Flashcards Studio

A boundary-dispute action involving adjacent parcels of land is filed in the Municipal Trial Court (MTC). The case involves title issues that fall within the exclusive original jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Court (RTC), regardless of the amount involved. The defendant did not object to the MTC’s lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and participated in the proceedings (answered, offered evidence, and cross-examined witnesses). After trial, the MTC renders judgment in favor of the plaintiff. The defendant then moves for relief, contending lack of SMJ. (a) Identify the doctrine governing the effect of estoppel on subject-matter jurisdiction. (b) Distinguish the controlling rule on estoppel in this context from the general principle that lack of SMJ cannot be cured by consent. (c) Apply the doctrine to the facts: is the defendant barred by estoppel from challenging the MTC’s lack of SMJ, and what is the proper judicial remedy if the court truly lacked SMJ?