ELECTION CONTESTS

SECTION 1. Jurisdiction of regional trial courts. - Regional trial courts shall have exclusive original jurisdiction over all election contests involving elective municipal officials.

SEC. 2. Jurisdiction of municipal trial courts. - Municipal trial courts shall have exclusive original jurisdiction over all election contests involving elective barangay officials.

SEC. 3. How initiated. - An election contest is initiated by the filing of an election protest or a petition for quo warranto against an elective municipal or barangay official. An election protest or a petition for quo warranto shall be filed directly with the proper court in three legible copies plus such number of copies corresponding to the number of protestees or respondents. An election protest shall not include a petition for quo warranto, nor shall a petition for quo warranto include an election protest.

SEC. 4. Modes of service and filing. - Service and filing of pleadings, including the initiatory petition and other papers, shall be done personally. Except with respect to papers emanating from the court, a resort to other modes of service must be accompanied by a written explanation why the service or filing was not done personally. A violation of this Rule shall be cause to consider the pleading or paper as not filed.

SEC. 5. Election protest. - A petition contesting the election or returns of an elective municipal or barangay official shall be filed with the proper regional trial court or municipal trial court by any candidate who was voted for the same office and who received the second or third highest number of votes or, in a multi-slot position, was among the next four candidates following the last-ranked winner duly proclaimed, as reflected in the official results of the election contained in the Statement of Votes By Precinct. The party filing the protest shall be designated as the protestant; the adverse party shall be known as the protestee. Each contest shall refer exclusively to one office; however, contests for offices of Sangguniang Bayan or Sangguniang Barangay may be consolidated in one case.

Tano vs Socrates 278 SCRA 154

Facts

The Sangguniang Panlungsod of Puerto Princessa enacted ordinance no. 15-92 banning the shipment of live fish and lobster outside Puerto Princessa City for a period of 5 years. In the same light, the Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Palawan also enacted a resolution that prohibits the catching, gathering, buying, selling and possessing and shipment of live marine coral dwelling aquatic organisms for a period of 5 years within the Palawan waters. The petitiones Airline Shippers Association of Palawan together with marine merchants were charged for violating the above ordinance and resolution by the city and provincial governments. The petitioners now allege that they have the preferential rights as marginal fishermen granted with privileges provided in Section 149 of the Local Government Code, invoking the invalidity of the above-stated enactments as violative of their preferential rights.

Issue

Whether or not the enacted resolutions and ordinances by the local government units violative of the preferential rights of the marginal fishermen ?

Estreller vs Manatad Jr., 268 SCRA 608

Facts

Respondent Manatad is a Court Interpreter I of the MTC in Southern Leyte against whom a complaint was filed by the petitioner for disgraceful and misconduct in violation of the Civil Service Law. Respondent’s conduct allegedly resulted to the birth of a child with the petitioner who alleges that she does not know that the respondent is a married man. The respondent admitted being the father of the child but denied the allegation that petitioner does not know he is married. The case was investigated in the RTC and during the initial hearing the complainant withdrew her complaint. Respondent has no objection to the motion to withdraw and both parties agreed to terminate the investigation and to submit the case for resolution of the investigating judge who found the respondent guilty of the administrative case filed against him. The judge recommended a sanction and warning because of the mitigating circumstances that the complainant withdrew her complaint. The office of the Court Administrator recommended an additional fine of P2,000.

Issue

Whether or not the administrative complaint and the imposition of its penalty may be imposed in view of the withdrawal of the complaint?

Department of Public Services Labor Union vs Court Industrial Relations 1 SCRA 316

Facts

The petitioners sought for the implementation of RA 1880 which fixes the legal number of hours of labor in every government agency to 8 hours, 5 days a week for a total of 80 hours a week. They also pray for the recovery of an overtime pay before the court of Industrial Relations against the city mayor and the municipality board of the City of Manila. The respondent court filed a motion to dismiss on the ground that it has no jurisdiction over the petition that states no cause of action. The judge affirmed the dismissal of the petition. Their motion for reconsideration was denied hence this petition for review before the Supreme Court.

Issue

Whether or not the Court of Industrial Relations has jurisdiction over the petition?

Municipality of Makati vs CA 190 SCRA 206

Facts

An expropriation proceeding was filed by the Municipality of Makati, herein petitioner, against the private property of Arceli Jo. In compliance to PD 42, the petitioner opened an account under its name at PNB depositing an amount of P417,510.00. The court fixed the appraised value of the expropriated property at P5,291,666.00 and an advanced payment was made in the amount of P338,160 leaving a balance of P4,953,506. After the decision becomes final and executory, the private respondent moved for the issuance of a writ of execution. A notice of garnishment was thereafter issued by the court to the PNB account. A manifestation was filed by the petitioner informing the court that the private respondent was no longer the true owner of the expropriated property. The court consolidated the ownership of the property to PSB as a mortgagee/purchaser. The private respondent and PSB agreed to divide the compensation due from the expropriation proceeding. The judge ordered PNB to immediately release to them the sum of P4,953.506 corresponding to the balance of the appraised value of the expropriated property. The PNB bank manager refused as he is waiting for the approval of their head office. The Municipality of Makati contends that its fund with DBP could neither be be garnished or levied upon execution for to do so would result to the disbursement of public funds without the proper appropriation required under the law. The lower court denied the motion for reconsideration of the petitioner ruling that the account with DBP of the petitioner was an account specifically opened for the expropriation proceeding. Petitioner filed a petition for certiorari to the Court of Appeals which affirmed the lower court’s decision. A petition for review with a prayer for preliminary injunction was filed to the S.C. A temporary restraining order was issued by the S.C.

Issue 

Whether or not the PNB funds may be levied in the expropriation proceeding ?

Cordillera vs COA 181 SCRA 495

Facts

The constitutionality of E.O. 220 was assailed which created the Cordillera Administrative Region (CAR) on the ground that it pre-empts the enactment of an Organic Act by the Congress and the creation of autonomous region in the Cordillera conditional on the approval of the act through a plebiscite.

Issue

Whether or not CAR is a territorial and political subdivision?

Whether or not E.O 220 is unconstitutional?

Province of Zamboanga Del Norte vs City of Zamboanga 22 SCRA 1334

Facts

Prior to the incorporation as a chartered city, the Municipality of Zamboanga was the provincial capital of Zamboanga Province. By virtue of Commonwealth Act 39, section 50 providing that the buildings and other properties that the Province will abandon in view of its conversion as Zamboanga City shall be paid for by the City of Zamboanga at a price to be fixed by the Auditor General, the said properties consisting of 50 lots were identified and the price were fixed thereof. An allotment for its payment was authorized by the BIR Commissioner. In June 17, 1961, RA 3039 was approved and it amended section 50 of the Commonwealth Act 39 providing that all buildings, properties, and assets belonging to the Province of Zamboanga and located in the City of Zamboanga are transferred free of charge in favor of the City of Zamboanga. The Province of Zamboanga del Norte filed a complaint for declaratory relief with preliminary injunction contending that the RA 3039 is unconstitutional as it deprives the Province of its properties without just compensation and due process.

Issue

Whether or not RA 3039 is unconstitutional?

Villanueva vs Castaneda 154 SCRA 142

Facts

Respondent Macalino, OIC of the Office of Mayor of San Fernando issued a resolution requiring the demolition of stalls constructed on what the respondent claims to be a public land which is now proliferated with the vendors’ stalls called “talipapa.” The petitioners contend that by virtue of the contract of lease issued to them by the previous municipal council they have the right to stay and do business at the place in issue. Thus, the petitioners filed a petition for prohibition with the Court of First Instance contending that they are protected by the lease contract. Their petition was denied hence this action to the Supreme Court was filed for certiorari.

Issue

Whether or not the land in issue is a public land?

Whether or not the respondent’s act to order the demolition of the stalls amount to grave abuse of discretion and whimsical?

Rabuco vs Villegas 55 SCRA 656

Facts

The constitutionality of RA No. 3120 was assailed by the city officials of the City of Manila contending that the conversion of the lots in Malate area into disposable and alienable lands of the state and placing its administration and disposal to the LTA to be subdivided into lots and selling it to bona fide occupants thereof in installments constitutes a deprivation of the City of Manila of its property by providing for its sale without the payment of just compensation.

Vilas vs City of Manila 42 Phil 935

Facts

Prior to the incorporation of the City of Manila under the Republic Act No. 183, petitioner Vilas is the creditor of the City. After the incorporation, Vilas brought an action to recover the sum of money owed to him by the city. The City of Manila that incurred the debts has changed its sovereignty after the cession of the Philippines to the US by the Treaty of Paris and its contention now is founded on the theory that by virtue of the Act No. 183 its liability has been extinguished.

Surigao Electric Company vs Municipal of Surigao 24 SCRA 898

Facts

Congress amended the Public Service Act changing the requirements of a certificate of public convenience and necessity from the Public Service Commission for public services owned and controlled by the government but at the same time affirming its power of regulation. The petitioners Surigao Electric Co. and Arturo Lumanlan to whom the rights and privileges of the former including its plants and facilities were transferred challenged the validity of such order of the Public Service Act holding that it had no alternative but to approve the tentative schedules of rate submitted by the Municipality of Surigao.