G.R. No. 191215 - THENAMARIS PHILIPPINES, INC. (FORMERLY INTERMARE MARITIME AGENCIES, INC.)/ OCEANIC NAVIGATION LTD. AND NICANOR B. ALTARES, VS. COURT OF APPEALS AND AMANDA C. MENDIGORIN (IN BEHALF OF HER DECEASED HUSBAND GUILLERMO MENDIGORIN).D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, the foregoing considered, judgment is hereby rendered in favor of the complainant [herein private respondent] and finding respondents [herein petitioners] liable to pay jointly and severally: (a) death benefits amounting to US $50,000.00 at its peso equivalent at the time of actual payment; (b) reimbursement of medical expenses amounting to P102,759.74; [(c)] moral and exemplary damages amounting to P100,000.00 and P50,000.00 respectively; and (d) attorneys fees in the [amount of] ten percent (10%) of the total monetary award. All other claims are DENIED. [6] Ruling of the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) On appeal, the NLRC reversed [7] the LAs Decision. Private respondent moved for reconsideration. [8] In a Resolution [9] dated June 29, 2009, however, her motion was denied for lack of merit. Private respondent, through counsel, received the June 29, 2009 Resolution of the NLRC on July 8, 2009. Sixty-two days thereafter, or on September 8, 2009, she filed a Motion for Extension of Time to File Petition for Certiorari [10] before the CA. Private respondent alleged that she had until September 7, 2009 (as September 6, 2009, the actual last day for filing, fell on a Sunday) within which to file a petition for certiorari . However, as her counsel was then saddled and occupied with equally important cases, it would be impossible for him to file the petition on time, especially since the case involves voluminous documents necessary in the preparation thereof. Accordingly, private respondent asked for an extension of 15 days from September 7, 2009, or until September 22, 2009, within which to file the petition. On September 22, 2009, private respondent filed her Petition for Certiorari [11] before the CA. Action of the Court of Appeals In a Resolution [12] dated November 20, 2009, the CA noted that private respondents Petition for Certiorari was filed 15 days late and suffers from procedural infirmities. Nonetheless, in the interest of substantial justice, the CA entertained the petition and directed private respondent to cure the technical flaws in her petition. Thus: The Court, in the interest of justice, resolved to NOTE the petition for certiorari filed on September 22, 2009, albeit the same was filed fifteen (15) days late. A perusal of the instant petition reveals the following procedural infirmities, namely: (1) The attached Verification/Certification of Non-Forum Shopping does not conform with the requirements under Section 12, Rule II of the 2004 Rules of Notarial Practice, as a Community Tax Certificate is no longer considered competent evidence of an affiants identity; and (2) Except for the copy of the Motion for Reconsideration filed with the National Labor Relations Commission, no other copies of pertinent and relevant pleadings/documents are attached therewith, such as petitioners Complaint , respondents Memorandum of Appeal , petitioners Opposition to Respondents Appeal , if any, all of which may aid this Co