VINZONS-CHATO VS.

COMELEC

FACTS: Unico has already been proclaimed and taken his oath of office
as a member of the HOR, hence, Comelec ruled that it had already lost
jurisdiction over petitioner chat's election protea against Unico
regarding canvassing of returns and allegedly invalidity of Unico's
proclamation. He then filed a special civil action for certiorari in the
SC.

ISSUE: WON the court should take cognisantce of Cahto's election

protea. If not, to who is this issue best addressed to.
WON his civil action for certiorari will prosper.

HELD: The court should not tae cognisance of Chato's election protest
for it would amount to usurpation of the constitutionally mandated
functions of the HRET.
Civil action for certiorari will not prosper.

RATIO: In an electoral contest where validity of the proclamation of a

winning candidate who has taken his oath of office and assumed his
post as Congressman is raised, that issue is best addressed to the
HRET.

REASON: It avoids duplicity of proceedings and a clash of jurisdiction

between constitutional bodies with due regard to the peoples
mandate.

-Special Civil Action for certiorari shall proper if the following

requisites concur.
> Tribunal, board or officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial
functions has acted without or in excess of jurisdiction or with grave
abuse of jurisdiction amounting to lack of jurisdiction.
> There is no appeal or any plain, speedy and adequate
remedy in the ordinary course of law to annul or modify the
proceeding.
-In this case, COMELEC did not commit rave abuse of discretion
when it issued a resolution holding that it had lost jurisdiction upon
Unico's proclamation. It demonstrated fealty to the constitutional
regarding HRET.