Case Digest (G.R. No. L-16509)
Facts:
- The case is titled "People of the Philippines vs. Hon. Bienvenido Tan, et al."
- Decided by the Supreme Court of the Philippines on April 29, 1961, under G.R. No. L-16509.
- The petitioner is the People of the Philippines; respondents include Judge Bienvenido Tan and several individuals.
- Events began on January 19, 1960, when the prosecution filed a petition for a writ of prohibition with a preliminary injunction against Judge Tan.
- The petition was related to Criminal Case No. 36042, involving allegations under Section 16 of Republic Act No. 85.
- The prosecution argued that Judge Tan should inhibit himself due to a prior opinion formed in a related civil case, Civil Case No. 24248.
- Judge Tan denied the motion to inhibit, leading to the present petition.
- The Supreme Court issued a preliminary injunction to halt lower court proceedings.
- By the time the case reached the Supreme Court, Judge Tan had retired, making the issue moot.
Issue:
- (Unlock)
Ruling:
- The Supreme Court dismissed the case as moot because Judge Bienvenido Tan had alr...(Unlock)
Ratio:
- The decision was based on the principle that a judge's retirement renders any issues regarding their ability to preside ov...continue reading
Case Digest (G.R. No. L-16509)
Facts:
The case at hand is titled "People of the Philippines vs. Hon. Bienvenido Tan, et al." and was decided by the Supreme Court of the Philippines on April 29, 1961, under G.R. No. L-16509. The petitioner in this case is the People of the Philippines, while the respondents include Hon. Bienvenido Tan, the Judge of the Court of First Instance of Manila, and several individuals including Francisco T. Koh, Vicente Villanueva, Santos Llorca, Eloy T. Koh, Dolores Siy Hai Pin, Jose Uy Eng Kui (also known as Jose Villanueva Uy), Procopio Eleazar, and Vicente Alunan. The events leading to this case began on January 19, 1960, when the prosecution filed a petition for a writ of prohibition with a preliminary injunction against Judge Bienvenido Tan. This petition was in relation to Criminal Case No. 36042, which involved allegations of violations under Section 16 of Republic Act No. 85. The prosecution sought to prevent Judge Tan from presiding over the criminal case, arguing that he should inhibit himself due to having previous...