Facts:

On October 11, 1978, the Multifarms Agro-Industrial Development Corporation (hereinafter "respondent") filed a complaint for consignation against Cebu Stevedoring Company, Inc. (hereinafter "petitioner") in the Court of First Instance of Cebu, presided over by Judge Jose R. Ramolete. Following the joining of issues, the court determined that the case solely involved a question of law - specifically, the interpretation of Customs Administrative Order No. 8, series 1974. The court requested parties to submit their affidavits and accompanying documentary evidence. On October 27, 1980, a judgment was rendered, wherein the respondent was declared liable to the petitioner for a sum of P9,783.33. The judgment also canceled a specific invoice and compelled the petitioner to pay P1,000.00 in attorney’s fees, while dismissing the petitioner’s counterclaim for lack of merit.

Petitioner, through its counsel Francisco M. Malilong, Jr., timely filed a notice of appeal, app

...

Facts:

Parties Involved

• Petitioner: Cebu Stevedoring Company, Inc.
• Respondents:
• The Honorable Judge José R. Ramolete of the Court of First Instance of Cebu
• Multifarms Agro-Industrial Development Corporation
• Assistant Clerk of Court Nicolas F. Jomuad
• Provincial Sheriff of Cebu and/or her lawful deputy, Felipe V. Belandres

Procedural History and Chronology

• Initiation of Action
• On October 11, 1978, Multifarms Agro-Industrial Development Corporation filed a complaint (as plaintiff) for consignation against Cebu Stevedoring Company, Inc. (as defendant) in Civil Case No. R-17440 before the Court of First Instance of Cebu.
• The underlying dispute involved a question of law regarding the interpretation of Customs Administrative Order No. 8, series 1974.
• Judgment of the Trial Court
• After the issues were joined and affidavits with documentary evidence submitted by the parties, the trial court rendered judgment in favor of Multifarms.
• The judgment declared:
• The liability of Multifarms to be P9,783.33.

ii. Cancellation of Invoice No. 4917 dated July 14, 1978. iii. That a sum of P4,743.33, validly consignated with the Clerk of Court, be added to an advance payment of P5,000.00 to settle the liability. iv. An award of P1,000.00 by way of damages for attorney’s fees against the defendant, while dismissing the defendant’s counterclaim. ii. The record on appeal. iii. The appeal bond. ii. There was no proper showing of payment for the appeal bond. ii. On the same day, lawyer Francisco M. Malilong, Jr. subsequently filed a formal notice of appearance as collaborating counsel alongside Atty. Valentin A. Zozobrado.

Issue:

The Primary Issue

• Does the failure of lawyer Francisco M. Malilong, Jr. to file a formal written notice of appearance before submitting the record on appeal render the petitioner's appeal invalid or "of no force and effect"?

Subsidiary Procedural Concerns

• Whether the filing of the notice of appeal, record on appeal, and payment of the appeal bond within the reglementary period satisfies the requirements notwithstanding the delayed formal entry of appearance as collaborating counsel.
• How should the technical requirement under Rule 13 and Section 21 of Rule 138 be interpreted in light of the substantive interests of justice and the presumption of a lawyer’s authority to represent his client?

The Role of Procedural Technicalities

• Whether rigid enforcement of procedural formalities, such as a formal entry of appearance, should override the fundamental purpose of ensuring a just and speedy determination of the appeal, particularly when no prejudice is caused to the opposing party.

Ruling:

• (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

• (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

• (Subscriber-Only)