Under Rules of Court Rule 37, a party who lost can ask the same trial court to reconsider its judgment, within the period for taking an appeal, on the ground that the damages awarded are excessive, the evidence is insufficient to justify the decision, or the decision is contrary to law. The motion must specifically point out which findings or conclusions are unsupported by evidence or contrary to law, referencing the actual testimony, documents, or legal provisions relied on. A generic, boilerplate (“pro forma”) motion does not stop the clock on the deadline to appeal. The court must resolve the motion within 30 days of submission, and only one motion for reconsideration is allowed per judgment.
What a motion for reconsideration is for
A motion for reconsideration asks the same court that issued a judgment or final order to take a second look and change its own ruling — before the losing party goes to the trouble and expense of a full appeal to a higher court. It is often the practical first step after an adverse judgment, since it can correct an error quickly without needing appellate review, and, procedurally, it also affects when the appeal period itself starts running.
The grounds for reconsideration
Rule 37, Section 1 allows a motion for reconsideration on the grounds that: the damages awarded are excessive; the evidence is insufficient to justify the decision or final order; or the decision or final order is contrary to law. (This is distinct from, though often filed together with, a motion for new trial, which is grounded instead on fraud, accident, mistake, excusable negligence, or newly discovered evidence.)
The deadline: tied to the appeal period
Section 1 sets the deadline as “within the period for taking an appeal” — meaning the same window a party would otherwise have to file a notice of appeal. Filing the motion for reconsideration within this window effectively pauses the appeal clock while the trial court considers it, giving the losing party a genuine chance to fix the outcome at the trial-court level first.
What the motion must actually say
Section 2 imposes real substance requirements, not just a filing formality. A motion for reconsideration must “point out specifically the findings or conclusions of the judgment or final order which are not supported by the evidence or which are contrary to law, making express reference to the testimonial or documentary evidence or to the provisions of law alleged to be contrary to such findings or conclusions.” A written notice of the motion must also be served on the adverse party.
This specificity requirement matters enormously: a motion that simply repeats the same arguments already made at trial, or that generally complains the decision was wrong without pinpointing exactly which finding lacks evidentiary support or which legal provision was misapplied, risks being treated as “pro forma” — and Section 2 states plainly that a pro forma motion does not toll (stop) the reglementary period of appeal. This is a serious trap: a party who files a defective, generic motion, believing it has paused their appeal deadline, may discover too late that the deadline actually kept running the whole time, and their right to appeal has lapsed.
What the court can do
Section 3 gives the trial court several options on resolving the motion: it may set aside the judgment and grant a new trial, deny the motion, or, where it finds the damages excessive or the judgment contrary to the evidence or law, simply amend the judgment or final order accordingly without needing a full new trial.
The 30-day resolution deadline, and the second-motion ban
Section 4 requires the court to resolve the motion within thirty (30) days from the time it is submitted for resolution. Section 5 addresses repeat motions: a party is generally not allowed a second motion for reconsideration of the same judgment or final order — the law expects a party to raise every available ground in a single motion, not to file successive motions hoping one eventually sticks. (A second motion for new trial, by contrast, is allowed only if based on a new ground not previously available.)
Practical takeaway
A motion for reconsideration is a real, substantive opportunity to fix an adverse judgment — but only if it does the specific work Section 2 requires: pinpointing exact findings, citing exact evidence or law, rather than simply re-arguing the case in general terms. Given the pro forma trap and the strict appeal-period tie-in, this is a document worth having reviewed carefully before filing, since getting it wrong can cost the right to appeal altogether.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the deadline to file a motion for reconsideration in the Philippines? Within the same period allowed for taking an appeal from the judgment or final order, under Rules of Court Rule 37, Section 1.
Can I file more than one motion for reconsideration of the same judgment? Generally no. Rule 37, Section 5 does not allow a second motion for reconsideration of the same judgment or final order — all available grounds should be raised in a single motion.
What happens if my motion for reconsideration is too generic? It risks being treated as 'pro forma,' which under Section 2 does not toll (stop) the deadline to appeal — meaning your appeal period may have kept running the whole time, potentially causing you to lose your right to appeal.
How long does the court have to decide a motion for reconsideration? 30 days from the time the motion is submitted for resolution, under Rule 37, Section 4.
This commentary is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For guidance specific to your situation, please consult a licensed attorney.
If you have questions about your rights or options under Philippine law, our firm is available to assist. You may reach us via Viber or WhatsApp, call us at 0995 433 5550, or send an email to vivasnobles@gmail.com. We look forward to hearing from you.