G.R. No. 102448 - Cuartero vs. Court of Appeals

Case Digest (G.R. No. 102448)
Standard Advanced

Facts:

Background of the Case

Petitioner: Wilfredo Go Bon Lee, born on June 9, 1884 in Amoy, China, of Chinese parentage.
His immigration details: Arrived in the Philippines on December 17, 1919 and was issued a landing certificate.

Family and Personal History

Marriage and Family:

Married in 1917 in Amoy, China to Sy Hong.
They have six children:

Go Kian Giap (born January 20, 1923 in Amoy, China)

ii. Go Kian Ti (born July 21, 1925 in Amoy, China) iii. Pacita, also known as Juanita Baby Go (born March 13, 1929 in Cebu City) iv. Go Kian Guan (born October 10, 1930 in Amoy, China)

Go Kian Sing (born July 7, 1934 in Amoy, China)

vi. Go Kian Tai (born June 6, 1938 in Amoy, China)

Efforts to Secure Philippine Citizenship for Family:

Before the war, petitioner attempted to bring his children to the Philippines but was hindered by his mother-in-law’s objections based on the alleged delicate health of the children.
In 1939, there was a promise to bring the children to the Philippines, which was not fulfilled due to complications ensuing from the outbreak of the war between China and Japan.
In 1948 or 1949, he applied for the admission of his children to the Philippines; however, the Department of Foreign Affairs found defects in his petition, refusing their admission.

Procedural History

First Petition:

Initially, petitioner filed for Philippine naturalization before the Court of First Instance of Cebu.
The Solicitor General later filed a petition for the cancellation of his certificate of naturalization on August 15, 1951, citing his failure to enroll his minor children in any public or private school recognized by the government.
On appeal from the order denying the petition, the Court revoked his certificate of naturalization.

Second Petition:

After the revocation became final, petitioner re-filed a petition on June 23, 1961 in an apparent attempt to cure the earlier defect by bypassing the schooling requirement.
The City Fiscal of Cebu filed an opposition reiterating the failure to enroll the minor children in recognized schools.
Evidence presented showed that, with the exception of his daughter Pacita who resided with him in Cebu City, his other children remained in Amoy, China.

Evidence of Petitioner’s Travels:

Petitioner admitted making multiple trips to China (in 1924, 1933, 1937, 1938, and 1947), indicating ample opportunity to bring his children to the Philippines, particularly before the outbreak of the Sino-Japanese War.

Alleged Justification and Court’s Observation

Petitioner’s Claim:

He argued that his failure to enroll his minor children was due to the difficulty in bringing them to the Philippines, compounded by health concerns as asserted by his mother-in-law.
He contended that his active attempts to bring them, albeit unsuccessful, should exempt him from the statutory schooling requirement.

Court’s Finding:

The court noted that the claim of children being sickly and the consequent travel difficulties did not constitute an insurmountable barrier.
It was observed that if he could bring his daughter Pacita to the Philippines, he could have similarly brought his other children when conditions allowed.
The court emphasized the lack of satisfactory proof that petitioner made genuine and adequate efforts at an earlier period (citing the earlier revocation decision which highlighted his failure to bring the other four minor children).

Issues:

Compliance with the Naturalization Law

Whether the petitioner’s failure to enroll his minor children in a public or private school recognized by the government is a defect that can be excused by difficulties in bringing them from China.
Whether the alleged difficulties due to the children’s purported ill health and the objections of his mother-in-law sufficiently justify non-compliance with statutory requirements.

Res Judicata of the Issue

Whether the matter regarding the schooling requirement, having been previously litigated in the context of his naturalization application, should now be considered res judicata.
Whether the filing of a subsequent petition to cure the defect is acceptable in light of the earlier decision revoking his certificate of naturalization.

Evidentiary and Procedural Considerations

Whether there is satisfactory evidence to show that petitioner exerted all necessary efforts to bring his minor children to the Philippines.
Whether the petitioner’s travel history and conduct indicate that the failure to enroll his children was merely neglectful rather than justified by unavoidable circumstances.

Ruling:

(Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

(Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

(Subscriber-Only)

Unlock Full Case Digest

Case Digest (G.R. No. 102448) Concise

Facts:

Case Digest (G.R. No. 102448) Standard Advanced

Facts:

Issues:

Ruling:

Ratio:

Doctrine:

Case Digest (G.R. No. 102448)
Concise

Case Digest (G.R. No. 102448)
Standard Advanced