Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

GLORIA Z. GARBO v. CA

This case has been cited 8 times or more.

	GR No. 166944 2014-08-18	JUANITO MAGSINO v. ELENA DE OCAMPO BERSAMIN, J.
The Court's pronouncement in Garbo v. Court of Appeals[36] is relevant:Procedural rules are tools designed to facilitate the adjudication of cases. Courts and litigants alike are thus enjoined to abide strictly by the rules. And while the Court, in some instances, allows a relaxation in the application of the rules, this, we stress, was never intended to forge a bastion for erring litigants to violate the rules with impunity. The liberality in the interpretation and application of the rules applies only in proper cases and under justifiable causes and circumstances. While it is true that litigation is not a game of technicalities, it is equally true that every case must be prosecuted in accordance with the prescribed procedure to insure an orderly and speedy administration of justice.
	GR No. 194104 2013-03-13	NOVATEKNIKA LAND CORPORATION v. PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK MENDOZA, J.
The petitioner is reminded that procedural rules are instituted to facilitate the adjudication of cases and, as such, the courts and the litigants are enjoined to abide strictly by the rules. While it is true that litigation is not a game of technicalities, it is equally important that every case must be prosecuted in accordance with the prescribed rules of procedure to ensure an orderly and speedy administration of justice.[27] Only for the most persuasive of reasons can such rules be relaxed to relieve a litigant of an injustice not commensurate with the degree of his thoughtlessness in not complying with the procedure prescribed.[28]
	GR No. 151243 2008-04-30	LOLITA R. ALAMAYRI v. PABALE CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
The parties must diligently and conscientiously present all arguments and available evidences in support of their respective positions to the court before the case is deemed submitted for judgment. Only under exceptional circumstances may the court receive new evidence after having rendered judgment;[18] otherwise, its judgment may never attain finality since the parties may continually refute the findings therein with further evidence. Alamayri failed to provide any explanation why she did not present her evidence earlier. Merely invoking that the ends of justice would have been best served if she was allowed to present additional evidence is not sufficient to justify deviation from the general rules of procedure. Obedience to the requirements of procedural rules is needed if the parties are to expect fair results therefrom, and utter disregard of the rules cannot justly be rationalized by harking on the policy of liberal construction.[19] Procedural rules are tools designed to facilitate the adjudication of cases. Courts and litigants alike are thus enjoined to abide strictly by the rules. And while the Court, in some instances, allows a relaxation in the application of the rules, this, we stress, was never intended to forge a bastion for erring litigants to violate the rules with impunity. The liberality in the interpretation and application of the rules applies only to proper cases and under justifiable causes and circumstances. While it is true that litigation is not a game of technicalities, it is equally true that every case must be prosecuted in accordance with the prescribed procedure to insure an orderly and speedy administration of justice.[20]
	GR No. 171098 2008-02-26	JUAN G. GARCIA v. CA and GARCIA PASION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
Petitioners seek a liberal application of the procedural rules. For their failure to attach certified true copies of the assailed orders of the RTC, petitioners place the blame on the appellate court. Petitioners brazenly suggest that what the Court of Appeals should have done was to issue an Order directing them to comply with the rule on attaching certified true copies, instead of dismissing the case on its face. We do not see reason to grant liberality in the application of the rules. It must be emphasized that the liberality in the interpretation and application of the rules applies only in proper cases and under justifiable causes and circumstances.[21] While it is true that litigation is not a game of technicalities, it is equally true that every case must be prosecuted in accordance with the prescribed procedure to insure an orderly and speedy administration of justice.[22] Only strong considerations of equity, which are wanting in this case, will lead us to allow an exception to the procedural rule in the interest of substantial justice.[23] To further suggest petitioners' impervious attitude towards rules, they even failed to attach certified true copies or duplicate original copies of the assailed Orders in their Motion for Reconsideration filed with the Court of Appeals. Concomitant to a liberal application of the rules of procedure should be an effort on the party invoking liberality to at least explain its failure to comply with the rules.[24] Circular No. 3-96 is also unequivocal that it shall be the duty and responsibility of the party to verify and ensure compliance with all the requirements detailed therein. In fact, failure to do so shall result in the rejection of such annexes and the dismissal of the case.[25]
	GR No. 169982 2007-11-23	SALVADOR A. PLEYTO v. PHILIPPINE NATIONAL POLICE CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
Intervention of the Office of the Ombudsman cannot be allowed on liberality. Obedience to the requirements of procedural rules is needed if the parties are to expect fair results therefrom, and utter disregard of the rules cannot justly be rationalized by harping on the policy of liberal construction.[31] Procedural rules are tools designed to facilitate the adjudication of cases. Courts and litigants alike are thus enjoined to abide strictly by the rules. And while the Court, in some instances, allows a relaxation in the application of the rules, this was never intended to forge a bastion for erring litigants to violate the rules with impunity. The liberality in the interpretation and application of the rules applies only in proper cases and under justifiable causes and circumstances. While it is true that litigation is not a game of technicalities, it is equally true that every case must be prosecuted in accordance with the prescribed procedure to ensure an orderly and speedy administration of justice.[32]
	GR No. 175020 2007-10-04	RURAL BANKERS ASSOCIATION OF PHILIPPINES v. MA. ROSARIO TANGHAL-SALVAÑA CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
Obedience to the requirements of procedural rules is needed if the parties are to expect fair results therefrom, and utter disregard of the rules cannot justly be rationalized by harking on the policy of liberal construction.[17] Procedural rules are tools designed to facilitate the adjudication of cases. Courts and litigants alike are thus enjoined to abide strictly by the rules. And while the Court, in some instances, allows a relaxation in the application of the rules, this was never intended to forge a bastion for erring litigants to violate the rules with impunity. The liberality in the interpretation and application of the rules applies only in proper cases and under justifiable causes and circumstances. While it is true that litigation is not a game of technicalities, it is equally true that every case must be prosecuted in accordance with the prescribed procedure to insure an orderly and speedy administration of justice.[18]
	GR NO. 165496 2007-02-12	HUN HYUNG PARK v. EUNG WON CHOI CARPIO MORALES, J.
Procedural rules are tools designed to facilitate the adjudication of cases. Courts and litigants alike are thus enjoined to abide strictly by the rules. And while the Court, in some instances, allows a relaxation in the application of the rules, this we stress, was never intended to forge a bastion for erring litigants to violate the rules with impunity. The liberality in the interpretation and application of the rules applies only in proper cases and under justifiable causes and circumstances. While it is true that litigation is not a game of technicalities, it is equally true that every case must be prosecuted in accordance with the prescribed procedure to insure an orderly and speedy administration of justice.[25] (Emphasis supplied)
	GR No. 160730 2004-12-10	SISTER MA. ANGELINA M. FERNANDO v. CESAR D. SANTAMARIA YNARES-SATIAGO, J.
While it is true that litigation is not a game of technicalities, it is equally true that every case must be prosecuted in accordance with the prescribed procedure to insure an orderly and speedy administration of justice.[21] In instances where we applied a liberal interpretation of the rules on filing a record on appeal, the parties although late, filed the required record on appeal.[22] Such, however, is not the case here because petitioner adamantly refused to file the required record on appeal.