Scribd
Upload
187 views1 page

Case Title: US Vs Look Chow, 18 Phil 573

The defendant was found in possession of two sacks of opium aboard a steamship docked in Cebu. [1] The defendant admitted to purchasing the opium in Hong Kong with the intent to sell it illegally in Mexico. [2] The steamship was of English nationality but stopped in the Philippine ports of Manila and Cebu on its way to Mexico. [3] The Philippine court ruled they had jurisdiction over the matter because, although foreign vessels transiting Philippine ports are generally considered an extension of their home country, the opium was removed from the vessel and onto Philippine soil, constituting a violation of local law over which the local courts had jurisdiction.

Uploaded by

giogmail
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
187 views1 page

Case Title: US Vs Look Chow, 18 Phil 573

The defendant was found in possession of two sacks of opium aboard a steamship docked in Cebu. [1] The defendant admitted to purchasing the opium in Hong Kong with the intent to sell it illegally in Mexico. [2] The steamship was of English nationality but stopped in the Philippine ports of Manila and Cebu on its way to Mexico. [3] The Philippine court ruled they had jurisdiction over the matter because, although foreign vessels transiting Philippine ports are generally considered an extension of their home country, the opium was removed from the vessel and onto Philippine soil, constituting a violation of local law over which the local courts had jurisdiction.

Uploaded by

giogmail
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

CASE DIGEST: US vs Look Chow, 18 Phil 573

Case Title: US vs Look Chow, 18 Phil 573


Subject Matter: Applicability of the provisions of Art 2 of the Revised Penal
Code

Facts:
Between 11 and 12 o'clock a.m. in August 19, 1909, the Port of Cebu and internal revenue agent of
Cebu, respectively, went aboard the steamship Erroll to inspect and search its cargo, and found two
sacks containing opium. The defendant stated freely and voluntarily that he had bought these sacks of
opium in Hong Kong with the intention of selling them as contraband in Mexico or Vera Cruz, and
that as his hold had already been searched several times for opium he ordered two other chinamen to
keep the sack. All the evidence found properly constitutes corpus delicti.

It was established that the steamship Erroll was of English nationality, that it came from Hong Kong,
and that it was bound for Mexico, via the call ports in Manila and Cebu.

Issue:
Whether or not courts of local state can exercise its jurisdiction over foreign vessels stationed in its
port.

Held:
Yes. The Philippine courts have jurisdiction over the matter. The mere possession of a thing of
prohibited use in these Islands, aboard a foreign vessel in transit, in any of their ports, does not, as a
general rule, constitute a crime triable by the courts of this country, on account of such vessel being
considered as an extension of its own nationality. However, the same rule does not apply when the
article, whose use is prohibited within the Philippines, in the present case, a can of opium, is landed
from the vessel upon the Philippine soil, thus committing an open violation of the penal law in force
at the place of the commission of the crime. Only the court established in the said place itself has
competent jurisdiction, in the absence of an agreement under an international treaty.

You might also like