25 Gonzales V GJH Land Inc
25 Gonzales V GJH Land Inc
_______________
* EN BANC.
243
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000168ecd969a73728a91d003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 1/33
2/15/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 774
244
245
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000168ecd969a73728a91d003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 3/33
2/15/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 774
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000168ecd969a73728a91d003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 4/33
2/15/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 774
246
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000168ecd969a73728a91d003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 5/33
2/15/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 774
No. 8799 did not transfer the cases enumerated under Section 5 of
Presidential Decree (PD) No. 902-A to all the Regional Trial
Courts (RTCs).—Section 5, Item 5.2 of R.A. No. 8799 did not
transfer the cases enu-
247
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000168ecd969a73728a91d003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 6/33
2/15/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 774
248
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000168ecd969a73728a91d003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 7/33
2/15/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 774
249
the general jurisdiction of the RTC under Sec. 19 of B.P. Blg. 129.
The mere filing of the Complaint before the Office of the Clerk of
Court in the RTC of Muntinlupa City, in the official station of the
designated Special Commercial Court as what occurred herein, is
not equivalent to the correct and proper filing of the Complaint
before the appropriate Regional Trial Court specially designated
by the Supreme Court to hear and decide cases enumerated under
Section 5 of P.D. No. 902-A. Branch 276 of the RTC, to which the
Complaint was consequently raffled, in the exercise of its general
jurisdiction, cannot order the transfer of the Complaint to Branch
256, the designated Special Commercial Court. Branch 276
cannot do so on the basis of authority over the case which it did
not have. Neither does it have authority over a coequal court.
Same; Same; Same; Same; View that courts should not
themselves correct the procedural mistakes of pleaders.—Indeed,
We
250
251
252
253
PERLAS-BERNABE, J.:
This is a direct recourse to the Court, via a petition for
review on certiorari,1 from the Orders dated April 17, 20122
and July 9, 20123 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000168ecd969a73728a91d003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 12/33
2/15/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 774
_______________
254
_______________
7 Rollo, p. 44.
8 Id., at p. 47.
9 Id., at pp. 90-91.
10 Id., at pp. 92-97.
11 Id., at p. 14.
12 Dated February 7, 2011. (Id., at pp. 98-114)
13 Id., at pp. 107-110.
14 Id., at pp. 34-38.
255
Act No. (RA) 8799,19 but since the Court selected specific
branches to hear and decide such suits, the case must, at
most, be transferred or raffled off to the proper branch.20
In an Order21 dated July 9, 2012, Branch 276 denied the
motion for reconsideration, holding that it has no authority
or power to order the transfer of the case to the proper
Special Commercial Court, citing Calleja v. Panday22
(Calleja); hence, the present petition.
_______________
15 Id., at p. 37.
16 Dated May 8, 2012. Id., at pp. 152-160.
17 Id., at pp. 152-154.
18 Id., at pp. 154-155.
19 Otherwise known as “The Securities Regulation Code.”
20 Rollo, p. 155.
21 Id., at pp. 39-41.
22 518 Phil. 801; 483 SCRA 680 (2006).
256
_______________
23 Rollo, p. 37.
24 See Medical Plaza Makati Condominium Corporation v. Cullen,
G.R. No. 181416, November 11, 2013, 709 SCRA 110, 120-121; citations
omitted.
25 Entitled “Re: Consolidation of Intellectual Property Courts with
Commercial Courts” (July 1, 2003). Prior to A.M. No. 03-03-03-SC,
however, the Court had already issued several resolutions in A.M. No. 00-
11-03-SC (entitled “Resolution Designating Certain Branches of Regional
Trial Courts to Try and Decide Cases Formerly Cognizable by the
Securities and Exchange Commission” [November 21, 2000]), A.M. No. 01-
5-298-RTC (August 27, 2001), and A.M. No. 01-12-656-RTC (July 8, 2002)
to implement the provisions of Item 5.2, Section 5 of RA 8799.
257
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000168ecd969a73728a91d003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 16/33
2/15/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 774
_______________
26 See Herrera, Oscar M., Remedial Law, Vol. I, p. 73, 2007 Ed.
27 G.R. No. 179155, April 2, 2014, 720 SCRA 371, 381.
28 SEC. 5. In addition to the regulatory and adjudicative functions of
the Securities and Exchange Commission over corporations, partnerships
and other forms of associations registered with it as expressly granted
under existing laws and decrees, it shall have original and exclusive
jurisdiction to hear and decide cases involving.
a. Devices or schemes employed by or any acts, of the board of directors,
business associates, its officers or partners, amounting to fraud and
misrepresentation which may be detrimental to the interest of the public
and/or of the stockholder, partners, members of associations or
organizations registered with the Commission;
b. Controversies arising out of intra-corporate or partnership relations,
between and among stockholders, members, or associates; between any or
all of them and the corporation, partnership or association of which they
are stockholders, members or associates, respectively; and between such
corporation, partnership or association and the state insofar as it concerns
their individual franchise or right to exist as such entity;
258
_______________
259
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000168ecd969a73728a91d003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 18/33
2/15/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 774
_______________
260
_______________
261
_______________
262
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000168ecd969a73728a91d003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 21/33
2/15/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 774
_______________
40 Tan v. Bausch & Lomb, Inc., 514 Phil. 307, 316; 478 SCRA 115, 124
(2005). See also final whereas clause of A.M. No. 03-03-03-SC.
41 See OCA Circular No. 82-2003, entitled “Subject: Consolidation of
Intellectual Property Courts with Commercial Courts.” (June 30, 2003)
263
personnel thereof.
The objective behind the designation of such specialized
courts is to promote expediency and efficiency in the
exercise of the RTCs’ jurisdiction over the cases
enumerated under Section 5 of PD 902-A. Such designation
has nothing to do with the statutory conferment of
jurisdiction to all RTCs under RA 8799 since in the first
place, the Court cannot enlarge, diminish, or dictate when
jurisdiction shall be removed, given that the power to
define, prescribe, and apportion jurisdiction is, as a
general rule, a matter of legislative prerogative.42
Section 2, Article VIII of the 1987 Constitution provides:
Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to
define, prescribe, and apportion the jurisdiction of the
various courts but may not deprive the Supreme
Court of its jurisdiction over cases enumerated in
Section 5 hereof.
x x x x
Here, petitioners filed a commercial case, i.e., an intra-
corporate dispute, with the Office of the Clerk of Court in
the RTC of Muntinlupa City, which is the official station of
the designated Special Commercial Court, in accordance
with A.M. No. 03-03-03-SC. It is, therefore, from the
time of such filing that the RTC of Muntinlupa City
acquired jurisdiction over the subject matter or the
nature of
_______________
42 See Tinitigan v. Tinitigan, Sr., 188 Phil. 597, 611; 100 SCRA 619,
634 (1980).
264
_______________
265
_______________
266
_______________
267
_______________
268
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000168ecd969a73728a91d003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 27/33
2/15/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 774
_______________
269
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000168ecd969a73728a91d003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 28/33
2/15/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 774
_______________
270
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000168ecd969a73728a91d003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 29/33
2/15/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 774
_______________
(1) In all civil actions in which the subject of the litigation is incapable
of pecuniary estimation;
(2) In all civil actions which involve the title to, or possession
of, real property, or any interest therein, where the assessed value
of the property involved exceeds Twenty thousand pesos
(P20,000.00) or for civil actions in Metro Manila, where such the
value exceeds Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000.00) except actions for
forcible entry into and unlawful detainer of lands or buildings,
original jurisdiction over which is conferred upon Metropolitan
Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial
Courts;
(3) In all actions in admiralty and maritime jurisdiction where he
demand or claim exceeds One hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00) or,
in Metro Manila, where such demand or claim exceeds Two hundred
thousand pesos (P200,000.00);
(4) In all matters of probate, both testate and intestate, where the
gross value of the estate exceeds One hundred thousand pesos
(P100,000.00) or, in probate matters in Metro Manila, where such gross
value exceeds Two hundred thousand pesos (P200,000.00);
(5) In all actions involving the contract of marriage and marital
relations;
(6) In all cases not within the exclusive jurisdiction of any court,
tribunal, person or body exercising jurisdiction or any court, tribunal,
person or body exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions;
(7) In all civil actions and special proceedings falling within the
exclusive original jurisdiction of a Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court
and of the Court of Agrarian Relations as now provided by law; and
(8) In all other cases in which the demand, exclusive of interest,
damages of whatever kind, attorney’s fees, litigation expenses, and costs
or the value of the property in controversy exceeds One hundred thousand
pesos (P100,000.00) or, in such other cases in Metro Manila, where the
demand, exclusive of the abovementioned items exceeds Two hundred
thousand pesos (P200,000.00).
271
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000168ecd969a73728a91d003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 30/33
2/15/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 774
_______________
272
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000168ecd969a73728a91d003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 31/33
2/15/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 774
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000168ecd969a73728a91d003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 32/33
2/15/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 774
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000168ecd969a73728a91d003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 33/33