Facts:

• Felix T. Caro was proclaimed as the elected governor with 14,948 votes.
• Silvino M. Gumpal, who obtained 14,858 votes, filed a protest on December 10, 1951.
• Melanio T. Singson, who obtained 14,423 votes and ranked third, filed a motion for intervention in Gumpal's protest.
• The hearing for the motion was scheduled for January 12, 1952.
• Caro and Gumpal opposed the intervention, arguing that it was filed out of time.
• The hearing was postponed to January 19, and on that day, Gumpal withdrew his opposition.

Issue:

• (Unlock)

Ruling:

• The court ruled in favor of Caro and Gumpal, declaring the intervention and the third-party answer null and void.
• The court also ordered...(Unlock)

Ratio:

• The court based its decision on the provision of Article 176, paragraph (g) of the Revised Election Code, which states that defeated candidates can intervene in the protest within the same deadline as the protestant.
• The court emphasized that the intervention is essentially another protest against both the protestant and the protested candidate, seeking affirmative relief in favor of the intervenor.
• To avoid duplication of work and excessive paperwork, the law provides that the intervention should be treated within the same proceedings as the protest.
• The court reasoned that if the protestant has a two-week deadline to file the protest, the intervenor, who is also a protestant, should have the same deadline.
• It would be unfair to grant the intervenor a longer period than the protestant.
• The court emphasized the need for a defined time w...continue reading