1

APPEALS
PERFECTION OF APPEAL
The right to appeal is NEITHER a natural right nor a part of due process. It
is merely a statutory privilege and may be exercised only in the manner and 1. If by notice of appeal:
in accordance with the provisions of law
An appeal may be taken only from judgments or final orders that completely Appeal is deemed perfected as to the party appealing upon the filing of the notice
dispose of the case of appeal and full payment of appeal fees in due time.

4blue95. The notice of appeal does not require the approval of the court. The
function of the notice of appeal is merely to notify the trial court that the appellant
NO APPEAL MAY BE TAKEN FROM: was availing of the right to appeal, and not to seek the court’s permission that he
be allowed to pose an appeal

a. Order denying a motion for new trial or recon (REMOVED);

2. If by record on appeal:

b. Order denying a petition for relief or any similar motion seeking
relief from judgment;
(BAR) A filed a complaint w/ the municipal court against B.
Judgment was rendered in favor of A. While the decision was
received by B’s lawyer, such lawyer however, had to go to the USA
to undergo a heart bypass operation. He failed to notify his client B
of the decision, hence, period to appeal lapsed. What is B’s remedy?
HELD: File petition for relief from judgment due to accident, the
accident being the sudden departure of B’s lawyer due to his heart
operation.
Appeal is deemed perfected as to the party appealing upon the approval of the
record on appeal filed in due time.
The ostensible reason for requiring a record on appeal instead of only a notice of
appeal is the multi-part nature of nearly all special proceedings, with each part
susceptible of being finally determined and terminated independently of the other
parts.
4blue95. A record of appeal is required only in: a. Certain kinds of special
proceedings; or b. Other cases of multiple or separate appeals. (Sec. 3, Rule 40)

Suppose the petition is denied,can B appeal from the order of denial?

NO, an appeal may not be taken from an order denying a petition for
relief, or any similar motion seeking relief from judgment.
But is there still remedy for B?YES, if order was denied w/o or in
excess of jurisdiction, B can file a petition for certiorari under rule
65.

c. Interlocutory order;
2022 notes: the remedy then if interlocutory order is not appealable
is that party should wait for final judgment or order and may assign
such interlocutory order as an error of the court on appeal.

d. Order disallowing or dismissing an appeal;

e. Order denying a motion to set aside a judgment by consent,
confession, compromise on the ground of fraud, mistake, or
duress, or any other ground vitiating consent;
f. Order of execution;
 Not appealable because execution is only the result of the
judgment. If order of execution is not in accord with the
dispositive portion, remedy is certiorari under Rule 65.
g. Judgment or final order for or against one or more of several
parties or in separate claims, while the main case is pending,
unless the court allows an appeal therefrom; HOW TO APPEAL
h. Order dismissing an action without prejudice;
Appeal perfected as to petitioner upon timely:

In all these cases, aggrieved party may file an appropriate civil action 1. FILING of a notice of appeal within 15 or 30 days from notice of judgment or
FOR CERTIORARI under Rule 65. final order with the court that rendered it, and SERVE upon the adverse party; and

2. PAYMENT of the full amount of the appellate court docket and other legal fees
to the clerk of the court which rendered the judgment or final order.
THE ISSUES THAT MAY BE RAISED ON APPEAL DEPEND ON THE (BUT, failure to pay warrants only discretion to dismiss the appeal.)
KIND OF APPEAL FILED.

Participation of the Solicitor General during Appeal:

1) Questions of FACT – exists when the doubt or difference arises as to the truth
or the falsehood of alleged facts; or when the query necessarily invites calibration
of the whole evidence considering mainly the credibility of witnesses, existence
and relevancy of specific surrounding circumstances, their relation to each other
and to the whole and the probabilities of the situation (Sesbreno vs. CA, G.R. No.
84096, 1995); (Cirtek Employees Labor Union vs. Cirtek Electronics, Inc., G.R.
No. 190515, 2011);
2) Questions of LAW – exists when the doubt or difference arises as to what the
applicable law is on certain state of facts
The Solicitor General is the sole representative of the People of the Philippines in
appeals before the CA and the SC. Failure to have a copy of a petition served on
the People of the Philippines, through the OSG, is a sufficient ground for the
dismissal of the petition as provided in Section 3, Rule 42 of the Rules of Court.
(People v. Duca, G.R. No. 171175, 2009)
If there is a dismissal of a criminal case by the trial court or if there is an acquittal
of the accused, it is only the OSG that can bring an appeal on the criminal aspect
representing the People, the State being the real party in interest in the criminal
case. (People v. Piccio, et al., G.R. No. 193681, 2014)

MODES OF APPEAL (2022 BAR MATTER)
I. ORDINARY APPEAL
An appeal where judgment was rendered by the court in the exercise of its original
jurisdiction. It is also known as an appeal by writ of error. (RIANO, 2019, p. 589).
RULE 40 – appeal from MTC to RTC
RULE 41 – appeal from RTC from its decisions rendered in the
exercise of its original jurisdiction
NOTICE OF APPEAL filed and payment of fees
II. PETITION FOR REVIEW
An appeal where judgment was rendered by the court in the exercise of its
appellate jurisdiction.
RULE 42- Appeal from RTC (exercising appellate to CA)
RULE 43- Appeal from QJA to CA
PETITION FOR REVIEW filed with payment of fees
III. PETITION FOR REVIEW ON CERTIORARI (RULE 45)
An appeal from a judgment or final order of the Regional Trial Court in the
exercise of its original jurisdiction directly to the Supreme Court on pure questions
of law.
Note: It also pertains to an appeal from the judgment, final order or resolutions of
the Court of Appeals, Sandiganbayan, Court of Tax Appeals en banc. (Sec. 1, Rule
45).
PETITION FOR REVIEW ON CERTIORARI with the SC with
payment of fees
Generally ,Question of Law Only
Exceptions (may raise questions of fact):
Based on SC Circulars:
1. Writ of Amparo
2. Writ of Habeas Data
3. Writ of Kalikasan
Exceptions Based on Jurisprudence:
1. When the factual findings of the Court of Appeals and the trial
court are contradictory;
2. When the conclusion is a finding grounded entirely on
speculation, surmises, or conjectures;
3. When the inference made by the Court of Appeals from its
findings of fact is manifestly mistaken, absurd, or impossible;
4. When there is a grave abuse of discretion in the appreciation of
facts;
5. When the appellate court, in making its findings, went beyond the
issues of the case and such findings are contrary to the admissions of
both appellant and appellee;
6. When the judgment of the Court of Appeals is premised on a
misapprehension of facts;
7. When the Court of Appeals failed to notice certain relevant facts
which, if properly considered, would justify a different conclusion;
8. When the findings of fact are themselves conflicting;
9. When the findings of fact are conclusions without citation of the
specific evidence on which they are based; and
10. When the findings of fact of the Court of Appeals are premised
on the absence of evidence but the evidence on record contradicts
such findings
2
RESIDUAL JURISDICTION OF THE COURT
Prior to the transmittal of the original record or record on appeal, the court which
rendered judgement may:
a. Issue orders for the protection and preservation of the rights of the
parties, which do not involve any matter litigated by the appeal.
b. Approve compromises;
c. Permit appeals of indigent litigants;
d. Order execution pending appeal in accordance with Sec. 2, Rule
39; and
e. Allow withdrawal of the appeal.
EXECUTION PENDING APPEAL
General Rule: A perfected appeal stays the challenged judgment or final
order; such judgment or final order cannot yet be the subject of a motion for
execution (except in instances where execution pending appeal is allowed).
Exception: The law, the Rules, or the Court of Appeals, provide otherwise.
This is NOT applicable to civil cases under the Rule on Summary Procedure
which provides that the decision of the RTC in civil cases governed by said Rule,
including forcible entry and unlawful detainer cases; shall be immediately
executory without prejudice to a further appeal that may be taken therefrom. (Id.,
see also Sec. 25, Revised Rules on Summary Procedure)
Rehabilitation proceedings are not bound by procedural rules spelled out in the
Rules of Court. The Interim Rules of Procedure for Corporate Rehabilitation, not
the Rules of Court, was the procedural law governing rehabilitation proceedings.
To quote Rule 3, Section 5 of the Interim Rules: “A petition for review or an
appeal therefrom shall not stay the execution of the order unless restrained or
enjoined by the appellate court.”
DISMISSAL OF APPEAL (RULE 50)
PRIOR to the transmittal of the original record or the record on the appeal to the
appellate court, the trial court may, motu proprio or on motion, dismiss the appeal
for having been taken out of time OR for non-payment of the docket and other
lawful fees within the reglementary period. (Sec. 13, Rule 41)
Rule 41 does not allow a trial court to disallow an appeal on grounds other than an
appeal being taken out of time or non-payment of docket and other fees within
reglementary period. Rule 41 is an appeal as a matter of right, once it is perfected,
only the CA may disallow an appeal (Kho v. Camacho, G.R. No. 82789, 1991)
General Rule: The failure to timely perfect an appeal cannot simply be
dismissed as a mere technicality, for it is jurisdictional. (Nuñez v. GSIS Family
Bank, G.R. No. 163988, Nov. 17, 2005)
Exception: If there has been extrinsic FAME, then resort to Petition for Relief
from Judgment under Rule 38 may be had.
4BLUE95.The lower courts or judges that rendered the judgment or final
order complained of should not be impleaded as parties. The same
prohibition is now provided in petitions for review on certiorari under Rule
45, since these are petitions for appeal and NOT original actions.
4blue95The failure of the petitioner to comply with any of the foregoing
requirements regarding the payment of the docket and other lawful fees, the
deposit for costs, proof of service of the petition, and the contents of and the
documents which should accompany the petition shall be sufficient ground
for the DISMISSAL thereof.
 3

RULES ON APPEAL APPEAL AS A MATTER OF RIGHT VERSUS NOT MATTER OF RIGHT

The appeal by notice of appeal under Rule 41 is a matter or right, but the appeal by
a.No trial de novo anymore petition for review under Rule 42 is a matter of discretion. An appeal as a matter of right,
which refers to the right to seek the review by a superior court of the judgment rendered
The appellate courts must decide the case on the basis of the record, except when by the trial court, exists after the trial in the first instance. In contrast, the discretionary
the proceedings were not duly recorded as when there was absence of a qualified appeal, which is taken from the decision or final order rendered by a court in the exercise
stenographer. of its primary appellatejurisdiction, may be disallowed by the superior court in its
discretion. Verily, the CA has the discretion whether to due course to the petition for
review or not. (Zambales v Garcia G.R. No. 162217 July 22, 2015)
b.no new parties

c.no change of theory

d.no new matters

e.there can be amendments of pleadings to conform to the evidence submitted before

the trial court IMPROPER APPEAL

f.liability of solidary defendant who did not appeal is not affected by appeal of
solidary debtor

2022 notes: When obligation of the other solidary debtors is SO DEPENDENT

on that of their co-debtors ,the RELEASE of the one who appealed provided it ERRONEOUS APPEAL
be NOT ON GROUNDS PERSONAL to such appealing defendant , operates as
well to the other who did not appeal (Universal motors v CA)

DEFINITION Mode of appeal taken by the Mode of appeal taken by

appellant is not the correct mode. the appellant is the correct
g.appeal by guarantor does not inure to the principal
mode but he raises the
h.in ejectment case, the RTC cannot award to the appellant on his counterclaim wrong issue to be decided
more than the amount of damages beyond the jurisdiction of the city courts

i.appellate court cannot dismiss the appealed case for failure to prosecute since the
case must be decided on basis of the record.
Example If the mode of appeal authorized If appellant appeals to the
by the Rules is a petition for SC via petition for review
(BAR) After judgment ,the losing party appealed but the same was filed outside the review, but appellant uses on certiorari (rule 45), the
period allowed by the law. Appellant reasoned out by saying that there was an erroneous ordinary appeal appeal is not erroneous.
understanding of the law on appeal by counsel and hence, invoked a relaxation of the
Rules. If you were ponente, how would you decide?
But if he raises questions
HELD: I would decide against the appellant since a mistake in the understanding of the
of fact the appeal is
law on appeals is not compelling enough or a highly exceptional circumstance to depart
improper because
from the rule on perfection of appeals in the manner and w/in the period prescribed by
questions of fact could not
law. Such manner and pd prescribed are not only mandatory but jurisdictional, the failure
be filed before the SC
to comply to such renders judgment final and executory (Batara v CA)

(BAR)JS appeals the decision against him to the RTC w/c affirmed in toto the lower
court’s decision. Suppose that instead of filing a motion for recon w/ RTC, JS filed a
notice of appeal w/ the RTC stating that he is appealing to the CA on the ground that the
judgment is contrary to law and the facts of the case. As lawyer for the opposing party, on
what ground will you oppose the appeal? Consequences
HELD: On ground that the proper procedure is the filing of a petition for review w/ CA
(sec22 BP129 ). The filing of notice of appeal is proper if the case was originally filed in
the RTC. 1.appeal to SC SC has discretion to refer the Appeal will be dismissed
appeal to CA outright

(BAR) MTC denied Land Registration of a parcel of land. To what Court should it
be appealed?
2.appeal to CA
AVAILABLE REMEDIES TO QUESTION THE VALIDITY OF JUDGMENT
Appeal will be dismissed Appeal will be dismissed
IN A REGISTRATION CASE
1. New trial or reconsideration under Rule 37
2. Relief of judgment under Rule 38
3. Appeal to the CA or SC in the manner as ordinary actions pursuant to
Section 33 of PD 1529
4. Review of Decree, Section 32
5. Claim under Assurance Fund, Section 95
6. Reversion under Section 101 of CA 141
7. Cancellation of title
8. Annulment of judgment under Rule 37
9. Quieting of Title
10. Action for reconveyance
11. Criminal prosecution under the Revised Penal Code

APPEAL FROM JUDGMENTS OR FINAL ORDERS OF THE MTC
(APPEAL TO RTC)
The title of the case shall remain as it was in the court of origin, but the party
appealing shall be further referred to as the appellant and the adverse party,
the appellee. After an appeal to the RTC has been perfected, the MTC loses
jurisdiction over the case and any motion for the execution of the judgment
should be filed with the RTC
4blue95. Still, it must be emphasized that the reckoning point for the RTC to
acquire jurisdiction over the appeal is NOT the receipt of the letter of
transmittal and of the notice of appealed case, but the timely filing of the
notice of appeal/record on appeal
Material Data Rule
The material dates required to be stated in the petition are the following:
1. The date of receipt of the judgment or final order or resolution subject of the
petition;
2. The date of filing of a motion for new trial or reconsideration, if any; and
3. The date of receipt of the notice of the denial of the motion. (Castilex Industrial
Corp. v. Vasquez, Jr., G.R. No. 132266, 1999).
The whole purpose of the statutory and reglementary requirements on material
dates is to established the timeliness of the appeal or petition for review, since
otherwise, the appealed decision would already be final and executory and the
appellate or reviewing court would be rendered without jurisdiction, where there
exist no valid grounds to seek relief from final judgment
Payment of Docket Fee
The payment of the appellate docket fee is not a mere technicality of law or
procedure but an essential requirement for the perfection of an appeal (Enriquez
vs. Enriquez, G.R. No. 139303, 2005), and without which, the decision or final
order appealed from would become final and executory, as if no appeal was filed
at all. (Sps. Manalili vs. Sps. De Leon, G.R. No. 140858, 2001)
Note: While, in appealed cases, the full payment of the appellate docket fees
within the prescribed period is mandatory, even jurisdictional, the decision to
dismiss the case is only discretionary as opposed to automatic dismissal of the
appeal. (De Leon, Appellate Remedies, 2013, p. 41) This is true under Rule 40
(Badillo v. Tayag, G.R. No. 143976, 2003)
Anyone seeking an exemption FROM PAYMENT OF DOCKET FEE has the
burden of proving that exceptionally meritorious instances exist which warrant
departure from the Rule
The RTC Can Decide Errors Not Assigned in the Appeal Memorandum
The RTC presently decides all appeals from the MTC based on the entire record of
the proceedings had in the court of origin and such memoranda or briefs as may be
submitted by the parties or required by the RTC. As a consequence, the RTC, in
exercising its appellate jurisdiction (i.e., in appeals from MTC to RTC), is not
limited to errors assigned in the appeal memorandum.
Thus, in Macaslang v. Zamora (G.R. No. 156375, 2011), it was held that the RTC,
as an appellate court, could rule on the failure of the complaint to state a cause of
action and the lack of demand to vacate even if not assigned in the appeal.
4
PROCEDURE IN THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
1. Upon receipt of the complete record or the record on appeal, the clerk of court
of the RTC shall notify the parties of such fact;
2. Within fifteen (15) days from notice, it shall be the duty of the appellant to
submit a MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL to briefly discuss the errors imputed to
the lower court, and a copy shall be furnished by him/her to the adverse party;
3. Within fifteen (15) days from receipt of the appellant’s memorandum, the
appellee may file his/her MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL; and
4. Upon filing of the memorandum of the appellee, OR the expiration of the period
to do so, the case shall be considered SUBMITTED FOR DECISION. (Sec. 7,
Rule 40)
The RTC shall decide the case on the basis of the entire record of the proceedings
in the court of origin and such memoranda as are filed. (Sec. 7(c), Rule 40).
Failure of the APELLANT to file a memorandum shall be a ground for the
dismissal of the appeal. The requirement for the submission of appellant’s
memorandum is a mandatory and compulsory rule. Non-compliance therewith
authorizes the dismissal of the appeal.
Notice Requirement
The notice to be sent to the parties cannot be downplayed as a mere formality, for
it is such notice which sets in motion the appellate procedure before the RTC and
the running of the prescriptive period within which the appellant must file his/her
appeal memorandum.
Moreover, the notice must be categorical enough in stating that the RTC has
already received the records of the case. If there is no such notice or the notice is
defective in that it does not contain a statement that the RTC is already in
possession of the records of the case, the appellant stands to lose his/her right to
seek a judicial review of his/her case.
Appeal from Orders Dismissing Case Without Trial; Lack of Jurisdiction
If an appeal is taken from an order of the lower court dismissing the case without a
trial on the merits, the Regional Trial Court may affirm or reverse it, as the case
may be. (Sec. 8, Rule 40)
If the ground for dismissal in the MTC is lack of jurisdiction:
A. If the RTC affirms the dismissal:
a. It shall try the case on the merits as if the case was originally filed
with it, if it has jurisdiction over the subject matter; or
b. It shall not try the case if it has no jurisdiction over the subject
matter.
B. If the RTC reverses the dismissal, the case shall be remanded to the MTC for
further proceedings
Appeal from Orders Dismissing Case With Trial; Lack of Jurisdiction
If the case was tried on the merits by the lower court without jurisdiction over the
subject matter, the RTC on appeal, shall NOT dismiss the case if it has original
jurisdiction thereof, BUT shall decide the case WITHOUT prejudice to the
admission of amended pleadings and additional evidence in the interest of justice.

APPEAL FROM JUDGMENTS/FINAL ORDERS OF THE RTC
As mentioned, an appeal may be taken only from judgments or final orders
that completely dispose of the case. An interlocutory order is NOT appealable
until after judgment on the merits has been rendered
THREE MODES OF APPEAL
A. RULE 41 – Ordinary Appeal or Appeal by Writ of Error by Notice of Appeal
from RTC, exercising original jurisdiction, to the CA. (pwede mix fact & law)
B. RULE 42 – Petition for Review from RTC, exercising appellate jurisdiction, to
the CA.
C. RULE 45 – Petition for Review on Certiorari or Appeal by Certiorari by Appeal
to SC from decisions of the RTC in its original jurisdiction, only on questions of
law
RTC acting as Special Agrarian Court – Petition for review to CA
RTC acting as a Commercial Court – Petition for review to CA
ISSUES CANNOT BE RAISED FOR THE FIRST TIME ON APPEAL
General Rule: Parties cannot raise issues for the first time on appeal.
Exceptions:
a. Grounds not assigned as errors but affecting jurisdiction over the subject matter;
b. Matters not assigned as errors on appeal but are evidently plain or clerical errors
within contemplation of law;
c. Matters not assigned as errors on appeal but consideration of which is necessary
in arriving at a just decision and complete resolution of the case or to serve the
interests of justice or to avoid dispensing piecemeal justice;
d. Matters not specifically assigned as errors on appeal but raised in the trial court
and are matters of record having some bearing on the issue submitted which the
parties failed to raise or which the lower court ignored;
e. Matters not assigned as errors on appeal but closely related to an error assigned;
and
f. Matters not assigned as errors on appeal but upon which the determination of a
question properly assigned, is dependent. (Spouses Devisfruto v. Greenfell, G.R.
No. 227725, 2020)
PERIOD OF ORDINARY APPEAL
Fifteen (15) days from notice of the judgment or final order appealed from.
If a record on appeal is required, file notice of appeal and record on appeal within
thirty (30) days from notice of the judgment or final order.
In HABEAS CORPUS cases, forty-eight (48) hours from notice of judgment or
final order appealed from.
The period shall be interrupted by a timely Motion for New Trial or Motion for
Reconsideration.
No motion for extension of time to file a Motion for Reconsideration or Motion
for New Trial shall be allowed (same rule as MTC-RTC appeals), except in cases
pending with the SUPREME COURT
5
Period of Ordinary Appeal; Appeal in Habeas Data Cases (A.M. No. 08-1-16-
SC, Sec. 19)
1. The period of appeal shall be five (5) working (not calendar) days from the date
of notice of the judgment or final order.
2. Appeal shall be made directly to the Supreme Court under Rule 45 where
questions of fact or of law or both may be raised.
Period of Ordinary Appeal; Appeal in Writ of Amparo Cases (A.M. No. 07-9-
12-SC, Sec. 19)
1. The period of appeal shall be five (5) working (not calendar) days from the date
of notice of the adverse judgment.
2. Appeal shall be made directly to the Supreme Court under Rule 45 where
questions of fact or of law or both may be raised.
Period of Ordinary Appeal; Appeal in Writ of Kalikasan Cases (A.M. No. 09-
6-8-SC, Section 16)
1. The period of appeal shall be fifteen (15) working (not calendar) days from the
date of notice of the adverse judgment.
2. Appeal shall be made directly to the Supreme Court under Rule 45 where
questions of fact or of law or both may be raised.
PETITION FOR REVIEW FROM RTC TO C.A.
4blue95. FAILURE to comply with the requirements for appeal thru petition
for review shall be a SUFFICIENT GROUND for Dismissal. (which are :
Payment of Docket fees, deposit for costs, proof of service of petition with the
documents that should accompany the petition)
Extension of Period to File Petition for Review
General Rule: the CA may allow only 1 extension of 15 days to file the petition for
review after docket fees are paid and if the motion for extension of time is filed
within the 15-day reglementary period.
Exception: for the most compelling reasons, the CA may allow another extension
not to exceed 15 days
Whenever the Court of Appeals deems it necessary, it may require the RTC
to elevate the original records of the case within 15 days. (Sec. 7, Rule 42)
Records remain with the trial court because it MAY still issue a writ of execution
pending appeal and also because in some cases (e.g., ejectment and those of
Summary Procedure), the judgments are immediately executory.
A REJOINDER (to the reply) is no longer required under AM No. 99-2-04-SC.
If the petition is given due course, the Court of Appeals (CA) may:
a. Set the case for oral argument; and/or
b. Require the parties to submit memoranda within a period of 15 days from
notice. (Sec. 9, Rule 42)
NO NEW ISSUES may be raised by a party in the Memorandum
2022 notes: All appeals from judgments rendered by the RTC in the exercise
of its appellate jurisdiction, regardless of whether the appellant raises
questions of fact, questions of law, or mixed questions of fact and law, shall be
brought to the Court of Appeals by filing a PETITION FOR REVIEW under
Rule 42. (Quezon City v. ABS-CBN Broadcasting Corp., G.R. No. 166408,
2008)
Note: In all cases decided by the RTC in the exercise of its original
jurisdiction, appeal may be made to the Court of Appeals by mere NOTICE
OF APPEAL where the appellant raises questions of fact or mixed questions
of fact and law
 6

RULE 45 (BAR)APPEAL BY CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME

COURT

CERTIORARI as mode of appeal:

From judgment or final order of the CA, CTA, Sandiganbayan, RTC on
pure questions of law, or other courts whenever authorized by law, by filing
a PETITION FOR REVIEW ON CERTIORARI with the SC within 15
days from notice of judgment.

2022 notes: Only questions of law may be raised in a petition for

certiorari ,although SC has option to put into account questions of facts
raised taking into account the attendant circumstances and decide the same
or to refer case to the CA for determination (AFP Mutual Benefit v CA)

Mode of Appeal Involving Pure Questions of Law in Cases where RTC

Exercises Original vs. Appellate Jurisdiction

In all cases decided by the RTC in the exercise of its original jurisdiction where
the appellant raises only questions of law, the appeal must be taken to the Supreme
Court on a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45;
All appeals from judgments rendered by the RTC in the exercise of its appellate
jurisdiction, regardless of whether the appellant raises questions of fact, questions
of law, or mixed questions of fact and law, shall be brought to the Court of
Appeals by filing a petition for review under Rule 42. (Quezon City v. ABS-CBN
Broadcasting Corp., G.R. No. 166408, 2008)

4blue95 Note: In all cases decided by the RTC in the exercise of its original
jurisdiction, appeal may be made to the Court of Appeals by mere notice of appeal
where the appellant raises questions of fact or mixed questions of fact and law

Time for Filing

General Rule: The petition shall be filed within 15 days from the notice of the
judgment appealed from, or of the denial of the petitioner’s motion for new trial or
reconsideration filed in due time after notice of the judgment. (Sec. 2, Rule 45)

Exceptions:
a. Writ of Amparo – 5 working days
b. Writ of Habeas Data – 5 working days

Within the fifteen (15) day period, the petitioner may, for good cause, file a
motion for extension of time to file his/her petition for review on certiorari. The
petitioner must submit the requisite proof of service of such motion on the
respondents, pay the docket and other lawful fees in full, as well as deposit the
costs of suit.

The Supreme Court may, for justifiable reasons, grant an extension of 30 days
within which to file the petition, provided the following requisites concur:

1. A motion duly filed and served (within the original 15-day period); and

2. Full payment of the docket and other lawful fees and the deposit for costs
(within the original 15-day period).

WHEN RULE 65 PETITION IS AVAILABLE

A special civil action for certiorari under Rule 65 lies only when there is no appeal
or any plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law. Thus,
certiorari cannot be allowed when a party to a case fails to appeal a judgment
despite the availability of that remedy. Certiorari is not a substitute for a lost
appeal. (Indoyon vs. CA, G.R. No. 193706, 2013) (N.B.: In this case, the Petition
for Certiorari under Rule 65 was filed 35 days after notice of resolution, by which
time petitioner had therefore lost his appeal under Rule 45.)

The remedies of appeal and certiorari are mutually exclusive and not alternative or
successive. Although it is true that the SC may treat a petition for certiorari (under
Rule 65) as having been filed under Rule 45 to serve the higher interest of justice,
it cannot be availed of when the petition is filed well beyond the reglementary
period for filing a petition for review (under Rule 45) and without offering any
reason therefor. (Banco Filipino v. CA, G.R. No. 132703, 2000; Sandoval v.
Calipan G.R. No. 200727, 2013)

To be sure, the distinctions between Rules 45 and 65 are far and wide. However,
the most apparent is that errors of jurisdiction are best reviewed in a special civil
action for certiorari under Rule 65, while errors of judgment can only be corrected
by appeal in a petition for review under Rule 45.

RULE APPLICABLE TO BOTH CIVIL AND CRIMINAL CASES
General Rule: The mode of appeal prescribed in this Rule shall be applicable to
both civil and criminal cases.
Exception: It is not applicable to criminal cases where the penalty imposed is:
a. Death.
b. Reclusion perpetua; or
c. Life imprisonment.
Appeal From Judgments Or Final Orders Of The Sandiganbayan
A party desiring to appeal from a judgment or final order or resolution of the
Sandiganbayan may file with the Supreme Court a verified petition for review on
certiorari. (Sec. 1, Rule 45)
The proper remedy is an appeal under Rule 45 and not a petition for certiorari
under Rule 65. Section 7 of Presidential Decree No. 1606, as amended by
Republic Act No. 8249, provides that “decisions and final orders of the
Sandiganbayan shall be appealable to the Supreme Court by a petition for review
on certiorari raising pure questions of law in accordance with Rule 45 of the Rules
of Court." (People v. Espinosa, G.R. Nos. 153714-20, Aug. 15, 2003)
Appeal From Judgments Or Final Orders Of The Court Of Tax Appeals
(CTA)
A party adversely affected by a ruling, order or decision of a Division of the CTA
may file a motion for reconsideration or new trial before the same Division of the
CTA within fifteen (15) days from notice thereof. (Sec. 11, R.A. 1125, as amended
by R.A. 9282).
A party adversely affected by a resolution of a Division of the CTA on a motion
for reconsideration or new trial, may file a petition for review with the CTA en
banc. (Sec. 18, R.A. 1125, as amended by R.A. 9282).
A party adversely affected by a decision or ruling of the CTA en banc may file
with the Supreme Court a verified petition for review on certiorari pursuant to
Rule 45 of the Rules of Court
4BLUE95. Court of Tax Appeals Not Covered by Rule 43 because it is on
THE SAME LEVEL of the CA and thus not covered by Rule 43
Review is discretionary (sec6):
A review is not a matter of right, but of sound judicial discretion, and will be
granted only when there are special and important reasons therefor. The
following, while neither controlling nor fully measuring the court’s discretion,
indicate the character of the reasons which will be considered:
(a) When the court a quo has decided a question of substance, not theretofore
determined by the Supreme Court, or has decided it in a way probably not in
accord with law or with the applicable decisions of the Supreme Court; or
(b) When the court a quo has so far departed from the accepted and usual course of
judicial proceedings, or so far sanctioned such departure by a lower court, as to
call for an exercise of the power of supervision.
2005 notes: A petition for review on certiorari (Rule 45) may be treated as one for
certiorari under Rule 65 if it is alleged that the respondents have abused their
discretion in their questioned actions (Triste v Leyte College Board of Trustees)
CONTENTS OF A PETITION (BAR) FOR REVIEW BY CERTIORARI UNDER THIS RULE
ARE:
a.concise statement of matters involved
b.the Assignment of errors made in court below
c.reasons relied on for allowance of the petition
d.accompanied w/ a true copy of judgment sought to be reviewed together w/ 12
copies of record on appeal, if any and of pettiioner’s brief as filed in CA.
e.A verified statement of the date when notice of judgment and denial of motion
for reconsideration (if any)
1. Question of Law – exists when doubt or difference arises
as to what the law is, based on a certain
state of facts
Question of Fact – exists when doubt or difference arises
as to the truth or the falsehood of
alleged facts
7
MATTERS NOT APPEALABLE
Q: What is an interlocutory order? (2006 Bar)
A: An interlocutory order is an order which decides some point or matter between
the commencement and end of the suit but it is not the final decision on the whole
controversy. It leaves something to be done by the court before the case is finally
decided on the merits. (Metropolitan Bank&. Trust Co. v. CA, G.R. No. 110147,
April 17, 2001; Gallardo v. People, G.R. No. 142030, April 21, 2005)
Q: After defendant has served and filed his answer to plaintiff’s complaint for
damages before the proper RTC, plaintiff served and filed a motion (with
supporting affidavits) for a summary judgment in his favour upon all of his claims.
Defendant served and filed his opposition (with supporting affidavits) to the
motion. After due hearing, the court issued an order (1) stating that the court has
found no genuine issue as to any material fact and thus concluded that plaintiff is
entitled to judgment in his favour as a matter of law except as to the amount of
damages recoverable, and (2) accordingly ordering that plaintiff shall have
judgment summarily against defendant for such amount as may be found due
plaintiff for damages, to be ascertained by trial on October 7, 2004, at 8:30 o’clock
in the morning. May defendant properly take an appeal from said order? Or, may
defendant properly challenge said order thru a special civil action for certiorari?
Reason. (2004 Bar)
A: No, plaintiff may not properly take an appeal from said order because partial
summary judgments are interlocutory orders. There is still something to be done,
which is the trial for the adjudication of damages (Province of Pangasinan v. Court
of Appeals,G.R. No. 104266, March 31, 1993; Guevarra v. Court of Appeals,G.R.
No. L-49017 and L49024, August 30, 1983). But the defendant may properly
challenge said order through a special civil action for certiorari. (Sec. 1 [c] and last
par. Rule 41)
NOT UNDER RULE 45:
Review Of Final Judgments Or Final Orders Of The Commission On Audit
(Coa)
A judgment or final order or resolution of the Commission on Audit may be
brought by the aggrieved party to the Supreme Court on certiorari under Rule
65. (Sec. 2, Rule 64)
The petitioner must show that the COA has acted without or in excess of its
jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of
jurisdiction. (Nayong Pilipino Foundation, Inc. v. Pulido Tan, G.R. No.
213200, 2017)
The petition shall be filed within thirty (30) days from notice of the judgment
or final order or resolution sought to be reviewed. The filing of a motion for
new trial or reconsideration of said judgment or final order or resolution, if
allowed under the procedural rules of the Commission concerned, shall
interrupt the period herein fixed. (Sec. 3, Rule 64).
Review Of Final Judgments Or Final Orders Of The National Labor
Relations Commission (NLRC)
Appeals from the NLRC shall be by petitions for certiorari under Rule 65, to
be filed with the Court of Appeals in strict observance of the doctrine on the
hierarchy of courts. (St. Martin Funeral Home v. National Labor Relations
Commission, G.R. No. 130866, 1998).
A special civil action for certiorari under Rule 65 is not the same as an appeal.
In an appeal, the appellate court reviews errors of judgment.
On the other hand, a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 is not an appeal but
a special civil action, where the reviewing court has jurisdiction only over
errors of jurisdiction. Thus, the CA may review NLRC decisions only when
there is grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction.
(Philippine National Bank v. Gregorio, G.R. No. 194944, 2017)

Modes of Appeal
Q: What are the modes of appeal to the Supreme Court? (2002 Bar) A: The modes
of appeal to the Supreme Court are: (a) appeal by certiorari on pure questions of
law under Rule 45 through a petition for review on certiorari; and (b) ordinary
appeal in criminal cases through a notice of appeal from convictions imposing
reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment or where a lesser penalty is involved but
for offenses committed on the same occasion or which arose out of the same
occurrence that gave rise to the more serious offense (Sec. 3, Rule 122).
Convictions imposing the death penalty are elevated through automatic
review.
Q: Distinguish the two (2) modes of appeal from the judgment of the Regional
Trial Court to the Court of Appeals. (2009 Bar)
A: In cases decided by the Regional Trial Courts in the exercise of their original
jurisdiction, appeals to the Court of Appeals shall be ordinary appeal by filing
written notice of appeal indicating the parties to the appeal; specifying the
judgment/final order or part thereof appealed from; specifying the court to which
the appeal is being taken; and stating the material dates showing the timeliness of
the appeal. The notice of appeal shall be filed with the RTC which rendered the
judgment appealed from and copy thereof shall be served upon the adverse party
within 15 days from notice of judgment or final order appealed from. But if the
case admits of multiple appeals or is a special proceeding, a record on appeal is
required aside from the written notice of appeal to perfect the appeal, in which
case the period for appeal and notice upon the adverse party is not only 15 days
but 30 days from notice of judgment or final order appealed from. The full amount
of the appellate court docket fee and other lawful fees required must also be paid
within the period for taking an appeal, to the clerk of the court which rendered the
judgment or final order appealed from (Secs. 4 and 5, Rule 41). The periods of 15
or 30 days above-stated are non-extendible. In cases decided by the Regional Trial
Court in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction, appeal to the Court of Appeals
shall be by filing a verified petition for review with the Court of Appeals and
furnishing the RTC and the adverse party with copy thereof, within 15 days from
notice of judgment or final order appealed from. Within the same period for
appeal, the docket fee and other lawful fees required with the deposit for cost
should be paid. The 15-day period maybe extended for 15 days and another 15
days for compelling reasons.
Q: What is the mode of appeal applicable to the following cases, and what issues
may be raised before the reviewing court/tribunal? (2017 Bar)
a. The decision or final order of the National Labor Relations Commission. A:
There is no mode of appeal from a decision or final order of the NLRC, since such
decision or final order is final and executory pursuant to the Labor Code (Art.
223). The remedy of the aggrieved party is to file a special civil action for
certiorari with the Court of Appeals (St. Martin Funeral Home v. NLRC, G.R. No.
103866, September 16, 1998). Such special civil action may raise questions both
of fact and law (Aggabao v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 163756, January 26, 2005).
b. The judgment or final order of the RTC in the exercise of its appellate
jurisdiction.
A: The mode of appeal applicable to judgments or final orders of the RTC in the
exercise of its appellate jurisdiction is a petition for review under Rule 42. The
petition may raise questions both of fact and law. (Sec. 2, Rule 42) Period of
appeal
Q: XXX received a copy of the RTC decision on June 9, 1999; YYY received it on
the next day, June 10, 1999. XXX filed a Notice of Appeal on June 15, 1999. The
parties entered into a compromise on June 16, 1999. On June 13, 1999, YYY, who
did not appeal, filed with the RTC a motion for approval of the Compromise
Agreement. XXX changed his mind and opposed the motion on the ground that the
RTC has no more jurisdiction. Rule on the motion assuming that the records have
not yet been forwarded to the CA. (1999 Bar)
A: The contention of XXX that the RTC has no more jurisdiction over the case is
not correct because at the time that the motion to approve the compromise had
been filed, the period of appeal of YYY had not yet expired, the records of the
case had not yet been forwarded to the Court of Appeals. The rules provide that in
appeals by notice of appeal, the court loses jurisdiction over the case upon the
perfection of the appeals filed in due time and the expiration of the time to appeal
of the other parties The rules also provide that prior to the transmittal of the record,
the court may, among others, approve compromises. (Sec. 9, Rule 41) Perfection
of appeal
8
Q: Defendant X received an adverse Decision of the RTC in an ordinary civil case
on 02 January 2003. He filed a Notice of Appeal on 10 January 2003. On the other
hand, plaintiff A received the same Decision on 06 January 2003 and, on 19
January 2003, filed a Motion for Reconsideration of the Decision. On 13 January
2003, defendant X filed a Motion withdrawing his notice of appeal in order to file
a Motion for New Trial which he attached. On January 2003, the court denied A’s
Motion to Withdraw Notice of Appeal. Plaintiff A received the Order denying his
Motion for Reconsideration on 03 February 2003 and filed his Notice of Appeal
on 05 February 2003. The court denied due course to A’s Notice of Appeal on the
ground that the period to appeal already lapsed.
a. Is the court’s denial of X’s Motion to Withdraw Notice of Appeal proper? A:
No, the court’s denial of X’s Motion to Withdraw Notice of Appeal is not proper,
because the period of appeal of X has not yet expired. From January 2, 2003 when
X received a copy of the adverse decision up to January 13, 2003 when he filed his
withdrawal of appeal and Motion for New Trial, only ten (10) days had elapsed
and he had fifteen (15) days to do so.
b. Is the court’s denial of due course to A’s appeal correct? (2003 Bar) A: No, the
court’s denial of due course to A’s appeal is not correct because the appeal was
taken on time. From January 6, 2003 when A received a copy of the decision up to
January 19, 2003 when he filed a Motion for Reconsideration, only twelve (12)
days had lapsed. Consequently, he had three (3) days from receipt on February
2003 of the Order denying his Motion for Reconsideration within which to appeal.
He filed his notice of appeal February 5, 2003, or only two (2) days later.
4BLUE 95 NOTE: To standardize the appeal periods provided in the Rules and to
afford litigants fair opportunity to appeal their cases, the Court deems it practical
to allow a Fresh Period of 15 days within which to file the notice of appeal in the
RTC, counted from receipt of the order dismissing a motion for a new trial or
motion for reconsideration. (Neypes v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 121524,
September 14, 2005)
Q: When is an appeal from the RTC to the Court of Appeals deemed perfected?
(1999 Bar) A: An appeal from the Regional Trial Court to the Court of Appeals is
deemed perfected as to the appellant upon the filing of a notice of appeal in the
Regional Trial Court in due time or within the reglementary period of appeal. An
appeal by record on appeal is deemed perfected as to the appellant with respect to
the subject matter thereof upon the approval of the record on appeal filed in due
time. (Sec. 9, Rule 4) Appeal from judgments or final orders of the MTC; Appeal
from judgments or final orders of the RTC; Appeal from judgments or final orders
of the CTA
Q: Where and how will you appeal the following:
a. An order of execution issued by the RTC. A: A petition for certiorari under
Rule 65 before the Court of Appeals.
b. Judgment of RTC denying a petition for Writ of Amparo. A: Any party
may appeal from the final judgment or order to the Supreme Court by way of
a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court. The
period of appeal shall be five (5) working days from the date of notice of the
adverse judgment, and the appeal may raise questions of fact or law or both.
(Sec. 19, Rule on the Writ of Amparo, A.M. No. 07- 9-12-SC, September
25,2007)
c. Judgment of MTC on a land registration case based on its delegated
jurisdiction. A: The appeal should be filed with the Court of Appeals by
filing a Notice of Appeal within 15 days from notice of judgment or final
order appealed from. (Sec. 34, B.P. Blg. 129, as by Republic Act No. 7691)
d. A decision of the Court of Tax Appeal's First Division. (2012 Bar) A: The
decision of the Court of Tax Appeals Division may be appealed to the CTA
en banc. The decisions of the Court of Tax Appeals are no longer appealable
to the Court of Appeals. Under the modified appeal procedure, the decision
of a division of the CTA may be appealed to the CTA en banc. The decision
of the CTA en banc may in turn be directly appealed to the Supreme Court
by way of a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 on questions of
law. (Section 11, R.A. No. 9282)

Q: After receiving the adverse decision rendered against his client, the defendant,
Atty. Sikat duly filed a notice of appeal. For his part, the plaintiff timely filed a
motion for partial new trial to seek an increase in the monetary damages awarded.
The RTC instead rendered an amended decision further reducing the monetary
awards. Is it necessary for Atty. Sikat to file a second notice of appeal after
receiving the amended decision? (2008 Bar)
A: Yes, it is necessary for Atty. Sikat to file a second notice of appeal to the
amended decision because a substantial change was made to the original decision
when the monetary awards were reduced in the amended decision and in effect the
amended decision superseded the original decision. A new notice of appeal is
required to comply with the required contents thereof in respect of the amended
decision. (Pacific Life Assurance Corporation v. Sison, G.R. No. 122839,
November 20, 1998; Magdalena Estates, Inc. v. Caluag,G.R. No. L-16250, June
30, 1964)
Q: On July 15, 2009, Atty. Manananggol was served copies of numerous
unfavorable judgments and orders. On July 29, 2009, he filed motions for
reconsideration which were denied. He received the notices of denial of the
motions for reconsideration on October 2, 2009, a Friday. He immediately
informed his clients who, in turn, uniformly instructed him to appeal. How, when
and where should he pursue the appropriate remedy for each of the following:
a. Judgment of a Municipal Trial Court (MTC) pursuant to its delegated
jurisdiction dismissing his client’s application for land registration? A: By
notice of appeal, within 15 days from notice of judgment or final order
appealed from, to the Court of Appeals.
b. Judgment of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) denying his client’s petition
for a Writ of Habeas Data? A: By verified petition for review on certiorari
under Rule 45, with the modification that appellant may raise questions of
fact or law or both, within 5 work days from date of notice of the judgment
or final order to the Supreme Court. (Sec. 19, A.M. No. 08-1- 16-SC)
c. Order of a Family Court denying his client’s petition for habeas corpus in
relation to custody of a minor child? A: By notice of appeal, within 48 hours
from notice of judgment or final order to the Court of Appeals. (Sec. 14, R.A.
No. 8369 in relation to Sec. 3, Rule 41)
d. Order of the RTC denying his client’s Petition for Certiorari questioning
the Metropolitan Trial Court’s (MeTC’s) denial of a motion to suspend
criminal proceedings? REMEDIAL Law 42 A: By notice of appeal, within
15 days from notice of the finalOrder, to the Court of Appeals. (Magestrado
v. People, G.R. No. 148072, July 7, 2007)
e. Judgment of the First Division of the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA)
affirming the RTC decision convicting his client for violation of the National
Internal Revenue Code? (2009 Bar) A: By petition for review filed with the
CTA en banc, within 30 days from receipt of the decision or ruling in
question. (Sec. 9[b], Rule 9, Revised Rulesof Court of Tax Appeals) Relief
from judgments, orders and other proceedings
Q: Mike was renting an apartment unit in the building owned by Jonathan. When
Mike failed to pay six months’ rent, Jonathan filed an ejectment suit. The
Municipal Trial Court (MTC) rendered judgment in favor of Jonathan, who then
filed a motion for the issuance of a writ of execution. The MTC issued the writ.
a. How can Mike stay the execution of the MTC judgment? Explain. A: Writ of
Execution shall be issue if immediately upon motion, unless Mike (a) perfects his
appeal to the RTC, (b) files a sufficient supersedeas bond to pay the rents,
damages and costs accruing up to the time of the judgment appealed from, and (c)
deposits monthly with the RTC during the pendency of the appeal the amount of
rent due from time to time. (Sec. 19, Rule 70)
b. Mike appealed to the Regional Trial Court (RTC), which affirmed the MTC
decision. Mike then filed a petition for review with the Court of Appeals (CA).
The CA dismissed the petition on the ground that the sheriff had already executed
the MTC decision and had ejected Mike from the premises, thus rendering the
appeal moot and academic. Is the CA correct? Reasons. (2009 Bar)
A: No, the Court of Appeals is not correct. The dismissal of the appeal is wrong
because the execution of the RTC judgment is only in respect of the eviction of the
defendant from the leased premises. Such execution pending appeal has no effect
on the merits of the ejectment suit which still has to be resolved in the pending
appeal. Sec. 21, Rule 70 provides that the RTC judgment against the defendant
shall be immediately executory, without prejudice to a further appeal that may be
taken therefrom. (Uy v. Santiago, G.R. No. 131237, July 31, 2000)
9
Q: Judgment was rendered against defendant Jaypee in an action for unlawful
detainer. The judgment ordered Jaypee to vacate and to pay attorney's fees in favor
of Bart, the plaintiff. To prevent the immediate execution of the judgment, would
you advise the posting of a supersedeas bond as counsel for Jaypee?
A: No, as counsel for Jaypee I would not advise the posting of a supersedeas bond.
Under the Rule 70, a supersedeas bond is necessary to prevent immediate
execution only if the judgment awarded rents, damages, and costs. Here, the
judgment only ordered Jaypee to vacate and to pay attorney’s fees. A supersedeas
bond is not required to cover attorney’s fees (Once v. Gonzalez, G.R. No. L-
44806, March 31, 1977). Hence the posting of a supersedeas bond is not required.
Q: Having obtained favorable judgment in his suit for a sum of money against
Patricio, Orencio sought the issuance of a writ of execution. When the writ was
issued, the sheriff levied upon a parcel of land that Patricio owns, and a date was
set for the execution sale.
a. How may Patricio prevent the sale of the property on execution?
A: Patricio may file a Petition for Relief with preliminary injunction (Rule
38), posting a bond equivalent to the value of the property levied upon; or
assail the levy as invalid if ground exists. Patricio may also simply pay the
amount required by the writ and the costs incurred therewith.
b. If Orencio is the purchaser of the property at the execution sale, how much
does he have to pay? Explain. A: Orencio, the judgment creditor should pay
only the excess amount of the bid over the amount of the judgment, if the bid
exceeds the amount of the judgment. c. If the property is sold to a third party
at the execution sale, what can Patricio do to recover the property? Explain.
(2009 Bar)
A: Patricio can exercise his right of legal redemption within 1 year from date
of registration of the certificate of sale by paying the amount of the purchase
price with interest of 1% monthly, plus assessment and taxes paid by the
purchaser, with interest thereon, at the same rate.
Q: A default judgment was rendered by the RTC ordering D to pay P a sum of
money. The judgment became final, but D filed a petition for relief and obtained a
writ of preliminary injunction staying the enforcement of the judgment. After
hearing, the RTC dismissed D’s petition, whereupon P immediately moved for the
execution of the judgment in his favour. Should P’s motion be granted? Why?
(2002 Bar)
A: P’s immediate motion for execution of the judgment in his favor should be
granted because the dismissal of D’s petition for relief also dissolves the writ of
preliminary injunction staying the enforcement of the judgment, even if the
dismissal is not yet final. (Golez v. Leonidas, G.R. No. L-56587, August 31, 1981)
Q: After his properties were attached, defendant Porfirio filed a sufficient
counterbond. The trial court discharged the attachment. Nonetheless, Porfirio
suffered substantial prejudice due to the unwarranted attachment. In the end, the
trial court rendered a judgment in Porfirio's favor by ordering the plaintiff to pay
damages because the plaintiff was not entitled to the attachment. Porfirio moved to
charge the plaintiff's attachment bond. The plaintiff and his sureties opposed the
motion, claiming that the filing of the counterbond had relieved the plaintiff's
attachment bond from all liability for the damages. Rule on Porfirio's motion.
(2008 Bar)
A: Porfirio’s motion to charge plaintiff’s attachment bond is proper and can be
granted. It is not correct to contend that Porfirio’s filing of a counterbond
constitutes a waiver of his right to proceed against the attachment bond for the
damages he suffered from the unwarranted attachment. It is a condition inter alia
of the applicant’s attachment bond that he will pay all the costs which may be
adjudged to the adverse party and all damages which the latter may sustain by
reason of the attachment, if the court shall finally adjudge that the applicant was
not entitled thereto. (Sec. 4, Rule 57; D.M. Wenceslao and Associates, Inc. v.
Readycon Trading and Construction Corp., G.R. No. 154106, June 29, 2004) Time
to file the petition
Q: May an order denying the probate of a will still be overturned after the period
to appeal therefrom has lapsed? Why? (2002 Bar)
A: Yes, an order denying the probate of a will may be overturned after the period
to appeal therefrom has lapsed. A petition for refief may be filed on the grounds of
fraud, accident, mistake or excusable negligence within a period of sixty (60) days
after the petitioner learns of the judgment or final order and not more than six (6)
months after such judgment or final order was entered. (Secs. 1 and 3, Rule 38;
Soriano v. Asi, G.R. No. L-9633, January 29, 1957) An action for annulment may
also be filed on the ground of extrinsic fraud within four (4) years from its
discovery, and if based on lack of jurisdiction, before it is barred by laches or
estoppel. (Secs. 2 and 3, Rule 47)
 10

REVIEW OF FINAL JUDGMENTS OR FINAL ORDERS OF QUASI-

JUDICIAL AGENCIES (RULE 43) PERIOD OF APPEAL

The period shall be within 15 days from:

1. Notice of the award, judgment, final order or resolution; or

Quasi-judicial Body; Nature of Quasi-judicial Function
A quasi-judicial agency or body is an organ of government other than a court and
other than a legislature, which affects the rights of private parties through either
adjudication or rule-making.
A "quasi-judicial function" is a term which applies to the action, discretion, etc. of
public administrative officers or bodies, who are required to investigate facts, or
ascertain the existence of facts, hold hearings, and draw conclusions from them, as
a basis for their official action and to exercise discretion of a judicial nature.
(Monetary Board v. Philippine Veterans Bank, G.R. No. 189571, 2015)
2. Date of last publication, if publication is required by law for its effectivity; or
3. Denial of petitioner’s Motion for New Trial or Motion for Reconsideration duly
filed in accordance with the governing law of the court or agency a quo. Only one
(1) Motion for Reconsideration is shall be allowed. (Sec. 4, Rule 43)
Note: Rule 43, Section 4 specifically allows only one motion for reconsideration to
an appealing party; as such, the reckoning of the fifteen (15)-day period to perfect
the appeal starts from the receipt of the resolution denying the motion for
reconsideration. (Yinlu Bicol Mining Corporation v. Trans-Asia Oil and Energy
Development Corporation, 2015)

Quasi-judicial Agencies Covered by Rule 43
Under Section 1 and 3 of Rule 43, appeals from awards, judgments, final orders,
resolutions of or authorized by any quasi-judicial agency in the exercise of its
quasi-judicial functions shall be taken to the Court of Appeals. The list below is
not exclusive:
Upon proper motion and the payment of the full amount of the docket fees before
the expiration of the reglementary period, the Court of Appeals may grant an
additional period of fifteen (15) days only within which to file the petition for
review. (Sec. 4, Rule 43)
No further extension shall be granted except for the most compelling reason and in
no case to exceed 15 days.

i. Civil Service Commission

ii. Central Board of Assessment Appeals.

iii. Securities and Exchange Commission.

iv. Office of the President (OP).

Note: The parties may file a motion for reconsideration of the order,
ruling, or decision of the OP. Since the OP is essentially an administrative
agency exercising quasi-judicial functions, its decisions or resolutions may
be appealed to the CA through a petition for review under Rule 43 of the
Rules of Court. Rule 65 bars its use as a mode of review when an appeal
or any other remedy at law is available (subject to exceptions). (PBA vs.
Gaite, G.R. No. 170312, 2009)

v. Land Registration Authority.

vi. Social Security Commission.
vii. Civil Aeronautics Board. viii. Bureau of Patents.
ix. Trademarks and Technology Transfer.
x. National Electrification Administration.
xi. Energy Regulatory Board.
xii. National Telecommunications Commission.
xiii. Dept. of Agrarian Reform under R.A. No. 6657.
xiv. Government Service Insurance System. Applicability to NLRC
xv. Employees Compensation Commission.
xvi. Agricultural Invention Board. General Rule: This Rule shall not apply to judgments or final orders issued under
xvii. Insurance Commission. the Labor Code of the Philippines. (Rule 43, Sec. 2)
xviii. Philippine Atomic Energy Commission.
xix. Board of Investments. Exception: Judgments and final orders or resolutions of the National Labor
xx. Construction Industry Arbitration Commission; and Relations Commission are now reviewable, in the first instance, by the Court of
xxi. Voluntary arbitrators authorized by law. Appeals on certiorari under Rule 65, but those of the Employees Compensation
Commission should be brought to the CA through a petition for review under this
4BLUE95 Note: The decision or award of the voluntary arbitrator or panel of Rule. (St. Martin Funeral Homes v. NLRC, G.R. No. 130866, 1998)
arbitrators under the Labor Code should likewise be appealable to the Court of
Appeals, in line with the procedure outlined in Revised Administrative Circular
No. 1-95 (now embodied in Rule 43 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure), just
like those of the quasi-judicial agencies, boards and commissions enumerated
therein, and consistent with the original purpose to provide a uniform procedure
for the appellate review of adjudications of all quasi-judicial entities. (Samahan ng
mga Manggagawa sa Hyatt vs. Bacungan, G.R. No. 149050, 2009) A motion for
reconsideration must first be filed by the party adversely affected by the ruling of
the Voluntary Abitrator or Panel of Voluntary Arbitrator within 10 days from such
ruling. Only after the resolution of the motion for reconsideration may the
aggrieved party appeal to the CA by filing the petition for review under Rule 43 of
the Rules of Court within 15 days from notice pursuant to Section 4 of Rule 43.
(Guagua National Colleges v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 188492, 2018)
 11

The “Harmless Error Rule” In Appellate Decisions

No error in either the admission or the exclusion of evidence and no error or defect
in any ruling or order or in anything done or omitted by the trial court or by any of
the parties is ground for granting a new trial or for setting aside, modifying, or
otherwise disturbing a judgment or order, unless refusal to take such action
appears to the court inconsistent with substantial justice. The court at every stage
of the proceeding must disregard any error or defect which does not affect the
substantial rights of the parties. (Sec. 6, Rule 51).

General Rule: No error which does not affect the jurisdiction over the subject
matter or the validity of the judgment appealed from or the proceedings therein
will be considered unless stated in the assignment of errors, or closely related to or
dependent on an assigned error and properly argued in the brief, save as the court
may pass upon plain errors and clerical errors. (Sec. 8, Rule 51)

Exceptions:

a. Those affecting jurisdiction over subject matter;

b. Evidently plain and clerical errors within contemplation of law;
c. In order to serve ends of justice;
d. Matters raised in trial court having some bearing on issue which parties failed to
raise or which lower court ignored;
e. Matters closely related to error assigned; (Sps. Mario and Julia Campos v.
Republic, G.R. No. 184371, 2014)

DISMISSAL OF APPEAL

Sec. 1, Rule 50 lists 9 grounds wherein the CA may, on its own motion or on that
of the appellee, dismiss an appeal. These are:

a. Failure of the record on appeal to show on its face that the appeal was
taken within the period fixed by these Rules;
b. Failure to file the notice of appeal or the record on appeal within the
period prescribed by these Rules;
c. Failure of the appellant to pay the docket and other lawful fees as provided
in section 5, Rule 40 and section 4 of Rule 41(Bar Matter No. 803, 1998);
d. Unauthorized alterations, omissions or additions in the approved record on
appeal as provided in Section 4 of Rule 44;
e. Failure of the appellant to serve and file the required number of copies of
his brief or memorandum within the time provided by these Rules;

f. Absence of specific assignment of errors in the appellant's brief, or of page

references to the record as required in section 13, paragraphs (a), (c), (d) and
(f) of Rule 44;

g. Failure of the appellant to take the necessary steps for the correction or
completion of the record within the time limited by the court in its order;

h. Failure of the appellant to appear at the preliminary conference under Rule

48 or to comply with orders, circulars, or directives of the court without
justifiable cause; and
i. The fact that the order or judgment appealed from is not appealable.

In deciding to dismiss an appeal, the CA is bound to exercise its sound discretion

upon taking all the pertinent circumstances into due consideration. (People v. Diaz,
G.R. No. 180677, 2013). Also, a litigant’s failure to furnish his opponent with a
copy of his appeal brief does not suffice to warrant the dismissal of an appeal. All
that is needed is for the court to order the litigant to furnish opponent with a copy
WITHDRAWAL OF AN APPEAL of brief. (Tiangco v. Land Bank of the Philippines, G.R. No. 153998, 2010)

Filing a motion to withdraw appeal does not result in automatic withdrawal of the
appeal. An appeal may be withdrawn as of right at any time before the filing of the
appellee's brief. Thereafter, the withdrawal may be allowed in the discretion of the
court. (Sec. 3, Rule 50; In Re: Resolution CA-G.R. No. 94656 v. Mortel, 2016)
 12

Q: Miguel filed a Complaint for damages against Jose, who denied liability and Q: Tom Wallis filed with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) a petition for declaration
filed a Motion to Dismiss on the ground of failure to state a cause of action. In an of nullity of his marriage with Debi Wallis on the ground of psychological
Order received by Jose on January 5, 2015, the trial court denied the Motion to incapacity of the latter. Before filing the petition, Tom Wallis had told Debi Wallis
Dismiss. On February 4, 2015, Jose sought reconsideration of that Order through a that he wanted the annulment of their marriage because he was already fed up with
Motion for Reconsideration. Miguel opposed the Motion for Reconsideration on her irrational and eccentric behaviour. However, in the petition for declaration of
the ground that it was filed out of time. Jose countered that the 15-day rule under nullity of marriage, the correct residential address of Debi Wallis was deliberately
Section 1 of Rule 52 does not apply where the Order sought to be reconsidered is not alleged and instead, the resident address of their married son was stated.
an interlocutory order that does not attain finality. Is Jose correct? Explain. (2016 Summons was served by served by substituted service at the address stated in the
Bar) petition. For failure to file an answer, Debi Wallis was declared in default and
A: Yes, Jose is correct. The 15-day period to file a motion for reconsideration Tom Wallis presented evidence ex parte. The RTC rendered judgment declaring
under Section 1 of Rule 52 refers to a motion for reconsideration of a judgment or the marriage null and void on the ground of psychological incapacity of Debi
final resolution or order. Here, what is involved is an order denying a motion to Wallis. Three (3) years after the RTC judgment was rendered, Debi Wallis got
dismiss, which is not a final order as it does not terminate the case. The order is hold of a copy thereof and wanted to have the RTC judgment reversed and set
simply an interlocutory order which may be reconsidered by the trial court at any aside. If you are the lawyer of Debi Wallis, what judicial remedy or remedies will
time during the pendency of the case (Rasdas v. Estenor, G.R. 157605, December you take? Discuss and specify the ground or grounds for said remedy or remedies.
13, 2005). It should also be noted that Miguel did not file a motion to declare Jose (2014 Bar)
in default. Annulment of judgments or final orders and resolutions A: Debi Wallis may file a Petition for Annulment of Judgment under Rule 47 of
the Rules of Court, on the grounds of lack of jurisdiction, extrinsic fraud and
denial of the right to due process (Diona v. Balange, G.R. No. 173589, January 7,
2013). An action for annulment of judgment is resorted to in cases where the
ordinary remedies of new trial, appeal, petition for relief from judgment, or other
appropriate remedies are no longer available through no fault of the appellant and
is based on the grounds of extrinsic fraud, and lack of jurisdiction. (Aleban v.
Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 156021, September 23, 2005) 45 Relative thereto, the
Q: Mr. X filed a complaint for sum of money against his old friend, Mr. Y. In act of Tom Wallis in deliberately keeping Debi Wallis away from the Court, by
order to ensure that Mr. Y would not be able to file a responsive pleading and intentionally alleging a wrong address in the complaint constitutes extrinsic fraud.
much more, participate in the case, Mr. X paid off Mr. Y's counsel, Atty. Z, who Moreover, the failure of the Court to acquire jurisdiction over the person of the
deliberately let the case proceed as such without his client's knowledge. respondent, being an indispensable party, necessitates the annulment of judgment
Eventually, judgment was rendered on March 1, 2016 in Mr. X's favor, a copy of of the Regional Trial Court. Likewise, there is denial of the right to due process
which was received by Atty. Z on April 4, 2016. Bothered by his conscience, Atty. when Debi Wallis was not given an opportunity to be heard in the case. At any
Z brought the copy of the decision to Mr.Y on June 1, 2016, thereby surprising the rate, the Court erred in declaring the defendant in default because there is no
latter and causing him grief. Meanwhile, the decision became final and executory default in a petition for declaration of nullity of marriage. (Sec. 3, Rule 9)
in due course on April 19, 2016. Thereafter, Mr. Y took steps in vindicating his
rights, which culminated on August 15, 2016 when he, as represented by a new
counsel, filed a petition for annulment of judgment before the Court of Appeals
(CA) on the ground of extrinsic fraud. The CA dismissed the petition on the
ground that Mr. Y failed to submit a satisfactory explanation as to why he directly
resorted to a petition for annulment of judgment, when he could have filed a
petition for relief from judgment. What are the differences between a petition for
relief from judgment and a petition for annulment of judgment in terms of grounds
and periods to file? (1998, 2019 BAR)
A: In a Petition for relief from judgment, when a judgment or final order is entered
or any other proceeding is thereafter taken against a party in any court through
fraud, accident, mistake, or excusable negligence, he may file a petition in such
court and in the same case praying that the judgment, order or proceeding be set
aside. (Section 1, Rule 38) It must be filed within sixty (60) days after the
petitioner learns of the judgment, and not more than six (6) months after such
judgment was entered, or such proceeding was taken, and must be accompanied
with affidavit showing the fraud, accident, mistake, or excusable negligence relied
upon, and the facts constituting the petitioner’s good and substantial cause of
action or defense as the case may be. (Sec. 3, Rule 38) Whereas, in annulment of
judgment, the Court of Appeals can annul the judgment of the RTC in civil actions
when the ordinary remedies of new trial, appeal, petition for relief or other
appropriate remedies are no longer available through no fault of the petitioner.
(Sec. 1, Rule 47) The grounds for annulment of judgment may be based only on
the grounds of extrinsic fraud and lack of jurisdiction. Jurisprudence, however,
provides for the third ground which is denial of due process. If based on extrinsic
fraud, it must be filed within four (4) years from its discovery and if based on lack
of jurisdiction, before it is barred by laches or estoppel. (Teaño v. Municipality of
Navotas, G.R No. 205814, February 15, 2016)