SC CIRCULAR NO. 2-90[*], March 09, 1990
SC CIRCULAR NO. 2-90[], March 09, 1990
| TO : |
COURT OF APPEALS, REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS, METROPOLITAN TRIAL
COURTS, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS, MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURTS, SHARI’A DISTRICT COURTS AND SHARI’ A CIRCUIT COURTS, ALL MEMBERS OF THE GOVERNMENT PROSECUTION SERVICE, AND ALL MEMBERS OF THE INTEGRATED BAR OF THE PHILIPPINES |
| SUBJECT: | Guidelines to be observed in appeals to the Court of Appeals and to the Supreme Court |
- No common mode of appeal to Court of Appeals and Supreme
Court.— The provisions of Rules 41 and 42 of the Rules of Court,
prescribing a common mode of appeal to the Court cf Appeals and to the
Supreme Court, and a common procedure for considering and resolving an
appeal, are no longer in force. They have been largely superseded and
rendered functus officio by certain statutes which wrought
substantial changes in the appellate procedures in this jurisdiction,
notably: Republic Acts Nos. 5433 and 5440 (both effective on September
9, 1968) and 6031 (effective August 4, 1969), and Batas Pambansa Blg.
129 (effective August 14, 1981). - Appeals from Regional Trial Courts tn the Supreme Court. —
Except in criminal cases where the penalty imposed is life imprisonment
or reclusion perpetua, judgments of regional trial courts may
be appealed to the Supreme Court only by petition for review on
certiorari in accordance with Rule 45 of the Rules of Court in relation
to Section 17 of the Judiciary Act of 1948, as amended,[1]
this being the clear intendment of the prevision of the Interim Rules
that “(a)ppeals to the Supreme Court shall be taken by petition for
certiorari which shall be governed by Rule 45 of the Rules of Court. “[2] - Appeals to the Court of Appeals. — On the other hand, appeals by certiorari will not lie with the Court of Appeals.[2a] Appeals to that Court from Regional Trial Courts may be taken:
- Erroneous Appeals. — An appeal taken to either the Supreme
Court or the Court of Appeals by the wrong or inappropriate mode shall
be dismissed.
a) by writ of error (ordinary appeal). — where the appealed
judgment was rendered in a civil or criminal action by the regional
trial court in the exercise of its original jurisdiction; or
b) by petition for review. — where the judgment was rendered by
the regional trial court in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction.
The mode of appeal in neither instances in entirely distinct from an appeal by certiorari to the Supreme Court.
a) Appeal to the Supreme Court by notice of appeal. — No appeal
may be taken to the Supreme Court from a judgment of a regional trial
court by notice of appeal under Rule 41 of the Rules of Court,
regardless of any statement in the notice that the Supreme Court,
regardless of any statement in the notice that the Supreme Court is the
court of choice; and no judge or clerk of a regional trial court shall
elevate or cause to be elevated to the Supreme Court the records of a
case thus erroneously appealed[3]
under pain of diciplinary action, said officials, no less than the
attorney taking the appeal, being chargeable with knowledge that the
appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court may properly be invoked only
through petitions for review on certiorari.b) Raising factual issues in appeal by certiorari. — Although
submission of issues of fact in an appeal by certiorari taken to the
Supreme Court from the regional trial court is ordinarily prohibited,
the Supreme Court nonetheless retains the option, in the exercise of its
sound discretion and considering the attendant circumstances, either
itself to take cognizance of and decide such issues or to refer them to
the Court of Appeals for determination.c. Raising issued purely of law in the Court of Appeals, or
appeal by wrong mode. — If an appeal under Rule 41 is taken from the
regional trial court to the Court of Appeals and therein the appellant
raises only questions of law, the appeal shall be dismissed, issues
purely of law not being reviewable by said Court.[4]
So too, if an appeal is attempted from the judgment rendered by a
Regional Trial Court in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction by
notice of appeal, instead of by petition for review, the appeal is inefficacious and should be dismissed.d) No transfer of appeals erroneously taken. — No transfers of
appeals erroneously taken to the Supreme Court or to the Court of
Appeals to whichever of these Tribunals has appropriate appellate
jurisdiction will be allowed;[5] continued ignorance or wilful disregard of the law on appeals will not be tolerated.e) Duty of counsel. — It is therefore incumbent upon every
attorney who would seek review of a judgment or order promulgated
against his client to make sure of the nature of the errors he proposes
to assign, whether these be of fact or of law, then upon such basis to
ascertain carefully which Court has appellate jurisdiction; and finally,
to follow scrupulously the requisites for appeal prescribed by law,
ever aware that any error or imprecision in compliance may well be fatal
to his client’s cause.[6]FOR STRICT COMPLIANCE.
March 9, 1990.
|
(Sgd.) MARCELO B. FERNAN |
|
|
Chief Justice
|
[*] Based on the Resolution of the Court En Banc in UDK-974B (Anacleto Murillo v. Rodolfo Consul), March 1, 1990.
[1]
Limiting the issues thus appealable to errors or questions of law,
or questions involving constitutionality or validity of any treaty
executive agreement, law, ordinance, or executive order or regulation;
or,the legality of any tan, impost, assessment, or toll, or penalty
imposed in relation thereto; or the jurisdiction of an inferior court.
SEE, HOWEVER, Sec. 54, R.A. No. 6657, fn 2a, infra.
[2] Par. 25, Sub-Head F.,
APPEAL TO THE SUPREME COURT, cf., Pars. 16-24, Sub-Head E, APPELLATE
PROCEDURE (in the Intermediate Appellate Court)
N.B. Appeals from any decision, order or ruling of a Constitutional
Commission (Civil Service Commission, Commission on Elections, or
Commission on Audit) may, unless otherwise provided by law, be brought
to the Supreme Court on certiorari by the aggrieved party within thirty
days from receipt of a copy thereof (Sec. 7, ART. IX, 1987 Constitution)
[2a] R.A. No. 6657 (1988)
provides, however, that appeals from the Agrarian Reform Arbitration
Board of the Department of Agrarian Reform shall be taken to the Court of Appeals by certiorari within 15 days from notice of final judgment or order (Sec. 54).
[3] In Service Specialists,
Inc, v. Sheriff of Manila, 145 SCRA 139, the differences in modes of
appeal was once again emphasized, it being held that an appeal from the
order of the trial court which dismissed a petition for relief from
judgment “for lack of jurisdiction to hear and determine the same
“should have been made to this Court through a petition for review on
certiorari in accordance with the Judiciary Act of 1948 as amended by
Republic Act No. 540 and Section 25 of the Interim Rules, ” and not by
“a notice of appeal to the Intermediate Appellate Court.”
[4] SEE fn. 2a, supra.
[5] SEC. 13(second par.),
transfer of a Rule 124, as amended, does speak of a transfer of a criminal case from
the Court of Appeal to this Court, but it has no relation to an erroneous appeal. The section
pertinently reads: “Whenever the Court of Appeals should be of the
opinion that the penalty of reclusion perpetua or higher should
be imposed in a case, the Court after discussion of the evidence and the
law involved, shall render judgment imposing the penalty of reclusion
perpetua or higher as the circumstances warrant, refrain from entering
judgment and forthwith certify the case and elevate the entire the
entire records thereof to the Supreme Court for review.”
[6] SEE, e.g., Circular No. 1-88, effective January 1, 1989