Difference between jurisdiction and venue

Dear PAO,
Is venue different from jurisdiction? I often hear lawyers talk about the venue and where to file the case, but I also sometimes hear them say that the court has no jurisdiction over it. Are these words interchangeable?
Mily

Dear Mily,
Please be informed of the Supreme Court’s ruling in People of the Philippines v. Angelo O. Montilla GR 241911, Feb. 8, 2023, and Spouses Rodolfo Palmes & Esmaelita Palmes v. Court of Appeals, GR 242375, Ponente: Associate Justice Maria Filomena Singh, where the legal concepts of venue and jurisdiction had been distinguished, to wit:

“It is important now to distinguish between jurisdiction and venue. Venue simply refers to the physical or geographical location where court proceedings will be held, while jurisdiction is abstract and refers to the power or authority of a court to hear and decide a case. In Radiowealth Finance Company, Inc. v. Pineda, the Court aptly distinguished:
“Petitioner confuses the concepts of jurisdiction and venue. In City of Lapu-Lapu v. Philippine Economic Zone Authority:

On the one hand, jurisdiction is ‘the power to hear and determine cases of the general class to which the proceedings in question belong.’ Jurisdiction is a matter of substantive law. Thus, an action may be filed only with the court or tribunal where the Constitution or a statute says it can be brought. Objections to jurisdiction cannot be waived and may be brought at any stage of the proceedings, even on appeal. When a case is filed with a court which has no jurisdiction over the action, the court shall motu proprio dismiss the case.
“On the other hand, venue is ‘the place of trial or geographical location in which an action or proceeding should be brought.’ In civil cases, venue is a matter of procedural law. A party’s objections to venue must be brought at the earliest opportunity either in a motion to dismiss or in the answer; otherwise the objection shall be deemed waived. When the venue of a civil action is improperly laid, the court cannot motu proprio dismiss the case.

“Wrong venue is merely a procedural infirmity, not a jurisdictional impediment. Jurisdiction is a matter of substantive law, while venue is a matter of procedural law.” (Emphasis and Underscoring Ours)
As elucidated by the Supreme Court, jurisdiction is a matter of substantive law, while venue is procedural in nature. Objections as to jurisdiction cannot be waived or may be raised at any time, even on appeal, while objections to venue may be waived. Jurisdiction delves into the power of the court to try and hear cases, while venue speaks of the place or geographical location where the action or proceeding should be brought.

If properly laid, jurisdiction and venue would refer to the same court, which has the power to hear the case and is, procedurally speaking, the place where it must be lodged. However, venue and jurisdiction remain two separate concepts that may not be used interchangeably.

We hope that we were able to answer your queries. This advice is based solely on the facts you have narrated and our appreciation of the same. Our opinion may vary when other facts are changed or elaborated on.

Editor’s note: Dear PAO is a daily column of the Public Attorney’s Office. Questions for Chief Acosta may be sent to [email protected]