University of Santo Tomas Faculty of Civil Law REMEDIAL LAW Questions Asked More Than Once (QuAMTO 2018) “QUAMTO is a compilation of past bar questions with answers as suggested by UPLC and other distinct luminaries in the academe, and updated by the UST Academics Committee to fit for the 2018 Bar Exams, “Bar questions are arranged per topic in accordance with the bar syllabus released by the Supreme Court and were selected based on their occurrence on past bar ‘examinations from 1987 to 2017.QUAMTO (1997-2018) REMEDIAL LAW QUAMTO (GENERAL PRINCIPLES /% How shall the Rules of Court be construed? (1998 Bar) ‘A: The Rules of Court should be_Ubersly ‘consiucted in order to promote thelr bjecave of securing 4 just spesdy, and Inexpensive Aispostton of every action and proceeding (See. 6 Rue} Q What Is the concept of Remedial Law? Distinguish between substantive law "and ‘remedial law (2006 Bar) ‘A: The concept of Remedial Law i that ite branch Of public lw whlch pressribe the procedural rules to be observed inIgations, whether ei ria, ‘or administrative and in special proceedings aswell asthe remedies or eis avalible Ineach ase Substantive la Is that part ofthe aw which creates, defines, and regulates rights and sbligatons, the ioltion of which ves rie toa cause of action. On the other hand, medal aw presribes the method ‘of enfreng rights or obtaining redress for their Invasion (@ Buse» Lucera€l" Phil. $40, 650 94a). How are remedial laws implemented tn our system of government? (2006 Bar) ‘A Remetal Laws are implemented in our system of {government through the judicial system, inching ‘the prosecutory service, our eours and quasi agencies. & Gh Bar) brief answers to the following: (2017 (@) Whatis the doctrine of herarchy of courts? ‘Av The dace of herarchy of ours provides tht where there isa concurence of janadetion by cours over an action or proceeding there fs an ordained sequence of recourse to such courts beginning frm the lowest tothe highest. direc invocation of the Supreme Courts riginal jurisdiction should be allowed only when there are special and important reasons therefor (Monas Court of Appeal Gt Ne 143797, 4Mey 2006), (©) What isthe Harmless Error Rule in relation ‘oappeals? ‘A: The harmless error rule In relation to appeals Provides that the appellate court should not reverse 2 Jdgment aso resul of any ervor or detec which doesnot afect the substintal right of the parties [See 56-51; Bersamin, Appeal & Review in the Phitppnes 362, (0 When does a pubic prosecutor conduct an Inquest instead ofa prelieinary investigation? ‘A: Under the Rules of Criminal Procedure, the publle Prosecutor “conducts an" inquest Instead of Dreiminay investigation when a person Is lawfully Arrested without a warrant involving an oflense ‘hic requlrsa preliminary investigation /S6 R112) Docitlne_of_nonlnterference or doctrine of {ud stabi In rendering a decision, should a court take {nto consideration the possible effect ofits verdict ‘upon the politcal stability and economic welfare ‘ofthe natlon? (2003 Bar) AA: No, because a court is required to take into consideration only the legal issues and the evidence admitted in the case, The politcal Stability and economic welfare of the nation are extraneous to the cate. They can have Persuasive influence but they are not the main fators chat should be considered in desiding 2 case. A decision should be based on the law, ules of procedure, justice, and equity. However, in exceptional cases the court may consider the political stability and economic Welfare of the nation when these are capable of Being taken into judicial notice of and are relevant tothe ease. JURISDICTION oF couRTS ‘Supremeaurt {: Distinguish Questions of Law from Questions of Fact, (2004 Bar) ‘A A question of aw is when the doubt or diference rises sto what the law son a coral sto act, Wile a" question of fact if when the doutt oF Aiference arises a5 to the wath or fled of alleged facts (Ramos v. Pepsi-Cola Boteling Ca. of {he Phil, Gi Na. 122533, February 8, 1967) Q Goodteather Corporation, through its President, Al Pakino, filed with the Regional Teal Court (RTC) a complaint for specte performance against Robert White Instead of fling an answer to the complaint, Robert White filed a mation to ‘dismiss the complaint onthe ground of lack of the appropriate board resolution from the Board of Directors of Good feather Corporation to show {he authority of AI Pakino to represent. the ‘corporation and fle the complaint in ite behalf, ‘The RTC granted the motion to dismiss and, accordingly It ordered the. demissal of the ‘complaint Al ‘Paldno fled. a" motion for ‘econsideration which the RTC denied As nothing ‘more could be done by Al Pakino before the RTE. he fle an appeal before the Court of Appeals (CA), Robert White moved fr dismissal of the appeal ta the round that the same involved purely 4 ‘question of law and should have been fied with {the Supreme Court (SC). However, Al Pakino lalmed that the appeal involved mixed questions of fact and law because there must be factual determination If Indeed, Al Paking was duly authorized by Goodreather Corporation tole the ‘complaint, Whose position Is correct? Explain (ore Bar) ‘A Al Palin is correct i claiming thatthe appeal Involved mixed questions o act and lav Theresa Suestion of law When the doubt or diference aise sto whatthe law is ona certain stat of facts On he ‘other hand, there is 2 gueston of fact whem the doubt or diference arses as tothe truth or flood of alleged facts (Mirae Philippines Corpration ‘Sari, GR No. 197598 November 2, 2012) Since the complaint was dismissed due to the alleged lack of appropriate board reslution from the Board of Direstors of Goodeather Corporation the apes ill necessary invalve a fatal determination the UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS Facutry oF Civit LawREMEDIAL LAW ‘authority 10. fle the Complaint for the said Corporation. Hence, the appeal before the Court of Appealsiscorrect. ‘Courtot Appeals Q¢Give atleast three instances where the Court of ‘Appeals may actas atrial court (2008 a ‘In annulment of judgment under Secs. 5 and 6 Role 47 Should the Court of Appeals ind pins facie merit im the petton, the same shall be aiven due course and summons shall be served fn the respondent, after which tral wil flow ‘where the procedure In ordinary ev eases shall be observed When a mation for new all is granted by the Court of Appeals the procedure in the new tra) shall be the same as that granted by a Regional ‘Tal Cour (Se 4, Rule53}. © Apion for habeas corpus shall be set for hearing (Se 12 Rule 102) 14. Ina petition forthe write of amparo and habeas data a heaving can be conducted Under Section 12, Rule 124 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure, the Court of Appeals has he power to try eases and conduct hearings, receive {vidence and perform any anda ats necessary to resolve factual issues Cases which fal within Itsorginal and appa jriscton. The court of Appeals can granta new trl based ‘onthe ground of newly discovered evidence(See Rule 120) The Court of Appeals, under Seaton 6, Rule 46 ‘whenever necessary to resolve factual issues, Imay conduct hearing thereon of delegate the eception ofthe evidence of such sues any of I embers orf an propriety oF Does the Court of Appeals have furisdlction to feview the Decisions in criminal and ‘administrative cases of the Ombudsman? (2006 Bar) ‘Az The Supreme Court ha exclusive appelate jurisdiction over decisions of the Ombudsman in ‘riminal eases (See 14, RA 6770). In administrative land disciplinary eases, appeals trom the Ombudsman ‘ste taen to the Cour of Appeals under Rule 43 (lantingv Ombudeman GR Na. 141426 May 6 2005: Fabian Desert, GR. No. 129742, September 16, 1998; Sec 16,R4670). SourtofTax Appeals (Qe Mark fed with the Bureau of Internal Revenue {complaint for rend of taxes pald, but It was ‘ot acted upon So, he filed a stmllar complaint withthe Court of Tax Appeals raffled to one of ts Divisions. Mark's complaint was dismissed. Thus, he fled withthe Court of Appeals a petition for Certlorart under Rule 5. Dose the Court of ‘Appeals have jurisdiction over Mark’s petition? (@006 Bar} ‘A No, The procedure is governed by Sec. 11 of RA 9292, Decitone of 3 divison of the Court of Tax Appeale must be apeated to the Cour of Tae Appeals En Bane Further, the CTA now bas the same ean the Cour of Appeals and ino longer considered as 3 ‘quas-judial agency. Tes Ukewise provided In the Said Taw thatthe decisions ofthe CTA en bane are ongniable by the Supreme Cour under Rule 45 of ‘he 1997 Rolex of Ci Procedare. ‘Sandigantavan ‘Q The Ombudsman, ater conducting the Fequisite preliminary investigation, "found Probable cause. to charge Gov. Matigas in Eonspiracy wth Carpinter, a private Individual, {or violating Section 3() of Republic Act (RA) No. 3019 (Anti-GraR and Corrupt Practices Act, 35 amended). Before the Information could be Med with the Sandiganbayan, Gov. Matigas was hiled in ‘an. ambush. This, notwithstanding, an Information was fed against Gov. Matigas and Ccarpintere. At the ‘Sandiganbayan, Carpintero through ‘counsel, led a Motion to Quash the Information, of lack of jurisdiction of the 3, arguing that with the death of theres no public oficer charged in the information. Isthe Motion to Quash legally tenable? (2014 Bar) [A: No. The Motion to quash Is not legally tenable Wile Wig tue that by reason ofthe death of Gov Matigas, there Is no longer any publ ofcer with ‘whom be canbe charge for vation of RA. 3019, I os not mean, however, that the allegation of “conspiracy between them can nolonger be proved or that theralleged conspiracy isaleady expunged. The ‘only thing extinguished by the death of Gor. Matgns ‘eis eiminal lability. Hs death dl not extinguish the rime nor didi remove the basis ofthe charge of conspiracy "between "hie and. Carpintera, ‘The requirement before a private person “may be Indicted for violation of Secon 3(g) of RA. 3019, mong others, Is that such private person must be lloged to have acted In conspiracy with a puble fer. The a, however doesnot require that such person mast tall Instances, be indented together With the puble ofc. Indeed, fs not necessary 9 Join al alleged co-conspirators In an Indletmen: for fonspracy(Peonle ofthe Philppnesv. Henry T. Go, (GR Ha 168539, March 25,2014) Reslonal rial Courts {state atleast fve (5) evil eases that fall under {he exclusive orginal jursdltion ofthe Regional Trial Court (RTC). (2016 Bar) ‘A: The Rogionl Tal Cours inter alia shal exercise ‘clusve original Jurislcton inthe folowing cil 1. Imall iil acions im whieh the subject of the Itsgaton incapable of pecuniary estimation: 2 Insall eli actions whlch Involve te to, oF possesion of, real property, or any Interest therein, where the assessed value of the property Involved exceeds twenty thousands esos (P20, 000.00) or for il actions In Metro Hanla were such value exoeds ity thousand pesos (P50, 000.00) except actions for forcible fntry Into and unlawful detainer of lands oF ‘buildings, original Juristion over which ts Confered upon the Metropaltan Til Cours: 3, Invallactons. in. admiralty and maritime |ursction where the demand or claim exceeds ‘hee hundred thousand pesos (00, 000.00) ‘or in Metro Mani, where such demand or claim fxoeeds four hundred thousand pesos (P400, 00.00); 4. In all maters of probate, both estate and Intestate, where the gross value ofthe estate txceeds three hundred thousand pesos (P200, £00.00) or, in probate maters in Metro Manila were such gross value exceeds four hundred "howsand pesos (P400, 00.00): 5. Inall action involving the contrac of mariage and marta reaons: UST BAR OPERATIONS Univensity of Sawro Tomas