Part III: h.

Partition (Rule 69) (e) All cases in which only an error or question of
i. Forcible Entry and Unlawful Detainer (Rule 70) law is involved.
I. Rules on Special Civil Actions (SCA) j. Contempt (Rule 71)
c. Art. VIII, Sec. 1, par. 2 (basis for Rule 65)
A. Basic Concepts 5.a. Other Special Civil Actions
Art. VIII, Sec. 1. The judicial power shall be vested in one
1. What Rule Shall Govern SCA? a. Writ of Kalikasan Supreme Court and in such lower courts as may be
b. Writ of Continuing Mandamus established by law.
Rule 1, Sec. 3(a) A civil action is one by which a party sues
another for the enforcement or protection of a right, or 6. How Can SCA be Commenced? Judicial power includes the duty of the courts of justice to
the prevention or redress of a wrong, (1a, R2) settle actual controversies involving rights which are
Complaint Petition legally demandable and enforceable, and to determine
A civil action may either be ordinary or special. Both are 62, 67-70 63-66, 71 Indirect contempt whether or not there has been a grave abuse of
governed by the rules for ordinary civil actions, subject to discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on
the specific rules prescribed for a special civil action. (n) 7. What are Some of the Constitutional Provisions the part of any branch or instrumentality of the
in Relation to Special Civil Actions? Government.
2. What are the Provisions of Ordinary Actions
Which Are Applicable in SCA? a. Art. VIII, Sec. 5(1) (basis for Rule 65-66) d. Art. III, Sec. 9 (basis for Rule 67)

a. As a GR, the rules on venue shall be applicable Art. VIII, Sec. 5. The Supreme Court shall have the Art. III, Sec. 9. No private property shall not be taken for
in SCA except as otherwise provided by the following powers: public use without just compensation.
particular provisions of the SCA
b. The formal requirements of a pleading provided (1) Exercise original jurisdiction over cases affecting e. Art. IX-A, Sec. 7 (basis for Rule 64)
under Rule 7, Sec. 1-5 ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls,
c. Rule on Motion to Dismiss (Rule 16) and over petitions for certiorari, prohibition, Art. IX-A, Sec. 7. Unless otherwise provided by this
mandamus, quo warranto, and habeas corpus. Constitution or by law, any decision, order, or ruling (DOR)
3. What is a SCA? of each Commission may be brought to the Supreme Court
b. Art. VIII, Sec. 5(2) (basis for Rule 65) on certiorari by the aggrieved party within thirty days from
SCA is a kind of action which are governed by its own receipt of a copy thereof.
special rules particularly Rule 62 to 71 of the 1997 Rules of Art. VIII, Sec. 5(2). The Supreme Court shall have the
Civil Procedure and such other actions as may be declared following powers: 8. Provisions of BP 129, as amended by R.A. 7691
by the SC. and P.D. 1083 in Relation to SCA
(2) Review, revise, reverse, modify, or affirm
4. What is the Nature of a SCA? (RRRMA) on appeal or certiorari, as the law or a. CA
the Rules of Court may provide, final judgments
 It is an action which has reference to special and orders of lower courts in: Sec. 9. Jurisdiction – The Court of Appeals shall exercise:
matters requiring special procedure
(a) All cases in which the constitutionality or validity 1. Original jurisdiction to issue writs of mandamus,
5. What are the SCA under the Rules of any treaty, international or executive prohibition, certiorari, habeas corpus, and quo
agreement, law, presidential decree, warranto, and auxiliary writs or processes,
a. Interpleader (Rule 62) proclamation, order, instruction, ordinance, or whether or not in aid of its appellate jurisdiction;
b. Declaratory Relief and other Similar Remedies regulation is in question (original jurisdiction)
(Rule 63) (b) All cases involving the legality of any tax, impost, b. RTC
c. Review of the Judgment, Final Order and assessment, or toll (TIAT), or any penalty
Resolution of the COA and COMELEC (Rule 64) imposed in relation thereto. Sec. 21. Original jurisdiction in other cases – Regional Trial
d. Certiorari, Prohibition, Mandamus (Rule 65) (c) All cases in which the jurisdiction of any lower Courts shall exercise original jurisdiction:
e. Quo Warranto (Rule 66) court is in issue.
f. Expropriation (Rule 67) (d) All criminal cases in which the penalty imposed is (1) In the issuance of writs of certiorari, prohibition,
g. Foreclosure of Real Estate Mortgage (Rule 68) reclusion perpetua or higher. mandamus, quo warranto, habeas corpus and
 injunction which may be enforced in any part of consider themselves entitled to demand compliance with
their respective regions; and 1. Petitions for certiorari, the obligation, be required to litigate among themselves,
2. Prohibition, in order to determine finally who is entitled to the
c. SDC 3. Mandamus, property or payment of the obligation.
4. Quo warranto, habeas corpus,
Art. 143(2)(c). All special civil actions for interpleader or 5. dDsciplinary proceedings against members of The remedy is afforded not to protect a person against
declaratory relief wherein the parties are Muslims or the the judiciary and attorneys, and double liability but to protect him against double vexation
property involved belongs exclusively to Muslims. 6. Cases affecting ambassadors, other public in respect of one liability.
ministers and consuls
d. MeTC/MTC/MCTC 2. Distinction Between Interpleader and
May be filed originally in the Supreme Court. (n) Intervention
Rule on Summary Procedure, Sec. 1. Scope — This rule
shall govern the summary procedure in the Metropolitan 2. Rules Applicable Intervention Interpleader
Trial Courts, the Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, the Ancillary action SCA
Municipal Trial Courts, and the Municipal Circuit Trial Rule 56-A, Sec. 2. Rules applicable — The procedure in Proper in any of the four Presupposes that:
Courts in the following cases falling within their original cases for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo instances mentioned in
jurisdiction: warranto and habeas corpus shall be in accordance with Rule 19, Sec. 1: (1) The plaintiff has
the applicable provisions of the Constitution, laws, and no interest in the
A. Civil Cases: Rules 46, 48, 49, 51, 52 and this Rule, subject to the (1) wherein a third subject matter of
following provisions: person has a legal action or
(1) All cases of forcible entry and unlawful detainer, interest over the (2) Has an interest
irrespective of the amount of damages or unpaid a. All references in said Rules to the Court of subject matter in therein which, in
rentals sought to be recovered. Where Appeals shall be understood to also apply to the litigation, or whole or in part,
attorney's fees are awarded, the same shall not Supreme Court; (2) Or in the success is not disputed by
exceed twenty thousand pesos (P20,000.00). b. The portions of said Rules dealing strictly with of either of the the other parties
and specifically intended for appealed cases in parties to the action
9. Rule on Non-Joinder of Causes of Actions If it the Court of Appeals shall not be applicable; and (3) Or an interest in
Involves Special Civil Actions c. Eighteen (18) clearly legible copies of the both
petition shall be filed, together with proof of (4) Or is situated as
Rule 2, Sec. 5. Joinder of causes of action — A party may service on all adverse parties. to be adversely
in one pleading assert, in the alternative or otherwise, as affected by the
many causes of action as he may have against an opposing The proceedings for disciplinary action against members of distribution or
party, subject to the following conditions: the judiciary shall be governed by the laws and Rules other disposition
prescribed therefor, and those against attorneys by Rules of property in the
(b) The joinder shall not include special civil actions or 139-B, as amended. (n) custody of the
actions governed by special rules; court or of an
III. Interpleader (Rule 62) officer thereof.
II. Procedure in SC in Original Cases (Rule 56- In complaint in Interpleader – the
A) A. Basic Concepts intervention, the defendants are being sued
defendant are already precisely to implead them
A. Procedure in the SC in Original Cases 1. Interpleader Defined original parties to the
pending suit
1. Original Cases Cognizable Alavarez v. Commonwealth. The action for interpleader is Can be filed where the Can be filed in the RTC or
a remedy whereby a person who has (a) property whether original action is pending MTC depending on the
Rule 56 personal or real, in his possession, or (b) an obligation to nature of property and its
render wholly or partially, without claiming any right in value
A. Original Cases both, or (c) claims an interest which in whole or in part is Remedy in case of Denial: Remedy in case of Denial:
not disputed by the conflicting claimants, comes to court
Rule 56-A, Sec. 1. Original cases cognizable — Only: and asks that the persons who claim the property or who
Plaintiff: File MR of the Plaintiff: File MR, Where a party was aware of a dispute and in fact has been If the interests of justice so require, the court may direct in
order sued by one of the claimants and the former did not such order that the subject matter be paid or delivered to
If MR is denied, appeal implead the other claimant, he can no longer invoke the the court.
(1) If MR is denied, judgment denying remedy of interpleader.
file an appeal interpleader 7. Issuance of Summons
(2) File a separate d. Interpleader Not Available in Case of Breach of
action Undertaking Rule 62, Sec. 3. Summons — (a) Summons shall be served
Commenced by filing a Commenced by complaint, upon the conflicting claimants, together with a (c) copy of
motion for leave of court to it being an original action Beltran v. PHHC. Intepleader cannot be availed of to the complaint and (c) order.
intervene attaching the resolve the issue of breach of undertakings made by
pleading in intervention defendants, which issues should be resolved in an ordinary 8. Filing of Motion to Dismiss
civil action for specific performance or other relief
3. When is Interpleader Proper? Rule 62, Sec. 4. Motion to dismiss — Within the time for
e. Interpleader is not Available When There are filing an answer, each claimant may file a motion to
Rule 62, Sec. 1. When interpleader proper — Whenever No Conflicting Claims dismiss on the ground of impropriety of the interpleader
conflicting claims upon the same subject matter are or action or on other appropriate grounds specified in Rule
may be made against a person who claims no interest Vda. De Camilo v. Aranio. Where there are no conflicting 16.
whatever in the subject matter, or an interest which in claims among the defendants, their respective claims
whole or in part is not disputed by the claimants, he may being separate and distinct from each other, the complaint The period to file the answer shall be tolled and if the
bring an action against the conflicting claimants to compel for interpleader may be dismissed for lack of cause of motion is denied, the movant may file his answer within
them to interplead and litigate their several claims among action the remaining period, but which shall not be less than five
themselves (5) days in any event, reckoned from notice of denial.
4. Courts which has Jurisdiction
a. Sheriff who is in Possession of the Proceeds of 9. Filing of Answer and Other Pleadings;
the Sale of Property on Execution May File for RTC MTC Declaration of Default
Interpleader Real Property Real property– Real property–
exceeds 20,000 does not exceed Rule 62, Sec. 5. Answer and other pleadings —
McMicking v. Martinez. The sheriff who is in possession of (outside MM) or 20,000 (outside
the proceeds of the sale of property on execution may file 50,000 (within MM) or 50,000 Par. 1. Each claimant shall file his answer setting forth his
for interpleader against several persons claiming adversely MM) (within MM) claim within fifteen (15) days from service of the summons
the proceeds of such sale. Personal Personal – Personal - upon him, serving a copy thereof upon each of the other
Property exceeds 300,000 exceeds 300,000 conflicting claimants who may file their reply thereto as
b. Lessee May File an Action for Interpleader if he (outside MM) or (outside MM) or provided by these Rules.
is in Doubt as to Whom he Shall Pay the Rent 400,000 (within 400,000 (within
MM) MM) If any claimant fails to plead within the time herein fixed,
De Jesus v. Sociedad Arrendataria de Galleras de Pasay. A the court may, on motion, declare him in default and
lessee who is in doubt as to the person to whom he should 5. Venue in an Action for Interpleader thereafter render judgment barring him from any claim in
pay the rent, because the property leased is claimed by respect to the subject matter.
several persons, may file an action for interpleader against Real property Rule 4, Sec. 1
such persons. Personal property Rule 4, Sec. 2 The parties in an interpleader action may file
counterclaims, cross-claims, third-party complaints and
6. Issuance of an Order responsive pleadings thereto, as provided by these Rules.
c. When to File an Action for Interpleader
Rule 62, Sec. 2. Order — Upon the filing of the complaint, Failure Plaintiff: Motion to declare defendant in default
Wack-Wack Golf & Country Club, Inc. v. Lee Won. An the court shall issue an order requiring the conflicting to
action for interpleader must be filed within a reasonable claimants to interplead with one another. Plead Defendant:
time after the dispute has arisen, otherwise it may be
barred by laches. (1) Before rendition of judgment, motion
to admit answer with attached
 answer; or c. What are the Requirements of an Action for
(2) In case of order of default, motion to Declaratory relief is a SCA brought in the RTC by a person Declaratory Relief?
lift order of default who is (1) interested under a deed, will, contract, or other
written instrument or (2) whose rights are affected by a (1) There must be a justiciable controversy
If motion is denied, MR. statute, executive order or regulation or ordinance, or (2) The controversy must be between persons
other governmental regulation, before breach or violation whose interests are adverse
If MR is denied, Rule 65 mo bhe thereof, asking the court to determine any question of (3) The party seeking declaratory relief must have a
construction or validity arising, and for a declaration of his legal interest in the controversy
If Rule 65 is denied, MR rights or duties thereunder. (4) The issue involved must be ripe for judicial
determination
If MR is denied, Rule 45 2. Persons Who May File a Petition for
Declaratory Relief and Other Similar Remedies d. Essential Requisites of an Action for Declaratory
(3) Petition for relief from judgment Relief
under Rule on the ground of FAMEN Rule 63, Sec. 1. Who may file petition — Any person
with affidavit of merit interested under a deed, will, contract or other written (1) The subject matter of the controversy must be a
instrument, or whose rights are affected by a statute, deed, will, contract or other written instrument,
10. Determination executive order or regulation, ordinance, or any other statute, executive order or regulation, ordinance
governmental regulation may, before breach or violation or other governmental regulation
Rule 62, Sec. 6. Determination — After the pleadings of thereof bring an action in the appropriate Regional Trial (2) The terms of said documents and the validity
the conflicting claimants have been filed, and pre-trial has Court to determine any question of construction or validity thereof are doubtful and require judicial
been conducted in accordance with the Rules, the court arising, and for a declaration of his rights or duties, construction
shall: thereunder. (3) There must have been no breach or violation of
documents in question, otherwise an ordinary
1. Proceed to determine their respective rights and An (a) action for the reformation of an instrument, (b) to civil action is the remedy
2. Adjudicate their several claims quiet title to real property or remove clouds therefrom, or (4) There must be an actual justiciable controversy
(c) to consolidate ownership under Article 1607 of the Civil or the “ripening seeds” of one between persons
11. Docket and Other Lawful Fees Code, may be brought under this Rule. whose interest are adverse
(5) The issue must be ripe for judicial determination
Rule 62, Sec. 7. Docket and other lawful fees, costs and a. Which Court has Jurisdiction over Petition for (6) Adequate relief is not available through other
litigation expenses as liens — The docket and other lawful Declaratory Relief? means or other forms of action or proceeding
fees paid by the party who filed a complaint under this
Rule, as well as the costs and litigation expenses, shall  RTC, a petition for declaratory relief is an action e. Petition for Declaratory Relief May be Treated
constitute: subject matter of which is capable of pecuniary as Petition for Prohibition if the Case has a Far
estimation and therefore falls under the Reaching Implication and Raises Questions that
1. A lien or exclusive original jurisdiction of the RTC Need to be Resolved for the Public Good
2. Charge upon the subject matter of the action, pursuant to B.P. 129, as amended by R.A. 7691
3. unless the court shall order otherwise Macasiano v. NHA. Petition for declaratory relief may be
b. Distinction Between the First par. of Rule 63, treated as a petition for prohibition if the case has far-
Menzi & Co. v. Bastida. The costs, expenses and attorney’s Sec. 1 and Second par. reaching implications and raises questions that need to be
fees incurred by the plaintiff in the action are recoverable resolved for the public good.
from the defendant who loses in the action and is found 1st par. 2nd par.
by the court to have caused the unnecessary litigation. Describes the general Refers to (a) an action for Francisco and Hizon v. Toll Regulatory Board. A petition
circumstances in which a reformation of instrument, for prohibition is a proper remedy to prohibit or nullify
IV. Declaratory Relief and Other Similar person may file a petition (b) quieting of title or (c) acts of executive officials that amount to usurpation of
Remedies for declaratory relief consolidation of ownership legislative authority.
Filed with the RTC Quieting of title may be
A. Basic Concepts in Declaratory Relief filed with the MTC based f. Petition for Declaratory Relief Treated as a
on jurisdictional amount Petition for Mandamus
1. Declaratory Relief Defined
Salvacion v. Central Bank of the Phil. The petition for If such ordinance is alleged to be unconstitutional, the
declaratory relief was treated as one for mandamus Solicitor General shall also be notified and entitled to be (b) Art. 1361. When a mutual mistake of the parties
considering the grave injustice that would result in the heard. causes the failure of the instrument to disclose
interpretation of a banking law. their real agreement, said instrument may be
6. Discretionary Action of the Court reformed.
g. Relief under Rule 63 and Rule 58 (c) Art. 1362. If one party was mistaken and the
Rule 63, Sec. 5. Court action discretionary — Except in other acted fraudulently or inequitably in such a
PDIC v. Phil. Countryside Rural Bank of Carmen actions falling under the second paragraph of Sec. 1 of this way that the instrument does not show their
Rule, the court, motu proprio or upon motion: true intention, the former may ask for the
Rule 63 Rule 58 reformation of the instrument.
Seeks a declaration of Seeks to enjoin or compel a (1) may refuse to exercise the power to declare (d) Art. 1363. When one party was mistaken and the
rights or duties, or the party to perform certain act rights and to construe instruments in any case other knew or believed that the instrument did
determination under a or acts where a decision would not terminate the not state their real agreement, but concealed
deed, will, contract or other uncertainty or controversy which gave rise to the that fact from the former, the instrument may
written instrument, or action, or be reformed.
whose rights are affected (2) In any case where the declaration or (e) Art. 1364. When through the (a) ignorance, (b)
by a statute, executive construction is not necessary and proper under lack of skill, (c) negligence or (d) bad faith on the
order or regulation, the circumstances. part of the person drafting the instrument or of
ordinance, or any other the clerk or typist, the instrument does not
governmental regulation 7. Conversion Into Ordinary Action express the true intention of the parties, the
before breach or violation courts may order that the instrument be
Rule 63, Sec. 6. Conversion into ordinary action — If reformed.
3. Parties Who May File an Action for Declaratory before the final termination of the case, a breach or (f) Art. 1365. If two parties agree upon the
Relief violation of an instrument or a statute, executive order or mortgage or pledge of real or personal property,
regulation, ordinance, or any other governmental but the instrument states that the property is
Rule 63, Sec. 2. Parties — All persons who have or claim regulation should take place, the action may thereupon be sold absolutely or with a right of repurchase,
any interest which would be affected by the declaration converted into an ordinary action, and the parties shall be reformation of the instrument is proper.
shall be made parties; and no declaration shall, except as allowed to file such pleadings as may be necessary or
otherwise provided in these Rules, prejudice the rights of proper 2. What are the Instances When Reformation of
persons not parties to the action Instrument is Not Proper?
B. Reformation of Instrument
4. Validity of Statutes, Executive Orders, (a) Art. 1359, par. 2. If mistake, fraud, inequitable
Regulations 1. What are the Instances Where Reformation of conduct, or accident has prevented a meeting of
Instrument is Proper? the minds of the parties, the proper remedy is
Rule 63, Sec. 3. Notice on Solicitor General — In any not reformation of the instrument but
action which involves the validity of a statute, executive (a) Art. 1359. When, there having been a meeting of annulment of the contract
order or regulation, or any other governmental regulation, the minds of the parties to a contract, their true (b) Art. 1366. There shall be no reformation in the
the Solicitor General shall be notified by the party assailing intention is not expressed in the instrument following cases:
the same and shall be entitled to be heard upon such purporting to embody the agreement, by reason
question. of mistake, fraud, inequitable conduct or (1) Simple donations inter vivos wherein no
accident (M-F-IC-A), one of the parties may ask condition is imposed;
5. Validity of Ordinances for the reformation of the instrument to the end (2) Wills;
that such true intention may be expressed. (3) When the real agreement is void.
Rule 63, Sec. 4. Local government ordinances — In any
action involving the validity of a local government If mistake, fraud, inequitable conduct, or (c) Art. 1367. When one of the parties has brought
ordinance, the corresponding prosecutor or attorney of accident has prevented a meeting of the minds an action to enforce the instrument, he cannot
the local governmental unit involved shall be similarly of the parties, the proper remedy is not subsequently ask for its reformation.
notified and entitled to be heard. reformation of the instrument but annulment of
the contract.
 3. Who May Ask for the Reformation of the has no rights to said immovable respect and not disturb V. Review of Judgment and Final Orders of
Instrument? the other, but also for the benefit of both, so that he who the COMELEC and COA (Rule 64)
has the right would see every cloud of doubt over the
Art. 1368. Reformation may be ordered at the instance of property dissipated, and he could afterwards without fear A. Basic Concepts
either party or his successors in interest, if the mistake was introduce the improvements he may desire, to use, and
mutual; otherwise, upon petition of the injured party, or even to abuse the property as he deems best. 1. Scope of the Rule
his heirs and assigns.
But "for an action to quiet title to prosper, two Rule 64, Sec. 1. Scope — This Rule shall govern the review
C. Quieting of Title indispensable requisites must concur, namely: of judgments and final orders or resolutions of the
Commission on Elections and the Commission on Audit
1. When is Quieting of Title Proper? (1) The plaintiff or complainant has a legal or an
equitable title to or interest in the real property a. What is the Remedy in Case of JFOR of the
(a) Art. 476. Whenever there is a cloud on (a) title subject of the action; and COMELEC and COA?
to real property or (b) any interest therein, by (2) The deed, claim, encumbrance, or proceeding
reason of any: instrument, record, claim, claimed to be casting cloud on his title must be Versoza, Jr. v. Carague. Decisions, orders or rulings of the
encumbrance or proceeding (IRCEP) which is shown to be in fact invalid or inoperative despite COA may be brought to the SC on certiorari under Rule 65
apparently valid or effective but is in truth and in its prima facie appearance of validity or legal by the aggrieved party.
fact invalid, ineffective, voidable, or efficacy."
unenforceable (IIVU), and may be prejudicial to Lokin, Jr. v. COMELEC. As Rule 64 states, the mode of
said title, an action may be brought to remove 4. What is the Effect if the Complaint Will be review is by a petition for certiorari in accordance with
such cloud or to quiet the title. Granted? Rule 65 to be filed with the SC within a limited period of 30
days.
(b) An action may also be brought to prevent a Art. 479. The plaintiff must return to the defendant all
cloud from being cast upon title to real property benefits he may have received from the latter, or b. The Orders, Ruling or Judgment Must be Issued
or any interest therein. reimburse him for expenses that may have redounded to in the Exercise of Adjudicatory Power or Quasi-
the plaintiff's benefit. Judicial Power of the COMELEC
(c) Art. 478. There may also be an action to quiet
title or remove a cloud therefrom when the 5. Courts Having Jurisdiction Ibrahim v. COMELEC. Sec. 7, Art. IX of the 1987
contract, instrument or other obligation has Constitution in part substantially provides that any
been extinguished or has terminated, or has RTC MTC decision, order or ruling of any of the Constitutional
been barred by extinctive prescription. Real property– exceeds Real property– does not Commissions may be brought for review to the Supreme
20,000 (outside MM) or exceeds 20,000 (outside Court on certiorari within 30 days from receipt of a copy
2. What are the Requisites in Order to Avail the 50,000 (within MM) MM) or 50,000 (within thereof.
Remedy of Quieting of Title? MM)
The orders, ruling and decisions rendered or issued by
Art. 477. The plaintiff must have legal or equitable title to, Heirs of Concha v. Sps. Lumocso. An action for the COMELEC en banc must be final and made in the
or interest in the real property which is the subject matter reconveyance of real property, removal of a cloud in a title exercise of its adjudicatory or quasi-judicial power.
of the action. He need not be in possession of said of real property, cancellation of title to real property and
property. similar actions shall fall within the MTC or the RTC Further, Sec. 1, Rule 64 of the Rules of Court states that it
depending on the assessed value of the land involved. shall govern the review of final judgments and orders or
3. Nature of the Remedy of Quieting of Title; resolutions of the COMELEC and COA
Requisites D. Consolidation of Ownership
c. Decisions of the MTC or RTC in Election Cases,
Manaquil, et. al. v. Moico. An action for quieting of title is Art. 1607. In case of real property, the consolidation of the Petition Shall be filed with the COMELEC in
essentially a common law remedy grounded on equity. ownership in the vendee by virtue of the failure of the aid of its Appellate Jurisdiction
vendor to comply with the provisions of Art. 1616 shall not
The competent court is tasked to determine the respective be recorded in the Registry of Property without a judicial Galang, Jr. v. Hon. Geronimo. In election cases involving
rights of the complainant and other claimants, not only to order, after the vendor has been duly heard. an act or an omission of a MTC or RTC, the petition shall be
place things in their proper place, to make the one who
filed exclusively with the COMELEC, in aid of its appellate party to the Supreme Court on certiorari under Rule 65, 5. Formal Requirements and Contents of the
jurisdiction. except as hereinafter provided. Petition

Interpreting the phrase "in aid of its appellate jurisdiction," a. Distinctions of Rule 64 to Rule 65 Sec. 5. Form and contents of petition —
the Court held in J.M. Tuason & Co., Inc. v. Jaramillo, et al..
that if a case may be appealed to a particular court or Rule 64 Rule 65 Par. 1.
judicial tribunal or body, then said court or judicial tribunal Involves JFOR of COMELEC Involves decisions, orders
or body has jurisdiction to issue the extraordinary writ of and COA or resolution (JDOR) of the (1) The petition shall be (a) verified and filed in (b)
certiorari, in aid of its appellate jurisdiction. court or tribunal exercising eighteen (18) legible copies. (amended by
judicial or quasi-judicial Efficient Use of Paper Rule)
d. Review Extends Only to Final Decisions or functions (2) The petition shall name the aggrieved party as
Resolutions of the COMELEC EB and not to Shall be filed with the SC Shall be filed: petitioner and shall join as respondents the
Interlocutory Orders by a Division within 30 days from notice Commission concerned and the person or
of JFOR sought to be (a) within 60 days from persons interested in sustaining the judgment,
Gov. Sahali and V.Gov. Sahali v. COMELEC. The reviewed notice of judgment, final order or resolution a quo.
petitioners’ resort to the extraordinary remedy of orders or resolution or (3) The petition shall state:
certiorari to assail an interlocutory order issued by the (b) notice of the denial of
COMELEC First Division is amiss. "A party aggrieved by an the MR or new trial (a) The facts with certainty,
interlocutory order issued by a Division of the COMELEC in either to the RTC, SB, (b) Present clearly the issues involved,
an election protest may not directly assail the order in this CA or the SC observing (c) Set forth the grounds and brief arguments relied
Court through a special civil action for certiorari. the hierarchy of courts upon for review, and
Filing of MR can be made if Filing of a MR is a condition
The remedy is to seek the review of the interlocutory allowed by the Rules of the sine qua non for the filing (4) Pray for judgment annulling or modifying the
order during the appeal of the decision of the Division in Commission of the petition, unless it questioned judgment, final order or resolution.
due course. falls under the exceptions
Findings of fact of the Commission supported by
Thus, exceptionally, this Court may take cognizance of a 3. Period to File for Certiorari substantial evidence shall be final and non-reviewable.
certiorari action directed against an interlocutory order
issued by a Division of the COMELEC when the following Rule 64, Sec. 3. Time to file petition — The petition shall Par. 2.
circumstances are present: be filed within thirty (30) days from notice of the judgment
or final order or resolution sought to be reviewed. (5) The petition shall be accompanied by a (a)
First, the order was issued without jurisdiction or in excess clearly legible duplicate original or (b) certified
of jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion The filing of a motion for new trial or reconsideration of true copy of the judgment, final order or
tantamount to lack or excess of jurisdiction; and said judgment or final order or resolution, if allowed under resolution subject thereof, together with (c)
the procedural rules of the Commission concerned, shall certified true copies of such material portions of
Second, under the COMELEC Rules of Procedure, the interrupt the period herein fixed. the record as are referred to therein and other
subject of the controversy is a matter which: documents relevant and pertinent thereto.
If the motion is denied, the aggrieved party may file the (6) The requisite number of copies of the petition
(1) The COMELEC en banc may not sit and consider petition within the remaining period, but which shall not shall contain plain copies of all documents
or be less than five (5) days in any event, reckoned from attached to the original copy of said petition.
(2) A Division is not authorized to act or notice of denial
(3) The members of the Division unanimously vote Par. 3.
to refer to the COMELEC en banc 4. Payment of Docket and Other Lawful Fees
(7) The petition shall state the specific material
2. Mode of Review Rule 64, Sec. 4. Docket and other lawful fees — Upon the dates showing that it was filed within the period
filing of the petition, the petitioner shall pay to the clerk of fixed herein, and shall contain a sworn
Rule 64, Sec. 2. Mode of review — A judgment or final court the docket and other lawful fees and deposit the certification against forum shopping as provided
order or resolution of the Commission on Elections and amount of P500.00 for costs in the third paragraph of Sec. 3, Rule 46.
the Commission on Audit may be brought by the aggrieved
Par. 4. Reyna v. COA. Findings of facts of quasi-judicial agencies, f. Amendment as to the Number of Copies of the
such as the COA, are generally accorded respect and even Petition to be Filed under “Efficient Use of
(8) The petition shall further be accompanied by finality by this Court, if supported by substantial evidence, Paper Rule” (A.M. No. 11-9-4-SC)
proof of service of a copy thereof on the in recognition of their expertise on the specific matters
Commission concerned and on the adverse under their jurisdiction. Sec. 5. Copies to be Filed. - Unless otherwise directed by
party, and of the timely payment of docket and the court, the number of court-bound papers that a party
other lawful fees. d. “Grave abuse of Discretion” Committed by the is required or desires to file shall be as follows:
COMELEC
Par. 5. The failure of petitioner to comply with any of the a. In the Supreme Court, one original (properly
foregoing requirements shall be sufficient ground for the Mitra v. COMELEC. The COMELEC’s use of wrong or marked) and four copies, unless the case is
dismissal of the petition. (n) irrelevant considerations in deciding an issue is sufficient referred to the Court En Banc, in which event,
to taint its action with grave abuse of discretion. the parties shall file ten additional copies.
a. Limited form of Review of the COMELEC’s
decisions As a concept, "grave abuse of discretion" defies exact For the En Bane, the parties need to submit only
definition; generally, it refers to "capricious or whimsical two sets of annexes, one attached to the original
Sabili v. COMELEC. GR: The SC does not ordinarily review exercise of judgment as is equivalent to lack of and an extra copy.
the COMELEC’s appreciation and evaluation of evidence jurisdiction"; the abuse of discretion must be patent and
gross as to amount to an evasion of a positive duty or a For the Division, the parties need to submit also
XPN: When the COMELEC’s appreciation and evaluation of virtual refusal to perform a duty enjoined by law, or to act two sets of annexes, one attached to the original
evidence becomes so grossly unreasonable as to turn into at all in contemplation of law, as where the power is and an extra copy.
an error of jurisdiction. exercised in an arbitrary and despotic manner by reason of
passion and hostility. Mere abuse of discretion is not All members of the Court shall share the extra
In these instances, the Court is compelled by its bounded enough; it must be grave. We have held, too, that the use copies of annexes in the interest of economy of
constitutional duty to intervene and correct the of wrong or irrelevant considerations in deciding an issue paper.
COMELEC’s error. is sufficient to taint a decision-maker’s action with grave
abuse of discretion. 6. Order of the SC to Comment
In light of the limited authority to review findings of fact,
we do not ordinarily review in a certiorari case the Amora, Jr. v. COMELEC. Certiorari lies where a court or Rule 64, Sec. 6. Order to comment — If the Supreme
COMELEC’s appreciation and evaluation of evidence. Any any tribunal, board, or officer exercising judicial or quasi- Court finds the petition sufficient in form and substance, it
misstep by the COMELEC in this regard generally involves judicial functions has acted without or in excess of shall order the respondents to file their comments on the
an error of judgment, not of jurisdiction. jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion. petition within ten (10) days from notice thereof;
otherwise, the Court may dismiss the petition outright.
b. Exception to the Review of Factual Findings of In this case, it was grave abuse of discretion to uphold
the COMELEC Olandria’s claim that an improperly sworn COC is The Court may also dismiss the petition if it was filed (a)
equivalent to possession of a ground for disqualification. manifestly for delay or (b) the questions raised are too
Sabili v. COMELEC. In exceptional cases, however, when Not by any stretch of the imagination can we infer this as unsubstantial to warrant further proceedings.
the COMELEC's action on the appreciation and evaluation an additional ground for disqualification from the specific
of evidence oversteps the limits of its discretion to the wording of the OEC in Sec. 68 and Sec. 40 of the LGC. 7. Comment of the Respondents
point of being grossly unreasonable, the Court is not only
obliged, but has the constitutional duty to intervene. e. Absence of Grave Abuse of the COA, question Rule 64, Sec. 7. Comments of respondents — The
of Fact Cannot be Raised in the Petition comments of the respondents shall
When grave abuse of discretion is present, resulting errors
arising from the grave abuse mutate from error of Reyna v. COA. In the absence of grave abuse of discretion (1) Be filed in eighteen (18) legible copies.
judgment to one of jurisdiction. question of fact cannot be raised in a petition for certiorari (2) The original shall be accompanied by certified
under Rule 64. true copies of such material portions of the
c. Findings of Facts of the COA if supported by record as are referred to therein together with
evidence are Accorded Respect and Finality Any resort to the said petition under Rule 64, in relation to other supporting papers.
Rule 65, is limited to the resolution of jurisdictional issues (3) The requisite number of copies of the comments
shall contain plain copies of all documents
 attached to the original and a copy thereof shall 2. What is a Petition for Certiorari? excess of jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of
be served on the petitioner. discretion.
Tan v. Sps. Antazo. A petition for certiorari under Rule 65
No other pleading may be filed by any party unless of the ROC is a pleading limited to correction of errors of Certiorari will issue only to correct errors of
required or allowed by the Court. jurisdiction or grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack jurisdiction, not errors of procedure or mistakes
or excess of jurisdiction. in the findings or conclusions of the lower court.
8. Effects of the Filing of the Petition for Certiorari
Its principal office is: As long as the court acts within its jurisdiction,
Rule 64, Sec. 8. Effect of filing — The filing of a petition for any alleged errors committed in the exercise of
certiorari shall not stay the execution of the judgment or (a) To keep the inferior court within the parameters its discretion will amount to nothing more than
final order or resolution sought to be reviewed, unless the of its jurisdiction or mere errors of judgment, correctible by an
Supreme Court shall direct otherwise upon such terms as (b) To prevent it from committing such a grave appeal or a petition for review under Rule 43 of
it may deem just. abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess the Rules of Court, and not a petition for
of jurisdiction. certiorari.
9. Submission of the Case for Decision
3. Origin of Writ of Certiorari b. Juliano-Llave v. Republic. An application for
Rule 64, Sec. 9. Submission for decision — Unless the certiorari is an independent action which is not
Court sets the case for oral argument, or requires the Sps. Delos Santos v. Metropolitan Bank and Trust Co. In part or a continuation of the trial which resulted
parties to submit memoranda, the case shall be deemed the common law, from which the remedy of certiorari in the rendition of the judgment complained of.
submitted for decision upon the filing of the comments on evolved, the writ of certiorari was issued out of Chancery, c. Republic v. CA. It is a remedy of last recourse
the petition, or of such other pleadings or papers as may or the King’s Bench, commanding agents or officers of the and is a limited form of review
be required or allowed, or the expiration of the period to inferior courts to return the record of a cause pending d. Yasuda v. CA. A petition for certiorari is not a
do so. before them, so as to give the party more sure and speedy mode of appeal where the appellate court
justice, for the writ would enable the superior court to reviews the errors of fact or law committed by
VI. Certiorari, Prohibition and Mandamus determine from an inspection of the record whether the the lower court.
inferior court’s judgment was rendered without authority.
A. Basic Concepts The issue in Rule 65 is WON the lower court
The errors were of such a nature that, if allowed to stand, acted without or in excess of jurisdiction or with
1. What Court Can Entertain Petition for CPM? they would result in a substantial injury to the petitioner grave abuse of discretion.
to whom no other remedy was available.
a. SC (Art. VIII, Sec. 5(1), Rule 56-A, Sec. 1) Republic v. Villarama. This remedy is
b. CA (B.P. 129, Sec. 9) If the inferior court acted without authority, the record extraordinary and its use is restricted to truly
c. SDB was then revised and corrected in matters of law. extraordinary cases.
d. RTC (B.P. 129, Sec. 21)
e. SDC (P.D. 1083, Art. 143) The writ of certiorari was limited to cases in which the 5. Grant of Certiorari – Discretionary; Grounds for
inferior court was said to be exceeding its jurisdiction or Denial
B. Certiorari was not proceeding according to essential requirements of
law and would lie only to review judicial or quasi-judicial Versoza, Jr. v. Carague. Petition for certiorari under Rule
Chamber and Real Estate and Builders’ Assoc. v. ERC. The acts. 65 is an extraordinary prerogative remedy and is never
writ of certiorari is an extraordinary remedy that the issued as a matter of right.
Court issues only under closely defined grounds and 4. Nature of Certiorari Proceeding
procedures that litigants and their lawyers must Under Rule 46, Sec. 3, par. 3, as amended, petitions for
scrupulously observe. a. Garcia v. Cs. CA and Tesoro. A certiorari certiorari must be verified and accompanied by a sworn
proceeding is limited in scope and narrow in certification of non-forum shopping.
They cannot seek refuge under the umbrella of this character.
remedy on the basis of an undemonstrated claim that they The acceptance of a petition for certiorari as well as the
raise issues of transcendental importance, while at the The special civil action for certiorari lies only to grant of due course thereto, is, in general, addressed to
same time flouting the basic ground rules for the remedy’s correct acts rendered without jurisdiction, in the sound discretion of the court.
grant.
Although the Court has absolute discretion to reject and Iligan Cement Corp. v. IEWU-SPFL. Clearly, the CA can In this regard, mere abuse of discretion is not enough to
dismiss a petition of certiorari, it does so only: resolve factual issues in special civil actions for certiorari warrant the issuance of the writ. The abuse of discretion
from decisions and resolutions of the NLRC. must be grave, which means either that the judicial or
(1) When the petition fails to demonstrate grave quasi-judicial power was exercised in an arbitrary or
abuse of discretion by any court, agency, or However, the remand of the case to the CA would only despotic manner by reason of passion or personal hostility,
branch of the government; or result in further delay. Pursuant to established precedents, or that the respondent judge, tribunal or board evaded a
(2) Where there are procedural errors, like violation we deem it expedient in the interest of speedy justice, to positive duty, or virtually refused to perform the duty
of the ROC or SC Circulars. rule on the merits of petitioner’s claims based on the enjoined or to act in contemplation of law, such as when
records of the case including the pleadings and the such judge, tribunal or board exercising judicial or quasi-
6. Purpose of Writ of Certiorari evidence submitted by the parties judicial powers acted in a capricious or whimsical manner
as to be equivalent to lack of jurisdiction.
Sps. Delos Santos v. Metropolitan Bank and Trust Co. The 9. Filing of a Petition for Certiorari
writ of certiorari – being a remedy narrow in scope and b. Person Who Can File a Petition For Certiorari
inflexible in character, whose purpose is to keep an Rule 65, Sec. 1. Petition for certiorari — When any Must be a Party at the Trial Court
inferior court within the bounds of its jurisdiction, or to tribunal, board or officer exercising judicial or quasi-
prevent an inferior court from committing such grave judicial functions (TBO-JQ) Pascual v. Robles. A person not a party to the proceedings
abuse of discretion amounting to excess of jurisdiction, or in the trial court or in the CA cannot maintain an action for
to relieve parties from arbitrary acts of courts (i.e., acts has acted without or in excess its or his jurisdiction, or certiorari in the SC to have the judgment reviewed.
that courts have no power or authority in law to perform) with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess
– is not a general utility tool in the legal workshop, and of jurisdiction, and If a petition for certiorari or prohibition is filed by one who
cannot be issued to correct every error committed by a was not a party in the lower court, he has no standing to
lower court. There is no appeal, or any plain, speedy, and adequate question the assailed order.
(PSA) remedy in the ordinary course of law,
7. Power of the CA in the Exercise of its Original c. What are the Requisites in Order that Certiorari
Jurisdiction A person aggrieved thereby may file a verified petition in Will Lie?
the proper court, (a) alleging the facts with certainty and
B.P. 129, Sec. 9, as amended by R.A. 7902. The Court of (b) praying that judgment be rendered annulling or Sps. Dacudao v. Sec. of Justice. For a special civil action for
Appeals shall have the power to: modifying the proceedings of such tribunal, board or certiorari to prosper, therefore, the following requisites
officer, and granting such incidental reliefs as law and must concur, namely:
1. Try cases and conduct hearings, justice may require.
2. Receive evidence and (a) It must be directed against a tribunal, board or
3. Perform any and all acts necessary to resolve The petition shall be accompanied: officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial
factual issues raised in cases falling within its functions;
original and appellate jurisdiction, including the (a) By a certified true copy of the judgment, order (b) The tribunal, board, or officer must have acted
4. power to grant and conduct new trials or further or resolution subject thereof, without or in excess of jurisdiction or with grave
proceedings. (b) Copies of all pleadings and documents relevant abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess
5. Trials or hearings in the Court of Appeals must and pertinent thereto, and of jurisdiction; and
be continuous and must be completed within (c) A sworn certification of non-forum shopping as (c) There is no appeal nor any plain, speedy, and
three (3) months, unless extended by the Chief provided in the third paragraph of Sec. 3, Rule adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law.
Justice." 46.
The burden of proof lies on petitioners to demonstrate
Marcelo v. LBC Bank. In a SCA for certiorari, the CA has a. What is the Sole Office of the Writ of Certiorari? that the assailed order was issued without or in excess of
ample authority to receive new evidence and perform any jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to
act necessary to resolve factual issues. Sps. Delos Santos v. Metropolitan Bank and Trust Co. The lack or excess of jurisdiction.
sole office of the writ of certiorari is the correction of
8. CA can Resolve Factual Issues in a Petition for errors of jurisdiction, which includes the commission of d. Grave Abuse of Discretion Proper Ground in a
Certiorari grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction. Petition for Certiorari But Not in a Petition for
Review on Certiorari
Ignacio v. Home Bankers Savings and Trust Co. it is to be Advocates for Truth in Lending v. BSP Monetary Board. l. Certiorari Cannot be a Substitute for Appeal;
noted that the above issues raised by petitioner alleged Judicial functions are exercised by a body or officer Exceptions
grave abuse of discretion committed by the CA, which is clothed with authority to determine what the law is and
proper in a petition for certiorari under Rule 65, but not in what the legal rights of the parties are with respect to the 1. Magtoto and Magtoto v. CA. Resort to Rule 65 is
the present petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45. matter in controversy. not a substitute for a lost appeal which is not
allowed.
e. Certified True Copy of the Judgment, Order or Quasi-judicial function is a term that applies to the action 2. Guerrero v. Domingo. Just as certiorari cannot
Resolution is Required or discretion of public administrative officers or bodies be made a substitute for an appeal where the
given the authority to (a) investigate facts or (b) ascertain latter remedy is available but was lost through
Go v. Sunbanun. Rule 65, Sec. 1, par.2. requires the the existence of facts, (c) hold hearings, and (d) draw the fault or negligence of petitioner, prohibition
submission of a certified true copy of the judgment, order conclusions from them as a basis for their official action should not lie when petition could have resorted
or resolution subject of the petition as well as the using discretion of a judicial nature. to other remedies that are now lost due to its
submission of copies of all pleadings and documents own neglect.
relevant to the petition j. Central Bank Monetary Board Performing 3. Tan v. Sps. Antazo. A writ of certiorari will not
Executive Functions Not Subject of Certiorari issue where the remedy of appeal is available to
Not all pleadings and parts of case records are required to the aggrieved party.
be attached, but only those which are material and Advocates of Truth in Lending vs. BSP MB. The CB-MB 4. Santos v. Orda, Jr. A special civil action under
pertinent that they may provide the basis for a (now BSP-MB) was created to perform executive functions Rule 65 cannot cure a party’s failure to timely
determination of a prima facie case for abuse of with respect to the establishment, operation or liquidation appeal the assailed decision or resolution.
discretion. of banking and credit institutions, and branches and
agencies thereof. It does not perform judicial or quasi- m. XPNs to the Rule that Certiorari is Not a
f. Certification of Non-Forum Shopping Required judicial functions. Certainly, the issuance of CB Circular Substitute for a Lost Appeal
in a Petition for Certiorari No. 905 was done in the exercise of an executive function.
Certiorari will not lie in the instant case Associated Anglo American Tabacco Corp. v. CA. While
Go v. Sunbanun. In filing a certiorari petition, one ordinarily, certiorari is unavailing where the appeal period
aggrieved by a court’s judgment, order or resolution must k. Sanggunian Panglungsod – Not a Judicial or has lapsed, there are exceptions:
verify his/her petition and must also attach a sworn Quasi-Judicial Body for Certiorari to Lie
certification of non-forum shopping (1) When public welfare and the advancement of
Sps. Yusay v. CA. It is further emphasized that a petition public policy dictates;
g. What is Judicial Power? for certiorari seeks solely to correct defects in jurisdictio.n, (2) When the broader interest of justice so requires;
and does not correct just any error or mistake committed (3) When the writs issued are null and void;
Art. VIII, Sec. 1, par. 1. Judicial power is the power of the by a court, board, or officer exercising judicial or quasi- (4) When the questioned order amounts to an
courts of justice to settle actual controversies involving judicial functions unless such court, board, or officer oppressive exercise of judicial authority
rights which are legally demandable and enforceable, and thereby acts without jurisdiction or in excess of jurisdiction (5) When, for persuasive reasons (FPR), the rules
to determine whether or not there has been grave abuse or with such grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack may be relaxed to relieve the litigant of an
of discretion on the part of any branch or instrumentality of jurisdiction. injustice not commensurate with his failure to
of the government. comply with the prescribed procedure
The first requisite is that the respondent tribunal, board, (6) In other meritorious cases.
h. What is Quasi-judicial Power? or officer must be exercising judicial or quasi-judicial
functions. n. Only Errors of Jurisdiction May be Reviewable
Quasi-judicial power is the power of quasi-judicial by a Petition for Certiorari
bodies/administrative agencies to hear and decide cases Based on the foregoing, certiorari did not lie against the
falling within its jurisdiction. As if judicial, said of Sangguniang Panglungsod, which was not a part of the Goco v. CA.. A writ of certiorari cannot be used for any
procedure which has some of the attribute of judicial Judiciary settling an actual controversy involving legally other purpose; it cannot be used to resolve questions or
functions. demandable and enforceable rights when it adopted issues beyond its competence such as errors of judgment.
Resolution No. 552, but a legislative and policy-making Certiorari will not be issued to cure errors by the trial court
i. Judicial Functions; Quasi-judicial Functions body declaring its sentiment or opinion. in its appreciation of the evidence of the parties, its
conclusions anchored on the said findings, and its
conclusions of law.
 of its jurisdiction and every erroneous judgment would be q. Excess of Jurisdiction Distinguished from
The supervisory jurisdiction of a court over the issuance of a void judgment. Absence of Jurisdiction
a writ of certiorari cannot be exercised for the purpose of
reviewing the intrinsic correctness of a judgment of the Hence, where the issue or question involved affects the Garcia v. CA. Excess of jurisdiction as distinguished from
lower court on the basis either of the law or the facts of wisdom or legal soundness of the decision – not the absence of jurisdiction means that an act, though within
the case, or of the wisdom or legal soundness of the jurisdiction of the court to render said decision – the the general power of a tribunal, board or officer is not
decision. same is beyond the province of a special civil action for authorized, and invalid with respect to the particular
certiorari proceeding, because the conditions which alone authorize
Even if the findings of the court are incorrect, as long as it the exercise of the general power in respect of it are
has jurisdiction over the case, such correction is normally p. Distinctions Between Without, Excess, and wanting. The supervisory jurisdiction of the court to issue
beyond the province of certiorari. Where the error is not Grave Abuse of Discretion a certiorari writ cannot be exercised in order to review the
one of jurisdiction, but of an error of law or fact - a judgment of the lower court as to its intrinsic correctness,
mistake of judgment - appeal is the remedy. 1. Without jurisdiction – the court acted with either upon the law or the facts of the case. In the absence
absolute lack of authority of a showing that there is reason for the Court to annul the
o. Errors of Judgment Not Subject of Certiorari 2. Excess of jurisdiction – when the court decision of the concerned tribunal or to substitute its own
transcends its power or acts without any judgment, it is not the office of the Court in a petition for
1. Artistica Ceramica, Inc. v. Ciudal del Carmen statutory authority certiorari to inquire into the correctness of the assailed
HOA. Under prevailing procedural rules and 3. Grave abuse of discretion – implies such decision or resolution
jurisprudence, errors of judgment are not capricious or whimsical exercise of judgment as
proper subjects of a special civil action for to be equivalent to lack or excess of jurisdiction; In a petition for certiorari, the public respondent acts
certiorari. in other words, power is exercised in an arbitrary without jurisdiction if it does not have the legal power to
or despotic manner by reason of passion, determine the case; there is excess of jurisdiction where
If every error committed by the trial court or prejudice, or personal hostility and; such the respondent, being clothed with the power to
quasi-judicial agency were to be the proper exercise is so patent or so gross as to amount to determine the case, oversteps its authority as determined
subject of a special civil action for certiorari, then an evasion of a positive duty enjoined or to act by law.
trial would never end and the dockets of at all in contemplation of law.
appellate courts would be clogged beyond r. Factual Findings of the NLRC if Not Supported
measure. Merceditas Gutierrez v. HOR Committee on Justice. The by Evidence Constitute Grave Abuse of
Court finds it well-within its power to determine whether Discretion
For this reason, where the issue or question public respondent committed a violation of the
involved affects the wisdom or legal soundness Constitution or gravely abused its discretion in the exercise Miguel v. JCT Group, Inc. The failure of the Labor Arbiter
of the decision, not the jurisdiction of the court of its functions and prerogatives that could translate as and the NLRC to express the factual and legal bases for
to render said decision, the same is beyond the lack or excess of jurisdiction, which would require their decisions is an evasion of then constitutional duty, an
province of a special civil action for certiorari. corrective measures from the Court. evasion that constituted grave abuse of discretion.

2. Sea Lion Fishing Corp. v. People. Under Rule 65, An aspect of the "case-or-controversy" requirement is the s. Use of Wrong or Irrelevant Consideration in
certiorari is unavailing when an appeal is the requisite of ripeness4 The question of ripeness is Deciding a Case is Grave Abuse of Consideration
plain, adequate and speedy remedy. The especially relevant in light of the direct, adverse effect on
jurisdiction of a court is not affected by its an individual by the challenged conduct. In the present Mitra v. COMELEC. The COMELEC’s use of wrong or
erroneous decision petition, there is no doubt that questions on, inter alia, the irrelevant consideration in deciding an issue is insufficient
3. The SCA of certiorari seeks to correct errors of validity of the simultaneous referral of the two complaints to taint its action with grave abuse of discretion.
jurisdiction and not errors of judgment and on the need to publish as a mode of promulgating the
Rules of Procedure in Impeachment Proceedings of the Sabili v. COMELEC. The use or wrong or irrelevant
Mansion Printing Center v. Bitara. The raison d’etre for House (Impeachment Rules) present constitutional considerations in deciding an issue is sufficient to taint a
the rule is when a court exercises its jurisdiction, an error vagaries which call for immediate interpretation. decision-maker’s action with grave abuse of discretion.
committed while so engaged does not deprive it of the
jurisdiction being exercised when the error is committed. The unusual act of simultaneously referring to public t. Certiorari Not Available in Case Appeal is
If it did, every error committed by a court would deprive it respondent two impeachment complaints presents a novel Present
situation to invoke judicial power.
Sps. Leynes v. Former 10th Div. of CA. Certiorari is not procedure. These are jurisdictional and mandatory c. upon by the lower court, or are the same as
available where the aggrieved party’s remedy of appeal is requirements which must be strictly complied with. those raised and passed upon in the lower court;
plain, speedy and adequate in the ordinary course, the d. Where there is an urgent necessity for the
reason being that certiorari cannot co-exist with an appeal Thus, failure to file an MR with the NLRC before availing resolution of the question and any further delay
or any other adequate remedy. oneself of certiorari is a fatal infirmity. would prejudice the interests of the government
or the petitioner or the subject matter of the
u. MR Required under Rule 65 w. Certiorari is Not a Defense for Failure to File the action is perishable;
Required MR e. Where, under the circumstances, a motion for
Villa-Rey Transit v. Bello. Before a certiorari may be reconsideration would be useless;
availed of, the petitioner must have filed a MR by the People’s Air Cargo v. Hon. Mendiola. Certiorari is not a f. Where petitioner was deprived of due process
lower court of the act or order complained of. defense against the unfavorable consequences of a failure and there is extreme urgency for relief;
to file the required motion for reconsideration. g. Where, in a criminal case, relief from an order of
v. The plain and adequate remedy under Rule 65 arrest is urgent and the granting of such relief by
is Filing of a MR; Condition Sine Qua Non: Petitioner may not designate to itself the determination of the trial court is improbable;
Exception whether a motion for reconsideration is necessary or not. h. Where the proceedings in the lower court are a
The plain and adequate remedy referred to in Sec. 1 of nullity for lack of due process;
NASECORE v. ERC and MERALCO. Rule 65 provides that a Rule 65 is a motion for reconsideration of the assailed i. Where the proceedings was ex parte or in which
petition for certiorari may be filed when "there is no decision. the petitioner had no opportunity to object; and
appeal, nor any plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the j. Where the issue raised is one purely of law or
ordinary course of law". The "plain" and "adequate The purpose of this requirement is to enable the court or where public interest is involved.
remedy" referred to in Rule 65 is a motion for agency to rectify its mistakes without the intervention of a
reconsideration of the assailed decision. higher court. To dispense with the requirement of filing a z. Basic Distinction Between Rule 45 and 65
motion for reconsideration, petitioner must show a
Thus, it is a well-settled rule that the filing of a motion for concrete, compelling, and valid reason for doing so. Rule 65 Rule 45
reconsideration is a condition sine qua non before the An original or independent A continuation of the
filing of a special civil action for certiorari. x. What is the Purpose of the Requirement of action based on grave appellate process over the
Filing of a MR? abuse of discretion original case
The purpose of this rule is to give the lower court the amounting to lack or excess
opportunity to correct itself. However, this requirement is Tan v. CA. Reason: To afford the respondent court of jurisdiction.
not an ironclad rule. opportunity to correct the errors imputed to it. Proper where the error is Proper to correct errors of
not one of jurisdiction but jurisdiction which is
The prior filing of a motion for reconsideration may be Ruiz v. Santos. The filing of MR before resort to certiorari an error of law or fact tantamount to lack or
dispensed with if petitioners are able to show a concrete, will lie is intended to afford the court an opportunity to which is mistake of excess of jurisdiction
compelling, and valid reason for doing so. The Court may correct any actual or fancied error attributed to it by way judgment
brush aside the procedural barrier and take cognizance of of re-examination of the legal and factual aspects of the Invokes the original Invokes the appellate
the petition if it raises an issue of paramount importance case. jurisdiction of the court jurisdiction of the Court
and constitutional significance. Filed within 60 days from Filed within the period of
y. What are the XPNs to the Rule on the Filing of a notice of judgment, order appeal 15 days from notice
True, we had, on certain occasions, entertained direct MR? or resolution of judgment or 30 days
recourse to this Court as an exception to the rule on when record on appeal is
hierarchy of courts. In those exceptional cases, however, Marawi Maranatao General Hospital, Inc. v. CA. There are required
we recognized an exception because it was dictated by several exceptions where the special civil action for Original and independent A continuation of the
public welfare and the advancement of public policy, or certiorari will lie even without the filing of a motion for action original case
demanded by the broader interest of justice, or the orders reconsideration, namely: Impleads the TBCO The parties are the original
complained of were found to be patent nullities, or the parties to the case
appeal was considered as clearly an inappropriate remedy. a. Where the order is a patent nullity, as where the As a rule, it stays the Does not stay the judgment
court a quo has no jurisdiction; judgment appealed from, or order subject of the
Republic v. Pantranco North Express. The filing of a MR b. Where the questions raised in the certiorari unless the law otherwise petition unless enjoined or
and filing it on time are not mere technicalities of proceeding have been duly raised and passed
provides restrained. Rule 41, Sec. 1. Subject of appeal — An appeal may be However, this Court generally frowns upon this remedial
Filed in the SC, CA, RTC, SC, Filed in the SC taken from a judgment or final order that completely measure as regards interlocutory orders. To tolerate the
SDC disposes of the case, or of a particular matter therein practice of allowing interlocutory orders to be the subject
While certiorari requires as Does not require a prior when declared by these Rules to be appealable. of review by certiorari will not only delay the
a general rule, a prior motion for reconsideration administration of justice, but will also unduly burden the
motion for reconsideration No appeal may be taken from: courts.
As a rule, raises purely Raises questions of
questions of law. jurisdiction (a) An order denying a petition for relief or any gg. Remedy of Appeal by Notice of Appeal from the
similar motion seeking relief from judgment; Denial of the Petition for Certiorari by the RTC
aa. Appeal and Certiorari are Mutually Exclusive (b) An interlocutory order;
(c) An order disallowing or dismissing an appeal; BF Citiland Corp. v. Otake. Notice of Appeal is the proper
Catindig v. Vda. de Meneses. Remedies of appeal and (d) An order denying a motion to set aside a mode of appeal from a decision of the RTC in a petition for
certiorari are mutually exclusive, not alternative or judgment by consent, confession or compromise certiorari under Rule 65.
successive. on the ground of fraud, mistake or duress, or any
other ground vitiating consent; (CCC-F-M-D-VC) hh. Remedy of Petition for Review on Certiorari
bb. Remedy in Case of an Interlocutory Order is (e) An order of execution; under Rule 45 in Case of a Decision of the CA in
Certiorari Not Appeal (f) A judgment or final order for or against one or the Petition for Certiorari
more of several parties or in separate claims,
Catindig v. Vda. de Meneses. The remedy from an counterclaims, cross-claims and third-party Mercado v. CA. The proper remedy of the party aggrieved
interlocutory one is not an appeal but a special civil action complaints (CCCT), while the main case is by a decision of the CA is a petition for review under Rule
for certiorari. pending, unless the court allows an appeal 45, which is not identical with a petition for review under
therefrom; and Rule 65
cc. Remedy in Case of an Interlocutory Order is (g) An order dismissing an action without prejudice.
Certiorari Not Appeal Sps. Leynes v. Former 10th Division of the CA. The proper
In all the above instances where the judgment or final remedy of a party aggrieved by a decision of the CA is a
Jose v. Javellana. The reason for disallowing an appeal order is not appealable, the aggrieved party may file an petition for review under Rule 45 which is not similar to a
from an interlocutory order is to avoid multiplicity of appropriate special civil action under Rule 65. petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of the ROC; when a
appeals in a single action, which necessarily suspends the party adopts an improper remedy, his petition may be
hearing and decision on the merits of the action during ee. Remedy Against an Interlocutory is Certiorari dismissed outright.
the pendency of the appeals. Not Appeal
ii. Certiorari is Discretionary to the Court
Permitting multiple appeals will necessarily delay the trial Calderon v. Roxas and CA. The remedy against an
on the merits of the case for a considerable length of time, interlocutory order not subject of an appeal is an Sps. Leynes v. Former 10th Division of the CA. The
and will compel the adverse party to incur unnecessary appropriate SCA under Rule 65 provided that the acceptance of a petition for certiorari, as well as the grant
expenses, for one of the parties may interpose as many interlocutory is rendered without or in excess of of due course thereto is, in general, addressed to the
appeals as there are incidental questions raised by him jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion. sound discretion of the court.
and as there are interlocutory orders rendered or issued
by the lower court. ff. Denial of a Motion to Dismiss or To Quash is an jj. Burden of Proof to Show Grave Abuse of
Interlocutory Order, Certiorari is Available Discretion Lies With Petitioner
An interlocutory order may be the subject of an appeal,
but only after a judgment has been rendered, with the University of Mindanao v. CA. The denial of a motion to Tan v. Antazo. A petition for certiorari against a court
ground for appealing the order being included in the dismiss or to quash, being interlocutory, cannot be which has jurisdiction over a case will prosper only if grave
appeal of the judgment itself. questioned by certiorari. It cannot be the subject of abuse of discretion is manifested. The burden is on the
appeal, until a final judgment or order is rendered. part of the petitioner to prove not merely reversible error,
dd. Orders and Judgment Not Appealable; but grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess
Remedies under Rule 65 Available An interlocutory order may be assailed by certiorari or of jurisdiction on the part of the public respondent issuing
prohibition only when it is shown that the court acted the impugned order. Mere abuse of discretion is not
without or in excess of jurisdiction or with grave abuse of enough; it must be grave.
discretion.
Gillamac’s Marketing Corp. v. Aboitiz Shipping Corp. In a mm. Failure to File Appellant’s Brief by the Petitioner judicial agencies in Rule 43 of the Rules of Court is
special civil action for certiorari, there must be proof that Cannot be the Subject of Certiorari in the deliberate
the act of the tribunal or court emanated from the Absence of Grave Abuse of Discretion
capricious and whimsical exercise of judgment. However, the petitioner must allege and show that the
Lagua v. CA. The SC in this case dismissed the petition for DOJ acted with grave abuse of discretion in granting or
Likewise, the use of discretion should have been arbitrary certiorari file by the petitioner under Rule 65 considering denying the petition for review.
due to passion, prejudice or personal hostility so patent that the SC found no valid justifiable reason for
and gross that it amounts to evasion to perform a positive petitioner’s failure to file his appellant’s brief with the CA Yambot v. Tuquero. It cannot be read to completely
duty under the law. that would warrant a reversal of the CA’s Resolutions. disallow the institution of certiorari proceedings against
the Sec. of Justice’s determination of probable cause when
In the case at bar, the records do not reveal nor does The Court cannot tolerate habitual failure to follow the the criminal information has already been filed in court.
petitioner allege malice or prejudice on the part of the CA procedural rules, which are indispensable for the orderly
in reinstating private respondent’s appeal. and speedy disposition of justice. oo. The CA shall exercise exclusive original
jurisdiction over petition for certiorari,
kk. Certiorari, An Available Remedy in Case of In the present case, accused Lagua was given more time, prohibition, or mandamus against (See
Execution not only to file his Appellant’s Brief, but also to secure new Jurisdiction of CA)
counsel to adequately prepare the appeal. The CA issued
Alagar v. PNB. The execution of a judgment pending an two Show Cause Orders and two Resolutions declaring the Barairo v. OP. The proper remedy to question the
action in a higher court essentially challenges its finality appeal as abandoned. Despite these issuances, his second decisions or orders of the Secretary of Labor is via Petition
cannot be deemed an abandonment of that action. The Motion for Reconsideration was filed 18 days after his for Certiorari under Rule 65, not via an appeal to the OP.
rules grant parties the right to question by special civil receipt of the second and final CA Resolution. To our mind, For appeals to the OP in labor cases have indeed been
actions those orders and rulings that inferior courts issue this delay is indicative of sheer laxity and indifference on eliminated, except those involving national interest over
with grave abuse of discretion. his part, for which he has lost the statutory right of appeal which the President may assume jurisdiction.

That a party complied with the writ of execution after its nn. Rule 65; Remedy Against Determination of Hence, petitioner’s appeal to the OP did not toll the
several attempts to stop it cannot be deemed a voluntary Probable Cause running of the period and the assailed decision of the Sec.
abandonment of its action before the CA. of Labor is deemed to have attained finality.
PCGG Chairman Elma and PCGG v. Jacobi, et. al. Contrary
to respondent’s claim, Rule 65 provides the proper remedy pp. Certiorari an Available Remedy in Case of Order
ll. Certiorari Does Not Include Appreciation of to assail the DOJ’s determination of the presence or of Default
Evidence and is Weight absence of probable cause instead of a petition for review
under Rule 43. Pacita v. Carriaga, Jr. Petition for certiorari is allowed
Tan v. Sps. Antazo. A petition for the writ of certiorari when the default is improperly declared, or when it is
does not deal with errors of judgment. Nor does it include By weighing the evidence submitted by the parties in a properly declared where grave abuse of discretion
a mistake in the appreciation of the contending parties’ preliminary investigation and by making an independent attended such declaration.
respective evidence or the evaluation of their relative assessment thereof, an investigating prosecutor is, to that
weight extent, performing functions of a quasi-judicial nature in Lina v. CA. Certiorari has been held as the proper remedy
the conduct of a preliminary investigation. However, since to question default order and judgment
Garcia v. NLRC. Certiorari is not intended to review the he does not make a determination of the rights of any
errors of judgment of the trial court. party in the proceeding, or pronounce the respondent’s qq. Certiorari Available in Case of Judgment by
guilt or innocence (thus limiting his action to the Default
In certiorari, judicial review does not go as far as to determination of probable cause to file an information in
examine and assess the evidence of the parties and to court), an investigating prosecutor’s function still lacks the Matute v. CA. If a default judgment was already
weigh the probative value thereof. element of adjudication essential to an appeal under Rule rendered, he can also resort immediately to certiorari as
43. his challenge is on the nullity of both the order and the
Raising errors of judgment is proper only in an appeal. judgment by default and not on the merits or correctness
Additionally, there is a "compelling reason" to conclude of the judgment, especially where a writ o execution was
that the DOJ’s exclusion from the enumeration of quasi- already issued, hence appeal would not be a speedy and
adequate remedy.
Continental Leaf Tabacco v. CA. As a GR, certiorari may in an appeal. In certiorari proceedings, judicial review does (c) A sworn certification of non-forum shopping as
not be availed of where an appeal is available and an not examine and assess the evidence of the parties nor provided in the third paragraph of Sec. 3, Rule
appeal lies from a judgment by default, nevertheless if weigh the probative value of the evidence. 46. (2a)
there was grave abuse of discretion on the part of the trial
court, the special civil action for certiorari may be availed It does not include an inquiry on the correctness of the 2. Function of Prohibition
by the aggrieved party as this is an exception to the rule. evaluation of the evidence.
Yusay v. CA.
Certiorari would provide a more speedy and adequate A review under Rule 65 only asks the question of whether
remedy since the aggrieved party in a default judgment there has been a validly rendered decision, not the (1) To prevent the unlawful and oppressive exercise
has no opportunity to adduce evidence in the courts, question of whether the decision is legally correct. of legal authority and
hence an appeal only the self-serving evidence presented (2) To provide for a fair and orderly administration
by the plaintiff in the ex parte reception thereof would be In other words, the focus of the review is to determine of justice
considered. whether the judgment is per se void on jurisdictional
grounds. 3. When is the Remedy of Prohibition Proper?
Lina v. CA. Certiorari is the proper remedy to question
default order and judgment. C. Prohibition  Rule 65, Sec. 2

rr. Can the Remedy of Certiorari be Availed of in 1. Prohibition Defined a. GR: Filing of a Motion for Reconsideration
Case of Judgment in Small Claims Cases Required; Exceptions
Rule 65, Sec. 2. Petition for prohibition — When the
Yes. Rule 23 on the Rules on Small Claims Cases, the proceedings of any tribunal, corporation, board, officer or AFP-BMAI Inc. v. RTC of Marikina. Regarding AFP-BMAI
decision of the court is final and unappeallable, and since person, whether exercising judicial, quasi-judicial or failure to file a motion for reconsideration of the assailed
appeal is not an available remedy and there is no plain, ministerial functions (TBCOP-JQM) order, which motion is required prior to the filing if a
adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law, certiorari petition for prohibition or mandamus, the Court
may be availed of under Rule 65. Are without or in excess of its or his jurisdiction, or with recognizes certain exceptions to such requirement
grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of
ss. No Double Jeopardy in Case of Petition for jurisdiction, and These include situations, such as exist in this case, where
Certiorari the petitioner raises only pure questions of law and the
There is no appeal or any other plain, speedy, and questioned order is a patent nullity.
Ysidoro v. Hon Leonardo-de Castro. As applied to adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law, a person
judgments rendered in criminal cases, unlike a review via a aggrieved thereby may file a verified petition in the proper The direct recourse to this Court rather than to the CA is
Rule 65 petition, only judgments of conviction can be court, also justified since the petition raises only questions of
reviewed in an ordinary appeal or a Rule 45 petition. As we law.
explained in People v. Nazareno, the constitutional right of Alleging:
the accused against double jeopardy proscribes appeals of b. Petition for Prohibition is Concurrence with the
judgments of acquittal through the remedies of ordinary (a) the facts with certainty and RTC and CA
appeal and a Rule 45 petition. (b) praying that judgment be rendered commanding
the respondent to desist from further Gamboa v. Teves. Among the remedies petitioner seeks,
However, the rule against double jeopardy cannot be proceedings in the action or matter specified only the petition for prohibition is within the original
properly invoked in a Rule 65 petition, predicated on two therein, or otherwise granting such incidental jurisdiction of this court, which however is not exclusive
(2) exceptional grounds, namely: reliefs as law and justice may require. but is concurrent with the RTC and the CA.
(1) in a judgment of acquittal rendered with grave
abuse of discretion by the court; and The petition shall likewise be accompanied by: The actions for declaratory relief, injunction, and
(2) Where the prosecution had been deprived of annulment of sale are not embraced within the original
due process. (a) a certified true copy of the judgment, order or jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. On this ground alone,
resolution subject thereof, the petition could have been dismissed outright.
The rule against double jeopardy does not apply in these (b) Copies of all pleadings and documents relevant
instances because a Rule 65 petition does not involve a and pertinent thereto, and However, since the threshold and purely legal issue on the
review of facts and law on the merits in the manner done definition of the term "capital" in Sec. 11, Art. XII of the
Constitution has far-reaching implications to the national (3) To pay the damages sustained by the petitioner  Rule 65, Sec. 3
economy, the Court treats the petition for declaratory by reason of the wrongful acts of the
relief as one for mandamus. respondent. a. When Mandamus Available

c. Distinctions Between Prohibition in Rule 65 and The petition shall also contain a sworn certification of non- Sps. Dacudao v. Sec. of Justice. The writ of mandamus
Preliminary Prohibitory Injunction in Rule 58 forum shopping as provided in the third paragraph of Sec. does not issue to control or review the exercise of
3, Rule 46. (3a) discretion or to compel a course of conduct, which, was
Injunction Prohibition what petitioners would have the Sec. of Justice do in their
Generally directed against a Directed against a tribunal, Aquino v. Mariano. Mandamus is an extraordinary favor.
party to the action board, corporation, officer remedy that can be resorted only in case of extreme
or person exercising necessity where the ordinary forms of procedure are Consequently, their petition has not indicated how and
judicial, quasi-judicial or powerless to afford relief where there is no other, clear where the Sec. of Justice’s assailed issuances excluded
ministerial function and adequate remedy. them from the use and enjoyment of a right or office to
does not involve the Must involve the question which they were unquestionably entitled.
question of jurisdiction of of jurisdiction of the court Before a writ may be issued, it is obligatory upon the
the court petitioner to exhaust all remedies in the ordinary course of b. Mandamus is Available in Case There is No
May be a main action itself Always a main action law. Plain, Adequate, and Speedy Remedy in the
or a provisional remedy Ordinary Course of Law
He must show that the duty sought to be performed must
Hence, for temporary restraint in a proceeding for be one which the law specifically enjoins a duty resulting Uy Kiao Eng v. Lee. Moreover, an important principle
prohibition, preliminary injunction must be sought from an office. followed in the issuance of the writ is that there should be
therein no plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary
2. Nature of Mandamus: Ministerial Duty Defined course of law other than the remedy of mandamus being
D. Mandamus invoked.
Special People, Inc. Foundation v. Canda. Mandamus is an
1. Mandamus defined extraordinary remedy lies to compel the performance of In other words, mandamus can be issued only in cases
duties that are purely ministerial in nature, not those where the usual modes of procedure and forms of remedy
Rule 65, Sec. 3. Petition for mandamus — When any discretionary. are powerless to afford relief.
tribunal, corporation, board, officer or person:
A purely ministerial act or duty is one that an officer or Although classified as a legal remedy, mandamus is
(a) unlawfully neglects the performance of an act tribunal performs in a given state of facts, in a prescribed equitable in its nature and its issuance is generally
which the law specifically enjoins as a duty manner, in obedience to the mandate to the legal controlled by equitable principles. Indeed, the grant of the
resulting from an office, trust, or station, or authority, without regard to or the exercise of its own writ of mandamus lies in the sound discretion of the court.
(b) unlawfully excludes another from the use and judgment upon the propriety or impropriety of the act
enjoyment of a right or office to which such done. c. What are the Grounds for the Issuance of a Writ
other is entitled, and of Mandamus?
3. Main Purpose of Mandamus
there is no other plain, speedy and adequate remedy in Uy Kiao Eng v. Lee. As a rule, mandamus will not lie in the
the ordinary course of law, the person aggrieved thereby Uy Kiao Eng v. Lee. This definition recognizes the public absence of any of the following grounds:
may file a verified petition in the proper court, alleging character of the remedy, and clearly excludes the idea that
it may be resorted to for the purpose of enforcing the (a) that the court, officer, board, or person against
(1) the facts with certainty and praying that performance of duties in which the public has no interest. whom the action is taken unlawfully neglected
judgment be rendered commanding the the performance of an act which the law
respondent, immediately or at some other time The writ is a proper recourse for citizens who seek to specifically enjoins as a duty resulting from
to be specified by the court, enforce a public right and to compel the performance of a office, trust, or station; or
(2) To do the act required to be done to protect the public duty, most especially when the public right is (b) that such court, officer, board, or person has
rights of the petitioner, and involved is mandated by the Constitution. unlawfully excluded petitioner/relator from the
4. Petition for Mandamus When Proper use and enjoyment of a right or office to which
he is entitled.
 f. Mandamus is Available in Case of Execution of i. Mandamus Will Not Lie in Case of Premature
On the part of the relator, it is essential to the issuance of Final and Executory Judgment Acts
a writ of mandamus that he should have a clear legal right
to the thing demanded and it must be the imperative duty FGU Insurance Corp. v. RTC of Makati. A writ of De Castro v. JBC. We find no sufficient grounds to grant
of respondent to perform the act required. mandamus lies to compel judge to issue a writ of the petitions for mandamus and to issue a writ of
execution when the judgment had already become final mandamus against the JBC. The actions for that purpose
d. Mandamus will Lie in Case a Tribinal, and executory and the prevailing party is entitled to the are premature, because it is clear that the JBC still has
Corporation, Board, Officer or Person same as a matter of right. until May 17, 2010, at the latest, within which to submit
Unlawfully Neglects the Performance of an Act the list of nominees to the President to fill the vacancy
Enjoined by Law g. Mandamus Will Not Lie to Compel an Official to created by the compulsory retirement of Chief Justice
do an Act which is Not His Duty or To Do or To Puno.
Uy Kiao Eng v. Lee. This definition recognizes the public Give in which an An Applicant is Not Entitled by
character of the remedy, and clearly excludes the idea that Law j. Mandamus Shall Lie to Compel “Ministerial” –
it may be resorted to for the purpose of enforcing the Not Discretionary Acts
performance of duties in which the public has no interest. Uy Kiao Eng v. Lee. The writ of mandamus, however, will
not issue to compel an official to do anything which is not Angeles v. Sec. of Justice. It is settled that mandamus is
The writ is a proper recourse for citizens who seek to his duty to do or which it is duty to not to do, or to give to employed to compel the performance, when refused, of a
enforce a public right and to compel the performance of a the applicant anything to which he is not entitled by law. ministerial duty, but not to compel the performance of a
public duty, most especially when the public right involved discretionary duty. Mandamus will not issue to enforce a
is mandated by the Constitution. Nor will mandamus issue to enforce a right which is in right which is in substantial dispute or to which a
substantial dispute or as to which a substantial doubt substantial doubt exists.
Mandamus will lie if the tribunal, corporation, board, exists, although objection raising a mere technical
officer, or person unlawfully neglects the performance of question will be discarded if the right is clear and the case It is nonetheless likewise available to compel action, when
an act which the law enjoins as a duty resulting from an is meritorious. refused, in matters involving judgment and discretion, but
office, trust or station. not to direct the exercise of judgment or discretion in a
h. Mandamus Will Not Lie to Enforce Contractual particular way or the retraction or reversal of an action
e. Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies Obligations already taken in the exercise of either.
Necessary Before Availment of Mandamus
Uy Kiao Eng v. Lee. Recognized further in this jurisdiction k. Distinction Between Discretionary and
Special People, Inc. Foundation v. Canda. It is axiomatic, is the principle that mandamus cannot be used to enforce Ministerial Duty
to begin with, that a party who seeks the intervention of a contractual obligations.
court of law upon an administrative concern should first Discretion Ministerial
avail himself of all the remedies afforded by administrative Generally, mandamus will not lie to enforce purely private When applied to public One which an officer or
processes. The issues that an administrative agency is contract rights, and will not lie against an individual unless functionaries, means a tribunal performs in a given
authorized to decide should not be summarily taken away some obligation in the nature of a public or quasi-public power or right conferred state of facts, in a
from it and submitted to a court of law without first giving duty is imposed. upon them by law of acting prescribed manner, in
the agency the opportunity to dispose of the issues upon officially, under certain obedience to the mandate
due deliberation. The writ is not appropriate to enforce a private right circumstances, of a legal authority, without
against an individual. The writ of mandamus lies to enforce uncontrolled by the regard to or the exercise of
The court of law must allow the administrative agency to the execution of an act, when, otherwise, justice would be judgment or conscience of his own judgment upon the
carry out its functions and discharge its responsibilities obstructed; and, regularly, issues only in cases relating to others propriety of the act done
within the specialized areas of its competence. the public and to the government; hence, it is called a
prerogative writ. Sps. Edralin v. Phil. Veterans Bank. Mandamus is a proper
This rests on the theory that the administrative authority is remedy to compel the issuance of a writ of possession
in a better position to resolve questions addressed to its To preserve its prerogative character, mandamus is not (because it is a ministerial duty).
particular expertise, and that errors committed by used for the redress of private wrongs, but only in matters l. Allegations in the Petition Determine the
subordinates in their resolution may be rectified by their relating to the public. Nature of the Action
superiors if given a chance to do so.
Sps. Alagar v. PNB. A reading of PNB’s allegations in its discretionary acts ministerial
petition shows that its action was not only for certiorari Respondent Respondent Respondent a. Concurrent Jurisdiction: Judicial Hierarchy
and prohibition but also for mandamus. exercises judicial exercises judicial, exercises
or quasi-judicial quasi-judicial or ministerial Constancio v. Mayor Villas. Although this Court, the CA
The bank alleged that by its whimsical, capricious and functions ministerial functions and the RTC have concurrent jurisdiction to issue writs of
arbitrary actions the RTC deprived the PNB of its appeal, functions certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto, habeas
leaving it with no other plain, speedy, and adequate corpus and injunction, such concurrence does not give the
remedy in the ordinary course of law. The PNB petition p. Distinction Between Mandamus and Continuing petitioner unrestricted freedom of choice of court forum.
also specifically prayed the CA to direct the trial court to Mandamus
give due course to its appeal. A becoming regard for that judicial hierarchy most
certainly indicates that petitions for the issuance of
Following the rule that the nature of an action is Mandamus – see definition in Rule 65, Sec. 3 extraordinary writs against first level ("inferior") courts
determined by the allegations of the pleading and the should be filed with the RTC, and those against the latter,
character of the relief sought, it is unmistakable that the Continuing Mandamus - is a writ issued by a court in an with the CA. A direct invocation of the SC’s original
petition is for mandamus. environmental case directing any agency or jurisdiction to issue these writs should be allowed only
instrumentality of the government or officer (AI-GO) when there are special and important reasons therefor,
m. Mandamus: Property Remedy to Compel thereof to perform an act or series of acts decreed by final clearly and specifically set out in the petition.
Issuance of a Writ of Possession judgment which shall remain effective until judgment is
fully satisfied. b. Hierarchy of Courts; Concurrence of
Sps. Edralin v. Phil. Veterans Bank. Mandamus is a proper Jurisdiction; Non-Observance Results in
remedy to compel the issuance of a writ of possession. The 5. When and Where to File the Petition? Dismissal
purpose of mandamus is to compel the performance of a
ministerial duty. Rule 65, Sec. 4. When and where petition filed — Sps. Dacudao v. Sec. of Justice. The Court must enjoin the
observance of the policy on the hierarchy of courts, and
n. Distinctions Between Mandamus and The petition shall be filed not later than sixty (60) days now affirms that the policy is not to be ignored without
Mandatory Injunction from notice of the judgment, order or resolution. serious consequences. The strictness of the policy is
designed to shield the Court from having to deal with
Injunction Mandamus In case a motion for reconsideration or new trial is timely causes that are also well within the competence of the
Directed against a party to Directed against a tribunal, filed, whether such motion is required or not, the sixty lower courts, and thus leave time to the Court to deal with
the action board, corporation, officer (60) day period shall be counted from notice of the denial the more fundamental and more essential tasks that the
or person exercising of said motion. Constitution has assigned to it. The Court may act on
ministerial functions petitions for the extraordinary writs of certiorari,
Does not involve the Involves the jurisdiction of prohibition and mandamus only when absolutely
jurisdiction of the court the court (1) if it relates to the acts or omissions of a necessary or when serious and important reasons exist to
May be the main action An original action municipal trial court or of a corporation, board, justify an exception to the policy.
itself or a provisional officer or person, in the Regional Trial Court
remedy exercising jurisdiction over the territorial area as Accordingly, every litigant must remember that the Court
defined by the Supreme Court. is not the only judicial forum from which to seek and
o. Distinction Between Certiorari, Prohibition and (2) It may also be filed in the Court of Appeals or obtain effective redress of their grievances. As a rule, the
Mandamus Sandiganbayan whether or not the same is in aid Court is a court of last resort, not a court of the first
of its appellate jurisdiction, or instance. Hence, every litigant who brings the petitions for
Certiorari Prohibition Mandamus (3) If it involves the acts or omissions of a quasi- the extraordinary writs of certiorari, prohibition and
Intended to Intended to Intended to judicial agency, unless otherwise provided by law mandamus should ever be mindful of the policy on the
correct an act prevent the compel the or these Rules, the petition shall be filed in and hierarchy of courts, the observance of which is explicitly
performed by the commission or performance of cognizable only by the Court of Appeals. defined and enjoined in Section 4 of Rule 65, Rules of
respondent carrying out of an the act desired (4) In election cases involving an act or an omission Court.
act of a municipal or regional trial court, the petition
Extends to Discretionary and Ministerial shall be filed exclusively with the COMELEC in aid c. Material Dates Rule
of its appellate jurisdiction.
 Par. 2. Unless otherwise specifically directed by the court
Great Southern Maritime Services Corp. v. Acuna. Sec. 3 2. Remedies from Judgment, Final Order and where the petition is pending, the public respondents
of Rule 46 of the Rules of Court provides that there are Resolution of the RTC shall not appear in or file an answer or comment to the
three material dates that must be stated in a petition for petition or any pleading therein.
certiorari brought under Rule 65: RTC
MR or Motion for New Trial to the RTC under Rule 37 If the case is elevated to a higher court by either party, the
(a) The date when notice of the judgment or final Petition for Certiorari to the CA/SB within 60 days under public respondents shall be included therein as nominal
order or resolution was received, Rule 65 parties. However, unless otherwise specifically directed by
(b) The date when a motion for new trial or for MR or Motion for New Trial under Rule 65, Sec. 4 in the court, they shall not appear or participate in the
reconsideration when one such was filed, and relation to Rule 37 proceedings therein. (5a)
(c) The date when notice of the denial thereof was MR or Motion for New Trial under Rule 52 or 53 within 15
received. days a. “Virtual Party or Forced Intervenor” in
SC via Petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 Certiorari
d. In Election Cases, the act or omission of the within 15 days
MTC or RTC, the petition shall be filed with the BPI v. Lee. Sec. 5, Rule 65 of the Revised ROC requires that
COMELEC 3. Remedy from the Judgment, Final Order and persons interested in sustaining the proceedings in court
Resolution of the CA and SB must be impleaded as private respondents. Upon the
Galang, Jr. v. Geronimo. In election cases involving an act merger of Citytrust and BPI, with the latter as the surviving
or an omission of a MTC or RTC, the petition shall be filed Petition for Certiorari from the CA/SB within 60 days corporation, and with all the liabilities and obligations of
exclusively with the COMELEC, in aid of its appellate under Rule 65 Citytrust transferred to BPI as if it had incurred the same,
jurisdiction. MR or Motion for New Trial under Rule 52 or 53 within 15 BPI undoubtedly became a party interested in sustaining
the proceedings, as it stands to be prejudiced by the
days
Interpreting the phrase "in aid of its appellate jurisdiction," outcome of the case.
SC via Petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45
the Court held in J.M. Tuason & Co., Inc. v. Jaramillo, et al.,
within 15 days
that if a case may be appealed to a particular court or It is a settled rule that upon service of the writ of
judicial tribunal or body, then said court or judicial tribunal garnishment, the garnishee becomes a "virtual party" or
6. Duty of the Petitioner and Respondents
or body has jurisdiction to issue the extraordinary writ of "forced intervenor" to the case and the trial court thereby
certiorari, in aid of its appellate jurisdiction. acquires jurisdiction to bind the garnishee to comply with
Rule 65, Sec. 5. Respondents and costs in certain cases —
its orders and processes. In Perla Compania de Seguros,
e. Flow Chart Inc. v. Ramolete, the Court ruled:
Par. 1. When the petition filed relates to the acts or
omissions of a judge, court, quasi-judicial agency, tribunal,
Note: Start from the top In order that the trial court may validly acquire
corporation, board, officer or person, the petitioner shall
jurisdiction to bind the person of the garnishee, it is not
join, as private respondent or respondents with such
1. Remedies from Judgment, Final Order and necessary that summons be served upon him. The
public respondent or respondents, the person or persons
Resolution of the MTC/MeTC, MCTC garnishee need not be impleaded as a party to the case.
interested in sustaining the proceedings in the court;
All that is necessary for the trial court lawfully to bind the
MeTC/MTC/MCTC person of the garnishee or any person who has in his
and it shall be the duty of such private respondents to
MR or Motion for New Trial under Rule 65, Sec. 4 in possession credits belonging to the judgment debtor is
appear and defend, both in his or their own behalf and in
relation to Rule 37 service upon him of the writ of garnishment.
behalf of the public respondent or respondents affected
Petition for Certiorari to the RTC within 60 days under by the proceedings,
Rule 65 The ROC themselves do not require that the garnishee be
MR or Motion for New Trial to the RTC under Rule 37 served with summons or impleaded in the case in order to
and the costs awarded in such proceedings in favor of the
Appeal to the CA by Notice of Appeal under Rule 41 make him liable.
petitioner shall be against the private respondents only,
within 15 days and not against the judge, court, quasi-judicial agency,
MR or Motion for New Trial under Rule 52 or 53 within 15 Through the service of the writ of garnishment, the
tribunal, corporation, board, officer or person impleaded
days garnishee becomes a "virtual party" to, or a "forced
as public respondent or respondents.
SC via Petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 intervenor" in, the case and the trial court thereby
within 15 days acquires jurisdiction to bind him to compliance with all
orders and processes of the trial court with a view to the abandoned. Being a summation of the parties' previous administrative sanctions under Rule 139 and Rule 139-B of
complete satisfaction of the judgment of the court. pleadings, the Memoranda alone may be considered by the Rules of Court.
the Court in deciding or resolving the petition.
7. Order to Comment The Court may impose motu proprio, based on res ipsa
9. Expediting the Proceedings and Injunction loquitor, other disciplinary sanctions or measures on
Rule 65, Sec. 6. Order to comment — If the petition is erring lawyers for patently dilatory and unmeritorious
sufficient in form and substance to justify such process, Rule 65, Sec. 7. Expediting proceedings; injunctive relief petitions for certiorari.
the court shall issue an order requiring the respondent or — The court in which the petition is filed may issue orders
respondents to comment on the petition within ten (10) expediting the proceedings, and it may also grant a 11. Service and Enforcement of Order of Judgment
days from receipt of a copy thereof. Such order shall be temporary restraining order or a writ of preliminary
served on the respondents in such manner as the court injunction for the preservation of the rights of the parties Rule 65, Sec. 9. Service and enforcement of order or
may direct together with a copy of the petition and any pending such proceedings. The petition shall not interrupt judgment — A certified copy of the judgment rendered in
annexes thereto. the course of the principal case unless a temporary accordance with the last preceding Sec. shall be served
restraining order or a writ of preliminary injunction has upon the court, quasi-judicial agency, tribunal,
In petitions for certiorari before the Supreme Court and been issued against the public respondent from further corporation, board, officer or person concerned in such
the Court of Appeals, the provisions of Sec. 2, Rule 56, proceeding in the case. manner as the court may direct, and disobedience thereto
shall be observed. Before giving due course thereto, the shall be punished as contempt.
court may require the respondents to file their comment The public respondent shall proceed with the principal
to, and not a motion to dismiss, the petition. Thereafter, case within ten (10) days from the filing of a petition for An execution may issue for any damages or costs awarded
the court may require the filing of a reply and such other certiorari with a higher court or tribunal, absent a in accordance with Sec. 1 of Rule 39. (9a)
responsive or other pleadings as it may deem necessary temporary restraining order or a preliminary injunction or
and proper. (6a) upon its expiration. Failure of the public respondent to 12. Effect of Failure to Comply with the Procedural
proceed with the principal case may be a ground for an and Formal Requirements in Filing of the
a. Test of Sufficiency of the Petition administrative charge. Petition under Rule 46, Sec. 3

Palm Tree Estates, Inc v. PNB. The determination of the 10. Proceeding After the Filing of the Comment Rule 46, Sec. 3. The failure of the petitioner to comply any
completeness or sufficiency of the form of the petition, of the requirements shall be sufficient ground for the
including the relevant and pertinent documents which Rule 65, Sec. 8. Proceedings after comment is filed — dismissal of the petition.
have to be attached to it, is largely left to the discretion of After the comment or other pleadings required by the
the court taking cognizance of the petition, in this case the court are filed, or the time for the filing thereof has 13. Cases Where Petition for CPM against an
CA. expired, the court may hear the case or require the parties Interlocutory Order are Prohibited
to submit memoranda.
If the petition is insufficient in form and substance, the a. FEUD, and in all other claims, (except probate
same may be forthwith dismissed without further If after such hearing or submission of memoranda or the proceedings), where the claim exceeds 100,000
proceedings. That is the import of Rule 65, Sec. 6. expiration of the period for the filing thereof the court (outside MM) and 200,000 (within MM)
finds that the allegations of the petition are true, it shall (Summary Proceedings)
8. Rules Dispensing the Filing of a Rejoinder render judgment for the relief prayed for or to which the b. Where the amount of the claim for payment of
petitioner is entitled. money or where the value of the claim does not
A.M. No. 99-2-04-SC. Upon the filing of a Reply (when exceed 100,000 (Small Claims)
required), no REJOINDER shall be required by the Court. The court, however, may dismiss the petition if it finds the
Instead, the Court shall resolve either to (a) give due same: VII. Quo Warranto (Rule 66)
course to the petition and either consider the case
submitted for decision based on the pleadings or require (a) To be patently without merit, 1. Quo Warranto Defined
the parties to submit their respective memoranda; or (b) (b) Prosecuted manifestly for delay, or
deny or dismiss the petition, as the case may be. (c) That the questions raised therein are too Rule 66, Sec. 1. Action by Government against individuals
unsubstantial to require consideration. — An action for the usurpation of a public office, position
No new issues may be raised by a party in the In such event, the court may award in favor of the or franchise (OPF) may be commenced by a verified
Memorandum. Issues raised in previous pleadings but not respondent treble (3-fold) costs solidarily against the petition brought in the name of the Republic of the
included in the Memorandum shall be deemed waived or petitioner and counsel, in addition to subjecting counsel to Philippines against:
 Rule 66, Sec. 6. Parties and contents of petition against
(a) A person who usurps, intrudes into, or Rule 66, Sec. 4. When hearing had on application for usurpation — When the action is against a person for
unlawfully holds or exercises (U-II-UHE) a public permission to commence action — Upon application for usurping a public office, position or franchise, the petition
office, position or franchise; permission to commence such action in accordance with shall set forth the
(b) A public officer who does or suffers an act which, the next preceding Sec., the court shall
by the provision of law, constitutes a ground for (a) name of the person who claim to be entitled
the forfeiture of his office; or (1) Direct that notice be given to the respondent so thereto, if any,
(c) An association which acts as a corporation within that he may be heard in opposition thereto; and (b) with an averment of his right to the same and
the Philippines without being legally (2) If permission is granted, the court shall issue an (c) that the respondent is unlawfully in possession
incorporated or without lawful authority so to order to that effect, copies of which shall be thereof.
act. (1a) served on all interested parties, and (d) All persons who claim to be entitled to the public
(3) The petition shall then be filed within the period office, position or franchise may be made
2. Instances Where the Solicitor General or Public ordered by the court. parties, and their respective rights to such public
Prosecutor Must Commence an Action for Quo office, position or franchise determined, in the
Warranto 5. Instances Where an Individual May Commence same action
an Action for Quo Warranto
Rule 66, Sec. 2. When Solicitor General or public 7. Venue of the Action
prosecutor must commence action — The Solicitor Rule 66, Sec. 5. When an individual may commence such
General or a public prosecutor: an action — A person claiming to be entitled:
Rule 66, Sec. 7. Venue — An action under the preceding
(a) when directed by the President of the (1) To a public office or six Sections can be brought only in the Supreme Court, the
Philippines, or (2) Position usurped or unlawfully held or exercised Court of Appeals, or in the Regional Trial Court exercising
(b) When upon complaint or by another may bring an action therefor in his jurisdiction over the territorial area where the respondent
(c) Otherwise he has good reason to believe that own name. or any of the respondents resides,
any case specified in the preceding Sec. can be
established by proof, must commence such a. Individual Filing the Petition Must Show His but when the Solicitor General commences the action, it
action Entitlement to the Office may be brought in a Regional Trial Court in the City of
Manila, in the Court of Appeals, or in the Supreme Court.
3. Requirements in Case the Solicitor General or Hon. General v. Hon. Urro. Quo warranto is a remedy to
Public Prosecutor may Commence an Action for try disputes with respect to the title to a public 8. Period of Filing Pleadings and Proceedings
Quo Warranto With the Permission of the Court office.lihpwal Generally, quo warranto proceedings are
commenced by the Government as the proper party- Rule 66, Sec. 8. Period for pleadings and proceedings may
Rule 66, Sec. 3. When Solicitor General or public plaintiff. However, under Sec. 5, Rule 66, an individual may be reduced; action given precedence — The court may
prosecutor may commence action with permission of commence such action if he claims to be entitled to the reduce the period provided by these Rules for filing
court — The Solicitor General or a public prosecutor may, public office allegedly usurped by another. We stress that pleadings and for all other proceedings in the action in
with the permission of the court in which the action is to the person instituting the quo warranto proceedings in his order to secure the most expeditious determination of the
be commenced, own behalf must show that he is entitled to the office in matters involved therein consistent with the rights of the
dispute; otherwise, the action may be dismissed at any parties.
(1) bring such an action at the request and upon the stage. Emphatically, Sec. 6, Rule 66 of the same Rules
relation of another person; requires the petitioner to state in the petition his right to Such action may be given precedence over any other civil
(2) but in such case the officer bringing it may first the public office and the respondent’s unlawful possession matter pending in the court. (9a)
require an indemnity for the expenses and costs of the disputed position.
of the action in an amount approved by and to
be deposited in the court by the person at Since the petitioner merely holds an acting appointment 9. Judgment Where Usurpation is Found
whose request and upon whose relation the (and an expired one at that), he clearly does not have a
same is brought. cause of action to maintain the present petition. Rule 66, Sec. 9. Judgment where usurpation found —
4. Hearing on the Application for Permission to 6. Parties and Contents of the Petition Against When the respondent is found guilty of usurping into,
Commence an Action for Quo Warranto Usurpation intruding into, or unlawfully holding or exercising a public
office, position or franchise,
 within one (1) year after the entry of the eligible
(1) judgment shall be rendered that such judgment establishing the petitioner's right to
respondent be ousted and altogether excluded the office in question. 15. Distinctions Between Quo Warranto and
therefrom, and Mandamus
(2) that the petitioner or relator, as the case may 12. Judgment For Cost
be, recover his costs. Quo Warranto Mandamus
(3) Such further judgment may be rendered Rule 66, Sec. 12. Judgment for costs — In an action The remedy to tests the Remedy to enforce clear
determining the respective rights in and to the brought in accordance with the provisions of this Rule, the title to one’s office claimed legal duties and not to try
public office, position or franchise of all the court may render judgment for costs against either the: by another and has as its disputed titles
parties to the action as justice requires object the ouster of the
(a) petitioner, holder from its enjoyment
10. Rights of the Person Adjudged to be Entitled to (b) the relator, or Proper where there is Proper remedy where the
Public Office, etc. (c) the respondent, or the person or usurpation or intrusion into respondent, without
(d) persons claiming to be a corporation, an office claiming any right to an
Sec. 10. Rights of persons adjudged entitled to public office, excludes the
office; delivery of books and papers; damages — If or may apportion the costs, as justice requires petitioner therefrom
judgment be rendered in favor of the person averred in
the complaint to be entitled to the public office he may, 13. Distinction Between a Quo Warranto and an 16. HRET has Jurisdiction Over Petition for Quo
Election Protest Warranto
(1) after taking the oath of office and executing any
official bond required by law, take upon himself Quo Warranto Election Protest Vilando v. House of Representative. The HRET has
the execution of the office, and Is the disqualification or Ground is irregularities in jurisdiction over quo warranto petitions, specifically over
(2) May immediately thereafter demand of the ineligibility of the the conduct of the election cases challenging ineligibility on the lack of citizenship.
respondent all the books and papers in the proclaimed candidate
respondent's custody or control appertaining to If the respondent is found The protestant who VIII. Expropriation (Rule 67)
the office to which the judgment relates. ineligible, the petitioner prevails will assume the
will not automatically contested office provided A. Basic Concepts
(1) If the respondent refuses or neglects to deliver assume the office but may he had obtained the
any book or paper pursuant to such demand, he only recover the costs of plurality of votes. 1. Expropriation Defined
may be punished for contempt as having suit, such respective right
disobeyed a lawful order of the court. to the position to be a. Eminent domain is the right of the State to
(2) The person adjudged entitled to the office may rendered only in a further acquire private property for public use upon
also bring action against the respondent to judgment payment of just compensation
recover the damages sustained by such person b. Republic v. Sps. Tan Song Bok. Eminent domain
by reason of the usurpation 14. Distinctions Between Quo Warranto in Elective is the power of the State to take private property
and Appointive Office for public use. It is an inherent power of State as
11. Period to File the Petition it is a power necessary for the State’s existence;
QW in Elective Office QW in Appointive Office it is a power the State cannot do without. As an
Rule 66, Sec. 11. Limitations — Nothing contained in this What is to be determined is What is to be determined inherent power, it does not need at all to be
Rule shall be construed to authorize an action against a the eligibility of the in the legality of the embodied in the Constitution; if it is mentioned
public officer or employee for his ouster from office unless candidate elect appointment at all, it is solely for purposes of limiting what is
When the candidate-elect The court determines who otherwise an unlimited power. The limitation is
(1) the same be commenced within one (1) year is found to be ineligible, the has been legally appointed found in the Bill of Rights – that part of the
after the cause of such ouster, or court cannot declare that and shall declare who is Constitution whose provisions all aim at the
(2) the right of the petitioner to hold such office or the candidate who entitled to occupy the protection of individuals against the excessive
position, arose, obtained the second office exercise of governmental powers.
(3) Nor to authorize an action for damages in highest number of votes
accordance with the provisions of the next has been elected if he were
preceding Sec. unless the same be commenced
 2. Constitutional Provision in Relation to Vda. de Ouano v. Republic. In expropriation, the private
Expropriation owner is deprived of property against his will. Withal, the (a) the right and purpose of expropriation,
mandatory requirement of due process ought to be strictly (b) describe the real or personal property sought to
Art. III, Sec. 9. Private property shall not be taken for followed, such that the state must show, at the minimum, be expropriated, and
public use without payment of just compensation a genuine need, an exacting public purpose to take private (c) join as defendants all persons owning or claiming
property, the purpose to be specifically alleged or least to own, or occupying, any part thereof or
a. Meaning of compensable taking reasonably deducible from the complaint. interest therein, showing, so far as practicable,
the separate interest of each defendant.
NAPOCOR v. Heirs of Sangkay. The taking of private 3. Which Court has Jurisdiction over Complaint For
property for public use, to be compensable, need not be Eminent Domain? If the title to any property sought to be expropriated:
an actual physical taking or appropriate.
B.P. 129, Sec. 19. RTC, the subject matter of expropriation (a) appears to be in the Republic of the Philippines,
Compensable taking includes destruction, restriction, is incapable of pecuniary estimation. although occupied by private individuals, or
diminution, or interruption of the rights of ownership or of (b) if the title is otherwise obscure or doubtful so
the common and necessary use and enjoyment of the 4. Prohibition Does not Lie Against Expropriation that the plaintiff cannot with accuracy or
property in a lawful manner, lessening or destroying its certainty specify who are the real owners,
value. Sps. Yusay v. CA. There can be no prohibition against a
procedure whereby the immediate possession of the land averment to that effect shall be made in the complaint.
It is neither necessary that the owner be wholly deprived under expropriation proceedings may be taken, provided
of the use of his property, nor material whether the always that due provision is made to secure the prompt 6. Entry of the Plaintiff Upon Deposit of the Value
property is removed from the possession of the owner, adjudication and payment of just compensation to the
or in any respect changes hands. owner. Rule 67, Sec. 2. Entry of plaintiff upon depositing value
with authorized government depositary —
b. Expropriation Must be For Public Use Only This bar against prohibition comes from the nature of the
power of eminent domain as necessitating the taking of (1) Upon the filing of the complaint or at
Vda. de Ouano v. Republic. Public use, as an eminent private land intended for public use, and the interest of (2) Any time thereafter and after due notice to the
domain concept, has now acquired an expansive meaning the affected landowner is thus made subordinate to the defendant,
to include any use that is of "usefulness, utility, or power of the State.
advantage, or what is productive of general benefit [of the plaintiff shall have the right to take or enter
the public]." Once the State decides to exercise its power of eminent upon the possession of the real property
domain, the power of judicial review becomes limited in involved if:
If the genuine public necessity—the very reason or scope, and the courts will be left to determine the
condition as it were—allowing, at the first instance, the appropriate amount of just compensation to be paid to (1) he deposits with the authorized government
expropriation of a private land ceases or disappears, then the affected landowners. depositary an amount equivalent to the assessed
there is no more cogent point for the government’s value of the property for purposes of taxation to
retention of the expropriated land. Only when be held by such bank subject to the orders of the
court.
The same legal situation should hold if the government (a) the landowners are not given their just (2) Such deposit shall be in money, unless in lieu
devotes the property to another public use very much compensation for the taking of their property or thereof the court authorizes the deposit of a
different from the original or deviates from the declared (b) when there has been no agreement on the certificate of deposit of a government bank of
purpose to benefit another private person. It has been said amount of just compensation may the remedy of the Republic of the Philippines payable on
that the direct use by the state of its power to oblige prohibition become available. demand to the authorized government
landowners to renounce their productive possession to depositary.
another citizen, who will use it predominantly for that 5. Commencement of an Action for Eminent (3) If personal property is involved, its value shall be
citizen’s own private gain, is offensive to our laws. Domain provisionally ascertained and the amount to be
c. In Expropriation Proceedings Due Process Must deposited shall be promptly fixed by the court.
be Strictly Followed Rule 67, Sec. 1. The complaint — The right of eminent
domain shall be exercised by the filing of a verified After such deposit is made the court shall:
complaint which shall state with certainty
 (1) order the sheriff or other proper officer to (2) He may share in the distribution of the award. order appealed from and serving a copy thereof
forthwith place the plaintiff in possession of the upon the adverse party.
property involved and 8. Order of Expropriation
(2) promptly submit a report thereof to the court (b) No record on appeal shall be required except in
with service of copies to the parties. Rule 67, Sec. 4. Order of expropriation — special proceedings and other cases of multiple
or separate appeals where law on these Rules so
7. Defenses and Objections (1) If the objections to and the defenses against the require. In such cases, the record on appeal shall
right of the plaintiff to expropriate the property be filed and served in like manner.
Rule 67, Sec. 3. Defenses and objections — If a defendant are overruled, or
has no objection or defense to the action or the taking of (2) When no party appears to defend as required by b. Two (2) Stages of Expropriation Proceedings
his property: this Rule
Municipality of Binan v. Garcia. There are two (2) stages
(1) he may file and serve a notice of appearance and The court may: in every action of expropriation.
a manifestation to that effect, specifically
designating or identifying the property in which (a) issue an order of expropriation declaring that the (1) The determination of the authority of the
he claims to be interested, within the time plaintiff has a lawful right to take the property plaintiff to exercise the power of eminent
stated in the summons. sought to be expropriated, for the public use or domain and the propriety of its exercise in the
(2) Thereafter, he shall be entitled to notice of all purpose described in the complaint, context of the facts involved in the suit.
proceedings affecting the same. (b) upon the payment of just compensation to be
determined as of the date of the taking of the It ends with an order, if not of dismissal of the action, "of
If a defendant has any objection to the filing of or the property or the filing of the complaint, condemnation declaring that the plaintiff has a lawful right
allegations in the complaint, or any objection or defense whichever came first. to take the property sought to be condemned, for the
to the taking of his property, public use or purpose described in the complaint, upon the
A final order sustaining the right to expropriate the payment of just compensation to be determined as of the
(1) he shall serve his answer within the time stated property may be appealed by any party aggrieved thereby. date of the filing of the complaint."
in the summons. Such appeal, however, shall not prevent the court from
(2) The answer shall specifically designate or determining the just compensation to be paid. An order of dismissal, if this be ordained, would be a final
identify the property in which he claims to have one, of course, since it finally disposes of the action and
an interest, state the nature and extent of the After the rendition of such an order, the plaintiff shall not leaves nothing more to be done by the Court on the
interest claimed, and adduce all his objections be permitted to dismiss or discontinue the proceeding Merits.
and defenses to the taking of his property. except on such terms as the court deems just and
(3) No counterclaim, cross-claim or third-party equitable. (4a) So, too, would an order of condemnation be a final one,
complaint shall be alleged or allowed in the for thereafter, as the Rules expressly state, in the
answer or any subsequent pleading. a. How To Appeal the Final Order of proceedings before the Trial Court, "no objection to the
Expropriation? exercise of the right of condemnation (or the propriety
A defendant: thereof) shall be flied or heard.
The mode of appeal from the judgment or final order
(1) waives all defenses and objections not so alleged issued by the court in expropriation proceedings is by way (2) The determination by the Court of "the just
but the court, in the interest of justice, of notice and record on appeal within 30 days from notice compensation for the property sought to be
(2) May permit amendments to the answer to be of judgment or final order since it involves multiple taken."
made not later than ten (10) days from the filing appeals.
thereof. This is done by the Court with the assistance of not more
Rule 41, Sec. 2. Modes of appeal — than three (3) commissioners.
However, at the trial of the issue of just compensation
whether or not a defendant has previously appeared or (a) Ordinary appeal — The appeal to the Court of The order fixing the just compensation on the basis of the
answered, Appeals in cases decided by the Regional Trial evidence before, and findings of, the commissioners would
(1) He may present evidence as to the amount of Court in the exercise of its original jurisdiction be final, too. It would finally dispose of the second stage of
the compensation to be paid for his property, shall be taken by filing a notice of appeal with the suit, and leave nothing more to be done by the Court
and the court which rendered the judgment or final regarding the issue.
 time within which their report shall be submitted economic benefits contributed by the farmers and the
Obviously, one or another of the parties may believe the to the court. farm-workers and by the Government to the property as
order to be erroneous in its appreciation of the evidence (3) Copies of the order shall be served on the well as the non-payment of taxes or loans secured from
or findings of fact or otherwise. Obviously, too, such a parties. any government financing institution on the said land shall
dissatisfied party may seek reversal of the order by taking be considered as additional factors to determine its
an appeal therefrom. Objections to the appointment of any of the valuation.
commissioners shall be filed with the court within ten (10)
Hacienda Luisita, Inc. v. Alyansa ng Manggagawang Bukid days from service, and shall be resolved within thirty (30) e. Legal Basis in the Determination of Just
ng Hacienda Luisita. Although expropriation may be either days after all the commissioners shall have received copies Compensation of Agricultural Lands
judicial or legislative, dual stages apply to both, for there is of the objections. (5a)
“no point in distinguishing between judicial and legislative Land Bank v. Chico. Land Bank's contention that the
expropriation as far as the two stages mentioned are c. What is Just Compensation? property was acquired for purposes of agrarian reform on
concerned. Oct. 21, 1972, the time of the effectivity of PD 27, ergo just
Land Bank v. Sps. Placido Orilla. Constitutionally, "just compensation should be based on the value of the
B.H. Berkenkotter v. CA. Just compensation is to be compensation" is the sum equivalent to the market value property as of that time and not at the time of possession
ascertained as of the time of the taking, which usually of the property, broadly described as the price fixed by the in 1993, is likewise erroneous. In OP, Malacañang, Manila
coincides with the commencement of the expropriation seller in open market in the usual and ordinary course of v. CA, we ruled that the seizure of the landholding did not
proceedings. legal action and competition, or the fair value of the take place on the date of effectivity of PD 27 but would
property as between the one who receives and the one take effect on the payment of just compensation.
Where the institution of the action precedes entry into the who desires to sell, it being fixed at the time of the actual
property, the just compensation is to be ascertain as of taking by the government. Under the factual circumstances of this case, the agrarian
the time of the complaint reform process is still incomplete as the just compensation
Just compensation is defined as the full and fair to be paid private respondents has yet to be settled.
g. Power to Decide Just Compensation Lodged equivalent of the property taken from its owner by the Considering the passage of RA 6657 before the completion
with the Courts expropriator. of this process, the just compensation should be
determined and the process concluded under the said law.
Land Bank v. Listana. The power to decide just It has been repeatedly stressed by this Court that the true Indeed, RA 6657 is the applicable law, with PD 27 and EO
compensation cases for the taking of lands under R.A. measure is not the taker's gain but the owner's loss. The 228 having only suppletory effect, conformably with our
6657 is vested in the court. word "just" is used to modify the meaning of the word ruling in Paris v. Alfeche.
"compensation" to convey the idea that the equivalent to
The jurisdiction of the RTC is not any less “original and be given for the property to be taken shall be real, It would certainly be inequitable to determine just
exclusive” because the question is first passed upon by the substantial, full, and ample. compensation based on the guideline provided by PD 27
DAR as the judicial proceedings are not a continuation of and EO 228 considering the DAR's failure to determine the
the administrative determination. d. How to Determine Just Compensation just compensation for a considerable length of time. That
just compensation should be determined in accordance
9. Determination of Just Compensation by the with RA 6657, and not PD 27 or EO 228, is especially
Commissioner Land Bank v. Chico. Just compensation, under the imperative considering that just compensation should be
premises, presupposes the expropriation or taking of the full and fair equivalent of the property taken from its
Rule 67, Sec. 5. Ascertainment of compensation — Upon agricultural lands for eventual distribution to agrarian owner by the expropriator, the equivalent being real,
the rendition of the order of expropriation, the court shall: reform beneficiaries. Sec. 17 of R.A. 6657 which provides substantial, full and ample
for the parameters in the determination of just
(1) appoint not more than three (3) competent and compensation, reads as follows: f. Interest on the Just Compensation
disinterested persons as commissioners to
ascertain and report to the court the just Sec. 17. Determination of Just Compensation — In Land Bank v. Chico. The twelve percent (12%) interest
compensation for the property sought to be determining just compensation, the cost of acquisition of imposed by the SAC has no legal basis. In Land Bank of the
taken. the land, the current value of like properties, its nature, Philippines v. Wycoco, this Court held that the interest of
(2) The order of appointment shall designate the actual use and income, the sworn valuation by the owner, 12% per annum on the just compensation is due the
time and place of the first session of the hearing the tax declarations, and the assessment made by landowner in case of delay in payment, which will, in
to be held by the commissioners and specify the government assessors shall be considered. The social and
effect, make the obligation on the part of the government property sought to be expropriated and its (2) Upon the filing of such report, the clerk of the
one of forbearance surroundings, and may measure the same, after court shall serve copies thereof on all interested
which either party may, by himself or counsel, parties, with notice that they are allowed ten
On the other hand, interest in the form of damages cannot argue the case. (10) days within which to file objections to the
be imposed where there is prompt and valid payment of (3) The commissioners shall assess the findings of the report, if they so desire.
just compensation. consequential damages to the property not
taken and deduct from such consequential 12. Action of the Court on the Report
Interest on just compensation is assessed only in case of damages the consequential benefits to be
delay in the payment thereof, a fact which must be derived by the owner from the public use or Rule 67, Sec. 8. Action upon commissioners' report
adequately proved. In this case, it is noteworthy that the purpose of the property taken, the operation of — Upon the expiration of the period of ten (10) days
LBP, all the while, believed in good faith in the validity of its franchise by the corporation or the carrying referred to in the preceding Sec., or even before the
the LTPA, assumed that the acquisition of the subject on of the business of the corporation or person expiration of such period but after all the interested
property was by way of a VLT scheme, and, thus, was not taking the property. But in no case shall the parties have filed their objections to the report or
obligated to finance the transfer. Given the foregoing, we consequential benefits assessed exceed the their statement of agreement therewith, the court
find that the imposition of interest on the award of just consequential damages assessed, or the owner may, after hearing:
compensation is not justified and should therefore be be deprived of the actual value of his property so
deleted. taken (1) accept the report and render judgment in
accordance therewith, or,
g. Qualification of a Commissioner 11. Report of the Commissioner and Rendition of (2) For cause shown, it may recommit the same to
Judgment the commissioners for further report of facts, or
Hernandez v. Hernandez. The commissioner to be (3) It may set aside the report and appoint new
appointed is specifically required to be disinterested. As Rule 67, Sec. 7. Report by commissioners and judgment commissioners; or
defined, such person must be free from bias, prejudice or thereupon — The court may order the commissioners to (4) It may accept the report in part and reject it in
partiality. part and it may make such order or
(1) report when any particular portion of the real (5) Render such judgment as shall secure to the
Cecilio acted for the expropriation court. He cannot be estate shall have been passed upon by them, plaintiff the property essential to the exercise of
allowed to consider such action as an act for or in behalf of and his right of expropriation, and to the defendant
the defendant in the same case. Cecilio could not have (2) may render judgment upon such partial report, just compensation for the property so taken
been a hearing officer and a defendant at the same time. and
Indeed, Cecilio foisted fraud on both the Court and the (3) direct the commissioners to proceed with their 13. Rule in Case of Uncertain Ownership or
Hernandezes when, after his appointment as work as to subsequent portions of the property Conflicting
commissioner, he accepted the appointment by the sought to be expropriated, and
Hernandezes to "represent" and "sue for" them. (4) may from time to time so deal with such Rule 67, Sec. 9. Uncertain ownership; conflicting claims —
property. If the ownership of the property taken is uncertain, or
10. Procedure by the Commissioner there are conflicting claims to any part thereof, the court
The commissioners shall: may:
Rule 67, Sec. 6. Proceedings by commissioners — Before
entering upon the performance of their duties, the (1) make a full and accurate report to the court of (1) order any sum or sums awarded as
commissioners shall take and subscribe an oath that they all their proceedings, and compensation for the property to be paid to the
will faithfully perform their duties as commissioners, (2) such proceedings shall not be effectual until the court for the benefit of the person adjudged in
which oath shall be filed in court with the other court shall have accepted their report and the same proceeding to be entitled thereto.
proceedings in the case. rendered judgment in accordance with their (2) But the judgment shall require the payment of
recommendations. the sum or sums awarded to either the
(1) Evidence may be introduced by either party defendant or the court before the plaintiff can
before the commissioners who are authorized to Except as otherwise expressly ordered by the court: enter upon the property, or retain it for the
administer oaths on hearings before them, and (1) such report shall be filed within sixty (60) days public use or purpose if entry has already been
(2) the commissioners shall, unless the parties from the date the commissioners were notified made.
consent to the contrary, after due notice to the of their appointment, which time may be
parties, to attend, view and examine the extended in the discretion of the court.
 14. Rights of the Plaintiff After Judgment and same for public use or purpose shall not be belonging to such minor or person judicially declared to be
Payment delayed by an appeal from the judgment. incompetent, which such minor or person judicially
(2) But if the appellate court determines that declared to be incompetent could do in such proceedings
Rule 67, Sec. 10. Rights of plaintiff after judgment and plaintiff has no right of expropriation, judgment if he were of age or competent.
payment — Upon payment by the plaintiff to the shall be rendered ordering the Regional Trial
defendant of the compensation fixed by the judgment, Court to forthwith enforce the restoration to the 18. Power of the LGUs to Expropriate:
with legal interest thereon from the taking of the defendant of the possession of the property, and Requirements
possession of the property, or after tender to him of the to determine the damages which the defendant
amount so fixed and payment of the costs, the plaintiff sustained and may recover by reason of the Sps. Yusay v. CA. The power of eminent domain is lodged
shall have: possession taken by the plaintiff. (11a) in the legislative branch of government, which may
delegate the exercise thereof to LGUs, other public entities
(1) the right to enter upon the property 15. Cost of the Proceedings and public utilities. An LGU may therefore exercise the
expropriated and to appropriate it for the public power to expropriate private property only when
use or purpose defined in the judgment, or Rule 67, Sec. 12. Costs, by whom paid — authorized by Congress and subject to the latter’s control
(2) To retain it should he have taken immediate and restraints, imposed "through the law conferring the
possession thereof under the provisions of Sec. 2 (1) The fees of the commissioners shall be taxed as power or in other legislations." In this case, Sec. 19 of RA
hereof. a part of the costs of the proceedings. 7160, which delegates to LGUs the power of eminent
(3) If the defendant and his counsel absent (2) All costs, except those of rival claimants litigating domain.
themselves from the court, or decline to receive their claims, shall be paid by the plaintiff,
the amount tendered, the same shall be ordered (3) unless an appeal is taken by the owner of the Thus, the following essential requisites must concur before
to be deposited in court and such deposit shall property and the judgment is affirmed, in which an LGU can exercise the power of eminent domain:
have the same effect as actual payment thereof event the costs of the appeal shall be paid by the
to the defendant or the person ultimately owner. 1. An ordinance is enacted by the local legislative
adjudged entitled thereto. (10a) council authorizing the local chief executive, in
16. Recording of the Judgment and its Effect behalf of the LGU, to exercise the power of
a. Remedy of Deposit of Proceeds to the Bank in eminent domain or pursue expropriation
Case of Conflicting Claims Rule 67, Sec. 13. Recording judgment, and its effect — proceedings over a particular private property.
The judgment entered in expropriation proceedings shall 2. The power of eminent domain is exercised for
Phil. Veterans Bank v. Bases Conversion Development state definitely, by an adequate description: public use, purpose or welfare, or for the benefit
Authority. Actually, PVB’s remedy was to secure an order of the poor and the landless.
from Br. 58 to have the proceeds of the expropriation (1) the particular property or interest therein 3. There is payment of just compensation, as
deposited with that branch in the meantime, pending expropriated, and required under Section 9 Article III of the
adjudication of the issues of ownership of the (2) The nature of the public use or purpose for Constitution and other pertinent laws.
expropriated lands by the DARAB. which it is expropriated. 4. A valid and definite offer has been previously
made to the owner of the property sought to be
Rule 67, Sec. 9 above empowers the court to order When real estate is expropriated, a certified copy of such expropriated, but said offer was not accepted.
payment to itself of the proceeds of the expropriation judgment shall be recorded in the registry of deeds of the
whenever questions of ownership are yet to be settled. place in which the property is situated, and its effect shall 19. Taking of Private Property Under the Agrarian
There is no reason why this rule should not be applied be to vest in the plaintiff the title to the real estate so Reform Program is in the Nature of
even where the settlement of such questions is to be described for such public use or purpose. Expropriation
made by another tribunal.
17. Power of the Guardian in Such Proceedings Land Bank v. DAR. The taking of private lands under the
10. Effect of Appeal agrarian reform program partakes of the nature of an
Rule 67, Sec. 14. Power of guardian in such proceedings expropriation proceeding
Rule 67, Sec. 11. Entry not delayed by appeal; effect of — The guardian or guardian ad litem of a minor or of a
reversal — person judicially declared to be incompetent may, with the 20. Basis of Just Compensation under the Agrarian
(1) The right of the plaintiff to enter upon the approval of the court first had, do and perform on behalf Reform Program
property of the defendant and appropriate the of his ward any act, matter, or thing respecting the Land Bank v. Heirs of Vda. De Arieta. The amount of
expropriation for public use or purpose of property "offer" which the DAR gives to the landowner as
compensation for his land, as mentioned in Sec. 16(b) and the PHilippines
(c), is based on the initial valuation by the LBP. This then is b. Extrajudicial Foreclosure – the possession of the
the amount which may be accepted or rejected by the IX. Foreclosure of Real Estate Mortgage (REM) property sold may be given to the purchaser by
landowner under the procedure established in Sec. 16. (Rule 68) the sheriff after the period of redemption had
Perforce, such initial valuation by the LBP also becomes expired, unless a third person actually holding
the basis of the deposit of provisional compensation A. Basic Concepts the property adversely to the mortgagor.
pending final determination of just compensation, in
accordance with sub-paragraph (e). 1. Foreclosure Defined An ordinary action for the recovery of possession
is not necessary.
21. Law Which Governs Just Compensation under a. Foreclosure – is the equitable action by which a
the Agrarian Reform Program (a) mortgagee or (d) a pledgee or (c) any other 4. Which Court has Jurisdiction Over an Action for
lien holder cuts off the right of the debtor whose Foreclosure of Real Estate Mortgage
Land Bank of the Philippine vs. Escandor. Since the property is pledged/mortgaged, because of
subject lands were placed under land reform after the default in meeting the obligation. RTC MTC
effectivity of R.A. No. 6657, it is said law which governs the Real property– exceeds Real property– does not
valuation of lands for the purpose of awarding just Foreclosure this extinguishes the equity of 20,000 (outside MM) or exceed 20,000 (outside
compensation. Section 17 of R.A. No. 6657 provides the redemption. 50,000 (within MM) MM) or 50,000 (within
guideposts for the determination of just compensation, MM)
the cost of acquisition of land, the current value of like The judgment in the foreclosure creates a right
properties, its nature, the tax declarations, and the to have the property sold at a public sale and the 5. Venue in an Action For Foreclosure of REM
assessment made by government assessors shall be proceeds used to pay the debt as well as interest
considered. and expenses. Real Property – Where the real property or a part thereof
is situated (Rule 4, Sec. 1)
22. Land Bank of the Philippines May File an If not enough to satisfy the debt, the mortgagee
Expropriation Proceeding is entitled to personal judgment for the 6. Foreclosure of Mortgage How Commenced
deficiency.
Davao Fruits Corp. v. Land Bank. The Land Bank possessed Rule 68, Sec. 1. Complaint in action for foreclosure — In
the legal personality to institute a petition for b. Foreclosure of Mortgage – is the termination of an action for the foreclosure of a mortgage or other
determination of just compensation in the Special Agrarian all the rights of the mortgagor in the property encumbrance upon real estate, the complaint shall:
Court (SAC) covered by the mortgage.
(1) set forth the date and due execution of the
23. Distinction Between Expropriation (Rule 67) 2. Nature of the Action for Foreclosure of mortgage;
Proceeding and Escheat (Rule 91) Mortgage (2) its assignments, if any;
(3) the names and residences of the mortgagor and
Expropriation Escheat a. It is quasi in rem since it is not only directed the mortgagee;
Special civil action Special proceeding against a particular person, but it constitutes a (4) a description of the mortgaged property;
Filed for the purpose of Intended to revert back the lien on the property of the defendant (5) a statement of the date of the note or other
taking private property for property of the decedent b. It is a real action documentary evidence of the obligation secured
public use leaving no heir to succeed by the mortgage,
or person by law entitled to 3. Classification of Foreclosure of Mortgage (6) the amount claimed to be unpaid thereon; and
it. (7) the names and residences of all persons having
There is a requirement of No payment of just a. Judicial Foreclosure – is an action quasi in rem or claiming an interest in the property
payment of just compensation based on a personal claim sought to be enforced subordinate in right to that of the holder of the
compensation against a specific property of the defendant. mortgage, all of whom shall be made defendants
Venue is RTC where the Venue is in the RTC where in the action.
property is located the deceased last resided Its purpose is to have the property seized and
or where his estate may be sold by court order to the end that the proceeds a. Principal Must be Named: He Must Sign and
found if he is residing out of thereof be applied to the payment of plaintiff’s Seal the Mortgage
claim.
Far East Bank v. Sps. Cayetano. GR: In law of agency, in confirmation of the same.
order to bind the principal by a mortgage on real property Simply put, the sheriff is incompetent to prove that the
executed by the agent, it must upon its face purport to be b. GR in Right of Redemption/XPN notice of sale was actually published in a newspaper of
made, signed, and sealed in the name of the principal, general circulation
otherwise, it will bind the agent only. Huerta Alba Resort v. CA. GR: There is no right of
redemption in judicial foreclosure 8. Sale of Mortgaged Property
b. Personal Notice to the Mortgagor Not
Necessary XPN: When the mortgagee is the Philippine National Bank Rule 68, Sec. 3. Sale of mortgaged property; effect —
or any banking institution. When the defendant, after being directed to do so as
Resort Hoterls Corp. v. DBP. Personal notice to the provided in the next preceding Sec., fails to pay the
mortgagor is not necessary for the validity of the Thus, where the mortgagee is the PNB or other banking amount of the judgment within the period specified
foreclosure proceedings. institution, there exist both equity of redemption and right therein, the court, upon motion,:
of redemption.
7. Judgment on Foreclosure for Payment or Sale (1) shall order the property to be sold in the manner
Heirs of Burgos-Lipat v. Heirs of Trinidad. The 1 year and under the provisions of Rule 39 and other
Rule 68, Sec. 2. Judgment on foreclosure for payment or redemption period applied by the CA is the rule that regulations governing sales of real estate under
sale — If upon the trial in such action the court shall find generally applies to foreclosure of mortgage by a bank. execution.
the facts set forth in the complaint to be true, (2) Such sale shall not affect the rights of persons
The period of redemption is not tolled by the filing of a holding prior encumbrances upon the property
(1) it shall ascertain the amount due to the plaintiff complaint or petition for annulment of the mortgage and or a part thereof, and
upon the mortgage debt or obligation, including the foreclosure sale conducted pursuant to the said (3) when confirmed by an order of the court, also
interest and other charges as approved by the mortgage. upon motion, it shall operate to divest the rights
court, and costs, and in the property of all the parties to the action
(2) shall render judgment for the sum so found due c. Proof of Publication Required in Case of and to vest their rights in the purchaser, subject
and order that the same be paid to the court or Foreclosure: Burden of Proof of Compliance to such rights of redemption as may be allowed
to the judgment obligee within a period of not by law.
less than ninety (90) days nor more than one Metropolitan Bank and Trust Co. v. Sps. Miranda. It
hundred twenty (120) days from the entry of would have been a simple matter for Metrobank to rebut Upon the finality of the order of confirmation or upon the
judgment, and the allegation of non-compliance by producing the expiration of the period of redemption when allowed by
(3) that in default of such payment the property required proof of publication. Yet, Metrobank opted not to law, the purchaser at the auction sale or last
shall be sold at public auction to satisfy the rebut the allegations; it simply relied on the presumption redemptioner, if any, shall be:
judgment. of regularity in the performance of official duty.
(1) entitled to the possession of the property unless
a. Distinction Between Right of Redemption and Unfortunately, Metrobanks’s reliance on the presumption a third party is actually holding the same
Equity of Redemption of regularity must fail because it did not present any proof adversely to the judgment obligor.
of publication of notice of sale. As held by this court in Sps. (2) The said purchaser or last redemptioner may
Right of redemption Equity of Redemption Pulido v. CA: secure a writ of possession, upon motion, from
Exist in extrajudicial Exist in judicial foreclosure the court which ordered the foreclosure.
foreclosure Petitioner’s reliance on the presumption of regularity in
The mortgagor may The mortgagor may the performance of official duties falls in the face of a a. Validity of Mortgage and its Foreclosure Not a
exercise his right of exercise his equity of serious imputation on non-compliance. Ground to Deny Writ of Possession
redemption within 1 year redemption during the
from the registration of the period of not less than 90 The presumption of official duty on the part of Sheriff Planters Dev. Bank v. Ng. Questions regarding the validity
sale in the Office of the days nor more than 120 Castillo is misplaced. of a mortgage or its foreclosure as well as the sale of the
Registry of Deeds days from entry of property covered by the mortgage cannot be raised as
judgment of foreclosure or While posting the notice of sale is part of a sheriff’s official ground to deny the issuance of a writ of possession.
even after the foreclosure functions, the actual publication of notice of sale cannot
sale but before judicial be considered as such, since this concerns the publisher’s 9. Disposition of Proceed of the Sale of the
business. Mortgaged Property
 (2) upon which execution may issue immediately if inconsistent with or may serve to supplement the
Rule 68, Sec. 4. Disposition of proceeds of sale — The the balance is all due at the time of the rendition provisions of the latter. (8a)
amount realized from the foreclosure sale of the of the judgment;
mortgaged property shall, after deducting the costs of the (3) otherwise; the plaintiff shall be entitled to a. Manner of Using Premises Pending
sale, execution at such time as the balance remaining Redemption; Waste Restrained
becomes due under the terms of the original
(1) be paid to the person foreclosing the mortgage, contract, which time shall be stated in the Rule 39, Sec. 31. Manner of using premises pending
and judgment. (6a) redemption; waste restrained — Until the expiration of
(2) when there shall be any balance or residue, after the time allowed for redemption, the court may, as in
paying off the mortgage debt due, the same shall 12. Registration of Judgment other proper cases:
be paid to junior encumbrancers in the order of
their priority, to be ascertained by the court, or Rule 68, Sec. 7. Registration — (1) restrain the commission of waste on the
(3) if there be no such encumbrancers or there be a property by injunction, on the application of the
balance or residue after payment to them, then (1) A certified copy of the final order of the court purchaser or the judgment obligee, with or
to the mortgagor or his duly authorized agent, or confirming the sale shall be registered in the without notice;
to the person entitled to it. registry of deeds. (2) But it is not waste for a person in possession of
(2) If no right of redemption exists, the certificate of the property at the time of the sale, or entitled
10. How the Sale Will Proceed in Case the Debt is title in the name of the mortgagor shall be to possession afterwards,
Not Due cancelled, and a new one issued in the name of (3) During the period allowed for redemption, to
the purchaser. continue to use it in the same manner in which it
Rule 68, Sec. 5. How sale to proceed in case the debt is was previously used, or
not all due — If the debt for which the mortgage or Where a right of redemption exists, (4) To use it in the ordinary course of husbandry; or
encumbrance was held is not all due as provided in the (5) To make the necessary repairs to buildings
judgment: (1) the certificate of title in the name of the thereon while he occupies the property. (33a)
mortgagor shall not be cancelled,
(1) as soon as a sufficient portion of the property (2) but the certificate of sale and the order b. Rents, Earning and Income of the Property
has been sold to pay the total amount and the confirming the sale shall be registered and a Pending Redemption
costs due, the sale shall terminate; and brief memorandum thereof made by the
(2) Afterwards as often as more becomes due for registrar of deeds upon the certificate of title. Rule 39, Sec. 32. Rents, earnings and income of property
principal or interest and other valid charges, the (3) In the event the property is redeemed, the deed pending redemption — The purchaser or a redemptioner
court may, on motion, order more to be sold. of redemption shall be registered with the shall:
(3) But if the property cannot be sold in portions registry of deeds, and a brief memorandum
without prejudice to the parties, the whole shall thereof shall be made by the registrar of deeds (1) not be entitled to receive the rents, earnings and
be ordered to be sold in the first instance, and on said certificate of title. income of the property sold on execution, or the
the entire debt and costs shall be paid, if the value of the use and occupation thereof when
proceeds of the sale be sufficient therefor, there If the property is not redeemed: such property is in the possession of a tenant.
being a rebate of interest where such rebate is (2) All rents, earnings and income derived from the
proper (1) the final deed of sale executed by the sheriff in property pending redemption shall belong to the
favor of the purchaser at the foreclosure sale judgment obligor until the expiration of his
11. Deficiency Judgment (2) shall be registered with the registry of deeds; period of redemption. (34a)
(3) whereupon the certificate of title in the name of
Rule 68, Sec. 6. Deficiency judgment — If upon the sale of the mortgagor shall be cancelled and a new one c. Recovery of Price if Sale Not Effective; Revival
any real property as provided in the next preceding Sec. issued in the name of the purchaser. (n) of Judgment
there be a balance due to the plaintiff after applying the 13. Applicability of Other Provisions Rule 39, Sec. 34. Recovery of price if sale not effective;
proceeds of the sale, he court, upon motion, revival of judgment — If the purchaser of real property
Rule 68, Sec. 8. Applicability of other provisions — The sold on execution, or his successor in interest, fails to
(1) shall render judgment against the defendant for provisions of Sec.s 31, 32 and 34 of Rule 39 shall be recover the possession thereof, or is evicted therefrom, in
any such balance for which, by the record of the applicable to the judicial foreclosure of real estate consequence of irregularities in the proceedings
case, he may be personally liable to the plaintiff, mortgages under this Rule insofar as the former are not concerning the sale, or because the judgment has been
reversed or set aside, or because the property sold was Consuelo Metal Corp. v. Planters Bank. Planters Bank, as a To this end, the court concerned shall submit to
exempt from execution, or because a third person has secured creditor, enjoys preference over a specific the Supreme Court, through the Office of the
vindicated his claim to the property, mortgaged property and has a right to foreclose the Court Administrator, quarterly reports on the
mortgage under Sec. 2248 of the Civil Code. progress of the cases involving ten million pesos
(1) he may on motion in the same action or in a and above.
separate action recover from the judgment The creditor-mortgagee has the right to foreclose the (4) All requirements and restrictions prescribed for
obligee the price paid, with interest, or so much mortgage over a specific real property WON the debtor- the issuance of a temporary restraining
thereof as has not been delivered to the mortgagor is under insolvency or liquidation proceedings. order/writ of preliminary injunction, such as the
judgment obligor, or posting of a bond, which shall be equal to the
(2) he may, on motion, have the original judgment The right to foreclose such mortgage is merely suspended amount of the outstanding debt, and the time
revived in his name for the whole price with upon the appointment of a management committee or limitation for its effectivity, shall apply as well to
interest, or so much thereof as has been rehabilitation receiver or upon the issuance of a stay order a status quo order.
delivered to the judgment obligor. The judgment by the trial court.
so revived shall have the same force and effect From these guidelines, it is evident that a disagreement
as an original judgment would have as of the However, the creditor-mortgagee may exercise his right to between the parties as to the amount of the secured loan
date of the revival and no more. (36a) foreclose the mortgage upon the termination of the that remains unpaid shall not, by itself, warrant the
rehabilitation proceedings or upon the lifting of the stay issuance of an injunctive writ to enjoin foreclosure. The
order. guidelines speak of strict exceptions and conditions. Even
14. Remedies of the Mortgagee in Case of Default an allegation of unconscionable interest being imposed on
of the Mortgagor/Waiver of the Right to 17. Foreclosure under A.M. 99-10-05-0, Re: the loan by the mortgagee shall no longer suffice to
Foreclose Procedure in Extrajudicial or Judicial support an injunction. Furthermore, if under this
Foreclosure of Real Estate Mortgage resolution a debtor can no longer seek an injunctive writ
a. Judicial or extrajudicial foreclosure by the unsubstantiated claim of full payment, there is even
b. File an ordinary action to collect the debt PNB v. Castalloy Technology Corp. The resolution more reason for a court not to issue an injunctive writ
embodies the additional guidelines intended to aid courts when the debtors or mortgagors readily admit default in
Caltex Phil. Inc. v. IAC. If an ordinary action to collect debt in foreclosure proceedings, specifically limiting the the payment of the secured loan, as in this case.
is filed, he will be deemed to have waived his right to instances, and citing the conditions, when a writ against
proceed against the property in a foreclosure proceeding foreclosure of a mortgage may be issued, to wit: 18. Remedies of the Mortgagee in Case of Death of
the Mortgagor
15. Alternative Remedies of Mortgagee-Creditor (1) No temporary restraining order or writ of
preliminary injunction against the extrajudicial Rule 86, Sec. 7. Mortgage debt due from estate — A
Flores v. Sps. Lindo. A mortgage-creditor may institute foreclosure of real estate mortgage shall be creditor holding a claim against the deceased secured by
against the mortgage-debtor either a personal action for issued on the allegation that the loan secured by mortgage or other colateral security, may:
debt or a real action to foreclose mortgage. The remedies the mortgage has been paid or is not delinquent
are alternative and not cumulative. unless the application is verified and supported (1) abandon the security and prosecute his claim in
by evidence of payment. the manner provided in this rule, and share in
The filing of a criminal action for violation of B.P. 22 was in (2) No temporary restraining order or writ of the general distribution of the assets of the
effect a collection suit or a suit for the recovery of the preliminary injunction against the extrajudicial estate; or
mortgage-debt. foreclosure of real estate mortgage shall be (2) He may foreclose his mortgage or realize upon
issued on the allegation that the interest on the his security, by action in court, making the
In that case, however, the Court pro hac vice, ruled that loan is unconscionable, unless the debtor pays executor or administrator a party defendant, and
the respondents could still be held liable for the balance of the mortgagee at least twelve percent per (3) If there is a judgment for a deficiency, after the
the loan, applying the principle that no person may annum interest on the principal obligation as sale of the mortgaged premises, or the property
unjustly enrich himself at the expense of another. stated in the application for foreclosure sale, pledged, in the foreclosure or other proceeding
which shall be updated monthly while the case is to realize upon the security, he may claim his
16. Mortgagor-Creditor Has the Right to Foreclose pending. deficiency judgment in the manner provided in
the Mortgaged Property Even under Insolvency (3) Where a writ of preliminary injunction has been the preceding Sec. or
or Liquidation under Art. 2248 of the Civil Code issued against a foreclosure of mortgage, the (4) He may rely upon his mortgage or other security
disposition of the case shall be speedily resolved. alone, and foreclosure the same at any time
 within the period of the statute of limitations, b. Compulsory Partition – is a partition by judicial Personal – exceeds 300,000 Personal - exceeds 300,000
and in that event he shall not be admitted as a proceedings at the instance of one or more of (outside MM) or 400,000 (outside MM) or 400,000
creditor, and shall receive no share in the the co-tenants without regard to the wishes of (within MM) (within MM)
distribution of the other assets of estate; the other co-tenants.
8. Venue in an Action for Partition
but nothing herein contained shall prohibit the executor or 4. Kinds of Partition
administrator from redeeming the property mortgaged or Real Property Personal Property
pledged, by paying the debt for which it is held as security, a. Total – when all things are divided among the Real Property – Where the Personal property – (1)
under the direction of the court, if the court shall adjudge participants real property or a part Where the plaintiff resides;
it to be for the best interest of the estate that such b. Partial – when some of the things are divided, thereof is situated (Rule 4, (2) where defendant
redemption shall be made. the rest remaining in the community ownership Sec. 1) resides or (3) in case of
c. Provisional – when it is temporary or non-resident defendant,
19. Mortgage in Favor of the Estate of the conditional, that is, until a final or definitive where he may be found at
Deceased division is made the election of plaintiff
d. Definite – when the division resulting is a
Rule 87, Sec. 5. Mortgage due estate may be foreclosed permanent, final and absolute a. Partition Not Available in An Action for
— A mortgage belonging to the estate of a deceased e. Judicial – when the court intervenes and Quieting of Title
person, as mortgagee or assignee of the right or a approves the division
mortgage, may be foreclosed by the executor or f. Extrajudicial – when made by the testator Alejandrino v. CA. Partition of the estate may not be
administrator. himself, or by some person named by the ordered in an action for quieting of title
deceased or by the interested heirs by common
20. Appointment of a Receiver in Case of a agreement 9. Complaint in an Action for Partition
Mortgage
5. Rationale of Partition of Properties Rule 69, Sec. 1. Complaint in action for partition of real
 Rule 59, Sec. 1(b) estate — A person having the right to compel the partition
Sibal. Co-ownership or community property is not favored of real estate may do so as provided in this Rule, setting
X. Partition (Rule 69) by the Civil Code. forth in his complaint the:

A. Basic Concepts Upon the death of the testator, all the heirs become co- (1) nature and extent of his title and
owners of the hereditary estate, and a co-owner has the (2) An adequate description of the real estate of
1. Partition Defined right to demand the division or partition thereof at any which partition is demanded and
time, although an agreement among them for a specified (3) Joining as defendants all other persons
a. Cruz v. CA. Partition, in general, is the period not exceeding 10 years is valid, which may be interested in the property.
separation, division or assignment of a thing held extended by a new agreement.
in common among those to whom it may belong. a. Description of the Property Subject of Partition
The thing itself be divided or its value. 6. Purpose of Partition Must be Described

2. Nature of an Action for Partition Gabila v. Perez. Purpose: To separate, divide, and assign a Lara v. Lara. The property sought to be divided should be
thing held in common among those to whom it may adequately described in the complaint; but insufficiency in
 Quasi in rem since it is not only directed against belong. that respect may be cured at the trial and therefore
a particular person, but it constitute a lien on the objection thereto should be made not after the trial.
property subject matter of the action with the 7. Which Court Has Jurisdiction Over an Actin for
intention of excluding the defendant therein. Partition? b. All co-owners Must be Joined as Defendants
Being an Indispensable Parties
3. Classes of Partition RTC MTC
Real property– exceeds Real property– does not Moran. All the co-owners must be joined. Accordingly, an
a. Voluntary partition – is a division of property by 20,000 (outside MM) or exceeds 20,000 (outside action will not lie without the joinder of all co-owners and
the act of the parties themselves. 50,000 (within MM) MM) or 50,000 (within other persons having interest in the property.
MM)
 (a) That they should have preformed unequivocal (b) Thereupon the parties may, if they are able to
All the co-owners therefore, are indispensable parties. acts of repudiation amounting to an ouster of agree, make the partition among themselves by
the other co-owners proper instruments of conveyance, and
c. Death of One of the Co-Owners May Bring an (b) That the co-owners were, or should have been, (c) the court shall confirm the partition so agreed
Action for Partition appraised of such positive acts of repudiation upon by all the parties, and such partition,
(c) That the evidence thereon should be clear and together with the order of the court confirming
Albano v. Agtarap. Where one of the co-owners has died, conclusive the same, shall be recorded in the registry of
the action for partition may be brought by the deeds of the place in which the property is
administrator or his estate. h. Acquisition of Exclusive Title on the Property in situated. (2a)
Good Faith, Prescription Lies
d. Action for Partition Does not Prescribe a. Appointment of Commissioner Not Necessary if
Ramos v. Ramos. Prescription also lies where one co- the Parties Agree to Partition
Bicarme v. CA. An Action for partition, as long as co- owner acquires in good faith in a clear exclusive title on
ownership exist will lie at anytime and does not prescribe the property and possesses the same exclusively for the Tell v. Tell. If the parties agree upon a partition, the
prescriptive period without knowing that others may have appointment of commissions is unnecessary; all that is left
Heirs of Infante v. CA. Action for partition is right to share therein. for the court to do is to confirm the instrument of partition
imprescriptible for as long as the co-owners expressly or presented by the parties, according to the preceding
impliedly recognize the co-ownership. i. Partition Premised on Existence of Co- section.
ownership
Heirs of Jardin v. Heirs of Hallasgo. However, if a co- If they fail to agree, the court shall proceed to appoint
owner repudiates the co-ownership and makes known Lacbayan v. Samoy, Jr. An action for partition does not commissioners to make the partition.
such repudiation to the other co-owners, then partition is preclude a settlement on the issue of ownership, but is
no longer a proper remedy of the aggrieved co-owners. nonetheless premised in the existence of a co-ownership. The selection of the commissioners is a matter of
discretion and will not be disturbed on appeal unless
He should file an accion reivindicatoria which is The determination as to the existence of co-ownership is abuse thereof is shown.
prescriptible. necessary in the resolution of an action for partition.
b. What is the Remedy of the Aggrieved Party?
e. Prescription Lies if There is Repudiation of Co- An admission is any statement of fact made by a party
ownership against his interest or unfavorable to the conclusion for A final order decreeing partition and accounting may be
which he contends or is inconsistent with the facts alleged appealed by any party aggrieved thereby.
Heirs of Restar v. Heirs of Cichon. While the action to by him.
demand partition of a co-owned property does not c. Multiple Appeals in Partition
prescribe, a co-owner may acquire ownership thereof by j. If the Allegation in the Complaint Asserts
prescription where there exists a clear repudiation of the Exclusive Property Partition is Not Available Roman Catholic Archbishop of Manila v. CA. Multiple
co-ownership and the co-owners are apprised of the claim appeals are allowed in special proceedings, in actions for
of adverse and exclusive ownership. Dela Cruz v. CA. When the allegations of the complaint recovery of property with accounting, in actions for
allege that the plaintiff asserts exclusive ownership of the partition of property with accounting, in the special civil
f. Claim of Defendant of Exclusive Ownership, Co- party sought to be partitioned, the nature of the action is actions of eminent domain and foreclosure of mortgage.
ownership is No Longer Present not one for partition. It is an action for the recovery of
property. The rationale behind allowing more than one appeal in the
Rodriguz v. Ravilan. An action for partition among co- same case is to enable the rest of the case to proceed in
owners ceases to be such, and becomes one for title 10. Order of Partition and Agreement to Partition the event that a separate and distinct issue is resolved by
where the defendants allege exclusive ownership the court and held to be final.
Rule 69, Sec. 2. Order for partition and partition by
g. Requirements for the Claim of Prescription agreement thereunder — If after the trial the court finds d. Two (2) Stages of an Action for Partition
that the plaintiff has the right thereto, it shall
Cortes v. Oliva. In order that the defendant co-owners 1. First Stage – Determination of the propriety of
may claim prescription founded on adverse possession, it (a) order the partition of the real estate among all partition
is indispensable: the parties in interest.
This involves a determination of whether the subject 12. Oath and Duties of the Commissioner which case the court shall order the
property is owned in common and whether all the co- commissioners to sell the real estate at public
owners are made parties in the case. All co-owners are Rule 69, Sec. 4. Oath and duties of commissioners — sale under such conditions and within such time
indispensable parties Before making such partition; the commissioners shall: as the court may determine.

Miranda v. CA. The order of may also require an (1) Take and subscribe an oath that they will 14. Report of the Commissioner and Confirmation
accounting of rents and profits recovered by the faithfully perform their duties as commissioners,
defendant. This order of partition and accounting is (2) which oath shall be filed in court with the other Rule 69, Sec. 6. Report of commissioners; proceedings
appealable. proceedings in the case. not binding until confirmed — The commissioners shall
make a full and accurate report to the court of all their
De Mesa v. CA. If not appealed, then the parties may In making the partition, the commissioners shall: proceedings:
partition the common property in the way they want. If
they cannot agree, then the case goes into the second (1) view and examine the real estate, after due (1) as to the partition, or
stage. However, the order of accounting may in the notice to the parties to attend at such view and (2) the assignment of real estate to one of the
meantime be executed. examination, and parties, or
(2) shall hear the parties as to their preference in (3) the sale of the same.
2. Second Stage – the actual partitioning of the the portion of the property to be set apart to
subject property them and the comparative value thereof, and Upon the filing of such report, the clerk of court shall serve
(3) shall set apart the same to the parties in lots or copies thereof on all the interested parties with notice
Municipality of Binan v. Garcia. If the parties are unable parcels as will be most advantageous and that they are allowed ten (10) days within which to file
to agree upon the partition, the partition shall be done for equitable, having due regard to the objections to the findings of the report, if they so desire.
the parties with the assistance of not more than 3 improvements, situation and quality of the
commissioners. different parts thereof. (4a) No proceeding had before or conducted by the
commissioners and rendered judgment thereon. (6a)
This is also a complete proceeding and the order or b. Viewing and Examination of the Property by the
decision is appealable. Commissioner 15. Action of the Court on the Report of the
Commissioner
e. Claimant Must Have a Rightful Interest in the Government of P.I. v. Abadilla. The manner of partition
Property, Otherwise Partition Will not Lie should be that which is nearest to absolute equity and Rule 69, Sec. 7. Action of the court upon commissioners
most consonant with reason and justice. report — Upon the expiration of the period of ten (10)
Garingan v. Garingan. The settlement of the issue of days referred to in the preceding Sec. or even before the
ownership is the first stage in an action for partition, and Of course under the above provision, the commissioners expiration of such period but after the interested parties
the action will not lie if the claimant has no rightful cannot view the lands adversely occupied by third persons. have filed their objections to the report or their statement
interest in the property in dispute. of agreement therewith the court may:
13. Assignment or Sale of Real Estate by the
11. Commissioner to Make Partition When Parties Commissioner (1) upon hearing, accept the report and render
Fail to Agree judgment in accordance therewith, or,
Rule 69, Sec. 5. Assignment or sale of real estate by (2) for cause shown recommit the same to the
Rule 69, Sec. 3. Commissioners to make partition when commissioners — When it is made to appear to the commissioners for further report of facts; or
parties fail to agree — If the parties are unable to agree commissioners that the real state, or a portion thereof, (3) set aside the report and appoint new
upon the partition, the court shall cannot be divided without prejudice to the interests of the commissioners; or
parties, the court may: (4) accept the report in part and reject it in part;
(1) appoint not more than three (3) competent and and
disinterested persons as commissioners to make (1) order it assigned to one of the parties willing to (5) may make such order and render such judgment
the partition, take the same, provided he pays to the other as shall effectuate a fair and just partition of the
(2) commanding them to set off to the plaintiff and parties such amount as the commissioners deem real estate, or of its value, if assigned or sold as
to each party in interest such part and equitable, above provided, between the several owners
proportion of the property as the court shall (2) unless one of the interested parties asks that the thereof. (7)
direct property be sold instead of being so assigned, in
 a. Partition of the Property Must be Made in a Rule 69, Sec. 10. Costs and expenses to be taxed and a. Judgment May Not be Voided on Mere
Manner Most Advantageous to the Parties collected — The court shall: Allegation of Non-Inclusion of Other Parties

Arias & Colet v. Arias and Arias. It rarely happens in 1. equitably tax and Tomias v. Tomias. The judgment in the partition case may
partition proceedings, where so many conflicting interests 2. apportion between or among the parties the not be voided on the mere allegation that some of the
and imponderable factors of value, convenience and the costs and expenses which accrue in the action, parcels of land partitioned were the property of persons
like may enter, that all parties are satisfied. including the compensation of the not made parties to the suit when none of those persons
commissioners, having regard to the interests of has come to the court to protest.
If no charge of partiality, fraud or irregularity in the the parties, and execution may issue therefor as
proceedings is made, and if so much rests upon the in other cases. (10a) The judgment may be maintained without prejudice to the
informed opinion and sound judgment of impartial proper action which the supposedly omitted parties may
commissioners and an impartial judge, it would see 19. Judgment and Its Effect bring against the legitimate heirs.
inexpedient for the appellate court to reverse the findings
and confirm the report of the commissioner who stands Rule 69, Sec. 11. The judgment and its effect; copy to be b. Partition May be Novated Upon Agreement of
alone in his recommendations. recorded in registry of deeds — If actual partition of All the Parties
property is made, the judgment shall:
In an action for partition, the properties should be Lucero v. Banaga. A partition may be novated with the
partitioned in a manner that would be most advantageous (1) state definitely, by metes and bounds and consent of all the interested parties, especially if such
and equitable to the parties, having due regard to the adequate description, novation is required in the interest of justice and equity
improvements, situation and quality of the different parts (2) the particular portion of the real estate assigned and is warranted under the prevailing circumstances for
of the properties subject of the partition. to each party, and the expeditious settlement of the estate.
(3) the effect of the judgment shall be to vest in
16. Accounting of the Rents and Profits of the each party to the action in severalty the portion 20. Rights of the Other Persons
Property of the real estate assigned to him.
(4) If the whole property is assigned to one of the Rule 69, Sec. 12. Neither paramount rights nor amicable
Rule 69, Sec. 8. Accounting for rent and profits in action parties upon his paying to the others the sum or partition affected by this Rule — Nothing in this Rule
for partition — In an action for partition in accordance sums ordered by the court, the judgment shall contained shall be construed so as to:
with this Rule, a party shall: state the fact of such payment and of the
assignment of the real estate to the party (1) prejudice, defeat, or destroy the right or title of
(1) recover from another his just share of rents and making the payment, and the effect of the any person claiming the real estate involved by
profits received by such other party from the judgment shall be to vest in the party making the title under any other person, or
real estate in question, and payment the whole of the real estate free from (2) by title paramount to the title of the parties
(2) the judgment shall include an allowance for such any interest on the part of the other parties to among whom the partition may have been
rents and profits the action. made,
(5) If the property is sold and the sale confirmed by (3) nor so as to restrict or prevent persons holding
17. Power of Guardian the court, the judgment shall state the name of real estate jointly or in common from making an
the purchaser or purchasers and a definite amicable partition thereof by agreement and
Rule 69, Sec. 9. Power of guardian in such proceedings — description of the parcels of real estate sold to suitable instruments of conveyance without
The guardian or guardian ad litem of a minor or person each purchaser, and the effect of the judgment recourse to an action. (12a)
judicially declared to be incompetent may, with the shall be to vest the real estate in the purchaser
approval of the court first had, do and perform on behalf or purchasers making the payment or payments, 21. Partition of Personal Property
of his ward any act, matter, or thing respecting the free from the claims of any of the parties to the
partition of real estate, which the minor or person action. Rule 69, Sec. 13. Partition of personal property — The
judicially declared to be incompetent could do in partition provisions of this Rule shall apply to partitions of estates
proceedings if he were of age or competent. (9a) A certified copy of the judgment shall in either case be composed of personal property, or of both real and
recorded in the registry of deeds of the place in which the personal property, in so far as the same may be applicable.
18. Rule on the Cost and Expenses of the real estate is situated, and the expenses of such recording
Proceedings shall be taxed as part of the costs of the action. (11a) 22. Instances When Partition is Not Available
 (a) There is an agreement among the co-owners to action for the recovery of physical possession
keep the property undivided for a certain period where the dispossession has not lasted for more a. Gumiran v. Gumiran. Forcible Entry – when one
of time but not to exceed 10 years (Art. 494, than one (1) year, and should be brought in the in physical possession of a land or building is
NCC) proper inferior court. deprived of that possession by another through
(b) When partition is prohibited by the donor or b. Accion Publiciana – the plenary action for the force, intimidation, threat, strategy or stealth
testator for a period not exceeding 20 years (Art. recovery of the real right of possession, which (FISTS)
494; Art. 1083, NCC) should be brought in the proper RTC when the b. Munoz v. Yabut. There is forcible entry or
(c) When partition is prohibited by law (Art. 494) dispossession has lasted for more than (1) year desahucio when one is deprived of physical
(d) When the property is not subject to a physical possession of land or building by means of force,
division and to do so would render it  Jurisdictional amount of real property (20,000- intimidation, threat, strategy or stealth.
unserviceable for the use for which it is intended 50,000)
(Art. 495) c. Accion Reivindicatoria – an action for the In such cases, the possession is illegal from the
(e) When the condition imposed upon voluntary recovery of ownership (and which includes the beginning and the basic inquiry centers on who
heirs before they can demand partition has not recovery of possession) which must also be has the prior possession de facto.
yet been fulfilled (Art. 1084) brought in the proper RTC
(f) An important principle to note is that In filing forcible entry cases, the law tells us that
prescription does not run in favor of a co-owner  Jurisdictional amount of real property (20,000- two allegations are mandatory for the municipal
or co-heir against his co-owner or co-heir as long 50,000) court to acquire jurisdiction:
as there is a recognition of the co-ownership
expressly or impliedly. 3. Nature of the Proceeding: Summary first, the plaintiff must allege prior physical
possession of the property, and
XI. Forcible Entry and Unlawful Detainer Barrientos v. Rapal. Ejectment cases – forcible entry and second, he must also allege that he was deprived
(FEUD) (Rule 70) unlawful detainer – are summary proceedings designed to of his possession by any of the means provided
provide expeditious means to protect actual possession or for in Sec. 1, Rule 70 of the Rules of Court, i.e.,
A. Basic Concept the right to possession of the property involved. The only by force, intimidation, threat, strategy, or
question that the courts resolve in ejectment proceedings stealth.
 In cases of FEUD, the Rules on Summary is: who is entitled to the physical possession of the
Procedure and not the ordinary rules of premises, that is, to the possession de facto and not to the It is also settled that in the resolution thereof,
procedure shall apply in the conduct of its possession de jure. It does not even matter if a party's title what is important is determining who is entitled
proceedings. to the property is questionable. to the physical possession of the property.
 Hearing is not necessary and the MeTC/MTC Indeed, any of the parties who can prove prior
shall decide the case on the basis of the position In an unlawful detainer case, the sole issue for resolution possession de facto may recover such
papers, affidavits, and other evidence submitted is physical or material possession of the property involved, possession even from the owner himself since
by the parties. independent of any claim of ownership by any of the such cases proceed independently of any claim
parties. Where the issue of ownership is raised by any of of ownership and the plaintiff needs merely to
1. Ejectment Defined the parties, the courts may pass upon the same in order to prove prior possession de facto and undue
determine who has the right to possess the property. The deprivation thereof.
Bouvier’s Law Dictionary. Ejectment is a form of action by adjudication is, however, merely provisional and would
which possessory titles to corporeal hereditaments may be not bar or prejudice an action between the same parties c. Union Bank v. Maunlad Homes, Inc. Unlawful
tried and possession obtained (or) which lies to regain the involving title to the property. Detainer - is an action to recover possession of
possession of real property, with damages for the illegal real property from one who unlawfully withholds
detention. 4. Issue Which May be Raised in Ejectment Cases possession after the expiration or termination of
his right to hold possession under any contract,
2. Kinds of Action to Recover Possession of Real Sps. Sioson v. Heirs of Avencena. In ejectment case, the express or implied.
Property only issue for resolution is the question of who is entitled
to the physical or material possession of the property in The possession of the defendant in unlawful
a. Accion Interdictal – an ejectment proceeding dispute detainer is originally legal but became illegal due
which may be either that for FE (detentacion) or to expiration or termination of the right to
unlawful detainer (desahucio), which is summary 5. Kinds of Ejectment Suit possess.
 Under Sec. 1, Rule 70 of the Rules of Court, the possession) and accion reivindicatoria (for the recovery of XPN: Rule 4, Sec. 4. Where the parties have validly agreed
action must be filed "within one (1) year after ownership) are plenary actions. in writing before the filing of the action on the exclusive
the unlawful deprivation or withholding of venue thereof
possession The purpose of allowing actions for forcible entry and
unlawful detainer to be decided in summary proceedings Union Bank v. Maunlad Homes. In Villanueva v. Judge
6. Distinctions Between Forcible Entry and is to provide for a peaceful, speedy and expeditious means Mosqueda, etc., et al., the Court upheld the validity of a
Unlawful Detainer of preventing an alleged illegal possessor of property from stipulation in a contract providing for a venue for
unjustly taking and continuing his possession during the ejectment actions other than that stated in the Rules of
Forcible Entry Unlawful Detainer long period it would take to properly resolve the issue of Court. Since the unlawful detainer action is connected
The possession of the land The possession of the possession de jure or ownership, thereby ensuring the with the contract, Union Bank rightfully filed the complaint
by the defendant is defendant is inceptively maintenance of peace and order in the community; with the MeTC of Makati City.
unlawful from the lawful but it becomes illegal otherwise, the party illegally deprived of possession might
beginning as he acquires by reason of the take the law in his hands and seize the property by force 11. Who May Institute Ejectment Case? When?
possession thereof by FISTS termination of his right to and violence.
the possession of the Rule 70, Sec. 1. Who may institute proceedings, and
property under his contract An ejectment case cannot be a substitute for a full-blown when — Subject to the provisions of the next succeeding
with the plaintiff. trial for the purpose of determining rights of possession or section:
Does not require previous Plaintiff must first make ownership.
demand for the defendant such demand, which is (1) a person deprived of the possession of any land
to vacate the premises jurisdictional in nature 8. Nature of Unlawful Detainer or building by force, intimidation, threat,
Plaintiff must prove that he The plaintiff need not have strategy, or stealth, or a lessor, vendor, vendee,
was in prior physical been in prior physical Ermitano v. Paglas. In unlawful detainer, one unlawfully or
possession of the premises possession withholds possession thereof after the expiration or (2) other person against whom the possession of
until he was deprived termination of his right to hold possession under any any land or building is unlawfully withheld after
thereof by the defendant contract, express or implied. the expiration or termination of the right to hold
The 1 year period is 1 year is counted from the possession, by virtue of any contract, express or
generally counted from the date of last demand In such case, the possession was originally lawful but implied, or the legal representatives or assigns of
date of entry on the land became unlawful by the expiration or termination of the any such lessor, vendor, vendee, or other
right to possess; hence, the issue of rightful possession is person, may, at any time within one (1) year
7. Distinctions Between Forcible Entry and Accion decisive for, in such action, the defendant is in actual after such unlawful deprivation or withholding of
Publiciana possession and the plaintiff’s cause of action is the possession, bring an action in the proper
termination of the defendant’s right to continue in Municipal Trial Court against the person or
Forcible Entry Accion Publiciana possession. persons unlawfully withholding or depriving of
Should be filed within 1 Filed 1 year after the possession, or any person or persons claiming
year from the unlawful unlawful dispossession of 9. What Court Has Jurisdiction over an Action for under them, for the restitution of such
dispossession of the real the real property FEUD? possession, together with damages and costs.
property (1a)
Concerned with the issue of The subject of the litigation  MTC/MeTC/MCTC (Rules on Summary
the right to the physical is the better right to Procedure) a. Essential Requisites for the Court’s Acquisition
possession of real property possession over the real of Jurisdiction over FE case
property 10. Venue in FEUD
1. The plaintiffs must alleges prior physical
Filed in the municipal trial A plenary action in the RTC
court and is summary  Place where the real property is situated possession of the property
2. They must assert that they were deprived
action
GR: Venue in FEUD is the MTC of the municipality or city possession either by FISTS
wherein the real property involved is situated 3. The action must be filed within 1 year from the
Jose v. Alfuerto. Because they only resolve issues of
time the owners or legal possessors learned of
possession de facto, ejectment actions are summary in
their deprivation of the physical possession of
nature, while accion publiciana (for the recovery of
the property
Nunez v. SLTEAS. As it is not essential that the complaint Abad v. Farrales. It is of course not enough that the Umale v. ASB Realty Corp. What petitioners argue is that
should expressly employ the language of the law, it is allegations of the complaint make out a case for forcible the corporate officer of ASB Realty is incapacitated to file
considered a sufficient compliance of the requirement entry. The plaintiff must also be able to prove his this suit to recover a corporate property because ASB
where the facts are set up showing that dispossession took allegations. Realty has a duly-appointed rehabilitation receiver.
place under said conditions.
He has to prove that he had prior physical possession for There is no denying that ASB Realty, as the owner of the
The one-year period within which to bring an action for that gives him the security that entitled him to remain in leased premises, is the real party-in-interest in the
forcible entry is generally counted from the date of actual the property until a person with a better right lawfully unlawful detainer suit. Real party-in-interest is defined as
entry on the land, except that when the entry is through ejects him. "the party who stands to be benefited or injured by the
stealth, the one-year period is counted from the time the judgment in the suit, or the party entitled to the avails of
plaintiff learned thereof. d. Mere Tolerance or Permission to Occupy the suit.”
Without Contract Can be the Subject of
b. Essential Requisites for the Court’s Acquisition Ejectment After Demand to Vacate There is no allegation whatsoever in this case that the SEC
of Ownership in UD gave ASAB Realty’s rehabilitation receiver the exclusive
Monasterio-Pe v. Sps. Tong. A person who occupies the right to sue.
Terana v. Desagun. Essential requisites of UE: land of another at the latter's tolerance or permission,
without any contract between them, is necessarily bound 12. Lessor to Proceed Against Lessee After Demand
1. The fact of lease by virtue of a contract, express by an implied promise that he will vacate upon demand,
or implied; failing which a summary action for ejectment is the proper Rule 70, Sec. 2. Lessor to proceed against lessee only
2. The expiration or termination of the possessor's remedy against him. after demand — Unless otherwise stipulated, such action
right to hold possession; by the lesser shall be commenced only:
3. Withholding by the lessee of possession of the Under Sec. 1, Rule 70, the one-year period within which a
land or building after the expiration or complaint for unlawful detainer can be filed should be (1) after demand to pay or
termination of the right to possess; counted from the date of demand, because only upon the (2) comply with the conditions of the lease and to
4. Letter of demand upon lessee to pay the rental lapse of that period does the possession become unlawful vacate is made upon the lessee, or
or comply with the terms of the lease and vacate (3) by serving written notice of such demand upon
the premises; and e. Task of Evicting Settlers is on the Lot Owners the person found on the premises if no person
5. The filing of the action within one year from the be found thereon, and the lessee fails to comply
date of the last demand received by the Edgewater Realty Dev. Inc. v. MWSS. The task of evicting therewith after fifteen (15) days in the case of
defendant. the large number of settlers from its land belongs to the land or five (5) days in the case of buildings.
landowners with the assistance of the authorities.
Corpuz v. Sps. Agustin. A requisite for a valid cause of a. Failure to Pay Rentals and Expiration of Lease
action in an unlawful detainer case is that possession must The landowner would not be justified in using MWSS and as Grounds For Unlawful Detainer
be originally lawful, and such possession must have turned MWCI as tool for depriving the people on its land of the
unlawful only upon the expiration of the right to possess. water they need for drinking, washing, and sanitation, Optima Realty Corp. v. Hertz Phil. Exclusive Cars. We find
It must be shown that the possession was initially lawful; subjecting them to the diseases that absence or shortage that the RTC’s ruling upholding the ejectment of Hertz
hence, the basis of such lawful possession must be of water would cause, considering that the water from the building premises was proper. First, respondent
established. If, as in this case, the claim is that such connections were installed lawfully when the MOA was failed to pay rental arrearages and utility bills to Optima;
possession is by mere tolerance of the plaintiff, the acts of still in effect. and, second, the Contract of Lease expired without any
tolerance must be proved. request from Hertz for a renegotiation thereof at least
f. Validity of Title Cannot be Attacked in an days prior to its expiration.
c. 2 Mandatory Allegations in Forcible Entry Ejectment
13. Rule Governing Action For FEUD
1. Plaintiff must allege his prior physical possession Reyes. V. Sps. Odones. The validity of a certificate of title
of the property cannot be attacked in an action for ejectment Rule 70, Sec. 3. Summary procedure — Except in cases
2. Plaintiff must allege that he was deprived of his covered by the agricultural tenancy laws or when the law
possession by means of FISTS g. Owner of the Property Under Rehabilitation is otherwise expressly provides, all actions for forcible entry
Still the Real Party-in-Interest in an Ejectment and unlawful detainer, irrespective of the amount of
Suit in the Absence of Authority on the Receiver damages or unpaid rentals sought to be recovered, shall
be governed by the summary procedure hereunder (2) Cross-claims and compulsory counterclaims not Rule 70, Sec. 7. Effect of failure to answer — Should the
provided. asserted in the answer shall be considered defendant fail to answer the complaint within the period
barred. above provided, the court:
14. Pleadings Allowed in an Action for FEUD
The answer to counterclaims or cross-claims shall be (1) motu proprio or on motion of the plaintiff, shall
Sec. 4. Pleadings allowed — The only pleadings allowed to served and filed within ten (10) days from service of the render judgment as may be warranted by the
be filed are: answer in which they are pleaded. (5 RSP) facts alleged in the complaint and limited to
what is prayed for therein.
(a) the complaint, a. Objections and Defenses Must be Seasonably (2) The court may in its discretion reduce the
(b) compulsory counterclaim and Raised amount of damages and attorney's fees claimed
(c) cross-claim pleaded in the answer, for being excessive or otherwise unconscionable,
(d) and the answers thereto. Estel v. Diego and Diego. A review of the records shows without prejudice to the applicability of Sec. 3
that petitioner did not raise the issue of jurisdiction or (c), Rule 9 if there are two or more defendants.
All pleadings shall be verified. venue in her Answer filed with the MTCC. The CA correctly
held that even if the geographical location of the subject 18. Preliminary Conference
15. Action of the Court on the Complaint property was not alleged in the Complaint, petitioner
failed to seasonably object to the same in her Affirmative Rule 70, Sec. 8. Preliminary conference; appearance of
Rule 70, Sec. 5. Action on complaint — The court may, Defense, and even actively participated in the proceedings parties — Not later than thirty (30) days after the last
from an examination of the allegations in the complaint before the MTCC. In fact, petitioner did not even raise this answer is filed, a preliminary conference shall be held. The
and such evidence as may be attached thereto: issue in her appeal filed with the RTC. Thus, she is already provisions of Rule 18 on pre-trial shall be applicable to the
estopped from raising the said issue in the CA or before preliminary conference unless inconsistent with the
(1) dismiss the case outright on any of the grounds this Court. Estoppel sets in when a party participates in all provisions of this Rule.
for the dismissal of a civil action which are stages of a case before challenging the jurisdiction of the
apparent therein. lower court. The failure of the plaintiff to appear in the preliminary
(2) If no ground for dismissal is found, it shall conference shall:
forthwith issue summons One cannot belatedly reject or repudiate the lower court's
decision after voluntarily submitting to its jurisdiction, just (1) be cause for the dismissal of his complaint.
a. What is the duty of the Court Upon Receipt of to secure affirmative relief against one's opponent or after (2) The defendant who appears in the absence of
the Complaint? failing to obtain such relief. the plaintiff shall be entitled to judgment on his
counterclaim in accordance with the next
Rules on Summary Procedure. The first duty of the judge The Court has, time and again, frowned upon the preceding Sec..
upon the filing of the case for ejectment is to examine the undesirable practice of a party submitting a case for (3) All cross-claims shall be dismissed. (7, RSP)
allegations in the complaint and the evidence appended to decision and then accepting the judgment, only if
it, and to dismiss the case outright on any of the grounds favorable, and attacking it for lack of jurisdiction when If a sole defendant shall fail to appear:
apparent for the dismissal of the action. adverse.
(1) the plaintiff shall likewise be entitled to
16. Filing of an Answer b. Affirmative and Negative Defenses Not Raised judgment in accordance with the next preceding
Deemed Waived Sec..
Rule 70, Sec. 6. Answers — Within ten (10) days from (2) This procedure shall not apply where one of two
service of summons, the defendant shall file his: Naguiat v. Capellan. Sec. 5 of the Rules on Summary or more defendants sued under a common cause
Procedure, in part, states that affirmative and negative of action defense shall appear at the preliminary
(a) answer to the complaint and defenses not pleaded in the answer shall be deemed conference.
(b) serve a copy thereof on the plaintiff. waived, except for lack of jurisdiction over the subject
matter. No postponement of the preliminary conference shall be
(1) ffirmative and negative defenses not pleaded granted except for highly meritorious grounds and without
therein shall be deemed waived, except lack of 17. Effect of Failure to File an Answer prejudice to such sanctions as the court in the exercise of
jurisdiction over the subject matter. sound discretion may impose on the movant. (n)
 a. Reason for non-allowance of Postponement of 5. Such other matters intended to expedite the Rule 70, Sec. 12. Referral for conciliation — Cases
Preliminary Conference disposition of the case. (8, RSP) requiring referral for conciliation, where there is no
showing of compliance with such requirement, shall:
Naguiat v. Capellan. Sound practice requires a judge to 20. Submission of Affidavit and Position Paper
remain, at all times, in full control of the proceedings in his (1) be dismissed without prejudice, and
sala and to adopt a firm policy against improvident Rule 70, Sec. 10. Submission of affidavits and position (2) may be revived only after that requirement shall
postponements – allowing postponements during the papers — Within ten (10) days from receipt of the order have been complied with. (18a, RSP)
preliminary conference stage of the case is not only highly mentioned in the next preceding Sec., the parties:
inappropriate but well-nigh improvident. 23. Prohibited Pleadings and Motions
(1) shall submit the affidavits of their witnesses and
b. Effect if Defendant Failed to Appear in the (2) other evidence on the factual issues defined in Rule 70, Sec. 13. Prohibited pleadings and motions — The
Preliminary Conference; Effect if There are Two the order, together with their position papers following petitions, motions, or pleadings shall not be
(2) or more defendants setting forth the law and the facts relied upon by allowed:
them.
Soriente v. The Estate of Concepcion. If a sole defendant 1. Motion to dismiss the complaint except on the
shall fail to appear in the preliminary conference, the a. Failure to Submit Position Paper Does Not Bar ground of lack of jurisdiction over the subject
plaintiff shall be entitled to judgment in accordance with the Court to Render Judgment matter, or failure to comply with Sec. 12;
Section 6 of the Rule, that is, the court shall render 2. Motion for a bill of particulars;
judgment as may be warranted by the facts alleged in the Terana v. Desagun. The failure of one party to submit his 3. Motion for new trial, or for reconsideration of a
Complaint and limited to what is prayed for therein. position paper does not bar at all MTC from issuing a judgment, or for reopening of trial;
However, "[t]his Rule (Sec. 7) shall not apply where one of judgment on the ejectment complaint 4. Petition for relief from judgment;
two or more defendants sued under a common cause of 5. Motion for extension of time to file pleadings,
action, who had pleaded a common defense, shall appear 21. Rendition of Judgment affidavits or any other paper;
at the preliminary conference." 6. Memoranda;
Rule 70, Sec. 11. Period for rendition of judgment — 7. Petition for certiorari, mandamus, or prohibition
The afore-quoted provision does not apply in case where against any interlocutory order issued by the
the petitioner is not a co-defendant in the same case but (a) Within thirty (30) days after receipt of the court;
actually sued in a separate case for ejectment. affidavits and position papers, or 8. Motion to declare the defendant in default;
(b) the expiration of the period for filing the same, 9. Dilatory motions for postponement;
19. Record of Preliminary Conference the court shall render judgment. 10. Reply;
11. Third-party complaints;
Rule 70, Sec. 9. Record of preliminary conference — However, should the court find it necessary to clarify 12. Interventions. (19a, RSP)
Within five (5) days after the termination of the certain material facts, during the said period:
preliminary conference, the court shall issue an order a. Purpose of the Prohibition
stating the matters taken up therein, including but not (1) issue an order specifying the matters to be
limited to: clarified, and Sps. Edillo v. Sps. Dulpina. The Revised Rules on Summary
(2) require the parties to submit affidavits or other Procedure applies to prevent undue delays in the
1. Whether the parties have arrived at an amicable evidence on the said matters within ten (10) disposition of cases; to achieve this end, the filing of
settlement, and if so, the terms thereof; days from receipt of said order. certain pleadings is prohibited.
2. The stipulations or admissions entered into by (3) Judgment shall be rendered within fifteen (15)
the parties; days after the receipt of the last affidavit or the 24. Affidavits
3. Whether, on the basis of the pleadings and the expiration of the period for filing the same.
stipulations and admission made by the parties, (4) The court shall not resort to the foregoing Rule 70, Sec. 14. Affidavits — The affidavits required to be
judgment may be rendered without the need of procedure just to gain time for the rendition of submitted under this Rule shall state:
further proceedings, in which event the the judgment. (n)
judgment shall be rendered within thirty (30) (1) only facts of direct personal knowledge of the
days from issuance of the order; 22. Referral for Conciliation affiants which are admissible in evidence, and
4. A clear specification of material facts which (2) shall show their competence to testify to the
remain converted; and matters stated therein.
 was lost through force, intimidation, threat, strategy, and In an unlawful detainer case, the sole issue for resolution
A violation of this requirement may: stealth, so that it behooves the court to restore possession is the physical or material possession of the property
regardless of title or ownership. involved, independent of any claim of ownership by any of
(1) subject the party or the counsel who submits the the party litigants.
same to disciplinary action, and c. Mere Allegation of Ownership Not Enough To
(2) Shall be cause to expunge the inadmissible Deprive Court of Jurisdiction Where the issue of ownership is raised by any of the
affidavit or portion thereof from the record parties, the courts may pass upon the same in order to
Sps. Alcantara v. Nido. The MTC cannot be deprived of determine who has the right to possess the property.
25. Preliminary Injunction jurisdiction over an ejectment case based merely on the
assertion of ownership over the litigated property, and the The adjudication is, however, merely provisional and
Rule 70m Sec. 15. Preliminary injunction — The court may underlying reason for this rule is to prevent any party from would not bar or prejudice an action between the same
grant preliminary injunction, in accordance with the trifling with the summary nature of an ejectment suit. parties involving title to the property.
provisions of Rule 58 hereof, to prevent the defendant
from committing further acts of dispossession against the d. Ejectment Based on Ownership Issue of 27. Judgment
plaintiff. Possession May be Resolved
Rule 70, Sec. 17. Judgment — If after trial court finds that
A possessor deprived of his possession through forcible Macaslang v. Zamora. Where the cause of action in an the allegations of the complaint are true, it shall render
from the filing of the complaint, present a motion in the ejectment suit is based on ownership of the property, the judgment in favor of the plaintiff for:
action for forcible entry or unlawful detainer for the defense that the defendant retained title or ownership is a
issuance of a writ of preliminary mandatory injunction to proper subject for determination by the MTC but only for (1) the restitution of the premises,
restore him in his possession. The court shall decide the the purpose of adjudicating the rightful possessor of the (2) the sum justly due as arrears of rent or as
motion within thirty (30) days from the filing thereof. (3a) property. reasonable compensation for the use and
occupation of the premises,
26. Resolving the Defense of Ownership e. Issue is an Ejectment Case is Only Material (3) attorney's fees and costs.
Possession of Property (4) If it finds that said allegations are not true, it
Rule 70, Sec. 16. Resolving defense of ownership — When shall render judgment for the defendant to
the defendant raises the defense of ownership in his Santos v. NSO. In ejectment suits, the only issue for recover his costs.
pleadings and the question of possession cannot be resolution is the physical or material possession of the (5) If a counterclaim is established, the court shall
resolved without deciding the issue of ownership, the property involved, independent of any claim of ownership render judgment for the sum found in arrears
issue of ownership shall be resolved only to determine the by any of the party litigants." However, "[i]n cases where from either party and award costs as justice
issue of possession defendant raises the question of ownership in the requires. (6a)
pleadings and the question of possession cannot be
a. Defense of Ownership in an Ejectment Suit resolved without deciding the issue of ownership, the a. Restoration of Possession; Purpose of the
court may proceed and resolve the issue of ownership but Action
Macaslang v. Renato and Melbazamora. Where the cause only for the purpose of determining the issue of
of action in an ejectment suit is based on ownership of the possession. Pagadora v. Ilao. One who is guilty of a forcible entry or of
property, the defense that the defendant retained title or detainer after a peaceable but unlawful entry, is therefore
ownership is a proper subject for determination by the f. In Ejectment Issues to be Resolved is Possession not only subject to indictment but is also required to
MTC but only for the purpose of adjudicating the rightful de facto not de jure: Resolution of the Issue is restore possession to the party from whom the property
possessor of the property. Not Conclusive was taken or detained.

b. Determination of Issue of Prior Physical Ermitano v. Paglas. At the outset, it bears to reiterate the The law is geared towards protecting the person who in
Possession Not Title is Important in an Action settled rule that the only question that the courts resolve fact has actual possession; and in case of a controverted
for Forcible Entry in ejectment proceedings is: who is entitled to the physical proprietary right, the law requires the parties to preserve
possession of the premises, that is, to the possession de the status quo until one or the other sees fit to invoke the
Munoz v. Yabut, Jr. Title is never in issue in a forcible entry facto and not to the possession de jure. decision of a court of competent jurisdiction upon the
case, the court should base its decision on who had prior question of ownership.
physical possession. The main thing to be proven in an It does not even matter if a party's title to the property is
action for forcible entry is prior possession and that same questionable. b. Right of the Plaintiff to Claim for Damages
Antioquia Dev. Corp. v. Rahacal. There is nothing in premises, thus forcing Optima to file the instant case in Union Bank of the Phil. v. Maunlad Homes. The authority
existing laws and procedural rules that obliges a plaintiff in order to protect its rights and interest. granted to the MeTC to preliminarily resolve the issue of
an unlawful detainer or forcible entry case to pay ownership to determine the issue of possession ultimately
compensation or financial assistance to defendants whose 28. Judgment Conclusive Only on Issue of allows it to interpret and enforce the contract or
occupation was either illegal from the beginning or had Possession Not Ownership agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant. To
become such when they refused to vacate the subject deny the MeTC jurisdiction over a complaint merely
premises upon demand by the owner or person having Rule 70, Sec. 18. Judgment conclusive only on possession; because the issue of possession requires the
better right to its possession. On the contrary, our Rules of not conclusive in actions involving title or ownership — interpretation of a contract will effectively rule out
Court expressly recognizes the right of such plaintiff to The judgment rendered in an action for forcible entry or unlawful detainer as a remedy. As stated, in an action for
claim for damages arising from the unlawful deprivation of detainer shall be: unlawful detainer, the defendant’s right to possess the
physical possession. property may be by virtue of a contract, express or
(1) conclusive with respect to the possession only implied; corollarily, the termination of the defendant’s
c. Reasonable Compensation for the Use and and right to possess would be governed by the terms of the
Occupaton of the Premises in Favor of the (2) shall in no wise bind the title or affect the same contract. Interpretation of the contract between the
Plaintiff Not an Unjust Enrichment ownership of the land or building. plaintiff and the defendant is inevitable because it is the
(3) Such judgment shall not bar an action between contract that initially granted the defendant the right to
Antioquia Dev. Corp. v. Rahacal. There is likewise no merit the same parties respecting title to the land or possess the property; it is this same contract that the
in respondents’ assertion that the payment of reasonable building. plaintiff subsequently claims was violated or extinguished,
compensation for the use and occupation of the property terminating the defendant’s right to possess. We ruled in
after demand to vacate was made by petitioners would The judgment or final order shall be appealable to the Sps. Refugia v. CA that –
unjustly enrich the latter. Respondents themselves appropriate Regional Trial Court which shall decide the
admitted they were able to build houses on the land and same on the basis of the entire record of the proceedings where the resolution of the issue of possession hinges on a
stayed there for several years without paying any rental had in the court of origin and such memoranda and/or determination of the validity and interpretation of the
even when Mariano Antioquia, Sr. already bought the briefs as may be submitted by the parties or required by document of title or any other contract on which the claim
land. And yet, respondents still ask to be compensated for the Regional Trial Court. of possession is premised, the inferior court may likewise
their long years of occupying the premises rent-free while pass upon these issues.
its owners could not make use of the same throughout a. Ruling on the Issue of Ownership Provisional
such period. The MeTC’s ruling on the rights of the parties based on its
Heirs of Olarte v. Olarte. An ejectment case is designed to interpretation of their contract is, of course, not
A plaintiff adjudged to have the better right to possession restore, through summary proceedings, the physical conclusive, but is merely provisional and is binding only
in an ejectment case cannot be said to have been unjustly possession of any land or building to one who has been with respect to the issue of possession.
enriched by the court’s award of reasonable compensation illegally deprived of such possession, without prejudice to
for the use and occupation of the premises the settlement of the parties’ opposing claims of juridical 29. Immediate Execution and Staying the Judgment
possession in appropriate proceedings. Any ruling on the
d. Award of Monthly Compensation and question of ownership is only provisional and made for the Sec. 19. Immediate execution of judgment; how to stay
Attorney’s Fees sole purpose of determining who is entitled to possession same — If judgment is rendered against the defendant,
de facto. execution shall issue immediately upon motion unless:
Optima Realty Corp. v. Hertz Phil. Exclusive Cars. As to
the award of monthly compensation, we find that Hertz Certainly, a judgment in an ejectment case could only (1) an appeal has been perfected and
should pay adequate compensation to Optima, since the resolve the question as to who has a better right to (2) the defendant to stay execution files a sufficient
former continued to occupy the leased premises even possess the subject property but definitely, it could not supersedeas bond, approved by the Municipal
after the expiration of the lease contract. As the lease conclusively determine whether petitioners are entitled to Trial Court and executed in favor of the plaintiff
price during the effectivity of the lease contract was the award under the ZIP or ascertain if respondents are to pay the rents, damages, and costs accruing
P54,200 per month, we find it to be a reasonable award. disqualified beneficiaries. down to the time of the judgment appealed
from, and
Finally, we uphold the award of attorney's fees in the b. Court May Give Effect on the Stipulation of the (3) unless, during the pendency of the appeal, he
amount of P30,000 and judicial costs in the light of Hertz's Contract by the Parties in an Ejectment Case deposits with the appellate court the amount of
unjustifiable and unlawful retention of the leased rent due from time to time under the contract, if
any, as determined by the judgment of the
 Municipal Trial Court. In the absence of a judgment of the Regional Trial Court disposing of July 6, 2011. For instituting a frivolous appeal manifestly
contract, he shall deposit with the Regional Trial the appeal. (8a) intended for delay, the Court imposes treble costs against
Court the reasonable value of the use and ALPA-PCM, Inc., to be paid by its counsel, Atty. Guillermo
occupation of the premises for the preceding a. Requirements for Judgment to be Stayed R. Bandonil, Jr.
month or period at the rate determined by the
judgment of the lower court on or before the Aznar Brothers Realty Co. v. CA. After the judgment has d. Equity May be a Basis for the Suspension of
tenth day of each succeeding month or period. been rendered against defendant, the plaintiff upon Ejectment Case
(4) The supersedeas bond shall be transmitted by motion may move for immediate execution, unless stayed
the Municipal Trial Court, with the papers, to the by the filing of the defendants, perfection of his appeal; Samonte v. Century Savings Bank. Only in rare instances is
clerk of the Regional Trial Court to which the filing of supersedeas bond; periodical deposit of the suspension allowed to await the outcome of a pending
action is appealed. monthly rentals or reasonable value for the use and civil action.
occupation of the premises falling due during the
All amounts so paid to the appellate court shall be pendency of the appeal In Vda. de Legaspi v. Avendaño, and Amagan v. Marayag
we ordered the suspension of the ejectment proceedings
(1) deposited with said court or authorized b. Execution of Decisions in Ejectment Cases: on considerations of equity. We explained that the
government depositary bank, and Available Even Before MR by Losing Party But ejectment of petitioners therein would mean a demolition
(2) shall be held there until the final disposition of Not After of their house and would create confusion, disturbance,
the appeal, unless the court, by agreement of inconvenience, and expense.
the interested parties, or ALPA-PCM v. Bulasao. ALPA-PCM misconstrues our ruling
(3) in the absence of reasonable grounds of in JP Latex Technology, Inc. v. Ballons Granger Balloons, Needlessly, the court would be wasting much time and
opposition to a motion to withdraw, or for Inc.12 The ruling does not prevent the prevailing party effort by proceeding to a stage wherein the outcome
justifiable reasons, shall decree otherwise. from filing a motion for execution until after the adverse would at best be temporary but the result of enforcement
party has filed a motion for reconsideration of the would be permanent, unjust and probably irreparable.
Should the defendant fail to make the payments above judgment. The RTC, however, is precluded from acting on
prescribed from time to time during the pendency of the the motion for execution until it has resolved the motion 30. Flow Chart on Appeal (from the top)
appeal, the appellate court, upon motion of the plaintiff, for reconsideration. In the present case, the RTC heeded
and upon proof of such failure: this rule, as it granted the Bulasaos’ motion for execution Judgment of the MTC/MCTC/MeTC
only after it has resolved to deny ALPA-PCM’s motion for Appeal to the RTC within 15 days from Notice of
(1) shall order the execution of the judgment reconsideration of its decision. Judgment by Notice of Appeal (Plus Appeal Docket Fee
appealed from with respect to the restoration of and Supersedeas Bond)
possession, c. Sanctions for Frivolous Appeals Filing of MR within 15 days from Notice of Judgment
(2) but such execution shall not be a bar to the Petition for Review with the CA under Rule 42 within 15
appeal taking its course until the final disposition ALPA-PCM v. Bulasao. Notwithstanding the rule’s Days from Notice of Judgment or Notice of Denial of the
thereof on the merits. objective and clear mandate, losing litigants and their MR and ask for the issuance of TRO or Injunction
lawyers are determined to stall execution by misusing MR within 15 days from Notice of Judgment under Rule
After the case is decided by the Regional Trial Court: judicial remedies, putting forth arguments that, by simple 52
logic, can easily be resolved by a basic reading of the File a Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 to
(1) any money paid to the court by the defendant applicable laws and rules. When judicial remedies are the SC within 15 days from notice of judgment or from
for purposes of the stay of execution shall be misused to delay the resolution of cases, the Rules of denial of the MR
disposed of in accordance with the provisions of Court authorizes the imposition of sanctions. Section 3,
the judgment of the Regional Trial Court. Rule 142 of the Rules of Court states: 31. Preliminary Mandatory Injunction Pending
(2) In any case wherein it appears that the Appeal
defendant has been deprived of the lawful Sec. 3. Costs when appeal frivolous.—Where an action or
possession of land or building pending the an appeal is found to be frivolous, double or treble costs Rule 70, Sec. 20. Preliminary mandatory injunction in
appeal by virtue of the execution of the may be imposed on the plaintiff or appellant, which shall case of appeal — Upon motion of the plaintiff, within ten
judgment of the Municipal Trial Court, damages be paid by his attorney, if so ordered by the court. (10) days from the perfection of the appeal to the Regional
for such deprivation of possession and Trial Court, the latter may issue a writ of preliminary
restoration of possession and restoration of WHEREFORE, the Court resolves to DENY the ALPA-PCM,
possession may be allowed the defendant in the Inc.’s motion for reconsideration of our Resolution dated
mandatory injunction to restore the plaintiff in possession what specific act or thing is forbidden or c. In-court contempt – disrupt the court
if the court is satisfied that: required proceedings and for which a hearing and a
formal presentation of evidence are dispensed.
(1) the defendant's appeal is frivolous or dilatory or b. Roxas v. Tipon. Contempt of court is a defiance d. Out of court contempt – require normal
(2) that the appeal of the plaintiff is prima facie of the authority, justice or dignity of the court; adversary procedures, is drawn for the purpose
meritorious. (9a) such conduct as tends to bring the authority and of prescribing what procedure must attend the
administration of the law into disrespect or to exercise the court’s authority to deal with
32. Decision of the RTC Immediately Executory interfere with or prejudice parties-litigant or contempt.
their witnesses during litigation.
Rule 70, Sec. 21. Immediate execution on appeal to Court 4. Nature of Contempt Proceedings: Criminal and
of Appeals or Supreme Court — The judgment of the The asseverations made by petitioners to justify Civil
Regional Trial Court against the defendant shall be their refusal to allow inspection or audit were
immediately executory, without prejudice to a further rejected by the trial court. Lorenzo Shipping Corp. v. Distribution Management
appeal that may be taken therefrom Assoc. of the Phil. Proceedings for contempt are sui
c. Lorenzo Shipping Corp. v. Distribution generis, in nature criminal, but may be resorted to in civil
XII. Contempt (Rule 71) Management Assoc. of the Phil. Contempt of as well as criminal actions, and independently of any
court has been defined as a willful disregard or action. They are of two classes, the criminal or punitive,
1. Contempt Defined disobedience of a public authority. In its broad and the civil or remedial.
sense, contempt is a disregard of, or
a. Contempt – is a willful disregard or disobedience disobedience to, the rules or orders of a A criminal contempt consists in conduct that is directed
b. In its broad sense, contempt constitutes a legislative or judicial body or an interruption of against the authority and dignity of a court or of a judge
disobedience to the court by acting in opposition its proceedings by disorderly behavior or acting judicially, as in unlawfully assailing or discrediting
to its authority, justice and dignity insolent language in its presence or so near the authority and dignity of the court or judge, or in doing
c. in its restricted sense, contempt comprehends a thereto as to disturb its proceedings or to impair a duly forbidden act
despising of the authority, justice or dignity of a the respect due to such a body. In its restricted
court and more usual sense, contempt comprehends a A civil contempt consists in the failure to do something
despising of the authority, justice, or dignity of a ordered to be done by a court or judge in a civil case for
2. Contempt of Court Defined court. the benefit of the opposing party therein.

a. Rivulet Agro-Industrial Corp. v. Parungao. The phrase contempt of court is generic, It is at times difficult to determine whether the
Contempt of court is defined as a disobedience embracing within its legal signification a variety proceedings are civil or criminal. In general, the character
to the court by acting in opposition to its of different acts. of the contempt of whether it is criminal or civil is
authority, justice, and dignity, and signifies not determined by the nature of the contempt involved,
only a willful disregard of the court’s order, but d. Halili v. Court of Industrial Relations. Such regardless of the cause in which the contempt arose, and
such conduct which tends to bring the authority conduct as tends to bring the authority and by the relief sought or dominant purpose.
of the court and the administration of law into administration of the law into disrespect or to
disrepute or, in some manner, to impede the interfere with or prejudice parties litigant or The proceedings are to be regarded as criminal when the
due administration of justice. their witnesses during litigation purpose is primarily punishment, and civil when the
purpose is primarily compensatory or remedial.
To be considered contemptuous, an act must be 3. Classification of Contempt
clearly contrary to or prohibited by the order of Where the dominant purpose is to enforce compliance
the court. a. Direct contempt – committed in the presence of with an order of a court for the benefit of a party in whose
or so near the judge as to obstruct him in the favor the order runs, the contempt is civil; where the
Thus, a person cannot be punished for contempt administration of justice dominant purpose is to vindicate the dignity and authority
for disobedience of an order of the Court, unless b. Indirect contempt – consist of willfull of the court, and to protect the interests of the general
the act which is forbidden or required to be disobedience of the lawful process or order of public, the contempt is criminal.
done is clearly and exactly defined, so that there the court
can be no reasonable doubt or uncertainty as to Indeed, the criminal proceedings vindicate the dignity of
the courts, but the civil proceedings protect, preserve, and
enforce the rights of private parties and compel obedience In this case, the Court cannot sustain Judge Blancaflor’s (2) including disrespect toward the court,
to orders, judgments and decrees made to enforce such order penalizing petitioners for direct contempt on the (3) offensive personalities toward others, or
rights. basis of Tulali’s Ex-Parte Manifestation. (4) refusal to be sworn or to answer as a witness, or
(5) to subscribe an affidavit or deposition when
5. Power to Punish for Contempt Inherent in All 6. Contempt Proceedings Distinguished from lawfully required to do so, may be summarily
Courts Administrative Proceedings for Suspension of adjudged in contempt by such court and
Lawyers
Lorenzo Shipping Corp. v. Distribution Management punished by a:
Assoc. of the Phil. The power to punish for contempt is Contempt Proceedings Administrative
inherent in all courts, and need not be specifically granted Proceedings (1) fine not exceeding two thousand pesos or
by statute. It lies at the core of the administration of a designed to vindicate the deal with the fitness of the (2) imprisonment not exceeding ten (10) days, or
judicial system. authority of the court court's officer to continue both,
in that office, to preserve (3) if it be a Regional Trial Court or a court of
Indeed, there ought to be no question that courts have the and protect the court and equivalent or higher rank, or
power by virtue of their very creation to impose silence, the public from the official (4) by a fine not exceeding two hundred pesos or
respect, and decorum in their presence, submission to ministrations of persons imprisonment not exceeding one (1) day, or
their lawful mandates, and to preserve themselves and unfit or unworthy to hold both, if it be a lower court. (1a)
their officers from the approach and insults of pollution. such office
Principal Purpose: To Principal Purpose: To a. How is Direct Contempt Punished?
The power to punish for contempt essentially exists for the safeguard the functions of assure respect for orders
preservation of order in judicial proceedings and for the the court and should thus of such court by attorneys
enforcement of judgments, orders, and mandates of the be used sparingly on a who, as much as judges, Lorenzo Shipping Corp. v. Distribution Management
courts, and, consequently, for the due administration of preservative and not, on are responsible for the Assoc. of the Phil. The punishment for the first is generally
justice. the vindictive principle orderly administration of summary and immediate, and no process or evidence is
justice. necessary because the act is committed in facie curiae.
The reason behind the power to punish for contempt is The inherent power of courts to punish contempt of court
that respect of the courts guarantees the stability of their Rodriguez Tulali v. Blancaflor. It has likewise been the rule committed in the presence of the courts without further
institution; without such guarantee, the institution of the that a notice to a lawyer to show cause why he should not proof of facts and without aid of a trial is not open to
courts would be resting on a very shaky foundation. be punished for contempt cannot be considered as a question, considering that this power is essential to
notice to show cause why he should not be suspended preserve their authority and to prevent the administration
Rodriguez Tulali v. Blancaflor. The power to punish a from the practice of law, considering that they have of justice from falling into disrepute; such summary
person in contempt of court is inherent in all courts to distinct objects and for each of them a different procedure conviction and punishment accord with due process of
preserve order in judicial proceedings and to uphold the is established. law. There is authority for the view, however, that an act,
orderly administration of justice. However, judges are to constitute direct contempt punishable by summary
enjoined to exercise the power judiciously and sparingly, Contempt of court is governed by the procedures laid proceeding, need not be committed in the immediate
with utmost restraint, and with the end in view of utilizing down under Rule 71 of the Rules of Court, whereas presence of the court, if it tends to obstruct justice or to
the same for correction and preservation of the dignity of disciplinary actions in the practice of law are governed by interfere with the actions of the court in the courtroom
the court, and not for retaliation or vindictiveness. It bears file 138 and 139 thereof. itself. Also, contemptuous acts committed out of the
stressing that the power to declare a person in contempt presence of the court, if admitted by the contemnor in
of court must be exercised on the preservative, not the B. Direct Contempt open court, may be punished summarily as a direct
vindictive principle; and on the corrective, not the contempt, although it is advisable to proceed by requiring
retaliatory, idea of punishment. 1. Direct Contempt Punished Summarily the person charged to appear and show cause why he
should not be punished when the judge is without
Such power, being drastic and extraordinary in its nature, Rule 71, Sec. 1. Direct contempt punished summarily — personal knowledge of the misbehavior and is informed of
should not be resorted to unless necessary in the interest it only by a confession of the contemnor or by testimony
of justice. (1) A person guilty of misbehavior in the presence of under oath of other persons.
or so near a court as to obstruct or interrupt the
proceedings before the same, In contrast, the second usually requires proceedings less
summary than the first. The proceedings for the
punishment of the contumacious act committed outside (b) Disobedience of or resistance to a lawful writ, proceedings under statutes governing them are to be
the personal knowledge of the judge generally need the process, order, or judgment of a court, including strictly construed.
observance of all the elements of due process of law, that the act of a person who, after being
is, notice, written charges, and an opportunity to deny and dispossessed or ejected from any real property Moreover, in contempt proceedings, if the answer to the
to defend such charges before guilt is adjudged and by the judgment or process of any court of contempt charge is satisfactory, the contempt proceedings
sentence imposed. competent jurisdiction, enters or attempts or end.
induces another to enter into or upon such real
b. Nature of the Order of Direct Contempt property, for the purpose of executing acts of 2. How Indirect Contempt be Commenced
ownership or possession, or in any manner
Tan v. Judge Usman. An order of direct contempt is not disturbs the possession given to the person Rule 71, Sec. 4. How proceedings commenced —
immediately executory or enforceable – the contemner adjudged to be entitled thereto; Proceedings for indirect contempt may be initiated:
must be afforded a reasonable remedy to extricate or (c) Any abuse of or any unlawful interference with
purge himself of the contempt. the processes or proceedings of a court not (1) motu propio by the court against which the
constituting direct contempt under Sec. 1 of this contempt was committed by an order or
2. Remedy in Case of Direct Contempt Rule; (2) any other formal charge requiring the
(d) Any improper conduct tending, directly or respondent to show cause why he should not be
Rule 71, Sec. 2. Remedy therefrom — The person indirectly, to impede, obstruct, or degrade the punished for contempt.
adjudged in direct contempt by any court may not appeal administration of justice; (3) In all other cases, charges for indirect contempt
therefrom, but may avail himself of the remedies of (a) (e) Assuming to be an attorney or an officer of a shall be commenced by a verified petition with
certiorari or (b) prohibition. court, and acting as such without authority; supporting particulars and certified true copies
(f) Failure to obey a subpoena duly served; of documents or papers involved therein, and
The execution of the judgment shall be suspended (g) The rescue, or attempted rescue, of a person or upon full compliance with the requirements for
pending resolution of such petition, provided such person: property in the custody of an officer by virtue of filing initiatory pleadings for civil actions in the
an order or process of a court held by him. court concerned.
(1) files a bond fixed by the court which rendered
the judgment and But nothing in this Sec. shall be so construed as to prevent If the contempt charges arose out of or are related to a
(2) conditioned that he will abide by and perform the court from issuing process to bring the respondent principal action pending in the court, the petition for
the judgment should the petition be decided into court, or from holding him in custody pending such contempt shall:
against him. proceedings. (3a)
(1) allege that fact but said petition
C. Indirect Contempt a. Any Publication Pending a Suit Against The (2) shall be docketed,
Court, Parties, Officers is Contempt (3) heard and decided separately, unless the court
1. Indirect Contempt in its discretion orders the consolidation of the
Re: Letter of UP Law Faculty. Any publication, pending a contempt charge and the principal action for
Rule 71, Sec. 3. Indirect contempt to be punished after suit, reflecting upon the court, the jury, the parties, the joint hearing and decision. (n)
charge and hearing — officers of the court, the counsel with the jury, the parties,
the officers of the court, the counsel with reference to the a. Procedural Requisites in an Action for Indirect
(1) After a charge in writing has been filed, and suit, or tending to influence the decision of the Contempt
(2) an opportunity given to the respondent to controversy, is contempt of court and is punishable.
comment thereon within such period as may be Esperida, et. al. v. Jurado. Sec. and 4, Rule 71, specifically
fixed by the court and b. Nature of Indirect Contempt outlines the procedural requisites before the accused may
(3) to be heard by himself or counsel, a person be punished for indirect contempt.
guilty of any of the following acts may be Esperida, et. al. v. Jurado. It must be stressed, however,
punished for indirect contempt; that indirect contempt proceedings partake of the nature First, there must be an order requiring the respondent to
of a criminal prosecution; hence, strict rules that govern show cause why he should not be cited for contempt.
(a) Misbehavior of an officer of a court in the criminal prosecutions also apply to a prosecution for
performance of his official duties or in his official criminal contempt; the accused is to be afforded many of Second, the respondent must be given the opportunity to
transactions; the protections provided in regular criminal cases; and comment on the charge against him.
Third, there must be a hearing and the court must (3) but the proceedings may also be instituted in Re: Letter of UP Faculty. It is true that contumacious
investigate the charge and consider respondent's answer. such lower court subject to appeal to the speech and conduct directed against the courts does by
Regional Trial Court of such place in the same any person, WON a member of the bar, may be considered
Finally, only if found guilty will respondent be punished manner as provided in Sec. 11 of this Rule as indirect contempt under Rule 71, Sec. 3
accordingly. A charge of indirect contempt, if proven in due
4. Hearing on Bail proceedings, carry with it penal sanctions such as
The law requires that there be a charge in writing, duly imprisonment or a fine or both.
filed in court, and an opportunity given to the person Rule 71, Sec. 6. Hearing; release on bail — If the hearing is
charged to be heard by himself or counsel. What is most not ordered to be had forthwith: b. Reprimand May be Imposed by the Court in
essential is that the alleged contemner be granted an Case of Indirect Contempt
opportunity to meet the charges against him and to be (1) the respondent may be released from custody
heard in his defenses. This is due process, which must be upon filing a bond, in an amount fixed by the Phil. Guardians Brotherhood, Inc. v. COMELEC. While Rule
observed at all times. court, for his appearance at the hearing of the 71 does not provide that reprimand may be imposed on
charge. the one found guilty of indirect contempt, the Court can
b. Hearing is Required in Contempt (2) On the day set therefor, the court shall proceed impose a penalty less than what is provided under the
to investigate the charge and consider such Rules if the circumstances merit such.
Esperida, et. al. v. Jurado. Clearly, the contempt case comment, testimony or defense as the
against petitioners is still in the early stage of the respondent may make or offer Departure from government service, however, do not
proceedings. render moot and academic their liability for indirect
5. Punishment for Indirect Contempt contempt, since "contempt of court applies to all persons,
The proceedings have not reached that stage wherein the whether in or out of government.
court below has set a hearing to provide petitioners with Rule 71, Sec. 7. Punishment for indirect contempt —
the opportunity to state their defenses. The higher interest of effective and efficient
(1) If the respondent is adjudged guilty of indirect administration of justice dictates that a petition for
Verily, a hearing affords the contemner the opportunity to contempt committed against a Regional Trial contempt must proceed to its final conclusion despite the
adduce before the court documentary or testimonial Court or a court of equivalent or higher rank, he retirement of the government official or employee, more
evidence in his behalf. The hearing will also allow the court may be punished by a fine not exceeding thirty so if it involves a former member of the bench.
a more thorough evaluation of the defense of the thousand pesos or imprisonment not exceeding
contemner, including the chance to observe the accused six (6) months, or both. 6. Imprisonment Until Order Obeyed
present his side in open court and subject his defense to (2) If he is adjudged guilty of contempt committed
interrogation from the complainants or the court itself. against a lower court, he may be punished by a Rule 71, Sec. 8. Imprisonment until order obeyed —
fine not exceeding five thousand pesos or When the contempt consists in the refusal or omission to
In fine, the proper procedure must be observed and imprisonment not exceeding one (1) month, or do an act which is yet in the power of the respondent to
petitioners must be afforded full and real opportunity to both. perform, he may be imprisoned by order of the court
be heard. (3) If the contempt consists in the violation of a writ concerned until he performs it
of injunction, temporary restraining order or
3. Where to Charge status quo order, he may also be ordered to 7. Proceedings When the Party Released Fails to
make complete restitution to the party injured Answer
Rule 71, Sec. 5. Where charge to be filed — by such violation of the property involved or
such amount as may be alleged and proved. Rule 71, Sec. 9. Proceeding when party released on bail
(1) Where the charge for indirect contempt has fails to answer — When a respondent released on bail
been committed against a Regional Trial Court or The writ of execution, as in ordinary civil actions, shall fails to appear on the day fixed for the hearing, the court
a court of equivalent or higher rank, or against issue for the enforcement of a judgment imposing a fine may:
an officer appointed by it, the charge may be unless the court otherwise provides. (6a)
filed with such court. (1) issue another order of arrest or
(2) Where such contempt has been committed a. Contumacious Speech and Conduct Against the (2) may order the bond for his appearance to be
against a lower court, the charge may be filed Judge Constitute Indirect Contempt forfeited and confiscated, or both; and,
with the Regional Trial Court of the place in (3) if the bond be proceeded against, the measure
which the lower court is sitting; of damages shall be the extent of the loss or
 injury sustained by the aggrieved party by reason Robosa v. NLRC. Under Art. 218 of the Labor Code, the Sec. 2. Contents of the petition - The verified petition
of the misconduct for which the contempt NLRC (and the labor arbiters) may hold any offending party shall contain the following:
charge was prosecuted, with the costs of the in contempt, directly or indirectly, and impose appropriate
proceedings, and such recovery shall be for the penalties in accordance with law. The penalty for direct (a) The personal circumstances of the petitioner;
benefit of the party injured. contempt consists of either imprisonment or fine, the (b) The name and personal circumstances of the
(4) If there is no aggrieved party, the bond shall be degree or amount depends on whether the contempt is respondent or if the name and personal
liable and disposed of as in criminal cases. against the Commission or the labor arbiter. circumstances are unknown and uncertain, the
respondent may be described by an assumed
8. Release of the Respondent by the Court The penalty for direct contempt consists of either appellation;
imprisonment or fine, the degree or amount depends on (c) The environmental law, rule or regulation
Rule 71, Sec. 10. Court may release respondent — The whether the contempt is against the Commission or the violated or threatened to be violated, the act or
court which issued the order imprisoning a person for labor arbiter omission complained of, and the environmental
contempt may discharge him from imprisonment when it damage of such magnitude as to prejudice the
appears that public interest will not be prejudiced by his The Labor Code, however, requires the labor arbiter or the life, health or property of inhabitants in two or
release. (9a) Commission to deal with indirect contempt in the manner more cities or provinces.
prescribed under Rule 71 of the Rules of Court. (d) All relevant and material evidence consisting of
9. Review of Final Judgment or Final Order and the affidavits of witnesses, documentary
Posting of Bond for Stay Rule 71 of the Rules of Court does not require the labor evidence, scientific or other expert studies, and
arbiter or the NLRC to initiate indirect contempt if possible, object evidence;
Rule 71, Sec. 11. Review of judgment or final order; bond proceedings before the trial court. This mode is to be (e) The certification of petitioner under oath that:
for stay — The judgment or final order of a court in a case observed only when there is no law granting them (1) petitioner has not commenced any action or
of indirect contempt may be appealed to the proper court contempt powers. As is clear under Article 218(d) of the filed any claim involving the same issues in any
as in criminal cases. Labor Code, the labor arbiter or the Commission is court, tribunal or quasi-judicial agency, and no
empowered or has jurisdiction to hold the offending party such other action or claim is pending therein; (2)
But execution of the judgment or final order shall not be or parties in direct or indirect contempt. The petitioners, if there is such other pending action or claim, a
suspended until: therefore, have not improperly brought the indirect complete statement of its present status; (3) if
contempt charges against the respondents before the petitioner should learn that the same or similar
(1) a bond is filed by the person adjudged in NLRC. action or claim has been filed or is pending,
contempt, in an amount fixed by the court from petitioner shall report to the court that fact
which the appeal is taken, XIII. Other Special Civil Actions in within five (5) days therefrom; and
(2) conditioned that if the appeal be decided against Environmental Cases (f) The reliefs prayed for which may include a
him he will abide by and perform the judgment prayer for the issuance of a TEPO.
or final order. (10a) A. Writ of Kalikasan (Part III, Rule 7)
3. Where to File the Petition?
10. Contempt Against Quasi-Judicial Entities 1. Nature of Writ of Kalikasan
Sec. 3. Where to file - The petition shall be filed with the
Rule 71, Sec. 12. Contempt against quasi-judicial entities Sec. 1. Nature of the writ - The writ is a remedy available Supreme Court or with any of the stations of the Court of
— Unless otherwise provided by law, this Rule shall apply to a natural or juridical person, entity authorized by law, Appeals.
to contempt committed against persons, entities, bodies people’s organization, non-governmental organization, or
or agencies exercising quasi-judicial functions, or shall any public interest group accredited by or registered with 4. Docket Fees
have suppletory effect to such rules as they may have any government agency, on behalf of persons whose
adopted pursuant to authority granted to them by law to constitutional right to a balanced and healthful ecology is Sec. 4. No docket fees - The petitioner shall be exempt
punish for contempt. The Regional Trial Court of the place violated, or threatened with violation by an unlawful act or from the payment of docket fees.
wherein the contempt has been committed shall have omission of a public official or employee, or private
jurisdiction over such charges as may be filed therefor individual or entity, involving environmental damage of 5. Issuance of the Writ
such magnitude as to prejudice the life, health or property
a. Contempt Power of the NLRC and Labor of inhabitants in two or more cities or provinces. Sec. 5. Issuance of the writ - Within three (3) days from
Arbiters the date of filing of the petition, if the petition is sufficient
2. Contents of the Petition in form and substance, the court shall give an order:
 All defenses not raised in the return shall be deemed 12. Discovery Measures
(a) issuing the writ; and waived.
(b) requiring the respondent to file a verified return Sec. 12. Discovery Measures - A party may file a verified
as provided in Sec. 8 of this Rule. The return shall include: motion for the following reliefs:
(c) The clerk of court shall forthwith issue the writ
under the seal of the court including the (1) affidavits of witnesses, (a) Ocular Inspection; order — The motion must
issuance of a cease and desist order and other (2) documentary evidence, show that an ocular inspection order is
temporary reliefs effective until further order (3) scientific or other expert studies, and necessary to establish the magnitude of the
(4) if possible, object evidence, in support of the violation or the threat as to prejudice the life,
6. Service of Writ defense of the respondent. health or property of inhabitants in two or more
cities or provinces. It shall state in detail the
Sec. 6. How the writ is served - The writ shall: A general denial of allegations in the petition shall be place or places to be inspected. It shall be
considered as an admission thereof. supported by affidavits of witnesses having
(1) be served upon the respondent by a court officer personal knowledge of the violation or
or any person deputized by the court, who shall 9. Prohibited Pleadings and Motions threatened violation of environmental law.
retain a copy on which to make a return of
service. Sec. 9. Prohibited pleadings and motions - The following After hearing, the court may order any person in
(2) In case the writ cannot be served personally, the pleadings and motions are prohibited: possession or control of a designated land or other
rule on substituted service shall apply. property to permit entry for the purpose of inspecting or
(a) Motion to dismiss; photographing the property or any relevant object or
7. Penalty for Refusal to Issue or Serve Writ (b) Motion for extension of time to file return; operation thereon.
(c) Motion for postponement;
Sec. 7. Penalty for refusing to issue or serve the writ - A (d) Motion for a bill of particulars; The order shall specify the person or persons authorized to
clerk of court who unduly delays or refuses to issue the (e) Counterclaim or cross-claim; make the inspection and the date, time, place and manner
writ after its allowance or a court officer or deputized (f) Third-party complaint; of making the inspection and may prescribe other
person who unduly delays or refuses to serve the same (g) Reply; and conditions to protect the constitutional rights of all
shall be punished by the court for: (h) Motion to declare respondent in default. parties.

(1) Contempt 10. Effect of Failure to File Return (b) Production or inspection of documents or things;
(2) without prejudice to other civil, criminal or order – The motion must show that a production
administrative actions. Sec. 10. Effect of failure to file return - In case the order is necessary to establish the magnitude of
respondent fails to file a return, the court shall proceed to the violation or the threat as to prejudice the
8. Return of Respondent hear the petition ex parte. life, health or property of inhabitants in two or
more cities or provinces.
Sec. 8. Return of respondent; contents - Within a non- 11. Hearing on the Petition
extendible period of ten (10) days after service of the writ, After hearing, the court may order any person in
the respondent shall file a verified return which shall possession, custody or control of any designated
contain: Sec. 11. Hearing - Upon receipt of the return of the documents, papers, books, accounts, letters, photographs,
respondent, the court may: objects or tangible things, or objects in digitized or
(1) all defenses to show that respondent did not electronic form, which constitute or contain evidence
violate or threaten to violate, or (a) call a preliminary conference to simplify the relevant to the petition or the return, to produce and
(2) allow the violation of any environmental law, issues, determine the possibility of obtaining permit their inspection, copying or photographing by or on
rule or regulation or stipulations or admissions from the parties, behalf of the movant.
(3) commit any act resulting to environmental (b) and set the petition for hearing.
damage of such magnitude as to prejudice the The production order shall specify the person or persons
life, health or property of inhabitants in two or The hearing including the preliminary conference shall not authorized to make the production and the date, time,
more cities or provinces. extend beyond sixty (60) days and shall be given the same place and manner of making the inspection or production
priority as petitions for the writs of habeas corpus, amparo and may prescribe other conditions to protect the
and habeas data. constitutional rights of all parties.
 13. Contempt of Court to make periodic reports on the execution of the
final judgment; and (1) the facts with certainty, attaching thereto
Sec. 13. Contempt - The court may after hearing punish (e) Such other reliefs which relate to the right of the supporting evidence, specifying that the petition
the respondent who: people to a balanced and healthful ecology or to concerns an environmental law, rule or
the protection, preservation, rehabilitation or regulation, and
(1) refuses or unduly delays the filing of a return, or restoration of the environment, except the (2) Praying that judgment be rendered commanding
(2) who makes a false return, award of damages to individual petitioners. the respondent to do an act or series of acts
(3) or any person who disobeys or resists a lawful until the judgment is fully satisfied, and
process or order of the court for indirect 16. Appeal (3) to pay damages sustained by the petitioner by
contempt under Rule 71 of the Rules of Court. reason of the malicious neglect to perform the
Sec. 16. Appeal - Within fifteen (15) days from the date of duties of the respondent, under the law, rules or
14. Submission of the Case for Decision: Filing of notice of the adverse judgment or denial of motion for regulations.
Memoranda reconsideration, any party may appeal to the Supreme (4) The petition shall also contain a sworn
Court under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court. The appeal may certification of non-forum shopping.
Sec. 14. Submission of case for decision; filing of raise questions of fact.
memoranda - After hearing, the court shall: 3. Where to File a Petition?
17. Institution of Separate Actions
(1) issue an order submitting the case for decision. Sec. 2. Where to file the petition - The petition shall be
(2) The court may require the filing of memoranda Sec. 17. Institution of separate actions - The filing of a filed with the Regional Trial Court exercising jurisdiction
and if possible, in its electronic form, within a petition for the issuance of the writ of kalikasan shall not over the territory where the actionable neglect or
non-extendible period of thirty (30) days from preclude the filing of separate civil, criminal or omission occurred or with the Court of Appeals or the
the date the petition is submitted for decision. administrative actions. Supreme Court.

15. Rendition of Judgment XIV. Writ of Continuing Mandamus (Part III, 4. Payment of Docket Fees
Rule 8)
Sec. 15. Judgment - Within sixty (60) days from the time Sec. 3. No docket fees - The petitioner shall be exempt
the petition is submitted for decision, the court shall 1. What is continuing mandamus? from the payment of docket fees.
render judgment granting or denying the privilege of the
writ of kalikasan.  Part. III, Rule 8, Sec. 1 5. Order to Comment

The reliefs that may be granted under the writ are the 2. Filing of Petition Sec. 4. Order to comment - If the petition is sufficient in
following: form and substance, the court shall:
Sec. 1. Petition for continuing mandamus - When any
(a) Directing respondent to permanently cease and agency or instrumentality of the government or officer (1) issue the writ and
desist from committing acts or neglecting the thereof: (2) require the respondent to comment on the
performance of a duty in violation of petition within ten (10) days from receipt of a
environmental laws resulting in environmental (a) unlawfully neglects the performance of an act copy thereof.
destruction or damage; which the law specifically enjoins as a duty (3) Such order shall be served on the respondents in
(b) Directing the respondent public official, resulting from an office, trust or station in such manner as the court may direct, together
government agency, private person or entity to connection with the enforcement or violation of with a copy of the petition and any annexes
protect, preserve, rehabilitate or restore the an environmental law rule or regulation or a thereto.
environment; right therein, or
(c) Directing the respondent public official, (b) unlawfully excludes another from the use or 6. Expediting the Proceedings: TEPO
government agency, private person or entity to enjoyment of such right and there is no other
monitor strict compliance with the decision and plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the Sec. 5. Expediting proceedings; TEPO - The court in which
orders of the court; ordinary course of law, the petition is filed may:
(d) Directing the respondent public official,
government agency, or private person or entity The person aggrieved thereby may file a verified petition (1) issue such orders to expedite the proceedings,
in the proper court, alleging: and
 (2) it may also grant a TEPO for the preservation of
the rights of the parties pending such
proceedings.

7. Proceedings After Comment

Sec. 6. Proceedings after comment is filed - After the

comment is filed or the time for the filing thereof has
expired, the court may:

(1) hear the case which shall be summary in nature

or
(2) require the parties to submit memoranda.

The petition shall be resolved without delay within sixty

(60) days from the date of the submission of the petition
for resolution.

8. Rendition of Judgment

Sec. 7. Judgment - If warranted, the court shall grant the

privilege of the writ of continuing mandamus requiring
respondent to:

(1) perform an act or series of acts until the

judgment is fully satisfied and
(2) To grant such other reliefs as may be warranted
resulting from the wrongful or illegal acts of the
respondent.
(3) The court shall require the respondent to submit
periodic reports detailing the progress and
execution of the judgment, and
(4) the court may, by itself or through a
commissioner or the appropriate government
agency, evaluate and monitor compliance.
(5) The petitioner may submit its comments or
observations on the execution of the judgment.

9. Return of the Writ

Sec. 8. Return of the writ - The periodic reports submitted

by the respondent detailing compliance with the judgment
shall be contained in partial returns of the writ.

Upon full satisfaction of the judgment, a final return of the

writ shall be made to the court by the respondent. If the
court finds that the judgment has been fully implemented,
the satisfaction of judgment shall be entered in the court
docket.