Just wanna share part II of our exam questionnaire on appelate court.
.
1. If a person is convicted by the RTC in criminal case involving violation of tax laws (tax evasion), where will he file the appeal?
.
2. Is appeal available to the order of the court denying your motion to dismiss? Why?
.
3. Is the decision of the NLRC, a quasi-judicial body, appealable? Where will you file the appeal?
.
4. Explain the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedy.
.
5. After an attempt to stage a coup d' etat, B/Gen. Lim and Col. Querubin were subjected to court martial. They were convicted and on appeal, the Chief of Staff of the AFP affirmed their conviction. Not satisfied with the performance of their lawyers, Gen. Lim and Col. Querubin asked your assistance to appeal further their conviction. As counsel of the two military officers, what action under the law will you take to protect their interests?
.
Any answers?
1. CTA
ReplyDelete2. No. The proper remedy is to file an answer.
3. Yes. Court of Appeals.
4. Administrative remedies must be exhausted first so that the case will be ripe for judicial determination. Other administrative remedies are mandatory.
5. To the President of the Philippines.
1. Court of Tax Appeals
ReplyDelete2. No.It is a prohibited pleading.
3. No. Certiorari with the Court of Appeals.
4. Admin first before courts.
5. OPS
1. court of appeals
ReplyDelete2. appeal is not the proper remedy. certiorari is possible but the best option is to wait for the decision, meaning continue with the proceeding, then raise it as an issue in appeal in case of an adverse judgement.
3. Decision of NLRC, the Commission proper, is not appealable. Petition for Certiorari before the CA is the proper remedy.
4. Exhaustion of Administrative Remedy simply bars litigants from going to courts unless the questioned decision have already passed through the president or the dept sec concerned.
5.Is coup d' etat under the jurisdiction of court martial?
1. court of appeals
ReplyDelete2. appeal is not the proper remedy. certiorari is possible but the best option is to wait for the decision, meaning continue with the proceeding, then raise it as an issue in appeal in case of an adverse judgement.
3. Decision of NLRC, the Commission proper, is not appealable. Petition for Certiorari before the CA is the proper remedy.
4. Exhaustion of Administrative Remedy simply bars litigants from going to courts unless the questioned decision have already passed through the president or the dept sec concerned.
5.Is coup d' etat under the jurisdiction of court martial?
thnx macka, andrea and lawstude's lawyer friends for ur answers.
ReplyDeletehere are my answers, my prof has not yet returned our papers so i do not know how i fared:
1. CTA under its expanded jurisdiction.
2. No, because it does not dispose of the cause on its merits. Remedy is to file an answer and raise yhe dismissal as an error to be reviewed on appeal.
3. Yes. The appeal should be filed to the CA via petition for certiorari under Rule 65. (I know that Rule 65 is not a mode of Appeal but I was tricked by the sub-question "Where will you file the appeal?" Shame shame shame.)
4. This one is easy, I have almost the same answer as u guys.
5. My answer was to exhaust first all admin remedies so I filed a motion for recon first then a petition for review with the Office of the President. (I dunno, lawstude's lawyer friend counter question keep me thinking, is this another tricky q?)
About the "coup d' etat"... I think it's part of military's code of "something" that they should remain loyal to the "chain of command." Nevertheless, I think the charge was not "coup d' etat" under the RPC, and well of course that was not the question.
ReplyDelete-------------
#3. Is the decision of the NLRC, a quasi-judicial body, appealable? Where will you file the appeal?
In my opinion,there is no trick with the word "appeal" in the aforequoted question. Since it was treated in a "generic sense." For one, the St. Martin case was worded this way ...
"Therefore, all references in the amended Section 9 of B.P. No. 129 to supposed appeals from the NLRC to the Supreme Court are interpreted and hereby declared to mean and refer to petitions for certiorari under Rule 65. Consequently, all such petitions should henceforth be initially filed in the Court of Appeals in strict observance of the doctrine on the hierarchy of courts as the appropriate forum for the relief desired. "
However, still on the same case, SC further held that:
"The use of the word "appeal" in relation thereto and in the instances we have noted could have been a lapsus plumae because appeals by certiorari and the original action for certiorari are both modes of judicial review addressed to the appellate courts. The important distinction between them, however, and with which the Court is particularly concerned here is that the special civil action of certiorari is within the concurrent original jurisdiction of this Court and the Court of Appeals;[23] whereas to indulge in the assumption that appeals by certiorari to the Supreme Court are allowed would not subserve, but would subvert, the intention of Congress as expressed in the sponsorship speech on Senate Bill No. 1495."
Hehehe ang haba na ba ng explanation? All said, I treated the word "appeal" in its generic sense only. Peace.