GR L 20516; (November, 1967) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-20516 November 15, 1967
NORBERTO ROMUALDEZ, JR., in his capacity as Commissioner of Customs and TEOTIMO A. ROJA, in his capacity as Acting Collector of Customs, petitioners, vs. HON. FRANCISCO ARCA, Judge of the Court of First Instance of Manila, and SAN DIEGO FISHERY ENTERPRISES, INC., respondents.
FACTS
On July 2, 1962, respondent San Diego Fishery Enterprises, Inc. leased its fishing boat “M/B Rio Grande” to Candido Mayor. Later that month, the vessel was seized by the Commissioner of Customs along the Pasig River for being loaded with untaxed blue-seal cigarettes, in violation of the Tariff and Customs Code. San Diego Fisheries requested the vessel’s release under bond from the Collector of Customs. The Customs legal officer and the Acting Collector initially recommended release, citing prior similar instances. However, the Deputy Commissioner of Customs advised that the Collector should exercise his discretion in line with the administration’s policy of non-release of seized vessels. Consequently, the Acting Collector of Customs formally denied the petition for release. San Diego Fisheries then filed a petition for Certiorari with Preliminary Mandatory Injunction in the Court of First Instance of Manila, seeking the vessel’s release under bond and to enjoin the cancellation of its fishing license. The lower court granted the writ, ordered the vessel’s release upon a P20,000 bond, and enjoined the license cancellation. The Commissioner of Customs did not comply, leading to a contempt motion. The Commissioner then filed the present Petition for Certiorari with Preliminary Injunction before the Supreme Court, challenging the lower court’s jurisdiction and orders.
ISSUE
Whether the Court of First Instance of Manila had jurisdiction to take cognizance of the case and issue a writ of preliminary mandatory injunction for the release of a vessel seized under the Tariff and Customs Code.
RULING
The Supreme Court granted the petition. It held that the Court of First Instance had no jurisdiction over the case. Jurisdiction over seizure and forfeiture cases under the Tariff and Customs Code is vested exclusively in the Collector of Customs, whose decision is appealable to the Commissioner of Customs, then to the Court of Tax Appeals, and finally to the Supreme Court. The Court reiterated its ruling in Pacis v. Averia that the Tariff and Customs Code, being a later law and based on public policy, intended to deprive Courts of First Instance of authority to intervene in such proceedings. Furthermore, the requirement to exhaust administrative remedies was not met, as there was no final decision from the Commissioner of Customs to appeal. Consequently, the Supreme Court declared the Court of First Instance without jurisdiction over Civil Case No. 51709 and made its preliminary injunction permanent.