ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™  
Main Index Law Library Philippine Laws, Statutes & Codes Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Jurisprudence
Prof. Joselito Guianan Chan's The Labor Code of the Philippines, Annotated Labor Standards & Social Legislation Volume I of a 3-Volume Series 2019 Edition (3rd Revised Edition)
 

 
Chan Robles Virtual Law Library
 
 

 
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

 
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

   
March-1950 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-1720 March 4, 1950 - SIA SUAN, ET AL. v. RAMON ALCANTARA

    085 Phil 669

  • G.R. No. L-2038 March 4, 1950 - LUIS DEL CASTILLO v. METROPOLITAN INSURANCE COMPANY

    085 Phil 678

  • G.R. No. L-2171 March, 4, 1950 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. IDE LAGON RAMOS

    085 Phil 683

  • G.R. No. L-2407 March 4, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MATIAS ALUPAY

    085 Phil 688

  • G.R. No. L-2447 March 4, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PEDRO PULIDO, ET AL

    085 Phil 695

  • G.R. No. L-1296 March 6, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JOSE PALICTE

    085 Phil 711

  • G.R. No. L-1546 March 6, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILS. v. RUFINO SURALTA

    085 Phil 714

  • G.R. No. L-2462 March 6, 1950 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. GO LEE

    085 Phil 718

  • G.R. No. L-2665 March 6, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FLORENTINO PATERNO, ET AL

    085 Phil 722

  • G.R. No. L-2996 March 6, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PRECIANO MEJARES, ET AL.

    085 Phil 727

  • G.R. No. L-3463 March 6, 1950 - LEONCIO ROSARES v. DIRECTOR OF PRISONS

    085 Phil 730

  • G.R. No. L-2335 March 7, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FRANCISCO MORENO

    085 Phil 731

  • G.R. No. L-3643 March 7, 950

    CARLOS C. ASPRA v. DIRECTOR OF PRISONS

    085 Phil 737

  • G.R. No. L-2269 March 14, 1950 - FABIAN B. S. ABELLERA v. NARCISO DE GUZMAN

    085 Phil 738

  • G.R. No. L-1990 March 15, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LEONILO GANAL, ET AL.

    085 Phil 743

  • G.R. No. L-2809 March 22, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FRISCO HOLGADO

    085 Phil 752

  • G.R. No. L-3022 March 22, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PEDRO CABASA, ET AL

    085 Phil 758

  • G.R. No. L-3580 March 22, 1950 - CONRADO MELO v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL., ET AL

    085 Phil 766

  • G.R. No. L-2217 March 23, 1950 - MIGUEL R. CORNEJO v. BIENVENIDO A. TAN

    085 Phil 772

  • G.R. No. L-2582 March 23, 1950 - TRINIDAD SEMIRA, ET AL v. JUAN ENRIQUEZ

    085 Phil 776

  • G.R. No. L-2981 March 23, 1950 - VISAYAN SURETY & INSURANCE CORP. v. VICTORIA PASCUAL, ET AL

    085 Phil 779

  • G.R. No. L-2434 March 25, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MACABANTUG RANGON ET AL.

    085 Phil 786

  • G.R. No. L-2584 March 25, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. TEODORO BARRAMEDA

    085 Phil 789

  • G.R. No. L-2636 March 25, 1950 - YU SIP v. COURT OF APPEALS

    085 Phil 795

  • G.R. No. L-2784 March 25, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. GERARDO NARSOLIS ET AL.

    085 Phil 798

  • G.R. No. L-2856 March 27, 1950 - GO CAM v. Hon. MAGNO S. GATMAITAN, ET AL

    085 Phil 802

  • G.R. No. L-2743 March 29, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. SIXTO CANDELARIA

    085 Phil 805

  • G.R. No. L-836 March 30, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ANACLETO MAGDANG, ET AL

    085 Phil 807

  • G.R. No. L-1912 March 30, 1950 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. ANATOLIO LLENARIZAS

    085 Phil 809

  • G.R. No. L-2239 March 30, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. AURELIO SANTIAGO

    085 Phil 813

  • G.R. No. L-2275 March 30, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. SIMPLICIO MACASO, ET ALS.

    085 Phil 819

  • G.R. No. L-2288 March 30, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MAXIMO MANOLONG

    085 Phil 829

  • G.R. No. L-2600 March 30, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PEDRO MARAPAO

    085 Phil 832

  • G.R. No. L-2647 March 30, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DIONISIO S. SERRANO

    085 Phil 835

  • G.R. No. L-2681 March 30, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DARIO MARGEN, ET AL.

    085 Phil 839

  • G.R. No. L-2175 March 31, 1950 - NG GIOC LIU v. SECRETARY OF THE DFA

    085 Phil 842

  • G.R. No. L-2189 March 31, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CILDO, ET AL

    085 Phil 845

  • G.R. No. L-2318 March 31, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. TEOFILO PAAR

    085 Phil 864

  • G.R. No. L-2405 March 31, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JUAN DE LOS SANTOS

    085 Phil 870

  • G.R. No. L-2801 March 31, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PEDRO BELANDRES, ET AL.

    085 Phil 874

  • G.R. No. L-2880 March 31, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DEMETRIO MOSTOLES, ET AL.

    085 Phil 883

  •  




     
     

    G.R. No. L-2175   March 31, 1950 - NG GIOC LIU v. SECRETARY OF THE DFA<br /><br />085 Phil 842

     
    PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

    FIRST DIVISION

    [G.R. No. L-2175. March 31, 1950.]

    NG GIOC LIU (alias VICENTE UY), Petitioner, v. THE SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS, Respondent.

    Juan E. Divina for Petitioner.

    First Assistant Solicitor General Roberto A. Gianzon and Solicitor Lucas Lacson for Respondent.

    SYLLABUS


    1. MANDAMUS; ISSUANCE OF "VISA" NOT MINISTERIAL FUNCTION. — The determination of whether or not an applicant for a visa has a non-immigrant status and whether or not his entry into this country would be contrary to public safety, is not a simple ministerial function. It involves the exercise of discretion and cannot therefore be controlled by mandamus.


    D E C I S I O N


    REYES, J.:


    Sometime in September, 1947, Ng Gioc Liu, alias Vicente Uy, presented to the Department of Foreign Affairs a letter from the Commissioner of Immigration, requesting that the Philippine Consulate at Amoy, China, be authorized to issue a returning resident visa to Mariano Uy as an unemancipated minor son of said Ng Gioc Liu, the Commissioner being satisfied that this minor was born in Manila in 1928, but that, having gone to China in 1930 to study and having stayed there since then, he has to have a visa to return to the Philippines. As the Commissioner’s request was not granted, Ng Gioc Liu came to this Court with a petition for a writ of mandamus to compel the Secretary of Foreign Affairs to authorize the issuance of the visa in question. Answering the petition, the Solicitor General, on behalf of the respondent, denies the non-immigrant status of the minor Mariano Uy and alleges as a defense, among other things, that the giving of a visa is not a ministerial act that may be compelled by mandamus and that the Government has already adopted the policy of not considering as bona fide residents those aliens who left the Philippines before 1941 and had not returned at the time the said policy was adopted in 1946.

    The Immigration Act of 1940, which is still in force, permits resident aliens who leave the Philippines for a temporary visit abroad to return to the Philippines provided they have not relinquished their residence here. Upon returning they are considered non-immigrants, but they are required by section 10 of the Act to present for admission into the Philippines unexpired passports and valid passport visas issued by a consular officer. Section 12 directs that passport visa be not issued to an applicant who fails to establish satisfactorily his non-immigrant status or whose entry into the Philippines would be contrary to the public safety.

    It is obvious from the legal provisions above cited that a visa is not issued as a matter of course to any one applying for it. In the case of a non-immigrant, the law directs that he must first establish satisfactorily his status as such and the consular officer, on his part, has to satisfy himself that the applicant’s entry into the Philippines would not be contrary to the public safety. The matter obviously requires an investigation by the consular officer issuing the visa. And it should be stated in this connection that although the foreign service has been placed under the over-all direction and supervision of the Department of Foreign Affairs by Executive Order No. 18 (42 Off. Gaz., 2064), this does not necessarily mean that the Department Secretary takes the place of the consular officers abroad in the matter of the issuance of passport visas, for the Secretary can not relieve those officers of their responsibility under the law. This is in accord with the practice in the United States where the State Department at Washington, D.C., "does not and will not take any interest to direct the issuance of visas by the various consulates in foreign countries," for the reason that "to do so would relieve the consul of his responsibility." (U.S. Immigration, Exclusion, Deportation and Citizenship by Sydney Kansas, p. 70.) The reason of the law in conferring upon the consuls themselves the duty and power to grant passports and visas is obvious. The applicant for a visa is in a foreign country and the Philippine consular officer there is naturally in a better position than the home office to determine through investigation conducted on the spot whether or not the said applicant is qualified to enter the Philippines.

    The determination of whether or not an applicant for a visa has a non-immigrant status and whether or not his entry into this country would be contrary to public safety, is not a simple ministerial function. It involves the exercise of discretion and cannot therefore be controlled by mandamus. The fact that the Commissioner of Immigration has made his own investigation and is himself satisfied that the applicant is entitled to his claim is immaterial. For the consular officers are not bound by the findings and conclusions of the immigration office.

    The petition for mandamus is, therefore, denied, with costs against the petitioner.

    Moran, C.J., Ozaeta, Pablo, Bengzon, Padilla and Tuason, JJ., concur.

    REYES, J.:


    I hereby certify that Mr. Justice Montemayor, who is now in Baguio, took part in the consideration of this case and voted in favor of the decision.

    G.R. No. L-2175   March 31, 1950 - NG GIOC LIU v. SECRETARY OF THE DFA<br /><br />085 Phil 842




    Back to Home | Back to Main

     

    QUICK SEARCH

    cralaw

       

    cralaw



     
      Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
    ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™
     
    RED