Reviewer on JURISDICTION based on Atty.

Brondial's lecture
by: Gretch

Jurisdiction: Power of the court to hear and decise a case

Fundamental Principles of Jurisdiction

1. Any judgement, decision, or final order rendered by a court without
jurisdiction is null and void.
2. heiarachy of courts
3. transcendal importance
4. sc is not trier if facts
5. venue is jurisdcition
6. juris obver the issues in dtermin in allegation of the pleadinsg
7. over the res is not necessary, nut the court over the defendant then the
case can continue
8. subject matter is confereed by law
9. over the parties
1. palintiff
2. defendant

yong sa marine mamals represented sya ng owners. Kasi sa enviromental law ito.

For jurisdiction to be exercised there must be a justiciable cause.

Where lies? With the courts, that is the regular courts; which are the following:
Supreme Court all authorities emantaes from it.
CA
CTA has already been regularized
RTC
Lower courts: (4)Municipal, Metropolitan, Mun. in Cities, Mun. Circuit
Shariah Courts: Circuit, District and Appellate
Doctrines: 1. Villagracia Case. - the Sharia Courts do not have juris
over actions or real actions when one of the parties is
not a muslim. (therefore, both parties must be muslims)

2. Lomondot vs. Balindong any decisions of the Circuit

Shariah Court must be brought to the District. Decisions of
the Disctrict courts it must be brought to the
Appellate Shariah Court. Cannot be appealled to regualr
Courts of Appeals.

Quasi judicial bodies also participate in the exrcise of jurisdiction, pursuant

to law creating them. They also have the power to determine justiciable
controversies
Primary jurisdiction- The court will not resolve the controversy involving
a question which is within the jurisdiction of the administrative tribunals,
esp. when the question demands the exercise of sound administrative
discretion. Exhaustion of adminitrative remedies, ex. Darab. certain
bodies which have jurisdictional authorities on certain bodies
 Military Courts are not really courts as it is known because they can only
take cognizance or justicibale controversies involving military service
oriented disputes. That's why there are case which can be brought to the
Military Courts or with the regular courts: Coup d'etat pweds sa trial
courts pweds sa military courts

As to the nature:
1. Original the court take cognizance for the first time.
Exclusive:
Concurrent:

2. Appellate second time to bring a case. That court execises the jurisdiction in
its appellate.

Exclusive Original
Exclusive Appellate

Case Doctrine: City of Manila vs Judge Cuerdo - Judge Cuerdo granted

injuntive relief, appeal brought to the CA. Tax case ito it shoud have been
brought to CTA. How can be brough to the CTA if 9262 does not provide
Certiorari.
SC: That would be Splitting Jurisdiction which is anathema to procedure. Appeal
chould have been brough to CTA, being in the nature of tax controversy. SP is not
allowed, it is procribed.

Is the SC has an exclusive original jurisdiction? Yes. Sc also have exclusive

original and exclusive concurrent jurisdiction.
Concurrent or Exclusive original- All cases involving ambassadors and public
ministers ( read the consti)
CPM, QW, HC
CPM will fall under the exclusive original of the SC if they emanate from the
following 6 (six) courts:
CA,
CTA en banc,
SB,
COA,
COMELEC,
Sharia Appelate courts
CPM from other courts(other those 6 mentioned), it is already concurrent. So
you can choose.
 Supreme Court has 3 divisions , 5 justices each.

Concurrent Jurisdiction is govern by three fundamental principles

1. Hierarchy of courts
2. Transcendental importance
3. SC is not a trier of facts (rule 45, pure question of law)

exceptions: transcendetal importance sa heirarchy of courts AGAN

vs. Piatco , AED vs. DOTC, in the case of Pres. Arroyo the SC take cognizance
granted the injunctive relief bec. Of transcendental importance

Agam vs. PIATCO, Liga ng mga Barangay vs. Atienza, these are cases on
concurrent jurisdiction and many others.
Case Doctrine: There is a latest case decided in June 2013, Pat-og vs. Civil
Service Commission. Yan ang latest sa concurrent jurisdiction. May isang
teacher ditto, highschool teacher. Mayroong mga studyante na may PE
class. Yung isang class na may PE rin, together with the other class, may
teacher. Yung mga studyante, sumama doon. Sabi ng teacher, di naman
kayo dito. May 1 studyanteng pasaway. Ang ginawa ng teacher, sinikmuraan
nya yung bata. Nagreklamo yung bata. Saan nagreklamo? Civil Service
Commission Cordillera Chapter. In short, natalo yung teacher. Dismissal
yung penalty according to the rule. Only that it was reduced later on. But
the issue here regarding concurrent jurisdiction, is the fact that the issue on
jurisdiction was contested on appeal saying that it should have been filed
with the Department of Education. The Supreme Court held that the Civil
Service Commission AND the Department of Education HAVE concurrent
jurisdiction over cases involving PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHERS.

(Exclusionary principle)The Supreme Court further stated that the principle

of concurrent jurisdiction, that court that takes cognizance of the case takes
it to the exclusion of all other courts.

2. Doctrine of Heirarchy of Courts

Case Doctrine: Agam vs. PIATCO. Ito alam na alam nyo to because this is the
case of NAIA Terminal 3.That was followed by the case of Republic vs.
Lingoyo (?) dba? And the latest of that is Aces Emerging Dragon vs. DOTC.
Lahat nitong kasong ito, series yan. Its all about the NAIA Terminal 3. The
first case regarding NAIA Terminal 3, it was directly filed to the Supreme
Court. And the respondent said, thats wrong. You are not following the
principle of hierarchy of courts. Ano sabi ng SC? We take cognizance of this
case on the ground of transcendental importance.
Injunction under Rule 58. The Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals do
not have jurisdiction over injunction as a principal action. That should be
filed with the RTC. O, si Gloria Macapagal Arroyo. She filed it with the
Supreme Court. The SC took cognizance of it. The DOJ did not even bother
to question that. But the DOJ should have questioned that on the ground of
hierarchy of court. She may be very small, but she is very important.
3. That the Supreme Court are not trier of facts
Under this principle, you tie that up with Rule 45. Rule 45 is appeal on
certiorari, ok? Remember that it says there, that you can only go up to
the Supreme Court on a pure question of law. If you mix it up with
questions of facts, that is dismissible.

Are there any exceptions in the SC is not a trier of facts? YES.

Sometimes, you go up to the SC by question of fact and the SC takes
cognizance of it. Why? Because kung ano ano na lang sagot nila. In the
interest of substantial justice,
The SC is not govern by the rules

Othe kinds of Jurisdiction:

Residual Jurisdiction - It is the jurisdiction of the trial court that remains with
it even if such court already lost jurisdiction over the case. So nandun pa rin
yung jurisdiction. In the interest of substantial justice of course. The next
question is, when does the trial court lose jurisdiction over the case? The
trial court loses jurisdiction over the case upon perfection of the appeal and
the expiration of the period to appeal. What is the basis? Sec. 9 of Rule 41.
There are 2 issues in Sec. 9 of Rule 41, the first issue there is with regard to
the perfection of appeal. The second issue there is not the perfection of
appeal, but the expiration of the perfection of the appeal. So when is an
appeal perfected? Appeal is perfected upon filing of the notice of appeal as
to the appellant only. But even if the appeal is perfected, the court does not
lose jurisdiction over the case yet. It is only upon the expiration of the
period to appeal that the court loses jurisdiction over the case. Is that clear
already to you? Of course not. Kasi, in every case, there may be multiple
parties.

Illustration of perfection of appeal

If A files a case against XYZ so there is a single plaintiff, there are 3
defendants. Judgment was rendered in favor of A. So talo si XYZ. A copy of
the judgment was received by XYZ on January 5, 10 and 15. So iba ibang
petsa pagkatanggap ng defendant ng desisyon laban sa kanila. So in the
case of X, he has 15 days, so he has until January 20. In the case of Y, he
has 15 days, he has only until January 25. And in the case of X who received
the copy of the judgment on January 15, he has until the 30 th of January. If
on January 8, X filed a notice of appeal. Question, when is appeal
perfected? ProvisionSec. 9 Rule 41, Appeal is perfected on January 8 as to
X. Suppose, when is appeal perfected as to Y and Z? Anong sagot nyo? The
question is wrong. They never file a notice of appeal. So it can never be
perfected diba? Appeal is only perfected as to X, not as to Y and Z.

Illustration on lose of jurisdiction

Only after January 30. Because the last day to appeal is supposedly by Z
who has until January 30 within which to appeal and therefore, the court
loses jurisdiction upon the expiration to appeal which is January 30. So by
Januray 31, the Court already has no jurisdiction over the subject matter.
 Remember, not jurisdiction over the person, but OVER THE CASE.

Illustration on residual jurisdiction

So before transmission, you file your motion for execution pending
appeal with the trial court, even if the trial court has already lost
jurisdiction over the case because it can still exercise residual jurisdiction.
Manlinaw na yun ha. That is the concept of residual jurisdiction. Tatandaan
niyo, Sec. 9 of Rule 41: perfection of an appeal and loss of or expiration of
the period to appeal.

Residual Prerogative
Residual prerogatives is different from residual jurisdiction. Residual
prerogative is the authority of the appellate court to dismiss a case motu
propio. So the appellate court can dismiss a case motu propio and that is
emphasizing residual prerogatives. Basis? Caton vs. Palanca, that is the
case. But you can also use Tecson vs. COMELEC.
Where do you find dismissal of a case motu propio allowed? That is only
allowed under Sec. 3 of Rule 17, dismissal of actions. 3 lang ang grounds
nyan
1) failure to present evidence for unreasonable period of time,
2) failure to appear at the presentation of evidence in chief and
3) failure to comply either any order of the cour

in addition Sec. 1 of Rule 9. Under Sec. 1 of Rule 9, there are other 4

grounds
lack of jurisdiction,
litis pendentia,
res judicata, and
prescription.
Delegated Jurisdiction
The jurisdiction of the MTC of the lower court in taking cognizance of land
registration and cadastral cases. There are 2 conditions
1) the assessed value of the property involved is not more than P100,000 and
2)there are no opposition.
What is the remedy of the aggrieved party? His remedy is appeal definitely.
But appeal from the (MTC) cadastral courts NOT to the RTC but to the CA.
This is the only instance where the judgment by the MTC has not pass
through the RTC, because the appeal here is to the CA.

Primary jurisdiction
This primary jurisdiction as early as Omictin vs. CA, refers to the jurisdiction
of quasi-judicial bodies in taking cognizance of administrative cases.
Regular courts cannot take cognizance of certain case unless, it has been
taken cognizance of these administrative cases. Halimbawa, under PD 1957,
ito yung mga subdivisions. You are a subdivision lot buyer and buimili ka sa
developer. Nagkaron kayo ng problema. You cannot file that to the regular
court. You have to file that with the HLURB in the exercise of the primary
 jurisdiction. In other words, you cannot go directly to the regular courts
without having exhausted administrative remedies. That is the usual and
ordinary regular concept of primary jurisdiction. Primary jurisdiction
therefore is the authority of administrative bodies to take
cognizance of certain cases before it can be brought to the regular
courts.
New rule by virtue of MOA. They have agreed that all cases cognizable
by the Sandiganbayan in the exercise of their original jurisdiction
must be investigated by means of preliminary investigation by the
Office of the Ombudsman in the exercise of his primary jurisdiction.
So that even if a case is already being investigated by the DOJ for
Preliminary Investigation, at any time, in the course of proceeding,
the Ombudsman can take it out from the DOJ and conduct the
investigation. Bago yan ha. Because doctrinally, the DOJ and the
Ombudsman have concurrent jurisdiction to conduct Preliminary
Investigation in cases cognizable by the SB
In the case of Garchitorena vs. Escobal. Remember 3 possible questions
1) WHAT offense was committed?
who committed the offense? Any public officer with a salary grade of 27
2) WHO committed the offense?
3) HOW was it committed.

The following offenses are cognizable by the SB:

1) violation of the anti-graft and corrupt practices act (1309)
2) EO 1214 & 14-A, or the Marcos wealth or the PCGG cases
3) ill-gotten wealth
4) bribery under the Revised Penal Code and by jurisprudence,
2 ang dinagdag dyan.
6) estafa and
The case of Hannah Serana vs. Sandiganbayan. this amended the jurisdiction of
the SB regarding Estafa.
The Supreme Court in Hannah Serana, as long as you commit the
offense of the crime in relation to ones office means that the office
FACILITATED (keyword) the commission of the offense, it is
committed in relation to ones office

7) falsification of documents.

Jurisdiction As to its object

1. Subject Matter
2. Persons of the Parties
3. The Res
4. Issue
5. Territory
Basic is the rule in Civil Procedure that jurisdiction is absolutely
 separate and distinct from venue. Venue is the place where the
offense or the act was committed, while jurisdiction is the authority to
hear and determine a case.
Exception? The only exception is if you ask from the Supreme Court
for a change of venue.

(5th Fundamental Principle in Jurisdiction)

5 . Venue is jurisdictional in criminal cases

Over the res

How does the court acquire jurisdcition over the res?

The court does not have to acquire jurisdiction over the res. Provided, it has
acquired jurisdiction over the person of the defendant. But if the court
cannot acquire jurisdiction over the person of the defendant, for one reason
or the other, then it has reason to acquire jurisdiction over the res in only to
continue with the proceeding.

Illustration:
An action for sum of money. It is a personal action. When you file an action
for a collection of sum of money, the court must acquire jurisdiction over
the person of the defendant. But if the court cannot acquire jurisdiction over
the person of the defendant because the defendant has already left for
abroad, halimbawa, and the defendant has to have properties located in the
Philippines, the court must acquire jurisdiction over the properties of the
defendant. And once the court acquires jurisdiction over the property of the
defendant, then, the case can continue even if the court was not able to
acquire jurisdiction over the person of the defendant.

And how does the court acquire jurisdiction over the properties of the defendant?
Through Rule 57Attachment

What is the limitation?

considering that the court did not acquire jurisdiction over the peron but
only to the res? Only the res is liable for the judgment. If the obligation, for
example, is P5M and he acquired over a property in Makati and it was worth
only P3M. Can the judgment oblige go beyond the res? In other words, can it
execute the judgment up to the maximum of P5M? NO. It is only up to P3M
because it is only the property over which the court has acquired
jurisdiction.

There are certain cases incidentally that the res in not an object per se. the
subject matter or the object of the action or status of the person.
Halimbawa, annulment of marriage. The subject matter there is the
 marriage and the object is the status of the person.and it happens that the
defendant lives abroad. So, do you have to acquire jurisdiction over the
status? YES. And how? You go now to the other mode of service of
summons, particularly Sec. 15 and 16 of Rule 14. But still, the principle
there, while the court does not have jurisdiction over the person of the
defendant acquires jurisdiction over the res. And the res there is the status
of the persons. Status dyan ay married.

Jurisdiction over the issues

Jurisdiction oer the issues is acquired or determined by the allegations in the
pleadings. So that which is not alleged in the pleadings, the court does not
have jurisdiction over that. Only those which are alleged in the pleading.

Illustrations:
Rule 70. Unlawful detainer and forcible entry. You very well know that
the only issue in unlawful detainer and forcible entry is possession de facto.
Ownership is not an issue in forcible entry and unlawful detainer. It is only
possession and not ownership and now these are 2 different matters.
Possession is not ownership and vice versa. So when one files a case of
unlawful detainer the court automatically acquires jurisdiction over the
parties of the action. But if you try to look at Sec. 16 of Rule 70, it says there
that when the issue of ownership is raised in the pleading the court is not
divested by its jurisdiction and must resolve on the issue of ownership. Only
to resolve the issue of possession. In other words, if the issue of possession
is never raised in the pleadings, the court has no jurisdiction over the issue
of ownership. It is only when it is raised in the pleading that the courts
acquire jurisdiction and in fact even goes further that the court is bound to
render a decision on the issue of ownership but not to resolve it with finality
but only in connection with the issue of possession. Remember that the
decision of the court as to the issue of ownership in an unlawful detainer
case is not a subject of res judicata. In other words, can you still file a case
of accion reinvindicatoria? YES, because the issue there on ownership in
unlawful detainer is only to resolve the issue on possession.

In an action for sum of money. A files a case against B for a sum of

P100,000. The issue in the complaint, the plaintiff never mentioned about
demand letters. But nonetheless, the case proceeded. During the
presentation of evidence by the plaintiff, he asked the following questions to
the plaintiff. The counsel was asked on the witness stand, after he realized
you were not paid, what did you do? Well, I demanded that he pays.
Then, how did you make the demand? I wrote him 3 demand letters.
And where are those demand letters? I have here 3 demand letters.
Kung yung kalaban hindi natutulog, that kind of question is objectionable on
the ground of lack of jurisdiction over the issues. So maguumpisa pa lang
yun, sabihin mo na Objection, your honor. The court has no jurisdiction
over demands. You know, there was no mention whatsoever of demands
and demand letters in the complaint.
What is the remedy of the complainant?
Sec. 5 of Rule 10, which is amendment of the compalint to conform to
the evidence.

Jurisdiction over the parties

How does the court acquire jurisdiction over the plaintiffs?

The court acquires jurisdiction upon filing of complaint AND timely payment
of correct docket fees. Nakita mo yung enunciation natin? TIMELY PAYMENT
OF THE CORRECT DOCKET FEES.

It is also required in a counterclaim. If the counterclaim is permissive. But if the

counterclaim is compulsory, the filing of the answer, confers already jurisdiction
without the payment of docket fees. Aside from the counterclaim, it is also
required in appeals. So that if you do not pay in the correct appellate docket fees
and at the right time, then the court does not acquire jurisdiction over the
plaintiff.

Case Doctrines:
Alday vs. FGU docket fees are required only are the permissive
countercliams. Not only sa initiaory pleading. On appeal klangan din ng
docket fees. Not equated to filing fees only, all other fess din.
Proton vs. BNP the principle of lineincy was applied bec. It was not the
error of the plaintiff. Per com. Of the clerk of court, later on it was found out
of docket fess it was already out of time. Pero not fault of the plaintiff.
Rubi Shelters
SLU vs. Cobarubias Appeal ito. Si Cobarubias employee ng SLU. Terminated
sya. CA said you have not paid the docket fees. Kelangan ba ng docket fees
sa labor case? Sa Coba paid. SLU, prescribed na yan. Bec. The non- payment
did not toll the running of prescriptioin. The Sc the court did not acquire
jurisdciton bec. Of the non-payment of the docket fees.
Gipa vs. SLI Sli files againt Gipa, recovery of property. SLI won sa RTC of
sorsogon. Gipa appaled by mail. Then pinadal yong pera. Sa CA timely
namn bbut the CA said kulang ang docket fees. Kulang 30 pesos research
fee ito. SC did not acuire jurisdiciton bec. The payment is incorrect.

How does the court acquire jurisdiction over the person of the defendant?
1. by valid service of summons
2. by voluntary appearance.
Wag nyong sabihing service of summons ha, always write it down
VALID service of summons. Wag nyo ng sabihin appeanrace, it must
be VOLUNTARY appearance.
this is settled already. When you enter special appeanrce for the
purpose of questioning jurisdiction, there is NO voluntary appeanrace.

How does the court acquire jurisdiction over C, the person of the co-defendant?
SAME with the defedant.

How does the court acquire jurisdiction over the 3rd/4th/5th party defendant?
SAME

How doe sthe court acquire jurisdiction over the person of the intervenor?
You have to qualify
You have to file a motion for leave to intervene. Upon approval of the
motion for leave to intervene.

Jurisdiction over the subject matter

Jurisdiction over the subject matter is CONFERRED by law.

Principle is that , it is conferred by law

Exception: The jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. Because the jurisdiction of the
Supreme Court over the subject matter is NOT conferred by law, but conferred by
the CONSTITUTION.
Sec. 5 of Art. VIII of the Constitution. Because that is the provision that
confers jurisdiction over the subject matter in the Supreme Court. But what
is strictly jurisdictional is only paragraph 1 & 2. Paragraph 1 speaks of
original jurisdiction which can either be exclusive or concurrent and yung 2 nd
paragraph appellate jurisdiction. All the rest, will constitute the judicial
power of the Supreme Courtthe power of judicial review. Change of venue
which I discussed last time, like promulgation of rules concerning pleadings,
the practice of law, the IBP. So when the issue is purely of law, connect that
also with Rule 45, that the SC is not a trier of facts, so you raise only
questions of law. So please memorize that, paragraph 1 which is about
original jurisdiction. It said, all cases involving ambassadors, public
ministers and consuls and all petitions for certiorari, prohibition and
mandamus, quo warranto and habeas corpus. These fall under the original
jurisdiction. Is it exclusive? NO, it is concurrent.
What is only exclusive are those petition for certiorari, prohibition and
mandamus against the 5 tribunals I have been emphasizingCA, CTA en
banc, SB, COA and COMELEC pursuant to Rule 64.
2nd paragraph- appellate jurisdiction, this is strictly the power of judicial
review. It says there review, revise, reverse, modify or amend all cases

How the Supreme Court exercises the power of judicial review?

2 ways, either
1) by appeal OR
2) by certiorari.
The certiorari referred to there is not petition for review on
certiorari under Rule 45, but rather, certiorari as a special civil
action under Rule 65.
The basis for the distinction of 65 and 45. 65 is applicable where
there is an error of jurisdiction as against 45, when there is an
 error of judgment.
ERROR OF JURISDICTION - When the court renders judgment without jurisdiction
or in excess of jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of
jurisdiction; remedy is RULE 65.
ERROR OF JUDGMENT IN other words, the court is authorized to render a
judgment, but the judgment is wrong.
What is the original exclusive jurisdiction of the CA?
Isa lang yunAll cases of annulment of judgments rendered by the RTC are
exclusively and originally cognizable by the CA. Yung iba, concurrent with
the RTC and the SCcertiorari, prohibition, madamus, quo warranto,
amparo, habeas corpus and habeas data.

What are the subject matters exclusively cognizable by the RTC?

There are about 11 or 12 provisions. But what are the salient points and possible
bar questions?
1) all cases, subject matter of which, are not capable of pecuniary estimation.

BUT what if it is capable of pecuniary estimation? When the pleadings and the
prayer in the complaint asks for money?
Look at the jurisdictional amount
1. P300,000 and above or above P300,000 outside Metro
Manila (RTC),
2. above P400,000 within Metro Manila (RTC).
If the conjunction is OR then it is capable of pecuniary estimation.
But if the conjunction is AND in the prayer then it is only incidental
to the principal action which is not measurable in terms of money and
therefore, not capable of pecuniary estimation

In actions for sum of money. Ano ang determinant? The amount. But
take note the exclusionary clause. Exclusive of interest, damages of
whatever kind and attorneys fees. So if the claim, for example, is
P250,000 as principal obligation, P50,000 moral damages, P50,000
exemplary damages, P50,000 attorneys fees. So P450,000 na yun.
Which court now has jurisdiction? It is still the MTC because of the
exclusionary clause.
A files a case aginst B for P250,000 but before he filed the case, he
wrote a demand letter to B saying, O, meron din akong moral
damages dyan. Im also asking from you exemplary damages. And if
ever you will not pay, I will be forced to hire a counsel and I
will be charging you P50,000. (there is contract) And he is in the
province, outside of Metro Manila. So the total claim is P400,000. And
so he made that demand letter. And B said, Ok, Im going to pay
that. (meeting of the minds) However, he did not pay his obligation
based on that and his conformity. So he filed now an action. The
principal action is P250,00 moral damages is P50,000, exemplary
damages is P50,000, attorneys fees is P50,000 or a total of P400,000
outside of Metro Manila. He filed that with the RTC. And then the
 defendant filed a motion to dismiss on the ground of lack of
jurisdiction over the subject matter because the principal claim is only
P250,000. What is your decision? Will the case be dismissed for lack of
jurisdiction? NO. Because in that particular case, what was actually
filed was NOT for sum of money but for breach of contract. Therefore,
it is already INCAPABLE of pecuniary estimation. What Im trying to tell
you is dont be misled by the basic principle without going to the
presentation of the problem.

Settlement of estate. The jurisdiction now depends on the GROSS VALUE of the estate.
Jurisdictional amount pa rin. P300,000 or P400,000 above or below, as the case may be.
So if the gross of the estate is P300,000 then MTC(outisdie MM) above P300,000 -
RTC. Witin MM, If it is above P400,000 then RTC, P400,000 below , MTC.

In all cases of unlawful detainer and forcible entry are exclusively and
originally cognizable by the MTC. You know the requirements to file an
unlawful detainer? There must be a demand to pay AND vacate.

But the plaintiff filed the case more than one year from the demand, so it is no
longer and accion interdictal but already accion publiciana. For a long, long time,
it has been settled that every accion publiciana is cognizable by the RTC. That no
longer holds. Hindi na po yan. As early as about 5 years ago. Vda. De Barreira
doctrine. And that has been reiterated in recent cases that accion publiciana is
not automatically cognizable by the RTC. It all depends now on the ASSESSED
VALUE. So that is another provision thereany action involving title to or
possession pf property, the jurisdiction is determined by the ASSESSED VALUE OF
THE PROPERTY.
P20,000 and P50,000. Less than P20,000 outside Metro Manila, less
than P50,000 within Metro Manila (MTC), above that RTC.

When the MTC dismisses the case for lack of jurisdiction and the
dismissal is appealed to the RTC, and the RTC in the exercise of its
original jurisdiction has, in fact, jurisdiction over the case, shall not
dismiss it but shall assume the case as if it has been originally filed
with it.

The Rules on Summary Procedure

in civil
1. unlawful detainer and forcible entry cases, irrespective of amount of
damages and unpaid rentals
2. Probate proceedings , which does not exceed 100k when outside MM or
200k when within MM
In criminal
3. All cases of traffic violation,
4. rental law.
5. Municipal ordinance

Probate Proceedings:
When is it considered under summary procedure and when is it covered under the
regular procedure? The key amount is P200,000 within Metro Manila, P100,000
outside Metro ManilaSUMMARY PROCEDURE yan.

Small Claim Suit

Remember that the amount involved here is P100,000. So if you are
presented with the problem, if the subject matter is P100,000, you are now
on a crossroads. If you read the provisions on Small Claims Suit, there are
some provisions there that are not on Summary Procedure, gaya nun, wala
doon na answer to the complaint. But a very characteristic in a Small Claim
Suit is the prohibition of lawyers. Kaya nga pag linagay lang dun sa problem,
A assisted by counsel hindi nay an papasok sa Small Claim Suit.

Salient characteristics of Summary Procedure:

1) it applies only in the lower court. Walang summary procedure sa RTC. Kung
may naririnig kayo sa RTC na, summary lang yan, that is just by analogy.
Ginagamit lang ito sa RTC pag ex parte of evidence, that is by analogy.
2) 2) In summary procedure, the requisite periods are much shorter than in
regular procedure. The defendant is required to file his answer within a
period of 10 DAYS only. In regular procedure, 15 days. The court must cause
the submission of the case within a period of 30 DAYS in Summary
Procedure but not in regular procedure. Once the case is submitted for
judgment, the court must render the judgment within 30 DAYS in Summary
Procedure, in regular procedure, 90 DAYS. I am talking about the rules, not
actual practice. Im teaching you this for purposes of the bar.
3) 3) there is no trial in summary procedure. Just submission of position
papers, affidavits, depositions and other evidence in support of your
position.
4) 4) there are prohibited pleadings.

In Barangay conciliation proceeding. This used to be PD 1508, pero repealed na

yan. Pero yang mga provisions na yan, this been reintegrated in the Local
Government Code. So sa Local Government Code, what does it say? ALL CASES
must pass through the barangay, so that if it does not pass through the barangay
it is questionable, it is dismissible. Not anymore on the ground of jurisdiction but
on the ground of PREMATURITY.

Exceptions.
1. If the party is a government official, whether provincial or national
1. If a party is a juridical person, a corporation, there is no need for
barangay conciliation proceeding.
1. And if the party is a resident of a separate or a different municipality
or city
Exception to the exceptionUnless, the barangays in which these 2 residentcities
or municiplaities are adjacent to each other
ADDITIONAL NOTES:

Delegted Jurisdcition of the MTC in handling cases of Land regitration and

cadastral cases whrete the asses value is not more than 100k and no oppositors.
Appeal thereform is not in the RTC , sa CA ito.

Special Jurisdction of the lower court in handling pets for bail and HB in the
absence of RTC judges.

Limited jurisdiction is the juris' of the court specif subject matter, like a probate
court. Unlawful dtainer, sa MTC

Primary Jurisdcition Ominting vs. CA reers to the juris o fthe quasi judicial in
handling asministratibe pursuant to the priniple exhasituion od administrative
ramedy.