Substantial Compliance with Procedural Rules: Certified Xerox Copies in Philippine Law

The Supreme Court, in Quintano v. National Labor Relations Commission (G.R. No. 144517, December 13, 2004), addressed a recurring question in Philippine litigation: whether a "certified xerox copy" of an assailed resolution satisfies the requirement for a "certified true copy" under the Rules of Court. The Court ruled that it does, emphasizing that procedural rules should serve substantial justice rather than defeat it.

The Facts of the Case

Antonio Quintano was hired as Senior Executive Vice-President of Moldex Land, Inc. in June 1995, later becoming President of Moldex Realty Marketing, Inc. His employment package included a P5,150,000.00 signing bonus, which he used to purchase a condominium unit that he agreed to assign as collateral for the cash advance.

In October 1997, the company discovered that Quintano had mortgaged the condominium unit to Citytrust Bank, allegedly breaching his undertaking. The respondents claimed this constituted serious breach of trust, prompting them to ask for his resignation. Quintano, however, claimed he was forced to resign without warning.

The Labor Arbiter dismissed Quintano's complaint for illegal dismissal, finding that he voluntarily resigned after securing concessions. The NLRC affirmed this decision on appeal.

The Procedural Issue Before the Court of Appeals

When Quintano elevated the case to the Court of Appeals via a petition for certiorari under Rule 65, he attached copies of the NLRC resolutions bearing the stamp "certified xerox copy" instead of "certified true copy." The appellate court dismissed the petition, ruling it was "deficient in form" because:

1. The attached copies were certified xerox copies, not certified true copies
2. Quintano failed to append copies of his complaint, motion for formal trial, notice of appeal, and the Labor Arbiter's decision
3. He did not manifest willingness to post an injunctive bond

The Supreme Court's Ruling

The Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals, ruling that the petitioner's submission substantially complied with the requirements of Section 3, Rule 46 in relation to Section 1, Rule 65 of the Rules of Court.

On certified xerox copies. The Court held that the operative word in "certified true copy" is "certified," which means is the operative word.** A copy certified by the proper officer—whether labeled "certified true copy" or "certified xerox copy"—satisfies the Rule 65 requirement if it is a faithful reproduction of the original.

• Courts should decide cases on the merits. The Supreme Court reiterated that cases should be resolved after full opportunity for all parties to ventilate their causes, rather than on technicalities or procedural imperfections.
• Missing attachments are not automatically fatal. If the Court of Appeals needs additional documents to determine whether a petition has substance, it should allow the petitioner to submit them instead of dismissing the case outright.
• Failure to post an injunctive bond affects only the ancillary relief. It does not warrant dismissal of the underlying petition for certiorari.
• Substantial justice prevails. Rules of procedure are tools designed to expedite case resolution, not to frustrate substantial justice through rigid technical application.

This article is general information and not legal advice. For your specific situation, consult a lawyer or ask ASG Legal AI.