This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2014-07-01 |
BERSAMIN, J. |
||||
| Necessarily, in discharging its duty under Section 1, supra, to set right and undo any act of grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction by any branch or instrumentality of the Government, the Court is not at all precluded from making the inquiry provided the challenge was properly brought by interested or affected parties. The Court has been thereby entrusted expressly or by necessary implication with both the duty and the obligation of determining, in appropriate cases, the validity of any assailed legislative or executive action. This entrustment is consistent with the republican system of checks and balances.[35] | |||||
|
2010-05-05 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| d. When the acts of the officer are without or in excess of authority;[42] | |||||
|
2005-02-16 |
CALLEJO, SR., J. |
||||
| The principal purpose for the writ of prohibition is to prevent an encroachment, excess, usurpation or assumption of jurisdiction on the part of an inferior court or quasi-judicial tribunal. It is granted when it is necessary for the orderly administration of justice, or prevent the use of the strong arm of the law in an oppressive or vindictive manner, or multiplicity of actions.[28] The writs of certiorari and prohibition, for that matter, are intended to annul or void proceedings in order to insure the fair and orderly administration of justice.[29] | |||||