FINALS EXAM: CIVIL PROCEDURE

ASSIGNED QUESTION / ANSWER

1 - BUBAN Q: State the undertakings implied under counsel's signature in court submissions
and the sanctions for breach thereof:

A: Rule 7, Sec. 3: Every pleading and other written submissions to the court must be
signed by the party or counsel representing him or her.

The signature of counsel constitutes a certificate by him or her that he or she has read
the pleading and document; that to the best of his or her knowledge, information, and
belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances:

(1) It is not being presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass, cause
unnecessary delay, or needlessly increase the cost of litigation;

(2) The claims, defenses, and other legal contentions are warranted by existing law or
jurisprudence, or by a non-frivolous argument for extending, modifying, or reversing
existing jurisprudence;

(3) The factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, will
likely have evidentiary support after availment of the modes of discovery under these
rules; and

(4) The denials of factual contentions are warranted on the evidence or, if specifically so
identified, are reasonably based on belief or a lack of information.

Effect of violation of this rule:

If the court determines, on motion or motu proprio and after notice and hearing, that
this rule has been violated, it may impose an appropriate sanction or refer such
violation to the proper office for disciplinary action, on any attorney, law firm, or
party that violated the rule, or is responsible for the violation. Absent exceptional
circumstances, a law firm shall be held jointly and severally liable for a violation
committed by its partner, associate, or employee. The sanction may include, but not
limited to, non-monetary directives or sanctions; an order to pay a penalty in
court; or, if imposed on motion and warranted for effective deterrence, an order
directing payment to the movant of part or all of the reasonable attorney's fees
and other expenses directly resulting from the violation, including attorney's fees for the
filing of motion for sanction. The lawyer or law firm cannot pass on the monetary penalty
to the client.

Note from UP BOC:

Under the Amended Rules, an unsigned pleading may no longer be remedied since the
provision for such has been deleted from the amended rules of court. The lawyer, law
firm, or party responsible for filing an unsigned pleading may thus be sanctioned under
this rule unless there are exceptional circumstances. Also note that an unsigned
pleading remains to be without legal effect, and is treated as “a mere scrap of paper.”

2 - BULAN Q: State the contents of the certification against forum shopping and sanctions for
breach thereof;

A: RULE 7, SECTION 5

Section 5. Certification against Forum Shopping. — The plaintiff or principal party shall
certify under oath in the complaint or other initiatory pleading asserting a claim for relief,
or in a sworn certification annexed thereto and simultaneously filed therewith:

CONTENTS TO:

(a) that he or she has not theretofore commenced any action or filed any claim involving
the same issues in any court, tribunal or quasi-judicial agency and, to the best of his or
her knowledge, no such other action or claim is pending therein;

(b) if there is such other pending action or claim, a complete statement of the present
status thereof; and
 (c) if he or she should thereafter learn that the same or similar action or claim has been
filed or is pending, he or she shall report that fact within 5 calendar days therefrom to the
court wherein his or her aforesaid complaint or initiatory pleading has been filed.

The authorization of the affiant to act on behalf of a party, whether in the form of a
secretary's certificate or a special power of attorney, should be attached to the pleading.

SANCTIONS:

Failure to comply with the foregoing requirements shall not be curable by mere
amendment of the complaint or other initiatory pleading but shall be cause for the
dismissal of the case without prejudice, unless otherwise provided, upon motion and
after hearing.

The submission of a false certification or non-compliance with any of the undertakings

therein shall constitute indirect contempt of court, without prejudice to the corresponding
administrative and criminal actions.

If the acts of the party or his or her counsel clearly constitute willful and deliberate forum
shopping, the same shall be ground for summary dismissal with prejudice and shall
constitute direct contempt, as well as a cause for administrative sanctions.

3 - CRUZADO Q: Distinguish Affirmative Defenses from a Motion to Dismiss;

A:

Grounds for dismissal - Affirmative Grounds for motion to dismiss

Defenses

Basis: (RULE 6) Sec. 5 Basis; (RULE 15) Sec 12.

An affirmative defense is an allegation of, Prohibited motions. — The following

a new matter which, while hypothetically motions shall not be allowed:
admitting the material allegations in the (a) Motion to dismiss except on the
pleading of the claimant, would following grounds:
nevertheless prevent or bar recovery by
him or her. The affirmative defenses 1. That the court has no jurisdiction
include over the subject matter of the
claim;
1. Fraud 2. That there is another action
2. statute of limitations pending between the same
3. Release parties for the same cause; and
4. Payment 3. That the cause of action is barred
5. Illegality by a prior judgment or by the
6. statute of frauds statute of limitations;
7. Estoppel
8. former recovery
9. discharge in bankruptcy
10. and any other matter by way of
confession and avoidance.

Affirmative defenses may also include

grounds for the dismissal of a complaint:

1. that the court has no jurisdiction

over the subject matter
2. that there is another action
pending between the same
parties for the same cause
3. that the action is barred by a prior
judgment.

4 - DAVID Q: Distinguish Third Party Complaints from Complaints in Intervention and Interpleader;

A:

Third Party Complaint Complaints in Complaints in

 Intervention Interpleader

Rule 6. Sec. 11- Third, Rule 19. Sec. 1.Who may Rule 62. Sec. 1. When
(fourth, etc.)-party intervene. — A person interpleader proper. —
complaint. — A third who has a legal interest Whenever conflicting
in the matter in litigation, claims upon the same
(fourth, etc.)-party
or in the success of subject matter are or may
complaint is a claim that a either of the parties, or be made against a
defending party may, with an interest against both, person who claims no
leave of court, file against or is so situated as to be interest whatever in the
a person not a party to adversely affected by a subject matter, or an
the action, called the third distribution or other interest which in whole
(fourth, etc.)-party disposition of property in or in part is not disputed
the custody of the court or by the claimants, he may
defendant for contribution,
of an officer thereof may, bring an action against the
indemnity, subrogation or with leave of court, be conflicting claimants to
any other relief, in respect allowed to intervene in the compel them to interplead
of his opponent's claim. action. The court shall and litigate their several
consider whether or not claims among themselves
the intervention will unduly
delay or prejudice the
adjudication of the rights of
the original parties, and
whether or not the
intervenor's rights may be
fully protected in a
separate proceeding

5 - DAYAWON Q: State the contents of a pretrial brief and the sanctions for absence at the pretrial for
plaintiff and defendant;

A: Contents of pre-trial brief:

a. A concise statement of the case and the reliefs prayed for;

b. A summary of admitted facts and proposed stipulation of facts;

c. The main factual and legal issues to be tried or resolved;

d. The propriety of referral of factual issues to commissioners;

e. The documents or other object evidence to be marked, stating the purpose thereof;

f. The names of the witnesses, and the summary of their respective testimonies; and

g. A brief statement of points of law and citation of authorities. [Sec. 6, Rule 18]

Absence at the pretrial for plaintiff and defendant:

6 - FLORES Q: Discuss the measures in the Expedited Rules for first level courts intended to avoid
delay;

The two measures are: summary procedure and small claims.

A:
7 - GERONIMO Q: Distinguish Failure to State a cause of action as an Affirmative Defense from a
Demurrer to Evidence;

A:

8 - GRIARTE Q: Discuss the grounds for the issuance of a writ of preliminary attachment;

A: RULE 57, SEC 1

The first 5 grounds are based upon the existence of fraud on the part of the defending
party, on the other hand, the 6th/last ground is a procedural device in order that the court
can acquire jurisdiction over the action by actual or constructive seizure of the property in
those instances where personal or substituted service of summons on the defendant
cannot be effected.

1) For the recovery of a specified amount of money or damages, other than moral
and exemplary, on a cause of action arising from law, contract, quasi-contract, delict
or quasi-delict against a party who is about to depart from the Philippines with
intent to defraud his creditors;

● There must be evidence shown that such departure was made with intent to
defraud his creditors.

2) For money or property embezzled or fraudulently misapplied or converted to

his own use by a public officer, or an officer of a corporation, or an attorney, factor,
broker, agent, or clerk, in the course of his employment as such, or by any other
person in a fiduciary capacity, or for a willful violation of duty;

3) To recover the possession of property unjustly or fraudulently taken,

detained or converted, when the property, or any part thereof, has been concealed,
 removed, or disposed of to prevent its being found or taken by the applicant or an
authorized person;

● The plaintiff must have the right to possess such property

4) Against a party who has been guilty of a fraud in contracting the debt or
incurring the obligation upon which the action is brought, or in the performance
thereof;

● There are two acts here: 1) fraud in contracting the debt or incurring the
obligation or incipient fraud; 2) In the performance of the obligation.

5) Against a party who has removed or disposed of his property, or is about to do

so, with intent to defraud his creditors;

6) Against a party who does not reside and is not found in the Philippines, or on
whom summons may be served by publication.

● Procedural device which seeks to convert the nature of the action from in
personam, which would require the service of summons upon such defendant, to
quasi in rem, which dispenses the need of personal service of writ of summons
so long as the defendant has property in the Philippines which can be subjected
to the jurisdiction of the court.

These grounds are exclusive in nature. No other ground can serve as the basis of a
preliminary attachment.

9 - LAPESURA Q: Discuss the grounds for quashing a writ of preliminary attachment;

A:

Grounds for objection to, or for the dissolution of injunction or restraining order

1. Showing of its insufficiency – The application for injunction or restraining order may
be denied upon a showing of its insufficiency;
When insufficient:
a) If it is not verified and supported by any of the grounds for
its issuance;
b) It does not show facts entitling applicant to the relief; or
c) Not supported by required bond

2. On other grounds upon affidavits of the party or parties enjoined, which may be
opposed by the applicant also by affidavits (Rule 58, Sec. 6);
3. If it appears after hearing that although the applicant is entitled to injunction or
restraining order, the issuance or continuance thereof, as the case may be, would
cause irreparable damage to the party or person enjoined while the applicant can be
fully compensated for such damages as he may suffer (Rule 58, Sec. 6).
The mere filing of a counterbond does not necessarily warrant the
dissolution of the writ of preliminary injunction. Under Sec. 6, Rule 58,
the court is called upon to exercise its discretion in determining or
weighing the relative damages that may be suffered by the parties. If the
damages that may be suffered by the defendant by the continuance of
the injunction outweigh the damages that may be suffered by the plaintiff
by the dissolution of the injunction, then the injunction should be
dissolved

10 - LIBO-ON Q: Discuss levy on personal properties and real properties through a writ of attachment;

A: RULE 57, SECTION 7

HOW TO ATTACH

SEC. 7, REAL PROPERTY OR By filing with the registry of deeds:

PAR. A GROWING CROPS, a. A copy of the order;
THEREON, OR ANY b. A description of the property
INTEREST THEREIN attached; and
c. A notice that it is attached, or that
such real
 property and any interest therein held
by or standing in the name of such
other person are
attached.

SEC. 7, PERSONAL By the sheriff taking and safely

PAR. B PROPERTY CAPABLE keeping it in his custody, after issuing
OF MANUAL the corresponding receipt.
DELIVERY Notice that the sheriff would not give
it to the parties,it will be in custodia
legis.

SEC. 7, STOCKS, SHARES By leaving with the president or

PAR. C OR INTEREST IN managing agent
STOCKS OR SHARES thereof:
OF a. A copy of the writ; and
ANY CORPORATION b. A notice stating that the stock or
OR COMPANY interest of the party against whom the
attachment is issued is attached in
pursuance of such writ.

SEC. 7, DEBTS AND By leaving with the person owing

PAR. D CREDITS, BANK debts or having in
DEPOSITS, his possession and control, such
FINANCIAL credits or other
INTERESTS, personal property, or with his agent:
ROYALTIES, a. A copy of the writ; and
COMMISSION AND b. A notice that the debts owed by
OTHER PERSONAL him to the party against whom the
PROPERTY NOT attachment is issued and the credits
CAPABLE OF and other personal property in his
MANUAL possession, or under his control,
DELIVERY belonging to said party, are attached
in pursuance of such writ.

SEC. 7, The interest of the

PAR. E party against whom -as heir, legatee, or devisee, by
attachment is issued serving the executor or administrator,
in property or
belonging to the
estate of the decedent -other personal representative of the
decedent with a copy of the writ and
notice that said interest is attached

-A copy of said writ of attachment and

of said notice shall also be filed in the
office of the clerk of the court in which
said estate is being settled and
served upon the heir, legatee or
devisee concerned.

11 - MANSOR Q: Discuss the concept of garnishment;

A: RULE 39, Section 9 (c ) Garnishment of debts and credits. - The officer may levy
on debts due the judgment obligor and other credits, including bank deposits, financial
interests, royalties, commissions and other personal property not capable of manual
delivery in the possession or control of third parties. Levy shall be made by serving
notice upon the person owing such debts or having in his possession or control such
credits to which the judgment obligor is entitled. The garnishment shall cover only such
amount as will satisfy the judgment and all lawful fees.

The garnishee shall make a written report to the court within five (5) days from service of
the notice of garnishment stating whether or not the judgment obligor has sufficient funds
or credits to satisfy the amount of the judgment. If not, the report shall state how much
funds or credits the garnishee holds for the judgment obligor. The garnished amount in
cash, or certified bank check issued in the name of the judgment obligee, shall be
delivered directly to the judgment obligee within ten (10) working days from service of
notice on said garnishee requiring such delivery, except the lawful fees which shall be
paid directly to the court.
 In the event there are two or more garnishees holding deposits or credits sufficient to
satisfy the judgment, the judgment obligor, if available, shall have the right to indicate the
garnishee or garnishees who shall be required to deliver the amount due; otherwise, the
choice shall be made by the judgment obligee.

The executing sheriff shall observe the same procedure under paragraph (a) with
respect to delivery of payment to the judgment obligee.

UP BOC:
The process of levying shall be called garnishment if the property involved
is money, stocks, or other incorporeal property in the hands of third persons.
Note: Garnishment merely sets apart such funds but does not constitute the
creditor as owner of the garnished property.
What may be garnished
The officer may levy on:
a. Debts due the judgment obligor and
b. Other credits, including
i. Bank deposits
ii. Financial interests,
iii. Royalties
iv. Commissions and
v. Other personal property not capable of manual
delivery in the possession or control of third parties. [Sec. 9(c), Rule 39].

12 - MARQUEZ Q: Discuss the procedural aspects of availment of the writ of replevin;

A: Basis: RULE 60

Replevin is an action for the recovery of personal property whereby a person entitled to
the repossession of a chattel may recover the same from ONE WHO HAS
WRONGFULLY DISTRAINED IT.

**all that the applicant must do is to FILE AN AFFIDAVIT AND BOND.

1. Apply for an order for the delivery of the Personal Property

a. at the commencement of the action; or
b. at any time BEFORE AN ANSWER IS FILED.

(Note: the applicant need not be the owner of the property sought to be
recovered. As long as he/she is able to specify his/her right to the possession of
the property and the legal basis therefor, the remedy of replevin may be availed
of. )

2. Requirements

In applying for the provisional remedy of a writ of replevin, the applicant or some other
person who personally knows the facts must execute an affidavit of merits showing:
a. The applicant is the owner of the property claimed or is entitled
to the possession thereof;
b. The property is wrongfully detained by the adverse party;
c. Property has not been distrained or taken for tax assessment or
a fine pursuant to law, or seized under a writ of execution or preliminary
attachment or otherwise placed under custodia legis, or if so seized, that
it is exempt from such seizure or custody;
d. Actual market value of the property

3. Applicant must also give a Replevin Bond in the amount equal to double the
value (actual market value) of the property as stated in the affidavit.

4. If the court finds that the application and Replevin Bond in order, it may issue an
order and the corresponding Writ of Replevin describing the Personal Property alleged to
be wrongfully detained. The Order and Writ shall require the sheriff to take such property
into his/her custody.

5. Duty of the Sheriff:

a. SERVICE OF WRIT - Upon receiving the order and writ, the
sheriff must serve a copy on the adverse party, together with a copy of
the application, affidavit and bond. (mandatory in line with procedural
due process)
 b. He/she must take the subject property – if it is concealed in a
bldg. or enclosure, the sheriff must demand its delivery otherwise, the
sheriff must cause the building/enclosure to be broken open and take
the property into his/her possession.
c. After the sheriff has taken the personal property into his/her
custody subject of the writ of replevin, he/she shall retain custody for at
least 5 days after such taking.

6. If the adverse party objects to the sufficiency of the applicant’s bond, or of the
surety/ies, he/she cannot immediately require the return of the property. The court shall
rule on the approval of the replevin or require the applicant to post a new bond. If the
adverse party does not so object, he/she may require the return of the property by
filing a counter-bond or redelivery bond. It must be equal to the amount of the applicant’s
replevin bond. Such must be filed within the five-day period when the property is still in
the custody of the sheriff. (mandatory). A copy of such redelivery bond shall be served to
the applicant.

7. After the 5-day period, the sheriff shall deliver the property to the applicant if:

a. The adverse party did not object to the sufficiency of the bond or surety;
b. Even if the party objects, but the court affirms the approval of the applicant’s
bond/approves a new bond;
c. The adverse party requires the return of the property through a redelivery bond,
but his/her bond is objected to and found insufficient and he does not file an
approved bond.

Upon the delivery of the property seized to the applicant, the latter shall retain custody
thereof until the court determines after trial which among the parties has the right of
possession. If for any reason the property is not delivered to the applicant, the sheriff
must return it to the adverse party.

13 - MELINDO Q: Distinguish judicial and extrajudicial foreclosure of real estate mortgage;

A:

14 - NUEZ Q: Discuss the right of redemption in relation to foreclosure and execution sales and
distinguish right of redemption from equity of redemption;

A:UP BOC:
Right of Redemption Equity of redemption

Right of the debtor, his successor in Right of defendant mortgagor to

interest, or any judicial creditor of extinguish the mortgage and retain
said debtor or any person having a ownership of the property by paying
lien on the property subsequent to the secured debt within the 90 to 120
the mortgage. day period after entry of judgment or
even after the foreclosure sale but
prior to its confirmation

Governed by Secs. 29-31, Rule 39 Governed by Rule 68

Period is 1 year from date of Period is 90-120 days after entry of

registration of certificate of sale. judgment or even after foreclosure
sale but prior to confirmation.
 Judicial Foreclosure vs. Judicial Foreclosure vs.
Extrajudicial Extrajudicial

Requires court No court intervention

intervention necessary

There is only an equity of Right of redemption exists;

redemption [Huerta mortgage has a right to redeem
the property within one year from
Alba Resort, Inc. v. CA, G.R. No. registration of the deed of sale
128567 (2000)] [Huerta Alba Resort, Inc. v. CA, G.R.
No. 128567 (2000), citing Act3135]

Notes
UP BOC:

Redemption
There is no right of redemption in a judicial foreclosure under Rule 68. In judicial
foreclosure, there is only an equity of redemption which can be exercised prior to the
order of confirmation of the foreclosure sale. This means that after the foreclosure sale
but before its confirmation, the mortgagor may exercise his right to pay the proceeds of
the sale and prevent the confirmation of the sale.

• Exception: There is a right of redemption in a judicial foreclosure if the foreclosure is in

favor of banks, as provided for in the General Banking Law [Sec. 47].

15 - PENAFLOR Q: Discuss the manner of obtaining a writ of execution from an appealed decision
and the remedy in the event of the failure and/or refusal of the trial court to issue
said writ notwithstanding such;

A: If the appeal is has been duly perfected and finally resolved, the execution may
fortwith be applied for in the court of origin, on motion of the judgment obligee, submitting
therewith certified true copies of the judgment or judgments or final order or orders
sought to be enforced and of the entry thereof, with notice to the adverse party.

The appellate court may, on motion in the same case, when the interest of justice so
requires, direct the court of origin to issue the writ of execution. (Sec 1, Rule 39)

(Remedy)

SECTION 2. (a) Execution of a judgment or final order pending appeal.- On motion of the
prevailing party with notice of the adverse party filed in the trial court while it has
jurisdiction over the case and is in possession of either the origina record or the record
on appeal, as the case may be, at the time of the filing of such motion, said court may, in
its discretion, order execution of a judgment or final order even before the expiration of
the period to appeal.

After the trial court has lost jurisdiction, the motion for execution pending appeal may be
filed in the appellate court.

Discretionaly execution may only issue upon good reasons for execution pending appeal
may be filed in the appellate court. (Sec. 2, Rule 29)

16 - PINEDA Q: Distinguish conclusiveness of judgment from res judicata;

A: RES JUDICATA

Dual aspect of RES JUDICATA

a. Bar by former judgment

1. The judgment or final order is a bar to the prosecution of a subsequent

action based on the same claim or cause of action

2. Described by Sec. 47, pars. (a) and (b), Rule 39

 3. Also known as “Estoppel by Verdict”

b. Conclusiveness of judgment

1. The judgment or final order precludes the relitigation of particular issues

or facts on a different demand or cause of action

2. Described by Sec. 47, par. (c), Rule 39

3. Also known as the Rule of Auter Action Pendant [1 Riano 541, 2011 Ed.; 1
Regalado 529, 2010 Ed.]

BAR BY FORMER JUDGMENT

The judgment or decree of a court of competent jurisdiction on the merits

concludes the parties and their privies to the litigation and constitutes a bar to a
new action or suit involving the same cause of action either before the same or
any other tribunal. [Machoca v. Cariaga, G.R. No. 75109-10 (1989)]

Requisites:
a. A final judgment or order
b. Jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties by the court rendering judgment
c. Judgment upon merits
d. Between the two cases, there is identity of:
1. Parties
2. Subject matter
3. Cause of action [1 Riano 430, 2011 Ed.]

CONCLUSIVENESS OF JUDGMENT
Any right, fact or matter in issue directly adjudicated or necessarily involved in the
determination of an action before a competent court in which a judgment or
decree is rendered on the merits is conclusively settled by the judgment therein
and cannot again be litigated between the parties and their privies whether or not
the claim or demand, purpose or subject matter of the two suits is the same.
[Machoca v. Cariaga, G.R. No. 75109-10 (1989)]

Requisites:
a. A final judgment or order
b. Jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties by the court rendering it
c. Judgment upon merits
d. Between the two cases, there is identity of:
1. Parties, and 2. Issues. [1 Regalado 529-531, 2010 Ed.]

17 - RODA Q: Discuss the procedural requisites for the issuance of an executive T.R.O;

A: Under Rule 58, below are the key procedural requisites:

1. Verified Petition: The party seeking the T.R.O. must file a verified petition with the
appropriate court. The petition should contain specific facts that justify the need for a
T.R.O., including the legal grounds and the urgency of the relief sought.

2. Grounds for Issuance: The petition must demonstrate that the applicant's rights or
interests are being violated or are about to be violated, and that there is an urgent
necessity to prevent irreparable injury. The grounds for issuance of a T.R.O. are typically
limited to instances where the violation of rights or interests is immediate and irreparable.

3. Bond: The petitioner may be required to post a bond, as determined by the court, to
cover any damages that the respondent may incur if it is later found that the T.R.O. was
wrongfully issued.

4. Ex Parte Hearing: The court may initially issue an ex parte T.R.O. based solely on the
verified petition and supporting documents, without hearing the other party. However, the
T.R.O. is typically temporary and only valid for a limited period.

5. Notice and Hearing: After the issuance of the ex parte T.R.O., the court must schedule
a hearing to give the respondent an opportunity to be heard and present arguments
against the continuation of the T.R.O. At this hearing, both parties can present evidence
and arguments to support their positions.
 6. Duration: The T.R.O. is temporary and has a limited duration. The court may set the
duration of the T.R.O., usually for a period of 20 days, but it can be extended under
certain circumstances.

7. Modification or Dissolution: The court may modify or dissolve the T.R.O. upon motion
by either party or upon its own initiative if it finds that the circumstances no longer
warrant the continued enforcement of the T.R.O.

18 - ROMERO Q: Discuss the basis for the replevin bond;

A: Rule 60 Section 2, The applicant must show by his own affidavit or that of some
‘/other person who personally knows the facts:

(a) That the applicant is the owner of the property claimed, particularly describing it, or is
entitled to the possession thereof;

(b) That the property is wrongfully detained by the adverse party, alleging the cause of
detention thereof according to the best of his knowledge, information, and belief;

(c) That the property has not been distrained or taken for a tax assessment or a fine
pursuant to law, or seized under a writ of execution or preliminary attachment, or
otherwise placed under custodia legis, or if so seized, that it is exempt from such seizure
or custody; and

(d) The actual market value of the property.

The applicant must also give a bond, executed to the adverse party in double the value
of the property as stated in the affidavit aforementioned, for the return of the property to
the adverse party if such return be adjudged, and for the payment to the adverse party of
such sum as he may recover from the applicant in the action.

19 - SAKUMA Q: Discuss the concept of quo warranto and those entitled to the availment of such; state
the doctrines enunciated in the Sereno case;

A: A quo warranto proceeding is the proper legal remedy to determine the right or title to
the contested public office and to oust the holder from its enjoyment.

Against Whom May the Action Be Brought

1. A PERSON who usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or exercises a public office,
position, or franchise; o Note: Sec. 2, Article XI of the Constitution allows the institution of
a quo warranto action against an impeachable officer. After all, a quo warranto petition is
predicated on grounds distinct from those of impeachment. The former questions the
validity of a public officer’s appointment while the latter indicts him for so-called
impeachable offenses without questioning his title to the office he holds [Republic v.
Sereno, G.R. No. 237428 (2018)

A PUBLIC OFFICER who does or suffers an act, which, by the provision of law,
constitutes a ground for forfeiture of office; or

An ASSOCIATION which acts as a corporation within the Philippines without being

legally incorporated or without lawful authority so to act

DOCTRINE OF THE CASE:

Quo warranto as a remedy to oust an ineligible public official may be availed of when the
subject act or omission was committed prior to or at the time of appointment or election
relating to an official’s qualifications to hold office as to render such appointment or
election invalid. Acts or omissions, even if it relates to the qualification of integrity being a
continuing requirement but nonetheless committed during the incumbency of a validly
appointed and/or validly elected official cannot be the subject of a quo warranto
proceeding, but of impeachment if the public official concerned is impeachable and the
act or omission constitutes an impeachable offense, or to disciplinary, administrative or
criminal action, if otherwise.
20 - TORIO Q: Distinguish Declaratory Relief from Similar Remedies;

A: Distinguish Declaratory Relief from Similar Remedies

Both Declaratory Relief and Similar Remedies are covered by Rule 63 of the ROC.

The SIMILAR REMEDIES referred to here are: [1] action for reformation of instrument;
[2] action to quiet title; and, [3] action to consolidate ownership under Art; 1607 of the
Civil Code.

I. DECLARATORY RELIEF
The SUBJECT MATTER in a PETITION FOR DECLARATORY RELIEF is any of the
following:

1. a deed;
2. a will;
3. a contract or other written instrument;
4. a statute;
5. an executive order or regulation;
6. an ordinance; or
7. any other governmental regulation (Sec. 1, Rule 63, Rules of Court).

●The enumeration of the subject matter is exclusive. Hence, an action not based on any
of the enumerated subject matters cannot be the proper subject of declaratory relief.

● An action for declaratory relief to ask the court to declare his filiation and consequently
his hereditary rights is improper. The action is not based on a deed, a will, statute or any
of those enumerated as the subject matter of the petition

●An action for declaratory relief to seek judicial declaration of citizenship to correct a
previous unilateral registration by petitioner as an alien is improper, the action not being
founded on a deed, contract or any ordinance (Obiles vs. Republic, 92 Phil. 864). An
action for declaratory relief is not proper to resolve doubts concerning one's citizenship.

● A petition for declaratory relief is not proper for the purpose of seeking enlightenment
as to the true import of a judgment. The remedy is to move for a clarificatory judgment.

● A petition for declaratory relief is not proper to assail a judgment. A party could appeal
and employ other remedies under the Rules of Court before or after the judgment has
become final and executor.

● Even if the subject is one enumerated under the Rules, where the contract or statute is
clear in its terms and there is no doubt as to its meaning and validity, a petition for
declaratory relief is improper. There would be no need for construction or a declaration of
rights thereunder.

Who shall be made parties to the action?

1. All persons who have or claim any interest which would be affected by the declaration
shall be made parties; and no declaration shall, except as otherwise provided in the
Rules, prejudice the rights of persons not parties to the action. (Sec 2, Rule 63).

2. In any action which involves the validity of a statute, executive order or regulation, or
any other governmental regulation, the Solicitor General shall be notified by the party
assailing the same and shall be entitled to be heard upon such question. (Sec 3, Rule
63).

3. In any action involving the validity of a local government ordinance, the corresponding
prosecutor or attorney of the local governmental unit involved shall be similarly notified
and entitled to be heard. If such ordinance is alleged to be unconstitutional, the Solicitor
General shall also be notified and entitled to be heard. (Sec 4, Rule 63).

What court has jurisdiction over declaratory relief?

The subject matter of a petition for declaratory relief raises issues which are not capable
of pecuniary estimation and must be filed with the appopriate Regional Trial Court (Sec.
19[11, BP 129; Sec. 1, Rule 63). It would be error to file the petition with the Supreme
Court which has no original jurisdiction to entertain a petition for declaratory relief.

When should a petition for declaratory relief be filed?

The petition for declaratory relief should be filed before there occurs any breach or
violation of the deed, contract, statute, ordinance or executive order or regulation. (Sec
1, Rule 63) It will not prosper when brought after a contract or a statute has already been
breached or violated.

What are the requisites of an action for declaratory relief ?

The requisites of an action for declaratory relief are:

1. The subject matter must be a deed, will, contract or other written instrument,
statute, executive order or regulation or ordinance;
2. The terms of said document or the validity thereof are doubtful and require
judicial construction;
3. There must have been no breach of said document;
4. There must be actual justiciable controversy or the "ripening seeds" of one
between persons whose interests are adverse;
5. The issue must be ripe for judicial determination [e.g. administrative remedies
already exhausted]; and
6. Adequate relief is not available thru other means or other forms of action or
proceedings. (Regalado, Remedial Law Compendium, Vol. 1)

What is the purpose of the petition?

● An action for declaratory relief is brought to secure an authoritative statement

of the rights and obligations of the parties under a contract or a statute for their
guidance in the enforcement or compliance with the same.

● The purpose of the petition is to ask the court to determine any question of
construction or validity arising from the subject matter, and for the declaration of
rights and duties therein (Sec. 1, Rule 63, Rules of Court). Thus, the purpose is
to seek for a judicial interpretation of an instrument or for a judicial declaration of
a person's rights under a statute and not to ask for affirmative reliefs like
injunction, damages or any other relief beyond the purpose of the petition as
declared under the Rules. It is not brought to settle issues arising from a breach
because after the breach of the contract or statute, the petition can no longer be
brought.

● It has been held that in an action for declaratory relief, the question raised is a
question of "construction" or "validity" arising under an instrument or statute. The
object is to terminate uncertainties in an instrument or statute and the judgment
of the court cannot extend beyond a declaration of the rights and duties of the
parties to the action and cannot provide corrective reliefs.

● It is the absence of allegations seeking material or affirmative reliefs in a

petition for declaratory relief that it has been held that when the main case is for
declaratory relief, a third-party complaint is inconceivable. The relief sought in
this kind of pleading is contribution, indemnity, subrogation or other relief from
the third-party defendant in respect of the claim of the plaintiff against him.
Accordingly, this relief cannot be granted because in a declaratory relief, the
 court is merely interpreting the terms of the contract. It has also been held
however, that a petition for declaratory relief may entertain a compulsory
counterclaim as long as it is based on or arising from the same transaction,
subject mater of the petition.

II. SIMILAR REMEDIES

What court has jurisdiction over actions described as "similar remedies"?

● The MTC exercise exclusive original jurisdiction over all civil actions which
involve title to or possession of real property where the assessed value does not
exceed P20,000.00 outside Metro Manila or does not exceed P50,000.00 in
Metro Manila.

Section 1, Rule 63 of the Rules of Court further provides in its second paragraph
that:

An action for the reformation of an instrument, to quiet title to real property or remove
clouds therefrom, or to consolidate ownership under Article 1607 of the Civil Code, may
be brought under this Rule.

The second paragraph of Section 1, Rule 63 of the Rules of Court specifically

refers to (1) an action for the reformation of an instrument, recognized under
Articles 1359 to 1369 of the Civil Code; (2) an action to quiet title, authorized by
Articles 476 to 481 of the Civil Code; and (3) an action to consolidate ownership
required by Article 1607 of the Civil Code in a sale with a right to repurchase.
These three remedies are considered similar to declaratory relief because
they also result in the adjudication of the legal rights of the litigants, often without
the need of execution to carry the judgment into effect.

To determine which court has jurisdiction over the actions identified in the
second paragraph of Section 1, Rule 63 of the Rules of Court, said provision
must be read together with those of the Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980, as
amended.
SHORTCUT ANSWER:
21 - Q: Distinguish Accion Reinvindicatoria from Accion Publiciana
VANGUARDIA
A:

Accion Reivindicatoria Accion Publiciana

An action whereby the plaintiff alleges The plenary action to recover the right of
ownership over a parcel of land and possession which should be brought in
seeks recovery of its full possession. the proper regional trial court when
(Heirs of Alfonso Yusingco v. Amelita dispossession has lasted for more than
Busilak, G.R. No. 210504, January 24, one year. (Heirs of Alfonso Yusingco v.
2018) Amelita Busilak, G.R. No. 210504,
January 24, 2018)

It is a suit to recover possession of a It is an ordinary civil proceeding to

parcel of land as an element of determine the better right of possession
ownership. (Heirs of Alfonso Yusingco v. of realty independently of title. (Heirs of
Amelita Busilak, G.R. No. 210504, Alfonso Yusingco v. Amelita Busilak, G.R.
January 24, 2018) No. 210504, January 24, 2018)

RTC has jurisdiction if the value of the property exceeds P400,000 MTC has
jurisdiction if value of the property does not exceed the above amount [R.A.
11576 (2021)]

22 - VASQUEZ Q: Distinguish Detentacion from Desajucho;

A:

Forcible Entry (Detentacion) Unlawful Detainer (Desajucho)

Possession of land by the defendant is Possession is initially lawful but it

unlawful from the beginning as he becomes illegal by reason of the
acquires possession by force, termination of his right to possession of
intimidation, strategy, threat, or stealth the property under his contract (express
(FISTS) [Dikit v. Ycasiano, G.R. No. or implied) with the plaintiff [Dikit v.
L-3621 (1951)] Ycasiano, G.R. No. L-3621 (1951)]

No previous demand for the defendant to Demand is jurisdictional [Sec. 2, Rule 70;
vacate the premises is necessary [Sec. 2, Medel v. Militante, G.R. No. 16096
Rule 70; Medel v. Militante, G.R. No. (1921)].
16096 (1921)].

Plaintiff must prove that he was in prior Plaintiff need not have been in prior
physical possession of the premises until physical possession [Pharma Industries,
he was deprived thereof by defendant Inc. v. Pajarillaga, G.R. No. 53788
[Pharma Industries, Inc. v. Pajarillaga, (1980)].
G.R. No. 53788 (1980)]

The 1-year period is generally counted Period is counted from the date of last
 from the date of actual entry on land [1 demand [Sarona v. Villegas, G.R. No.
Regalado 873, 2010 Ed.]. L22984 (1968)] or last letter of demand
[DBP v. Canonoy, G.R. No. L-29422
(1970)].

23 - VILLAR Q: State the contents of the requisite demand to vacate in the event of nonpayment of
rentals;

A:Section 2. Lessor to proceed against lessee only after demand. — Unless otherwise
stipulated, such action by the lesser shall be commenced only after demand to pay or
comply with the conditions of the lease and to vacate is made upon the lessee, or by
serving written notice of such demand upon the person found on the premises if no
person be found thereon, and the lessee fails to comply therewith after fifteen (15) days
in the case of land or five (5) days in the case of buildings.

Contents of Demand to Vacate in the Event of Nonpayment of Rentals:

- Name
- Date sent
- Reason for Eviction
- Date Lapsed
- Days to Vacate

24 - BUBAN Q: State the prohibited pleadings under the rule on summary procedure:

A: Sec. 19. Prohibited pleadings and motions. — The following pleadings, motions or
petitions shall not be allowed in the cases covered by this Rule:

(a) Motion to dismiss the complaint or to quash the complaint or information except on
the ground of lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter, or failure to comply with the
preceding section;

(b) Motion for a bill of particulars;

(c) Motion for new trial, or for reconsideration of a judgment, or for opening of trial;

(d) Petition for relief from judgment;

(e) Motion for extension of time to file pleadings, affidavits or any other paper;

(f) Memoranda;

(g) Petition for certiorari, mandamus, or prohibition against any interlocutory order
issued by the court;

(h) Motion to declare the defendant in default;

(i) Dilatory motions for postponement;

(j) Reply;

(k) Third party complaints;

25 - BULAN Q: Discuss the concept and purpose of a record on appeal and distinguish these from
the material data rule;

A:

CONCEPT PURPOSE

RECORD ON APPEAL Required in the following The rationale behind

cases: (MEP-FD) allowing more than one
1. In special proceedings appeal in the same case is
and in other cases of to enable the rest of,the
Muitiple or separate case to proceed in the
appeals (ROC, Rule 40, event that.a separate and
Sec. 3); distinct issue is resolved
 2.- In an order of by the.court and held to be
Expropriation in eminent final
domain proceedings
(ROC, Rule 67, Sec. 2);
3. In a judgment for
recovery of property or
Partition with accounting;
4. In a Foreclosure of
mortgage (Roman Catholic
Archbishop of Manila v.
CA, G.R. No. 111324, July
5, 1996); and
In a judgment for or
against one or more of
several Defendants,
leaving the action to
proceed against the others
(ROC, Rule 36, Sec. 4).

MATERIAL DATA RULE This is the material date The purpose 1s to

showing the timeliness of established the timeliness
the appeal. of the appeal or petition for
review, since clherwise the
Where the undisputed appealed decision would
material dates as already be final and
subsequently submitted executory and the
under oath show the fact of appellate or reviewing
timeliness of the appeal, it court would be rendered
would subserve the ends without jurisdiction, where
of substantial justice and there exist no valid
be in consonance with a grounds to seek relief from
sound and just exercise of final judgment
judicial discretion to admit
such supplemental data
and give due course lo the
appeal rather than to apply
the strict letter of the law
and punish with dismissal
of appeal the petitioner for
they fault or mistake of his
counsel

26 - CRUZADO Q: Distinguish rule 45 from rules 42 and 65;

A:

(RULE 42)
The regional trial court here acts as an appellate court. This mode of appeal covered
by Rule 42 is brought to the Court of Appeals on questions of fact, on questions of
law, or mixed questions of fact and law.

● Therefore, even if the question brought to the regional trial court from a decision
of the metropolitan or municipal trial court is a pure or raises pure questions of
law, there are no questions of fact, there are no mixed questions of fact and law,
but purely questions of law, then this mode of appeal is through a petition for
review to the Court of Appeals. So the resolution here of the regional trial court,
if brought to the Court of Appeals on pure questions of law, is in accordance with
the rules governing petitions for review.

DIFFERENCE FROM RULE 45: Petition for review by way of certiorari.

This mode of appeal provided for by Rule 45 is brought to the Supreme Court from the
decision of the regional trial court in the exercise of its original and not appellate
jurisdiction, and only on pure questions of law
(RULE 45)
The Revised Rules of Court specifically provides that an appeal by certiorari from a
judgment or final order or resolution of the Sandiganbayan is by verified petition for
review on certiorari and shall raise only questions of law.

Specifically, Section 1, Rule 45 of the Rules of Court dictates that:

 SECTION 1. Filing of petition with Supreme Court. – A party desiring to appeal by
certiorari from a judgment or final order or resolution of the Court of Appeals, the
Sandiganbayan, the Regional Trial Court or other courts whenever authorized by law,
may file with the Supreme Court a verified petition for review on certiorari. The petition
shall raise only questions of law which must be distinctly set forth

(RULE 65)
However, the present Petition is one for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Revised Rules
of Court.

Under Rule 65, a party may only avail himself of the special remedy of certiorari under
the following circumstances:
SECTION 1. Petition for Certiorari. – When any tribunal, board or officer exercising
judicial or quasi-judicial functions has acted without or in excess of its or his jurisdiction,
or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction, and there is
no appeal, nor any plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law, a
person aggrieved thereby may file a verified petition in the proper court, alleging the facts
with certainty and praying that judgment be rendered annulling or modifying the
proceedings of such tribunal, board or officer, and granting such incidental reliefs as law
and justice may require.

● The writ of certiorari issues for the correction of errors of jurisdiction only or
grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction. It cannot
be legally used for any other purpose. Its function is only to keep the inferior
court within the bounds of its jurisdiction or to prevent it from committing such a
grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction.
● It may issue only when the following requirements are alleged in the petition and
established:
1. the writ is directed against a tribunal, a board or any officer exercising
judicial or quasi-judicial functions;
2. such tribunal, board or officer has acted without or in excess of
jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or
excess of jurisdiction; and
3. there is no appeal or any plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the
ordinary course of law.
● Excess of jurisdiction as distinguished from absence of jurisdiction, means that
an act, though within the general power of a tribunal, a board or an officer is not
authorized, and is invalid with respect to the particular proceeding, because the
conditions which alone authorize the exercise of the general power in respect of
it are wanting.
● “Without jurisdiction” means lack or want of legal power, right or authority to hear
and determine a cause or causes, considered either in general or with reference
to a particular matter. It means lack of power to exercise authority. [Land Bank of
the Philippines v. Court of Appeals, 456 Phil. 755, 784-785 (2003)]

➔ Contrasting the two remedies, a petition for review (RULE 45) is a mode of
appeal, while a special civil action for certiorari (RULE 65) is an extraordinary
process for the correction of errors of jurisdiction.
➔ The extraordinary remedy of certiorari is proper if the tribunal, board, or officer
exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions acted without or in grave abuse of
discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction and there is no appeal or
any plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in law.
➔ A petition for review, on the other hand, seeks to correct errors of judgment
committed by the court, tribunal, or officer. When a court, tribunal, or officer has
jurisdiction over the person and the subject matter of the dispute, the decision on
all other questions arising from the case is an exercise of that jurisdiction.
➔ Consequently, all errors committed in the exercise of said jurisdiction are merely
errors of judgment. Under prevailing procedural rules and jurisprudence, errors
of judgment are not proper subjects of a special civil action for certiorari.

27 - DAVID Q:Distinguish direct and indirect contempt;

A:

Direct Contempt Indirect Contempt

 Rule 71. Section 1 of ROC Rule 71 Section 3 of ROC

Direct contempt punished summarily. — Indirect contempt to be punished after

A person guilty of misbehavior in the charge and hearing. — After a charge in
presence of or so near a court as to writing has been filed, and an opportunity
obstruct or interrupt the proceedings given to the respondent to comment
before the same, including disrespect thereon within such period as may be
toward the court, offensive fixed by the court and to be heard by
personalities toward others, or refusal himself or counsel, a person guilty of
to be sworn or to answer as a witness, any of the following acts may be
or to subscribe an affidavit or punished for indirect contempt;
deposition when lawfully required to
do so, may be summarily adjudged in (a) Misbehavior of an officer of a court
contempt by such court and punished by in the performance of his official
a fine not exceeding two thousand pesos duties or in his official transactions;
or imprisonment not exceeding ten (10)
days, or both, if it be a Regional Trial (b) Disobedience of or resistance to a
Court or a court of equivalent or higher lawful writ, process, order, or
rank, or by a fine not exceeding two judgment of a court, including the act of
hundred pesos or imprisonment not a person who, after being dispossessed
exceeding one (1) day, or both, if it be a or ejected from any real property by the
lower court judgment or process of any court of
competent jurisdiction, enters or attempts
or induces another to enter into or upon
such real property, for the purpose of
executing acts of ownership or
possession, or in any manner disturbs the
possession given to the person adjudged
to be entitled thereto;

(c) Any abuse of or any unlawful

interference with the processes or
proceedings of a court not constituting
direct contempt under section 1 of this
Rule;

(d) Any improper conduct tending,

directly or indirectly, to impede,
obstruct, or degrade the
administration of justice;

(e) Assuming to be an attorney or an

officer of a court, and acting as such
without authority;

(f) Failure to obey a subpoena duly

served;

(g) The rescue, or attempted rescue, of

a person or property in the custody of
an officer by virtue of an order or
process of a court held by him

Contempt of court is of two kinds, namely: direct contempt, which is committed in the
presence of or so near the judge as to obstruct him in the administration of justice; and
constructive or indirect contempt, which consists of willful disobedience of the lawful
process or order of the court Narcida v. Bowen, 22 Phil. 365

28 - DAYAWON Q: State grounds for disallowing support pendente lite;

A:
1. Lack of Legal Basis (Section 1 Rule 61)
2. Lack of Necessity (Sec. 3 Rule 61)
 3. Lack of Supporting Evidence
4. Fraud or Misrepresentation
5. Change in Circumstances (Sec. 5 Rule 61)
6. Violation of Court Orders or Rules.

29 - FLORES Q: Discuss the concept of just compensation;

A: Just compensation is the full and fair equivalent of the property taken from its owner
by the expropriator. It is considered to be a sum equivalent to the market value of the
property, which is defined as the price fixed by the seller in the open market in the usual
and ordinary course of legal action and competition [2 Riano 284-285, 2016 Bantam
Ed.].

30 - GERONIMO Q: Discuss the jurisprudential basis and standard of the concept of "beyond pecuniary
estimation";

A:

Under the First Sarmiento case, the SC held that the test to determine whether an
action is capable or incapable of pecuniary estimation is to ascertain the nature of the
principal action or relief sought.

Thus, if the principal relief sought is the recovery of a sum of money or real property,
then the action is capable of pecuniary estimation.

However, if the principal relief sought is not for the recovery of money or real
property and the money claim is only a consequence of the principal relief, then
the action is incapable of pecuniary estimation.

31 - GOLOSINO Q: Distinguish the applicable rules on indigent litigants;

A:

Indigent parties Indigent litigants

(Rule 21) (Sec.19, Rule 141)

One who has no money or property One whose gross income and that of
sufficient and available for food, shelter, their immediate family do not exceed an
and basic necessities [Sec. 21, Rule 3] amount double the monthly minimum
wage of an employee, and who does not
own real property with a fair market
value of more than PHP300,000

One whose gross income and that of

their immediate family do not exceed an
amount double the monthly minimum
wage of an employee, and who does not
own real property with a fair market
value of more than PHP300,000 own any
real property with the assessed value
aforementioned, supported by an
affidavit of a disinterested person
attesting to the truth of the litigant’s
affidavit

1. Exemption from payment of docket 1. Exempt from the payment of legal

and other lawful fees, and of transcripts fees.
of stenographic notes which the court
may order to be furnished him

2. Amount of the docket and other lawful

fees shall be a lien on any judgment 2. The legal fees shall be a lien on any
rendered in the case favorable to the judgment rendered in the case favorably
indigent, unless the court otherwise to the indigent litigant, unless the court
provides otherwise provides

Consequence if party not actually Any falsity in the affidavit of a litigant or

indigent: The proper docket and other a disinterested party shall be sufficient
lawful fees shall be assessed and cause to dismiss the complaint or action
collected by the clerk of court. If payment or to strike out the pleading of that party,
 is not made within the time fixed by the without prejudice to whatever criminal
court, execution shall issue or the liability may have been incurred
payment thereof, without prejudice to
such other sanctions as the court

32 - GRIARTE Q: Discuss the concept of "plain, adequate and speedy remedies in the ordinary course
of law";

A: A remedy is plain, adequate and speedy if it will promptly relieve the petitioner from
the injurious effects of the judgment, order or resolution of the court concerned [Riano
2019, Citing Bordomeo v. CA].

33 - LAPESURA Q:Discuss the factors considered in giving due course to a petition for review by way of
certiorari;

A:

1) WHERE TO FILE: Filing a Petition with the Supreme Court (Sec 1, Rule 45)
1. The petition for review by way of certiorari can be filed by a party desiring to
appeal by certiorari to the Supreme Court whenever authorized by law from
judgment, final order or resolution of the:
1. The Court of appeals:
2. Sandiganbayan
3. Court of Tax Appeals; and,
4. The RTC and other courts

2. The petition may include application for a writ of preliminary injunction or other
provisional remedies and shall only raise questions of law.
3. The petitioner may seek the same provisional remedies by verified motion filed
in the same action or proceedings at any time during its pendency.

2) WHEN TO FILE: Time For Filing and its Extension (Section 2, Rule 45)

1. 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.

2. Extension allowed: On motion duly filed and served, with full payment of the
docket and other lawful fees and the deposit for costs before the expiration of
the reglementary period, the Supreme Court may for justifiable reasons grant an
extension of thirty (30) days only within which to file the petition.

3) Payment of Fees: Docket and other lawful fees and proof of service (Sec 3,
Rule 45)

1. Petitioner shall pay corresponding docket and other lawful fees to the clerk of
court of the Supreme Court and deposit the amount of P500 for cost of time and
filing of the petition.

2. Proof of service of a copy thereof on the lower court concerned and on the
adverse party shall be submitted together with the petition.

4) WHAT TO FILE: Contents of the petition: (Sec 4, Rule 45)

The petition shall be filed in eighteen (18) copies, with the original copy intended for the
court being indicated as such by the petitioner, and shall:
a. State the full name of the appealing party as the petitioner and the adverse
party as respondent, without impleading the lower courts or judges thereof
either as petitioners or respondents;

b. Indicate the material dates showing when notice of the judgment or final
order or resolution subject thereof was received;

c. Set forth concisely a statement of the matters involved, and the reasons or
arguments relied on for the allowance of the petition;
 d. Be accompanied by a clearly legible duplicate original, or a certified true
copy of the judgment or final order or resolution certified by the clerk
contrary to both the admissions of appellants and appellees;

i. When the findings of fact of the CA are at

variance with those of the trial court, the SC has to review the
evidence in order to arrive at the correct findings based on the
record;
ii. When the findings of fact are conclusions
without citation of specific evidence on which they are based;
iii. When the facts set forth in the petition as well
as in the petitioner’s main and reply briefs are not disputed by
the respondents;
iv. The findings of fact of the CA is premised on
the supposed evidence on record;
v. When certain material facts and circumstances
have been overlooked by the trial court which, if taken into
account, would alter the result of the case in that they would
entitle the accused to acquittal of court of the court a quo and
the requisite number of plain copies thereof, and such material
portions of the record as would support the petition; and
vi. Submit together with the petition a certification
against forum shopping.

5) Grounds for Outright Dismissal by Court of Appeals of the Petition (Motu Proprio
Dismissal) (FP-DQ (Section 5, Rule 45)

1. Failure of the petition to comply with the requirements on form

a. Payment of docket and other lawful fees;
b. Deposit for costs;
c. Proof of service of the same petition to the adverse party;
d. Certification against forum shopping 2
2. Patently without merit;
3. Prosecuted manifestly for Delay; or
4. Questions raised are too insubstantial to require consideration

6) Due Course: Review is Discretionary (Sec 6, Rule 45)

A review 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.

7) Submissions: Pleadings and documents that may be required and the related
sanctions in case of non-compliance (Sec 7, Rule 45)

1. For purposes in determining whether the petition should be dismissed or

denied, the Supreme court may require filing of such pleadings, briefs,
memoranda, documents as it deems necessary within periods and under
such conditions as it may consider appropriate.
2. The Supreme Court may impose corresponding sanctions in case of
non-filing or unauthorized filing of such pleadings and documents or
non-compliance with the conditions therefore.

8) Given Due Course : elevation of records (Sec 8, Rule 45)

If the petition is given due course, the Supreme Court may require the elevation of the
complete record of the case or specified parts thereof within fifteen (15) days from
notice.

9) Applicability: Both civil and criminal cases: (Sec 9, Rule 45)

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.

34 - LIBO-ON Q: Distinguish rendition of judgment from entry of judgment;

A:
 Rendition of judgment

Pronouncement of the judgment in open court does not constitute rendition of judgment.
It is the filing of the signed decision with the COC that constitutes rendition. Even if
the judgment has already been put in writing and signed, it is still subject to amendment
if it has not yet been filed with the COC, [Ago v. CA, G.R. No. L-17898 (1962)]

Promulgation of judgment

Promulgation is the process by which a decision is published, officially announced,

made known to the public or delivered to the COC for filing, coupled with notice to the
parties or their counsel. [2 Herrera 151, 2007 Ed., Neria v. Commissioner of Immigration,
G.R. No. L-24800 (1968)]

Period for rendition

a. All cases filed must be decided or resolved by the Supreme Court within 24
months from the date of their submission for decision.
b. Unless reduced by the SC, within 12 months for lower collegiate courts and
within 3 months for all other lower courts. [Sec. 15, Art. VIII, Constitution,]
Entry of judgment
The entry of judgment refers to the physical act performed by the clerk of court in
entering the dispositive portion of the judgment in the book of entries of judgment after
the same has become final and executory. [1Riano 615, 2014 Bantam Ed.]
When entered: If no appeal, or motion for new trial or reconsideration is filed within the
time provided in the Rules, the judgment or final order shall forthwith be entered by the
clerk in the book of entries of judgments [Sec. 2, Rule 36]
Note: The date of finality of the judgment or final order shall be deemed to be the date of
itsentry. [Sec. 2, Rule 36] This is regardless of the date when the physical act of entry
was done.[1 Riano 615, 2014 Bantam Ed.]
Contents of record in the book of entries:
1. Dispositive part of the judgment or final Order
2. Signature of the clerk; and
3. Certification that such judgment or final order has become final and executory.
[Sec. 2, Rule 36]

UP BOC REM LAW 2022, P. 92-93

35 - SOLOMON Q: Discuss perfection of an appeal in relation to entry of judgment;

A: Sec 9, Rule 41

Perfection of appeal:

1. A party’s appeal by notice of appeal is deemed perfected as to him upon the filing of
the notice of appeal in due time.

2. A party’s appeal by record on appeal is deemed perfected as to him with respect to

the subject matter thereof upon the approval of the record on appeal filed in due time
[Sec. 9, Rule 41].

Note: Payment of docket fees in full is mandatory and is a condition sine qua non for the
perfection of an appeal. Subsequent payment of appellate docket fees does not cure the
defect of the appeal because payment is a jurisdictional requirement [Santander v.
Villanueva, G.R. No. L-6184 (1958)].

Effect of perfected appeal

1. In appeals by notice of appeal, the court loses jurisdiction over the case upon the
perfection of the appeals filed in due time and the expiration of the time to appeal of the
other parties.

2. In appeals by record on appeal, the court loses jurisdiction only over the subject
matter thereof upon the approval of the records on appeal filed in due time and the
expiration of the time to appeal of the other parties [Sec . 9, Rule 41]

GENERAL RULE: After perfection of appeal, the court loses jurisdiction over the case (1
REGALADO, supra at 571)

EXCEPTION: Residual powers/jurisdiction of the RTC In either case, prior to the

transmittal of the original record or the record on appeal, the court may 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Issue orders for the protection and preservation of the rights of the parties which do not
involve any matter litigated by the appeal Approve compromises Permit appeals of
indigent litigants Order execution pending a accordance with Sec. 2 of Rule , and Allow
withdrawal of the appeal [Sec. 9, Rule 41]

TO UNDERSTAND MORE:

Walang entry of judgment kapag nakapagperferct ng appeal ata ang point based dun sa
question.

If di perfected appeal, magkaka-entry of judgment na