RULES ON

SUMMARY
PROCEDURE
R.A. 7691
AN ACT EXPANDING THE JURISDICTION
OF METC, MTC AND MCTC

SEC. 32. JURISDICTION OF MeTC,

MTC & MCTC IN CRIMINAL CASES.
EXCEPT IN CASES FALLING WITHIN THE
EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION OF RTC AND
SANDIGANBAYAN, THE MeTC, MTC AND MCTC
SHALL EXERCISE:
(1) EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION OVER
ALL VIOLATIONS OF CITY AND MUNICIPAL
ORDINANCES COMMITTED WITHIN THEIR
RESPECTIVE TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION; AND

(2) EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION OVER ALL

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 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. 33. JURISDICTION OF MeTC,

MTC & MCTC IN CIVIL CASES.
(1) EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION OVER CIVIL ACTIONS AND
PROBATE PROCEEDINGS, TESTATE AND INTESTATE, INCLUDING THE
GRANT OF PROVISIONAL REMEDIES IN PROPER CASES, WHERE THE
VALUE OF THE PERSONAL PROPERTY, ESTATE, OR AMOUNT OF THE
DEMAND DOES NOT EXCEED P100,000.00 OR, IN METROMANILA
WHERE SUCH PERSONAL PROPERTY,ESTATE OR AMOUNT OF THE
DEMAND DOES NOT EXCEED P200,000.00 EXCLUSIVE OF INTEREST,
DAMAGES OF WHATEVER KIND, ATTORNEYS FEES, LITIGATION
EXPENSES AND COSTS, THE AMOUNT OF WHICH MUST BE
SPECIFICALLY ALLEGED: PROVIDED, THAT THERE ARE SEVERAL
CLAIMS OR CAUSES OF ACTION 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 CAUSES OF
ACTION, IRRESPECTIVE OF WHETHER THE CAUSES OF ACTION AROSE
OUT OF THE SAME OR DIFFERENT TRANSACTIONS;

(2) EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION OVER

CASES OF FORCIBLE ENTRY AND UNLAWFUL
DETAINER: PROVIDED, THAT WHEN, IN SUCH
CASES,
THE
DEFENDANT
RAISES
THE
QUESTION OF OWNERSHIP IN HIS PLEADINGS
AND THE QUESTION OF POSSESSION CANNOT
BE RESOLVED WITHOUT DECIDING THE ISSUE
OF OWNERSHIP, THE ISSUE OF OWNERSHIP
SHALL BE RESOLVED ONLY TO DETERMINE
THE ISSUE OF POSSESSION.

(3) EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION IN ALL CIVIL

ACTIONS WHICH INVOLVE TITLE TO, OR POSSESSION
OF, REAL PROPERTY, OR ANY INTEREST THEREIN
WHERE THE ASSESSED VALUE OF THE PROPERTY OR
INTEREST THEREIN DOES NOT EXCEED P20,000.00 OR,
IN CIVIL ACTIONS IN METRO MANILA, WHERE SUCH
ASSESSED VALUE DOES NOT EXCEED P50,000.00
EXCLUSIVE OF INTEREST, DAMAGES OF WHATEVER
KIND, ATTORNEYS FEES, LITIGATION EXPENSES AND
COSTS: PROVIDED, THAT VALUE OF SUCH PROPERTY
SHALL BE DETERMINED BY THE ASSESSED VALUE OF
THE ADJACENT LOTS.

SEC. 34. DELEGATED JURISDICTION

IN
CADASTRAL
&
LAND
REGISTRATION CASES.
MTC MAY BE ASSIGNED BY THE SUPREME COURT TO
HEAR AND DETERMINE CADASTRAL OR LAND
REGISTRATION CASES COVERING LOTS WHERE
THERE IS NO CONTROVERSY OR OPPOSITION, OR
CONTESTED LOTS WHERE THE VALUE OFWHICH
DOES NOT EXCEED P100,000.00, SUCH VALUE TO BE
ASCERTAINED BY THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE CLAIMANT
OR BY AGREEMENT FO THE RESPECTIVE CLAIMANTS
IF THERE ARE MORE THAN ONE, OR FROM THE
CORRESPONDING TAX DECLARATION OF REAL
PROPERTY.

SEC. 35. SPECIAL JURISDICTION IN

CERTAIN CASES.
IN THE ABSENCE OF ALL REGIONAL TRIAL JUDGES IN
A PROVINCE OR CITY, ANY METROPOLITAN TRIAL
JUDGE, MUNICIPAL TRIAL JUDGE, MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT
TRIAL JUDGE MAY HEAR AND DECIDE PETITIONS FOR
A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS OR APPLICATIONS FOR
BAIL IN CRIMINAL CASES IN THE PROVINCE OR CITY
WHERE THE ABSENT REGIONAL TRIAL JUDGES SIT.

SEC. 36. SUMMARY PROCEDURES IN

SPECIAL CASES.
IN METC AND MTC WITH AT LEAST TWO BRANCHES,
THE SC MAY DESIGNATED ONE OR MORE BRANCHES
THEREOF TO TRY EXCLUSIVELY FORCIBLE ENTRY
AND
UNLAWFUL
DETAINER
CASES,
THOSE
INVOLVING VIOLATIONS OF TRAFFIC LAWS, RULES
AND REGULATIONS, VIOLATIONS OF RENTAL LAW,
AND SUCH OTHER CASES REQUIRING SUMMARY
DISPOSITION AS THE SUPREME COURT MAY
DETERMINE.

THE AMOUNT OF THE ORIGINAL EXCLUSIVE

JURISDICTION ON CIVIL CASES OF THE FIRST
LEVEL COURTS WERE DOUBLED AS OF
MARCH 20, 1999 AS PROVIDED UNDER SEC. 5
OF RA 7691; CIRCULAR 21-99. THE ORIGINAL
AMOUNT OF P100,000.00 WAS INCREASED
TO P200,000.00. FIVE YEARS THEREAFTER,
P200,000.00
WILL
BE
INCREASED
TO
P300,000.00. TO QUOTE SEC. 5 OF RA 7691:

SECTION 5. AFTER 5 YEARS FROM THE EFFECTIVITY

OF THIS ACT, THE JURISDICTIONAL AMOUNTS
MENTIONED IN SEC. 19(3), (4) AND (8); AND SEC.
33(1) OF BP 129 AS AMENDED BY THIS ACT, SHALL BE
ADJUSTED TO P200,000.00. FIVE YEARS THEREAFTER,
SUCH
JURISDICTIONAL
AMOUNTS
SHALL
BE
ADJUSTED FURTHER TO P300,000.00: PROVIDED,
HOWEVER, THAT IN THE CASE OF METRO MANILA,
THE ABOVEMENTIONED JURISDICTIONAL AMOUNTS
SHALL BE ADJUSTED AFTER 5 YEARS FROM THE
EFFECTIVITY OF THIS ACT TO P400,000.00.

FEATURES
PROCEDURE

OF

SUMMARY

1. Unlike the regular procedure, the summary

procedure does not allow: 3-party complaint,
complaint-in-intervention,
reply,
counter-claims,
counter-cross-claims, motion to dismiss (except lack
of jurisdiction over subject matter and noncompliance of barangay conciliation), motion for bill
of particulars, motion for new trial, motion for
reconsideration
of
a
judgment,
motion
for
reopening trial, motion to declare defendant in
default, petition for relief of judgment, motion for
extension of time to file pleadings, petition for
certiorari, petition for mandamus, petition for
prohibition against interlocutory order, and dilatory

FEATURES
PROCEDURE

OF

SUMMARY

2. Unlike the regular procedure, the summary

procedure grants the power to the first level courts
to dismiss the civil case outright for any of the
grounds enumerated under Sec. 1 (a to j), Rule 16
of the 1991 Revised Rule on Summary Procedure
and to dismiss a criminal case for being patently
without merit.

FEATURES
PROCEDURE

OF

SUMMARY

3. Unlike the regular procedure which provides for

fifteen (15) days to file an answer to a complaint
after service of summons (Sec. 1, Rule 11, Revised
Rules on Civil Procedure), the summary procedure
provides for ten (10) days to file an answer to a
complaint after service of summons in a civil case
(Sec. 5, Rules on Summary Procedure). However, in
a criminal case, the period to file a counter-affidavit
is same with the regular procedure which is ten (10)
days.

FEATURES
PROCEDURE

OF

SUMMARY

4. Unlike the regular procedure which the court may

declare the defendant in default for the latters
failure to file an answer upon motion by the plaintiff
(Sec. 3, Rule 9, Revised Rule on Civil Procedure),
the summary procedure gives the first level courts,
on its own or on motion of the plaintiff, the power
to render judgment on the basis of the allegations
in the complaint and grant the plaintiffs prayers
but may reduce the amount of damages and
attorneys fees in its discretion when defendant
fails to file an answer. (Sec. 6, Rules on Summary
Procedure).

FEATURES
PROCEDURE

OF

SUMMARY

5. Unlike the regular procedure, the summary

procedure has no formal hearing of the civil case
because of first level courts decide the case based
on the affidavits and position papers submitted by
the parties; and
6. Unlike the regular procedure, the summary
procedures conduct of direct examination is
shortened because the affidavit of the witness
constitutes as a direct testimony subject to crossexamination.

PURPOSE
PROCEDURE

OF

SUMMARY

TO ACHIEVE AN EXPEDITIOUS AND INEXPENSIVE

DETERMINATION OF CASES REFERRED UNDER SEC. 1
OF THE 1991 REVISED RULES ON SUMMARY
PROCEDURE.
SUMMARY MEANS DISPATCH, WITH THE LEAST
POSSIBLE DELAY,SIGNIFYING THAT THE POWER MAY
BE EXERCISED WITHOUT A TRIAL IN THE ORDINARY
MANNER PRESCRIBED BY THE LAW FOR THE
REGULAR JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS.
###

FORCIBLE ENTRY
It is an action to recover possession of a property from the
defendant whose occupation thereof is illegal from the
beginning as he acquired possession by F.I.S.T.S. In forcible
entry, the plaintiff must allege in the complaint, and prove,
that he was in prior physical possession of the property in
dispute until he was deprived thereof by the defendant by
any of the means provided in Sec. 1, Rule 70 of the Rules
either by F.I.S.T.S. As time is of the essence, and the fact
that the defendnts are mere intruders or usurprers who
have no possessory right whatsoever over the land illegally
occupied by them, trifling technicalities that would tend to
defeat the speedy administration of justice formal demand
is not necessary thereto.

UNLAWFUL DETANER
It is an action for recovery of possession from the defendant
whose possession of the property was inceptively lawful by
virtue of a contract whether express or implied with the
plaintiff, but became illegal when he continued his
possession despite the termination of his right thereunder.
In unlawful detainer, there must be an allegation in the
complaint of how the possession of defendant started or
continued, tht is, by virtue of lease or any other contract,
and that defendant holds possession of the land or building
after the expiration or termination of the right to hold
possession by virtue of any contract, express or implied.
The possession of the defendant in unlawful detainer is
originally legal but became illegal due to the expiration or
termination of the right to possess. The action must be
brought within one year from the date of last demand; and