Title
Atienza vs. Commission on Elections
Case
G.R. No. 108533
Decision Date
Dec 20, 1994
A 1988 mayoral election protest led to a revised vote count favoring Atienza, who was awarded damages. COMELEC dismissed Sia’s appeal as moot after 1992 elections, reversing the damages due to lack of legal basis. SC upheld COMELEC, ruling dismissal didn’t revive RTC’s judgment and damages required wrongful acts.
Font Size:

Case Digest (G.R. No. 108533)

Facts:

  1. Election Results and Initial Protest

    • Private respondent Antonio G. Sia was elected mayor of Madrilejos, Cebu, in the 1988 local elections, winning by a plurality of 126 votes over petitioner Lou A. Atienza.
    • Atienza filed an election protest (Election Case No. EC-5) with the Regional Trial Court (RTC), contesting the results in several precincts.
    • After a revision of votes, Atienza was declared the winner by the RTC with a plurality of 12 votes. The RTC also ordered Sia to reimburse Atienza P300,856.19 for election protest expenses.
  2. Appeal to COMELEC

    • Sia appealed the RTC decision to the Commission on Elections (COMELEC), raising two issues: (1) errors in vote computation and (2) the alleged excessive award of damages. The case was docketed as EAC No. 20-89.
    • The RTC granted Atienza’s motion for execution pending appeal, but Sia filed a petition for certiorari and mandamus (SPC No. 19-91) to challenge this. The COMELEC issued a preliminary injunction to stop the execution.
    • On April 7, 1992, the COMELEC en banc lifted the injunction, allowing Atienza to assume office pending resolution of the appeal.
  3. Mootness Due to 1992 Elections

    • Following the May 11, 1992 synchronized elections, the COMELEC Second Division dismissed Sia’s appeal (EAC No. 20-89) as moot and academic, citing Resolution No. 2494, which terminated all election protest cases arising from the 1988 elections as of June 30, 1992.
    • Sia sought clarification, and the COMELEC Second Division clarified that only the appeal case was dismissed, not the original protest case.
    • Sia filed a Motion for Reconsideration, arguing that dismissing the appeal would affirm the RTC’s monetary judgment without considering its merits. The case was elevated to the COMELEC en banc.
  4. COMELEC En Banc Resolution

    • On January 28, 1993, the COMELEC en banc issued a resolution stating that the dismissal of the appeal did not revive the RTC’s vacated judgment. It reversed the RTC’s award of P300,856.19, finding no legal basis for the damages in the absence of wrongful or negligent acts by Sia.

Issue:

  1. Whether the COMELEC acted with grave abuse of discretion in reversing the RTC’s award of damages after dismissing the appeal as moot and academic.
  2. Whether the dismissal of the appeal automatically revived the RTC’s judgment, including the award of damages.
  3. Whether the award of P300,856.19 for election protest expenses was legally justified.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)


Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.