03-03-2023, 06:22 PM
GR#256337, February 13, 2023
Highlights:
Preliminary Investigation – cannot be considered valid and final judgment.
Jurisprudence has long settled that preliminary investigation does not form part of trial. Investigation for the purpose of determining whether an actual charge shall subsequently be filed against the person subject of the investigation is a purely administrative, rather than a judicial or quasi-judicial, function. It is not an exercise in adjudication: no ruling is made on the rights and obligations of the parties, but merely evidentiary appraisal to determine if it is worth going into actual adjudication.
The dismissal of a complaint on preliminary investigation by a prosecutor 'cannot be 'considered a valid and final judgment.' As there is no former final judgment or order on the merits rendered by the court having jurisdiction over both the subject matter and the parties, there could not have been res judicata xxxx
Reference Cited:
G.R. No. 226420, March 4, 2020, citing Pavlov. Mendenilla, 809 Phil. 24, 49 (2017).
Highlights:
Preliminary Investigation – cannot be considered valid and final judgment.
Jurisprudence has long settled that preliminary investigation does not form part of trial. Investigation for the purpose of determining whether an actual charge shall subsequently be filed against the person subject of the investigation is a purely administrative, rather than a judicial or quasi-judicial, function. It is not an exercise in adjudication: no ruling is made on the rights and obligations of the parties, but merely evidentiary appraisal to determine if it is worth going into actual adjudication.
The dismissal of a complaint on preliminary investigation by a prosecutor 'cannot be 'considered a valid and final judgment.' As there is no former final judgment or order on the merits rendered by the court having jurisdiction over both the subject matter and the parties, there could not have been res judicata xxxx
Reference Cited:
G.R. No. 226420, March 4, 2020, citing Pavlov. Mendenilla, 809 Phil. 24, 49 (2017).