May 30, 1952 92
SCRA 482
Ponente: Justice
Bengzon
Facts: On March 12, 1950 an inter-collegiate oratorical
competition was held in Naga City. Felipe was one of the Judges and was the
chairman. Nosce was awarded the first price and Imperial the second price. Imperial
addressed a letter to the Board of Judges protesting the verdict and alleged
that one of the judges committed a mathematical error on computing the scores.
The Board refused to amend their award, Imperial filed a complaint in court.
She asserts that she should have ranked 3rd place in the vote, which
makes her score 9 or the First place.
Issue: Whether the RTC reverse the decision of the board
of judges to obtain a new award?
Held: Members of the court sometimes are
members of the board of judges in an oratorical contest. But it is UNWRITTEN in
the law that in such contests the decisions of the board of judges be final and
cannot be appealed. The contestants do not have the right to the prizes because
theirs is only a privilege to compete for the prize and did not become a
demandable right. The respondent judge erred in his reasoning that where there
is a wrong there is remedy. To quote “The flaw in his reasoning lies
in the assumption that Imperial suffered some wrong at the
hands of the board of judges. If at all, there was error on
the part of one judge, at most. Error and wrong do not mean the same thing.
"Wrong" as used in the aforesaid legal principle is the deprivation
or violation of a right. As stated before, a contestant has no
right to the prize unless and until he or she is declared winner by
the board of referees or judges. Granting that Imperial suffered some loss or
injury, yet in law there are instances of "damnum absque injuria".
This is one of them. If fraud or malice had been proven, it would be a
different proposition. But then her action should be directed against the
individual judge or judges who fraudulently or maliciously injured her. Not
against the other judges.”
No comments:
Post a Comment