Professional Documents
Culture Documents
26 ST Louis V Cobarrubias
26 ST Louis V Cobarrubias
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156bb6b7a429bca3c0a003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 1/12
8/24/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME626
_______________
*THIRD DIVISION.
650
BRION, J.:
We resolve the present petition for review on certiorari1
filed by petitioner Saint Louis University, Inc. (SLU), to
challenge the decision2 and the resolution3 of the Court of
Appeals (CA) in CAG.R. SP No. 101708.4
_______________
1Filed under Rule 45 of the Revised Rules of Court Rollo, pp. 1342.
2 Dated November 5, 2008, penned by Associate Justice Celia C.
LibreaLeagogo, and concurred in by Associate Justices Mario L. Guaria
III and Arturo G. Tayag id., at pp. 144158.
3Dated February 24, 2009 id., at pp. 167168.
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156bb6b7a429bca3c0a003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 2/12
8/24/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME626
651
Section 7.7. For teaching employees in college who fail the yearly
evaluation, the following provisions shall apply:
(a) Teaching employees who are retained for three (3) cumulative
years in five (5) years shall be on forced leave for one (1) regular
semester during which period all benefits due them shall be
suspended.7
_______________
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156bb6b7a429bca3c0a003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 3/12
8/24/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME626
652
_______________
653
The CA Decision
_______________
654
The Petition
The Issues
_______________
655
_______________
25Espejo v. Ito, G.R. No. 176511, August 4, 2009, 595 SCRA 192, 204.
26 SEC. 4. Period of appeal.The appeal shall be taken within
fifteen (15) days from notice of the award, judgment, final order or
resolution, or from the date of its last publication, if publication is
required by law for its effectivity, or of the denial of petitioners motion for
new trial or reconsideration duly filed in accordance with the governing
law of the court or agency a quo. Only one (1) motion for reconsideration
shall be allowed. Upon proper motion and the payment of the full amount
of the docket fee before the expiration of the reglementary period, the
Court of Appeals may grant an additional period of fifteen (15) days only
within which to file the petition for review. No further extension shall be
granted except for the most compelling reason and in no case to exceed
fifteen (15) days. (Rule 43, Revised Rules of Court.)
27 SEC. 5. How appeal taken.Appeal shall be taken by filing a
verified petition for review in seven (7) legible copies with the Court of
Appeals, with proof of service of a copy thereof on the adverse party and
on the court or agency a quo. The original copy of the petition intended for
the Court of Appeals shall be indicated as such by the petitioner.
656
_______________
Upon the filing of the petition, the petitioner shall pay to the clerk of
court of the Court of Appeals the docketing and other lawful fees and
deposit the sum of P500.00 for costs. Exemption from payment of
docketing and other lawful fees and the deposit for costs may be granted
by the Court of Appeals upon a verified motion setting forth valid grounds
therefor. If the Court of Appeals denies the motion, the petitioner shall
pay the docketing and other lawful fees and deposit for costs within fifteen
(15) days from notice of the denial. (Rule 43, Revised Rules of Court.)
28SEC. 7. Effect of failure to comply with requirements.The failure
of the petitioner to comply with any of the foregoing requirements
regarding the payment of the docket and other lawful fees, the deposit for
costs, proof of service of the petition, and the contents of and the
documents which should accompany the petition shall be sufficient ground
for the dismissal thereof. (Rule 43, Revised Rules of Court.)
29 Ruby Shelter Builders and Realty Development Corporation v.
Formaran III, G.R. No. 175914, February 10, 2009, 578 SCRA 283, 297.
30Ruiz v. Delos Santos, G.R. No. 166386, January 27, 2009, 577 SCRA
29, 43.
3157 Phil. 552, 553 (1932).
32No. L15027, January 31, 1964, 10 SCRA 65, 67.
33203 Phil. 120, 127 117 SCRA 753, 759 (1982).
657
_______________
34 241 Phil. 40, 4445 157 SCRA 32, 3637 (1988) docket fees paid
fortyone (41) days late.
35327 Phil. 153, 158 257 SCRA 373, 378 (1996) docket fees paid four
(4) months late.
36358 Phil. 228, 232 297 SCRA 587, 591 (1998) nonpayment of docket
fees despite CA notice to pay.
37 386 Phil. 412, 417 330 SCRA 208, 212 (2000) docket fees paid six
(6) months late.
38 422 Phil. 214, 221 370 SCRA 625, 631 (2001) docket fees paid
almost ten (10) months late.
39463 Phil. 785, 793 418 SCRA 380, 387 (2003) docket fees paid one
(1) year and eleven (11) months late.
40 478 Phil. 739, 750 434 SCRA 575, 586 (2004) docket fees paid
almost a month late.
41484 Phil. 500, 504 441 SCRA 525, 529 (2004) docket fees paid seven
(7) months and twentyfive (25) days late.
42485 Phil. 599, 610 443 SCRA 218, 229 (2004) docket fees paid 132
days late.
43492 Phil. 698, 701 452 SCRA 626, 630 (2005) docket fees paid one
(1) month late.
44G.R. No. 148482, August 12, 2005, 466 SCRA 618, 622623 docket
fees paid only upon the filing of the motion for reconsideration.
45 G.R. No. 139303, August 25, 2005, 468 SCRA 77, 86 docket fees
paid four (4) months late.
46 G.R. No. 174219, November 23, 2007, 538 SCRA 713, 730 docket
fees paid more than thirty (30) days late.
658
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156bb6b7a429bca3c0a003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 9/12
8/24/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME626
_______________
47 G.R. No. 172849, December 10, 2008, 573 SCRA 479, 492 docket
fees paid two (2) days late.
48 G.R. No. 171659, March 17, 2009, 581 SCRA 643, 646 docket fees
paid more than three (3) months late.
49 G.R. No. 183335, December 23, 2009, 609 SCRA 223 deficiency in
docket fees paid only upon the filing of the motion for reconsideration.
50Mejillano v. Lucillo, G.R. No. 154717, June 19, 2009, 590 SCRA 1, 9
Ko v. Philippine National Bank, G.R. Nos. 16913132, January 20, 2006,
479 SCRA 298, 303.
51Villa v. Heirs of Enrique Altavas, G.R. No. 162028, July 14, 2008,
558 SCRA 157, 166 Moneytrend Lending Corporation v. Court of Appeals,
G.R. No 165580, February 20, 2006, 482 SCRA 705, 714.
659
_______________
52Lim v. Delos Santos, G.R. No. 172574, July 31, 2009, 594 SCRA 607,
616617 Villena v. Rupisan, G.R. No. 167620, April 3, 2007, 520 SCRA
346, 358359.
660
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156bb6b7a429bca3c0a003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 11/12
8/24/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME626
_______________
Copyright2016CentralBookSupply,Inc.Allrightsreserved.
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156bb6b7a429bca3c0a003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 12/12