Is a failure to pay a filing fee for supplemental accounting a jurisdictional defect that renders the trial court powerless to hear and determine a case?

Moreover, we reject appellants' argument that failure to pay a filing fee for a supplemental accounting is a jurisdictional defect that renders the trial court powerless to hear and determine a case. "[A] party's failure to comply with a mandatory requirement 'does not necessarily mean a court loses fundamental jurisdiction resulting in "'an entire absence of power to hear or determine the case, an absence of authority over the subject matter or the parties."' [Citations.] It is a 'misuse of the term "jurisdictional" . . . to treat it as synonymous with "mandatory"' as a general matter. [Citation.] 'There are many time provisions, e.g., in procedural rules, that are not directory but mandatory; these are binding, and parties must comply with them to avoid a default or other penalty. But failure to comply does not render the proceeding void' in a fundamental sense." (Kabran v. Sharp Memorial Hospital (2017) 2 Cal.5th 330, 341, italics omitted.)

C. Continuance on Court's Own Motion on April 14, 2016