Case Summary (G.R. No. L-16452)
Case Proceedings and Allegations
Tiongco's election protest was filed with the Court of First Instance of Davao (Case No. 79) and included serious allegations of fraud, terrorism, and unlawful acts conducted in around 200 precincts. Porras responded by denying these allegations and raising a counter-claim for damages, alongside a counter-protest claiming irregularities in the ballot counts of 41 precincts. Tiongco posted a bond of P10,000 for his protest, while Porras was required to post a bond of P2,000 for his counter-protest.
Appointment of Commissioners and Costs
To assist in the examination and recount of the ballots, the court appointed eight teams of commissioners. Each team included a commissioner for the protestant, a commissioner for the protestee, and a court representative. Compensation for these commissioners was set at P5.00 per ballot box for Tiongco's representatives and P10.00 for those representing Porras and the court. The counter-protest involved costs totaling P1,230 for the 41 precincts disputed by Porras.
Court's Order and Subsequent Actions
After an extensive delay of over two years, largely due to postponements sought by Tiongco, the court issued an order on April 15, 1958, dismissing both the original protest and the counter-protest, with costs awarded against Tiongco. The court also granted Porras the right to pursue a separate civil suit for damages against Tiongco.
Bill of Costs and Approval
On June 18, 1958, Porras submitted a bill of costs to the Clerk of Court, which included various fees related to the protest: the answer, attorney attendance, witness fees, bond premium, and commissioner’s fees, totaling P1,678. Despite Tiongco's opposition, the Clerk approved this bill, which was later affirmed by the court on February 13, 1959, prompting Tiongco’s appeal.
Legal Basis for Costs
In his appeal, Tiongco argued that there was no legal provision supporting the awarding of costs for the amounts paid to the commissioners and the bond premium. However, the court found this argument unpersuasive. The Revised Election Code, specifically Section 180, clearly mandates the payment of costs associated with election protests, emphasizing that fees incurred by commissioners revising ballots are incidental expenses tied to the protest itself.
Liability for Costs
The cour
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. L-16452)
Case Overview
- Gaudioso M. Tiongco and Carmelo L. Porras were candidates for the Mayor of Davao City during the November 1955 elections.
- The Davao City Board of Canvassers officially proclaimed Porras as the Mayor-Elect following the election results, with Porras receiving 15,462 votes compared to Tiongco's 13,398 votes.
- Following the election, Tiongco filed an election protest against Porras, citing numerous allegations of fraud, irregularities, terrorism, and other illegal acts affecting approximately 200 precincts.
Proceedings and Counter-Protests
- Tiongco's protest was filed with the Court of First Instance of Davao (Case No. 79), where he alleged significant electoral misconduct.
- Porras responded to the protest by denying the allegations and filing a counter-claim for damages and attorney's fees.
- Additionally, Porras initiated a counter-protest, claiming irregularities in the counting of ballots in 41 precincts.
Bond Requirements
- Tiongco posted a bond of P10,000.00 to cover expenses associated with the protest.
- Porras was required to file a bond of P2,000.00 to address costs linked to his counter-protest.
Appointment of Commissioners
- The court appointed eight teams of commissioners, each consisting of three members: one from the protestant (Ti