This case has been cited 4 times or more.
|
2004-03-04 |
VITUG, J. |
||||
| Rule 47, entitled "Annulment of Judgments or Final Orders and Resolutions," is a new provision under the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure albeit the remedy has long been given imprimatur by the courts.[3] The rule covers "annulment by the Court of Appeals of judgments or final orders and resolutions in civil actions of Regional Trial Courts for which the ordinary remedies of new trial, appeal, petition for relief or other appropriate remedies could no longer be availed of through no fault of the petitioner."[4] An action for annulment of judgment is a remedy in law independent of the case where the judgment sought to be annulled is rendered.[5] The concern that the remedy could so easily be resorted to as an instrument to delay a final and executory judgment,[6] has prompted safeguards to be put in place in order to avoid an abuse of the rule. Thus, the annulment of judgment may be based only on the grounds of extrinsic fraud and lack of jurisdiction,[7] and the remedy may not be invoked (1) where the party has availed himself of the remedy of new trial, appeal, petition for relief or other appropriate remedy and lost therefrom, or (2) where he has failed to avail himself of those remedies through his own fault or negligence. | |||||