Practice question
A party wants ordinary appellate review of a CTA en banc ruling and cites the old Rule 43 text naming the CTA. Which current route controls?
- A verified Rule 45 petition for review on certiorari in the Supreme Court under the CTA charter
- A new ordinary appeal to any first-level court
- An ordinary Rule 43 petition in the CA merely from the old listing
- No judicial review can ever exist
- A private arbitration unilaterally demanded by the losing party
Legal references
- https://lawphil.net/courts/rules/rc_1-71_civil.html — Rule 43 sections 1–5, 10 and 12, quasi-judicial functions, scope, period, one reconsideration motion, substantial evidence and nonautomatic stay; read with later special statutes.
- https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2004/ra_9282_2004.html — amended CTA charter section 7(a)(5), CBAA appellate decisions, and section 19, Supreme Court Rule 45 review of CTA en banc.
- https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2008/ra_9503_2008.html — CTA’s current collegiate-court rank and structure.
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1998/sep1998/gr_130866_1998.html — St. Martin Funeral Home v. NLRC, G.R. No. 130866, September 16, 1998, main decision on CA Rule 65 review of NLRC action.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.