1. No. The remedy of annulment of judgment may be availed of when the ordinary remedies of new trial, appeal, petition for relief or other appropriate remedies are no longer available through no fault of the petitioner (Sec. 1, Rule 47).

2. Within what period should annulment of judgment be filed if it is based on the ground of fraud?

If based on extrinsic fraud, the action must be filed within four (4) years from its discovery.

3. Within what period should a party file his notice of appeal?

Under, the Rules of Court, The Notice of Appeal shall be filed within 15 days after notice to the appellant of the judgment or final order appealed.

4. Within what period should a motion for new trial be filed?

It should be filed with the trial court within 15 days from the promulgation of the judgment.

5. What are the remedies available to a defaulted party before finality of the judment judgment by default?

He may file a motion for new trial under Rule 37. He may also appeal from the judgment as being contrary to the evidence or the law (Talsan Enterprises, Inc. v. Baliwag Transit, Inc., G.R. No. 169919, Sept. 11, 2009)

6. What are the remedies available to a defaulted party after finality of judgment?

What He may file a petition for relief from judgment under Rule 38 (Balangcad v. Justices of the CA, G.R. No. 83888, Feb. 12, 1992) (2006, 1998 Bar Question)

Where the defendant has however, been wrongly or improvidently declared in default, the court can be considered to have acted with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction and when the lack of jurisdiction is patent in the face of the judgment or from the judicial records, he may avail of the special civil action of certiorari under Rule 65 (Balangcad v. Justices of the CA, G.R. No. 83888, Feb. 12, 1992)

7. Requisites for newly discovered evidence as ground for new trial:1. The evidence was discovered after trial; 2. Such evidence could not have been discovered and produced at the trial with reasonable

diligence; and 3. Such evidence is material, not merely cumulative, corrobative or impeaching, and is of such

weight that if admitted would probably change the judgment (BERRY RULE) (CIR v. A. Soriano Corporation, GR No. 113703 January 31, 1997).

8. An affidavit of merit is required when a motion for new trial is filed on the ground of Fraud, accident, mistake, excusable negligence (FAME).

An affidavit of merit should establish the nature and character of FAME on which the motion is based and stating the movant’s good and substantial cause of action or defense and the evidence he intends to present if the motion is granted, which evidence should be such as to warrant reasonable belief that the result of the case would probably be otherwise. Paz vs Inandan, 75 Phil. 608; Manila Surety vs. Del Rosario, 101 Phil. 412

9. A defaulted defendant cannot file an appeal from the order declaring him in default. Defendant may file a motion, under oath, to set aside order of default upon showing that his failure to answer was due to FAME. (An order of default is merely an interlocutory order, thus cannot be appealed) (Sec. 1, Rule 38)

10. Appellant may file Petition for Relief from denial of an appeal praying that the appeal be given due course. (Sec. 2, Rule 38)

11. Judgment rendered by the RTC may be appealed by:

Section 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 law on these Rules so require. In such cases, the record on appeal shall be filed and served in like manner.

(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.

(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 the Rule 45. (n)

12. Decisions of quasi-judicial agencies may be appealed to the Court of Appeals within the period and manner provided by law. (Section 3, Rule 43)

Appeal shall be taken by filing a verified petition for review in seven (7) legible copies with the Court of Appeals, with proof of service of a copy thereof on the adverse party and on the court or agency a quo. The original copy of the petition intended for the Court of Appeals shall be indicated as such by the petitioner.

Upon the filing of the petition, the petitioner shall pay to the clerk of court of the Court of Appeals the docketing and other lawful fees and deposit the sum of P500.00 for costs. Exemption from payment of docketing and other lawful fees and the deposit for costs may be granted by the Court of Appeals upon a verified motion setting forth valid grounds therefor. If the Court of Appeals denies the motion, the petitioner shall pay the docketing and other lawful fees and deposit for costs within fifteen (15) days from notice of the denial. (Section 5, Rule 43)

13. What court has jurisdiction over Petitions for Certiorari under Rule 65 against decisions and final resolutions of the NLRC?

Rule 43, Sec. 2. Cases not covered. This rule shall not apply to judgments or final orders issued under the Labor Code of the Philippines.

NLRC judgments and final orders or resolutions are now reviewable by the Court of Appeals in an original action for certiorari under Rule 65. (St. Martin Funeral Homes vs NLRC, GR No. 130866, September 16, 1998)

14. Where and how may decisions/resolutions of the Civil Service Commission be appealed?

Sec. 3, Rule 43. Appeal under this rule may be taken to the Court of Appeals within the period and in the manner herein provided, whether the appeal involves a question of fact, of law, or mixed questions of fact and law.

See: Section 5 as to how appeal is taken.

OR CASE: the remedy of an aggrieved party from a resolution issued by the CSC is to file a petition for review thereof under Rule 43 of the ROC within fifteen days from notice of resolution. (DECS vs Cuanan (2008)

15. If the RTC judge upholds the MTC ruling that it has no jurisdiction but the RTC, what should the RTC judge do? Sec. 8, Rule 40. Appeal from orders dismissing the case without trial; lack of jurisdiction.

A. if the lower court dismissed the case without trial on the merits: RTC maya. Affirm, if the ground of dismissal is lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter, the RTC if it has,

jurisdiction, shall try the case on the merits as if the case was originally filed therein.b. reverse, in which case, it shall remand the case for further proceedings.

(B. if the case was tried on the merits by the lower court with jurisdiction over the subject matter:a. RTC shall not dismiss the case if it has original jurisdiction, but shall decide the case, and shall

admit amended pleadings or additional evidence.)

16. Can the trial court dismiss an appeal by notice of appeal on the ground that issues involved only questions of law? (friends, again dili ko sure ani). consult martel. Hahaha

Yes. the trial court may dismiss an appeal by notice of appeal on the ground that issues involved only questions of law. Under Rule 40, an appeal by notice of appeal from a judgment or final order of a lower court issues that may be raised are questions of fact or mixed questions of fact and law.

17. Under what rule and in what court should decisions of the Special Agrarain Court be appealed?

Sec 60, RA 6657. Appeals. Appeals may be taken from the decision of Special Agrarian Court by filing a petition for review with the Court of Appeals fifteen (15) days from receipt of notice of the decisions; otherwise the decision shall become final. ( I think Rule 43 ni xa friends!)

18. Under what rule and in what court should DARAB decisions be appealed?

Rule XV. Sec 1. (THE 2009 DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM ADJUDICATION BOARD (DARAB) RULES OF PROCUDURE) Appeal to the CA – Any decision, order, resolution, award or ruling of the Board on any agrarian dispute on any matter pertaining to the application, implementation, enforcement, interpretation of agrarian reform laws or rules and regulations promulgated thereunder, may be brought an within fifteen (15) days from receipt of a copy thereof, to the Court of Appeals in accordance with the Rules of Court. (Rule 43 japon. Hahaha!)

19. In Appeals from administrative agencies to the CA via Rule 43 of the Rules of Court, does it require exhaustion of administrative remedies as a condition precedent?

If an appeal/remedy obtained or is available within the administrative machinery, this should be resorted to before

resort can be made to the courts. The rule on exhaustion of administrative remedies and doctrine of primary jurisdiction applies only when the administrative agency exercises quasi-judicial or adjudicatory function (Associate Communications and Wireless Services v. Dumalao, G.R. 136762, Nov. 21, 2002).

20. No. Before a party can avail of the reliefs provided for by Rule 43, it is a condition sine qua non that one must have failed to move for new trial in, or appeal from, or file a petition for relief against said issuances or take other appropriate remedies thereon, through no fault attributable to him. If he failed to avail of those cited remedies without sufficient justification, he cannot resort to the actions for annulment provided in Rule 47, for otherwise he would benefit from his own inaction or negligence. (Republic vs De Castro, 641 SCRA 548). In this case, the party still has other remedies to nullify the order aside from the remedy provided under Rule 47.

21. Yes. The private offended party or complainant may question such acquittal or dismissal or appeal there from only insofar as the civil aspect is concerned, in the name of the petitioner or appellant and not in the name of the People of the Philippines (Metropolitan Bank and Trust Co. vs. Veridiano II, 360 SCRA 359).

22. Appeal by certiorari to the Supreme Court applies in the following cases: All cases in which only errors/questions of law are involved.

23. As a general rule, the supreme court cannot pass upon in a petition for review on a certiorari (Rule 45) factual findings of a lower court since its jurisdiction is limited to reviewing errors of law (Natividad vs MTRCB, 540 SCRA 124)

The rule proscribing the raising of questions of fact is not an absolute one. Questions of fact may be raised in an appeal under Rule 45 provided the petition shows any, some or all of the following:

a. The conclusion of the CA is grounded entirely on speculations, surmises and conjectures;b. The inference made is manifestly mistaken, absurd or impossible;c. There is grave abuse of discretion;d. The judgment is based on misapprehension of facts;e. The findings of facts are conflicting;f. The CA, in making its findings went beyond the issues of the case and the same is contrary to the

admissions of both appellant and appellee;g. The findings of facts of the CA are contrary to those of the trial court;h. The findings of fact are conclusions without citation of specific evidence on which they are based;i. The facts set forth in the petition as well as in the petitioner’s main and reply briefs are not disputed

by the respondents; orj. The findings of fact of the CA are premised on the supposed absence of evidence and contradicted

by the evidence on record. (Jarantilla vs Jarantilla, 636 SCRA 299)

24. The distictions:Rule 45 Rule 65(1) Issues RaisedQuestions of Law Grave Abuse of

Discretion Amounting to Lack or Excess of Jurisdiction

(2) Against What CourtAction Directed Review of the judgment, award or final

Directed Against an Interlocutory Order of the court prior to appeal from the judgment, or where there is no appeal or any other plain speedy and adequate remedy

(3) Reglementary PeriodMust be filed within the reglementary period for appeal.

Not later than sixty (60) days from notice of the judgment, order or resolution

(4) Effect on the Proceedings BelowJudgment, award or order appealed from is stayed by the Appeal

No effect (i.e., proceedings below continue) unless a writ of preliminary injunction or a temporary restraining order has been issued

(5) Parties InvolvedOriginal Parties to the action remain the same during appeal (albeit with the corresponding appellation of appellant and appellee), the lower court or quasi-judicial agency is not to be impleaded.

The parties are the aggrieved party against the lower court/Quasijudicial agency and the prevailing parties, who thereby respectively become the petitioner and the respondents.

(6) Requirement of Motion for ReconsiderationFor purposes of appeal, MR is not required

MR is a CONDITION PRECEDENT subject only to

(7) Exercise of JurisdictionThe Appellate Court exercises its appellate jurisdiction and power of review

Higher Court exercises original jurisdiction under its power of control and supervision over the proceedings of lower courts.

25. Discuss the importance of selecting the proper or correct remedy against a judgment or final order.

Like a petition for relief, an action for the annulment of a judgment is recourse equitable in character, allowed only in exceptional cases as where there is no available or adequate remedy. It is important to elect the

proper remedy because an action for annulment of a judgment may no longer be invoked where the party has availed himself of the remedy of new trial, appeal, petition for relief, or other appropriate remedy and lost or where he has failed to avail himself to those remedies through his fault or negligence. The remedies are exclusive of each other (Francisco vs. Puno 108 scra 427).

26. Discuss the fresh period rule or the neypes ruling.

A party litigant may either file his notice of appeal within 15 days from receipt of the RTC’s decision or file it within 15 days from receipt of the order denying his motion for new trial or motion for reconsideration (neypes vs. ca, G.R. 141524)

27. Is non-payment of correct docket fee a ground for dismissal of an appeal? Discuss.

As a general rule, payment of appellate court docket fees is jurisdictional. Failure to do so is a ground for dismissal of appeal.

However, non-payment of docket fees does not automatically result in dismissal of appeal, the dismissal being discretionary in the court if there are justifications for non-payment (Fontanar vs. Bonsubre, G.R. 56315)

28. Discuss the remedy that may be availed of from decisions of the department heads, agencies and instrumentalities involving disciplinary action against its employees that are final and inappealable and the decisions of such bodies which are appealable.

The decisions of the department heads, agencies and instrumentalities involving disciplinary actions against its employees that are final and appealable, are appealable to the Court of Appeals under Rule 43 of the Rules of court. The decisions (Reprimand or Suspension for not more than 30 days) that are inappealable may be appealed to the Supreme Court under Rule 65.

29. Under what Rule or jurisdiction can the court of appeals take cognizance over judgments of the Secretary of Justice?

Under B.P. 129 the Court of Appeals has concurrent and original jurisdiction with the Supreme Court to issue writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus against the …….. (d) Other quasi-judicial agencies mentioned in Rule 43 of the Rules of Court.

Notably, Section 1, supra, of Rule 43 includes the Office of the President in the agencies named therein; thereby accentuating the fact that appeals from rulings of department heads must first be taken to and resolved by that office before any appellate recourse may be resorted to (Orosa vs. Roa, G.R. 140423)

30. In what court should a petition for relief from judgment be filed?

Under the present Rules, petition for relief from a judgment, final order or other proceedings rendered or taken should be filed and resolved by the court in the same case from which the petition arose (Redena vs. CA, G.R. 146611).