CIVIL PROCEDURE

Judge Asuncion - Lesson for July 8, 2014 (Tuesday)

Jurisdiction
A. Jurisdiction in General
a. BPI v. Hong, G.R. No. 11!!1, "#$ruar% 1&, '(1'
$. Nocu) v. *an, G.R. No. 1+&('', ,#-t#)$#r '., '((&
c. C/av#0 v. C1, G.R. No. 1'&21., "#$ruar% , '((!
. Jurisdiction o!er t"e #arties
1. $o% &urisdiction o!er t"e #laintiff is ac'uired
a. 1gravant# v. Patriarca, G.R. No. L3+2.'+, 4arc/ 1+, 155(
2. $o% &urisdiction o!er t"e defendant is ac'uired
a. P#r6ins v. Di0on, G.R. No. +.1, Nov#)$#r 1, 15.5
(. Jurisdiction o!er t"e su)&ect *atter
1. +eaning
a. Banco Es-a7o83"i8i-ino v. Pa8anca, G.R. No. L311.5(,4arc/ ',
1512
2. Jurisdiction !ersus t"e e,ercise of &urisdiction
a. OC1 v. Judg# 4atas, 1.4. No. R*J35'32', 1ugust ', 155&
-. .rror of &urisdiction distinguis"ed fro* error of &udg*ent
a. "#rnando v. Hon. Vas9u#0, G.R. No. L3'+1!, Januar% .(, 15!(
4. $o% &urisdiction is conferred and deter*ined
a. ,ogod v. Hon. Rosa8, G.R. No. L3.2'(+, ,#-t#)$#r '+, 1551
/. 0octrine of #ri*ary &urisdiction
a. G41 N#t:or6 Inc. v. 1B,3CBN Broadcasting Cor-., G.R. No.
1(!(., ,#-t#)$#r '., '((&
1. 0octrine of ad"erence of &urisdiction
a. Ba8ta0ar v. C1, G.R. No L3+(151, 4a% '!, 1521
2. 3)&ections to &urisdiction o!er t"e su)&ect *atter
a. Di8% Dan% Nac-i8 v. Int#rnationa8 Broadcasting, G.R. No 1++!!,
4arc/ '1, '(('
8. .ffect of esto##el on o)&ections to &urisdiction
a. *i;a) v. ,i$ong/ano%, G.R. No. L3'1+&(, 1-ri8 1&, 152
0. Jurisdiction o!er t"e issues
a. La0o v. R#-u$8ic ,ur#t%, G.R. No. L3'!.&, Januar% .(, 15!(
.. Jurisdiction o!er t"e res or #ro#erty in litigation
a. Banco Es-a7o83"i8i-ino v. Pa8anca, su-ra
Legim Discipulo: Anne Lorraine Co & Meiki Merlin (Civil Procedure Case Digest)
(Jurisdiction in General)
B1N< O" *HE PHILIPPINE I,L1ND, V, HONG
G.R. No. 11!!1, 1& "#$ruar% '(1'
"acts=
3n 4e#te*)er 11, 1552, .6(3 Grou# of (o*#anies (.6(3)
filed a #etition for sus#ension of #ay*ents and re"a)ilitation )efore
t"e 4ecurity and .,c"ange (o**ission (4.().
T"e "earing #anel a##ro!ed t"e #ro#osed re"a)ilitation
#lan #re#ared )y .6(3. T"e 4.( rendered its decision disa##ro!ing
t"e #etition for sus#ension of #ay*ents, ter*inating .6(37s
#ro#osed re"a)ilitation #lan and ordering t"e dissolution and
li'uidation of t"e #etitioning cor#oration.
T"e case %as re*anded to t"e "earing #anel for
li'uidation #roceedings. (ourt of A##eals ((A) u#"eld t"e 4.( ruling.
.6(3 filed a #etition for certiorari )efore t"e 4u#re*e
(ourt (4() %"ic" case %as e!entually dis*issed under a resolution
%"ic" "ad )eco*e final and e,ecutory.
8"ile t"e case %as still #ending in t"e (A, #etitioner an9
of t"e :"ili##ine ;slands (:;), filed %it" t"e 3ffice of t"e (ler9 of
(ourt, <egional Trial (ourt (<T() of =alen>uela (ity, a #etition for
e,tra-&udicial foreclosure of real #ro#erties *ortgaged to it )y .yco
:ro#erties ;nc. and lue 4tar +a"ogany, ;nc. :u)lic auction %as
sc"eduled.
(lai*ing t"at t"e foreclosure #roceedings initiated )y
#etitioner %as illegal, res#ondent .duardon $ong, an unsecured
creditor of ?i9on ;ndustrial (or#oration, one of t"e co*#anies of
6.(3, filed an action for in&unction and da*ages against t"e
#etitioner in t"e sa*e court (<T( of =alen>uela (ity). $e alleged t"at
t"e e,-officio s"eriff "as no aut"ority to sell t"e *ortgaged
#ro#erties. T"e 4.( retains &urisdiction o!er t"e *ortgaged
#ro#erties of .6(3 :ro#erties, ;nc.
T"e trial court issued a te*#orary restraining order (T<3).
:etitioner filed a *otion to dis*iss %"ic" %as denied )y t"e <T(.
(A affir*ed t"e trial court7s denial of #etitioner7s *otion
to dis*iss. @ Auestions relating to !alidity or legality of t"e
foreclosure #roceedings, including an action to en&oin t"e sa*e,
*ust necessarily )e cogni>a)le )y t"e <T(. (A denied *otion for
reconsideration.
Issu#=
8"et"er or not t"e <T( can ta9e cogni>ance of t"e
in&unction suit des#ite t"e #endency of 4.( (ase. >#s?
H#8d=
Jurisdiction is defined as t"e #o%er and aut"ority of a
court to "ear and decide a case. A court7s &urisdiction o!er t"e
su)&ect *atter of t"e action is conferred only )y t"e (onstitution or
)y statute.
T"e nature of an action and t"e su)&ect *atter t"ereof, as
%ell as %"ic" court or agency of t"e go!ern*ent "as &urisdiction
o!er t"e sa*e, are deter*ined )y t"e *aterial allegations of t"e
co*#laint in relation to t"e la% in!ol!ed and t"e c"aracter of t"e
reliefs #rayed for, %"et"er or not t"e co*#lainantB#laintiff is
entitled to any or all of suc" reliefs.
And &urisdiction )eing a *atter of su)stanti!e la%, t"e
esta)lis"ed rule is t"at t"e statute in force at t"e ti*e of t"e
co**ence*ent of t"e action deter*ines t"e &urisdiction of t"e
court.
:erusal of t"e co*#laint re!eals t"at res#ondent does not
as9 t"e trial court to rule on its interest or clai* -- as an unsecured
creditor of t%o co*#anies under .6(3 -- against t"e latter7s
#ro#erties *ortgaged to #etitioner. T"e co*#laint #rinci#ally see9s
to en&oin t"e foreclosure #roceedings initiated )y #etitioner o!er
t"ose #ro#erties on t"e ground t"at suc" #ro#erties are "eld in trust
and #laced under t"e &urisdiction of t"e a##ointed Li'uidator in 4.(
(ase. T"us, (i!il (ase is one for in&unction %it" #rayer for da*ages.
An action for in&unction is a suit %"ic" "as for its #ur#ose
t"e en&oin*ent of t"e defendant, #er#etually or for a #articular
ti*e, fro* t"e co**ission or continuance of a s#ecific act, or "is
co*#ulsion to continue #erfor*ance of a #articular act.
;t "as an inde#endent e,istence, and is distinct fro* t"e
ancillary re*edy of #reli*inary in&unction %"ic" cannot e,ist e,ce#t
only as a #art or an incident of an inde#endent action or #roceeding.
;n an action for in&unction, t"e au,iliary re*edy of #reli*inary
in&unction, #ro"i)itory or *andatory, *ay issue.
As a rule, actions for in&unction and da*ages lie %it"in t"e
&urisdiction of t"e <T( #ursuant to 4ection 15 of atas :a*)ansa lg.
125, ot"er%ise 9no%n as t"e CJudiciary <eorgani>ation Act of 1580,C
as a*ended )y <e#u)lic Act (<.A.) ?o. 2151.
<.A. ?o. 8255, %"ic" too9 effect on August 8, 2000,
transferred to t"e a##ro#riate regional trial courts t"e 4.(7s
&urisdiction o!er t"ose cases enu*erated in 4ec. / of :.0. ?o. 502-A.
4ection /.2 of <.A. ?o. 8255 #ro!idesD 4.(. /.2 T"e (o**ission7s
&urisdiction o!er all cases enu*erated under 4ection / of
:residential 0ecree ?o. 502-A is "ere)y transferred to t"e (ourts of
general &urisdiction or t"e a##ro#riate <egional Trial (ourtD Provided,
t"at t"e 4u#re*e (ourt in t"e e,ercise of its aut"ority *ay designate
t"e <egional Trial (ourt )ranc"es t"at s"all e,ercise &urisdiction o!er
t"ese cases. T"e (o**ission s"all retain &urisdiction o!er #ending
cases in!ol!ing intra-cor#orate dis#utes su)*itted for final
resolution %"ic" s"ould )e resol!ed %it"in one (1) year fro* t"e
enact*ent of t"is (ode.
*/# Co))ission s/a88 r#tain ;urisdiction ov#r -#nding
sus-#nsion o@ -a%)#ntsAr#/a$i8itation cas#s @i8#d as o@ .( Jun#
'((( unti8 @ina88% dis-os#d.
:ursuant to its original &urisdiction o!er suits for in&unction
and da*ages, t"e <T( of =alen>uela (ity #ro#erly too9 cogni>ance of
t"e in&unction case filed )y t"e res#ondent. ?o re!ersi)le error %as
t"erefore co**itted )y t"e (A %"en it ruled t"at t"e <T( of
=alen>uela (ity "ad &urisdiction to "ear and decide res#ondent7s
co*#laint for in&unction and da*ages.
(Jurisdiction in General)
NOCU4 V, *1N
G.R. No. 1+&('', (' ,#-t#)$#r '(1+
"acts=
Lucio Tan filed a co*#laint against re#orter Ar*and
?ocu*, (a#t. Elorendo F*ali, AL:A: and ;n'uirer %it" t"e <egional
Trial (ourt of +a9ati see9ing *oral and e,e*#lary da*ages for t"e
alleged *alicious and defa*atory i*#utations contained in a ne%s
article.
;t a##eared t"at t"e co*#laint failed to state t"e residence
of t"e co*#lainant at t"e ti*e of t"e alleged co**ission of t"e
offense and t"e #lace %"ere t"e li)elous article %as #rinted and first
#u)lis"ed.
T"e <egional Trial (ourt of +a9ati issued an order
dis*issing t"e co*#laint %it"out #re&udice on t"e ground of
Legim Discipulo: Anne Lorraine Co & Meiki Merlin (Civil Procedure Case Digest)
i*#ro#er !enue.
Aggrie!ed )y t"e dis*issal of t"e co*#laint, res#ondent
Lucio Tan filed an 3*ni)us +otion see9ing reconsideration of t"e
dis*issal and ad*ission of t"e a*ended co*#laint. ;n t"e a*ended
co*#laint, it is alleged t"at This article was printed and first
published in the City of Makati, and t"at This caricature was
printed and first published in the City of Makati.
T"e lo%er court, after "a!ing t"e case dis*issed for
i*#ro#er !enue, ad*itted t"e a*ended co*#laint and dee*ed set
aside t"e #re!ious order of dis*issal.
:etitioners a##ealed t"e <T( decision to t"e (ourt of
A##eals. (ourt of A##eals denied and dis*issed t"e #etition and
affir*ed in toto t"e order of t"e court a 'uo. :etitioners7 *otion for
reconsideration %as denied.
Issu#=
8"et"er or not t"e lo%er court ac'uire &urisdiction o!er
t"e ci!il case u#on t"e filing of t"e original co*#laint for da*ages.
>#s?
H#8d=
Article -10 of t"e <e!ised :enal (ode #ro!ides t"at it is a
(ourt of Eirst ;nstance t"at is s#ecifically designated to try a li)el
case.
:etitioners are confusing &urisdiction %it" !enue. A for*er
colleague, t"e $on. Eloren> 0. <egalado, differentiated &urisdiction
and !enue as follo%sD (a) Jurisdiction is t"e aut"ority to "ear and
deter*ine a caseG !enue is t"e #lace %"ere t"e case is to )e "eard or
triedG ()) Jurisdiction is a *atter of su)stanti!e la%G !enue, of
#rocedural la%G (c) Jurisdiction esta)lis"es a relation )et%een t"e
court and t"e su)&ect *atterG !enue, a relation )et%een #laintiff and
defendant, or #etitioner and res#ondentG and, (d) Jurisdiction is fi,ed
)y la% and cannot )e conferred )y t"e #artiesG !enue *ay )e
conferred )y t"e act or agree*ent of t"e #arties.
;t is ele*entary t"at o)&ections to !enue in (;=;L A(T;3?4
arising fro* li)el *ay )e %ai!ed since t"ey do not in!ol!e a 'uestion
of &urisdiction.
T"e laying of !enue is #rocedural rat"er t"an su)stanti!e,
relating as it does to &urisdiction of t"e court o!er t"e #erson rat"er
t"an t"e su)&ect *atter. =enue relates to trial and not to
&urisdiction.
;t is a #rocedural, not a &urisdictional, *atter. ;t relates to
t"e #lace of trial or geogra#"ical location in %"ic" an action or
#roceeding s"ould )e )roug"t and not to t"e &urisdiction of t"e
court. ;t is *eant to #ro!ide con!enience to t"e #arties, rat"er t"an
restrict t"eir access to t"e courts as it relates to t"e #lace of trial. ;n
contrast, in (<;+;?AL A(T;3?4, it is funda*ental t"at !enue is
&urisdictional it )eing an essential ele*ent of &urisdiction.
:etitioners7 argu*ent t"at t"e lo%er court "as no
&urisdiction o!er t"e case )ecause res#ondent failed to allege t"e
#lace %"ere t"e li)elous articles %ere #rinted and first #u)lis"ed
%ould "a!e )een tena)le if t"e case filed %ere a cri*inal case.
T"e failure of t"e original co*#laint to contain suc"
infor*ation %ould )e fatal )ecause t"is fact in!ol!es t"e issue of
!enue %"ic" goes into t"e territorial &urisdiction of t"e court. This is
not to be because the case before us is a civil action where venue is
not jurisdictional
(Jurisdiction in General)
CH1VEB V, COUR* O" 1PPE1L,
G.R. No. 1'&21., ( "#$ruar% '((!
"acts=
An ;nfor*ation for li)el %as filed )efore t"e <egional Trial
(ourt (<T() of +anila against #ri!ate res#ondents, %"o %ere editor-
in-c"ief and aut"or-re#orter of H4*art EileI, a *aga>ine of general
circulation in +anila, %it" #etitioner Erancisco ("a!e> as t"e
co*#lainant.
:ri!ate res#ondents *o!ed to 'uas" t"e ;nfor*ation, as
%ell as t"e corres#onding %arrants of arrest su)se'uently issued )ut
%ere denied )y t"e <T( +anila. :ri!ate res#ondents filed a :etition
for (ertiorari %it" t"e (ourt of A##eals %"ic" %as granted.
T"e a##ellate court "eld t"at t"e ;nfor*ation failed to
allege %"ere t"e %ritten defa*ation %as C#rinted and first
#u)lis"ed,C an allegation sine qua non Cif t"e circu*stances as to
%"ere t"e li)el %as #rinted and first #u)lis"ed is used as t"e )asis of
t"e !enue of t"e #u)lication.C
/
;t %as o)ser!ed t"at C!enue of li)el
cases %"ere t"e co*#lainant is a #ri!ate #erson is eit"er in any of
only t%o #laces, na*elyD (1) %"ere t"e su)&ect article %as #rinted
and first #u)lis"edG and (2) %"ere co*#lainant of t"e co**ission
actually resides at t"e ti*e of t"e co**ission of t"e offense.C T"e
;nfor*ation, it %as noted, did not indicate t"at t"e li)elous articles
%ere #rinted or first #u)lis"ed in +anila, or t"at #etitioner resided
in +anila at t"e ti*e of t"e #u)lication of t"e articles.
T"e (ourt of A##eals furt"er o)ser!ed t"at e!en during
t"e #reli*inary in!estigation, #ri!ate res#ondents "ad already
inter#osed t"at 4*art Eile %as actually #rinted and first #u)lis"ed in
t"e (ity of +a9ati, and t"at t"e address of t"e #u)lis"er Ani*al
Ear*s :u)lication as indicated in t"e editorial #age of t"e
#u)lication itself %as a #ost office )o, %it" t"e +a9ati (entral :ost
3ffice. .!en as t"is o)ser!ation %as dis#uted )y #etitioner, %"o
insisted t"e #lace of #ri!ate res#ondent7s #rinting and #u)lis"ing
)usiness %as actually in +anila, t"e (ourt of A##eals noted t"at "e
s"ould "a!e )een alerted enoug" )y #ri!ate res#ondentsJ ad!erse
insistence and t"at a due in!estigation %ould "a!e ine!ita)ly
re!ealed t"at #ri!ate res#ondents "ad transferred fro* t"eir
#re!ious +anila address to +a9ati )y t"e ti*e t"e su)&ect articles
%ere #u)lis"ed.
Issu#=
8"et"er or not t"e su)&ect infor*ation sufficiently !est
&urisdiction in t"e +anila trial courts to "ear li)el c"arge, in
consonance %it" Article -10 of t"e <e!ised :enal (ode. No?
H#8d=
T"e rules on !enue in article -10 *ay )e restated t"usD 1.
8"et"er t"e offended #arty is a #u)lic official or a #ri!ate #erson,
t"e cri*inal action *ay )e filed in t"e (ourt of Eirst ;nstance of t"e
#ro!ince or city %"ere t"e li)elous article is #rinted and first
#u)lis"ed. 2. ;f t"e offended #arty is a #ri!ate indi!idual, t"e cri*inal
action *ay also )e filed in t"e (ourt of Eirst ;nstance of t"e #ro!ince
%"ere "e actually resided at t"e ti*e of t"e co**ission of t"e
offense. -. ;f t"e offended #arty is a #u)lic officer %"ose office is in
+anila at t"e ti*e of t"e co**ission of t"e offense, t"e action *ay
)e filed in t"e (ourt of Eirst ;nstance of +anila. 4. ;f t"e offended
#arty is a #u)lic officer "olding office outside of +anila, t"e action
*ay )e filed in t"e (ourt of Eirst ;nstance of t"e #ro!ince or city
%"ere "e "eld office at t"e ti*e of t"e co**ission of t"e offense.
T"e ;nfor*ation states t"at t"e li)elous articles %ere
#u)lis"ed in 4*art Eile, and not t"at t"ey %ere #u)lis"ed in +anila.
T"e #lace C+anilaC is in turn e*#loyed to situate %"ere 4*art Eile
%as in general circulation, and not %"ere t"e li)el %as #u)lis"ed or
Legim Discipulo: Anne Lorraine Co & Meiki Merlin (Civil Procedure Case Digest)
first #rinted. T"e fact t"at 4*art Eile %as in general circulation in
+anila does not necessarily esta)lis" t"at it %as #u)lis"ed and first
#rinted in +anila, in t"e sa*e %ay t"at %"ile leading national dailies
suc" as t"e :"ili##ine 0aily ;n'uirer or t"e :"ili##ine 4tar are in
general circulation in (e)u, it does not *ean t"at t"ese ne%s#a#ers
are #u)lis"ed and first #rinted in (e)u.
:etitioner does su)*it t"at t"ere is no need to e*#loy t"e
clause C#rinted and first #u)lis"edC in indicating %"ere t"e cri*e of
li)el %as co**itted, as t"e ter* C#u)lis"C is Cgeneric and %it"in t"e
general conte,t of t"e ter* J#rintJ in so far as t"e latter ter* is
utili>ed to refer to t"e #"ysical act of #roducing t"e #u)lication.C
8"ere t"e la% does not distinguis", %e s"ould not distinguis".
($o% &urisdiction o!er t"e #laintiff is ac'uired)
1GR1V1N*E V, P1*RI1RC1
G.R. No. L3+2.'+, 1+ 4arc/ 155(
"acts=
Juana :atriarca :eKa filed %it" t"e (ourt of Eirst ;nstance
of an action to 'uiet title %it" da*ages against Jose Agra!ante and
Juan Agra!ante.
T"e case for #re-trial %as sc"eduled. T"e defendants7
counsel *o!ed for cancellation of t"e setting. T"e court reset t"e
#re-trial. T"e defendants7 attorney, #leading illness, soug"t to "a!e
second #re-trial setting cancelled )y *otion )ut %as denied.
At t"e sc"eduled #re-trial, neit"er t"e defendants nor t"eir
counsel a##eared. T"e court declared t"e defendants in default.
Juana :atriarca :eKa died, "er "eirs #resented a *otion ad!ising of
"er de*ise and #raying t"at t"ey )e su)stituted in "er stead in
action.
0efendants *o!ed for reconsideration %"ic" %as denied
for lac9 of *erit.
Issu#=
8"et"er or not trial court "ad ac'uired &urisdiction o!er
t"e #erson of Juana :atriarca :eKa.
H#8d=
Also co*#letely %it"out *erit is t"e defendantsJ
contention t"at t"e de*ise of t"e #laintiff, Juana :atriarca, long
)efore t"e #re-trial setting #re!ented t"e Trial (ourtJs ac'uisition of
&urisdiction o!er "er. ;t is a,io*atic t"at &urisdiction of t"e #erson of
t"e #laintiff is ac'uired )y t"e court )y t"e filing of t"e co*#laint.
T"e su)se'uent deat" of t"e #laintiff in a real action li9e t"e one at
)ar, does not affect t"e (ourtJs &urisdiction, all t"at is entailed in t"is
e!entuality )eing t"e su)stitution of t"e "eirs for t"e deceased in
accordance %it" t"e #rocedure set out in 4ection 12, <ule - of t"e
<ules of (ourt. T"at su)stitution is #recisely %"at %as done )y t"e
(ourt a quo.
T"ere is furt"er*ore no s"o%ing %"ate!er t"at
defendants "ad any ground at all to o##ose t"at su)stitution
*andated )y t"e <ules, or t"at t"ey "a!e suffered any #re&udice of
any sort )y reason of t"at su)stitution, so as to gi!e !alidity to t"eir
ot"er #laint t"at t"ey "ad not )een accorded sufficient o##ortunity
to o)&ect to t"e su)stitution.
($o% &urisdiction o!er t"e defendant is ac'uired)
PER<IN, V, DIBON
G.R. +.1, 1 Nov#)$#r 15.5
"acts=
<es#ondent, .ugene Art"ur :er9ins, instituted an action in
t"e (ourt of Eirst ;nstance of +anila against t"e enguet
(onsolidated +ining (o*#any for di!idends a*ounting to
:21,-25.50 on /2,824 s"ares of stoc9 registered in "is na*e,
#ay*ent of %"ic" %as )eing %it""eld )y t"e co*#anyG and, for t"e
recognition of "is rig"t to t"e control and dis#osal of said s"ares, to
t"e e,clusion of all ot"ers.
To t"e co*#laint, t"e co*#any filed its ans%er alleging, )y
%ay of defense, t"at t"e %it""olding of suc" di!idends and t"e non-
recognition of #laintiffJs rig"t to t"e dis#osal and control of t"e
s"ares %ere due to certain de*ands *ade %it" res#ect to said
s"ares )y t"e #etitioner "erein, ;dona" 4lade :er9ins, and )y one
George $. .ngel"ard.
T"e ans%er #rays t"at t"e ad!erse clai*ants )e *ade
#arties to t"e action and ser!ed %it" notice t"ereof )y #u)lication,
and t"at t"ereafter all suc" #arties )e re'uired to inter#lead and
settle t"e rig"ts a*ong t"e*sel!es.
T"e trial court ordered res#ondent .ugene Art"ur :er9ins
to include in "is co*#laint as #arties defendant #etitioner, ;dona"
4lade :er9ins, and George $. .ngel"ard.
T"e co*#laint %as accordingly a*ended and in addition to
t"e relief #rayed for in t"e original co*#laint, res#ondent :er9ins
#rayed t"at #etitioner ;dona" 4lade :er9ins and George .ngel"ard
)e ad&udged %it"out interest in t"e s"ares of stoc9 in 'uestion and
e,cluded fro* any clai* t"ey assert t"ereon.
4u**ons )y #u)lication %ere ser!ed u#on t"e non-
resident defendants, ;dona" 4lade :er9ins and George $. .ngel"ard,
#ursuant to t"e order of t"e trial court.
.ngel"ard filed "is ans%er to t"e a*ended co*#laint, and
#etitioner ;dona" 4lade :er9ins, t"roug" counsel, filed "er #leading
entitled Co)&ection to !enue, *otion to 'uas", and de*urrer to
&urisdictionC %"erein s"e c"allenged t"e &urisdiction of t"e lo%er
court o!er "er #erson.
:etitionerJs o)&ection, *otion and de*urrer "a!ing )een
o!erruled as %ell as "er *otion for reconsideration of t"e order of
denial, s"e no% )roug"t t"e #resent #etition for certiorari, #raying
t"at t"e su**ons )y #u)lication issued against "er )e declared null
and !oid, and t"at, %it" res#ect to "er, res#ondent Judge )e
#er*anently #ro"i)ited fro* ta9ing any action on t"e case.
Issu#=
8"et"er or not t"e (ourt of Eirst ;nstance of +anila "as
ac'uired &urisdiction o!er t"e #erson of t"e #resent #etitioner as a
non-resident defendant, or, not%it"standing t"e %ant of suc"
&urisdiction, %"et"er or not said court *ay !alidly try t"e case.
H#8d=
T"e general rule, t"erefore, is t"at a suit against a non-
resident cannot )e entertained )y a :"ili##ine court. 8"ere,
"o%e!er, t"e action is in rem or quasi in rem in connection %it"
#ro#erty located in t"e :"ili##ines, t"e court ac'uires &urisdiction
o!er t"e res, and its &urisdiction o!er t"e #erson of t"e non-resident
is non-essential.
;n order t"at t"e court *ay e,ercise #o%er o!er t"e res, it
is not necessary t"at t"e court s"ould ta9e actual custody of t"e
#ro#erty, #otential custody t"ereof )eing sufficient. T"ere is
#otential custody %"en, fro* t"e nature of t"e action )roug"t, t"e
#o%er of t"e court o!er t"e #ro#erty is i*#liedly recogni>ed )y la%.
Legim Discipulo: Anne Lorraine Co & Meiki Merlin (Civil Procedure Case Digest)
CAn illustration of %"at %e ter* #otential &urisdiction o!er
t"e res, is found in t"e #roceeding to register t"e title of land under
our syste* for t"e registration of land. $ere t"e court, %it"out
ta9ing actual #"ysical control o!er t"e #ro#erty , assu*es, at t"e
instance of so*e #erson clai*ing to )e o%ner, to e,ercise a
&urisdiction in rem o!er t"e #ro#erty and to ad&udicate t"e title in
fa!or of t"e #etitioner against all t"e %orld.C
As )efore stated, in an action in rem or quasi in rem against
a non-resident defendant, &urisdiction o!er "is #erson is non-
essential, and if t"e la% re'uires in suc" case t"at t"e su**ons
u#on t"e defendant )e ser!ed )y #u)lication, it is *erely to satisfy
t"e constitutional re'uire*ent of due #rocess.
;f any )e said, in t"is connection, t"at C*ay re#orted cases
can )e cited in %"ic" it is assu*ed t"at t"e 'uestion of t"e
sufficiency of #u)lication or notice in t"e case of t"is 9ind is a
'uestion affecting t"e &urisdiction of t"e court, and t"e court is
so*eti*es said to ac'uire &urisdiction )y !irtue of t"e #u)lication.
T"is #"raseology %as undou)tedly originally ado#ted )y
t"e court )ecause of t"e analogy )et%een ser!ice )y #u)lication and
#ersonal ser!ice of #rocess u#on t"e defendantG and, as "as already
)een suggested, #rior to t"e decision of Pennoyer v. eff (supra), t"e
difference )et%een t"e legal effects of t"e t%o for*s of ser!ice %as
o)scure.
;t is accordingly not sur#rising t"at t"e *odes of
e,#ression %"ic" "ad already )een *oulded into legal tradition
)efore t"at case %as decided "a!e )een )roug"t do%n to t"e
#resent day. ut it is clear t"at t"e legal #rinci#le "ere in!ol!ed is not
affected )y t"e #eculiar languages in %"ic" t"e courts "a!e
e,#ounded t"eir ideas.C
T"e reason for t"e rule t"at :"ili##ine courts cannot
ac'uire &urisdiction o!er t"e #erson of a non-resident, as laid do%n
)y t"e 4u#re*e (ourt of t"e Fnited 4tates in Pennoyer v. eff! supra,
*ay )e found in a recogni>ed #rinci#le of #u)lic la% to t"e effect
t"at Cno 4tate can e,ercise direct &urisdiction and aut"ority o!er
#ersons or #ro#erty %it"out its territory. 4tory, (onfl. L., c". 2G
8"eat, ;nt. L., #t. 2, c". 2.
T"e se!eral 4tates are of e'ual dignity and aut"ority, and
t"e inde#endence of one i*#lies t"e e,clusion of #o%er fro* all
ot"ers. And so it is laid do%n )y &urists, as an ele*entary #rinci#le,
t"at t"e la%s of one 4tate "a!e no o#eration outside of its territory,
e,ce#t so far as is allo%ed )y co*ityG and t"at no tri)unal
esta)lis"ed )y it can e,tend its #rocess )eyond t"at territory so as to
su)&ect eit"er #ersons or #ro#erty to its decisions. CAny e,ertion of
aut"ority of t"is sort )eyond t"is li*it,C says 4tory, Cis a *ere nullity,
and inca#a)le of )inding suc" #ersons or #ro#erty in any ot"er
tri)unals.C 4tory, (onfl. L., sec. /-5.C (:ennoyer !. ?eff, 5/ F.4., 214G
24 La%. ed., /1/, /18-/15.).
(Jurisdiction o!er t"e su)&ect *atter)
B1NCO E,P1 COL3FILIPINO V, P1L1NC1
G.R. No. L311.5(, ' 4arc/ 1512
"acts=
An action %as instituted )y C.l anco .s#anol-Eili#inoC to
foreclose a *ortgage u#on !arious #arcels of real #ro#erty situated
in t"e city of +anila.
T"e *ortgage in 'uestion %as e,ecuted )y t"e original
defendant "erein, .ngracio :alanca Tan'uinyeng y Li*'uingco, as
security for a de)t o%ing )y "i* to t"e )an9.
After t"e e,ecution of t"e instru*ent )y t"e *ortgagor, "e
returned to ("ina %"ic" a##ears to "a!e )een "is nati!e countryG
and "e t"ere died %it"out again returning to t"e :"ili##ine ;slands.
As t"e defendant, =icente :alanca, %as a nonresident at
t"e ti*e of t"e institution of t"e #resent action, it %as necessary for
t"e #laintiff in t"e foreclosure #roceeding to gi!e notice to t"e
defendant )y #u)lication #ursuant to section -55 of t"e (ode of (i!il
:rocedure.
An order for #u)lication %as accordingly o)tained fro* t"e
court, and #u)lication %as *ade in due for* in a ne%s#a#er of t"e
city of +anila.
At t"e sa*e ti*e t"at t"e order of t"e court s"ould
de#osit in t"e #ost office in a sta*#ed en!elo#e a co#y of t"e
su**ons and co*#laint directed to t"e defendant at "is last #lace
of residence, to %it, t"e city of A*oy, in t"e .*#ire of ("ina.
8"et"er t"e cler9 co*#lied %it" t"is order does not
affir*ati!ely a##ear. An "ffidavit, "o%e!er, %as signed )y ernardo
("an y Garcia, t"e )an97s attorney, s"o%ing t"at "e "ad de#osited in
t"e +anila #ost-office a registered letter, addressed to .ngracio
:alanca Tan'uinyeng, at +anila, containing co#ies of t"e Complaint,
t"e :laintiff7s "ffidavit, t"e #ummons, and t"e aforesaid $rder for
Publication. ;t a##ears fro* t"e #ost*aster7s recei#t t"at ernardo
#ro)a)ly used an en!elo#e o)tained fro* t"e cler97s office, as t"e
recei#t #ur#orts to s"o% t"at t"e letter e*anated fro* t"e office.
T"e 0efendant not "a!ing a##eared, %ud&ment by 'efault
%as t"en ta9en against "i* )efore t"e trial court and a 'ecision
rendered in fa!or of :laintiff. ;n t"is 'ecision! it %as recited t"at
#u)lication "ad )een #ro#erly *ade in a #eriodical, )ut not"ing %as
said a)out notice "a!ing )een gi!en )y *ail. Eoreclosure of t"e
su)&ect #ro#erty #roceeded and sale %as confir*ed )y t"e court
t"ereafter.
4e!en years after t"e confir*ation sale, =icente :alanca,
as ad*inistrator of t"e 0efendant7s estate, *o!ed t"at t"e $rder of
'efault and t"e a)o!e %ud&ment rendered t"ereon )e declared !oid.
4aid Motion to (acate %ud&ment %as deniedG "ence, t"is "ppeal.
Issu#=
8"et"er or not t"e lo%er court ac'uired &urisdiction o!er
t"e defendant and t"e su)&ect *atter of t"e action
H#8d=
3n Jurisdiction
T"e %ord H&urisdictionI is used in se!eral different, t"oug"
related, senses since it *ay "a!e reference (1) to t"e aut"ority of t"e
court to entertain a #articular 9ind of action or to ad*inister a
#articular 9ind of relief, or it *ay refer to t"e #o%er of t"e court o!er
t"e #arties, or (2) o!er t"e #ro#erty %"ic" is t"e su)&ect to t"e
litigation.
T"e so!ereign aut"ority %"ic" organi>es a court
deter*ines t"e nature and e,tent of its #o%ers in general and t"us
fi,es its co*#etency or &urisdiction %it" reference to t"e actions
%"ic" it *ay entertain and t"e relief it *ay grant.
$o% Jurisdiction is Ac'uired
Jurisdiction o!er t"e #erson is ac'uired )y t"e !oluntary
a##earance of a #arty in court and "is su)*ission to its aut"ority, or
it is ac'uired )y t"e coerci!e #o%er of legal #rocess e,erted o!er t"e
#erson.
Jurisdiction o!er t"e #ro#erty %"ic" is t"e su)&ect of t"e
litigation *ay result eit"er fro* a sei>ure of t"e #ro#erty under legal
#rocess, %"ere)y it is )roug"t into t"e actual custody of t"e la%, or
Legim Discipulo: Anne Lorraine Co & Meiki Merlin (Civil Procedure Case Digest)
it *ay result fro* t"e institution of legal #roceedings %"erein,
under s#ecial #ro!isions of la%, t"e #o%er of t"e court o!er t"e
#ro#erty is recogni>ed and *ade effecti!e. ;n t"e latter case t"e
#ro#erty, t"oug" at all ti*es %it"in t"e #otential #o%er of t"e court,
*ay ne!er )e ta9en into actual custody at all.
An illustration of t"e &urisdiction ac'uired )y actual sei>ure
is found in attac"*ent #roceedings, %"ere t"e #ro#erty is sei>ed at
t"e )eginning of t"e action, or so*e su)se'uent stage of its
#rogress, and "eld to a)ide t"e final e!ent of t"e litigation. An
illustration of %"at %e ter* #otential &urisdiction o!er t"e res, is
found in t"e #roceeding to register t"e title of land under our syste*
for t"e registration of land. $ere t"e court, %it"out ta9ing actual
#"ysical control o!er t"e #ro#erty assu*es, at t"e instance of so*e
#erson clai*ing to )e o%ner, to e,ercise a &urisdiction in re* o!er
t"e #ro#erty and to ad&udicate t"e title in fa!or of t"e #etitioner
against all t"e %orld.
;n t"e ter*inology of A*erican la% t"e action to foreclose
a *ortgage is said to )e a #roceeding 'uasi in re*, )y %"ic" is
e,#ressed t"e idea t"at %"ile it is not strictly s#ea9ing an action in
re* yet it #arta9es of t"at nature and is su)stantially suc". T"e
e,#ression Caction in re*C is, in its narro% a##lication, used only
%it" reference to certain #roceedings in courts of ad*iralty %"erein
t"e #ro#erty alone is treated as res#onsi)le for t"e clai* or
o)ligation u#on %"ic" t"e #roceedings are )ased. T"e action 'uasi
re* differs fro* t"e true action in re* in t"e circu*stance t"at in
t"e for*er an indi!idual is na*ed as defendant, and t"e #ur#ose of
t"e #roceeding is to su)&ect "is interest t"erein to t"e o)ligation or
lien )urdening t"e #ro#erty. All #roceedings "a!ing for t"eir sole
o)&ect t"e sale or ot"er dis#osition of t"e #ro#erty of t"e defendant,
%"et"er )y attac"*ent, foreclosure, or ot"er for* of re*edy, are in
a general %ay t"us designated. T"e &udg*ent entered in t"ese
#roceedings is conclusi!e only )et%een t"e #arties.
(Jurisdiction !ersus t"e e,ercise of &urisdiction)
O""ICE O" *HE COUR* 1D4INI,*R1*OR V, JUDGE 41*1,
1.4. No. R*J35'32., (' 1ugust 155&
"acts=
T"e 3ffice of t"e (ourt Ad*inistrator (3(A) filed %it" t"e
(ourt an ad*inistrati!e co*#laint c"arging t"e "erein res#ondents
%it" t"e !iolation of 4ection -(e) of t"e Anti-graft and (orru#t
:ractices Act.
<es#ondents Judge Jesus =. +atas, .duardo Torres, Jr., 3;(
(ler9 of (ourt and in conni!ance %it" #ri!ate citi>en George
+ercado concealed fro* J.L. +ercado and 4ons Agricultural
.nter#rises "is (George +ercadoJs) 9no%ledge of t"e #etition for t"e
issuance of ne% o%nerJs du#licate co#ies 3(T and filed +isc. (ase
?o. 1121 )efore t"e sala of res#ondent Judge and too9 cogni>ance
of t"e sa*e not%it"standing t"e fact t"at "is (ourt "as no
&urisdiction o!er La#along and 4to. To*as, 0a!ao %"ere su)&ect
#ro#erties co!ered )y t"e aforesaid titles %"ere located.
T"at not%it"standing t"e fact t"at t"e #ro#erties are
o%ned )y J.L. +ercado and 4ons Agricultural .nter#rises,
res#ondent Judge issued an 3rder directing t"e #osting of said 3rder
and #etition #rior to t"e sc"eduled "earing at t"e 3ffice of t"e (ler9
of (ourt, t"e +unici#al $all, arangay $all or arangay 4c"ool %"ere
t"e #ro#erties are located.
T"at a day after t"e "earing %"ere J.L. +ercado and 4ons
Agricultural .nter#rises %as not #resent, res#ondent Judge fort"%it"
issued an 3rder for t"e issuance )y t"e <egister of 0eeds of 0a!ao of
ne% o%nerJs du#licate of aforesaid titles to George +ercado.
Justice ;*#erial %as tas9ed %it" t"e
in!estigations. $earing %it" t"e 3(A co**ence )ut after #resenting
t%o %itnesses, it *o!ed for sus#ension of t"e #roceedings to a*end
t"e co*#laint adding t"e grounds of gross ine,cusa)le negligence
and gross ignorance of t"e la% as %ell as *odifying ot"er #ortions of
t"e co*#laint. T"e co*#laint alleged t"at Judge +atas and Torres
acted %it" )ad fait" and #artiality in ruling in fa!or of George
+ercado.
Issu#=
8"et"er or not t"e res#ondent Judge acted %it"out
&urisdiction in ta9ing cogni>ance of +iscellaneous (ase ?o. 1212.
H#8d=
;n t"e instant case, it cannot )e said t"at ranc" ; of t"e
<T( of 0a!ao del ?orte, t"en #resided )y t"e res#ondent Judge, "ad
no &urisdiction o!er +iscellaneous (ase ?o. 1121 %"ic" is a C:etition
for t"e ;ssuance of 3%nerJs 0u#licate (ertificates in lieu of Lost
3.(.T. ?os. :-121/8, :-121/5, :-12111, and :-58//.C
4ection 2 of :.0. ?o. 1/25 states t"at (ourts of Eirst
;nstance ((E;) s"all "a!e e,clusi!e &urisdiction o!er all a##lications
for original registration of title to lands including i*#ro!e*ents and
interests t"erein, and over all petitions filed after ori&inal
re&istration of title! %it" #o%er to "ear and deter*ine all 'uestions
arising u#on suc" a##lications or #etitions. Fnder ("a#ter M of t"e
decree entitled CPetitions and "ctions "fter $ri&inal )e&istrationC is
4ection 105 %"ic" go!erns #etitions for issuance of lost or stolen
o%nerJs du#licate certificate of title. (learly, #etitions for
re#lace*ent of lost du#licate certificates, as in +iscellaneous (ase
?o. 1121, are cogni>a)le )y t"e <T(s.
?o%, on t"e !enue or t"e #lace %"ere suc" #etitions *ay
)e instituted. 4ection 12 of :.0. ?o. 1/25 #ro!ides t"at t"e
a##lication for land registration s"all )e filed %it" t"e C*+ (no% <T()
of the province or city where the land lies. Fnder 4ection 108 of t"e
sa*e decree, all #etitions *otions after original registration s"all )e
filed and entitled in t"e original case in %"ic" t"e decree of
registration %as entered.
?ota)ly, t"e certificates in!ol!ed in +iscellaneous (ase
?o. 1121 %ere eac" o)tained not #ursuant to a decree issued in a
&udicial registration #roceeding, )ut #ursuant to a #atent issued )y
t"e 0irector of Lands and registered in accordance %it" 4ection 122
of Act ?o. 451 (no% 4ection 10- of :.0. ?o. 1/25). ?e!ert"eless,
a##lying 4ections 2, 12, 108, and 105 of :.0. ?o. 1/25, %e *ay say
t"at t"e #etition for re#lace*ent of lost du#licate certificates in
+iscellaneous (ase ?o. 1121 %as #ro#erly ta9en cogni>ance of )y
ranc" ; of t"e <T( of 0a!ao del ?orte #resided )y t"e res#ondent
Judge, since t"at #etition stated t"at t"e lots co!ered )y t"e lost
du#licates are situated in La#along and 4to. To*as %"ic" are )ot" in
t"e #ro!ince of 0a!ao del ?orte.
$ence, no lac9 of &urisdiction, gross ignorance of la%, or
gross ine,cusa)le negligence can )e ascri)ed to t"e res#ondent
Judge.
Legim Discipulo: Anne Lorraine Co & Meiki Merlin (Civil Procedure Case Digest)
(.rror of &urisdiction distinguis"ed fro* error of &udg*ent)
"ERN1NDO V. HON. V1,DUEB
G.<. ?o. L-21412, January -0, 1520
"acts=
Eernando, o%ner of t"e #ro#erty, as9ed res#ondents 4#s.
4antos to !acate t"e 2
nd
floor of t"e )uilding )ut t"ey refused so
#etitioner filed a co*#laint for unla%ful detainer in t"e (ity (ourt of
+anila.
(ity (ourt of +anila rendered &udg*ent in fa!or of
#etitioner. <es#ondent s#ouses filed a #etition 'uestioning t"e
&urisdiction of t"e city court o!er t"e unla%ful detainer case )efore
t"e (E; of +anila.
T"e &udge declared t"e city court %it"out &urisdiction o!er
t"e unla%ful detainer case and nullified t"e #roceedings t"erein,
including t"e %rit of e,ecution. :etitioner "erein atte*#ted to
a##eal fro* t"is &udg*ent.
Issu#=
8"et"er or not t"e res#ondent &udge of first instance
co**itted an error of &urisdiction.
H#8d=
?o. ;f error t"ere %as, it %as si*#ly an error of &udg*ent
in "is a##reciation of t"e facts and t"e la%. T"e &udge concededly
"ad t"e &urisdiction to render t"e &udg*ent under re!ie%. ;f e!er "e
co**itted a *ista9e on t"e *erits of t"e case, it %as in t"e e,ercise
of suc" &urisdiction. T"e error )eing one of &udg*ent, not of
&urisdiction, #etitionerJs re*edy is a##eal, not certiorari. And, t"e
#etition for certiorari fails of its #ur#ose.
HAn error of &udg*ent is one %"ic" t"e court *ay co**it
in t"e e,ercise of its &urisdiction. An error of &urisdiction renders an
order or &udg*ent !oid or !oida)le. .rrors of &urisdiction are
re!ie%a)le on certiorariG errors of &udg*ent, only )y a##eal. H
($o% &urisdiction is conferred and deter*ined)
,OGOD V. HON. RO,1L
G.<. ?o. L--8204, 4e#te*)er 24, 1551
"acts=
(ongress #assed <A ?o. /22 creating t"e *unici#ality of
ontoc, for*erly a )arrio of t"e *unici#ality of 4ogod. A )oundary
dis#ute later arose )et%een t"e *unici#ality of ontoc and t"e
*unici#ality of 4ogod %it" t"e latter clai*ing t"at t"e for*er
e,ercised &urisdiction.
:res. Garcia #ro*ulgated ..3. ?o. -18, %"ic" a##ro!ed t"e
reco**endation of t"e #ro!incial )oard of Leyte, and reconstituted
t"e )arrios and sitios %"ic" s"ag co*#ose t"e *unici#alities of
ontoc and 4ogod. T"e e,ecuti!e order also s#ecified Granada (ree9
as t"e )oundary line se#arating ontoc and 4ogod.
T"e :ro!incial oard of 4out"ern Leyte #assed <esolution
?o. 12 sus#ending t"e i*#le*entation of ..3. -18. T"e oard also
created a co**ittee to conduct t"e "olding of a #le)iscite in t"e
)arrios and sitios affected )y .,ecuti!e 3rder -18 and to finally
settle t"e )oundary dis#ute.
T"e *unici#ality of 4ogod filed a ci!il case for certiorari
and #ro"i)ition %it" t"e (E; of 4out"ern Leyte to en&oin t"e
#ro!incial )oard and #ro!incial go!ernor fro* ta9ing cogni>ance of
t"e long #ending )oundary dis#ute )et%een t"e t%o *unici#alities
and to en&oin t"e *unici#ality of ontoc fro* e,ercising territorial
&urisdiction o!er t"e )arrios all allegedly )elonging to t"e
*unici#ality of 4ogod.
T"e trial court dis*issed t"e action for lac9 of &urisdiction
o!er t"e su)&ect *atter of t"e case. T"e #etition %as filed alleging
t"at t"e res#ondent &udge acted %it" gra!e a)use of discretion in
dis*issing t"e case.
Issu#=
8"et"er or not t"e trial court "as t"e aut"ority to decide
on t"e *unici#al )oundary dis#ute.
H#8d=
?o. T"e court ruled t"at t"e trial court acted correctly in
dis*issing t"e cases for %ant of &urisdiction and in allo%ing t"e
#ro!incial )oard to continue %it" t"e #ending in!estigation and
#roceedings on t"e )oundary dis#ute.
HJurisdiction "as )een defined as t"e #o%er and aut"ority
to "ear and deter*ine a cause or t"e rig"t to act in a case.
Jurisdiction is conferred only )y t"e (onstitution or )y la%. ;t cannot
)e fi,ed )y t"e %ill of t"e #arties nor can it )e ac'uired or
di*inis"ed )y any act of t"e #arties. ;n deter*ining %"et"er a case
lies %it"in or outside t"e &urisdiction of a court, reference to t"e
a##lica)le statute on t"e *atter is indis#ensa)le. ;t is a settled rule
t"at &urisdiction of a court is deter*ined )y t"e statute in force at
t"e ti*e of co**ence*ent of action.I
At t"e ti*e t"e ci!il actions %ere filed %it" t"e trial court
)y #etitioner *unici#ality in 1520, t"e a##lica)le la%s necessary for
t"e deter*ination of t"e 'uestion of %"et"er t"e trial court "as t"e
aut"ority to decide on t"e *unici#al )oundary dis#ute are t"e
follo%ingD 1) <e#u)lic Act ?o. /22, creating t"e *unici#ality of
ontocG 2) <e#u)lic Act ?o. -/50, t"e <e!ised arrio ("arter,
re!ising <e#u)lic Act ?o. 2-20G and -) 4ection 2112 of t"e <e!ised
Ad*inistrati!e (ode of 1512.
T"e la% t"en !ested t"e rig"t to settle )oundary dis#utes
)et%een *unici#alities on t"e #ro!incial )oard #ursuant to 4ection
2112 of t"e <e!ised Ad*inistrati!e (ode.
;t is clear t"at t"e aut"ority to "ear and resol!e *unici#al
)oundary dis#utes )elongs to t"e #ro!incial )oards and not to t"e
trial courts.
T"e decisions of t"e )oards are t"en a##eala)le to t"e
.,ecuti!e 4ecretary. :etitioner *unici#ality s"ould "a!e ele!ated t"e
*atter of delay to t"e t"en 4ecretary of ;nterior (no% .,ecuti!e
4ecretary) for action instead of )ringing it to t"e trial court. Alt"oug"
e,isting la%s t"en !ested on t"e #ro!incial )oard t"e #o%er to
deter*ine or e!en alter *unici#al )oundaries, t"e 4ecretary of
;nterior or t"e .,ecuti!e 0e#art*ent for t"at *atter, %as not
#recluded during t"at ti*e fro* ta9ing necessary ste#s for t"e
s#eedy settle*ent of t"e )oundary dis#ute.
;n Pelae, v. "uditor -eneral! ?o. L-2-82/, 0ece*)er 24,
151/, 1/ 4(<A /15, %"ic" a##lied <e#u)lic Act ?o. 2-20, 9no%n as
t"e arrio ("arter, 8e "eld t"at t"e #o%er to fi, co**on
)oundaries in order to a!oid or settle conflicts of &urisdiction
)et%een ad&oining *unici#alities *ay also #arta9e of an
ad*inistrati!e nature t"at can )e decided )y t"e ad*inistrati!e
de#art*ent, in!ol!ing as it does, t"e ado#tion of *eans and %ays to
carry into effect t"e la%s creating said *unici#alities.
Legim Discipulo: Anne Lorraine Co & Meiki Merlin (Civil Procedure Case Digest)
(0octrine of :ri*ary Jurisdiction)
G41 NE*EOR< INC. V. 1B,3CBN BRO1DC1,*ING CORP.,
G.<. ?o. 11020-, 4e#te*)er 2-, 200/
"acts=
G+A ?et%or9 filed )efore t"e <T( of A( a co*#laint for
da*ages against A4-(? alleging t"at res#ondents engaged in
unfair co*#etition %"en t"e ca)le co*#anies ar)itrarily re-
c"anneled #etitionerJs ca)le tele!ision )roadcast on Ee)ruary 1,
200-, in order to arrest and destroy its u#s%ing #erfor*ance in t"e
tele!ision industry.
G+A argued t"at res#ondents %ere a)le to #er#etrate
suc" unfair )usiness #ractice t"roug" a co**on o%ners"i# and
interloc9ing )usinesses.
:ursuant to a +aster (onsolidation Agree*ent, t"e
o%ners"i#, rig"ts and interests in 49y =ision and Fnilin9 %ere
#ur#ortedly #laced under a "olding co*#any 9no%n as Jeyond
(a)leJ, is o%ned )y t"e en#res Grou#, co*#osed of Lo#e> ;nc.,
en#res $oldings and A4-(?, and :L0T Grou#. As a result of t"is
)usiness co*)ination, res#ondents "a!e cornered at least 21N of
t"e total ca)le tele!ision *ar9et in +ega +anila. T"ey are t"us a)le
to dictate t"e signal trans*ission, c"annel #osition, and t"e airing of
s"o%s, #rogra*s, and )roadcast of non-ca)le co*#anies %"ic" t"e
la% re'uires t"e* to carry. G+A alleged t"at t"e re-c"anneling of its
ca)le tele!ision )roadcast resulted in da*age to its )usiness
o#erations.
T"e trial court issued t"e assailed resolution dis*issing t"e
co*#laint. T"e trial court "eld t"at t"e resolution of t"e legal issues
raised in t"e co*#laint re'uired t"e deter*ination of "ig"ly
tec"nical, factual issues o!er %"ic" t"e ?T( "ad #ri*ary &urisdiction.
Issu#=
8"et"er or not ?T( (?ational Teleco**unications
(o**ission) "as #ri*ary &urisdiction o!er #etitioner7s co*#laint for
da*ages.
H#8d=
6es. T"e (ourt ruled t"at t"e factual *atters undou)tedly
#ertain to t"e ?T( and not t"e regular courts. T"e co*#laint failed
to state a cause of action against A4-(? and t"e ot"er
res#ondents, considering t"at t"e ulti*ate facts u#on %"ic" t"e
co*#laint for da*ages de#ends fall %it"in t"e tec"nical co*#etence
of an ad*inistrati!e )ody.
H;t *ay occur t"at t"e (ourt "as &urisdiction to ta9e
cogni>ance of a #articular case, %"ic" *eans t"at t"e *atter
in!ol!ed is also &udicial in c"aracter. $o%e!er, if t"e case is suc" t"at
its deter*ination re'uires t"e e,#ertise, s#eciali>ed s9ills and
9no%ledge of t"e #ro#er ad*inistrati!e )odies )ecause tec"nical
*atters or intricate 'uestions of facts are in!ol!ed, t"en relief *ust
first )e o)tained in an ad*inistrati!e #roceeding )efore a re*edy
%ill )e su##lied )y t"e courts e!en t"oug" t"e *atter is %it"in t"e
#ro#er &urisdiction of a court. T"is is t"e doctrin# o@ -ri)ar%
;urisdiction. ;t a##lies C%"ere a clai* is originally cogni>a)le in t"e
courts, and co*es into #lay %"ene!er enforce*ent of t"e clai*
re'uires t"e resolution of issues %"ic", under a regulatory sc"e*e,
"a!e )een #laced %it"in t"e s#ecial co*#etence of an
ad*inistrati!e )odyG in suc" case t"e &udicial #rocess is sus#ended
#ending referral of suc" issues to t"e ad*inistrati!e )ody for its
!ie%.I
(onse'uently, %"ile it is true t"at t"e regular courts are
#ossessed of general &urisdiction o!er actions for da*ages, it %ould
nonet"eless )e #ro#er for t"e courts to yield its &urisdiction in fa!or
of an ad*inistrati!e )ody %"en t"e deter*ination of underlying
factual issues re'uires t"e s#ecial co*#etence or 9no%ledge of t"e
latter. ;n t"is era of clogged court doc9ets, ad*inistrati!e )oards or
co**issions %it" s#ecial 9no%ledge, e,#erience and ca#a)ility to
#ro*#tly "ear and deter*ine dis#utes on tec"nical *atters or
intricate 'uestions of facts, su)&ect to &udicial re!ie% in case of gra!e
a)use of discretion, are %ell nig" indis#ensa)le. et%een t"e #o%er
lodged in an ad*inistrati!e )ody and a court, t"erefore, t"e
un*ista9a)le trend is to refer it to t"e for*er.
(0octrine of Ad"erence of Jurisdiction)
B1L*1B1R V. C1
G.<. ?o L-40151, +ay 22, 1581
"acts=
:ri!ate res#ondent, t"e o%ner of t"e su)&ect #ro#erty,
instituted a (o*#laint for .&ect*ent against #etitioner )efore t"e
(ourt of Agrarian <elations. :etitioner clai*ed t"at t"e for*er
lando%ner, in !iolation of sections 11 and 1- of t"e (ode of Agrarian
<efor*s (<.A. -844 %"ic" too9 effect in 151- until a*ended )y <.A.
18-5 in 1521) sold t"e #ro#erties %it"out gi!ing "i* notice, and
registered t"e sale %it"out t"e re'uired Affida!it to t"e effect t"at
t"e notice re'uire*ent "ad )een co*#lied %it".
y %ay of counter-clai*, #etitioner e,ercised "is rig"t of
rede*#tion and t"e Agrarian (ourt u#"eld #etitionerJs rig"t of
rede*#tion and ordered #ri!ate res#ondent to con!ey t"e
#ro#erties to "i*. 3n a##eal to t"e (ourt of A##eals, "o%e!er, t"e
co*#laint for e&ect*ent %as dis*issed )ased on t"e status quo
pro!ision of :residential 0ecrees ?os. 22 and -11 %"ic" %ere )ot"
issued during t"e #endency of t"e a##eal. $ence, t"is #etition.
Issu#=
8"et"er or not #etitioner can !alidly e,ercised "is rig"t of
rede*#tion.
H#8d=
6es. T"e 4( ruled t"at :residential 0ecrees ?os. 22 and
-11 *ay not )e a##lied retroacti!ely, so t"at #etitioner, %"o is
entitled to t"e rig"t of #re-e*#tion and rede*#tion under t"e
#ro!isions of <.A. -844, t"e la% t"en in force, "ad !alidly e,ercised
"is rig"t to redee*, "is rig"t of #ree*#tion not "a!ing )een *ade
a!aila)le to "i* due to lac9 of notice of t"e sale.
;t is a funda*ental #ostulate in statutory construction t"at
Cla%s s"all "a!e no retroacti!e effect, unless t"e contrary is
#ro!ided.. 8ell-settled is t"e #rinci#le t"at 8"ile t"e Legislature "as
t"e #o%er to #ass retroacti!e la%s %"ic" do not i*#air t"e
o)ligation of contracts, or affect in&uriously !ested rig"ts, it is e'ually
true t"at statutes are not to )e construed as intended to "a!e a
retroacti!e effect so as to affect #ending #roceedings, unless suc"
intent is e,#ressly declared or clearly and necessarily i*#lied fro*
t"e language of t"e enact*ent.
T"ere )eing no e,#ress nor clearly i*#lied aut"ori>ation
e*)odied in :0 ?os. 22 and -11 allo%ing retros#ecti!e a##lication,
#ros#ecti!e construction is called for.
T"e funda*ental #olicy o)&ecti!es of our agrarian la%s,
inclusi!e of :0 22 and -11, are ac"ie!ed and u#"eld )y according to
#etitioner t"e rig"t to redee*, a !ested rig"t %"ic" "e "ad ac'uired
under t"e (ode of Agrarian <efor*s and of %"ic" "e cannot )e
de#ri!ed )y su)se'uent legislation.
;n Cabatan vs. Court of "ppeals! et al. 5/ 4(<A -2-, -4/
(1580)- +r. Justice Guiller*o 4antos %rote t"e o#inion for t"e (ourt
t"usD Eurt"er, on #etitionerJs contention t"at t"e cases s"ould "a!e
Legim Discipulo: Anne Lorraine Co & Meiki Merlin (Civil Procedure Case Digest)
)een dis*issed for lac9 of &urisdiction O on t"e ground of t"e
a)sence of a certification of tria)ility )y t"e +inistry of Agrarian
<efor* O t"e records s"o% t"at t"e cases %ere initiated in t"e (A<
in 1521. :res. 0ecrees ?os. -11 and /8- in!o9ed )y t"e #etitioners
in assailing t"e (A<J4 e,ercise of &urisdiction o!er t"e cases and
deciding t"e sa*e %ere #ro*ulgated only on 3cto)er 21, 1522 and
3cto)er 22, 152-, res#ecti!ely. +t is a fundamental postulate that
once a court has taken jurisdiction over a case! its authority can not
be affected adversely by a subsequent statute prescribin& a
precondition before the Court may take co&ni,ance of the case.
(3)&ections to &urisdiction o!er t"e su)&ect *atter)
DIL> D1N> N1CPIL V. IN*ERN1*ION1L BRO1DC1,*ING
G.<. ?o 144212, +arc" 21, 2002
"acts=
:etitioner %as t"e Assistant General +anager for
EinanceBAd*inistration and (o*#troller of #ri!ate res#ondent
;ntercontinental roadcasting (or#oration (;() fro* 1551 until A#ril
1552. F#on assu*#tion of Te*#lo as t"e ;( :resident, #etitioner
%as forced to retire. Te*#lo refused to #ay "i* "is retire*ent
)enefits. $ence #etitioner filed %it" t"e La)or Ar)iter a co*#laint
for illegal dis*issal and non-#ay*ent of )enefits.
;( alleged t"at t"e La)or Ar)iter "ad no &urisdiction o!er
t"e case, t"at t"e #etitioner %as a cor#orate officer %"o %as duly
elected )y t"e oard of 0irectors of ;(.$ence, t"e case 'ualifies as
an intra-cor#orate dis#ute falling %it"in t"e &urisdiction of t"e
4ecurities and .,c"ange (o**ission (4.().
:etitioner argued t"at "e %as not a cor#orate officer of
t"e ;( )ut an e*#loyee t"ereof since "e "ad not )een elected nor
a##ointed as (o*#troller and Assistant +anager )y t"e ;(Js oard
of 0irectors. $e #ointed out t"at "e "ad actually )een a##ointed on
January 11, 155/ )y t"e ;(Js General +anager.
Issu#=
8"et"er or not t"e La)or Ar)iter "ad &urisdiction o!er t"e
case for illegal dis*issal and non-#ay*ent of )enefits filed )y
#etitioner.
H#8d=
?o. 0is*issal or non-a##oint*ent of a cor#orate officer is
clearly an intra-cor#orate *atter and &urisdiction o!er t"e case
#ro#erly )elongs to t"e 4.(, not to t"e ?L<(.
Fnder :residential 0ecree ?o. 502-A (t"e <e!ised
4ecurities Act), (ontro!ersies in t"e election or a##oint*ent of
directors, trustees, officers, or *anagers of suc" cor#orations,
#artners"i#s or associations fall under t"e e,clusi!e of t"e 4.(
(4ecurities and .,c"ange (o**ission). T%o ele*ents are to )e
considered in deter*ining %"et"er t"e 4.( "as &urisdiction o!er t"e
contro!ersy, to %itD (1) t"e status or relations"i# of t"e #artiesG and
(2) t"e nature of t"e 'uestion t"at is t"e su)&ect of t"eir contro!ersy.
4ince co*#lainantJs a##oint*ent %as a##ro!ed
unani*ously )y t"e oard of 0irectors of t"e cor#oration, "e is
t"erefore considered a cor#orate officer and "is clai* of illegal
dis*issal is a contro!ersy t"at falls under t"e &urisdiction of t"e 4.(
as conte*#lated )y 4ection / of :.0. 502-A. T"at t"e #osition of
(o*#troller is not e,#ressly *entioned a*ong t"e officers of t"e
;( in t"e y-La%s is of no *o*ent, )ecause t"e ;(Js oard of
0irectors is e*#o%ered under 4ection 2/ of t"e (or#oration (ode
and under t"e cor#orationJs y-La%s to a##oint suc" ot"er officers
as it *ay dee* necessary.
(.ffect of esto##el on o)&ections to &urisdiction)
*IJ14 V. ,IBONGH1NO>
G.<. ?o. L-214/0, A#ril 1/, 1518
"acts=
Ti&a* filed for reco!ery of :1,508 #lus legal interest fro*
4i)onga"anoy. 0efendants filed a counter )ond %it" +anila 4urety
and Eidelity (o (4urety).
Judge*ent %as in fa!our of t"e #laintiffs, a %rit of
e,ecution %as issued against t"e defendant. 0efendants *o!ed for
%rit of e,ecution against surety %"ic" %as granted. 4urety *o!ed to
'uas" t"e %rit )ut %as denied, a##ealed to (A %it"out raising t"e
issue on lac9 of &urisdiction.
(A affir*ed t"e a##ealed decision. 4urety t"en filed
+otion to 0is*iss on t"e ground of lac9 of &urisdiction against (E;
(e)u in !ie% of t"e effecti!ity of Judiciary Act of 1548 a *ont"
)efore t"e filing of t"e #etition for reco!ery.
Act #laced original e,clusi!e &urisdiction of inferior courts
all ci!il actions for de*ands not e,ceeding 2,000 e,clusi!e of
interest. (A set aside its earlier decision and referred t"e case to 4(
since it "as e,clusi!e &urisdiction o!er Call cases in %"ic" t"e
&urisdiction of any inferior court is in issue.
Issu#=
8"et"er or not t"e 4urety )ond is esto##ed fro*
'uestioning t"e &urisdiction of t"e (E; (e)u for t"e first ti*e u#on
a##eal.
H#8d=
6es. T"oug" it is clear t"at t"e case is outside t"e
&urisdiction of t"e of t"e <egional Trial of (e)u, defendants %ere
esto##ed fro* 'uestioning t"e courtJs &urisdiction. T"e (ourt
e,#lained Ca #arty *ay )e esto##ed or )arred fro* raising a
'uestion in different %ays and for different reasons. T"us %e s#ea9
of esto##el in pais, or esto##el )y deed or )y record, and of esto##el
)y laches.
Lac"es, in a general sense is failure or neglect, for an
unreasona)le and une,#lained lengt" of ti*e, to do t"at %"ic", )y
e,ercising due diligence, could or s"ould "a!e )een done earlierG it is
negligence or o*ission to assert a rig"t %it"in a reasona)le ti*e,
%arranting a #resu*#tion t"at t"e #arty entitled to assert it eit"er
"as a)andoned it or declined to assert it.
T"e doctrine of lac"es or of Cstale de*andsC is )ased u#on
grounds of #u)lic #olicy %"ic" re'uires, for t"e #eace of society, t"e
discourage*ent of stale clai*s and, unli9e t"e statute of li*itations,
is not a *ere 'uestion of ti*e )ut is #rinci#ally a 'uestion of t"e
ine'uity or unfairness of #er*itting a rig"t or clai* to )e enforced or
asserted.
A #arty can not in!o9e t"e &urisdiction of a court to sure
affir*ati!e relief against "is o##onent and, after o)taining or failing
to o)tain suc" relief, re#udiate or 'uestion t"at sa*e &urisdiction.
T"e 'uestion %"et"er t"e court "ad &urisdiction eit"er of t"e
su)&ect-*atter of t"e action or of t"e #arties %as not i*#ortant in
suc" cases )ecause t"e #arty is )arred fro* suc" conduct not
because the jud&ment or order of the court is valid and conclusive as
an adjudication! but for the reason that such a practice can not be
tolerated O o)!iously for reasons of #u)lic #olicy.
T"e facts of t"is case s"o% t"at fro* t"e ti*e t"e 4urety
)eca*e a 'uasi-#arty, it could "a!e raised t"e 'uestion of t"e lac9 of
&urisdiction Pit only raised t"e 'uestion of &urisdiction after 1/ yearsQ
of t"e (ourt of Eirst ;nstance of (e)u to ta9e cogni>ance of t"e
#resent action )y reason of t"e su* of *oney in!ol!ed %"ic",
according to t"e la% t"en in force, %as %it"in t"e original e,clusi!e
Legim Discipulo: Anne Lorraine Co & Meiki Merlin (Civil Procedure Case Digest)
&urisdiction of inferior courts. ;t failed to do so. ;nstead, at se!eral
stages of t"e #roceedings in t"e court a quo as %ell as in t"e (ourt
of A##eals, it in!o9ed t"e &urisdiction of said courts to o)tain
affir*ati!e relief and su)*itted its case for a final ad&udication on
t"e *erits. ;t %as only after an ad!erse decision %as rendered )y t"e
(ourt of A##eals t"at it finally %o9e u# to raise t"e 'uestion of
&urisdiction.
(Jurisdiction o!er t"e issues)
L1BO V. REPUBLIC ,URE*>
G.<. ?o. L-22-1/, January -0, 1520
"acts=
4#s La>o, acting as guarantors <o)les, %it" a loan o)tained
)y t"e latter fro* t"e :"ili##ine an9 of (o**erce, a real estate
*ortgage in fa!or of t"e defendant <e#u)lic 4urety R ;nsurance (o.,
;nc. in consideration of its "a!ing consented to act as #rinci#al co-
de)tor for t"e loan aforesaid.
T"e *ortgage %as foreclosed e,tra-&udicially and sold to
t"e *ortgagee.(ertificate of title in t"e na*e of t"e s#ouses La>o
%as cancelled and a ne% one issued in t"e na*e of t"e defendant
co*#any. T"e foreclosure of t"e *ortgage %as in!alid )ecause
#laintiff <o)les "ad #aid on t"e *ortgage loan, "e continued to
*a9e ot"er #ay*ents. T"e #rinci#al #rayer of t"e #laintiffs %as for
t"e defendant co*#any to render an accounting of t"e #ay*ents
t"us *ade.
T"e trial court did not resol!e t"e *otion to dis*iss
categorically, )ut in an order, set t"e case for trial, %it" t"e
ad!ertence t"at Ce!idence on %"et"er or not t"e action "as
#rescri)ed s"all first )e #resented ... and t"en t"e court %ill
consider t"e sa*e ... as #art of t"e e!idence on t"e *erits.C After
t"e #laintiffs filed t"eir a*ended co*#laint, t"e defendants
ans%ered t"e sa*e, alleging inter alia t"at all t"e #ay*ents *ade )y
t"e #laintiffs after t"e foreclosure sale %ere *ade in t"e conce#t of
rents, for %"ic" t"e defendant co*#any %as under no o)ligation to
render an accounting.
Issu#=
8"et"er or not actuation of t"e trial court %as legally #er*issi)le.
H#8d=
?o. T"e (ourt ruled t"at t"e actuation of t"e trial court
%as not legally #er*issi)le es#ecially )ecause t"e t"eory on %"ic" it
#roceeded in!ol!ed factual considerations neit"er touc"ed u#on t"e
#leadings nor *ade t"e su)&ect of e!idence at t"e trial. <ule 1,
4ection 1, is 'uite e,#licit in #ro!iding t"at C#leadings are t"e %ritten
allegations of t"e #arties of t"eir res#ecti!e claims and defenses
submitted to the court for trial and jud&ment.C T"is rule "as )een
consistently a##lied and ad"ered to )y t"e courts.
T"e su)&ect *atter of any gi!en case is deter*ined ... )y
t"e nature and c"aracter of t"e #leadings su)*itted )y t"e #arties
to t"e court for trial and &udg*ent. .elandres vs. /ope, #u&ar
Central Mill Co.! +nc.! 52 :"il. 100, 10-.
;t is a funda*ental #rinci#le t"at &udg*ents *ust confor*
to )ot" t"e #leadings and t"e #roof, and *ust )e in accordance %it"
t"e t"eory of t"e action u#on %"ic" t"e #leadings %ere fra*ed and
t"e case %as triedG t"at a #arty can no *ore succeed u#on a case
#ro!ed. )ut not alleged, t"an u#on one alleged )ut not #ro!ed.C
(<a*on !. 3rtu>ar, 85 :"il. 2-0, 242)
;t is a %ell-9no%n #rinci#le in #rocedure t"at courts of
&ustice "a!e no &urisdiction or #o%er to decide a 'uestion not in
issue.C (Li* Toco !s. Go :ay, 80 :"il. 111)
A &udg*ent going outside t"e issues and #ur#orting to
ad&udicate so*et"ing u#on %"ic" t"e #arties %ere not "eard, is not
*erely irregular, )ut e,tra&udicial and in!alid.C (4al!ante !. (ru>, 88
:"il. 2-1, 244.)
T"e #arties "ere %ent to court and #resented t"eir
res#ecti!e sides on t"e #re*ise, ad*itted )y )ot", t"at t"e
*ortgage %as !alid and su)sisting. .!idence, t"erefore, to esta)lis"
suc" #re*ise %as unnecessary and uncalled for. ;ndeed, it %as for
t"at reason and )ecause in any e!ent t"e record of t"is case,
#articularly %it" res#ect to t"e actuations of t"e #arties after t"e
*ortgage %as foreclosed, s"o%s %it" o!er%"el*ing #re#onderance
t"at t"e said *ortgage "ad not )een e,tinguis"ed, t"at t"is (ourt
did not consider fa!ora)ly t"e defendant co*#anyJs #etitions to
su)*it a #"otostat of t"e first #ro*issory note, and signed
du#licates of t"e t"ree rene%al notes, e,ecuted )y t"e #laintiffs in
fa!or of <e#u)lic ;n!est*ent (o., ;nc. )earing not only t"eir
signatures as de)tors )ut also t"e signatures of t"e defendants
co*#any as solidary co-de)tor O all t"ese )eing e!idence %"ic" t"e
said defendant could "a!e su)*itted at t"e trial if t"e !alidity and
e,istence of t"e *ortgage "ad )een a contentious issue raised in t"e
#leadings. T"at t"e co#y of t"e note in t"e "ands of t"e #laintiffs
does not )ear t"e signature of t"e defendant co*#any is not
decisi!e of t"e latterJs lia)ility, t"e #ri*ary e!idence t"ereof )eing
t"e original of t"e said note in t"e "ands of t"e creditor, to %"o*,
after all, t"e rig"t to reco!er e,clusi!ely )elonged.
(Jurisdiction o!er t"e res or #ro#erty in litigation)
B1NCO E,P1COL3"ILIPINO V, P1L1NC1
Gr. ?o. L-11-50, +arc" 21, 1518
"acts=
anco .s#anol-Eili#ino foreclose a *ortgage u#on !arious
#arcels of real #ro#erty in +anila city..ngracio :alanca Tan'uinyeng
y Li*'uingco original defendant as security for a de)t o%ing )y "i*
to t"e )an9. 8"ic" is not a non-resident at t"at ti*e, and died
during t"e case.
;t %as declared t"at in case of t"e failure of t"e defendant
to satisfy t"e &udg*ent %it"in suc" #eriod, t"e *ortgage #ro#erty
s"ould )e e,#osed to #u)lic sale. And so t"e #ro#erty %as )oug"t )y
t"e )an9.
4e!en years later, after confir*ation of t"e sold #ro#erty, a
*otion %as *ade )y =icente :alanca. Eollo%ed )y a##eals.
Jurisdiction o!er t"e #ro#erty %"ic" is t"e su)&ect of t"e
litigation *ay result eit"er fro* a sei>ure of t"e #ro#erty under legal
#rocess, or fro* t"e institution of legal #roceedings, %"erein t"e
-o:#r o@ t/# court o!er #ro#erty is recogni>ed and *ade effecti!e.
T"e court in fact entered a #ersonal &udg*ent against t"e
a)sent de)tor for t"e full a*ount of t"e inde)tedness secured )y
t"e *ortgage.
T"e re'uire*ent is t"at t"e &udge s"all direct t"at t"e
notice )e de#osited in t"e *ail )y t"e cler9 of t"e court and it is not
in ter*s declared t"at t"e notice *ust )e de#osited in t"e *ail.
T"e a)sent o%ner of t"e *ortgaged #ro#erty *ust ta9e
t"e ris9 incident to t"e #ossi)le failure of t"e cler9 to #erfor* "is
duty, t"e act is #ut effectually )eyond t"e control of t"e #laintiff in
t"e litigation. T"e o)ser!ation %"ic" lead to t"e conclusion t"at t"e
Legim Discipulo: Anne Lorraine Co & Meiki Merlin (Civil Procedure Case Digest)
failure of t"e cler9 to *ail t"e notice is not suc" an irregularity
%ould not a!oid t"e &udg*ent in t"is case.
;f t"e re'uire*ents as to t"e *ailing of notice s"ould )e
considered as a ste# antecedent to t"e ac'uiring of &urisdiction,
t"ere is no esca#e t"at t"e failure to ta9e t"at ste# %as fatal to t"e
!alidity of t"e &udg*ent.
T"e #ro!ision of Act of (ongress declaring t"at no #erson
s"all )e de#ri!ed of "is #ro#erty %it"out due #rocess of la% "as not
)een infringed.
Issu#=
8"et"er or not court ac'uired t"e necessary &urisdiction
to ena)le t"e #roceedings %it" t"e foreclosure of t"e *ortgage.
H#8d=
Tan'uinyeng is a non-resident and "a!ing refused to
a##ear in court !oluntarily, t"e court ne!er ac'uired &urisdiction o!er
"i*. T"is is, "o%e!er, not essential since t"e foreclosure of *ortgage
is an action 'uasi in re* and %"at is essential is t"e court7s
&urisdiction o!er t"e res. Jurisdiction o!er t"e #ro#erty is )ased on
t"e follo%ingD
(1) T"at t"e #ro#erty is located %it"in t"e districtG
(2) T"at t"e #ur#ose of t"e litigation is to su)&ect t"e #ro#erty )y
sale to an o)ligation fi,ed u#on it )y t"e *ortgageG and
(-) T"at t"e court at a #ro#er stage of t"e #roceedings ta9es t"e
#ro#erty into custody,if necessary, and e,#ose it to sale for t"e
#ur#ose of satisfying t"e *ortgage de)t.
And since &urisdiction is e,lusi!ely o!er #ro#erty, t"e relief
granted )y t"e court *ust )e li*ited only to t"at %"ic" can )een
forced against t"e #ro#erty itself.
T"erefore, %"ate!er *ay )e t"e effect in ot"er res#ects of
t"e failure of t"e (ler9 of t"e (ourt to *ail t"e #ro#er #a#ers to t"e
defendant in A*oy, ("ina, suc" irregularity could i*#air or defeat
t"e &urisdiction of t"e court.
Legim Discipulo: Anne Lorraine Co & Meiki Merlin (Civil Procedure Case Digest)