Jurisdiction of Philippine courts
Court of Appeals
WHAT IS THE CA'S ORIGINAL JURISDICTION?
CA'S Exclusive Jurisdiction
[1] Actions for annulment of judgments of Regional Trial Courts (Sec. 9[2], Batas Blg. 129 [1983]; Rule 47, 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure)
[2] Petitions for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus involving an act or omission of a quasi-judicial agency, unless otherwise provided by law (Sec. 4, Rule 65, as amended by A.M. No. 07-7-12-SC dated December 12, 2007)
CA's Concurrent Jurisdiction with Supreme Court
[1] Petitions for writs of certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus against the Civil Service Commission (Rep. Act No. 7902 [1995])
[2] Petitions for writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus against the National Labor Relations Commission under the Labor Code (Sec. 9, Batas 129 [1983], as amended by Rep. Act No. 7902 [1995]) (St. Martin’s Funeral Homes vs. National Labor Relations Commission, G.R. No. 130866, September 16, 1998, 295 SCRA 494)
CA's Concurrent with the Supreme Court and the Regional Trial Courts
[1] Petitions for habeas corpus and quo warranto
[2] Actions brought to prevent and restrain violations of laws concerning monopolies and combinations in restraint of trade (Sec. 17, Rep. Act No. 296 [1948], as amended by Rep. Act No. 5440 [1968])
CA's Concurrent with Supreme Court, Sandiganbayan, and Regional Trial Courts
[1] Petitions for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus relating to an act or omission of a municipal trial court, or of a corporation, a board, an officer, or person
[2] Petitions for issuance of writ of amparo (Sec. 3, A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC or “The Rule on the Writ of Amparo,” effective October 24, 2007)
[3] Petitions for issuance of writ of habeas data (Sec. 3, A.M. No. 08-1-16- SC, effective February 2, 2008)
WHAT IS THE CA'S APPELLATE JURISDICTION?
Ordinary Appeal to the CA
[1] Appeals from Regional Trial Courts, except those appealable to the Supreme Court
[2] Appeals from Regional Trial Courts on constitutional, tax, jurisdictional questions involving questions of fact which should be appealed first to the Court of Appeals (Sec. 17, subparagraph 4 of the fourth paragraph of Rep. Act No. 296 [1948] as amended, which was not intended to be excluded by Sec. 9[3], Batas Pambansa Blg. 129 [1983])
[3] Appeals from decisions and final orders of the Family Courts (Sec. 14, Rep. Act No. 8369 [1997])
[4] Appeals from Regional Trial Courts in criminal cases, where the penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment, or where a lesser penalty is imposed but for offenses committed on the same occasion or which arose out of the same occurrence that gave rise to the more serious offense for which the penalty of reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment is imposed (Sec. 3[c], Rule 122, as amended by A.M. No. 00-5-03-SC, effective October 15, 2004; People vs. Mateo, G.R. Nos. 147678-87, July 7, 2004, 433 SCRA 640)
[5] Direct Appeal from land registration and cadastral cases decided by metropolitan trial courts, municipal trial courts, and municipal circuit trial courts based on their delegated jurisdiction
[6] Petition for certiorari against decisions and final resolutions of the National Labor Relations Commission (A. M. No. 99-2-01-SC; St. Martin Funeral Homes vs. National Labor Relations Commission, G.R. No. 13086, September 16, 1998, 295 SCRA 494; Torres, et. al. vs. Specialized Packaging Development Corp. , et. al. , G.R. No.149634, July 6, 2004, 433 SCRA 455)
[7] Automatic review in cases where the Regional Trial Courts impose the death penalty (Secs. 3[d] and 10, Rule 122, as amended by A.M. No. 00-5-03-SC, effective October 15, 2004; People vs. Mateo, supra)
Petition for Review with the CA
[1] Appeals from Regional Trial Courts in cases decided by the RTC in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction (Sec. 22, Batas Blg. 129 [1983]; Rule 42, 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure; Sec. 3[b], Rule 122)
[2] Appeals from decisions of the Regional Trial Courts acting as Special Agrarian Courts in cases involving just compensation to the landowners concerned (Land Bank of the Philippines vs. De Leon, G. R. No. 143275, September 10, 2002, 388 SCRA 537)
[3] Appeals from awards, judgments, final orders, or resolutions of, or authorized by, quasi-judicial agencies in the exercise of their quasi-judicial functions. Among these are: CSC, GSIS, NEA, CIAC, SEC, DAR, OP, CBAA, BPTTT, ERC, LRA, CAB, BOI, PAEC, SSS, IC, ECC, Voluntary Arbitrator [4] Appeals from the Office of the Ombudsman in administrative disciplinary cases (A.M. No. 99-2-02-SC; Fabian vs. Desierto, G.R. No. 129742, September 16, 1998, 295 SCRA 470)
Court of Tax Appeals
Exclusive Appellate Jurisdiction of the CTA
[1] Decisions of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue in cases involving disputed assessments, refunds of internal revenue taxes, fees or other charges, penalties in relation thereto, or other matters arising under the National Internal Revenue or other laws administered by the Bureau of Internal Revenue;
[2] Inaction by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue in cases involving disputed assessments, refunds of internal revenue taxes, fees or other charges, penalties in relations thereto, or other matters arising under the National Internal Revenue Code or other laws administered by the Bureau of Internal Revenue, where the National Internal Revenue Code provides a specific period of action, in which case the inaction shall be deemed a denial;
[3] Decisions, orders or resolutions of the Regional Trial Courts in local tax cases originally decided or resolved by them in the exercise of their original or appellate jurisdiction;
[4] Decisions of the Commissioner of Customs in cases involving liability for customs duties, fees or other money charges, seizure, detention or release of property affected, fines, forfeitures or other penalties in relation thereto, or other matters arising under the Customs Law or other laws administered by the Bureau of Customs;
[5] Decisions of the Central Board of Assessment Appeals in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction over cases involving the assessment and taxation of real property originally decided by the provincial or city board of assessment appeals;
[6] Decisions of the Secretary of Finance on customs cases elevated to him automatically for review from decisions of the Commissioner of Customs which are adverse to the Government under Sec. 2315 of the Tariff and Customs Code;
[7] Decisions of the Secretary of Trade and Industry, in the case of nonagricultural product, commodity or article, and the Secretary of Agriculture in the case of agricultural product, commodity or article, involving dumping and countervailing duties under Sec. 301 and 302, respectively, of the Tariff and Customs Code, and safeguard measures under Republic Act No. 8800, where either party may appeal the decision to impose or not to impose said duties.
CTA's Jurisdiction over Cases involving Criminal offenses
[1] Exclusive original jurisdiction over all criminal offenses arising from violations of the National Internal Revenue Code or Tariff and Customs Code and other laws administered by the Bureau of Internal Revenue or the Bureau of Customs: Provided, however, That offenses or felonies mentioned in this paragraph where the principal amount of taxes and fees, exclusive of charges and penalties, claimed is less than One million pesos (P1,000,000.00) or where there is no specified amount claimed shall be tried by the regular courts and the jurisdiction of the CTA shall be appellate. Any provision of law or the Rules of Court to the contrary notwithstanding, the criminal action and the corresponding civil action for the recovery of civil liability for taxes and penalties shall at all times be simultaneously instituted with, and jointly determined in the same proceeding by the CTA, the filing of the criminal action being deemed to necessarily carry with it the filing of the civil action, and no right to reserve the filling of such civil action separately from the criminal action will be recognized.
[2] Exclusive appellate jurisdiction in criminal offenses 1. Over appeals from the judgments, resolutions or orders of the Regional Trial Courts in tax cases originally decided by them, in their respective territorial jurisdiction. 2. Over petitions for review of the judgments, resolutions or orders of the Regional Trial Courts in the exercise of their appellate jurisdiction over tax cases originally decided by the Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts in their respective jurisdiction.3. Jurisdiction over tax collection cases
[3] Exclusive original jurisdiction in tax collection cases involving final and executory assessments for taxes, fees, charges and penalties: Provided, however, That collection cases where the principal amount of taxes and fees, exclusive of charges and penalties, claimed is less than One million pesos (P1,000,000.00) shall be tried by the proper Municipal Trial Court, Metropolitan Trial Court and Regional Trial Court.
[4] Exclusive appellate jurisdiction in tax collection cases: 1. Over appeals from the judgments, resolutions or orders of the Regional Trial Courts in tax collection cases originally decided by them, in their respective territorial jurisdiction. 2. Over petitions for review of the judgments, resolutions or orders of the Regional Trial Courts in the Exercise of their appellate jurisdiction over tax collection cases originally decided by the Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts, in their respective jurisdiction. (Sec. 7, RA 1125, amended by RA 9282)
Sandiganbayan
WHAT IS THE SANDIGANBAYAN'S EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION?
Exclusive Jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan
[1] Violation of Rep. Act No. 3019 [1960] (Anti-Graft) , Rep. Act No. RA 1379 [1955] and Chapter II, Sec. 2, Title VII of Revised Penal Code; and other offenses committed by public officials and employees in relation to their office, and private individuals charged as co-principals, accomplices, and accessories including those employed in government-owned or –controlled corporations, where one or more of the accused are officials occupying the following positions in government, whether in a permanent, acting, or interim capacity, at the time of the commission of the offense:
Officials of the Executive Branch xxx classified as salary grade “27” or higher xxx specifically including: [a] Members of Congress [b] Members of the Judiciary [c] Members of Constitutional Commissions [d] All other national and local officials classified as salary grade “27” and higher
In cases where none of the accused is occupying the above positions, the original jurisdiction shall be vested in the proper Regional Trial Court or Metropolitan Trial Court, etc. , as the case may be, pursuant to their respective jurisdictions. (Sec. 2, Rep. Act No. 7975 [1995], as amended by Rep. Act No. 8249 [1997]
In cases where there is no specific allegation of facts showing that the offense was committed in relation to the public office of the accused, the original jurisdiction shall also be vested in the proper Regional Trial Court or Metropolitan Trial Court, etc. , as the case may be. (Lacson vs. Executive Secretary, G.R. No. 128096, January 20, 1999, 310 SCRA 298)
[2] Civil and criminal cases filed pursuant to and in connection with Executive Order Nos. 1, 2, 14, and 14-A. (Sec. 2, Rep. Act No. 7975 [1995] as amended by Rep. Act No. 8249 [1997]).
[3] Violations of Rep. Act No. 9160, or “Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2001,” as amended by Rep. Act No. 9194, when committed by public officers and private persons who are in conspiracy with such public officers.
Sandiganbayan's Concurrent with Supreme Court
Petitions for issuance of writs of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, habeas corpus, and injunction and other ancillary writs in aid of its appellate jurisdiction, including quo warranto arising in cases falling under said Executive Order Nos. 1, 2, 14, and 14-A. (Rep. Act No. 8249 [1997])
Sandiganbayan's Concurrent with Supreme Court, Court of Appeals and Regional Trial Courts
[1] Petitions for writ of amparo and writ of habeas data when action concerns public data files of government offices (Sec. 3, A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC or “The Rule on the Writ of Amparo,” effective October 24, 2007; Sec. 3, A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC, effective February 2, 2008)
[2] Petitions for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus, relating to an act or omission of a Municipal Trial Court, corporation, board, officer, or person (Sec. 4, Rule 65, as amended by A.M. No. 07-7-12-SC dated December 12, 2007)
Sandiganbayan's Appellate Jurisdiction
Decisions and final orders of Regional Trial Courts in the exercise of their original or appellate jurisdiction under Pres. Decree No. 1606 [1979], as amended, shall be appealable to the Sandiganbayan in the manner provided by Rule 122 of the Rules of Court. (Sec. 5, Rep. Act No. 8249 [1997])
Regional Trial Courts
WHAT IS THE RTC'S ORIGINAL JURISDICTION?
For civil cases:
RTC's Exclusive
[1] Subject of the action not capable of pecuniary estimation; Actions not capable of pecuniary estimation [a] Where it is primarily for the recovery of a SUM OF MONEY, the claim is considered capable of pecuniary estimation – jurisdiction, whether in the MTC or RTC, would depend on the AMOUNT of the claim. [b] Where the basic issue is other than the right to recover a sum of money, or where the money claim is purely incidental to, or a consequence of the principal relief sought, the subject of litigation may not be estimated in terms of money – jurisdiction exclusively of RTC. Examples: Expropriation specific performance support foreclosure of mortgage annulment of judgment actions questioning the validity of a mortgage annulment of deed of conveyance rescission [c] While actions under Sec. 33(3) of B.P. 129 are also incapable of pecuniary estimation, the law specifically mandates that they are cognizable by the MTC, METC, or MCTC where the assessed value of the real property involved does not exceed P20,000.00 in Metro Manila, or P50,000.00, if located elsewhere. (Russel vs. Vestil, G.R. No. 119347, March 17, 1999).
[2] Actions involving title to, or possession of real property or any interest therein - where assessed value of property exceeds P20,000.00 (P50,000.00 in Metro Manila) , excluding forcible entry and unlawful detainer
[3] Actions in admiralty and maritime jurisdiction – where demand or claim exceeds P300,000.00 (P400,000.00 in Metro Manila)
[4] Matters of probate, testate and intestate - where. gross value of estate exceeds P300,000.00 (P400,000.00 in Metro Manila)
[5] Cases not within exclusive jurisdiction of any court, tribunal, person or body exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions.
[6] All other cases where demand – exclusive of interests, damages of whatever kind, attorney’s fees, litigation expenses and cost, or value of property in controversy – exceeds P300,000.00 (P400,000.00 in Metro Manila)
[7] Additional original jurisdiction transferred under Sec. 5.2. of the Securities Regulation Code.
[8] Application for issuance of writ of search and seizure in civil actions for infringement of intellectual property rights (Sec. 3, A.M. No. 02-1-06-SC, effective February 15, 2002)
[9] Violations of Rep. Act No. 9160 or “Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2001,” as amended by Rep. Act No. 9194.
RTC's Concurrent Jurisdiction
[1] RTC with Supreme Court in actions affecting ambassadors and other public ministers and consuls
(Sec. 21[1], Batas Blg. 129 [1983])
[2] RTC with Supreme Court and Court of Appeals in petitions for habeas corpus and quo warranto Appeals
(Sec. 5 [1], Article VIII, 1987 Constitution)
[3] RTC with Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, and Sandiganbayan [a] Petitions for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus, if they relate to an act or omission of a municipal trial court, corporation, board, officer, or person (Sec. 4, Rule 65, as amended by A.M. No. 07-7-12-SC, dated December 12, 2007) [b] Petitions for writ of amparo and writ of habeas data (Sec. 3, A.M. No. 07 9-12-SC or “The Rule on the Writ of Amparo,” effective October 24, 2007; Sec. 3, A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC, effective February 2, 2008)
[4] RTC with metropolitan trial courts, municipal trial courts, and municipal circuit trial courts. Application for Protection Order under Sec. 10, Rep. Act No. 9282, unless there is a Family Court in the residence of petitioner.
[5] RTC with Insurance Commission Claims not exceeding PhP 100,000.00
(Sec. 416, Insurance Code [1974], Pres. Decree No. 612 [1975]. Applicable if subject of the action is not capable of pecuniary estimation; otherwise, jurisdiction is concurrent with Metropolitan Trial Court, etc.)
For criminal Cases:
RTC's Exclusive
Criminal cases not within the exclusive jurisdiction of any court, tribunal, or body. (Sec. 20, Batas Blg. 129 [1983]). These include criminal cases where the penalty provided by law exceeds six (6) years imprisonment irrespective of the fine. (Rep. Act No. 7691 [1994]).
These also include criminal cases not falling within the exclusive original jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan, where none of the accused are occupying positions corresponding to salary grade “27” and higher. (Rep. Act No. 7975 [1995] and Rep. Act No. 8249 [1997]).
But in cases where the only penalty provided by law is a fine, the Regional Trial Courts have jurisdiction if the amount of the fine exceeds PhP 4,000. (Rep. Act No. 7691 [1994] as clarified by Administrative Circular No. 09-94 dated June 14, 1994).
RTC's Appellate Jurisdiction
All cases decided by lower courts (metropolitan trial courts, etc.) in their respective territorial jurisdictions. (Sec. 22, Batas Blg. 129 [1983])
Family Courts
Family Courts' Exclusive and Original Jurisdiction [1] Criminal cases where one or more of the accused is below eighteen (18) years of age but not less than nine (9) years of age, when one or more of the victims is a minor at the time of the commission of the offense: Provided, That if the minor is found guilty, the court shall promulgate sentence and ascertain any civil liability which the accused may have incurred. The sentence, however, shall be suspended without need of application pursuant to Presidential Decree No. 1903, otherwise known as “The Child and Youth Welfare Code;” (RA 8369 [Family Courts Act of 1997])
[2] Petitions for guardianship, custody of children, habeas corpus in relation to the latter; (Sec. 3, A.M. No. 03-04-04-SC, effective May 15, 2003; Sec. 3, A.M. No. 03-02-05-SC, effective April 15, 2003)
[3] Petitions for adoption of children and the revocation thereof; (Secs. A.20 and B.28, A.M. No. 02-6-02-SC, effective August 22, 2002; See also Rep. Act No. 9523 or “An Act Requiring Certification of the Department of Social Welfare and Development to Declare A Child ‘Legally Available for Adoption’ as a Prerequisite for Adoption Proceedings, Amending for this Purpose Certain Provisions of Republic Act No. 8552, otherwise known as The Domestic Adoption Act of 1998, Republic Act No. 8043, otherwise known as The Inter-Country Adoption Act of 1995, Presidential Decree No. 603, otherwise known as The Child and Youth Welfare Code, and for Other Purposes,” approved on March 12, 2009)
[4] Complaints for annulment of marriage, declaration of nullity of marriage, and those relating to marital status and property relations of husband and wife or those living together under different status and agreements, and petitions for dissolution of conjugal partnership of gains; (Sec. 2, A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC, effective March 15, 2003)
[5] Petitions for involuntary commitment of a child, for removal of custody against child-placement or child-caring agency or individual, and for commitment of disabled child; (Secs. 4[b], 5[a][ii], 6[b], A.M. No. 02-1-19-SC, effective April 15, 2002)
[6] Cases against minors cognizable under Rep. Act No. 9165, or “The Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002;” (See also A.M. No. 07-8-2-SC, effective November 5, 2007)
[7] Violation of Rep. Act No. 7610 [1991], otherwise known as the “Special Protection of Children Against Child Abuse, Exploration and Discrimination Act,” as amended by Rep. Act No. 7658 [1993] and as further amended by Rep. Act No. 9231 [2003];
[8] (RA 9775 [Anti-Child Pornography Act of 2009]
[9] Cases of violence against women and their children under Rep. Act No. 9262, otherwise known as “Anti-Violence Against Women and their Children Act of 2004,” including applications for Protection Order under the same Act;
[10] Criminal cases involving juveniles if no preliminary investigation is required under Sec. 1, Rule 112 of Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure (Sec. 1, A.M. No. 02-1-18-SC, effective April 15, 2002)
Metropolitan Trial Courts/Municipal Trial Courts
MTC's Original Jurisdiction
For civil cases:
What is the MTC's Exclusive Jurisdiction?
[1] Actions involving personal property valued at not more than PhP 300,000.00 (PhP 400,000.00 in Metro Manila)
[2] Actions demanding sums of money not exceeding PhP 300,000.00 (Php 4000,000.00 in Metro Manila) ; in both cases, exclusive of interest, damages, attorney’s fees, litigation expenses and costs, the amount of which must be specifically alleged, but the filing fees thereon shall be paid. These include admiralty and maritime cases;
[3] Actions involving title or possession of real property where the assessed value does not exceed PhP 20,000.00 (Php 50,000.00 in Metro Manila) ;
[4] Provisional remedies in principal actions within their jurisdiction, and in proper cases, such as preliminary attachment, preliminary injunction, appointment or receiver and delivery of personal property; (Rule 57, 58, 59, and 60)
[5] Forcible entry and unlawful detainer, with jurisdiction to resolve issue of ownership to determine issue of possession;
[6] Probate proceedings, testate or intestate, where gross value of estate does not exceed PhP 300,000.00 or in Metro Manila PhP 400,000.00; (Sec. 33, Batas Blg. 129 [1983] as amended by Rep. Act No. 7691 [1994])
[7] Inclusion and exclusion of voters. (Sec. 38, Batas Blg. 881, Omnibus Election Code of the Philippines [1985]).
MTC's Delegated Jurisdiction
Cadastral and land registration cases assigned by Supreme Court where there is no controversy or opposition and in contested lots valued at more than PhP 100,000. (Sec. 34, Batas Blg. 129 [1983] as amended by Rep. Act No. 7691 [1994])
MTC's Special Jurisdiction
Petition for habeas corpus in the absence of all Regional Trial Court judges. (Sec. 35, Batas Blg. 129 [1983])
For criminal cases:
MTC's Original Jurisdiction
[1] All violations of city or municipal ordinances committed within their respective territorial jurisdictions;
[2] All offenses punishable with imprisonment of not more than six (6) years irrespective of the fine and regardless of other imposable accessory or other penalties and the civil liability arising therefrom; provided, however, that in offenses involving damage to property through criminal negligence, they shall have exclusive original jurisdiction. (Sec. 32, Batas Blg. 129 [1983] as amended by Rep. Act No. 7691 [1994])
[3] All offenses committed not falling within the exclusive original jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan where none of the accused is occupying a position corresponding to salary grade “27” and higher. (As amended by Rep. Act No. 7975 [1995] and Rep. Act No. 8249 [1997])
[4] In cases where the only penalty provided by law is a fine not exceeding PhP 4,000, the Metropolitan Trial Courts, etc. have jurisdiction. (Administrative Circular No. 09-94, dated June 14, 1994)
MTC's Special Jurisdiction
Applications for bail in the absence of all Regional Trial Court judges. (Sec. 35, Batas Blg. 129 [1983])
Sharia's Courts
Presidential Decree (P.D.) No. 1083 created the Shari’a Courts, which have limited jurisdiction over the settlement of issues, controversies or disputes pertaining to the civil relations between and among Muslim Filipinos.
Specifically, these controversies require the interpretation of laws on Persons, Family Relations, Succession, Contracts, and similar laws applicable only to Muslims. Despite the seeming exclusivity of the jurisdiction of the Shari’a Courts with regard to controversies involving Muslims, the Supreme Court retains the power of review orders of lower courts through special writs. (R.A. 6734, Art. IX, Sec.1) This review extends to decisions made by the Shari’a Courts.