Lanada v CA February 1, 2002 / De Leon, Jr., J. Facts The Union of Filipro Employees (UFE) e!lare a s"ri#e on a!!oun" of alle$e unfair • labor pra!"i!es !ommi""e by %es"le &hilippines, 'n!. (%es"le) an pu" up a pi!#e" line in fron" of "he !ompanys abuyao, La$una fa!"ory. %L* issue a T*+ enoinin$ "he UFE "o esis" from -blo!#in$, barri!ain$ barri!ain$ an • obs"ru!"in$ "he poin"s of in$ress an e$ress from %es"les abuyao plan". To enfor!e "he T*+, %es"le sou$h" "he assis"an!e of "he &hilippine ons"abulary an • "he fire bri$ae of abuyao. ee#in$ "o "ransfer i"s prou!"s from "he abuyao fa!"ory "o i"s arehouse in Ta$ui$ • urin$ "he s"ri#e, %es"le hire !ar$o "ru!#s from bro"hers ons"an!io an Jesus lima$no. le3aner sinas of "he UFE an Fran!is an"os of %es"le a$ree "o !ons"i"u"e a • panel "o is!uss sai "ransfer of prou!"s, as "he ma""er ma""er as no" o4ere by "he T*+. 5oe4er, in ba fai"h, an"os ins"ea orere "he & "o isperse "he s"ri#ers a" "he • barri!aes in fron" of "he plan" $a"e so "ha" "he "ru!#s !an $e" ou" of "he plan". The & an "he fire bri$ae be$an hi""in$ "he s"ri#ers i"h "run!heons an a"er • !annons. 6i"h 6i"h $a"e !leare, "he !ar$o "ru!#s be$an lea4in$ "he !ompoun. • 7eanhile, Dr. 8ie 8ie 8emir 8emir 9ar!ia 5emee: as on his ay home from his h is mas"eral • !lass a" "he U& olle$e of &ubli! 5eal"h. 5e arri4e a" "he %es"le fa!"ory hile "he ispersal as on$oin$ so he s"oppe his !ar. • " "ha" "ime, "he one of "he !ar$o "ru!#s, ri4en by &a!ifi!o 9alasao, as lea4in$ "he • %es"le !ompoun a" full spee. To a4oi s"ones bein$ "hron a" his ire!"ion, "he "ru!# ri4er ro4e in a !rou!hin$ • posi"ion. 5oe4er, he los" !on"rol of "he "ru!# an bumpe "he !ar of Dr. 5emee:. &inne on by his o4er"urne !ar, Dr. 5emee: as#e someone "o inform his • paren"s an pleae for help from "he people. 6hile e3"ri!a"in$ Dr. 5emee: from "he o4er"urne !ar, his mo"her an bro"hers • repea"ely as#e "he help of & soliers, spe!ifi!ally "o unloa "he !ar$o "ru!# "o spee up "he res!ue, bu" sai soliers refuse, sayin$ "ha" "he "ru!# mi$h" $e" loo"e if "hey i so. Dr. 5emee: as pulle ou" from uner his !ar 2 hours la"er by his family members • an as rushe "o "he hospi"al, h ospi"al, here he ie shor"ly af"er arri4al. pouses *o$elio an Eli:a 5emee:, 5emee: , paren"s of Dr. 5emee:, sue %es"le, Jesus • lima$no, Fran!is an"os, &a!ifi!o 9alasao, an &/ap". *ey La;aa for ama$es. f"er efenan"s file "heir ansers "o "he !omplain", "he 5emee: spouses ser4e • "he efenan"s a re
•
• • •
The 5emee: spouses mo4e "o s"ri#e ou" sai ansers an "o e!lare "he ma""ers sou$h" "o be ami""e as impliely ami""e, !on"enin$ "ha" efenan"s "hemsel4es an no" "heir !ounsel shoul personally anser "he re
Issue/Ratio: 1. Should a person to whom a request for admission is addressed personall answer the request! "#.
PSFC Financial Corp. V CA= e!"ion 2> of *ule 1>? pro4ies "ha" -(a)""orneys ha4e au"hori"y "o bin "heir !lien"s in any !ase by any a$reemen" in rela"ion "here"o mae in ri"in$, an in "a#in$ appeals, an in all ma""ers of orinary ui!ial pro!eure 3 3 3 . Thus, when Rule $% states that a part shall respond to the request for admission& it should not 'e restrictivel construed to mean that a part ma not en(a(e the services of counsel to ma)e the response in his 'ehalf. 'nee, "he "heory of pe"i"ioner mus" no" be "a#en seriously@ o"herise, i" ill ne$a"e "he prin!iples on a$en!y in "he i4il oe, as ell as e!. 2>, *ule 1>?, of "he *ules of our". 'n "he !ase a" bar, "here is no shoin$ "ha" pe"i"ioners i no" au"hori:e "heir respe!"i4e !ounsels "o file in "heir behalf "heir respe!"i4e ansers "o "he 5emee: spouses ri""en re
