Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 18 views

    Dacoycoy vs. Intermediate Appellate Court

    Uploaded by

    Beng Chiong
    This case discusses issues relating to jurisdiction and venue. It confirms that venue deals with the locality or place where a suit may be heard, while jurisdiction concerns the court's power to decide a case on its merits. It also finds that a defendant who fails to timely object to venue through a motion to dismiss cannot later challenge venue, as it is deemed waived. The trial court is not allowed to dismiss a case sua sponte on grounds of improper venue without first allowing the defendant an opportunity to object as outlined in the rules.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Dacoycoy vs. Intermediate Appellate Court

    Uploaded by

    Beng Chiong
    18 views1 page
    This case discusses issues relating to jurisdiction and venue. It confirms that venue deals with the locality or place where a suit may be heard, while jurisdiction concerns the court's power to decide a case on its merits. It also finds that a defendant who fails to timely object to venue through a motion to dismiss cannot later challenge venue, as it is deemed waived. The trial court is not allowed to dismiss a case sua sponte on grounds of improper venue without first allowing the defendant an opportunity to object as outlined in the rules.

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case discusses issues relating to jurisdiction and venue. It confirms that venue deals with the locality or place where a suit may be heard, while jurisdiction concerns the court's power to decide a case on its merits. It also finds that a defendant who fails to timely object to venue through a motion to dismiss cannot later challenge venue, as it is deemed waived. The trial court is not allowed to dismiss a case sua sponte on grounds of improper venue without first allowing the defendant an opportunity to object as outlined in the rules.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    18 views1 page

    Dacoycoy vs. Intermediate Appellate Court

    Uploaded by

    Beng Chiong
    This case discusses issues relating to jurisdiction and venue. It confirms that venue deals with the locality or place where a suit may be heard, while jurisdiction concerns the court's power to decide a case on its merits. It also finds that a defendant who fails to timely object to venue through a motion to dismiss cannot later challenge venue, as it is deemed waived. The trial court is not allowed to dismiss a case sua sponte on grounds of improper venue without first allowing the defendant an opportunity to object as outlined in the rules.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 1

    11/12/2018 CentralBooks:Reader

    Close Reader

    SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 195

    Information | Reference
    Copy Selection
    Case Title: Select some text within a
    JESUS DACOYCOY, petitioner, paragraph and click here to
    vs. HON. INTERMEDIATE copy the selected text. Citation
    APPELLATE COURT, HON. included.
    ANTONIO V. BENEDICTO,
    Executive Judge, Regional Trial
    Court, Branch LXXI, Antipolo, VOL. 195, APRIL 2, 1991 641
    Rizal, and RUFINO DE GUZMAN,
    respondents. Dacoycoy vs. Intermediate Appellate Court
    Citation: 195 SCRA 641
    *
    Less... G.R. No. 74854. April 2, 1991.

    Search Result JESUS DACOYCOY, petitioner, vs. HON. INTERMEDIATE


    APPELLATE COURT, HON. ANTONIO V. BENEDICTO,
    Executive Judge, Regional Trial Court, Branch LXXI, Antipolo,
    Rizal, and RUFINO DE GUZMAN, respondents.

    Civil Procedure; Jurisdiction; Venue; Jurisdiction treats of the power


    of the court to decide a case on the merits, while venue deals on the locality,
    the place where the suit may be had.—Questions or issues relating to venue
    of actions are basically governed by Rule 4 of the Revised Rules of Court. It
    is said that the laying of venue is procedural rather than substantive. It
    relates to the jurisdiction of the court over the person rather than the subject
    matter. Provisions relating to venue establish a relation between the plaintiff
    and the defendant and not between the court and the subject matter. Venue
    relates to trial not to jurisdiction, touches more of the convenience of the
    parties rather than the substance of the case. Jurisdiction treats of the power
    of the court to decide a case on the merits; while venue deals on the locality,
    the place where the suit may be had.
    Same; Same; Same; Where a defendant fails to challenge timely the
    venue in a motion to dismiss, and allows the trial to be held and a decision
    to be rendered, he cannot appeal or belatedly challenge the wrong venue.—
    Dismissing the complaint on the ground of improper venue is certainly not
    the appropriate course of action at this stage of the proceeding, particularly
    as venue, in inferior courts as well as in the courts of first instance (now
    RTC), may be waived expressly or impliedly. Where defendant fails to
    challenge timely the venue in a motion to dismiss as provided by Section 4
    of Rule 4 of the Rules of Court, and allows the trial to be held and a
    decision to be rendered, he cannot on appeal or in a special action be
    permitted to challenge belatedly the wrong venue, which is deemed waived.
    Same; Same; Same; Courts; Actions; Dismissal of; The trial court
    cannot pre-empt the defendant’s prerogative to object to the improper laying
    of the venue by motu proprio dismissing the case.—Thus, unless and until
    the defendant objects to the venue in a motion to dismiss, the venue cannot
    be truly said to have been improperly laid, as for all practical intents and
    purposes, the venue, though technically wrong,

    _______________

    * THIRD DIVISION.

    642

    642 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

    Dacoycoy vs. Intermediate Appellate Court

    may be acceptable to the parties for whose convenience the rules on venue
    had been devised. The trial court cannot pre-empt the defendant’s
    prerogative to object to the improper laying of the venue by motu proprio
    dismissing the case. Indeed, it was grossly erroneous for the trial court to
    have taken a procedural short-cut by dismissing motu proprio the complaint
    on the ground of improper venue without first allowing the procedure
    outlined in the Rules of Court to take its proper course. Although we are for
    the speedy and expeditious resolution of cases, justice and fairness take
    primary importance The ends of justice require that respondent trial court
    © Copyright 2018 Central Book Supply, Inc. All rights reserved.

    http://central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016707921f42e5ab9374003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 1/1

    You might also like