GR 45230; (October, 1936) (Digest)
G.R. No. 45230 ; October 31, 1936
JOSE ARNEDO, VICTORIANO FRANCISCO, JUAN DIONISIO, MANUEL MARIANO and REMIGIO LARA, petitioners, vs. VICENTE ALDANESE, as Collector of Customs for the Port of Manila, respondent.
FACTS
Petitioners imported five bags of rice from Hongkong, claiming exemption from import duties under paragraph 354 of the Philippine Tariff Act of 1909, as amended by Act No. 4198 , which allows duty-free importation of food materials during a declared emergency. They invoked Proclamation No. 58, issued by the President, which declared a state of emergency due to a serious rice shortage. The respondent Collector of Customs refused to admit the rice free of duty, arguing that the petitioners were not “distressed individuals” under the law and that the proclamation designated the National Rice and Corn Corporation as the sole relief organization authorized to import rice duty-free to prevent monopoly and speculation. The Collector assessed duties under paragraph 215 of the Tariff Act and demanded payment, which the petitioners refused.
ISSUE
Whether a writ of mandamus is the proper remedy to compel the Collector of Customs to allow the duty-free importation and release of the rice.
RULING
No. The Supreme Court denied the petition for mandamus. The Court held that mandamus is only available when there is no other plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law. Here, the petitioners had an alternative remedy: they could appeal the Collector’s decision to the Secretary of Finance under section 79(c) of the Revised Administrative Code. Since such an administrative appeal was available, the writ of mandamus would not issue. The Court declined to rule on the substantive issues raised by the parties, disposing of the case solely on the procedural ground of the availability of another adequate remedy.
AI Generated by Armztrong.