Article VIII- Judicial Department

Section 1. Power of judicial interview:

- Actual controversy
- Moot and academic. Issue is no longer relevant. Lacson V Perez-
state of rebellion declared by Arroyo.
- To exercise its symbolic function.- to guide the bench/ bar for the
particular issue that may come up in the future
o Paco V Secretary of Educ..
- Constitutional question must be raised by the proper party. Legal
standing/ locus standi- suffers or sustained of imminent danger
(injury test)
o Personal/ substantial interest on the case that will suffer injury
or sustained of imminent danger
o This technicality can be set aside by court if it has
transcendental importance- Tatad V Secretary of DOE
Taxpayers suit- if the law questions public fund
appropriation. 2 Requisites
Public funds are disbursed by political subdivision
and instrumentality and
in doing so, the law is violated and the party has
suffered injury
government of Ph- question the validity of own laws.
Estoppel is not invoked. People V vEra
- Constitutional question must be raised in the earliest opportunity
o Raised in the petition or initiatory pleading
o Can be raised during appeal if there is a grave abuse of
discretion
d) The decision on the constitutional question must be determinative of
the case itself.

Judicial Review power

a. Review the ruling of lower courts.

Section 4. 15 Justices of the Supreme Court

3 divisions composed of 5 justices

Under Memorandum Circular No. 2311 signed by Chief Justice Maria

Lourdes P. A. Sereno, the SCs first division is now composed of Sereno,
and Justices Teresita J. Leonardo-de Castro, Lucas P. Bersamin, Estela M.
Perlas-Bernabe, and Francis H. Jardeleza.
The second division is headed by Justice Antonio T. Carpio with Justices
Arturo D. Brion, Mariano C. del Castillo, Jose Catral Mendoza, and Marvic
Mario Victor F. Leonen as members.
Justice Presbitero J. Velasco Jr. heads the third division with Justices
Diosdado M. Peralta, Jose Portugal Perez, and Bienvenido L.
Reyes. Justice Jardeleza is also a member of the division in temporary
capacity until a new justice is appointed.

En banc- concurrence of a majority

- Cases involving :
o Need to overturn the decision of the division
o Need to overturn a doctrine or principle of law laid down by
the court
o When division cannot reach a decision
o All cases involving the constitutionality of treaty, international
or executive agreement or law which it shall be heard by the
SC en banc
o All other cases which under the ROC required to be heard en
banc including those involving the constitutionality, application
or operation of presidential decrees, proclamations, orders,
instructions, ordinances and other regulations.
- Cases are decided while matters are resolved. Only cases are
referred to the SC en banc for decision whenever the required
number of votes is not obtained. Fortich V. Corona

Division

Section 7. Qualifications of members of the SC, and Collegiate courts-

(Court of Appeals, Sandiganbayan, Court of Tax Appeals)
- 15 years Practice of law- application of legal knowledge- for SC and
collegiate
- 10 years- RTC
- 5 years- lower court

Section 12. Garcia v. Macaraig- Macaraig cannot do non-judicial functions

Section 10. Salary

Section 10. Tenure. Section 2 par 2

Section 3. Fiscal autonomy of the Supreme Court.

Section 1 (2) Judicial power

Section 2 (1). Jurisdiction of courts will be defined by Congress

Section 5. Supreme Court powers

-

Section 30, Article VI- If appellate jurisdiction will be increased by

Congress, it should be in concurrence of SC

Section 18, Article VII- The Supreme Court may review, in an

appropriate proceeding by any citizen, the sufficiency of the factual basis
of the proclamation of martial law or the suspension of the privilege of the
writ or the extension thereof, and must promulgate its decision theron
within thirty days from its filing.

Section 13, Article VIII- Certification of the ponente

- Consing V CA, 177 SCRA 14, even if there is no signature below the
decision, it is still valid.

Section 14
- Minute resolutions dont need to put the facts (Mendoza v CFI 66
SCRA 96) because the petition is lack of merit (enough legal
basis accdg to SC)

Sin Perjuicio judgment is a judgment without statement of facts in

support of its conclusions. (Villaluin V Enchong)

Section 4 (4), Article VII- PET

Section 6, Article VIII- Administrative/ supervisory powers over the

lower courts

Section 15, Article VIII

-