Republic of the Philippines

COURT OF APPEALS
Manila

FORMER ELEVENTH DIVISION

PEOPLE OF THE CA-G.R. CV No. 115395

PHILIPPINES,
Plaintiff,
Members:

HEIRS OF ROBERTO GO, GARCIA-FERNANDEZ, M.V., Chairperson

as represented by HELEN PAYOYO-VILLORDON, T.M.B., and
GO, PASCUAL, R.B.L., JJ.
Private Complainants-
Appellants, Promulgated:
FEBRUARY 27, 2023

- versus -

DIDIERE LADRIERE and

SHIELA P. TIRU,
Accused-Appellees.

x-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------x

RESOLUTION

PAYOYO-VILLORDON, J.:

Before this Court is a Motion for Reconsideration dated 11

August 20221 filed by the Heirs of Roberto Go, as represented by
Helen Go (private complainants-appellants), through counsel,
which prays for the revisitation of Our Resolution dated 11 July
2022 (assailed Resolution),2 the dispositive portion of which reads:

WHEREFORE, for private complainants-

appellants' failure to file the required Brief within the

1
Rollo, pp. 59-66.
2
Rollo, pp. 57-58.
CA-G.R. CV No. 115395
Resolution 2

prescribed period, the present appeal is now DEEMED

ABANDONED. Accordingly, the case is hereby
DISMISSED pursuant to Section 1(e), Rule 50 of the
Revised Rules of Civil Procedure.

SO ORDERED.3

In a Minute Resolution dated 1 September 2022, 4 the Motion for

Reconsideration was referred to accused-appellees for their comment
within ten (10) days from notice. Thereafter, accused-appellees,
through counsel, filed their Comment dated 3 October 2022. 5

We now resolve.

To recall, the Notice to File Brief dated 21 December 2020 6 was

earlier sent to private complainants-appellants. However, the notice
returned unclaimed with postal notation “RTS – No One to Receive”.

In the present Motion, private complainants-appellants admit

their failure to file the required Brief within the prescribed period and
allege the poor health conditions of their representative Helen Go,
and their counsel, as reasons for their failure to timely file their Brief.

Helen Go alleges that she left for the United States of America
to seek oncology treatment after the onset of the COVID-19
Pandemic and before the imposition of the Enhanced Community
Quarantine. She adds that she has since remained thereat up to the
present. Consequently, Helen Go failed to receive the Notice to File
Brief which was sent to her address of record.

On the other hand, private complainants-appellants' primary

counsel, Atty. Edmundo Legaspi, died on 6 March 2021. Meanwhile,
his collaborating counsel, Atty. Prudencio B. Jalandoni, also of
advanced age, was constrained to remain in his family residence in
Manila during the imposition of the Enhanced Community Quarantine
while undergoing medical treatment.

In the interest of justice, and in line with the liberal spirit

pervading the Rules, this Court recognizes that the representative of
private complainants-appellants may have had constraints and
difficulties anent her representation before Us which then hampered
her capacity to strictly abide by the technicalities set forth thereunder.
3
Ibid, p. 58.
4
Rollo, p. 67.
5
Rollo, pp. 68-71.
6
Rollo, p. 53.
CA-G.R. CV No. 115395
Resolution 3

Hence, finding no badge of fraud or intent to delay the

proceedings on the part of private complainants-appellants, this Court
considers the explanations proferred by Atty. Jalandoni as cogent
reasons to relax Our usual application of the technical rules to afford
the former the fullest opportunity to establish the merits of their
appeal.

IN VIEW WHEREOF, the present Motion for Reconsideration is

GRANTED. This Court's Resolution dated 11 July 2022 is hereby
REVERSED and SET ASIDE. Accordingly, the Division Clerk of Court
is ORDERED to SERVE ANEW a copy of the 21 December 2020
Notice to File Brief.

SO ORDERED.

ORIGINAL SIGNED
TITA MARILYN B. PAYOYO-VILLORDON
Associate Justice

WE CONCUR:

ORIGINAL SIGNED
MYRA V. GARCIA-FERNANDEZ
Associate Justice

ORIGINAL SIGNED
REX BERNARDO L. PASCUAL
Associate Justice