The Narrow Path to a Strict Application of Procedural Rule, 703 SCRA

668(2013)] By MAURICIO C. ULEP

Rules of procedure especially those prescribing the time within which
certain acts must be done is strictly followed

1) Thus, rules of procedure, especially those prescribing the time
within which certain acts must be done, are absolutely
indispensable to the prevention of needless delays and to the
orderly and speedy discharge of justice (Mapagay v. People, 596 SCRA
470 [2009], Duco v. Commission on Elections, First Division, 596 SCRA
572 [2009], Bolos v. Bolos, 634 SCRA 429 [2010], Munoz v. Yabut, Jr.,
650 SCRA 344 [2011]).

2) Besides, a liberal application of the rules cannot be made the vehicle
by which to ignore the Rules of Court at will and at random to the
prejudice of the orderly presentation and assessment of the issues
and their just resolution. (Dadizon v. Court of Appeals, 601 SCRA 351
[2009])

3) While litigation is not a game of technicalities, it is a truism that
every case must be prosecuted in accordance with prescribed
procedure to insure an orderly and speedy disposition of justice.
(Sajot v. Court of Appeals, 304 SCRA 534 [1999], Casolita v. Court of
Appeals, 275 SCRA 257 [1997], Luna v. Mirafuente, 471 SCRA 1 [20058],
Marohomsalic v. Cole, 547 SCRA 98 [2008], Mendoza v. United Coconut
Planters Bank, Inc., 641 SCRA 333 [2011])

4) The court understands the frustration that litigants and lawyers
alike, would at times encounter in procedural bureaucracy, but
imperative justice requires proper observance of indisputable
technicalities precisely designed to ensure its proper dispensation.
(Dionisio v. Escano, 302 SCRA 411 [1999])

5) The liberality in the interpretation and application of the rules applies
only in proper cases and under justifiable circumstances. While it is
true that litigation is not a game of technicalities, it is equally true
that every case must be prosecuted in accordance with the
prescribed procedure to insure an orderly and speedy administration
of justice. (Don Tino Realty and Development Corporation v. Florentino,
314 SCRA 197 [1999])

6) The reason for rules of this nature is because the dispatch of
business by courts would be impossible and intolerable delays would
result, without rules governing practice. Such rules are a necessary
incident to the proper, efficient and orderly discharge of judicial
functions (Lazaro v. Court of Appeals, 330 SCRA 208 [2000].

7) Rules of court prescribing the time within which certain acts must
be done, or certain proceedings taken, are very familiar, and have
oft been held as absolutely indispensable to the prevention of
needless delays and to the orderly and speedy discharge of business.
Such rules are a necessary incident to the proper, efficient, and
orderly discharge of judicial functions. [Shioji vs. Harvey, 43 Phil.
333(1922)]

8) Time and again the Court has stressed that the rules of procedure must
be faithfully complied with and should not be discarded with the mere
expediency of claiming substantial merit. As a corollary, rules
prescribing the time for doing specific acts or for taking certain
proceedings are considered absolutely indispensable to prevent
needless delays and to orderly and promptly discharge judicial
business. By their very nature, these rules are regarded as
mandatory. Bolos v. Bolos, 634 SCRA 429 [2010],