Dear PAO,
I encouraged my brother to file a petition to nullify the decision of the court in a civil case where he lost on the ground of lack of jurisdiction. He told me that the decision had become final, making him hesitant to heed my advice. Allegedly, he asked someone regarding this legal remedy and was told that it is essential to state in the petition that the ordinary remedies of new trial, reconsideration, or appeal were no longer available through no fault of his own. He thinks that he was at fault because he failed to avail of these remedies due to financial constraints. Can he still file a petition for annulment of judgment?
Tiranikov
Dear Tiranikov,
Annulment of judgment is specifically governed by Rule 47 of the 1997 Revised Rules of Procedure, as amended. Pursuant to Section 1 of the said rule:
“This Rule shall govern the annulment by the Court of Appeals of judgments or final orders and resolutions in civil actions of Regional Trial Courts for which the ordinary remedies of new trial, appeal, petition for relief or other appropriate remedies are no longer available through no fault of the petitioner.”
Correlative thereto, the grounds for annulment of judgment are provided under Section 2 of the said Rules, which states that: “The annulment may be based only on the grounds of extrinsic fraud and lack of jurisdiction.”
It is essential in a civil action that the court which rendered judgment must have jurisdiction over the person of the parties or the subject matter. Without jurisdiction, a decision which was rendered by a court is null and void. This is exactly the pronouncement in Ancheta v. Ancheta, GR 145370, March 4, 2004, where the Supreme Court, speaking through Associate Justice Romeo Callejo Sr., stated that:
“In a case where a petition for the annulment of a judgment or final order of the RTC filed under Rule 47 of the Rules of Court is grounded on lack of jurisdiction over the person of the defendant/respondent or over the nature or subject of the action, the petitioner need not allege in the petition that the ordinary remedy of new trial or reconsideration of the final order or judgment or appeal therefrom are no longer available through no fault of her own. This is so because a judgment rendered or final order issued by the RTC without jurisdiction is null and void and may be assailed any time either collaterally or in a direct action or by resisting such judgment or final order in any action or proceeding whenever it is invoked, unless barred by laches.”
Applying the above-quoted jurisprudence to your situation, the remedy of annulment of judgment may still be available to your brother. The Supreme Court made it clear that if the ground is lack of jurisdiction over the parties or the subject matter, the petitioner need not allege in the petition that the ordinary remedy of new trial or reconsideration of the final order or judgment or appeal therefrom are no longer available through no fault of his own. This is for the simple reason that a decision rendered by the court without jurisdiction is null and void and the same may be assailed collaterally or by direct action at any time. The only exemption to this is when the same was barred by laches.
We hope that we were able to answer your queries. This advice was based solely on the facts you have narrated and our appreciation of the same. Our opinion may vary when other facts are changed or elaborated.
Thank you for your continued trust and support.
Editor’s note: Dear PAO is a daily column of the Public Attorney’s Office. Questions for Chief Acosta may be sent to dearpao@manilatimes.net
