Case Digest (G.R. No. L-23239)
Facts:
Hon. Martiniano P. Vivo, as Acting Commissioner of Immigration, Petitioner, vs. Hon. Gaudencio Cloribel, as Judge of the Court of First Instance of Manila, Br. VI, et al., G.R. No. L-23239, November 23, 1966, the Supreme Court En Banc, Bengzon, J., writing for the Court.The petition was brought by Commissioner Martiniano P. Vivo seeking certiorari and prohibition to annul a preliminary injunction issued by Judge Gaudencio Cloribel of the Court of First Instance (CFI) of Manila, Branch VI, in Civil Case No. 51626 and the judge’s subsequent denial of a motion to dissolve that injunction. The injunction restrained the Commissioner from arresting or requiring three aliens (Sy King Fong and her minor children, hereafter “respondents visitors”) to leave the Philippines and from confiscating a cash bond posted for them.
Chronology: On January 9, 1961 the visitors obtained visas at the Philippine Consulate in Hong Kong to visit their husband/father Co Chin in the Philippines; they arrived January 17, 1961 with an initial authorized three-month stay (to April 17, 1961). Co Chin deposited a P28,000 cash bond with the Bureau of Immigration guaranteeing their departure and observance of admission conditions. The Office of the President authorized an extension to July 17, 1961. Co Chin’s petition for naturalization was granted by the CFI on June 24, 1961 (judgment not appealed).
Subsequent administrative actions: Respondents sought and received an administrative extension to October 17, 1961. On August 17, 1961 the visitors requested a further extension to June 24, 1963; the Secretaries of Foreign Affairs and of Justice indorsed approval of a change of status to “special non-immigrants” and an extension to June 24, 1963 — the Secretary of Justice conditioned approval on reentry permits and retention of the cash bond. The Commissioner of Immigration, however, extended their stay only to October 17, 1962. The visitors again pressed for the June 24, 1963 date by letter of October 2, 1961, without further administrative action.
A change in national administration followed. On August 29, 1962 the Commissioner (with the new Secretary of Justice) issued Immigration Circular No. V-101 abrogating extensions of stay of temporary visitors who arrived in 1961 and prior years. The Commissioner required the visitors to leave by September 18, 1962. Instead, Co Chin filed in the CFI (Sept. 17, 1962) a petition for prohibition with preliminary injunction; on September 18, 1962 Judge Cloribel issued the injunction (upon bond) enjoining the Commissioner from removing the visitors or confiscating the P28,000.
The Commissioner answered (Oct. 16, 1962), arguing that the visitors’ authorized stays had expired, that the Secretaries lacked authority to grant the contested extensions or to change status, and that the petition below stated no cause of action. The Commissione...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Was certiorari/prohibition the proper remedy — i.e., was appeal or motion for reconsideration an adequate remedy so as to bar the petition?
- Did the Secretaries’ indorsements (and the Cabinet Resolution of February 29, 1956) lawfully change the visitors’ status to special non‑immigrants or otherwise authorize their stay up to June 24, 1963?
- Did Judge Cloribel act in excess of jurisdiction/with grave abuse of discretion in issuing the preliminary injunction and in refusing to dissolve it after t...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)