Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Judicial Department
Judicial power includes the duty of the courts of justice to settle actual controversies involving rights which are
legally demandable and enforceable, and to determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the Government.
Justiciable Controversy
A definite and concrete dispute touching on the legal relations of parties having adverse legal interests,
which may be resolved by a court of law through the application of a law (Cutaran v. DENR)
Justiciability Requirements
That there be an actual controversy between or among the parties to the dispute
That the interests of the parties be adverse
That the matter in controversy be capable of being adjudicated by judicial power
That the determination of the controversy will result in practical relief to the complainant (J. Nachura’s
opinion in De Castro v. JBC)
No law shall be passed reorganizing the Judiciary when it undermines the security of tenure of its Members.
Jurisdiction
Power and authority of a court to hear, try and decide a case (Zamora v. CA)
Congress shall have the power to define, prescribe and apportion the jurisdiction of the various courts but
may not deprive the SC of its jurisdiction over cases enumerated in ART VIII, Sec 5
No law shall be passed increasing the appellate jurisdiction of the SC as provided in the Consti w/o its
advice and concurrence (ART VI, Sec 30)
The power to control execution of its decision is an essential aspect of jurisdiction. It cannot be the subject
of substantial subtraction for our Consti vests the entirety of judicial power in 1 SC and in such lower
courts as may be established by law (Echegaray v. SOJ)
Fiscal autonomy
The basic aim of granting fiscal autonomy to the judiciary is to assure its independence (Bernas Green
Book)
(2) All cases involving the constitutionality of a treaty, international or executive agreement, or law, which
shall be heard by the Supreme Court en banc, and all other cases which under the Rules of Court are
required to be heard en banc, including those involving the constitutionality, application, or operation of
presidential decrees, proclamations, orders, instructions, ordinances, and other regulations, shall be
decided with the concurrence of a majority of the Members who actually took part in the deliberations on
the issues in the case and voted thereon.
(3) Cases or matters heard by a division shall be decided or resolved with the concurrence of a majority of the
Members who actually took part in the deliberations on the issues in the case and voted thereon, and in no
case, without the concurrence of at least three of such Members. When the required number is not
obtained, the case shall be decided en banc: Provided, that no doctrine or principle of law laid down by the
court in a decision rendered en banc or in division may be modified or reversed except by the court sitting
en banc.
Referral to en banc
The ff cases must be heard en banc:
o All cases involving the constitutionality of a treaty, int’l/executive agreement, or law
o All cases which under the ROC may be required to be heard en banc
o All cases involving the constitutionality, application or operation of PDs, proclamations, orders,
instructions, ordinances, and other regulations
o Cases heard by a division when the required majority in the division is not obtained
o Cases where the SC modifies or reverses a doctrine or principle of law previously laid down either
en banc or in division
o Administrative cases involving the discipline/dismissal of judges of lower courts (Section 11)
o Election contests for Pres./VP
When the SC sits en banc, cases are decided by the concurrence of a majority of the Members who actually
took part in the deliberations on the issues in the case and voted thereon, provided there is a quorum
Decisions/resolutions of a division of the court, when concurred in by a majority of its members who
actually took part in the deliberations on the issues in a case and voted thereon is a decision/resolution of
the SC itself. The SC sitting en banc is not an appellate court vis-a-vis its Divisions, and it exercises no
appellate jurisdiction over the latter. (Bernas primer)
Division Cases
Other cases or matters may be heard either in division or en banc as the ROC may provide (Bernas
commentary)
Cases v. Matters
o Cases – decided
Controversies brought to the Court for the first time
Where the required number of votes is not obtained, there is no decision
The only way to dispose of the case is then is to refer it to the Court en banc (Fortich v.
Corona)
o Matters – resolved
The rule on cases does not apply to matters
(1) Exercise original jurisdiction over cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and
over petitions for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto, and habeas corpus.
(2) Review, revise, reverse, modify, or affirm on appeal or certiorari, as the law or the Rules of Court may
provide, final judgments 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 in
relation thereto.
(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.
(3) Assign temporarily judges of lower courts to other stations as public interest may require. Such temporary
assignment shall not exceed six months without the consent of the judge concerned.
(5) Promulgate rules concerning the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights, pleading, practice,
and procedure in all courts, the admission to the practice of law, the Integrated Bar, and legal assistance
to the underprivileged. Such rules shall provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for the speedy
disposition of cases, shall be uniform for all courts of the same grade, and shall not diminish, increase, or
modify substantive rights. Rules of procedure of special courts and quasi-judicial bodies shall remain
effective unless disapproved by the Supreme Court.
(6) Appoint all officials and employees of the Judiciary in accordance with the Civil Service Law.
Judicial Review
It is the SC’s power to declare a law, treaty, int’l or executive agreement, PD, proclamation, order,
instruction, ordinance, or regulation unconstitutional (Bernas primer)
It is the power of the courts to test the validity of executive and legislative acts in light of their conformity
w/ the Consti. This is not an assertion of superiority by the courts over the other depts, but merely an
expression of the supremacy of the Consti (Angara v. Electoral Commission)
Effect of unconstitutionality
When a law is declared unconstitutional, it is either:
o Void (traditional view)
If, on its face, it does not enjoy any presumption of validity because it is patently
offensive to the Consti
Produces no effect, creates no office, and imposes no duty (Igot v. COMELEC)
o Voidable
If, on its face, it enjoys the presumption of constitutionality
The law becomes inoperative only upon the judicial declaration of its invalidity; the
declaration produces no retroactive effect (Serrano de Agbayani v. PNB)
Operative Fact Doctrine
o Under this doctrine, the law is recognized as unconstitutional but the effects of the
unconstitutional law, prior to its declaration of nullity, may be left undisturbed as a matter of
equity and fair play. (Hacienda Luisita v. Presidential Agrarian Reform Council)
o In keeping with the demands of equity, the Court can apply the operative fact doctrine to acts and
consequences that resulted from the reliance not only on a law or executive act which is quasi-
legislative in nature but also on decisions or orders of the executive branch which were later
nullified
Requisites before a law can be declared partially unconstitutional
o The legislature must be willing to retain valid portion – separability clause
o The valid portion can stand independently as law (Cruz)
Automatic review
While the Fundamental Law requires a mandatory review by the Supreme Court of cases where the penalty
imposed is reclusion perpetua, life imprisonment, or death, nowhere, however, has it proscribed an
intermediate review.
Allowing an intermediate review by the Court of Appeals before the case is elevated to the Supreme Court
on automatic review is a procedural matter within the rule-making prerogative of the Supreme Court than
the law-making power of Congress. (People v. Mateo)
Change of venue
The courts “can by appropriate means do all things necessary to preserve and maintain every quality
needful to make the judiciary an effective institution of gov’t”
One of these incidental and inherent powers of courts is that of transferring the trial of cases from one court
to another of equal rank in a neighboring site, whenever the imperative of securing a fair and impartial trial,
or of preventing a miscarriage of justice, so demands.
The SC possesses inherent power and jurisdiction to decree that the trial and disposition of a case pending
in a CFI be transferred to another whenever:
o The interest of justice and truth so demand serious and weighty reasons to believe that a trial by
the court that originally had jurisdiction over the case would not result in a fair and impartial trial
lead to a miscarriage of justice. (People v. Gutierrez)
(2) The Congress shall prescribe the qualifications of judges of lower courts, but no person may be appointed
judge thereof unless he is a citizen of the Philippines and a member of the Philippine Bar.
(3) A Member of the Judiciary must be a person of proven competence, integrity, probity, and independence.
How may the right of a judge to hold his position be contested? Through a quo warranto proceeding
(2) The regular Members of the Council shall be appointed by the President for a term of four years with the
consent of the Commission on Appointments. Of the Members first appointed, the representative of the
Integrated Bar shall serve for four years, the professor of law for three years, the retired Justice for two
years, and the representative of the private sector for one year.
(3) The Clerk of the Supreme Court shall be the Secretary ex officio of the Council and shall keep a record of
its proceedings.
(4) The regular Members of the Council shall receive such emoluments as may be determined by the Supreme
Court. The Supreme Court shall provide in its annual budget the appropriations for the Council.
(5) The Council shall have the principal function of recommending appointees to the Judiciary. It may exercise
such other functions and duties as the Supreme Court may assign to it.
Composition
Ex-officio members: Chief Justice, as Chairman; the Secretary of Justice, and a representative of Congress.
Regular members: A representative of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, a professor of law, a retired
justice of the Supreme Court, and a representative of the private sector.
Secretary ex-officio: The Clerk of the Supreme Court.
For the lower courts, the President shall issue the appointments within ninety days from the submission of the list.
Salaries
The change of phraseology of said provision from “shall not be diminished” to “shall not be decreased”
thereby manifests the intent of the framers to subject the salaries of justices and judges to a general tax law
applicable to all income owners (Nitafan v. CIR)
Is the salary of justices and judges subject to income tax? YES
Security of Tenure
Essential to an independent judiciary
Since members of the SC are removable only by impeachment, they can be said to have failed to satisfy the
requirement of “good behavior” only if they are guilty of the offenses which are constitutional grounds for
impeachment. (Bernas Commentary)
The SC alone can determine what “good behavior” is.
Disciplinary cases which are required to be heard by SC en banc
When the penalty to be imposed is:
o Dismissal of a judge
o Disbarment of a lawyer
o Suspension of either for more than 1 year
o A fine exceeding P10,000.00 (People v. Gacott, Jr.)
No petition for review or motion for reconsideration of a decision of the court shall be refused due course or denied
without stating the legal basis therefor.
(2) A case or matter shall be deemed submitted for decision or resolution upon the filing of the last pending,
brief, or memorandum required by the Rules of Court or by the court itself.
(3) Upon the expiration of the corresponding period, a certification to this effect signed by the Chief Justice or
the presiding judge shall forthwith be issued and a copy thereof attached to the record of the case or
matter, and served upon the parties. The certification shall state why a decision or resolution has not been
rendered or issued within said period.
(4) Despite the expiration of the applicable mandatory period, the court, without prejudice to such
responsibility as may have been incurred in consequence thereof, shall decide or resolve the case or matter
submitted thereto for determination, without further delay.
(Self-explanatory)