Cu-Unjieng vs. Court of Appeals

Full payment of appellate docket fees within the reglementary period is mandatory and jurisdictional for the perfection of an appeal. Failure to comply deprives the appellate court of jurisdiction and renders the decision appealed from final and executory.

Respondent Union Bank of the Philippines (UBP) posted a list of acquired realty assets for sale, including a 218,769-square-meter agricultural land in Bulacan. Petitioner offered to buy the property for a lesser amount, explaining the reduction was due to tenant demands, and tendered a check as earnest money. UBP initially withheld action pending a legal opinion, then rejected the offer because the land was CARPable and required Department of Agrarian Reform approval for sale, refunding the earnest money. Petitioner demanded specific performance, which UBP rejected again citing the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law.

• The Offer to Purchase: UBP owned agricultural land registered under TCT No. TC-1062, offered for sale at P2,200,000.00. Petitioner offered to buy it for P2,078,305.50, payable 50% down with the balance in monthly installments over two years. Petitioner tendered PCIB Check No. 565827 for P103,915.27 as earnest money, which UBP acknowledged receipt of.
• Rejection by the Bank: UBP advised petitioner that his offer was pending a legal opinion regarding the sale of CARPable agricultural assets. On December 19, 1994, UBP rejected the offer, citing its legal division's opinion that selling lands covered by the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law without prior DAR approval is null and void. UBP advised petitioner to claim a refund of his earnest money.
• Demand and Lawsuit: Petitioner made a formal demand for UBP to execute a deed of conveyance. UBP reiterated its rejection on July 19, 1995, stating the CARPable land could only be disposed of through a Voluntary Offer to Sell or compulsory acquisition under RA 6657. Petitioner filed a complaint for specific performance and damages in the RTC.
• RTC Decision: The trial court found no perfected contract of sale and dismissed the complaint for lack of cause of action, ordering UBP to reimburse petitioner the earnest money with interest.
• Appeal and Docket Fee Issue: Petitioner filed a Notice of Appeal on November 5, 1998, but failed to pay the full appellate docket fees within the reglementary period. Payment was made only after four months. The CA dismissed the appeal pursuant to Section 1(c), Rule 50 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure. The CA subsequently denied the motion for reconsideration and expunged the attached appellant's brief.

• Relaxation of Procedural Rules: Petitioner argued that his failure to pay the appeal docket fees on time was a non-fatal lapse and a non-jurisdictional defect that the CA should have ignored to attain substantial justice.
• Clerical Error: Petitioner blamed the RTC clerk of court for allegedly making an erroneous computation of the docket fees, causing the delay.

• Strict Application of Procedural Rules: Respondent opposed the motion for reconsideration, maintaining that the filing of the notice of appeal was not accompanied by full and correct payment of docket fees, and the four-month tardiness justified the dismissal and expungement of the brief.

• Perfection of Appeal: Whether the Court of Appeals erred in dismissing the appeal for non-payment of docket fees within the reglementary period, despite petitioner's invocation of substantial justice and alleged clerical error.

• Perfection of Appeal: The dismissal was correctly upheld. The right to appeal is a statutory privilege requiring strict compliance with the rules. Payment of docket and other legal fees within the prescribed period is mandatory and jurisdictional; noncompliance is fatal to an appeal. While dismissal for late payment is discretionary rather than automatic, a four-month delay in payment does not warrant relaxation. The invocation of substantial justice does not automatically compel the suspension of procedural rules.

• Mandatory and Jurisdictional Nature of Docket Fees — Payment of docket and other legal fees within the prescribed period is mandatory and jurisdictional for the perfection of an appeal. Without such payment, the appeal is not perfected, the appellate court does not acquire jurisdiction, and the decision appealed from becomes final and executory.
• Discretionary Dismissal for Late Payment — Failure to pay docket fees within the reglementary period allows only discretionary, not automatic, dismissal. The court must exercise sound discretion in accordance with justice and fair play, considering all attendant circumstances. However, a delay of four months in paying the fees justifies dismissal.

• "Well-settled is the rule that payment of the docket and other legal fees within the prescribed period is both mandatory and jurisdictional, noncompliance with which is fatal to an appeal. For, to stress, appeal is not a matter of right, but a mere statutory privilege." — Defines the jurisdictional nature of docket fee payment.
• "We must emphasize that invocation of substantial justice is not a magical incantation that will automatically compel this Court to suspend procedural rules." — Restricts the use of substantial justice as a blanket excuse for procedural lapses.

• La Salette College vs. Victor Pilotin, 418 SCRA 381 (2003) — Followed. Recognized that failure to pay docket fees within the reglementary period allows only discretionary, not automatic, dismissal, requiring the exercise of sound discretion.
• Mactan Cebu International Airport Authority (MCIAA) vs. Mangubat, 312 SCRA 463 (1999) — Distinguished. Late payment of docket fees may be admitted when the party showed willingness to abide by the rules by immediately paying the fees (six days late), unlike the four-month delay in the present case.
• Pedrosa vs. Hill, 257 SCRA 373 (1996) — Followed. Cited for the principle that payment of the full amount of the docket fee is an indispensable step for the perfection of an appeal.

• Section 4, Rule 41, 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure — Requires the appellant to pay the full amount of the appellate court docket and other lawful fees to the clerk of the court which rendered the judgment within the period for taking an appeal. Applied to deny the appeal for failure to pay fees within the 15-day reglementary period.
• Section 1(c), Rule 50, 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure — Provides that failure of the appellant to pay the docket and other lawful fees as provided in Section 4 of Rule 41 is a ground for dismissal of the appeal. Applied by the CA to dismiss the appeal.
• Section 16, Republic Act No. 6657 (Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law) — Cited by respondent UBP as the legal basis for rejecting the sale of CARPable agricultural assets without DAR approval.

Reynato S. Puno, Angelina Sandoval-Gutierrez, Renato C. Corona, Adolfo S. Azcuna