Remedial Law 1 Notes Atty. Jesus Obra

REMEDIAL LAW 1 NOTES 5.
Batas Pambansa – BP 22 (Bouncing Checks law);

Atty. Jesus Obra BP 129 (Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980)
1. Differentiate Remedial Law from Substantive 6. What is the rule-making power of the Supreme
Law. Court?
A: Remedial Law lays down methods by which the A: Sec. 5(5), Art. VIII of the Constitution provides
rights and obligations arising from substantive law that:
are protected, enforced, and given effect. On the a.) The SC shall have the power to promulgate rules
other hand, substantive law creates, defines, and concerning:
regulates rights and duties concerning life, liberty, 1. The protection and enforcement of
or property the violation of which gives rise to a constitutional rights
cause of action. 2. Pleading, practice, and procedure in all courts
3. Admission to the practice of law
2. Give examples of Remedial Law and Substantive 4. Integrated Bar
Law. 5. Legal assistance to the underprivileged
A: b.) Rules of procedure of special courts and quasi-
Remedial Law- judicial bodies shall remain effective unless
a. Rules of Court disapproved by the Supreme Court.
b. IRRs???
c. The SC has the sole prerogative to amend, repeal,
Substantive Law- or even establish new rules for a more simplified
a. Civil Code?? and inexpensive process, and the speedy
b. Family Code?? disposition of cases. Note that the power to
c. establish procedural rules is no longer shared by
the SC with Congress.
3. What are the sources of Remedial Law?
A: Remedial law is mostly in the Rules of Court. 7. What are the limitations on the rule-making
Circulars of the SC implementing the Rules of Court power of the SC?
are also sources of Remedial Law. An example of A: The rules of procedure promulgated by the SC
such circular is the Rules on Summary Procedure. must:
> provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure
4. What are the classification of courts? for speedy disposition of cases
A: > uniform for all courts of the same grade
Lower Courts- > not diminish, increase, or modify substantive
> Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) rights
> Municipal Trial Court (MuTC)
> Municipal Trial Court in Cities (MTCC) 8. What is the difference between/among courts?
> Municipal Circuit Trial Courts (MCTC) A: Territorial Jurisdiction.
*same level: Shari’a Circuit Court *Jurisdiction is the same in terms of cases, but the
> Regional Trial Court (RTC) difference is the territory. You will never file an
*same level: Shari’a District Court appeal with the same level court.
> Court of Appeals (CA)
> Supreme Court (SC) 9. Where are the following courts located?
> Special courts: Sandiganbayan (SB), Court of Tax A:
Appeals (CTA) 1. MeTC – Cities in MM
2. MuTC – Towns/Municipalities (i.e, if only one)
5. What are the laws created from the American 3. MTCC – Cities outside MM
occupation to 1987? 4. MCTC – Towns/Municipalities (i.e, if it covers
A: two or more municipalities)
1. 1901 to 1935 – American Rule – Laws enacted – 5. RTC – established among the 13 regions in the
ACTS: Philippine Organic Act of 1902 (Jones Law); Philippines, consisting of Regions I to XII and NCR.
Land Registration Act of 1902 (law that created the
Court of Land Registration [LRA]) Principle of judicial hierarchy
2. 1946 to 1972 – Republic Acts: RA 183 (An Act A common refrain in jurisprudence is that, where
Creating the Rizal City), RA 4103 (ISLAW) court have concurrent jurisdiction over a subject
3. 1972 - Presidential Decrees: PD 603 (created the matter, the doctrine of hierarchy of courts, should
Council for the Welfare of Children [CWC] aka Child be observed. Under this doctrine, a case must be
and Youth Welfare Code [1974]); PD 1596 (KIG as filed before the lowest court possible having the
PH territory) appropriate jurisdiction, except if one can advance
4. Transition government – Executive Orders: EO xx a special reason which would allow a party a direct
CYPV NOTES – REM1 1

resort to a higher court [1 Riano 57, 2014 Bantam
Ed.]
The principle of hierarchy of courts requires that
recourses should be made to the lower courts
before they are made to the higher courts
[Republic v. Caguioa, G.R. No. 174385 (2013)]
Parties must observe the hierarchy of courts before
they can seek relief directly from the SC – the
rationale is two-fold:
1. It would be an imposition upon the limited time
of the Court; and
2. It would inevitably result in a delay, in the
adjudication of cases, which are remanded or
referred to the lower court as the proper forum, or
a trier of facts
[People v. Azarraga, G.R. No. 187117 (2011)]
A disregard of the doctrine of hierarchy of courts
warrants, as a rule, the outright dismissal of a
petition [De Castro v. Carlos, G.R. No. 194994
(2013)]
The SC may disregard the doctrine if warranted by
the nature and importance of the issues raised in
the interest of speedy justice and to avoid future
litigations [1 Riano 58-59, 2014 Bantam Ed.]
The SC has allowed direct invocation of its original
jurisdiction to issue writs of certiorari when
1. There are special and important reasons clearly
stated in the petition
2. Dictated by public welfare and the advancement
of public policy
3. Demanded by the broader interest of justice
4. The challenged orders were patent nullities
5. Analogous exceptional and compelling

circumstances called for and justified the
immediate and direct handling of the case
[Republic v. Caguioa, G.R. No. 174385 (2013)]
The Supreme Court held that strict observance of
the doctrine of judicial hierarchy should not be a
matter of mere policy but is a constitutional
imperative. It ruled that when a question
presented to the Court involves the determination
of a factual issue indispensable to the resolution of
the legal issue, the Court will refuse to resolve the
question regardless of the allegation or invocation
of compelling reasons, such as the transcendental
or paramount importance of the case. Such
question must first be brought before the proper
trial courts or the CA, both of which are specially
equipped to try and resolve factual issues. [Gios-
Samar, Inc. v. DoTC and CAAP, G.R. No. 217158
(2019)]
CYPV NOTES – REM1 2

Remedial Law 1 Notes Atty. Jesus Obra

Uploaded by

Remedial Law 1 Notes Atty. Jesus Obra

Uploaded by

REMEDIAL LAW 1 NOTES 5.

Batas Pambansa – BP 22 (Bouncing Checks law);

CYPV NOTES – REM1 1

5. Analogous exceptional and compelling

CYPV NOTES – REM1 2

You might also like