Rem Law Tips

Harmless Error Rule in appellate decisions

No error in either the admission or 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 (Velasco v CA, GR 31018)

Ladder-like Theory (aka Hierarchy of Courts)

The principle that lower courts shall initially decide a case before it is considered by a higher
court. A higher court will not entertain direct resort to it unless the redress desired cannot be
obtained in the appropriate courts.

Slip Rule (When Judgment becomes final and executory)

A Slip rule refers to a rule permitting the correction of any accidental slip or omission in
judgments or orders. Correction can be made only of typographical errors or matters that were
genuine slips or mistakes. Such errors can be corrected at any time by the court on application
without an appeal. The rule cannot be used to correct errors of substance, nor in an attempt to
add to or detract from the original order made.

Dual Function of Appellate Court

a. Review for Correctness Function – case is reviewed on appeal to assure that substantial
justice has been done; concerned with the justice of the particular case

b. Institutional Function - case is reviewed for the progressive development of the law for
general application in the judicial system

Error of judgment v error of jurisdiction

An error of judgment is one which the court may commit in the exercise of it jurisdiction and
reviewable by appeal. When the court has jurisdiction, an erroneous decision is not void. The
judgment cannot be considered a nullity and therefore cannot be collaterally impeached. Such
is binding on the parties unless reversed or annulled.

An error of jurisdiction is one where the act complained of was issued by the court without or in
excess of jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion, which is tantamount to lack or in excess
of jurisdiction and which error is correctible only by the extraordinary writ of certiorari.
Reverse order of trial

Trial where the accused presented his evidence first before the prosecution submits its
evidence. It may be resorted to when the accused admits the act or omission charged in the
complaint or information but interposes a lawful or affirmative defense.

In civil cases, reverse trial may be resorted to by agreement of the parties or when defendant
sets up an affirmative defense.

Summary Judgment v Judgment on the Pleadings

Judgment on the Pleadings Summary Judgment

As to ground Rendered because the Rendered on the ground that
answer fails to tender an while there is an issue, there
issue is no genuine factual issue

As to basis of judgment Solely on the pleadings Pleadings, depositions and

admissions

As to who may file Claiming party Either claiming or defending

party

As to notice Movant must give adverse Movant must give a 10-day

As to its termination
As to existence of an answer
party a 3-day notice of
hearing
The entire case is terminated
in a judgment on the
pleadings
There is already an answer
filed
notice
There may be partial
termination in a summary
judgment
If filed by plaintiff, it must be
filed at any time after the
answer is served

If filed by defendant, it may

be filed any time, even
before there is an answer

Neypes Rule applicable only to Rules 40 and 41, but NOT to Rules 42, 43 and 45 (People v Rodriguez)

The fresh period rule enunciated in Neypes need NOT apply to Rules 42, 4 and 45 as there is no
interruption in the 15-day reglementary period to appeal. It is explicit in Rules 42, 43 and 45
that the appellant or petitioner is accorded a fresh period of 15 days from notice of the decision,
award, judgment, final order or resolution or of the denial of petitioner’s motion for new trial or
reconsideration filed (GR 192799).
The fresh period rule applies to appeals in criminal cases, notwithstanding the wording of Sectin
6, Rule 122.

It shall NOT apply to Rule 64 as to COMELEC, to COA, and in administrative appeals.