This case has been cited 4 times or more.
|
2010-03-09 |
PERALTA, J. |
||||
| In Hofer v. House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal,[10] a case that is closely analogous to the instant petition, the Court emphasized that "[p]rocedural rules in election cases are designed to achieve not only a correct but also an expeditious determination of the popular will of the electorate."[11] Thus, the time limit set by the rules is not something to be taken lightly, for it was stressed in the same case that "the observance of the HRET Rules in conjunction with our own Rules of Court, must be taken seriously."[12] Quoting Baltazar v. Commission of Elections,[13] The Court reiterated in Hofer[14] that: By their very nature and given the public interest involved in the determination of the results of an election, the controversies arising from the canvass must be resolved speedily, otherwise the will of the electorate would be frustrated. And the delay brought about by the tactics resorted to by petitioner is precisely the very evil sought to be prevented by election statutes and controlling case law on the matter.[15] | |||||
|
2009-04-02 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| The processes of the adjudication of election disputes should not be abused. By their very nature and given the public interest involved in the determination of the results of an election, the controversies arising from the canvass must be resolved speedily; otherwise, the will of the electorate would be frustrated. And the delay brought about by the means resorted to by petitioner is precisely the very evil sought to be prevented by election laws and the relevant jurisprudence.[33] | |||||
|
2004-05-12 |
SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, J. |
||||
| In Baltazar vs. Commission of Elections,[5] we held:"By their very nature and given the public interest involved in the determination of the results of an election, the controversies arising from the canvass must be resolved speedily, otherwise the will of the electorate would be frustrated. And the delay brought about by the tactics resorted to by petitioner is precisely the very evil sought to be prevented by election statutes and controlling case law on the matter." | |||||
|
2004-05-12 |
SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, J. |
||||
| In Baltazar vs. Commission of Elections,[5] we held:"By their very nature and given the public interest involved in the determination of the results of an election, the controversies arising from the canvass must be resolved speedily, otherwise the will of the electorate would be frustrated. And the delay brought about by the tactics resorted to by petitioner is precisely the very evil sought to be prevented by election statutes and controlling case law on the matter." | |||||