Rule 45: Professor: Justice Gomez-Estoesta
Rule 45: Professor: Justice Gomez-Estoesta
❖ 2.11 FORM
❖ 2.12 QUESTION OF LAW v. QUESTION OF FACT
❖ 2.13 DISTINGUISHED FROM CERTIORARI UNDER
RULE 65
❖ 2.14 WHEN A PETITION FOR CERTIORARI UNDER
RULE 65 CAN BE TREATED AS AN APPEAL BY
CERTIORARI UNDER RULE 45
❖ 2.2 UNDER THE CONCEPT OF JUDICIAL COURTESY
❖ 2.3 THE INTERNAL RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT (A.M. No.
10-4-20-SC, Rules 3 and 6)
❖ 2.4 REVIEW OF JUDGEMENTS AND FINAL ORDERS OBTAINED IN:
❖ Writ of Amparo (Sec. 19, A.M. No. 07-9-12 dated Oct. 16, 2000)
❖ Writ of Habeas Data (Sec. 19, A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC dated January 22,
2008)
❖ Writ of Kalikasan (Sec. 16, Rule 7, Part III, A.M. No. 09-6-8-SC on the
Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases Resolution)
2.11 FORM
❖ CHECK RULE 45
2.12 QUESTION OF LAW v. QUESTION OF FACT
Rule 3, Section 1.
2) IT IS NOT A TRIER OF FACTS.
The Court is not a trier of facts its role is to decide cases
based on the findings of fact before it. Where the
Constitution, the law or the Court itself, in the exercise of
its discretion, decides to receive evidence, the reception
of evidence may be delegated to a member of the Court,
to either the Clerk of Court or one of the Division Clerks of
Court, or to one of the appellate courts or its justices who
shall submit to the Court a report and recommendation
on the basis of the evidence presented.
Rule 3, Section 2.
3) EXCEPTIONS
(a) the conclusion is a finding grounded entirely
on speculation, surmise and conjecture;
(b) the inference made is manifestly mistaken;
(c) there is grave abuse of discretion;
(d) the judgment is based on a
misapprehension of facts;
Rule 3, Section 4.
3) EXCEPTIONS
(e) the findings of fact are conflicting;
(f) the collegial appellate courts went beyond the
issues of the case, and their findings are contrary
to the admissions of both appellant and appellee;
(g) the findings of fact of the collegial appellate
courts are contrary to those of the trial court;
(h) said findings of fact are conclusions without
citation specific evidence on which they are based;
Rule 3, Section 4.
3) EXCEPTIONS
(i) the facts set forth in the petition as well as in the
petitioner’s main and reply briefs are not disputed by
the respondents;
(j) the findings of fact of the collegial appellate courts
are premised on the supposed evidence, but are
contradicted by the evidence on record; and
(k) all other similar and exceptional cases warranting
a review of the lower courts’ findings of fact.
Rule 3, Section 4.
4) ADVISORY OPINIONS ARE
PROSCRIBED.
Rule 3, Section 3.
RULE 6
FILING, RECEIVING &
PROCESSING OF INITIATORY
PLEADINGS AND APPEALS
Section 1. Governing rules of procedure in appeals or petitions
filed in the Supreme Court.
Section 2. Reception of pleadings and other documents.
Section 3. Assessment and payment.
Section 4. Docket number and entry in logbook.
Section 5. Case Administration System.
Section 6. Indexing and transmittal to Docket Division.
Section 7. Classification of cases.
Section 8. Recording of cases in the main docket book.
Section 9. The rollo for each case.
Section 10. Processing.
Section 11. Transmittal of rollo from the Receiving Section to
the Office of the Clerk of Court or the Division Clerk of Court.
2.4 REVIEW OF JUDGEMENTS AND FINAL ORDERS
OBTAINED
❖ Writ of Amparo (Sec. 19, A.M. No. 07-9-12 dated Oct. 16,
2000)
❖ Writ of Habeas Data (Sec. 19, A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC dated
January 22, 2008)
❖ Writ of Kalikasan (Sec. 16, Rule 7, Part III, A.M. No.
09-6-8-SC on the Rules of Procedure for Environmental
Cases Resolution)
Writ of Amparo (Sec. 19, A.M. No. 07-9-12 dated Oct. 16,
2000)
xxx
xxx
Writ of Habeas Data (Sec. 19, A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC dated
January 22, 2008)
❖ SEC. 19. Appeal. - Any party may appeal from the final
judgment or order to the Supreme Court under Rule 45.
The appeal may raise questions of fact or law or both.
❖ The period of appeal shall be five (5) working days from
the date of notice of the judgment or final order.
❖ The appeal shall be given the same priority as in habeas
corpus and amparo cases.
Writ of Kalikasan (Sec. 16, Rule 7, Part III, A.M. No. 09-6-8-SC
on the Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases Resolution)
❖ When is it available?
❖ 1. there is an actual or threatened violation of the constitutional right to
a balanced and healthful ecology;
❖ 2. the actual or threatened violation arises from an unlawful act or
omission of a public official or employee, or private individual or
entity; and
❖ 3. the actual or threatened violation involves or will lead to an
environmental damage of such magnitude as to prejudice the life,
health or property of inhabitants in two or more cities or provinces (LNL
Archipelago Minerals, Inc. v. Agham Party List, G.R. No. 209165, April
12, 2016).
Writ of Kalikasan (Sec. 16, Rule 7, Part III, A.M. No. 09-6-8-SC
on the Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases Resolution)
❖ Where is it filed?
❖ Section 3—
❖ Supreme Court or
❖ Any of the stations of the Court of Appeals
Writ of Kalikasan (Sec. 16, Rule 7, Part III, A.M. No. 09-6-8-SC
on the Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases Resolution)