This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2012-06-20 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| Basic is the rule that a party cannot be allowed to invoke the jurisdiction of a court to secure affirmative relief and later on renounce or repudiate the same after it fails to obtain such relief.[28] After voluntarily submitting a cause and encountering an adverse decision on the merits, it is too late for the loser to question the jurisdiction or power of the court. The Court frowns upon the undesirable practice of a party submitting his case for decision and then accepting the judgment, only if favorable, and attacking it for lack of jurisdiction, when adverse.[29] | |||||
|
2009-06-11 |
NACHURA, J. |
||||
| But it is not only for this reason that Alfonso's argument must fail. Equally significant is the fact that he had already submitted himself to the jurisdiction of the CSC when he filed his counter-affidavit[27] and his motion for reconsideration and requested for a change of venue, not from the CSC to the BOR of PUP, but from the CSC-Central Office to the CSC-NCR.[28] It was only when his motion was denied that he suddenly had a change of heart and raised the question of proper jurisdiction.[29] This cannot be allowed because it would violate the doctrine of res judicata, a legal principle that is applicable to administrative cases as well.[30] At the very least, respondent's active participation in the proceedings by seeking affirmative relief before the CSC already bars him from impugning the Commission's authority under the principle of estoppel by laches.[31] | |||||