01 - Introduction to Civil Procedure

Question 1

What is remedial law?

Answer 1

Remedial law is that branch of law which prescribes the method of enforcing rights or obtaining redress for their invasion. It is at the very core of procedural due process. (Albert v. University Publishing 13 SCRA 84).

It is procedure that ensures due process.

Question 2

What is due process?

Answer 2

“A law which hears before it condemns, which proceeds upon inquiry and renders judgment only after trial. The meaning is that every citizen shall hold his life, liberty, property and immunities under the protection of general rules which govern society.” Due process is guaranteed in the Constitution. It is a process or proceeding governed by a law prescribed in harmony with the general powers of the legislative department; reasonable in its operation, enforced according to the regular methods of procedure prescribed, and lastly, enforceable alike to all citizens of the state or to all of a class (US vs. Ling Su Fan, 10 Phil 104).

Question 3

What are the components of due process?

Answer 3

A. Court or tribunal clothed with judicial power

B. Jurisdiction over the parties or the object of the proceedings

C. An opportunity to be heard

D. Judgment rendered upon a lawful hearing

Question 4

What is an impartial tribunal?

Answer 4

• One who decides a dispute cannot sit as a judge and a jury simultaneously. He cannot also review his own decision on appeal.
• An independent judiciary that administers justice undeterred by any fear of reprisal or untoward consequence will render judgments that are even more likely to be inspired solely by knowledge of the law and the dictates of conscience, free from corrupting influence of base or unworthy motives (Bengzon vs. Drilon, 208 SCRA 133).

Question 5

Does due process always require a trial-type proceeding?

Answer 5

No. Due process does not always require trial-type proceedings. The essence of due process is to be found in the reasonable evidence one may have in support of one’s defense. To be heard does not only mean “verbal arguments” made in court. One may be heard through pleadings. Where opportunity to be heard through oral arguments or pleadings is accorded, there is no denial of procedural due process (Abiera vs. NLRC, G. R. No. 102023, November 6, 1992, 215 SCRA 476).

Question 6

What is substantive law and substantive due process?

Answer 6

Substantive Law – part of the law that creates, defines, regulates rights concerning life, liberty, property or the power of agencies or instrumentalities for the administration of public affairs.

Substantive due process – requires that the law itself, not merely the procedure by which the law would be enforced is fair, reasonable and just.

Question 7

What is procedural law and procedural due process?

Answer 7

Procedural Law – prescribes the methods of enforcing rights or obtaining redress for their invasion (Bustos vs. Lucero, 81 Phil 640).

Procedural due process - refers to method/manner by which the law is enforced. (Corona vs. United Harbor Pilots Association of the Philippines 283 SCRA 31).

Question 8

Constitutional provision for the rule-making power of the Supreme Court

Answer 8

Rule-Making Power of the Supreme Court

Section 5. The Supreme Court shall have the following powers:

x x x x x x x x x x x x

(5) Promulgate rules concerning the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights, pleading, practice, and procedure in all courts, the admission to the practice of law, the Integrated Bar, and legal assistance to the underprivileged. Such rules shall provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition of cases, shall be uniform for all courts of the same grade, and shall not diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights. Rules of procedure of special courts and quasi-judicial bodies shall remain effective unless disapproved by the Supreme Court (Sec. 5 (5), Article VIII, 1987 Constitution).

Question 9

Where is judicial power vested and what is judicial power?

Answer 9

Sec. 1. Art. VIII. CONST. The judicial power shall be vested in one Supreme Court and in such lower courts as may be established by law.

Judicial power includes the duty of the courts of justice to settle actual controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceable, and to determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the Government.

Question 10

What are the limitations on the rule-making power of the Supreme Court?

Answer 10

• Congress shall have the power to define, prescribe, and apportion the jurisdiction of various courts but may not deprive the Supreme Court of its jurisdiction over cases enumerated in Section 5 hereof. (Sec. 2 of Article VIII, 1987 Constitution)
• No law shall be passed reorganizing the Judiciary when it undermines the security of tenure of its Members.” (Sec. 2 of Article VIII, 1987 Constitution) (limitation upon Congress)
• No law shall be passed increasing the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court as provided in this Constitution without its advice and concurrence.” (Sec. 30, Article VI, 1987 Constitution). (limitation upon Congress)
  
  • Section 27 of R.A. No. 6770 cannot validly authorize an appeal to the SC from decisions of the Office of the Ombudsman in administrative disciplinary cases without violating the proscription in Section 30, Article VI of the Constitution against a law which increases the appellate jurisdiction of the SC. The constitutional prohibition was intended to give the SC a measure of control over cases placed under its appellate jurisdiction; otherwise, the indiscriminate enactment of legislation enlarging its appellate jurisdiction would unnecessarily burden it. x x x With Section 27 of R.A. No. 6770 struck down as unconstitutional, and in line with the regulatory philosophy adopted in appeals from quasi-judicial agencies in the 1997 Revised Rules of Civil Procedure, appeals from decisions of the Office of the Ombudsman in administrative disciplinary cases should be taken to the Court of Appeals under the provisions of Rule 43. Fabian v. Desierto, G.R. No. 129742, September 16, 1998, 295 SCRA 470

Question 11

Does the SC have the power to amend and suspend procedural rules?

Answer 11

YES.

Technical infirmities may be set aside to give due course to tardy appeals in extraordinary situations that merit liberal application of the Rules. This liberality is not meant to undermine the force and effectivity of the periods set by law but to a grave injustice. Our judicial system and the courts have always tried to maintain a healthy balance between the strict enforcement of procedural laws and the guarantee that every litigant be given the full opportunity for the just and proper disposition of his cause.

The Supreme Court may promulgate procedural rules in all courts. It has the sole prerogative to amend, repeal or even establish new rules for a more simplified and inexpensive process, and the speedy disposition of cases. In the rules governing appeals to it and to the Court of Appeals, particularly Rules 42, 43 and 45, the Court allows extensions of time, based on justifiable and compelling reasons, for parties to file their appeals. (Neypes v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 141524, September 14, 2005, 469 SCRA 633)

Question 12

Art. 4 NCC.

Answer 12

Laws shall have no retroactive effect, unless the contrary is provided.” (Article 4, Civil Code)

Question 13

What is the exception to the law that laws shall have no retroactive effect?

Answer 13

Procedural rules may have retroactive application.

The 2019 Proposed Amendments to the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure shall govern all cases filed after their effectivity on May 1, 2020, and also all pending proceedings, except to the extent that in the opinion of the court, their application would not be feasible or would work injustice, in which case the procedure under which the cases were filed, shall govern x x x x (Rule 144 of 2019 Amendments (A.M. No. 19-10-20-SC).

*The issue here is whether the ruling in Manchester Development Corporation vs. CA applies to the instant case considering that at the time of the filing of the complaint, Manchester was not yet promulgated. Here, the SC held that the contention that Manchester cannot apply retroactively to this case is untenable. Statutes regulating the procedure of the courts will be construed as applicable to actions pending and undetermined at the time of their passage. Procedural laws are retrospective in that sense and to that extent. (Sun Insurance Office Ltd. v. Asuncion, G.R. No. 79937-38, February 13, 1989).

Question 14

What are the elements of jurisdiction?

Answer 14

Elements of Jurisdiction

a. Jurisdiction over the subject matter/nature of the case
b. Jurisdiction over the parties
c. Jurisdiction over the res

Question 15

What is jurisdiction over the subject matter/nature of the case?

Answer 15

Jurisdiction over the subject matter - The power to hear and determine cases of the general class to which the proceedings in question belong and is conferred by the sovereign which organizes the court and defines its powers (Perkins v. Roxas, 72 Phil 514). Usually refers to jurisdiction over the subject only (Singco v. Co Ho, 74 Phil 239)

Question 16

What is jurisdiction over the parties?

Answer 16

Jurisdiction over the parties - ordinarily understood to mean 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 counsel, to render good judgment. (Banco Espanol v. Palanca, 37 Phil 921)

Question 17

What is jurisdiction over the res?

Answer 17

Jurisdiction over the res - 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 court’s act may confer such jurisdiction.

Question 18

May jurisdiction over the subject matter be conferred by administrative issuances or court orders?

Answer 18

No. In De Pedro v. Romasan, jurisdiction over the subject matter “is conferred by the Constitution or by law. It is not acquired through administrative issuances or court orders. It is not acquire by agreement, stipulation, waiver, or silence. Any decision by a court, without a law vesting jurisdiction upon such court is void.”

Question 19

How does the court acquire jurisdiction over the res?

Answer 19

The court may acquire jurisdiction over the thing by actually or constructively seizing or placing it under the court’s custody. [de Pedro v. Romasan]

Question 20

When do courts acquire jurisdiction over the parties of a case?

Answer 20

Courts acquire jurisdiction over complainants or petitioners as soon as they file their complaints or petitions.

Courts acquire jurisdiction over the persons of defendants or respondents by a valid service of summons or through their voluntary submission.

Question 21

Differentiate actions in personam, in rem, and quasi in rem.

Answer 21

• In personam* - the judgment is for or against a person directly.
• In rem* - actions against the thing itself. They are binding upon the whole world.
• Quasi in rem* - actions involving the status of a property over which a party has interest. They are not binding upon the whole world but affect only the interest of the particular parties.

Question 22

Is jurisdiction over the person a dispensable component in actions in rem and quasi in rem?

Answer 22

No. Jurisdiction over the parties is required regardless of the type of action – whether the action is in personam, in rem, or quasi in rem. To satisfy the requirement of due process, jurisdiction over the parties in in rem and quasi in rem actions is required. [de pedro v. romasan]

Question 23

What are the classes of jurisdiction of the courts?

Answer 23

(i) General – courts take cognizance of all causes, civil or criminal, except those assigned to special courts;

• a court of general jurisdiction is presumed to be acting within its jurisdiction unless contrary is shown.

(ii) Special or Limited – that which is confined to particular causes, or which can be exercised only under limitations and circumstances prescribed by statute (Yu Lay vs. Galmes, 40 Phil 651);

- a court of limited jurisdiction has only the jurisdiction expressly delegated and must appear from the record that its acts are within its jurisdiction

(iii) Original – power of the court to take judicial cognizance of a case instituted for judicial action or the first time under conditions provided by law.

(iv) Appellate – authority of a court higher in rank to re-examine the final order or judgment of a lower court which tried the case now elevated for judicial review

(v) Exclusive – that which is confined to a particular court to the exclusion of the other courts.

(vi) Concurrence/confluent/coordinate – when two or more courts exercise jurisdiction over the same subject matter and within the dame territory and the litigant may elect either court.

Question 24

What is the meaning of a court and a judge?

Answer 24

Courts are judicial tribunals in the administration or dispensation of justice. They exist to resolve and end disputes in accordance with the law peacefully, orderly, authoritatively, definitely and finally. A judge is a public officer appointed to preside over the court for the purpose of administering the law.

Question 25

Distinguish court from a judge.

Answer 25

Both may be used interchangeably but: jurisdiction is vested in a court, and not a judge. Courts are an entity, and the person who occupies the position is the judge. Courts may exist even without judges.

Question 26

What is the hierarchy/jurisdiction of courts in the Philippines?

Answer 26

first level courts – MTC, MeTC, MTCC (original, exclusive and special jurisdiction)

second level court – RTC (original, appellate, general, civil, and criminal, exclusive, concurrent, special and limited)

third level courts – Court of Appeals, Sandiganbayan, Court of Tax Appeals (original and appellate, exclusive and concurrent)

fourth level court – Supreme Court (original and appellate, exclusive and concurrent)

Question 27

What are constitutional courts?

Answer 27

Constitutional Courts are courts that are created by the Constitution itself. Example: the Supreme Court, the Sandiganbayan

Question 28

What are statutory courts?

Answer 28

Statutory courts are courts that are created by legislature.

The Court of Appeals, the RTC, the METC, and MTC were created by B.P 129. The Courts created by special laws are the CTA and the Family Courts.

Question 29

What is the difference between courts of law and courts of equity?

Answer 29

Courts of Laws – tribunals duly administering the laws of the land

Courts of equity – courts that administer justice according to “fairness”

Question 30

What are the different kinds of jurisdiction?

Answer 30

1. Delegated jurisdictions (BP 129, sec. 34 in rel PD 1529 sec. 2);
2. Special jurisdiction (BP 129, sec 35);
3. Residual jurisdiction;
4. Primary jurisdiction;
5. Expanded jurisdiction (sec 1, par 2, Art VIII CONST);
6. Split jurisdiction;
7. Epistolary jurisdiction;
8. Equity jurisdiction

Question 31

What is delegated jursidiction?

Answer 31

Delegated jurisdiction is when the court assigns the jurisdiction to certain courts.

Delegated jurisdiction in cadastral and land registration cases. – Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts may be assigned by the Supreme Court to hear and determine cadastral or land registration cases covering lots where there is no controversy or opposition, or contested lots the where the value of which does not exceed One hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00) (BP 129, Sec. 34 in relation to PD 1529, Sec. 2)

Question 32

What is special jurisdiction?

Answer 32

Special jurisdiction in certain cases. — In the absence of all the Regional Trial Judges in a province or city, any Metropolitan Trial Judge, Municipal Trial Judge, Municipal Circuit Trial Judge may hear and decide petitions for a writ of habeas corpus or applications for bail in criminal cases in the province or city where the absent Regional Trial Judges sit. (e.g. BP 129, Sec. 35)

Question 33

What is residual jurisdiction?

Answer 33

• Residual jurisdiction refers to the authority of the trial court to issue orders for the protection and preservation of the rights of the parties which do not involve any matter litigated by the appeal; to approve compromises; to permit appeals by indigent litigants; to order execution pending appeal in accordance with Section 2, Rule 39; and to allow the withdrawal of the appeal, provided these are done prior to the transmittal of the original record or the record on appeal, even if the appeal has already been perfected or despite the approval of the record on appeal or in case of a petition for review under Rule 42, before the CA gives due course to the petition.
• The “residual jurisdiction” of the trial court is available at a stage in which the court is normally deemed to have lost jurisdiction over the case or the subject matter involved in the appeal. This stage is reached upon the perfection of the appeals by the parties or upon the approval of the records on appeal, but prior to the transmittal of the original records or the records on appeal. In either instance, the trial court still retains its so-called residual jurisdiction to issue protective orders, approve compromises, permit appeals of indigent litigants, order execution pending appeal, and allow the withdrawal of the appeal (DBP vs. Carpio, G.R. No. 195450, February 1, 2017).
• Residual jurisdiction implies a prior trial on the merits.

Question 34

What is the difference between residual prerogatives and residual jurisdiction?

Answer 34

lorem ipsum…

Question 35

What is split jurisdiction?

Answer 35

Split jurisdiction occurs when two courts exercise jurisdiction over the same subject matter. In City of Manila v. Judge Cuerdo, the SC held that the petitioners were incorrect for filing the petition for certiorari concerning a tax case. According to the SC, “the split-jurisdiction situation […] is anathema to the orderly administration of justice.”

Question 36

What is equity jurisdiction?

Answer 36

There is equity jurisdiction when the court relaxes the rules in order to avoid an injustice upon the parties of the case– to prevent a wrong. Liberal interpretation is warranted in cases where a strict enforcement of the rules will not serve the ends of justice [Rubio v. Alabata].

Question 37

What is estoppel by jurisdiction?

Answer 37

While an order or decision rendered without jurisdiction is a total nullity and may be assailed at any stage, active participation in the proceedings in the court which rendered the order or decision will bar such party from attacking its jurisdiction. [Gonzaga v. CA citing TIjam v. Sibonghanoy].

Question 38

Doctrine of hierarchy of courts

Answer 38

The hierarchy of courts is determinative of the venue of appeals, and should also serve as a general determinant of the appropriate forum for petitions for the extraordinary writs. A becoming regard for that judicial hierarchy most certainly indicates that petitions for the issuance of extraordinary writs against first level (“inferior”) courts should be filed with the Regional Trial Court, and those against the latter, with the Court of Appeals. A direct invocation of the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction to issue these writs should be allowed only when there are special and important reasons therefor, clearly and specifically set out in the petition. This is an established policy. [Gios Samar v. DOTC citing People v. Cuaresma]