Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEDRO TAGABI v. MARGARITO TANQUE

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	GR No. 194122 2012-10-11	HECTOR HERNANDEZ v. SUSAN SAN PEDRO AGONCILLO PERALTA, J.
Procedural rules are designed to facilitate the adjudication of cases.[25] Courts and litigants alike are enjoined to abide strictly by the rules.[26] While in certain instances, the Court allows a relaxation in the application of the rules, there is no intention to forge a weapon for erring litigants to violate the rules with impunity.[27] The liberal interpretation and application of rules apply only in proper cases of demonstrable merit and under justifiable causes and circumstances.[28] 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.[29] Party litigants and their counsel are well advised to abide by rather than flaunt procedural rules for these rules illumine the path of the law and rationalize the pursuit of justice.[30]
	GR No. 158073 2007-11-23	ALEX M. CADORNIGARA v. NLRC AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
The foregoing circumstances considered, we cannot fault the CA for not accepting the petition for certiorari. In Tagabi v. Tangue,[25] we upheld the CA for dismissing an appeal that lacked a written explanation of why it was filed by registered mail, even when in said case, petitioner's counsel held office in Iloilo City and found it impractical to personally file the appeal brief with the CA in Manila.
	GR No. 149909 2007-10-11	GABRIEL v. RONQUILLO NACHURA, J.
On the second issue, the written explanation why another mode of service was resorted to is a mandatory and indispensable requirement in pleadings or papers filed before all the courts of the land. Parties must exert their best to effect personal service. The Rules of Court[24] provides that personal service of petitions and other pleadings is the general rule, while a resort to other modes of service and filing is the exception.[25] Strictest compliance with Section 11 of Rule 13 is mandated by the Court,[26] and noncompliance therewith is a ground for the denial of the petition or the expulsion of the pleading from the records.