St. Louis University Inc. vs Cobarrubias
Facts: Cobarrubias is an associate professor of SLU
and an active member of the union of faculty and employees. The CBAS
contained that for teaching employees in college who fail the yearly
evaluation, who are retained for 3 cumulative years in 5 years, shall be on
forced leave for 1 regular semester during which period all benefits due them
shall be suspended. SLU placed Cob on forced leave for failing to achieve the
required rating points. To reverse the imposed forced leave, Cob sought recourse from the CBA’s
grievance machinery but the parties failed to settle their dispute. Cob filed a
case for illegal forced leave or illegal suspension with DOLE but circulation
and mediation again failed. Cob argued that the CA already resolved the forced leave issue in a
prior case between the parties ruling that the forced leave should be
coterminous with the CBA in force during the same 5-year period. On the other
hand, SLU argued that said CA decision is not yet final for there is still a
pending appeal.
Voluntary Arbitration dismissed the complaint, then Cob filed with the
CA a petition for review under Rule 43 of the Rules of Court, but failed to pay
the required filing fees and to attach to the petition copies of the material
portions of the record. CA responded by dismissing the petition for procedural
lapses.
Issue: WON the CA is correct in reinstating the
petition despite the failure of Cob to pay the appeal docket fees on
time.
Held: Appeal is not a natural right but a mere
statutory privilege, thus it must be made strictly in accordance with
the provision set by law that appeals from the judgment of the VA shall be
taken to the CA, by filing a petition for review within 15 days from the
receipt of the notice of judgment. Upon the filing of the petition, the petitioner
shall pay to the CA clerk of court the docketing and other lawful fees;
non-compliance with the procedural requirements shall be a sufficient ground
for dismissal. Thus, payment in full of docket fees within the prescribed
period is not only mandatory, but also jurisdictional. It is an essential
requirement, without which, the decision appealed from would become final and
executory as if no appeal has been filed.
There are exceptions. Thus, there should be an effort, on the part of the party invoking
liberality, to advance a reasonable or meritorious explanation for his/her failure
to comply with the rules, in this case, no explanation has been given.
No comments:
Post a Comment