Practice question
A plaintiff labels a complaint unlawful detainer but alleges neither initially lawful possession nor facts supporting forcible entry. The relief actually seeks the better right to possess in a non-ejectment setting. The plaintiff says the label alone guarantees ejectment jurisdiction. What is correct?
- The label conclusively determines the cause of action
- Every land dispute is unlawful detainer
- The defendant’s surname determines jurisdiction
- The material allegations and actual relief control; the proper plenary possessory action and assessed-value jurisdiction must be examined
- The court must award ownership without proof
Legal references
- https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2021/ra_11576_2021.html — RA 11576, sections 1–2, assessed-value jurisdiction
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2022/dec2022/gr_241507_2022.html — G.R. No. 241507, December 7, 2022, nature of accion publiciana
- https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/64941 — Miranda v. Spouses Mallari, G.R. No. 218343, accion publiciana where ejectment allegations are absent
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.