Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

BF CORPORATION v. COURT OF APPEALS

This case has been cited 4 times or more.

	GR NO. 156660 2009-08-24	ORMOC SUGARCANE PLANTERS' ASSOCIATION v. CA LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
The requirements that an arbitration agreement must be written and subscribed by the parties thereto were enunciated by the Court in B.F. Corporation v. CA.[12]
	GR No. 143581 2008-01-07	KOREA TECHNOLOGIES CO. v. ALBERTO A. LERMA VELASCO JR., J.
The arbitration clause which stipulates that the arbitration must be done in Seoul, Korea in accordance with the Commercial Arbitration Rules of the KCAB, and that the arbitral award is final and binding, is not contrary to public policy. This Court has sanctioned the validity of arbitration clauses in a catena of cases. In the 1957 case of Eastboard Navigation Ltd. v. Juan Ysmael and Co., Inc.,[38] this Court had occasion to rule that an arbitration clause to resolve differences and breaches of mutually agreed contractual terms is valid. In BF Corporation v. Court of Appeals, we held that "[i]n this jurisdiction, arbitration has been held valid and constitutional. Even before the approval on June 19, 1953 of Republic Act No. 876, this Court has countenanced the settlement of disputes through arbitration. Republic Act No. 876 was adopted to supplement the New Civil Code's provisions on arbitration."[39] And in LM Power Engineering Corporation v. Capitol Industrial Construction Groups, Inc., we declared that:Being an inexpensive, speedy and amicable method of settling disputes, arbitration along with mediation, conciliation and negotiation is encouraged by the Supreme Court. Aside from unclogging judicial dockets, arbitration also hastens the resolution of disputes, especially of the commercial kind. It is thus regarded as the "wave of the future" in international civil and commercial disputes. Brushing aside a contractual agreement calling for arbitration between the parties would be a step backward.
	GR NO. 152471 2006-08-18	FIESTA WORLD MALL CORPORATION v. LINBERG PHILIPPINES SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, J.
Moreover, we note that the computation of the energy fees disputed by petitioner also involves technical matters that are better left to an arbitration panel who has expertise in those areas. Alternative dispute resolution methods or ADRs like arbitration, mediation, negotiation and conciliation are encouraged by this Court. By enabling the parties to resolve their disputes amicably, they provide solutions that are less time-consuming, less tedious, less confrontational, and more productive of goodwill and lasting relationships.[9] To brush aside such agreement providing for arbitration in case of disputes between the parties would be a step backward. As we held in BF Corporation v. Court of Appeals,[10]
	GR NO. 140086 2005-06-08	TEOVILLE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION v. EDWARD L. FERREIRA CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
In the case of Manila Midtown Hotel v. NLRC [33] this Court upheld the dismissal of a petition for failure of a party to attach the required documents to his petition.