ANGARA

VS
THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION, PEDRO YNSUA & DIONISIO C. MAYOR G.R. NO. L-45081

Facts:

That in the elections of September 17, 1935, the petitioner, Jose A. Angara,
and the respondents, Pedro Ynsua, Miguel Castillo and Dionisio Mayor, were
candidates voted for the position of member of the National Assembly for the first
district of the Province of Tayabas;

That on October 7, 1935, the provincial board of canvassers, proclaimed the

petitioner as member-elect of the National Assembly for the said district, for
having received the most number of votes;
That on November 15, 1935, the petitioner took his oath of office;

That on December 8, 1935, the herein respondent Pedro Ynsua filed before the
Electoral Commission a "Motion of Protest" against the election of the herein
petitioner, Jose A. Angara, being the only protest filed after the passage of
Resolutions No. 8 aforequoted, and praying, among other-things, that said
respondent be declared elected member of the National Assembly for the first
district of Tayabas, or that the election of said position be nullified.

Issue: Whether or not Supreme Court has jurisdiction over the Electoral Commission
and the subject matter of the controversy upon the foregoing related facts

Ruling: Yes, Supreme court has jurisdiction, i this case the nature of the present
controversy shows the necessity of a final constitutional arbiter to determine the
conflict of authority between two agencies created by the Constitution. The court
has jurisdiction over the Electoral Commission and the subject matter of the
present controversy for the purpose of determining the character, scope and extent
of the constitutional grant to the Electoral Commission as "the sole judge of all
contests relating to the election, returns and qualifications of the members of the
National Assembly." (Sec 4 Art. VI 1935 Constitution)