5/19/2021 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly The CA then affirmed the NLRC's decision with modification only as to the amount of salary due the respondent.[12] Both parties moved for reconsideration which the CA denied on February 21, 2019.[13] Present Petition Eagle Clarc, Mama Shipping and Capt. Arcilla are now before the Court raising the following issues: I. THE HONORABLE COURT COMMITTED GRAVE ERROR WHEN IT AWARDED RESPONDENT WITH THE UNEXPIRED PORTION OF HIS CONTRACT. II. THE HONORABLE COURT GRAVELY ERRED WHEN IT AWARDED BENEFITS FOR ILLEGAL DISMISSAL. PRIVATE RESPONDENT'S DISMISSAL WAS LEGAL, VALID AND JUST UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES. LIKEWISE, THE TWIN NOTICE RULE IN TERMINATION DISPUTES HAS BEEN COMPLIED WITH. III. IN THE REMOTE EVENT ILLEGAL DISMISSAL IS FOUND TO BE PRESENT, THE AWARD SHOULD BE LIMITED TO PRIVATE RESPONDENT'S BASIC SALARY ONLY. THERE IS NO BASIS TO AWARD OTHER ALLOWANCES UNPROVEN BY PRIVATE RESPONDENT. IV. THE AWARD FOR ATTORNEY'S FEES AND DAMAGES SHOULD LIKEWISE BE DENIED. PETITIONERS CANNOT BE FAULTED FOR PURSUING AND DEFENDING AGAINST RESPONDENT'S UNFOUNDED CLAIM. V. MR. LEOPOLDO ARCILLA SHOULD NOT BE SOLIDARILY LIABLE WITH PETITIONERS.[14] The Court finds NO MERIT in the petition. Petitioners argue that Loyola's lapses in procedure, particularly his failure to personally file the complaint, attend the mandatory hearings and execute the verification and certification against non-forum shopping, merit the dismissal of his complaint before the Labor Arbiter.[15] The NLRC and the CA were correct in not giving weight to these assertions. The rule on verification of a pleading is a formal, not jurisdictional, requirement. Noncompliance with the verification requirement does not necessarily render the pleading fatally defective, as it is substantially complied with when signed by one who has ample knowledge of the truth of the allegations in the complaint or petition, and when matters alleged in the petition have been made in good faith or are true and correct.[16] Certification, not signed by a duly authorized person, meanwhile, renders the petition subject to dismissal. But there are cases when this Court acts with leniency due to the presence of special circumstances or compelling reasons. When the counsel who signed the certification was given a special power of attorney by the client, there is substantial compliance with the rules on verification and certification against forum shopping.[17] https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/66403 4/9