Second MR

UE further contends that the Court in resolving the issue on the second MR should not be too dogmatic in its ruling. It persuades the Court to adopt a complete and holistic view, taking into consideration the peculiar circumstances of the case as well as the provisions on the liberal interpretation of the rules and the inherent power of the NLRC to amend and reverse its findings and conclusions as may be necessary to render justice.

Indeed, a second MR as a rule, is generally a prohibited pleading. The Court, however, does not discount instances when it may authorize the suspension of the rules of procedure so as to allow the resolution of a second motion for reconsideration, in cases of extraordinarily persuasive reasons such as when the decision is a patent nullity (University of the East Vs. University of the East Employees' Association, G.R. No. 179593. September 14, 2011).