Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 19

1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 41 Appeal From

2001 Edition The Regional Trial Courts

Rule 41
APPEAL FROM THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS

Majority of the important rules are found here in Rule 41.

Section 1. Subject of appeal. An appeal may be taken from a judgment or


final order that completely disposes of the case, or of a particular matter
therein when declared by these Rules to be appealable.
No appeal may be taken from:
(a) An order denying a motion for new trial or reconsideration;
(b) An order denying a petition for relief or any similar motion seeking
relief from judgment;
(c) An interlocutory order;
(d) An order disallowing or dismissing an appeal;
(e) An order denying a motion to set aside a judgment by consent, confession
or compromise on the ground of fraud, mistake or duress, or any other ground
vitiating consent;
(f) An order of execution;
(g) A judgment or final order for or against one or more of several parties
or in separate claims, counterclaims, cross-claims and third-party complaints,
while the main case is pending, unless the court allows an appeal therefrom; and
(h) An order dismissing an action without prejudice.
In all the above instances where the judgment or final order is not
appealable, the aggrieved party may file an appropriate special civil action
under Rule 65. (n)

Q: What orders or judgment are subject to appeal ?


A: Only FINAL judgments or orders can be appealed as distinguished from interlocutory
judgments or orders (paragraph [c])which are not appealable.

FINAL JUDGMENT OR ORDERSthe term final has two (2) possible meanings in Civil
Procedure:

[1] The judgment is final in the sense that it is already executory and that happens if
there is no appeal. And that is for purposes of applying Rule 39 on execution.

[2] The judgment is final in the sense that it is not merely interlocutory and this is for
the purpose of applying the law on appeal under Rule 41. In other words, a final order or
judgment (for purposes of appeal) is one which is not merely interlocutory in the sense
that it completely disposes of the case or a particular matter therein where there is
nothing more for the court to do after its rendition. (Bairan vs. Tan Sui Lay, L-19460, Dec.
28, 1966)

Q: What is the definition of a final judgment or for purpose of appeal?


A: A judgment or order is final if it disposes of the pending action so that nothing more
can be done in the trial court with respect to its merits. (Salazar vs. De Torres, 58 O.G.
1713, Feb. 26, 1962; Bairan vs. Tan Sui Lay, L-19460, Dec. 28, 1966)

Q: On the other hand, what is an interlocutory judgment or order?


A: An interlocutory order is something which does not completely dispose of the action
and there is still something for the court to do after its rendition. (Olsen & Co. vs. Olsen, 48
Phil. 238; Restauro vs. Fabrica, 80 Phil. 762) Actually, the law does not prohibit a party
from appealing an interlocutory judgment or order, only you cannot appeal immediately.
(Abesamis vs. Garcia, 98 Phil. 762)

Q: What is the test for determining whether a judgment or order is final or


interlocutory?
A: The test for the determination of whether a judgment or order is final or
interlocutory is this: Does it leave something to be done in the trial court with respect to
the merits of the case? If it does, it is interlocutory, hence, you cannot appeal yet; if it
does not, it is final and therefore you can appeal. (Reyes vs. De Leon, L-3720, June 24,
1952)

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA 68


1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 41 Appeal From
2001 Edition The Regional Trial Courts

So you must know the meanings of the word final in civil procedure to avoid
confusion. A good example is Section 20 of Rule 3 where the word final was first
mentioned:
Rule 3, Sec. 20. Action on contractual money claims. - When the action is
for recovery of money arising from contract, express or implied, and the
defendant dies before entry of final judgment in the court in which the action
was pending at the time of such death, it shall not be dismissed but shall
instead be allowed to continue until entry of final judgment. A favorable
judgment obtained by the plaintiff therein shall be enforced in the manner
especially provided in these Rules for prosecuting claims against the estate of
a deceased person. (21a)

The word final here in Section 20 refers to the second meaning that the judgment is
final in the sense that it is not merely interlocutory

BAR QUESTION: Plaintiff vs. Defendant. Defendant file a motion to dismiss under Rule
16. The court granted the motion and consequently ordered the dismissal of the complaint
of the plaintiff. Can the plaintiff appeal from the order dismissing his complaint?
A: We will apply the test: Is there anything more for the court to do after issuing the
order of dismissal? Wala na! [Awanen!] Ano pa ba ang gagawin eh na-dismiss na nga eh!
Therefore, the order of dismissal is a final order it has completely disposed of the case
hence, the plaintiff can appeal.

PROBLEM: Lets modify the problem: Plaintiff vs. Defendant. Defendant file a motion to
dismiss under Rule 16. The court denied the motion to dismiss. Can the defendant appeal
from the order of the court denying his motion to dismiss?
A: Again, we will apply the test: Is there anything more for the court to do after
denying the motion to dismiss of the defendant? Yes because after the court denies such
motion, the defendant will now file his answer, then there will be pre-trial, trial, judgment.
Meaning, after denying the motion to dismiss, may trabaho pa ako. Therefore, the order
denying the motion to dismiss is interlocutory, hence the defendant cannot appeal.

Q: So how do you appeal from an interlocutory order?


A: The procedure if there is an order which is against you but it is not appealable, you
have to wait. The case is to be tried and then you have to wait for the final judgment to be
rendered and if you are dissatisfied with the judgment, that is the time you appeal from
the said judgment together with the interlocutory orders issued in the course of the
proceeding. (Mapua vs. Suburban Theaters, Inc., 81 Phil. 311) So there should only be one
appeal from that case. Thats why, as a general rule, the law on Civil Procedure prohibits
more that one appeal in one civil action.

The reasons why interlocutory orders are not appealable are to avoid multiple appeals
in one civil case since the order is interlocutory and the court still continues to try the case
in the course of the proceeding, the court will realize its error and the court may change
its order so it will be given an opportunity to correct its own mistake. (Manila Elec. Co. vs.
Artiaga, 50 Phil. 147)

Take note of the new rule saying that a judgment or order is final if it disposes of the
case or of a PARTICULAR MATTER. So, it is not necessarily the whole case.

In the case of DAY vs. RTC (191 SCRA 640), a case filed by A against B, X filed a motion
to intervene and it was denied. Can X appeal the denial? Now, it would seem that the
order is interlocutory because the court, after denying the motion to intervene, still has
something to do since the case between A and B will continue. But according to the SC,
YES, X can appeal because the order denying the motion to intervene is final.

But is it not true that the court has something to do after denying such motion? Yes but
what the SC is trying saying is that, as far as Xs right is concerned, the court has nothing
to do anymore. Marami pa akong trabaho dito (case between A and B), pero kay X wala
na. That is why the order denying the motion to intervene is a final order and is

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA 69


1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 41 Appeal From
2001 Edition The Regional Trial Courts

appealable. Kaya nga the test that there is nothing more for the court to do is very
confusing. In other words, you divide the case into parts.

DAY vs. RTC OF ZAMBOANGA CITY


191 SCRA 640

HELD: An order which decides an issue or issues in a complaint is final and


appealable, although the other issue or issues have not been resolved, if the
latter issues are distinct and separate from the others.

REPUBLIC vs. TACLOBAN CITY ICE PLANT


258 SCRA 145 [1996]

HELD: A court order is final in character if it puts an end to the particular


matter resolved or settles definitely the matter therein disposed of, such that no
further questions can come before the court except the execution of the order.
Such an order or judgment may validly refer to the entire controversy or to some
definite and separate branch thereof.

So the opening paragraph of Section 1 is in accordance with the DAY and TACLOBAN
cases. In other words, either the whole case is disposed of or a particular matter therein
has been disposed of.

Q: If I cannot appeal because Section 1 of Rule 41 prohibits an appeal, is there a way of


hastening the issue before the appellate court in order to avoid the waste of time and
effort and money of entering into a trial which is null and void because of lack of
jurisdiction?
A: The answer is the last paragraph of Section 1:

In all the above instances where the judgment or final order is not
appealable, the aggrieved party may file an appropriate special civil action
under Rule 65. (n)

So if appeal is not available, the correct remedy is an appropriate special civil action
under Rule 65. There are three civil actions there: Certiorari, Prohibition, Mandamus.

The present Rule 41 tells us exactly what orders cannot be appealed:

(a) An order denying a motion for new trial or reconsideration;

So when a motion for new trial or reconsideration is denied, there is no appeal from
that order. Your remedy is you appeal from the judgment, not from the order denying your
motion for new trial or reconsideration. That is found on Rule 37, Section 9:

Section 9. Remedy against order denying a motion for new trial or


reconsideration.- An order denying a motion for new trial or reconsideration is
not appealable, the remedy being an appeal from the judgment or final order.

So the correct remedy is in Rule 37 you appeal from the judgment, not from the order
denying the motion for new trial or reconsideration.

(b) An order denying a petition for relief or any similar motion seeking
relief from judgment;

Paragraph [b] has changed some decided cases in the past. Before, an order granting a
petition for relief is interlocutory but an order denying a petition for relief is final. NOW,
wala na yan! Whether it is an order granting or denying a petition for relief, you cannot
appeal.

So what is remedy for such order? Go with special civil action under Rule 65 as
provided in the last paragraph of Section 1.
Property of LAKAS ATENISTA 70
1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 41 Appeal From
2001 Edition The Regional Trial Courts

Give an example of an order denying a motion other than a petition for relief: motion
for new trial. So it is not appealable.

Suppose I am declared in default, can I appeal from a DEFAULT JUDGMENT? The 1964
rules say, yes. You notice that such provision is lost. There is no more direct provision on
that. But still, it is appealable. The provision in the old rules is not necessary. There is
nothing in paragraphs [a] to [h] prohibiting an appeal from a default judgment. So it falls
under the general rule.

Q: How about the order to LIFT the order of default? Suppose you file a motion to set
aside the judgment of default and motion is denied, can you appeal?
A: NO, because the law says, an order denying any similar motion seeking relief from
judgment cannot be appealed. As a matter of fact, the 1995 case of MANILA ELECTRIC
COMPANY vs. CAMPANA FOOD PRODUCTS (246 SCRA 77), there is no such remedy as a
motion to set aside an order of default but there is no provision in the rules to set aside a
judgment of default. The correct remedy is to appeal from the judgment of default not to
set aside. And that is clear. The default judgment is appealable.

(d) An order disallowing or dismissing an appeal;

So, if an appeal is dismissed, you cannot appeal from the order dismissing it. What is
the remedy? The 1964 rules provides for the remedy of mandamus. That is a direct
provision because if the appeal is on time, the duty of the court to grant due course to the
appeal is ministerial. There is no more such provision in the present rules because it is
already provided in the last paragraph.

Another possible remedy where an appeal is allowed aside from the mandamus is if I
lost my right to appeal because of fraud, mistake accident and inexcusable negligence,
the other possible remedy is a petition for relief from judgment denying my appeal and
that is found in Rule 38, Section 2:

Rule 38, Sec. 2. Petition for relief from denial of appeal. When a judgment
or final order is rendered by any court in a case, and a party thereto, by
fraud, accident, mistake, or excusable negligence, has been prevented from
taking an appeal, he may file a petition in such court and in the same case
praying that the appeal be given due course. (1a)

So, aside from the remedy under Rule 65, the other possible remedy is a petition for
relief from the order denying the appeal.

(e) An order denying a motion to set aside a judgment by consent, confession


or compromise on the ground of fraud, mistake or duress, or any other ground
vitiating consent;

PROBLEM: So there is a judgment by consent (cognovit judgment) and the motion to


set aside such judgment is denied. The order of denial is not appealable. So again, there
is judgment by confession or compromise and then you file a motion to set aside the
judgment of compromise on the ground of fraud, mistake or duress or any other ground.
Motion denied!
Q: Can you appeal?
A: NO. (paragraph [e])

Q: So what is my remedy?
A: You file a separate case for annulment for such judgment (Rule 47). In the case of

DOMINGO vs. COURT OF APPEALS


255 SCRA 189 [1996]

HELD: The correct remedy is for the party to file an action for annulment of
judgment before the Court of Appeals pursuant to Section 9, par. 2, of the
Judiciary Law.
Property of LAKAS ATENISTA 71
1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 41 Appeal From
2001 Edition The Regional Trial Courts

A compromise may however be disturbed and set aside for vices of consent
or forgery. Hence, where an aggrieved party alleges mistake, fraud, violence,
intimidation, undue influence, or falsity in the execution of the compromise
embodied in a judgment, an action to annul it should be brought before the
Court of Appeals, in accordance with Section 9(2) of Batas Pambansa Bilang 129,
which gives that court (CA) exclusive original jurisdiction over actions for
annulment of judgments of regional trial courts.

(f) An order of execution;

So you cannot appeal from an order of execution because if we will allow the losing
party to appeal from an order of execution, then there will be no end to litigation. Kaya
nga execution, eh it means tapos na ang kaso. That case is finished, decided, final.

But suppose the order of execution contains portions which are not found in the
judgment, meaning, the order of execution is changing the judgment which should not be
done, then obviously, the correct remedy is certiorari under Rule 65 because of grave
abuse of discretion.

(g) A judgment or final order for or against one or more of several parties
or in separate claims, counterclaims, cross-claims and third-party complaints,
while the main case is pending, unless the court allows an appeal therefrom;

The best example of a judgment of final order where there are separate claims is found
in Rule 36. There could be more than one judgment in one civil case and there can be
more than one decision judgment on the main action, on the counterclaim, etc. (c.f.
Sections 4 and 5, Rule 36)

Q: Everytime a judgment is issued, can you appeal already form the first judgment
when there will be a second judgment in that civil action? Can you appeal from all these
separate judgment?
A: No, unless the court allows an appeal therefrom. Generally, you have to wait for all
the judgments to be rendered before you can appeal because, normally, there can be no
appeal from every judgment rendered. A good example of this is in the case of

PROVINCE OF PANGASINAN vs. COURT OF APPEALS


220 SCRA 726

FACTS: This was a partial summary judgment under Rule 35. Is it appealable?
One party claims that a partial summary judgment is appealable because of Rule
36, where the court allows an appeal therefrom. But according to the Supreme
Court:

HELD: A partial summary judgment is not covered by Rule 36. It is governed


by Rule 35 and there is no appeal because it is merely interlocutory.

Rule 35, Sec. 4. Case not fully adjudicated on motion. If on motion under
this Rule, judgment is not rendered upon the whole case or for all the reliefs
sought and a trial is necessary, the court at the hearing of the motion, by
examining the pleadings and the evidence before it and by interrogating counsel
shall ascertain what material facts exist without substantial controversy and
what are actually and in good faith controverted. It shall thereupon make an
order specifying the facts that appear without substantial controversy,
including the extent to which the amount of damages or other relief is not in
controversy, and directing such further proceedings in the action as are just.
The facts so specified shall be deemed established, and the trial shall be
conducted on the controverted facts accordingly.

Q: When can there be a partial summary judgment?


A: When some portions of a claim are substantially controverted and the rest are not
substantially controverted. So the court is authorized to render a partial summary
judgment on the claim where there is no genuine issue we continue trying the case with

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA 72


1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 41 Appeal From
2001 Edition The Regional Trial Courts

respect to the claim where there is a genuine issue. So there will be two judgments. A
summary judgment for one claim and an ordinary judgment for the other claim. So nauna
yung partial summary judgment.

Q: Can you appeal from there immediately?


A: NO, you have to wait for the other judgment to come out. You cannot appeal from
that partial summary judgment while the main case is pending, unless the court allows
appeal therefrom.

(h) An order dismissing an action without prejudice.

If an action is dismissed without prejudice, it cannot be appealed because, as it is


without prejudice, you can re-file the case. But supposed the dismissal without prejudice is
arbitrary, and I dont want to re-file because it is too costly and I really want to question
the court dismissing my case without prejudice, I want to challenge the order. Now,
because appeal is not appealable, your remedy is Rule 65 on certiorari.

Q: Give examples of dismissal of cases without prejudice.


A: Rule 16, Section 5 (c.f. Rule 16, Section 1 [f], [h], [i]):

Rule 16, Sec. 5. Effect of dismissal. Subject to the right of appeal, an


order granting a motion to dismiss based on paragraphs (f), (h) and (i) of
section 1 hereof shall bar the refiling of the same action or claim.

Rule 16, Section 1. Grounds. Within the time for but before filing the
answer to the complaint or pleading asserting a claim, a motion to dismiss may
be made on any of the following grounds:
(f) That the cause of action is barred by a prior judgment or by the statute
of limitations;
(h) That the claim or demand set forth in the plaintiff's pleading has been
paid, waived, abandoned, or otherwise extinguished;
(i) That the claim on which the action is founded is unenforceable under the
provisions of the statute of frauds;

Another new provision is Section 2. But, actually, the principles are not new. How do
you appeal from the RTC to the CA? (or to a higher court) Take note that Section 2 tells us
that there are 3 possible ways:
1) Ordinary Appeal (in cases decided by the RTC pursuant to its original jurisdiction)
2) Petition For Review (in cases decided by the RTC pursuant to its appellate
jurisdiction)
3) Appeal By Certiorari (appeal from RTC direct to the SC on pure questions of law)

Sec. 2. Modes of appeal.


(a) Ordinary appeal.- The appeal to the Court of Appeals in cases decided by
the Regional Trial Court in the exercise of its original jurisdiction shall be
taken by filing a notice of appeal with the court which rendered the judgment or
final order appealed from and serving a copy thereof upon the adverse party. No
record on appeal shall be required except in special proceedings and other cases
of multiple or separate appeals where the law or these Rules so require. In such
cases, the record on appeal shall be filed and served in like manner.

Ordinary Appeal is the mode of appeal from RTC to CA in cases decided by the RTC
pursuant to its original jurisdiction.

Just like in Rule 40, you file a notice of appeal with the RTC furnishing the
adverse/losing party. No record on appeal shall be required except in special proceedings
and other cases of multiple or separate appeals where the law or these Rules so require.

(b) Petition for review.- The appeal to the Court of Appeals in cases
decided by the Regional Trial Court in the exercise of its appellate
jurisdiction shall be by petition for review in accordance with Rule 42.

Actually, this was already touched in Judiciary Law. How do you appeal to the CA from
the RTC in cases decided by the RTC pursuant to its appellate jurisdiction? not by
ordinary appeal but by petition for review.

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA 73


1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 41 Appeal From
2001 Edition The Regional Trial Courts

ORDINARY APPEAL (par. A) PETITION FOR REVIEW (par. B)


The case was decided by the RTC pursuant The case was decided by the RTC
to its original jurisdiction. The case was pursuant to its appellate jurisdiction
originally filed in the RTC. (governed by Rule 42)

EXAMPLE: You filed an action for recovery of money amounting to P1 million. Obviously
the jurisdiction is in the RTC. Now, natalo ka and you want to go to the CA. What is your
mode of appeal? Ordinary Appeal because the case was decided by the RTC pursuant to its
original jurisdiction.

EXAMPLE: In paragraph B, the case is recovery of sum of money amounting to P50,000.


Saan i-file yan? MTC man yan ba. Now, you lose, where will you appeal and what is the
mode of appeal? RTC by Ordinary appeal. Suppose, talo ka pa rin sa RTC and you want to
go to CA. This time, the mode of appeal is not by ordinary appeal but by petition for review
because the case now being appealed has been decided by the RTC pursuant to its
appellate jurisdiction.

(c) Appeal by certiorari.- In all cases where only questions of law are
raised or involved, the appeal shall be to the Supreme Court by petition for
review on certiorari in accordance with Rule 45.

This goes back to the jurisdiction of the SC. The SC has exclusive, appellate jurisdiction
in certain cases constitutionality of a law, treaty is in issue, jurisdiction of the court is in
issue, and when only questions of law are being raised.

So the case is in the RTC and you lost. You would like to appeal on pure question of law.
Now, do not go to the CA for it has no jurisdiction. You by-pass CA and go directly to the SC
on appeal by certiorari in accordance with Rule 45.

What is the period to appeal? Section 3:

Sec. 3. Period of ordinary appeal. The appeal shall be taken within fifteen
(15) days from notice of the judgment or final order appealed from. Where a
record on appeal is required, the appellant shall file a notice of appeal and a
record on appeal within thirty (30) days from notice of the judgment or final
order. However, an appeal in habeas corpus cases shall be taken within forty-
eight (48) hours from notice of the judgment or final order appealed from.
The period of appeal shall be interrupted by a timely motion for new trial
or reconsideration. No motion for extension of time to file a motion for new
trial or reconsideration shall be allowed.

The period to appeal is 15 days. And when a record on appeal is required, the period to
appeal is doubled 30 days.

Section 3 is already amended. It now specifically provides the period to appeal in cases
of habeas corpus, which is 48 hours. This is because the SC made an error in one of the
latest cases involving Rufus Rodriguez as Immigration Commissioner, where the SC ruled
that the period to appeal in habeas corpus cases is 15 days since the 48-hour period
disappeared in the 1997 Rules. So many got confused now.

So when I had a talk with Justice Panganiban last year during the celebration of the 100
years of SC here in Davao, I opened this issue to him. Sabi ko, Mali man yung ruling nyo
ba. Under the judiciary law, it is 48-hours! Two months after the conversation, Section 3
was amended. [ehem!]

Alright, the period to appeal shall be interrupted by timely motion for new trial or
motion for new consideration provided that the motion for new trial is not a pro forma
motion (Rule 37, Section 2).

LABITAD vs. COURT OF APPEALS


246 SCRA 434 [1995]

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA 74


1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 41 Appeal From
2001 Edition The Regional Trial Courts

FACTS: You receive a judgment on January 31. You filed a motion for
reconsideration on February 10. So, interrupted and then on February 20, you
receive the order denying the motion for reconsideration. When is the last day to
appeal?

HELD: The last day is February 26. The filing of a motion for new trial or
reconsideration is not counted in the 15-day period. Upon the filing in February
10, it is already interrupted. So, you did not consume 10 days. You consumed
only 9 days.
The period to appeal is suspended if a motion for reconsideration or one for
a new trial is filed, which, if denied, continues to run upon receipt of the order
denying the same as if no interruption has occurred. The time during which a
motion for reconsideration or one for new trial has been pending shall be
counted from the date the motion is duly filed to the date when the movant is
duly notified of the denial thereof.
The period during which the motion is pending with the trial court includes
the day the same is filed because the motion shall have been already placed
under the court's consideration during the remaining hours of the day. The very
date the motion for reconsideration has been filed should be excluded from the
appeal period.

So how do you reconcile this pronouncement with the rule that the first day is excluded
and the last day is included? The answer is found in Rule 22, Section 2:

Rule 22, Sec. 2. Effect of interruption.- Should an act be done which


effectively interrupts the running of the period, the allowable period after such
interruption shall start to run on the day after notice of the cessation of the
cause thereof.
The day of the act that caused the interruption shall be excluded in the
computation of the period. (n)

RUBIO vs. MTCC BRANCH 4 OF CAGAYAN DE ORO CITY


252 SCRA 172

FACTS: The period to file a motion for new trial or reconsideration is within
the period to appeal which is 15 days, kaya walang extension. Now this is what
happened. The court issued an interlocutory order. After two months, one of the
parties filed a motion for reconsideration and, of course, the other party said, no
more, you should file the motion within 15 days. You cannot file beyond the 15-
day period. Is that correct?
HELD: NO. That is wrong because an interlocutory order cannot be appealed
hence, the 15-day period does not apply. You can file your motion for
reconsideration anytime for as long as the court still has jurisdiction over the
case.
The 15-day period only applies when the order is final. But when the order is
interlocutory, you can file it anytime because there is no definite period for the
court to change it. For as long as the court has jurisdiction over the case, it has
the power to change that wrong order.
The period subject to interruption by a motion for reconsideration is the
period to appeal. An interlocutory order is not appealable if there is accordingly
no period to suspend or interrupt.

Sec. 4. Appellate court docket and other lawful fees. Within the period for
taking an appeal, the appellant shall pay to the clerk of the court which
rendered the judgment or final order appealed from, the full amount of the
appellate court docket and other lawful fees. Proof of payment of said fees
shall be transmitted to the appellate court together with the original record or
the record on appeal. (n)

Under the law, within the period for taking an appeal, the appellant shall only pay to
the clerk of court of the RTC which rendered the judgment or final order the full amount of
the appellate court docket fee and all other lawful fees and the proof of payment shall be
transmitted to the CA together with the original record on appeal.
Property of LAKAS ATENISTA 75
1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 41 Appeal From
2001 Edition The Regional Trial Courts

Q: How does this amend the Old law?


A: Under the OLD Law, when you appeal from the RTC to the CA, you just file a notice of
appeal. You do not pay anything, you do not pay the appellate docket fee. So the records
will be transmitted upon order of the clerk of court.

Pagdating sa CA, later on, the clerk of court there will communicate to the appellant na
the records are there already, magbayad ka ng docket fee within so many days. So,
mamaya mo na bayaran, hintayin mo munang mapunta doon at hintayin mo ang notisya.

NOW, you do not wait. Pag - file mo ng notice of appeal, you PAY IMMEDIATELY. When
you appeal, bayaran mo na ang CA docket fee sa RTC clerk and then pag -transmit, sabay
na! That is the change.

If we will notice, the counterpart is Section 5 Rule 40 yung appeal from the MTC to the
RTC:

RULE 40, Section 5. Appellate court and other lawful fees. - Within the period
for taking an appeal, the appellant shall pay to the clerk of the court which
rendered the judgment or final order appealed from the full amount of the appellate
court docket and other lawful fees. Proof of payment thereof shall be transmitted
to the appellate court together with the original record or the record on appeal,
as the case may be. (n)

Q: Suppose the person appealing from the MTC to the RTC failed to pay the appeal fee
under Rule 40, can the appeal be dismissed?
A: No, because it is not one of the requisites. That was the ruling in SANTOS vs. CA.
That can be collected from you later but that is not a requisite. The appeal cannot be
dismissed.

We will ask the same question under Section 4 Rule 41. BUT this time, you are
appealing from the RTC to the CA and this contains an identical provision that when you
are appealing from the RTC to the CA, you already pay there with the clerk of court of the
RTC the docket fee. Bayaran mo na, siya na ang bahalang mag-forward. Heres the
problem:

Q: You failed to pay the docket fee within 15 days. So, when the case was transmitted
to the CA, hindi kasali yung fee no. Now, can your appeal be dismissed on the ground of
failure to pay the docket fee or not in accordance with the ruling in SANTOS (by analogy,
although in this case, the appeal is from the MTC to the RTC. Pero the same, hindi ka rin
magbayad ng docket fee.) Is the ruling in SANTOS also applicable to Rule 41 ?
A: NO, the ruling in SANTOS is not applicable. Your appeal will be dismissed.

Q: What provision of the Rules authorizes such dismissal? Is there any direct provision
of the Rules of Court which authorizes the dismissal of the appeal by non-payment of the
appeal docket fee?
A: YES. Rule 50 Section 1 [c];

RULE 50, Section 1 An appeal may be dismissed by the Court of Appeals, on


its own motion or on that of the appellee. on the following grounds:
x x x x
(c) Failure of the appellant to pay the docket and other lawful fees as
provided in Section 4 of Rule 41 ;
x x x x

I believe that it is dismissible because of that. So, to my mind, the SANTOS vs. CA
ruling which governs Rule 40 and which for me is valid, is NOT APPLICABLE to Rule 41
because there is a direct provision in Rule 50 that an appeal can be dismissed for
non-payment of appeal docket fee. That is the difference between these two situations.

NOTICE OF APPEAL

Now, let us go back to Section 5 of Rule 41;

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA 76


1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 41 Appeal From
2001 Edition The Regional Trial Courts

Sec. 5. Notice of appeal. The notice of appeal shall indicate the parties to
the appeal, specify the judgment or final order or part thereof appealed from,
specify the court to which the appeal is being taken, and state the material
dates showing the timeliness of the appeal. (4a)

Ano ba ang nakalagay sa notice of appeal? Its very clear there that you indicate the
parties to the appeal, specify the judgment and state the material date showing the
timeliness of the appeal.

Do you know how to do it? Its very simple. The defendant merely says; Defendant
hereby serves notice that he is appealing to the CA on questions of fact or on questions of
fact and law the judgment of the Honorable Court (RTC) dated December 20, 1997, copy
of which was received by me on January 5, 1998. So it is simple that only 15 days is
required to file the notice. When the law says the period to file an appeal is non-
extendible, that is fair. I do not need 15 days to prepare the notice of appeal. You can do it
only in two minutes. [sobra pa sa quicky!!]

So you must state the date when you received because the computation of the 15 -day
period is from the receipt of the judgment and NOT from the date of the judgment. This is
the so-called the MATERAL DATA RULE material dates showing timeliness of appeal. The
date received and the date of decision are not the same. Both dates must be included in
the notice of appeal.

Now, kung sabihin mo na I am appealing from the judgment of the court dated
December 20, 1997, and hindi mo sinabi kung kailan mo natanggap, the presumption is
you also received the copy of the judgment on December 20, 1997. And then you are
appealing today, it will be dismissed because you did not state the material dates.

And of course, there is one SC decision which said that you do not only specify the final
judgment or order, but you also specify as much as possible the interlocutory orders from
where you are appealing because interlocutory orders can only be appealed at this time.
So, isabay mo na rin, i-one time ba!

In the case of

HEIRS OF MAXIMO RIGOSO vs. COURT OF APPEALS


211 SCRA 348

FACTS: Plaintiff filed an action against defendant for partition of property.


While the action was pending, defendant died. Partition is an action which
survives. Defendants lawyer failed to inform the court about plaintiffs death (it
is the lawyers duty which he did not do). So with that, there was no proper
substitution. Later, judgment was rendered against the deceased defendant. But
after the decision came out, the lawyer of the defendant filed a notice of appeal
in accordance with Rule 41.

ISSUE #1: Was the appeal properly made?


HELD: NO. Upon the death of the defendant, the lawyers authority to
represent him already expired. There was an automatic expiration of the lawyer-
client relationship. The notice of appeal which the lawyer filed in behalf of the
deceased was an unauthorized pleading, therefore not valid.

ISSUE #2: Is the judgment binding to the defendants heirs (remember, they
were not substituted)?
HELD: YES. The validity of the judgment was not affected by the defendants
demise for the action survived (partition, eh). The decision is binding and
enforceable against the successor-in-interest of the deceased litigant by title
subsequent to the commencement of the action pursuant to Section 47 [b] of
Rule 39Rule on Res Judicata.

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA 77


1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 41 Appeal From
2001 Edition The Regional Trial Courts

Now, in our outline in appeal, the general rule is when you appeal, you only file a notice
of appeal and you pay the docket. The important requirement there is notice of appeal
but, we said in some cases, aside from notice of appeal, there is a second requirement
which is the RECORD ON APPEAL.

This time, the period to appeal is not only 15 but 30 days and a record on appeal is
only required in special proceedings or in civil cases where multiple appeals are allowed.
Never mind special proceedings, saka na yun. It sounds strange because what weve
studied so far, multiple appeals are not allowed in civil cases, there should only be one
appeal. Kaya nga interlocutory orders are not appealable, precisely to avoid order on
appeal in a civil case. We will explain this later.

RECORD ON APPEAL

Sec. 6. Record on appeal; form and contents thereof. The full names of all
the parties to the proceedings shall be stated in the caption of the record on
appeal and it shall include the judgment or final order from which the appeal is
taken and, in chronological order, copies of only such pleadings, petitions,
motions and all interlocutory orders as are related to the appealed judgment or
final order for the proper understanding of the issue involved, together with
such data as will show that the appeal was perfected on time. If an issue of
fact is to be raised on appeal, the record on appeal shall include by reference
all the evidence, testimonial and documentary, taken upon the issue involved.
The reference shall specify the documentary evidence by the exhibit numbers or
letters by which it was identified when admitted or offered at the hearing, and
the testimonial evidence by the names of the corresponding witnesses. If the
whole testimonial and documentary evidence in the case is to be included, a
statement to that effect will be sufficient without mentioning the names of the
witnesses or the numbers or letters of exhibits. Every record on appeal
exceeding twenty (20) pages must contain a subject index. (6a)

A record on appeal is simply a reproduction of all the pleadings filed by the parties, all
the motions filed by the parties, all the orders issued by the court and the final judgment
rendered by the court arranged in chronological order.

For EXAMPLE: Juan de la Cruz versus Pedro Santos. Record on appeal. Normally, it
starts with this phrase
Be it remembered the following proceedings took place in the court below:
Par. 1. On January 5, 1998, plaintiff filed a complaint against defendant as
follows: -- (so kopyahin mo yung complaint. Practically it is mechanical work,
eh.)
Par. 2. On January 25, 1998, defendant filed an answer (kopyahin mo ang
answer)
Par. 3. On March 5, 1998, the court rendered judgment (kopyahin mo na
naman.)

How long? Gaano kakapal yan? Depende. For example, the case lasted for more than
two years. So practically, the record on appeal may amount to hundreds of pages. That is
why the period to appeal is increased from 15 to 30 if the law requires a record on appeal
because of the possibility that you may not be able to complete everything within 15 days.
Sometimes the 30-day period can be extended.

Q: Do you have to include there every motion, every order of the case?
A: No, the law says you reproduce in chronological order copies of only such pleadings,
motions, petitions, and all interlocutory orders as are related to the appealed judgment or
final order for the proper understanding of the issues involved. This is to allow the
appellate court to review the order appealed from.

But there are some motions na hindi na kailangan. For example, the case will be set for
trial next week. Sabi ng defendant, Motion to postpone, I am not ready because I am
suffering from diarrhea. So the trial was postponed. Kailangan pa bang ilagay ang motion
na yan? That is not necessary to understand the issue. Piliin mo lang ang importante.

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA 78


1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 41 Appeal From
2001 Edition The Regional Trial Courts

Now, bakit kailangan yang record on appeal? Bakit sa ordinary appeal, hindi man
kailangan? Because in Ordinary Civil Actions, when the appeal is perfected, the clerk of
court of the RTC transmits the entire record to the CA. So andoon na lahat yan. But in
special proceedings or in civil cases where multiple appeals are allowed, when an order or
judgment is rendered, the case continues pa. So, the records are not yet elevated. So, how
can the CA understand what happened without the records? That is called the record on
appeal.

Q: Give an example of a civil action where multiple appeals are allowed.


A: Section 4 of Rule 36, where several judgments will be rendered in one case:

RULE 36, Sec. 4. Several judgments. - In an action against several


defendants, the court may, when several judgment is proper, render judgment
against one or more of them, leaving the action to proceed against the others.
(4)

And to be more specific, that rule was applied by the SC in the case of

MUNICIPALITY OF BIAN vs. GARCIA


180 SCRA 576

FACTS: Municipality of Binan filed expropriation cases against several


landowners because it would like to expropriate their land for public use. All of
them were named as co-defendants in one complaint. Landowner A filed a
motion for separate trial (Rule 31). The court granted it. The court rendered a
decision expropriating the land of A. Nauna siya. As for the other landowners, the
case continued.

ISSUE #1: Can A appeal already from the decision rendered against him or
must he wait for the decision to be rendered against the other landowners?
HELD: YES, A can now appeal because the order was already final against A.
There is something more for the court to do but only with respect to the other
defendants. But as far as A is concerned, there is nothing more for the court to
do.
So when the judgment is already rendered against the other landowners, they
can now also appeal. So there could be two or more final judgments and two or
more appeals.

ISSUE #2: Suppose the case was tried against all of them (sabay ba) and
there was one decision against themso sabay-sabay sila mag-appeal. Is record
on appeal required?
HELD: NO, only notice of appeal because there is only one decision.

Q: Why is it that in ordinary civil cases, normally a record on appeal is not required?
A: Ordinarily, when the case is over and you say that you are appealing, the entire
record of the case will be elevated to the CA. But in the case of BIAN, there is judgment
against landowner A and he wants to appeal, the record cannot be brought to the CA
because the case will still be tried with respect to landowners B, C and D. So for the CA to
know what happened, a record on appeal is needed.

ROMAN CATHOLIC ARCHBISHOP OF MANILA vs. COURT OF APPEALS


258 SCRA 186 [1996]

HELD: Multiple appeals are allowed in:


1.) Special proceedings;
2.) Actions for recovery of property with accounting;
3.) Actions for partition of property with accounting;
4.) Special civil actions of eminent domain (expropriation);
5.) Special civil actions for foreclosure of mortgage.

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA 79


1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 41 Appeal From
2001 Edition The Regional Trial Courts

The rationale behind allowing more than one appeal in the same case is to
enable the rest of the case to proceed in the event that a separate and distinct
case is resolved by the court and held to be final.

The enumeration cited in ROMAN CATHOLIC CASE is taken from the ruling of the SC in
the cases of MIRANDA vs. CA (71 SCRA 295) and DE GUZMAN vs. CA (74 SCRA 222). In
these cases, when you file only a notice of appeal without the record on appeal, it will not
suffice. So it will be dismissed.

Q: What if the party filed a record on appeal without a notice of appeal? Should the
appeal be dismissed?
A: NO, the appeal will not be dismissed because the filing of the record on appeal is
harder to comply with than the filing of a notice of appeal. The filing of the record on
appeal is more expressive of the desire of the party to appeal. (Peralta vs. Solon, 77 Phil.
610)

(The following discussions under Section 6 was taken from the 4th year review
transcription) Now, let us try to tie this up with what may be appealed and what may not
be appealed, lets go back to section 1 [g] of Rule 41:

Section 1. Subject of appeal. - An appeal may be taken from a judgment or final


order that completely disposes of the case, or of a particular matter therein when
declared by these Rules to be appealable.
No appeal may be taken from:
x x x x x
(g) A judgment or final order for or against one or more of several parties or
in separate claims, counterclaims, cross-claims and third-party complaints, while
the main case is pending, unless the court allows an appeal therefrom.
x x x x x

Take note that as a GENERAL RULE: a judgment for or against one or more of several
parties or in separate claims, counterclaims, cross-claims, etc., while the main case is
pending, cannot be appealed because that will result to multiple appeals, unless the court
allows an appeal therefrom, in which case, multiple appeals would now be possible.

Q: Cite examples of civil actions where, by direct provision of the Rules, the law
mentions that the judgment is already final and appealable despite the fact that the case
still goes on with respect to the other issues.

A: The case of MUNICIPALITY OF BIAN vs. GARCIA which is now expressly provided for
in Rule 67, Section 4, (on Expropriation):

Sec. 2. Entry of plaintiff upon depositing value with authorized government


depositary Upon the filing of the complaint or at any time thereafter and
after due notice to the defendant, the plaintiff shall have the right to take or
enter upon the possession of the real property involved if he deposits with the
authorized government depositary an amount equivalent to the assessed value of
the property for purposes of taxation to be held by such bank subject to the
orders of the court. Such deposit shall be in money, unless in lieu thereof the
court authorizes the deposit of a certificate of deposit of a government bank of
the Republic of the Philippines payable on demand to the authorized government
depositary. x x x x x x

Did you notice that an Order of Expropriation MAY BE APPEALED? When there is an
order of expropriation - the court says, Alright, the property is declared expropriated.
Tapos na ba ang case? NOT YET because there is still a Part 2 which the determination of
just compensation. So, technically, it does not yet really dispose of the case BUT by
express provision of the law, the order is already appealable. That is an instance where
multiple appeals may arise in one civil case.

Another example is Rule 69 on Partition:

RULE 69, Sec. 2. Order for partition, and partition by agreement thereunder.
- If after the trial the court finds that the plaintiff has the right thereto,
it shall order the partition of the real estate among all parties in interest.
Thereupon the parties may, if they are able to agree, make the partition among
Property of LAKAS ATENISTA 80
1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 41 Appeal From
2001 Edition The Regional Trial Courts

themselves by proper instruments of conveyance, and the court shall confirm the
partition so agreed upon by all the parties, and such partition, together with
the order of the court confirming the same, shall be recorded in the registry of
deeds of the place in which the property is situated. (2a)
A final order decreeing partition and accounting may be appealed by any
party aggrieved thereby. (n)

A final order decreeing partition is appealable. But the case will go on because if the
first order is that there is a co-ownership, then there should be a partition. Ang sunod is
how to partition. As a matter of fact, the court may even hire commissioners as to how to
partition but in the meantime, the order to partition is already appealable although it did
not completely disposed of the civil action.

Sec. 7. Approval of record on appeal. Upon the filing of the record on


appeal for approval and if no objection is filed by the appellee within five (5)
days from receipt of a copy thereof, the trial court may approve it as presented
or upon its own motion or at the instance of the appellee, may direct its
amendment by the inclusion of any omitted matters which are deemed essential to
the determination of the issue of law or fact involved in the appeal. If the
trial court orders the amendment of the record, the appellant, within the time
limited in the order, or such extension thereof as may be granted, or if no time
is fixed by the order within ten (10) days from receipt thereof, shall redraft
the record by including therein, in their proper chronological sequence, such
additional matters as the court may have directed him to incorporate, and shall
thereupon submit the redrafted record for approval, upon notice to the appellee,
in like manner as the original draft. (7a)

What you have to remember here is that in appeals, where a record on appeal is
required, the law requires an approval. The record on appeal has to be approved by the
court. In ordinary cases where you only file a notice of appeal, approval is not required. A
record on appeal has to be approved because the other party is given the right to object
your record on appeal.

The possible grounds for objections are necessary pleadings were not produced like
kulang-kulang ang record on appeal [kulang-kulang din siguro yung nag-file] ; or, you did not
reproduce the pleading properly; to pester the other party and just to block the approval,
like i-reklamo kahit wrong spelling lang. [peste talaga!]

Sec. 8. Joint record on appeal. Where both parties are appellants, they may
file a joint record on appeal within the time fixed by section 3 of this Rule,
or that fixed by the court. (8a)

Q: Is it possible that both sides will appeal?


A: Yes, when both are not satisfied.

Suppose both plaintiff and defendant will want to appeal and a record on appeal is
required, it would be tedious. Para walang gulo at para makatipid, the plaintiff and the
defendant will file a joint record on appeal, tapos hati tayo sa gastos.

WHEN APPEAL IS DEEMED PERFECTED

Let us now go to Section 9 of Rule 41 which is one of the most important provisions
when is appeal deemed perfected. Now, if you are asked this question: HOW DO YOU
PERFECT AN APPEAL? This question is not the same as WHEN IS THE APPEAL DEEMED
PERFECTED?

Q: How do you perfect an appeal?


A: By:
1.) Filing a NOTICE OF APPEAL, generally within 15 days; or by
2.) Filing A NOTICE OF APPEAL and RECORD ON APPEAL WITHIN 30 DAYS.

Those are the steps taken to perfect the BUT the appeal is NOT YET PERFECTED. It is
perfected according to Section 9, and it is important to determine the exact date when the

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA 81


1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 41 Appeal From
2001 Edition The Regional Trial Courts

appeal is considered as perfected because of the doctrine that from the moment the
appeal is perfected, the RTC automatically loses jurisdiction of the case. And by fiction of
law, the jurisdiction is automatically transferred to the CA, although the records as still
with the RTC. Therefore it is important to determine the exact date.

For example, in notice of appeal, is it perfected on the very day that the appellant will
file a notice of appeal that if he files it, after two days perfected na?

All of these are answered by Section 9 and I noticed that Section 9 has improved on the
language of the Interim Rules. Under the Interim Rules, they are actually the same, the
question when is the appeal deemed perfected is also answered by the Interim Rules but
the language of the law there is more convoluted. Now, it is more clearer:

Sec. 9. Perfection of appeal; effect thereof. A partys appeal by notice of


appeal is deemed perfected as to him upon the filing of the notice of appeal in
due time.
A partys appeal by record on appeal is deemed perfected as to him with
respect to the subject matter thereof upon the approval of the record on appeal
filed in due time.
In appeals by notice of appeal, the court loses jurisdiction over the case
upon the perfection of the appeals filed in due time and the expiration of the
time to appeal of the other parties.
In appeals by record on appeal, the court loses jurisdiction only over the
subject matter thereof upon the approval of the records on appeal filed in due
time and the expiration of the time to appeal of the other parties.
In either case, prior to the transmittal of the original record or the
record on appeal, the court may issue orders for the protection and preservation
of the rights of the parties which do not involve any matter litigated by the
appeal, approve compromises, permit appeals of indigent litigants, order
execution pending appeal in accordance with section 2 of Rule 39, and allow
withdrawal of the appeal. (9a)

WHEN ONLY NOTICE OF APPEAL IS REQUIRED

Q: When only a notice of appeal is required, when is an appeal deemed perfected?


A: First and third paragraph: A partys appeal by record on appeal is deemed
perfected as to him with respect to the subject matter thereof upon the approval of the
record on appeal filed in due time. x x x In appeals by notice of appeal, the court loses
jurisdiction over the case upon the perfection of the appeals filed in due time and the
expiration of the time to appeal of the other parties.

This was taken in the case of DELGADO vs IAC (147 SCRA 258). Lets compose a
problem based on that case:

PROBLEM: I received a copy of the decision on March 31 so I have 15 days to appeal


i.e. up to April 15. My opponent received the decision on April 10. So ang opponent ko
naman ang bilang niya is from April 10 to April 25. Iba ang 15 days niya, iba din sa akin.
Q: Since I received the decision on March 31, I filed my notice of appeal on April 5, is
the appeal perfected?
A: Yes, as far as I am concerned.

Q: How about the other side?


A: Not yet, because as of April 5, he has not yet received a copy of the decision. He will
start computing from April 10. So as of now, it is already perfected only by 50%.

Q: Suppose by April 25 which is the last day of 15-day period of my opponent, he did
not file anything. Nag-expire na. What will happen now?
A: Then as of April 25, the appeal is now fully perfected (100%) because as far as I am
concerned, I have already filed a notice of appeal. As far as he is concerned, his 15-day
period to appeal has lapsed. Therefore, the case is now ripe for elevation. This is what the
third paragraph means, In appeals by notice of appeal, the court loses jurisdiction over
the case upon the perfection of the appeals filed in due time and the expiration of the
time to appeal of the other parties. You have to look at it from the viewpoint of both
parties.
Property of LAKAS ATENISTA 82
1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 41 Appeal From
2001 Edition The Regional Trial Courts

That is the time for the clerk of court to elevate the records. It is from that moment that
the court has lost 100% jurisdiction over the case from the viewpoint of both parties.

Up to now, despite this provision, Im still receiving these kind of orders from the
courts. Nakalagay doon: A notice of appeal having been filed by the defendant on this
date, the appeal is now deemed perfected and let the record now be elevated to the CA.
My Golly! This is WROOOONG! The appeal is perfected only as far as the defendant is
concerned why decree it as perfected? Tiningnan mo lang yung isang side eh. Paano kung
yung plaintiff mag-file pa ng motion for execution pending appeal?

So, do not elevate the record until the 15-day period has expired on BOTH SIDES. This
is the correct interpretation of the Rules. We will now go to some interesting cases:

UNIVERSAL FAR EAST CORP. vs. COURT OF APPEALS


131 SCRA 642

FACTS: On March 31, both Epi and Hilde received a copy of the decision. Epi
won, Hilde lost. From the viewpoint of both, April 15 is the last day to appeal. On
April 5, Hilde filed a notice of appeal. So the appeal is perfected from the
viewpoint of Hilde. On April 13, Epi file a motion to execute pending appeal. Was
the motion filed on time? Yes, because Epi can file the motion between March 31
and April 15. On April 25, the court granted Epis motion.
This is now the argument of Hilde: [My Golly!] The order of execution by Epi
is void because the court has already lost jurisdiction over the case as of April 25
because From the viewpoint of both parties, the last day is April 15, after April
15 the period within which Epi can file a motion to execute has expired. From
the viewpoint of Hilde, he already filed a notice of appeal on April 5. So, from the
viewpoint of both, the court already lost jurisdiction.
According to Epi: But I filed my motion on April 13, the court has not yet lost
jurisdiction. Ah Yes, sabi naman ni Hilde, but the court acted on your motion
on April 25, which is after April 15.

HELD: Epi is correct. The important point is the date of filing. Thus, even if
the court acts beyond the 15-day period, the order is still valid. The important
thing is the motion to execute pending appeal was filed within the 15-day period.
It may be argued that the trial court should dispose of the motion for
execution within the reglementary fifteen-day period. Such a rule would be
difficult, if not impossible, to follow. It would not be pragmatic and expedient and
could cause injustice.
The motion for execution has to be set for hearing. The judgment debtor has
to be heard. The good reasons for execution pending appeal have to be
scrutinized. These things cannot be done within the short period of fifteen days,
or in this case, two days. The trial court may be confronted with other matters
more pressing that would demand its immediate attention.

So in this case, the court has not yet lost jurisdiction the act on the motion for
execution pending appeal even if it is beyond 15 days, provided the motion was filed
within 15 days.

WHEN RECORD OF APPEAL IS REQUIRED

Q: How about an appeal where a record of appeal is required? When is the appeal
deemed perfected?
A: Second paragraph of Section 9: A partys appeal by record on appeal is deemed
perfected as to him with respect to the subject matter thereof upon the approval of the
record on appeal filed in due time. So it is not upon the filing of the record of appeal, but
upon the APPROVAL. Because as we said, under Section 7, a record on appeal has to be
approved while a notice of appeal need not be approved.

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA 83


1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 41 Appeal From
2001 Edition The Regional Trial Courts

As to the fourth paragraph: In appeals by record on appeal, the court loses jurisdiction
only over the subject matter thereof upon the approval of the records on appeal filed in
due time and the expiration of the time to appeal of the other parties. The principle is the
same. But definitely an appeal is not perfected upon the filing of the record on appeal but
upon the approval.

The last point to remember in Section 9. GENERAL RULE: once an appeal is deemed
perfected from the viewpoint of both sides, the trial court loses jurisdiction over the case.
The jurisdiction is automatically transferred to the Court of Appeals.

Q: Are there EXCEPTIONS to the rule? Are there things that the trial court can do even if
it has no more jurisdiction? What things or actions can the trial court do?
A: Last paragraph of Section 9: In either case, prior to the transmittal of the original
record or the record on appeal, the court may issue orders for the protection and
preservation of the rights of the parties which do not involve any matter litigated by the
appeal, approve compromises, permit appeals of indigent litigants, order execution
pending appeal in accordance with section 2 of Rule 39, and allow withdrawal of the
appeal.

Lets us outline the last paragraph: Once an appeal is deemed perfected under Section
9, the RTC loses jurisdiction over the case and can no longer act in that case.

Q: What things or what actions can the RTC do even if it has technically lost jurisdiction
over the case? Sometimes they call this as the residual jurisdiction, a.k.a. dukot
jurisdiction.
A: For as long as the original record or the record on appeal is not yet transmitted
(because it takes some time for the records to be transmitted) the trial court, despite the
fact that it has already lost jurisdiction, can do the following acts:
1.) to issue orders for the protection and preservation of the rights of the parties
which do not involve in any matter litigated in the appeal;
2.) to approve compromises between the parties;
3.) to permit appeals to indigent litigants;
4.) to order executions pending appeal in accordance with Section 2 of Rule 39; and
5.) to allow the withdrawal of the appeal.
6.) The court can order the dismissal of an appeal under Section 13, Rule 41.

Q: Can the parties settle the case amicably despite the fact that there is already an
appeal?
A: Yes, compromise is welcome anytime.

Q: Now who will approve the compromise?


A: Technically, the court has no jurisdiction. But for as long as the records are still there,
the trial court can approve the compromise. Now, suppose the records are already
transmitted to the CA? Then you better submit your compromise agreement before the
CA.

Sections 10, 11, and 12 are purely administrative provisions.

Sec. 10. Duty of clerk of court of the lower court upon perfection of
appeal. Within thirty (30) days after perfection of all the appeals in
accordance with the preceding section, it shall be the duty of the clerk of
court of the lower court:
(a) To verify the correctness of the original record or the record on
appeal, as the case may be, and to make a certification of its correctness;
(b) To verify the completeness of the records that will be transmitted to
the appellate court;
(c) If found to be incomplete, to take such measures as may be required to
complete the records, availing of the authority that he or the court may
exercise for this purpose; and
(d) To transmit the records to the appellate court.
If the efforts to complete the records fail, he shall indicate in his letter
of transmittal the exhibits or transcripts not included in the records being
transmitted to the appellate court, the reasons for their non-transmittal, and
the steps taken or that could be taken to have them available.

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA 84


1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 41 Appeal From
2001 Edition The Regional Trial Courts

The clerk of court shall furnish the parties with copies of his letter of
transmittal of the records to the appellate court. (10a)

Sec. 11. Transcript. Upon the perfection of the appeal, the clerk shall
immediately direct the stenographers concerned to attach to the record of the
case five (5) copies of the transcripts of the testimonial evidence referred to
in the record on appeal. The stenographers concerned shall transcribe such
testimonial evidence and shall prepare and affix to their transcripts an index
containing the names of the witnesses and the pages wherein their testimonies
are found, and a list of the exhibits and the pages wherein each of them appears
to have been offered and admitted or rejected by the trial court. The
transcripts shall be transmitted to the clerk of the trial court who shall
thereupon arrange the same in the order in which the witnesses testified at the
trial, and shall cause the pages to be numbered consecutively. (12a)

Sec. 12. Transmittal. The clerk of the trial court shall transmit to the
appellate court the original record or the approved record on appeal within
thirty (30) days from the perfection of the appeal, together with the proof of
payment of the appellate court docket and other lawful fees, a certified true
copy of the minutes of the proceedings, the order of approval, the certificate
of correctness, the original documentary evidence referred to therein, and the
original and three (3) copies of the transcripts. Copies of the transcripts and
certified true copies of the documentary evidence shall remain in the lower
court for the examination of the parties. (11a)

Sec. 13. Dismissal of appeal. Prior to the transmittal of the original


record or the record on appeal to the appellate court, the trial court may motu
proprio or on motion dismiss the appeal for having been taken out of time. (14a)

Q: May the RTC dismiss the appeal?


A: Yes, for as long as the record of the case or the record of appeal has not yet been
transmitted to the appellate court, the court may motu propio, even without any motion,
or on motion of the appellee, the trial court is empowered to dismiss the appeal on the
ground of having been taken out of time.

Q: Can the trial court dismiss the appeal on the ground that the appeal is dilatory?
A: NO. The trial court has no power to say that the appeal is dilatory. Such question can
only be passed upon by the appellate court. Otherwise, trial courts can easily forestall
review or reversal of their decisions no matter how erroneous such decisions may be.
(Dasalla vs. Caluag, L-18765. July 31, 1963; GSIS vs. Cloribel, L-22236, June 22, 1965;
Republic vs. Rodriguez, L-26056, May 29, 1969) The only ground for the trial court to
dismiss appeal is for having been taken out of time. Thats all.

Dont confuse that with Rule 39.

Q: Can the prevailing party file a motion for execution pending appeal, on the ground
that the appeal is dilatory? Any appeal which is frivolous is intended as dilatory.
A: Well, its not the appeal that is being questioned but whether there is a ground for
execution pending appeal. Ang jurisprudence niyan magulo eh: NO, the trial court cannot
do that. Only the CA can determine whether the appeal is dilatory. But there are cases
where the SC said YES because that can be a good reason.

Pero dito (Rule 41), iba ang tanong. The court is not being asked to grant an execution
pending appeal but being asked to dismiss an appeal. Ah, ito talaga hindi pwede. NEVER,
because of Section 13, Rule 41 there is only one ground, filed out of time. Yaaan!

-oOo-

published by

LAKAS ATENISTA 1997 1998: FOURTH YEAR: Anna Vanessa Angeles Glenda Buhion Joseph
Martin Castillo Aaron Philip Cruz Pearly Joan Jayagan Anderson Lo
Yogie Martirizar Frecelyn Mejia Dorothy Montejo Rowena Panales Regina Sison
Ruby Teleron Marilou Timbol Maceste Uy Perla Vicencio Liberty Wong Jude Zamora
Special Thanks to: Marissa Corrales and July Romena

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA 85


1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 41 Appeal From
2001 Edition The Regional Trial Courts

SECOND YEAR: Jonalyn Adiong Emily Alio Karen Allones Joseph Apao
Melody Penelope Batu Gemma Betonio Rocky Cabarroguis Charina Cabrera
Marlon Cascuejo Mike Castaos Karen de Leon Cherry Frondozo Jude Fuentes Maila Ilao
Ilai Llena Rocky Malaki Jenny Namoc Ines Papaya Jennifer Ramos Paisal Tanjili

LAKAS ATENISTA 20012002: REVISION COMMITTEE: Melissa Suarez Jessamyn Agustin


Judee Uy Janice Joanne Torres Genie Salvania Pches Fernandez Riezl Locsin
Kenneth Lim Charles Concon Roy Acelar Francis Ampig Karen Cacabelos
Maying Dadula Hannah Examen Thea Guadalope Myra Montecalvo Paul Ongkingco
Michael Pito Rod Quiachon Maya Quitain Rina Sacdalan Lyle Santos Joshua Tan
Thaddeus Tuburan John Vera Cruz Mortmort

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA 86