RULE 64

Review of Judgments and Final

Orders or Resolutions of the
Commission on Elections and the
Commission on Audit
 NATURE AND PURPOSE OF RULE 64
Section 1. Scope. — This Rule shall govern Rule 64 is a remedy available to a party who
the review of judgments and final orders or seeks the review by the Supreme Court of a
resolutions of the Commission on Elections judgment or final order or resolution of the
and the Commission on Audit. COMELEC or the COA.

Section 2. Mode of review. — A judgment or While a mode of review, Rule 64 clearly

final order or resolution of the Commission on provides that it is governed by the provisions
Elections and the Commission on Audit may of Rule 65, except as provided in Rule 64.
be brought by the aggrieved party to the
Supreme Court on certiorari under Rule 65, Rule 64 is a special civil action of certiorari
except as hereinafter provided. (Bar Matter which is not an original action but a mode of
No. 803, 17 February 1998) review.
2
 BASIS OF RULE 64
Section 7, Article IX, 1987 Constitution provides that:

“ Each Commission shall decide by a majority vote of all its Members, any case or matter
brought before it within sixty days from the date of its submission for decision or resolution. A case
or matter is deemed submitted for decision or resolution upon the filing of the last pleading, brief, or
memorandum required by the rules of the Commission or by the Commission itself. Unless
otherwise provided by this Constitution or by law, any decision, order, or ruling of
each Commission may be brought to the Supreme Court on certiorari by the aggrieved
party within thirty days from receipt of a copy thereof.”

3
 Why is the CSC excluded from the coverage of Rule
64?
REPUBLIC ACT No. 7902 (Expanding the Jurisdiction of the CA):

"Sec. 9. Jurisdiction. — The Court of Appeals shall exercise:

"(3) Exclusive appellate jurisdiction over all final judgments, decisions, resolutions, orders or awards of
Regional Trial Courts and quasi-judicial agencies, instrumentalities, boards or commissions, including the
Securities and Exchange Commission, the Social Security Commission, the Employees Compensation
Commission and the Civil Service Commission, except those falling within the appellate jurisdiction of the
Supreme Court in accordance with the Constitution, the Labor Code of the Philippines under Presidential Decree
No. 442, as amended, the provisions of this Act, and of subparagraph (1) of the third paragraph and subparagraph
(4) of the fourth paragraph of Section 17 of the Judiciary Act of 1948.

4
 Within what time should the petition for
certiorari under Rule 64 be filed?
Section 3. Time to file petition. — The
petition shall be filed within thirty (30) days
from notice of the judgment or final order or The petition shall be filed within 30 days from
resolution sought to be reviewed. The filing of notice of the judgment or final order or
a motion for new trial or reconsideration of resolution sought to be reviewed.
said judgment or final order or resolution, if
allowed under the procedural rules of the If a motion for new trial or
Commission concerned, shall interrupt the reconsideration is filed and denied, the movant
period herein fixed. If the motion is denied, the shall have the remaining period within which
aggrieved party may file the petition within the to file the petition but which shall not be less
remaining period, but which shall not be less than 5 days reckoned from notice of the denial.
than five (5) days in any event, reckoned from
notice of denial.
5
 Distinctions in the Application of Rule 65 to Judgments of the
COMELEC and COA and the Application of Rule 65 to Other Tribunals,
Persons, and Officers

RULE 64 RULE 65
Directed to judgments, final orders or resolutions of Directed to any tribunal, board, or officer exercising
COMELEC and COA. judicial or quasi-judicial functions.
Filed within 30 days from notice of the judgment. Filed within 60 days from notice of the judgment.
The denial of a prior motion for reconsideration or new
The denial of the motion for reconsideration or new trial
trial gives the filing part time to file within the
gives the filing party a fresh period of 60 days for the
remainder of the 30-day period, but never less than 5
filing of a Rule 65 petition for certiorari.
days reckoned from the notice of denial.

6
 Will the filing of the petition for certiorari under Rule 64 stay
the execution of the judgment or final order sought to be
reviewed?

Section 8. Effect of filing. — The filing of a petition for certiorari shall not
stay the execution of the judgment or final order or resolution sought to be
reviewed, unless the Supreme Court shall direct otherwise upon such terms as
it may deem just.

7
 FORM AND CONTENTS OF THE PETITION
The petition shall be verified and filed in eighteen (18) legible copies.
The petition shall state
1. facts with certainty;
2. present clearly the issues involved;
3. set forth the grounds and brief arguments relied upon for review;
4. Pray for judgment annulling or modifying the questioned judgment, final
order or resolution.

8
 FORM AND CONTENTS OF THE PETITION
The petition shall be accompanied by a clearly legible duplicate original or
CTC of the judgment, final order or resolution subject thereof, together with
certified true copies of such material portions of the record as are referred to
therein and other documents relevant and pertinent thereto

The petition shall state the specific material dates showing that it was filed
within the period fixed herein, and shall contain a sworn certification against
forum shopping.

9
 FORM AND CONTENTS OF THE PETITION
The petition shall further be accompanied by proof of service of a copy
thereof on the Commission concerned and on the adverse party, and of the
timely payment of docket and other lawful fees.

The failure of petitioner to comply with any of the foregoing requirements shall
be sufficient ground for the dismissal of the petition.

10
 ORDER TO COMMENT
If the Supreme Court finds the petition sufficient in form and substance, it shall
order the respondents to file their comments on the petition within ten (10) days from
notice thereof; otherwise, the Court may dismiss the petition outright.

The Court may also dismiss the petition if it was filed manifestly for delay or the
questions raised are too unsubstantial to warrant further proceedings.

No other pleading may be filed by any party unless required or allowed by the Court.

11
 SUBMISSION FOR DECISION

Unless the Court sets the case for oral argument, or requires the parties to
submit memoranda, the case shall be deemed submitted for decision upon the
filing of the comments on the petition, or of such other pleadings or papers as
may be required or allowed, or the expiration of the period to do so.

12
 JEREMIAS V. ESTEVES v. RENE V. SARMIENTO
G.R. NO. 182374 : November 11, 2008
Esteves filed an election protest with the RTC. Bitong Yes. Under Art. IX-C, Sec. 3, Constitution, an
moved to dismiss the election protest because it did not aggrieved party must first file a motion for
specify the precincts were fraud and irregularities were reconsideration of a resolution of a Division of to the
allegedly committed. The RTC denied the motion to COMELEC en banc. This requirement of a motion for
dismiss. Bitong assailed the denial in a petition for reconsideration is mandatory and jurisdictional in
certiorari and prohibition with the COMELEC. The invoking the power of review of the High Court.
COMELEC rendered a decision which nullified the Failure to abide by this requirement constitutes a good
RTC’s denial order and dismissed Esteves’ election ground for the dismissal of the petition.
protest. Esteves then filed a petition for certiorari under
Rule 64 with the SC assailing COMELEC’s decision.
May the petition of Esteves be dismissed?

13
 NILO T. PATES vs. COMELEC and EMELITA B. ALMIRANTE
G.R. No. 184915: June 30, 2009
On February 04, 2008, the petitioner received the resolution of the COMELEC 1 st Division. On
February 08, 2008, the petitioner filed a MFR of the resolution, which motion was elevated to the
COMELEC en banc for resolution. On September 22, 2008, the petitioner received the resolution of
COMELEC en banc denying his MFR.
On October 22, 2008, petitioner filed with the SC a petition for certiorari under Rule 64 to set
aside COMELEC en banc’s resolution. Respondent moved to dismiss on the ground that the petition
was filed out of time. Petitioner contended that pursuant to the Neypes Rule, he had a fresh period
from September 22, the day when he received notice of the denial of his MFR. Was the petition for
certiorari timely filed?

14
 NILO T. PATES vs. COMELEC and EMELITA B. ALMIRANTE
G.R. No. 184915: June 30, 2009
Rule 64 cannot simply be equated to Rule 65 even if it expressly refers to the latter rule. They exist as separate rules
for substantive reasons as discussed below. Procedurally, the most patent difference between the two – i.e., the
exception that Section 2, Rule 64 refers to – is Section 3 which provides for a special period for the filing of petitions
for certiorari from decisions or rulings of the COMELEC en banc.

The period is 30 days from notice of the decision or ruling (instead of the 60 days that Rule 65 provides), with the
intervening period used for the filing of any motion for reconsideration deductible from the originally-granted 30
days (instead of the fresh period of 60 days that Rule 65 provides).

15