Crim Pro 14324

I
C
U
n
s
t
i
E N T R A
n i t e d
t
L
P
u
t
e
B A R
u r s u i
o
P
O
t
f
L
a
w
E R A T I O N S
o f
E x c e l l e
2 0 0
c e
CBO OVER-ALL CHAIR: Evangeline Co; ASSISTANT CHAIR: Rose Lyn Rabanera; SECRETARIAT - HEAD: Romino Arzadon; ACADEMICS - HEADS:
Reigel Prado, Omar Gabrieles; FINANCE HEAD: Kyan Sioco; LOGISTICS - HEAD: Janis Ruckenbrod
M E M O R Y
A I D
I N
R E M E D I A L
Preliminary Concepts
Jurisdiction
the power and authority of the court to hear,
try and decide a case.
The issue of jurisdiction is both vital and
fatal; vital, because its presence is the source of
power for the trial court to act on all matters
complained of; fatal, because its absence
renders all its actuations null and void.
Jurisdiction cannot be fixed by the will of
the parties; it cannot be acquired through, or
waived, enlarged or diminished by, any act or
omission of the parties. (Municipality of Sogod
vs. Rosal, 201 SCRA 632)
Note however, that aside from jurisdiction
over the subject mater, a court must have
jurisdiction over the case, the persons of the
parties, the issues, and the res before it can try a
particular case.
But while jurisdiction over the subject
matter is a matter of substantive law, the other
kinds of jurisdiction are a matter of procedure.
(Valdepeas vs. People, 16 SCRA 871; People
vs. Mariano, 71 SCRA 600)
Jurisdiction
The authority to
decide a case at all
and not the decision
rendered therein is
what makes up
jurisdiction
Exercise of
Jurisdiction
Where there is
jurisdiction over the
person and the subject
matter, the decision of
all other questions
arising in the case is
but an exercise of
jurisdiction
L A W
jurisdiction,
the
proceedings are null
and
void
unconditionally
proceedings are void only

when the error is shown
to have caused harm.
(Banco Filipino-Espaol
vs. Palanca, 3 Phil. 921)
Error of
Jurisdiction
Correctible only by
certiorari
A judgment
rendered without
jurisdiction is void
Error of Judgment
Reviewable only by
appeal
An erroneous
judgment by a
competent court is not
a void judgment
Jurisdiction Over the Subject Matter vs.

Jurisdiction Over a Particular Case
1. Jurisdiction over the subject matter is
conferred by law and refers to the power of the
court to try and hear cases belonging to the
general class to which a particular proceeding
belongs; jurisdiction over a particular case is
invested by the act of the plaintiff and attaches
upon the filing of the complaint or information.
2. The court may have jurisdiction over the
subject matter, like naturalization, but it does
not acquire jurisdiction over the case itself
until its jurisdiction is invoked with the filing of
the complaint or petition.
Jurisdiction Over the Person
the power obtained by the service of
summons or other process or notice in a
defendant personally within the territorial
limits of the jurisdiction or by voluntary
appearance in person or by attorney, to
render a personal judgment.
Jurisdiction
Deals with the power
of the courts in the
real and substantive
sense
Procedure
Deals with the means by
which such powers are
put into action or the
means by which the
power of the courts are
made effective. (Manila
Railroad
Co.
vs.
Attorney General, 20
Phil. 523)
As a consequence The effects of a mere
of
lack
of procedural error, the
Jurisdiction Over the Subject of

Litigation
the power of a court over the thing before it,
without regard to the person who may be
interested therein, and the presence of the
res within the territorial dominion of the
sovereign power under authority of which
the courts act may confer such jurisdiction.
Jurisdiction over the issue, or person, or res
may be acquired by the act or omission of
parties. Nonetheless, the will or act of the
parties cannot fix, enlarge or diminish these
jurisdictional matters.
R E M E D I A L
L A W
ADVISERS: Atty. Jos Aguila Grapilon, Atty. Aeneas Eli Diaz, Atty. Wylie Paler
REMEDIAL LAW HEADS: Joseph Stephen Apsay, Tareeq Radjaie; CO-HEAD: Roberto Santos
MEMBERS: Francis Belandres, Regina Bernabe, Joana Bilongilot, Evangeline Co, Loreto Dapon Jr.., Ronald dela Paz, Christy Dimabuyu,
Christian May Godinez, Briccio Lista, Paolo Ramiro
Page 1 of 212
I
C
U
n
s
t
i
E N T R A
n i t e d
t
L
P
u
t
e
B A R
u r s u i
o
P
O
t
f
L
a
w
E R A T I O N S
o f
E x c e l l e
2 0 0
c e
M E M O R Y
A I D
I N
R E M E D I A L
Requisites of Judicial Due Process:

1. A court or tribunal clothed with judicial
power to hear and determine the matter
before it;
2. Jurisdiction must be lawfully acquired over
the person of the defendant or over the
property which is the subject of the
proceeding;
3. The defendant must be given an opportunity
to be heard;
4. Judgment must be rendered upon lawful
hearing
Requisites of Administrative Due
Process:
1. An impartial tribunal constituted to
determine the right involved.
2. Due notice and opportunity to be heard be
given.
3. The procedure at the hearing be consistent
with the essentials of a fair trial.
4. The proceedings be conducted in such a way
that there will be opportunity for a court to
determine whether the applicable rules of
law and procedure were observed
(Mabuhay Textile Mills Corporation vs.
Ongpin, GRN L-67784 February 28, 1986)
Judicial Power the right to determine
controversies arising between adverse litigants
duly instituted in courts of proper jurisdiction.
L A W
The Theory of Political Question refers

to those questions which:
1. Under the Constitution, are to be decided by
the people in their sovereign capacity, e.g.,
the wisdom of electing movie stars, media
practitioners and sports personalities; or
2. In regard to which full discretionary
authority has been delegated to the
legislative
or
executive
branch
of
government;
concerned
with
issues
dependent upon the wisdom, not legality, of
a particular measure, e.g., the wisdom of
enacting more tax laws, or of pardoning
certain convicts.
Jurisdiction over Political Questions
Rule: When a litigation raises matters
challenging
the
exclusive
political
prerogatives of a co-equal branch of
government,
the
judiciary
should
immediately and simply dismiss the petition
on the ground of lack of jurisdiction.
Exception: When a petition sufficiently alleges
prima
facie
infringements
of
the
Constitution or the law or jurisprudence or
there is a grave abuse of discretion, the
Court acquires jurisdiction over the subject
matter.
Doctrine of Primary Jurisdiction
Two Judicial Review Powers

1. Ordinary power to settle actual
controversies involving rights which are
legally demandable and enforceable.
2. Extraordinary power or certiorari
power to decide issues involving grave
abuse of discretion on the part of any
branch or instrumentality of government,
including the legislative and executive
departments.
Rule: If a case is such that its determination

requires the expertise, specialized skills and
knowledge of the proper administrative
bodies because technical matters or
intricate questions of fact are involved, then
relief must first be obtained in an
administrative proceeding before a remedy
will be supplied by the courts even though
the matter is within the proper jurisdiction
of a court.
Grave Abuse of Discretion

capricious and whimsical exercise of
judgment by reason of passion or personal
hostility, so patent and gross as to amount
to an evasion of positive duty or to a virtual
refusal to perform the duty enjoined, or to
act at all in contemplation of law
includes any action done contrary to the
Constitution, the law or jurisprudence
regardless of the reasons therefor
Exceptions:
1. Where the findings are not supported by
evidence.
2. Where the findings are vitiated by fraud,
imposition, or collusion.
3. Where the procedure which lead to the
factual findings are irregular.
4. When palpable errors are committed.
5. When grave abuse of discretion, arbitrariness
or capriciousness is manifested.
R E M E D I A L
L A W
Page 2 of 212
I
C
U
n
s
t
i
E N T R A
n i t e d
t
L
P
u
t
e
B A R
u r s u i
o
P
O
t
f
L
a
w
E R A T I O N S
o f
E x c e l l e
2 0 0
c e
M E M O R Y
A I D
I N
R E M E D I A L
The Doctrine of Non-interference in

Associations
Rule: The Courts will not interfere with the
internal affairs of an unincorporated
association so as to settle disputes between
the members on question of policy,
discipline, or internal government, so long
as the government of the society is fairly and
honestly administered in conformity with
laws and the law of the land no property or
civil rights are invaded.
Exceptions:
1. Where law and justice so require, and the
proceeding of the association are subject to
judicial review, where there is fraud,
oppression, or bad faith, or where the action
complained of is capricious, arbitrary or
unjustly discriminating. (Fortunato vs.
Palma, GRN 70203, Dec. 18, 1987, 156
SCRA 691)
2. If it is shown that the Church authorities
have acted outside the scope of their
authorities or in a manner contrary to their
organic law and rules and the Courts
interference is necessary for the protection
of Civil and Property rights. (Negros
District Conference, Inc. vs. CA, 108 Scra
458, 1981)
3. Where the proceedings in question are
violative of the laws of society, or the law of
the land, as by depriving a person of due
process of law.
4. Where there is lack of jurisdiction on the
part of the tribunal conducting the
proceedings, where the organization
exceeds its powers, or where the
proceedings are otherwise illegal. (Lions
Club International vs. Amores, 121 SCRA
621, 1983)
L A W
259, 1984; Santos vs. Bayhon, GRN 88643,

July 23, 1991, 199 SCRA 525)
2. When the Sheriff, acting beyond the bounds
of his office seizes a stranger's property.
(Uy, Jr. vs. CA, GRN 83897, Nov. 9, 1990)
Jurisdiction Cannot be Waived
Rule: The issue of jurisdiction is not lost by
waiver or by estoppel. The jurisdiction of
court is a matter of law and may not be
conferred by consent or agreement of the
parties. The lack of jurisdiction of a court
may be raised at any stage of the proceeding
even on appeal. (Calimlim vs. Ramirez, 118
SCRA 399, 1982)
Exceptions:
1. Estoppel by Laches to Question
Jurisdiction
A party cannot invoke the jurisdiction of a
court to secure affirmative relief against his
opponent and, after obtaining or failing to
obtain such relief, repudiate or question that
same jurisdiction. (Tijam vs. Sibonghanoy, 23
SCRA 29, 1968)
However, in subsequent cases, the Supreme
Court observed that the ruling in Tijam vs.
Sibonghanoy that a party is estopped from
questioning the jurisdiction applies only to
exceptional circumstances and reiterated the
doctrine that jurisdiction over the subject
matter of the action is a matter of law and may
not be conferred by consent or agreement of the
parties. The lack of jurisdiction may be raised at
any stage of the proceedings, even on appeal.
(Calimlim vs. Ramirez, 118 SCRA 399)
2. Active Participation in Trial even if
Jurisdiction is Challenged
Doctrine of Judicial Stability

Rule: No court has authority to interfere by
injunction with the judgment of another court
of coordinate jurisdiction (Cojuangco vs.
Villegas, 184 SCRA 374); that the judgment of a
court of competent jurisdiction may not be
opened, modified or vacated by any court of
concurrent jurisdiction.
Exceptions:
1. Where a third party claimant is involved.
(Traders Royal Bank vs. IAC, 133 SCRA
The La Naval Doctrines on Jurisdiction

1. Jurisdiction over the person must be
seasonably raised, that is, pleaded in a
motion to dismiss or by way of an
affirmative defense in an answer. Voluntary
appearance shall be deemed a waiver of this
defense. The assertion, however, of
affirmative defenses shall not be construed
as an estoppel or as a waiver of such
defense.
R E M E D I A L
L A W
Page 3 of 212
I
C
U
n
s
t
i
E N T R A
n i t e d
t
L
P
u
t
e
B A R
u r s u i
o
P
O
t
f
L
a
w
E R A T I O N S
o f
E x c e l l e
2 0 0
c e
M E M O R Y
A I D
I N
R E M E D I A L
2. Where the court itself clearly has no

jurisdiction over the subject matter or the
nature of the action, the invocation of this
defense may be done at any time. It is
neither for the courts nor the parties to
violate or disregard that rule, let alone to
confer that jurisdiction, this matter being
legislative in character. (La Naval vs. CA,
236 SCRA 78)
L A W
2. The question of constitutionality must be

raised by the proper party.
3. The question must be raised at the earliest
opportunity.
4. The determination of the constitutionality of
the statute must be necessary to a final
determination of the case.
CLASSIFICATIONS OF
ORDINARY CIVIL ACTIONS
When is Jurisdiction Determined?

Jurisdiction is determined by the law at the
time of the filing of the complaint. The
jurisdiction of a court to try a criminal action is
determined by the law in force at the time of
instituting the action and not at the time of the
commission of the crime. Ordinarily, the
subsequent happening of events will not
operate to wrest jurisdiction.
I. As to nature, cause or foundation

A. Real action
one founded on privity of real estate and
seeks to recover a specific real property
or its possession
one affecting title to real property for the
recovery of possession, or of an interest
therein
Doctrine of Adherence of Jurisdiction

Rule: Jurisdiction, once it attaches cannot be
ousted by the happening of subsequent
events although of such a character which
should have prevented jurisdiction from
attaching in the first instance.
Exceptions:
1. Where a subsequent statute expressly
prohibits the continued exercise of
jurisdiction.
2. Where the law penalizing an act which is
punishable is repealed by a subsequent law.
3. When accused is deprived of his
constitutional right such as where the court
fails to provide counsel for the accused who
is unable to obtain one and does not
intelligently waive his constitutional right.
4. Where the statute expressly provides, or is
construed to the effect that it is intended to
operate as to actions pending before its
enactment.
5. When the proceedings in the Court
acquiring jurisdiction is terminated,
abandoned or declared void.
6. Once appeal has been perfected.
7. When the statute is curative.
8. When the case is consolidated with other
cases pending in another court.
Requisites to Question Constitutionality
of a Law
B. Personal action
one founded on privity of contract or the
recovery of personal property or
damages
one that is brought for the recovery of
personal property, for the enforcement
of some contract or for the recovery of
damages, or the recovery of damages for
the commission of an injury to the
person or property
II. As to place
A. Transitory
an action founded on the privity of
contract between the parties.
Example: The enforcement of debt or
covenant must be brought in the place
where the party resides.
B. Local
an action founded on privity of estate
only and there is no privity of contract
and it must be brought in a particular
place.
III. As to object or against which the
action is directed
A. In Personam
a proceeding to enforce personal rights
and obligations brought against the
1. There must be an actual controversy.

R E M E D I A L
L A W
Page 4 of 212
I
C
U
n
s
t
i
E N T R A
n i t e d
t
L
P
u
t
e
B A R
u r s u i
o
P
O
t
f
L
a
w
E R A T I O N S
o f
E x c e l l e
2 0 0
c e
M E M O R Y
A I D
I N
R E M E D I A L
person and based on jurisdiction of the

person, although it may involve his right
to, or the exercise of ownership of,
specific property, or seek to compel him
to control or dispose of it
jurisdiction is acquired through personal
notices to the parties in interest
B. In Rem
the object is to bar indefinitely all who
might be minded to make an objection
of any sort against the right sought to be
established
jurisdiction
is
acquired
through
publication of notice
C. Quasi In Rem
a proceeding which is not strictly and
purely in rem but is brought against a
defendant personally although the real
object is to deal with a particular
property or subject it to the discharge of
claim asserted therein
jurisdiction over the person of the
defendant is not necessary; service of
summons is required only for the
purpose of complying with due process.
In Personam
action against a person on
the basis of his personal
liability
Jurisdiction is over the
person
In Rem
action against the thing or
property itself
Summons is served either

personally or by substituted
service
It is sufficient that summons

is served by publication
and/or posting of notices
Judgment is conclusive
between the parties
An individual is named as
defendant
Judgment is conclusive
against the whole world
There
is
no
named
defendant
Jurisdiction is over the res

through service of summons
by publication or posting of
notices
TRIBAL COURTS (R.A. 8371)

This law provides for the creation of the
National Commission for Indigenous Peoples
(NCIP) which has jurisdiction over disputes
involving members of cultural communities
whose decision is appeallable to the Court of
Appeals.
Under this law, the NCIP through its
regional offices, shall have jurisdiction over all
claims and disputes involving ICCs/IPs:
Provided, however, That no such dispute shall
be brought to the NCIP unless the parties have
exhausted all remedies provided under their
customary laws to settle the dispute as certified
by the Council of Elders/Leaders who
L A W
Quasi In Rem
action to subject a partys interest to
the obligation or lien burdening the
property
Jurisdiction over the party is not
necessary; it is enough that due
process is observed.
Summons is served extraterritorially

if defendant is an absent
non-resident; in case of an absent
resident, same as above, or by
substituted service
Judgment is conclusive between the
parties
An individual is named as defendant
participated in the attempt to settle the dispute

that the same has not been resolved, which
certification shall be a condition precedent to
the filing of a petition with the NCIP.
THE KATARUNGANG PAMBARANGAY

LAW
This law provides for the amicable settlement of
disputes at the barangay level as a compulsory
alternative to the formal adjudication of
disputes.
Parties: only individuals shall be parties either
as complainants or respondents. Juridical
persons cannot be parties.
R E M E D I A L
L A W
Page 5 of 212
I
C
U
n
s
t
i
E N T R A
n i t e d
t
L
P
u
t
e
B A R
u r s u i
o
P
O
t
f
L
a
w
E R A T I O N S
o f
E x c e l l e
2 0 0
c e
M E M O R Y
A I D
I N
R E M E D I A L
Venue of Disputes:
1. Parties residing in the same barangay
in said barangay
2. Parties
residing
in
different
barangays in the same city or
municipality in the barangay where the
respondent resides, or in the barangay of
where any of the respondents resides, at the
choice of the complainant
3. Where real property is involved in
the barangay where real property or larger
portion thereof is situated
4. Where parties are employed in the
same workplace or enrolled for study
in the same institution in the barangay
where such workplace or institution is
located
Condition Precedent
All disputes may be the subject of
proceedings for amicable settlement and prior
recourse to barangay conciliation is a condition
precedent before filing a complaint in court or
government offices.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
L A W
d. Actions barred by Statute of

Limitations
Disputes which the President may
determine
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law
cases
Involving status of a person
Labor disputes
Actions to annul judgment upon a
compromise
Personal Appearance The parties must

appear in person without the assistance of
counsel or the intervention of anyone. Minors
and incompetents may be assisted by their next
of kin who is not a lawyer.
Issuance of Summons The Pangkat ng
Tagapagkasundo may issue summons for the
personal appearance of parties and witnesses
before it.
Effect When Parties Fail to Appear
1. As to Complainant the complaint may
be dismissed and shall bar the complainant
from seeking judicial recourse.
Exceptions: Cases where

1. One party is the government
2. One party is a public officer or employee
in relation to his official functions
3. Where real property is located in
different cities and municipalities,
UNLESS the parties agree to submit
dispute to appropriate Lupon
4. Complaint by or against juridical
persons.
5. Parties residing in barangays of different
cities or municipalities, EXCEPT where
barangays adjoin each other and they
submit amicable settlement by a Lupon
6. Offenses for which the maximum
penalty imposable is imprisonment
exceeding one (1) year or a fine
exceeding P5,000
7. Offenses where there is no private
offended party
8. Where urgent legal action is necessary to
prevent injustice such as:
a. Where accused is under police
investigation or detention
b. Petitions for habeas corpus
c. Actions
with
provisional
remedies
2. As to Respondent any counterclaim he

has made may be dismissed and shall bar him
from filing such counterclaim in court or any
government office for adjudication; it shall be
the basis for the issuance of a certification for
filing complainants case in court or
government agencies or office.
Suspension of Prescriptive Period
The prescriptive periods for offenses and
cause of action under existing laws shall be
interrupted upon the filing of the complaint
with the Punong Barangay, provided that such
interruption shall NOT exceed sixty (60) days
from the filing of the complaint with the
Punong Barangay.
Proceedings in the KP Law
1. Mediation
2. Arbitration
3. Conciliation
Effect of Amicable Settlement
The amicable settlement and arbitration
award shall have the force and effect of a final
R E M E D I A L
L A W
Page 6 of 212
I
C
U
n
s
t
i
E N T R A
n i t e d
t
L
P
u
t
e
B A R
u r s u i
o
P
O
t
f
L
a
w
E R A T I O N S
o f
E x c e l l e
2 0 0
c e
M E M O R Y
A I D
I N
R E M E D I A L
judgment of court upon the expiration of ten

(10) days from the date thereof, UNLESS
repudiated or sought to be nullified before the
city or municipal court.
Remedies
Settlement
Against
an
Amicable
1. Repudiation
2. Annulment
Note: In case the court referred the case to the
Katarungang Pambarangay Law, any agreement
made or arrived at in the barangay should be
brought back to the court.
The conciliation procedure required under
the Katarungang Pambarangay Law is NOT A
JURISDICTIONAL REQUIREMENT in the
sense that failure to have prior recourse to it
does not deprive the court of its jurisdiction,
either over the subject matter or over the
person of the defendant. Non-compliance with
the condition precedent under said law does not
prevent a court of competent jurisdiction from
exercising its power of adjudication over a case
where defendants FAIL to object to such
exercise of jurisdiction. BUT such objection
should be seasonably made before the court
first taking cognizance of the complaint, and
must be raised in the Answer or in such other
pleading allowed under the Rules of Court.
(Junson vs. Martinez, GRN 141324, July 8,
2003, 405 SCRA 390)
Principal
Court
Functions of the
Principle of Judicial Hierarchy

By hierarchy of courts is meant that
while the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals
and the Regional Trial Courts have concurrent
jurisdiction to issue original writs of certiorari,
prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto and
habeas corpus, such concurrence does not
accord litigants unrestrained freedom of
choice of the court to which application
therefore may be directed. The application
should be filed with the court of lower level
unless the importance of the issue involved
deserves the action of the court of higher level.
Exception: On several instances where the
Supreme Court was confronted with cases of
national interest and of serious implications, it
never hesitated to set aside the rule and proceed
with the determination of the case. (COMELEC
vs. Quijano-Padilla, 389 SCRA 353)
OUTLINE OF JURISDICTION
I. SUPREME COURT
A. Original
1. Exclusive
Petitions for the issuance of writs of
certiorari, prohibition and mandamus against
the following:
1.1. Court of Appeals
1.2. Commission on Elections
1.3. Commission o Audit
1.4. Sandiganbayan
1.5. Court of Tax Appeals
Supreme
1. Power of Adjudication (Judicial Power)

2. Administrative Power (Disciplinary Power)
3. Rule Making Power
L A W
2. Concurrent
2.1. with Court of Appeals
Scope of Rule Making Power of the SC

1. Protection and enforcement of constitutional
rights
2. Pleading, practice and procedure in all courts
3. Admission to the practice of law, the IBP
4. Legal assistance to the underprivileged
The 1987 Constitution took away the power
of Congress to repeal, alter, or supplement rules
concerning pleading, practice and procedure.
(Echegaray vs. Secretary of Justice, GRN
132601, Jan. 19, 1999)
R E M E D I A L
Petitions for issuance of writs of

certiorari, prohibition and mandamus
against the following:
2.1.1. Civil Service Commission
2.1.2. Central Board of Assessment
Appeals
2.1.3. Quasi-Judicial Agencies
2.1.4. Regional Trial Courts and lower
courts
2.2. with Court of Appeals and RTC
L A W
Page 7 of 212
I
C
U
n
s
t
i
E N T R A
n i t e d
t
L
P
u
t
e
B A R
u r s u i
o
P
O
t
f
L
a
w
E R A T I O N S
o f
E x c e l l e
2 0 0
c e
M E M O R Y
A I D
I N
R E M E D I A L
2.2.1. Petitions for habeas corpus

and quo warranto
2.2.2. Petitions for issuance of writs
of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus
against the lower courts or bodies
2.3. with Regional Trial Courts
L A W
II. COURT OF APPEALS

A. Original
1. Exclusive
Actions for annulment of judgments of
Regional Trial Courts
2. Concurrent
Actions affecting ambassadors and

other public ministers and consuls
2.1. with Supreme Court

Refer to Sec.2.1 above under I.A. supra
B. Appellate
1. Notice of Appeal
2.2. with Supreme Court and RTCs

Refer to Sec.2.2. above under I.A. supra
Where the RTC imposed the penalty of

death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment,
the case shall be automatically brought to the
Court of Appeals for intermediate review before
such cases are elevated to the Supreme Court.
(A.M. No. 04-9-05-SC, Sept. 14, 2004, People
vs. Mateo, G.R. Nos. 147678-87, July 7, 2004)
2. Petition for Review on Certiorari
2.1. Appeals from the Court of Appeals
2.2. Appeals from the Sandiganbayan on
pure question of law, except cases where the
penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua, life
imprisonment or death
2.3. Appeals from the Court of Tax Appeals
En Banc
2.4. Appeals from Regional Trial Courts
exercising original jurisdiction in the following
cases:
2.4.1. If no question of fact is involved
and the case involves:
a. Constitutionality or validity of treaty,
international or executive agreement, law,
presidential decree, proclamation, order,
instruction, ordinance or regulation
b. Legality of tax, impost, assessments
or toll, or penalty in relation thereto
c. Jurisdiction of lower court
2.4.2. All cases in which only errors or
questions of law are involved.
3. Special Civil Action on Certiorari filed
within 30 days against the following:
3.1. Commissions on Elections
3.2. Commission on Audit
B. Appellate
1. Notice of Appeal or Record on Appeal
1.1. Appeals from RTCs, except those
appeallable to the Supreme Court (see I.B.1
(1.2.)
1.2. Appeals from RTCs on constitutional,
tax, jurisdictional questions involving questions
of fact which should be appealed first to the
Court of Appeals.
1.3. Appeals from decisions and final orders
of the Family Courts
2. Petition for Review
2.1. Appeals from the Civil Service
Commission
2.2. Appeals from RTCs in cases appealed
from MeTCs, MTCs, MCTCs, MTCCs which are
not a matter of right
2.3. Appeals from quasi-judicial agencies
2.4. Appeals
from
the
National
Commission on Indigenous Peoples
2.5. Appeals from the Office of the
Ombudsman in administrative disciplinary
cases
2.6. Appeals from the RTC in cases falling
under the Interim Rules of Corporate
Rehabilitation and the Interim Rules of
Procedure
Governing
Intra-Corporate
Controversies under Republic Act No. 8799
III. SANDIGANBAYAN
A. Original
1. Exclusive
1.1. Violation of R.A. 3019 (Anti-Graft), R.A.
1379 and Chapter II, Sec. 2, Title VII of the
Revised Penal Code; and other offenses
R E M E D I A L
L A W
Page 8 of 212
I
C
U
n
s
t
i
E N T R A
n i t e d
t
L
P
u
t
e
B A R
u r s u i
o
P
O
t
f
L
a
w
E R A T I O N S
o f
E x c e l l e
2 0 0
c e
M E M O R Y
A I D
I N
R E M E D I A L
committed by public officials and employees in

relation to their office, and private individuals
charged as co-principals, accomplices and
accessories including those employed in
GOCCs, where one or more of the accused are
officials occupying the following positions in the
government, whether in a permanent, acting or
interim capacity, at the time of the commission
of the offense:
a. Officials of the Executive branch
classified as Grade 27 or higher
b. Members of Congress and officials
thereof classified as Grade 27 and
higher
c. Members of Judiciary
d. Members
of
Constitutional
Commissions
e. All other national and local officials
whose positions are classified as Grade
27 or higher
In cases where none of the accused are
occupying the above positions, the original
jurisdiction shall be vested in the proper RTC or
MeTC, MTC, etc., as the case may be, pursuant
to their respective jurisdictions.
L A W
election of board of directors appointed by the

PCGG is with the Sandiganbayan.
IV. COURT OF TAX APPEALS
A. Original
1. Exclusive
1.1. Criminal offenses in violations of the
NIRC, Customs Code and other laws
administered by the BIR or BOC where the
principal amount of taxes and fees, exclusive of
charges and penalties, claimed is One Million
Pesos (P1M) and above.
1.2. Tax collection cases involving final and
executory assessments for taxes, charges and
penalties where principal amount of taxes and
fees, exclusive of charges and penalties, claimed
is One Million Pesos (P1M) and above.
Note! When the principal amount claimed is
less than One Million Pesos (P1M), the case
shall be tried by the RTC or MTC based on the
jurisdictional amount.
B. Appellate
1. Notice of Appeal
In cases where there is no specific allegation

of facts showing that the offense committed in
relation to the public office of the accused, the
original jurisdiction shall also be vested in the
proper regional trial court or MeTC, MTC, etc.,
as the case may be.
1.2. Civil and criminal cases filed pursuant
with Executive Order Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A
(PCGG cases).
2. Concurrent with Supreme Court
Petitions
for
certiorari,
prohibition,
mandamus, habeas corpus, injunction and
other ancillary writs in aid of its appellate
jurisdiction including quo warranto arising in
cases falling under E.O.s 1, 2, 14, 14-A.
B. Appellate
Decisions and final orders of RTCs in the
exercise of their original or appellate
jurisdiction in the manner provided by Rule 122
of the Rules of Court.
Note! In case of a corporation sequestered by
the PCGG, jurisdiction with regard to the
In tax collection cases, judgments,

resolutions or orders of the Regional Trial Court
originally decided by them.
2. Petition for Review
2.1. Civil
2.1.1. Decisions or inaction of the
Commissioner of Internal Revenue
2.1.2. Decisions of the Commissioner
of Customs
2.1.3. Decisions of the Secretary of
Finance on customs cases elevated to him
automatically
from
decisions
of
the
Commissioner of Customs
Trade and Industry regarding duties upon nonagricultural products
Agriculture regarding duties upon agricultural
products
2.1.6. Decisions of the Central Board of
Assessment Appeals in the exercise of its
appellate jurisdiction
2.1.7. In
tax
collection
cases,
judgments, resolutions or orders of the
Regional Trial Courts in the exercise of their
R E M E D I A L
L A W
Page 9 of 212
I
C
U
n
s
t
i
E N T R A
n i t e d
t
L
P
u
t
e
B A R
u r s u i
o
P
O
t
f
L
a
w
E R A T I O N S
o f
E x c e l l e
2 0 0
c e
M E M O R Y
A I D
I N
R E M E D I A L
appellate jurisdiction originally decided by the

MTC, etc.
1.2. Criminal
1.2.1. Violations of the NIRC, Tariff and
Customs Code and other laws administered by
the BIR and BOC originally decided by the
regular courts where the principal amount of
taxes and fees is less than One Million Pesos
(P1M) or NO specified amount claimed.
Note: The cases enumerated above should be
raffled to the CTA Divisions. A party adversely
affected may file a petition for review with the
CTA En Banc whose decision or resolution may
be appealed to the Supreme Court under Rule
45.
L A W
the amount thereof shall be considered in

determining the jurisdiction of the court.
1.1.9. Additional original jurisdiction
transferred under Sec. 5.2. of the Securities
Regulations Code:
a. Devices or schemes employed by, or
any act of, the board of directors, business
associates, its officers or partners, amounting to
fraud and misrepresentation
b. Controversies arising out of intracorporate, partnership or association relations
c. Controversies in the election or
appointment of directors, trustees, officers or
managers of corporations, partnerships or
associations
d. Derivative suits
e. Inspection of corporate books
1.1.10. Tax collection cases NOT falling
under the exclusive original jurisdiction of the
Court of Tax Appeals where principal amount
claimed is less than One Million Pesos (P1M).
V. REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS

A. Original
1. Civil
1.2. Concurrent
1.1. Exclusive
1.1.1. Subject of action not capable of
pecuniary estimation
1.1.2. Actions involving title or
possession of real property or interest therein
where the assessed value exceeds P20,000 or in
Metro Manila, P50,000
1.1.3. Actions in admiralty and maritime
jurisdiction where demand or claim exceeds
P300,000, or in Metro Manila, P400,000
1.1.4. Matters of probate, testate or
intestate, where gross value of estate exceeds
P300,000, or in Metro Manila, P400,000
1.1.5. In all actions involving marriage
and marital relations (now under the
jurisdiction of the family Courts)
1.1.6. Cases not within the exclusive
jurisdiction of any court, tribunal, person or
body exercising judicial or quasi-judicial
function
1.1.7. Actions and special proceedings
falling within the exclusive original jurisdiction
of the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Courts
(now the Family Courts) and the Court of
Agrarian Relations
1.1.8. Other cases where demand,
exclusive of interest, damages, attorneys fees,
litigation expenses and costs, or value of
property in controversy exceeds P300,000, or
in Metro Manila, P400,000. However, if the
claim for damages is the main cause of action,
1.2.1. with Supreme Court

Actions affecting ambassadors and other
public ministers and consuls.
1.2.2. with Supreme Court and CA
a. Certiorari,
prohibition
and
mandamus against lower courts and bodies.
b. Habeas corpus and quo warranto
1.2.3. with the Insurance Commission
*Claims not exceeding P100,000.
*Applicable if the subject of the action is not
capable of pecuniary estimation; otherwise,
jurisdiction is concurrent with MeTCs, MTCs,
etc.
2. Criminal
2.1. Exclusive
Criminal cases not within the exclusive
jurisdiction of any court, tribunal or body which
includes cases:
a. where penalty exceeds six (6) years.
b. with regard to offenses NOT
cognizable by the Sandiganbayan where none of
the
accused
are
occupying
positions
R E M E D I A L
L A W
Page 10 of 212
I
C
U
n
s
t
i
E N T R A
n i t e d
t
L
P
u
t
e
B A R
u r s u i
o
P
O
t
f
L
a
w
E R A T I O N S
o f
E x c e l l e
2 0 0
c e
M E M O R Y
A I D
I N
R E M E D I A L
corresponding to salary grade 27 and higher, or

by the Court of Tax Appeals with regard to
claim of taxes and fees not amounting to one
million pesos.
c. where the only penalty is fine, the
amount of fine exceeds P4,000.
d. violations of the NIRC, Tariff and
the BIR and BOC where the principal amount of
taxes and fess claimed is less than One Million
Pesos (P1M) or where there is NO specified
amount
Note: The Family Courts have exclusive
original jurisdiction over criminal cases where
one or more of the accused is below 18 years of
age but not less than 9 years of age, or when one
or more of the victims is a minor at the time of
the commission of the offense. (Sec. 5a, R.A.
8369)
B. Appellate
All cases decided by lower courts in their
respective territorial jurisdictions.
Action Incapable of Pecuniary
Estimation
Whether it is primarily for a sum of
money. If yes, the action is capable of
Where the sum of money is merely
incidental or as a consequence
If there is something more to be done,
the award of money is merely incidental
Where sum of money is an alternative
remedy/prayer, the action is capable of
pecuniary
estimation
(specific
performance OR damages)
Specific performance AND damages, the
sum of money is merely incidental,
therefore the action is incapable of
Where the action is for damages,
jurisdiction is determined by the
principal cause of action. Where the
action is primarily for actual damages,
moral and exemplary damages, the
moral and exemplary damages will not
be considered in the determination of
jurisdiction. (Huguete vs. Embudo,
GRN 149554, July 1, 2003, 405 SCRA
168)
VI. FAMILY COURTS
A. Exclusive and Original
L A W
1. Criminal cases where one or more of the

accused is below 18 years of age but not less
than 9 years of age, or when one or more of the
victims is a minor at the time of the commission
of the offense: Provided, That if the minor is
found guilty, the court shall promulgate
sentence and ascertain any civil liability which
the accused may have incurred. The sentence,
however, shall be suspended without need of
application pursuant to P.D. 903 otherwise
known as the Child and Youth Welfare Code.
2. Petitions for guardianship, custody of
children, habeas corpus in relation to the latter
and hospitalization of insane minors.
3. Petitions for adoption of children and the
revocation thereof.
4. Complaints for annulment of marriage,
declaration of nullity of marriage and those
relating to marital status and property relations
of husband and wife or those living together
under different status and agreements; and
petitions for dissolution of conjugal partnership
of gains.
5.
Petitions
acknowledgment.
for
support
and/or
6. Summary judicial proceedings brought under

the provisions of E.O. 209, otherwise known as
the Family Code of the Philippines.
7. Petitions for declaration of status of children
as abandoned, dependent or neglected children;
petitions for voluntary or involuntary
commitment of children, the suspension,
termination, or restoration pf parental authority
and other cases cognizable under P.D. 603, E.O.
56 and other related laws.
8. Petitions for the constitution of the family
home.
9. Cases against minors cognizable under the
Dangerous Drugs Act.
10. Violations of R.A. 7160, otherwise known as
the Special Protection of Children Against
Child Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination
Act.
11. Cases of domestic violence against women
and children.
VII. MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS, etc.
R E M E D I A L
L A W
Page 11 of 212
I
C
U
n
s
t
i
E N T R A
n i t e d
t
L
P
u
t
e
B A R
u r s u i
o
P
O
t
f
L
a
w
E R A T I O N S
o f
E x c e l l e
2 0 0
c e
M E M O R Y
A I D
I N
R E M E D I A L
A. Original
1. Civil
1.1. Exclusive
1.1.1.
Actions
involving
personal
property valued at not more than P300,000, or
in Metro Manila, P400,000.
1.1.2. Actions demanding sums of money
not exceeding P300,000, or in Metro Manila,
P400,000; in both cases, exclusive of interest,
damages, attorneys fees, litigation expenses
and costs, the amount of which must be
specifically alleged, but the filing fees thereon
shall be paid. These include admiralty and
maritime cases.
1.1.3. Actions involving title or
possession of real property where the assessed
value does not exceed P20,000, or in Metro
Manila, P50,000.
1.1.4. Provisional remedies in principal
actions within their jurisdiction, and in proper
cases such as preliminary attachment,
preliminary injunction, appointment of receiver
and delivery of personal property.
1.1.5. Forcible entry and unlawful
detainer, with jurisdiction to resolve ownership
to determine issue of possession.
1.1.6. Probate proceedings, testate or
intestate, where gross value of estate does not
exceed P300,000, or in Metro Manila,
P400,000.
1.1.7. Inclusion and exclusion of voters.
1.1.8. Tax collection cases NOT falling
under the exclusive original jurisdiction of the
Court of Tax Appeals and RTC where principal
amount claimed is less than One Million Pesos
(P1M).
L A W
2.1.1. All violations of city or municipal

ordinances committed within their respective
territorial jurisdictions.
2.1.2. All offenses punishable with
imprisonment of not more than 6 years
irrespective of the fine and regardless of other
imposable accessory or other penalties and the
civil liability arising therefrom; Provided,
however, that in offenses involving damage to
property through criminal negligence, the
imposable fine does not exceed P10,000.
2.1.3. All offenses committed NOT
falling within the exclusive original jurisdiction
of the Sandiganbayan where none of the
accused are occupying positions corresponding
to salary grade 27 and higher, or of the Court of
Tax Appeals with regard to claim of taxes and
fees amounting to one million pesos.
2.1.4. In cases where the only penalty
provided by law is a fine not exceeding P4,000.
2.1.5. Violations of the NIRC, Tariff and
the BIR and BOC where the principal amount of
taxes and fess claimed is less than One Million
Pesos (P1M) and not falling within the exclusive
jurisdiction of the RTC.
2.2. Concurrent with Prosecutors
Except for MetCs in the National Capital
Region, conduct preliminary investigation of
offenses where the penalty prescribed by law is
at least four (4) years, two (2) months and one
(1) day without regard to fine. Preliminary
investigation of crimes within the jurisdiction of
the Sandiganbayan is conducted by the Office of
the Special Prosecutor under the Ombudsman.
3. Summary Procedure
1.2. Concurrent with RTCs None
3.1. Civil
1.3. Delegated
Cadastral and land registration cases
assigned by the Supreme Court where there is
no controversy or opposition and in contested
lots valued at not more than P100,000.
3.1.1. Forcible entry and unlawful

detainer, irrespective of the amount of damages
or unpaid rentals sought to be recovered; but
attorneys fees shall not exceed P20,000.
It can issue writ of preliminary
mandatory action in case of unlawful detainer.
1.4. Special
Petition for habeas corpus in the
absence of all Regional Trial Court Judges.
2. Criminal
3.1.2. All other cases, except probate

proceedings, where total claim does not exceed
P10,000.
3.2. Criminal
2.1. Exclusive
R E M E D I A L
L A W
Page 12 of 212
I
C
U
n
s
t
i
E N T R A
n i t e d
t
L
P
u
t
e
B A R
u r s u i
o
P
O
t
f
L
a
w
E R A T I O N S
o f
E x c e l l e
2 0 0
c e
M E M O R Y
A I D
I N
R E M E D I A L
3.2.1. Traffic law and rules violations

3.2.2. Rental law violations
3.2.3. Violations of municipal or city
ordinances
3.2.4. Violations of B.P. 22 (Bouncing
Checks Law)
3.2.5. All other cases where penalty does
not exceed 6 months and/or fine of P1,000, or
both, irrespective of other imposable penalties,
accessory or civil liability arising therefrom;
Provided, however, that in offenses involving
damage to property through criminal
negligence, the imposable fine does not exceed
P10,000.
When
Defense
of
Ejectment Case Proper
Ownership
in
The defense of ownership contemplated

under the Rule refers to a situation where the
defendants either claim ownership of the
subject property or attributes of said ownership
to another person other than the plaintiff. It
does not apply where the defendant merely
questions the validity of the title of the plaintiff.
(Lacap vs. Lee, GRN 142131, Dec. 11, 2002, 394
SCRA 1)
L A W
How to Determine Jurisdiction

Foreclosure of Property
in
1. In foreclosure of property where the value of

the property is involved, the value of the
property itself determines the jurisdiction.
2. In foreclosure of property where the value of
the property is NOT involved (specific
value), the value of alternative prayer for
damages determines the jurisdiction.
Principle of Exercise of Equity
Jurisdiction
This is a situation where the court is called
upon to decide a particular situation and release
the parties from their correlative obligations but
if it would result in adverse consequences to the
parties and the public, the court would go
beyond its powers to avoid negative
consequences in the release of the parties.
CIVIL PROCEDURE
RULE 1
General Considerations
Damages in Ejectment Case
Sec. 3. Cases governed.
In ejectment cases, the ONLY damages that

can be recovered are the fair rental value or
the reasonable compensation for the use
and occupation of the property. Considering
that the only issue raised in ejectment is that of
rightful possession, damages which could be
recovered are those which the plaintiff could
have sustained as a mere possessor, or those
caused by the loss of the use and occupation of
the property, and not the damages which he
may have suffered but which have no direct
relation to his loss of material possession. (C&S
Fishfarm Corp. vs. CA, GRN 122720, Dec. 16,
2002, 394 SCRA 82)
Civil action
One by which a party sues another for
the enforcement or protection of a right,
or the prevention or redress of a wrong.
May either be ordinary or special.
Based on a cause of action.
May RA 7691, the act which expanded the

jurisdiction of the municipal trial courts,
be given retroactive application?
No. Jurisdiction being a matter of
substantive law, the established rule is that the
statute in force at the time of the
commencement of the action determines the
jurisdiction of the court. (Yu Oh vs. CA. GRN
125297, June 6, 2003, 403 SCRA 300)
Criminal action
One by which the State prosecutes a
person for an act or omission punishable
by law.
Based on a cause of accusation.
Special proceeding a remedy by which a
party seeks to establish a status, a right, or a
particular fact.
Ordinary Action
A formal demand of
ones right in a court
of justice in the
manner
prescribed
by the court or by the
law
R E M E D I A L
Special
Proceeding
An application or
petition to establish
the status or right of
a
party
or
a
particular fact.
L A W
Page 13 of 212

Crim Pro 14324

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Crim Pro 14324

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Crim Pro 14324

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

I

proceedings are void only

Jurisdiction Over the Subject Matter vs.

Jurisdiction Over the Subject of

Requisites of Judicial Due Process:

The Theory of Political Question refers

Two Judicial Review Powers

Rule: If a case is such that its determination

Grave Abuse of Discretion

The Doctrine of Non-interference in

259, 1984; Santos vs. Bayhon, GRN 88643,

Doctrine of Judicial Stability

The La Naval Doctrines on Jurisdiction

2. Where the court itself clearly has no

2. The question of constitutionality must be

When is Jurisdiction Determined?

I. As to nature, cause or foundation

Doctrine of Adherence of Jurisdiction

1. There must be an actual controversy.

person and based on jurisdiction of the

Summons is served either

It is sufficient that summons

Jurisdiction is over the res

TRIBAL COURTS (R.A. 8371)

Summons is served extraterritorially

participated in the attempt to settle the dispute

THE KATARUNGANG PAMBARANGAY

d. Actions barred by Statute of

Personal Appearance The parties must

Exceptions: Cases where

2. As to Respondent any counterclaim he

judgment of court upon the expiration of ten

Principle of Judicial Hierarchy

1. Power of Adjudication (Judicial Power)

Scope of Rule Making Power of the SC

Petitions for issuance of writs of

2.2.1. Petitions for habeas corpus

II. COURT OF APPEALS

Actions affecting ambassadors and

2.1. with Supreme Court

2.2. with Supreme Court and RTCs

Where the RTC imposed the penalty of

committed by public officials and employees in

election of board of directors appointed by the

In cases where there is no specific allegation

In tax collection cases, judgments,

appellate jurisdiction originally decided by the

the amount thereof shall be considered in

V. REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS

1.2.1. with Supreme Court

corresponding to salary grade 27 and higher, or

1. Criminal cases where one or more of the

6. Summary judicial proceedings brought under

2.1.1. All violations of city or municipal

1.2. Concurrent with RTCs None

3.1.1. Forcible entry and unlawful

3.1.2. All other cases, except probate

3.2.1. Traffic law and rules violations