Practice question
A litigant seeks Rule43 ordinary review of an NLRC decision and argues RA7902’s broad language automatically converts the case into a statutory appeal. He does not establish the proper extraordinary remedy. What distinction does St Martin require?
- The established judicial review route is proper Rule65 certiorari in the CA, not automatic ordinary appeal
- All NLRC decisions permit unrestricted Rule43 appeal
- The CA has no power over NLRC action in any form
- A statute’s broad phrase removes every remedy requirement
- Only the labor arbiter can review the NLRC
Legal references
- RA7902 amended BP129 Section9: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1995/ra_7902_1995.html
- St Martin Funeral Home v NLRC GR130866 September16,1998 MAIN: https://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1998/sep1998/gr_130866_1998.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.