Short answer. Rule 46 governs original actions for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, and quo warranto filed in the Court of Appeals — though annulment of judgment actions follow Rule 47, the specifics of certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus follow Rule 65, and quo warranto follows Rule 66.

What the law says

This Rule shall apply to original actions for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus and quo warranto.

Rule 46, Section 2 — To what actions applicable. Read the full provision →

What the law says

Except as otherwise provided, the actions for annulment of judgment shall be governed by Rule 47, for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus by Rule 65, and for quo warranto by Rule 66.

Rule 46, Section 2 — To what actions applicable. Read the full provision →

Four kinds of original actions

Section 2 defines Rule 46's reach in a single sentence: this Rule shall apply to original actions for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus and quo warranto. These are the extraordinary remedies a party can bring straight to the Court of Appeals rather than through an ordinary appeal from a trial court judgment, and each has its own substantive grounds a petitioner must actually establish.

Rule 46 works alongside other rules, not alone

Section 2 immediately qualifies that general statement: except as otherwise provided, the actions for annulment of judgment shall be governed by Rule 47, for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus by Rule 65, and for quo warranto by Rule 66. Rule 46 supplies the shared procedural scaffolding — case titling, filing requirements, how the court acts on a petition — while the more specific rules govern the substance of each particular action.

Why both sets of rules matter together

A party bringing an original petition to the Court of Appeals should read Rule 46 together with whichever specific rule governs the type of action being filed, since Rule 46 alone does not tell the full story of what must be alleged or proven for a certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, or quo warranto action to actually succeed on the merits before the court.

Notably absent: annulment of judgment

Although Section 2's second sentence mentions annulment of judgment in the same breath as certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, and quo warranto, the first sentence defining Rule 46's own scope does not list it among the actions Rule 46 applies to. Annulment of judgment before the Court of Appeals is governed by Rule 47 in its own right, with Rule 46 supplying only whatever general procedure Rule 47 does not itself displace, rather than annulment sitting as a fifth original action directly under Rule 46.

What falls outside this framework entirely

Rule 46 and the specific rules it points to bind a party who is bringing one of these four original actions directly to the Court of Appeals — they do not extend to an ordinary appeal from a trial court judgment, which instead proceeds under Rule 41 or Rule 44, nor to a petition for review from a quasi-judicial agency, which falls under Rule 43. A party who files an original certiorari petition but actually needed an ordinary appeal, or vice versa, does not get to treat Rule 46 as a fallback; using the wrong vehicle risks dismissal for pursuing the wrong remedy rather than simply being redirected to the correct one.

Related provisions

Note. Statute text quoted on this page is reproduced from the official enactment and is linked to the full provision. The explanation around it is general legal information from Vivas & Nobles Law Office, not legal advice. Whether it applies to your situation depends on facts only a lawyer reviewing them can assess.