GENERAL PRINCIPLES

Distinguish
Bar
by
prior
judgment
from conclusiveness of judgment.
Distinguish Cause of action from action
Distinguish civil actions from special proceedings.
What is the difference, if any, between the conciliation proceedings under
the Katarungang Pambarangay Law and the negotiations for an amicable
settlement during the pre-trial conference under the Rules of Court?
5. How should the records of child and family cases in the Family Courts or RTC
designated by the Supreme Court to handle Family Court cases be treated and
dealt with?
6. Under what conditions may the identity of parties in child and family cases be divulged
7. What is an interlocutory order?
8. What is the difference between a judgment and an opinion of the court?
9. In rendering a decision, should a court take into consideration the possible effect
of its verdict upon the political stability and economic welfare of the nation?
10.How shall the Rules of Court be construed?
11.How are remedial laws implemented in our system of government?
12.Distinguish between substantive law and remedial law.
13.What is the concept of remedial law?
Under Republic Act No. 8353, one may be charged with and found guilty of qualified
rape if he knew on or before the commission of the crime that he is afflicted with
Human Immuno-Deficiency Virus (HIV)/Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome
(AIDS) or any other sexually transmissible disease and the virus or disease is
transmitted to the victim. Under Section 17(a) of Republic Act No. 8504 the court
may compel the accused to submit himself to a blood test where blood samples would
be extracted from his veins to determine whether he has HIV.
14. Are the rights of the accused to be presumed innocent of the crime charged, to
privacy, and against
self-incrimination
violated
by
such compulsory testing?
15.If the result of such test shows that he is HIV positive, and the prosecution offers such
result in evidence to prove the qualifying circumstance under the Information for
qualified rape, should the court reject such result on the ground that it is the fruit of a
poisonous tree?
1.
2.
3.
4.

1.

2.

3.

4.
5.

JURISDICTION
What courts have jurisdiction over the following cases filed in Metro Manila?
a) An action for specific performance or, in the alternative, for damages in
the amount of P180,000.00
b) An action for a writ of injunction.
c) An action for replevin of a motorcycle valued at P150,000.00.
d) An action for interpleader to determine who between the defendants is entitled
to receive the amount of P190,000.00 from the plaintiff.
e) A petition for the probate of a will involving an
f) estate valued at P200,000.00.
Distinguish jurisdiction from venue?
Mark filed with the Bureau of Internal Revenue a complaint for refund of taxes
paid, but it was not acted upon. So, he filed a similar complaint with the Court of Tax
Appeals raffled to one of its Divisions. Mark's complaint was dismissed. Thus, he filed with
the Court of Appeals a petition for certiorari under Rule 65.
Does the Court of Appeals have jurisdiction over Mark's petition?
A brings an action in the MTC of Manila against B for the annulment of an
extrajudicial foreclosure sale of real property with an assessed value of P50,000.00
located in Laguna. The complaint alleged prematurity of the sale for the reason that the

mortgage was not yet due. B timely moved to dismiss the case on the ground that
the action should have been brought in the RTC of Laguna. Decide with reason.
6. A files an action in the Municipal Trial Court against B, the natural son of As father, for the
partition of a parcel of land located in Taytay, Rizal with an assessed value of
P20,000.00. B moves to dismiss the action on the ground that the case should have been
brought in the RTC because the action is one that is not capable of pecuniary
estimation as it involves primarily a determination of hereditary rights and not merely
the bare right to real property. Resolve the motion.
7. A filed with the MTC of Manila an action for specific performance against B, a resident of
Quezon City, to compel the latter to execute a deed of conveyance covering a
parcel of land situated in Quezon City having an assessed value of p19,000.00. B
received the summons and a copy of the Complaint on 02 January 2003. On 10
January 2003, B filed a Motion to Dismiss the Complaint on the ground of lack of
jurisdiction contending that the subject matter of the suit was incapable of pecuniary
estimation. The court denied the motion. In due time, B filed with the RTC a Petition for
Certiorari praying that the said Order be set aside because the MTC had no
jurisdiction over the case.
On 13 February 2003, A filed with the MTC a motion to declare B in default. The motion
was opposed by B on the ground that his Petition for Certiorari was still pending.
a. Was the denial of the Motion to Dismiss the Complaint correct?
b) Resolve the Motion to Declare the Defendant in Default.
8. P sued A and B in one complaint in the RTC-Manila, the cause of action against A being
on an overdue promissory note for P300,000.00 and that against B being on an
alleged balance of P300,000.00 on the purchase price of goods sold on credit.
Does the RTC-Manila have jurisdiction over the case? Explain.
9. In 1996, Congress passed Republic Act No. 8189, otherwise known as the Voter's
Registration Act of 1996, providing for computerization of elections. Pursuant
thereto, the COMELEC approved the Voter's Registration and Identification System
(VRIS) Project. It issued invitations to pre-qualify and bid for the project. After the
public bidding, Fotokina was declared the winning bidder with a bid of P6 billion and
was issued a Notice of Award. But COMELEC Chairman Gener Go objected to the
award on the ground that under the Appropriations Act, the budget for the
COMELEC's modernization is only P1 billion. He announced to the public that the
VRIS project has been set aside. Two Commissioners sided with Chairman Go, but the
majority voted to uphold the contract.
Meanwhile, Fotokina filed with the RTC a petition for mandamus compel the COMELEC
to implement the contract. The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), representing
Chairman Go, opposed the petition on the ground that mandamus does not lie to
enforce
contractual
obligations.
During
the proceedings, the majority
Commissioners filed a manifestation that Chairman Go was not authorized by the
COMELEC En Banc to oppose the petition.
May the OSG represent Chairman Go before the RTC notwithstanding that his
position is contrary to that of the majority?
10.Does the Court of Appeals have jurisdiction to review the Decisions in criminal
and administrative cases of the Ombudsman?
11.Josefa filed in the Municipal Circuit Trial Court of Alicia and Mabini, a petition for
the probate of the will of her husband, Martin, who died in the Municipality of
Alicia, the residence of the spouses. The probable value of the estate which
consisted mainly of a house and lot was placed at P95,000.00 and in the petition
for the allowance of the will, attorneys fees in the amount of P10,000.00, litigation
expenses in the amount of P5,000.00 and costs were included. Pedro, the next of kin
of Martin, filed an opposition to the probate of the will on the ground that the total
amount included in the relief of the petition is more than P100,000.00, the
maximum jurisdictional amount for municipal circuit trial courts. The court
overruled the opposition and proceeded to hear the case. Was the Municipal circuit
trial court correct in its ruling?

12. P sued A in the RTC-Manila to recover the following sums: (1) P200,000.00 on an

overdue promissory note, (2) P80,000.00 on the purchase price of a computer, (3)
P150,000.00 for damages to his car and (4) P100,000.00 for attorneys fees and
litigation expenses. Can A move to dismiss the case on the ground that the court
has no jurisdiction over the subject matter? Explain.
13. What court has jurisdiction over an action for specific performance filed by a
subdivision homeowner against a subdivision developer? Choose the correct answer.
Explain.
a)
b)
c)
d)

The Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board

The Securities and Exchange Commission
The Regional Trial Court
The Commercial Court or the Regional Trial Court designated by the Supreme
Court to hear and decide "commercial cases."
14. An amicable settlement was signed before a Lupon Tagapamayapa on January 3,
2001. On July 6, 2001, the prevailing party asked the Lupon to execute the amicable
settlement because of the non-compliance by the other party of the terms of the
agreement. The Lupon
concerned
refused
to
execute
the
settlement/agreement.
a) Is the Lupon correct in refusing to execute the settlement/agreement?
b) What should be the course of action of the prevailing party in such a case?
CIVIL PROCEDURE