HMDM NOTES 2022, ATTY. BRONDIAL.

over the person of the defendant is

REMEDIAL LAW 1 acquired through voluntary
ATTY. HENEDINO M. BRONDIAL appearance or valid service of
summons. Jurisdiction over the person
of the intervenor is acquired upon
Jurisdiction approval of the motion for leave to
intervene.
Principles of Jurisdiction
7. Jurisdiction over the issues is
1. Any judgment, decision or final order determined by the allegations in the
rendered by a court without pleading in such that those issues
jurisdiction is NULL AND VOID. which are not alleged cannot be
resolved by the court.
Exception: Jurisdictional Estoppel
(Boston Equity Resources v. CA) 8. Jurisdiction over the subject matter is
- the court has no jurisdiction, conferred by law except that of the
but procedurally the court can jurisdiction of the Supreme Court
continue because the parties is which is conferred by the Constitution.
deemed estopped. Estoppel is
presenting something and 9. Jurisdiction over the “res” is not
claiming otherwise. necessary provided that the court
acquired jurisdiction over the person
2. On concurrent jurisdiction, always of the defendant. But if the court
remember 3 principles: Hierarchy of cannot acquire jurisdiction over the
Courts, Transcendental Importance, person of the defendant, in action
and Supreme Court is not a trier of strictly in personam, the plaintiff shall
facts. convert the action to quasi-in rem by
attaching the property of the
3. Venue (Territory) is jurisdictional in defendant.
criminal cases, but not in civil cases
because that is only a matter of venue. Q: What is Jurisdiction?
A: Jurisdiction is the authority to hear and
4. Jurisdiction over the issues is decide a case by the courts.
determined by the allegations in the
pleadings. • Jurisdiction shall not be confused
with the exercise of Jurisdiction.
5. Jurisdiction cannot be subject to the The exercise of jurisdiction is the
stipulations of the parties. result of the authority of the court.
Decisions and resolutions are
6. Jurisdiction over the parties – examples of an exercise of
jurisdiction over the person of plaintiff jurisdiction by the court.
is acquired through the filing of the
complaint and the timely payment of Hierarchy of Courts in the Philippines
the correct docket fees. Jurisdiction

1
 HMDM NOTES 2022, ATTY. BRONDIAL.
Supreme Court respondent from the service. "In
administrative cases involving the concurrent
jurisdiction of two or more disciplining
Court of Appeals – Court of Tax Appeals – authorities, the body in which the complaint
Sandiganbayan – Appellate Sharia Courts is filed first, and which opts to take
cognizance of the case, acquires jurisdiction
to the exclusion of other tribunals exercising
Regional Trial Courts – Family Courts concurrent jurisdiction" .

Note: FC are not RTC and vice versa. They are both Thus you can be charged simultaneously by
creations of law. RA 8369 is the law that created a the military courts and regular courts.
family court. However, the decision of one will affect the
other.

Metropolitan Trial Courts – Municipal Trial Ex: Trillanes was charged before the regular
Courts (in cities) – Municipal Trial Court – courts and the court martial because coup de
Municipal Circuit Trial Court etat is a criminal case as well as a violation of
the Articles of War. But if Trillanes is to be
acquitted/convicted in one, he can no longer
• The Barangay Conciliation be convicted on the other.
Proceedings / Lupon Nang Mga
Tagpagkasundo is NOT a court. On Quasi-Judicial Bodies

Note: The barangay is not a court, so the • These are not courts. They only
barangay resolution is not a decision of the participate in the jurisdictional
court. The barangay conciliation agreement, authority of courts in compliance with
although under the Local Government Code the principle of the exhaustion of
the enforcement of the barangay conciliation administrative remedies.
agreement is enforceable by the MTC where
• They have primary jurisdiction over
the barangay is located, if it become functus
issues cognizable by them and you
officio after 6 months.
cannot go to regular courts if you have
not passed through these tribunals.
Q: How about military courts? Are they
courts? • Ex: Case is between landlord and
tenant: you cannot go to court
immediately. You must go to DARAB
A: Office of the Ombudsman vs Mislang:
first. When the DARAB as a quasi-
Military Courts are courts and their decisions
judicial tribunal resolves the
are res judicata.
controversy, then one who is not
satisfied with the judgment can
Being sui generis, court-martial proceedings
remedy the decision of the quasi-
contemplate both the penal and
judicial tribunal to the COURT OF
administrative disciplinary nature of military
APPEALS; NOT RTC (subject to
justice. In view of its administrative
exceptions like expropriation which
disciplinary aspect which court-martial
has 2 parts: second is just
proceedings share with the petitioner, both
compensation – there is no finality in
have the concurrent authority to dismiss
the resolution of the administrative

2
 HMDM NOTES 2022, ATTY. BRONDIAL.
body of just compensation because it
is strictly within the judicial • Means only that court can take
prerogative by virtue of the cognizance of the case.
Constitution [Land Bank of the • Ex: Rule 70 – Unlawful Detainer and
Philippines v. Dalauta]). Forcible Entry cases (MTC)

Judicial Function Q: Under Sec. 1(a), Art. VII of the

Determination of what the law is in a Constitution, it says that the SC has
given situation and whether that law
original jurisdiction. What does the
was properly applied.
constitution mean? Is it original exclusive
Quasi- judicial function or original concurrent?
Determination of what the law is in a A: Both. It is concurrent because the law
given situation and whether that law is provides so: BP 129, RA 7691. It is exclusive
properly applied but it is performed by also.
a quasi-judicial body/ entity/
instrumentality, like NLRC and SEC. Q: What is the original-exclusive
jurisdiction of SC?
A: Any complaints against the judgment,
a. Jurisdiction According to Its Nature decisions, or final order of the six
tribunals, which can only go up to the SC
1. Original and nowhere else: CA, CTA en banc, SB,
Shari-ah Appellate Courts, COA, and
• The authority of the court that takes COMELEC en banc (Rule 64).
cognizance of the case for the first
time. Q: How does the court exercise power
• When a court exercises original of judicial review?
jurisdiction of a case, it is the first A: Appeal (rule 45 as far as SC is
time that the case is being concerned) and certiorari (Rule 65).
investigated.
o If it is not the first, then the Brondi: The SC and CA has no original
court is exercising its appellate jurisdiction in criminal cases, they only
jurisdiction. have appellate jurisdiction. As compared
to Sandiganbayan, it has original and
Brondi: To remember call it virginal appellate jurisdiction in criminal cases.
jurisdiction, kasi una pa lang. If it is the
2nd, 3rd or 4th time, appellate na yan. Rule 45 v. Rule 65
Rule 45 Rule 65
Ex: When you file a case of forcible entry, the Mode of appeal Special civil action
original jurisdiction is with the MTC You can only You can raise pure
(original) raise questions of
questions of law
– appeal RTC (appellate) – CA – SC law and questions of
fact
2 Classifications of Original Jurisdiction: Ground is on Ground is on
errors of errors of
1. Original- Exclusive judgment, award jurisdiction.

3
 HMDM NOTES 2022, ATTY. BRONDIAL.
or final order on If denied – interlocutory (not appealable;
the merits. remedy is certiorari)
Filed within 15 Filed not later
days from the than 60 days from Review v. revise v. reverse v. modify v.
receipt of the the receipt of the affirm
notice of notice of Review Taking cognizance
judgment, final judgment, final of a case is a
order or order or power of review.
resolution resolution Revise Revision, not a
appealed from. appealed from. simple
MFR not required MFR is required amendment
It is a mode of It is a mode of Reverse Overturn a
appeal. The SC is review; a special favorable
exercising its civil action. It is an judgment to an
appellate independent civil unfavorable one
jurisdiction. action and not a or vice versa
continuation of the
original action. Modify Modification or
The SC is amendment
exercising Affirm Accept the
original- decision of the
concurrent. lower body
jurisdiction
The petition shall The petition shall
be filed with the be filed with the Review means is to take cognizance of
SC RTC, CA, the decision but does not cover
Sandiganbayan resolution of the lower body. Review
and COMELEC. means to look into.
Remedy against a Remedy against an Q: What does review consist of?
final judgment. interlocutory A: It consist of Reverse, Revise, Modify or
order. Affirm.

2. Original-Concurrent
Interlocutory Order v. Final Order
Interlocutory Final Order • When the authority of the court to
Order take cognizance of the case may be
Does not resolve Disposes the exercised by more than one kind of
with finality. entire case. court.

Ex: Certiorari, Prohibition,

Q: When a court resolves a motion to Mandamus, Quo Warranto, Habeas
dismiss, is the resolution Corpus concurrently cognizable by
interlocutory or final order? the SC-CA-RTC-Family Courts.
A: It depends:
If granted - final order (appealable)

4
 HMDM NOTES 2022, ATTY. BRONDIAL.
3 Principles on Concurrent 2. Appellate
Jurisdiction:
• When the tribunal take cognizance of
1. Hierarchy of Courts the case for the 2nd, 3rd or 4th time.
• No sub-classification. There is no such
• If a justiciable controversy is thing as concurrent-appellate
cognizable concurrently by classification.
several courts, the principle • Appellate jurisdiction is always
of HOC demands that you file exclusive. Never concurrent.
it at the lowest court having • You cannot bypass an appellate court
jurisdiction over the case. and proceed to a higher court.
• Rationale: there are a lot of
questions of issues and not Most Important Principle of Jurisdiction
just question of law where
the lowest court under General Rule: Any judgment, decision or
concurrent jurisdiction is final order rendered by a court without
more proficient than the jurisdiction is NULL AND VOID.
appellate court.
• Practical reason: if you go to Exception: Jurisdictional estoppel, which is
the highest court you have no only applicable to jurisdiction over the
more recourse if the subject matter, NOT over the person.
judgment is against you. Because jurisdiction over the person may
be waived through voluntary appearance.
2. Transcendental Importance
Thus, if the issue is on the subject matter, it
• An exception to the principle can be raised even for the first time on
of the HOC. appeal.
• The higher court under
concurrent jurisdiction can Boston Equity Resources, Inc. v. CA
take cognizance of the case
because it is of great concern The aspect of jurisdiction which may be
to the nation and barred from being assailed as a result of
transgresses jurisdictional estoppel by laches is jurisdiction over the
barriers. subject matter. Thus, in Tijam, the issue
involved was the authority of the then
3. Supreme Court is not a Trier of Court of First Instance to hear a case for the
Facts collection of a sum of money in the amount
of ₱1,908.00 which amount was, at that
• The SC is also a trial court time, within the exclusive original
but it is not a trier of facts. jurisdiction of the municipal courts.
• Hence when you go up to the
SC under Rule 45, you can The Supreme Court barred the attack on
only raise with the SC pure the jurisdiction of the respective courts
questions of law. concerned over the subject matter of the
case based on estoppel by laches, declaring

5
 HMDM NOTES 2022, ATTY. BRONDIAL.
that parties cannot be allowed to belatedly Q: Do these kinds of jurisdiction apply in
adopt an inconsistent posture by attacking civil cases?
the jurisdiction of a court to which they
submitted their cause voluntarily. A: Not all. Only those enumerated from 1-4.
There is no jurisdiction over the territories in
Here, what respondent was questioning in civil cases. Territoriality in civil cases is a
her motion to dismiss before the trial court matter of venue.
was that court’s jurisdiction over the
person of defendant Manuel. Thus, the i. Over the Subject Matter
principle of estoppel by laches finds no
application in this case. Instead, the
The power to hear and determine cases of
principles relating to jurisdiction over the
general class to which the proceeding in
person of the parties are pertinent herein.
question belongs.

General Rule: Jurisdiction over the subject

Q: What kind of estoppel and to what kind
matter is conferred by law.
of jurisdiction will such apply in order for
a party be said to estopped to question the
jurisdiction of the court? Exception: Except that of the jurisdiction of
the Supreme Court which is conferred by the
A: It is estoppel by laches and ONLY to
Constitution.
jurisdiction over the subject matter (Tijam
v. Sibonghanoy)
Section 5, Art. VIII. (MEMORIZE!!)
Estoppel by laches
SECTION 5. The Supreme Court shall have
the following powers:
It refers to an estoppel which:
1. Arises from the negligence or omission to
(1) Exercise original jurisdiction over
assert a right;
cases affecting ambassadors, other public
2. Within a reasonable time; and ministers and consuls, and over petitions
3. Warranting a presumption that the party for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo
entitled to assert it either has abandoned or warranto, and habeas corpus. (Original
declined to assert it (Alday v. FGU jurisdiction; It is concurrent jurisdiction
Insurance Corporation) with the RTC) Apply Doctrine of Hierarchy
of Courts, transcendental importance, SC is
not a trier of facts.
b. Jurisdiction According to its Object
Classification according to its object. Note: By logical deduction, we conclude that the
These are: (SPRIT) SC has exclusive original jurisdiction by
1. Jurisdiction over the subject rationalizing that the SC is the highest tribunal.
Review judgment of 6 tribunals, COMELEC,
matter
Sandiganbayan, etc..
2. Jurisdiction over the persons
3. Jurisdiction over the res (2) Review, revise, reverse, modify, or
4. Jurisdiction over the issues affirm on appeal or certiorari, as the law or
5. Jurisdiction over the territories the Rules of Court may provide, final
judgments and orders of lower courts in:

6
 HMDM NOTES 2022, ATTY. BRONDIAL.
(Appellate jurisdiction, also known as rights. Rules of procedure of special courts
power of judicial review) and quasi-judicial bodies shall remain
effective unless disapproved by the
(a) All cases in which the Supreme Court.
constitutionality or validity of any
treaty, international or executive (6) Appoint all officials and
agreement, law, presidential decree, employees of the Judiciary in
proclamation, order, instruction, accordance with the Civil Service Law.
ordinance, or regulation is in
question.
2 Ways which the court exercise the Power
(b) All cases involving the of Judicial Review:
legality of any tax, impost,
assessment, or toll, or any penalty 1. By Appeal (Rule 45 –remedy against
imposed in relation thereto. error of judgment) ordinary civil action

(c) All cases in which the 2. By Certiorari (Rule 65-remedy against

jurisdiction of any lower court is in error of jurisdiction) special civil action,
issue.
Errors of fact and law v grave abuse of
(d) All criminal cases in which jurisdiction
the penalty imposed is reclusion
perpetua or higher. Q: WHAT LAWS CONFER JURISDICTION
OVER THE COURTS?
(e) All cases in which only an A:
error or question of law is involved. 1. Section 5, Article VIII, 1986
Constitution
(3) Assign temporarily judges of lower 2. Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980
courts to other stations as public interest 3. B.P. Blg. 129
may require. Such temporary assignment 4. RA 7691 as amended by A.M. No. 19-
shall not exceed six months without the 10-20-SC
consent of the judge concerned. 5. RA 11576 (Approved, July 30, 2021)
6. RA 8369 (Family Courts Act)
(4) Order a change of venue or place of 7. SC-AO No. 113-95- Intellectual
trial to avoid a miscarriage of justice. Property Courts
8. PD 1486; 1606 (Sandiganbayan)
(5) Promulgate rules concerning the 9. RA 7975; 8249; 10660
protection and enforcement of (Sandiganbayan)
constitutional rights, pleading, practice, 10. RA 9282 (Court of Tax Appeals)
and procedure in all courts, the admission 11. RA 9054 (Sharia’h Courts)
to the practice of law, the Integrated Bar, 12. RA 11054 (Bangsamoro Basic Law,
and legal assistance to the underprivileged. July 2018)
Such rules shall provide a simplified and 13. A.M. No. 15-06-10-SC (Continuous
inexpensive procedure for the speedy trial of criminal cases)
disposition of cases, shall be uniform for all
courts of the same grade, and shall not ii. Over the Persons of the Parties
diminish, increase, or modify substantive Kinds of Parties in Civil Cases:

7
 HMDM NOTES 2022, ATTY. BRONDIAL.
XPN: When criminal complaint is filed and
1. A – Plaintiff the civil aspect is deemed instituted with
> Jurisdiction is acquired by: it, you may be required to pay docket fees.
a. Filing of the complaint (Rule 111)
b. Timely payment of the correct
docket fees. Note: In criminal cases, the plaintiff,
Note: Payment of docket which is the Republic of the Philippine, is
fees is not only mandatory not bound to pay docket fee. Although
but also jurisdictional. there are exception in Rule 111 and Rule
112, like BP 22 wherein there is a docket
2. B – Defendant fee, and when you include in your
> Jurisdiction is acquired by: criminal complaint claims for damages
a. Valid service of summons OR then you are bound to pay docket fee.
b. Voluntary appearance (Sec. 20, Rule
14) The difference in criminal cases, even
though you did not pay the docket fee, it
3. C - Co-defendant is not jurisdictional. Because the docket
> Jurisdiction is acquired by: fees in criminal cases if so required is a
a. Valid service of summons OR first lien on the judgment.
b. Voluntary appearance (Rule 14)

4. D -3rd, 4th, etc – party defendant 2. Accused

> Jurisdiction is acquired by: > Jurisdiction is acquired by:
a. Valid service of summons OR a. Lawful arrest OR
b. Voluntary appearance (Rule 14) b. Voluntary surrender

5. E- Intervenor
> Jurisdiction is acquired upon approval of Kind of Parties in Special Proceedings
the court of the motion for leave to 1. Party-petitioner
intervene (Sec. 1, Rule 19) > Jurisdiction is acquired after complying
>may either be a plaintiff or defendant. with publication requirements.

Kind of Parties in Criminal Cases: In line with this, an affidavit of the publisher
and the clippings of the publication must be
1. Plaintiff (Republic of the Philippines) submitted.

Q: Should the court acquire jurisdiction 2. Respondent, if there are oppositors that are
over the person of the plaintiff in needed to be impleaded
criminal cases?
A: No, because it is the Republic of the iii. Over the Res
Philippines who instituted the case, there “res” – thing which is the object of the action
is no need for the court to acquire Object of the action is not always a property,
jurisdiction. They are the same party, it can be a right or status.
different branch only.

GR: not required to pay docket fees

8
 HMDM NOTES 2022, ATTY. BRONDIAL.
The court need not acquire jurisdiction over
the res, as long as it has jurisdiction over the Once those properties are attached, even if
person of the defendant the court does not acquire the jurisdiction
of B, the case can still continue provided
However, in actions strictly in personam, if that the court acquires jurisdiction over the
the court cannot acquire jurisdiction over the res.
defendant and if no valid service of summons
can be done upon the defendant, the case can In this case, the judgment can only be
still continue by acquiring jurisdiction over satisfied by the res. The court cannot go
the res. beyond the res.

• The court acquires a jurisdiction over When the 1M property attached pursuant
the res by converting an action in to the writ of attachment was sold for only
personam to an action quasi in rem 500k, the deficiency of 500k can no longer
(done by the provisional remedy of be claimed by the defendant because the
attachment under Rule 57) court has no jurisdiction over the person of
the defendant and it cannot claim beyond
the res.
Q: Is it necessary for the court to acquire
jurisdiction over the res?
A: In action in personam, as a general rule,
no, as jurisdiction over the person would
suffice. REAL or PERSONAL ACTION- refers to the
object of an action.
However, as an exception, if the court cannot
acquire jurisdiction over the person of the Real action- actions affecting title or
defendant or no valid service of summons can possession of real property
be done, jurisdiction over the res is required Personal action- personal property is
in order for the court to take the case. sought to be recovered or where
damages for breach of contract are
Note: If the court was able to acquire sought; basically, all other actions
jurisdiction over the property of the which are not real
defendant, the only limitation is that you can
execute a judgment only against the res. IN PERSONAM or IN REM- refers to the effect
of the action.
Ex: A files a case against B for a collection In rem- binds the whole world
of a sum of money amounting to 1M. The In personam- binds only the defendant
case cannot prosper if the court did not
acquire jurisdiction of B, the defendant. Example: Annulment of marriage- Personal
action and in rem. The decision will bind the
If the court in this case cannot acquire whole world, but it only affects the marriage
jurisdiction over the person of B because of the person party to the case.
his whereabouts are unknown, then
convert the action in personam to quasi iv. Over the Issues
in rem and attach all the known properties
of B in the Philippines through a writ of Jurisdiction over the issues is determined by
preliminary attachment. the allegations in the pleadings. Those that

9
 HMDM NOTES 2022, ATTY. BRONDIAL.
are not alleged in the pleadings, the court has A: It is inherent, because in the very right to
no jurisdiction over such issues. Therefore, be informed of the nature and cause of
no evidence can be presented to the support accusation against him, everything must be
that issue over which the court has no given to the accused. If the qualifying
jurisdiction. circumstances of relationship or minority is
not included in the information, the court
Q: Is it necessary for the court the acquire cannot use minority or relationship in the
jurisdiction over the issues? resolution in rendition of judgment, because
A: Yes, as without any allegation thereof, the it is not included in the information.
court cannot rule upon it.
In line with Rules on Evidence, no proof Q: How is jurisdiction over the issues
would be necessary as to those NOT alleged, acquired in criminal actions?
as the court never acquired jurisdiction to try A: It is via the arraignment, specifically in the
such. information or complaint-affidavit.
Thus, if circumstances are not alleged in the
EXAMPLE: information, the court cannot appreciate
If Mr. A filed a complaint and in his complaint, those circumstances to mitigate, exempt, or
he never alleged that he sent demand letters aggravate liability.
to B before filing the action, and during the
trial A presented the demand letter, that is Q: If the information does not include the
assailable/ objectionable. Because it was qualifying circumstance of relationship
never alleged in the pleading, the court did but during the trial, the presentation of
not acquire jurisdiction over the issue of evidence by the prosecution established
demand and demand letter. Hence the that the victim was the 16 yrs. old
demand letters cannot be raised in the course daughter of the accused, but the judge
of trial. (But this is not applicable now, rendered a judgment imposing the penalty
because under the new rules [Sec. 6, Rule 7] for simple rape not qualified rape. Was the
the pleading does not only consist of ultimate judgment correct?
facts, but it will include evidentiary matters.) A: Yes, because the qualifying circumstance of
relationship was not included in the
Q: Is jurisdiction over the issues information, despite being established by
applicable in criminal cases? evidence in the course of trial, take note that
A: Yes, the court acquired jurisdiction over one of the rights of the accused is to be
the issues in criminal cases upon arraignment informed of the nature and cause of the
(Sec. 1, Rule 116), when the accused is accusation against him.
informed of the nature and cause of the
accusation against him. v. Over the Territory

Q: Under Rule 116, arraignment is only for • Applies only in criminal cases, because
the purpose of complying the requirement in civil cases territory is not a matter
of the constitutional provision that the of jurisdiction but a matter of venue.
accused shall be informed of the nature Q: In criminal cases, venue is
and cause of accusation against him. jurisdictional. In civil cases, venue is not
Where do you based the answer that in jurisdictional. Why?
arraignment the court acquire jurisdiction
over the issues?

10
 HMDM NOTES 2022, ATTY. BRONDIAL.
A: Because venue in criminal cases is 3. Issues
conferred by law, you cannot file a case o It is the power of the court to try and
outside where the crime was committed. decide the issues raised in the
pleadings of the parties
(See Rule 4 notes) o An issue is a disputed point or
question to which parties to an action
ELEMENTS OF JURISDICTION have narrowed down their several
allegations and upon which they are
1. Subject matter desirous of obtaining a decision.
o It is the power to hear and determine o It is conferred and determined by:
cases of the general class to which the ▪ The pleadings of the plaintiff
proceedings in question belong.
which present the facts that is
o It is a matter of substantive law and as
the subject matter of the
such, it is conferred by law and is not complaint.
covered by the Rules of Court. ▪ The defendant’s specific denial
o Thus, it cannot be: of such allegations.
▪ Conferred by agreement of the ▪ In pre-trial, they narrow down
parties the issues to be heard.
▪ Acquired, waived, enlarged, or
diminished by any act of the
parties JURISDICTION OF REGULAR COURTS
▪ EXPN: Tijam Case *refer to badj notes and court jurisdiction
The SC barred a belated 2 pdf*
objection to jurisdiction that Supreme Court
was raised by the party when Petitions for certiorari, prohibition, and
an adverse decision was mandamus against appellate courts,
rendered by the lower court namely:
against it, and only 15 years 1. CA
after seeking affirmative relief 2. COMELEC en banc
from the court and actively 3. COA
participating in all stages of the 4. SB
proceedings. 5. CTA en banc
6. Shari’a Appelate Courts
2. Parties
7. Ombudsman in criminal and non-
o Refers to the power of the court to administrative disciplinary cases
make decisions that are binding on
persons. Also called “jurisdiction in Court of Appeals
personam.” Actions for annulment of judgments of the
o It is an element of due process that is RTC on the grounds of extrinsic fraud and
essential in all actions, except in rem lack of jurisdiction.
or quasi rem.
o Kinds: Regional Trial Court
▪ Over the plaintiff
▪ Over the defendant 1) In all civil actions in which the subject of
the litigation is incapable of pecuniary

11
 HMDM NOTES 2022, ATTY. BRONDIAL.
estimation; Take note: Not applicable in the new
rules anymore!!! Because of the
Note: amendment under R7, S6 contents
of pleadings – pleadings now not
First Sarmiento Property only constitute ultimate facts but
Holdings, Inc. vs. Phil Bank of also includes evidence.
Communications, June 19, 2018,
Justice Leonen, en banc 2) Actions involving title to or possession of
real property, or any interest therein. The
>Obiter: To determine action threshold value now is more than (assessed
incapable of pecuniary estimation, value) 400K (In R.A. 11576: no more
you only look at the allegation. This distinction, whether outside or inside
is because the court has not metro manila.)
examined the evidence yet, as it is to
be presented during the trial. Not 3) Admiralty and maritime cases where the
applicable under the new rules demand or claim exceeds 2M.
anymore – because under the
amended rules, the very evidence 4) In all other cases of probate, both testate
already forms part of the contents of and intestate where the gross value of the
the pleading. estate exceeds 2M pesos.

> Overturned the old doctrine in 5) Money claims: exceeding 2M exclusive of

Home Guarantee Case – it amounts interest, damages of any kind, attorney’s
to action capable of pecuniary fees, litigation expenses and costs. (But if
estimation because there is recovery the principal action is for damages, you
of property even if the prayer does cannot apply the exclusion of damages.)
not call for money per se but when
you seek to recover property then Note: However, prior decisions of
the value of the property will the courts following the previous
determine jurisdiction. thresholds are still valid because of
> In eo, no prayer for recovery as the concept of immutability of
property is still with them.??? judgment.

New nature of an action incapable of Ex: Suppose, the RTC has decides
pecuniary estimation - Leonen said that the case is dismissed for lack of
that in order to determine whether jurisdiction and it is on appeal for
action is capable of pecuniary lack of jurisdiction, the appeal
estimation, we only need to look continues, you don’t apply RA 11576
into the allegations in the pleadings; because there is already a vested
not to the evidence because interest to the obligee.
evidence is submitted during trial.
The determinant would simply be 6) Cases not within the exclusive
the allegations in the pleading. jurisdiction of any court, tribunal, person or
body exercising judicial or quasi-judicial

12
 HMDM NOTES 2022, ATTY. BRONDIAL.
functions. (General Jurisdiction) Trademark or Service Mark, Fraudulent
Designation of Origin, and False Description),
Q: Over what cases that the RTC has Presidential Degree No. 49 (Protection of
original exclusive jurisdiction? Intellectual Property Rights), Presidential
A: (1) All actions which are incapable of Degree No. 87 (An Act Creating-the
Videogram Regulatory Board), Republic Act
pecuniary estimation; (2) Actions for sum of
No. 165 "as amended (The Patent Law), and
money exceeding 2M; (see enumeration
Republic Act 166 as amended' (The
above) Trademark Law) committed within their
respective territorial areas
Q: An action was filed for sum of money for
failure to comply with promissory notes. RA 8293: Intellectual Property Code of the
Specifying in the complaint that the 2.1M Philippines
is distributed as follows:
1.5M- principal Section 163. Jurisdiction of Court. - All
300K- interest actions under Sections 150, 155, 164, and 166
200K- damages to 169 shall be brought before the proper
100k- attys fees courts with appropriate jurisdiction under
The complaint was based on failure to existing laws.
comply with the promissory notes.
- Section 150 - License Contracts
Which court has jurisdiction?
- Section 155 - Remedies for
A: The RTC, because the action was based on Infringement of registered mark
breach of contract. And breach is incapable of - Section 164 - Notice of Filing Suit
pecuniary estimation. Given to the Director
- Section 166 - Goods Bearing
a. Intellectual Property Courts Infringing Marks or Trade Names
- Section 167 - Collective Marks
SC-AO No. 113-95: Re: Designation of Special - Section 168 - Unfair Competition,
Courts For Intellectual Property Rights Rights, Regulation and Remedies
(October 02, 1995) - Section 169 - False Designations of
Origin; False Description or
In the interest of an efficient administration Representation.
of justice and to ensure speedy disposition of
cases involving violation of Intellectual RA 166
Property Rights, the following Branches of the
Regional Trial Courts, Metropolitan Trial Section 27. Jurisdiction of Court of First
Courts and Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, Instance. - All actions under this Chapter and
presently presided over by their respective Chapters VI and VII hereof shall be brought
trial judges as herein below indicated, are before the proper Court of First Instance.
hereby specially designated to try and decide
cases for violations of Intellectual Property AM No. 10-3-10-SC: 2020 Revised Rules of
Rights such as, but riot limited to, violations Procedure for Intellectual Property Rights
of Art. 188 of the Revised Penal Code Cases (Effectivity date: November 16, 2020)
(Substituting and Altering Trademarks, Trade
Names, or Service Marks), Art. 189 of the Rule 1, Sec 2 : These Rules shall be observed
Revised Penal Code (Unfair Competition, by the RTC designated by the Supreme Court
Fraudulent Registration of Trade Name, as Special Commercial Courts.
13
 HMDM NOTES 2022, ATTY. BRONDIAL.

Rule 1, Sec 3: These Rules shall apply to all Family Courts

cases involving Intellectual Property Rights.
Family Courts have exclusive original
When the court determines that the civil or jurisdiction over:
criminal action involved several intertwined
issues, it shall issue a special order that the 1. Petitions for guardianship (if the ground
regular procedure prescribed in the Rules of is minority – family court; if the ground is
Court shall apply, stating the reason therefor. incompetency- RTC; if incompetent minor -
family court), custody of children, habeas
Where applicable, the Rules of Court shall corpus involving children; (children lang)
apply suppletorily to proceedings under these
Rules. 2. Petitions for adoption of children and the
revocation thereof;
Rule 2, Sec 1: Scope: Rules 2 to 9 shall apply
to all civil actions for violations of intellectual 3. Complaints for annulment of marriage,
property rights provided for in Republic Act declaration of nullity of marriage, and those
No. 8293 or the Intellectual Property Code, as relating to status and property relations of
amended, including Repetition of husband and wife or those living together
Infringement of Patent (Section 84), Utility under different status or agreement, and
Model (Section 108) and Industrial Design petitions for dissolution of conjugal
and Layout of Integrated Circuits (Section partnership of gains;
119), Trademark Infringement (Section 155
in relation to Section 170), Unfair 4. Petitions for Support and/or
Competition (Section 168 in relation to acknowledgment;
Section 170), False Designations of Origin;
False Description or Representation (Section 5. Summary judicial proceedings brought
169.1 in relation to Section 170), under the provisions of the Family Code;
infringement of copyright, moral rights, and
performers' rights, producers' rights, and
broadcasting rights (Section 177, 193, 203, 6. Petition for declaration of status of
208 and 211 in relation to Section 216), children as abandoned, dependent or
Infringement of Plant Variety Protection neglected children, petitions for voluntary
under Republic Act No. 9168 or the Plant or involuntary commitment of children, the
Variety Protection Act Section 47), and other suspension, termination, or restoration of
violations of intellectual property rights as parental authority and other cases
may be defined by law. cognizable under P.D. No.. 603, E.O. No. 56
(1996), and other related laws.

Special Courts Note: The provisions of R.A. No. 8369 reveal

no manifest intent to revoke the
SC may designate certain branches of RTC to jurisdiction
try exclusively criminal cases, juvenile and of the Court of Appeals and Supreme Court
domestic relations cases, agrarian cases, to issue writs of habeas corpus relating to
urban land reform cases not falling within the the custody of minors. Further, it cannot be
jurisdiction of any quasi-judicial body and said that the provisions of R.A. No. 8369,
other special cases in the interest of justice. R.A.

14
 HMDM NOTES 2022, ATTY. BRONDIAL.
No. 7092 (An Act Expanding the Jurisdiction
of the Court of Appeals) and B.P. Blg. 129 Note: When a minor is a party in a case, then
(The it is under the exclusive jurisdiction of Family
Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980) are Court.
absolutely incompatible since R.A. No. 8369
does not prohibit the Court of Appeals and Q: Minor principal witness in a rape case,
the Supreme Court from issuing writs of
who has jurisdiction?
habeas corpus in cases involving the
A: in criminal cases, the principal witness is
custody of minors. Thus, the provisions of
R.A. No. 8369 must be read in harmony not a party in a case. The jurisdiction is with
with R.A. No. 7029 and B.P. Blg. 129 – that the RTC, because the minor is not a party to
family courts have concurrent jurisdiction the case.
with the Court of Appeals and the Supreme
Court in Take note of Support as a principal action, not
petitions for habeas corpus where the a provisional remedy under Rule 61.
custody of minors is at issue (Thornton v.
Thornton, G.R. No. 154598, August 16, MTC
2004).

Special Provisional Remedies: Metropolitan Trial In each

Court metropolitan area
1. In cases of violence among the family
established by law
members living in the same domicile or
household, the Family Court may issue a particularly Metro
restraining order against the accused or Manila
defendant upon verified application by the
complainant or the victim for relief from Municipal Trial In every city NOT
abuse. Courts in Cities part of a
metropolitan area
2. The court may order the temporary
custody of children in all civil actions for Municipal Circuit In each circuit
their custody. The court may also order Trial Court comprising such
support pendente lite, including deduction cities and
from the salary, and use of conjugal home
municipalities
and other properties in all civil actions for
grouped together
support.
pursuant to law
Note: In areas where there are no Family
Courts, the abovementioned cases shall be Municipal Trial In municipalities
adjudicated by the RTC Court not comprised
 RTC is not the same with Family within a
Courts. metropolitan area
 Family courts are creation of law. and a municipal
Meanwhile, Intellectual property circuit
courts and criminal courts are creation
of SC Circulars and in any point in
time, the SC can change them. MTC Jurisdiction:

15
 HMDM NOTES 2022, ATTY. BRONDIAL.
1. Actions involving personal property: not B. RA 1379 Forfeiture of Illegally
exceeding 2M Acquired Wealth
C. Articles 210-212 of the RPC
2. Actions demanding sum of money: 2M (Direct Bribery, Indirect Bribery,
Qualified Bribery, and
3. Admiralty and maritime cases: less than Corruption of Public Officials)
or equal to 2M
2. Other offenses or felonies committed by
4. Probate proceedings, testate or intestate:
less than or equal to 2M public officials mentioned above in relation
to their office;
5. Actions involving title or possession of
real property: Assessed value should not 3. Civil and criminal cases filed pursuant to
exceed 400K and in connection with Executive Order
Nos. 1, 2, 14, and 14-A series of 1986 (PCGG
6. Forcible entry and unlawful detainer; Cases); and
with jurisdiction to resolve the issue of
ownership to determine issue of 4. Petitions for the issuance of the writs of
possession. mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, habeas
(1:44:00) corpus injunctions and other ancillary writs
and processes in aid of its appellate
7. Provisional remedies in principal actions
jurisdiction
within their jurisdiction (preliminary
attachment, preliminary injunction, etc.)
Note: One of the principally accused
8. Inclusion and exclusion of voters. [Sec. officials must be a government official
49, Omnibus Election Code] classified as grade 27 or higher, a member
of the congress, a member of the judiciary,
9. Small claims cases or a chairman of the constitutional
commissions OR those that are specifically
Note: Money claims under summary mentioned in the law.
procedure = 2M and below

Small claims = 1M and below

Brondi: Don’t call them inferior courts, call
them lower courts. Hannah Serana vs. Sandiganbayan,
653 SCRA (2011)
Under RA 7691 and RA 11576, MTC governs
3 procedures: It is not only the salary grade that
1. Ordinary civil action, determines the jurisdiction of the
2. small claims and Sandiganbayan. The Sandiganbayan also
3. summary procedures. has jurisdiction over other officers
enumerated in P.D. No. 1606. In
Sandiganbayan Geduspan v. People, 451 SCRA 187 (2005),
1. Cases involving violations of: (GFB) The Court held that while the first part
A. Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices of Section 4(A) covers only officials with
Act Salary Grade 27 and higher, its second

16
 HMDM NOTES 2022, ATTY. BRONDIAL.
part specifically includes other relation thereto, or other matters arising
executive officials whose positions may under the NIRC
not be of Salary Grade 27 and higher but
who are by express provision of law 2. Inaction by the Commissioner Internal
placed under the jurisdiction of the said Revenue in cases involving disputed
court. Petitioner falls under the jurisdiction assessments, refunds of internal revenue
of the Sandiganbayan as she is placed there taxes, fees or other charges, penalties in
by express provision of law. Section 4(A)(1) relation thereto, or other matters arising
(g) of P.D. No. 1606 explictly vested the under the NIRC or other laws administered
Sandiganbayan with jurisdiction over by the BIR, where the NIRC provides a
Presidents, directors or trustees, or specific period of action, in which case the
managers of government-owned or inaction shall be deemed a denial.
controlled corporations, state universities
or educational institutions or foundations. 3. Decisions, orders or resolutions of
Regional Trial Courts in local tax cases
originally decided or resolved by them in
Duncano vs. Sandiganbayan, 762 SCRA the exercise of their original and appellate
(2015) jurisdiction.

Those that fall within the original 4. Decisions of the Commissioner of

jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan are: Customs in cases involving liability for
(1) officials of the executive branch with customs duties, fees, or other money
Salary Grade 27 or higher, and (2) charges; seizure, detention or release of
officials specifically enumerated in property affected; fines, forfeitures, or
Section 4 (A) (1) (a) to (g), regardless of other matters arising penalties imposed in
their salary grades. While the first part of
relation thereto; and other matters arising
Section 4 (A) covers only officials of the
under the Customs Law
executive branch with Salary Grade 27 and
higher, its second part specifically includes
other executive officials whose positions 5. Decisions of the Central Board Of
may not be of Salary Grade 27 and higher Assessment Appeals in the exercise of its
but who are by express provision of law appellate jurisdiction over cases involving
placed under the jurisdiction of the the assessment and taxation of real
Sandiganbayan. property originally decided by the
provincial or city board of assessment
Petitioner is not an executive official with appeals.
Salary Grade 27 or higher. Neither does he
hold any position particularly enumerated 6. Decisions of the Secretary of Finance on
in Section 4 (A) (1) (a) to (g). customs cases elevated to him/her
automatically for review from decisions of
the Commissioner of Customs which are
Court of Tax Appeals
adverse to the Government under Section
1. Decisions of the Commissioner of 2315 of the Tariff and Customs Code.
Internal Revenue in cases involving
disputed assessments, refunds of taxes, fees Decisions of the SECRETARY OF
or other charges, penalties imposed in
17
 HMDM NOTES 2022, ATTY. BRONDIAL.
TRADE AND INDUSTRY in the case
of non-agricultural product, Based on the foregoing disquisitions, it can
commodity or article; and Decisions be reasonably concluded that the
of the SECRETARY OF authority of the CTA to take cognizance
of petitions for certiorari questioning
AGRICULTUREin the case of
interlocutory orders issued by the RTC
agricultural product, commodity or
in a local tax case is included in the
article involving dumping and powers granted by the Constitution as
countervailing duties under Sections well as inherent in the exercise of its
301 and 302, respectively, of the appellate jurisdiction.
Tariff and Customs Code and
safeguard measures under the RA
8800, where either party may CE Casecnan Water & Energy Co. vs. Prov.
appeal the decision to impose or not Of Nueva Ecija 759 CRA 180
to impose said duties.

It is the CTA which has exclusive

jurisdiction over a special civil action for
City of Manila vs. Judge Cuerdo, February
certiorari assailing an interlocutory
4, 2014
order issued by the RTC in a local tax
case.
The CTA has jurisdiction over a special The jurisdiction of CTA was expanded
civil action for certiorari assailing an and its rank elevated to that of a
interlocutory order issued by the RTC in collegiate court with special jurisdiction
a local tax case. In order for any by virtue of Republic Act No. 9282. This
appellate court to effectively exercise its expanded jurisdiction of the CTA
appellate jurisdiction, it must have the includes its exclusive appellate
authority to issue, among others, a writ jurisdiction to review by appeal the
of certiorari. In transferring exclusive decisions, orders or resolutions of the
jurisdiction over appealed tax cases to the RTC in local tax cases originally decided
CTA, it can reasonably be assumed that the or resolved by the RTC in the exercise of
law intended to transfer also such power as its original or appellate jurisdiction.
is deemed necessary, if not indispensable,
in aid of such appellate jurisdiction. There If this Court were to sustain petitioners'
is no perceivable reason why the transfer contention that jurisdiction over their
should only be considered as partial, not certiorari petition lies with the CA, this
Court would be confirming the exercise by
total.
two judicial bodies, the CA and the CTA, of
Section 1 of RA 9282 states that the CTA jurisdiction over basically the same
shall be of the same level as the CA and subject matter - precisely the split-
shall possess all the inherent powers of jurisdiction situation which is anathema
a court of justice. Indeed, courts possess to the orderly administration of justice.
certain inherent powers which may be said The Court cannot accept that such was the
to be implied from a general grant of legislative motive, especially considering
jurisdiction, in addition to those expressly that the law expressly confers on the CTA,
conferred on them. the tribunal with the specialized
competence over tax and tariff matters, the
role of judicial review over local tax cases
18
 HMDM NOTES 2022, ATTY. BRONDIAL.
without mention of any other court that xiv. Employees Compensation
may exercise such power. Thus, the Court Commission,
agrees with the ruling of the CA that xv. Agricultural Invention Board,
since appellate jurisdiction over private xvi. Insurance Commission,
respondents' complaint for tax refund is xvii. Philippine Atomic Energy
vested in the CTA, it follows that a Commission,
petition for certiorari seeking
xviii. Board of Investments,
nullification of an interlocutory order
xix. Construction Industry
issued in the said case should, likewise,
be filed with the same court. To rule Arbitration Commission, and
otherwise would lead to an absurd xx. voluntary arbitrators authorized
situation where one court decides an by law. (n)
appeal in the main case while another court
rules on an incident in the very same case.
Sharia’h Courts: appellate, district, circuit

Quasi-Judicial Tribunals Shari’a courts were created under Art 137 of

Rule 43, Section 1. Scope. — This Rule PD 1083 (February 4, 1977).
shall apply to appeals from judgments or
final orders of the Court of Tax Appeals and Shari’a District Courts
from awards, judgments, final orders or 1. All cases involving custody,
resolutions of or authorized by any quasi- guardianship, legitimacy, paternity and
judicial agency in the exercise of its quasi- filiation arising under the Code of
judicial functions. Among these agencies Muslim Personal Laws;
are the:
i. Civil Service Commission, 2. All cases involving disposition,
distribution and settlement of the estate
ii. Central Board of Assessment
of the deceased Muslims, probate of
Appeals,
wills, issuance of letters of
iii. Securities and Exchange administration or appointment of
Commission, administrators or executors regardless
iv. Office of the President, of the nature or the aggregate value of
v. Land Registration Authority, the property;
vi. Social Security Commission,
vii. Civil Aeronautics Board, 3. Petitions for the declaration of absence
viii. Bureau of Patents, Trademarks and death and for the cancellation or
and Technology Transfer, correction of entries in the Muslim
ix. National Electrification Registries mentioned in Title VI of the
Administration, Book Two of the Code;
x. Energy Regulatory Board,
4. All actions arising from the customary
xi. National Telecommunications
contracts in which the parties are
Commission,
Muslims, if they have not specified
xii. Department of Agrarian Reform which law shall govern their relations;
under Republic Act No. 6657, and
xiii. Government Service Insurance
System, 5. All petitions for mandamus, prohibition,

19
 HMDM NOTES 2022, ATTY. BRONDIAL.
injunction, certiorari, habeas corpus, Municipality of Tangkal vs. Balindong,
and all other auxiliary writs and 814 SCRA (2017)
processes in aid of its appellate
jurisdiction. Shari' a district courts original jurisdiction
(P.D. No. 1083, Sec. 143, par. (1)). over personal and real actions except those
for forcible entry and unlawful detainer.
The Shari'a district courts' jurisdiction over
Shari’a Circuit Courts these matters is concurrent with regular
1. Offenses defined and punished under civil courts, i.e., municipal trial courts and
P.D. No. 1083 (or the Code of Muslim regional trial courts. There is, however, a
limit to the general jurisdiction of Shari'a
Personal Laws of the Philippines);
district courts over matters ordinarily
cognizable by regular courts: such
2. All civil actions between parties who jurisdiction may only be invoked if both
are Muslims or have been married in parties are Muslims. If one party is not a
accordance with P.D. No. 1083, relating Muslim, the action must be filed before the
to: regular courts.
a. Marriage
b. Divorce When Article 143(2)(b) qualifies the
c. Betrothal or breach of contract conferment of jurisdiction to actions
to marry "wherein the parties involved are
d. Customary dower (mahr) Muslims," the word "parties" necessarily
e. Disposition and distribution of refers to the real parties in interest.
property upon divorce Section 2 of Rule 3 of the Rules of Court
defines real parties in interest as those who
f. Maintenance and support and
stand to be benefited or injured by the
consolatory gifts (mut’s); and
judgment in the suit, or are entitled to the
g. Restitution of marital rights; and avails of the suit. In this case, the parties
who will be directly benefited or injured
3. Disputes relative to communal are the private respondents (HEIRS OF
properties (P.D. No. 1083, Art. 155). THE LATE MACALABO ALOMPO) as real
party plaintiffs, and the Municipality of
Tangkal, as the real party defendant.
Lomondot vs. Balindong, 762 SCRA 494
It is clear from the title and the averments
In Tomawis v. Hon. Balindong, we stated in the complaint that Mayor Batingolo was
that the SAC has yet to be organized with impleaded only in a representative
the appointment of a Presiding Justice and capacity, as chief executive of the local
two Associate Justices. Until such time government of Tangkal. When an action is
that the SAC shall have been organized, defended by a representative, that
appeals or petitions from final orders or representative is not-and neither does
decisions of the SDC filed with the CA he become-a real party in interest. The
shall be referred to a Special Division to person represented is deemed the real
be organized in any of the CA stations party in interest; the representative
preferably composed of Muslim CA remains to be a third party to the action.
Justices. That Mayor Batingolo is a Muslim is
therefore irrelevant for purposes of
complying with the jurisdictional
20
 HMDM NOTES 2022, ATTY. BRONDIAL.
requirement under Article 143(2)(b) that Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial
both parties be Muslims. To satisfy the Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts
requirement, it is the real party defendant, may be assigned by the Supreme Court to
the Municipality of Tangkal, who must be a hear and determine cadastral or land
Muslim. Such a proposition, however, is a registration cases covering lots where
legal impossibility. there is no controversy or opposition, or
contested lots the where the value of which
does not exceed One hundred thousand
Military Courts. Articles of War pesos (P100,000.00), such value to be
Office of the Ombudsman vs. Mislang, 883 ascertained by the affidavit of the claimant
SCRA, Oct. 15, 2018 or by agreement of the respective claimants
if there are more than one, or from the
The Ombudsman and the General Court corresponding tax declaration of the real
Martial of the AFP have concurring or property. Their decisions in these cases
coordinate jurisdiction over administrative shall be appealable in the same manner as
disciplinary cases involving erring military decisions of the Regional Trial Courts. (as
personnel, particularly over violations of amended by R.A. No. 7691)
the Articles of War that are service-
connected. SC clarified that court-martial Jurisdiction of the inferior (lower) courts to
is a court, and the prosecution of an take cognizance of cases involving land
accused before it is a criminal and not registration and cadastral cases regardless
an administrative case. of value if the case is uncontested, or if
contested, Provided that:
Military law is sui generis, applicable only (1) the value of the lots should not
to military personnel because the military exceed, P100,000 (assessed value; not
organization dictate that military personnel market) and
must be subjected to a separate (2) there are no oppositors.
disciplinary system not applicable to
unarmed civilians or unarmed government Q: If a court exercising delegated
personnel. As such, court-martial jurisdiction renders judgment, where do
proceedings contemplate both the penal you file an appeal?
and administrative nature of military A: Appeal to the CA because the MTC here is
justice. In administrative cases involving precisely exercising the jurisdiction of the
the concurrent jurisdiction of 2 or more RTC.
disciplining authorities, the body in which
the complaint is filed first, and which It is a peculiar instance where an appeal may
opts to take cognizance of the case, be brought from the MTC immediately to the
acquires jurisdiction to the exclusion of CA.
other tribunals exercising concurrent
jurisdiction. 2. Special Jurisdiction
Sec. 35, BP 129. Special jurisdiction in
certain cases. – In the absence of all the
KINDS OF JURISDICTION Regional Trial Judges in a province or city,
any Metropolitan Trial Judge, Municipal
1. Delegated Jurisdiction Trial Judge, Municipal Circuit Trial Judge
Sec. 34, BP 129. Delegated jurisdiction in may hear and decide petitions for a writ of
cadastral and land registration cases. – habeas corpus or applications for bail in
criminal cases in the province or city where
21
 HMDM NOTES 2022, ATTY. BRONDIAL.
the absent Regional Trial Judges sit. limited jurisdiction and can only take
cognizance of the allowance or disallowance
• Exercised by lower courts whose of the will is not deprived after rendering a
jurisdiction extends only to particular or resolution allowing or disallowing a will
specified cases; those which have a special because the probate is only part of settlement
jurisdiction only for a particular purpose or of the estate. Settlement of the estate is not
are clothed with special powers for the limited to the probate.
performance of specified duties beyond
which they have no authority of any kind. When there is a will, it is mandated that you
have first to probate the will as a starting
Example: The jurisdiction of the lower court point of the settlement of the estate. But it
in handling petitions for bail or petitions for does not mean that after allowing or
habeas corpus in the absence of RTC judges. disallowing the will, the court that allowed or
disallowed it loses jurisdiction over the
Condition: Can only be exercised in the settlement of the estate. It continues.
absence of RTC judges.
4. Primary Jurisdiction
3. Limited Jurisdiction The doctrine of primary jurisdiction holds
The jurisdiction of the court that can only that if a case is such that its determination
resolve certain issues or can handle only requires the expertise, specialized training
specific subject matters. and knowledge of the proper administrative
bodies, relief must first be obtained in an
Example: administrative proceeding before a
(1) MTC handling unlawful detainer and remedy is supplied by the courts even if the
forcible entry cases. matter may well be within their proper
jurisdiction.
The MTC taking cognizance of an unlawful
detainer or forcible entry case under Rule 70. Brondi: Jurisdiction of quasi-judicial tribunal
The issue is limited only to possession of in taking cognizance of cases in compliance
property. But it is very clear from rule 70, with the principle of exhaustion of
particularly section 60 of the rule, that when administrative remedies. They don't form
the issue of ownership is raised in the part of the Judicial Branch of the Government,
pleading, the court is NOT divested with ordinarily they form part of the Executive
jurisdiction but must resolve the issue of Branch of the government but they exercise
ownership solely for the purpose of resolving quasi-judicial function.
the issue of possession. Kaya tinatawag din
yang limited jurisdiction. Note: RULE 43 lahat na mention dian sila ang
quasi- judicial the office of the government
(2) RTC taking cognizance of a petition for
probate of a will. Section 1, Rule 43. Scope. — This Rule
shall apply to appeals from judgments or
The Probate court can only resolve the issue final orders of the Court of Tax Appeals and
of the extrinsic validity of the will and nothing from awards, judgments, final orders or
else. resolutions of or authorized by any quasi-
judicial agency in the exercise of its quasi-
The probate court exercises limited judicial functions. Among these agencies
jurisdiction but do not be confused with the are the Civil Service Commission, Central
probate court because this court which has Board of Assessment Appeals, Securities
22
 HMDM NOTES 2022, ATTY. BRONDIAL.
and Exchange Commission, Office of the the doctrine of primary jurisdiction, the office of the
President, Land Registration Authority, ombudsman has the right over anybody to conduct
preliminary investigation in all cases cognizable by the
Social Security Commission, Civil Sandiganbayan in the exercise of its original
Aeronautics Board, Bureau of Patents, jurisdiction.
Trademarks and Technology Transfer,
National Electrification Administration, In Sanchez v. Demetrio: where should the Preliminary
Energy Regulatory Board, National Investigation be conducted.
Sanchez alleged that it must be the ombudsman, and
Telecommunications Commission, the case is cognizable by the Sandiganbayan because
Department of Agrarian Reform under he is a mayor.
Republic Act No. 6657, Government Service The SC ruled that the DOJ and ombudsman have
Insurance System, Employees concurrent jurisdiction in conducting preliminary
Compensation Commission, Agricultural investigation.
Invention Board, Insurance Commission, Brondi: But when this Guerrero case came, a new
Philippine Atomic Energy Commission, concept of primary jurisdiction stood out. Hence, in the
Board of Investments, Construction exercise of primary jurisdiction, even if the
Industry Arbitration Commission, and DOJ/Fiscal’s Office is already conducting preliminary
voluntary arbitrators authorized by law. (n) investigation, the office of the ombudsman can take it
from the DOJ and proceed and conduct the preliminary
investigation.
Brondi: Enumeration is not exhaustive,
marami pang wala dyan. However, if what is to be investigated is cognizable by
the Sandiganbayan in its appellate jurisdiction, then
the preliminary investigation is still concurrent with
*LBP v. Dalauta – might be in the bar.*
the DOJ and the Office of the Ombudsman.

Original Jurisdiction of Sandiganbayan

New Concept of Primary Jurisdiction
Jurisdiction of the Office of the Ombudsman Q: How do you determine its original
to conduct preliminary investigation in all jurisdiction?
cases cognizable by the Sandiganbayan in the A: Original and exclusive jurisdiction under
exercise of its original jurisdiction. (De Lima the ff. guidelines:
v. Guerrero, G.R. No. 229781, October 10, a. what offense or crime was committed
2017) a) R.A. 3019 – Anti Graft and Corrupt
Practices Act
Sandiganbayan has original and appellate b) R.A. 1379 – the law on Ill-gotten
jurisdiction in criminal cases. If the crime Wealth
committed is cognizable by the c.) Chap. II, Title VII, Bk. 2 of RPC –
Sandiganbayan exercising original Bribery
jurisdiction, then the Preliminary d) Exec. Orders 1, 2, 14, 14-A – PCGG
Investigation must be conducted by the Office cases
of the Ombudsman. e) Other offenses or felonies
committed by public officials
> Basis: MOA between DOJ and the Office of the mentioned in the law in relation to
Ombudsman somehow modifying the landmark their office, such as:
case doctrine in Sanchez vs Demetrio where the
court held the Office of the Ombudsman and DOJ
 Estafa under the Hannah
have concurrent jurisdiction in conducting Serana case, 542 SCRA,
preliminary investigation of public officers. 1/22/08
Brondi: Office of the ombudsman is not a court. The
Ombudsman is similar with the Prosecutor. But under

23
 HMDM NOTES 2022, ATTY. BRONDIAL.
 Falsification under the
Ramiscal vs Sandiganbayan, Escobal Case
630 SCRA > Escobal was a sergeant in the army with
 Plunder salary grade 23.
> Thus not within the jurisdiction of the
* not limited to these crimes because it depends upon Sandiganbayan.
the circumstances of the case. Even if it is not among
the enumerated crimes committed, but the court Binay
decides that the crime could not have been committed
had you not been appointed as a public officer, then it > When Binay was still not yet the mayor of
can be brought to the Sandiganbayan. As long as the Makati. At that time, Makati was still not a
public office facilitated the commission of the city.
crime. > SC held that Binay’s case is still
cognizable by the Sandiganbayan.
b. Who committed the offense/crime

b-1. Public officers in the executive, legislative Q: May an individual who is not a public
and judicial branches of the government with officer be brought to the Sandiganbayan?
salary grade 27 according to R.A. 6758 The A: Yes. A private citizen can be charged and
Compensation and Position Classification Act prosecuted with the Sandiganbayan if he
of 1989 committed the crime cognizable by the SB
acting in conspiracy with a public officer with
b-2. Private individuals committing the salary grade 27.
offense/crime with public officers,
Illustration:
c. How was the offense/crime committed Q: If a janitor in the Central bank stole
money from the coffers of the Central
Appellate Jurisdiction of Sandiganbayan Bank and was charged with anti-graft
under RA 3019, which court must take
All cases decided by the RTC in the exercise of cognizance of the information?
original or appellate jurisdiction over cases of A: File it with the MTC or RTC depending on
public officers with salary grade less than 27 the amount stolen.
charged with offenses/crimes.
Q: If the same janitor committed the crime
Brondi: Sandiganbayan is not a constitutional with a director of the BSP with salary
court, rather it is a constitutional mandated grade 27, where should you bring the
court. The Sandiganbayan, unlike the SC and case?
CA, have both original and appellate A: Bring the case to the Sandiganbayan
jurisdiction. The SC and CA have no original
jurisdiction over criminal cases. Q: Suppose, during the pendency of the
case, the BSP public officer who conspired
with the janitor died, what will happen to
Duncano vs Sandiganbayan the case of the janitor? (Henry Go)
> Duncano was a BIR Regional Director A: The janitor may still be indicted with the
> The case of Duncano is not cognizable by Sandiganbayan. Death does not extinguish the
the Sandiganbayan because is salary graded crime, it only extinguishes criminal liability.
and his salary grade is 26. Considering that there was a conspiracy as a
> Case was dismissed. manner of committing the crime and thus the
case must proceed in the Sandiganbayan.
24
 HMDM NOTES 2022, ATTY. BRONDIAL.
Residual jurisdiction refers to the authority
Q: Suppose the janitor committed the of the trial court to issue orders for the
crime on his own, where should the protection and preservation of the rights of the
preliminary investigation be done? parties which do not involve any matter
A: The DOJ, not the Ombudsman because the litigated by the appeal; to approve
case is not cognizable of the Sandiganbayan in compromises; to permit appeals by indigent
the exercise of its original jurisdiction. litigants; to order execution pending appeal in
accordance with Section 2, Rule 39; and to
Q: If the janitor is convicted, where should allow the withdrawal of the appeal, provided
he appeal? these are done prior to the transmittal of
A: The Sandiganbayan in its appellate the original record or the record on
jurisdiction, not the CA because it will appeal, even if the appeal has already
constitute a split jurisdiction. been perfected or despite the approval of
the record on appeal or in case of a
5. Residual Jurisdiction petition for review under Rule 42, before
RULE 41, SEC. 9. Perfection of the CA gives due course to the petition.
appeal; effect thereof. — A party's appeal (DBP v. Judge Carpio, 2017)
by notice of appeal is deemed perfected as
to him upon the filing of the notice of Brondi’s definition: Residual jurisdiction-
appeal in due time. jurisdiction of trial court that remains with it
A party's appeal by record on appeal is even after it has loss jurisdiction over the
deemed perfected as to him with respect to case.
the subject matter thereof upon the
approval of the record on appeal filed in Requisites: (before a trial court may exercise
due time. residual jurisdiction over a case)
In appeals by notice of appeal, the court
loses jurisdiction over the case upon the (1) a trial on the merits must have
perfection of the appeals filed in due time been conducted;
and the expiration of the time to appeal of (2) the court rendered judgment; and
the other parties. (3) the aggrieved party appealed
In appeals by record on appeal, the court therefrom
loses jurisdiction only over the subject
matter thereof upon the approval of the • It is the jurisdiction left to be exercised by
records on appeal filed in due time and the the trial court after the case has been
expiration of the appeal of the other appealed to a higher court.
parties.
In either case, prior to the transmittal of • Residual jurisdiction is only exercised by the
the original record or the record on trial court on matters not to be litigated by
appeal, the court may issue orders for the appellate court. Trial court has the
the protection and preservation of the jurisdiction to: (I-COW)
rights of the parties which do not 1. to approve compromises;
involve any matter litigated by the 2. to permit appeals by indigent litigants;
appeal, approve compromises, permit 3. to order execution pending appeal in
appeals of indigent litigants, order accordance with Section 2, Rule 39;
execution pending appeal in accordance 4. and to allow the withdrawal of the
with 2 of Rule 39, and allow withdrawal of appeal
the appeal. (9a)

25
 HMDM NOTES 2022, ATTY. BRONDIAL.
provided these are done prior to the the 25th of January. As to Z, until the
transmittal of the original record or the 30th. (15 days)
record on appeal, even if the appeal has
already been perfected or despite the Q: When does the trial court lose
approval of the record on appeal or in jurisdiction over the case?
case of a petition for review under Rule A: After January 30. On 31, the court
42, before the CA gives due course to the has residual jurisdiction.
petition.
Q: If A filed a case against X, Y, Z and
• Matters to be litigated by the appellate court judgment was rendered in favor of A, the
are outside the scope of a trial court’s plaintiff. X ,Y ,Z received copies of the
residual jurisdiction. judgment on different dates. January 5, 10,
15. They did not file an appeal. When does
Q: Where do you file Motion for execution the residual jurisdiction begins to run?
for pending appeal? A: Upon the expiration of the period to appeal
A: you file it with Trial Court in the exercise of or after Jan. 30 (which is on Jan. 31).
its residual jurisdiction, even if it has no
jurisdiction over the subject matter; provided Q: Does appellate court have residual
that the record of the case is still with the jurisdiction?
Trial Court. A: No, appellate court has no residual
jurisdiction. The very definition of residual
If record of the case was already transmitted jurisdiction says that “jurisdiction of the trial
to the appellate court, then you file it to the court.”
appellate court.
• If it is with the appellate court, residual
*Insert the unlawful detainer explanation prerogatives.
here, explanation of principle of residual
jurisdiction (2:02:00. 8/27/22) *
6. Epistolary Jurisdiction
Q: If A filed a case against B judgment was Brondi: This is not a form of
rendered in favor of A. When does the trial jurisdiction, this is actually the
court lose jurisdiction over the case? increase of the threshold of the courts
A: Upon the expiration of the period to to accept parties who are not really
appeal. parties-in-interest.

Illustration: If A filed a case against X,Y,Z The power and authority of the court to hear,
and judgment was rendered in favor of A, try, and decide a case arising from a letter
the plaintiff. X,Y,Z received copies of the petition introduced by a third person, rather
judgment on different dates. January 5, 10, than the aggrieved party, for the protection of
15. On January 8, X files a notice of appeal. public interest, pursuant to the concept of
Judicial Activism.
Q: When is appeal perfected?  From the root word “epistle” — letter.
A: As to X, appeal was perfected on
January 8.
RESIDENT MARINE MAMMALS OF THE
As to Y and Z, it cannot be perfected
PROTECTED SEASCAPE TANON STRAIT
because they did not file a notice of
v. REYES (2015)
appeal. It will only be perfected if they
file a notice of appeal. Y can file up to
26
 HMDM NOTES 2022, ATTY. BRONDIAL.

FACTS: Petitioners ask the SC to lower the Stated differently, it would be somewhat
standard of locus standi because of the incongruent with the pronounced judicial
nature of the petition. abhorrence to split jurisdiction to conclude
that the intention of the law is to divide the
DOCTRINE: SC: No need because there authority over a local tax case filed with
were ample provisions provided in the the RTC by giving to the CA or this Court
Environmental SC Rules. But still, mammals jurisdiction to issue a writ of certiorari
cannot be parties to the case. against interlocutory orders of the RTC but
giving to the CTA the jurisdiction over the
appeal from the decision of the trial court
In United State allow an inanimate object to in the same case
file cases. Rocks, mountain and Rivers allow
yan sa US. It is more in consonance with logic and
legal soundness to conclude that the grant
Resident Mammals it was allowed not of appellate jurisdiction to the CTA over
because this inanimate object can defend tax cases filed in and decided by the RTC
themselves but they are properly carries with it the power to issue a writ of
represented by the HUMAN being who they certiorari when necessary in aid of such
call themselves as stewards of nature. Kaya appellate jurisdiction. The supervisory
nag karoon tayo ng kaso ng Resident mamal power or jurisdiction of the CTA to issue a
and na mention dito ang Epistolary writ of certiorari in aid of its appellate
Jurisdiction ng court. jurisdiction should co-exist with, and be a
complement to, its appellate jurisdiction to
7. Split Jurisdiction review, by appeal, the final orders and
decisions of the RTC, in order to have
*Asked three times in the bar* complete supervision over the acts of the
Split Jurisdiction is anathema procedure. latter.
Bawal, it is not allowed do not confuse split
jurisdiction with concurrent jurisdiction Brondi: the power of judicial review is not
(allowed). limited to appeal, the constitution already
provides that the power or judicial review
CITY OF MANILA vs. Judge Cuerdo (check can either be appeal or certiorari. So that
case digest) certiorari is inherent, even though it is not
specifically provided in RA 9282.
The Court agrees with the ruling of the CA
that since appellate jurisdiction over
private respondents' complaint for tax 8. Expanded/Extended Jurisdiction
refund is vested in the CTA, it follows that
a petition for certiorari seeking *might be asked in Bar*
nullification of an interlocutory order Authority of the court to look into non-
issued in the said case should, likewise, be justiciable controversy when a particular
filed with the same court. To rule instrumentality/ agency/body abuses its
otherwise would lead to an absurd discretion in performing its function.
situation where one court decides an
appeal in the main case while another The first part is to be known as the
court rules on an incident in the very
traditional concept of judicial power while
same case.
the latter part, an innovation of the 1987

27
 HMDM NOTES 2022, ATTY. BRONDIAL.
Constitution, became known as the court's interests, which may be resolved by a court
expanded jurisdiction. Under its expanded of law through the application of a law.
jurisdiction, courts can now delve into acts
of any branch or instrumentality of the A cause of action has three elements:
Government traditionally considered as 1) the legal right of the plaintiff; 2) the
political if such act was tainted with grave correlative obligation of the defendant not
abuse of discretion, even if there is no to violate the right; and 3) the act or
justiciable controversy. omission of the defendant in violation of
that legal right.
The expanded jurisdiction principle is
necessary under the principle of checks and Brondi: The non-traditional concept, is
balances in the government. The SC should when the court in the exercise of their
check the legislative branch. power of judicial review, can take non-
justiciable controversies.
Q: The concept of expanded/extended *may be given in the bar* Q: Can the
jurisdiction of the SC, does it apply to court take cognizance of political
other courts other than the SC? issues?
A: Yes, the expanded jurisdiction is not A: Yes, in the exercise of
limited to the SC. The power of judicial expanded/extended jurisdiction even
review is not limited to SC, the Constitution political issues can be brought to the
provides that it trickles down to the lowest courts.
court including the MTC, but not to the quasi-
judicial bodies like SEC. You never raise the In the exercise of the expanded
constitutionality of a law before SEC. jurisdiction, even if it is a political issue
the court can still look into, not in the
If you assail the constitutionality of a law, you exercise of its traditional jurisdiction, but
don’t have to go to SC. Because all courts also in the non-traditional limited only in
have authority over the power of judicial grave abuse of discretion via petition
review. for certiorari.

Concurring separate discussion of Brion

Q: Is the expanded jurisdiction an original in Villanueva vs. JBC; Lagman vs.
or appellate jurisdiction? Pimentel III
A: Original jurisdiction A non-traditional concept of jurisdiction.
Taking cognizance of controversies in other
Brondi: The traditional concept of jurisdiction branches of the government other than the
of the courts is such that it takes cognizance judiciary. The SC can look into the
only if there is justiciable controversy, actuations of these bodies under the
without justiciable controversy it is beyond principle of expanded jurisdiction limited
the courts. to grave abuse of discretion.

Q: What is justiciable controversy?

Villanueva v. JBC
A: Justiciable controversy is a definite and
concrete dispute touching on the legal While the 1987 Constitution has provided
relations of parties having adverse legal the qualifications of members of the

28
 HMDM NOTES 2022, ATTY. BRONDIAL.
judiciary, this does not preclude the JBC discretion to quasi-judicial or judicial
from having its own set of rules and acts, but to any act involving the exercise
procedures and providing policies to of discretion on the part of the
effectively ensure its mandate. government.

The functions of searching, screening, and A distinctive feature in these developments

selecting are necessary and incidental to is the strong correlation between the
the JBC's principal function of choosing and Court's exercise of its expanded
recommending nominees for vacancies in jurisdiction, and its relaxation of the
the judiciary for appointment by the requirements for actual case or
President. However, the Constitution did controversies. The Court relaxes the
not lay down in precise terms the process requirements for judicial review when the
that the JBC shall follow in determining petition raises matters of transcendental
applicants' qualifications. In carrying out its importance. That a matter is of
main function, the JBC has the authority to transcendental importance tempers the
set the standards/criteria in choosing its standing requirement for judicial review,
nominees for every vacancy in the which in turn, indirectly relaxes the
judiciary, subject only to the minimum presence of an actual case or controversy
qualifications required by the Constitution itself.
and law for every position.
Amidst these jurisprudential
Thus, the adoption of the five-year developments, the Rules of Court has
requirement policy applied by JBC to the remained static; its express terms
petitioner's case is necessary and incidental remained confined to the courts' exercise of
to the function conferred by the traditional jurisdiction over judicial or
Constitution to the JBC. quasi-judicial acts. Yet the Court
unhesitatingly used the remedies
Brion, opinion: of certiorari and prohibition to enforce its
power and to undertake its duty to
At the same time, the Court has recognized determine grave abuse of discretion on the
and acted on the basis of its expanded part of the government. Thereby, the Court
jurisdiction under the second paragraph of effectively relaxed the rules on certiorari,
Section 1, Article VIII of the 1987 notably by allowing its use in the review of
Constitution, albeit not explicitly at first. acts of government that are neither judicial
Thus, we have cases where the Court, nor quasi-judicial.
recognizing its duty to determine grave
abuse of discretion on the part of
governmental agencies or entities,
reviewed acts that are neither judicial nor Lagman v. Pimentel
quasi-judicial in nature. Notably, the
procedural media used in invoking the The Court reiterated their earlier ruling in
Court's expanded jurisdiction have been Lagman case where they emphasized that
petitions for certiorari, or prohibition. This the Court’s jurisdiction under the third
practice reflects the wording of Section 1, paragraph of Section 18, Article VII is
paragraph 2, which does not limit the special and specific, different from those
determination of grave abuse of enumerated in Sections 1 and 5 of Article

29
 HMDM NOTES 2022, ATTY. BRONDIAL.
VIII. It was further stressed therein that the 9. Equity Jurisdiction
standard of review in a petition for
certiorari is whether the respondent has Power of court to resolve issues presented in
committed any grave abuse of discretion a case in accordance with the natural rules
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction of fairness and justice in the ABSENCE OF A
in the performance of his or her functions, CLEAR, POSITIVE LAW governing such
whereas under Section 18, Article VII, the issues.
Court is tasked to review the sufficiency of
the factual basis of the President’s exercise Equity seeks to reach and to do complete
of emergency powers. justice where the courts of law are
incompetent to do so because of the
Hence, the Court concluded that a inflexibility of the rules and the lack of
petition for certiorari pursuant to power to adapt their judgments to the
Section 1 or Section 5 of Article VIII is special circumstance of cases. Equity regards
not the proper tool to review the the spirit of the law and not its letter, the
sufficiency of the factual basis of the intent and not the form, the substance rather
proclamation of martial law or the than the circumstance. (Air Manila v CIR)
suspension of the privilege of the writ of
habeas corpus. • There is no law providing for which court
has jurisdiction. In order for the court to
The Court added that to apply the standard resolve the justiciable controversy, it resolves
of review in a petition for certiorari will it through equity jurisdiction (through
equity)
emasculate the Court’s constitutional task
under Section 18, Article VII, which was
Regulus v. Dela Cruz (2:17:00, 8/27/22)
precisely meant to provide an additional
safeguard against possible martial law
The withdrawal of the deposit with the
abuse and limit the extent of the powers of
RTC.
the Commander-in-Chief.
* Rule 7 Unlawful detainer, Forcible Entry:
Finally, the Court held that a certiorari
the decision in ejectment cases are
petition invoking the Court’s expanded
immediately executory. Under the
jurisdiction is not the proper remedy to regular rules, the judgment can only be
review the sufficiency of the factual stalled by an appeal and as for an
basis of the Congress’ extension of the Unlawful Detainer (appeal is not
proclamation of martial law or enough; posting of supersedeas bond
suspension of the privilege of the writ. and regular monthly deposit for the
use and occupancy of premises [Rule
70, Sec 19])

Brondi: It is the executive branch that > Deposit for the unpaid rentals made
declares martial law. It is not under the in RTC. MTC’s decision was sustained.
jurisdiction of SC, but when the executive Case reached CA under petition for
branch of the government commits grave review leaving the supersedeas bond
abuse of discretion, the court can look into it to the RTC. When Regulus wanted to
in the exercise of its expanded jurisdiction. get the bond, de la cruz questioned
RTC’s authority because the case
already reached CA.
30
 HMDM NOTES 2022, ATTY. BRONDIAL.

> SC: RTC must act on that motion on

the basis of its equity jurisdiction.
Brondi: When there is a vacuum, you look at
the principle of equity and justice. After all
the law is an order of reason promulgated for
the common good by one who was by the
community. So every law must be rational. It
is an order of reason, so it must be directed
towards justice and equity.

People v. Pagal—included in Bar syllabus: if

accused confessed guilt to a capital offense,
the prosecution must still establish the guilt
of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. You
cannot condemn a person solely on his
confession.

31