Verification Of Pleadings: The Court Has Time And Again Reiterated The Doctrine That The Rules Of Procedure Are Mere Tools Aimed At Facilitating The Attainment Of Justice, Rather Than Its Frustration... - The Lawyer's Post

See - 

Verification Of Pleadings: The Court Has Time And Again Reiterated The Doctrine That The Rules Of Procedure Are Mere Tools Aimed At Facilitating The Attainment Of Justice, Rather Than Its Frustration... - The Lawyer's Post





"x x x.

Verification of a pleading is a formal, not jurisdictional, requirement intended to secure the assurance that the matters alleged in a pleading are true and correct.  Thus, the court may simply order the correction of unverified pleadings or act on them and waive strict compliance with the rules.  It is deemed substantially complied with when one who has ample knowledge to swear to the truth of the allegations in the complaint or petition signs the verification, and when matters alleged in the petition have been made in good faith or are true and correct.⁠1 

As to certification against forum shopping, non-compliance therewith or a defect therein, unlike in verification, is generally not curable by its subsequent submission or correction thereof, unless there is a need to relax the Rule on the ground of “substantial compliance” or presence of “special circumstances or compelling reasons.”⁠2  Rule 7, Section 5 of the Rules of the Court, requires that the certification should be signed by the “petitioner or principal party” himself.  The rationale behind this is “because only the petitioner himself has actual knowledge of whether or not he has initiated similar actions or proceedings in different courts or agencies.”⁠3 

In Lim v. The Court of Appeals, Mindanao Station,⁠4 we reiterated that the requirements of verification and certification against forum shopping are not jurisdictional.  Verification is required to secure an assurance that the allegations in the petition have been made in good faith or are true and correct, and not merely speculative.  Non-compliance with the verification requirement does not necessarily render the pleading fatally defective, and is substantially complied with when signed by one who has ample knowledge of the truth of the allegations in the complaint or petition, and when matters alleged in the petition have been made in good faith or are true and correct.  On the other hand, the certification against forum shopping is required based on the principle that a party-litigant should not be allowed to pursue simultaneous remedies in different fora.  While the certification requirement is obligatory, non-compliance or a defect in the certificate could be cured by its subsequent correction or submission under special circumstances or compelling reasons, or on the ground of “substantial compliance.”⁠5 

In both cases, the submission of an SPA authorizing an attorney-in-fact to sign the verification and certification against forum-shopping in behalf of the principal party is considered as substantial compliance with the Rules.

x x x."