You're currently signed in as:
User
CONTINUE TO LAWYERLY APP
Digest Add to Casebook
Add TAGS to your cases to easily locate them or to build your SYLLABUS.
Please SIGN IN to use this feature.
https://www.lawyerly.ph/juris/view/c2633?user=fbGU2WFpmaitMVEVGZ2lBVW5xZ2RVdz09
[FELIX M. PAMANIAN v. PERFECTO PILAPIL](https://www.lawyerly.ph/juris/view/c2633?user=fbGU2WFpmaitMVEVGZ2lBVW5xZ2RVdz09)
{case:c2633}
Highlight text as FACTS, ISSUES, RULING, PRINCIPLES to generate case DIGESTS and REVIEWERS.
Please LOGIN use this feature.
Show printable version with highlights

[ GR No. L-1983, Jun 30, 1948 ]

FELIX M. PAMANIAN v. PERFECTO PILAPIL +

DECISION

81 Phil 212

[ G.R. No. L-1983, June 30, 1948 ]

FELIX M. PAMANIAN, PROTESTANT AND APPELLANT, VS. PERFECTO PILAPIL, PROTESTEE AND APPELLEE

D E C I S I O N

TUASON, J.:

This case is before us on appeal from an order of tho Court of First Instance of Leyte dismissing a motion of election protest. Judge Edmundo S. Piccio, who made the order, held that the court "did not acquire jurisdiction on the instant case" because the motion of protest did not allege that the protestant had duly filed a certificate of candidacy as provided by section 174 of the Revised Election Code.

The motion of protest recited that the protestant "was a candidate voted for in the general election held on November 11, 1947, with a valid certificate of candidacy for the Office of Mayor of the Municipality of Capoocan, Province of Leyte, Philippines, within the jurisdiction of this Court." This allegation unequivocally signifies that the protestant "presented a certificate of candidacy." Couched in different forms, the two expressions convey the same idea.

This Court in Dato Ali vs. Court of First instance of Lanao and Natancop Indol, G.R. No. L-1888, and in Ismael Marohon vs. Court of First instance of Lanao and Macaorao Balindong,[1] G. R. No. L-1889, said that an allegation that the protestonts filed certificate of candidacy and an allegation that they were candidates, mean the same thing. He further said that jurisdictional facts need not have to be recided in precise and technical forn, although that may be the better practice in proper cases; that when, from the allegations of the pleadings, taken together, the matters required to be averred may be gathered, the court will entertain jurisdiction.

The allegation in the above cases relative to the filing of a certificate of candidacy was much loss specific than the allegation which has been held insufficient in the present case.

With reversal of the order from which this appeal has teen taken, tho Court of First Instance of Leyte is hereby ordered to proceed with the trial of the protest on the merits. The protestee and appellee will pay the cost of this appeal.

Parás, Feria, Perfecto, and Briones, JJ., concur.
Pablo, Bengzon, and Padilla, JJ., concur in the result.


[1] 80 Phil., 506.
tags