You are on page 1of 1

Lokin, Jr. v.

COMELEC

FACTS:

 Two different faction both purporting to represent CIBAC partylist, a multi-sectoral party
registered under Party List Act, submitted to the COMELEC their manisfestation of Intent to
Participate in in the Party-List System of Representation in th coming election
 COMELEC issued a resulution on July 5, 2010 and w/c was received by petitioners on July 12,
2010, expunging the certificate of nomination of Petitioners’ faction.
 Petiotioner filed an MR on July 15, 2010.
 The COMELEC en banc affirmed their decision on Aug 31, 2010, which was received by petitioner
on Sep 1, 2010
 This prompt petitioners to file this present petition for certiorari on October1, 2010 in
accordance with Rule 64 and 65, alleging GADALEJ on the part off the COMELEC is issuing both
resolution
 However, the court deniesthis petition for being filed outside the requisite period.

ISSUE:

WON the petition for certiorari was filed within the reglementary period.

RULING:

 Yes, this Court denies the petition for being filed outside the requisite period.
 The review by this Court of judgments and final orders of the COMELEC is governed specifically
by Rule 64 of the Rules of Court.
 While Rule 64 refers to the same remedy of certiorari as the general rule in Rule 65, they cannot
be equated, as they provide for different reglementary periods. Rule 65 provides for a period of 60
days from notice of judgment sought to be assailed in the Supreme Court, while Section 3
expressly provides for only 30 days.
 The Resolution was received by petitioners on July 12, 2010 and the MR was filed on July 15,
2010. Pursuant to sec.3 of ROC deducting the 3 days it took them to file the MR, they had a
remaining period of 27 days or until Sep 28, 2010 to file the Petition for Certiorari
 However, petitionners filed the petition only on Oct 1, 2010. Clearly,outside the requuired period.
The Court further add in Pates v. COMELEC, it was established that the fresh-period rule in Rule
64 does not similary apply to the timeliness of petitions under Rule 64.

You might also like