A summary of Rules 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 48, 49, 50,

51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, and 64 concerning appeals

Remedies after the case became final and executory:

Rules” 38, 47, and except: Rule 65 and collateral attack of
a judgment
General Principles/Basic rules for appeal
 APPELLANT vs. APPELLEE
The party against whom an appeal is filed.

The appellee usually seeks affirmance of the lower court's

decision.

By contrast, the appellant is the party who filed the appeal.

 “The purpose in
“The perfection of
limiting the period
an appeal within
of appeal is to
“The right to the statutory or “A decision of a
forestall or avoid
appeal; a mere reglementary division of the
an unreasonable
statutory privilege period and in the Court of Appeals
delay in the
and of statutory manner prescribed is not binding on
administration of
origin” by law is its other division.”
justice and to put
mandatory and
an end to
jurisdictional”
controversies.”

Heirs of Agustin-Se
Yu vs. Samson-Tatad Opinaldo vs. Ravina Rodolfo Crisostomo vs. Office of the President
JUDGEMENTS AND ORDERS THAT ARE APPEALABLE

An appeal may be taken from a judgment or

final order that completely disposes of the case,
or of a particular matter when declared by the
rules to be appealable
 JUDGEMENTS AND ORDERS THAT ARE NOT APPEALABLE
SEC 1 RULE 41

An order denying a petition for relief or any

similar motion seeking relief from judgment

An order disallowing
An interlocutory order
or dismissing an appeal

An order denying a motion to set aside a

judgment by consent, confession or compromise
on the ground of fraud, mistake or duress, or
any other ground vitiating consent
An order dismissing an action
without prejudice.
An order of execution
A judgment or final order for or
against one or more of several parties
or in separate claims, counterclaims,
cross-claims, and third-party
complaints, while the main case is
pending, unless the court allows an
appeal therefrom
“Findings of trial courts on the credibility of witnesses deserve
a high degree of respect. Having observed their deportment in
court, the trial judge is in a position to determine the issue of
credibility. For this reason, the findings of trial judges will not
be disturbed on appeal.”

(People vs. Caballero, GR NO. 210673, June 29, 2016)

Especially in cases where the factual findings
of the trial court when affirmed by the CA, are
final and conclusive and may not be
reviewed on appeal.
(Bacalso v. Aca-ac, GR No. 172919, January 13, 2016)
A party may not change his theory of the case
on appeal
Such a rule has been expressly
adopted in Rule 44, Section 15, which
provides —
SEC. 15. Questions that may be raised
on appeal. ——“ Whether or not the
appellant has filed a motion for new
trial in the court below, he may include
in his assignment of errors any question
of law or fact that has been raised in
the court below and which is within the
issues framed by the parties.”
 Hence, the court may consider an error not raised on appeal
provided the same falls within any of the following categories :

Error closely Error that affects the

related to or jurisdiction over the
It is a plain and
Error that dependent on subject matter
clerical error
affects validity Error which an assigned
of the validity affects the validity error and
of the judgment of the proceedings properly argued
appealed from
in the brief

“The fact that the appellant’s brief did not raise the lack of jurisdiction of the trial court
should not prevent the Court from taking up the issue of lack of jurisdiction”
(Dy v. NLRC, 145 SCRA 211, 213; Bar 1993)
 • In Comilang v. Burcena, 482 SCRA 342, 349, the Court
categorically made it clear that an appellate court is clothed
grounds not assigned as errors
with ample authority to review rulings even if they are not
but affecting jurisdiction over
the subject matter;
1
assigned as errors in the appeal in the following instances :

matters not assigned as errors on

appeal but are evidently plain or
2 clerical errors within
contemplation of law;
matters not assigned as errors
on appeal but consideration of
which is necessary in arriving at
a just decision and complete
resolution of the case or to 3
serve the interests of justice or
to avoid dispensing piecemeal
justice;
 matters not specifically assigned
as errors on appeal but raised in
the trial court and are matters of
4 record having some bearing on the
issue submitted which the parties
failed to raise or which the lower
court ignored;

matters not assigned as

errors on appeal but closely
related to an error assigned;
5

matters not assigned as errors on

appeal but upon which the
6 determination of a question
properly assigned, is dependent.
HARMLESS ERROR RULE

SEC 6.RULE 51
Errors committed by the trial court which do
not affect the substantial rights of the parties.

Harmless error is easiest to understand in

an evidentiary context.
In the case of Earll v. State of
Wyoming, the Wyoming Supreme
Court distinguished between reversible
error (which requires a conviction be
overturned) and harmless error (which
does not), as follows:

Before we hold that an error has

affected an accused’s substantial right,
thus requiring reversal of a conviction,
we must conclude that, based on the
entire record, a reasonable possibility
exists that, in the absence of the error,
the verdict might have been more
favorable to the accused.
Section 6, Rule 51 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure:

“No error in either the admission or the exclusion of evidence and no

error or defect in any ruling or order or in anything done or omitted
by the trial court or by any of the parties is ground for granting a
new trial or for setting aside, modifying, or otherwise disturbing a
judgment or order, unless refusal to take such action appears to the
court inconsistent with substantial justice.”
The court at every stage of the proceeding must disregard
any error or defect which does not affect the substantial
rights of the parties."
 The established rule is that the payment in
full of the docket fees within the prescribed
period is mandatory. Nevertheless, this rule
must be qualified, to wit:
Payment of docket fee;
mandatory and
1st the failure to pay appellate court docket fee
within the reglementary period allows only
jurisdictional but subject
discretionary dismissal, not automatic dismissal,
to the liberal construction
of the appeal; rule
(Cu-Unjieng v. Court of Appeals, 479

2nd such power should be used in the exercise of

the Court’s sound discretion “in accordance
SCRA 594, 602).

with the tenets of justice and fair play and with

great deal of circumspection considering all
attendant circumstances” (Republic v. Spouses Luriz, 513
SCRA 140,151 citing Buenaflor v. Court of Appeals, 346 SCRA 563,
567).
“In a criminal case, an
appellate court appears to Appeals in criminal cases
enjoy wide latitude in deciding
an appealed case. Thus, it was
held that in criminal cases,
it is axiomatic that where an accused
appeals the decision against him,
he throws open the whole case for review
and it then becomes the duty of the
Supreme Court to correct any error as may
be found in the appealed judgment,
whether it was made the subject of
assignment of errors or not”
(Dico v. Court of Appeals, 452 SCRA 441, 454).

An appeal in a criminal case opens the

entire case for review.
An appeal is made by filing a notice of appeal
with the court which rendered the judgment or
final order appealed from and serving a copy
thereof upon the adverse party
(Sec. 2[a], Rule 41, Rules of Court)

No record on appeal shall be required except

in special proceedings and other
cases of multiple or separate
appeals where the law or the
Rules of Court so require
(Sec. 2[a], Rule 41, Rules of Court)
RECORD ON APPEAL. VS NOTICE OF APPEAL
While an appeal may be dismissed for failure of the appellant “to
serve and file the required number of copies of his brief or
memorandum within the time provided,” this provision
accordingly, merely confers a power and not a duty to dismiss, it
being directory and not mandatory. The appellate court has the
discretion to dismiss or not to dismiss the appeal

(Tiangco v. Bank of the Philippines, G.R. No. 153998, October 6, 2010).

SEC 3, RULE 50

Withdrawal of the appeal

Before the filing of the appellee’s
brief/memorandum – matter of right

After – discretionary
QUESTION OF LAW QUESTION OF FACT

VS..
A question of law arises when there is doubt as to
what the law is on a certain state of facts, while
there is a question of fact when the doubt arises
as to the truth or falsity of the alleged facts.
 “The
“The question of “Whether or not “A determination
determination
whether a person the litigant is a of whether or not
of whether or
acted with good builder in good the worker
not there exists
faith or bad faith faith or in bad abandoned his
a perfected
in purchasing and faith is a factual work is factual in
contract of sale
registering real issue” nature”
is essentially a
property is a
question of
question of fact”
fact”

Tamblot Security
Heirs of Cabigas Hyatt Escalators Cabling vs
and General
vs. Limbaco Corporation case Dangcalan
Services case
 QUESTIONS OF LAW
(facts are undisputed)

Mixed Question Of Law And Fact:


Some questions are partly of law and
partly of fact. Such questions are
called mixed questions of law and
fact. If there is a dispute whether a
partnership exists among certain
parties or not.
EXAMPLE:
Whether a partnership exists between
A and B is…
(A) It is question of fact as to “what is the
basic relationship between the parties?”
(B) It is a question of law as to “whether the
basic relationship between the parties
constitute partnership in the eyes of law
or not?”
• TABLE .
MTC – RTC
RULE 40
Notice of appeal– MTC

Within 15 days after notice

to the appellant of the
Question of fact,
question of law,
judgment or final order
appealed from (Sec 2, Rule
40)

The appellant shall file a

notice of appeal and a
or mixed
record on appeal within
thirty (30) days from notice
of the judgment or final
order. (Sec. 3, Rule 41)
Perfection of appeal (Sec. 9 of Rule 41)

Upon the filing of the notice of appeal in due time.

Different in record on appeal since it is deemed perfected upon

the approval of the record on appeal filed in due time
(BAR 1999)
 The notice of appeal shall:
Serving a copy of the notice/
notice and record to the adverse
party (Sec 3, Rule 40)

Indicate the
1st parties to the State the material dates
appeal 3rd showing the timeliness of
the appeal
The judgment or final
2nd order or part thereof ***Within the period for taking an appeal,
appealed from Payment of the full amount of the appellate
court docket and other lawful fees to the
COC of the MTC (Sec. 5, Rule 40) -
Mandatory and Jurisdictional
• Appellant shall submit a memorandum.
Copy furnish appellee. (Sec 7{b}, Rule 40)

NOTE: Under (Sec 7{b}, Rule 40), f

or the appellant, Failure to so file shall
be a ground for the dismissal of the appeal.

• The appellee may, if his so desires, file his

memorandum within fifteen (15) days
from receipt of the appellant’s
memorandum
• (Sec. 7[b], Rule 40, Rules of Court).
 Appeal from an order dismissing a case for lack of
jurisdiction over the subject matter
Anabel filed a complaint against B for Sakto bala si Anabel?
unlawful detainer before the Municipal Trial Is the RTC correct?
Court (MTC) of Candaba, Pampanga. After the Assuming that Anabel
issues had been joined, the MTC dismissed the elevates the case to the
complaint for lack of jurisdiction over the Court of Appeals, which
subject matter after noting that the action was remands the case to the
one for accion publiciana. RTC, Is the appellate court
correct? (BAR 2010)
Anabel appealed the dismissal to the RTC
which affirmed it and accordingly dismissed
her appeal.
 SUGGESTED ANSWER:

Yes, the Court of Appeals is correct in remanding the

case to RTC for the latter to try the same on the merits.

The RTC, having jurisdiction over the subject matter of

the case appealed from MTC should try the case on the
merits as if the case was originally med with it, and not
just to affirm the dismissal of the case.
 CONFLICT BETWEEN
Sec. 8 of Rule 40:
Sec. 1 (g) of Rule 41:
The order
dismissing an
action without
prejudice is not
appealable.
Sec. 8 of Rule 40:

Appeal from orders dismissing case without trial; lack of jurisdiction. —

If an appeal is taken from an order of the lower court dismissing the case without
a trial on the merits, the RTC may affirm or reverse it, as the case may be.

In case of affirmance and the ground of dismissal is lack of jurisdiction over the
subject matter, the RTC, if it has jurisdiction thereover, shall try the case on the
merits as if the case was originally filed with it.
In case of reversal, the case shall be remanded for further proceedings.

If the case was tried on the merits by the lower court without jurisdiction over the
subject matter, the RTC on appeal shall not dismiss the case if it has original
jurisdiction thereof, but shall decide the case in accordance with the preceding
section, without prejudice to the admission of amended pleadings and additional
evidence in the interest of justice.
The tenor, however, of Sec. 8 of Rule 40, indicates that the rule
allows an appeal from an order of the MTC dismissing a case for
lack of jurisdiction.

Sec. 8 of Rule 40 should be considered as an EXCEPTION to

Sec. 1 of Rule 41 which precludes an appeal from an order
dismissing an action without prejudice.
 This provision specifically
allows, by necessary
implication, an appeal from
orders dismissing cases on
the ground of lack of
jurisdiction over the subject
matter.
Despite Sec. 1 of Rule 41, appeal may
nevertheless be taken from the order
dismissing an action for lack of
jurisdiction over the subject matter in a
situation contemplated under Sec. 8 of
Rule 40.

The tenor of Sec. 8 of Rule 40, therefore, operates to furnish an exception to the
general rule enunciated in Sec. 1 of Rule 41. In this situation, it must be noted,
applies in a dismissal made in the Municipal Trial Court and not to a dismissal in
the Regional Trial Court.
RTC - CA
RULE 41
An ordinary On questions
appeal or Original of fact or
appeal by jurisdiction mixed
writ of error questions of
fact and law.
Sec. 2 of Rule 50 states that:

“An appeal under Rule 41 taken from

the Regional Trial Court to the Court of An appeal
Appeals raising only questions of law erroneously taken to
shall be dismissed, issues purely of law the Court of Appeals
not being reviewable by said court.” shall NOT be
transferred to the
“Similarly, an appeal by notice of appropriate court but
shall be dismissed
appeal instead of by petition for review
outright.
from the appellate judgment of a
Regional Trial Court shall be
dismissed.”
 By filing a notice of
appeal / notice of
appeal and record on
appeal with the RTC Payment of the full
Serving a within fifteen (15) days amount of the appellate
copy thereof pr 30 days, as the case court docket and other
may be, from notice of lawful fees; Mandatory
upon the the judgment or final and jurisdictional
adverse party order

2nd 1st 3rd

Same rule regarding the perfection of appeal

Within forty-five (45) days from receipt of the
notice of the clerk of court, the appellant shall file
Seven (7) copies of his legibly typewritten,
mimeographed or printed brief, with proof of
service of two (2) copies thereof upon the
appellee. (Sec. 7, Rule 44, Rules of Court).

Within forty-five days from the receipt of the

appellant’s brief, the appellee shall file his
own brief with proof of service to the
appellant.

Within twenty (20) days from receipt of the

appellee’s brief, the appellant may file a reply
brief answering points in the appellee’s brief
not covered in his main brief (Sec. 9, Rule 44,
Rules of Court).

Extension of time for the filing of briefs will

not be allowed, except for good and sufficient
cause and only if the motion for extension is
filed before the expiration of the time sought
to be extended (Sec. 12, Rule 44, Rules of Court).
Sec. 13, Rule 44; Contents of appellant’s brief
A subject index of the matter in the brief with a digest of the arguments
and page references

An assignment of errors intended to be urged, which errors shall be

separately, distinctly and concisely stated without repetition and numbered
consecutively

Summary of the proceedings; statement and nature of the action; the

appealed rulings and orders of the court; with page references to the record

A clear and concise statement in a narrative form of the facts, with page
references to the record

A clear and concise statement of the issues

Appellant’s arguments on each assignment of error with page references to

the record

A specification of the order or judgment which the appellant seeks

MTC - RTC – CA
Rule 42
 In the exercise of On questions
Petition for the RTC’s of fact,
review appellate questions of
jurisdiction law or mixed
questions of
fact and law
 Filing a verified petition for review with the Court of Appeals, within fifteen (15)
days from notice of the decision sought to be reviewed
Paying at the same time to the clerk of said court the corresponding docket and
other lawful fees, and furnishing the Regional Trial Court and the adverse party
with a copy of the petition
The petition shall be filed in The petition shall be filed in seven (7) legible copies,
with the original copy intended for the court being indicated as such by the
petitioner.

The proper form required in Sec. 2 of Rule 42 stating among others :

• a concise statement of the matters involved,
the issues raised, the specification of errors
of law or fact, or both, allegedly committed
by the trial court and the reasons or
arguments relied upon for the allowance of
the appeal.
• The petitioner shall likewise indicate the
specific material dates showing that the
petition was filed on time (Sec. 2, Rule 42, Rules of
Court).
This petition also requires a certification against forum shopping

(Sec. 2, 2nd par., Rule 42, Rules of Court)


Section 3. Effect of failure to comply with
requirements — “The failure of the
petitioner to comply with any of the
foregoing requirements regarding the
payment of the docket and other lawful
fees, the deposit for costs, proof of service
of the petition, and the contents of and the
documents which should accompany the
petition shall be sufficient ground for the
dismissal thereof.”
The Court of Appeals may:
Dismiss the petition if it finds the
same to be patently without merit,
prosecuted merely for delay, or that
the questions raised are too
unsubstantial to require consideration
(Sec. 4, Rule 42, Rules of Court).
If the court does not dismiss the
petition, it may require the
respondent to file a comment on the
petition within ten (10) days from
notice. The respondent shall file a
comment, not a motion to dismiss.
RESIDUAL JURISDICTION
RULE 41 -prior to the transmittal
of the original record

RULE 42 - before the CA gives

due course to the petition
 Dismissal of an appeal
The following are the grounds for the dismissal of an appeal
(f) Absence of specific assignment
by the Court of Appeals on its own motion or on that of the
of errors in the appellant’s brief, or
appellee (Sec. 1, Rule 50, Rules of Court):
of page references to the record as
(a) Failure of the record on appeal to show on required in Sec. 13, paragraphs (a),
its face that the appeal was taken within the (c) , (d) and (f) of Rule 44;
period fixed by these Rules;
(g) Failure of the appellant to take
the necessary steps for the
(b) Failure to file the notice of appeal or the correction or completion of the
record on appeal within the period prescribed
record within the time limited by
by these Rules;

the court in its order;

(c) Failure of the appellant to pay the docket
and other lawful fees as provided in Sec. 5, (h) Failure of the appellant to
Rule 40 and Sec. 4 of Rule 41;
appear at the preliminary
conference under Rule 48 or to
(d) Unauthorized alterations, omissions or comply with orders, circulars, or
additions in the approved record on appeal as directives of the court without
provided in Sec. 4 of Rule 44;
justifiable cause; and

(e) Failure of the appellant to serve and file the (i) The fact that the order or
required number of copies of his brief or judgment appealed from is not
memorandum within the time provided by appealable.”
these Rules;

•
The following are the grounds for the dismissal of an
appeal in the Supreme Court motu proprio by the
Court or on motion (Sec. 5, Rule 56, Rules of
Court):

Failure to take the appeal within the reglementary

period;
Lack of merit in the petition;
Failure to pay the requisite docket fee and other
lawful fees or to make a deposit for costs;
Failure to comply with the requirements regarding
proof of service and contents of and the documents
which should accompany the petition;
Failure to comply with any circular, directive or
order of the Supreme Court without justifiable
cause;
Error in the choice or mode of appeal; and
The fact that the case is not appealable to the
Supreme Court.
Gov’t of Belgium vs. Court of Appeals

Gonzales vs. Gonzales

 RULE 45
Petition for review
on certiorari
 Section 3. of Rule 56 Mode of appeal

An appeal to the Supreme Court

Court of Appeals may be taken only by a petition
for review on certiorari, except in
criminal cases where the penalty
imposed is death, reclusion
Sandiganbayan perpetua or life imprisonment
from a judgment or final order or
resolution of the:
Regional Trial Court ***other courts or tribunals, whenever
in the exercise of its ORIGINAL authorized by law
JURISDICTION

Appeal from the judgment,
final order, or resolutions of
the Sandiganbayan where the
petition shall raise only
questions of law distinctly set
forth (Sec. 1, Rule 45, Rules
of Court)-,
Appeals from a judgment or final order
in a petition for a writ of amparo to the
Supreme Court. While in other cases of
appeal under Rule 45, only questions of
law may be raised, here the question
raised need not only be questions of
law but also questions of fact or of both
law and fact (A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC, The Rule
on the Writ of Amparo [Sec. 19] effective October
24, 2007).
Appeals from a judgment or final
order in a petition for a writ of
Habeas Data. The appeal may raise
questions of fact or law or both
(A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC, Rule on the Writ of
Habeas Data [Sec. 19], effective February 2,
2008).
Appeal from the decision
or ruling of the Court of
1 3 5 Tax Appeals en banc (Sec.
11, R.A. 9282; Sec. 1, Rule 45
as amended by A.M. No.
07-7-12-SC).
2 4
The mode of appeal prescribed
under Rule 45 shall be applicable
to both civil and criminal cases,
except in criminal cases where the
penalty imposed is death, reclusion
perpetua or life imprisonment (Sec.
9, Rule 45, Rules of Court).
The petition shall raise only questions of law which must be
distinctly set forth (Sec. 1, Rule 45)

Note since it is a petition for review.

Same rule applies sa rule 42. Otherwise, dismissible

Petition shall be filed within fifteen (15) days from notice of the
judgment or final order or resolution appealed from, or of the
denial of the petitioner's motion for new trial or reconsideration
filed in due time after notice of the judgment.
On motion duly filed
and served, with full
payment of the docket Proof of service of a
and other lawful fees copy, thereof on the
before the expiration lower court
of the reglementary concerned and on
period, the Supreme the adverse party (18) copies, with the
Court may for shall be submitted original copy
justifiable reasons together with the intended for the
grant an extension of petition. court being
thirty (30) days only indicated as such by
within which to file the petitioner
the petition.
 Section 5.
Dismissal or denial of petition

The failure of the petitioner to

comply with any of the foregoing
Same rules in rule 42; requirements regarding the payment
of the docket and other lawful fees,
Petition for Review deposit for costs, proof of service of
the petition, and the contents of and
the documents which should
accompany the petition shall be
sufficient ground for the dismissal
thereof.
NOT A MATTER OF RIGHT

An appeal or a review under Rule 45 is not a matter of right, but of

sound judicial discretion , and will be granted only when special and
important reasons could justify the petition.
 When the court When the court
When the court below decided a below has departed
below has question of from the accepted
decided a substance in a way and usual course of
question of judicial proceedings,
that is probably not
or so far sanctioned
substance not yet in accord with law such departure by a
determined by or with the lower court, as to call
the Supreme applicable for the exercise of the
Court; decisions of the power of supervision
Supreme Court; of the Supreme Court
(Sec. 6, Rule 45, Rules of Court).
“Every appeal to the Supreme Court is not a
matter of right but of sound judicial discretion
with the exception of cases where the penalty of
death or reclusion perpetua where an appeal is a
matter of right leaving the reviewing court
without any discretion.”
People vs. Flores, 481 SCRA 451, 453
When questions of fact may be passed upon in
a Rule 45 petition
 (a) The conclusion of the
Court of Appeals is
grounded entirely on
speculations, surmises
and conjectures;
(b) The inference made is manifestly
mistaken, absurd or impossible;
(c) There is a grave abuse of
discretion;
(d) The judgment is based on
misapprehension of facts;
(e) The findings of facts are
conflicting;
(f) The Court of Appeals, in making
its findings went beyond the issues of
the case and the same is contrary to
the admissions of both appellant and
appellee;
Questions of fact may be raised in an appeal
under Rule 45 provided the petition shows any,
some or all of the following:
(g) The findings of fact of the
Court of Appeals are contrary to
those of the trial court;
(h) The findings of fact are
conclusions without citation of
specific evidence on which they
are based;
(i) The facts set forth in the
petition as well as in the
petitioner’s main and reply briefs
are not disputed by the
respondents; or
(j) The findings of fact of the Court
of Appeals are premised on the
supposed absence of evidence
and contradicted by the evidence
on record
 Ang vs. Joaquin, Jr., GR no. 185549
August 7, 2013

“Oft-repeated doctrine that the SC may deal

with questions of facts for instance when the
court found a divergence between the findings
of the NLRC and that of the CA.”
RULE 43

 Civil Service Commission

Department of Agrarian
Central Board of Assessment
Reform under Republic Act
Appeals
No. 6657
Securities and Exchange
Government Service
Commission
Insurance System
Office of the President
Employees Compensation
Land Registration Authority
Commission
Social Security Commission
Agricultural Invention Board
Civil Aeronautics Board
Insurance Commission

Section 1
Bureau of Patents
Philippine Atomic Energy
Trademarks and Technology
Commission
Transfer
Board of Investments
National Electrification
Construction Industry
Administration
Arbitration Commission, and

Scope:
Energy Regulatory Board
voluntary arbitrators
National Telecommunications
authorized by law
Commission
• Cayao-Lasam v. Spouses Ramolete, it was clarified that the
enumeration of the quasi-judicial agencies under Section 1, Rule
43 is not exclusive:

The Rule expressly provides that it should be applied to appeals from awards,
judgments, final orders or resolutions of any quasi-judicial agency in the exercise
of its quasi-judicial functions. The phrase "among these agencies" confirms that
the enumeration made in the Rule is not exclusive to the agencies therein listed.

Thus, although unmentioned in the enumeration, the Court, in the

case of Dwikarna v. Hon. Domingo42 (Dwikarna), held that the
decisions rendered by the Board of Investments, Board of
Commissioners may be appealable to the CA via Rule 43
 Labor Code of Note that under R.A. 9282, the

the Philippines judgments and final orders of the

Court of Tax Appeals are no longer
appealable by way of petition for
Presidential review to the Court of Appeals.
Judgments of the Court of Tax
Decree No. Appeals rendered en banc are
appealable to the Supreme Court by
442:
way of Rule 45 (Sec. 11, R.A. 9282)
 Within fifteen (15) days
Appeal shall be taken from notice of the award,
by filing a verified judgment, final order or
petition for review in resolution, or from the date
seven (7) legible copies of its last publication, if
with the Court of publication is required by
Appeals, with proof of law for its effectivity, or of
service of a copy the denial of petitioner's
thereof on the adverse motion for new trial or
party and on the court reconsideration duly filed
or agency a quo. in accordance with the
governing law of the court
or agency a quo.
Section 6. Contents of
the petition.

Section 7. Effect of
failure to comply with
requirements.
RULE 64
Governs the review of
judgements, final orders (Not
interlocutory orders), or
resolutions of the commissions
on elections and the
commission on audit
Aratuc vs. COMELEC:

“ That under existing constitutional and statutory provisions,

the certiorari jurisdiction of court over orders, rulings, and
decisions of the COMELEC x x x should be confined to
instances of grave abuse of discretion amounting to patent and
substantial denial of due process”
Raising jurisdictional grounds:

That the commission concerned acted without or in excess of

jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack
or excess o jurisdiction
Findings of fact; not reviewable

The findings of facts of the commission, when supported by

substantial evidence, shall be final and non- reviewable
When to file the Petition

The petition for certiorari referred to in Rule 64 shall be filled

within 30 days from notice of judgement, final order, or resolution
of Commission on Elections and Commission on Audit sought to
be reviewed
Payment of docket and lawful fees:

- note: mandatory and jurisdictional

Form of the petition:

Shall be verified and filed in 18 legible copies ( Sec 5, Rule 64)

 Contents of the petition ( Sec. 5 Rule 64)
• Verification

• Material date rule

-sec 5 of Rule 64: “the petition shall state the specific material
dates showing that it was filed within the period fixed by the rules”

• Certification against forum shopping

*** failure to comply with any of the foregoing requirements shall be sufficient
ground for dismissal of petition.
REMEDIES AFTER A JUDGEMENT HAS BECOME
FINAL AND EXECUTORY
 BAR 1995

(a) Petition for relief from judgment

under Rule 38; and

(b) Petition for annulment of a judgment

under Rule 47. 2.

In addition to the above, jurisprudence has

likewise recognized an additional relief through:

(a) a direct action of certiorari under Rule 65, and

(b) a collateral attack of a judgment that is void on

its face (Escareal v. Philippine Airlines, Inc., 455 SCRA 119, 133).
RULE 38
 Grounds for a petition for relief; proper court
A petition for relief may be filed on the following grounds:

When a judgment or final order is entered, or any other

proceeding is thereafter taken against the petitioner in any court
through fraud, accident, mistake, or excusable negligence (Sec. 1
and 38, Rules of Court); or
When the petitioner has been prevented from taking an appeal
by fraud, accident, mistake, or excusable negligence (Sec. 2, Rule
38, Rules of Court).

Indeed, relief is allowed only in exceptional cases as when there

is no other available or adequate remedy. And failure to avail of
such “last chance” within the grace period fixed by the Rules is
fatal. (Quelnan v. VHF Philippines, 470 SCRA 73, 80).
 In letter “a,”
The petition shall pray that
the judgment, order or
proceeding be set aside
(Sec. 1, Rule 38, Rules of Court).
In letter “b,”
The petition the prayer
this time is that the appeal
be given due course
(Sec. 2, Rule 38, Rules of Court).
In letter {a},
“that fraud which the
prevailing party caused to
prevent the losing party from
being heard on his action or
defense. Such fraud concerns
not the judgment itself but the
manner in which it was
obtained.”
 Extrinsic fraud.
For example, the petition of a defending party would be
justified where the plaintiff deliberately caused with the
process server’s connivance the service of summons on
defendant at the wrong address and thus succeeded in
getting a judgment by default against him

(AFP Mutual Benefit Association, Inc. v. Regional Trial Court,

Marikina City, Branch 193, 642 SCRA 720, 727, February 14, 2011).
 Intrinsic fraud
Refers to fraud in a party’s conduct of a prior
litigation. It is deception that pertains to an issue
involved in an original action
Both grounds to be Filed with the same court

MTC- MTC
RTC – RTC
60judgment,
days from knowledge of
order or other proceedings
WHEN TO FILE
to be set aside; and a petition for
relief from
judgment must be
6judgment,
months from entry of such
order or other proceeding.
filed within:
***These two periods
must concur
 Form of the petition; affidavit of merit
The petition must be verified
and must be accompanied with
affidavits showing fraud,
accident, mistake or excusable
negligence relied upon, and
the facts constituting the
petitioner’s good and
substantial cause of action or
defense, as the case may be
(Sec. 3, Rule 38, Rules of Court).
On the ground that it has been entered or
taken against petitioner by fraud,
accident, mistake or excusable negligence Effect when the petition is granted/
— The case then shall stand as if such
judgment, final order or proceeding had dismissed
never been rendered, issued or taken. The
court shall then proceed to hear and
determine the case as if a timely motion for
a new trial or reconsideration had been
granted by it

(Sec. 6, Rule 38, Rules of Court).

 Where the prayer of petitioner is to give due course to his appeal because
he was prevented from taking an appeal through fraud, accident, mistake or
excusable negligence, and the court finds the allegations of the petition to
be true — the court shall set aside the previous denial of the appeal and
shall give due course to the said appeal. It shall then elevate the records of
the appealed case as if a timely and proper appeal had been made
(Sec. 7, Rule 38, Rules of Court)
Annulment of judgment /Final order
Rule 47
It is a remedy in equity exceptional in
character availed only when other
remedies are wanting

Failed to avail the appropriate

remedies provided by law without
fault on his part

BUT it cannot be resorted to as a

substitute in a party’s own neglect
in not promptly availing of such
remedies
• The purpose of such action is to have the final and executory judgement
set aside so that there will be a renewal of litigation

• It presupposes that filing of a separate and original action for the purpose
of annulling a decision in another case

- Note: in contrast with Rule 38

 Grounds for Note:
jurisprudence
(1) Extrinsic
annulment: fraud
added an
additional ground
(yu vs yu June 20 2016) :
(2) Lack of
Sec 2 rule 47 jurisdiction (3) Denial of
due process

(3)
 WHERE TO FILE
File before the proper appellate
court

• MTC - RTC

WHEN TO FILE • RTC - CA

Extrinsic fraud - four years from

discovery

Lack of jurisdiction - must be brought

before the action is barred by laches or
estoppel
Yu v. Yu, June 20, 2016
 “Such action is never resorted to as a substitute for the
petitioner’s own neglect in not promptly availing himself of
the ordinary or appropriate remedies”

Aquino v. Tangkengko, August 24, 2016

 EFFECT OF A JUDGMENT OF ANNULMENT
Lack of jurisdiction - said judgment or final order
will be declared null and void, but without prejudice
to the refiling of the complaint

Extrinsic fraud - the court, upon motion, may order

the trial court to try the case as if a motion for new
trial was granted