Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

This case has been cited 2 times or more.

	GR NO. 151452 2005-08-29	SPS. ANTONIO C. SANTOS AND ESPERANZA C. SANTOS v. NORMANDIE B. PIZARDO TINGA, J.
Now the procedural issue. Admittedly, petitioners should have appealed the order of dismissal of the trial court instead of filing a petition for certiorari with the Court of Appeals. Such procedural misstep, however, should be exempted from the strict application of the rules in order to promote their fundamental objective of securing substantial justice.[20] We are loathe to deprive petitioners of the indemnity to which they are entitled by law and by a final judgment of conviction based solely on a technicality. It is our duty to prevent such an injustice.[21]
	GR No. 151452 2005-07-29	SPS. ANTONIO C. SANTOS AND ESPERANZA C. SANTOS v. NORMANDIE B. PIZARDO TINGA, J.
Now the procedural issue. Admittedly, petitioners should have appealed the order of dismissal of the trial court instead of filing a petition for certiorari with the Court of Appeals. Such procedural misstep, however, should be exempted from the strict application of the rules in order to promote their fundamental objective of securing substantial justice.[20] We are loathe to deprive petitioners of the indemnity to which they are entitled by law and by a final judgment of conviction based solely on a technicality. It is our duty to prevent such an injustice.[21]