You are on page 1of 3

JURISDICTION

Preliminary

Defined

Traditional- the power and authority of the court to hear, try and decide a case.

Expanded- Not only the power and authority of the court to hear and decide a case but ALSO includes the power to
execute judgment until the final disposition of the case until the full and complete service of sentence of the
accused in a criminal case. (Echegaray case)

Effect of Lack of Jurisdiction

The proceedings are null and void – A court devoid of jurisdiction may only dismiss the case for want of jurisdiction
– the court cannot make any other order such as referral of the case to the proper court.

The judgment is an absolute nullity, confers no right and affords no protection but will be pronounced as void when
collaterally attacked.

-000-

JURISDICTION OVER THE SUBJECT MATTER

Preliminary

Defined – Power or authority to hear and determine cases of the general class to which the proceeding in question
belongs.

Vs Exercise of Jurisdiction: Jurisdiction is the power or authority. The exercise of this power and authority is called
the exercise of jurisdiction.

Error of Jurisdiction v Error in Judgment: in jurisdiction, the court acted without or in excess of jurisdiction –
correctible by Certiorari under R65

:in judgment, presupposes that the court is vested with jurisdiction over the subject matter of the action, but in the
process of exercising that jurisdiction, it committed mistakes I the appreciation of facts. – Correctible by Appeal.
Conferred by Law: Consequently : a. It cannot be granted by agreement of the parties, b. it cannot be acquired,
waived, enlarged or diminished by any act or omission of the parties, c. not conferred by acquiescence of the
courts.

Determined by the allegations in the pleadings: once vested, jurisdiction remains vested irrespective of: a. whether
Plaintiff is entitled to recover upon all or some of the claims, b. Defenses set up in the answer or MTD, c. amount
ultimately awarded – RTC may award below its jurisdictional amount of P300K/400k; RIANO: but the MTC cannot
award beyond its jurisdictional amount.

DOCTRINE OF PRIMARY ADMINISTRATIVE JURISDICTION:

Defined: Courts cannot and will not resolve a controversy involving a question within the jurisdiction of an
administrative tribunal, especially when the question demands the sound exercise of administrative discretion
requiring special knowledge, experience, and services to determine technical and intricate matters of fact. – Relief
must first be obtained in an administrative proceeding before resort to the court is had even if the matter is within
the court’s jurisdiction.

Exceptions: 1. Estoppel 2. Challenged administrative act is patently illegal amounting to lack of jurisdiction 3.
Unreasonable delay or official inaction will irretrievably prejudice the complaint 4. Where amount involved is
relatively small 5. Where questions involved is purely legal 6. Judicial intervention is urgent 7. Application may
cause great and irreparable damage 8. Controverted acts violate due process 9. Quo warranto proceedings 10. No
other PSA (plain, speedy and adequate remedy)

DOCTRINE OF ADHERENCE OF JURISDICTION (Continuity of Jurisdiction):

Defined: Once jurisdiction has attached, it cannot be ousted by subsequent happenings or events, although of a
character which would have prevented jurisdiction from attaching in the first place. – The court, once jurisdiction
has been acquired, refrains that jurisdiction until it finally disposes of the case.

Case: Echegaray- Even the finality of judgement does not totally deprive the court of jurisdiction over the case.
What the court loses is the power to amend, modify or alter the judgment. – Even after judgment has become final,
the court retains jurisdiction to enforce and execute it.

GR: Even a new or subsequent law placing proceedings under the jurisdiction of another tribunal does not divest
court jurisdiction Exn: 1. There is express provision in the statute 2. The statute clearly intended to apply to actions
pending before its enactment.
DOCTRINE OF ESTOPPEL BY LACHES:

Exceptions to the General Rule : A party’s active participation in at stages of a case, invoking the authority of the
court in seeking affirmative relief and questioning the court’s jurisdiction only after receiving a ruling or decision
adverse to his case, for the purpose of annulling everything done in the trial. – Tijam v. Sibonghanoy: Raise for the
first time after almost 15 years.

Applies even in administrative proceedings.

-000-

You might also like