Rule 65 Report.docx

Provisional Remedies Rule 65 CERTIORARI, PROHIBITION AND MANDAMUS

Gypsy Jennsen Arquio Mario Bello, Jr Aubrey Bonilla

Sheena Marie L. Erasmo Manuel Adolfo Laza Cyril Jed Martel

27 October 2018

RULE 65 CERTIORARI, PROHIBITION AND MANDAMUS

SECTION 1. Petition for certiorari.—When any tribunal, board or officer exercising judicial or quasijudicial 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, or any plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law, a person aggrieved thereby may file a verified petition in the proper court, alleging the facts with certainty and praying that judgment be rendered annulling or modifying the proceedings of such tribunal, board or officer, and granting such incidental reliefs as law and justice may require. The petition shall be accompanied by a certified true copy of the judgment, order or resolution subject thereof, copies of all pleadings and documents relevant and pertinent thereto, and a sworn certification of non-forum shopping as provided in the third paragraph of section 3, Rule 64. (1a)

Definition

Certiorari is an extraordinary writ annulling or modifying the proceedings of a tribunal, board or officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions when such tribunal, board or officer has acted without or in excess of its or his jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction, there being no appeal or any other plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law (Sec. 1, Rule 65).

Against whom

Directed against an entity or person exercising judicial or quasi-judicial function.

Purpose

Purpose is to annul or nullify a proceeding.

Nature

This remedy is corrective – to correct usurpation of jurisdiction (Sec 1, Rule 65).

Scope

Extends to discretionary acts.

Where can be filed? SC,CA or RTC

When? “When any 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…” Instances when the petitions for certiorari, mandamus and prohibition are NOT available

1. Rule on Summary Procedure as to interlocutory order issued by the lower court (Sec. 19(g), Rules on Summary Procedure); 2. Writ of Amparo against any interlocutory order (Sec.11(l), Rule on Writ of Amparo); 3. Petition for writ of Habeas data against any interlocutory order (Sec. 13(l), A.M. No. 08-1-16); 4. Small claims cases against interlocutory order issued by the lower court (Sec. 14(g) of A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC).

Distinguish Certiorari Rule 45

Certiorari Rule 65

As to issues involved Issues raised or involved are purely of law.

As to jurisdiction exercise

Jurisdictional issues, i.e whether the respondent committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction.

Court is in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction.

Court is jurisdiction.

exercising

original

As to Where filed Brought only to the SC.

May be filed in the appropriate court having jurisdiction over the lower court, tribunal, board or officer.

As to Pre-condition No need for reconsideration.

a

motion

for

MR is a perquisite.

As to time of filing Appeal is taken within 15 days from Petition is filed not later than 60 days notice of the judgment, final order, or from notice of the judgment, order, or resolution, or of denial of petitioner’s resolution sought to be assailed. motion for new trial or reconsideration. As to Parties Lower court of judge which rendered the Tribunal, board, or officer has to be judgment or final order appealed from impleaded in the action as normal party shall not be impleaded in the appeal. respondent. As to stay of Execution Appeal by certiorari stays the judgment In a certiorari proceeding, the final order, or resolution. challenged proceeding is not stayed unless the court issues a TRO or injunctive writ. As to Stage of proceedings Appeal by certiorari may be availed of Petition for certiorari may be availed of only after a final judgment. It seeks to during the pendency of the case pr even review final judgments or final orders. before judgment. Thus it may be availed of against an interlocutory order.

Requisites of a valid certiorari

1. The petition is directed against a tribunal, board or officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions;

2. Such tribunal, board or officer has acted without or in excess of jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion; and

3. There is neither appeal nor any plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law for the purpose of annulling or modifying the proceeding. There must be capricious, arbitrary and whimsical exercise of power for it to prosper (Sec. 1 Rule 65; Aggabao v. Comelec, G.R. No. 163756, January 26, 2005; Riano, 2009).

The tribunal, board or officer, etc. has acted without jurisdiction, or in excess of its jurisdiction or grave abuse of discretion – Without jurisdiction if it is acting without absolute authority. Ex. A forcible entry was filed before the RTC (bec. Forcible entry cases are cognizable by MTC)

The court acted in excess of jurisdiction – The court has jurisdiction but it went beyond the limits of its authority. Ex. Petition for support is filed in the RTC with a prayer for support pendent lite. Under rule 61, court will require the defendant to comment within 10days, and there will be a hearing. If it was granted ex parte, certiorari is proper because it although it has authority but it exceeded. The court acted in grave abuse of discretion – Discretion means choice or authority to decide one way or the other. For certiorari, the abuse of discretion must be grave. It is not enough to say that the decision of the court is wrong, the wrong must be a grave abuse. There is no appeal – Ex. Order is interlocutory which is unappealable. Certiorari is not allowed if the remedy of appeal is available because certiorari is not a substitute for appeal. No plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law – Principle is: do not file a certiorari without filing a prior Motion for Reconsideration. EXCEPTIONS when Motion for Reconsideration not required: 1. Where the order is a patent nullity, as where the court a quo has no jurisdiction; 2. Where the questions raised in the certiorari proceeding have been duly raised and passed by the lower court, or are the same as those raised and passed upon in the lower court; 3. Where there is an urgent necessity for the resolution of the question and any further delay would prejudice the interests of the government or of the petitioner; 4. Where the subject matter of the action is perishable; 5. Where under the circumstances, a motion for reconsideration would be useless; 6. Where petitioner was deprived of due process and there is extreme urgency for relief; 7. Where in a criminal case, relief from order of arrest is urgent and the granting of such relief by the trial court is improbable; 8. Where the proceedings in the lower court are a nullity for lack of due process; 9. Where the proceedings was ex parte or in which the petitioner had no opportunity to object; and

10. Where the issue raised is one purely of law or where public interest is involved. Important requirements in filing a petition for certiorari:

a. the petition must be verified;

b. the petition shall be accompanied by a certified true copy of the judgment, order or resolution subject thereof;and

c.sworn certification of non-forum shopping

WHEN PETITION FOR CERTIORARI IS PROPER

It is a writ issued by a superior court to an inferior court, board or officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions whereby the record of a particular case is ordered to be elevated for review and correction in matters of law. In a petition for certiorari, the court will only resolve errors of jurisdiction and not errors of judgment.

Remedies of appeal and certiorari NOT exclusive

GR: Where the proper remedy is appeal, the action for certiorari will not be entertained. Certiorari is not a remedy for errors of judgment. Errors of judgment are correctible by appeal; errors of jurisdiction are reviewable by certiorari.

XPNs: A petition for certiorari may be allowed despite the availability of the remedy of appeal when:

1. Appeal does not constitute a speedy and adequate remedy; 2. Orders were issued either in excess of or without jurisdiction; 3. For certain special considerations as for public policy or public welfare; 4. Order is a patent nullity; 5. Decision in the certiorari case will avoid future litigation; or 6. In criminal actions, the court rejects rebuttal evidence for the prosecution as, in case of acquittal, there could be no remedy (Regalado, 2010).

Certiorari is not a substitute for a lost appeal

The filing of a petition for certiorari as a substitute for a lost appeal is erroneous. Certiorari is not and cannot be made a substitute for an appeal where the latter remedy is available but was lost through fault or negligence.

GR: Certiorari is not available when the period for appeal has lapsed.

XPNs:

1. When public welfare and the advancement of public policy dictates; 2. When the broader interest of justice so requires; 3. When the writs issued are null and void 4. When the questioned order amounts to an oppressive exercise of judicial authority

Necessity for a motion for reconsideration

Except in some recognized situations, the filing of a motion for reconsideration is a condition sine qua non to the filing of a petition for certiorari. The reason for this is to allow the court an opportunity to correct its imputed errors.

SEC. 2. Petition for prohibition.—When the proceedings of any tribunal, corporation, board, officer or person, whether exercising judicial, quasi-judicial or ministerial functions, are 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 or any other plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law, a person aggrieved thereby may file a verified petition in the proper court, alleging the facts with certainty and praying that judgment be rendered commanding the respondent to desist from further proceedings in the action or matter specified therein, or otherwise granting such incidental reliefs as law and justice may require. The petition shall likewise be accompanied by a certified true copy of the judgment, order or resolution subject thereof, copies of all pleadings and documents relevant and pertinent thereto, and a sworn certification of non-forum shopping as provided in the third paragraph of section 3, Rule 46. (2a) Requisites for a writ of prohibition

a. the petition must be directed against a tribunal, corporation, board or person exercising judicial, quasijudicial, or ministerial functions; b. the tribunal, corporation, board or person must have acted without or in excess of jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction; c. there is no appeal or any other plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law d. like a petition for certiorari, the petition for prohibition shall be accompanied by a certified true copy of the judgment or order subject of the petition, copies of all pleadings and documents relevant and pertinent thereto, and a sworn certification of non-forum shopping as provided in Sec.3 of Rule 46. Prohibition vs. Injunction An injunction is directed against a party to the action. Prohibition is directed to the court or tribunal directing it to refrain from the performance of acts which it has no jurisdiction to perform. Certiorari

Prohibition

Purpose is to annul the proceedings or order issued by the lower tribunal. Corrective remedy and operates on acts already consummated.

Preventive remedy. Its function is to restrain the doing of some act about to be done, it is not intended to provide a remedy for acts already accomplished.

A corporation cannot be made a respondent A corporation can be made a respondent. because it is not exercising quasi-judicial functions. Exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions

Ministerial functions are included.

Directed to the action of the court which is Directed to the court itself to restrain it from sught to be annulled. further proceeding with the case.

SEC. 3. Petition for mandamus.—When any tribunal, corporation, board, officer or person unlawfully neglects the performance of an act which the law specifically enjoins as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station, or unlawfully excludes another from the use and enjoyment of a right or office to which such other is entitled, and there is no other plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law, the person aggrieved thereby may file a verified petition in the proper court, alleging the facts with certainty and praying that judgment be rendered commanding the respondent, immediately or at some other time to be specified by the court, to do the act required to be done to protect the rights of the petitioner, and to pay the damages sustained by the petitioner by reason of the wrongful acts of the respondent. The petition shall also contain a sworn certification of non-forum shopping as provided in the third paragraph of section 3, Rule 46. (3a) What are the grounds for Mandamus? The tribunal, board, officer or person… a. unlawfully neglects the performance of an act which the law specifically enjoins as a duty resulting from an office, trust or station; or b. the said tribunal, etc., unlawfully excludes another from the use or enjoyment of a right or office to which others are entitled. Requisites for Mandamus:

a. the plaintiff has a clear legal right to the act demanded. It will never be issued in doubtful cases. (mandamus does not establish a legal right, but merely enforces one that is already clearly established.) b. it must be the duty of the defendant to perform the act because the same is mandated by law; c. the defendant unlawfully neglects the performance of the duty enjoined by law; d. the act to be performed is ministerial, not discretionary; and e. there is no appeal or any other plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law. Mandamus Its object is to compel an inferior tribunal to comply with the function which the law specifically prescribes as a duty. Affirmative remedy for it commands that something be done.

Prohibition Its object is to prevent an inferior tribunal from executing an act not within or in excess of its jurisdiction. Purely negative for it commands that something be left undone.

What kind of duty may be compelled by mandamus? Ministerial  Illustration: A case of forcible entry or unlawful detainer is filed with the RTC, you filed a motion to dismiss alleging that the court has no jurisdiction, the court denied the motion saying that it has jurisdiction. What petition under Rule65 will you resort to? Answer: certiorari, because the court in denying your motion is acting without or in excess of jurisdiction; prohibition, to prohibit the judge from trying the case; and Mandamus, to command the judge to dismiss the case. It’s a petition for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus. Certiorari to correct the wrong order, prohibition to stop him trying the case, and mandamus to compel him to dismiss the case. Under sec.3, damages can be awarded in a petition for mandamus. “..and to pay the damages sustained by the petitioner by reason of the wrongful acts of the respondent.” SEC. 4. When and where petition filed.—The petition may be filed not later than sixty (60) days from notice of the judgment, order or resolution. In case a motion for reconsideration or new trial is timely filed, whether such motion is required or not, the sixty (60) day period shall be counted from notice of the denial of said motion. The petition shall be filed in the Supreme Court or, if it relates to the acts or omissions of a lower court or of a corporation, board, officer or person, in the Regional Trial Court exercising jurisdiction over the territorial area as defined by the Supreme Court. It may also be filed in the Court of Appeals whether or not the same is in aid of its appellate jurisdiction, or in the Sandiganbayan if it is in aid of its appellate jurisdiction. If it involves the acts or omissions of a quasi-judicial agency, and unless otherwise provided by law or these rules, the petition shall be filed in and cognizable only by the Court of Appeals. No extension of time to file the petition shall be granted except for compelling reason and in no case exceeding fifteen (15) days. Effect of filing before the trial court a motion for new trial or reconsideration- it will suspend the running of the 60day period. When the motion is denied, you can still go on certiorari for the remaining period- but you are guaranteed a period of 5days in any event reckoned from the denial. The 60day period is extendible provided you cite a compelling reason because general rule is that no extension of time to file petition shall be granted EXCEPT for the most compelling reasons and in no case will the extension last more than 15days. Courts which have jurisdiction to entertain petition for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus: a. supreme court, within its original jurisdiction;

b. court of appeals, whether or not the same is in aid of its appellate jurisdiction. (and according to the law, if you are going to question an act or omission of a quasi-judicial agency, the petition shall be filed in the CA. Certiorari from a judgment of NLRC CA) c. RTC, exercising jurisdiction over the territorial area as defined by the SC, except if the case was tried by the MTC under the summary rules of procedure d. Sandiganbayan, pursuant to RA 8249 e. COMELEC SEC. 5. Respondents and costs in certain cases—When the petition filed relates to the acts or omissions of a judge, court, quasi-judicial agency, tribunal, corporation, board, officer or person, the petitioner shall join, as private respondent or respondents with such public respondent or respondents, the person or persons interested in sustaining the proceedings in the court; and it shall be the duty of such private respondents to appear and defend, both in his or their own behalf and in behalf of the public respondent or respondents affected by the proceedings, and the costs awarded in such proceedings in favor of the petitioner shall be against the private respondents only, and not against the judge, court, quasi-judicial agency, tribunal, corporation, board, officer or person impleaded as public respondent or respondents. Unless otherwise specifically directed by the court where the petition is pending, the public respondents shall not appear in or file an answer or comment to the petition or any pleading therein. If the case is elevated to a higher court by either party, the public respondents shall be included therein as nominal parties. However, unless otherwise specifically directed by the court, they shall not appear or participate in the proceedings therein. (5a) Private Respondent- your opponent who is benefited by the questioned order. And the (example) judge of the court who issued the order should also be included as the public respondent. However, the judge is merely a formal party. Not supposed to answer the petition unless the high court will direct him to make his comment SEC. 6. Order to comment.- If the petition is sufficient in form and substance to justify such process, the court shall issue an order requiring the respondent or respondents to comment on the petition within ten (10) 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. In petitions for certiorari before the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals, the provisions of section 2, Rule 56, shall be observed. Before giving due course thereto, the court may require the respondents to file their comment to, and not a motion to dismiss, the petition. Thereafter, the court may require the filing of a reply and such other responsive or other pleadings as it may deem necessary and proper. (6a)

SEC. 7. Expediting proceedings; injunctive relief.—The court in which the petition is filed may issue orders expediting the proceedings, and it may also grant a temporary restraining order or a writ of preliminary injunction for the preservation of the rights of the parties pending such proceedings. The petition shall not interrupt the course of the principal case unless a temporary restraining order or a writ of preliminary injunction has been issued against the public respondent from further proceeding in the case. (7a) SEC. 8. Proceedings after comment is filed.—After the comment or other pleadings required by the court are filed, or the time for the filing thereof has expired, the court may hear the case or require the parties to submit memoranda. If after such hearing or submission of memoranda or the expiration of the period for the filing thereof the court finds that the allegations of the petition are true, it shall render judgment for the relief prayed for or to which the petitioner is entitled. The court, however, may dismiss the petition if it finds the same to be patently without merit, prosecuted manifestly for delay, or that the questions raised therein are too unsubstantial to require consideration. (8a)

SEC. 9. Service and enforcement of order or judgment.—A certified copy of the judgment rendered in accordance with the last preceding section shall be served upon the court, quasi-judicial agency, tribunal, corporation, board, officer or person concerned in such manner as the court may direct, and disobedience thereto shall be punished as contempt. An execution may issue for any damages or costs awarded in accordance with section 1 of Rule 39. (9a)

Ordinary Judgment

Special Judgment

Judgement which orders defendant to pay Judgment where a defendant is ordered to money or to deliver property, real or personal. perform an act other than money or to deliver property. Cannot be enforced by contempt but by Non-compliance is punishable by contempt. execution. The kind of judgment under Rule 65 is a special judgment. Disobedience can be punished by contempt. Damages can be awarded in certiorari, prohibition and mandamus. ADDITIONAL NOTES from RIANO 

Certiorari is a remedy for the correction of errors of jurisdiction, not errors of judgment (remedy for this is appeal).



Petitions for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus are not available under the Rule on Summary Procedure, in a petition for a writ of amparo and in a petition for a writ of habeas data. It is not also available in small claims cases.



If the complaint is dismissed with prejudice through a motion to dismiss, the normal remedy of the plaintiff is to appea because the dismissal is final in character, not to file a petition for certiorari.

WHEN CERTIORARI IS AVAILABLE DESPITE THE LOSS OF APPEAL a. Certiorari may still be invoked when appeal is lost without the appellant’s negligence; b. When public welfare and the advancement of public policy dictates; c. When the broader interest of justice so requires; d. When the writs issued are null and void; e. When the questioned order amount to an oppressive exercise of judicial authority. 

A quasi-judicial act refers to the acts of the public administrative officers or bodies required to investigate facts or ascertain the existence of facts, hold hearings, and draw conclusions from them, as a basis for their official actions, and to exercise discretion of a judicial nature. o Must be clothed with power and authority to pass judgment or render a decision on the controversy construing and applying the laws to that end



A respondent is said to be exercising judicial functions where he has the power to determine what the law is and what the legal rihts of the parties are, and then undertakes to determine these questions and adjudicate upon the rights of the parties.



Ministerial function is one which an officer or tribunal performs in the context of a given set of facts, in a prescribed manner and without regard to the exercise of his own judgment upon the propeity or impropriety of the act done.



Mere abuse of discretion is not enough. It must be grave, as when it is exercised arbitrarily or despotically by reason of passion or personal hostility- so patent and gross as to amount to an evasion of positive duty or a virtual refusal to perform the duty enjoined by, or to act at all in contemplation of law. o A judge gravely abuses his discretion when he extends by 20days the 72-hour restraining order he initially issued because in no case shall the total period of effectivity of the TRO exceed 20days.



Petition for certiorari shall be accompanied by (a) a certified true copy of the judgment, order or resolution subject of the petition, (b) copies of all relevant pleadings and documents which are material and pertinent to the petition, and (c) a sworn certification of non-forum shopping



Under the material date rule, three material dates must be stated in the petition (a) the date when the judgment or final order or resolution was received, (b) the date when a motion for new trial or a motion for reconsideration when one was filed, and (c) the date when notice of the denial thereof was received.

COURT WHERE PETITION IS FILED o If the petition relates to acts or omissions of a lower court or of a corporation, board, or officer or person, then the petition shall be filed in the RTC exercising jurisdiction over the territorial area as defined by the SC o The petition may also be filed in the CA whether or not the same is in aid of its appellate jurisdiction. If it involves the acts or omissions of a quasi-judicial agency, the petition shall be filed in and cognizable only by the Court of Appeals, unless otherwise provided by law or by the Rules of Court. o The rule used to be that the petition may be filed in the Sandiganbayan WON in aid of its appellate jurisdiction (A.M. No. 07-7-12-SC) o In election cases involving an act or omission of a municipal or RTC, the petition shall be filed exclusively with the COMELEC, in aid of its appellate jurisdiction. Certiorari in Rule 64

Certiorari in Rule 65

Directed only to the judgments, finals orders or Directed to any tribunal, board or officer resolutions of the COMELEC and COA exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions Filed within 30days from notice of the Filed within 60days from notice of judgment judgment The filing of a motion for recon or a motion for new trial if allowed, interrupts the period for the filing of the petition for certiorari. If the motion is denied, the aggrieved party may file the petition within the remaining period, but which shall not be less than 5days reckoned from the notice of denial.



The period within which to file the petition if the motion for recon or new trial is denied, is sixty days from notice of the denial of the motion.

The purpose of prohibition is to prevent an encroachment, excess, usurpation or assumption of jurisdiction on the part of tribunal, corporation, board or officer. It is granted when it is necessary for the orderly administration of justice, or prevent the use of the strong arm of the law in an oppressive or vindictive manner, or multiplicity of actions.



  



A SCA of prohibition is an original and independent action and not merely a continuation or a part of the trial resulting in the rendition of the judgment or order complained of. It bears stressing that an action for prohibition or certiorari, for that matter, does not divest the inferior or trial court of its jurisdiction validly acquired over the case pending before it; it is merely an invocation for the exercise of its supervisory power over the lower court to insure that the lower court acts within its jurisdiction. For a writ of mandamus to be issued, it is essential that petitioner should have a clear right to the thing demanded and it must be the imperative duty of the respondent to perform the act required. The principal function mandamus is to command, not to inquire, expedite or to adjudicate. As a rule, mandamus requires the exhaustion of admin remedies available to the petitioner. Prior resort to exhaustion of administrative remedies however, is not required where the questions are purely legal or when the respondent is estopped from invoking the rule of exhaustion of admin remedies. Mandamus cannot be availed of as a remedy to enforce the performance of contractual obligations. It was not intended to aid a plaintiff in the enforcement of a mere contract right, or to take place of the other remedies provided by law for the adjudication of disputed claims.

Mandamus SCA Directed against a tribunal, corp board, or officer Purpose is for the tribunal, corp board, or officer to perform a ministerial and legal duty

Injunction OCA Directed against a litigant

For the defendant either to refrain from an act or to perform not necessarily a legal or ministerial duty To perform a positive legal duty and not to To prevent an act to maintain the status quo undo what has been done between parties Mandamus vs. quo warranto In mandamus, the suit is brought against the person who is responsible for excluding the petitioner from office. The respondent does not have to usurp, intrude into or hold the office. Quo warranto is brought against the holder of the office, who is the person claiming the office as against the petitioner, not necessarily the one who excludes the petitioner.

WRIT OF CONTINUING MANDAMUS/WRIT OF KALIKASAN WRIT OF CONTINUING MANDAMUS DEFINITION: A Writ of Continuing Mandamus is a writ issued by a court in an environmental case directing any agency or instrumentality of the government or officer thereof to perform an act or series of acts decreed by final judgment which shall remain effective until judgment is fully satisfied. WHEN COULD BE AVAILED? 1. The writ is available when an agency, instrumentality of the government, or officer thereof: a. unlawfully neglects the performance of an act the law enjoins as a duty resulting from an office, trust or station in connection with the enforcement or violation of environmental law or regulation or a right therein; or b. unlawfully excludes another from the use or enjoyment of such right.

2. There must be a showing that there is no other plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law. FORMS AND CONTENT OF THE PETITION 1. It should be verified. 2. It shall allege the facts with certainty. 3. Supporting evidence may be attached. 4. Specify that the petition concerns an environmental law, rule or regulation. 5. The prayer is that judgment be rendered commanding the respondent to do an act or series of acts until the judgment is fully satisfied. 6. The prayer may include damages sustained by the petitioner by reason of the malicious neglect to perform the duties of the respondent under the law, rules or regulations. 7. Sworn certification of non-forum shopping.

WRIT OF KALIKASAN DEFINITION:

A Writ of Kalikasan is a remedy available to a natural or juridical person, entity authorized by law, people’s organization, non-governmental organization, or any public interest group accredited by or registered with any government agency on behalf of persons whose constitutional right to a balanced and healthful ecology is violated, or threatened with violation by an unlawful act or omission of a public official or employee, or private individual or entity without involving environmental damage of such magnitude as to prejudice the life, health or property of inhabitants in two or more cities or provinces.

ISSUANCE OF THE WRIT

1. The Court shall order the issuance of the writ and requiring the respondent to file a verified return; 2. The Writ shall be issued three (3) days from the filing of the petition if it is sufficient in form and substance.

CONTENTS OF THE RETURN 1. All defenses to show that the respondent did not:

a. violate; b. threaten to violate; c. allow the violation of any environmental law, rule or regulation; or d. commit any act resulting to environmental damage. 2. Affidavit of witnesses, documentary evidence, scientific or other expert studies, and, if possible object evidence. All defenses not raised in the return shall deemed waived. RELIEFS WHICH THE COURT MAY GRANT 1. Cease and desist from committing acts or neglecting performance; 2. Directing the respondent to protect, preserve, rehabilitate or restore the environment; 3. Directing the respondent to monitor strict compliance with the decision or order of the court; 4. Directing the respondent to make periodic reports on the execution of the final judgement; 5. Such other reliefs which relate to the right of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology or to the protection, preservation, rehabilitation or restoration of the environment, except the award of damages to individual petitioners. SUMMARY: WRIT OF CONTINUING MANDAMUS V WRIT OF KALIKASAN Writ of Mandamus Subject Matter

Continuing

Writ of Kalikasan

Neglect or exclusion; law, rule or right

Unlawful act or omission; life, health or property

Petitioner

One who aggrieved

Any person or representative/agent (PO/NGO/Public Interest Group)

Respondent

Government or officers

is

personally

Public or individual

Action of the Court

Expedite TEPO

Venue

SC, CA, or RTC

SC or CA

Docket Fees

None

None

the

proceeding;

private

entity

PROHIBITE D PLEADINGS FOR ENVIRONM ENTAL CASES

or

Expedite the proceeding; TEPO

a. counter claim; b. crossclaim; c. thirdparty complaint; d. reply

PROHIBITED MOTIONS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CASES a. Motion to Dismiss; b. Motion for Extension of time to file return; c. Motion for Postponement; d. Motion for a Bill of Particulars; and e. Motion to declare the respondent in default