Scribd Logo
Загрузить

Добро пожаловать в Scribd!

  • Buac and Bautista V COMELEC Digest

    Загружено:

    Kevin Juat Bulotano
    612 просмотров1 страница
    The Supreme Court ruled that the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) has jurisdiction over controversies involving the conduct of plebiscites and the annulment of their results. Ma. Salvacion Buac and Antonio Bautista questioned COMELEC's resolution stating it had no jurisdiction over plebiscite controversies. The Court held that plebiscite controversies could not be resolved by regular courts and fall under COMELEC's quasi-judicial powers based on the nature of such cases and to avoid confusion in settling disputes.

    Исходное описание:

    Digest regarding Buac and Bautista v COMELEC

    Оригинальное название

    Buac and Bautista v COMELEC digest

    Авторское право

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Доступные форматы

    DOCX, PDF, TXT или читайте онлайн в Scribd

    Этот документ был вам полезен?

    Это неприемлемый материал?

    Пожаловаться на этот документ
    The Supreme Court ruled that the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) has jurisdiction over controversies involving the conduct of plebiscites and the annulment of their results. Ma. Salvacion Buac and Antonio Bautista questioned COMELEC's resolution stating it had no jurisdiction over plebiscite controversies. The Court held that plebiscite controversies could not be resolved by regular courts and fall under COMELEC's quasi-judicial powers based on the nature of such cases and to avoid confusion in settling disputes.

    Авторское право:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Скачайте в формате DOCX, PDF, TXT или читайте онлайн в Scribd
    Отметить как неприемлемый контент
    612 просмотров1 страница

    Buac and Bautista V COMELEC Digest

    Загружено:

    Kevin Juat Bulotano
    The Supreme Court ruled that the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) has jurisdiction over controversies involving the conduct of plebiscites and the annulment of their results. Ma. Salvacion Buac and Antonio Bautista questioned COMELEC's resolution stating it had no jurisdiction over plebiscite controversies. The Court held that plebiscite controversies could not be resolved by regular courts and fall under COMELEC's quasi-judicial powers based on the nature of such cases and to avoid confusion in settling disputes.

    Авторское право:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Скачайте в формате DOCX, PDF, TXT или читайте онлайн в Scribd
    Отметить как неприемлемый контент
    из 1

    Article IX-C, Section 2 Buac and Bautista v. COMELEC G.R. No. 155855, January 26, 1994 Facts: - Ma.

    Salvacion Buac and Antonio Bautista filed a petition questioning COMELECs resolution stating that it has no jurisdiction over plebiscite controversies. - COMELEC contends that the rules and regulations it has only covers election protests. The quasijudicial jurisdiction of the Commission extends to those enumerated in Section 2(2). Issues: WON the COMELEC has jurisdiction over controversies involving the conduct of plebiscite and the annulment of its result. Held/Ratio: YES. The COMELEC has jurisdiction over controversies involving the conduct of plebiscites. One must first look at the nature of the case. Such controversy could not be attended by the judiciary because it is not within its jurisdiction to settle such type of controversy it does not fit the usage of judicial power. If the RTC would be given jurisdiction over such case, there would be a confusion regarding the settlement of justice. The judiciary, based on the Constitution, has jurisdiction only on elections, returns and qualifications of elected officials.

    Вам также может понравиться