Case Digest (G.R. No. 5768)
Facts:
- The case involves Pedro A. Enriquez as the petitioner and J.S. Powell, the Judge of First Instance for the Seventh Judicial District, along with Emilio Campomanes as the respondents.
- In December 1909, Enriquez sought a writ of mandamus to compel Judge Powell to acknowledge a protest against the election of a municipal president.
- The protest was filed with the clerk of the court while Judge Powell was in another province.
- Upon returning, Judge Powell refused to entertain the protest, claiming it was filed beyond the two-week period set by the Election Law.
- The judge argued that the law did not permit the clerk to receive and file election protests.
- Enriquez sought judicial intervention, asserting the protest was validly presented according to the law.
Issue:
- (Unlock)
Ruling:
- The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the petitioner, granting the writ of mandamus.
- The Court held that the protest was presented in accordance with Section 27 of Act No. 1582.
- It was determin...(Unlock)
Ratio:
- The Court's decision was based on the interpretation of Section 27 of Act No. 1582, which details the procedures for filing election protests.
- The law aims to facilitate the filing of protests to ensure fair and expeditious resolution of electoral disputes.
- Judge Powell's refusal to acknowledge the protest due to the timing of its fili...continue reading
Case Digest (G.R. No. 5768)
Facts:
The case of G.R. No. 5768 involves Pedro A. Enriquez as the petitioner and J.S. Powell, the Judge of First Instance for the Seventh Judicial District, along with Emilio Campomanes as the respondents. The events leading to this case transpired in December 1909 when Enriquez sought a writ of mandamus to compel Judge Powell to acknowledge a protest against the election of a municipal president. The protest was filed with the clerk of the court while Judge Powell was conducting sessions in another province. Upon his return, the judge refused to entertain the protest, citing that it had been filed beyond the two-week period stipulated by the Election Law for the presentation of such protests. He further argued that the law did not authorize the clerk to receive and file election protests. The lower court's refusal to act on the protest prompted Enriquez to seek judicial intervention, asserting that the protest was validly presented according t...