This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2014-03-31 |
BERSAMIN, J. |
||||
| Finally, we also conclude that the CA rightly sustained the RTC's dismissal of Pascual's petition for certiorari because of the impropriety of her chosen remedy. A special civil action for certiorari is the proper action to bring when a tribunal, board or officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial function has acted without or in excess of its or his jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction and there is no appeal, or any plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law.[32] The exercise of judicial function consists in the power to determine what the law is and what the legal rights of the parties are, and then to adjudicate upon the rights of the parties.[33] The term quasi-judicial function applies to the action and discretion of public administrative officers or bodies that are required to investigate facts or to ascertain the existence of facts, hold hearings, and draw conclusions from them as a basis for their official action and to exercise discretion of a judicial nature.[34] However, the issuance by Daquioag of the assailed memorandum implementing the writ of execution did not derive from the performance of a judicial or quasi-judicial function. He was not thereby called upon to adjudicate the rights of the contending parties or to exercise any discretion of a judicial nature, but only performing an administrative duty of enforcing and implementing the writ. | |||||