BOARD OF MEDICINE V.

OTA
Facts:
Ota is a Japanese national, married to a Filipina, has been residing in the PH for more than 10 years,
and graduated Doctor of Medicine. He filed an application to take the board exams. PRC requires him
to submit affidavit stating that if he passes the boards, he cannot practice medicine until he submits
proof that reciprocity exists between Japan and the Philippines in admitting foreigners into the
practice of medicine. Ota submitted a duly notarized English translation of the Medical Practitioners
Law of Japan duly authenticated by the Consul General of the Philippine Embassy to Japan. He was
allowed to take the boards and he passed. In spite of all these, the Board of Medicine denied Otas
request for a license to practice medicine in the Philippines on the ground that no genuine reciprocity
can be found in the law of Japan, as there is no Filipino or foreigner who can possibly practice there.
Ota filed petition before the RTC. RTC ruled in favor of Ota stating that there is adequate proof that
there exists a principle of reciprocity and ordering PRC to issue the license. PRC appealed to CA. CA
affirmed RTC Ruling.
Issue:
Whether or not the principle of reciprocity exists.
Held:
Yes. The contention of the PRC that the requirements to practice medicine in Japan are practically
impossible for a Filipino to comply with, there are also ambiguities in the Medical Practitioners Law
of Japan, and there had not been a single Filipino who was issued a license to practice medicine by the
Japanese Government is untenable. What the law requires is for the foreigner to show proof that a
Filipino can practice in his foreign country. It is enough that the laws in the foreign country permit a
Filipino to get license and practice therein. Requiring respondent to prove first that a Filipino has
already been granted license and is actually practicing therein unduly expands the requirements
provided for under R.A. No. 2382 and P.D. No. 223.