This case has been cited 6 times or more.
|
2008-12-10 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| Notwithstanding the catena of cases we have earlier cited, there are, admittedly, exceptions to the general rule on the timely payment of appellate docket fees which are also embodied in jurisprudence.[37] Yet a common thread in all of said cases is an exceptionally meritorious reason why the appellate docket fees in the cases were not timely paid. | |||||
|
2007-11-23 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| From the foregoing, we are tasked to determine whether the above justification constitutes adequate excuse to call for a relaxation of the Rules of Civil Procedure regarding the mandatory payment of docket fees. We answer this in the negative. In exceptional circumstances, we allowed a liberal application of the rule.[31] However, in those exceptional circumstances, the payments of the required docket fees were delayed for only a few days,[32] so much unlike this case in which the delay was for more than thirty days; and, at worse, counsel had several opportunities to rectify said faux pas, yet failed to do so. We are, thus, reminded of Guevarra v. Court of Appeals,[33] in which the payment of docket fees was made 41 days after notice of the questioned Decision; and the excuse of "inadvertence, oversight, and pressure of work was disregarded as too flimsy, an old hat, a hackneyed pretext. Such has never been given the badge of excusability by the Court. | |||||
|
2007-01-31 |
|||||
| A perusal of the herein parties' pleadings also shows that private respondent's counsel had no intention to violate the rules. He was also candid enough to have admitted his participation in the delay of the payment of the appeal and docket fees although he later on paid them. In some cases,[13] we condoned oversights of parties in failing to pay these fees on time to avoid undue burden on their right to appeal. We are well aware of the importance of appeals, thus, we have advised courts to exercise prudence in dismissing them. In the case of Yambao v. Court of Appeals,[14] we declared:Considering the importance and purpose of the remedy of appeal, an essential part of our judicial system, courts are well-advised to proceed with caution so as not to deprive a party of the right to appeal, but rather, ensure that every party-litigant has the "amplest opportunity for the proper and just disposition of his cause, freed from constraints of technicalities." In line with this policy, we have held that, in appealed cases, the failure to pay docket fees does not automatically result in the dismissal of the appeal… | |||||
|
2007-01-26 |
VELASCO, JR., J. |
||||
| The established rule is that the payment in full of the docket fees within the prescribed period is mandatory. Nevertheless, this rule must be qualified, to wit: First, the failure to pay appellate court docket fee within the reglementary period allows only discretionary dismissal, not automatic dismissal, of the appeal; Second, such power should be used in the exercise of the Court's sound discretion "in accordance with the tenets of justice and fair play and with great deal of circumspection considering all attendant circumstances.[11] In Mactan Cebu International Airport Authority v. Mangubat,[12] the payment of the docket fees was delayed by six days but the Court excused the late payment because the party showed willingness to abide by the Rules by immediately paying the docket fees. Also, we ruled in Yambao v. Court of Appeals that "the appellate court may extend the time for the payment of the docket fees if appellant is able to show that there is a justifiable reason for x x x failure to pay the correct amount of docket fees within the prescribed period, like fraud, accident, mistake, excusable negligence, or a similar supervening casualty, without fault on the part of the appellant."[13] | |||||
|
2006-03-30 |
GARCIA, J. |
||||
| Given the foregoing perspective, the appellate court may very well extend the time for the payment of the docket fees should an appellant provide a justifiable reason for his failure to pay the correct amount of docket fees within the prescribed period, such as fraud, accident, mistake, excusable negligence, or a similar supervening casualty, without fault on the part of the appellant.[13] In Mactan Cebu International Airport Authority v. Court of Appeals,[14] the Court held that the failure of the Solicitor General to pay the docket fees within the reglementary period was excusable since the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure requiring the payment of the docket fees to the court which rendered the judgment within the period for taking an appeal took effect only fourteen days prior to the filing of the notice of appeal. | |||||
|
2004-11-19 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| In petitioner's Memorandum,[41] our ruling in the case of Mactan Cebu International Airport Authority (MCIAA) v. Mangubat,[42] where we held that "[l]ate payment of docket fees may be admitted when the party showed willingness to abide by the Rules by immediately paying the required fees,"[43] was cited. This doctrine cannot be applied in the case at bar because, in the MCIAA case, the Solicitor General, as counsel for the petitioner, paid the appellate docket fees six (6) days after the timely filing of the notice of appeal. In the instant case, the payment of the appellate docket fees was made 132 days after the lapse of the reglementary period to take an appeal. It is also worthy to note that when the Solicitor General filed the notice of appeal, the 1997 Rules had been in effect only for fourteen (14) days, and that is why we ruled that "the omission of the Solicitor General to pay docket fees together with the filing of the notice of appeal fourteen (14) days after the effectivity of the new rules may be excused."[44] | |||||