This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2005-06-27 |
CARPIO, J. |
||||
| Appeals merely followed the Rules. However, in the exercise of its equity jurisdiction this Court may disregard procedural lapses so that a case may be resolved on its merits based on the evidence presented by the parties.[17] Rules of procedure should promote, not defeat, substantial justice.[18] Hence, the Court may opt to apply the Rules liberally to resolve the substantial issues raised by the parties.[19] The material dates required to be stated in the petition for certiorari under Rule 65 are: the date of receipt of the notice of the judgment or final order or resolution; the date of filing of the motion for new trial or for reconsideration; and the date of receipt of the notice of denial of the motion.[20] Contrary to the Court of Appeals' findings, Security Bank correctly asserted that page 13 of its petition states the date of filing of the motion for reconsideration on 23 February 1999, or thirteen days after the receipt of the Order.[21] The petition | |||||