City of Cebu v. Consolacion
REITERATIONFacts
1. The Antecedents: A complaint was filed by Governor Rene Espina, the Province of Cebu, and several municipalities against Mayor Sergio Osmeña, Jr., the City of Cebu, and other public officials. The core of the dispute was to declare Resolution No. 186 of the Province of Cebu and a subsequent Deed of Donation null and void, or alternatively, to annul and revoke it due to alleged breaches of its terms. This action was initiated as Civil Case No. 238-BC. 2. Procedural History: Upon the filing of the complaint, the respondent judge issued an ex parte Writ of Preliminary Injunction, restraining the defendants from disposing of the 210 province-owned lots subject to the donation. The petitioner, the City of Cebu, filed a motion to dismiss, citing lack of legal capacity to sue and improper venue. After a substitution of the Mayor, a similar motion was filed, which the respondent judge denied on December 1, 1965, ordering the defendants to answer. The City of Cebu filed its answer, challenging the respondent judge's authority. A subsequent motion for reconsideration regarding the transfer of the case to a proper branch was also denied, and the case was set for pre-trial. 3. The Petition: The City of Cebu filed an original action for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus with a prayer for a preliminary injunction. The petition argues that the respondent judge, presiding over Branch VII stationed in Barili, lacked the authority to take cognizance of Civil Case No. 238-BC because the subject lots were within the territorial limits of Cebu City, and thus should have been handled by a branch stationed in the city. The petition contends that Administrative Order 302, which allocated cases to specific branches, did not grant Branch VII jurisdiction over this matter. The Supreme Court noted that the petition failed to allege that the respondent judge acted without the prior approval of the Department of Justice, which would have validated his jurisdiction under certain circumstances.
Issue(s)
Whether the respondent judge, presiding over Branch VII of the Court of First Instance of Cebu stationed in Barili, had the authority to take cognizance of Civil Case No. 238-BC concerning lots located within the territorial limits of Cebu City. Whether the actuations of the respondent judge in taking cognizance of the case were void for lack of authority.
Ruling
The petition is dismissed. The actuations of the respondent judge are presumed to be regular and with due authority in the absence of allegations that the Department of Justice's approval was not secured for the transfer of the case.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of the respondent judge's authority to take cognizance of the case: The Court held that Administrative Order 302, which apportioned cases among the branches of the Court of First Instance of Cebu, recognized the authority of any judge to try any case coming from any municipality or city within the province, provided that the interest of the administration of justice so requires and the Department of Justice grants its previous approval. The petition failed to allege that the respondent judge had taken cognizance of the case without the previous approval of the Department of Justice. Without such an allegation, the presumption is that the respondent judge was acting regularly and that official duty in connection with the transfer of the case had been duly complied with. Therefore, the respondent judge had the authority to take cognizance of the case. On whether the actuations of the respondent judge were void for lack of authority: The Court found that the petition did not state a case of lack of authority on the part of the respondent judge. The absence of an allegation that the Department of Justice's approval was not secured, and that the exercise of authority was not demanded by the interest of the administration of justice, leads to the presumption that the judge acted regularly. The Court further noted that whether the action was personal or real, any branch of the Court of First Instance of Cebu, whether stationed in the City or in any municipality, would be a proper venue, as the parties were residents of the Province of Cebu and the lands were within its territorial limits. The apportionment through Administrative Order No. 302 was the only basis for claiming lack of authority, but this order itself allowed for exceptions with the necessary approval.
Main Doctrine
A judge of a branch of the Court of First Instance may validly take cognizance of a case outside its designated territorial jurisdiction if the interest of the administration of justice so requires and the Department of Justice has given its previous approval. The absence of an allegation that such approval was not secured creates a presumption that the judge acted regularly and with due authority.