An independent Philippine legal research libraryRead with context. Verify with confidence.
← Back to library
DILG legal opinionSource checked

Legal opinion on the interpretation of Section 409 (d) of the Local Government Code of 1991.

DILG Opinion No. 32, s. 2026 · 2026 · DILG legal opinions — verified official source

Source checked. The source check identifies the document; it does not verify every transcribed word or its current legal effect. Recovered or scanned text may contain errors. Compare the wording and subsequent history with the linked legal source.

SCANNED TEXT · CHECK ORIGINAL WORDING · DIGITAL P. 2 / 2
DMS R10-2026-02-20-010 barangay in resolving objections to venue herein referred to may be submitted to the Secretary of Justice or his duly designated representative, whose ruling thereon shall be binding.” Based on the above-quoted provision of Section 408 of the LGC, the Lupong Tagapamayapa only acquires jurisdiction over the parties who are “actually residing in the same city or municipality.” It is clearly established in the said provision that parties must be residing in the same municipality or city, otherwise, the Lupon will not acquire jurisdiction over the person of those parties. The jurisdiction of the Lupon must first be established before applying the provision on venue for amicable settlement. Section 409 (d) should be read in consideration of Section 408, thus, failure to establish the jurisdiction of the Lupon, the determination of venue is no longer necessary. To illustrate, if the subject matter of the amicable settlement happens in a workplace where the parties are employed or enrolled for study, yet they reside in different cities or municipalities, the Lupon of the barangay where the said workplace or institution is located cannot acquire jurisdiction over the person of the parties concerned. On the other hand, if the parties concerned reside in the same city or municipality, then the Lupon of the barangay where the said workplace or institution is located acquires jurisdiction over the person of the parties concerned. The opinion of this Department is based solely on the facts and representations you have narrated in your letter and our appreciation of the same. Further, this opinion is being rendered without prejudice to any contrary opinion of competent authorities and the courts. We hope to have addressed your concern accordingly. Very truly yours, BY AUTHORITY OF THE SECRETARY: PP ATTY. ROMEO P. BENITEZ Undersecretary for External, Legal and Legislative Affairs OUSELLA/RPB/LLLS-LRALLD/nss Page 2 of 2