Philippine Labor Law Glossary
Definition: Certiorari is a special civil action under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court questioning an act done with grave abuse of discretion. In labor cases it is the route from an NLRC decision to the Court of Appeals — and it is not an appeal.
Sa Filipino · Filipino Explanation
Ano ang certiorari?
Ang certiorari ay isang special civil action sa ilalim ng Rule 65 na kumukuwestiyon sa isang gawaing may grave abuse of discretion. Sa mga kaso sa paggawa, ito ang daan mula sa desisyon ng NLRC patungo sa Court of Appeals.
Hindi ito appeal. Walang appeal mula sa NLRC. Ang tanong sa certiorari ay kung may grave abuse of discretion, hindi kung tama ba ang naging pasya.
What Certiorari Means
Certiorari is a corrective remedy, not a second opinion. Rule 65 allows it where a tribunal “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.”[1]
The distinction matters more than it sounds. An appeal asks whether the tribunal was wrong. Certiorari asks whether the tribunal acted so far outside its authority that its act cannot stand at all.
There Is No Appeal From the NLRC
This is the sentence to hold on to, and it comes from the case that settled the route.
In St. Martin Funeral Home v. NLRC the Supreme Court stated plainly that “under the present state of the law, there is no provision for appeals from the decision of the NLRC,” and directed that “all such petitions should henceforth be initially filed in the Court of Appeals in strict observance of the doctrine on the hierarchy of courts.”[2] References in the law to appeals from the NLRC were “declared to mean and refer to petitions for certiorari under Rule 65.”[2]
So a party unhappy with an NLRC ruling does not appeal it. It files a Rule 65 petition with the Court of Appeals, and the question on the table is grave abuse of discretion.
The Route, in Order
| Stage | What happens | Deadline |
|---|---|---|
| Labor Arbiter decides | Decision, award or order issued | Final and executory unless appealed within ten calendar days from receipt[3] |
| Appeal to the NLRC | The one true appeal in the chain | Ten calendar days |
| Motion for reconsideration | Generally required before certiorari | Per the NLRC Rules |
| Rule 65 petition to the Court of Appeals | Not an appeal — a special civil action | Sixty days[4] |
Sixty Days, Counted From the Right Date
Rule 65 provides that “[t]he petition shall be filed not later than sixty (60) days from notice of the judgment, order or resolution.” Where a motion for reconsideration was timely filed, “the petition shall be filed not later than sixty (60) days counted from the notice of the denial of the motion.”[4]
The second sentence is the one that matters in practice, because a motion for reconsideration is normally the step before certiorari.
File the Motion for Reconsideration First
As a general rule, “certiorari as a special civil action will not lie unless a motion for reconsideration is filed before the respondent tribunal.”[5] The purpose is to give the tribunal a chance to correct itself.
The Supreme Court recognises exceptions — among them where the order is a patent nullity because the tribunal had no jurisdiction, and where a motion for reconsideration would be useless in the circumstances.[5] Those are narrow, and a party who skips the motion is betting on fitting inside one.
What Grave Abuse of Discretion Means
Not every error qualifies. The Supreme Court holds that an act is done with grave abuse of discretion “when such act is done in a ‘capricious or whimsical exercise of judgment as is equivalent to lack of jurisdiction.’” The abuse must be “so patent and gross” as to amount to “an evasion of a positive duty or to a virtual refusal to perform a duty enjoined by law,” exercised “in an arbitrary and despotic manner by reason of passion and hostility.”[6]
A tribunal that weighed the evidence differently than a party would like has not committed grave abuse of discretion. That is the practical reason most Rule 65 petitions in labor cases fail.
Why the Term Matters
Because the remedy is narrow and the deadline is fixed, calling it an “appeal” leads people to prepare the wrong case. A Rule 65 petition that re-argues the facts, without showing the NLRC acted capriciously or outside its authority, is answering a question the court did not ask.
For workers and employers alike, the practical point is upstream: the record built before the Labor Arbiter, judged against substantial evidence, is where a labor case is usually won or lost.
Common Misunderstanding
Misunderstanding: “We will appeal the NLRC decision to the Court of Appeals.”
Correct approach: There is no appeal from the NLRC. The remedy is a petition for certiorari under Rule 65, and the ground is grave abuse of discretion — not simple error.
Misunderstanding: “Certiorari lets the Court of Appeals re-examine the evidence.”
Correct approach: Certiorari reaches jurisdiction and grave abuse of discretion. Findings of fact of quasi-judicial bodies supported by substantial evidence are generally accorded respect.
Related and Contrasting Terms
Broader term: National Labor Relations Commission
Related terms:
Do not confuse with:
- An appeal — which asks whether the tribunal was wrong, not whether it exceeded its authority
Related LaborCode.ph Guides
- DOLE, SEnA and NLRC procedures
- Filing labor claims directly with the NLRC
- NLRC e-filing system guide
Sources and Legal Citations
- Rules of Court, Rule 65, Section 1, Supreme Court E-Library. Supports: the grounds for certiorari.
- St. Martin Funeral Home v. National Labor Relations Commission and Bienvenido Aricayos, G.R. No. 130866, 16 September 1998, Supreme Court E-Library. Supports: no appeal from the NLRC; petitions go first to the Court of Appeals under Rule 65.
- Labor Code of the Philippines, Article 229 [223], quoted in Noel M. Manrique v. Delta Earthmoving, Inc., G.R. No. 229429, 9 November 2020, LawPhil Project. Supports: ten calendar days for a Labor Arbiter decision to become final absent appeal.
- Rules of Court, Rule 65, Section 4, as amended by A.M. No. 07-7-12-SC, LawPhil Project. Supports: the sixty-day period and its reckoning.
- Jennifer Abraham v. NLRC, Philippine Institute of Technical Education and Jaime Magnanao, G.R. No. 143823, 6 March 2001, LawPhil Project. Supports: the general rule requiring a motion for reconsideration, and the recognised exceptions.
- Malayang Manggagawa ng Stayfast Phils., Inc. v. NLRC, G.R. No. 155306, 28 August 2013, LawPhil Project. Supports: the definition of grave abuse of discretion.
Sources rechecked as of: 9 September 2026
Disclaimer
This glossary entry is for general educational and legal-information purposes and is not legal advice. Labor disputes depend on specific facts and current law. LaborCode.ph is independent and is not a government website, tribunal or law firm.