This case resolves a Petition for Mandamus filed by Datu Malingin, a tribal chieftain, seeking to compel the regional trial court and prosecutors to desist from prosecuting a rape case against him and declare certain police officers guilty of arbitrary detention. The Supreme Court denies the petition. It finds that Datu Malingin did not follow the hierarchy of courts and did not establish the requirements for mandamus. While he invoked the Indigenous Peoples' Rights Act, mere invocation is insufficient to evade criminal prosecution. The criminal case may proceed as he failed to show a clear legal right was violated by respondents.
This document is a memorandum submitted by the defendant's counsel in a civil case regarding ejectment. The plaintiff filed a complaint to eject the defendant from an apartment the defendant had been leasing. The defendant argues that the plaintiff has no cause of action because the lease contract presented by the plaintiff is fictitious. Additionally, the defendant asserts that the plaintiff's action is barred by the one-year statute of limitations for unlawful detainer cases. Finally, the defendant claims the complaint should be dismissed for lack of a proper certification against forum shopping. The defendant requests that the court dismiss the plaintiff's complaint.
This document summarizes the rules regarding motions for new trial or reconsideration, and petitions for relief from judgments under the Rules of Court. It outlines the grounds and requirements for filing these motions, including affidavits of merit. It also describes the periods for resolving such motions, and the effects of granting a motion for new trial or ordering a partial new trial. Relief from judgments may be sought through a verified petition filed within 60 days of learning of the judgment and no more than 6 months after its entry.
This document summarizes rules regarding motions for new trial or reconsideration, relief from judgments, and appeals from regional trial court decisions in civil procedure. Key points include:
1) Grounds for motions for new trial include newly discovered evidence and grounds for reconsideration include excessive damages or decisions contrary to law. Affidavits of merit are generally required.
2) Petitions for relief from judgments allow aggrieved parties a second chance at a hearing if deprived of one due to fraud or mistake. They must be filed within 6 months and show grounds like fraud or excusable negligence.
3) Appeals can be made through ordinary appeal, petition for review, or appeal by certiorari. The record on appeal must be filed
This document summarizes rules regarding special proceedings in the Philippines, specifically focusing on the settlement of estates of deceased persons. It provides details on:
1) Which courts have jurisdiction over probate proceedings based on the value of the estate. Regional trial courts have jurisdiction over most estates, while metropolitan and municipal trial courts handle smaller estates.
2) Venue requirements for probate, which is generally the province where the deceased resided. Extrajudicial settlement is allowed if heirs agree and certain conditions are met.
3) Probate court powers including ordering probate of wills, granting letters of administration, approving claims and debts, authorizing real estate transactions, and distributing estates.
The document then provides
It was so important and prudent to include a right to reasonable bail in the Bill of Rights because bail is inherently intertwined with a defendant's right to innocence until proven guilty. A person should have the right to be released on bail while preparing for their trial.
This document discusses criminal procedure and prosecution of offenses in the Philippines. It outlines the key aspects of criminal procedure such as the accusatorial system, distinction between criminal law and procedure, construction of rules, jurisdiction, venue, types of jurisdiction including territorial jurisdiction, and jurisdiction of various courts like MTC, MCTC, MTCC, and RTC. It provides definitions and explanations of important concepts in criminal procedure under Philippine law.
The document outlines the rights of the accused in criminal prosecutions under Philippine law, including the right to be presumed innocent, to be informed of charges, to present a defense, not to testify against oneself, confront witnesses, and have a speedy and public trial. It also describes the procedures for arraignment and plea, including the ability to plead guilty to a lesser offense. The accused may file a motion to quash the complaint or information before entering a plea based on grounds such as lack of an offense or lack of jurisdiction.
Rule 23 regulates depositions taken for pending legal actions, while Rule 24 regulates depositions taken to preserve evidence for future legal actions. The document then discusses the various methods of discovery laid out in the rules, including depositions, interrogatories, requests for admission, and medical examinations. It provides guidance on when depositions can be taken, how they are conducted, and how they can be used in court proceedings, noting that depositions are generally inadmissible as evidence but have some exceptions. The document also discusses taking depositions in foreign countries and the differences between commissions and letters rogatory for obtaining these types of depositions internationally.
This document is a memorandum submitted by the defendant's counsel in a civil case regarding ejectment. The plaintiff filed a complaint to eject the defendant from an apartment the defendant had been leasing. The defendant argues that the plaintiff has no cause of action because the lease contract presented by the plaintiff is fictitious. Additionally, the defendant asserts that the plaintiff's action is barred by the one-year statute of limitations for unlawful detainer cases. Finally, the defendant claims the complaint should be dismissed for lack of a proper certification against forum shopping. The defendant requests that the court dismiss the plaintiff's complaint.
This document summarizes the rules regarding motions for new trial or reconsideration, and petitions for relief from judgments under the Rules of Court. It outlines the grounds and requirements for filing these motions, including affidavits of merit. It also describes the periods for resolving such motions, and the effects of granting a motion for new trial or ordering a partial new trial. Relief from judgments may be sought through a verified petition filed within 60 days of learning of the judgment and no more than 6 months after its entry.
This document summarizes rules regarding motions for new trial or reconsideration, relief from judgments, and appeals from regional trial court decisions in civil procedure. Key points include:
1) Grounds for motions for new trial include newly discovered evidence and grounds for reconsideration include excessive damages or decisions contrary to law. Affidavits of merit are generally required.
2) Petitions for relief from judgments allow aggrieved parties a second chance at a hearing if deprived of one due to fraud or mistake. They must be filed within 6 months and show grounds like fraud or excusable negligence.
3) Appeals can be made through ordinary appeal, petition for review, or appeal by certiorari. The record on appeal must be filed
This document summarizes rules regarding special proceedings in the Philippines, specifically focusing on the settlement of estates of deceased persons. It provides details on:
1) Which courts have jurisdiction over probate proceedings based on the value of the estate. Regional trial courts have jurisdiction over most estates, while metropolitan and municipal trial courts handle smaller estates.
2) Venue requirements for probate, which is generally the province where the deceased resided. Extrajudicial settlement is allowed if heirs agree and certain conditions are met.
3) Probate court powers including ordering probate of wills, granting letters of administration, approving claims and debts, authorizing real estate transactions, and distributing estates.
The document then provides
It was so important and prudent to include a right to reasonable bail in the Bill of Rights because bail is inherently intertwined with a defendant's right to innocence until proven guilty. A person should have the right to be released on bail while preparing for their trial.
This document discusses criminal procedure and prosecution of offenses in the Philippines. It outlines the key aspects of criminal procedure such as the accusatorial system, distinction between criminal law and procedure, construction of rules, jurisdiction, venue, types of jurisdiction including territorial jurisdiction, and jurisdiction of various courts like MTC, MCTC, MTCC, and RTC. It provides definitions and explanations of important concepts in criminal procedure under Philippine law.
The document outlines the rights of the accused in criminal prosecutions under Philippine law, including the right to be presumed innocent, to be informed of charges, to present a defense, not to testify against oneself, confront witnesses, and have a speedy and public trial. It also describes the procedures for arraignment and plea, including the ability to plead guilty to a lesser offense. The accused may file a motion to quash the complaint or information before entering a plea based on grounds such as lack of an offense or lack of jurisdiction.
Rule 23 regulates depositions taken for pending legal actions, while Rule 24 regulates depositions taken to preserve evidence for future legal actions. The document then discusses the various methods of discovery laid out in the rules, including depositions, interrogatories, requests for admission, and medical examinations. It provides guidance on when depositions can be taken, how they are conducted, and how they can be used in court proceedings, noting that depositions are generally inadmissible as evidence but have some exceptions. The document also discusses taking depositions in foreign countries and the differences between commissions and letters rogatory for obtaining these types of depositions internationally.
The document discusses rules and procedures related to motions for new trial or reconsideration in criminal cases. It outlines the grounds for granting a new trial, such as errors during the trial or newly discovered evidence. It also discusses exceptions, such as recantation by a witness generally not being sufficient for a new trial. The effects of granting a new trial and procedures for appeals are also covered.
The document provides samples of basic legal forms used in Philippine courts, including captions, acknowledgments, affidavits, and negotiable instruments. It describes the types of courts established after the Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980 and provides examples of captions for each court. It also provides templates for acknowledgments, jurats, affidavits, verifications, and certifications. Finally, it includes examples of promissory notes and bills of exchange as samples of negotiable instruments.
Judgment is a decision of a court regarding the rights and liabilities of parties in a legal action or proceeding. Judgments also generally provide the court's explanation of why it has chosen to make a particular court order.
Criminal procedure in the Philippines mandates that a pre-trial conference be held within 30 days of arraignment unless a special law specifies a shorter period. The pre-trial conference can only be held with the agreement of the accused and their counsel. Considerations during the pre-trial conference include plea bargaining, stipulating facts, identifying evidence, and modifying the trial order. Agreements made during pre-trial must be in writing and signed or they cannot be used against the accused. The court will issue an order after pre-trial outlining the actions, stipulated facts, and marked evidence, which then binds the parties and guides the trial.
when all the facts of a case are heard, and a judge or jury makes the final decision about the court case. An offender can waive their rights to a jury trial and just have the judge make the ruling in a bench trial.
The document outlines 4 requirements for justiciability in determining the constitutionality of a law:
1) There must be an actual case or controversy, not a hypothetical question.
2) The constitutional question must be raised by a party with proper legal standing.
3) The constitutional issue must be raised at the earliest opportunity.
4) Resolving the constitutional question must be necessary to determine the case itself.
The document summarizes key rights recognized in the Philippine constitution. It discusses the rights of the accused, including due process, right to bail, rights against self-incrimination, and rights to a speedy trial. It also covers the Miranda rights stemming from a landmark US Supreme Court case, rights related to arrests and exceptions for warrantless arrests. Habeas corpus rights are also addressed, including allowances for suspension during times of rebellion or invasion.
The document discusses the salient features of notarial law and the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice, including the duties and responsibilities of notaries public, requirements for obtaining and renewing a notarial commission, prohibited acts for notaries, and cases related to notarial violations. It provides an overview of the legal framework for notarial practice in the Philippines.
The document summarizes the revised rules of criminal procedure in the Philippines regarding the prosecution of offenses. It outlines rules for instituting criminal actions through complaints or informations, defines complaints and informations, specifies who may prosecute criminal actions, and establishes requirements for complaints and informations such as stating the accused's name, designation of the offense, acts constituting the offense, place and approximate date of commission, and name of the offended party. It also addresses issues like amending complaints or informations, where criminal actions are to be instituted, and jurisdiction over offenses committed in transit.
The document discusses the Barangay Justice System in the Philippines. It defines key terms, describes the constitution of the Lupon Tagapamayapa (community mediation council), and outlines the stages of Katarungang Pambarangay (community mediation process). The process involves mediation by the Barangay Captain, followed by conciliation by a Pangkat Tagapagkasundo (conciliation panel) if needed. Indigenous and Shariah dispute resolution systems are also recognized for certain communities. The goal is to promote amicable out-of-court settlements at the local level.
APERTURA DEL DEBATE. DELITO EN AUDIENCIA. FORMALIDADES. FACULTAD DEL IMPUTADO...saribel colmenarez
Este documento resume las formalidades y procedimientos de una audiencia penal formal en Venezuela según el Código Orgánico Procesal Penal Venezolano. Se describe el proceso de apertura de la audiencia, las facultades del acusado, las formas de pronunciamiento de la sentencia, y las formalidades requeridas para el acta del debate. El resumen debe contener las declaraciones esenciales del juez, la presencia requerida de partes como fiscales, querellantes, defensores e intérpretes, y la redacción y publicación de la
The document summarizes a Supreme Court case regarding mining rights in the Diwalwal Gold Rush Area in the Philippines. It describes how various groups have claimed exploration and mining permits for the area over time, including Marcopper being granted Exploration Permit No. 133 in 1988. There was ongoing conflict between large-scale and small-scale miners claiming rights. In 1997, the Secretary of DENR issued a memorandum providing for a study of direct state utilization of the area, but the Court ruled this did not divest the rights already granted under Exploration Permit No. 133 to Southeast Mindanao Gold Mining Corp.
Este documento define las cuestiones previas como mecanismos de defensa que puede oponer el demandado dentro del plazo para contestar la demanda para exigir que se subsane algún vicio procesal o desechar la demanda. Explica los 11 supuestos en los que se pueden alegar cuestiones previas de acuerdo al Código de Procedimiento Civil venezolano, como falta de jurisdicción, ilegitimidad de las partes, falta de caución, defectos formales de la demanda, cosa juzgada o caducidad de la acción
The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals' decision remanding the case of ejectment to the regional trial court. It found that the proper action was accion publiciana instead of unlawful detainer, as the respondent's possession of the land portion in question had lasted more than one year. While the petitioner filed the complaint within one year of demanding possession, the respondent had been in possession since 1985, or for over 15 years prior to the complaint. As such, the case involved determining possession rights over a period longer than one year, making it a case for the regional trial court under accion publiciana instead of the municipal court under unlawful detainer.
The document discusses two writs: the writ of habeas corpus and the writ of amparo. The writ of habeas corpus allows a court to order a detainee to be brought before the court to determine if the detention is lawful. The privilege of the writ can be suspended by the President during times of invasion, rebellion, or when public safety requires it. The writ of amparo protects individuals from violations of their rights to life, liberty, or security by public or private entities and allows courts to issue orders to investigate such violations.
The document provides notes on proposed amendments to the Revised Rules on Evidence in the Philippines. Key amendments include:
- In Rule 128, evidence may now be excluded by the Constitution in addition to the law or rules.
- In Rule 129, judicial notice can now be taken of official acts of the National Government, and the court may announce intent to take judicial notice during pre-trial in addition to trial.
- In Rule 130, the definition of documentary evidence was expanded to include recordings, photographs, sounds and their equivalents. The original document rule now applies to writings, recordings, photographs and other records in addition to documents. Exceptions were also added when the original cannot be obtained through judicial processes or is
This document discusses exempting circumstances under Philippine law that exempt individuals from criminal liability for committing a crime. It outlines 7 situations where exempting circumstances apply: 1) imbeciles or insane persons, 2) those under 9 years old (now 15 years old), 3) those over 9 but under 15 who did not act with discernment, 4) accidental harm during a lawful act with due care, 5) acts under compulsion of irresistible force, 6) acts due to uncontrollable fear of equal or greater injury, and 7) failure to perform a legally required act due to a lawful or insuperable cause. The document provides details on the elements and standards of proof required for each exempting circumstance.
Philippine Constitution - Article VII - Executive DepartmentJohn Paul Espino
The document outlines the powers and responsibilities of the President of the Philippines according to Article VII of the Philippine Constitution. It details that the executive power is vested in the President, who is tasked with enforcing laws and administering the government. It also discusses the qualifications, terms of office, succession order, and impeachment process for the President and Vice President. Furthermore, it examines the specific powers granted to the President, including appointment powers, removal powers, military powers, pardon powers, borrowing powers, and budgetary powers. Conditions for declaring martial law and exercising emergency powers are also summarized.
The Regional Trial Court dismissed the petitioner's petition for review of an arbitration decision in favor of the respondent. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that (1) while arbitration decisions are subject to judicial review, the petitioner failed to avail the proper remedies and incorrectly filed in the RTC; (2) the RTC did not have jurisdiction over the review as the PCHC Rules purporting to grant such jurisdiction could not override the law; and (3) the proper remedies were a motion to vacate with the RTC, a petition for review with the Court of Appeals, or a petition for certiorari with the Court of Appeals. The arbitration proceedings are governed by the Arbitration Law and Rules of Court.
The document discusses the meaning and purpose of revision under the Code of Civil Procedure in India. Revision allows the High Court to review and revise cases decided by subordinate courts. It can be filed by an aggrieved party if the subordinate court exercised jurisdiction improperly, illegally, or with material errors. The High Court may also revise a case sua sponte. Revision is meant to ensure justice and fairness when appeals are not available or have been dismissed. It differs from appeal in that it is based on the subordinate court's improper exercise of jurisdiction rather than questions of fact or law.
The document discusses rules and procedures related to motions for new trial or reconsideration in criminal cases. It outlines the grounds for granting a new trial, such as errors during the trial or newly discovered evidence. It also discusses exceptions, such as recantation by a witness generally not being sufficient for a new trial. The effects of granting a new trial and procedures for appeals are also covered.
The document provides samples of basic legal forms used in Philippine courts, including captions, acknowledgments, affidavits, and negotiable instruments. It describes the types of courts established after the Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980 and provides examples of captions for each court. It also provides templates for acknowledgments, jurats, affidavits, verifications, and certifications. Finally, it includes examples of promissory notes and bills of exchange as samples of negotiable instruments.
Judgment is a decision of a court regarding the rights and liabilities of parties in a legal action or proceeding. Judgments also generally provide the court's explanation of why it has chosen to make a particular court order.
Criminal procedure in the Philippines mandates that a pre-trial conference be held within 30 days of arraignment unless a special law specifies a shorter period. The pre-trial conference can only be held with the agreement of the accused and their counsel. Considerations during the pre-trial conference include plea bargaining, stipulating facts, identifying evidence, and modifying the trial order. Agreements made during pre-trial must be in writing and signed or they cannot be used against the accused. The court will issue an order after pre-trial outlining the actions, stipulated facts, and marked evidence, which then binds the parties and guides the trial.
when all the facts of a case are heard, and a judge or jury makes the final decision about the court case. An offender can waive their rights to a jury trial and just have the judge make the ruling in a bench trial.
The document outlines 4 requirements for justiciability in determining the constitutionality of a law:
1) There must be an actual case or controversy, not a hypothetical question.
2) The constitutional question must be raised by a party with proper legal standing.
3) The constitutional issue must be raised at the earliest opportunity.
4) Resolving the constitutional question must be necessary to determine the case itself.
The document summarizes key rights recognized in the Philippine constitution. It discusses the rights of the accused, including due process, right to bail, rights against self-incrimination, and rights to a speedy trial. It also covers the Miranda rights stemming from a landmark US Supreme Court case, rights related to arrests and exceptions for warrantless arrests. Habeas corpus rights are also addressed, including allowances for suspension during times of rebellion or invasion.
The document discusses the salient features of notarial law and the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice, including the duties and responsibilities of notaries public, requirements for obtaining and renewing a notarial commission, prohibited acts for notaries, and cases related to notarial violations. It provides an overview of the legal framework for notarial practice in the Philippines.
The document summarizes the revised rules of criminal procedure in the Philippines regarding the prosecution of offenses. It outlines rules for instituting criminal actions through complaints or informations, defines complaints and informations, specifies who may prosecute criminal actions, and establishes requirements for complaints and informations such as stating the accused's name, designation of the offense, acts constituting the offense, place and approximate date of commission, and name of the offended party. It also addresses issues like amending complaints or informations, where criminal actions are to be instituted, and jurisdiction over offenses committed in transit.
The document discusses the Barangay Justice System in the Philippines. It defines key terms, describes the constitution of the Lupon Tagapamayapa (community mediation council), and outlines the stages of Katarungang Pambarangay (community mediation process). The process involves mediation by the Barangay Captain, followed by conciliation by a Pangkat Tagapagkasundo (conciliation panel) if needed. Indigenous and Shariah dispute resolution systems are also recognized for certain communities. The goal is to promote amicable out-of-court settlements at the local level.
APERTURA DEL DEBATE. DELITO EN AUDIENCIA. FORMALIDADES. FACULTAD DEL IMPUTADO...saribel colmenarez
Este documento resume las formalidades y procedimientos de una audiencia penal formal en Venezuela según el Código Orgánico Procesal Penal Venezolano. Se describe el proceso de apertura de la audiencia, las facultades del acusado, las formas de pronunciamiento de la sentencia, y las formalidades requeridas para el acta del debate. El resumen debe contener las declaraciones esenciales del juez, la presencia requerida de partes como fiscales, querellantes, defensores e intérpretes, y la redacción y publicación de la
The document summarizes a Supreme Court case regarding mining rights in the Diwalwal Gold Rush Area in the Philippines. It describes how various groups have claimed exploration and mining permits for the area over time, including Marcopper being granted Exploration Permit No. 133 in 1988. There was ongoing conflict between large-scale and small-scale miners claiming rights. In 1997, the Secretary of DENR issued a memorandum providing for a study of direct state utilization of the area, but the Court ruled this did not divest the rights already granted under Exploration Permit No. 133 to Southeast Mindanao Gold Mining Corp.
Este documento define las cuestiones previas como mecanismos de defensa que puede oponer el demandado dentro del plazo para contestar la demanda para exigir que se subsane algún vicio procesal o desechar la demanda. Explica los 11 supuestos en los que se pueden alegar cuestiones previas de acuerdo al Código de Procedimiento Civil venezolano, como falta de jurisdicción, ilegitimidad de las partes, falta de caución, defectos formales de la demanda, cosa juzgada o caducidad de la acción
The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals' decision remanding the case of ejectment to the regional trial court. It found that the proper action was accion publiciana instead of unlawful detainer, as the respondent's possession of the land portion in question had lasted more than one year. While the petitioner filed the complaint within one year of demanding possession, the respondent had been in possession since 1985, or for over 15 years prior to the complaint. As such, the case involved determining possession rights over a period longer than one year, making it a case for the regional trial court under accion publiciana instead of the municipal court under unlawful detainer.
The document discusses two writs: the writ of habeas corpus and the writ of amparo. The writ of habeas corpus allows a court to order a detainee to be brought before the court to determine if the detention is lawful. The privilege of the writ can be suspended by the President during times of invasion, rebellion, or when public safety requires it. The writ of amparo protects individuals from violations of their rights to life, liberty, or security by public or private entities and allows courts to issue orders to investigate such violations.
The document provides notes on proposed amendments to the Revised Rules on Evidence in the Philippines. Key amendments include:
- In Rule 128, evidence may now be excluded by the Constitution in addition to the law or rules.
- In Rule 129, judicial notice can now be taken of official acts of the National Government, and the court may announce intent to take judicial notice during pre-trial in addition to trial.
- In Rule 130, the definition of documentary evidence was expanded to include recordings, photographs, sounds and their equivalents. The original document rule now applies to writings, recordings, photographs and other records in addition to documents. Exceptions were also added when the original cannot be obtained through judicial processes or is
This document discusses exempting circumstances under Philippine law that exempt individuals from criminal liability for committing a crime. It outlines 7 situations where exempting circumstances apply: 1) imbeciles or insane persons, 2) those under 9 years old (now 15 years old), 3) those over 9 but under 15 who did not act with discernment, 4) accidental harm during a lawful act with due care, 5) acts under compulsion of irresistible force, 6) acts due to uncontrollable fear of equal or greater injury, and 7) failure to perform a legally required act due to a lawful or insuperable cause. The document provides details on the elements and standards of proof required for each exempting circumstance.
Philippine Constitution - Article VII - Executive DepartmentJohn Paul Espino
The document outlines the powers and responsibilities of the President of the Philippines according to Article VII of the Philippine Constitution. It details that the executive power is vested in the President, who is tasked with enforcing laws and administering the government. It also discusses the qualifications, terms of office, succession order, and impeachment process for the President and Vice President. Furthermore, it examines the specific powers granted to the President, including appointment powers, removal powers, military powers, pardon powers, borrowing powers, and budgetary powers. Conditions for declaring martial law and exercising emergency powers are also summarized.
The Regional Trial Court dismissed the petitioner's petition for review of an arbitration decision in favor of the respondent. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that (1) while arbitration decisions are subject to judicial review, the petitioner failed to avail the proper remedies and incorrectly filed in the RTC; (2) the RTC did not have jurisdiction over the review as the PCHC Rules purporting to grant such jurisdiction could not override the law; and (3) the proper remedies were a motion to vacate with the RTC, a petition for review with the Court of Appeals, or a petition for certiorari with the Court of Appeals. The arbitration proceedings are governed by the Arbitration Law and Rules of Court.
The document discusses the meaning and purpose of revision under the Code of Civil Procedure in India. Revision allows the High Court to review and revise cases decided by subordinate courts. It can be filed by an aggrieved party if the subordinate court exercised jurisdiction improperly, illegally, or with material errors. The High Court may also revise a case sua sponte. Revision is meant to ensure justice and fairness when appeals are not available or have been dismissed. It differs from appeal in that it is based on the subordinate court's improper exercise of jurisdiction rather than questions of fact or law.
The Regional Trial Court dismissed the petitioner's petition for review of an arbitration decision in favor of the respondent. The petitioner argued the RTC had jurisdiction based on the Philippine Clearing House Corporation Rules. However, the Supreme Court upheld the dismissal, finding the RTC did not have jurisdiction and the petitioner should have filed for review with the Court of Appeals or petitioned to vacate the arbitral award with the RTC instead. The Court emphasized that while alternative dispute resolution is encouraged, arbitration is primarily governed by the Arbitration Law and Rules of Court, not private rules of an organization like the PCHC.
This document summarizes the rules regarding certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus based on the Revised Rules of Procedure Annotated from Estopia. It outlines the requirements and procedures for filing a petition for each remedy. For certiorari, it discusses the timeline for filing, where to file, and what must be attached. It also describes the functions of certiorari and when it is the appropriate remedy. For prohibition and mandamus, it provides the requisites for filing a petition and outlines what actions can and cannot be remedied by each type of special civil action.
This document summarizes the rules regarding certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus based on the Revised Rules of Procedure Annotated from Estopia. It outlines the requirements and procedures for filing a petition for each remedy. For certiorari, it discusses the timeline for filing, where to file, and what must be attached. It also describes the functions of certiorari and when it is the proper remedy. For prohibition and mandamus, it provides the requisites for filing a petition and outlines what actions can and cannot be remedied by each type of special civil action.
This document summarizes the rules regarding certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus based on the Revised Rules of Procedure Annotated from Estopia. It outlines the requirements and procedures for filing a petition for each remedy. For certiorari, it discusses the timeline for filing, where to file, and what must be attached. It also describes the functions of certiorari and when it is the appropriate remedy. For prohibition and mandamus, it provides the requisites for filing a petition and outlines what actions can and cannot be remedied by each type of special civil action.
This document summarizes Rule 45 of the Revised Rules of Procedure Annotated regarding appeals by certiorari. It outlines where petitions for review on certiorari must be filed, which are the Supreme Court. It can be filed from judgments of the Court of Appeals, Sandiganbayan, Regional Trial Courts, or other courts authorized by law. The petition must raise only questions of law. It also lists exceptions to the general rule that appeals by certiorari are limited to errors of law. Finally, it provides the time period of 15 days to file the petition for review on certiorari.
This document summarizes Rule 45 of the Revised Rules of Procedure Annotated regarding appeals by certiorari. It outlines where petitions for review on certiorari must be filed, which are the Supreme Court. It can be filed from judgments of the Court of Appeals, Sandiganbayan, Regional Trial Courts, and other courts authorized by law. The petition must raise only questions of law. It also lists several exceptions to the general rule that appeals by certiorari are limited to errors of law. It distinguishes petitions for certiorari filed under Rule 45 versus those filed under Rule 65. It provides guidelines on the timing of filing a petition for review on certiorari and consequences for not meeting deadlines.
This document summarizes a Supreme Court decision regarding a dispute over local business taxes assessed by the City of Manila against various companies. The key points are:
1. Private respondents filed a case in regional trial court challenging the legality of certain local business tax provisions. The trial court issued a preliminary injunction preventing collection.
2. Petitioners filed a petition for certiorari with the Court of Appeals challenging the injunction, but the CA dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
3. The Supreme Court treated the case as a petition for review. It found that while the CTA has appellate jurisdiction over local tax cases, its jurisdiction over petitions for certiorari against interlocutory RTC orders was not expressly granted. However
The document provides an overview of proposed reforms to civil procedure rules in the Supreme Court, including:
1) Significant proposed reforms include enacting an Overriding Objective, reforms to case management, expert evidence, costs regime, and settlement offers.
2) Key terminology is defined that is changing, such as replacing writs with claim forms and pleadings with statements of case.
3) Fixed date claims and the procedures for them are outlined.
Arbitration as Applicable in Pakistan.pptxFahim Siddiqui
This document summarizes arbitration procedures in Pakistan. It notes that arbitration is a form of alternative dispute resolution where parties voluntarily agree to have their dispute settled by an arbitrator rather than courts. The arbitrator hears evidence from both sides and issues a final award that can be enforced by courts. However, under Pakistan's previous Arbitration Act, parties could frequently delay proceedings by seeking intervention from courts. The new Act aims to limit such intervention and make arbitration more efficient.
The document discusses the definition and types of decrees under civil procedure law in India. It defines a decree as a formal expression of adjudication by a court that determines the rights of parties regarding a matter in dispute. A decree must include an adjudication in a suit that conclusively determines the rights of parties. There are different types of decrees including preliminary decrees, final decrees, partly preliminary and partly final decrees, and deemed decrees. The document outlines the essential elements for a decision to be considered a decree and provides examples to distinguish decrees from other court orders.
15 March 2016 - Law Institute of Victoria conference presentation.Andrew Downie
Here are the slides from my presentation to the 2016 Law Institute of Victoria conference 17 March 2016. The topic is "Recent Developments in Commercial Litigation: Case Law and Court Procedure".
Werksmans Director Bulelwa Mabasa speaks on appeals, reviews, mandamus, interdicts & administrative actions in terms of the minerals & petroleum resources development act ("MRPDA") No.28 of 2002 at the Junior Mining & Exploration Conference 8th November 2012.
1. The document discusses the time limits for filing liens under California law, both before and after 2013 reforms.
2. Prior to 2013, lien claimants had 6 months after learning of an industrial injury to file a lien. The reforms in 2013 changed this to 12 months and removed healthcare providers from those able to file liens.
3. For services provided for future medical treatment or where the case was settled prior to 2013, the lien filing deadlines and rules in effect at that time would apply rather than the current laws.
The document discusses a revision application aimed at revising an order of the Provincial High Court regarding a dispute over the use of a pathway between three siblings. The High Court refused to entertain the revision application, stating there were no exceptional grounds. The petitioner argues this was contrary to law and facts of the case. The document analyzes relevant case law and acts governing disputes over land rights to determine what must be proven to establish entitlement to a disputed right in the Primary Court under this act, concluding there are two ways to prove entitlement: 1) by establishing acquisition of the right as in a civil case, or 2) by proving enjoyment of the right at the time the dispute arose, which requires less stringent proof than a civil case.
The document discusses a revision application aimed at revising an order of the Provincial High Court regarding a dispute over the use of a pathway between three siblings. The High Court had refused to entertain the revision application, stating there were no exceptional circumstances. The petitioner argued there were exceptional circumstances warranting revision. The Court of Appeal analyzed relevant case law and principles regarding revisionary jurisdiction. It determined that the petitioner failed to establish exceptional circumstances to warrant revision by the Court of Appeal. The document also discusses the standard of proof required in determining entitlement to rights under Section 69 of the Primary Court Procedure Act in disputes brought under Chapter VII.
Workshop on Understanding the Amended law of Service Tax dated 03.09.2014 Ses...Agarwal sanjiv & Co
This document summarizes the key aspects of the adjudication process for service tax demands in India. It discusses the triggers for issuance of a show cause notice, the contents and timing of show cause notices, the handling and adjudication of show cause notices, and the consequences after an adjudication order is issued. The presentation covers the demand determination process, principles of natural justice that must be followed, requirements for a valid adjudication order, and jurisdictional limits for different tax officers to adjudicate cases involving certain demand amounts.
Exploiting Artificial Intelligence for Empowering Researchers and Faculty, In...Dr. Vinod Kumar Kanvaria
Exploiting Artificial Intelligence for Empowering Researchers and Faculty,
International FDP on Fundamentals of Research in Social Sciences
at Integral University, Lucknow, 06.06.2024
By Dr. Vinod Kumar Kanvaria
How to Build a Module in Odoo 17 Using the Scaffold MethodCeline George
Odoo provides an option for creating a module by using a single line command. By using this command the user can make a whole structure of a module. It is very easy for a beginner to make a module. There is no need to make each file manually. This slide will show how to create a module using the scaffold method.
This presentation was provided by Steph Pollock of The American Psychological Association’s Journals Program, and Damita Snow, of The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), for the initial session of NISO's 2024 Training Series "DEIA in the Scholarly Landscape." Session One: 'Setting Expectations: a DEIA Primer,' was held June 6, 2024.
LAND USE LAND COVER AND NDVI OF MIRZAPUR DISTRICT, UPRAHUL
This Dissertation explores the particular circumstances of Mirzapur, a region located in the
core of India. Mirzapur, with its varied terrains and abundant biodiversity, offers an optimal
environment for investigating the changes in vegetation cover dynamics. Our study utilizes
advanced technologies such as GIS (Geographic Information Systems) and Remote sensing to
analyze the transformations that have taken place over the course of a decade.
The complex relationship between human activities and the environment has been the focus
of extensive research and worry. As the global community grapples with swift urbanization,
population expansion, and economic progress, the effects on natural ecosystems are becoming
more evident. A crucial element of this impact is the alteration of vegetation cover, which plays a
significant role in maintaining the ecological equilibrium of our planet.Land serves as the foundation for all human activities and provides the necessary materials for
these activities. As the most crucial natural resource, its utilization by humans results in different
'Land uses,' which are determined by both human activities and the physical characteristics of the
land.
The utilization of land is impacted by human needs and environmental factors. In countries
like India, rapid population growth and the emphasis on extensive resource exploitation can lead
to significant land degradation, adversely affecting the region's land cover.
Therefore, human intervention has significantly influenced land use patterns over many
centuries, evolving its structure over time and space. In the present era, these changes have
accelerated due to factors such as agriculture and urbanization. Information regarding land use and
cover is essential for various planning and management tasks related to the Earth's surface,
providing crucial environmental data for scientific, resource management, policy purposes, and
diverse human activities.
Accurate understanding of land use and cover is imperative for the development planning
of any area. Consequently, a wide range of professionals, including earth system scientists, land
and water managers, and urban planners, are interested in obtaining data on land use and cover
changes, conversion trends, and other related patterns. The spatial dimensions of land use and
cover support policymakers and scientists in making well-informed decisions, as alterations in
these patterns indicate shifts in economic and social conditions. Monitoring such changes with the
help of Advanced technologies like Remote Sensing and Geographic Information Systems is
crucial for coordinated efforts across different administrative levels. Advanced technologies like
Remote Sensing and Geographic Information Systems
9
Changes in vegetation cover refer to variations in the distribution, composition, and overall
structure of plant communities across different temporal and spatial scales. These changes can
occur natural.
How to Manage Your Lost Opportunities in Odoo 17 CRMCeline George
Odoo 17 CRM allows us to track why we lose sales opportunities with "Lost Reasons." This helps analyze our sales process and identify areas for improvement. Here's how to configure lost reasons in Odoo 17 CRM
A workshop hosted by the South African Journal of Science aimed at postgraduate students and early career researchers with little or no experience in writing and publishing journal articles.
Main Java[All of the Base Concepts}.docxadhitya5119
This is part 1 of my Java Learning Journey. This Contains Custom methods, classes, constructors, packages, multithreading , try- catch block, finally block and more.
বাংলাদেশের অর্থনৈতিক সমীক্ষা ২০২৪ [Bangladesh Economic Review 2024 Bangla.pdf] কম্পিউটার , ট্যাব ও স্মার্ট ফোন ভার্সন সহ সম্পূর্ণ বাংলা ই-বুক বা pdf বই " সুচিপত্র ...বুকমার্ক মেনু 🔖 ও হাইপার লিংক মেনু 📝👆 যুক্ত ..
আমাদের সবার জন্য খুব খুব গুরুত্বপূর্ণ একটি বই ..বিসিএস, ব্যাংক, ইউনিভার্সিটি ভর্তি ও যে কোন প্রতিযোগিতা মূলক পরীক্ষার জন্য এর খুব ইম্পরট্যান্ট একটি বিষয় ...তাছাড়া বাংলাদেশের সাম্প্রতিক যে কোন ডাটা বা তথ্য এই বইতে পাবেন ...
তাই একজন নাগরিক হিসাবে এই তথ্য গুলো আপনার জানা প্রয়োজন ...।
বিসিএস ও ব্যাংক এর লিখিত পরীক্ষা ...+এছাড়া মাধ্যমিক ও উচ্চমাধ্যমিকের স্টুডেন্টদের জন্য অনেক কাজে আসবে ...
How to Make a Field Mandatory in Odoo 17Celine George
In Odoo, making a field required can be done through both Python code and XML views. When you set the required attribute to True in Python code, it makes the field required across all views where it's used. Conversely, when you set the required attribute in XML views, it makes the field required only in the context of that particular view.
This presentation includes basic of PCOS their pathology and treatment and also Ayurveda correlation of PCOS and Ayurvedic line of treatment mentioned in classics.
2. G.R. No 247661, June 15, 2020
DEEPAK KUMAR, PETITIONER, V. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, RESPONDENT.
• This resolves a Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court praying that
the assailed Decision and Resolution of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 156711 be
reversed and set aside. The assailed Decision denied petitioner Deepak Kumar's (Kumar)
Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court and found no grave abuse of
discretion on the part of the Regional Trial Court in declining to entertain Kumar's Notice of
Appeal, as the trial court decision which Kumar sought to appeal had lapsed into finality. The
assailed Resolution denied Kumar's Motion for Reconsideration.
• In an August 18, 2016 Joint Decision,the Regional Trial Court of Muntinlupa City found Kumar
guilty for charges of violating Republic Act No. 9262, otherwise known as the Anti-Violence
Against Women and Their Children Act of 2004 (the "Anti-VAWC Law"), specifically, that he
choked his wife, hit her head, pulled her hair, and forced her into sexual activity.
• The court also finds accused Deepak Kumar guilty beyond reasonable doubt
in Criminal Case No. 11-545 for violation of Section 5(g) of Republic Act No.
9262
3. • Despite notice, Kumar was absent during the promulgation of judgment. As no motion, pleading, or
any other submission in reference to this Decision was ever filed before the Regional Trial Court, this
Decision lapsed into finality.
• A year and a half later, on March 14, 2018, D Dimayacyac Law Firm filed before the Regional Trial
Court an Entry of Appearance with Notice of Appeal.
• In a March 27, 2018 Order, the Regional Trial Court, still through Judge Aguinaldo, denied the Notice
of Appeal as the Decision sought to be appealed had become final.
• Following the denial of his Motion for Reconsideration, Kumar filed a Petition for Certiorari before the
Court of Appeals.
• The Court of Appeals dismissed Kumar's Rule 65 Petition as it found no grave abuse of discretion on
the part of Judge Aguinaldo in denying Kumar's Notice of Appeal.
• Following the denial of his Motion for Reconsideration,Kumar filed the present Petition.
4. • ISSUE : Whether or not the Court of Appeals erred in not finding grave abuse of
discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of Regional Trial
Court Judge Philip A. Aguinaldo in refusing to entertain petitioner Deepak Kumar's
Notice of Appeal.
• RULING :
• This Court dispenses with the filing of a Comment by respondent and outright denies
due course to the present Petition. It fails to present any consideration of such
character as those identified in Rule 45, Section 6 of the Rules of Court and as would
warrant the exercise of this Court's power of judicial review.
• Petitioner comes to this Court by way of a Petition for Review on Certiorari under
Rule 45 of the Rules of Court. Other than appeals brought to this Court concerning
"criminal cases where the penalty imposed is death, reclusion perpetua or life
imprisonment[,] a Petition for Review on Certiorari is the sole procedural vehicle
through which appeals may be taken to this Court.
5. From Rule 45's provisions will be gleaned basic procedural standards which a petitioner must
satisfy if one's Rule 45 Petition is to be entertained:
(1) that the petition does not only exclusively raise questions of law, but
also that it distinctly sets forth those legal issues;
(2) that it be filed within 15 days of notice of the adverse ruling that
impels it;
(3) that docket and other lawful fees are paid;
(4) that proper service is made;
(5) that all matters that Section 4 specifies are indicated, stated, or
otherwise contained in it;
(6) that it is manifestly meritorious;
(7) that it is not prosecuted manifestly for delay; and
(8) that that the questions raised in it are of such substance as to
warrant consideration.
6. • Failing in these, this Court is at liberty to deny outright or deny due course to a Rule 45 Petition. Any such denial
may be done without the need of any further action, such as the filing of responsive pleadings or submission of
documents, the elevation of records, or the conduct of oral arguments.
• Furthermore, this Court's denial may come in the form of a minute resolution which does not go into the merits of
the case, and instead merely states which among the eight (8) standards it is based. A denial by minute resolution
does not violate the constitutional imperative that judicial decisions "[express]. . . clearly and distinctly the facts and
the law on which [they are] based.“ This is because any such minute resolution is not a judgment on a case, but is a
declaration that a Rule 45 petition is insufficient in form and substance.
• Hence, it is that petition's manifest inadequacies that prevent it from proceeding any further, not the ultimate
quality of its factual and legal assertions.
• It is basic that appeal is not a matter of right. Parties wishing to appeal must comply with the rules, otherwise they
lose their opportunity to appeal:
• T]he right to appeal is not a natural right or a part of due process. It is merely a statutory privilege, and
may be exercised 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. Rules of procedure are required to be followed, except only when, for the most persuasive
of reasons, they may be relaxed to relieve the litigant of an injustice not commensurate with the degree
of his thoughtlessness in not complying with the procedure prescribed. (Citation omitted)
7. This Court may decline to review cases when all that are involved are settled rules
for which nothing remains but their application. Also, when there is no manifest or
demonstrable departure from legal provisions and/or jurisprudence. So too, when
the court whose ruling is assailed has not been shown to have so wantonly deviated
from settled procedural norms or otherwise enabled such deviation.
Litigants may very well aggrandize their petitions, but it is precisely this Court's task
to pierce the veil of what they purport to be questions warranting this Court's sublime
consideration. It remains in this Court's exclusive discretion to determine whether a
Rule 45 Petition is attended by the requisite important and special reasons
WHEREFORE, in view of petitioner's failure to show that the discretionary power of
the Court to review meets the requirements of Rule 45, Section 6 of the Rules of
Court, the Petition is DENIED DUE COURSE. The assailed November 23, 2018
Decision and May 21, 2019 Resolution of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No.
156711 are AFFIRMED.
8.
9. [ G.R. No. 247787, March 02, 2021 ]
DEVELOPMENT BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES, PETITIONER, VS. COMMISSION ON AUDIT,
RESPONDENT.
FACTS:
• Under its 1999 compensation plan, the Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP) Board of
Directors authorized salary increases to eight top officers totaling P17,380,307.64 in 2006.
• The supervising auditor prohibited the amount on June 19, 2007, since the DBP's pay plan lacks
Office of the President approval.The DBP appealed the disallowance to the COA Corporate
Government Sector Cluster A - Financial. COA Cluster Director refused appeal on June 2, 2010.
• The DBP petitioned the COA in anger. Former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo's April 22,
2010 Memorandum authorized the DBP's pay scheme from 1999.The COA granted the petition
and lifted the disallowance on February 1, 2012.
• The DBP received the COA Decision on February 6, 2012, but did not appeal or petition the
Supreme Court. Mario P. Pagaragan, DBP's Vice President/Officer-In-Charge of Program
Evaluation, sent confidential letters to the COA on March 27, 2012, urging it to reconsider its
February 1, 2012 Decision.
• The letters explained that Omnibus Election Code bans wage increases 45 days before a regular
election. Since President Arroyo approved DBP's compensation plan on April 22, 2010, within 45
days before the May 10, 2010 elections, it is invalid.
10. • The COA considered Pagaragan's letters a move for reconsideration and opened and
revised settled accounts on April 13, 2015. The COA upheld the motion and reversed its
February 1, 2012 Decision.
• The DBP requested review on July 29, 2015, arguing that the February 1, 2012 COA
Decision was final and executable. Pagaragan is not a party and has no solution.
• June 14, 2019, the COA partially approved the motion. Approving officers and passive
beneficiaries are excluded from refunding the disallowance. They depended on Arroyo's
post-facto approval in good faith.
• Thus, this recourse alleging COA significant discretion abuse. The DBP claims that the
COA's February 1, 2012 Decision is final and executable without a move for
reconsideration or appeal within 30 days of notice or on February 6, 2012 until March 7,
2012.
• DBP contented that Pagaragan has no legal standing to request a retrial. The DBP also
alleges due process and case speed violations. The COA didn't let DBP respond to
Pagaragan's letters.
• DBP's reconsideration motion took COA four years to resolve. Finally, former President
Arroyo's April 22, 2010 ratification of the DBP's compensation plan approved senior
officials' wage hikes and did not extend new privileges.
• However, the COA believes Pagaragan is a legitimate party-in-interest.
11. ISSUE :
• Whether or not COA committed grave abuse of discretion in reviewing a final and
executory judgment and reopening a settled account beyond the legal period
RULING
• Yes. Pagaragan is not an aggrieved party who may appeal the COA Decision or
Resolution. Under Rule VII, Section 1 of the COA Rules, it is "[t]he party aggrieved by a
decision of the Director or the ASB [who] may appeal to the Commission Proper."
• COA is guilty of unjustified delay in acting on Pagaragan's Letters and resolving DBP's
motion for reconsideration.
• Here, the COA is guilty of unjustified delay. On March 27, 2012, Pagaragan submitted
confidential letters to the COA asking to reconsider its Decision dated February 1, 2012
which lifted the notice of disallowance. However, it took COA more than three years or
until April 13, 2015 to act on the letters and reversed the Decision dated February 1,
2012. The COA did not provide any justification for the delay. On July 29, 2015, the DBP
filed a motion for reconsideration. This time, COA took almost four years or until June 14,
2019 to resolve the motion. Again, the COA did not explain the length of time to decide
the pending incident
12. • In this case, the COA lifted the notice of disallowance on February 1, 2012. The DBP received a copy of the
COA's Decision dated February 1, 2012 on February 6, 2012 and it has 30 days or until March 7, 2012
to move for a reconsideration or file a petition to the Supreme Court.
• Nonetheless, Pagaragan's letters which the COA treated as a motion for reconsideration was filed only
on March 27, 2012 or beyond the 30-day reglementary period. Hence, the COA has no more jurisdiction
to entertain Pagaragan's letters given that the Decision dated February 1, 2012 has become final and
executory absent a timely motion for reconsideration or appeal.
• It is settled that all the issues between the parties are deemed resolved and laid to rest once a judgment
becomes final. No other action can be taken on the Decision except to order its execution.. The rule,
however, is subject to well-known exceptions, however, not one of these exceptions is present in this case.
• Taken together, the COA committed grave abuse of discretion in reviewing a final and executory
judgment and reopening a settled account beyond the legal period. Nothing is more settled that a
definitive final judgment is no longer subject to change or revision, thus:
• FOR THESE REASONS, the Petition for Certiorari is GRANTED. The Commission on Audit's Decision dated
April 13, 2015 is SET ASIDE. The Decision dated February 1, 2012 lifting the notice of disallowance
is REINSTATED.
13.
14. [ G.R. No. 240056, October 12, 2020 ]
DATU MALINGIN (LEMUEL TALINGTING Y SIMBORIO),
TRIBAL CHIEFTAIN, HIGAONONSUGBUANON TRIBE,
PETITIONER, VS. PO3 ARVIN R. SANDAGAN, PO3 ESTELITO
R. AVELINO, PO2 NOEL P. GUIMBAOLIBOT, HON.
PROSECUTOR III JUNERY M. BAGUNAS AND HON. JUDGE
CARLOS O. ARGUELLES, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT,
BRANCH 10, ABUYOG, LEYTE, RESPONDENTS.
15. FACTS :
Through the criminal Informations issued by respondent Prosecutor, petitioner was accused of having carnal
knowledge of a 14-year-old minor, AAA,2 on six occasions by force, threat, intimidation and by taking advantage
of superior strength. This was filed and raffled with the RTC presided by Judge Carlos O. Arguelles He averred
that he was a member of the Higaonon-Sugbuanon Tribe, an indigenous group.
According to him, pursuant to Sections 655 and 66,6 Republic Act No. (RA) 8371, the criminal cases filed
against him should be resolved first through the customary law and practices of the indigenous group he
belonged to and thereafter, the issues must be referred to the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples
(NCIP).He ratiocinated that the invocation of petitioner of the provisions of RA 8371 was misplaced.
Proceedings before the Court Undeterred, petitioner filed the present petition contending that mandamus is the
only available remedy in order to ensure that the victims of violations of cultural rights are given reparation.
Respondent Judge contended that the petition was filed out of time. He posited that petitioner did not file a
motion for reconsideration on the denial of the Motion to Quash which is a sine qua non condition in the filing of
a petition for certiorari; and that the direct resort to the Court is unjustified and, thus, violative of the doctrine of
hierarchy of courts.
• ISSUE
May the Court issue a writ of mandamus to compel respondent Judge and Prosecutor to desist from proceeding
with the rape case against petitioner and declare respondent Police Officers guilty of Arbitrary Detention?
• RULING
The Petition for Mandamus lacks merit.
16. Non-observance of the doctrine of hierarchy of courts.
The doctrine of the hierarchy of courts guides litigants on the proper forum of their appeals as
well as the venue for the issuance of extraordinary writs. As to the latter, even if the RTC, the
CA, and the Court have concurrent original jurisdiction over petitions for certiorari,
prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto, and habeas corpus, litigants must, as a rule, file their
petitions, with the court below and failure to do so will be sufficient for the dismissal of
the case.
Invocation of the provisions of RA 8371 is insufficient to evade criminal prosecution.
• At any rate, even if the Court sets aside the failure of petitioner to abide by the doctrine of
hierarchy of courts, the Petition for Mandamus. will still fail as it is not a proper recourse to
compel respondents to defer from pursuing the criminal cases against him.
• Under Section 3, Rule 65 of the Rules of Court, a petition for mandamus is an appropriate
remedy when any tribunal, corporation, board, officer or person: (1) unlawfully neglects the
performance of an act which the law specifically enjoins as a duty resulting from an office,
trust, or station; or (2) unlawfully excludes another from the use and enjoyment of a right or
office to which such other is entitled. Added to this, it must be shown that there is "no other
plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law" that may be availed of by
the aggrieved person. Notably, the foregoing requirements were not established in the
case.
17. First, petitioner failed to show that he has a clear legal right
which respondents had violated.
• To stress, petitioner relied on Sections 65 and 66 (on the
jurisdiction of the NCIP), RA 8371 in arguing that respondents have
no jurisdiction to prosecute him for his supposed criminal liability.
However, his postulation is untenable because RA 8371 finds
application in disputes relating to claims and rights of ICCs/IPs.
This is not the case here.
• Let it be underscored that petitioner's indictment for Rape has
nothing to do with his purported membership in an ICC, but by
reason of his alleged acts that is covered by the RPC. At the same
time, RA 8371 does not serve as a bar for criminal prosecution
because crime is an offense against the society. Thus, penal laws
apply to individuals without regard to his or her membership in an
ICC.
18. Second, petitioner did not prove any ministerial duty on the part of
respondents which they neglected to perform.
• In prosecuting a criminal case, the State, through the public prosecutor,
exercises its police power and punishes those who are found guilty,
through the determination by the court of law. Undeniably, criminal
prosecution and the court's adjudication pertain to discretionary duties, not
ministerial functions, because they require respondents Judge, Prosecutor
and even respondents Police Officers to act in accordance with their own
judgments and consciences uncontrolled by anyone. Overall, when the
law requires and grants a public officer the right to decide on how he
or she shall perform one's duty, then he or she is vested with
discretionary functions, as in the case of respondents.
• Verily, in the absence of a clear legal right on the part of petitioner and the
corresponding ministerial duties required by law on respondents that they
neglected to perform, then a writ of mandamus cannot be issued.
• the Petition for Mandamus is DISMISSED.