CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

INTRODUCTION o NOTE: VOLUNTARY; deference, mutuality, respect

o Vs. reciprocity  not necessarily voluntary
 Diversity of laws and customs  Binding force of foreign judgments; reciprocity (Hilton v. Guyot)
o Increased number of independent and sovereign states – causes o Requisites for binding force of a foreign judgment
 Decolonization  Rendered by competent ct w/ jurisdiction over COA and parties
 Dismemberment of existing states  Upon due allegations and proofs
o Promulgation of laws and dev of juris =e exercise of sovereignty  w/ due opp to defend
o Laws may be similar, but may be applied/ interpreted diff bc: religion,  in proper proceeds accd to course of civilized jurisprudence
culture, customs  stated in clear and formal record
o Results of development in communication and transportation o Effects
 More people enter into contracts w/ nationals of other states  (a) prima facie evidence  of truth of matter adjudged
 Entered into in one state – take effect in another, hence gov  (b) conclusive  upon merits tried in foreign ct
by different laws o BUT foreign judgment should NOT be given conclusive effect if:
 May also be tried and decided in yet another state  (1) ground to impeach judgment, like, fraud, prejudice
 Marriages and common law relationships among nationals of  (2) by prin of IL, or comity  should not begiven full credit and
varying states effect
o Conflict of laws or private international law addresses problems caused by:  Ex. By comity of our nation, want of reciprocity on part of
 Division of world into many territorial units France as to effect to be given to judgments of PH and
 Imposition by each unit of its own set of laws other foreign states, is enuf ground not to give conclusive
 Occurrence of events that contain elements significant to more than effect to French judgment  TF US no need to give
one legal system conclusive effect on French judgments  merits of case are
o Formulation of uniform municipal laws examined anew  prima facie evidence only of justice of
 ASEAN Law Association – Formulated uniform laws on personal plaintiff’s claim
law, prop, contracts for member states o Reason: Intl law is founded on mutuality and reciprocity.
 But sov and indep prevents uniform laws in the municipal sphere
o International conventions relating to mutual recognition of foreign laws and GENERAL PRINCIPLES / DEFINITION
judgments
 6th international conference of American States on Private  Conflict of laws or private international law
International Law (1928) o Classical: Part of municipal law governing cases involving foreign element
 Bustamane Code (by International Commission of Jurists)  Part of municipal law of state which directs courts and admin
 Inter-American Council of Jurists (by Org of American States) – agencies, when confronted with legal problem involving foreign
nothing concrete achieved element, WON to apply foreign laws
 Hague Convention on Private International Law - made 34 o Hilton v. Guyot:
conventions on family law, succession, products liability, etc.  Law concerning rights of persons within territory and dominion of
 Conflict of laws incorporated in municipal laws one nation, by reason of acts, private or public, done within dominion
o Problem of COF confronts judges, admin agencies, public officers called upon of another nation
to resolve case where foreign elements involved. o Minor: Universal prins of right and justice, governing cts of state having before
o TF, states have adopted in their municipal law body of rules, in accd w/ w/c them cases involving operation and effect of laws of other state
legislative and judicial decrees of foreign states are applied in deciding cases o Chesire: when issue affects fact, event, transaction closely connected w/ foreign
re: acts done or property located in foreign jurisdictions, governing recognition system of law as to necessitate recourse to them system
and enforcement of foreign judgments and decrees o American Juris (2nd Ed): dets whether, in dealing w/ legal sitch, law of some
 Basis: comity of nations other state or nation will be recog, given effect, or applied
o Basis of COF is comity (mutuality, reciprocity)  Conflict of law rules
 NOT extraterritorial validity of law of foreign state o National conflict rules – referring to internal law of each country
o Comity define: recognition (adoption, enforcement) w/c a nation allows w/n o International conflict rules – constitute intl conventions, foreign case law,
its territory to legislative, executive, judicial acts of other nations – w/ due commentaries interpreting conventions
regard both to international duty and convenience, and rights of own citizens or  Conflict of laws cases
other persons under protection of its laws (Hilton v. Guyot)
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

o Any case involving facts occurring in more than one state or nation, that Persons involved: Privates; individuals, corporations
must choose between laws of different states or countries in deciding the case Sovereign states and entities possessed of
 Define state international personality, exceptionally,
o Includes not only foreign sovereign countries or states but also political individuals, too; internationally recog orgs
subdivisions of states or countries which have their own legal systems Transactions involved: Strictly private transactions between
 Basic cause for conflict of laws case transactions entered into w/c generally individuals
o Variance in municipal laws affect public interest; transactions w/c
o Assuming laws in various countries are uniformly the same, still different sovereign states are interested; state to
municipal tribunals may give identical laws varying interpretations state; gov to gov
 Elements of conflict of laws Remedies applied: Municipal tribunals; remedies available
o (a) Legal problem or case involving foreign elements; and In case of violation of international law  under municipal law; resort to cts or
 NOTE: foreign elements resort may be peaceful or forcible admin tribes
 factual situation cutting across territorial lines , affected by
diverse laws of two or more states  peaceful  diplomatic protest,
 presence of foreign elements in case determines existence diplomatic negotiation, tender and
of conflict of laws situation exercise of good offices, mediation,
 anything NOT domestic inquiry, conciliation, arbitration,
 has foreign component to it judicial settlement by ICJ or intl tribes
 foreigner, foreign corp, incident happening in foreign  forcible  severance of diplomatic
country, or foreign law chosen by parties relations, retorsions, reprisals,
o (b) determination of application of law or judgments of other state(s) embargo, boycott, non-intercourse,
pacific blockades, collective measures
 and if so, extent of recognition/ application in forum (pangalangan)
under UN charter, war
 Remedies of conflict of laws
o enforcement of rights accrued in foreign country in form of action filed in PH
 Municipal law in general v. conflict of law rules w/n municipal law
courts by citizen or aggrieved person
o foreign element: pure internal or domestic law  NO foreign element present
o recog and enforcement of foreign judgment
 municipal law
 Public international law v. private international law o Pangalangan: CONFLICT OF LAWS IS NOT MERELY PART OF
o compared in terms of applicability (ratione personae) and subject-matter
MUNICIPAL LAW.
jurisdiction (ratione materiaeI  It involved sitches containing foreign elements, upon w/c ct or tibe
PUBLIC PRIVATE decides to apply local law or foreign law
Governs states in relationships amongst Govs individuals in their private o Some cases when, despite foreign element, internal law still controls – as EXPs
themselves transactions involving foreign element to rule of comity
e.g. cutting across 1/+ municipal law juris
 Sources
o Direct sources
 treaties and international conventions
CONVERGENCE: human rights, where  constitutions
cases involve individual Rs  codifications and statutes
Sources of law (central distinction): Internal law of each states; Domestic and  judicial decisions
international conventions (e.g. treaties), municipal laws, constitution, statutes  international customs
international custom, GPL recognized by adopted by individual countries o Indirect sources
civilized nations, judicial decisions and  natural moral law
teachings of most highly qualified EXP: any conflict of laws Q, w/c is  writing and treaties of thinkers, famous writers, and jurists on
publicists of various nations (statute of ICJ governed by treaty (e.g. Hague Con on subjects, among others
(A38(1)) conflict of laws relating to Form of TT o NOTE: formal treaty – NOT lone primary source of customary international
dispositions, 18 signatories) law
Nature or character: National, municipal, local
International
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 NO treaty, and NO controlling executive or legislative act or judicial  these three phases are separate from each other and defense in one
decision  resort must be had to customs and usages of civilized phase is NOT defense in other phases
nations
BRIEF HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT OF CONFLICT OF LAWS
OBJECT, FUNCTION, SCOPE
 Roman law origin
 OBJECT/ FUNCTION o Lus gentium
o To provide rational and valid rules or guidelines in deciding cases where either  Law of nations
parties, events, or transactions, are linked to more than 1 jurisdiction  Law that govs relations of states
o To protect juridical and natural persons of diff nationalities amidst constantly  Early roman empire: body of rules developed by praetor pregrinus to
increasing transactions resolve disputes bet foreigners and citizens
o To promote stability and uniformity of solutions provided by laws and cts of  Derived from greek legal doctrines – inc bona fides
states called upon to decide conflicts cases o Lus civile
o Note: Complies w/ state policy, recog GAPIL, peace, equality, justice, freedom,  Applied only to roman citizens
cooperation, amity w/ all nations (A2.S2 CONST)1 o Rise of Italian city states
 SCOPE  They all had their respective municipal laws  led to intensive study
o Jurisdiction of local cts or tribes of conflict of laws.
o Evidence or proof of foreign law  Bartolus – “Father of Conflict of Laws”
o Personal law of indivs and juridical entities  Formulated “Theory of Statutes.”
o Naturalization o Theory of statutes
o Domicile, residence  Italy was divided into several city states – problem of w/c law to
o Family relations apply in transactions bet indivs of diff city states.
 The “Statute” applied to Qs of choice of law.
o Contracts, torts, crimes, corpo, property law
 Classifications:
o International air transportation contracts (Warsaw)
 Real (statuta realia) – immovable prop w/n state;
 3 interrelated issues in conflict of laws; 3-fold functions of private international law
 Personal (statute personalia) – personal status, capacity and
o (a) Adjudicatory jurisdiction
movables; and
 Circumstances that allow for legal order to impose upon judiciary
 Mixed (statute mixta) – contracts, depending on where
task of deciding multi-state and multinational disputes
entered into by diff nationals.
 Question of jurisdiction - Prescribe conditions under which court or
o 16h century France
agency is competent to entertain proceedings w/ foreign elements
 Charles dumoulin – dev method to det what law would gov contracts
 Concerns authority of court of law to take cognizance of case
bet diff nationals
 where can or should litigation be initiated
 Bertrand D’Arhentre – formed principle of universal succession
o (b) Choice of law
o 16th – 17th century Netherlands
 Probable sources from w/c applicable law of controversy may be
 Dutch jurists: Burgundou, Rodenberg, Huber
derived
 Huber was the first to use the term “conflict of laws.”
 Question of choice of law - Determines particular system of law for
each class of cases to ascertain rights of parties  State NOT obliged to apply foreign law unless imposed by
o (c) Recog and enforcement of foreign judgments treaty, comitas gentium (comity), or consideration of
courtesy and expediency.
 Question of applicability of foreign judgment
 Voet: no statute can have extraterritorial application.
 Specifies the circumstances in w/c foreign judgment will be
recognized as valid and binding in forum  BUT sovereign can make foreign law operative in its
 Concerns enforcement of foreign laws and judgment in another territory, provided it does not prejudice subjects of
jurisdiction (where can the resulting judgment be enforced) sovereign whose recognition is sought
o NOTE: o Lus commune – supernational law based on roman law; bcm continental
European common law
1
Article II, §2, 1987 Const. The Philippines x x x adopts the generally accepted principles of o Codification of national laws resulted in incorp of conflict of laws provisions in
countries’ civil codes
international law as part of the law of the land and adheres to the policy of peace, equality,
 Bavarian – theory of statutes
justice, freedom, cooperation, and amity with all nations
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 Prussian – theory of efficacy of contracts  Hardly known or given importance until PH bcm sovereign state
 French (basis of Spanish, Belgian and Romanian) – nationality law  Spanish civil code – contained conflict of laws provis, from Code of Napoleon 1804
principle, now Art. 15, NCC  New civil code
o 19th century o Nationality principle
 Justice Story – the foundation of conflict of laws is the principle of  Laws relating to family rights and duties, or to the status, condition
comity of nations. and legal capacity of persons are binding upon citizens of the
 Prof. Joseph Beale – territorial “vested rights” school of thought. Philippines, even though living abroad. (A15 NCC)
 Carl Von Savigny – basis is not comity but the resultant benefits for o Lex situs rule
everyone concerned.  Real property as well as personal property is subject to the law of
 Founder of modern PrIL. the country where it is stipulated (A16.P1 NCC).
 Advocated the theory of situs (seat of the legal relationship) o Universal succession  national law
– every element of a transaction must be governed by the  However, intestate and testamentary successions, both with respect
law of the place with which said element has most to the order of succession and to the amount of successional rights
substantive connection. and to the intrinsic validity of testamentary provisions, shall be
 Mancini – nationality theory (for matters concerning status, capacity regulated by the national law of the person whose succession is
and private interests of the individual). under consideration, whatever may be nature of property and
 History and development regardless of country wherein said property may be found (A16.P2).
o 14th century (theory of statutes)  From Spanish Civil Code
 Bartolus “father of conflict of laws”. Formulated the theory of o Lex loci contractus
statutes, in w/c conflicts were resolved by classifying issues based on  The forms and solemnities of contracts, wills, and other public
real, personal and mixed statutes. Classifications were overlapping instruments shall be governed by the laws of the country in which
o 16th century they are executed. (A17.P1)
 Customs were used for resolving conflicts  From Spanish Civil Code
o 17th century (doctrine of comitas gentium)  Initially NO significant jurisprudence – EXP some decision applying the provis on wills
 Relied on theory of state sovereignty; denied that states were under and succession.
any legal obligation to apply foreign law, unless made out of  UP law started 1911 – intro of PrIL in PH
considerations of courtesy and expediency  Foreign law books and US cases were studied until 1950s – even Fil authored books
o Beginning of codifications relied on them.
 Conflicts of laws provisions were include in civil codes of states  Bar exams required PrIL
o PRIL merged w/ Civil law
MODERN DEVELOPMENTS o PIL merged w/ political law
o BUT mindset that PrIL is part of civil law limits perspective and scope of
 Neo-statutists analysis required for conflict of laws problems
o ff italian theory; when two or more laws are applicable to a conflict of laws  Now, more foreign transactions (both natural and juridical persons)
problem, the statute determines what law shall prevail. o Specific areas – business transactions of foreign corporations in PH;
 Internationalists International air transport (Warsaw)
o there should be a single body of rules that can solve problems involving a o More PH jurisprudence of foreign torts claim and interpretation of contracts re:
foreign element. OFWs
 Territorialists – law of state applies to the persons and things within state. No foreign
law should be applied. SOURCES OF CONFLICT OF LAWS
o Only rights vested or acquired under foreign law are recognized but NOT law
itself.  (A) Codes and statutes
 1969: Second Restatement of the Conflict of Laws (Reese) o Originated in continental Europe where most laws are codified
o In absence of statutory law, law to apply is law of most significant relationship o Primary sources of the law – civil codes of diff countries.
 Cavers, Currie, Ehranzweig – policy-centered approaches  Roman codes of law – ius gentium
 Code Napoleon of 1804 – personal law of the individual
CONFLICT OF LAWS IN PH  CodeS of Netherlands (Dutch 1829, Romanian 1865, Italian 1865,
Portuguese 1867 and Spanish 1888 Codes
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 German Code (1896) – contained provisions on Conflict of Laws. o Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women
 Switzerland – laws on cases involving foreign element o Convention on the Political Rights of Women
 Greece Civil Code o International Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Women and
 South America (Code of Bustamante) Children
o Spanish Civil Code of 1888 o Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Persons and of the
 Enforced in the Philippines on Dec 7, 1889 Exploitation of the Prostitution of Others
o Philippine Civil Code, 1950 o Convention Establishing the World Intellectual Property Organization
 until PCC took effect on August 30, 1950. o Berne Conventions for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works
 SCC provisions on Conflict of Laws were adopted in the NCC. o Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property
o Code of Commerce of Spain o Hague Conventions on PrIL
 contained provisions on foreign transactions which were enforced in  Recognition of Foreign Judgment on Civil and Commercial Matters
PH. (signatory)
o 1987 CONST  Convention in Respect of Inter-Country Adoption (ratified)
 Contains provis on nationality and comity  (C) treaties, commentaries, and studies of learned societies
 Basic source of law in PH o Works of distinguished jurists; studies of learned societies
o Special laws  Continental Europe
 Corporation Code  Huber
 General Banking Act
 Manresa
 Act Instituting the Foreign Currency System
 Savigny
 Philippine Foreign Law Guarantee Corporation
 Act Regulating Retail Business  Weiss
 Anti-Dummy Law  English and American
 Nationalization of Rice and Corn Industry  Baele
 Insurance Code  Cavers
 IP Code  Cheatham
 Patent Law  Currie
 Trademark Law  Ehrenzweigh
 COGSA  Goodrich
 Salvage Law  Kuhm
 Public Service Act  Gussbaum
 Civil Aeronautics Act  Rabel
 Philippine Overseas Shipping Act  Story
 Investment Incentives Act  Wharton
 Export Incentives Act  Chesire
 RA 7722: Liberalizing the Entry of Foreign Banks in the Philippines
 Graveson
 (B) treaties and international conventions
 (D) judicial decisions
o Since PH became a RP, it entered into several treaties and intl conventions
o Most important source of conflict of laws rules
dealing w/ PRIL.
o PrIL is more completely judge-made than most other branch of law
o Convention on International Civil Aviation + Protocol
(Graveson)
o Warsaw Convention (Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules Relating
 Bc jdgs have to deal w/ all manner of people more than other branch
to International Carriage by Air) o In PH: judicial decisions undoubtedly form main bulk of source of conflict
o Convention on Offenses Committed on Board Aircraft
rules
o Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Civil
Aviation PART TWO
o UN Convention on the COGSA
o Convention on the Consent to Marriage, Minimum Age for Marriage and JURISDICTION
Registration of Marriages
o Convention on the Traffic of Persons  Define
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

o Authority of ct to hear and decide case (judicial)  Voluntary appearance (ROC R14.S20 OLD); entry of
o Right of state to exercise authority over persons and things w/n boundaries appearance
(Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corp v. Jack Robert Sherman et al)  Coercive process thru personal or substituted service of
 Test of jurisdiction summons (ROC R14.S6-7 OLD)2
o Whether law vests upon tribunal power to enter upon inquiry  in rem, and quasi in rem
 (2) concepts of jurisdiction in conflict of laws  Constructive service of summons by publication where
o Judicial jurisdiction identity/ whereabout of defendant is unknown (R14.S14)
 Power, authority of court to try case, render judgment, execute it in  State tribunals have NO authority to adjudicate obligs of
accordance with law nonresidents, where they have NO property w/n its limits.
o Legislative jurisdiction pennoyer v. neff
 Ability of state to promulgate laws and enforce them on all persons  Extra-territorial service (R14.S15-16)3
and property w/n territory  Counterclaim against non-resident plaintiff – as long as it arises out
 4 major questions to be considered in resolving PrIL Q of original COA
o Has ct jurisdiction over  Service upon foreign private juridical entity which has transacted
 person of def business in PH through its resident agent designated in accordance
 his property w/ law for that purpose or if non, the government official designated
 SM by law to that effect, or any of its officers or agents within the PH. If
o If foreign element is involved  has suit been brought in proper venue? the foreign private juridical entity is not registered to do business in
PH, service may be coursed thru any of ff means:
o Is there a statute or doctrine under w/c ct qualified to try case may or may not
 Personal service coursed thru appropriate court in foreign
refuse to entertain it?
country, with assistance of DFA
 Jurisdiction v. choice of law
 Publication in newspaper of gen circ in country where def
o Jurisdiction
may be found, and serving copy of summons/ court order at
 whether fair to cause defendant to travel to this state
defendant’s lask known address by registered mail
 power to exercise juris NOT automatically give state constitutional
authority apply forum law 2
 power or autho to hear and decide case Service in person on defendant. — Whenever practicable, the summons shall be served
o Choice of law handing a copy thereof to the defendant in person, or, if he refuses to receive and sign for it,
 whether application of substantive law w/c will determine merits of by tendering it to him. (R14.S6)
case is fair to both parties
o NOTE: Substituted service. — If, for justifiable causes, the defendant cannot be served within a
 while jurisdiction and choice of lex fori (internal law of forum) reasonable time as provided in the preceding section, service may be effected (a) by leaving
often coincide, “minimum contacts” for one do not always provide copies of the summons at the defendant’s residence with some person of suitable age and
necessary “significant contacts” for other. discretion then residing therein, or (b) by leaving the copies at defendant’s office or regular
 Question of whether law of state can be applied to a transaction is place of business with some competent person in charge thereof. (S7)
different from question of whether courts of that state have
jurisdiction to enter judgment. 3
 Types of judicial jurisdiction; basis of exercise of judicial jurisdiction Extraterritorial service. — When the defendant does not reside and is not found in the
 Competence direct v. competence indirect Philippines, and the action affects the personal status of the plaintiff or relates to, or the
 (A) JURISDICTION OVER PERSON subject of which is, property within the Philippines, in which the defendant has or claims a
o Forum-def contacts lien or interest, actual or contingent; or in which the relief demanded consists, whole or in
o Define: Competence or power of court to renderjudgment that will bind part, in excluding the defendant from any interest therein, or the property of the defendant
parties to a case has been attached within the Philippines, service may, by leave of court, be effected out of
o Acquiring juris over plaintiff the Philippines by personal service as under section 6; or by publication in a newspaper of
 Filing case in court general circulation in such places and for such time as the court may order, in which case a
 Moment he invokes aid or power of court by instituting action copy of the summons and order of the court shall be sent by registered mail to the last
through proper pleading known address of the defendant, or in any other manner the court may deem sufficient. Any
o Acquiring juris over defendant order granting such leave shall specify a reasonable time, which shall not be less than sixty
 in personam (60) days after notice, within which the defendant must answer. (17a)
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 Facsimile or any recognized electronic means that could o THE MINIMUM CONTACTS AND FUNDAMENTAL FAIRNESS TEST
generate proof of service  Applies: minimum contacts and fundamental fairness test must be
 Other means as ct may direct in discretion (AM 11-3-6-SC) satisfied, whether (Shaffer)
 (B) JURISDICTION OVER THE RES (PROPERTY)  in rem (satisfied by mere physical presence)
o Define: Juris over particular subject matter in controversy, regardless of  quasi in rem
persons who may be interested  in personam (persons even those outside territory)
o Converting in personam to in rem  NOTE: for IN REM, physical presence satisfies minimum
 attachment of property contact
 etc  Define:
o How acquired  State does NOT have jurisdiction in absence of some
 Seizure of property under legal process; reasonable basis for exercising it.
 i.e. attachment o jurisdiction must be based on some minimum
 Institution of legal proceedings wherein, under special provisions of contacts
law, power of ct over property is recognized and made effective; o and will NOT offend traditional notions of fair
 i.e. land registration play and substantial justice
o In rem jurisdiction  International shoe co.: Due process reqs that defendant
 bind the world and NOT just interest of specific persons. has certain minimum contacts (FORUM, DEF) such that
 basis: physical presence of property within territorial jurisdiction of maintenance of suit does not affect traditional notions of
forum. fair play and substantial justice. (International Shoe Co.)
o In personam jurisdiction  Shaffer v. Heitner To bind defendant ABSENT from
 binds interest of specific persons territory of forum to judgment in personam, due process
o Quasi in rem jurisdiction requires that he should have certain minimum contacts
 based on the physical presence of property within territorial (COA, FORUM, DEF) with it, and that maintenance of suit
jurisdiction of forum, BUT affects only particular persons does not offend traditional notions of fair place and
 i.e. quieting of title – ct may declare claimant’s title to be superior substantial justice
than others  Defendant corporations: Forum-transaction contacts
 Affects only interests of particular persons in thing. requirement
 Ct may render valid judgment when it has juris over such persons  DOES business in state
whose interests are affected o it can be sued in that forum
o Basis for exercise of judicial jurisdiction o EVEN on claim not arising from its business
 (A) THEORY OF TERRITORIAL POWER - state’s physical activities
power over persons and property w/n its territory (traditional basis)  ESTAB presence in state thru acts of authorized agents
 In personam o corpo deemed to have consented to service and
o J over person physically served w/ summons suit International shoe
while physically present in state  Purpose: Makes it fair for def to defend suit in forum,
 In rem regardless of non-resident status
o Prop situated w/n state  Standard for adequate notice Mullane
o regardless of whether it could exercise juris over  Should reasonably result in informing affected party
persons whose interest would be affected by  When conditions do NOT allow such notice, forum chosen
decision should NOT substantially be less likely to bring home
 PH still recognizes these distinctions  Pennoyer v. Neff notice, other than of feasible and customary substitutes
good law  In Mullane: they only did publication by notice, even tho
 (B) Minimum contacts test and fundamental fairness test they had K of addresses of interested parties, some of
 Followed in US whom are NOT resident of state of forum.
 International shoe co.: Due process reqs that defendant has  IN PERSONAM: change in conceptual foundation
certain minimum contacts such that the maintenance of  International shoe  reqs minimum contacts between
the suit does not affect traditional notions of fair play and DEF and FORUM
substantial justice.  Shaffer  reqs among DEF, FORUM and COA
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

o Bc doubtful whether juris can be sustained in o Basis: cases are allocated among cts according to
case COA arises from business activities w/c  nature of controversy/ COA
took place outside forum  relief sought Perkins v. Roxas
 BUT change in conceptual foundation NOT affect IN  herecase, petition for adj of title to shares in PH company
REM suits where property itself is subject of controversy  IN rem  PH cts have J
o Physical presence in state of forum ALREADY o Exceeding jurisdiction
provides necessary minimum contacts  decision is void
o State’s CT is fair forum  may be set aside, directly or collaterally
o Parties could very well foresee that CT would o Consider enforceability
exercise J based on situs of property  CT must consider, in determining matter of jurisdiction, possible
 LONG-ARM STATUTES enforceability of its decision in foreign states, subject to rights of said
 Law that allows plaintiff to make claim against NON- states.
RESIDENT DEF – PROVIDED there are minimum  Basic principle underlying all rules of jurisdiction
contacts with forum to justify exercise of juris over him. o Due process: in rem and quasi-in rem  DP is satisfied when defendant is
 Statutes allowing the courts to exercise jurisdiction when given adequate notice and opp to be heard, by service of summons / thru
there are minimum contacts bet non-resident defendant and publication
forum. o State does NOT have jurisdiction in absence of some reasonable basis for
 Specify kinds of contacts upon w/c J will be asserted, such exercising it, whether the proceedings are in rem, quasi-in-rem, or in personal.
as:  J must be based on some minimum contacts that will NOT offend
o Commission of tortious act w/n state traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice
o Celebration of contract there; OR o Point of contact
o Presence of prop owned by defendant  Essential element of COL rules: “test” or “connecting factor”, or
 If these, or other minimum contacts exist, CT may “point of contact”.
exercise J – bc:  Choice of law rules invariably consist of factual relationship (e.g.
o state has justified interest in providing plaintiff property right, contract claim”), and connecting fact or POINT OF
w/ forum CONTACT, such as
o and no fundamental unfairness results in  situs of res
subjecting def to suit a there  place of celebration
 Some long-arm statutes broadly authorize cts to assert  place of performance
jurisdiction in any case NOT inconsistent w/ CONST – to  place of wrongdoing (Continental Micronesia v. Basso)
be decided on case to case basis o To bind defendant absent from territory to judgment in personam, due
 (C) JURISDICTION OVER SM process requires that
o Define  he should have certain minimum contacts (DEF, FORUM, COA)
 Power of court to hear and determine cases of general class to which with it
proceedings in Q belongs  and that maintenance of suit does not offend traditional notions of
 SM juris is MORE than above – power of ct must be properly fair place and substantial justice (Shaffer v. Heitner)
invoked by filing petition  Points to remember on jurisdiction
o Conferred by o In choosing a forum, plaintiff accepts forum’s entire judicial machinery  he
 Law; sovereign authority w/c organizes the CT Perkins v. Roxas must accept not only its benefits and burdens.
 NOT conferred by parties’ consent o Jurisdiction of court continues even if DEF leaves state of forum prior to
o In PH juris, determined by final determination of action against him.
 CONST o Parties may stipulate on foreign law, to govern disputes arising from contract
 Judiciary reorganization act  Parties may stipulate on Jurisdiction Clause – contract clause w/c
 BP 129 provides that any dispute arising from contract shall be tried before
 Etc. the competent, specific court of particular state.
 NOTE: in the PH, jurisdiction over SM is conferred by law (e.g. o Court, in assuming jurisdiction over case, may apply internal law of forum (lex
Constitution and judiciary reorganization act) (BP 129, Judiciary Act fori), or law of some other state(s)).
of 1948 as amended by RA 9252) o Case may be dismissed for
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 lack of jurisdiction of court, or  Removing any unfairness to either party w/c would result
 forum non conveniens from
 Steps/ ways in dealing with problem in conflict of laws trial if forum seized of case
o (1) Determine whether court has jurisdiction over case.  Global forum shopping
 NO jurisdiction  dismiss  Filing of repetitious suits in cts of diff jurisdictions, 2/++
o (2) If yes jurisdiction  ct may: courts having juris over case.
 (a) Refuse to assume jurisdiction  Litigants execute judgment most favorable to them.
 forum non conveniens  Result: conflicting decisions; antithetical to orderly and fair
 (b) Assume jurisdiction  ct may apply: administration of justice
 internal law of forum (lex fori)  Forum shopping originally PRIL concept. Litigants have
 proper foreign law (lex causae) option to choose forum for various reasons or excuses, such
 (A) Dismiss the case as:
o Principle of FORUM NON-CONVENIENCE o Procedural advantages
 “the forum is inconvenient” o To annoy and harass def
 CT discretionary power to decline exercise of juris, if another ct o To avoid overcrowded dockets
may more conveniently or suitably hear case. o Select more friendly venue (First PH
 Ct, in conflict of law cases, may refuse impositions on its jurisdiction international bank v. CA
where it is not most convenient or available forum, and parties are  Plaintiff’s choice of forum should NOT be disturbed unless
not precluded from seeking remedies elsewhere (First PH balance is strongly in favor of defendant
international bank v. CA)  NO existing catalogue of circumstances that will justify sustaining
 Relates to FORUM, NOT choice of governing law. plea of forum non conveniens – public and private interests should be
o Origin is vague weights
 NOT Roman Law or continental practice  Factors for private interest
 First used in 1800s, when Scottish cts would refuse to hear cases on  Ease of access to source of proof Union Carbide
ground that ends of justice would best be served by trial in other  Availability of compulsory process for attendance of
forum unwilling WTs
o Purposes/reasons  Cost of obtaining attendance of WTs
 American courts  Possibility of viewing premises
 Applied it to prevent abuse of the court’s process.  All other practical problems that make trial easy,
o plaintiff chooses forum to make def incur expeditious, inexpensive
unnecessary expenses, hardship;  Factors for public interest
 non-resident plaintiff chose forum BC he felt that jury  Admin difficulties encountered (congested courts);
verdicts were larger than in other fora  Jury duty as burden imposed upon community;
 burdensome on  Appropriateness of having trial in CT with familiarity w/
court or taxpayers. applicable state law
 Severe backlog of cases o Discretion and factual determination
 Jury duty where a community has no link or interest in  Use of word “may” – matter of jurisdiction rests on sound discretion
litigation of court.
 Local machinery was inadequate to effectuate right  BUT NEITHER mere invocation of forum non conveniens NOR
o E.g. NO way to secure evidence or attendance of averment of foreign elements operates to automatically divest court
willing witnesses of jurisdiction
 English and Scottish cts  Court should renounce juris ONLY after vital facts are estab, to
 there was another available and more appropriate forum determine whether special circ require CTs desistance.
where ends of justice would be better served;  Propriety of applying forum non conveniens is contingent on factual
 vexatious or oppressive character of pending proceedings; determination  TF, matter of defense
and  Bank of America v. CA
o Application
 GR: apply only if defendant is a corporation.
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 Individual def  proper forum may not be able to acquire  A16 mandates application of lex situs or lex rei sitae to all
jurisdiction over him (i.e. he may not be residing there), properties (real, personal) located here
leaving plaintiff w/o any remedy.  Testamentary and intestate succession – lex nationale of decedent
o PH court may choose to assume jurisdiction subject to following requisites:  Law governing order and amount of successional rights,
 The Philippine court is one to which the parties may conveniently intrinsic validity of testamentary provis, capacity to
resolve; succeed (NCC A16.P2)
 That the Philippine court is in the position to make an intelligent  Laws governing revocation of wills (NCC A829)  law of place
decision as to the laws and facts where will was made (lex domicilii)
 The Philippine court has likely to have the power to enforce decision  Prohibition against joint wills (A819)
Raytheon v. Rouzie  Laws governing property relations of marriage (FC A80)
o What COURT may INVOKE forum non conveniens: Court, though it has o (B) When foreign law or judgment NOT been properly pleaded and
jurisdiction over case, may decline to exercise it, in view of any of ff practical proved
reasons  Our cts do NOT take judicial notice of foreign judgments and laws.
 Evidence and witness may not be readily available in forum  Presume party consents to application of foreign law.
 Court dockets of forum clogged – permitting additional cases would  Failure to plead and prove foreign law (3 alternatives)
hamper speedy administration of justice  Assume foreign law is same as forum law
 Belief that matter can be better tried and decided in other jurisdiction,  Dismiss for inability to estab COA
bc main aspects of case transpired there, or material witnesses have  Apply forum law
residence there  R132.S25
 Curb evils of forum shopping  R130.S45
 Forum has no particular interest in case  Authenticity must be proven as fact in evidence, together with alien’s
 Other courts are open, and case may be better tried there applicable national law, to show effect of judgment on alien himself
 Inadequate local judicial machinery o (C) When the case involves any of exceptions to application of proper
 Difficulty ascertaining foreign law applicable foreign law (When foreign law cannot be applied)
o EXP: Forum COURT may NOT invoke FNC  SEE CHAPTER OF PROVING FOREIGN LAW
 Forum is only state where jurisdiction can be obtained over DEF  Instances exempting application of internal law to conflict of laws cases
 Some relation w/ parties exists o Foreign sovereign, diplomatic official, or public vessel or property of another
 When forum provides procedural remedies NOT available in other state is involved
state o State accepted limitation upon jurisdiction over certain persons or things of
o NOTE: another state thru treaty
 Court will not dismiss case unless plaintiff has another her forum o Foreign law been pleaded and proved (ROC R132.S25)
open to him
 Proving foreign laws
 Power to exercise jurisdiction NOT auto give states constitutional
o SEE CHAPTER ON PROVING FOREIGN LAW
authority to apply forum law
 Effect of failure to plead of prove foreign law (3)
 (B) Assume jurisdiction
o (a) Dismiss case
o Assume jurisdiction  ct may apply:
 for inability to establish cause of action
 internal law of forum (lex fori)
 Defendant may move for demurer to evidence –
 proper foreign law (lex causae) if properly pleaded and proved
o When internal (forum) law MAY be applied –  if plaintiff’s COA rests on unproven foreign law, resulting
in no COA to his case
 (a) Specific law of forum decrees that internal law should apply;
 (b) Proper foreign law not properly pleaded or proved;  If defense rests on unproven foreign law, defense fails
 (c) Case falls under EXPs to application of foreign law/ exceptions to o (b) Doctrine of processual presumption bcms operative
rule of comity  Assume that the foreign law of the same as the law of the forum.
o (A) Forum law decrees application of internal law; When local law Apply law of forum.
expressly so provides o (c) Apply foreign law
 Real and personal property subject to law of place they are situated  Doctrine of processual presumption or presumed-identity approach
 Law governing property transactions (NCC A16.P1) o Absent pleading and proof, laws of foreign country or state presumed same as
our local or domestic law
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

CHOICE OF LAW  (a) Reciprocity

 (b) Persuasiveness of foreign judgment
 Correlation between jurisdiction and choice of law o If forum is persuaded that foreign judgment is
o Relationship meritorious and has been rendered by court of
 (a) contacts of factors that will justify forum court’s exercise of competent jurisdiction, it will not hesitate to
judicial jurisdiction are same ones that will determine WoN it is enforce that foreign judgment in the forum even
proper for forum to apply own internal law if the foreign forum does not reciprocate
 Minimum contact o Foreign final judgment or final order is
 Most significant contact presumptive evidence of right as between parties
 (2) if forum applies own internal law on account of its real interest in and their successors in interest by subseq title,
the case, the outcome will be predetermined by forum where suit is and may be repelled by evidence of want of
brought jurisdiction, want of notice to party, collusion,
 Practical effect: plaintiff will bring suit in state which has fraud, or clear mistake of law or fact (ROC
real interest in applying its internal law R39.S48)
 (3) since in practice forum is more likely to apply internal law, o Vested rights theory
plaintiff will predictably bring his claim in state where provisions of o Local law theory
internal law are more favorable to him o Theory of justice (Caver’s Principles of Preference)
o Distinction o Harmony of laws theory
 There are cases over which forum may exercise jurisdiction but will  Identical or similar problems should be given identical or similar
NOT apply own law solutions
 Divorce cases, adopted law of state where divorce is  Prevents forum shopping
allowed, but must be proved.  Approaches to choice of law
 There are cases over which forum has no jurisdiction, tho its internal o (2) important questions
law may be applied as proper law  What legal system should control case where some of significant
 Questions that choice of applicable law seeks to answer facts occurred in two or more states?
o What legal system should control a given situation where some significant facts  To what extent should the chosen legal system regulate the situation?
occurred in 2 or more states o Issue: theories NOT always uphold both justice and predictability – problem
o To what extent should chosen system regulate the situation w/c must be more stressed
 Foreign law has no territorial effect; exception to this right must be traced to  Traditional approach  simplicity; convenience; uniformity
consent of nation  Modern approach  reaching appropriate result in particular cases
o Appropriate to assume that Congress had domestic concerns in mind. (Von Mehren and Trautman)
o This assumption is similar to legal presumption that Congress ordinarily o (A) Traditional Approach
intends its statutes to have domestic, not territorial application.  (a) Vested rights theory
o Ct assumes Congressional intent that phrase “convicted in any court” applies  Last acts
domestically, not extraterritorially  Choice of law rules
 unless statutory language, context, history, purpose shows contrary o Are simple in form
 Theories in justifying application of foreign law in conflict cases o Are capable of easy administration
o Theory of comity o Would promote uniformity of result
 foreign law is applied because of its convenience & because we want o Enhance predictability
to give protection protection to our citizens, residents, & transients in o Discourage forum shopping
our land  Beale locates source of choice of law rules in a normative
 Otherwise, non-application would constitute disregard of foreign system that is not confined to the law of one specific state.
sovereignty, or lack of comity towards other states  Define: Under this theory, act done in foreign
 Comity: recognition w/c one nation allows within its territory, to jurisdiction gives rise to existence of right if laws of that
legislative, executive, judicial acts of other nation, having due regard state provide so/ created such right
to both international duty and convenience, and rights of own  Courts enforce NOT foreign law or judgment, but the rights
citizens, of other persons who are under protection of its laws vested under such law or judgment.
 2 principles of comity
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 TF, rights acquired in one country must be recognized and o Law protects not only vested rights, but also
legally protected in other countries foreign legal relationships, capacities or powers
 Forum – law of place of occurrence of “last act” out of which rights, or the extinction of duties
necessary to complete COA. and charges or the invalidity of acts may arise.
o If laws of last state create no legal right, there is  Criticism of beale’s basis: despite being a positivist, he
nothing relied on his own a priori theories instead of judicial
for the forum to recognize and enforce. decisions
 The law of state of “last act” is considered the law  This approach is rigid but some courts still ff it – bc of
applicable to all substantive issues of the case. uncertainty of policy-oriented approaches
 Weakness of vested rights theory: failure to resolve  (b) Local law theory
conflicts cases w/ ref to considerations of policy and  Transformation?
fairness  Appropriation of foreign rule by state of forum and
 EFFECT: LAW PLACE OF TORT transforming it to domestic rule.
 Comparing cases Gray v. Gray and Alabama Company v.  We apply foreign law not because it is foreign, but
Carroll because our laws, by applying similar rules require us
 Gray: NO COA in place occurred to do so; hence, it is as if foreign law has become part &
o Husband’s negligence injuring wife in Maine. parcel of our local law
But Maine law says cannot sue H  NO COA.  Ex. A16 NCC requires application of national law of
o even though Maine’s relation to the spouses was deceased in matter of testate or intestate succession
solely that it was place where accident occurred,  Walter wheeler cook “deduction from general principles as
court auto applied law of place of wrong/ means to ascertain positive law.
negligence thereby rejecting a choice of law  Proposal: unearth rules by looking at cases and other
method based on “reason, justice and concrete phenomena, including judges’ behavior
expediency.”  Observations
o Look at rationale behind Maine law on spousal o (a) power of state to regulate w/n own territory
incapacity to sue. What were policy has no limitation – EXP such as may be imposed
considerations? by own positive law
o To prevent domestic controversy? If so, why o (b) in conflict of laws problems, court does NOT
should it be allowed in New Hampshire? enforce foreign right, but right created by own
o Problems of family relations should be governed law by treating a case as purely domestic case
by personal laws of parties that does not involve foreign element
 Carroll: NO COA in place on injury  Result: law applied may not be exactly what foreign ct
o Criticism: Mississippi law was applied at may have enforced
expense of arriving at just result  Criticism: practical and equitable considerations may be
o Strict application of law of place of injury (NOT overlooked in favor of exercise of sovereignty
negligence) was counterintuitive and arbitrary  (c) Theory of justice: Cavers’ Principles of Preference
 (5) major defects of theory (Salonga)  Compare preferred v. forum law
o Difficult and impracticable to apply the theory  Choice of law should be determined by considerations of
where material aspects of a transaction or justice and social expediency.
event touch two or more states equally.  Not result of mechanical application of a rule or principle
o Not all rights acquired under foreign law are of selection.
protected elsewhere, nor is their protection  GUIDES: In determining whether to apply forum or
always desirable. foreign law, the court should:
o It is not foreign law but the rights acquired under o Scrutinize event or transaction giving rise to issue
it which are enforced by the courts of another before it;
country – there is a self-delusion of reasoning. o Compare carefully the proffered rule of law
o Protection of rights and interests is not the only and result which its application might work in
consideration to be taken into account. case at bar with rule of forum; and
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

o Appraise results from standpoint of justice o Contracts

between litigants or of those broader  Law chosen by parties and in absence
considerations of social policy which conflicting thereof;
laws may evoke.  Place where contract was entered into;
 Using this framework, we can successfully set aside the  Place where it was negotiated;
stifling effects of ensuring certainty and uniformity above  Place of performance; and
all other objectives.  Domicile, residence, nationality, place
 Choice of law decisions should be made with reference to of incorporation and place of business
principles of preference which are conceived to: of parties.
o Provide fair accommodation to conflicting state o In both torts and contracts cases, contacts are
policies; and evaluated depending on relative importance and
o Afford fair treatment to the parties who are relevance to issue at hand.
caught up in hazards between conflicting state  Interchangeable terms
policies. o State of the most significant relationship
 This theory shows “territorialist bias”— looks to place (Restatement 2d);
where significant events occurred or where legal o Center of gravity Auten v. Auten
relationship is centered o Place which has most significant contacts (ibid);
o (B) Modern approaches o Grouping of contacts (ibid)
 (a) Place of Most Significant Relationship  Auten case v. Haag case
 Consider all factual contacts or factors o Auten v. Auten: considered ALL significant
 w/c state has more interest contacts – NO auto application of law where
 which ofthese contacts have a significant relation in the contract was made, or law of location of trustee
COA? to whom payment made
 PLURALITY of factors/ contacts must be considered – o Haag: v. Barnes used man’s home
NOT just where last act occurred (Reese; Auten v.  Criticism of most significant relationship approach: can be
Auten) manipulated to achieve virtually any result
 Principles considered o Ex. Haag v. Barnes
o Needs of the interstate and international system;  Criticism: no standard to apply
o Relevant policies of the concerned states;  (b) interest analysis
o Relevant policies of the other interested states  A.k.a state/ gov interest analysis
and the relative interest of those in the  Re-interpretation of center of gravity
determination of the particular issue;  Is there conflict in interest?
o Protection of the justified expectations of the  Which one has more interests or GREATEST CONCERN
parties; w/ issue, INTIMATE CONCERN w/ outcome
o Basic policies underlying the particular field of  W/c one would be in disadvantage if its law is not applied
law;  What is the policy behind law?
o Certainty, predictability and uniformity of  Prof Currie attacked Auten case for its failure to provide
result; and standard to determine which contacts are significant.
o Ease in the determination and application of the  Must consider: Policy behind laws of involved states,
law to be applied AND Interest each state had in applying own law
 Contacts differed in each area of substantive law. Ex. o Factual contacts NOT enuf – must reflect state
o Torts policy w/c would be advanced by application of
 Where injury occurred; substantive state law
 Where negligent conduct occurred; o Then, court determines whether BOTH states
 Domicile, residence or nationality of had real interest in having their law applied.
the parties; and o Yes  there is true conflict
 Place where relationship between
parties is entered.
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

o No  false conflict; apply substantive law of  Consider whether the law reflects an “emerging” or
interested state “regressing” policy.
 Babcock v. Jackson  Law not always reflect current, emerging policy
o False conflict case. Walang pake ung isang state.  Dev by Trautman and Von Mehren
o CA guest statute  Determine “concerned J” or interested state.
o competing interests of states  Look into general policies of state:
o Justice, fairness, best practical result o Beyond those reflected in substantive law; and
o law of state w/ greatest concern with issue in o To policies and values relating to effective and
litigation harmonious intercourse between states.
o Forum most intimate concern w/ outcome  Reciprocity
o gives to place having most interest in problem'  Advancement of multistate activity
paramount control over legal issues arising out of  Protecting justifiable expectations
particular factual context  Evenhandedness in dealing with similar
o Application of this state’s law does NOT impair cases
interest of other state  Effectiveness
 Criticism  Policy-weighing
o Ordinarily, COL cases are concerned w/ private, o Consider relative strength of state policy
NOT gov’l or state interests (Ehrenzweigh)  Miliken v. Pratt:
o Method is unworkable: (1) bc decision of each o F: Daniel Pratt was resident of MA, under law of
case done will be on ad hoc basis, or pro hac vice which spouse cannot be surety of other. Sarah,
– bc cts will have to ascertain purposes or wife, applied for credit from Milliken & Co. in
policies behind each applicable local law rule Maine. Milliken insisted on guaranty from
 Difficulty Daniel. Guaranty executed. Place of contracting
o Some legislatures do not publish their policies was Maine. Miliken sued Daniel on default, on
o Ct must look into purpose of law in Q before guaranty in Maine.
deciding whether should be applied o H: Daniel liable.
 Fear of armchair speculation of policy o R: Contract was complete when Milliken
of another state’s law received Daniel’s guaranty. Milliken extended
 Not all laws reflect policy credit on the strength of this guaranty. Place of
 Some laws have no purpose other than contracting was Maine.
decide cases o Analysis: Restrictive policy on right of married
 Ex. Provis on interpretation of docus women was on
 (c) comparative impairment the wane in MA. Rule in force at the time was not
 W/c one would be in disadvantage if its law is not applied based on a “strongly held policy.”
 Presumes BOTH are interested  Vs. interest analysis
 Offshoot of the interest analysis approach. o IA only looks at substantive law.
 Proposed by Baxter. o THIS approach looks at other related laws, even
 Called for subordination of state objective which would abolished laws.
be least impaired o More demanding for judges – they have to be
 Courts are to weigh conflicting interests and apply law of socially aware.
state whose interests would be impaired if its law were not  (e) choice-influencing considerations
followed.  Leflar proposed (5):
 Look behind an apparent conflict to precise issue and o Predictability of results;
precise interest of each state o Maintenance of interstate and intl order;
 (d) functional analysis o Simplification of judicial task;
 Rule in force at the time was not based on a “strongly held o Application of better rule of law; and
policy.” o Advancement of forum’s governmental interests
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 Vs. interest analysis  Law of country w/ which factual situation is most intimately
o Latter applies particular rule of substantive law to connected
implement policy reflected therein.  Characterization or doctrine of qualification or classification
o Courts will prefer rules of law as long as they o Before choice of applicable law can be made, it is necessary to determine
make “good socioeconomic sense for time court under what category a certain set of facts or rules fall.
speaks” o This determination process is known as “characterization:, or the “doctrine of
o and sound in view of present day conditions qualification”.
 No principled or objective standards to o Process of deciding whether or not facts relate to the kinds of question
determine what law is superior specified in a conflict rule.”
 In practice, cts almost always o The purpose of “characterization” is to enable the forum to select proper law
considered own law as better law (Saudi Arabian Airlines V. CA)
o Law chosen should be applied only insofar as it bring about good it intended to
NATURE, COMPOSITION, CHARACTERIZATION OF CONFLICT RULES bring. The selected proper law is applied to factual situation to decide (1) legal
consequences resulting from situation; (2) interests created in thing in Q
 Conflict rules  Steps in characterization
o Provisions found in our own law governing factual situation possessed of o (a) Determination of facts involved
foreign element.  Starting point of analysis: factual situation, event, or operative fact –
o Usually expressed in form of abstract proposition that given legal question is NOT legal relation
governed by law of particular country (w/c may be internal law or proper  Essential element of conflict rules: “test”, “connecting factor”, point
foreign law), to be ascertained in manner indicated in provision. of contact.”
 Ordinary internal rules v. conflict rules  1/++ circs may be present to serve as test for det of applicable law
Ordinary internal rules Conflict rules o (b) Characterization of factual situation*
Authorize, command, prohibit Decides which law or o (c) Determination of conflict rule to be applied*
certain mode of conduct (e.g. jurisdiction will give final o (d) Characterization of point of contact where the connecting factor*
A796 NCC). solution to question (e.g. o (e) Characterization of problem as procedural or substantive*
A16.P1; A17.P2 NCC) o (f) Pleading and proving proper foreign law
Legal effects are immediately o (g) Application of proper foreign law to problem
indicated (e.g. Express  NOTE: only 2-5 concerned w/ characterization proper
prohibition)  Sample “test factors” or “points of contact” or “connecting factors”
o Nationality of person, his domicile, his residence, his place of sojourn, or his
 Two kinds of conflict rules origin
o One-sided rule o Seat of legal or juridical person, such as corporation
 Indicates when PH law will apply (e.g. A15, A818 NCC only apply o Situs of thing – where thing is or is deemed to be situated; lex situs is decisive
to Filipinos) when real rights are involved
o All-sided or multilateral rule
o Locus actus (lex loci actus) - where act was done
 Indicates whether to apply local law or proper foreign law (e.g.
 E.g. where contract made, marriage celebrated, will signed or tort
A16.P1; A17; A1763; A1039 NCC) committed
o NOTE: A15 NCC
o Where act is intended to come into effect
 SC: multi-lateral application when it held that foreigners, in their
 E.g. place of performance of contractual duties; where power of atty
status and legal capacities, are governed by their national laws is to be exercised
 Justice Sempio-Diy: one-sided, since applies only to Filipinos
o Lex loci intentionis – intention of contracting parties as to law that should
 Nationality theory been applied by SC even to citizens of states
govern agreement
following domiciliary theory
o Lex voluntatis
 Parts of conflict rules
o Lex fori – where judicial or admin proceedings are instituted or done.
o Object of the factual situation
 Law of forum important – bc matters of procedure not going to
 Facts or situation presenting conflicts problem, bc there is foreign
substance of claim involved are governed by it
element involved
o Legal consequences or point of contract or connecting factor
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 Lex fori applies whenever content of otherwise applicable foreign  Goal: to reach a just resolution of the case at hand
law is excluded from application in given case, for being an  Two-types of characterization under single-aspect method
exception to applications of foreign law o (A.1) Subject-matter characterization
 Flag of ship, which in many cases is decisive of practically all legal  Define: Process by which court at beginning of choice-of-law process
relationships of ship and master or owner as such. It also covers assigns issue to an area of substantive law/ legal category
contractual relationships particularly contracts of affreightment  Torts
 Two (2) methods of characterization  Contracts
o (A) Single-aspect method  family law
 FOLLOWED IN PH!  property
 Define: When choice-of-law theories focus on one element of a  reason: because legal category to w/c an issue is assigned determines
situation to connect case to particular legal community. applicable law
 Goal: simplicity, convenience, uniformity of results  Issue: Characterization becomes problem because there are at least
 NCC provisions: two jurisdictions with divergent laws involved.
 Laws re: family rights and duties, status, condition and o (A.2) Substance-procedure dicho characterization
legal capacity of persons  binding upon citizens of ph,  Directs court to what extent that it will apply foreign law
even though abroad A15 NCC  Substance v. procedure principle
 Real property as well as personal property  is subject  (A) Matters of procedure  gov by law of forum where
to the law of the country where it is stipulated. | However, case filed
intestate and testamentary successions, both with respect to  (B) Matters of substance  law of country where cause
the order of succession and to the amount of successional of action arose
rights and to the intrinsic validity of testamentary o Ct MAY apply forum OR foreign
provisions  shall be regulated by the national law of the
 Generally, foreign procedural law NOT apply in forum.
person whose succession is under consideration, whatever
Procedural matters (e.g. service of process, joinder, period,
may be the nature of the property and regardless of the
appeal reqs) are gov by laws of forum. This true even if
country wherein said property may be found A16 NCC
action is based upon a foreign substantive law (Cadalin v.
 Forms and solemnities of contracts wills, and other public Admin, POEA)
instruments  shall be governed by the laws of country in
 NOTE: Characterization of statute into procedural-
which they are executed. | When the acts referred to are
substantive is irrelevant when state of forum has
executed before the diplomatic or consular officials of
“BORROWING STATUTE”.
the Republic of the Philippines in a foreign country 
 Said statute has practical effect of treating foreign statute of
solemnities established by Philippine laws shall be
limitation as one of substance (Cadalin)
observed in their execution. | Prohibitive laws concerning
 Determinants of issue as procedural or substantive
persons, their acts or property, and those which have for
their object public order, public policy and good customs  Questions of evidence – procedural
 shall NOT be rendered ineffective by laws or judgments  (a) Statute of frauds
promulgated, or by determinations or conventions agreed o Substantive  IF words of law forbids
upon in a foreign country. A17 NCC CREATION of obligation (i.e. void contracts)
 NOTE: provisions specify geo location from where governing law is o Procedural  IF law forbids ENFORCEMENT
found. of oblig (i.e. unenforceable contracts; A1403
 Issue: Inherent rigidity and unjust decisions that may result from NCC (statute of frauds))
their application.  (b) Borrowing statues
 Solution: resort to “characterization” and renvoi o To eliminate forum shopping
 Also read on DEPECAGE o Bars filing of suit in forum IF it already barred by
o (B) Multi-aspect method statute of limits in place where COA arose
 Define multi-aspect method: modern approach where all important (although there are many other kinds of
factors, both territorial and non-territorial, are analyzed. borrowing statutes)
 Applicable law arrived at by “rationally elaborating and applying o Char of statute into procedural or subst bc
policies and purposes underlying particular legal rules that come in Q IRRELEVANT when country has a borrowing
 as well as needs of interstate or international intercourse. statute Cadalin v. POEA Admin
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

o Effect of borrowing statute: treats foreign statute o Period and req for appeal
of limitation as substantial Cadalin  EXP: LAW ON PRESCRIPTION of actions is sui
o Directs state of forum to apply foreign statute of generis in conflict-of-laws – may be viewed EITHER as
limitations to pending claims based on foreign procedural or substantive, dep on char given such a law
law Cadalin  Substantive – may apply foreign law
o EXP to Code of Civil Procedure, w/c says: If by  Procedural – supposed to apply apply forum law (lex fori)
the laws of the state or country where the COA, o GR: foreign procedural law NOT apply in forum,
action is barred, it is also barred in the even if action is based on foreign substantive law.
Philippine Islands. o EXP: see Cadalin v. POEA Administration case.
 (c) Statute of limitations  Rationale
o GR: procedural – bc affects only legal remedy,  Rights and duties of parties should not be substantially
NOT subst R involved varied bc of forum in w/c an action is brought to settle
 Suit may still be brought in other J w/ disputed questions arising out of situation
longer periods  Intl commerce would not dev if parties are frequently
o EXP: SOL = substantive when: exposed to hazards of unknown reqs of foreign laws
 Provide shorter period for certain kinds  Reference to foreign law is appropriate to protect parties
of claims against substantial change of position because of fortuitous
 Fall w/n wider classification covered circumstance that suit is brought in that particular state
by a general statute of limitations  Theoretically: foreign law would govern both the existence
o Specificity test of rights and duties of the parties as well as the means of
 limitation is substantive  when compulsion to enforce performance by defeated party.
directed at newly created liability, o Impossible in many instances. Heavy burden
warranting qualification of right upon courts and delay in orderly administration
 Limitation is procedural  when bars of justice
only legal remedy, w/o impairing  Thus, need to limit scope of reference to foreign law.
substantive right involved  Administration of foreign law – usually, procedural rules of
o When char of procedural - substantive is forum are applied
irrelevant: when country of forum has  Grant v. McAuliffe: SURVIVAL STATUTES – procedural 
borrowing statute, w/ effect of treating foreign law of forum
statute of limitation as substantive law.  Ratio: A statute or other rule of law will be characterized as
o NOTE: law on prescription is sui generis in substantive or procedural according to nature of problem
conflict of laws – may be viewed as procedural or for which a characterization must be made.
substantive, depending on characterization given  Since there is no compelling weight of authority for either,
o Modern trend is to consider prescriptive periods Court makes a choice and so holds that survival of COA
or statute of fraud that parties had in mind at time should be governed by law of the forum.
transaction took place  Survival is NOT essential part of COA itself but relates to
 Procedural laws are governed by forum law Cadalin v. POEA procedures available for enforcement of legal claim of
Administrator damages. Q is one of administration of DC’s estates, which
 CT should NOT be burdened with study of uncommon is purely local proceeding.
peculiarities and refinements of other legal system. o (B) Depecage (for single aspect method)
 BUT sometimes procedure and substance are so closely  French “deceper”, “dissect”
related – that refusal to accept foreign rule will defeat  Phenomenon where diff aspects of case involving foreign element
policy involved in foreign substantive law may be governed by different systems of law
 RULE:  Cutting up case into issues, and applying pertinent laws
 GR: Foreign procedural law will NOT be applied in forum respectively – allows ct to reach decision fair and desirable.
– EVEN if action is based on foreign substantive law  Different issues in single case
o Service of process  arising from single set of facts
o Joinder of actions
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 may be decided according to laws of different states  GR: facts and issues characterized based on forum’s own law. Then,
(Buchanan v. Doe) foreign/domestic law is applied to lex fori based characterization
 Procedural matters  forum law  Lex fori determined char bc of practical necessity
 Substantive matters  some other law (Buchanan v. Doe)  EXP: when lex fori char will result in clear injustice  lex fori
 Example: Man dies intestate, domiciled in A with movables in B characterization NOT apply
(Von Mehren and Trautman) o Lex causae solution
 A law: laws of domicile apply for division of estate  Characterization will depend on governing law
 B law: gives widow share in estate o Analytic jurisprudence and comparative law solution
 WON woman claiming share is indeed wife  family law  Court determines common patrimony of juridical concepts and
question – NOT succession employs universal or quasi-universal characterization
 Qs re: validity of marriage to DC  affects solution – bc it o Double characterization solution
answers preliminary or incidental Q  Couples lex fori and lex causae solution
 Qs re: movable properties and successional rights  o Center of gravity doctrine
embody substance of the claim  Application of law of jurisdiction, w/c has most significant
 A single element of case is made to relate to one legal system relationship to or contact w/ event, parties, issues
 Allows relevant interests of parties to be addressed o Autonomous theory
 CTs arrive at functionally sound result.  Forum considers the characterization of country referred to in lex
 1969 Restatement 2d adopted depecage and set out the ff factors: causae
 Needs of interstate and international system o Totality theory
 Relevant policies of forum  Determines intended law of parties
 Relevant policies of other interested stated, and interests of  Applies characterization given by intended law
those state in det of the issue
 Protection of justified expectations of parties THE PROBLEM OF RENVOI
 Basic policies underlying particular field of law
 Certainty, predictability, uniformity of results  Renvoi
o Procedure where jural matter presented is referred by conflict-of-laws rules of
 Ease in det and applying law
 Factors above help ease restrictions of single aspect method forum to  foreign state, conflict-of-laws rule of w/c in turn refers the matter

 Application of w/c may lead to egregious results
 back to law of forum (remission) or
 Cutting up case into issues, and applying pertinent laws
 3rd state (transmission)
respectively – allows ct to reach decision fair and desirable.
 Use of renvoi has NOT received intl acceptance
 BUT explicit reference to depecage in case law still UNCOMMON
o In jurisdiction where it been applied, used domiciliary/ national laws to decide
 Capacity of spouse to sue other in tort Haumschild v. Continental
Casualty problems of succession, domestic relations and real property.
o US courts rarely look at COL rules of other states. Instead, they
 Law of place of accident  issue of negligence
o look at law which foreign court would apply if case purely domestic
 Law of domicile  spousal immunity
 UCC – whole law of foreign state
 Problems confronting characterization
 Restatement 2d – also encourages use of renvoi
o Filipino child adopted in PH by former Filipino who moved to US. Adopter
 Sometimes called “table tennis” theory, as law is being referred back and forth from
dies. What law governs child’s capacity to succeed intestate?
forum law to law of domicile of foreign party, w/c involves conflict of laws rule, pointing
 If it is an adoption issue  governing law is PH law because that is
back to forum law as applicable law
where the adoption decree was granted.
 If succession issue  DC’s national law is controlling  French word; “refer back”; “return”. Anglo-American countries use term “remission”
o Agent abroad on behalf of principal commits negligent act matter for consideration or judgment
 If agency issue  liab det by laws of place where contract was  Implication of recognition of renvoi theory
entered into o that rules of COL to be understood as incorporating not only ordinary or
 If tort issue  where tort took place internal law of foreign state or country, but rules of COL as well.
 Proposed solutions to problem of characterization o That “law of the country” means whole of its law (Aznar v. Garcia)
o Lex fori solution  Four ways of treating renvoi problem
o (a) Rejection (internal law solution)
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 If conflict rules of forum refer case to law of another foreign state, it  Would never find a suitable body of substantive rules to apply to
is deemed to mean only internal law of that state. particular case
 Internal law – law w/c state would apply to purely o Only workable if one of states rejects it.
domestic case o Achieves harmony of decision only if states concerned do NOT agree on
 Court only apply foreign law applying it same way
 CT NOT look at COL rule of foreign state  Griswold: This is based on a false premise. When remission occurs,
o (b) Acceptance (single renvoi or single transmission) it goes back to the state’s internal law alone—there will be a stop
 If conflict rules of forum refer case to law of other state, it is deemed to “endless chain of reference.”
to include totality of foreign law (internal law and COL rules)  Lorenzen acknowledges renvoi in certain cases for reasons of
 Ct will recognize the referral back by foreign law, and apply local necessity and expediency.
law  Restatement:
 PH COL rule  NY COL rule  PH internal law (Griswold)  Title to land – lex situs
o Desistment theory (mutual disclaimer of jurisdiction theory)  Divorce – domiciliary law
 Call it revenge theory o Courts may be unnecessarily burdened with the task of identifying conflicts
 Forum ct, upon reference to other state’s law, sees that such foreign rules of another state.
law is limited in application to own nationals domiciled in its  But courts will not use renvoi if, in the first place, they cannot
territory, and has no provi for applic to nationals domiciled outside determine conflicts rules of another state.
 Local ct will apply local law  Inapplicability of renvoi in a false conflict
 Same result as acceptance but process used is to desist applying o Restatement 2d provides for use of renvoi when there is a disinterested
foreign law forum, to ensure that only laws advancing policies of interested states will be
o Foreign court theory applied.
 Forum court assumes same position that foreign ct would take if case o Pfau NJ-CT held that since domiciliaries CT and NJ had identical substantive
is litigated in foreign state laws, and third concerned state, Iowa, had no interest in ensuring that its law
 A.k.a. Double renvoi applied, there was false conflict.
 When local ct in adopting foreign court theory, discovers o Renvoi inapplicable
that foreign ct accepts renvoi also  Transmission
 PH COL rule  NY COL rule  PH internal law  NY internal o process of applying law of foreign state thru law of second foreign state
law? o NOT same as renvoi
 Double renvoi is a form of renvoi whereby, parity of result is ensured
 Renvoi  involves 2 laws
by the forum court. The forum court resolves the issues in the same
 Transmission  3 laws
manner as a foreign court selected by its choice of law rules might
o Ex. Italian domiciled in PH dies in England. English ct (under domiciliary
resolve it.
theory) refers to PH law, but discovers that PH refers matter to Italian law
 Double renvoi is enforced by the forum court when NO OTHER
RELEVANT LAW is specified to resolve dispute. (under nationality theory)  England, thru PH law, applies Italian law.
 Forum court considers that it is sitting as the foreign court and  Renvoi/ remission – transmission – double renvoi
will decide the matter as the foreign court would. Renvoi/ remission Transmission Double renvoi
 In this system, there can never be more than two remissions. Reference is made Reference is made When local ct, in
 Double renvoi is known as the foreign courts doctrine, or multiple back to law of to 3rd state adopting foreign ct
renvoi. forum theory, discovers
 Disadvantage of renvoi that foreign ct
o If both courts follow it, there would be no end to case accepts renvoi
 Usefulness of renvoi 2 laws 3 laws
o US cts do NOT see it as useful
 They just use it to avoid unjust results  How to resolve renvoi problem in absence of definitive law on matter
o Promotes uniformity of results, despite discrepancies in choice-of-law rules o Theory to be adopted should be that w/c, considering circumstances, will best
among states result in fairness, equity, justice
 Objections to renvoi  Waiver of renvoi
o Places ct in perpetually-enclosed circle from w/c it could never emerge
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

o To prevent complications, parties may waive, in case same is provided for by o Sec 2: Discretionary JN.
foreign law  public knowledge
o Rules of PRIL will find NO applic once foreign law is chosen by parties  capable of unquestionable demonstration
 ought to be known to judges because of their judicial functions.
NOTICE AND PROOF OF FOREIGN LAW o Sec 3: JN, when hearing necessary.
 During trial, court, on its own initiative, or on request of party, may
 Manner of proving foreign laws announce its intention to take JN of any matter and allow parties to
o GR: Courts are NOT authorized to take judicial notice of foreign laws. Laws of be heard thereon.
foreign country must be properly pleaded and proved as facts in manner  After trial, before judgment or on appeal, proper court, on its own
provided under ROC: initiative or on request of a party, may take judicial notice of any
 Extent of judicial notice matter and allow the parties to be heard thereon – if such matter is
o Party whose COA or defense depends upon foreign law has burden of proving decisive of material issue in case.(n)
such law o NOTE: there can be NO summary judgment where Qs of fact are in issue, or
 Treated as question of fact. where material allegations of pleadings are in dispute.
 Thus, must be pleaded and proved.  Proof of foreign law
 Foreign laws do NOT prove themselves in our cts, and cannot be o R132.S19: Classes of documents. For purpose of presentation in evidence
subject of JN  Public documents:
 Rationale: Presumed to know only domestic law.  written official acts, or records of official acts of sovereign
o GR: A judge cannot decide a case on basis of his own knowledge and authority, official bodies and tribunals, and public officers,
information. whether of PH, or of foreign country;
 Can only act based upon evidence presented before him  docs considered public under treaties and conventions, w/c
o EXP 1: CT is evidently familiar w/ FL Delgado v. RP are in force bet PH and country of source
 May be generally K, as in American or Spanish law o R132.S24 Proof of official record (OLD RULE)
 Or judges may have ruled upon it in other cases  (a) official publication thereof
 In US, CTs can take JN of laws passed by other US states as  (b) copy attested by: officer having legal custody of record, or by his
mandated by full faith and credit clause of Federal Constitution. deputy
 Rationale: to transform several sovereignties into single,  if record not kept in Philippines: + certificate that such
unified nation. officer has custody.
o EXP 2: Waiver to challenge erroneous JN In re Estate of Johnson  If office in which record is kept is in foreign country:
 Failure to challenge erroneous taking of JN = waived certificate may be made by Secretary of Embassy or
 Formally valid will under IL law (JN – official gov act) legation, consul general, consul, vice consul, or consular
o EXP3: Estoppel agent or by any officer in foreign service of PH, stationed
 ADRs arguing what TX law says (re: legitime) in foreign country in which record is kept, and
 Admission by party re: effects of foreign law (w/c have to be proven authenticated the seal of his office.
in CT) create estoppel PH Commercial and Industrial Bank v. o R132.S24 Proof of official record (NEW RULE)
Escolin  official publication or
o Rule 129 Mandatory JN.  OR by copy attested by the officer having legal custody of record or
 existence and territorial extent of states by his or her deputy
 their political history  if record is not kept in PH: + certificate that such officer
 forms of government has custody.
 symbols of nationality  Certificate:
 law of nations  If office in which record is kept is in foreign country, co-
 admiralty and maritime courts of world and their seals party to treaty or convention w/ PH Philippines or public
 political constitution and history of PH document under such treaty or convention
 official acts of legislative, executive and judicial departments of o certificate or its equivalent shall be in form
Philippines prescribed by such treaty or convention
 laws of nature o subject to reciprocity granted to public
 measure of time. documents originating from the Philippines.
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 documents originating from foreign NOT co-party importance of presenting TY of WTs orally in
o certificate may be made by secretary of embassy open court, to allow deposition to be used; and
or legation, consul general, consul, vice-consul,  (d) If only part of deposition is offered in evidence by
or consular agent or by any officer in foreign party; adverse party may require him to introduce all of it
service of PH stationed in foreign country in which is relevant to part introduced, and any party may
which record is kept, and authenticated by seal of introduce any other parts. (4a, R24)
his [or her] office.  S11. Persons before whom depositions may be taken in foreign
 Document accompanied by a certificate or equivalent may be countries
presented in evidence without further proof  (a) on notice before secretary of embassy or legation,
 certificate or its equivalent being prima facie evidence of consul general, consul, vice-consul, or consular agent of the
due execution and genuineness of document involved. Republic of the Philippines;
 Certificate NOT required when a treaty or convention between  (b) before such person or officer as may be appointed by
foreign country and PH abolished the requirement, or has exempted commission or under letters rogatory, or
document itself from this formality.  (c) person referred to in S14 hereof.
o R132.S25 NOT exclude presentation of other competent evidence to prove o (B) Unwritten law
existence of foreign law (not just clerk or officer can attest to copy of  (a) by oral testimony of expert WT
documents)  NOTE: TT of expert WT may be allowed to prove FL.
o R130.S46(c) Published treatise on subject law – PROVIDED that court takes  R132.S25 NOT exclude presentation of other competent
JN of competence of writer, or evidence is introduced to estab author’s evidence to prove existence of foreign law (not just clerk or
competence officer can attest to copy of documents)
o R23: Deposition of non-residents:  (b) by printed and published books of report of decisions of country
 S4: At trial or upon hearing of motion or interlocutory proceeding, involved, if proved to be commonly admitted in its cts
any part or all of a deposition, so far as admissible under the rules of  R130.S45 Records of regularly conducted business activity
evidence, may be used against any party who was present or  EXPs: Exceptions to procedural reqs for proving foreign law (Beda: strict rules of
represented at taking of deposition or who had due notice thereof, in evidence to prove foreign law do NOT apply in):
accordance with any one of the following provisions: o Beda:
 (a) Any deposition may be used by any party for purpose of  Election
contradicting or impeaching testimony of deponent as a  Land registration
witness;  Cadastral
 (b) The deposition of party or of any one who at time of  Naturalization
taking deposition was an officer, director, or managing  Insolvency proceedings
agent of public or private corporation, partnership, or  Other cases not herein provided for, expt by analogy or in suppletory
association which is party may be used by adverse party for character, and when practicable and convenient.
any purpose; o Waiver to challenge erroneous JN In re Estate of Johnson
 (c) Deposition of WT, WON party, may be used by any o Estoppel PH Commercial and Industrial Bank v. Escolin
party for any purpose if court finds: o Presentation of foreign-licensed attorney, who will testify in open ct re:
o (1) that WT is dead; or knowledge of law in Q CIR v. Fisher
o (2) that WT resides at a distance more 100 km o Admin agencies recognizing foreign laws, without proof thereof
from place of trial or hearing, or is out of o Lack of objection to improper presentation by one party of proof of foreign law
Philippines, unless it appears that his absence was o Laws appearing in official websites of gov agencies w/c have custody of laws
procured by the party offering the deposition; or o NOTE:
o (3) that WT is unable to attend or testify because  In international law, juris is often defined as right of state to exercise
of age, sickness, infirmity, or imprisonment; or authority over persons and things w/n its boundaries, subject to
o (4) that party offering deposition unable to certain exceptions.
procure attendance of WT by subpoena; or  TF, state does NOT assume jurisdiction over travelling sovereigns,
o (5) upon application and notice, that such ambassadors, and diplo reps of other states, and foreign military units
exceptional circs exist as to make it desirable, in stationed in or marching thru state territory, w/ permission of latter’s
interest of justice and with due regard to authorities.
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 This authority, w/c finds its source in concept of sovereignty, is  (i.e. incestuous marriage; joint will)
exclusive within and throughout domain of state.  A71 NCC Marriages performed outside PH in accordance with laws
 A state is competent to take hold of any judicial matter it sees fit by in force in where they were performed, and valid there as such, shall
making its courts and agencies assume jurisdiction over all kinds of also be valid in this country, EXP: bigamous, polygamous, or
cases brought before them incestuous marriages as determined by Philippine law.
 Effect of failure to plead or prove foreign law (3)  Public policy – legal principle; that NO subject or citizen can
o (a) Dismiss case for inability to establish cause of action lawfully commit any act w/c has tendency to be injurious to public,
 May move for demurer to evidence – or against public good
 if plaintiff’s COA rests on unproven foreign law, resulting  Public policy technique – CT will not give due course to claim
in no COA existing under foreign law bc:
 If defense rests on unproven foreign law, defense fails  Nature of claim unconscionable
o (b) Assume that foreign law is same as law of forum  Enforcement would violate
 Doctrine of processual presumption  Kinds of public policy as to extent of operations
o (c) Apply law of forum  (1) Operates no matter where event or transaction takes
 Approaches to failure to prove foreign law place
o (a) Traditional approach: He who alleges, proves.  (2) Operates only where event or transaction takes place in
 Forum court, upon proof of law, will enforce rights existing under forum – NOT offended if transaction is completed abroad
that law.  CTs may refuse to entertain case and dismiss it w/o prejudice
 Hence, failure to law results in failure to prove prima facie case  Entertain case, and apply domestic law
Walton v. Arabian American Oil  Entertain case but invoke own public policy to domestic
o (b) Parties who fail to prove foreign law acquiesce to application of forum law
law  Criticism – can be used as ultimate escape device
 Forum law is basic law  Disregarding COL approaches w/o explaining its analysis
 In absence of proof of applicable foreign law, NO reason to displace  Goodrich: it should take extraordinary case to justify
basic law. argument based on public policy of forum
 Leary v. Gledhill Difficulty in assuming foreign ct, like all civilized  Intolerable affectation of superior virtue
states, recog fundamental principles – what’s fundamental? SC  Courts of one state would pretend that enforcement of right
applied acquiescence created by other state would offend local good morals.
o (c) Presumed-identity /processual presumption  CT of forum should not sit in judgment over wisdom and
 Presume foreign law is same as forum law soundness of applicable foreign law.
 Factors to be considered in det whether to apply domestic law/ or decide case  Cts should ask: in what way is foreign law repugnant to our public
against party who has burden of proving foreign law policy
o Public interest involved in dispute  If judge is absolutely sure that foreign law is barbarous or
o Accessibility of foreign law materials to parties frightfully unjust, public policy is properly invoked
o Possibility that plaintiff is merely forum shopping  If not so convinced, ask what policies are served by one
o Similarities bet forum and foreign law on issue in point COL over other.
o More likely that forum law will NOT apply, EXP in some cases involving o (b) Foreign law is contrary to good morals
marriage and family rels  Contrary to almost universally conceded principles of morality
 RECALL: When NOT to apply foreign law (contra bonos mores) (e.g. foreign laws recognizing prostitution)
o Local law expressly provides  Standard difficult to define
o Failure to plead and prove foreign law or judgment  Contra bonos mores – acts having mischievous or pernicious
consequences or against true principles of morality
o Case falls under EXPs to rule of comity
 Killing
 Exceptions to application of proper foreign law (When foreign law should NOT be
 Bribery of public officers
applied)
o Notwithstanding the choice of foreign law as governing law, PH CT may, in  Incestuous marriages
 Subject to same criticisms as public policy
disregard of any provision of foreign law, apply PH laws when:
o (a) Foreign law runs counter to sound and estab public policy of forum  exception to due inherent subjectivity
o (c) Foreign law is penal in character
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 Justice Marshall in The Antelope: “The courts of no country shall  NOTE: Penal clause in contract exec abroad may be enforced here –
execute the penal laws of another.” civil in nature, NOT crim, for liquidated damages
 Ratio: restrain the courts from infringing upon another  Enforcement v. recognition of foreign penal laws
state's  State may recognize foreign penal laws for various
 sovereign authority, especially when what was at issue was purposes, tho it will NOT directly enforce such laws in own
a state's right to benefit by the execution of its public law jurisdiction
 Context: What established the infringement in both The o (d) Foreign law involves procedural matters/ is procedural in nature
Louis and The Antelope was that the adjudicating state was  Reason:
also the confiscating state (subjects here are slaves in  foreign procedural laws are applied = making over of
Spanish and Portuguese ships, w/c Marshall did not want machinery for admin of justice in the forum.
US to confiscate – would offend Spain and Portugal).  Not unduly burden or complicate task of ct w/ study of
 EXP: if local law adopts penal law of other countries as part thereof uncommon peculiarities and refinements of another legal
 may apply foreign law system.
 Ex. Law on extradition: Under extradition treaty, state  Procedural laws are purely internal matters peculiar only to
that receives fugitive from justice is legally obliged to the State.
surrender him to state from where he escaped.  Why apply forum procedural law? Judicial convenience.
 Political and religious offenders are generally not  Any individual who submits himself to jurisdiction of law
extraditable. of forum must follow forum’s rules of procedure.
 PH extradition law:  Procedural law – prescribes forms of remedies in order that courts
http://www.oecd.org/site/adboecdanti-corruptioninitiative/3 applying them are able to administer justice.
9368242.pdf  Problem: characterization as substantive or procedural.
And CONST: Constitution the Philippines adopts the o (e) Foreign law is purely fiscal or administrative in nature
generally accepted principles of intl law as part of the law  Or issue involved in enforcement of foreign claim is fiscal or
of land. administrative
 When penal?  E.g. collection of taxes by foreign countries or relating to
 US CTs have tried to define penal to help determine when governmental functions
and when not they should apply foreign laws or execute  Ex. Revenue laws
foreign judgments which conceivably might be  A state is not obliged to enforce revenue law of another;
characterized as "penal. Reason:
 Penal statute test: Whether, it appears to the tribunal, o Banco de Brazil v. A.C. Israel: no enforcement of
which is called upon to enforce it, in essential character and currency regulations.
effect, a punishment of offense against public. o Moore v. Mitchell: Revenue laws fall within
 Penalty – a sum of money exacted as punishment for civil same reasoning as penal laws. They affect a state
wrong in matters as vital to its existence as its criminal
o distinguished from compensation for loss laws.
suffered by injured party. o Leflar: Foreign country wants to sue, let it.
 Lorenzo v. Posadas: statute is penal when it imposes Follow benefits-received theory behind taxation.
punishment for offense committed against State which, o (f) Application of foreign law will work undeniable injustice to citizens of
under Constitution, Executive has the power to pardon.” forum
 Penal statutes – all statutes which command or prohibit  NOTE: application of foreign = injustice to citizens or residents of
certain acts and establish penalties for violation. forum, or endangers foreign relations or vital interests of state
 Revenue laws – GR NOT penal statutes (FISCAL). But same  Ex. Termination-at-will – anathema to public policies on labor
reasoning as penal law - affect state. protection espoused by our laws and Constitution, which dictates that
 Recall interest analysis approach. no worker shall be dismissed except for just and authorized causes
 Penal laws often express vital state interests. provided by law and after due process having been complied wit
 Should it not be, then, that penal laws should be one of the o (g) Case involves real or personal property (lex situs)
first foreign laws to be enforced?  Case involves real or personal prop located in our country (NCC
A16.P1)
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 GR: Qs re: immovable property are gov by law of place where prop o Situs or eclectic theory
is located.  Particular place or situs of event or transaction is generally
 See A16 NCC controlling law
 3 reasons why lex situs governs property  Justification of personal law
 Property is in exclusive control of State o Prof Graveson: man is social being, so that those transactions of daily life, w/c
o Interest in immovables cannot be affected affect him most closely in personal sense may be governed universally by that
without consent of State. system of law, most suitable, adequate for the purpose
 Only state officials can lawfully deal with them physically. o E.g. marriage, divorce, legitimacy, capacity, succession
 Following policy-centered approach, immovables are of  Nationality or personal theory or lex nationalii
greatest concern to state in which they are situated. o Theory by virtue of w/c status and capacity of individual are generally
 Demands of certainty and convenience. governed by laws of nationality
 EXPs: o Personal law of individual is his national law
 Where transaction does not affect transfer of title to or o Adopted by civil law countries (e.g. PH), where identity and legal position of
ownership of land citizens are guaranteed by consistent application of their national laws on status
o E.g. ejectment cases and fam relations, wherever they go.
 In contracts where real property is offered by way of o A15 NCC: laws relating to family rights and duties, or status, condition,
security capacity of persons, are binding upon PH citizens, even tho living abroad
 Testate or intestate succession  Nationality
o A16 NCC national law of DC gov succession and o Membership in political community
Rs o Personal and more or less permanent
o (h) Application of foreign law might endanger vital interest of state o In conflict of laws, used interchangeably w/ citizenship
 Ex. labor cases – termination at will  Status
 Ex. cases where fundamental and const protected rights of parties are o Place of individual in society
effected o More or less permanent personal qualities and relationships, w/ w/c state and
 Instances exempting application of internal law to conflict of laws cases community are concerned
o Foreign sovereign, diplomatic official, or public vessel or property of another  Capacity
state is involved o Part of one’s status and is sum total of one’s rights and obligs
o State accepted limitation upon jurisdiction over certain persons or things of
another state thru treaty NATIONALITY
o Foreign law been pleaded and proved (ROC R132.S25)
 Importance of personal law
PERSONAL LAW o Nationality or domicile connects an individual to a state.
o Assignment of a personal law:
 Personal law  Allows courts to exercise jurisdiction; or
o Law w/c attaches person wherever he may go  Determines governing COL rule on a specific situation or transaction
o Generally governs status, capacity, condition, family relations, consequences of involving him.
his actuations o Individual’s personal law follows him wherever he is.
o Allows courts to exercise J or determine gov COL rule on specific situation or  It governs following transactions:
transaction involving person wherever he may be (Pangalangan)  Marriage
 Theories of personal law  Divorce
o Nationality theory or personal theory  Legitimacy
 Status and capacity of person is determined by law of nationality or  Capacity to contract
national law o History
 PH follows this!  Italian city-states
o Domiciliary or territorial theory  Transactions were made between inhabitants of different
 Status and capacity of person is determined by law of domicile cities owing allegiance to the same state.
 US, other common law countries ff  Hence, domicile was the only relevant basis for personal
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 1803: Code Napoleon  they are NOT excluded class under CONST
 1812: Austrian Code  as long as high probability that parents are Fils (Poe-
 Both used the law of nationality. LLamanzares v. COMELEC)
 Provided that laws concerning states and capacity govern  reason: to deny such and render stateless for theoretical
all cities irrespective of their residence. chance that child of both foreigners is discriminatory,
 Merits and Demerits of Nationality as Personal Law irrational, unjust (Poe v. COMELEC)
o Rationale: the laws of each state were presumed to be made for an “ascertained  Jus sanguinis  citizenship is acquired thru blood relationship w/
population.” parent
o Good: o Naturalization
 lawmakers considered physical and moral qualities of citizens, then  Confirming on alien the citizenship of another country, by any means
logically, laws should apply to such citizens wherever they are. provided by law
 Nationality is easily verifiable from documents.  Acquisition and reacq of PH citizenship.
o Bad:  Mode of acquiring  CA No. 473.
 Stateless persons  Mode of reacquiring  CA No. 63
 those with multiple nationalities.  Determination of nationality
 Places with no single national law like the US. o Each state has the authority to determine its own nationals.
 Individuals who are nationals of one state but have lived in another o Hague Convention on Certain Questions Relating to Conflict of Nationality
state for most of their life – defeats morality Law:
 Importance of Nationality in Philippines  A2: Any question as to whether a person possesses the nationality of
o Most civil law countries follow national law theory. particular State shall be determined in accordance with the law of
o National law regulates: State.
 Civil status o A9.S1 1987 CONST
 Capacity  The following are citizens of the Philippines:
 Condition  Those who are citizens of the PH at the time of the
 Family rights and duties adoption of this Constitution;
 Succession  Those whose fathers OR mothers are citizens of PH;
o Nationality law theory – a conflict of laws theory by virtue of which J over  Those born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino mothers,
particular subject matter affecting a person, such as status of natural person, is who elect Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of
determined by the latter’s nationality Ellis v. Republic majority; and
 NCC15: Laws relating to family rights and duties, or to the status,  Those who are naturalized in accordance with law.
condition and legal capacity of persons are binding upon citizens of  Natural-born citizens
PH, even though living abroad. o Jus soli – law of the place of one’s birth; used in many common law countries.
o The provision is taken from OCC9 which, in turn, is taken from A3 of Code o Jus sangguinis – rule of descent or blood; articulated in the Constitution.
Napoleon. o Co v. Electoral Tribunal: Jose Ong is a natural-born citizen because he did
 French laws concerning personal status and capacity govern not have to perform any act to perfect his Filipino citizenship.
Frenchmen even when residing in foreign countries.  His mother was Filipina.
 For foreigners residing in France, French courts applied their national  His father was Chinese who was naturalized when he was only
laws. minor.
 Underlying theory: awareness of national identity that was born in o Aznar v. COMELEC: Private respondent presumed to be Filipino because his
French Revolution and strengthened in the Italian struggle for father is Filipino.
national unity.  Burden of proof is on the person alleging that one has lost his
 Acquisition of nationality citizenship
o Birth  Citizens by naturalization
 Natural-born citizens are citizens of PH from birth w/o having to o Naturalization – confers to an alien nationality after birth by any of means
perform any act to acquire or perfect citizenship provided by the law.
 Jus soli  citizenship is acquired by being born w/n o Naturalization Law is CA 473 as amended by RA 530.
territorial boundaries of state o During the Marcos regime, LOI 270 was in force:
 Foundlings (no known natural parents) are natural born citizens
 Summary administrative inquiry
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 No filing of declaration of intention, income requirements o (3) Of good moral character, believes in the principles underlying CONST,
 Speak and write Filipino, English, or Spanish and any principal conducted himself in a proper and irreproachable manner during entire period
Filipino language of residence in PH in his relations with gov as well as with community.
 Special committee recommends issuance of a Decree to qualified  Proper and irreproachable – higher standard of morality than good
applicants to the President moral character.
 Modes of naturalization  Dy Lam Go v. Republic: moral character of highest degree; merely
o Direct naturalization being a law-abiding citizen is insufficient.
 Judicial process – CA 475 amended by RA 530  Must be proved by competent evidence/ testimony of 2 character WT
 Legislative process – PH citizenship conferred by Congress  well-known in community
 Admin process – The Administrative Naturalization Law of 2000  good reputation for probity.
(RA 9139) o EEs of applicant CANNOT be WT:
o Derivative naturalization  known petitioner for period prescribed by law Que Tiac v.
 Types Republic
 (A) Wife of naturalized husband  able to attest that applicant conducted himself in proper and
 (B) Minor children of naturalized father irreproachable manner during entire period of residence.
 (C) Alien wife of natural-born or naturalized citizen o (4) Must own real estate in PH worth not less than P5,000, or must have some
 Woman repatriated  repatriation NOT mean repatriation of child lucrative trade, profession or lawful occupation.
(Villahermosa v. Commissioner of Immigration)  Real estate
 bc minor was never FIL previously – nothing to reacquire  A12.S3 CONST: Lands of the public domain are classified
 CA 63 NOT provide that upon repatriation of Filipina, her into agricultural, forest or timber, mineral lands and
kids acquire PH citizenship national parks. Agricultural lands of the public domain may
 Widow automatically regained PH citizenship  nationally of minor be further classified by law according to the uses to which
child follows (Talaroc v. Uy) they may be devoted. Alienable lands of the public
 When widow reacquires PH citizenship domain shall be limited to agricultural lands
 BCM widow before effectivity of CA 63 (Oct 21, 1963)   Private corporations or associations may not hold such
immediately reacquires PH citizenship (Talaroc v. Uy) alienable lands of the public domain except by lease, NOT
 BCM widow on or after Oct 21, 1963  must repatriate exceeding 25y, renewable for not more than 25y, and NOT
self – else, remains foreigner (Villahermosa v. Comm. of exceed 100 hectares in area.
Immigration)  Citizens of PH may lease NOT more than 500 hectares, or
o PH citizens married to aliens acquire not more than 12 hectares thereof, by purchase,
 Fils retain citizenship homestead, or grant.
 UNLESS, by act or omission, they are deemed to have renounced it,  Taking into account the requirements of conservation,
under law ecology, and development, and subject to the requirements
 Qualifications for Applicants for Naturalization of agrarian reform, the Congress shall determine, by law,
o (1) Not less than 21 years old on the date of the hearing of the petition. the size of lands of public domain which may be acquired,
o (2) Resided in PH for continuous period not less than 10 years. developed, held, or leased and conditions therefor
 EXP: 10-year residency requirement may be reduced in ff. cases:  A12.S7 CONST Save in cases of hereditary succession, no
 If applicant has honorably held office under PH Gov or any private lands shall be transferred or conveyed except to
of its political subdivisions or LGUs; individuals, corporations, or associations qualified to
 If he established a new industry or introduced a new acquire or hold lands of public domain.
invention in PH;  Property ownership requirement is at odds with CONST
 If he is married to FIL woman;  Palacias v. Vda. de Ramirez: Hereditary succession
 If he had been engaged as teacher in a public or private exception does not extend to cases of testamentary
school NOT established for exclusive instruction of succession.
children of persons of a particular nationality/race in any of o Would be easy to circumvent provision by asking
branches of education or industry for a period of 2y someone to give property to an alien by way of
 If he was born in PH devise.
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 BP 185 natural-born citizens who have lost FIL  Persons defending or teaching the necessity or propriety of violence,
citizenship MAY be transferees of private land for personal assault, or assassination for the success and predominance of
residential purposes – NOT exceeding 1K sq m. of urban their ideas;
land or 1 ha. of rural land:  Polygamists or believers in the practice of polygamy;
 Held: Naturalized aliens CAN own land.  Persons convicted of crimes involving moral turpitude;
 Ratio: underlying purpose of prohibition is to preserve  Persons suffering from mental alienation or incurable contagious
patrimony of nation for future generations of FILs. diseases;
 “Lucrative trade, profession or lawful occupation” – substantial  Persons who, during the period of their residence in the Philippines,
gainful employment; obtaining of tangible receipts have not mingled socially with the Filipinos, or who have not evinced
 Appreciable margin of income over expenses. a sincere desire to learn and embrace the customs, traditions, and
 Able to provide adequate support for income-earner and ideals of the Filipinos;
family in event of sickness, unemployment or disability to  Citizens or subjects of nations with whom the United States 2and the
work. Philippines are at war, during the period of such war;
 NOT enough to show that applicant is not financial burden  Citizens or subjects of a foreign country other than the United States
upon community. Watt v. Republic 3whose laws do not grant Filipinos the right to become naturalized
citizens or subjects thereof
 His financial condition must be such to permit him and
o Crimes involving moral turpitude – acts of baseness, vileness or depravity in
members of his family to live with reasonable comfort, in
accordance with prevailing standard of living, and the private and social life in general, contrary to the accepted and customary
consistently with demands of human dignity. law of right and duty between men.
 Contrary to honesty, modesty or good morals.
 Courts should be skeptical of evidence provided by
o Applicant must deal with and receive Filipinos in his home, and visit Filipino
applicants who work for their relatives or parents.
o (5) Must be able to speak and write English or Spanish and any one of principal homes with a spirit of friendship, friendliness and equality without
discrimination CA 473
PH languages.
 Petitioner kept his wife and children in a neighboring country —
 If he can only understand, he is not qualified.
shows lack of sincere desire to establish himself as Filipino citizen.
o (6) Must have enrolled minor children of school age in any of the public or
o Applicant must establish that nation grants reciprocal Rs to Filipino citizens at
recog private schools where PH history, gov and civics are taught or prescribed
time of hearing of application
as part of school curriculum during entire period of residence required of him,
prior to hearing of his petition for naturalization as a citizen.  Procedure for naturalization
 Children of the applicant must learn and imbibe Filipino customs and o (1) Filing of declaration of intention, unless exempted;
traditions. o (2) Filing of petition for naturalization;
 Must be affirmatively shown, otherwise the application will be o (3) Publication in the OG or newspaper of general circulation, hearing;
denied. o (4) If petition approved, rehearing two years after promulgation of judgment
 Even if children cannot be brought to the Philippines due to financial awarding naturalization;
difficulties, petition will still be denied. o (5) Oath-taking (allegiance to support and defend the Constitution and laws).
 If school is predominantly enrolled in by Chinese students,  Declaration of intention
application will be denied. o S5. Declaration of intention. – 1y prior to filing petition for admission to PH
 Disqualifications for naturalization citizenship, applicant for PH citizenship shall file with Bureau of Justice,
o GR: STATE has burden of proving disqualification of applicant. declaration under oath that it is bona fide his intention to become a citizen of
o EXP: SC has held in some cases that applicant has the burden have proving the Philippines. Such declaration shall set forth name, age, occupation, personal
that he has none of disqualifications. description, place of birth, last foreign residence and allegiance, date of arrival,
 Rationale: naturalization is a privilege, not a right. the name of the vessel or aircraft, if any, in which he came to PH, and the place
o S4 CA 473 Who are disqualified. of residence in the Philippines at the time of making the declaration. No
 The following cannot be naturalized as Philippine citizens: declaration shall be valid until lawful entry for permanent residence has been
 Persons opposed to organized government or affiliated with any established and certificate of date, place, and manner of arrival has been issued.
association or group of persons who uphold and teach doctrines The declarant must also state that he has enrolled his minor children, if any, in
opposing all organized governments; any of the public schools or private schools recognized by the Office of Private
Education of the Philippines, where PH history, government, and civics are
taught or prescribed as part of the school curriculum, during the entire period of
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

the residence in the Philippines required of him prior to the hearing of his  Residing in PH at time of parent’s naturalization 
petition for naturalization as Philippine citizen. Each declarant must furnish Filipino
two photographs of himself  Residing outside PH at time of parent’s naturalization 
 Exemptions to dec of intention req FIL only during minority – unless he resides permanently
o Grounds in PH, when still minor, in w/c case he will continue to be
 (1) Born in PH and have received their primary and secondary FIL citizen even after becoming of age CA 473
education in public schools or those recognized by Government and  NOTES:
not limited to any race or nationality;  Children already of age at time of parent’s naturalization 
 (2) Resided continuously in PH for 30y or more before filing their NOT Fil, unless naturalized themselves
application; o Minor born AFTER naturalization
 (3) WIDOW and minor kids of alien who dec intent to become  Born in PH – Filipino
citizen of Philippines and dies before he is actually naturalized.  Born outside PH – shall be considered Fil citizen, unless w/n 1y after
o Requisites to avail Watt v. RP reaching age of majority, he fails to register himself as a Filipino
 statement of such exemption + reasons in petition citizen in PH consulate of country where he resides and to take
 reason: To apprise public so they can object or contest. necessary oath of allegiance CA 473
 Failure to comply: fatal defect; petition void for noncompliance with  No Judicial Declaration of Philippine Citizenship
law. o Dati: May NOT be granted in action for declaratory relief.
o Jurisdiction conferred by S8  Summary procedure under NCC412 for correction of error in the
 S8. Competent court. – The CFI of the province in which the Civil Registry was disallowed.
petitioner has resided at least one year immediately preceding filing o Rule later relaxed.
of petition shall have exclusive original jurisdiction to hear petition  Change of citizenship may be granted where appropriate action is
o Character witnesses must be qualified and competent to testify on: made.
 Period of applicant’s residence in PH;  All parties who may be affected must be notified and represented
 His good and irreproachable conduct.  there must be full-blown hearing.
o During the motion to take oath, court may inquire into any question affecting o Tan Yu Chin v. Republic
qualifications of applicant.  Under our laws, there can be no action or proceeding for judicial
 Effect of naturalization on Wife and Kids declaration of citizenship of individual.
o S15 Effect of naturalization on wife and children.  As incident only of adjudication of rights of parties to controversy,
 Wife: Any woman who is now or may hereafter be married to a court may pass upon, and make pronouncement relative to, their
citizen of the Philippines, and who might herself be lawfully status.
naturalized shall be deemed a citizen of PH.  Otherwise, such pronouncement is beyond judicial power.
 Minor children of persons naturalized under this law who have been  Loss of PH citizenship: Modes provided in CA 63 as amended by RA 106.
born in PH shall be considered citizens thereof. A foreign-born minor o (1) Naturalization in foreign countries
child, if dwelling in the Philippines at the time of naturalization of the o (2) By express renunciation of citizenship
parent, shall automatically become a Philippine citizen, and a o (3) Subscribing to oath of allegiance to support the constitution or laws of
foreign-born minor child, who is not in the Philippines at the time the foreign country upon attaining 21y of age or more, subject to certain exceptions
parent is naturalized, shall be deemed a Philippine citizen only during o (4) Rendering service to, or accepting commission in, armed forces of foreign
his minority, unless he begins to reside permanently in the country, subject to certain exceptions
Philippines when still a minor, in which case, he will continue to be o (5) Declared by competent authority as deserter of PH armed forces in time of
PH citizen even after becoming of age. war, unless subsequent plenary pardon or amnesty
 A child born outside of the Philippines after the naturalization of his o (6) WOMAN’s marriage to foreigner, if by virtue of laws in force in her
parent, shall be considered a Philippine citizen, unless within one
husband’s country, she acquires his nationality
year after reaching the age of majority, he fails to register himself as
o (7) Cancellation of certificate of naturalization
a Philippine citizen at the American Consulate of country where he
 How
resides, and to take the necessary oath of allegiance.
o Minor born BEFORE naturalization  Cancellation of Naturalization Certificate Issued. – Upon
motion by Solicitor-General or his rep, or by the proper
 Born in PH  Filipino
provincial fiscal, competent judge may cancel
 Born outside PH
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

naturalization certificate issued and its registration in the  Ex. NOTTEBOHM CASE
Civil Register S18 CA 473  Solution: RENOUNCE other citizenship
 Grounds  Person possessing 2 nationalities acquired w/o any
 (1) naturalization certificate obtained fraudulently or voluntary act on his part may renounce one of them w/o
illegally authorization of state whose nationality he desires to
 (2) person naturalized shall, within 5y ff issuance of surrender Hague Con on Certain Questions Relating to
naturalization certificate, return to native country, or to Conflict of Nationality Laws
some foreign country and establish his permanent residence o Dual Citizenship v. Dual Allegiance
there  Dual citizenship
o Provided, That fact of the person naturalized  Arises when, due to concurrent application of different
remaining for more than 1y in his native country laws of 2/+ states, person is simultaneously consid national
or the country of his former nationality, or 2y in of both states
any other foreign country, shall be considered as  Involuntary
prima facie evidence of his intention of taking  Dual allegiance
up his permanent residence elsewhere  Person simultaneously owes, by some positive act, loyalty
 (3) petition was made on invalid declaration of intention; to 2/+ states.
 (4) minor children of person naturalized failed to graduate  Individual volition Mercado v. Manzano
from public or private high schools recognized by Office of o General principles in dealing w/ conflict of nationality laws
Private Education of Philippines, where PH history, gov,  It’s for each state to determine who are its nationals under own law,
and civics are taught as part of the school curriculum, w/c shall be recognized by other states
through fault of parents either by neglecting to support  Any question re: possession of nationality shall be determined in accd
them or by transferring them to another school or schools. w/ law of that state
A certified copy of the decree cancelling the naturalization  Person having 2/++ nationalities may be regarded as national by each
certificate shall be forwarded by the clerk of the Court to of states whose nationality he possesses
the Office of the President and the Office of the Solicitor  State may not afford diplomatic protection to one of nationals against
General; a state whose nationality such person also possesses
 (5) naturalized citizen allowed himself to be used as  Theory of effective nationality – 3rd state shall recognize
dummy requiring PH citizenship as requisite for exercise, exclusively in its territory either Hague on Conflict of Nationality
use or enjoyment of R, franchise or privilege. Laws
 Estoppel/ res judicata cannot be invoked against decree directing  nationality of country of w/c one is habitually and
issuance of certificate of naturalization—it is mere grant of political principally resident;
privilege.  or nationality of country w/ w/c one appears to be in fact
 Problems in applying nationality principle most closely connected
o A. Dual or multiple citizenship o Causes of multiple citizenship
 Under Hague Convention, possible that person can be claimed as  Naturalized citizen’s failure to effectively renounce former
national of two or more states. nationality
 Ex. Manzano case  Concurrent application of jus soli and jus sanguinis at birth
 Ex. born in country that follows jus soli , to parents whose  Legislative act
national laws follow jus sanguinis, such child will have dual  Formal, voluntary act of individual concerned (Pangalangan)
nationality Manzano case  Refusal of states of full application of doctrine of expatriation
 A Filipino who marries an alien MAY acquire the latter’s citizenship  Marriage
if his/her national law so allows. o Concepts
 GR: PH citizenship retained.  Re: status: person usually considered by forum as exclusively its own
 EXP: Renunciation by oath of allegiance or express national. Additional foreign nationality is disregarded
renunciation.  If litigation arises in 3rd country: usually apply law of country of
 In determination of rights of individual who may claim multiple which persons is
nationality in third state, the ICJ applied the principle of effective  (1) national
nationality  AND (2) domicile/ habitual residence/ residence
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 (Hague Con. on Conflict of Nationality Laws A5)  Habitual residence

o B. Statelessness  Temporary residence
 De jure statelessness – refers to individual stripped of nationality by  Citizenship retention and reacquisition act of 2003 RA No. 9225
his own former government without having an opportunity to acquire o RA 9225 allows reacquisition and retention of PH citizenship by
another.  Natural-born citizens deemed to have lost PH citizenship due to
 Problem began in WWII. naturalization in foreign country
 Became serious during Nazi regime and in USSR.  Natural-born citizens of PH who, after effectivity of law, bcm
 De facto statelessness – refers to an individual possessed of a citizens of foreign country
nationality but whose country does not give him protection outside its o Law says they are deemed to have reacquired or retained PH citizenship upon
own territory. taking oath of allegiance (Maquiling v. COMELEC)
 Commonly referred to as refugees. o Sec 2 Declaration of policy
 Post-Vietnam war: people from Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos  All PH citizens of another country deemed NOT to have lost PH
 1951 Geneva Convention on Status of Refugees citizenship under conditions of this Act
 Ratified by 54 states. o Sec 3 Retention of PH Citizenship
 Provided some basic rights of stateless persons.  P1. Any provisions of law to contrary notwithstanding, natural-born
 1954: UN Conference on the Elimination or Reduction of Future citizenship by reason of naturalization as citizens of foreign country
Statelessness are deemed to have re-acquired PH citizenship upon taking oath of
 1961: Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness allegiance to Republic.
 Individual would not lose his nationality despite marriage,  P2. Natural-born citizens of PH who, after effectivity of Act, bcm
divorce, adoption, naturalization, expatriation. citizens of foreign country, shall retain PH citizenship upon taking
 Prohibits states from depriving their nationals of their aforesaid oath
identity as punishment.  NOTE: reacquisition v. retention
 Objective is to remedy the situation of children born  Sec3 heading is “Retention” – BUT law authors
without acquiring any nationality. intentionally used “re-acquire”, and “retain” to describe
o Occurs when a child is born in a jus sanguinis legal effect of taking oath of allegiance to RP of PH.
jurisdiction of parents whose national laws follow  This is evident from title of law using both terms.
jus soli.  Reacquisition will apply to those who lost PH citizenship
o Jus sanguinis country would have to extend under CA 63. Second aspect is retention of PH citizenship
nationality to person born within its territory if he applying future instances (David v. Agbay)
would otherwise be stateless. o Sec 4 Derivative citizenship
 Jus soli country would extend its nationality to a person  Unmarried child
who would otherwise be considered stateless when one of  whether legitimate, illegit, or adopted
his parents is a citizen of the contracting state.  below 18yo
 Stateless persons can be naturalized if they possess all the  of those who reacquire PH citizenship upon effectivity of
qualifications, save that of reciprocity. this Act
o Cause of statelessness  shall be deemed citizens of PH
 Deprivation of citizenship for any cause (e.g. commission of crime) o Sec 5 Civil and political rights and liabilities
 Renunciation of nationality by express or implied acts  Those who retain or re-acquire PH citizenship under this Act
 Voluntary release from original state  enjoy full civil and political rights
 Born in country recognizing only jus sanguinis of parents, whose law  and shall be subject to all attendant liabilities and responsibilities
recognizes only jus solis (like a renvoi??) under existing laws of PH, and ff conditions
o Convention on reduction of statelessness (1961) mandates that  (a) those intending to exercise right of suffrage must meet
 jus sanguinis country to grant nationality to person born w/n its requirements under A1.S1 CONST, RA 9189 (The
territory if he would otherwise be stateless (e.g. PH) Poe-Llamarez Overseas Absentee Voting Act, 2003), and other existing
 jus soli country to extend nationality to person otherwise would be laws
stateless, when one of parents is citizen of contracting state  (b) those seeking elective public office in PH shall meet
o Law governing stateless persons qualifications for holding such public office, as required by
 Law of domicile CONST and existing laws, and, at time of filing of
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

certificate of candidacy, make a personal and sworn

renunciation of any and all foreign citizenship before any DOMICILE
public officer authorized to admin an oath
o Sobejana-Condon v. COMELEC: Sec4(2) of RA  Domiciliary or territorial theory/ lex domicilii
9225 compels natural-born Fils, who have been o Person’s status, condition, rights, obligs, capacity are determined by law of
naturalized as citizens of foreign country, but domicile
who reacquired or retained PH citizenship: o Assumes that attributes w/c make up one’s status and personal relations are
 (1) to take oath of allegiance under Sec intimately connected w/ country where they made their home
3 RA 9225 and  Definition
 (2) for those seeking elective public o Domicile is defined by
offices in PH, to additionally execute  Municipal law (Philippine law); and
personal and sworn renunciation of any  Private international law.
and all foreign citizenship before o As to municipal law
authorized public officer prior or  A50 NCC: For the exercise of civil rights and the fulfillment of civil
simultaneous to filing of their obligations, the domicile of natural persons is the place of their
certificates of candidacy, to qualify as habitual residence
candidates in PH elections. o As to PRIL
o Rule applies to all those who have re-acquired Fil  Restatement – place with which person has settled connection for
citizenship, w/o regard re WON they are still dual certain legal purposes, either because his
citizens.  home is there
 Prerequisites imposed for exercise of
 or place is assigned to him by law.
right to run for public office.
 Justice Story – place of his true, fixed permanent home and principal
o Maquiling v. COMELEC:; petitioner was
establishment, and to which, whenever he is absent, he has intention
repatriated and renounced US citizenship. of returning.
Repeatedly used US passport. Repeated use of o Domicile has acquired technical meaning; a person may be living somewhere
US passport = US citizen, reverting back to
but domiciled elsewhere.
status, as if no renunciation was made. Cannot
 Requisites of domicile
run for public office.
o (a) Intention to make a place one’s domicile; and
 (c) those appointed to any public office shall subscribe and
o (b) Physical presence
swear to an oath of allegiance to RP of PH, and its duly
constituted authorities prior to assumption of office,  Residence for election purposes is synonymous w/ domicile. TF, person must:
provided they renounce their oath of allegiance to country o Intent to reside in particular place
where they took that oath o conduct indicative of such intention
 (d) those intending to practice profession in PH shall apply o personal presence in such place Romualdez-Marcos v. COMELEC
w/ proper authority for license or permit to engage in such  Versus residence
practice o Residence simple bodily presence of inhabitant in given place.
 (e) right to vote or be elected or appointed to any public o Koh v. CA: NOT synonymous
office of PH cannot be exercised by or extended to those  domicile – relatively more permanent abode of person
who  residence – applies to temporary stay of person in a given place…”
o Are candidates for or are occupying any public  Domicile v. residence v. citizenship
office in country of w/c they are naturalized o Residence and domicile are dictated by political law criteria.
citizen, and or Domicile Residence Citizenship
o Are active service as commissioned or non- Fixed, permanent residence Place of abode, whether Indicates ties of allegiance
commissioned officers in armed forces of country With intention of returning permanent or temporary and loyalty
w/c they are naturalized citizens
o RE 9225 also: state policy that all PH citizens of another country shall be  Merits and demerits of domicile
deemed not to have lost PH citizenship under conditions provided therein o Merits
(Arnado v. COMELEC)  Domicile is the very purpose for having a personal law.
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 Relationship between individual and place where he has his be assumed that that determination will be binding on other states or
permanent home is adequate basis for him to exercise rights on same state for other purposes.
therein and for state to impose duties. o (3) Domicile establishes connection between person and particular territorial
 Right to invoke protection of laws, unit.
 responsibility of sharing costs of government. o (4) The BOP change of domicile: whoever alleges
 Domicile is suitable for places having federal system of government  Favor of continuance of existing domicile
 since domiciliary law is law of place where person lives.  Domicile, once acquired, is retained unless new one is gained
o Demerits o Every natural person, as long as free and sui juris, may change domicile at
 Domicile is not ascertainable without going to court pleasure
 to establish existence of animo manendi o To retain existing domicile  EITHER residence there OR intention to
 Notion of domicile differs widely. remain must be present
 Some states hold that it is synonymous with residence. o To acquire fresh domicile  BOTH residence AND intention not to return
 Some attribute different meanings to it depending on (abandon) at old must concur.
purpose. o To abandon domicile  BOTH residence in new place AND intention to
 Attenuated connection (reduced in force, effect, or value); same abandon old place must concur (Gallego v. Verra)
problem with nationality.  Mere abandonment =/= lose OG domicile
 Domicile is fixed at birth.  Kinds of domicile
 There may be NO significant ties bet person and place. o (A) Domicile of origin
 Individual’s relations with state may be so diluted that it no  (a) Minors
longer serves as valid basis for personal law.  Legitimate  domicile of parents at time of child’s birth
 When do we use DOMICILIARY THEORY?  Illegitimate  of mother at time of birth
o GR: PH follows the nationality law theory.  Legitimated  of father at time of birth – as effects of
o EXP: Domiciliary law is adverted to in following situations— legitimation retroacts to time of child’s birth (A180 FC)
 Cases where litigant is alien whose country ff domiciliary principle  Adopted child  of REAL parents at time of birth – NOT
 his personal status, capacity, condition and family rights are domicile of adopters
governed by law of domicile;  Foundling  country where foundling is found
 Stateless persons;  (b) married woman
 dual nationalities;  Hubby and wife shall fix family domicile.
 Alien domiciled in PH executes will abroad;  Disagreement  ct shall decide A69 FC
 follow formalities prescribed by law of domicile.  Upon emancipation, can acquire domicile of choice.
 Revocation of will outside PH.  more enduring and less easily shaken off than domicile of choice.
 Must be done in accordance with domiciliary law of  NOT lost by mere abandonment and remains until domicile of
testator NCC829 choice is acquired.
 General rules on domicile  Y: can’t have NO domicile
o (1) No person shall be without domicile. o (B) Domicile of choice
o (2) A person cannot have two simultaneous domiciles.  aka voluntary domicile.
 Purpose of identifying domicile is to establish connection between  Place freely chosen by person sui generis (of one’s own right) as
person and definite legal system home, with intent to return when absent
 In practice, courts may attribute different meanings to domicile  Requisites
depending on purpose  Book
 LCC: domiciled in one state for purposes of divorce o Physical presence in new place; and
 LGC: but not for running for public office o Unqualified intention to make that place one’s
o E.g. residence is held to be synonymous with home
domicile. o Conduct (?)
 More accurate to say: “person can only have one domicile for given  Romualdez v. RTC
purpose or given time under law of particular state, BUT it should not o (a) Residence or bodily presence in new locality
o (b) Animus Manendi – intention to remain there
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

o (c) Animus non revertendi – intenion to abandon  Irrelevant: Length of time person has actually lived in new
old domicile domicile
 Consummation of change of domicile  What matters is that new domicile been selected and
 Romualdez-Marcos v. COMELEC Domicile of origin is entered upon.
NOT easily lost. To successfully effect change of domicile,  Irrelevant: Motive for change of domicile immaterial.
must demonstrate;  Once permanent abode been established in new place,
o Actual removal from domicile; courts will not weigh ethical values of motives.
o Bona fide intention of abandoning former place  EXP: to genuineness of intent to acquire new domicile
of resid and estab new one; o (C) Constructive domicile; domicile by operation of law
o Acts which correspond with purpose.  By operation of law
 Bradley v. Lowery  domicile is assigned to persons incapable of acquiring own
o leaves State with INTENT NOT TO RETURN  Minors
o enters another State w/ INTENT TO  Mentally disabled
PERMANENETLY SETTLE.  Married women
 White v. Tennant  Domicile assigned by law to persons after birth on account of legal
o In sum: disability
 entirely abandoned former domicile  (a) minors
 no intention of returning  Legitimate  domicile of both parents
 establishes residence in new place for o Disagreement  GR: that of father; EXP: unless
ANY period of time, however brief judicial order to contrary A211 FC
 intention of making home at another  Illegitimate  domicile of mother A178 FC
State  Absence/ death of either parent  domicile of present
 new domicile remains until changed parent
like manner o EVEN IF surviving parent remarries
o Removal of intent to return EVEN before new  Adopted  domicile of choice of adopter
domicile is acquired (e.g. en route) is OK.  Father’s domicile changes  ff father’s domicile
o Floating intention to return to FORMER place  Father dies  mother’s domicile
of abode at some future period is OK. o This is prevailing rule in many countries as
 Ex. Maybe they want to visit relatives consequence of application of laws on parental
they left behind authority
o Constructive residence also OK tho actual resid  A212 FCC: In case of absence or death of either parent,
NOT have begun. parent present shall continue exercising parental
 Reverter/ revival doctrine – once domicile of choice is given up authority. Remarriage of surviving parent shall NOT
(abandoned), presumed that domicile of origin is revived until new affect parental authority over children, unless the court
one is acquired. appoints another person to be the guardian of person or
 Criticism: violates principles that property of children.
o Domicile continues until new one acquired o DIFF from NCC:
o Domicile acquired upon concurrence of act and  A328 NCC: mother who contracts subsequent marriage
intent loses parental authority over her children, UNLESS DC H,
 My solution: non-loss by mere abandonment only applies father of latter, has expressly provided in his will that his
to OG domicile. Domicile of choice can be abandoned  widow might marry again, and has ordered that in such
OG domicile is what is revived. case she should keep and exercise parental authority over
 Degree of permanence of abode children.
 trend is to state intention in negative way  A333 NCC: widow who remarries only regains parental
 As long as NO intention to return to old domicile, new authority should she become widow again.
domicile is created, whether intention is to remain for rest  TF, child whose mother remarries retains his old domicile
of one’s life or indefinitely or for time being. until he voluntarily changes it upon reaching age of
majority
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 (b) mentally disabled; insane, idiots, imbecile o People under compulsion – freedom of choice is an indispensable criterion.
 CANNOT select own domicile  A person under compulsion is in that place NOT as result of his
o Presumed they cannot acquire domicile of choice volition.
because of inherent inability to decide where to  Examples: military personnel, prisoners, PWDs confined in
make his home. institutions
o Below age of majority  rules on minors apply  Recent US decisions: person should be allowed to prove acquisition
o Of age + has guardians  domicile of choice of of domicile of choice, if he shows intent to remain in place even after
guardian compulsion ceases.
o NO guardian  constructive domicile of choice  Compulsion is reduced to factor which determines whether intent
before bcm insane exists.
 EXP: But if it is shown that person is capable of  Otherwise would be to curtail constitutionally protected right to
understanding his act and its consequences, he may be able choose one’s domicile.
to acquire domicile of choice. o Married women – unity of identity of spouses; wife presumed to take domicile
 (c) married woman of husband.
 Valid marriage  Dom of both spouses  Archaic and constitutes gender-based discrimination
o UNLESS law allows wife to have separate  FC69: Husband and wife shall fix the family domicile
domicile for valid and compelling reasons A69 [TOGETHER]. In case of disagreement, the court shall decide. | CT
FC may exempt one spouse from living with other if latter should live
abroad, or there are other valid and compelling reasons for
 Legal or de facto separation  can have own dom of
exemption. However, such exemption shall not apply if same is not
choice (De la Vina v. Villareal)
compatible with solidarity of the family.
 Voidable marriage  same rules as when marriage is
 No case yet deciding controversy over the wife’s right to establish
valid.
her OWN domicile.
 Annulled  can freely select own domicile of choice  EXPs
 Void  can have own  Wife had right to acquire own domicile BUT after her
 (d) other persons husband’s death Romualdez
 Convict or prisoner  that which he possessed prior to  Wife may establish separate domicile if justified in leaving
incarceration – CANNOT choose her husband FC69.
 Soldier  that before enlistment – BC compelled to ff o BUT modern view dispenses with presumption that the wife’s domicile is
dictates of military same as her husband.
 Public officials or employees abroad (diplomat, consular,  Each party establishes his/her domicile independent of the other.
etc)  that before they were assigned elsewhere (BC stay  W need NOT show that H have cause for divorce/legal separation to
abroad is official, not personal, capacity) – UNLESS they be able to fix her own domicile.
voluntarily adopt place of employment as permanent  Venue in estate proceedings
residence o Actual residence or place of abode, NOT domicile (as well as for ordinary civil
 Legal classification of domicile proceedings) (Jao v. CA)
Domicile of Origin Constructive Domicile Domicile of Choice o Residence for purpose of fixing venue (ROC)
Acquisition: acq at birth Assigned after birth  Personal, actual, physical habitation, or actual residence or place of
Scope: assigned ONLY to Assigned to persons under abode
infants legal disabilities  NOT necessary legal residence or domicile
Nature: NEVER changes May change  Provided he resides there w/ continuity and consistency (San Luis v.
Assigned by law Assigned by law Result of voluntary will and San Luis)
action  Situs or Eclectic Theory
o Capacity, condition, status of person is gov by law of place (situs) where
 Special problems in domicile of choice v-a-v constructive domicile important element of problem occurs, or is situated
o Problems confronting acquisition of domicile of choice:  Two kinds of participation of individual concerned
 People under compulsion; o Active
 Married women seeking to acquire domicile separate from husbands.  person acts voluntarily
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 governing law: law of actual situs of transaction or event o Universality of status

o passive  Status, once established by personal law, is given universal
 effects of act are set forth or determined by law recognition
 governing law is law of legal situs (i.e. domicile of individual  Once status is set by A, B is bound to attribute to any person of A the
concerned) status as established in A.
 Cannot introduce qualifications may exceptions not set in
PRINCIPLES ON PERSONAL STATUS AND CAPACITY A.
o If aliens sue or are sued in PH
Factual situation Point of contract  Procedural rules  PH law (judicial jurisdiction)
Beginning of personality of natural persons National law of child  Status and capacity  personal law (legislative)
Age of majority o Divorce: PH CTs no longer try actions for divorce even if brought by persons
Use of names and surnames whose national laws allow it.
Use of titles of nobility  Contrary to public policy.
Absence  A26 FC instead
Presumptions of death and survivorship Lex fori  Beginning and end of personality
o Civil personality is commenced at birth, it is extinguished by death.
 Definition o Beginning – commenced by birth
o Status  PH: for Filipinos, always national (PH) law A15 CC
 place of individual in society  Other states
 more or less permanent personal qualities and relationships with w/c  German CC: upon completion of person’s birth.
state and community are concerned  Spanish CC: must be alive for at least 24 hours.
 “Status” was taken from the Roman doctrine of status libertates  PH: fetus legal existence – retroacts to moment of conception
(freedom), status civitates (citizenship) and status familiae (position  Before birth, fetus is NOT person, but part of internal organ
as head of house or person subject to pater familia). of mother. (Tolentino)
 No exact meaning and is nebulous because the law does not  BUT, expectancy that it will be born, thus law affords it
recognize absolute legal characteristics inherent in every person. protection.
o Personal status o A40 NCC Birth determines personality; but
 GR: includes both condition and capacity conceived child shall be considered born for all
 Specific: purposes that are favorable to it, provided it be
 Beginning and end of human personality; born later with conditions specified in the
 Capacity to have rights in general; following article.
 Capacity to engage in legal transactions; o A41 NCC For civil purposes, foetus is
 Protection of personal interests, family relations; considered born if it is alive at time it is
o Husband-wife completely delivered from mother's womb.
o Parent-child However, if foetus had an intra-uterine life of
o Guardian-ward <7m, it is not deemed born if it dies within 24h
 Transactions of family law; after its complete delivery from maternal womb.
o Marriage  No cause of action for damages on behalf of unborn
o Divorce child, because CC states that it should be subsequently
o Separation born alive Geluz v. CA.
o But damages may be awarded to the parents for
o Adoption
such damage directly sustained by them.
o Legitimation
o End – extinguished by death
o Emancipation
 Declaration of death by competent CT is considered valid for all
 Succession purposes.
o Testate  Rights and obligations are extinguished by death but others are
o Intestate transmitted to his heirs/successors Limjoco v. Intestate Estate of
 Legislative vs. judicial jurisdiction Fragrante
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 Purpose of estate as artifical person is to enable proper A376 NCC provides that no person can change his name or surname
disposition of assets of DC. without judicial authority.
 Bill of Rights makes no distinction between natural and  A364 – 366 NCC govern use of surnames4.
artificial persons as to due process clause and right against o Grounds allowed under jurisprudence:
unreasonable searches and seizures.  Ridiculous, tainted with dishonor, extremely difficult to pronounce;
 Pending application for CPC is right that survived  Change is necessary to avoid confusion;
decedent’s death. Estate can be considered applicant.  Right to new name is consequence of change in status;
 Absence  Sincere desire to adopt Filipino name to erase signs of former alien
o Legal effects of absence nationality which unduly hamper social and business life.
 and restrictions on ABS capacity to act  Confusion as to paternity is valid ground for denial of petition for
 are det by personal law. change of name Padilla v. Republic.
o Problem: Domestic laws of various countries do not treat absentees alike.  Y: name is reflection of paternity.
o Ways to deal with this problem  Affects status as LC or IC.
 Rebuttable presumption that person is dead after absence for o Aliens: WON change of name is valid depends on alien’s personal law.
specified number of years;  Age of majority
 Person’s unexplained absence is judicially investigated and o Governing law
established which results in legal effects similar to those of death;  Personal law determines attainment of majority age. A15 NCC
and  RA 6809 lowered age of majority from 21 to 18.
 Judicial decree shall be issued declaring person dead before legal o Aspects of personal status
effects of death take place.  Legal disability attached to minority
o PH follows rebuttable presumption:  Rights recognized upon attainment of age of majority
 A390 NCC regular o Emancipation
 7y  presumed dead for all purposes – EXP for  parental authority terminates
succession.  person is qualified and responsible for all acts of civil life, subject to
 10y  presumed dead for purpose of opening his certain EXPs
succession  Parental consent to contract marriage required until age 21.
 Disappeared after age of 75y + 5y absence  sufficient in  parents’ continued observance of responsibilities under A46 PD 603.
order that succession may be opened  Capacity
 A391 danger of death: presumed dead for all purposes, including o part of one’s status; sum total of rights and obligations
division of estate among the heirs (4y): o It is best qualified to decide what restrictions should be imposed on individual.
 (1) A person on board a vessel lost during sea voyage, or an o Kinds of capacity
aeroplane which is missing, who has not been heard of for  Juridical capacity – fitness of man to be subject of legal relations.
four years since the loss of vessel or aeroplane;  Inherent in every natural person
 (2) A person in the armed forces who has taken part in war,  Lost only thru death A37
and has been missing for four years;  Capacity to act – the power to do acts with legal/ juridical effects
 (3) A person who has been in danger of death under other  Acq and may be lost A37
circumstances and his existence has not been known for  Both must concur to produce complete civil capacity
four years. o Governing law: PERSONAL LAW
 Periods reduced to 4y and 2y
 modern means of communications.
4
o Declaration of death ARTICLE 365. An adopted child shall bear the surname of the adopter.
 is required for certain purposes ARTICLE 366. A natural child acknowledged by both parents shall principally use the surname of the
 e.g. subsequent marriage under FC41. father. If recognized by only one of parents, a natural child shall employ the surname of the recognizing
 Otherwise, marriage void. parent.
 Name
ARTICLE 367. Natural children by legal fiction shall principally employ the surname of the father.
o Beale: Determination of name is not problem of status because person is
ARTICLE 368. Illegitimate children referred to in article 287 shall bear the surname of the mother.
traditionally free to assume a name and change at will. ARTICLE 369. Children conceived before decree annulling a voidable marriage shall principally use the
o Judicial intervention is needed. surname of the father.
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 FIL – Status and capacity of a person is det by national law of  Difficulties in determining what individual’s personal law is and
person NCC15. issue of WON he should be governed by such law have led courts to
 Aliens compromise.
 Within PH  nationality theory  Distinctions must be made between:
 Outside of PH  depends on w/c principle their country  Situations which call for law of contract as demanded by
follows (Sempio-Dy) local interests (e.g. need for stability in commercial
o country follows nationality principle – OK. transactions), and
o country follows domiciliary principle – OK.  Those where protective policies are enshrined in one’s
o EXP: personal law (e.g. transactions involving family relations).
 Torts – law of the place of tort;
 Contracting capacity of married woman – can be governed by law CHOICE OF LAW PROBLEMS
governing spousal relations.
 Spousal rels: GR: national law of H, subject to exceptions FAMILY RELATIONS
o Capacity to contract
 GR: Gov by person’s personal law – whether lex nationalii, or lex  Introduction
domicilii o Problems in conflict of laws began
 EXP:  When people ventured beyond immediate surroundings and entered
 contracts re: real or personal prop  lex situs or lex reisitae into transactions and relations that were necessarily connected to
o Ex. Alien (15yo) wants to apply for PH more than one legal system.
naturalization. Abroad, he is already of majority  Interstate/intl families whose family relations span globe.
age. PH laws says he must be 18yo to be  Marriage between man and woman in country other than that of their
naturalized. nationality—questions may arise as to:
o A: At age of 15yo, he may FILE petition to be Fil  Personal and property relations;
citizen – provided that at time of hearing, he is  Status and rights of children
already 18yo. Hearing must be postponed until o Use of the father’s surname;
then, even if already majority age in own country o Right to inherit.
abroad. o Family law
 Incapacities attached to legal status follow individual wherever he  area of law which reflects strong state policies anchored on values
goes. highly held by its society.
 Those who contract with another must first ascertain his  Emotions rule but once created, family relations give rise to grave
legal capacity. individual and societal concerns.
 Nearly impossible task—investigate personal law of  one of most complicated and sensitive areas to be dealt with from
another to see if capacity to act is limited. COL perspective
 Problem:  Governing law
 When person fully capacitated under personal law enters o GR: Qs of family rights, duties, status, conditions, capacity are governed by lex
into contract to be performed in foreign country that does nationalii A15 NCC
not consider him capable of contracting o
 Recall some cases prev used significant factors, or where
contract was completed. (A) MARRIAGE
 Insular Gov v. Frank
 Interpretation and validity  law of place where contract  Importance
is made o Of all domestic relations, marriage is most important
 Performance  law of place of performance. o Validity of marriage in one state may be at issue in another state in cases of
 Remedies  law of place where suit is brought. annulment, support, custody, legitimacy, taxation, divorce, inheritance, bigamy
 Beth: Court applied lex loci contractus but result would have been (crim case)
same had it applied Frank’s personal law. o A1 FC: Marriage is special contract of permanent union between man and a
woman entered into in accd with law for the establishment of conjugal and
family life. It is the foundation of the family and an inviolable social institution
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

whose nature, consequences, and incidents are governed by law and not oMust be BOTH intrinsic and extrinsically valid
subject to stipulation, except that marriage settlements may fix the property  Intrinsic  personal law
relations during the marriage within the limits provided by this Code.  Not prohibited by personal law
o Full significance of this definition is realized when juxtaposed with A15  Extrinsic  where celebrated
NCC.  EXTRINSIC VALIDITY (marriage as contract)
 Lex nationalii governs questions of family rights and duties, status, o Extrinsic
conditions and capacity  Formalities
 As a contact (marriage certificate)  External conduct required of parties or of third persons especially of
o Marriage is declaration of contracting parties public officers, necessary to formation of legally valid marriage.
o in presence of— o Governing law
 Solemnizing officer  LAX LOCI CELEBRATIONIS Hague Convention
 Two witnesses of legal age  reason: BC predictability and interstate order arising from societal
o That they take each other as husband and wife, interest in marriage
o Signed or marked by contracting parties and their witnesses, and o Formal requisites of marriage A3 FC
o Attested by person solemnizing the marriage.  (1) Authority of solemnizing officer;
o Special contract because:  (2) A valid marriage license
 It must be entered into by man and a woman;  Exp: cases in Chapter 2 Title 15
 They must be at least 18 years of age;  (3) A marriage ceremony
 It is solemnized by an officer specifically authorized by law;  with appearance of contracting parties
 It is permanent union unless—  before solemnizing officer
 One of parties dies;  personal declaration that they take each other as husband
 The marriage is declared void or annulled (voidable) and wife (marriage certificate)
 Cannot be abrogated, amended or terminated by one or both parties at  not less than 2 WTs of legal age.
will; o GR: Marriages validly celebrated in foreign countries + complied with
 Nature and consequences are governed by law and are not subject to legal formalities there  valid and recognized in all other states Hague
stipulation;  Forms, solemnities of contracts, wills, other public instruments be
 Violation of marital obligations may give rise to penal or civil governed by laws of country were executed NCC A17
sanctions.  All marriages soleminized outside PH, in accd w/ laws in force in
 Breach of ordinary contract entitles party to damages. country where solemnized, and valid there as such  also valid in
 PH policy on marriage and family PH A26 FC
o A15 CONST: o EXP: VOID marriages in PH, even if valid in foreign country where
 Marriage, as an inviolable social institution, is foundation of family celebrated - exceptions to lex loci celebrationis – controlled by LEX
and shall be protected by State. NATIONALII
o Presumption of validity of marriage  EXPs below put into issue capacity of parties to enter into marriage,
 Purpose: stability to institution of marriage: or substantive requirements of marriage
 NCC220: In case of doubt, all presumptions favor the solidarity of  … except those prohibited under A35 (1), (4), (5) and (6), 3637 and
the family. Thus, every intendment of law or facts leans toward the 38 A26 NCC
validity of marriage, indissolubility of marriage bonds, the  A26 FC Expanded exceptions to 16:
legitimacy of children, community of property during marriage, the  Same-sex marriages A2 FC
authority of parents over their children, and the validity of defense  Either or both parties below 18yo – even w/ parental
for any member of the family in case of unlawful aggression. consent A35.P1 FC
o Purpose of principles:
5
 To guide courts; Art. 27. In case either or both of the contracting parties are at point of death, the marriage
 To further strengthen solidarity of family; and may be solemnized without necessity of a marriage license and shall remain valid even if the
 To impress upon its members importance of family and paramount ailing party subsequently survives. (72a)
interest state has in preserving it. Art. 28. If the residence of either party is so located that there is no means of transportation
o Many conflict rules distinguish between extrinsic and intrinsic validity of to enable such party to appear personally before the local civil registrar, the marriage may be
marriage. solemnized without necessity of a marriage license. (72a)
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 Bigamous, polygamous marriages A35.P4 FC  Mixed marriages – also national law of parties.
 Mistake as to identity of contracting party A35.P5 FC  Filipino + Foreigner; abroad
 Subsequent marriage performed o If valid under law of one spouse + void under law
o w/o recording in Civil Reg judgment of other  uphold validity
o of annulment or declaration of nullity, partition, o UNLESS universally incestuous or immoral
distribution of properties  Filipino + Foreigner; in PH
o delivery of children’s presumptive legitimes A53 o Follow PH law
FC o Reason: public policy
 Either spouse is psych incap to comply with essential o Intrinsic requirements of marriage under PH law A2 FC
marital obligs A36 FC  (1) Legal capacity of contracting parties who must be
 Incestuous marriages A37 FC  male and female
 A38 FC marriages that are void on grounds of public  at least 18 years old
policy.  without legal impediments;
o (1) Between collateral blood relatives whether  (2) Consent freely given in presence of solemnizing officer.
legitimate or illegitimate, up  Matrimonial consent – that parties are at least, not ignorant
o to the fourth civil degree; that marriage is permanent union.
o (2) Between step-parents and step-children; o Void marriages
o (3) Between parents-in-law and children-in-law;  A26 FC Expanded exceptions to 16:
o (4) Between the adopting parent and the adopted  Same-sex marriages A2 FC
child;  Either or both parties below 18yo – even w/ parental
o (5) Between the surviving spouse of the adopting consent A35.P1 FC
parent and the adopted  Bigamous, polygamous marriages A35.P4 FC
o child;  Mistake as to identity of contracting party A35.P5 FC
o (6) Between the surviving spouse of the adopted  Subsequent marriage performed
child and the adopter; o w/o recording in Civil Reg judgment
o (7) Between an adopted child and a legitimate o of annulment or declaration of nullity, partition,
child of the adopter; distribution of properties
o (8) Between adopted children of the same o delivery of children’s presumptive legitimes A53
adopter; and FC
o (9) Between parties where one, with the intention  Either spouse is psych incap to comply with essential
to marry other, killed that other person's spouse, marital obligs A36 FC
or his or her own spouse.  Incestuous marriages A37 FC
o NOTE:  Void marriages by reason of public policy A38 FC
 Personal law of parties governs Qs of intrinsic validity of marriages o Contracting state may REFUSE RECOGNITION of marriage if Hague
between Fils abroad.  One of spouses was already married;
 TF above enumerations are exceptions to lex loci celebrationis –  Spouses were related to each other
controlled by lex nationalii  either by blood or by adoption
 INTRINSIC VALIDITY (marriage as a status)  in direct line
o Intrinsic  or brother or sister;
 Capacity or “general ability of person to marry  One of spouses had not attained minimum age required for marriage
 det by reqs of age and parental consent nor acquired necessary dispensation
 but does not refer clearly to individual’s being permitted to marry  One of spouses did not have mental capacity to consent;
specific person or person of determinate class.  One of spouses did not freely give consent to marriage.
o Governing law o Christianity prohibits polygamous and incestuous marriages
 PERSONAL laws of parties (i.e. either domiciliary or nationality)  doctrine must be confined to cases deemed incestuous by general
 Municipal laws provide substantive requirements of a valid consent of all Christendom.
marriage
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

o Public policy may be ground for courts to refuse recognition of foreign setting forth circs showing his legal capacity to marry in lieu of
marriage affidavit
 Manifestly incompatible with ordre public of state of which parties o Examples
are nationals  First cousins married in CALI  In PH law, incestuous.
 EXP: This rule should not apply where Q of marriage is only  Fil step-brother married Fil step-sister in CALI  PH WILL
incidental to resolution of another issue. recognize marriage as valid, bc it is valid in place of celebration,
o In Re Dalip Singh BIR’s Estate and marriage is not prohibited (bigamous, polygamous, incestuous
 F: Singh died leaving two purported legal wives, both claiming to under PH law) A26 FC
have married DC in Punjab over 50y ago in accd with laws of that  Fil step-brother married Fil stepsis inside PH consulate  deemed
state. took place in PH – VOID
 H: both marriages were valid. o Rules on extrinsic validity of certain situations
 F: (EN CT) DC died in CA. Under laws of CA, only first wife is legal  Proxy marriages
widow. Petitioners claim that both marriages should be declared as  GR: where permitted by law of place where proxy
valid on strength of A63 NCC, similar to A26 FC. participates, they are entitled to recognition (at least, formal
 H: Polygamous marriages can be recognized in EN law as validity) in countries adhering to lex loci celebrationis
to confer on wives status of wife, for purposes of §10 of  PH law: NOT sanction proxy marriages. BUT if validly
British Nationality and Status of Aliens Act or for purpose celebrated in foreign state, MAY be recognized in PH
of succession, and upon children, status of legitimacy. under lex loci celebrationis
 Marriages Celebrated by a Consular Official; Marriage contracted outside PH  Common law marriages
o PH Consul General/ Consul/ V-Consul may perform marriages  GR: If valid in state where parties cohabit as hubby + wife,
o Governing law: LEX LOCI CELEBRATIONIS it is given recog by sister states w/c do not permit so.
 RECALL: Marriage formally valid where celebrated is valid  PH law: NOT recognize common law marriage
elsewhere A17(1) NCC; A26 FC  Marriage on board vessel on high seas
o Place:  Nation whose flag ship is flying has juris over ship,
 Which country’s consulate. compliance w/ this law is required for marriage to be
o Reason for lex loci celebrationis validly contracted.
 when parties choose place as loci celebrationis of marriage,  Consular marriages
 considered to have subjected all Qs of form to law of that place  Marriages bet Fils abroad may be solemnized by consul-
 and if valid there, it be considered valid everywhere general, consul, vice-consul of PH (A10 FC)
o Requisites (GR: FIL-FIL)  Plural marriages
 Formal and essential reqs complied with.  If parties or at least H is Mulsim, PH will recognize max 4
 valid marriage license marriages of same H (as recog by PH Muslim Code on
 publication and registration Personal Laws) to protect rights of wives and children
 Marriages celebrated by diplomatic agent/consular official in o Rules on marriage if celebrated abroad or in PH
accordance with state law shall be valid as long as it is not prohibited  Celebrated abroad
by state of celebration. Hague Convention
 Marriage performed by consular or diplomatic agent empowered by Factual situation Point of contract
sending state to officiate marriage is valid in receiving state, only if Between Filipinos Lex loci celebrationis
officer agreed to his acting in that capacity
 NOTE: above focus on validity is RECEIVING state w/o prejudice to exceptions under A26, 35(1), (4), (5), (6),
o Requisites (FIL-ALIEN) 36, 37, 38 FC (bigamous, polygamous, incestuous) and
 Same as above applicable consular marriages
 As long as alien complies with requisites under his NATIONAL law. Between foreigners Lex loci celebrationis
 Additionally, alien must present in PH Certificate of Legal
Capacity to Contract Marriage issued by his diplo/consular office EXP if mar is:
o Requisites (Stateless)  Highly immoral (like bigamous and polygamous)
 he must submit affidavit  Universally considered incestuous
Mixed Lex loci celebrationis
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

o A69 FC: The husband and wife shall fix family

1. If valid under law of one spouse + void under law of domicile. In case of disagreement, CT shall
other  uphold validity decide. The court may exempt one spouse from
2. UNLESS universally incestuous or highly immoral living with other if latter should live abroad or
there are other valid and compelling reasons for
o Celebrated in PH exemption. However, such exemption shall not
Between foreigners National law (A21 FC) apply if the same is not compatible with
solidarity of family.
o Valid reason: legal impediment of continued
Provided marriage is NOT highly immoral or incestuous
residence in PH of foreigner spouse
Mixed National law of Filipino
 Djumantan v. Domingo:
o F: FIL H married Indonesian W in Indonesia.
(otherwise public policy may be militated against) They arrived in PH with intention of staying.
Marriage by proxy Lex loci celebrationis (w/ prejudice to foregoing rules) o H: NO law guaranteeing aliens married to FIL
citizens a right to be admitted, much less to be
NOTE: considered GR: permitted by law of place where proxy participates  given permanent residency, in PH.
celebrated where proxy recognized (at least, formal validity) in countries adhering o Immigration laws are still applicable and
appears to lex loci celebrationis marriage does not excuse alien from her failure to
depart country upon the expiration of her
PH law: If validly celebrated in foreign state, MAY be extended stay here as an alien.
recognized in PH under lex loci celebrationis  Restatement 2d:
o Wife who lives with her husband has same
 MARRIAGE AS STATUS domicile as his
o Marriage is not mere contract, but inviolable social institution. o EXP when special circumstances of wife make
o Nature, consequences, and incidents are governed by law, NOT subject to such result unreasonable.
stipulation A1 FC  When woman marries foreigner, usually loses her
o PERSONAL relations between spouses nationality, and ff. hubby.
 Scope  H usual head of family, so his personal law governs
 Mutual fidelity personal relations of sps.
 Respect  National law of wife or PH law governs spouses’ personal
 Support relations by party of reasoning w/ A80 FC
 Cohabitation  Previous chapter: constructive domicile assigned to wife constitutes
 Support gender-based discrimination.
o PROPERTY relations of spouses
 Right to use husband’s surname
 Governing law: PERSONAL LAW  Governing law (BOTH ALIENS)
 PH (FIL marriages): National law of parties  *Internal law designated by spouses before marriage (ff by
 Mixed: H’s national law prevails – so long not contrary to law, PH law)
morals, good customs of forum.  OR Internal law of state in which both spouses fix their
 EXPs: first habitual residence Hague Convention:
o If national law of hubby violates public policy of  PH LAW (FILS, or MIXED)
forum  GR:
o National law of wife is law of forum, intended to o (1) Stipulation in marriage settlement
protect wife’s Rs o (2) PH laws
 REASONS:  Absent such stipulation
o In PH, personal relations of sps are governed by  Regardless of place of celebration of
PH law – BC PH follow domiciliary theory, law marriage and their residence. A80 FC
of their domicile governs  EXP: PH rules does NOT apply (GR: lex rei sitae)
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

o (1) BOTH spouses are aliens  GR in conflict of  OR Internal law of state in which both spouses fix
laws apply their first habitual residence Hague Convention:
o (2) extrinsic validity of contracts affecting
property not situated in PH and executed in In PH LAW
country where property is located; and  GR:
o (3) extrinsic validity of contracts entered into in o (1) Stipulation in marriage settlement
PH but affecting property situated in foreign o (2) PH laws
country whose laws req different formalities for o Absent such stipulation
its extrinsic validity. o Regardless of place of celebration of
o Such provision generally follows rule of lex rei
marriage and their residence. A80 FC
sitae A16 NCC.
 EXP: PH rule NOT apply (GR: lex rei sitae)
 Only ONE SPS is Filipino
o (1) Where both spouses are aliens  GR
 Philippine law would still apply regardless of whether he or
in conflict of laws apply
she later changes citizenship (principle of immutability).
o (2) With respect to the extrinsic validity
 Doctrine of immutability of matrimonial property regime
of contracts affecting property not
 Regardless of change of nationality by either or both sps,
situated in PH and executed in country
original property regime existing at start of marriage
where property is located; and
prevails
o (3) With respect to extrinsic validity of
 Reasons:
contracts entered into in PH but affecting
o Marital peace in sps’ prop relations more or less
property situated in foreign country
guaranteed whose laws require different formalities
o Sps will not be able to prejudice creditors, who in for its extrinsic validity.
turn can jeopardize interest of sps
o Sps may protect selves from each other
NOTE: effect of change of nationality – NONE.
 Hague Convention: applicable law continues notwithstanding
(Doctrine of immutability in matrimonial property
change of nationality or residence
regime.
o Rules on nature, consequences, incidents of marriage
(B) DIVORCE (a vinculo matrimonii) and SEPARATION
Factual situation Point of contract
Personal rights and obligations National law of hubby Factual situation Point of contract
between husband and wife
Sought in PH (by Fils OR foreigners) Lex fori  will NOT be granted
Effect of subseq nationality change
(mutual fidelity, cohabitation,  If both have new common nationality  new EXP: muslim divorce
respect, assistance and support,  Only 1 changed  last common nationality Obtained abroad bet Fils National law  NOT valid in PH, even if valid
right of wife to use hubby  Sps retain different nationalities after marriage  abroad
name, duty to ff hubby national law of both sps govern Obtained abroad bet foreigners National law  if valid in state granting it, AND
residence)
valid accd to law of both parties, valid in PH
One writer says law of hubby at time of marr apply – Obtained abroad bet Fil and foreigner IF valid in state granting it and valid accd to nat
BC it may even be more favorable to wife. law of foreigner  valid in PH (RP v. Manalo)

Some exceptions to above rule are:  Introduction

 If national law of hubby violates public policy of o Two kinds
forum  Absolute
 National law of wife is law of forum, intended to  Limited
protect wife’s Rs o Absolute divorce – Termination of the legal relationship between spouses by
Property relations between  *Internal law designated by spouses before act of law.
hubby and wife marriage (ff by PH law)
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 Legal dissolution of marriage bond rendered by competent ct, for o capacitating alien sps to remarry
causes defined by law w/c arose after valid marriage   Fil sps also cap to marry under PH law A26 FC
o Relative divorce/ legal separation – separation from bed and board  Severing marital ties between parties in mixed marriage
 NOT affect dissolution of marital ties. and capacitating Fil sps to remarry as necessary
 Modifies the incidents of the marriage consequence of upholding validity of divorce obtained
 spouses no longer reqd to live with each other. abroad by alien sps San Luis v. San Luis
 CT may order payment of support by spouse  (b) Both aliens
o TF must have personal J over spouse and  valid divorce obtained abroad between foreigners whose
property it seeks to affect by its decree national laws allow divorce
o NO CONFLICT WHEN, spouses, in same country are:  (a) Divorce decrees obtained by Filipinos
 nationals o Divorce obtained by Sps BOTH FILs abroad
 domiciled  INVALID and are NOT recognized in PH
 and divorced there o Marriage bet FIL + foreigner susceptible to divorce
o When any one of those factors is governed by the laws of another state,  Whether obtained by FIL OR alien spouse RP v. Manalo
conflict arises.  A26.P2 FC: Where marriage between Filipino citizen and foreigner
 Problems: is validly celebrated and divorce is thereafter validly obtained
 Recognition of decree abroad by alien spouse capacitating him or her to remarry, the
 Division of marital property Filipino spouse shall have capacity to remarry under Philippine law.
 Claim to custody (As amended by EO 227)
 Provisions for support  Limited recognition of divorce obtained aborad
o JURISDICTION: Most countries exercise divorce jurisdiction based on  Rationale: uneven status of Filipino nationals whose alien
domicile spouses obtained divorce abroad and remarried other
 Domicile of one of parties; or persons while the Filipino spouses remained married to
 Matrimonial domicile. them in eyes of PH law
o Rationale: Divorce, being a matter of concern of the state, should be governed  Reckoning point
by the law of the place where the person is most intimately concerned, the  citizenship at time VALID DIVORCE is obtained abroad
place where he dwelleth and hath his home. by alien sps RP v. Orbecido
 Forum court must have substantive contact with the relationship  When marriage initially NOT mixed
which by its laws it will decide whether or not to dissolve.  Even if marriage not mixed, if one sps later bcms foreign
o Granting of divorce/separation must comply with Hague Convention citizen, and obtains valid foreign divorce decree  sps who
 national law of spouses (right to divorce) did NOT change citizenship WILL be considered
 AND law of place where application for divorce is made (grounds) capacitated to remarry RP v. Orbecido
o Codigo Bustamante/Siamese law: o Limited recognition of divorce obtained abroad
 Right to divorce – national law of the spouses  Requisites Corpuz v. Sto Tomas
 Grounds – forum law, provided the parties were domiciled there.  Divorce must be judicially recog by PH CT
o Grounds are dictated by lex fori  Annotated in local civil reg
 Many states refuse to recognize a foreign ground for divorce unless it o Reqs judicial recog
is also a ground under forum law. o NO entry in civreg shall be changed or corrected
 This practice is followed whether the choice-of-law approach used is w/o judicial order (A412 NCC)
traditional or policy-centered  If non-recog of divorce will work injustice and unfairness to Fils
 General rules  A15 FC
o GR: we only observe relative divorce or legal separation in PH  Under nationality principle – only PH nationals are covered
o EXP: limited recognition of divorce obtained aborad by policy against absolute divorces, same being consid
 (a) Mixed marriages contrary to public policy and morality.
 requisites  BUT aliens may obtain divorces abroad, recog in PH,
o Valid marriage provided valid accd to their national law Van Dorn v.
o bet Fil and foreigner Romillo
o valid divorce abroad
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 A26.P2 FC extended limited recognition to divorce obtained by  State has duty to recognize divorce pronounced by another state
FIL against alien sps where both parties are domiciled there.
 Divorce abroad is considered valid in PH, even if it’s Fil  If it is only plaintiff, other conditions must be satisfied (e.g. service
sps who files for divorce abroad. of process to defendant).
 A26.P2 FC only requires that there be divorce validly  A divorce rendered by foreign country is not subject to full faith and
obtained abroad. credit clause, but would be recognized under same circumstances that
 NO demand that alien sps be one who initiated proceeding, sister state’s divorce decree is given recognition.
wherein divorce decree was granted.  Jurisdiction of foreign court based on domicile.
 NO distinguish bet Fil sps being petitioner or respondent in  Recognition of divorce is SPECIAL proceeding
foreign divorce case. RP v. Manalo o Petition for recog of foreign judgment is SPECIAL proceeding, w/c seeks to
 Retroactivity of A26 FC San Luis v. San Luis estab status, right, fact
 A26.P2 FC can be applied retroactively o NOT civil, w/c is for enforcement or protection of right, or prevention of
 FIL who divorced by alien Sps abroad may validly remarry redress. (Fujiki v. Marinay)
under NCC, considering that marriage was solemnized  Correction of entry
before FC took effect (August 3, 1988). o Judicial order and special proceeding needed
 Must be judicially recognized Corpuz v. Sto Tomas o ROC: needs special remedial proceeding, by w/ entries in civreg may be
 While law allows entry of divorce decree in in civil reg, judicially cancelled or corrected.
law and submission of decree by themselves NOT ipso o NOT mean 2 separate proceedings for registration of foreign divorce decree is
facto autho decree’s registration. needed (Corpuz v. Sto Tomas)
 Law should be read in rel w/ req of judicial recog of foreign
judgment before it can be given res judicata effect BOC NOTES: legal separation or relative divorce (a mensa et thoro)
o Effects of divorce obtained abroad by foreigner spouse
 Foreign national may NOT go against Fil sps for accounting of  Conflict rules on legal separation
conjugal property after issuance of divorce dec. Van Dorn v. o Parties of same nationality  grounds for legal sep are those given by personal
Romillo law
 Foreign sps can no longer claim to be sps of Fil partner o Parties of different nationality  grounds available under personal law of both
 Foreign sps cannot maintain crim case of adultery and concubinage sps are all available grounds for granting legal separation (Hague on Legal
against former sps Pilapil v. Ibay-Somera Separation A8)
 Fil sps endowed w/ capacity to remarry, and subseq sps can file
 Some grounds for legal separation
petition for letters of admin San Luis v. San Luis
Factual situation Point of contract
 If alien sps is granted right to remarry, so is FIL sps RP v. Manalo
Grounds for legal separation National law of parties
 Legal effects of divorce on custody, care, support of kids must still be
det by ct (Roehr v. Rodriguez)  adultery  if of same or common nationality,
 concubinage national law governs
 (b) Validity of foreign divorce between foreigners
o Foreign divorce will be recognized in all contracting states IF, at date of  attempt by one sps against life of other  if diff nationalities – grounds given by
BOTH national laws all be consid
institution of proceedings Hague convention on recognition of divorce and
proper grounds (Hague on legal
LS
separation A8)
 Respondent/petitioner had his habitual residence in state where
divorce was obtained;
 BOTH spouses were nationals of that state; or  JURISDICTION: where legal separation should be filed
 Altho petitioner was national of another country, s/he had residence o Most countries assume juris over cases for LS based
in place where divorce was obtained  DOMICILE of ONE party
o Reason for recog in PH  MATRIMONIAL domicile
 Foreign divorce between foreigners should be recognized under o Foreigners may ask for legal sep in PH – even if they did not get married in
principle of comity PH
 not violate strongly held policy of PH  Important is that ct has juris over both parties
o in US  NOTE: NOT necessary that cause for LS takes place in PH for our
cts to have juris over case. Important is ct has jurisdiction over
parties, and ROC complied with
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

o Annulment brought in State C, husband’s residence.

(C) ANNULMENT AND DECLARATION OF NULLITY o What law applies?
 Following lex loci celebrationis, State B law. If such law requires
 Annulment v. declaration of nullity parental consent, then annulment may be granted.
o Annulment o If most significant relationship approach is used, State A law (marital
 voidable marriage domicile). If the law states that they have full capacity, no ground for
 grounds are provided by law alleged to be violated annulment.
o Declaration of nullity o Choice of law rule of State C is irrelevant
 void ab initio marriage  Summons
 grounds are exceptions to lex loci celebrationis in FC o When def NOT PH resident, and actions affects personal status of plaintiff 
 e.g. incestuous, bigamous, polygamous publication in newspaper of gen circulation
 Governing law
o National law D. PARENTAL RELATIONS
 Capacity of parties to marry
o Lex loci celebrationis  Issue of legitimacy is submitted to the personal law of the parents.
 Dets consequences of any defect to form  Personal law of father is used to determine legitimate relationship.
 Generally, substantive/ intrinsic validity o German law: head of the family
o EXP: Consular marriages  either national law or law of domicile of parties  Paternity – civil status of the father/mother with respect to the child begotten by him/her.
applies  Filiation – status of the child in relation to his parents.
 PH rule  PH law: legitimacy of child governed by the national law of the parents.
o We follow nationality theory o If different, national law of the father
o TF PH cts have jurisdiction over annulment and nullity cases in marriages w/  Determination of legitimacy of child
FIL litigants o A163 FC The filiation of children may be by nature or by adoption. Natural
o PH DOMICILIARIES can also file suits in PH filiation may be legitimate or illegitimate
 JURISDICTION to annul o A164 FC Children conceived or born during the marriage of the parents are
o Court of NATIONALITY or DOMICILE of parties legitimate. | Par 2. Children conceived as a result of artificial insemination of
 NOT celebration of marr (locus delecrationis) the wife with the sperm of the husband or that of a donor or both are likewise
 Reason: state of domicile has greatest interest in domestic relations of legitimate children of husband and his wife, provided, that both of them
parties authorized or ratified such insemination in written instrument executed and
 Also affects the status and domestic relations of the parties. signed by them before the birth of child. The instrument shall be recorded in
 Based on defects existing at the time of celebration of marriage. the civil registry together with birth certificate of child.
o In divorce, ground occurs after celebration. o A165 FC Children conceinved and born outside a valid marriage are illegit
 For states whose choice-of-law approach is traditional, the grounds follow lex loci unless otherwise provided in this Code
celebrationis. o Personal law of illegitimate child is governed by personal law of mother.
 For those who follow the policy-centered approach, applicable law is law of the state of o If legitimated, personal law follows that of the father.
marital domicile.  Common law
o Has most significant interest in the status of the spouses.  Now provides that children born of certain invalid
 In both approaches, lex fori plays no substantial role since the action turns on validity of marriages may still be legitimate.
the marriage.  Illegitimate children may be legitimated by events occurring after
 Ff. following states can claim adequate jurisdictional basis to hear conflicts case: their birth.
o State where marriage was celebrated; o Differences in some states give rise to choice of law problems.
o State where parties have their marital domicile  Child may be legitimate as to one parent but illegitimate as to other.
 Whealton v. Whealton: even a court which acquires only personal jurisdiction over the o Restatement 2d
parties can grant an annulment decree.  S287 Child legitimate if this would be his status under the law of the
 Example of conflicts annulment case: state where:
o Both parties are domiciliaries of State A, 18 years old.  Parent was domiciled when the child’s status of legitimacy
o Married in State B without knowledge of parents. is claimed to have been created; or
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 Child was domiciled when the parent acknowledged child  Status of legit or illegit child is not affected by subseq change of
as his own. nationality of parents
 S288 A state usually gives same incidents to a status of legitimacy  If child is later legitimated, personal law of child ff father
created by foreign law under principles stated in S28 that it gives to o Parental authority over child
status when created by its own local law:  Derived from patria potestas (roman law)
 Persons legitimated may inherit land in the forum to same  Personal law of father controls Rs and duties of parents and children
extent and under same circumstances as those legit under (Pangalangan)
forum law  NOTE: ref to personal law of dad may result in joint exercise of
 Parental authority over child parental autho over child’s prop (A221 FC).
o Roman law concept of patria potestas.  Dad’s personal law may also grant parental autho to mom of illegit
o Personal law of the father controls the rights and duties of parents and children. children (A176 FC)
 NOTE: ref to personal law of dad may result in joint exercise of  (B) Legitimation
parental autho over child’s prop (A221 FC). o Process where kids NOT born in lawful wedlock, and should be ordinarily
 Dad’s personal law may also grant parental autho to mom of illegit considered illegitimate children, are by fiction of law and upon compliance w/
children (A176 FC) legal reqs, regarded as “legit” (born after parents already validly married)
o Joint exercise of parental authority is mandated by FC211. o Reqs of legitimation are gov by
o If child is illegitimate, mother exercises parental authority under FC176.  (1) National law of parents
o Scope:  (2) National law of father
 Care and rearing of children for civic consciousness and efficiency o Effects
and development of their moral, mental and physical character and  If child is later legitimated, personal law of child ff father
development.  immutable status of child
 Actions for support.  BUT nature and extent of Rs and duties flowing as incidents from
 Requirements of parental consent to marriage. status of legitimacy may be modified by change of personal law
 Discipline and chastisement deemed to be decisive of child’s status. – Legitimary is immutable,
 Doctrine of immutability of status but incidents of status are mutable.
o Status of legit or illegit child is not affected by subseq change of nationality of o Change in personal law of parents or dad
parents  Legitimated of child NOT effected (immutable status)
o Once legitimacy is created under law of parent, under by birth or legitimation,
permanent status. E. ADOPTION
o BUT nature and extent of Rs and duties flowing as incidents from status of
legitimacy may be modified by change of personal law deemed to be decisive  Adoption – act by which relations of paternity and affiliation are recognized as legally
of child’s status. – Legitimary is immutable, but incidents of status are mutable. existing between persons not so related by nature.
 (A) Legitimacy and illegitimacy o Judicial act creating between two persons relationship similar to that which
o Determination of legitimacy/ governing laws results from legitimate paternity and affiliation.
 (1) Use common personal law of parents, either domiciliary or  Adoption originally considered to supply solace to those who:
nationality o Had no children;
 (2) OR personal law of father if parents have different nationalities o Lost their children.
(Pangalangan)  Now, adoption is given a social and moral purpose.
o Status and personal law governing Rs and duties bet child and parents o Even those with biological children and single people can adopt.
(PH rules)  Process of adoption affects status of parties, thus governed by lex domicilii.
 Personal law of illegit child  Problem: if adopter is domiciled in one state and the child, in another.
 GR: mom’s personal law o What court has power to create adoptions whose effects would be recognized
 EXP: child is recognized by father  personal law of outside its jurisdiction?
father o What law is applicable to adoption of or by a foreigner in forum?
 NOTE: Providing neither conditions nor distinctions, 1935 CONST,  Since main object of adoption is to provide for the welfare of the child, then his personal
says that among citizens of PH are those whose fathers are citizens of law should apply.
PH, regardless of whether child is legit or illegit  Use of child’s personal law is weakened where his domicile is merely constructed or if he
o Doctrine of immutability of status is citizen of state where he does not actually reside in.
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

o No basis for courts to protect interest of child. o Objectives of Hague Convention

o Cannot supervise relations between child and adopters.  To establish safeguards to ensure that inter-country adoptions takes
o This has led many states to consider adopter’s personal law as having place in best interests of child and with respect for his or her
reasonable basis for exercising jurisdiction, either exclusively or concurrently. fundamental rights as recognized in international law;
 May an alien adopt a child in the Philippines?  To establish system of cooperation amongst Contracting States to
o GR: No, because they have very different family orientation, cultures, customs ensure that those safeguards are respected and thereby prevent
and traditions which could pose problem for Filipinos to adapt themselves to a abduction, sale of, or traffic in children;
new environment.  To secure recognition in Contracting States of adoptions made in
o EXP: accd with Convention.
 A184 FC: o Prior to RA 8043
 (a) A former Filipino citizen who seeks to adopt a relative  what applied were “Rules and Regulations on Foreign Adoption”
by consanguinity;  which implemented PD 603 and bilateral agreements with foreign
 (b) One who seeks to adopt the legitimate child of his or countries.
her Filipino spouse; or  Effects of adoption
 (c) One who is married to a Filipino citizen and seeks to o Body of rights and other legal effects may be governed by two laws depending
adopt jointly with his or her spouse relative by on which law governed creation of adoption.
consanguinity of latter  If adopter’s personal aw applied, same law governs effects.
 Aliens not included in foregoing exceptions may adopt Filipino  If child’s personal law applied, such law will cease to regulate parent-
children in accordance with the rules on inter-country adoptions as child relations and will yield to personal law of parents.
may be provided by law. o Adoption relates to a civil right and does not effect changes in the political
 RA 8552 S7.b (Domestic Adoption Law) introduced significant changes in adoption rights of adopter.
law.  Citizenship of adopter not automatically given to adopted child.
o Any alien possessing the same qualifications as above stated for Filipino o Decree granting adoption is foreign judgment, hence, principles on recognition
nationals and enforcement of foreign judgment shall govern.
o Provided, That his/her country has diplomatic relations with the Republic of
the Philippines, that he/she has been living in PH for at least (3) continuous Beda Notes: Adoption
years prior to filing of the application for adoption and maintains such
residence until adoption decree is entered, that he/she has been certified by  (C) Adoption
his/her diplomatic or consular office or any appropriate government agency o Juridical act; proceeding in rem
that he/she has legal capacity to adopt in his/her country, and that his/her gov o Creates between 2 persons a rel similar to that w/c results from legitimate
allows adoptee to enter his/her country as his/her adopted son/daughter: paternity and filiation
Provided, Further, That requirements on residency and certification of alien's o Creates parent-child relationship by judicial order between 2 parties usually
qualification to adopt in his/her country may be waived for following: unrelated
 (i) former Filipino citizen who seeks to adopt a relative within fourth o Governing law (determinative law WON relationship of adoption been created)
(4th) degree of consanguinity or affinity; or  (1) Child’s personal law, for own protection
 (ii) one who seeks to adopt legitimate son/daughter of his/her  (2.) If child NOT reside in country of citizenship 
Filipino spouse; or  (2.1) personal law of adopter OR
 (iii) one who is married to Filipino citizen and seeks to adopt jointly  (2.2) personal law of adopter AND of child, concurrently
with his/her spouse relative within the fourth (4th) degree of  GR: legal effect of adoption is det by same law creating it
consanguinity or affinity of Filipino spouse  EXP: where public policy or interests of inhabitants forbid
o Alien must present enforcement and demand substitution of lex fori
 Certificate of legal capacity o Legal effects that flow from adoption
 That their state laws allow entry of adoptee to adopter’s country as  Successional Rs of adopted children
adopted child  Parental authority of adopter over adopted
 May be WAIVED if adoptee is relative  Entitlement of adopted to all Rs and obligs provided by law to legit
 RA 8043 Adoption of Filipino children by ALIENS and FIL citizens permanently children (RA 8552.S16-18)
residing ABROAD  NOT WAY TO ACQUIRE FILIPINO CITIZENSHIP!!
o Passed in consideration of obligations under Hague Convention.
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

o Under Domestic Adoption Act of 1998 (RA 8552), an alien (NOT former  Adoption NOT confer on adoptee the citizenship of adopter.
Fil) may adopt, provided he is:  Citizenship is political, NOT civil – outside of NCC (Uggi
 Of legal age Lindamand Therkelsen v. RP; Ching Leng v. Galang)
 Possession of full civil capacity and legal Rs o Law governing adoption proceeding
 Good moral character  Alien qualified to adopt under Child and Youth Welfare Code, w/c
 Not convicted of any crime re: moral turpitude was in force at time of FILING petition, acquired vested right w/c
 Emotionally and psych capable of caring for kids could not be affected by subseq law disqualifying him.
 At least 6yo older than adoptee  FC (1988) will NOT impair R of aliens to adopt Fil child, bc R has
 In position to support and care for kids become vested at time of filing, w/c shall be governed by law then in
 His country has diplo relations w/ PH force (RP v. Miller)
 Resident in PH for at least 3 cont. years, prior to filing applic for o Recording foreign adoptions NOT inimical to private international law
adoption, and maintains such residence until adoption decree is  Private internal law offers no obstacle to recog of foreign adoption –
entered principle being status of adoption, created by law of state having juris
 Issued cert of legal capacity to adopt in his country by his diplo or to create it, will be given by latter state to status of adoption when
consular officer created by own law.
 His gov allows adoptee to enter his country, as adopted son/ daughter  Status of adoption, once created under proper foreign law, will be
(RA 8552.S7) recognized in PH, EXP when public policy or interests of inhabitants
o Requirement on residency and certificate of qualification to adopt may be forbid so, and demand substitution of lex fori.
waived for ff:  Implicit in A15 NCC: exercise of incidents to foreign adoption
 Former Fil citizen who seeks to adopt relative w/n 4th degree of remains subj to local law (Marcaida v. Aglubat)
consanguinity/ affinity o (SEE MEM-EID FOR ADOPTION PROCEDURE AND PERSONS AND
 Seeks to adopt legit child of Fil sps FAMILY RELATIONS UNDER THIS BOOK ON DOMESTIC AND INTER-
 Married to Fil, and seeks to adopt jointly w/ Fil sps, a relative of COUNTRY ADOPTION LAWS)
latter w/n 4th degree of con/ aff (RA 8552.S7)  Rules on guardianship
o NOTE on joint adoption
 RA 8552 requires that hubby and wife jointly adopt. Factual situation Point of Contract
 If sps are legally separated, hubby or wife can adopt alone – consent Over person  Court of domicile ward
of other sps NOT needed  Appointing court  Coextensive w/ those of
o Requirement of 16y difference may be waived, if adopter is:  Powers of guardianship appointing court law of
 Biological parent of adoptee appointing state)
 Sps of adoptee’s parent (RA 8552.S7) Over property  Court where property is
o Capacity to adopt is vested right from FILING  Appointing court found (lex rei sitae)
 Alien qualified to adopt under Child and Youth Welfare Code, w/c  Powers of guardianship  Coextensive w/ those of
was in force at time of filing petition, acquired vested right w/c could appointing court (law of
not be affected by subseq law disqualifying him the appointing state)
o Sempio-Dy: under R39.S48 ROC,PH may recognize foreign decree of Over person and over property Same as above
adoption, provided: (general guardian)
 Foreign ct had jurisdiction to render said decree
 NO want of notice, collusion, extrinsic fraud, clear mistake of law or  Rules on funerals
fact leading to foreign decree of adoption
o Inter-country adoption
Factual situation Point of contract
 Socio-legal process of adopting Fil child by foreigner or Fil citizen,
Funerals – incidents thereof Where body is buried
permanently resides abroad
 Abroad is where petition is filed, supervised trial custody done,
CHOICE OF LAW IN PROPERTY
decree of adoption issued.
 Alternative means of child-care, if child cannot be cared for in PH
 The controlling law
(RA 8042 S3)
o Adoption NOT way to acquire Fil citizenship o The classification of whether a particular piece of property is movable or
immovable usually determines the applicable legal system.
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

o For immovables  lex situs.  Modern: Even under modern approach (significant contacts
 Rationale approach, state interest approach etc.), place where property is
 characterization of immovable property as isolated object located is still state that is closely and significantly related to issue in
of rights question
 so interests of persons are determined by law of place  Trad: Since physically part of country, property should be governed
where property is situated. by laws thereof.
 Connecting factor o Rule governs ff. issues
 immovable itself  Any form of alienation
 NOT parties concerned.  Sale
o For movables  may be lex domicilii, lex situs, lex loci actus, or property law  Mortgage
of transfer (e.g. sales of shares)  Barter
 Old law: lex loci domicilii  Exchange
 mobilia sequuntur personam – rights over movables are  Lease assignment
gov by domiciliary law of owner.  Effects of co-ownership
 Reason  Quieting of title
o Simplicity and convenience.  Taxation
o Objects could be moved from place to place,  Registration
difficult to anticipate where they may be situated  Prescription
at given time o Effect on tax
 Lex situs  Owner may be taxed at place where property is located, altho he is
 Reason NOT domiciliary, citizen or resident of state which imposed tax.
o State where property is located has sole power to  When is there COL problem?
decide validity of transfer of property. o If property is located in foreign country which law distinguishes bet real and
o Policy-centered – Parties’ legit expectations are personal property.
protected. o Elements of conflict of laws on property ownership
 Normal expectation is for contract to be  There is dispute over title or ownership of property, such that
gov by law of state where object is capacity to take and transfer, formalities of conveyance, essential
located validity and effect of transfer, or interpretation and effect of
 Parties should know at time of conveyance, are to be determined
conveyance whether there is valid  Foreign law on ownership and conveyance is asserted to Conflict w/
transfer and nature of such. a domestic law on same matters
 Lex loci actus  Capacity to transfer or acquire property
 law of place where transaction was made o Gov by law of place where property is located (lex situs)
 Proper law of forum  GR: LEX SITUS – Extrinsic and intrinsic validity of conveyances
 law of state which has most real connection with transfer o Formalities: lex situs
 e.g. previous case on support agreement  Compliance with formal reqs of lex situs is pre-req to reg of title for
 PH follows lex rei sitae rule transfers w/ Register of Property
o Civil Code does NOT dist bet real and personal o Essential validity: lex situs
 A414 NCC define property: All things which are or may be object  EXP: lex intentionis is clearly established
of appropriation are considered either: o Effect of conveyance: lex situs
 (1) Immovable or real property; or  treated as Q of property – rather than of contract.
 (2) Movable or personal property.  EXPs to lex situs rule
 A16 NCC Real AND personal property are subject to law of country o (a) Transaction does not affect transfer of title to or ownership of land
where it is SITUATED  Lex intentionis or lex voluntatis
o Rationale o (b) Contracts where real property is offered by way of security for
 Code Commission: Great increase in amount and variety of performance of obligation such as loan.
personal property not actually with person of owner makes  Principal contract  proper law of contract (lex loci voluntatis or
 So better to use lex sitae also to movables. intentionis)
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 Gov by rules on ordinary contracts.  Only duty was to deliver checks issued
 Accessory contract  lex situs and made out by home office to
o (c) Testate or intestate succession and capacity to succeed annuitant.
 National law of DC o No showing that funds been transferred from CA
 A16.P2 CC (Successional rights) to MNL
 A1039 CC (Capacity to succeed) o (c) Situs of debts
o (d) others  2 kinds of movable property:
 If lex situs is chosen for convenience of parties, but both parties  Choses in possession – embraces all kinds of tangible
knew that property be used principally in another place  law of physical objects.
place of principal use.  Choses in action – refers to intangible objects.
 Where issue involves considerations other than validity and effect of o RIGHTS of actions – ex. Debt arising from loan.
transfer itself, law of state which has real interest in applying its law o Rights represented by documents – those capable
governs of delivery and susceptible to negotiation as
 Rudow v. Fogel Ex. Issue is WON conveyance would separate legal entity
result in trust among family, who ALL reside in other state.  Basis: Harris v. Balk
Held: Domiciliary  Debt, though intangible, is subject to seizure like
 Policy-centered approach tangible property
 forum court not bound to look at law of situs when situs of  Debt is located where debtor is located because it is
movable property at time of transfer was insignificant or where he can be sued and the debt collected.
incidental  Prof. Beale’s criticism: The decision did injustice to creditor.
 Situs of certain properties  Creditor is actually owner of property.
o (a) Situs of personal property for tax purposes  Yet, he has no control over where his own property is
 Mobilia sequuntur personam - rights over movables are gov by located because debtor may travel all over.
domiciliary law of owner  This issue remains unsettled in PH jurisdiction.
 Mere fiction of law  Suggestion: law which governs contract from which debt
 Basis: convenience and public policy. arises should also govern transfer of debt.
 BUT does NOT prevent right of state to tax property within its J. o (d) Situs of corporate shares of stocks
 Yields to established facts of legal ownership, actual  S63 Corporation Code
presence, and control elsewhere.  Certificate of stock and transfer of shares. – The capital
 Cannot be applied if it would result in inescapable and patent stock of stock corporations shall be divided into shares for
injustice. which certificates signed by president or vice president,
 Asiatic Petroleum v. Co Quico (1940) countersigned by the secretary or assistant secretary, and
 CT has J. Situs of res (no dist im/movable) is PH. Even if sealed with the seal of the corporation shall be issued in
def is outside PH. accordance with the by-laws. Shares of stock so issued are
o (b) Situs of money personal property and may be transferred by delivery of the
 Leon v. Manufacturers Life Insurance Co certificate or certificates indorsed by owner or his attorney-
 F: Contract entered into in Canada. Leon wanted to in-fact or other person legally authorized to make the
recovery money from instrument endorsed in an annuity in transfer. No transfer, however, shall be valid, except as
CA. He sued PH branch of the Insurance Comp. between the parties, until transfer is recorded in the books
 H: Situs of the money was in Canada, hence, outside of the corporation showing the names of parties to the
probate J of MNL courts. transaction, the date of the transfer, the number of the
o Money to be recovered was from inst endorsed in certificate or certificates and the number of shares
annuity in CA transferred.
o …under contract exec in CA  No shares of stock against which the corporation holds any
o From funds held in CA unpaid claim shall be transferable in the books of the
o PH branch corporation.
 only held checks.  CIR v. Anglo California Nat Bank
 Situs of shares themselves
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 Situs of income derived from sale of shares law, in addition to rights to which any owner of intellectual
 Collector of Internal Revenue v. Anglo California National Bank property right is otherwise entitled by this Act. (n)
(1960) o Capacity to sue v. damages for infringement Phillips Export BV v. CA
 Tax purposes: concern is situs of SALE of shares  Foreign corps may bring action under S160
 Place of sale = place where title is passed.  BUT S156 allows ONLY owners of registered marks may recover
 Patents, trademarks, trade name, and copyright damages for infringement of rights
o 27 sept. 1965: PH became party to Union Convention for Protection of  Exclusive R to use its corp and trade name is property right in
industrial property rem
 A8: trade name shall be protected in all countries of Union without  Can be asserted and protected against whole world
obligation of filing of registration, whether or not it forms part of o …SEC denied prayer for issuance of preliminary injuction.
trade name.  Petition itself was later dismissed.
o Western Equipment and Supply Co. v. Reyes A comp, tho has NOT done  Rules on property
business in PH, has right to protect reputation. Use of corporate and trade name o SEE: PRIL - MEMAID
is property right which may be asserted against the whole world.  Paris convention for protection of industrial property (PH is member-country)
 F o Nationals of members countries shall be entitled to:
 Western Electric Co. (WEC), Inc  Rs provided by Paris Convention in PH, w/c are consistent w/ PH
o foreign corp duly organized under NY laws Laws
o NOT licensed to do business in PH  Enjoy privileges that PH laws grant or may grant to its nationals
 Nevada corp imported WEC’s products into PH  Sources of rights of foreign nationals
 Herman, et al. filed with SEC, AOI for corp to be known as o (a) Reciprocity  law of alien’s country extends reciprocal Rs to Fil citizens
Western Electric Company, Inc. o (b) Convention, treaty, agreement, where PH is also a party
o For manufacture and dealing in electrical and o NOTE: trademarks protection has source in, and is subject to, limitations of PH
telephone supplies. law – NOT law of alien’s country
 WEC sought to restrain issuance of COI  Sources of rights and legal remedies for trademarks
 H: Although WEC has not done business in PH, it has right to o (a) Prior use in commerce of mark or trade name in PH, from w/c grows
protect reputation. Use of corporate and trade name is property property rights thereto (intellectual prop code S123.2)
right which may be asserted against the whole world. o (b) Trademarks’s registration w/ intellectual property office (intellectual
o Hanover Star Milling v. Allen: Since it is trade and not mark that is to be property code S122)
protected, trademark ack no territorial boundaries of municipalities or states  Rights of foreign nationals pertaining to trademarks
or nations, but extends to every market where trader’s goods have become o (a) Sue in trademark or service mark enforcement action (intellectual property
known and identified by use of mark.” code S160)
o RA 8293 1998: prescribing Intellectual Property Code and Intellectual o (b) Register their marks or trade names under same terms and conditions as
Property Office those applicable to local applicants or to base their applications on their home
 S123 what cannot be registered registrations, or to claim priority Rs in connections / pending foreign
 names well known internationally and in PH – WON reg in applications
PH  Grounds for refusal of registration
 since already a mark of person other than applicant for  Mark constitutes reproduction of well-known mark
registration and used for identical or similar goods or  Mark is armorial bearing, flag, etc.
services  Mark infringes Rs of other, is devoid of distinctiveness, or
 S3 Intl Conventions and Reciprocity. is contrary to public morals
 Any person who national OR domiciled OR has real and  Territoriality or independence of registration
effective industrial estab in country which is party to any  Paris Conention provides that “mark duly registered in
convention, treaty or agreement rel to intellectual property country Union shall be regarded as independent of marks
rights or repression of unfair competition, to which PH is registered in other countries of Union, including the
also party, or extends reciprocal rights to nationals of PH country origin (Paris convention for protection of industrial
by law, shall be entitled to benefits necessary to give effect property A6)
to any provision of such convention, treaty or reciprocal o (c) file action for infringement or unfair competition
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

o (d) oppose or cancel registration of identical mark or substantially similar to  or domiciled

own marks or trade names  or has real and effective industrial establishment
 NOTE: for enjoyment of these Rs, it is necessary that foreign  in any of member countries of Paris convention
nationals submit proof that their country grants substantially si o IF engaged in business in PH  must first secure license to do business
milar Rs and privileges to citizens of PH, and their marks should’ve  Rights guaranteed by Berne convention for copyright holder
been previously registered in intellectual property office, or are well- o Authors shall enjoy
known marks or trade names  in countries of Union, other than origin country Rs w/c their
o (e) Protection in PH against unfair competition respective laws do now or hereafter grant to their nationals
o (f) Right of priority, subject to certain conditions  Rs specifically granted by Berne Con
 Right of priority – right accorded to applicant who has previously o Enjoyment and exercise of Rs
filed application in any of member countries.  shall NOT be subject to any formality
 His application filed in PH is considered as if filed on date the first  shall be independent of existence of protection in origin country of
application was filed in country of origin work
o (g) Assign trademark and protect trade names o where author is NOT national of origin country of the work for which he is
 NOTE: Paris convention requires protection of trade names even w/o protected by the Con  enjoy in that country same R as national authors
registration. (Berne Convention A5)
 S165 IPC incorporated this req by protecting trade names even prior
to reg CHOICE OF LAW IN CONTRACTS
o (h) right to protect collective marks
 Collective marks  Scope:
 any visible sign designated in application for reg o In conflict of laws, discussion of contracts only includes those purely civil or
 capable of distinguishing origin or any other common char commercial in nature.
– including quality of goods or services of diff enterprises o Excludes those w/c create status (e.g. marriage), or those transferring real rights
w/c use sign under control of reg owner of collective mark (Sempio-Diy; Paras)
(IPC S121.2)  Civil Code re: contracts
o (i) right to protect service marks o Article 1305
 Service marks – any visible sign capable of dist services of enterprise  contract is meeting of minds between 2 persons
(IPC S121.1)  where one binds himself, with respect to other
 Legal remedies of foreign nationals  to give something or to render some service.
o Action for dam and inj –infringement, unfair competition, false designation, o Article 1315 perfected by mere consent
false description  from that moment, parties are bound not only to fulfillment of what is
o Petition to oppose, cancel reg expressly stipulated, but also to all consequences which, according to
o Petition ofr seizure of prohibited goods (IPC S160) their nature, may be in keeping with good faith, usage and law.
 Rights pertaining to patents  Contracts shall be obligatory, in whatever form they may have been
o National member countries enjoy in other member countries adv that their entered into
respective laws grant on nationals  - provided all essential requisites for validity are present.
o Inventor has R to be mentioned in patent  - However, when law requires that contract be in some form to be
o Grant of patent shall NOT be refused valid or enforceable, or that contract be proved in certain way, that
o Patents shall NOT be invalidated on ground that sale of patent product, or of req is absolute and indispensable. In such cases, right of parties stated
product obtained by patented process, is subj to restrictions or limitation of in ff article cannot be exercised.
domestic law  Purposes of contract law
o Importation by patentee into country where patent been granted of articles o Protect reasonable expectations of parties to contract
manufactured in any country of the Union shall NOT entail forfeiture of parent o Stability in commercial transactions
o Industrial designs shall be protected in all countries of the Union  Elements to consider
o Entitled to file suit for infringement of patent o Intrinsic
 Requirements for foreign patentee’s to file infringement suit o Extrinsic
o He is: o capacity
 National  A. Contracts involving foreign element
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

o Due to modern means of communications, there are now more contracts being  A1319.P2 NCC
entered into by people of varying nationalities, thus giving rise to problems in o Acceptance made by letter or telegram does not
conflict of laws. bind offeror except from time acceptance came to
o States may have different rules regarding: offeror’s K
 Formalities of contract; o The contract, in such a case, is presumed to have
 Capacity of parties; been entered into in place where offer was
 Essential requisites for intrinsic validity; made.
 Interpretation of contracts; and  Engel v. Velasco
 Law governing execution of contracts. o Where tele-communications are followed by
o Parties to contract may have intended particular State law to govern. letters expressly referring to telegrams and
 Forum CT must be ready to displace own law with that earlier relied confirming same, such telegrams become
upon by parties. admissible as part of correspondence bet parties.
o Provisions on contracts (e.g. interpretations of contracts)  Declaration theory – place where dec was made
 Many are merely designed to carry out general policies of contract  Mailbox rule – once you send, done
law common to all states.  Cognition theory
 Applied only when lex loci intentionis cannot be ascertained. o EXP: When lex loci contractus NO apply
o Contract law does not reflect strong state policies grounded on particular  If place of execution was merely casual or accidental, law w/c has
society’s values. most significant relationship to transaction should be applied
 Thus the forum court is not prevented from supplanting forum law o Effect of contract NOT comply with formal reqs of lex loci celebrationis
with another state law.  Contract NOT come into existence
o Instances of foreign elements in contracts  No contract is valid which is not made in accordance with local form.
 Alien individual becoming party to contract  C. Intrinsic validity of contracts
 Parties choosing foreign law as choice of law o Scope
 Places of execution and performance different from each other  Nature
 B. Extrinsic validity of contracts  content
o Governing law  effects of agreement
 LEX LOCI CELEBRATIONIS or LEX LOCI CONTRACTUS o NCC1318 Reqs of contracts
 NCC17 forms and solemnities of contracts, wills, and other public  (1) Consent of contracting parties;
instruments are gov by laws of country in which they are executed. X
 (2) Object certain – SM of contract;
XX
 (3) Cause of obligation established
 Broader principle: place governs act (locus regit actum).
o Three possible laws
 Restatement 2d considers acceptable “formalities which meet reqs
of place where parties executed contract  Lex loci contractus – place of making;
o Where exactly?  Lex loci solutionis – place of performance;
 Lex loci intentionis/ voluntatis – intended by parties
 Place where LAST ACT was executed – necessary to bring binding
agreement into being, insofar as acts of parties are concerned  Policy of our law to give effect to intention of parties
o Reason (very traditional in approach) (A1306 NCC)
 Stability of commercial transactions: no progress if people cannot  TF should apply proper law of contract
depend on the promises made by other persons o 1. Lex loci contractus
 Easy to determine  Reason
 Encourages uniformity, simplicity, convenience, predictability  Same as earlier
 Recognize justified expectations of parties  Very traditional in approach
 at time parties entered into contract, they prolly had in  Where exactly?
mind that place where they executed contract is the law  look to place where “last act necessary to bring binding
they intended or expected to apply to their transaction agreement into being, insofar as acts of parties are
o Variations concerned
 Contracts by cablegram, telex or fax in 2 diff countries  Disadvantage
 Place of execution? Offer
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 may lead to unjust results where place of making is  (P2) If words appear to be contrary to evident intention,
incidental or casual – no significant rel with contract or intention prevails.
performance  lex loci intentionis  Stipulated Intention/ choice-of-law
o RECALL: SUPPORT AGREEMENT CASE  Lex loci voluntatis
 Cts of forum will not enforce foreign claims obnoxious to forum’s  NCC1306 contracting parties may establish such
public policy stipulations, clauses, terms and conditions as they may
 PH law follows this. deem convenient, provided they are not contrary to law,
 In PH, EMP agreements are more than contractual morals, good customs, public order, or public policy.
 CONST itself, A13.S3 guarantees special protection of  When parties stipulate that contract be governed by specific
workers (Princess Talent Center Production Inc v. law, such will be recognized unless there are cogent
Masagca) reasons not to (e.g. public policy exception).
 NOTE: I think this is more of an option available to CT, esp when  Implied intention (NOT stipulated)
unclear what parties agreed on  Lex loci intentionis
o 2. Lex loci solutionis  Guide to det intent
 Reason o A1371 To judge intention of parties, their
 since contract is to be performed in particular place or state, contemporaneous and subseq acts shall be
it is proper that law of state govern rel of parties principally considered.
 USUALLY connected to contract in significant way o Parties may not have considered effects of
o RECALL: SUPPORT AGREEMENT CASE agreement.
 Criticism  TF law looks at acts and
 to allow state where contract is to be performed to det circumstances to det which among
validity of contract made in other state is to give them could have possibly exerted
extraterritorial effects to laws of former. influence upon their actions, and
 What if contract be performed in 2+ states with conflicting assumes that intentions are in harmony
laws on validity with such acts and circumstances.
 Governs  If you can't tell based on acts what parties intended
 matters relating to time, place, manner of performance o Forum court should apply the law of place which
 sufficiency of performance would sustain contract’s validity.
 valid excuses for non-performance o Parties presumed to have contemplated entering
o 3. Lex loci intentionis into valid contract.
 Reason o (you don't go through the process, undergo
 A1371 NCC intention of parties is paramount formalities, unless you don't have any other
o In order to judge the intention of contracting intention to carry it out)
parties, their contemporaneous and subsequent  Effect of indeterminate applicability of choice of law
acts shall be principally considered.  If parties do not specify extent of applicability of chosen
 A1306 NCC freedom to contract law, chosen law will normally apply to ff. concerns
o The contracting parties may establish such o Interpretation
stipulations, clauses, terms and conditions as o Rs and obligations arising from contract
they may deem convenient, provided they are not o Performance and consequences of non-
contrary to law, morals, good customs, public performance, including assessment of damages
order, or public policy. o Ways of extinguishing obligations, and
 Dicey and Cheshire intrinsic validity of contract should be prescription and limitation periods
governed by law intended by parties o Validity and consequences of invalidity of
 Qs of construction and interpretation of contracts are within contract
contractual capacity of parties. o Burden of proof and legal presumption
 A1370 If terms of contract are clear, leaving no doubt upon o Pre-contractual obligations Hague Principles on
intention of contracting parties, literal meaning of choice of law in international commercial
stipulations control. contracts A9
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

o (4) MODERN APPROACH: State of most significant relationship rule; o EXP: contracts involving alienation or encumbrance of realty or personalty 
center of gravity doctrine; grouping-of-contracts theory LEX SITUS
 Law of place w/ most connection to dispute o Incapacities attached to legal status follow individual – issue:
 Reason  Those who contract with another must first ascertain his legal
 convenience and practicality capacity.
 connected to contract in significant way  Nearly impossible task—investigate personal law of another to see if
 Factual contacts to consider capacity to act is limited.
 Place of contracting o Problem:
 Place of negotiating  When person fully capacitated under personal law enters into
 Place of performance contract to be performed in foreign country that does not
 Situs of SM of contract consider him capable of contracting
 Parties’ domicile, residence, nationality, place of  Recall some cases prev used significant factors, or where
incorporation, place of business contract was completed.
 These contracts are evaluated dep on relative importance to issue at  Ex. Alien (15yo) wants to apply for PH naturalization. Abroad, he is
hand Restatement (2nd) of conflicts of laws Sec 188) already of majority age. PH laws says he must be 18yo to be
 RECALL: SUPPORT AGREEMENT CASE naturalized.
 D. Capacity to enter into contracts  A: At age of 15yo, he may FILE petition to be Fil citizen –
o GR: PERSONAL LAW of parties (national or domiciliary law). provided that at time of hearing, he is already 18yo.
 In PH, capacity is governed by nationality theory A15 NCC Hearing must be postponed until then, even if already
 Article 15. majority age in own country abroad.
 Laws relating to family rights and duties, or to the status,  EXP: Insular Gov v. Frank
condition and legal capacity of persons are binding upon  CT disregarded lex nationalii and instead applied lex loci
citizens of the Philippines, even though living abroad. celebrationis.
 Article 37.  H: No rule is better settled in law than that matters bearing
 Juridical capacity, which is the fitness to be the subject of upon the execution, interpretation and validity of a
legal relations, is inherent in every natural person and is contract are determined by the law of the place where the
lost only through death. Capacity to act, which is the power contract is made
to do acts with legal effect, is acquired and may be lost. (n)  Rule
 Article 38. o Interpretation and validity  law of place
 Minority, insanity or imbecility, the state of being a deaf- where contract is made
mute, prodigality and civil interdiction are mere restrictions o Performance  law of place of performance.
on capacity to act, and do not exempt the incapacitated o Remedies  law of place where suit is brought.
person from certain obligations, as when the latter arise o Those where protective policies are enshrined in
from his acts or from property relations, such as easements. one’s personal law (e.g. transactions involving
(32a) family relations)
 Article 39.  Result would be same if applied lex nationalii
 The following circumstances, among others, modify or o Accd to Frank’s nat law, he was already
limit capacity to act: age, insanity, imbecility, the state of capacitated to enter into contract.
being a deaf-mute, penalty, prodigality, family relations, o Issue with lex loci nationalii
alienage, absence, insolvency and trusteeship. The  Difficulties in determining what individual’s personal law is and
consequences of these circumstances are governed in this issue of WON he should be governed by such law have led courts to
Code, other codes, the Rules of Court, and in special laws. compromise.
Capacity to act is not limited on account of religious belief  Distinctions must be made between:
or political opinion.  Situations which call for law of contract as demanded by
 A married woman, twenty-one years of age or over, is local interests (e.g. need for stability in commercial
qualified for all acts of civil life, except in cases specified transactions), and
by law. (n)  Those where protective policies are enshrined in one’s
personal law (e.g. transactions involving family relations).
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 E. Choice of law issues in conflicts contracts cases o autho entry of judgment against him
o Basis: freedom of contract (A1306 NCC)  In King Mau
 parties may stipulate on law to gov their agreement  “there is no conflict of laws involved in this case.”
o Issue  This statement disregards concept of COL as encompassing
 Qs on validity of stipulations regarding venue in litigation, all cases which have at least 1 foreign element.
arbitration, contracts w/ adhesion clauses  Forum CT is PH. Contract executed in NY, and parties
o 1. Choice of forum clause based in NY, it is obvious that there are foreign elements
 Define involved.
 which COURT would have J over dispute  In saying that “it is only a question of enforcing an
 Vs. COL obligation created by or arising from contract,” the court
 Which LAWS would apply to their contract must have meant that there is only APPARENT conflict.
 GR: Plaintiff decides venue. o Using interest analysis: can say PH has no
 EXP: significant interest in applying own law. Thus,
 Stipulation on venue of suit for litigation concerning false conflict.
contract will be given effect o Law to be applied is that of interested state which
 But only if parties specified choice of forum as ONLY is lex loci celebrationis.
venue, and if NO cogent reasons not to use selected forum o 2. Arbitration clause
 EXP to EXP: Action in Another Place by Agreement: If parties  Agreement between parties to undergo arbitration proceedings
agreed in writing that action on controversy be brought ONLY in  Governing law
another state, and it is brought in court of THIS state, court will  Law of place where contract is made. Korea Tech
dismiss or stay action, as appropriate, UNLESS:  Arbitration clauses are in itself a contract
 court is required by statute to entertain action;  Basis
 plaintiff cannot secure effective relief in other state, for  A1306 NCC freedom to contract
reasons other than delay in bringing action  In PH jurisdiction, commercial arbitration is purely private
 other state would be substantially less convenient place for system of adjudication facilitated by private citizens which
trial of action than this state we have consistently recognized as valid, binding, and
o non conveniens is invoked by CT, or as defense enforceable.
 agreement as to place of action was obtained by fraud,  A2042 NCC Persons who may enter into compromise may
misrepresentation, duress, abuse of economic power, submit their controversies to one or more arbitrators for
other unconscionable means decision.
o Ex. contracts of adhesion.  A2044 NCC Any stipulation that the arbitrators' award or
 unfair or unreasonable to enforce agreement Restatement decision shall be final, is valid, without prejudice to articles
Second 2038, 2039, and 2040.
 Parties failed to designate forum as exclusive, to exclusion  Preference to arbitration
of rest HSBC  In PH, NCC and Arbitration Law (RA 876) embody clear
 CT upheld jurisdiction of PH court in absence of any legislative policy in favor of settling controversies by
showing that compliance with arbitration clause was method considered more expeditious, less expensive, and
condition precedent for enforcement of contract, accd to w/ greater chance in some cases for substantial justice
law where executed Compagnie de Commerce  Q: May one party compel the other to submit to arbitration?
 Cognovit clause or confession-of-judgment  Multistate or multinational contract that contains arbitration
 Debtor may agree to be subject to J of specific CTs in case clause gives rise to issue of whether one party can compel
of contractual breach other submit to arbitration
 Valid only if  BEFORE: NO
o parties of equal bargaining power o Meacham v. Jamertone, Franklin and
o AND debtor voluntarily agreed Clearfield R.R. Co.
 Effect o F: Arbitration clause:
o waives debtor’s right to receive notice
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 designated Chief Engineer as arbiter to o gross negligence

decide matters in dispute arising out of  and be
contracts. o fairly and freely agreed upon
 His decisions be final and conclusive o reasonable and just under circumstances
bet parties  EXP:
 Parties waive all rights of actions.  Oppressive use of superior bargaining power
o H: (American CT) clause contrary to declared o PH CT justified in refusing to apply contract or
policy of courts. stipulation
 NOW: YES o Ground: NO real arm’s length transaction bet
o New York Arbitration Law (1912): arbitration parties
contracts are valid, enforceable, irrevocable  Additional requirement: understanding
 TF, in US law, arbitration clauses NO  Fricke v. Isbrandtsen Co
longer contrary to public policy of o F: Steamship ticket written in English called for
forum. application of US law, issued in GE to GE
o Nothing inherently wrong, immoral, or against plaintiff.
natural justice in arbitration agreements o H: provision cannot be enforced unless party
 Forum clause should control, absent strong showing that it should urging enforcement proved other as literate in
be set aside. language of contract, with K of what was
 unreasonable and unjust intended.
 or invalid for reasons such as fraud or overreaching.  Ensure that (parties) passengers understand terms Sweet
 The Bremen, et al. v. Zapata Off-Shore Company Lines Case
(1972)  Undue advantage made by dominant party
o Effect of arbitration and venue stipulations  linusually in huge corp or business monopoly
 AM and PH CTs: choice-of-law and choice-of-venue provisions do  principle of contracting party autonomy not apply.
not oust them of J.  CT may invoke public interest/public policy
o 3. Adhesion contracts  Ambiguity
 Adhesion contract  resolved in favor of party impugning provi in adhesion
 NOT negotiated by parties. contract
 Drafted by dominant party and usually embodied in  Construed strictly against party who drafted Saludo v.
standardized form –other party merely signs Court of Appeals
 “take it or leave it” contract o struck down as void and unenforceable ONLY if
 Why considered voluntary? weaker party is imposed upon in dealing with
 when adhering party enters into contract, he is presumed to dominant party
have read and understood the terms of the contract and o and is reduced to alternative of taking it or
have agreed to be bound by it leaving it, completely deprived of opportunity
 One who agrees to it is free to reject it entirely to bargain on equal footing.
 If he adheres, he gives his consent Ong Yiu v. CA;  Consent
PanAm v. Rapadas  Sweet Lines v. Teves
 Examples:  NOT just and proper to expect passengers to examine
 Insurance contract tickets received in congested counters, more often than not
 Bill of lading during rush hours
 Contract of sale of land from real estate firms  for conditions that may be printed much charge them with
 Airline tickets having consented to conditions, so printed, especially if
 GR: Adhesion contracts are NOT entirely prohibited, it is VALID there are number of such conditions in fine print
 in absence of  Again, it should be noted that Condition No. 14 was
o proof of arbitrariness prepared solely at instance of the petitioner, respondents
o abuse of power had no say in its preparation.
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

o Passenger could not examine same before

buying tix. NOTE: invalidity of principal contract
o Unlike in insurance contracts, where the would- results in invalidity of this accessory
be insured is given full opportunity to examine Guaranty and suretyship
and consider fine print. Extrinsic validity Lex loci celebrationis
 The Comp is franchise holders with virtual monopoly Capacity of parties National law
over business of transporting passengers bet ports covered
by their franchise. Intrinsic validity Lex loci voluntatis or lex loci intentionis
o passengers often without choice. Contract of common carrier of goods
 Circumstances of inter island vessels: Finally, judicial Extrinsic validity Fixed situs of carrier (depot or resting
notice may be taken of the fact that the bulk of those who place)
board these inter-island vessels come from low income Capacity of parties Fixed situs of carrier
groups and are less literate – w/ little or no choice but to Intrinsic validity Fixed situs of carrier
avail of petitioner's vessels.
Liability for loss, destruction, or Law of destination (A1753 NCC)
o 4. Special contracts
deterioration of goods in transit
 Rules on specific contracts
 Carriage of goods by sea
Factual situation Point of contract
 AM president lines v. Klepper
Sales and barter, lease of property, and commodatum
Extrinsic validity Lex situs  PH ports to foreign ports – law of country of destination
Capacity of parties Lex situs (A1753 NCC)
Intrinsic validity Lex situs  Foreign ports of PH ports
o Civil code (primary law)
Lease of services and simple loan or mutuum
o Code of commerce
Extrinsic validity Lex loci celebtrationis
o Carriage of goods by sea act (Aquino)
Capacity of parties National law  Contracts for international transportation
Intrinsic validity Lex loci voluntatis or lex loci intentionis  Claims for damages arising from contracts of international
situs air transportation – a comparatively new subject in Conflict
Pangalangan: of Laws.
 Warsaw Convention (Convention for the Unification of
GR: law of the permanent place of business of the financial institution Certain Rules Relating to International Transportation by
Loan by private indiv – law of place where loan was obtained Air)
Contract of agency o Oct. 12, 1929
Extrinsic validity Lex loci celebrationis o For the regulation and establishment of uniform
Capacity of parties to be principal or National law of parties rules and regulations on the liability of
agent international airline carriers in case of death,
Intrinsic validity Lex loci voluntatis or lex loci intentionis injuries of passengers or loss/damage of cargo.
o Amendments:
 Hague Convention
EXP to 1-3:
 Guadalajara
Lex situs if agency deals w/ conveyance
 Montreal Agreement
or encumbrance of property and
 Guatemala Protocol
property applies
 Montreal Protocol
Pledge, chattel mortgage, real mortgage, antichresis
o Philippines became a party to the Convention on
Extrinsic validity Lex situs
Feb. 7, 1951.
Capacity of parties Lex situs
Intrinsic validity Lex situs
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

o Applies to all international transportation of  Warsaw Convention applies to all international carriage of
persons, baggage or goods performed by aircraft persons, baggage, goods performed by aircraft for hire on
for hire. liability of airline in case of death, injury to passengers,
o Enumerates instances where the carrier is or loss or damage to cargo, but not to carriage of mail and
liable, fixing maximum amount of damages. postal packages (Warsaw A1, 2, 17, 18)
 By special contract, parties may agree  Recognition of application of Warsaw Convention does not
to greater liability. preclude operation of Civil Code and other pertinent laws
 Negligence of the passenger may in det of extent of liability of common carrier (PH Airlines
relieve the carrier from liability. v. CA)
o Carrier liable for death/injury of a passenger  GR: limit of liability
if the accident took place: o baggage lost  $1K
 On the aircraft; o death of passenger  P$100K
 While embarking or disembarking. o parties may stipulate higher limit of lia
o Carrier liable for loss/damage to checked in  EXP: carrier is liable for damages beyond those limited by
luggage, if damage took place during the Warsaw convention if there is malice, gross ne, BF,
transportation by air. improper discrimination by carrier or agents
 Period of responsibility includes the  Limits of liability shall not apply if proved that damage
time during which baggage/goods are resulted from act or omission of carrier or its servants/
in the charge of the carrier. agents, w/ intent to cause damage or done recklessly, with
o Liability for death/injury = $75,000. K that damage would prolly result, provided proved That
 Limits do not apply where the carrier’s servant/ agent was acting w/n scope of EMP
employee/agents acted recklessly or  NOT operate as exclusive enumeration of instances when
with intent to cause damage, or with K carrier shall be liable for breach of contract or as absolute
that damage would probably result. limit of extent of liability nor does it regulate or exclude
o Liability for lost/damaged luggage: liability for other breaches of contract by carrier,
 $20/kg. for checked luggage; misconduct of EEs, or for some particular or exceptional
 $400 for unchecked luggage. type of damage
o Passenger ticket is prima facie evidence of the  Period of responsibility
contract of carriage. o Includes time baggage or goods are in charge of
o Checked baggage is prima facie evidence of the carrier, wherever it may be (Warsaw Convention
registration of the luggage and the condition A18)
thereof.  Venue of suits at option of plaintiff-passenger
o Venue: o Domicile of carrier
 Domicile of the carrier o Principal place of business of carrier
 Principal place of business of the o Where carrier has place of business thru w/c
carrier contract was made
 Place of business of the carrier o Place of destination (Warsaw Convention A28)
through which the contract was
 Action will prescribe if not brought within 2y from
made
o Date of arrival
 Place of destination
o Procedural rules of the forum court apply. o Date on w/c aircraft ought to have arrived
o Prescription: 2 years from— o Date on w/c transpo stopped (Warsaw A29)
 Date of arrival at destination  Method of counting period of limitation is determined by
 Date on which the aircraft ought to law of forum or lex fori
have arrived  In case of several carriers:
 Date on which the transportation  Carriage to be performed by several successive carriers is
stopped deemed undivided carriage, if regarded by parties as single
operation, whether agreed upon under single contract or of
series of contracts.
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

o Does not lose intl char merely bc one contract or o Restatement 2d: In the absence of an effective choice of law by the parties,
series of contracts is to be performed entirely w/n consideration will be given to the following factors to determine the state with
a territory subject to sov of same high contracting which the contract has its most significant relationship:
party (Warsaw A1)  (a) the place of contracting
 Each of the successive carriers is bound by the rules set in  (b) the place of negotiating of the contract
Convention, deemed to be a contracting party only insofar  (c) the place of performance
as said carrier deals with part of transportation which it  (d) the situs of the subject matter of the contract
performed under its supervision (Warsaw A30).  (e) the domicile, residence, nationality, place of incorporation and
 Passenger or rep can take action only against carrier who place of business of the parties, and
performed the transpo during w/c the accident or delay  (f) the place under whose local law the contract will be most
occurred; unless by express agreement, the first carrier effective.
assumed responsibility for entire journey (Warsaw A30) o If (a), (b) and (c) are the same, the local law of that state ordinarily determines
 FOR GOODS: the validity of the contract.
o Consignor has right of action against first carrier.  Exception: usury
o Consignee has right of action against last carrier. o The Restatement directs the forum court to single out the state of the most
o Both can take action against the carrier who significant relationship with the contract:
performed transportation during which loss,  As a whole; or
damage or delay took place.  With a specific issue arising therefrom.
o Jointly and severally liable (Warsaw A30) o Court localizes the contract by examining factual contacts with concerned state.
 Where convention does NOT apply, Second Restatement  Example: deterioration of goods in transit – place of destination
holds that validity of contract of carriage as well as rights o If the place of making and performance are the same, it is presumed that it is
created thereby are determined, in absence of effective that state which is most significantly related to the contract.
choice of law by parties, by local law of state from w/c o Where there are significant contacts with a transaction, the court will apply its
passenger departs or goods are dispatched, unless w/ own law following a policy-centered approach.
respect to particular issue, some other state has more  The court should also consider the legitimate expectation of the
significant relationship to the contract and to parties. parties.
o Most SC decisions involved malice, bad faith and discriminatory acts. Thus,  G. Limitations to choice of law
Court refused to apply the Warsaw Convention. o Connection
o Sabena Belgian World Airlines v. Court of Appeals:  Parties may not select law to gov contract if law has NO connection
 Lower court applied “usual rules” on recovering damages beyond at all with transaction or parties.
Warsaw limitations. o Law selected changes
 Common carrier held liable for all damages which can be reasonably  Law as changed should govern.
attributed, although unforeseen, to the nonperformance of obligation,  EXP: change so revolutionary – never contemplated by parties.
including moral and exemplary damages.  Gov law is OG intent
o Northwest Airlines v. Court of Appeals: o Jurisdiction
 Remanded to trial court for reception of evidence.  COL (and its interpretation) cannot oust court of J over parties and
 In moving for summary judgment, Northwest admitted that its SM previously acquired.
liability was limited to the maximum allowed in Art. 22(2) of o If several laws are selected
Convention.  each will govern diff elements of transaction
 However, it should be allowed to prove that it was liable ONLY to o Prefer law that makes contract legal
maximum amount.  If under selected law, contract is legal, but in place of performance, it
 The Convention does not regulate or exclude liability for other is illegal, selected law should prevail
breaches of contract or misconduct of officers or employees. o If law of performance can be ascertained, substantial and essential validity
o Another issue arising from the Convention is the character of Art. 28 (1). should still be governed by proper law of contract.
 Court ruled that it is a matter of jurisdiction. o Parties cannot contract away provis of law, esp peremptory provis heavily
 F. Applicable law in absence of effective choice impressed w/ public interest
 Manila Resources Development Corporation v. NLRC
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 Ruben Manahan was hired to work as a mechanical o Generally, in conflict of laws case, court must determine at outset the nature of
engineer in Riyadh. problem presented to it for solution, specifically, if it relates to torts, contracts,
 Upon arrival, it was discovered that his qualifications did prop, others, or to matter of substance or procedure. (Erie Insurance Exchange
not meet requirements of the job. v. Heffernan)
 Salary reduced from USD1k to USD360.  Rule on validation
 He was repatriated. o Parties entering into contract upon equal terms intend their agreement to be
 HELD: Philippine laws cannot be rendered illusory by the binding under any law whose application the parties can reasonably be assumed
parties agreeing on some other law to govern their to have taken into acct
relationship. o PH cts may adopt this in interpreting A17 of NCC, in cases where execution
o Thus, counter-balancing the principle of cannot be localized due to multi-state contracts
autonomy of contracting parties is the equally  Enforcement of foreign contract claim
general rule that provisions of applicable law, o PH cts may assume J as long as there is J over person of def as personal action
especially provisions relating to matters affected is involved
with public policy are deemed written into the
contract. WILLS, SUCCESSION, AND ADMINISTRATION OF ESTATE
o The governing principle is that parties may not
contract away applicable provisions of law  Define will
especially peremptory provisions heavily o A783 NCC
impressed with public interest.  Will is act whereby person is permitted, with formalities prescribed
o Cognovit clauses (confession of judgment) by law, to control to a certain degree disposition of this estate, to take
 Cognovit clause – debtor may agree to be subject to J of specific effect after his death.
court/s in case he breaches contract or defaults payment. o Osorio v. Posadas: A will is a disposition made:
 Valid only if  By a competent testator,
 parties of equal bargaining power  In form prescribed by law,
 AND debtor voluntarily agreed  Of property over which he has legal power of disposition.
 Effect o Conflicts perspective: will is involuntary transfer of property.
 waives debtor’s right to receive notice  Execution of will is voluntary act but that in itself does NOT transfer
 autho entry of judgment against him title
 Will comes into effect upon death of TR
Other BEDA notes  Only then that transfer of title is effected.
 Governing law
 Primacy of contractual stipulations o Domiciliary law (for common law countries)
o Contracting parties may estab stipulations, clauses, terms, conditions they deem o National law (for civil law countries)
convenient, provided they are NOT contrary to law, morals, good customs,  A. EXTRINSIC VALIDITY OF WILLS
public order, public policy (A1306 NCC) o FILIPINO executes will ABROAD
o Counterbalancing autonomy of contracting parties is equally GR that  (1) Lex loci celebrationis – pursuant to NCC815, which follows the
provisions of applicable law, esp provis rel to matters affected w/ public policy, rule in NCC17
are deemed written into contract.  Article 17
o Governing principle is that parties may NOT contract away applicable provis of o Forms and solemnities of contracts, wills, and
law, esp peremptory provis dealing w/ matters heavily impressed w/ public other public instruments shall be governed by
interest. laws of country in which they are executed.
 Ex. Law rel to labor and employment – parties NOT at liberty to o When acts referred to are executed before
insulate selves and their relationships from impact of labor laws and diplomatic or consular officials of PH in foreign
regulations by simply contracting w/ each other (Pakistan country
International Airlines v. OPLE)  solemnities established by PH laws
o Even if there is choice of law stipulated in contract, law of place of shall be observed in their execution.
performance always find applicability to ensure that local laws thereof are NOT
violated, nor public policy infringed by execution of contract
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

o Prohibitive laws concerning persons, their acts  joint will may expose TR to undue
or property, and those which have for their object influence
public order, public policy and good customs  may even tempt one of TRs in
 shall NOT be rendered ineffective by reciprocal wills to kill other
laws or judgments promulgated, or by o Prevent overreaching, esp bet H and W
determinations or conventions agreed  Sps more aggressive or dominant might
upon in foreign country. dictate terms of will for his or her own
 Article 815 benefit or for third persons
o When Filipino is broad, he is authorized to make  Effect of probate of joint wills
a will in any of the forms established by law of  If joint will is admitted to probate upon death of H, decree
country in which he may be. of probate affects only the estate of the husband.
o Will may be probated in PH.  Wife would then die intestate
 (2) Lex nationalii o Extrinsic validity of JOINT WILL made by ALIENS in RP  VOID
 No specific provision  NCC says nothing about a joint will executed in RP by aliens whose
o implied by A816 NCC? national laws allow it. Maam says dapat if alien law allows, then OK.
 Tolentino:  Harmonize: Considering Article 819 (prohib on joint wills), joint will
o ALIENs in PH are allowed to execute will in should not be probated if affects heirs in PH.
foreign country ff PH law on formalities  Lex loci celebrationis
o Then FILs should be allowed too  VOID – even if allowed by alien’s nat law (Article 817)
o Law did not intend to put the Filipino in a worse  Bc prohibition on joint wills is clear expression of public
position than alien in relation to Philippine law. policy (Article 17(1))
o Code should have expressly stated this o Extrinsic Validity of HOLO Wills
considering rule in NCC17.  Made by alien abroad
o Extrinsic validity on JOINT WILL made by FILs ANYWHERE  LEX  A816. Will of alien abroad produces effect in RP, if made
NATIONALII (VOID) with formalities under
 Article 818 NCC o law of place in which he resides
 Two or more persons cannot make a will jointly, or in same o OR formalities observed in his country
instrument, either for their reciprocal benefit or for the o OR in conformity with those which this Code
benefit of third person. prescribes
 Article 819 NCC  Made by alien in the RP  LEX NATIONALII
 Joint wills, prohibited by A818, executed by Filipinos in  A817 A will made in RP by an alien, which is executed
foreign country shall not be valid in RP, even though under law of country of which he is citizen or subject, and
authorized by laws of country where they may have which might be proved and allowed by the law of his own
been executed. country, shall have the same effect as if executed according
 Article 17 to the laws of PH.
o Prohibitive laws concerning persons, their acts or  A holographic will is defined in NCC810
property, and those which have for their object  Person may execute a holographic will which must be
public order, public policy and good customs entirely written, dated, and signed by the hand of the
shall NOT be rendered ineffective by laws or testator himself. It is subject to no other form and may be
judgments promulgated, or by determinations or made in or out of the Philippines, and need not be
conventions agreed upon in foreign country. witnessed.
 Purpose/ reason of prohibition  A holographic will is also known as an autographic wil.
 Dacanay v. Florendo  To facilitate secret expression of desire by TR
o Will is purely personal and unilateral  Simplest and most convenient method for making a last
 defeated if 2+ persons make their will testament.
in same instrument;  Problem
o contrary to revocable character of will o JBL Reyes: simplicity of holographic wills is
invitation to forgery.
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

• B. INTRINSIC VALIDITY OF WILLS  Thus, lex rei sitae would apply.

o Governing law • C. INTERPRETATION OF WILLS
 LEX NATIONALII – any kind of prop, anywhere o LEX NATIONALII
 NCC16  Pursuant to nationality principle (NCC15), interpretation be gov by
 x x x However, intestate and testamentary successions, both rules of interpretation of DC national law
with respect to order of succession and to the amount of o Clear, unambiguous terms in will
successional rights and to intrinsic validity of  lex intentionis
testamentary provisions, shall be regulated by national o Ambiguity
law of person whose succession is under consideration,  Use:
whatever may be nature of property and regardless of  context instrument itself; or
country wherein property may be found.  TR’s contemporaneous and subsequent acts in keeping with
o Miciano v. Brimo nature and object of document
 F: Re: condition in the testator’s will— Second. I likewise desire to  Resolved in keeping with laws and customs of that state most
state that although, by law, I am Turkish citizen, this citizenship probably in mind of TR when he used words, and with which he is
having been conferred upon me by conquest and not by free choice, presumed most familiar
nor by nationality and, on other hand, having resided for a  Or apparent state law in mind, such will control interpretation of
considerable length of time in Philippine Islands where I succeeded will
in acquiring all of the property that I now possess, it is my wish that  Presumptions may be resorted to if intentions of TR cannot be
the distribution of my property and everything in connection with ascertained
this, my will, be made and disposed of in accordance with the laws in o Different interpretations
force in PH Islands, requesting all of my relatives to respect this  Prefer interpretation by which disposition will be operative
wish, otherwise, I annul and cancel beforehand whatever disposition (NCC788).
found in this will favorable to the person or persons who fail to  Most favorable construction to accomplish the purpose
comply with this request. intended by the testator.
 H: Applied processual presumption. Condition is void under RP  Presumed that the testator intended a lawful thing.
law (RP follows ex nationalii) • D. REVOCATION
 Assuming said condition was legal and valid, any legatee o Article 828
who fails to comply with it, as the herein oppositor who, by  Will may be revoked by TR at any time before death
his attitude in these proceedings has not respected the will  Any waiver or restriction of this right is void.
of the testator, as expressed, is prevented from receiving his o Revocation ABROAD by NON-RP DOMICILIARY done
legacy (system of legitimes)
 NCC829
 Said condition is considered unwritten, and the institution
 Revocation done outside PH, by person who does not have
of legatees in said will is unconditional and consequently
his domicile in this country, is valid when it is done
valid and effective even as to the oppositor.
according to:
o Criticism
o law of place where will was made (lex loci
 Court, in applying doctrine of processual presumption, disregarded
celebrationis); or
clear intention of TR.
o law of place where TR domiciled at time of
 CT should have used policy-centered approach in addressing issue,
revocation (lex domicilii)
instead of mechanical application of lex nationalii.
o Revocation ABROAD by RP DOMICILIARY
 ANYWAY, using most significant relationship approach, RP law
still apply  Lex domicilii (Philippine law)
 DC was a resident of the PH.   Law of place of revocation (lex loci actus)
 Basis: Article 17
 Executed will here.
o Revocation in the RP – WON RP domiciliary
 He desired PH law to govern.
 Article 829
 Properties subject of will were located in the PH.
 if revocation takes place in PH, valid when it is in
 OR, CT could have used “disingenuous characterization”:
accordance with provisions of Civil Code
 Issue characterized as one of property instead of
 Lex loci actus (of the revocation) (Article. 829)
succession.
 TF, PH law
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 NCC 830 Methods of revocation o Under NCC799, there is testamentary capacity

 (1) By implication of law; or where TR was able at time of making will to
 (2) By some will, codicil, or other writing executed as know nature of the estate to be disposed of,
provided in case of wills; or proper objects of his bounty, and character of
 (3) By burning, tearing, cancelling, or obliterating the will testamentary act.
with intention of revoking it, by the testator himself, or by o REPROBATE
some other person in his presence, and by his express  PH courts may order allowance of wills already probated in foreign
direction. If burned, torn, cancelled, or obliterated by some countries
other person, without the express direction of testator, the  R77.S1
will may still be established, and the estate distributed in  Wills proved and allowed in foreign country, accd to
accordance therewith, if its contents, and due execution, laws of such country, may be allowed, filed, and recorded
and the fact of its unauthorized destruction, cancellation, or by proper CT in PH.
obliteration are established according to the Rules of Court.  What to prove Vda. De Perez v. Tolete (1994)
o Problem:  (1) due execution under foreign laws
 Testator is domiciled in State A (where revocation is valid), revokes  (2) TR domicile in foreign country
his will there. He changes domicile to State B (where revocation is  (3) will was admitted to probate abroad
not valid), where he dies. Which law applies?  (4) CT was a probate court
 Common law jurisdictions: law of domicile at the time of the TR  (5) laws of foreign country on procedure and allowance of
death governs, revocation is invalid. wills
 Philippines: Law of place of revocation. Revocation valid. (But what  More of enforcement of foreign judgement
is the statutory basis for this?)  Otherwise, foreign judgment has no extraterritorial effect
• E. PROBATE o Effect of allowance of wills executed ABROAD
o Probate  R77.S3
 adjudication that will of person was executed with all formalities  If it appears at the hearing that will should be allowed in
required by law. the Philippines, the shall so allow it, and a certificate of its
 GR: does not pass upon the intrinsic validity of the will. allowance, signed by the judge, and attested by the seal of
 EXP: practical considerations court, to which shall be attached a copy of the will, shall be
 Synonymous with authentication of will. filed and recorded by clerk, and the will shall have same
o GR: Governing law effect as if originally proved and allowed in such court.
 LEX FORI  procedural matters  NCC 817
 Disallowance of will is procedural in character  A will made in PH by citizen or subject of another country
 LEX LOCI CELEBRATIONIS  Extrinsic validity of will which is executed in accordance with the law of the country
 NCC17, 816 and 817. of which he is citizen or subject, and which might be
o Grounds for disallowance R76.S9 ROC proved and allowed by the law of his own country, shall
 (a) If not executed and attested as required by law; have same effect as if executed according to laws of PH.
 (b) If the testator was insane, or otherwise mentally incapable to o Common law conflicts rule
make will, at the time of its execution;  If will is allowed at testator’s last domicile
 (c) If it was executed under duress, or the influence of fear, or threats;  movable property  valid everywhere
 (d) If it was procured by undue and improper pressure and influence, o For movable property, lex domicilii gov.
on part of the beneficiary, or of some other person for his benefit;  real property  not affect conveyance of land
 (e) If the signature of the testator was procured by fraud or trick, and o which is gov by lex situs.
he did not intend that instrument should be his will at the time of • F. ADMINISTRATION OF ESTATES
fixing his signature thereto. o Duties:
o PROBATE of wills EXECUTED ABROAD  Manage and settle DC debts;
 What to prove  Distribute residue of estate to DC heirs.
 (1) Due execution o Probate court has duty
o in accd with lex loci celebrationis;  Issue letters testamentary
 (2) Testamentary capacity at time of execution of will.  upon allowance of will
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 to person named in will  In accd w/ TR intention

 upon application  Verba legis if terms are clear and unambiguous
 Appoint administrator  Interpretation of ambiguous words made in accd w/ law w/c was
 No will most probably in mind of TR when he used those words and w/ w/c
 No named EXR he is presumed ti be most familiar
o Title vested in ADR results from law  If will admits of diff interpretations, that w/c will made dispositions
 PRIMARY PURPOSE: Protection of creditors operative shall be preferred
 INCIDENTAL PURPOSE: Distribution of estate to next of kin  Interpretation that will give will most favorable construction to
o Title of domicilary ADR accomplish its purpose shall be made
 NO extraterritorial force  Every effort should be made to prevent intestacy in keeping w/ policy
o Title of anciliary ADR of respecting will of TR – provided this can be ascertained
 National law of DC should apply since we may reasonably presume
 appointed by court abroad where assets or property are located
that this was TR’s intent
 I think when DC has props in 2+ state
o Revocation of wills
• G. TRUSTS
o Trust – a right of property, real or personal, held by one party for benefit of  If revocation takes place in PH, whether TR is domiciled in PH, or in
some other country, it is valid of in accd w/ PH laws
another.
 If revocation takes place outside PH by a TR domiciled in PH, it is
 Deed – during lifetime of trustor
valid when it is in accd w/ laws of PH
 Will
 Revocation done outside PH, by TR who does not have his domicile
o Conflicts issues arise when:
in PH, is valid when done accd to:
 They involve interests or properties in place other than DC domicile;
 Law of place where will was made
 Q as to validity or propriety of trust arise; or
 Issues as to compliance with formalities.  Law of place where TR had his domicile at time of
o Governing law: revocation
o Administration of estate
 If there is choice-of-law clause
 Like probate, administration is procedural in nature.
 law chosen by creator of trust.
 PH law and procedure ff main principle of territorialism.
 Law that will sustain validity of trust. May be law of state where
 Law of domicile governs distribution, but law of state appointing
 trust is being administered;
ADR or EXR governs admin.
 OR trustor’s domicile  Admin is gov by law where admin takes place, w/c is law of country
 Testamentary trusts from w/c ADR derives authority
 capacity and extrinsic validity  law gov will  Admin extends only to assets of DC found w/n state or country where
 Intrinsic validity  lex situs it was granted, to administer property situated in foreign state, the
o Bc characterized as issue of property admin must be re-appointed, or a new one named in state
o Principal domiciliary administration
 2 theories to determine proper law for transmission of successional rights  Administration granted in country of DC last domicile
o Unitary or single system o Ancillary administration
 Only one law determines transmission of realty and personalty  Admin in other countries where DC also left properties
 In countries ff lex nationalii, like PH, DC national law governs (A16  Ancillary admin is proper, whenever person dies, leaving in country
NCC) other than that of his last domicile, property to be administered in
 In common law countries or those ff lex domicilii, law of DC’s nature of assets of DC liable for his individual debts or to be
domicile governs distributed among his heirs (Tayag v. Benguet Consolidated)
o Split or scission system  Reason: grant of admin does not ex proprio vifore have any effect
 Succession to realty – lex situs beyond limits of country in w/c it is granted. Hence ad admin
 Succession to personalty – lex domicilii of DC at time of death appointed in foreign state has no authority in PH (Tayag v. Benguet)
 Rules on wills, succession, administration  Note: GR universally recognized that admin, whether principal or
o SEE: MEMAID ancillary, certainly extends to assets of DC found w/c state or country
 Other rules in PH COL where it was granted, the corollary being an administrator appointed
o Interpretation of wills in one state or country has no power over property in otger state or
country (Tayag)
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 Distribution of estates  To rectify the consequences of the tortious act by distributing the
 Regulated accd to national law of person whose succession losses that result from accident and products liability.
is under consideration (A16.P2 NCC) o Thus, the policy behind tort law will most likely be a strongly held policy of the
 Domicillary admin of estate of DC AM citizen in US has state.
no power over and is not entitled to possession of stock  As a result, courts will be less inclined to displace forum law with
certs of shares of stock owned by DC in PH corp, w/c foreign law.
certificates must be delivered to ancillary admin of DC’s o Considerations in determining the applicable law in conflicts torts cases:
estate in PH, to be admin by latter in nature of assets of DC  Needs of interstate and international systems including the policies
liable for his debt, or to be distributed among his heirs of:
(Sempio Dy)  Upholding the justified expectation of parties; and
o Holographic wills  Minimizing the adverse consequences that might follow
 Must be entirely written, dated, signed by hand of TR himself. It is from subjecting a party to the law of more than one state.
subject to no other form, and may be made in/out of PH, and need not  Discouraging forum shopping
be witnessed (A810 CC)  Achieving decisional harmony
 Conflict of rules in person dies intestate o Ordinarily, parties to a tort case could not have had a specific state law in mind,
o Civil law countries (PH) since accidents are fortuitous.
 Lex nationalii  Nonetheless, they may have anticipated the possibility of liability and
o Common law countries insured against it.
 Split or scission system, that is: o In the same vein, corporations may expect that the laws of the state where it has
 personalty  lex domicilii of DC at time of death continuous and systematic business activities will be applicable.
 realty  lex situs  But it cannot comply with various laws without reincorporating in
 Caduciary rights each state.
o 2 theories: adopted by states to claim properties left by DC with NO heirs and o In such cases, the courts should lessen the adverse effects of applying the laws
NO will of several states on the parties.
 England and most AM states o When will a conflicts tort problem arise?
 Said props bcm bona vacantia (ownerless)  Place where tortious conduct and resulting injury occurred are
 Should revert to state where situated by escheat different.
 Some civil law countries (PH)  One state imposes higher standards than the other.
 State is last heir of DC.  Difference in product liability laws.
 TF state succeeds to props left  Varying judicial interpretations in the extent of liability.
o Interstate accidents:
TORTS AND CRIMES  Concerned states are those where:
 The victims and tortfeasor reside; or
 “Tort” is derived from the French word torquere or “to twist.”  The enterprise has business activity.
 It is an act or omission producing injury to another without any previous existing lawful  It is in these states that the effects of granting/denying damages will
relation of which the act or omission may be said to be a natural outgrowth or incident. be greatly felt.
 Anglo-American law/jurisprudence: Tort includes malice and willful intent. o Other states which may be considered concerned states on the grounds of
 Spanish concept of quasi delict excludes obligations arising from contract. strongly held state policies:
 NCC provisions:  State where the liability creating conduct occurred; or
o Article 20. Every person who, contrary to law, wilfully or negligently causes  State where the injury occurred.
damage to another, shall indemnify the latter for the same.  B. LEX LOCI DELICTI COMMISSI
o Article 2176. Whoever by act or omission causes damage to another, there o The law of the place where the alleged tort was committed determines tort
being fault or negligence, is obliged to pay for the damage done. Such fault or liability in matters affecting conduct and safety.
negligence, if there is no pre-existing contractual relation between the parties,  Traffic rules and speed limits further state policies of deterring
is called a quasi-delict and is governed by the provisions of this Chapter. socially unproductive conduct.
 A. POLICIES BEHIND CONFLICTS TORT LAW o The locus delicti is not easily determined where the liability producing conduct
o Policies underlying substantive tort law: occurs in one state but the injuries are sustained in another.
 To deter socially undesirable or wrongful conduct; and
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

o Common law: where the last event necessary to make an actor liable for an  It then assesses the event or transaction in light of the
alleged tort occurs. relevant policy considerations of the interested states and
 Adheres to the vested rights theory. their underlying policies.
 If there is no harm, then there is no tort.  Babcock v. Jackson:
 Negligence in itself is not actionable unless there is injury.  NY contacts were more significant than Ontario contacts.
o Civil law: where the tortious conduct was committed. o Only connection with Ontario was that the
 Legality or illegality of a person’s act should be determined by law of accident occurred there.
the state where he is at the time he does such act.  Guest-host relationship was formed in NY, trip commenced
 If he falls short of the standard of conduct prescribed, he is liable for and was to terminate there.
any injury caused even if it takes place in another state. o Interest analysis
o Whether the situs of the tort is the place of conduct or the place of injury, the  Considers the relevant concerns that the state may have in the case
traditional view is that an actor liable by the lex loci delicti is liable and its interest in having its law applied on that issue.
everywhere, in accordance with the vested rights theory.  First step: determine if there is a false or true conflict.
 Lex loci delicti will not be enforced in the forum where it violates  False conflict – if only one state has an interest in having its
state policy. law applied and failure to apply the other state’s law would
 However, absence of a similar law in the forum imposing liability not impair policy reflected in that law.
does not preclude the grant of relief under a foreign tort claim.  True conflict – where both states have an apparent interest
o Alabama Great Southern Railroad v. Carroll: in applying their respective laws to the case.
 Negligent act – failure to inspect the links – occurred in Alabama. o Check if the interests are substantial.
 Injury – occurred in Mississippi.  Babcock presented a false conflict.
 Since under Mississippi law, no recovery could be had, it follows that  Canada had no interest in applying its guest statute to the
the plaintiff had no rights which could be enforced by the Alabama case because the policy behind the law was to protect hosts
courts. from suits by ungrateful guests or insurance companies
o The application of lex loci commissi leads to uniformity of results. from collusive suits.
o Prof. Weintraub’s criticism: If the object of conflicts law is to achieve o The parties to the case were both non-
uniformity of results, then there must be uniformity of rules in each possible domiciliaries.
forum. o The insurance was registered in NY.
 Unreasoned application of the lexi loci delicti commissi to achieve  Application of NY law will advance state policies without
uniformity of results independent of fairness to the parties frustrates impairing the policy of Canada.
the ends of justice. o 3. Caver’s principle of preference
 C. MODERN THEORIES ON FOREIGN TORT LIABILITY  Third principle in torts deals with rules that sanction some kind of
o The most significant relationship conduct engaged in by a defendant in one state and extends the
 Considers the state’s contacts with the: benefit of this higher standard of conduct and financial protection to
 Occurrence the plaintiff even if the state of injury does not create analogous
 Parties liabilities
 Contacts to be considered:  Schmidt illustrates the imposition of liability under a substantive rule
 Where the tortious conduct occurred of tort law that has a strong underlying admonitory policy.
 Where the injuries were sustained  American Contributions to Conflicts Tort Law
 Domicile, residence or nationality of the victim and  Law of the tort – applicable to matters involving regulation
tortfeasor of conduct.
 Place where the relationship of the parties are centered.  Domiciliary law of the parties – governs in matters relating
 Two-fold purpose of determining contacts: to loss distribution or financial protection.
 To identify the interested state; and  Applying these principles, Babcock would be decided on
 To evaluate the relevance of these contacts to the issue in the basis of the parties’ domiciliary law, which is New
question. York law.
 Strength is not drawn in numbers. Rather, the court localizes the state o Award of damages centered around the parties’
of most significant relation. domicile.
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

o A state’s loss distribution policy benefits its  The widow of the Brunei resident brought suit against the
domiciliaries even when they act outside the state Malaysian company before a Brunei court, and against
borders. Aerospatiale and its affiliate in Texas.
 D. FOREIGN TORT CLAIMS  Jurisdiction in Texas was asserted on the basis of
o Introduction Aerospatiale’s doing business there.
 Tortious liability is transitory—it is deemed personal to the tortfeasor o Texas appeared to have more favorable laws on
and follows him wherever he goes. products liability.
 Compensation may be exacted from him in any tribunal o Aerospatiale filed MTD, denied.
which can obtain jurisdiction over his person.  Aerospatiale filed proceedings before a Brunei court to
 Enforcement of claim not limited to the place where the enjoin plaintiff from continuing with the Texas case.
cause of action arises. o Brunei was the natural forum for the trial.
 Thus, action for tort may be brough wherever tortfeasor is subject to o It would be oppressive for the plaintiffs to
suit continue with the TX proceedings as Aerospatiale
o 1. Conditions for enforcement of tort claims would not be able to pursue legal proceedings
 Requisites: against the Malaysian company.
 1. The foreign tort is based on a civil action and not on a  Bier v. Mines de Potasse d’ Alsac: A Dutch market gardener
crime; operating nurseries using water from the Rhine river filed suit against
 2. The foreign tort is not contrary to the public policy of the a French mining company before a Dutch court.
forum; and  He alleged that the French company had been dumping
 3. The judicial machinery of the forum is adequate to chloride into the river causing pollution damage.
satisfy the claim.  Where did the harmful event occur, as required by the
 As opposed to contracts, the defendant in a transnational tort is Brussels Convention?
usually sued before a foreign court against his will. o Where the wrongful conduct occurred (France)
 Questions often arise as to jurisdiction, especially in issues o Where the effects were felt (Netherlands)
involving products liability.  Dutch court originally declined to exercise jurisdiction.
o 2. Products liability of foreign manufacturer  European Court held that the plaintiff could at its election,
 State laws on basis and extent of liability for defectively sue at either place.
manufactured products vary significantly, giving rise to conflicts torts  Sovereignty as Basis of Jurisdiction
cases.  Jurisdiction
 Possible bases: o An aspect of sovereignty.
o Negligence o Refers to judicial, legislative and administrative
o Strict liability competence.
o Breach of warranty against hidden defects  Exercise of civil jurisdiction over aliens presents the same
 In a typical products LB case, plaintiff purchases fungible or non- problems as in criminal cases.
fungible product from an out-of-state manufacturer. If he suffers  Common law: Tag jurisdiction
injury after ingesting/using the product, he may bring an action o Used to justify the exercise of personal
against manufacturer in his home state. jurisdiction over a defendant present in the
 Forum court has real interest in applying its own law in territory, however short.
order to allow its injured domiciliary to recover damages. o Pennoyer v. Neff: “Every state possesses
o This principle was not followed in Asahi Metal exclusive jurisdiction and sovereignty over
Industry. persons and property within its territory… No
 Societe Nationale Industrille Aerospatiale v. Lee Kui Jak: A state can exercise direct jurisdiction and authority
helicopter manufactured by Aerospatiale crashed in Brunei killing a over persons and property not within its
Brunei resident. territory.”
 Aerospatiale is a French company, owned by an English  Worldwide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson: US courts have
company and operated by a Malaysian company. jurisdiction over foreign corporation which introduces its
products into the stream of commerce with the expectation
that they will be purchased by consumers in forum state.
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

o 3. The alien tort act  How could a tort committed by a citizen of a foreign
 28 U.S.C. §1350. The district courts shall have original jurisdiction country on fellow citizen within that country ever amount
of any civil action by an alien for a tort only, committed in violation to a violation of intl law?
of law of nations or treaty of US  In Guinto v. Marcos, the US District Court excluded free speech
 The Alien Tort Statute was enacted in 1789. claims from coverage of the ATS.
 Rationale: “compliance with the law of nations was a  Violation of human rights is a universal evil which warrants the
fundamental concomitant of Nationhood… and the nation’s exercise of J over completely foreign tort cases under the ATS. This
obligation to comply with a particular legal duty was is so even though:
supplemented by a moral duty.  There are no significant contacts between the forum, the
 Purposes: parties and the events; or
o Stability of commercial relations and national  There is no substantial state interest in the case other than
security. compliance with international law.
o Recognition of the obligation of every state to  In order for the ATS to apply, it must be established that the tortious
law of nations as means to avert war and chaos. conduct violated an internationally protected human right.
 Hilao v. Estate of Ferdinand Marcos: Victims of human rights abuses o 4. PHILIPPINE RULE ON FOREIGN TORTS
during the Marcos administration filed suit for damages before the  There is no specific statutory law governing the enforcement of
District Court of Hawaii. claims for damages arising from foreign torts.
 US Court of Appeals upheld jurisdiction over a tort claim  It is submitted that Philippine courts may exercise
of an alien against an official of his own government for jurisdiction over such cases provided the defendant can be
torture committed within that government’s internal served with summons in PH.
jurisdiction.  It is suggested that we should follow the English Rule – tort
 Case recognized that tort liability is transitory. committed abroad is actionable in the country where it was
 Other pertinent issues discussed in the case involved: committed and also under PH law.
o Lex loci delicti commissi  There would be no choice of law problem because the PH
o Statute of limitations law on torts would be applicable regardless of the forum
o Command responsibility chosen.
o Exhaustion of remedies  Phillips v. Eyre: Plaintiff was arrested and imprisoned in
 Trajano v. Marcos: Agapita Trajano sued Imee Marcos and Fabian Jamaica upon orders of defendant who was then the
Ver for wrongful death of her son Archimedes. District Court Governor of Jamaica. He brought suit for damages before
awarded $4.4 million in damages. an English court.
 US DOJ filed an amicus brief with a narrowed o Defense: martial law was declared, acts were
interpretation of scope of the ATS. lawful.
o US jurisdiction over foreign tort actions limited o HELD: Defendant not liable.
to those which the US might be held accountable o In order to found a suit in England for a wrong
to the offended nation if it did not extend alleged to have been committed abroad, two
protection of its laws. conditions must be fulfilled:
 If accountability were to be made the basis of jurisdiction under the  First, the wrong must be of such a
ATS, it would present a significant setback to the advancement of character that it would have been
international law. actionable if committed in England;
 Furthermore, it has been recognized that individuals are subjects of and
PIL and are protected against abuses committed by their own  Second, the act must not have been
governments. justifiable by law of the place where it
 In 1789, when the ATS was passed, the drafters of the Judiciary Act was done.
could not have expected the provision to extend to a case like  Time v. Reyes was an opportunity for the Philippine SC to clarify the
Filartiga because they could not have imagined international law PH conflicts torts rule. But instead, it characterized the issue as one
extending so far. of procedure than of PrIL.
 If the Court had characterized Time as a conflicts torts case:
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER


Following lex loci delicti commissi, Philippine law would be regarded as against the state itself altho it has
not apply since tortious conduct took place in another not been formally impleaded.
country.  A distinction is made between acts performed in a
 Following the modern approach (most significant sovereign capacity (jure imperii) and private, commercial
relationship), PH law would apply because of the contacts or proprietary acts (jure gestionis).
between forum and the parties.  Wylie v. Rarang: Wylie and Williams caused the
 E. DISTINGUISHING BETWEEN TORTS AND CRIMES TORT CRIME publication of US Navy Newsletter mentioning [Auring]
Rarang as “a disgrace to her division and to the Office of
Tort Crime the Provost Marshal.” She sued for libel.
Transitory and personal – tortfeasor may be Local – perpetrator can be sued only in the o Court held that ultra vires acts cannot be part of
sued wherever he is found state where the crime was committed official duty.
Injury to an individual who may be situated Injury to the state – an affront against the o Killing a person in cold blood while on patrol
in any place sovereignty and good order of the state duty, running over a child while driving with
within whose jurisdiction it occurs reckless imprudence on an official trip, or
Purpose of tort law is to indemnify victim Purpose of a penal law is to punish and slandering a person during office hours could not
for injuries sustained reform perpetrators and to deter them from possibly be covered by the immunity agreement.
violating the law Our laws and, we presume, those of US do not
allow commission of crimes in name of official
 F. LEX LOCI DELICTI duty.
o Nullum crimen sine lege (no crime without law) – in order for a person to be  Crimes committed on board a foreign vessel even if it is within the
punished for an act, such act should have been made punishable as a crime by territorial waters of the coastal state.
law.  PH courts do not acquire jurisdiction over offenders.
o Crimes may be defined by:  PH laws cannot apply unless the crime disturbs our peace
 Municipal law; and and order.
 More recently, international law.  UNCLOS, Art. 27 provides: Criminal jurisdiction on board
o NCC14 provides: a foreign ship.
 Penal laws and those of public security and safety shall be obligatory o 1. The criminal jurisdiction of the coastal State
upon all who live or sojourn in PH territory, subject to the principles should not be exercised on board foreign ship
of public international law and to treaty stipulations. passing through territorial sea to arrest any
o As a general rule, criminal laws have no extraterritorial effect. person or to conduct any investigation in
o What if offender was never physically present in the jurisdiction where the connection with any crime committed on board
crime was consummated? the ship during its passage, save only in ff. cases:
 US courts: constructive presence is sufficient.  (a) if the consequences of the crime
o Lex loci delicti (law of the place where the crime is committed) is controlling extend to the coastal State;
since it determines specific law by which the criminal is to be penalized and  (b) if the crime is of a kind to disturb
designates the state that has jurisdiction to punish him. the peace of the country or the good
 Also known as locus regit actum order of the territorial sea;
o Exceptions to the territoriality rule:  (c) if the assistance of the local
authorities has been requested by the
 Crimes committed by state officials, diplomatic representatives and
master of the ship or by a diplomatic
officials of recognized intl organizations.
agent or consular officer of the flag
 Basis is the doctrine of state immunity from suit.
State; or
 US v. Guinto: doctrine applies to acts committed by  (d) if such measures are necessary for
officials in their official capacity. the suppression of illicit traffic in
o Garcia v. Chief of Staff: if the judgment against narcotic drugs or psychotropic
such officials will require the state itself to substances.
perform an affirmative act to satisfy the same, o 2. The above provisions do not affect the right of
such as the appropriation of the amount needed to the coastal State to take any steps authorized by
pay the damages awarded against them, suit must
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

its laws for purpose of an arrest or investigation

on board a foreign ship passing through the TORTS
territorial sea after leaving internal waters.
o 3. In the cases provided for in paragraphs 1 and 2,  GR: lex loci delicti comissi
coastal State shall, if the master so requests, o Law of place where tort was committed
notify diplomatic agent or consular officer of the o CT applies substantive laws of state where last even necessary to make actor
flag State before taking any steps, and shall liable for alleged wrong takes place (Shaw v. LDC)
facilitate contact between such agent or officer o Connecting factor or point of contact may be places where tortious conduct or
and the ship's crew. In cases of emergency this lex loci actus occurred.
notification may be communicated while the o Ex. PH is situs of tort. Certain acts or parts of injury allegedly occurred in other
measures are being taken. country is of NO moment.
o 4. In considering whether or in what manner an  What’s important is place where OVER-ALL harm or totality of
arrest should be made, the local authorities shall alleged injury to person, reputation social standing and human rights
have due regard to the interests of navigation. of complainant, had lodged 9Saudi Arabia Airlines v. CA)
o 5. Except as provided in Part XII or with respect o Basis: VESTED RS THEORY – vested in place of injury – no else
to violations of laws and regulations adopted in o Reason
accd with Part V, the coastal State may not take  State where social disturbance occurred has primary duty to redress
any steps on board a foreign ship passing through wrong and det effects of injury
the territorial sea to arrest any person or to  Compensate victim for damage or injury suffered
conduct any investigation in connection with any  EXP: when place of tort is insignificant contract, other factors:
crime committed before the ship entered the o Place where conduct causing injury occurred
territorial sea, if the ship, proceeding from a o Residence or place of nosiness of parties
foreign port, is only passing through the
o Place where rel is centered (Melton v. Stephens)
territorial sea w/o entering internal waters.
 Crimes which, although committed by PH nationals abroad, are  Concepts of place of wrong (Locus delictis)
punishable under PH law. o Ex. A was hunting in State X, near boundary of State Y. A accidentally shot B,
 RPC2: Application of its provisions. — Except as provided standing in Y.
in treaties and laws of preferential application, provisions o Common law concept
of this Code shall be enforced not only within PH  Place where wrongful act bcm EFECTIVE (LAST EVENT needed to
Archipelago, including its atmosphere, its interior waters make actor LB)
and maritime zone, but also outside of its J , against those  Locus delicti is State Y (where victim was)
who:  Reason
o 1. Should commit an offense while on a PH ship  No injury = nothing to protect = no need for judicial relief
or airship;  Vested rights – no harm = no tort
o 2. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or o Civil law theory
currency note of PH Islands or obligations and  Place where tortuous act BEGAN
securities issued by Gov of PH Islands;  Lex loci delicti is state X
o 3. Should be liable for acts connected with  Reason: legality or illegality of one’s act should be determined by
introduction into these islands of the obligations law of state where he is at time he does act
and securities mentioned in the presiding number; o Theory of Dr. Rabel (Jurist recognized in comparative law)
o 4. While being public officers or employees,  Place where important and substantial acts leading to tortious act
should commit an offense in exercise of their were committed/ place having most substantial connection w/
functions; or wrongful act
o 5. Should commit any of the crimes against  E.g. situs of radio station where libelous broadcast was made is locus
national security and law of nations, defined in delicti – even if broadcast is heard in many places
Title One of Book Two of this Code.  Obligation theory
 Reason for extraterritorial application of penal laws: o Tortious act gives rise to obligation, w/c is transitory and ff person committing
national interest is imperiled by the acts enumerated. tortuous act, and may be enforced, wherever he may be found
 Modern theories in det liability for torts
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

o Theory of most significant rel (MSR) o Where wrongful death occurred in A state, and action is brought in B, B is
o Action for tort may be filed in country that has most significant rel to NOT bound by A’s law on any limitation of liab arising from death, where set
occurrence and parties, and thus has greatest concern w/ specific issue of case limitations on dams are procedural.
o 2-step analysis for significant rel inquiry o Law of forum B should be applied
 CTs will continue to evaluate contacts w/ each interested J  Lox locu delicti commissii on maritime torts
 CTs will continue to eval interests and public policies of potentially o Law of flag
concerned Js (Restatement (2nd) of COL S145)  Torts committed abroad public vessel
o Interest-analysis approach  Whether on high seas or in foreign territorial waters
 Consids relevant concerns that 2++ states may have in the case, and o Law of registry
their respective interests in applying laws to it  Torts committed aboard private or merchant vessel on high seas
 State w/c has more relevant and weighty interests in case should be  When 2 vessels from same state collide
consid locus delicti o Identical law
o Caver’s principle of preference  If vessels come from diff states w/ identical laws
 Higher standard of conduct and financial protection given to injured o General maritime law as understood and applied by forum where case is filed
party by a State is applied by State where injury happened, if latter  Vessels from diff states w/ diff laws
State adopts lower standard of conduct and financial protection to  Enforcement of claim for foreign tort
injured o Action for foreign tort may be brought in any place where tortfeasor may be
o German rule or elective concurrence found so that he can be subjected to J of CT
 Injured persons may choose to sue either under law of o Officials may be held LB for damages in tort suit filed against them in US fro
 Place where actor engages in tortuous conducts acts of torture committed against political detainees or prisoners in PH in
 Place where effect of conduct occur violation of intl and muni law (In re estate of Marcos)
 NOTE: he cannot cumulate benefits flowing from more than one law  Conditions for enforcement of tort claims
 Comparative impairment test o Foreign tort is based on civil action – NOT on crime
o Aka governmental interest test o Enforcement of tort would NOY infrigne public policy of forum
o Determines impairment of policy resulting from non-applic of laws of state. o Judicial machinery of forum is adeq for its proper enforcement
Then compared impairment to det who stands to lose more. o NOTE: ehilre procedural matters are gov by lex fori, all substantive matters are
o J that loses more is J that has greatest interest gov by lex locu delicti commissii
o 3-tiered approach  Alien tort claims act of US
 WON there is diff in laws of J involved o Grant US district CTs OG J over any civil action filed by alien for tort
 WON relevant law of affected J w/ regards to issue in Q is committed in violation of law of nations/treaty of US.
same or different o Applying said act, US CA upheld Hawaiian CT’s J over class action for dams
 WON there is true COL brought by thousands of FIL victims of human rights and torture, allegedly
 If there is diff – det each J’s interest in application of own committed by late Pres Marcos and officials (Trajano v. Marcos Manotoc)
law
 Which state whose interest more impaired CRIMES
 Compare nature and strength of interest of each J
 Which state’s interest would be more impaired if its state’s  Rule of generality in criminal law
policy were subord to policy of other state o Penal laws and those of public security shall be obligatory upon all who live or
 Choice-influencing consid approach sojourn in PH territory subj to principles of Public Intl Law and treaty
o Predictability of result stipulations (A14 NCC)
o Maintenance of interstate and intl order  GRL lex loci delicti or law of place where crime was committed
o Simplification of judicial task  EXP:
o Adv of forum’s gov interest o Theory of state immunity
o Applic of better rule of law  Crimes committed by heads of state/ officials, diplo reps, admin
 Kilberg v. Northeast Airlines doctrine officers, attached to diplomat or attache, and officials of recognized
intl organizations (A14.S3)
o French rule
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 Crimes committed on board foreign vessel even if w/n territorial CORPORATIONS AND OTHER JURIDICAL ENTITIES
waters of coastal state, as long as effect of such crime does NOT BUSINESS ASSOCIATIONS
affect peace and order of coastal state.
 Based on Nationality theory  A. CORPORATIONS
 NOTE: PH adopts English rule, which is pursuant to territorial o S2 Corporation Code. Corporation defined. - A corporation is an artificial being
theory. Territory where crime was committed will have J except on created by operation of law, having the right of succession and the powers,
matters: attributes and properties expressly authorized by law or incident to its
 1. In rel to internal order and discipline of vessel existence.
 2. Solely affecting ship and its occupants such as minor or o S123. Definition and rights of foreign corporations. - For the purposes of this
petty criminal offenses committed by members of crew Code, a foreign corporation is one formed, organized or existing under any
o Extraterritoriality laws other than those of PH and whose laws allow Filipino citizens and
 Crimes punishable under local law, altho committed by PH nationals corporations to do business in its own country or state. It shall have right to
abroad, pursuant to protective principles of crim J transact business in the Philippines after it shall have obtained a license to
 Theories on jurisdiction to try criminal cases/ theories on extraterritorial competence transact business in this country in accordance with this Code and a certificate
o Territorial theory of authority from the appropriate government agency.
 State where crime was committed has J to try case o 1. PERSONAL LAW OF CORPORATION
 2 kinds  Law of the state where it is incorporated.
 Subjective territorial principle  Since a corporation is an artificial being, it only has the rights and
o State where crime began may prosecute same powers conferred upon it in its charter.
even tho crime was completed in other state  The state of incorporation may withhold from a corporation the
 Objective territorial principle power to enter into certain contracts.
o State can prosecute crimes that began abroad but  If it enters into such contract in another state, contract is
were completed w/n territory void.
o Nationality or personal theory/ active nationality theoru  Anglo-American Legal Theory on Corporation
 Country of w/c criminal is citizen, or subject has J to try him for  Bank of Augusta v. Earle: Four basic theories drawn from
offense he supposedly did the case of Bank of Augusta:
 Whether effectuation of act b inside or outside territory o 1. A corporation, being a creature of law, has no
 Provided act is crime under his country’s penal law legal status beyond bounds of the sovereignty
o Protective theory within which it was created;
 Ant state whose national interests may be jeopardized has J over o 2. A corporation cannot exercise powers not
criminal offenses granted by its corporate charter or by the laws of
 even if committed outside its territory the state of incorporation;
 even of committed by alien o 3. No state is under any obligation to adhere to
 so it may protect itself the doctrine of comity. Every state has the power
o Real theory/ eclectic theory to refuse to recognize or prevent the foreign
 Any state whose penal code has been transgressed upon has J to bring corporation from acting within its jurisdiction;
justice to perpetrators of offense and
 Whether crime was committed inside or outside own territory o 4. A state is not obliged to grant to a foreign
o Cosmopolitan or university theory corporation privileges and immunities common
 Any state where criminal is found, or w/c has custody over him to citizen of that state.
 Is vested w/ J to try him for crime he is alleged to have committed  A corporation has no legal status beyond the bounds of
 Unless extradition is possible sovereignty by which it was created.
o Passive personality theory o It cannot migrate to another sovereignty.
 Aka passive nationality theory o But corporation can act in another state with the
 State of w/c victim is a citizen or subject has J latter’s express or implied consent.
 Rules on crimes o In many US and PH court decisions, it has been
o SEE: MEMAID held that a foreign corporation may sue in the
courts of another state.
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 But how can an entity that does not development, and utilization of natural resources
exist sue in a foreign state if such state shall be under the full control and supervision of
does not recognize the legal personality the State. The State may directly undertake such
of principal? activities, or it may enter into co-production, joint
 Paul v. Virginia: a state may impose any term it may desire venture, or production-sharing agreements with
as a prerequisite to admission. Filipino citizens, or corporations or associations
o Exception: commerce clause – prohibits a state at least sixty per centum of whose capital is
from imposing conditions on corporations owned by such citizens. Such agreements may be
engaged in interstate commercial activities and for a period not exceeding twenty-five years,
provides the basis of federal power to regulate renewable for not more than twenty-five years,
interstate commerce. and under such terms and conditions as may be
o A corporation is also a “person” protected by the provided by law. In cases of water rights for
due process and equal protection clauses of the irrigation, water supply fisheries, or industrial
constitution. uses other than the development of waterpower,
o A state cannot impose “unconstitutional beneficial use may be the measure and limit of
conditions” which require corporation to give up the grant.
its constitutional rights either as prerequisite to o The State shall protect the nation's marine wealth
doing business in the state or to avoid being in its archipelagic waters, territorial sea, and
removed therefrom. exclusive economic zone, reserve its use and
 Although a corporation is a person, it is not deemed a enjoyment exclusively to FIL citizens.
“citizen” entitled to privileges given by the state to o The Congress may, by law, allow small-scale
individual citizens. utilization of natural resources by Filipino
o A grant of corporate existence is a grant of citizens, as well as cooperative fish farming, with
special privileges to the corporations, enabling priority to subsistence fishermen and fish-
them to act for certain designated purposes as a workers in rivers, lakes, bays, and lagoons.
single individual, and exempting them from o The President may enter into agreements with
individual liability. foreign-owned corporations involving either
o If right asserted of the foreign corporation, when technical or financial assistance for large-scale
composed of citizens of one State, to transact exploration, dev, and utilization of minerals,
business in other States were even restricted to petroleum, and other mineral oils accd to the
such business as corporations of those States general terms and conditions provided by law,
were authorized to transact, it would still follow based on real contributions to the economic
that those States would be unable to limit number growth and general welfare of country. In such
of corporations doing business therein. agreements, the State shall promote the
o 2. EXCEPTIONS TO THE RULE OF INCORPORATION TEST development and use of local scientific and
 a. Constitutional and Statutory Restrictions technical resources.
 A state may by legislation exclude a foreign corporation o The President shall notify the Congress of every
altogether, subject to constitutional limitations, or prescribe contract entered into in accd with this provision,
any conditions it may see fit as prerequisite to the within thirty days from its execution.
corporation’s right to do business within its territory.  Art. XII S10 CONST:
 Art. XII S2 CONST: o The Congress shall, upon recommendation of the
o All lands of the public domain, waters, minerals, economic and planning agency, when the
coal, petroleum, and other mineral oils, all forces national interest dictates, reserve to citizens of the
of potential energy, fisheries, forests or timber, PH or to corporations or associations at least
wildlife, flora and fauna, and other natural sixty per centum of whose capital is owned by
resources are owned by State. With the exception such citizens, or such higher percentage as
of agricultural lands, all other natural resources Congress may prescribe, certain areas of
shall not be alienated. The exploration, investments. The Congress shall enact measures
that will encourage the formation and operation
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

of enterprises whose capital is wholly owned by  Prevailing view: With the consent of a state, a foreign corporation
Filipinos. shall be recognized and will be allowed to transact business in that
o In the grant of rights, privileges, and concessions state.
covering the national economy and patrimony,  Corp Code provide:
the State shall give preference to qualified  S125. Application for a license. - A foreign corporation
Filipinos. applying for license to transact business in the Philippines
o The State shall regulate and exercise authority shall submit to the Securities and Exchange Commission a
over foreign investments within its national copy of its articles of incorporation and bylaws, certified in
jurisdiction and in accordance with its national accordance with law, and their translation to an official
goals and priorities. language of the Philippines, if necessary. The application
 b. Control test during war shall be under oath and, unless already stated in its articles
 In wartime, the courts may pierce the veil of corporate of incorporation, shall specifically set forth the following: x
fiction and look into nationality of the controlling xx
stockholders to determine “citizenship” of the corporation. o 3. The name and address of its resident agent
 Daimler Co. v. Continental Tire and Rubber Co.: A business authorized to accept summons and process in all
corporation incorporated in England, with a British secretary, but legal proceedings and, pending the establishment
whose shares were controlled by Germans, was considered an enemy of a local office, all notices affecting the
corporation. corporation;
 Thus, prohibited from trading in England. o 4. The place in the Philippines where the
 Place of incorporation is not conclusive in determining corporation intends to operate;
whether corporation is an enemy corporation. o 5. The specific purpose or purposes which the
 The company itself is incapable of enmity or amity, since corporation intends to pursue in the transaction of
such are attributable only to human beings. its business in the Philippines: Provided, That
 The company had the predominant character of its said purpose or purposes are those specifically
shareholders who were Germans. stated in the certificate of authority issued by the
o 3. DOMICILE OR RESIDENCE OF FOREIGN CORPORATIONS appropriate government agency; x x x
 Article 51, Civil Code. When the law creating or recognizing them, o 10. Such additional information as may be
or any other provision does not fix the domicile of juridical persons, necessary or appropriate in order to enable the
the same shall be understood to be the place where their legal Securities and Exchange Commission to
representation is established or where they exercise their principal determine whether such corporation is entitled to
functions. a license to transact business in the PH , and to
 A foreign corporation that has been licensed to do business in PH determine and assess the fees payable.
acquires a domicile here. o Attached to the application for license shall be a
 Domicile is synonymous with residence in this case. duly executed certificate under oath by the
Although traditionally: authorized official or officials of the jurisdiction
o Domicile – state of incorporation of its incorporation, attesting to the fact that the
o Residence – where the center of control reposes laws of the country or state of applicant allow
 Why does the Corporation Code require a foreign corporation to Filipino citizens and corporations to do business
obtain a license before it can do business here? therein, and that the applicant is an existing
 To prevent such corporations from acquiring domicile here corporation in good standing.
without first taking steps necessary to render them o If such certificate is in a foreign language, a
amenable to suit in local courts. translation thereof in English under oath of the
o 4. JURISDICTION OVER FOREIGN CORPORATIONS translator shall be attached thereto.
 The dictum in Bank of Augusta v. Earle to the effect that a corp has o The application for a license to transact business
no existence outside the incorporating state has been abandoned in in the Philippines shall likewise be accompanied
view of foreign investments. by a statement under oath of the president or any
other person authorized by the corporation,
showing to satisfaction of the Securities and
Exchange Commission and other gov agency in
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

the proper cases that the applicant is solvent and authorities of said corporation, in form and substance as
in sound financial condition, and setting forth the follows:
assets and liabilities of corp as of the date not o "The (name of foreign corporation) does hereby
exceeding one (1) year immediately prior to the stipulate and agree, in consideration of its being
filing of the application. granted by the Securities and Exchange
o Foreign banking, financial and insurance Commission a license to transact business in PH,
corporations shall, in addition to the above that if at any time said corporation shall cease to
requirements, comply with the provisions of transact business in the Philippines, or shall be
existing laws applicable to them. In the case of all without any resident agent in the Philippines on
other foreign corporations, no application for whom any summons or other legal processes may
license to transact business in PH shall be be served, then in any action or proceeding
accepted by the Securities and Exchange arising out of any business or transaction which
Commission without previous authority from the occurred in the Philippines, service of any
appropriate government agency, whenever summons or other legal process may be made
required by law. upon the Securities and Exchange Commission
 S126. Issuance of license. If the Securities and Exchange and that such service shall have the same force
Commission is satisfied that the applicant has complied and effect as if made upon the duly-authorized
with all requirements of this Code and other special laws, officers of corporation at its home office."
rules and regulations, the Commission shall issue a license  Whenever such service of summons or other process shall
to the applicant to transact business in Philippines for the be made upon Securities and Exchange Commission, the
purpose or purposes specified in such license. Upon Commission shall, within ten
issuance of the license, such foreign corporation may  (10) days thereafter, transmit by mail a copy of such
commence to transact business in the Philippines and summons or other legal process to the corporation at its
continue to do so for as long as it retains its authority to act home or principal office. The sending of such copy by the
as a corporation under the laws of the country or state of its Commission shall be necessary part of and shall complete
incorporation, unless such license is sooner surrendered, such service. All expenses incurred by the Commission for
revoked, suspended or annulled in accordance with this such service shall be paid in advance by the party at whose
Code or other special laws. Xxx instance the service is made. In case of a change of address
 Section 127. Who may be a resident agent. - A resident of the resident agent, it shall be his or its duty to
agent may be either an individual residing in the immediately notify in writing the Securities and Exchange
Philippines or a domestic corporation lawfully transacting Commission of the new address. (72a; and n)
business in the Philippines: Provided, That in the case of an  Foreign Corps Doing Business are bound by PH law
individual, he must be of good moral character and of  S129 Corporation Code:
sound financial standing. (n) o Law applicable. - Any foreign corporation
 Section 128. Resident agent; service of process. - The lawfully doing business in PH shall be bound by
Securities and Exchange Commission shall require as a all laws, rules and regulations applicable to
condition precedent to issuance of the license to transact domestic corporations of the same class, except
business in the Philippines by any foreign corporation that such only as provide for creation, formation,
such corporation file with the Securities and Exchange organization or dissolution of corporations or
Commission a written power of attorney designating some those which fix the relations, liabilities,
person who must be a resident of the Philippines, on whom responsibilities, or duties of stockholders,
any summons and other legal processes may be served in members, or officers of corporations to each
all actions or other legal proceedings against such other or to the corporation.
corporation, and consenting that service upon such resident  S12 Rule 14 ROC amended by AM 11-3-6-SC on rules on
agent shall be admitted and held as valid as if served upon summons
duly authorized officers of the foreign corporation at its o S12. Service upon foreign private juridical entity.
home office. Any such foreign corporation shall likewise —When defendant is a foreign private juridical
execute and file with Securities and Exchange Commission entity which has transacted business in
an agreement or stipulation, executed by the proper Philippines, service may be made on its resident
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

agent designated in accordance with law for that  b. Action to protect trademark, trade name, goodwill, patent or for
purpose, or, if there be no such agent, on gov’t unfair competition
official designated by law to that effect, or on any  A foreign corporation doing business without a license may
of its officers or agents within the Philippines. file a complaint for unfair competition.
o If foreign private juridical entity is not registered  Why? Equity considerations—
in the Philippines or has no resident agent, o To enjoin the unfair trader from pursuing the
service may, with leave of court, be effected out unlawful competition; and
of PH through any of the following means: o To enable the aggrieved party to recover
 a) By personal service coursed through damages.
the appropriate court in the foreign  Converse Rubber Corp. v. Jacinto Rubber and Plastic Co.,
country with assistance of the Inc.: Converse, a US corporation, was the manufacturer of
Department of Foreign Affairs; “Converse Chuck Taylor All Star” shoes, a trademark
 b) By publication once in a newspaper registered with both the US and PH patent offices. It sued
of general circulation in the country Jacinto for manufacturing “Custombuilt” shoes of identical
where defendant may be found and by appearance as Chuck Taylor.
serving a copy of the summons and o HELD: Converse has capacity to sue.
court order by-registered mail at the  GENERAL RULE: A foreign
last known address of defendant; corporation doing business without a
 c) By facsimile or any recognized license cannot seek redress from our
electronic means that could generate courts “to enforce any legal or contract
proof of service; or rights arising from, or growing out, of
 d) By such other means as the court any business which it has transacted in
may in its discretion direct. the Philippine Islands.”
 Summons may also be served through diplomatic channels.  EXCEPTION: Where the purpose of a
 Recall International Shoe: Minimum contacts required suit is "to protect its reputation, its
between defendant and state so as not to offend traditional corporate name, its goodwill, whenever
notions of fair play and substantial justice. that reputation, corporate name or
o 5. RIGHT OF FOREIGN CORPORATIONS TO BRING SUIT goodwill have, through the natural
 A foreign corporation may not file a case before a Philippine court development of its trade, established
unless it has a license to transact business in the Philippines. themselves," an unlicensed foreign
 S133 of Corporation Code: corporation may sue in the Philippines.
 Doing business without a license. - No foreign corporation (Western Equipment & Supply Co. v.
transacting business in the Philippines without a license, or Reyes)
its successors or assigns, shall be permitted to maintain or o Converse does not have a branch office in the
intervene in any action, suit or proceeding in any court or Philippines nor does it do business here. Hence, it
administrative agency of the Philippines; but such is not disqualified from filing and prosecuting
corporation may be sued or proceeded against before this action for unfair competition.
Philippine courts or administrative tribunals on any valid o Furthermore, it has a cause of action pursuant to
cause of action recognized under PH laws. the Paris Convention for the Protection of
o 6. EXCEPTIONS TO THE LICENSE REQUIREMENT Industrial Property. Both the Philippines and the
 a. Isolated Transactions US are signatories to such convention.
 Isolated business transaction – occasional, incidental and  c. Agreements fully transacted outside the Philippines
casual, not of a character to indicate a purpose to engage in  Policy: stabilization of commercial transactions.
business.  Universal Shipping Lines v. IAC: “On the issue of
 Does not constitute doing business as contemplated by law. jurisdiction, we uphold the appellate court's ruling that the
 An activity is isolated if there is no continuity of conduct private respondent may sue in Philippine courts upon the
and intention on part of the foreign corporation to establish marine insurance policies issued by it abroad to cover
a continuous business within state. international-bound cargoes shipped by a Philippine carrier,
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

even if it has no license to do business in this country, for it prosecution of, commercial gain or of the purpose and
is not the lack of the prescribed license (to do business in object of the business organization: Provided, however,
the Philippines) but doing business without such license, That the phrase `doing business' shall not be deemed to
which bars a foreign corporation from access to our include mere investment as a shareholder by a foreign
courts.” entity in domestic corporations duly registered to do
 Furthermore, holding otherwise would make our country a business, and/or exercise of rights as such investor; nor
haven for unprincipled businessmen who enter into having a nominee director or officer to represent its
contracts in foreign countries. interests in such corporation; nor appointing a rep or
 d. Petition filed is merely a corollary defense in a suit against it distributor domiciled in the Philippines which transacts
 Time, Inc. v. Reyes: By filing a petition for prohibition to business in its own name and for its own account.
prevent the trial court from exercising jurisdiction, a  It is important to determine whether a corporation is doing business
foreign corporation is not “maintaining any suit” but is in PH because it is the basis of the exercise of the courts’ jurisdiction
merely defending one against itself. over such corporation.
o No need to allege and prove capacity to sue.  Exercise of jurisdiction is justified based on the
 Philippine Columbia Enterprises v. Lantin: If a domestic corporation’s “presence” within the forum state or on its
corporation files counterclaim against a foreign consent to be sued.
corporation, there is no implied recognition of the latter’s  Quantum of business necessary to constitute “doing business” is
capacity to sue. This is because the foreign corporation determined by the law of the state.
(original plaintiff), is now the defendant. Hence, the  A corporation may be considered to be doing business in a certain
prohibition does not apply. state if latter is “a community nto whose business life the defendant
o 7. DEFINITION AND SCOPE OF “TRANSACTING BUSINESS” had significantly entered as determined by the quality, substantiality,
 A corporation has the capacity to act and contract, through its agent, continuity and systematic nature of its activities.”
in a state or country other than that in which it was created, with the  Bryant v. Finnish National Airline: The test for doing
express or implied consent of that country or state. business is a simple pragmatic one which leads us to
 GENERAL RULE: A corporation can do business in a foreign state, conclude that the defendant is suable in that state.
the state consent being presumed.  Top-Weld Manufacturing, Inc. v. ECED, S.A.:
 EXCEPTIONS: o There is no general rule to determine what
 Where it is prohibited by express statutory authority or constitutes “doing business.”
constitutional enactment; o Each case must be judged in light of its peculiar
 Where it is seeking to perform acts contrary to the public circumstances.
policy of the state; o Casual, isolated transactions do not come within
 Where it is seeking to exercise extraordinary and special the meaning of law.
franchises; and o But when a single transaction is not merely
 Where it is seeking to perform acts which are not incidental or casual but is indicative of the
authorized by the law of the state of its incorporation. foreign corporation’s intention to do business in
 Foreign Investments Act of 1991 defines “doing business,” thus: PH, such single act or transaction constitutes
 [T]he phrase "doing business" shall include "soliciting “doing” or “engaging in” or “transacting”
orders, service contracts, opening offices, whether called business in PH.
‘liaison’ offices or branches; appointing representatives or  Avon Insurance PLC v. CA: A reinsurance company is not
distributors domiciled in the PH or who in any calendar doing business in a certain state merely because the
year stay in the country for a period or periods totalling one property or lives which are insured by the original insurer
hundred eighty (180) days or more; participating in are located in that state.
management, supervision or control of any domestic o Reinsurance contract is separate and distinct from
business, firm, entity or corporation in PH; and any other the original insurance contract.
act or acts that imply a continuity of commercial dealings  Revocation of License to Transact Business
or arrangements, and contemplate to that extent the  Section 134, Corporation Code.
performance of acts or works, or the exercise of some of o Revocation of license. - Without prejudice to
functions normally incident to, and in progressive other grounds provided by special laws, the
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

license of a foreign corporation to transact religious denomination, sect or church, a corporation sole may be
business in PH may be revoked or suspended by formed by the chief archbishop, bishop, priest, minister, rabbi or
the Securities and Exchange Commission upon other presiding elder of such religious denomination, sect or church.
any of the following grounds: x x x  S116. Religious societies. - Any religious society or religious order,
o 2. Failure to appoint and maintain a resident or any diocese, synod, or district organization of any religious
agent in the Philippines as required by this Title; denomination, sect or church, unless forbidden by the constitution,
o 3. Failure, after change of its resident agent or of rules, regulations, or discipline of the religious denomination, sect or
his address, to submit to Securities and Exchange church of which it is a part, or by competent authority, may, upon
Commission a statement of such change as written consent and/or by an affirmative vote at a meeting called for
required by this Title; x x x purpose of at least two-thirds (2/3) of its membership, incorporate for
o 7. Transacting business in the Philippines outside administration of its temporalities or for the management of its
of the purpose or purposes for which such affairs, properties and estate by filing with Securities and Exchange
corporation is authorized under its license; Commission, articles of incorporation verified by the affidavit of the
o 8. Transacting business in PH as agent of or presiding elder, secretary, or clerk or other member of such religious
acting for and in behalf of any foreign society or religious order, or diocese, synod, or district organization
corporation or entity not duly licensed to do of the religious denomination, sect or church, setting forth following:
business in the Philippines; or  1. That the religious society or religious order, or diocese,
o 9. Any other ground as would render it unfit to synod, or district organization is a religious organization of
transact business in the Philippines. a religious denomination, sect or church;
 No. 9 is a catch-all which gives the SEC wide latitude to  2. That at least two-thirds (2/3) of its membership have
determine WoN it should suspend or revoke the license. given their written consent or have voted to incorporate, at
 Procedure: a duly convened meeting of the body;
o There must be notice and hearing.  3. That the incorporation of the religious society or
o SEC issues certificate of revocation. religious order, or diocese, synod, or district organization
desiring to incorporate is not forbidden by competent
 Copy given to government agency in
authority or by the constitution, rules, regulations or
charge.
discipline of the religious denomination, sect, or church of
 Copy given to foreign corporation at its
w/c it forms a part
office in PH.
 Effect of Failure to Secure License to Transact Business  4. That the religious society or religious order, or diocese,
synod, or district organization desires to incorporate for the
 Section 133. Doing business without a license. - No foreign
administration of its affairs, properties and estate;
corporation transacting business in the PH without a
license, or its successors or assigns, shall be permitted to  5. The place where the principal office of the corporation is
maintain or intervene in any action, suit or proceeding in to be established and located, which place must be within
any court or administrative agency of the PH; but such the Philippines; and
corporation may be sued or proceeded against before  6. The names, nationalities, and residences of the trustees
Philippine courts or administrative tribunals on any valid elected by the religious society or religious order, or the
cause of action recognized under Philippine laws. diocese, synod, or district organization to serve for first
 Contracts entered into may be valid as between the parties year or such other period as may be prescribed by the laws
but may not be enforced in PH courts. of the religious society or religious order, or of the diocese,
synod, or district organization, the board of trustees to be
 B. SPECIAL CORPORATIONS
not less than five (5) nor more than fifteen (15).
o 1. RELIGIOUS SOCIETIES AND THE CORPORATION SOLE
 Register of Deeds of Rizal v. Ung Siu Si Temple: The Ung Siu Si
 S109. Classes of religious corporations. - Religious corporations may
Temple is non-stock corporations whose members were Chinese
be incorporated by one or more persons. Such corporations may be
nationals.
classified into corporations sole and religious societies. Religious
 HELD: RD properly denied registration of agricultural land
corporations shall be governed by this Chapter and by the general
in view of constitutional prohibition against aliens owning
provis on non-stock corporations insofar as they may be applicable.
real property in PH. At least 60% of the members (since
 S110. Corporation sole. - For the purpose of administering and
there is no capital stock) should be Filipino citizens.
managing, as trustee, the affairs, property and temporalities of any
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 To permit religious societies controlled by aliens to acquire  Does it share office with parent corp?
agricultural lands would be to drive the opening wedge to o US CTs: J over parent corp may be acq when subsidiary does not maintain
revive religious holdings in this country. separate corp existence.
 Roman Catholic Apostolic Administrator of Davao v. Land  Also, State may acq J over parent if activities of subsidiary in
Registration Commissioner: The petitioner is a corporation sole, but state:
is a Canadian citizen.  Provide a basis for J over subsidiary; and
 HELD: Registration allowed. In a corporation sole, the  Can be said to have been done in course for parent corp or
head of diocese is not the OWNER of the land but merely on its behalf.
ADMINISTRATOR thereof. He administers the church’s o Conversely, if state has J over parent, it also has J over subsidiary, IF:
properties on behalf of the faithful who are Filipino  Subsidiary’s separate corp existence has not been adequately
citizens. maintained
o 2. TRANSNATIONAL CORPORATIONS  Parent acted w/n state as subsidiary’s agent
 Transnational corporations  C. PARTNERSHIPS
 clusters of several corps, each with separate entity; existing o A1767 NCC
and spread out in several countries; but controlled by HQ in  By contract of partnership, two or more persons bind themselves to
developed state where it was OG organized contribute money, property, or industry to common fund, with
o Not org under intl law (treaty). intention of dividing profits among themselves.
o All locally incorporated branches are joined  Two or more persons may also form a partnership for the exercise of
together by common control and management of a profession.
higher officials in home state. o Choice-of-law questions often arise from the determination of the rights, duties,
 What is the personal law applicable to transnational corp? liabilities of
 OG, law of foreign state where it was originally organized.  partners inter se as agents and fiduciaries; and
 BUT, by associating with local entrepreneurs and  the partnership and partners in dealing with 3rd persons.
incorporating under laws of host state, it becomes domestic o Extent of liability of parties to partnership are wholly dependent on
corp of such state. o governing law.
 Still, major decisions re: operation and man of corporation o NCC51 states:
come from parent corp in industrialized state.  When law creating or recognizing them, or any other provision does
 NOT unusual for transnationals to drive unfair bargains with local not fix domicile of juridical persons, same shall be understood to be
EEs, customers, and suppliers. place where their legal representation is established or where they
 Only local corps will be held liable exercise their principal functions
 but NOT parent corporation. o Domicile
 Derivative Jurisdiction Over Foreign Corporations  If partnership is formed in one state but conducts business in other,
o If state has J over subsidiary, does it have J over parent? may be considered to be domiciled in state where business is done.
 Is ownership by parent over the subsidiary’s stock enough to o Capacity to contract
 confer J?  Law of state where partnership is formed
 Will subsidiary’s activities in state give that state J over parent?  A15 Code of Commerce; PH law applies in:
o Restatement: J over parent will exist if parent controls and dominates  creation of partnership’s establishments within PH
subsidiary. territory;
o Considerations in det WON subsidiary is maintaining separate corporate  mercantile operations; and
existence:  jurisdictions of courts of nation
 Does it have its own— o Existence of partnership
 Records  personal law of partnership
 Assets  conditions and formalities extrinsic validity)
 Employees o Grounds for dissolution
 Advertising  Partnership’s personal law
 Payroll o Obligations limited partners
 Accounting  NCC: limited partners are NOT bound by oblig of partnership.
 Are its dirs. same as parent corp?  King v. Sarria:
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 F: partnership forged in Cuba, whose laws provide that o Law of place of INCORPORATION (PH FOLLOWS THIS)
only general partners are liable for partnership obligs. o Law of place of center of management
Partnership entered into contract in NY. Was sued before  central office principle
NY court; among parties impleaded was Sarria, limited  or center of administration
partner domiciled in Cuba.  or siege social
 H: Sarria cannot be held liable, ff law of creation of o Place of exploitation
partnership – NOT lex loci contractus.  Exploitation center
 Extraterritorial Enforcement of IN PERSONAM Judgments Against Partnerships  Siege d’exploitation
o Is service of summons on partner enuf to Acq J over partnership?  Domicile or residence of foreign corps
 Restatement: o GR: fixed by law creating them
 A state in which partnership or other unincorporated o EXP: place where
associations is subjected to suit under the firm or common  legal rep is
name has power to exercise judicial J over the partnership  OR exercise their principal functions
or association if, under circs, it would exercise judicial J o US law (same)
over and individual.  If any, where exercises corp functions
 Valid judgment rendered against partnership or association  Dwells in place where its business is done
is binding adjudication as to liability of partnership or  Located where its franchises are exercised
association, with respect to its assets in every state.  Present where it is engaged in prosecution of corp enterprises
 R14.S11 ROC. Service upon domestic private juridical entity. —  Foreign corp licensed to do business in state, is resident of any
When defendant is a corp, partnership, or association org under country where it maintains office, or agent for transaction of its usual
PH laws, with juridical personality, service may be made on: and customary business ofr venue purposes (State Investment House,
 President Inc v. Citibank)
 managing partner o NOTE: foreign corp granted LICENSE TO OP in PH acq DOMICILE in
 general manager PH
 corporate secretary  VALIDITY of corporate acts and contracts
 treasurer o To be valid and binding, corp acts or contracts must be authorized by BOTH:
 in-house counsel  Law of place of incorporations
 Law of place of performance
BEDA NOTES o Else, may not be given effect – subject to ESTOPPEL
 Multinational or transnational corporations
 Rules on juridical persons o Branches of big mother corp, that have been incorp under local law of each
o SEE: MEMAID country or state where it has extended its business are separate entities gov’d by
 Effects of recognition of foreign business association said local laws
o Merely admits or affirms legal existence created under law of one State  Jurisdiction of foreign corporations
o NOT involve Rs of corp “to do” or “transact” business o Consent doctrine
 Theories of recognition  Foreign corporation will be recognized and will be allowed to
o Territorial theory – company has NO legal existence beyond sovereignty, by transact business in any state which gives its consent.
w/c it was created  This doctrine is established in S140-153 Title XV of Revised
o International theory – foreign corp is immediately recog w/o further formality Corporation Code
o Restricted admission theory – State impose comprehensive examination,  S146 RCC: foreign corp lawfully doing business in PH
superV, control of foreign corps shall be bound by all laws, rules, regus applicable to
 In PH domestic corps of same clas, EXP those w/c provide for
o Every State may impose conditions on exercise by foreign corps of activities creation, formation, org, dissolution of corps, or those w/c
fix relations, liabilities, responsibilities, dutie of SHs,
w/n its territory.
members, officers of corps to each other or to the corp
o Minimum contact required for power of restriction and superV
(S146 RCC)
 Fact of transaction or doing business in PH
o Withdrawal of business in PH/ revocation of license
 Corporation/ partnership theories on personal or governing law of Corp
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 Foreign corp may STILL be sued on contracts prev entered into by o Notes
it.  In either case, foreign corp is NOT maintaining a suit.
 Same rule applies to contracts entered into before revocationof corp’s  Such counterclaim may embrace only compulsory counterclaim –
licnese NOT permissive one
o Parent and subsidiary corporations  Since compulsory CC is deemed waived if not raised
 J over parent corp can be acq when  Trust
 separate existence of subsidiary has NOT been fully o When trust contains express choice of law provi, that law shall apply.
maintained o In absence of express provision, CTs will deem as controlling tha law that will
 OR of parent acted w/n state as subsidiary’s agent sustain validity of trust
 IF local counterpart is subsidiary w/ entirely distinct perso
 J over local counterpart is NOT J over parent FOREIGN JUDGMENTS
 Right of foreign corp to bring suit
o Foreign corp transacting business in PH W/O LICENSE, or its successors or Recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments
assigns
 GR: NOT allowed to maintain of intervene in any action, suit,  Recognition v. enforcement
proceeding, in any CT or admin agency of PH o Foreign judgment – all decisions rendered outside forum
 BUT such may be sued, or proceeded against, before PH  Includes judgments, decrees, orders of:
CTs or admin tribes  Foreign courts
o On any valid COA, recog under PH law  Sister states in federal system
o S150 RCC o If successful plaintiff fails to obtain satisfaction of judgment in court which
 EXP: when MAY sue despite w/o license granted it, he may try to enforce it in another state where defendant can be
 Isolated transactions (Eriks PTE Ltd. V. CA, 1997) located.
 Action to protect trademark, trade name, goodwill, patent, o If defendant wins and asserts that decision to preclude plaintiff from suing on
unfair competition same COA in another court, he is asking for recognition of the original
 Enforcement of right NOT arising from business judgment.
transactions
o E.g. tort w/n PH
 Parties contractually stipulated that PH is venue of actions
 Party sued in barred by estoppel or unjust enrichment from
Q’ing capacity of foreign corp
 Recovery of misdelivered property
 Agreements or transactions fully transacted outside PH (B.
Vam Zuiden v. GTVL Manufacturing industries, 2007)
 Petition is merely corollary defense in suit against it
 Failure to secure license to transact business
o R to sue
 Bases of recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments
 Foreign corp doing business in PH /o license has NO R to sue in PH
o Comity (Hilton v. Guyot)
– BUT can be sued (S133, S150 RCC)
 Cheshire: It would appear that, to obtain reciprocal treatment from
 SEE: ABOVE
the courts of other countries, we are compelled to take foreign
o Contracts
judgments as they stand and to give them full faith and credit.
 Contracts entered into are valid as bet parties, but may not be
 Effect: reciprocity among concerned jurisdictions
enforced in PH CTs (Pangalangan)
o “The obligation of foreign judgments”
 Foreign corporations and compulsory counterclaims
 Derived from Vested Rights Theory.
o When foreign corp is sued, it may interpose counterclaim
 Considers judgment of foreign court as imposing duty or obligation
 W/c would defeat the complaint on losing litigant.
o If foreign corp is suing on isolated contract, or is exempt from license
 Ex. Judgment on debt owing to plaintiff is handed down by
requirement, local def can file counterclaim F1. F2 considers this judgment as evidence of the debt.
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 TF action may be brought in F2 to enforce it.  Where there is an egregious disregard for due process, the foreign
 Policies underlying recognition and enforcement judgment will be denied recognition and enforcement.
o Ground: res judicata  For as long as the foreign court acquired jurisdiction, its decisions
 Those who have contested an issue shall be bound by the result of will not be disturbed whether it was reached through an adversary
contest. proceeding or by default.
 Matters once tried and decided with finality in one Jshall be  Somportex v. Philadelphia Chewing Gum Corporation:
considered settled as between the parties.  Default judgment rendered by English court should still be
 Anglo-American jurisprudence: Foreign judgments are not open to extended hospitality by American courts.
reexamination on merits when placed in issue before local CTs.  In absence of fraud or collusion, a default judgment is
 Rule is subject to few exceptions conclusive as adjudication between the parties as when
o Policies involved rendered after answer and complete contest in open court.
 To give finality to litigation  Test: whether a reasonable method of notification is
 To protect legit expectations of parties employed and reasonable opportunity to be heard is
o TF Rule 39 afforded to person affected.
 Effect of foreign judgments or final orders. — Effect of judgment o 2. Judgment must be valid under laws of court that rendered it.
or final order of tribe of a foreign country, having  Pemberto v. Hughes:
 jurisdiction to render the judgment or final order, is as follows:  F: Summons was served on Mrs. Pemberto in Florida, but
 (a) In case of a judgment or final order upon a specific thing, the she was only given 9 days to answer instead of the statutory
judgment or final order is conclusive upon title of thing; and 10. Judgment was rendered against her and an action for
 (b) In case of judgment or final order against person, judgment or enforcement filed before an English court. Pemberto
final order is presumptive evidence of right as between parties and asserted that decree was invalid.
their successors in interest by a subsequent title.  H: English court held that since no substantial injustice was
 In either case, the judgment or final order may be repelled by caused to petitioner, all the court could look to is the
evidence of want of J, want of notice to the party, collusion, fraud, or finality of judgment and the jurisdiction of the court.
clear mistake of law or fact. o Competence to entertain the sort of case which it
o Apart from res judicata, consider also concepts of “merger” and “bar” did deal with; and
 Merger – considers COA as merged in judgment. o Competence to require the defendant to appear
 TF cannot relitigate claim. before it.
 Bar – when successful defendant interposes the judgment in his favor  The error in procedure was not significant enough to alter
to avert a second action by the plaintiff on the same claim. an otherwise valid decree.
 Direct estoppel – the relitigation of all matters decided are o 3. Judgment must be final and executory to constitute res judicata in another
precluded. action.
 Collateral estoppel – all essential issues of fact actually litigated in  Interlocutory/provisional order – one which contemplates that a fuller
suit decided on by the foreign court are rendered conclusive. investigation leading to a final decision may later be held.
 Concerned with issue preclusion by barring relitigation on  Creates no obligation on forum CT to recognize or enforce
issue already litigated on in a prior proceeding. it.
 Compare with res judicata which seeks to end litigation by o 4. The state where the foreign judgment was obtained allows recognition or
disallowing suit on same claim. enforcement of PH judgments – RECIPRICAL RESPECT, COMITY
 Requisites for recognition or enforcement  Reiteration of international comity as basis for recognition and
o 1. Foreign judgment was rendered by a judicial or a quasi-judicial tribunal enforcement of foreign judgment.
which had J over parties and case in proper judicial proceedings.  Hilton v. Guyot: French judgment was not declared conclusive
 For in personam proceedings because “international law is founded upon mutuality and
 Consent of the parties; or reciprocity.”
 Relation of the parties or events to the forum (International  French law allowed review of American decisions.
Shoe: satisfy minimum standards of fair play and  Comity was used as a means of retaliation.
substantial justice)  French legal system coerced to change its laws.
 For in rem proceedings:  Criticism: litigants are punished because of their
 power of state over property found within the territory. governments’ policies over which they have no control.
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

o Also, is the task of formulating policies through  Must be extrinsic, collateral act which vitiates the most
reciprocity a power to be appropriately exercised solemn proceedings of courts of justice.
by the judiciary?  Examples:
 Trautman & Von Mehren: Difficulties with the reciprocity o Collusion by parties
requirement— o Suppression of important document
 Tends to lower rather than raise the standards of practice. o Presentation of forged will or false affidavit
Hence, no constructive effect.  E. Grounds for non-recognition
 Private litigants burdened may not be closely attached to o Section 4, Uniform Foreign Money-Judgments Recognition Act. Grounds for
legal order sought to be changed. Non-Recognition.
 Administration can be difficult because finding the exact  (a) foreign judgment is not conclusive if
law which grants reciprocity is, in itself, still nebulous.  (1) Judgment was rendered under a system which does not
o Is general recognition sufficient or must there be provide impartial tribunals or procedures compatible with
specific recognition of a case identical or the requirements of due process of law;
analogous to one before court?  (2) Foreign court did not have personal jurisdiction over the
o 5. The judgment must be for a fixed sum of money defendant; or
 Unless foreign judgment specifies performance or delivery, there is  (3) The foreign court did not have jurisdiction over the
nothing forthe forum court to enforce. subject matter.
 Sadler v. Roberis: Until taxation, the plaintiff cannot enforce his  (4) foreign judgment need not be recognized if
claim.  *(1) defendant in the proceedings in the foreign court did
 Jamaican court held that costs (which are to be taxed) not receive notice of proceedings in sufficient time to
should first be deducted from the award. enable him to defend;
 Hence, the amount of the decree was not fixed.  *(2) Judgment was obtained by fraud;
 What if plaintiff showed the applicable tax rate? Would the amount  *(3) The [cause of action] [claim for relief] on which the
now be fixed? judgment is based is repugnant to public policy of this
o 6. The foreign judgment must not be contrary to public policy the good state;
morals of the country where enforced.  (4) Judgment conflicts with another final and conclusive
 Forum is not under any duty to apply foreign law (or recognize judgment;
foreign judgments) when such is repugnant to its internal policies or  (5) The proceeding in the foreign court was contrary to
prejudicial to its interests. agreement between parties under which dispute in
 Then prevailing choice-of-law method was the vested question was to be settled otherwise than by proceedings in
rights theory. that court; or
o 7. The judgment must not have been obtained by fraud, collusion mistake of  (6) In case of jurisdiction based only on personal service,
fact or mistake of law the foreign court was seriously inconvenient forum for
 WON there is fraud is to be decided by the court on the basis of its trial of the action.
internal law. o The first three grounds are *mandatory while the last three are discretionary.
 Can be basis of a conflicts problem if principles not in line o Most debatable: lack of jurisdiction in personam.
with those of the foreign state.  Why? In most courts, forum-defendant contacts are appropriate bases
 §48, Rule 39: for exercise of J.
 x x x In either case, the judgment or final order may be  Traditional basis (presence) has long been eroded.
repelled by evidence of want of J , want of notice to the  In fact, last ground (forum non conveniens) further restricts use of
party, collusion, fraud, or clear mistake of law or fact. presence as cornerstone for exercise of jurisdiction.
 The kind of fraud referred to is extrinsic fraud. o Grounds recognized under various Hague Conventions:
 A finding of intrinsic fraud would result in a trial de novo,  Child not given opportunity to be heard, public policy exception
hence, it is NOT a defense in an action to enforce a foreign (Hague Convention on Jurisdiction, Applicable Law, Recognition,
judgment. Enforcement and Cooperation in Respect of Parental Responsibility
 Extrinsic fraud – signifies that the party had been deprived of his and Measures for the Protection of Children);
day in court.  Violation of the ordre public of the recognizing state;
 Failure to comply with the due process requirements.
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

 F. Modern developments in enforcement of foreign judgments  o Permits member states to include in bilateral treaties
o There has been a growing effort to take the rout of treaties and multilateral clauses that protect domiciliaries against recognition of
conventions to regulate recognition and enforcement practices. foreign judgments that are improperly based.
o 1. The Hague Conference on Private International Law o 3. Uniform Foreign Money-Judgments Recognition Act
 Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign  Applicable to any foreign country judgment that is final and
Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters: conclusive and enforceable.
 Established conditions and prerequisites under which  Even if appeal is available/pending.
contracting states would recognize and enforce each other’s  Excludes judgments from:
judgments.  Taxes
 Significant provisions:  Penalties
o Applicability of the convention irrespective of  Child/spousal support
nationality of the parties;  G. Procedure for enforcement
o Non-refusal for the sole reason that the court of o 1. New action/petition
the state of origin has applied law other than that  Common law: When a foreign judgment is recognized, it is not
which would have been applicable according to instantaneously executed as a judgment.
rules of private international law of the state  Adopted by the Philippines.
addressed.  A petition must be filed in the proper court attaching an authenticated
 Convention also addresses the issues of: copy of the foreign judgment to be enforced.
o WON default judgment is subject to enforcement;  Recall Rule 132:
and  Section 24. Proof of official record. — The record of public
o Procedures for enforcement and recognition. documents referred to in paragraph (a) of Section 19, when
 Supplementary Protocol: admissible for any purpose, may be evidenced by an
 Applicable to all foreign judgments, irrespective of place of official publication thereof or by a copy attested by officer
origin, affecting all matters to which the convention having the legal custody of the record, or by his deputy,
extends, directed against a domiciliary of a contracting and accompanied, if record is not kept in PH, with
state. certificate that such officer has the custody. If office in
 Domiciliary may obtain recognition/enforcement by a which the record is kept is in foreign country, the certificate
contracting state where foreign judgment was based on an may be made by a secretary of embassy or legation, consul
improper forum. general, consul, vice consul, or consular agent or by any
 Convention on Recognition and Enforcement of Decisions Relating officer in the foreign service of the Philippines stationed in
to Maintenance Obligations: foreign country in which record is kept, and authenticated
 Relates to family, relationship, parentage, marriage or by the seal of his office.
affinity.  Why the requirement of new action? It seeks to reconcile two
 In 1993, the 17th Session of the Hague Convention looked into the principles—
possibility of a general convention on recognition and enforcement.  First, territorial jurisdiction of courts, which demands that
 Benefit: uniform procedure. enforcement of a foreign judgment should be based upon
 Ease in determining the effects that a contracting state something other than authority of rendering court which
would give to foreign judgment. ceased at its jurisdictional limits; and
 Could address the practice of using unreasonable  Second, res judicata.
jurisdictional bases against persons not domiciled in a o 2. Summary proceeding for enforcement of judgments (other civil law
contracting state. countries)
o 2. EEC Convention of 1968  Exequatur – validation proceeding
 Convention Relating to the Jurisdiction of Courts and Enforcement of  French law: authenticated copy of judgment + validation certificate
Decisions in Civil and Commercial Matters (formule executoire) issued by the Clerk of Court.
 Extends to Common Market area the reach of  Once validated, the foreign judgment is given the same effect as local
jurisdictionally improper for presently available against judgment.
non-residents under procedural systems of four member  Compared to this method, the common law method is protracted and
states. expensive.
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

o 3. Judgment registration  i.e. judgment in merits is final

 May or may not involve judicial supervision.  issued by foreign CT having J over SM and parties
 Authenticated copy of judgment filed in the registrar’s office + other  identity of parties, SM, COA
proof required by domestic laws. o NOT barre by prescription BOTH in
 Judgment converted into local one that is immediately  State where promulgated
executory.  State where sought to be enforced
 England requires judicial approval to avoid mistake or negligence.  State where foreign judgment was obtained allows recognition o
 In US, distinctions between a foreign country and sister-state judgment are enforcement of PH judgments
indispensable in the manner of enforcement.  If judgment is for sum of money, must be fixed
o Under the Constitution, states must give extraterritorial recognition to all the  Foreign judgment not contrary to public policy or good morals of
acts, records and judgments of the several states (“full faith and credit” clause). country where to be enforce
o Judgments of the sister-states may be brought to the US SC for review.  Judgment NOT obtained by fraud, collusion, mistake of fact or law
o Judgments rendered by sister-states are based on legal procedures similar to  Judgment on civil or commercial matters, including Qs of status –
those of the court whose recognition is sought. NOT on criminal, revenue, admin matter
 Foreign court may have disregarded rules which the recognizing  PH rule on effect of foreign judgment
court regards as important. o Effect if judgment or final order of tribunal of foreign country, having J to
 But in practice, courts are inclined to give recognition to foreign judgments because render judgment or final order, is as ff:
of overriding public interest and the dictates of public policy that there be an END  Judgment or final order upon specific thing
LITIGATION.  conclusive upon title to thing
 Judgment or final order against person
BEDA NOTES  Presumptive evidence of right as bet parties and successors
in interest by subsequent title
RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT o Either case, judgment or final order may be repelled by evidence of want of J,
want of notice to party, collusion fraud, or clear mistake of law or fact (ROC
Recognition of foreign judgment Enforcement of foreign judgment R39.S48)
Defendant or respondent is presenting Plaintiff or petitioner wants CT to o NOTE: judgment in foreign CT does NOT constitute res judicata as basis for
foreign judgment merely as defense, on positively carry out and make effective the enforcement, w/o giving losing party the opportunity to dispute it
basis of res judicata foreign judgment  3 modes of enforcement of judgment
Invokes merely sense of justice (Perkins v. Implies act of sovereignty o By filing petition in CT where judgment is sought to b recognized for
Benguet Consolidated Mining, 1954) recognition of judgment
Needs no proceeding or action – but implies Reqs separate action brought precisely to o By summary procedure known as exequature proceedings (summary procedure
that same already been filed against def, make foreign judgment effective outlined in statutes of some civil law countries such as France, Italy,
who is invoking foreign judgment Switzerland, Austria, for enforcement of foreign judgments that have no auto
Recognition is passive effect of foreign Enforcement is an active recognition and effect or authority in themselves) and
judgment implementation of foreign judgment from o By registration of foreign judgment in registry of judgments in forum where it
local T, rendering foreign judgment as is w/ or w/o judicial supervision
domestic judgment and seeking its  Reasons for refusal by local ct to recognize or enforce foreign judgment
enforcement by sheriff in accd w/ ROC o Requisite proof of foreign judgment may not have been presented
 NOTE: manner of proving foreign judgment is same as proving
 NOTE: enforcement necessarily implies recognition – NOT vice versa foreign law (R132.S25)
 Examples of foreign judgments w/c can only be recognized: o Foreign judgment may contravene recognized and established policy in our
o Declaratory judgments country
o Judgments w/c give no affirmative relief, and  E.g. foreign decree of divorce obtained by FIL from his/her FIL Sps
o Judgments w/c det parties interests in thing or status abroad
 Requisites for recognition or enforcement  Admin of justice in country where foreign judgment came from may
o Defendant has been given reasonable notice and opportunity to be heard be shockingly corrupt or not beyond reproach
o Adequate proof of foreign judgment  Procedure of enforcement of judgment in PH
o Foreign judgment disposed of controversy on merits, and is RES JUDICATA
CONFLICT OF LAWS - REVIEWER

o Filing petition in proper court, attaching authenticated copy of foreign

judgment
o Authentication calls for PH consul, assigned to country where foreign judgment
was decrees to certify that such judgment was rendered by CT of competent J
 Foreign judgment must conform w/ constitutional reqs
o Requirement that judgment must state facts and law upon w/c it is based is
embodied in S14.S8 CONST
o Any foreign law, whether substantive or procedural, cannot overrule or prevail
over this CONST provision