2. Over the Issues

Jurisdiction Over the Issues

Concept

Jurisdiction over the issues concerns the questions submitted for the court’s determination. The pleadings frame those questions, but an issue not pleaded may also become part of the case when the parties try it with their express or implied consent. (Rule 10, Sec. 5, Rules of Court)¹

Governing provisions

Rule 10, Section 5 governs issues tried by consent and amendments to conform the pleadings to the evidence. Rule 6, Section 10 explains how a reply joins issue on new matters raised in an answer. Rule 46, Section 6 permits the court, when necessary, to receive evidence on factual issues itself or delegate its reception. (Rule 10, Sec. 5, Rules of Court)¹ (Rule 6, Sec. 10, Rules of Court)² (Rule 46, Sec. 6, Rules of Court)³

Requisites / Rules

• An unpleaded issue tried with the parties’ express or implied consent is treated as though raised in the pleadings. A party may move to amend the pleadings to conform to the evidence, even after judgment; failure to amend does not change the result of the trial of that issue. (Rule 10, Sec. 5, Rules of Court)¹
• If a party objects that evidence is outside the pleaded issues, the court may allow an amendment. It must act with liberality when doing so serves the presentation of the merits and substantial justice, and it may grant a continuance to enable the amendment. (Rule 10, Sec. 5, Rules of Court)¹
• A reply may deny, or allege facts in denial or avoidance of, new matters pleaded as defenses in the answer. Without a reply, those new matters are deemed controverted. Claims arising from them must instead be stated in an amended or supplemental complaint. (Rule 6, Sec. 10, Rules of Court)²
• A challenge to a party’s legal existence or capacity to sue or be sued in a representative capacity must be made by specific denial, with supporting particulars peculiarly within the pleader’s knowledge. (Rule 8, Sec. 4, Rules of Court)⁴

Distinctions

Do not equate an error in deciding an issue with absence of jurisdiction. The jurisdictional test is whether the tribunal had power to enter upon the inquiry; an erroneous conclusion does not itself negate that power. Conversely, a judgment rendered without the requisite power is void. (Salvador v. Patricia, Inc., G.R. No. 195834, 9 November 2016)⁵

Key doctrines

For certiorari, the question is not simply whether the court decided an issue incorrectly. Rule 65, Section 1 addresses action without or in excess of jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction, where there is no appeal or other plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law. Grave abuse calls for capricious or whimsical action equivalent to lack of jurisdiction. (Rule 65, Sec. 1, Rules of Court)⁶ (Lara'S Gift and Decors, Inc. v. Co., G.R. No. 159922, 24 January 2018)⁷

Exceptions

The pleadings need not be formally amended for the result of a trial by consent to stand. But when evidence outside the pleaded issues is met by an objection, the court must address whether amendment should be allowed under Rule 10, Section 5. (Rule 10, Sec. 5, Rules of Court)¹

Bar tip

Identify the issue as pleaded, deemed controverted, or tried by consent before discussing its resolution. Then keep a wrong answer to an issue distinct from a lack of power to decide it. (Rule 6, Sec. 10, Rules of Court)² (Rule 10, Sec. 5, Rules of Court)¹ (Salvador v. Patricia, Inc.)⁵