Objections based on lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter

A court that has no subject matter jurisdiction over a case should dismiss it. Any decision that it renders will be void, regardless of the quality and quantity of evidence presented by the parties.

How do you raise objections to subject matter jurisdiction? How do you tell the court that the case must be dismissed?

You may file a Motion to Dismiss anytime. This is one of the four situations when a Motion to Dismiss can be filed under Rule 15, Sections 5 and 12 of the Rules of Court (with 2019 amendments).

Section 5 classifies a Motion to Dismiss as a litigious motion, meaning that the adverse party has a chance to file an opposition within five (5) calendar days from receipt. Section 12 provides:

Section 12. Prohibited motions. — The following motions shall not be allowed:

(a) Motion to dismiss except on the following grounds:

1) That the court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter of the claim;

2) That there is another action pending between the same parties for the same cause; and

3) That the cause of action is barred by a prior judgment or by the statute of limitations.

Effect of lack of subject matter jurisdiction

A court can render a valid judgment only if it has jurisdiction over the subject matter of a case. If it has no subject matter jurisdiction, it must dismiss the case because any decision that it renders will be void.

It will be a waste of time and resources if the court continues with the case and renders a decision which, at the end of the day, will be void.

Explaining the effects of lack of subject matter jurisdiction, the Supreme Court stated:

It should be stressed that the court a quo's lack of subject matter jurisdiction over the case renders it without authority and necessarily obviates the resolution of the merits of the case. To reiterate, when a court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter, the only power it has is to dismiss the action, as any act it performs without jurisdiction is null and void, and without any binding legal effects. (Bernadette S. Bilag ,et al vs. Estela Ay-ay, et al,  G.R. No. 189950, April 24, 2017).

Jurisdiction over the issues

What do we mean by the issues?

These are the factual and legal questions that the parties present to the court, for the court to resolve.

In determining the issues that the parties are presenting to the court in an ordinary civil action, you must compare the allegations in the Complaint and in the Answer. 

There will be factual allegations in these two pleadings that are admitted by the parties. Because these are both admitted, there is no issue as to these. Only those factual allegations that are not admitted will be considered factual issues. The court can resolve these factual issues by analyzing the evidence presented by both parties.

As for legal issues, these are questions that the court will resolve by applying the law, which may either be a statute or case law (jurisprudence). 

Example:

In his Complaint, Mr. Creditor alleged that Mr. Debtor borrowed P1,000,000 from him as shown by a promissory note. Mr. Debtor agreed to pay the full amount on December 1, 2024. However, he did not pay.

Mr. Creditor sent him a demand letter giving him until December 10, 2024 to pay. When Mr. Debtor did not pay, Mr. Creditor engaged the services of a lawyer, who prepared and filed a Complaint on his behalf

Mr. Debtor filed an Answer in due course, in which he admitted borrowing the money, but claimed that he paid it in full on December 12, 2024 by depositing it in the bank account of Mr. Creditor. He attached a copy of the deposit slip to his Answer.

As you can see, there are two factual allegations here:

1) The fact of lending and borrowing money;

2) The fact of payment or non-payment.

Mr. Creditor and Mr. Debtor both admit the fact of lending and borrowing, so there is no issue regarding this. There is no need to present any evidence on this matter.

However, they dispute the allegation of payment or non-payment. This is the factual issue that they will now present to the court. Each of them must present evidence to support their allegations: Mr. Creditor, to prove non-payment, and Mr. Debtor, to prove payment. The court will later on examine the evidence and then decide.

Remember, evidence is needed only when there are factual issues. 

Since the dispute involves the amount of P1,000,000, the first-level courts (Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial Court, Municipal Trial Court in Cities, and Municipal Circuit Trial Court) have subject matter jurisdiction over this case. Do these courts also have jurisdiction over the factual issues in this case? Yes. If it were subject matter with a different issue, such as whether or not a marriage may be annulled, these courts have no jurisdiction. It is the Family Court that would have jurisdiction.

In th excerpt below, the Supreme Court discussed the different types of jurisdiction of a court:

HELEN P. DENILA, PETITIONER, V. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, G.R. No. 206077, July 15, 2020 ]

First, jurisdiction over the subject matter is the power to hear and determine the general class to which the proceedings in question belong and is conferred by the sovereign authority which organizes the court. Second, jurisdiction over the parties is the power of the courts to make decisions that are binding on them and is based on due process. This is acquired through voluntary appearance, in the case of the plaintiff or petitioner, or through the coercive power of legal processes, in the case of the defendant or respondent. Third, jurisdiction over the issues pertains to a tribunal's power and authority to decide over matters which are either disputed by the parties or simply under consideration. This aspect of jurisdiction is closely tied to jurisdiction over the remedy and over the subject matter which, in turn, is generally determined in the allegations of the initiatory pleading (complaint or petition) and not the result of proof. However, unlike jurisdiction over the subject matter, jurisdiction over the issues may be conferred by either express or implied consent of the parties. Fourth, jurisdiction over the res pertains to the court's authority over the object or thing subject of the litigation as well as its power to bind the same with its judgment. Last, jurisdiction over the remedy pertains to authority of a tribunal to take cognizance and pass upon the propriety of petitioner or complainant's reliefs sought. The same aspect of jurisdiction is dependent on either the statute providing for a specific procedure for the recognition of a particular right (i.e. reconstitution of certificate of title, registration of title, etc.) or the procedure promulgated by this Court pursuant to its constitutional powers (i.e. habeas corpus, quo warranto, declaratory relief, etc.).

Nature of remedial law

When we ask: what is the nature of remedial law, we want to know what kind of law it is.

Remedial law is procedural in nature, in that it is the "how to" counterpart of substantive law. Substantive laws create rights and impose obligations, while remedial laws show us how to protect or enforce those rights, or to seek redress if there is a violation.

For example, let's talk about the right of a child to financial support. There is a law creating this right, and that is the Family Code. Here are some provisions:

Art. 194. Support comprises everything indispensable for sustenance, dwelling, clothing, medical attendance, education and transportation, in keeping with the financial capacity of the family.

The education of the person entitled to be supported referred to in the preceding paragraph shall include his schooling or training for some profession, trade or vocation, even beyond the age of majority. Transportation shall include expenses in going to and from school, or to and from place of work. (290a)

Art. 195. Subject to the provisions of the succeeding articles, the following are obliged to support each other to the whole extent set forth in the preceding article:

(1) The spouses;
(2) Legitimate ascendants and descendants;
(3) Parents and their legitimate children and the legitimate and illegitimate children of the latter;
(4) Parents and their illegitimate children and the legitimate and illegitimate children of the latter; and
(5) Legitimate brothers and sisters, whether of full or half-blood (291a)

These two provisions from the Family Code show us who have the right to be supported, and who are obliged to give support. This is substantive law.

How do you enforce this right in case the person bound to give support does not do so? This is procedural law.

The procedure is found in AM No. 21-03-03-SC entitled "Rules on Action for Support and Petition for Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Decisions or Judgments on Support" that took effect on May 31, 2021. A complaint must be filed by the plaintiff; the defendant must file an answer. Pre-trial and trial will be held, then the court will render judgment.

For a good write-up about the nature of remedial law, also known as adjective law, read this post entitled "adjective law - Meaning in Law and Legal Documents, Examples and FAQs".

Jurisdiction over the subject matter

There are different courts, and there are different types of cases that they can decide, depending on the subject matter. This is what we call "subject matter jurisdiction". Usually, when we say "jurisdiction", we mean subject matter jurisdiction but bear in mind that there are different aspects of jurisdiction.

For example, when a tenant violates a lease contract leading to its termination, the landlord will file a case to evict him from the leased property. This action is known as "unlawful detainer". 

Courts that have the power to hear and decide unlawful detainer cases are the first-level courts (Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, Municipal Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts). In other words, subject matter jurisdiction over unlawful detainer cases belongs to these first-level courts.

So what is subject matter jurisdiction? It is the power and authority of a court to hear and decide cases of a certain class or category. 

In the case of City of Lapu-Lapu v. Philippine Economic Zone Authority, G.R. No. 184203, November 26, 2014), the Supreme Court stated:

Jurisdiction over the subject matter is "the power to hear and determine cases of the general class to which the proceedings in question belong." It is conferred by law, which may either be the Constitution or a statute. Jurisdiction over the subject matter means "the nature of the cause of action and the relief sought." Thus, the cause of action and character of the relief sought as alleged in the complaint are examined to determine whether a court had jurisdiction over the subject matter. Any decision rendered by a court without jurisdiction over the subject matter of the action is void. (citations omitted)

It is important to file a case in a court that has subject matter jurisdiction. Otherwise, the decision will be void.

In this blog, there is a separate post showing you the subject matter jurisdiction of the different courts.

HOW IS JURISDICTION CONFERRED? HOW IS IT DETERMINED?

Jurisdiction is conferred by law. Specific laws confer subject matter jurisdiction upon specific courts. Since we are talking about laws, we mean the statutes that are issued by Congress.

The laws that confer subject matter jurisdiction upon our courts are:

1. Batas Pambansa 129 as amended known as the Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980; and

2. Republic Act No. 11576 (2021) which further expanded the jurisdiction of the first level courts.

I must add that the 1987 Constitution also confers jurisdiction upon our Supreme Court.

Again, note that jurisdiction is conferred by law. This means that only the Congress can grant or change it. The parties cannot agree or stipulate on subject matter jurisdiction, unlike venue which they can stipulate on. 

HOW IS JURISDICTION DETERMINED?

In specific cases, subject matter jurisdiction is determined by the allegations of the complaint.

For example, if the complaint seeks to have the defendant evicted from the rented premises because he failed to pay rent despite repeated demands, the allegations of the complaint will determine the court that has jurisdiction for that particular case.

In this case, it is the first-level court.

On the other hand, if the complaint seeks to recover possession from the defendant, where the plaintiff has been deprived of possession for more than one year, and the real property involved has an assessed value of P500,000, the Regional Trial Court has subject matter jurisdiction.

Concept of remedial law

Remedial law is a branch of law that tells us how persons can enforce their legal rights, or obtain redress for violation of these rights. It is about making things right when one's legal rights have been violated.

It outlines the rules and procedures involved in legal proceedings, from the time a case is filed, until judgment is rendered and becomes final.

Since it involves procedure, it instructs persons about HOW these legal remedies can be availed of, or how they can defend themselves if cases are filed against them. 

Remedial law is also known as procedural or adjective law.