June 2 2016

May 2 2016

Rule 64 Does not apply to all government agencies

Only applies to COMELEC and COA

- How to review final orders or judgment or

resolutions of COMELEC and COA. REVIEW

- Does not talk about interlocutory orders,

only final orders in the form of a judgement

- If you lose in COMELEC OR COA, no mode

of appeal. Question the judgment from the
point of view of jurisdiction. Allege that
constitutional commission acted with grave
abuse of discretion amounting to lack or
excess of jurisdiction.

- Errors of Jurisdiction. Not errors of

judgments.

- Sec 2 Rule 64 -> Rule 65

- Special Rule 65 for COA and COMELEC

which can be found in Rule 64
MARINA v. COA COA audited the finances of MARINA and
disallowed certain expenses and
disbursements. Reached SC.

- Marina questioned finding of facts.

Inaccurate in interpretation of facts in relation
to auditing rules. Errors in the analysis for
disbursements of MARINA.

- It filed however a petition for certiorari,

styled petition for certiorari but errors in
computation and analysis were alleged.

- Hindi tugma. By insisting on analysis it

committed grave abuse of discretion. Use
MAGIC WORDS.

- Allegations and jurisdiction. Nature of cause

of actions depends upon material allegations
of the pleading.

- Errors of jurisdiction. GRAVE ABUSE OF

DISCRETION AMOUNTING TO LACK OR
EXCESS OF JURISDICTION
- Note mere error of judgements because such
are correctible by Appeal -> As long as there is
no appeal or any plain, adequate, speedy
remedy in the ordinary course of Law.

Page 1 of 14
 June 2 2016

- MARINA should have alleged that COA

insisted on its KAMALIAN
Jan 21 2015 Dioces of Bacolod v. COMELEC COMELEC ordered the DIOCES to remove the
tarpaulin because the tarpaulin was huge.
Election Offense. TEAM Buhay and Patay

- Dioces said that it is freedom of expression

- Dioces went certiorari under Rule 64

- COMELEC why did you go 65 because under

64 you need final orders or judgment
- Violated hierarchy of Courts
- Order is not final
* Such answer is acceptable to the BAR.
Traditional jurisprudence

- SC said suspend hierarchy of Courts in

exceptional cases
- So what if its not a final order or judgment?
* Judicial power has 2 aspects
1. Legal controversies among litigants
2. No branch of government may abuse its
discretion -> Power of Judicial Review ->
Constitution
Rule 64 Somewhat modified aspects of Rule 65
- Under rule 65, 60 days from notice of
judgment or order
- Rule 65 in Rule 64, Sec 3, period of 30 days.
New trial or reconsideration suspends the 30
day period. But minimum number of days is 5
days. Its like NEYPES but not NEYPES
because its already in effect before NEYPES.

- Sec 8, even if there is a pending petition for

certiorari in SC against COA or COMELEC,
judgment of such institution that is subject of
your certiorari is not stayed. The judgment
can be executed despite petition for certiorari
pending in the Supreme Court,

- Sec 7 of Rule 65 -> RW, filing petition of

certiorari does not interrupt course of
principal case. Unless you avail of writ of
preliminary injunction or a temporary
restraining order.
Rule 65 Know when to use Rule 65

New provisions Sec 7 and Sec 8

Not every grave abuse of discretion is a

ground for certiorari. Because it is not the
only element of certiorari and prohibition.

- Another important element is there IS NO

Page 2 of 14
 June 2 2016

APPEAL, NO PLAIN, ADEQUATE, SPEEDY,

REMEDY IN THE ORDINARY COURSE OF
LAW

Thus even if there is grave abuse of discretion,

then no certiorari. A judgment is appealed.

- What cannot be appealed?

- If you cannot appeal something, special civil
action of 65
Philippine Electric Corp v. CA Dec 10 2015 - No remedy of certiorari if may appeal etc.
Rule 41 Matters that cannot be appealed?

Memorize Letter A to G
1. Order denying petition for relief (If
denied then no appeal, 65 ka)
2. Interlocutory Order cannot be
appealed (You appeal a final order
which disposes of a case completely)
3. An order disallowing an appeal or
dismissing an appeal can be appealed
from
4. Confession or Compromise cannot be
appealed from
5. Execution which is wrong
6. Order dismissing an action without
prejudice

- Severance judgment in Rule 36 relate

with what cannot be appealed from.
Also separate judgments
- In several judgments, there are
several defendants. Depending on
evidence, court may decide a case
ahead of the others. (But hindi pa
tapos ang buong caso since wala pang
judgment in relation to other
defendants, kaya hindi appealable)

- Seprate judgment, cross claims and

3rd party. PWede unahin and counter
claim, thus if hindi pa tapos, not
appealable pa.

- File a complaint, no certification of

forum shopping. Under Sec 5 Rule 7,
ground for dismissal.
* Thus complaint was dismissed.
* I disagree, while I did not attach
certificate, essence is in my allegations
substantial compliance.
* MR denied.
* Appeal or Rule 65? Ask Sec Rule 41
Sec 1, is dismissal with prejudice or
without prejudice. Order dismissing an

Page 3 of 14
 June 2 2016

action without prejudice cannot be

appealed. Thus Rule 65 REMEDY.

- Sec 5 of Rule 7
* Remedy in the question is 65,
because there is no appeal. Without
prejudice, not appealable.
- Annul is certiorari
- Compel the court to go on with the
case is MANDAMUS.

- P did not appear during pre-trial.

* Ground for dismissal
* MR denied
- With prejudice, remedy is appeal

- With prejudice; appeal

* precluded from filing
* adjudication from the merits
- Without prejudice; Rule 65

* Dismiss on the ground of

prescription
- Rule 16 Sec 5 REMEDY
* reference to letter F,H, I
- any of those grounds, you are
precluded from filing case; remedy
APPEAL

Sec 5 gives idea, subject to the

RIGHT TO APPEAL
* Res judicata
* Prescription
* Statute of Frauds
- Remedy is appeal because it is with
prejudice

Rule 18 Plaintiff dismissal is with prejudice

Question Marc 6 2016

Municipality of Mursha v. CIA

- case was not filed for unreasonable length of
time
- P said it is not my fault?
- Can it be appealed?
* What is nature of dismissal of an action for
failure to prosecute? Rule 17 Sec 3 -> Note
that this is also motu proprio ground for
dismissal
- Rule says it has effect of adjudication on the
merits. Remedy is appeal

Functions of a Respondent File against a tribunal, board, or officer

Page 4 of 14
 June 2 2016

What is function? Sec 1 Rule 65

What function is respondent performing?
Judicial or quasi-judicial; it adjudicates on
the rights of litigants, legality or illegality of an
act.

SC does not follow Codal definition, power to

suspend.

Question Aquino declared moratorium on GOCC

allowances because main departments low
allowances

- A filed a Rule 65 to question the order

- Certiorari in Rule 65 requires that
respondent must have performed a judicial or
quasi-judicial act.
- Order of the president was in relation to an
executive function, dismissed.
SUMMARY Judicial or quasi-judicial

No Appeal or adequate plain speedy remedy in

the ordinary course of law

Errors of jurisdiction

Grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack

or excess of jurisdiction
October 5 2010 Southern Hemisphere Engagement Network v.
Anti-Terrorism Council

Acts of terrorism council is not in pursuance

of judicial function. It was a quasi-legislative
function in issuing rules and regulations.

Case Mayor Lim was simply performing executive

function.

Executive order. Ordinance.

He was merely implementing his ordinance.

CAVEAT or WARNING: Not every executive

order is executive in nature. Sometimes can it
be quasi-judicial. If EO declares whether act is
legal or illegal, it is a quasi-judicial function
because it determines legality.

But an EO implementing an ordinance or law,

it is executive
Aquino v. Malay Boracay Island Westcove

Construction of BORACY ISLAND WESTCOVE

Page 5 of 14
 June 2 2016

is illegal, EO was issued.

SC said it is covered by certiorari, because it

decided the legality or illegality of the
construction.
July 1 2014 Arraulo v. Aquino III

DAP Case. Transfer of funds from one agency

to another. Amounted to technical
malversation. But EO of Aquino allowed
transfer.

OSG said not proper subject of Certiorari

under Rule 65 because it was not pursuant to
judicial or quasi-judicial function.

- With to this Court, concept of certiorari and

prohibition are broader. Because SC, even if,
agency does not perform judicial or quasi-
judicial, as long as it is branch of government,
the Constitution gives power to judiciary to
determine grave abuse of discretion
amounting to lack of jurisdiction. (Certiorari
under the Constitution v Certiorari under 65)

Hindi Codal - Consti kasi

- Traditional decisions are codal. Lately hindi

na CODAL
Villanueva v. JBC April 7 2015

Villanueva not included in shortlist

- Certiorari and Mandamus to compel JBC to
include him

- 1st issue: In screening applicants not judicial

* SC correct! But when there is allegation of
grave abuse of discretion SC has power Sec 1
Art 8.
- But no mandamus, because choice of
candidate is discretionary
- Basis of non-traditional doctrines, judicial
power in Philippine Constitution.
Quo Warranto RTC, CA, Sandiganbayan, and SC has
jurisdiction

Quo warranto by what right?

Can u file quo warranto in MTC? Yes in
relation to election cases. Question election of
a barangay official. Quo warranto in the MTC.

When to file Quo warranto against CORP? If

CORP has not complied with provisions of the
LAW. Must be at least a de facto corporation.

Page 6 of 14
 June 2 2016

It exists in Fact but not in Law. Every de facto

corp has a certificate of incorporation which
was given by mistake or oversight.

It must have applied in good faith under a

valid law. But there was an oversight.

It is like a voidable contract, valid can be

annulled. But its existence can be attacked
directly only. Like a voidable contract.
Expropriation San Roque v. Pastor

Expro with the RTC because it is an action

incapable of pecuniary estimation

Rule 67
Foreclosure of Real Estate Mortgage File in RTC

Incapable of pecuniary estimation because

issue is the right to foreclose.

Rule 69 is partition of real property

- In partition of real prop including
foreclosure, look at assessed value in relation
to sec 33 and 19 in Real Estate Act

Barrido v. Nonato. October 20 2014

Cabrera v. Francisco

Rule 70 Where do you file?

Forcible Entry and Unlawful Detainer.

Do not look at assessed value.

FE or UD, MTC in Metro Manila, Metropolitan

Trial Court

Will Court lose jurisdiction if defendant

interposes the defense of ownership? NO.

Court can deal with ownership issue;

Provisional. When it is essential in the
determination to the determination of the
issue of FE or UD.
Jurisdiction over PROV REM Sec 33 No. 1 BP. 129

Court which has jurisdiction over main action

has jurisdiction over the provisional remedy.
PROV REM is Kabit lang.

Family Court, can RTC issue support pendent

lite? No, because Family Court has

Page 7 of 14
 June 2 2016

jurisdiction not the RTC. If there is no FC in

that particular province, file in RTC.

You cannot file it in MTC because it is

incapable of pecuniary estimation: support.

RTC, court of general jurisdiction.

Question From NLRC and you lost

No appeal, you cannot appeal.

Question judgment from point of view of

jurisdiction. Go to CA on certiorari Rule 65.

What is mode of appeal from NLRC final

order? None. But there is a mode of review.
You must file a special civil action for
certiorari under rule 65 to the CA.
Probable Case No appeal

Rule 65. Go to the CA and use Rule 65. It is

not an appeal CA Rule 65.

But when determination of probable cause is

in relation to Tax offense or Tariff offense, go
to the CTA. Criminal offenses in relation to
Tax or Tariff offense. BIR v. De Vanadera, Sept
8 2015

CTA Because it is now of equal level with CA, go to

CTA for tax offenses
Specific performance lagging incapable of Look at ultimate objective of the action
pecuniary estimation?
Teodoro v. Francisco November 27 2014

Contract to sell. Upon performance of certain

conditions, payment price in full.
- A paid price in full.
- Owner refused to honor agreement

- Action for specific performance to enforce the

agreement.
- You should not file in RTC because main
objective is to acquire ownership. Therefore
lack of jurisdiction because it is a real action.
Assessed value.

- SC, in the allegations it says that I want to

enforce agreement Even if the end effect is to
acquire ownership, the allegations stated
enforcement of agreement. Allegations
control jurisdiction.

Heirs of Bautista v. Solindo March 10 2014

Page 8 of 14
 June 2 2016

- Heirs acquired land by homestead

- If you sell within 5 years, you have right to
repurchase.

- Buyer refused to resell, action to enforce

right to repurchase.

- End effect is to acquire ownership, then it is

a real action, MTC, assessed value.

- But the allegations control. The allegations

stated it was the right to enforce right to
repurchase
Doctrine of Adherence of jurisdiction Once jurisdiction is acquired, then it cannot
be deprived by new law.

Ex. Filed an action in RTC to collect 1m.

- RTC
- During trial of the case, 100k lang pala ang
utang.
- Will court lose jurisdiction? No because of
doctrine of adherence of jurisdiction. But the
doctrine does not apply to tenancy cases.
* January 26 2015 Offilada v. Andan

Offilada UD

Defense was not it is not a UD case, it is a

tenancy case under DARAB

- The mere defense that it is tenancy will not

dismiss the case. Because the jurisdiction is
dependent upon allegations of the compliant.
- While jurisdiction is conferred by law, it is
determined by allegations of the complaint.
But if it determined during trial that it is
indeed a tenancy case, then it should
dismiss the case.
Docket FEE File complaint, no jurisdiction without docket
fee

No payment, no jurisdiction. But it can be

interpreted liberally by the Court.

Never really asked in Bar because it is too

much liberality.

Monsanito v. Lim
- Exception: Failure to pay was in good faith,
there was no intention to avoid payment of
docket fee.

Page 9 of 14
 June 2 2016

Jurisdiction over the parties Over the plaintiff and over the defendant
Plaintiff: Acquired when he files the complaint
court. Asked twice in the Bar.

Defendant: Sec 20 Rule 14. Voluntary

Appearance and Summon

- Defect in service of summons is cured by

Voluntary appearance
- Asking for affirmative relief is voluntary
appearance

- Sec 20, 2nd part will be asked.

- Filing a motion for extension of time to file

an answer is voluntary appearance. It is
asking for affirmative relief. Filing an answer
with a counter-claim is also voluntary
appearance. Answer without defense of lack of
jurisdiction over person of the defendant is
voluntary appearance.

- Remedy is special appearance to question

jurisdiction over the person of the defendant.
It is not voluntary appearance even if such
ground is accompanied by other grounds.

Question Australian who has business interest in the

PH.

He authorized lawyers to file complaint in PH.

But he never went to the PH.

Defendants filed a motion to dismiss on the

ground that there no jurisdiction over the
person.

The motion must be denied. A compliant was

When is jurisdiction over person of defendant
mandatory?
duly filed on his name. Jurisdiction over the
plaintiff is acquired by filing the complaint.
When in personam
However even if it is in rem or quasi in rem,
serve summons because he needs due
process.

Foreclosure of property, partition of RE is

quasi-in rem -> Just memorize. But still serve
him summons as if it is action in personam.
But if he is outside PH, non-resident who is
outside of PH, extra territorial service of
summons.

Whether rem or quasi in rem, summons ka

parin. Nagbabago lang yung style ng

Page 10 of 14
 June 2 2016
Sec 15 Rule 14
No more personal service
Sec 16 makes reference to Sec 15
Conversion
Can you file a case against unknown
defendant?
Questions on Summons are usually Easy
Personam
summons. You need due process.
In personam, jurisdiction and due process
In rem and quasi in rem due process lang
Note: Different kind of services
- Substituted service
- Personal
Does not apply to actions in personam
Service in person
Any service court deems sufficient. Court has
wide discretion.
Non-resident, outside Philippines.
You do not use Sec 15 because the action is
not in rem or quasi in rem
You cannot acquire jurisdiction over his
person.
Convert personam to quasi in rem by
attachment
However you only need it non-resident,
outside PH. No attachment required.
If he is not a non-resident, no need to attach.
Sec 16 In any action.
Substituted service may also be sought
because he has residence here.
Rule 3, Sec 14
How to summon him? Sec 14 of Rule 14
Summons by publication, in any action
In personam, refers to a particular person.
Thats is why court requires jurisdiction over
the person because the court will require him
to do something particular
In rem, to whom it may concern
How to serve incompetent? Serve him
personally and his guardian.
How to serve government? Solicitor General
Defendant of a city? Mayor, Governor.
Page 11 of 14
 June 2 2016

Persons transacting in a common name

- A,B,C under name handsome boys corp but
they are not a corp.
- They incur liabilities
- Can they be sued under that name? Yes
But in their answer they sued give their name.

How are they summoned? Sec 8 of Rule 14

- Service on one is service upon all SEC 8
FAMILIARIZE

SEC 11
- Enumeration is exclusive
- E.B Villarosa v. Benito
- No branch manager, it says general
manager. Strict Interpretation
- EXCLUSIVE and STRICT Interpretation

- General mode to follow is SEC 6

- What is Misis yung kumuha ng summons
para kay Mister? Sinabi ni Sheriff yung
circumstances ng service. Answer is NO.
* Manotoc v. CA
- Sheriff has obligation under Section 6 to look
for defendant and exert effort to look for
defendant. He cannot immediately apply
Section 7.
* He must go back to the place of business or
residence at least 3 times. He must also
narrate the circumstances why he could not
find the defendant. He must write the
narration of facts in detail. Only after
complying with such requirements can he
resort to apply Sec 7.

- Conditions for substituted service

- If service is incorrect, there is no jurisdiction
over the person. But the defendant must
invoke it. If not invoked in MTD, you may still
invoke it in the answer. If you do not invoke it
in the MTD, omnibus motion rule. Objections
not invoked are waived. -> Except
1. Lack of jurisdiction over subject matter
2. Prescription
3. Res judicata
4. Litis pendencia

Robinsons v. Merialles
- Defendant had instruction to the guard not
to allow any person to enter.
- Sheriff then placed circumstances of service
- If you prevented compliance of the Rules,
then you are estopped in invoking the Rules.

Sec 12 amendment as of March 15 2011 A.M 11-3-6-SC

Page 12 of 14
 June 2 2016

Sec 12, 2nd par is new.

1st part is foreign juridical entity

2 definitions of foreign corp in PH. Sec 123 of

Corp Code and Domestic Corp.

What is effect of engaging business in PH

without license? It can be sued but it cannot
maintain an action. It can be sued but it
cannot sue. It effects the legal capacity to sue.

Exceptions: Estoppel. If I transact without

someone who I know is engaging in business
without a license.

How do you summon that person? March 15

2011 amendment. Personal service in the
country where it is in the courts where it is.
Newspaper of general circulation in its
country. Electronic means and facsimile is
allowed as long as it can prove fact of service.
Or in any manner the court may deem
sufficient. AM 11-3-6 SC

Parties Entities authorized by Law

Natural Person
Juridical Person

Roman Catholic Church -> Corporation by

Prescription
- Has turned into common law

Corporation by estoppel is not a corporation

but it can be sued under its name

Is it mandatory to implead indispensable
parties?
April 21 2015
Resident Mammals of Canyon Straight v.
Secretary Reyes
- Wanted to service contracts in Canyon
Straight
- Rem issue is can you represent mammals
etc.
- If we can give legal standing to a corp which
does not exist, why not give legal standing to
living things.
* We have citizen suit, no need to resort to
such allegations.
Yes. Because without indispensable there is
no final determination of the case.

Unlike necessary parties, the case may still go

on. But without complete relief.

Page 13 of 14
 June 2 2016

Can court immediately dismiss the case when No. Differentiate from non-joinder or mis-
indispensable defendant is not impleaded? joinder of parties.

What the Court should do first is to order that

missing parties be impleaded. It should order
the amendment of the complaint. Dismissal
will not be FAILURE to obey order of the
Court. Sec 3 Rule 17.

Motu proprio or on motion.

Sec 11 of Rule 3 Neither misjoinder or non-joinder is a ground
of dismissal.
Sec 3 of Rule 16 Option of the Court to order the amendment
of the pleading.

Page 14 of 14