IN THE MATTER OF PETITION FOR NATURALIZATION OF TY ENG HUA, TY ENG HUA, PETITIONER-APPELLEE, VS. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, OPPOSITOR-APPELLANT.

Ty Eng Hua versus Republic of the Philippines

The Case

This is a naturalization case. Ty Eng Hua, a subject of Nationalist China, asked the courts to admit him as a citizen of the Philippines under the Revised Naturalization Law. The Republic of the Philippines opposed him. The case matters because it fixes a quiet but decisive rule for the bar: the applicant's income must be lucrative, and it is measured as of the filing of the application, judged against the number of persons he must support. A man of modest means with a wife and four minor children cannot qualify, however worthy his character may otherwise be.

Procedural History

Ty Eng Hua filed his petition for naturalization in the Court of First Instance of Camarines Sur. The trial court ruled in his favor. It found that he has all the qualifications required by the Revised Naturalization Law and none of the disqualifications specified therein, and it declared him eligible to be admitted a citizen of the Philippines. The Republic appealed. The case reached the Supreme Court on that appeal, and the Supreme Court reversed the judgment below.

Facts

Ty Eng Hua is a subject of Nationalist China. He sought admission as a citizen of the Philippines by naturalization, and he earned his living as a merchant.

He filed his application for naturalization on March 28, 1961. In the third paragraph of that application, he stated that from his trade as merchant he derives an income of 3,600 pesos, more or less. His income tax return for 1960, however, showed a net income of 4,739 pesos and 32 centavos.

At the hearing, he testified that he could get around 6,000 pesos, more or less, for the year 1961. He has a wife and four minor children to support. The trial court nonetheless declared him eligible for citizenship, and the Republic appealed.

Issues

• Whether or not the applicant has a lucrative income within the meaning of the Revised Naturalization Law.
• Whether or not income for purposes of naturalization is reckoned as of the time of the filing of the application.
• Whether or not an income of around 6,000 pesos is lucrative for an applicant who must support a wife and four minor children.

Applicable Provisions

The decision applies the income requirement of the Revised Naturalization Law, which the Court refers to as the standard required in that law. The Court states the governing requirement in these terms:

The petitioner must have some known lucrative trade, profession, or lawful occupation.

This requirement is the ground on which the petition rises or falls, because the Court denies the petition for the reason alone that the applicant does not have a lucrative income.

Ruling

On the first issue, the Court held that the applicant does not have a lucrative income. On the second issue, the Court held that income for purposes of naturalization is to be reckoned as of the time of the filing of the application. That application was filed on March 28, 1961, and it averred an income of 3,600 pesos, more or less, while his 1960 income tax return showed a net income of 4,739 pesos and 32 centavos.

On the third issue, the Court held that neither figure represents income lucrative for one who, as is the case of the petitioner, has a wife and four minor children to support. Even on the assumption that he can get around 6,000 pesos, more or less, for the year 1961, that income does not come up to the standard required in the Naturalization Law. The Court rested this conclusion on a long line of judicial pronouncements.

The Court closed with the rule that governs the outcome:

For the reason alone that applicant does not have a lucrative income, the petition should be denied.

Accordingly, the judgment under review was reversed and the petition for naturalization was denied, with costs against the petitioner.

Doctrine

An applicant for naturalization must have a lucrative income. The requirement is not satisfied by a modest or barely sufficient livelihood. The test is whether the income is lucrative for a person in the applicant's actual circumstances, and the number of dependents he must support is part of that test.

Income is reckoned as of the time of the filing of the application, not at some later date and not by the most favorable figure the applicant can project at trial. The applicant's own averment in the petition and his income tax return for the preceding year are the measures the Court will examine.

Failure of the income requirement alone is sufficient ground to deny the petition, even if the trial court found that the applicant has all the qualifications and none of the disqualifications.

Disposition

The Republic won. The Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the trial court, denied Ty Eng Hua's petition for naturalization, and taxed the costs against him.

Remember This

Memorize the line that decides the case: for the reason alone that the applicant does not have a lucrative income, the petition should be denied. Examiners use this case to test the income requirement in naturalization, the rule that income is reckoned as of the filing of the application, and the principle that the sufficiency of income is measured against the number of dependents the applicant must support.