Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

KABANKALAN CATHOLIC COLLEGE v. KABANKALAN CATHOLIC COLLEGE UNION-PACIWU-TUCP

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	GR NO. 169204 2007-03-23	ADELAIDA ESCOBAR v. LIGAYA OLIGARIO LUNA QUISUMBING, J.
In Kabankalan Catholic College v. Kabankalan Catholic College Union-PACIWU-TUCP,[21] we said that under the principle of the law of the case, whatever is irrevocably established as the controlling legal rule or decision between the same parties in the same case continues to be the law of the case, so long as the facts on which the decision was predicated continues. Otherwise stated, the principle holds that once an appellate court has declared the law in a case, that declaration continues to hold even in a subsequent appeal. Reasons of public policy, judicial orderliness and economy require such stability in the final judgments of courts or tribunals of competent jurisdiction.[22]
	GR NO. 149489 2006-06-30	PRIVATE ENTERPRISE CORPORATION v. REYNALDO MAGADA AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
Law of the case has been defined as the opinion delivered on a former appeal.[23] More specifically, it means that whatever is once irrevocably established as the controlling legal rule or decision between the same parties in the same case continues to be the law of the case, whether correct on general principles or not, so long as the facts on which such decision was predicated continue to be the facts of the case before the court.[24] Indeed, courts must adhere thereto, because public policy, judicial orderliness and economy require such stability in the final judgments of courts or tribunals of competent jurisdiction.[25]
	GR No. 142308 2005-11-15	SPS. REV. ELMER J. BAÑES AND ANGELA BAÑES v. LUTHERAN CHURCH IN PHILIPPINES AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
As a rule, a decision on a prior appeal of the same case is held to be the law of the case whether that question is right or wrong, the remedy of the party deeming himself aggrieved being to seek a rehearing.[39] Indeed, courts must adhere thereto, whether the legal principles laid down were "correct on general principles or not," or "whether the question is right or wrong"[40] because public policy, judicial orderliness and economy require such stability in the final judgments of courts or tribunals of competent jurisdiction.[41]