RULE MAKING POWER OF THE SUPREME COURT

SEC. 5(5) Art VIII of consti.

Promulgate rules concerning the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights, promulgate
pleadings, practice, and procedure in all courts( necessarily carries with it the power to overturn
judicial precedents on points of remedial law through amendment of the rules of court), the
admission to the practice of law, the integrated bar, and legal assistance to the underprivileged.
Such rules shall provide a SIMPLIFIED ad INEXPENSIVE procedure for the speedy disposition
of cases, shall be uniform for all courts of the same grade, and shall not DIMINISH, INCREASE,
OR MODIFY substantive rights. Rules of procedure of special courts and quasi-judicial bodies
shall remain effective unless disapproved by the supreme court.

Power to amend

SOLE PREROGATIVE to AMEND, REPEAL, or EVEN ESTABLISH NEW RULES for a more
SIMPLIFIED AND INEXPENSIVE PROCESS, AND the SPEEDY DISPOSITION OF CASES.

Power to suspend rules

Power to RELAX OR SUSPEND TECHNICAL OR PROCEDURAL RULES

EXCEPTION:
Except a case from their operation when compelling reasons so warrant or
when the purpose of justice requires it.

What constitutes good and sufficient cause that would merit suspension of the rules is
discretionary upon the courts.

REASON:

Courts view rules of procedure as mere tools designed to facilitate the attainment of justice.
Hence, their strict application which would result in technicalities and tend to frustrate rather than
promote substantial justice must, accordingly, “always be eschewed.”

View point of the court:

The power to suspend or even disregard rules can be so pervasive and compelling as to alter
even that which the court itself had already declared to be final.

OBJECTIVE:

Rules shall be liberally construed in order to promote their object and assist the parties in obtaining
just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every actions and proceeding.
Courts, therefore, not only have the power but the duty to construe and apply technical rules
liberally in favor of substantive law and substantial justice.

Power not only to liberally construe the rules but also to suspend them, in favor of substantive law
or substantial rights.
REASON WHICH WOULD WARRANT THE SUSPENSION OF THE RULES:

1. The existence of special or compelling circumstances;

2. The merits of the case;
3. A cause not entirely attributable to the fault or negligence of the party favored by the
suspension of rules;
4. A lack of any showing that the review sought is merely frivolous and dilatory; and
5. The rights of the other party will not be unjustly prejudiced thereby.

Inherent power of a court to a amend and control its processes and orders includes the right to
reverse itself if only to make its findings and conclusion conformable to law and justice. Every
court has the power and the corresponding duty to review, amend, or reverse its findings and
conclusions whenever its attention is seasonably called to any error or defect that it may have
committed.

Limitation on the rule making power of the supreme court

a. The rules shall provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition of
cases;
b. The rules shall be uniform for courts of the same grade; and
c. The rules shall not diminish, increase or modify substantive rights.

Courts of law and equity

Philippine courts are courts of both law and equity. Hence, both legal and equitable jurisdiction is
dispensed with in the same tribunal.

General rule: When supported by substantial evidence, the findings of fact of the court of appeals
are conclusive and binding on the parties and are not reviewable by the supreme court.
EXCEPTION: When the same contradict the findings of a lower court SC finds the need to re
evaluate and re examine the factual findings of CA. SC does so in the exercise of its equity
jurisdiction

Equity jurisdiction ( Justice outside legality)

Power of the court to resolve the issues presented in case, in accordance with the natural rules
of fairness and justice, and in the absence of a clear, positive law governing such issues.

For all its conceded merits, equity is available only in the absence of law and not as its
replacement. It cannot supplant, although it may, as it often happens, supplement the law. It is
availed of only in the absence of a law and is never availed of against statutory law or judicial
pronouncements.

Fills the open spaces of the law.

PRINCIPLE OF JUDICIAL HIERARCHY

*Where courts have concurrent jurisdiction over a subject matter, the doctrine of hierarchy of
courts should be observed
GEN RULE: A case must be filed before the lowest court possible having the appropriate
jurisdiction, EXCEPT if one can advance special reason which would allow a party direct resort
to higher court.
* concurrence of jurisdiction, does not grant the party seeking relief the absolute freedom to file
petition in any court of his choice ex. Writ of prohibition under rule 65 of the rules of court also
with competence of another court
* The SC is a court of last resort.( Must so remain if it is to satisfactorily perform the function
assigned to it by the constitution and what the court referred to as an immemorial tradition
“unwarranted demands upon the court’s attention must be prevented to allow time and devotion
for pressing matter within its exclusive jurisdiction.”) It cannot, and should not, be burdened with
the task of deciding cases in the first instance.
* NOTE: Its jurisdiction to issue extraordinary writs should be exercised only where absolutely
necessary or where serious and important reasons exist.

RATIONALE

A. It would be an imposition upon limited time of the court

B. It would inevitably result in a delay, intended or otherwise, in the adjudication of cases, which
in some instances, had to be remanded or referred to the lower court as the proper forum
under the rules of procedure, or as court equipped to resolve the issues Bec. The court is not
a trier of facts.

WHEN IT MAY BE DISREGARDED

GENERAL EXCEPTION: IF warranted by the nature and importance of the issues raised in the
interest of speedy justice and to avoid future litigations.
it is only for special and compelling reasons that is, clearly and specifically se out in the petition
such as cases if national interest and of serious implications that justify the availment of the
extraordinary remedy of writ certiorari, prohibition, or mandamus) that court shall exercise its
primary jurisdiction over the extraordinary remedy of writ of prohibition.

DIRECT RESORT ALLOWED

1. When there are special and important reasons clearly stated in the petition;
2. When dictated by public welfare and the advancement of public policy;
3. When demanded by the broader interest of justice;
4. When the challenged orders were patent nullities; or
5. When analogous exceptional and compelling circumstances called for and justified the
immediate and direct handling by the court.

DOCTRINE OF NON INTERFERENCE OR DOCTRINE OF JUDICIAL STABILITY

Courts of equal and coordinate jurisdiction cannot interference with each other’s orders. Hence,
a regional trial court has no power or authority to nullify or enjoin the enforcement of a writ of
possession issued by another RTC.
Bars a court from reviewing or interfering with the judgement of a co equal court over which it has
no appellate jurisdiction or power of review.
Applies to administrative bodies. When appeal from the decision of an administrative body to the
SC or CA, it means that such body is co equal with the RTC in terms of rank and stature and
logically beyond the control of the latter.

CONSTITUTIONAL VS STATUTORY COURTS

Constitutional court is one created by a direct constitutional provision. Ex. SC

Statutory court is one created by a law other than the constitution. Created by statutory
enactments.
Sandigan bayan is not a constitutional created court. It was not directly created by the constitution
but was created by law pursuant to a constitutional mandate.