Philippine Bar review · Topic

Error of Jurisdiction vs. Error of Judgment

Explore Error of Jurisdiction vs. Error of Judgment in Subject Matter Jurisdiction for the Philippine Bar. Browse subtopics and published practice questions…

Explore the syllabus

Direct subtopics

This topic has no further subtopics. Explore its practice questions below.

Put it into practice

Practice questions

  1. An ordinary mistake in assessing evidence by a court acting within its jurisdiction is generally what?
  2. Rule65 certiorari principally addresses which kind of defect?
  3. What ordinarily corrects an appealable error of judgment within jurisdiction?
  4. A court has jurisdiction and resolves conflicting testimony against a party. The party alleges only that a witness shou…
  5. A tribunal acts on a subject matter over which governing law gives it no authority. The aggrieved party invokes the jur…
  6. A litigant lets an available ordinary appeal lapse, then files Rule65 solely to relitigate factual findings. No grave a…
  7. A tribunal has general authority over the case, but the challenger alleges a particular act was capricious and whimsica…
  8. Distinguish error of judgment from error of jurisdiction and identify the ordinary review implications.
  9. Why does labeling an adverse finding grave abuse not automatically justify certiorari?
  10. A party misses an available appeal and files certiorari solely to contest ordinary factual findings. Explain the defect…
  11. Does the phrase petition for review on certiorari in Rule 45 make it identical to the special civil action under Rule 6…
  12. Can a procedural mistake by a court acting within its jurisdiction be an error of judgment?