Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION v. ROEL R. DEGAMO

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	GR No. 172574 2009-07-31	NOLI LIM v. ANGELITO DELOS SANTOS NOW HIS HEIRS PUNO, C.J.
Here, petitioner paid the appeal fee only after the Office of the President had already dismissed his appeal on December 22, 2003. Obviously, at the time of payment, the assailed decision and order of the DENR had already attained finality. A judgment becomes "final and executory" by operation of law. Finality becomes a fact when the reglementary period to appeal lapses and no appeal is perfected within such period.[27] Hence, just as a losing party has the right to appeal within the prescribed period, the winning party has the correlative right to enjoy the finality of the case.[28]
	GR No. 162356 2008-04-14	DONG SEUNG INCORPORATED v. BUREAU OF LABOR RELATIONS AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
The timeliness of an appeal is a factual issue as it requires a review or evaluation of evidence on when the judgment was actually received and the appeal filed. The Court cannot entertain such factual issue in a proceeding under Rule 45 for it does not try facts nor evaluate evidence,[21] much less in the present case where the only evidence submitted by petitioner on the issue of timeliness consists of a certification by Acting Postmaster Mendoza which is of dubious authenticity as it is a plain photocopy, completely deviod of any marking or note of authentication. Moreover, the certification is woefully lacking in material details - such as the exact nature and origin of the letter that was purportedly sent to Jorge Villamarin and the date it was received by Evelyn Villamarin - that it could not be reasonably concluded that what was sent and received was actually the December 1, 2000 DOLE Region IV Order. Therefore, the certification alone cannot serve as basis for the reversal of the findings of the CA.[22]
	GR NO. 170948 2007-06-26	SILLIMAN UNIVERSITY v. NANILA FONTELO-PAALAN CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
Considering that the judgment is already final and executory against the party who does not appeal,[29] then the winning party already acquired vested rights by virtue of said judgment. Time and again, we never fail to press the dictum that just as the losing party has the privilege to file an appeal within the prescribed period, so does the winner also have the correlative right to enjoy the finality of the decision.[30]