Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1999 > August 1999 Decisions > G.R. No. 132425 August 31, 1999 - THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

SECOND DIVISION

[G.R. No. 132425. August 31, 1999.]

THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, CULTURE AND SPORTS, represented by its Division Superintendent Region 2, Tuguegarao, Cagayan, Petitioner, v. COURT OF APPEALS, LUCAS TANGUILAN, JULIANA TANGUILAN, assisted by her husband, ROBERTO TANGUILAN, DOMINGO TANGUILAN, JUAN TANGUILAN, JOSE TANGUILAN, CATARINA TANGUILAN, PAULINO TANGUILAN, PEDRO TANGUILAN and INES TANGUILAN, Respondents.

D E C I S I O N


BUENA, J.:


This is a petition for review on certiorari seeking the reversal and setting aside of the decision of the Court of Appeals dated January 28, 1998 in CA-G.R. SP No. 45579 entitled "The Republic of the Philippines through the Department of Education, Culture and Sports, etc. versus Hon. Rolando V. Salacup, Et. Al." chanrobles virtual lawlibrary

The antecedent facts of the case are as follows:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

A complaint for recovery of possession and ownership with damages was filed by plaintiffs Lucas Tanguilan, Juliana Tanguilan assisted by her husband Roberto Tanguilan, Domingo Tanguilan, Juan Tanguilan, Jose Tanguilan, Catarina Tanguilan, Paulino Tanguilan, Pedro Tanguilan, Digna Tanguilan, and Ines Tanguilan (herein private respondents) against the Department of Education, Culture and Sports, represented by its Division Superintendent of Schools of Cagayan, Region 2, Tuguegarao, Cagayan (DECS, for brevity). 1

The parcel of land in question is designated as Lot No. 7133 of the Cadastral Survey of Tuguegarao, Cagayan with an area of three thousand four hundred ninety-four (3494) square meters and covered by OCT No. 2145 issued in the name of the spouses Domingo Tanguilan and Modesta Addun. 2

On January 18, 1996, summons was served upon the defendant DECS (petitioner herein). 3 Peregrino N. Alan, the Schools Division Superintendent, filed a motion for extension of time to file a responsive answer. 4 In the order of the trial court on February 2, 1996 the motion was granted whereby the defendant was given until February 17, 1996 within which to file its answer. 5

On February 22, 1996, defendant DECS filed a manifestation and motion for new period to file answer to the complaint. 6chanrobles.com:cralaw:red

On February 23, 1996, the plaintiffs moved to declare defendant DECS in default for failure of the latter to file an answer within the period fixed by the court. 7 A hearing on the said motion was set on March 1, 1996. 8

On even date, in open court, an order was issued (1) finding that there is no more legal basis to grant the motion for extension to file an answer since the same was filed after the expiration of the original 15-day period, (2) declaring defendant in default, and (3) setting the reception of plaintiffs’ evidence that afternoon. 9

The following motions were thereafter filed by the defendant: a motion for reconsideration, 10 a motion to admit attached answer 11 with the corresponding answer, 12 and a rejoinder. 13 An opposition to the motion for reconsideration 14 and an opposition to the motion to admit answer 15 were filed by plaintiffs.chanrobles virtual lawlibrary

On September 10, 1996, a resolution was issued denying, for lack of merit, the motion for reconsideration. 16

On October 29, 1996, the trial court rendered its decision, 17 the dispositive portion of which reads:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, this Court renders judgment in favor of the plaintiffs and against the defendant by:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"1. Ordering the defendant to pay the amount of TWO THOUSAND (P2,000.00) PESOS from January, 1972 up to this date representing the monthly rentals of its occupancy or a total amount of FIVE HUNDRED SEVENTY SIX THOUSAND (P576,000.00) PESOS;

"2. To vacate the land in suit;

"3. To pay attorney’s fee in the amount of TWENTY THOUSAND (P20,000.00) PESOS; and

"4. Payment of costs of this suit.chanrobles virtual lawlibrary

IT IS SO ORDERED." 18

A copy of the decision was received by defendant on November 5, 1996. Consequently on November 20, 1996, a motion for reconsideration 19 was filed. An opposition thereto was filed by plaintiffs. 20 The motion for reconsideration was denied for lack of merit in the resolution of March 14, 1997. 21

A motion for the issuance of a writ of execution was thereafter filed by the plaintiffs. 22 An opposition to the said motion was filed by defendant DECS. 23 Reply to the same was subsequently filed. 24

A notice of appeal dated March 31, 1997 was then filed by defendant. 25 A motion to dismiss the notice of appeal was filed. 26 Comment (re: motion to dismiss the notice of appeal and reply to the opposition to the motion for the issuance of writ of execution) 27 and rejoinder to the comment 28 were filed.

On August 1, 1997, a resolution was issued by the trial court dismissing the notice of appeal for being filed out of time and ordering the issuance of a writ of execution for the enforcement of the decision dated October 29, 1996. 29chanrobles.com : virtual law library

Subsequently a writ of execution was issued on August 21, 1997. 30

On October 9, 1997, an Order was issued authorizing the Sheriff to withdraw the amount garnished from the Land Bank of the Philippines to satisfy the obligation of the defendant and to immediately deliver the same to the plaintiffs. 31

Accordingly a petition for certiorari and prohibition with urgent prayer for a temporary restraining order and/or preliminary injunction was filed with the Court of Appeals docketed as CA-G.R. SP No. 45579. 32

After the requisite pleadings had been filed, the Court of Appeals issued its questioned decision dated January 28, 1998 dismissing the petition for lack of merit. 33

Hence this petition.chanrobles law library

Petitioner assigns the following lone error:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS ERRED GRAVELY IN RENDERING THE QUESTIONED DECISION

The petition is without merit.

The right to appeal is not a constitutional, natural or inherent right. It is a statutory privilege of statutory origin and, therefore, available only if granted or provided by statute. 34 As such it may be exercised only in the manner and in accordance with the provision of law. 35

Section 39 of Batas Pambansa Blg. 129 provides:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"SECTION 39. Appeals. — The period for appeal from final orders, resolutions, awards, judgments, or decisions of any court in all cases shall be fifteen (15) days counted from the notice of the final order, resolution, award, judgment, or decision appealed from: ". . . (Emphasis supplied)chanrobles law library

Petitioner admits the following in the Opposition to the Motion for the Issuance of a Writ of Execution it filed with the trial court: (1) that it should have filed its notice of appeal on March 26, 1997; (2) that the same was not filed until April 1, 1997 because from March 24-27, 1997, Ma. Zorayda V. Tejones-Zuniga, the Associate Solicitor handling the case was in General Santos City attending the hearing in Civil Case No. 5026 entitled "Board of Liquidators v. Munsayac, Et. Al." ; (3) that it was only around 4:00 o’clock in the afternoon of March 31, 1997 that she (Tejones-Zuniga) received the resolution denying the motion for reconsideration of the decision dated October 29, 1996; (4) that the notice of appeal was filed two (2) days late (excluding March 27, 28, 29 and 30, being holidays). 36

It is well-settled that failure to perfect an appeal within the period provided for by law has the effect of rendering the decision or judgment final and executory.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

Petitioner acknowledged that the appeal was filed two (2) days after the expiration of the period to appeal. This being the case the decision of the trial court dated October 29, 1996 became final and executory upon the expiration of the period to appeal.

Perfection of an appeal within the statutory or reglementary period is not only mandatory but also jurisdictional and failure to do so renders the questioned decision final and executory, and deprives the appellate court or body of jurisdiction to alter the final judgment much less to entertain the appeal. 37 (Emphasis ours)

We can not and must not countenance the practice of asking that a final judgment or order be set aside or be reopened every time the counsel fails to personally receive a copy thereof because at the time it was delivered to her office she was absent therefrom. For to do so would mean that the end to litigations would be speculative, if not dependent upon the will of the parties and/or their lawyers. 38 Not to mention that it would result in cases dragging and clogging the already congested dockets of the court.cralawnad

Petitioner cites the ruling in Dimayacyac v. Court of Appeals 39 to bolster its argument that the petition for certiorari they filed before the Court of Appeals is the appropriate remedy.

We disagree. Certiorari cannot be used as a substitute for the lost or lapsed remedy of appeal especially if such loss or lapse was occasioned by one’s own neglect or error in the choice of remedies. 40 And it is undisputed that the cause for the late filing of the notice to appeal is the neglect of the counsel for petitioner to do so.

WHEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, the petition is hereby DISMISSED.

SO ORDERED.chanrobles.com.ph : virtual law library

Bellosillo, Mendoza and Quisumbing, JJ., concur.

Endnotes:



1. Annex "B" ; Rollo, p. 56.

2. Ibid., p. 57.

3. Annex "1" ; Rollo, p. 189.

4. Annex "2" ; Ibid., p. 191.

5. Annex "3" ; Ibid., p. 192.

6. Annexes "C" and "7" ; Ibid., pp. 61 and 196, respectively.

7. Annex "4" ; Ibid., p. 193.

8. Annex "5" ; Ibid., p. 194.

9. Annex "6" ; Ibid., p. 195.

10. Annexes "E" and "8" ; Ibid., pp. 65 and 199, respectively.

11. Annexes "G" and "9" ; Ibid., pp. 71 and 203, respectively.

12. Ibid., p. 74; Annex "10" ; Ibid., p. 206.

13. Annexes "H" and "13" ; Ibid., pp. 78 and 214, respectively.

14. Annexes "F" and "11" ; Ibid., pp. 69 and 210, respectively.

15. Annex "12" ; Ibid., p. 212.

16. Annexes "I" and "14" ; Ibid., pp. 82 and 218, respectively.

17. Annexes "J" and "15" ; Ibid., pp. 85 and 221, respectively.

18. Ibid., pp. 89-90 and 225-226, respectively.

19. Annexes "K" and "16" ; Ibid., pp. 91 and 227, respectively.

20. Annexes "L" and "17" ; Ibid., pp. 98 and 234, respectively.

21. Annexes "M" and "18" ; Ibid., pp. 101 and 237, respectively.

22. Annexes "O" and "19" ; Ibid., pp. 105 and 240, respectively.

23. Annexes "P" and "21" ; Ibid., pp. 107 and 243, respectively.

24. Annexes "R" and "23" ; Ibid., pp. 114 and 250, respectively.

25. Annexes "N" and "20", Ibid., pp. 104 and 242, respectively.

26. Annexes "Q" and "22", Ibid., pp. 112 and 248, respectively.

27. Annexes "S" and "24" ; Ibid., pp. 117 and 253, respectively.

28. Annex "25" ; Ibid., p. 257.

29. Annex "T" ; Ibid., p. 121.

30. Annex "U" ; Ibid., p. 125.

31. Annexes "Y" and "30" ; Ibid., pp. 135 and 259, respectively.

32. Annex "Z" ; Ibid., p. 136.

33. Annex "A" ; Ibid., p. 51.

34. Aris (Phil.) Inc. v. National Labor Relations Commission, 200 SCRA 246 [1991].

35. Philippine Commercial International Bank v. Court of Appeals, 229 SCRA 560 [1994].

36. Annexes "P" and 21" ; Rollo, pp. 108-109 and 244-245, respectively.

37. Pedrosa v. Hill, 257 SCRA 373 [1996].

38. Sumbillo v. Intermediate Appellate Court, 165 SCRA 232, 238 [1988].

39. 93 SCRA 265 [1979].

40. Sempio v. Court of Appeals, 263 SCRA 617 [1996].chanrobles.com.ph : virtual law library




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






August-1999 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 96453 August 4, 1999 - NATIONAL FOOD AUTHORITY, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 122339 August 4, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LOVEN DAGANTA

  • G.R. No. 131429 August 4, 1999 - OSCAR BERMUDEZ v. RUBEN TORRES

  • A.M. No. RTJ-99-1467 August 5, 1999 - SAMUEL D. PAGDILAO v. ADORACION G. ANGELES

  • G.R. No. 119385 August 5, 1999 - NATIONAL TOBACCO ADMINISTRATION, ET AL. v. COMMISSION ON AUDIT

  • G.R. No. 119956 August 5, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CRESENTE NAPIOT

  • G.R. No. 128632 August 5, 1999 - MSF TIRE AND RUBBER v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 133366 August 5, 1999 - UNIONBANK OF THE PHIL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. RTJ-98-1416 August 6, 1999 - REYNALDO V. ABUNDO v. GREGORIO E. MANIO JR.

  • G.R. No. 86963 August 6, 1999 - BATONG BUHAY GOLD MINES v. DIONISIO DELA SERNA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 129049 August 6, 1999 - BALTAZAR G. CAMPOREDONDO v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 134602 August 6, 1999 - RAMONA T. LOGRONIO v. ROBERTO TALESEO

  • G.R. No. 136426 August 6, 1999 - E.B. VILLAROSA & PARTNER CO. v. HERMINIO I. BENITO, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 105965-70 August 9, 1999 - GEORGE UY v. SANDIGANBAYAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 130214 August 9, 1999 - ISMAEL A. MATHAY v. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION

  • G.R. Nos. 96663 & 103300 August 10, 1999 - PEPSI - COLA PRODUCTS PHIL. v. SECRETARY OF LABOR, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 125132 August 10, 1999 - PHILEX MINING CORP. v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 125397 August 10, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NESTOR MOLINA

  • G.R. Nos. 131261-62 August 10, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL v. AUGUSTO CESAR RAMOS

  • G.R. No. 132690 August 10, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JAIME IBAY

  • G.R. No. 133140 August 10, 1999 - JOSE MA. T. GARCIA v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. MTJ-98-1162 August 11, 1999 - ANA MAY M. SIMBAJON v. ROGELIO M. ESTEBAN

  • A.M. No. MTJ-99-1181 August 11, 1999 - IN RE: ADMINISTRATIVE MATTER NO. MTJ-99-1181

  • G.R. Nos. 96618-19 August 11, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PINKER JOSEPH BAUTISTA

  • G.R. No. 107369 August 11, 1999 - JESULITO A. MANALO v. PEDRO G. SISTOZA, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 122550-51 August 11, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. WINEFRED ACCION

  • G.R. No. 130617 August 11, 1999 - MA. LIZA DE GUZMAN v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • Adm. Case No. 5105 August 12, 1999 - FERNANDO SALONGA v. ISIDRO T. HILDAWA

  • A.M. No. P-99-1330 August 12, 1999 - CLARITA I. DIONISIO v. PACIFICO S. GILERA, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 115981-82 August 12, 1999 - RUBEN LAGROSA v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 123265-66 August 12, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JOEMAR C. QUILANG

  • G.R. No. 123486 August 12, 1999 - EUGENIA RAMONAL CODOY, ET AL. v. EVANGELINE CALUGAY, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 134792 August 12, 1999 - PERLA GARCIA, ET AL. v. HARRY ANGPING, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 131209 August 13, 1999 - ARCANGEL GUTIB v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 132893 August 13, 1999 - PETER C. CHUA LAO v. ALFREDO N. MACAPUGAY

  • A.M. No. RTJ-99-1470 August 16, 1999 - VILLA MACASASA, ET AL. v. FAUSTO H. IMBING

  • G.R. No. 103065 August 16, 1999 - JUAN DE CARLOS v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 124382 August 16, 1999 - PASTOR DIONISIO V. AUSTRIA v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 127754 August 16, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ANTONIO DESOY, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 135886 August 16, 1999 - VICTORINO SALCEDO II v. COMELEC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 136121 August 16, 1999 - MACTAN CEBU INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY v. FRANCISCA CUIZON MANGUBAT, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. MTJ-98-1161 August 17, 1999 - HONESTO RICOLCOL v. RUBY BITHAO CAMARISTA

  • G.R. No. 96092 August 17, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALEXANDER BAUTISTA

  • G.R. No. 104955 August 17, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. HECTOR DOMINGO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 109941 August 17, 1999 - PACIONARIA C. BAYLON v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 112330 August 17, 1999 - HENRY CO, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 127348 August 17, 1999 - LYDIA R. LAPAT v. JOSEFINO ROSARIO

  • G.R. Nos. 131861-63 August 17, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BENJAMIN B. LIM

  • G.R. No. 132577 August 17, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. HUBERT JEFFREY P. WEBB

  • G.R. No. 133047 August 17, 1999 - LORENZO YAP v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 135046 August 17, 1999 - LAARNI BAUTISTA, ET AL. v. PILAR DEV’T. CORP.

  • G.R. No. 128827 August 18, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROLANDO R. CAYAGO

  • G.R. No. 128966 August 18, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EDWIN DE VERA

  • G.R. No. 129694 August 18, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALFREDO MANTE

  • G.R. No. 119380 August 19, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FEDERICO LOPEZ

  • G.R. No. 123123 August 19, 1999 - EDWIN CADUA v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 124348 August 19, 1999 - DOMINADOR SANCHEZ v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 130637 August 19, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DAVID ANDALES

  • G.R. No. 131457 August 19, 1999 - CARLOS O. FORTICH, ET AL. v. RENATO C. CORONA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 132426 August 19, 1999 - PUBLIC ESTATES AUTHORITY v. JOSE F. CAOIBES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 135216 August 19, 1999 - TOMASA VDA. DE JACOB v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 119307 August 20, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RENANTE SISON

  • G.R. No. 126413 August 20, 1999 - ANTONIO C. MARTINEZ v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 128889 August 20, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. AVELINO DIZON

  • G.R. No. 113363 August 24, 1999 - ASIA WORLD RECRUITMENT INC. v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 134142 August 24, 1999 - SANTANINA TILLAH RASUL v. COMELEC, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. 98-3-34-MeTC August 25, 1999 - REPORT ON THE SPOT JUDICIAL AUDIT CONDUCTED IN METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT

  • A.M. No. 99-5-18-SC August 25, 1999 - RE: PETITION FOR UPGRADING OF COURT OF APPEALS POSITIONS

  • A.M. No. 99-8-108-MCTC August 25, 1999 - HOLD DEPARTURE ORDER ISSUED BY JUDGE EUSEBIO M. BAROT

  • G.R. No. L-77468 August 25, 1999 - EDUARDO LUCENA, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 108169 August 25, 1999 - VENANCIO DAVID, ET AL. v. ALEJANDRO TIONGSON, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 125524 August 25, 1999 - BENITO MACAM v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 127195 August 25, 1999 - MARSAMAN MANNING AGENCY v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 127318 August 25, 1999 - FRANCIS KING L. MARQUEZ v. COMELEC, ET., AL.

  • G.R. No. 131151 August 25, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EDGAR LOPEZ

  • G.R. No. 135084 August 25, 1999 - MANUEL V. OLONDRIZ v. COMELEC, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. 9777-Ret August 26, 1999 - TESSIE L. GATMAITAN

  • G.R. No. 105854 August 26, 1999 - ANIANO E. IJARES v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 121087 August 26, 1999 - FELIPE NAVARRO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 125735 August 26, 1999 - LORLENE A. GONZALES v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 126875 August 26, 1999 - MARIANO BRUSAS, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 130608 August 26, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ARTHUR DELA CRUZ

  • G.R. No. 132294 August 26, 1999 - DELFIN R. VOLUNTAD, ET AL. v. MAGTANGGOL DIZON, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 134298 August 26, 1999 - RAMON C. TAN v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. 135128 August 26, 1999 - BONIFACIO SANZ MACEDA v. DBP, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. 99-7-20-SC August 27, 1999 - RESOLUTION DESIGNATING BRANCH 10 OF THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF CEBU CITY AS A SPECIAL COURT

  • G.R. No. 108765 August 27, 1999 - SSSEA (PSLINK-TUCP) v. PERLITA BATHAN-VELASCO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 131116 August 27, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ANTONIO L. SANCHEZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 132413 August 27, 1999 - RAMON ALQUIZOLA, ET AL. v. GALLARDO OCOL, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 126252 August 30, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JESUS GARCIA

  • G.R. No. 130091 August 30, 1999 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL v. ELINO NAGUITA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 136587 August 30, 1999 - ERNESTO A. DOMINGO v. COMELEC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 137113 August 30, 1999 - NOEL F. CIACICO v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 94285 & 100313 August 31, 1999 - JESUS SY, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 123825 August 31, 1999 - MARK ROCHE INTERNATIONAL, ET AL. v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 127064 August 31, 1999 - FIVE STAR BUS COMPANY INC., ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 132425 August 31, 1999 - THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 132803 August 31, 1999 - JESSIE V. PISUEÑA v. PETRA UNATING, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 134625 August 31, 1999 - U.P. BOARD OF REGENTS v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.