PEx Highlights

PROMO: In the Heart of the Sea

Join the promo and get a chance to win In the Heart of the Sea screening tickets.

read more


Who will rule the hard court this season? A new champion will emerge. Will it be UST or FEU?

read more

REVIEW: Hunger Games

Check out the review for Hunger Games: Mockingjay part 2. PEx mod Hydrangea shares his views here.

read more

REVIEW: Victor Frankenstein

"Victor Frankenstein comes in after Halloween, but for a good reason". Check out the full movie review here!

read more

Philippine Superliga 2015

Who will be the queens of volleyball this season? Cheer for your volleyball idols in this thread.

read more

NOW SHOWING: A Second Chance

Ano ang paborito mong hugot line galing sa A Second Chance? Wag magpahuli sa kwentuhan.

read more

Results 1 to 13 of 13
  1. #1


    Facts: Ex-girlfriend wishes the barangay captain to mediate a domestic squabble with ex-boyfriend. Ex-girlfriend lives in Barangay A, ex-boyfriend lives in Barangay B and goes to work in Barangay C.

    Question: Does Barangay Captain C have jurisdiction in this matter?

  2. #2


    assuming the subject matter is within the jurisdiction of the barangay, venue should be in barangay "b" by virtue of section 3 of pd 1508 which states:

    "disputes between or among persons actually residing in the same barangay shall be brought for amicable settlement before the Lupon of said barangay. Those involving actual residents of different barangays within the same city or municipality shall be brought in the barangay where the respondent or any of the respondents actually resides, at the election of the complainant."

  3. #3


    kd / gg: the question is "does Bgy. Captain C have jurisdiction over the squabble?"

    Ans: on the given facts, NO. The determining factor in referring cases to the Bgy. is firstly: a) the nature of the controversy; b) the particular residences of the parties (must be belonging to the same or adjacent barangays) and c) does not fall under the exception of the katarungan pambarangay law, among which are as follows: 1) one of the the parties is a corporation, when one party is the government or its agencies, 3)the offense has no private offended party (ex. bribery) etc. etc. (haba eh!)

  4. #4

    Red face

    So if ex-boyfriend in this case receives summons from Barangay Captain C, he may refuse service on the grounds of "lack of jurisdiction"?

  5. #5


    kd: yup - any other question?

    [This message has been edited by senator yak (edited 05-23-2000).]

  6. #6


    ang cute ng smiley mo senator! gigantum!!!

  7. #7


    nakakatakot nga, eh. hahahaha!

  8. #8



    Sorry to beat this horse, but this is a true case, so my questions arise as the case evolves.

    It now happens that ex-boyfriend received summons from Barangay Captain C and decides to respond by personally appearing at the barangay hall, where he meets the complainant. After some discussion, the complaint is dismissed on the merits. Ex-boyfriend did not need to use the improper jusrisdiction argument.

    Ex-girlfriend, though, is a tenacious creature, and we are anticipating further action.

    Supposing ex-girlfriend discovers that the place of complaint was wrong in the first place, can she file the same complaint in the *correct* place, i.e. Barangay B?

  9. #9


    BTW, adidas ang tatak ng tenacious niya.

  10. #10


    kuyadanny - in my look (sa tingin ko), the girl cannot do that anymore. the proper party to raise the objection of improper jurisdiction is the respondent or the government agency. in this case, there were no such objections hence they all submitted freely to the jurisdiction of baranggay captain "c". if she does file it with baranggay captain "b", you can raise the defense of "forum shopping" (which is probably where she got her tenacious - hehe).

    please feel free to ask, kuyadanny. i think i can speak for bb and senator yak when i say we welcome these queries from our fellow pexers.

    (senator yak, bb - please comment on my advice above. thanks.)

  11. #11



    The Katarungan Pambarangay Law clearly specifies who has jurisdiction over controversies covered by the said law.

    In your problem, it is quite clear that Bgy. C has no jurisdiction. So, even though the parties voluntarily submitted themselves before Bgy. C, and that the complaint was dismissed on the merits, still, the ex-girlfriend can file the complaint in the proper forum, i.e. Bgy. B or A.

    To sustain the action of Bgy. C in dismissing the complaint is similar to a litigant asking a disinterested court to rule on a legal issue. The principle of law following this controversy is that "jurisdiction is defined by law and is not subject to the whims and caprices of party litigants."

    I hope this helps.

    BTW - ex-boyfriend can always raise the defenses he raised in Bgy. C to warrant the dismissal of the case.

  12. #12

    Post The latest developments

    This is no longer an issue of a barangay captain's jurisdiction. Shortly after my last post, my driver was sued for the felony of slight physical injuries, "People of the Philippines vs My Driver*" in the Metropolitan Trial Court of Mandaluyong. In the past eight months, we have experienced a wonderful education on the expeditious and economical ways of the Philippine justice system.

    My driver was found guilty last Monday, and sentenced to a fine of P200, which he paid on his way back to the office from the court. He has 15 days to appeal the decision.

    My questions, counsel, are these:

    Is this a typical sentence? It seems a little light, and absurd, to me. By levying such a light sentence, is the court trying to send defendant a signal to not consider filing an appeal and forget about the whole affair?

    *name was changed to protect the guilty

  13. Advertisement

  14. #13
    Laker fan for life aticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Seoul, S. Korea


    It all has to do with the Revised Penal Code, and other applicable criminal laws.

    Most of them were promulgated many decades ago, so the amounts of the fines are ridiculously low. They weren't when they were first conceived, but now some serious thought has to be put into establishing a more prohibitive set of penalties.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts