Practice question
In a labor appeal, a party submits decisive affidavits for the first time without explaining the delay. The tribunal treats liberality as an automatic reason to accept them at full weight. Under Agapito, is that approach justified merely by the nontechnical nature of labor procedure?
- No; the delay must be adequately explained and the allegations sufficiently supported, consistently with fair play
- Yes; late evidence must always receive full weight
- Yes; labor procedure has no due-process limits
- Yes; an affidavit automatically defeats all earlier testimony
- No; no evidence may ever be received on labor appeal
Legal references
- https://lawphil.net/courts/rules/rc_1-71_civil.html — Rule 1, Section 6 (liberal construction for a just, speedy, inexpensive determination).
- https://lawphil.net/courts/rules/pdf/am_19-08-15-sc_2019.pdf — A.M. No. 19-08-15-SC, 2019 Revised Rules on Evidence, effective May 1, 2020; Rules 128 §§1–4, 130 §§1–2, 131 §1, and 133 §§1–2,6.
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2025/apr2025/gr_263794_2025.html — CIR v. Marily Development Corporation, G.R. No. 263794, April 2, 2025, MAIN decision (justified evidentiary reopening and opportunity to examine and object).
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2022/apr2022/gr_248304_2022.html — Agapito v. Aeroplus Multi-Services, Inc., G.R. No. 248304, April 20, 2022, MAIN decision (limits on procedural and evidentiary liberality).
- https://lawphil.net/consti/cons1987.html — 1987 Constitution, Article III §§2–3,12,14 (exclusionary protections and due process).
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.