Acting on my earlier promise to state the salient parts of the new SPECIAL RULES OF COURT ON ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR), docketed as A.M. No. 07-11-08-SC, which took effect on October 30, 2009, may I start by saying that it is the policy of the State to actively promote the use of various modes of ADR and to respect party autonomy or the freedom of the parties to make their own arrangements in the resolution of disputes with the greatest cooperation of and the least intervention from the courts. To this end, the objectives of the Special ADR Rules are to encourage and promote the use of ADR, particularly arbitration and mediation, as an important means to achieve speedy and efficient resolution of disputes, impartial justice, curb a litigious culture and to de-clog court dockets.
The Special Rules of Court on Alternative Dispute Resolution (the “Special ADR Rules”) shall apply to and govern the following cases:
a. Relief on the issue of Existence, Validity, or Enforceability of the Arbitration Agreement;
b. Referral to Alternative Dispute Resolution (“ADR”);
c. Interim Measures of Protection;
d. Appointment of Arbitrator;
e. Challenge to Appointment of Arbitrator;
f. Termination of Mandate of Arbitrator;
g. Assistance in Taking Evidence;
h. Confirmation, Correction or Vacation of Award in Domestic Arbitration;
i. Recognition and Enforcement or Setting Aside of an Award in International
Commercial Arbitration;
j. Recognition and Enforcement of a Foreign Arbitral Award;
k. Confidentiality/Protective Orders; and
l. Deposit and Enforcement of Mediated Settlement Agreements.
All proceedings under the Special ADR Rules are special proceedings.
The proceedings in the following instances are summary in nature and shall be governed by this provision:
a. Judicial Relief Involving the Issue of Existence, Validity or Enforceability of
the Arbitration Agreement;
b. Referral to ADR;
c. Interim Measures of Protection;
d. Appointment of Arbitrator;
e. Challenge to Appointment of Arbitrator;
f. Termination of Mandate of Arbitrator;
g. Assistance in Taking Evidence;
h. Confidentiality/Protective Orders; and
i. Deposit and Enforcement of Mediated Settlement Agreements.
The following pleadings, motions, or petitions shall not be allowed in the cases governed by the Special ADR Rules and shall not be accepted for filing by the Clerk of Court:
a. Motion to dismiss;
b. Motion for bill of particulars;
c. Motion for new trial or for reopening of trial;
d. Petition for relief from judgment;
e. Motion for extension, except in cases where an ex-parte temporary order of
protection has been issued;
f. Rejoinder to reply;
g. Motion to declare a party in default; and
h. Any other pleading specifically disallowed under any provision of the Special
ADR Rules.
Where the parties have agreed to submit their dispute to arbitration, courts shall refer the parties to arbitration pursuant to Republic Act No. 9285 bearing in mind that such arbitration agreement is the law between the parties and that they are expected to abide by it in good faith. Further, the courts shall not refuse to refer parties to arbitration for reasons including, but not limited to, the following:
a. The referral tends to oust a court of its jurisdiction;
b. The court is in a better position to resolve the dispute subject of arbitration;
c. The referral would result in multiplicity of suits;
d. The arbitration proceeding has not commenced;
e. The place of arbitration is in a foreign country;
f. One or more of the issues are legal and one or more of the arbitrators are not
lawyers;
g. One or more of the arbitrators are not Philippine nationals; or
h. One or more of the arbitrators are alleged not to possess the required
qualification under the arbitration agreement or law.
Where court intervention is allowed under ADR Laws or the Special ADR Rules, courts shall not refuse to grant relief, as provided herein, for any of the following reasons:
a. Prior to the constitution of the arbitral tribunal, the court finds that the
principal action is the subject of an arbitration agreement; or
b. The principal action is already pending before an arbitral tribunal.
The Special ADR Rules recognize the principle of competence-competence, which
means that the arbitral tribunal may initially rule on its own jurisdiction, including any objections with respect to the existence or validity of the arbitration agreement or any condition precedent to the filing of a request for arbitration.
The Special ADR Rules recognize the principle of separability of the arbitration
clause, which means that said clause shall be treated as an agreement independent of
the other terms of the contract of which it forms part. A decision that the contract is null and void shall not entail ipso jure the invalidity of the arbitration clause.
The arbitral tribunal shall be accorded the first opportunity or competence to rule on the issue of whether or not it has the competence or jurisdiction to decide a dispute submitted to it for decision, including any objection with respect to the existence or validity of the arbitration agreement. When a court is asked to rule upon issue/s affecting the competence or jurisdiction of an arbitral tribunal in a dispute brought before it, either before or after the arbitral tribunal is constituted, the court must exercise judicial restraint and defer to the competence or jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal by allowing the arbitral tribunal the first opportunity to rule upon such issues.
Where the court is asked to make a determination of whether the arbitration
agreement is null and void, inoperative or incapable of being performed, under this
policy of judicial restraint, the court must make no more than a prima facie
determination of that issue.
Unless the court, pursuant to such prima facie determination, concludes that the
arbitration agreement is null and void, inoperative or incapable of being performed, the court must suspend the action before it and refer the parties to arbitration pursuant to the arbitration agreement.
Any party to an arbitration agreement may petition the appropriate court to determine any question concerning the existence, validity and enforceability of such arbitration agreement serving a copy thereof on the respondent in accordance with Rule 1.4 (A). The petition for judicial determination of the existence, validity and/or enforceability of an arbitration agreement may be filed at any time prior to the commencement of arbitration. Despite the pendency of the petition provided herein, arbitral proceedings may nevertheless be commenced and continue to the rendition of an award, while the issue is pending before the court.
A prima facie determination by the court upholding the existence, validity or enforceability of an arbitration agreement shall not be subject to a motion for reconsideration, appeal or certiorari.
Such prima facie determination will not, however, prejudice the right of any party
to raise the issue of the existence, validity and enforceability of the arbitration
agreement before the arbitral tribunal or the court in an action to vacate or set aside the arbitral award. In the latter case, the court’s review of the arbitral tribunal’s ruling upholding the existence, validity or enforceability of the arbitration agreement shall no longer be limited to a mere prima facie determination of such issue or issues as prescribed in this Rule, but shall be a full review of such issue or issues with due regard, however, to the standard for review for arbitral awards prescribed in these Special ADR Rules.
Any party to arbitration may petition the appropriate court for judicial relief from the ruling of the arbitral tribunal on a preliminary question upholding or declining its jurisdiction. Should the ruling of the arbitral tribunal declining its jurisdiction be reversed by the court, the parties shall be free to replace the arbitrators or any one of them in accordance with the rules that were applicable for the appointment of arbitrator sought to be replaced.
The court shall not enjoin the arbitration proceedings during the pendency of the petition. Judicial recourse to the court shall not prevent the arbitral tribunal from
continuing the proceedings and rendering its award. The aggrieved party may file a motion for reconsideration of the order of the court. The decision of the court shall, however, not be subject to appeal. The ruling of the court affirming the arbitral tribunal’s jurisdiction shall not be subject to a petition for certiorari. The ruling of the court that the arbitral tribunal has no jurisdiction may be the subject of a petition for certiorari.
Where the arbitral tribunal defers its ruling on preliminary question regarding its jurisdiction until its final award, the aggrieved party cannot seek judicial relief to question the deferral and must await the final arbitral award before seeking appropriate judicial recourse. A ruling by the arbitral tribunal deferring resolution on the issue of its jurisdiction until final award, shall not be subject to a motion for reconsideration, appeal or a petition for certiorari.
A party to a pending action filed in violation of the arbitration agreement, whether contained in an arbitration clause or in a submission agreement, may request the court to refer the parties to arbitration in accordance with such agreement. The request for referral shall be made not later than the pre-trial conference. After the pre-trial conference, the court will only act upon the request for referral if it is made with the agreement of all parties to the case. If there is no existing arbitration agreement at the time the case is filed but the parties subsequently enter into an arbitration agreement, they may request the court to refer their dispute to arbitration at any time during the proceedings. The request for referral shall be in the form of a motion, which shall state that the dispute is covered by an arbitration agreement. Apart from other submissions, the movant shall attach to his motion an authentic copy of the arbitration agreement. The request shall contain a notice of hearing addressed to all parties specifying the date and time when it would be heard. The party making the request shall serve it upon the respondent to give him the opportunity to file a comment or opposition as provided in the immediately succeeding Rule before the hearing.
After hearing, the court shall stay the action and, considering the statement of policy embodied in Rule 2.4, above, refer the parties to arbitration if it finds prima facie, based on the pleadings and supporting documents submitted by the parties, that there is an arbitration agreement and that the subject-matter of the dispute is capable of settlement or resolution by arbitration in accordance with Section 6 of the ADR Act. Otherwise, the court shall continue with the judicial proceedings. An order referring the dispute to arbitration shall be immediately executory and shall not be subject to a motion for reconsideration, appeal or petition for certiorari. An order denying the request to refer the dispute to arbitration shall not be subject to an appeal, but may be the subject of a motion for reconsideration and/or a petition for certiorari.
The court shall not decline to refer some or all of the parties to arbitration for any of the following reasons:
a. Not all of the disputes subject of the civil action may be referred to arbitration;
b. Not all of the parties to the civil action are bound by the arbitration
agreement and referral to arbitration would result in multiplicity of suits;
c. The issues raised in the civil action could be speedily and efficiently resolved
in its entirety by the court rather than in arbitration;
d. Referral to arbitration does not appear to be the most prudent action; or
e. The stay of the action would prejudice the rights of the parties to the civil
action who are not bound by the arbitration agreement.
The court may, however, issue an order directing the inclusion in arbitration of
those parties who are not bound by the arbitration agreement but who agree to such
inclusion provided those originally bound by it do not object to their inclusion.
A petition for an interim measure of protection may be made (a) before arbitration is commenced, (b) after arbitration is commenced, but before the constitution of the arbitral tribunal, or (c) after the constitution of the arbitral tribunal and at any time during arbitral proceedings but, at this stage, only to the extent that the arbitral tribunal has no power to act or is unable to act effectively. A petition for an interim measure of protection may be filed with the Regional Trial Court, which has jurisdiction over any of the following places:
a. Where the principal place of business of any of the parties to arbitration is
located;
b. Where any of the parties who are individuals resides;
c. Where any of the acts sought to be enjoined are being performed, threatened
to be performed or not being performed; or
d. Where the real property subject of arbitration, or a portion thereof is situated.
The following grounds, while not limiting the reasons for the court to grant an interim measure of protection, indicate the nature of the reasons that the court shall consider in granting the relief:
a. The need to prevent irreparable loss or injury;
b. The need to provide security for the performance of any obligation;
c. The need to produce or preserve evidence; or
d. The need to compel any other appropriate act or omission.
The verified petition must state the following:
a. The fact that there is an arbitration agreement;
b. The fact that the arbitral tribunal has not been constituted, or if constituted, is unable to act or would be unable to act effectively;
c. A detailed description of the appropriate relief sought;
d. The grounds relied on for the allowance of the petition
The following, among others, are the interim measures of protection that a court may grant:
a. Preliminary injunction directed against a party to arbitration;
b. Preliminary attachment against property or garnishment of funds in the
custody of a bank or a third person;
c. Appointment of a receiver;
d. Detention, preservation, delivery or inspection of property; or,
e. Assistance in the enforcement of an interim measure of protection granted by
the arbitral tribunal, which the latter cannot enforce effectively.
Any party to an arbitration, whether domestic or foreign, may request the court to provide assistance in taking evidence. Assistance may be sought at any time during the course of the arbitral proceedings when the need arises. A petition for assistance in taking evidence may, at the option of the petitioner, be filed with Regional Trial Court where (a) arbitration proceedings are taking place, (b) the witnesses reside or may be found, or (c) where the evidence may be found. The court may grant or execute the request for assistance in taking evidence within its competence and according to the rules of evidence. A party requiring assistance in the taking of evidence may petition the court to direct any person, including a representative of a corporation, association, partnership or other entity (other than a party to the ADR proceedings or its officers) found in the Philippines, for any of the following:
a. To comply with a subpoena ad testificandum and/or subpoena duces tecum;
b. To appear as a witness before an officer for the taking of his deposition upon
oral examination or by written interrogatories;
c. To allow the physical examination of the condition of persons, or the
inspection of things or premises and, when appropriate, to allow the
recording and/or documentation of condition of persons, things or premises
(i.e., photographs, video and other means of recording/documentation);
d. To allow the examination and copying of documents; and
e. To perform any similar acts.
For mediation proceedings, the court shall be further guided by the following
principles:
a. Information obtained through mediation shall be privileged and confidential.
b. A party, a mediator, or a nonparty participant may refuse to disclose and may
prevent any other person from disclosing a mediation communication.
c. In such an adversarial proceeding, the following persons involved or
previously involved in a mediation may not be compelled to disclose
confidential information obtained during the mediation: (1) the parties to the
dispute; (2) the mediator or mediators; (3) the counsel for the parties: (4) the
nonparty participants; (5) any persons hired or engaged in connection with
the mediation as secretary, stenographer; clerk or assistant; and (6) any other
person who obtains or possesses confidential information by reason of his/
her profession.
d. The protection of the ADR Laws shall continue to apply even if a mediator is
found to have failed to act impartially.
e. A mediator may not be called to testify to provide information gathered in
mediation. A mediator who is wrongfully subpoenaed shall be reimbursed
the full cost of his attorney fees and related expenses.
The arbitral award may be vacated on the following grounds:
a. The arbitral award was procured through corruption, fraud or other undue
means;
b. There was evident partiality or corruption in the arbitral tribunal or any of its
members;
c. The arbitral tribunal was guilty of misconduct or any form of misbehavior
that has materially prejudiced the rights of any party such as refusing to
postpone a hearing upon sufficient cause shown or to hear evidence pertinent
and material to the controversy;
d. One or more of the arbitrators was disqualified to act as such under the law
and willfully refrained from disclosing such disqualification; or
e. The arbitral tribunal exceeded its powers, or so imperfectly executed them,
such that a complete, final and definite award upon the subject matter
submitted to them was not made.
The award may also be vacated on any or all of the following grounds:
a. The arbitration agreement did not exist, or is invalid for any ground for
the revocation of a contract or is otherwise unenforceable; or
b. A party to arbitration is a minor or a person judicially declared to be
incompetent.
The Court may correct/modify or order the arbitral tribunal to correct/modify the arbitral award in the following cases:
a. Where there was an evident miscalculation of figures or an evident mistake in
the description of any person, thing or property referred to in the award;
b. Where the arbitrators have awarded upon a matter not submitted to them,
not affecting the merits of the decision upon the matter submitted;
c. Where the arbitrators have omitted to resolve an issue submitted to them for
resolution; or
d. Where the award is imperfect in a matter of form not affecting the merits of
the controversy, and if it had been a commissioner’s report, the defect could
have been amended or disregarded by the Court.
Any party to an international commercial arbitration in the Philippines may petition the proper court to recognize and enforce or set aside an arbitral award. The petition for enforcement and recognition of an arbitral award may be filed anytime from receipt of the award. If, however, a timely petition to set aside an arbitral award is filed, the opposing party must file therein and in opposition thereto the petition for recognition and enforcement of the same award within the period for filing an opposition. The petition to set aside an arbitral award may only be filed within three (3) months from the time the petitioner receives a copy thereof. If a timely request is made with the arbitral tribunal for correction, interpretation or additional award, the three (3) month period shall be counted from the time the petitioner receives the resolution by the arbitral tribunal of that request. A petition to set aside can no longer be filed after the lapse of the three (3) month period. The dismissal of a petition to set aside an arbitral award for being time-barred shall not automatically result in the approval of the petition filed therein and in opposition thereto for recognition and enforcement of the same award. Failure to file a petition to set aside shall preclude a party from raising grounds to resist enforcement of the award.
The court may set aside or refuse the enforcement of the arbitral award only if:
a. The party making the application furnishes proof that:
(i). A party to the arbitration agreement was under some incapacity, or the
said agreement is not valid under the law to which the parties have
subjected it or, failing any indication thereof, under Philippine law; or
(ii). The party making the application to set aside or resist enforcement was
not given proper notice of the appointment of an arbitrator or of the
arbitral proceedings or was otherwise unable to present his case; or
(iii). The award deals with a dispute not contemplated by or not falling
within the terms of the submission to arbitration, or contains decisions
on matters beyond the scope of the submission to arbitration; provided
that, if the decisions on matters submitted to arbitration can be separated
from those not so submitted, only that part of the award which contains
decisions on matters not submitted to arbitration may be set aside or
only that part of the award which contains decisions on matters
submitted to arbitration may be enforced; or
(iv). The composition of the arbitral tribunal or the arbitral procedure was
not in accordance with the agreement of the parties, unless such
agreement was in conflict with a provision of Philippine law from which
the parties cannot derogate, or, failing such agreement, was not in
accordance with Philippine law;
b. The court finds that:
(i). The subject-matter of the dispute is not capable of settlement by
arbitration under the law of the Philippines; or
(ii). The recognition or enforcement of the award would be contrary to
public policy.
The recognition and enforcement of a foreign arbitral award shall be governed by the 1958 New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (the “New York Convention”) and this Rule. The court may, upon grounds of comity and reciprocity, recognize and enforce a foreign arbitral award made in a country that is not a signatory to the New York Convention as if it were a Convention Award.
A Philippine court shall not set aside a foreign arbitral award but may refuse it
recognition and enforcement on any or all of the following grounds:
a. The party making the application to refuse recognition and enforcement of
the award furnishes proof that:
(i). A party to the arbitration agreement was under some incapacity; or the
said agreement is not valid under the law to which the parties have
subjected it or, failing any indication thereof, under the law of the
country where the award was made; or
(ii). The party making the application was not given proper notice of the
appointment of an arbitrator or of the arbitral proceedings or was
otherwise unable to present his case; or
(iii). The award deals with a dispute not contemplated by or not falling
within the terms of the submission to arbitration, or contains decisions
on matters beyond the scope of the submission to arbitration; provided
that, if the decisions on matters submitted to arbitration can be separated
from those not so submitted, only that part of the award which contains
decisions on matters not submitted to arbitration may be set aside; or
(iv). The composition of the arbitral tribunal or the arbitral procedure was
not in accordance with the agreement of the parties or, failing such
agreement, was not in accordance with the law of the country where
arbitration took place; or
(v). The award has not yet become binding on the parties or has been set
aside or suspended by a court of the country in which that award was
made; or
b. The court finds that:
(i). The subject-matter of the dispute is not capable of settlement or
resolution by arbitration under Philippine law; or
(ii). The recognition or enforcement of the award would be contrary to
public policy.
The court shall disregard any ground for opposing the recognition and
enforcement of a foreign arbitral award other than those enumerated above.
It is presumed that a foreign arbitral award was made and released in due course of arbitration and is subject to enforcement by the court. The court shall recognize and enforce a foreign arbitral award unless a ground to refuse recognition or enforcement of the foreign arbitral award under this rule is fully established. The decision of the court recognizing and enforcing a foreign arbitral award is immediately executory. In resolving the petition for recognition and enforcement of a foreign arbitral award in accordance with these Special ADR Rules, the court shall either [a] recognize and/or enforce or [b] refuse to recognize and enforce the arbitral award. The court shall not disturb the arbitral tribunal’s determination of facts and/or interpretation of law.
The court shall, only upon grounds provided by these Special ADR Rules, recognize and enforce a foreign arbitral award made in a country not a signatory to the New York Convention when such country extends comity and reciprocity to awards made in the Philippines. If that country does not extend comity and reciprocity to awards made in the Philippines, the court may nevertheless treat such award as a foreign judgment enforceable as such under Rule 39, Section 48, of the Rules of Court.
A party may ask the Regional Trial to reconsider its ruling on the following:
a. That the arbitration agreement is inexistent, invalid or unenforceable
pursuant to Rule 3.10 (B);
b. Upholding or reversing the arbitral tribunal’s jurisdiction pursuant to Rule
3.19;
c. Denying a request to refer the parties to arbitration;
d. Granting or denying a party an interim measure of protection;
e. Denying a petition for the appointment of an arbitrator;
f. Refusing to grant assistance in taking evidence;
g. Enjoining or refusing to enjoin a person from divulging confidential
information;
h. Confirming, vacating or correcting a domestic arbitral award;
i. Suspending the proceedings to set aside an international commercial arbitral
award and referring the case back to the arbitral tribunal;
j. Setting aside an international commercial arbitral award;
k. Dismissing the petition to set aside an international commercial arbitral
award, even if the court does not recognize and/or enforce the same;
l. Recognizing and/or enforcing, or dismissing a petition to recognize and/or
enforce an international commercial arbitral award;
m. Declining a request for assistance in taking evidence;
n. Adjourning or deferring a ruling on a petition to set aside, recognize and/or
enforce an international commercial arbitral award;
o. Recognizing and/or enforcing a foreign arbitral award, or refusing
recognition and/or enforcement of the same; and
p. Granting or dismissing a petition to enforce a deposited mediated settlement
agreement.
No motion for reconsideration shall be allowed from the following rulings of the
Regional Trial Court:
a. A prima facie determination upholding the existence, validity or enforceability
of an arbitration agreement pursuant to Rule 3.1 (A);
b. An order referring the dispute to arbitration;
c. An order appointing an arbitrator;
d. Any ruling on the challenge to the appointment of an arbitrator;
e. Any order resolving the issue of the termination of the mandate of an
arbitrator; and
f. An order granting assistance in taking evidence.
As a general rule, the court can only vacate or set aside the decision of an arbitral tribunal upon a clear showing that the award suffers from any of the infirmities or grounds for vacating an arbitral award under Section 24 of Republic Act No. 876 or under Rule 34 of the Model Law in a domestic arbitration, or for setting aside an award in an international arbitration under Article 34 of the Model Law, or for such other grounds provided under these Special Rules.
The court shall not set aside or vacate the award of the arbitral tribunal merely
on the ground that the arbitral tribunal committed errors of fact, or of law, or of fact and law, as the court cannot substitute its judgment for that of the arbitral tribunal.
The court can deny recognition and enforcement of a foreign arbitral award only upon the grounds provided in Article V of the New York Convention, but shall have no power to vacate or set aside a foreign arbitral award.
An appeal to the Court of Appeals through a petition for review under this Special Rule shall only be allowed from the following final orders of the Regional Trial Court:
a. Granting or denying an interim measure of protection;
b. Denying a petition for appointment of an arbitrator;
c. Denying a petition for assistance in taking evidence;
d. Enjoining or refusing to enjoin a person from divulging confidential
information;
e. Confirming, vacating or correcting/modifying a domestic arbitral award;
f. Setting aside an international commercial arbitration award;
g. Dismissing the petition to set aside an international commercial arbitration
award even if the court does not decide to recognize or enforce such award;
h. Recognizing and/or enforcing an international commercial arbitration award;
i. Dismissing a petition to enforce an international commercial arbitration
award;
j. Recognizing and/or enforcing a foreign arbitral award;
k. Refusing recognition and/or enforcement of a foreign arbitral award;
l. Granting or dismissing a petition to enforce a deposited mediated settlement
agreement; and
m. Reversing the ruling of the arbitral tribunal upholding its jurisdiction.
When the Regional Trial Court, in making a ruling under the Special ADR Rules, has acted without or in excess of its 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, a party may file a special civil action for certiorari to annul or set aside a ruling of the Regional Trial Court. A special civil action for certiorari may be filed against the following orders of the court.
a. Holding that the arbitration agreement is inexistent, invalid or
unenforceable;
b. Reversing the arbitral tribunal’s preliminary determination upholding its
jurisdiction;
c. Denying the request to refer the dispute to arbitration;
d. Granting or refusing an interim relief;
e. Denying a petition for the appointment of an arbitrator;
f. Confirming, vacating or correcting a domestic arbitral award;
g. Suspending the proceedings to set aside an international commercial arbitral
award and referring the case back to the arbitral tribunal;
h. Allowing a party to enforce an international commercial arbitral award
pending appeal;
i. Adjourning or deferring a ruling on whether to set aside, recognize and or
enforce an international commercial arbitral award;
j. Allowing a party to enforce a foreign arbitral award pending appeal; and
k. Denying a petition for assistance in taking evidence.
The Court of Appeals shall not, during the pendency of the proceedings before it, prohibit or enjoin the commencement of arbitration, the constitution of the arbitral tribunal, or the continuation of arbitration.
A review by the Supreme Court is not a matter of right, but of sound judicial discretion, which will be granted only for serious and compelling reasons resulting in grave prejudice to the aggrieved party. The following, while neither controlling nor fully measuring the court's discretion, indicate the serious and compelling, and necessarily, restrictive nature of the grounds that will warrant the
exercise of the Supreme Court’s discretionary powers, when the Court of Appeals:
a. Failed to apply the applicable standard or test for judicial review prescribed
in these Special ADR Rules in arriving at its decision resulting in substantial
prejudice to the aggrieved party;
b. Erred in upholding a final order or decision despite the lack of jurisdiction of
the court that rendered such final order or decision;
c. Failed to apply any provision, principle, policy or rule contained in these Special ADR Rules resulting in substantial prejudice to the aggrieved party; and
d. Committed an error so egregious and harmful to a party as to amount to an
undeniable excess of jurisdiction.
The mere fact that the petitioner disagrees with the Court of Appeals’ determination of questions of fact, of law or both questions of fact and law, shall not warrant the exercise of the Supreme Court’s discretionary power. The error imputed to the Court of Appeals must be grounded upon any of the above prescribed grounds for review or be closely analogous thereto.
