June 2010 - Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions
Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions
Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions > Year 2010 > June 2010 Resolutions >
[G.R. No. 191771 : June 29, 2010] LIBERAL PARTY, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT MANUEL A. ROXAS II AND ITS SECRETARY GENERAL JOSEPH EMILIO A. ABAYA, PETITIONER -VERSUS- COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, NACIONALISTA PARTY, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT MANUEL B. VILLAR, AND NATIONALIST PEOPLE'S COALITION, ALLEGEDLY REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN FAUSTINO S. DY, JR., RESPONDENTS. :
[G.R. No. 191771 : June 29, 2010]
LIBERAL PARTY, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT MANUEL A. ROXAS II AND ITS SECRETARY GENERAL JOSEPH EMILIO A. ABAYA, PETITIONER -VERSUS- COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, NACIONALISTA PARTY, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT MANUEL B. VILLAR, AND NATIONALIST PEOPLE'S COALITION, ALLEGEDLY REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN FAUSTINO S. DY, JR., RESPONDENTS.
Sirs/Mesdames:
Please take notice that the Court en banc issued a Resolution dated JUNE 29, 2010, which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 191771 - LIBERAL PARTY, represented by its President Manuel A. Roxas II and its Secretary General Joseph Emilio A. Abaya, petitioner -versus- COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, NACIONALISTA PARTY, represented by its President Manuel B. Villar, and NATIONALIST PEOPLE'S COALITION, allegedly represented by its Chairman Faustino S. Dy, Jr., respondents.
Before us is the motion filed by the respondents Nacionalista Party (NP) and Nationalist People's Coalition (NPC) for reconsideration of our Decision of May 6, 2010, recognizing the petitioner Liberal Party as the dominant minority party for purposes of the May 10, 2010 elections. The motion was posted on May 7, 2010 and received by the Court on May 18, 2010.
We resolve to deny the motion for being moot and academic.
The issues raised in the respondents' motion for reconsideration have already been rendered moot and academic by the May 10, 2010 elections; the identification of the dominant minority party was needed in this election but no longer served any purpose thereafter. In short, the resolution of the motion, at this point, is no longer necessary or relevant.
This ruling is based on the established principle that an issue becomes moot and academic when it ceases to present a justiciable controversy because its resolution has lost practical use or value, or would have no practical legal effect.[1] In the context of a motion for reconsideration, no actual substantial relief stands to accrue to the plaintiff that would be negated by the denial of the motion.[2]
In the present case, no practical use or value would be served - after the May 10, 2010 election has been held - by a ruling on the validity of the NP and NPC's registration for purposes of this election. Consistent with our rulings on similar situations, the present motion should be denied and the assailed Decision should stand.
In any event, the issues raised by the respondents have already been exhaustively addressed and passed upon in our May 6, 2010 Decision. We note that the respondents' motion for reconsideration raises no new and substantively meritorious issues necessitating a reconsideration of our May 6, 2010 Decision; hence, the present motion should now be denied with finality.
WHEREFORE, premises considered, we resolve to DENY the motion for reconsideration for being moot and academic." Velasco, Jr. and Bersamin, JJ., no part.
"G.R. No. 191771 - LIBERAL PARTY, represented by its President Manuel A. Roxas II and its Secretary General Joseph Emilio A. Abaya, petitioner -versus- COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, NACIONALISTA PARTY, represented by its President Manuel B. Villar, and NATIONALIST PEOPLE'S COALITION, allegedly represented by its Chairman Faustino S. Dy, Jr., respondents.
R E S O L U T I O N
Before us is the motion filed by the respondents Nacionalista Party (NP) and Nationalist People's Coalition (NPC) for reconsideration of our Decision of May 6, 2010, recognizing the petitioner Liberal Party as the dominant minority party for purposes of the May 10, 2010 elections. The motion was posted on May 7, 2010 and received by the Court on May 18, 2010.
We resolve to deny the motion for being moot and academic.
The issues raised in the respondents' motion for reconsideration have already been rendered moot and academic by the May 10, 2010 elections; the identification of the dominant minority party was needed in this election but no longer served any purpose thereafter. In short, the resolution of the motion, at this point, is no longer necessary or relevant.
This ruling is based on the established principle that an issue becomes moot and academic when it ceases to present a justiciable controversy because its resolution has lost practical use or value, or would have no practical legal effect.[1] In the context of a motion for reconsideration, no actual substantial relief stands to accrue to the plaintiff that would be negated by the denial of the motion.[2]
In the present case, no practical use or value would be served - after the May 10, 2010 election has been held - by a ruling on the validity of the NP and NPC's registration for purposes of this election. Consistent with our rulings on similar situations, the present motion should be denied and the assailed Decision should stand.
In any event, the issues raised by the respondents have already been exhaustively addressed and passed upon in our May 6, 2010 Decision. We note that the respondents' motion for reconsideration raises no new and substantively meritorious issues necessitating a reconsideration of our May 6, 2010 Decision; hence, the present motion should now be denied with finality.
WHEREFORE, premises considered, we resolve to DENY the motion for reconsideration for being moot and academic." Velasco, Jr. and Bersamin, JJ., no part.
Very truly yours,
(Sgd.) MA. LUISA D. VILLARAMA
Clerk of Court
(Sgd.) MA. LUISA D. VILLARAMA
Clerk of Court
Endnotes:
[1] Vda. de Dabao v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 116526, March 23, 2004, 426 SCRA 91, 97.
[2] Honesto B. Villarosa v. Hon. Cresenciano B. Trajano, G.R. No. 73679, July 23, 1992, 211 SCRA 685, 691.