Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The quo warranto petition against Maria Lourdes Sereno, filed before the Supreme Court of the Philippines, led to the landmark case Republic v. Sereno [note 1] (G. R. No. 237428), [3] [4] [5] which nullified Maria Lourdes Sereno's appointment as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the Philippines, finding that she never lawfully held the office due to a lack of integrity for failing to file ...
Impeachment proceeding of Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno was terminated after she was removed on May 11, 2018, via quo warranto by a special en banc session of the Supreme Court which also ruled that the Chief Justice post vacant; the petition alleged Sereno's appointment was void ab initio due to her failure in complying with the Judicial ...
She returned from leave shortly after the rest of the Supreme Court made a decision on the quo warranto petition. Deciding on the quo warranto petition en banc the Supreme Court justices voted to remove Sereno from the court on May 11, 2018, by a vote of 8–6. [1] Sereno filed a motion for consideration but the high court denied with finality ...
[2]: 366–367 Corona was impeached in 2012, the first time a Chief Justice had been impeached in Philippine history. [30] His successor, Maria Lourdes Sereno, also had impeachment proceedings brought against her. However, she was removed from office through quo warranto proceedings, before any impeachment proceedings took place. [31]
The writ of quo warranto and its replacement, the information in the nature of a quo warranto are either obsolete or have been abolished. Section 30 of the Senior Courts Act 1981 grants to the High Court the power to issue an injunction to restrain persons from acting in offices in which they are not entitled to act and to declare the office ...
The impeachment bid is the latest twist in a high-profile row among three of the Philippines' highest office-holders, after the collapse of a powerful alliance between their families led to Mr ...
Quid pro quo is not necessary for impeachment “This quid-pro-quo dispute misses the larger, and more important, point: What Trump did was wrong, and an abuse of his power as president ...
The case was an action of quo warranto, on behalf of the Government against Milton E. Springer, Dalamacio Costas, and Anselmo Hilario, the three directors of the National Coal Committee. [1] The Philippine Legislature created a coal company and a bank, and the majority of the stock was owned by the government itself.