Quick answer

Certiorari and prohibition are two of the three special civil actions under Rule 65 (the third being mandamus), and while they share the same core ground, they differ in timing and purpose. Certiorari is directed against a tribunal, board, or officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions that has acted without or in excess of jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction; its purpose is corrective, to annul or modify the proceedings already had, that is, it looks backward at an act already performed and nullifies it. Prohibition, by contrast, is directed against a tribunal, corporation, board, officer, or person exercising judicial, quasi-judicial, or ministerial functions on the same grounds, but its purpose is preventive, to command the respondent to desist from further proceeding, that is, it looks forward and stops an act about to be done or a proceeding from continuing. A simple way to remember: certiorari undoes what has been done; prohibition prevents what is about to be done. There are two other differences worth noting. First, as to the functions covered: certiorari lies against judicial or quasi-judicial functions, while prohibition lies against judicial, quasi-judicial, or ministerial functions (a broader reach). Second, both require that there be no appeal or any plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law, and both are anchored on lack or excess of jurisdiction or grave abuse of discretion, not on mere errors of judgment (which are corrected by appeal). Both are filed within sixty days from notice of the judgment, order, or resolution, following the hierarchy of courts. So certiorari annuls an act already done, while prohibition stops an act or proceeding from continuing, and both rest on jurisdictional error or grave abuse of discretion.

Same Ground, Different Timing

Certiorari and prohibition both rest on acting without/in excess of jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion — but they differ in timing and purpose.

Corrective vs. Preventive

Other Differences

Certiorari lies against judicial or quasi-judicial functions; prohibition reaches judicial, quasi-judicial, or ministerial functions (broader). Both need no other adequate remedy, rest on jurisdictional error (not mere errors of judgment), and are filed within 60 days.

Practical Takeaways

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the difference between certiorari and prohibition? Certiorari is corrective and annuls an act already done, while prohibition is preventive and commands the respondent to desist from further proceeding. Both rest on lack or excess of jurisdiction or grave abuse of discretion.

What functions does each cover? Certiorari lies against a tribunal, board, or officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions. Prohibition reaches those exercising judicial, quasi-judicial, or ministerial functions, giving it a broader reach.

Can either be used for a simple error of judgment? No. Both are anchored on lack or excess of jurisdiction or grave abuse of discretion, not on mere errors of judgment, which are corrected by appeal.

When must a petition for prohibition or certiorari be filed? Within sixty days from notice of the judgment, order, or resolution assailed, following the hierarchy of courts.

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.