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 Relations, Volume II of a 3-Volume Series 2017 Edition, 5th Revised Edition,
 

 
Chan Robles Virtual Law Library
 









 

 
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

 
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

   
September-1955 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-6363 September 15, 1955 - IN RE: JOHANNA HOFER BORROMEO v. CANUTO O. BORROMEO

    097 Phil 549

  • G.R. No. L-7797 September 15, 1955 - IN RE: TY MA SIU v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILS.

    097 Phil 555

  • G.R. No. L-8446 September 19, 1955 - APOLlNARIO VALERIO v. BIENVENIDO A. TAN, ET AL.

    097 Phil 558

  • G.R. No. L-7553 September 22, 1955 - EUGENIO PALUAY v. CELESTINO BACUDAO, ET AL.

    097 Phil 561

  • G.R. No. L-7685 September 23, 1955 - IN RE: NABIH AWAD v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILS.

    097 Phil 569

  • G.R. No. L-8158 September 23, 1955 - WESTERN MINDANAO LUMBER CO., INC. v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, ET AL.

    097 Phil 572

  • G.R. Nos. L-3770-71 September 27, 1955 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DATUMANONG MONADI, ET AL.

    097 Phil 575

  • G.R. No. L-7412 September 27, 1955 - IN RE: VICTOR TE TEK LAY v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILS.

    097 Phil 586

  • G.R. No. L-7534 September 27, 1955 - MARIA MINA, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

    097 Phil 590

  • G.R. No. L-7559 September 27, 1955 - CONSUELO ROXAS, ET AL. v. JUAN YSMAEL & CO., INC.

    097 Phil 594

  • G.R. No. L-6371 September 28, 1955 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FILEMON NOTARTE, ET AL.

    097 Phil 598

  • G.R. No. L-7687 September 28, 1955 - FERMIN VILLAR v. CESARIA JAVIER DE PADERANGA

    097 Phil 604

  • G.R. No. L-8060 September 28, 1955 - PAULINO GARCIA v. MARIA BISAYA, ET AL.

    097 Phil 609

  • G.R. No. L-8558 September 28, 1955 - LEODEGARIO BENGA-ORAS v. JOSE EVANGELISTA, ET AL.

    097 Phil 612

  • G.R. No. L-8559 September 28, 1955 - RUFINA C. DE PAULA v. JOSE ESCAY, ET AL.

    097 Phil 617

  • G.R. No. L-7567 September 29, 1955 - IN RE: KARAM SINGH v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILS.

    097 Phil 622

  • G.R. No. L-7679 September 29, 1955 - CENTRAL AZUCARERA DE DON PEDRO v. CITY OF MANILA, ET AL.

    097 Phil 627

  • G.R. No. L-7796 September 29, 1955 - JOSE PIDELO v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILS.

    097 Phil 632

  • G.R. No. L-6553 September 30, 1955 - ADVERTISING ASSOCIATES, INC. v. COLL. OF INTERNAL REVENUE

    097 Phil 636

  • G.R. No. 6758 September 30, 1955 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. GUILLERMO GALIT, ET AL.

    097 Phil 642

  • G.R. No. L-7311 September 30, 1955 - NEW ZEALAND INS. CO., LTD. v. ADRIANO CHOA JOY

    097 Phil 646

  • G.R. No. L-7495 September 30, 1955 - EVARISTO CORPUZ v. SUSANA CORPUZ, ET AL.

    097 Phil 655

  • G.R. No. L-7760 September 30, 1955 - IN RE: MARIANO RODRIGUEZ v. ZOILO REYES

    097 Phil 659

  • G.R. No. L-8474 September 30, 1955 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PEDRO DE LA PEÑA, ET AL.

    097 Phil 669

  •  





     
     

    G.R. No. L-7685   September 23, 1955 - IN RE: NABIH AWAD v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILS. <br /><br />097 Phil 569

     
    PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

    SECOND DIVISION

    [G.R. No. L-7685. September 23, 1955.]

    In the matter of the petition for Philippines citizenship. NABIH AWAD, Petitioner-Appellant, v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, Oppositor-Appellee.

    Castillo, Cervantes, Occeña, Lozano, Montaña, Cunanan & Sison for Appellant.

    Solicitor General Jose G. Bautista and Solicitor Juan T. Alano for Appellee.


    SYLLABUS


    1. CITIZENSHIP; PETITION; AFFIDAVITS OF TWO FILIPINO CITIZENS TO HAVE KNOWN APPLICANT OF HIS TEN YEARS’ RESIDENCE. — Pursuant to section 7, of the Revised Naturalization Law (Commonwealth Act No. 473), an applicant for naturalization must attach to his petition the affidavits of at least two credible persons stating that they are citizens of the Philippines and personally know the petitioner to be a resident of the Philippines for the period of time required by this Act. This period is ten (10) years (Section 2, Commonwealth Act No. 473), except when petitioner falls within certain specified classes. — namely, "having been born in the Philippines" ; or "being married to a Filipino woman" ; or "having been engage as a teacher in the Philippines if a public or recognized private school . . . for . . . not less than two years" ; or "having honorably had office under the government of the Philippines or of its local subdivisions" ; or "having established a new industry or introduced a new invention in the Philippines" (Sec. 2) — to neither of which classes petitioner herein belongs. In other words, for the validity of petitioner’s application, it is essential that the same be supported by the affidavits of two citizens of the Philippines who knew him to be a resident thereof for at least ten (10) years. In the case at bar, since the petitioner’s application was accompanied by the affidavits of O, and M. and the latter did not take the witness stand, whereas the former testified that he came to know petitioner only five (5) years prior to the filing of petitioner’s application, it is obvious that the same is fatally defective and must be necessarily dismissed.


    D E C I S I O N


    CONCEPCION, J.:


    This is an appeal, taken by petitioner Nabih Awad, from a decision of the Court of First Instance of Davao, denying his application for naturalization as citizen of the Philippines, upon the ground of insufficiency of the evidence to establish his ability to read and write a principal local dialect.

    In this connection, petitioner testified that he was born in Lebanon, in 1924; that he came to the Philippines in 1936; that, since then, he had resided continuously in the Philippines, having returned to Lebanon only once in 1948; that he studied up to the first year high school; that he knows how to read and write English; that he understood the contents of his petition, which is in Spanish; and that, he can speak the Visayan and the Tagalog dialects. Although there is no direct evidence that he can write either dialect, his ability to do so is conceded by the Solicitor General, for, having reached first year high school, he is literate and, as such, may be deemed capable of writing the dialects he speaks, namely, the Visayan and the Tagalog, which are phonetic. (Lao Chin Kieng v. Republic of the Philippines, * 40 Off. Gaz., 2654, 2656.)

    This notwithstanding, we are of the opinion that petitioner’s application for naturalization has been properly dismissed. Pursuant to section 7 of the Revised Naturalization Law (Commonwealth Act No. 473), an applicant for naturalization must attach to his petition the affidavits of at least two credible persons stating "that they are citizens of the Philippines and personally know the petitioner to be a resident of the Philippines for the period of time required by this Act." This period is ten (10) years (Section 2, Commonwealth Act No. 473), except when petitioner falls within certain specified classes- namely, "having been born in the Philippines" ; or "being married to a Filipino woman" ; or "having been engaged as a teacher in the Philippines in a public or recognized private school . . . for . . . not less than two years" ; or "having honorably held office under the government of the Philippines or of its local subdivisions" ; or "having established a new industry or introduced a new invention in the Philippines" (Sec. 2) — to neither of which classes petitioner herein belongs. In other words, for the validity of petitioner’s application (See Cu v. Republic of the Philippines, L-3018, decided on July 18, 1951) it is essential that the same be supported by the affidavits of two citizens of the Philippines who knew him to be a resident thereof for at least ten (10) years.

    In the case at bar, petitioner’s application was accompanied by the affidavits of Jesus V. Oceña and Gregorio P. Manongdo. The latter did not take the witness stand, whereas the former testified that he came to know petitioner in 1947, or only five (5) years prior to the filing of petitioner’s application on December 4, 1952. It is obvious, therefore, that the same is fatally defective and must necessarily be dismissed.

    Wherefore, the decision appealed from is hereby affirmed, with costs against petitioner herein. So ordered.

    Bengzon, Padilla, Montemayor, Reyes, A., Jugo, Bautista Angelo, Labrador and Reyes, J.B.L., JJ., concur.

    Endnotes:



    * 91 Phil., 510.

    G.R. No. L-7685   September 23, 1955 - IN RE: NABIH AWAD v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILS. <br /><br />097 Phil 569


    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