ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™  
Main Index Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Jurisprudence


 

 
Chan Robles Virtual Law Library
 

 

 
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

 
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

   
April-2010                  

  • [A.M. No. P-10-2771 [Formerly A.M. OCA IPI No. 09-3162-P] : April 28, 2010] LEAVE DIVISION-OAS, OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR V. DOLORES T. ALMEDINA, COURT STENOGRAPHER III, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 69, IBA, ZAMBALES

  • [G.R. No. 184617 : April 28, 2010] FERDINAND TARUC AND GAUDINES RICANA, PETITIONERS, V. MAYNILAD WATER SERVICES, INC., LUCIA MAGNO AND MAYNILAD WATERS SEWERAGE UNION-PHILIPPINE TRANSPORT GENERAL WORKERS ORGANIZATION [PTGWO], RESPONDENTS.

  • [G.R. No. 171627 : April 28, 2010] EMILIO ZUÑIGA, REPRESENTED BY ATTORNEY-IN-FACT BERNADETTE LEYVA V. TOWN SAVINGS AND LOAN BANK

  • [G.R. No. 177269 : April 28, 2010] OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN V. BERNARDO FORBES, RUPERTO PILAPIL AND EDUARDO ESTOLANO

  • [A.M. No. 09-11-195-MTC : April 27, 2010] RE: TRANSFER OF HEARING OF NEWLY FILED CASES IN THE MTC-BACOOR TO THE MTC-NOVELETA, BOTH IN CAVITE

  • [A.M. No. 10-3-37-MCTC : April 27, 2010] RE: REQUEST TO ALLOW JUDGE LORENZO F. BALO, MCTC, BAGUMBAYAN-ESPERANZA-SEN. NINOY AQUINO, SULTAN KUDARAT TO ALSO CONDUCT HEARING OF CASES AT ESPERANZA

  • [G.R. No. 191106 : April 27, 2010] CELESTINO A. MARTINEZ HI V. HON. PROSPERO C. NOGRALES, IN HIS CAPACITY AS SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND MARILYN B. BARUA-YAP, IN HER CAPACITY AS SECRETARY GENERAL OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PHILIPPINES

  • [A.M. No. 10-4-07-CA : April 27, 2010] RE: FREQUENT UNAUTHORIZED ABSENCES OF MR. PACITO C. VILLANUEVA, CLERK IV, COURT OF APPEALS

  • [G.R. No. 190138 : April 26, 2010] VICTORIA CABRAL V. LUISA FILOTEO

  • [G.R. No. 190384 : April 21, 2010] HEIRS OF SPOUSES CRISPULO FERRER AND ENGRACIA PUHAWAN, PETITIONERS VS. COURT OF APPEALS, NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION, ET AL.,

  • [G.R. No. 176389 : April 20, 2010] ANTONIO LEJANO, PETITIONER VERSUS PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, RESPONDENT. [G.R. NO. 176864] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE VERSUS HUBERT JEFFREY P. WEBB, ANTONIO LEJANO, MICHAEL A. GATCHALIAN, HOSPICIO FERNANDEZ, MIGUEL RODRIGUEZ, PETER ESTRADA AND GERARDO BIONG, ACCUSED-APPELLANTS; ARTEMIO VENTURA, JOEY FILART AND JOHN DOES (AT-LARGE), ACCUSED.

  • [G.R. No. 185007 : April 19, 2010] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES V. VICENTE JAWOD, JR.

  • [G.R. No. 184358 : April 19, 2010] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES V. EDGAR CAMAS, ET AL.; CALBARIO, ET AL.

  • [G.R. No. 178774 : April 14, 2010] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE -VERSUS- MARLYN P. BACOS, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.

  • [G.R. No. 189302 : April 14, 2010] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES V. ADOLFO DALIGDIG

  • [G.R. No. 191269 : April 14, 2010] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES V. ALEXANDER BASTIDA Y ALVIAR

  • [A.M. No. RTJ-09-2172(Formerly A.M. OCA IPI No. 08-2892-RTJ) : April 14, 2010] JUANCHO DAACO V. JUDGE FRISCO T. LILAGAN, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 34, TACLOBAN CITY

  • [G.R. No. 179366 : April 14, 2010] HON. SECRETARY OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES AND ISAURO FLORIANO, REPRESENTED BY HIS HEIRS V. HILARIO ALDERITE, REPRESENTING LOT 11, BLOCK 63, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, INC.

  • [A.M. No. RTJ-08-2105 (Formerly A.M. OCA IPI No. 97-278-RTJ) : April 14, 2010] THELMA P. QUINTO V. JUDGE CRISPIN C. LARON, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 44, DAGUPAN CITY

  • [G.R. No. 170885 : April 14, 2010] FEDERICO T. ESCALONA, PETITIONER, V. EUPEN CABLE ASIA, INC., EUPEN MARKETING ASIA, INC., AXEL BOURSEAUX AND ERNESTO APOCADA,

  • [A.M. No. 09-12-507-RTC : April 13, 2010] RE: REQUEST FOR THE TRANSFER OF VENUE OF CRIMINAL CASE NOS. SL-195 TO 214 [SHOULD BE CRIMINAL CASE NOS. SL-171 TO 195 PER COURT'S RESOLUTION DATED DECEMBER 15, 2009], ENTITLED 'PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES V. DATU ANDAL AMPATUAN, JR., ET AL.,' FROM THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 15, COTABATO CITY, TO ANY OF THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS IN METRO MANILA, EITHER IN QUEZON CITY OR MANILA

  • [G.R. No. 191113 : April 13, 2010] ALYANSA NG MGA NAULILA NG LYIGA TAGAPAGTANGGOL NG BAYAN, INC., HEREIN REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, CHARLEMAGNE ALEJANDRINO, PETITIONER -VERSUS- COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 186000 : April 12, 2010] FRANCISCO TAPIC VS. JUANA DELA CRUZ VDA. DE GANAO

  • [G.R. No. 183810 : April 07, 2010] FARLEY FULACHE, MANOLO JABONERO,DAVID CASTILLO, JEFFREY LAGUNZAD, MAGDALENA MALIG-ON BIGNO, FRANCISCO CABAS, JR., HARVEY PONCE AND ALAN C ALMENDRAS, PETITIONERS VS. ABS-CBN BROADCASTING CORPORATION, RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 188123 : April 07, 2010] PEOPLE OF THE PHIILIPPINES V. PERCIVAL VILLAFLORES FABILINIA

  • [G.R. No. 190450 : April 07, 2010] MECTAP INTERNATIONAL SERVICES INCORPORATED, PETITIONER -VERSUS- RICHARD S. GUTIB, RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 190172 : April 07, 2010] RAMOLITO A. ENAJE, PETITIONER VS. GALLANT MARITIME SERVICES, INC. AND/OR LEOPOLDO TENORIO AND MARLOW NAVIGATION CO. LTD., RESPONDENTS.

  • [G.R. No. 170832 : April 07, 2010] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE VS. TERESA PASAMIC, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.

  • [G.R. NO. 184044 : April 06, 2010] MIRIAM DEFENSOR SANTIAGO V. THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ET AL.

  • [G.R. No. 187271 : April 06, 2010] DR. MANUEL R. PANGILINAN VS. THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE MARIKINA POLYTECHNIC COLLEGE [BOT-MPC] REPRESENTED BY ENGR. HENRY L. LANADA, COLLEGE PRESIDENT AND VICE-CHAIRMAN OF THE MPC-BOT

  • [G.R. No. 191583 : April 17, 2012] ABAKADA GURO PARTY LIST AND SAMSON S. ALCANTARA, NOEL T. TIAMPONG, PEDRO T. DABU, JR., RODOLFO MAPILE, ROMEO R. ROBISO, AND LOPE E. FEBLE v. JONATHAN A. DELA CRUZ AND SPEAKER PROSPERO C. NOGRALES.

  •  





     
     



    chanrobles.com - PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT RESOLUTIONS - ON-LINE

    cralaw_scresolutions_separator.NHAD

     

    EN BANC

    [G.R. No. 191583 : April 17, 2012]

    ABAKADA GURO PARTY LIST AND SAMSON S. ALCANTARA, NOEL T. TIAMPONG, PEDRO T. DABU, JR., RODOLFO MAPILE, ROMEO R. ROBISO, AND LOPE E. FEBLE v. JONATHAN A. DELA CRUZ AND SPEAKER PROSPERO C. NOGRALES.

    Sirs/Mesdames:

    Please take notice that the Court en banc issued a Resolution dated APRIL 17, 2012, which reads as follows:  cralaw

    "G.R. No. 191583 - ABAKADA GURO PARTY LIST AND SAMSON S. ALCANTARA, NOEL T. TIAMPONG, PEDRO T. DABU, JR., RODOLFO MAPILE, ROMEO R. ROBISO, AND LOPE E. FEBLE v. JONATHAN A. DELA CRUZ AND SPEAKER PROSPERO C. NOGRALES 

    RESOLUTION 

    Following the May 14, 2007 elections, petitioners, through this petition for Quo Warranto[1] with prayer for the issuance of a temporary restraining order and/or writ of preliminary injunction, seek among others, that the Court render judgment "ousting and altogether excluding" respondent Jonathan Dela Cruz (Dela Cruz) as nominee-representative of the ABAKADA GURO Party-List (ABAKADA) and declaring, in his stead, petitioner Samson S. Alcantara (Alcantara). The petitioners also seek that all books, papers, salaries, emoluments, and privileges received by Dela Cruz as nominee-representative of ABAKADA be ordered delivered to Alcantara.

    On April 6, 2010, the Court issued a resolution requiring the respondents to file their respective comments on the petition and on the prayer for a temporary restraining order and writ of preliminary injunction. On May 28, 2010, Dela Cruz filed his Comment/Opposition.[2]

    On June 22, 2010, the Court resolved to dismiss the petition for lack of jurisdiction. On July 8, 2010, Speaker Nograles filed his comment.[3]

    On July 20, 2010, the Court required petitioners to file their reply.[4]

    On August 24, 2010, the Court issued the following resolution: 

    G.R. No. 191583 (ABAKADA Guro Party-List, et al. v. Jonathan A. [dela] Cruz, et al.). - In view of the resolution of the July 20, 2010, noting the comment on the petition filed by respondent Speaker Prospero C. Nograles and requiring petitioners to file a reply to the said comment, the Court Resolved to: 

    (a) SET ASIDE the resolution of June 22, 2010, dismissing the instant petition for lack of jurisdiction; 

    (b) REINSTATE the petition; and 

    (c) REQUIRE the petitioners to likewise file a REPLY to the Comment/Opposition (on the petition) dated May 24, 2010, filed by counsel for respondent Jonathan dela Cruz, within ten (10) days from notice hereof.

    Unaware of the above resolution, the petitioners sought reconsideration[5] of the Court's June 22, 2010 Resolution. On October 5, 2010, the Court denied petitioners' motion for reconsideration.

    On November 2, 2010, after seeking several extensions,[6] the petitioners filed their Consolidated Reply in compliance with the August 24, 2010 Resolution of the Court.

    Through their Manifestation and Motion dated November 17, 2010, the petitioners prayed that the Court recall its October 5, 2010 Resolution denying their petition with finality, in view of its August 24, 2010 resolution reinstating the petition and requiring them to file their reply to the Comment/Opposition of Dela Cruz.

    Rather than prolong the disposition of this case any further, the Court notes the mootness of the petition and, accordingly, dismisses the same.

    The Court is not unmindful that the term of office being contested between the parties ended at noon of June 30, 2010. The Court thus has no alternative except to dismiss the petition accord with jurisprudence, to the effect that the expiration of the contested term of office renders the petition moot and academic. A moot and academic case is one that ceases to present a justiciable controversy by virtue of supervening events, so that a declaration thereon would be of no practical value. As a rule, courts decline jurisdiction over such a case, or dismiss it on ground of mootness.[7]

    In Malaluan v. COMELEC[8]  reiterated more recently in the case of Sales v. COMELEC[9] and Baldo, Jr. v. COMELEC,[10] this Court clearly pronounced that the expiration of the challenged term of office renders the corresponding petition moot and academic, to wit: 

    It is significant to note that the term of office of the local officials elected in the May, 1992 elections expired on June 30, 1995. This petition, thus, has become moot and academic insofar as it concerns petitioner's right to the mayoralty seat in his municipality because expiration of the term of office contested in the election protest has the effect of rendering the same moot and academic. 

    When the appeal from a decision in an election case has already become moot, the case being an election protest involving the office of [the] mayor the term of which had expired, the appeal is dismissible on that ground, unless the rendering of a decision on the merits would be of practical value. This rule we established in the case of Yorac v. Magalona which we dismissed because it had been mooted by the expiration of the term of office of the Municipal Mayor of Saravia, Negros Occidental x x x. (Underscoring ours.) (Citation omitted.)

    Indeed, an academic discussion of a case presenting a moot question is not necessary, because a judgment on the case cannot have any practical legal effect or, in the nature of things, cannot be enforced. Stated otherwise, this Court will not determine a moot question in a case in which no practical relief can be granted.[11]cralaw

    IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, the Court DISMISSES the petition for quo warranto for being MOOT and ACADEMIC."

    Very truly yours,

    ENRIQUETA E. VIDAL
    Clerk of Court

    By:

    (Sgd.) FELIPA B. ANAMA
      Deputy Clerk of Court En Banc

    Endnotes:


    [1] Rollo, pp. 3-73.

    [2] Id. at 77-91. 

    [3] Id. at 97-151. 

    [4] Id. at 153. 

    [5] Id. at 185-187, 189-191. 

    [6] Id. at 74-75. 

    [7] Gunsi v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 168792, February 23, 2009, 580 SCRA 70, 76. 

    [8] 324 Phil. 676, 683 (1996) 

    [9] G.R. No. 174668, September 12, 2007. 

    [10] G.R. No. 176135, June 16, 2009. 

    [11] Villarico v. Court of Appeals, 424 Phil. 26, 33-34 (2002).


    Back to Home | Back to Main

     

    PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

    QUICK SEARCH

    cralaw

     

     



     
      Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
    ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™
     
    RED