314 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOL. 684, OCTOBER 22, 2012 Bu “Avro vn. Rosal Homeowners Association, Ine “Montes vx Cipriano ‘On the Base ofall the foregoing, the Court fds mo error om the pvt of the CA to warrant the reversal or modifention tf the analled decision. WHEREFORE, the petition is DENTED, 50 ORDERED. Velecco, Jr (Chairperson, Leonardo-De Castro,” Peralta sand Abad, J concur. Peston denied. [Notes.—Any presived denial ofa party's right tobe hese con the other partys motion for execution i cured by het mo- on for reconsideration ard the sur’ action on the sane. {Chine Banting Corporation ox Abe, 689 SCRA 184 [2011)) ‘Article II, Setin 14(2) of the Constitution, provides that ‘ip all eimipal prosecutions, the seeused .. shall enjoy the abt te be heard by himself and counsel.” (Viloreal ve Pepi, 664 SCRA 619 (2012) oo Desist acting mers, par Special Onler No. 134% dated Oster, 2012, GR. Na 151089, Ocbor 22,201: MERLINDA CIPRIANO MONTANEZ, complainant, ve LOURDES TAJOLOSA CIPRIANO, roependent. Crimi! Law; igus: Blomant fest in the prose tin for igang tat the alleged scond mariage hating al the tou meuroment, oud be bald were at forthe ables the rt marriage ements fe erie 0 aya 0) theese has bos gly mar) the mariage as 20 bees Tepe or ines is her spss abet, the abent oust could not tb prertne ea scoelng to the Ci Code (Grtha he contrac tse or aubenquent mariage en hs fcind or sbmeguet aia’ as al he sees reas fot ‘Sie. The fon le comsummatad on the clara athe send ‘arage or euequent marrage Bex entail in the poet [Ee tignny a hv alleged soon mange, having che eset Iesurementn old be aid vere fit ir the sultetee oho Saray Sams The subg! eieldelratin of mlity of efit marine wont Chg ef at she cotated the tteind marsoge daring the absinthe fit marviage tthe ‘Snu'erpoden! contested the ond arog, the ft warring trav all ating hid tot yt ben legal solved. a ued Jpike abovementioned jureyeueey, the aban jut ce ‘ton ef ly of thet avigy ould ange tect hat ‘he 'ontnted the osra arvings ring the suites the [Ete muriage, Tin, wapendant as pope charged he crime ‘bigamy, sine the oul elements the ease charged wore fifty alles PETITION far review on certiorari of the order and reshition ‘ofthe Regional Trial Court af San Pedro, Laguse, Br ‘Tho facts are stated in th opinion ofthe Court ‘THIRD DIVISION,316. SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOL, 634, OCTORBR 22, 2012 Bu ‘Moniaes ve. Coriano Montasies vs, Cipriano “Tose Marion P, Paton or petition. Robert Sion for respandent. PERALTA, J For our teroution is a petition for review on certioraré ‘which socks to antl the Orter* dated September 24, 2007 of the Regional Teal Court (RTC) of San Pedro, Laguna, Branch ‘2h ienied in Criminal Case No. 4900-SPL which dsmisted the Infarmation for Digamy Bled against rspondent Lourdes ‘Tajslona Cipriano, Also nawsled i the RTC Resolution dated ‘January 2, 2008 denying the motion for econsiderticn. (On April 8 1976, respondent marred Socrates Flares (Soc rates) im Lez, Ahlan” On Jonary 26, 1088, daring the sub- stonce ofthe auld marving, respondent marred Slvr V. ‘Giprinnc (Slveris) in San Pedro, Laguna Th 2001, respon- dent filed with the RTC of Muntinlupa, Branch 256, a Pest ‘Gon for tho Antuiment of her marriage with Socrates on the found of the Inter’ poyeholgial incapacity as defined une flr Article 96 ofthe Family Code, which wax docketod (inal Case No, 01268, Om daly 18, 2008, the RTC of Mun- Gnlupe, Branch 258, rendered tn Amended Dedboa! desl lg the marriage of respondent with Socrates all and wid Sid decision Became final and exocutory on October 12, 2009." ‘On May 14, 2004, petioner Merlinds Cipslano Monta, Sivevit daughter fom the Beet marrage, filed with the Moniipal Trial Court of San Ped, Laguns, a Complaint for olla yp 4-55; Pe ge Sonia. Yo-Casam, Hd app. 68. last 8. Tasty 8 STE stp 6668 sian ‘igamy ageinst reapondan, which was dsketal aa Criminal (Case No. 1972, Attached tothe complaint was an Aida Malosang Sinwmpaans Seloyeey) ded August 25, 2004, ‘humfb-marked ad signed ly Silver? which alleged, song others, Get respondent fled to revel t Silvera that she ‘ras stl marie to Socrates, On November 17,2004, an Ls {mation for Bigamy was led against respondent with the ‘RTC of Sn Potro, Laguna, Branch 31. The aoe Waa doketed ‘4 Ceiminal Cae No. s990SPI. The lfaration read! ‘oat ono aout Januar 24, 1865, the Mesicpalty of San Pedra, Province of Lagu, Pipe, and win te arin ct Hanerla Cour he sai asad l then sod there il fly, unlawly apd fbiniosly etree» sand cr bwogoat ‘mariage nth One SILVERIO CIPRIANO VINALON wile her et ‘arnage with SOCRATES FLORES tae at heen july die feted by oroper el eutaritie.” (On July 24,2007 ana before hee arcegminent, eapondent through councdl filed a Bltion to Quash Infermtion (and Dismlscl ofthe Criminal Complain®” alleging thee er mar ago with Socrates hel aleady been declared wid ab ents 52005, thus, here war 0 more marrage to mpi of pict 2 ‘her marriage t Silverio on January 24,1965; that the basic slement of the crime of bigamy, Le, to valid marriages, is therefore wanting” She alo claimed thot since the second ‘marriage was held in 1883, the erie of bigamy hd already presebed. The prorecstion fled it Comment’ arpuing thst fho erie of bigamy had already been exnrummated when espandnt fled her petition for declaration of mit that ‘he law punisbes the at of eotracting a second marriage "dap * Did on May 27,2007, a 9.68 id atp 13 oa "i, pp. 308 dat pn ssa,319. SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED ‘Monto, Cipriana ‘hich appsare to be valid, while dhe frst marrage is stil Subsistig and se not sot hoon annlled or declared eid by the sour. In ts Onde dated August 8, 2007, the RTC denied the ‘motion. It found respondents argument that withthe deda ation of nulty of her fest mariage, there was no mare Best ‘marriage to speak of ond thus the element of wo valid ae ages im bigamy was abront, to have Bee Ind fo nee hy our ulingin Meroadoo, Tan where we eld: In the instant cae, pttonr contrasted» sco marie ‘hough cere nas eto federation of uly tha Set ‘eurage. Inet, be nated he Peon tobe the fee ae age decarod wid. only er complalaat bad fled alter ‘ompliot charging ht with hur. For antag sccnd ar ‘igo le to vt all subatn, he omen te Ss pan ‘Bhate unr Ace 94 of oe Revs Penal Ge That be subeequany obtaied a jul ésaraton of the null ef dh Gat mariage was immaterial, To topes, the eine Td already ben enone by hen AAs to respondents claim tht the setion had alrondy pre scribe, the RTC found that while th second marrage indeed took plain 1983, or more than the b-year prescriptive peed forthe erime of bigamy, the mmistion of the crime teas only discovered on Novembor 17, 2004, which should be Ue reckoning peed ence presription has nt yet sti, Reaponden filed a Motion for Recusderatien” dlaiming ‘hat the Mercado ring wa not apple, since respondent contracted hor fret matvago in 1976, b, before Cue Femly (Code: that the pesitin for anniment wae grant and be ‘p84 ‘Git No, IS7L10, August 1, 2000, 37 8 00 2003 "Mercado Tan eypra, ap 188 ap. 82 "Rap 8687 VoL. 684, OCTOBER 22, 2012 a9 “Mowares va, Cipriano ‘me final before the crninal complaint for bigamy was Ged: fand, that Article 40 of tho Family Code eannot be given any ‘trouve effet becaus his will impair her right remarry without need of secring a decoration of mllity of @ com Bletly void prior mariage. Op Soptomber 24, 2107, the RTC isued its ateailed Or er. the dispositive portion of which rend: ‘Where, he Order of Aug 3 2007 scoala and set side Lata new one be teed asahing te intranet {Ba ie the neta care te DISMISSED. In co ruling, the RTC sid that atthe time the azeused ad contracted @ sooond marrage on January 24 1988, Le, before the effectivity of the Fumily Code the existing law dd not require a judicial decarston of absolute nullity asa condion precedent to contracting a subsequent marrige; that jira. Dradenee before the Fonily Cade was arbivaleat cathe ssse ‘tthe need of prior judicial dedaration of sbecute ally of the first marrage. The RIC found that both marriages of respondent look place hofare the effestity of the Family (Code, thus, considering che unsettled state of jureprudence nthe neod for prior declration of absolute mulity af mare ‘age before commencing a scwnd marrage and tie principle that laws shouldbe intarpreted Uberally in favor of the ace ‘aed ie delared thatthe absence of a judicial dedration of dulity should not prejadie the accused whose second mare age as declared once and fr all val with the anmelment other frst mariage bythe RTC of Muntalupa City in 2008. Disastis ed, a Motion for Reconsideration wa fl by the prosecution, but opposed by reependent. Ina Resolution dated ‘Senuary 2, 2008, the RTC denied the same ruling. peng ‘ters, chat the Jodi! declaration of mult of repondent320 SUPREME COUR? REPORTS ANNOTATED VOL. 684, OCTOBER 22, 2012 321 “Montane ve, Cipriano ‘marriage is tantamunt to a were declaration or cnfimation hat said marriage never existed stall and for this Toate, her actin contracting aseeand marriage cainot be conedoved ‘ciminal, Agatioved petitioner diveetly filed the present petition ‘ith us rising te felling isto 1, Whether he jst a fat mariage porto the ‘pscmtent of the Family Cale and the ponouncenent i Wiel Sempio-Diy on the ground of papell toapacty ie valid sfinon form charg of bia fr easrng inte a and ernge ‘orto the enactment he Fly Cate andthe posoncrnea it ‘Weal Senge? "_ Water the rior cre in tating ht the aig. Aone rie to the enssaent of the Femy Code ad Ihe pe. naneemet fa Wage ve. Semplo-Diy reparng the ous Hf sraring declaration af ity of test marin tte eleing ‘toto ravage anvaen, sich that sors Was tloned eter a sobsguest rag witout the snnulaent of eit ‘ichotieuring ena ait.” Proliminarly, we aot thatthe instant petition asaing the RTC dismissal ofthe Infrmation for bignny war Hod ty private complainant and aot by the Office of the Salicitor General (086) which should reprecent the government inal indiil proceedings Sled beero us Notwithstanding we will i ape ® Section 88, Chagor 12, Te I af Book V ofthe 1987 A sinitatve Cade proves Sec, 35." Foner and Ractons —The Of of be Slictor General shall open! the Coven fe Pape, gee ‘det and intramantlte apd trols nd gests ny ign tie, receding, terion or mater requ the aetce ot Inwerm vom It aha ave the flowing apse Power and fae (0) Represent the Goverment in the Supreme Cour ‘ad he Corto apoule nl eriminl proses reese Montaies vx Cipriana lve due course to this petition ax we had dous inthe past Ta Antone: Bernie the offended party pvt complainant) ‘questioned before the Court of Appeals (CA) the BING de- ‘missl ofthe Information for bigamy filed aginst er hus- band, and the CA dismissed the petition on the ground, among others, that the petition shonld have been fed in behalf of the People ofthe Phippines by the OSG, being ite statutory counsel in ll appealed criminal esse I's pfition Sed with us we said that we had given de cousse toa mum bor of actions even when the resporiv interests ofthe gor= ‘erument were nt properly represented by the OSG snd sai In Labor, Panay, this Court del wth a similar delet in ‘ho flowy mance emt, be str that fhe pull: proms tion is ageved by any ror rllng the al jug tn 8 ‘imines, the OSG, and nt the praetor, tet oe the hes quetion te reer or ling btn we ‘Nevrthols, sinee the challenged order affect tho ‘nthe patito, ae bad dene hte nse case, ago Ite Comment, ere hat the OSC hur tif wad ped as ‘he Goverament adits oe nthe Spee Cour, Ceuta Appeal, and all ce ruts or tnale all el actions fd pel romedings in hich the Govemors fer ‘herein hot expan nv po “Avan exeption this Fle, the Stor General is allowed to (8) Dept legal ons of sovernnentdeprtments be: renus gels anos to ont te Slt Catzral ad epronr tr roprset the Gatwanent Jn eas ivvng te rorpcive oa, brought bee the evr and snare rpervon eo ‘uoloter sac gal ose with repost sue ese GH No 188826 Decomber, 2010, 607 SCRA GIB822. SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED ‘Montane w. Cipriana “is own the stam pion forthe Popo ofthe Filipine (pine upped Considering that we aso seguir the OSG to fe Com- ‘mont on the petition, which it di, praying that the potion bo granted in effet, rach Comment had rated the petion fle with s. ‘As to the merit of the potion, the issue for resclation whether or not the ETC eed in qeashing the formation for bigamy led against reepondnt Article 349 of the Revised Penal Cade defines and penalizes bigamy fll Ac, 848. Biguny.—the peasy of prism mayor shal be Imposd upon any pemom wh al sua wun ot sborquent ‘arias before the former maeioge har ben Toga astro itive the bent spouse Bas eon Sadar peeampaivey dead Oy ‘rans af jedgmeat rendre athe per posed. ‘The elements ofthe crime of bigamy are: (a) the ofider has boon legally marrio(b) the marrage has not been le tally dissolved os, in cate his or er spouse ie eon, the nent spouse could not yt be presumed dead aconding te ‘the Civil Code; (c) that he eonracta second or subnequnt ‘marriage; and (2 tbe socond or subsequent marriage has ll he essential requisites for valicity. The felony fy eonsum mated on the eglsbration of the second mariage or subse= ‘quent marrage.” It is essential inthe prosecution Sr bigamy thatthe alleged second mariage, having all the sae requirements, would be valid were tnt forthe subeistance af ‘he fret marrage” Antone» Broilo, supra, 823, * Manuel. Pople, G3 No 105802, November 29, 2005, $78 Sona got Si Pie, anaes iat. 3 VOL, 684, OCTOBER 22, 2012 923 Montane vs. Cipriano Th this ase appears thet when respondent contracted » cecond macrage with Silver n 1989, her fst marriage with Stortee cxlsbrsted in 1976 waa at] subsisting ae the same had not yet been annulled o dsclared void Ly a eompotent thority Thus, all the elements of bigamy wore alleged in the Infornition, Im her Afoton to Quash the [aformation, she allogd, among others, that: 12 The records of this cso would Mer Ot that asanes hhrvnge with sud Srtne Foe waa feared vid [Rig on 34 Api 109 by Bend 266 of tho Ragin ‘al Coote o Mastilupa Cay ‘The sid decom was ever apptal, and teeame al and executor sory Sorat, 2, Inothar wort, bef the ling ofthe Eatin in his ‘er mariage with Mr Hes So ele been de ‘Sood id fom he begin 4. Thay es three no arsage peor to 24 January 15 to speck et Inher more there was oly oc m2 sage 5, The Base emt af the erie of bigamy, tht two {il neg hei wanna CCeary, the snmulment of respondents first mariage on the ground of peyehologicalsneapcity was deeared cn in 2008, The quection nn ia whether he declaration of nullity Gf respondents first snuerage justifies the dismissal of the Tnformaties for bigamy fed against her ‘We rulein the negative. Ia Mereudo », Te" we ruled thatthe subsequent judi sclaration ofthe nullity of the fst mariago ‘eas imate ial, because prior tothe declaration of mult, the crime of "Rot, p80. Sige nte 25, 188; tp. 824524 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOL. 684, OCTOBER 22, 2012 325 ‘Montaies ve Cipriana ‘Montes ve, Cipriana ‘igumy had already bees consummated. And hy contracting 3 scoond marrage wile the Seat was ail subsisting, tho at- faced committed the sets punishable under Article 949 of the Revised Penal Code, In Abunado v. People.” wo be that what is roqired for the change of bigamy to prosper is chat the first marriage be fubsitng at the tte the second marrage ix contracted” [ven ifthe aseused eventually obtained a detaration that his fit marriage wa void eb into, che pot 3s, both the Best find the second marrage were subsisting bere the fist mar age was anmled.” Tn Toned o. CA,” we declared that although the judi Aeclaration of the nallityof a marrage onthe ground of p= ‘holgial incapacity retronets ta th date ofthe clebratian of the mariage insofar asthe vinculum between the spouses is concarne, ti sgnfieat Co note thet said marrage is not thous logal effects, Among there effets ie that cbideen {mlved or born before tho jdgment of absolute nullity of the matrlage stall be considered legitimate. There la, chore favo, areognition sri info the iw tf that mach a me- riage, although void ob initio, may stl produce lgal eneo ‘Guences, Among these lgalconectuencee ie incurring crim tal lability for bigemy. To hold otherwise would render the State's penal Jv on bigamy completely nugatry, and allow individuals fo deliberately ensure tote esch marital contract be flawed in some manser, and to thus eseape the canse- ‘quences of contacting multiple merringes, while beguiling {henge of faplese women with th promive of ftonify and BGR No, 160218, March 0, 2004426 SCRA 682 ='GR No, 160758, Fetanry 18, 2004, 428 SORA 212 487 ‘And in Jarifow. Pople applying the foregoing jorspra- dence, affirmed the aectneds conviction far bigamy, ruling ‘hat the moment the sessed contracted a second mariage ‘without the previous one having been jodiillydedared nll fand void, the crime of bigamy was already consummated eens atthe time of the celebration of the second marriage, the seuseds Bret maeriage whieh had not vet bon deeared null and void by @ court of competont jurisdiction was deemed ‘valid and eubsieting, Here, nt the time respendent contracted the second mar- riage, the ise marrage we tl subsisting 95 thd not yet tram logllydiaaved. Ar rl nthe above-mentioned fur: ridenee, the subsequent jadiial declaration of ality f the Sat marsiage would mot change the fac that she contracted ‘he second marriage daring the eubsistence ofthe frst mar riage. Thus, respondent was properly charged of the erime of Figumy, since the esuntial elements ofthe ofense charged swore alicenty allege Respondent claims that Tensbro o. CA” i aot applicable, since the declaration of nullity ofthe previous marrage came after tho Fling af the Informatio, wake in this ease where the dachration wa rendered befae the information was filo. Wo do not ngroe. What makes a perton eiminally Babe for igamy is when he contracts «second or aubwequent marriage uring the subsistence of svat marriage Parties to the mariage should not be permitted to judge for themealves its nuit forthe same mast be submited to the judgment of competent spurts and only when the mit of the marrige i a0 decared ean it be held az wid, and 20 long fe thre je no sua delaration the presumption is that the tarrage exists” Therefore, he who coatrets a second maz GR No, 164495 Sorter 99,2000, 601 SCRA 286 Supa nota 0 Londihe sel, CR No 122570, Pebrnr 23,1968, 22 soma 7, Tad 190 Pal 743, 748 1968,826 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED ‘Moniates vs. Ciprian "age before the judicial dedaration of malty ofthe ist mar- ‘age assumer the risk of bing prosecuted fer bigamy.” Anoat reapondents contention in her Comment that since her two marriages were contracted prior to the effectivity of the Family Code, Arie 40 of the Family Cade cannot be fiven retroactive effect because this wll impale her right to remarry without need of securing a judlclal delaation of allty of completely aid marsage Wie are not persuaded In Jorilo». Pople,” where the accused, in her motion for ‘econsideratien, argued that since her matriagee were es ‘ered into before the effectivity of the Family Code then the spplcabl lw ie Setian 20 of che Marviago Law (Act 3613)" Inscad of Article 40 of Use Family Code, which rquires 8 final judgment declaring the previous marviage void bofore & parson may contract subsequent marriage, We didnot find {he argument meritorious and eid As far back a 1985, in Ao Brilone, J, the Cart ready‘made the declaration int Ace 4, whi rule oc tare, should be applied etwactelybeecuss Artie 255 ofthe Family Cae tact prover that ai “Cade sal hve etactive “i GIR No, 14486, June 2,200, 62 SORA 2, Sesion 29 of At No S5(areinge Law) which vied ‘bgt mareages Any massage subsequently conracted by sng pero dung the ine athe fret pus thal be Mga ed (a) The set marrage was annals or sled () ‘The int eps had own abet for seven cone tive yeary the time of tha sxond maage witout the ‘pou presene having new f the bmanze ban ve, re tte beng generally considered a eb and bored tobe fob tho epsut presen! a tbe ea string ach sabe. ‘unt marrage he mariage ao oneatad bing vals mo ‘rcre unt delved sl ad ved lyn someon nae VoL. 684, OCTOBER 22, 2012 827 “Mentos va Cipriano ‘ct inate a does aot pode or impair wind or eued "gts "The Coat wen nea, ou ‘The fre eb procadoral sates sy schon aft ‘he gant rights may not pole thr active sole tion to peodiog acons. Toe retentive epplstion sf ra ‘dra ie oot valaive af any ie of prea wh fy el {hate is aderely allen. The reason et a general Ful, mn Vested ight ayaa oor is on, pdr inv In Morell Bobie Bobi, the Cour pintado the dager of nt enforcing he pelos Arle 0 of Se Fama Co, nthe cso at hr, respondents clear intent it bain 9 Judi tesaratono lt ef is et marrage and tart terto inwke that very sae aden! to prevent hi rat tin fortune cannot hive heal scat its Ot Win, ll tht an advestros bgario ht doi Soren “Arlce 40 ofthe Fry Colo, contret»stacgsen amas fed ecape igany chars by tnply aiming thet the fe Iarige i vid ad hat the ebecquent marrage ie egal eid flee os pro ial cedsraten efit otto et ‘Appar may even stat hla arnge evar ofS vee ra reqiterorly the mariage fwaee=and arate Sates eusequent mnviage wfhove ssining wtedara on etm the fine ante aarumptin thatthe ar Fingevld Such mension gery the por Som on igay™ WHEREFORE, consitering the foregoing, the petitan is GRANTED. The Order dated September 2 2007 nd te Resolution dated Jansary 2, 2008 of te Regional Teal Court of San Pedr, Laguna, Branch 91, ierved in Crgtinal Case No, 4900-SPL, are hershy SET ASIDE, Criminal Case No 4990-SPL is ordered REMANDED to the il court fr fir- ther proceedings * darilo People, spr nto 36, ot pp. 2-98. (Citation ont 7 AOINS TWHOISem rs328 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED ‘Moniaies ux, Cipriano ‘50 ORDERED. Velasco, Jr. (Chairperson), Lesnardo.De Casto,” Abad sna Mendes, J, ones Puition granted, order ana resolution set asd Noton.—Under the Family Code a subsequent judicial dee lavation ofthe mlity of th fst sarsige is iamateril in 8 bigomy case because, by then, the eime had already been consummated. Antone ox. Beroilla, 637 SCRA 615 (2010) ‘The elements of bigamy are ae flows: 1. That the offender thas bean logelly marred; 2. Tat Use marsiage hos uot been legally dined on in ears hie or her spoure is absent, the absent spouse could not yet be presumed dood according to the Civil Code, 5. That he eantracts «second or subsequent ‘marriage; and 4 That the seoond or cubgoquent marriage has 1 de cosatal cequiites for validity. ooo ce People, 635 ‘SCRA 307 (201s) ot Desiganind Acting Member, por Spedal Onder Na. 1943, VoL. 684, OCTOBER 22, 2012 329 ‘SM Land, Ine, Pormerly Shoemart ne) ve. City of Manila GR Na 16751, eter, 2012 SSM LAND, INC. (Formerly Shoemart, In:} and WATSONS PERSONAL CARE STORES, PHILS, INC, patitoner, CITY OF MANILA, LIBERTY TOLEDO, in hr officiel expae- Sty aa the City Tessurer of Mani and JOSEP SANTIAGO, {nls fil eapaciy asthe Chie of Lisenes Divison of the City of Mail, respondent, Ronediat La inl Procedare, Cerifeation of Now Foren ‘Shopping: It mut be hepa in th ete earnen of the ‘enifeation of nonoram shopping is mandatory, nanehley the ‘eoulament mt nat be itera to erely ond thas at the objectte of precontng the andesrebleprostie of fru stop Ding ont be kee in ind that we the regiment the {riaton of non‘brum shopping ie wandatry, nonetheless, the Fesugementa ut ot be isrpreia tan erly and ht dot the ebjectie of preventing te undacrabe pace of ara age ‘lg Ti ae agai, he Courts ata rule of rmedurare ‘rahe secre eubtatal jai. Being instru fr Che Speedy and efile administration of jue hey must be und to lier sud ed, nc to der im prin, when ms rk ‘tara applet othe rls on contre sbpping And vere ton wil recltina patent dello usta jun, thos ma be ery esd. Same; Some: Sane ta number fs, the Supreme Court hs eee th lard fling of he required ereton nd et tion of nm foram shopping cing that pei direst or ompaling reasons mate ti pplition of the rue Sor ‘uted “te mumbo of cares, hn Court has encod tn be sheppng. cng that spec reamacanas oe cplingrarons ‘Dabs srctappcalln ee rae cerlycxjrte. ie Curt ‘led tha substan jar and the aparene mone he b> ‘Sandive pet ofthe cas te deemed tec ceunstanes oF tho wall In fat is Covet asl ‘THIRD DIVISION, Ane TEMETEOS sts