Case Digest (G.R. No. 263481)
Facts:
In 2016, Warren T. Gutierrez filed an action for unlawful detainer against Spouses Ricardo and Ligaya Ang before the Metropolitan Trial Court in Civil Case No. 10549, claiming ownership of a lot sold on installment in 1998 and alleging long default by the Angs. The MeTC rendered judgment for Warren on November 15, 2016; the Regional Trial Court affirmed on July 3, 2017.
Ligaya Ang moved for extension of time to file a petition for review under Rule 42, Rules of Court in the Court of Appeals, but the CA denied the motion on September 22, 2017 for non-payment of docket fees and denied reconsideration on February 20, 2018 after its receiving section found no payment; Ligaya then filed this petition for certiorari.
Issues:
- Were the appellate docket and other lawful fees duly paid within the reglementary period?
- Did the Court of Appeals commit grave abuse of discretion in denying the motion for extension and refusing to admit the petition for review for non-payment of docket fees?
Ruling:
The Court held that Ligaya Ang failed to prove that the appellate docket fees were duly paid and that the CA did not commit grave abuse of discretion in denying the motion for extension or in refusing to admit the petition for review. The petition for certiorari was dismissed.
Ratio:
The Court reiterated that the right to appeal is a statutory privilege and that Rule 42, Rules of Court mandates payment of docket and other lawful fees within the reglementary period to perfect an appeal. Although non-payment may warrant discretionary rather than automatic dismissal under Buenaflor v. Court of Appeals, the petitioner must present convincing proof of payment; here the messenger’s affidavit and belated assertions were insufficient and contradicted by the CA receiving section’s affidavits, and no compelling reason existed to relax the rules.
Doctrine:
- The right to appeal is a statutory privilege and must be exercised strictly in accordance with the rules.
- (Get Pro to unlock 4 more doctrines)