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.

1. Notes on Civil Procedure by Lawrence Villamar
Source: “Revised Rules of Procedure Annotated” (Estopia, 2013)
Rule 45
Appeal by certiorari/Petition for Review on Certiorari
• WHERE FILED: Supreme Court
• FROM: Judgment/final order/resolution of:
◦ Court of Appeals
◦ Sandiganbayan
◦ RTC
◦ Other courts authorized by law
• Must be verified and must raise only questions of law
• AMMENDMENT: “Petitioner may seek the same provisional remedies by verified motion filed
in the same action or proceeding at any time during pendency” (AM No 7-7-12-SC December
4, 2007)
• Appeal by certiorari is limited only to errors of law. Exceptions:
◦ conclusion is the findinf grounded entirely on speculation, surmise, and conjecture
◦ the inference made is manifestly mistaken
◦ there is grave abuse of discretion
◦ the judgment is based on misapprehension of facts
◦ the findings of fact are conflicting
◦ the CA went beyond the issues of the case/finding are contrary to admission by the parties
◦ findings of the CA are contrary to the findings of trial court
◦ the findings of the fact are conclusions without citation of specific evidences on which they
are based
◦ facts set fourth in the petition are not disputed by respondents
◦ findings of fact by the CA are premised on supposed absence of evidence and contradicted
by evidenc eon record
• Factual findings of labor arbiter when affirmed by NLRC and CA are binding to the Supreme
Court. Findings of fact of CA affirming those of the trial court are accorded great respect by the
Supreme Court.
• Rule 45 is not the proper remedy to interlocutory orders of the Court of Appeals (only to appeal
findal judgments). Only judgments or final orders that completely dispose of the case can be
subject of an appeal by certiorari under Rule 45
• Petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 is NOT the proper remedy for defendant
declared in default (Rule 41 Sec 2 para 3)
• Distinction between Rule 45 and Rule 65:
Rule 65 Rule 45
Grave Abuse of Discretion is the proper issue Grave Abuse of Discretion is not the proper issue
Issue involves reversible errors of law, if any
• Rule 65 is the proper remedy to question an improvident order granting execution pending
appeal
• Under Rule 45, petitioner may only raise questions of law. The Supreme Court is not a trier of

2. Notes on Civil Procedure by Lawrence Villamar
Source: “Revised Rules of Procedure Annotated” (Estopia, 2013)
facts (subject to exceptions enumerated above).
• The Supreme Court has original jurisdiction over petition for certiorari, prohibition, and
mandamus under Rule 65
• Petition for review on certiorari (under Rule 45) should only be filed with the CA in as much as
the appeallate court has exclusive jurisdiction over quasi judicial agency (like the NLRC) unless
otherwise provided by law or the Rules.
• Rule 65 is proper only when there is no “plain, speedy, adequate” remedy in the cours eof law.
A remedy is such if it will promptl relieve the petitioner from the injurious effects of judgment
and acts of the lower court or agency (Nautica vs Yumul 2005)
• Petition filed under Rule 65 may be treated as filed under Rule 45 is it is filed within the
prescribed period and there are special circumstances alleged therein.
• Modification made by the Supreme Court to the judgment of Court of Appeals must operate
against party who did not appeal. Exception: When the rights and liability of defendants are so
interwowen and inseperable e.g. solidary (Chan vs INC 2005)
• Certitorari will not lie unless a motion for reconsideration is filed. Exceptions:
◦ order is patent nullity e.g. court has no jurisdiction
◦ questions in certiorari has been duly raised and passed by lower court/same as those raised
and passed by lower court
◦ urgent necessity for resolution and further delay wuld prejudice the interest of government
◦ subject matter is perishable
◦ MR is useless
◦ Petitioner was deprived of due process/extreme urgency of relief
◦ In criminal case, releief from an order of arrest is urgent/granting of trial court is improbable
◦ Proceeding of lower court are a nullity due to lack of due process
◦ Proceedings was ex parte
◦ Where issue is one purely of law
◦ Where public interest is involved
• Final orders vs final and executory order:
Final orders Final and executory order
One that finally disposes of a case, leaving
nothing more for the court to do/adjudication on
the merits/res judicata/prescription
Final judgment upon expiration of the period to
appeal therefrom/no appeal was perfected
Execution issues as a matter of right
• The proper remedy from CA decusuib us a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45
• A writ of certiorari (under Rule 65) is of the highest utility and importance for curbing
excessive jurisdiction and correcting errors and mist essential to the safety of the people and the
public welfare. Its appropriate function is to relieve aggrieved parties from the injustice arising
from errors of law committed in proceeding affecting justiciable rights when no toher means for
an adequate and speedy relief is open.
• The Supreme Court can not revuew factual findings on appeal, especially when they are borne
out of records or are based on substantial evidence.
• TIME OF FILING: 15 days from notice of the judgment or final order or resolution appealed
frin or denial of the petitioner's motion of new trial or reconsideration. May be extended to 30

3. Notes on Civil Procedure by Lawrence Villamar
Source: “Revised Rules of Procedure Annotated” (Estopia, 2013)
days with justifiable reasons, and on motion duly filed, and served, with full payment of docket
and other lawful fees and deposit for costs vefore expireation of reglementary period. If not
filed within period, decision of CA becomes final and executory and petition for review under
Rule 45 may be properly outrightly dismissed due to correlative right oof winner to enjoy the
finality of the decision.
• Failure to implead lower court does not automaticallu mean the dismissal of the appeal, but it
authorizes the dismissal of the petition.
• Review is not a matter if right but of sound judicial discretion (Sec. 6 Rule 45)
• Upon filing of petition, the Supreme Court assumes jurisdication regardless of whether or not
the petitionw ill be given due course
• Mode of appeal available to both civil and criminal except in criminal cases with penalty
imposed is death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment (Sec. 9 Rule 45).
• Motion for postponement, what must be borne: (a) reason for postponement and (b) merits of
the case of the movant. May not be interefered by mandamus or appeal, except when grave
abuse of discretion is shown. It is addressed to the sound discretion of the court predicated to
considerations that the end of justice and fairness should be served thereby, more than
convenience of court or parties. Postponement is part and parcel of procuderal system of
dispensing justice. Exception:
◦ substantial rights are affected and intention to delat is manfest