This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2011-03-23 |
BERSAMIN, J. |
||||
| Air Ads' submission is flawed. It is not the caption of the pleading that determines the nature of the complaint but rather its allegations.[37] Although Air Ads' observation that the substitute third party complaint contained allegations only against Pioneer is correct, sight should not be lost of the fact that Dominguez Law Office represented TADECO in its third party complaint only against Pioneer, which was precisely why the substitute third party complaint referred only to Pioneer. | |||||
|
2011-02-23 |
NACHURA, J. |
||||
| The right to appeal is neither a natural right nor a part of due process. It is merely a statutory privilege and may be exercised only in the manner and in accordance with the provisions of law. Thus, one who seeks to avail of the right to appeal must comply with the requirements of the Rules. Failure to do so inevitably leads to the loss of the right to appeal.[15] Nonetheless, 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.[16] This is based, no less, on the Rules of Court which itself calls for a liberal construction of its provisions, with the objective of securing for the parties a just, speedy, and inexpensive disposition of every action and proceeding.[17] | |||||
|
2008-08-11 |
AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J. |
||||
| Moreover, 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.[26] | |||||