UST Golden Notes Civil Procedure Remedial Law General Principles Included PDF

Preview

Summary

GENERAL PRINCIPLES I. GENERAL PRINCIPLES 7. Court decisions (Herrera, Vol. I, p. 2, 2007 ed.) A. CONCEPT OF REMEDIAL LAW Q: What is procedural rule? Q: What is the concept of remedial law? A: Procedural rule is the judicial process for A: It is a branch of public law, which prescribes the enforcing ...

Description

GENERAL PRINCIPLES I. GENERAL PRINCIPLES

7.

Court decisions (Herrera, Vol. I, p. 2, 2007 ed.)

A. CONCEPT OF REMEDIAL LAW Q: What is procedural rule? Q: What is the concept of remedial law? A: It is a branch of public law, which prescribes the procedural rules to be observed in litigations, whether civil, criminal, or administrative, and in special proceedings, as well as the remedies or reliefs available in each case. (2006 Bar Question) Q: What is the importance of remedial law? A: It plays a vital role in the administration of justice. It lies at the very core of procedural due process, which means a law which hears before it condemns, which proceeds upon inquiry and renders judgment only after trial, and contemplates an opportunity to be heard before judgment is rendered (Herrera, Vol. I, p. 1, 2007 ed.) B. SUBSTANTIVE LAW AS DISTINGUISHED FROM REMEDIAL LAW

A: Procedural rule is the judicial process for enforcing rights and duties recognized by substantive law and for justly administering remedy and redress for their disregard or infraction. Note: If the rule takes away a vested right, it is not procedural. If the rule creates a right such as the right to appeal, it may be classified as substantive matter; but if it operates as a means of implementing an existing right, then the rule deals merely with procedure (Fabian v. Desierto, G.R. No. 129742, Sept. 16, 1998).

Q: How are remedial laws implemented in our system of government? A: They are implemented through the judicial system, including the prosecutory service of courts and quasi-judicial agencies. (2006 Bar Question)

Q: Distinguish substantive and remedial law

C. RULE-MAKING POWER OF THE SUPREME COURT

A:

1. LIMITATIONS ON THE RULE-MAKING POWER OF THE SUPREME COURT

Substantive Law Remedial Law Part of the law which Refers to the legislation creates, defines or providing means or regulates rights concerning methods whereby causes life, liberty or property or of action may be the powers of agencies or effectuated, wrongs instrumentalities for the redressed and relief administration of public obtained (also known as affairs. Adjective Law). Does not create vested Creates vested rights. rights Retroactive in Prospective in application. application The Supreme Court is expressly empowered to Cannot be enacted by the promulgate procedural Supreme Court. rules. (2006 Bar Question)

Q: What are the principal sources of remedial law? A: 1. 2.

3. 4. 5. 6.

Constitution Different laws creating the judiciary, defining and allocating jurisdiction to courts of different levels Procedural laws and rules promulgated by the Supreme Court Circulars Administrative orders Internal rules

Q: What are the limitations on the rule-making power of the Supreme Court? A: 1.

2. 3.

It shall provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition of cases. The rules must be uniform for all the courts of the same grade. The rules must not diminish, increase or modify substantive rights (Cruz, Philippine Political Law, p. 281, 2002 ed.)

2. POWER OF THE SUPREME COURT TO AMEND AND SUSPEND PROCEDURAL RULES Q:

May the Supreme Court suspend the application of the Rules of Court and exempt a case from its operation?

A: Yes. In the interest of just and expeditious proceedings, the Supreme Court may do so because the Rules were precisely adopted with the primary objective of enhancing fair trial and expeditious justice. (Republic v. CA, G.R. No. L-31303, May 31, 1978)

ACADEMICS CHAIR: LESTER JAY ALAN E. FLORES II UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS VICE CHAIRS FOR ACADEMICS: KAREN JOY G. SABUGO & JOHN HENRY C. MENDOZA VICE CHAIR FOR MANAGEMENT AND FINANCE: JEANELLE C. LEE Facultad de Derecho Civil VICE CHAIRS FOR LAY-OUT AND DESIGN: EARL LOUIE M. MASACAYAN & THEENA C. MARTINEZ

1

UST GOLDEN NOTES 2011 D. NATURE OF PHILIPPINE COURTS 1. MEANING OF A COURT Q: What is a court?

Q: Distinguish Courts of general jurisdiction from special jurisdiction.

A: It is an organ of the government, belonging to the judicial department, whose function is the application of laws to controversies brought before it and the public administration of justice. (Black’s Law Dictionary) 2. COURT AS DISTINGUISHED FROM A JUDGE Q: Distinguish court from a judge Court Entire body in which the judicial power is vested May exist without a present judge Disqualification of a judge does not affect the court

Judge Only an officer or member of the court There may be a judge without a court May be disqualified

3. CLASSIFICATION OF PHILIPPINE COURTS Q: What are the classifications of Philippine courts? A: 1.

2.

3.

5. COURTS OF GENERAL AND SPECIAL JURISDICTION

Regular courts (Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, Regional Trial Courts, Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, Municipal Trial Courts , Municipal Circuit Trial Courts) Special courts (Sandiganbayan, Court of Tax Appels, Shari'a District Courts, Shari'a Circuit Courts) Quasi-courts or Quasi-judicial agencies (e.g Civil Service Commission)

4. COURTS OF ORIGINAL AND APPELLATE JURISDICTION

A: Courts of General jurisdiction Takes cognizance of all cases , civil or criminal, of a particular nature, or courts whose judgment is conclusive until modified or reversed on direct attack, and who are competent to decide on their own jurisdiction

6. CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY COURTS Q: Distinguish constitutional court from statutory court. A: Constitutional Court Created by the constitution e.g. SC Cannot be abolished by Congress without amending the Constitution

Q: Distinguish Courts of law from equity. A: Courts of Law Any tribunal duly administering the laws of the land

Courts of Equity Any tribunal administering justice outside the law, being ethical rather than jural and belonging to the sphere of morals rather than of law. It is grounded on the precepts of conscience and not on any sanction of positive law, for equity finds no room for application where there is law. (Herrera, Vol. I, p. 18, 2007 ed.)

Decides a case according to what the promulgated law is

Adjudicates a controversy according to the common precepts of what is right and just without inquiring into the terms of the statutes

A:

2

Courts of Appellate jurisdiction Superior Courts reviewing and deciding cases previously decided by a lower court

Statutory Court Created by law e.g. CTA May be abolished by Congress by just simply repealing the law which created those courts

7. COURTS OF LAW AND EQUITY

Q: Distinguish Courts of original jurisdiction from Courts of appellate jurisdiction.

Courts of Original jurisdiction Courts exercising jurisdiction in the first instance

Courts of Special jurisdiction Takes cognizance of special jurisdiction for a particular purpose, or are clothed with special powers for the performance of specified duties, beyond which they have no authority of any kind

REMEDIAL LAW TEAM: ADVISER: JUDGE MYRA B. QUIAMBAO, JUSTICE OSCAR C. HERRERA, JR., JUSTICE JAIME M. LANTIN, JUDGE CESAR D. STAMARIA, SR.; SUBJECT HEAD: ANGELI P. ALBAÑA; ASST. SUBJECT HEADS: DARRELL L. BAGANG, DIANE CAMILLA R. BORJA, YRIZ TAMIE A. MARIANO, MA. KATRINA NADINE G. JUANENGO; MEMBERS: AKEMI B. AIDA, TERESE RAY-ANNE O. AQUINO, GRETCHEN C. SY, RHONDEE E. DUMLAO, KRISTINE P. MIJARES, DONNA GRAGASIN, EDELISE D. PINEDA, SHERY PAIGE A. LIM, MARA KHRISNA CHARMINA F. MENDOZA, UNICA AMOR R. MANANQUIL, MICHAEL ANGELO V. FLORES; CONTRIBUTORS: VICENTE JAN O. PLATON III, RONN ROBBY D. ROSALES

GENERAL PRINCIPLES Q: What are courts of record? A: These are courts whose proceedings are enrolled and which are bound to keep written records of all trials and proceedings handled by them. R.A. No. 6031 mandates all Municipal Trial Courts to be courts of record. 8. PRINCIPLE OF JUDICIAL HIERARCHY Q: What is the policy of Judicial Hierarchy or hierarchy of courts? A: A higher court will not entertain direct resort to it unless the redress desired cannot be obtained in the appropriate courts. The Supreme Court is a court of last resort and must so remain if it is to satisfactorily perform assigned to it. (1996 Bar Question) 9. DOCTRINE OF NON-INTERFERENCE OR DOCTRINE OF JUDICIAL STABILITY Q: What is Doctrine of Non-Interference or Judicial Stability? A: Courts of equal and coordinate jurisdiction cannot interfere with each other’s orders. Thus, the RTC has no power to nullify or enjoin the enforcement of a writ of possession issued by another RTC. The principle also bars a court from reviewing or interfering with the judgment of a coequal court over which it has no appellate jurisdiction or power of review. Note: GR: No court has the authority to interfere by injunction with the judgment of another court of coordinate jurisdiction or to pass upon or scrutinize and much less declare as unjust a judgment of another court. XPN: The doctrine does not apply where a third party claimant is involved (Santos v. Bayhon, G.R. No. 88643, July 23, 1991).

ACADEMICS CHAIR: LESTER JAY ALAN E. FLORES II UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS VICE CHAIRS FOR ACADEMICS: KAREN JOY G. SABUGO & JOHN HENRY C. MENDOZA VICE CHAIR FOR MANAGEMENT AND FINANCE: JEANELLE C. LEE Facultad de Derecho Civil VICE CHAIRS FOR LAY-OUT AND DESIGN: EARL LOUIE M. MASACAYAN & THEENA C. MARTINEZ

3

UST GOLDEN NOTES 2011 II. JURISDICTION

Q: Distinguish jurisdiction over the subject matter from jurisdiction over the person.

Q: What is jurisdiction? A: A: It is the power and authority of a court to try, hear, and decide a case and to carry its judgments into effect (Latin: “juris” and “dico,” which literally means “I speak of the law”). Q: Is the statement that “Jurisdiction is conferred by substantive law“ accurate? A: No, because only jurisdiction over the subject matter is conferred by substantive law. Jurisdiction over the parties, issues and res is governed by procedural laws. A. JURISDICTION OVER THE PARTIES 1. HOW JURISDICTION OVER THE PLAINTIFF IS ACQUIRED Q: How is jurisdiction over the plaintiff acquired? A: It is acquired from the moment of filing the complaint, petition or initiatory pleading. 2. HOW JURISDICTION OVER THE DEFENDANT IS ACQUIRED Q: How is jurisdiction over the defendant acquired? A: It is acquired either: a. By his voluntary appearance in court and his submission to its authority b. By service of summons c. Other coercive process upon him Note: Jurisdiction over the defendant is not essential in actions in rem or quasi in rem as long as the court has jurisdiction over the res (Herrera, Vol. I, p. 114, 2007 ed.)

B. JURISDICTION OVER THE SUBJECT MATTER 1. MEANING OF JURISDICTION OVER THE SUBJECT MATTER Q: What is jurisdiction over the subject matter?

Jurisdiction Over the Subject Matter Determined by the allegations of the complaint (Riano, Civil Procedure: A Restatement for the Bar, p. 144, 2009 ed.) XPN: Where the real issues are evident from the record of the case, jurisdiction over the subject matter cannot be made to depend on how the parties word or phrase their pleadings (Herrera, Vol. I, p. 2, 2007 ed.) e.g. in ejectment cases in which the defendant averred the defense of the existence of tenancy relationship between the parties (Ibid p.148)

Jurisdiction Over the Person Acquired by the filing of the petition in case of the plaintiff or by arrest (Rule 113), by valid service of summons or voluntary submission to the court’s authority in case of the defendant (Ibid. p. 158)

Note: Tenancy relationship is not presumed and it is not enough that it is alleged. There must be evidence to prove that it exists and that all its elements are established (Salmorin v. Zaldivar, G.R. No. 169691, July 23, 2008).

Conferred by law which may be either the Constitution or a statute (Ibid. p. 143) Cannot be conferred by the agreement of the parties, by contract or by parties’ silence or acquiescence Ibid. p. 144)

It is sometimes made to depend, indirectly at least, on the party’s volition GR: The appearance of the defendant in whatever form is submission to the jurisdiction of the court XPN: If the appearance is to object or question the court’s jurisdiction (Ibid. p. 161) Note: In criminal cases, jurisdiction over the accused is always required

A: It is the power to deal with the general subject involved in the action, and means not simply jurisdiction of the particular case then occupying the attention of the court but jurisdiction of the class of cases to which the particular case belongs. It is the power or authority to hear and determine cases to which the proceeding in question belongs.

4

REMEDIAL LAW TEAM: ADVISER: JUDGE MYRA B. QUIAMBAO, JUSTICE OSCAR C. HERRERA, JR., JUSTICE JAIME M. LANTIN, JUDGE CESAR D. STAMARIA, SR.; SUBJECT HEAD: ANGELI P. ALBAÑA; ASST. SUBJECT HEADS: DARRELL L. BAGANG, DIANE CAMILLA R. BORJA, YRIZ TAMIE A. MARIANO, MA. KATRINA NADINE G. JUANENGO; MEMBERS: AKEMI B. AIDA, TERESE RAY-ANNE O. AQUINO, GRETCHEN C. SY, RHONDEE E. DUMLAO, KRISTINE P. MIJARES, DONNA GRAGASIN, EDELISE D. PINEDA, SHERY PAIGE A. LIM, MARA KHRISNA CHARMINA F. MENDOZA, UNICA AMOR R. MANANQUIL, MICHAEL ANGELO V. FLORES; CONTRIBUTORS: VICENTE JAN O. PLATON III, RONN ROBBY D. ROSALES

JURISDICTION 2. JURISDICTION VERSUS THE EXERCISE OF JURISDICTION Q: Distinguish jurisdiction from exercise of jurisdiction. A: Jurisdiction is the authority to hear and decide cases. On the other hand, exercise of jurisdiction is any act of the court pursuant to such authority, which includes making decisions. 3. ERROR OF JURISDICTION AS DISTINGUISHED FROM ERROR OF JUDGMENT

5. DOCTRINE OF PRIMARY JURISDICTION Q: What is Doctrine of Primary Jurisdiction? A: Courts will not resolve a controversy involving a question which is within the jurisdiction of an administrative tribunal, especially where the question demands the exercise of sound administrative discretion requiring the special knowledge and experience of said tribunal in determining technical and intricate matters of fact (Villaflor v. CA, G.R. No. 95694, Oct. 9, 1997).

Q: Distinguish error of jurisdiction from error of judgment.

Q: What is Doctrine of Ancillary Jurisdiction?

A:

A: It involves the inherent or implied powers of the court to determine issues incidental to the exercise of its primary jurisdiction.

Error of Jurisdiction One where the court, officer or quasi-judicial body acts without or in excess of jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion Renders a judgment void or at least voidable Correctible by certiorari There is an exercise of jurisdiction in the absence of jurisdiction

Error of Judgment One that the court may commit in the exercise of jurisdiction; it includes errors of procedure or mistakes in the court’s findings Does not make the court’s decision void Correctible by appeal The court acted with jurisdiction but committed procedural errors in the appreciation of the facts or the law (1989 Bar Question)

4. HOW JURISDICTION IS CONFERRED AND DETERMINED Note: discussion on how jurisdiction is conferred is on page 4.

Q: What are the instances in which jurisdiction cannot be conferred? A: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

6.

By the administrative policy of any court; A court’s unilateral assumption of jurisdiction; An erroneous belief by the court that it has jurisdiction; By the parties through a stipulation e.g. contract; The agreement of the parties acquired through, or waived, enlarged or diminished by, any act or omission of the parties; Parties silence, acquiescence or consent (Riano, Civil Procedure: A Restatement for the Bar, p. 143, 11th ed.).

Note: Under its ancillary jurisdiction, a court may determine all questions relative to the matters brought before it, regulate the manner in which a trial shall be conducted, determine the hours at which the witnesses and lawyers may be heard, and grant an injunction, attachment or garnishment.

6. DOCTRINE OF ADHERENCE TO JURISDICTION Q: What is Doctrine of Adherence to Jurisdiction or Continuity of Jurisdiction? A: GR: Jurisdiction, once attached, cannot be ousted by subsequent happenings or events although of a character which would have prevented jurisdiction from attaching in the first instance, and the court retains jurisdiction until it finally disposes of the case. XPNs: 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;

ACADEMICS CHAIR: LESTER JAY ALAN E. FLORES II UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS VICE CHAIRS FOR ACADEMICS: KAREN JOY G. SABUGO & JOHN HENRY C. MENDOZA VICE CHAIR FOR MANAGEMENT AND FINANCE: JEANELLE C. LEE Facultad de Derecho Civil VICE CHAIRS FOR LAY-OUT AND DESIGN: EARL LOUIE M. MASACAYAN & THEENA C. MARTINEZ

5

UST GOLDEN NOTES 2011 5.

6. 7.

When the proceedings in the court acquiring jurisdiction is terminated, abandoned or declared void; Once appeal has been perfected; Curative statutes (Herrera, Vol. I, p. 106, 2007 ed.).

because it cannot be tolerated by reason of public policy (Filipinas Shell Petroleum Corp. v. Dumlao, G.R. No. L-44888, Feb. 7, 1992). 3.

Q: Does retroactivity of a law affect jurisdiction? A: No. Jurisdiction being a matter of substantive law, the established rule is that statute in force at the time of the commencement of the action determines jurisdiction. (Herrera, Vol. I, p. 105, 2007 ed.) 7. OBJECTIONS TO JURISDICTION OVER THE SUBJECT MATTER Q: What is the effect of lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter? A: When it appears from the pleadings or evidence on record that the court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter, the court shall dismiss the same. (Sec. 1, Rule 9). The court may on its own initiative object to an erroneous jurisdiction and may ex mero motu take cognizance of lack of jurisdiction at any point in the case and has a clearly recognized right to determine its own jurisdiction (Riano, Civil Procedure: A Restatement for the Bar, p. 154, 2009 ed.). Q: May jurisdiction of the court be raised or questioned at any time? A: GR: Yes. The prevailing rule is that jurisdiction over the subject matter may be raised at any stage of the proceedings (Riano, Civil Procedure: A Restatement for the Bar, p. 154, 2009 ed.). Note: Jurisdiction can be questioned even for the first time on appeal (Herrera, Vol. I, p. 91, 2007 ed.)

XPNs: 1. Estoppel by laches. SC barred a belated objection to jurisdiction that was raised only after an adverse decision was rendered by the court against the party raising the issue of jurisdiction and after seeking affirmative relief from the court and after participating in all stages of the proceedings(Tijam v. Sibonghanoy, G.R. No. L-21450, Apr. 15, 1968). 2.

6

Public policy – One cannot question the jurisdiction which he invoked, not because the decision is valid and conclusive as an adjudication, but

A party who invokes the jurisdiction of the court to secure affirmative relief against his opponents cannot repudiate or question the same after failing to obtain such relief (Tajonera v. Lamaroza, G.R. No. L-48907, 49035, Jan. 19, 1982).

Note: Under the Omnibus Motion Rule, a motion attacking a plead...