Sunteți pe pagina 1din 30

Monday, 20 May 2019

I. Jurisdiction defined the decision made. (Century Insurance Co. v.

A. Traditional Meaning Fuentes, 2 SCRA 1168 [1961])
1. Jurisdiction has, traditionally, been C. Correctness or rightfulness of the decision
referred to as the power and authority of relates to the exercise of and not to the
the court to hear, try and decide a case. authority itself.
2. In its complete aspect, jurisdiction IV. Duty of the Court to determine its jurisdiction
includes not only the powers to hear and — It is the duty of the court to consider the
decide a case, but also the power to question of jurisdiction before it looks at other
enforce the judgment (14 Am. Jur. matters involved in the case. It may, and must, do
363-364), as the judgment or decree is this on its own motion without waiting for the
the end for which jurisdiction is exercised, question of jurisdiction being raised by any of the
and it is only through the judgment and its parties involved in the proceeding (20 Am Jur 2d,
execution that the power of the court is Courts, S 92). Courts are bound to take notice of
made efficacious and its jurisdiction the limits of their authority and they may act
complete. accordingly by dismissing the action even though
3. The power to control the execution of its the issue of jurisdiction is not raised or not even
decision is an essential aspect of suggested by counsel (Ace Publications vs.
jurisdiction. It cannot be the subject of Commissioner of Customs, 11 SCRA 147).
substantial subtraction and the most V. Effect if the court has no jurisdiction or of
important part of the litigation is the absence or lack of jurisdiction over the case
process of execution of decisions A. it has no power or authority to try a case and
(Echegaray vs. Secretary of Justice, 301 because it has no authority it must not
SCRA 96). exercise it.
II. Judicial Power includes the duty of the courts B. Exercise of jurisdiction absent authority or
of justice: power is necessarily nothing. Thus, without
A. To settle actual controversies involving rights, jurisdiction, the entire proceedings would be
which are legally demandable and null and void.
enforceable; and C. The only recourse for the court, absent
B. To determine whether or not there has been jurisdiction, is to dismiss the case motu
grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or proprio or on motion for without authority it
excess of jurisdiction on the part of any cannot act.
branch or instrumentality of Government. VI. Effect if it has jurisdiction — It is the duty of the
(Sec. 1, Art. VIII, 1987 Constitution) court to exercise the jurisdiction conferred upon it
III. Test of Jurisdiction by law and to render a decision in a case properly
A. The test of jurisdiction is whether the court submitted to it. Failure to do so may be enforced
has the power to enter into the inquiry and not by way of a mandamus proceeding (20 Am Jur.
whether the decision is right or wrong. 2d, S 93).
(Herrera vs. Barretto, 25 Phil. 245) VII. Jurisdiction vs Exercise of Jurisdiction
B. Since jurisdiction refers to power or authority A. Jurisdiction – is the power or authority of the
to hear, try and decide a case, it cannot court to hear, try, decide and execute a case.
depend on the correctness or rightfulness of B. Exercise of Jurisdiction – is the exercise of the
power of the court or authority of the court to

Monday, 20 May 2019

hear, try, decide and execute a case.
 mistake will bind unless corrected.

ILLUSTRATION: Where there is jurisdiction ERRORS OF JURISDICTION are
over the person and the subject matter, the reviewable by the extraordinary
decision on all other questions arising in the writ of certiorari; whereas,
case is but an exercise of that jurisdiction. ERRORS OF JUDGMENT are
VIII. Error of Jurisdiction vs Error of Judgment reviewable by appeal.
A. Distinctions: B. Importance of the distinction — to determine
1. Error of judgment – happens when the the proper remedy
court vested with jurisdiction over the 1. An error of judgment should be raised
subject matter of the action, while in the a) on ordinary appeal, not by
process of exercising the jurisdiction, it certiorari because certiorari is only
committed mistakes in the appreciation of confined to correcting errors of
the facts and the evidence leading to an jurisdiction or grave abuse of
erroneous judgment. discretion.
a) When a court acquires jurisdiction (1) The governing rule is that the
over the subject matter, the decision remedy of certiorari is not
or order on all other questions available when
arising in the case is but an exercise (a) the remedy of appeal is
of jurisdiction; Errors which the court available or
may commit in the exercise of such (b) even if available, when it
jurisdiction, like errors of procedure will not be a speedy and
or mistakes in the court's findings, adequate remedy.
are merely ERRORS OF i) And when the remedy
JUDGMENT; whereas, of appeal is lost, you
2. Error of jurisdiction – is one which occurs cannot revive it by
when the court exercises a jurisdiction resorting to certiorari
not conferred upon it by law. because certiorari is
a) When a court takes cognizance of a not a substitute for the
case over the subject matter of lost remedy of appeal.
which it has no jurisdiction, or acts in 2. Error of jurisdiction — petition for
excess of jurisdiction or with grave certiorari is only confined to correcting
abuse of discretion amounting to errors of jurisdiction or grave abuse of
lack of jurisdiction, the court commits discretion.
an ERROR OF JURISDICTION. IX. Aspects of Jurisdiction
(GSIS vs. Oliza 304 SCRA 421). 
 A. Jurisdiction over the subject matter;
ILLUSTRATION: When the court B. Jurisdiction over the parties;
acts without authority (error of C. Jurisdiction over the issues of the case; and
jurisdiction) such act would be null D. Jurisdiction over the res or thing involved in
and void or at least voidable, but if the litigation 

the court has authority but commits a (Boston Equity Resources, Inc. v CA, G.R.
mistake in the exercise of such No. 173946, June 19, 2013)
authority (error of judgment) such

Monday, 20 May 2019

X. Jurisdiction over the subject matter — It refers D. Exception to the rule that jurisdiction is
to the jurisdiction of the court over the class of determined by the allegations of the
cases to which a particular case belongs. complaint
A. Example of subject matters are: 1. In Ignacio vs. CFI of Bulacan (42 SCRA
1. real actions, 89) and other ejectment cases
2. personal actions, (Salandanan vs. Tizon 62 SCRA 388;
3. actions incapable of pecuniary Concepcion vs. CFI of Bulacan 119
estimation. SCRA 222), where tenancy was the
B. How jurisdiction over the subject matter is defense, the court went beyond the
 allegations of the complaint in
It is conferred by law which may be either determining jurisdiction over the subject
the Constitution or a statute. matter and required the presentation of
1. Consequences of the rule that evidence to prove or disprove the
jurisdiction is conferred by law: defense of tenancy. After finding the
a) It cannot be granted by the real issue to be tenancy, the cases
agreement of the parties; were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction
b) It cannot be acquired, waived, as it should properly be filed with the
enlarged, or diminished by any act or Court of Agrarian Reform (now
omission of the parties; DARAB) [de la Cruz vs. CA 510 SCRA
c) It cannot be conferred by the 103] plainly, after joining of the issues
acquiescence of the courts (Republic and the ultimate fact is revealed and
vs Estipular, 336 SCRA 333, 340). therefore the relief sought as well.
2. The law applicable to the case: E. Doctrines on jurisdiction
Jurisdiction being a matter of substantive 1. Doctrine of hierarchy of courts —
law, the established rule is that the Where courts have concurrent
statute in force at the time of the jurisdiction over a subject matter,
commencement of the action determines such concurrence of jurisdiction does
the jurisdiction of the court (Barangay not grant the party seeking relief the
Mayamot vs Antipolo City, G.R. No. absolute freedom to file a petition in
187349, August 17, 2016). any court of his choice. Pursuant to
C. Determination of the subject matter or this doctrine, a case must be filed first
nature (class) of the action — It is a before the lowest court possible
settled rule that jurisdiction over the having the appropriate jurisdiction,
subject matter is determined by the except if one can advance a special
allegations in the complaint (Baltazar vs. reason which would allow a party a
Ombudsman, 510 SCRA 74) regardless of direct resort to a higher court.
whether or not the plaintiff is entitled to a) When the doctrine of hierarchy of
his claims asserted therein (Gocotano vs. courts may be disregarded:
Gocotano 469 SCRA 328; Cadimas vs. b) In relation to cases filed with the
Carrion GR No. 180394, Sept. 29, 2008). Supreme Court, a direct resort to it
was allowed in certain cases, like:

Monday, 20 May 2019

(1) When there are special and intricate matters of fact. (Villaflor vs. CA,
important reasons clearly stated GR No. 95694, Oct. 8, 1997).
in the petition; 2. Exceptions:
(2) When directed by public welfare a) Where there is estoppel on the part
and the advancement of public of the party invoking the doctrine;
policy; b) Where the challenged administrative
(3) When demanded by the broader act is patently illegal, amounting to
interest of justice; lack of jurisdiction;
(4) When the challenged orders c) Where there is unreasonable delay
were patent nullities; or official inaction that will
(5) When analogous exceptional irretrievably prejudice the complaint;
and compelling circumstances d) Where the amount involved is
called for and justified the relatively small so as to make the
immediate and direct handling rule impractical and oppressive;
by the court. e) Where the question involved is
(6) When there are genuine issues purely legal and will ultimately have
of constitutionality that must be to be decided by the courts of justice;
addressed at the most f) Where judicial intervention is urgent;
immediate time. g) When its application may cause
F. Doctrine of non-interference (Doctrine of great and irreparable damage;
judicial stability) — Holds that courts of h) Where the controverted acts violate
equal and coordinate jurisdiction cannot due process;
interfere with each other’s orders. i) When the issue of non-exhaustion of
G. Doctrine of primary jurisdiction (Primary administrative remedies has been
administrative jurisdiction) — Under this rendered moot;
doctrine, a remedy within the j) When there is no other plain, speedy
administrative machinery must be resorted and adequate remedy;
to give the administrative officers every k) When strong public interest is
opportunity to decide a matter within its involved; and
jurisdiction. Such remedy must be l) In quo warranto proceedings.
exhausted first before the court’s power of H. Doctrine of adherence of jurisdiction
judicial review can be sought. (Continuity of jurisdiction) — Under this
1. Under this doctrine, courts will not rule, jurisdiction, once it attaches cannot
resolve a controversy involving a be ousted by the happening of subsequent
question which is within its jurisdiction events although of such a character which
and also of an administrative tribunal, should have prevented jurisdiction from
especially where the question demands attaching in the first instance (Ramos vs.
the exercise of sound administrative Central Bank of the Phil. 41 SCRA 586
discretion requiring the special [1971]).
knowledge and experience of said 1. The court, once jurisdiction has been
tribunal in determining technical and acquired, retains that jurisdiction until it

Monday, 20 May 2019

finally disposes of the case (De La Rosa I. Doctrine of ancillary (incidental)

vs. Roldan, 501 SCRA 34). jurisdiction — This power refers to the
2. As a consequence of this principle, authority of an office or tribunal to do all
jurisdiction is not affected by a new law things necessary for the administration of
placing a proceeding under the justice within the scope of its jurisdiction,
jurisdiction of another tribunal except and for the enforcement of its judgment
when otherwise provided in the statute or and mandate (University of the Immaculate
if the statute is clearly intended to apply Conception vs Office of the Secretary of
to actions pending even before its Labor and Employment, G.R. Nos.
enactment (People vs. Cawaling, 293 178085-178086, September 14, 2015).
SCRA 267) J. Doctrine of Judicial stability — The
3. Exceptions to the Rule of Adherence/ doctrine of judicial stability is one which
Continuity of Jurisdiction precludes a court from interfering by
a) When there is an express provision injunction with the regular orders of a co-
in the statute on retroactive equal court.
application; or K. Objections to jurisdiction over the subject
b) The statute is clearly intended to matter — The court may on its own
apply to actions pending before its initiative object to an erroneous
enactment; or jurisdiction and may ex mero motu take
c) The statute is curative. This means cognizance of lack of jurisdiction at any
that even if originally there was no point in the case and has a clearly
jurisdiction, the lack of jurisdiction recognized right to determine its own
may be cured by the issuance of the jurisdiction (Fabian vs. Desierto, 295
amendatory decree which is in the SCRA 470). “When it appears from the
nature of a curative statute with pleadings or evidence on record that the
retrospective application to a court has no jurisdiction over the subject
pending proceeding and cures that matter,…the court shall dismiss the same”
lack of jurisdiction. (Sec. 1, Rule 9, Rules of Court)
(1) Thus, in a case, while the CFI 1. The earliest opportunity of a party to
has no jurisdiction over a raise the issue of jurisdiction is in a
complaint for damages arising motion to dismiss filed before the filing or
from the dismissal of a radio service of an answer. Lack of jurisdiction
station manager which was filed over the subject matter is a ground for a
on August 2, 1976, PD 1367 motion to dismiss (Sec. 1(b), Rule 16,
vesting the court with jurisdiction Rules of Court). If no motion is filed, the
over such type of cases cured defense of lack of jurisdiction may be
the lack of jurisdiction of the trial raised as an affirmative defense in the
court at the time the instant answer (Sec. 6, Rule 16)
claim was filed before it. (Garcia 2. Omnibus Motion rule, a motion
vs. Martinez 90 SCRA 331 attacking a pleading like a motion to
[1979]) dismiss, shall include all grounds then
available, and all objections not so

Monday, 20 May 2019

included shall be deemed waived defendants in their memorandum filed

(Sec. 8 Rule 15). before the trial court did not render them
a) The defense of lack of jurisdiction in estoppel (Vda. De Barrera vs. Heirs of
over the subject matter is however, a Vicente Legaspi GR No. 174346 Sept.
defense not barred by the failure to 12, 2008).
invoke the same in a motion to 5. When the court dismisses the
dismiss already filed. Even if a complaint for lack of jurisdiction over
motion to dismiss was filed and the the subject matter, should it refer or
issue of jurisdiction was not raised forward the case to another court with
therein, a party may, when he files the proper jurisdiction? It is submitted
an answer, raise the lack of that the court should not do so. Its only
jurisdiction as an affirmative defense authority is to dismiss the complaint and
because this defense is not barred not to make any other order.
under the omnibus motion rule. L. Objections to Jurisdiction over the
b) Thus, the prevailing rule is that subject matter and Estoppel by Laches
jurisdiction over the subject matter 1. Estoppel means you cannot disown your
may be raised at any stage of the act by which you have misled another
proceedings, even for the first time while laches means abandonment of a
on appeal (Calimlim vs. Ramirez, right for failure to assert it for a long time.
118 SCRA 399; Francel Realty a) General Rule: You can raise your
Corporation vs. Sycip 469 SCRA objection on jurisdiction over the
424). subject matter even for the first
3. The issue is so basic that it may be time on appeal.
raised at any stage of the proceedings, b) The ONLY exception is when there
even on appeal. In fact, courts may take is estoppel by laches, as laid
cognizance of the issue even if not raised down in TIJAM vs.
by the parties. There is thus no reason to SIBONGHANOY ( Tijam vs.
preclude the Court of Appeals, for Sibonghanoy 23 SCRA 29, April
example, from ruling on this issue even if 15, 1968).
the same has not yet been resolved by XI. JURISDICTION OVER THE PARTIES
the trial court below (Asia International XII. Q: Define jurisdiction over the person. 

Auctioneers, Inc. vs. GR No. 163445, A: Jurisdiction over the person is the power to
Dec. 18, 2007). render a personal judgment against a party to an
4. Lack of jurisdiction is one of those action or proceeding through the service of
excepted grounds where the court may process or by voluntary appearance of a party
dismiss a claim or a case at any time during the progress of a cause. (Banco Español
when it appears from the pleadings or the Filipino vs. Palanca, 37 Phil. 291) 

evidence on record that any of those It is the power of the court to bring before it
ground exists, even if they were not persons to be affected by the judgment so as to
raised in the answer or in a motion to give him an opportunity to be heard, and to render
dismiss. That the issue of lack of a judgment binding upon his person. (21C.J.S.,
jurisdiction was raised only by the Courts, Sec. 11, 1990)

Monday, 20 May 2019

 acquires jurisdiction over his person. Without

How Jurisdiction over the persons of the parties is service of summons, or when the service is
acquired ( Bar 2009)
 improper, the trial and the judgment being in
Q: How does the court acquire jurisdiction over violation of due process, are both null and void.
the person? 
 (Avon Insurance PLC v. CA, 278 SCRA 312, 325
A: In civil cases, it is also a must that the court [1997]) 

acquires jurisdiction over the person of the parties. The mode of acquisition of jurisdiction over the
The manner by which the court acquires plaintiff and the defendant applies to both ordinary
jurisdiction over the parties depends on whether and special civil actions like mandamus or
the party is the plaintiff or the defendant. 
 unlawful detainer cases (Bar 1994).

As to Plaintiff 
 A. First Instance: UPON SERVICE ON HIM OF
Jurisdiction over the person of the plaintiff is COERCIVE PROCESS IN THE MANNER
acquired by his/her filing of the complaint or PROVIDED BY LAW 

petition. By doing so, he submits himself/herself to The first instance when a court acquires
the jurisdiction of the court. (Davao Light & Power jurisdiction over the person of the defendant
Co. Inc. v. CA, 204 SCRA 343, 348 [1991])
 is through a service upon him of the

 appropriate court process which in civil law is
As to Defendant 
 called service of summons. This is the
Jurisdiction over the person of the defendant is counterpart of warrant of arrest in criminal
required only in action in personam (Asiavest procedure. 

Limited vs. CA, 296 SCRA 539). Jurisdiction over So if the defendant was never served with
the person of the defendant is not a prerequisite in summons, any judgment rendered by the
an action in rem and quasi in rem (Gomez vs. CA court will not bind him. Even if he is the loser
425 SCRA 98; Biaco vs. Phil. Countryside Rural in the case, judgment cannot be enforced
Bank 515 SCRA 106.
 because the court did not acquire jurisdiction

 over his person. 

Jurisdiction Over the Person of the Defendant in The same principle holds true in criminal
Actions in Personam, How Acquired 
 cases. A court cannot try and convict an
Jurisdiction over the person of the defendant is accused over whose person the court never
obtained either by a valid service of summons acquired jurisdiction. In criminal cases, the
upon him or by his/her voluntary submission to the court acquires jurisdiction over the person
court’s authority. (Ang Ping vs. CA, 310 SCRA through the issuance and service of a warrant
343, 349 [1999]; Davao Light vs. CA) 
 of arrest. The warrant cannot have its effect
The service of summons is intended to give official even if it was issued, if the same had not
notice to the defendant or respondent that an been served, i.e. by effecting the arrest of the
action has been commenced against him. He is accused by virtue of a warrant. 

thus put on guard as to the demands of the 

plaintiff as stated in the complaint. The service of Q: In criminal cases, how can the warrant of
summons is an important element in the operation arrest be effected? 

of a court’s jurisdiction upon a party to a suit A: Once an information has been filed in
because it is the means by which the court court, the court issues a warrant. Then, the

Monday, 20 May 2019

arresting officer will arrest the accused. The defendant? 

court acquires jurisdiction by A: Lack of jurisdiction over the person of the
ENFORCEMENT OF SERVICE for effective defendant may be cured by waiver, consent,
arrest of the accused pursuant to the warrant silence or failure to object, whereas
of arrest. jurisdiction over the subject matter cannot be
B. Second Instance: BY HIS VOLUNTARY cured by failure to object or by silence, waiver
SUBMISSION TO THE JURISDICTION OF or consent. (MRR Co. vs. Atty. Gen. 20 Phil.

Another way to acquire jurisdiction over the 

person of the accused even if the accused is Vo l u n t a r y A p p e a r a n c e a s Vo l u n t a r y
not arrested is through VOLUNTARY Submission To Court’s Jurisdiction 

SURRENDER. Since there is no more need 

for the warrant, the court will recall the same. 
 Voluntary appearance must be the kind that
In civil cases, it is the voluntary submission of constitutes voluntary submission to the court’s
the defendant to the jurisdiction of the court. 
 jurisdiction. Voluntary submission to the

 court’s jurisdiction cannot be inferred from the
Q: Defendant was served with summons defendant’s mere knowledge or existence of a
improperly or irregularly therefore, he could case against him/her. In general, the form of
question the jurisdiction of the court over his appearance that would be construed as a
person. But instead, he did not question the voluntary submission to the court’s jurisdiction
jurisdiction of the court despite the defective is an appearance that seeks affirmative relief
service of court process. Did the court acquire except when the relief is for the purpose of
jurisdiction over the person of the defendant? 
 objecting to the jurisdiction of the court over

 the person of the defendant. 

A: YES, because jurisdiction over the person Certain actions which could be construed as
can be acquired by: voluntary appearance are:
1. waiver; 1. when the defendant’s counsel files the
2. consent; or corresponding pleading thereon;
3. lack of objection by the defendant. (MRR 2. w/hen the defendant files a motion for
Co. vs. Atty. Gen. 20 Phil. 523)
 reconsideration of the judgment by
This is unlike the jurisdiction over subject default;
matter wherein the case could be 3. when the defendant files a petition to set
dismissed upon filing in the wrong court. aside the judgment of default;
The SC said that when you remained 4. when the defendant and plaintiff jointly
silent despite the defects, your silence submit a compromise agreement for the
has cured the defect. Meaning, the approval of the court;
jurisdiction over your person was 5. when the defendant files an answer to
acquired by waiver, or consent, or lack of the contempt charge;
objection. 6. when the defendant files a petition for
certiorari without questioning the court’s
C. Q: Distinguish jurisdiction over the subject jurisdiction over his person (Navale v.
matter from jurisdiction over the person of the

Monday, 20 May 2019

CA, 253 SCRA 705, 709, 710, 709-712 which they are desirous of obtaining a
[1996]) decision. (Black’s 5th Ed., 745 citing Muller v.
D. Objections to jurisdiction over the person of Muller, 235 Cal App. 2nd 341, 45 Cal. Rptr
the defendant 
 182, 184)
An objection to the jurisdiction over the B. How Jurisdiction Over The Issues Is
person of the defendant may be raised as a Conferred and Determined 

ground for a motion to dismiss (Sec. 1(a) In order to determine whether or not a court
Rule 16). If no motion to dismiss has been has jurisdiction over the issue or issues of the
filed, the objection may be pleaded as an case, one must examine the pleadings. 

affirmative defense in the answer (Sec. 6 

Rule 16). 
 Q: Define jurisdiction over the issues. 

If a motion to dismiss has been filed, the A: Jurisdiction over the issue is the authority
objection to the lack of jurisdiction over the to try and decide the issues raised in the
person of the defendant must be pleaded in pleadings of the parties. (Reyes vs. Diaz, 73
the same motion where such ground is Phil. 484) 

available at the time the motion is filed, 

otherwise it is deemed waived pursuant to the Q: What are pleadings? 

omnibus motion rule. The defense of lack of A: Rule 6, Section 1 - Pleadings are the
jurisdiction over the person of the defendant written allegation of the parties of their
is not one of those defenses which are not respective claims and defenses submitted to
deemed waived if not raised in the motion to the court for trial and judgment. 

dismiss. Only lack of jurisdiction over the In a civil case, pleadings are written
subject matter, litis pendentia, res judicata statements of the respective positions of the
and prescription are not waived (Sec. 1 Rule parties, namely, the claims for the plaintiff and
9 in relation to Sec. 8 Rule 15).
 defenses for the defendant.

 Jurisdiction over the issue is, therefore,
Effect of pleading additional defenses aside conferred and determined by the pleadings of
from lack of jurisdiction over the person of the the parties. 

 Jurisdiction over the issues may also be
The rule was re-examined in La Naval Drug determined and conferred by stipulation of the
Corporation vs. CA 236 SCRA 78). The parties as when in the pre-trial, the parties
pronouncements in said case are now enter into stipulation of facts and documents
embodied in Sec. 20 of Rule 14 which or enter into an agreement simplifying the
provides: ****The inclusion in a motion to issues of the case (Sec. 2 Rule 18) 

dismiss of other grounds aside from lack of Jurisdiction over the issues may also be
jurisdiction over the person of the defendant conferred by waiver or failure to object to the
shall not be deemed a voluntary appearance. presentation of evidence on a matter not
XIII. JURISDICTION OVER THE ISSUES raised in the pleadings. Here the parties try
A. Meaning of Issue 
 with their express or implied consent issues
An issue is a disputed point or question to not raised by the pleadings. The issues tried
which parties to an action have narrowed shall be treated in all respects as if they had
down their several allegations and upon been raised in the pleadings (Sec. 5 Rule 10).

Monday, 20 May 2019

C. Jurisdiction Over the Subject Matter evidence even if the claim is not mentioned in
Distinguished from Jurisdiction Over the the complaint. (Cindy and Lynsy Garment v.
 NLRC, 284 SCRA 38, 45 [1998]) 

Jurisdiction over the issues is conferred by Take note that jurisdiction over the issues in
the pleadings and by the express (stipulation) civil cases is acquired after defendant has
or implied (failure to object to evidence) filed an answer. In criminal cases, jurisdiction
consent of the parties because an issue not over the issues is acquired when the accused
duly pleaded may be validly tried and decided enters a plea of not guilty or pleads guilty but
by the court as long as there is no objection seeks to prove a mitigating circumstance. 

from the parties. Jurisdiction over the subject For a decision to be effective, the court must
matter is conferred by law and cannot be acquire the jurisdiction over the subject
subject to the agreement of the parties. (Vda matter, the person, the res in case the
de Victoria v. CA, GR No. 147550, Jan. 26, defendant is not around, and the last is
 jurisdiction over the issue.
A: The following are the distinctions: E. Question of Law v. Question of Fact ( Bar
1. Jurisdiction over the subject matter is the 2004)

power to hear and try a particular case, There is a question of law when the doubt or
 difference arises as to what the law is
Jurisdiction over the issues is the power applicable on a certain set of facts. There is a
of the court to resolve legal questions question of fact when the doubt or difference
involved in the case; arises as to the truth or falsehood of the
2. Jurisdiction over the subject matter is alleged facts (Sps. Santos vs. CA 337 SCRA
acquired upon filing of the complaint, 67). 

 When the issue involves a review of the
Jurisdiction over the issues of the case is evidence, it involves a question of fact
acquiredupon filing of the answer which because evidence, as defined, is the means,
joins the issues involved in the case. sanctioned by the rules, of ascertaining in a
D. When An Issue Arises Even If Not Raised In judicial proceeding the truth respecting a
the Pleadings 
 matter of fact. (Sec. 1 Rule 128)
Although it is a rule that jurisdiction over the XIV. JURISDICTION OVER THE RES or property in
issue is to be determined by the pleadings of litigation
the parties, an issue may arise in a case A. RES is the Latin word for “thing.” It is applied
without it being raised in the pleadings. This to an object, subject matter (not nature of the
happens when the parties try an issue with action), status, considered as the defendant
their consent. Under Sec. 5, Rule 10 of the in the action or as the object against which,
Rules of Court, when issues not raised by the directly, proceedings are taken. (Black’s 5th
pleadings are tried with the express or the Ed., 1172)
implied consent of the parties, they shall be B. Define jurisdiction over the res.

treated in all respects, as if they had been Jurisdiction over the res is the power or
raised in the pleadings. Thus, if evidence on a authority of the court over the thing or
claim for salary differential is not objected to, property under litigation. (Perkins v. Dizon, 69
the Labor Arbiter correctly considered the Phil. 186, 190 [1939]) 

Monday, 20 May 2019

It is the power to bind the “thing”. 
 defendant, jurisdiction over the res becomes
How acquired — It is acquired either by the a substitute over the person. 

(a) the seizure of the property under legal In the example of action for compulsory
process whereby it is brought into actual or recognition, even if the defendant is a non-
constructive custody of the court or (b) as a resident who is out of the country the object
result of the institution of legal proceedings, in of litigation is status here in the Philippines,
which the power of the court is recognized then acquisition of jurisdiction over the res
and made effective. (Macahilig vs. Heirs of confers jurisdiction to the court even if the
Grace M. Magalit, GR No. 141423, Nov. 15, defendant is abroad. The res here is the
 status against which or in relation to which
Acquisition of jurisdiction over the res by the judgment can be enforced. 

actual seizure is exemplified by an In Rule 57 Section 1, among the grounds for
attachment proceeding where the property is issuance of a writ of preliminary attachment
seized at the commencement of the action or is: 

at some subsequent stage in the action. It is “(f) In an action against a party who does not
also acquired through a legal provision which reside and is not found in the Philippines, or
authorizes the court to exercise authority over on whom summons may be served by
a property or subject matter such as suits publications.”
involving a person’s status or property located XV. JURISDICITON OF REGULAR COURTS
in the Philippines in actions in rem or quasi in A. JURISDICTION OF THE SUPREME COURT
rem. (Banco Espanol Filipino vs. Palanca 37 1. The Supreme Court is not a trier of facts
Phil. 921, 927 [1918]; Perkins v. Dizon; Sec. — The SC is not a trier of facts, which
15, Rule 14, Rules of Court.) 
 means that passing upon a factual issue
In Land Registration cases or probate is not within the province of the Court
proceedings, jurisdiction is acquired by (Romy’s Freight Service vs. Castro, 490
compliance with procedural requisites, such SCRA 160). The findings of facts of the
as publication. 
 Court of Appeals are not generally
In a petition for change of name, the title of reviewable by the SC (Sarmiento vs. Yu
the petition must be complete by including the 497 SCRA 513). Also, factual findings of
name sought to be adopted; otherwise, the the trial court, particularly when affirmed
court acquires no jurisdiction over the by the Court of Appeals, are generally
proceedings. (Telmo vs. Republic, 73 SCRA binding on the Court (Tan vs. GVT
29 (1976). Engineering Services 498 SCRA 93;
C. Importance of jurisdiction over the res — The Office of the Ombudsman vs. Lazar0-
court obtains the authority to bind the “thing”. Baldazo GR No. 170815 February 2,
Sometimes it is a substitute for jurisdiction 2007). 

over the person. There are instances when It is not the function of the SC to
the court cannot acquire jurisdiction over the determine the weight of the evidence
defendant like when he is abroad. But if the supporting the assailed decision (JR
court acquires jurisdiction over the res, the Blanco vs. Quasha 318 SCRA 373).
case may go on. Even if the court cannot However, factual issues may be delved
acquire jurisdiction over the person of the into and resolved where the findings and

Monday, 20 May 2019

conclusions of the trial court or the quasi- SC is not only an original court, it is
judicial bodies are frontally inconsistent also an appellate court.
with the findings of the CA (Office of the B. APPELLATE JURISDICTION OF THE
Ombudsman vs. Tongson 499 SCRA SUPREME COURT
 1. The appellate jurisdiction is found in
The highest court of the land is the Section 5, Paragraph (2), Article VIII
Supreme Court. It was not affected by 1987 Constitution:

the Judiciary Law (BP 129) which “Review, revise, reverse, modify, or affirm
reorganized the judiciary in 1983. Being on appeal or certiorari, as the law or the
a constitutional court, its jurisdiction is Rules of Court may provide, final
found in the fundamental law itself. The judgments and orders of lower courts in:
SC is both an original and appellate a) All cases in which the
court. constitutionality or validity of any
2. ORIGINAL JURISDICTION OF THE treaty, international or executive
 agreement, law, presidential decree,
Article VIII, Section 5 , paragraph 1 of the proclamation, order, instruction,
1987 Constitution enumerates the ordinance, or regulation is in
ORIGINAL jurisdiction of the SC:
Section 5. The Supreme Court shall have b) All cases involving the legality of any
the following powers: tax, impost, assessment, or toll, or
a) Exercise original jurisdiction over any penalty imposed in relation
cases affecting ambassadors, other thereto.
public ministers and consuls, over c) All cases in which thejurisdiction of
petitions for certiorari, prohibition, any lower court is in issue.
mandamus, quo warranto , and d) All criminal cases in which the
habeas corpus.
 penalty imposed is reclusion
Now, it is still premature for us to perpetua or higher.
discuss now what do you mean by e) All cases in which an error or
certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, question of law is involved.
quo warranto because that is f) All cases in which the
discussed exhaustively in the study constitutionality or validity of any
of Special Civil Actions. But you are treaty, international or executive
more acquainted with habeas agreement, law, presidential decree,
corpus. It is a special proceeding. If proclamation, order, instruction,
you are illegally detained, you can ordinance, or regulation is in
file a petition for habeas corpus question.

directly before the SC because it has So if the RTC in a certain civil case
original jurisdiction. 
 declares the law as unconstitutional
So that is the first provision in the since it has the power to do so, the
Constitution dealing with the same has to be appealed directly to
jurisdiction of the SC. However, the the SC. It cannot pass through the
CA because the SC has exclusive

Monday, 20 May 2019

appellate jurisdiction regarding the their jurisdiction. Election cases, sa

matter. COMELEC man yan ba. Claims against
g) b) All cases involving the legality of the government – COA. Or disallowance
any tax, impost, assessment, or toll, on disbursement by government officers
or any penalty imposed in relation or removal from government service –

This is related to the legality of tax Now, according to Section 7, any
cases – whether a tax or tax penalty decision, order or ruling of these
is legal or not. However, whatever commissions may be brought to the SC
decision the lower court gives, it has on certiorari, etc. So you will see that the
to be appealed directly to the SC. decisions of the constitutional
h) All cases in which the jurisdiction of commissions are reviewable by the SC. 

any lower court is in issue However, Congress amended the
i) All criminal cases in which the Judiciary Law particularly Section 9 on
penalty imposed is reclusion the jurisdiction of the CA by now making
perpetua or higher. decisions of the CSC no longer
j) (e) All cases in which only an error appealable to the SC directly but
or question of law is involved.
 appealable to the CA. 

Take note that ONLY an error or When that law was passed where the
question of law is involved. So, if decisions of the CSC are appealable to
there is a mixed question of law and the CA, first I was stunned. I said there
a question of fact, appeal must be is something queer here because the
filed with the CA. You only go to the CSC is a constitutional body and the CA
SC if the appeal is 100% legal. That is not. So why will a decision of a
applies to both criminal and civil constitutional body be reviewable by a
cases. non-constitutional body? And I said
C. OTHERCONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS parang it might violate the Constitution.
DEALING WITH THE JURISDICTION OF Under the Constitution, decisions of the
THE SUPREME COURT constitutional commissions are
1. Article IX, Section 7, paragraph (a), 1987 appealable to the SC. Does Congress
 have the power to change that by making
“Each Commission shall decide by a it appealable to the CA? 

majority vote x x x. Unless otherwise So I had to look at the provision again to
provided by this Constitution or by law, find out whether this is possible. But
any decision, order, or ruling of each pwede naman pala. You look at the
Commission may be brought to the provision, “Unless otherwise provided by
Supreme Court on certiorari by the this Constitution or by law..” Meaning, the
aggrieved party within thirty days from decisions are appealable to the SC
receipt of a copy thereof.”
 unless otherwise provided by law. The
The COMELEC, COA and the CSC act Constitution itself gave Congress the
also as courts of justice. They have power to change it. So there is no
powers to decide certain cases within problem. 

Monday, 20 May 2019

 discretion, the sufficiency of the factual

Article VII, Section 4, last paragraph, basis of the proclamation of martial law
1987 Constitution:
 or the suspension of the privilege of the
“The Supreme Court, sitting en banc, writ or the extension thereof.

shall be the sole judge of all contests So this particular provision of the
relating to the election, returns, and Constitution came about in 1987 to check
qualifications of the President or Vice- the supposed excesses during the time
President, and may promulgate its rules of Marcos, though it came too late. It may
for the purpose.”
 well take another 100 years to produce
If there’s an electoral protest for the another Marcos. 

President and Vice-President, the matter 

is not to be decided by the COMELEC Article VIII, Section 2, 1987 Constitution:

but by the SC. This is what is called as The Congress shall have the power to
the SC acting as the Presidential define, prescribe, and apportion the
Electoral Tribunal. The only case so far jurisdiction of the various courts but may
was that filed by DefensorSantiago but not deprive the Supreme Court of its
which was dismissed, the SC ruled that jurisdiction over cases enumerated in
when she ran for the Senate, she has Section 5 hereof. 

already technically abandoned her Congress may change or even remove
interest for the Presidency.
 the jurisdiction of the RTC or CA. The law

 can change them because jurisdiction
Article VII, Section 18 (3), 1987 over the subject matter is conferred by
Constitution – Commander-in-Chief law. However, Congress does not have
 the power to lessen or deprive the
“The Supreme Court may review, in an Supreme Court of its jurisdiction under
appropriate proceeding filed by any Section 5, Article VIII.

citizen, the sufficiency of the factual basis However Article VI, Section 30 states:

of the proclamation of martial law or the “No law shall be passed increasing the
suspension of the privilege of the writ or appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme
extension thereof, and must promulgate Court as provided in this Constitution
its decision thereon within thirty days without its advice and concurrence.”

from its filing.”
 Thus , Congress cannot lessen but it can
So, the SC, in an appropriate proceeding increase the SC’s powers and
filed by any citizen review the sufficiency jurisdiction, PROVIDED it is with the
of the factual basis of the proclamation of latter's advice and concurrence.

martial law. Meaning, the SC can inquire The provision under the Ombudsman
into the basis on why martial law is Law with regard to the Ombudsman’s
 disciplining power appealable directly to
Which therefore abandons the Political the SC, was declared unconstitutional by
Question doctrine laid down in many the SC because it increased the SC’s
earlier cases that it is the prerogative of jurisdiction and was passed without the
the President to determination, at his advise and concurrence of the SC.

Monday, 20 May 2019

So more or less, these are the scattered (RA 8249), there is now a
provisions of the Constitution dealing CONCURRENCE between the SC and
with the SC’s jurisdiction.
 the Sandiganbayan in so far as petitions
The ORIGINAL EXCLUSIVE jurisdiction for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus,
of the SC refers to petitions for the habeas corpus, injunction and other
issuance of writs of certiorari, prohibition ancillary writs in aid of the
and mandamus as defined in Rule 65 S a n d i g a n b a y a n ' s A P P E L L AT E
against the following: the CA, the JURISDICTION.
Central Board of Assessment Appeals, SUPREME COURT:
NLRC or the Secretary of Labor under 1. Automatic review of death penalty. So
the Labor Code.
 when the RTC imposes the death
The cases where its original jurisdiction penalty, whether the accused appeals or
is CONCURRENT with the CA are not, the case will be elevated to the SC;
likewise petitions for the issuance of writs 2. Ordinary appeal from the RTC direct to
of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus the SC. This only applies to criminal
against the following: the SEC, the CSC, cases where the penalty of reclusion
the different boards, tribunals or agencies perpetua or life imprisonment is imposed
which replaced the old Public Service or other offenses which arise out of the
C o m m i s s i o n ( e . g . LT F R B ) . A l s o , same occurrence or committed by the
issuance of writ of certiorari against the accused on the same occasion;
RTC and other quasijudicial agencies, 3. Appeal by Certiorari under Rule 45.
courts, instrumentalities and When it comes to appeal by Certiorari,
 there are three types:
CONCURRENT with the RTC are those a) From the CA or all appeals from the
actions affecting ambassadors and other CA are certiorari which is different
public ministers and consuls. This is from the certiorari in Rule 65.
based on the Judiciary Law and the b) From the RTC direct to the SC. Now,
 this is not ordinary appeal because
CONCURRENT with the CA and RTC this only applies to criminal cases. In
are those involving habeas corpus, quo civil cases, if you want to go directly
warranto, and writs of certiorari, to the SC, you can do so by appeal
prohibition, and mandamus against by certiorari, provided that the
inferior courts and bodies. For example, following conditions are met:

a petition for mandamus against the MTC If no question of fact is involved and
of Davao City can be filed with the SC, the case involves the
CA, or RTC although the policy of the constitutionality or legality validity of
Supreme Court is that it should be filed any tax, impost, etc., or jurisdiction
with the RTC based on the hierarchy of of the lower courts is in issue
the courts. (Vergara vs. Suelto, 156 ( Article VIII, section 5 par.(2)
SCRA 758)
 4. only an error or question of law involved
Finally, with the advent of the new law (supra);

Monday, 20 May 2019

5. a judgment rendered upon an award 9[2]); 1997 Rules of Civil

under the Arbitration Law (RA 876) Procedure, Rule 47).
6. appeal on pure questions of law in cases (b) Petitions for certiorari,
of appeal to the RTC from inferior courts. prohibition, and mandamus
So, from the MTC to the RTC – ordinary involving an act or omission
appeal. From the RTC, on pure questions of a quasi-judicial agency,
of law, to the SC – appeal by certiorari. unless otherwise provided
7. Appeal from other courts or by law (Rule 65, Sec. 4, as
administrative agencies liked appeal from amended by A.M. No.
the Sandiganbayan to the SC, from the 077-12-SC dated
Central Board of Assessment Appeal or December 12, 2007).
from the Ombudsman. (2) Concurrent
E. Procedure when the SC en banc is equally (a) with the Supreme Court
divided ( Bar 2012)
 Refer to 2.1. above under
Where the opinion of the SC en banc is I.A., supra
equally divided, or the necessary majority (b) with the Supreme Court
cannot be had, the case shall again be and Regional Trial Courts
deliberated on. If after such deliberatio no Refer to Sec. 2.2. above
decision is reached, the original action under I.A., supra
commenced in the court shall be dismissed. 
 (c) with the Supreme Court,
In appealed cases, the judgment or order Sandiganbayan, and
appealed from shall stand affirmed. Regional Trial Courts Refer
F. JURISDICTION OF THE COURT OF to 2.3. above under I.A.,

 Q. Being concurrent, what will happen if such a case is
Original Concurrent Section 9, paragraph filed simultaneously in the CA and SC? 

1, BP 129
 A: The consequence is found in Section 17 of the
Section 9 – Jurisdiction – The Court of Interim Rules. In other words, the Interim Rules are still
Appeals shall exercise: 

Original jurisdiction to issue writs of Interim Rules, Sec. 17. Petitions for writs of certiorari,
mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, etc. - No petition for certiorari, mandamus, prohibition,
habeas corpus, and quo warranto, and habeas corpus or quo warranto may be filed in the IAC
auxiliary writs or processes whether or if another similar petition has been filed or is still
not in aid of its appellate jurisdiction. pending in the SC. Nor may such petition be filed in the
a) Original Jurisdiction SC if a similar petition has been filed or is still pending
(1) Exclusive in the IAC, unless it is to review the action taken by the
(a) Actions for annulment of IAC on the petition filed with it. A violation of this rule
judgments of the Regional shall constitute contempt of court and shall be a cause
Trial Courts (Batas for the summary dismissal of both petitions, without
Pambansa Blg. 129, Sec. prejudice to the taking of appropriate action against the

Monday, 20 May 2019

counsel or party concerned. 
 (1) Ordinary Appeal by Notice of

Appeal or with Record on
b) Original Exclusive Section 9, Appeal
paragraph 2, BP 129 
 (a) Appeals from the Regional
(2) “Exclusive” jurisdiction over Trial Courts, except those
actions for annulment of judgments appealable to the Supreme
of Regional Trial Courts; Court under Sec. 2(3) of
Q: Actions for annulment of judgments of RTC’s, is this I.B. above.
similar to an appeal? Is this the same as appealing the (b) Appeals from the Regional
decision of the RTC to the CA? Trial Courts on
A: No, because in appeal, you are invoking the constitutional, tax,
appellate jurisdiction of the CA. Here in paragraph 2, it jurisdictional questions
is not appellate but original jurisdiction. Meaning, you involving questions of fact
are filing an action before the CA for the first time. And or mixed questions of fact
the nature of the action is to annul a judgment of the and law or which should be
 appealed first to the Court
The implementation is found in Rule 47 of the Rules. 
 of Appeals (Republic Act
No. 296 [1948] Sec. 17,
2. APPELLATE JURISDICTION OF THE par. 4.4, as amended,
 which was not intended to
Paragraph 3, Sec. 9 of BP 129 defines be excluded by Batas
the appellate jurisdiction of the CA. Pambansa Blg. 129 [1983],
Section 9, paragraph 3, BP 129 
 Sec. 9[3]).
Exclusive appellate jurisdiction over all (c) Appeals from the decisions
final judgments, decisions, resolutions, and final orders of the
orders or awards of the RTCs and quasi- Family Courts (Republic Act
judicial agencies, instrumentalities, No. 8369 [1997], Sec. 14).
boards or commissions, including the (d) Appeals from the Regional
Securities and Exchange Commission, Trial Courts, where the
the Social Security Commission, the penalty imposed is
Employees Compensation Commission reclusion perpetua, or life
and the Civil Service Commission, imprisonment, or where a
except those falling within the appellate lesser penalty is imposed
jurisdiction of the SC in accordance with but for offenses committed
the Constitution, the Labor Code of the on the same occasion or
Philippines under PD 442, as amended, which arose out of the
the provisions of this Act, and of same occurrence that gave
subparagraph (1) of the third paragraph rise to the more serious
and subparagraph (4) of the fourth o ff e n s e f o r w h i c h t h e
paragraph of Sec. 17 of the Judiciary Act penalty of reclusion
of 1948. perpetua or life
a) Appellate Jurisdiction imprisonment is imposed

Monday, 20 May 2019

(Rule 122, Sec. 3[c], as (b) Appeals from the Regional

amended by A.M. No. Tr i a l C o u r t s i n c a s e s
00-5-03-SC, effective appealed from the
October 15, 2004; People v. Metropolitan Trial Courts
Mateo, G.R. Nos. and Municipal Circuit Trial
147678-87, July 7, 2004, Courts, which are not a
433 SCRA 640) matter of right (Batas
(e) Direct appeal from land Pambansa Blg. 129 [1983],
registration and cadastral Sec. 22; Rule 42, 1997
cases decided by Rules of Civil Procedure;
metropolitan trial courts, Rule 122, Sec. 3[b]).
municipal trial courts, and (c) Appeals from awards,
municipal circuit trial courts judgments, final orders, or
based on their delegated resolutions of, or authorized
jurisdiction. by, quasi-judicial agencies
(2) Special civil action of certiorari in the exercise of their
(Rule 65) against decisions and quasi-judicial functions.
final resolutions of the National Among these are:
Labor Relations Commission (A. i) Securities and
M. No. 99-2-01-SC; St. Martin E x c h a n g e
Funeral Homes v. National Commission;
Labor Relations Commission, ii) Office of the President;
G.R. No. 13086, September 16, iii) Land Registration
1998, 295 SCRA 494; Torres, et. Authority;
al. v. Specialized Packaging iv) Social Security
Development Corp., et. al., G.R. Commission;
No.149634, July 6, 2004, 433 v) Civil Aeronautics
SCRA 455) Board;
(3) Automatic review in cases vi) Intellectual Property
where the Regional Trial Courts Office (formerly the
impose the death penalty14 Bureau of Patents,
(Secs. 3[d] and 10, Rule 122, as Trademarks, and
amended by A.M. No. 00-5-03- Technology Transfer);
SC, effective October 15, 2004; vii) National Electrification
People vs. Mateo, supra) Administration;
(4) Petition for Review viii) E n e r g y R e g u l a t o r y
(a) Appeals from the Civil Board;
Service Commission (Rep. ix) N a t i o n a l
Act No. 7902 [1995]; Rule Telecommunications
43, 1997 Rules of Civil Commission;

Monday, 20 May 2019

x) Department of Agrarian decisions, resolution, orders or awards of RTC’s. So as

Reform under Rep. Act a general rule, if the RTC, anywhere in the country
No. 6657; renders a decision and you want to appeal, whether
xi) Government Service civil or criminal, chances are it will go the to CA. It is a
Insurance System; powerful court, because it covers all RTC’s and the
xii) E m p l o y e e s appellate jurisdiction is generally exclusive. 

Compensation And not only RTC’s. The law says “and quasi-judicial
Commission; agencies, instrumentalities, boards or commissions...”
xiii) Agricultural Inventions Not only decisions of the RTC but also of quasi-judicial
Board; agencies or bodies, also called administrative bodies.
xiv) I n s u r a n c e Administrative bodies are actually part of the executive
Commission; branch but they act just like courts of justice. They can
xv) P h i l i p p i n e A t o m i c decide cases and there are hundreds of administrative
Energy Commission; agencies in the Philippines. And therefore, if you lose a
xvi) Board of Investments; case before anyone of these bodies, or tribunals, you
xvii) Construction Industry appeal the decision not with the SC, but to the CA. 

A r b i t r a t i o n The amendments by RA 7902 is even more specific by
Commission; adding this phrase, “including the SEC, SSS, the
xviii) Voluntary arbitrators Employees Compensation commission and the Civil
authorized by law; and Service Commission (CSC).” That is the addition.
19. Decisions of Q:A labor case is not supposed to be filed in court but
Special Agrarian with a quasi-judicial agency known as the NLRC and
Courts you start in the local level – from the Labor Arbiter, then
(d) Appeals from the National the decisions of the Labor Arbiter are appealable to the
Commission on Indigenous NLRC and then from there, where will you go?
Peoples (NCIP) (Rep. Act NOTE:Subparagraph 4 of the fourth paragraph of
No. 8371 [1997], Sec. 67). Section 17 refers to appeal from the RTC on pure legal
(e) Appeals from the Office of question which should be filed with the SC.
the Ombudsman in Q: Suppose there are questions of fact, or it is an
administrative disciplinary appeal on questions of fact and questions of law?
cases (A.M. No. 99-2-02- A: Under the 1948 Judiciary Law, you cannot appeal
SC; Fabian v. Desierto, directly to the SC. You must appeal to the CA. The
G.R. No. 129742, same thing when the issue is on the constitutionality of
September 16, 1998, 295 a treaty, law, legality of tax, when the jurisdiction of the
SCRA 470). lower court is in issue, as explained here in this
Take note, the appellate jurisdiction of the CA is paragraph of the Judiciary Act of 1948, if the appeal is
generally EXCLUSIVE except in criminal cases 100% constitutional issue, jurisdictional or legality issue
decided by the RTC when the penalty imposed is – appeal is to the SC under the Constitution. But if it is
reclusion perpetua, life imprisonment or death. Now, if mixed with questions of fact, do not go to the SC. You
you will analyze paragraph 3, you will notice that the go first to the CA. That is what the paragraph is all
CA is a powerful court because it has exclusive about.
appellate jurisdiction over all final judgments, 3. Exclusive appellate jurisdiction

Monday, 20 May 2019

a) Exclusive appellate jurisdiction by power to try cases and conduct

way of ordinary appeal from the RTC hearings, receive evidence and
and the Family Courts (Sec. 9[3] BP perform any and all acts necessary
Blg. 129). to resolve factual issues raised in
b) Exclusive appellate jurisdiction by cases falling within its original and
way of petition for review from the appellate jurisdiction, including the
RTC rendered by the RTC in the power to grant and conduct new
exercise of its appellate jurisdiction trials or further proceedings. Trials or
(Sec. 22 BP Blg. 129; Rule 43, Rules hearings in the CA must be
of Court; Sec. 9 BP Blg. 129) continuous and must be completed
c) Exclusive appellate jurisdiction by within three (3) months unless
way of petition for review from the extended by the Chief Justice. (As
decisions, resolutions or orders or amended by RA 7902) 

awards of the CSC, Central Board of Even if the CA is not a trial court,
Assessment Appeals and other under the law it has the power to try
bodies mentioned in Rule 43 (Sec. cases and conduct hearings, receive
9[3]), BP Blg. 129) and of the Office evidence and perform any and all
of the Ombudsman in administrative acts necessary to resolve factual
disciplinary cases (Enemecio vs. issues in cases falling within its
Office of the Ombudsman 419 SCRA original and appellate jurisdiction,
82; Gonzales vs. Rosas 423 SCRA including the power to grant and
488). conduct new trials or further
Note that under RA No. 9282, the judgments AND proceedings (Sec. 9 [3], BP 129 as
FINAL ORDERS OF THE Court of Tax Appeals are no amended by RA 7902). The CA may
longer appealable by way of petition for review to the pass upon factual issues as when a
CA. Judgments of the CTA rendered en banc are petition for certiorari is filed before it
appealable to the SC by way of Rule 45 (Sec. 11 RA (Alcazaren vs. Univet Agricultural
No. 9282) Products, Inc. 475 SCRA 636). 

d) Exclusive appellate jurisdiction over This paragraph shows that the
decisions of MTCs in cadastral or present CA is a more powerful court
land registration cases pursuant to than before. It is a unique court.
its delegated jurisdiction (Sec. 34 BP Aside from being an appellate court,
Blg. 129 as amended by RA No. it also acts as a trial court. It may
7691). This is because decisions of receive evidence but only those
MTCs in these cases cases are evidence which were overlooked by
appealable in the same manner as the trial court. It can order a new trial
decisions of RTCs (Sec. 34 BP Blg. or conduct a new trial itself. 

129). The CA may pass upon factual
4. Power to try and conduct hearings issues as when a petition for
a) [4] Section 9, last paragraph, BP certiorari is filed before it(Alcazaren
 vs. Univet Agricultural Products, Inc.
The Court of Appeals shall have the 475 SCRA 636) or in petitions for

Monday, 20 May 2019

writ of amparo or habeas corpus i) Under Sec 5.2 of Securities

data or in case of actions to annul Regulation Code:
judgment of the RTC over which the (1) Cases involving devices or
CA has original jurisdiction (Bar schemes employed by or any
2008). acts of the board of directors,
G. Jurisdiction of RTC business associates, its officers
1. Exclusive and original or partnership, amounting to
a) All actions in admiralty and maritime fraud and misrepresentation
jurisdiction where the demand or (2) Controversies arising out of
claim exceeds P300,000 or intra-corporate or partnership
P400,000 in Metro Manila; relations
b) Probate proceedings, both testate (3) Controversies in elections or
and intestate, where the gross value appointments of directors,
of the estate exceeds P300,000 or trustees, officers or managers of
P400,000 in Metro Manila; such corporations, partnerships
c) In all other cases in which the or associations
demand, exclusive of IDALEC or the (4) P e t i t i o n s o f c o r p o r a t i o n s ,
value of the property in controversy partnerships or associations to
exceeds P300,000 or P400,000 in be declared in a state of
Metro Manila suspension of payment
d) Actions Involving the title to or j) RTC used to have jurisdiction over
possession of real property or any all actions involving the contract of
interest therein, where the assessed marriage and marital relations but
value of the property involved such is now exclusive to the Family
exceeds P20,000 or P50,000 in Courts
Metro Manila, except actions for 2. Actions incapable of pecuniary estimation
forcible entry and unlawful detainer; a) Basic issue is one other than
e) Actions involving personal property recovery of money. In this kind of
valued at more than P300,00 or action the money claim is merely
P400,000 in Metro Manila incidental
f) Subject of the litigation is incapable b) If the action is one primarily for the
of pecuniary estimation; recovery of money
g) In all cases not within the exclusive c) Complaint for expropriation, specific
jurisdiction of any court, tribunal, performance, support, foreclosure of
person or body exercising judicial or mortgage, annulment of judgment,
quasi-judicial functions; annulling a deed of sale, partition of
h) In all civil actions and special land, annul a deed of declaration of
proceedings falling within the heirs.
exclusive original jurisdiction of 3. Extent of RTC’s jurisdiction when acting
Juvenile and Domestic Relations as a probate court
Courts and of the Court of Agrarian a) A probate court cannot adjudicate or
Relations as now provided by law determine title to properties claimed

Monday, 20 May 2019

to be part of the estate and also (2) A p p e a l s f r o m R T C o n

claimed by outside parties constitutional, tax, jurisdictional
b) Only issue is whether they should be questions involving questions of
included in the inventory or list of fact which should be appealed
properties to be administered first to the CA.
c) Probate court may only decide on b) Petition for Review
question of ownership when no third (1) Appeals from Civil Service
parties are prejudiced and all parties Commission (CSC)
consent to the assumption of (2) Appeals from Central board of
jurisdiction by the court assessment appeals and other
H. Jurisdiction of the CA bodies mentioned in Rule 43
1. Exclusive and original — Actions for the (3) Appeals from RTC in the
annulment of the judgment of the RTC exercise of its appellate
2. Concurrent and original jurisdiction, which are not a
a) With Supreme Court — Petitions for matter of right
certiorari, prohibition or mandamus (4) quasi-judicial agencies
against (5) A p p e a l s f r o m N a t i o n a l
(1) RTC Commission on Indigenous
(2) NLRC, but it should be filed with Peoples (NCIP)
the CA first St. Martin Funeral (6) Appeals from the office of the
Home vs CA (GR130866 Ombudsman in administrative
September 16, 1998 disciplinary cases
(3) NLRC, but it should be filed with 4. Decisions of the MTC in cadastral and
the CA first St. Martin Funeral land registration cases pursuant to its
Home vs CA (GR130866 delegated jurisdiction
September 16, 1998) Power to try and conduct hearings
(4) Other quasi-judicial agencies It has the power to try and conduct hearings,
mentioned in Rule 43 receive evidences and perform all acts
(5) Court of tax appeals necessary to resolve factual issues in cases
b) With the Supreme Court and RTC falling within its original and appellate
(1) Petitions for certiorari, jurisdiction, including the power to grant and
prohibition or mandamus against conduct new trials or further proceedings
lower courts and other bodies I. Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court
(2) Petitions for Quo Warranto and 1. Exclusive and Original

habeas corpus Petitions for certiorari, prohibition or
3. Exclusive appellate mandamus against:
a) Ordinary Appeal by Notice of Appeal a) CA
(1) Appeals from RTC and family b) COMELEC
courts, except those appealable c) Commission on Audit
to the Supreme Court or d) Sandiganbayan

Monday, 20 May 2019

2. Concurrent With Court of Appeals in questions of law, except where

petition for certiorari, prohibition and the penalty imposed is reclusion
mandamus against the: perpetua, life imprisonment or
a) RTC death.
b) Civil Service Commission (3) Appeals from the RTC
c) Central Board of Assessment exercising original jurisdiction in
Appeals the following cases:
d) NLRC (a) All cases in which the
e) Quasi-Judicial Agencies constitutionality or validity of
3. Concurrent With the Court of Appeals and any treaty, agreement, law,
Regional Trial Court PD, proclamation, order,
a) Petitions for certiorari, prohibition or instruction or regulation is in
mandamus against lower courts and question.
other bodies (b) All cases involving the
b) Petitions for Quo Warranto and legality of any tax, impost,
habeas corpus assessment, or toll, or any
4. Concurrent With Regional Trial Court penalty imposed in relation
a) Actions affecting ambassadors, thereto
public ministers and consuls (c) All cases in which the
5. Appellate jurisdiction of any lower
a) By Notice of Appeal court is in issue
(1) From the RTC or (d) Cases involving only an
Sandiganbayan in all criminal error or question of law
cases involving offenses for (e) Courts of tax appeals in its
which penalty imposed is decision rendered en banc
reclusion perpetua or life c) Special Civil Action of Certiorari filed
imprisonment, and those within 30 days
involving other offenses, (1) Against the COMELEC
although not so punished, that (2) Against the COA
arose out of the same GR: Supreme court is not a trier of facts
occurrence or were committed Exceptions:

by the offender on the same When the findings are grounded entirely on
occasion. speculation, surmises or conjectures

(2) Automatic Review in criminal When the inference made is manifestly
cases where death penalty is mistaken, absurd or impossible

imposed by the RTC or the When there is a grave abuse of discretion

Sandiganbayan When the judgment is based on
b) Petition for Review on Certiorari misapprehension of facts

(Rule 45) When the findings of facts are conflicting

(1) Appeals from the CA When in making its finding the CA went
(2) Appeals from the beyond the issues of the case or its findings
Sandiganbayan on pure are contrary to the admissions of both parties

Monday, 20 May 2019

and the appellee
 a) Petition for guardianship, custody of

When the findings are contrary to the trial children and habeas corpus involving
court children
When the findings are conclusions without b) Petition for adoption for children and
citation of specific evidence on which they are the revocation thereof
based c) Complaints for annulment of
When the facts set forth in the petition as well marriage, declaration of nullity of
as in the petitioner’s main and reply briefs are marriage and those relating to status
not disputed by the respondent and property relations of husband
When the findings of facts are premised on and wife or those living together and
the supposed absence of evidence and for dissolution of conjugal
contradicted by the evidence on record partnership of gains
When the CA manifestly overlooked certain d) Petition for support and/or
relevant facts not disputed by the parties acknowledgment
which if considered could justify a different e) Summary judicial proceedings under
conclusion the family code
6. Cases which under the constitution must f) Petition for declaration of status of
be heard en banc children as abandoned, dependent,
a) All cases involving the or neglected children, petitions for
c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y o f a t r e a t y, voluntary or involuntary commitment
international or executive agreement of children, the suspension,
or law termination or restoration of parental
b) Required by the Rules of Court authority and cases under PD 603
c) All cases involving the and other related laws
constitutionality, application or g) Petitions for the constitution of a
operation of PD’s, proclamations, family home
orders, instructions, ordinances and J. Jurisdiction of Municipal Trial Courts
other regulations 1. Actions involving personal property where
d) Cases heard by a division when the value of the property does not exceed
required majority in the division is not Php 300,000 or Php 400,000 in Metro
obtained’ Manila
e) Cases involving a modification or a) The jurisdictional amount does not
reversal of a doctrine or principle of include the following:
law laid down previously by the SC (1) Interest;
f) Cases involving the discipline of (2) damages of whatever kind;
judges of lower courts (3) attorney’s fees;
g) Contests relating to the election, (4) litigation expenses; and
returns and qualifications of the (5) costs

President or Vice President Although excluded in
7. Jurisdiction of the Family Courts RA 8369 determining the jurisdiction of
the court, the above items
however, shall be included in

Monday, 20 May 2019

the determination of the filing of the same or different

fees. transactions
b) Administrative Circular No. 09-94: 2. Actions for claim of money where the
“The exclusion of the term demand does not exceed Php 300,000 or
‘damages of whatever kind” Php 400,000 in Metro Manila
(1) applies to cases where the 3. Probate proceedings, testate or intestate,
damages are merely where the value of the estate does not
incidental to or a exceed Php 300,000 or Php 400,000 in
consequence of the main Metro Manila
cause of action. 4. Actions involving title to or possession of
(a) However, in cases where real property or any interest therein
the claim for damages is the where the value or amount does not
main cause of action, or exceed P20,000 or P50,000 in Metro
one of the causes of action, Manila, exclusive of interest damages,
the amount of such claim attorney’s fees, litigation expense, and
shall be considered in costs
determining the jurisdiction a) determined by the assessed value
of the court. of the said property and NOT the
c) Meaning of Interest: Gomez vs. market value thereof.
Montalban 548 SCRA 693 (FMV*assessment level = AV) as
(1) If interest on the loan is a found in a tax declaration. In cases
primary and inseparable of land not declared for taxation
component of the cause of purposes, the value of such property
action, not merely incidental shall be determined by the assessed
thereto, and already value of the adjacent lots
determinable at the time of filing (1) Fair Market Value — the price at
of the Complaint, it must be which a property may be sold by
included in the determination of a seller, who is not compelled to
which court has the jurisdiction sell, and bought by a buyer, who
over petitioner’s case. is not compelled to buy
d) Totality rule: b) Title is the “legal link between
(1) where there are several claims (1) a person who owns property and
or causes of actions between (2) the property itself.

the same or different parties it also gives the owner the right
(2) embodied in the same to demand or be issued a
complaint, the amount of the “certificate of title”.
demand c) accion reivindicatoria is a suit which
(a) shall be the totality of the has for its object the recovery of
claims in all the causes of possession over the real property as
action, owner. It involves recovery of
(b) irrespective of whether the ownership and possession based on
causes of action arose out said ownership.

Monday, 20 May 2019

d) an accion publiciana is one for the same manner as the

recovery of possession of the right to decisions of the
possess. Regional Trial Courts
(1) It is also referred to as an 7. Inclusion or exclusion of voters
ejectment suit filed after the 8. Covered by Rules on Summary
expiration of one year after the Procedure
occurrence of the cause of 9. Forcible entry and unlawful detainer
action or from the unlawful otherwise known as accion interdictal.
withholding of possession of the a) raises the question of ownership in
realty. It is considered a plenary the pleadings and the issue of
action to recover the right of possession cannot be resolved
possession when without deciding the issue of
dispossession was effected ownership, the court may resolve
by means other than unlawful the issue of ownership but only for
detainer or forcible entry. the purpose of determining the issue
5. Maritime claims where the demand or of possession.
claim does not exceed Php 300,000 or (1) the issue of ownership should
Php400,000 in Metro Manila be regarded merely as
6. The MTC also exercises delegated provisional
jurisdiction in (2) a necessary consequence of the
a) cadastral and land registration cases nature of the case where the
covering lots where only issue to be settled is the
(1) there is no controversy or physical or material possession
opposition, or over the real property, that is,
(2) contested lots the value of which possession de facto and not
does not exceed P100,000.00,
 possession de jure.
as may be delegated by the 10. Covered by the Rules on Small Claims
Supreme Court. 11. Grant provisional remedies — The MTC
(a) value of the lot shall be has exclusive original jurisdiction to grant
ascertained by provisional remedies in such principal
i) the affidavit of the cases in its jurisdiction.
claimant or by 12. Appeal — Judgments of the MTC shall be
ii) agreement of the appealable to the Regional Trial Courts
respective claimants if K. Sandiganbayan

there are more than EXLCUSIVE: Violations of Republic Act No.
one, or 3019, as amended, otherwise known as the
iii) from the corresponding Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, Republic
tax declaration of the Act No. 1379, and Chapter II, Section 2, Title
real property.
 VII, Book II of the Revised Penal Code, where
The decisions of one or more of the accused are officials
these courts shall be occupying the following positions in the
appealable in the government, whether in a permanent, acting

Monday, 20 May 2019

or interim capacity, at the time of the or educational institutions or

commission of the offense: foundations.
1. Officials of the executive branch b) Members of Congress and officials
occupying the positions of regional thereof classified as Grade ’27’ and
director and higher, otherwise classified higher under the Compensation and
as Grade ’27’ and higher, of the Position Classification Act of 1989;
Compensation and Position Classification c) Members of the judiciary without
Act of 1989 (Republic Act No. 6758), prejudice to the provisions of the
specifically including: Constitution;
a) Provincial governors, vice-governors, d) Chairmen and members of the
members of the sangguniang Constitutional Commissions, without
panlalawigan, and provincial prejudice to the provisions of the
treasurers, assessors, engineers, Constitution; and
and other provincial department e) All other national and local officials
heads: classified as Grade ’27’ and higher
(1) City mayors, vice-mayors, under the Compensation and
members of the sangguniang Position Classification Act of 1989.
panlungsod, city treasurers, 2. Other offenses or felonies whether simple
assessors, engineers, and other or complexed with other crimes
city department heads; committed by the public officials and
(2) Officials of the diplomatic employees mentioned in subsection a. of
service occupying the position of this section in relation to their office.
consul and higher; 3. Civil and criminal cases filed pursuant to
(3) Philippine army and air force and in connection with Executive Order
colonels, naval captains, and all Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A, issued in 1986.
officers of higher rank; L. Court of Tax-Appeals EXCLUSIVE: Final
(4) O ff i c e r s o f t h e P h i l i p p i n e and executory assessments for taxes, fees,
National Police while occupying charges and penalties where the principal
the position of provincial director amount of taxes and fees, exclusive of
and those holding the rank of charges and penalties claimed is not less than
senior superintendent and Php 1M.

higher; APPELLATE: Charges and penalties claimed
(5) City and provincial prosecutors is less than Php1M tried by the proper: MTC,
and their assistants, and officials MeTC and RTC.
and prosecutors in the Office of M. Quasi-Courts: It is the power of
the Ombudsman and special administrative authorities to make
prosecutor; determinations of facts in the performance of
(6) Presidents, directors or trustees, their official duties and to apply the law as
or managers of government- they construe it to the facts so found. The
owned or controlled exercise of this power is only incidental to the
corporations, state universities main function of administrative authorities,
which is the enforcement of the law. 

Monday, 20 May 2019

Determinative Powers: Enabling, Directing, C. Venue becomes jurisdictional only in criminal

Dispensing, Summary and Equitable. cases. (Heirs of Lopez v. De Castro, G.R. No.
N. Sharia’h Courts: appellate, district, circuit 112905, supra).
1. All cases involving custody, guardianship,
Venue Jurisdiction
legitimacy, paternity and filiation arising
under the Code of Muslim Personal As to Definition
Laws; The place where the The authority to
2. All cases involving disposition, case is to be heard hear and determine
distribution and settlement of estate of 
 or tried a case
deceased Muslims, probate of wills, As to Governing Law
issuance of letters of administration or
appointment of administrators or
Matter of procedural Matter of
law substantive law
executors regardless of the nature or
aggregate value of the property As to Relations Established
3. Petitions for declaration of absence and Establishes a Establishes a
death for the cancellation or correction of relation between relation between
entries in the Muslim Registries plaintiff and the court and the
4. All actions arising from the customary
defendant, or subject matter
petitioner and
contracts in which the parties are respondent
Muslims, if they have not specified which
As to Basis
law shall govern their relations
5. All petitions for mandamus, prohibition, May be conferred by Fixed by law and
injunction, certiorari, habeas corpus, and the act of cannot be conferred
all other auxiliary writs and processes in
agreement of the by the parties
aid of its appellate jurisdiction.
XVI. Rule 4 – Venue of Actions (Nocum v. Tan, G.R. No. 145022, September 23,

A. Venue is the place, or the geographical area 2005)

which a court with jurisdiction may hear and Note: A court may not motu proprio dismiss a complaint

determine a case or the place where a case if on the ground of improper venue as it is not one of the
to be tried (1 RIANO, supra at 146). grounds wherein the court may dismiss an action motu
B. In civil proceedings, venue is procedural, not proprio.

jurisdictional, and may be waived by the Exception: Actions covered by the Rules on Summary

defendant if not seasonably raised either in a Procedure and Small Claims Cases

motion to dismiss or in the answer (BPI In these types of action, the court may motu proprio

Family Savings Bank, Inc., v. Sps. Yujuico, dismiss a case from an examination of the allegations

G.R. No. 175796, July 22, 2015). It is meant of the complaint and such evidence as may be attached
to provide convenience to the parties, rather thereto on any of the grounds apparent therefrom for
than restrict their access to the courts as it the dismissal of a civil action. (1 RIANO, supra at 148.)

relates to the place of trial (Heirs of Lopez v. The SC has the power to order a change of venue to

De Castro, G.R. No. 112905, February 3, prevent a miscarriage of justice (CONSTI. Art. VIII, Sec.

2000). 5, par. 4)
Basic Venue Analysis: in order to know the venue of a
particular action, the basic and initial step is to

Monday, 20 May 2019

determine if the action is real or personal. (1 RIANO, Personal Action

supra at 148). One which is not founded upon the privity of real rights
or real property (Id. at 23).
Actions affecting title to or possession of real property, A personal action is transitory. The venue is either
or interest therein, shall be commenced and tried in the Where the plaintiff or any of the principal plaintiffs
proper court which has jurisdiction over the area resides; or
wherein the real property involved, or a portion thereof, Where the non-resident defendant may be found.
is situated. Note: All at the election of the plaintiff

Forcible entry and detainer actions shall be The residence of the person is his personal, actual, or
commenced and tried in the MTC of the municipality or physical habitation or actual residence or place of
city wherein the real property involved, or a portion abode, whether permanent or temporary as long as he
thereof, is situated. resides with continuity and consistency therein. (Ang
Real Actions Klek Chen v. Sps. Calasan, G.R. No. 161685, July 24,
An action is real when it affect title to or possession of 2007).
real property, or interest therein. All other actions as
personal actions. (Id. At 151) When there is more than one defendant or plaintiff in
the case, the residences of the principal parties should
A real action is local, i.e., its venue depends upon the be the basis for determining the proper venue.
location of the property (Id.). Otherwise, the purpose of the Rule would be defeated
where a nominal or formal party is impleaded in the
Where the subject-matter of the action involves various action since the latter would not have the degree of
parcels of land situated in different provinces, the interest in the subject of the action which would warrant
venue is determined by the singularity or plurality of the and entail the desirably active participation expected of
transactions involving the said parcels of land. Thus: litigants in a case. (1 REGALADO, supra at 121).
Where the parcels of land are the objects of one and
the same transaction – the venue is in the court of any SECTION 3. VENUE OF ORDINARY CIVIL ACTIONS
of the provinces wherein a parcel of land is situated; or AGAINST NON-RESIDENTS
If subjects of separate and distinct transactions – there
is no common venue and separate actions should be Non-resident found in the Philippines
laid in the court of the province wherein each parcel of For personal actions – where the plaintiff resides; and
land is situated (1 REGALADO, supra at 118). For real actions – where the property is located.

Non-resident not found in the Philippines

SECTION 2. VENUE OF PERSONAL ACTIONS Personal status of the plaintiff – where plaintiff resides;
All other actions may be commenced and tried where and
the plaintiff or any of the principal plaintiffs reside, or Any property of said defendant located in the
where the defendant or any of the principal defendant Philippines – where the property or any portion thereof
reside, or in the case of a non-resident defendant, is situated or found.
where he may be found, at the election of the plaintiff.

Monday, 20 May 2019


Note: Where the action is no longer based on the
The Rules on venue are not applicable in any of the agreement but on the tortious act of sending collection
following cases: telegrams despite the fact that the obligation had
Where a specific Rule or law provides otherwise (e.g., already been paid, venue is no longer based on the
Civil actions on damages in case of libel, as special written stipulation but at the election of the plaintiff as
Rules of venue are provided for in Art. 360 of the fixed by law (Zoleta v. Romillio, Jr., G.R. No. L-58080,
Revised Penal Code) (1 REGALADO, supra at 123); or February 15, 1982).
Where the parties have validly agreed in writing before
the filing of the action on the exclusive venue thereof. Effect of venue stipulation when the validity of the
written instrument is controverted
Requisites of Stipulations on Venue: (WEB) A complaint directly assailing the validity of the written
In Writing; instrument itself should not be bound by the exclusive
Exclusive as to the venue; and venue stipulation contained therein and should be filed
Made Before the filing of the action (1 RIANO, supra at in accordance with the general Rules on venue. It
156). would be inherently inconsistent for a complaint of this
nature to recognize the exclusive venue stipulation
The mere stipulation on the venue of an action is not when it, in fact, precisely assails the validity of the
enough to preclude the parties from bringing a case in instrument in which such stipulation is contained
other venues. It must be shown that such stipulation is (Briones v. CA, G.R. No. 204444, January 14, 2015).
exclusive. In the absence of qualifying or restrictive Complementary-Contracts-Construed Together
words, such as “exclusively” and “waiving for his Doctrine
purpose any other venue”, “shall only” preceding the An accessory contract must be read in its entirety and
designation of the venue, “to the exclusion of all other together with the principal agreement. Thus, suretyship
courts”, or other words of similar import, the stipulation agreement can only be enforced in conjunction with the
should be deemed as merely an agreement on an promissory note also applies to the suretyship
additional forum, not as limiting venue to the specified agreement as an ancillary contract of the promissory
place (Auction in Malinta, Inc., v. Luyaben, G.R. No. note (Philippine Bank of Communications v. Lim, G.R.
173979, February 12, 2007). No. 158138, April 12, 2015).

Thus, in contracts involving passage tickets, a condition

printed at the back thereof of all actions arising out of
that contract of carriage can be filed only in a particular
province or city, to the exclusion of all others, was
declared void and unenforceable due to the state of the
shipping industry. The Court noted that the acute
shortage of inter-island vessels could not provide
enough accommodations for the plaintiffs to travel to
the venue indicated, aside from the fact that the
passengers did not have the opportunity to examine the
fine print providing for such venue (Sweet Lines, Inc. v.
Teves, Jr., G.R. No. L-37750, May 19, 1978).