1

Module 1.
General Principles.
Overview
Our judicial system, a passive machinery that requires an external
force to set it in motion, is of paramount importance. This external force,
which convenes in a single entity or the court, is crucial for the
administration of justice. This module will delve into the court system, its
composition, scope, and the variations in its jurisdiction, thereby
emphasizing its significance.

Objectives: At the end of the chapter, the students will be

able to:
1) explain what is a court;
2) elaborate on who a judge is, his obligations,
duties, and functions;
3) determine judicial power and its scope;
4) determine the Philippine Courts;
5) discuss the concept of jurisdiction;
6) describe what is a venue;
7) discuss the different requisites of the valid
exercise of jurisdiction
8) describe the different kinds of jurisdiction of
courts;
9) discuss the different criminal jurisdictions of court;
10) determine different principles of jurisdiction; Figure 1 the Lady Justice
11) discuss how criminal actions are instituted
before the court and
12) know the concepts of preliminary investigation and probable
cause

I. Court
Court. A body to which the public administration of justice is delegated is
a tribunal officially assembled under the authority of law at the appropriate
time and place for the administration of justice through which the state
enforces its sovereign rights and powers. (Madelo, 2013, p.60)
2

Judge. A public officer so named in his commission and appointed to

preside over and administer the law in a court of justice. The role of a judge
is not just a title, but a significant responsibility that carries the weight of
administering justice.

Judicial Power and its Scope.

Judicial Power. It is the power to apply the laws to contests or

disputes concerning legally demandable rights and duties between state and
private persons or individual litigants in cases properly brought before the
judicial tribunals. (Madelo. 2013.p.63)

Scope of Judicial Power:

1. To pass upon the validity or constitutionality of the law
2. To determine the legality of the acts of the state or the other
departments (Legislative and Executive) of the government.
3. To interpret and construe them.
4. To render authoritative judgments. (Ibid.)

The Philippine Courts.

Regular Courts.
Supreme Court. (Constitutional Court)
Court of Appeals
Regional Trial Courts
Municipal Trial Courts, Municipal Circuit Trial Courts, Metropolitan
Trial Courts
Special Courts.
Court of Tax Appeals
Sandiganbayan (Ibid.p.64)

Quasi-Judicial Agencies: These administrative bodies under the

executive branch perform quasi-judicial functions that do not form part of the
integrated judicial system. (Ibid.p.65)

Exercise #1
1. When may you invoke the court’s authority?
3

2. What makes Supreme Court as the only constitutional court among

the different courts?
3. Give at least 5 agencies of the government that may have quasi-
judicial power.
Note: Please write your answer on yellow paper (please write
legibly). I am using the following format.

Name Year
and Section
Subject
Date received the module:
Module # Date
submitted the exercise:
Instructor
Topic
Exercise #

Case Digest #1. Make a case digest of the following cases using the
following format. Write this yellow paper, and your case digest
should not exceed two pages in each case (don’t write on the back
page of your paper).

Facts of the case

Issue of the case
Decision.
1) People v. Mariano, G.R. No. L-40527, June 30 1976
2) Foz, Jr. V. People, GR. No. !67764, October 9 2009
3) People V. Lagon, GR No. 45815, May 18, 1990
4) Figueroa V. People, GR No. 147406, July 14, 2008
5) Magno V. People, GR No. 171542, April 6, 2001

___________________________________________________________________________

References:

Madelo, Porferio C. 2013. Criminal Justice System: Basic Concepts and Approaches. Rex Book Store, Inc.
Manila

San Beda. 2017 Memory Aid on Remedial Law. San Beda Bar Operations. Manila

Supreme Court Reports Annotated. (SCRA)

4

II. Jurisdiction.
The power and authority of a court to
hear and decide a case. (Albano, 2017, p. 2)

Criminal Jurisdiction. It is the

authority to hear and try a particular
offense and impose the punishment
provided by law. (Remedial Law Memory
Aid, San Beda, 2017, p.379)

Venue is defined as the particular

country or geographical area in which
a case is filed and where the trial is
held (Ibid.)
Figure 2 the Supreme Court of the Philippines
Requisite for Valid Exercise of
Jurisdiction.

1. Jurisdiction over the Subject Matter. This is the power to hear

and determine the cases of the general class to which the proceedings in
question belong.
 How conferred? By sovereign authority.
 How determined? Based on the allegations in the complaint or
information.
It is conferred by law that is B.P. Blg. 129, otherwise known as the
“Judiciary Reorganization Act. It does not depend on the objections,
acts, or omissions of the parties or any of them. (Albano,2017,p. 3)

2. Jurisdiction over the territory where the crime was

committed. The fundamental rule is that for courts to acquire jurisdiction in
criminal cases, the offense should have been committed or any of its
essential ingredients taken place within the court's territorial jurisdiction.
Territorial jurisdiction in criminal cases is the territory where the court has
5

jurisdiction to take cognizance or to try the offense allegedly committed by

the accused.
See transitory crimes.

3. Jurisdiction over the person of the accused. It is acquired: 1.

Upon lawful arrest of the accused, 2. Upon his voluntary appearance.
(Ibid.p.380)
(Seeking affirmative relief is implied in submission to the court for its
jurisdiction).

Kinds of Jurisdiction.

1. General Jurisdiction. RTC is considered a court of general jurisdiction

because it has the authority to decide upon all disputes filed before it,
except those pending before other courts.
2. Limited jurisdiction is the authority to hear and determine only a
specified case. Examples include special courts (family courts).
3. Original jurisdiction. This is the authority to hear and decide on a
case presented to it for the first time.
4. Appellate Jurisdiction is the authority to take a case already
heard and decided by a lower court and elevate it from the latter
by appeal.
5. Exclusive Jurisdiction is the authority to try and decide a case to the
exclusion of all other courts.
6. Concurrent Jurisdiction. Is the authority of two or more courts to
take cognizance of the case?
7. Criminal Jurisdiction. It is the authority to hear and decide upon
criminal cases.
8. Civil Jurisdiction. It is the authority to hear and decide upon civil
cases. (Madelo.p.66)

Criminal Jurisdiction of the Courts.

Criminal Jurisdiction of Municipal Trial Courts

1. Over offenses punishable with imprisonment not exceeding six years
irrespective of the amount of acceptable and regardless of the other
impossible accessory or other penalties, including the civil liability
arising from such offenses or predicated thereon, irrespective of the
kind, nature, value thereof,
2. Where the only penalty provided by law is a fine, over offenses
punishable with a fine of not more than 4000.
6

3. Offenses involving damage to property through criminal negligence.

4. Special jurisdiction to decide on applications for bail in criminal cases
in the absence of all the RTC-Judges in a province or city.
5. Under PD 1606 as amended by RA 8249 in criminal cases of;
a. government officials and employees.
b. where the imposable penalty is imprisonment of 6 years or less or a
fine of less than 4000.
c. The officer charged does not fall under Sandiganbayan's jurisdiction
or have a salary grade below grade 27.
6. Summary procedure in the following cases.
a. B.P. 22 (Anti-Bouncing Check Law)
b. violations of Municipal Ordinance
c. violation of rental law
d. all criminal offenses with not exceeding six months of imprisonment
or a fine not exceeding 100 or both or damage to property through
criminal negligence where the impossible penalty does not exceed
10,000
e. violations of traffic rules and regulations.

Criminal Jurisdiction of Regional Trial Court.

1) Overall criminal cases not within the exclusive jurisdiction of any court,
tribunal, or body except those now falling under the exclusive and
concurrent jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan.
2) Over offenses punishable with imprisonment exceeding six years.
3) Where the only penalty provided by law is a fine over offenses
punishable with a fine of more than 4,000.
4) Appellate jurisdiction over all cases decided by MTC, MCTC, or MeTC.
5) Over criminal cases under specific laws such as;
a. libel even though punishable by prison correctional.
b. Violation of RA 9165.
c. violation of intellectual property rights
6. Under PD 1606 as amended by RA 8249 in criminal cases of;
a. government officials and employees.
b. where the imposable penalty is imprisonment
exceeding six years or a fine exceeding 4000.
c. The officer charged does not fall under
Sandiganbayan's jurisdiction or have a
salary grade below grade 27.
7. Election offenses.
8. Court martial
7

9. RTC shall have jurisdiction for offenses cognizable by the

Sandiganbayan where the information:
a. does not allege any damage to the government or any bribery;
b. alleged damage to the government of bribery arising from the same
or closely related transactions or amounts not exceeding 1 million.
Figure 3 the Hall of Justice of the Supreme
Court of the Philippines Jurisdiction of Court of Appeals.
1) Exclusive original jurisdiction in actions for annulment of judgments of
the RTC
2) Concurrent jurisdiction:
a. with the SUPREME COURT for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus
against RTC
b. with the RTC and SUPREME COURT for certiorari, prohibition, and
mandamus against lower courts.
3) Exclusive appellate jurisdiction:
a. by appeal from the RTC in cases commenced therein, except those
appealable to the SC or the Sandiganbayan.
b. by petition for review from the RTC in cases appealed to it from the
lower courts and not appealable to the Sandiganbayan. (Ibid.p.69)

Powers and Functions of the Supreme Court.

1) Exercise original jurisdiction over cases affecting ambassadors, other
public ministers, and consuls, and over petitions for certiorari,
prohibition, mandamus, and quo warranto.
2) Review, revise, reverse, modify, or affirm on appeal or certiorari as the
law or the rules of court may provide final judgment and orders of
lower courts in;
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,
b. all cases involving the legality of any tax impost assessment or toll
or any penalty imposed about it,
c. all cases in which the jurisdiction of any lower court is in issue.
d. all criminal cases in which the penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua
or higher.
e. all cases involving only the error or question of law.
3) Assign judges of lower courts temporarily to other stations as the
public interest may require. Such temporary assignment shall not
exceed six months without the consent of the judge concerned.
4) Order a change of venue or place of trial to avoid miscarriage of
justice.
8

5) Promulgate rules.
6) Appoint all officials and employees of the judiciary according to civil
service law. (Ibid.p.67)

Cases heard by Supreme Court EN BANC.

1) All cases involving the constitutionality of an international or executive
agreement or law. To declare a treaty, international or executive
agreement, or law unconstitutional, the concurrence of a majority of
the members who actually took part in the deliberation on the issues in
the case and voted thereon is required. When the necessary majority
cannot be reached, its constitutionality shall be upheld.
2) All other cases, including those involving the constitutionality,
application, or operation of presidential decrees, proclamations orders,
instructions, ordinances, and other regulations which, under the rules
of court, are required to be heard en banc, shall be decided with the
concurrence of the majority who took part in the deliberations.
3) In administrative cases, where the decision is to dismiss a judge of the
lower court, the same majority vote is necessary to order such
dismissal.
4) Cases heard by the division shall be decided or resolved with the
concurrence of the majority of the members who actually took part in
the deliberations of the case and voted thereon, and in no case without
the concurrence of at least thereof such members.
5) Cases modifying or reversing a doctrine or principle of law laid down by
the court in a decision rendered en banc shall be decided by the court
en banc. (Ibid.)

Principles under Jurisdiction.

1) Policy of Judicial Hierarchy. This means that lower courts should

initially decide on a case before a higher court considers it. A higher
court will not entertain a direct resort to it unless the redress desired
cannot be obtained in the appropriate courts. P. 8
2) Doctrine of Judicial Stability or Non-interference. No court has
the authority to interfere by injunction with the judgment or decrees of
another court with concurrent or coordinated jurisdiction possessing
equal power to grant injunctive relief or pass upon or scrutinize and
much less declare as unjust a judgment of another court. P. 9
3) Doctrine of adherence to Jurisdiction. This doctrine means that
once jurisdiction has been attached, it cannot be ousted by subsequent
happenings or events of a character that would have prevented
 9

jurisdiction from attaching in the first instance. Once jurisdiction has

been acquired, the court retains that jurisdiction until it finally disposes
of the case. P. 9
4) Exclusionary principle. When several courts have concurrent
jurisdiction, the first that acquires jurisdiction retains it to the exclusion
of the others. P.9
5) Doctrine of Primary Jurisdiction. Courts will not resolve a
controversy involving a question within the jurisdiction of an
administrative tribunal, especially where the question demands the
exercise of sound administrative discretion and requires the special
knowledge and expertise of said administrative tribunal in determining
technical and intricate matters.
6) Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies. This rule provides that if
a remedy within the administrative machinery can still be resorted to
by giving the administrative officer concerned every opportunity to
decide on a matter within his jurisdiction, the remedy should be
exhausted first before the court’s judicial power can be sought. (ibid)

Constitutional and Statutory Evolution of the Supreme Court’s

Original and Concurrent Jurisdiction.

1. Original and Concurrent Jurisdiction

 Begnaen v. Spouses Caligtan – Affirmed that concurrent jurisdiction means multiple
courts can hear the same subject matter; the court that first acquires jurisdiction has
exclusive right to resolve the controversy (“rule of priority”) eLibrary.
 Olimpio Neñaria et al. v. Veluz (G.R. No. L-4683, May 29, 1952) – Explained that
even when Justice of the Peace courts and Courts of First Instance share concurrent
jurisdiction, the First Instance court retains jurisdiction when it properly takes over
proceedings for trial on the merits Lawphil.

2. Direct Resort to the Court under the Angara Model

(“Angara Model” = relaxed standing via transcendental importance)
 Ang Anti-Trapo Movement of the Philippines v. LTO (citing Funa v. Villar) – The
Supreme Court allowed non-traditional litigants (taxpayers, voters, concerned citizens,
legislators) standing provided they show transcendental importance, such as illegal use of
public funds or constitutional issues eLibrary.
 Quo Warranto Petition vs. Maria Lourdes Sereno – The Court allowed direct
proceeding under the "transcendental importance" of the issue (validity of her
appointment) and upheld the petition even though typically impeachment is the route;
emphasized that quo warranto may proceed independently
10

3. The Transcendental Importance Doctrine

 Sema v. COMELEC and Dilangalen – Petition reached SC directly due to the
transcendental constitutional issue (validity of Shariff Kabunsuan province), highlighting
urgency and public interest.
 Funa v. Villar (cited within FTAP decision) – Clarified that, for concerned citizens to
invoke standing, the case must involve issues of transcendental importance: nature of
funds or assets, government disregard for constitutional prohibition, and lack of other
parties with stronger interest eLibrary.
Additionally, overarching principle: direct resort is only permitted when issues are purely legal
and not factual; the Court is not a trier of facts eLibraryChief Law.

4. The Court (SC) Is Not the Trier of Fact

 Gios-Samar, Inc. v. DOTC (cited in Funa) – The SC restated that it must refuse cases
involving factual issues, even under transcendental importance; trial courts must resolve
facts first eLibrary+1.
 Aala v. Uy – Petition dismissed for raising factual issues instead of purely legal
questions, reaffirming that the Supreme Court doesn’t consider or assess evidence
eLibrary.

5. Doctrine of Hierarchy of Courts

 G.R. No. 228234 (Apr 2023) – The SC reiterated that while it has expanded certiorari
power, this doesn’t override the rule that lower courts with concurrent jurisdiction must
first be approached; SC remains the "court of last resort." Exceptions for direct SC
recourse include matters of constitutionality, public welfare, urgency, lack of remedy, etc.
LawphilChief Law.

 Aala v. Uy – Direct petitions will be dismissed when factual issues are present and relief
could be obtained from lower courts; hierarchy prevents clogging of SC docket and
preserves its appellate role Chief LawStudocu.

6. Court’s Expanded Jurisdiction, Social Rights, and Constitutional Rule–Making Power

under the 1987 Constitution
Expanded Certiorari Jurisdiction:
 G.R. No. 228234 (Apr 2023) again emphasizes SC’s constitutional power (Section 1,
Article VIII) to exercise certiorari and prohibition to correct grave abuse of discretion by
any government branch or instrumentality—not limited to judicial acts Lawphil.
 Separate Concurring Opinion, G.R. No. 225973 (Nov 2016) – Justice Brion opined
that SC’s expanded jurisdiction should be limited to constitutional violations and grave
abuse of discretion, discouraging overreach into statutory matters and preserving lower
courts’ roles Lawphil.
11

Social Rights & Constitutional Rule-Making:

 Oposa v. Factoran (1993) – Landmark case formally recognizing intergenerational
responsibility and environmental rights as social rights enforceable in Philippine law,
broadening the scope of judicial protection beyond traditional political questions.
 Ebralinag v. Division Superintendent (1993) – Supreme Court upheld freedom of
religion, protecting Jehovah’s Witness students who refused to salute the flag, reinforcing
fundamental social rights in state institutions .

Summary Table

Doctrine / Principle Case 1 Case 2

 Original & Concurrent Begnaen v. Spouses
Neñaria v. Veluz (L-4683)
Jurisdiction Caligtan
 Angara Model (Direct Anti-Trapo v. LTO (citing
Quo Warranto vs. Sereno
Resort) Funa)
 Transcendental
Sema v. COMELEC Funa v. Villar (as cited)
Importance
 SC Not Trier of Fact Gios-Samar, Inc. v. DOTC Aala v. Uy
 Hierarchy of Courts G.R. No. 228234 (2023) Aala v. Uy
 Expanded Jurisdiction & G.R. No. 228234 (2023) – Brion concurrence in 225973
Social Rights certiorari power (2016) – limits of power
Ebralinag v. Division
Oposa v. Factoran –
Superintendent – religious
environmental rights
liberty
12

The Prosecution Process. (Rule 110, Revised Rules of

Criminal Procedure)
Criminal Action. One by which the state
prosecutes a person for an act or omission
punishable by law. (Memory Aid 2017, San
Beda, p. 384)
Section 1. Institution of Criminal Action.
1. For offenses where a preliminary
investigation is required under Rule
112 section 1. By filing the complaint
with the proper officer…
 Preliminary investigation is required for
offenses where the penalty prescribed
by law is at least four years, two
months, and one day (prison
correctional in medium period) (Ibid.)
2. For all other offenses: by filing the
complaint or information directly with
the MTC or the complaint with the
prosecutor's office.
Note: in Manila and other chartered Figure 4. The criminal procedure flow chart.
cities, the complaint shall be filed with
the Office of the Prosecutor unless
otherwise provided in their charter.
(Ibid)
Preliminary Investigation. is an inquiry or
proceeding to determine whether there is
sufficient ground to engender a well-funded
belief that a crime has been committed and
that the respondent is probably guilty and should be held for trial. (Madelo, 2012.p 51)
Probable Cause implies probability of guilt and requires more than bare
suspicion but less than evidence to justify conviction (Ibid.)
Exercise #2 (use the same format in exercise #1)
1) Define the following:
A. Jurisdiction
B. Venue
C. General Jurisdiction.
D. Limited jurisdiction
E. Original jurisdiction
13

F. Appellate Jurisdiction
G. Exclusive Jurisdiction.
H. Concurrent Jurisdiction
I. certiorari
J. mandamus
K. Quo warranto
2) Under venue and Jurisdiction. Discuss briefly the case of the Ampatuan
massacre. The crime was committed in Ampatuan, Maguindanao, and
as a general rule, where the crime is committed, the trial should be
held in the court that has jurisdiction over the place; however, this
case is being tried and heard in RTC-Quezon City.
Case Digest #2 (use the same format in exercise #1)
A. Mobilia Products v. Umezawa, G.R. No. 149357, March 4, 2005
B. Uy v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 119000, July 28, 1997
C. Tomas V. Salac, [Link]. 152642, November 13 2002
D. Miranda V. Tuliao, G.R. No. 158763, March 31 2006
E. David V. Agbay, G.R. No. 11913, March 8 2015

______________________________________________________________________________
References:

Albano, Ed Vincent S. 2017. Pre-Week Reviewer in Remedial Law. Central

Bookstore. Manila.

Madelo, Porferio C. 2013. Criminal Justice System: Basic Concepts and Approaches. Rex Book Store, Inc.
Manila

San Beda. 2017 Memory Aid on Remedial Law. San Beda Bar Operations. Manila

Supreme Court Reports Annotated. (SCRA)