R.A. No. 11576, approved on 30 July 2021, amended B.P. Blg. 129, the law on court jurisdiction, by increasing the jurisdictional amounts in civil cases before the RTCs and the MTCs as follows:
For real actions, the jurisdictional amount was increased to an assessed value of ₱400,000.
For probate proceedings, the jurisdictional amount was increased to a gross estate value of ₱2,000,000.
For admiralty and maritime cases, as well as for cases of a demand or claim, the jurisdictional amount was increased to ₱2,000,000.
The Regional Trial Courts (RTCs) or the second-level courts would have jurisdiction when the value or amount involved in the civil case exceeds the jurisdictional amounts; otherwise, jurisdiction over the civil case would belong to the first-level courts or the MTCs.
R.A. No. 11576 took effect on 21 August 2021, the 15th day following its publication on 6 August 2021, pursuant to Section 7 thereof.
On 20 August 2021, the Supreme Court’s Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) issued OCA Circular No. 115-2021, captioned “Effectivity of R.A. No. 11576.” The Circular, addressed to all RTC and MTC judges, provides as follows:
“Consistent with the usual practice, those cases now falling within the jurisdiction of the first level courts pursuant to R.A. No. 11576, though filed with the second level courts prior to its effectivity but no Pre-Trial Order has yet been issued, shall be remanded to and heard by the first level courts. They shall be transmitted to the Clerks of Court of the Office of the Clerk of Court for raffle among the first-level courts in multi-sala stations, or the Branch Clerks of Court for single sala first level courts.”
With utmost respect, it is submitted that OCA Circular No. 115-2021 is not in accord with Section 4 of R.A. No. 11576 which provides that its provisions “shall apply prospectively to all civil cases filed in the second level courts and first level courts from the date of its effectivity,” as well as with Article 4 of the Civil Code which provides that “laws shall have no retroactive effect, unless the contrary is provided.”
It is clear from the provisions of Section 4 of R.A. No. 11576 that it does not apply to civil cases filed before its effectivity on 21 August 2021. In such cases, the RTC shall retain the jurisdiction it has over the civil case notwithstanding the passage of R.A. No. 11576. Otherwise put, R.A. No. 11576 has no retroactive effect whatsoever. Thus, if a civil case for collection of ₱1,000,000 was filed with the RTC prior to 21 August 2021, the RTC would retain jurisdiction over the case even after 21 August, irrespective of the absence of a pre-trial order.
OCA Circular No. 115-2021, however, clearly imports that R.A. No. 11576 applies to civil cases filed before 21 August 2021 but in which no pre-trial order has yet been issued. With due respect, this would amount to an amendment of Section 4 of R.A. No. 11576, a power which the Supreme Court, let alone the OCA, does not possess.
The passage of OCA Circular No. 115-2021 has led to some confusion and even paralysis in the RTCs. Some RTCs have declined to issue protective and ancillary orders and writs, even in urgent and exigent situations, invoking OCA Circular 115-2021.
On 1 September 2021, the OCA issued OCA Circular No. 118-2021 which suspended the remand of cases pursuant to Circular No. 115-2021 “pending the approval of the revisions to the Rules on Summary Procedure and Small Claims Cases by the Court.” The confusion and paralysis engendered by OCA Circular No. 115-2021 was not relieved by Circular No. 118-2021 since it merely suspended the remand of cases, thus giving the distinct impression that the remand would push through upon approval by the Supreme Court of the revisions.
It is thus respectfully and earnestly submitted that OCA Circular No. 115-2021 be recalled at the Court’s earliest convenience. This would clear up doubts on the part of the RTCs on whether they should continue proceedings in the affected civil cases.
Postscript
On 28 March 2022, the OCA issued OCA Circular No. 72-2022. OCA Circular No. 72-2022 recognized that R.A. No. 11576 does not have any retroactive effect and stopped (not merely suspended) the remand of cases to the MTCs that had been ordered under OCA Circular No. 115-2021. OCA Circular No. 72-2022 also directed that those cases which had been remanded to the MTCs pursuant to OCA Circular No. 115-2021 should be returned to the concerned RTCs.
However, regarding remanded cases which had already been decided by the MTCs prior to the issuance of OCA Circular No. 72-2022, the circular provides that these decisions “are deemed in order and valid as the concerned first level courts are considered to have acquired jurisdiction over the subject cases.”
With due respect, this provision of OCA Circular No. 72-2022 is arguable. The remand of cases to the MTC of cases falling within the RTC’s jurisdiction would not confer subject-matter jurisdiction upon the MTC. Clearly, the MTC does not have jurisdiction over the remanded cases and proceedings in the MTC after the remand, including the rendition of judgment, are without any legal force and effect for lack of jurisdiction. It is submitted that all remanded cases be returned to the RTC regardless of whether they have been decided or not and that it be expressly stated that all proceedings in the MTC after the remand are without any legal force and effect.
-oOo-
Sir, with due respect to your well supporyed legal opinion re Pulido v Tenebro cases, i submit that the doctrine of pro reo will apply even to the subsequent marriage.