Dismissal of appeal - absence of specific assignment of errors in the appellant's brief, or of page references to the record.

DOLORES ALEJO, PETITIONER, V. SPOUSES ERNESTO CORTEZ AND PRISCILLA SAN PEDRO, SPOUSES JORGE LEONARDO AND JACINTA LEONARDO AND THE REGISTER OF DEEDS OF BULACAN, RESPONDENTS. [ G.R. No. 206114, June 19, 2017 ].



“x x x.

Dismissal of Appeal Lies within the Sound
Discretion of the Appellate Court

Technically, the CA may dismiss the appeal for failure to comply with the requirements under Sec. 13, Rule 44. Thus, Section 1, Rule 50 provides that an appeal may be dismissed by the Court of Appeals, on its own motion or on that of the appellee upon the ground, among others, of absence of specific assignment of errors in the appellant's brief, or of page references to the record.

Nevertheless, it has been consistently held that such provision confers a power, not a duty, on the appellate court.[22] The dismissal is directory, not mandatory, and as such, not a ministerial duty of the appellate court.[23] In other words, the CA enjoys ample discretion to dismiss or not to dismiss the appeal. What is more, the exercise of such discretion is presumed to have been sound and regular and it is thus incumbent upon Dolores to offset such presumption. Yet, the records before this Court do not satisfactorily show that the CA has gravely abused its discretion in not dismissing the Spouses Leonardo's and Spouses Cortez' appeals.

On the contrary, We are of the view that the ends of justice will be better served if the instant case is determined on the merits, after full opportunity to ventilate their respective claims and defenses is afforded to all parties. After all, it is far better to decide a case on the merits, as the ultimate end, rather on a technicality.

X x x.”