Back

FASAP vs. PAL [CONCURRING OPINION , CAGUIOA, J.]

FLIGHT ATTENDANTS AND STEWARDS ASSOCIATION OF THE PHILIPPINES (FASAP), Petitioner, Vs. PHILIPPINE AIRLINES, INC., PATRIA CHIONG and THE COURT OF APPEALS, Respondents. x------------------------------------------x A.M. No. 11-10-1-SC IN RE: LETTERS OF ATTY. ESTELITO P. MENDOZA RE: G.R. NO. 178083 – FLIGHT ATTENDANTS AND STEWARDS ASSOCIATION OF THE PHILIPPINES (FASAP) vs. PHILIPPINE AIRLINES, INC., ETAL. Present: *SERENO, C.J, ** CARPIO, Acting Chief Justice, ***VELASCO, JR., ****LEONARDO-DE CASTRO PERALTA, BERSAMIN, *****DEL CASTILLO, PERLAS-BERNABE, LEONEN, ****** JARDELEZA CAGUIOA, MAR TIRES, TIJAM, REYES, JR., and GESMUNDO, JJ

G.R. No. 178083 / A.M. No. 11-10-1-SC | 2018-03-13

CONCURRING OPINION
 
CAGUIOA, J.:
 
I concur with the ponencia.
 
More often than not, judicial decisions, in determining compliance with legal requirements, fall prey to the technicalities created by statutory text and jurisprudential pronouncements, often denying recognition to even the most reasonable and most commonplace of exceptions. This is precisely what the case at bar presents, as the Court is yet again faced with the dilemma of whether or not requirements historically perpetuated as indispensable could reasonably be put aside in light of the factual circumstances surrounding the controversy.
 
Yet, before...