This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2008-02-13 |
VELASCO JR., J. |
||||
| Fifth, the judicial policy of observing the hierarchy of courts dictates that direct resort from administrative agencies to this Court will not be entertained, unless the redress desired cannot be obtained from the appropriate lower tribunals, or unless exceptional and compelling circumstances justify availment of a remedy falling within and calling for the exercise of our primary jurisdiction.[14] The above principle was reiterated in Asaphil Construction and Development Corporation v. Tuason, Jr. (Asaphil).[15] However, the Carpio ruling was not applied to Asaphil as the petition in the latter case was filed in 1999 or three years before the promulgation of Carpio in 2002. Here, the petition was filed on April 28, 2004 when the Carpio decision was already applicable, thus Benguet should have filed the appeal with the CA. | |||||