Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • CMTC Int'l Marketing Corp vs. Bhagis GR 170488 Dec 10 2012

    Uploaded by

    bryan
    3 views1 page
    The appellant failed to file its appellant's brief within the required 45 days despite receiving notice to do so. As a result, the appellate court dismissed the appeal. The appellant then filed a motion for reconsideration and to admit the late appellant's brief, which was filed 42 days past the deadline. The court emphasized the importance of following procedural rules to facilitate timely resolution of cases. Exceptions are only made for compelling reasons where strict adherence would not serve justice. In a separate case, a student was blinded in one eye during a chemistry experiment accident. The parents sued the school, who lost in the lower court and filed an appeal. However, they failed to pay the required fees for the appeal on time despite being represented by a

    Original Description:

    case

    Original Title

    Research 2

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The appellant failed to file its appellant's brief within the required 45 days despite receiving notice to do so. As a result, the appellate court dismissed the appeal. The appellant then filed a motion for reconsideration and to admit the late appellant's brief, which was filed 42 days past the deadline. The court emphasized the importance of following procedural rules to facilitate timely resolution of cases. Exceptions are only made for compelling reasons where strict adherence would not serve justice. In a separate case, a student was blinded in one eye during a chemistry experiment accident. The parents sued the school, who lost in the lower court and filed an appeal. However, they failed to pay the required fees for the appeal on time despite being represented by a

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    3 views1 page

    CMTC Int'l Marketing Corp vs. Bhagis GR 170488 Dec 10 2012

    Uploaded by

    bryan
    The appellant failed to file its appellant's brief within the required 45 days despite receiving notice to do so. As a result, the appellate court dismissed the appeal. The appellant then filed a motion for reconsideration and to admit the late appellant's brief, which was filed 42 days past the deadline. The court emphasized the importance of following procedural rules to facilitate timely resolution of cases. Exceptions are only made for compelling reasons where strict adherence would not serve justice. In a separate case, a student was blinded in one eye during a chemistry experiment accident. The parents sued the school, who lost in the lower court and filed an appeal. However, they failed to pay the required fees for the appeal on time despite being represented by a

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 1

    CMTC Intl Marketing Corp vs.

    Bhagis
    GR 170488 Dec 10 2012
    Pursuant to Rule 44, Sec. 7 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure appellant is hereby
    required to file with this Court within forty-five (45) days from receipt of this notice,
    SEVEN (7) legibly typewritten, mimeographed or printed copies of the Appellant's
    Brief with legible copies of the assailed decision of the Trial Court and proof of
    service of two copies upon the appellee/s.
    However, despite said notice, petitioner failed to file its appellant's brief timely.
    Hence, on August 19, 2005, the appellate court issued a Resolution dismissing the
    appeal filed by petitioner. Upon receipt of the order of dismissal, petitioner filed its
    Motion for Reconsideration with Motion to Admit Appellant's Brief, 9 which was filed
    forty-two (42) days late from the date of its expiration. Time and again, this Court
    has emphasized that procedural rules should be treated with utmost respect and
    due regard, since they are designed to facilitate the adjudication of cases to remedy
    the worsening problem of delay in the resolution of rival claims and in the
    administration of justice. From time to time, however, we have recognized
    exceptions to the Rules, but only for the most compelling reasons where stubborn
    obedience to the Rules would defeat rather than serve the ends of justice.

    St Louis University vs. Cordero


    GR 144118 July 21 2004
    An occurred during an experiment in the Organic Chemistry class at Saint Louis
    University (SLU), Baguio City, when chemicals known as anhydrous sodium acetate
    and barium hydroxide burst from a hard test tube and hit the face and eyes of a
    student, herein respondent Winston Joseph Z. Cordero, causing his right eye to be
    totally blind. Parents sued the school who enlisted the services of a former law dean
    as counsel. The school lost in the lower court and filed an appeal with the RTC.
    Despite failure to pay fees, the RTC said they filed their appeal on time. When asked
    why they failed to pay, the counsel for the school said that he didnt know the
    amount to pay and the procedure through which he could make payment.
    Considering that the counsel was a former law dean with decades of practice, this
    reason provided was considered unacceptable, and the rules of court were applied
    strictly.

    You might also like