You are on page 1of 2

Board of Commissioners (CID) v.

Dela Rosa (1991)
Facts:
 Commission on Immigration and Deportation (CID) commenced
deportation proceedings against William Gatchalian, an alleged
Chinese citizen, for violating the Immigration Act.
 CID pointed out that the marriages of William’s grandfather,
Santiago, (to Chu Gim Tee) and father, Francisco, (to Ong Chiu
Kiok) in China were not supported by any evidence other than
their self-serving testimony now was there any showing what the
laws of China were.
 CID claims that for the said marriages to be valid in this country,
it should have been shown that they were valid by the laws of
China. There being no showing of the laws, they concluded that
the marriages cannot be considered valid.
 Hence, Santiago’s children followed the citizenship of their
mother, having been born outside of a valid marriage. Similarly,
the validity of Francisco’s marriage not having been
demonstrated, William followed the citizenship of his mother.
Issue/s:
 WON the marriage of Gatchalian in China is valid in accordance
with Philippine law – YES
Held:
 In absence of evidence to the contrary, foreign laws on a
particular subject are presumed to be the same as those of the
Philippines. This is known as Processual Presumption.
 In this case, there being no proof of Chinese law relating to
marriage, there arises a presumption that it is the same as that
of Philippine law.
 Philippine law, following the lex loci celebrationis, adheres to the
rule that marriage formally valid where celebrated is valid
everywhere.

a Filipino citizen. Having declared the assailed marriage is valid. William Gatchalian follows the citizenship of his father. .