DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN PETITION FOR REVIEW ON CERTIORARI and PETITION FOR CERTIORARI
As summarized by A. Dean Oscar B. Bernardo
PETITION FOR REVIEW ON CERTIORARI
under Rule 45
1. mode of appeal
2. ordinary remedy but wider in scope
3. continuation of the appellate
process of the original case
4. only questions of law are involved
5. seeks to correct errors of law as
errors of judgment
6. the appellate court exercises
appellate jurisdiction under its
power of review
7. the judgment, final order, or
resolution of the lower court is the
subject of appeal
8. lower court or judge is not
impleaded either as petitioner or
respondent
9. motion for reconsideration is not
required
10. filed within 15 days from receipt of
judge, final order, or resolution
appealed from, or if MNT or MR is
filed, within fresh period of 15 days
from receipt of order denying MNT
or MR
11. filed only before 5C
12. stays or interrupts the judgment,
final order, or resolution of the
lower court on appeal
PETITION FOR CERTIORARI under Rule 65
1. mode of review
2. extraordinary remedy but limited in
scope
3. original and independent special
civil action
4. only questions of jurisdiction are
involved
5. seeks to correct errors of jurisdiction
6. the higher court exercises original
jurisdiction under its power of
control and supervision
7. the proceedings of the lower court is
the subject of certiorari
8. lower court or judge is impleaded as
public respondent, together with
private respondent
9. motion for reconsideration is
required
10. filed within 60 days from receipt of
judgment, order (interlocutory) or
resolution, or if MNT or MR is filed,
within another 60 days from receipt
of order denying MNT or MR
11. filed either before SC, CA,
Sandiganbayan, CTA, RTC, SDC,
Comelec
12. does not stay or does not interrupt
the challenged proceedings of the
lower court where the main case is
pending, in the absence of TRO or
WPI issued by the higher court