REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION

NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION
QUEZON CITY

_________________________________,
Complainant,

-versus-
CIVIL CASE NO. _______
_________________________________,
Respondent.
x-----------------------------------------------x

MOTION TO ADMIT
(ATTACHED POSITION PAPER)

Respondent ___________________, (hereinafter referred to as

“Respondent”) by counsel states:

1. On ________________, Respondent attended the second

mediation session in the instant action and was given until
_______________ to file its position paper.

2. On ____________________, Respondent transmitted the

attachments and the copies thereof to _____________________, a
messenger of Undersigned Law Firm.

3. After the transmittal of the attachments, ____________

proceeded to the NLRC to file the Position Paper and arrived in
the said office at around _______ p.m.

4. However, upon his arrival, ______________ received a call

informing him that Respondent’s representatives inadvertently
failed to transmit the Verification and Secretary’s Certificate
together with the other attachments.

5. As such, _______________ was constrained to wait for Mr.

____________________, another one of Undersigned Law Firm’s
messengers, to bring the Verification and Secretary’s Certificate
to the NLRC.
 2

6. Accordingly, due to the holiday rush and traffic, Mr.

____________ was unable to reach the NLRC in time for the
scheduled 2:30 p.m. hearing (hereinafter referred to as
“Scheduled Hearing”) and Respondent was not allowed to file
the attached Position Paper.

7. Respondent then filed the attached Position Paper by registered

mail with registry receipt no. ____________ in order to be able
to meet the _______________ deadline.

8. Respondent therefore apologizes to the honorable court for

failing to file the attached Position Paper during the Scheduled
Hearing and asserts that failure was due to the inadvertence of
Respondent and the logistical problems caused by the holiday
season.

9. In Dr. Joseph Malixi et al. v. Glory Baltazar the Supreme Court

demanded the relaxation of procedural rules for the attainment
of substantial justice to wit:

“Time and again, this Court has reiterated the doctrine

that the rules of procedure are mere tools intended to
facilitate the attainment of justice, rather than frustrate
it. A strict and rigid application of the rules must
always be eschewed when it would subvert the
rules' primary objective of enhancing fair trials and
expediting justice. Technicalities should never be
used to defeat the substantive rights of the other
party. Every party-litigant must be afforded the
amplest opportunity for the proper and just
determination of his cause, free from the constraints
of technicalities. (Citations omitted)…
In Parañaque Kings Enterprises, Inc. v. Court of
Appeals,…

We have ruled that when non-compliance with the

Rules was not intended for delay or did not result in
prejudice to the adverse party, dismissal of appeal
on mere technicalities — in cases where appeal is a
matter of right — may be stayed, in the exercise of
the court's equity jurisdiction. It does not appear that
respondents were unduly prejudiced by petitioner's
 3

nonfeasance. Neither has it been shown that such

failure was intentional”.1 (emphasis supplied)

10. Applying the foregoing pronouncement by analogy, Respondent

submits that the strict and rigid application of the rules of
procedure will result in a manifest injustice in the instant action
because it will allow the NLRC to hear and decide an action
outside its jurisdiction in depriving Respondent with the
opportunity to present its defense.

11. Further, it is imperative for the honorable Labor Arbiter to hear

and consider the arguments stated in the Position Paper in order
to appreciate its lack of jurisdiction over the instant action.

12. Respondent also submits that the denial of Respondent’s right to

be heard is undeserved considering that Respondent has tried its
best to file the attached Position Paper within the Scheduled
Hearing and was only prevented from doing so by circumstances
beyond its control.

13. Moreover, Respondent substantially complied with the rules

because it was able to file the Position Paper within the due date
by registered mail.

14. Finally, Complainant __________________ (hereinafter referred

to as “Complainant”) was not prejudiced in any manner by the
filing through registered mail because he was able to file his own
Position Paper and was not deprived of any rights he is entitled
to under the law.

15. Accordingly, Defendant again profusely apologizes for its failure

to file the attached Position Paper during the Scheduled Hearing
and appeals to its sense of justice and fair play for an opportunity
to be heard especially since the attached Position Paper will
clearly establish that the honorable Labor Arbiter has no
jurisdiction to hear and decide the instant action.

16. In support of the instant Motion, Mr. __________ and Mr.

___________ executed Affidavits in order to relay the events that
transpired as stated herein.

1
Dr. Joseph Malixi v. Joseph Baltazar, G.R. 208224 (November 22, 2017).
 4

The Affidavits of Mr. _________ and Mr. _________ are attached

herein as Annexes “A” and “B”.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, in the interest of substantial justice, Respondent

____________ prays that the Honorable Labor Arbiter admit the
attached Position Paper.

Other reliefs that are just and equitable under the circumstances
are likewise prayed for.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED.

Mandaluyong City for Quezon City, 15 December 2019.

___________________ LAW OFFICES

Counsel for Respondent
No. ____ ______________________
Mandaluyong City 1550
Telephone/Fax No. _____________

By:
 5

REQUEST FOR AND NOTICE OF HEARING

THE HONORABLE LABOR ARBITER

NLRC, Quezon City

Greetings!

Please set the foregoing Motion for hearing on _____________ at

11:00 a.m. or as soon as the Honorable Office’s calendar permits.

______________________________

Copy furnished:

_________________________
Counsel for ______________

EXPLANATION

This Motion to Admit was served by registered mail due to the

distance, time constraints and the lack of sufficient office messengers
to personally file and serve the same. (Please disregard if served by
personal service).

___________________________________