General Principles

Question 1

What is the Principle of Judicial Hierarchy?

Answer 1

The principle of hierarchy of courts guides litigants as
to the proper venue of appeals and/ or the appropriate
forum for the issuance of extraordinary writs. The principle provides that the appropriate forum is the court lowest in the judicial hierarchy. Hence, as a rule, recourse must be first made to the lower-ranked courts exercising concurrent jurisdiction with a higher court.

Question 2

What is the effect if there is non-compliance with the
principle of hierarchy of courts?

Answer 2

Failure to comply is sufficient cause for the dismissal of
the petition. It is a constitutional imperative, not a matter
of mere policy, given (1) the structure of our judicial
system; and (2) requirements of due process.

Question 3

What are the exceptions to the principle of judicial
hierarchy?

Answer 3

Immediate resort to the Supreme Court may be allowed when any of the following grounds are present:
1. When genuine issues of constitutionality are raised that must be addressed immediately;
2. When the case involves transcendental importance;
3. When the case is novel;
4. When the constitutional issues raised are better decided by the Supreme Court;
5. When time is of the essence;
6. When the subject of review involves acts of a constitutional organ;
7. When there is no other plain, speedy, adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law;
8. When the petition includes questions that may affect public welfare, public policy, or demanded by the broader interest of justice;
9. When the order complained of was a patent nullity; and
10. When the appeal was considered as an inappropriate remedy.

Question 4

What is the Doctrine of Non-Interference or Judicial
Stability?

Answer 4

The doctrine of non-interference or judicial stability dictates that a trial court has no authority to interfere with the proceedings of a court of equal jurisdiction, much less to annul the final judgment of a co-equal court. The orders and decisions of a competent court cannot be altered, modified or amended by another court of concurrent jurisdiction.

Question 5

What are the exceptions to the doctrine of noninterference
or judicial stability?

Answer 5

The doctrine of non-interference or judicial stability does not apply:
1. Where a third-party claimant is involved;
2. When another court with concurrent jurisdiction later
acquires jurisdiction pursuant to a sanctioned change
of venue.

Question 6

When is a matter deemed of transcendental importance?

Answer 6

In determining whether a matter is of transcendental importance, it must be guided by the presence of three factors:
1. The character of the funds or other assets involved in the case;
2. The presence of a clear case of disregard of a constitutional or statutory prohibition by the public respondent agency or instrumentality of the government; and
3. The lack of any other party with a more direct and specific interest in the questions being raised.

Question 7

What is jurisdiction?

Answer 7

Jurisdiction is the power and authority of a court to hear, try and decide a case, as well as to enforce or execute its judgments or final orders. Jurisdiction is a matter of substantive law. An action may be filed only with the court or tribunal where the Constitution or a statute says it can be brought.

Without jurisdiction, a judgment rendered by a court is null and void and may be attacked anytime. A void judgment is no judgment at all - it can neither be the source of any right nor the creator of any obligation; all acts performed pursuant to it and all claims emanating from it have no legal effect.

Question 8

What are the aspects of jurisdiction?

Answer 8

In adjudication, the concept of jurisdiction has several aspects, namely:
a. Jurisdiction over the parties;
b. Jurisdiction over subject matter;
c. Jurisdiction over the issues;
d. Jurisdiction over the res or property in litigation;
e. Jurisdiction over the remedy.

Question 9

What is meant by jurisdiction over the parties?

Answer 9

It is the power of a court to render a personal judgment or to subject the parties in a particular action to the judgment and other rulings rendered in the action. It is the power of the courts to make decisions that are binding on them and is based on due process.

Question 10

How is jurisdiction over the plaintiff acquired?

Answer 10

Courts acquire jurisdiction over the plaintiff or petitioner once the complaint or petition. is filed. A court automatically acquires jurisdiction over the person of the plaintiff upon the filing of the initiatory pleading.

Question 11

How is jurisdiction over the defendant acquired?

Answer 11

Jurisdiction over the defendant is acquired through voluntary appearance in court or a valid service of summons.

Question 12

When is jurisdiction over the person of the defendant
indispensable?

Answer 12

Jurisdiction over the person of the defendant is indispensable in actions in personam or those actions based on a party’s personal liability.

Question 13

What is the effect if jurisdiction over the defendant is not acquired in actions in personam?

Answer 13

The proceedings in an action in personam are void if the court had no jurisdiction over the person of the defendant.

Question 14

What is meant by jurisdiction over the subject matter?

Answer 14

Jurisdiction over the subject matter is the power to hear and determine cases of the general class to which the proceedings in question belong and is conferred by the sovereign authority which organizes the court and defines its powers.

Question 15

How is jurisdiction over the subject matter conferred and determined?

Answer 15

Jurisdiction over the subject matter of a case is conferred by law and determined by the allegations in the complaint which comprise a concise statement of the ultimate facts constituting the plaintiff’s cause of action.

The nature of an action, as well as which court or body has jurisdiction over it, is determined based on the allegations contained in the complaint of the plaintiff, irrespective of whether or not the plaintiff is entitled to recover upon all or some of the claims asserted therein. The averments in the complaint and the character of the relief sought are the ones to be consulted.

Question 16

When may lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter be raised?

Answer 16

The issue of jurisdiction may be raised at any stage of the proceedings, even on appeal. It is the time-honored principle that the issue of jurisdiction is not lost by waiver or by estoppel.

Question 17

May objections to jurisdiction over the subject matter be waived?

Answer 17

No. Objections to jurisdiction over the subject matter cannot be waived and may be brought at any stage of the proceedings, even on appeal. When a case is filed with a court that has no jurisdiction over the action, the court shall motu proprio dismiss the case.

Question 18

What is error of jurisdiction?

Answer 18

An error of jurisdiction is one where the officer or tribunal acted without or in excess of its jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction, and which error is correctible only by the extraordinary writ of certiorari.

Question 19

What is error of judgment?

Answer 19

An error of judgment is one which the court may commit in the exercise of its jurisdiction. It only involves errors in the court or tribunal’s appreciation of the facts and of the law. Errors of judgment are reviewable only by appeal.

Question 20

What are the remedies available if a court committed errors of jurisdiction?

Answer 20

Errors of jurisdiction may be assailed through:
1. Certiorari
2. Prohibition
3. Annulment of judgment, in exceptional circumstances when there is lack of jurisdiction.

Question 21

What is jurisdiction over the issues?

Answer 21

It is the power of the court to try and decide issues raised in the pleadings of the parties. This pertains to a tribunal’s power and authority to decide over matters which are either disputed by the parties or simply under consideration.

Question 22

Can jurisdiction over the issues be agreed upon by the
parties?

Answer 22

Yes. Unlike jurisdiction over the subject-matter, jurisdiction over the issues may be conferred by either express or implied consent of the parties.

Question 23

How is jurisdiction over the issues determined?

Answer 23

Jurisdiction over the issues of the case is determined and conferred by the pleadings filed in the case by the parties, or by their agreement in a pre-trial order or stipulation, or, at times by their implied consent as by the failure of a party to object to evidence on an issue not covered by the pleadings.

Question 24

What is jurisdiction over the res or property in litigation?

Answer 24

Jurisdiction over the res or property in litigation is obtained by actual or constructive seizure placing the property under the orders of the court.

Question 25

How is jurisdiction over the res acquired?

Answer 25

Jurisdiction over the res is acquired either: 1. By the seizure of the property under legal process, whereby it is brought into actual custody of the law; or 2. As a result of the institution of legal proceedings, in which the power of the court is recognized and made effective.

Question 26

What is the doctrine of primary jurisdiction?

Answer 26

The doctrine of primary jurisdiction holds that if a case is such that its determination requires the expertise, specialized training and knowledge of an administrative body, relief must first be obtained in an administrative proceeding before resort to the courts is had even if the matter may well be within their proper jurisdiction.

Question 27

When does the doctrine of primary jurisdiction apply?

Answer 27

It applies where a claim is originally cognizable in the courts and comes into play whenever enforcement of the claim requires the resolution of issues which, under a regulatory scheme, have been placed within the special competence of an administrative agency. In such a case, the court in which the claim is sought to be enforced may suspend the judicial process pending referral of such issues to the administrative body for its view or, if the parties would not be unfairly disadvantaged, dismiss the case without prejudice.

Question 28

What is the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies?

Answer 28

The doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies mandates that whenever there is an available administrative remedy provided by law, no judicial recourse can be made until all such remedies have been availed of and exhausted.

Question 29

Distinguish original jurisdiction from appellate jurisdiction.

Answer 29

Original jurisdiction is the power of a court to take judicial cognizance of a case instituted for judicial action for the first time under the conditions prescribed by law. Appellate jurisdiction is the authority of a court higher in rank to re-examine the final order or judgment of a lower court which tried the case now elevated for judicial review.

Question 30

Distinguish general jurisdiction from special jurisdiction.

Answer 30

A court of general jurisdiction has the power or authority to hear and decide cases whose subject matter does not fall within the exclusive original jurisdiction of any court, tribunal or body exercising judicial or quasi-judicial function. In contrast, a court of limited jurisdiction, or a court acting under special powers, has only the jurisdiction expressly delegated. Limited or special jurisdiction is that which is confined to particular cases, or which can be exercised only under limitations and circumstances prescribed by the statute.

Question 31

Distinguish exclusive jurisdiction from concurrent jurisdiction.

Answer 31

Exclusive jurisdiction is the power of the court to take cognizance of and decide certain cases to the exclusion of any other courts. Concurrent or coordinate jurisdiction is that which is exercised by different courts at the same time over the same subject matter and within the same territory, and wherein litigants may in the first instance resort to either court indifferently, that of several different tribunals, each is authorized to deal with the same subject matter, and when a proceeding in respect of a certain subject matter can be brought in any one of several different courts, they are said to have concurrent jurisdiction.

Question 32

What is the principle of priority or the rule of exclusive concurrent jurisdiction?

Answer 32

This principle pertains to the rule that the court which first takes cognizance of an action over which it has jurisdiction and power to afford complete relief has the exclusive right to dispose of the controversy without interference from other courts of concurrent jurisdiction in which similar actions are subsequently instituted between the same parties seeking similar remedies and involving the same questions.