This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2011-10-12 |
SERENO, J. |
||||
| Contrary to the assertion of petitioner, this Court did not commit any violation of R.A. 9165 when it issued the assailed guidelines. Rather, it merely obeyed Article VIII, Sec. 5(5) of the 1987 Constitution, which mandates that the rules promulgated by this Court should provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition of cases, in conformity with the right of all persons to a speedy disposition of their cases before all judicial, quasi-judicial, or administrative bodies.[15] As this Court stated in San Ildefonso Lines v. Court of Appeals,[16] there must be a renewed adherence to the time-honored dictum that procedural rules are designed not to defeat, but to safeguard, the ends of substantial justice. | |||||
|
2003-03-17 |
AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J. |
||||
| '. . . to avoid multiplicity of suits, to guard against oppression and abuse, to prevent delays, to clear congested dockets, to simplify the work of the trial court; in short, the attainment of justice with the least expense and vexation to the parties-litigants.'[20] | |||||