Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to www.scribd.com

Scribd
Upload
115 views3 pages

Legal Insights on Docket Fees

1. Payment of docket fees is generally considered jurisdictional by the Supreme Court, however there have been some cases where the Court has allowed relaxation of this requirement. 2. The cases of National Transmission Corporation v. Heirs of Teodulo Ebesa and Manchester v. Court of Appeals reaffirmed that payment of docket fees is mandatory and jurisdictional. 3. However, in some cases like Sun Insurance Office, Ltd. v. Asuncion and United Overseas Bank v. Ros, the Court relaxed this jurisdictional requirement when the party demonstrated willingness to comply with rules by paying additional fees and did not intend to defraud the court.

Uploaded by

Atty Julie
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
115 views3 pages

Legal Insights on Docket Fees

1. Payment of docket fees is generally considered jurisdictional by the Supreme Court, however there have been some cases where the Court has allowed relaxation of this requirement. 2. The cases of National Transmission Corporation v. Heirs of Teodulo Ebesa and Manchester v. Court of Appeals reaffirmed that payment of docket fees is mandatory and jurisdictional. 3. However, in some cases like Sun Insurance Office, Ltd. v. Asuncion and United Overseas Bank v. Ros, the Court relaxed this jurisdictional requirement when the party demonstrated willingness to comply with rules by paying additional fees and did not intend to defraud the court.

Uploaded by

Atty Julie
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

1.

One. The payment of Docket Fees is jurisdictional. However, we have this


question, If payment of Docket fee is jurisdictional, why did the Supreme Court allowed
relaxation in some cases?

2. As ruled in the 2016 case of NATIONAL TRANSMISSION CORPORATION


vs. HEIRS OF TEODULO EBESA, G.R. No. 186102, the payment of appeal
docket fees is both mandatory and jurisdictional. It is mandatory as it is required
in all appealed cases, otherwise, the Court does not acquire the authority to hear
and decide the appeal. The failure to pay or even the partial payment of the
appeal fees does not toll the running of the prescriptive period, hence, will not
prevent the judgment from becoming final and executory.

3. Another case is the case of Manchester vs Court of Appeals.

• The Court held that in the present case, the RTC did not acquire jurisdiction over
the case by the payment of P410.00 as docket fee. Neither can the amendment
of the complaint vest jurisdiction upon the Court. For all legal purposes, there is
no original complaint that was duly filed which could be amended. The order
admitting the amended complaint and all subsequent proceedings and actions
taken by the trial court are null and void. CA was correct in ruling that the basis of
assessment of the docket fee should be the amount of damages sought in the
original complain and not in the amended complaint.
Henceforth, all complaints, petitions, answers and other similar pleadings should
specify the amount of damages being prayed for not only in the body of the
pleading but also in the prayer, and said damages shall be considered in the
assessment of the filing fees in any case. Any pleading that fails to comply with
this requirement shall not be accepted nor admitted, or shall otherwise be
expunged from record. The Court acquires jurisdiction over any case only upon
the payment of the prescribed docket fee. An amendment of the complaint or
similar pleading will not thereby vest jurisdiction in the Court, much less the
payment of the docket fee based on the amounts sought in the amended
pleading.

4. In the case of La Sallete College vs Pilotin G.R. No. 149227 : December 11,
2003, it was held that in order to perfect an appeal from a decision rendered by
the RTC in the exercise of its original jurisdiction, the following requirements
must be complied with. First, within 15 days, a notice of appeal must be filed with
the court that rendered the judgment or final order sought to be appealed;
second, such notice must be served on the adverse party; and third, within the
same 15-day period, the full amount of appellate court docket and other legal
fees must be paid to the clerk of the court that rendered the judgment or final
order.

5. There are several cases, however, when the Court relaxed the Rule that Docket
fee is jurisdictional.
First is the Sun insurance office, ltd.
V. Asuncion, G.R. Nos. 79937-38
February 13, 1989 where The court decreed that where the initiatory pleading is not
accompanied by the payment of the docket fee, the court may allow payment of the fee
within a reasonable period of time, but in no case beyond the applicable prescriptive or
reglementary period. This ruling was made on the premise that the plaintiff had
demonstrated his willingness to abide by the rules by paying the additional docket fees
required.
Also in the case of United Overseas Bank v. Ros G.R. NO. 171532 August 7, 2007 where
The Court explained that where the party does not deliberately intend to defraud the court in
payment of docket fees, and manifests its willingness to abide by the rules by paying additional
docket fees when required by the court, the liberal doctrine enunciated in Sun Insurance Office,
Ltd., and not the strict regulations set in Manchester, will apply.

You might also like