Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

SULPICIO LINES v. FIRST LEPANTO-TAISHO INSURANCE CORPORATION

This case has been cited 2 times or more.

	GR No. 185565 2014-11-26	LOADSTAR SHIPPING COMPANY v. MALAYAN INSURANCE COMPANY REYES, J.
The rights of a subrogee cannot be superior to the rights possessed by a subrogor. "Subrogation is the substitution of one person in the place of another with reference to a lawful claim or right, so that he who is substituted succeeds to the rights of the other in relation to a debt or claim, including its remedies or securities. The rights to which the subrogee succeeds are the same as, but not greater than, those of the person for whom he is substituted, that is, he cannot acquire any claim, security or remedy the subrogor did not have. In other words, a subrogee cannot succeed to a right not possessed by the subrogor. A subrogee in effect steps into the shoes of the insured and can recover only if the insured likewise could have recovered."[22]
	GR No. 172891 2007-11-22	SPS. HENRY LANARIA AND LATE BELEN LANARIA AS SUBSTITUTED BY FRANCIS JOHN LANARIA v. FRANCISCO M. PLANTA CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
In view of the circumstances of this case, this Court finds our ruling in Padilla applicable. Petitioners' subsequent submission of the following documents annexed to their Motion for Reconsideration - viz, Complaint for Ejectment, Transfer Certificate of Title, Answer to the Complaint, Four Affidavits, Position Paper filed by petitioners, Memorandum on Appeal, Appellee's Memorandum, and Motion for Reconsideration - constitutes substantial compliance with Section 2, Rule 42. Jurisprudence pertaining to the same has established that "submission of a document together with the motion for reconsideration constitutes substantial compliance with the requirement that relevant or pertinent documents be submitted along with the petition, and calls for the relaxation of procedural rules."[19] There is ample jurisprudence holding that the subsequent and substantial compliance of an appellant may call for the relaxation of the rules of procedure.[20] This ruling is in consonance with the fact that the Rules do not specify the precise documents, pleadings or parts of the records which must be annexed to the petition, apart from the assailed judgment, final order, or resolution.[21]