This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2013-10-22 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| The accepted definition of grave abuse of discretion is: a capricious and whimsical exercise of judgment so patent and gross as to amount to an evasion of a positive duty or a virtual refusal to perform a duty enjoined by law, as where the power is exercised in an arbitrary and despotic manner because of passion or hostility.[6] | |||||
|
2013-10-22 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| The latest relevant ruling on COMELEC/HRET jurisdictional boundary came via Jalosjos, Jr. v. Commission on Elections[74] where the Court, through Mr. Justice Roberto Abad no less, categorically ruled that "[t]he Court has already settled the question of when the jurisdiction of the COMELEC ends and when that of the HRET begins."[75] In Jalosjos, the Court held that the proclamation of a congressional candidate following the election divests the COMELEC of jurisdiction over disputes relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of the proclaimed Representative in favor of the HRET. I note, at this point, that by arguing in his Concurring Opinion that the COMELEC's jurisdiction ends and the HRET begins only upon the assumption to the office on June 30 by the winning candidate, Justice Abad conveniently eschews the prevailing jurisprudence of the Court on the matter and makes an extraordinary volte face from his categorical declaration in Jalosjos, Jr. | |||||
|
2013-06-25 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| On 5 June 2013, the COMELEC En Banc issued a Certificate of Finality[16] declaring the 14 May 2013 Resolution of the COMELEC En Banc final and executory, considering that more than twenty-one (21) days have elapsed from the date of promulgation with no order issued by this Court restraining its execution.[17] | |||||