Practice question
A party brings an independent action directly in the CA to annul a first-level Municipal Trial Court’s civil judgment, invoking the CA’s exclusive original power to annul RTC judgments. Assume the remedy is properly one for annulment rather than an available appeal. Which is correct?
- Every judgment of every court is directly annulled by the CA
- The fact that the challenged judgment is from a first-level court is irrelevant
- Rule 47 section 10 directs the action to the RTC having jurisdiction over the first-level court, not the CA’s RTC-judgment annulment jurisdiction
- Only the CTA can annul first-level civil judgments
- No court can ever entertain annulment of a first-level judgment
Legal references
- https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1995/ra_7902_1995.html — RA 7902 section 1, current BP 129 section 9, original writ, annulment, appellate and factual-hearing powers.
- https://lawphil.net/courts/rules/rc_1-71_civil.html — Rules 42 and 43, relevant review routes, and Rule 47 sections 1 and 10, RTC versus first-level court annulment.
- https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2004/ra_9282_2004.html — amended CTA charter sections 7 and 19, special tax appellate jurisdiction and Supreme Court review of CTA en banc.
- https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2008/ra_9503_2008.html — section 1, CTA’s current rank at the same level as the Court of Appeals.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.