This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2005-10-20 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| Anent the procedural issue, petitioners contend that the appellate court erroneously applied the ruling in Velasco v. Ortiz,[13] because the factual circumstances therein were different from the present case. In Velasco, the parties sought for the admission of their appeal that was filed beyond the reglementary period. In the present case, however, petitioners filed their motion for extension of time within the reglementary period. They maintain that they have a valid and compelling reason in asking the appellate court for extension. Moreover, petitioners posit that technical rules of procedure should give way to substantive justice. | |||||