Nature of the Remedy
Rule 42 governs the appeal by petition for review from a judgment or final order of the Regional Trial Court rendered in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction to the Court of Appeals.
The usual setting is a case that began in a first-level court, was appealed to the Regional Trial Court, and is then sought to be reviewed by the Court of Appeals. The remedy is therefore the second level of appellate review in cases originating below the Regional Trial Court.
The petition is an appellate remedy, not an original action. It seeks correction of errors of judgment committed by the Regional Trial Court in resolving the appeal from the first-level court. It does not implead the lower courts or their judges, because they are not adverse parties in an appeal.
Review under Rule 42 is discretionary. Timely filing does not automatically require the Court of Appeals to examine the entire case on the merits. The court first determines whether the petition shows, on its face and from the attached record, a prima facie reversible error of fact, law, or mixed fact and law.
Judgments and Orders Covered
Rule 42 applies only when the Regional Trial Court acted as an appellate court. When the same court acted in the exercise of original jurisdiction, the ordinary appeal to the Court of Appeals is generally by notice of appeal under Rule 41, not by petition for review under Rule 42.
The remedy covers judgments and final orders that completely dispose of the appeal before the Regional Trial Court. An order is final when nothing more remains to be done by the court with respect to the merits except execution or enforcement.
- A decision of the Regional Trial Court affirming, reversing, or modifying the first-level court judgment is reviewable by Rule 42.
- An order dismissing the appeal in the Regional Trial Court may be reviewable if it finally disposes of the appellate case.
- Interlocutory orders issued while the appeal is pending in the Regional Trial Court are generally not appealable by Rule 42 because they do not terminate the case.
- Where a special rule makes a judgment final, executory, and unappealable, Rule 42 does not create an appeal that the rule itself withholds.
The first-level courts whose decisions may reach the Regional Trial Court include the Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, Municipal Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts. The controlling point is not the label of the lower court, but the fact that the Regional Trial Court decided the case on appeal.
Period to File
The petition must be filed with the Court of Appeals within fifteen days from notice of the Regional Trial Court judgment or final order sought to be reviewed.
If a timely motion for new trial or motion for reconsideration is filed in the Regional Trial Court, the period is counted from notice of the order denying that motion. The fresh-period doctrine gives the aggrieved party a new fifteen-day period from notice of denial, because the Rules themselves count the Rule 42 period from that denial when the motion was filed in due time.
The Court of Appeals may grant an additional period of fifteen days to file the petition if a proper motion for extension is filed and the docket and other lawful fees and deposit for costs are paid before the original period expires. A further extension is exceptional, requires the most compelling reason, and cannot exceed another fifteen days.
The petition is filed in the Court of Appeals, not in the Regional Trial Court. Copies must be furnished to the adverse party and to the Regional Trial Court whose judgment is under review.
Essential Filing Requirements
Rule 42 is commenced by a verified petition that complies with the requirements for appellate petitions. The petition must show both the factual basis for review and the procedural basis for its timeliness.
| Requirement | Purpose and Effect |
|---|---|
| Verification | Assures that the allegations are made in good faith and are based on personal knowledge or authentic records. |
| Certification against forum shopping | Requires disclosure of other actions or claims involving the same issues and guards against multiple remedies in different tribunals. |
| Material dates | Shows that the petition was filed on time, usually by stating the dates of receipt of the Regional Trial Court judgment, filing of any timely post-judgment motion, receipt of denial, and filing of the petition. |
| Statement of matters involved | Identifies the controversy with enough precision for the Court of Appeals to understand the case without searching the entire record. |
| Assignment or specification of errors | Defines the factual or legal rulings allegedly made incorrectly by the Regional Trial Court. |
| Arguments for allowance of the petition | Explains why the errors are substantial enough to warrant discretionary appellate review. |
| Relevant judgments, orders, pleadings, and record portions | Allows the Court of Appeals to determine prima facie merit from the petition and annexes without requiring immediate transmittal of the entire record. |
| Payment of docket and lawful fees and deposit for costs | Perfects the appeal as to the petitioner when made together with timely filing, subject to the court's power to dismiss for noncompliance. |
The material dates requirement is especially important because timeliness is determined from the face of the petition. A petition that omits the relevant dates may be dismissed even if it was actually filed within the period, unless the record clearly supplies the omission and strict application would defeat substantial justice.
The annexes must include the assailed Regional Trial Court judgment or final order and the material portions of the record that support the petition. Since Rule 42 review is primarily record-based, unsupported factual allegations carry little weight.
Parties and Caption
The parties are the litigants in the case, not the judges who decided it. The petitioner is the party aggrieved by the Regional Trial Court judgment, and the respondent is the adverse party who obtained the favorable ruling or has an interest in sustaining it.
Lower courts and their judges are not impleaded because the proceeding is an appeal, not a special civil action for certiorari, prohibition, or mandamus. Naming the judge as a respondent reflects the wrong procedural character of the remedy and may signal that the pleading is not a proper Rule 42 petition.
Grounds for Denial or Dismissal
The Court of Appeals may dismiss the petition outright for formal or substantive defects. Dismissal is proper when the petition fails to comply with the requirements on form, contents, service, supporting documents, payment of fees, or proof of service.
The petition may also be denied when it is patently without merit, prosecuted manifestly for delay, or raises questions too unsubstantial to require further proceedings. These grounds reflect the discretionary character of Rule 42 review.
Nonpayment or late payment of docket fees is a serious defect because payment within the reglementary period is tied to the perfection of the appeal. Liberal application may be considered only when the circumstances show good faith, absence of intent to delay, and a persuasive reason to relax the rule.
Defects in verification are generally treated as formal, but the absence or falsity of the certification against forum shopping is more serious because it affects the integrity of judicial proceedings. Substantial compliance is exceptional and must be justified by the circumstances of the party signing and the nature of the case.
Comment, Reply, and Due Course
If the Court of Appeals does not dismiss the petition outright, it may require the respondent to file a comment. The comment is not a motion to dismiss; it addresses whether the petition should be given due course and may point out defects, inaccuracies, or lack of merit.
The respondent may accept the petitioner's statement of matters involved or specify the inaccuracies and omitted facts. The comment should be supported by the record portions necessary to sustain the Regional Trial Court ruling or to show why further review is unwarranted.
The Court of Appeals gives due course only when the petition shows prima facie that the Regional Trial Court committed an error of fact, law, or both, that warrants reversal or modification. If due course is granted, the case proceeds as an appellate review on the record, with the court having discretion to require memoranda or take other steps needed for resolution.
The grant of due course is not a ruling that the petitioner is correct. It only means that the petition presents enough substance to justify full consideration by the Court of Appeals.
Scope of Review
Rule 42 review may involve questions of fact, questions of law, or mixed questions. This distinguishes it from a petition for review on certiorari to the Supreme Court, which is generally limited to questions of law.
A question of law exists when the doubt concerns what the law is on a given set of facts. A question of fact exists when the doubt concerns the truth or falsity of alleged facts, the credibility of evidence, or the existence of circumstances shown by the record. A mixed question requires applying a legal standard to disputed or established facts.
The Court of Appeals is not required to retry the case. It reviews the record to determine whether the Regional Trial Court correctly resolved the appeal from the first-level court. Findings of fact that are supported by the record, especially when the first-level court and the Regional Trial Court agree, are accorded respect, but they may be disturbed when the record shows misapprehension of facts, overlooked material evidence, unsupported conclusions, or legally erroneous inferences.
Issues not raised in the Regional Trial Court generally cannot be raised for the first time in the Court of Appeals. Appellate review is ordinarily confined to matters assigned as errors and argued in the petition, together with issues necessarily related to them, jurisdictional issues, and matters the court may consider to arrive at a just resolution.
Effect of Timely Filing
Upon timely filing of the petition and payment of the required fees, the appeal is deemed perfected as to the petitioner. Perfection fixes the petitioner's resort to the appellate court and prevents the Regional Trial Court judgment from becoming final against that party while the appeal is pending, subject to special rules on immediate execution.
The Regional Trial Court loses jurisdiction over the case upon perfection of the appeals filed in due time and expiration of the time to appeal of the other parties. Before the Court of Appeals gives due course, however, the Regional Trial Court retains limited residual authority over matters consistent with the appeal.
Residual authority includes acts for the preservation of the rights of the parties, approval of compromises, permission for indigent appeals, withdrawal of the appeal, and execution pending appeal when allowed by the rules on execution. This residual authority exists because some matters may need action before the appellate court fully assumes control of the review.
In ordinary civil cases, a proper Rule 42 appeal generally stays the Regional Trial Court judgment unless the Court of Appeals, the law, or the Rules provide otherwise. When the judgment is immediately executory by special rule, the petition alone does not suspend enforcement; the aggrieved party must obtain appropriate relief from the appellate court when such relief is available.
Execution and Immediately Executory Judgments
The effect of a Rule 42 petition on execution depends on the nature of the case and the governing rule. The general rule of stay yields to provisions that make the judgment immediately executory.
In civil cases governed by summary procedure, the Regional Trial Court judgment on appeal is treated with special immediacy. Further review by petition for review may be available when not otherwise barred, but the filing of the petition does not automatically defeat the rule on prompt execution.
In ejectment cases, the policy of speedy recovery of physical possession gives special force to immediate execution. A losing party who seeks further review must address execution directly through the remedies and bonds or deposits required by the applicable rules and through appropriate orders from the appellate court.
Execution pending appeal remains extraordinary. It requires good reasons stated in a special order and must conform to the rules on execution. The mere filing of a Rule 42 petition does not by itself prevent the Regional Trial Court from acting within its residual authority before the Court of Appeals gives due course, where the Rules permit such action.
Comparison with Related Remedies
| Remedy | When Used | Reviewing Court | Principal Function |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ordinary appeal by notice of appeal | From a Regional Trial Court judgment rendered in original jurisdiction, when appeal is available by ordinary appeal | Court of Appeals | Transfers the case for review as an ordinary appeal |
| Rule 42 petition for review | From a Regional Trial Court judgment or final order rendered in appellate jurisdiction | Court of Appeals | Seeks discretionary review of errors of fact, law, or both |
| Rule 45 petition for review on certiorari | From judgments or final orders reviewable by the Supreme Court under that rule | Supreme Court | Generally reviews questions of law only |
| Rule 65 certiorari | When a tribunal, board, or officer acted without or in excess of jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion, and there is no plain, speedy, and adequate remedy | Proper court under the hierarchy and jurisdictional rules | Corrects jurisdictional error, not ordinary errors of judgment |
Rule 42 and Rule 65 are not interchangeable. Errors in appreciation of evidence, interpretation of contracts, or application of law to the facts are ordinarily errors of judgment reviewable by appeal. Grave abuse of discretion involves a capricious, whimsical, or arbitrary exercise of judgment equivalent to lack or excess of jurisdiction.
Certiorari cannot be used as a substitute for a lost Rule 42 appeal. Exceptions are narrow and depend on compelling circumstances, such as lack of due process, a void judgment, issues of jurisdiction, or a showing that appeal is not plain, speedy, and adequate under the circumstances.
Judgment of the Court of Appeals
After giving due course and considering the submissions, the Court of Appeals may affirm, reverse, or modify the Regional Trial Court judgment. It may also remand the case when further proceedings are necessary and consistent with appellate review.
The Court of Appeals resolves the case on the record and the assigned errors. It may consider unassigned errors when they are closely related to assigned errors, affect jurisdiction, or are necessary to a complete determination of the case.
The judgment of the Court of Appeals in a Rule 42 case may itself be subject to further review by the Supreme Court through the proper mode and within the proper period. Further review is not a matter of right and ordinarily turns on questions of law, not on a renewed factual evaluation of the whole case.
Practical Operation of Rule 42
The remedy operates as a filtering mechanism between the Regional Trial Court and the Court of Appeals. It gives the losing party a route for further appellate review while allowing the Court of Appeals to reject petitions that do not show substantial reversible error.
A proper petition therefore connects the procedural facts, the assigned errors, and the supporting record. The court must be able to see why the petition is timely, what ruling is being challenged, what error was allegedly committed, why that error matters, and where the record supports the claim.
The most important consequence of choosing Rule 42 is that the appeal is perfected by a petition filed in the Court of Appeals within the reglementary period, accompanied by the required fees and supporting papers. A party who treats the remedy as a mere continuation of the Regional Trial Court appeal, or as an original attack on the judge, invokes the wrong procedural character of the review.