General Principles

CONCEPT OF REMEDIAL LAW

CONCEPT
Remedial statute or statutes:
(1) relating to remedies or modes of procedure;
(2) do not take away or create vested rights;
(3) BUT operate in furtherance of rights already
existing. [Riano citing Systems Factor Corporation
v NLRC (2000)]
The Rules of Court, promulgated by authority of law,
have the force and effect of law, if not in conflict with
positive law [Inchausti & Co v de Leon (1913)]. The rule
is subordinate to the statute, and in case of conflict,
the statute will prevail. [Shioji v Harvey (1922)].
APPLICABILITY
The Rules of Court is applicable in ALL COURTS,
except as otherwise provided by the SC [Rule 1, Sec.
2].
It governs the procedure to be observed in civil or
criminal actions and special proceedings [Rule 1, Sec.
3]. It does not apply to the following cases: [ELCINO]
(1) Election cases,
(2) Land registration cases,
(3) Cadastral cases,
(4) Naturalization cases,
(5) Insolvency proceedings
(6) Other cases not herein provided for
Except by analogy or in a suppletory character and
whenever practicable and convenient [Rule 4, Sec. 4]

PROSPECTIVITY/RETROACTIVITY
The Rules of Court are not penal statutes and cannot
be given retroactive effect [Bermejo v Barrios (1970)].
Rules of procedure may be made applicable to
actions pending and undetermined at the time of
their passage, and are deemed retroactive in that
sense and to that extent. [In the Matter to Declare in
Contempt of Court Hon. Simeon Datumanong
(2006)].
SUBSTANTIVE LAW AS DISTINGUISHED FROM
REMEDIAL LAW
REMEDIAL LAW OR PROCEDURAL LAW
(a) provides a method of enforcing the rights
established by substantive law;
(b) prescribes the method of enforcing rights or
obtaining redress for their invasion. [Bustos v
Lucero (1948)]
(c) Judicial process for enforcing rights and duties
recognized by substantive law and for justly
administering remedy and redress for a disregard
or infraction of them. [Fabian v Desierto (1998)]
SUBSTANTIVE LAW
That part of the law which creates, defines and
regulates rights concerning life, liberty, or property, or
the powers of agencies or instrumentalities for the
administration of public affairs [Bustos v Lucero
(1948)]
RULE-MAKINGPOWEROF THE SUPREME COURT
(a) The Rules of Court was adopted and
promulgated by the Supreme Court pursuant to
the provisions of Sec 5(5) of Art. VIII of the
Constitution, vesting in it the power to:
(1) 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.
(b) The power to promulgate rules of pleading,
practice, and procedure is no longer shared by the
Supreme Court with Congress, more so with the
executive… [Riano citing Echegaray v Secretary of
Justice (1999)]
LIMITATIONS ON THE RULE-MAKING POWER OF THE
SUPREME COURT
Sec 5(5) of Art. VIII of the Constitution sets forth the
limitations to the power: [SUS]
(a) that the rules shall provide a simplified and
inexpensive procedure for speedy disposition of
cases;
(b) that the rules shall be uniform for courts of the
same grade; and
(c) that the rules shall not diminish, increase or
modify substantive rights.
POWER OF THE SUPREME COURT TO AMEND AND SUSPEND
PROCEDURAL RULES
Power to amend remedial laws
(a) The constitutional faculty of the Court to
promulgate rules of practice and procedure
necessarily carries with it the power to overturn
judicial precedents on points of remedial law
through the amendment of the Rules of Court.
[Pinga v Heirs of Santiago (2006)].
(b) The SC has the sole prerogative to amend, repeal,
or even establish new rules for a more simplified
and inexpensive process, and the speedy
disposition of case [Neypes v CA (2005)]
UP COLLEGE OF LAW CIVIL PROCEDURE BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION
PAGE 3
Power to suspend remedial laws
(a) It is within the inherent power of the Supreme
Court to suspend its own rules in a particular case
in order to do justice [De Guia v De Guia (2001)].
(b) When the operation of rules will lead to an
injustice or if their application tends to subvert
and defeat instead of promote and enhance
justice, their suspension is justified [Republic v CA
(1978)].
(c) There is no absolute rule as to what constitutes
good and sufficient cause that will merit
suspension of the rules. The matter is
discretionary upon the Court [Republic v Imperial
Jr. (1999)].
(d) The bare invocation of "the interest of substantial
justice" is not a magic wand that will
automatically compel this Court to suspend
procedural rules [Ramos v Sps Lavendia (2008)].
(e) Procedural rules are not to be belittled or
dismissed simply because their non-observance
may have resulted in prejudice to a party's
substantive rights. Like all rules, they are required
to be followed except only for the most persuasive
of reasons when they may be relaxed to relieve a
litigant of an injustice not commensurate with the
degree of his thoughtlessness in not complying
with the procedure prescribed. [Polanco v Cruz
(2009)].
NOTE: Although not laws in the technical sense of
the term, Rules of Court, promulgated by authority of
law, have the force and effect of law. [Riano citing
Shioji v Harvey (1922)]
Applicability: Prospective
The Rules of Court shall govern cases brought after
they take effect, and also all further proceedings
then pending, EXCEPT to the extent that in the
opinion of the Court their application would not be
feasible or would work injustice. [Riano citing Rule
114]
NATURE OF PHILIPPINE COURTS
MEANING OF A COURT
Definition
(a) A court is an organ of the government belonging
to the judicial department, the function of which is
the application of the laws to controversies
brought before it (and) as well as the public
administration of justice.
(b) Generally, the term describes an organ of the
government consisting of one person or of several
persons, called upon and authorized to
administer justice. It is also the place where
justice is administered. [Riano citing Black’s and
Am. Jur. and C. J. S.]
COURT AS DISTINGUISHED FROM A JUDGE
Court Judge
Tribunal officially
assembled under
authority of law
Simply an officer of such
tribunal
An organ of the
government with a
personality separate and
distinct from judge
Person who sits in court
An office A public officer [Riano]
The circumstances of the court are not affected by the
circumstance that would affect the judge. The
continuity of a court and the efficacy of its
proceedings are not affected by the death,
resignation, or cessation from the service of the
judge presiding over it. In other words, the judge may
resign, become incapacitated, or be disqualified to
hold office, but the court remains. The death of the
judge does not mean the death of the court [Riano
citing ABC Davao Auto Supply v. CA (1998)].
CLASSIFICATION OF PHILIPPINE COURTS
Note: Please see succeeding subsections for
discussions on a to d.
(a) Courts of law and equity
(b) Courts of Original and Appellate jurisdiction
(c) Courts of General and Special jurisdiction
(d) Constitutional and statutory courts
(e) Superior and Inferior courts
(1) Superior courts – Courts which have the
power of review or supervision over another
and lower court.
(2) Inferior courts – Those which, in relation to
another court, are lower in rank and subject to
review and supervision by the latter.
[Regalado]
(f) Courts of record and not of record
(1) Courts of record – Those whose proceedings
are enrolled and which are bound to keep a
written record of all trials and proceedings
handled by them. [Regalado] One attribute of
a court of record is the strong presumption as
to the veracity of its records that cannot be
collaterally attacked except for fraud. All
Philippine courts, including inferior courts, are
now courts of record. [Riano]
(2) Courts not of record – Courts which are not
required to keep a written record or transcript
of proceedings held therein.
UP COLLEGE OF LAW CIVIL PROCEDURE BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION
PAGE 4
COURTS OF ORIGINAL AND APPELLATE JURISDICTION
(a) Courts of original jurisdiction – Those courts in
which, under the law, actions or proceedings may
be originally commenced.
(b) Courts of appellate jurisdiction – Courts which
have the power to review on appeal the decisions
or orders of a lower court. [Regalado]
COURTS OF GENERAL AND SPECIAL JURISDICTION
(a) Courts of general jurisdiction – Those competent
to decide their own jurisdiction and to take
cognizance of all kinds of cases, unless otherwise
provided by the law or Rules.
(b) Courts of special or limited jurisdiction – Those
which have no power to decide their own
jurisdiction and can only try cases permitted by
statute. [Regalado]
CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY COURTS
(a) Constitutional courts – Those which owe their
creation and existence to the Constitution and,
therefore cannot be legislated out of existence or
deprived by law of the jurisdiction and powers
unqualifiedly vested in them by the Constitution.
e.g. Supreme Court; Sandiganbayan is a
constitutionally-mandated court but created by
statute.
(b) Statutory courts – Those created, organized and
with jurisdiction exclusively determined by law.
[Regalado]
COURTS OF LAW AND EQUITY
Philippine courts are both courts of law and equity.
Hence, both legal and equitable jurisdiction is
dispensed with in the same tribunal [U.S. v.
Tamparong (1998)]
PRINCIPLE OF JUDICIAL HIERARCHY
(a) The judicial system follows a ladderized scheme
which in essence requires that lower courts
initially decide on a case before it is considered by
a higher court. Specifically, under the judicial
policy recognizing hierarchy of courts, a higher
court will not entertain direct resort to it unless
the redress cannot be obtained in the appropriate
courts. [Riano citing Santiago v. Vasquez (1993)]
(b) The principle is an established policy necessary to
avoid inordinate demands upon the Court’s time
and attention which are better devoted to those
matters within its exclusive jurisdiction, and to
preclude the further clogging of the Court’s docket
[Lim v. Vianzon (2006)].
(c) When the doctrine/principle may be disregarded:
A direct recourse of the Supreme Court’s original
jurisdiction to issue writs (referring to the writs of
certiorari, prohibition, or mandamus) should be
allowed only when there are special and
important reasons therefor, clearly and
specifically set out in the petition. [Mangahas v.
Paredes (2007)]. The Supreme Court may
disregard the principle of hierarchy of courts if
warranted by the nature and importance of the
issues raised in the interest of speedy justice and
avoid future litigations [Riano].
DOCTRINE OF NON-INTERFERENCE OR DOCTRINE OF
JUDICIAL STABILITY
(a) The principle holds that courts of equal and
coordinate jurisdiction cannot interfere with each
other’s orders [Lapu-lapu Development and
Housing Corp. v. Group Management Corp.(2002)]
The principle also bars a court from reviewing or
interfering with the judgment of a co-equal court
over which it has no appellate jurisdiction or
power of review [Villamor v. Salas (1991)].
(b) The doctrine of non-interference applies with
equal force to administrative bodies. When the law
provides for an appeal from the decision of an
administrative body to the SC or CA, it means
that such body is co-equal with the RTC in terms
of rank and stature, and logically beyond the
control of the latter [Phil Sinter Corp. v. Cagayan
Electric Power (2002)].