Rule 45 – Appeals by Certiorari to the

Supreme Court

Appeal by certiorari from the RTC to the SC via Rule 45

RTC must have rendered judgment in the exercise of its original

jurisdiction [1 Regalado 609, 2010 Ed.].

If the RTC is in exercise of its appellate jurisdiction, proper remedy is

to appeal to
the CA via Rule 42 even if only questions of law are raised [1 Regalado
609, 2010 Ed.].

Note: A question of law exists when there is a doubt/controversy as to

what the law is on a certain state of facts. There is a question of fact
when the doubt/ difference arises as to the truth/ falsehood of facts
[Ramos v. Pepsi, G.R. No. L-22533 (1967)]. If the test is whether the
appellate court can determine the issue raised without reviewing or
evaluating the evidence, it is a question of law. The question must not
involve the examination of the probative value of the evidence
presented [Vda. De Arroyo v. El Beaterio, G.R. No. L- 22005 (1968)].

Grave abuse of discretion is not an allowable ground under Rule 45

[Martires v. CA, G.R. No. 78036-37 (1990)].
Appeal from Judgments or Final Orders of The Court of Appeals

Any alleged errors committed in the exercise of its jurisdiction will

amount to nothing more than errors of judgment which are reviewable
by timely appeal and not by special civil action of certiorari [Chuidian
v. Sandiganbayan (Fifth Division), G.R. No. 139941 (2001)]].

As provided in Rule 45, decisions, final orders or resolutions of the CA

in any case,
i.e., regardless of the nature of the action or proceedings involved,
may be appealed to
the SC by filing a petition for review, which would be but a
continuation of the appellate
process over the original case [ Fortune Guarantee and Insurance
Corporation v. CA,
G.R. No. 110701 (2002)].
>DISTINGUISH RULE 45 vs. RULE 65

Procedure [Rule 45]

File a verified petition for review on certiorari, which may include an
application for a writ of preliminary injunction or other provisional
remedies [Sec. 1].
Proof of service of a copy thereof on the lower court concerned and on
the adverse party shall be submitted together with the petition [Sec.
3].
↓
Pay the corresponding docket and other lawful fees to the COC of the
SC and deposit
the amount of ₱500.00 for costs at the time of the filing of the petition
[Sec. 3].
↓
SC may dismiss or deny the petition [Sec. 5], or give due course to it
[Sec. 8].
↓
If the petition is given due course, the SC may require the elevation of
the complete record of the case or specified parts thereof within 15
days from notice [Sec. 8].

Propriety as a mode of appeal

A party desiring to appeal by certiorari from a judgment or final order

or resolution of the CA, the Sandiganbayan, the RTC or other courts
whenever authorized by law, may file with the SC a verified petition for
review on certiorari [Sec. 1, Rule 45].

Only questions of law are allowed.

The petition shall raise only questions of law [Sec. 1, Rule 45].

Whether an appeal involves only questions of law or both questions of

law and fact is best left to the determination of an appellate court and
not by the court which rendered the
decision appealed from [PNB v. Romillo, etc., et al., G.R. No. L-70681
(1985)].
>Distinguish Questions of Law v. Questions of Fact

Conclusiveness of findings of fact

General rule: The SC is not a trier of facts and is not to review or
calibrate the evidence
on record. Moreover, findings of facts of trial court, as affirmed on
appeal by the CA, are conclusive on the court [ Boston Bank of the
Philippines v. Manalo, G.R. No. 158149
(2006)].

Exceptions:
CA’s findings of fact may be reviewed by the SC on appeal by certiorari
when:
1. Conclusion is a finding grounded entirely on speculations,
surmises or conjectures [Joaquin v. Navarro, G.R. No. L-5426
(1953)]
2. Inference made is manifestly mistaken, absurd or impossible
[Luna v. Linatok, G.R. No. 48403 (1942)]
3. There is grave abuse of discretion in the appreciation of facts
[Buyco v. People, G.R. No. L-6327 (1954)]
4. Judgment is based on a misapprehension of facts [ De la Cruz v.
Sosing, G.R. No. L- 4875 (1953)]
5. The CA’s findings of fact are conflicting [ Casica v. Villaseca, G.R.
No. L-9590 (1957)]
6. The CA, in making its findings, went beyond the issues of the
case and the same is contrary to the admissions of both
appellant and appellee [Nakpil & Sons v. CA, G.R. No. L-47851
(1986)]
7. The CA manifestly overlooked certain relevant facts not disputed
by the parties and which, if properly considered, would justify a
different conclusion [Abellana v. Dosdos, G.R. No. L-19498 (1965)]
8. The CA’s findings of fact are contrary to those of the trial court,
or are mere conclusions without citation of specific evidence, or
where the facts set forth by the petitioner are not disputed by the
respondent, or where the findings of fact of the CA are premised
 on absence of evidence but are contradicted by the evidence of
record [Manlapaz v. CA, G.R. No. L-56589 (1987)]

Period of appeal
Within 15 days from notice of the
1. Judgment or final order or resolution appealed from, or
2. Denial of the petitioner’s MNT or MR filed in due time after notice
of the judgment. [Sec. 2, Rule 45]

Note: The Neypes doctrine which gives a fresh 15-day period to the
appellant is also applicable to Rule 45 petitions [ Neypes v. CA, G.R.
No. 141524 (2005)].

Extension of period
On motion duly filed and served, with full payment of the docket and
other lawful fees and the deposit for costs before the expiration of the
reglementary period, the SC may for justifiable reasons grant an
extension of 30 days only within which to file the petition [Sec. 2, Rule
45].

Form and contents of petition

1. In 7 legible copies, with the original copy intended for the court
being indicated as
such by the petitioner
a. Under Sec. 5(a) of the Efficient Use of Paper Rule [A.M. 11-
9-4-SC], file one original (properly marked) and four copies,
unless the case is referred to the SC en banc, in which
event, the parties shall file ten additional copies and
simultaneously soft copies of the same and their annexes
(the latter in PDF format) either by email to the SC’s e-mail
address or by compact disc (CD)
2. Full names of the parties to the case, without impleading the
lower courts or judges thereof either as petitioners or
respondents;
3. Specific material dates showing that it was filed on time;
4. A concise statement of the
a. Matters involved
 b. Issues raised
c. Specification of errors of fact or law, or both, allegedly
committed by the rtc, and
d. Reasons or arguments relied upon for the allowance of the
appeal
5. Clearly legible duplicate originals or true copies of the judgments
or final orders of both lower courts, certified correct by the COC
of the RTC,
6. Requisite number of plain copies thereof and of the pleadings and
other material portions of the record as would support the
allegations of the petition
7. Certificate of non-forum shopping [Sec. 2, Rule 45]

Grounds for denial of petition

The SC may dismiss the petition on motion or motu proprio upon
showing:
a. Failure of petitioner to comply with
1. Payment of docket or other lawful fees
2. Deposit for costs
3. Proof of Service; and
4. Contents of and documents which would accompany the
petition
b. Appeal is without merit
c. It is prosecuted manifestly for delay
d. That the questions raised are so unsubstantial as to require
consideration [Sec. 5, Rule 45].

Note: Although the lower court is not a party to the case, failure to
present proof of service of copies to the lower court and to the
adverse party shall result in the outright dismissal of the appeal. This
is because the service is for the purpose of giving the lower court
notice that its judgment should not be entered since it is not yet
executory due to the pending petition [1 Regalado 615-616, 2010 Ed.].

Review is discretionary
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 therefore.
The following are examples that may be considered by the court:
1. When the court a quo has decided a question of substance, not
theretofore determined by the SC, or has decided it in a way
probably not in accord with law or with the applicable decisions
of the SC, or
2. 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. [Sec. 6, Rule 45]

Elevation of records
If the petition is given due course, the SC may require the elevation of
the complete record of the case or specified parts thereof within 15
days from notice [Sec. 8, Rule 45].

Appeal from Judgments or Final Orders of The Sandiganbayan

Mode of review
Decisions and final orders of the Sandiganbayan shall be appealable to
the SC by petition for review on certiorari raising pure questions of law
in accordance with Rule
45 of the ROC [Sec. 7, P.D. 1606, as amended; and Sec. 1, Rule 45].

Appeal from Judgments or Final Orders of The Court of Tax Appeals

Mode of review
The CTA is no longer a quasi-judicial agency under R.A. 9282, as of
April 7, 2004. The CTA is no longer covered by Rule 43. A party
adversely affected by a decision or ruling of the CTA en banc may file
with the SC a verified petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45
[Sec. 11, R.A. 9282 and A.M. No. 07-7-12-SC].