Casus omissus: Analyzing the absence of an express statutory grant of certiorari jurisdiction upon the Court of Tax Appeals to establish that its court-granted certiorari power is a clear case of judicial legislation
Date of Publication
2018
Document Type
Master's Thesis
Degree Name
Juris Doctor
Subject Categories
Law
College
College of Law
Department/Unit
Law
Thesis Adviser
Anne Perpetual Rivera Sia
Defense Panel Chair
Ramon Esguerra
Defense Panel Member
Milagros Isabel A. Cristobal
Esteban Molon
Abstract/Summary
Judicial power is wielded by the judiciary, but the power to confer jurisdiction, which is pre-requisite to the exercise of judicial power, is lodged with the legislature. The Supreme Court earlier emphasized that jurisdiction of an inferior court cannot be presumed, but must appear clearly from statute. Otherwise, it will not be held to exist. Thus, absent an express conferment of jurisdiction over a subject matter by legislative fiat, neither convenience nor propriety of exercise can justify the assumption of jurisdiction by courts; and a shortcoming on the part of the legislature cannot be cured by judicial fiat, despite it being a more expeditious approach. In the Philippine setting, certiorari is an original action that must be the subject of legislative apportionment. A reading of the Constitution and existing laws would reveal that only the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, the Regional Trial Courts, and the Sandiganbayan are vested with original jurisdiction to issue writs of certiorari. However, in City of Manila v. Hon. Grecia-Cuerdo, the Supreme Court, in an unconventional decision, held that the Court of Tax Appeals is possessed with jurisdiction over petitions for certiorari, notwithstanding the absence of an express provision in any law conferring it with certiorari jurisdiction. In so ruling, the Supreme Court relied on two premises: first, that a plain reading of Art. VIII, Section 1, of the 1987 Constitution would reveal that such authority is inherent in every court, the Court of Tax Appeals included, and second, that jurisdiction over certiorari petitions may be impliedly derived from the Court of Tax Appeals’ appellate jurisdiction. While the authors do not question the noble intentions behind the subject decision, it is the authors’ position that the Supreme Court overstepped its boundaries by transgressing legislative powers. This thesis challenges the constitutionality of the City of Manila decision by proving that first, Art. VIII, Section 1, of the 1987 Constitution is not a jurisdiction-vesting provision, and thus, insufficient to confer certiorari jurisdiction on the Court of Tax Appeals; and second, the Court of Tax Appeals’ appellate jurisdiction does not impliedly carry with it original jurisdiction to try and decide petitions for certiorari. The authors recommend the elimination of such conflict by proposing that Congress further amend Republic Act No. 1125, as amended by Republic Act No. 9282, so as to include a provision expressly granting the CTA the power to entertain and acquire jurisdiction over petitions for certiorari. Further, this thesis will analyze the effects of ubiquitously using Rule 65 of the Rules of Court as an adhoc remedy in order to operationalize the expanded judicial power of courts. It will demonstrate the urgency of promulgating specific rules of procedure in invoking the expanded judicial power of the courts. But ultimately, this thesis aims establish that jurisdiction over petitions for certiorari is conferred only by a legislative act which requires balancing between the two fundamental powers of two co-equal departments of government – the power of Congress to confer jurisdiction and the expanded judicial power of the judiciary.
Abstract Format
html
Language
English
Format
Electronic
Accession Number
CDTG007469; TG007469
Shelf Location
Archives, The Learning Common's, 12F Henry Sy Sr. Hall
Keywords
Judge-made law--Philippines; Philippines. Court of Tax Appeals
Upload Full Text
wf_no
Recommended Citation
Angsiy, W. M., & Huecas, I. R. (2018). Casus omissus: Analyzing the absence of an express statutory grant of certiorari jurisdiction upon the Court of Tax Appeals to establish that its court-granted certiorari power is a clear case of judicial legislation. Retrieved from https://animorepository.dlsu.edu.ph/etd_masteral/7255
Embargo Period
11-15-2024
