Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 105 views

    In Re Garcia

    Uploaded by

    ambahomo
    1) Arturo Efren Garcia, a Filipino citizen, petitioned for admission to the Philippine Bar without taking the required bar examinations. He argued that under a treaty between the Philippines and Spain, he was entitled to practice law in the Philippines after graduating law school and practicing law in Spain. 2) The Supreme Court denied Garcia's petition. It found that the treaty was intended to govern Filipinos practicing in Spain and Spaniards practicing in the Philippines, not the other way around. Garcia was still subject to Philippine laws requiring bar passage. 3) The Court also noted that the treaty stated its privileges were subject to the laws of the country where one wanted to practice. Philippine law requires bar passage

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    In Re Garcia

    Uploaded by

    ambahomo
    105 views2 pages
    1) Arturo Efren Garcia, a Filipino citizen, petitioned for admission to the Philippine Bar without taking the required bar examinations. He argued that under a treaty between the Philippines and Spain, he was entitled to practice law in the Philippines after graduating law school and practicing law in Spain. 2) The Supreme Court denied Garcia's petition. It found that the treaty was intended to govern Filipinos practicing in Spain and Spaniards practicing in the Philippines, not the other way around. Garcia was still subject to Philippine laws requiring bar passage. 3) The Court also noted that the treaty stated its privileges were subject to the laws of the country where one wanted to practice. Philippine law requires bar passage

    Original Description:

    SCRA Full text

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) Arturo Efren Garcia, a Filipino citizen, petitioned for admission to the Philippine Bar without taking the required bar examinations. He argued that under a treaty between the Philippines and Spain, he was entitled to practice law in the Philippines after graduating law school and practicing law in Spain. 2) The Supreme Court denied Garcia's petition. It found that the treaty was intended to govern Filipinos practicing in Spain and Spaniards practicing in the Philippines, not the other way around. Garcia was still subject to Philippine laws requiring bar passage. 3) The Court also noted that the treaty stated its privileges were subject to the laws of the country where one wanted to practice. Philippine law requires bar passage

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    105 views2 pages

    In Re Garcia

    Uploaded by

    ambahomo
    1) Arturo Efren Garcia, a Filipino citizen, petitioned for admission to the Philippine Bar without taking the required bar examinations. He argued that under a treaty between the Philippines and Spain, he was entitled to practice law in the Philippines after graduating law school and practicing law in Spain. 2) The Supreme Court denied Garcia's petition. It found that the treaty was intended to govern Filipinos practicing in Spain and Spaniards practicing in the Philippines, not the other way around. Garcia was still subject to Philippine laws requiring bar passage. 3) The Court also noted that the treaty stated its privileges were subject to the laws of the country where one wanted to practice. Philippine law requires bar passage

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 2

    August 15, 1961.

    studied and finished the law course graduating there as Licenciado En Derecho; that
    thereafter he was allowed to practice the law profession in Spain; and that under the
    IN RE:PETITION OF ARTURO EFREN GARCIA for admission to the Philippine Bar provisions of the Treaty on Academic Degrees and the Exercise of Professions
    without taking the examination. ARTURO EFREN GARCIA, petitioner. between the Republic of the Philippines and the Spanish state, he is entitled to
    practice the law profession in the Philippines without submitting to the required bar
    Philippine Bar; Requisites for Admission.A Filipino citizen who had finished the law examinations.
    course in Spain and thereafter allowed to practice the profession in said country, is not
    entitled to practice law in the Philippines without passing the required bar After due consideration, the Court resolved to deny the petition on the following
    examinations provided for in Section 1 of Rule 127 of the Rules of Court. grounds:
    Treaty on Academic Degrees and the Exercise of Professions; Professionals (1) The provisions of the Treaty on Academic Degrees and the Exercise of
    governed by treaty.The Treaty on Academic Degrees and the Exercise of Professions between the Republic of the Philippines and the Spanish State can not be
    Professions between the Republic of the Philippines and the Spanish State, is invoked by applicant. Under Article 11 thereof;
    intended to govern Filipino citizens desiring to practice their profession in Spain, and
    the citizens of Spain desiring to practice their professions in the Philippines. A Filipino The Nationals of each of the two countries who shall have obtained recognition of the
    citizen desiring to practice the legal profession in the Philippines, is not entitled to the validity of their academic degrees by virtue of the stipulations of this Treaty, can
    privileges extended to Spanish nationals desiring to practice in the Philippines. practice their professions within the territory of the Other, x x x. (Italics supplied).

    Same; Treaty cannot modify regulations governing admission to Philippine bar.The from which it could clearly be discerned that said Treaty was intended to govern
    aforementioned Treaty could not have been intended to modify the laws and Filipino citizens desiring to practice their profession in Spain, and the citizens of Spain
    regulations governing admission to the practice of law in the Philippines, for the desiring to practice their professions in the Philippines. Applicant is a Filipino citizen
    reason that the Executive Department may not encroach upon the constitutional desiring to practice the legal profession in the Philippines. He is therefore subject to
    prerogative of the Supreme Court to promulgate rules for admission to the practice of the laws of his own country and is not entitled to the privileges extended to Spanish
    law in the Philippines, the power to repeal, alter or supplement such rules being nationals desiring to practice in the Philippines.
    reserved only to the Congress of the Philippines. (See Sec. 13, Art. VIII, Philippine
    Constitution.) (2) Article I of the Treaty, in its pertinent part, provides:

    RESOLUTION 986

    BARRERA, J.:
    986

    985 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

    Estrada vs. Court of Agrarian Relations

    VOL. 2, AUGUST 15, 1961 The nationals of both countries who shall have obtained degrees or diplomas to
    practice the liberal professions in either of the Contracting States, issued by
    985 competent national authorities, shall be deemed competent to exercise said
    professions in the territory of the Other, subject to the laws and regulations of the
    In re Garcia latter. x x x
    Arturo E. Garcia has applied for admission to the practice of law in the Philippines It is clear, therefore, that the privileges provided in the Treaty invoked by the applicant
    without submitting to the required bar examinations. In his verified petition, he avers, are made expressly subject to the laws and regulations of the contracting State in
    among others, that he is a Filipino citizen born in Bacolod City, Province of Negros whose territory it is desired to exercise the legal profession; and Section 1 of Rule
    Occidental, of Filipino parentage; that he had taken and finished in Spain, the course 127, in connection with Sections 2, 9, and 16 thereof, which have the force of law,
    of Bachillerato Superior; that he was approved, selected and qualified by the require that before anyone can practice the legal profession in the Philippines he must
    Instituto de Cervantes for admission to the Central University of Madrid where he first successfully pass the required bar examinations; and
    (3) The aforementioned Treaty, concluded between the Republic of the Philippines
    and the Spanish State could not have been intended to modify the laws and
    regulations governing admission to the practice of law in the Philippines, for the
    reason that the Executive Department may not encroach upon the constitutional
    prerogative of the Supreme Court to promulgate rules for admission to the practice of
    law in the Philippines, the power to repeal, alter or supplement such rules being
    reserved only to the Congress of the Philippines. (See Sec. 13, Art VIII, Phil.
    Constitution).

    Bengzon, C.J., Padilla, Labrador, Reyes, J.B.L., Paredes, Dizon, De Leon and
    Natividad, JJ., concur.

    Bautista Angelo, J., on leave, took no part.

    Concepcion, J., took no part.

    Petition denied.

    _______________ In re Garcia, 2 SCRA 984, August 15, 1961

    You might also like