Showing posts with label March 14. Show all posts
Showing posts with label March 14. Show all posts

Sunday, February 7, 2016

CIVIL PROCEDURE: REPUBLIC VS. BANTIGUE POINT (Jurisprudence)

G.R. No. 162322 March 14, 2012

OBJECTIONS TO JURISDICTION OVER THE SUBJECT MATTER

The rule is settled that lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter may be raised at any stage of the proceedings. Jurisdiction over the subject matter is conferred only by the Constitution or the law. It cannot be acquired through a waiver or enlarged by the omission of the parties or conferred by the acquiescence of the court. Consequently, questions of jurisdiction may be cognizable even if raised for the first time on appeal.

Thursday, January 21, 2016

VILAR VS. PARAISO

G.R. No. L-8014                      March 14, 1955

FACTS:
Vilar and Paraiso were candidates registered and voted for the office of mayor of Rizal, Nueva Ecija. After the canvass was made, Paraiso was declared as the mayor duly elected. However, Vilar instituted a present quo warranto proceedings before the tial court contending that Paraiso be declared ineligible to assume office because he was a minister of the United Church of Christ in the Philippines (UCCP) and such was disqualified to be a candidate under section 2175 of the Revised Administrative Code. He also prayed that he be declared duly elected mayor of Rizal. Paraiso denied his ineligibility and claimed that he resigned as minister of UCCP and that even if he was not eligible to the office, petitioner could not be declared elected to take his place. The lower court favored Vilar but stated that the latter could not be declared as mayor. Both parties appealed before the CA. However, the court elevated it to the Supreme Court because of the conflicting issues between Vilar and Paraiso.

ISSUE:
Whether respondent, being an ecclesiastic, is ineligible to hold office.

RULING:
Yes. The Court ruled that Paraiso never ceased as minister and that the resignation he claimed to have filed before the date of the elections is but a mere scheme to circumvent the prohibition of the law regarding ecclesiastics who desire to run for a municipal office. If the respondent intended to resign as minister of the religious organization for the purpose of launching his candidacy, he should resign in due form and have the acceptance of his resignation registered with the Bureau of Public Libraries. The purpose of registration is twofold: to inform the public not only the authority of the minister to discharge religious functions, but equally to keep it informed of any change in his religious status. This information is necessary for the protection of the public. It is no argument to say that the duty to secure the cancellation of the requisite resignation devolves, not upon respondent, but upon the head of his organization or upon the official charge of such registration, upon proper showing of the reason for such cancellation, because the law likewise imposes upon the interested party the duty of effecting such cancellation. who in the instant case is the respondent himself. This he failed to so. And what is more, he failed to attach to his certificate of candidacy, a copy of his alleged resignation as minister knowing full well that a minister is disqualified by law to run for a municipal office.

The documents Paraiso presented to show his alleged resignation were held to be self-serving and appeared to have been prepared haphazardly, leading the court to believe that these were made only to cure his ineligibility to hold office.