HOW TO READ SUPREME COURT

DECISIONS
(SOURCE: PROJECT JURISPRUDENCE
-HTTPS://WWW.PROJECTJURISPRUDENCE.COM/2020/10/HOW-TO-
READ-SUPREME-COURT-DECISIONS.HTML)

Reading decisions of the Supreme Court (pieces of jurisprudence) is one

of the main themes in the life of normal law students. The others are
recitations, examinations, textbooks, codals and bad grades.

The suggestion below is only one of the many techniques in reading

jurisprudence. It may not work for everyone but it has been used and has
shown positive results among members of Project Jurisprudence -
Philippines. This suggestion is called "reverse reading" because it starts
from the bottom, proceeds to the middle of the case and ends at the first
parts thereof. The suggestion is as follows:

1. Know the main parts of a decision.

2. Read the fallo [Spanish, meaning ruling, decision, judgment;
particularly it is the dispositive portion of the decision] first.
3. Identify the laws involved.
4. Read the decision or ruling of the Court.
5. Read the factual antecedents, if still needed. [in the course of your
readings as law students, you may sometimes realize that you are
already able to obtain the rule or principle sought to be learned
without having to read the entire decision; but in legal practice one
needs to be careful in citing cases to ensure that the case cited is
indeed supportive of the lawyer’s proposition, this may require him
to read the entire decision]

KNOWING THE MAIN PARTS OF A DECISION. The reason why a

law student needs to know the usual or main parts of a decision is to, at
least, have a simple map. It is easy to get lost in reading a piece of
jurisprudence, especially for those who are doing it for the first time.

The usual main parts of a Supreme Court decision are:

1. Citation;
2. Caption;
3. Ponente;
4. Nature of the Case;
5. Factual Background;
6. Ruling of the Lower Courts;
7. Ruling of the Court of Appeals (if any) ;
8. Arguments;
9. Counter-arguments;
10. Issues;
11. Discussion/Ruling of the Supreme Court;
12. Fallo; [the dispositive portion]
 13. Votes;
14. Citations; and
15.Separate Opinions.

Citation, caption. The citation is the case number (e.g., G.R. No.

123456, September 08, 1992) while the caption states the names of the
parties and their participation in the case (e.g., AAA, petitioner, v. BBB,
respondent. CCC and DDD, intervenors.)

Ponente. The ponente is the one who wrote the decision of the Supreme
Court for and in behalf of the majority. Immediately upon arriving at a
conclusion regarding the issue or issues in the case, the Court shall
assign a Member to write the opinion of the Court. Should the majority
vote of the court on such conclusion be different from or contrary to the
conclusion arrived at by the ponente, the writing of the new opinion shall
be assigned to a ponente chosen by the majority. (A.M. No. 10-4-20-SC)

According to the 1987 Constitution, "The conclusions of the Supreme

Court in any case submitted to it for decision en banc or in division shall
be reached in consultation before the case is assigned to a Member for
the writing of the opinion of the Court. A certification to this effect
signed by the Chief Justice shall be issued and a copy thereof attached to
the record of the case and served upon the parties. Any Member who
took no part, or dissented, or abstained from a decision or resolution
must state the reason thereof. The same requirements shall be observed
by all lower collegiate courts." (Section 13, Article VIII)

Nature of the case. This is the part where the ponente explains why
the case reached the Supreme Court and where it came from. Normally,
the remedy is discussed (e.g., Rule 45, Rule 65, etc.), including what
judgment, decision, order, resolution or action is being questioned or
assailed. 

Factual background, ruling of the lower courts, ruling of the

Court of Appeals, arguments and counterarguments. Basically,
the factual antecedents (the factual background or backdrop) of the case
include what the transpired before the case was filed at the first instance,
what transpired during the trial, what orders or rulings were issued by
the lower court, whether or not the case reached a higher court, and what
such superior court said, ruled or did.

Arguments of the petitioner or appellant and counterarguments of the

respondent or appellee are also detailed for the proper understanding of
the reader of the contentions from both sides.

Issues. In this part of the case, the writer intelligently streamlines the
issues submitted by the parties. It is common for parties to formulate
their own list of issues submitted to the court for decision. However, for
the purpose of writing the decision, the ponente combines two or three
and rejects one or two in order to arrive at a list of issues that are more
determinative of the controversy.

If a party or parties submit a good list, the Supreme Court normally

adopts it. This is what happened in the case of Fujiki v. Marinay in which
the three-item list of issues was adopted by the ponente from the
pleadings of the petitioner.

The final issues are then the basis of the next part of the decision: the
discussion or ruling of the Supreme Court.

Discussion or ruling of the Supreme Court. Ideally, the discussion

meets the issues point by point by methodically giving an answer (e.g.,
correct or wrong), laying down the legal basis (i.e., law, jurisprudence,
etc.) and connecting the facts of the case to the legal basis (conclusion).
Take the following as an example.
Issues

1. Did the petitioner violate the rule on hierarchy of courts when he went
directly to the Supreme Court via Rule 45 to question the legality of the RTC's
denial of his petition for recognition of a foreign arbitral award?

2. xxx

Discussion

No violation of hierarchy of courts

Petitioner did not violate the rule on hierarchy of courts.

A Rule 45 appeal by certiorari is a remedy that allows a party to directly raise

to the Supreme Court a pure question of law. There is no need for a motion
for reconsideration or for an appeal to the Court of Appeals. (Tuna
Processing, Inc. v. Philippine Kingford)

Here, what petitioner raised to the Court was a pure question of law, i.e.,
whether a law exists allowing courts to recognize a foreign arbitral award.
Therefore, the above rule was not violated.

Fallo or dispositive portion. The dispositive portion of a case is

usually written this way:

WHEREFORE, we GRANT the petition. The Order dated 31 January 2011 and the
Resolution dated 2 March 2011 of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 107, Quezon
City, in Civil Case No. Q-11-68582 are REVERSED and SET ASIDE. The Regional
Trial Court is ORDERED to REINSTATE the petition for further proceedings in
accordance with this Decision.

SO ORDERED.

The fallo is the part of a decision that states the order of the court as a result of
the discussions above. It is that part of the decision which the implementer
(usually, the sheriff for lower courts) should enforce. As a general rule, when
there is a conflict between the body of the decision and its fallo, the fallo
prevails.

When there is a conflict between the dispositive portion or fallo of a

decision and the opinion of the court contained in the text or body of the
judgment, the former prevails over the latter. An order of execution is
based on the disposition, not on the body, of the decision. (G.R. No.
109648, November 22, 2001)

Votes. This part merely lists the Members of the Court who concurred
with or dissented against the majority opinion. It usually looks like this:
"Brion, Del Castillo, Perez, and Perlas-Bernabe, JJ., concur."

Citations. Citations are those listed at the end of the decision after the
fallo and the votes. They are also called "footnotes." They either tell the
basis of a certain word, phrase or paragraph or give more explanations.

Separate opinions. The majority opinion is the controlling one but

nothing prevents other Members of the Court from writing a separate
opinion which may either be a concurring one or a dissenting one. A
concurring opinion largely agrees with the conclusions or results of the
majority opinion but disagrees on the legal basis, the arguments made
and other matters. 

On the other hand, a dissenting opinion is one which takes the view that
different conclusions or results should have been arrived at.

A Member who disagrees with the majority opinion, its conclusions, and
the disposition of the case may submit to the Chief Justice or Division
Chairperson a dissenting opinion, setting forth the reason for such
dissent. A Member who agrees with the result of the case, but based on
different reason or reasons may submit a separate opinion; a
concurrence "in the result" should state the reason for the qualified
concurrence. A Member who agrees with the main opinion, but opts to
express other reasons for concurrence may submit a concurring opinion.
The dissenting, separate, or concurring opinion must be within one week
from the date the writer of the majority opinion presents the decision for
the signature of the Members. (A.M. No. 10-4-20-SC)

READ THE FALLO FIRST. Reading the fallo first gives the reader a
spoiler (in a good way) as to the results of the case. It is very difficult,
especially for first timers, to understand the discussions on a piece of
jurisprudence without knowing who actually won and how the Court
actually decided the case in the end.

If the fallo says, "WHEREFORE, we GRANT the petition," the reader's

frame of mind while reading the rest of the text will be informed that the
petitioner won and whatever arguments the respondent has are rejected
either partly or wholly by the Court. This way, there will be no confusion
as to whose legal arguments should be given more attention.

If the fallo says, "The Order dated 31 January 2011 and the Resolution
dated 2 March 2011 of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 107, Quezon
City, in Civil Case No. Q-11-68582 are REVERSED and SET ASIDE," the
reader is likewise informed that the Regional Trial Court's Order and
Resolution are found wrong or illegal which is why the Supreme Court
reversed and set them aside. From this viewpoint, the text becomes clear
and what remains in the mind of the reader is "Why did the Supreme
Court decide the case this way?" 

IDENTIFY THE LAWS INVOLVED. Identifying the laws involved is

important. Is this a family law issue or a political law issue? Is this a tax
remedy issue or a remedial law issue?

A Supreme Court decision can touch on different fields of law, depending

on how complicated the factual matters are. For example, a case about
death benefits, which is a labor law issue, may touch on the meaning of
death, which is a persons law issue. Another example is when an action
for damages is filed by one corporation against another corporation.
This, of course, requiring a reading of torts law and corporation law.
When studying a piece of jurisprudence, always remember the purpose
of reading it. Law professors normally want their students to zero in on
certain issues under particular fields of law.

READ THE DECISION OR THE RULING OF THE COURT. After

reading the fallo, the reader need not go straight to the top of the text.
Instead, he should go to the part that says: "Decision of the Court" or
"Ruling of the Court." This is where the ponente discusses the ratio
decidendi [Latin, "rationale for the decision;" the term refers to a key factual point or
chain of reasoning in a case that drives the final judgment; the legal principle or
rationale on which a judicial decision is based]  and meets each issue.

The reason why reading the factual background (facts of the case) of the
case is not important at this point is the fact that the discussion actually
mentions the facts of the case. For example, in the case Fujiki v. Marinay,
the following can be found in the "discussion" part:

"There is therefore no reason to disallow Fujiki to simply prove as a fact the

Japanese Family Court judgment nullifying the marriage between Marinay
and Maekara on the ground of bigamy. While the Philippines has no divorce
law, the Japanese Family Court judgment is fully consistent with Philippine
public policy, as bigamous marriages are declared void from the beginning
under Article 35(4) of the Family Code. Bigamy is a crime under Article 349 of
the Revised Penal Code. Thus, Fujiki can prove the existence of the
Japanese Family Court judgment in accordance with Rule 132, Sections 24
and 25, in relation to Rule 39, Section 48(b) of the Rules of Court."

From the above, it can be inferred that the case is about declaration of
nullity of marriage. It seems that bigamy is involved and the issue of
proving a foreign judgment was also raised. An intelligent reader can
easily theorize the facts of the case from the discussion alone.

READ THE FACTUAL BACKGROUND, IF STILL NEEDED. If

other factual matters remain unclear, it is time to read the narration of
the factual antecedents.