Rule 65 Certiorari, Prohibition and Mandamus Note: GR: well established doctrine of the courts provides that the

rules of procedures are used to help secure, not override, substantial justice. But the doctrine does not warrant wanton disregard of the Rules of Courts, otherwise no orderly administration of justice can be maintained. !ception: procedural rules may be set aside when: ". #t is a procedural defect to correct a patent injustice $efinition % Certiorari
Definition & writ from the higher court to a lower one re'uesting a transcript of proceedings for review & common law writ issued by a superior to one of inferior jurisdiction demanding the record of a particular case for review 2 types of certiorari ".(etition for review on certiorari under rule )* +.(etition on certiorari under rule ,*

Prohibition
-he act of prohibiting or the condition of being prohibited &n order of a superior court forbidding.inhibiting an inferior court to determine a matter outside its jurisdiction

Mandamus
&n order issued by a superior court ordering a public official or body or lower court to perform a specified duty.

Purpose

$esigned to correct errors of jurisdiction not errors of judgment /odifying or annulling a proceeding.

-o 0eep the lower court within the limits of its jurisdiction in order to maintain the administration of justice in orderly channels. Commanding the respondent to desist from further proceeding in the action or matter specified in the petition.

Commands a tribunal, corporation, board, or person to do the act re'uired to be done when it or he unlawfully neglects an act which the law specifically enjoins or unlawfully e!cludes another from the use and enjoyment of a right or office to which such other is entitled

When Defeated

-he rules provides: Certiorari.(rohibitio n /andamus

: :

1and there is No appeal or any other plain, speedy, and ade'uate remedy in the ordinary course of law2 1and there is no other plain, speedy and ade'uate remedy in the ordinary course of law 3e!haustion of administrative remedy42

-a0e note of the difference. -he special civil action of certiorari and prohibition is defeated not by the e!istence but by the ade'uacy of a remedy by appeal. 5hen other remedy is available or sufficient to afford redress, the special civil action under the rules will not prosper. -his is in view of the doctrine of e!haustion of local remedies in relation also with the hierarchy of courts regarding jurisdiction. /andamus may lie even if the remedy by appeal is ade'uate, provided that local remedies have been e!hausted. 6therwise, it will not prosper. Note: the 7pecial civil action of petition for certiorari or prohibition may accordingly be granted where the remedy by appeal is not plain, speedy or

ade'uate.

GR: when there is a remedy of appeal certiorari will not lie. E : certiorari is allowed when the appeal does not appear to be plain! speedy and ade"uate remedy in the ordinary course of law and will not promptly relie#e a party from the in$urious effects of the order complained of. %ierarchy of courts & Under the constitution, the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction to issue writs of certiorari, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto, habeas corpus and injunction. But this is not exclusive. Meaning it is shared b the SC with the !"C and the C#. $ierarch of courts principle is an established polic which requires courts of superior ran%&level are not allowed, except when there are special and important reasons, to ta%e cogni'ance cases over which are shared b courts of inferior level . there is an ordained sequence of recourse to courts vested with concurrent jurisdiction, beginning from the lowest, on to the next highest, and ultimatel to the highest. "he purpose of which is to unclog court doc%ets and to prevent inordinate demand upon the court(s time and attention which are better devoted to those matters within its exclusive jurisdiction. 'nterlocutory (rders & )Da#id #s Re#ira! *2+ ,CR- .+/ GR: Being an interlocutor order, an order den ing demurer to evidence is not appealable. )either can it be the subject of a petition for certiorari. REMED0: after such denial, the petitioners should present their evidence and if the decision of the trial judge would be adverse to them, they could raise on appeal the same issues raised in the demurer. E1: when the denial of demurer 3interlocutory order4 is tainted with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lac0 or e!cess of jurisdiction. & petition on certiorari under rule ,* may be filed with the appropriate tribunal. Distin2uished 3rom each other Certiorari When any: ". -ribunal +. Board or 8. 6fficer

Prohibition When the proceedin2s of any: ". tribunal +. corporation 8. board ). officer *. person 5hether e!ercising judicial, 'uasi9judicial or ministerial functions

Mandamus When any: ". tribunal +. corporation 8. board ). officer *. person unlawfully neglects the performance of an act which the law specifically enjoins as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station unlawfully e!cludes another from the use and enjoyment of a right or office to which such other is entitled

!ercising judicial or 'uasi9judicial functions

:as acted: without its or his jurisdiction in e!cess of its or his jurisdiction with grave abuse of discretion all amounting to lac0 or e!cess of jurisdiction &nd: -here is no appeal, nor any plain,

&re: without of its or his jurisdiction in e!cess of its or his jurisdiction with grave abuse of discretion all amounting to lac0 or e!cess of jurisdiction speedy, and ade'uate remedy in &nd: -here is no other plain, speedy,

the ordinary course of law (raying that: ;udgment be rendered annulling or modifying the proceedings of such tribunal, board or officer, (raying that: ;udgment be rendered commanding the respondent to desist from further proceedings in and granting such incidental the action or matter specified reliefs as law and justice may therein, or otherwise granting re'uire. such incidental reliefs as law and justice may re'uire

and ade'uate remedy in the ordinary course of law (raying that: ;udgment be rendered commanding the respondent, immediately or at some other time to be specified by the court, to do the act re'uired to be done to protect the rights of the petitioner,

and

-he petition shall li0ewise be accompanied by: ". a certified true copy of the judgment, final order or resolution subject thereof +. copies of all pleadings and documents relevant and pertinent thereto 8. and a sworn certification of non9forum shopping

to pay the damages sustained by the petitioner by reason of the wrongful acts of the respondent. -he petition shall contain: ". a sworn certification of non9forum shopping

Material Data Rule: 4 material dates must be stated in the petition: 5. date when the $ud2ment or final order! or resolution is RECE'6ED 2. date when motion for new trial or motion for reconsideration when one is filed 4. date when notice of the denial thereof was RECE'6ED Purpose: determine the timeliness of the petition )ote* the perfection of an appeal in the manner and within the period prescribed b law is jurisdictional and failure to perfect an appeal renders the judgment final and executor +Mabuha vs ),!C , -.. SC!# / Rule 78 Certiorari! Prohibition and Mandamus ,ec.5. & Petition for certiorari & 0hen an tribunal, board, or officer exercising judicial or quasi1judicial function has acted without or in excess of its or his jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lac% or in excess of jurisdiction, and there is no appeal, nor an plain, speed and adequate remed in the ordinar course of law, a person aggrieved thereb ma file a verified petition in a proper court, alleging the facts with certaint and pra ing that judgment be rendered annulling or modif ing the proceedings of such tribunal, board or officer such incidental reliefs as law and justice ma require.

and

granting

2ecision of the following are subject of Certiorari under !ule 34 5 /. ),!C -. 267 +justice secretar 8 rulings 5 affirming or reversing the resolution of the investigating prosecutor is final and executor. "he remed is to file a petition for certiorari under rule 34 to the C# not a petition for review under rule 9: +alcara' vs ;on'ale', September -<, -<<38. :. "ribunal, board, officer exercising judicial or quasi1judicial functions 2ecision of the following quasi1judicial bod is subject to !U,= 9: not !U,= 34 +sec./, rule 9:8 5 ". Court of -a! &ppeals 2. Ci#il ,er#ice Commission 8. Central Board of &ssessment &ppeals ). 7ecurities and !change Commission *. 6ffice of the (resident ,. <and Registration &uthority =. 7ocial 7ecurity Commission >. Civil &eronautics Board ?. Bureau of (atents, -rademar0s and -echnology -ransfer "@. National lectrification &dministration "". nergy Regulatory Board

"+. National -elecommunication Commission "8. $epartment of &grarian Reform under R& no. ,,*= "). Government 7ervice #nsurance 7ystem "*. mployees Compensation Commission ",. &gricultural #nventions Board "=. #nsurance Commission ">. (hilippine &tomic nergy Commission "?. Board of #nvestments +@. Construction #ndustry &rbitration Commission 25. 6oluntary arbitrators authori9ed by law ,ec.2. Petition for Prohibition & 0hen the proceedings of an "ribunal, Corporation, Board, 6fficer or >erson whether exercising judicial, quasi1judicial function or ministerial functions, are without or in excess of its or his jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lac% or in excess of jurisdiction, and there is no appeal, nor an plain, speed , and adequate remed in the ordinar course of the law, a person aggrieved thereb ma file a verified petition in a proper court, alleging the facts with certaint and pra ing that judgment be rendered commanding the respondent to desist from further proceeding in he action or matters specified therein,

or!

otherwise grant such incidental reliefs as the law and justice may re'uire.
,ec.4. Petition for Mandamus & 0hen an tribunal, corporation, board, officer or person unlawfull neglects to perform an act which the law specificall enjoins as a dut resulting from an office, trust, or station or unlawfull excludes another from the use and enjo ment of a right or office to which such other is entitled, and there is no plain, speed , and adequate remed in the ordinar course of law, the person aggrieved thereb ma file a verified petition in a proper court, alleging the facts with certaint and pra ing that judgment be rendered commanding the respondent, immediatel or at some other time to be specified b the court, to do the act required to be done to protect the rights of the petitioner, and to pa the damages sustained b the petitioner b reason of the wrongful acts of the respondent.

,ec.* When and Where to 3ile the petition & "he petition shall be filed )6" ,#"=! "$#) 3< da s from notice of judgment, final orders or resolution. ?n case a motion for reconsideration or new trial is timel filed, whether such motion is required or not, the petition shall be filed )6" ,#"=! "$#) 3< da s from the notice of the denial of the motion. "he petition shall be filed with the !"C exercising jurisdiction over the territorial area as defined b the SC, ?f the petition relates to an act or omission of a* /. Municipal trial court -. Corporation :. Board 9. 6fficer, or 4. >erson 't may also be filed with the C(:R; (3 -PPE-<, or with the ,-=D'G-=>-0-=! whether or not the same is in aid of the court?s appellate $urisdiction. ;he rule used to be that the petition may be filed with the ,-=D'G-=>-0-= if it is in aid of its appellate $urisdiction but not the petition may be filed in the ,> whether or not the same is in aids of its appellate $urisdiction )-M no. +@A@A52A,C/. '= election cases in#ol#in2 an act or omission of a M:='C'P-< or REG'(=-< trial court! the petition shall be filed e clusi#ely with the C(ME<EC! in aids of its appellate $urisdiction. Case: <a2una Metts Corporation #s Caalam! Buly 2@! 2++. & >rivate respondent filed a complaint for illegal dismissal with the ,abor #rbiter. "he labor arbiter decided in favor of private respondent. >etitioner ,MC appeal the decision of the labor arbiter to the

),!C which reversed the appealed decision. >rivate !espondent timel filed a motion for reconsideration but was denied. "he notice of denial was received on Ma 3, -<<.. Counsel for private respondent filed with the C# a /41da period motion for extension of time to file a petition for certiorari under !ule 34. "he C# granted the motion and respondent was given a non1extendible /41 da period within which to file the petition for certiorari. "he petitioner ,MC assailed the resolution of the C# contending that extensions of time to file a petition for certiorari is no longer allowed under the rules. ?s the petitioner correct@ #ns* Aes. "he rule used to be that the grant of an extension of time to file a petition for certiorari under rule 34 was left to the discretion of the court because the rules provide that no extension of time for filing a petition for certiorari shall be granted except for compelling reason and in no case exceeds /41da s. but the rules have been amended, +#M no. <B1B1/-1SC8 which deleted that provision. "he filing of motion to extend the time to file a petition for certiorari is no longer allowed under the new rules to avoid unreasonable dela that would violate the constitutional rights of the parties to speed disposition of their case. <apid #s <aurea & Spouses ,apid filed complaint for damages against respondents before the !"C. the complaint alleged that the malicious imputations against their son tarnished their good name and reputation. ?t further avers that their son was summaril dismissed from the school without them being diligentl informed. >etitioner filed a motion to declare the respondent as in default which motion was denied b the court. a motion for reconsideration of such denial was filed but was denied. a petition for certiorari was filed without indicating the date when the motion for reconsideration was filed. "he C# dismissed the motion. ?s the dismissal correct@ #)S* Aes. "here are three materials dates that must be stated in a petition for certiorari under rule 34. /. 2ate when notice of judgment, final order or resolutions have been received -. 2ate when motion for reconsideration or new trial was filed :. 2ate when notice of denial thereof was received Cailure to compl with the requirements shall be a sufficient ground for the dismissal of the petition. "he requirement is for determining the timeliness of the petition.

Parties a. Person -22rie#ed Concepcion 7r vs C6M=,=C 5 4D/ SC!# 9-< 5 >etitioner concepcion is an incumbent Baranga Captain of C6!B=S >#!E, Ma%ati Cit and at the same time the )ational Chairman of )#MC!=,. )#MC!=, filed a petition for accreditation to conduct operation quic% with the C6M=,=C. >etitioner was one of the signatories of the petition. C6M=,=C in its en banc resolution conditionall grants the petition. "he condition provides that petitioner must be removed from his position and membership of )#MC!=, and shall be disqualified to be a part of the in citi'ens( arm in view of the passage of !esolution no. BBD. pursuant to =6 no. D9, which provides*
7ec. 8. (rohibition on baranga officials. % No baranga official shall be appointed as member of the Board of lection #nspectors or as official watcher of each duly registered major political party or any socio9civic, religious, professional or any similar organiAation of which they may be members.

)#MC!=, did not question the C6M=,=C(s !U,?);.

#ggrieved thereb , petitioner assailed C6M=,=C(s en banc resolution b certiorari under rule 34. 0ould the petition prosper@

filing a petition for

#)S* )o. the petition for certiorari under rule 34 is misused. >etitioner has no personalit to file a petition for certiorari because he was not a part to, and the direct part , )#MC!=,, did not question the assailed petition. $e is not the part 1in1interest who can directl assail the C6M=,=C(s resolution in an original !U,= 34 before this Court. Under sec./, !ule 34, an aggrieved part is one who was a part to the original proceedings that gave rise to the original action for certiorari under !ule 34. "he petition for certiorari under rule 34 is not available to an person who feels injured b the decision of a tribunal, board or officer exercising judicial or quasi1judicial functions. ?t would have been another matter if )#MC!=, had filed the present petition with the petitioner as intervenor. b. >rivate !espondent and >ublic !espondent "he petitioner shall join, as private respondent with such public respondents, the person interested in sustaining the proceedings in the court when the petition filed relates to the acts or omissions of a* +the following are the public respondents8 judge Court Fuasi1judicial agenc "ribunal Corporation Board, officer or person Duty of pri#ate respondent "o appear and defend both in his own behalf and in behalf of the public respondent affected b the proceedings Cost awarded in such proceedings in favor of the petitioner shall be against the private respondent onl Duty of public respondent ?n the court where the petition is pending* Shall not appear in or file

or comment to the petition or any pleadin2 therein, unless otherwise

?f the case is elevated to a higher court b either part * "he public respondent shall be included

nominal parties "he public respondent shall not appear or participate in the proceedin2s therein, unless
therein as specificall directed b the court

c. 'ndispensable party ;olangco vs Cung, 4D. SC!# 3:B # complaint for the crime of libel was filed against respondent before the !"C. 2uring trial, the prosecution failed to present their witnesses despite the request for a subpoena testifecandum. "he !"C then issued an order terminating the prosecution(s presentation of evidence. "he petitioner assailed the order in the C# b filing a petition for certiorari under rule 34 on the ground of grave abuse of discretion. "he petition did not join the >=6>,= of the >$?,?>>?)=S and did not obtain the consent of the 6S;. 0ill the petition for certiorari prosper@

#)S* )o. it will not prosper. "he petitioner did not join the >eople of the >hilippines as a part in his action for certiorari. "he >eople of the >hilippines in criminal proceedings are indispensable part in a petition for certiorari. "he omission is fatal and a sufficient ground for the rejection of the petition. "he petitioner did not also obtained the consent of the 6ffice of the Solicitor ;eneral +6S;8 or at the ver least furnished a cop of the petition to the 6S;. "he 6S; is mandated under the administrative code +Sec.:4,Chapter /-,"itle ??? of Boo% ?G, =6 no. -D-8 to represent the ;overnment in the Supreme Court and the Court of #ppeals in all criminal proceedings. ,ec.7 (rder to Comment A Petition for mandamusC Petition for prohibition & "he court shall issue an order requiring the respondent to comment on the petition within /< da s from receipt of a cop thereof if the petition is sufficient in form and substance to justif the process. Such order shall be served on the respondent in such manner as the court ma direct, together with a cop of the petition and an annexes thereto. Petition for certiorari & Before giving due course thereto, the court M#A require the respondents to file their comment to, and not a motion to dismiss, the petition. "hereafter, the court ma require the filing of a repl and such other responsive or other pleadings as it ma deem necessar and proper. ,ec.@ E peditin2 proceedin2sC in$uncti#e relief & "he court in which the petition is filed ma issue* a. 6rders expediting the proceedings b. ?t ma also grant a temporar restraining order or a writ of preliminar preservation of the rights of the parties pending such proceedings

injunction for the

=ffect of filing a petition for mandamus&prohibition "he petition shall not interrupt the course of the principal case, unless a temporar restraining order or a writ of preliminar injunction has been issued, enjoining the public respondent from further proceeding with the case. =ffect of filing a petition for certiorari "he public respondent shall proceed with the principal case within /< da s from filing of a petition for certiorari with a higher court or tribunal, absent a temporar restraining order or a preliminar injunction, or upon its expiration. Cailure of the public respondent to proceed with the principal case ma be a ground for administrative charge. ,ec.D. Proceedin2s after comment is filed & #fter the comment or other pleadings required b the court are filed, or the time for the filing thereof has expired, the court ma * a. $ear the case or b. !equire the parties to submit memoranda ?f, 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 are true, it shall render judgment for such relief to which the petitioner is entitled. 0hen ma the court dismiss the petition@ ?f it finds that the petition* /. ?s patentl without merit -. >rosecuted manifestl for dela

:. "he questions raised therein are too unsubstantial to require consideration ?n such event, the court ma award in favor of the respondent ;RE><E C(,; solidary a2ainst the petitioner and counsel! in addition subjecting counsel to administrative sanctions. "he court ma imposed motu proprio, based on res ipsa loquitor, other disciplinar sanctions or measures on erring law ers for patentl dilator and unmeritorious petitions for certiorari. ,ec... ,er#ice and enforcement of order of $ud2ment & # certified cop of the judgment shall be served upon the court, quasi1judicial agenc , tribunal, corporation, board, officer or person concerned in such manner as the court ma direct, and disobedience thereto shall be punished as contempt. #n execution ma issue for an damages or costs awarded in accordance with sec./ rule :D. D(B rulin2s & -lcara9 #s Gon9ale9 ,ep. 2+! 2++7 & # complaint for attempted homicide was filed against alcara' in the prosecutor office. #fter the prosecution conducted an inquest an information was filed with the M="C. 6n motion of alcara', Me"C order the cit prosecutor to conduct a preliminar investigation. "he cit prosecutor finds probable cause and retain the information. #lcara' filed a motion for reconsideration and was denied. from the order of the denial, he filed a petition for review with the 267. "he Secretar of 7ustice issued a resolution granting the petition and ordered the withdrawal of the information. ;on'ales filed a motion for reconsideration which was denied b the 267. #ggrieved to the decision of the 267, he filed a petition for review under !U,= 9: before the C# see%ing reversal of the 267(s !esolution. "he C# granted the petition. #lcara' filed a motion for reconsideration but was denied. 0as the C# correct to grant the petition@ #ns* )6. the C# was not correct to grant the petition. "he petition for review under rule 9: was not the proper remed for the respondent. $e should have instead filed a petition for certiorari under rule 34 in appealing his case before the C#. the decision&resolution of the Secretar of 7ustice in affirming, modif ing, or reversing the resolution of the investigating prosecutor is final and executor . "he legislature has not provided an adequate remed b appeal in such case. "hus, the petition for certiorari is available.