3. Exceptions to Mootness

Moot Questions

General Rule: A case becomes moot and academic when there is no more actual controversy between the parties or no useful purpose can be served in passing upon the merits [Quiño v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 197466 (2012)]

Exceptions: The Court may decide cases otherwise moot and academic when:

• There is a grave constitutional violation;
• The situation is of exceptional character and paramount public interest is involved;
• Constitutional issue requires a formulation of controlling principles to guide the bench, the bar, and the public; and
• The case is capable of repetition yet evading review [Islamic Da’wah v. Executive Secretary, G.R. No. 216870 (2020)].

Moot Questions

An action is considered moot when it no longer presents a justiciable controversy because the issues involved have become academic or dead or when the matter has already been resolved. There is nothing for the court to resolve as the determination thereof has been overtaken by subsequent events (Atty. Evillo C. Pormento v. Estrada and COMELEC, G.R. No. 191988, Aug. 31, 2010).

However, the “moot and academic” principle is not a magical formula that automatically dissuades courts in resolving a case. The Court may still take cognizance of an otherwise moot case, if it finds that:

• there is a grave violation of the Constitution;
• the situation is of exceptional character and paramount public interest is involved;
• the constitutional issue raised requires formulation of controlling principles to guide the bench, the bar, and the public; and
• the case is capable of repetition yet evading review.

(Narra Nickel Mining and Development Corp. v. Redmont Consolidated Mines Corp., G.R. No. 195580, Jan. 28, 2015)

Exceptions:

• In criminal cases — at any time at the discretion of the court
• In civil cases — at any stage of the proceedings if necessary for the determination of the case itself; or
• In every case (Except where there is estoppel) — at any stage if it involves the jurisdiction of the court (People v. Vera, G.R. No. 45685, Nov. 16, 1937)