Civ Pro 1st Exam Notes

Judicial Hierarchy (4) where the constitutional issues raised are better decided
after a thorough deliberation by a collegiate body and with

(1) Relational hierarchy of courts – the relationship
the concurrence of the majority of those who participated
between and among several courts of the judiciary in
in its discussion;
terms of jurisdiction and supervisory authority.
(5) where time is of the essence;
(2) Doctrinal hierarchy of courts – a limitation on a litigant’s
(6) where the act being questioned was that of a constitutional
right of recourse in cases where there exists, between
body;
several courts, a concurrence of subject matter
(7) where there is no other plain, speedy, and adequate
jurisdiction.
remedy in the ordinary course of law that could free
petitioner from the injurious effects of respondents' acts in
People vs. Cuaresma violation of their constitutional rights; and
(8) the issues involve public welfare, the advancement of
Doctrine of Hierarchy of Courts public policy, the broader interest of justice, or where the
This concurrence of jurisdiction is not, however, to be taken as orders complained of are patent nullities, or where appeal
according to parties seeking any of the writs an absolute, can be considered as clearly an inappropriate remedy.
unrestrained freedom of choice of the court to which
application therefor will be directed. There is after all a Gios-Samar vs. DOTC
hierarchy of courts. That hierarchy is determinative of the
venue of appeals and should also serve as a general
Transcendental importance doctrine
determinant of the appropriate forum for petitions for the
We take this opportunity to clarify that the presence of one or
extraordinary writs.
more of the so-called “special and important reasons” is not the
decisive factor considered by the Court in deciding whether to
Petitions for the issuance of extraordinary writs against first
permit the invocation, at the first instance of its original
level inferior courts should be filed with the Regional Trial
jurisdiction over the issuance of extraordinary writs. Rather, it is
Court, and those against the latter, with the Court of Appeals. A
the nature of the question raised by the parties in those
direct invocation of the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction to
“exceptions” that enabled us to allow the direct action before
issue these writs should be allowed only when there are
us.
special and important reasons therefor, clearly and specifically
set out in the petition.
To be clear, the transcendental importance doctrine does not
clothe us with the power to tackle factual questions and play
Purpose of Hierarchy of Courts
the role of a trial court. The only circumstance when we may
(1) The hierarchy of courts serves as the general determinant
take cognizance of a case in the first instance, despite the
of the appropriate forum for such petitions.
presence of factual issues, is in the exercise of our
(2) It is a constitutional filtering mechanism designed to
constitutionally expressed task to review the sufficiency of the
enable the Court to focus on the more fundamental and
factual basis of the President’s proclamation of martial law
essential tasks assigned to it by the highest law of the
under Section 18, Article VII of the 1987 Constitution.
land.
When a question before the Court involves determination of a
When there is concurrence of jurisdiction among courts, the
factual issue indispensable to the resolution of the legal issue,
doctrine of hierarchy of courts requires that recourse must first
the Court will refuse to resolve the question regardless of the
be made to the lower-ranked court exercising concurrent
allegation or invocation of compelling reasons, such as the
jurisdiction with a higher court.
transcendental or paramount importance of the case. Such
question must first be brought before the proper trial courts or
Heirs of Hinog vs. Melicor the CA, both of which are specially equipped to try and resolve
factual questions.
Rationale for the doctrine of hierarchy of courts
The rationale for this rule is two-fold:
(1) it would be an imposition upon the precious time of this Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court
Court; and
(2) it would cause an inevitable and resultant delay, intended
or otherwise, in the adjudication of cases.
Concept of Judicial Power
Sec. 1, Art. VIII of the 1987 Constitution
The judicial power shall be vested in one Supreme Court
Barroso vs. Omelio
and in such lower courts as may be established by law.
Exceptions to the doctrine of hierarchy of courts
For exceptionally compelling reasons, the Court may Traditional concept
exercise its discretion to act on special civil actions for Judicial power includes the duty of the courts of justice to
certiorari filed directly with it. Examples of cases that present settle actual controversies involving rights which are legally
compelling reasons are: demandable and enforceable.
(1) those involving genuine issues of constitutionality that
must be addressed at the most immediate time; Expanded concept
(2) those where the issues are of transcendental importance, To determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse
and the threat to fundamental constitutional rights are so of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on
great as to outweigh the necessity for prudence; the part of any branch or instrumentality of the Government.
(3) cases of first impression, where no jurisprudence yet
exists that will guide the lower courts on such issues;
Powers of the Supreme Court
Erika Cristel Diaz | CIV PRO NOTES

Sec. 2, Art. VIII of the 1987 Constitution habeas corpus or the extension thereof (Sec. 18, Art. VII
(1) Exercise original jurisdiction over cases affecting of the Constitution)
ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and
over petitions for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo 4. Disciplinary proceedings against members of the judiciary
warranto, and habeas corpus. and attorneys (Rule 56-A of the Rules of Court)
(2) Review, revise, reverse, modify, or affirm on appeal or
certiorari, as the law or the Rules of Court may provide, 5. Injunction in agrarian cases and others specified by law.
final judgments and orders of lower courts in:
Rules of Procedure in environmental cases
a. All cases in which the constitutionality or validity of Rule 2, Sec. 10. Issue a TRO or writ of preliminary
any treaty, international or executive agreement, injunction against lawful actions of government agencies
law, presidential decree, proclamation, order, that enforce environmental laws or prevent violations
instruction, ordinance, or regulation is in question. thereof.
b. All cases involving the legality of any tax, impost,
assessment, or toll, or any penalty imposed in Types of Certiorari
relation thereto. 1. Rule 45 – appeal by certiorari to the SC for pure questions
c. All cases in which the jurisdiction of any lower court of law.
is in issue. 2. Rule 65 – grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or
d. All criminal cases in which the penalty imposed is excess of jurisdiction.
reclusion perpetua or higher. 3. Rule 64 – review of judgments and final orders or
e. All cases in which only an error or question of law resolutions of the COMELEC or COA.
is involved.
(3) Assign temporarily judges of lower courts to other

Petitions for certiorari, prohibition and
stations as public interest may require. Such temporary mandamus against the Ombudsman in
assignment shall not exceed six months without the
consent of the judge concerned.
Criminal Cases
Case Held
(4) Order a change of venue or place of trial to avoid a Estrada v. Desierto (2004) / The remedy of aggrieved
miscarriage of justice. parties from resolutions of
Information Technology v. the Office of the
(5) Promulgate rules concerning the protection and COMELEC (2017) Ombudsman finding
enforcement of constitutional rights, pleading, practice, probable cause in criminal
and procedure in all courts, the admission to the cases or non-administrative
practice of law, the integrated bar, and legal assistance cases, when tainted with
to the underprivileged. Such rules shall provide a grave abuse of discretion, is
simplified and inexpensive procedure for the speedy to file an original action for
disposition of cases, shall be uniform for all courts of certiorari (Rule 65) with
the same grade, and shall not diminish, increase, or the Supreme Court and not
modify substantive rights. Rules of procedure of special with the Court of Appeals.
courts and quasi-judicial bodies shall remain effective Carpio-Morales vs. CA The second paragraph of
unless disapproved by the Supreme Court. (2015) Section 14, RA 6770
provides that no appeal or
(6) Appoint all officials and employees of the Judiciary in application for remedy may
accordance with the Civil Service Law. be heard against the
decision or findings of the
Ombudsman, with the
Exclusive Original Jurisdiction of the exception of the Supreme
Supreme Court Court on pure questions of
1. Petitions for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus against law.
the:
(1) Court of Appeals (Sec. 17, Judiciary Act of 1948); Since the second paragraph
(2) COMELEC (Sec. 7, Art. IX of the Constitution); of Section 14, RA 6770
(3) COA (Sec. 7, Art. IX of the Constitution); limits the remedy against
(4) Sandiganbyan (R.A 10660); "decision or findings" of the
(5) Court of Tax Appeals (P.D No 1125 as amended); Ombudsman to a Rule 45
(6) Ombudsman in criminal cases (Sec. 14, R.A 6770) appeal and thus - similar to
the fourth paragraph of
2. Election contests involving the position of the President Section 27, RA 6770 -
and Vice President (Sec. 4, Art. VIII of the Constitution) attempts to effectively
increase the Supreme
3. Cases questioning the factual basis for the declaration of Court's appellate jurisdiction
martial law and suspension of the privilege of the writ of without its advice and
concurrence, it is therefore
concluded that the former

provision is also  on pure questions of law;
unconstitutional and  in cases involving the constitutionality or validity of any
perforce, invalid. treaty, international or executive agreement, law,
presidential decree, proclamation, order, instruction,
Subject matter jurisdiction ordinance, or regulation;
(Rule 65 petition) lies with  legality of any tax, impost, assessment, or toll, or any
the Court of Appeals, not penalty imposed;
with the Supreme Court.  on the issue of jurisdiction of any lower court;
Gatchalian v. Ombudsman Criminal Cases  when the penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua or
(2018) Special Civil Action for higher.
Certiorari under Rule 65
before the Supreme Court. Limitations on the power of Congress in
Administrative Cases
enacting laws which affect jurisdiction
(1) It cannot increase the appellate jurisdiction of the SC
Appeal under Rule 43 or a
without its consent (Sec. 30, Art. VI of the Constitution)
Petition for Certiorari under
(2) It cannot diminish the jurisdiction of the SC as defined in
Rule 65 before the Court of
Sec. 5 (Sec. 2, Art. VIII of the Constitution).
Appeals.
Cases required which must be heard en banc

by the Supreme Court
(a) All cases involving the constitutionality of a treaty,
Concurrent Original Jurisdiction of the international or executive agreement or law;
Supreme Court (b) All cases which under the Rules of Court are required to
be heard en banc;
1. With the CA in petitions for certiorari, prohibition and
(c) All cases involving the constitutionality, application or
mandamus against the:
operation of presidential decrees, proclamations, orders,
(1) RTC (Sec. 21 (1), B.P. Blg. 129);
instructions, ordinances and other regulations;
(2) Civil Service Commission (R.A. No. 7902);
(d) Cases heard by a division when the required number in
(3) Central Board of Assessment Appeals (P.D. No.
division is not obtained;
464; B.P. Blg. 129; R.A. No. 7902);
(e) Cases involving a modification or reversal of a doctrine or
(4) NLRC (St. Martin Funeral Homes vs. NLRC).
principle of law laid down previously by the SC in a
(5) Other quasi-judicial agencies (Heirs of Hinog vs.
decision rendered en banc or by a division;
Melicor);
(f) Cases involving the discipline of judges of lower courts;
(g) Contests relating to the election, returns and qualifications
2. With the RTC and CA in petitions for certiorari, prohibition
of the President or Vice President;
and mandamus against lower courts and bodies, and in
petitions for quo warranto and habeas corpus. This
Baviera vs. Paglinawan
jurisdiction is subject to the doctrine of hierarchy of courts
(Secs. 9(1), B.P. Blg. 129; Sec. 5, Art. VIII of the 1987
Constitution) Under the doctrine of primary jurisdiction, courts will not
determine a controversy involving a question within the
3. With the RTC in cases affecting ambassadors, public jurisdiction of the administrative tribunal, where the question
ministers and consuls (Sec. 21(2), B.P. Blg. 129; Sec. 5, demands the exercise of sound administrative discretion
Art. VIII of the 1987 Constitution) requiring the specialized knowledge and expertise of said
administrative tribunal to determine technical and intricate
4. With the RTC and CA for petitions of continuing matters of fact.
mandamus.
Jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals
5. With the CA for petitions of writ of kalikasan.
Sec. 9, B.P 129
6. With the RTC and CA for petitions of habeas corpus; The Court of Appeals shall exercise:
1. Concurrent Original jurisdiction with the SC and
7. With the RTC and CA for writ of amparo. RTC to issue writs of mandamus, prohibition, certiorari,
habeas corpus, and quo warranto, and auxiliary writs or
Appellate Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court processes, whether or not in aid of its appellate
jurisdiction;
Sec. 5, Art. VIII of the Constitution
The Supreme Court has appellate jurisdiction by way of 2. Exclusive Original jurisdiction over actions for
petition for review on certiorari (appeal by certiorari under annulment of judgments of Regional Trial Court; and
Rule 45) against the:
a. CA; 3. Exclusive Appellate jurisdiction over all final
b. Sandiganbayan; and judgments, resolutions, orders or awards of Regional
c. RTC. Trial Courts and quasi-judicial agencies,
instrumentalities, boards or commission, including the

Securities and Exchange Commission, the Social Court of Tax Appeals rendered en banc are appealable to the
Security Commission, the Employees Compensation Supreme Court by way of Rule 45 (Sec. 11, R.A. No. 9282).
Commission and the Civil Service Commission, Except This is pursuant to the doctrine of non-interference.
those falling within the appellate jurisdiction of the
Supreme Court in accordance with the Constitution, the 4. By way of petition for review from the decisions of the
Labor Code of the Philippines under Presidential Philippine Competition Commission in cases over which it
Decree No. 442, as amended, the provisions of this Act, has jurisdiction.
and of subparagraph (1) of the third paragraph and
subparagraph 4 of the fourth paragraph of Section 17 of 5. Decisions and Final orders of the RTC acting as a
the Judiciary Act of 1948. Special Commercial Court in cases falling under the
Interim Rules of Corporate Rehabilitation and the Interim
Rules of Procedure Governing Intra-Corporate
Exclusive Original Jurisdiction of the Court Controversies under Republic Act No. 8799.
of Appeals
1. Actions for annulment of judgments of RTCs (Sec. 9(2), 6. Decisions of Municipal Trial Courts in Cadastral or Land
B.P 129); registration cases pursuant to its delegated jurisdiction
2. Extend the freeze order issued by the Anti-Money (Sec. 34, B.P. 129).
Laundering Council (AMLC) and determine the basis of
the freeze order (R.A 10168); Duenas vs. Guce-africa
Question of law and Question of fact distinguished

Concurrent Original Jurisdiction of the Petitioner endeavors to convince us to determine, yet again,
Court of Appeals the weight, credence, and probative value of the evidence
1. With the SC to issue writs of certiorari, prohibition, and presented. This cannot be done in this petition for review on
mandamus against the: certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court where only
(a) RTC; questions of law may be raised by the parties and passed upon
(b) CSC; by us.
(c) Central Board of Assessment Appeals;
(d) Other Quasi-judicial agencies mentioned in Rule 43; and A question of law arises when there is doubt as to what the
(e) NLRC. law is on a certain state of facts, while there is a question of
fact when the doubt arises as to the truth or falsity of the
2. With the SC, RTC and Sandiganbayan to issue writs of alleged facts. For a question to be one of law, the same must
amparo and writs of habeas data; not involve an examination of the probative value of the
evidence presented by the litigants or any of them. The
3. With the SC to issue Writ of Kalikasan. resolution of the issue must rest solely on what the law
provides on the given set of circumstances.
4. With the SC and RTC to issue a writ of continuing
mandamus. Once it is clear that the issue invites a review of the evidence
presented, the questioned posed is one of fact. Thus, the test
5. With the SC in the issuance of a restraining order, of whether a question is one of law or of fact is not the
preliminary injunction, or preliminary mandatory injunction appellation given to such question by the party raising the
in any case involving the powers, duties, and same; rather, it is whether the appellate court can determine
responsibilities of the Securities and Exchange the issue raised without reviewing or evaluating the evidence,
Commission that falls exclusively within its jurisdiction in which case, it is a question of law; otherwise, it is a question
(Sec. 179, R.A No. 11232) of fact.
Determination of breach of contract is factual

Exclusive Appellate Jurisdiction of the It has already been held that the determination of the existence
Court Appeals of a breach of contract is a factual matter not usually
1. Ordinary appeal from the RTC and the Family Courts reviewable in a petition filed under Rule 45.
(Sec. 9(3), B.P 129);
Lingner & Fisher GMBH vs. IAC
2. Petition for review from the RTC rendered in the exercise
of its appellate jurisdiction. (Sec. 22, B.P. Blg. 129; Rule Evidence necessary to resolve factual issues
42, Rules of Court; Sec. 9, B.P. Blg. 129); Evidence necessary in regards to factual issues raised in
cases falling within the Appellate Court's original and appellate
3. Petition for review from the decisions, resolutions, orders jurisdiction contemplates incidental facts which were not
or awards of the Civil Service Commission, Central Board touched upon, or fully heard by the trial or respondent Court.
of Assessment Appeals and other bodies mentioned in The law could not have intended that the Appellate Court
Rule 43 and of the Office of the Ombudsman in would hold an original and full trial of a main factual issue in a
administrative disciplinary cases (Sec. 9(3), B.P 129); case, which properly pertains to Trial Courts.
Jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Court

Note: Under R.A. No. 9282, the judgments and final orders of
the Court of Tax Appeals are no longer appealable by way of
petition for review to the Court of Appeals. Judgments of the

Exclusive Original Jurisdiction of the exclusive original
jurisdiction of a Juvenile
Regional Trial Court and Domestic Relations
Sec. 19, B.P 129 Court and of the Courts
of Agrarian Relations as
Prior to amendment Amendment by R.A 11567 now provided by law.
on July 30, 2021 (8) In all other cases in In all other cases in which
(1) In all civil actions in ----- which the demand, the demand, exclusive of
which the subject of the exclusive of interest, interest, damages of
litigation is incapable of damages of whatever whatever kind, attorney’s
pecuniary estimation. kind, attorney’s fees, fees, litigation expenses and
(2) In all civil actions which In all civil actions which litigation expenses, and costs or the value of the
involve the title to, or involve the title to, or costs or the value of the property in controversy
possession of, real possession of, real property, property in controversy exceeds P2,000,000.
property, or any interest or any interest therein, exceeds P300,000 or
therein, where the where the assessed value exceeds P400,000 in
assessed value of the exceeds P400,000, except Metro Manila;
property involved for forcible entry into and
exceeds P20,000 or
for civil actions in
unlawful detainer of lands or
buildings, original jurisdiction
Summary: When Money is the Parameter
(3) Actions in admiralty and Demand, claim, or gross
Metro Manila, where over which is conferred
maritime jurisdiction. value of the estate or the
such the value upon the Metropolitan Trial
(9) Matters of probate, both property exceeds
exceeds P50,000 Courts, and Municipal Trial
testate and intestate. P2,000,000.
except actions for Courts in Cities, Municipal
forcible entry into and Trial Courts, and Municipal (8) Any other demand,
unlawful detainer of Circuit Trial Courts; exclusive of interest,
lands or buildings, damages of whatever kind,
original jurisdiction over attorney's fees, litigation
which is conferred upon expenses, and costs or the
Metropolitan Trial value of the property in
Courts, Municipal Trial controversy.
Courts, and Municipal If demand, claim, or gross Automatic MTC
Circuit Trial Courts. value does not exceed these
(3) In all actions in In all actions in admiralty amounts.
admiralty and maritime and maritime jurisdiction
jurisdiction where the where the demand or claims Under Special Laws
demand or claim exceeds P2,000,000. 1. Acting as a Special Agrarian Court, over all petitions for
exceeds P300,000 or the determination of just compensation to land owners,
in Metro Manila, where and the prosecution of all criminal offenses under RA 6657
such demand or claim (Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law);
exceeds P400,000.
(4) In all matters of probate, In all matters of probate, v Mode of appeal from decisions of RTCs acting as
both testate and both estate and intestate, Special Agrarian Court
intestate, where the where the gross value of the A petition for review under Rule 42 of the Revised Rules
gross value of the estate exceeds P2,000,000. of Court, and not an ordinary appeal under Rule 41, is the
estate exceeds appropriate mode of appeal from decisions of RTCs acting
P300,000 or, in probate as Special Agrarian Courts (SACs). Clearly, jurisdiction
matters in Metro over appeals from decisions of the SAC resides in the
Manila, where such Court of Appeals via a Rule 42 petition for review, which
gross value exceeds may raise either questions of fact, or of law, or mixed
P400,000. questions of fact and law. (Land bank of the Philippines
vs. J.L Jocson and Sons)
(5) In all actions involving -----
the contract of marriage
v The fact that the decision of the Adjudicator on land
and marital relations.
valuation and preliminary determination and payment of
(6) In all cases not within -----
just compensation shall be brough directly to the Regional
the exclusive jurisdiction Note: catch all jurisdiction of
Trial Courts does not mean that the RTC is exercising
of any court, tribunal, the RTC; RTC as court of
appellate jurisdiction. The valuation of property in eminent
person or body general jurisdiction.
domain is essentially a judicial function which cannot be
exercising jurisdiction or
vested in administrative agencies. (Export Processing
any court, tribunal,
Zone Authority v. Dulay)
person or body
exercising judicial or
2. Acting as a Special Commercial Court, over intra-
quasi-judicial functions;
corporate disputes and corporate rehabilitation cases
(7) In all civil actions and -----
(Sec. 5.2, RA 8799).
special proceedings
falling within the

3. Over criminal and civil cases involving violations of the it affects title to or on the privity of
Philippine Competition Act and other competition- possession of real real estate.
related laws (Sec. 44, R.A 10667). property, or an
interest therein.
Concurrent Original Jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Parameter to Assessed value of Amount of the
Court determine the real property. claim or demand or
whether RTC value of personal
1. With the SC in actions affecting ambassadors, other public has property.
ministers and consuls; jurisdiction
Where Where the real Where the plaintiff
2. With the SC and CA in petitions for certiorari, prohibition commenced property involved, or any of the
and mandamus against lower courts and bodies and in or a portion thereof, principal plaintiffs
petitions for quo warranto and habeas corpus; is situated. resides, or where
the defendant or
3. With the SC, CA, and Sandiganbayan to issue Writs of any of the principal
Amparo; defendants
resides, at the
4. With the MTC in petitions for indirect contempt where such election of the
contempt has been committed against the Municipal Trial plaintiff.
Court (Sec. 5, Rule 71).
5. With the MTC in the issuance of Temporary Protection Jurisdiction when there is a claim of
Orders or Permanent Protection Orders (Sec. 10, R.A damages
9262). Claim for damages Determination of
jurisdiction
Summary: Jurisdiction over Habeas Corpus Merely incidental or ancillary DO NOT include the amount
to the main cause of action. of damages in determining
petitions jurisdiction.
Remedy Jurisdiction Main cause of action, or one Amount of such claim shall
Habeas Corpus filed as Concurrent among the SC, of the causes of action. be considered in
main remedy under Rule CA and RTC determining the jurisdiction
102 of the court.
Habeas Corpus filed as an Exclusive RTC acting as
ancillary remedy in a petition Family Court
for custody of minors Actions incapable of pecuniary estimation
Russell vs. Vestil
Exclusive Appellate Jurisdiction of the
Regional Trial Court Determination of whether an action is capable of
Sec. 22, B.P 129 pecuniary estimation
Over all cases decided by Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal In determining whether an action is one the subject matter of
Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts in their which is not capable of pecuniary estimation this Court has
respective territorial jurisdictions. The decision of the Regional adopted the criterion of first ascertaining the nature of the
Trial Courts in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction shall be principal action or remedy sought. If it is primarily for the
appealable by petition for review to the Court of Appeals. recovery of a sum of money, the claim is considered capable of
pecuniary estimation, and whether jurisdiction is in the
municipal courts or in instance would depend on the amount of
the claim.
Special Jurisdiction of the Regional Trial
Court However, where the basic issue is something other than the
Sec. 23, B.P 129 right to recover a sum of money, where the money claim is
Certain branches of the Regional Trial Court may be purely incidental to, or a consequence of, the principal relief
designated by the Supreme Court to handle exclusively sought, this Court has considered such where the subject of
criminal cases, juvenile and domestic relations cases, agrarian the litigation may not be estimated in terms of money, and are
cases, urban and land reform cases which do not fall under the cognizable exclusively by courts of first instance (now Regional
jurisdiction of quasi-judicial bodies and agencies, and/or such Trial Courts).
other special cases as the Supreme Court may determine in
the interest of a speedy and efficient administration of justice. Examples of actions incapable of pecuniary estimation
Examples of actions incapable of pecuniary estimation are
those for specific performance, support, or foreclosure of
Real Action distinguished from Personal mortgage or annulment of judgment; also actions questioning
Action the validity of a mortgage, annulling a deed of sale or
conveyance and to recover the price paid and for rescission,
Real Action Personal Action
which is a counterpart of specific performance.
Scope Founded on the Any other action
privity of real estate, that is not founded SSS vs. Atlantic Gulf

But as herein before stated, the issue of title, ownership
Action for specific performance and/or possession thereof is intertwined with the issue of
If the controversy lies in the non-implementation of the annulment of sale and reconveyance hence within the
approved and agreed dacion en pago, it is a suit for specific ambit of the jurisdiction of the RTC. The assessed value of
performance and one incapable of pecuniary estimation. the parcels of land thus becomes merely an incidental matter
Therefore, jurisdiction is vested upon the regional trial court. to be dealt with by the court, when necessary, in the resolution
of the case but is not determinative of its jurisdiction.
Bardillon vs. Brgy. Masili of Calamba
Expropriation suit
Actions capable of pecuniary estimation
An expropriation suit does not involve the recovery of a sum of
Iniego vs. Purganan
money. Rather, it deals with the exercise by the government of
its authority and right to take property for public use. As such, it
Actions for damages based on quasi-delicts
is incapable of pecuniary estimation and should be filed with
Actions for damages based on quasi-delicts are actions that
the regional trial courts.
are capable of pecuniary estimation. As such, they fall within
the jurisdiction of either the RTC or the municipal courts,
It should be stressed that the primary consideration in an
depending on the amount of damages claimed.
expropriation suit is whether the government or any of its
instrumentalities has complied with the requisites for the taking
of private property. Hence, the courts determine the authority Heirs of Sebe vs. Heirs of Sevilla
of the government entity, the necessity of the expropriation,
and the observance of due process. In the main, the subject of Action involving title to real property
an expropriation suit is the government's exercise of eminent The action is, therefore, about ascertaining which of these
domain, a matter that is incapable of pecuniary estimation. parties is the lawful owner of the subject lots, jurisdiction over
which is determined by the assessed value of such lots.
True, the value of the property to be expropriated is estimated
in monetary terms, for the court is duty-bound to determine the An action involving title to real property means that the
just compensation for it. This, however, is merely incidental to plaintiff’s cause of action is based on a claim that he owns
the expropriation suit. Indeed, that amount is determined only such property or that he has the legal rights to have exclusive
after the court is satisfied with the propriety of the control, possession, enjoyment, or disposition of the same.
expropriation. Title is the legal link between (1) a person who owns property
and (2) the property itself.
Mendoza vs. Teh
Determination on whether RTC or Quasi-
Appointment of an administratix for an estate
Likewise falling within its jurisdiction are actions incapable of
judicial bodies have jurisdiction
pecuniary estimation, such as the appointment of an v If the resolution of the case ultimately boils down to
administratrix for an estate. application of a special law within the competence of an
In the present suit, no settlement of estate is involved, but administrative or quasi-judicial agency, the RTC has no
merely an allegation seeking appointment as estate jurisdiction.
administratrix which does not necessarily involve settlement of v If the resolution of the case can be had without reference
estate that would have invited the exercise of the limited to these special laws, the RTC has jurisdiction.
jurisdiction of a probate court.
Halaguena et. al vs. PAL
BCDA vs. UY
Courts have jurisdiction when a general civil law applies
Action for injunction and it is not covered by a special law
Section 19 of BP 129 shows that a Regional Trial Court has Thus, where the principal relief sought is to be resolved not by
jurisdiction over all civil cases in which the subject of litigation reference to the Labor Code or other labor relations statute or
is incapable of pecuniary estimation. Jurisprudence has a collective bargaining agreement but by the general civil law,
recognized complaints for injunction with a prayer for the jurisdiction over the dispute belongs to the regular courts of
temporary restraining order or writ of preliminary injunction as justice and not to the labor arbiter and the NLRC.
such. In such situations, resolution of the dispute requires expertise,
not in labor management relations nor in wage structures and
Copioso vs. Copioso other terms and conditions of employment, but rather in the
application of the general civil law. Clearly, such claims fall
Joinder of causes of action outside the area of competence or expertise ordinarily ascribed
to labor arbiters and the NLRC and the rationale for granting
Clearly, this is a case of joinder of causes of action which
comprehends more than the issue of title to, possession of, or jurisdiction over such claims to these agencies disappears.
any interest in the real property under contention but includes
an action to annul contracts, reconveyance or specific The said issue cannot be resolved solely by applying the Labor
Code. Rather, it requires the application of the Constitution,
performance, and a claim for damages, which are incapable of
pecuniary estimation and thus properly within the jurisdiction of labor statutes, law on contracts and the Convention on the
Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, and
the RTC.
the power to apply and interpret the constitution and CEDAW is
within the jurisdiction of trial courts, a court of general

jurisdiction. This Court held that not every dispute between an
employer and employee involves matters that only labor
arbiters and the NLRC can resolve in the exercise of their
adjudicatory or quasi-judicial powers. Concurrent Original Jurisdiction of the
Municipal Trial Court
Summary: Modes of Review of RTC 1. With the RTC in petitions for indirect contempt when such
Decisions contempt has been committed against a lower court (Rule
71, Sec. 5).
Mode
Original Jurisdiction Ordinary Appeal under Rule 41 2. With the RTC in the issuance of Temporary Protection
Appellate Petition for Review under Rule 42 Orders or Permanent Protection Orders (Sec. 10, R.A
Jurisdiction 9262).
Special Jurisdiction Petition for Review under Rule 42
(SAC)
Special Jurisdiction Ordinary Appeal under Rule 41
Special Jurisdiction of the Municipal Trial
(Family Court) Court
Pure questions of Petition for Review under Rule 45 Sec. 35, B.P 129
law To hear and decide petitions for a writ of habeas corpus and
applications for bail in the absence of all RTC judges in the
province or city.
Jurisdiction of the Municipal Trial Court
Among all the courts, it is only the MTC whose subject matter Delagated Jurisdiction of the Municipal
jurisdiction is wholly ORIGINAL. It does not have appellate
jurisdiction. MTC does not supervise any courts.
Trial Court
Sec. 34, B.P 129
In cadastral and land registration cases covering lots where
Exclusive Original Jurisdiction of the there is no controversy or opposition or contested lots the
value of which does not exceed P100,000 as may be
Municipal Trial Court delegated by the SC.
Sec. 33, B.P 129
Prior to amendment Amendment by R.A 11676
on July 30, 2021 Totality Rule
(1) Civil actions where the Civil actions where the Sec. 33, B.P 129 (last par)
amount of the demand amount of the demand does Where there are several claims or causes of action between
does not exceed not exceed P2,000,000. the same or different parties, embodied in the same complaint,
P300,000 or P400,000 the amount of the demand shall be the totality of the Scclaims
in Metro Manila; in all the causes of action, irrespective of whether the causes
Civil actions where the value Civil actions where the value of action arose out of the same or different transactions.
of the personal property of the personal property
does not exceed P300,000 does not exceed v The TOTALITY RULE has no application in cases where
or P400,000 in Metro P2,000,000. the main claim is for damages. Recall that under
Manila; Administrative Circular No. 09-94, the exclusion of
Probate proceedings where Probate proceedings where damages of whatever kind applies only to cases where
the value of the estate does the value of the estate does the damages are merely incidental to or a consequence
not exceed P300,000 or not exceed P2,000,000. of the main cause of action.
P400,000 in Metro Manila; v However, in cases where the claim for damages is the
Admiralty and maritime Admiralty and maritime main cause of action, or one of the causes of action, the
actions where the demand actions where the demand amount of such claim shall be considered in determining
or claim does not exceed or claim does not exceed the jurisdiction of the court.
P300,000 or P400,000 in P2,000,000.
Metro Manila. Remedies available to the owner/possessor
(2) Forcible entry and -----
unlawful detainer cases; to judicially recover possession of real
(3) Real actions where the Real actions where the property
assessed value of the assessed value of the
property or interest property or interest therein Accion Accion Accion
therein does not does not exceed P400,000. Interdictal Publiciana Reivindicatoria
exceed P20,000 or Scope Ejectment Possessory Reivindicatory
P50,000 in Metro Suit; action action
Manila.
Note: All are exclusive of interest, damages of whatever kind, Unlawful

attorney's fees, litigation expenses and costs. However, such detainer/
are included in the determination of the filing or docket fees to
be paid. Forcible

entry (force, may pass upon the issue of ownership in order to determine
intimidation, who has the right to possess the property.
stealth,
threat or We stress, however, that this adjudication is only an initial
strategy) determination of ownership for the purpose of settling the issue
Purpose To recover To recover To recover of possession, the issue of ownership being inseparably linked
possession possession possession thereto. The lower court’s adjudication of ownership in the
de facto, de jure, based on ejectment case is merely provisional and would not bar or
with no independentl ownership prejudice an action between the same parties involving title to
reference to y of title the property. It is, therefore, not conclusive as to the issue of
ownership or ownership. This resolution on the issue of ownership is only
title provisional for the purpose of settling the issue of possession.
What The plaintiff The plaintiff Ownership or
plaintiff merely merely title
proves alleges proof alleges proof
of a better of a better Jurisdiction if ejectment suit is not possible
right to right to A mere ejectment suit may not be the proper remedy
possess possess cognizable by the MTCs in at least two situations:
without without claim 1. The action was not brought in the proper MTC within 1
claim of title of title year from the date of actual entry on the land or from the
Period 1 year from 10 years from 30 years from date of last demand to vacate.
to file date of the date of the date when 2. The assessed value of the property may not be within the
action actual entry possession the owner has jurisdiction of the MTC and the action was not brought
on the land by another been deprived within 1 year.
or from the person of his property.
date of last In both cases, jurisdiction is already lodged in the RTC. Even if
demand to the assessed value of the property is in the millions but the
vacate proper action is still an accion interdictal, jurisdiction is still with
the MTCs.
Accion Interdictal
The main difference between the actions lies in the time when Original Jurisdiction over certain barangay-
possession became unlawful: related cases and matters
v Forcible entry – from the time of entry. R.A 7160
v Unlawful detainer – possession which at first lawful later The MTC has jurisdiction over the cases related to barangay
became illegal. settlements and arbitrations:
1. Enforcement – Any amicable settlement or arbitration
The only issue involved in Accion Interdictal is mere physical or award reached in the barangay may be enforced by
material possession (possession de facto) of which a person execution by the Lupong Tagapamayapa within 6 months
has been deprived or against whom it has been withheld. from the date of settlement. After the lapse of such time,
the settlement may be enforced by action in the MTC
De Grano vs. Lacaba (Sec. 417).
2. Nullification – The amicable settlement and arbitration
Possession in forcible entry and unlawful detainer cases award shall have the force and effect of a final judgment of
It bears emphasizing that the word possession, as used in a court upon the expiration of 10 days from the date
forcible entry and unlawful detainer cases, means nothing thereof, unless repudiation of the settlement has been
more than physical possession, not legal possession in the made or a petition to nullify the award has been filed
sense contemplated in civil law. When the law speaks of before the MTC (Sec. 416).
possession, the reference is to prior physical possession or 3. Approval – The MTC in which in which non-criminal
possession de facto, as contra-distinguished from possession cases not falling within the authority of the lupon are filed
de jure. may, at any time before trial, motu proprio refer the case to
the lupon concerned for amicable settlement. The
Only prior physical possession, not title, is the issue Issues as amicable settlement. The amicable settlement if reached,
to the right of possession or ownership are not involved in the shall be submitted to the MTC and upon approval thereof,
action; evidence thereon is not admissible, except only for the have the force and effect of a judgment of said court.
purpose of determining the issue of possession.
Cabrera vs. Getaruela Determination of docket fees or filling fees

to be paid
Courts may pass upon the issue of ownership in order to
resolve the issue of possession
In an unlawful detainer case, the sole issue for resolution is Manchester Dev’t Corporation vs. CA
physical or material possession of the property involved,
independent of any claim of ownership by any of the parties. Jurisdiction not acquired by paying insufficient docket fee
However, where the issue of ownership is raised, the courts when there is intent to avoid its payment

The design to avoid payment of the required docket fee is Where the trial court acquires jurisdiction over a claim by the
obvious. The Court serves warning that it will take drastic filing of the appropriate pleading and payment of the prescribed
action upon a repetition of this unethical practice. To put a stop filing fee but, subsequently, the judgment awards a claim not
to this irregularity, henceforth all complaints, petitions, answers specified in the pleading, or if specified the same has been left
and other similar pleadings should specify the amount of for determination by the court, the additional filing fee therefor
damages being prayed for not only in the body of the pleading shall constitute a lien on the judgment. It shall be the
but also in the prayer, and said damages shall be considered in responsibility of the Clerk of Court or his duly authorized
the assessment of the filing fees in any case. Any pleading that deputy to enforce said lien and assess and collect the
fails to comply with this requirement shall not bib accepted nor additional fee.
admitted, or shall otherwise be expunged from the record.
Tacay, et. al vs. RTC
The Court acquires jurisdiction over any case only upon the
payment of the prescribed docket fee. An amendment of the Additional rules on docket fees for real actions with prayer
complaint or similar pleading will not thereby vest jurisdcition for damages
on the Court, much less the payment of the docket fee based Where the action involves real property and a related claim for
on the amount sought in the amended pleading. damages as well, the legal fees shall be assessed on the basis
of both:
(a) the value of the property and
(b) the total amount of related damages sought.
Sun Insurance vs. Asuncion The court acquires jurisdiction over the action if the filing of the
initiatory pleading is accompanied by the payment of the
Liberal interpretation of the rules when there is no intent requisite fees, or, if the fees are not paid at the time of the filing
to defraud in payment of docket fees of the pleading, as of the time of full payment of the fees within
However, in Manchester, petitioner did not pay any additional such reasonable time as the court may grant, unless, of
docket fee until the case was decided by this court on May 7, course, prescription has set in the meantime.
1987. Thus, in Manchester, due to the fraud committed on the
government, this court held that the court a quo did not acquire But where the fees prescribed for an action involving real
jurisdiction over the case and that the amended complaint property have been paid, but the amounts of certain of the
could not have been admitted inasmuch as the original related damages being demanded are unspecified, the action
complaint was null and void. may not be dismissed.
In the present case, a more liberal interpretation of the rules if Ayala Corp. et al. v Madayag,
called for considering that, unlike Manchester, private
respondent demonstrated his willingness to abide by the rules Payment of additional docket fees allowed when paid
by paying the additional docket fees as required. The within a reasonable time
promulgation of the decision in Manchester must have had that As ruled in Tacay, the trial court may either order said claim to
sobering influence on private respondent who thus paid the expunged from the record as it did not acquire jurisdiction over
additional docket fee as ordered by the respondent court. the same or on motion, it may allow, within a reasonable time,
the amendment of the amended and supplemental complaint
Nevertheless, petitioners contend that the docket fee that was so as to state the precise amount of the exemplary damages
paid is still insufficient considering the total amount of the sought and require the payment of the requisite fees therefor
claim. This is a matter which the clerk of court of the lower within the relevant prescriptive period.
court and/or his duly authorized docket clerk or clerk-in-charge
should determine and, thereafter, if any amount is found due, Heirs of Hinog vs. Melicor
he must require the private respondent to pay the same.
Clarification of the rule in Manchester
Principles regarding payment of docket fees While the payment of the prescribed docket fee is a
It is not simply the filing of the complaint or appropriate jurisdictional requirement, even its non-payment at the time of
initiatory pleading, but the payment of the prescribed docket filing does not automatically cause the dismissal of the case,
fee, that vests a trial court with jurisdiction over the subject as long as the fee is paid within the applicable prescriptive or
matter or nature of the action. reglementary period, more so when the party involved
demonstrates a willingness to abide by the rules prescribing
Where the filing of the initiatory pleading is not accompanied by such payment.
payment of the docket fee, the court may allow payment of the
fee within a reasonable time but in no case beyond the Thus, when insufficient filing fees were initially paid by the
applicable prescriptive or reglementary period. plaintiffs and there was no intention to defraud the government,
the Manchester rule does not apply. This is simply a
The same rule applies to permissive counterclaims, third party qualification on the Manchester rule. Meaning, the Manchester
claims and similar pleadings, which shall not be considered rule will only apply under the peculiar circumstances or similar
filed until and unless the filing fee prescribed therefor is paid. circumstances as with Manchester.
The court may also allow payment of said fee within a
reasonable time but also in no case beyond its applicable Proton Pilipinas Corp. et al. vs. Banque Nationale de
prescriptive or reglementary period. Paris

With respect to the interest accruing after the filing of the  Insolvency proceedings.
complaint, the same can only be determined after a final
judgment has been handed down. Respondent cannot thus be Sec. 4. In what cases not applicable – These Rules shall
made to pay the corresponding docket fee therefore. Pursuant, not apply to election cases, land registration, cadastral,
however, to Section 2, Rule 141, as amended by naturalization and insolvency proceedings, and other cases
Administrative Circular No. 11-94, respondent should be made not herein provided for, except by analogy or in a suppletory
to pay additional fees which shall constitute a lien in the event character and whenever practicable and convenient.
the trial court adjudges that it is entitled to interest accruing
after the filing of the complaint.
Classification of Civil Actions
As to nature
Rule 1: General Provisions 1. Special Civil Actions (Rules 62-71)
 Interpleader
Sec. 1. Title of the Rules. – These Rule shall be known  Declaratory Relief and Similar Remedies
and cited as the Rules of Court.  Review of Judgments
 Final Orders or Resolutions of Comelec and COA
Sec. 2. In what courts applicable. – These Rules shall  Certiorari
apply in all the courts, except as otherwise provided by the
 Prohibition
Supreme Court.
 Mandamus
 Quo Warranto
Sec. 3. Cases governed – These Rules shall govern the
procedure to be observed in actions, civil or criminal and  Expropriation
special proceedings.  Foreclosure of Real Estate Mortgage
 Partition
 Forcible Entry and Unlawful Detainer,
(a) A civil action is one by which a party sues another for
 Contempt.
the enforcement or protection of a right, or the
2. Ordinary Civil actions – all other actions are considered
prevention or redress of a wrong.
ordinary.
A civil action may either be ordinary or special. Both are Both ordinary and special civil actions are governed by the
governed by the rules for ordinary civil actions, subject rules on ordinary civil actions, subject to the specific rules. In
to the specific rules prescribed for a special civil action. the case of conflict between the specific rule governing a
particular type of civil action and the ordinary, the specific
(b) A criminal action is one by which the State prosecutes rule will prevail. If the rules on specific civil actions are silent,
a person for an act or omission punishable by law. the rules for ordinary actions will be applied.
(c) A special proceeding is a remedy by which a party Ordinary civil Special civil action
seeks to establish a status, a right, or a particular fact. action
Governing Governed by the Governed by the
rules rules for ordinary rules for ordinary
Applicability of the rules of court civil actions and civil actions and,
The general applicability of the Rules is pursuant to Article never the specific subject to the
VIII, 5(5) of the Constitution which mandates that the rules prescribed for specific rules
procedural rules to be promulgated by the Supreme Court shall a special civil action. prescribed for a
be uniform for all courts of the same grade. special civil action.
Jurisdictio Filed before the Either the MTC,
The Rules of Court is the collective term to describe all the n MTC or the RTC, RTC, CA or SC.
rules from Rule 1 to Rule 144. Technically speaking, Civil depending on the
Procedure actually begins at Rule 2 because Rule 1 relates to jurisdictional amount
General Provisions. or nature of the
action involved.
The doctrine we follow here is generalia specialibus non Cause of Every ordinary civil The requirement of a
derogant or that universal things do not detract from specific action action must be cause of action does
things. The special provision will always prevail. based on a cause of not apply. It is not a
action. A cause of prerequisite for filing.
When the rules not applicable action is the act or
omission by which a
The Rules of Court do not apply where it is otherwise provided
party violates a right
by the Supreme Court, such as:
of another.
1. Summary Proceedings
2. Small Claims Cases How By filing of the By filing of the
3. Examination of Child Witnesses initiated complaint. complaint or petition.
4. Cases enumerated under Rule 1, Sec. 4. Verification Need not be under Must be verified
 Election cases; oath unless such as:
 Land registration cases; specifically required  Complaint for
 Cadastral cases; by law. (Rule 7, Sec. expropriation
 Naturalization cases; and 4) (Rule 67);

 Petitions for the ordinary course the tribunal acted
Certiorari, of law, may file a without or in excess
Prohibition and special civil action of his jurisdiction, or
Mandamus for certiorari on the with grave abuse of
(Rule 65); ground that the discretion amounting
 Petitions for quo tribunal acted to lack or excess of
warranto (Rule without or in excess jurisdiction, if there
66, Sec.1) of his jurisdiction, or is no appeal or other
 Rule 64 with grave abuse of plain, speedy or
petitions; discretion amounting adequate remedy in
 Pleadings in to lack or excess of the ordinary course
accion jurisdiction. of law.
interdictal (Rule
70); and
 Petitions for
indirect
contempt. (Rule As to the cause or foundation
71) 1. Real action – It affects title to or possession of real
Summons The court shall direct Rule on issuance of property, or an interest therein. It is founded upon the
the clerk of court to summons do not privity of real estate. That means that realty, or an interest
issue summons to apply to certain therein is the subject matter of the action. Not every action
the defendant within special civil actions. however, involving a real property is a real action because
5 calendar days. the realty may only be incidental to the subject matter of
(Rule 14, Sec. 1.) the suit.
Defendant If the defending Default may be
declared in party fails to answer declared if a party To be a real action, it is not enough that the action must deal
default within the time fails to plead with real property. It is important that the matter in litigation
allowed, the court (claimant must involve issues relating to real property such as:
shall, upon the interpleader in Rule  Title;
motion of the 62).  Ownership;
claiming party, with  Possession;
notice to the  Partition;
But, failure to  Foreclosure of Mortgage; or
defending party, and answer does not
proof of such failure,  Any interest in real property.
lead to a default
declare the declaration under
defending party in Rule 70 where a Doctrines
default. (Rule 9, Sec. default motion is a v An action for damages to real property, while involving
3) prohibited motion. realty is a personal action because although it involves
Remedy of There can only be Special civil action real property, it does not involve any of the issue
appeal one appeal. where multiple mentioned.
appeals are allowed:
1. Expropriation; v An action to recover possession of real property plus
Appeal – remedy of
2. Foreclosure of damages is a real action. The aspect of damages is
defeated party.
mortgage; and merely an incidental part of the main action.
3. Partition.
Petition for review – v An action to recover a possession of a personal property is
remedy of a party a personal action. An action for a declaration of nullity of
aggrieved by a marriage is also a personal action. (Tamano v. Ortiz)
judgement rendered
on appeal. v An action for Specific Performance is a personal action, if
Venue Depends on whether Does not depend on it does not involve, a claim or recovery of possession of a
the action is real or whether the action is real property. Where the allegations as well as the prayer
personal. real or personal. of the complaint do not claim ownership or possession of
Special An ordinary civil A special civil action lots, but instead seeks for the execution of a Deed of Sale
civil action action cannot be for declaratory relief by the defendants in favor of the plaintiff, the action is a
as a converted into a may be converted personal action (Adamos v. J.M. Tuason & Co., Inc.)
corrective special civil action. into an ordinary civil
relief and action. (Rule 63, v However, where a complaint is denominated as one for
conversion In exceptional cases, Sec. 6) Specific Performance but nonetheless prays for the
a party aggrieved by issuance of a deed of dale for a parcel of land, for the
a judgment in an A party aggrieved by plaintiff to acquire ownership of the land, its primary
ordinary civil action, a judgment in a objective and nature is one to recover the parcel of land
when there is no special civil action itself and thus, is deemed a real action (Gochan v.
appeal or other may file a special Gochan).
plain, speedy or action for certiorari,
adequate remedy in on the ground that 2. Personal action

claim that he owns such property or that he has the legal
Hernandez vs. DBP right to have exclusive control, possession, enjoyment, or
disposition of the same.
Venue of real actions and personal actions
A real action is local, its venue depends upon the location of Actions incapable of pecuniary estimation
the property involved in the litigation. Actions affecting title to or 1. Specific Performance;
possession of real property, or interest therein, shall be 2. Rescission;
commenced and tried in the proper court which has jurisdiction 3. Support;
over the area wherein the real property involved, or a portion 4. Foreclosure of mortgage;
thereof is situated (Rule 4, Sec. 1). 5. Annulment of judgment;
6. Actions Questioning the validity of a Mortgage; and
On the other hand, if it's a personal action, it means it is 7. Annulment of Deeds of Conveyance and Recovery of the
transitory, its venue depends upon the residence of the price paid.
plaintiff or the defendant at the option of the plaintiff. A
personal action may be commenced and tried where the Roldan vs. Spouses Barrios
plaintiff or any of the principal defendant resides, or in the case
of a non-resident defendant, where he may be found, at the Actions incapable of pecuniary estimation which involve
election of the plaintiff (Rule 4, Sec. 2). real property, assessed value used for jurisdiction
Foreclosure is but a necessary consequence of non-payment
Declaration as null and void the cancellation of the award of the mortgage indebtedness and, therefore, the foreclosure
of house and lot, personal action suit is a real action so far as it is against property, and seeks
The Action is a personal action. The nature of the action is one the judicial recognition of a property debt, and an order for the
to compel the recognition of the validity of the award by sale of the res. As foreclosure mortgage is a real action, it is
seeking a declaration that the cancellation of the award is null the assessed value of the property which determine the court’s
and void. The issue does not involve a title to the property or jurisdiction. Considering that the assessed value of the
interest therein. mortgage property is only P 13,380.00, the RTC correctly
found that the action falls within the jurisdiction of the first level
Test of determination court (MTC).
If the trial court cannot decide the case without ruling on title
In the Russell vs. Vestil, we held:
over real property, it is a real action. Otherwise, it is a personal
action.
While actions under Sec. 33(3) of BP 129 are also incapable of
pecuniary estimation, the law specifically mandates that they
3. Mixed action/Confused action – An action partaking of
are cognizable by the MTC, METC, or MCTC where the
the two-fold nature of real and personal actions, having for
assessed value of the real property involved does not exceed
its object the demand and restitution of real property and
P20,000.00 in Metro Manila, or P50,000.00, if located
also personal damages for a wrong sustained.
elsewhere. If the value exceeds P20,000.00 or P50,000.00 as
the case may be, it is the RTC which have jurisdiction under
ex: Recovery of possession of real property with a prayer
Sec. 19(2).
for damages.
Clearly, the last paragraph clarified that while the civil actions
Navarro vs. Lucero which involve title to, or possession of real property, or any
interest therein, are also incapable of pecuniary estimation as it
Where several or alternative reliefs are prayed for in the is not for recovery of money, the court’s jurisdiction will be
complaint, the nature of the action as real or personal is determined by the assessed value of the property involved.
determined by the primary object of the suit or by the nature of
the principal claim. Thus, where the purpose is to nullify the As to the object of the action
title to real property, the venue of the action is in the province 1. Action in rem – directed against the thing or property or
where the property lies, notwithstanding the alternative relief status of a person and seeks judgments with respect
sought, recovery of damages which is predicated upon a thereto as against the whole world. An action in rem is an
declaration of nullity of the title. action against the thing itself instead of against the person.
A cadastral proceeding is an action in rem. The probate of a

Review: Real actions vs. Actions incapable will is a proceeding in rem, because the order of probate is
of pecuniary estimation effective against all persons wherever residing. (In Re Estate
v The RTC exercises exclusive original jurisdiction in civil of Johnson)
actions where the subject of the litigation is incapable of
pecuniary estimation. A land registration proceeding is an action in rem. Hence,
the failure to give a personal notice to the owners or claimants
v The RTC also has jurisdiction in civil cases involving title of the land is not jurisdictional defect. It is the publication of
to, or possession of, real property or any interest in it such notice that brings in the whole world as a party in the
where the assessed value of the property involved case and vests the court with jurisdiction.
exceeds P400,000.
Biaco vs. Countryside rural bank
v A real action or an action involving title to real property
means that the plaintiff’s cause of action is based on a Jurisdiction how acquired in actions in rem

Jurisdiction over the person of the defendant is not a A judgment in personam is binding only upon the parties
prerequisite to confer jurisdiction on the court provided that the properly impleaded therein and duly heard or given an
court acquires jurisdiction over the res. Jurisdiction over the res opportunity to be heard. The purpose of a proceeding in
is acquired either (1) by the seizure of the property under legal personam is to impose, through the judgment of a court, some
process, whereby it is brought into actual custody of the law; or responsibility or liability directly upon the person of the
(2) as a result of the institution of legal proceedings, in which defendant. An action for specific performance is an action in
the power of the court is recognized and made effective. personam. An action for specific performance praying for
the execution of a deed of sale in connection with an
Summons still necessary for due process undertaking in a contract, such as the contract to sell is an
Summons must still be served upon the defendant, not for the action in personam.
purpose of vesting the court with jurisdiction but merely to
satisfy the requirements of due process. 3. Action quasi in rem – names a person as defendant, but
its object is to subject that person’s interest in a property to
2. Action in personam – directed against specific persons a corresponding lien or obligation.
on the basis of their personal liabilities and seeks personal
judgments. No one other than the defendant is sought to A proceeding quasi in rem is one brought against persons
be held liable, not the whole world. seeking to subject the property of such persons to the
discharge of the claims assailed. In an actions quasi in rem, an
ex: individual is named as defendant and the purpose of the
 action for reconveyance; proceeding is to subject his interests therein to the obligation or
 action for sum of money; loan burdening the property.
 action for damages;
 action for specific performance; Actions quasi in rem deal with the status, ownership or liability
 action for rescission. (Gomez vs. CA) of a particular property but which are intended to operate on
these questions only as between the particular parties to the
Cases involving an auction sale of land for the collection of proceedings and not to ascertain or cut-off the rights or
delinquent taxes is an action in personam. Mere publication of interests of all possible claimants. (Domagas v. Jensen)
the notice of delinquency does not suffice. Notice by
publication although sufficient in proceedings in rem does not Such actions are essentially for the purpose of affecting the
satisfy the requirements of proceedings in personam. (Talusan defendant’s interest in the property and not to render a
vs. Tayag) judgment against him. (Valmonte v. CA)
ex:
Ejercito vs. M.R Vargas Construction  Action for partition;
 Action for accounting;
Jurisdiction how acquired in actions in personam  Attachment;
In an action strictly in personam, personal service of summons  Judicial foreclosure of mortgage.
on the defendant is the preferred mode of service, that is, by
handing a copy of the summons to the defendant in person.
Recall that jurisdiction over the person of the defendant can
Summary: Judicial foreclosure of mortgage
- It is a special civil action under Rule 68.
also be acquired by his voluntary appearance and submission
- It is an action incapable of pecuniary estimation. (Rusell v.
to the jurisdiction of the court.
Vestil)
- It is also a real action. Thus, the determination of
Against a resident defendant in an action in personam, this
jurisdiction is subject to the assessed value of the
jurisdiction is acquired by service in person of summons of the
property. (Roldan v. Sps. Barrios)
defendant (Sec. 6, Rule 14, Rules of Court) or in case he
- it is an action quasi in rem.
cannot be served in person within a reasonable time, by
substituted service of summons. (Sec. 7, Rule 14).
Acosta vs. Salazar
Without a valid service of summons the court cannot obtain
Petition for the cancellation of the entries annotated at the
jurisdiction over the person of the defendant unless the
back of OCT
defendant voluntarily appears in the action. This voluntary
the registration of land under the Torrens system is a
appearance is equivalent to service of summons. (Sec. 20,
proceeding in rem and not in personam. Such a proceeding in
Rule 14)
rem, dealing with a tangible res, may be instituted and carried
to judgment without personal service upon the claimants within
Spouses Yu vs. Pacleb
the state or notice by mail to those outside of it. Jurisdiction is
acquired by virtue of the power of the court over the res.
Binding effect of actions in personam
A proceeding in personam is a proceeding to enforce personal
However, the proceedings instituted by the Salazars – for the
rights and obligations brought against the person and is based
cancellation of entries in the subject OCT and for quieting of
on the jurisdiction of the person although it may involve his
title can hardly be classified as actions in rem. The petition for
right to, or the exercise of ownership of, specific property, or
cancellation of entries annotated at the back of the said OCT
seek to compel him to control or dispose of it in accordance
ought to have been directed against specific persons: namely,
with the mandate of the court.
the heirs of Juan Soriano and, indubitably, against their
successors-in-interest who have acquired different portions of

the property over the years because it is in the nature of an parties and thing. parties and
action quasi in rem. their their
successors by successors
Accordingly, the Salazars should have impleaded as party a subsequent by a
defendants the heirs of Juan Soriano and/or Vicenta Macaraeg title. subsequent
as well as those claiming ownership over the property under title.
their names because they are indispensable parties. This was
not done in this case. Since no indispensable party was ever
impleaded by the Salazars in their petition for cancellation of
Significance of distinction
entry filed before Branch 63 of the RTC of Tarlac, herein The distinction is important to determine whether or not
petitioners are not bound by the dispositions of the said court. jurisdiction over the person of the defendant is required and
Consequently, the judgment or order of the said court never consequently to determine the type of summons to be
even acquired finality. employed. Jurisdiction over the person of the defendant is
necessary for the court to validly try and decide a case against
said defendant where the action is one in personam but not
Distinctions where the action is in rem or quasi in rem.
In personam In rem Quasi in
rem
Scope Directed Directed Brought
Foreign judgment
It is essential that there should be an opportunity to challenge
against specific against the against
the foreign judgment, in order for the court in this jurisdiction to
persons on the thing or persons
properly determine its efficacy. In this jurisdiction, our Rules of
basis of their property or seeking to
Court clearly provided that with respect to actions in personam,
personal status of a subject the
as distinguished from actions in rem, a foreign judgment
liabilities and person. property of
merely constitutes prima facie evidence of the justness of the
seeks personal such
claim of a party and, as such, is subject to proof to the
judgments. persons to
contrary. (Bayot v. Bayot)
the
discharge of
the claims Combinations
assailed. An action in personam is not necessarily a personal action. Nor
Binding Binds only the Binds the Binds only is a real action necessarily an action in rem. An in personam or
effect parties to the whole the parties an in rem action is a classification of actions according to the
action. world. to the object of the action. A personal and real action is a
action. classification according to foundation.
Jurisdictio Requires Requires jurisdiction over
n how jurisdiction the res. ex:
acquired over the Personal and in personam Damages
person. Personal and in rem Declaration of Nullity of
Jurisdiction is acquired
Marriage
either:
Real and in personam  Forcible Entry
1. By the seizure of the
 Unlawful Detainer
property under legal
 Recovery of Possession
process, whereby it is
Real and in rem Proceedings under Land
brought into actual
Registration Decree but not
custody of the law; or
an action for reconveyance
2. As a result of the
(in personam).
institution of legal
proceedings, in which
the power of the court An action for declaration of nullity of marriage is a personal
is recognized and action because it is not founded on real estate. It is also an in
made effective. rem action because the issue of the status of a person is one
directed against the whole world. One's status is a matter that
can be set up against anyone in the world. On the other hand,
Summons Service of Not required to obtain an action for damages is both a personal action and an action
summons is jurisdiction but merely to in personam.
jurisdictional. satisfy the requirements of
due process. Salandanan vs. Sps. Mendez
Requires
personal When non-party may be bound by a judgment in personam
service of A judgment directing a party to deliver possession of a property
summons to to another is in personam and a real action. Any judgment
the defendant therein is binding only upon the parties properly impleaded and
to acquire duly heard or given an opportunity to be heard. Even a non-
jurisdiction. party may be bound by the judgment in an ejectment suit
Foreign Presumptive, Conclusive Presumptive where he is any of the following:
judgment of a right as upon the of a right as
between the title to the between the

(1) Trespasser, squatter or agent of the defendant parties: definite party.
fraudulently occupying the property to frustrate the
judgment; Plaintiff – the party who No definite
(2) Guest or occupant of the premises with the permission of demands a right. adverse party
the defendant; Defendant – the party the proceeding is
(3) Transferee pendente lite; whom the right is usually considered
(4) Sublessee; sought. to be against the
(5) Co-lessee; whole world.
(6) Member of the family, relative or privy of the defendant. Filing A complaint is filed. A petition is filed.
Place of filing the action Natcher vs. CA

1. Local action – one which must be brought in a particular
place. Settlement of the estate of a deceased person
An action for reconveyance and annulment of title with
ex: Real actions, since it must be filed in the court which damages is a civil action whereas matters relating to
has territorial jurisdiction if the place where the property or settlement of the estate of a deceased person such as
a portion thereof is situated. advancement of property made by the decedent, partake of the
nature of a special proceeding which concomitantly requires
2. Transitory action – an action which follows the party the application of specific rules as provided for in the Rules of
wherever he may reside. Court. Clearly, matters, which involve settlement and
distribution of the estate of the decedent fall within the
ex: Personal actions since the case can be filed where the exclusive province of the probate court in the exercise of its
plaintiff or defendant resides at the option of the plaintiff. limited jurisdiction.
Special Proceedings under the Rules of Ching vs. Rodriguez
Court Action for reconveyance, civil action

Rule 72, Sec. 1 An action for reconveyance and annulment of title with
a. Settlement of the estate of deceased persons; damages is a civil action, whereas matters relating to
b. Escheat; settlement of the estate of a deceased person such as
c. Guardianship and custody of children; advancement of property made by the decedent, partake of the
d. Trustees; nature of a special proceeding, which concomitantly requires
e. Adoption; the application of specific rules as provided for in the Rules of
f. Rescission and revocation of adoption; Court.
g. Hospitalization of insane persons;
h. Habeas Corpus; Special proceeding distinguished from ordinary civil
i. Change of name; action
j. Voluntary dissolution of corporations; A special proceeding is a remedy by which a party seeks to
k. Judicial approval of voluntary recognition of minor establish a status, a right, or a particular fact. It is distinguished
natural children; from an ordinary civil action where a party sues another for the
l. Constitution of family home; enforcement or protection of a right, or the prevention or
m. Declaration of absence and death; redress of a wrong. To initiate a special proceeding, a petition
n. Cancellation or correction of entries in the civil registry. and not a complaint should be filed.
Ordinary Civil Actions Special Under Article 916 of the Civil Code, disinheritance can be
Proceedings effected only through a will wherein the legal cause therefor
Scope A formal demand of An application or shall be specified. While the respondents in their complaint
one's right in a court of proceeding to sought the disinheritance of Ramon, no will or any instrument
justice in the manner establish the status supposedly effecting the disposition of Antonio's estate was
prescribed by the court or right of a party, ever mentioned.
or by the law. or a particular fact. Hence, despite the prayer for Ramon's Disinheritance, the Civil
Pleadings Required No formal case does not partake of the nature of a special proceeding
pleadings are and does not call for the probate's exercise of its limited
required unless the jurisdiction.
statute expressly
so provides. Heirs of Yaptinchay vs. Del Rosario
Declaration of heirship cannot be made in a civil action

Remedy granted:
The trial court cannot make a declaration of heirship in the civil
an application or
action for the reason that such a declaration can only be made
motion.
in a special proceeding.
Courts Can be tried by Courts Can only be tried
of general jurisdiction by courts of special
Republic vs. CA
or limited
jurisdiction.
Parties Two definite adverse Petitioner – A

When a declaration of presumptive death may be The rule on formal offer of evidence (Rule 132) now being
classified as special proceeding or summary ordinary invoked by petitioner is clearly not applicable to the present
proceeding case involving a petition for naturalization. The only instance
Take note that Rule 72, Sec. 1(m) includes declaration of when said rules may be applied by analogy or suppletorily in
absence and death as one of the special proceedings. such cases is when it is "practicable and convenient." That is
However, under Article 41 of the Family Code, for the purpose not the case here, since reliance upon the documents
of contracting the subsequent marriage under the preceding presented by the State for the first time on appeal, in fact,
paragraph, the spouses present must institute a summary appears to be the more practical and convenient course of
proceeding as provided in this Code for the declaration of action considering that decisions in naturalization proceedings
presumptive death of the absentee, without prejudice to the are not covered by the rule on res judicata. Consequently, a
effect of a reappearance of the absent spouse. final favorable judgment does not preclude the State from later
on moving for a revocation of the grant of naturalization on the
basis of the same documents.
If it is a petition for declaration of presumptive death for Sec. 5. Commencement of Action – A civil action is
purposes of succession, it is a special proceeding but if it is a commenced by the filing of the original complaint in court. If
summary proceeding for declaration of presumptive death an additional defendant is impleaded in a later pleading, the
for purposes of remarriage, it is an ordinary civil action. action is commenced with regard to him on the dated of the
filing of such later pleading, irrespective of whether the
There is no doubt that the petition is a summary proceeding motion for its admission, if necessary, is denied by the court.
under the Family Code, not a special proceeding under the Sec. 6. Construction – These Rules shall be liberally
Revised Rules of Court appeal for which calls for the filing of a construed in order to promote their objective of securing a
Record on Appeal. It being a summary ordinary proceeding, just, speedy and inexpensive disposition of every action and
the filing of a Notice of Appeal from the trial court’s order proceeding.
sufficed.
Anson Trader Center Inc. vs. Pacific Banking
Petition for liquidation of insolvent Corporation
corporation Litigation is not a game of technicality, in which one more

A petition for liquidation of an insolvent corporation should be deeply schooled and skilled in the subtle art of movement and
classified a special proceeding and not an ordinary action. position entraps and destroys the other. It is rather a contest in
Such petition does not seek the enforcement or protection of a which each contending party fully and fairly lays before the
right nor the prevention or redress of a wrong against a party. It court the facts in issue and then brushing aside as wholly trivial
does not pray for affirmative relief for injury arising from a and indecisive all imperfection of forms and technicalities of
party's wrongful act or omission nor state a cause of action that procedure, asks that justice be done upon the merits. Lawsuits,
can be enforced against any person. unlike duels, are not to be won by a rapier’s thrust.
Technicality, when it deserts its proper office as an aid to
 The cases covered by the Interim Rules for Intra- justice and becomes its great hindrance and chief enemy,
Corporate Controversies should be considered as deserves scant consideration from courts.
ordinary civil actions. These cases either seek the
recovery of damages/property or specific performance of Redena vs. CA
an act against a party for the violation or protection of a
right. It is equally settled, however, that this Court’s power to liberally
construe and even to suspend the rules, presupposes the
 A petition for rehabilitation, the procedure for which is existence of substantial rights in favor of which, the strict
provided in the Interim Rules of Procedure on application of technical rules must concede.
Corporate Recovery, should be considered as a special
proceeding. It is one that seeks to establish the status of Tagabi vs. Tanque
a party or a particular fact. (AM No. 00-8-10-SC)
Procedural rules are not to be belittled or dismissed simply
Arbitration because their non-observance may have resulted in prejudice
Under the Special Alternative Dispute Resolution Rules, all to a party’s substantive rights. Like all rules, they are required
proceedings under the Special ADR Rules are special to be followed except only for the most persuasive of reasons
proceedings. when they may be relaxed to relieve a litigation of an injustice
not commensurate with the degree of his thoughtlessness in
Under RA 9285, or the Alternative Dispute Resolution Law, not complaining with the procedure prescribed.
proceedings for recognition and enforcement of an arbitration
agreement or for vacation, setting aside, correction or Jose vs. CA
modification of an arbitral award, and any application with a
court for arbitration assistance and supervision shall be Rules of procedures are intended to promote, not to defeat,
deemed as special proceedings. substantial justice and, therefore, they should not be applied in
a very rigid and technical sense. The exception is that, while
Ong Chia vs. Republic the Rules are liberally construed, the provisions with respect to
the rules on the manner and periods for perfecting appeals are
Rule on formal offer of evidence does not apply when not strictly applied.
practical and convenient in a special proceeding

As an exception to the exception, these rules have sometimes The test to determine whether a complaint states a cause of
been relaxed on equitable considerations. Also, in some cases action against the defendant is this: Admitting hypothetically
the Supreme Court has given due course to an appeal the truth of the allegation of fact made in the complaint, may a
perfected out of time where a stringent application of the rules judge validly grant the relief demanded in the complaint?
would have denied it, but only when to do so would serve the
demands of substantial justice, and in the exercise of equity In determining whether the elements of a cause of action are
jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. present or whether they have been sufficiently alleged, the
inquiry is therefore confined to the four corners of the
Rule 2: Cause of Action complaint.
There is that RIGHT, there is that OBLIGATION, and there is
that VIOLATION, and in other cases, DAMAGE is also present
Sec. 1. Ordinary civil actions, basis of – Every ordinary
that is required by law. (Asia Brewery, Inc. v. Equitable PCI
civil action must be based on a cause of action.
Bank)
Sec. 2. Cause of action defined – A cause of action is the
Spouses Zepeda v. China Banking Corporation
act or omission by which a party violates a right of another.
Only material allegations in the complaint are considered
Cause of Action in determining whether a cause of action exists
It is the delict or the wrongful act or omission committed by the To be taken into account are only the material allegations in
defendant in violation of the primary right of the plaintiff. the complaint; extraneous facts and circumstances or other
matters aliunde are not considered. The court may consider in
addition to the complaint the appended annexes or documents,
other pleadings of the plaintiff, or admissions in the records.
Elements of Cause of Action
(1) Right in favor of the plaintiff by whatever means and
under whatever law it arises or is created;
(2) Obligation on the part of the named defendant to respect
or not to violate such right; and
Material allegations in the complaint
Only the allegations of the complaint are considered in order to
(3) Act or omission on the part of such defendant in violation
determine:
of the right of the plaintiff or constituting a breach of the
1. Whether all the elements of a cause of action are
obligation of the defendant to the plaintiff for which the
present.
latter may maintain an action for recovery of damages or
other appropriate relief.
XPN: Labor case filed with the NLRC
A complaint in a case filed before the NLRC consists only of a
It is only upon the occurrence of the last element (violation)
blank form which provides the checklist of possible causes of
that a cause of action arises, giving the plaintiff the right to
action that the employee may have against the employer. The
maintain an action in court for recovery of damages or other
checklist was designed to facilitate the filing of the complaints
appropriate relief. (Universal Aquarius, Inc., et al. vs Q.C.
by employees and laborers even without the intervention of
Human Resources Management)
counsel. It allows the complainant to expediently set forth his
grievance in a general manner but is not solely determinative
(4) Damage – If there is no damage sustained, no suit can be
of the ultimate cause of action that he may have against the
maintained because of the principle of damnum absque
employer.
injuria.
Thus, the complaint is not the only document from which the
Damnum Absque Injuria
complainant's cause of action is determined in a labor case.
It means a loss or damage for which there is no legal remedy.
Any cause of action that may not have been included in the
Even if there is violation of a right but the law does not consider
complaint or position paper, can no longer be alleged after the
it as an actionable injury, the plaintiff cannot file a claim.
position paper is submitted by the parties. In other words, the
filing of the position paper is the operative act which forecloses
Violations of a right but are not actionable under the law:
the raising of other matters constitutive of the cause of action.
1. Breach of promise to marry.
This necessarily implies that the cause of action is finally
2. Gambling debts – the parties are deemed to be in pari
ascertained only after both the complaint and position paper
delicto so the courts will leave them as they are. A person
are properly evaluated.
who seeks to enforce a gambling debt does not come to
court with clean hands.
A cause of action is the delict or wrongful act or omission
3. De minimis non curat lex – the law does not deal with
committed by the defendant in violation of the primary right of
trifles.
the plaintiff. A complaint before the NLRC does not contain
specific allegations of these wrongful acts or omissions which
Test to determine sufficiency of cause of constitute the cause of action. All that it contains is the term by
which such acts or omissions complained of are generally
action known. It cannot therefore be considered as the final
The test of the sufficiency of the facts found in a petition as determinant of the cause of action. (Tegmienta Chemical Phils.
constituting a cause of action is whether or not, admitting the vs. Buensalida)
facts alleged, the court can render a valid judgment upon the
same accordance with the prayer thereof. (Spouses Chu vs. 2. Whether the court has jurisdiction over the subject
Benelda Estate Dev’t Corp.) matter.

judgment. by law, it commits
Distinction between cause of action and an error
jurisdiction.
of
subject matter Absence Lack of or failure to A complaint is

Cause of Action Subject Matter state a cause of vulnerable to
action are considered dismissal on the
Definition A cause of action is The subject
affirmative defenses ground that the
the act or omission by matter is the item
only. court has no
which a party violates with respect to
jurisdiction over
a right of another. It is which the
the subject
the delict or the controversy has
matter.
wrongful act or arisen, or
omission committed concerning which Prejudice to A dismissal on the A dismissal on
by the defendant in the wrong has refiling ground that the the ground that
violation of the been done, and it complaint fails to the court has no
primary right of the is ordinarily the state a cause of jurisdiction over
plaintiff. right, the thing, or action is without the subject
the contract prejudice to refiling. matter bars the
under dispute. refiling of the
complaint in the
same court.
It is the what of ex: In a breach of contract, the contract violated is the subject
It is the why of an an action or matter while the breach thereof by the obligor is the cause of
action. proceeding. action.
Basis It is the basis of a civil It is the basis of
action. jurisdiction. Iniego vs. Purganan
Capable of Immaterial. GR: If the subject
pecuniary matter is Distinction between cause of action and subject matter
estimation incapable of What must be determined to be capable or incapable if
pecuniary pecuniary estimation is not the cause of action, but the subject
estimation, matter of the action. A cause of action is the delict or wrongful
jurisdiction is act or omission committed by the defendant in violation of the
lodged with the primary rights of the plaintiff.
RTC.
On the other hand, the subject matter of the action is the
XPN: Foreclosure physical facts, the thing real or personal, the money, the lands,
of Real Estate chattels, and the like, in relation to which the suit is prosecuted,
Mortgage – and not the delict or wrong committed by the defendant.
assessed value
will be Actions for damages based on quasi-delicts are primarily and
considered in effectively actions for the recovery of a sum of money for the
determining damages suffered because of the defendant’s alleged tortious
jurisdiction. acts. The subject matter of the action is the relief sought. That
Existence A cause of action Every action or is asking for the recovery of damages. The cause of action,
need only exist in a proceeding has a which is the act or omission by which the defendant violated
civil action. subject matter. the right of the plaintiff, was his fault or negligence.
Determination Whether one has a To determine
cause of action subject matter, Commonalities between cause of action and
depends on law, reference is
contract and other made to law.
subject matter
sources of  Only the allegations of the complaint will be examined in
obligations. determining whether there is a cause of action and
whether the court has jurisdiction over the subject matter.
 Both are used in determining whether or not res judicata
It is here where you exists (i.e., identity of causes of action and identity of
can determine what is subject matter).
your right; what is the
obligation of the
defendant; if the Special civil actions not grounded on a
defendant
such.
violated cause of action
The requirement that a suit must be grounded on a cause of
Error When the court takes When a court action applies only to ordinary civil actions and not to special
cognizance of a takes cognizance civil actions. The requirement of a cause of action finds no
cause of action when of a subject application to certain special civil actions where the violation of
none actually exists, matter not the plaintiff's rights is not a prerequisite for the commencement
it commits an error of conferred upon it of such actions.

Definition The right to presently The act or
1. Interpleader (Rule 62) – the the plaintiff may file a enforce a cause of omission by which
complaint even though there is no transgression of his action. a party violates a
rights as he is, more often than not, not interested in the right of another.
subject matter of the action. Effect A remedial right A formal statement
belonging to some of the operative
2. Declaratory relief (Rule 63) – when there is any breach or person. facts that give rise
violation of a statute, executive order or regulation, to such remedial
ordinance, or any other governmental regulation. right.
Existence A matter of right and A matter of
3. Partition (Rule 69) – the plaintiff has the right to compel depends on the statement and is
partition, but the defendants are joined in the suit not substantive law. governed by the
because they violated the rights of the plaintiff but because law of procedure.
the defendants are also interested in the property.
There is a right of
action if the same is There is a cause of
Special proceedings not grounded on a cause allowed by remedial action if the same
law. If there is no arises from
of action remedy provided, there substantive law.
Strictly speaking, it is only in civil actions that one speaks of a can be no redress.
cause of action. The term does not apply to special When it After the performance The moment a
proceedings which seek to establish a status, a right or a arises or fulfillment of all right is violated.
particular fact. conditions precedent.
Statute of Affected Not affected
Rehabilitation proceedings seeks to establish the inability of
limitations
the corporate debtor to pay its debts when they fall due so that
a rehabilitation plan is necessary. It does not seek a relief from
an injury caused by another party. Thus, a petition for Rule against splitting a cause of action
rehabilitation need not state a cause of action. (Rombe vs. If the plaintiff files separate cases to prosecute his several
Asiatrust Development Bank) claims individually, he violates the rule against splitting a cause
of action.
Cause of action must exist at the time of Sec. 3. One suit for a single cause of action – A party
filing of the complaint may not institute more than one suit for a single cause of
Unless the plaintiff has a valid and subsisting cause of action at action.
the time his action is commenced, the defect cannot be cured
or remedied by the acquisition or accrual of one while the Marilag vs. Fernandez
action us pending, and a supplemental complaint or an
amendment setting up such after-accrued cause of action is Loan contracts secured by real estate mortgage
not permissible. (Surigao mine exploration co., inc. vs. Harris In loan contracts secured by a real estate mortgage, the rule is
et. al) that the creditor-mortgagee has a single cause of action
against the debtor-mortgagor, i.e., to recover the debt, through
Right of Action the filing of a personal action for collection of sum of money or
The term right of action is the right to commence and maintain the institution of a real action to foreclose on the mortgage
an action. The right of action springs from the cause of action, security.
but does not accrue until all the facts which constitute the
cause of action have occurred. (Sps. Borbe et al. vs. Calalo) The two remedies are alternative, not cumulative or
successive, and each remedy is complete by itself. Thus, if the
creditor-mortgagee opts to foreclose the real estate mortgage,
Distinction between right of action and he waives the action for the collection of the unpaid debt,
cause of action except only for the recovery of whatever deficiency may remain
in the outstanding obligation of the debtor-mortgagor after
A right of action is the right to presently enforce a cause of
deducting the bid price in the public auction sale of the
action, while a cause of action consists of the operative facts
mortgaged properties.
which give rise to such right of action. The right of action does
not arise until the performance of all conditions precedent to
the action and may be taken away by the running of the statute Rationale behind prohibition of splitting a
of limitations, through estoppel, or by other circumstances
which do not affect the cause of action.
cause of action
Splitting a cause of action is the act of dividing a single cause
Performance or fulfilment of all conditions precedent upon of action, claim or demand into two or more parts, and bringing
which a right of action depends must be sufficiently alleged, suit for one of such parts only, intending to reserve the rest for
considering that the burden of proof to show that a party has a another separate action. The purpose of the rule is to avoid
right of action is upon the person initiating the suit. (Philamgen harassment and vexation to the defendant and avoid
vs. Sweetlines) multiplicity of suits. (Quadra vs. CA)
For a single cause of action or violation of a right, the plaintiff

Right of Action Cause of Action
may be entitled to several reliefs. It is the filing of the separate

complaints for these several reliefs that constitutes splitting of Rule on forum shopping
the cause of action. This is what is prohibited by the rule. When  If willful and deliberate – All actions may be dismissed
there is only one delict or wrong, there is but a single cause of with prejudice to refiling.
action regardless of the number of rights violated belonging to  If NOT willful and deliberate – It will be a dismissal
one person. All such rights should be alleged in a single without prejudice to refiling.
complaint, otherwise they are barred forever. (Private vs.
Magada)
Rules to determine singleness of a cause of
Effect of splitting a cause of action action
The question of whether a cause of action is single and entire
Sec. 4. Splitting a single cause of action, effect of – If
or separate is not always easy to determine and the same
two or more suits are instituted on the basis of the same
must often be resolved, not by the general rules, but by
cause of action, the filing of one or a judgment upon the
reference to the facts and circumstances of the particular case.
merits in any one is available as a ground for the dismissal
of the others.
The rule, therefore, is whether the entire amount arises from
one and the same act or contract which must, thus, be sued for
Splitting a cause of action amounts to:
in one action, or the several parts arise from distinct and
1. Litis pendentia – A ground for dismissal of a civil action. It
different acts or contracts, for which a party may maintain
refers to that situation wherein another action is pending
separate suits.
between the same parties for the same cause of action,
such that the second action becomes unnecessary and
1. One contract, one cause
vexatious.
A contract embraces only one cause of action because it may
be violated only once, even if it contains several stipulations.
The underlying principle of litis pendentia is the theory that
a party is not allowed to vex another more than once regarding
Nonpayment of a loan secured by mortgage
the same subject matter and for the same cause of action. This
Nonpayment of a loan secured by mortgage constitutes a
theory is founded on the public policy that the same subject
single cause of action. The creditor cannot split up this single
matter should not be the subject of controversy in courts more
cause of action into two separate complaints, one for payment
than once, in order that possible conflicting judgments may be
of the debt and another for the foreclosure of the mortgage. If
avoided for the sake of the stability of the rights and status of
he does so, the filing of the first complaint will bar the second
persons, and also to avoid the costs and expenses incident to
complaint. (Quioque vs. Bautista)
numerous suits.
2. One violation, one cause
Consequently, a party will not be permitted to split up a single
A contract which provides for several stipulations to be
cause of action and make it a basis for several suits as the
performed at different times gives rise to as many causes of
whole cause must be determined in one action.
action as there are violations.
2. Res judicata – Another ground for the dismissal of a civil
Where a contract is to be performed periodically, as by
action. It holds that a final judgment on the merits by a
installments, each failure to pay an installment constitutes a
court of competent jurisdiction is conclusive of the rights of
cause of action and can be subject of a separate suit as the
the parties in all later suits on points and matters
installment falls due or can be included in the pending or
determined in the former suit. It rests on the principle that
supplemental pleading.
parties should not be permitted to litigate the same issue
more than once.
3. Non-application of no. 2 when there is stipulation or
repudiation
3. Forum Shopping – Filing multiple cases based on the
same cause of action, but with different prayers. It is he
Acceleration Clause
institution of two or more actions or proceedings involving
An acceleration clause is a stipulation stating that, on the
the same parties for the same cause of action, either
occasion of the debtor’s default, the whole sum remaining
simultaneously or successively, on the supposition that
unpaid automatically becomes due and payable. (Luzon
one or the other court would make a favorable disposition.
Development Bank vs. Conquilla)
(Yap vs. Chua)
Repudiation
Forum shopping can be committed in three ways:
An unqualified and positive refusal to perform a contract,
(1) Filing multiple cases based on the same cause of action
though the performance thereof is not yet due, may, if the
and with the same prayer, the previous case not having
renunciation goes to the whole contract, be treated as a
been resolved yet (where the ground for dismissal is litis
complete breach which will entitle the injured party to bring his
pendentia);
action at once. (Blossom and Company, Inc. vs. Manila Gas
Corp)
and the same prayer, the previous case having been
finally resolved (where the ground for dismissal is res
4. Barring Effect
judicata); and
All obligations which have matured at the time of the suit must
be integrated as one cause of action in one complaint. Those
but with different prayers; splitting of causes of action,
not so included would be barred.
where the ground for dismissal is also either litis pendentia
or res judicata. (Collantes vs. CA)
Joinder of Causes of Action

Sec. 5. Joinder of causes of action – A party may in one joinder of a special proceeding with a special civil action.
pleading assert, in the alternative or otherwise, as many (Caballes vs. CA)
causes of action as he may have against an opposing party,
subject to the following conditions:  The joinder of the action for injunction and the action
to quiet title is disallowed by the Rules of Court, the first
a) The party joining the causes of action shall comply with being an ordinary suit and the latter a special civil action
the rules on joinder of parties; under Rule 63. Under Section 5(b), Rule 2, “the joinder
b) The joinder shall not include special civil actions or shall not include special civil action or actions governed by
actions governed by special rules; special rules.”
c) Where the causes of action are between the same
parties but pertain to different venues or jurisdictions, Consequently, the RTC should have severed the causes
the joinder may be allowed in the Regional Trial Court of action, either upon motion or motu proprio, and tried
provided one of the causes of action falls within the them separately, assuming it had jurisdiction over both.
jurisdiction of said court and the venue lies therein; and Such severance is pursuant to Section 6, Rule 2 of the
d) Where the claims in all the causes action are principally rules of Court. (Salvador vs. Patricia Inc.)
for recovery of money, the aggregate amount claimed
shall be the test of jurisdiction.  Interpleader cannot be joined with declaratory relief.
They are both special civil actions. (Belo Medical Group
Inc. vs. Santos and Belo)
a) The party joining the causes of action shall comply
with the rules on joinder of parties.
Cases when joinder allowed
Permissive joinder of parties – All persons in whom or  By section 4 of Rule 3, supra, applications to pronounce
the husband an absentee and to place the
against whom any right to relief in respect to or arising out of
the same transaction or series of transactions is alleged to management of the conjugal assets in the hands of
the wife may, in our opinion, be combined and
exist, whether jointly, severally, or in the alternative, may,
except as otherwise provided in these Rules, join as plaintiffs adjudicated in one and the same proceeding. (Preyer vs.
Martinez et. al)
or be joined as defendants in one complaint, where any
question of law or fact common to all such plaintiffs or to all
 The question whether a person in the position of the
such defendants may arise in the action; but the court may
make such orders as may be just to prevent any plaintiff or present plaintiff can in any event maintain a complex
action to compel recognition as a natural child and at
defendant from being embarrassed or put to expense in
connection with any proceedings in which he may have no the same time to obtain ulterior relief in the character
of heir, is one which in the opinion of this court must be
interest. (Rule 3, Sec. 6)
answered in the affirmative, provided always that the
conditions justifying the joinder of the two distinct causes
b) The joinder shall not include special civil actions or
actions governed by special rules. of action are present in the particular case.
Rationale behind prohibition of joinder including special In other words, there is no absolute necessity requiring
that the action to compel acknowledgment should have
civil actions or actions governed by special rules
1. To avoid confusion – The rules of procedure for civil been instituted and prosecuted to a successful conclusion
prior to the action in which that same plaintiff seeks
actions and actions governed by special rules are peculiar
to the latter. The same cannot be applied to an ordinary additional relief in the character of heir. (Briz vs. Briz)
civil action.
2. To avoid jurisdictional issues – Actions governed by c) Where the causes of action are between the same
parties but pertain to different venues or jurisdictions,
special rules are, more often than not, cognizable by
quasi-judicial tribunals, or maybe, courts of special the joinder may be allowed in the Regional Trial Court
provided one of the causes of action falls within the
jurisdiction. There can be no joinder where one of the
issues to be tried pertain to a tribunal of special jurisdiction of said court and the venue lies therein.
jurisdiction.
Joinder in the RTC
Under Rule 2, Section 5(c), the causes of action between the
Cases when joinder not allowed
 An action for reimbursement or for recovery of same parties but pertaining to different jurisdictions can be
joined in the RTC because one of the causes of action falls
damages may not be properly joined with the action for
ejectment. The former is an ordinary civil action requiring within the jurisdiction of the same.
a full-blown trial, while an action for unlawful detainer is a
special civil action which requires a summary procedure. There must be at least one cause of action the jurisdiction of
which falls within the RTC. If both cases are within the
The joinder of the two actions is specifically enjoined by
Section 5 of Rule 2 of the Rules of Court. (Terana vs. De jurisdiction of the MTCs, the can be no joinder.
Sagub)
d) Where the claims in all the causes action are
principally for recovery of money, the aggregate
 A petition for a writ of habeas corpus cannot be joined
with the special civil action for certiorari because the amount claimed shall be the test of jurisdiction.
two remedies are governed by a different set of rules. Rule
2, Section 5(b) of the Rules of Court mandates that the Restatement of the Totality Rule
Corollary, Section 5(d), Rule 2 of the same Rules provides that
joinder of causes of action shall not include special actions
or actions governed by special rules, thus proscribing the where the claims in all the causes action are principally for

recovery of money the aggregate amount claimed shall be the 2. the causes of action arise out of the same
test of jurisdiction. contract, transaction, or relation between
the parties, or are for demands for money
This paragraph embodies the Totality Rule as exemplified by or are of the same nature and character.
Section 33 (1) of B.P. Blg. 129 which states, among others,
that where there are several claims of different parties, Types  Alternative joinder
embodied in the same complaint, the amount of the demand  Cumulative joinder
shall be the totality of the claims in all the causes of action
arose out of the same or different transactions.
Misjoinder
Common question of fact or law Sec. 6. Misjoinder of causes of action – Misjoinder of
It is well to remember that the joinder of causes of action may causes of action is not a ground for dismissal of an action. A
involve the same parties or different parties. If the joinder misjoined cause of action may, on motion of a party or on
involves different parties, as in this case, there must be a the intiative of the court, be severed and proceed
question of fact or of law common to both parties joined, arising separately.
out of the same transaction or series of transaction. (Sps.
Perez vs. Hermano) Misjoinder, not a ground for dismissal
Misjoinder of causes of action and parties do not involve a
Unlimited joinder not allowed question of jurisdiction of the court to hear and proceed with
While the rule allows a plaintiff to join as many separate claims the case. They are not even accepted grounds for dismissal
as he may have, there should nevertheless be some unity in thereof. Instead, under the Rules of Court, the misjoinder of
the problem presented and a common question of law and fact causes of action and parties involve an implied admission of
involved, subject always to the restriction thereon regarding the court's jurisdiction.
jurisdiction, venue and joinder of parties. Unlimited joinder is
not authorized. It acknowledges the power of the court, acting upon the motion
of a party to the case or on its own initiative, to order the
Our rule on permissive joinder of causes of action, with the severance of the misjoined cause of action, to be proceeded
proviso subjecting it to the correlative rules on jurisdiction, with separately in case of misjoinder of causes of action;
venue and joinder of parties and requiring a conceptual unity in and/or the dropping of a party and the severance of any claim
the problems presented, effectively disallows unlimited joinder. against said misjoined party, also to be proceeded with
separately in case of misjoinder of parties. (Republic vs.
Alternative joinder Herbieto)
Alternative defendants – Where the plaintiff is uncertain
against who of several persons he is entitled to relief, he may Misjoinder and non-joinder of parties
join any or all of them as defendants in the alternative, Neither misjoinder nor non-joinder of parties is ground for
although a right to relief against one may be inconsistent with a dismissal of an action. Parties may be dropped or added by
right of relief against the other. (Rule 3, Sec. 13) order of the court on motion of any party or on its own initiative
at any stage the action and on such terms as are just. Any
Cumulative Joinder claim against a misjoined party may be severed and proceeded
When two causes of action are pursued simultaneously (e.g with separately. (Rule 3, Sec. 11)
specific performance and damages in a breach of contract).
Ada vs. Baylon
Summary: Joinder of Causes of Action
Definition By a joinder of actions, or more properly, a Partition cannot be joined with action for recission
joinder of causes of action, is meant the The action for partition filed by the petitioners could not be
uniting of two or more demands or rights of joined with the action for the rescission of the said donation
action in one action; the statement of more inter vivos in favor of Florante. Lest it be overlooked, an action
than one cause of action in a declaration. It is for partition is a special civil action governed by Rule 69 of the
the union of two or more civil causes of action Rules of Court while an action for rescission is an ordinary civil
action, each of which could be made the basis action governed by the ordinary rules of civil procedure.
of a separate suit, in the same complaint,
declaration or petition. The variance in the procedure in the special civil action of
Nature A party is generally not required to join in one partition and in the ordinary civil action of rescission precludes
suit several distinct causes of action. their joinder in one complaint or their being tried in a single
proceeding to avoid confusion in determining what rules shall
govern the conduct of the proceedings as well as in the
The joinder of separate causes of action, determination of the presence of requisite elements of each
where allowable, is permissive and not particular cause of action.
mandatory in the absence of a contrary
statutory provision, even though the causes of
action arose from the same factual setting
Rule 31: Consolidation or Severance
and might under applicable joinder rules be
joined. Consolidation
Requisites Rule 2, Sec. 5 Because there are common questions of fact among the
1. it will not violate the rules on jurisdiction, actions, this would mean that essentially the same evidence
venue and joinder of parties; and

would be required to prove or disprove the issue. It would be
more expedient to order a joint trial.
Sec. 1. Consolidation – When actions involving a common

question of law or fact are pending before the court, it may
order a joint hearing or trial of any or all the matters in issue
in the actions; it may order all the actions consolidated, and
it may make such orders concerning proceedings therein as
may tend to avoid unnecessary costs or delay.
Severance
The court determines that it would be complicated and
confusing to simultaneously try all the claims existing in the
same case filed by the parties. This does not mean however
that the claims separated will be dismissed and prosecuted
independently by the filing of other cases. They will still be tried
in the same action.
The court may properly and logically organize a trial of the

several claims. This is a recognition of the inherent power of
the court to amend and control its process and orders so as to
make them conformable to law and justice under Rule 135,
Sec. 5(g).
Sec. 2. Separate trials – The court, in furtherance of

convenience or to avoid prejudice, may order a separate
trial of any claim, cross-claim, counterclaim, or third-party
complaint, or of any separate issue or of any number of
claims, cross-claims, counterclaims, third-party complaints
or issues.
-----------------------END OF FIRST EXAM COVERAGE----------------------
Humility and
Perseverance ⚖️

Civ Pro 1st Exam Notes

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Civ Pro 1st Exam Notes

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Civ Pro 1st Exam Notes

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Judicial Hierarchy (4) where the constitutional issues raised are better decided

after a thorough deliberation by a collegiate body and with

Erika Cristel Diaz | CIV PRO NOTES

(3) Assign temporarily judges of lower courts to other

Erika Cristel Diaz | CIV PRO NOTES

Cases required which must be heard en banc

Erika Cristel Diaz | CIV PRO NOTES

Question of law and Question of fact distinguished

Determination of breach of contract is factual

Jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Court

Erika Cristel Diaz | CIV PRO NOTES

Erika Cristel Diaz | CIV PRO NOTES

Erika Cristel Diaz | CIV PRO NOTES

Erika Cristel Diaz | CIV PRO NOTES

Note: All are exclusive of interest, damages of whatever kind, Unlawful

Erika Cristel Diaz | CIV PRO NOTES

Cabrera vs. Getaruela Determination of docket fees or filling fees

Erika Cristel Diaz | CIV PRO NOTES

Erika Cristel Diaz | CIV PRO NOTES

Erika Cristel Diaz | CIV PRO NOTES

Erika Cristel Diaz | CIV PRO NOTES

A cadastral proceeding is an action in rem. The probate of a

Erika Cristel Diaz | CIV PRO NOTES

Erika Cristel Diaz | CIV PRO NOTES

Erika Cristel Diaz | CIV PRO NOTES

Place of filing the action Natcher vs. CA

Special Proceedings under the Rules of Ching vs. Rodriguez

Court Action for reconveyance, civil action

Declaration of heirship cannot be made in a civil action

Erika Cristel Diaz | CIV PRO NOTES

corporation Litigation is not a game of technicality, in which one more

Erika Cristel Diaz | CIV PRO NOTES

Erika Cristel Diaz | CIV PRO NOTES

subject matter Absence Lack of or failure to A complaint is

Erika Cristel Diaz | CIV PRO NOTES

For a single cause of action or violation of a right, the plaintiff

Erika Cristel Diaz | CIV PRO NOTES

Erika Cristel Diaz | CIV PRO NOTES

Erika Cristel Diaz | CIV PRO NOTES

Erika Cristel Diaz | CIV PRO NOTES

Sec. 1. Consolidation – When actions involving a common

The court may properly and logically organize a trial of the

Sec. 2. Separate trials – The court, in furtherance of

-----------------------END OF FIRST EXAM COVERAGE----------------------

Erika Cristel Diaz | CIV PRO NOTES

You might also like