This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2009-07-21 |
NACHURA, J. |
||||
| A petition for certiorari is an extraordinary remedy.[4] As such, the party who seeks to avail of the same must strictly observe the procedural rules laid down by law,[5] and non-observance thereof may not be brushed aside as mere technicality.[6] The decision on whether or not to accept a petition for certiorari, as well as to grant due course thereto, is generally addressed to the sound discretion of the court.[7] | |||||
|
2008-11-27 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| Section 3 of Rule 46 does not require that all supporting papers and documents accompanying a petition be duplicate originals or certified true copies. What it explicitly directs is that all petitions originally filed before the Court of Appeals shall be accompanied by a clearly legible duplicate original or certified true copy of the judgment, order, resolution or ruling subject thereof. Similarly, under Rule 65, governing the remedies of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus, petitions for the same need to be accompanied only by duplicate originals or certified true copies of the questioned judgment, order or resolution.[23] Other relevant documents and pleadings attached to such petitions may be mere machine copies thereof.[24] As to petitioners' Petition for Prohibition in CA-G.R. SP No. 00365, the attached annexes that were not duplicate originals or certified true copies, namely, Annexes "V,"[25] "W,"[26] "HH,"[27] "LL,"[28] "NN,"[29] "QQ,"[30] "UU"[31] and "VV,"[32] were mere supporting documents and pleadings referred to in the petition and were not themselves the judgments, orders or resolutions being challenged in said Petition. At any rate, petitioners were able to attach certified true copies of these annexes to their Motion for Reconsideration of the dismissal of their Petition. | |||||