ChanRobles Virtual law Library

[ G.R. No. 136808. April 12, 1999]

EYPTAIR vs. JAPAN AIRLINES, et al.

SECOND DIVISION

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated APR 12, 1999.

G.R. No. 136808 (Eyptair vs. Japan Airlines, et al.)

In accordance with Rule 45 in relation to Rule 56 and other pertinent provisions of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended, governing appeals by certiorari to the Supreme Court, only petitions which comply strictly with the requirements specified therein shall be entertained. On the basis thereof, the Court RESOLVES to DENY the petition for review on certiorari for failure of petitioner to:

(a) take the appeal within the reglementary period of fifteen (15) days in accordance with Section 2, Rule 45 in relation to Section 5(a), Rule 56, in view of the denial of petitioner's motion for extension of time to file petition in the resolution of 10 February 1999;

(b) submit together with the petition the proof of service of a copy of the petition on the Court of Appeals in accordance with Section 13, Rule 13 and Sections 3 and 5, Rule 45 in relation to Section 5(d), Rule 56; and

(c) submit a certification, duly executed by petitioner itself, that no other action or proceeding involving the same issues raised in this case has been filed or is pending before this Court, the Court of Appeals, or in the different divisions thereof, or any other tribunal or agency, with the undertaking to inform the Court of any similar case filed or pending in any court or quasi-judicial agency that may thereafter come to his knowledge in accordance with Section 5, Rule 7 and Section 4(e) Rule 45, and Section 2, Rule 42 in relation to Section 5(d), Rule 56.

At ant rate, even if the foregoing requirements were complied with, the petition would nevertheless be denied for failure to sufficiently show that the Court of Appeals committed any reversible error in the questioned judgment as to warrant the exercise by this Court of its discretionary appellate jurisdiction in this case.

Accordingly, the manifestation and motion of petitioner dated 18 February 1999 submitting to this Court the attached allegedly omitted page of the petition containing the certification on non-forum shopping and praying that the same be admitted, and its motion for reconsideration of aforesaid resolution of 10 February 1999 are NOTED WITHOUT ACTION.

The comment of respondent Japan Airlines dated 18 February 1999 on the petition for review on certiorari is NOTED.

Very truly yours,

TOMASITA M. DRIS
Clerk of Court

Back to Home | Back to Main

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE