Appellate Practice (Keynote) PDF

APPELLATE
PRACTICE
HON. MARIA FILOMENA D. SINGH
Associate Justice, Court of Appeals
Professor, Ateneo Law School
Professor, UP College of Law
Member, Corps of Professors, Philippine Judicial Academy
WHAT IS THE NATURE OF AN
APPEAL?
“Appeal is not a natural right. Neither is it part of

due process. It is a mere statutory privilege and,
as such, must be exercised only in the manner
provided and in strict accordance with law. Since
it is not granted by the Constitution, it can be
availed of only when a statute provides for it.”
(Levi Strauss & Co. v. Blancaflor, G.R. No. 199354,

20 April 2016)
HOWEVER…
“When made available by law or regulation,

however, a person cannot be deprived of the
right to appeal. Otherwise, there will be a
violation of the constitutional requirement of
due process of law.”
(Light Rail Transport Authority v. Salvana,

G.R. No. 192074, 10 June 2014)
Rule 37:
Motion for
Reconsideration
WHAT IS THE NATURE OF A
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION?
“A motion for reconsideration is one that does

not put forward a new issue, does not present
any new evidence, nor does it change the theory
of a case. It is one that only seeks for the
reconsideration of the judgment or final order
based on the same issues, contentions, and
evidence.”
(Reterta v. Lopez, G.R. No. 159941, 17 August 2011)

WHEN IS A MOTION FOR
RECONSIDERATION FILED?
“A motion for reconsideration of a judgment or a final order is
filed within the period for taking an appeal.” (Rule 37, Sec.
1)
The period of appeal referred to is within 15 days after
notice to the appellant of the judgment or final order
appealed from. (Rule 40, Sec. 2; Rule 41, Sec. 3; Rule 45, Sec. 2)
Where a record on appeal is required, the appellant shall

file a notice of appeal and a record on appeal within 30 days
from notice of final judgment or order. A record on appeal
shall be required only in special proceedings and in other cases
of multiple or separate appeals. (Rule 40, Sec. 2; Rule 41, Sec. 3;
Rule 45, Sec. 2)
NO MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE
MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL OR
RECONSIDERATION.
“No Motion for Extension of Time to File

Motion for New Trial or Reconsideration may be
filed with the MTC, RTC, CA. Such motion may
only be filed in cases pending with the Supreme
Court as the Court of last resort, which may, in
its sound discretion, either grant or deny the
extension requested.”
(Habaluyas v. Japson, G.R. No. L-70895, 30 May 1986)

WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF FILING A MOTION
FOR RECONSIDERATION ON THE PERIOD TO
APPEAL?
“The timely filing of a motion for

reconsideration interrupts the period to appeal.”
(Rule 40, Sec. 2; Rule 41, Sec. 3)

WHAT ARE THE GROUNDS FOR FILING
A MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION?
Under Rule 37, Section 1, a Motion for Reconsideration

must be in writing, a written notice of which must be
served on the adverse party. The motion may be
anchored on any of the following grounds:
That the damages awarded are excessive.

That the evidence is insufficient to justify the
decision or final order.
That the decision or final order is contrary to law.
WHAT ARE THE GROUNDS FOR FILING
A MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION?
“It is not sufficient to mention the ground relied

upon. It is necessary for the Motion for
Reconsideration to point out specifically the
findings or conclusions of the judgment or final
order which are not supported by the evidence or
which are contrary to law, making express reference
to the testimonial or documentary evidence or to
the provisions of law alleged to be contrary to such
findings or conclusions.”
(Rule 37, Section 2)
WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF NON-
COMPLIANCE WITH RULE 37, SECTION 2?
“Non-compliance with this requirement would

reduce the motion to a mere pro forma motion.
Under the provisions of Rule 37, Section 2, a pro
forma motion for reconsideration shall not toll
the reglementary period of appeal.”
(Victorio-Aquino v. Pacific Plans, Inc., G.R. No. 193108,

10 December 2014)
WHEN WILL A MOTION FOR
RECONSIDERATION BE DEEMED AS
PRO FORMA?
“A pro forma motion is one which does not

satisfy the requirements of the rules and one
which will be treated as a motion intended to
delay the proceedings.”
(Anama v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 187021,

25 January 2012)
PRO FORMA?
“It is settled that although a motion for

reconsideration may merely reiterate issues
already passed upon by the court, that by
itself does not make it pro forma and such is
immaterial because what is essential is compliance
with the requisites of the Rules.”
(First Lepanto-Taisho Insurance v. Chevron, G.R. No. 177839,

18 January 2012)
PRO FORMA?
“When the circumstances of a case do not show

an intent on the part of the pleader to merely
delay the proceedings and his motion reveals a
bona fide effort to present additional matters or
to reiterate his arguments in a different light, the
courts should be slow to declare the same
outright as pro forma.”
(PNB v. Paneda, G.R. No. 149236, 14 February 2007)

PRO FORMA?
“Because the doctrine relating to pro forma motions for

reconsideration impacts upon the reality and substance of the
statutory right of appeal, that doctrine should be applied
reasonably, rather than literally. The right to appeal, where it
exists, is an important and valuable right. Public policy would
be better served by according the appellate court an effective
opportunity to review the decision of the trial court on the
merits, rather than by aborting the right to appeal by a literal
application of the procedural rules relating to pro forma
motions for reconsideration.”
(Marikina Valley Corporation v. Flojo, G.R. No. 110801,
8 December 1995)
WHAT IS THE “FRESH PERIOD
RULE” OR THE “NEYPES RULE?”
“To standardize the appeal periods provided in the

Rules and to afford litigants a 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 new
trial or motion for reconsideration.”
(Neypes v. CA, G.R. No. 141524, 14 September 2005)

WHAT IS THE “FRESH PERIOD
RULE” OR THE “NEYPES RULE?”
“This ‘fresh period’ rule applies not only to Rule

41 governing appeals from the RTC but also to
Rule 40 governing appeals from the MTC to the
RTC; Rule 42 on petitions for review from the
RTC to the CA; Rule 43 on appeals from quasi-
judicial agencies to the CA, and Rule 45 governing
appeals by certiorari to the SC.”
(Neypes v. CA, G.R. No. 141524, 14 September 2005)

IS THE “NEYPES RULE” APPLICABLE
TO CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS?
“The provisions of B.P. 129 which provides that

the period for appeal shall be 15 days counted
from the notice of the final order, resolution,
award, judgment, or decision appealed from. This
period of appeal is, by the clear tenor of Sec. 39
applicable in ‘all cases’ hence, covers criminal
cases as well.”
(Yu v. Samson-Tatad, G.R. No. 170979, 9 February 2011)

WHAT IS THE REMEDY WHEN A MOTION
FOR RECONSIDERATION IS DENIED?
“The remedy from an order denying a motion for

reconsideration is not to appeal the order of
denial. The order is not appealable. The remedy is
to appeal from the judgment or final order subject
of the motion for reconsideration.”

WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF GRANTING
A MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
“If the courts grant the motion, it may amend

such judgment or final order accordingly. The
amended judgment is in the nature of a new
judgment which supersedes the original judgment.
It is not a mere supplemental decision which
does not supplant the original but only serves to
add something to it.”
(Rule 37, Section 3; Esquivel v. Alegre, G.R. No. 79425,
17 April 2009)
WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF GRANTING
A MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
“However, if the court finds that a motion affects

the issues of the case as to only a part, or less than
all of the matters in controversy, or only one, or
less than all of the parties to it, the order may
grant a reconsideration as to such issues if
severable without interfering with the judgment
or final order upon the rest.”

Rule 37:
Motion for
New Trial
WHAT IS THE NATURE OF A
MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL?
“A new trial is a remedy that seeks to temper the

severity of a judgment or prevent a failure of
justice. The grant of a new trial is, generally
speaking, addressed to the sound discretion of the
court, which cannot be interfered with unless a
clear abuse thereof is shown.”
(Ybiernas v. Tanco-Gabaldon, G.R. No. 178925, June 1, 2011)

WHEN IS A MOTION FOR NEW
TRIAL FILED?
“A motion for new trial is filed within the period for taking
an appeal.” (Rule 37, Sec. 1)
The period of appeal referred to is within 15 days after

notice to the appellant of the judgment or final order
appealed from. (Rule 40, Sec. 2; Rule 41, Sec. 3; Rule 45, Sec. 2)

from notice of final judgment or order. A record on appeal
shall be required only in special proceedings and in other cases
of multiple or separate appeals. (Rule 41, Sec. 3)
NEWLY DISCOVERED EVIDENCE
AS A GROUND FOR NEW TRIAL:
Before a new trial may be granted on the ground of newly
discovered evidence, it must be shown that:
The evidence was discovered after trial.
That such evidence could not have been discovered and
produced at the trial even with the exercise of reasonable
diligence.
That it is material, not merely cumulative, corroborative, or
impeaching.
The evidence is of such weight that it would probably change
the judgment if admitted.
(Ybiernas v. Tanco-Gabaldon, G.R. No. 178925, 1 June 2011)
WHAT IS REQUIRED TO BE FILED TOGETHER
WITH THE MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL?
“A motion for new trial grounded in fraud, accident,

mistake, or excusable negligence shall be supported
by an affidavit of merit.”
(Rule 37, Sec. 2)
“A motion for new trial grounded in newly
discovered evidence shall be supported by: (1)
Affidavits of witnesses by whom such evidence is
expected to be given, or (11) by duly authenticated
documents which are proposed to be introduced in
evidence.” (Rule 37, Sec. 2)
WHAT IS AN AFFIDAVIT OF
MERIT?
“Under the Rules, the moving party mush show that he
has a meritorious defense. The facts constituting the
movant’s good and substantial defense, which he may
prove if the petition were granted, must be shown in
the affidavit which should accompany the Motion for
New Trial. Mere allegations that one has a “meritorious
defense” and a “good cause” are mere conclusions
which do not provide the court with any basis for
determining the nature and merit of the case.”
(Republic v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148154,
17 December 2007)
WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF
GRANTING A NEW TRIAL?
“If the court grants the motion, the original judgment

or final order shall be vacated, and the action shall
stand for trial de novo. The recorded evidence taken
upon the former trial shall be used at the new trial
without retaking the same if the evidence is material
and competent.”

IS A PARTIAL NEW TRIAL
SANCTIONED BY THE RULES?
“If the court finds that a motion affects the issues of the
case as to only a part, or less than all of the matters in
controversy, or only one, or less than all, of the parties to
it, the court may grant a new trial as to such issues if
severable without interfering with the judgment or final
order upon the rest.” (Rule 37, Sec. 7)
“When there is an order for a partial new trial, the court

may either enter a judgment or final order as to the rest,
or stay the enforcement of such judgment or final order
until after the new trial.” (Rule 37, Sec. 8)
IS A SECOND MOTION FOR NEW
TRIAL ALLOWED BY THE RULES?
While a second motion for reconsideration is not
allowed, a second motion for new trial is authorized by
the Rules. A motion for new trial shall include all
grounds then available. Those not so included are
deemed waived. However, when a ground for a new trial
was not existing or available when the first motion was
made, a second motion for new trial may be filed within
the period allowed but excluding the time during which
the first motion had been pending.

Rule 38:
Petition for Relief
from Judgments,
Orders, or Other
Proceedings
WHAT IS THE NATURE OF A PETITION
FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT?
“It is a legal remedy whereby a party seeks to

set aside a judgment rendered against him by
a court whenever he was unjustly deprived of
a hearing, or was prevented from taking an
appeal because of fraud, accident, mistake or
excusable neglect.”
(Quelnan v. VHF Philippines,

G.R. No. 138500, 16 September 2005)
FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT?
A petition for relief is in effect a second opportunity

for an aggrieved party to ask for a new trial. As it were,
a petition for relief is actually the last chance given by
law to litigants to question the final judgment or order,
such that the failure to avail of such last chance within
the grace period fixed by the Rules is fatal. Being an act
of grae, it is not regarded with favor.
(Agan v. Heirs of Nueva,

G.R. No. 155018, 11 December 2003)
WHEN IS A PETITION FOR
RELIEF FILED?
“The petition shall be filed within 60 days

after the petitioner learns of the judgment,
final order or proceeding and not more that 6
months after such judgment or final order was
entered, or such proceeding was taken.”

RELIEF FILED?
“These two periods must concur. Both periods
are also not extendible and never interrupted.
Strict compliance with these periods stems from
the equitable character and nature of the
petition for relief. Indeed, relief is allowed only
in exceptional cases as when there is no other
available or adequate remedy.”
((dela Cruz v. Quiazon, G.R. No. 171961,
November 28, 2008)
RELIEF FILED?
“The petition shall be filed within 60 days

after the petitioner learns of the judgment,
final order or proceeding and not more that 6
months after such judgment or final order was
entered, or such proceeding was taken.”

WHAT ARE THE GROUNDS FOR
FILING A PETITION FOR RELIEF?
I.) When the judgment or final order is entered, or any
other proceeding is taken against the petitioner in any
court through fraud, accident, mistake, or excusable
negligence.
In this case, the petition shall likewise be filed in

such court and in the same case (not in another or
higher court) but the prayer this time is that the
appeal be given due course. (Rule 38, Section 2)
WHAT ARE THE GROUNDS FOR
FILING A PETITION FOR RELIEF?
II.) When the petitioner has been prevented from

taking an appeal by fraud, accident, mistake, or
excusable negligence.
In this case, the petition shall be filed in such

court and in the same case (not in another or
higher court). The petition shall pray that the
judgment, order or proceeding be set aside. (Rule 38,
Section 1)
EXTRINSIC FRAUD AS A GROUND
FOR A PETITION FOR RELIEF
The extrinsic or collateral fraud that invalidates a

final judgment must be such that it prevented the
unsuccessful party from fully and fairly presenting
his case or defense and the losing party from having
an adversarial trial of the issue. Such fraud concerns
not the judgment itself but the manner in which it
was obtained.
(AFP Mutual Benefit Association v. RTC of

Marikina, G.R. No. 183906, 14 February 2011)
ACCIDENT AS A GROUND FOR A
PETITION FOR RELIEF
Accident, in this context, refers to something which

ordinary prudence could not have guarded against
and by reason of which the party applying has
probably been impaired in his rights.
(Escueta v. Lim, G.R. No. 137162, 24 January 2007)

ACCIDENT AS A GROUND FOR A
PETITION FOR RELIEF
In Lopez v. Court of Appeals (G.R. No. 127827, 5 March

2003) respondents’ counsel failed to appear in two
crucial hearings - one of which was when pretitioner
presented evidence ex party, - due to severe asthma
attacks that disabled him and made it difficult for
him to talk. The Supreme Court upheld the grant of
the petition for relief, ruling that respondents have
been deprived of their right to a hearing due to
accident.
MISTAKE AS A GROUND FOR A
PETITION FOR RELIEF
The “mistake” contemplated here is one of fact, not

of law, which relates to the case. Mistake does not
apply, and never was intended to apply, to a judicial
error which the court in question might have
committed in the trial referred to because such
errors may be corrected by means of appeal.
(Agan v. Heirs of Nueva, G.R. No. 155018, 1 December 2003)

MISTAKE AS A GROUND FOR A
PETITION FOR RELIEF
In like manner, the erroneous opinion of a party

concerning the incorrectness of a judicial decision is
not a ground for a petition for relief. While it
constitutes a mistake of the party, it is not such a
mistake as confers the right to relief. If a party
complains of a decision as being void, then the
proper remedy is to appeal said judgment.
(Air Services Cooperative v. CA, G.R. No. 118693, 23 July 1998)

WHAT MUST BE FILED TOGETHER
WITH THE PETITION FOR RELIEF?
“The petition must be verified and must be

accompanied with affidavits showing 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.”

A PETITION FOR RELIEF IS AVAILABLE
ONLY TO THE PARTIES IN THE CASE.
“A petition for relief from judgment together

with a motion for new trial and a motion for
reconsideration are remedies available only to
parties in the proceedings where the assailed
judgment is rendered. In fact, it has been held
that a person who was never a party to a case or
even summoned to appear therein, cannot avail
of a petition for relief from judgment.”
(Alaban v. CA, G.R. No. 156021,
September 23, 2005)
THE PETITION IS AVAILABLE TO
PROCEEDINGS AFTER THE JUDGMENT
A petition for relief is available not only against a judgment

or final order. It is also available when “any proceeding is
thereafter taken against the petitioner in any court through
fraud, accident, mistake, or excusable negligence.
“A petition for relief is also applicable to a proceeding taken

after the entry of judgment or final order such as an order of
execution. Rule 38 does not only refer to judgments but also
to orders, or any other proceedings.”
(Bayog v. Natino, G.R. No. 118691, July 5, 1996)
MAY A PETITION FOR RELIEF BE FILED WITH
THE COURT OF APPEALS OR THE SUPREME
COURT?
There is no provision in the Rules of Court making the

petition for relief applicable in the Court of Appeals or the
Supreme Court.
“If a petition for relief from judgment is not among the

remedies available in the CA, with more reason that this
remedy cannot be available in the Supreme Court. The
Supreme Court entertains only questions of law. A petition for
relief raises questions of facts on fraud, accident, mistake, or
excusable negligence, which are beyond the concerns of the
Supreme Court.”
(Bayog v. Natino, G.R. No. 118691, July 5, 1996)

A PETITION FOR RELIEF IS NOT ALLOWED IN
SUMMARY PROCEDURE AND SMALL CLAIMS
CASES
In Afdal v. Carlos, (G.R. No. 173379, December 1, 2010) the

petitioners argued that petitions for relief from judgment
in forcible entry and unlawful detainer cases can be filed
with the RTC provided that petitioners have complied
with all the requirements to entitle him to avail of such
remedy.
The Supreme Court ruled that a petition for relief from
judgment in forcible entry and unlawful detainer cases is a
prohibited pleading. The reason for such is to achieve an
expeditious and inexpensive determination of the cases
subject of summary procedure.
Rule 40 and 41:
Appeal by Notice
of Appeal
Rule 40:
Appeal from
Municipal Trial
Courts to the
Regional Trial
Courts
WHERE IS A JUDGMENT OR A FINAL ORDER
OF A MUNICIPAL COURT APPEALED?
An appeal from a judgment or final order of a

Municipal Trial Court may be taken to the
Regional Trial Court exercising jurisdiction over
the area to which the former pertains.

WHEN IS THE APPEAL FILED?
“An appeal may be taken within 15 days after notice to the

appellant of the judgment or final order appealed from.” (Rule
40, Sec. 2)

after notice of the judgment or final order. (Rule 40, Sec. 2)
WHAT IS THE PROCEDURE FOR
TAKING AN APPEAL UNDER RULE 40?
I.) The appeal is taken by:

Filing a notice of appeal with the court that rendered
the judgment or final order appealed from, and by
serving a copy of the notice to the adverse party.
II.) The notice of appeal shall:
Indicate the parties to the appeal.
The judgment, final order, or part thereof appealed
from.
State the material dates showing the timeliness of the
appeal.
“Within the period for taking an appeal, the

appellant shall pay to the clerk of court which
rendered the judgment or final order appealed
from the full amount of the appellate court
docket and other lawful fees. Proof of payment
thereof shall be transmitted to the appellate
court together with the original record or the
record on appeal, as the case may be.”
WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF NON-
PAYMENT OF DOCKET FEES?
“The payment of docket fees within the prescribed
period is mandatory for the perfection of an appeal.
Without such payment, the appeal is not perfected.
The appellate court does not acquire jurisdiction
over the subject matter of the action and the
decision sought to be appealed from becomes final
and executory. The payment of the full amount of
the docket fee is an indispensable step for the
perfection of an appeal.”
(Gonzales v. Pe, G.R. No. 167398, 9 August 2011)
WHEN IS THE APPEAL DEEMED
PERFECTED?
A party’s appeal by notice of appeal is deemed perfected as to

him upon the filing of the notice of appeal in due time. (Rule 40,
Sec. 4, in relation to Rule 41, Sec. 9)
A party’s appeal by record on appeal is deemed perfected as to

him with respect to the subject matter thereof upon the
approval of the record on appeal filed in due time. (Rule 40,
Sec. 4, in relation to Rule 41, Sec. 9)
WHAT IS THE NATURE AND THE
FUNCTION OF A NOTICE OF APPEAL?
“The notice of appeal does not require the
approval of the court. Its function is merely
to notify the trial court that the appellant
was availing of the right to appeal, and not
to seek the court’s permission that he be allowed
to pose an appeal. The trial court’s only duty with
respect to a timely notice of appeal is to transmit
the original record of the case to the appellate
court.”
(Crisologo v. Daray, A.M. No. RTJ-07-2036, 20 August 2008
DUTY OF THE CLERK OF COURT
OF THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
“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.”
(Rule 40, Section 7[a])

SUBMISSION OF MEMORANDUM
“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.”

SUBMISSION OF MEMORANDUM
Within 15 days from such notice, it shall be the duty of the

appellant to submit a memorandum, a copy of which shall be
furnished the appellee. (Rule 40, Sec. 7[b])
For the appellant, the filing of a memorandum is vital to his

appeal. Failure to do so shall be a ground for the dismissal of the
appeal. (Bergonia v. CA, G.R. No. 189151, 25 January 2012)
The appellee may, if he so desires, file his memorandum within

15 days from receipt of the appellant’s memorandum. (Rule 40,
Sec. 7[b])
WHEN IS THE CASE DEEMED
SUBMITTED FOR DECISION?
The case shall be considered submitted for

decision upon the filing of the memorandum of
the appellee, or the expiration of the period to
do so.
(Rule 40, Section 7[c])

APPEAL FROM AN ORDER DISMISSING
A CASE FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
A case may be dismissed in the Municipal Trial

Court without a trial on the merits. This occurs
for instance, when a motion to dismiss is filed
and granted in accordance with Rule 16 of the
Rules of Court. If an appeal is taken from the
dismissal by the lower court, the Regional Trial
Court may affirm or reverse it, as the case may
be.
If the dismissal in the MTC is made on the
ground of lack of jurisdiction over the subject
matter, and the RTC on appeal affirms the
dismissal, the action of the latter court, if it has
jurisdiction, shall not be confined to a mere
affirmation of the dismissal if it has jurisdiction
over the subject matter. Instead, the RTC is
required to try the case on the merits as if the
case was originally filed with it.
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 and shall decide
the case in accordance with the Rules. The court
may, however, admit amended pleadings and
additional evidence in the interest of justice.

Rule 41:
Appeal from the
Regional Trial
Courts to the
Court of Appeals
WHAT ARE THE MODES OF APPEAL FROM THE
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT TO THE COURT OF
APPEALS?
There are two modes of appeal from the RTC to the

CA:
By writ of error (Ordinary Appeal) - where

theappealed judgment was rendered in a civil or
criminal actions by the RTC in the exercise of its
original jurisdiction; or
By petition for review - where the judgment was
rendered by the RTC in the exercise of its appellate
jurisdiction.
APPLICATION OF RULE 41 ON
ORDINARY APPEAL
Rule 41 applies to appeals from the judgment or

final order of the RTC in the exercise of its
original jurisdiction. This appeal is called an
“ordinary appeal.”

WHEN IS THE APPEAL FILED?
The appeal shall be taken 15 days from notice of the

judgment or final order appealed from. Where a
record on appeal is required, the appellant shall file
a notice of appeal and a record on appeal within 30
days from notice of the judgment or final order.
In habeas corpus cases, the appeal shall be taken,
within 48 hours from notice of judgment or final
order.

The appeal to the CA in cases decided by the RTC in
the exercise of its original jurisdiction shall be taken by:
Filing a notice of appeal with the court which

rendered the judgment or final order appealed from;
and
Serving a copy thereof upon the adverse party.

Within the period for taking an appeal, the appellant shall pay to
the clerk of court, which rendered the judgment or final order
appealed from, the full amount of the appellate court docket
fees. (Rule 41, Sec. 4)
Within 30 days after the perfection of all the appeals, the clerk
of court shall verify the correctness and completeness of the
records and if incomplete, to take such measures, certify to the
correctness of the records, to transmit the same to the appellate
court, and to furnish the parties with copies of his letter of
transmittal of the records to the appellate court. (Rule 41, Sec.
10)
Upon receiving the original record on appeal and the

accompanying documents transmitted by the lower court,
as well as the proof of payment of the docket and other
lawful fees, the clerk of court of the Court of Appeals shall
docket the case and notify the parties. (Rule 44, Sec. 4)
Within 45 days from receipt of the notice of the clerk of

court, the appellant shall file a brief with proof of service
upon the appellee. (Rule 44, Sec. 7)
Within 45 days from the receipt of the appellant’s brief, the
appellee shall file his own brief with proof of service to the
appellant. (Rule 44, Sec. 8)
Within 20 days from receipt of the appellee’s brief, the
appellant may file a reply brief answering points in the
appellee’s brief not covered in his main brief. (Rule 44, Sec.
9)
Extension of time for the filing of briefs will not be
allowed, except for good and sufficient cause and only if
the motion for extension is filed before the expiration of
the time sought to be extended. (Rule 44, Sec. 12)
PERFECTED?
A party’s appeal by notice of appeal is deemed
perfected as to him upon the filing of the notice of
appeal in due time.
A party’s appeal by record on appeal is deemed

perfected as to him with respect to the subject
matter thereof upon the approval of the record on
appeal filed in due time.

IS EXECUTION PENDING APPEAL
ALLOWED BY THE RULES?
“When a motion for execution pending appeal is filed

within the reglementary period for perfecting an
appeal, the court must hear and resolve the motion for
it would become part of the records to be elevated on
appeal. Since the court has jurisdiction to act on the
motion at the time it was filed, said jurisdiction
continues until the matter is resolved and is not lost
by the subsequent action of the opposing party.”
(Lee v. Trocino, G.R. No. 164648, 6 August 2008)

IS EXECUTION PENDING APPEAL
ALLOWED BY THE RULES?
“When an appeal has been duly perfected, execution

of the judgment, whether wholly or partially, is not a
matter of right, but of discretion provided good
reasons therefor exist. The compelling grounds for the
issuance of the writ must be stated in a special order
after due hearing.”
(Associated Anglo-American Tobacco v. CA, G.R. No.

167237, 23 April 2010)
WHAT IS THE DOCTRINE OF
RESIDUAL JURISDICTION?
It refers to the authority of the trial court to:
Issue orders for the protection and preservation of the
rights of the parties which do not involve any matter
litigated by the appeal;
Approve compromises;
Permit appeals of indigent litigants order execution
pending appeal in accordance with Rule 9, Sec. 2;
Allow withdrawal of the appeal, provided these are done
prior to the transmittal of the original record or the
record on appeal even if the appeals have already been
perfected despite the approval of the record on appeal.
WHAT IS THE DOCTRINE OF
RESIDUAL JURISDICTION?
“The concept of residual jurisdiction of the trial

court is available at a stage in which the court is
normally deemed to have lost jurisdiction over
the case or the subject matter involved in the
appeal. There is no residual jurisdiction to speak
of where no appeal or petition has even been
filed.”
(Angeles v. CA, G.R. No. 178733, 15 September 2014)

Rule 42:
Petition for Review

from the Regional
Trial Courts to the
Court of Appeals
WHEN IS THE PETITION FILED?
The appeal shall be made within 15 days from notice of the
decision sought to be reviewed or of the denial of petitioner’s
motion for new trial or reconsideration filed in due time after
judgment.
The court may grant an additional period of 15 days, provided
that the extension is sought:
• Upon motion; and
• There is payment of the full amount of the docket and
other lawful fees and the deposit for costs before the
expiration of the reglementary period.
No further extension shall be granted except for the most
compelling reason and in no case to exceed 15 days.
The appeal is made by filing a verified petition

for review with the CA, paying at the same time
to the clerk of the said court the corresponding
docket and other lawful fees, depositing the
amount of PhP 500 for costs, and furnishing the
RTC and the adverse party with a copy of the
petition.

The petition shall be filed in 7 legible copies, with the
original copy intended for the court, and shall state the
following:
Full names of the parties in the case;
Material dates showing that it was filed on time;
Concise statements of the matters involved, issues
raised, specification of errors of law or fact allegedly
committed by the trial court;
Arguments relied upon for the allowance of the
appeal.
PERFECTED?
The appeal is perfected as to the petitioner upon

the timely filing of a petition for review and the
payment of the corresponding docket, and other
lawful fees.

WHAT ACTIONS MAY THE COURT OF
APPEALS TAKE ON THE PETITION?
The CA may dismiss the petition if it finds the same
to be patently without merit, prosecuted merely for
d e l a y, o r t h a t t h e q u e s t i o n s r a i s e d a r e to o
unsubstantial to require consideration.
If the court does not dismiss the petition, it may

require the respondent to file a comment on the
petition within 10 days from notice. The respondent
shall file a comment, not a motion to dismiss.

WHAT ACTIONS MAY THE COURT OF
APPEALS TAKE ON THE PETITION?
If the CA makes a prima facie finding that the lower
court has committed an error of fact or law that will
warrant a reversal or modification of the appealed
decision, it may accordingly give due course to the
petition.
If the petition is given due course, the CA may set the
case for oral argument or require the parties to submit
their memoranda within a period of 15 days from notice.
The case shall be deemed submitted for decision upon
the filing of the last pleading or memorandum required.
WHEN THE PETITION IS FILED, DOES IT
STAY THE JUDGMENT APPEALED FROM?
Except in civil cases decided under the Rules on

Summary Procedure, the appeal, as a rule, shall
stay the judgment or final order, unless the CA,
the law, or the rules shall provide otherwise.
(Rule 42, Section 8[b])

COURT OF APPEALS HAS NO APPELLATE
JURISDICTION OVER METC DECISIONS
A decision of the Metropolitan Trial Court

cannot be entertained by the Court of Appeals
via a direct appeal; neither is it a proper matter
for a petition for review under Rule 42 since the
Court of Appeals has no appellate jurisdiction
over the METC.
(Banting v. Maglapuz, G.R. No. 158867, 22 August 2006)

APPEAL BY NOTICE OF APPEAL
SHALL BE DISMISSED
Under Rule 50, Section 2, an appeal by notice of
appeal instead of by petition for review from the
appellate judgment of the RTC shall be
dismissed. Moreover, an appeal erroneously
taken to the Court of Appeals shall not be
transferred to the appropriate court but shall be
dismissed outright.
(Dadizon v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 159116, 30

September 2009)
Rule 43:
Appeals from
Quasi-Judicial
Agencies to the
Court of Appeals
NATURE OF APPEALS FROM
QUASI-JUDICIAL BODIES
“Appeals from judgments and final orders of quasi-

judicial bodies/agencies are now required to be brought
to the Court of Appeals under the requirements and
conditions set forth in Rule 43. This rule was adopted
precisely to provide a uniform rule of appellate
procedure from quasi-judicial bodies.”
(Carpio v. Sulu Resource Development Corporation, G.R.

No. 148267, 8 August 2012)
NATURE OF APPEALS FROM
QUASI-JUDICIAL BODIES
“The appeal shall not stay the award, judgment, final

order or resolution sought to be reviewed unless the
Court of Appeals shall direct otherwise upon such
terms as it may deem just.”

HOW SHOULD THE APPEAL BE
TAKEN?
The appeal under Rule 43 may be taken to the Court of
Appeals, whether the appeal involves a question of fact,
a question of law, or mixed questions of fact and law.
(Rule 43, Sec. 3)
The appeal shall be taken by filing a verified petition for

review with the Court of Appeals, within 15 days from
notice.(Rule 43, Sec. 4 and 5)
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
NOT A CONDITION PRECEDENT
“The use of the disjunctive ‘or’ in the rule suggests that a
petitioner has the option to file the petition after notice of
the assailed judgment or resolution directly, without need of
a prior motion for reconsideration, provided such motion
is duly filed in accordance with the rule of procedure
of the court or agency below. Thus, for instance, if the
rule of procedure court or agency a quo requires the filing of a
motion for reconsideration of the judgment or resolution
before appeal may be taken, then failure to comply with the
requisite is a groudn to dismiss the appeal on the basis of
prematurity.”
(CHED v. Mercado, G.R. No. 157877, 10 March 2006)
FINDINGS OF ADMINISTRATIVE
AGENCIES
“Findings of fact of administrative agencies and

quasi-judicial bodies, which have acquired expertise
because their jurisdiction is confined to specific
matters, are generally accorded not only respect, but
finality when affirmed by the Court of Appeals. Such
findings deserve full respect and, without justifiable
reason, ought not to be altered, modified, or
reversed.”
(Carpio v. Sebastian, G.R. No. 166108, 16 June 2010)

DOCTRINE OF EXHAUSTION OF
ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES
 
“For reasons of comity and convenience, courts of
justice will shy away from a dispute until the system
of administrative redress has been completed and
complied with, so as to give the administrative
agency concerned every opportunity to correct its
error and dispose of the case.”
(Samar II Electric Cooperative, Inc. v. Seludo, Jr., G.R. No.

173840, 25 April 2012)
REVIEW OF THE DECISIONS OF
THE NLRC
“The remedy of a party aggrieved by the decisions of

the NLRC is to promptly move for the reconsideration
of the decision, and if denied, to timely file a special
civil action of certiorari under Rule 65 within 60 days
from notice of the decision. In observance of the
hierarchy of courts, the petition for certiorari should be
filed with the Court of Appeals”
(St. Martin Funeral Homes v. NLRC, G.R. No. 130866,

16 September 1998)
APPEALS FROM THE
SANDIGANBAYAN
“Decisions and final orders of the Sandiganbayan shall

be appealable to the Supreme Court by way of
certiorari under Rule 45 raising only pure questions of
law.”
(People v. Espinosa, G.R. Nos. 153714-20,

15 August 2003)
REVIEW OF THE RULINGS OF THE
OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN
In Administrative Disciplinary Cases:
Appeals from the decisions of the Ombudsman in
administrative disciplinary actions should be brought to
the Court of Appeals under Rule 43.
The provisions of R.A. No. 6770, Section 27 (The
Ombudsman Act of 1987) insofar as it allowed a direct
appeal to the SC was declared invalid in Fabian v.
Desierto because the statute, being one which increased
the appellate jurisdiction of the SC, was enacted
without the advice and concurrence of the Court.
“Although as a consequence of Fabian v. Desierto,
appeals from the Ombudsman in administrative cases
are now cognizable by the Court of Appeals,
nevertheless in cases in which it is alleged that the
Ombudsman has acted with grave abuse of discretion
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction, a special
civil action of certiorari under Rule 65 may be filed
with the Supreme Court to set aside the Ombudsman’s
order or resolution”
(Belongilot v. Cua G.R. No. 160933,
24 November 2010)
In Criminal Cases:
The ruling of the Ombudsman shall be elevated to the
Supreme Court by way of a petition for certiorari under Rule
65. The Supreme Court’s power of review over resolutions and
orders of the Office of the Ombudsman is restricted only to
determining whether grave abuse of discretion has been
committed by it. The Court is not authorized to correct every
error or mistake of the Office of the Ombudsman other than
grave abuse of discretion.
The remedy is not a petition for review on certiorari under

Rule 45 but a petition for certiorari under Rule 65.
APPEALS FROM THE JUDGMENTS
OF THE COURT OF TAX APPEALS
A party adversely affected by a resolution of a

Division of the CTA may file a petition for review
with the CTA en banc.
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.
(Lascona Land v. CIR, G.R. No. 171251, 5 March 2012)

REVIEW OF JUDGMENTS OF THE
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS
“A judgment, resolution, or final order of the

Commission on Elections may be brought by the
aggrieved party to the Supreme Court on certiorari
under Rule 65 by filing the petition within 30 days
from notice.”
(Rule 64, Sections 2 and 3)

COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS
“The Review of the Supreme Court is limited only to the
jurisdictional issue of whether the Comelec acted without or
in excess of jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion
amounting to lack or excess of jursidiction. Findings of fact
of the commission, supported by substantial
evidence, shall be final and non-reviewable. In
exceptional cases, however, when the action of the Comelec
on the appreciation and evaluation of evidence oversteps the
limits of its discretion to the point of being grossly
unreasonable, the Court is not only obliged but has the
constitutional duty to intervene.”
(Mitra v. Comelec, G.R. No. 191938, 2 July 2010)
COMMISSION ON AUDIT
“A judgment, resolution or final order of the

Commission on Audit may be brought by the aggrieved
party to the Supreme Court on certiorari under Rule 65
by filing the petition within 30 days from notice.”
(Rule 64, Sections 2 and 3)

CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
A judgment, final order or resolution of the Civil

Service Commission may be taken to the Court of
Appeals under Rule 43 of the Rules of Court. The
appeal shall be taken within 15 days from notice.
(Rule 43, Sections 1, 3 and 4)

Rule 45:
Appeal by
Certiorari
APPLICATION OF RULE 45
Appeal by certiorari to the Supreme Court, also
commonly known as petition for review on certiorari
applies in the following cases:
Appeal from a judgment or final order of the RTC in
cases where only questions of law are raised or are
involved, and the case is one decided by the said court
in the exercise of its original jurisdiction.
Appeal from the judgment, final order, or resolutions of
the CA where the petition shall raise only questions of
law distinctly set forth.
Appeals from the decision or ruling of the CTA en banc.
Appeals from a judgment or final order in a petition for

a writ of amparo to the SC. While in other cases of
appeal under Rule 45, only questions of law may be
raised, here, the questions raised need not only be
questions of law but also questions of fact or of both
law and fact.
Appeals from a judgment or final order in a petition for
a writ of Habeas Data. The appeal may raise questions
of fact or law or both.
The mode of appeal prescribed under Rule 45 shall be

applicable to both civil and criminal cases, except in
criminal cases where the penalty imposed is death,
reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment.
(Rule 45, Sections 9)

APPLICABILITY OF PROVISIONAL REMEDIES
IN A PETITION FOR REVIEW ON CERTIORARI
The petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45

may include an application for a writ of preliminary
injunction or other provisional remedies. The
petitioner may seek the same provisional remedies by a
verified motion filed in the same action or proceeding
at any time during its pendency.
(Rule 45, Sections 1, as amended by A.M. No. 07-7-12-SC)

REVIEW UNDER RULE 45 IS NOT
A MATTER OF RIGHT
“Every appeal to the Supreme Court is not a matter of

right but of sound judicial discretion with the
exception of cases where the penalty of death or
reclusion perpetua, where an appeal is a matter of right
leaving the reviewing court without any discretion.”
(People v. Flores, G.R. No. 170565, 31 January 2007)

REVIEW UNDER RULE 45 IS NOT
A MATTER OF RIGHT
The following are some examples of reasons which the Court
may consider in allowing the petition:
When the court below has decided a question of substance
not yet determined by the Supreme Court.
When the court below decided a question of substance in a
way that is probably not in accord with law or with the
applicable decisions of the Supreme Court;
When the court below has departed from the accepted and
usual course of judicial proceedings, or so far sanctioned such
departure by a lower court, as to call for the exercise of the
power of supervision of the Supreme Court. (Rule 45, Sec. 6)
QUESTIONS OF LAW
VS.
QUESTIONS OF FACT
“A question of law arises when there is doubt as to what

the law is on a certain state of facts, while there is a
question of fact when the doubt arises as to the truth
or falsity of the alleged fact.”
(Far Eastern Surety Company v. People, G.R. No. 170618,

20 November 2013)
QUESTIONS OF LAW
VS.
QUESTIONS OF FACT
“The test of whether a question is one of law or of fact

is not the appellation given to such question by the
party raising the same; rather it is whether the
appellate court can determine the issue raised without
reviewing or evaluating the evidence, in which case, it
is a question of law; otherwise, it is a question of fact.”
(Piedras Negras Construction Corporation vs. Fil-Estate

Properties, Inc., G.R. No. 211568, January 28, 2015)
FINDINGS OF FACT ARE NOT ORDINARILY
REVIEWED BY THE SUPREME COURT
“In the exercise of its power of review, the Supreme

Court is not a trier of facts and is not the proper forum
for the ventilation and substantiation of issues. Unless
there are excepting circumstances, it does not
routinely undertake the re-examination of the evidence
presented by the contending parties during the trial of
the case.”
(Land Bank of the Philippines v. Spouses Costo, G.R. No.

174647, December 5, 2012.)
WHEN WILL THE SUPREME COURT
PASS UPON QUESTIONS OF FACT?
Questions of fact may be raised in an appeal under Rule 45
provided that the petition shows any, or all of the following:
The conclusion of the lower court is grounded entirely on
speculations, surmises, and conjectures.
The inference made is manifestly mistaken, absurd or
impossible.
There is grave abuse of discretion.
The judgment is based on misapprehension of facts;
The findings of facts of the lower courtsare conflicting;
The lower court, in making its findings went beyond the
issues of the case and the same is contrary to the admissions
of both appellant and appellee;
WHEN WILL THE SUPREME COURT
PASS UPON QUESTIONS OF FACT?
The findings of fact of the Court of Appeals are

contrary to those of the trial court;
The findings of fact are conclusions without citation of
specific evidence on which they are based;
The facts set forth in the petition as well as in the
petitioner’s main and reply briefs are not disputed by
the respondents; or
The findings of the lower Court are premised on the
supposed evidence and contradicted by the evidence on
record.
(Co v. Vargas, G.R. No. 195167, 16 November 2012.)
CERTIORARI UNDER RULE 45 VS.
CERTIORARI UNDER RULE 65
Certiorari under Rule 45 Certiorari under Rule 65
A special civil action that is an original
A mode of appeal. action and not a mode of appeal
A continuation of the appellate Not a part of the appellate process but an

process over the original case. independent action.
May be directed against an interlocutory

Seeks to review final judgments
order or matters where no appeal may be
or final orders. taken from.
Raises a question of jurisdiction because a
tribunal, board or officer exercising judicial or
quasi-judicial functions has acted without
Raises questions of law. jurisdiction or in excess of jurisdiction or with
grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of
jurisdiction.
Shall be filed not later than 60 days
from notice of judgment, order or
Shall be filed within 15 days resolution sought to be assailed and
from notice of judgment or in case a motion for reconsideration
final order or resolution or new trial is timely filed, whether
appealed from. such motion is required or not, the
60 day period shall be counted from
notice of denial of said motion.
Does not require a prior As a general rule, a prior motion for

motion for reconsideration reconsideration is required.
Does not stay the judgment or order

Stays the judgment appealed
subject of the petition unless enjoined or
from. restrained.
The parties are the original

parties with the appealing party
The tribunal, board or officer exercising
as the petitioner and the adverse
judicial or quasi-judicial function is
party as respondent without impleaded as respondent.
impleading the lower court or its
judge.
Certiorari as a special civil action is filed
Filed with the Supreme Court. with the RTC, the CA, or with the SC.
WHEN SHOULD THE
PETITION BE FILED?
The appeal which shall be in the form of a verified

petition shall be filed within 15 days from notice of the
judgment, final order or resolution appealed from, or
within 15 days from notice of the denial of the
petitioner’s motion for new trial or motion for
reconsideration filed in due time.

WHEN SHOULD THE
PETITION BE FILED?
The Supreme Court may, for justifiable reasons grant an
extension of 30 days only within which to file the petition
provided:
There is a motion for extension of time duly filed and

served.
There is full payment of the docket and other lawful
fees and the deposit for costs.
The motion is filed and served and the payment is made
before the expiration of the reglementary period.

Rule 47:
Annulment of
Judgment
FOR ANNULMENT OF JUDGMENT?
“An action for annulment of judgment is a remedy in

law independent of the case where the judgment
sought to be annulled was rendered. The purpose of
such action is to have the final and executory judgment
set aside so that there will be a renewal of litigation. It
is resorted to in cases where the ordinary remedies of
new trial, appeal, or other appropriate remedies are no
long available through no fault of the petitioner.”
(Pinausukan Seafood House v. BPI, G.R. No. 159926,

January 20, 2014)
“Before a party can avail of the reliefs provided for by Rule

47, it is a condition sine qua non that one must have failed to
move for new trial in, or appeal from, or file a petition for
relief against said issuances or take other appropriate
remedies thereon, through no fault attributable to him. If
he failed to avail of those cited remedies without sufficient
justification, he cannot resort to the action for annulment
provided in Rule 47, for otherwise, he would benefit from
his own inaction or negligence.”
(Pinausukan Seafood House v. BPI, G.R. No. 159926,
January 20, 2014)
The action is commenced by the filing of a verified

petition with the proper court. If it is the judgment
or final order of the RTC which is sought to be
annulled, then the action shall be filed in the CA.
(Rule 47, Sec. 1)
If it is that of an MTC, the verified petition shall be

filed in the RTC having jurisdiction over the MTC.
WHAT ARE THE GROUNDS
FOR ANNULMENT?
A petition for annulment of judgment is an extraordinary
action. By virtue of its exceptional character, the action is
restricted exclusively to the grounds specified in the rules,
namely:
Extrinsic fraud; and
Lack of Jurisdiction.
The rationale for the restriction is to prevent the
extraordinary action from being used by a losing party to
make a complete farce of a duly promulgated decision that
has long become final and executory.
(Republic v. TAFPA, G.R. No. 165333, 9 February 2010)
EXTRINSIC FRAUD AS A
GROUND FOR ANNULMENT
“An action to annul a judgment on the ground of fraud lies
only if the fraud is extrinsic or collateral in character.
Fraud is regarded as extrinsic where it prevents a party
from having a trial or from presenting his entire case to
the court, or where it operates upon matters pertaining
not to the judgment itself but to the manner in which it
was procured. The overriding consideration when extrinsic
fraud is alleged is that the fraudulent scheme of the
prevailing litigant preventing a party from having his day
in court.
(De Pedro v. Roman Development, G.R. No. 194751,
November 26, 2014)
EXTRINSIC FRAUD AS A
Extrinsic fraud shall not be a valid ground if it was availed

of, or could have been availed of, in a motion for new trial
or petition for relief.

IS FORGERY OR PERJURY A GROUND
FOR THE ANNULMENT OF JUDGMENT?
“The use of forged instruments or perjured testimonies

during trial is not an extrinsic fraud. Such evidence does
not preclude a party’s participation in the trial.”
(Villanueva v. Viloria, G.R. No. 155804, 15 March 2008)
“Likewise, offering manufactured evidence is intrinsic and

not extrinsic fraud. Intrinsic fraud is not sufficient to
annul a judgment.”
(Conde v. IAC, G.R. No. 70443, 15 September 1996)
LACK OF JURISDICTION AS A
“Lack of jurisdiction as a ground for annulment of

judgment refers to either lack of jurisdiction over the
person of the defending party or over the subject matter of
the claim. Where the court has jurisdiction over the
defendant and over the subject matter of the case, its
decision will not be voided on the ground of absence of
jurisdiction.
(Manila v. Manzo, G.R. No. 163602, 7 September 2011)

LACK OF JURISDICTION AS A
“The petitioner must show not a mere grave abuse of

discretion but an absolute lack of jurisdiction. The concept
of lack of jurisdiction as a ground to annul a judgment does
not embrace abuse of discretion.
(Antonino v. Register of Deeds, G.R. No. 185663, June 20, 2012)

WHEN SHOULD THE
PETITION BE FILED?
If the ground for the petition is extrinsic fraud, the
action must be filed within 4 years from its discovery.
(Rule 47, Sec. 3)
If the ground for the petition is lack of jurisdiction,

the action must be brought before it is barred by
laches or estoppel. (Rule 47, Section 3)
WHO MAY FILE THE ACTION?
“The petitioner need not be a party to the judgment

sought to be annulled. What is essential is that
petitioner is one who can prove his allegation that the
judgment was obtained by the use of fraud and
collusion and that he was affected thereby.”
(Alaban v. CA, G.R. No. 156021, September 23, 2005)

WHO MAY FILE THE ACTION?
“An action for annulment of judgment can be filed by

one who was not a party to the action in which the
assailed judgment was rendered. It is a remedy in law
independent of the case where the judgment sought to
be annulled is promulgated.”
(PTA v. Philippine Golf, Inc., G.R. No. 176628,

March 19, 2012)
AN ACTION FOR ANNULMENT OF
JUDGMENT IS TREATED AS AN ORDINARY
CIVIL ACTION
An action for annulment of a judgment, although

treated as an ordinary civil action, departs from the
usual norm because the court, upon filing of the
petition may make an outright dismissal of the petition
as long as it has specific reasons for its dismissal. This
dismissal may be made even before summons is served.
It is only when the court finds a prima facie merit in
the petition shall summons be served on the
respondent.
EFFECT OF A JUDGMENT OF
ANNULMENT
A judgment of annulment based on lack of jurisdiction

shall have the effect of setting aside the questioned
judgment or final order and rendering the same null
and void but the judgment of annulment is without
prejudice to the re-filing of the original action in the
proper court.

ANNULMENT
The prescriptive period for the re-filing of the original

action shall be deemed suspended from the filing of
such original action until the finality of the judgment of
annulment. This prescriptive period shall not, however,
be suspended where the extrinsic fraud is attributable
to the plaintiff in the original action.

ANNULMENT
Where the judgment or final order is set aside and

annulled on the ground of extrinsic fraud, the court
upon motion, may order the trial court to try the case
as if a motion for new trial was granted.

WHAT IS THE REMEDY WHEN THE
QUESTIONED JUDGMENT HAS ALREADY
BEEN EXECUTED
If the questioned judgment, final order or resolution

had already been executed, the court may issue such
orders of restitution or other reliefs as justice and
equity may warrant under the circumstances.

Appellate Practice (Keynote) PDF

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Appellate Practice (Keynote) PDF

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

APPELLATE

“Appeal is not a natural right. Neither is it part of

(Levi Strauss & Co. v. Blancaflor, G.R. No. 199354,

“When made available by law or regulation,

(Light Rail Transport Authority v. Salvana,

“A motion for reconsideration is one that does

(Reterta v. Lopez, G.R. No. 159941, 17 August 2011)

Where a record on appeal is required, the appellant shall

“No Motion for Extension of Time to File

(Habaluyas v. Japson, G.R. No. L-70895, 30 May 1986)

“The timely filing of a motion for

(Rule 40, Sec. 2; Rule 41, Sec. 3)

Under Rule 37, Section 1, a Motion for Reconsideration

That the damages awarded are excessive.

“It is not suﬃcient to mention the ground relied

“Non-compliance with this requirement would

(Victorio-Aquino v. Pacific Plans, Inc., G.R. No. 193108,

“A pro forma motion is one which does not

(Anama v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 187021,

“It is settled that although a motion for

(First Lepanto-Taisho Insurance v. Chevron, G.R. No. 177839,

“When the circumstances of a case do not show

(PNB v. Paneda, G.R. No. 149236, 14 February 2007)

“Because the doctrine relating to pro forma motions for

“To standardize the appeal periods provided in the

(Neypes v. CA, G.R. No. 141524, 14 September 2005)

“This ‘fresh period’ rule applies not only to Rule

(Neypes v. CA, G.R. No. 141524, 14 September 2005)

“The provisions of B.P. 129 which provides that

(Yu v. Samson-Tatad, G.R. No. 170979, 9 February 2011)

“The remedy from an order denying a motion for

(Rule 37, Section 9)

“If the courts grant the motion, it may amend

“However, if the court finds that a motion aﬀects

(Rule 37, Section 7)

“A new trial is a remedy that seeks to temper the

(Ybiernas v. Tanco-Gabaldon, G.R. No. 178925, June 1, 2011)

The period of appeal referred to is within 15 days after

Where a record on appeal is required, the appellant shall

“A motion for new trial grounded in fraud, accident,

“If the court grants the motion, the original judgment

(Rule 37, Section 6)

“When there is an order for a partial new trial, the court

(Rule 37, Section 5)

“It is a legal remedy whereby a party seeks to

(Quelnan v. VHF Philippines,

A petition for relief is in eﬀect a second opportunity

(Agan v. Heirs of Nueva,

“The petition shall be filed within 60 days

(Rule 38, Section 3)

“The petition shall be filed within 60 days

(Rule 38, Section 3)

In this case, the petition shall likewise be filed in

II.) When the petitioner has been prevented from

In this case, the petition shall be filed in such

The extrinsic or collateral fraud that invalidates a

(AFP Mutual Benefit Association v. RTC of

Accident, in this context, refers to something which

(Escueta v. Lim, G.R. No. 137162, 24 January 2007)

In Lopez v. Court of Appeals (G.R. No. 127827, 5 March

The “mistake” contemplated here is one of fact, not

(Agan v. Heirs of Nueva, G.R. No. 155018, 1 December 2003)