Notes on Civil Procedure by Lawrence Villamar

Source: Revised Rules of Procedure Annotated (sto!ia" #$%&'

RULE 65
CERTIORARI, PROHIBITION, AND MANDAMUS
A. CERTIORARI
WHEN to file: N() later t*an +$ days from notice of ,ud-ment" order or resolution. /f motion
for reconsideration0new trial is filed" reco1onin- of re-lamentary !eriod is from notice of denial
of t*e motion.
N( e2tension to file t*e !etition s*all be -ranted e2ce!t for com!ellin- reason and in no
case e2ceedin- fifteen (%3' day. (4oc*e v 4oc*e" #$$5'
)*e !eriod as s!ecifically set to avoid any unreasonable delay violative of ri-*t of !arties to
s!eedy dis!osition. 6ence" it is ine2tendible" e2ce!t for e2ce!tional circumstaces ot *e
-round of ustice and e7uity.
WHERE to file: /f !etition relates to act of 8)C0cor!oration0board0an officer0!erson" filed
wit* a!!ro!riate R)C. 8ay also be filed wit* CA or Sandi-anbayan9 if involvin- 7uasi:,udicial
a-ency" wit* CA unless ot*erwise !rovided by law. /n election cases (8)C0R)C'" e2clusively
wit* C(8LC in aid of its a!!ellate ,urisdiction
Pertinent !leadin-s and documets must be attac*ed to t*e !etition (Sec. % (#'" Rule +3'
FUNCTION: )o 1ee! inferior courts wit*in t*e bounds of its urisdiction or to !revent it from
committin- suc* -rave abue of discretion amountin- to lac1 or e2cess of ,urisdiction
As a rule" -rant of !etition for certiorari does N() interru!t t*e course of t*e !rinci!al case"
unless cou!led wit* a )R( or writ of !reliminary in,unction. Public res!ondent to !roceed
wit*in ten (%$' days from filin- of !etition for certiorari" absent )R( or writ of !reliminary
in,unction
Court may dismiss !etition if it finds t*e same to be !atentl wit*out merit or !rosecuted
manifestly for delay or 7uestions raised are too unsubstantial. /t my im!ose motu propio, based
on res ipsa loquitur" ot*er disci!linar sanctions0measures on errin- lawyers for !atently
dilatory0umeritorious !etitions for certiorari.
)*e remedy a-ainst interlocutory resolutions of t*e Court of A!!eals is certiorari under Rule +3
(as !rovided in Sec % (b' Rule ;%'
)*e -rant of a !etition for certiorari under Rule +3 re7uires -rave abuse of discretion
amountin- to lac1 or e2cess of ,urisdiction.
<rave abuse of discretoion: were an an act / !erformed wit a ca!ricious or w*imsical e2ercise
of ,ud-ment e7uivalent to lac1 of ,uridiction. Abuse must be !atent and -ross as to amount to an
evasion of !ositive duty0 !ower is e2ercised in an arbitrary and des!otic manner by reaon of
!asion or *ostility.
=uestion of law s*ould be filed wit* Su!reme Court" N() Court of A!!eals. )*e Su!reme
Court *as ori-inal ,urisdiction 222 over cases in wic* only 7uestion of law is involved (6an,in
vs CA" #$$+'
Petition for certiorari a-ainst 7uasi:,udicial a-ency co-ni>able only by t*e Court of A!!eals (via
!etition for review on certiorari" under Rule ;&'.
Certiorari is !ro!er only if t*e !arty *as no !lai" s!eedy" ade7uate remed in t*e course of law.
Remedies of a!!eal uder Rule ;3 and an ori-inal action for certiorari under Rule +3 are
mutually e2clusive (Ni!!on vs CA" #$$;'. Certiorari is not subtitute to a lost a!!eal" as
!roscribed under Rule ;3. /f t*ere are ot*er e2istin- remedy" it must N() be !lain" s!eedy and
Notes on Civil Procedure by Lawrence Villamar
Source: Revised Rules of Procedure Annotated (sto!ia" #$%&'
ade7uate.
)*ere are occasions w*en t*e Su!reme Court treated a !etition for certiorari under Rule +3 as
one filed under Rule ;3 (provided" t*at it was filed wit*in !rescribed time and attended by
s!ecial circumstances'.
?udicial !ower is vested in one Su!reme Court and in suc* ot*er courts as may be establis*ed
by law (Sec %" Art V/// of t*e %@A5 Constitution'" includes determiation of -rave abuse of
discretion and issuance of certiorari" !ro*ibition" and mandamus etc.
Certiorari will only issue to correct errors of ,urisdiction. rrors of ,ud-ment not enou-*9 it
must be ca!ricious" arbitrarym abd w*imsical e2ercise of !ower. Abuse of discretion must be
!atet0e2ercised arbitrarily0des!otically.
8otion for reconsideration a condition !recedent before certiorari may be -ranted" e2ce!t:
w*en t*e court !ronounced its decision final and e2cecutory.
8otion for conideration is no lon-er necessary0ot*er s!ecial circumstances warrant
immediate and direct action (i.e. bail *as been -ranted0accused free to roam'
w*en t*e court a 7uo *ad no ,urisdiction
w*en 7uestion raised in certiorari *as been duly raised and !assed u!on by lower court0sa"e
as t*ose raised and !assed u!on in lower court
B*e t*ere is an ur-ent necessity for t*e resolution of t*e 7uestion and any furt*er delay
would !reudice interest of -overnment0!etitioner0sub,ect matter is !eris*able
8R is useless" under t*e circumastances
Petitioner de!rived of due !rocess0e2treme ur-ency of relief is im!robable
Proceedin-s e2 !arte
Petitioner *as no o!!ortunity to ob,ect
Purely 7uestion of law
A 7uestion of law does not call for e2amination of t*e !robative vale of evidence
!resented" t*e trut* of false*ood of facts bein- admitted0doubt concerns t*e correct
a!!lication of law and ,uris!rudence o t*e matter. B*en t*ere is a dis!ute as to fact" t*e
7uestio of w*et*er or nott*e conclusio draw t*ere from is correct" is a 7uestion of law.
Public interest is involved (e.-. em!loyer:em!loyee relations*i! im!ressed wit* !ublic
interest'
rror is !atent nullity
?udicial intervention is ur-ent0-reat and irre!arable dama-e
No -rave abuse of discretio may be attributed to a court sim!ly becaue of its alle-ed wron-ful
a!!reciation of fact a evidence. Certiorari will N() issue for errors of !rocedure or mista1e in
t*e findin-s or conclusion of t*e lower court. Review of evidence can not be secured in !etitio
for CP8.
Petition fo Re!ie" #n$e R#le %5 Petition fo Cetio&i #n$e R#le 65
Pro!er remedy of a !art a--rieved by decision of
t*e CA as continuation of a!!ellate !rocess over
ori-inal case
(ri-inal case
No !lain" s!eedy" and ade7uate remedy in t*e
ordinary course of law
Notes on Civil Procedure by Lawrence Villamar
Source: Revised Rules of Procedure Annotated (sto!ia" #$%&'
Prom!tly relieves !etitioner from inurious effects
of ,ud-ments0acts of lower court0a-ency
%
/nterlocutory orders" if found to be wit* -rave abuse of discretion amountin- to lac1 or e2cess
of ,urisdiction" may be remedied wit* s!ecial civil action of certiorari under Rule +3.
)*e doctrine of *ierarc*y of courts is not n iro$n:clad dictum and it may be rela2ed w*e
e2ce!tional and com!ellin- circumstance so warrant t*e e2ercise of t*e CSu!reme CourtDsE
!rimary ,urisdiction. )ec*nical rules on substitution of !arties s*ould not be nrrowly construed
as to !revent t*e court from decidin- t*e case on its merit.
B. PROHIBITION
Re'#i(ite(:
tribunal0cor!oration0board0an officer0!erson unlawfully ne-lects t*e !erformance of an act
w*ic* t*e law s!ecfically en,oins as duty0 unlawfully e2cludes anot*er from t*e use or
en,oyment of a ri-*t or office
No ot*er !lain" s!eedy and ade7uate remedy
verified !etition in t*e !ro!er courts alle-in- facts wit* certainty0!rayin- ,ud-ments be
rendered commandin- t*e res!osndent to desist from furt*er !roceedin-s in t*e action or
matter s!ecified t*erein0incidental relief
<rounds for !etition
wit*out or in e2cess of its or *is ,urisdiction
wit* -rave abuse of discretion amountin- to lac1 or e2cess of ,urisdiction
no a!!eal0 any ot*er !lain" s!eedy and ade7uate remedy in t*e ordinary course of law
Certified true co!y of t*e ,ud-ment must accom!any t*e !etition as well as co!ies of !ertinent
!leadin-s and documents" and sworn certificate of non:forum s*o!!in- (Sec & Rule ;+'
C. MANDAMUS
A mandamus will not !ros!er to com!el a discretionary act
E)CEPTION: /nstances of(%' -ross abuse of discretion " manifest in,ustice or !al!able
e2cess of aut*ority" e7uivalent to denia of settled ri-*t and (#' no ot*er !lain" s!eedy"
ade7uate remedy
Commission wit* ministerial duty sub,ect to mandamus
A !urely ministerial act is one w*ic* an officer or tribunal !erforms in a -iven state of facts
in a !rescribed manner in obedience ot t*e mandate of le-al aut*ority B/)6(F) re-ard to
or t*e e2ercise of *is own ,ud-ment u!on !ro!riety or im!ro!riety of t*e act done.
8andamus is t*e !reo!er remedy to com!el a cor!oration to -rant mont*ly salary and
*oliday !ay
8andamus is N() t*e !ro!er to com!el a sc*ool to enroll a student for academic
deficiencies because t*is involves t*e e2ercise by t*e sc*ool of discretion under academic
freedom
% )*e -rant of !etition for certiorari does not sto! t*e assailed !rinci!al !roceedin-s" unless it* )R( or writ of !relimary
in,unction.
Notes on Civil Procedure by Lawrence Villamar
Source: Revised Rules of Procedure Annotated (sto!ia" #$%&'
8andamus will not lie a-ainst t*e President or Con-ress due to !rinci!le t*at t*e ,udiciary
is a co:e7ual branc*
Gailure to e2*aust administrative remedies is -enerally fatal to an action for mandamus
/f !etition is sufficient in form and substance" court will order res!ondent to comment wit*in
ten (%$' days from recei!t of co!y. Res!ondent may not file a motion to dismiss but t*e court
may re7uire filin- of re!ly and ot*er res!onsive !leadin-
Court may issue in,unctive relief ()R( or writ of !reliminary in,unction' wit* t*e -rant of t*e
!etition. H