Sei sulla pagina 1di 87

CIVIL PROCEDURE DEAN FERDINAND A. TAN

By ALBERTSON S. CAJAYON

I Preliminaries

1. What is remedial law?

Prescribes the methods of enforcing those rights and obligations created by substantive law (Bustos vs. Lucero, 81 Phil. 640) by providing a procedural system for obtaining redress for the invasion of rights and violations of duties and by prescribing rules as to how suits are filed, tried and decided upon by the courts.

Branch of law which prescribes the method of enforcing the rights or obtaining redress for
Branch
of
law
which
prescribes
the method
of
enforcing the rights or obtaining redress for their
invasion.
2. Distinguish remedial law and substantive law.
Substantive law creates, defines and regulates
rights, while adjective or remedial law which
prescribes the method of enforcing the rights or
obtaining redress for their invasion.

Substantive law makes vested rights possible, while remedial law vests no rights.

Substantive law, as a general rule, is prospective

regulating the

procedure of courts(remedial law) may be made applicable to cases pending at the time of their passage and are retroactive in that sense.

in application, while statutes

the

Congress, while remedial law is promulgated by the

Supreme Court.

Substantive law

is enacted or promulgated by

1 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan Sororitas

Substantive law cannot be waived, while remedial

law

parties.

subject to agreement of

can

be

waive

or

3. What at the four main divisions of remedial law?

A. Civil Procedure Rules 1 71 (a)Ordinary civil actions (Rules 1-56); (b)Provisional remedies (Rules 57-61); and (c)Special civil actions (Rules 62-71)

Note: Petitions for Writ of Kalikasan and Writ

of Continuing actions.

Mandamus

are

special

civil

B. Special Proceedings Rules 72 – 109 C. Criminal Procedure Rules 110 – 127 D.
B.
Special Proceedings Rules 72 – 109
C.
Criminal Procedure Rules 110 – 127
D.
Rules on Evidence Rule 128 – 134
4.
What is the nature of remedial law?

The rules of procedure are merely tools designed to facilitate the attainment of justice. They were conceived and promulgated to effectively aid the court in the dispensation of justice. Courts are not slaves to or robots of technical rules, shorn of judicial discretion. In rendering justice, courts have always been, as they ought to be, conscientiously guided by the norm that on the balance, technicalities take a backseat against substantive rights, and not the other way around. Thus, if the application of the Rules would tend to frustrate rather than promote justice, it is always within the power of the Court to suspend the rules, or except a particular case from its operation (SPOUSES ESPEJO vs. ITO, G.R. No. 176511, August 4, 2009, Third Division, Chico-Nazario, J.).

Procedural rules may be relaxed for persuasive reasons to relieve a litigant of an injustice not commensurate with his failure to comply with the prescribed

2 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan Sororitas

procedure. More so, when

decision to go unchecked would set a precedent that will sanction a violation of substantive law (PHIL.

JOSEPH JUDE

CARATES, Et al. G.R. No. 181274, June 23, 2010, Third Division, Villarama, Jr. J.).

ECONOMIC ZONE AUTHORITY, et al. vs.

to

allow

the assailed

5. What are the sources of Remedial Law?

A. 1987 Constitution

B. BP 129 (Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980) as

the

amended by

Jurisdiction of the MTCs, MuTCs and MCTCs)

RA

7691(An

Act

expanding

C. Rules of Court D. Supreme Court Administrative Matters and Circulars a. Rules on Examination
C.
Rules of Court
D.
Supreme
Court
Administrative
Matters
and
Circulars
a. Rules on Examination of Child Witness
Section 1. Applicability of the Rule. - Unless
otherwise provided, this Rule shall govern the
examination of child witnesses who are victims of
crime, accused of a crime, and witnesses to crime.
It shall apply in all criminal proceedings and
non-criminal proceedings involving child

witnesses.

b. Rules on Electronic Evidence

apply to all civil actions and proceedings, as

well as quasi-judicial and administrative cases. (Note: In People vs Enojas, the Court held that

applicable in

Rules on Electronic Evidence is criminal cases).

Rules shall

Section 2. Cases

covered.

These

3 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan Sororitas

c.

2004 Rules on Notarial Practice

Initiatory pleadings need to be verified, these

rules provide for

following:

procedure on the

the

(1) acknowledgments; (2) oaths and affirmations; (3) jurats; (4) signature witnessings; (5) copy certifications;

d. Rules on DNA Evidence

SECTION 1. Scope. This Rule shall apply whenever DNA evidence, as defined in Section 3 hereof, is offered, used, or proposed to be offered or used as evidence in all criminal and civil actions as well as special proceedings.

e. Judicial Affidavit Rule Section 1. Scope. - (a) This Rule shall apply to all
e. Judicial Affidavit Rule
Section 1. Scope. - (a) This Rule shall apply to
all actions, proceedings, and incidents requiring
the reception of evidence before:
xxx
E. Supreme Court Decisions

F.

G. Family Code

New Civil Code

Article 151 of the Family Code wherein it is provided

that no suit between members of the same family shall prosper unless it should appear from the verified complaint or petition that earnest efforts toward a compromise have been made, but that the same have

failed.

H. PD 1508 Katarungang Pambarangay Decree as amended by RA 7160 (Local Government Code) Sections 399 -

422

4 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan Sororitas

I. Special Laws and Amendments

a. Intellectual Property Code

Section 76. Civil Action for Infringement.

76.1. The making, using, offering for sale, selling, or importing a patented product or a product obtained directly or indirectly from a patented process, or the use of a patented process without the authorization of the patentee constitutes patent infringement.

76.2. Any patentee, or anyone possessing any right, title or interest in and to the
76.2. Any patentee, or anyone possessing any
right, title or interest in and to the patented
invention, whose rights have been infringed, may
bring a civil action before a court of competent
jurisdiction, to recover from the infringer such
damages sustained thereby, plus attorney's fees
and other expenses of litigation, and to secure an
injunction for the protection of his rights.
b. PRESIDENTIAL DECREE No. 902-A

This action, therefore, partakes the nature of an “intra-corporate controversy,” the jurisdiction over which used to belong to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), but transferred to the courts of general jurisdiction or the appropriate Regional Trial Court (RTC), pursuant to Section 5b of P.D. No. 902-A, as amended by Section 5.2 of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 8799.

Court on Alternative Dispute

J. Special Resolution

K. Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases

L. Rules of Procedure for Small Claims Court

M. R.A. 1125 (An Act Creating the Court of Appeals)

as amended by R.A. 9503.

Rules of

5 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan Sororitas

N. Presidential Decree No. 1486 (CREATING A SPECIAL COURT TO BE KNOWN AS 'SANDIGANBAYAN' AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES) as amended by Presidential Decree No. 1606 further amended by RA No. 10660 (AN ACT STRENGTHENING FURTHER THE FUNCTIONAL AND STRUCTURAL ORGANIZATION OF THE SANDIGANBAYAN, FURTHER AMENDING PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NO. 1606, AS AMENDED, AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR).

O. 1991 Revised Rules on Summary Procedure

P. Revised Manual of the Clerk of Court

6. Distinguish Civil Actions, Criminal Actions and Special Procedure (a) A civil action is one
6. Distinguish Civil Actions, Criminal Actions and
Special Procedure
(a) A civil action
is
one
by which
a
party sues
another for the enforcement or protection of a right,
or the prevention or redress of a wrong,
A civil action may either be ordinary or special. Both
are governed by the rules for ordinary civil actions,
subject to the specific rules prescribed for a special
civil action.
(b) A criminal action
is
one
by
which the
State
prosecutes a person for an act or omission punishable
by law.

(c) A special proceeding is a remedy by which a party seeks to establish a status, a right, or a particular

fact.

Civil action involves 2 or more parties (plaintiff and defendant or petitioner and respondent), criminal action involves the state and the accused or respondent, special proceeding may involve only one

party.

Civil action is initiated by a complaint, petition or statement of claim, criminal action is commenced by a

6 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan Sororitas

complaint or information, special proceeding is commenced by a petition.

Civil action is based on a cause of action, criminal action is based on an act or omission punishable by law, special proceeding, except habeas corpus, need not be based on a cause of action.

habeas corpus, need not be based on a cause of action. 7 F raternal O rder

7 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan Sororitas

CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS RELATING TO CIVIL PROCEDURE

ARTICLE III

shall

liberty, or property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.

Section 9. Private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation. (Basis of Rule 67 Expropriation)

Section 11.

and quasi-

judicial bodies and adequate legal assistance shall not be denied to any person by reason of poverty.

Section 1.

No person

be deprived

of

life,

Free access

to

the courts

Section 16. All persons shall have the right to a speedy disposition of their cases
Section 16. All persons shall have the right to a
speedy disposition of their cases before all judicial,
quasi-judicial, or administrative bodies.
ARTICLE VI
Section 30. No law shall be passed increasing the
appellate jurisdiction
of
the
Supreme Court
as
provided in this Constitution without its advice and
concurrence.

Section 27 of RA 6770 cannot validly authorize an appeal to the SC from decisions of the Office of the Ombudsman in administrative disciplinary cases. It consequently violates the proscription in Sec. 30, Art. VI of the Constitution against a law which increases the appellate jurisdiction of the SC. (Fabian vs. Desierto G.R. No. 129742, September 16, 1998)

ARTICLE VII

Section 4. Last Par. The Supreme Court, sitting en banc, shall be the sole judge of all contests relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of the President or Vice-President, and may promulgate its rules for the purpose.

8 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan Sororitas

Section 18. Par. 3. The Supreme Court may review, in an appropriate proceeding filed 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 thereon within thirty days from its filing.

ARTICLE VIII

Section 1. The judicial power shall be vested in one Supreme Court and in such lower courts as may be established by law.

Judicial power includes the duty of the courts of justice to settle actual controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceable, and to determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the Government.

Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to define, prescribe, and apportion the jurisdiction
Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to
define, prescribe, and apportion the jurisdiction of
the various courts but may not deprive the Supreme
Court of its jurisdiction over cases enumerated in
Section 5 hereof.

No law shall be passed reorganizing the Judiciary when it undermines the security of tenure of its Members.

Section 4(2)

All cases involving the constitutionality of a treaty, international or executive agreement, or law, which shall be heard by the Supreme Court en banc, and all

are

including those

or

other cases which

under the

en

Rules

of

Court

required to be heard

the

banc,

involving

operation of presidential decrees, proclamations,

other

regulations, shall be decided with the concurrence of

a majority of the Members who actually took part in

orders,

constitutionality,

application,

and

instructions,

ordinances,

9 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan Sororitas

the deliberations on the issues in the case and voted thereon.

Section 5. The Supreme Court shall have the following powers:

1. Exercise original jurisdiction over cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and over petitions for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto, and habeas corpus.
2. Review, revise, reverse, modify, or affirm on appeal or certiorari, as the law or the Rules of Court may provide, final judgments and orders of lower courts in:

a. All cases in which the constitutionality or validity of any treaty, international or executive
a. All cases in which the constitutionality or
validity of any treaty, international or
executive agreement, law, presidential decree,
proclamation, order, instruction, ordinance, or
regulation is in question.
b. All
cases involving the legality of
any
tax, impost, assessment, or toll, or any
penalty imposed in relation thereto.
c. All cases in which the jurisdiction of any
lower court is in issue.
d. All
criminal
cases
in
which the penalty
imposed is reclusion perpetua or higher.
e. All cases in which only an error or
question of law is involved.(Basis of Rule 56)

Par. 5. Promulgate rules concerning the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights, pleading, practice, and procedure in all courts, the admission to the practice of law, the integrated bar, and legal assistance to the under-privileged. Such rules shall provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition of cases, shall be uniform for all courts of the same grade, and shall not diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights. Rules of procedure of special courts and quasi-judicial bodies shall remain effective unless disapproved by the Supreme Court. (Statutory Basis of promulgation of Rules of Court)

10 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

Section 6. The Supreme Court shall have administrative supervision over all courts and the personnel thereof.

Section 14. No decision shall be rendered by any court without expressing therein clearly and distinctly the facts and the law on which it is based.

No petition for review or motion for reconsideration of a decision of the court shall be refused due course or denied without stating the legal basis therefor. (Basis of Rule 36)

ARTICLE IX

A. COMMON PROVISIONS

8. Section 7. Each Commission shall decide by a majority vote of all its Members,
8. Section 7. Each Commission shall decide by a
majority vote of all its Members, any case or matter
brought before it within sixty days from the date of
its submission for decision or resolution. A case or
matter is deemed submitted for decision or resolution
upon the filing of the last pleading, brief, or
memorandum required by the rules of the Commission or
by the Commission itself. Unless otherwise provided
by this Constitution or by law, any decision, order,
or ruling of each Commission may be brought to the
Supreme Court on certiorari by the aggrieved party
within thirty days from receipt of a copy thereof.
(Basis of Rule 64)

Section 10. All courts existing at the time of the ratification of this Constitution shall continue to exercise their jurisdiction, until otherwise provided by law. The provisions of the existing Rules of Court, judiciary acts, and procedural laws not inconsistent with this Constitution shall remain operative unless amended or repealed by the Supreme Court or the Congress.

11 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

1. In Relation to ARTICLE VIII Section 1

A. Constitutional Court Supreme Court

B. Statutory Courts

a.

Court of Appeals

b.

Sandiganbayan (PD 1486, PD 1606, RA 10660)

c.

Court of Tax Appeals(RA 1125, RA 9282, RA 9503)

d.

Shari’ah Appellate Court

e.

Regional Trial Court (BP 129)

f. Shari’ah District Court (PD 1083) g. Shari’ah Circuit Court (PD 1083) h. Metropolitan Trial
f. Shari’ah District Court (PD 1083)
g. Shari’ah Circuit Court (PD 1083)
h. Metropolitan
Trial Court,
Municipal Trial
Court, and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts. (BP 129)
i. Family Courts (Republic Act No. 8369)
C. Are tribal courts part of the judiciary?

Such tribal courts are not a part of the Philippine judicial system which consists of the Supreme Court and the lower courts which have been established by law (Sec. 1, Art. VIII, 1987 Constitution). They do not possess judicial power. Like the pangkats or conciliation panels created by P.D. No. 1508 in the barangays, they are advisory and conciliatory bodies whose principal objective is to bring together the

parties to a dispute and persuade them to make peace,

and compromise. (Sps. Badua vs Cordillera

Bodong Administration)

settle,

12 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

D.

Are military courts/commissions/tribunals judicial

courts?

Military commissions or tribunals, by whatever name they are called, are not courts within the Philippine judicial system. (Olaguer vs Military Commission)

E. Distinguish judge and court.

a. A court is a tribunal clothed with the power and

authority to entertain and resolve legal disputes between the parties to carry out the dispensation of justice in accordance with law; while a judge is a public officer who exercises the power of the court in the dispensation of justice.

b. A court is more of a permanent status or existence; while a judge is
b. A court is more of a permanent status or existence;
while a judge is merely temporary.
F. What is the nature of Philippine courts? Court of
law or court of equity?
Under the system of procedure which obtains in the
Philippine Islands, both legal and equitable relief is
dispensed in the same tribunal. (US vs Tamparong) If
there is no applicable law on a particular matter or
issue, common precepts of what is right or wrong is
applied.

A court of equity is a court having jurisdiction in equity or administering justice in accordance with the principles of equity; while a court of law decides a case according to what the promulgated law is.

2. In relation to rule making power of the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court may promulgate procedural rules in all courts. It has the sole prerogative to amend,

more

repeal or

simplified and inexpensive process, and the speedy disposition of cases. (Neypes vs CA)

even

establish new

rules

for

a

13 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

3. In relation to Sec. 30, Art VI

It is suggested, however, that the provisions of Rule 43 should apply only to "ordinary" quasi-judicial agencies, but not to the Office of the Ombudsman which is a "high constitutional body." We see no reason for this distinction for, if hierarchical rank should be a criterion, that proposition thereby disregards the fact that Rule 43 even includes the Office of the President and the Civil Service Commission, although the latter is even an independent constitutional commission, unlike the Office of the Ombudsman which is a constitutionally-mandated but statutorily created body.

xxx As a consequence of our ratiocination that Section 27 of Republic Act No. 6770
xxx
As a consequence of our ratiocination that Section 27
of Republic Act No. 6770 should be struck down as
unconstitutional, and in line with the regulatory
philosophy adopted in appeals from quasi-judicial
agencies in the 1997 Revised Rules of Civil Procedure,
appeals from decisions of the Office of the Ombudsman
in administrative disciplinary cases should be taken
to the Court of Appeals under the provisions of Rule
43. (Fabian vs Desierto)
Civil Procedure Proper

1. Jurisdiction - Power or authority given by the law to a court or tribunal to hear (Rule 30) and determine (Rule 36) certain controversies and to implement its decision (Rule 39).

2. Venue - is the place where the case is to be heard or tried.

3. Jurisdiction and venue are distinguished as follows:

a. Jurisdiction

determine a case; venue is the place where the

case is to be heard or tried.

is

the

authority to hear

and

14 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

b. Jurisdiction is a matter of substantive law; venue, of procedural law.

c. Jurisdiction establishes a relation between the court and the subject-matter; venue, a relation between plaintiff and defendant, or petitioner and respondent.

d. Jurisdiction is fixed by law and cannot be conferred by the parties; venue may be conferred by the act or agreement of the parties (Manila

Railroad Co. vs. Attorney-General, 20 Phil. 523). In criminal cases, the venue of the crime
Railroad Co. vs. Attorney-General,
20
Phil.
523).
In criminal cases, the venue of the crime goes
into the territorial jurisdiction of the court
(Lopez vs. Paras,
L-25795, Oct.
29,
1966),
hence where the criminal action is instituted
not in the place specified by the Rules and
declared by the substantive
law
as within
the
territorial jurisdiction of the trial court, the
motion to quash should be grounded
jurisdiction, and not improper venue.
on lack
of

to decide a case and not the

up

jurisdiction. Where there is jurisdiction, the

decision of all questions arising in the case is but an exercise of jurisdiction (De la Cruz vs.

decision rendered therein

4. The authority

is

what makes

Moir, 36 Phil. 213; Associated Labor Ramolete, L-23527, Mar. 31, 1965).

a court may have jurisdiction over the case but

at

such

Union

vs.

Consequently,

of

the

same

time

act

in

excess

jurisdiction.

15 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

5. Requisites for the exercise of jurisdiction and how the court acquires such jurisdiction:

a. Jurisdiction over the plaintiff or petitioner:

This is acquired by the filing of the complaint, petition or initiatory pleading before the court by the plaintiff or petitioner.

b. Jurisdiction over the defendant or

This is acquired by the voluntary appearance or submission by the defendant or respondent to the

respondent:

court or by coercive process

issued

by

the

court

to

him, generally by the service

of

summons (Sharuff vs. Bubla, L-17029, Sept. 30, 1964; Aban vs. Enage, L-30666, Feb. 25, 1983).
summons
(Sharuff
vs. Bubla,
L-17029,
Sept.
30,
1964; Aban
vs.
Enage, L-30666, Feb.
25,
1983).
c. Jurisdiction over the subject-matter: This is
conferred by law and, unlike jurisdiction over the
parties, cannot be conferred on the court by the
voluntary act or agreement of the parties.
d. Jurisdiction over the issues of the case: This
is determined
and conferred
by the pleadings
filed in the case by the parties,
or by their

agreement in a pre-trial order or stipulation, or, at times, by their implied consent as by the failure of a party to object to evidence on an issue not covered by the pleadings, as provided in

Republic

Surety & Insurance

1970).

Sec. 5, Rule 10 (see Lazo, et al. vs.

Co., Inc.,

L-27365, Jan. 30,

or

thing which is the subject of the litigation):

This

seizure by the court of the thing in question,

in

attachment or garnishment ; or by provision of

thus placing

is acquired by the actual or constructive

e. Jurisdiction over the res (or the property

it

in

custodia

legis,

as

16 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

law which recognizes in the court the power to deal with the property or subject-matter within its territorial juris• diction, as in land registration proceedings or suits involving civil status or real property in the Philippines of a nonresident defendant.

In two instances, the court acquires jurisdiction to try the case, even if it has not acquired jurisdiction over the person of a nonresident defendant, as long as it has jurisdiction over the res, as when the action involves the personal status of the plaintiff or property in the

Philippines in which the defendant claims an interest (see Sec. 15, Rule 14). In such
Philippines in which the defendant
claims an
interest (see Sec. 15, Rule 14).
In such cases,
the service of summons by publication and notice
to the defendant is merely to comply with due
process requirements (Banco Espanol-Filipino vs.
Palanca, 37 Phil. 921; De Midgely vs. Ferandos, et
al., L-34314, May 13, 1975). Under Sec. 133 of the
Corporation Code, while a foreign corporation
doing business in the Philippines without a
license cannot
sue or intervene
in
any
action
here; it may be sued or proceeded against before
our court s or administrative tribunals.

6. As a general proposition, the jurisdiction of the court is determined by the statute in force at the time of the commencement of the action (People vs. Paderna, L-28518, Jan. 29, 1968), unless such statute provides for its retroactive application, as where it is a curative legislation (Atlas

Fertilizer Corp. vs. Navarro, etc., et G.R. No.72074, April 30, 1987).

al.,

17 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

7. Under our present statutory and jurisprudential taxonomy, jurisdiction is classified, based on its nature, as follows:

a. General jurisdiction,

or

the

power

to

adjudicate

all

controversies

except

those

expressly withheld from the plenary powers of the court;

b. Original jurisdiction,

or

the

power

of

the

court to take judicial cognizance

of

a

case

instituted for judicial action for the first time under conditions provided by law; and

c. Appellate jurisdiction, or the authority of a court higher in rank to reexamine the
c. Appellate jurisdiction, or the authority of a
court higher in rank to reexamine the final order
or judgment of a lower court which tried the case
now elevated for judicial review.
d. Exclusive jurisdiction,
or
the
power
to
adjudicate a case or proceeding to the exclusion
of all other courts at that stage; and
e. Concurrent jurisdiction, sometimes referred to
as
confluent
or
coordinate jurisdiction,
which
is
the
power
conferred
upon different

courts, whether of the same or different ranks,

to take

same

cognizance

at

the same stage of the

case

in

the

same

or different

judicial

territories.

f. Also,

jurisdiction is provided for, i.e., the grant of

authority to

determine cadastral an d land registration cases

under certain conditions (see Sec. 34, infra); and

and

under

B.P.

Blg.

129,

to

delegated

hear

inferior

courts

18 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

the power of

inferior courts to hear and decide petitions for

a writ of habeas corpus or applications for bail in the absence of all the Regional Trial Judges in the province or city (see Sec. 35,

was

infra). This latter type of jurisdiction

formerly included, with variations, in what was

of

g. special jurisdiction, which is

known as the interlocutory jurisdiction inferior courts under the Judiciary Act.

which

refers to the geographical area within which its powers can be exercised. As already stated, this assumes importance in criminal cases wherein considerations of the territory vis-a-vis the locus of the crime determine not only the

h. territorial jurisdiction

of

a court,

venue of the case but the jurisdiction of the court; and, in civil cases, the
venue
of
the
case but the jurisdiction of the
court; and, in civil cases, the venue of real or
mixed actions. In all cases, the Supreme Court
and the Court of Appeals have national
jurisdiction; the Regional Trial Courts have
regional jurisdiction; and the inferior courts
have such territorial jurisdiction
as
may
be
defined by the Supreme Court pursuant to Secs,
25, 28 and 31 ,
B.P.
Blg. 129.
i.
special or
limited jurisdiction
-
which

to

particular cases and subject to such limitations

restricts the court' s jurisdiction only

as may be provided by the governing law.

the

courts to settle issues which are incidental to the main issue.

j. ancillary jurisdiction -

the power

of

k. residual jurisdiction prior to the transmittal of the original record or the record on appeal, the court may issue orders for the protection and preservation of the rights of the parties which do

19 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

not involve any matter litigated by the appeal, approve compromises, permit appeals of indigent litigants, order execution pending appeal in accordance with 2 of Rule 39, and allow withdrawal of the appeal.

8. Doctrine of primary jurisdiction

The doctrine of primary jurisdiction holds that if a case is such that its determination requires the expertise, specialized training and knowledge of the proper administrative bodies, relief must first be obtained in an administrative proceeding before a remedy is supplied by the courts even if the matter may well be within their proper jurisdiction. It applies where a claim is originally cognizable in the courts, and comes into play whenever enforcement of the claim requires the resolution of issues which, under a regulatory scheme, have been placed within the special competence of an administrative agency. In such a case, the court in which the claim is sought to be enforced may suspend the judicial process pending referral of such issues to the administrative body for its view or, if the parties would not be unfairly disadvantaged, dismiss the case without prejudice.

unfairly disadvantaged, dismiss the case without prejudice. The objective of the doctrine of primary jurisdiction is

The objective of the doctrine of primary jurisdiction is to guide the court in determining whether it should refrain from exercising its jurisdiction until after an administrative agency has determined some question or some aspect of some question arising in the proceeding before the court.24.

THE PROVINCE OF AKLAN, Petitioner, -versus- JODY KING CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT CORP., Respondent. G.R. Nos. 197592 & 202623, NOV. 27,

20 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

Review on

Certiorari under Rule 45 and Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65.

There are well-settled distinctions between these two rules, among which are the following:

9. Distinguish Appeal by Petition

for

although called a

petition for review on certiorari, is

appeal (Sec. 2[c], Rule 41, Rules of Court), while certiorari under Rule 65 is a special civil action that is an original and independent action and not a mode of appeal (Rule 65, Rules of Court; Agrarian

of

(a)

Certiorari under Rule

45

a

mode

Reform Beneficiaries Association vs. Nicolas, G.R. No. 168394, October 6, 2008).

Certiorari under Rule 45 is but a continuation of the appellate process over the original
Certiorari under Rule 45 is but a continuation of the
appellate process over the original case. Certiorari
under Rule 65 is not a part of the appellate process
but an independent action (Norsk Hydro [Phils.] G.R.
No. 162871, January 31, 2007; Agrarian reform
Beneficiaries Association vs. Nicolas, G.R. No.
168394, October 6, 2008).
(b) Because it is a mode of appeal, certiorari under

Rule 45 seeks to review final judgments or final orders while certiorari under Rule 65 may be directed against an interlocutory order or matters where no appeal may be taken from (Sec. 1, Rule 41, Rules of

Court).

(c) Certiorari under Rule 45 as a rule, raises only

questions of law (DMA Shipping Philippines, Inc. vs.

2005) while

raises questions of

jurisdiction because a tribunal, board or officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions has

acted

jurisdiction

Cabilar,

certiorari under

452

SCRA

551, February 28,

Rule

65

without

jurisdiction with grave

or

abuse

in

excess of discretion

or

of

21 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

amounting to lack of jurisdiction (Sec. 1, Rule 65, Rules of Court; Aggabao vs. COMELEC, 449 SCRA 4000, January 26, 2005).

The purpose of a Rule 65 petition is to annul the

proceedings of a lower tribunal and prevent

unlawful and oppressive exercise of legal authority

an

(Agrarian

reform

Beneficiaries

Association

vs.

Nicolas, G.R. No. 168394, October 6, 2008).

(d) An appeal by certiorari under Rule 45 shall be

of

judgment or final order appealed from (Sec. 2, Rule

filed within fifteen

(15)

days

from notice

45, Rules of Court), while a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 shall be filed
45, Rules of Court), while a petition for certiorari
under Rule 65 shall be filed not later than sixty
(60)
days
from
notice
of
judgment, order
or
resolution sought to be assailed and in case a motion
for reconsideration or new trial is timely filed,
whether such motion is required or not, the sixty
(60)
day period
shall be
counted from notice of
denial of said motion (Sec. 4, Rule 65, Rules of
Court; A.M. No. 00-2-03 amending Sec. 4 of Rule 65
effective
September
1,2000;
Systems
Factors
Corporation vs. NLRC, 346 SCRA 149, 152 [2000]).

(e) Certiorari under Rule 45 does not require a prior motion for reconsideration while certiorari under Rule 65 requires as a general rule, a prior motion for reconsideration (Progressive Development Corporation vs. Court of Appeals, 301 SCRA 637).

stays the judgment

appealed from while judgment or order

enjoined or restrained (Sec. 7, Rule 65, Rules of Court).

stay the

(f) Certiorari under Rule

45

certiorari

does not

subject of the petition unless

(g) In certiorari under Rule 45, the parties are the

appealing party as the

petitioner and the adverse party as respondent

original parties with

the

22 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

without impleading the lower court or its judge (Sec. 4[a], Rule 45, Rules of Court; Cebu Women's Club vs. De la Victoria, 327 SCRA 533; Marquez vs. Court of Appeals, 329 SCRA 567), while in certiorari under Rule 65, the tribunal, board, officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions is impleaded as respondent (Sec. 5, Rule 65, Rules of Court).

the

also the original

parties to the action in the lower court. In certiorari as an original action, the parties are the

petitioner and respondent

In an appeal by certiorari

under

Rule

45,

are

aggrieved party against the lower court or quasi-

judicial agency and the prevailing parties, who thereby respectively become the petitioner and respondents (Yasuda
judicial agency and
the prevailing parties, who
thereby respectively become the petitioner and
respondents (Yasuda vs. Court of Appeals, 330 SCRA
385).
(h) Certiorari as a special civil action is filed
with the Regional Trial Court (Sec. 21, BP 129 as
amended), the Court of Appeals Sec. 9, BP 129 as
amended) or with the Supreme Court (Sec. 5[1], Art.
VIII, Constitution of the Philippines) or with the
Sandiganbayan, whereas certiorari as a mode of appeal
is filed with the Supreme Court (Sec. 1, Rule 45,
Rules of Court).

10. Exhaustion of administrative remedies

The general rule is that before a party may seek the intervention of the court, he should first avail of

all

him by administrative

processes. The issues which administrative agencies

summarily

are authorized

taken from them and submitted to a court without

administrative agency the

dispose of the same after due

opportunity to deliberation.

the

means afforded

to

decide should

not

be

first

giving

such

23 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

Nonetheless, the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies and the corollary doctrine of primary jurisdiction, which are based on sound public policy and practical considerations, are not inflexible rules. There are many accepted exceptions, such as: (a) where there is estoppel on the part of the party invoking the doctrine; (b) where the challenged administrative act is patently illegal, amounting to lack of jurisdiction; (c) where there is unreasonable delay or official inaction that will irretrievably prejudice the complainant; (d) where the amount involved is relatively small so as to make the rule impractical and oppressive; (e) where the question involved is purely legal and will ultimately have to be decided by the courts of justice; (f) where judicial intervention is urgent; (g) when its application may cause great and irreparable damage; (h) where the controverted acts violate due process; (i) when the issue of non-exhaustion of administrative remedies has been rendered moot; (j) when there is no other plain, speedy and adequate remedy; (k) when strong public interest is involved; and, (l) in quo warranto proceedings.

11. Doctrine of non-interference
11. Doctrine of non-interference

Courts of equal and coordinate jurisdiction cannot interfere with each other‘s orders. The principle also bars a court from reviewing or interfering with the judgment of a co-equal court over which it has no appellate jurisdiction or power of review.

court has the authority to

interfere by injunction with the judgment of another court of coordinate jurisdiction or to pass upon or scrutinize and much less declare as unjust a judgment of another court. However, the doctrine does not apply where a third party claimant is involved (Santos v. Bayhon, G.R. No. 88643, July 23, 1991).

As

a general

rule,

No

24 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

12.

Doctrine of Continuing Jurisdiction

The general principle that once a court has acquired jurisdiction, that jurisdiction continues until the court has done all that it can do to exercise that

jurisdiction.

jurisdiction.

of

See

Doctrine

of

adherence

13. Doctrine of adherence of jurisdiction.

The principle that 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. 2. The doctrine holding that [e]ven the finality of the judgment does not totally deprive the court of jurisdiction over the case. What the court loses is the power to amend, modify or alter the judgment. Even after the judgment has become final, the court retains jurisdiction to enforce and execute it [Echegaray v. Sec. of Justice, 301 SCRA 96]. Also called Doctrine of continuity of jurisdiction.

14. Doctrine of hierarchy of courts.
14. Doctrine of hierarchy of courts.

An established policy that parties must observe the hierarchy of courts before they can seek relief directly from th[e Sup.] Court. Therationale for this rule is twofold: (a) it would be an imposition upon the limited time of th[e Sup.] Court; and (b) it would inevitably result in a delay, intended or otherwise, in the adjudication of cases, which in some instances, had to be remanded or referred to the lower court as the proper forum under the rules of procedure, or as better equipped to resolve the issues because th[e Sup.] Court is not a trier of facts. [Heirs of Hinog v. Melicor, GR 140954, 12 Apr. 2005, 455 SCRA 460].

25 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

JURISDICTION OF VARIOUS COURTS

I. SUPREME COURT A. Original Exclusive

Petitions for certiorari, prohibition or mandamus against:

Court of Appeals; Court of Tax Appeals; Sandiganbayan; Commission on Elections; and Commission on Audit Ombudsman in criminal cases(Salvador vs Mapa) B. Concurrent with the Court of Appeals

a. Petitions for certiorari, prohibition or mandamus against: Regional Trial Courts; Civil Service Commission; Central
a. Petitions for certiorari, prohibition or
mandamus against:
Regional Trial Courts;
Civil Service Commission;
Central Board of Assessment Appeals;
National Labor Relations Commission; and
Other quasi-judicial agencies.
b. Petition for Writ of Kalikasan.

C. With the Court of Appeals, Sandiganbayan,

Regional Trial Courts, and Shari’a District Court

(1) Petitions for certiorari, prohibition or mandamus against courts of the first level and other bodies; and

(2) Petitions for habeas corpus and quo warranto, Writ of Amparo, Habeas Data and Continuing Mandamus(not Shari’a DC).

26 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

D. With Regional Trial Courts

Actions against ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls.

Appellate

A. Petitions for review on certiorari against:

a. Court of Appeals;

b. Court of Tax Appeals;

c. Sandiganbayan; and

d. Regional Trial Courts in cases involving — 1. Constitutionality or validity of a treaty,
d. Regional Trial Courts in cases involving —
1.
Constitutionality
or
validity
of
a
treaty, international or executive agreement,
law, presidential decree, proclamation, order,
instruction, ordinance, or regulation;
2. Legality of a tax, impost, assessment,
toll or a penalty in relation thereto;
3. Jurisdiction of a lower court; and
4. Only errors or questions of law.
II. COURT OF APPEALS
A. Original

Exclusive:

Actions for annulment of judgments of regional Trial Courts.

Concurrent:

a.

With the Supreme Court (see Par. 2, sub- par, a.

on

the

original

jurisdiction

of

the

Supreme

Court); and

27 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

b. With the Supreme Court and the Regional Trial

Courts (see Par. 2, sub-par, b., loc.

cit.).

Appellate:

Ordinary appeals from:

a. Regional Trial Courts, except in cases

exclusively appealable to the Supreme Court, supra;

and

b.

Family Courts.

Appeal by petition for review from: a. Civil Service Commission; b. Central Board of Assessment
Appeal by petition for review from:
a.
Civil Service Commission;
b.
Central Board of Assessment Appeals;
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.

Land Registration Authority; Social Security Commission; Office of the President; Civil Aeronautics Board; Bureaus under the Intellectual Property Office; National Electrification Administration; Energy Regulatory Board; National Telecommunications Commission;

j.

k. Department of Agrarian Reform under R.A. 6657;

l. Government Service Insurance System;

m. Employees Compensation Commission;

n. Agricultural Inventions Board;

o. Insurance Commission;

p. Philippine Atomic Energy Commission;

q. Board of Investments;

r. Office of the Ombudsman, in administrative

disciplinary cases; and

s.

instrumentality,

Any

other

quasi-judicial

or

agency,

in

the

board

commission

28 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

exercise of its quasi-judicial functions, such as voluntary arbitrators.

t. Petitions

lower

from the Regional Trial

Courts in cases appealed thereto courts.

for review

from the

III. REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

Exclusive Original Jurisdiction

1. Section 19. Jurisdiction in civil cases. Regional Trial Courts shall exercise exclusive original jurisdiction:

(1) In all civil actions in which the subject of the litigation is incapable of
(1) In all civil actions in which the subject of
the
litigation
is
incapable
of
pecuniary
estimation;

(2) In all civil actions which involve the title to, or possession of, real property, or any interest therein, where the assessed value of the property involved exceeds Twenty thousand pesos (P20,000.00) or for civil actions in Metro Manila, where such the value exceeds Fifty thousand pesos (50,000.00) except actions for forcible entry into and unlawful detainer of lands or buildings, original jurisdiction over which is conferred upon Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts;

(3)

In

all actions

in admiralty and maritime

jurisdiction where he demand or claim exceeds Three hundred thousand pesos (P300,000.00) or , in

Metro Manila, where such demand or claim exceeds Four hundred thousand pesos (400,000.00);

(4) In all matters of probate, both testate and intestate, where the gross value of the estate exceeds Three hundred thousand pesos (P300,000.00) or, in probate matters in Metro Manila, where such

29 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

gross value exceeds Four

(400,000.00);

hundred thousand pesos

involving the contract of

marriage and marital relations;

within the exclusive

jurisdiction of any court, tribunal, person or

body exercising jurisdiction

tribunal, person or body exercising judicial or

quasi-judicial functions;

(7) In all civil actions and special proceedings falling within the exclusive original jurisdiction of a Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court and of the Courts of Agrarian Relations as now provided by law; and

(5)

(6)

In

In

all actions

all

cases

not

or

any

court,

(8) In all other cases in which the demand, exclusive of interest, damages of whatever
(8)
In
all
other cases
in
which
the demand,
exclusive of interest, damages of whatever kind,
attorney's fees, litigation expenses, and costs or
the value of the property in controversy exceeds
Three hundred thousand pesos (300,000.00) or, in
such other abovementioned items exceeds Four
hundred thousand pesos (400,000.00). (as amended
by R.A. No. 7691*)
2. Section 10. Annulment of judgments
or final

orders of Municipal Trial Courts. An action to

annul a judgment or final order of a Municipal Trial Court shall be filed in the Regional Trial Court having jurisdiction over the former.

3. Civil cases for Copyright infringement cases under the provisions of the Intellectual Property Code.

4. Child and Family Cases under the Family Courts.

R.A. 8369 Family Court s Act of 1997

Exclusive original jurisdiction in the following civil cases or proceedings:

30 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

a. Petitions for guardianship, custody of children, habeas corpus in relation to the latter;

b. Petitions for

revocation thereof;

adoption of

children and

the

c. Complaints for annulment of marriage, declaration

of nullity of marriage and those relating to marital status and property relations of husband and wife or those living together under different status and agreements , and petitions for dissolution of conjugal partnership of gains;

d.

Petitions for support and/or acknowledgment;

e. Summary judicial proceedings brought under the provisions of Executive Order No. 209 (Family Code
e. Summary judicial proceedings brought under the
provisions of Executive Order No. 209 (Family Code of
the Philippines);
f. Petitions for declaration of status of children as
abandoned, dependent or neglected children, petitions
for voluntary or involuntary commitment of children;
the suspension, termination, or restoration of
parental authority under P.D. 603, Executive Order No.
56 (Series of 1986), and other related laws;
g. Petitions for the constitution of the family home;

h.

as defined therein, but which do not constitute criminal offenses subject to criminal proceedings and penalties

Cases of domestic violence against women and children,

5. Civil Forfeiture of monetary instrument, property or proceeds representing, involving or relating to unlawful activity, or to money laundering offenses.

6. Original Jurisdiction of the RTC

Special Rules on Alternative Dispute Resolution:

under the

a. Questioning the existence, validity, and enforceability of an arbitration agreement;

31 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

b. For judicial relief from a ruling of an arbitral

tribunal on a preliminary question of upholding or declining jurisdiction;

c. For interim measure of protection;

d. For appointment of arbitrator;

e. Challenging the appointment of arbitrator;

f. Terminate the mandate of arbitrator;

g. For assistance in taking evidence;

h. For protective order;

i. Confirmation, correction/modification or vacation of a domestic arbitral award; j. to recognize and enforce,
i. Confirmation, correction/modification or
vacation of a domestic arbitral award;
j. to recognize and enforce, set aside an arbitral
award;
k. Recognize and enforce a foreign arbitral award.
7. Intra-Corporate Disputes
Appellate
All
cases
decided
by
lower
courts
in
their
respective territorial jurisdictions.

32 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

IV. METROPOLITAN, MUNICIPAL, AND MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURTS Original

Exclusive

a. Actions involving personal property valued at

not more

than P300,000

or,

in

Metro

Manila,

P400,000;

demanding sum

 

s

of

money

not

b. Actions exceeding

P300,000

or,

in

Metro

Manila,

P400,000, exclusive of interest, damages, attorney's fees, litigation expenses, and costs; c. Actions in admiralty
P400,000, exclusive of interest,
damages,
attorney's fees, litigation expenses, and costs;
c. Actions in admiralty and maritime juris•
diction where the demand or claim does not
exceed P300.000 or, in Metro Manila , P400,000,
exclusive of interest, damages, attorney's fees,
litigation expenses, and costs;
d. Probate proceedings, testate or intestate,
where the gross value of the estate does not
exceed P300,000 or, in Metro Manila, P400.000;

e. Forcible entry and unlawful detainer cases;

f. Actions involving title to or possession of real

property, or any interest therein , where the assessed value does not exceed P20.000 or, in Metro

Manila, P50.000, exclusive of interest, damages, attorney's fees, litigation expenses, and costs; and

g. Provisional remedies where the principal action is within their jurisdiction.

33 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

Delegated (Section 34, BP 129)

Cadastral or land registration cases covering lots

or

contested lots the value of which does not exceed P

where there is no controversy or

opposition,

100,000, as may be assigned by the Supreme Court.

Special (Section 35, BP 129)

Petitions for habeas corpus in the absence of all the Regional Trial Judge s in the province or city.

Summary Procedure (Exclusive Original) a. Forcible entry and unlawful detainer cases irrespective of the amount
Summary Procedure (Exclusive Original)
a. Forcible entry and unlawful detainer
cases
irrespective of the amount of damages or unpaid
rentals sought to be recovered; and
b.
All
other
court
cases,
except
probate
proceedings, where the total claim does not exceed
P200,000, exclusive of interest and costs.
V. Shari'a District Court
Original jurisdiction.

(1)

The

Shari'a

District

Court

shall

have

exclusive original jurisdiction over:

(a) All cases involving custody, guardianship, legitimacy, paternity and filiation arising under this Code;

(b)

All

cases

involving

disposition,

distribution and settlement of the estate of deceased Muslims, probate of wills, issuance of

letters of administration or appointment of administrators or executors regardless of the

34 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

nature or the aggregate value of the property

shall

jurisdiction of the Shari’a District Courts

be

under

the

exclusive

original

(Article 143(b) of Presidential Decree No. 1083, otherwise known as the Code of Muslim Personal Laws of the Philippines cited in MONTAÑER vs. SHARI’A DISTRICT COURT, G.R. No. 174975, January 20, 2009, First Division, Puno, C.J.).

(c) Petitions for the declaration of absence

and death and for the cancellation or correction of entries in the Muslim Registries mentioned in Title VI of Book Two of this Code;

(d) All actions arising from customary contracts in which the parties are Muslims, if they
(d)
All
actions
arising from customary
contracts in which the parties are Muslims, if
they have not specified which law shall govern
their relations; and
(e) All petitions for mandamus, prohibition,
injunction, certiorari, habeas corpus, and all
other auxiliary writs and processes in aid of
its appellate jurisdiction.
(2) Concurrently with existing civil courts, the
Shari'a
District
Court
shall have original
jurisdiction over:

(a) Petitions by Muslims for the constitution

of a family home, change of name and commitment of an insane person to an asylum;

(b) All other personal and real actions not

wherein the

parties involved are Muslims except those for

forcible entry and unlawful detainer, which shall fall under the exclusive original jurisdiction of the Municipal Circuit Court; and

mentioned in paragraph

1

(d)

35 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

(c)

All special civil actions for interpleader

or declaratory relief wherein the parties are Muslims or the property involved belongs

exclusively to Muslims.

Appellate jurisdiction.

(1) Shari'a District Courts shall have appellate jurisdiction over all cases tried in the Shari'a

their territorial

Circuit Courts jurisdiction.

within

IV. Shari'a Circuit Courts

The Shari'a Circuit Courts shall have exclusive original jurisdiction over; (2) All civil actions and
The Shari'a Circuit Courts shall have exclusive
original jurisdiction over;
(2)
All civil
actions
and proceedings between
parties who are Muslims or have been married in
accordance with Article 13 involving disputes
relating to:
(a)
Marriage;
(b)
Divorce recognized under this Code;
(c)
Betrothal or breach of contract to marry;
(d)
Customary dower (mahr);

(e) Disposition and distribution of property

upon divorce;

(f) Maintenance and support, and consolatory

gifts, (mut'a); and

(g) Restitution of marital rights.

(3)

All cases involving disputes relative

communal properties.

36 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

to

VI. Sandiganbayan

Exclusive and original jurisdiction

Over civil cases for the forfeiture of illegally acquired wealth under R.A. 1379(AN ACT DECLARING FORFEITURE IN FAVOR OF THE STATE ANY PROPERTY FOUND TO HAVE BEEN UNLAWFULLY ACQUIRED BY ANY PUBLIC OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE).

Exclusive Appellate Jurisdiction

Over final judgment, resolutions, or orders of Regional Trial Courts whether in the exercise of
Over final judgment, resolutions, or
orders of
Regional Trial Courts whether in the exercise of
their own original jurisdiction or of their appellate
jurisdiction.
VII. Court Of Tax Appeals
Exclusive appellate jurisdiction
To review by appeal:

1. Decisions of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue in cases involving disputed assessments, refunds of internal revenue taxes, fees or other charges, penalties in relation thereto, or other matters arising under the National Internal Revenue or other laws administered by the Bureau of Internal Revenue;

"2. Inaction by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue in cases involving disputed assessments, refunds of internal revenue taxes, fees or other charges, penalties in relations thereto, or other matters arising under the National Internal

37 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

Revenue Code or other laws administered by the Bureau of Internal Revenue, where the National Internal Revenue Code provides a specific period of action, in which case the inaction shall be deemed a denial;

"3. Decisions,

orders

or

resolutions of the

Regional

Trial

Courts

in

local

tax

cases

originally decided

or resolved

by

them

in

the

exercise

jurisdiction;

"4. Decisions of the Commissioner of Customs in cases involving liability for customs duties, fees or other money charges, seizure, detention or release of property affected, fines, forfeitures or other penalties in relation thereto, or other matters arising under the Customs Law or other laws administered by the Bureau of Customs;

appellate

of

their

original

or

"5. Decisions of the Central Board of Assessment Appeals in the exercise of its appellate
"5. Decisions of the Central Board of Assessment
Appeals in the exercise of its appellate
jurisdiction over cases involving the assessment
and taxation of real property originally decided
by the provincial or city board of assessment
appeals;
"6. Decisions of
the
Secretary of Finance on

customs cases elevated to him automatically for review from decisions of the Commissioner of Customs which are adverse to the Government under Section 2315 of the Tariff and Customs Code;

Trade and

Industry, in the case of nonagricultural product,

commodity or article, and the Secretary of

Agriculture in the case of agricultural product,

involving dumping and

"7. Decisions of

the

Secretary of

commodity

or article,

countervailing duties under Section 301 and 302,

38 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

respectively, of the Tariff and Customs Code, and safeguard measures under Republic Act No. 8800, where either party may appeal the decision to impose or not to impose said duties.

Decisions of the CTA Division are reviewable by

the CTA en banc.

Section 11.

amended as follows:

Section

18

of

the

same Act

is hereby

"SEC. 18. Appeal to the Court of Tax Appeals En

- arising under the National Internal Revenue Code, the Tariff and Customs Code or the Local Government Code shall be maintained, except as herein provided, until and unless an appeal has been previously filed with the CTA and disposed of in accordance with the provisions of this Act.

Banc.

No civil proceeding involving matter

"A party adversely affected by a resolution of a Division of a reconsideration or new
"A party adversely affected by a resolution of a
Division of
a
reconsideration or new trial, may file a petition
the
CTA
on
motion for
for review with the CTA en banc."
"SEC.
19.
Review by Certiorari.
-
A
party
adversely affected by a decision or ruling of the
CTA en banc may file with the Supreme Court a

verified

pursuant to Rule 45 of the 1997 Rules of Civil

certiorari

petition

for

review

on

Procedure."

39 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

Commencement of a Civil Action

A. Commencement of action

civil

action is commenced by the filing of the original

Section 5.

Commencement of action.

A

complaint in court. If an additional defendant is

action is

impleaded in a later

pleading,

the

commenced with regard to him on the dated of the

filing of such later pleading, irrespective of

whether the motion for its admission, necessary, is denied by the court.

Section 1. Ordinary civil actions, basis of. Every ordinary civil action must be based on a cause of action.

if

When the complaint is filed and the prescribed fees are paid, the action is deemed
When the complaint is filed and the prescribed
fees are paid, the action is deemed commenced.
1. What is a cause of action, right of action and
action?
Cause of action - A cause of action is the act or
omission by which
another.
a party
violates a right
of
Right of action
enforce a cause
-
of action,
is
the
right
to presently
a remedial
right

a

legal right belonging to some definite person.

Action suit for the enforcement or protection of a right or redress or prevention of a wrong.

affording redress for the infringement

of

2. Elements of Cause of Action:

1) A legal right of the plaintiff; 2) A correlative duty of the defendant to respect plaintiff’s right; and

3)

An

act

or omission

of

the defendant

in

violation

of

the

plaintiff’s

right

with

40 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

consequential injury or damage to the plaintiff for which he may maintain an action for recovery or other relief (Relucio vs. Lopez, 373 SCRA 578,

2002).

3. Elements of Right of Action:

a) Existence of the cause of action;

b) Performance of all conditions precedent; and

c) The action must be instituted by the proper

party.

4. Right of Action versus Cause of Action

Right of action is the right to commence and prosecute an action to obtain the
Right of action
is
the
right
to commence
and
prosecute an action to obtain the relief sought,
while cause of action is the act or omission by
which a party violates the right of another (Rule
2, Sec. 2).
5. Failure to State Cause of Action
Where there is failure to state a cause of action
in a pleading, the remedy of the defendant is to
move for its dismissal
on
the ground that
the
pleading asserting the claim states no cause of
action. Rule 16, Sec 1 (g)

6. Test of Sufficiency of Action

Whether or not admitting the facts alleged, the court could render a valid judgment upon the same in accordance with the prayer in the complaint (Misamis Occidental II Cooperative, Inc. v. David, 468 SCRA 63).

The question of whether the complaint states a cause of action is determined by its averments regarding the acts committed by the defendant. Thus, it must contain a concise statement of the

41 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

ultimate or essential facts constituting the plaintiff’s cause of action. To be taken into account are only the material allegations in the complaint; extraneous facts and circumstances or other matters aliunde are not considered.

The test of sufficiency of facts alleged in the complaint as constituting a cause of action is whether or not admitting the facts alleged, the

court could render a valid verdict in accordance

with

complaint. Stated

differently, if the allegations in the complaint

furnish sufficient basis by which the complaint can be maintained, the same should not be dismissed regardless of the defense that may be

the

prayer

of

said

asserted by the defendant. (Juana Complex I Homeowners Association, Inc., et al. vs. Fil- Estate
asserted by the defendant.
(Juana Complex
I
Homeowners Association, Inc., et al.
vs. Fil-
Estate Land, Inc., G.R. No. 152272, March 5, 2012)
7. Splitting a Single Cause of Action and its Effects
a. Splitting a single cause of Action
The act of dividing a single cause of action, claim
or demand into two or more parts, and bringing the
suit
for
one
of such parts only, intending to

reserve the rest for another separate action is the prohibited act of splitting a single cause of action (Regalado).

b. Effects

If two or more suits are instituted on the basis of the same cause of action, the filing of one or a judgment upon the merits in any one is available as a ground for the dismissal of the others (Rule 2, Sec. 4).

When a single cause of action is split, the remedy of the defendant is to move for its dismissal under

42 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

Rule 16 on the ground that:

1) There is another action pending between the

litis

same parties

for

the

same

cause,

or

pendentia (Sec. 1[e]); or

2) If the first action has already been finally terminated, on the ground of res judicata (Sec.

1[f]).

The well-entrenched rule is that "a party cannot, by varying the form of action, or adopting a different method of presenting his case, escape the operation of the principle that one and the same cause of action shall not be twice litigated.This Court has laid down the test in determining whether or not the causes of action in the first and second cases are identical, to wit: would the same evidence support and establish both the present and former cause of action? If so, the former recovery is a bar; if

otherwise, it does not stand in the way of the former action. (Goodland Company, Inc.,
otherwise, it does
not
stand
in
the
way
of
the
former action. (Goodland Company, Inc., vs. Asia
United Bank, Abraham Co, Atty. Joel T. Pelicano And
The Register Of Deeds Of Makati City, G.R.
195561, March 14, 2012)
No.

43 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

B. Kinds of Actions

1. For the purpose of determination of venue

a. Real Action - Actions affecting title to

interest

matter in

or possession of

therein.

It

is

real property, or

that the

important

litigation

must

also

involve

any

of

the

following

issues:

title

to,

ownership,

possession, partition, foreclosure of mortgage

or any interest in real property.

Examples:

- Accion reivindicatoria . - An action to recover possession of real property plus damages
- Accion reivindicatoria .
- An action to recover possession of real
property plus damages
- where a complaint is denominated as one for
specific performance but nonetheless prays for
the issuance of a deed of sale for a parcel of
land for the plaintiff to acquire ownership of
the land, its primary objective and nature is
one to recover the parcel of land itself and
thus,
is
deemed
a
real
action
(Gochan vs.
Gochan)

- Where it is alleged in the complaint that the defendant breached the contract, so that the plaintiff prays that the contract be rescinded and that the defendant be ordered to return possession of the hacienda to the plaintiff, the ultimate purpose or end of the action is to recover possession of real property and not a mere breach of contract (De Jesus vs. Coloso)

- Where the action to annul or rescind a sale

fundamental and

of

real

property

has

as

its

44 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

prime objective the recovery of real property, the action is real (Emergency Loan Pawnshop, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals)

- mortgage is a real action.

- action is the delivery of the certificate of title, said relief, in turn depends upon who,

the

real estate

An action

to

foreclose a

Although the main

relief sought in

between the parties, has a better right to the

possible for the

lot in question.

It

is

not

court to decide the main relief without passing upon the claim of the parties with
court to decide the main relief without passing
upon the claim of the parties with respect to
the title to and the possession of the lot in
question. The action is a real action (Espineli
vs. Santiago)
-
absolutely no consideration, it
Where
the
sale
is fictitious, with
should
be
regarded as a non-existent contract. There being
no contract between the parties, there is

nothing in truth to annul by action. The action therefore, cannot be an action for annulment but one for the recovery of a fishpond, a real action (Pascual vs. Pascual)

b. Personal action - One which is not founded

upon

property. In a personal action, the plaintiff

the

recovery of

real

the

privity

of

real

rights

or

seeks the recovery of personal property,

enforcement of a damage

Examples:

a damages to real property

contract or the

- Action

for

sum

of

money, action for

45 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

- An action for a declaration of the nullity of marriage, An action for specific performance is a personal action as long as

it does not involve a claim of or recovery

of ownership of real property (Siosoco vs.

Court of Appeals)

- Where

the

allegations as well

as

the

prayer of the complaint do

not

claim

ownership of the lots in question or ask for

possession of the same but instead seeks for

a defendants in favor

the execution

the

the

of

deed

of

sale

by

of the plaintiff,

action is a personal action (Adamos vs. J.M. Tuason & Co., Inc.) - Where an
action is a personal action (Adamos vs. J.M.
Tuason & Co., Inc.)
- Where an award of a house and lot to the
plaintiff was unilaterally cancelled, an
action that seeks to annul the cancellation
of the award over the said house and lot is
a personal action
The
action
does
not
involve title to ownership or possession of
real property. The nature of the action is
one to compel the recognition of
the
validity of the previous award by seeking a
declaration that the cancellation is null
and void (Hernandez vs. Development Bank of
the Philippines)

- but an action to compel the mortgagee to

accept payment of the mortgage debt and to

release the

mortgage is a personal action

(Hernandez vs. Rural Bank of Lucena)

- An action to annul a contract of loan and

a

its accessory real estate mortgage personal action.

is

46 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

c. Mixed action: One brought for protection or recovery of real property an d also for an award for damage s sustained. Example: Accion publiciana with a claim for damages.

2.

jurisdiction/service of summons.

a. Action in rem - One which is not directed only against particular persons but against the thing itself and the object of which is to bar indifferently all who might be minded to make any objection against the right sought to be enforced, hence the judgment therein is binding theoretically upon the whole world.

purpose

determining

For

the

of

Example: Expropriation. b. Action in personam: One which is directed against particular persons on the
Example: Expropriation.
b. Action
in
personam: One
which
is
directed
against particular persons on the basis of their
personal liability to establish a claim against
them and the judgment wherein binding only upon the
parties impleaded or their successors in interest
is.
Example: for breach of contract.

against

particular persons but the purpose of which is to bar and bind not only said persons but any other person who claims any interest in the property or right subject of the suit.

Example: Judicial foreclosure of a mortgage (Ocampo vs. Domalanta), Partition, Attachment.

c.

Action quasi in

rem: One

directed

47 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

C. Kinds of Pleadings

1. Pleading - These are written statements of the respective claims and defenses of the parties submitted to the court for appropriate judgment (Rule 6, Sec. 1).

a. Initiatory Pleading initiates an action. Examples:

a

pleading that

1. Original Complaint 2. Permissive Counterclaim 3. Cross Claim Third, 4 th , etc. party
1. Original Complaint
2. Permissive Counterclaim
3. Cross Claim
Third, 4 th , etc. party Complaint
Complaint in intervention
Petition in special civil actions
Petition in special proceedings
Counter counter claim
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
b. Responsive Pleading
a
pleading that
responds to allegations in the adverse party’s
pleading.
Examples:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Answer to original complaint
Answer to permissive counterclaim
Answer to cross claim
Answer to 3 rd , 4 th , etc complaint
Answer to complaint in intervention

6. Comment or objection to petition

7. Compulsory counterclaim

8. Reply

9. Answer to counter claim

10. Answer to counter cross claim

NOTE: a MOTION, POSITION PAPER, OR MEMORANDUM is not a pleading.

48 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

2. Kinds of pleadings

a) Complaint, counterclaim, cross-claim, third (fourth, etc.)-party complaint, complaint-in- intervention - The complaint is the pleading alleging the plaintiff's cause or causes of action. The names and residences of the plaintiff and defendant must be stated in the complaint. (Rule 6, Sec. 3)

b) Answer - An answer is a pleading in which a defending party sets forth his defenses. (Rule 6, Sec. 4)

Kinds of defenses: 1) Negative Defenses - The specific denial (Sec. 10, Rule 9) of
Kinds of defenses:
1) Negative Defenses
-
The specific denial
(Sec.
10,
Rule
9)
of
the material
fact/s
alleged
in
the
pleading
of the claimant
essential to his cause/s of action. (Sec. 5[a])
Kinds of denial:

1) Absolute denial - the defendant must specify each material allegation of fact the truth of which he does not admit and setting forth the substance of the matters upon which he relies to support his denial, whenever practicable.

2) Partial denial - the defendant shall specify so much of it as is true and material and shall deny the remainder.

3) Disavowal of knowledge - the defendant shall state in his pleading that he does not have knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of a material averment.

The defendant must positively state how it is that he is ignorant of the facts as alleged.

49 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

This denial does not apply where the facts as to which want of knowledge is asserted, is so plainly and necessarily within the defendant’s knowledge, that his averment of ignorance must be palpably untrue. It is as if that no denial at all has been made.

Negative Pregnant

expression which carries with it an affirmation or at least an implication of some kind favorable to the adverse party. It is a denial pregnant with an admission of the substantial facts alleged in the pleading.

a

form of negative

Where a fact is alleged with qualifying or modifying language and the words of the
Where
a
fact
is
alleged with qualifying or
modifying language and the words of the
allegation are so qualified or modified are
literally denied, has been held that the
qualifying circumstances alone are denied while
the fact itself is admitted (Republic vs.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 152154, July 15, 2003).

Example: In Republic vs. Sandiganbayan, it was alleged that it was clearly and overwhelmingly showed how the respondents stashed away the country’s wealth to Switzerland amounting to $356M and hid the same under layers of foundations and corporate entities to prevent detection.

Negative Pregnant: The respondents specifically denies the allegations for it was false, the truth being that respondent’s properties in the bank were lawfully acquired. Thus, it was implied that they admit that it was stashed to Switzerland.

2. Affirmative Defenses - an allegation of a new matter which while hypothetically admitting

50 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

the material allegations in the pleading of the claimant, would nevertheless prevent or bar recovery by him.

Kinds of affirmative defenses:

Affirmative defenses include fraud, statute of limitations, release, payment, illegality, statute of frauds, estoppel, former recovery, discharge in bankruptcy and any other matter by way of confession and avoidance. (Sec. 5[b])

defending party may have against an opposing party (Rule 6, Sec. 6).

a

c. Counterclaim

It

is

any claim

which

Nature of a counterclaim A counterclaim a complaint such that it must be answered within
Nature of a counterclaim
A counterclaim
a
complaint such that it must be answered within 10
days from service. It is a cause of action against
plaintiff.
is
in
the
nature
of
cross
Counterclaim must be within the jurisdiction of
the court
Where
to
file:
A
counterclaim which is filed

before the MTC must be within the jurisdiction of

nature

thereof.

said

court

as

to

the

amount

and

the

A court (if MTC) has no jurisdiction to hear and determine a set-off or counterclaim in excess of

A counterclaim beyond the

court’s jurisdiction may only be pleaded by way of

or

weaken the plaintiff’s claim, but NOT to obtain

affirmative relief.

defense, the purpose of which is to defeat

its jurisdiction.

51 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

Counterclaim cannot exceed the jurisdiction of the court

MOREOVER, the amount of judgment obtained by the

defendant on appeal cannot exceed the jurisdiction

of the court in which the action began. Since the

trial court did not acquire jurisdiction over the counterclaim in excess of the jurisdictional amount, the appellate court likewise did not have jurisdiction over the same. In such a case, the award in excess of the jurisdiction of the trial court is void (Agustin v. Bacalan, L-16000 March 18, 1985).

Effect if counterclaim in excess of the jurisdiction of the court A counterclaim, even if
Effect
if
counterclaim
in
excess
of
the
jurisdiction of the court
A counterclaim, even if otherwise compulsory, but
the
amount
exceeds the
jurisdiction of the
inferior court,
will
only
be considered
permissive. Hence, the fact that it is not set-up
in the inferior court will not bar plaintiff from
instituting a separate
action to prosecute
it
(Calo v. Ajax, L-20865, March 13, 1968).
Counterclaim in the RTC no limit: Requirement

A counterclaim may

addition to

the

RTC

regardless of the amount involved provided that,

requirements, it is

cognizable by the regular courts of justice

in

other

be entertained by

the

(Regalado, 2010).

52 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

d.

Compulsory Counterclaim (Sec. 7)

Requisites:

or be necessarily

connected with the transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter of the opposing party’s claim; 2) It does not require for its adjudication the presence of third parties of whom the court cannot acquire jurisdiction; and 3) It must be cognizable by the regular courts. 4) The trial court has jurisdiction to entertain the claim both as to the amount and the nature thereof, EXCEPT that in an original action before the RTC, the counterclaim may be considered compulsory regardless of the amount. 5) It must be existing at the time the defendant files his answer (Sec. 8, Rule 11).

1)

It

must

arise out

of,

Test of Compulsoriness: The logical relationship between the claim and counterclaim. e. Permissive Counterclaim
Test of Compulsoriness:
The logical relationship between the claim and
counterclaim.
e. Permissive Counterclaim

It is a counterclaim which does not arise out of or is necessarily connected with the subject matter of the opposing party’s claim. It is not barred even of it is not set up in the original action.

Effect if counterclaim counterclaim is not raised:

General rule:

A compulsory counterclaim not set up in the answer is deemed barred.

53 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

Exceptions:

a) If it is a counterclaim which either matured or

was acquired by a party after serving his answer. In this case, it may be pleaded by filing a supplemental answer or pleading before judgment.

b) When a pleader fails to set-up a counterclaim

through oversight, inadvertence, excusable negligence,

or when justice requires, he may, by leave of court, set-up the counterclaim by amendment of the pleadings before judgment (Sec. 10, Rule 11).

Effect if compulsory counterclaim is not answered A plaintiff who fails or chooses not to
Effect if compulsory counterclaim is not answered
A plaintiff who fails or chooses not to answer a
compulsory counterclaim may not be declared in default
principally because the issues raised in the
counterclaim are deemed automatically joined by the
allegations of the complaint (Gojo v. Goyala, G.R.
No. 26768, Oct. 30, 1970).
Motion to dismiss with compulsory counterclaim is
incompatible

The filing of a motion to dismiss and the setting up of a compulsory counterclaim are incompatible remedies. In the event that a defending party has a

ground for dismissal and a compulsory counterclaim at the same time, he must choose only one remedy. If he decides to file a motion to dismiss, he cannot set up

his counterclaim. But if he opts

counterclaim, he may

still plead

to

his

set

up ground for

his

dismissal as an affirmative (Regalado, 2010).

defense

in

his answer

54 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

Effect

dismissed

on

the

counterclaim when the complaint is

Under the 1997 Rules, the dismissal of the main complaint will not correspondingly result in the dismissal of the counterclaim where the defendant had already filed and served the answer with counterclaims upon the plaintiff. The defendant has the option of prosecuting the counterclaim in the same or in a separate action (Riguera, Primer Reviewer on Remedial Law).

1) If no motion to dismiss has been filed, any of the grounds for dismissal provided for in this Rule (Rule 16) may be pleaded as an affirmative defense in the answer and, in the discretion of the court, a preliminary hearing may be had thereon as if a motion to dismiss had been filed.

The dismissal of the complaint under this section shall be without prejudice to the prosecution
The dismissal of the complaint under this section
shall be without prejudice to the prosecution in the
same or separate action of a counterclaim pleaded in
the answer (Sec. 6, Rule 16).

2) Where the plaintiff himself files a motion to dismiss his complaint after the defendant has pleaded his answer with a counterclaim, the dismissal shall be limited to the complaint and is without prejudice to the right of the defendant to prosecute his counterclaim in a separate action unless within 15 days from notice of the motion he manifests his preference to have his counterclaim resolved in the same action (Sec. 2, Rule 17).

3) If the dismissal is due to the fault of the plaintiff and a counterclaim has been set up by the defendant, the latter may prosecute such counterclaim in the same or in a separate action (Sec. 3, Rule 17; Riano).

55 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

f. Cross-Claims

It is any claim by one party against a co-party arising out of the transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter either of the original action or of a counterclaim therein (Rule 6 Sec. 8).

The dismissal of the complaint carries with it the dismissal of a cross-claim which is purely defensive (but NOT a cross-claim seeking affirmative relief)

Reason: It has no independent existence and based entirely on the complaint.

g. Third (fourth, etc.) party complaints – It is a claim that a defending party
g. Third (fourth, etc.) party complaints
– It is a claim that a defending party may, with
leave of court, file against a person not a party to
the
action, called the third (fourth, etc.)-party
defendant for:
a. contribution,
b. indemnity,
c. subrogation or
d. any other relief in respect to his opponent’s
claim (Rule 6, Sec. 11).

Application of third- party complaint

Explaining the application of Section 12, Rule 6, supra, the Court said in Balbastro v. Court of Appeals, to wit: Section 12 of Rule 6 of the Revised Rules of Court authorizes a defendant to bring into a lawsuit any person "not a party to the action for contribution, indemnity, subrogation or any other relief in respect of his opponent's claim." From its

explicit language it does not compel the defendant to bring the third-parties into the litigation, rather it simply permits the inclusion of anyone who meets the

standard set forth

in

the rule.

56 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

The secondary

or

derivative liability of the third-party is central

whether

contribution, express or implied warranty or some other theory. The impleader of new parties under this rule is proper only when a right to relief exists under the applicable substantive law. This rule is merely a procedural mechanism, and cannot be utilized unless there is some substantive basis under applicable law.

the

basis

is

indemnity,

subrogation,

Apart from the requirement that the third-party complainant should assert a derivative or secondary claim for relief from the third-party defendant there are other limitations on said party’s ability to implead. The rule requires that the third-party defendant is "not a party to the action" for otherwise the proper procedure for asserting a claim against one who is already a party to the suit is by means of counterclaim or cross-claim under sections 6 and 7 of Rule 6. In addition to the aforecited requirement, the claim against the third-party defendant must be based upon plaintiff's claim against the original defendant (third-party claimant). The crucial characteristic of a claim under section 12 of Rule 6, is that the original "defendant is attempting to transfer to the third-party defendant the liability asserted against him by the original plaintiff. (Philtranco Service Enterprises, Inc., Vs. Felix Paras And Inland Trailways, Inc., And Hon. Court Of Appeals, G.R. No. 161909, April 25, 2012)

And Hon. Court Of Appeals, G.R. No. 161909, April 25, 2012) Third-party complaint: Requisites Accordingly, the

Third-party complaint: Requisites

Accordingly, the requisites for a third-party action are, firstly, that the party to be impleaded must not yet be a party to the action; secondly, that the claim against the third-party defendant must belong to the original defendant; thirdly, the claim of the original defendant against the third-party

57 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

defendant must be based upon the plaintiff’s claim against the original defendant; and, fourthly, the defendant is attempting to transfer to the third-party defendant the liability asserted against him by the original plaintiff.

As the foregoing indicates, the claim that the third-party complaint asserts against the third-party defendant must be predicated on substantive law. (Philtranco Service Enterprises, Inc., Vs. Felix Paras And Inland Trailways, Inc., And Hon. Court Of Appeals, G.R. No. 161909, April 25, 2012)

Third-party complaint need not be based on same claim
Third-party complaint need not be based on same claim

The third-party claim need not be based on the same theory as the main claim. For example, there are cases in which the third-party claim is based on an express indemnity contract and the original complaint is framed in terms of negligence. Similarly, there need not be any legal relationship between the third- party defendant and any of the other parties to the action. Impleader also is proper even though the third party’s liability is contingent, and technically does not come into existence until the original defendant’s liability has been established. In addition, the words ‘is or may be liable’ in Rule 14(a) make it clear that impleader is proper even though the third-party defendant’s liability is not automatically established once the third-party plaintiff’s liability to the original plaintiff has been determined. (Philtranco Service Enterprises, Inc., Vs. Felix Paras And Inland Trailways, Inc., And Hon. Court Of Appeals, G.R. No. 161909, April 25, 2012)

h. Complaint in Intervention

A pleading wherein an intervenor asserts a claim against either or all of the original parties (Rule 19, Sec. 3).

58 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

i. Reply

A reply is a pleading, the office or function of

or

avoidance of new matters alleged by way of defense in

the answer and thereby join or make issue as to such

which

is

to

deny,

or allege

facts

in denial

new matters. If a party does not file such reply, all

are deemed

the new matters

controverted. (Rule 6, Sec. 10).

alleged in

the answer

controverted. (Rule 6, Sec. 10). alleged in the answer 59 F raternal O rder of L

59 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

FLOW OF CIVIL PROCEDURE

I. Condition Precedents

1. Barangay Conciliation (Sec. 412, LGC)

2. Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies

3. Earnest efforts towards amicable settlement

between members of the family (Art. 151 Family

Code)

4. Prior resort to an alternative dispute

resolution.

II. Barangay Conciliation 1. General rule: The lupon tagapamayapa of each barangay shall have authority
II. Barangay Conciliation
1. General rule:
The lupon tagapamayapa of each barangay shall have
authority to bring together the parties residing
in the same city or municipality for amicable
settlement of ALL disputes
EXCEPT
a. Where
one
party
is
the government,
or
any

subdivision or instrumentality thereof; however, when it is only one of the contending parties, a confrontation should still be undertaken among the other parties (Gegare v. CA, G.R. No. 83907. September 13, 1989) b. Where one party is a public officer or employee, and the dispute relates to the performance of his official functions; c. Offenses punishable by imprisonment exceeding 1 year or a fine exceeding P5,000; d. Offenses where there is no private offended party;

e. Where the dispute involves real properties located in different cities or municipalities unless the

60 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

parties thereto agree to submit their differences to amicable settlement by an appropriate lupon;

f. Disputes involving parties who actually reside in barangays of different cities or municipalities, except where such barangay units adjoin each other and the parties thereto agree to submit their differences to amicable settlement by an appropriate lupon;

g. Such other classes of disputes which the President may determine in the interest of justice or upon the recommendation of the Sec. of Justice; and

h. Where one of the parties is a juridical entity

(Sec. 408, R.A. 7160)

i. Where the dispute arises from the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law j. The submission of
i. Where the dispute arises from the Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Law
j. The submission of disputes before the Lupon prior
to their filing with the court or other government
offices are not applicable to labor cases.
(Montoya v. Escayo, G.R. No. 82211-12 March 21,
1989)
k. An action for annulment of a compromise judgment
which as a general rule is immediately executory
and accordingly, beyond the authority of the
Barangay Court to change or modify.(Sanchez v.
Tupaz, G.R. No. 76690 February 29, 1988)
l.

Proceedings where relief is sought under R.A. No. 9262 or the Anti-Violence against Women and their Children Act (Sec. 33, R.A. No. 9262)

2. Other Instances where parties may go directly to

court without conciliation:

need

barangay

the

of

prior

a. Where the accused is under detention

b. Where a person has otherwise been deprived of

habeas corpus

personal

liberty

calling

for

proceedings;

61 F raternal O rder of L eviathan L evithan S ororitas

c.

Where actions are coupled with provisional remedies such as preliminary injunction, attachment, replevin and support pendent lite; and

d. Where the action may otherwise be barred by the statute of limitations. (Section 412, LGC)

3. Barangay conciliation not required in case of juridical entity:

Referral of a dispute to the Lupon is required only in cases involving natural persons, and not where any of the parties is a juridical person such as a corporation, partnership, corporation sole, testate or intestate, estate, etc. (Vda. De Borromeo v. Pogoy, G.R. No. L-63277. November 29, 1983)

4. Nature and effects of non-compliance with barangay conciliation: As cited in the case Sanchez
4.
Nature and effects
of non-compliance with
barangay conciliation:
As cited in the case Sanchez v. Tupaz, referral to
the Lupon is compulsory (as ruled in the cited case
of Morato vs. Go, 125 SCRA 444), [1983] and non-
compliance of the same could affect the sufficiency
of the cause of action and make the complaint
vulnerable to dismissal on the ground of lack of
cause of action or prematurity (Peregrina vs. Panis,
133 SCRA 75).

5. Venue of barangay conciliation.

Disputes between or among persons actually

residing in the same barangay shall be brought for

said

amicable

barangay.

1.

settlement

before

the

Lupon

of

2. Actual residents of different barangays within the same city or municipality shall be brought in the barangay where the respondent or any of the respondents actually resides, at the election of the complainant

62 F raternal O