Booking.com

Author Topic: Jurisdiction is conferred upon the court, not the judge  (Read 264 times)

MIKELIGALIG.com

  • FOUNDER
  • Webmaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 21082
  • NEED A WEBSITE? 09206301130 | info@mikeligalig.com
Jurisdiction is conferred upon the court, not the judge
« on: November 15, 2016, 08:31:37 PM »
Explain the rule that jurisdiction is conferred upon the court, not the judge.

ANSwer: The jurisdiction is vested in the court, not in the judges. When a case is filed in one branch, jurisdiction over the case does
not attach to the branch or judge alone to the exclusion of the other branches. Trial may be held or proceedings continue by and before another branch or judge. The apportionment
and distribution of cases do not involve a grant or limitation of jurisdiction; the jurisdiction attaches and continues to be
vested in the CFI (now RTC) of the province, and the trials may be held by any branch or judge of the court. (Bacalso v. Ramolete, 21 SCRA 519, October 26,1967; Bala v. Martinez, 181 SCRA 459; Hasegawa, et al. v. Kitamura, G.R. No. 149177

TUBAGBOHOL.com can now be accessed on mobile phones via Tapatalk App both in Android and Apple OS.

Romans 10:9-10
"If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved."

My Facebook Profile: https://www.facebook.com/michaelortegaligalig
RSS Feeds Tubag Bohol Feed Burner


 

Mobile View
SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal