OUTLINE OF JURISDICTION

OUTLINE OF JURISDICTION
Magdangal M. de Leon

I. SUPREME COURT A. Original Jurisdiction 1. Exclusive Petitions for issuance of writs of certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus against the following: 1.1. Court of Appeals (Republic Act No. 296 [1948], Sec. 171); 1.2. Commission on Elections2 En Banc (CONSTITUTION, Art. IX-A, Sec. 7); 1.3. Commission on Audit (CONSTITUTION, Art. IX-A, Sec. 7); 1.4. Sandiganbayan (Presidential Decree No. 1606 [1979], Sec 7, as amended by Rep. Act No. 8249 [1997], Sec. 5); 1.5. Court of Tax Appeals En Banc (Rep. Act No. 1125 [1954], Sec. 19, as amended by Rep. Act No. 9282 [2004], Sec. 12); and 1.6. Ombudsman in criminal and non-administrative disciplinary cases.3 2. Concurrent 2.1. with the Court of Appeals 2.1.1. Petitions for writs of certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus against the Civil Service Commission (Rep. Act No. 7902 [1995]). 2.1.2. Petitions for writs of certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus against the National Labor Relations

1 2

Revised Judiciary Act of 1948. CONSTITUTION, Art. IX-A Sec. 7; Aratuc v. COMELEC, No. 49705-09, February 8, 1979, 88 SCRA 251. 3 See Fabian v. Desierto, G.R. No. 129742, September 16, 1998, 295 SCRA 470. A-1

OUTLINE OF JURISDICTION

Commission under the Labor Code4 (Batas Pambansa Blg. 129 [1983], Sec. 9, as amended by Rep. Act No. 7902, St. Martins Funeral Homes v. National Labor Relations Commission, G.R. No. 130866, September 16, 1998, 295 SCRA 494). 2.2. with the Court of Appeals and Regional Trial Courts 2.2.1 Petitions for habeas corpus5 and quo warranto.6 2.2.2 Actions brought to prevent and restrain violations of laws concerning monopolies and combinations in restraint of trade (Rep. Act No. 296, Sec. 17, as amended by Rep. Act No. 5440 [1968]). 2.3. with the Court of Appeals, Sandiganbayan and Regional Trial Courts 2.3.1. Petitions for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus relating to an act or omission of a municipal trial court, or of a corporation, a board, an officer, or person.7 2.3.2. Petitions for issuance of writ of amparo8 (Sec. 3, A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC or The Rule on the Writ of Amparo, effective October 24, 2007).
4

However, the petitions should be filed with the Court of Appeals; otherwise, they shall be dismissed (A.M. No. 99-2-01-SC). See also Torres, et. al. v. Specialized Packaging Development Corporation, et. al., G.R. No. 149634, August 6, 2004, 433 SCRA 455. 5 However, a petition for writ of habeas corpus involving custody of minors shall be filed with a Family Court, or in the absence of its judge and in places where there is no Family Court, the petition may be filed with the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, or any of its members (Sec. 20, A.M. No. 03-04-04-SC, effective May 15, 2003.) 6 However, jurisdiction for petitions for quo warranto are concurrent with the municipal courts insofar as barangay officials are concerned. As such, any voter contesting the election of any municipal or barangay officer on the ground of ineligibility or disloyalty to the Republic of the Philippines shall file a sworn petition for quo warranto with the Regional Trial Court or Metropolitan, or Municipal Trial Court, respectively, within ten days after the proclamation of the results of the election (See Regalado, Remedial Law, Vol. III [2006], citing ELECTION CODE [1978], Art. XVIII, Sec. 189, par. 2). 7 Although reference to the Supreme Court has been removed in the amendment to Sec. 4, Rule 65 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure by virtue of A.M. No. 07-7-12-SC dated December 12, 2007, the Supreme Court still retains its jurisdiction over petitions for certiorari, mandamus, and prohibition, as per CONSTITUTION, Article VIII, Sec. 5 (1) and (2). It is believed that this amendment, which underscores respect for the hierarchy of courts, will help prevent the clogging of the Supreme Courts dockets as litigants will be discouraged from filing petitions directly with the Supreme Court (See Rationale for the Amendment of Rules 41, 45, 58 and 65). 8 The petition for issuance of writ of amparo may be filed with the Supreme Court or any of its justices, the Court of Appeals, or the Sandiganbayan. A-2

OUTLINE OF JURISDICTION

2.3.3. Petitions for issuance of writ of habeas data9 (Sec. 3, A. M. No. 08-1-16-SC, effective February 2, 2008).

2.4. with the Regional Trial Courts Actions affecting ambassadors and other public ministers and consuls (CONSTITUTION, Art. VIII, Sec. 5[1]; Batas Pambansa Blg. 129, Sec. 21[2]) B. Appellate Jurisdiction 1. Ordinary Appeal by Notice of Appeal From the Court of Appeals, in all criminal cases involving offenses for which the penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment; or a lesser penalty is imposed10 for offenses committed on the same occasion or which arose out of the same occurrence that gave rise to the more severe offense for which the penalty of death is imposed (Sec. 13[c], Rule 124, as amended by A.M. No. 00-5-03-SC, effective October 15, 2004, Sec. 13[b], Rule 124) 2. By Petition for Review on Certiorari 2.1. Appeals from the Court of Appeals (Rep. Act No. 296, Sec. 17, as amended by Rep. Act No. 5440; Constitution, Art. VIII, Sec. 5[2]; Rule 45, 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure) 2.2. Appeals from the Sandiganbayan on pure questions of law, except cases where the penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua, life imprisonment, or death (Pres. Decree No. 1606, Sec. 7, as amended by Rep. Act No.
9

The petition for issuance of writ of habeas data may be filed with the Supreme Court, or the Court of Appeals, or the Sandiganbayan when the action concerns public data files of government offices. 10 The word imposed contemplates both situations where the Court of Appeals itself metes out reclusion perpetua, life imprisonment, or a lesser penalty but for offenses committed on the same occasion or which arose out of the same occurrence that gave rise to the more serious offense for which the penalty of reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment is imposed, or where it merely affirms the imposition of said penalties by the lower courts (Sec. 3[c], Rule 122, as amended by A.M. No. 00-5-03-SC, effective October 15, 2004; People vs. Mateo, G.R. Nos. 147678-87, July 7, 2004, 433 SCRA 640).

A-3

OUTLINE OF JURISDICTION

8249; Nunez v. Sandiganbayan, Nos. 50581-50617, January 20, 1982, 111 SCRA 433; Rule 45, id.). 2.3. Appeals from judgments or final orders of the Regional Trial Courts exercising original jurisdiction in the following: a) All cases in which the constitutionality or validity of any treaty, international or executive agreement, law, presidential decree, proclamation, order, instruction, ordinance, or regulation is in question; All cases involving the legality of any tax, impost, assessment, or toll, or any penalty imposed in relation thereto; All cases in which the jurisdiction of any lower court is in issue; and All cases in which only an error or question of law is involved. (CONSTITUTION, Art. VIII, Sec. 5[2-a, b, c]; Rep. Act No. 296, Sec. 17, as amended; Batas Pambansa Blg. 129, Sec. 9[3]; Id., Rule 45; Id., Rule 41, Sec. 2[c]; Id., Rule 122, Sec. 3[e]). Appeals from decisions or final resolutions of the Court of Tax Appeals 11 (Rule 16, Sec. 1, A.M. No. 05-11-07-CTA, or The Revised Rules of the Court of Tax Appeals; Sec. 1, Rule 45, as amended by A.M. No. 07-7-12-SC dated December 12, 2007; See also Rep. Act No. 9282 [2004]).

b)

c)

d)

2.3.1.

3. By Special Civil Action of Certiorari filed within thirty (30) days from notice of the judgment/ final order/ resolution sought to be reviewed against the following: (Rule 64, 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure) 3.1. Commission on Elections (CONSTITUTION, Art. IX-A, Sec. 7; Aratuc v. COMELEC, No. 49705-09, February 8, 1979, 88 SCRA 251).
11

The procedure in the Court of Tax Appeals reveals that only decisions of said Court en banc shall be appealable to the Supreme Court via a petition for review on certiorari. (See Sec. 16, A.M. No. 05-11-07-SCTA). This is because appeals from decisions and resolutions of the Court of Tax Appeals Divisions fall under the exclusive appellate jurisdiction of the Court of Tax Appeals en banc. A-4

OUTLINE OF JURISDICTION

3.2. Commission on Audit (Ibid., CONSTITUTION).

II. COURT OF APPEALS A. Original Jurisdiction 1. Exclusive 1.1. Actions for annulment of judgments of the Regional Trial Courts (Batas Pambansa Blg. 129, Sec. 9[2]); 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 47). 1.2. Petitions for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus involving an act or omission of a quasi-judicial agency, unless otherwise provided by law (Rule 65, Sec. 4, as amended by A.M. No. 077-12-SC dated December 12, 2007).

2. Concurrent 2.1. with the Supreme Court Refer to 2.1. above under I.A., supra with the Supreme Court and Regional Trial Courts Refer to Sec. 2.2. above under I.A., supra with the Supreme Court, Sandiganbayan, and Regional Trial Courts Refer to 2.3. above under I.A., supra

2.2.

2.3.

B. Appellate Jurisdiction 1. Ordinary Appeal by Notice of Appeal or with Record on Appeal 1.1. Appeals from the Regional Trial Courts, except those appealable to the Supreme Court under Sec. 2(3) of I.B. above. 1.2. Appeals from the Regional Trial Courts on constitutional, tax, jurisdictional questions involving questions of fact or mixed questions of fact and law or which should be appealed first to the Court of Appeals (Republic Act No. 296 [1948] Sec. 17, par. 4.4, as amended, which was not intended to be excluded by Batas Pambansa Blg. 129 [1983], Sec. 9[3]).
A-5

OUTLINE OF JURISDICTION

1.3. Appeals from the decisions and final orders of the Family Courts (Republic Act No. 8369 [1997], Sec. 14). 1.4. Appeals from the Regional Trial Courts, where the penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment, or where a lesser penalty is imposed but for offenses committed on the same occasion or which arose out of the same occurrence that gave rise to the more serious offense for which the penalty of reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment is imposed (Rule 122, Sec. 3[c], as amended by A.M. No. 00-5-03-SC, effective October 15, 2004; People v. Mateo, G.R. Nos. 147678-87, July 7, 2004, 433 SCRA 640) 1.5. Direct appeal from land registration and cadastral cases decided by metropolitan trial courts, municipal trial courts, and municipal circuit trial courts based on their delegated jurisdiction.12

2. Special civil action of certiorari (Rule 65) against decisions and final resolutions of the National Labor Relations Commission (A. M. No. 99-2-01-SC; St. Martin Funeral Homes v. National Labor Relations Commission, G.R. No. 13086, September 16, 1998, 295 SCRA 494; Torres, et. al. v. Specialized Packaging Development Corp., et. al., G.R. No.149634, July 6, 2004, 433 SCRA 455) 3. Automatic review13 in cases where the Regional Trial Courts impose the death penalty14 (Secs. 3[d] and 10, Rule 122, as
12

Batas Pambansa Blg. 129, Sec. 34, as amended by Rep. Act No. 7691 states: Delegated Jurisdiction in Cadastral and Land Registration Cases. Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Circuit Trial Courts may be assigned by the Supreme Court to hear and determine cadastral or land registration cases covering lots where there is no controversy or opposition, or contested lots where the value of which does not exceed one hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00), such value to be ascertained by the affidavit of the claimant or by agreement of the respective claimants if there are more than one, or from the corresponding tax declaration of the real property. Their decisions in these cases shall be appealable in the same manner as decisions of the Regional Trial Courts.

13

Notice that while Rule 122, Secs. 3[d] and 10, as amended by A.M. No. 00-5-03-SC, use the words automatic review, in People v. Mateo, G.R. Nos. 147678-87, July 7, 2004, 433 SCRA 640, the Supreme Court used the words intermediate review and explained the rationale for such amendment: While the Fundamental Law requires mandatory review by the Supreme Court of cases where the penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua, A-6

OUTLINE OF JURISDICTION

amended by A.M. No. 00-5-03-SC, effective October 15, 2004; People vs. Mateo, supra)

4. Petition for Review 4.1. Appeals from the Civil Service Commission (Rep. Act No. 7902 [1995]; Rule 43, 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure). 4.2. Appeals from the Regional Trial Courts in cases appealed from the Metropolitan Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts, which are not a matter of right (Batas Pambansa Blg. 129 [1983], Sec. 22; Rule 42, 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure; Rule 122, Sec. 3[b]). 4.3. Appeals from awards, judgments, final orders, or resolutions of, or authorized by, quasi-judicial agencies in the exercise of their quasi-judicial functions. Among these are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Securities and Exchange Commission; Office of the President; Land Registration Authority; Social Security Commission; Civil Aeronautics Board; Intellectual Property Office (formerly the Bureau of Patents, Trademarks, and Technology Transfer); 7. National Electrification Administration; 8. Energy Regulatory Board; 9. National Telecommunications Commission; 10. Department of Agrarian Reform under Rep. Act No.
life imprisonment, or death, nowhere, however, has it proscribed an intermediate review. If only to ensure utmost circumspection before the penalty of death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment is imposed, the Court now deems it wise and compelling to provide in these cases a review by the Court of Appeals before the case is elevated to the Supreme Court. x x x If the Court of Appeals should affirm the penalty of death, reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment, it could then render judgment imposing the corresponding penalty as the circumstances so warrant, refrain from entering judgment and elevate the entire records of the case to the Supreme Court for its final disposition.
14

In People v. Bunaladi, G.R. No. UDK-13384, October 18, 2004, the Supreme Court stated that no notice of appeal is necessary in cases where the death penalty is imposed by the Regional Trial Court. In People v. Rocha, G.R. No. 173797, August 31, 2007, 531 SCRA 761 the Supreme Court clarified that there is no mandatory review in cases where the penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment. Note, however, that the imposition of the death penalty has been suspended by Republic Act No. 9346 or An Act Prohibiting the Imposition of Death Penalty in the Philippines, approved on June 24, 2006. 2006. A-7

OUTLINE OF JURISDICTION

6657; 11. Government Service Insurance System; 12. Employees Compensation Commission; 13. Agricultural Inventions Board; 14. Insurance Commission; 15. Philippine Atomic Energy Commission; 16. Board of Investments; 17. Construction Industry Arbitration Commission; 18. Voluntary arbitrators authorized by law; and 19. Decisions of Special Agrarian Courts 4.4. Appeals from the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) (Rep. Act No. 8371 [1997], Sec. 67). 4.5. Appeals from the Office of the Ombudsman in administrative disciplinary cases (A.M. No. 99-2-02-SC; Fabian v. Desierto, G.R. No. 129742, September 16, 1998, 295 SCRA 470).

III.

SANDIGANBAYAN A. Original Jurisdiction 1. Exclusive 1.1. Violation of Rep. Act No. 3019 [1960] (Anti-Graft), Rep. Act No. 1379 [1955] and Chapter II, Sec. 2, Title VII of the REVISED PENAL CODE; and other offenses committed by public officials and employees in relation to their office, and private individuals charged as co-principals, accomplices, and accessories including those employed in government-ownedorcontrolled-corporations, where one or more of the accused are officials occupying the following positions in government, whether in a permanent, acting, or interim capacity, at the time of the commission of the offense: 1. Officials of the Executive Branch xxx classified as salary grade 27 or higher xxx specifically including xxx 2. Members of Congress xxx 3. Members of the Judiciary xxx 4. Members of Constitutional Commissions xxx

A-8

OUTLINE OF JURISDICTION

5. All other national and local officials classified as salary grade 27 and higher In cases where none of the accused is occupying the above positions, the original jurisdiction shall be vested in the proper Regional Trial Court or Metropolitan Trial Court, etc., as the case may be, pursuant to their respective jurisdictions. (Rep. Act No. 7975 [1995], Sec. 2, as amended by Rep. Act No. 8249 [1997]). In cases where there is no specific allegation of facts showing that the offense was committed in relation to the public office of the accused, the original jurisdiction shall also be vested in the proper Regional Trial Court or Metropolitan Trial Court, etc., as the case may be. (Lacson v. Executive Secretary, G.R. No. 128096, January 20, 1999, 310 SCRA 298). 1.2. Civil and criminal cases filed pursuant to and in connection with Executive Order Nos. 1, 2, 14, and 14-A. (Sec. 2, Rep. Act No. 7975, as amended by Rep. Act No. 8249). 1.3. Violations of Rep. Act No. 9160, or Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2001, as amended by Rep. Act No. 9194, when committed by public officers and private persons who are in conspiracy with such public officers. 2. Concurrent with the Supreme Court Petitions for issuance of writs of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, habeas corpus, and injunction15 and other ancillary writs in aid of its appellate jurisdiction, including quo warranto arising in cases falling under said Executive Order Nos. 1, 2, 14, and 14-A. (Id., as amended by Rep. Act No. 8249).

3. Concurrent with the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, and Regional Trial Courts 3.1. Petitions for writ of amparo and writ of habeas data when action concerns public data files of government offices (Sec. 3,
15

The petitions for issuance of writs of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, and habeas corpus referred to in this section, are all main actions. Neither the Supreme Court nor the Court of Appeals has original jurisdiction over a main action for injunction. A-9

OUTLINE OF JURISDICTION

A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC or The Rule on the Writ of Amparo, effective October 24, 2007; Sec. 3, A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC, effective February 2, 2008). 3.2. Petitions for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus, relating to an act or omission of a Municipal Trial Court, corporation, board, officer, or person (Sec. 4, Rule 65, as amended by A.M. No. 07-7-12-SC dated December 12, 2007).

B. Appellate Jurisdiction Decisions and final orders of the Regional Trial Courts in the exercise of their original or appellate jurisdiction under Presidential Decree No. 1606 [1979], as amended, shall be appealable to the Sandiganbayan in the manner provided by Rules of Court, Rule 122 (Rep. Act No. 8249, Sec. 5). IV. REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS A. Original16 Jurisdiction 1. Civil 1.1. Exclusive17 1.1.1. Subject of the action not capable of pecuniary estimation; 1.1.2. Actions involving title or possession of real property or interest therein where the assessed value exceeds P20,000.00 or in Metro Manila P50,000.00, except for forcible entry and unlawful detainer; 1.1.3. Actions in admiralty and maritime jurisdiction where demand or claim exceeds P300,000.00, or in Metro Manila P400,000.00;

16

The old rates in 1.1.3, 1.1.4, and 1.1.6 were P100,000.00 outside of Metro Manila, and P200,000.00 in Metro Manila. These rates have now been increased to P300,000.00 and P400,000.00 respectively, based on the principle of automatic expansion under Rep. Act No. 7691, amending Batas Pambansa Blg. 129. 17 Actions involving marriage and marital relations now fall within the exclusive original jurisdiction of Family Courts. A-10

OUTLINE OF JURISDICTION

1.1.4. Matters of probate, testate or intestate, where gross value of estate exceeds P300,000.00, or in Metro Manila P400,000.00; 1.1.5. Cases not within the exclusive jurisdiction of any court, tribunal, person, or body exercising judicial or quasijudicial function; 1.1.6. Other cases where the demand, exclusive of interest, damages,18 attorneys fees, litigation expenses and costs, or value of property in controversy exceeds P300,000.00, or in Metro Manila P400,000.00 (Batas Pambansa Blg. 129, Sec. 19, as amended by Rep. Act No. 7691 [1994]). However, if the claim for damages is the main cause of the action, the amount thereof shall be considered in determining the jurisdiction of the court. (Administrative Circular No. 09-94, dated June 14, 1994). 1.1.7. Additional original jurisdiction transferred under Sec. 5.2. of the Securities Regulation Code: a) Devices or schemes employed by, or any acts of, the board of directors, business associates, its officers or partnership, amounting to fraud and misrepresentation xxx; b) Controversies arising partnership relations xxx; out of intra-corporate

c) Controversies in the election or appointment of directors, trustees, officers, or managers of such corporation, partnership, or association; and d) Petitions of corporations, partnerships or associations to be declared in a state of suspension of payments xxx (Rep. Act No. 8799, approved July 19, 2000). 1.1.8. Application for issuance of writ of search and seizure in civil actions for infringement of intellectual property rights (Sec. 3, A.M. No. 02-1-06-SC, effective February 15, 2002).

18

Damages of whatever kind. A-11

OUTLINE OF JURISDICTION

1.1.9. Violations of Rep. Act No. 9160, or Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2001, as amended by Rep. Act No. 9194.19

1.2.

Concurrent 1.2.1. with the Supreme Court Actions affecting ambassadors and other public ministers and consuls (Batas Pambansa Blg. 129 [1983], Sec. 21[1]). 1.2.2. with the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Petitions for habeas corpus and quo warranto. 1.2.3. with the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, and Sandiganbayan 1.2.3.1. Petitions for writ of amparo and writ of habeas data (Sec. 3, A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC, or The Rule on the Writ of Amparo, effective October 24, 2007; Sec. 3, A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC, effective February 2, 2008). 1.2.3.2. Petitions for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus, if they relate to an act or omission of a municipal trial court, corporation, board, officer, or person (Sec. 4, Rule 65, as amended by A.M. No. 07-7-12-SC, dated December 12, 2007). 1.2.4. with the Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts Application for Protection Order under Republic Act No. 9282, Sec. 10, unless there is a Family Court in the residence of petitioner. 1.2.5. with the Insurance Commission Claims not exceeding P100,000.00 (INSURANCE CODE [1974], Sec. 416; Pres. Decree No. 612

19

When private persons commit crimes in conspiracy with public officers, the jurisdiction belongs to the Sandiganbayan. A-12

OUTLINE OF JURISDICTION

[1975]). Applicable if subject of the action is not capable of pecuniary estimation; otherwise, jurisdiction is concurrent with Metropolitan Trial Court, etc.

2. Criminal 2.1. Exclusive Criminal cases not within the exclusive jurisdiction of any court, tribunal, or body (Batas Pambansa Blg. 129 [1983], Sec. 20). These include criminal cases where the penalty provided by law exceeds six (6) years imprisonment irrespective of the fine (Republic Act No. 7691 [1994]).20 These also include criminal cases not falling within the exclusive original jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan, where none of the accused are occupying positions corresponding to salary grade 27 and higher (Rep. Act No. 7975 and Rep. Act No. 8249). But in cases where the only penalty provided by law is a fine, the Regional Trial Courts have jurisdiction if the amount of the fine exceeds P4,000.00. (Rep. Act No. 7691 as clarified by Administrative Circular No. 09-94 dated June 14, 1994). Jurisdiction over the whole complex crime is lodged with the trial court having jurisdiction to impose the maximum and most serious penalty imposable for an offense forming part of the complex crime.21

B. Appellate Jurisdiction All cases decided by lower courts (Metropolitan Trial Courts, etc.) in their respective territorial jurisdictions (Batas Pambansa Blg. 129, Sec. 22).

20

However, Family Courts have exclusive original jurisdiction over criminal cases where one or more of the accused is below eighteen (18) years of age but not less than nine (9) years of age, or where one or more of the victims is a minor at the time of the commission of the offense (Rep. Act No. 8369 [1997], Sec. 5(a)). 21 Cuyos v. Garcia, G.R. No. 46934, April 15, 1998, 160 SCRA 302. A-13

OUTLINE OF JURISDICTION

V. FAMILY COURTS A. Exclusive and Original Jurisdiction 1. Criminal cases22 where one or more of the accused is below eighteen (18) years of age but not less than nine (9) years of age,23 when one or more of the victims is a minor at the time of the commission of the offense: Provided, That if the minor is found guilty, the court shall promulgate sentence and ascertain any civil liability which the accused may have incurred. The sentence, however, shall be suspended without need of application, pursuant to Pres. Decree No. 1903, otherwise known as The Child and Youth Welfare Code; 2. Petitions for guardianship, custody of children, and habeas corpus in relation to the latter (Sec. 3, A.M. No. 03-04-04-SC, effective May 15, 2003; Sec. 3, A.M. No. 03-02-05-SC, effective April 15, 2003); 3. Petitions for adoption of children and the revocation thereof (Secs. A.20 and B.28, A.M. No. 02-6-02-SC, effective August 22, 2002; See also Rep. Act No. 9523, or An Act Requiring Certification of the Department of Social Welfare and Development to Declare A Child Legally Available for Adoption as a Prerequisite for Adoption Proceedings, Amending for this Purpose Certain Provisions of Republic Act No. 8552, otherwise known as The Domestic Adoption Act of 1998, Rep. Act No. 8043, otherwise known as The Inter-Country Adoption Act of 1995, Pres. Decree No. 603, otherwise known as The Child and Youth Welfare Code, and for Other Purposes, approved on March 12, 2009); 4. Complaints for annulment of marriage, declaration of nullity of marriage, and those relating to marital status and property relations of husband and wife or those living together under different status and agreements, and petitions for dissolution of conjugal partnership of gains (Sec. 2, A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC, effective March 15, 2003);
22

These include acts of trafficking, where one of the trafficked persons is a child, as defined by Rep. Act No. 9208 (Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 2003), approved on May 26, 2003. 23 However, note that Rep. Act No. 9344, Sec. 6, or The Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006, approved on April 28, 2006, has set the minimum age of criminal responsibility. Thus, a child fifteen (15) years of age or under at the time of the commission of the offense shall be exempt from criminal liability but shall be subjected to an intervention program. A child above fifteen (15) years but below eighteen (18) years of age shall likewise be exempt from criminal liability and shall be subjected to an intervention program, unless he/ she has acted with discernment, in which case he/ she shall be subjected to the appropriate proceedings in accordance with Rep. Act No. 9344. A-14

OUTLINE OF JURISDICTION

5. Petitions for involuntary commitment of a child, for removal of custody against child-placement or child-caring agency or individual, and for commitment of disabled child (Secs. 4[b], 5[a][ii], 6[b], A.M. No. 02-1-19-SC, effective April 15, 2002); 6. Petitions for support and/ or acknowledgment; 7. Summary judicial proceedings brought under the provisions of Exec. Order No. 209, otherwise known as The Family Code of the Philippines; 8. Petitions for declaration of status of children as abandoned, dependent, or neglected children, petitions for voluntary or involuntary commitment of children, the suspension, termination, or restoration of parental authority and other cases cognizable under Pres. Decree No. 603, Executive Order No. 56 (series of 1986) and other related laws; 9. Petitions for constitution of family home;24 10. Cases against minors cognizable under Rep. Act No. 9165, or The Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 (See also A.M. No. 07-8-2-SC, effective November 5, 2007); and 11. Violation of Rep. Act No. 7610 [1991], otherwise known as the Special Protection of Children Against Child Abuse, Exploration and Discrimination Act, as amended by Rep. Act No. 7658 [1993] and as further amended by Rep. Act No. 9231 [2003]. 12. Violation of Rep. Act No. 9775, otherwise known as the Anti-Child Pornography Act of 2009 13. Cases of domestic violence against:

13.1. Women - which are acts of gender based violence that results, or are likely to result in physical, sexual or psychological harm or suffering to women; and other forms of physical abuse such as battering or threats and coercion which violate a woman's personhood, integrity and freedom of movement; and 13.2. Children which include the commission of all forms of abuse, neglect, cruelty, exploitation, violence, and discrimination and all other conditions prejudicial to their development.25
24

Repealed by Exec. Order No. 209, or The Family Code of the Philippines. A-15

OUTLINE OF JURISDICTION

14.

Cases of violence against women and their children under Rep. Act No. 9262, otherwise known as Anti-Violence Against Women and their Children Act of 2004,26 including applications for Protection Order under the same Act;27 and Criminal cases involving juveniles if no preliminary investigation is required under Sec. 1, Rule 112 of Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure28 (Sec. 1, A.M. No. 02-1-18-SC, effective April 15, 2002).

15.

VI. METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURTS, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS, MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURTS, AND MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS IN CITIES A. Original29 Jurisdiction 1. Civil 1.1. Exclusive 1.1.1. Actions involving personal property valued at not more than P300,000.00 or in Metro Manila P400,000.00; 1.1.2. Actions demanding sums of money not exceeding P300,000.00 or in Metro Manila P400,000.00; in both
25

If an act constitutes a criminal offense, the accused or batterer shall be subject to criminal proceedings and the corresponding penalties. If any question involving any of the above matters should arise as an incident in any case pending in the regular courts, said incident shall be determined in that court. 26 In the absence of a Family Court in the place where the offense was committed, the case shall be filed in the Regional Trial Court where the crime or any of its elements was committed at the option of the complainant. 27 Where no Family Court exists in the place of residence of petitioner, applications for Temporary Protection Order and Permanent Protection Order are filed in the Regional Trial Court, Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial Court, or Municipal Circuit Trial Court with territorial jurisdiction over the place of residence of petitioner. 28 SECTION 1. Preliminary investigation defined; when required. xxxx Except as provided in Section 7 of this Rule, a preliminary investigation is required to be conducted before the filing of a complaint or information for an offense where the penalty prescribed by law is at least four (4) years, two (2) months and one (1) day without regard to the fine. 29 The old rates in 1.1.1, 1.1.2 and 1.1.6 were P100,000.00 or less, outside of Metro Manila, and P200,000.00 or less, in Metro Manila. These rates have now been increased to P300,000.00 and P400,000.00 respectively, based on the principle of automatic expansion under Rep. Act No. 7691, amending Batas Pambansa Blg. 129. A-16

OUTLINE OF JURISDICTION

cases, exclusive of interest, damages, attorneys fees, litigation expenses and costs, the amount of which must be specifically alleged, but the filing fees thereon shall be paid. These include admiralty and maritime cases; 1.1.3. Actions involving title or possession of real property where the assessed value does not exceed P20,000.00 or in Metro Manila P50,000.00; 1.1.4. Provisional remedies in principal actions within their jurisdiction, and in proper cases, such as preliminary attachment, preliminary injunction, appointment or receiver and delivery of personal property; (Rule 57, 58, 59, and 60) 1.1.5. Forcible entry and unlawful detainer, with jurisdiction to resolve issue of ownership to determine issue of possession; 1.1.6. Probate proceedings, testate or intestate, where gross value of estate does not exceed P300,000.00 or in Metro Manila P400,000.00 (Batas Pambansa Blg. 129, Sec. 33, as amended by Rep. Act No. 7691); and 1.1.7. Inclusion and exclusion of voters. (Sec. 38, Batas Pambansa Blg. 881, Omnibus Election Code of the Philippines [1985]). 1.2. Delegated30 Cadastral and land registration cases assigned by the Supreme Court where there is no controversy or opposition and in contested lots valued at more than P100,000.00 (Batas Pambansa Blg. 129, Sec. 34, as amended by Rep. Act No. 7691). 1.3. Special Petition for habeas corpus in the absence of all Regional Trial Court judges (Batas Pambansa Blg. 129, Sec. 35).

30

See 1.5 of B.1. under II. Court of Appeals, supra. A-17

OUTLINE OF JURISDICTION

2. Criminal 2.1. Exclusive 2.1.1. All violations of city or municipal ordinances committed within their respective territorial jurisdictions; 2.1.2. All offenses punishable with imprisonment of not more than six (6) years irrespective of the fine and regardless of other imposable accessory or other penalties and the civil liability arising therefrom; provided, however, that in offenses involving damage to property through criminal negligence, they shall have exclusive original jurisdiction (Batas Pambansa Blg. 129, Sec. 32, as amended by Rep. Act No. 7691);31 2.1.3. All offenses committed not falling within the exclusive original jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan where none of the accused is occupying a position corresponding to salary grade 27 and higher (As amended by Rep. Act No. 7975 and Rep. Act No. 8249); and 2.1.4. In cases where the only penalty provided by law is a fine not exceeding P4,000.00, the Metropolitan Trial Courts, etc. have jurisdiction (Administrative Circular No. 09-94, dated June 14, 1994). 2.2. Special Applications for bail in the absence of all Regional Trial Court judges. (Batas Pambansa Blg. 129, Sec. 35).

31

Jurisdiction over the whole complex crime lies with the trial court having jurisdiction to impose the maximum and most serious penalty imposable for an offense forming part of the complex crime. (See Cuyos v. Garcia, G.R. No. 46934, April 15, 1988, 160 SCRA 302). Thus, where the imposable penalty for the physical injuries charged would come within the jurisdiction of the Municipal Trial Court, while the fine for the damage to the property would fall on the Regional Trial Court, the court that would take cognizance of the case must be determined not by the corresponding penalty for the physical injuries charged but by the fine imposable for the damage to the property resulting from the reckless imprudence. A-18