REMEDIAL LAW REVIEWER

KATARUNGANG PAMBARANGGAY
(Part I of IX)

I. Katarungang Pambarangay
A. Local Government Code (Secs. 399-422)
Sec. 399. Lupong Tagapamayapa. - (a) There is hereby created in
each barangay a lupong tagapamayapa, xxx.
xxx
(f) In barangays where majority of the inhabitants are members
of indigenous cultural communities, local systems of settling
disputes through their councils of datus or elders shall be
recognized without prejudice to the applicable provisions of this
Code.
Sec. 400. Oath and Term of Office. - xxx.
Sec. 401. Vacancies. - xxx.
Sec. 402. Functions of the Lupon. - xxx
Sec. 403. Secretary of the Lupon. - xxx
Sec. 404. Pangkat ng Tagapagkasundo. - (a) There shall be
constituted for each dispute brought before the lupon a conciliation
panel to be known as the pangkat ng tagapagkasundo, xxx.
Sec. 405. Vacancies in the Pangkat. - xxx
Sec. 406. Character of Office and Service of Lupon Members. - xxx
Sec. 407. Legal Advice on Matters Involving Questions of Law. -
The provincial, city legal officer or prosecutor or the municipal legal
officer shall render legal advice on matters involving questions of
law to the punong barangay or any lupon or pangkat member
whenever necessary in the exercise of his functions in the
administration of the katarungang pambarangay.
Sec. 408. Subject Matter for Amicable Settlement; Exception
Thereto. – - The lupon of each barangay shall have authority to bring
together the parties actually residing in the same city or
municipality for amicable settlement of all disputes except:
xxx (compiled by SC AC 14-93)
 2

Sec. 409. Venue. - (a) Disputes between persons actually residing

in the same barangay shall be brought for amicable settlement
before the lupon of said barangay.
(b) Those involving actual residents of different barangays within
the same city or municipality shall be brought in the barangay
where the respondent or any of the respondents actually resides, at
the election of the complainant.
(c) All disputes involving real property or any interest therein
shall be brought in the barangay where the real property or the
larger portion thereof is situated.
(d) Those arising at the workplace where the contending parties
are employed or at the institution where such parties are enrolled
for study, shall be brought in the barangay where such workplace or
institution is located. Objections to venue shall be raised in the
mediation proceedings before the punong barangay; otherwise, the
same shall be deemed waived. Any legal question which may
confront the punong barangay in resolving objections to venue
herein referred to may be submitted to the Secretary of Justice, or
his duly designated representative, whose ruling thereon shall be
binding.
Rules on Venue
.1 living in the same barangay – said barangay
.2 living in the different barangays within the same city or municipality –
barangay where the/a respondent resides, at the option of the
complainant
.3 involving real property or any interest therein – where the real property or
the larger portion thereof is situated
.4 arising at the workplace or at the educational institution – where such
workplace or institution is located
Sec. 410. Procedure for Amicable Settlement. - (a) Who may
initiate proceeding - Upon payment of the appropriate filing fee, any
individual who has a cause of action against another individual
involving any matter within the authority of the lupon may
complain, orally or in writing, to the lupon chairman of the
barangay.
(b) Mediation by lupon chairman - Upon receipt of the complaint,
the lupon chairman shall within the next working day summon the
respondent(s), with notice to the complainant(s) for them and their
witnesses to appear before him for a mediation of their conflicting
interests. If he fails in his mediation effort within fifteen (15) days
from the first meeting of the parties before him, he shall forthwith

Remedial Law Reviewer Mark de Leon, JD 2001

 3

set a date for the constitution of the pangkat in accordance with the
provisions of this Chapter.
(c) Suspension of prescriptive period of offenses - While the
dispute is under mediation, conciliation, or arbitration, the
prescriptive periods for offenses and cause of action under existing
laws shall be interrupted upon filing of the complaint with the
punong barangay. The prescriptive periods shall resume upon
receipt by the complainant of the complaint or the certificate of
repudiation or of the certification to file action issued by the lupon
or pangkat secretary: Provided, however, That such interruption
shall not exceed sixty (60) days from the filing of the complaint with
the punong barangay.
(d) Issuance of summons; hearing; grounds for disqualification -
The pangkat shall convene not later than three (3) days from its
constitution, on the day and hour set by the lupon chairman, to hear
both parties and their witnesses, simplify issues, and explore all
possibilities for amicable settlement. For this purpose, the pangkat
may issue summons for the personal appearance of parties and
witnesses before it. In the event that a party moves to disqualify
any member of the pangkat by reason of relationship, bias, interest,
or any other similar grounds discovered after the constitution of the
pangkat, the matter shall be resolved by the affirmative vote of the
majority of the pangkat whose decision shall be final. Should
disqualification be decided upon, the resulting vacancy shall be
filled as herein provided for.
(e) Period to arrive at a settlement - The pangkat shall arrive at a
settlement or resolution of the dispute within fifteen (15) days from
the day it convenes in accordance with this section. This period
shall, at the discretion of the pangkat, be extendible for another
period which shall not exceed fifteen (15) days, except in clearly
meritorious cases.
Procedure for Amicable Settlement
.1 Complaint (need not be in writing) with filing fee to the lupon chairman of
the barangay (interrupts prescription for at most 60 days)
.2 lupon chairman shall within the next working day summon the
respondents, with notice to the complainants for them and their witnesses
to appear before him for a mediation
.3 if there is failure to mediate within 15 days from the first meeting,
pangkat is constituted
.4 pangkat convenes not later than 3 days from constitution, may issue
summons

Remedial Law Reviewer Mark de Leon, JD 2001

 4

.5 In the event that a party moves to disqualify any member of the pangkat
on a ground discovered after the constitution, the matter shall be
resolved by the affirmative vote of the majority of the pangkat whose
decision shall be final. Should disqualification be decided upon, the
resulting vacancy shall be filled.
.6 The pangkat shall arrive at a settlement or resolution of the dispute within
15 days from the day it convenes, extendible for at most 15 days; may be
extended further only in clearly meritorious cases.
.7 The prescriptive periods shall resume
.a upon receipt by the complainant of
)1 the complaint
)2 the certificate of repudiation issued by the lupon or pangkat
secretary
)3 the certification to file action issued by the lupon or pangkat
secretary
.b lapse of 60 days from filing of complaint with the baranggay chairman
Sec. 411. Form of Settlement. - All amicable settlements shall be
in writing, in a language or dialect known to the parties, signed by
them, and attested to by the lupon chairman or the pangkat
chairman, as the case may be. When the parties to the dispute do
not use the same language or dialect, the settlement shall be
written in the language or dialect known to them.
Form of settlement
.1 in writing
.2 in a language or dialect known to the parties
.3 signed by the parties, and
.4 attested to by the lupon or pangkat chairman
Sec. 412. Conciliation. - (a) Pre-condition to Filing of Complaint in
Court. - No complaint, petition, action, or proceeding involving any
matter within the authority of the lupon shall be filed or instituted
directly in court or any other government office for adjudication,
unless there has been a confrontation between the parties before
the lupon chairman or the pangkat, and that no conciliation or
settlement has been reached as certified by the lupon secretary or
pangkat secretary as attested to by the lupon or pangkat chairman
or unless the settlement has been repudiated by the parties
thereto.
(b) Where Parties May Go Directly to Court. – xxx (compiled by SC
AC 14-93)

Remedial Law Reviewer Mark de Leon, JD 2001

 5

(c) Conciliation among members of indigenous cultural

communities. - The customs and traditions of indigenous cultural
communities shall be applied in settling disputes between members
of the cultural communities.
GR: Preconditions to filing a complaint in court when the cause of action
within the authority of the lupon, either
.1 There had been
.a confrontation before the lupon chairman or the pangkat,
.b no conciliation or settlement has been reached, and
.c certification by the lupon or pangkat secretary as attested to by the
lupon or pangkat chairman that no conciliation or settlement has been
reached
.2 or, settlement has been repudiated by the parties thereto
Sec. 413. Arbitration. - (a) The parties may, at any stage of the
proceedings, agree in writing that they shall abide by the
arbitration award of the lupon chairman or the pangkat. Such
agreement to arbitrate may be repudiated within five (5) days from
the date thereof for the same grounds and in accordance with the
procedure hereinafter prescribed. The arbitration award shall be
made after the lapse of the period for repudiation and within ten
(10) days thereafter.
(b) The arbitration award shall be in writing in a language or
dialect known to the parties. When the parties to the dispute do not
use the same language or dialect, the award shall be written in the
language or dialect known to them.
Agreement to arbitrate must be in writing.
Repudiation of
1. Agreement to arbitrate – within 5 days from agreement to arbitrate (Sec.
413)
2. Arbitration award – within 10 days, action for annulment of arbitration
award with the MTC (Sec. 416)
3. Amicable settlement – within 10 days by an affidavit filed with the lupon
chairman (Sec. 418)
Sec. 414. Proceedings Open to the Public; Exception. - All
proceedings for settlement shall be public and informal: Provided,
however, That the lupon chairman or the pangkat chairman, as the
case may be, may motu proprio or upon request of a party, exclude
the public from the proceedings in the interest of privacy, decency,
or public morals.

Remedial Law Reviewer Mark de Leon, JD 2001

 6

Sec. 415. Appearance of Parties in Person. - In all katarungang

pambarangay proceedings, the parties must appear in person
without the assistance of counsel or representative, except for
minors and incompetents who may be assisted by their next-of-kin
who are not lawyers.
Sec. 416. Effect of Amicable Settlement and Arbitration Award. -
The amicable settlement and arbitration award shall have the force
and effect of a final judgment of a court upon the expiration of ten
(10) days from the date thereof, unless repudiation of the
settlement has been made or a petition to nullify the award has
been filed before the proper city or municipal court. However, this
provision shall not apply to court cases settled by the lupon under
the last paragraph of Section 408 of this Code (non-criminal cases not
within the lupon’s authority referred by a court), in which case the
compromise settlement agreed upon by the parties before the lupon
chairman or the pangkat chairman shall be submitted to the court
and upon approval thereof, have the force and effect of a judgment
of said court.
Sec. 417. Execution. - The amicable settlement or arbitration
award may be enforced by execution by the lupon within six (6)
months from the date of the settlement. After the lapse of such
time, the settlement may be enforced by action in the appropriate
city or municipal court.
Execution of an amicable settlement or arbitration award in KB
.1 by motion by the lupon – within 6 months from date of settlement
.2 by action before the inferior courts – after 6 months from date of
settlement
Sec. 418. Repudiation. - Any party to the dispute may, within ten
(10) days from the date of the settlement, repudiate the same by
filing with the lupon chairman a statement to that effect sworn to
before him, where the consent is vitiated by fraud, violence, or
intimidation. Such repudiation shall be sufficient basis for the
issuance of the certification for filing a complaint as hereinabove
provided.
Grounds for repudiation of settlement: consent vitiated by fraud, violence, or
intimidation
Sec. 419. Transmittal of Settlement and Arbitration Award to the
Court. - The secretary of the lupon shall transmit the settlement or
the arbitration award to the appropriate city or municipal court
within five (5) days from the date of the award or from the lapse of
the ten-day period repudiating the settlement and shall furnish

Remedial Law Reviewer Mark de Leon, JD 2001

 7

copies thereof to each of the parties to the settlement and the

lupon chairman.
Sec. 420. Power to Administer Oaths. - The punong barangay, as
chairman of the lupong tagapamayapa, and the members of the
pangkat are hereby authorized to administer oaths in connection
with any matter relating to all proceedings in the implementation of
the katarungang pambarangay.
Sec. 421. Administration; Rules and Regulations. - xxx.
Sec. 422. Appropriations. - xxx
B. Supreme Court Administrative Circular No. 14-93
I. All disputes are subject to Barangay conciliation pursuant to
the Revised Katarungang Pambarangay Law xxx, and prior recourse
thereto is a pre-condition before filing a complaint in court or any
government offices, except in the following disputes:
1. Where one party is the government, or any subdivision or
instrumentality thereof;
2. Where one party is a public officer or employee, and the
dispute relates to the performance of his official functions;
3. Where the dispute involves real properties located in
different cities and municipalities, unless the parties thereto
agree to submit their difference to amicable settlement by an
appropriate Lupon;
4. Any complaint by or against corporations, partnership or
juridical entities, since only individuals shall be parties to
Barangay conciliation proceedings either as complainants or
respondents (Sec. 1, Rule VI, Katarungang Pambarangay Rules);
5. Disputes involving parties who actually reside in barangays
of different cities or municipalities, except where such barangay
units adjoin each other and the parties thereto agree to submit
their differences to amicable settlement by an appropriate
Lupon;
6. Offenses for which the law prescribes a maximum penalty of
imprisonment exceeding one (1) year or a fine over five thousand
pesos (P5,000.00);
7. Offenses where there is no private offended party;
8. Disputes where urgent legal action is necessary to prevent
injustice from being committed or further continued, specifically
the following:

Remedial Law Reviewer Mark de Leon, JD 2001

 8

a. Criminal cases where accused is under police custody or

detention (see Sec. 412 (b) (1), Revised Katarungang
Pambarangay Law);
b. Petitions for habeas corpus by a person illegally deprived
of his rightful custody over another or a person illegally
deprived or on acting in his behalf;
c. Actions coupled with provisional remedies such as
preliminary injunction, attachment, delivery of personal
property and support during the pendency of the action; and
d. Actions which may be barred by the Statute of
Limitations.
9. Any class of disputes which the President may determine in
the interest of justice or upon the recommendation of the
Secretary of Justice;
10. Where the dispute arises from the Comprehensive Agrarian
Reform Law (CARL) (Sec. 46 & 47, R.A. 6657);
11. Labor disputes or controversies arising from employer-
employee relations (Montoya vs. Escayo, et al., 171 SCRA 442;
Art. 226, Labor Code, as amended, which grants original and
exclusive jurisdiction over conciliation and mediation of disputes,
grievances or problems to certain offices of the Department of
Labor and Employment);
12. Actions to annul judgment upon a compromise which may
be filed directly in court (See Sanchez vs. Tupaz, 158 SCRA 459).
When prior recourse to Barangay conciliation is not a pre-condition before
filing a complaint in court or any government offices (MEMORIZE!)
.1 one party is the government, or any subdivision or instrumentality
thereof;
.2 one party is a public officer or employee, and the dispute relates to the
performance of his official functions;
.3 dispute involves real properties located in different cities and
municipalities, unless the parties thereto agree to submit their difference
to amicable settlement by an appropriate Lupon;
.4 complaint by or against juridical entities
.5 parties who actually reside in barangays of different cities or
municipalities, except where such barangay units adjoin each other and
the parties thereto agree to submit their differences to amicable
settlement by an appropriate Lupon
.6 Offenses punishable by more than 1 year or a fine over P5,000

Remedial Law Reviewer Mark de Leon, JD 2001

 9

.7 Offenses where there is no private offended party

.8 accused is under police custody or detention
.9 Petitions for habeas corpus
.10 Actions coupled with provisional remedies
.11 Actions which may be barred by the Statute of Limitations.
.12 As determined by the President
.13 CARL disputes
.14 Labor disputes or controversies arising from employer-employee
relations
.15 Actions to annul judgment upon a compromise
Escolin: Cases for legal separation should be among the exceptions. It was
an oversight.
II. Under the provisions of R.A. 7160 on Katarungang
Pambarangay conciliation, as implemented by the Katarungang
Pambarangay Rules and Regulations promulgated by the Secretary
of Justice, the certification for filing a complaint in court or any
government office shall be issued by Barangay authorities only upon
compliance with the following requirements:
1. Issued by the Lupon Secretary and attested by the Lupon
Chairman (Punong Barangay), certifying that a confrontation of
the parties has taken place and that a conciliation settlement has
been reached, but the same has been subsequently repudiated
(Sec. 412, Revised Katarungang Pambarangay Law; Sec. 2[h],
Rule III, Katarungang Pambarangay Rules);
2. Issued by the Pangkat Secretary and attested by the
Pangkat Chairman, certifying that:
a. a confrontation of the parties took place but no
conciliation/settlement has been reached (Sec. 4[f], Rule III,
Katarungang Pambarangay Rules; or
b. that no personal confrontation took place before the
Pangkat through no fault of the complainant (Sec. 4[f], Rule III,
Katarungang pambarangay Rules).
3. Issued by the Punong Barangay, as requested by the proper
party on the ground of failure of settlement where the dispute
involves members of the same indigenous cultural community,
which shall be settled in accordance with the customs and
traditions of that particular cultural community, or where one or
more of the parties to the aforesaid dispute belong to the
minority and the parties mutually agreed to submit their dispute

Remedial Law Reviewer Mark de Leon, JD 2001

 10

to the indigenous system of amicable settlement, and there has

been no settlement as certified by the datu or tribal leader or
elder to the Punong Barangay of place of settlement (Secs. 1,4 &
5, Rule IX, Katarungang Pambarangay Rules); and
4. If mediation or conciliation efforts before the Punong
Barangay proved unseccessful, there having been no agreement
to arbitrate (Sec. 410 [b], Revised Katarungang Pambarangay
Law; Sec. 1, c. (1), Rule III, Katarungang Pambarangay Rules), or
where the respondent fails to appear at the mediation proceeding
before the Punong Barangay (3rd par. Sec. 8, a, Rule VI,
Katarungang Pambarangay Rules), the Punong Barangay shall
not cause the issuance at this stage of a certification to file
action, because it is now mandatory for him to constitute the
pangkat before whom mediation, conciliation, or arbitration
proceedings shall be held.
Requirements for issuance of certification for filing a complaint in court or
any government office
.1 Issued by the Lupon Secretary and attested by the Lupon Chairman,
certifying that
.a a confrontation took place and that a conciliation settlement has been
reached, but the same has been subsequently repudiated
.2 Issued by the Pangkat Secretary and attested by the Pangkat Chairman,
certifying that:
.a a confrontation took place but no conciliation/settlement has been
reached, or
.b no confrontation took place before the Pangkat through no fault of the
complainant
.3 Issued by the Punong Barangay, as requested by the proper party on the
ground of failure of settlement where
.a Either
)1 the dispute involves members of the same indigenous cultural
community, which shall be settled in accordance with the customs
and traditions of that particular cultural community, or
)2 one or more of the parties to the aforesaid dispute belong to the
minority and the parties mutually agreed to submit their dispute to
the indigenous system of amicable settlement, and
.b there has been no settlement as certified by the datu or tribal leader or
elder to the Punong Barangay of place of settlement; and
The Punong Barangay shall not issue the certification to file action, but
should constitute the pangkat in the following cases

Remedial Law Reviewer Mark de Leon, JD 2001

 11

.1 If mediation or conciliation efforts before the Punong Barangay proved

unsuccessful, there having been no agreement to arbitrate, or
.2 where the respondent fails to appear at the mediation proceeding before
the Punong Barangay,
III. xxx
IV. A case filed in court without compliance with prior Barangay
conciliation which is a pre-condition for formal adjudication xxx may
be dismissed upon motion of defendant/s, not for lack of jurisdiction
of the court but for failure to state a cause of action or prematurity
xxx, or the court may suspend proceedings upon petition of any
party under Sec. 1, Rule 21 of the Rules of Court; and refer the case
motu proprio to the appropriate Barangay authority, applying by
analogy Sec. 408 [g], 2nd par., of the Revised Katarungang
Pambarangay Law which reads as follows:
"The court in which non-criminal cases not falling within the
authority of the Lupon under this Code are filed may at any time
before trial, motu proprio refer case to the Lupon concerned for
amicable settlement.”
Options where a case is filed in court without the required prior Barangay
conciliation
.1 dismissal upon motion of defendant on failure to state a cause of action or
prematurity
.2 suspension of proceedings upon petition of any party
.3 refer the case motu proprio to the appropriate Barangay authority
C. Cases
Morata v. Go, 125 SCRA 444 (1983) The Lupon has the authority to settle
amicably all types of disputes involving parties who actually reside in the
same city or municipality. The law makes no distinction with respect to the
classes of civil disputes that should be compromised at the barangay level,
in contradistinction to the limitation imposed upon the Lupon over criminal
cases. The fact that the city or municipal courts are forum for the nullification
or execution of the settlement or arbitration award issued by the Lupon
cannot be construed as a limitation of the scope of authority of the Lupon.
This merely confers upon the city and municipal courts the jurisdiction to
pass upon and resolve petitions or actions for nullification or enforcement of
settlement/arbitration awards issued by the Lupon, regardless of the amount
involved or the nature of the original dispute. But there is nothing in the
context of said sections to justify the thesis that the mandated conciliation
process in other types of cases applies exclusively to said inferior courts. The
conciliation process at the barangay level is compulsory not only for cases

Remedial Law Reviewer Mark de Leon, JD 2001

 12

falling under the exclusive competent of the MeTCs and MTCs, but for actions
cognizable by the RTCs as well.
Candido v. Macapagal, 221 SCRA 328 (1993) The barangay court or Lupon
has jurisdiction over disputes between parties who are actual residents of
barangays located in the same city or municipality or adjoining barangays of
different cities or municipalities. Where some of the other co-defendants
reside in barangays of municipalities, cities and provinces different with that
of the complainant, compulsory conciliation is not required. The action may
be filed directly in court.
Ramos v. CA, 174 SCRA 690 (1989) The dispute should not have ended with
the mediation proceedings before the Punong Barangay because of his
failure to effect a settlement. It was not for the Punong Barangay to say that
referral to the Pangkat was no longer necessary merely because he himself
had failed to work out an agreement between the parties. The Pangkat could
have exerted more efforts and succeeded (where he had not) in resolving
the dispute. If the complainant refuses to appear before the Punong
Barangay, he is barred from seeking judicial recourse for the same course of
action. The parties must appear in person without assistance of counsel,
except minors and incompetents.
Vda. de Borromeo v. Pogoy, 126 SCRA 217 (1983): Referral of a dispute to
the Barangay Lupon is required only where the parties thereto are
individuals. An intestate estate is a juridical person and not an individual.
The administrator may file the complaint directly in court.
San Miguel v. Pundogar, 173 SCRA 704 (1989): Failure of a plaintiff to comply
with the requirements of Katarungang Pambaranggay does not affect the
jurisdiction of the court that tried the action. Failure of a plaintiff to go
through the required conciliation procedure merely affects the sufficiency, or
the maturity or ripeness of the cause of action and the complaint becomes
vulnerable to a motion to dismiss, not on the ground of lack of jurisdiction,
but rather for want of cause of action or for prematurity. Where, however,
the defendant in an action fails for one reason or another to respond to a
notice to appear before the Lupon, the requirement of conciliation
proceedings must be regarded as having been satisfied by the plaintiff. A
defendant cannot be allowed to frustrate the requirements of the statute by
her own refusal or failure to appear before the Lupon and then later to assail
a judgment rendered in such action by setting up the very ground of non-
compliance with conciliation proceedings. The alleged failure on the part of a
plaintiff to comply with conciliation proceedings must be raised in a timely
manner, that is, at the first available opportunity, if such alleged failure is to
provide legal basis for dismissal of the complaint. Such failure must be
pleaded, in a timely motion to dismiss or in the answer. Failure to so set up
that defense produces the effect of waiver of such defense.
Uy v. Contreras, 237 SCRA 167 (1994): Conciliation process at the Barangay
level is a condition precedent for the filing of a complaint in Court. Non-

Remedial Law Reviewer Mark de Leon, JD 2001

 13

compliance with that condition precedent could effect the sufficiency of the
plaintiff's cause of action and make his complaint vulnerable to dismissal on
the ground of lack of cause of action or prematurity. Pending the first
mediation, no case could be validly filed with the courts. Filing of complaint
with the lupon tolls the prescriptive period for 60 days at most.
Escolin: Labor cases are exempt from Barangay Conciliation proceedings
because the labor court has its own experts at arriving at an amicable
settlement.
Gegare v. CA, 177 SCRA 471 (1989) Where the case involves residents of the
same barangay, it must comply with conciliation proceedings even if a
government instrumentality is one of the defendants. If the other only
adverse party is the government or its instrumentality or subdivision, the
case falls within the exception. But when the government instrumentality is
only one of multiple adverse parties, a confrontation should still be
undertaken among the other parties.
Galuba v. Laureta, 157 SCRA 627 (1988): The amicable settlement and
arbitration award shall have the force and effect of a final judgment of a
court upon the expiration of the 10 days from the date thereof unless
repudiation of the settlement has been made or a petition for nullification of
the award has been filed before the proper city or municipal court. Having
failed to repudiate the amicable settlement within the 10-day period,
petitioner is left with no recourse but to abide by its terms.

Remedial Law Reviewer Mark de Leon, JD 2001