file:cvpro_part_3_ib.htm
A satisfied Microsoft Office User
Normal
JOJO
3
5
2002-01-10T09:09:00Z
2002-01-11T04:01:00Z
1
282
1608
sc
13
3
1974
9.2720
120
2. Declaratory Relief and Similar
Remedies
(1) There must be a justiciable controversy;396
(2) The controversy must be between persons whose
interest is adverse;
(3) The parties must have legal interest in the
controversy;
(4) The controversy must be ripe for judicial
determination;397 and
(5) The petition must be filed before there is a
breach or violation.398
2.1 The petition must be filed before there is a
breach of contract or violation of the statute or ordinance.399
2.2 Third-party complainant is not allowed.400
2.3 Except in actions for quieting of title, the
court action on an action for declaratory relief is discretionary. Thus, the
court motu proprio or upon motion may refuse to exercise the power to
declare rights and to construe instruments in any case where a decision would
not terminate the uncertainty or controversy which gave rise to the action or
in any case where the declaration or construction is not necessary under the
circumstances.401
2.4 When a statute, executive order or any
government regulation or ordinance is alleged to be unconstitutional, the
Solicitor-General should be notified by the party assailing the same.402 If the validity of a local government
ordinance is in question, the prosecutor or attorney of the local government
should be notified.403
3. Declaratory Relief Improper in the
Following Cases
(1) to obtain judicial declaration of
citizenship;404
(2) to seek relief on moot questions or to
resolve hypothetical, abstract or theoretical questions, or to decide claims
which are uncertain;405
(3) to resolve political issues or questions;406
(4) to test the correctness or validity of a
court decision;407
(5) to determine hereditary rights;408
(6) when the petition is based upon the happening
of a contingent event;
(7) when the petitioner is not the real party in
interest;409 and
(8) when administrative remedies have not yet
been exhausted.410
396 Obiles v.
Republic, 92 Phil. 864 [1953].
397 Board of
Optometry v. Colet, G. R. No. 122241, July 30, 1996, 260 SCRA 88.
398 Rules of
Court, Rule 63, Sec. 1.
399 Ibid.
400 Commissioner
of Customs v. Cloribel, No. L-21036, June 30, 1977, 77 SCRA 459.
401 Rules of
Court, Rule 63, Sec. 5.
402 Ibid.,Sec.
3.
403 Ibid.,Sec.
4.
404 Dy Poco v.
Commissioner of Immigration, No. L-22313, March 31, 1966, 16 SCRA 615; Singson
v. Republic, No. L-21855, January 30, 1968, 22 SCRA 353.
405 Lim v.
Republic, No. L-29535, February 27, 1971, 37 SCRA 783.
406 Dela Llana v.
Commission on Elections, No. L-47245, December 9, 1977, 80 SCRA 525.
407 Tanda v.
Aldaya, 52 O.G. No. 11, 5175 (September 15, 1956).
408 Edades v.
Edades, 52 O.G. No. 11, 5149 (September 15, 1956).
409 Santos v.
Aquino, 94 Phil. 65 [1953].
410 Ollada v.
Central Bank, No. L-11357, May 31, 1962, 5 SCRA 297.