DEAN SALVADORN.

MOYA II
BSC, Ll.B., Ll.M., DCL

Founding Dean, Toma Claudio Colleges, College of Law, Morong, Rizal

Managing Partner, Moya Ablola Ebarle Law Firm
MCLE Lecturer on Trial Advocacy
Bar Reviewer [Legal EDGE Review Center, Villasis Law Center, Powerhaus Review Center, Recoletos
Law Center, Magnificus Juris Reviews and Seminars Inc., UP Law Center, University of Cebu, Albano
Review Center, PUP Bar Review Center, University of San Jose Recoletos]
Author [The 2000 Rules of Criminal Procedure, Notes and Cases (2017); The Revised Guidelines on
Continuous Trial in Criminal Cases in Relation to The 2000 Rules of Criminal Procedure (2018); Bar
Notes and Cases in Remedial Law (2018); Bar Notes and Cases in Criminal Law, 2018 & 2019; Notes
and Cases in Remedial Law (Volumes I-IV), 2019; Notes and Cases in Civil Procedure (Volumes I, II &
IV), 2020; Notes and Cases in Remedial Law, Volume IV (Evidence), 2020; Notes and Cases in Civil
Procedure (Volume III), 2021; Bar Reviewer in Remedial Law (Volumes I-IV), 2021]
Professor in Civil Procedure, Criminal Procedure, Evidence, Spec. Pro., Remedial Law Review I & II,
and Criminal Law [TCC-COL, TSU-SOL, NEU-COL, SSCR-COL, UE-COL, BulSU-COL, UP-COL, PUP-COL,
DLSU-SOL; BU-COL; UST-FCL]
 2022 REMEDIAL LAW BAR
EXAMINATION QUESTIONS
WITH SUGGESTED ANSWERS
 PART I

Note: As stated in the Instructions, Part I covers problem sets

labelled A.1. to A.10. All answers to these questions should be
written in Booklet I.
REMEDIAL LAW 1
Q.1

Lebron, a Makati resident, obtained a Php 350,000.00 loan from a bank

secured by a real estate mortgage (REM) overhis lot located in Quezon
City with an assessed value of Php 500,000.00. Lebron failed to pay
despite written demands. The bank intends to file an action for judicial
foreclosure of the REM.

Where should the action for judicial foreclosure of the REM be

filed and in which court? Explain briefly. (5 points)
SUGGESTED ANSWER

The action should be filed in the Regional Trial Court of

Quezon City. As to its venue, since an action for judicial
foreclosure is an action in rem, it should be where the
property is located. As to which court, under B.P. 129,
Sec.19, in all civil actions which involve title to, or possession
of, real property, or any interest therein, where the assessed
value of the property involved located in Metro Manila
exceeds P 50,000.00 the jurisdiction belong to the Regional
Trial Court.
Q28: What is the jurisdiction of the RTCs in civil and criminal actions? Explain

A28: The jurisdiction of the RTC is provided under Section 19, B.P. Blg. 129, as amended by R.A
No. 7691, and further amended by R.A. No. 11576,

Section 19. Jurisdiction in civil cases- Regional Trial Courts shall exercise exclusive
original jurisdiction
(1) In all civil actions in which the subject of the litigation is incapable of pecuniary
estimation
(2) In all civil actions which involve the title to, or possession of real property,
or any interest therein, where the assessed value exceeds.

Remedial Law Reviewer Syllabus based pp 74-75 by S.N. Moya II (2021) Ed. (Vol 1, Part 1)
Q.2
Asya, Inc. sued Kobe, a resident of Bukidnon. To serve summons, the sheriff waited in the
lobby of Makati Hotel (MH), where Kobe stays whenever he is in Manila. The sheriff failed
to serve the summons because Kobe left the hotel for an emergency. Hours later, the
sheriff asked the front desk about Kobe’s whereabouts and his room number. The hotel
refused to disclose on grounds of confidentiality. The sheriff tried again the next day, but
Kobe was in a conference until midnight. So, the following day, the sheriff left the
summons and a copy of the complaint with MH's chief security officer (CSO), even as the
CSO refused because Kobe had already checked out by then. The sheriff thereafter filed
his return, stating the dates, times and places of his attempts, the name of the CSO, and
the fact that the complaint was served with the summons. When Kobe did not file an
Answer, Asya, Inc. moved to declare him in default.

Was there a valid substituted service of summons? Explain Briefly.

SUGGESTED ANSWER

No, there was no valid substituted service of summons. Under Rule

14 Sec. 6 par. 3, if for justifiable causes, the defendant cannot be
served personally after at least three (3) attempts on two (2) different
dates, service may be effected by leaving copies of the summons, if
refused entry upon making known his or her authority and purpose
known to the chief security officer of the community or building
where the defendant may be found. In this case, Kobe cannot be
found in the hotel since at the time when the last attempt for
servicing of summons may be made he already checked out. Thus,
there was no valid service of summons.
DUTY OF THE SHERIFF/PROCESS SERVER AFTER THE SERVICE OFSUMMONS

A.In case of personal service:

1. Within thirty (30) Calendar days from issuance of summons by the clerk of court and receipt
thereof, the sheriff or process server, or person authorizexd by the court, shall complete its service.

2. Within five (5) calendar days from service of summons, the server shall file with the court, and
personally, by registered mail, or by electronic means authorized by the Rules

x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x

Remedial Law Reviewer Syllabus based pp 306-307 by S.N. Moya II (2021) Ed. (Vol 1, Part 1)
B. In case of substituted service:

The Sheriff/Process Server shall state in the return:

1. The impossibility of prompt personal service within a period pf thirty (30) calendar days from
issue and receipt summons;
2. The date and time of the three(3) attempts on at least ( 2) separate dates to cause personal
service and the details of the inquiries made to locate the defendant residing thereat; and
3. The name of the person at least eighteen (18) years of age and of sufficient discretion residing
thereat:
3.a. The name of competent person in charge of the defendant’s office or regular place of
business or
3.b. The name of the officer of the homeowner’s association or condominium corporation or its
chief security officer in charge of the community or building where the defendant may be found
Q.3

Ten days after service of summons, defendant Kay filed a

motion to dismiss the complaint for collection of sum of
money against her on the ground of improper service of
summons, on the basis of which the court did not acquire
jurisdiction over her person. If you were the judge, how
would you rule? Explain briefly. (5 points)
SUGGESTED ANSWER

If I were the judge, I would deny the motion to dismiss. Under

Rule 15, Sec.12, a motion to dismiss is a prohibited pleading
except on the following instances: 1.) lack of jurisdiction over
the subject matter, 2.) litis pendencia, 3.) res judicata. In this
case, the ground used in the motion to dismiss filed is not
one of those exceptions stated under Rule 15, Sec.12. Thus,
the motion to dismiss must be denied.
1.That the court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter of the claim;

Q12. What are the factors to be considered in resolving a motion to dismiss on the ground of lack of
jurisdiction of the court?

A12. The nature of an action and whether the tribunal has jurisdiction over such action are to be
determined from:

1. The material allegations of the complaint;

2. The law in force at the time the complaint is filed; and

3. The character of the relief sought irrespective of whether the plaintiff is entitled to all or some of the
claims averred. (Republic vs. Roman Catholic Archbishop of Manila). Arzaga vs. Copias, 448 Phil. 171 (2003);
Del Mar vs. PAGCOR, 400 Phil. 307 (2000).685 SCRA 216 (12 November 2012)(Second Division)[Perlas-
Bernabe, J.].

Remedial Law Reviewer Syllabus based pp 343-246 by S.N Moya II (2021) Ed (Vol1, Part 1)
2. That there is another action pending between the same parties for the same
cause;

LITIS PENDENTIA

Litis pendentia literally means a pending suit. It is a situation when between the
same parties there is already one proceeding before a court, concerning the same object.

It refers to that situation wherein another action is pending between the same parties
for the same cause of action, such that the second action becomes unnecessary and
vexatious.

x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x
Q13. What are the requisites for litis pendentia to exist?
Young vs. Keng Seng, 446 Phil. 823 (2003)[Per J. Panganiban, Third Division]; Zamora v s. Quinan, Jr.,
et al., G.R. No. 216139 (29 November 2017)(Second Division)[Peralta, J.].

A13. It exists when the following requisites concur:

• Identity of parties or of representation in both cases;

• Identity of rights asserted and relief prayed for;
• The relief must be founded on the same facts and the same basis; and
• Identity in the two preceding particulars should be such that any judgment which may be
rendered in the other action, will, regardless of which party is successful, amount to res judicata on
the action under consideration. [BF Citiland Corporation vs. Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas, G.R. No.
224912 (16 October 2019)(Second Division) [Reyes, J. Jr., J.], citing Goodland Co., Inc. vs. Banco
De Oro- Unibank, Inc.]. See also Melo vs. CA, 318 SCRA 94 (1999); Ong vs. CA, 384 SCRA 139
(2002); Bradford United Church of Christ, Inc. vs. Ando, 791 SCRA 337 (30 May 2016).
3. That the cause of action is based by prior judgment or by statute of limitation;

RES JUDICATA

Q14. What does res judicata mean? Explain.

A14. Res judicata is a legal principle where a party is barred from raising an issue or presenting
evidence on a fact that has already been judicially tried and decided. It is "a matter adjudged; a thing
judicially acted upon or decided; a thing or matter settled by judgment." (Heirs of Lamirez vs. Sps.
Ampatuan, et al., G.R. No. 226043, 3 February 2020)(Third Division)[Leonen, J.].

It also refers to the rule that a final judgment or decree on the merits by a court of competent
jurisdiction is conclusive of the rights of the parties or their privies in all later suits on points and
matters determined in the former suit.
x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-
It rests on the principle that parties should not to be permitted to litigate the same issue more
than once; that, when a right or fact has been judicially tried and determined by a court of
competent jurisdiction, or an opportunity for such trial has been given, the judgment of the
court, so long as it remains un-reversed, should be conclusive upon the parties and those in
privity with them in law or estate. (See also Burgundy Realty Corporation vs. MAA General
Assurance Phils., Inc., G.R. No. 225610, 19 February 2020) (Second Division)[Inting, J.].

Degayo vs. Magbanua-Dinglasan, 757 Phil. 376 (6 April 2015)(Second Division)[Brion, J.];
Solidbank Union vs. MBTC, 680 SCRA 629 (17 September 2012); Dy vs. Yu, 762 SCRA 357
(8 July 2015)(First Division) [Perlas-Bernabe, J.].
Q15. What are the requisites for res judicata to exist?

A15. Res judicata exists if the following requisites concur:

(1) the former judgment or order must be final;

(2) the judgment or order must be on the merits;

(3) it must have been rendered by a court having jurisdiction over the subject matter and
the parties;

(4) there must be, between the first and the second action, identity of parties, of subject
matter and cause of action. (See BF Citiland Corporation vs. Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas,
G.R. No. 224912, 16 October 2019)(Second Division) [Reyes, J., Jr., J.].
Q.4
PROBLEM
Attorney Woo, the newly-hired lawyer of a law firm, booked Samurai Express, a duly
accredited courier service within the National Capital Judicial Region, to serve a copy
of a motion for reconsideration to Attorney Han, counsel for the adverse party,
whose office is in the City of Manila. Attorney Han moved to deny the motion for
failure to contain a written explanation as to why the motion was not served
personally.

(a) Was the motion for reconsideration properly served? Explain briefly.
(b) What shall be considered as proof of service of this motion? Explain briefly.
(5 points)
SUGGESTED ANSWER

a.) Was the motion for reconsideration properly served? Explain Briefly.

No, the motion for reconsideration was not properly served. In Aguilar vs. Benlot & Cuico, the
Supreme Court ruled that when personal service or filing is not practicable may resort to
other modes be had, which must then be accompanied by a written explanation as to why
personal service or filing was not practicable to begin with. In this case, Attorney Woo failed
to contain a written explanation as to why the motion was not served personall. [Aguilar vs.
Benlot&Cuico, G.R. No. 232806, 21 Jan. 2019, REYES, J. JR., J.]

b.) What shall be considered as proof of service of this motion? Explain Briefly.

Under Rule 13, Section 16, if the pleading or any other court submission was filed through an
accredited courier service, the filing shall be proven by an affidavit of service of the person
who brought the pleading or other document to the service provider, together with the
courier’s official receipt and document tracking number.
SECTION 17.Proof of service. — Proof of personal service shall consist of a written admission of
the party served, or the official return of the server, or the affidavit of the party serving, containing a
statement of the date, place, and manner of service. If the service is made by

(a) Ordinary mail. – Proof shall consist of an affidavit of the person mailing stating the facts
showing compliance with Section 7 of this Rule.

(b) Registered mail. – Proof shall be made by the affidavit mentioned above and the registry
receipt issued by the mailing office. The registry return card shall be filed immediately upon its
receipt by the sender, or in lieu thereof, the unclaimed letter together with the certified or sworn
copy of the notice given by the postmaster to the addressee.

Remedial Law Reviewer Syllabus based pp 343-246 by S.N Moya II (2021) Ed (Vol1, Part 1)
(c) Accredited courier service. – Proof shall be made by an affidavit of service
executed by the person who brought the pleading or paper to the service provider,
together with thecourier’s official receipt or document tracking number.

(d) Electronic mail, facsimile, or other authorized electronic means of transmission. –

Proof shall be made by an affidavit of service executed by the person who sent the e-
mail, facsimile, or other electronic transmission, together with a printed proof of
transmittal.

x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x

Remedial Law Reviewer Syllabus based pp 343-246 by S.N Moya II (2021) Ed (Vol1, Part
1)
HOW SERVICE SHOULD BE PROVEN

(a) If done via personal service:

By written admission of the party served, or the official return of the server, or the affidavit of the party
serving, containing a statement of the date, place, and manner of service.

(b) If done by ordinary mail:

By an affidavit of the person mailing, stating the facts showing compliance with Section 7 of Rule 13.

(c) If done via registered mail:

By the affidavit mentioned together with the registry receipt issued by the mailing office. The registry return
card shall be filed immediately upon its receipt by the sender, or in lieu thereof, the unclaimed letter together
with the certified or sworn copy of the notice given by the postmaster to the addressee.

x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x

Remedial Law Reviewer Syllabus based pp 343-246 by S.N Moya II (2021) Ed (Vol1, Part 1)
Section 13 [now Section 17(b)], Rule 13 of the old rules, thus
requires that if the service is done by registered mail, proof of service
shall consist of the affidavit of the person effecting the mailing and
the registry receipt, both of which must be appended to the paper
being served. A compliance with the rule is mandatory, such that there
is no proof of service if either or both are not submitted

x-x-x-x-x-x-x
 REGISTRY RECEIPT REQUIRED TO BE APPENDED TO THE PLEADINGS AND NOT A
REPRODUCTION

In Fortune Life Insurance Company, Inc. vs. COA Proper (748 SCRA 286, 27 January
2015)(En Banc Resolution of the Motion for Reconsideration)(The main petition was denied
due to non-compliance with Section 13, Rule 13 of the old Rules)[now Section 17, Rule
13][Bersamin, J.],

The petition only bore, however, the cut printouts of what appeared to be the registry receipt
numbers of the registered matters, not the registry receipts themselves. The rule requires to
be appended the registry receipts, not their reproductions. Hence, the cut printouts did not
substantially comply with the rule. This was the reason why the Court held in the resolution of
August 19, 2014 that the petitioner did not comply with the requirement of proof of service.

x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x
(d) If done via accredited courier:
By an affidavit of service executed by the person who brought the pleading or
paper to the service provider, together with the courier's official receipt or document
tracking number.

(e) If done via electronic mail facsimile, or other authorized electronic means of
transmission:
By an affidavit of service executed by the person who sent the e-mail, facsimile, or
other electronic transmission, together with a printed proof of transmittal.

x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x
Q8. What are the acceptable proof of mailing and service by a court to a party?

A8. The following are acceptable proofs of mailing and service by a court to a party:

(1) Certifications from the official Post Office record book and/or delivery book;

(2) The actual page of the postal delivery book showing the acknowledgment of receipt;

(3) Registry receipt; and

(4) Return card. (Gatmaytan vs. Dolor, supra, citing Cortes vs. Valdellon).

x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x
Q.5
PROBLEM
Jimuel filed against his wife Jewel a petition for the declaration of nullity of their
marriage, alleging as ground therefor Jewel’s psychological incapacity under Article 36
of the Family Code. The court denied the petition for insufficiency of the evidence
presented at the trial. Muchlater, Jimuel again filed a petition against Jewel for the
declaration of nullity of their marriage. This time, the basis of Jimuel’s petition was the
absence of a marriage license at the time their marriage was celebrated. Upon Jewel’s
motion, the court dismissed the petition on the ground of res judicata by virtue of the
judgment in the first suit.

Was the denial of the petition on the ground of res judicata proper? Explain
briefly. (5 points)
SUGGESTED ANSWER

Yes, the denial of the petition on the ground of res judicata is proper. In
Mallion vs. Alcantara, the Supreme Court ruled that Res Judicata
requires the following requisites: 1) the former judgment in final; 2) it is
rendered by a court having jurisdiction over the subject matter and the
parties; 3) it is a judgment or an order on the merits, and 4) there is
between the first and second actions identity of parties, or subject
matter, and of causes of action. In this case, Jimuel simply invoked
different grounds for the same cause of action. Thus, the dismissal of
the petition is proper. [Mallion vs. Alcantara, G.R. No. 141528, 31
October 2006]
104Q.What does res judicata mean? Explain.

104A. Res judicata literally means “a matter adjudged; a thing judicially acted
upon or decide; a thing or mater settled by judgment. It rises from the underlying
idea that parties should not be permitted to litigate the same issue more that a
right or fact that has already been judicially determined by a competent court
should be conclusive to the parties. [People vs. Camenforte, et al. (G.R.No.
220916, 14 June 2021)(First Division)[Caguioa,J.]; Republic vs. Roguza Dev’t.
Corp. (G.R. No.199705, 3 April 2019)(Second Division)[Caguioa,J.].

x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x
105Q. What are the requisites before res judicatacan apply?

105A.The following requisites must be present:

(a) the former judgement must be final

(b) It must be rendered by a court having jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties;

(c) It must be rendered by a court having jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties

(d) There must be, between the first and second actions, the identify of parties, the subject
matter, and of the cause of action . [Jebsen Maritime, Inc et al vs. Gutierrez (G.R No.
244098, 3 March 2021)(First Division) [Caguioa,J.].]
RES JUDICATA

Q14. What does res judicata mean? Explain.

A14. Res judicata is a legal principle where a party is barred from raising an issue or
presenting evidence on a fact that has already been judicially tried and decided. It is "a
matter adjudged; a thing judicially acted upon or decided; a thing or matter settled by
judgment." (Heirs of Lamirez vs. Sps. Ampatuan, et al., G.R. No. 226043, 3 February
2020)(Third Presidential Decree No. 1271 Committee vs. De Guzman, 801 Phil. 731
(2016)[Per J. Leonen, Second Division], citing Oropeza Marketing Corp. vs. Allied
Banking Corp., 441 Phil. 551 (2002)[Per J. Quisumbing, Second Division].
Division)[Leonen, J.].
x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x
RES JUDICATA

It also refers to the rule that a final judgment or decree on the merits by a
court of competent jurisdiction is conclusive of the rights of the parties
or their privies in all later suits on points and matters determined in the
former suit.

Remedial Law Reviewer Syllabus based pp 345 by S.N Moya II (2021) Ed

(Vol1, Part 1); No.10 and 105 Q and A by Dean SNM II-LMT
Q.6
PROBLEM
Isol, Inc. supplies rotisserie chicken products to the grocery section of shopping malls. It conducts
kitchen operations in a refurbished house located in Palanan, a residential neighborhood. Rona, a
resident of Palanan, filed an action against Isol, Inc. to enjoin the operations of its kitchen on the
ground that it emits intolerable odors and violates laws on waste disposal. In the same action, Rona
also seeks to have Isol, Inc.’s business permit revoked because an industrial facility is not allowed
by law to be located in a residential neighborhood and Isol, Inc. failed to comply with sanitary
inspection and other procedural and health requirements. In the complaint Rona filed, she likewise
prayed for the issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction (WPI) to stop the kitchen operations during
the pendency of the case. Isol, Inc., in its verified answer, strongly opposed the prayer for WPI
considering the huge financial disaster that it will suffer if the writ were to be issued, especially in
light of the possibility that the suit could continue to be pending for more than a year. Based on the
foregoing, may the WPI prayed for already be issued? Explain briefly. (5 points)
SUGGESTED ANSWER

Yes, the WPI prayed for may already be issued. In Ama Land, Inc. vs. Wack
Wack Residents’ Assoc. , the Supreme Court ruled that to be entitled to the
injuctive writ, the petitioner must show that: 1) there exists a clear and
unmistakable right to be protected; 2) this right is directly threatened by the
act sought to be enjoined; 3) the invasion of the right is material and
substantial; 4) there is an urgent and paramount necessity for the writ to
prevent serious and irreparable damage. In this case, Rona has a clear and
unmistakable right to live in a peaceful, quiet and safe environment which
was being violated by the operations of Isol Inc. and there is urgent necessity
to prevent serious and irreparable damage. Thus, the WPI may already be
issued. [Ama Land Inc. vs. Wack Wack Residents’ Association, Inc., G.R. No.
202342, 19 July 2017, CAGUIOA, J.]
Preliminary Injunction (Rule 58);[Grounds for Issuance of Preliminary
Injunction (Section 3)]

110Q. What is a writ of preliminary injunction and its purpose? Explain.

110A. A writ of preliminary injunction is a provisional remedy that is
adjunct to the main suit
Q.7
PROBLEM

Is a prior determination of the status as a legal heir in a

separate special proceeding a prerequisite to an ordinary
civil action seeking the protection and enforcement of
ownership rights of such legal heir vested by the law of
succession? Explain briefly. (5 points)
SUGGESTED ANSWER

No, prior determination of the status of a legal heir in a separate special proceeding
is not a prerequisite to an ordinary civil action seeking the protection and ownership
of rights. The property of a deceased person, both real and personal, becomes the
property of the heir by the mere fact of death of his predecessor in interest, and as
such he can deal with it in precisely the same way in which the deceased could have
dealt, subject only to the limitations which by law or by contract may be imposed
upon the deceased himself Henceforth the rules is: unless there is a pending special
proceeding for the settlement of the decedent’s estate or for the determination of
heirship, the compulsory or intestate heir may commence an ordinary civil action to
declare the nullity of a deed or instrument, and for recovery of property, or any other
action in the enforcement of their ownership rights acquired by virtue of succession
without the necessity of a prior and separate judicial declaration of their status as
such. [Treyes vs. Larlar, G.R. No. 232579, 8 Sept. 2020, CAGUIOA, J.]
5A. No judicial declaration of heirship is necessary in order that an heir may
assert his or her right to the property of the deceased. This is upon the theory that
the property of a deceased person, both real and personals, becomes the property of
the heir by the mere fact of the death of his predecessor in interest, and as such he
can deal with it in precisely the same way in which the deceased could have dealt,
subject only to the limitations which by law orby contract may be imposed upon the
deceased himself. (Treyes vs. Larlar, et al., supra.)

x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x

Syllabus based pp 22 and 24 by S.N.Moya II (2021) Ed. (Vol II); No 5Q and A by

Dean SNM OO-LMT
Q14. When are the intestate heirs entitled to the hereditary
shares? Explain.

A14. They are immediately entitled to their hereditary

shares in the estate even though they may not be entitled
to any particular properties yet

x-x-x-x-xx-x-x
Q15. Is there a requirement under our substantive and
procedural law for the declaration of heirship? Explain.

A14. There is none. No judicial declaration of heirship

isnecessary in order that an heir may assert his or her
right to the property of the deceased. Capablanca vs.
Heirs of Pedro Bas, G.R. No.224144, 28 June
2017)(Second Division)[Leonen, J.]
Q.8
Namjoon, a Korean national and Regine, a Filipina, were married in Makati City on
February 14, 2012. Unfortunately, their relationship shortly turned sour and ended with a
divorce by mutual agreement in South Korea. The local court in Korea granted the
divorce. Wanting to marry her new boyfriend Tachyung, Regine filed a petition for
recognition of the foreign decree of divorce in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Cebu
where she resides.

The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) opposed the petition contending that the
proper remedy is a special proceeding for cancellation or correction of entries in the civil
registry under Rule 108 of the Rules of Court, which can only be filed in the RTC of
Makati where the marriage was celebrated and recorded in the Civil Registry of Makati.

Is the OSG’s contention tenable? Explain Briefly.

SUGGESTED ANSWER

No, the OSG’s contention is untenable. Well settled is the rule that
for purposes of remarriage, the divorce decree obtained abroad
must first be recognized in the Philippines. In this case, the
purpose of Regine is to marry Tachyung, therefore a judicial
declaration of recognition of foreign judgment must be obtained
first. With such recognition, a change in Regine’s civil status is an
expected consequence. The judicial recognition of foreign
judgment is necessary to establish a good and valid ground for the
correction and cancellation of entry in the civil registry under Rule
108, Sec. 2. Therefore, the OSG’s contention is untenable.
Q85. How should foreign divorce be judicially recognized in this jurisdiction?
Explain

A85. Judicial recognition of a foreign divorce requires that the national law of
the foreign spouse and the divorce decree be pleaded and proved as a fact
before the Regional Trial Court. The Filipino spouse may be granted the capacity to
remarry once our courts foreign spouse according to his or her national law, and that
the foreign spouse’s national law considers the dissolution of the marital relationship
to be absolute.

x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x
Syllabus based pp 625-626 and as alternative answer on pp 619-620 by
S.N.Moya II (2021) ED. (Vol I,Part 1)
Under the Article 26 of the Family Code, a divorce between a foreigner and a Filipino
may be recognized in the Philippines as long as it was validly obtained according to
the foreign spouse’s national law.

Mere presentation of the divorce decree before a trial court is insufficient. In Garcia
vs. Recio, this Court established the principle that before a foreign divorce decree is
recognized in this jurisdiction, a separate action mist be institute for that purpose.
Courts do not take judicial notice of foreign laws and foreign judgements; thus, our
laws require that the divorce decree and the national law of the foreign spouse must
be pleaded and proved like any other fact before trial courts. (Racho Tanaka vs.
Seiichi Tanaka, G.R. No.199515 (25 June 2018)(Thid Division)(Leonen, J]:

x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x
Enforcement and effects of Foreign Judgements or Final Orders

SECTION 48: Effect of foreign judgements or final orders- The effect of a judgement or final
order of a tribunal of a foreign country, having jurisdiction to render the judgement or final
order is as follows:

(a) In case of judgement or final order upon a specific thing, the judgement or final order is
conclusive upon the title to the things; and
(b) In case of judgement or final order against a person, the judgements or final order is
presumptive evidence of a right as between the parties and their successors in interest by a
subsequent title.

In either case, the judgement or final order may be repelled by evidence of a want of
jurisdiction, want of notice to the party, collusion, fraud, or clear mistake of law or fact.

x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x
REVIEW NOTES AND CASES

Q78. Is Judicial recognition of foreign judgement allowed in this jurisdiction?

Explain.

A78. Yes. Judicial recognition of a foreign judgement is allowed under Section 48. Rule
39 of the Rules of Court.

The rules states that the foreign judgement against a person is already “presumptive
evidence of a right as between the parties”. Upon judicial recognition of the foreign
judgement, the right becomes conclusive and the judgement serves as the basis for the
correction or cancellation of entry in the civil registry.

x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x
Q79. What are the underlying principles in the recognition and
enforcement of foreign judgements in this jurisdiction?

A79.It is an established international legal principle that final

judgements of foreign courts of competent jurisdiction are reciprocally
respected and rendered efficacious subject to certain conditions that
vary in different countries. ―In the recognition of foreign judgements,
Philippine courts are incompetent to substitute their judgement on how a case
was decided under foreign law‖. They are limited to the question pf whether to
extend the effect of the foreign judgement in the Philippines.

x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x
Thus, in a foreign judgement relating to the status of
adoption involving a citizen of a foreign country,
Philippine courts will only decide whether to extend its
effect to the Filipino party.
Q.9
PROBLEM
Notting Hill Corp. filed an action for forcible entry against the ten occupants of a parcel of
land it owns. After the summary proceedings, the Municipal Trial Court (MTC) rendered
judgment against the ten defendants. The defendants filed a notice of appeal, but failed to
file a supersedeas bond to stay the judgment to vacate. Upon Notting Hill Corp.’s motion,
the MTC issued a writ of execution. When Hugh, the sheriff, was implementing the writ of
execution, he discovered that the land was occupied by a number of families who all
claimed that they were legitimate lessees of the ten defendants. Julia, one of the lessees,
pleaded with Hugh, beseeching: ―I’m just a lessee, standing in front of a sheriff, asking him
to let me stay in my home.‖ May Hugh implement the writ of execution against the
lessees? Explain briefly.
(5 points)
SUGGESTED ANSWER

Yes, Hugh may implement the writ of execution. Under Rule

39, Sec.11, the writ of execution shall be served by the officer
upon the party against whom the same is rendered, or upon
any other person required thereby, or by law, to obey the
same, and such party or person may be punished for
contempt if he disobeys such judgment. In this case, since by
law they are not considered as legitimate lessees as they
claimed to be, the writ of execution can be implemented
against them.
Q41. How may the immediate execution of judgement in ejectment
case be stayed? Explain.

A41. To stay the immediate execution of the said judgement, while

the appeal is pending, the following requisites must concur:

(a) The defendant perfects his appeal;

(b) He files a supersedeas bond; and
(c) He periodically deposits the rentals, which become due during
the pendency of the appeal
The failure of the defendant to comply with any of these
conditions is a ground for the outright execution of the judgement,
the duty of the court in this respect being “ministerial and
imperative.” Hence, if the defendant-appellant perfected the appeal
but failed to file a supersedeas bond, the immediate execution of
the judgement would automatically follow. Conversely, the filing of
supersedeas bond will not stay the execution of the
judgement if the appeal is not perfected. Necessarily then, the
supersedeas bond should be filed within the period for the
perfection of the appeal.
Q.10
An Information for Murder was filed against the accused Demo and Onyok. It reads:

―That on or about the 9th day of March 2008, in the City of Las Piñas, Philippines and within the
jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above named accused, conspiring and confederating together and
both of them mutually helping and aiding each other, without justifiable motive, with intent to kill and with
treachery and abuse of superior strength, did then and there knowingly, unlawfully and feloniously attack,
assault and use personal violence upon one Angel Rosario, by then and there repeatedly hitting and
beating his head with a baseball bat, thereby inflicting upon the latter mortal injury which caused his death.

Contrary to law.‖

The accused filed a motion to quash on the ground that the Information does not conform substantially to
the prescribed form.

Is the accused correct? Explain briefly. (5 points)

SUGGESTED ANSWER

Yes, the accused is correct. In People vs. Solar, an information alleging

that treachery exists, to be sufficient, must therefore have factual
averments on how the person charged had deliberately employed
means, methods, or forms in the execution of the act that tended
directly and specially to insure its execution without risk to the accused
arising from the defense that the victim might make. In this case, the
information merely enumerated the aggravating circumstances present
but did not sufficiently provide the facts which constituted such
circumstances. Therefore, the accused is correct. [People vs. Solar,
G.R. No. 225595, 6 August 2019, CAGUIOA, J. EN BANC]
 COMPLAINT/INFORMATION DOES NOT CONFORMSUBSTANTIALLY TO THE
PRESCRIBED FORM

Where an information does not conform substantially to the prescribed form, it is subject to
quashal. In Sasot vs. People, the Supreme Court held that a complaint is substantially
sufficient if it stated the known address of the respondent, it is accompanied by complaint’s
affidavit and his witnesses and supporting documents, and the affidavits are sworn to before
any fiscal, state prosecutor or government official authorized to administer oath, or in their
absence or unavailability, a notary public who must certify that he personally examined the
affiants and that he is satisfied that they voluntarily executed and understood their affidavits.

Remedial Law vs. 2000 Rules of Criminal Procedure Notes and Cases (p.484) by
S.N.Moya OO(2017 Ed)
Q.11
PROBLEM
Cain was indicted under an Information charging him with the crime of Murder. He was caught
by the police in flagrante delicto as the incident happened in a public place with many witnesses
present. Videos of the incident were also posted online which the judge was able to watch.

During his arraignment, Cain pleaded guilty to the crime charged. The Regional Trial Court
(RTC) accepted the plea because it was made voluntarily and with full understanding of the
consequences. The RTC directed the prosecution to present evidence to prove Cain’s guilt.
However, the prosecution failed to present any evidence during the scheduled hearings. The
RTC then ruled and found Cain guilty beyond reasonable doubt based solely on his plea of guilt.

Was Cain’s conviction proper? Explain briefly. (5 points)

SUGGESTED ANSWER

No, Cain’s conviction is improper. In People vs. Pagal, the judge is

required to accomplish three things: 1) to conduct a searching inquiry
into the voluntariness and full comprehension of the consequences of
the accused’s plea; 2) to require the prosecution to prove the guilty of
the accused and the precise degree of his culpability; and 3) to
inquire whether or not the accused wishes to present evidence on his
behalf and allow him to do so if he so desires. In this case, the
mandatory procedure was not observed by the RTC. Therefore,
Cain’s conviction is improper. [People vs. Pagal, G.R. No. 241257, 29
September 2020, GESMUNDO, J. EN BANC.]
REVIEW NOTES AND CASES

Q7. What are the guidelines promulgated by the Supreme Court which concerns pleas of guilty to a
capital offences? Explain.

A7. For the guidance of the bench and the bar, the Supreme Court adopts the following guidelines
concerning pleas of guilty offenses as enunciated in the case of People vs. Pagal (G.R.No. 241257, 29
September 2020) (En Banc)(Gesmundo,J.]:

• AT THE TRIAL STAGE: When the accused make a plea of guilty to a capital offense, the trial court
must strictly abide by the provisions of Sec 3, Rule 116 of the 2000 Revised Rules of Criminal
Procedure. In particular, it must afford the prosecution an opportunity to present evidence as to
the guilt of the accused and the precise degree of his culpability. Failure to comply with these
mandates constitute grave abuse of discretion
x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x

Remedial Law vs. Remedial Law Reviewer Syllabus based pp 235-236 by S.N.Moya II (2021) Ed. Vol III
a. In the case the plea guilty to a capital offense is supported by proof beyond reasonable
doubt, the trial court shall enter a judgement of conviction

b. In case the prosecution presents evidence but fails to prove the accused’s guilt beyond
reasonable doubt, the trial court shall enter a judgement of acquittal in favor of the accused.

c. In case the prosecution fails to present any evidence despite the opportunity to do so, the
trial court shall enter a judgement of acquittal in favor of the accused

In the above instance, the trial court shall require the prosecution to explain in writing within
ten (10) days from receipt its failure to present evidence. Any instance of collusion between
the prosecution and the accused shall be dealt with to the full extent of the law.

x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x
Q.12

Enumerate and describe three warrants that may be

issued by the courts pursuant to the Rule on
Cybercrime Warrants. (5 points)
SUGGESTED ANSWER
a. Warrant to Disclose Computer Data (WDCD) is an order in writing issued in the name of
the People of the Philippines, signed by a judge, upon application of law enforcement
authorities, authorizing the latter to issue an order to disclose and accordingly, require any
person or service provider to disclose or submit subscriber’s information, traffic data, or
relevant data in his/her or its possession or control.

b. Warrant to Search, Seize and Examine Computer Data (WSSECD) is an order in writing
issued in the name of the People of the Philippines, signed by a judge, upon application of
law enforcement authorities, authorizing the latter to search the particular place for items to
be seized and/or examined.

c. Warrant to Examine Computer Data (WECD) is required to be applied for and obtained by
law enforcement authorities, upon acquiring possession of a computer device or computer
system via a lawful warrantless arrest, or by any other lawful method, and before searching
the said computer device or computer system for the purpose of obtaining for forensic
examination the computer data contained therein.
DISCLOSURE OF COMPUTER DATA

Q41. How should the computer data be disclosed?

A41. Sections 4.1 and 4.2 of the Rule on Cyber crime Warrants require
law enforcement authorities to secure a Warrant to disclosure Computer
Data (WDCD). It provides:

x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x
Section 4.1. Disclosure of Computer Data-

Pursuant to Section 14, Chapter IV of RA 10175, law enforcement

authorities, upon securing a warrant to Disclose Computer Data (WDCD)
under this Rule, shall issue an order requiring any person or service
provider to disclose or submit subscriber’s information, traffic data or
relevant data in his/her or its possession or control within seventy-two (72)
complaint officially docketed and assigned for investigation and the
disclosure is necessary and relevant for the purpose of investigation.

x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-
Section 4.2 Warrant to Disclosure Computer Data (WDCD)-

A WDCD is an order writing issued in the name of the People of

the Philippines, signed by a judge, upon application of law
enforcement authorities, authorizing the latter to issue an order to
disclose and accordingly, require subscriber’s information, traffic
data, or relevant data in his/her or its possession or control.

x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-
Interception of Computer Data

Q43. How can computer data be intercepted?

A43. Sections 5.1 and 5,2 of the rule on cybercrime Warrant require a court
issued warrant to intercept computer data. It provides:

Section 5.1 Interception of Computer Data-

Interception as defined under Section 3(m), Chapter I of RA 10175, may be
carried out only by virtue of a court issued warrant, duly applied for by law
enforcement authorities.
x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-
Section 5.2- Warrant to Intercept Computer Data (WICD)-

A WICD is an order in writing issued in the name of the People of the

Philiipines, signes by a judge, upon application of law enforcement
authorities, authorizing the latter to carry out any or all of the following
activities: (a) listening to, (b) recording, (c) monitoring, or (d) surveillance of
the content of communications, including proccuring of the content of
computer data, either directly, through access and use of a computer
system or indirectly, through the use of electronic eavesdropping or tapping
devices, at the same ties that the communication is occurring.
x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-
Section 5.3 Contents of Application for WICD-
The verified application for a WICD, as well as the supporting affidavits, shall
state the essential facts similar to those in Section 4.3 of this Rule, except that
the subject matter is the communication orcomputer data sought to be
intercepted.

Section 5.4 Issuance and Form of WICD-

If the judge is satisfied that there is probable cause to believe that the facts upon
which the application for WICD exists, he shall issue the WICD, which must be
substantially in the form prescribed in ―Annex B‖ of this Rule

x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-
Section 5.5 Return WICD-

Within forty-eight (48) hours from implementation or after the

expiration of the effectivity of the WICD, whichever comes first, the
authorized law enforcement officers shall submit a return on the WICD
to the court that issued it and simultaneously turn-over the custody of
the communication or computer data thereto as provided under
Section 7.1 of this Rule.

x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-
Section 5.6 Notice After Filing of Return

Within thirty (30) days from the filing of the return, or, if no return is
filed, from the lapse of the forty-eight (48) hour period to file the
return , the authorized law enforcement officer has the duty to
notify the person whose communications computer data have
been intercepted of the activities conducted pursuant to the WICD.

x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-
Search, Seizure And Examination Of Computer Data

Q44. What is the warrant to search, seize and examine of computer data
means?

A44. WWSECD is an order in writing issued in the name of the People of the
Philippines, signed by a judge, upon application of law enforcement authorities,
authorizing the latter to search the particular place for items to be seized and/or
examined.

This is provided by Section 6.1 of the rules on Cyber crime warrants.

x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-
Section 6.1 Warrant to Search, Seize and Examine Computer Data
(WSSECD)- A warrant to Search, Seize and Examine Computer
Data (WSSECD) is an order in writing issued in the name of the
People of the Philippines, signed by a judge, upon application of
law enforcement authorities, authorizing the latter to search the
particular place for items to be seized and/or examined.
Q.13
PROBLEM
Ricky, while driving his Maserati, smashes into the Toyota Vios of Dante.
Immediately after the incident, Ricky offers to pay the value of the Toyota
Vios.

Dante still sued Ricky criminally for Reckless Imprudence because of Ricky’s
wayward and speedy driving. During trial, Dante was called as witness to
testify on Ricky’s offer to compromise as an admission of guilt. Ricky’s
counsel objected.

If you were the judge, how would you rule on the objection? Explain briefly.
(5 points)
SUGGESTED ANSWER

If I were the judge, I would sustain the objection.

Under Rule 130, Section 28 (RROE), in criminal
cases, except those involving quasi-offenses or those
allowed by law to be compromised, an offer of
compromised by the accused may be received in
evidence as an implied admission of guilt. In this case,
the criminal case filed was a quasi-offense. Therefore,
there was no implied admission of guilt.
Q.14
Klaus was drinking in front of his rented apartment when he suddenly heard a gunshot which came
from inside the apartment owned by Luther. Klaus then saw Igor, a neighbor, going down the stairs
and leaving the scene holding a gun. Klaus also witnessed Luther fall from the stairs with blood
oozing from his chest. Vanya, Luther’s daughter, also rushed to Luther when he fell.

During Igor’s trial for Murder, Vanya testified and presented a flash drive containing the closed-
circuit television (CCTV) footages of the scene. Said footages showed a man appearing to be Igor,
armed with a gun, proceeding up the stairs and entering Luther’s apartment. In the video, the same
man was seen hastily leaving the premises. Vanya further testified that she was the one who
transferred to the flash drive the video footages from the barangay-owned CCTV that was located
outside their apartment.

When the footages were played in court and an enlarged screenshot was presented, Vanya
identified the shooter as Igor. The defense objected on the ground that Vanya was not the recorder
of the video footages. Are the CCTV footages admissible as electronic evidence? Explain
briefly. (5 points)
SUGGESTED ANSWER

Yes, the CCTV footages are admissible as electronic evidence. In

People vs. Manansala, the Supreme Court ruled that the Rules on
Electronic Evidence provides that persons authorized to
authenticate the video or CCTV recording is not limited solely to
the person who made the recording but also by another competent
witness who can testify it accuracy. In this case, Vanya was able to
establish the origin of the recording and explain how it was
transferred to the flash drive and subsequently presented to the
trial court. Therefore, the CCTV footages are admissible. [People
vs. Manansala, G.R. No. 233104, 2 Sep 2020, HERNANDO, J.]
Q.15
PROBLEM
In a case for Estafa, the prosecution offered the photocopy of the
acknowledgment receipt signed by the accused showing personal receipt
of the sum of money from the private complainant to prove the amount of
damage. Accused objected to the offer of the photocopy on the sole
ground that it is a mere reproduction of the original in violation of the
original document rule. The court overruled the accused’s objection and
admitted in evidence the photocopy of the acknowledgment receipt.

Did the court err in admitting the photocopy? Explain briefly. (5

points)
SUGGESTED ANSWER

No, the court did not err in admitting the photocopy. Under
Rule 130, Sec. 4 par. c, a duplicate is admissible to the
same extent as an original unless 1) a genuine question is
raised as to the authenticity of the original, or 2) in the
circumstances, it is unjust or inequitable to admit the
duplicate in lieu of the original. In this case, the accused did
not raise a genuine question as to the authenticity or its
admission is unjust or inequitable. Thus, the court did not
err in admitting the photocopy.
REMEDIAL LAW 2
Q.1
1. Assume that you received an adverse decision and filed a motion for
reconsideration which was denied.
Give the reglementary periods for filing the following:
a) Notice of Appeal to the Court of Appeals
b) Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65
c) Petition for Review to the Court of Appeals under Rule 42
d) Petition for Review on Certiorari to the Supreme Court under Rule 45
e) Petition for Certiorari under Rule 64
 SUGGESTED ANSWER

a) Under Rule 41, Sec. 3, the appeal shall be taken within fifteen (15) days from
notice of the judgment or final order appealed from.
b) Under Rule 65, Sec. 4, the petition shall be filed not later than sixty (60) days
from notice of judgment, order or resolution.
c) Under Rule 42, Sec.1, the petition shall be filed and served within fifteen (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.
d) Under Rule 45, Sec.2, the petition shall be filed within fifteen (15) days from
notice of judgment or final order or resolution appealed from, or of the denial of the
petitioner’s motion for new trial or reconsideration filed in due time after notice of
the judgment.
e) Under Rule 64, Sec.3, the petition shall be filed within thirty (30) days from
notice of the judgment or final order or resolution sought to be reviewed.
Q.3
Gail filed a forcible entry complaint against Marianina before the
Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC). The MeTC ruled in favor of
Marianina. Gail appealed the MeTC decision to the Regional Trial
Court (RTC). The RTC denied Gail’s appeal and sustained the
MeTC. Gail then filed a notice of appeal with the RTC indicating
that it is appealing the RTC’s decision to the Court of Appeals
(CA). In her notice of appeal, Gail also requested the RTC to
transmit the records of the case to the CA.
Did Gail take the correct mode of appeal? Explain Briefly.
SUGGESTED ANSWER

No, Gail did not take the correct mode of appeal. Under Rule
42, Sec.1, a party desiring to appeal from a decision of the
Regional Trial Court rendered in the exercise of its appellate
jurisdiction may file a verified petition for review with the Court
of Appeals. In this case, Gail should have filed a verified
petition for review with the Court of Appeals and not a notice of
appeal with the RTC since the RTC was in the exercise of its
appellate jurisdiction. Therefore, Gail did not take the correct
mode of appeal.
Q.4
The Regional Trial Court (RTC) rendered a decision against Kat. She
received a copy of the decision on December 26, 2021. Kat’s counsel filed
with the Supreme Court a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 by
registered mail on January 10, 2022. The petition was dismissed for failure to
pay the docket fees within the reglementary period. Kat’s counsel challenged
the dismissal arguing that: i) the intention was to pay the docket fess after the
same is assessed upon the court’s receipt of the petition by registered mail;
and ii) the dismissal of the petition effectively rendered nugatory a party’s
statutory right to appeal by registered mail under the rules. Kat’s counsel also
added that she did not want to include cash money in the mail.
Is Kat’s counsel correct? Explain Briefly.
 SUGGESTED ANSWER
No, Kat’s counsel is incorrect. First, in Ang vs. CA, the Supreme Court ruled that full payment of
docket fees within the prescribed period is mandatory and necessary to perfect the appeal. In
this case, their intention was to pay the docket fees after the petition is assessed upon the
court’s receipt which is already beyond the prescribed period. [Ang vs. CA, G.R. No. 238203, 3
September 2020, LOPEZ, J.]

Second, in Kumar vs. People, the Supreme Court ruled that the right to appeal is merely a
statutory privilege and may be exercise only in the manner and in accordance with the
provisions of the law. The party who seeks to avail of the remedy of appeal must comply with
the requirements of the rules; otherwise, the appeal is lost. In this case, it is not the dismissal of
the petition that effectively rendered Kat’s statutory right to appeal nugatory but their failure to
pay the docket fees. [Kumar vs. People, G.R. No. 247661, 15 June 2020, LEONEN, J.]

Furthermore, even if Kat did not want to include cash money in the mail, she may opt to use
postal money order in the payment of docket fees.
Q.5
In December of 2021, Matibag Realty Corp. and Kasangga
Construction Co. submitted their construction dispute to arbitration
before the Construction Industy Arbitration Commission (CIAC). In
March 2022, the CIAC arbitral tribunal rendered an award in favor
of Kassangga Construction Co.

What is the Matibag Realty Corp’s remedy? Explain

Briefly.
 SUGGESTED ANSWER

It depends. In, Global Medical Center of Laguna, Inc. vs. Ross Systems
International, Inc., the Supreme Court ruled that if the issue to be raised by the
parties is a pure question of law, the appeal should be filed directly and
exclusively with the Court through a petition for review under Rule 45. If the
parties will appeal factual issues, the appeal may be filed with the CA, but only
on the limited grounds that pertain to either a challenge on the integrity of the
CIAC arbitral tribunal or an allegation that the arbitral tribunal violated the
Constitution or positive law in the conduct of the arbitral process, through the
special civil action of a petition for certiorari under Rule 65. [Global Medical
Center of Laguna, Inc. vs. Ross Systems International, Inc., G.R. No. 230112,
11 May 2021, CAGUIOA, J. EN BANC]
Q.6
Nysa was defrauded by Jackie resulting in damages to the former.
Nysa filed a civil suit before the Regional Trial Court (RTC). The
RTC dismissed her complaint. Within four years from Nysa’s
discovery of the dismissal of her complaint, she filed, through her
counsel, a petition for annulment of judgment under Rule 47 of the
Rules of Court before the Court of Appeals (CA) on the ground of
fraud.

Should the CA give due course to Nysa’s petition? Explain

Briefly.
SUGGESTED ANSWER

No, the CA should not give due course to Nysa’s

petition. Under Rule 47, Sec. 2, the annulment may
be based only on the grounds of extrinsic fraud and
lack of jurisdiction. In this case, the ground being
raised by Nysa is only fraud which could have been
availed of, in a motion for new trial or petition for
relief.
Q.7
Alex, Bobbie, and Gabbie were charged with the crime of Murder. Finding them to have acted
in conspiracy, the Regional Trial Court (RTC) convicted them of Homicide. Only Bobbie
appealed the conviction with the Court of Appeals (CA). Consequently, an entry of judgment
was issued against Alex and Gabbie.

Subsequently, the CA modified Bobbie’s conviction from Homicide to Murder. In the same
judgment, the CA likewise modified Alex and Gabbie’s conviction from Homicide to Murder.

Upon learning of the CA’s decision, Alex and Gabbie confronted Bobbie, saying: ―Bakit ka pa
ba nag-appeal? Tumaas tuloy ang sentensya namin. Nadamay pa kami!‖ Bobbie snapped
back: ―Bakit parang galit kayo? Pero bakit kasalanan ko? Parang kasalanan ko?‖

Was the CA correct in modifying the judgment as to Alex and Gabbie? Explain Briefly.
SUGGESTED ANSWER

No, the CA was incorrect in modifying the judgment as to Alex and

Gabbie. Under the Doctrine of Immutability of Final Judgment, a
decision that has acquired finality becomes immutable and
unalterable and may no longer be modified in any respect even if
the modification is meant to correct erroneous conclusion of fact or
law and whether it was made by the court that rendered it or by the
highest court of the land. In this case, there was already an entry of
judgment issued against Alex and Gabbie which is deemed to be a
finality of the judgment against them. [Lanto vs. COA, G.R. No.
217189, 18 April 2017, BERSAMIN, J. EN BANC]
Q.8
Mayor Dalupan, who was notorious for being involved in rigged public
biddings, was convicted by the Sandiganbayan, in the exercise of its
original jurisdiction, for violation of Section 3 (e) of Republic Act No.
3019 or the Anti- Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. Seeking to overturn
his conviction, Mayor Dalupan filed a Rule 65 petition for certiorari
before the Supreme Court on the 59th day from notice of assailed
Sandiganbayan ruling.

Is the remedy availed of by Mayor Dalupan correct? Explain

Briefly.
SUGGESTED ANSWER

No, the remedy availed of by Mayor Dalupan is incorrect. In

People vs. Talaue, the Supreme Court ruled that the proper
mode of appeal from the Sandiganbayuan’s judgment of
conviction in the exercise of its original jurisdiction to the
Supreme Court is by filing a Notice of Appeal under Rule XI,
Sec. 1 (a) of the Sandiganbayan Rules. In this case, Mayor
Dalupan filed a petition under Rule 65 which is an improper
remedy. [People vs. Talaue, G.R. No. 248652, 12 January
2021, PERALTA, C.J.]
Q.9
Police officers Miggy and Laida were involved in an alleged buy-bust operation against Mr.Magtalas, a
suspected drug dealer. Mr.Magtalas maintained his innocence, asserting that the drugs were merely planted.
He further claimed that he was unjustifiably beaten up by the police officers. Mr. Magtalas filed before the Office
of the Deputy Ombudsman for Military and Other Law Enforcement Officers (OMB-MOLEO) a criminal
complaint for planting evidence which is punishable under Section 29 of the Dangerous Drugs Act (R.A. No.
9165). Mr. Magtalas also filed an administrative complaint for grave misconduct against Miggy and Laida in light
of the unwarranted physical assault against him.

The Office of the Ombudsman (OMB) rendered a decision holding Miggy and Laida administratively liable for
grave misconduct and accordingly imposed the penalty of dismissal from service. A few weeks later, the OMB
issued a separate resolution finding probable cause against them for violation of Section 29 of R.A. No, 9165.

Aggrieved, Miggy and Laida filed before the Supreme Court the following: i) a Rule 65 petition for certiorari
assailing the OMB’s decision finding them administratively liable for grave misconduct; and ii) a Rule 45 petition
for review on certiorari assailing the OMB’s resolution finding probable cause against them.

Were the remedies availed of by Miggy and Laida proper? Explain Briefly.
SUGGESTED ANSWER

No, the remedies availed of by Miggy and Laide were improper. In

Gatchalian vs. Ombudsman, the Supreme Court ruled that appeals from
decisions of the Office of the Ombudsman in administrative disciplinary
cases should be taken to the Court of Appeals under the provisions of
Rule 43 and the remedy against the Ombudman’s decision in criminal
cases is to file a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 before the Supreme
Court. In this case, a petition under Rule 43 should have been filed in
assailing the administrative liability for grave misconduct while Rule 65
should have been filed in assailing the OMB’s resolution of finding
probable cause. [Gatchalian vs. Ombudsman, G.R. No. 229288, 1
August 2018, CAGUIOA, J.]
THANK YOU