A.I. Powered: Philippine Bar Reviewer

Question

Collegiate Courts: Court of Appeals - B.P. Blg. 129, as amended by R.A. No. 7902

Scenario:

Janet, a resident of Metroville, filed a Petition for Certiorari before the Court of Appeals (CA), alleging grave abuse of discretion on the part of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) in dismissing her case without conducting a hearing. The CA, after reviewing the records and finding merit in Janet's petition, rendered a Decision nullifying the RTC's dismissal order and remanding the case for further proceedings.

In the process of the remand, Janet requested that the case be re-raffled to a different branch of the RTC, citing bias and partiality on the part of the judge who previously handled the case. The RTC denied Janet's request, stating that the remand order did not carry with it the authority to change the branch of the court handling the case.

Unsatisfied with the RTC's denial, Janet filed an appeal before the CA, arguing that the denial infringed on her right to due process and fair trial. The CA, after considering the arguments of both parties, issued a Resolution affirming the RTC's denial of Janet's request to re-raffle the case.

Question:

1. Was the CA correct in affirming the RTC's denial of Janet's request to re-raffle the case? Explain your answer citing the relevant provisions of B.P. Blg. 129, as amended by R.A. No. 7902.

---

Answer