The Supreme Court of the Philippines (Filipino: Kataas-taasang Hukuman ng Pilipinas or Korte Suprema) is the Philippines' highest judicial

court, as well as the court of last resort. The court consists of 14 Associate Justices and 1 Chief Justice. Pursuant to the Constitution, the Supreme Court has "administrative supervision over all courts and the personnel thereof"

The conclusions of the Supreme Court in any case submitted to it for decision en banc or in division shall be reached in consultation before the case is assigned to a Member for the writing of the opinion of the Court. A certification to this effect signed by the Chief Justice shall be issued and a copy thereof attached to the record of the case and served upon the parties. Any Member who took no part, or dissented, or abstained from a decision or resolution must state the reason therefore. The same requirements shall be observed

Procedure in Rendering Decisions

1. Conclusions of decisions reached in consultation
Certification of Compliance

2. Purpose of Requirement

Requirement in Case of:

1. Non-participation or abstention 2. Dissent (disagree/oppose/dispute)

Will not the certification by the Chief Justice that he has assigned the case to a Justice for writing the opinion expose such Justice to pressure? No.

What is the reason for the required explanation to be given by the individual Justices for their non-participation to be given by individual Justices for their nonparticipation abstention? To encourage participation.

What is the purpose of the certification required by Section 13? Ensure the implementation of the constitutional requirement that decisions of the Supreme Court and lower collegiate courts are reached after consultation with the members of the court.

What is the effect of absence of certification? The lack of certification at the end of the decision would only serve as evidence of failure to observe certification requirement and maybe basis for holding the official responsible for the omission to account therefor.

No decision shall be rendered by any court without expressing therein clearly and distinctly the facts and the law on which it is based. No petition for review or motion for reconsideration of a decision of the court shall be refused due course or denied without stating the legal basis therefore.

Decision
- Judgment rendered by a court of justice or other competent tribunal after the presentation of the respective positions of the parties in an ordinary or criminal case of upon a stipulation of facts upon which the disposition of the case is based.

Form of Decision of Court

Statement of both factual and legal bases. Reason for requirement. Statement of Legal basis only.

What does the rule on decisions and petitions require? The Court clarified the constitutional requirement that a decision must express clearly and distinctly the facts and law on which it is based as referring only to decisions.

Memorandum Decision

After a careful and thorough perusal, evaluation and study of the records of this case, this Court hereby adopts by reference the findings of fact and conclusions of law contained in the decision of the Metropolitan Trial Court of Makati, Metro Manila, Branch 63 and finds that there is no cogent reason to disturb the same. Wherefore, judgment appealed from is hereby affirmed in toto.

Is this sufficient compliance with Article VIII, Section 14?

The purpose of this requirement is to inform the person reading the decision, and especially the parties of how it was reached by the court after consideration of the pertinent facts and examination of the applicable laws.

The proceedings in a military tribunal terminate with a simple guilty or not guilty verdict. Does this violate the provision that a decision of a court record shall clearly and distinctly State the facts and the law on which it is based? No.

Nor does Section 14 apply to the COMELEC, which is not a court.

Note

The Supreme Court has discretion to decide whether minute resolutions should be used in lieu of a full dress decision.
If a Judge in his decision adopts the report of a Hearing Examiner in a labor case, does he thereby violate Section 14 which requires that every decision of a court shall clearly and distinctly state the facts and the law on which it is based? No.

(1) All cases or matters filed after the effectivity of this Constitution must be decided or resolved within twenty-four months from date of submission for the Supreme Court, and, unless reduced by the Supreme Court, twelve months for all lower collegiate courts, and three months for all other lower courts. (2) A case or matter shall be deemed submitted for decision or resolution upon the filing of the last pending, brief, or memorandum required by the Rules of Court or by the court itself.

(3) Upon the expiration of the corresponding period, a certification to this effect signed by the Chief Justice or the presiding judge shall forthwith be issued and a copy thereof attached to the record of the case or matter, and served upon the parties. The certification shall state why a decision or resolution has not been rendered or issued within said period.
(4) Despite the expiration of the applicable mandatory period, the court, without prejudice to such responsibility as may have been incurred in consequence thereof, shall decide or resolve the case or matter submitted thereto for determination, without further delay.

Maximum Periods for Rendition of Decisions

From date of submission for decision or resolution
Supreme Court The Court of Appeals and other collegiate appellate courts Lower Courts

Where no decision or resolution has been rendered or issued

Time Limitations Mandatory

Purpose Consequence of Violation

What effect does the lapse of the reglementary period have on cases filed after the effectivity of this constitution? The case remains undecided.

What effect does it have on the Justices or judges concerned?

It can be a ground for impeachment or other form of disciplinary action if it is found to constitute culpable violation of the Constitution.

The Code of Judicial Conduct requires judges to decide cases and matters pending before them within the period fixed by law. Their failure to do so constitutes gross inefficiency and warrants administrative sanctions. A heavy case load and a poor health may partially excuse such lapses, only if the judges concerned request reasonable extensions. In the present case, however, the respondent made no effort to inform this Court of his reasons for the delay, much less to request any extension. Worse, he signed certifications that all cases and motions pending before him had been attended to within the prescribed period.

Note

What effect does the lapse of the reglementary period have on cases filed before the effectivity of this constitution? Answer to this is to be found in Sections 14 and 14 of Article XVIII

The Supreme Court shall, within thirty days from the opening of each regular session of the Congress, submit to the President and the Congress an annual report on the operations and activities of the Judiciary.

Submission of Annual Report