Criminal Procedure and Court

Testimony
Concept of Prejudicial Question

A prejudicial question is an issue involved in civil case

which is similar or intimately related to the issue raised
in the criminal action, the resolution of which
determines whether or not the criminal action may
proceed. To constitute a prejudicial questions, the rule
also requires aside from the related issues, that the civil
action be instituted previously or ahead of criminal
action(Sec7,Rule 111,Rules of Court)
 Reason for the principles
The reason behind the principle of a prejudicial question is to avoid two
conflicting decisions in the civil case and in the criminal case( Jose v.Suarez, 556
SCRA 773; Sy Thiong Siou v. Sy Chim, G.R.No.174168, March 30,2009)

Requisites for prejudicial question

Sec.7 Rule 111 Rules of Court provides:
Elements of prejudicial questions

a)the previously instituted civil action involves

an ISSUE similar or intimately related to the
issue raised in a subsequent criminal action

b) the RESOLUTION of such issue determines

whether or not the criminal action may
proceed. Jose v. Suariz, 556 SCRA 773)
Thus, for a civil action to be considered prejudicial to a
criminal case the following requisites must be present:
1) the civil case involves facts intimately related to those
upon which the criminal prosecution would be based
2) in the resolution of the issue or issues raised in the civil
action the guilt or innocence of the accused would
necessarily be determined
3jurisdiction to try said question be lodged in another
tribunal (Magestrado v. People, G.R No. 148072, July
10,2009).
The phraseology of Sec.7 presupposes the existence of two actions-one civil
and other criminal.Hence, strictly speaking a prejudicial questions under Sec
7 of Rule 111 may not be invoked in any of the following situations
a)both cases are criminal
b)both civil
c)both cases are administrative
d)both cases are aadministrative
e)one case is administrative and the other criminal.

It also discloses that even if one case is a civil and the other criminal, the
principle of prejudicial question will not arise if the criminal case was
instituted prior to the civil case. It does not arise because the rule does not
merely refer to an instituted civil action but specifically to a "previously
intituted" civil action. That the civil action must have been instituted ahead
of the criminal action is confirmed by the same rule which makes reference
to a "subsequent criminal action".
It requires the decision before a final judgment is rendered
in the criminal action with which said questions is closely
connected. The civil action must be instituted prior to the
institution of criminal action. If the criminal information
was filed ahead of the complaint in the civil case no
prejudicial question exist( Torres v. Garchitorena, G. R.No.
153666, December 27,2002).

The issue in the civil case which needs to be resolved

first before it is determined whether or not the
criminal case should proceed or whether or not there
should be, in the criminal case, a judgment of acquittal
or conviction.
It is worth remarking that not every issue raised in
the civil action will result in prejudicial question. The
rule clearly implies that it is not enough that both
cases involve the same facts or even the same or
similar issues to make the civil case prejudicial to the
criminal case.

If the resolution of the issue in the civil action will

not determine the criminal responsibility of the
accused in the criminal action based on the same
facts, the civil case does not involve a prejudicial
question.
Effect of the existence of a prejudicial questions;
suspensionof the criminal action (Bar
1995;1999;2010)
Under the clear terms Sec.6, it is worth remembering that the rule
requires the filing of a petition before the suspension of the criminal
action.
The need for the filing of a petition finds support in jurisprudence which
declares that since suspension of the proceedings in the criminal action may
be made only upon petition and not at the instance of the judge or the
investigating prosecutor, the latter cannot take cognizance of a claim of a
prejudicial question without a petition to suspend being filed. Since a
petition to suspend can be filed only in the criminal action, the
determination of the pendency of a prejudicial question should not be made
at the first instance in the criminal action, and not before the Supreme Court
in an appeal from the civil action (Integrated Bar of the Philippines v.
Atienza, G.R. 175241, February 24,2010)
 When there is a prejudicial question, the criminal case may be suspended
pending the final determination of the issues in the civil case. A prejudicial
question accords a civil case preferential treatment and constitutes an
exception to the general rule that the civil action shall be suspended when the
criminal action is instituted

The general rule provides that if the civil action was commenced
before the institution of the criminal action, the civil action shall be
suspended in whatever stage it may be found before judgment on
merits, once the criminal action. A prejudicial question is an exception
to this rule. The principle of prejudicial question is not within the
ambit of this general rule under Sec. 2 of Rule 111
Thank you for listening.❤️