Reagan v CIR, 30 SCRA 968

Facts:

A question novel in character, the answer to which has far-reaching implications,

is raised by petitioner William C. Reagan, at one time a civilian employee of an
American corporation providing technical assistance to the United States Air Force in the
Philippines. He would dispute the payment of the income tax assessed on him by
respondent Commissioner of Internal Revenue on an amount realized by him on a sale
of his automobile to a member of the United States Marine Corps, the transaction
having taken place at the Clark Field Air Base at Pampanga. It is his contention,
seriously and earnestly pressed, that in legal contemplation the sale was made outside
Philippine territory and therefore beyond our jurisdictional power to tax.

Issue:

Whether or not the sale was made outside the Philippine territory and therefore beyond
our jurisdictional function to tax.

Held:

The Court held that nothing is better settled than that the Philippines being
independent and sovereign, its authority may be exercised over its entire domain. There
is no portion there of that is beyond its power. Within its limits, its decrees are
supreme, its commands paramount. Its laws govern therein, and everyone to whom it
applies must submit to its terms. That is the extent of its jurisdiction, both territorial
and personal. On the other hand, there is nothing in the Military Bases Agreement that
lends support to Reagans assertion. The Base has not become foreign soil or territory.
This country's jurisdictional rights therein, certainly not excluding the power to tax,
have been preserved, the Philippines merely consents that the US exercise jurisdiction
in certain cases this is just a matter of comity, courtesy and expediency. It is likewise
noted that he indeed is employed by the USAF and his income is derived from US
source but the income derived from the sale is not of US source hence taxable.
PEOPLE vs GOZO 53 SCRA 476

Facts:

Loreta Gozo seeks to set aside a judgment of the Court of First Instance of Zambales,
convicting her of a violation of an ordinance of Olongapo, Zambales, requiring a permit
from the municipal mayor for the construction or erection of a building, as well as any
modification, alteration, repair or demolition thereof. She questions its validity, or at the
very least, its applicability to her, by invoking due process citing the case of People v.
Fajardo.

She contends that her house was constructed within the naval base leased to the
American armed forces located inside the United States Naval Reservation within the
territorial jurisdiction of Olongapo City and therefore shall be exempted from the
Municipal Ordinance No. 14.

Issue:

Whether or not the property of the Appellant shall be exmpeted from the application of
the Municipal Ordinance.

Held:

Yes. The appellants contention that because her property was located within the naval
base leased to the American armed forces located inside the United States Naval
Reservation, she must be entitled of the exemption from complying with the ordanance
was given no merit. Though the property yielded within the Naval base of US, it is a
clear doctrine that the Philippines still possesses the sovereignty over that area given
the record that it is still a part of its territory. Thus, it can still enforce its administrative
jurisdiction by virtue of its government instrumentalities which the people sojourning to
that territory must always adhere and respect. Citing the case of Reagan vs CIR it
states that, By the Agreement, it should be noted, the Philippine Government merely
consents that the United States exercise jurisdiction in certain cases. The consent was
given purely as a matter of comity, courtesy, or expediency. The Philippine Government
has not abdicated its sovereignty over the bases as part of the Philippine territory or
divested itself completely of jurisdiction over offenses committed therein. Under the
terms of the treaty, the United States Government has prior or preferential but not
exclusive jurisdiction of such offenses. The Philippine Government retains not only
jurisdictional rights not granted, but also all such ceded rights as the United States
Military authorities for reasons of their own decline to make use of. The first proposition
is implied from the fact of Philippine sovereignty over the bases; the second from the
express provisions of the treaty. "Thus, the Philippine jurisdictional right might be
diminished but will never disappear. This manifests the principle of Sovereignty as auto-
limitation, which, in the succinct language of Jellinek, "is the property of a state-force
due to which it has the exclusive capacity of legal self-determination and self-
restriction." A state then, if it chooses to, may refrain from the exercise of what
otherwise is illimitable competence.

"WHEREFORE, the appealed decision of November 11, 1969 is affirmed insofar as it

found the accused, Loreta Gozo, guilty beyond reasonable doubt of a violation of
Municipal Ordinance No.14, series of 1964 and sentencing her to pay a fine of P200.00
with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency, and modified insofar as she is
required to demolish the house that is the subject matter of the case, she being given a
period of thirty days from the finality of this decision within which to obtain the required
permit. Only upon her failure to do so will that portion of the appealed decision
requiring demolition be enforced.
Commissioner vs. Robertson 143 SCRA 397

Facts:

Frank and James Robertson (brothers) were American citizens born in the Philippines.
They stayed here in the Philippines until they were repatriated by the US in 1945.
Thereafter they established their domicile in California soon after they were employed
by the US Federal Government as workers in the US Navy. They were later assigned at
the US Naval Base in Olongapo City in 1962. They hold American passports and are
admitted as special temporary visitors under the Philippine Immigration Act of 1940. On
the other hand, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue (CIR) contends that the
American brothers are subject to taxation because their residence here in the
Philippines is not by reason of their employment in connection with the construction,
maintenance, operation or defense of the US Bases here as provided by the Military
Bases Agreement. Further, the burden of proof of such exemption to taxation shall be
upon the respondents.
ISSUE:
Whether or not the American brothers are exempt from taxation?
HELD:
Yes. The law and the facts of the case are so clear that there is no room left for doubt
the validity of the brothers defense. In order to avail oneself of the tax exemption
under the RP-US Military Bases Agreement: he must be a national of the United States
employed in connection with the construction, maintenance, operation or defense, of
the bases, residing in the Philippines by reason of such employment, and the income
derived is from the U.S. Government (Art. XII par. 2 of PI-US Military Bases Agreement
of 1947). Said circumstances are all present in the case at bar.
Mejoff vs. Director of Prisons 90 Phil 70

Facts:
Mejoff was a Russian national. He was brought to the Philippines from Shanghai as a
secret spy by the Japanese forces. When the US regime took over the Philippines Mejoff
was arrested as a Japanese spy. He was deported after finding out that he had no
travel documents. Therefore his entry in the Philippines was illegal. The Deportation
Board ordered the Immigration Officials to deport Mejoff. However, two Russian ships
refused to take Mejoff because they don't have the authority to do so. Thus, Mejoff was
moved to Bilibid Prison Muntinglupa and his detention was prolonged.

Issue:
Whether or not Mejoffs' prolonged detention as an alien was unlawful

Held:
Mejoff entry in the Philippines was not illegal since he was brought in the Philippines by
the arm forces during the De Facto Government.
The Philippines adopt the generally accepted principles of the International Law as part
of the Law of the Nation. This principle provides the right to life and liberty to all human
beings without any distinction. This is embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights.
The writ of Habeas Corpus was issued commanding the Director of Prisons to release
Mejoff from custody upon bail.