JURISDICTION

Jurisdiction the power and authority of the

court to hear, try and decide a case.
JURISDICTION OVER THE PARTIES
a) The manner by which the court acquires
jurisdiction over the parties depends on
whether the party is the plaintiff or the
defendant
b) Jurisdiction over the plaintiff is acquired by
his filing of the complaint or petition. By
doing so, he submits himself to the
jurisdiction of the court.
c) Jurisdiction over the person of the defendant
is obtained either by a valid service of
summons upon him or by his voluntary
submission to the courts authority.
d) The mode of acquisition of jurisdiction over
the plaintiff and the defendant applies to
both ordinary and special civil actions like
mandamus or unlawful detainer cases.
HOW JURISDICTION OVER PLAINTIFF IS
ACQUIRED
Acquired when the action is commenced
by the filing of the complaint. This
presupposes payment of the docket fees.
HOW JURISDICTION
ACQUIRED

OVER

DEFENDANT

IS

Jurisdiction over the person of the defendant is

required only in an action in personam; it is not
a prerequisite in an action in rem and quasi in
rem. In an action in personam, jurisdiction over
the person is necessary for the court to validly
try and decide the case, while in a proceeding in
rem or quasi in rem, jurisdiction over the person
of the defendant is not a prerequisite to confer
jurisdiction on the court, provided the latter has
jurisdiction over the res.
By voluntary appearance of the defendant,
without service of summons or despite a
defective service of summons. The defendants
voluntary appearance in the action shall be
equivalent to service of summons.
Instances when appearance of defendant is not
tantamount to voluntary submission to the
jurisdiction of the court:
1) when defendant files the necessary
pleading;
2) when defendant files motion for
reconsideration of the judgment by
default;

3) when defendant files a petition to set

aside the judgment of default;
4) when the parties jointly submit a
compromise agreement for approval of
the court;
5) when defendant files an answer to the
contempt charge;
6) when defendant files a petition for
certiorari without questioning the courts
jurisdiction over his person.
JURISDICTION OVER THE SUBJECT MATTER
It is the power to deal with the general subject
involved in the action, and means not simply
jurisdiction of the particular case then
occupying the attention of the court but
jurisdiction of the class of cases to which the
particular case belongs. It is the power or
authority to hear and determine cases to which
the proceeding is question belongs.
When a complaint is filed in court, the basic
questions that ipso facto are to be immediately
resolved by the court on its own:
a) What is the subject matter of their
complaint filed before the court?
b) Does the court have jurisdiction over the
said subject matter of the complaint
before it? Answering these questions
inevitably requires looking into the
applicable laws conferring jurisdiction.
JURISDICTION VERSUS EXERCISE OF
JURISDICTION
Jurisdiction is the power or authority of the
court. The exercise of this power or authority is
the exercise of jurisdiction.
ERROR OF JURISDICTION VS. ERROR OF
JUDGMENT
An ERROR OF JURISDICTION is one where the act
complained of was issued by the court without
or in excess of jurisdiction. It occurs when the
court exercises a jurisdiction not conferred upon
it by law, or when the court or tribunal although
with jurisdiction, acts in excess of its jurisdiction
or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to
lack or jurisdiction.
An ERROR OF JUDGMENT is one which the court
may commit in the exercise of its jurisdiction. 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 errors of judgment. Errors of judgment
include errors of procedure or mistakes in the
courts findings.

Errors of judgment are correctible by appeal;

errors of jurisdiction are correctible only by the
extraordinary writ of certiorari. Any judgment
rendered without jurisdiction is a total nullity
and may be struck down at any time, even on
appeal; the only exception is when the party
raising the issue is barred by estoppel.
HOW JURISDICTION IS CONFERRED AND
DETERMINED
Jurisdiction is a matter of substantive law
because it is conferred by law. This jurisdiction
which is a matter of substantive law should be
construed to refer only to jurisdiction over the
subject matter. Jurisdiction over the parties, the
issues and the res are matters of procedure. The
test of jurisdiction is whether the court has the
power to enter into the inquiry and not whether
the decision is right or wrong.
It is the duty of the court to consider the
question of jurisdiction before it looks at other
matters involved in the case. If the court finds
that it has jurisdiction, it is the duty of the court
to exercise the jurisdiction conferred upon it by
law and to render a decision in a case properly
submitted to it. It cannot decline to exercise its
jurisdiction. Failure to do so may be enforced by
way of mandamus proceeding.
Note: Jurisdiction over the subject matter
is conferred by substantive law which
may either be a Constitution or statute;
while jurisdiction over the subject matter
is determined by the allegations of
the complaint regardless of whether or
not the plaintiff is entitled to the claims
asserted therein.
DOCTRINE OF PRIMARY JURISDICTION
Courts will not resolve a controversy involving a
question which is within the jurisdiction of an
administrative tribunal, especially where the
question demands the exercise of sound
administrative discretion requiring the special
knowledge, experience and services of the
administrative tribunal to determine technical
and intricate matters of fact.
The objective is to guide a court in determining
whether it should refrain from exercising its
jurisdiction until after an administrative agency
has determined some question or some aspect
of some question arising in the proceeding
before the court.
DOCTRINE OF ADHERENCE OF JURISDICTION
/ CONTINUITY OF JURISDICTION
Once a court has acquired jurisdiction, that

jurisdiction continues until the court has done all

that it can do in the exercise of that jurisdiction.
This principle also means that once jurisdiction has
attached, it cannot be ousted by
subsequent happenings or events and retains
that jurisdiction until it finally disposes of the
case.
Even the finality of the judgment does not
totally deprive the court of jurisdiction over the
case. What the court loses is the power to
amend, modify or alter the judgment. Even after
the judgment has become final, the court
retains jurisdiction to enforce and execute it.
OBJECTION TO JURISDICTION OVER THE
SUBJECT MATTER
When it appears from the pleadings or evidence
on record that the court has no jurisdiction over
the subject matter, the court shall dismiss the
same. (Sec. 1, Rule 9). The court may on its
OWN INITIATIVE object to an erroneous
jurisdiction and may ex mero motu take
cognizance of lack of jurisdiction at any point in
the case and has a clearly recognized right to
determine its own jurisdiction.
Jurisdiction over the subject matter may be
raised at any stage of the proceedings, even for
the first time on appeal. When the court
dismisses the complaint for lack of jurisdiction
over the subject matter, it is common reason
that the court cannot remand the case to
another court with the proper jurisdiction. Its
only power is to dismiss and not to make any
other order.
EFFECT OF ESTOPPEL ON OBJECTION TO
JURISDICTION
The active participation of a party in a case is
tantamount to recognition of that courts
jurisdiction and will bar a party from impugning
the courts jurisdiction. The general rule
remains: a courts lack of jurisdiction may be
raised at any stage of the proceedings even on
appeal. The Sibonghanoy applies only to
exceptional circumstances.
Doctrine of estoppels by laches (in relation to
objections to jurisdiction) = the SC barred a
belated objection to jurisdiction that was raised
only after an adverse decision was rendered by
the court against the party raising the issue of
jurisdiction and after seeking affirmative relief
from the court and after participating in all
stages of the proceedings.
The SC frowns upon the undesirable practice of
submitting ones case for decision, and then
accepting the judgment only if favorable, but

attacking it for lack of jurisdiction if it is not.

JURISDICTION OVER THE ISSUES
It is the power of the court to try and decide
issues raised in the pleadings of the parties.
An issue is a disputed point or question to which
parties to an action have narrowed down their
several allegations and upon which they are
desirous of obtaining a decision. Where there is
no disputed point, there is no issue.
Generally, jurisdiction over the issues is
conferred and determined by the pleadings of
the parties. The pleadings present the issues to
be tried and determine whether or not the
issues are of fact or law.
a) may also be determined and conferred
by stipulation of the parties as when in
the pre-trial, the parties enter into
stipulations of facts and documents or
enter into agreement simplifying the
issues of the case.
b) may also be conferred by waiver or
failure to object to the presentation of
evidence on a matter not raised in the
pleadings. Here the parties try with their
express or implied consent or issues not
raised by the pleadings. The issues tried
shall be treated in all respects as if they
had been raised in the pleadings.
JURISDICTION OVER THE RES OR PROPERTY IN
LITIGATION
Jurisdiction over the res refers to the courts
jurisdiction over the thing or the property which
is the subject of the action.
Jurisdiction over the res may be acquired by the
court
1) by placing the property or thing under its
custody (custodia legis) (the seizure of
the thing under legal process whereby it
is brought into actual custody of law).
Example: attachment of property.
2) through statutory authority conferring
upon it the power to deal with the
property or thing within the courts
territorial jurisdiction (institution of a
legal proceeding wherein the power of
the court over the thing is recognized
and made effective). Example: suits
involving the status of the parties or
suits involving the property in the
Philippines of non-resident defendants.

JURISDICTION OF THE SUPREME COURT

CRIMINAL CASES
EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
Petitions for certiorari, prohibition and
mandamus against CA and Sandiganbayan
CONCURRENT JURISDICTION
a) With the CA and RTC: petitions for
certiorari, prohibition and mandamus
against the MTC

b) With the CA: petitions for certiorari,

prohibition and mandamus against
the RTC
c) with Sandiganbayan: petitions for
mandamus, prohibition, certiorari,
habeas
corpus,
injunction
and
ancillary writs 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.
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
1) from the RTC in all criminal cases
involving offenses for which the
penalty is reclusion perpetua or life
imprisonment, and those involving
other offenses which, although not so
punished, arose out of the same
occurrence or which may have been
committed by the accused on the
same occasion;
2) Automatic
review
where
death
penalty is imposed.
3) By petition for review on Certiorari
from the CA, Sandiganbayan and
from the RTC where only error or
question of law is involved
Note: In PP vs. Mateo (2004), the SC held
that while the Fundamental Law requires a
mandatory review by the SC of cases where
the penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua,
life imprisonment or death, nowhere
however, has it proscribed an intermediate
review.
If
only
to
ensure
utmost
circumspection before the penalty of
reclusion perpetua, life imprisonment or
death is imposed, the Court now deems it
wise and compelling to provide in these
cases a review by the CA before the case is
elevated to the SC. A prior determination by
the CA on, particularly, the factual issues,
would minimize the possibility of an error of
judgment. If the CA should affirm the penalty
of reclusion perpetua, life
imprisonment or death, it could then render
judgment
imposing
the
corresponding
penalty as the circumstances so warrant,
refrain from entering judgment and elevate

the entire records of the case to the SC

for final disposition.
CIVIL CASES
EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION in
petitions for certiorari, prohibition and
mandamus against the CA, COMELEC, COA,
CTA, Sandiganbayan
CONCURRENT JURISDICTION
1) With Court of Appeals in petitions for
certiorari, prohibition and mandamus
against the RTC, CSC, Central Board of
Assessment Appeals, NLRC,
Quasi-judicial agencies, and writ of
kalikasan, all subject to the doctrine of
hierarchy of courts.
2) With the CA and RTC in petitions for
certiorari,
prohibition
and
mandamus
against lower courts and bodies and in
petitions for quo warranto, and writs of
habeas corpus, all subject to the doctrine of
hierarchy of courts.
3) With CA, RTC and Sandiganbayan for
petitions for writs of amparo and habeas
data
4) Concurrent original jurisdiction with the RTC
in cases affecting ambassadors, public
ministers and consuls.
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
1)
by way of petition for review on
certiorari
(appeal by certiorari under Rule 45)
against CA, Sandiganbayan, RTC on
pure questions of law and CTA in its
decisions rendered en banc.
2)
in
cases
involving
the
constitutionality or validity of a law or
treaty, international or executive
agreement, law, presidential decree,
proclamation,
order,
instruction,
ordinance or regulation, legality of a
tax, impost, assessment, toll or
penalty, jurisdiction of a lower court;
and
3)
all cases in which the jurisdiction
of any court is in issue;
4)
all cases in which an error or
question of law is involved
Exceptions in which factual issues may be
resolved by the Supreme Court:
a) When the findings are grounded entirely
on speculation, surmises or conjectures;
b) When the inference made is manifestly
mistaken, absurd or impossible;
c) When there is grave abuse of discretion;
d) When the judgment is based on
misapprehension of facts;

e) When the findings of facts are conflicting;

f) When in making its findings the CA went
beyond the issues of the case, or its findings
are contrary to the admissions of both the
appellant and the appellee;
g) When the findings are contrary to the trial
court;
h) When the findings are conclusions without
citation of specific evidence on which they
are based;
i) When the facts set forth in the petition as
well as in the petitioners main and reply
briefs are not disputed by the respondent;
j) When the findings of fact are premised on
the supposed absence of evidence and
contradicted by the evidence on record; and
k) When the Court of Appeals manifestly
overlooked certain relevant facts not
disputed by the parties, which, if properly
considered,
could
justify
a
different
conclusion.
JURISDICTION OF THE COURT OF APPEALS
(69 Justices)
CRIMINAL CASES
EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
a) Actions for annulment of judgment of the
RTCs
b) Crimes of Terrorism under Human
Security Act of 2007
CONCURRENT ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
a) With the SC: petitions for certiorari,
prohibition and mandamus against the RTC
b) With the SC and RTC: petitions for certiorari,
prohibition and mandamus against the MTC
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Notice of Appeal:
a) From the RTC in the exercise of its
original jurisdiction, except those
appealable to the Sandiganbayan
b) From the RTC where penalty imposed
is
reclusion
perpetua
or
life
imprisonment or where a lesser
penalty is imposed but for offenses
committed on the same occasion or
which arose out of the same
occurrence that gave rise to the more
serious offense for which the penalty
of death, reclusion perpetua or life
imprisonment is imposed (Sec. 3,
Rule 122 as amended by AM No. 005-03-SC).
Automatic Review (i.e. no notice of appeal is
necessary) from the RTC in cases wherein
the death penalty is imposed.

Petition for Review from the RTC in cases

appealed thereto from the lower courts
and
not
appealable
to
the
Sandiganbayan.
CIVIL CASES
EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
in actions for the annulment of the
judgments of the RTC.
CONCURRENT ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
1) With SC to issue writs of certiorari,
prohibition and mandamus against
the RTC, CSC, CBAA, other quasijudicial agencies mentioned in Rule
43, and the NLRC (however, this
should be filed first with the CA as
per St. Martin Funeral Home case),
and writ of kalikasan.
With the SC and RTC to issue writs of
certiorari, prohibition and mandamus
(CPM) against lower courts and bodies
and writs of quo warranto, habeas
corpus, whether or not in aid of its
appellate jurisdiction, and writ of
continuing mandamus on environmental
cases.
3) With SC, RTC and Sandiganbayan for
petitions for writs of amparo and habeas
data where the action involves public
data or government office
EXCLUSIVE APPELLATE JURISDICTION
1) by way of ordinary appeal from the RTC
and the Family Courts.
2) by way of petition for review from the
RTC rendered by the RTC in the exercise
of its appellate jurisdiction.
3) by way of petition for review from the
decisions, resolutions, orders or awards
of the CSC, CBAA and other bodies
mentioned in Rule 43 and of the Office of
the
Ombudsman
in
administrative
disciplinary cases.
4) over decisions of MTCs in cadastral or
land registration cases pursuant to its
delegated jurisdiction; this is because
decisions of MTCs in these cases are
appealable in the same manner as
decisions of RTCs.
Note: There is no action to annul the
decision of the CA.
JURISDICTION OF THE COURT OF TAX APPEALS
(UNDER RA 9282 AND RULE 5, AM 05 11 07CTA)
EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL OR APPELLATE
JURISDICTION TO REVIEW BY APPEAL

1) Decisions of CIR 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 BIR;
2) Inaction by CIR in cases involving disputed
assessments, refunds of IR taxes, fees or other
charges, penalties in relation thereto, or other
matters arising under the NIRC or other laws
administered by BIR, where the NIRC or other
applicable law provides a specific period of
action, in which case the inaction shall be
deemed an implied denial;
3) Decisions, orders or resolutions of the RTCs in
local taxes originally decided or resolved by
them in the exercise of their original or
appellate jurisdiction;
4) Decisions of the Commissioner of Customs
a.
in cases involving liability for customs
duties, fees or other charges, seizure,
detention or release of property affected,
fines, forfeitures or other penalties in
relation thereto, or
b.
other matters arising under the
Customs law or other laws, part of laws
or special laws administered by BOC;
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) Decision of the secretary of Finance on
customs cases elevated to him automatically
for
review
from
decisions
of
the
Commissioner of Customs which are adverse
to the government under Sec. 2315 of the
Tariff and Customs Code;
7) Decisions of Secretary of Trade and Industry
in the case of non-agricultural product,
commodity or article, and the Secretary of
Agriculture in the case of agricultural
product, commodity or article, involving
dumping duties and counterveiling duties
under Secs. 301 and 302, respectively, of
the Tariff and Customs Code, and safeguard
measures under RA 8800, where either party
may appeal the decision to impose or not to
impose said duties.
EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
1) Over all criminal cases arising from violation
of the NIRC and the TCC and other laws, part
of laws, or special laws administered by the
BIR or the BOC where the principal amount
of taxes and fees, exclusive of charges and
penalties claimed is less than P1M or where
there is no specified amount claimed (the
offenses or penalties shall be tried by the
regular courts and the jurisdiction of the CTA

shall be appellate);
2) In tax collection cases involving final and
executory assessments for taxes, fees,
charges and penalties where the
principal amount of taxes and fees,
exclusive of charges and penalties
claimed is less than P1M tried by the
proper MTC, MeTC and RTC.
EXCLUSIVE APPELLATE JURISDICTION
1) In criminal offenses
a)
over
appeals
from
the
judgment, resolutions or orders of the
RTC in tax cases originally decided by
them, in their respective territorial
jurisdiction, and
b)
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 by the MeTCs,
MTCs, and MCTCs in their respective
jurisdiction.
2) In tax collection cases
a)
over
appeals
from
the
judgments, resolutions or orders of
the RTC in tax collection cases
originally decided by them in their
respective territorial jurisdiction; and
over petitions for review of the
judgments, resolutions or orders of the
RTC in the exercise of their appellate
jurisdiction over tax collection cases
originally decided by the MeTCs, MTCs
and MCTCs in their respective
jurisdiction.
JURISDICTION OF THE SANDIGANBAYAN
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION in all cases involving
1) Violations of RA 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt
Practices Act)
2) Violations of RA 1379 (Anti-Ill-Gotten Wealth
Act)
3) Sequestration cases (E.O. Nos. 1,2,14,14-A)
4) Bribery (Chapter II, Sec. 2, Title VII, Book II,
RPC) where one or more of the principal
accused are occupying the following
positions in the government, whether in
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 (RA 6758)
b)
Members of Congress and officials

c)
d)

e)
f)

g)

thereof classified as G-27 and up under RA

6758
Members of the Judiciary without
prejudice
to
the
provisions
of
the
Constitution
Chairmen and Members of the
Constitutional
Commissions
without
prejudice
to
the
provisions
of
the
Constitution
All other national and local officials
classified as Grade 27 and higher under RA
6758
Other offenses or felonies committed
by the public officials and employees
mentioned in Sec. 4(a) of RA 7975 as
amended by RA 8249 in relation to their
office
Civil and criminal cases filed pursuant
to and in connection with EO Nos. 1, 2, 14-A
(Sec. 4, RA 8249)

Note: Without the office, the crime cannot be

committed.
APPELLATE JURISDICTION - from the RTC in cases
under PD 1606, as amended by PD 1861, whether
or not the cases were decided b them in the
exercise of their original or appellate jurisdictions.
CONCURRENT ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WITH SC, CA
AND RTC for petitions for writs of habeas data and
amparo
The requisites that the offender
occupies salary Grade 27 and the
be intimately connected with
function must concur for the
jurisdiction Justice Magdangal De

the offender
offense must
the official
SB to have
Leon

JURISDICTION OF THE REGIONAL TRIAL

COURTS
CRIMINAL CASES
EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
1) Offenses punishable with imprisonment
which exceeds 6 years imprisonment
2) Offenses not within the exclusive jurisdiction
of any court, tribunal or body, except those
falling under the exclusive jurisdiction of the
Sandiganbayan
Note: In cases where the only penalty is
fine, the amount thereof shall determine
jurisdiction. If the amount exceeds
P4,000, the RTC has jurisdiction.
3) Family Court Criminal Cases
a)
One or more of the accused is/are
below 18 years old but not less than
9 years old;

b)

Where one of the victims is a

minor at the time of the
commission of the offense;
c)
Cases
against
minors
cognizable under the Dangerous
Drugs Act;
d)
Violations
of
RA
7610,
otherwise known as the Special
Protection of Children Against
Child Abuse, Exploitation and
Discrimination Act as amended
by RA 7658; and
e)
Cases of domestic violation
against women and their children.
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
All cases decided by the MTC in
their respective territorial
jurisdiction.
CIVIL CASES
EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
1) The action is incapable of pecuniary estimation
(such
as rescission of contract, action to revive
judgment, declaratory relief (1st part),
support, expropriation)
2) Title to,
property
P20,000
P50,000

possession of, or interest in, real

with assessed value exceeding
outside Metro Manila, or exceeds
in Metro Manila

3) If the amount involved exceeds P300,000

outside MM or exceeds P400,000 in MM in
the following cases:
a)
Admiralty and maritime
cases
b)
Matters of Probate (testate
and intestate)
c)
Other actions involving
personal property
d)
Demand for money
4) Cases not falling within the jurisdiction of
any court, tribunal, person or body
exercising
judicial
or
quasi-judicial
functions (general jurisdiction of RTC)
5) All actions involving the contract of marriage and
family relations
JURISDICTION OF FAMILY COURTS (RA 8369)
a) Petitions for guardianship, custody of
children and habeas corpus involving
children
b) Petitions for adoption of children and the
revocation thereof
c) Complaints for annulment of marriage,
declaration of nullity of marriage and

those relating to status and property

relations of husband and wife or those living
together
under
different
status
and
agreements, and petitions for dissolution of
conjugal partnership of gains
d) Petitions for support and/or acknowledgment
e) Summary judicial proceedings brought under
the provisions of EO 209 (Family Code)
f) 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 PD 603, EO 56 (1986) and
other related laws
g) Petitions for the constitution of the family
home
In areas where there are no Family
Courts, the above-enumerated cases
shall be adjudicated by the RTC (RA
8369)
6) To hear and decide intra-corporate controversies
Sec. 52, Securities and Regulations Code):
a) Cases involving
devises or schemes
employed by or any acts, of the board of
directors, business associates, its officers or
partnership, amounting to fraud and
misrepresentation which may be detrimental
to the interest of the public and/or of the
stockholders,
partners,
members
of
associations or organizations registered with
the SEC
b) Controversies arising out of intra-corporate
or partnership relations, between and among
stockholders,
members
or
associates;
between any or all of them and the
corporation, partnership or association of
which they are stockholders, members or
associates, respectively; and between such
corporation , partnership or association and
the state insofar as it concerns their
individual franchise or right to exist as such
entity
c) Controversies
in
the
election
or
appointments of directors, trustees, officers
or
managers
of
such
corporations,
partnerships or associations
d) Petitions of corporations, partnerships or
associations to be declared in the state of
suspension of payments in cases where the
corporation, partnership of association
possesses
sufficient property to cover all its debts
but foresees the impossibility of meeting
them when they respectively fall due or
in
cases
where
the
corporation,
partnership of association has no
sufficient assets to cover its liabilities,
but is under the management of a
Rehabilitation Receiver or Management

Committee.
CONCURRENT JURISDICTION
1) with the Supreme Court in actions
affecting ambassadors, other public
ministers and consuls
2) with the SC and CA in petitions for
certiorari, prohibition and mandamus
against lower courts and bodies in
petitions for quo warranto, habeas
corpus, and writ of continuing
mandamus on environmental cases
3) with the SC, CA and Sandigabayan in
petitions for writs of habeas data and
amparo
4) With Insurance Commissioner
claims not exceeding P100,000
APPELLATE
JURISDICTION
over
cases
decided by lower courts in their respective
territorial jurisdictions except decisions of
lower courts in the exercise of delegated
jurisdiction.
SPECIAL JURISDICTION SC may designate
certain branches of RTC to try exclusively
criminal cases, juvenile and domestic
relations cases, agrarian cases, urban land
reform cases not falling within the
jurisdiction of any quasi-judicial body and
other special cases in the interest of justice.
JURISDICTION OF METROPOLITAN
TRIAL COURTS/MUNICIPAL TRIAL
COURTS
CRIMINAL CASES
EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
1) Cases covered by Summary proceedings
a)
Violations of city or municipal
ordinances including traffic laws
b)
Violation of rental law
c)
Violation of traffic laws, rules and
regulations
d)
Violation of BP 22 (Bouncing
Check Law) effective April 15, 2003
e)
All other criminal cases where
the penalty is imprisonment not
exceeding 6 months and/or P100,000
fine irrespective of other penalties
arising therefrom
offenses punishable with imprisonment not
exceeding six (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 the kind, nature, value or amount thereof;

provided however, that in offenses involving
damage
to
property
through
criminal
negligence, they shall have exclusive original
jurisdiction thereof (Sec. 2, RA 7691).
3) Offenses involving DAMAGE TO PROPERTY
through CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE where the
imposable fine is not exceeding P10,000
Note: In cases where the only penalty is
fine, the amount thereof shall determine
jurisdiction. If the amount does not
exceed P4,000, the MTC has jurisdiction.
4) All offenses (except violations of RA 3019, RA
1379 and Arts. 210 to 212, RPC) committed by
public officers and employees in relation to their
office, including those employed in GOCCs, and
by private individuals charged as co-principals,
accomplices or accessories, punishable with
imprisonment of not more than 6 years OR
where none of the accused holds a position of
salary Grade 27 and higher.
CIVIL ACTIONS
EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
1) If the amount involved does not exceed P300,000
outside MM or does not exceed P400,000 in MM
in the following cases:
a)
Actions involving personal property
b)
Probate Proceeding (testate and
intestate) based on gross value of the
estate
c)
Admiralty and maritime cases
d)
Demand for money
Note: Do not include Interest, Damages
of whatever kind, Attorneys fees,
Litigation Expenses, and Costs (IDALEC).
However, in cases where the claim or
damages is the main cause of action, or
one of the causes of action, the amount
of such claim shall be considered in
determining the jurisdiction of the court.
2) Actions involving title to, or possession of, real
property, or any interest therein where the
assessed value of the property or interest
therein does not exceed P20,000 outside MM or
does not exceed
P50,000 in MM
3) Inclusion and exclusion of voters
4) Those governed by the Rules on Summary
Procedure
a) Forcible entry and unlawful detainer (FEUD)
With jurisdiction to resolve issue of
ownership to determine ONLY issue of
possession (provisional only)
Irrespective of the amount of
damages or unpaid rentals sought to
be recover
Where attorneys fees are

awarded, the same shall not

exceed P20,000
b) Other civil cases, except probate
proceeding, where the total amount
of the plaintiffs claim does not
exceed P200,000 in MM, exclusive of
interests and costs.
SPECIAL JURISDICTION over petition for writ
of habeas corpus OR application for bail in
criminal cases in the absence of all RTC
judges in the province or city
DELEGATED JURISDICTION to hear and
decide cadastral and land registration cases
where there is no controversy over the land
or in case of contested lands, the value does
not exceed P100, 000 = appealable to the
CA
1st level courts:
a. Metropolitan Trial Court Metro Manila;
b. Municipal Trial Courts in Cities
situated in cities
c. Municipal Circuit Trial Court
composed of multi-sala
d. Municipal
Trial
Courts

in
one
municipality

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

change of name and commitment of an

insane person to an asylum
2) All other personal and legal actions not
mentioned in par 1 (d) wherein the
parties involved are Muslims except
those for forcible entry and unlawful
detainer, which shall fall under the
exclusive 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
Cases that can be files:
1) Offenses defined and punished under PD
1083
2) Disputes relating to:
a. Marriage
b. Divorce
c. Betrothal or breach of contract to
marry
d. Customary dowry (mahr)
e. Disposition
and
distribution
of
property upon divorce
f. Maintenance
and
support
and
consolatory gifts (muta)
g. Restitution of marital rights
3) Disputes relative to communal properties
JURISDICTION OVER SMALL CLAIMS
1) MTCs, MeTCs and MCTCs shall have jurisdiction
over actions for payment of money where the
value of the claim does not exceed P100,000
exclusive of
interest and costs (Sec. 2, AM 08-8-7-SC, Oct.
27, 2009).
2) Actions covered are
a) 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
b) 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, pursuant to Rule 111
(Sec. 4, AM 08-8-7-SC).
These claims may be:
a) For money owed under the contracts of
lease, loan, services, sale, or mortgage;
b) For
damages
arising
from
fault
or
negligence, quasi-contract, or contract; and
c) The enforcement of a barangay amicable
settlement or an arbitration award involving
a money claim pursuant to Sec. 417 of RA
7160 (LGC).
CASES COVERED BY RULES ON SUMMARY
PROCEDURE (SEC. 1 RSP)

CIVIL CASES
1) All cases of forcible entry and unlawful
detainer (FEUD), irrespective of the amount
of damages or unpaid rentals sought to be
recovered. Where attorneys fees are
awarded, the same shall not exceed
P20,000;
2) All
other
cases,
except
probate
proceedings where the total amount of
the plaintiffs claim does not exceed
P100,000 (outside MM) or P200,000 (in
MM), exclusive of interest and costs.
CRIMINAL CASES
1) Violations
of
traffic
law,
rules
and
regulations;
2) Violation of the rental law;
3) All other criminal cases where the
penalty prescribed is imprisonment not
exceeding six (6) months, or fine not
exceeding P1,000, or both, irrespective
of other imposable penalties, accessory
or otherwise, or of the civil liability
arising therefrom, provided, that in
offenses involving damage to property
through criminal negligence, RSP shall
govern where the imposable fine does
not exceed P10,000.
RSP does not apply to a civil case
where the plaintiffs cause of action is
pleaded in the same complaint with
another cause of action subject to the
ordinary procedure; nor to a criminal
case where the offense charged is
necessarily
related
to
another
criminal case subject to the ordinary
procedure.
CASES COVERED BY THE RULES ON
BARANGAY CONCILIATION
The Lupon of each barangay shall have the
authority to bring together the parties
actually residing in the same municipality or
city for amicable settlement of all disputes
except:
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) Offenses punishable by imprisonment

exceeding one (1) year or a fine

exceeding P5,000
4) Offenses where there is no private offended
party
5) Where
the
dispute
involves
real
properties located in different cities or
municipalities unless the parties thereto
agree to submit their differences to
amicable settlement by an appropriate
lupon
6) 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
Such other classes of disputes which the President
may determine in the interest of justice or upon the
recommendation of the Secretary of Justice 8) Any
complaint by or against corporations, partnerships,
or juridical entities. The reason is that only
individuals shall be parties to barangay conciliation
proceedings either as complainants or respondents
8) Disputes where urgent legal action is
necessary to prevent injustice from being
committed or further continued, specifically:
a) A criminal case where the accused is
under police custody or detention
b) A petition for habeas corpus by a
person illegally detained or deprived
of his liberty or one acting in his
behalf
c) Actions coupled with provisional
remedies,
such
as
preliminary
injunction, attachment, replevin and
support pendente lite
d) Where the action may be barred by
statute of limitation
9) Labor disputes or controversies arising from
employer-employee relationship
10) Where the dispute arises from the CARL
11) Actions to annul judgment upon a
compromise which can be directly filed in
court.
It is a condition precedent under Rule 16;
can be dismissed but without prejudice
TOTALITY RULE
Where there are several claims or causes of actions
between the same or different parties, embodied in
the same complaint, the amount of the demand
shall be the totality of the claims in all the
claims of action, irrespective of whether the
causes of action arose out of the same or different
transactions (Sec. 33[1], BP 129).