Monday, 20 May 2019
I. Jurisdiction defined
A. Traditional Meaning
1. Jurisdiction has, traditionally, been
referred to as the power and authority of
the court to hear, try and decide a case.
2. In its complete aspect, jurisdiction
includes not only the powers to hear and
decide a case, but also the power to
enforce the judgment (14 Am. Jur.
363-364), as the judgment or decree is
the end for which jurisdiction is exercised,
and it is only through the judgment and its
execution that the power of the court is
made efficacious and its jurisdiction
complete.
3. The power to control the execution of its
decision is an essential aspect of
jurisdiction. It cannot be the subject of
substantial subtraction and the most
important part of the litigation is the
process of execution of decisions
(Echegaray vs. Secretary of Justice, 301
SCRA 96).
II. Judicial Power includes the duty of the courts
of justice:
A. To settle actual controversies involving rights,
which are legally demandable and
enforceable; and
B. To determine whether or not there has been
grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or
excess of jurisdiction on the part of any
branch or instrumentality of Government.
(Sec. 1, Art. VIII, 1987 Constitution)
III. Test of Jurisdiction
A. The test of jurisdiction is whether the court
has the power to enter into the inquiry and not
whether the decision is right or wrong.
(Herrera vs. Barretto, 25 Phil. 245)
B. Since jurisdiction refers to power or authority
to hear, try and decide a case, it cannot
depend on the correctness or rightfulness of
1
the decision made. (Century Insurance Co. v.
Fuentes, 2 SCRA 1168 [1961])
C. Correctness or rightfulness of the decision
relates to the exercise of and not to the
authority itself.
IV. Duty of the Court to determine its jurisdiction
— It is the duty of the court to consider the
question of jurisdiction before it looks at other
matters involved in the case. It may, and must, do
this on its own motion without waiting for the
question of jurisdiction being raised by any of the
parties involved in the proceeding (20 Am Jur 2d,
Courts, S 92). Courts are bound to take notice of
the limits of their authority and they may act
accordingly by dismissing the action even though
the issue of jurisdiction is not raised or not even
suggested by counsel (Ace Publications vs.
Commissioner of Customs, 11 SCRA 147).
V. Effect if the court has no jurisdiction or of
absence or lack of jurisdiction over the case
A. it has no power or authority to try a case and
because it has no authority it must not
exercise it.
B. Exercise of jurisdiction absent authority or
power is necessarily nothing. Thus, without
jurisdiction, the entire proceedings would be
null and void.
C. The only recourse for the court, absent
jurisdiction, is to dismiss the case motu
proprio or on motion for without authority it
cannot act.
VI. Effect if it has jurisdiction — It is the duty of the
court to exercise the jurisdiction conferred upon it
by law and to render a decision in a case properly
submitted to it. Failure to do so may be enforced
by way of a mandamus proceeding (20 Am Jur.
2d, S 93).
VII. Jurisdiction vs Exercise of Jurisdiction
A. Jurisdiction – is the power or authority of the
court to hear, try, decide and execute a case.
B. Exercise of Jurisdiction – is the exercise of the
power of the court or authority of the court to

hear, try, decide and execute a case.
 mistake will bind unless corrected.
ILLUSTRATION: Where there is jurisdiction
over the person and the subject matter, the
decision on all other questions arising in the
case is but an exercise of that jurisdiction.
VIII. Error of Jurisdiction vs Error of Judgment
A. Distinctions:
1. Error of judgment – happens when the
court vested with jurisdiction over the
subject matter of the action, while in the
process of exercising the jurisdiction, it
committed mistakes in the appreciation of
the facts and the evidence leading to an
erroneous judgment.
a) When a court acquires jurisdiction
over the subject matter, the decision
or order on all other questions
arising in the case is but an exercise
of jurisdiction; Errors which the court
may commit in the exercise of such
jurisdiction, like errors of procedure
or mistakes in the court's findings,
are merely ERRORS OF
JUDGMENT; whereas,
2. Error of jurisdiction – is one which occurs
when the court exercises a jurisdiction
not conferred upon it by law.
a) When a court takes cognizance of a
case over the subject matter of
which it has no jurisdiction, or acts in
excess of jurisdiction or with grave
abuse of discretion amounting to
lack of jurisdiction, the court commits
an ERROR OF JURISDICTION.
(GSIS vs. Oliza 304 SCRA 421). 
 A.
ILLUSTRATION: When the court
acts without authority (error of
jurisdiction) such act would be null
and void or at least voidable, but if
the court has authority but commits a
mistake in the exercise of such
authority (error of judgment) such
2
Monday, 20 May 2019


ERRORS OF JURISDICTION are
reviewable by the extraordinary
writ of certiorari; whereas,
ERRORS OF JUDGMENT are
reviewable by appeal.
B. Importance of the distinction — to determine
the proper remedy
1. An error of judgment should be raised
a) on ordinary appeal, not by
certiorari because certiorari is only
confined to correcting errors of
jurisdiction or grave abuse of
discretion.
(1) The governing rule is that the
remedy of certiorari is not
available when
(a) the remedy of appeal is
available or
(b) even if available, when it
will not be a speedy and
adequate remedy.
i) And when the remedy
of appeal is lost, you
cannot revive it by
resorting to certiorari
because certiorari is
not a substitute for the
lost remedy of appeal.
2. Error of jurisdiction — petition for
certiorari is only confined to correcting
errors of jurisdiction or grave abuse of
discretion.
IX. Aspects of Jurisdiction
Jurisdiction over the subject matter;
B. Jurisdiction over the parties;
C. Jurisdiction over the issues of the case; and
D. Jurisdiction over the res or thing involved in
the litigation 

(Boston Equity Resources, Inc. v CA, G.R.
No. 173946, June 19, 2013)

X. Jurisdiction over the subject matter — It refers
to the jurisdiction of the court over the class of
cases to which a particular case belongs.
A. Example of subject matters are:
1. real actions,
2. personal actions,
3. actions incapable of pecuniary
estimation.
B. How jurisdiction over the subject matter is
conferred? 
 allegations of the complaint in
It is conferred by law which may be either
the Constitution or a statute.
1. Consequences of the rule that
jurisdiction is conferred by law:
a) It cannot be granted by the
agreement of the parties;
b) It cannot be acquired, waived,
enlarged, or diminished by any act or
omission of the parties;
c) It cannot be conferred by the
acquiescence of the courts (Republic
vs Estipular, 336 SCRA 333, 340).
2. The law applicable to the case:
Jurisdiction being a matter of substantive
law, the established rule is that the
statute in force at the time of the
commencement of the action determines
the jurisdiction of the court (Barangay
Mayamot vs Antipolo City, G.R. No.
187349, August 17, 2016).
C. Determination of the subject matter or
nature (class) of the action — It is a
settled rule that jurisdiction over the
subject matter is determined by the
allegations in the complaint (Baltazar vs.
Ombudsman, 510 SCRA 74) regardless of
whether or not the plaintiff is entitled to
his claims asserted therein (Gocotano vs.
Gocotano 469 SCRA 328; Cadimas vs.
Carrion GR No. 180394, Sept. 29, 2008).
3
Monday, 20 May 2019
D. Exception to the rule that jurisdiction is
determined by the allegations of the
complaint
1. In Ignacio vs. CFI of Bulacan (42 SCRA
89) and other ejectment cases
(Salandanan vs. Tizon 62 SCRA 388;
Concepcion vs. CFI of Bulacan 119
SCRA 222), where tenancy was the
defense, the court went beyond the
determining jurisdiction over the subject
matter and required the presentation of
evidence to prove or disprove the
defense of tenancy. After finding the
real issue to be tenancy, the cases
were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction
as it should properly be filed with the
Court of Agrarian Reform (now
DARAB) [de la Cruz vs. CA 510 SCRA
103] plainly, after joining of the issues
and the ultimate fact is revealed and
therefore the relief sought as well.
E. Doctrines on jurisdiction
1. Doctrine of hierarchy of courts —
Where courts have concurrent
jurisdiction over a subject matter,
such concurrence of jurisdiction does
not grant the party seeking relief the
absolute freedom to file a petition in
any court of his choice. Pursuant to
this doctrine, a case must be filed first
before the lowest court possible
having the appropriate jurisdiction,
except if one can advance a special
reason which would allow a party a
direct resort to a higher court.
a) When the doctrine of hierarchy of
courts may be disregarded:
b) In relation to cases filed with the
Supreme Court, a direct resort to it
was allowed in certain cases, like:

(1) When there are special and
important reasons clearly stated
in the petition;
(2) When directed by public welfare
and the advancement of public
policy;
(3) When demanded by the broader
interest of justice;
(4) When the challenged orders
were patent nullities;
(5) When analogous exceptional
and compelling circumstances
called for and justified the
immediate and direct handling
by the court.
(6) When there are genuine issues
of constitutionality that must be
addressed at the most
immediate time.
F. Doctrine of non-interference (Doctrine of
judicial stability) — Holds that courts of
equal and coordinate jurisdiction cannot
interfere with each other’s orders.
G. Doctrine of primary jurisdiction (Primary
administrative jurisdiction) — Under this
doctrine, a remedy within the
administrative machinery must be resorted
to give the administrative officers every
opportunity to decide a matter within its
jurisdiction. Such remedy must be
exhausted first before the court’s power of
judicial review can be sought.
1. Under this doctrine, courts will not
resolve a controversy involving a
question which is within its jurisdiction
and also of an administrative tribunal,
especially where the question demands
the exercise of sound administrative
discretion requiring the special
knowledge and experience of said
tribunal in determining technical and
4
Monday, 20 May 2019
intricate matters of fact. (Villaflor vs. CA,
GR No. 95694, Oct. 8, 1997).
2. Exceptions:
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 complaint;
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.
H. Doctrine of adherence of jurisdiction
(Continuity of jurisdiction) — Under this
rule, jurisdiction, once it attaches cannot
be ousted by the happening of subsequent
events although of such a character which
should have prevented jurisdiction from
attaching in the first instance (Ramos vs.
Central Bank of the Phil. 41 SCRA 586
[1971]).
1. The court, once jurisdiction has been
acquired, retains that jurisdiction until it

finally disposes of the case (De La Rosa
vs. Roldan, 501 SCRA 34).
2. As a consequence of this principle,
jurisdiction is not affected by a new law
placing a proceeding under the
jurisdiction of another tribunal except
when otherwise provided in the statute or
if the statute is clearly intended to apply
to actions pending even before its
enactment (People vs. Cawaling, 293
SCRA 267)
3. Exceptions to the Rule of Adherence/
Continuity of Jurisdiction
a) When there is an express provision
in the statute on retroactive
application; or
b) The statute is clearly intended to
apply to actions pending before its
enactment; or
c) The statute is curative. This means
that even if originally there was no
jurisdiction, the lack of jurisdiction
may be cured by the issuance of the
amendatory decree which is in the
nature of a curative statute with
retrospective application to a
pending proceeding and cures that
lack of jurisdiction.
(1) Thus, in a case, while the CFI
has no jurisdiction over a
complaint for damages arising
from the dismissal of a radio
station manager which was filed
on August 2, 1976, PD 1367
vesting the court with jurisdiction
over such type of cases cured
the lack of jurisdiction of the trial
court at the time the instant
claim was filed before it. (Garcia
vs. Martinez 90 SCRA 331
[1979])
5
Monday, 20 May 2019
I. Doctrine of ancillary (incidental)
jurisdiction — This power refers to the
authority of an office or tribunal to do all
things necessary for the administration of
justice within the scope of its jurisdiction,
and for the enforcement of its judgment
and mandate (University of the Immaculate
Conception vs Office of the Secretary of
Labor and Employment, G.R. Nos.
178085-178086, September 14, 2015).
J. Doctrine of Judicial stability — The
doctrine of judicial stability is one which
precludes a court from interfering by
injunction with the regular orders of a co-
equal court.
K. Objections to jurisdiction over the subject
matter — The court may on its own
initiative object to an erroneous
jurisdiction and may ex mero motu take
cognizance of lack of jurisdiction at any
point in the case and has a clearly
recognized right to determine its own
jurisdiction (Fabian vs. Desierto, 295
SCRA 470). “When it appears from the
pleadings or evidence on record that the
court has no jurisdiction over the subject
matter,…the court shall dismiss the same”
(Sec. 1, Rule 9, Rules of Court)
1. The earliest opportunity of a party to
raise the issue of jurisdiction is in a
motion to dismiss filed before the filing or
service of an answer. Lack of jurisdiction
over the subject matter is a ground for a
motion to dismiss (Sec. 1(b), Rule 16,
Rules of Court). If no motion is filed, the
defense of lack of jurisdiction may be
raised as an affirmative defense in the
answer (Sec. 6, Rule 16)
2. Omnibus Motion rule, a motion
attacking a pleading like a motion to
dismiss, shall include all grounds then
available, and all objections not so

included shall be deemed waived
(Sec. 8 Rule 15).
a) The defense of lack of jurisdiction
over the subject matter is however, a
defense not barred by the failure to
invoke the same in a motion to
dismiss already filed. Even if a
motion to dismiss was filed and the
issue of jurisdiction was not raised
therein, a party may, when he files
an answer, raise the lack of
jurisdiction as an affirmative defense
because this defense is not barred
under the omnibus motion rule.
b) Thus, the prevailing rule is that
jurisdiction over the subject matter
may be raised at any stage of the
proceedings, even for the first time
on appeal (Calimlim vs. Ramirez,
118 SCRA 399; Francel Realty
Corporation vs. Sycip 469 SCRA
424).
3. The issue is so basic that it may be
raised at any stage of the proceedings,
even on appeal. In fact, courts may take
cognizance of the issue even if not raised
by the parties. There is thus no reason to
preclude the Court of Appeals, for
example, from ruling on this issue even if
the same has not yet been resolved by
the trial court below (Asia International
Auctioneers, Inc. vs. GR No. 163445,
Dec. 18, 2007).
4. Lack of jurisdiction is one of those
excepted grounds where the court may
dismiss a claim or a case at any time
when it appears from the pleadings or the
evidence on record that any of those
ground exists, even if they were not
raised in the answer or in a motion to
dismiss. That the issue of lack of
jurisdiction was raised only by the
6
Monday, 20 May 2019
defendants in their memorandum filed
before the trial court did not render them
in estoppel (Vda. De Barrera vs. Heirs of
Vicente Legaspi GR No. 174346 Sept.
12, 2008).
5. When the court dismisses the
complaint for lack of jurisdiction over
the subject matter, should it refer or
forward the case to another court with
the proper jurisdiction? It is submitted
that the court should not do so. Its only
authority is to dismiss the complaint and
not to make any other order.
L. Objections to Jurisdiction over the
subject matter and Estoppel by Laches
1. Estoppel means you cannot disown your
act by which you have misled another
while laches means abandonment of a
right for failure to assert it for a long time.
a) General Rule: You can raise your
objection on jurisdiction over the
subject matter even for the first
time on appeal.
b) The ONLY exception is when there
is estoppel by laches, as laid
down in TIJAM vs.
SIBONGHANOY ( Tijam vs.
Sibonghanoy 23 SCRA 29, April
15, 1968).
XI. JURISDICTION OVER THE PARTIES
XII. Q: Define jurisdiction over the person. 

A: Jurisdiction over the person is the power to
render a personal judgment against a party to an
action or proceeding through the service of
process or by voluntary appearance of a party
during the progress of a cause. (Banco Español
Filipino vs. Palanca, 37 Phil. 291) 

It is the power of the court to bring before it
persons to be affected by the judgment so as to
give him an opportunity to be heard, and to render
a judgment binding upon his person. (21C.J.S.,
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

7
 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.
THE COURT 
 523) 

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

8
 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. 

defendant 
 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).

9
 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.
Issues 
 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
2005) 
 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
while 
 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). 

while 
 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]) 


10

It is the power to bind the “thing”. 
 defendant, jurisdiction over the res becomes
How acquired — It is acquired either by the
(a) the seizure of the property under legal
process whereby it is brought into actual or
constructive custody of the court or (b) as a
result of the institution of legal proceedings, in
which the power of the court is recognized
and made effective. (Macahilig vs. Heirs of
Grace M. Magalit, GR No. 141423, Nov. 15,
2000) 
 status against which or in relation to which
Acquisition of jurisdiction over the res by
actual seizure is exemplified by an
attachment proceeding where the property is
seized at the commencement of the action or
at some subsequent stage in the action. It is
also acquired through a legal provision which
authorizes the court to exercise authority over
a property or subject matter such as suits
involving a person’s status or property located
in the Philippines in actions in rem or quasi in
rem. (Banco Espanol Filipino vs. Palanca 37
Phil. 921, 927 [1918]; Perkins v. Dizon; Sec.
15, Rule 14, Rules of Court.) 
 means that passing upon a factual issue
In Land Registration cases or probate
proceedings, jurisdiction is acquired by
compliance with procedural requisites, such
as publication. 
 Court of Appeals are not generally
In a petition for change of name, the title of
the petition must be complete by including the
name sought to be adopted; otherwise, the
court acquires no jurisdiction over the
proceedings. (Telmo vs. Republic, 73 SCRA
29 (1976).
C. Importance of jurisdiction over the res — The
court obtains the authority to bind the “thing”.
Sometimes it is a substitute for jurisdiction
over the person. There are instances when
the court cannot acquire jurisdiction over the
defendant like when he is abroad. But if the
court acquires jurisdiction over the res, the
case may go on. Even if the court cannot
acquire jurisdiction over the person of the
11
Monday, 20 May 2019
a substitute over the person. 

In the example of action for compulsory
recognition, even if the defendant is a non-
resident who is out of the country the object
of litigation is status here in the Philippines,
then acquisition of jurisdiction over the res
confers jurisdiction to the court even if the
defendant is abroad. The res here is the
the judgment can be enforced. 

In Rule 57 Section 1, among the grounds for
issuance of a writ of preliminary attachment
is: 

“(f) In an action against a party who does not
reside and is not found in the Philippines, or
on whom summons may be served by
publications.”
XV. JURISDICITON OF REGULAR COURTS
A. JURISDICTION OF THE SUPREME COURT
1. The Supreme Court is not a trier of facts
— The SC is not a trier of facts, which
is not within the province of the Court
(Romy’s Freight Service vs. Castro, 490
SCRA 160). The findings of facts of the
reviewable by the SC (Sarmiento vs. Yu
497 SCRA 513). Also, factual findings of
the trial court, particularly when affirmed
by the Court of Appeals, are generally
binding on the Court (Tan vs. GVT
Engineering Services 498 SCRA 93;
Office of the Ombudsman vs. Lazar0-
Baldazo GR No. 170815 February 2,
2007). 

It is not the function of the SC to
determine the weight of the evidence
supporting the assailed decision (JR
Blanco vs. Quasha 318 SCRA 373).
However, factual issues may be delved
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
567). 
 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
SUPREME COURT
 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:
 question.
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

12

appellate jurisdiction regarding the
matter.
g) b) All cases involving the legality of
any tax, impost, assessment, or toll,
or any penalty imposed in relation
thereto.
 CSC.
This is related to the legality of tax
cases – whether a tax or tax penalty
is legal or not. However, whatever
decision the lower court gives, it has
to be appealed directly to the SC.
h) All cases in which the jurisdiction of
any lower court is in issue
i) All criminal cases in which the
penalty imposed is reclusion
perpetua or higher.
j) (e) All cases in which only an error
or question of law is involved.
 appealable to the CA.
Take note that ONLY an error or
question of law is involved. So, if
there is a mixed question of law and
a question of fact, appeal must be
filed with the CA. You only go to the
SC if the appeal is 100% legal. That
applies to both criminal and civil
cases.
C. OTHERCONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS
DEALING WITH THE JURISDICTION OF
THE SUPREME COURT
1. Article IX, Section 7, paragraph (a), 1987
Constitution:
 have the power to change that by making
“Each Commission shall decide by a
majority vote x x x. 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.”
 unless otherwise provided by law.
The COMELEC, COA and the CSC act
also as courts of justice. They have
powers to decide certain cases within
13
Monday, 20 May 2019
their jurisdiction. Election cases, sa
COMELEC man yan ba. Claims against
the government – COA. Or disallowance
on disbursement by government officers
or removal from government service –


Now, according to Section 7, any
decision, order or ruling of these
commissions may be brought to the SC
on certiorari, etc. So you will see that the
decisions of the constitutional
commissions are reviewable by the SC. 

However, Congress amended the
Judiciary Law particularly Section 9 on
the jurisdiction of the CA by now making
decisions of the CSC no longer
appealable to the SC directly but


When that law was passed where the
decisions of the CSC are appealable to
the CA, first I was stunned. I said there
is something queer here because the
CSC is a constitutional body and the CA
is not. So why will a decision of a
constitutional body be reviewable by a
non-constitutional body? And I said
parang it might violate the Constitution.
Under the Constitution, decisions of the
constitutional commissions are
appealable to the SC. Does Congress
it appealable to the CA? 

So I had to look at the provision again to
find out whether this is possible. But
pwede naman pala. You look at the
provision, “Unless otherwise provided by
this Constitution or by law..” Meaning, the
decisions are appealable to the SC
The
Constitution itself gave Congress the
power to change it. So there is no
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
Clause 
 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
declared.
 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.


14
 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.
COMELEC, COA, Sandiganbayan, D. APPELLATE JURISDICTION OF THE
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,
commissions.
 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,
Constitution.
 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);

15
 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.,
APPEALS supra
1. ORIGINAL JURISDICTION OF THE 

COURT OF APPEALS 
 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: 
 intact. 

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

16
 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
RTC. 
 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,
COURT OF APPEALS 
 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

17
 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;
Procedure).

18

x) Department of Agrarian
Reform under Rep. Act
No. 6657;
xi) Government Service
Insurance System;
xii) E m p l o y e e s
Compensation
Commission;
xiii) Agricultural Inventions
Board;
xiv) I n s u r a n c e
Commission;
xv) P h i l i p p i n e A t o m i c
Energy Commission;
xvi) Board of Investments;
xvii) Construction Industry
A r b i t r a t i o n
Commission;
xviii) Voluntary arbitrators
authorized by law; and
19. Decisions of
Special Agrarian
Courts
(d) Appeals from the National
Commission on Indigenous
Peoples (NCIP) (Rep. Act
No. 8371 [1997], Sec. 67).
(e) Appeals from the Office of
the Ombudsman in
administrative disciplinary
cases (A.M. No. 99-2-02-
SC; Fabian v. Desierto,
G.R. No. 129742,
September 16, 1998, 295
SCRA 470).
Take note, the appellate jurisdiction of the CA is
generally EXCLUSIVE except in criminal cases
decided by the RTC when the penalty imposed is
reclusion perpetua, life imprisonment or death. Now, if
you will analyze paragraph 3, you will notice that the
CA is a powerful court because it has exclusive
appellate jurisdiction over all final judgments,
19
Monday, 20 May 2019
decisions, resolution, orders or awards of RTC’s. So as
a general rule, if the RTC, anywhere in the country
renders a decision and you want to appeal, whether
civil or criminal, chances are it will go the to CA. It is a
powerful court, because it covers all RTC’s and the
appellate jurisdiction is generally exclusive. 

And not only RTC’s. The law says “and quasi-judicial
agencies, instrumentalities, boards or commissions...”
Not only decisions of the RTC but also of quasi-judicial
agencies or bodies, also called administrative bodies.
Administrative bodies are actually part of the executive
branch but they act just like courts of justice. They can
decide cases and there are hundreds of administrative
agencies in the Philippines. And therefore, if you lose a
case before anyone of these bodies, or tribunals, you
appeal the decision not with the SC, but to the CA. 

The amendments by RA 7902 is even more specific by
adding this phrase, “including the SEC, SSS, the
Employees Compensation commission and the Civil
Service Commission (CSC).” That is the addition.
Q:A labor case is not supposed to be filed in court but
with a quasi-judicial agency known as the NLRC and
you start in the local level – from the Labor Arbiter, then
the decisions of the Labor Arbiter are appealable to the
NLRC and then from there, where will you go?
NOTE:Subparagraph 4 of the fourth paragraph of
Section 17 refers to appeal from the RTC on pure legal
question which should be filed with the SC.
Q: Suppose there are questions of fact, or it is an
appeal on questions of fact and questions of law?
A: Under the 1948 Judiciary Law, you cannot appeal
directly to the SC. You must appeal to the CA. The
same thing when the issue is on the constitutionality of
a treaty, law, legality of tax, when the jurisdiction of the
lower court is in issue, as explained here in this
paragraph of the Judiciary Act of 1948, if the appeal is
100% constitutional issue, jurisdictional or legality issue
– appeal is to the SC under the Constitution. But if it is
mixed with questions of fact, do not go to the SC. You
go first to the CA. That is what the paragraph is all
about.
3. Exclusive appellate jurisdiction

a) Exclusive appellate jurisdiction by
way of ordinary appeal from the RTC
and the Family Courts (Sec. 9[3] BP
Blg. 129).
b) Exclusive appellate jurisdiction by
way of petition for review from the
RTC rendered by the RTC in the
exercise of its appellate jurisdiction
(Sec. 22 BP Blg. 129; Rule 43, Rules
of Court; Sec. 9 BP Blg. 129)
c) Exclusive appellate jurisdiction by
way of petition for review from the
decisions, resolutions or orders or
awards of the CSC, Central Board of
Assessment Appeals and other
bodies mentioned in Rule 43 (Sec.
9[3]), BP Blg. 129) and of the Office
of the Ombudsman in administrative
disciplinary cases (Enemecio vs.
Office of the Ombudsman 419 SCRA
82; Gonzales vs. Rosas 423 SCRA
488).
Note that under RA No. 9282, the judgments AND
FINAL ORDERS OF THE Court of Tax Appeals are no
longer appealable by way of petition for review to the
CA. Judgments of the CTA rendered en banc are
appealable to the SC by way of Rule 45 (Sec. 11 RA
No. 9282)
d) Exclusive appellate jurisdiction over
decisions of MTCs in cadastral or
land registration cases pursuant to
its delegated jurisdiction (Sec. 34 BP
Blg. 129 as amended by RA No.
7691). This is because decisions of
MTCs in these cases cases are
appealable in the same manner as
decisions of RTCs (Sec. 34 BP Blg.
129).
4. Power to try and conduct hearings
a) [4] Section 9, last paragraph, BP
129: 
 vs. Univet Agricultural Products, Inc.
The Court of Appeals shall have the
20
Monday, 20 May 2019
power to try cases and conduct
hearings, receive evidence and
perform any and all acts necessary
to resolve factual issues raised in
cases falling within its original and
appellate jurisdiction, including the
power to grant and conduct new
trials or further proceedings. Trials or
hearings in the CA must be
continuous and must be completed
within three (3) months unless
extended by the Chief Justice. (As
amended by RA 7902) 

Even if the CA is not a trial court,
under the law it has the power to try
cases and conduct hearings, receive
evidence and perform any and all
acts necessary to resolve factual
issues in cases falling within its
original and appellate jurisdiction,
including the power to grant and
conduct new trials or further
proceedings (Sec. 9 [3], BP 129 as
amended by RA 7902). The CA may
pass upon factual issues as when a
petition for certiorari is filed before it
(Alcazaren vs. Univet Agricultural
Products, Inc. 475 SCRA 636). 

This paragraph shows that the
present CA is a more powerful court
than before. It is a unique court.
Aside from being an appellate court,
it also acts as a trial court. It may
receive evidence but only those
evidence which were overlooked by
the trial court. It can order a new trial
or conduct a new trial itself. 

The CA may pass upon factual
issues as when a petition for
certiorari is filed before it(Alcazaren
475 SCRA 636) or in petitions for

writ of amparo or habeas corpus
data or in case of actions to annul
judgment of the RTC over which the
CA has original jurisdiction (Bar
2008).
G. Jurisdiction of RTC
1. Exclusive and original
a) All actions in admiralty and maritime
jurisdiction where the demand or
claim exceeds P300,000 or
P400,000 in Metro Manila;
b) Probate proceedings, both testate
and intestate, where the gross value
of the estate exceeds P300,000 or
P400,000 in Metro Manila;
c) In all other cases in which the
demand, exclusive of IDALEC or the
value of the property in controversy
exceeds P300,000 or P400,000 in
Metro Manila
d) Actions Involving the title to or
possession of real property or any
interest therein, where the assessed
value of the property involved
exceeds P20,000 or P50,000 in
Metro Manila, except actions for
forcible entry and unlawful detainer;
e) Actions involving personal property
valued at more than P300,00 or
P400,000 in Metro Manila
f) Subject of the litigation is incapable
of pecuniary estimation;
g) In all cases not within the exclusive
jurisdiction of any court, tribunal,
person or body exercising judicial or
quasi-judicial functions;
h) In all civil actions and special
proceedings falling within the
exclusive original jurisdiction of
Juvenile and Domestic Relations
Courts and of the Court of Agrarian
Relations as now provided by law
21
Monday, 20 May 2019
i) Under Sec 5.2 of Securities
Regulation Code:
(1) Cases involving devices or
schemes employed by or any
acts of the board of directors,
business associates, its officers
or partnership, amounting to
fraud and misrepresentation
(2) Controversies arising out of
intra-corporate or partnership
relations
(3) Controversies in elections or
appointments of directors,
trustees, officers or managers of
such corporations, partnerships
or associations
(4) P e t i t i o n s o f c o r p o r a t i o n s ,
partnerships or associations to
be declared in a state of
suspension of payment
j) RTC used to have jurisdiction over
all actions involving the contract of
marriage and marital relations but
such is now exclusive to the Family
Courts
2. Actions incapable of pecuniary estimation
a) Basic issue is one other than
recovery of money. In this kind of
action the money claim is merely
incidental
b) If the action is one primarily for the
recovery of money
c) Complaint for expropriation, specific
performance, support, foreclosure of
mortgage, annulment of judgment,
annulling a deed of sale, partition of
land, annul a deed of declaration of
heirs.
3. Extent of RTC’s jurisdiction when acting
as a probate court
a) A probate court cannot adjudicate or
determine title to properties claimed

to be part of the estate and also
claimed by outside parties
b) Only issue is whether they should be
included in the inventory or list of
properties to be administered
c) Probate court may only decide on
question of ownership when no third
parties are prejudiced and all parties
consent to the assumption of
jurisdiction by the court
H. Jurisdiction of the CA
1. Exclusive and original — Actions for the
annulment of the judgment of the RTC
2. Concurrent and original
a) With Supreme Court — Petitions for
certiorari, prohibition or mandamus
against
(1) RTC
(2) NLRC, but it should be filed with
the CA first St. Martin Funeral
Home vs CA (GR130866
September 16, 1998
(3) NLRC, but it should be filed with
the CA first St. Martin Funeral
Home vs CA (GR130866
September 16, 1998)
(4) Other quasi-judicial agencies
mentioned in Rule 43
(5) Court of tax appeals
b) With the Supreme Court and RTC
(1) Petitions for certiorari,
prohibition or mandamus against
lower courts and other bodies
(2) Petitions for Quo Warranto and
habeas corpus
3. Exclusive appellate
a) Ordinary Appeal by Notice of Appeal
(1) Appeals from RTC and family
courts, except those appealable
to the Supreme Court or
Sandiganbayan
22
Monday, 20 May 2019
(2) A p p e a l s f r o m R T C o n
constitutional, tax, jurisdictional
questions involving questions of
fact which should be appealed
first to the CA.
b) Petition for Review
(1) Appeals from Civil Service
Commission (CSC)
(2) Appeals from Central board of
assessment appeals and other
bodies mentioned in Rule 43
(3) Appeals from RTC in the
exercise of its appellate
jurisdiction, which are not a
matter of right
(4) quasi-judicial agencies
(5) A p p e a l s f r o m N a t i o n a l
Commission on Indigenous
Peoples (NCIP)
(6) Appeals from the office of the
Ombudsman in administrative
disciplinary cases
4. Decisions of the MTC in cadastral and
land registration cases pursuant to its
delegated jurisdiction
Power to try and conduct hearings
It has the power to try and conduct hearings,
receive evidences and perform all acts
necessary to resolve factual issues in cases
falling within its original and appellate
jurisdiction, including the power to grant and
conduct new trials or further proceedings
I. Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court
1. Exclusive and Original

Petitions for certiorari, prohibition or
mandamus against:
a) CA
b) COMELEC
c) Commission on Audit
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

23
 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

24

the determination of the filing
fees.
b) Administrative Circular No. 09-94:
“The exclusion of the term
‘damages of whatever kind”
(1) applies to cases where the
damages are merely
incidental to or a exceed Php 300,000 or Php 400,000 in
consequence of the main
cause of action.
(a) However, in cases where
the claim for damages is the
main cause of action, or
one of the causes of action,
the amount of such claim
shall be considered in
determining the jurisdiction
of the court.
c) Meaning of Interest: Gomez vs.
Montalban 548 SCRA 693
(1) If interest on the loan is a
primary and inseparable
component of the cause of
action, not merely incidental
thereto, and already
determinable at the time of filing
of the Complaint, it must be
included in the determination of
which court has the jurisdiction
over petitioner’s case.
d) Totality rule:
(1) where there are several claims
or causes of actions between
the same or different parties
(2) embodied in the same
complaint, the amount of the
demand
(a) shall be the totality of the
claims in all the causes of
action,
(b) irrespective of whether the
causes of action arose out
25
Monday, 20 May 2019
of the same or different
transactions
2. Actions for claim of money where the
demand does not exceed Php 300,000 or
Php 400,000 in Metro Manila
3. Probate proceedings, testate or intestate,
where the value of the estate does not
Metro Manila
4. Actions involving title to or possession of
real property or any interest therein
where the value or amount does not
exceed P20,000 or P50,000 in Metro
Manila, exclusive of interest damages,
attorney’s fees, litigation expense, and
costs
a) determined by the assessed value
of the said property and NOT the
market value thereof.
(FMV*assessment level = AV) as
found in a tax declaration. In cases
of land not declared for taxation
purposes, the value of such property
shall be determined by the assessed
value of the adjacent lots
(1) Fair Market Value — the price at
which a property may be sold by
a seller, who is not compelled to
sell, and bought by a buyer, who
is not compelled to buy
b) Title is the “legal link between
(1) a person who owns property and
(2) the property itself.

it also gives the owner the right
to demand or be issued a
“certificate of title”.
c) accion reivindicatoria is a suit which
has for its object the recovery of
possession over the real property as
owner. It involves recovery of
ownership and possession based on
said ownership.

d) an accion publiciana is one for the
recovery of possession of the right to
possess.
(1) It is also referred to as an
ejectment suit filed after the
expiration of one year after the
occurrence of the cause of
action or from the unlawful
withholding of possession of the
realty. It is considered a plenary
action to recover the right of
possession when
dispossession was effected
by means other than unlawful
detainer or forcible entry.
5. Maritime claims where the demand or
claim does not exceed Php 300,000 or
Php400,000 in Metro Manila
6. The MTC also exercises delegated
jurisdiction in
a) cadastral and land registration cases
covering lots where
(1) there is no controversy or
opposition, or
(2) contested lots the value of which
does not exceed P100,000.00,
 possession de jure.
as may be delegated by the
Supreme Court.
(a) value of the lot shall be
ascertained by
i) the affidavit of the
claimant or by
ii) agreement of the
respective claimants if
there are more than
one, or
iii) from the corresponding
tax declaration of the
real property.
 VII, Book II of the Revised Penal Code, where
The decisions of
these courts shall be
appealable in the
26
Monday, 20 May 2019
same manner as the
decisions of the
Regional Trial Courts
7. Inclusion or exclusion of voters
8. Covered by Rules on Summary
Procedure
9. Forcible entry and unlawful detainer
otherwise known as accion interdictal.
a) raises the question of ownership in
the pleadings and the issue of
possession cannot be resolved
without deciding the issue of
ownership, the court may resolve
the issue of ownership but only for
the purpose of determining the issue
of possession.
(1) the issue of ownership should
be regarded merely as
provisional
(2) a necessary consequence of the
nature of the case where the
only issue to be settled is the
physical or material possession
over the real property, that is,
possession de facto and not
10. Covered by the Rules on Small Claims
11. Grant provisional remedies — The MTC
has exclusive original jurisdiction to grant
provisional remedies in such principal
cases in its jurisdiction.
12. Appeal — Judgments of the MTC shall be
appealable to the Regional Trial Courts
K. Sandiganbayan

EXLCUSIVE: Violations of Republic Act No.
3019, as amended, otherwise known as the
Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, Republic
Act No. 1379, and Chapter II, Section 2, Title
one or more of the accused are officials
occupying the following positions in the
government, whether in a permanent, acting

or interim capacity, at the time of the
commission of the offense:
1. Officials of the executive branch
occupying the positions of regional
director and higher, otherwise classified
as Grade ’27’ and higher, of the
Compensation and Position Classification
Act of 1989 (Republic Act No. 6758),
specifically including:
a) Provincial governors, vice-governors,
members of the sangguniang
panlalawigan, and provincial
treasurers, assessors, engineers,
and other provincial department
heads:
(1) City mayors, vice-mayors,
members of the sangguniang
panlungsod, city treasurers,
assessors, engineers, and other
city department heads;
(2) Officials of the diplomatic
service occupying the position of
consul and higher;
(3) Philippine army and air force
colonels, naval captains, and all
officers of higher rank;
(4) O ff i c e r s o f t h e P h i l i p p i n e
National Police while occupying
the position of provincial director
and those holding the rank of
senior superintendent and
higher;
(5) City and provincial prosecutors
and their assistants, and officials
and prosecutors in the Office of
the Ombudsman and special
prosecutor;
(6) Presidents, directors or trustees,
or managers of government-
owned or controlled
corporations, state universities
27
Monday, 20 May 2019
or educational institutions or
foundations.
b) Members of Congress and officials
thereof classified as Grade ’27’ and
higher under the Compensation and
Position Classification Act of 1989;
c) Members of the judiciary without
prejudice to the provisions of the
Constitution;
d) Chairmen and members of the
Constitutional Commissions, without
prejudice to the provisions of the
Constitution; and
e) All other national and local officials
classified as Grade ’27’ and higher
under the Compensation and
Position Classification Act of 1989.
2. Other offenses or felonies whether simple
or complexed with other crimes
committed by the public officials and
employees mentioned in subsection a. of
this section in relation to their office.
3. Civil and criminal cases filed pursuant to
and in connection with Executive Order
Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A, issued in 1986.
L. Court of Tax-Appeals EXCLUSIVE: Final
and executory assessments for taxes, fees,
charges and penalties where the principal
amount of taxes and fees, exclusive of
charges and penalties claimed is not less than
Php 1M.

APPELLATE: Charges and penalties claimed
is less than Php1M tried by the proper: MTC,
MeTC and RTC.
M. Quasi-Courts: It is the power of
administrative authorities to make
determinations of facts in the performance of
their official duties and to apply the law as
they construe it to the facts so found. The
exercise of this power is only incidental to the
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
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

28

determine if the action is real or personal. (1 RIANO,
supra at 148).
SECTION 1. VENUE OF REAL ACTIONS
Actions affecting title to or possession of real property,
or interest therein, shall be commenced and tried in the
proper court which has jurisdiction over the area
wherein the real property involved, or a portion thereof,
is situated.
Forcible entry and detainer actions shall be
commenced and tried in the MTC of the municipality or
city wherein the real property involved, or a portion
thereof, is situated.
Real Actions
An action is real when it affect title to or possession of
real property, or interest therein. All other actions as
personal actions. (Id. At 151)
A real action is local, i.e., its venue depends upon the
location of the property (Id.).
Where the subject-matter of the action involves various
parcels of land situated in different provinces, the
venue is determined by the singularity or plurality of the
transactions involving the said parcels of land. Thus:
Where the parcels of land are the objects of one and
the same transaction – the venue is in the court of any
of the provinces wherein a parcel of land is situated; or
If subjects of separate and distinct transactions – there
is no common venue and separate actions should be
laid in the court of the province wherein each parcel of
land is situated (1 REGALADO, supra at 118).
SECTION 2. VENUE OF PERSONAL ACTIONS
All other actions may be commenced and tried where
the plaintiff or any of the principal plaintiffs reside, or
where the defendant or any of the principal defendant
reside, or in the case of a non-resident defendant,
where he may be found, at the election of the plaintiff.
29
Monday, 20 May 2019
Personal Action
One which is not founded upon the privity of real rights
or real property (Id. at 23).
A personal action is transitory. The venue is either
Where the plaintiff or any of the principal plaintiffs
resides; or
Where the non-resident defendant may be found.
Note: All at the election of the plaintiff
The residence of the person is his personal, actual, or
physical habitation or actual residence or place of
abode, whether permanent or temporary as long as he
resides with continuity and consistency therein. (Ang
Klek Chen v. Sps. Calasan, G.R. No. 161685, July 24,
2007).
When there is more than one defendant or plaintiff in
the case, the residences of the principal parties should
be the basis for determining the proper venue.
Otherwise, the purpose of the Rule would be defeated
where a nominal or formal party is impleaded in the
action since the latter would not have the degree of
interest in the subject of the action which would warrant
and entail the desirably active participation expected of
litigants in a case. (1 REGALADO, supra at 121).
SECTION 3. VENUE OF ORDINARY CIVIL ACTIONS
AGAINST NON-RESIDENTS
Non-resident found in the Philippines
For personal actions – where the plaintiff resides; and
For real actions – where the property is located.
Non-resident not found in the Philippines
Personal status of the plaintiff – where plaintiff resides;
and
Any property of said defendant located in the
Philippines – where the property or any portion thereof
is situated or found.

SECTION 4. WHEN RULE NOT APPLICABLE
The Rules on venue are not applicable in any of the
following cases:
Where a specific Rule or law provides otherwise (e.g.,
Civil actions on damages in case of libel, as special
Rules of venue are provided for in Art. 360 of the
Revised Penal Code) (1 REGALADO, supra at 123); or
Where the parties have validly agreed in writing before
the filing of the action on the exclusive venue thereof.
Requisites of Stipulations on Venue: (WEB)
In Writing;
Exclusive as to the venue; and
Made Before the filing of the action (1 RIANO, supra at
156).
The mere stipulation on the venue of an action is not
enough to preclude the parties from bringing a case in
other venues. It must be shown that such stipulation is
exclusive. In the absence of qualifying or restrictive
words, such as “exclusively” and “waiving for his
purpose any other venue”, “shall only” preceding the
designation of the venue, “to the exclusion of all other
courts”, or other words of similar import, the stipulation
should be deemed as merely an agreement on an
additional forum, not as limiting venue to the specified
place (Auction in Malinta, Inc., v. Luyaben, G.R. No.
173979, February 12, 2007).
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).
30
Monday, 20 May 2019
Note: Where the action is no longer based on the
agreement but on the tortious act of sending collection
telegrams despite the fact that the obligation had
already been paid, venue is no longer based on the
written stipulation but at the election of the plaintiff as
fixed by law (Zoleta v. Romillio, Jr., G.R. No. L-58080,
February 15, 1982).
Effect of venue stipulation when the validity of the
written instrument is controverted
A complaint directly assailing the validity of the written
instrument itself should not be bound by the exclusive
venue stipulation contained therein and should be filed
in accordance with the general Rules on venue. It
would be inherently inconsistent for a complaint of this
nature to recognize the exclusive venue stipulation
when it, in fact, precisely assails the validity of the
instrument in which such stipulation is contained
(Briones v. CA, G.R. No. 204444, January 14, 2015).
Complementary-Contracts-Construed Together
Doctrine
An accessory contract must be read in its entirety and
together with the principal agreement. Thus, suretyship
agreement can only be enforced in conjunction with the
promissory note also applies to the suretyship
agreement as an ancillary contract of the promissory
note (Philippine Bank of Communications v. Lim, G.R.
No. 158138, April 12, 2015).