Practice question
An appellant identifies a genuine jurisdiction defect. The appellee proves only that the appellant attended trial under court orders and cannot show prolonged tactical delay, advantage or a prejudicial change of position. It asks the court to presume all Tijam factors. Which is best?
- Obedience to court orders conclusively proves laches
- Every appearance is an irrevocable jurisdiction contract
- The court may presume all missing equitable facts
- The exceptional bar requires its actual factual basis; compelled or ordinary participation alone does not replace that showing
- Any jurisdiction defect must be ignored after trial
Legal references
- Figueroa, G.R.147406, July14 2008: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2008/jul2008/gr_147406_2008.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.