Case Title OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR V ALBERTO V.

GARONG
A.M. No. P-99-1311
Ponente YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
Digest By MATEO, Katleen Ann

SYNOPSIS / FACTS
- Respondent Alberto V. Garong was charged with frustrated homicide. The judgment of the trial court
was affirmed by the Court of Appeals in a Decision promulgated on August 9, 1996,2 and the same
became final on November 15, 1996, for which Entry of Judgment was accordingly made.

- Garong remained at large and was not yet terminated from the service. He continued to receive his
salaries and other fringe benefits and leave credits as Court Interpreter III

- OCA filed an administrative complaint to against respondent praying for his dismissal from the
service with forfeiture of all his retirement benefits and leave credits. OCA then recommended that
the administrative complaint be treated as an administrative matter.

- Respondent, Garong filed an Urgent Motion to Quash Warrant of Arrest claiming that he was not
properly served with notice of the decisions against him. The notice of judgement should have been
sent to respondent’s counsel of record’s new address

- Respondent filed with CA:

Motion to Lift/ Set Aside Entry of Judgment
Resolve Motion For Reconsideration
Recall Order of Execution and Warrant of Arrest

RELEVANT PROVISIONS / CONCEPTS / DOCTRINES

DOCTRINE

Strict compliance with such rules is mandatory and imperative. Procedural rules were conceived to aid in the
attainment of justice.

RULES OF COURT

Rule 1, Section 6, of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure

SEC. 6. Construction. – These rules shall be liberally construed in order to promote their objective of
securing a just, speedy and inexpensive disposition of every action and proceeding.

ISSUE/S
ISSUE 1:
- Whether or not the judgement of the Court may be upheld if the procedural rules were not properly
complied with
RULING
RULING FOR ISSUE 1:
- The Court’s primary duty is to render or dispense justice.

- The rule may be relaxed if a party successfully shows that the alleged defect in the questioned final
and executory judgement is not apparent on its face or from the recitals contained therein. Litigations
1 | Digest Pool of UST FCL 1C A.Y. 22-23
 should be decided on merits and not on technicalities.

- Garong’s life and liberty is at stake. It is just that respondent be given every opportunity to defend
himself and to pursue his appeal.

- The Complaint against Garong is hereby HELD in ABEYANCE

ADDITIONAL NOTES
- Held in Abeyance – temporary suspension of activity

2 | Digest Pool of UST FCL 1C A.Y. 22-23