RULE 19: MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION, APPEAL AND CERTIORARI

A. MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

Q. What are the grounds for a motion for reconsideration?
A. Rule 19.1 enumerates the grounds for an MR. They are the following:
a. That the arbitration agreement is inexistent, invalid or unenforceable pursuant to Rule
3.10 (B);
b. Upholding or reversing the arbitral tribunals jurisdiction pursuant to Rule 3.19;
c. Denying a request to refer the parties to arbitration;
d. Granting or denying a party an interim measure of protection;
e. Denying a petition for the appointment of an arbitrator;
f. Refusing to grant assistance in taking evidence;
g. Enjoining or refusing to enjoin a person from divulging confidential information;
h. Confirming, vacating or correcting a domestic arbitral award;
i. Suspending the proceedings to set aside an international commercial arbitral award and
referring the case back to the arbitral tribunal;
j. Setting aside an international commercial arbitral award;
k. Dismissing the petition to set aside an international commercial arbitral award, even if
the court does not recognize and/or enforce the same;
l. Recognizing and/or enforcing, or dismissing a petition to recognize and/or enforce an
international commercial arbitral award;
m. Declining a request for assistance in taking evidence;
n. Adjourning or deferring a ruling on a petition to set aside, recognize and/or enforce an
international commercial arbitral award;
o. Recognizing and/or enforcing a foreign arbitral award, or refusing recognition and/or
enforcement of the same; and
p. Granting or dismissing a petition to enforce a deposited mediated settlement
agreement.

Q. What are prohibited subjects of a motion for reconsideration from the ruling of the RTC?
A. Paragraph 2 of Rule 19.1 states that: No motion for reconsideration shall be allowed
from the following rulings of the Regional Trial Court:
a. A prima facie determination upholding the existence, validity or enforceability of an
arbitration agreement pursuant to Rule 3.1 (A);
b. An order referring the dispute to arbitration;
c. An order appointing an arbitrator;
d. Any ruling on the challenge to the appointment of an arbitrator;
e. Any order resolving the issue of the termination of the mandate of an arbitrator; and
f. An order granting assistance in taking evidence.

Q. What is the period for filing a MR?

A. A motion for reconsideration may be filed with the Regional Trial Court within a non-extendible
period of fifteen (15) days from receipt of the questioned ruling or order. (Rule 19.2)

Q. What shall the MR contain?

A. The motion must be in writing, stating the ground/grounds relied on. It shall be filed with
the court and served upon the parties. (Rule 19.3)

BATACAN, CALATRAVA, GINGCO, LUMAPAS 1

Q. What is the period for filing an opposition or comment to the MR?
A. Rule 19.4. Opposition or comment. - Upon receipt of the motion for reconsideration, the other
party or parties shall have a non-extendible period of fifteen (15) days to file his opposition
or comment.

Q. What is the period for resolution of a motion for reconsideration?

A. A motion for reconsideration shall be resolved within thirty (30) days from receipt of the
opposition or comment or upon the expiration of the period to file such opposition or
comment. (Rule 19.5)

Q. Is a second motion for reconsideration allowed?

A. No. Rule 19.6.

B. GENERAL PROVISIONS ON APPEAL AND CERTIORARI

Q. When is the remedy of appeal or certiorari available?
A. Rule 19.8. Subject matter and governing rules. - The remedy of an appeal through a petition
for review or the remedy of a special civil action of certiorari from a decision of the Regional
Trial Court made under the Special ADR Rules shall be allowed in the instances, and
instituted only in the manner, provided under this Rule. Cf: Rule 19.26

Q. When is appeal or certiorari not allowed?

A.

Rule 19.7. No appeal or certiorari on the merits of an arbitral award. - An agreement to refer a
dispute to arbitration shall mean that the arbitral award shall be final and binding. Consequently,
a party to an arbitration is precluded from filing an appeal or a petition for certiorari
questioning the merits of an arbitral award.

Rule 19.9. Prohibited alternative remedies. - Where the remedies of appeal and certiorari are
specifically made available to a party under the Special ADR Rules, recourse to one remedy
shall preclude recourse to the other.

Q. When can the court vacate a decision of the arbitral tribunal in the Philippines?
A. The general rule is the court can only vacate or set aside the decision of an arbitral tribunal
upon a clear showing that the award suffers from any of the infirmities or grounds for vacating
an arbitral award under Section 24 of Republic Act No. 876 or under Rule 34 of the Model
Law in a domestic arbitration, or for setting aside an award in an international arbitration
under Article 34 of the Model Law, or for such other grounds provided under these Special
Rules.

If the Regional Trial Court is asked to set aside an arbitral award in a domestic or
international arbitration on any ground other than those provided in the Special ADR
Rules, the court shall entertain such ground for the setting aside or non-recognition of the arbitral
award only if the same amounts to a violation of public policy.

The court shall not set aside or vacate the award of the arbitral tribunal merely on the
ground that the arbitral tribunal committed errors of fact, or of law, or of fact and law, as
the court cannot substitute its judgment for that of the arbitral tribunal.

BATACAN, CALATRAVA, GINGCO, LUMAPAS 2

 RCBC CAPITAL CORPORATION VS BANCO DE ORO UNIBANK, G.R. 196171
BANCO DE ORO UNIBANK VS CA AND CAPITAL, G.R. 199238
December 10, 2012
The applicable standard for judicial review of arbitral awards in this jurisdiction is set forth in
Rule 19.10 which states:
Rule 19.10. Rule on judicial review on arbitration in the Philippines.--As a general rule,
the court can only vacate or set aside the decision of an arbitral tribunal upon a clear
showing that the award suffers from any of the infirmities or grounds for vacating an
arbitral award under Section 24 of Republic Act No. 876 or under Rule 34 of the Model
Law in a domestic arbitration, or for setting aside an award in an international
arbitration under Article 34 of the Model Law, or for such other grounds provided
under these Special Rules.

xxxx
The court shall not set aside or vacate the award of the arbitral tribunal merely on the
ground that the arbitral tribunal committed errors of fact, or of law, or of fact and law,
as the court cannot substitute its judgment for that of the arbitral tribunal. (Emphasis
supplied)
The above rule embodied the stricter standard in deciding appeals from arbitral awards
established by jurisprudence. In the case of Asset Privatization Trust v. Court of
Appeals, this Court held:
As a rule, the award of an arbitrator cannot be set aside for mere errors of judgment either
as to the law or as to the facts. Courts are without power to amend or overrule merely
because of disagreement with matters of law or facts determined by the arbitrators. They will
not review the findings of law and fact contained in an award, and will not undertake to
substitute their judgment for that of the arbitrators, since any other rule would make an
award the commencement, not the end, of litigation. Errors of law and fact, or an erroneous
decision of matters submitted to the judgment of the arbitrators, are insufficient to invalidate
an award fairly and honestly made. Judicial review of an arbitration is, thus, more limited
than judicial review of a trial.

Q. Can the court vacate or set aside a foreign arbitral award?

A. No. Rule 19.11. The court can only deny recognition and enforcement but it cannot
vacate or set aside the award.

C. APPEALS TO THE COURT OF APPEALS

Q: When is appeal to the CA allowed?
A: Rule 19.12. Appeal to the Court of Appeals. - An appeal to the Court of Appeals through a
petition for review under this Special Rule shall only be allowed from the following final orders of
the Regional Trial Court:
a. Granting or denying an interim measure of protection;

BATACAN, CALATRAVA, GINGCO, LUMAPAS 3

 b. Denying a petition for appointment of an arbitrator;
c. Denying a petition for assistance in taking evidence;
d. Enjoining or refusing to enjoin a person from divulging confidential information;
e. Confirming, vacating or correcting/modifying a domestic arbitral award;
f. Setting aside an international commercial arbitration award;
g. Dismissing the petition to set aside an international commercial arbitration award even
if the court does not decide to recognize or enforce such award;
h. Recognizing and/or enforcing an international commercial arbitration award;
i. Dismissing a petition to enforce an international commercial arbitration award;
j. Recognizing and/or enforcing a foreign arbitral award;
k. Refusing recognition and/or enforcement of a foreign arbitral award;
l. Granting or dismissing a petition to enforce a deposited mediated settlement agreement;
and
m. Reversing the ruling of the arbitral tribunal upholding its jurisdiction.

Q: Where and when to appeal?

A: Rule 19.13. Where to appeal. - An appeal under this Rule shall be taken to the Court of Appeals
within the period and in the manner herein provided.

Rule 19.14. When to appeal. - The petition for review shall be filed within fifteen (15) days from
notice of the decision of the Regional Trial Court or the denial of the petitioners motion for
reconsideration.

Q: How to appeal?
A: Rule 19.15. How appeal taken. - 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 Regional Trial Court. The original copy of the petition intended for the
Court of Appeals shall be marked original by the petitioner.

Upon the filing of the petition and unless otherwise prescribed by the Court of Appeals, the
petitioner shall pay to the clerk of court of the Court of Appeals docketing fees and other lawful
fees of P3,500.00 and deposit the sum of P500.00 for costs.
Exemption from payment of docket 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 days from the notice of the denial.

Q: What shall the petition contain?

A: Rule 19.16. Contents of the Petition. - The petition for review shall
(a) state the full names of the parties to the case, without impleading the court or agencies
either as petitioners or respondent,
(b) contain a concise statement of the facts and issues involved and the grounds relied upon
for the review,
(c) be accompanied by a clearly legible duplicate original or a certified true copy of the
decision or resolution of the Regional Trial Court appealed from, together with certified
true copies of such material portions of the record referred to therein and other supporting
papers, and
(d) contain a sworn certification against forum shopping as provided in the Rules of Court.

BATACAN, CALATRAVA, GINGCO, LUMAPAS 4

The petition shall state the specific material dates showing that it was filed within the period fixed
herein.

Q: What is the effect if there is failure to comply with the requirements?

A: Rule 19.17. Effect of failure to comply with requirements. - The court shall dismiss the petition
if it fails to comply with the foregoing requirements regarding the payment of the docket and other
lawful fees, the deposit for costs, proof of service of the petition, the contents and the documents,
which should accompany the petition.

Q: How will the CA act on the petition?

A: Rule 19.18. Action on the petition. - The Court of Appeals may require the respondent to file a
comment on the petition, not a motion to dismiss, within ten (10) days from notice, or dismiss the
petition if it finds, upon consideration of the grounds alleged and the legal briefs submitted by the
parties, that the petition does not appear to be prima facie meritorious.

Rule 19.20. Due course. - If upon the filing of a comment or such other pleading or documents
as may be required or allowed by the Court of Appeals or upon the expiration of the period for the
filing thereof, and on the basis of the petition or the records, the Court of Appeals finds prima facie
that the Regional Trial Court has committed an error that would warrant reversal or modification
of the judgment, final order, or resolution sought to be reviewed, it may give due course to the
petition; otherwise, it shall dismiss the same.

Q: When shall the comment be filed? What shall it contain?

A: Rule 19.19. Contents of Comment. - The comment shall be filed within ten (10) days from
notice in seven (7) legible copies and accompanied by clearly legible certified true copies of such
material portions of the record referred to therein together with other supporting papers. The
comment shall
(a) point out insufficiencies or inaccuracies in petitioners statement of facts and issues,
and
(b) state the reasons why the petition should be denied or dismissed.

A copy thereof shall be served on the petitioner, and proof of such service shall be filed with the
Court of Appeals.

Q: Can the CA require the transmittal of the entire record of the proceeding under review?
A: Rule 19.21. Transmittal of records. - Within fifteen (15) days from notice that the petition has
been given due course, the Court of Appeals may require the court or agency concerned to
transmit the original or a legible certified true copy of the entire record of the proceeding under
review. The record to be transmitted may be abridged by agreement of all parties to the
proceeding. The Court of Appeals may require or permit subsequent correction of or addition to
the record.

Q: Will the appeal stay the decision sought to be reviewed?

A: Rule 19.22. Effect of appeal. - The appeal shall not stay the award, judgment, final order or
resolution sought to be reviewed unless the Court of Appeals directs otherwise upon such terms
as it may deem just.

BATACAN, CALATRAVA, GINGCO, LUMAPAS 5

 G.R. No. 196171 December 10, 2012
RCBC CAPITAL CORPORATION vs. BANCO DE ORO UNIBANK, INC.

Injunction Against Execution Of Arbitral Award

Before an injunctive writ can be issued, it is essential that the following requisites are present: (1)
there must be a right in esse or the existence of a right to be protected; and (2) the act against
which injunction to be directed is a violation of such right. The onus probandi is on movant to
show that there exists a right to be protected, which is directly threatened by the act sought to be
enjoined. Further, there must be a showing that the invasion of the right is material and substantial
and that there is an urgent and paramount necessity for the writ to prevent a serious damage.

Rule 19.22 of the Special ADR Rules states:

Rule 19.22. Effect of appeal.The appeal shall not stay the award, judgment, final order or
resolution sought to be reviewed unless the Court of Appeals directs otherwise upon such terms
as it may deem just.

We find no reversible error or grave abuse of discretion in the CAs denial of the application for
stay order or TRO upon its finding that BDO failed to establish the existence of a clear legal right
to enjoin execution of the Final Award confirmed by the Makati City RTC, Branch 148, pending
resolution of its appeal. It would be premature to address on the merits the issues raised by BDO
in the present petition considering that the CA still has to decide on the validity of said court's
orders confirming the Final Award. But more important, since BOO had already paid
P637,941,185.55 manager's check, albeit under protest, and which payment was accepted by
RCBC as full and complete satisfaction of the writ of execution, there is no more act to be
enjoined.

Settled is the rule that injunctive reliefs are preservative remedies for the protection of substantive
rights and interests. Injunction is not a cause of action in itself, but merely a provisional remedy,
an adjunct to a main suit. When the act sought to be enjoined has become fait accompli, the
prayer for provisional remedy should be denied.

Thus, the Court ruled in Gov. Looyuko107 that when the events sought to be prevented by
injunction or prohibition have already happened, nothing more could be enjoined or prohibited.
Indeed, it is a universal principle of law that an injunction will not issue to restrain the performance
of an act already done. This is so for the simple reason that nothing more can be done in reference
thereto. A writ of injunction becomes moot and academic after the act sought to be enjoined has
already been consummated.

D. SPECIAL CIVIL ACTION FOR CERTIORARI

The Special Civil Action for Certiorari from the orders, decisions or judgments of the Regional
Trial Court in ADR related cases to the Court of Appeals referred to in Rules 19.26 to 19.35 of the
Special Rules is akin to a Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Civil Procedure.

Q: Why are they the same?

A:

The similarity lies in the fact that both remedies are based on the same ground, i.e., the
Regional Trial Court has acted without or in excess of its jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of

BATACAN, CALATRAVA, GINGCO, LUMAPAS 6

discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction, and there is no appeal or any plain, speedy
and adequate remedy under the ordinary course of law.1

Q: How do they differ from each other?

A:

In terms of the SPECIFIC GROUNDS

Unlike in a Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure which
can cover any and all kinds of grave abuse of discretion committed by a tribunal, board or officer
exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions, the special civil action for certiorari under the Special
ADR Rules is limited to grave abuse of discretion in the following orders of the Regional Trial
Court in ADR related proceedings:

a. Holding that the arbitration agreement is inexistent, invalid or unenforceable;

b. Reversing the arbitral tribunals preliminary determination upholding its jurisdiction;

c. Denying the request to refer the dispute to arbitration;

d. Granting or refusing an interim relief;

e. Denying a petition for the appointment of an arbitrator;

f. Confirming, vacating or correcting a domestic arbitral award;

g. Suspending the proceedings to set aside an international commercial arbitral award and
referring the case back to the arbitral tribunal;

h. Allowing a party to enforce an international commercial arbitral award pending appeal;

i. Adjourning or deferring a ruling on whether to set aside, recognize and or enforce an

international commercial arbitral award;

j. Allowing a party to enforce a foreign arbitral award pending appeal; and

k. Denying a petition for assistance in taking evidence.

In terms of the period to file the petition

Rule 19.28 of the Special ADR Rules provides that the petition must be filed with the Court
of Appeals within fifteen (15) days from the notice of judgment, order or resolution sought to be
annulled or set aside. However, in a Petition for Certiorari under the Rule 65 of the 1997 Rules of
Civil Procedure the petition should be filed within sixty (60) days from the notice of the judgment,
order or resolution sought to be assailed.

1
Rule 19.26, Special ADR Rules; Section 1, Rule 65, 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure (as amended).

BATACAN, CALATRAVA, GINGCO, LUMAPAS 7

In terms of the tribunal being a party to the remedy sought

In a Petition under Rule 65, the tribunal that issued the assailed judgment, order or
resolution shall be named as a public respondent to the petition although he is considered merely
as a nominal party. Hence, it is the duty of the private respondent to appear and defend in his
behalf and behalf of the public respondent.2 Further, unless specifically required by the reviewing
court, the public respondent shall not appear in or file an answer or comment to the petition or
any pleading therein.

This is almost the same with a Special Civil Action for Certiorari under the Special ADR
Rules. The arbitral tribunal shall be named as a party albeit it is merely a nominal party. Being as
such, the arbitral tribunal is not required to file any pleading or written submission to the Court
except if such filing or submission will serve the interest of justice.3

Nevertheless, in petitions involving the recognition and enforcement of a foreign arbitral

award, the arbitral tribunal shall not even be included as a nominal party, but it shall be notified of
the proceedings and be furnished with court processes. The reason is that the Philippine courts
do not have jurisdiction over the foreign arbitral tribunal.

Arbitration may continue despite petition for Certiorari

Under Rule 65, the filing of a special action for certiorari under the Special ADR Rules
does not stay the proceedings of the lower court or arbitral tribunal. Thus, the arbitral tribunal or
the lower court notwithstanding the filing and pendency of a special civil action for certiorari may
continue with the arbitral proceedings and render an award thereon. 4

Remedy is available only for orders, decisions or judgments of the Regional Trial Courts
in ADR related cases

Rule 65 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure covers the institution of petitions for certiorari
over orders and judgments of any inferior court. The silence of the special ADR Rules and the
exclusionary rule under Rule 22.1 thereof preclude the filing of special civil actions for certiorari
from orders, decisions or judgments of the Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court. Besides the
availability of the remedy of a petition for review on certiorari from orders, decisions or judgments
of the Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court under Rules 19.36 to 19.42 of the Special ADR
Rules, constituting as it does a speedy and adequate remedy under the ordinary course of law,
precludes a special civil action for certiorari. Thus, the remedy of a party aggrieved by a final
resolution or decision of the Court of Appeals in an ADR related case is to file a petition for review
on certiorari with the SC under the ADR Act.

Q: What are the formalities required?

A:

Rule 19.27. Form. - The petition shall be accompanied by a certified true copy of
the questioned judgment, order or resolution of the Regional Trial Court, copies of

2
Section 5, Rule 65, 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure.
3
Rule 19.29, Special ADR Rules.
4
Rule 19.32, Special ADR Rules.

BATACAN, CALATRAVA, GINGCO, LUMAPAS 8

 all pleadings and documents relevant and pertinent thereto, and a sworn
certification of non-forum shopping as provided in the Rules of Court.

Upon the filing of the petition and unless otherwise prescribed by the Court of
Appeals, the petitioner shall pay to the clerk of court of the Court of Appeals
docketing fees and other lawful fees of P3,500.00 and deposit the sum of P500.00
for costs. Exemption from payment of docket 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 the notice of the denial.

Q: What will happen if the petitioner fails to comply with Rule 19.27 and 19.28?
A:

The petition will be dismissed. Rule 19.30 provides that the court shall dismiss the petition
if it fails to comply with Rules 19.27 and 19.28 above, or upon consideration of the ground alleged
and the legal briefs submitted by the parties, the petition does not appear to be prima facie
meritorious.

Q: What if the petition is sufficient in form and substance what will happen next?
A:

If the petition is sufficient in form and substance to justify such process, the Court of
Appeals shall immediately issue an order requiring the respondent or respondents to comment
on the petition within a non-extendible period of fifteen (15) days from receipt of a copy thereof.
Such order shall be served on the respondents in such manner as the court may direct, together
with a copy of the petition and any annexes thereto.5

E. APPEAL BY CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT

Q: Is review by the Supreme Court a matter of right?
A: Rule 19.36. Review discretionary. - A review by the Supreme Court is not a matter of right, but
of sound judicial discretion, which will be granted only for serious and compelling reasons
resulting in grave prejudice to the aggrieved party.
Q: What are the grounds that will warrant the exercise of the Supreme Courts discretionary
powers?
A: The following, while neither controlling nor fully measuring the court's discretion, indicate the
serious and compelling, and necessarily, restrictive nature of the grounds that will warrant the
exercise of the Supreme Courts discretionary powers, when the Court of Appeals:
a. Failed to apply the applicable standard or test for judicial review prescribed in these
Special ADR Rules in arriving at its decision resulting in substantial prejudice to the
aggrieved party;

5
Rule 19.31, Special ADR Rules.

BATACAN, CALATRAVA, GINGCO, LUMAPAS 9

 b. Erred in upholding a final order or decision despite the lack of jurisdiction of the court that
rendered such final order or decision;
c. Failed to apply any provision, principle, policy or rule contained in these Special ADR
Rules resulting in substantial prejudice to the aggrieved party; and
d. Committed an error so egregious and harmful to a party as to amount to an undeniable
excess of jurisdiction.
Q: Is the fact that the petitioner disagrees with the Court of Appeals determination of fact,
of law or both, shall warrant the exercise of the Supreme Courts discretionary power?
A: The mere fact that the petitioner disagrees with the Court of Appeals determination of
questions of fact, of law or both questions of fact and law, shall not warrant the exercise of the
Supreme Courts discretionary power. The error imputed to the Court of Appeals must be
grounded upon any of the above prescribed grounds for review or be closely analogous thereto.
Q: Will a mere general allegation that Court of Appeals committed a serious and substantial
error resulting in substantial prejudice to the petitioner constitute a sufficient ground?
A: A mere general allegation that the Court of Appeals has committed serious and substantial
error or that it has acted with grave abuse of discretion resulting in substantial prejudice to the
petitioner without indicating with specificity the nature of such error or abuse of discretion and the
serious prejudice suffered by the petitioner on account thereof, shall constitute sufficient ground
for the Supreme Court to dismiss outright the petition.
Q: What shall the petitioner to if he desire to appeal by certiorari from a judgment or final
order or resolution of the Court of Appeals?
A: Rule 19.37. Filing of petition with Supreme Court. - A party desiring to appeal by certiorari from
a judgment or final order or resolution of the Court of Appeals issued pursuant to these Special
ADR Rules may file with the Supreme Court a verified petition for review on certiorari. The petition
shall raise only questions of law, which must be distinctly set forth.
Q: When shall the petition be filed?
A: Rule 19.38. Time for filing; extension. - The petition shall be filed within fifteen (15) days from
notice of the judgment or final order or resolution appealed from, or of the denial of the petitioner's
motion for new trial or reconsideration filed in due time after notice of the judgment.
Q: Can the Supreme Court grant an extension?
A: On motion duly filed and served, with full payment of the docket and other lawful fees and the
deposit for costs before the expiration of the reglementary period, the Supreme Court may for
justifiable reasons grant an extension of thirty (30) days only within which to file the petition.
Q: Is there a need for the petitioner to pay docket and other lawful fees?
A: Rule 19.39. Docket and other lawful fees; proof of service of petition. - Unless he has
theretofore done so or unless the Supreme Court orders otherwise, the petitioner shall pay docket
and other lawful fees to the clerk of court of the Supreme Court of P3,500.00 and deposit the
amount of P500.00 for costs at the time of the filing of the petition. Proof of service of a copy

BATACAN, CALATRAVA, GINGCO, LUMAPAS 10

thereof on the lower court concerned and on the adverse party shall be submitted together with
the petition.
Q: What shall the petition contain?
A: Rule 19.40. Contents of petition. - The petition shall be filed in eighteen (18) copies, with the
original copy intended for the court being indicated as such by the petitioner, and shall:
a. state the full name of the appealing party as the petitioner and the adverse party as
respondent, without impleading the lower courts or judges thereof either as petitioners or
respondents;
b. indicate the material dates showing when notice of the judgment or final order or resolution
subject thereof was received, when a motion for new trial or reconsideration, if any, was
filed and when notice of the denial thereof was received;
c. set forth concisely a statement of the matters involved, and the reasons or arguments
relied on for the allowance of the petition;
d. be accompanied by a clearly legible duplicate original, or a certified true copy of the
judgment or final order or resolution certified by the clerk of court of the court a quo and
the requisite number of plain copies thereof, and such material portions of the record as
would support the petition; and
e. contain a sworn certification against forum shopping.
Q: Can the petition be dismissed?
A: Rule 19.41. Dismissal or denial of petition. - The failure of the petitioner to comply with any of
the foregoing requirements regarding the payment of the docket and other lawful fees, deposit for
costs, proof of service of the petition, and the contents of and the documents which should
accompany the petition shall be sufficient ground for the dismissal thereof.
Q: Can the Supreme Court deny the petition motu proprio?
A: The Supreme Court may on its own initiative deny the petition on the ground that the appeal is
without merit, or is prosecuted manifestly for delay, or that the questions raised therein are too
insubstantial to require consideration.
Q: What shall the Supreme Court do if the petition is given due course?
A: Rule 19.42. Due course; elevation of records. - If the petition is given due course, the Supreme
Court may require the elevation of the complete record of the case or specified parts thereof within
fifteen (15) days from notice.

BATACAN, CALATRAVA, GINGCO, LUMAPAS 11