Pardo vs. RepublicG.R. No. L-2248. January 23, 1950.
FACTS:
Vicente Rosal Pardo is a Spanish citizen born in Spain in
1895 and is residing in the Philippines since 1905. He married a Filipina and
at the time of this case was employed in Manila. He was adjudged by the CFI of
Manila entitled to become a Filipino citizen.
The government appealed on the ground, among others, that Pardo is unable to speak and write any of
the principal Filipino languages..
Pardo also introduced a certificate signed by the Consul
General of Spain in the Philippines, stating that in accordance with articles
17 and 25 of the Spanish Civil Code, among other Spanish legislation, Filipinos
are eligible to Spanish citizenship in Spain. Article 17 provides that
foreigners who have obtained a certificate of naturalization and those who have
not obtained such certificate but have acquired domicile in any town of the
Monarchy are Spaniards. No discrimination being made in these provisions, they
apply to persons of any nationality.
ISSUE:
Whether or not Filipinos being eligible to Spanish
citizenship in Spain is a matter within judicial notice
RULING:
YES.
As the Spanish Civil Code has been and still is "the
basic code in force in the Philippines," articles 17 et seq. thereof may
be regarded as matters known to judges of the Philippines by reason of their
judicial functions and may be judicially recognized by them without the
introduction of proof. Moreover, in a number of decisions mere authentication
of the Chinese Naturalization Law by the Chinese Consulate General of Manila
has been held to be competent proof of that law.
MR:
YES.
Accordingly, evidence of the law of a foreign country on
reciprocity regarding the acquisition of citizenship, although not meeting the
prescribed rule of practice by section 41 of Rule 123, may be allowed and used
as basis for a favorable action if, in the light of all the circumstances, the
court is satisfied of the authenticity of the written proof offered.
Comments
Post a Comment