This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2013-10-22 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| (3) The Court's June 25, 2013 Resolution is contrary to prevailing jurisprudence on the validity of the proclamation of a winning candidate. Reyes cites the cases of Planas v. Commission on Elections,[27] Limkaichong v. Commission on Elections[28] and Gonzalez v. Commission on Elections[29] where the Court upheld the validity of the proclamations made considering that the cancellation of their CoCs at that time had not attained finality. Even so, such questions on the validity of Reyes' proclamation are better addressed by the HRET which now has jurisdiction over the present case, citing Lazatin v. The Commission on Elections.[30] | |||||
|
2009-04-01 |
PERALTA, J. |
||||
| The Court has held in the case of Planas v. COMELEC,[60] that at the time of the proclamation of Defensor, the respondent therein who garnered the highest number of votes, the Division Resolution invalidating his certificate of candidacy was not yet final. As such, his proclamation was valid or legal, as he had at that point in time remained qualified. Limkaichong's situation is no different from that of Defensor, the former having been disqualified by a Division Resolution on the basis of her not being a natural-born Filipino citizen. When she was proclaimed by the PBOC, she was the winner during the elections for obtaining the highest number of votes, and at that time, the Division Resolution disqualifying her has not yet became final as a result of the motion for reconsideration. | |||||