Facts:

The case of Alberto A. Villavert vs. Tobias Fornier revolves around an election contest for the position of provincial governor of Antique, stemming from the elections held on November 11, 1947. The provincial board of canvassers initially declared Alberto A. Villavert as the winner with a majority of 60 votes. However, Tobias Fornier, the opposing candidate, filed a protest. The trial court subsequently found that Fornier had actually secured a majority of 36 votes over Villavert, leading to his declaration as the elected governor. Villavert appealed this decision to the Court of Appeals, which upheld the trial court's ruling, determining that Fornier won by a margin of 28 votes. Villavert then filed a petition for certiorari to the Supreme Court, questioning the rejection of certain ballots by the Court of Appeals. Specifically, the issue at hand was whether the ballots, where Villavert's name was written on a double line above the designated space for...

Facts:

This case involves an election contest for the office of provincial governor of Antique held on November 11, 1947. The provincial board of canvassers declared Alberto A. Villavert elected with a majority of 60 votes. Tobias Fornier, the losing candidate, filed a protest, and the trial court found that Fornier had obtained a majority of 36 votes. Villavert appealed to the Court of Appeals, which also found Fornier as the winner, with a majority of 28 votes.

The primary issue revolves around the validity of 40 ballots where Villavert's name was written not on the dotted line following the words "Provincial Governor" but on the double line immediately above it. The Court of Appeals rejected these ballots, but the Supreme Court reviewed the case to determine if they should be counted in Villavert's favor.

Additional issues include the validity of other ballots, some of which were marked, written in incorrect spaces, or contained names not idem sonans with Villavert or Fornier. There were also issues regarding the votes of patients from the Santa Barbara Leprosarium, whose votes were initially rejected due to registration irregularities.

Issue:

• (Unlock)

Ruling:

• (Unlock)

Ratio:

1. The Court emphasized that the intention of the voter, if clear, should prevail over technical errors in filling out the ballot. Failure to strictly follow the Election Law due to ignorance or good faith mistake should not invalidate the vote.
2. The provisions of the Revised Election Code are considered directory rather than mandatory when enforcing them after the election would disenfranchise innocent voters.
3. Marked ballots are invalid only if the markings are irrelevant or serve as distinguishing marks. If the voter’s intention is clear, minor irregularities should not invalidate the vote.
4. Votes of leprosarium patients, despite registration irregularities, should not be annulled when the voters acted in good faith and the irregularities were not their fault.