Dy Sy v. Collector of Customs of Davao
REITERATIONFacts
1. The Antecedents: The underlying dispute concerns the right of Dy Sy, a Chinese national, to remain in the Philippines. The petitioner presented a registry certificate as proof of his right to residency, but this certificate was issued by the Collector of Internal Revenue and was not considered sufficient by the authorities. 2. Procedural History: Dy Sy's petition for a writ of habeas corpus, seeking to remain in the Philippines, was denied by the Court of First Instance of Davao. This denial followed a prior petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed by Dy Sy, which was also denied by a competent court on October 6, 1928, and that decision became final after his appeal was dismissed. 3. The Petition: This case is an appeal from the denial of a writ of habeas corpus by the Court of First Instance of Davao. The appellant contends that his registry certificate, Exhibit D, entitles him to remain in the Philippines. However, the court found this certificate to be equivalent to a cedula certificate, issued to all residents, and not specifically to Chinese immigrants, and that the matter was res judicata due to prior judicial decisions.
Issue(s)
Whether the registry certificate (Exhibit D) is sufficient to grant the petitioner the right to remain in the Philippines. Whether the issue of the petitioner's right to remain in the country is res judicata.
Ruling
The judgment of the Court of First Instance of Davao denying the writ of habeas corpus is affirmed. The petitioner is not entitled to remain in the Philippines based on the registry certificate presented.
Ratio Decidendi
On the sufficiency of the registry certificate: The registry certificate, Exhibit D, is merely equivalent to a cedula certificate, which was issued to every resident in the country, not exclusively to Chinese residents. This is supported by Circular No. 12 issued by the Office of the Military Governor of the United States in the Philippines on December 12, 1899. Furthermore, the Military Governor issued Circular No. 6 of May 30, 1899, which incorporated Circular No. 13 of the Bureau of Customs and Insular Affairs, dated April 14, 1899, declaring that the laws and regulations governing immigration to the United States were in effect in the territory under the military government. The certificate in question was issued by the Collector of Internal Revenue of Manila, not by the Collector of Customs, at a time when a Collector of Customs had already been appointed by the Military Government for the city. Therefore, the certificate does not confer the right to remain in the country. On the issue of res judicata: The matter of the petitioner's right to remain in the country has already been finally decided by a competent tribunal. The appellant had previously petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus on the same grounds, which was denied by a competent court on October 6, 1928. This decision became final upon the dismissal of the appeal taken by the appellant. Consequently, the principle of res judicata bars the relitigation of this issue.
Main Doctrine
A registry certificate issued by the Collector of Internal Revenue, which is equivalent to a cedula certificate issued to all residents, is not sufficient to grant an alien the right to remain in the Philippines, especially when the matter has already been decided with finality by a competent court.