The standard under Rule 65 for the issuance of
the writ of prohibition is "grave abuse of discretion" and not mere
"abuse of discretion." The difference is not a simple matter of
semantics. The writs governed by Rule 65 – certiorari, mandamus, and
prohibition – are extraordinary remedies designed to correct not mere errors of
judgment (i.e., in the appreciation of facts or interpretation of law) but
errors of jurisdiction (i.e., lack or excess of jurisdiction). Unlike the first
category of errors which the lower tribunal commits in the exercise of its
jurisdiction, the latter class of errors is committed by a lower tribunal
devoid of jurisdiction or, alternatively, for exercising jurisdiction in an
"arbitrary or despotic manner." By conflating "abuse of
discretion" with "grave abuse of discretion," the Court of
Appeals failed to follow the rigorous standard of Rule 65, diluting its office
of correcting only jurisdictional errors.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.