This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2005-09-30 |
AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J. |
||||
| There is no merit to the claim that the CA erred in affirming the RTC's order directing BPI-FB to pay the balance of their account plus interest although the prayer was only to reinstate their Current Account. The complaint does contain a general prayer "for such other relief as may be just and equitable in the premises." And this general prayer is broad enough "to justify extension of a remedy different from or together with the specific remedy sought."[24] Indeed, a court may grant relief to a party, even if the party awarded did not pray for it in his pleadings.[25] | |||||