Remedial Law is 25% of the examination and the most structurally demanding subject in it. Within that subject, two questions generate the majority of problems: which court has power over this, and what may be filed, where, and when.
Everything else in procedure is downstream of those two.
Jurisdiction: the questions in order
Jurisdiction is not one concept but a sequence. Answer in this order and the problems simplify.
- Is it jurisdiction over the subject matter? Conferred by law, not by the parties, and not waivable by them (though a party may be estopped by conduct). If the court lacks it, nothing else matters.
- Is it jurisdiction over the person? Acquired over the plaintiff by filing, and over the defendant by valid service of summons or voluntary appearance.
- Is it jurisdiction over the issue? Conferred by the pleadings and the relief sought.
- Is it jurisdiction over the property — where the action is a real action or involves a res?
Each of the four has its own rules and its own examinable questions. A candidate who treats "jurisdiction" as one item cannot answer a procedural problem; one who runs the sequence can usually answer it in four sentences.
Subject-matter jurisdiction: how to prove it in an answer
Do not assert jurisdiction; demonstrate it. Three moves:
- Name the law that confers it. The statute or rule, and the provision.
- Match the claim's nature and amount to the court's jurisdiction.
- Note the consequence if it is absent — dismissal for lack of jurisdiction, which may be raised at any stage, and which is not cured by the defendant's participation.
The most frequent error in answers is naming the right court and the wrong basis. The second most frequent is failing to notice that the amount, or the nature of the action (real or personal), changes the answer.
The hierarchy of courts
A concept that is examined in its own right, and that decides many questions:
- Concurrent jurisdiction is the exception, not the rule: certain remedies may be filed in more than one court.
- The doctrine of hierarchy requires that the remedy be sought in the lowest court that can grant it, and the Supreme Court will generally refuse a petition that bypasses the intermediate courts.
- The exceptions — where the hierarchy may be disregarded — are themselves examinable, and are usually tied to a constitutional question or a matter of transcendental importance.
A question asking "may the petition be filed directly with the Supreme Court" is a hierarchy question, and the answer is usually "no, unless".
The remedy tables
The efficient way to hold Remedial Law is a set of tables, one per situation, with the same columns:
| Situation | Remedy | File with | Period (from what) | Effect of filing |
|---|
Four tables cover most of the syllabus:
- Judgments and final orders. Motion for reconsideration, motion for new trial, appeal (ordinary, by notice, by record), petition for review, petition for review on certiorari, motion for reconsideration of the appellate judgment.
- Interlocutory orders. Which orders are subject to a motion for reconsideration, and which may be challenged only through a special civil action.
- Judgments of other bodies. Appeals from quasi-judicial agencies to the Court of Appeals, and the extension rules.
- Special civil actions. Certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto — each with its own ground, period, and forum.
Fill each table from the Rules, one at a time, then rebuild it from memory weekly. Periods and fora are the most precisely markable content in the paper.
Provisional remedies: same structure, five times
Attachment, preliminary injunction, receivership, replevin, support pendente lite — each is answered by the same four questions:
- What is the ground? (The statute's list, and whether it is mandatory or discretionary.)
- What is required of the applicant? (Affidavit, bond, notice.)
- What is the court's action? (Order, hearing, writ.)
- When does it end? (Duration, lifting, counterbond, judgment.)
Because the structure repeats, a single comparison table for all five is genuinely enough — and it is worth building, because the questions are usually "was the remedy properly applied for" rather than "what is a preliminary attachment".
How this produces an answer
A remedial problem usually reads like a story: an order was issued, someone wants to challenge it, and the period is running.
The four-move answer:
- Conclusion. "The remedy is X, filed with Y, within Z days from receipt."
- Rule. The provision, with its ground.
- Application. The order, the date, the nature of the order, and why the remedy fits — plus why the alternative does not.
- Consequence. What happens if filed, what happens if not, and whether the filing stays execution.
The step that earns marks in the middle is rejecting the alternatives — it shows you know the boundary of each remedy, which is precisely what a procedural examiner is testing.
Practising
- The table drill. One table a week, from memory, checked against the Rules. Twenty minutes.
- The forum drill. Ten past questions where the only answer required is: which court, which remedy, which period. Do not write the substance.
- The rejection drill. For each remedy in the table, write one sentence on why its neighbour is unavailable.
Why the spine matters
Every other block of Remedial Law — pleading, pre-trial, evidence, execution — assumes these two answers. And the same habits recur in Civil Law and Criminal Law questions, where a "what is the remedy" tail converts a substantive question into a procedural one.
For the subject's map, see how to study Remedial Law; for the evidence block, evidence fundamentals.