Short answer. Yes, if it meets the Rules' conditions. The ordinary venue rules do not apply where the parties have validly agreed in writing, before the filing of the action, on the exclusive venue of their suits. A stipulation that satisfies those requirements confines the parties to the chosen court's location.
What the law says
Where the parties have validly agreed in writing before the filing of the action on the exclusive venue thereof.
Rule 4, Section 4 — When Rule not applicable. Read the full provision →
Venue rules are default rules
Rule 4 of the Rules of Court supplies the ordinary answers to where a civil action may be filed. But the Rule itself announces when it steps aside: it shall not apply in cases where a specific rule or law provides otherwise, or where the parties have validly agreed in writing before the filing of the action on the exclusive venue thereof. Venue, in other words, is a matter the parties are allowed to arrange for themselves in advance — and when they have done so validly, the default menu of venues disappears and the contractual choice takes its place.
The three conditions packed into one sentence
Each element of the provision is a requirement. The agreement must be valid — a genuine, binding stipulation, not one procured improperly. It must be in writing: an oral understanding about where to sue counts for nothing. It must precede the filing of the action — the parties fix venue before litigation begins, not after a complaint has already landed somewhere. And it must cover the exclusive venue: the stipulation must actually restrict the parties to the chosen place. Wording that merely names a city as an available forum, without language of exclusivity, is a weaker creature than wording that shuts every other door.
What the stipulation does not change
A venue clause chooses among courts; it does not create competence. Venue is about the place of trial, which parties may arrange; jurisdiction — which level of court has power over the subject matter — is conferred by law and no contract can move it. So a stipulation naming a specific city sends the case to the proper court sitting there; it cannot send a case to a court that the law does not empower to hear it. Nor does the stipulation reach cases where a specific rule or law provides otherwise — some actions carry venue fixed by law that private agreement cannot override.
Reading your own clause
Before filing — or before objecting to where you were sued — read the exact words of the clause. Does it say suits must or shall only be brought in the named city, or merely that they may be? Was it in the signed written contract before the case was filed? A party who files in the wrong place despite a binding exclusivity clause invites dismissal or transfer at the threshold, spending months on venue instead of the merits. If the clause is ambiguous, that ambiguity is worth a lawyer's reading before it is tested in court.