Practice question
The court never awarded a requested penalty. After finality, the creditor asks a nunc pro tunc order inserting it solely because the court should have awarded it. Which is sound?
- Anything the court should have done may automatically be backdated.
- Every requested item was necessarily awarded.
- The label avoids all substantive-right limitations.
- The corrective label cannot supply an adjudication never made.
- A party’s proposed order is conclusive proof of prior adjudication.
Legal references
- DOST Officials and Personnel v. Commission on Audit, G.R. No. 253218, February 4, 2025, main decision, finality and its exceptions: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2025/feb2025/gr_253218_2025.html
- Atup v. People, G.R. Nos. 229395 and 252705, November 10, 2021, main decision, limits of clerical and nunc pro tunc correction: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2021/nov2021/gr_229395_2021.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.