Professional Documents
Culture Documents
522,APRIL27,2007 585
DelaCruzvs.Andres
*
G.R.No.161864.April27,2007.
SameSameStrictCompliancewithRulesisIndispensable.Whileit
is true that rules of procedure are not cast in stone, it is equally true that
strict compliance with the Rules is indispensable for the prevention of
needless delays and for the orderly and expeditious dispatch of judicial
business.Utterdisregardoftherulescan
_______________
*SECONDDIVISION.
586
586 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATED
DelaCruzvs.Andres
notjustlyberationalizedbyharkingonthepolicyofliberalconstruction.
PETITIONforreviewoncertiorarioftheresolutionsoftheCourtof
Appeals.
ThefactsarestatedintheresolutionoftheCourt.
Samonte,Felicen,Tria,SamonteandHernandezLawOffice
forpetitioners.
RomeoA.Sadornasforrespondents.
RESOLUTION
QUISUMBING,J.:
_______________
1Rollo,pp.812.
2Id.,atpp.1415.
587
VOL.522,APRIL27,2007 587
DelaCruzvs.Andres
I.
_______________
3CARollo,pp.210.
4Id.,atp.50.
5Id.,atpp.8397.
588
588 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATED
DelaCruzvs.Andres
II.
IV.
Thethresholdissuebeforeusis:Canpetitionersavailofapetition
forreliefunderRule38ofthe1997RulesofCivilProcedurefroma
judgmentoftheCourtofAppealsduetotheircounselsnegligence
whenhesignedtheCertificationofNonForumShopping?
Petitioners plead that they be spared the consequences of their
procedural lapse since it was caused by their counsels gross
negligence in ignoring a wellestablished rule that it is the party
himselfwhoshouldverifyandcertifythepleading.
Respondents, on the other hand, maintain that petitioners
counselwasnotnegligentandinfactdidhisbestsincehefiledthe
petitionforreviewontime.
After considering the submission of the parties, we deny the
petitionforlackofmerit.
_______________
6Rollo,p.201.
589
VOL.522,APRIL27,2007 589
DelaCruzvs.Andres
ApetitionforrelieffromjudgmentunderRule38ofthe1997Rules
of Civil Procedure is an equitable remedy that is allowed only in
exceptional
7
cases when there is no other available or adequate
remedy. It may be availed of only after a judgment, final order or
other proceeding was taken against the petitioner in 8any court
throughfraud,accident,mistake,orexcusablenegligence.
While the law uses the phrase any court, it 9
refers only to
Municipal/Metropolitan and Regional Trial Courts. The procedure
in the Court of Appeals and this Court are governed by separate
provisions of the Rules of Court and may, from time to time, be
supplementedbyadditionalrulespromulgatedbythisCourtthrough
resolutionsorcirculars.Asitstands,neithertheRulesofCourtnor
the Revised Internal Rules of the Court of Appeals
10
allows the
remedyofpetitionforreliefintheCourtofAppeals.
Moreover,underSection1(b),Rule41ofthe1997RulesofCivil
Procedure,thedenialofapetitionforrelieffromjudgmentissubject
onlytoaspecialcivilactionforcertiorariunderRule65.Inseeking
to reverse the appellate courts decision denying their petition for
relief from judgment by a petition for review on certiorari
11
under
Rule45,petitionershaveavailedofthewrongremedytwice.
Nevertheless,evenifthisCourtweretodelveintothemeritsof
thispetition,thesamemuststillbedenied.Whatpetitionerscounsel
didinthiscasewastoattachanimproper
_______________
7InsularLifeSavingsandTrustCompanyv.Runes,Jr.,G.R.No.152530,August12,
2004,436SCRA317,325SeeMercuryDrugCorporationv.CourtofAppeals,G.R.
No.138571,July13,2000,335SCRA567,576.
8Rule38,Section1.
9Mesinav.Meer,G.R.No.146845,July2,2002,383SCRA625,634.
10Id.
11Azucenav.ForeignManpowerServices,G.R.No.147955,October25,2004,441
SCRA346,353354.
590
590 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATED
DelaCruzvs.Andres
_______________
12Quev.CourtofAppeals,G.R.No.150739,August18,2005,467SCRA358,369.
13Saint Louis University v. Cordero,G.R. No. 144118, July 21, 2004, 434 SCRA
575,584.
14Id.,atp.586.
15HeirsoftheLateCruzBarredov.Asis,G.R.No.153306,August27,2004,437
SCRA196,201SeeSaintLouisUniversityv.Cordero,supra.
591
VOL.522,APRIL27,2007 591
DelaCruzvs.Andres
Utterdisregardoftherulescannotjustlyberationalizedbyharking
16
onthepolicyofliberalconstruction.
WHEREFORE,theinstantpetitionisDENIEDforlackofmerit.
The assailed Resolutions dated October 21, 2003 and January 21,
2004 of the Court of Appeals in CAG.R. SP No. 67966, are
AFFIRMED.
Costsagainstpetitioners.
SOORDERED.
Carpio,CarpioMorales,TingaandVelasco,Jr.,JJ.,concur.
Petitiondenied,assailedresolutionsaffirmed.
Note.Thedoctrinalruleisthatthenegligenceofcounselbinds
the client, and to fall within the exceptional circumstances, it must
be shown that the negligence of counsel must be so gross that the
clientisdeprivedofhisdayincourt,theresultofwhichisthatheis
deprived of his property without due process of law. (Saint Louis
Universityvs.Cordero,434SCRA575[2004])
o0o
_______________
2003,415SCRA573,584.
592
Copyright2017CentralBookSupply,Inc.Allrightsreserved.