This document summarizes key cases and concepts related to jurisdiction that were covered in a Civil Procedure lesson. It discusses cases on jurisdiction in general, jurisdiction over the parties, jurisdiction over the subject matter, primary jurisdiction, and jurisdiction over property in litigation. The document is intended to provide an overview of jurisdiction for a Civil Procedure class.
This document summarizes key cases and concepts related to jurisdiction that were covered in a Civil Procedure lesson. It discusses cases on jurisdiction in general, jurisdiction over the parties, jurisdiction over the subject matter, primary jurisdiction, and jurisdiction over property in litigation. The document is intended to provide an overview of jurisdiction for a Civil Procedure class.
This document summarizes key cases and concepts related to jurisdiction that were covered in a Civil Procedure lesson. It discusses cases on jurisdiction in general, jurisdiction over the parties, jurisdiction over the subject matter, primary jurisdiction, and jurisdiction over property in litigation. The document is intended to provide an overview of jurisdiction for a Civil Procedure class.
Judge Asuncion - Lesson for July 8, 2014 (Tuesday)
Jurisdiction A. Jurisdiction in General a. BPI v. Hong, G.R. No. 11!!1, "#$ruar% 1&, '(1' $. Nocu) v. *an, G.R. No. 1+&('', ,#-t#)$#r '., '((& c. C/av#0 v. C1, G.R. No. 1'&21., "#$ruar% , '((! . Jurisdiction o!er t"e #arties 1. $o% &urisdiction o!er t"e #laintiff is ac'uired a. 1gravant# v. Patriarca, G.R. No. L3+2.'+, 4arc/ 1+, 155( 2. $o% &urisdiction o!er t"e defendant is ac'uired a. P#r6ins v. Di0on, G.R. No. +.1, Nov#)$#r 1, 15.5 (. Jurisdiction o!er t"e su)&ect *atter 1. +eaning a. Banco Es-a7o83"i8i-ino v. Pa8anca, G.R. No. L311.5(,4arc/ ', 1512 2. Jurisdiction !ersus t"e e,ercise of &urisdiction a. OC1 v. Judg# 4atas, 1.4. No. R*J35'32', 1ugust ', 155& -. .rror of &urisdiction distinguis"ed fro* error of &udg*ent a. "#rnando v. Hon. Vas9u#0, G.R. No. L3'+1!, Januar% .(, 15!( 4. $o% &urisdiction is conferred and deter*ined a. ,ogod v. Hon. Rosa8, G.R. No. L3.2'(+, ,#-t#)$#r '+, 1551 /. 0octrine of #ri*ary &urisdiction a. G41 N#t:or6 Inc. v. 1B,3CBN Broadcasting Cor-., G.R. No. 1(!(., ,#-t#)$#r '., '((& 1. 0octrine of ad"erence of &urisdiction a. Ba8ta0ar v. C1, G.R. No L3+(151, 4a% '!, 1521 2. 3)&ections to &urisdiction o!er t"e su)&ect *atter a. Di8% Dan% Nac-i8 v. Int#rnationa8 Broadcasting, G.R. No 1++!!, 4arc/ '1, '((' 8. .ffect of esto##el on o)&ections to &urisdiction a. *i;a) v. ,i$ong/ano%, G.R. No. L3'1+&(, 1-ri8 1&, 152 0. Jurisdiction o!er t"e issues a. La0o v. R#-u$8ic ,ur#t%, G.R. No. L3'!.&, Januar% .(, 15!( .. Jurisdiction o!er t"e res or #ro#erty in litigation a. Banco Es-a7o83"i8i-ino v. Pa8anca, su-ra Legim Discipulo: Anne Lorraine Co & Meiki Merlin (Civil Procedure Case Digest) (Jurisdiction in General) B1N< O" *HE PHILIPPINE I,L1ND, V, HONG G.R. No. 11!!1, 1& "#$ruar% '(1' "acts= 3n 4e#te*)er 11, 1552, .6(3 Grou# of (o*#anies (.6(3) filed a #etition for sus#ension of #ay*ents and re"a)ilitation )efore t"e 4ecurity and .,c"ange (o**ission (4.(). T"e "earing #anel a##ro!ed t"e #ro#osed re"a)ilitation #lan #re#ared )y .6(3. T"e 4.( rendered its decision disa##ro!ing t"e #etition for sus#ension of #ay*ents, ter*inating .6(37s #ro#osed re"a)ilitation #lan and ordering t"e dissolution and li'uidation of t"e #etitioning cor#oration. T"e case %as re*anded to t"e "earing #anel for li'uidation #roceedings. (ourt of A##eals ((A) u#"eld t"e 4.( ruling. .6(3 filed a #etition for certiorari )efore t"e 4u#re*e (ourt (4() %"ic" case %as e!entually dis*issed under a resolution %"ic" "ad )eco*e final and e,ecutory. 8"ile t"e case %as still #ending in t"e (A, #etitioner an9 of t"e :"ili##ine ;slands (:;), filed %it" t"e 3ffice of t"e (ler9 of (ourt, <egional Trial (ourt (<T() of =alen>uela (ity, a #etition for e,tra-&udicial foreclosure of real #ro#erties *ortgaged to it )y .yco :ro#erties ;nc. and lue 4tar +a"ogany, ;nc. :u)lic auction %as sc"eduled. (lai*ing t"at t"e foreclosure #roceedings initiated )y #etitioner %as illegal, res#ondent .duardon $ong, an unsecured creditor of ?i9on ;ndustrial (or#oration, one of t"e co*#anies of 6.(3, filed an action for in&unction and da*ages against t"e #etitioner in t"e sa*e court (<T( of =alen>uela (ity). $e alleged t"at t"e e,-officio s"eriff "as no aut"ority to sell t"e *ortgaged #ro#erties. T"e 4.( retains &urisdiction o!er t"e *ortgaged #ro#erties of .6(3 :ro#erties, ;nc. T"e trial court issued a te*#orary restraining order (T<3). :etitioner filed a *otion to dis*iss %"ic" %as denied )y t"e <T(. (A affir*ed t"e trial court7s denial of #etitioner7s *otion to dis*iss. @ Auestions relating to !alidity or legality of t"e foreclosure #roceedings, including an action to en&oin t"e sa*e, *ust necessarily )e cogni>a)le )y t"e <T(. (A denied *otion for reconsideration. Issu#= 8"et"er or not t"e <T( can ta9e cogni>ance of t"e in&unction suit des#ite t"e #endency of 4.( (ase. >#s? H#8d= Jurisdiction is defined as t"e #o%er and aut"ority of a court to "ear and decide a case. A court7s &urisdiction o!er t"e su)&ect *atter of t"e action is conferred only )y t"e (onstitution or )y statute. T"e nature of an action and t"e su)&ect *atter t"ereof, as %ell as %"ic" court or agency of t"e go!ern*ent "as &urisdiction o!er t"e sa*e, are deter*ined )y t"e *aterial allegations of t"e co*#laint in relation to t"e la% in!ol!ed and t"e c"aracter of t"e reliefs #rayed for, %"et"er or not t"e co*#lainantB#laintiff is entitled to any or all of suc" reliefs. And &urisdiction )eing a *atter of su)stanti!e la%, t"e esta)lis"ed rule is t"at t"e statute in force at t"e ti*e of t"e co**ence*ent of t"e action deter*ines t"e &urisdiction of t"e court. :erusal of t"e co*#laint re!eals t"at res#ondent does not as9 t"e trial court to rule on its interest or clai* -- as an unsecured creditor of t%o co*#anies under .6(3 -- against t"e latter7s #ro#erties *ortgaged to #etitioner. T"e co*#laint #rinci#ally see9s to en&oin t"e foreclosure #roceedings initiated )y #etitioner o!er t"ose #ro#erties on t"e ground t"at suc" #ro#erties are "eld in trust and #laced under t"e &urisdiction of t"e a##ointed Li'uidator in 4.( (ase. T"us, (i!il (ase is one for in&unction %it" #rayer for da*ages. An action for in&unction is a suit %"ic" "as for its #ur#ose t"e en&oin*ent of t"e defendant, #er#etually or for a #articular ti*e, fro* t"e co**ission or continuance of a s#ecific act, or "is co*#ulsion to continue #erfor*ance of a #articular act. ;t "as an inde#endent e,istence, and is distinct fro* t"e ancillary re*edy of #reli*inary in&unction %"ic" cannot e,ist e,ce#t only as a #art or an incident of an inde#endent action or #roceeding. ;n an action for in&unction, t"e au,iliary re*edy of #reli*inary in&unction, #ro"i)itory or *andatory, *ay issue. As a rule, actions for in&unction and da*ages lie %it"in t"e &urisdiction of t"e <T( #ursuant to 4ection 15 of atas :a*)ansa lg. 125, ot"er%ise 9no%n as t"e CJudiciary <eorgani>ation Act of 1580,C as a*ended )y <e#u)lic Act (<.A.) ?o. 2151. <.A. ?o. 8255, %"ic" too9 effect on August 8, 2000, transferred to t"e a##ro#riate regional trial courts t"e 4.(7s &urisdiction o!er t"ose cases enu*erated in 4ec. / of :.0. ?o. 502-A. 4ection /.2 of <.A. ?o. 8255 #ro!idesD 4.(. /.2 T"e (o**ission7s &urisdiction o!er all cases enu*erated under 4ection / of :residential 0ecree ?o. 502-A is "ere)y transferred to t"e (ourts of general &urisdiction or t"e a##ro#riate <egional Trial (ourtD Provided, t"at t"e 4u#re*e (ourt in t"e e,ercise of its aut"ority *ay designate t"e <egional Trial (ourt )ranc"es t"at s"all e,ercise &urisdiction o!er t"ese cases. T"e (o**ission s"all retain &urisdiction o!er #ending cases in!ol!ing intra-cor#orate dis#utes su)*itted for final resolution %"ic" s"ould )e resol!ed %it"in one (1) year fro* t"e enact*ent of t"is (ode. */# Co))ission s/a88 r#tain ;urisdiction ov#r -#nding sus-#nsion o@ -a%)#ntsAr#/a$i8itation cas#s @i8#d as o@ .( Jun# '((( unti8 @ina88% dis-os#d. :ursuant to its original &urisdiction o!er suits for in&unction and da*ages, t"e <T( of =alen>uela (ity #ro#erly too9 cogni>ance of t"e in&unction case filed )y t"e res#ondent. ?o re!ersi)le error %as t"erefore co**itted )y t"e (A %"en it ruled t"at t"e <T( of =alen>uela (ity "ad &urisdiction to "ear and decide res#ondent7s co*#laint for in&unction and da*ages. (Jurisdiction in General) NOCU4 V, *1N G.R. No. 1+&('', (' ,#-t#)$#r '(1+ "acts= Lucio Tan filed a co*#laint against re#orter Ar*and ?ocu*, (a#t. Elorendo F*ali, AL:A: and ;n'uirer %it" t"e <egional Trial (ourt of +a9ati see9ing *oral and e,e*#lary da*ages for t"e alleged *alicious and defa*atory i*#utations contained in a ne%s article. ;t a##eared t"at t"e co*#laint failed to state t"e residence of t"e co*#lainant at t"e ti*e of t"e alleged co**ission of t"e offense and t"e #lace %"ere t"e li)elous article %as #rinted and first #u)lis"ed. T"e <egional Trial (ourt of +a9ati issued an order dis*issing t"e co*#laint %it"out #re&udice on t"e ground of Legim Discipulo: Anne Lorraine Co & Meiki Merlin (Civil Procedure Case Digest) i*#ro#er !enue. Aggrie!ed )y t"e dis*issal of t"e co*#laint, res#ondent Lucio Tan filed an 3*ni)us +otion see9ing reconsideration of t"e dis*issal and ad*ission of t"e a*ended co*#laint. ;n t"e a*ended co*#laint, it is alleged t"at This article was printed and first published in the City of Makati, and t"at This caricature was printed and first published in the City of Makati. T"e lo%er court, after "a!ing t"e case dis*issed for i*#ro#er !enue, ad*itted t"e a*ended co*#laint and dee*ed set aside t"e #re!ious order of dis*issal. :etitioners a##ealed t"e <T( decision to t"e (ourt of A##eals. (ourt of A##eals denied and dis*issed t"e #etition and affir*ed in toto t"e order of t"e court a 'uo. :etitioners7 *otion for reconsideration %as denied. Issu#= 8"et"er or not t"e lo%er court ac'uire &urisdiction o!er t"e ci!il case u#on t"e filing of t"e original co*#laint for da*ages. >#s? H#8d= Article -10 of t"e <e!ised :enal (ode #ro!ides t"at it is a (ourt of Eirst ;nstance t"at is s#ecifically designated to try a li)el case. :etitioners are confusing &urisdiction %it" !enue. A for*er colleague, t"e $on. Eloren> 0. <egalado, differentiated &urisdiction and !enue as follo%sD (a) Jurisdiction is t"e aut"ority to "ear and deter*ine a caseG !enue is t"e #lace %"ere t"e case is to )e "eard or triedG ()) Jurisdiction is a *atter of su)stanti!e la%G !enue, of #rocedural la%G (c) Jurisdiction esta)lis"es a relation )et%een t"e court and t"e su)&ect *atterG !enue, a relation )et%een #laintiff and defendant, or #etitioner and res#ondentG and, (d) Jurisdiction is fi,ed )y la% and cannot )e conferred )y t"e #artiesG !enue *ay )e conferred )y t"e act or agree*ent of t"e #arties. ;t is ele*entary t"at o)&ections to !enue in (;=;L A(T;3?4 arising fro* li)el *ay )e %ai!ed since t"ey do not in!ol!e a 'uestion of &urisdiction. T"e laying of !enue is #rocedural rat"er t"an su)stanti!e, relating as it does to &urisdiction of t"e court o!er t"e #erson rat"er t"an t"e su)&ect *atter. =enue relates to trial and not to &urisdiction. ;t is a #rocedural, not a &urisdictional, *atter. ;t relates to t"e #lace of trial or geogra#"ical location in %"ic" an action or #roceeding s"ould )e )roug"t and not to t"e &urisdiction of t"e court. ;t is *eant to #ro!ide con!enience to t"e #arties, rat"er t"an restrict t"eir access to t"e courts as it relates to t"e #lace of trial. ;n contrast, in (<;+;?AL A(T;3?4, it is funda*ental t"at !enue is &urisdictional it )eing an essential ele*ent of &urisdiction. :etitioners7 argu*ent t"at t"e lo%er court "as no &urisdiction o!er t"e case )ecause res#ondent failed to allege t"e #lace %"ere t"e li)elous articles %ere #rinted and first #u)lis"ed %ould "a!e )een tena)le if t"e case filed %ere a cri*inal case. T"e failure of t"e original co*#laint to contain suc" infor*ation %ould )e fatal )ecause t"is fact in!ol!es t"e issue of !enue %"ic" goes into t"e territorial &urisdiction of t"e court. This is not to be because the case before us is a civil action where venue is not jurisdictional (Jurisdiction in General) CH1VEB V, COUR* O" 1PPE1L, G.R. No. 1'&21., ( "#$ruar% '((! "acts= An ;nfor*ation for li)el %as filed )efore t"e <egional Trial (ourt (<T() of +anila against #ri!ate res#ondents, %"o %ere editor- in-c"ief and aut"or-re#orter of H4*art EileI, a *aga>ine of general circulation in +anila, %it" #etitioner Erancisco ("a!e> as t"e co*#lainant. :ri!ate res#ondents *o!ed to 'uas" t"e ;nfor*ation, as %ell as t"e corres#onding %arrants of arrest su)se'uently issued )ut %ere denied )y t"e <T( +anila. :ri!ate res#ondents filed a :etition for (ertiorari %it" t"e (ourt of A##eals %"ic" %as granted. T"e a##ellate court "eld t"at t"e ;nfor*ation failed to allege %"ere t"e %ritten defa*ation %as C#rinted and first #u)lis"ed,C an allegation sine qua non Cif t"e circu*stances as to %"ere t"e li)el %as #rinted and first #u)lis"ed is used as t"e )asis of t"e !enue of t"e #u)lication.C / ;t %as o)ser!ed t"at C!enue of li)el cases %"ere t"e co*#lainant is a #ri!ate #erson is eit"er in any of only t%o #laces, na*elyD (1) %"ere t"e su)&ect article %as #rinted and first #u)lis"edG and (2) %"ere co*#lainant of t"e co**ission actually resides at t"e ti*e of t"e co**ission of t"e offense.C T"e ;nfor*ation, it %as noted, did not indicate t"at t"e li)elous articles %ere #rinted or first #u)lis"ed in +anila, or t"at #etitioner resided in +anila at t"e ti*e of t"e #u)lication of t"e articles. T"e (ourt of A##eals furt"er o)ser!ed t"at e!en during t"e #reli*inary in!estigation, #ri!ate res#ondents "ad already inter#osed t"at 4*art Eile %as actually #rinted and first #u)lis"ed in t"e (ity of +a9ati, and t"at t"e address of t"e #u)lis"er Ani*al Ear*s :u)lication as indicated in t"e editorial #age of t"e #u)lication itself %as a #ost office )o, %it" t"e +a9ati (entral :ost 3ffice. .!en as t"is o)ser!ation %as dis#uted )y #etitioner, %"o insisted t"e #lace of #ri!ate res#ondent7s #rinting and #u)lis"ing )usiness %as actually in +anila, t"e (ourt of A##eals noted t"at "e s"ould "a!e )een alerted enoug" )y #ri!ate res#ondentsJ ad!erse insistence and t"at a due in!estigation %ould "a!e ine!ita)ly re!ealed t"at #ri!ate res#ondents "ad transferred fro* t"eir #re!ious +anila address to +a9ati )y t"e ti*e t"e su)&ect articles %ere #u)lis"ed. Issu#= 8"et"er or not t"e su)&ect infor*ation sufficiently !est &urisdiction in t"e +anila trial courts to "ear li)el c"arge, in consonance %it" Article -10 of t"e <e!ised :enal (ode. No? H#8d= T"e rules on !enue in article -10 *ay )e restated t"usD 1. 8"et"er t"e offended #arty is a #u)lic official or a #ri!ate #erson, t"e cri*inal action *ay )e filed in t"e (ourt of Eirst ;nstance of t"e #ro!ince or city %"ere t"e li)elous article is #rinted and first #u)lis"ed. 2. ;f t"e offended #arty is a #ri!ate indi!idual, t"e cri*inal action *ay also )e filed in t"e (ourt of Eirst ;nstance of t"e #ro!ince %"ere "e actually resided at t"e ti*e of t"e co**ission of t"e offense. -. ;f t"e offended #arty is a #u)lic officer %"ose office is in +anila at t"e ti*e of t"e co**ission of t"e offense, t"e action *ay )e filed in t"e (ourt of Eirst ;nstance of +anila. 4. ;f t"e offended #arty is a #u)lic officer "olding office outside of +anila, t"e action *ay )e filed in t"e (ourt of Eirst ;nstance of t"e #ro!ince or city %"ere "e "eld office at t"e ti*e of t"e co**ission of t"e offense. T"e ;nfor*ation states t"at t"e li)elous articles %ere #u)lis"ed in 4*art Eile, and not t"at t"ey %ere #u)lis"ed in +anila. T"e #lace C+anilaC is in turn e*#loyed to situate %"ere 4*art Eile %as in general circulation, and not %"ere t"e li)el %as #u)lis"ed or Legim Discipulo: Anne Lorraine Co & Meiki Merlin (Civil Procedure Case Digest) first #rinted. T"e fact t"at 4*art Eile %as in general circulation in +anila does not necessarily esta)lis" t"at it %as #u)lis"ed and first #rinted in +anila, in t"e sa*e %ay t"at %"ile leading national dailies suc" as t"e :"ili##ine 0aily ;n'uirer or t"e :"ili##ine 4tar are in general circulation in (e)u, it does not *ean t"at t"ese ne%s#a#ers are #u)lis"ed and first #rinted in (e)u. :etitioner does su)*it t"at t"ere is no need to e*#loy t"e clause C#rinted and first #u)lis"edC in indicating %"ere t"e cri*e of li)el %as co**itted, as t"e ter* C#u)lis"C is Cgeneric and %it"in t"e general conte,t of t"e ter* J#rintJ in so far as t"e latter ter* is utili>ed to refer to t"e #"ysical act of #roducing t"e #u)lication.C 8"ere t"e la% does not distinguis", %e s"ould not distinguis". ($o% &urisdiction o!er t"e #laintiff is ac'uired) 1GR1V1N*E V, P1*RI1RC1 G.R. No. L3+2.'+, 1+ 4arc/ 155( "acts= Juana :atriarca :eKa filed %it" t"e (ourt of Eirst ;nstance of an action to 'uiet title %it" da*ages against Jose Agra!ante and Juan Agra!ante. T"e case for #re-trial %as sc"eduled. T"e defendants7 counsel *o!ed for cancellation of t"e setting. T"e court reset t"e #re-trial. T"e defendants7 attorney, #leading illness, soug"t to "a!e second #re-trial setting cancelled )y *otion )ut %as denied. At t"e sc"eduled #re-trial, neit"er t"e defendants nor t"eir counsel a##eared. T"e court declared t"e defendants in default. Juana :atriarca :eKa died, "er "eirs #resented a *otion ad!ising of "er de*ise and #raying t"at t"ey )e su)stituted in "er stead in action. 0efendants *o!ed for reconsideration %"ic" %as denied for lac9 of *erit. Issu#= 8"et"er or not trial court "ad ac'uired &urisdiction o!er t"e #erson of Juana :atriarca :eKa. H#8d= Also co*#letely %it"out *erit is t"e defendantsJ contention t"at t"e de*ise of t"e #laintiff, Juana :atriarca, long )efore t"e #re-trial setting #re!ented t"e Trial (ourtJs ac'uisition of &urisdiction o!er "er. ;t is a,io*atic t"at &urisdiction of t"e #erson of t"e #laintiff is ac'uired )y t"e court )y t"e filing of t"e co*#laint. T"e su)se'uent deat" of t"e #laintiff in a real action li9e t"e one at )ar, does not affect t"e (ourtJs &urisdiction, all t"at is entailed in t"is e!entuality )eing t"e su)stitution of t"e "eirs for t"e deceased in accordance %it" t"e #rocedure set out in 4ection 12, <ule - of t"e <ules of (ourt. T"at su)stitution is #recisely %"at %as done )y t"e (ourt a quo. T"ere is furt"er*ore no s"o%ing %"ate!er t"at defendants "ad any ground at all to o##ose t"at su)stitution *andated )y t"e <ules, or t"at t"ey "a!e suffered any #re&udice of any sort )y reason of t"at su)stitution, so as to gi!e !alidity to t"eir ot"er #laint t"at t"ey "ad not )een accorded sufficient o##ortunity to o)&ect to t"e su)stitution. ($o% &urisdiction o!er t"e defendant is ac'uired) PER<IN, V, DIBON G.R. +.1, 1 Nov#)$#r 15.5 "acts= <es#ondent, .ugene Art"ur :er9ins, instituted an action in t"e (ourt of Eirst ;nstance of +anila against t"e enguet (onsolidated +ining (o*#any for di!idends a*ounting to :21,-25.50 on /2,824 s"ares of stoc9 registered in "is na*e, #ay*ent of %"ic" %as )eing %it""eld )y t"e co*#anyG and, for t"e recognition of "is rig"t to t"e control and dis#osal of said s"ares, to t"e e,clusion of all ot"ers. To t"e co*#laint, t"e co*#any filed its ans%er alleging, )y %ay of defense, t"at t"e %it""olding of suc" di!idends and t"e non- recognition of #laintiffJs rig"t to t"e dis#osal and control of t"e s"ares %ere due to certain de*ands *ade %it" res#ect to said s"ares )y t"e #etitioner "erein, ;dona" 4lade :er9ins, and )y one George $. .ngel"ard. T"e ans%er #rays t"at t"e ad!erse clai*ants )e *ade #arties to t"e action and ser!ed %it" notice t"ereof )y #u)lication, and t"at t"ereafter all suc" #arties )e re'uired to inter#lead and settle t"e rig"ts a*ong t"e*sel!es. T"e trial court ordered res#ondent .ugene Art"ur :er9ins to include in "is co*#laint as #arties defendant #etitioner, ;dona" 4lade :er9ins, and George $. .ngel"ard. T"e co*#laint %as accordingly a*ended and in addition to t"e relief #rayed for in t"e original co*#laint, res#ondent :er9ins #rayed t"at #etitioner ;dona" 4lade :er9ins and George .ngel"ard )e ad&udged %it"out interest in t"e s"ares of stoc9 in 'uestion and e,cluded fro* any clai* t"ey assert t"ereon. 4u**ons )y #u)lication %ere ser!ed u#on t"e non- resident defendants, ;dona" 4lade :er9ins and George $. .ngel"ard, #ursuant to t"e order of t"e trial court. .ngel"ard filed "is ans%er to t"e a*ended co*#laint, and #etitioner ;dona" 4lade :er9ins, t"roug" counsel, filed "er #leading entitled Co)&ection to !enue, *otion to 'uas", and de*urrer to &urisdictionC %"erein s"e c"allenged t"e &urisdiction of t"e lo%er court o!er "er #erson. :etitionerJs o)&ection, *otion and de*urrer "a!ing )een o!erruled as %ell as "er *otion for reconsideration of t"e order of denial, s"e no% )roug"t t"e #resent #etition for certiorari, #raying t"at t"e su**ons )y #u)lication issued against "er )e declared null and !oid, and t"at, %it" res#ect to "er, res#ondent Judge )e #er*anently #ro"i)ited fro* ta9ing any action on t"e case. Issu#= 8"et"er or not t"e (ourt of Eirst ;nstance of +anila "as ac'uired &urisdiction o!er t"e #erson of t"e #resent #etitioner as a non-resident defendant, or, not%it"standing t"e %ant of suc" &urisdiction, %"et"er or not said court *ay !alidly try t"e case. H#8d= T"e general rule, t"erefore, is t"at a suit against a non- resident cannot )e entertained )y a :"ili##ine court. 8"ere, "o%e!er, t"e action is in rem or quasi in rem in connection %it" #ro#erty located in t"e :"ili##ines, t"e court ac'uires &urisdiction o!er t"e res, and its &urisdiction o!er t"e #erson of t"e non-resident is non-essential. ;n order t"at t"e court *ay e,ercise #o%er o!er t"e res, it is not necessary t"at t"e court s"ould ta9e actual custody of t"e #ro#erty, #otential custody t"ereof )eing sufficient. T"ere is #otential custody %"en, fro* t"e nature of t"e action )roug"t, t"e #o%er of t"e court o!er t"e #ro#erty is i*#liedly recogni>ed )y la%. Legim Discipulo: Anne Lorraine Co & Meiki Merlin (Civil Procedure Case Digest) CAn illustration of %"at %e ter* #otential &urisdiction o!er t"e res, is found in t"e #roceeding to register t"e title of land under our syste* for t"e registration of land. $ere t"e court, %it"out ta9ing actual #"ysical control o!er t"e #ro#erty , assu*es, at t"e instance of so*e #erson clai*ing to )e o%ner, to e,ercise a &urisdiction in rem o!er t"e #ro#erty and to ad&udicate t"e title in fa!or of t"e #etitioner against all t"e %orld.C As )efore stated, in an action in rem or quasi in rem against a non-resident defendant, &urisdiction o!er "is #erson is non- essential, and if t"e la% re'uires in suc" case t"at t"e su**ons u#on t"e defendant )e ser!ed )y #u)lication, it is *erely to satisfy t"e constitutional re'uire*ent of due #rocess. ;f any )e said, in t"is connection, t"at C*ay re#orted cases can )e cited in %"ic" it is assu*ed t"at t"e 'uestion of t"e sufficiency of #u)lication or notice in t"e case of t"is 9ind is a 'uestion affecting t"e &urisdiction of t"e court, and t"e court is so*eti*es said to ac'uire &urisdiction )y !irtue of t"e #u)lication. T"is #"raseology %as undou)tedly originally ado#ted )y t"e court )ecause of t"e analogy )et%een ser!ice )y #u)lication and #ersonal ser!ice of #rocess u#on t"e defendantG and, as "as already )een suggested, #rior to t"e decision of Pennoyer v. eff (supra), t"e difference )et%een t"e legal effects of t"e t%o for*s of ser!ice %as o)scure. ;t is accordingly not sur#rising t"at t"e *odes of e,#ression %"ic" "ad already )een *oulded into legal tradition )efore t"at case %as decided "a!e )een )roug"t do%n to t"e #resent day. ut it is clear t"at t"e legal #rinci#le "ere in!ol!ed is not affected )y t"e #eculiar languages in %"ic" t"e courts "a!e e,#ounded t"eir ideas.C T"e reason for t"e rule t"at :"ili##ine courts cannot ac'uire &urisdiction o!er t"e #erson of a non-resident, as laid do%n )y t"e 4u#re*e (ourt of t"e Fnited 4tates in Pennoyer v. eff! supra, *ay )e found in a recogni>ed #rinci#le of #u)lic la% to t"e effect t"at Cno 4tate can e,ercise direct &urisdiction and aut"ority o!er #ersons or #ro#erty %it"out its territory. 4tory, (onfl. L., c". 2G 8"eat, ;nt. L., #t. 2, c". 2. T"e se!eral 4tates are of e'ual dignity and aut"ority, and t"e inde#endence of one i*#lies t"e e,clusion of #o%er fro* all ot"ers. And so it is laid do%n )y &urists, as an ele*entary #rinci#le, t"at t"e la%s of one 4tate "a!e no o#eration outside of its territory, e,ce#t so far as is allo%ed )y co*ityG and t"at no tri)unal esta)lis"ed )y it can e,tend its #rocess )eyond t"at territory so as to su)&ect eit"er #ersons or #ro#erty to its decisions. CAny e,ertion of aut"ority of t"is sort )eyond t"is li*it,C says 4tory, Cis a *ere nullity, and inca#a)le of )inding suc" #ersons or #ro#erty in any ot"er tri)unals.C 4tory, (onfl. L., sec. /-5.C (:ennoyer !. ?eff, 5/ F.4., 214G 24 La%. ed., /1/, /18-/15.). (Jurisdiction o!er t"e su)&ect *atter) B1NCO E,P1 COL3FILIPINO V, P1L1NC1 G.R. No. L311.5(, ' 4arc/ 1512 "acts= An action %as instituted )y C.l anco .s#anol-Eili#inoC to foreclose a *ortgage u#on !arious #arcels of real #ro#erty situated in t"e city of +anila. T"e *ortgage in 'uestion %as e,ecuted )y t"e original defendant "erein, .ngracio :alanca Tan'uinyeng y Li*'uingco, as security for a de)t o%ing )y "i* to t"e )an9. After t"e e,ecution of t"e instru*ent )y t"e *ortgagor, "e returned to ("ina %"ic" a##ears to "a!e )een "is nati!e countryG and "e t"ere died %it"out again returning to t"e :"ili##ine ;slands. As t"e defendant, =icente :alanca, %as a nonresident at t"e ti*e of t"e institution of t"e #resent action, it %as necessary for t"e #laintiff in t"e foreclosure #roceeding to gi!e notice to t"e defendant )y #u)lication #ursuant to section -55 of t"e (ode of (i!il :rocedure. An order for #u)lication %as accordingly o)tained fro* t"e court, and #u)lication %as *ade in due for* in a ne%s#a#er of t"e city of +anila. At t"e sa*e ti*e t"at t"e order of t"e court s"ould de#osit in t"e #ost office in a sta*#ed en!elo#e a co#y of t"e su**ons and co*#laint directed to t"e defendant at "is last #lace of residence, to %it, t"e city of A*oy, in t"e .*#ire of ("ina. 8"et"er t"e cler9 co*#lied %it" t"is order does not affir*ati!ely a##ear. An "ffidavit, "o%e!er, %as signed )y ernardo ("an y Garcia, t"e )an97s attorney, s"o%ing t"at "e "ad de#osited in t"e +anila #ost-office a registered letter, addressed to .ngracio :alanca Tan'uinyeng, at +anila, containing co#ies of t"e Complaint, t"e :laintiff7s "ffidavit, t"e #ummons, and t"e aforesaid $rder for Publication. ;t a##ears fro* t"e #ost*aster7s recei#t t"at ernardo #ro)a)ly used an en!elo#e o)tained fro* t"e cler97s office, as t"e recei#t #ur#orts to s"o% t"at t"e letter e*anated fro* t"e office. T"e 0efendant not "a!ing a##eared, %ud&ment by 'efault %as t"en ta9en against "i* )efore t"e trial court and a 'ecision rendered in fa!or of :laintiff. ;n t"is 'ecision! it %as recited t"at #u)lication "ad )een #ro#erly *ade in a #eriodical, )ut not"ing %as said a)out notice "a!ing )een gi!en )y *ail. Eoreclosure of t"e su)&ect #ro#erty #roceeded and sale %as confir*ed )y t"e court t"ereafter. 4e!en years after t"e confir*ation sale, =icente :alanca, as ad*inistrator of t"e 0efendant7s estate, *o!ed t"at t"e $rder of 'efault and t"e a)o!e %ud&ment rendered t"ereon )e declared !oid. 4aid Motion to (acate %ud&ment %as deniedG "ence, t"is "ppeal. Issu#= 8"et"er or not t"e lo%er court ac'uired &urisdiction o!er t"e defendant and t"e su)&ect *atter of t"e action H#8d= 3n Jurisdiction T"e %ord H&urisdictionI is used in se!eral different, t"oug" related, senses since it *ay "a!e reference (1) to t"e aut"ority of t"e court to entertain a #articular 9ind of action or to ad*inister a #articular 9ind of relief, or it *ay refer to t"e #o%er of t"e court o!er t"e #arties, or (2) o!er t"e #ro#erty %"ic" is t"e su)&ect to t"e litigation. T"e so!ereign aut"ority %"ic" organi>es a court deter*ines t"e nature and e,tent of its #o%ers in general and t"us fi,es its co*#etency or &urisdiction %it" reference to t"e actions %"ic" it *ay entertain and t"e relief it *ay grant. $o% Jurisdiction is Ac'uired Jurisdiction o!er t"e #erson is ac'uired )y t"e !oluntary a##earance of a #arty in court and "is su)*ission to its aut"ority, or it is ac'uired )y t"e coerci!e #o%er of legal #rocess e,erted o!er t"e #erson. Jurisdiction o!er t"e #ro#erty %"ic" is t"e su)&ect of t"e litigation *ay result eit"er fro* a sei>ure of t"e #ro#erty under legal #rocess, %"ere)y it is )roug"t into t"e actual custody of t"e la%, or Legim Discipulo: Anne Lorraine Co & Meiki Merlin (Civil Procedure Case Digest) it *ay result fro* t"e institution of legal #roceedings %"erein, under s#ecial #ro!isions of la%, t"e #o%er of t"e court o!er t"e #ro#erty is recogni>ed and *ade effecti!e. ;n t"e latter case t"e #ro#erty, t"oug" at all ti*es %it"in t"e #otential #o%er of t"e court, *ay ne!er )e ta9en into actual custody at all. An illustration of t"e &urisdiction ac'uired )y actual sei>ure is found in attac"*ent #roceedings, %"ere t"e #ro#erty is sei>ed at t"e )eginning of t"e action, or so*e su)se'uent stage of its #rogress, and "eld to a)ide t"e final e!ent of t"e litigation. An illustration of %"at %e ter* #otential &urisdiction o!er t"e res, is found in t"e #roceeding to register t"e title of land under our syste* for t"e registration of land. $ere t"e court, %it"out ta9ing actual #"ysical control o!er t"e #ro#erty assu*es, at t"e instance of so*e #erson clai*ing to )e o%ner, to e,ercise a &urisdiction in re* o!er t"e #ro#erty and to ad&udicate t"e title in fa!or of t"e #etitioner against all t"e %orld. ;n t"e ter*inology of A*erican la% t"e action to foreclose a *ortgage is said to )e a #roceeding 'uasi in re*, )y %"ic" is e,#ressed t"e idea t"at %"ile it is not strictly s#ea9ing an action in re* yet it #arta9es of t"at nature and is su)stantially suc". T"e e,#ression Caction in re*C is, in its narro% a##lication, used only %it" reference to certain #roceedings in courts of ad*iralty %"erein t"e #ro#erty alone is treated as res#onsi)le for t"e clai* or o)ligation u#on %"ic" t"e #roceedings are )ased. T"e action 'uasi re* differs fro* t"e true action in re* in t"e circu*stance t"at in t"e for*er an indi!idual is na*ed as defendant, and t"e #ur#ose of t"e #roceeding is to su)&ect "is interest t"erein to t"e o)ligation or lien )urdening t"e #ro#erty. All #roceedings "a!ing for t"eir sole o)&ect t"e sale or ot"er dis#osition of t"e #ro#erty of t"e defendant, %"et"er )y attac"*ent, foreclosure, or ot"er for* of re*edy, are in a general %ay t"us designated. T"e &udg*ent entered in t"ese #roceedings is conclusi!e only )et%een t"e #arties. (Jurisdiction !ersus t"e e,ercise of &urisdiction) O""ICE O" *HE COUR* 1D4INI,*R1*OR V, JUDGE 41*1, 1.4. No. R*J35'32., (' 1ugust 155& "acts= T"e 3ffice of t"e (ourt Ad*inistrator (3(A) filed %it" t"e (ourt an ad*inistrati!e co*#laint c"arging t"e "erein res#ondents %it" t"e !iolation of 4ection -(e) of t"e Anti-graft and (orru#t :ractices Act. <es#ondents Judge Jesus =. +atas, .duardo Torres, Jr., 3;( (ler9 of (ourt and in conni!ance %it" #ri!ate citi>en George +ercado concealed fro* J.L. +ercado and 4ons Agricultural .nter#rises "is (George +ercadoJs) 9no%ledge of t"e #etition for t"e issuance of ne% o%nerJs du#licate co#ies 3(T and filed +isc. (ase ?o. 1121 )efore t"e sala of res#ondent Judge and too9 cogni>ance of t"e sa*e not%it"standing t"e fact t"at "is (ourt "as no &urisdiction o!er La#along and 4to. To*as, 0a!ao %"ere su)&ect #ro#erties co!ered )y t"e aforesaid titles %"ere located. T"at not%it"standing t"e fact t"at t"e #ro#erties are o%ned )y J.L. +ercado and 4ons Agricultural .nter#rises, res#ondent Judge issued an 3rder directing t"e #osting of said 3rder and #etition #rior to t"e sc"eduled "earing at t"e 3ffice of t"e (ler9 of (ourt, t"e +unici#al $all, arangay $all or arangay 4c"ool %"ere t"e #ro#erties are located. T"at a day after t"e "earing %"ere J.L. +ercado and 4ons Agricultural .nter#rises %as not #resent, res#ondent Judge fort"%it" issued an 3rder for t"e issuance )y t"e <egister of 0eeds of 0a!ao of ne% o%nerJs du#licate of aforesaid titles to George +ercado. Justice ;*#erial %as tas9ed %it" t"e in!estigations. $earing %it" t"e 3(A co**ence )ut after #resenting t%o %itnesses, it *o!ed for sus#ension of t"e #roceedings to a*end t"e co*#laint adding t"e grounds of gross ine,cusa)le negligence and gross ignorance of t"e la% as %ell as *odifying ot"er #ortions of t"e co*#laint. T"e co*#laint alleged t"at Judge +atas and Torres acted %it" )ad fait" and #artiality in ruling in fa!or of George +ercado. Issu#= 8"et"er or not t"e res#ondent Judge acted %it"out &urisdiction in ta9ing cogni>ance of +iscellaneous (ase ?o. 1212. H#8d= ;n t"e instant case, it cannot )e said t"at ranc" ; of t"e <T( of 0a!ao del ?orte, t"en #resided )y t"e res#ondent Judge, "ad no &urisdiction o!er +iscellaneous (ase ?o. 1121 %"ic" is a C:etition for t"e ;ssuance of 3%nerJs 0u#licate (ertificates in lieu of Lost 3.(.T. ?os. :-121/8, :-121/5, :-12111, and :-58//.C 4ection 2 of :.0. ?o. 1/25 states t"at (ourts of Eirst ;nstance ((E;) s"all "a!e e,clusi!e &urisdiction o!er all a##lications for original registration of title to lands including i*#ro!e*ents and interests t"erein, and over all petitions filed after ori&inal re&istration of title! %it" #o%er to "ear and deter*ine all 'uestions arising u#on suc" a##lications or #etitions. Fnder ("a#ter M of t"e decree entitled CPetitions and "ctions "fter $ri&inal )e&istrationC is 4ection 105 %"ic" go!erns #etitions for issuance of lost or stolen o%nerJs du#licate certificate of title. (learly, #etitions for re#lace*ent of lost du#licate certificates, as in +iscellaneous (ase ?o. 1121, are cogni>a)le )y t"e <T(s. ?o%, on t"e !enue or t"e #lace %"ere suc" #etitions *ay )e instituted. 4ection 12 of :.0. ?o. 1/25 #ro!ides t"at t"e a##lication for land registration s"all )e filed %it" t"e C*+ (no% <T() of the province or city where the land lies. Fnder 4ection 108 of t"e sa*e decree, all #etitions *otions after original registration s"all )e filed and entitled in t"e original case in %"ic" t"e decree of registration %as entered. ?ota)ly, t"e certificates in!ol!ed in +iscellaneous (ase ?o. 1121 %ere eac" o)tained not #ursuant to a decree issued in a &udicial registration #roceeding, )ut #ursuant to a #atent issued )y t"e 0irector of Lands and registered in accordance %it" 4ection 122 of Act ?o. 451 (no% 4ection 10- of :.0. ?o. 1/25). ?e!ert"eless, a##lying 4ections 2, 12, 108, and 105 of :.0. ?o. 1/25, %e *ay say t"at t"e #etition for re#lace*ent of lost du#licate certificates in +iscellaneous (ase ?o. 1121 %as #ro#erly ta9en cogni>ance of )y ranc" ; of t"e <T( of 0a!ao del ?orte #resided )y t"e res#ondent Judge, since t"at #etition stated t"at t"e lots co!ered )y t"e lost du#licates are situated in La#along and 4to. To*as %"ic" are )ot" in t"e #ro!ince of 0a!ao del ?orte. $ence, no lac9 of &urisdiction, gross ignorance of la%, or gross ine,cusa)le negligence can )e ascri)ed to t"e res#ondent Judge. Legim Discipulo: Anne Lorraine Co & Meiki Merlin (Civil Procedure Case Digest) (.rror of &urisdiction distinguis"ed fro* error of &udg*ent) "ERN1NDO V. HON. V1,DUEB G.<. ?o. L-21412, January -0, 1520 "acts= Eernando, o%ner of t"e #ro#erty, as9ed res#ondents 4#s. 4antos to !acate t"e 2 nd floor of t"e )uilding )ut t"ey refused so #etitioner filed a co*#laint for unla%ful detainer in t"e (ity (ourt of +anila. (ity (ourt of +anila rendered &udg*ent in fa!or of #etitioner. <es#ondent s#ouses filed a #etition 'uestioning t"e &urisdiction of t"e city court o!er t"e unla%ful detainer case )efore t"e (E; of +anila. T"e &udge declared t"e city court %it"out &urisdiction o!er t"e unla%ful detainer case and nullified t"e #roceedings t"erein, including t"e %rit of e,ecution. :etitioner "erein atte*#ted to a##eal fro* t"is &udg*ent. Issu#= 8"et"er or not t"e res#ondent &udge of first instance co**itted an error of &urisdiction. H#8d= ?o. ;f error t"ere %as, it %as si*#ly an error of &udg*ent in "is a##reciation of t"e facts and t"e la%. T"e &udge concededly "ad t"e &urisdiction to render t"e &udg*ent under re!ie%. ;f e!er "e co**itted a *ista9e on t"e *erits of t"e case, it %as in t"e e,ercise of suc" &urisdiction. T"e error )eing one of &udg*ent, not of &urisdiction, #etitionerJs re*edy is a##eal, not certiorari. And, t"e #etition for certiorari fails of its #ur#ose. HAn error of &udg*ent is one %"ic" t"e court *ay co**it in t"e e,ercise of its &urisdiction. An error of &urisdiction renders an order or &udg*ent !oid or !oida)le. .rrors of &urisdiction are re!ie%a)le on certiorariG errors of &udg*ent, only )y a##eal. H ($o% &urisdiction is conferred and deter*ined) ,OGOD V. HON. RO,1L G.<. ?o. L--8204, 4e#te*)er 24, 1551 "acts= (ongress #assed <A ?o. /22 creating t"e *unici#ality of ontoc, for*erly a )arrio of t"e *unici#ality of 4ogod. A )oundary dis#ute later arose )et%een t"e *unici#ality of ontoc and t"e *unici#ality of 4ogod %it" t"e latter clai*ing t"at t"e for*er e,ercised &urisdiction. :res. Garcia #ro*ulgated ..3. ?o. -18, %"ic" a##ro!ed t"e reco**endation of t"e #ro!incial )oard of Leyte, and reconstituted t"e )arrios and sitios %"ic" s"ag co*#ose t"e *unici#alities of ontoc and 4ogod. T"e e,ecuti!e order also s#ecified Granada (ree9 as t"e )oundary line se#arating ontoc and 4ogod. T"e :ro!incial oard of 4out"ern Leyte #assed <esolution ?o. 12 sus#ending t"e i*#le*entation of ..3. -18. T"e oard also created a co**ittee to conduct t"e "olding of a #le)iscite in t"e )arrios and sitios affected )y .,ecuti!e 3rder -18 and to finally settle t"e )oundary dis#ute. T"e *unici#ality of 4ogod filed a ci!il case for certiorari and #ro"i)ition %it" t"e (E; of 4out"ern Leyte to en&oin t"e #ro!incial )oard and #ro!incial go!ernor fro* ta9ing cogni>ance of t"e long #ending )oundary dis#ute )et%een t"e t%o *unici#alities and to en&oin t"e *unici#ality of ontoc fro* e,ercising territorial &urisdiction o!er t"e )arrios all allegedly )elonging to t"e *unici#ality of 4ogod. T"e trial court dis*issed t"e action for lac9 of &urisdiction o!er t"e su)&ect *atter of t"e case. T"e #etition %as filed alleging t"at t"e res#ondent &udge acted %it" gra!e a)use of discretion in dis*issing t"e case. Issu#= 8"et"er or not t"e trial court "as t"e aut"ority to decide on t"e *unici#al )oundary dis#ute. H#8d= ?o. T"e court ruled t"at t"e trial court acted correctly in dis*issing t"e cases for %ant of &urisdiction and in allo%ing t"e #ro!incial )oard to continue %it" t"e #ending in!estigation and #roceedings on t"e )oundary dis#ute. HJurisdiction "as )een defined as t"e #o%er and aut"ority to "ear and deter*ine a cause or t"e rig"t to act in a case. Jurisdiction is conferred only )y t"e (onstitution or )y la%. ;t cannot )e fi,ed )y t"e %ill of t"e #arties nor can it )e ac'uired or di*inis"ed )y any act of t"e #arties. ;n deter*ining %"et"er a case lies %it"in or outside t"e &urisdiction of a court, reference to t"e a##lica)le statute on t"e *atter is indis#ensa)le. ;t is a settled rule t"at &urisdiction of a court is deter*ined )y t"e statute in force at t"e ti*e of co**ence*ent of action.I At t"e ti*e t"e ci!il actions %ere filed %it" t"e trial court )y #etitioner *unici#ality in 1520, t"e a##lica)le la%s necessary for t"e deter*ination of t"e 'uestion of %"et"er t"e trial court "as t"e aut"ority to decide on t"e *unici#al )oundary dis#ute are t"e follo%ingD 1) <e#u)lic Act ?o. /22, creating t"e *unici#ality of ontocG 2) <e#u)lic Act ?o. -/50, t"e <e!ised arrio ("arter, re!ising <e#u)lic Act ?o. 2-20G and -) 4ection 2112 of t"e <e!ised Ad*inistrati!e (ode of 1512. T"e la% t"en !ested t"e rig"t to settle )oundary dis#utes )et%een *unici#alities on t"e #ro!incial )oard #ursuant to 4ection 2112 of t"e <e!ised Ad*inistrati!e (ode. ;t is clear t"at t"e aut"ority to "ear and resol!e *unici#al )oundary dis#utes )elongs to t"e #ro!incial )oards and not to t"e trial courts. T"e decisions of t"e )oards are t"en a##eala)le to t"e .,ecuti!e 4ecretary. :etitioner *unici#ality s"ould "a!e ele!ated t"e *atter of delay to t"e t"en 4ecretary of ;nterior (no% .,ecuti!e 4ecretary) for action instead of )ringing it to t"e trial court. Alt"oug" e,isting la%s t"en !ested on t"e #ro!incial )oard t"e #o%er to deter*ine or e!en alter *unici#al )oundaries, t"e 4ecretary of ;nterior or t"e .,ecuti!e 0e#art*ent for t"at *atter, %as not #recluded during t"at ti*e fro* ta9ing necessary ste#s for t"e s#eedy settle*ent of t"e )oundary dis#ute. ;n Pelae, v. "uditor -eneral! ?o. L-2-82/, 0ece*)er 24, 151/, 1/ 4(<A /15, %"ic" a##lied <e#u)lic Act ?o. 2-20, 9no%n as t"e arrio ("arter, 8e "eld t"at t"e #o%er to fi, co**on )oundaries in order to a!oid or settle conflicts of &urisdiction )et%een ad&oining *unici#alities *ay also #arta9e of an ad*inistrati!e nature t"at can )e decided )y t"e ad*inistrati!e de#art*ent, in!ol!ing as it does, t"e ado#tion of *eans and %ays to carry into effect t"e la%s creating said *unici#alities. Legim Discipulo: Anne Lorraine Co & Meiki Merlin (Civil Procedure Case Digest) (0octrine of :ri*ary Jurisdiction) G41 NE*EOR< INC. V. 1B,3CBN BRO1DC1,*ING CORP., G.<. ?o. 11020-, 4e#te*)er 2-, 200/ "acts= G+A ?et%or9 filed )efore t"e <T( of A( a co*#laint for da*ages against A4-(? alleging t"at res#ondents engaged in unfair co*#etition %"en t"e ca)le co*#anies ar)itrarily re- c"anneled #etitionerJs ca)le tele!ision )roadcast on Ee)ruary 1, 200-, in order to arrest and destroy its u#s%ing #erfor*ance in t"e tele!ision industry. G+A argued t"at res#ondents %ere a)le to #er#etrate suc" unfair )usiness #ractice t"roug" a co**on o%ners"i# and interloc9ing )usinesses. :ursuant to a +aster (onsolidation Agree*ent, t"e o%ners"i#, rig"ts and interests in 49y =ision and Fnilin9 %ere #ur#ortedly #laced under a "olding co*#any 9no%n as Jeyond (a)leJ, is o%ned )y t"e en#res Grou#, co*#osed of Lo#e> ;nc., en#res $oldings and A4-(?, and :L0T Grou#. As a result of t"is )usiness co*)ination, res#ondents "a!e cornered at least 21N of t"e total ca)le tele!ision *ar9et in +ega +anila. T"ey are t"us a)le to dictate t"e signal trans*ission, c"annel #osition, and t"e airing of s"o%s, #rogra*s, and )roadcast of non-ca)le co*#anies %"ic" t"e la% re'uires t"e* to carry. G+A alleged t"at t"e re-c"anneling of its ca)le tele!ision )roadcast resulted in da*age to its )usiness o#erations. T"e trial court issued t"e assailed resolution dis*issing t"e co*#laint. T"e trial court "eld t"at t"e resolution of t"e legal issues raised in t"e co*#laint re'uired t"e deter*ination of "ig"ly tec"nical, factual issues o!er %"ic" t"e ?T( "ad #ri*ary &urisdiction. Issu#= 8"et"er or not ?T( (?ational Teleco**unications (o**ission) "as #ri*ary &urisdiction o!er #etitioner7s co*#laint for da*ages. H#8d= 6es. T"e (ourt ruled t"at t"e factual *atters undou)tedly #ertain to t"e ?T( and not t"e regular courts. T"e co*#laint failed to state a cause of action against A4-(? and t"e ot"er res#ondents, considering t"at t"e ulti*ate facts u#on %"ic" t"e co*#laint for da*ages de#ends fall %it"in t"e tec"nical co*#etence of an ad*inistrati!e )ody. H;t *ay occur t"at t"e (ourt "as &urisdiction to ta9e cogni>ance of a #articular case, %"ic" *eans t"at t"e *atter in!ol!ed is also &udicial in c"aracter. $o%e!er, if t"e case is suc" t"at its deter*ination re'uires t"e e,#ertise, s#eciali>ed s9ills and 9no%ledge of t"e #ro#er ad*inistrati!e )odies )ecause tec"nical *atters or intricate 'uestions of facts are in!ol!ed, t"en relief *ust first )e o)tained in an ad*inistrati!e #roceeding )efore a re*edy %ill )e su##lied )y t"e courts e!en t"oug" t"e *atter is %it"in t"e #ro#er &urisdiction of a court. T"is is t"e doctrin# o@ -ri)ar% ;urisdiction. ;t a##lies C%"ere a clai* is originally cogni>a)le in t"e courts, and co*es into #lay %"ene!er enforce*ent of t"e clai* re'uires t"e resolution of issues %"ic", under a regulatory sc"e*e, "a!e )een #laced %it"in t"e s#ecial co*#etence of an ad*inistrati!e )odyG in suc" case t"e &udicial #rocess is sus#ended #ending referral of suc" issues to t"e ad*inistrati!e )ody for its !ie%.I (onse'uently, %"ile it is true t"at t"e regular courts are #ossessed of general &urisdiction o!er actions for da*ages, it %ould nonet"eless )e #ro#er for t"e courts to yield its &urisdiction in fa!or of an ad*inistrati!e )ody %"en t"e deter*ination of underlying factual issues re'uires t"e s#ecial co*#etence or 9no%ledge of t"e latter. ;n t"is era of clogged court doc9ets, ad*inistrati!e )oards or co**issions %it" s#ecial 9no%ledge, e,#erience and ca#a)ility to #ro*#tly "ear and deter*ine dis#utes on tec"nical *atters or intricate 'uestions of facts, su)&ect to &udicial re!ie% in case of gra!e a)use of discretion, are %ell nig" indis#ensa)le. et%een t"e #o%er lodged in an ad*inistrati!e )ody and a court, t"erefore, t"e un*ista9a)le trend is to refer it to t"e for*er. (0octrine of Ad"erence of Jurisdiction) B1L*1B1R V. C1 G.<. ?o L-40151, +ay 22, 1581 "acts= :ri!ate res#ondent, t"e o%ner of t"e su)&ect #ro#erty, instituted a (o*#laint for .&ect*ent against #etitioner )efore t"e (ourt of Agrarian <elations. :etitioner clai*ed t"at t"e for*er lando%ner, in !iolation of sections 11 and 1- of t"e (ode of Agrarian <efor*s (<.A. -844 %"ic" too9 effect in 151- until a*ended )y <.A. 18-5 in 1521) sold t"e #ro#erties %it"out gi!ing "i* notice, and registered t"e sale %it"out t"e re'uired Affida!it to t"e effect t"at t"e notice re'uire*ent "ad )een co*#lied %it". y %ay of counter-clai*, #etitioner e,ercised "is rig"t of rede*#tion and t"e Agrarian (ourt u#"eld #etitionerJs rig"t of rede*#tion and ordered #ri!ate res#ondent to con!ey t"e #ro#erties to "i*. 3n a##eal to t"e (ourt of A##eals, "o%e!er, t"e co*#laint for e&ect*ent %as dis*issed )ased on t"e status quo pro!ision of :residential 0ecrees ?os. 22 and -11 %"ic" %ere )ot" issued during t"e #endency of t"e a##eal. $ence, t"is #etition. Issu#= 8"et"er or not #etitioner can !alidly e,ercised "is rig"t of rede*#tion. H#8d= 6es. T"e 4( ruled t"at :residential 0ecrees ?os. 22 and -11 *ay not )e a##lied retroacti!ely, so t"at #etitioner, %"o is entitled to t"e rig"t of #re-e*#tion and rede*#tion under t"e #ro!isions of <.A. -844, t"e la% t"en in force, "ad !alidly e,ercised "is rig"t to redee*, "is rig"t of #ree*#tion not "a!ing )een *ade a!aila)le to "i* due to lac9 of notice of t"e sale. ;t is a funda*ental #ostulate in statutory construction t"at Cla%s s"all "a!e no retroacti!e effect, unless t"e contrary is #ro!ided.. 8ell-settled is t"e #rinci#le t"at 8"ile t"e Legislature "as t"e #o%er to #ass retroacti!e la%s %"ic" do not i*#air t"e o)ligation of contracts, or affect in&uriously !ested rig"ts, it is e'ually true t"at statutes are not to )e construed as intended to "a!e a retroacti!e effect so as to affect #ending #roceedings, unless suc" intent is e,#ressly declared or clearly and necessarily i*#lied fro* t"e language of t"e enact*ent. T"ere )eing no e,#ress nor clearly i*#lied aut"ori>ation e*)odied in :0 ?os. 22 and -11 allo%ing retros#ecti!e a##lication, #ros#ecti!e construction is called for. T"e funda*ental #olicy o)&ecti!es of our agrarian la%s, inclusi!e of :0 22 and -11, are ac"ie!ed and u#"eld )y according to #etitioner t"e rig"t to redee*, a !ested rig"t %"ic" "e "ad ac'uired under t"e (ode of Agrarian <efor*s and of %"ic" "e cannot )e de#ri!ed )y su)se'uent legislation. ;n Cabatan vs. Court of "ppeals! et al. 5/ 4(<A -2-, -4/ (1580)- +r. Justice Guiller*o 4antos %rote t"e o#inion for t"e (ourt t"usD Eurt"er, on #etitionerJs contention t"at t"e cases s"ould "a!e Legim Discipulo: Anne Lorraine Co & Meiki Merlin (Civil Procedure Case Digest) )een dis*issed for lac9 of &urisdiction O on t"e ground of t"e a)sence of a certification of tria)ility )y t"e +inistry of Agrarian <efor* O t"e records s"o% t"at t"e cases %ere initiated in t"e (A< in 1521. :res. 0ecrees ?os. -11 and /8- in!o9ed )y t"e #etitioners in assailing t"e (A<J4 e,ercise of &urisdiction o!er t"e cases and deciding t"e sa*e %ere #ro*ulgated only on 3cto)er 21, 1522 and 3cto)er 22, 152-, res#ecti!ely. +t is a fundamental postulate that once a court has taken jurisdiction over a case! its authority can not be affected adversely by a subsequent statute prescribin& a precondition before the Court may take co&ni,ance of the case. (3)&ections to &urisdiction o!er t"e su)&ect *atter) DIL> D1N> N1CPIL V. IN*ERN1*ION1L BRO1DC1,*ING G.<. ?o 144212, +arc" 21, 2002 "acts= :etitioner %as t"e Assistant General +anager for EinanceBAd*inistration and (o*#troller of #ri!ate res#ondent ;ntercontinental roadcasting (or#oration (;() fro* 1551 until A#ril 1552. F#on assu*#tion of Te*#lo as t"e ;( :resident, #etitioner %as forced to retire. Te*#lo refused to #ay "i* "is retire*ent )enefits. $ence #etitioner filed %it" t"e La)or Ar)iter a co*#laint for illegal dis*issal and non-#ay*ent of )enefits. ;( alleged t"at t"e La)or Ar)iter "ad no &urisdiction o!er t"e case, t"at t"e #etitioner %as a cor#orate officer %"o %as duly elected )y t"e oard of 0irectors of ;(.$ence, t"e case 'ualifies as an intra-cor#orate dis#ute falling %it"in t"e &urisdiction of t"e 4ecurities and .,c"ange (o**ission (4.(). :etitioner argued t"at "e %as not a cor#orate officer of t"e ;( )ut an e*#loyee t"ereof since "e "ad not )een elected nor a##ointed as (o*#troller and Assistant +anager )y t"e ;(Js oard of 0irectors. $e #ointed out t"at "e "ad actually )een a##ointed on January 11, 155/ )y t"e ;(Js General +anager. Issu#= 8"et"er or not t"e La)or Ar)iter "ad &urisdiction o!er t"e case for illegal dis*issal and non-#ay*ent of )enefits filed )y #etitioner. H#8d= ?o. 0is*issal or non-a##oint*ent of a cor#orate officer is clearly an intra-cor#orate *atter and &urisdiction o!er t"e case #ro#erly )elongs to t"e 4.(, not to t"e ?L<(. Fnder :residential 0ecree ?o. 502-A (t"e <e!ised 4ecurities Act), (ontro!ersies in t"e election or a##oint*ent of directors, trustees, officers, or *anagers of suc" cor#orations, #artners"i#s or associations fall under t"e e,clusi!e of t"e 4.( (4ecurities and .,c"ange (o**ission). T%o ele*ents are to )e considered in deter*ining %"et"er t"e 4.( "as &urisdiction o!er t"e contro!ersy, to %itD (1) t"e status or relations"i# of t"e #artiesG and (2) t"e nature of t"e 'uestion t"at is t"e su)&ect of t"eir contro!ersy. 4ince co*#lainantJs a##oint*ent %as a##ro!ed unani*ously )y t"e oard of 0irectors of t"e cor#oration, "e is t"erefore considered a cor#orate officer and "is clai* of illegal dis*issal is a contro!ersy t"at falls under t"e &urisdiction of t"e 4.( as conte*#lated )y 4ection / of :.0. 502-A. T"at t"e #osition of (o*#troller is not e,#ressly *entioned a*ong t"e officers of t"e ;( in t"e y-La%s is of no *o*ent, )ecause t"e ;(Js oard of 0irectors is e*#o%ered under 4ection 2/ of t"e (or#oration (ode and under t"e cor#orationJs y-La%s to a##oint suc" ot"er officers as it *ay dee* necessary. (.ffect of esto##el on o)&ections to &urisdiction) *IJ14 V. ,IBONGH1NO> G.<. ?o. L-214/0, A#ril 1/, 1518 "acts= Ti&a* filed for reco!ery of :1,508 #lus legal interest fro* 4i)onga"anoy. 0efendants filed a counter )ond %it" +anila 4urety and Eidelity (o (4urety). Judge*ent %as in fa!our of t"e #laintiffs, a %rit of e,ecution %as issued against t"e defendant. 0efendants *o!ed for %rit of e,ecution against surety %"ic" %as granted. 4urety *o!ed to 'uas" t"e %rit )ut %as denied, a##ealed to (A %it"out raising t"e issue on lac9 of &urisdiction. (A affir*ed t"e a##ealed decision. 4urety t"en filed +otion to 0is*iss on t"e ground of lac9 of &urisdiction against (E; (e)u in !ie% of t"e effecti!ity of Judiciary Act of 1548 a *ont" )efore t"e filing of t"e #etition for reco!ery. Act #laced original e,clusi!e &urisdiction of inferior courts all ci!il actions for de*ands not e,ceeding 2,000 e,clusi!e of interest. (A set aside its earlier decision and referred t"e case to 4( since it "as e,clusi!e &urisdiction o!er Call cases in %"ic" t"e &urisdiction of any inferior court is in issue. Issu#= 8"et"er or not t"e 4urety )ond is esto##ed fro* 'uestioning t"e &urisdiction of t"e (E; (e)u for t"e first ti*e u#on a##eal. H#8d= 6es. T"oug" it is clear t"at t"e case is outside t"e &urisdiction of t"e of t"e <egional Trial of (e)u, defendants %ere esto##ed fro* 'uestioning t"e courtJs &urisdiction. T"e (ourt e,#lained Ca #arty *ay )e esto##ed or )arred fro* raising a 'uestion in different %ays and for different reasons. T"us %e s#ea9 of esto##el in pais, or esto##el )y deed or )y record, and of esto##el )y laches. Lac"es, in a general sense is failure or neglect, for an unreasona)le and une,#lained lengt" of ti*e, to do t"at %"ic", )y e,ercising due diligence, could or s"ould "a!e )een done earlierG it is negligence or o*ission to assert a rig"t %it"in a reasona)le ti*e, %arranting a #resu*#tion t"at t"e #arty entitled to assert it eit"er "as a)andoned it or declined to assert it. T"e doctrine of lac"es or of Cstale de*andsC is )ased u#on grounds of #u)lic #olicy %"ic" re'uires, for t"e #eace of society, t"e discourage*ent of stale clai*s and, unli9e t"e statute of li*itations, is not a *ere 'uestion of ti*e )ut is #rinci#ally a 'uestion of t"e ine'uity or unfairness of #er*itting a rig"t or clai* to )e enforced or asserted. A #arty can not in!o9e t"e &urisdiction of a court to sure affir*ati!e relief against "is o##onent and, after o)taining or failing to o)tain suc" relief, re#udiate or 'uestion t"at sa*e &urisdiction. T"e 'uestion %"et"er t"e court "ad &urisdiction eit"er of t"e su)&ect-*atter of t"e action or of t"e #arties %as not i*#ortant in suc" cases )ecause t"e #arty is )arred fro* suc" conduct not because the jud&ment or order of the court is valid and conclusive as an adjudication! but for the reason that such a practice can not be tolerated O o)!iously for reasons of #u)lic #olicy. T"e facts of t"is case s"o% t"at fro* t"e ti*e t"e 4urety )eca*e a 'uasi-#arty, it could "a!e raised t"e 'uestion of t"e lac9 of &urisdiction Pit only raised t"e 'uestion of &urisdiction after 1/ yearsQ of t"e (ourt of Eirst ;nstance of (e)u to ta9e cogni>ance of t"e #resent action )y reason of t"e su* of *oney in!ol!ed %"ic", according to t"e la% t"en in force, %as %it"in t"e original e,clusi!e Legim Discipulo: Anne Lorraine Co & Meiki Merlin (Civil Procedure Case Digest) &urisdiction of inferior courts. ;t failed to do so. ;nstead, at se!eral stages of t"e #roceedings in t"e court a quo as %ell as in t"e (ourt of A##eals, it in!o9ed t"e &urisdiction of said courts to o)tain affir*ati!e relief and su)*itted its case for a final ad&udication on t"e *erits. ;t %as only after an ad!erse decision %as rendered )y t"e (ourt of A##eals t"at it finally %o9e u# to raise t"e 'uestion of &urisdiction. (Jurisdiction o!er t"e issues) L1BO V. REPUBLIC ,URE*> G.<. ?o. L-22-1/, January -0, 1520 "acts= 4#s La>o, acting as guarantors <o)les, %it" a loan o)tained )y t"e latter fro* t"e :"ili##ine an9 of (o**erce, a real estate *ortgage in fa!or of t"e defendant <e#u)lic 4urety R ;nsurance (o., ;nc. in consideration of its "a!ing consented to act as #rinci#al co- de)tor for t"e loan aforesaid. T"e *ortgage %as foreclosed e,tra-&udicially and sold to t"e *ortgagee.(ertificate of title in t"e na*e of t"e s#ouses La>o %as cancelled and a ne% one issued in t"e na*e of t"e defendant co*#any. T"e foreclosure of t"e *ortgage %as in!alid )ecause #laintiff <o)les "ad #aid on t"e *ortgage loan, "e continued to *a9e ot"er #ay*ents. T"e #rinci#al #rayer of t"e #laintiffs %as for t"e defendant co*#any to render an accounting of t"e #ay*ents t"us *ade. T"e trial court did not resol!e t"e *otion to dis*iss categorically, )ut in an order, set t"e case for trial, %it" t"e ad!ertence t"at Ce!idence on %"et"er or not t"e action "as #rescri)ed s"all first )e #resented ... and t"en t"e court %ill consider t"e sa*e ... as #art of t"e e!idence on t"e *erits.C After t"e #laintiffs filed t"eir a*ended co*#laint, t"e defendants ans%ered t"e sa*e, alleging inter alia t"at all t"e #ay*ents *ade )y t"e #laintiffs after t"e foreclosure sale %ere *ade in t"e conce#t of rents, for %"ic" t"e defendant co*#any %as under no o)ligation to render an accounting. Issu#= 8"et"er or not actuation of t"e trial court %as legally #er*issi)le. H#8d= ?o. T"e (ourt ruled t"at t"e actuation of t"e trial court %as not legally #er*issi)le es#ecially )ecause t"e t"eory on %"ic" it #roceeded in!ol!ed factual considerations neit"er touc"ed u#on t"e #leadings nor *ade t"e su)&ect of e!idence at t"e trial. <ule 1, 4ection 1, is 'uite e,#licit in #ro!iding t"at C#leadings are t"e %ritten allegations of t"e #arties of t"eir res#ecti!e claims and defenses submitted to the court for trial and jud&ment.C T"is rule "as )een consistently a##lied and ad"ered to )y t"e courts. T"e su)&ect *atter of any gi!en case is deter*ined ... )y t"e nature and c"aracter of t"e #leadings su)*itted )y t"e #arties to t"e court for trial and &udg*ent. .elandres vs. /ope, #u&ar Central Mill Co.! +nc.! 52 :"il. 100, 10-. ;t is a funda*ental #rinci#le t"at &udg*ents *ust confor* to )ot" t"e #leadings and t"e #roof, and *ust )e in accordance %it" t"e t"eory of t"e action u#on %"ic" t"e #leadings %ere fra*ed and t"e case %as triedG t"at a #arty can no *ore succeed u#on a case #ro!ed. )ut not alleged, t"an u#on one alleged )ut not #ro!ed.C (<a*on !. 3rtu>ar, 85 :"il. 2-0, 242) ;t is a %ell-9no%n #rinci#le in #rocedure t"at courts of &ustice "a!e no &urisdiction or #o%er to decide a 'uestion not in issue.C (Li* Toco !s. Go :ay, 80 :"il. 111) A &udg*ent going outside t"e issues and #ur#orting to ad&udicate so*et"ing u#on %"ic" t"e #arties %ere not "eard, is not *erely irregular, )ut e,tra&udicial and in!alid.C (4al!ante !. (ru>, 88 :"il. 2-1, 244.) T"e #arties "ere %ent to court and #resented t"eir res#ecti!e sides on t"e #re*ise, ad*itted )y )ot", t"at t"e *ortgage %as !alid and su)sisting. .!idence, t"erefore, to esta)lis" suc" #re*ise %as unnecessary and uncalled for. ;ndeed, it %as for t"at reason and )ecause in any e!ent t"e record of t"is case, #articularly %it" res#ect to t"e actuations of t"e #arties after t"e *ortgage %as foreclosed, s"o%s %it" o!er%"el*ing #re#onderance t"at t"e said *ortgage "ad not )een e,tinguis"ed, t"at t"is (ourt did not consider fa!ora)ly t"e defendant co*#anyJs #etitions to su)*it a #"otostat of t"e first #ro*issory note, and signed du#licates of t"e t"ree rene%al notes, e,ecuted )y t"e #laintiffs in fa!or of <e#u)lic ;n!est*ent (o., ;nc. )earing not only t"eir signatures as de)tors )ut also t"e signatures of t"e defendants co*#any as solidary co-de)tor O all t"ese )eing e!idence %"ic" t"e said defendant could "a!e su)*itted at t"e trial if t"e !alidity and e,istence of t"e *ortgage "ad )een a contentious issue raised in t"e #leadings. T"at t"e co#y of t"e note in t"e "ands of t"e #laintiffs does not )ear t"e signature of t"e defendant co*#any is not decisi!e of t"e latterJs lia)ility, t"e #ri*ary e!idence t"ereof )eing t"e original of t"e said note in t"e "ands of t"e creditor, to %"o*, after all, t"e rig"t to reco!er e,clusi!ely )elonged. (Jurisdiction o!er t"e res or #ro#erty in litigation) B1NCO E,P1COL3"ILIPINO V, P1L1NC1 Gr. ?o. L-11-50, +arc" 21, 1518 "acts= anco .s#anol-Eili#ino foreclose a *ortgage u#on !arious #arcels of real #ro#erty in +anila city..ngracio :alanca Tan'uinyeng y Li*'uingco original defendant as security for a de)t o%ing )y "i* to t"e )an9. 8"ic" is not a non-resident at t"at ti*e, and died during t"e case. ;t %as declared t"at in case of t"e failure of t"e defendant to satisfy t"e &udg*ent %it"in suc" #eriod, t"e *ortgage #ro#erty s"ould )e e,#osed to #u)lic sale. And so t"e #ro#erty %as )oug"t )y t"e )an9. 4e!en years later, after confir*ation of t"e sold #ro#erty, a *otion %as *ade )y =icente :alanca. Eollo%ed )y a##eals. Jurisdiction o!er t"e #ro#erty %"ic" is t"e su)&ect of t"e litigation *ay result eit"er fro* a sei>ure of t"e #ro#erty under legal #rocess, or fro* t"e institution of legal #roceedings, %"erein t"e -o:#r o@ t/# court o!er #ro#erty is recogni>ed and *ade effecti!e. T"e court in fact entered a #ersonal &udg*ent against t"e a)sent de)tor for t"e full a*ount of t"e inde)tedness secured )y t"e *ortgage. T"e re'uire*ent is t"at t"e &udge s"all direct t"at t"e notice )e de#osited in t"e *ail )y t"e cler9 of t"e court and it is not in ter*s declared t"at t"e notice *ust )e de#osited in t"e *ail. T"e a)sent o%ner of t"e *ortgaged #ro#erty *ust ta9e t"e ris9 incident to t"e #ossi)le failure of t"e cler9 to #erfor* "is duty, t"e act is #ut effectually )eyond t"e control of t"e #laintiff in t"e litigation. T"e o)ser!ation %"ic" lead to t"e conclusion t"at t"e Legim Discipulo: Anne Lorraine Co & Meiki Merlin (Civil Procedure Case Digest) failure of t"e cler9 to *ail t"e notice is not suc" an irregularity %ould not a!oid t"e &udg*ent in t"is case. ;f t"e re'uire*ents as to t"e *ailing of notice s"ould )e considered as a ste# antecedent to t"e ac'uiring of &urisdiction, t"ere is no esca#e t"at t"e failure to ta9e t"at ste# %as fatal to t"e !alidity of t"e &udg*ent. T"e #ro!ision of Act of (ongress declaring t"at no #erson s"all )e de#ri!ed of "is #ro#erty %it"out due #rocess of la% "as not )een infringed. Issu#= 8"et"er or not court ac'uired t"e necessary &urisdiction to ena)le t"e #roceedings %it" t"e foreclosure of t"e *ortgage. H#8d= Tan'uinyeng is a non-resident and "a!ing refused to a##ear in court !oluntarily, t"e court ne!er ac'uired &urisdiction o!er "i*. T"is is, "o%e!er, not essential since t"e foreclosure of *ortgage is an action 'uasi in re* and %"at is essential is t"e court7s &urisdiction o!er t"e res. Jurisdiction o!er t"e #ro#erty is )ased on t"e follo%ingD (1) T"at t"e #ro#erty is located %it"in t"e districtG (2) T"at t"e #ur#ose of t"e litigation is to su)&ect t"e #ro#erty )y sale to an o)ligation fi,ed u#on it )y t"e *ortgageG and (-) T"at t"e court at a #ro#er stage of t"e #roceedings ta9es t"e #ro#erty into custody,if necessary, and e,#ose it to sale for t"e #ur#ose of satisfying t"e *ortgage de)t. And since &urisdiction is e,lusi!ely o!er #ro#erty, t"e relief granted )y t"e court *ust )e li*ited only to t"at %"ic" can )een forced against t"e #ro#erty itself. T"erefore, %"ate!er *ay )e t"e effect in ot"er res#ects of t"e failure of t"e (ler9 of t"e (ourt to *ail t"e #ro#er #a#ers to t"e defendant in A*oy, ("ina, suc" irregularity could i*#air or defeat t"e &urisdiction of t"e court. Legim Discipulo: Anne Lorraine Co & Meiki Merlin (Civil Procedure Case Digest)