Remedial Law are rules that:

 Provide a system for the protection of rights

 Prevention of violation of rights
 Redress for violation of rights
 Provides methods of enforcement of obligations
 Layouts procedure that an action may be filed, tried, and
decided.
 Provides means and methods whereby causes of action may be
effectuated, wrong redress and relief obtained

Basically, remedial law lays down the processes in the court,

how are rights are protected, and obtain redress when
violated.

Sources of Remedial Law

 Rules of Court
 Circulars and administrative issuances of the Supreme Court
 Constitution
 Some statute passed by the Legislative

Remedial Law vs Substantive Law

 Substantive Law pertains to statutes which creates, defines,
and regulates rights and duties
 Remedial Law does not create rights, rather it lays down the
processes on how those rights are protected, enforced, and
given effect.

EX. The Civil Code is a Substantive Law. It created the rights of the
owner over his properties, and liabilities of someone who violates
that right. However, the Civil Code does not provide the methods
and means on how an individual make the erring party liable. It is
the Rules of Court, a Remedial Law, which provides the processes
on how the victim can claim damages against the erring party.

EX. The Revised Penal Code is a Substantive Law. It created crimes,

their nature, and punishment. However, the Revised Penal Code
does not provide the processes on how an offender make to answer
the crime he committed. It is the Rules of Court, a Remedial Law,
which provides the process on how to punish a criminal and make
him liable to his crime.
 Law Making Power of the Judiciary

The Rules of Court is not a law in its strict sense because it is

the Supreme Court who promulgated the rule, not the legislative.
Only the legislative can make laws. However, the Philippine
Constitution (Art VIII, Sec 5 (5)) delegated to the Supreme Court
the Power to create rules concerning the enforcement and
protection of rights, as well as the procedures in Court. Therefore,
the Rules of Law have the force and effect of law.

The Supreme Court has the sole prerogative over the

processes involved in courts, pleadings and practice. The 1987
Constitution gave the Supreme Court the exclusive domain
over such matter. The legislative nor the executive cannot amend
nor repeal any rules promulgated by the Supreme Court.

When the legislative enact laws which contravenes with the

rules promulgated by the Supreme Court, the latter shall be
deemed ineffective. It is the inherent power of the Supreme to
promulgate the Rules on Procedures, not the legislative.

Limitation on the rule-making power of the Supreme Court

 It shall provide simplified and inexpensive procedure for the
speedy disposition of cases
 It shall be uniform for courts of the same grade
 It shall not diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights

The Rules of Court shall govern cases brought after they take effect,
as well as pending cases. However, it shall not be retroactively
apply when:
 It would impair rights
 Would result to injustice
 Impair independence of the courts
 When the statute expressly provided

Scope of Civil Procedure in the Rules of Court

a) Ordinary Civil Action
b) Provisional Remedy
c) Special Civil Action

The courts have discretionary power to decide whether they will

uphold or suspend technical or procedural rules in order to except a
cases. However, such circumstance is only warranted for compelling
reason.

EX. Under Rule 119, an order denying a demurrer to evidence is not

reviewable by certiorari. However, in the case of Macapagal-Arroyo
vs People, the court entertained the petition for certiorari. The
rationale of the action, under the constitution, the Supreme Court
has the power to review cases involving grave abuse of discretion
amounting from lack or excess jurisdiction.

EX. Under Rule 114, an accused cannot be admitted to bail when

the imposable penalty is reclusion perpetua and the evidence of
guilty is strong. However, in the case of Sen. Enrile vs
Sandiganbayan, the court granted the bail of the accused not
because the evidence of guilt is weak, but because of his age and
fragile health. Rationale: National Commitment to uphold human
rights, value, and dignity of every person.

EX. In order to commence a legal action, the petitioner must have a

locus standi. However, when the issue being raise has
transcendental importance, the court has the discretion to entertain
the action.

EX. Prescriptive period may not be strictly followed when the

circumstance merits in order to avoid miscarriage of justice. This is
on the premise that the review or appeal sought is not dilatory and
frivolous.

Pro Hac Vice Rule

 Eaning “for this one only”
 When the court suspends a procedural rule it cannot be relied on
as a precedent since it only apply to that particular case.
 It cannot be taken as part of the jurisprudence

Factors that shall be considered when suspending the Rules

of Court
 Existence of special and compelling reason
 Merits of the case
 A cause not entirely attributable to the fault or negligence of the
party favored by the suspension of rules
 Lack of showing that the review sought is merely frivolous and
dilatory
 The right of the accused and the other party will not be in
prejudice.

The Rules of Court shall not apply on the following cases:

 Election cases
 Land registration cases
 Cadastral cases
 Naturalization Cases
 Insolvency Proceedings.

Exception: It may apply to the above enumerated cases by

 Analogy
 Suppletory Character, whenever practicable and convenient

Administrative bodies and quasi-judicial bodies are not

bound by the laws and procedure provided by the Rules of
Court (DAR vs Uy; Reyes vs COMELEC; Atienza vs Board of
Medicine)

Rules of Court shall not govern over cases involving Labor

disputes (Sime DAR employees Association vs NLRC) and issues
on citizenship and naturalization (Ong Chia vs Republic).

Judicial Power
 Power of the court to settle actual controversies and determine
whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction.
 The judicial power of the court only extend to issues and
controversies that are real, actual, and substantial. An issue
which is moot and academic does no merit judicial review for the
decision will have no practical use or value.

Doctrine of Hierarchy of Courts

 This doctrine is usually triggered when there is a concurrent
jurisdiction among courts. It is use to determine where to
appropriately file a petition.
 When courts have concurrent jurisdiction over a subject matter,
the petitioner does not have the absolute freedom to file the
petition in any of his choice. The petition must be first filed
before the lowest court, having appropriate jurisdiction.

EX. Under Art. 8 Sec5 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court has
the original jurisdiction over cases affecting ambassadors, and other
public ministers and consul. Under BP 129, the RTC also has the
original jurisdiction over the same cases enumerated. Therefore, the
Supreme Court and the RTC has concurrent jurisdiction over the
subject matter. However, a petition cannot be filed directly before
the RTC because under the principle of Hierarchy of Courts, cases
should be filed first before the lowest court having appropriate
jurisdiction.
EX. The Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, and the RTC has
concurrent jurisdiction to issue writ of certiorari, prohibition,
mandamus, quo warranto, habeas corpus, and injunction. The
petition shall be first file before the RTC.

The RTC is not just a trier of fact. It can also resolve

questions of law (Ocampo vs Enriquez, 2016)

Exception to the Doctrine of Hierarchy of Courts

 When there is a special reason to advance the issue directly to a
higher court.
 When dictated by public welfare and advancement of public
policy
 When demanded by the broader interest of justice
 When the challenged orders were patent nullities
 Exceptional and compelling circumstances
 When there is an issue of constitutionality that needs to be
address immediately
 Issue raised is of transcendental importance

Doctrine of non-interference/Doctrine of Judicial Stability

 Courts of equal or coordinate jurisdiction cannot interfere with
each other’s order.

EX. RTC Laoang cannot nullify a writ of habeas corpus issued by RTC
Catarman.

EX. RTC Laoang cannot review the judgment of RTC Gamay.

Court in the Philippines.

Constitutional Court vs Statutory Court

 Constitutional Courts are courts created by the Constitution
itself. The Supreme Court is the only constitutional Court in the
Philippines. It cannot be legislated our of existence or deprived
of its jurisdiction
 Statutory Courts are courts created by law other than the
constitution. All courts, except the Supreme Court are Statutory
Court.
 Sandiganbayan, although the constitution mandates its creation,
it is not a constitutional court for its creation is based on an
statute.

Criminal Court vs Civil Court

 Criminal Courts are court which adjudicates offenses allegedly
committed against the state.
 Civil courts are courts which settles controversies between
private persons.
 All Philippine Courts can exercise criminal and civil jurisdiction
Superior Court vs Inferior Court
 A superior court is one with controlling authority over other
court. It has the power of review and supervision over lower
court
 Inferior courts are courts lower in rank in relation to other court.
Its decision is subject for review by the superior court.

Note: In the 1987 constitution, the term “lower court” is used in lieu
of “inferior court”

Courts General Jurisdiction vs Court of Special Jurisdiction

 Courts of General Jurisdiction are those with competence to
decide on their own jurisdiction and take cognizance of all cases.
 Courts of special jurisdiction are sometimes called Courts of
Limited Jurisdiction. Can only try cases permitted by statute.

Original vs Exclusive Jurisdiction

 The power of the court to take cognizance of a case and try it
and pass judgment for the first time.
 The power of the court to try particular case, excluding other
courts from doing the same.

Court of Tax Appeal

 The CTA is created by RA 1125 with special jurisdiction to act on
cases involving tax, customs, or assessment of law.
 On March 30, 2004, the law was amended by RA 9282,
expanding the jurisdiction of CTA elevating it to a collegiate
court.
 It has now 1 Presiding Justice and 5 Associate Justice
 It has 2 division
 It has exclusive appellate jurisdiction to review decision of the
Commissioner of Internal Revenue, BIR, RTC, and Commissioner
of Customs.