You're currently signed in as:
User

FIRESTONE CERAMICS v. CA

This case has been cited 2 times or more.

2014-06-30
BRION, J.
The Court has residual authority to ensure the proper enforcement and implementation of its final judgment.[110] In the exercise of this residual authority, we may delegate to another court, as we have done in this case, the execution of our final rulings. The Court does not surrender its authority to execute its final rulings by such delegation. In other words, we maintain our authority over all matters concerning the implementation of our final rulings and issue such orders necessary for their implementation.
2011-02-15
CARPIO MORALES, J.
In Firestone Ceramics v. Court of Appeals,[9] the Court treated the consolidated cases as En Banc cases and set the therein petitioners' motion  for oral argument, after finding that the cases were of sufficient importance to merit the Court En Banc's attention.  It ruled that the Court's action is a legitimate and valid exercise of its residual power.[10]