MANSION PRINTING CENTER and CLEMENT CHENG, vs

DIOSDADO BITARA, JR.

G.R. No. 168120 January 25, 2012

Davis Cheng, on the other hand, did both. First, he indicated in the
notices the notation that respondent refused to sign together with
the corresponding dates of service. Second, he executed an Affidavit
dated 29 July 2000 stating that: (1) he is the General Manager of the
company; (2) he personally served each notice upon respondent,
when respondent went to the office/factory on 17 March 2000 and
21 March 2000, respectively; and (3) on both occasions, after
reading the contents of the memoranda, respondent refused to
acknowledge receipt thereof. We are, thus, convinced that the
notices have been validly served.

CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, G.R. No. 161733

Petitioner,
- versus -
ARNULFO A. SEBASTIAN,
Respondent.

MUNICIPALITY OF KABASALAN,

ZAMBOANGA SIBUGAY and Present:

Mayor FREDDIE I. CHU,

Vs COURT OF APPEALS and ARNULFO A.
SEBASTIAN

October 11, 2005

G. R. No. 162463

CSC vs Sebastian, GR Nos. 162463, 161733, October 11, 2005

Case law has it that one is barred from asserting a right if he fails to do so for an
unreasonable and unexplained length of time which by the exercise of diligence, he
could have or should have done earlier. By sleeping on his right for almost four
years, the respondent is now barred from claiming his right to be reinstated to his
position as Municipal Secretary. Relief has been denied to those who, by sleeping on
their rights for an unreasonable length of time, either by negligence, sheer folly or
inattention, have allowed their claims to slumber. The laws aid the vigilant and not
those who slumber on their rights

Under the rules, if the addressee refuses to accept delivery, service by registered
mail is deemed complete if the addressee fails to claim the mail from the postal
office after five days from the date of first notice of the postmaster. (JOVEN YUKI,
JR. vs WELLINGTON CO, G.R. No. 178527, November 27, 2009)