Rem MCQ
Rem MCQ
Rem MCQ
ANSWER:
(C) (See Sec. 34, B.P. Blg. 129)
ANSWER:
(A) (S1 & 3, R35)
ANSWER:
(B) Note: In an appeal from RTC judgment in the exercise of its appellate
jurisdiction, the appeal should be to the CA even if the questions are only
legal. Hence A should be excluded. (S2[c] R42).
IV.Mr. Boaz filed an action for ejectment against Mr. Jachin before the
Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC). Mr. Jachin actively participated in every
stage of the proceedings knowing fully well that the MeTC had no
jurisdiction over the action. In his mind, Mr. Jachin was thinking that if
the MeTC rendered judgment against him, he could always raise the
issue on the jurisdiction of the MeTC. After trial, the MeTC rendered
judgment against Mr. Jachin. What is the remedy of Mr. Jachin? (1%)
(A) File an appeal
(B) File an action for nullification of judgment
(C) File a motion for reconsideration
(D) File a petition for certiorari under Rule 65
ANSWER:
(A) See S8 R40. R47 is not available since appeal is still available. Not C
since a prohibited pleading.
OTHERS:
I. State at least five (5) civil cases that fall under the exclusive original
jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Courts (RTCs). (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The following civil cases fall under the exclusive original jurisdiction of
the RTCs:
II. What trial court outside Metro Manila has exclusive original
jurisdiction over the following cases? Explain briefly your answers.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(a) It would be either the MTC or the RTC depending upon the assessed
value of the apartment unit.
Under B.P. Blg. 129, jurisdiction over real actions is vested in the MTC if
the assessed value of the real property involved does not exceed P20,000
and in the RTC if such assessed value exceeds P20,000.
The Supreme Court has held that where the ultimate relief sought by an
action is the assertion of title to real property, the action is a real one
and not one incapable of pecuniary estimation. [Brgy. Piapi v. Talip, 7
Sep 2005]
Here the ultimate relief sought by the complaint is the assertion of title
since the seller seeks to exercise his right to repurchase. Hence the
action is a real one and jurisdiction is vested in the MTC since the
assessed value does not exceed P20,000.
Alternative Answer:
The Supreme Court has held that an action to enforce the right of
redemption is one which is incapable of pecuniary estimation and thus
within the exclusive original jurisdiction of the RTC pursuant to B.P. Blg.
129. [Heirs of Bautista v. Lindo, 10 March 2014]
SUGGESTED ANSWERS
IV.