Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

COCA-COLA BOTTLERS PHILIPPINES v. COCA-COLA BOTTLERS

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	GR No. 169704 2010-11-17	ALBERT TENG v. ALFREDO S. PAHAGAC BRION, J.
In Coca-Cola Bottlers Phil., Inc., Sales Force Union-PTGWO-Balais v. Coca-Cola Bottlers Philippines, Inc.,[27] we likewise ruled that the VA's decision may still be reconsidered on the basis of a motion for reconsideration seasonably filed within 10 days from receipt thereof.[28] The seasonable filing of a motion for reconsideration is a mandatory requirement to forestall the finality of such decision.[29] We further cited the 1989 Procedural Guidelines which implemented Article 262-A, viz:[30]
	GR No. 163103 2009-02-06	CHARLIE VIOS AND SPS. ROGELIO AND TERESITA ANTONIO v. MANUEL PANTANGCO BRION, J.
The doctrine of finality of judgment is grounded on fundamental considerations of public policy and sound practice that at the risk of occasional errors, the judgment of adjudicating bodies must become final and executory on some definite date fixed by law. [...], the Supreme Court reiterated that the doctrine of immutability of final judgment is adhered to by necessity notwithstanding occasional errors that may result thereby, since litigations must somehow come to an end for otherwise, it would "be even more intolerable than the wrong and injustice it is designed to correct."[12]
	GR NO. 165648 2006-03-26	EASTLAND CONSTRUCTION v. BENEDICTA MORTEL CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
As pointed out by respondent, petitioner did not appeal the decision of the Housing and Land Use Arbiter to the HLURB Board of Commissioners. As borne by the records, only PDIC and Orient Bank appealed to the HLURB Board of Commissioners. There being no petition for review filed by petitioner before the HLURB Board of Commissioners within thirty (30) calendar days after receiving a copy [28] of the decision of the Housing and Land Use Arbiter, the latter's decision as regards the former became final and executory.