Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1960 > September 1960 Decisions > G.R. No. L-15274 September 30, 1960 - DOMINGO ALMONTE UY v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

109 Phil 694:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. L-15274. September 30, 1960.]

DOMINGO ALMONTE UY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, Oppositor-Appellee.

Tabora, Concon & Dacanay for Appellant.

Assistant Solicitor General A. A. Torres and Solicitor D. I. Quiroz for Appellee.


SYLLABUS


1. NATURALIZATION; LUCRATIVE EMPLOYMENT REQUIREMENT; FAILURE TO SHOW THAT PETITIONER HAS LUCRATIVE EMPLOYMENT, GROUND FOR DISQUALIFICATION. — Petitioner testified that he owns and manages a tailoring shop capitalized at more than P3,000.00. He did not say how he raised this capital, considering that prior to the opening of the shop, he was merely earning P120.00 a month. He also declared that he did not know as yet whether his business would be profitable or not, as he had just begun it. Held: In the circumstances, it is highly doubtful if petitioner can provide his family with adequate support, and his children with at least a primary and secondary education. Having failed to satisfy the requirement of lucrative lawful occupation provided in Sec. 2 (4) of the Revised Naturalization Law, his petition must be denied.


D E C I S I O N


BARRERA, J.:


Petitioner Domingo Almonte Uy appeals from the decision of the Court of First Instance of Camarines Sur, denying his petition for naturalization as a Philippine citizen.

The records disclose that petition was born on February 24, 1928 (Exh. C) in Tabaco, Albay, the son of Uy Toco and Sy Chia, both Chinese citizens. He resided in said municipality since his birth until 1954. Thereafter, he moved to Naga City, where he has been residing up to the present. He has resided in the Philippines continuously for more than 30 years, and has not left it at any time. He married Belen Jardinel, a Filipina, on June 23, 1956 (Exh. J), with whom he has now 2 children, namely, Marilyn and Aster, born on April 19, 1956 (Exh. H) and August 10, 1958 (Exh. I), respectively. He is of good moral character, and has conducted himself in a proper and irreproachable manner during the entire period of his residence in this country in his relation with the constituted government, as well as with the community in which he is living. He is owner and manager of the "Saxon Tailoring Shop," which he established in June, 1958, with a capital of more than P3,000.00. Prior thereto, he was salesman of the "Golden Star Trading," with a monthly salary of P120.00. He had not filed any income tax return. He speaks and writes English and the Bicol dialect (Exhs. K and K-I). He finished his elementary education at Tabaco Chinese School, In Tabaco, Albay, and his secondary education at St. Johns Institute of Tabaco, in the same municipality. He also took up commerce at the University of the East, but was unable to finish the course. He possesses none of the disqualifications for naturalization provided in Section 4 of the Revised naturalization Law. 1 (See clearances, Exhs. L-1 to L-5).

In support of his petition, petitioner presented as character witnesses, Mayor Monico Imperial of Naga City, and Dr. Francisco Gomez of the same municipality.

In denying his petition for naturalization, the court, in its decision of November 22, 1958, stated as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"It is clear from the foregoing that the petitioner possesses the first, second, fifth, and sixth qualifications required by Sec. 2 of the Revised Naturalization Law and none of the disqualifications mentioned in Sec. 4 thereof.

"Regarding the third qualification, the evidence failed to show that the petitioner believed in the principles underlying the Philippine Constitution. On the said subject he only testified that he believed in a democratic government, but the Philippine Constitution embraces other underlying principles besides belief in a democracy. And even his knowledge of a democratic government, is faulty. He said defining a democratic government, that it is a government where the people can vote, where there is freedom of speech, press, and ‘transportation from one place to another,’ and ‘where people can file complaints.’ Certainly, his lack of knowledge of all the principles underlying the Philippine Constitution and his insufficient understanding of a democratic government make him unfit to become a citizen of this country. Knowledge of the fundamental law, at least of its principal underlying principles, is indispensable to a good citizenship.

"As to the fourth qualification, the evidence failed to show that he has a lucrative trade or occupation. It is true that he owns and manages a tailoring business with an operating capital of about P3,000.00 but there is no proof that he earns enough from this business to provide sufficient support for himself and his family. He confessed that he did not know as yet whether or not his business would be profitable. As a matter of fact, his earnings could not be much above the minimum wage level because he had not filed any income tax return. It is thus reasonably doubtful if he can provide his family with sufficient support and his children with at least a primary and secondary education. If admitted a citizen of this country, he may only be an addition to the many problems that now confront the nation."cralaw virtua1aw library

His motion for reconsideration of said decision having been denied, petitioner appealed to us.

The decision appealed from must be affirmed. We are in accord with the lower court that petitioner failed to show that he has a lucrative lawful occupation. True it is that he testified that he owns and manages a tailoring shop capitalized at more than P3,000.00. He did not say how he raised this capital, considering that prior to the opening of this shop, he was merely earning P120.00 a month. There is no evidence that petitioner’s earnings would be sufficient to support himself and the members of his family of 3 (his wife and 2 children). In fact, at the date of the hearing (September 18, 1958), said tailoring shop was in existence barely 4 months. At said hearing, Petitioner, in effect, declared that he did not know as yet whether his business would be profitable or not, as he had just begun it. In the circumstances, it is highly doubtful if petitioner can provide his family with adequate support, and his children with at least a primary and secondary education. In this connection, the lower court aptly observed that "if admitted a citizen of this country, he (petitioner) may only be n addition to the many problems that now confront the nation." In the very recent case of Swee Din Tan v. Republic (supra, p. 287), we reversed the decision of the lower court granting the application for citizenship of Swee Din Tan, on the ground that he had no lucrative employment, stating:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"We find a sounder reason to refuse citizenship; no lucrative employment. It is admitted that Swee Din Tan, with a wife and three children, is a mere employee receiving P200.00 a month only. We think that at the present valuation of the peso, petitioner may have an employment; but he has not a ‘lucrative’ employment. It is true, we have held in some cases that an alien receiving P80.00, P140.00 or 250.00 a month had a lucrative employment; but the applicants therein received free board and lodging. (Lim v. Republic, 92 Phil., 522; 49 Off. Gaz., 122; Tiong v. Republic, 94 Phil., 473; 50 Off. Gaz., 1025; Uy Tiao Hong v. Republic, 101 Phil., 77; 54 Off. Gaz., 629; Republic v. Yap, L-11187, April 28, 1958). It is also true that we admitted to citizenship persons whose income did not exceed P250.00 or P200.00 a month, with no lodging; however, the applicants thereon had no children. (Republic v. Lim, L-3030, Jan. 31, 1951; Pang Kok Hua v. Republic, 91 Phil., 254.) At any rate, with the low purchasing power of our currency, a married man with three children to support can hardly make both ends meet, if he makes P200.00 a month only. Therefore, he may not be held to have a lucrative employment."cralaw virtua1aw library

The above ruling applies with even greater force to the instant case, it appearing that petitioner at the time of the hearing had yet no determinate or fixed income from his said tailoring shop business or occupation.

We find, as did the lower court, that petitioner failed to satisfy the requirement of lucrative lawful occupation provided in Section 2(4) of the Revised Naturalization Law. having arrived at this conclusion, we need not discuss whether or not petitioner-appellant has sufficiently proven his knowledge of and belief in the principles underlying our Constitution and form of government.

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

Paras, C.J., Bengzon, Bautista Angelo, Labrador, Concepcion, Reyes, J.B.L., Gutierrez David, Paredes, and Dizon, JJ., concur.

Endnotes:



1. Commonwealth Act No 473, as amended.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






September-1960 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-12645 September 15, 1960 - JUANA PADRON VDA. DE VALENZUELA, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

    109 Phil 396

  • G.R. No. L-14179 September 15, 1960 - PERMANENT CONCRETE PRODUCTS, INC., ET AL. v. JUAN FRIVALDO

    109 Phil 404

  • G.R. No. L-13943 September 19, 1960 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MARCELIANO ARRANCHADO, ET AL.

    109 Phil 410

  • G.R. No. L-13815 September 26, 1960 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ELIAS OYCO

    109 Phil 415

  • G.R. No. L-14740 September 26, 1960 - ANDRES SANTOS, ET AL. v. HON. NUMERIANO G. ESTENZO, ETC.

    109 Phil 419

  • G.R. No. L-14939 September 26, 1960 - ELVIRA VIDAL TUASON DE RICKARDS v. ANDRES F. GONZALES

    109 Phil 423

  • G.R. No. L-12298 September 29, 1960 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FEDERICO AGARIN

    109 Phil 430

  • G.R. No. L-12906 September 29, 1960 - DUMANGAY GUITING v. DIRECTOR OF LANDS, ET AL.

    109 Phil 436

  • G.R. No. L-13255 September 29, 1960 - COLLECTOR OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. JOSE COJUANGCO

    109 Phil 443

  • G.R. No. L-13475 September 29, 1960 - PHIL. SUGAR INSTITUTE v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, ET AL.

    109 Phil 452

  • G.R. No. L-15226 September 29, 1960 - LEE GUAN v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

    109 Phil 460

  • G.R. No. L-10119 September 30, 1960 - RAFAEL LACSON v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

    109 Phil 462

  • G.R. Nos. L-10352-53 September 30, 1960 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. GAUDENCIO MANlGBAS, ET AL.

    109 Phil 469

  • G.R. No. L-11329 September 30, 1960 - CIPRIANO B. MOTOS v. ROBERTO SOLER, ET AL.

    109 Phil 481

  • G.R. No. L-11440 September 30, 1960 - SERGIO F. DEL CASTILLO v. EDUARDO D. ENRIQUEZ, ET AL.

    109 Phil 491

  • G.R. No. L-12030 September 30, 1960 - JOSE J. ROTEA v. FORTUNATO F. HALILI

    109 Phil 495

  • G.R. No. L-12149 September 30, 1960 - HEIRS OF EMILIO CANDELARIA, ETC. v. LUISA ROMERO, ET AL.

    109 Phil 500

  • G.R. No. L-12328 September 30, 1960 - CARLOS J. RIVERA v. TOMAS T. TIRONA, ET AL.

    109 Phil 505

  • G.R. No. L-12353 September 30, 1960 - NORTH CAMARINES LUMBER CO., INC. v. COLLECTOR OF INTERNAL REVENUE

    109 Phil 511

  • G.R. No. L-12641 September 30, 1960 - EMILIANA C. ESTRELLA v. PUBLIC SERVICE COM., ET AL.

    109 Phil 514

  • G.R. Nos. L-12664-65 September 30, 1960 - ANTONINO LAZARO, ET AL. v. FIDELA R. GOMEZ, ET AL.

    109 Phil 518

  • G.R. No. L-12894 September 30, 1960 - LILIA JUANA BARLES, ET AL. v. DON ALFONSO PONCE ENRILE

    109 Phil 522

  • G.R. No. L-13023 September 30, 1960 - INSULAR LIFE ASSURANCE CO., LTD. v. TERESA DUAT VDA. DE FERNANDEZ, ET AL.

    109 Phil 530

  • G.R. No. L-13283 September 30, 1960 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. SERAPIO CARUNUNGAN, ET AL.

    109 Phil 534

  • G.R. No. L-13349 September 30, 1960 - MIGUEL GAMAO, ET AL. v. DOMINADOR C. CALAMBA, ET AL.

    109 Phil 542

  • G.R. Nos. L-13389-90 September 30, 1960 - CAPITOL SUBD., INC., ET AL. v. ALFREDO LOPEZ MONTELIBANO, ET AL.

    109 Phil 546

  • G.R. No. L-13417 September 30, 1960 - JOSE B. VILLACORTA, ETC. v. HON. FERNANDO VILLAROSA, ET AL.

    109 Phil 551

  • G.R. No. L-13426 September 30, 1960 - INT’L. OIL FACTORY v. TOMASA MARTINEZ VDA. DE DORIA, ET AL.

    109 Phil 553

  • G.R. No. L-13446 September 30, 1960 - MAXIMO SISON v. HON. FROILAN BAYONA, ET AL.

    109 Phil 557

  • G.R. No. L-13467 September 30, 1960 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JUAN NECESITO, ET AL.

    109 Phil 563

  • G.R. No. L-13546 September 30, 1960 - GREGORIO VERZOSA v. CITY OF BAGUIO, ET AL.

    109 Phil 571

  • G.R. Nos. L-13567-68 September 30, 1960 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROSARIO B. DE LEON

    109 Phil 574

  • G.R. No. L-13582 September 30, 1960 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. CIRILO P. BAYLOSIS, ET AL.

    109 Phil 580

  • G.R. No. L-13686 September 30, 1960 - HEIRS OF JUSTO MALFORE v. DlR. OF FORESTRY

    109 Phil 586

  • G.R. No. L-13912 September 30, 1960 - COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. CONSUELO L. VDA. DE PRIETO

    109 Phil 592

  • G.R. No. L-13941 September 30, 1960 - ANTONIO A. RODRIGUEZ, ETC. v. S. BLAQUERA, ETC.

    109 Phil 598

  • G.R. Nos. L-13992 & L-14035 September 30, 1960 - MANILA ELECTRIC CO. v. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, ET AL.

    109 Phil 603

  • G.R. No. L-14008 September 30, 1960 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. TRIZON REMOLLINO

    109 Phil 607

  • G.R. No. L-14348 September 30, 1960 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CIRIACO YEBRA

    109 Phil 613

  • G.R. No. L-14395 September 30, 1960 - MALAYAN INSURANCE CO., INC. v. CATALINA V. YANDOC, ET AL.

    109 Phil 616

  • G.R. No. L-14497 September 30, 1960 - FELIX PAULINO, SR., ET AL. v. HON. JOSE T. SURTIDA, ET AL.

    109 Phil 621

  • G.R. No. L-14628 September 30, 1960 - FRANCISCO HERMOSISIMA v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

    109 Phil 629

  • G.R. No. L-14630 September 30, 1960 - LY HONG v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

    109 Phil 635

  • G.R. No. L-14733 September 30, 1960 - ERLINDA ESTOPA v. LORETO PIANSAY, JR.

    109 Phil 640

  • G.R. No. L-14737 September 30, 1960 - LEONCIA VELASCO v. COURT OF AGRARIAN RELATIONS, ET AL.

    109 Phil 642

  • G.R. No. L-14817 September 30, 1960 - ANDRES G. SANCHEZ, ET AL. v. NORTHERN LUZON TRANS. CO. INC.

    109 Phil 647

  • G.R. No. L-14822 September 30, 1960 - KHAW DY, ET AL. v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL., ET AL.

    109 Phil 649

  • G.R. No. L-14874 September 30, 1960 - ANTONIO PEREZ v. ANGELA TUASON DE PEREZ

    109 Phil 654

  • G.R. No. L-14914 September 30, 1960 - JOHN TAN CHIN ENG v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

    109 Phil 660

  • G.R. No. L-14930 September 30, 1960 - MARLI PLYWOOD & VENEER CORP. v. JOSE ARAÑAS, ET AL.

    109 Phil 664

  • G.R. No. L-15021 September 30, 1960 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. COURT OF TAX APPEALS, ET AL.

    109 Phil 667

  • G.R. No. L-15101 September 30, 1960 - IN RE: CHUA TIAN SANG v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

    109 Phil 670

  • G.R. No. L-15158 September 30, 1960 - JESUS S. DIZON v. HON. NECIAS O. MENDOZA, ET AL.

    109 Phil 674

  • G.R. No. L-15179 September 30, 1960 - TEODORA AMAR v. JESUS ODIAMAN

    109 Phil 681

  • G.R. No. L-15208 September 30, 1960 - ALIPIO N. CASILAN, ET AL. v. SANTIAGO GANGCAYCO, ET AL.

    109 Phil 686

  • G.R. No. L-15266 September 30, 1960 - TAN HOI v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

    109 Phil 689

  • G.R. No. L-15274 September 30, 1960 - DOMINGO ALMONTE UY v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

    109 Phil 694

  • G.R. No. L-15305 September 30, 1960 - CITY OF MANILA v. ARCADIO PALLUGNA

    109 Phil 698

  • G.R. No. L-15327 September 30, 1960 - FIDEL FERNANDEZ, ET AL. v. HON. GREGORIO D. MONTEJO

    109 Phil 701

  • G.R. No. L-15380 September 30, 1960 - CHAN WAN v. TAN KIM, ET AL.

    109 Phil 706

  • G.R. No. L-15392 September 30, 1960 - REX TAXlCAB CO., INC. v. JOSE BAUTISTA, ET AL.

    109 Phil 712

  • G.R. No. L-15454 September 30, 1960 - MANILA RAILROAD CO. v. EMILIANA FERRER, ET AL.

    109 Phil 716

  • G.R. No. L-15802 September 30, 1960 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. ENRIQUE MAGALONA, JR., ET AL.

    109 Phil 723

  • G.R. Nos. L-15928-33 September 30, 1960 - DIOSDADO C. TY v. FILIPINAS CIA. DE SEGUROS, ET AL.

    109 Phil 730

  • G.R. No. L-16088 September 30, 1960 - LUZON SURETY CO., INC. v. FIDELA MORIN DE MARBELLA, ET AL.

    109 Phil 734

  • G.R. No. L-16226 September 30, 1960 - GUILLERMO REÑOSA v. HON. NICASIO YATCO, ET AL.

    109 Phil 740