Rule 51

JUDGMENT
You already know that the Court of Appeals operates by division. There are 69 justices there. Every division is
composed of 3. The 3 must be unanimous. In case there is no unanimity, there should be a special division of 5 to
hear the case all over again and the majority rules. Although from what I gathered sa CA, this is a farce . Actually,
they do not discuss it, they will just give it to the ponente. Tapos sabihin mo concur. Bihira lang talaga ang nagaparticipate unless siguro malakas ka sa isang justice and then mag-dissent para magkaroon ng division of 5. That is
not really the intention of the of the law.
Lets go back to what we were saying before under Rule 36. Every decision or resolution of a court shall clearly
and distinctly state the facts and the law on which it is based. If a decision does not state its basis, it is a SIN
PERJUICIO judgment. That is not a valid judgment. The requirement applies to all courts whether MTC, RTC, or CA.
This is emphasized again in Section 5:
Sec. 5. Form of decision. - Every decision or final resolution of the court in appealed cases shall
clearly and distinctly state the findings of fact and the conclusions of law on which it is based, which
may be contained in the decision or final resolution itself, or adopted from those set forth in the
decision, order, or resolution appealed from. (Sec. 40, BP Blg. 129) (n)
The CA must state its findings and conclusions or according to Section 5 it may simply adopt the findings and
conclusions set forth in the decision or order appealed from. If the CA is going to affirm the judgment of the RTC, it
may simply copy or adopt the findings and conclusions of the RTC. It is called a MEMORANDUM DECISION.
If you will look at Section 5, it states that the provision is taken from Section 40, BP 129. It is taken from the
Judiciary Law.
Is this provision not an invitation to laziness on the part of the CA justices? If the CA will affirm the judgment of
the RTC, the work is easier because it may simply adopt on its own the findings of the RTC. If the CA would reverse
the decision, the job would be more difficult, because it would write an entirely new decision to rebut or dispute the
findings of the RTC. This is why when this provision came out in the Judiciary Law, there was a sort of fear that this
might be the cause of laziness.
The SC, well aware of that danger, clarifies in one case that memorandum decisions are not allowed in all cases.
The CA is only allowed to render a memorandum decision in simple cases especially when the appeal is dilatory and
there is nothing wrong in the appealed decision. But if the case is complicated or complex, even if CA would affirm
the decision, it cannot simply copy the work of the RTC. It should write its own decision. The limitation or guidelines
was issued by the SC precisely to avoid the danger of laziness on the part of CA justices. The SC said in the case of
FRANCISCO vs. PERMSKUL
173 SCRA 324
HELD: The Court finds it necessary to emphasize that the memorandum decision should be sparingly used lest
it become an addictive excuse for judicial sloth. It is an additional condition for its validity that this kind of decision
may be resorted to only in cases where the facts are in the main accepted by both parties or easily determinable by
the judge and there are no doctrinal complications involved that will require an extended discussion of the laws
involved. The memorandum decision may be employed in simple litigations only, such as ordinary collection cases,
where the appeal is obviously groundless and deserves no more than the time needed to dismiss it.
Q: When is a case deemed submitted for judgment?
A: Section 1 of Rule 51:
Sec. 1. When case deemed submitted for judgment. - A case shall be deemed submitted for judgment:
A.

In Ordinary appeals.
Where no hearing on the merits of the main case is held,

a.

upon the filing of the last pleading, brief, or memorandum required

by the Rules or by the court itself, or

b.

the expiration of the period for its filing.

Where such a hearing is held,

a. upon its termination or

a. upon the filing of the last pleading or memorandum as may be required or permitted to be
filed by the court, or
b. the expiration of the period for its filing.
B. In original actions and petitions for review. 1. Where no comment is filed,
a.
upon the expiration of the period to comment.
2. Where no hearing is held,
a.
upon the filing of the last pleading required or permitted to be filed
by the court, or
b.
the expiration of the period for its filing.
c.
a.
a.
b.

Where a hearing on the merits of the main case is

held,
upon its termination or
upon the filing of the last pleading or memorandum as may be
required or permitted to be filed by the court, or
the expiration of the period for its filing. (n)

Sec. 2. By whom rendered. - The judgment shall be rendered by the members of the court who
participated in the deliberation on the merits of the case before its assignment to a member for the
writing of the decision. (n)
Sec. 3. Quorum and voting in the court. - The participation of all three Justices of a division shall be
necessary at the deliberation and the unanimous vote of the three Justices shall be required for the
pronouncement of a judgment or final resolution. If the three Justices do not reach a unanimous vote,
the clerk shall enter the votes of the dissenting Justices in the record. Thereafter, the Chairman of the
division shall refer the case, together with the minutes of the deliberation, to the Presiding Justice who
shall designate two Justices chosen by raffle from among all the other members of the court to sit
temporarily with them, forming a special division of five Justices. The participation of all the five
members of the special division shall be necessary for the deliberation required in section 2 of this Rule
and the concurrence of a majority of such division shall be required for the pronouncement of a
judgment or final resolution. (2a)
Sec. 4. Disposition of a case. - The Court of Appeals, in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction, may
affirm, reverse, or modify the judgment or final order appealed from, and may direct a new trial or
further proceedings to be had. (3a)
Sec. 5. Form of decision. - Every decision or final resolution of the court in appealed cases shall
clearly and distinctly state the findings of fact and the conclusions of law on which it is based, which
may be contained in the decision or final resolution itself, or adopted from those set forth in the
decision, order, or resolution appealed from. (Sec. 40, BP Blg. 129) (n)
Sec. 6. Harmless error. - No error in either the admission or the exclusion of evidence and no error or
defect in any ruling or order or in anything done or omitted by the trial court or by any of the parties is
ground for granting a new trial or for setting aside, modifying, or otherwise disturbing a judgment or
order, unless refusal to take such action appears to the court inconsistent with substantial justice. The
court at every stage of the proceeding must disregard any error or defect which does not affect the
substantial rights of the parties. (5a)
Sec. 7. Judgment where there are several parties. - In all action or proceedings, an appealed judgment
may be affirmed as to some of the appellants, and reversed as to others, and the case shall thereafter
be proceeded with, so far as necessary, as if separate actions had been begun and prosecuted; and
execution of the judgment of affirmance may be had accordingly, and costs may be adjudged in such
cases, as the court shall deem proper. (6)

Lets go to Section 7.
Q: When there are 2 or more plaintiffs or 2 or more defendants in the cases appealed, is it possible that the CA
will render decision for one plaintiff but against the other plaintiffs, or in favor of one defendant and against the
other?
A: YES. It is possible that one plaintiff will win, other plaintiffs will lose especially when the facts are not identical.
This is also true in cases of 2 or more defendants when each one interposes separate defenses. The defense of one
may be true, others may be false. It is possible that one defendant will win and other defendants will lose.
Q: Suppose there are 2 defendants in a case. All of them lost. Defendant A appealed. Defendant B did not
appeal. On appeal, defendant A won. Will the appeal of A benefit B who did not appeal?
A: As a GENERAL RULE: No, the appeal would only benefit the appealing defendant. The judgment becomes
final to those who did not appeal even if it is wrong.
EXCEPTION : When the LIABILITY of the 2 parties are so INTERTWINED that it would be absurd that one of them
will win and the other will lose. Thus, the appeal by the appealing party benefits his co-party who did not appeal.
This principle was laid down in some cases. Among them is the case of
UNIVERSAL MOTORS CORP. vs. COURT OF APPEALS
205 SCRA 428 [1992]
HELD: It is erroneous to rule that the decision of the trial court could be reversed as to the appealing private
respondent and continue in force against the other private respondents. The latter could not remain bound after the
former had been released; although the other private respondents had not joined in the appeal, the decision
rendered by the respondent court inured to their benefit. When the obligation of the other solidary debtors is so
dependent on that of their co-solidary debtor, the release of the one who appealed, provided it be not on grounds
personal to such appealing private respondent, operates as well as to the others who did not appeal. It is for this
reason, that a decision or judgment in favor of the private respondent who appealed can be invoked as res judicata
by the other private respondents. So, their liabilities are so intertwined.
EXAMPLE : Mayakin Skywalker and Darth Mort borrowed money from Qui Gon Jet. They bound themselves jointly
and severally to pay the loan. There is only one promissory note, one loan and both Mayakin and Darth Mort signed.
Their common defense is payment. But the trial court ruled in favor of the plaintiff (Qui Gon Jet) and ordered Mayakin
and Darth Mort to pay. Mayakin appealed but Darth Mort did not. On appeal, CA decided in favor of Mayakin saying,
Wala nang utang si Mayakin ba dahil bayad na! How about Darth Mort? Darth Mort is also released.
This principle is reiterated in the case of
CAYABA vs. COURT OF APPEALS
219 SCRA 571 [1993]
HELD: A reversal of a judgment on appeal is binding on the parties to the suit but does not inure to the benefit
of parties who did not join in the appeal (as a general rule). The recognized exception is when their rights and
liabilities and those of the parties appealing are so interwoven and dependent so as to be inseparable,
in which case a reversal as to one operates as a reversal to all.
The rule is so similar in Criminal Procedure. When the appeal of one accused benefits his co-accused who did not
appeal especially when the defense of such appealing accused is applicable to him.
Sec. 8. Questions that may be decided. - No error which does not affect the jurisdiction over the
subject matter or the validity of the judgment appealed from or the proceedings therein will be
considered unless stated in the assignment of errors, or closely related to or dependent on an assigned
error and properly argued in the brief, save as the court may pass upon plain errors and clerical errors.
(7a)
Q: Can the CA decide an issue which was not raised by the parties? Can the CA correct the error which was never
assigned by the other party?
A: GENERAL RULE : Only errors which are stated in the appellants brief should be considered. If the error is not
assigned, that cannot be corrected. This is just an extension of the rule that objections and defenses not pleaded are
deemed waived.

EXCEPTION : The following matters can be corrected or the court can take cognizance even if the parties did
not raise them:
1.)
2.)
3.)
4.)

Jurisdiction over the subject matter of the case;

Plain errors;
Clerical Errors.
Errors which are not assigned but closely related to or dependent on an assigned
error.
The fourth exception is taken from decided cases. According to the SC, even if you will not mention a mistake
committed by the trial court if such mistake is related to the mistake mentioned, it can be corrected. In the case of
ABEJARON vs. COURT OF APPEALS
208 SCRA 899 [1992]
HELD: An unassigned error closely related to the error properly assigned, or upon which the determination of the
question raised by the error properly assigned is dependent, will be considered by the appellate court
notwithstanding the failure to assign it as error.
While an assignment of error which is required by law or rule of court has been held essential to appellate
review, and only those assigned will be considered, there are a number of cases which appear to accord to the
appellate court a broad discretionary power to waive this lack of proper assignment of errors and consider errors not
assigned.
The same principle was reiterated in the 1995 case of
CASA FILIPINO ROYALTY CORP. vs. OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
241 SCRA 165
HELD: While the rule is that no error which does not affect jurisdiction will be considered unless stated in the
assignment or errors, the trend in modern-day procedure is to accord the courts broad discretionary power such that
the appellate court may consider matters bearing on the issues submitted for resolution which the parties failed to
raise or which the lower court ignored.

Let us look at the second exception plain errors.

What is a plain error ? Because a plain error can be corrected by the appellate court even if not asked by the
parties, plain man? If you will ask me, any plain error is yung talagang obvious mistake one which is apparent to
the eye.
Now, suppose the trial court made an error in applying a law or in interpreting a law. But it was not attacked by
the losing party and it was not corrected on appeal. Is it a plain error? It would seem no and yet that is what
happened in the 1993 case of SANTOS vs. CA (221 SCRA 42).
But before we discuss the case of Santos, we have to know the basics. There are two principles here to
remember.
The appellant is the one who appeals and it is he who will file the appellants brief and then he will make the
assignment of errors. The appellee will refute the appellants assignment of errors which were committed by the trial
court.
Q: Can the appellee impute errors or make assignment of errors?
A: The general rule is NO. If you are an appellee, you are not appealing and thus you are accepting the
decision. So if you think the decision is in your favor pero mali pa rin, you must also appeal.
So an appellee is not allowed to assign errors committed by the trial court except if the purpose of the
assignment of errors is to sustain the decision on another ground. Because sometimes you agree with the decision
but you do not agree with the reason. The decision is correct but this should be the reason. Because actually, you
are defending the decision on another ground.
Meaning the court made a mistake in arriving at the decision but the decision is correct. Yan, puwede yan. But if
you want the decision to be changed, then you must also appeal.

Now, let us go to the case of SANTOS which involves the law on lease, particularly the interpretation and the
application of Article 1678 Civil Code. Under the law on lease, suppose I will rent to you my land and you built a
building there and there is no agreement as to who will own the building after the termination of the lease. Suppose
there is no stipulation, who will own the building?
According to the Civil Code, the owner of the land has the option to acquire the building by paying one half of its
value. Pero, if I do not want to appropriate the building, then you have the right to remove the building provided you
will not damage the land. So the option to pay you belongs to the owner of the land. The lessee cannot compel the
owner of the land to pay.
Let us go now to the case of Santos. This is a very queer case.
SANTOS vs. COURT OF APPEALS
221 SCRA 42
FACTS: Artemio Santos et al are lessees of a piece of land. They have not paid the rentals for 28 years. The
lessor filed a case of unlawful detainer against all of them before the Metropolitan Trial Court of Pasig. The trial court
rendered judgment against Santos et al. So they were ordered ejected.
Now, these people were not satisfied. They still appealed to the RTC. The RTC affirmed the judgment that they
should be ejected but modified it by ordering the lessor to reimburse the lessees for the latters improvements on
the leased property. So, affirmed, but bayaran mo iyong mga bahay ng mga tao. (DEAN I: To my mind, that portion of
the decision is wrong. You cannot order the lessor to reimburse.)
But despite that, Santos et al were not satisfied. They still appealed to the CA. The lessor did not appeal so
obviously, the lessor is willing to pay. Although he has no obligation to pay the improvements, pero sige na lang para
matapos na! He did not appeal.
Now, the CA affirmed again the ejectment. So tatlo na. There were three courts where the occupants lost. But
the CA deleted the portion of the RTC decision ordering reimbursement of the improvements. It was really wrong.
Walang reimbursement diyan.
So this time, Santos et al appealed to the SC. And they say that the portion of the decision deleting our right to
reimbursements is wrong because the owner of the land is not questioning it, he is not appealing so why should the
CA delete it? So, meaning payag iyong owner. Therefore that portion of the decision of the CA where we are no
longer entitled to reimbursement is erroneous. The CA has no power to delete that portion of the RTC decision
because there was no appeal from the landowner.
ISSUE: Is the decision of the CA correct?
HELD: YES. The CA is correct. It is true that the rule is well-settled that a party cannot impugn the correctness
of a Judgment not appealed from by him, and while he may make counter-assignment of errors, he can do so only to
sustain the judgment on other grounds but not to seek modification or reversal thereof for in such a case he must
appeal. A party who does not appeal from the decision may not obtain any affirmative relief from the appellate court
other than what he has obtained from the lower court, if any, whose decision is brought up on appeal. However, the
Rules of Court and jurisprudence authorize a tribunal to consider errors, although unassigned, if they involve
(1) errors affecting the lower court's Jurisdiction over the subject matter,
(2) plain errors not specified, and
(3) clerical errors.
Under Article 1678, it is the lessor who has the option to pay for one-half of the value of the improvements
which the lessee has made in good faith. The lessee cannot compel the lessor to appropriate and reimburse.
Therefore, the decision of the RTC ordering the lessor is actually erroneous.
Hence, the award of reimbursement for improvements by the trial court in favor of petitioners amounts to a
plain error which may be rectified on appeal although not specified in the appellees brief.
But the trouble is, the landowner did not appeal. If we follow the ruling, then lahat ng mali ng trial court ay plain
error na. That is what the SC said. Bakit man naging plain error ito when actually it will not qualify as plain error ? If
we will follow that line of reasoning, every mistake committed by a trial court can be corrected being a plain error.
To my mind, merong equity ito, eh. Analyze the case. You are occupants for 28 years and you did not pay. Ayaw
mo lumayas, bayaran ka pa? There is something wrong there already. I think that is the factor eh.
So the SC said that it is too unfair for the landowner still to be required to pay. Imagine they stayed there for 28
years, hindi pa nagbayad. I think those are the factors. So in other words, equity bah! So the Court has to look for a
reason to justify. Ang nakita is plain error when you do not know how to apply the law, then it is plain error. But
actually, that should be an assigned error. It is a very interesting case.

Sec. 9. Promulgation and notice of judgment. - After the judgment of final resolution and dissenting or
separate opinions, if any, are signed by the Justices taking part, they shall be delivered for filing to the
clerk who shall indicate thereon the date of promulgation and cause true copies thereof to be served
upon the parties or their counsel. (n)
Sec. 10. Entry of judgments and final resolutions. - If no appeal or motion for new trial or
reconsideration is filed within the time provided in these Rules, the judgment or final resolution shall
forthwith be entered by the clerk in the book of entries of judgments. The date when the judgment or
final resolution becomes executory shall be deemed as the date of its entry. The record shall contain
the dispositive part of the judgment or final resolution and shall be signed by the clerk, with a
certificate that such judgment or final resolution has become final and executory. (2a, R36)
Sec. 11. Execution of judgment. - Except where the judgment or final order or resolution, or a portion
thereof, is ordered to be immediately executory, the motion for its execution may only be filed in the
proper court after its entry.
In original actions in the Court of Appeals, its writ of execution shall be accompanied by a certified
true copy of the entry of judgment or final resolution and addressed to any appropriate officer for its
enforcement.
In appealed cases, where the motion for execution pending appeal is filed in the Court of Appeals at
a time that it is in possession of the original record or the record on appeal, the resolution granting
such motion shall be transmitted to the lower court from which the case originated, together with a
certified true copy of the judgment or final order to be executed, with a directive for such court of
origin to issue the proper writ for its enforcement. (n)
Q: Now, how do you execute a judgment of the CA?
A: Under Section 11, it depends if it is an original action or an appealed case.
For an appealed case, in case of execution pending appeal, take note that if the records of the case are already
elevated to the CA, motion for execution pending appeal should already be filed there. And if the CA grants the
motion to execute pending appeal, it will follow the third paragraph there. It will issue the order and direct the RTC to
enforce the judgment.
Now, you should correlate this with Rule 39 Sections 1 and 2:
Rule 39, Section 1. Execution upon judgments or final orders. - Execution shall issue as a matter of right,
on motion , upon a judgment or order that disposed of the action or proceeding upon the expiration of
the period-to appeal therefrom if no appeal has been duly perfected.
If the appeal has been duly perfected and finally resolved, the execution may forthwith be applied
for in the court or origin, on motion of the judgment obligee, submitting therewith certified true copies
of the judgment or judgments or final order or orders sought to be enforced and of the entry thereof,
with notice to the adverse party.
The appellate court may, on motion in the same case, when the interest of justice so requires, direct
the court of origin to issue the writ of execution.
Section 2. Discretionary execution.
A. Execution of a judgment or final order pending appeal.- On motion of the prevailing party with notice to
the adverse party filed in the trial court while it has jurisdiction over the case and is in possession of
either the original record or the record on appeal, as the case may be, at the time of the filing of such
motion, said court may, in its discretion, order execution of a judgment or final order even before the
expiration of the period to appeal.
After the trial court has lost jurisdiction, the motion for execution pending appeal may be filed in
the appellate court.
Discretionary execution may only issue upon good reasons to be stated in a special order after due
hearing.

B. Execution of several, separate or partial judgments.- A several, separate or partial judgment may be
executed under the same terms and conditions as execution of a judgment or final order pending
appeal.
-oOoRule 52
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
Sec. 1. Period for filing. - A party may file a motion for reconsideration of a judgment or final
resolution within fifteen (15) days from notice thereof, with proof of service on the adverse party. (n)
Q: Can a party file a motion for reconsideration of a CA decision?
A: YES. That is very obvious. (Section 1)
Sec. 2. Second motion for reconsideration. - No second motion for reconsideration of a judgment of final
resolution by the same party shall be entertained. (n)
Q: Can you file more than one motion for reconsideration?
A: NO. No second motion for reconsideration of a judgment or final resolution by the same party shall be
entertained. (Section 2) There is no such thing as second motion for reconsideration.
Section 2 of Rule 52 is also in accord with Section 11 of the Judiciary law. Section 11 of the Judiciary law governs
how may times you can file a motion for reconsideration in the CA.
BP 129, Section 11. Quorum xxxx A motion for reconsideration of its decision or final resolution shall be resolved by the Court
within ninety (90) days from the time it is submitted for resolution and no second motion for
reconsideration from the same party shall be entertained.
Under par. (3), the CA has 90 days from the time it is submitted for the resolution to rule on a motion for
reconsideration.
Sec. 3. Resolution of motion. - In the Court of Appeals, a motion for reconsideration shall be resolved
within ninety (90) days from the date when the court declares it submitted for resolution. (n)
The CA is given only 90 days to resolve a motion for reconsideration.
Sec. 4. Stay of execution. - The pendency of a motion for reconsideration filed on time and by the
proper party shall stay the execution of the judgment or final resolution sought to be reconsidered
unless the court, for good reasons, shall otherwise direct. (n)
Q: What happens when a judgment of the CA is the object of a motion for reconsideration? What happens to the
execution?
A: Stayed it is not yet final unless the court for good reasons shall otherwise direct like when there is a good
ground to execute pending appeal.
Rule 53
NEW TRIAL
Q: What is the ground for new trial in CA?
A: The ground for new trial is newly discovered evidence. (Section 1)
Sec. 1. Period for filing; ground. - At any time after the appeal from the lower court has been perfected
and before the Court of Appeals loses jurisdiction over the case, a party may file a motion for a new
trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence which could not have been discovered prior to the
trial in the court below by the exercise of due diligence and which is of such a character as would
probably change the result.
The motion shall be accompanied by affidavits showing the facts
constituting the grounds therefor and the newly discovered evidence. (1a)

The ground is newly discovered evidence similar to the second ground for new trial in the RTC
(FAME). Fraud, accident, mistake hindi kasali. Only newly discovered evidence is the ground under
Rule 53.
Q: Suppose the case is before the SC, can a party file a motion for new trial on the ground of newly discovered
evidence before the SC under Rule 53 in a civil case?
A: NO. The SC said in the case of
NAVARRA vs. COURT OF APPEALS
204 SCRA 850
HELD: The Rules of Court allows only two (2) occasions where a party may file a motion for new trial
on the ground of newly discovered evidence. That motion may be filed only with the trial court under
Rule 37 or with the CA under Rule 53 BUT NEVER with the SC.
Time and again, We have stressed that the SC is not a trier of facts. It is not a function of the SC to analyze or
weigh all over again the evidence already considered in the proceedings below. Its jurisdiction is limited to reviewing
only errors of law that may have been committed by the lower courts.
If there would be a motion for new trial with the SC and it would be granted, you are converting the SC into a
trial court.
Sec. 2. Hearing and order. - The Court of Appeals shall consider the new evidence together with that
adduced at the trial below, and may grant or refuse a new trial, or may make such order, with notice to
both parties, as to the taking of further testimony, either orally in court, or by depositions, or render
such other judgment as ought to be rendered upon such terms as it may deem just. (2a)
Sec. 3. Resolution of motion. - In the Court of Appeals, a motion for new trial shall be resolved within
ninety (90) days from the date when the court declares it submitted for resolution. (n)
Sec. 4. Procedure in new trial. - Unless the court otherwise directs, the procedure in the new trial
shall be the same as that granted by a Regional Trial Court. (3a)
Q: If the motion for new trial is granted, can the CA conduct the new trial itself acting as a trial court?
A: YES, under section 4 and under the Judiciary Law particularly section 9, the CA can receive evidence and
act as a trial court. That is why it is a powerful court.
BP 129, Section 9, last paragraph:
The Court of Appeals shall have the power to try cases and conduct hearings, receive evidence and
perform any and all acts necessary to resolve factual issues raised in cases falling within its original
and appellate jurisdiction, including the power to grant and conduct new trials or further proceedings.
Rule 54
INTERNAL BUSINESS
Section 1. Distribution of cases among divisions. - All the cases of the Court of Appeals shall be allotted
among the different divisions thereof for hearing and decision. The Court of Appeals, sitting en banc,
shall make proper orders or rules to govern the allotment of cases among the different divisions, the
constitution of such divisions, the regular rotation of Justices among then the filing of vacancies
occurring therein, and other matters relating to the business of the court; and such rules shall continue
in force until repealed or altered by it or by the Supreme Court.
Section 2. Quorum of the court.
A majority of the actual members of the court shall constitute a quorum for its sessions en banc.
Three members shall constitute a quorum for the sessions of a division.
The affirmative votes of the majority of the members present shall be necessary to pass a
resolution of the court en banc.
The affirmative votes of three members of a division shall be necessary for the pronouncement of a
judgment or final resolution, which shall be reached in consultation before the writing of the opinion by
any member of the division.

Rule 55
PUBLICATION OF JUDGMENTS
AND FINAL RESOLUTIONS
The decisions of the CA must be published. Kung wala sa Philippine Reports, nasa Court of Appeals Reports. They
call that CARA (Court of Appeals Reports Annotated).
Section 1. Publication. - The judgments and final resolutions of the court shall be published in the
Official Gazette and in the Reports officially authorized by the court in the language in which they have
been originally written, together with the syllabi therefore prepared by the reporter in consultation
with the writers thereof. Memoranda of all other judgments and final resolutions not so published shall
be made by the reporter and published in the Official Gazette and the authorized reports.
Section 2. Preparation of opinions for publication. - The reporter shall prepare and publish with each
reported judgment and final resolution a concise synopsis of the facts necessary for a clear
understanding of the case, the names of counsel, the material and controverted points involved, the
authorities cited therein, and a syllabus which shall be confined to points of law.
Section 3. General make-up of volumes. - The published decisions and final resolutions of the Supreme
Court shall be called "Philippine Reports," while those of the Court of Appeals shall known as the "Court
of Appeals Reports." Each volume thereof shall contain a table of the cases reported and the cases
cited in the opinions, with a complete alphabetical index of the subject matters of the volume. It shall
consist of not less than seven hundred pages printed upon good paper, well bound and numbered
consecutively in the order of the volumes published.
Powers and Functions of the Supreme Court:
1.)
Adjudication
2.)
Discipline
3.)
Rule-Making

Rule 56
PROCEDURE IN THE SUPREME COURT
This is an entirely new provision. In the SC, there are 2 types of cases ORIGINAL and APPEALED. The SC has
both the original and appellate jurisdiction.
What are the original cases cognizable by the SC?
A.) ORIGINAL CASES
SECTION 1. Original cases cognizable.
a.
b.
c.

Only petitions for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto, habeas corpus,
disciplinary proceedings against members of the judiciary and attorneys, and
cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls may be

filed originally in the Supreme Court. (n)

You know them no? Certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto, habeas corpus, cases affecting
ambassadors other public ministers and consuls nasa Constitution din yan. This is only a repetition of Article
VIII, Section 5 (1) of the Constitution. Aside from that, the Rules of Court give the SC authority to hear disciplinary
proceedings against members of the judiciary, disbarment or removal of judges. SC man yan ba! And they are
governed specially for disbarment by Rule 139-B of the Rules of Court.
SEC. 2. Rules applicable. The procedure in original cases for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo
warranto and habeas corpus shall be in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Constitution,
laws, and Rules 46,48, 49, 51, 52 and this Rule, subject to the following provisions:

a.) All references in said Rules to the Court of Appeals shall be understood to also apply to the
Supreme Court;
b.) The portions of said Rules dealing strictly with and specifically intended for appealed cases in
the Court of Appeals shall not be applicable; and
c.) Eighteen (18) clearly legible copies of the petition shall be filed, together with proof of service
on all adverse parties.
The proceedings for disciplinary action against members of the judiciary shall be governed by the
laws and Rules prescribed therefor, and those against attorneys by Rule 139-B, as amended. (n)
a.) All references in said Rules to the Court of Appeals
shall be understood to also apply to the Supreme Court
Actually, kulang ito eh. These proceedings are actually governed more by Rule 65 and 66. But they are also
covered by Rule 46, 48, 49, 51 and 52 (CA) and it also applies to SC.
b.) The portions of said Rules dealing strictly with and specifically intended for
appealed cases in the Court of Appeals shall not be applicable; and
This is more of legal and judicial ethics.
Q: When you file a petition before the SC for certiorari, prohibition or mandamus, how many copies?
A: First filing 18 copies minimum. Why? Because you do not know whether it will be considered as
an en banc case or a division case. The SC operates in 2 ways. It decides cases either en banc or by
division. 18 copies is required because 15 na ang justices, only three (3) for the clerk.
Q: How about subsequent pleadings? How many copies?
A: Depende.
Kung en banc, all subsequent pleadings, still 18 copies.
Kapag division case, 9 na lang. Now, there are three divisions in the SC the first, second and third
divisions. And every division is composed of five (5) members.
The SC meets en banc twice a week Tuesday and Thursday unless they have changed it. It is
called an en banc session. Cases are raffled for assignment by division. Monday and Wednesday, hiwa-hiwalay
sila the 5 justices who belong to the same division meet together and discuss cases which are raffled to that
division. Friday is a NO SESSION but a working day. That is when they study, prepare their decisions and resolutions.
That is why we can also predict when will the result of the Bar be released because that is an en banc session. Only
the SC en banc can order the release of the results of the Bar Exam. They have to pass a resolution.
B. APPEALED CASES
SEC. 3. Mode of appeal. An appeal to the Supreme Court may be taken only by a petition for review
on certiorari, except in criminal cases where the penalty imposed is death, reclusion perpetua or life
imprisonment. (n)
There is only one way of appeal to the SC. The only mode of appeal recognized is Petition for Review by
Certiorari under Rule 45, except in criminal cases when the penalty imposed by the RTC is death penalty, reclusion
perpatua or life imprisonment where only ordinary appeal (under Rule 41) is required. Outside of that, the only mode
of appeal to the SC is Petition for Review by Certiorari.
Please connect this with Rule 45, Section 9:
Rule 45, Sec. 9. Rule applicable to both civil and criminal cases.- The mode of appeal prescribed in this
rule shall be applicable to both civil and criminal cases except in criminal cases where the penalty
imposed is death, reclusion; perpetua or life imprisonment.

Rule 56, Sec. 4. Procedure.- The appeal shall be governed by and disposed of in accordance with the
applicable provisions of the Constitution, laws, Rules 45, 48, sections l,2, and 5 to 11 of Rule 51, 52 and
this rule.
Q: What are the grounds for dismissal of an appeal before the SC?
A: Section 5:
Section 5. Grounds for dismissal of appeal.- The appeal may be dismissed motu propio or on motion of
the respondent on the following grounds:
a. Failure to take the appeal within the reglementary period;
b. Lack of merit in the petition;
c. Failure to pay the requisite docket fee and other lawful fees or to make a deposit for costs;
d. Failure to comply with the requirements regarding [proof of service and contents of and the
documents which should accompany the petition;
e. Failure to comply with any circular, directive or order of the Supreme Court without justifiable
cause;
f. Error in the choice of mode of appeal; and
g. The fact that the case is not appealable to the Supreme Court.
Connect Rule 56, Section 5 with Rule 45, Section 5. The grounds are identical, to wit:
Rule 45, Sec. 5. Dismissal or denial of petition. The failure of the petitioner to comply with any of the
foregoing requirement regarding the payment of the docket and other lawful fees, deposit for costs,
proof of service of the petition, and the contents of and the documents which should accompany the
petition shall be sufficient ground for the dismissal thereof.
The Supreme Court may on its own initiative deny the petition on the ground that the appeal is
without merit, or is prosecuted manifestly for delay or that the questions raised therein are too
unsubstantial to require consideration.
Sec. 6. Disposition of improper appeal Except as provided in section 3, Rule 122 regarding appeals in
criminal cases where the penalty imposed is death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, an appeal
taken to the Supreme Court by notice of appeal; shall be dismissed.
An appeal by certiorari taken to the Supreme court from the Regional Trial Court submitting issues
of fact may be referred to the Court of Appeals for decision or appropriate action. The determination of
the Supreme Court on whether or not the issues of fact are involved shall be final.
This is already discussed in Rule 50, Section 2. A wrong appeal is a ground for a dismissal of such appeal.
Q: If the appeal is on pure question of law (it should be before the SC) and by mistake the party appealed to the
CA, what will happen?
A: The appeal will be dismissed under Rule 50. The CA will not endorse the case to the SC.
Q: Suppose you will appeal by certiorari to the SC under Rule 45. Tapos, halo pala hindi naman pala question of
law lahat may kasamang question of fact. What will happen now in the appeal?
A: Under Rule 56, Section 6, the SC may or may not dismiss the appeal. It may refer the matter to the
CA baliktad noh? So it is not the same as Rule 50, Section 2.
Section 7. Procedure if opinion is divided. Where the court en banc is equally divided in opinion, or the
necessary majority cannot be had, the case shall again be deliberated on, and if after such deliberation
no decision is reached,
-

the original action commenced in the court shall be

dismissed;

in appealed cases,
the judgment or order appealed from shall stand affirmed; and

on all incidental matters,

the petition or motion shall be denied.
What happens if the justices of the SC are equally divided?
For instance, there were 4 in attendance in a division dahil absent ang isa the result is 2:2. So, we
will deliberate again, but still 2:2. If that is so, the decision appealed from is considered affirmed. In
other words, the ruling in the lower court is considered correct.
The counterpart of this rule in Criminal Procedure is Rule 125, Section 3. If after deliberation, the justices are
even, they will deliberate again but still even. The decision must be acquittal. Since you cannot break the tie, it must
be in favor of the accused.
EN BANC CASES
Now, before we leave this topic, of course we know very well that when you appeal to the SC, there are two
possibilities either it will be heard by a division (there are 3 divisions there) or your case might be decided by the
entire SC en banc.
Q: What cases are heard by the SC en banc?
A: There was a circular in 1993 issued by the SC enumerating en banc cases:

1.)

Cases in which the constitutionality or validity of any treaty, international or executive

agreement, law, executive order, presidential decree, proclamation, order, instruction, ordinance or
regulations in question. For example, the recent Oil Deregulation Law;

2.)

Criminal cases in which the appealed decision imposes death penalty; Criminal cases
where a change of venue is required to avoid miscarriage of justice where SC has to make an order to
change the venue;
Pag reclusion perpetua, hindi man yan en banc ba! Only for death penalty.

3.)

Cases raising novel questions of law;

There is a point of law where there is no decided case yet. Meaning, such legal issue is raised for the
first time.

4.)

Cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers or consuls;

5.)

Cases involving decisions, resolutions, orders of the COMELEC, COA, or the Office of the
OMBUDSMAN, SANDIGANBAYAN in administrative disciplinary cases;

6.)

Cases in which the penalty involved is a dismissal of the judge, officer or employee of the
judiciary, disbarment of a lawyer or even suspension of any of them for a period of more than one (1)
year of fine exceeding P10,000.
Tignan mo sa SCRA. Pag ang penalty is removal of a judge or disbarment, en banc yan. And sometimes,
you cannot even identify who is the ponente. Ang tawag diyan per curiae. The ponente is not identified.

7.)

Cases where a doctrine or principle of law laid down by the Court en banc or division may
be modified or reversed;
A decision by a division can only be reversed by the SC en banc. The same is true in a decision
previously decided en banc. Only SC en banc can change its mind and reverse its previous ruling.

8.)

Cases assigned in a division which in the opinion of at least three (3) members thereof,
merit the attention of the Court en banc and are acceptable to the majority of the actual members of
the court en banc;
Meaning, it is a division case but at least three members of the division are of the view that it
should be elevated to the SC en banc. And the majority of the entire court also agree.

Example: A case is assigned to a division. After deliberating, majority of the 5 hold that the case is so important
that referral to the entire membership is proper. Then when it is referred en banc, majority accepts it, then it is to be
decided en banc.
Specific Example: The case of PEOPLE vs. LUCAS in Criminal Law. ISSUE: Is the penalty of reclusion perpetua
divisible or indivisible? The original ruling there by a division is that it is a divisible penalty. But upon motion for
reconsideration by the Solicitor General, the first division realized that maraming implications ito. So at least 3 or 4
voted na itapon natin to the SC en banc and then the entire voted.
BAR QUESTION : A lost in an appealed decision. He filed a motion for reconsideration. He is insisting that his
motion be resolved by the entire membership of the SC. Can he insist that his motion for reconsideration be heard
by the entire membership of the SC en banc when he lost in a division?
A: NO, because the SC en banc is not a separate court from one of its divisions. You cannot say that
a decision by a division can be appealed to the SC en banc because it is the same court. The best that
can happen to you is you convince the members of the same division to refer the matter to the entire
court en banc and try to convince the majority of the court en banc to accept it. That is the correct
move.
9.)

All other cases as the court en banc, by the majority of its actual members, may deem of
sufficient importance to merit its attention.
These cases are those involving the welfare of the nation like Lotto case, EVAT, Manila Hotel case. This is also
the ground invoked by Imelda Marcos where she tries to convince the court en banc to hear her motion for
reconsideration.
-oOo-