ChanRobles Virtual law Library

[ G.R. No. 143739. August 21, 2000]

BIENVENIDO SENSENG vs. SAMAHAN NG MAGKAKAISANG MANGGAGAWA NG STA. RITA WOOD STEEL, ETC.

THIRD DIVISION

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated AUG 21 2000.

G.R. No. 143739 (Bienvenido Senseng vs. Samahan ng Magkakaisang Manggagawa ng Sta. Rita Wood Steel, etc.)

Petitioner assails the decision of the Court of Appeals dismissing his petition for failure to comply with the rule on certification on non-forum shopping in accordance with Section 3, Rule 46 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure.

It appears that a certain Lolita Senseng, the registered owner of Sta. Rita Woodsteel, together with petitioner, filed a petition for certiorari with the Court of Appeals assailing the decision of the National Labor Relations Commission. However, only petitioner signed the verification and certification on non-forum shopping. He did not show any authority that he was authorized to sign also for and in behalf of Lolita Senseng or Sta Rita Woodsteel. Moreover, the petition failed to make a complete statement of material dates. Likewise, no affidavit of proof of service was attached to the petition in violation of Section 13, Rule 13 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure. Hence, the Court of Appeals dismissed the petition.

A subsequent motion for reconsideration proved unavailing.

Thus, the instant petition which must likewise fail.

It has long been recognized that strict compliance with the rules and circulars is indispensable for the prevention of needless delays and for the orderly and expeditious dispatch of judicial business. For a party to seek exception for its failure to comply strictly with the statutory requirements for perfecting its appeal, strong and compelling reasons such as serving the ends of justice and preventing a grave miscarriage thereof must be shown, in order to warrant the Court's suspension of the rules. Otherwise, the rules must strictly apply (Villanueva vs. Court of Appeals, 205 SCRA 537 [1992]).

Time and again, this Court has ruled that certiorari being an extraordinary remedy, the party who seeks to avail itself of the same must observe the rules laid down by law (Manila Midtown Hotel and Land Corporation vs. NLRC, 288 SCRA 259 [1998]).

WHEREFORE, petition is denied due course.

SO ORDERED.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) JULIETA Y. CARREON

Clerk of Court

Back to Home | Back to Main

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE