CIR v. Getz Pharma (Phils.), Inc.
CTA EB NO. 2316
May 16, 2022
Doctrine:
It is well-settled that a Motion for Reconsideration containing a mere
rehash of grounds and arguments that have already been considered and
resolved by the Court before the Decision sought to be reconsidered is
rendered does not need a new judicial determination.
Facts:
For the Court's resolution is petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration• ("Motion"), filed via registered mail on 28 February 2022 and received by the Court on 9 March 2022, with respondent's Comment (Re: Motion for Reconsideration dated February 28, 2022)2 ("Comment"), filed on 4 April 2022. In his Motion, petitioner seeks the reversal and setting aside of this Court's Decision3 ("Assailed Decision").
Issue:
Whether or not the motion for reconsideration should be granted.
Held:
No. It is well-settled that a Motion for Reconsideration containing a mere rehash of grounds and arguments that have already been considered and resolved by the Court before the Decision sought to be reconsidered is rendered does not need a new judicial determination.9 The Court need not "cut and paste" pertinent portions of the Decision or re-write the ponencia in accordance with the outline of the Motion for Reconsideration. Therefore, there is no necessity to discuss and rule again on these grounds since this would be a useless formality of ritual invariably involving merely a reiteration of the reasons for rejecting the arguments advanced by the movant already set forth in the judgment.
