Civil Procedure: First Half Reviewer

100%

CIVIL PROCEDURE

One. General Principles a. Distinguish: Substantive law versus Remedial/Adjective law b. Rule-making power of the Supreme Court i. The Supreme Court has the sole prerogative to amend, repeal, or establish new rules.

ii. The NLRC has its own Rules of Procedure. Should its Rules be approved by the SC before they take effect? No. Rules of procedure of special courts and quasi-judicial bodies shall remain effective unless disapproved by the Supreme Court.

iii. Only the Supreme Court has the power to suspend or relax technical or procedural rules.

iv. The CA, RTC, and other courts cannot suspend or relax procedural rules.

c. Basics of Jurisdiction

i. Classification of Jurisdiction

One. Original versus Appellate - The case was originally filed versus Power to review the decision of a lower court

Two. General versus Special - The RTC versus Every other court

Three. Exclusive versus Concurrent - Only one court has jurisdiction versus Multiple courts a. NOTE: You just have to be familiar with these terms, so you can determine, based on the problem, which court has jurisdiction over the case (RTC, MTC, and so on).

Four. Example:

ii. Doctrine of Hierarchy of Courts/Judicial Hierarchy

iii. Doctrine of Adherence of Jurisdiction; Continuity of Jurisdiction

Six. Distinguish doctrine of non-interference and doctrine of adherence of jurisdiction.

v. Doctrine Of Residual Jurisdiction -

vi. PRIMARY ADMINISTRATIVE JURISDICTION AND DOCTRINE OF EXHAUSTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES

ii. Exceptions

B. Doctrine of Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies

Two. Aspects of Jurisdiction

Three. Why is lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter a NON-WAIVEABLE DEFENSE?

Four. Why can the court dismiss the case MOTU PROPRIO?

Five. Why can the defendant raise this defense at ANY STAGE?

B. Parties

C. Issues

JURISDICTION

One. SUPREME COURT

Two. COURT OF APPEALS

Three. SECOND-LEVEL COURTS (RTC)

Four. FIRST-LEVEL COURTS (MTC, MTCC, MeTC, MCTC)

Five. CRIMINAL CASES

Six. Rules on Expedited Procedures in the First Level Courts (A.M. No. zero eight eight seven SC, as amended, March first, two thousand twenty-two)

Seven. IMPORTANT NOTES:

V. Action involving a demand or claim; Exclusive of interest, damages, attorney's fees, litigation expenses and costs

vii. Now that we've finished jurisdiction under B.P. one hundred twenty-nine, we will correlate this with venue, and summons.

One. PERSONAL ACTIONS AND REAL ACTIONS

Two. VENUE OF REAL ACTIONS

Three. VENUE OF PERSONAL ACTIONS

i. Definition of residence

Four. VENUE OF ACTIONS AGAINST NON-RESIDENTS WHO CAN BE FOUND IN THE PHILIPPINES (REAL AND PERSONAL ACTIONS)

Five. VENUE OF ACTIONS AGAINST NON-RESIDENTS WHO CANNOT BE FOUND IN THE PHILIPPINES (REAL AND PERSONAL ACTIONS)

Six. When the rules on venue do not apply.

iv. Dismissal based on improper venue.

Action in Personam, Action in Rem, and Action Quasi in Rem

One. Jurisdiction - B.P. one hundred twenty-nine

Two. Venue - Rule four

Three. Summons - Rule fourteen

How do we avoid confusion?

EXAMPLES!

Inherent Powers of the Court and the Means to Carry Out Jurisdiction into Effect

Two. Means to carry jurisdiction into effect

BARANGAY CONCILIATION PROCEEDINGS

Four. BARANGAY CONCILIATION PROCEEDINGS

c. Effect of Amicable Settlement

RULE one - GENERAL PROVISIONS

Two. One cause of action may give rise to SEVERAL RELIEFS.

Three. One cause of action may give rise to ALTERNATIVE REMEDIES.

Four. When is a remedy deemed chosen?

Four. Contracts with numerous stipulations

One. EXAMPLES:

Two. Examples.

Two. Doctrine of anticipatory breach.

Three. Examples.

Five. When must the cause of action exist?

Six. How to determine the existence of a cause of action.

Two. Exception:

Seven. FAILURE TO STATE CAUSE OF ACTION V. LACK OF CAUSE OF ACTION

Four. Examples:

Eight. SPLITTING OF A SINGLE CAUSE OF ACTION

Three. LITIS PENDENTIA

Two. EXAMPLE:

Three. EXAMPLES:

Four. RES JUDICATA

Four. "Former judgment must be final"

Five. "Judgment must be on the merits"

Two. Examples:

Six. "Jurisdiction over the subject matter, of person of the defendant, and due process purposes"

Nine. JOINDER OF CAUSES OF ACTION

Three. Permissive joinder of parties

Six. "Totality rule in Rule two and in BP one hundred twenty-nine"

Ten. MISJOINDER AND NON-JOINDER OF CAUSES OF ACTION

RULE THREE - PARTIES TO A CIVIL ACTION

Two. Effect when a party impleaded is not authorized to be a party

Three. Real parties in interest

Four. Representatives as parties

Five. Minor or incompetent person as party

Six. Indispensable parties

Two. Nature of interest

Three. Examples:

Two. What then is a joint debtor?

Two. What then is a solidary debtor?

Five. Why is Mr. C an indispensable party?

Seven. Why is Mr. B not an indispensable party?

Seven. Necessary parties

Eight. EFFECT OF NON-JOINDER OF INDISPENSABLE PARTIES

Two. After Judgment:

Nine. EFFECT OF NON-JOINDER OF NECESSARY PARTIES

Ten. Non-joinder of an indispensable party versus non-joinder of a necessary party

Eleven. Examples:

Twelve. Class Suit

Five. Examples of existence of "common or general interest"

Six. Examples of non-existence of "common or general interest"

Seven. Is a derivative suit a class suit?

Eight. Differentiate class suit and representative suit

Nine. Differentiate class suit and joinder of parties

Thirteen. Suits against entities without juridical personality

Two. Example:

Fourteen. Transfer of Interest

Four. Court discretion

Five. Who files the "motion"?

Two. Example:

Fifteen. Effect of death of party litigant

Sixteen. INDIGENT PARTIES

Two. No condition for exemption to apply.

Four. Consequence if party not actually indigent:

Sixteen. INDIGENT LITIGANTS

b. There is a condition for exemption.

c. Exemptions from legal fees.

Seventeen. Summary of rules for indigent litigants

Nineteen. Actions for recover of money arising from contractual obligations

c. How can we correlate Section sixteen on death of party litigant and Section twenty?

Twenty. Distinguish Section twenty, Rule three, Section one, Rule eighty-six, and Section seven, Rule thirty-nine

RULE SIX - KINDS OF PLEADINGS

One. Kinds of pleadings and when they should be filed

Two. Payment of docket fees and acquisition of jurisdiction

Overview

The document provides an in-depth examination of civil procedure, addressing key concepts such as jurisdiction, the rule-making power of the Supreme Court, and various legal doctrines. It aims to equip students and practitioners with essential knowledge for navigating civil law.

Key Points

1Distinguishes between substantive law and remedial law
2Clarifies the Supreme Court's unique rule-making power
3Explains classification of jurisdiction in various courts
4Addresses doctrines of adherence and non-interference in judicial matters
5Discusses the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies and its implications.

Details

Authors: Atty. Anselmo
Category: Law and Legal Studies

PDF
Joevanie Arellano Tabasa vs. Hon. Court of Appeals, Bureau of Immigration and Deportation, and Wilson Soluren
This document is a decision regarding the petition of Joevanie Arellano Tabasa, challenging his summary deportation by the Bureau of Immigration and Deportation after losing his U.S. citizenship and claiming his right to repatriation to the Philippines.
PDF
PCC Guidelines on Merger Remedies
These guidelines outline the Philippine Competition Commission's approach to assessing remedies for mergers and acquisitions that may substantially prevent, restrict, or lessen competition, explaining key principles, types of remedies, considerations for design, and the remedies process.
PDF
In the Matter of the Proposed Acquisition by Universal Robina Corporation of Assets of Central Azucarera Don Pedro, Inc. and Roxas Holdings, Inc.
This document is a decision issued by the Philippine Competition Commission regarding the proposed acquisition by Universal Robina Corporation of the assets of Central Azucarera Don Pedro, Inc. and Roxas Holdings, Inc., assessing the transaction's potential impact on competition in the relevant market.
PDF
In the Matter of the Proposed Acquisition by International Container Terminal Services, Inc. of Shares in the Manila North Harbour Port, Inc.
This document presents the Philippine Competition Commission's decision regarding the acquisition of shares in Manila North Harbour Port, Inc. by International Container Terminal Services, Inc., analyzing the competitive effects and market implications of the proposed transaction.
PDF
Manfredi and Others Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) 13 July 2006
This document presents the judgment of the Court regarding preliminary rulings concerning the interpretation of Article 81 EC in relation to insurance companies involved in unlawful agreements affecting civil liability auto insurance premiums.