Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

This case has been cited 2 times or more.

	GR No. 165109 2009-12-14	MANUEL N. MAMBA v. EDGAR R. LARA DE LEON, JR., J.
We cannot overemphasize that procedural rules are mere tools to aid the courts in the speedy, just and inexpensive resolution of cases.[63] Procedural defects or lapses, if negligible, should be excused in the higher interest of justice as technicalities should not override the merits of the case. Dismissal of cases due to technicalities should also be avoided to afford the parties the opportunity to present their case. Courts must be reminded that the swift unclogging of the dockets although a laudable objective must not be done at the expense of substantial justice.[64]
	GR No. 183196 2009-08-19	CHONA ESTACIO v. PAMPANGA I ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
As for respondent Engr. Allas' authority to file the same Petition on behalf of respondent PELCO I, it is evidenced by Board Resolution No. 53-06,[37] approved by the Board of Directors of the cooperative on 5 August 2006. Even though Board Resolution No. 53-06 was belatedly filed, the Court of Appeals rightfully accepted the same. In the present case, the findings and conclusion of the Labor Arbiter and the NLRC are at odds, and the case concerns a labor matter to which our fundamental law mandates the state to give utmost priority and full protection.[38] Necessarily, this Court will look beyond alleged technicalities to open the way for resolution of substantive issues.[39]