G.R. No. L-8892, L-8893, L-8899, L-8900, L-8901, L-8902, L-8903, L-8904, L-8905; October 10, 1913.
Julian Gala, et al., petitioners, vs. Mariano Cui, as judge of the Court of First Instance, Province of Tayabas, et al., respondents.

FACTS

These are consolidated petitions for writs of certiorari. The petitioners were candidates declared elected based on the face of the returns in the June 4, 1912, municipal elections. Their respective opponents filed election protests in the Court of First Instance of Tayabas. The trial court, after finding that the election in a particular precinct was void due to illegal practices and fraud, conducted a recount excluding that precinct. The recount resulted in judgments ousting the petitioners and declaring their opponents elected. The petitioners now seek to annul these judgments, alleging lack of jurisdiction in the trial court. Their primary ground is that the court acquired no jurisdiction because not all candidates voted for the contested offices were notified of the protests as required by Section 27 of the Election Law.

ISSUE

Whether a writ of certiorari is the proper remedy to annul the judgments in the election contests based on the alleged failure to notify all candidates, which petitioners claim deprived the trial court of jurisdiction.

RULING

No. The petitions for writs of certiorari are denied. The Supreme Court held that certiorari will not lie. The alleged failure to notify all candidates is a question of fact that should have been raised and determined in the trial court. Whether jurisdiction was properly acquired depends on the existence of that fact. If the trial court had already passed upon that question, its determination would be conclusive against collateral attack. Raising it for the first time in the Supreme Court is improper. Furthermore, even assuming irregularities or errors in the trial court’s proceedingssuch as its decision to declare the election in a precinct void or to exclude ballotsthese pertain to the exercise of its jurisdiction and not to the jurisdiction itself. Errors in the exercise of jurisdiction, however erroneous, are not correctible by certiorari but by appeal. Since the trial court had jurisdiction over the subject matter (election contests) and over the persons of the protestants and protestees, its judgments cannot be annulled via certiorari.