Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

CHRISTINE CHUA v. JORGE TORRES

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	GR Nos. 151983-84 2008-07-31	JOSE MAX S. ORTIZ v. SAN MIGUEL CORPORATION CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
It is elementary that it is only in the name of a real party in interest that a civil suit may be prosecuted.[43] Section 2, Rule 3 of the 1997 Revised Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended, provides:SEC. 2. Parties in interest. - A real party in interest is the party who stands to be benefited or injured by the judgment in the suit, or the party entitled to the avails of the suit. Unless otherwise authorized by law or these Rules, every action must be prosecuted or defended in the name of the real party in interest.
	GR NOS. 158786 & 158789 2007-10-19	TOYOTA MOTOR PHILS. CORP. WORKERS ASSOCIATION v. NLRC VELASCO, JR., J.
The verification requirement is significant, as it is intended to secure an assurance that the allegations in the pleading are true and correct and not the product of the imagination or a matter of speculation.[30] This requirement is simply a condition affecting the form of pleadings, and noncompliance with the requirement does not necessarily render it fatally defective. Indeed, verification is only a formal and not a jurisdictional requirement.[31]
	GR No. 149909 2007-10-11	GABRIEL v. RONQUILLO NACHURA, J.
In numerous decisions,[19] this Court has been consistent in stringently enforcing the requirement of verification[20] and certification of non-forum shopping. When there is more than one petitioner, a petition signed solely by one of them is defective, unless he was authorized by his co-parties to represent them and to sign the certification. The attestation contained in the certification of non-forum shopping requires personal knowledge by the party who executed the same.[21]