Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

INTERLINING CORPORATION v. PHILIPPINE TRUST COMPANY

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	GR No. 179999 2009-03-17	ANSON TRADE CENTER v. PACIFIC BANKING CORPORATION CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
Pre-trial, by definition, is a procedural device intended to clarify and limit the basic issues raised by the parties[11] and to take the trial of cases out of the realm of surprise and maneuvering.[12] It is an answer to the clarion call for the speedy disposition of cases. Hailed as the most important procedural innovation in Anglo-Saxon justice in the nineteenth century,[13] it thus paves the way for a less cluttered trial and resolution of the case.[14]
	GR No. 170606 2007-11-23	LCK INDUSTRIES INC. v. PLANTERS DEVELOPMENT BANK CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
The conduct of pre-trial in civil actions has been mandatory as early as 1 January 1964 upon the effectivity of the Revised Rules of Court.[33] Pre-trial is a procedural device intended to clarify and limit the basic issues between the parties[34] and to take the trial of cases out of the realm of surprise and maneuvering.[35]
	GR No. 146082 2004-07-30	MELCHOR CUSTODIO v. ROSENDO F. CORRADO QUISUMBING, J.
At any rate, the issue of tenancy relationship had already been settled during the pre-trial stage where the parties stipulated that the subject lot is registered in the name of respondent and that petitioner was never a tenant of respondent. Petitioner and respondent are bound by such stipulations which are deemed settled and need not be proven during the trial. Pre-trial is a procedural device intended to clarify and limit the basic issues between the parties. It thus paves the way for a less cluttered trial and resolution of the case. Its main objective is to simplify, abbreviate and expedite the trial, or totally dispense with it. Prescinding therefrom, it is a basic legal precept that the parties are bound to honor the stipulations they made during the pre-trial.[24]