You are on page 1of 9

Private International Law negotiations, arbitration, or tribunals

Comes into plat when the issue before the court affects some fact or conciliation, or adjudication
event, or transaction that is so closely connected with a foreign by foreign tribunals; war
system of law as to necessitate recourse to that system
Part of the law of each state or nation which determined whether, in History
dealing with a legal situation, the law of some other state or nation
will be recognized, given effect, or applied A. Roman Law Origin
Law concerning the rights of persons within the territory and
dominion of one nation, by reason of acts, private or public, done 1. juris gentium
within the dominion of another nation was used during the early Roman Empire to denote a body of
laws developed by the praetor peregrinus to resolve disputes
Public and Private International Law Distinguished between foreigners or between foreigners and Romans
Public International Law Private International Law in contrast with jus civile which governed or applied to Romans
Except in matters involving Governs individuals in only
human rights, it deals with their private transactions 2. Bartolus- father of Conflict of laws
relationships among states which involve a foreign Formulated the Theory of the States
element (e.g., cutting Prompted by the creation of various city-states within Italy
across more than one governed by different laws
municipal jurisdiction) o Statuta realia- laws governing the immovable within the
Sources of law Custom, treaty, and general Derived mostly form State
principles of international law internal law of each state o Statuta personalia- laws that follow the person wherever
recognized by nations and and not from any he may go
juridical decisions and international law o statuta mixta- contracts, depending in where they were
teachings of most highly extraneous to municipal entered into by the different nationals
qualified publicists law [except the Hague 3. 16th century France
Convention on Conflict of Charles Dumuolin and Bertrand DArgentre developed the statute
Laws theiry for resolving conflicts between persons governed
National conflict rules 4. Netherlands
which refer to internal law A State is under no obligation to apply a foreign law unless
of each country or imposed by a treaty, courtesy, or expedience
international conflict rules The territorial principle- laws of the State operate only within its
which constitute territory
international conventions, 5. Jus commune
foreign case law, and Supranational law based on Roman law that became continental
commentaries interpreting European common law
these laws 6. Codification of law
subject States and internationally Individuals and When nations began codifying their national laws, conflict of
recognized organizations; corporations; private laws provisions were included in their civil codes
state to state or government transactions between Many adopted the French Civil code which created the
to government transactions individuals nationality law principle as determinant of an individuals
remedies Diplomatic protest, peaceful Provided by the laws of personal laws and the French Code was adopted by Many
means of settling disputes the state--- resort to nations including the Philippines, Spain, Belgium, and Romania
such as diplomatic courts or administrative
ARANETA- SESSION 1 1
B. Modern development 4. Judicial Decisions
The three modern schools of thought
1. Neostatutists- when two or more independent laws are
applicable to a conflict of laws problem, the method so
devised determines what law shall prevail II. JURISDICTION
2. Internationalists- there should be a single body of law A. DEFINITION
that can solve problems involving problems with a foreign
element Hasegawa and Nippon Engineering Consultants vs Minoru Kitamura
3. Territorialists- laws of the State apply to persons and (2007)
things within the State
a. Only rights vested or acquired under a foreign The Supreme Court in this case discussed the 3 different aspects of Conflict
law are recognized in the forum but not the of Law: Jurisdiction; Choice of Law; enforcement of resulting Judgment
foreign law itself
In the Philippines Facts:
o Only became siginificant after the independence 1. Petitioner Nippon Engineering entered into an Independent
o The Spanish Code implemented in the Philippines until 1950 Contractor Agreement with respondent Kitamura, a Japanese
contained the conflict of laws principles of: national residing in the Philippines.
Nationality principle in Art. 15 (from the French) a. Nippon assigned the respondent to work as the project
Lex situs rule of Art 16. Par 1 (from Art. 10 of manager of the Southern Tagalog Access Road Project in the
Spanish Civil Code) Philippines as Nippon into a consultancy contract with the
Lex loci contractus PH.
2. When the STAR project was about to be completed, DPWH engaged
with the services of Nippon once again. Respondent Kitamura was
Sources of Conflict of Laws detailed as the project manager once again.
1. Codes and Statutes 3. However, Hasegawa, the manager of Nippon, informed respondent
a. The Constitution Kitamura that they no longer had the intention of renewing his
b. The Civil Code contract and that his services will be only up to the completion of the
c. Special Statutes to govern cases involving foreign elements STAR Project.
including the Corporation Code, the General Banking Act, the 4. The Action: When negotiations failed, the respondent Kitamura was
Insurance Code, Investment Incentives Act, Civil Aeronautics threatened with his impending unemployment. He then instituted an
Act action with the RTC of Lipa City for specific performance and
2. Treaties and International Conventions damages against Nippon.
a. Convention on International Civil Aviation a. Motion to dismiss by Nippon: the court had no
b. Convention of Unification of Certain Rules on International jurisdiction because the ICA had been perfected in Japan
Carriage by Air and between Japanese Nationals.
c. Convention on the Consent to Marriage, Minimum Age for i. That the improper pre-termination of the
Marriage, and Registration of Marriages respondent could only be heard and ventilated in the
d. Convention on Recognition of Foreign Judgment on Civil and courts of Japan following the principles of lex loci
Commercial matters celebrationis and lex contractus
e. Convention in Respect of Inter-Country Adoption 5. Decision of the trial court: deny the motion to dismiss and ruled
3. Treatises, Commentaries, and Studies of Learned Societies that the matter connected with the performance of contracts are
a. Courts may resort to works of distinguished jurists as well as regulated bythe law prevailing at the place of performance.
studies of learned societies 6. The CA affirmed the decision of the RTC:

ARANETA- SESSION 1 2
a. The CA ruled, among others, that the principle of lex loci As a first step, the issue of jurisdiction must first be determined.
celebrationis was not applicable to the case, because
nowhere in the pleadings was the validity of the written for a court to validly exercise its power to adjudicate a controversy,
agreement put in issue. The CA thus declared that the trial it must have:
court was correct in 1. jurisdiction over the plaintiff or the petitioner,
b. applying instead the principle of lex loci solutionis 2. over the defendant or the respondent,
7. hence, the present action by the petitioner arguing that: 3. over the subject matter,
a. RTC of Lipa City is an inconvenient forum, petitioners 4. over the issues of the case and,
question its jurisdiction to hear and resolve the civil case for 5. in cases involving property, over the res or the thing which is the
specific performance and damages filed by the respondent. subject of the litigation
b. The ICA subject of the litigation was entered into and
perfected in Tokyo, Japan, by Japanese nationals, and In the present case the petitioners are mainly questioning the
written wholly in the Japanese language. Thus, petitioners jurisdiction of our courts with the subject matter. How does one
posit that local courts have no substantial relationship to the determine jurisdiction over the subject matter?
parties following the [state of the] most significant
relationship rule in Private International Law. (1) it is conferred by the sovereign authority which establishes and
organizes the court. It is given only by law and in the manner
Issue: Does the RTC have jurisdiction over the present case? prescribed by law.
(2) It is further determined by the allegations of the complaint
Ruling: Yes. irrespective of whether the plaintiff is entitled to all or some of the
claims asserted therein
in the judicial resolution of conflicts problems, three consecutive phases are
involved: 1. Jurisdiction or where can or should litigation be initiated? However, in the present case, the petitioners are already raising
2. choice of law or which law should the court apply; and questions in relation to choice of law which is the second aspect
3. recognition and enforcement of judgments or where can the resulting after the determination of jurisdiction. Hence, the choice-of-law
judgemetn be enforced. rules are inapplicable yet.
Note that Jurisdiction and Choice of Law are different concepts:
Controlling issue: does the RTC have jurisdiction over the case?
The question of whether the law of a state can be applied to a transaction is
different from the question of whether the courts of that state have Yes.
jurisdiction to enter a judgment.
The power to exercise jurisdiction does not automatically give a It should be noted that when a conflicts case, one involving a
state constitutional authority to apply forum law foreign element, is brought before a court or administrative agency,
there are three alternatives open to the latter in disposing of it:
Jurisdiction Choice of Law (1) dismiss the case, either because of lack of jurisdiction or refusal to
Jurisdiction considers whether it is choice of law asks the further assume jurisdiction over the case;
fair to cause a defendant to travel to question whether the application of a (2) assume jurisdiction over the case and apply the internal law of the
this state substantive law which will determine forum; or
the merits of the case is fair to both (3) assume jurisdiction over the case and take into account or apply the law
parties of some other State or States.

The courts power to hear cases and controversies is derived from the
Constitution and the laws. While it may choose to recognize laws of foreign

ARANETA- SESSION 1 3
nations, the court is not limited by foreign sovereign law short of treaties or
other formal agreements, even in matters regarding rights provided by
foreign sovereigns.

May the petitioner invoke the rule of forum non conveniens?

No.

First, it is not a proper basis for a motion to dismiss because Section 1, Rule
16 of the Rules of Court does not include it as a ground.

Second, whether a suit should be entertained or dismissed on the basis of


the said doctrine depends largely upon the facts of the particular case and is
addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court

And in the present case,

RTC decided to assume jurisdiction. Third, the propriety of


dismissing a case based on this principle requires a factual
determination; hence, this conflicts principle is more properly
considered a matter of defense

Accordingly, since the RTC is vested by law with the power to entertain and
hear the civil case filed by respondent and the grounds raised by petitioners
to assail that jurisdiction are inappropriate, the trial and appellate courts
correctly denied the petitioners motion to dismiss.

ARANETA- SESSION 1 4
B. TYPES OF JUDICIAL JURISDICTION AND BASES FOR ITS failure of a party to object to evidence on an issue not
EXERCISE covered by the pleadings, as provided in Sec. 5, Rule 10.
e. Jurisdiction over the res (or the property or thing which is
De Joya vs Judge Marquez of Manila RTC, People of the Philippines the subject of the litigation). This is acquired by the actual or
and the Secretary of Justice constructive seizure by the court of the thing in question,
thus placing it in custodia legis, as in attachment or
Facts: garnishment; or by provision of law which recognizes in the
1. a warrant of arrest was issued by the respondent judge against court the power to deal with the property or subject matter
petitioner Chester De Joya for syndicated Estafa made pursuant to within its territorial jurisdiction, as in land registration
Section 6, Rule 112 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure. proceedings or suits involving civil status or real property in
a. The judge issued the same as he found probable cause the Philippines of a nonresident defendant.
against the same Hence,
2. Hence. The petition for certiorari and prohibition seeking to nullify
and set aside the warrant of arrest. 1. When the action involves the personal status of the plaintiff or property in
the Philippines in which the defendant claims an interest,
Aside from the issue of the finding of probable cause, may the petitioner
seek the present relief from the Court? the court acquires jurisdiction to try the case, even if it has not
acquired jurisdiction over the person of a nonresident defendant, as
Ruling: No. petitioner is not entitled to seek relief from this Court nor from long as it has jurisdiction over the res. In such cases, the service of
the trial court as he continuously refuses to surrender and submit to the summons by publication and notice to the defendant is merely to
courts jurisdiction comply with due process requirements

Requisites for the exercise of jurisdiction and how the court acquires such
jurisdiction: 2. Under Sec. 133 of the Corporation Code, while a foreign corporation doing
business in the Philippines without a license cannot sue or intervene in any
action here, it may be sued or proceeded against before our courts or
a. Jurisdiction over the plaintiff or petitioner: This is acquired administrative
by the filing of the complaint, petition or initiatory pleading tribunals
before the court by the plaintiff or petitioner.
b. Jurisdiction over the defendant or respondent: This is
acquired by the voluntary appearance or submission by the
defendant or respondent to the court or by coercive process 1. Jurisdiction over the subject matter
issued by the court to him, generally by the service of
summons. IDONAH SLADE PERKINS vs Mamerto Roxas
c. Jurisdiction over the subject matter: This is conferred by
law and, unlike jurisdiction over the parties, cannot be Facts:
conferred on the court by the voluntary act or agreement of 1. Eugene Perkins Filed a complaint in the CFi of Manila against the
the parties. Benguet Consolidated Mining company for declared dividends
d. Jurisdiction over the issues of the case: This is determined registered and payable in his name.
and conferred by the pleadings filed in the case by the a. However, he was ordered to include in his complaint as
parties, or by their agreement in a pretrial order or party defendants the petitioner Idonah Perkins his wife, and
stipulation, or, at times by their implied consent as by the Engelhard who were asserting adverse interests in relation

ARANETA- SESSION 1 5
to the shares of stock subject of the case. hence, petitioner
was impleaded as a defendant The respondent's action, calls for the adjudication of title to certain shares of
b. Summons by publication were served upon the non-resident stock of the Benguet Consolidated Mining Company, and the granting of
defendants, petitioner Idonah and Engelhard. affirmative reliefs, which fall within the general jurisdiction of the Court of
2. Petitioner set up a cross complaint in which she sets up a judgment First Instance of Manila.
by the New York Supreme Court obtained by her against respondent
Eugene Perkins. The said decisions declared her to be the sole legal B. Does the Court have jurisdiction over the subject matter of the
owner of of the shares of stock in relation to the declared dividends petitioners cross complaint?
by the Benguet Consolidated Mining Company.
a. The respondent set up several defenses to the enforcement Ruling: Yes.
of the judgment by the foreign court.
b. She then filed a demurrer thereto on the ground that the the Court of First Instance of Manila is empowered to adjudicate the several
court has no jurisdiction to the subject of the action because demands contained in petitioner's crosscomplaint. The crosscomplaint sets
the alleged judgment of the SC of NY is res judicata in all up a judgment allegedly recovered by Idonah Slade Perkins against Eugene
aspects of the present action. Arthur Perkins in the Supreme Court of New York
3. The CFI of Manila overruled the demurrer of the petitioner. Hence
the present action with the SC alleging that: Idonah Slade Perkins in her crosscomplaint brought suit against Eugene
a. the respondent judge is about to and will render judgment Arthur Perkins and the Benguet Consolidated Mining Company upon the
in the abovementioned case disregarding the constitutional alleged judgment of the Supreme Court of the State of New York and asked
rights of this petitioner; contrary to and annulling the final, the court below to render judgment enforcing that New York judgment, and
subsisting, valid judgment rendered and entered in this to issue execution thereon. This is a form of action recognized by section 309
petitioner's favor by the courts of the State of New York, ... of the Code of Civil Procedure (now section 47, Rule 39, Rules of Court) and
which decision is res judicata on all the questions which falls within the general jurisdiction of the Court of First Instance of
constituting the subject matter of civil case No. 53317, of Manila, to adjudicate, settled and determine.
the Court of First Instance of Manila; and which New York
judgment the Court of First Instance of Manila is without However, the question on whether or not he respondent judge in the course
jurisdiction to annul, amend, reverse, or modify in any of the proceedings will give validity and efficacy to the New York judgment
respect whatsoever" set up by the petitioner in her crosscomplaint is a question that goes to the
merits of the controversy and relates to the rights of the parties as between
Issue: in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court of New York, does the each other, and not to the jurisdiction or power of the court. The test of
CFI of Manila, the local court, has jurisdiction over the subject matter of the jurisdiction is whether or not the tribunal has power to enter upon the
action in the said case? inquiry, not whether its conclusion in the course of it is right or wrong. If its
decision is erroneous, its judgment case be reversed on appeal; but its
What is jurisdiction over the subject matter? determination of the question, which the petitioner here anticipates and
subject matter is meant the nature of the cause of action and of the seeks to prevent, is the exercise by that court and the rightful exercise
relief sought, and this is conferred by the sovereign authority which of its jurisdiction.
organizes the court, and is to be sought for in general nature of its
powers, or in authority specially conferred.
Reyes vs Diaz

A. Does the Court have jurisdiction over the the subject matter of the Jurisdiction over the subjectmatter is the power to hear and determine cases
respondents complaint? of the general class to which the proceedings in question belong (C. J. S., p.
Ruling: Yes.

ARANETA- SESSION 1 6
36) and is conferred by the sovereign authority which organizes the court a. summons were not served to him according to the
and defines its powers. rules. he stated that he presently resides in Quezon city and
that he received the notification in his old residence in Nueva
The question, therefore, of whether a court has jurisdiction over the subject- Ecija.
matter, calls for interpretation and application of the law of jurisdiction which i. That when he learned of the judgment, he
distributes the judicial power among the different courts in the Philippines, immediately went to the miunicipality to
and since the ruling on the matter is of farreaching consequences, affecting, claim the said notice much to his surprise
as it may, the very life and structure of our judicial system, the law has because he was never summoned for the
deemed it wise to place the power and authority to act thereon in the hearing
highest court of the land. ii. That had the copy of the summons and of the
order for its publication been sent to him by
In the instant, case, there is no such question of jurisdiction as above mail, as provided in Rule 7, section 21, of the
described. Both parties agree that if the due filing of the protestant's Rules of Court said summons and order would
certificate of candidacy is proven, the trial court has no jurisdiction except to have reached him, "as the judgment herein
dismiss the case. There is, therefore, no question between the parties as to had"; and that his failure to appear before the
what the jurisdiction of the trial court is according to law in either case. The court is excusable it being due to the mistake
real question between them is one of fact whether or not the protestant's of the authorities concerned in not complying
certificate of candidacy has been duly filed. And not the until this fact is with the provisions of said section.
proved can the question of jurisdiction be determined. 4. Decision of the CFI: the CFI denied the petitioner for relief.
5. Hence, the present appeal by Asuncion maintaining that the
summons were not served in accordance with the rules of court.
3. jurisdiction over the Person (plaintiff and Defendant) a. Contrary to the requirement of Rule 7 Section 21 of the
ROC, which provided that the copy of the summons and the
Pantaleon vs Asuncion order for the publication thereof were not deposited in the
post office, postage prepaid, directed to the defendant by
Facts: ordinary mail to his last known address
1. Vicenta Pantaleon instituted an action in the CFI of Nueva Ecija 6. Argument of the plaintiff Reyes is that the provision
against Asuncion for a sum of money. For the service of the applicable in the present case is Section 16 Rule 7 of the
summons, it would appear that: Rules of Court applicable to unknown owner, or the like, or
i. The summons originally issued was returned by the whenever the address of a defendant is unknown and
Sheriff unserved with the statement that Asuncion cannot be ascertained by diligent inquiry, publication may
was already residing on Caloocan rizan. be done.
ii. An alias summons was issued but the same a. And that Section 21 which the defedndant invokes
remained unserved with the information that only applies to extraterritorial service of summons
Asuncion already left the address and that after (when the defendant does not reside in the
diligent efforts, Asuncion was not located Philippines or not found in the Philippines.
iii. The summons then were served through publication
in a newspaper of general circulation in Nueva Ecija. Issue: Was the summons properly served to the effect that the jurisdiction
2. Asuncion failed to answer the complaint and was declared in default. over the person of the defendant was acquired by the court?
Consequently, a decision was rendered against Asuncion.
3. 46 days after the judgment, the defendant then filed a petitioner Ruling: No.
for relief from the judgment on the ground of mistake and excusable
negligence. In his affidavit, he stated that:

ARANETA- SESSION 1 7
Said section 21, however, is unqualified. It prescribes the "proof of service enforcing the exercise of their rights on certain shares of
by publication", regardless of whether the defendant is a resident of the stock in Philippines- Swiss Trading.
Philippines or not. Section 16 must be read in relation to section 21, which 2. The CFI of Rizal Dismissed the case for:
complements it. Then, too, we conceive of no reason, and plaintiff has a. lack of jurisdiction over the person of Paul Schenker and for
suggested none, why copy of the summons and of the order for its want of cause of action against his wife, co-defendant Helen.
publication should be mailed to nonresident defendants, but not to resident 3. Hence the present action Gemperle with the Supreme Court arguing
defendants. We can not even say that defendant herein, who, according to that:
the return of the Sheriff of Nueva Ecija, was reportedly residing in Rizal a. Jurisdiction over the persons of Paul and Helen were
where he, in fact (San Francisco del Monte and Quezon City used to be part acquired by voluntary appearance asking for relief
of Rizal), was residing could reasonably be expected to read the summons when Helen made an answer and filed a counterclaim
published in a newspaper said to be a general circulation in Nueva Ecija. against the plaintiff
b. That there is a waiver of the defense of lack of
Considering that strict compliance with the terms of the statute is necessary jurisdiction over persons
to confer jurisdiction through service by publication, the conclusion is
inescapable that the lower court had no authority whatsoever to issue the Does the Court have jurisdiction over the persons of the defedndants?
order of July 12, 1955, declaring the defendant in default and to render the
decision of September 8, 1955, and that both are null and void ad initio. Ruling: Yes.

Apart from the foregoing, it is a wellsettled principle of Constitutional Law Over the person of Helen: by the counterclaim set up by her.
that, in an action strictly in personam, like the one at bar, personal service of
summons, within the forum, is essential to the acquisition of jurisdiction over Over the person of Paul:
the person of the defendant, who does not voluntarily submit himself to the
authority of the court. In other words, summons by publication cannot lower court had acquired jurisdiction over said defendant, through
consistently with the due process clause in the Bill of Rights confer upon service of the summons addressed to him upon Mrs. Schenker, it
the court jurisdiction over said defendant. appearing from said answer that she is the representative and
attorneyinfact of her husband aforementioned civil case No. Q2796,
which apparently was filed at her behest, in her aforementioned
William Gemperle vs Helen Schenker and Paul Schenker representative capacity.
In other words, Mrs. Schenker had authority to sue, and had
Facts: actually sued on behalf of her husband, so that she was, also,
empowered to represent him in suits filed against him, particularly
1. William Gemperle filed an action against Helen Schenker and Paul in a case, like the of the one at bar, which is consequence of the
Schenker with the CFI of Rizal. action brought by her on his behalf.
a. Admittedly Paul Schenker and Helen Schenker are Swiss
citizens. Paul resides in Switzerland. Helen is in the
Philippines.
b. SUMMONS WERE NOT ACTUALLY SUMMONED TO Sequito vs Letrondo
PAUL, ALTHOUGH THE SUMMONS ADDRESSED TO
HIM AND MRS. SCHENKER WERE SERVED Facts:
PERSONALLY TO HER IN THE PH. 1. Sequito filed a complaint before the CFI of Leyte for Reconveyance
c. The action was based on a publication which was alleged to of a property located in Dagami Leyte.
be defamatory and derogatory of Gemperles name in 2. Facts of the service of summons:
relation to a previous civil case filed by the Schenkers

ARANETA- SESSION 1 8
a. Summons were served by Borja, a police sergeant instead
of a sheriff of the court
b. The proof of the substituted service was also not made
under oath
c. It was served upon the daughter of the defendant who was
then 12 years old, a fourth graed student
3. The defendant failed to file his answer on the prescribed period,
hence, he was declared in default upon motion of the plaintiff
4. The CFI judge rendered a decision consequently in favour of the
plaintiff.
5. The defendant then fied a motion for new trial alleging that he did
not receive the summons and came to know about the case when he
received a copy of the decision of the court.
a. He also presented a deed of sale of the land subject of the
case as a defense for the action filed by the petitioner
6. The trial court denied the motion for new trial.
7. Hence, the present action by defendant Letrondo

Issue: whether or not there had been a valid substituted service of summons
in accordance with Section 8, Rule 7 of the Rules of Court to bind the
defendant?

Ruling: None.

1. irregularity in the service of summons contrary to the requirements


of the Rules of Court
a. The record shows that the service of the summons was
irregular. It was served by one police sergeant, Pacifico
Borja, who was not a sheriff or a court officer, and who was
not authorized by the court to deliver the summons. This
violates the provisions of Section 5, Rule 7, Rules of Court.
b. The proof of service is also not under oath as required by
Section 20 of said rule.
2. No valid substituted service of summons:
a. still there was no valid substituted service because she,
being only 12 years of age and a grade four pupil, could not
have appreciated the importance of the paper delivered to
her.
b. We can not say with certainty that the daughter was at the
time of a suitable age and discretion to be entrusted with so
important a document as a court summons (Section 8, Rule
7, Rules of Court).

ARANETA- SESSION 1 9