Remedies AFTER Judgment becomes Final R38 R47 R65

Question 1

Compare the remedies under Rules 38, 47, 65 & collateral attack.

In summary, while Rule 38, Rule 47, and Rule 65 provide specific procedures for seeking relief, annulment, or extraordinary remedies against judgments or orders, collateral attack offers a separate avenue to challenge the validity of a judgment in a different action or proceeding. Each remedy has its own time limits, grounds, and effects upon granting or success.

Answer 1

Here’s a comparison of the key points of differences among the remedies under Rules 38, 47, 65, and collateral attack under the Revised Rules of Court in the Philippines:

1. Rule 38 - Relief from Judgments, Orders, or Other Proceedings:
   
   • Nature of Remedy: Rule 38 provides a remedy for parties seeking relief from judgments, final orders, and other proceedings due to fraud, mistake, or excusable negligence.
   • Time Limit: The petition for relief under Rule 38 must be filed within 60 days after the petitioner learns of the judgment, order, or proceeding.
   • Grounds for Relief: Relief can be granted on the grounds of fraud, mistake, or excusable negligence, and the petitioner must show due diligence in filing the petition.
   • Effects of Granting Relief: If relief is granted, the judgment or final order is set aside, and the case is reinstated for further proceedings.
2. Rule 47 - Annulment of Judgments or Final Orders and Resolutions:
   
   • Nature of Remedy: Rule 47 provides a remedy for parties seeking the annulment of judgments or final orders and resolutions of the Regional Trial Courts for extrinsic fraud and lack of jurisdiction.
   • Time Limit: The petition for annulment under Rule 47 must be filed within four years from the discovery of the extrinsic fraud and within a reasonable time from the discovery of lack of jurisdiction.
   • Grounds for Annulment: The grounds for annulment are limited to extrinsic fraud and lack of jurisdiction.
   • Effects of Annulment: If the judgment or final order is annulled, the case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings.
3. Rule 65 - Certiorari, Prohibition, and Mandamus:
   
   • Nature of Remedy: Rule 65 provides for extraordinary remedies of certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus against judgments, resolutions, or orders of any tribunal, board, or officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions.
   • Time Limit: The petition for certiorari, prohibition, or mandamus under Rule 65 must be filed within 60 days from notice of the judgment, resolution, or order.
   • Grounds for Petition: The petition must allege grave abuse of discretion, lack or excess of jurisdiction, or commission of errors of law that are equivalent to lack of jurisdiction.
   • Effects of Granting the Petition: If the petition is granted, the judgment, resolution, or order is annulled or modified accordingly.
4. Collateral Attack:
   
   • Nature of Remedy: Collateral attack refers to challenging the validity of a judgment or order in a separate action or proceeding, rather than through the regular modes of review or direct attack.
   • Time Limit: There is no specific time limit for collateral attack, as it can be raised at any time when the judgment is invoked as a basis for a claim or defense.
   • Grounds for Attack: Any ground that would render the judgment void or voidable can be raised in a collateral attack, including lack of jurisdiction, fraud, or denial of due process.
   • Effects of Successful Attack: If the collateral attack is successful and the judgment is declared void, it cannot be enforced or relied upon in any subsequent proceeding.

In summary, while Rule 38, Rule 47, and Rule 65 provide specific procedures for seeking relief, annulment, or extraordinary remedies against judgments or orders, collateral attack offers a separate avenue to challenge the validity of a judgment in a different action or proceeding. Each remedy has its own time limits, grounds, and effects upon granting or success.

Question 2

Who does what under these remedies?

Answer 2

Certainly, let’s break down the key elements of who does what, to where, when, how, and why in relation to the comparison of the remedies under Rules 38, 47, 65, and collateral attack under the Revised Rules of Court in the Philippines:

1. Who:
   
   • Petitioner: The party seeking relief or remedy under the rules, such as relief from judgments (Rule 38), annulment of judgments (Rule 47), or filing a petition for certiorari, prohibition, or mandamus (Rule 65).
   • Respondent: Typically, the opposing party or parties in the original case from which relief is sought.
2. What:
   
   • Petition: The formal document filed by the petitioner to initiate the specific remedy under the relevant rule.
   • Relief or Remedy: The outcome sought by the petitioner, which could include setting aside a judgment, annulling an order, or obtaining extraordinary relief.
3. Where:
   
   • Court: The judicial body with jurisdiction over the matter, such as the Regional Trial Court or the appropriate appellate court, where the petition is filed.
4. When:
   
   • Time Limit: Each remedy has a specific time frame within which the petition must be filed, such as 60 days for relief under Rule 38, four years for annulment under Rule 47, and 60 days for petitions under Rule 65.
5. How:
   
   • Filing: The process of submitting the petition to the court according to the rules of procedure.
   • Allegations: The petitioner must include specific allegations in the petition, depending on the rule invoked, such as fraud, lack of jurisdiction, or grave abuse of discretion.
6. Why:
   
   • Purpose of the Remedy: The petitioner seeks relief or remedy for various reasons, including correcting errors, addressing injustices, or challenging the validity of a judgment or order.
   • Legal Basis: The petitioner relies on the specific rules and legal principles outlined in the Revised Rules of Court to support their claim for relief.

In summary, these legal proceedings involve petitioners seeking specific remedies from the court, following procedural rules and guidelines, with the ultimate goal of obtaining relief or remedy for perceived injustices or errors in the original judgment or order.

Question 3

summarize Rule 38

Answer 3

Here’s a sequential summary of the key points of Rule 38, focusing on who does what:

1. Party Affected by Judgment, Order, or Proceeding:
   
   • When a judgment, final order, or proceeding is entered against a party through fraud, accident, mistake, or excusable negligence, that party may file a petition in the same court praying for relief (Section 1).
2. Party Prevented from Taking Appeal:
   
   • If a party is PREVENTED from Taking an APPEAL due to fraud, accident, mistake, or excusable negligence, they may file a petition in the same court requesting that the appeal be given due course (Section 2).
3. Filing of Petition:
   
   • The petitioner must file the petition within specific time limits (60 days after learning of the judgment or proceeding) and include necessary affidavits showing the grounds for relief (Section 3).
4. Court Action on Petition:
   
   • If the petition justifies relief, the court issues an order requiring adverse parties to answer within 15 days (Section 4).
   • The court may grant a preliminary injunction for the preservation of rights, upon the petitioner filing a bond (Section 5).
5. Hearing and Decision:
   
   • After the answer is filed or the period expires, the court hears the petition. If the allegations are found to be true, the court sets aside the judgment or order upon just terms (Section 6).
6. Appeal Denial Procedure:
   
   • If the denial of an appeal is set aside, the lower court must give due course to the appeal and elevate the record of the appealed case (Section 7).

In summary, the affected party files a petition for relief, and the court takes action based on the petition, including issuing orders, granting injunctions, hearing the petition, and deciding whether to set aside the judgment or order. If an appeal denial is set aside, the lower court must follow specific procedures to ensure the appeal is processed appropriately.

Question 4

Here are comprehensive multiple-choice questions for the bar examinations based on Rule 38:

1. When can a party file a petition for relief from judgment, order, or other proceedings under Rule 38?
   A) Only if there is evidence of fraud
   B) When the judgment or proceeding was taken through fraud, accident, mistake, or excusable negligence
   C) Within 30 days of learning about the judgment or proceeding
   D) If the party is not satisfied with the judgment

Answer 4

Answer: B) When the judgment or proceeding was taken through fraud, accident, mistake, or excusable negligence

Question 5

2. What does Rule 38 provide regarding relief from denial of appeal?
   A) It allows automatic granting of appeals upon petition
   B) It provides for filing a petition to overturn the denial of an appeal due to fraud, accident, mistake, or excusable negligence
   C) It prohibits any relief for denied appeals
   D) It only applies to criminal cases

Answer 5

Answer: B) It provides for filing a petition to overturn the denial of an appeal due to fraud, accident, mistake, or excusable negligence

Question 6

3. How long does a petitioner have to file a petition for relief under Rule 38?
   A) 90 days after learning of the judgment
   B) Within 60 days after learning of the judgment or proceeding
   C) Within 6 months of the final judgment or order
   D) Only during the trial phase

Answer 6

Answer: B) Within 60 days after learning of the judgment or proceeding

Question 7

4. What is the consequence if the court finds the allegations in the petition for relief under Rule 38 to be untrue?
   A) The petition is automatically granted
   B) The petition is dismissed
   C) The petitioner is fined
   D) The petitioner is given additional time to amend the petition

Answer 7

Answer: B) The petition is dismissed

Question 8

5. What happens if the court finds the allegations in the petition for relief under Rule 38 to be true?
   A) The court must grant a new trial automatically
   B) The judgment or order complained of is set aside upon just terms
   C) The petitioner must pay damages to the adverse party
   D) The case is automatically appealed to a higher court

Answer 8

Answer: B) The judgment or order complained of is set aside upon just terms

Question 9

Here are 5 true or false questions based on Rule 38:

1. True or False: According to Rule 38, a party can file a petition for relief from judgment, order, or other proceedings if they were prevented from taking an appeal due to fraud, accident, mistake, or excusable negligence.

Answer 9

• True

Question 10

2. True or False: A petition provided for in Rule 38 must be filed within 90 days after the petitioner learns of the judgment, final order, or other proceeding to be set aside.

Answer 10

• False (It must be filed within 60 days)

Question 11

4. True or False: According to Rule 38, the court may grant a preliminary injunction pending proceedings upon the filing of a bond by the petitioner.

Answer 11

• True

Question 12

5. True or False: If a petition under Rule 38 is deemed sufficient, the court may require the adverse parties to answer the same within 30 days from the receipt thereof.

Answer 12

• False (It is within 15 days)

Question 12

1. What governs the annulment by the Court of Appeals of judgments or final orders and resolutions in civil actions of Regional Trial Courts when ordinary remedies are no longer available?
   
   • A) Coverage
   • B) Grounds for Annulment
   • C) Filing and Contents of Petition
   • ## D) Action by the Court

Answer 12

Answer: A) Coverage
- Explanation: Rule 47 specifically governs the annulment of judgments or final orders and resolutions in civil actions of Regional Trial Courts when ordinary remedies are no longer available.

Question 13

2. Under Rule 47, what are the only grounds for annulment of judgments or final orders and resolutions?
   
   • A) Time for Filing Action
   • B) Suspension of Prescriptive Period
   • C) Grounds for Annulment
   • D) Relief Available

Answer 13

• Answer: C) Grounds for Annulment
  
  • Explanation: Rule 47 allows for annulment based only on the grounds of extrinsic fraud and lack of jurisdiction.

Question 14

3. What is the period within which an action based on extrinsic fraud must be filed under Rule 47?
   
   • A) Filing and Contents of Petition
   • B) Suspension of Prescriptive Period
   • C) Effect of Judgment
   • D) Procedure

Answer 14

• Answer: B) Suspension of Prescriptive Period
  
  • Explanation: An action based on extrinsic fraud must be filed within four years from its discovery under Rule 47.

Question 15

4. According to Rule 47, what happens if the court finds no substantial merit in the petition for annulment?
   
   • A) Action by the Court
   • B) Effect of Judgment
   • C) Coverage
   • D) Relief Available

Answer 15

• Answer: A) Action by the Court
  
  • Explanation: If the court finds no substantial merit in the petition, it may dismiss the case outright with specific reasons for the dismissal.

Question 16

5. Which section of Rule 47 deals with the suspension of the prescriptive period for refiling the original action?
   
   • A) Effect of Judgment
   • B) Time for Filing Action
   • C) Suspension of Prescriptive Period
   • ## D) Annulment of Judgments or Final Orders of Municipal Trial Courts

Answer 16

Answer: C) Suspension of Prescriptive Period
- Explanation: Section 8 of Rule 47 deals with the suspension of the prescriptive period for refiling the original action until the finality of the judgment of annulment.

Question 17

6. What relief may be available in a judgment of annulment under Rule 47?
   
   • A) Action by the Court
   • B) Filing and Contents of Petition
   • C) Relief Available
   • D) Annulment of Judgments or Final Orders of Municipal Trial Courts

Answer 17

• Answer: C) Relief Available
  
  • Explanation: The judgment of annulment under Rule 47 may include the award of damages, attorney’s fees, and other relief.

Question 18

7. In what court should an action to annul a judgment or final order of a Municipal Trial Court be filed?
   
   • A) Coverage
   • B) Suspension of Prescriptive Period
   • C) Annulment of Judgments or Final Orders of Municipal Trial Courts
   • D) Effect of Judgment

Answer 18

• Answer: C) Annulment of Judgments or Final Orders of Municipal Trial Courts
  
  • Explanation: An action to annul a judgment or final order of a Municipal Trial Court should be filed in the Regional Trial Court having jurisdiction over the former.

Question 19

8. Under Rule 47, what must the petitioner submit together with the petition for annulment?
   
   • A) Filing and Contents of Petition
   • B) Relief Available
   • C) Suspension of Prescriptive Period
   • D) Coverage

Answer 19

• Answer: A) Filing and Contents of Petition
  
  • Explanation: The petitioner must submit a sworn certification that he has not commenced any other action involving the same issues in various courts or tribunals.

Question 20

9. If a judgment or final order is set aside on the ground of extrinsic fraud under Rule 47, what may the court do upon motion?
   
   • A) Procedure
   • B) Coverage
   • C) Action by the Court
   • D) Relief Available

Answer 20

• Answer: C) Action by the Court
  
  • Explanation: The court may, upon motion, order the trial court to try the case as if a timely motion for a new trial had been granted if the judgment is set aside on the ground of extrinsic fraud.

Question 21

10. Which section of Rule 47 specifies the procedure to be observed in ordinary civil cases?
    
    • A) Time for Filing Action
    • B) Filing and Contents of Petition
    • C) Action by the Court
    • D) Procedure

Answer 21

• Answer: D) Procedure
  
  • Explanation: Section 6 of Rule 47 specifies that the procedure in ordinary civil cases shall be observed, including the reception of evidence if necessary.

Question 22

1. Cause: A petitioner discovers extrinsic fraud in a judgment.
   Effect: What action must the petitioner take according to Rule 47?
   
   • A) File a verified petition within 4 years of discovery.
   • B) Request for an extension of the prescriptive period.
   • C) File a motion for reconsideration.
   • D) Seek relief from the Court of Appeals.

Answer 22

• Answer: A) File a verified petition within 4 years of discovery.

Question 23

2. Cause: The court finds no substantial merit in a petition for annulment.
   Effect: What action may the court take under Rule 47?
   
   • A) Grant the petition outright.
   • B) Dismiss the petition with specific reasons.
   • C) Refer the case to the Supreme Court.
   • D) Order a retrial of the original case.

Answer 23

• Answer: B) Dismiss the petition with specific reasons.

Question 24

3. Cause: A judgment is set aside due to extrinsic fraud.
   Effect: What action can the court take upon motion according to Rule 47?
   
   • A) Order the trial court to retry the case.
   • B) Dismiss the petitioner’s claims.
   • C) Suspend all legal proceedings.
   • D) Refer the case to the Court of Appeals.

Answer 24

• Answer: A) Order the trial court to retry the case.

Question 25

4. Cause: A judgment is annulled under Rule 47.
   Effect: What happens to the original action?
   
   • A) It remains valid.
   • B) It is automatically reinstated.
   • C) It is rendered null and void.
   • D) It is transferred to a different court.

Answer 25

• Answer: C) It is rendered null and void.

Question 26

5. Cause: A judgment is annulled due to lack of jurisdiction.
   Effect: How does this impact the prescriptive period for refiling the original action?
   
   • A) It accelerates the prescriptive period.
   • B) It suspends the prescriptive period.
   • C) It resets the prescriptive period.
   • D) It does not affect the prescriptive period.

Answer 26

• Answer: D) It does not affect the prescriptive period.

Question 27

Summarize Rule 65

Answer 27

Here’s a summary of Rule 65 for the bar examinations, focusing on who does what, where, when, how, and why:

Who:
- The petitioner: a person aggrieved by the actions of a tribunal, board, or officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions.
- The respondent: the tribunal, board, or officer whose actions are being challenged.

What:
- The petitioner files a verified petition in the proper court, alleging lack or excess of jurisdiction or grave abuse of discretion.
- The petition may be for certiorari, prohibition, or mandamus, depending on the circumstances.

Where:
- The petition is filed in the proper court, which may be the Regional Trial Court, Court of Appeals, Sandiganbayan, or Commission on Elections, depending on the nature of the case.

When:
- The petition must be filed within sixty (60) days from notice of the judgment, order, or resolution, or from the denial of a motion for reconsideration or new trial.

How:
- The petition must be verified and accompanied by relevant documents.
- It must allege the facts with certainty and include a sworn certification of non-forum shopping.
- If the petition is sufficient, the court issues an order requiring the respondent to comment.
- The court may expedite proceedings and grant injunctive relief if necessary.
- After the comment is filed, the court may hear the case, require the parties to submit memoranda, or dismiss the petition if it lacks merit.

Why:
- The purpose of the petition is to correct errors or abuses of discretion by lower tribunals or officers.
- It ensures that justice is served and rights are protected.
- Disobedience to the court’s orders may be punished as contempt.

Question 28

1. Question: What happens if a petition for certiorari is filed without a certified true copy of the judgment or resolution subject thereof?-

Answer 28

• Answer: The court may dismiss the petition outright.
  
  • Explanation: This requirement ensures that the court has access to the relevant documents for proper consideration of the petition.

Question 29

2. Question: If a respondent fails to file a comment within the prescribed period, what action may the court take?

Answer 29

• Answer: The court may issue an order requiring the respondent to comment.
  
  • Explanation: The court ensures that all parties have an opportunity to present their arguments before making a decision.

Question 30

4. Question: If a petition for mandamus is granted, what relief may the court provide?

Answer 30

• Answer: The court may command the respondent to perform the act required by law and award damages to the petitioner.
  
  • Explanation: Mandamus aims to compel a public official to fulfill their legal duty, and damages may be awarded for any harm caused by their failure to do so.

Question 30

3. Question: What may happen if a petition for prohibition is found to be patently without merit?

Answer 30

• Answer: The court may dismiss the petition and award treble costs against the petitioner and counsel.
  
  • Explanation: This discourages the filing of frivolous petitions and imposes consequences for wasting the court’s time.

Question 31

5. ## Question: What is the effect if a petition for certiorari is filed beyond the prescribed period?

Answer 31

Answer: The court may dismiss the petition.
- Explanation: Timely filing is essential to ensure the efficient administration of justice and prevent undue delay in legal proceedings.

Question 32

7. Question: If a petition for prohibition relates to the acts of a judge, what duty do private respondents have?

Answer 32

• Answer: Private respondents must defend both their own interests and those of the public respondent.
  
  • Explanation: Private respondents play a crucial role in ensuring that all aspects of the case are properly represented before the court.

Question 32

6. ## Question: What happens if the court finds that the allegations of the petition are true after the parties have submitted memoranda?

Answer 32

Answer: The court may render judgment in favor of the relief sought by the petitioner.
- Explanation: The court’s decision is based on the merits of the case and the evidence presented by the parties.

Question 33

8. Question: What happens if the public respondent fails to proceed with the principal case within ten days from the filing of a petition for certiorari?

Answer 33

• Answer: Failure to proceed may be a ground for an administrative charge.
  
  • Explanation: Timely action is required to uphold the integrity of the judicial process and prevent unnecessary delays.

Question 34

9. Question: What action may the court take if a petition for mandamus is found to be prosecuted manifestly for delay?

Answer 34

• Answer: The court may dismiss the petition and impose administrative sanctions on counsel.
  
  • Explanation: This ensures that legal actions are pursued in good faith and not for the purpose of causing unnecessary delays.

Question 35

10. Question: What happens if a petition for certiorari is filed without a sworn certification of non-forum shopping?

Answer 35

• Answer: The court may dismiss the petition.
  
  • Explanation: The certification is required to prevent forum shopping and ensure the integrity of the legal process.

Question 36

11. Question: If a respondent fails to appear and defend in a petition for prohibition, who may bear the costs awarded in favor of the petitioner?

Answer 36

• Answer: Costs may be awarded against the private respondents only.
  
  • Explanation: Private respondents are expected to actively participate in the defense of the proceedings and may be held liable for costs if they fail to do so.

Question 37

12. Question: What happens if a petition for mandamus is filed against a public official who unlawfully neglects their duty?

Answer 37

• Answer: The court may command the respondent to perform the required act and award damages to the petitioner.
  
  • Explanation: Mandamus is a remedy to compel public officials to fulfill their legal obligations, and damages may be awarded for any harm caused by their failure to do so.

Question 38

13. Question: If a petition for prohibition is filed beyond the prescribed period, what action may the court take?

Answer 38

• Answer: The court may dismiss the petition.
  
  • Explanation: Timely filing is essential to prevent undue delay in legal proceedings and ensure the efficient administration of justice.

Question 39

14. Question: What happens if the court finds a petition for certiorari patently without merit?

Answer 39

• Answer: The court may award treble costs against the petitioner and counsel.
  
  • Explanation: This discourages the filing of frivolous petitions and imposes consequences for wasting the court’s time.

Question 40

Remedy of certiorari - state the rule.

Answer 40

Certainly! Let’s contrast the key points of differences and similarities between the rules on certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus from Rule 65:

1. Certiorari:
   
   • Definition: Certiorari is a legal remedy used to review decisions of lower courts or administrative bodies to determine if they acted without or in excess of jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion.
   • Key Points:
     
     • It applies when a tribunal, board, or officer acts without jurisdiction, in excess of jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion.
     • The petitioner seeks the annulment or modification of the proceedings.
     • The petition must be filed within 60 days from notice of the judgment, order, or resolution.
     • It is filed with the proper court and must be accompanied by relevant documents and a sworn certification of non-forum shopping.
   • Rationale: Certiorari ensures that lower courts and administrative bodies adhere to the boundaries of their jurisdiction and exercise their discretion lawfully, thereby upholding the rule of law and protecting individuals from arbitrary actions.

Question 41

Prohibition - state the rule

Answer 41

2. Prohibition:
   
   • Definition: Prohibition is a legal remedy that seeks to stop a tribunal, corporation, board, officer, or person from proceeding with an action or matter outside their jurisdiction or in excess thereof.
   • Key Points:
     
     • It applies when proceedings are without jurisdiction or in excess of jurisdiction or when there is grave abuse of discretion.
     • The petitioner requests the court to command the respondent to desist from further proceedings.
     • Similar to certiorari, it must be filed within 60 days from notice of the judgment, order, or resolution.
     • It is also filed with the proper court and requires accompanying documents and a sworn certification of non-forum shopping.
   • Rationale: Prohibition serves as a preventive measure to halt improper proceedings before they reach a conclusion, thereby avoiding potential harm or injustice resulting from actions beyond the authority of the tribunal or individual.

Question 42

Mandamus - state the rule

Answer 42

3. Mandamus:
   
   • Definition: Mandamus is a legal remedy used to compel a tribunal, corporation, board, officer, or person to perform a specific act required by law.
   • Key Points:
     
     • It applies when there is an unlawful neglect or refusal to perform a duty enjoined by law.
     • The petitioner seeks a court order commanding the respondent to perform the required act.
     • The petition must be filed within a reasonable time and accompanied by relevant documents and a sworn certification of non-forum shopping.
     • Mandamus may also include a request for damages sustained by the petitioner due to the respondent’s wrongful acts.
   • Rationale: Mandamus ensures that individuals or entities fulfill their legal obligations and duties, promoting accountability and safeguarding the rights of individuals who are entitled to the performance of such acts.

Question 43

CPM - state the key differences

Answer 43

Key Differences:
- Nature of Relief: Certiorari and prohibition focus on reviewing and potentially annulling or modifying proceedings, while mandamus focuses on compelling the performance of a specific act.
- Triggering Events: Certiorari and prohibition are triggered by actions taken or proceedings initiated, while mandamus is triggered by the neglect or refusal to perform a legal duty.
- Time Limit: The time limit for filing varies slightly among the remedies, with mandamus having a more flexible “reasonable time” requirement compared to the fixed 60-day period for certiorari and prohibition.

Question 44

CPm - state similarities

Answer 44

Key Similarities:
- Jurisdiction: All three remedies address situations where there is a lack of jurisdiction, excess of jurisdiction, or grave abuse of discretion.
- Court of Filing: They are all filed in the proper court, accompanied by relevant documents and a sworn certification of non-forum shopping.
- Remedy: They all provide a means for individuals to seek relief from unlawful or improper actions of lower courts, administrative bodies, or individuals.

Overall, these legal remedies serve to uphold the principles of justice, ensure the proper exercise of authority, and protect the rights and interests of individuals within the legal system.

Question 45

give an example certiorari - RTC

Answer 45

Certainly! Here are examples illustrating the appropriate use of certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus:

Case Example 1: Certiorari

Facts: The Regional Trial Court (RTC) in City A, Philippines, rendered a judgment in a civil case against Mr. Santos. However, Mr. Santos believes that the RTC acted without jurisdiction because the case did not fall within its territorial jurisdiction.

Issue: Whether the RTC acted without jurisdiction.

Correct Remedy: Certiorari

Rationale: Certiorari is appropriate because Mr. Santos alleges that the RTC acted without jurisdiction. Certiorari allows for the review of decisions of lower courts when they act without jurisdiction. Mr. Santos should file a verified petition for certiorari in the Court of Appeals, as the RTC is a lower court exercising judicial functions. The petition should be filed within 60 days from notice of the judgment, accompanied by relevant documents and a sworn certification of non-forum shopping.

Courts Involved: Regional Trial Court (lower court), Court of Appeals (higher court)

Question 46

give an example Prohibition - mayors office

Answer 46

Case Example 2: Prohibition

Facts: The Mayor of City B, Philippines, issued an order allowing the construction of a commercial building in a residential area, which is beyond the Mayor’s jurisdiction. Concerned residents, led by Ms. Garcia, believe that the Mayor’s order is in excess of jurisdiction and will adversely affect their community.

Issue: Whether the Mayor’s order is in excess of jurisdiction.

Correct Remedy: Prohibition

Rationale: Prohibition is appropriate because the Mayor’s order is allegedly in excess of jurisdiction. Prohibition seeks to stop further proceedings or actions that are beyond the jurisdiction of the tribunal or individual. Ms. Garcia and the concerned residents should file a verified petition for prohibition in the Regional Trial Court, which exercises jurisdiction over City B. The petition should be filed within 60 days from notice of the order, accompanied by relevant documents and a sworn certification of non-forum shopping.

Courts Involved: Mayor’s Office (lower authority), Regional Trial Court (higher court)

Question 47

give an example Mandamus - assessors office

Answer 47

Case Example 3: Mandamus

Facts: Mr. Reyes, a resident of Municipality C, Philippines, requested copies of public documents from the Municipal Assessor’s Office, as required by law. However, despite repeated requests, the Municipal Assessor’s Office refused to provide the documents to Mr. Reyes.

Issue: Whether the Municipal Assessor’s Office unlawfully neglected its duty to provide public documents.

Correct Remedy: Mandamus

Rationale: Mandamus is appropriate because the Municipal Assessor’s Office unlawfully neglected its duty to provide public documents. Mandamus seeks to compel a tribunal or office to perform a specific act required by law. Mr. Reyes should file a verified petition for mandamus in the Regional Trial Court, which exercises jurisdiction over Municipality C. The petition should be filed within a reasonable time, accompanied by relevant documents and a sworn certification of non-forum shopping.

Courts Involved: Municipal Assessor’s Office (lower authority), Regional Trial Court (higher court)

Question 48

give an example certiorari ERC

Answer 48

Certainly! Here are examples illustrating the appropriate use of certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus when the trier of facts comes from quasi-judicial agencies in the Philippines:

Case Example 1: Certiorari

Facts: The Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC) rendered a decision approving a significant increase in electricity rates, affecting consumers in Province X, Philippines. However, consumers believe that the ERC acted with grave abuse of discretion and exceeded its jurisdiction by approving the unreasonable rate hike.

Issue: Whether the ERC acted with grave abuse of discretion and exceeded its jurisdiction in approving the electricity rate increase.

Correct Remedy: Certiorari

Rationale: Certiorari is appropriate because the consumers allege that the ERC acted with grave abuse of discretion and exceeded its jurisdiction. Certiorari allows for the review of decisions of quasi-judicial agencies when they act without jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion. The consumers should file a verified petition for certiorari in the Court of Appeals within 60 days from notice of the ERC’s decision. The petition should be accompanied by relevant documents and a sworn certification of non-forum shopping.

Courts Involved: Energy Regulatory Commission (quasi-judicial agency), Court of Appeals (higher court)

Question 49

give an example of Prohibition NLRC

Answer 49

Case Example 2: Prohibition

Facts: The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) issued an order allowing the termination of employment of several employees of Corporation Y, Philippines, based on grounds not supported by law. The affected employees believe that the NLRC acted in excess of jurisdiction and without legal basis.

Issue: Whether the NLRC acted in excess of jurisdiction and without legal basis in allowing the termination of employment.

Correct Remedy: Prohibition

Rationale: Prohibition is appropriate because the affected employees allege that the NLRC acted in excess of jurisdiction and without legal basis. Prohibition seeks to stop further proceedings or actions that are beyond the jurisdiction of the tribunal or agency. The affected employees should file a verified petition for prohibition in the Court of Appeals within 60 days from notice of the NLRC’s order. The petition should be accompanied by relevant documents and a sworn certification of non-forum shopping.

Courts Involved: National Labor Relations Commission (quasi-judicial agency), Court of Appeals (higher court)

Question 50

give an example madamus HLURB

Answer 50

Case Example 3: Mandamus

Facts: Mr. Cruz filed a complaint before the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB) against Developer Z, Philippines, for failure to deliver the amenities promised in their housing project. Despite a clear legal duty to resolve the complaint promptly, the HLURB has neglected to take any action on Mr. Cruz’s complaint.

Issue: Whether the HLURB unlawfully neglected its duty to resolve Mr. Cruz’s complaint against Developer Z.

Correct Remedy: Mandamus

Rationale: Mandamus is appropriate because the HLURB unlawfully neglected its duty to resolve Mr. Cruz’s complaint. Mandamus seeks to compel a tribunal or agency to perform a specific act required by law. Mr. Cruz should file a verified petition for mandamus in the Court of Appeals within a reasonable time from the HLURB’s inaction. The petition should be accompanied by relevant documents and a sworn certification of non-forum shopping.

Courts Involved: Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (quasi-judicial agency), Court of Appeals (higher court)

These examples illustrate how certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus can be utilized when the trier of facts comes from quasi-judicial agencies in the Philippines, addressing specific legal issues within the jurisdiction of these agencies.

Question 51

Collateral attack - on a court judgment. Example

Answer 51

Certainly! Here are examples of cases involving collateral attacks on a judgment in a Philippine court and in a quasi-judicial agency:

Example 1: Collateral Attack on a Judgment in a Philippine Court

Facts: Mr. Santos filed a complaint for damages against Corporation X in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of City A, Philippines. After trial, the RTC rendered a decision dismissing Mr. Santos’ complaint for lack of merit. Mr. Santos did not appeal the decision, and it became final and executory. Several months later, Mr. Santos filed a separate complaint against Corporation X for the same cause of action in the Municipal Trial Court (MTC) of City B, arguing that he discovered new evidence supporting his claim.

Issue: Whether Mr. Santos’ filing of a new complaint against Corporation X in the MTC constitutes a collateral attack on the judgment of the RTC, which has become final and executory.

Correct Remedy: The proper remedy for Mr. Santos would have been to file a motion for relief from judgment in the RTC, presenting the alleged new evidence for reconsideration of the decision. Filing a new complaint in the MTC for the same cause of action constitutes a collateral attack on the judgment of the RTC.

Rationale: Final and executory judgments are deemed conclusive and immutable. Mr. Santos’ filing of a new complaint in a different court for the same cause of action constitutes a collateral attack on the final judgment of the RTC. The appropriate course of action would have been to seek relief from the RTC that rendered the final judgment.

Courts Involved: Regional Trial Court (RTC) of City A, Municipal Trial Court (MTC) of City B

Question 52

Collateral attack - on a quasi-judicial agency

Answer 52

Example 2: Collateral Attack on a Decision of a Quasi-Judicial Agency

Facts: Ms. Rivera filed a complaint against Land Developer Y before the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB) for violation of their contract to deliver a condominium unit. After proceedings, the HLURB rendered a decision dismissing Ms. Rivera’s complaint. The decision became final and executory. Subsequently, Ms. Rivera filed a complaint for the same cause of action against Land Developer Y in the Regional Trial Court (RTC), arguing that she discovered new evidence supporting her claim.

Issue: Whether Ms. Rivera’s filing of a new complaint against Land Developer Y in the RTC constitutes a collateral attack on the decision of the HLURB, which has become final and executory.

Correct Remedy: Similar to Example 1, the proper remedy for Ms. Rivera would have been to file a motion for relief from judgment before the HLURB, presenting the alleged new evidence for reconsideration of the decision. Filing a new complaint in the RTC for the same cause of action constitutes a collateral attack on the decision of the HLURB.

Rationale: Final and executory decisions of quasi-judicial agencies, like the HLURB, are binding and conclusive. Ms. Rivera’s filing of a new complaint in a different forum for the same cause of action constitutes a collateral attack on the final decision of the HLURB. The appropriate course of action would have been to seek relief from the HLURB that rendered the final decision.

Agencies Involved: Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB), Regional Trial Court (RTC)

In both examples, the parties attempted to initiate new proceedings in different courts or forums for the same cause of action, constituting collateral attacks on the final and executory judgments or decisions.