Scribd
Upload
105 views3 pages

Judgment and Final Orders Subject To Appeal: Collateral Attack On Judgment

Uploaded by

Aiza Cabenian

The document discusses rules regarding appeals of judgments and final orders. It states that only final judgments or orders can be appealed, and interim or incidental judgments cannot be appealed until a final judgment is issued. It also discusses that void judgments can be collaterally attacked if it is required to definitively settle the issues raised. Additionally, it outlines the bodies whose judgments and final orders can be appealed, such as the Commission on Audit, Commission on Elections, Civil Service Commission, Ombudsman, and other quasi-judicial agencies based on the rules and statutes governing appeals for each agency.

Copyright:

© All Rights Reserved
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt

Judgment and Final Orders Subject To Appeal: Collateral Attack On Judgment

Uploaded by

Aiza Cabenian
105 views3 pages
The document discusses rules regarding appeals of judgments and final orders. It states that only final judgments or orders can be appealed, and interim or incidental judgments cannot be appealed until a final judgment is issued. It also discusses that void judgments can be collaterally attacked if it is required to definitively settle the issues raised. Additionally, it outlines the bodies whose judgments and final orders can be appealed, such as the Commission on Audit, Commission on Elections, Civil Service Commission, Ombudsman, and other quasi-judicial agencies based on the rules and statutes governing appeals for each agency.

Original Title

Remedial Law

Copyright

© © All Rights Reserved

Available Formats

DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

The document discusses rules regarding appeals of judgments and final orders. It states that only final judgments or orders can be appealed, and interim or incidental judgments cannot be appealed until a final judgment is issued. It also discusses that void judgments can be collaterally attacked if it is required to definitively settle the issues raised. Additionally, it outlines the bodies whose judgments and final orders can be appealed, such as the Commission on Audit, Commission on Elections, Civil Service Commission, Ombudsman, and other quasi-judicial agencies based on the rules and statutes governing appeals for each agency.

Copyright:

© All Rights Reserved
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
105 views3 pages

Judgment and Final Orders Subject To Appeal: Collateral Attack On Judgment

Uploaded by

Aiza Cabenian
The document discusses rules regarding appeals of judgments and final orders. It states that only final judgments or orders can be appealed, and interim or incidental judgments cannot be appealed until a final judgment is issued. It also discusses that void judgments can be collaterally attacked if it is required to definitively settle the issues raised. Additionally, it outlines the bodies whose judgments and final orders can be appealed, such as the Commission on Audit, Commission on Elections, Civil Service Commission, Ombudsman, and other quasi-judicial agencies based on the rules and statutes governing appeals for each agency.

Copyright:

© All Rights Reserved
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1/ 3

JUDGMENT AND FINAL ORDERS SUBJECT TO APPEAL

"Sec. 2, Rule 41. Judgments or orders subject to appeal. --Only final judgments or orders shall be
subject to appeal. No interlocutory or incidental judgment or order shall stay the progress of an
action, nor shall it be the subject of appeal until final judgment or order is rendered for one party or
the other.

A judgment denying relief under Rule 38 is subject to appeal, and in the course thereof, a party may
also assail the judgment on the merits, upon the ground that it is not supported by the evidence or it
is contrary to law. ( METROPOLITAN BANK & TRUST COMPANY vs COURT OF APPEALS and ALFONSO
ROXAS CHUA, G.R. No. 110147)

A party who has been declared in default may likewise appeal from the judgment rendered against
him as contrary to the evidence or to the law, even if no petition for relief to set aside the order of
default has been presented by him in accordance with Rule 38. ( METROPOLITAN BANK & TRUST
COMPANY vs COURT OF APPEALS and ALFONSO ROXAS CHUA, G.R. No. 110147)

COLLATERAL ATTACK ON JUDGMENT

Void judgments may also be collaterally attacked. A collateral attack is done through an
action which asks for a relief other than the declaration of the nullity of the judgment but requires
such a determination if the issues raised are to be definitively settled. (Rene H. Imperial and NIDSLAND
RESOURCES AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION vs HON. EDGAR L. ARMES. Et.al., GR No. 178842)

The legitimate province of collateral impeachment is void judgments. There and there alone
can it meet with any measure of success. Decision after decision bears this import: In every case the
field of collateral inquiry is narrowed down to the single issue concerning the void character of the
judgment and the assailant is called upon to satisfy the court that such is the fact. To compass his
purpose of overthrowing the judgment, it is not enough that he show a mistaken or erroneous
decision or a record disclosing non-jurisdictional irregularities in the proceedings leading up to the
judgment. He must go beyond this and show to the court, generally from the fact of the record itself,
that the judgment complained of is utterly void. If he can do that his attack will succeed for the cases
leave no doubt respecting the right of a litigant to collaterally impeach a judgment that he can prove
to be void.( IN RE: TRANSFER CERTIFICATE OF TITLE NO. 14123. TIRSO T. REYES, as guardian of the
minors. AZUCENA, FLOR-DE-LIS and TIRSO, JR. all surnamed REYES Y BARRETTO vs MILAGROS
BARRETTO-DATU, G.R. No. L-5549 )

REVIEW OF JUDGMENTS OR FINAL ORDERS

COMMISSION ON AUDIT AND COMELEC


Rule 64 governs the review of judgments and final orders or resolutions of the Commission on Audit
and the Commission on Elections.  It refers to Rule 65 for the mode of review of the judgment or
1âwphi1

final order or resolution of the Commission on Audit and the Commission on Elections. A petition
filed under Rule 65 requires that the "tribunal, board, or officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial
functions has acted without or in excess of its or his jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction, and there is no appeal, nor any plain, speedy, and
adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law. (ANNALIZA J. GALINDO and EVELINDA P. PINTO VS
COMMISSION ON AUDIT)

CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION

The jurisdiction of the CA over petitions for review under Rule 43 is not limited to judgments and final
orders of the CSC, but can extend to appeals from awards, judgments, final orders or resolutions
issued by the latter. (PAGCOR v. Aumentado, Jr., G.R. No. 173634)

OMBUDSMAN

The Court of Appeals has jurisdiction over orders, directives and decisions of the Office of the
Ombudsman in administrative disciplinary cases only. It cannot, therefore, review the orders,
directives or decisions of the Office of the Ombudsman in criminal or non-administrative cases .
(Golangco vs. Fung 535 Phil. 331)

xxx  An aggrieved party is not without recourse where the finding of the Ombudsman as to the existence of
probable cause is tainted with grave abuse of discretion, amounting. to lack or excess of jurisdiction. An aggrieved
party may file a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure. (SHERWIN T. GATCHALIA
VS OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN AND FIELD INVESTIGATION OFFICE OF THE OFFICE OF THE
OMBUDSMAN, G.R. NO. 229288)

CIRCULAR NO. 1-91

SUBJECT:  PRESCRIBING THE RULES GOVERNING APPEALS TO THE COURT OF APPEALS


FROM A FINAL ORDER OR DECISION OF THE COURT OF TAX APPEALS AND QUASI-JUDICIAL
AGENCIES.

1. Scope. – These rules shall apply to appeals from final orders or decision of the Court of
Tax Appeals. They shall also apply to appeals from final orders or decisions of any quasi-
judicial agency from which an appeal is now allowed by statute to the Court of Appeals or
the Supreme Court. Among these agencies are the Securities and Exchange Commission,
Land Registration Authority, Social Commission, Civil Aeronautics Board, Bureau of
Patents, Trademarks and Technology Transfer, National Electrification Administration,
Energy Regulatory Board, National Telecommunications Commission, Secretary of
Agrarian Reform and Special Agrarian Courts under RA 6657, Government Service
Insurance System, Employees Compensation Commission, Agricultural Inventions Board,
Insurance Commission and Philippine Atomic Energy Commission

2. Cases not covered. – These rules shall not apply to decisions and interlocutory orders of
the National Labor Relations Commission or the Secretary of Labor and Employment
under the Labor Code of the Philippines, the Central Board of Assessment Appeals, and
other quasi-judicial agencies from which no appeal to the courts is prescribed or allowed
by statute.
4. Period of appeal. – The appeal shall be taken within fifteen [15] days from notice of the
ruling, award, order, decision, or judgment or from the date of its last publication, if
publication is required by law for its effectivity. One [1] motion for reconsideration of said
ruling, award, order, decision, or judgment may be allowed, if the motion is denied, the
movant may appeal during the remaining period for appeal reckoned from notice of the
resolution of denia

You might also like