Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

HERMINIA CANDO v. SPS. AURORA OLAZO AND CLAUDIO OLAZO

This case has been cited 4 times or more.

	GR No. 179593 2011-09-14	UNIVERSITY OF EAST v. UNIVERSITY OF EAST EMPLOYEES' ASSOCIATION MENDOZA, J.
Time and again, the Court has upheld the theory that the rules of procedure are designed to secure and not to override substantial justice.[27] These are mere tools to expedite the decision or resolution of cases, hence, their strict and rigid application which would result in technicalities that tend to frustrate rather than promote substantial justice must be avoided.[28]
	GR No. 146157 2009-02-13	LA CAMPANA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION v. DEVELOPMENT BANK OF PHILIPPINES CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
Be that as it may, this Court is of the view that the procedural faux pas of petitioner La Campana should not take precedence over the final resolution of the present controversy that has long plagued the parties herein. The denial of the present Petition will have put the instant case to rest, but this court has time and again ruled that litigants should have the amplest opportunity for a proper and just disposition of their cause - free, as much as possible, from the constraints of procedural technicalities.[42] In the interest of our equity jurisdiction, this court may disregard procedural lapses so that a case may be resolved on its merits.[43]
	GR NO. 147776 2007-07-10	SPS. GUILLERMO MALISON AND AMELITA MALISON v. CA CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
The emerging trend in our jurisprudence is to afford every party-litigant the amplest opportunity for the proper and just determination of his cause free from the constraints of technicalities. While it is desirable that the Rules of Court be faithfully and even meticulously observed, courts should not be so strict about procedural lapses that do not really impair the administration of justice.[14] Even the RTC apparently found petitioners' reason to be valid as it subsequently directed the clerk of court to furnish petitioners with certified xerox copies of the Decision. The RTC even relaxed strict compliance with the rules when it gave due course to petitioners' Notice of Appeal. If the rules are intended to ensure the orderly conduct of litigation, it is because of the higher objective they seek which is the protection of the substantive rights of the parties.[15] The CA, therefore, seriously erred in considering petitioners' Notice of Appeal not to have been timely filed.
	GR NO. 159153 2007-07-09	ISIDRO ANADON v. MIGUELINA HERRERA AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
The emerging trend in our jurisprudence is to afford every party-litigant the amplest opportunity for the proper and just determination of his cause free from the constraints of technicalities. While it is desirable that the Rules of Court be faithfully and even meticulously observed, courts should not be so strict about procedural lapses that do not really impair the administration of justice.[14] Even the RTC apparently found petitioners' reason to be valid as it subsequently directed the clerk of court to furnish petitioners with certified xerox copies of the Decision. The RTC even relaxed strict compliance with the rules when it gave due course to petitioners' Notice of Appeal. If the rules are intended to ensure the orderly conduct of litigation, it is because of the higher objective they seek which is the protection of the substantive rights of the parties.[15] The CA, therefore, seriously erred in considering petitioners' Notice of Appeal not to have been timely filed.