G.R. No. 146079, July 20, 2001
Kanemitsu Yamaika, petitioner, vs. Pescarish Manufacturing Corporation (formerly Yamaoka Nippon Corporation), Tetsuo Adachi, Eiji Kawai and Mara Lynn Gesmundo, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Kanemitsu Yamaoka filed a case with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) for recovery of corporate control. On July 21, 1999, the SEC Hearing Officer denied petitioner’s application for a writ of preliminary injunction and appointment of a management committee. Petitioner moved for reconsideration on August 9, 1999. While this motion was pending, the New Rules of Procedure of the SEC took effect on August 29, 1999. The Hearing Officer denied the motion for reconsideration on October 14, 1999. Petitioner received this order on October 28, 1999. On December 17, 1999 (50 days after receipt), petitioner filed a petition for certiorari before the SEC En Banc assailing the Hearing Officer’s orders. Respondents moved to dismiss, arguing the petition was filed beyond the 15-day appeal period under Section 1, Rule XV of the New SEC Rules. The SEC En Banc granted the petition, ruling it was filed on time under the suppletory application of the 60-day period for certiorari under the Rules of Court. The Court of Appeals reversed the SEC, holding that Section 1, Rule XV of the New SEC Rules, which allows appeal from “any decision, ruling or order” within 15 days, applies to both final and interlocutory orders without distinction, and thus petitioner’s certiorari petition was an improper substitute for a lost appeal.

ISSUE

Whether Section 1, Rule XV of the New SEC Rules, which states that “[a]ny decision, ruling or order of the Hearing Officer may be appealed… within fifteen (15) days,” applies to interlocutory orders, thereby making an appeal the exclusive remedy and precluding a petition for certiorari.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court ruled that Section 1, Rule XV of the New SEC Rules does not apply to interlocutory orders. The Court held that the remedy of appeal under this rule is available only from final orders of the Hearing Officer. For interlocutory orders, the proper remedy is a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court, applied in a suppletory manner. The Court reasoned that: (1) the New SEC Rules omitted the separate provision for certiorari found in the old rules but did not expressly prohibit it, except in election cases; (2) allowing appeals from interlocutory orders would lead to delay and multiplicity of suits, contrary to the SEC’s objective of speedy dispute resolution; and (3) the SEC correctly applied the Rules of Court suppletorily, under which petitioner’s certiorari petition filed within 60 days was timely. The Decision of the Court of Appeals was reversed.