PROJECT JURISPRUDENCE

In case of loss, deterioration or improvement of the thing before the arrival of the day certain, Article 1194 of the Civil Code of the Philippines applies, to wit: ART. 1194. In case of loss, deterioration or improvement of the thing before the arrival of the day certain, the rules in Article 1189 shall be observed. (n) Article 1189 provides: ART. 1189. When the conditions have been imposed with the intention of suspending the efficacy of an obligation to give, the following rules shall be observed in case of the improvement, loss or deterioration of the thing during the pendency of the condition:  (1) If the thing is lost without the fault of the debtor, the obligation shall be extinguished;  (2) If the thing is lost through the fault of the debtor, he shall be obliged to pay damages; it is understood that the thing is lost when it perishes, or goes out of commerce, or disappears in such a way that its existence is unknown or it cannot be recovered; (3) When the thing deteri

Article 1195 of the Civil Code of the Philippines discusses the effect of advance payment or delivery in an obligation with a period, to wit: ART. 1195. Anything paid or delivered before the arrival of the period, the obligor being unaware of the period or believing that the obligation has become due and demandable, may be recovered, with the fruits and interests . (1126a)

Obligations with a period or term are governed by Article 1193 of the Civil Code of the Philippines, to wit: ART. 1193. Obligations for whose fulfillment a day certain has been fixed, shall be demandable only when that day comes.  Obligations with a resolutory period take effect at once, but terminate upon arrival of the day certain.  A day certain is understood to be that which must necessarily come, although it may not be known when.   If the uncertainty consists in whether the day will come or not, the obligation is conditional, and it shall be regulated by the rules of the preceding Section. (1125a) An obligation with a period is one whose consequences are subjected in one way or another to the expiration of said period or term.[1] A period or term is an interval of time, which either suspends demandability or produces extinguishment. While a period and a condition may refer to future events, both are still different from each other. A period is an interval of time which is f

A condition can be classified as express or implied if we refer to its form. If the condition is stated, it is an express condition. If it is merely inferred, it is an implied condition.[1][2] [1] Rabuya. (2019). Obligations and Contracts. [2] De Leon. (2014). Obligations and Contracts.

A condition can be classified as to number. Conjunctive condition refers to several conditions and all must be fulfilled or performed. Disjunctive or alternative condition refers to several conditions and only one or some of them must be fulfilled. 

A condition can be classified as divisible and indivisible if we refer to its divisibility. The condition can be performed in parts depending on its nature, stipulation of the contracting parties or under the law. A divisible condition can be performed in parts. An indivisible condition is not susceptible of partial performance.

The concepts of positive and negative conditions are discussed on Article 1184 and Article 1185 of the Civil Code of the Philippines, to wit: ART. 1184. The condition that some event happen at a determinate time shall extinguish the obligation as soon as the time expires or if it has become indubitable that the event will not take place. (1117) ART. 1185. The condition that some event will not happen at a determinate time shall render the obligation effective from the moment the time indicated has elapsed, or if it has become evident that the event cannot occur.   If no time has been fixed, the condition shall be deemed fulfilled at such time as may have probably been contemplated, bearing in mind the nature of the obligation. (1118) The condition that some event happen at a determinate time shall extinguish the obligation is a positive condition. Article 1184 applies if a condition is a positive one. The obligation subject to a positive condition will be extinguished as soon as

Impossible and possible condition refers to whether or not a condition can be fulfilled either physically or legally. The concept of impossible condition is discussed on Article 1183 of the Civil Code of the Philippines, viz: ART. 1183. Impossible conditions, those contrary to good customs or public policy and those prohibited by law shall annul the obligation which depends upon them. If the obligation is divisible, that part thereof which is not affected by the impossible or unlawful condition shall be valid.  The condition not to do an impossible thing shall be considered as not having been agreed upon. (1116) Article 1183 only applies to cases where the impossibility already existed at the time the obligation was constituted. If the impossibility arises after the creation of the obligation, Article 1266 of the Civil Code applies.[1] Moreover, impossible conditions can either be physically or legally. It is physically impossible if it is incompatible with or contrary with nature. O

Mixed condition is when the fulfilment of the condition depends partly upon the will of a party to the contract and partly upon chance and/or will of a third person .  There are two doctrines that you need to know when talking about mixed conditions. Doctrine of Constructive Fulfillment of Suspensive Condition. This doctrine requires that the condition be suspensive, that the debtor actually prevents the fulfillment of the condition, and the debtor acts voluntarily. If these three requisites are present, then Article 1186 of the Civil Code applies, to wit: ART. 1186. The condition shall be deemed fulfilled when the obligor voluntarily prevents its fulfillment. (Emphasis applied) If the condition depends partly on the will of the debtor and partly on chance or the will of the third person, and the part that depends partly on chance or the will of the third person was already fulfilled but the debtor intentionally prevents the fulfillment of the part of the condition that depends on hi

The second part of Article 1182 of the Civil Code of the Philippines discusses the concept of casual condition, to wit: ART. 1182. When the fulfillment of the condition depends upon the sole will of the debtor, the conditional obligation shall be void. If it depends upon chance or upon the will of a third person, the obligation shall take effect in conformity with the provisions of this Code. (1115) (Emphasis supplied) Casual condition may be viewed in two aspects: depends upon chance or depends upon the will of a third person. Example, X obliges himself in favor of Y to give Php10,000 to Y if he wins a case in the Supreme Court. In this example the condition is subject to the will of a third person. Hence, it is a casual condition.

The first part of Article 1182 of the Civil Code of the Philippines discusses the concept of potestative condition, to wit: ART. 1182. When the fulfillment of the condition depends upon the sole will of the debtor, the conditional obligation shall be void. If it depends upon chance or upon the will of a third person, the obligation shall take effect in conformity with the provisions of this Code. (1115) A potestative condition is a condition suspensive in nature and which depends upon the sole will of one of the contracting parties.[1] The first part of Article 1182 talks about the condition that is potestative to the debtor and, at the same time, suspensive.[2] The obligation is void when the condition is both potestative and suspensive to the debtor because it creates illusory obligations . Moreover, if the condition is resolutory and subject to the will of the debtor, the obligation is not illusory because the debtor is naturally interested in the fulfillment of the resolutory

De minimis means "belongs to the minimum" in Latin, [1][2] usually quoted in fully as "de minimis non curat praetor" -- which means the law does not deal with trivial things -- or "de minimis non curat lex." [3][4][5] The phrase dates back to the 15th century.[6] In essence, the phrase means that, at certain low levels, the amount of injury or damage involved is considered so insignificant that it may be ignored.[7] The law ignores insignificant details.[8] The law does not take account of trifles. It will not, for example, award damages for a trifling nuisance.[9] The law does not concern itself with trifles. This is a principle of law that states that, even if a technical violation of a law appears to exist according to the letter of the law, if the effect is too small to be of consequence, the violation of the law will not be considered as a sufficient cause of action, whether in civil or criminal proceedings.[10] The “de minimis” doc

 There is no confusion if there is only one debtor and only one creditor. In such a case, the single creditor can simply collect the whole amount from the single debtor./For Louise P. For example, AAA is indebted to BBB in the amount of Php100. There is no sense in classifying them as "solidary" or "joint" debtor or creditor because such labels only make sense in case of two or more debtors and/or two or more creditors. Hence, BBB can simply collect Php100 from AAA. To simplify the rules, one may be tempted to formulate rules based on the following: 2 JOINT DEBTORS V. 1 CREDITOR 1 DEBTOR V. 2 JOINT CREDITORS 2 SOLIDARY DEBTORS V. 1 CREDITOR 1 DEBTOR V. 2 SOLIDARY CREDITORS However, it is submitted that a simpler approach would be to focus on the obligations of the parties, whether solidary or joint and whether debtor or creditor. For debtors, solidarity means: "I will pay 100%." Hence, if AAA and BBB are solidarily indebted to CCC in the amount of Php100,

[ NO RECOMMENDED CITATION ] PJP UNDOCKETED : This content is yet to be peer reviewed and has not yet received any favorable recommendation for citation. It may or may not be queued up for citation recommendation or peer review. Caution is advised. CONTACT US: For immediate action on requests, comments, concerns, suggestions, and other forms of feedback, please message us on Facebook at www.m.me/projectjuris . Article 1181 of the New Civil Code (NCC) of the Philippines provides: ART. 1181. In conditional obligations, the acquisition of rights, as well as the extinguishment or loss of those already acquired, shall depend upon the happening of the event which constitutes the condition. A resolutory condition (condition subsequent) extinguishes the obligation upon its fulfillment. The obligation is demandable at once, without prejudice to the effects of the happening of the event. [1] Before the fulfillment of a resolutory

Article 1181 of the Civil Code of the Philippines provides: ART. 1181. In conditional obligations, the acquisition of rights, as well as the extinguishment or loss of those already acquired, shall depend upon the happening of the event which constitutes the condition. (1114)  The happening of a suspensive condition gives rise to an obligation . In Gaite vs. Fonacier,[1] the Supreme Court discussed the concept of suspensive condition, to wit: What characterizes a conditional obligation is the fact that its efficacy or obligatory force (as distinguished from its demandability) is subordinated to the happening of a future and uncertain event; so that if the suspensive condition does not take place, the parties would stand as if the conditional obligation had never existed. (Emphasis supplied) Moreover, before the fulfillment of a suspensive condition, the demandability and acquisition/ effectivity of the rights arising from the obligation is suspended, but the creditor may bring the appro

 Article 1181 of the Civil Code of the Philippines discusses the concept of conditional obligation, to wit: ART. 1181. In conditional obligations, the acquisition of rights, as well as the extinguishment or loss of those already acquired, shall depend upon the happening of the event which constitutes the condition. (1114) In conditional obligations, the acquisition of rights and the loss of rights already acquired depends upon the happening of the event that constitutes the condition. Moreover, Manresa defines condition as any "uncertain event which wields an influence on a legal relation."[1] A conditional obligation is one whose consequences are subject in one way or another to the fulfillment of a condition.[2] A condition must be future and uncertain and a past event unknown to the parties. Moreover, there are two principal kinds of condition such as: a) suspensive condition, or the fulfillment of which will give rise to an obligation; and b) resolutory condition, or

[POST UNDER CONSTRUCTION. SORRY FOR THE INCONVENIENCE.] In an obligation to pay Php100 wherein there are two debtors and two creditors, what are the rules? Since the law does not presume the solidary nature of debt or credit, it is presumed that there are two joint debtors and two joint creditors: A, B, (debtors) C and D (creditors). When we say the law presumes the joint nature of debt and credit, we mean that the law presumes that: C gave Php25 to A and another Php25 to B; while D gave Php25 to A and another Php25 to B. Hence, in the example above, when the debt becomes due and demandable, A cannot be presumed to have the obligation to pay for B, and vice versa. Also, C cannot be presumed to have the agency to collect from both A and B the whole debt (i.e. Php100). As a result, C can only collect Php25 from A and collect Php25 from B, thereby completing the Php50 to which C is entitled to as a joint debtor. The same is true for D. [POST UNDER CONSTRUCTION.  SORRY FOR THE INCONVE

Abortion is one of the many contentious issues in the Philippines. The list includes gay marriage, discipline of children, the death penalty and many more. There are those who propose that a law be passed and enacted to decriminalize abortion in the Philippines. The pertinent law is the Revised Penal Code (Act No. 3815).

According to Manresa, a condition is any uncertain event which wields an influence on a legal relation.[1] It is also defined by De Leon as "a future and uncertain event, upon the happening of which, the effectivity or extinguishment of an obligation (or rights) subject to it depends."[2] The following are the various classifications of conditions: (1) Suspensive and resolutory; (2) Potestative, casual and mixed; (3) Impossible and possible; (4) Positive and negative; (5) Divisible and indivisible; (6) Conjunctive and alternative; and (7) Express and implied. [1] 8 Manresa, 126. [2] De Leon. (2014). Obligations and Contracts.

Under A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC, the Supreme Court promulgated the Revised Rules of Procedure for Small Claims Cases. After a two-year pilot test, on March 18, 2010, the Rules of Procedure for Small Claims Cases was promulgated and made effective to all first level courts nationwide. From the time the Rules of Procedure for Small Claims Cases was implemented, it has been found to be an effective tool in providing a simplified and inexpensive recourse for litigants to assert their claims. Due to its success, there is a need to introduce amendments to the existing Rules to be more effective in reducing the dockets of the first level courts, a wider coverage, and better access to the courts by the underprivileged, among others. On August 11, 2015, the Special Committee on Small Claims Cases (Committee) was created under Memorandum Order No. 32-2015 to "review the existing Rules of Procedure for Small Claims Cases to fulfill the Judiciary’s objective of expediting t

 Bong Go

The Supreme Court has set a clear demarcation line between an error of judgment and an error of jurisdiction. An error of judgment is one in which the court may commit in the exercise of its jurisdiction, and which error is reviewable only by an appeal, while an error of jurisdiction is one where the act complained of was issued by the court, officer or a quasi-judicial body without or in excess of jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion which is tantamount to lack or in excess of jurisdiction, and which error is correctable only by the extraordinary writ of certiorari. (Toh v. CA, G.R. No. 140274, November 15, 2000) READ:  Who made the Supreme Court king?

Paragraph 1 of Article 1179 of the Civil Code tackles the concept of pure obligation, to wit: ART. 1179. Every obligation whose performance does not depend upon a future or uncertain event, or upon a past event unknown to the parties, is demandable at once.   Every obligation which contains a resolutory condition shall also be demandable, without prejudice to the effects of the happening of the event. (1113) A pure obligation is one where the performance does not depend upon a condition and no specific term or period is mentioned. Therefore, it is demandable at once. In Olivarez Realty Coporation v. Castillo,[1] the Supreme Court defined pure obligation, viz.: On one hand, pure obligations, or obligations whose performance do not depend upon a future or uncertain event, or upon a past event unknown to the parties , are demandable at once . On the other hand, obligations with a resolutory period also take effect at once but terminate upon arrival of the day certain. Olivarez Realty

(1) Primary classification of obligations under the Civil Code: (a) Pure and conditional obligations (Arts. 1179-1192.); (b) Obligations with a period (Arts. 1193-1198.); (c) Alternative (Arts. 1199-1205.) and facultative obligations (Art. 1206.); (d) Joint and solidary obligations (Arts. 1207-1222.); (e) Divisible and indivisible obligations (Arts. 1223-1225.); and (f) Obligations with a penal clause. (Arts. 1226-1230.) (2) Secondary classification of obligations under the Civil Code: (a) Unilateral and bilateral obligations (Arts. 1169-1191.); (b) Real and personal obligations (Arts. 1163-1168.); (c) Determinate and generic obligations (Art. 1165.); (d) Civil and natural obligations (Art. 1423.); and (e) Legal, conventional, and penal obligations. (Arts. 1157, 1159, 1161.)

It is hereby proposed that a bill be passed by Congress and signed by the President into law, allowing and mandating the recognition of being a civil service eligible as an accepted title for those who have passed the professional level of the career service examination (CSE), which is more commonly known as the civil service exam, administered by the Civil Service Commission (CSC), also further recognizing such status of having passed the CSE as an academic achievement for any and all purposes, and finally, allowing and mandating recognition of the name suffix, "CSE," to be used by said passers, meaning " certified service eligible ." For example, Mr. Juan X. Dela Cruz, who has passed said professional-level CSE, will be allowed to use the name "Mr. Juan X. Dela Cruz, CSE." In other words, those who passed lower levels of CSE (non-professional) are not entitled to avail of this proposed law. Also, this shall not be available to those who did not ac

Article 1170 of the Civil Code of the Philippines provides the breaches of obligation, to wit: ART. 1170. Those who in the performance of their obligations are guilty of fraud, negligence, or delay, and those who in any manner contravene the tenor thereof, are liable for damages. (1101) Fraud (dolo). The fraud contemplated by the foregoing provision is the deliberate and intentional evasion of the normal fulfillment of obligations.  Negligence (culpa). Fault or negligence of the debtor as an incident in the fulfillment of an existing obligation.  Delay (mora). Delay in the fulfillment of the obligation. The delay however must be imputable to the debtor/obligor.  And those who in any manner contravene the tenor thereof . Covers any illicit act which impairs the strict and faithful fulfillment of the obligation 

In cases where the obligor breached his/her obligation, s/he shall be liable for damages.[1] If the obligation to give a specific thing is breach by the debtor, the creditor may either compel the debtor to make delivery (specific performance)[2] or rescind.[3] Moreover, if the debtor fails to comply with his obligation to do and give a generic thing, the creditor may: a) to have the obligation performed by himself, or by another unless personal considerations are involved, at the debtor’s expense; b) in case the obligation is done in contravention of the terms of the same or is poorly done, it may be ordered (by the court) that it be undone if it is still possible to undo what was done[4]; and c) to recover damages. When a negative (not to do) obligation is breached, as a rule, the remedy of the obligee is the undoing of the forbidden thing plus damages.[5] However, if it is not possible to undo what was done, either physically or legally, or because of the rights acquired by th

Article 1174 of the Civil Code of the Philippines discusses the concept of fortuitous event, to wit: Art. 1174. Except in cases expressly specified by the law, or when it is otherwise declared by stipulation, or when the nature of the obligation requires the assumption of risk, no person shall be responsible for those events which could not be foreseen, or which, though foreseen, were inevitable. (1105a) A fortuitous event is an event which cannot be foreseen, or which, although foreseeable, cannot be avoided. Therefore, it is not enough to say that an event is fortuitous if it is not impossible to foresee or to be avoided. Since a fortuitous event is unforeseeable and unavoidable, it is therefore independent of the will of the obligor/debtor. As a rule, the happening of a fortuitous event excuses the debtor from liability for the non-performance of obligation except: a) in cases expressly specified by law; b) when it is otherwise declared by stipulation; and c) when the nature of th

NON-PEER-REVIEWED CITATION: TULIAO, Danica R. (2021), "Contravention of the Tenor," UNDOCKETED, available at <insert link> (last accessed on <date>). WARNING: This is not a journal entry. It has not yet been peer-reviewed. Those who in the performance of their obligations are guilty of the following are liable for damages: (a) fraud; (b) negligence; (c) delay; and (d) performance in any manner contravene the tenor thereof. [1] Under this law, not only debtors guilty of fraud, negligence or default in the performance of obligations are decreed liable. In general, every debtor who fails in the performance of his/her obligations is bound to indemnify for the losses and damages caused thereby. [2] “In any manner contravenes the tenor” means any illicit act [3] which impairs the strict and faithful fulfillment of the obligation, or every kind of defective performance. In the case of Arrieta v. NARIC, [4] the Supreme Court held t

Negligence, or culpa, may be understood as any voluntary act or omission, there being no malice , which prevents the normal fulfillment of an obligation.[1] The provision in Article 1173 of the Civil Code says that negligence is the omission of the diligence required by the nature of the obligation and that which corresponds with the circumstances of the persons, of the time and of the place.[2] In Cortes v. Manila Railroad Company,[3] the Supreme Court held that negligence is the want of care required by the circumstances. Paragraph 2 of the Article 1173 states that if the law or contracts does not state the required diligence, the diligence of a good father of family shall be employed. The test of negligence was held by the Supreme Court in the case of Mandarin Villa Inc. v. CA.[4], to wit: “Whether or not the defendant, in doing the alleged negligent act, observed the reasonable care and caution, which an ordinary and prudent person would have used in the same situation.” If not,

Article 1170 of the Civil Code states the grounds for liability which may entitle an injured party for damages, to wit: Art. 1170. Those who in the performance of their obligations are guilty of fraud , negligence, or delay, and those who in any manner contravene the tenor thereof, are liable for damages. (1101) (Emphasis supplied) The term fraud used in Article 1170 is the deliberate and intentional evasion of the normal fulfillment of obligation.[1] Fraud implies some kind of malice or dishonesty and it cannot cover cases of mistake and errors of judgment made in good faith.[2] It is synonymous to bad faith in that it involves a design to mislead or deceive another.[3] There are two kinds of fraud: a) dolo incidente, or those that are committed in the performance of pre-existing obligation; and b) dolo causante, or the fraud to induced the other party to enter into a contract. The former gives rise to an action for damages while the latter makes the contract voidable and the reme

Global Fame (Read more: http://legacy.senate.gov.ph/senators/sen_bio/santiago_bio.asp.) She earned the degree, Doctor of Juridical Science, in the United States. Dr. Miriam Defensor Santiago is a globally famous personality, because of her legal brilliance and courageous example in fighting corruption. In a nation where many public officials are charged with, or suspected, of plunder, her honesty shines like a light in the darkness. She has brought honor to the Philippines in several ways. She is the first Filipino and the first Asian from a developing country, to be elected in the United Nations as judge of the International Criminal Court. The ICC hears cases against heads of state. Thus, she put the Philippines on the global map in the 21st century. Unfortunately, grave illness forced her to waive the privilege of being an ICC judge. For two years, she suffered from chronic fatigue syndrome. In June 2014 she

The word delay in Article 1169 of the Civil Code is synonymous to default or mora, which means delay in the fulfillment of obligations. Hence, delay or default is the non-fulfillment of the obligation with respect to time.[1] The general rule is " no demand, no delay ." In unilateral obligations, the mere expiration of the period fixed by the parties is not enough in order that the debtor may incur in delay. Those obliged to deliver or to do something incur in delay from the time the obligee judicially or extrajudicially demands from them the fulfillment of their obligation.[2] On the other hand, in reciprocal obligations, neither party incurs in delay if the other does not comply or is not ready to comply in a proper manner with what is incumbent upon him. From the moment one of the parties fulfills his obligation, delay by the other begins.[3] There is no delay if neither of the parties performs. The demand for performance marks the time when the ob

All rights acquired by virtue of an obligation are generally transmissible. The pertinent legal basis is found in Article 1178 of the Civil Code, to wit: Art. 1178. Subject to the laws, all rights acquired in virtue of an obligation are transmissible, if there has been no stipulation to the contrary. (1112) The exceptions to this rule are: a) nature of obligation; b) prohibited by law; and c) prohibited by stipulation of parties. Moreover, only personal obligations, or those identified with the persons themselves are extinguished by death. (Stronghold Insurance Co. v. Republic-Asahi Glass Corp., G.R. No. 147561, 2006)

Delicts or crimes are one of the sources of obligation. Article 1161 of the Civil Code of the Philippines provides that civil obligations resulting from criminal offenses shall be governed by the penal laws, subject to the provisions of Article 2177 and of the pertinent provisions of Chapter 2, Preliminary Title, on Human Relations, and of Title XVII of said Code, regulating damages.  The basis of civil liability arising from crime is incorporated in Article 100 of the Revised Penal Code, to wit: Article 100. Civil liability of a person guilty of felony. - Every person criminally liable for a felony is also civilly liable. Responsibility for fault or negligence under a quasi-delict[1] is entirely separate and distinct from the civil liability arising from negligence under the penal code. But the plaintiff cannot recover damages twice for the same act or omission of the defendant.[2] While an act or omission is felonious because it is punishable by law, it gives rise to civil liability

The Supreme Court, in at least two decisions, has declared that when a patient dies or suffers serious injuries due to the medical malpractice, gross negligence or fault of an attending physician, surgeon, anesthesiologist and other medical and para-medical service providers, those practitioners may be held liable for damages. (READ MORE: Atty. Jimenez, Josephus (2012). Hospitals are liable for doctors' negligence. The Philippine Star. https://www.philstar.com/opinion/2012/07/09/825941/hospitals-are-liable-doctors-negligence.) They may even lose their license for such negligence or fault may be held as a medical malpractice. The hospitals too, cannot escape liability by merely alleging that the doctors are not their employees but are allegedly, independent practitioners of medicine and surgery. The hospitals’ liability is based on the legal doctrine of “RESPONDEAT SUPERIOR’’, and other principle in the Civil Code on damages. There are many other cases of simil

Rentmeester v. Nike, Inc. - 883 F.3d 1111 (9th Cir. 2018) To state a claim for copyright infringement, a plaintiff must plausibly allege two things: (1) that he owns a valid copyright, and; (2) that the alleged infringer copied protected aspects of the copyright. The second element has two distinct components: copying and unlawful appropriation. Proof of copying by a defendant is necessary because independent creation is a complete defense to copyright infringement. No matter how similar the plaintiff's and the defendant's works are, if the defendant created his independently, without knowledge of or exposure to the plaintiff's work, the defendant is not liable for infringement. Proof of unlawful appropriation, that is, illicit copying, is necessary because copyright law does not forbid all copying. (READ MORE: https://www.lexisnexis.com/community/casebrief/p/casebrief-rentmeester-v-nike-inc.) A panel of the court of appeal

The rule on venue of real actions is provided in Section 1, Rule 4 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, which reads in part: Section 1. Venue of Real Actions. Actions affecting title to or possession of real property, or interest therein, shall be commenced and tried in the proper court which has jurisdiction over the area wherein the real property involved, or a portion thereof, is situated. On the other hand, Section 2 of Rule 4 of the Rules of Court provides that personal actions[1] must be commenced and tried (1) in the place where the plaintiff resides, or (2) where the defendant resides, or (3) in case of non-resident defendants, where they may be found, at the choice of the plaintiff.[2] This rule on venue does not apply when the law specifically provides otherwise, or when -- before the filing of the action -- the contracting parties agree in writing on the exclusive venue thereof.[3] Venue is not jurisdictional and may be waived by the parties.[4] A stipulation

Pre-trial is an answer to the clarion call for the speedy disposition of cases. Although it was discretionary under the 1940 Rules of Court, it was made mandatory under the 1964 Rules and the subsequent amendments in 1997. Hailed as "the most important procedural innovation in Anglo-Saxon justice in the nineteenth century," pre-trial seeks to achieve the following: The possibility of an amicable settlement or of a submission to alternative modes of dispute resolution; The simplification of the issues; The necessity or desirability of amendments to the pleadings: The possibility of obtaining stipulations or admissions of facts and of documents to avoid unnecessary proof; The limitation of the number of witnesses; The advisability of a preliminary reference of issues to a commissioner; The propriety of rendering judgment on the pleadings, or summary judgment, or of dismis

In law, nothing is as elementary as the concept of jurisdiction, for the same is the foundation upon which the courts exercise their power of adjudication, and without which, no rights or obligation could emanate from any decision or resolution. Jurisdiction is defined as the power and authority of a court to hear, try, and decide a case.[1] In order for the court or an adjudicative body to have authority to dispose of the case on the merits, it must acquire, among others, jurisdiction over the subject matter.[2] It is axiomatic that jurisdiction over the subject matter is the power to hear and determine the general class to which the proceedings in question belong; it is conferred by law and not by the consent or acquiescence of any or all of the parties or by erroneous belief of the court that it exists.[3] The power of a court to hear and decide a controversy is called its jurisdiction, which includes the power to determine whether

The most basic jurisdiction to the Supreme Court and such other courts as may be created by law is the power and duty to settle actual controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceable. In the words of no less than the Supreme Court, judicial power includes the power to "settle justiciable controversies or disputes involving rights that are enforceable and demandable before the courts of justice or the redress of wrongs for violations of such rights"[1] In simplest terms, this is the most basic subject-matter jurisdiction of the courts and it is up for Congress to approtion this power. The 1987 Constitution , however, has expanded judicial power to include not only the settlement of actual controversies but also the determination of the existence of  grave abuse of discretion by any government instrumentality. This expanded power does not require actual controversy as long as grave abuse of discretion was committed by any branch, office,