CIVIL PROCEDURE
Morillo Notes
What is the meaning of Jurisdiction?
- It is the power and authority of the court to
hear, try and decide a case. (Cuenca vs.
PCGG, 535 SCRA 102)
- It is also referred as the power or capacity
given by the law to a court or tribunal to
entertain, hear, and determine certain
controversies. (Dela Cruz vs. CA, 510 SCRA
103)
Test of Jurisdiction:
- 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)
Effect of Lack of Jurisdiction:
- A court devoid of jurisdiction over the case
cannot make a decision in favor of wither party.
It can only dismiss the case for want of
jurisdiction. However, a court may set aside
orders it had improperly made before the want
of jurisdiction is discovered and it is said that a
judgment by a court without jurisdiction over
the subject matter may be set aside and
vacated at any time by the court that rendered
it. (Riano (2014), Civil Procedure Vol. 1, p. 70)
Aspects of Jurisdiction:
a. 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.
vs. CA, GR no. 173946, June 19, 2013)
What is “Jurisdiction Over the Subject Matter”?
- It is the power or authority to hear and
determine cases of the general class to which
the proceeding in question belongs. (Reyes vs.
Diaz, 73 Phil. 484)
How jurisdiction over the Subject Matter is
conferred?
- Jurisdiction over the subject matter is
conferred by law which may be either the
Constitution or a statute. (City of Dumaguete
vs. Philippine Ports Authority, 656 SCRA 102)
- It is not for the courts or the parties to
determine or to conveniently set aside (Borra
vs. CA, GR no. 167484, September 9, 2013)
- Only a statute can confer jurisdiction on courts
and administrative agencies. (BF Homes, Inc.
vs. Manila Electric Company, 636 SCRA 495)
Consequences of the rules that jurisdiction is
conferred by law:
- Since jurisdiction over the subject matter is
conferred only by the Constitution or by law, it
cannot be;
1. Granted by the agreement of the parties;
1 CIVIL PROCEDURE
0
2. Acquired, waived, enlarged, or diminished
by act or omission of the parties; or
3. Conferred by the acquiescence of the
courts (Republic vs.Estipular, 336 SCRA
333; Dela Rosa vs. Roldan, 501 SCRA 34)
- Jurisdiction cannot be conferred by a court’s
unilateral assumption of jurisdiction. (Tolentino
vs. SSC, 138 SCRA 428)
- Jurisdiction may not be changed by the mere
agreement of the parties. Moreso, it cannot be
the subject matter of a contract. (Atlas
Developer & Steel Industries, Inc. vs.
Sarmiento Enterprises, Inc., 184 SCRA 153)
- Jurisdiction cannot be conferred by consent or
waiver (Cadimas vs. Carrion, 567 SCRA 101)
- Jurisdiction cannot be waived by the parties or
cured by their silence, acquiescence or even
express consent. (Peralta-Labrador vs.
Bugarin, 468 SCRA 308)
How is jurisdiction over subject matter is
determined?
- Jurisdiction over the subject matter of a case is
determined by the allegations in the complaint
which comprise a concise statement of the
ultimate facts constituting the plaintiff’s cause
of action. The nature of an action, as well as
which court or body has jurisdiction over it, is
determined based on the allegations contained
in the complaint of the plaintiff, irrespective of
whether or not the plaintiff is entitled to recover
upon all or some of the claims asserted therein.
The averments in the complaint and the
character of the relief sought are the ones to
be consulted. (City of Dumaguete vs. Philippine
Ports Authority, 656 SCRA 102)
The defenses and the evidence do not determine
jurisdiction:
- Jurisdiction over the subject matter is not
affected by the pleas or theories set up by the
defendant in an answer or a motion to dismiss.
(Del Monte Phils., Employees Agrarian Reform
Beneficiaries Cooperative vs. Sangunay, 641
SCRA 87)
- Jurisdiction is based on the allegations in the
initiatory pleading and the defenses in the
answer are deemed irrelevan and immaterial in
its determination. (Dela Cruz vs. CA, 510 SCRA
103)
- Jurisdiction of the court cannot be made to
depend upon the defenses set up in the
answer or upon the motion to dismiss, for
otherwise, jurisdiction would almost entirely
depend upon the defendant. (Cadimas vs.
Carrion, 567 SCRA 101)
- The court’s jurisdiction cannot be made to
depend upon defenses set up in the answer or
in a motion to dismiss, otherwise, the ends of
justice would be frustrated by making the
sufficiency of this kind of action dependent
upon the defendant in all cases. (Tomas
 CIVIL PROCEDURE
Morillo Notes
Claudio Memorial College, Inc. vs. CA, 316
SCRA 502)
Exception to the rule that jurisdiction is
determined by the allegations in the complaint:
- In the case of Ignacio vs. CFI Bulacan (42
SCRA 89), it was held that “while the
allegations in the complaint make out a case
for forcible entry, where tenancy is averred by
way of defense and is proved to be the real
issue, the case should be dismissed for lack of
jurisdiction as the case should properly be filed
with the then Court of Agrarian Relations (now
DARAB).
- However, the Municipal Trial Court does not
automatically lose its jurisdiction over
ejectment cases by the mere allegation of the
defense of tenancy relationship between the
parties. There must first be a reception of
evidence, and if, after hearing, tenancy had in
fact been shown to be the real issue, the court
should dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction.
(Hilado vs. Chavez, 438 SCRA 623)
o The rule is still that jurisdiction of the
court is determined by the allegations
in the complaint.
Doctrine of Primary Jurisdiction (Primary
Administrative Jurisdiction):
- Courts cannot and will not resolve a
controversy involving a question within the
jurisdiction of an administrative tribunal,
especially when the question demands the
sound exercise of administrative discretion
requiring special knowledge, experience and
services of the administrative tribunal to
determine technical and intricate matters of
fact. The court cannot arrogate unto itself the
authority to resolve a controversy, the
jurisdiction of which is initially lodged with the
administrative body of special competence.
(BF Homes, Inc vs. Manila Electric Company,
636 SCRA 495)
- If determination of a case requires the
expertise, specialized training, and knowledge
of an administrative body, relief must first be
obtained in an administrative proceeding
before resort to the court is had even if the
matter may well be within the latter’s proper
jurisdiction. (Nestle Philippines, Inc. vs.
Uniwide Sales, Inc. 634 SCRA 232)
- The SC recognized that the MWSS was in the
best position to evaluate and decide which bid
for a waterworks project was compatible with
its development plan. (Concerned Officials of
the MWSS vs. Vasquez, 240 SCRA 502)
Exceptions to the Doctrine of Primary Jurisdiction:
a. Where there is estoppel on the part of the
party invoking the doctrine;
b. Where the challenged administrative act is
patently illegal, amounting to lack of
jurisdiction;
c. Where there is unreasonable delay or official
inaction that will irretrievably prejudice the
complainant;
d. Where the amount involved is relatively small;
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; when strong public interest
is involved; and
k. In Quo warranto proceedings. (Province of
Aklan vs. Jody King Constructions, GR no.
197592, November 27, 2013)

Objective of the Doctrine of Primary Jurisdiction:

- To guide the court in determining whether it
should refrain from exercising its jurisdiction
until after an administrative agency has
determined some question arising in the
proceeding before the court. (Nestle
Philippines, Inc. vs. Uniwide Sales, Inc., 634
SCRA 232)

CIVIL PROCEDURE 1
1