Title
Aviado vs. Talens
Case
G.R. No. 30574
Decision Date
Jan 23, 1929
Election protest over 1928 San Isidro mayoral race; disputed ballots with minor irregularities deemed valid, affirming Aviado's victory.
Font Size:

Case Digest (G.R. No. 30574)

Facts:

  1. Election Context: The case involves an election protest filed by Irineo D. Aviado against Teodoro Talens and others regarding the election for the office of municipal president of San Isidro, Nueva Ecija, held on June 5, 1928.
  2. Initial Canvassing Results: The municipal board of canvassers declared Teodoro Talens as the winner with 282 votes, while Irineo D. Aviado received 278 votes.
  3. Trial Court Decision: The trial court reversed the canvassing results, declaring Aviado the winner by a margin of 7 votes.
  4. Ballot Irregularities: The case centered on the validity of 32 disputed ballots. Some ballots contained irregularities, such as:
    • Voting for non-candidates for certain offices.
    • Writing the same name twice for a single office.
    • Prefixing the word "Senator" to a candidate's name.
    • Ballots found in the wrong box (e.g., a valid ballot found in the spoiled ballot box).
  5. Statutory Context: The case referenced amendments to the Election Law (Act No. 3210 and Act No. 3387), particularly regarding the invalidation of ballots for voting for non-candidates.

Issue:

  • (Unlock)

Ruling:

  • (Unlock)

Ratio:

  1. Voting for Non-Candidates: The Court held that voting for non-candidates or writing names in incorrect spaces does not automatically invalidate a ballot or make it a marked ballot. The intention of the voter must be considered, and minor irregularities should not disenfranchise voters.
  2. Statutory Interpretation: The Court noted that the Legislature, by amending the Election Law (Act No. 3387), intended to eliminate the provision that invalidated ballots for voting for non-candidates. This indicated a legislative intent to avoid disenfranchising voters for such irregularities.
  3. Ballot Validity: The Court emphasized that ballots should not be invalidated for minor errors or lack of skill in filling them out, as long as the voter's intent is clear.
  4. Presumption of Validity: The Court upheld the presumption of validity for ballots unless there is clear evidence of fraud or intentional marking.


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.