ELS: Civil Procedure Notes Rae Gammad 1

Introduction

What is Remedial law?

ANS: Remedial law is that branch of law which prescribes the method of
enforcing rights or obtaining redress for their invasion. (Bustos v. Lucero, 81
Phil. 640). It is also known as adjective law.

Distinction between substantive law and procedural law

REMEDIAL LAW SUBSTANTIVE LAW

As to This refers to the legislation This refers to that branch of law

Definition providing means or methods which creates, defnes or
whereby causes of action regulates rights concerning life,
may be effectuated, wrongs liberty or property; or
redressed and relief obtained.
The powers of agencies or
instrumentalities for the
administration of public affairs.

As to Rights Does not vest rights Vests rights

As to Retroactive effect on actions Prospective in application

Application pending and undetermined
at the time of their passage.

-De Los Santos vs Vda. De

Mangubat

In relation to Supreme Court is expressly Inherently legislative

the power and empowered to promulgate
governance of rules and procedure.
Supreme Court
Refer to Par 5, Sec 5, Art VIII
of the Constitution which
provides for the rule making
power of the Supreme Court.

Distinction among civil action, criminal action and special proceedings

A. Civil Action one by which a party sues another for the enforcement or
protection of a right or the prevention or redress of a wrong
may either be: ordinary or special

B. Criminal Action one by which the State prosecutes a person for an act or
omission punishable by law

C. Special Proceeding a remedy by which a party seeks to establish a status, a

ELS: Civil Procedure Notes Rae Gammad 2

right, or a particular fact

Jurisdiction in General

What is jurisdiction?

Etymology: Juris + dico, means I speak of the law

Refers to the power or authority of the court to hear, try and decide a
case (Zamora vs. CA, 183 SCRA 279).
It includes the courts power to execute its decision (People vs.
Echegaray).
Jurisdiction is the power to hear and decide cases. (Herrera v. Baretto &
Joaquin, 25 Phil. 245).
Jurisdiction is the power with which courts are invested with the power
of administering justice, that is, for hearing and deciding cases.

How is jurisdiction determined?

It is determined by the allegations contained in the complaint or

information.
The averments in the complaint and the character of the relief sought are
the ones to be consulted.
Once vested by the allegations in the complaint, jurisdiction also remains
vested irrespective of whether or not the plaintiff is entitled to recover
upon all or some of the claims asserted therein.
How is jurisdiction over the issues determined?
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.
Jurisdiction over the issues 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.
It 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 issues not raised by the pleadings.
The issues tried shall be treated in all respects as if they had been raised
in the pleadings.

How is jurisdiction over the parties acquired?

Plaintiff- by filing of a complaint
Defendant- thru valid service of summons or thru his voluntary
appearance (filing of an answer).
Jurisdiction over the res- acquired thru summons by publication or
seizure.

Jurisdiction as distinguished from venue

ANS:
ELS: Civil Procedure Notes Rae Gammad 3

1. Jurisdiction is the authority to hear and determine a case; venue is the place
where the case is to be heard or tried;
2. Jurisdiction is a matter of substantive law; venue, of procedural law;
3. Jurisdiction establishes a relation between the court and the subject matter;
venue, a relation between plaintiff and defendant, or petitioner and
respondent; and
4. Jurisdiction is fixed by law and cannot be conferred by the parties; venue
may be conferred by the act or agreement of the parties.

Classification of jurisdiction
General Jurisdiction - It is the power to adjudicate all controversies
except those expressly withheld from the plenary powers of the court.
It extends to all controversies which may be brought before a court
within the legal bounds of rights and remedies.
An example is the RTC because the RTC has jurisdiction over all cases
which is not provided by law to be within any other court.
Special Jurisdiction - It is the power of the court to adjudicate only
particular cases and subject to such limitations as may be provided by the
governing law.
An example is the jurisdiction over probate proceedings.
Limited Jurisdiction - It is the power of the court to hear only cases which
are expressly delegated to it.
Original Jurisdiction - It is the power of the court to take judicial
cognizance of a case instituted for judicial action for the first time under
the conditions provided by law.
Exclusive Jurisdiction - It is the power of the court to hear and decide
case to the exclusion of all other courts.
Exclusive Original Jurisdiction - The power of the courts to hear and
decide case at the first instance and to the exclusion of all other courts.
Appellate Jurisdiction - The power and authority conferred upon a
superior court to rehear and determine causes which have been tried in
lower courts, the cognizance which a superior court takes of a case
removed to it, by appeal or writ of error, from the decision of a lower
court, or the review by a superior court of the final judgment or order of
some lower courts.
Territorial Jurisdiction - Refers to geographical area within which the
courts powers can be exercised. In civil cases, assumes importance in
case of venue of real or mixed action. In criminal cases, consideration of
territory and locus of crime determine venue and jurisdiction.
Supreme Court and Court of Appeals national territory
Regional Trial Court - Regional jurisdiction
Inferior courts - Territorial jurisdiction as defined by SC in BP129
*Power of tribunal considered with reference to the territory within
which it is to be exercised.
Extra-Territorial Jurisdiction - The power of the court to hear and decide
cases beyond the confines of the territory where the court is located.
Ancillary Jurisdiction - It is the inherent power of the court to determine
issues which are incidental to the exercise of its primary jurisdiction
Concurrent Jurisdiction - It is also known as confluent or coordinate
jurisdiction. It is the power conferred upon different courts, whether of
ELS: Civil Procedure Notes Rae Gammad 4

the same or different ranks, to take cognizance at the same stage of the
same case in the same or different judicial territories.
Delegated Jurisdiction - It is the grant of authority to inferior courts to
hear and determine cadastral and land registration cases under certain
conditions.

Principle of Judicial Hierarchy

Applies when there is an exercise of concurrent jurisdiction of the courts.
A higher court will not entertain direct resort to it unless the redress
cannot be obtained in the appropriate courts.
This is an ordained sequence of recourse to courts vested with
concurrent jurisdiction, beginning from the lowest, on to the next highest
and ultimately to the highest. This hierarchy is determinative of the venue
of appeals, and is likewise determinative of the proper forum for petitions
for extraordinary writs. This is an established policy necessary to avoid
inordinate demands upon the Court's time and attention which are better
devoted to those matters within its exclusive jurisdiction, and to preclude
the further clogging of the Court's docket.
However, by way of exception cases which involve transcendental
importance or paramount interest can be filed directly to the Supreme
Court.

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
demand 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.

Doctrine of Adherence 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.
Once jurisdiction has attached, it cannot be ousted by subsequent
happenings or events, although of a character which would have
prevented jurisdiction from attaching in the first instance. The court will
decide on the case until it disposes it.
ELS: Civil Procedure Notes Rae Gammad 5

JURISDICTION OF COURTS

JURISDICTION OVER SMALL CLAIMS, CASES COVERED BY THE RULES ON

SUMMARY PROCEDURE AND BARANGAY CONCILIATION
ELS: Civil Procedure Notes Rae Gammad 6
ELS: Civil Procedure Notes Rae Gammad 7

METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURTS/MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS

ELS: Civil Procedure Notes Rae Gammad 8

REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS

ELS: Civil Procedure Notes Rae Gammad 9

What is the test to determine whether an action is capable of pecuniary

estimation?
The criterion is the nature of the principal action or the remedy sought. If
it is primarily for the recovery of a sum of money, the claim is considered
capable of pecuniary estimation, and whether jurisdiction is in the MTCs
or in the RTCs would depend on the amount of the claim.
However, where the basic issue is something other than the right to
recover a sum of money, where the money claim is purely incidental to,
or a consequence of, the principal relief sought like specific performance
suits and in actions for support, or for annulment of a judgment or
foreclosure of mortgage, such actions are incapable of pecuniary
estimation, and are cognizable exclusively by the RTCs (Barangay Piapi v.
Talip, G.R. No. 138248, Sept. 7, 2005).

FAMILY COURTS
ELS: Civil Procedure Notes Rae Gammad 10

COURT OF APPEALS
ELS: Civil Procedure Notes Rae Gammad 11

COURT OF TAX APPEALS

ELS: Civil Procedure Notes Rae Gammad 12

SANDIGANBAYAN
ELS: Civil Procedure Notes Rae Gammad 13

JURISDICTION OVER THE:

Subject Matter

How is Jurisdiction acquired over the Subject Matter?

Conferred by law and is determined by the allegations of the parties.

General Rule: Jurisdiction over the subject matter may be raised at any
stage of the proceedings, even for the first time on appeal.
Exception: when one is declared as estopped- estoppel by laches (Tijam
vs. Sibonghanoy).
Illustration of allegations:
Pay and vacate -> unlawful detainer (MTC)
Pay or vacate -> action for a sum of money (depends upon the
amount)
Comply with the conditions of the lease and to vacate -> UD (MTC)
Comply or vacate -> specific performance (RTC)
UD: there is a need to demand to vacate
FE: no such need
Amount claimed or damages- complaint for damages; totality rule
not applicable
Amount claimed and damages- collection; apply totality rule
Note: Effect of estoppel on objections to jurisdiction: The active
participation of a party in a case is tantamount to recognition of that
court's jurisdiction and will bar a party from impugning the courts
jurisdiction.

Q How is jurisdiction over the subject matter conferred?

ANS: It is conferred by law, that is, B.P. Big. 129, otherwise known as the Judiciary
Reorganization Act. It does not depend on the objection or the acts or omissions
of the parties or anyone of them. (Republic v. Sangalang, 159 SCRA 515 [1988]; PNB
v. Florendo, 206 SCRA 582 [1992]).

Q May jurisdiction over the subject matter be waived? Is the rule absolute? Why?
ANS: As a rule, jurisdiction over the subject matter is not waivable. The exception is
in cases of estoppel to question or raise jurisdiction. W^arn. v. Sihnnghrmn$> 23
SCRA 29 [1968]; Lim, et al. v. Pacquing, et al., 55 SCAD 112, G.R. No. 115044,
September 1, 1994).

Q When a complaint was filed, the docket fee was not paid. It was contended
that since the docket and other lawful fees were not paid, the trial court did not
acquire jurisdiction over the subject matter of the case. Is the contention correct?
Why?
ANS: Yes, the contention is correct. It is a well-settled rule that the court acquires
jurisdiction over any case only upon the payment of the prescribed docket fee. An
amendment of the complaint or similar pleading will not thereby vest jurisdiction in
the court, much less the payment of the docket fee based on the amounts sought
in the amended pleading. (Manchester Development Corp. v. CA, 149 SCRA 562;
Baritaua, et al. v. Mercaes, et al., G.R. No. 136048, January 23, 2001).
ELS: Civil Procedure Notes Rae Gammad 14

Q How is jurisdiction over the subject matter determined?

ANS: Jurisdiction over the subject matter is determined upon the allegations made
in the complaint, irrespective of whether the plaintiff is entitled or not, to recover
upon the claim asserted therein, a matter resolved only after and as a result of the
trial. Neither can the jurisdiction of the court be made to depend upon the
defenses made by the defendant in his answer or motion to dismiss. If such were
the rule, the question of jurisdiction would depend almost entirely upon the
defendant. (Magay v. Estiandan, 69 SCRA 456; Multinational Village Homeowners
Association, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, 203 SCRA 104, October 17, 1991; Cardenas v.
Camus, July 30,1962; Torio v. CA, 49 SCAD 141, G.R. No. 107293, March 2, 1994;
Javelosa v. CA, 77 SCAD 860, G.R. No. 124292, December 10, 1996; Torres v. CA,
363 Phil. 539; Ganadin u. Ramos, 99 SCRA 613; Perez v. Cruz, G.R. No. 142503, June
30, 2003; Frianela v. Banayan, Jr., G.R. No. 169700, July 30, 2009; Sison v. Cariaga,
G.R. No. 177847, July 31, 2009).

Q What should the court do if the complaint on its face does not confer
jurisdiction upon the court?
ANS: It should dismiss it, because its only jurisdiction is to dismiss it. The court
cannot defer any action. (Administrator v. Alberto, October 31, 1958; Rosario v.
Carandang, 96 Phil. 845).

Q But in the above-cited question, suppose on its face, the court has jurisdiction
over the subject matter, and later on, it is proven that the court has no jurisdiction,
what should the court do?

ANS: It should try and decide the case and in so doing, if theBevidence shows lack
of jurisdiction, the court should dismiss it. (Basilio v. David, 98 Phil. 955).

Parties

How is jurisdiction over the parties acquired?

Plaintiff- by filing of a complaint
Defendant- thru valid service of summons or thru his voluntary
appearance (filing of an answer).

Q How is jurisdiction over the person of the plaintiff acquired?

ANS: Jurisdiction over the person of the plaintiff is acquired by the filing of the
initiatory pleading like a complaint.

Q How is jurisdiction over the person of the defendant acquired?

ANS: As a rule, jurisdiction over the person of the defendant is acquired by the
proper service of summons, or bv his voluntary appearance in court and his
submission to the authority of the court. (.Paramount Industries v. Luna, 148 SCRA
564; Toyota Cubao, Inc. v. CA, et al., 88 SCAD 557, G.R. No. 126321, October 23,
1997; Munar v. CA, 56 SCAD 787, G.R. No. 100740, November 25,1994; Avon
Insurance, PLC, et al. v. CA, 86 SCAD 401, G.R. No. 97642, August 29, 1997).

Q How is jurisdiction over the person of the plaintiff in a special civil action for
mandamus acquired?
ANS: Jurisdiction is acquired over the person of the plaintiff in a special civil action
ELS: Civil Procedure Notes Rae Gammad 15

for mandamus by the commencement or filing of the action and the payment of
the prescribed docket fees.

Q How is jurisdiction over the person of a defendant in an action for unlawful

detainer acquired?
ANS: Jurisdiction is acquired over the person of the defendant in an action for
unlawful detainer by the proper service of summons on him or by his voluntary
appearance.

Q How is jurisdiction over the person of a non-resident defendant not found in

the Philippines in an action for compulsory recognition of a child acquired?
ANS: Jurisdiction cannot be acquired over the person of a nonBresident defendant
who is not found in the Philippines in an action for compulsory acknowledgment of
his natural child. Jurisdiction, however, may be acquired over the res (status') with
leave of court, by effecting service of summons out of the Philippines by personal
service of summons, or bv publication in a newspaper of general circulation in such
places and for such terms as the court may order, in which case, a copy of the
summons and order of the court shall be sent by Registered mail to the last known
address of the defendant, or in any other manner the court may deem sufficient.
(Sec. 17, Rule 14; Perkins v. Dizon, 69 Phil. 86).
It can also be done by voluntary appearance of the defendant.

Q What is the purpose of the service of summons?

ANS: It is intended to give notice to the defendant that an action has been filed
against him. The defendant is then put on guard as to the demands of the plaintiff.
(Paramount Industries v. Luna, 148 SCRA 564).

Q Are there any distinctions between jurisdiction over the subject matter and
jurisdiction over the person?
ANS: Yes. They are:
1. Jurisdiction over the subject matter does not depend upon the consent or
omissions of the parties to the action or any of them; while jurisdiction over
the person may be conferred by consent expressly or impliedly given, or it
may, by an objection, be prevented from attaching or being removed after it
is attached;
2. As to subject matter, nothing can change the jurisdiction of the court over it,
or dictate when it shall be removed. It is a matter of legislative enactment
which none but the legislature may change; while jurisdiction over the
person is sometimes made to depend, indirectly at least, on the partys
volition. (MRR Co. v. Atty. General).

Issues

How is jurisdiction over the issues determined?

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.
Jurisdiction over the issues 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
ELS: Civil Procedure Notes Rae Gammad 16

the issues of the case.

It 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 issues not raised by the pleadings.
The issues tried shall be treated in all respects as if they had been raised
in the pleadings.

Res

Q How is jurisdiction over the res acquired?

ANS: It is acquired by the seizure of the thing under legal process whereby it is
brought into actual custody of law, or it may result from the institution of a legal
proceeding wherein the power of the court over the thing is recognized and made
effective. (Banco-Espanol Filipino u. Palanca, 37 Phil. 291).

Q -- Explain how a court may acquire jurisdiction over a case.

ANS: The courts acquire jurisdiction over the subject matter when the cases are
filed. Failure to pay the correct docket fees used to be fatal when the court did not
acquire jurisdiction. {Manchester Development Corp. v. CA, 149 SCRA 56; Hodges
v. CA, April 6, 1990). This rule has however been relaxed when the SC ruled that
even if the correct filing fees were not paid, plaintiffs were given time to pay the
docket fees within the prescriptive period. {Sun Insurance v. Asuncion, 170 SCRA
275).

Lack of Jurisdiction over the person of the Defendant

This ground is waivable especially if there is a voluntary appearance.
Under the law it is held that while lack of jurisdiction over the person of
the defendant may be duly and seasonably raised, his voluntary
appearance in court without qualification is a waiver of such defense.

Lack of Jurisdiction over the Subject Matter

General Rule: This ground is not waivable.
It can be raised anytime on the proceedings.
Exceptions: Estoppel by laches
Where a party invokes the jurisdiction of a court to obtain affirmative
relief, and it failed, he cannot therefor repudiate such jurisdiction.
ELS: Civil Procedure Notes Rae Gammad 17

While the issue of jurisdiction may be raised at anytime, he is estopped

as it is tantamount to speculating on the fortunes of litigation.
Also where the other party knows the lack of jurisdiction but filed a
counterclaim.

Take Note!
Under the law, jurisdiction over the subject matter is conferred by law and
determined by the allegations in the complaint regardless of whether or
not the plaintiff is entitled to recover upon all or some of the claims
asserted therein.
Lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter is not cured by regular
exercise of authority. Also lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter is
not cured by the correctness of the decision of the court that has no
jurisdiction over the same.

Q Is it possible to cure the lack of jurisdiction of a court over a case? Explain.

ANS: Generally, no. In Bandoy v. CA, G.R. No. 77133, July 1989, it was said that
where the complaint for ejectment contains no allegation that a demand had been
made upon the defendant to vacate the premises but only an allegation that
demand was made for payment of the rentals agreed upon, such allegation is
insufficient to confer jurisdiction upon the municipal court.
In said case, there was no allegation in the complaint that a notice to vacate was
made. During the trial, however, plaintiff offered as evidence a notice to vacate
alleged to have been served upon the defendant prior to the filing of the complaint.
It was held that even supposing without conceding that the complaint was
deficient, the deficiency was cured by the evidence.

Q Is it possible for a court to lose jurisdiction? Explain.

ANS: As a rule, once jurisdiction is acquired, it can never be lost; however, if there is
a law that expressly divests the court of its jurisdiction, then, that court may be
divested. (Sec. 14, B.P. Big. 129; Parcon v. CA, November 9, 1990). In this case, the
law provides that the CA shall have jurisdiction to annul decisions of the RTC and
even those pending in the RTC then, were forwarded to the CA in compliance with
the law. (See Aruego, Jr. u. CA, 69 SCAD 423, G.R. No. 112193, March 13, 1996).

Q-May a case already filed with the Regional Trial Court be transferred to the
Municipal Court?
ANS: Yes, cases filed before the RTC which now fall within the jurisdiction of the
MTC by virtue of R.A. 7691 may be transferred to the MTC. But this applies only to
civil cases, not to criminal cases, for as long as they have not yet reached the pre-
trial stage. Otherwise, jurisdiction would remain with the RTC.

Q - May a court act on a case pending before it to the exclusion of other courts?
Why?
ANS: Yes, because of the doctrine of judicial stability. Should one branch be
permitted to equally assert, assume or retain jurisdiction over a case in controversy
over which another coordinate or co-equal branch has already assumed
jurisdiction, then, that would be sanctioning undue interference by one branch over
another. With that, judicial stability would be a meaningless precept in a well-
ordered administration of justice. (Parcon v. Court of Appeals, 111 SCRA 262).