Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 435 views

    Fernandez vs. Fernandez

    Uploaded by

    Kitchie San Pedro
    This case involves a war profits tax assessed on the estate of Olimpio Fernandez, who died in 1945. The administratrix of his estate refused to pay, arguing that (a) the tax law was retroactive and unconstitutional, (b) it taxed individuals when Fernandez had died, and (c) his estate should be taxed separately from his wife's. The court rejected these arguments. It found that the tax was both a property and income tax related to properties Fernandez owned before and during the war. The tax did not violate prohibitions on retroactivity as it concerned civil rather than criminal matters. Fernandez profited from the war and his death did not relieve the estate of tax liability. The properties

    Copyright:

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

    Fernandez vs. Fernandez

    Uploaded by

    Kitchie San Pedro
    435 views1 page
    This case involves a war profits tax assessed on the estate of Olimpio Fernandez, who died in 1945. The administratrix of his estate refused to pay, arguing that (a) the tax law was retroactive and unconstitutional, (b) it taxed individuals when Fernandez had died, and (c) his estate should be taxed separately from his wife's. The court rejected these arguments. It found that the tax was both a property and income tax related to properties Fernandez owned before and during the war. The tax did not violate prohibitions on retroactivity as it concerned civil rather than criminal matters. Fernandez profited from the war and his death did not relieve the estate of tax liability. The properties

    Original Description:

    Case related to Public International Law

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case involves a war profits tax assessed on the estate of Olimpio Fernandez, who died in 1945. The administratrix of his estate refused to pay, arguing that (a) the tax law was retroactive and unconstitutional, (b) it taxed individuals when Fernandez had died, and (c) his estate should be taxed separately from his wife's. The court rejected these arguments. It found that the tax was both a property and income tax related to properties Fernandez owned before and during the war. The tax did not violate prohibitions on retroactivity as it concerned civil rather than criminal matters. Fernandez profited from the war and his death did not relieve the estate of tax liability. The properties

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    435 views1 page

    Fernandez vs. Fernandez

    Uploaded by

    Kitchie San Pedro
    This case involves a war profits tax assessed on the estate of Olimpio Fernandez, who died in 1945. The administratrix of his estate refused to pay, arguing that (a) the tax law was retroactive and unconstitutional, (b) it taxed individuals when Fernandez had died, and (c) his estate should be taxed separately from his wife's. The court rejected these arguments. It found that the tax was both a property and income tax related to properties Fernandez owned before and during the war. The tax did not violate prohibitions on retroactivity as it concerned civil rather than criminal matters. Fernandez profited from the war and his death did not relieve the estate of tax liability. The properties

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    EN BANC

    [G.R. No. L-9141. September 25, 1956.]


    Testate Estate of OLIMPIO FERNANDEZ, deceased. REPUBLIC OF THE
    PHILIPPINES, claimant-Appellee, vs. ANGELINA OASAN VDA DE FERNANDEZ,
    PRISCILLA O. FERNANDEZ, and ESTELA O. FERNANDEZ, Oppositors-Appellants.
    FACTS:
    Olimpio Fernandez and his wife Angelina Oasan had a net worth of P8,600 on December 8,
    1941. During the Japanese occupation the spouses acquired several real properties, and at the
    time of his death on February 11, 1945 he had a net worth of P31,489. The Collector of
    Internal Revenue assessed a war profits tax on the estate of the deceased at P7,614.60, which
    his administratrix refused to pay.
    ISSUES:
    (a) the unconstitutionality of the war profits tax law for the reason that it is retroactive;
    esvirtuallawlibrarISS chan

    (b) the inapplicability of said law to the estate of the deceased Olimpio Fernandez, because
    roblesvirtualawlibrary

    the law taxes individuals; and chan roblesvirtualawlibrary

    (c) the separate taxation of the estate of the deceased Olimpio Fernandez from that of his
    wifes, because Olimpio Fernandez died before the law was passed.
    RULING:
    (A )Appellants contention that the law is invalid or unconstitutional because it acts
    retroactively, thus violating the due process of law clause, is not supported by reason or
    authority. The tax, insofar as applicable to the estate of the deceased Olimpio Fernandez, is
    both a property tax and a tax on income. It is a property tax in relation to the properties that
    Fernandez had in December, 1941 and it is an income tax in relation to the properties which
    lesvirtualawlibrary

    he purchased during the Japanese occupation. In both cases, however, the war profits tax may
    not be considered as unconstitutional.
    The doctrine of unconstitutionality raised by Appellant is based on the prohibition against ex
    post facto laws. But this prohibition applies only to criminal or penal matters, and not to laws
    which concern civil matters or proceedings generally, or which affect or regulate civil or
    private rights .
    (b) The contention that the deceased Olimpio Fernandez or his estate should not be
    responsible because he died in 1945 and was no longer living when the law was enacted at a
    later date, in 1946, is absolutely without merit. Fernandez died immediately before the
    liberation and the actual cessation of hostilities. He profited by the war; there is no reason chan roblesvirtualawlibrary

    why the incident of his death should relieve his estate from the tax.
    (C) The last contention is also without merit. The property which Olimpio Fernandez was
    possessed of in December, 1941 is presumed to be conjugal property and so are the properties
    which were acquired by him during the war, because at that time he was married. There is no
    claim or evidence to support the claim that any of the properties were paraphernal properties
    of the wife; so the presumption stands that they were conjugal properties of the husband
    chan roblesvirtualawlibrary

    and wife. Under these circumstances they cannot be considered as properties belonging to
    two individuals, each of which shall be subject to the tax independently of the other.

    You might also like

    pFad - Phonifier reborn

    Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

    Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


    Alternative Proxies:

    Alternative Proxy

    pFad Proxy

    pFad v3 Proxy

    pFad v4 Proxy