You're currently signed in as:
User

LINTON COMMERCIAL CO. v. ALEX A. HELLERA

This case has been cited 2 times or more.

2009-06-30
VELASCO JR., J.
Apropos the matter of verification which the OSG failed to observe, it cannot be over-emphasized that the requirement on verification is simply a condition affecting the form of pleadings. Non-compliance with it is not jurisdictional, and would not render the pleading fatally defective.[29] A pleading required by the Rules of Court to be verified may be given due course even without a verification if the circumstances warrant the suspension of the rules in the interest of justice.[30] So it must be here.
2008-10-29
NACHURA, J.
In the instant case, this requirement was substantially complied with when one of the petitioners (respondents herein), who undoubtedly had sufficient knowledge and belief to swear to the truth of the allegations in the petition, signed the verification attached to it. Indeed, the Court has ruled in the past that a pleading required by the Rules of Court to be verified may be given due course even without a verification, if the circumstances warrant the suspension of the rules in the interest of justice, as in the present case. [27]