This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2015-09-16 |
JARDELEZA, J. |
||||
| In the case of Far Eastern Shipping Company v. Court of Appeals,[32] while we said that, strictly, a certification against forum shopping by counsel is a defective ce1iification, the verification, signed by petitioner's counsel in said case, is substantial compliance because it served the purpose of the Rules of informing the Court of the pendency of another action or proceeding involving the same issues. We then explained that procedural rules are instruments in the speedy and efficient administration of justice which should be used to achieve such end and not to derail it.[33] | |||||
|
2012-09-26 |
BRION, J. |
||||
| Section 5, Rule 7[33] of the Rules of Court mandates that it should be the plaintiff or principal party who should sign the certification against forum shopping. A petition is flawed when the certification is signed only by the counsel and not by the party,[34] because it is the party, and not the counsel, who is in the best position to know whether he actually filed or caused the filing of a petition.[35] While we have relaxed this rule in instances when substantial justice requires it, i.e., when the petitioner's case was meritorious,[36] this case does not fall within this exception, as will be discussed later. | |||||