sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2012/august2012/178288.pdf
"x x x.
However, the (2002) two-raffle system is already abandoned under the 2009 IRCA. As the rule now stands, the Justice to whom a case is raffled shall act on it both at the completion stage and for the decision on the merits, thus:
SEC. 2. Raffle of Cases. –
(a) Cases shall be assigned to a Justice by raffle for completion of records, study
and report, subject to the following rules:
(1) Cases, whether original or appealed, shall be raffled to individual justices;
(1.1) Records are deemed completed upon filing of the required pleadings, briefs or memoranda or the expiration of the period for the filing thereof and resolution of all pending incidents. Upon such completion, the Division Clerk of Court shall report the case to the Justice concerned for the issuance of a resolution declaring the case submitted for decision.
(Emphasis supplied.)
Corollarily, the alleged defect in the processing of this case before the CA has been effectively cured. We stress that rules of procedure may be modified at any time and become effective at once, so long as the change does not affect vested rights.
Moreover, it is equally axiomatic that there are no vested rights to rules of procedure.
Thus, unless spouses Fortaleza can establish a right by virtue
of some statute or law, the alleged violation is not an actionable wrong.
At any rate, the 2002 IRCA does not provide for the effect of non-compliance with the two-raffle system on the validity of the decision. Notably too, it does not prohibit the assignment by raffle of a case for study and report to a Justice who andled the same during its completion stage.
x x x."
