURISDICTION OVER THE
include the defense of lack of jurisdiction over the ISSUES
subject matter in a motion to dismiss, when such
ground was already available at the time of filing, does The power of the court to try and decide the issues
NOT bar the defendant to subsequently raise it as an raised in the pleadings of the parties.
affirmative defense.
If no motion to dismiss has been filed, such defense An ISSUE is a disputed point or question to which
may be raised as an affirmative defense in the answer. parties to an action have narrowed down their several
allegations and upon which they are desirous of
Thus, the prevailing rule is that jurisdiction over the obtaining a decision.
subject matter may be raised at ANY stage of the
proceedings, even for the first time on appeal. With respect to an issue raised by the pleadings, an
(Calimlim v. Ramirez, G.R. No. L-34362, 1982) issue arises because the material allegations of a
claiming party are specifically denied by the defending
Furthermore, courts may take cognizance of the issue party.
even if not raised by the parties themselves. (Asia
International Auctioneers, Inc. v. Parayno, G.R. No. How conferred and determined:
163445, 2007) General Rule: It is conferred and determined by the
pleadings of the parties that present the issues to be
When the court dismisses the complaint based on tried and determine whether or not the issues are of
such ground, its only authority is to dismiss the fact or of law. Whether or not a court has jurisdiction
complaint and not to refer or forward the case to over a specific issue is a question that requires nothing
another court with the proper jurisdiction. but an examination of the pleadings.

8. EFFECTS OF ESTOPPEL ON Exceptions:

OBJECTIONS TO JURISDICTION It may be conferred:
1. By stipulation of the parties - as when in the pre-
trial, the parties enter into stipulations of facts and
While it is true that jurisdiction over the subject matter documents or enter into an agreement simplifying
may be raised at any stage of the proceedings, it is the issues of the case.
nevertheless settled that a party may be barred from 2. By waiver or failure to object to the
raising it on the ground of estoppel. presentation of evidence on a matter not raised
in the pleadings; the parties try with the other
The doctrine of estoppel by laches in relation to party’s express or implied consent issues not
objections to jurisdiction first appeared in the landmark raised by the pleadings; such issues shall be
case of (Tijam v. Sibonghanoy, G.R. No. L-21450, treated in all respects as if they had been raised in
1968) the pleadings.
The fact pattern common among cases wherein the
Court invoked estoppel to prevent a party from D. JURISDICTION OVER THE RES
questioning jurisdiction is a party’s active participation OR PROPERTY IN LITIGATION
in all stages of a case which is tantamount to
recognition of court’s jurisdiction.
Jurisdiction over the res or property in litigation is
acquired either by seizure of the property under legal
The general rule as it has always been, is that the
process or as a result of the institution of legal
issue of jurisdiction may be raised at any stage of the
proceedings, in which the power of the court is
proceedings, even on appeal, and is not lost by waiver
recognized and made effective.
or by estoppel. Estoppel by laches, to bar a litigant
from asserting the court’s absence or lack of
In civil actions, particularly actions in rem or quasi in
jurisdiction, only supervenes in exceptional cases
rem, jurisdiction over the res and the subject matter is
similar to the factual milieu of Tijam v. Sibonghanoy.
sufficient to vest jurisdiction in the court even in the
The fact that a person attempts to invoke unauthorized
absence of jurisdiction over the person of the
jurisdiction of a court does not estop him from
defendant.
thereafter challenging its jurisdiction over the subject
matter, since such jurisdiction must arise by law and
not by mere consent of the parties.
(Figueroa v. People, GR No. 147406, 2008)

Downloaded by Limberd Guese (limberdguese13@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|21535835

E. JURISDICTION OF COURTS
NOTE: The Jurisdiction tables below are taken from Feria†, Justice Jose Y. and Atty. Maria Concepcion S.
Noche. Civil Procedure Annotated. Vol. 1. 2013 Ed. Quezon City: Central Book Supply, Inc., 2013. 665-700.

1. SUPREME COURT (Feria and Noche, pp.665-668)

SUPREME COURT

I. ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

A. Original and Exclusive

Petitions for the issuance of writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus against:
1. Court of Appeals.
2. Commission on Elections.
3. Commission on Audit.
4. Sandiganbayan.
5. Court of Tax Appeals.
B. Original and Concurrent

1. With the 1. Petitions for the issuance of writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus against:
CA a. NLRC. [However, the petitions should be filed with the CA; otherwise, they shall be
dismissed.]
b. CSC.
c. Quasi-Judicial Agencies. [However, the petitions should be filed with the CA.]
d. RTC and lower courts.
2. Petitions for the issuance of a writ of kalikasan.

2. With the 1. Petition for writ of amparo.

CA, SB and 2. Petition for writ of habeas data.
RTC

3. With the 1. Petitions for habeas corpus and quo warranto.

CA and 2. Petitions for the issuance of writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus against lower
RTC courts or bodies.
3. Petitions for the issuance of writ of continuing mandamus in environmental cases.

4. With the Actions affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls.
RTC

II. APPELLATE JURISDICTION

1. Appeal by From the RTC or the SB in all criminal cases in which the penalty imposed is reclusion
Notice of perpetua or higher, and those involving other offenses which, although not so punished,
Appeal arose out of the same occurrence or which may have been committed by the accused on the
same occasion, as that giving rise to the more serious offense, regardless of whether the
accused are charged principals, accomplices or accessories, or whether they have been tried
jointly or separately.

By appeal, the SC reviews the questions of law and of fact decided by the court a quo.

Downloaded by Limberd Guese (limberdguese13@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|21535835

2. Appeal by Appeals from the:

Petition for 1. Court of Appeals
Review on 2. Sandiganbayan - on pure questions of law, except in cases where the penalty
Certiorari imposed is reclusion perpetua, life imprisonment or death
3. Court of Tax Appeals.
4. Regional Trial Courts - exercising original jurisdiction in the following cases:
a. If no question of fact is involved and the cases involves:
(i) Constitutionality or validity of any treaty, international or executive
agreement, law, presidential decree, proclamation, order,
instruction, ordinance or regulation in question;
(ii) Legality of any tax, impost, assessment, or toll, or any penalty
imposed in relation thereto; or
(iii) Jurisdiction of lower courts is in issue.

(Note: If, in addition to constitutional, tax, or jurisdictional questions, the cases

mentioned in (i), (ii) and (iii) above also involve questions of fact or mixed questions
of fact and law, the aggrieved party shall appeal to the CA; and the final judgment
or decision of the latter may be reviewed, revised, reversed, modified or affirmed by
the SC on writ of certiorari)

b. All cases in which only errors of questions of law are involved.

3. Special Decision, order or ruling of:

Civil Action 1. Commission on Elections.
of 2. Commission on Audit.
Certiorari
within 30
days

2. COURT OF APPEALS (Feria and Noche, pp. 669-672)

COURT OF APPEALS

I. ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

A. Original and Exclusive

Actions for annulment of judgments of the RTC on the grounds of extrinsic fraud and lack of jurisdiction.

B. Original and Concurrent

1. With the SC 1. Petitions for the issuance of writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus against:
a. NLRC. [However, the petitions should be filed with the CA; otherwise, they shall
be dismissed.]
b. CSC.
c. Quasi-Judicial Agencies. [However, the petitions should be filed with the CA.]
d. RTC and lower courts.
2. Petitions for the issuance of a writ of kalikasan.

Downloaded by Limberd Guese (limberdguese13@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|21535835

2. With the SC, 1. Petition for writ of amparo.

SB, and RTC 2. Petition for writ of habeas data.

3. With the SC 1. Petitions for habeas corpus and quo warranto.

and RTC 2. Petitions for the issuance of writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus against
lower courts or bodies.
3. Petitions for the issuance of writ of continuing mandamus in environmental
cases.

II. APPELLATE JURISDICTION

Exclusive Appellate

1. Ordinary Appeal Appeals from:

by Notice of 1. RTC in the exercise of its original jurisdiction, except in all cases where only
Appeal or Record questions of law are raised or involved, which are appealable to the SC by
on Appeal petition for review on certiorari in accordance with Rule 45.
2. RTC on constitutional and jurisdictional questions which involve questions
of fact.
3. Family Courts.

Downloaded by Limberd Guese (limberdguese13@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|21535835

2. Appeal by Petition An appeal may be taken to the CA whether the appeal involves questions of fact,
for Review mixed questions of fact and law, or questions of law, in the following cases:

Regular
1. Appeals from RTC in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction.
Special
1. Appeals from CSC.
2. Appeals from Quasi-Judicial Agencies:
a. Securities and Exchange Commission
b. Office of the President
c. Land Registration Authority
d. Social Security Commission
e. Civil and Aeronautics Board
f. Intellectual Property Office
g. National Electrification Administration
h. Energy Regulatory Commission
i. National Telecommunications Commission
j. Department of Agrarian Reform under RA 6657
k. Government Service Insurance System
l. Employees’ Compensation Commission
m. Insurance Commission
n. Philippine Atomic Energy Commission
o. Board of Investments
p. Construction Industry Arbitration Commission
q. Voluntary Arbitrators authorized by law
r. Ombudsman, in administrative disciplinary cases
s. National Commission on Indigenous Peoples
From the judgments or final orders or resolutions of the CA, the aggrieved party may
appeal by certiorari to the SC as provided in Rule 45.

Judgments and final orders of the CTA en banc are now appealable to the SC through
a petition for review under Rule 45, pursuant to RA 9282.

3. SANDIGANBAYAN

SANDIGANBAYAN
(as amended by Section 4, R.A. 10660, promulgated April 16, 2015)

A. EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL

Downloaded by Limberd Guese (limberdguese13@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|21535835

1. Violations of Republic Act No. 3019, as amended, otherwise known as the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices
Act, Republic Act No. 1379, otherwise known as An Act Declaring Forfeiture in favor of the State any
Property Found to have been Unlawfully Acquired by any Public Officer or Employee and Providing for the
Proceedings therefor, and Chapter II, Section 2, Title VII, Book II of the Revised Penal Code, where one or
more of the accused are officials occupying the following positions in the government, whether in a
permanent, acting or interim capacity, at the time of the commission of the offense:
a. Officials of the executive branch occupying the positions of regional director and higher, otherwise
classified as Grade ’27’ and higher, of the Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989
(Republic Act No. 6758), specifically including:
i. Provincial governors, vice-governors, members of the sangguniang panlalawigan, and provincial
treasurers, assessors, engineers, and other provincial department heads:
ii. City mayors, vice-mayors, members of the sangguniang panlungsod, city treasurers, assessors,
engineers, and other city department heads;
iii. Officials of the diplomatic service occupying the position of consul and higher;
iv. Philippine army and air force colonels, naval captains, and all officers of higher rank;
v. Officers of the Philippine National Police while occupying the position of provincial director and
those holding the rank of senior superintendent and higher;
vi. City and provincial prosecutors and their assistants, and officials and prosecutors in the Office of
the Ombudsman and special prosecutor;
vii. Presidents, directors or trustees, or managers of government-owned or controlled corporations,
state universities or educational institutions or foundations.
b. Members of Congress and officials thereof classified as Grade ’27’ and higher under the
Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989;
c. Members of the judiciary without prejudice to the provisions of the Constitution;
d. Chairmen and members of the Constitutional Commissions, without prejudice to the provisions of the
Constitution; and
e. All other national and local officials classified as Grade ’27’ and higher under the Compensation and
Position Classification Act of 1989.

Note: In case private individuals are charged as co-principals, accomplices or accessories with the public
officers or employees, including those employed in government-owned or controlled corporations, they shall
be tried jointly with said public officers and employees in the proper courts which shall exercise exclusive
jurisdiction over them.

Note: In cases where none of the accused are occupying positions corresponding to Salary Grade ’27’ or
higher, as prescribed in the said Republic Act No. 6758, or military and PNP officers mentioned above,
exclusive original jurisdiction thereof shall be vested in the proper regional trial court, metropolitan trial court,
municipal trial court, and municipal circuit trial court, as the case may be, pursuant to their respective
jurisdictions as provided in Batas Pambansa Blg. 129, as amended.

2. Other offenses or felonies whether simple or complexed with other crimes committed by the public officials
and employees mentioned in subsection a. of this section in relation to their office.

3. Civil and criminal cases filed pursuant to and in connection with Executive Order Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A,
issued in 1986.

Note: Any provisions of law or Rules of Court to the contrary notwithstanding, the criminal action and the
corresponding civil action for the recovery of civil liability shall at all times be simultaneously instituted with, and
jointly determined in, the same proceeding by the Sandiganbayan or the appropriate courts, the filing of the
criminal action being deemed to necessarily carry with it the filing of the civil action, and no right to reserve the
filing of such civil action separately from the criminal action shall be recognized.

Note: Where the civil action had heretofore been filed separately but judgment therein has not yet been rendered,
and the criminal case is hereafter filed with the Sandiganbayan or the appropriate court, said civil action shall be
transferred to the Sandiganbayan or the appropriate court, as the case may be, for consolidation and joint
determination with the criminal action, otherwise the separate civil action shall be deemed abandoned.

4. Petitions for the issuance of the writs of mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, habeas corpus, injunctions, and
other ancillary writs and processes in aid of its appellate jurisdiction and over petitions of similar nature,
including quo warranto, arising or that may arise in cases filed or which may be filed under Executive Order
Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A, issued in 1986.
Note: That the jurisdiction over these petitions shall not be exclusive of the Supreme Court.

Downloaded by Limberd Guese (limberdguese13@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|21535835

B. EXCLUSIVE APPELLATE

The Sandiganbayan shall exercise exclusive appellate jurisdiction over final judgments, resolutions or orders of
Regional Trial Courts whether in the exercise of their own original jurisdiction or of their appellate jurisdiction as
provided in R.A. 10660.

Note: The procedure prescribed in Batas Pambansa Blg. 129, as well as the implementing rules that the
Supreme Court has promulgated and may hereafter promulgate, relative to appeals/petitions for review to the
Court of Appeals, shall apply to appeals and petitions for review filed with the Sandiganbayan. In all cases
elevated to the Sandiganbayan and from the Sandiganbayan to the Supreme Court, the Office of the
Ombudsman, through its special prosecutor, shall represent the People of the Philippines, except in cases filed
pursuant to Executive Order Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A, issued in 1986.

4. COURT OF TAX APPEALS (Feria and Noche, pp.676-680)

COURT OF TAX APPEALS

A. EXCLUSIVE APPELLATE JURISDICTION: By APPEAL

1. Decisions from 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 Code
(NIRC) or other laws administered by the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR).
2. Inaction by the COMMISSIONER 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 NIRC or other laws administered by
the BIR, where the NIRC provides a specific period of action, in which case the inaction shall be
deemed a denial.
3. Decisions, orders or resolutions of REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS
- in local tax cases originally decided or resolved by them in the exercise of their original and
appellate jurisdiction.
4. Decisions of the COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS
- in cases involving liability for custom 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/her 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
Decisions of the SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE
- in the case of agricultural product, commodity or article involving dumping and countervailing duties
under Sections 301 and 302, respectively, of the Tariff and Customs Code and safeguard
measures under the RA 8800, where either party may appeal the decision to impose or not to
impose said duties.

Downloaded by Limberd Guese (limberdguese13@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|21535835

B. CRIMINAL CASES

1. Exclusive Original Criminal cases arising from violations of the:

Jurisdiction 1. National Internal Revenue Code.
2. Tariff and Customs Code.
3. Other laws administered by the BIR or the Bureau of Customs.
Provided, however, that offenses or felonies mentioned in this paragraph where the
principal amount of taxes and fees, exclusive of charges and penalties, claimed in
less than P1M or where there is no specified amount claimed shall be tried by the
regular courts and the jurisdiction of the CTA shall be appellate.

Any provision of law or the Rules of Court to the contrary notwithstanding, the criminal
action and the corresponding civil action for the recovery of civil liability for taxes and
penalties shall be at all times be simultaneously instituted with, and jointly determined
in the same proceeding by the CTA, the filing of the criminal action being deemed to
necessarily carry with it the filing of the civil action, and no right to reserve the filing
of such civil action separately from the criminal action will be recognized.

2. Exclusive 1. Over appeals from the judgments, resolutions or orders of the RTC in tax cases
Appellate originally decided by them, in their respective territorial jurisdiction.
Jurisdiction 2. Over petitions for review of the judgments, resolutions or orders of the RTC in
the exercise of their appellate jurisdiction over tax cases originally decided the
MeTC, MTC and MCTC in their respective jurisdiction.

3. TAX COLLECTION CASES

1. Exclusive Original Cases involving final and executory assessment for taxes, fees, charges and
Jurisdiction penalties: Provided, however, that collection cases where the principal amount of
taxes and fees, exclusive of charges and penalties, claimed is less than P1M shall be
tried by the proper MTC, MeTC and RTC.

2. Exclusive In tax collection cases:

Appellate 1. Over appeals from the judgments, resolutions or orders of the RTC in tax
Jurisdiction collection cases originally decided by them, in their respective territorial
jurisdiction.
2. Over petitions for review of judgments, resolutions or orders of the RTC in
the exercise of their appellate jurisdiction over tax collection cases originally
decided the MeTC, MTC and MCTC in their respective jurisdiction.

5. REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS (Feria and Noche, pp. 680-684)

IMPORTANT:

REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS

I. ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

A. Original and Exclusive

10

Downloaded by Limberd Guese (limberdguese13@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|21535835

1. CIVIL Cases 1. Civil actions in which the subject of litigation is incapable of pecuniary estimation
3. 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 P20K,
or P50K if in Metro Manila, except actions forcible entry and unlawful detainer which
are cognizable by the MeTC, MTC, MCTC.
3. Actions in admiralty and maritime jurisdiction where the demand or claim exceeds
P300K, or P400K if in Metro Manila.
4. Matters of probate, both testate and intestate, where the gross value of the estate
exceeds P300K, or P400K if in Metro Manila.
5. Cases not within the exclusive jurisdiction of any court, tribunal, person or body
exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions.
6. Actions involving the contract of marriage and marital relations.
7. Civil actions and special proceedings falling within the exclusive original jurisdiction
of a Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court and of the Special Agrarian Courts as
now provided by law.
8. 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 P300K, or P400K if in Metro Manila.
IMPORTANT: If the claim for damages is the main cause of action, the amount
thereof shall be considered in determining the jurisdiction of the court.

2. CRIMINAL Criminal cases not within the exclusive jurisdiction of any court, tribunal or body, such as
Cases the following:
1. Penalty provided by law exceeds 6 years imprisonment, irrespective of fine.
2. Under (a) above not falling under the original jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan
where none of the principal accused are occupying positions corresponding to
salary grade “27” or higher, or military and PNP officers occupying the rank of
superintendent or higher, or their equivalent.
3. Only penalty provided by law is a fine exceeding P4K.
4. Violations of the:
a. Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002.
b. Anti-Violence against Women and their Children Act of 2004 (specifically,
those involving violence against women and children as defined under
Section 5).
c. Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law.
d. Omnibus Election Code.
N.B.: Family Courts have exclusive original jurisdiction over criminal cases where one or
more of the accused is below 18 years old, or when one or more of the victims is a minor
at the time of the commission of the offense.

11

Downloaded by Limberd Guese (limberdguese13@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|21535835

3. OTHER Cases 1. Actions for recognition and enforcement of an arbitration agreement or for vacation,
setting aside, correction or modification of an arbitral award, and any application
with a court for arbitration assistance and supervision.
2. Actions for determination of just compensation to land under the CARL.
3. R.A. 10660 (promulgated April 16, 2015):
The REGIONAL TRIAL COURT shall have exclusive original jurisdiction where the
information involving civil and criminal cases filed pursuant to and in connection with
Executive Order Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A (1986):
a. Does not allege any damage to the government or any bribery; or
b. Alleges damage to the government or bribery arising from the same or closely
related transactions or acts in an amount not exceeding One million pesos
(P1,000,000.00).

Note: Subject to the rules promulgated by the Supreme Court, the cases falling
under the jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Court under Section 4 of R.A. 10660 shall
be tried in a judicial region other than where the official holds office.

B. Original and Concurrent

1. With the SC Actions affecting ambassadors and other public ministers and consuls.

2. With the SC 1. Issuance of writs of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto, habeas
and CA corpus, and injunction which may be enforced in any part of their respective
regions.
2. Petition for the issuance of writ of continuing mandamus in environmental cases.

3. With the SC, 1. Petition for writ of amparo.

CA and SB 2. Petition for writ of habeas data.
4. With the Claims not exceeding P100K. This is applicable if subject of the action is incapable of
Insurance pecuniary estimation; otherwise, jurisdiction is concurrent with the MeTC.
Commissioner

II. APPELLATE JURISDICTION

Cases decided by the MeTC, MTC, MTCC and MCTC in their respective territorial Jurisdiction.

III. SPECIAL JURISDICTION

The SC may designate certain branches of the 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 quasi-judicial
bodies and agencies, and/or such other special cases as the SC may determine in the interest of a speedy and
efficient administration of justice.

6. FAMILY COURTS (Feria and Noche, pp. 690-692)

12

Downloaded by Limberd Guese (limberdguese13@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|21535835

FAMILY COURTS

ORIGINAL AND EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION

1. Criminal cases where one or more of the accused is 15≤x<18 years old, 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 the Child
and Youth Welfare Code (PD 603).
2. Petitions for guardianship, custody of children, habeas corpus in relation to the latter.
3. Petitions for adoption of children and revocation thereof.
4. 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 or gains
5. Petitions for support and/or acknowledgment.
6. Summary judicial proceedings brought under the provisions of the Family Code of the Philippines (E.O
No. 209).
7. 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 the Child and Youth Welfare Code (PD 603),
Authorizing the Ministry of Social Services and Development to Take Protective Custody of Child
Prostitutes and Sexually Exploited Children, and for Other Purposes (E.O. 56), and other related laws.
8. Petitions for constitution of the family home.
9. Cases against minors cognizable under the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2005.
10. Violations of Special Protection of Children against Child Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act
(RA 7610), as amended by RA 7658 and RA 9231.
11. Cases of domestic violence against:
a. 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 of movement; and
b. 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.

7. MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS – MeTC, MTC and MCTC (Feria and Noche, pp.685-689)

MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS

I. ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

2. Original and Exclusive

13

Downloaded by Limberd Guese (limberdguese13@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|21535835

1. CIVIL cases 1. 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 demand does NOT exceed P300K, or P400K if in Metro
Manila, exclusive of interest, damages of whatever kind, attorney’s fees, litigation
expenses, and costs, the amount of which must be specifically alleged. However,
interest, damages of whatever kind, attorney’s fees, litigation expenses, and
costs shall be included in the determination of the filing fees.
2. Admiralty and maritime cases where the demand or claim does NOT exceed
P300K, or P400K if in Metro Manila.
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
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.
3. Forcible entry and unlawful detainer, with jurisdiction to determine the issue of
ownership only to resolve the issue of possession.
4. 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 P20K, or P50K if in Metro Manila, exclusive of interest, damages of
whatever kind, attorney’s fees, litigation expenses, and costs. 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.
5. Inclusion and exclusion of voters.

2. CRIMINAL cases EXCEPT in cases falling within the exclusive original jurisdiction of the RTC or SB—
1. Violations of city or municipal ordinances committed within their respective
territorial jurisdiction.
2. Offenses punishable with imprisonment NOT exceeding 6 years irrespective of
the amount of fine, and regardless of other imposable accessory or other
penalties, including the civil liability arising from such offenses or predicated
thereon, irrespective of kind, nature, value or amount thereof.
3. Offenses under (2) above include those NOT falling within the exclusive original
jurisdiction of the SB where none of the accused is occupying positions
corresponding to salary grade “27” or higher.
4. Offenses involving damage to property through criminal negligence.
5. In cases where the only penalty provided by law is a fine of not more than P4K.

II. DELEGATED JURISDICTION

Cadastral or land registration cases covering lots where there is no controversy or opposition, or contested lots
where the value of which does NOT exceed P100K, such value to be ascertained by the affidavit of the claimant
or by agreement of the respective claimants if there are more than one, or from the corresponding tax declaration
of the real property.

III. SPECIAL JURISDICTION

14

Downloaded by Limberd Guese (limberdguese13@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|21535835

In the absence of all the RTC Judges in a province of city—

1. Hear and decide petitions for writ of habeas corpus.
2. Hear and decide applications for bail in criminal cases.

IV. SUMMARY PROCEDURE

1. CIVIL cases 1. Forcible entry and unlawful detainer, irrespective of the amount of damages or
unpaid rentals sought to be recovered.
2. All other cases, except probate proceedings, where the total amount of the
plaintiff's claim does not exceed one hundred thousand pesos (P100,000) or two
hundred thousand pesos (P200,000) in Metropolitan Manila, exclusive of interest
and costs. (A.M. No. 02-11-09-SC)

2. CRIMINAL cases 1. Traffic violations.

2. Rental law violations.
3. Violations of city or municipal ordinances.
4. Violations of B.P. 22 (Bouncing Checks Law).
5. All other cases where penalty does NOT exceed 6 months and/or fine of P1K.

8. THE COURTS OF MUSLIM MINDANAO

1. THE SHARI’AH APPELLATE COURT (Feria and Noche, p. 697)

THE SHARI’AH APPELLATE COURT

I. ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

Petitions for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, habeas corpus, and other auxiliary writs and processes only in
aid of its appellate jurisdiction

II. APPELLATE JURISDICTION

All cases tried in the Shari’ah District Courts as established by law

2. THE SHARI’AH DISTRICT COURT (Feria and Noche, pp. 698-699)

THE SHARI’AH DISTRICT COURT

I. ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

15

Downloaded by Limberd Guese (limberdguese13@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|21535835

1. Original and 1. All cases involving the custody, guardianship, legitimacy, paternity and filiation
Exclusive arising under the Code of Muslim Personal Laws of the Philippines (PD 1083).
2. All cases involving the disposition, distribution and settlement of the estate of
deceased Muslims, probate of wills, issuance of letters of administration or
appointment of administrators or executors, regardless of the nature or the
aggregate value of the property.
3. Petitions for the declaration of absence and death and for the cancellation or
correction of entries in the Muslim Registries mentioned in Title VI of Book 2 of
PD 1083.
4. All actions arising from customary contracts in which the parties are Muslims,
if they have not specified which law shall govern their relations.
5. All petitions for mandamus, prohibition, injunction, certiorari, habeas corpus,
and all other auxiliary writs and processes in aid of its appellate jurisdiction.

2. Original and 1. Petitions by Muslims for the constitution of a family home, change of name
Concurrent with and commitment of an insane person to an asylum.
Civil Courts 2. All other personal and real actions NOT mentioned in paragraph 1(4) above
wherein the parties involved are Muslims except those for forcible entry
and unlawful detainer, which shall fall under the exclusive original
jurisdiction of the MTC.
3. All special civil actions for interpleader or declaratory relief wherein the
parties are Muslims or the property involved belongs exclusively to Muslims.

II. APPELLATE JURISDICTION

Over all cases tried in the Shari’ah Circuit Courts within their territorial jurisdiction.

3. THE SHARI’AH CIRCUIT COURTS (Feria and Noche, pp. 699-700)

THE SHARI’AH CIRCUIT COURTS

ORIGINAL and EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION

1. All cases involving offenses denied and punished under the Code of Muslim Personal Laws of the
Philippines (PD 1083).
2. All civil actions and proceedings between parties who are Muslims or have been married in accordance
with Article 13 of PD 1083 involving disputes relating to:
a. Marriage;
b. Divorce under PD 1083;
c. Betrothal or breach of contract to marry;
d. Customary dower (marh);
e. Disposition and distribution of property upon divorce;
f. Maintenance and support, and consolatory gifts (mut’a); and
g. Restitution of marital rights.
3. All cases involving disputes relative to communal properties.

4. THE TRIBAL COURTS (Feria and Noche, p. 700)

16

Downloaded by Limberd Guese (limberdguese13@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|21535835

THE TRIBAL COURTS

1. Determine, settle and decide controversies and enforce decisions involving personal, family and property
rights in accordance with the tribal codes of the tribal communities.
2. Exercise exclusive jurisdiction over crimes committed by members of indigenous cultural communities
where the imposable penalty as prescribed by RPC or other pertinent laws does NOT exceed
imprisonment of 6 years or a fine NOT exceeding P50K or both such imprisonment and fine and where
the offended party or parties are also members of the indigenous cultural community concerned.

17

Downloaded by Limberd Guese (limberdguese13@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|21535835

F. JURISDICTION OVER SMALL CLAIMS, CASES COVERED BY THE RULES ON

SUMMARY PROCEDURE AND BARANGAY CONCILIATION
SMALL CLAIMS

Actions before the Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal
Circuit Trial Courts for payment of money where the value of the claim does not exceed One Hundred Thousand Pesos
(P100,000.00), exclusive of interest and costs.

Cases Covered:
1. Purely civil in nature where the claim or relief prayed for by the plaintiff is solely for payment or reimbursement of
sum of money; and
2. The civil aspect of criminal actions, either filed before the institution of the criminal action, or reserved upon the filing
of the criminal action in court. (Rule 111 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure)

Claims or Demands Covered:

1. For money owed under any of the following:
a) Contract of Lease;
b) Contract of Loan;
c) Contract of Services;
d) Contract of Sale; or
e) Contract of Mortgage.
2. For damages arising from any of the following:
a) Fault or negligence;
b) Quasi-contract; or
c) Contract.
3. The enforcement of a barangay amicable settlement or an arbitration award involving a money claim covered by
the Rule

KATARUNGANG PAMBARANGAY
(A.C. No. 14-93)

General Rule:
ALL disputes between individuals/natural persons are subject to Barangay conciliation pursuant to the Revised
Katarungang Pambarangay Law and prior recourse thereto is a pre-condition before filing a complaint in court or any
government offices is allowed.

There must have been confrontation between the parties before the lupon chairman or pangkat and a showing that
there was no settlement reached or that it was repudiated by the parties before a complaint, petition, action or
proceeding may be filed or instituted in court or in a government office for adjudication.

Exceptions:
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, partnerships 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 of over
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 [Sec. 412 (b) (1), Revised Katarungang
Pambarangay Law];

18

Downloaded by Limberd Guese (limberdguese13@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|21535835

b) Petitions for habeas corpus by a person illegally deprived of his rightful custody over another or a person illegally
deprived of 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;
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 (Secs. 46 & 47, R. A. 6657);
11. Labor disputes or controversies arising from employer-employee relations (Montoya v. Escayo, et al., G.R. No.
82211-12, 1989); (Art. 226, Labor Code)
12. Actions to annul judgment upon a compromise that may be filed directly in court (Sanchez v. Tupaz, G.R. No.
76690, 1988)

A case filed in court WITHOUT compliance with prior Barangay conciliation, which is a pre-condition for formal
adjudication, may be dismissed upon motion of defendant/s on the ground of failure to comply with a condition
precedent. The non-referral of a case for barangay conciliation is not jurisdictional in nature, thus it necessitates a
motion to dismiss before it may be considered by the Court.

A prior recourse to Barangay conciliation is a pre-condition before filing a complaint in court or any government
offices. Non-compliance with the said condition precedent could affect the sufficiency of the plaintiff’s cause of action
and make his complaint vulnerable to dismissal on ground of lack of cause of action or prematurity; but the same would
not prevent a court of competent jurisdiction from exercising its power of adjudication over the case before it, where
the defendants failed to object to such exercise of jurisdiction. (Sps. Santos v. Sps. Lumbao, G.R. No. 169129, 2007)

Interruption of Prescriptive Period:

While the dispute under mediation, conciliation, or arbitration, the prescriptive periods for offenses and cause of action
under existing laws shall be interrupted upon filing of the complaint with the Punong Barangay.

Agreement to Arbitrate:
The parties may, at any stage of the proceedings, agree in writing to have the matter in dispute decided by arbitration
by the Lupon Chairman or Pangkat.

RULE ON SUMMARY PROCEDURE

The rule shall govern the summary procedure in the Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, Municipal
Trial Courts, and the Municipal Circuit Trial Courts in cases falling within their jurisdiction.

Cases Covered:
1. Civil Cases
a) All cases of forcible entry and unlawful detainer, irrespective of the amount of damages or unpaid rentals sough
to be recovered. Where attorney’s fees are awarded, the same shall not exceed twenty thousand pesos
(P20,000)
b) All other cases, except probate proceedings, where the total amount of the plaintiff's claim does not exceed
one hundred thousand pesos (P100,000) or two hundred thousand pesos (P200,000) in Metropolitan Manila,
exclusive of interest and costs. (A.M. No. 02-11-09-SC)

2. Criminal Cases
a) Violations of traffic laws, rules and regulations;
b) Violations of the rental law;
c) Violations of municipal or city ordinances;
d) Violations of B.P. 22 (Bouncing Checks Law)
e) All other criminal cases where the penalty prescribed by law for the offense charged is imprisonment not
exceeding six (6) months, or a fine not exceeding (P1,000), or both, irrespective of other imposable penalties,
accessory or otherwise, or of the civil liability arising therefrom; Provided, however, that in offenses involving
damage to property through criminal negligence, this Rule shall govern where the imposable fine does not
exceed ten thousand pesos (P10,000).

Exception:

19

Downloaded by Limberd Guese (limberdguese13@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|21535835

The Rule on Summary Proceedings shall not apply to a civil case where the plaintiff’s cause of action is pleaded in the
same complaint with another cause of action subject to the ordinary procedure.

Nor is it applicable to a criminal case where the offense charged is necessarily related to another criminal case subject
to the ordinary procedure.

Prohibited Pleadings:
1. Motion to dismiss the complaint or to quash the complaint or information except on the ground of a) lack of
jurisdiction over the subject matter, or b) failure to comply with the preceding section;
2. Motion for a bill of particulars;
3. Motion for new trial, or for reconsideration of judgment, or for reopening of trial;
4. Petition for relief from judgment;
5. Motion for extension of time to file pleadings, affidavits or any other paper;
6. Memoranda;
7. Petition for certiorari, mandamus, or prohibition against any interlocutory order issued by the court;
8. Motion to declare the defendant in default;
9. Dilatory motions for postponement;
10. Reply;
11. Third party complaints; and
12. Interventions.
Appeal:
The judgment or final order shall be appealable to the appropriate Regional Trial Court.

The decision of the Regional Trial Court in civil cases governed by this Rule, including forcible entry and unlawful
detainer, shall be immediately executory, without prejudice to further appeal that may be taken therefrom.

Execution Pending Appeal

On motion of the prevailing party with notice to the adverse party filed in the trial court while it has jurisdiction over the
case and is in possession of either the original record or the record on appeal, as the case may be, at the time of the
filing of such motion, said court may, in its discretion, order execution of a judgment or final order even before the
expiration of the period to appeal. After the trial court has lost jurisdiction the motion for execution pending appeal may
be filed in the appellate court. Discretionary execution may only issue upon good reasons to be stated in a special order
after due hearing. (Rule 39, Section 2)

G. TOTALITY RULE
Under this rule, where there are several claims or causes of action between the same or different parties, embodied in
the same complaint, the amount of the demands shall be the 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.
Concepts in jurisdiction –

Hierarchy of courts
Petitions for the issuance of a writ of certiorari against the acts or issuances of a court, tribunal or any government
agency should be filed with the Regional Trial Court. The jurisdiction of the RTC over petitions for certiorari is concurrent
with the Supreme Court.

However, such concurrence does not allow unrestricted freedom of choice of the court forum. A direct invocation of the
Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction to issue this writ should be allowed only when there are special and important
reasons, clearly and specifically set out in the petition.(First United v. Poro Point, GR No. 178799, 2009)

SC power to discipline judiciary employees

The CSC has administrative jurisdiction over the civil service. However, the Constitution provides that the Supreme
Court is given exclusive administrative supervision over all courts and judicial personnel. By virtue of this power, it is

20

Downloaded by Limberd Guese (limberdguese13@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|21535835

only the Supreme Court that can oversee the judges’ and court personnel’s compliance with all laws, rules and
regulations. No other branch of government may intrude into this power, without running afoul of the doctrine of
separation of powers.

Administrative jurisdiction over a court employee belongs to the Supreme Court, regardless of whether the offense was
committed before or after employment in the judiciary.(Sarah Ampong v. CSC GR No. 167916, 26 August 2008)

Intra-corporate case
Not every allegation of fraud done in a corporate setting or perpetrated by corporate officers will bring the case within
the special commercial court’s jurisdiction. There must be sufficient nexus showing that the corporation’s nature,
structure, or powers were used to facilitate the fraudulent device or scheme.

In cases governed by the Interim Rules of Procedure on Intra-Corporate Controversies, a bill of particulars is a
prohibited pleading. It is essential for the complaint to show on its face what are claimed to be the fraudulent corporate
acts if the complainant wishes to invoke the court’s special commercial jurisdiction. (Oscar Reyes v. RTC Makati, GR
No. 265744, 2008)

Basis for determining jurisdiction for real actions

With the modifications introduced by R.A. No. 7691 in 1994, the jurisdiction of the first level courts has been expanded
to include jurisdiction over other real actions where the assessed value does not exceed P20,000, P50,000 where the
action is filed in Metro Manila. The first level courts thus have exclusive original jurisdiction over accion publiciana and
accion reivindicatoria where the assessed value of the real property does not exceed the aforestated amounts.
Accordingly, the jurisdictional element is the assessed value of the property.(Barrera v. Legaspo, GR No. 174346, 2008
)

Referral to Lupon when appropriate

The barangay justice system is accomplished through a proceeding before the barangay courts which is essentially
arbitration in character; and to make it truly effective, it should also be compulsory. It would be wholly in keeping with
the underlying philosophy of Presidential Decree No. 1508 (Katarungang Pambarangay Law), if an out-of-court
settlement of the case is reached voluntarily by the parties. To ensure this objective, Section 6 of Presidential Decree
No. 1508 requires the parties to undergo a conciliation process before the Lupon Chairman or the Pangkat ng
Tagapagkasundo as a precondition to filing a complaint in court subject to certain exceptions. The said section has
been declared compulsory in nature. (Wee v. De Castro, GR No. 176405, 2008 )

Referral to Lupon NOT jurisdictional

It is true that the precise technical effect of failure to comply with the requirement of Section 412 of the Local
Government Code on barangay conciliation is much the same effect produced by non-exhaustion of administrative
remedies—the complaint becomes afflicted with the vice of pre-maturity; and the controversy there alleged is not ripe
for judicial determination. Nevertheless, the conciliation process is not a jurisdictional requirement, so that non-
compliance therewith cannot affect the jurisdiction which the court has otherwise acquired over the subject matter or
over the person of the defendant.
(Aquino v. Aure, GR No. 253567, 2008)

END OF TOPIC

21

Downloaded by Limberd Guese (limberdguese13@gmail.com)