EXAMINATION ANSWER/OROSA

 

SPECIAL CIVIL ACTION- OROSA, FLORES MAY L.

1

I think that these are the features which make it a special civil action, first, Rule 65 is an independent action. It is autonomous from the case in which it emanates; second, Rule 65 also has a longer period in which a person aggrieved can file. The petition can be filed for a period of no longer than 60 days counted from the notice of judgment, order or resolution; third, Rule 65 can be invoke for errors of jurisdiction and can only be filed when there is no more appeal, nor any plain, adequate, speedy relief; fourth, the judge, the tribunal or the quasi-judicial agency can be impleaded In this action; and fifth, it can be directed against interlocutory order of a court.

 

2

 

1)     Immutability of judgment provides that a judgment which attained finality can no longer be disturbed.

2)     One exception to this principle is to correct clerical errors or to make nunc pro tunc entries; second, when the judgment is void; and third, to clarify and ambiguous judgment.

3)     No, the Supreme Court cannot invalidate the judgment and render an acquittal.

As a rule, a decision that has acquired finality becomes immutable and it cannot be changed. Even if it is to correct an error and whether be made by the SC.

In the present case, Jose’s case already attained finality since no appeal has been made by his counsel. The Supreme Court cannot anymore order his acquittal for it will disturbed the finality and execution of his case. Instead of writing a letter to the Supreme Court, he should have filed a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of Rules of Court.

 

3

 

As the lawyer of Maria, I could file for an appeal to SC via Rule 45 of the Rules of Court if the order of the CA is not yet final and executory. However if the acquittal has become final, I would file petition for certiorari via Rule 65 to question the acts of the court which acted with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of their jurisdiction so the judgment rendered in such proceedings can be annulled or modified.

 

4

Contempt is of two kinds, direct and indirect contempt. There is a direct contempt when a person is guilty of misbehaving in the court or near a court which can interrupt the proceedings. Direct contempt includes, disrespect towards the court, refusal to be sworn or to answer as a witness. Direct contempt is summarily adjudged. Indirect contempt are those act of misbehavior of sn officer of court in the performance of his duties, disobedience to a lawful order of the court and other similar acts which not done inside or near the court.

 

 

 

5

As a mayor, there must be a negotiation as to the land of Maria, if she does not agree to sell her land then my next step would be to  exercise the power of eminent domain through expropriation.

 

In the case of Spouses Yusay, the SC held that before an LGU can exercise its power to exercise eminent domain there are requirements that must be fulfilled. First, an ordinance must be enacted to exercise the power of eminent domain, second, it must be for public use or welfare, third, there must be payment of just compensation and fourth, there was a valid offer made to the owner of the property which has been declined.

 

6

I would file for Interpleader under Rule 62 of Rules of Court.

The requisites of an interpleader are as follows: there must be two or more claimants with conflicting interest, the claim involves the same subject matter, the claims are made against the same person and the plaintiff has no claim upon the subject matter or even if he has, it is not disputed by the claimants.

 

7

I would charge Atty Juan of indirect contempt.

Indirect contempt can be filed when there is an improper conduct which degrades the administration of justice.

In this case, Atty Juan’s acts clearly degrades the administration of justice and tarnished my honor as a judge, therefore, the charge of indirect contempt that I will file against him is only proper.

 

8

Declaratory relief is an action by an person interested under a deed, will, contract or other written instrument or whose rights are affected by a statute, executive order, government regulation or ordinance to determine any question of construction or validity arising and for the declaration of their rights or duties thereunder. This action must be filed before the breach or violation thereof.

The similar reliefs are reformation of an instrument, quieting of title or consolidation of ownership.

Declaratory relief cannot be used when the rights has already been violated or breached or when the decision will not terminate the uncertainty or controversy.

 

 

9

In the case of Republic vs Sereno, SC declared that quo warranto is proper  since quo warranto involves the validity of the appointment of a public official based on a predetermined rules. The usurpation of the office is deemed to be a public wrong. Although, under the Constitution she is an impeachable officer, she however did not hold such position validly for in the first place, she lack requirement to be a chief justice. Her lacking SALNs are seen to be as an act which devoid her of integrity, and a person of proven competence and integrity are one of the qualifications to be a member of the Supreme Court.

In this case, the SC ruled that the filing of the SALNs are of high importance. It is required upon her application to be a chief justice and without which she should have been disqualified at the outset.

According to the SC, the quo warranto is the valid remedy to oust her since she usurped the position since she is not qualified for such due to her lacking requirements. Moreover, the prescription for filing quo warranto is not strictly applied in this case, because it was initiated by the SolGen and this case is of public interest.

Quo warranto in the election code is used to question the eligibility of the person elected while in civil, it is use to question the legality of the occupancy of the office through appointment of such person.

 

10

Judicial foreclosure is governed by Rule 68 of rules of court and it involves of filing of an independent action. There is only equity of redemption in judicial foreclosure, while in extrajudicial foreclosure does not need to be filed as an action and right of redemption exists.

In my opinion, extrajudicial foreclosure is much convenient than judicial foreclosure since no action will be lodged in the court. The client can save expenses if he opt to have extrajudicial foreclosure since he will not pay for filing fees nor he will pay for the services of the lawyer who will appear to court.

 

CASE PROBLEM

The Spouses Balbosa availed of the wrong remedy. They should have filed for accion publiciana. Ejectment cases must be filed within one year from the date of dispossession. If the dispossession lasts for more than a year, then an accion publiciana must be filed. Moreover, the MTC has no jurisdiction to over the case since it is in fact accion publiciana. Ejecment cases are lodge in the MTC but accion publiciana must be filed in the RTC. MTC being without jurisdiction should have dismissed the case.

Wherefore, the order of the MTC is REVERSED and SET ASIDE. So ordered.