Professional Documents
Culture Documents
RULE 64-65 - COMELEC&COA and Certiorari, Prohibition and Mandamus
RULE 64-65 - COMELEC&COA and Certiorari, Prohibition and Mandamus
REVIEW OF JUDGMENTS AND FINAL ORDERS OR RESOLUTIONS OF THE Commission concerned and on the adverse party, and of the timely payment of
COMELEC AND THE COA docket and other lawful fees.
Sec. 1. Scope. The failure of the petitioner to comply with any of the foregoing requirements shall be
Sec. 2. Mode of review. sufficient ground for the dismissal of the petition.
A judgment or final order or resolution of the Comelec and the COA may be brought by
the aggrieved party to the Supreme Court on certiorari under Rule 65, except as Sec. 6. Order to comment.
hereinafter provided. If the Supreme Court finds the petitions sufficient in form and substance, the Court
shall order the respondents to file their comments on the petition within 10 days
Sec. 3. Time to file petition. from notice thereof; otherwise, the Court may dismiss the petition outright. The court
The petition shall be filed within 30 days from notice of the judgment or final order or may also dismiss the petition if it was filed manifestly for delay, or the question
resolution sought to be reviewed. The filing of a motion for new trial or reconsideration raised is too unsubstantial to warrant further proceedings.
of said judgment or final order or resolution, if allowed under the procedural rules of
the Commission concerned, shall interrupt the period herein fixed. If the motion is Sec. 7. Comments of respondents.
denied, the aggrieved party may file the petition within the remaining period, but which The comments of the respondents shall be filed in 18 legible copies. The original
shall not be less than 5 days in any event, reckoned from notice of denial. shall be accompanied by certified true copies of such material portions of the record
as are referred to therein together with other supporting papers. The requisite number
Sec. 4. Docket and other lawful fees. of copies of the comments shall contain plain copies of all documents attached to the
Upon the filing of the petition, the petitioner shall pay to the clerk of court the docket original and a copy thereof shall be served on the petitioner.
and other lawful fees and deposit the amount of P500.00 for costs.
No other pleading may be filed by any party unless required or allowed by the
Sec. 5. Form and contents of petition. Court.
The petition shall be verified and filed in 18 legible copies. The petition shall name
the aggrieved party as petitioner and shall join as respondents the Commission Sec. 8. Effect of filing.
concerned and the person or persons interested in sustaining the judgment, final order The filing of a petition for certiorari shall not stay the execution of the judgment,
or resolution a quo. The petition shall (1) state the facts with certainty, (2) present final order or resolution sought to be reviewed, unless the Supreme Court shall
clearly the issues involved, (3) set forth the grounds and brief arguments relied upon direct otherwise upon such terms as it may deem just.
for review, and (4) pray for judgment annulling or modifying the questioned judgment,
final order or resolution. Findings of fact of the Commission supported by substantial Sec. 9. Submission for decision.
evidence shall be final and non-reviewable. Unless the Court sets the case for oral argument, or requires the parties to submit
memoranda, the case shall be deemed submitted for decision upon the filing of the
The petition shall be accompanied by a clearly legible duplicate original or comments of the petition, and such other pleadings or papers as may be required or
certified true copy of the judgment, final order or resolution subject thereof, together allowed, or the expiration of the period to do so.
with certified true copies of such material portions of the record as are referred to
therein and other documents relevant and pertinent thereto. The requisite number of
copies if the petition shall contain plain copies of all documents attached to the original
copy of said petition.
The petition shall state the specific material dates showing that it was filed within the
period fixed herein, and shall contain a sworn certification against forum shopping.
RULE 65
CERTIORARI, PROHIBITION AND MANDAMUS respondent respondent exercise judicial and/or non-judicial
exercising judicial functions.
Sec. 1. Petition for CERTIORARI. or quasi-judicial
When any tribunal, board or officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions (1) has functions.
acted without or in excess of its or his jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion
amounting to lack or excess of its or his jurisdiction, and (2) there is no appeal, or A respondent is said to be exercising judicial functions where he has (1) the power
any plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law, a to determine what the law is, (2) what are the legal rights of the parties, and (3) he
person aggrieved thereby may file a verified petition in the proper court, alleging the undertakes to determine these questions and adjudicate upon the rights of the parties.
facts with certainty and praying that the judgment be rendered annulling or modifying
the proceedings of such tribunal, board or officer, and granting such incidental reliefs The respondent acts without jurisdiction if he does not have the legal power to
as law and justice may require. determine the case.
The petition shall be accompanied by a (1) certified true copy of the judgment, There is excess of jurisdiction where the respondent, being clothed with the power
order or resolution subject thereof, (2) copies of all pleadings and documents to determine the case, oversteps his authority as determined by law.
relevant and pertinent thereto, and (3) a sworn certification of non-forum shopping.
There is grave abuse of discretion where the respondent acts in a capricious,
The writ of certiorari is proper to correct errors of jurisdiction committed by the lower whimsical, arbitrary or despotic manner in the exercise of his judgment as to be
court, or grave abuse of discretion which is tantamount to lack of jurisdiction. Where said to be equivalent to lack of jurisdiction.
the error is not one of jurisdiction but an error of law or fact which is a mistake of
judgment, appeal is the remedy. A requisite common to the writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus is that these
writs may be availed of only when there is no appeal, or any plain, speedy and
However, the SC has doctrinally observed that it is sometimes necessary to delve into adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law from the acts of the respondent.
factual issues in order to resolve allegations of grave abuse of discretion as a ground
for the special civil actions of certiorari and prohibition. Where the proper remedy is appeal, the action for certiorari will not be entertained. The
original action for certiorari is not a substitute for appeal, especially when the remedy
“person aggrieved” – refers to one who is a party with legal standing founded upon of appeal was lost thru the fault of the petitioner, except where the court acted without
material interest in the proceedings before said court. jurisdiction in issuing the order.
The mere pendency of a special civil action for certiorari, in connection with a pending However, even when appeal is available and is the proper remedy, the Supreme Court
case in a lower court, does not interrupt the course of the latter if there is no writ of has allowed a writ of certiorari:
injunction. 1. Where the appeal does not constitute a speedy and adequate remedy;
2. Where the orders were also issued either in excess of or without jurisdiction;
Certiorari, prohibition and mandamus are distinguished as follows: 3. For certain special considerations, as public welfare or public policy;
Certiorari Prohibition Mandamus 4. Where, in criminal actions, the court rejects the rebuttal evidence of the
With respect to the Intended to Intended to Intended to prosecution as, in case if acquittal, there could be no remedy;
purpose of the correct an act prevent the compel the 5. Where the order is a patent nullity;
writ performed by the commission or performance of the 6. Where the decision in the certiorari case will avoid future litigations.
respondent. carrying out of an act desired.
act. All of these petitions must be verified and, in the case certiorari and prohibition,
With respect to the Extends only to Discretionary and Ministerial acts. accompanied by certified copies of the judgment or order complained of and the
act sought to be discretionary acts. ministerial acts. pertinent pleadings and documents.
controlled
With respect to the Lies only against a Available against respondents who
A remedy is considered “plain, speedy and adequate” if it will promptly relieve the or his jurisdiction, and there is no appeal or any other plain, speedy, and adequate
petitioner from the injurious effects of the judgment and the acts of the lower court or remedy in the ordinary course of law, a person aggrieved thereby may file a verified
agency. Thus, while in the regular course of the appeal the interlocutory acts of the petition in the proper court, alleging the facts with certainty and praying that the
court may be assigned as errors, such remedy may not necessarily be adequate as it judgment be rendered commanding the respondent to desist from further
can be availed of only in the future and prejudice may have been caused in the interim, proceedings in the action or matter specified therein, or otherwise granting such
hence certiorari is permitted to be availed of. incidental reliefs as law and justice may require.
The rule is that, before certiorari may be availed of, the petitioner must have filed a The petition shall likewise be accompanied by a certified true copy of the judgment or
motion for reconsideration by the lower court of the act or order complained of. order subject thereof, copies of all pleadings and documents relevant and pertinent
The purpose of this requirement is to enable the lower court, in the first instance, to thereto, and a sworn certification of non-forum shopping.
pass upon and correct its mistakes without the intervention of the higher court. For this
reason, it has been held that such motion for reconsideration, reiterating the same Prohibition is a preventive remedy. However, to prevent the respondent from
grounds against the order sought to be considered, is not covered by the pro forma performing the act sought to be prevented during the pendency of the proceedings for
rule if it is directed against an interlocutory order. the writ, the petitioner should obtain a restraining order and/or a writ if
preliminary injunction.
In the case of a final order or judgment, a motion for reconsideration prior to taking
an appeal is not required; hence, in such a case, the pro forma rule applies. Prohibition lies against judicial or ministerial functions, but not to legislative
functions.
Motion for reconsideration of an interlocutory order may be dispensed with: In order that prohibition will lie against an executive officer, the petitioner must first
1. Where the order is a Patent nullity exhaust all administrative remedies.
2. Where the Questions raised in the certiorari proceedings have been duly
raised and passed upon by the lower court Prohibition, and not mandamus, is the remedy where a motion to dismiss is improperly
3. Where there is an Urgent necessity for the resolution of the question and any denied.
further delay would prejudice the interests of the Government
4. Where, under the circumstances, a motion for reconsideration would be Sec. 3. Petition for MANDAMUS.
Useless When any tribunal, corporation, board, officer or person (1) unlawfully neglects the
5. Where petitioner was Deprived of due process and there is extreme urgency performance of an act which the law specifically enjoins as a duty resulting from
for relief an office, trust, or station, or (2) unlawfully excludes another from the use and
6. Where, in a criminal case, Relief from an order of arrest is urgent and the enjoyment of a right or office to which such other is entitled, and there is no plain,
granting of such relief by the trial court is improbable speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law, the person aggrieved
7. Where the proceedings in the lower court are a nullity for Lack of due process thereby may file a verified petition in the proper court, alleging the facts with
8. Where the proceeding was Ex parte or in which the petitioner had no certainty and praying that the judgment be rendered commanding the respondent,
opportunity to object immediately or at some other time to be specified by the court, to do the act
9. Where the issue raised is one purely of Law or where public interest is required to be done to protect the rights of the petitioner, and to pay the damages
involved. (PQU-DREL) sustained by the petitioner by reason of the wrongful acts of the respondent.
In original actions for certiorari under this Rule, the findings of fact of the Court of The petition shall also contain a sworn certification of non-forum shopping.
Appeals are not conclusive or binding upon the Supreme Court.
Discretion – a power or a right conferred upon them by law of acting officially, under
Sec. 2. Petition for PROHIBITION. certain circumstances, uncontrolled by the judgment or conscience of others.
When the proceedings of any tribunal, corporation, board, officer or person, whether
exercising judicial, quasi-judicial or ministerial functions, are without or in excess of its If the law imposes a duty upon a public officer and gives him the right to decide how or
or his jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of its when the duty shall be performed, such duty us discretionary and not ministerial. The
duty is ministerial only when the discharge of the same requires neither the exercise of Sec. 4. When and where to file petition.
official discretion or judgment. The petition shall be filed not later than 60 days from notice of judgment, order or
resolution. In case a motion for consideration or new trial is timely filed, whether such
Mandamus will lie to compel a ministerial duty, not a discretionary duty, and motion is required or not, the petition shall be filed not later than 60 days counted
petitioner must show that he has a well-defined, clear and certain right to warrant the from notice of the denial of the motion.
grant thereof.
If the petition relates to an or omission of a municipal trial court or of a
However, in extreme situations generally in criminal cases, mandamus lies to compel corporation, a board, an officer or a person, it shall be filed with the RTC
the performance by the fiscal of what ostensibly are discretionary functions where, by exercising jurisdiction over the territorial areas as defined by the Supreme Court. It may
reason of grave abuse of discretion on his part, his actuations are tantamount to a also be filed with the Court of Appeals or with the Sandiganbayan, whether or not
willful refusal to perform a duty specifically required by law. the same is in aid of the court’s appellate jurisdiction
While the discretion of a court will not ordinarily be controlled by mandamus, where If the petition involves an act or omission of a quasi-judicial agency, unless
such discretion can be legally exercised in only one way and it refuses to act, otherwise provided by law or these rules, the petition shall be filed with and be
mandamus will lie to compel the court to exercise it. cognizable only by the Court of Appeals.
The general rule is that in the performance of an official duty or act involving In election cases involving an act or omission of a municipal or a regional
discretion, such official can only be directed by mandamus to act but not to act in one trial court, the petition shall be filed exclusively with the Commission on
way or the other. An exception to this rule is where there has been gross abuse of Elections, in aid of its appellate jurisdiction.
discretion, manifest injustice, or palpable excess of authority, in which case
the respondent can be ordered to act in a particular manner, especially where a The petitioner is not at complete liberty to file his petition in any of the above stated
constitutional right has been violated. courts just because they have concurrent original jurisdiction over the same. The
hierarchy of courts must be observed.
While mandamus lies to compel a court to give due course to the appeal which it
has erroneously dismissed, mandamus will not lie to compel a court to dismiss the The Supreme Court will not entertain direct resort to it unless the (1) redress desired
appeal as the remedy is to assign such failure to dismiss as an error in the cannot be obtained in the appropriate courts or (2) where exceptional and compelling
course of the appeal. circumstances justify availment of a remedy within and calling for the exercise of our
primary jurisdiction.
The appellate court may deny a petition for mandamus if it is frivolous and intended
solely for delay. Sec. 5. Respondents and costs in certain cases.
When the petition filed relates to the acts or omissions of (1) a judge, (2) court, (3)
Mandamus does not lie to compel the performance of a contractual duty, especially if a quasi-judicial agency, (4) tribunal, (5) corporation, (6) board, (7) officer or person,
contract is disputed, and such mandamus suit cannot be converted into an ordinary the petitioner shall join as private respondent or respondents with such public
action for breach of contract. respondent or respondents, the person or persons interested in sustaining the
proceedings in the court; and it shall be the duty of such private respondents to
Mandamus can be availed of only by the party who has direct legal interest in the appear and defend, both in his or their own behalf and in behalf of the public
right sought to be enforced. However, if the question is one of public right and the respondent or respondents affected by the proceedings, and the costs awarded in
object of the mandamus suit is to procure the performance of a public duty, it is such proceedings in favor of the petitioner shall be against the private
sufficient to show that petitioner is a citizen even if he has no special interest. respondents only, and not against the judge, quasi-judicial agency, tribunal,
corporation, board, officer or person impleaded as public respondent or respondents.
Where the case involves only legal questions, the litigant need not exhaust all
administrative remedies before such judicial relief can be sought. Unless otherwise specifically directed by the court where the petition is pending, the
public respondents shall not appear in or file an answer or comment to the petition
or pleading therein. If the case is elevated to a higher court by either party, the public expiration. Failure of the public respondent to proceed with the principal case
respondents shall be included therein as nominal parties. However, unless may be a ground for an administrative charge.
otherwise specifically directed by the court, they shall not appear or participate in the
proceedings therein. Sec. 8. Proceedings after comment is filed.
After the comment or other pleadings required by the court are filed, or the time for the
The private respondent being an indispensable party, his non-inclusion would filing thereof has expired, the court may (1) hear the case or (2) require the parties to
render the petition for certiorari defective. submit memoranda. If, after such hearing or filing of memoranda or upon the
expiration of the period for filing, the court finds that the allegations of the petition
Sec. 6. Order to comment. are true, it shall render judgment for such relief to which the petitioner is entitled.
If the petition is sufficient in form and substance to justify such process, the court shall
issue an order requiring the respondent or respondents to comment on the However, the court may dismiss the petition if it finds the same (1) patently
petition within 10 days from receipt of a copy thereof. Such (1) order shall be without merit or (2) prosecuted manifestly for delay, or (3) if the questions raised
served on the respondents in such a manner as the court may direct, together with (2) therein are too unsubstantial to require consideration. In such event, the court
a copy of the petition and (3) any annexes thereto. may award in favor of the respondent treble costs solidarily against the petitioner and
counsel, in addition to subjecting counsel to administrative sanctions.
In petitions for certiorari before the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals, the
provisions of section 2, Rule 56, shall be observed. Before giving due course thereto, The Court may impose motu proprio, based on res ipsa loquitur, other disciplinary
the court may require the respondents to file their comment to, and not a motion to sanctions or measure in erring lawyers for patently dilatory and unmeritorious
dismiss, the petition. Thereafter, the court may require the filing if a reply and such petitions for certiorari.
other responsive or other pleadings as it may deem necessary and proper.
Sec. 9. Service and enforcement of order or judgment.
In the petitions under this Rule filed in the RTC, no prior service of a copy thereof on A certified copy of the judgment rendered in accordance with the last preceding
the respondent is required. On the other hand, pursuant to the second paragraph of section shall be served upon the court, quasi-judicial agency, tribunal, corporation,
this section, in petitions for certiorari before the Supreme Court and the Court of board, officer or person concerned in such manner as the court may direct, and
Appeals, there must be proof of prior service of a copy of said petition on the disobedience thereto shall be punished as contempt. An execution may issue for
respondent, aside from the other requirements such as the contents and certifications any damages or costs awarded in accordance with section 1.
provided therefor.
Where the higher court finds that the lower court was in error, ordinarily the
Failure of the petitioner to comply with any of the foregoing requirements shall be case is remanded to the lower court for further appropriate proceedings. However,
sufficient ground for the dismissal of the petitions. it may render judgment on the merits without remand of the case where the facts
revealed by the pleadings clearly show that the petitioner is entitled to the relief prayed
Sec. 7. Expediting proceedings; injunctive relief. for.
The court in which the petition is filed may (1) issue orders expediting the proceedings,
and it may also (2) grant a temporary restraining order or a writ of preliminary
injunction for the preservation of the rights of the parties pending such proceedings.
The petition shall not interrupt the course of the principal case, unless a
temporary restraining order or a writ of preliminary injunction has been issued,
enjoining the public respondent from further proceeding with the case.
The public respondent shall proceed with the principal case within 10 days
from the filing of a petition for certiorari with a higher court or tribunal, absent a
temporary restraining order or a preliminary injunction, or upon its