Tible and Tible Company vs Royal Savings and Loan Association
When is the rule on the Certification of Non-Forum Shopping relaxed?
In 1977, Tible & Tible Company, Inc. (TTCI) obtained a loan amounting to P1.5 million from Royal Savings and Loan Association. The loan matured however TTCI was not able to pay hence Royal savings sued TTCI. TTCI later entered into a compromise agreement with Royal Savings but again TTCi was not able to comply with it.
In 1981, the properties of TTCI were awarded to Comsavings via a public auction sale where Comsavings was the highest bidder. It, however, took ten years for the Deed of Sale to be issued in favor of Comsavings.
Upon issuance of the Deed, TTCI filed an action for Annulment of Deed of Sale. This was eventually dismissed. TTCI’s Motion for Reconsideration was also dismissed.
In 2002, TTCI filed a petition for certiorari before the Court of Appeals. The CA dismissed the petition on the ground that, among others, that the “Verification Affidavit of Non-Forum Shopping” was signed by one Almabella Menla Vda. de Tible, but there is no Special Power of Attorney, Board Resolution nor Secretary’s Certificate was attached thereto authorizing said signatory to sign the Verification and Affidavit of Non-Forum Shopping in behalf of the other petitioners.
ISSUE: Whether or not the Petition shall prosper.
HELD: No. The petition is defective. The signature of the widow in the verification and affidavit of non-forum shopping of the petition for certiorari was not ratified by any special power of attorney, board resolution nor secretary’s certificate executed by her co-petitioners authorizing her to sign for and in their behalf.
But in the Motion for Reconsideration which TTCI filed after the CA denied the Petition, TTCI have already complied with the requirement (there’s now a special power of attorney executed in favor of the widow), will this cure the defect?
The subsequent compliance with said requirement does not excuse a party’s failure to comply therewith in the first instance. In those cases where this Court excused the non-compliance with the requirement of the submission of a certificate of non-forum shopping, it found special circumstances or compelling reasons which made the strict application of said Circular clearly unjustified or inequitable.
The Supreme Court noted that there are two pre-requisites for the relaxation of the rules on the attaching of the Certification of Non-Forum shopping:
- justifiable cause or plausible reason for non-compliance; and
- compelling reason to convince the court that outright dismissal of the petition would seriously impair the orderly administration of justice.
Leave a Comment