You are on page 1of 35


 Part of international law which deals with legal problems involving foreign element concerning the conflict in the application of local and foreign laws, raised in a proper forum.  That part of municipal law of a state which directs its courts and administrative agencies, when confronted with a legal problem involving a foreign element, whether or not they should apply a foreign law/s (Paras).  That part of the law of each State or nation which determines whether, in dealing with a legal situation, the law or some other State or nation will be recognized, given effect, or applied (16 Am Jur, 2d, Conflict of Laws, §1)



ELEMENTS FOR THE APPLICATION OF CONFLICT OF LAWS 1. 2. 3. 4.   Conflict of laws is that part of the municipal law of the State The direction to Courts and Administrative agencies A legal problem involving a foreign element The application or non-application of foreign law/foreign laws

I. Legal problem involving foreign element—
If there is no foreign element, there is no conflict of law. Foreign elements is a factual situation that cut across territorial lines and affected by diverse laws of two or more states -- Saudia vs Morada 1. One or both litigant is alien 2. Cause of action arises in foreign state - location of the res - place of celebration - place of the act - place of the crime

II. Assumption of the proper forum
Cases involving COL, forum may: 1. Refuse - apply forum non conviniens, no COL

2. Assume- forum may apply the following: a. local law -- lex fori b. Foreign law - lex causae c. apply both -- Cadalin vs POEA

III. Conflict between local and foreign law
  if there is no conflict between the two, there is nothing to resolve. court can apply foreign law if properly pleaded and proved, application discretionary to the court.

IV. Choice of law to be applied Which law applies?
 depends on the factual situation and connection of the foreign element, apply characterization process of determining under what category a certain set of facts or rules falls.  Purpose - to enable the forum to select the proper law

FUNCTIONS OF CONFLICT OF LAWS (IS 3 FOLD) 1. To prescribe the conditions under which a court or agency is competent to entertain a suit or proceeding involving facts containing a foreign element; 2. To determine the extent, validity and enforceability of foreign judgment (or to specify the circumstances in which foreign judgment will be recognized as valid and binding in the forum) 3. To determine for each class of cases the particular system if law by reference to which the rights of the parties must be ascertained this is the fundamental problem of choice of law In other words, 1. The determination of which country has jurisdiction 2. The applicability to a particular case of either the local or the foreign law 3. The determination of the force, validity and effectiveness of a foreign judgment 4 important points: 1. Rules of Private International Law, like all other rules of law, apply only to certain given facts not characterized as creating some legal relationship

2. The selection of legal systems open to the court is limited to those that are simultaneously valid 3. The legal effects of a certain set of facts are not always determined by one single legal system. 4. It is sometimes necessary to apply several systems, either cumulatively or alternatively Cumulative application: 1. a given set of facts may produce legal effects each of which is governed by a different legal system, 2. or a given set of facts may produce legal effects only if certain conditions common to two legal systems are fulfilled Alternative application: Under the Philippine law, if an alien executes a will in the Philippines, the formal validity of the will may be judged alternatively by the requirement of internal Philippine law or of his own national law. If either law considers it formally valid, it may be admitted to probate ALSO: Promoting the peaceable intercourse of private persons, made imperative by the economic and social demands of an interdependent world, through rules that are eminently just and workable, may well be the ultimate objective of Private International Law – protection of the justified and rational expectations of parties to a transaction, the application of the law of the state having a dominant interest in a given set of facts, the promotion of stability and predictability by achieving uniformity of solution to a case wherever the forum may be situated, and of course, the dispensing of justice in individual cases. SIGNIFICANCE/IMPORTANCE OF CONFLICT OF LAWS 1. To adjust conflicting rights in international mercantile and corporate transactions 2. To solve personal, family, property and successional contractual problems, possessed of facts or elements operating in two or more states. Why conflict of law is observed?  States must of necessity observe the subject because it is part of their municipal law. Surely, a government, anywhere and anytime, is duty bound to enforce and respect its own municipal legislation

real statutes 2. and such is binding to all subjects but not beyond those limits Subjects of a state are all those who are found within the limits of its territory. presumed it is real In matters of succession. whether they reside there permanently or whether their presence there is only temporary . mixed statutes The French Jurists of the 16th century: 2 thinkers Charles Dumoulin Doctrine: Parties to the contract could choose the law that was to govern their agreement Bertrand D’Argentre Doctrines   Whenever there was any doubt as to whether a statutory rule was personal or real. the law of the countries concerned should be applied respectively to the immovable therein situated rather than for the latter to be regulated by one and only one law  The Doctrine of Comitas Gentium • Doctrine: States are not obligated to take note of foreign laws unless imposed by treaty Product of Netherland’s independence Principles: Doctrine of Pure Territoriality   Laws of every state operate within the territorial limits. individuals observe it because of fear of municipal sanctions IDENTIFYING ISSUES IN CONFLICT OF LAWS HISTORY OF CONFLICT OF LAWS ORIGIN HISTORY OF THE SUBJECT Earliest Period – Theory of Statutes to solve conflicts Bartolus (from the Italian city-states) – Father of Private International Law  Determined CoL rules by differentiating 3 types of statutes 1. personal statutes 3. where a person leaves immovables in various countries.

Theoretical -Deductive method. do not claim universal validity Joseph Story • American judge. the contract is valid if under the law is either (his domicile or that of Prussia) he is capable of entering into contracts 19th Century Jurists 2 groups of writers 1. System of Modern Roman Law (1849) It is expedient that in cases containing a foreign element. that domicile is decisive under the law of which the contract or act in question is valid • If a person domiciled abroad enters into contract within Prussian territory respecting chattels there. Every sovereign. or bind persons not resident therein. Every nation possesses an exclusive sovereignty and jurisdiction within its own territory that directly binds all properties within its territory. out of comity. which is possible under European laws. provided that this will not prejudice the subjects of the sovereign by whom its recognition is sought  This doctrine merely states that the Theory of Statutes is subordinate to the idea of Comitas Beginning of codifications • Prussian General Code of 1794 made emphasis of res magis valet quam.Inductive method. Positive . whether they are natural born subjects or others Friedrich Carl von Savigny • • Great German jurist. which as applied to Private International Law: • If a person has 2 domiciles. Commentaries on the Conflict of Laws (1834) • Approach was more positive than theoretical • Maxims: 1. No state or nation can by its law directly affect or bind property out of its own territory. and all persons who are residents within it (territorial sovereignty) 2.Studies actual rules in force and reduce them to systematic order. the same legal relations have to expect the same decision whether the judgment be pronounced in this state or in that . admits that a law which has already operated in the country of origin shall retain its force everywhere.Begins with a set of priori principles to derive a body of consistent rules 2.

the state and the individuals The question is not W/N the rule is related to property. each have own law – so they have conflicts of law problems BARTOLUS (father of conflict of laws): formulated the THEORY OF STATUTES -the theory of statutes was used by the Italian city-states to resolve conflict of law issues . language. persons or acts but to classify legal relationships so as to ascertain for every legal relation that law to which. the components of which are: religion. historical traditions. it belongs or is subject and thus find out where a relation has its seat (the situs) – the seat of a particular legal relationship Pasquale Stanislao Mancini • • Nationality as the Basis of the Law of Nations (1851) Opposing the rule on domicile. those for the protection of public order – binding to all within the territory (other version:) Roman Empire Ius gentium: -law of nations in PIL -governs relations of States -body of rules developed by the PRAETOR PEREGRINUS to resolve disputes between Foreigners and Roman Citizens Ius Civile: applied only to Roman Citizens Italy -Italy was divided into many city-states. Mancini asserts the rule of nationality. those created in the interest of private individuals – binding to persons who belong to the country by nationality ii. an individual’s personality is recognized only if his nationality is recognized In every kind of legal system. there are 2 kinds of rules i.• • • It is essential to bear in mind the existence of an international community of nations having intercourse with one another Comity is beneficial and advantageous to all concerned. race of the people. in its proper nature. customs of life. even the landscape of the country and its climate • • Personality of an individual is determined only by his nationality.

ULRICH HUBER (first used CONFLICT OF LAWS): State was under no obligation to apply foreign law UNLESS imposed by o o o …treaty …COMITAS GENTIUM (Comity of Nations?) …on consideration of courtesy and expediency JOHN VOET: no statue. PERSONAL STATUTES (STATUTA PERSONALIA): followed persons even outside his domicile. can act by itself beyond the territory of the legislator nor can it have any effect elsewhere against the will of the legislator of another state -Territorial Principle: GR: laws of every state may operate ONLY WITHIN THE TERRITORIAL LIMIT OF SUCH STATE X: may recognize laws of another country PROVIDED that it will not prejudice the subjects of the sovereign whose recognition is sought *Comitas Gentium (Comity of Nations) approach readily accepted -most trans-jurisdictional disputes to be resolved by the application of IUS GENTIUM or IUS COMMUNE .depend on where entered 16th century France CHARLES DUMOULIN: method to determine what law would govern CONTRACTS BETWEEN DIFFERENT NATIONALS BERTRAND D'ARGENTE: PRINCIPLE OF UNIVERSAL SUCCESSION Netherlands BURGUDNOU. REAL STATUTES (STATUTA REALIA): applied to immovable property w/n the state 2.STATUTES classification 1. real. MIXED STATUTES (STATUTA MIXTA): on contracts . RODENBERG. governed all questions concerning o o o …personal status …capacity …movables 3. personal or mixed.

became continental European Common Law -nations began codifying their national laws to include conflict of laws provisions: *Bavarian Code: theory of statutes *Prussian Code: theory of efficacy of contracts *French Civil Code: pattern for Civil Codes of Spain. and Romania: nationality principle -adopted by RP: ART15. NCC J.nationality theory(sortof Mixed statute) -nationality theory on o o o Status Capacity Private interests of the individual -NEW THEORY OF PRIL MODERN VIEWS/DEVELOPMENTS Modern Developments • Neo-statutory system   Assumption: 2 or more independent laws are applicable to conflicts problem Then proceed to devise some method to determine the law that shall prevail .territorial theory/comitas gentium approach -territorial sovereignty. Belgium. developed territorial "VESTED RIGHTS" school of thought FREDERICH CARL VON SAVIGNY: System of Modern Law . JOSEPTH STORY: Commentaries on the Conflict of Laws . American Restatement of Conflict of Laws.Ius Commne: supranational law based on Roman Law.Situs theory -advocated historical school of jurisprudence -applicationof foreign law was not due to comity BUT the resultant benefits for everyone concerned -founder of MODERN PRIL -theory of situs/seat of legal relationship: every element of a transaction be governed by the law of the place with which said element has the most substantive connection PASCUALE MANICINI: Nationality as the Basis of Law of Nations. founded conflict of laws on the principle of comity of nations -adopted by JOSEPH BEALE.

Foreign law is not applied in the forum 2 Factions only rights vested or acquired under the foreign law are recognized in the forum. Many adhere to Mancini’s theory • International system    There exists or should exist. it holds that the applicable law in a conflicts case is the law of the most significant relationship which is determined by weighing the factors considered more relevant (Other version: ) *Neostatutists: when two or more independent laws are applicable to a conflict of laws problem. the method so devised determines what law shall prevail *Internationalists: there should be a single body of rules that can solve problems involving foreign element *Territorialists: law of the State applied to persons and things within the State. but not the foreign law itself vested rights theory is illogical and is not true in practice Second Restatement of the Conflicts of Law (by American Law Institute) In the absence of statutory rules. there are wide differences of opinion on the most appropriate law to govern each legal relation • Territorial system     Only the law of a state applies to persons and things within its territory. no foreign law should be applied -branch: only rights vested or acquired under a foreign law are recognized but not the foreign law itself . a single body of international rules that can and should solve all legal problems that involve a foreign element A juridical act should in all countries be governed by the law of the place in which the act has its seat (Savigny) But while almost every adherent of the international system is agreed on this abstract principle.

and other public instruments shall be governed by the laws of the country in which they are executed. CURRIE AND EHRENZWEIG: policy-centered Approaches CONFLICT OF LAWS IN THE PHILIPPINES Conflicts of Laws in the Philippines -only when RP became sovereign state In NCC: • • Article 15: nationality principle Art. *condition and *legal capacity of persons are binding upon citizens of the Philippines. even though living abroad. 15. intestate and testamentary successions. William Reese: the law to be applied in a conflict of laws case is the law of the most significant relationship *CAVERS. (9a) • • • Article 16(1): lex situs rule Art. shall be regulated by the national law of the person whose succession is under consideration. both with respect to the order of succession and to the amount of successional rights and to the intrinsic validity of testamentary provisions. • • Article 17(1): lex loci contractus Art.*2nd Restatement. The forms and solemnities of contracts. 16. *or to the status. Real property as well as personal property is subject to the law of the country where it is stipulated. . 17. Laws relating to *family rights and duties. wills. Article 16(2): universal succession However. whatever may be the nature of the property and regardless of the country wherein said property may be found.

PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW DISTINGUISH BASIS Nature Persons involved CONFLICT OF LAW Municipal in character LAW OF NATIONS International in character international e. Sovereign states and other entities governs individuals in their private possessing transactions which involve a personality. their affected UN. governs relationships by public Dealt with by private individuals. except any conflict Principles of law. relations. Sources Generally derived from the internal Custom. Treaty and General law of the state. boycott. inquiry & conciliation. noncollective measures under the UN Charter. reprisals. reference to regional agencies Forcible: includes severance of diplomatic intercourse. states in foreign element amongst themselves Transactions involved Private transactions between Generally private individuals Remedies and Sanctions Resort to municipal tribunals interest.CONFLICT OF LAWS VS. recognized by of law question governed by a civilized nations treaty and juridical of decisions the most and highly teachings qualified publicists SOURCES Sources of Conflict of laws: 1. blockades. embargo. Indirect . mediation. and war.. judicial settlement by ICJ. pacific retorsions.g. those in general are of interest only to sovereign states May be peaceful or forcible Peaceful: includes diplomatic negotiation. tender & exercise of good offices. arbitration.

Protection of Intellectual Property 10. COGSA . Act Instituting Foreign Currency System in the Philippines 4. Tradesmark Law 12. Nationalization of the Rice and Corn Industry 8.International Customs A.Special Laws . General Banking Act Civil Codes are primary sources of Conflict of Laws rules -principle of ius gentium: codified in Roman Codes In RP Spanish Civil Code of 1888: enforced in RP Dec7. Insurance Code 9.Treaties and Conventions . Patent Law 11. Anti-Dummy Law 7. 1889 until August 30.Judicial Decisions .. Direct .Work of Writers 2. Comity Special Statutes 1. Act Regulating Retail Business 6. Corporation Code 2. 1888 New: 1987 Consti: Nationality.also enforced in Dec1. 1950 -Conflict of laws provisions adopted by RP NCC Code of Commerce of Spain: foreign transactions provisions .Constitutions .Natural Moral Law .codified . Philippine Foreign Law Guarantee Corporation 5.CODES AND STATUTES Note: -Conflict of Laws from Continental Europe .Codifications .

Minimum Age for Marriage and Registration of Marriages 7.TREATIES AND INTERNATIONAL CONVENTIONS 1. Salvage Law 14. UN COGSA 6. International Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Women and Children 11. Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Persons and of the Exploitation of the Prostitution of Others 12. Hague Conventions on PRIL: …personal status …patrimonial family status …patrimonial status such as agency and trusts 17.COMMENTARIES AND STUDIES OF LEARNED SOCIETIES European Ulrich Huber. Convention on Recognition of Foreign Judgment on Civil and Commercial matters 18. Convention on Traffic of Person 8. De Conflicto Legum Diversarum in Diversia Impecis . Convention for Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Civil Aviation 5. Convention Establishing the World Intellectual Property Organization 13. Convention on Offenses Committed on Board Aircraft 4. Berne Conventions for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works 14. RA 7722 liberalizing entry of foreign banks in the Philippines B.TREATISES . Civil Aeronautics Act 16. Convention on the Consent to Marriage. Investment Incentives Act 18. Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property 15. Convention in Respect of Inter Country Adoption C.13. Convention on International Civil Aviation 2. Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules relating to international Carriage by Air . Philippine Overseas Shipping Act 17. Convention on Political Rights of Women 10. Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) 9.Warsaw Convention 3. Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property 16. Export Incentives Act 19. Public Service Act 15.

Conflict of Laws AK Kuhn. Comentarios al Codigo Civil Espanol FK von Savigny. Conflict of laws American Institute Restatement of the Conflicts of Laws Second Restatement D. Principles of PRIL E Rabel. Traite Theorique et Pratique de Droit International Prive American and English JH Beale. Cases and Materials on Conflict of Laws B.Mareas (di ba Manresa?). Ehrenzweig. Treatiese on the Conflict of Laws GC Chesire. System des Beutigen Romishcen Rights. Selected Essays on the Conflict of Laws A.JUDICIAL DECISIONS Graveson: this branch of law is more completely judge-made Than almost any other CONFLICT OF LAWS UNDER COMMON LAW AND PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW UNDER CIVIL LAW . The Choice of Law Process E. Commentaries on the Conflict of Laws F Wharton. The Conflict of Laws J Story. Cheatham. Private International Law RH Graveson. Commentarieson PRIL A Gussbaum. English translation by Guthrie Andrei Weiss. Conflict of Laws DF Cavers. Currie. A Treatise on the Conflict of Laws HF Goodrich.

CASES: 1. "to provide security for employment. the US Naval Base authorities in Subic conducted a public bidding for a 5-year contract for the right to operate and/or manage the transportation services inside the naval base. the then incumbent concessionaire doing business under the name of Blayblock Transport Services Blayblock. in the event . The order wasn’t appealed so it was declared final & executor Subsequently. owner-operator of Guerrero’s Transport Services. Upon appeal. of Labor affirming the NLRC Resolution. The Union filed a Motion for Issuance of Writ of Execution. of Labor affirmed. of Labor the determination of members of the Union who shall be reinstated by Guerrero. w/c determination shall be final. the US Armed Forces undertook. This bidding was won by Santiago Guerrero. it refused to employ the members of the Union. GUERRERO’S TRANSPORT SERICES. Pursuant to Sec. The Sec. 71 SCRA 621 (1976) FACTS   In 1972. The agreement is deemed to have superseded the Resolution of the NLRC. (Guerrero). RULING   YES. INC VS BLAYBLOCK TRANSPORT SERVICES. Sec. 6 of Art.     When Guererro commenced its operations. consistent w/ military requirements. over Concepcion Blayblock. The NLRC issued a Resolution ordering Guererro to “absorb all complainants who filed their applications on or before the deadline” set by Guerrero. The case was dismissed by the NLRC upon Guerrero’s MTD on jurisdictional grounds. & that any non-compliance was attributable to the individual complainants who failed to submit themselves for processing & examination. Blayblock’s 395 employees are members of the union BTEA-KILUSAN (the Union). there being no employer-employee relationship between the parties. the Sec. the parties arrived at a Compromise Agreement wherein they agreed to submit to the Sec. of Labor remanded the case to the NLRC. The Sec. and. pursuant to Art. Inc. I of the RP-US Labor Agreement. So the Union filed a complaint w/ the NLRC against Guerrero to compel it to employ its members. of Labor ordered the absorption of 175 members of the Union subject to 2 conditions. 1. except those who may have derogatory records w/ the US Naval Authorities in Subic.    The Labor Arbiter ordered the reinstatement of 129 individuals. ISSUE Whether or not the said members of the Union were entitled to be reinstated by Guerrero.  Guerrero claims that it substantially complied w/ the decision of the Sec. 2 of the RP-US Base Agreement.

the effect and authority of res judicata and is enforceable by execution upon approval by the court. and that such determination shall be considered as final. the provision of the treaty enters into and forms part of the contract between Guerrero and the US Naval Base authorities. As part of the municipal law. bound to give "priority" to the employment of the qualified employees of the previous contractor (Blaylock). therefore. the parties agreed to submit to the Sec. of Labor the determination as to who of the members of the Union shall be absorbed or employed by Guerrero. naval Base at Subic.S. it is. of Labor issued an Order directing the NLRC.  A treaty has 2 aspects o o   as an international agreement between states. the US Armed Forces shall require the contractor or concessioner to give priority consideration to affected employees for employment. the new contractor (Guerrero) is.certain services are contracted out. that they should pass final screening and approval by the appropriate authorities of the U.S. and as municipal law for the people of each state to observe. through Labor Arbiter Francisco de los Reyes. and 2.  Under the Compromise Agreement. Naval Base concerned. In view of said stipulation. to implement the absorption of the 175 members into Guerrero's Transport Services. subject to the following conditions: 1.  The Sec. upon the parties. Guerrero is ordered to submit to and secure from the appropriate authorities of the U. . It is obviously in recognition of such obligation that Guerrero entered into the aforementioned Compromise Agreement.  Considering that the Compromise Agreement of the parties is more than a mere contract and has the force and effect of any other judgment. conclusive upon the parties and their privies. Zambales the requisite screening and approval. that they were bona fide employees of the Blaylock Transport Service at the time its concession expired. the names of the members of the Union. therefore.  For this purpose.  For it is settled that a compromise has.

Morada became a victim of attempted rape by fellow crewmembers. Indonesia. while on a lay-over in Jakarta. which later found her guilty of (1) adultery.  The two were eventually arrested and deported back to Saudi Arabia while Morada was transferred to Manila.  Hence. dancing and listening to the music in violation of Islamic laws.  However. Whether or not the trial court has jurisdiction over the case 2. in contravention of Islamic tradition. or that a contract between nationals of one State involves properties situated in another State. the foreign element may assume a complex form. Whether or not the case involves a ‘conficts problem’ HELD: Is there a ‘conflicts’ case?   The Supreme Court held in the affirmative. purporting to be statements dropping the case against Thamer and Allah. A factual situation that cuts across territorial lines and is affected by the diverse laws of two or more states is said to contain a “foreign element. The foreign element may simply consist in the fact that one of the parties to a contract is an alien or has a foreign domicile. In other cases. it turned out that a case was in fact filed against her before the Saudi court. who are both Saudi nationals. SAUDI ARABIAN AIRLINES VS. Jurisdiction is based on allegations on the pleading State of the Most Significant Relationship Theory Conflicts of Laws Problem Points of Contact . On various dates after the incident. CA. (2) going to a disco. and (3) socializing with the male crew. Morada was summoned to Jeddah by her employer in order to sign documents. On April 27.2. 1990. 297 SCRA 469 (1998)     FACTS:  Plaintiff Morada is a flight attendant for defendant SAUDIA’s airlines based in Jeddah.” The presence of a foreign element is inevitable since social and economic affairs of individuals and associations are rarely confined to the geographic limits of their birth or conception. Whether the proper law applicable is Philippine law or the law of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia 3. ISSUE: 1.  The forms in which this foreign element may appear are many. Thamer and Allah. Morada filed this complaint for damages based on Article 21 of the New Civil Code against SAUDIA and its country manager.

the foreign element consisted in the fact that private respondent Morada is a resident Philippine national. or his origin. his place of sojourn. event or operative fact. contract claim) and a connecting factor or point of contract. 19 and 21. violations of Articles 19 and 21 are actionable.” Choice-of-law rules invariably consist of factual relationship (such as property right.” It is the “process of deciding whether or not the facts relate to the kind of question specified in a conflicts rule. Applicability of Art. his residence. This process is known as “characterization. that caused a “conflicts” situation to arise. jurisdiction over the person of the plaintiff and defendant were properly acquired. and (2) to what extent should the chosen legal system regulate the situation. An essential element of conflict rules is the indication of a “test” or “connecting factor” or “point of contact. . Although Article 19 merely declares a principle of law. Furthermore. by virtue of the employment of Morada with the petitioner SAUDIA as a flight stewardess. In the instant case. particularly from Manila. such as the situs of the res. Choice-of-law Problem  Choice-of-law problems seek to answer two important questions: (1) What legal system should control a given situation where some of the significant facts occurred in two or more states. but a factual situation. the Supreme Court found that the RTC of Quezon City possesses jurisdiction over the subject matter of the suit. or the place of wrongdoing. The seat of a legal or juridical person.” or the “doctrine of qualification. the place where a thing is.  Note that one or more circumstances may be present to serve as the possible test for the determination of the applicable law. Thus. events did transpire during her many occasions of travel across national borders. These “test factors” or “points of contact” or “connecting factors” could be any of the following:    The nationality of a person. such as a corporation. the place of performance. and that petitioner SAUDIA is a resident foreign corporation. Also.” The purpose of “characterization” is to enable the forum to select the proper law. the lex situs is decisive when real rights are involved. Venue was also held to be proper.  Before a choice can be made. Its authority to try and hear the case is provided under Section 1 of RA 7691. Article 21 gives flesh to its provisions. In particular. or is deemed to be situated. the place of celebration. Philippines to Jeddah. Saudi Arabia. his domicile. read in the light of the Rules of Court on jurisdiction.  Our starting point of analysis here is not a legal relation. NCC and Jurisdiction of Quezon City RTC  The Supreme Court held that private respondent aptly predicated her cause of action on Articles 19 and 21 of the New Civil Code. and vice versa. that is.  Based on the allegations in the Amended Complaint. The situs of a thing. with judicially enforceable remedies in the municipal forum. it is necessary for us to determine under what category a certain set of facts or rules fall.

The lex fori – the law of the forum – is particularly important because. she had honestly believed that petitioner would. had lodged. In keeping abreast with the modern theories on tort liability.” Instead. a Filipina residing and working here. and because the lex fori applies whenever the content of the otherwise applicable foreign law is excluded from application in a given case for the reason that it falls under one of the exceptions to the applications of foreign law. the place of performance of contractual duties. matters of ‘procedure’ not going to the substance of the claim involved are governed by it. a marriage celebrated. give her her due and observe honesty and good faith. e. And applying the torts principle in a conflicts case. This is because it is in the Philippines where petitioner allegedly deceived private respondent. with the widespread criticism of the traditional rule of lex loci delicti commissi.  In applying said principle to determine the State which has the most significant relationship. according to the plaintiff below (herein private respondent). the lex loci intentionis. a will signed or a tort committed.    The place where an act is intended to come into effect. in the exercise of its rights and in the performance of its duties. The place where an act has been done. For in our view what is important here is the place where the over-all harm or the fatality of the alleged injury to the person. we find here an occasion to apply the “State of the most significant relationship” rule. as we have seen earlier. it is not without basis to identify the Philippines as the situs of the alleged tort. All told. the locus actus. “act with justice. or the place where a power of attorney is to be exercised. The place where judicial or administrative proceedings are instituted or done. and  The flag of the ship. It also covers contractual relationships particularly contracts of affreightment. That certain acts or parts of the injury allegedly occurred in another country is of no moment. given the factual context of this case. reputation.”  Considering that the complaint in the court a quo is one involving torts. According to her. social standing and human rights of the complainant. The lex loci actus is particularly important in contracts and torts.g. which in our view should be appropriate to apply now. the “connecting factor” or “point of contact” could be the place or places where the tortious conduct or lex loci actus occurred. the following contacts are to be taken into account and evaluated according to their relative . The intention of the contracting parties as to the law that should govern their agreement. such as the place where a contract has been made. she claimed. which in many cases is decisive of practically all legal relationships of the ship and of its master or owner as such. modern theories and rules on tort liability have been advanced to offer fresh judicial approaches to arrive at just results. we find that the Philippines could be said as a situs of the tort (the place where the alleged tortious conduct took place).  Moreover. petitioner failed to protect her.

Indonesia. nationality. raised by private respondent as plaintiff below against defendant (herein petitioner). 1990. She was afraid that she might be tricked into something she did not want because of her inability to understand the local dialect. between the parties is centered.  When plaintiff returned to Jeddah a few days later.importance with respect to the particular issue: (a) the place where the injury occurred. (b) the place where the conduct causing the injury occurred.  Plaintiff learned that. In Jakarta. (c) the domicile. Eventually. Eventually. they were again put in service by defendant SAUDI (sic). Thus. a resident foreign corporation engaged here in the business of international air carriage. Later. Shortly after he did. Saudi Arabia. while on a lay-over in Jakarta. Over-all injury occurred in the Philippines  As already discussed. plaintiff went to a disco dance with fellow crew members Thamer Al-Gazzawi and Allah Al-Gazzawi. the “relationship” between the parties was centered here. There is likewise no question that private respondent is a resident Filipina national. place of incorporation and place of business of the parties. They then requested her to go back to Jakarta to help arrange the release of Thamer and Allah. the latter as an accomplice. a roomboy and several security personnel heard her cries for help and rescued her. they agreed to have breakfast together atthe room of Thamer. . On April 27. through the intercession of the Saudi Arabian government. When they were in te (sic) room. Because it was almost morning when they returned to their hotels. She also declined to sign a blank paper and a document written in the local dialect. . working with petitioner. the Indonesian authorities agreed to deport Thamer and Allah after two weeks of detention. the claim that the Philippines has the most significant contact with the matter in this dispute. has been properly established. the Indonesian police came and arrested Thamer and Allah Al-Gazzawi. Allah left on some pretext. . several SAUDIA officials interrogated her about the Jakarta incident. . Thamer attempted to rape plaintiff. both Saudi nationals. there is basis for the claim that over-all injury occurred and lodged in the Philippines. 1988 defendant SAUDIA hired plaintiff as a Flight Attendant for its airlines based inJeddah. Fortunately. SAUDIA allowed plaintiff to return to Jeddah but barred her from the Jakarta flights. in our view. Other version: Facts:   On January 21. although it should be stressed that this suit is not based on mere labor law violations. defendant SAUDIA transferred plaintiff to Manila. if any. SAUDIA Legal Officer Sirah Akkad and base manager Baharini negotiated with the police for the immediate release of the detained crew members but did not succeed because plaintiff refused to cooperate. and (d) the place where the relationship. From the record. In September 1990. residence.

just when plaintiff thought that the Jakarta incident was already behind her. Meanwhile.Saudi Arabia. At the airport. 1992. Yahya Saddick took away her passport and told her to remain in Jeddah. Chief Legal Officer of SAUDIA. a SAUDIA officer told her that the airline had forbidden her to take flight.  On July 3. Ali Meniewy. 1993 for further investigation. to pay for her upkeep. she worked on the domestic flight of SAUDIA. Nothing happened then but on June 28. until further orders. They told her that this was necessary to close the case against Thamer and Allah. the Chief Legal Officer of SAUDIA. 1993.  Facing conviction. private respondent sought the help of her employer. a Saudi judge interrogated plaintiff through an interpreter about the Jakarta incident. the secretary of Mr. that the investigation was routinary and that it posed no danger to her.  In Jeddah. translated to her in English. When she saw him. Aslam Saleemi. her superiors requested her to see Mr. they let her go. The court found plaintiff guilty of (1) adultery. sentencing her to five months imprisonment and to 286 lashes. Plaintiff did so after receiving assurance from SAUDIA's Manila manager. together with Thamer and Allah. Only then did she realize that the Saudi court had tried her. dancing and listening to the music in violation of Islamic laws. defendant SAUDIA summoned plaintiff to report to Jeddah once again and see Miniewy on June 27. she was denied any assistance. just as her plane was about to take off. She then asked the Philippine Embassy in Jeddah to help her while her case is on appeal. a few minutes before the departure of her flight to Manila. Not until she agreed to do so did the police return her passport and allowed her to catch the afternoon flight out of Jeddah. 1993. petitioner SAUDIA. and (3) socializing with the male crew. a SAUDIA legal officer brought plaintiff to the same Saudi court on June 27. Plaintiff then returned to Manila. in Jeddah. 1993 a SAUDIA legal officer again escorted plaintiff to the same court where the judge. Miniewy. however. On January 14. while Thamer and Allah continued to serve in the international flights. in contravention of Islamic tradition. 1993. to her astonishment and shock. rendered a decision. After one hour of interrogation. 1993. at the crew quarters. At the Inflight Service Office where she was told to go. Saudi Arabia. Miniewy simply stood by as the police put pressure on her to make a statement dropping the case against Thamer and Allah. he brought her to the police station where the police took her passport and questioned her about the Jakarta incident.  Shortly afterwards. a certain Khalid of the SAUDIA office brought her to a Saudi court where she was asked to sign a document written in Arabic. As it turned out. . plaintiff signed a notice to her to appear before the court on June 27. When she did. plaintiff was not allowed to board the plane and instead ordered to take a later flight to Jeddah to see Mr. in Riyadh. (2) going to a disco.  One year and a half later or on lune 16. Unfortunately. for what happened in Jakarta.

A factual situation that cuts across territorial lines and is affected by the diverse laws of two or more states is said to contain a "foreign element". 5. (2) that defendant Al-Balawi is not a real party in interest. 3. 1994.   On November 23. (3) that the claim or demand set forth in the Complaint has been waived.  The forms in which a foreign element may appear are many. its country manager. events transpire across national borders that caused "conflict" situation to arise. she was terminated from the service by SAUDIA.  Where the factual antecedents satisfactorily establish the existence of a foreign element. 1. Relative advantages and obstacles to a fair trial are equally important. the Prince of Makkah dismissed the case against her and allowed her to leave Saudi Arabia. Morada filed a Complaint for damages against SAUDIA.Pragmatic considerations 1. such as the fact that one party is a resident Philippine National and that the other is a resident foreign corporation . 4. 3. 1993. Convenience of the Parties 2.The forms in which this foreign element may appear are many. to wit: (1) that the Complaint states no cause of action against Saudia. Forum Convenience . or 2. On January 19. The presence of a foreign element is inevitable since social and economic affairs of individuals and associations are rarely confined to the geographic limits of their birth or conception. in this case. . by virtue of the employment. 4. and Khaled AlBalawi ("Al-Balawi"). that a contract between nationals of one State involves properties situated in another state. without her being informed of the cause. abandoned or otherwise extinguished. Issue: Whether of not the trial court can validly take cognizance and decide upon the case. it may assume complex form. Paramount is the Private Interest of the Parties. Held: Yes Conflicts of Laws . The foreign element may simply consist in the fact that one of the parties to a contact is an alien or has a foreign domicile. and (4) that the trial court has no jurisdiction to try the case. SAUDIA filed an Omnibus Motion To Dismiss which raised the following grounds. Because she was wrongfully convicted. the foreign element consisted in the fact that private respondent Morada is a resident Philippine National and that petitioner SAUDIA is a resident foreign corporation. Enforceablility of a judgment if one is obtained. the problem could present a "conflicts case". Shortly before her return to Manila.

"connecting factors". "points of contact" . that is. What legal system should control a given situation where some of the significant facts occurred in two or more states and 2. (3) the situs of a thing. lex loci actus is particularly important in contracts and torts. the place of performance. the place of performance of contractual duties or the place where a power of attorney is to be exercised. his place of sojorn or his origin. by filing her Complaint and Amended Complaint. The purpose of "characterization" is to enable the forum to select the proper law. "Test factors" . Over the petitioner / defendant .    An essential element of conflict rules is the indication of a "test" or "connecting factor" or "point of contact" Our starting point of analysis is factual situation.. To what extent should the chosen legal system regulate the situation. praying for the dismissal of the complaint on grounds other than lack of jurisdiction Choice of Applicable Law .g. A factual relationship and a connecting factor or point of contact. the locus-actus. 2. the lex fori (8) the flag ship. (4) the place where an act has been done. or the place of wrondoing. such as the situs of the res. she has voluntarily submitted herself to the jurisdiction of the court. his residence. Plaintiff's choice of forum should not be disturbed unless the balance is strongly in favor of the defendant. harass or oppress the defendant by inflicting upon him needless expense or disturbance. the place where a thing is or is deemed to be situated. (2) the seat of a legal or juridical person. lex situs is decisive when real reights are involved. seeks to answer two important questions : 1.lex loci intentionis. (5) the place where an act is intended to come into effect. (6) the intention of the contracting parties as to what law should govern their agreement . vex. Over the respondent / plaintiff . event or operative fact. .  the process of deciding whether or not the facts relate to the kind of question specified in a conflicts rule. practically decisive of all legal relationships of the ship and of its master or owner as such. Choice of Law Theories: Characterization or Doctrine of Qualification . e.   Plaintiff may not by choice of a inconvenient forum. such as a corporation. any of the following: (1) the nationality of a person. Forcing a party to seek remedial action in a place where she no longer maintains substantial connections would cause a fundamental unfairness to her. Jurisdiction over the Persons 1. Determine under what category a certain set of facts or rules fall. (7) the place where the judicial or administrative proceedings are instituted or done. the place of celebration. his domicile..

However there is the widespread criticism of the traditional rule of lex loci delicti commissi.The Situs is the Philippines where the tort is committed (lex loci delicti commissi). nationality. it is in the Philippines where the defendant allegedly deceived the plaintiff. 1) The respondent is a resident Filipina National 2) The petitioner is a resident foreign corporation engage here in the business of international air carriage 3) The relationship was centered in the Philippines 4) The Philippines has the most significant contact with the matter in this dispute 5) The Philippines is the situs of the tort complained of 6) The Philippines has the most interest in the problem 7) The RTC has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter of the complaint . 4 The place where the relationship. if any. Apply State of the Most Significant relationship Rule .appropriate theory on tort liability: 1) the place where the injury occurred 2) the place where the conduct causing the injury occurred 3) the domicile. social standing and human rights of the plaintiff had lodged. for what is important is the place where the over-all harm or the totality of the injury to the person. reputation. place of incorporation and place of business of the parties. the Philippine Law on tort liability should have paramount application to and control in the resolution of the legal issues arising therein in view of the foregoing. residence. between the parties is centered The Philippines is the situs of the tort complained of and the place " having the most interest in the problem". a citizen residing and working here and the fact that certain acts or parts of the injury occurred in another country is of no moment.

sued in the district court of the fourth judicial district of Minnesota to recover $25. plaintiff below. 1888. 161 at the time the said Hugh M. rendering the running of said engine upon said railway dangerous. Munro was so ordered to run the same upon and over said railway Munro was running said engine in performance of his duty as such engineer. Munro was employed of the said NPRC. improperly. a certain pilot plow. 154 US 190 FACTS:   an action by Albert L. 10. and rods of which were broken. Munro. bolts. for damages for the death of said Munro. willfully. imperfect. and pursuant to the orders of defendant. 161 attached to the engine. NORTHERN P. as administrator of Hugh M. 10. and dangerous condition of said engine No. 10. and insufficient.  prior to and at the time the said orders were so presented to Munro. by reason of which condition the said plow was loose and insufficiently secured to the pilot of said engine.  there was attached to the forward part of said engine a certain attachment known as a 'pilot plow. against the Northern Pacific Railroad Company. as was the intention of its construction. and before daylight on Jan.R. 161 safe and proper. and defendant directed and ordered Munro to run a certain locomotive engine owned by the defendant over and upon its said railway in said territory. 161 to clear the snow and ice from said defendant's said track. and render safe the passage of the engine to which said plow was attached over and upon said railway of defendant. there was a severe snowstorm in progress. Babcock. negligently. the said engine struck an accumulation of snow and ice which said defendant had carelessly and negligently . which had accumulated.3. and carelessly refuse and neglect to send a snow plow ahead of said engine No.000 damages for the killing of Munro   on Jan. defective. deceased. the iron braces. so as to render the passage of said engine No. Munro on Jan. and defendant's line of railway over and upon which said Munro was so ordered to run said engine was covered with drifting snow theretofore accumulated thereon. within the territory of Montana.   defendant well knew of the broken. who was the administrator of the estate of Hugh M. allowing the said pilot to raise up and ride over obstructing snow and ice instead of cutting through the same. BABCOCK.  defendant corporation did willfully. CO VS. in the capacity of locomotive the duty of running a locomotive engine upon said defendant's line of railway within Montana was assigned to said Hugh M.' an appliance constructed thereon for the purpose of clearing the railway of snow and ice accumulated thereon. and carelessly allowed Munro to be and remain upon said engine No. in territory of Montana. Munro.   defendant corporation knowingly. negligently.

may maintain an action for the injury or death of a child. was the amount of damage to be controlled by the law of the place of employment and where the accident occurred. or by the law of the forum in which the suit was pending? RULING:  The plaintiff's intestate was an engineer in the employ of the defendant corporation in the territory of Montana. and throwing the same from said railway track. denying the averments of the complaint. In every action under this and the preceding section such damages may be given as under all the circumstances of the case may be just.000. then also against such other person. A father. "Sec.000. and imperfect condition aforesaid. and not by the negligence of the defendant or any of its servants or employes.allowed to accumulate upon its said railway track. or a guardian for the injury or death of his ward. 13.' Or simply stated. Where the death of a person not being a minor is caused by the wrongful act or neglect of another. In every action . and the pilot plow of said engine.  Law in the territory of Montana: "Sec. thereby derailing said engine. or if such person be employed by another person who is responsible for his action. It has lately been increased to $10. and the accident by which he lost his life occurred there.000 could be given in a case of death. did ride upon said accumulation of snow and ice. and alleging that the death of Munro was caused solely by his negligence and carelessness. by reason of its broken. or if such person be employed by another person who is responsible for his action. then also against such other person. The law in this state until recently was that only $5. in case of his death or desertion of his family. or. where an answer was filed by the defendant. ISSUE: WON the court erred further in charging the jury as follows: 'Many states have different laws. his heirs or personal representatives may maintain an action for damages against the person causing the death. Munro was instantly killed."  The case was removed to the circuit court of the United States for the district of Minnesota. the mother.  There was a verdict and judgment in favor of the plaintiff for $10. The law of the territory of Montana at the time provided as follows: 'Where the death of a person not being a minor is caused by the wrongful act or neglect of another his heirs or personal representatives may maintain an action for damages against the person causing the death. 14. loose. whereby the said Hugh M.

therefore it would be held contrary to the policy of the laws of the latter state. when the death occurred. If the state of Iowa sees fit to impose this obligation upon those operating railroads within her bounds. To justify a court in refusing to enforce a right of action which accrued under the law of another state because against the policy of our laws. but at the time of the trial of the case in the court below this limit had been increased to $10. or prejudicial to the interests of our own citizens. . and not by the lex fori.   'But it by no means follows that. the enforcement of it would be prejudicial to the general interests of our own citizens.000 by amendment of the Minnesota statutes. for some other such reason.000.'  We think there was no error in holding that the right to recover was governed by the lex loci. we see nothing in such a law repugnant either to good morals or natural justice.under this and the preceding section such damages may be given as under all the circumstances of the case may be just. and to make it a condition of the employment of those who enter their service. because the statute of one state differs from the law of another state. it must appear that it is against good morals or natural justice. or that.'  Under the law of Minnesota. the limit of recovery in case of death was $5.

1990. 1990 FACTS:  This is a petition for prohibition seeking to enjoin respondents. 2. R. and jurisdiction to sell the Roppongi property. . Any such conveyances must be authorized and approved by a law enacted by the Congress. And the property continues to be part of the public domain.4. JULY 25. their representatives and agents from proceeding with the bidding for the sale of the 3.  It is not for the President to convey valuable real property of the government on his or her own sole will. her officers and agents have the authority.  The subject property in this case is one of the four (4) properties in Japan acquired by the Philippine government under the Reparations Agreement entered into with Japan on 9 May 1956. Japan scheduled on February 21. 187 SCRA 797 (1990) G.  Petition is granted. There can be no doubt that it is of public dominion and is outside the commerce of man. not available for private appropriation or ownership until there is a formal declaration on the part of the government to withdraw it from being such (Ignacio vs. one must first determine whether a conflict of laws situation exists. LAUREL VS. 108 Phil 335). The nature of the Roppongi lot as property for public service is expressly spelled out. GARCIA. RULING:      The Court ruled in the negative. It requires executive and legislative concurrence. Whether or not the Roppongi property and others of its kind can be alienated by the Philippine government. Other version: PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW: Before determining whether it is domestic or foreign law that should be applied. Director of Lands. NO.179 square meters of land at 306 Roppongi. 5-chome Minato-ku Tokyo.  The properties and the capital goods and services procured from the Japanese government for national development projects are part of the indemnification to the Filipino people for their losses in life and property and their suffering during World War II. ISSUES: 1. Whether or not the Chief Executive. It is dictated by the terms of the Reparations Agreement and the corresponding contract of procurement which bind both the Philippine government and the Japanese government. 92013.

the Aquino administration advanced the sale of the reparation properties. The opinion does not tackle the alienability of the real properties procured through reparations nor the existence in what body of the authority to sell them. The rule of lex situs does not apply. none of the above elements exists.         In the instant case. In discussing who are capable of acquiring the lots. which included the Roppongi lot. A conflict of law situation arises only when: (1) There is a dispute over the title or ownership of an immovable. 377-383). and (2) A foreign law on land ownership and its conveyance is asserted to conflict with a domestic law on the same matters. or the interpretation and effect of a conveyance. And the validity of the procedures adopted to effect its sale.      The Roppongi property became the site of the Philippine Embassy until the latter was transferred to another site when the Roppongi building needed major repairs. pp. such that the capacity to take and transfer immovables. The issues are not concerned with validity of ownership or title. Due to the failure of our government to provide necessary funds. Hence. For their part. as part of the indemnification to the Filipino people for their losses in life and property and their suffering during WWII. following the doctrine of lex loci rei sitae. This move was opposed on the ground that the Roppongi property is public in character. There is no question that the property belongs to the Philippines. the Secretary merely explains that it is the foreign law which should determine who can acquire the properties so that the constitutional . the need to determine which law should apply. After many years. This is governed by Philippine Law. The assertion that the opinion of the Secretary of Justice sheds light on the relevance of the lex situs rule is misplaced. the essential validity and effect of the transfer.FACTS:  The Roppongi Property is one of the four properties in Japan acquired by the Philippine government under the Reparations Agreement. The issue is the authority of the respondent officials to validly dispose of property belonging to the State. the proponents of the sale raised that Japanese law should apply. the Roppongi property has remained undeveloped since that time. 1981 ed. the formalities of conveyance.. are to be determined (See Salonga. Private International Law. ISSUE: Whether or not the conflict of law rule on lex loci rei sitae should apply HELD:   We see no reason why a conflict of law rule should apply when no conflict of law situation exists.

Why should we discuss who can acquire the Roppongi lot when there is no showing that it can be sold? .limitation on acquisition of lands of the public domain to Filipino citizens and entities wholly owned by Filipinos is inapplicable.  We see no point in belaboring whether or not this opinion is correct.

Eastern Book Supply PTE. HSBC filed this action with the Philippine courts. 8/11/89 Choice-of-forum clause Jurisdiction and Venue Parties can stipulate as to their choice of venue. In a Motion to Dismiss.”  However.5. FACTS:  Sometime in 1981. private respondents who were directors of the Company executed a Joint and Several Guarantee in favour of HSBC. VS. We hereby agree that the Courts of Singapore shall have jurisdiction over all disputes arising under this guarantee…. But if the stipulation is not restrictive. Ltd.   We hereby agree that the Courts in Singapore shall have jurisdiction over all disputes arising under this guarantee” be liberally construed. which provides that:  “This guarantee and all rights. HONG KONG AND SHANGHAI BANKING CORP. a company incorporated in Singapore. it shall be treated as merely permissive and will not bar the other party from airing the case in a different forum which has jurisdiction over the subject matter. the very essence of due process dictates that the stipulation that “[t]his guarantee and all rights. obligations and liabilities arising hereunder shall be construed and determined under and may be enforced in accordance with the laws of the Republic of Singapore. ISSUE: Whether or not Philippine courts have jurisdiction over the suit HELD:   The Supreme Court held that the clause in question did not operate to divest (deprive) the Philippine courts of jurisdiction. the private respondents raised the abovementioned provision of the Joint and Several Guarantee. obligations and liabilities arising hereunder shall be construed and determined under and may be enforced in accordance with the laws of the Republic of Singapore. SHERMAN. applied with and was granted by the Singapore Branch of HSBC an overdraft facility. While it is true that “the transaction took place in Singaporean setting” and that the Joint and Several Guarantee contains a choice-of-forum clause. citing said provision as basis. One basic principle underlies all rules of jurisdiction in International Law: . 176 SCRA 331 (1989) GR 72494. The trial court affirmed the plaintiffs but CA reversed. when the Company failed to pay its obligation. To secure the overdraft facility. (Company).

in this case. a State does not assume jurisdiction over travelling sovereigns. with more reason as a defendant. The defense of private respondents that the complaint should have been filed in Singapore is based merely on technicality. or in personam. ambassadors and diplomatic representatives of other States. or expense. In the ordinary habits of life. Indeed. as pointed-out by petitioner BANK at the outset. Thus. the payment of a just obligation. is exclusive within and throughout the domain of the State. there is no showing that petitioner BANK filed the action here just to harass private respondents. They did not even claim. not to mention inconvenience. or at least delay. jurisdiction is often defined as the light of a State to exercise authority over persons and things within its boundaries subject to certain exceptions. whether the proceedings are in rem. A State is competent to take hold of any judicial matter it sees fit by making its courts and agencies assume jurisdiction over all kinds of cases brought before them. than to have a Philippine court try and resolve the case. damage. In International Law. . much less prove.o o o a State does not have jurisdiction in the absence of some reasonable basis for exercising it. o        Private respondents' stance is hardly comprehensible. The parties did not thereby stipulate that only the courts of Singapore. has jurisdiction. that the filing of the action here will cause them any unnecessary trouble. which finds its source in the concept of sovereignty.   This authority. the instant case presents a very odd situation. o However. the jurisdiction must be based on some minimum contacts that will not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. On the other hand. anyone would be disinclined to litigate before a foreign tribunal. unless their ultimate intent is to evade. Neither did the clause in question operate to divest Philippine courts of jurisdiction. quasi in rem. To be reasonable. and foreign military units stationed in or marching through State territory with the permission of the latter's authorities. to the exclusion of all the rest. PRIVATE RESPONDENTS ARE PHILIPPINE RESIDENTS (a fact which was not disputed by them) who would rather face a complaint against them before a foreign court and in the process incur considerable expenses.

a higher salary than its local-hires. or creed. i. INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL ALLIANCE OF EDUCATORS VS. International law. General principles of law include principles of equity.  It justifies this under the ‘dislocation factor’ – that foreigners must be given a higher salary both to attract them to teach here. fairness and justice. The Philippines. economic. has incorporated this principle as part of its national laws. as it rests on fundamental norms of justice 1. Sec. based on the test of what is reasonable. 333 SCRA 13 (2000) FACTS:  International School (IS) pays its teachers who are hired from abroad. race. Art. but some are American). or foreign-hires. likewise proscribes (bans) discrimination. These conditions are not restricted to the physical workplace. which springs from general principles of law.” “…regardless of sex.6. reduce social.”. XIII. Lastly.. and to compensate them for the “significant economic disadvantages” involved in coming here.” The Constitution also provides that labor is entitled to “humane conditions of work. the Constitution directs the State to promote “equality of employment opportunities for all. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and numerous other international Conventions all embody the general principle against discrimination. . Equal pay for equal work is a principal long honored in this jurisdiction. The Teacher’s Union cries discrimination. whether the latter are Filipino or not (most are Filipino. through its Constitution. QUISUMBING.” It would be an affront to both the spirit and the letter of these provisions if the State closes its eyes to unequal and discriminatory terms and conditions of employment. and political inequalitites.  HELD:   Discrimination exists. 2. but include as well the manner by which employers treat their employees. 1 of the Constitution (Social Justice and Human Rights) exhorts Congress to give the highest priority to the enactment of measures that protect and ennhance the right od all people to human dignity.e. the very antithesis of fairness and justice.

the presumption is that these employees perform equal work. That would be adding insult to injury. for short). Section 2(c) of the same decree authorizes the School to employ its own teaching and management personnel selected by it either locally or abroad. the local-hires of private respondent School. effort and responsibility.Other version: Facts:    Receiving salaries less than their counterparts hired abroad. under similar conditions. except laws that have been or will be enacted for the protection of employees. its "international character" notwithstanding." Persons who work with substantially equal qualifications. The employer has discriminated against that employee. beside the point.    Accordingly. the local-hires are paid more than their colleagues in other schools is. skill. Private respondent International School. pursuant to Presidential Decree 732. classifying the same into two: (1) foreign-hires and (2) local-hires. is a domestic educational institution established primarily for dependents of foreign diplomatic personnel and other temporary residents. Inc.  The School contends that petitioner has not adduced evidence that local-hires perform work equal to that of foreign-hires. Issue: Whether or Not the grants provided by the school to foreign hires and not to local hires discriminative of their constitutional right to the equal protection clause. The point is that employees should be given equal pay for work of equal value. (the School. it is for the employer to explain why the employee is treated unfairly. These include housing. . transportation. namely: (a) the "dislocation factor" and (b) limited tenure. cry discrimination. taxes. of course. The School justifies the difference on two "significant economic disadvantages" foreign-hires have to endure. should be paid similar salaries. This rule applies to the School. from Philippine or other nationalities.  To enable the School to continue carrying out its educational program and improve its standard of instruction. If the employer pays one employee less than the rest. Foreign-hires are also paid a salary rate twenty-five percent (25%) more than local-hires. The Court finds this argument a little cavalier. The School grants foreign-hires certain benefits not accorded local-hires. This presumption is borne by logic and human experience. mostly Filipinos. shipping costs. the School hires both foreign and local teachers as members of its faculty. If an employer accords employees the same position and rank. and home leave travel allowance. such personnel being exempt from otherwise applicable laws and regulations attending their employment. it is not for that employee to explain why he receives less or why the others receive more. Held:  The foregoing provisions impregnably institutionalize in this jurisdiction the long honored legal truism of "equal pay for equal work.

collective bargaining agreements included. are hereby reversed and set aside insofar as they uphold the practice of respondent school of according foreign-hires higher salaries than local-hires. The orders of the secretary of labor and employment dated June 10. . 1997. we find the point-of-hire classification employed by respondent School to justify the distinction in the salary rates of foreign-hires and local hires to be an invalid classification. Should such contracts contain stipulations that are contrary to public policy. 1996 and march 19.  The Constitution enjoins the State to "protect the rights of workers and promote their welfare. While we recognize the need of the School to attract foreign-hires." The State. These relations are not merely contractual but are so impressed with public interest that labor contracts. salaries should not be used as an enticement to the prejudice of local-hires." "to afford labor full protection.  In this case.  Wherefore. courts will not hesitate to strike down these stipulations. has the right and duty to regulate the relations between labor and capital. the petition is given due course. For the same reason. therefore. The petition is hereby granted in part. the "dislocation factor" and the foreign-hires' limited tenure also cannot serve as valid bases for the distinction in salary rates. There is no reasonable distinction between the services rendered by foreign-hires and local-hires. must yield to the common good. The local-hires perform the same services as foreignhires and they ought to be paid the same salaries as the latter.