COURSE OUTLINE ON CONFLICT OF LAWS

COURSE OUTLINE IN CONFLICT OF LAWS
By: Atty. Enrique V. dela Cruz, Jr.
CONFLICT OF LAWS
By: Atty. Enrique V. dela Cruz, Jr.1
PART ONE: INTRODUCTION
I. Scope and Conflict of Laws: Nature, Definition and Importance
A. Diversity of Laws, Customs and Practices
PRIL: that part of municipal law which covers cases with a foreign element.
Hilton vs. Guyot

(1895)
FACTS: Defendants were sued in France, and the French court rendered judgment against them.
Plaintiffs sued defendants on the French judgment in the US. The US court held the French judgment
conclusive.
HELD: No law has any effect, of its own force, beyond the limits of the sovereignty form which its
authority is derived. The extent to which the law of one nation, as put in force within its territory xxx
shall be allowed to operate within the dominion of another nation, depends upon xxx “the comity of
nations.”
Comity of nations is the recognition which one nation allows within its territory to the legislative,
executive or judicial acts of another nation, having due regard both to international duty and
convenience, and to the rights of its own citizens or of other persons who are under the protection
of its laws.
The reasonable, if not necessary conclusion appears to us to be that judgments rendered in France, or
in any other foreign country, by the laws of which our own judgments are reviewable upon the merits,
are not entitled to full credit and conclusive effect when sued upon in this country, but are prima
facie evidence only of the justice of the plaintiff’s claim.
B. Definition
Second Edition of Jurisprudence: private international law is that part of the law of each state or nation
which determines whether, in dealing with a legal situation, the law of some other state or nation will be
recognized, given effect or applied.
Distinguished from Public International Law and other disciplines:
1
Atty. Dela Cruz is an MCLE lecturer and a Bar Reviewer at the Jurist Bar Review Center and the Cosmopolitan Review
Center. He teaches law at UST, FEU and the Bulacan State University. He obtained his Master of Laws (with
Distinction) from the London Metropolitan University, and a Postgraduate Diploma in International Trade Law from the
University College London (UCL), U.K., both as a Chevening scholar of the British government. He completed a
Postgraduate Fellowship on Leadership and International Relations from the John F. Kennedy School of Government,
Harvard University, USA. He also holds a Masters in Public Management degree from the Ateneo School of
Government. He obtained his Bachelor of Laws degree (with honors) and an AB Legal Management degree (cum
laude) from the University of Santo Tomas as a Rector’s Scholar. He is on his 3 rd term as an elected Councilor of Baliuag,
Bulacan and the current Vice-President (Luzon) of the Philippine Councilors League. He is also a Partner at the Ponce
Enrile Reyes & Manalastas (PECABAR) Law Office in Makati City.
1
Public International Private

Law International Law
Principally governs Principally governs

states in their individuals in their
relationships amongst private transactions
themselves which involves a
foreign element
As to sources of law:
Codified in Art. 38 of Generally derived from
the Statute of the internal law of
International Court of each state and not
Justice from any
“international” law
extraneous to
municipal law
As to persons involved:
Governs only states Governs individuals or
and internationally- corporations
recognized
organizations
As to transactions:
Involves state-to-state Relates to private
or government-to- transactions between
government matters individuals
As to remedies:
In case of violation, a All the remedies are
state may resort to provided by municipal
1) diplomatic protest laws of the state, such
2) peaceful means of as resort to courts or
settlement (diplomatic administrative tribunals
negotiations,
arbitration or
conciliation)
3) adjudication by filing
a case before
international tribunals
4) use force short of
war, or eventually go
to war
C. Object, Function and Scope
Object and Function of Conflict of Laws: to provide rational and valid rules or guidelines in deciding cases
where the parties, events or transactions are linked to more than one JD.
Conflict of law rules aim to promote stability and uniformity of solutions provided by the laws and courts of
each state called upon to decide conflicts cases.
Scope: covers the entire range of laws as it cuts across the subjects of JD of local courts or tribunals, the
law on evidence or proof of foreign law, the personal law of individuals and juridical entities, naturalization
law, laws on domicile and residence, family relations, contracts, torts, crimes, corporation law and property
law.
3 Issues in Conflict of Laws:
2
1) Issue of adjudicatory JD: determines the circumstances that allow for a legal order to impose upon its
judiciary the task of deciding multi-state and multinational disputes
2) Issue of choice-of-law: refers to the probable sources from which the applicable law of the controversy
may be derived
3) Recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments: study of situations which justify recognition by the
forum court of a judgment rendered by a foreign court or the enforcement of such within the forum
II. A Brief History and Development of Conflict of Laws
A. Roman Law
 Ius gentium
In PIL, it means the law of nations
It is used in the early Roman empire to mean the body of rules developed by the praetor
peregrinus to resolve disputes between foreigners or between foreigners and Roman citizens
It includes Greek legal doctrines and concept of bona fides as ius civile only applies t Roman
citizens
 Italian City States

The rise of this city states prompted intensive study of conflict of laws
- Bartolus: Father of Conflict of Laws; formulated Theory of Statutes
Because Northern Italy was divided into several city states each having their own laws on private
matters, the “Statute” was applied to problems of choice of law.
Statute is classified into:

a. real – applied to immovable property within the state
b. personal – followed the person even outside the domicile and governed questions on personal
status, capacity and movables
c. mixed – contracts, if entered into by the different nationals
 16th century, France
Charles Dumoulin – advocated a method to determine what law would govern contracts between
different nationals
Bertrand D’Argentre – formulated the principle of universal succession followed in the Spanish Civil
Code and adopted in the Phil. Civil Code
 Netherlands
Ulrich Huber – first used the term, conflict of laws
Dutch jurists asserted that State has no obligation to apply a foreign law unless imposed by treaty, by
comitas gentium or on consideration of courtesy and expediency.
Dutch jurists led by Huber developed territorial principle where the laws of every state may operate
only within its territorial limit but such sovereign state may recognize that a law, which operated in the
country of its origin, shall retain force everywhere provided that it will not prejudice its subjects.
Comitas Gentium was readily accepted because of increasing international transactions.
Ius Commune, applied by Italian and French jurists, was a supranational law based on Roman law and
which became the continental European common law.
3
Nations codified their national laws which included conflict of laws provisions.
Ex. French Civil Code of 1804

- became the pattern for Civil Codes of Spain, Belgium and Romania
- nationality law principle (contained in Art. 15 of our CC) was provided in Art. 3 of the French
Code
 19th Century
Justice Joseph Story – relied on the European continental theorists’ concept of territorial sovereignty
and founded conflict of laws on the principle of comity of nations.
Frederich Carl Von Savigny

- founder of modern private IL
-application of foreign law was not
due to comity but the resultant
benefits for everyone concerned
- advocated situs theory (seat of
legal relationship): every element
of transaction be governed by the
law of the place with which said
element has the most substantive
connection
Pascuale Mancini
- advanced nationality theory in matters concerning status, capacity and private interests of the
individual
B. Modern Developments
 Neo-Statutists
- followed Italian theory: when 2 or more independent laws are applicable to a Conflict problem, the
method so devised determines what law shall prevail
 Internationalists
- there should be a single body of rules that can solve problems involving a foreign element
 Territorialists
- law of the State applies to persons and things within the State, therefore, no foreign law is applied.
- Branch: only rights vested or acquired under foreign law are recognized in the forum but not
foreign law itself
 1969
- 2nd Restatement of Conflict of Laws, adopted by American Law Institute under Prof. William Reese,
proposed that in the absence of statutory law, law to be applied in Conflict case, is the law of the
most significant relationship.
Conflict of Laws in the Philippines
Spanish Civil Code enforced in the Philippines until 1950 contained the principles adopted from the French
Civil Code (Code of Napoleon) particularly the nationality law principle. Art 16, par. 1, which applies lex situs
rule was adopted from Art. 10 of Spanish CC while par. 2 represents the system of universal succession. Art.
17, par. 1 follows lex loci contractus. But there was no significant jurisprudence on the subject.
Conflict of Laws was included in law curriculum by UP College of Law in 1911 (no less!). Until 1950s, law
teachers predominantly used foreign law books and decisions by American courts.
In the Bar, it used to be a separate subject along with PIL but when it was revised, PIL was included in Pol
Law while PRIL was merged with Civil Law. But, this does not mean that PRIL is a part of civil law as this
mindview tends to limit the perspective and scope of analysis required for conflicts problems.
4
Now, more problems in Conflict have arisen esp. with Filipinos engaging in foreign business transactions,
and in international air transport and foreign tort claims and labor contracts for OFWs.
III. Sources of Conflict of Laws
A. Codes and Statutes
Conflict of Laws (CL) originated in continental Europe was most laws were codified.
Primary sources of law are found in the civil codes of different countries:
1. Roman code codified principles of ius gentium.

2. Code of Napoleon contained specific rule on personal law of individual, this was followed by several
codes (Netherlands, Romania, Italy, Portugal, Spain)
3. The German civil Code contained many provisions on Conflict of Laws.
4. Switzerland also enacted Laws on cases involving foreign elements.
5. Greece enacted a Civil Code with CL rules which became a model in other countries
6. The Code of Bustamante (in South America) was patterned after the Code of Napoleon
Conflict Laws of the Philippines
Spanish Civil Code was enforced in the Philippines on December 7, 1889 until the Philippine Civil Code’s
effectivity on August 30, 1950 which contained the provisions on conflict of laws of the earlier code.
Spain’s Code of Commerce, having some provisions on foreign transactions, were also enforced in the
Philippines on Dec 1, 1888.
One basic source of law is the 1987 Constitution which contains principles on nationality and comity.
Special statutes were also enacted to govern cases with foreign elements, to wit:
1. Corporation Code
2. General Banking Act
3. Foreign Currency System Act
4. Phil Foreign Law Guarantee Corp
5. Retail Business Regulation Act
6. Anti-Dummy Law
7. Nationalization of Rice and Corn Industry Act
8. Insurance Code
9. IP Code
10. Patent Law
11. Trademark Law
12. COGSA
13. Salvage Law
14. Public Service Act
15. Civil Aeronautics Act
16. Phil Overseas Shipping Act
17. Investment Incentives Act
18. Export Incentives Act
19. RA 7722
B. Treaties and International Conventions
The Philippines has entered into a number of treaties and international conventions which deal with private
international law since it became a Republic.
5
Some of these treaties/conventions are:
1. Convention on Intl Civil Aviation,

2. Warsaw Convention,
3. Convention on Offenses Committed on Board Aircraft
4. Convention on the Suppression of Unlawful
5. Acts against Civil Aviation
6. UN Convention COGSA
7. Convention on Consent to Marriage, etc
8. Convention on Traffic of Persons
9. Convention on Elimination of Discrimination against Women
10. Convention on Political Rights of Women
11. IC on the Suppression of Traffic of Women and Children
12. Convention on World Intellectual Property Organization
13. Berne Convention on Protection of Literary and Artistic Works
14. Paris Convention on Protection of Industrial Property.
Although many Hague Conventions on Private International Law were concluded since 1951, which dealt
with issues on:
 Personal status
 Patrimonial family status
 Patrimonial status such as agency and trusts
The Philippines is a signatory to the Convention on Recognition of Foreign Judgment on Civil and
Commercial Matters and has ratified the 1993 Convention in Respect of Inter-Country Adoption only.
C. Treatises, Commentaries and Studies of Learned Societies

In interpreting statutes and codes involving CL, courts resort to works of distinguished jurists and studies of
learned societies.
Distinguished writers in continental Europe include Huber Manreas, Savigny (whose work was translated
into English by Guthrie), and Weiss.
Distinguished American and English writers, on the other hand, include Beale, Cavers, Cheatham, Currie,
Ehrenzweig, Goodrich, Gussbaum, Story, Wharton, Cheshire, Graveson.
The American Law Institute published 2 studies on CL: Restatement of the Conflict of Laws and a Second
Restatement with William Reese as Reporter.
D. Judicial decisions
Decisions of courts are the most important source of CL rules and form the main bulk of source of conflict
rules.
According to Graveson: “This branch of law is more completely judge-made than almost any other. In its
application, judges have to deal with “All Manner of People” more than any other branch. The claim of
justice for right as a basis for conflict of laws is supported not only by the terms of the judicial oath but by
judicial dicta in judgments”.
PART TWO: JURISDICTION AND CHOICE OF LAW
IV. Jurisdiction
Jurisdiction may mean either a) judicial or b) legislative jurisdiction. (This part talks of judicial jurisdiction)
6
Judicial JD – the power or authority of a court to try a case, render judgment and execute it in accordance
with law.
Legislative JD – the ability of the state to promulgate laws and enforce them on all persons and property
within its territory.
4 Major Questions in Analyzing a Conflict of Laws Problem:
1) Has the court JD over the person of the defendant or over his property?
2) Has the court JD over the subject matter (“competency”)?
3) Has the suit been brought in the proper venue in cases where a foreign element is involved?
4) Is there a statute or doctrine under which a court otherwise qualified to try the case may or may
not refuse to entertain it?
A. Basis of Exercise of Judicial Jurisdiction
Bases of Judicial Jurisdiction (3 groups):
1) JD over the person (based on forum-defendant contacts)
2) JD over the res (based on forum-property contacts)
3) JD over the subject matter
1. Jurisdiction over the Person
This is acquired by the voluntary appearance of a party and his submission to authority.
Over the person of the plaintiff: acquired the moment he invokes the aid of the court by filing a suit.
Over the person of the defendant: acquired when he enters his appearance or is served with the legal
process within the state.
When he or his lawyer appears in court, he gives consent to the forum’s exercise of JD over him, except
where the appearance is for the purpose of protesting the JD over him.
A non-resident plaintiff who files a suit is deemed to consent to the court’s exercise of JD over subsequent
proceedings arising out of his original cause of action (counterclaims).
JD over the defendant may be had by personal or substituted service of summons.
Gemperle vs. Schenker

(1967)
FACTS: Paul Schenker (Swiss citizen and resident) filed a complaint against Gemperle through his
wife Helen Schenker, for enforcement of subscription to shares of stock. Gemperle filed a suit against
Paul for damages, saying that Paul caused allegations to be published attacking his reputation and
bringing him into public hatred and discredit as a businessman. Schenker’s defense: court has no JD
over the person of Paul.
7
HELD: Jurisdiction was acquired by the lower court over the person of Paul through service of summons
addressed to him upon Helen, it appearing from the answer that she is the representative and
attorney-in-fact of her husband in the civil case.
Jurisdiction:
1) over the person
a) voluntary appearance
b) submission to authority
rule: in substituted service, the premise is that the defendant is within the territorial JD of the court
exception: Gemperle case – because Helen is legally authorized to file a case in behalf of Paul, she is also
authorized to receive summons
2) over the property

a) in rem – the situs could “bind the world”
b) quasi in rem
basis of JD: presence of the property within the territory
3) over the subject-matter - WON the court has competence to hear the case and render judgment;
the court’s JD must be properly invoked (provided for by statute)
_______________
2. Jurisdiction over the Property
JD over the property results from:
a) seizure of the property under a legal process
b) the institution of legal proceedings wherein the court’s power over the property is recognized
and made effective
This kind of JD is referred to as in rem JD; the situs could “bind the world” and not just the interest of
specific persons.
Basis of exercise of JD: the presence of the property within the territorial JD of the forum.
Quasi in rem JD: affects only the interests of particular persons in that thing (ex. Quieting of title). (actions
against a person in respect of the res)
In these 2 proceedings, all that due process requires is that the defendant be given adequate notice and
opportunity to be heard (which are both met by service of summons by publication).
Pennoyer vs. Neff

(1878)
FACTS: Neff, a California resident, owned land in Oregon which was sold under a Sheriff’s deed to
satisfy a money judgment against him. The service of summons was made by publication. He is suing
for recovery of said land, alleging that the sale was invalid for lack of JD of the Oregon court over him.
HELD: Substituted services by publication, or in any other authorized form, may be sufficient to
inform parties of the object of the proceedings taken where property is once brought under the control
of the court by seizure or some equivalent act to any proceedings authorized by law upon such seizure
for its condemnation and sale.
8
But where the entire object of the action is to determine the personal rights and obligations of
defendants, that is, where the suit is merely in personam, constructive service in this form upon a non-
resident is ineffectual for any purpose.
The important thing to prove is what kind of action is involved (to determine sufficiency of form of service to
be used)
International Shoe Co. vs. Washington

(1945)
FACTS: The state of Washington sued International Shoe Co. (a Delaware corporation with principal
place of business in Missouri) to collect the tax laid upon the exercise of the privilege of employing
salesmen within the state. International Shoe’s defense is that its activities within the state, consisting
merely of exhibiting samples and soliciting orders and nothing more, were not sufficient to manifest
its “presence” there; hence the state courts had no JD over it.
HELD: The SC of Washington has JD over International Shoe. Due process requires only that in order
to subject a defendant to a judgment in personam, if he be not present within the territory of the forum,
he should have certain minimum contacts with it, such that the maintenance of the suit does not offend
“traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice”. (Minimum contacts so that the suit will not
offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.)
The demands of due process regarding the corporation’s “presence” may be met by such contacts of the
corporation with the state of the forum as to make it reasonable xxx to require the corporation with defend the
particular suit which is brought there.
Its “presence” can be manifested only by such activities carried on in its behalf by those who are
authorized to act for it.
Mullane vs. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.

(1950)
FACTS: In an action for judicial settlement of accounts of Central Hanover Bank as trustee of a
common trust fund, some of the beneficiaries who are non-residents of NY were notified only by
publication in a local newspaper.
HELD: When notice is a person’s due, process which is a mere gesture is NOT due process. The means
employed must be such as one desirous of actually informing the absentee might reasonably adopt to
accomplish it. Within the limits of practicability, notice must be such as is reasonably calculated to
reach interested parties.
In Mullane, the manner notice was given should reasonably result in informing the affected partner; when
conditions do not allow such notice, the form chosen should not substantially be “less likely to bring home
notice than other of the feasible and customary substitutes.”
Shaffer vs. Heitner

(1977)
FACTS: Heitner, a non-resident of Delaware with 1 share of stock in the Delaware corporation
Greyhound, sued Greyhound and its officers for allegedly violating its duties. Pursuant to the case,
Heitner filed a motion for sequestration of the defendants’ stocks in Greyhound. The stocks, while not
9
physically present in Delaware, are considered to be there in view of it being the place of
incorporation.
HELD: The Delaware court cannot exercise JD just because the stocks are statutorily present in
Delaware. The property (stocks) is not the subject matter of the litigation nor is the underlying cause of
action related to the property. Also, the facts in CAB does not demonstrate that defendants have
purposefully availed themselves of the privilege of conducting activities within the forum state in a
way that would justify bringing them before a Delaware court.
In Shaffer, the minimum contacts and fundamental fairness test should be satisfied regardless of whether
the proceedings are in rem, quasi in rem or in personam.
Traditional basis for the exercise of judicial JD is the state’s physical power over persons and property within
its territory; this is why in in rem proceedings, it can exercise JD over property situated in the state
regardless of whether it could otherwise exercise JD over the persons whose interest would be affected by
the decision.
In the US, there is a shifting trend from theory of territorial power to considerations of minimum contacts
and fundamental fairness. This approach demands that there be forum-transaction contacts that will make it
fundamentally fair to require the defendant to defend a suit in the forum regardless of his non-resident
status.
Distinction, Shaffer and International Shoe: while International Shoe requires minimum contacts between
the defendant and the forum, Shaffer demands that minimum contacts exist among the forum, defendant
and the cause of action.
The change in the conceptual foundation of JD from territorial power to fairness does not significantly affect
proceedings in rem, which are suits where the property itself is the object of the controversy. The physical
presence of the property within the state establishes the state’s paramount interest in adjudicating a claim
over it and provides the necessary minimum contacts.
Long-Arm Statutes
Long-arm statutes specify the kinds of contacts upon which JD will be asserted. Some long-arm statutes
broadly authorize courts to assert JD in any case not inconsistent with the Constitution, leaving it to the
court to define its limitations on a case-by-case basis.
3. Jurisdiction over the Subject-matter
Subject-matter JD is allocated among the courts by constitutional and statutory laws, according to the
nature of the controversy, thereby determining the competence of the court to try and decide a case.
It is not enough that a court has a power in abstract to try and decide the case; it is necessary that said
power be properly invoked xxx by filing a petition.
Subject-matter JD cannot be conferred by consent of the parties.
Idonah Perkins vs. Roxas

(1941)
FACTS: Eugene Perkins filed a complaint against Benguet Consolidated for the recovery of declared
dividends, but Benguet withheld payment upon the opposing claim of Idonah Perkins, wife of
Eugene. Idonah sets up a NY judgment declaring her to be the sole owner of the Benguet shares and
allege that such judgment is res judicata.
10
HELD: The CFI has jurisdiction over the case, despite the presence of the NY judgment. Whether or
not the trial judge in the course of the proceedings will give validity and efficacy to the NY judgment
set up by Idonah in her cross-complaint is a question that goes to the merits of the controversy and
relates to the rights of the parties as between each other, and not to the jurisdiction of the court. The
fear that the trial judge may render judgment annulling the final judgment of the NY court is not a
ground to deny the lower court of JD. The test of JD is whether or not the tribunal has power to enter
upon the inquiry, not whether its conclusion in the course of it is right or wrong.
“Presence”/Jurisdiction:
1) Traditional Views
a) Pennoyer – actual physical presence
2) Modern Views
a) Int’l. Shoe – contact between the forum and the corporation (even in the absence of an
actual office, etc.)
b) Mullane – disregards strict distinction between in rem and in personam
c) Shaffer – minimum contacts between the properties and forum; fundamental fairness test
Long-arm statutes: already identify what are the bases of JD.
 Jurisdiction and choice of law do not mean the same thing.

_______________
B. Ways of Dealing with a Conflicts Problem
The court may deal with a conflicts problem, by:
1) dismissing the case for lack of jurisdiction or on the ground of forum non conveniens
2) assuming jurisdiction and applying either forum or foreign law
1. Dismiss the case
Doctrine of Forum non Conveniens

This doctrine requires the court to dismiss the case on the ground that the controversy may be more
suitably tried elsewhere. This phrase literally means “the forum is inconvenient.”
Reasons for applying forum non conveniens:
1) to prevent abuse of the court’s processes (prevent harassment of defendant, dissuade a non-
resident plaintiff from choosing the forum because of larger jury verdicts, etc.)
2) burdensome on the court or taxpayers (severe backlog of cases)
3) local machinery is inadequate to effectuate a right (no way for court to secure evidence and
attendance of witnesses)
4) avoid global forum shopping
11
English and Scottish courts have applied FNC when there was “another available and more appropriate
forum, in which the ends of justice would be better served in view of the interests of all parties, by
eliminating the vexatious or oppressive character of the pending proceedings and by removing any
unfairness to either party which would result from trial in the forum seized of the case.”
Heine vs. New York Insurance Co.

(1940)
FACTS: An action for recovery on life insurance policies made and issued in Germany was filed by
German citizens in Oregon against a NY corporation.
HELD: The Oregon court may refuse to exercise JD. The courts of Germany and New York are open
and functioning and competent to take JD of the controversies, and service can be made upon the
defendants in either of such JDs. To require the defendants to defend the actions in Oregon would
impose upon them great and unnecessary inconvenience and expense. The courts of this country are
established and maintained primarily to determine controversies between its citizens and those having
business there, and manifestly the court may protect itself against a flood of litigation over contracts
made and to be performed in a foreign country, where the parties and witnesses are nonresidents of
the forum, and no reason exists why the liability, if any, cannot be enforced in the courts of the country
where the cause of action arose, or in the state where the defendant was organized and has its
principal offices.
In re: Union Carbide

(1986)
FACTS: An industrial disaster in a chemical plant of Union Carbide in Bhopal, India caused deaths
and injuries to a number of residents. India enacted the Bhopal Gas Leak Disaster Act, which
authorized the government (Union of India) to represent the victims. The UOI filed a complaint in NY
in behalf of the victims. Union carbide moved to dismiss on the ground of forum non conveniens.
HELD: Indian courts have JD, not US courts. Even if UCC has domicile in the US, this loses
significance because it gave its consent to Indian JD. Moreover, the findings of the court show that the
proof bearing on the issues to be tried is almost entirely located in India (principal witnesses and
documents, detailed designs, implementation of plans, safety precautions, etc.).
Wing On Company vs. Syyap

(1967)
FACTS: Syyap failed pay Wing On, a NY-based partnership, its obligation for a contract of purchase of
clothing material. Wing On filed an action in the Philippines against Syyap, but Syyap contends that
the trial court should have declined JD on the ground of forum non conveniens.
HELD: Forum non conveniens is inapplicable. Unless the balance is strongly in favor of the defendant,
the plaintiff’s choice of forum should be rarely disturbed, and furthermore, the consideration of
inadequacy to enforce the judgment, which is one of the important factors to be considered in the
application of said principle, would precisely constitute a problem to the plaintiff if the local courts
decline to assume JD on the basis of said principle, considering that defendant is a resident of the
Philippines.
There is no existing catalogue of circumstances that will justify sustaining a plea of forum non
conveniens but, in general, both public and private interests should be weighed.
12
When the forum is the only state where JD can be obtained over the defendant and, in addition, some
relation with the parties exists or when the forum provides procedural remedies not available in
another state, the forum court may not resist imposition upon its JD.
Bank of America vs. CA

(2003)
FACTS: The spouses Litonjua are engaged in the shipping business; they executed a contract where
Bank of America was made the trustee of their businesses. But the businesses suffered losses in the
hands of the bank, so the spouses filed a case for damages for breach of trust and accounting of
revenues in the Philippines. Bank of America filed a Motion to Dismiss on the ground of forum non
conveniens.
HELD: While it is within the discretion of the trial court to abstain from assuming JD on the ground of
forum non conveniens, it should do so only after vital facts are established, to determine whether special
circumstances require the court’s desistance; and the propriety of dismissing a case based on this
principle of forum non conveniens requires a factual determination, hence it is more properly considered
a matter of defense.
The SC also held in Philsec. Investment vs. CA that the doctrine of FNC should not be used as a ground
for a motion to dismiss because Sec. 1 Rule 16 of ROC does not include said doctrine as a ground.
Forum non conveniens:

1) prevent abuse of court processes
2) burdensome on the court/taxpayers
3) prevent global forum shopping
 FNC is not something that automatically applies; its application rests in the sound discretion of the
court
 in Wing On vs. Syyap. Prof. Pangalangan does not agree with the holding that “unless the balance
is strongly in favor of the defendant, the plaintiff’s choice of forum should rarely be disturbed”,
because in the first place, it was the plaintiff who chose that forum.
_______________
2. Assume Jurisdiction
When the court assumes JD, it may apply forum law or foreign law, although forum law should be applied
whenever there is good reason to do so because the forum law is the basic law.
Factors which justify the application of internal law:
1) A specific law of the forum decrees that internal law should apply
Examples of this are Art. 16 of Civil Code (lex nationale governs testate and intestate succession of the
person whose succession is under consideration); Art. 829 of the Civil Code (revocation of wills outside RP);
and Art. 819 (prohibition on joint wills by Filipinos).
 Example: prohibitory or mandatory laws of the forum
2) The proper foreign law was not properly pleaded and proved
Our courts may not take judicial cognizance of any foreign law; hence, failure to plead and prove foreign
law leads to the presumption that it is the same as forum law.
13
 Under the Rules of Court, the foreign law may be proved by:
a) official publication
b) certification form the officer with official custody, under seal, and the Phil. Embassy must
certify that such officer has official custody, etc.: that it is the law in force at the time etc., etc.
Fleumer vs. Hix

(1930)
FACTS: Fleumer, the special administrator of the estate of Hix, appealed the denial of the probate of
Hix’s will, alleging that since the will was executed in West Virginia by a resident therein, West
Virginia law should govern.
HELD: The courts of the Philippines are not authorized to take judicial notice of the laws of the
various States of the American Union. Such laws must be proved as facts. Here the requirements of
law were not met. There was no showing that the book from which an extract was taken was printed
or published under the authority of the state of West Va. as provided in the Code of Civil Procedure;
nor was the extract from the law attested by the certificate of the officer having charge of the original.
Philippine Trust Co. vs. Bohanan

(1960)
FACTS: The will of Bohanan was admitted to probate; in the probate he was declared to be a citizen of
Nevada. In the hearing for the proposed project of partition, Nevada law was not introduced.
Bohanan’s widow questioned the validity of the will under Philippine law; however, if Nevada law
was to be applied, the will would be valid.
HELD: The law of Nevada, being a foreign law, can only be proved in our courts in the form and
manner provided for by our Rules. However, it has been found that during the hearing for the motion
of the widow Bohanan for withdrawal of her share, the foreign law was introduced in evidence by her
counsel. In addition, the other heirs do not dispute the provisions of the Nevada law. Under these
circumstances, the pertinent laws of Nevada can be taken judicial notice of by the court, without proof
of such law having been offered at the hearing of the project of partition.
As the validity of the testamentary dispositions are to be governed by the national law of the testator,
the order of the court approving the project of partition in accordance with Nevada law must be
affirmed.
3) The case falls under any of the exceptions to the application of foreign law
a) The foreign law is contrary to an important public policy of the forum

b) The foreign law is penal in nature
c) The foreign law is procedural in nature
d) The foreign law purely fiscal or administrative in nature
e) The application of the foreign law will work undeniable injustice to the citizens of the forum
f) The case involves real or personal property situated in the forum
g) The application of the foreign law might endanger the vital interest of the state
h) The foreign law is contrary to good morals
V. Choice of Law
A. The Correlation between Jurisdiction and Choice of Law
1) The factors that justify exercise of judicial jurisdiction maybe the same factors used to
determine choice of law
14
2) if the forum applies its internal law because it has a real interest, the outcome of the case will
be foreordained by the forum
- plaintiff will choose forum who has real interest in applying its internal law
3) generally, forum will apply its internal law so plaintiff will bring suit where internal law is
favorable to him
BUT these are 2 diff. concepts. A court may exercise jurisdiction but apply foreign law or not
exercise jurisdiction but the state’s internal law will be applied.
B. Approaches to Choice of Law
Ideally, the object of all choice of law theories must be justice and predictability.
1. Traditional Approaches
- theories that emphasize simplicity, convenience and uniformity
a. vested rights theory
- advanced by Prof. Beale (1st Restatement)

- an act done in a foreign jurisdiction gives rise to a right if the laws of that state provides so.
The right vests and he can bring suit in any forum he chooses.
- The forum refers law of the place of the “last act” necessary to complete the cause of action.
(place of injury)
- If place of the last act creates no legal right, although forum court creates such right if
act is done within its territory, it will not enforce the right.
Gray vs. Gray

(1934)
FACTS: Wife (W) sued husband (H) for damages in New Hampshire where they are residents.
Accident happened in Maine. Maine bars suit between spouses.
HELD: The effect of the prohibition in Maine is to divest the W of any cause of action against H. If
there is a conflict between lex fori and lex loci, lex loci governs in torts in respect to the legal effect and
incidents of the act.
The status as spouses is determined by New Hampshire law but the incidents of that status is
governed by the law of the place of the transaction (Maine).
Alabama Great Southern Railroad vs. Carroll

(1892)
FACTS: Carroll is an employee of Alabama RR. Both are residents of Alabama. C was injured in the
course of work bec. of negligence of co-EE in Mississippi. Mississippi bars recovery. Alabama makes
employer liable. Suit is filed in Alabama.
HELD: There can be no recovery in one sate for injuries to the person sustained in another unless the
infliction of the injuries is actionable under the law of the state in which the injuries were received.
Although it is claimed that the negligent conduct was done in Alabama, the injury sustained creates
the cause of action and not the negligence. (law of the place of injury)
Criticisms to the Approach: failure to resolve conflicts cases with considerations of policy and
fairness.
15
b. Cook’s Local Law Theory
- treat conflicts cases as a purely domestic case that does not involve a foreign element
- power of a state to regulate within its territory has no limitation except as imposed by
its own positive law
- criticism: appeals to narrow-mined who favors an exaggerated local policy bec a
sovereign can do as they please, depreciating the practical and equitable
considerations that should control the case.
c. Caver’s Principles of Preference
- choice-of-law decisions should be made with reference to principles of preference which are
conceived to provide a fair accommodation of conflicting state policies and afford fair treatment to
the parties.
- Caver’s principles have a territorialist bias; it looks to the place where the significant
events occurred or where the legal relationship is centered.
- Court should:
1) scrutinize the event/ transaction giving rise to the issue
2) compare carefully the proffered rule of law & the result of its application with the rule of the
forum & its effect
3) appraise these results from the standpoint of justice between the litigants or of considerations
of social policy
2. Modern Approaches
a. Place of the Most Significant Relationship
-identifies a plurality of factors:

i. needs of the interstate and intl system
ii. relevant policies of the concerned states
iii. relevant policies of other interested states
iv. protection of justified expectations of the parties
v. basic policies underlying the particular field of law
vi. certainty, predictability and uniformity of result
vii. ease in the determination and application of law to be applied
Examples of application:
i. torts – place of injury, place of tortious conduct, domicile, residence or
nationality of parties, place where relationship is entered
ii. contracts – choice of law of the parties, place of contracting, place of performance,
domicile, residence, nationailty, place of incorporation and place of business
Auten vs. Auten

(1954)
FACTS: Spouses were married and lived in England. H left and went to NY. Spouses executed support
agreement in NY. H failed to pay support. W sued H for legal separation. W sued in NY to enforce
agreement. H claimed that legal separation suit, extinguished liability under NY law.
HELD: English law should govern the parties. England has all the truly significant contacts while the
nexus to NY is entirely fortuitous.
England is the seat of marital domicile and the place where W & children were to be, it has the greatest
concern in defining and regulating the rights and duties existing under the agreement and the
16
circumstances that affect it. Whereas NY is only the place of the agreement and where the trustee,
where moneys will be paid for the account the W & children, had his office.
In applying the “grouping of contacts” theory, courts, instead of regarding as conclusive the intention
of the parties or the place of making or performance, lay emphasis rather on the law of the place which
has the most significant contacts with the matter in dispute.
Haag vs. Barnes

(1961)
FACTS: Barnes & Haag had an affair in NY. H became pregnant. After giving birth, H went to
Chicago. Parties entered into a support agreement in Chicago. The agreement contained a choice of
law clause (Illinois). H & child went back to live in NY. H filed support action in NY against B. Under
NY law, agreement is not binding. B’s defense: Illinois agreement bars suit.
HELD: Suit is barred by the prior support agreement. Court found that Illinois has the most significant
contacts. It is what the parties intended to apply, the place of performance, the place of business of B &
the agents and the place where support are being made compared to NY whose contacts are of less
weight & significance. (place of liaison & residence of H & child)
Criticisms to approach: no standard to evaluate the relative significance/importance of each

contact such that court may use approach to support any preconceived result without
explaining its real motives.
b. Interest Analysis
- resolve conflicts cases by looking at the policy behind the laws of the involved states and
the interest each state has in applying its own law.
- Tasks of the court:
1st: determine whether the case involves a true, false or apparent conflict (false conflict:
only one state has an actual interest in having the law applied and the failure to apply the other
state law will not impair its policy)
2nd: if there is apparent or true conflict, court should take a second look on the policies
and interests of the states. If only one has a real interest, the other is insubstantial, then there
is false conflict. If both have real interests in applying their law, then the apparent
conflict is a true conflict.
Babcock vs. Jackson

(1963)
FACTS: Babcock & Jackson, NY residents, met a car accident in Ontario thru J’s fault. B sued J in NY
for damages. Ontario bars recovery under a guest statute. NY does not have a similar rule.
HELD: B should be allowed to recover. NY had a greater & more direct interest than Ontario. NY’s
policy is to afford compensation to a guest against tortfeasor host while Ontario’s policy is to prevent
fraudulent collusion to the prejudice of Ontario defendants-insurance companies. Thus, Ontario had
no interest in denying a remedy to a NY guest against a NY host.
The rule on tort claim is:

Where the issue involves standard of conduct, law of the place of the tort is controlling, but as to other
issues, court must apply the law of the state which has the strongest interest in the resolution of the
issue presented.
17
Criticisms to Approach: not all state legislatures publish reports that explain the background and purpose of
the laws, thus court is left to speculate on the purpose of the law and not all reflected policy or had a
purpose other than to decide cases.
 Pangalangan on Interest analysis: why consider what the state wants when interests of individuals
are in issue?
c. Comparative Impairment
- subordination of the state objective which would be least impaired

- How? Court should weigh conflicting interests and apply the law of the state whose interest would
be more impaired if its laws were not followed
d. Trautman’s Functional Analysis
- this approach looks into:

1) the general policies of the state beyond those reflected in substantive law
2) policies and values reflecting effective and harmonious relationship between states
ex. Reciprocity, advancement of multistate activity, protecting justifiable expectations,
evenhandedness and effectiveness.
- after determining these policies, court should then weigh the relative strength of a state policy
- HOW? Court should consider whether the law of a state reflects an “emerging” or “regressing”
policy.
e. Leflar’s Choice-Influencing Considerations
5 major choice-influencing considerations

1) predictability of results
2) maintenance of interstate and int’l order
3) simplification of the judicial task
4) application of the better rule of law
5) advancement of the forum’s governmental interest
- court should prefer a law that make good socioeconomic sense and are sound in view of present
day conditions
- Criticism: no principled or objective standard to determine “better rule”.
Traditional approaches do not consider policy; all modern approaches look at policy.
______________
VI. The Problem of Characterization
A. Characterization and the Single-Aspect Method
Single-aspect method: choice of law theories traditionally concentrated on one element of a situation to
connect case to particular legal community.
Goal: simplicity, convenience, uniformity
Multi-aspect method: modern approach by which all important factors (non/territorial) are analyzed.
18
The applicable law is arrived at by elaborating policies & purposes underlying rules, and the needs of
international intercourse.
Goal: just resolution of case
The Philippines follows single-aspect method. Our conflicts rules are mostly found in the Civil Code.
Art 15: Laws relating to family rights & duties, or to the status, condition and legal capacity of persons are
binding upon citizens of the Philippines, even though living abroad.
Art 16: Real property as well as personal property is subject to the law of the country where it is situated.
However, intestate and testamentary succession, both with respect to the order of succession and to the
amount of successional rights and to the intrinsic validity of testamentary provisions shall be regulated by
the National law of the person whose succession is under consideration, whatever may be the nature of the
property and regardless of the country wherein said property may be found. (AOI)
Art 17: The forms and solemnities of contracts, wills, and other public instruments shall be governed by the
laws of the country in which they are executed.
When the acts referred to are executed before the diplomatic or consular officials of the Republic of the
Philippines in a foreign country, the solemnities established by Philippine laws shall be observed in their
execution.
Prohibitive laws concerning persons, their acts or property, and those which have for their object public
order, public policy and good customs shall not be rendered ineffective by laws or judgments promulgated,
or by determinations or conventions agreed upon in a foreign country.
The rules specify geographical location in accordance with traditional approach. The problem with this:
inherent rigidity, unjust decisions.
Solution: Characterization, Renvoi, Escape devices
Characterization: the process by which a court assigns a disputed question to an area in

substantive law. It is a part of legal analysis and a pervasive problem since at least 2 jurisdictions with
divergent laws are involved.
Two Types of Characterization:
1. Subject-matter Characterization
This calls for classification of a factual situation into a legal category. It is significant in a single-
aspect method because the legal category to which an issue is assigned determines governing law
Gibbs vs. Gov’t. of PI

(1933)
FACTS: Spouses Allison & Eva were residents & citizens of California owning parcels of land in
Manila. Eva died. Allison, as administrator files petition to declare lands in his favor pursuant to
California law. California Civil Code provides that upon wife’s death previous to husband,
community property belongs absolutely to husband.
HELD: California Civil Code will not apply. The law of the place where land is situated governs its
descent, alienation &transfer & for the effect & construction of wills & other conveyances.
As mandated by Philippine law, the lands were acquired as community property in the conjugal
partnership. The wife was vested with a title equal to that of her husband. Upon her death, if there are
19
no obligations of the decedent, her share in the conjugal property is transmitted to the heirs by
succession.
Though the court was silent on the matter of characterization, it had the task of categorizing the issue as
one involving:
b) property to be governed by lex situs, or
c) succession to be governed by decedent’s national law (California)
Characterization problems are considered a threat to traditional choice-of-law theories whose aims are
uniformity & predictability of results.
Problems:
A) C, is adopted in the Philippines by a former Filipino citizen and moves to the US with her adoptive
mother, M. By M’s laws, C will not be an heir. Will C be entitled to an intestate share in M’s estate?
The court would have to decide whether it is a Q relating to

1. Legality & effects of adoption: law of state where legal relationship of adoption was
established or where the adoption decree was granted shall govern; or
2. Succession: adopter’s personal law shall prevail
B) Principal authorizes a person to act as his agent in another country. Agent commits a negligent act. What
law will determine the principal’s liability?
It depends on the court’s characterization of the case as:
1. Contractual: law of the place where the contract of agency was entered into; or
2. Tortious: law of the place where tortuous conduct or injury occurred
2. Substance-Procedure Dichotomy
Directs the court to the extent it will apply foreign law.
If issue substantive: court may apply foreign law

If issue procedural: follow forum law
Why apply forum law to matters of procedure?
One of the main goals of a rational system of CL rules: Rights & Duties of parties arising from a legal
situation shall not be substantially varied because the forum in w/c action is brought.
Courts of all civilized states now seek to protect parties, by referring to foreign law, against a substantial
change of position because of fortuitous circumstance that suit was brought in that forum.
The means provided for compulsion, or the limitation upon compulsion are in most cases of equal practical
importance to the declaration of the validity of the plaintiff’s claim.
Such all inclusive reference to foreign law is never made. It would be too burdensome on the part of the
forum and administration of justice will be delayed. Thus, it is necessary to limit the scope of reference to
foreign law.
This limitation excludes phases of the case which make the administration of foreign law inconvenient or
violative of local policy. In such instances, local rules of the forum are applied & are classified as matters of
procedure.
20
Grant vs. Mcauliffe

(1953)
FACTS: Plaintiffs, Grant, et al., (California residents) were injured in Arizona when their vehicle
collided with that of Pullen’s (California resident), who died of accident. The suit against estate of
Pullen filed by Grant to recover damages was dismissed because under Arizona law- “a tort action not
commenced before the death of the tortfeasor must be abated”. But under California law, an action for
tort survives the death of tortfeasor.
HELD: Survival statutes are procedural. Thus, California (forum) law applies. Forum law governs if
issue is procedural. Under California Civil Code the action out of a wrong resulting to a physical
injury shall not abate because of the death of the wrongdoer. Plaintiff’s cause of action survives
Pullen’s death.
The reaction to Grant was generally negative. It was criticized as being based on an erroneous
characterization greatly influenced by “sympathy”.
Other view: Correct result but arrived at using dubious method.
Currie: The court availed of one of several escape devices - characterization. It characterized the problem
differently, such producing the result previously recognized as the sound result.
This device is not ideal. It is better if courts could expressly state the considerations that helped them
determine the results and indicate clearly how these considerations will be used in other cases.
No objective standard has been suggested. An attempt to explain the court decision in terms of “demands
of justice” or “social policy” would create uncertainty & arouse criticism.
Procedural issues are governed by forum law so that the court will not be unduly burdened by task of
studying peculiarities of another legal system. It must be noted, though, that some matters cannot be
clearly defined as procedural or substantive.
Two Issues whose classification (as procedural or substantive) is debatable:
1) Statute of Frauds
It is considered substantive if words of law relate to forbidding the creation of obligation. One that forbids
the enforcement of the obligation is characterized as procedural
Marie vs. Garrison: Defendant maintains that the NY Statute of Frauds affects the remedy upon a contract
w/in its terms—a rule prescribing evidence & deemed a rule of procedure. Garrison claims that rules of the
forum must be followed. Marie claims that NY law was constructed as a rule of substance going into
existence of contract; determined by lex loci contractus.
Issue: Whether a contract declared ‘void’ by a stature still subsists as a contract w/ the only effect of
depriving party of a remedy or mere evidence.
Held: It was a word of substance because the statute provided that the contract of sale of any interest in
land shall be void unless it was in writing ex contrario to a law stating that ‘no action shall be brought’ of the
requirement was not complied with.
2) Statutes of Limitations (SL) & Borrowing Statutes
Statutes of limitations are traditionally classified as ‘procedural’ because they only barred the legal remedy
w/out impairing the substantive right involved.
21
Thus, a suit can still be maintained in another JD w/c has a longer SL. However, certain SL’s have been
classified as substantive for conflicts purposes if providing a shorter period for certain claim types falling
w/in wider class covered by the general SL.
Specificity test: to determine whether an SL is substantive or procedural.
An SL of a foreign country is treated as “substantive” when limitation was directed to newly created liability
so specifically as to warrant saying that it qualified the right
Borrowing statutes
Purpose: Many states, the Philippines among others, have passed borrowing statutes to eliminate forum-
shopping.
However, in the case of Cadalin, the court said that to enforce the borrowed statute would contravene
public policy on protection of labor.
Cadalin vs. POEA Administrator

(1994)
FACTS: Cadalin et al. instituted a class suit with the POEA for money claims arising from their
recruitment by AIBC and BRII for pretermination of employment contracts. Under Bahrain law where
some of the complainants were deployed, the prescriptive period for claims arising out of a contract of
employment is one year.
HELD: Even though a law on prescription may be considered as substantial or procedural, its
characterization as either becomes irrelevant when the country of the forum has a “borrowing statute.”
Said statute has the practical effect of treating the foreign statute of limitation as one of substance.
Under the ROC of the Philippines, it is provided that “if by the laws of the state or country where the
cause of action arose, the action is barred, it is also barred in the Philippines.” The Bahrain law on
prescription should apply. However, it cannot be enforced as it would contravene the public policy on
the protection to labor. Philippine law will then be applied.
B. Depecage
From depecer, which means “to dissect.”
Different aspects of a case involving a foreign element may be governed by different systems of laws.
Von Mehren & Trautman: A man dies intestate domiciled in state A & w/ movable properties in State B.
How will the man’s estate be divided?

State A conflict rules refer to laws of domicile. Intestate law of State B gives the widow a definite share in
the estate of deceased. But the determination of WON the woman claiming the share is a “wife” is referred
to family law, not laws on succession.
Issues of law governing movable properties & successional rights of spouse are of primary importance,
embodying substance of claim. Validity of marriage ‘affects solution because it answers a preliminary or
incidental Q.
The presence of an incidental Q is one instance which calls for the employment of depecage.
Merits of Depecage:
This technique allows other relevant interests of parties to be addressed. Thus, it permits
courts to arrive at a functionally sound result w/out rejecting the methodology of the traditional
approach. This nuanced single-aspect method employs depecage by choice.
22
Haumschild vs. Continental Casualty

(1959)
FACTS: Haumschild and Gleason were married in Wisconsin, their domicile. Haumschild was injured
in California while riding a motor truck driven by Gleason. Their marriage was later annulled. An
action for recovery of damages was filed by Haumschild in Wisconsin. Continental alleges that under
California law, a spouse is immune from suit by the other spouse.
HELD: The law of the domicile ought to be applied in any issue of incapacity to sue based upon family
relationship. The policy reason for denying the capacity to sue (preventing family discord) more
properly lies within the sphere of family law, where domicile usually controls the law to be applied,
than it does tort law, where the place of the injury generally determines the substantive law which will
govern.
The court decided that the law of the place of accident (California) governed the issue of negligence while
Wisconsin law governed the issue of interspousal immunity. The characterization process was taken one
step further by not limiting the classification to the case itself but likewise, to the issue arising from the
case.
The 1969 Restatement 2d adopted depecage & set out a number of factors to be considered in choosing the
applicable law:
a. needs of interstate & international system
b. relevant policies of the forum
c. relevant policies of other interested states & the relative interests of those states in the
determination of a particular issue
d. protection of the justified expectations of the parties
e. the basic policies underlying the particular field of law
f. certainty, predictability, uniformity of results, and
g. ease in determination & application of law to be applied
The consideration of any elements & acceptance by courts of depecage help ease restrictions of single
aspect method.
Courts not compelled to apply entire law to all aspects of case…that might produce egregious results.
Cutting up the case issue by issue is fair & reasonable.
But even if a useful tool in modern choice-of-law analysis, the express reference to depecage in case law,
both in US & the Phil still uncommon.
VII. The Problem of Renvoi
A. Definition
Renvoi – a procedure whereby a jural matter presented is referred by the conflict of laws rules of
the forum to a foreign state, the conflict of laws rule of which, in turn, refers the matter to the
law of the forum or a third state.
23
Remission: reference is made back to the law of the forum
Transmission: reference to a third state
Renvoi has been employed in cases where the domiciliary and nationality laws are applied to the same
individual in issues involving succession, domestic relations and real properties.
Renvoi:
State A State B
(RP)
Art. 16 Internal law

CC
Conflict-of-
laws rule
B. Various ways of dealing with the Problem of Renvoi
4 Ways of Dealing with the Problem of Renvoi (Prof. Griswold):
1) if the conflicts rules of the forum court refer the case to the law of another state, it is deemed to
mean only the “internal” law of that state (internal law: that which would be applied to a domestic
case that has no conflict-of-laws complications) – rejects the renvoi
2) the court may accept the renvoi and refer not just to another state’s “internal” law but
to the “whole” law (includes choice-of-law rules applicable in multi-state cases)
Aznar vs. Garcia

(1963)
FACTS: The will of Edward Christensen, a domiciliary of the Philippines, was admitted to probate,
and a project of partition was proposed. Edward’s illegitimate child opposed the project of partition
on the ground that the distribution of the estate should be governed by Philippine law. The lower
court found that Edward was a US citizen; hence the successional rights and intrinsic validity of the
will should be governed by California.
HELD: Philippine law should apply. Art. 16 of the Phil. Civil Code provide that the national law of
the decedent governs the validity of his testamentary dispositions. Such national law means the law
on conflict of laws of the California code, which authorizes the reference or return of the question to
the law of the testator’s domicile. The conflict of laws rule in California precisely refers back the case,
when a decedent is not domiciled in California, to the law of his domicile (the Philippines in the CAB).
The Phil. court must apply its own law as directed in the conflict of laws rule of the state of the
decedent.
3) by desistance or mutual disclaimer of JD – the same result as the acceptance of the renvoi
doctrine but the process used by the forum court is to desist applying the foreign law.
4) “foreign court” theory – the forum court would assume the same position the foreign court
would take were it litigated in the foreign state
24
Disadvantage to renvoi: if both courts follow the same theory, there would be no end to the case since the
courts would be referring it back to each other. It gives rise to situations that have been invariably
described as resembling “revolving doors,” a “game of lawn tennis,” a “logical cabinet of mirrors” or a
“circulus inextricabilis.”
Annesley, Davidson vs. Annesley

(1926)
FACTS: The testatrix, a British subject, was a domiciliary of France according to British law, but not
according to French law. She made a will in English form. In the will she disposed of all her property
in favor of her daughter, and stipulated that she had no intention of abandoning her domicile in
England. If she was a domiciliary of France, she could only dispose of 1/3 of her personal property.
HELD: The domicile of the testatrix at the time of her death was French. Applying English law, the fact
of her residence in France coupled with animus manendi showed her intention to abandon her English
domicile even if she had not complied with the formalities required under French law to become a
French domicile.
According to French municipal law, the law applicable in the case of a foreigner not legally domiciled
in France is the law of that person’s nationality, which is British. But British law refers the question
back to French law, the law of the domicile. And according to French law, the French courts, in
administering the movable property of a deceased foreigner who, according to the law of his country
is domiciled in France, and whose property must, according to that law, be applied in accordance with
the law of the country in which he was domiciled, will apply French municipal law, even if he had not
complied with the French requirements for acquisition of domicile.
Optionswhich the forum court may do:

a) accept the renvoi (apply forum law)
b) reject the renvoi (apply the internal law of the foreign state)
c) desistance/mutual disclaimer
d) “foreign court” theory
- the difficulty with the foreign court theory is that the forum court will have to anticipate or guess
how the foreign court will act.
 Renvoi is optional, based on the discretion of the court and the facts of the case.
_______________
C. Usefulness of Renvoi
Renvoi has been used to avoid unjust results.
University of Chicago vs. Dater

(1936)
FACTS: Mr. and Mrs. Price executed a trust deed and promissory notes in favor of University of
Chicago, for a loan secured by Mr. Price and Mr. Dater. They were residents of Michigan; the
mortgage and the notes were also signed there and sent by mail to Chicago. In a suit filed by the
University in Michigan against the spouses Dater and Mrs. Price (Mr. Price having died earlier), the
court ruled that there was no cause of action against Mrs. Price, because under Michigan law a
married woman has no capacity to enter into an obligation such as this, hence the note and trust deed
were void. The question is which law should be applied, Michigan or Illinois law.
HELD: Under the law of Illinois, the capacity of Mrs. Price is governed by Michigan law (as held in the
similar case of Burr vs. Beckler, where the court said that since the contract was completed in Florida,
25
that state governed her capacity to contract). In this case, the contract was complete in Michigan, and it
governs her capacity to contract. Since she was not competent to contract under Michigan law, her
note and trust deed were void.
In the Dater decision, Michigan protected the interest of a Michigan wife especially since Illinois disclaimed
any desire in applying its law. Also, uniformity of results was promoted in spite of discrepancies in the
choice-of-law rules of the involved states. With renvoi, the Dater decision was made dependent on
substantive law and not on the incidental law of the forum.
Objections to Renvoi
Critics:
1) renvoi would place the court in a “perpetually-enclosed circle form which it would never emerge
and that it would never find a suitable body of substantive rules to apply to a particular case.” The
theoretical problem presented is that renvoi is workable only if one of the states rejects it and that
it achieves harmony of decisions only if the states concerned do not agree on applying it the same
way.
Griswold: the objection is based on a false premise; as long as remission is to the state’s internal law alone
there will be a stop to the “endless chain of reference.”
2) Courts may be unnecessarily burdened with the task of identifying the choice-of-law rules of
another state.
Pangalangan: from a practical perspective, the forum court will not use renvoi if, in the first place, it cannot
ascertain what the conflict-of-law rules of the foreign state are.
Inapplicability of Renvoi in a False Conflict
US Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws: renvoi to be used when there is a disinterested forum, to
ensure that only the laws advancing the policies of the interested states will be applied. If the choice-of-law
rules of the state to which reference is made refers the case back to the forum state, the court may use this
situation to determine if both states have an interest in having their laws applied or if there is merely a false
conflict.
Pfau vs. Trent Aluminum Co.

(1970)
FACTS: Trent (a New Jersey domiciliary) agreed to drive Pfau (a Connecticut domiciliary) to Missouri.
While in Iowa, they had a vehicular accident causing injuries to Pfau. Pfau filed suit in New Jersey
against Trent Aluminum Co. (registered owner of the car) for the damages he sustained while a
passenger in Trent’s car. The defense of Trent Aluminum was that Iowa law is applicable, which
provides that the host-driver is not liable to his passenger-guest for ordinary negligence.
HELD: Connecticut and New Jersey law both allow passenger-guest recovery. It appears that
Connecticut’s substantive law allowing a guest to recover form his host’s ordinary negligence would
give it a significant interest in having that law applied to this case. Since Iowa has no interest in this
litigation, and since the substantive laws of Connecticut and New Jersey are the same, this case
presents a false conflict and the Connecticut plaintiff should have the right to maintain an action for
ordinary negligence in New Jersey.
Bellis vs. Bellis

(1968)
26
FACTS: The probate of the will of Texas citizen and domiciliary Amos Bellis was opposed by his 3
illegitimate children in the Philippines for depriving them of their compulsory legitime. However, the
trial court ruled that under Art. 16 of the Phil. Civil Code, the national law of the decedent is to be
applied in testamentary succession. The law of Texas did not provide for legitimes.
HELD: Texas law should apply. The decedent was both a national and a domiciliary of Texas, so that
even assuming Texas has a conflict of law rule providing that the law of the domicile should govern,
the rule would not result in a reference back (renvoi) to Philippine law, but would still refer to Texas
law.
VIII. Notice and Proof of Foreign Law
A. Extent of Judicial Notice
It is the party whose cause of action or defense depended upon the foreign law who has the burden of
proving the foreign law.
Foreign law is treated as a question of fact that should be properly pleaded and proved
In the Phils., judicial notice may be taken of a foreign law with which the court is evidently familiar.
(Delgado vs. Republic) Such familiarity may be because the law is generally known such as American or
Spanish Law from which Phil law was derived or the judge had previously ruled upon it in other cases.
In US, courts are allowed to take judicial knowledge of the law of sister states.
B. Proof of Foreign Law
Foreign law may be proved by presenting either of the ff:

1. an official publication of the law
2. a copy of the law attested by the officer having legal custody of the record or by his deputy. If the
record is not kept in the Philippines, it must be accompanied with a certificate that such officer has
the custody (by the consular officer of the Phil embassy in said state and authenticated by his seal
of office)
Proof of documents executed abroad: any public document executed abroad to be used in the Phils must be
duly authenticated by the Phil. consul attaching his consular seal
Depositions of non-residents in a foreign country: they may be taken—
1) on notice before a secretary of embassy or legation, consul general, consul, vice-consul, or
consular agent of the Phils.
2) before such person or officer as may be appointed by commission or under letters rogatory.
3) before such person which the parties have stipulated in writing
PCIB vs. Escolin

(1974)
FACTS: Case bet. the administrators of the estates of Hodges spouses. W’s administrator sought the
application of Texas law. H’s administrator also used the Texas law but arrived at a different
conclusion.
27
HELD: Case remanded for parties to present proof of the applicable Texas law. The question of what
are the applicable laws of Texas is one of fact and not of law. Foreign laws may not be taken judicial
notice of & have to be proven like any other fact in dispute between the parties in any proceeding with
the rare exception in instances when the laws are within the actual knowledge of the courts, such as
when:
a. they are well and generally known
b. they have been actually ruled upon in other cases before it and none of the parties claim
otherwise
In Re Estate of Johnson
(1918)
FACTS: In the hearing for the probate of the will of J, alleged to be made in accordance with the laws
of Illinois, TC judge took judicial notice of the said foreign law.
HELD: Trial court judge erred in taking judicial notice.

 The judge cannot take judicial notice of the acts of the Legislative Department of US particularly
the various laws of the American states.
 Likewise, Phil. courts cannot take judicial notice of the same under “matters of public
knowledge”.
 The proper rule is to require proof of the Statute whenever it is determinative of the issue/s in
Phil. courts.
Effects of Failure to Plead and Prove Foreign Law
Forum court may:

1. dismiss the case for inability to establish cause of action
2. apply law of the forum (courts conclude that by failing to adduce proof, parties acquiesce to the
application of the forum law since it is the basic law)
3. assume foreign law is the same as law of the forum (processual presumption)
First approach: Dismiss the case
Walton vs. Arabian Oil Co.

(1956)
FACTS: Walton, US citizen, was injured in Saudi Arabia. His complaint did not allege the Saudi
Arabia law nor did he proved the same during the trial. TC ruled in favor of defendant as he did not
take judicial notice of S. Arabian law.
HELD: Because of failure to prove the foreign law, plaintiff loses.

Plaintiff has the burden of proving the law of Saudi Arabia from which he shall base his claim because
under NewYork law, where action was instituted, lex loci delicti is the substantive la applied in tort
cases.
A court abuses its discretion under the New York Civil Practice Act if it takes judicial notice of the foreign law
when it is not pleaded esp. when the party who had the burden to prove the same has not assisted the court in
judicially learning it.
 The applicable tort principles necessary to establish plaintiff’s claim are not rudimentary. In
countries where common law does not prevail, these principles may not exist or maybe vastly
different.
28
Second approach: apply forum law, conclude that parties acquiesce to its application.
Leary vs. Gledhill

(1951)
FACTS: Leary instituted this action in New Jersey to recover the loan contracted in France against G. G
moved to dismiss on the ground that L’s proof were insufficient as there is no pleading or proof of the
law of France where the transaction occurred.
HELD: L can recover despite failure to prove French law. Altho the court recognizes the fact that
France adopts civil law rather than common law principles, the cause of action of L may still be
pursued, as there are 3 presumptions that the court may apply in the CAB. These are:
1, French law is the same as law of the
forum
2. French law, like all civilized countries, recognizes certain fundamental principles (taking of a
loan creates obligation to repay)
3. By failing to prove French law, parties acquiesce to apply forum law
The third presumption does not present any difficulties for it to be universally applied regardless of
the nature of the controversy. This is more favored by the authorities and has been followed in Sturm
v. Sturm.
In CAB, Rights of the parties are to be determined by New Jersey laws which permit recovery on the
facts proven.
Zalamea vs. CA
(1993)
FACTS: Zalamea filed action for damages against TWA. RTC awarded actual and moral damages. CA
denied award of moral damages because there was no fining of bad faith and because overbooking
was an allowed practice in US airlines.
HELD: CA was wrong. The US law or regulation authorizing overbooking was not proved in
accordance with our laws.
 TWA relied solely on the statement of its agent that the Code of Fed. Regulations of Civil
Aeronautics Board allows overbooking.
 No official publication of the said code was presented as evidence.
Written law maybe evidenced by an official publication thereof or by a copy attested by the officer having
legal custody of the record or by his deputy, accompanied by a certificate (made by a Phil. consular officer
and authenticated by his seal of office) that such officer has legal custody.
Third approach: processual presumption
Miciano vs. Brimo

(1924)
FACTS: Action for partition of estate of Brimo, a Turkish citizen. Oppositor claims that proposed
partition is contrary to Turkish law but he failed to prove & present evidence on the said Turkish law.
HELD: In the absence of evidence on foreign law, they are to be presumed the same as those of the
Phils. Oppositor, himself, acknowledges that the foreign law was not proven when he asked for
opportunity to present evidence. He was granted ample opportunity to present competent evidence
and there was no GAOD when the court refused to grant him another opportunity.
29
Suntay vs. Suntay

(1952)
FACTS: A will executed in Amoy by the deceased is sought to be allowed in the Phils. The will was
allegedly recorded and probated by a district court in Amoy.
HELD: Will cannot be allowed. Silvino was unable to adduce the necessary proof under Secs. 1-3 of
Rule 78 in order to probate the will in the Philippines, specifically:
a. the fact that the municipal court of Amoy is a probate court
b. the procedural law of China regarding probate of wills
c. the legal requirements for the execution of a valid will
Although there were unverified answers of the Consul General of China, his answers are inadmissible
because:
a. he does not qualify as an expert on Chinese law on probate procedure (usu. attend to trade
matters), and
b. if admitted, the adverse party will be deprived of their right to cross-examine him
Thus, in the absence of proof, it may be presumed that the probate laws of China are the same as ours
and the will in question does not comply with our probate laws.
CIR vs. Fisher

(1961)
FACTS: Spouses Stevenson are British subjects. H dies leaving W as sole heir. CIR assessed estate tax
on the whole properties of the spouses because English law does not recognize conjugal partnership.
HELD: English law cannot be applied. The pertinent English law that allegedly vests in husband full
ownership of properties acquired during the marriage was not proved by CIR (petitioner). In the
absence of proof, the Court is justified in indulging in “processual presumption” in presuming that the
law of England on the matter is the same as our law.
Board of Commissioners vs. CID

(1991)
FACTS: Board sought the deportation of G who is alleged to be an alien. Marriages of G’s grandfather
and of G’s father all performed in China were not properly proven.
Only self-serving testimonies were allegedly presented. Also, marriages are claimed to be void
according to Chinese law.
HELD: In the absence of evidence to the contrary, foreign laws are presumed to be the same as those of
the Phils. In CAB, there being no proof of Chinese law on marriage, the presumption arises. The Phils.
adhere to the presumption of validity of marriage (A.220 FC) He who asserts the marriage is not valid
under our laws bears the burden of proof to present the foreign law.
In deciding whether to apply forum law or to dismiss the case/rule against the party who failed to prove the
foreign law, court must consider the ff: factors
a. degree of public interest involved

b. accessibility of foreign law materials to the parties
c. possibility that plaintiff is merely forum shopping
d. similarities between forum law and foreign law on the issue involved
30
C. Exceptions to the Application of Foreign Law
1) The foreign law is contrary to an important public policy of the forum

2) The foreign law is procedural in nature
3) Issues are related to property (lex situs)
4) The issue involved in the enforcement of foreign claim is fiscal or administrative
5) Foreign law or judgment is contrary to Good Morals
6) The application of Foreign law will work Undeniable Injustice to the Citizens of the Forum
7) The Foreign law is Penal in Character
8) The application of the Foreign law might endanger the Vital Interests of the State
These exceptions fall under 3 main categories:
1: when local law expressly so provides

2: when there is failure to plead and prove the foreign law or judgment
3: when the case falls under the exceptions to the rule of comity
1. The foreign law is contrary to an important public policy of the forum
“public policy”: no subject or citizen can lawfully commit any act which has a tendency to be injurious to the
public or against the public good.
“public policy technique”: court declines to give due course to a claim existing under a foreign law because
it considers the nature of the claim unconscionable or its enforcement will violate a fundamental principle of
justice, good morals or some deep-rooted tradition.
dismissal on the ground of public policy is not dismissal on the merits and plaintiff can go elsewhere to file
his claim.
Pakistan Intl Airlines v. Ople

(1990)
FACTS: 2 Filipino stewardess-employees of PIA filed a case for illegal dismissal against their employer
in DOLE. PIA’s defense is that under the contract of employment, the parties agreed that the EE-ER
relationship shall be governed by the contract (which provided that Pakistan law shall apply) and not
the Labor Code.
HELD: Public Interest standard was applied. Pakistan law cannot be invoked to prevent the
application of Phil labor laws and regulations to the subject matter of the case. The ER-EE relationship
is much affected with public interest, such that otherwise applicable Phil laws and regulations cannot
be rendered illusory by the parties agreeing upon some other law to govern their relationship.
Also, PIA did not undertake to plead and prove the contents of the Pakistan law on the matter; it must
therefore be presumed to be the same as applicable provisions of Phil law.
Criticisms: courts using public policy exception can disregard the applicable law reached and replace it with
forum law to arrive at its desired result without having to provide the rigorous legal analysis required to
explain the shift. Courts engage in “intolerable affectation of superior virtue”.
2. The foreign law is procedural in nature
Procedural or remedial laws are purely internal matters peculiar only to the State. It would be impractical for
the court to adopt the procedural machinery of another state such as rules on venue, forms and pleadings.
Any individual who submits himself to the jurisdiction of the law of the forum must follow the forum’s rules
of procedure.
31
Problem: courts are tasked to characterize the problem as to whether it is substantive or procedural law
which can be difficult at times, ex. If issue involves statute of limitations or statute of frauds
3. Issues are related to property (lex situs)
The universally-accepted rule is that as to immovable property, it is governed by the law of the place where
it is located.
Phil Civil Code also applies lex situs to personal property. It also applies to cases of sale, exchange, barter,
mortgage or any other form of alienation of property.
WHY? 3 reasons:
a. land & its improvements are within the exclusive control of the State & its officials are the ones
who can physically deal with them
b. following a policy-centered approach, immovables are of greatest concern to the state in which
they are situated
c. demands of certainty & convenience
4. The issue involved in the enforcement of foreign claim is fiscal or administrative
State is not obliged to enforce the revenue law of another.
Revenue laws affect a state in matters as vital to its interests as penal laws. No court ought to hear a case
which it cannot prosecute without determining whether these laws are consonant with its own notions of
what is proper.
Opposition to exception: person should not be permitted to escape his obligations in maintaining the
government by crossing state lines.
5. Foreign law or judgment is contrary to Good Morals
“contra bonos mores” - acts having mischievous or pernicious consequences or against true principles of
morality.
ex. Hiring for killing, bribery of public officials, marriage between ascendants and descendants
6. The application of Foreign law will work Undeniable Injustice to the Citizens of the Forum
7. The Foreign law is Penal in Character
Statute is not “penal” not by what the statute is called by the legislature but whether it appears, in its
essential character and effect, a punishment of an offense against the public.
Penal statutes are all statutes which command or prohibit certain acts, and establish penalties for their
violation and even those which, without expressly prohibiting certain acts, impose a penalty upon their
commission. Revenue laws are not classed as penal laws although there are authorities to the contrary.
This exception is partly remedied under the international law of extradition on the basis of jurisdictional
cooperation and assistance.
8. The application of the Foreign law might endanger the Vital Interests of the State
32
PART THREE: PERSONAL LAW
IX. Nationality
A. Importance of a Personal Law
The individual’s nationality or domicile serves as permanent connection b/w individual & state. Thus, what is
assigned him is a personal law allowing courts to exercise jd or determine the governing choice-of-law rule
on a specific situation or transaction involving him.
Personal law follows the individual. It governs transactions affecting him most (marriage, divorce,
legitimacy, capacity to contract).
The need for personal law arose w/ Italian Medieval city states. Domicile was the only relevant basis for
personal law.
Law of nationality first used in Napoleon Code, then in Austrian Code, which said that laws concerning
states & capacity govern all cities irrespective of residence.
Merits & Demerits of Nationality as Personal Law
Merits:
1) used to establish link b/w individual & state, because laws of each state presumed to be made
for an “ascertained population” .
-since laws considered physical, moral qualities of citizens, laws should apply to citizens wherever
they are
2) an individual’s nationality is easily verifiable from documents.
Demerits:
1) Problems arise with regard to:
a. stateless persons
b. persons with multiple nationalities
c. states w/ diverse legal systems having no single national law
2) a person’s ties to his nation may be so attenuated if he has lived in another country.
- unreasonable for his national law to govern him if he has no shared sense of identity.
Importance of Nationality in the Philippines
Most civil law countries follow the national law theory.
Phil SC: Nationality law theory is a conflict of laws theory by virtue of which JD over the particular subject
matter affecting a person, such as status of a natural born person, is determined by the latter’s nationality.
Art 15 CC expresses the nationality principle.

Art 15: “Laws relating to family rights & duties, or to status, condition & capacity of persons are binding
upon citizens of the Philippines even though living abroad.”
This notion that a person’s private rights should be determined by his political allegiance & not by his
physical location, owes its origin to the awareness of national identity born in the French revolution,
33
B. Determination of Nationality
Each state has prerogative to determine who are its nationals or citizens by its own municipal law.
The Hague Convention on Conflict of National laws: “It is for each state to determine who are its nationals.
This shall be recognized insofar as consistent w/ int’l. convention, int’l. customs, & the principles of law
generally recognized w/ regard to nationality”.
Art 2. Hague Convention: Question on possession of nationality of a particular state “shall be determined in
accordance w/ the law of that state.
Who are Filipino citizens? (Philippine Constitution, Art IV)
1) Those who are citizens of Philippines at time of the adoption of this Constitution
2) Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the Philippines
3) Those born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino mothers, who elect Philippine citizenship upon
reaching the age of majority; and
4) Those who are naturalized in accordance w/ law
1. Natural-born Citizens
Two principles w/c may be followed:
jus soli: looks to the law of the place of one’s birth to determine one’s nationality (followed in many
common law countries).
jus sanguinis: rule of descent or blood. Followed in the Philippines, articulated in the Constitution.
Natural born citizens: citizens of the Philippines from birth w/out having to perform any act to acquire or
perfect citizenship.
Concept broadened by the Constitution to include “those born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino mothers,
who elect Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority”.
Talaroc vs. Uy
(1952)
FACTS: Uy was elected mayor of Manticao, but one of the defeated candidates filed a petition for quo
warranto, alleging that Uy was a Chinese citizen and therefore ineligible for the office.
HELD: Uy is a Filipino citizen, following the citizenship of his mother, who reacquired her Filipino
citizenship upon the death of her Spanish husband. A wife reverts to her former status upon
dissolution of the marriage by the death of her husband, and where the widowed mother herself thus
reacquired her former nationality, her children (she being their natural guardian) should follow her
nationality with the proviso that they may elect for themselves upon reaching majority.
Co vs. Electoral Tribunal of the House of Representatives

(1991)
FACTS: Ong Jr. ran as representative of the 2nd district of Samar and was proclaimed the winner. The
losing candidates filed election protests, claiming that Ong Jr. was not a natural-born citizen.
HELD: Ong Jr. is a natural-born Filipino. He could not have been expected to have formally or in
writing elected citizenship upon reaching majority, because he was already a citizen. His mother was a
34
natural-born citizen, and his father was naturalized when Ong Jr. was only 9 years old. The filing of a
sworn statement or formal declaration is a requirement for those who still have to elect citizenship. For
those already Filipinos when the time to elect came up, there are acts of deliberate choice which cannot
be less binding. Election is both a formal and an informal process, and it has been held that
participation in election exercises constitute a positive act of election of Philippine citizenship.
2. Citizens by Naturalization
Naturalization confers to an alien a nationality after birth by any means provided by the law.
In the Philippines, naturalization is by judicial method, under CA 473, as amended RA 530.
The naturalization process was relaxed under Marcos’ regime. Liberal method, summary inquiry. This,
however, is no longer in force.
Qualifications for Applicants for Naturalization
1) Petitioner must not be less than 21 years of age on date of hearing of petition
2) He must have, as a rule, resided in the Philippines for a continuous period of not less than 10 years
o Why the 10 yr residence requirement?

So government can observe applicant’s conduct & ensure he imbibes principles & spirit
of our Constitution.
o When may period be reduced to 5 years?
a) applicant honorably held office under the Phil gov’t. or under any of its political subdivisions
b) applicant has established a new industry or introduced a useful invention in the Phil
c) Married to a Filipino woman
d) Engaged as teacher in a public or recognized private school not for exclusive instruction of
children of persons w/ particular nationality in any of the branches of education for a period of
2 years
e) Born in the Philippines
3) Must be of good moral character,

& believe in the principles underlying the Phil Constitution &
must have conducted himself in a proper & irreproachable manner during entire period of residence
here in his relations w/ the constituted government as well as w/ the community in w/c he is living
o “Proper & irreproachable” imposes a higher standard of morality than “good moral
character”
o How to prove “irreproachable conduct”? By competent evidence such as testimony of 2
character witnesses well known in community w/ high reputation for probity.
The law requires moral character of highest degree. Being merely a “law-abiding citizen is inadequate.
4) Must own real estate in the Phil worth not less than P5,000, Phil currency, or must have lucrative
trade., profession, or lawful occupation
Yu Kian Chie vs. Republic

(1965)
35
FACTS: Yu Kian Chie, a Chinese national, applied for naturalization, but the Solicitor General
opposed the petition on the ground that Yu failed to prove that he had a lucrative income.
HELD: The petition should be denied. His true income (outside of allowances and bonuses which are
merely contingent) is only P150 a month, which amount does not come up to the category of lucrative,
especially considering that he is a married man.
o What does “lucrative trade, profession, or lawful occupation” mean?

Substantial gainful employment or the obtaining of tangible receipts
lucrative employment: appreciable margin of income over expenses in order to provide for
adequate support for himself & his family in case of sickness, unemployment, disability to work.
o Requirement of ownership of real property: At odds w/ Art XII, Sec. 7 Phil Constitution:
“Save in cases of hereditary succession, no private lands shall be transferred or conveyed
except to individuals qualified to acquire or hold lands of the public domain.”
o Exceptions to prohibition on ownership of land:

a) Save in cases of hereditary succession, no private lands shall be transferred or
conveyed except to individuals qualified to acquire or hold lands of the public domain -
Testamentary succession is not covered by the exception provided in the Constitution.
b) Sec. 2, BP 185 allowing a natural-born citizen who lost his Filipino citizenship to be a
transferee of a private land for residential purposes (not in excess of 1,000 sq. m. urban or 1 ha
rural land)
c) SC broadened exception to prohibition by applying In Pari Delicto doctrine, excluding
from the ban the alien vendee who later becomes a naturalized Filipino
o Additional exceptions thru judicial decisions have been criticized for inviting violation of the
Constitution & disregarding a fundamental policy of allowing no one to reap benefits from an
unlawful act.
5) Must be able to speak & write English or Spanish & any one of the principal Philippine languages
6) Must have enrolled his minor children of school age in any of the public schools or recognized
private schools where Phil history, government & civics are taught or prescribed as part of
curriculum during entire period of residence required of him, prior to hearing of his petition for
naturalization as citizen.
o Children must learn & imbibe customs, traditions & ideals of Filipinos so they’ll become law-abiding
citizenship.
o Compliance & affirmative showing…otherwise, denied.
o Non-compliance because of insufficient finances: denied.
Disqualification for Naturalization
General Rule: Burden of proving disqualification is upon the state.
But SC held that petitioner must prove he has none of disqualifications.
The law must be strictly construed against applicant because naturalization is a privilege, not a right.
Possible causes for Disqualification:

1) crime involving moral turpitude (act of bareness, vileness, depravity in private and social life in
general; contrary to conduct of honesty, modesty or good morals)
36
2) if applicant does not deal with and receive Filipinos in his home and visit Filipino homes in a spirit of
friendship and equality without discrimination
3) applicant’s conduct of keeping wife and children in a neighboring country and only visiting them (lack
of sincere desire to embrace Filipino customs and traditions)
4) if it is not fully established that applicant’s nation grants reciprocal rights to Filipino citizens
C. Procedure for Naturalization
The following are the steps for naturalization:
a) a declaration of intention to become a citizen must first be filed, unless the applicant is exempted
from this requirement (Secs. 5 and 6, Com. Act No. 473).
b) The petition for naturalization must then be filed (Sec. 8, Com Act No. 473)
c) After publication in the Official Gazette or newspaper of general publication the petition will be
heard (Sec. 9, Com. Act No. 473 as amended)
d) If the petition is approved, there will be a rehearing two years after the promulgation of the
judgment awarding naturalization (Sec. 1, Rep., Act No. 530)
e) The last step will be the taking of the oath of allegiance to support and defend the Constitution and
the laws of the Philippines (Sec. 11, Com. Act No. 473, amended)
Declaration of Intention
When: One year before petition is filed

With whom: File with office of the Solicitor
General
How: Declaration under oath of bona fide intention to become Philippine citizen
Exemptions to Filing of Declaration of Intention:
1) persons born in the Philippines and who have received their primary and secondary education in
public or private schools recognized by the Government, and not limited to any race or nationality
2) those who have resided continuously in the Philippines for a period of thirty years or more before
filing their application
3) the widow and minor children of an alien who declared his intention to become a citizen of the
Philippines and dies before he is actually naturalized.
Requirement is mandatory, absolute prerequisite to naturalization. Failure is fatal. Void for noncompliance
with law.
Watt vs. Republic: In cases where petition is exempt, statement to his exemption and reasons should
appear on the petition so the public maybe prepared to object to any evidence on this regard.
Which court has jurisdiction?

RTC of province has exclusive jurisdiction on which petitioner has resided for at least one year immediately
preceding filing of person.
Effect of Naturalization on Wife and Children
37
Section 15, C.A. 473 states that::

“Any woman who is now or may hereafter be married to a citizen of the Philippines, and who might herself
be lawfully naturalized shall be deemed a citizen of the Philippines.
Minor children of persons naturalized under this law who have been born In the Philippines shall be
considered citizens thereof.
A foreign-born minor child, if in the Philippines at the time of naturalization of the parent, shall automatically
become a Philippine citizen, and a foreign-born minor child, who is not in the Philippines at the time the
parent is naturalized, shall be deemed a Philippines citizen only during his minority, unless he begins to
reside permanently in the Philippines when still a minor, in which case, he will continue to be a Philippine
citizen even after becoming of age.
A child born outside of the Philippines after the naturalization of his parent shall be considered a Philippine
citizen, unless within one year after reaching the age of majority, he fails to register himself as a Philippine
citizen at the American Consulate of the country where he resides, and to take the necessary oath of
allegiance.”
Vivo vs. Cloribel

(1968)
FACTS: Chinese wife, Chua and her minor children arrived in the Phils from Hkong. Her husband
applied for naturalization in the Phils. Wife and children applied for indefinite extension of stay. Sec of
Foreign Affairs allowed the change of their status from temporary visitors to special non-immigrants
for 2 years. Commissioner of Immigration refused their extension. The Foreign Affairs Sec. denied
their appeal and they were advised to leave the Phils. Chua filed action for mandamus to implement
the first ruling of the Secretary but this was denied. Chua 38efilled alleging that her husband will be
granted Filipino citizenship so they were also due for eventual conversion.
HELD: The wife, under Sec. 15 of the Revised Naturalization Law, will not automatically become a
Filipino citizen upon her husband’s naturalization as she must still show that she possesses all the
qualifications and none of the disqualifications for naturalization. But her having misrepresented that
she will stay for a brief period but her intention was really to stay for a long time, demonstrated her
incapacity to satisfy the qualifications under Sec. 2 which provides that she must be of good moral
character and must have conducted herself in a proper and irreproachable manner during the entire
period of her stay. She also failed to satisfy the requirement of continuous residence for 10 years in the
Philippines (actual stay: Oct. 16 ’60 – June ’62)
As to the children: The law requires that they must be dwelling in the Philippines at the time of the
naturalization of the parent. Since prior to their father’s naturalization, they were already required to
leave the country, they cannot be said to be lawfully residing here.
Also, they cannot be allowed to extend their stay. The period of stay of temporary visitors cannot be
extended without first departing form the Islands. They cannot also claim that they should be allowed
extension until the father’s oath taking because their allowed stay was for a definite period up to a
fixed day.
Moy Ya Lim vs. Commissioner of Immigration

(1971)
FACTS: In 1961, Lau, a Chinese, was permitted to stay in the Philippines for 1 month to visit her
grandfather. After repeated extensions, she was allowed to stay until Feb. 1962. However, on Jan. 1962
she married a Filipino. Commissioner ordered her to leave and sought her deportation. Spouses filed
appeal in SC.
38
HELD: Under Sec. 15 of CA 473, an alien woman marrying a Filipino, native born or naturalized,
becomes ipso facto a Filipina provided she is not disqualified to be a citizen of the Phils under Sec. of
the same law. Likewise, an alien woman married to an alien who is subsequently naturalized here
follows the Philippine citizenship of her husband the moment he takes his oath as Filipino, provided,
that she does not suffer from any of the disqualifications under Sec. 4.
This ruling reversed a prior decision of the SC (Burca vs. Republic) which held that the alien woman married
to a Filipino must first file a petition for citizenship alleging that she possesses all the qualifications and none
of the disqualifications mandated by law.
No Judicial Declaration of Philippine Citizenship
A declaration of Phil citizenship may not be granted in an action for declaratory relief nor under the Civil
Code provision (Art. 412) on correction of entry in the Civil Registry.
But the rule was relaxed in later decisions. A petition for correction of errors in the entry of the Civil Registry
even for a change of citizenship or status may be granted provided that an appropriate action is made
wherein all parties who may be affected by the entries are notified and represented and there is a full blown
adversary proceeding.
Tan Yu vs. Republic: There can be no action or proceeding for the judicial declaration of the citizenship of
an individual.
D. Loss of Philippine Citizenship
CA 63, as amended by RA 106, provides that a Filipino citizen may lose his citizenship in any of the following
ways:
1) Naturalization in foreign countries
Frivaldo vs. COMELEC

(1989)
FACTS: Frivaldo was elected governor of Sorsogon and assumed office. The League of Municipalities
of Sorsogon filed for annulment of his election on the ground that he is a US citizen and therefor
incapable of holding public office. Frivaldo admitted that he was a naturalized US citizen in 1983 but
he underwent naturalization only to protect himself from then Pres. Marcos. Sol Gen supported
respondent’s contention that he is a US citizen because he did not repatriate himself after his
naturalization in the US
HELD: Frivaldo lost his Filipino citizenship. If Frivaldo really wanted to disavow his US citizen
citizenship & reacquire Phil. citizenship, he must do so under our laws. Under CA 63, Phil. citizenship
may be reacquired through:
1. direct act of Congress
2. naturalization
3. repatriation
The alleged forfeiture of US citizenship because of his active participation in the elections is between
him and the US; it could not have resulted to automatically restoring his Filipino citizenship which he
earlier renounced. At most, he could be said to be a stateless individual. Also, although the Special
Committee to hear repatriation cases under LOI 270 has not yet been convened, F should have waited
for such or seek naturalization by legislative or judicial process.
Frivaldo vs. COMELEC

(1996)
FACTS: Frivaldo took his oath of allegiance under PD 725 on June 30 ’95, much later than he filed his
certificate of candidacy. He now claims Filipino citizenship through a valid repatriation
39
HELD: Frivaldo reacquired his Filipino citizenship and is now eligible to assume the office as
governor. Law does not specify any particular date or time when candidate must possess citizenship
unlike that of residence and age. It can also be said that Frivaldo’s repatriation retroacted to the date of
his filing his application in Aug. 1994.
Labo vs. COMELEC

(1989)
FACTS: Labo was elected mayor of Baguio. Lardizabal filed a petition for quo warranto alleging that
Labo is not a citizen.COMELEC declared that he was a citizen but the CID ruled that he is not since the
Australian Govt said that he is still a naturalized Australian citizen.
HELD: Labo is not a citizen of the Phils because he lost the same by performing the ff acts under CA
63:
1. naturalization in a foreign country
2. express renunciation of citizenship
3. subscribing to an oath of allegiance to support the Consti and laws of a foreign country.
Even if it is to be assumed that his naturalization was annulled because his marriage to an Australian
was found to be bigamous, this does not automatically restore his citizenship. He must reacquire it by
direct act of Congress, by repatriation or by naturalization. None of these methods were done. Under
PD 725, repatriation may be done by applying with the Special Committee on Naturalization and if the
application is approved, applicant must make an oath of allegiance to the Republic of the Phils before
a certificate of registration is issued by the CID.
2) Express renunciation of citizenship

Aznar vs. COMELEC
(1990)
FACTS: Osmeña filed a COC for provincial governor of Cebu but was declared ineligible (upon
petition of Aznar) for being a US citizen, as shown by an Alien Certificate of Registration. Osmeña
alleges that he is a Filipino citizen being the child of a Filipino, holder of a Phil. passport, a resident of
the Phils. since birth, and a registered voter.
HELD: Osmeña is a Filipino citizen. Aznar failed to present proof that O lost his citizenship by any of
the modes under CA 63; he merely relied in the Alien Certificate of Registration in concluding that O
has been a naturalized US citizen. Phil. courts are only allowed to determine who are Filipino citizens,
but have no power to determine who are persons considered as American citizens under US laws.
Also, the mere fact that he has an ACR does not mean that he is no longer a Filipino; the renunciation
needed to lose Phil. citizenship must be “express.”
3) By subscribing to an oath of allegiance to support the constitution or laws of a foreign country

upon attaining twenty one years of age or more, subject to certain exceptions
4) by rendering service to, or accepting commission in, the armed forces of a foreign country,
subject to certain exceptions
5) by having been declared by competent authority, a deserter of the Philippine armed forces in
time of war, unless subsequently, a plenary pardon or amnesty has been granted
6) in the case of a woman, upon her marriage to a foreigner, if by virtue of the laws in force in her
husband’s country, she acquires his nationality
7) cancellation of the certificate of naturalization
40
The Judge may cancel the naturalization certificate issued and the registration in the Civil Registry, upon
motion made in proper proceedings by Sol Gen, on any of the following grounds:
a) if it shown that said naturalization certificate was obtained fraudulently or illegally;
b) if the person naturalized shall, w/in the 5 yrs next following the issuance of said certificate, return
to his native country or to some foreign country & establish his permanent residence there;
Provided that the fact that person naturalized remain for 1 year in his native country of former
nationality, or 2 years in any country, shall be considered as prima facie evidence of his intention of
taking up his permanent residence therein
c) If the petition was made on an invalid declaration of intention
d) If it is shown that the minor children of the person failed to graduate from recognized public or
private high school where the required subjects are taught, through the fault of the parents either
by neglecting to support or by transferring them to another school.
Certified copy of decree canceling certificate forwarded to the Office of the President & the Solicitor
General.
e) If it is shown that the naturalized citizen allowed himself to be used as dummy in violation of the
Constitution or law requiring Philippine citizenship as a requisite for exercise, use or enjoyment of a
right, franchise or privilege.
Only a Grant of Political Privilege:
Judgment directing issuance of certificate of naturalization is a mere grant of political privilege. Neither
estoppel nor res judicata may be invoked to bar the state from initiating an action for cancellation or
nullification of certificate of naturalization issued.
If shown to have been obtained by fraud or illegal means, the certificate may be cancelled. Decision in
naturalization case does not constitute res judicata.
Republic vs. Li Yao

(1992)
FACTS: Li Yao was a naturalized Filipino citizen, but the Sol Gen filed a petition to cancel his
certificate of naturalization on the ground that he obtained such certificate through fraudulent means.
One of the grounds was tax evasion.
HELD: A certification of naturalization may be cancelled if it was subsequently discovered to have

been obtained by misleading the court upon any material fact. And a naturalization proceeding is not
a judicial adversary proceeding, such that a decision therein is not res judicata as to any matter that
would support a judgment canceling a certificate of naturalization on the ground of illegal or
fraudulent procurement thereof.
E. Problems in Applying the Nationality Principle
1. Dual or Multiple Citizenship
Each state determines who its nationals are in accordance w/ the rule in the Hague Convention on Conflict
of National Laws.
Questions on WON a person possesses the nationality of a certain state are to be determined in accordance
w/ the state’s internal law.
It is possible that a person can be claimed as national of 2 or more states.
41
Situations w/c may result to dual nationality:

Application of jus soli & jus sanguinis
1) Child born of
o parents who are nationals of country applying jus sanguinis
o in a country applying jus soli
has dual nationality
2) Filipino citizen who marries an alien may acquire citizenship of his or her spouse if the spouse’s
national law so allows.
But a Filipino citizen who marries an alien shall retain Philippine citizenship, unless by his or her act or
omission, he is deemed under the law, to have renounced it by taking an oath of allegiance to the spouse’s
country or by express renunciation.
3) Another instance of dual or multiple nationality is the case of an individual who is naturalized
citizen of another state but has not effectively renounced his former nationality.
In determining rights of an individual who may claim multiple nationality in a third state, the ICJ applied
principle of “effective nationality.”
Nottebohm Case
(1955)
FACTS: Liechtenstein brought a case against Guatemala in the ICJ for breach of its obligations under
international law and asking for reparations in behalf of Nottebohm. It is the position of Liechtenstein
that Nottebohm acquired Liechtenstein citizenship which would entitle him to its diplomatic
protection.
HELD: Liechtenstein is not entitled to extend protection to Nottebohm, because when N applied for
naturalization, there is nothing to indicate that such application was motivated by any desire to
dissociate himself from the Government of his country, Germany. He had been settled in Guatemala
for 34 years, and it was the main seat of his interests and business activities.
In contrast, his actual connections with Liechtenstein were extremely tenuous. No settled abode and
no prolonged residence at the time of application; the application shows that he was a mere visitor and
his visit is of a transient character. There is an absence of any bond of attachment between N and L
and, on the other hand, the existence of a long-standing and close connection between him and G, a
link which his naturalization in no way weakened.
Oh Hek How vs. Republic

(1969)
FACTS: Oh Hek How, a Chinese citizen, applied for naturalization in the Philippines which was
granted. A certificate of naturalization was issue in his favor but the Government appealed, claiming
that it was issued before the Minister of the Interior of Nationalist China issued the permission for a
valid renunciation of Chinese citizenship. Oh Hek How argues that such permission is not among the
requirements under our law for the naturalization of an alien.
HELD: The permission of the Minister of the Interior of China is required before a certificate of
naturalization can be issued in favor of Oh Hek How. The question of how a Chinese citizen may strip
himself of that status is necessarily governed by the laws of China, not that of the Philippines. As a
consequence, a Chinese national cannot be naturalized as a citizen of the Philippines, unless he has
complied with the laws of China requiring previous permission of its Minister of the Interior for
renunciation of nationality.
42
2. Statelessness
Understood in two senses: (Geneva Convention)
a) De jure stateless person: refers to an individual who has been stripped of his nationality by his own
former government w/out having opportunity to acquire another.
Problem of statelessness began during WW II & worsened under Nazi regime in Germany & in
USSR.
b) De facto stateless person: individual possessed of a nationality but whose country does not give
them protection outside their own territory.
- commonly called “refugees”.
Vietnam War: Masses of people escaped from Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos without any travel documents,
identity papers or any form of identification normally granted by government.
Conventions to Alleviate Problems of Stateless Persons:
1) 1951 Geneva Convention on Status Refugees
-provided some basic rights of stateless persons
2) 1954 UN Conference on the Elimination or Reduction of Future Statelessness
3) Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness

- enumerates conditions under w/c an individual would not lose his or her nationality upon the risk of
becoming stateless should a new nationality not be proved: i.e. divorce, adoption, naturalization,
expatriation.
Convention also prohibits states from depriving nationals of identity:
1) as punishment or
2) as discriminatory instrument for political, religious or ethnic reasons
Major objective: Remedy situation of children born w/out acquiring any nationality, i.e. when a child is born
in a country following jus sanguinis principle of parents who are citizens of a jus soli country.
Convention mandates that:

*jus sanguinis country grant its nationality to a person born w/in its territory if he would otherwise be
stateless.
*jus soli country to extend its nationality to a person who would otherwise be considered stateless when
one of his parents is a citizen of the contracting state.
Kookooritchkin vs. Solicitor General

(1948)
FACTS; Kookooritchkin, a native-born Russian who claims to be a stateless refugee, filed a petition for
naturalization. The petition was granted, for which the SolGen appealed, saying that Kookooritchkin
is not a stateless person.
HELD: K is a stateless person. His testimony, aside from being uncontradicted, is supported by the
well-known fact that the ruthlessness of modern dictatorships has scattered throughout the world a
large number of stateless refugees or displaced persons, without country and without flag. Knowing
the history, nature and character of the Soviet dictatorship, it would be technically fastidious to
require further evidence of K’s claim that he is stateless than his testimony that he owes no allegiance
43
to the Russian Communist government and, because he has been at war with it, he fled from Russia to
permanently reside in the Philippines.
X. Domicile
A. Definition
Municipal law concept of domicile (Art. 50, CC):
natural persons: the place of habitual residence

juridical persons: determined by the law creating or recognizing it; and in its absence shall be
understood as the place where their legal representation or place of business is.
Conflict-of-laws definition of domicile (Restatement): the place with which a person has a settled
connection for certain legal purposes, either because his home is there or because that place is assigned
to him by law.
Justice Story: the place of true, fixed permanent home and principal establishment, and to which, whenever
he is absent, he has the intention of returning.
A person may live in a place where he is not domiciled. To acquire a domicile, there must be concurrence of
1) intention to make it one’s domicile and
2) physical presence.
“Residence” simply requires bodily presence. It is a relatively more permanent abode of a person, while
residence applies to a temporary stay of a person in a given place (Koh vs. CA).
Domicile is permanent in nature; it is not as transient and temporary as residence.
2 Requisites for domicile:

1) physical presence
2) intent – actual intent, not merely floating intent
 In order to establish new domicile, it is not necessary to prove intent to stay indefinitely, as long
as the intent to abandon the old domicile is apparent.
 In domicile of choice, intent is important
 In constructive domicile, there is no intent because the domicile is chosen by the law for the
person
 The motive for leaving and the length of stay in the new domicile is not relevant in the
determination of domicile of choice
 Habitual residence: “bridge” between residence and domicile
You can only have one domicile; intention to return or stay in one place permanently; residence
is not permanent- one can have one or more residences
_______________
Caasi vs. CA
(1990)
FACTS: Miguel ran for mayor of Bolinao, Pangasinan and won. His opponent filed a petition for
disqualification, alleging that Miguel is a green card holder and hence, a permanent resident of the US
and not of Bolinao.
44
HELD: Miguel’s possession of a green card disqualified him from running for mayor. His application
for immigrant status and his possession of a green card are conclusive proof that he is a permanent
resident of the US despite his occasional visits to the Philippines.
A candidate who is a green card holder must have waived his status as a permanent resident or
immigrant of a foreign country in order to be qualified to run for elective office in the Philippines.
In this case, there is no proof that he had waived his status as a permanent resident or immigrant of
the US before he ran for election as mayor of Bolinao; hence he was disqualified to run for that office.
Overt act which will convince the state that he renounced his permanent residency must be done;
Law in 2004, allows dual citizenship[
Uytengsu vs. Republic

(1954)
FACTS: Uytengsu was born in the Philippines of Chinese parents. He went to the US to study; but in
one of his vacations in the Philippines he applied for naturalization, during the pendency of which he
returned to the US to finish his studies. Upon his return, his application was granted; the Government
appealed the grant because under the law an applicant for naturalization is required to reside
continuously in the Phils. from the date of filing of the petition up to the time of his admission to
Philippine citizenship. Uytengsu’s defense is that since he has been domiciled in the Philippines
during the period of his application, he was also a resident for that period.
HELD: “Residence” and “domicile” each has, in strict legal parlance, a meaning distinct and different
from each other. The essential distinction between resident and domicile is this: the first involves
the intent to leave when the purpose for which he has taken up abode ceases, while the other has
no such intent, the abiding is animo manendi. They are not to be held synonymous; residence is an
act, while domicile is an act coupled with intent. The question of domicile is not involved in
determining whether a person is a resident of a state or country.
Residence- intent to leave after the accomplishment of the purpose; an act

Domile- an act coupled with an intent; intent to stay and return after the accomplishment of such
statement.
Animos amendi- intent to stay
B. Merits and Demerits of Domicile
Merits:
1) preferred primary connection between a person and a state because it satisfies the very purpose
for having a personal law (in common law countries) – it provides an adequate basis for him to
exercise rights therein and the state to impose duties on him
2) also suitable for countries with a federal system of government – the law of the domicile is
the law of the place where the individual lives
Demerits:
1) one’s domicile is not ascertainable without first resorting to the courts to establish whether
or not there is animo manendi
2) the notion of domicile differs widely in different states (some distinguish between domicile and
residence; others attribute different meanings of domicile for different purposes)
45
3) if the law of domicile of origin is given overriding significance, it may create the problem of
attenuated connection (similar to the use of nationality as personal law)
The Philippines follow the nationality law theory, but there are instances when our courts refer to the
domicile of an individual in order to determine his rights or obligations. Example is
1) when the litigant is an alien whose country of origin follows the domiciliary principle; or
2) where the situation concerns stateless persons, or those with dual or multiple nationalities; or
3) when an alien domiciled in the Philippines executes a will abroad.
C. General Rules on Domicile
1) No person shall be without a domicile; his domicile of origin prevails until the acquisition of a new
one.
2) A person cannot have two simultaneous domiciles (a person can have only one domicile for a given
purpose or a given time under the law of a particular state, but it should not be assumed that that
determination will be binding on other states or on the same state for other purposes).
3) Domicile establishes a connection between a person and a particular territorial unit.
4) The burden of proving a change of domicile is upon whoever alleges that a change has been
secured.
Romualdez-Marcos vs. COMELEC

(1995)
FACTS: Imelda Marcos filed her Certificate of Candidacy for representative of 1 st District of Leyte. A
petition to disqualify her was filed on the ground that she lacked the 1-yr resident requirement as
provided for in the Constitution. In her COC, she placed “7 months”(changed it to since childhood;
alleged that it was an honest misrepresentation) as length of residence.
HELD: For purposes of election law, residence is synonymous with domicile. Mere absence of an
individual from his permanent residence without the intention to abandon it does not result in a loss
or change of domicile.
While Marcos held various residences for different purposes during the past four decades, none of
these purposes unequivocally point to an intention to abandon her domicile of origin in Tacloban,
Leyte. She did not lose her domicile of origin upon her marriage to Pres. Marcos; what she gained was
actual residence.
Ujano vs. Republic

(1966)
FACTS: Ujano was a naturalized US citizen who returned to the Philippines as a visitor and petitioned
to reacquire Philippine citizenship. The petition was denied because he did not have the required
residence.
HELD: Residence, for naturalization purposes, has been interpreted to mean the actual or
constructive permanent home or domicile. He cannot be said to have established his domicile here
although he is actually present because his allowed stay as a visitor is only temporary and he must
leave when the purpose of his coming is done.
46
In re Dorrance’s Estate
(1932)
FACTS: Dorrance was born in Pennsylvania. He worked and resided in New Jersey, transferred to
Philadelphia and then returned to New Jersey. Later he was able to buy an estate in Pennsylvania,
where he stayed with his family until his death. During his lifetime he expressed that he intends to
remain a domiciliary of New Jersey. Pennsylvania assessed inheritance tax on his estate.
HELD: He was domiciled in Pennsylvania at the time of his death. A man cannot retain a domicile in
one place when he has moved to another, and intends to reside there for the rest of his life, by any
wish, declaration or intent inconsistent with the facts of where he actually lives and what he means to
do.
D. Kinds of Domicile
3 Kinds of Domicile:
1) Domicile of origin: a person’s domicile at birth. A legitimate child’s domicile is that of his father,
while an illegitimate child’s is that of his mother.
2) Domicile of choice: also called voluntary domicile, is the place freely chosen by a person sui
juris. There must be concurrence of physical presence in the new place and unqualified
intention to make that place one’s home.
A problem deciding the issue of domicile of choice is the degree of permanence of abode.
Difference between domicile of origin and domicile of choice: lies in a) conditions necessary for
abandonment and b) capacity for revival.
Reverter or revival doctrine: presumption that domicile of origin revived once the domicile of choice is
given up, before a new one is required.
Velilla vs. Posadas

(1935)
FACTS: Velilla, the administrator of the estate of Moody, appealed the inheritance tax assessed against
the estate on the ground that the decedent was not domiciled in the Philippines. Moody went to
Calcutta and Paris before his death, and he died in India.
HELD: He was a domiciliary of Manila. Domicile in the Civil Code is defined as the place of habitual
residence, which was Manila in the CAB. There was no statement from Moody, oral or written that he
adopted a new domicile while he was absent from Manila. To establish abandonment, he must show
his deliberate and provable choice of new domicile coupled with actual residence and declared or
proved intent that it should be his permanent abode. This was not proven.
White vs. Tennant

(1888)
FACTS: White and his wife lived in West Virginia, but agreed to sell their house there with the
declaration, intent and purpose of making Pennsylvania their home. Upon reaching Penn., they had to
go back to West Va. on account of the wife’s illness but White went to Penn. everyday to look after his
stock. Upon his death, the administrator paid the whole of the estate to the widow according to West
Va. law. However, if Penn. law was applied, ½ of the estate would go to White’s siblings. The law of
his domicile governs the distribution of his estate.
47
HELD: Pennsylvania was his domicile at the time of his death. Two things must concur to establish
domicile—the fact of residence, and the intention of remaining. These two must exist in
combination. When one domicile is definitely abandoned, and a new one selected and entered
upon, length of time is not important; one day will be sufficient, provided the animus exists.
3) Constructive domicile: domicile assigned to persons incapable of choosing their own domicile by
operation of law. Includes minors, mentally disabled, married women.
Minors or infants are indubitably incapable of choosing their own domicile. Their domicile automatically
changes when their father’s domicile changes. Minors take the domicile of their mother upon the death of
their father.
A person who has a mental disability is also assigned a constructive domicile. It is presumed that a person
with a mental disability cannot acquire a domicile of choice because of his inherent inability to decide where
to make his home.
Special Problems in Domicile of Choice vis-à-vis Constructive Domicile
1) domicile of people kept under physical or legal compulsion
2) domicile of married women seeking to acquire separate domicile from their husbands
People under Compulsion: traditional view is that he is in that place not as a result of his volition. Examples
are military personnel, prisoners and people with disabilities who are confined in institutions.
Caraballo vs. Republic

(1962)
FACTS: Caraballo, an American staff sergeant in the US Air Force stationed in Clark Air Base, filed a
petition for adoption of a Filipino child. The petition was denied on the ground that he was not
qualified to adopt, him being a non-resident alien.
HELD: Actual or physical presence or stay of a person in a place, not of his free and voluntary
choice and without intent to remain there indefinitely, does not make him a resident of the place.
Caraballo is disqualified to adopt because he is a non-resident alien. His stay in the Philippines is only
temporary, and is merely the result of his assignment as staff sergeant.
In recent decisions, courts have held that a person under compulsion should not be barred from
proving that he has developed the required unqualified intention to establish his permanent
abode in such place. The fact of compulsion is reduced to just one of the factors in determining whether
intent, in fact, exists.
Married Women: based on the concept of unity of identity of spouses, the wife was presumed to take the
domicile of the husband.
Go Chen and Go Lek vs. Collector of Customs

(1932)
FACTS: Tan Bon, a Chinese citizen, entered the Philippines as the wife of a Chinese merchant. She
asked her minor children from a previous marriage to join her here, but they were not allowed entry.
HELD: The minor children cannot enter the Philippines. A Chinaman’s Chinese wife and her minor
children do not enter the Philippine Islands through their own right, but by virtue of the right of the
48
husband and father. Since Tan Bon did not enter the Philippines by her own right but by virtue of her
husband, she is not entitled to bring in her minor children by another Chinaman who never had legal
residence in the Archipelago. The mere fact of their being children of Tan Bon confers on them no right
of entry, inasmuch as she herself did not enter of her own right, and they cannot base their right on
hers.
De La Vina vs. Villareal and Geopano

(1920)
FACTS: Geopano filed a complaint in CFI Iloilo against de la Vina, her husband, for divorce on the
ground of infidelity. De la Vina opposed, saying that CFI Iloilo has no JD over the case considering
that he resides in Negros, such that Geopano must also be considered a Negros resident, because the
domicile of the wife follows that of the husband.
HELD: CFI Iloilo has JD. Where the husband has given cause for divorce, the wife may acquire
another and separate domicile from that of her husband.
*There are exceptions to the rule that the domicile of the wife is determined by that of her husband, one
of which is that the wife may acquire another and separate domicile from that of her husband where
the theoretical unity of husband and wife is dissolved, as it is by the institution of divorce proceedings;
or where the husband has given cause for divorce; or where there is a separation of the parties by
agreement, or a permanent separation due to desertion of the wife by the husband or attributable to
cruel treatment on the part of the husband; or where there is a forfeiture by the wife of the benefit of
the husband’s domicile.
Modern view (married women): dispenses with the presumption that the wife’s domicile is the
same as her husband’s. Each party establishes his or her own domicile completely independent
of each other. As a result, the wife need not show that her husband has given cause for divorce or legal
separation to have a separate domicile.
XI. Principles on Personal Status and Capacity
A. Definition
Personal capacity
 Includes both condition and capacity

 Embraces matters as the beginning and end of personality, capacity to have rights,
capacity to engage in legal transactions, protection of personal interests, family relations, also
transactions of family law such as marriage, divorce, separation, adoption, legitimation and
emancipation, and succession.
Juridical capacity: fitness of a man to be the subject of legal relations
Capacity to Act: power to do acts with legal effects
ART. 37, Civil Code:

Juridical capacity, which is the fitness to be the subject of legal relations, is inherent in every natural
person and is lost only through death. Capacity to act, which is the power to do acts with legal effect, is
acquired and may be lost.
In case of Filipinos, Art. 15 of the CC states that personal status and capacity follows the nationality
principle.
49
In case of aliens, courts may refer to their national law or domiciliary law.
Recto vs. Harden

(1959)
FACTS: H engaged the services of R, as counsel in her suit against her husband for support and for
preservation of her rights in the conjugal partnership in contemplation of a divorce suit. However, the
spouses entered into a compromise agreement to defeat the claim of R in attorney’s fees. H moved to
dismiss on the ground of invalidity of the contract of service because divorce is contrary to Phil law.
HELD: R should be paid his fees. H spouses are US citizens and their status and the dissolution thereof
are governed by the laws of the United States, which sanction divorce. Therefore, contract is not
contrary to public policy.
B. Legislative Jurisdiction Distinguished from Judicial Jurisdiction
Status once established by the personal law of the party, is given universal recognition.
Status, capacity, and rights and duties, brought into existence by State A and conferred in a natural or
juridical person under its jurisdiction, should be recognized by State B, without any exception or qualification
imposed by the latter, except by some definite or protected rule of municipal law.
- Aliens can sue and be sued in our courts even on issues relating to status and capacity. However, the
applicable law is their personal law.
Barnuevo vs. Fuster

(1913)
FACTS: Fuster and Yanez separated. After 10 years, Y filed for divorce on the ground of F’s adultery.
Court granted decree of divorce. Fuster contests jurisdiction of the court to issue the said decree.
HELD: Phil court has jurisdiction. The authority and jurisdiction of courts are not a matter of private
law of persons but of the public or political law of the nation. The jurisdiction of courts and other
matters of procedure are of public nature and are submitted to the territorial principle.
Note: The doctrine is no longer controlling. Divorce is considered a violation of public policy so that courts
cannot issue the same.
C. Beginning and End of Personality
The determination of the exact moment personality begins is referred to the individual’s personal law.
Art. 40, CC
Birth determines personality; but the conceived child shall be considered born for all purposes that
are favorable to it, provided it be born later with the conditions specified in the following
article.
Art. 41, CC
For civil purposes, the fetus is considered born if it is alive at the time it is completely delivered from the
mother’s womb. However, if the fetus had an intra-uterine life of less than 7 months, it is not
deemed born if it dies within 24 hours after its complete delivery from the maternal womb
50
Geluz vs. CA: SC did not allow for recovery of damages for the injury and death of a conceived child which
is still in the mother’s womb. Art. 40 cannot be invoked since it expressly limits the provisional personality
by imposing the condition that the child should be subsequently born alive.
Civil personality is commenced at birth and is extinguished by death. A declaration of death issued
by a competent court is considered valid for all purposes.
Limjoco vs. Intestate Estate of Fragante: HELD: SC ruled that the estate of a deceased applicant can be
granted a CPC to avoid injustice or prejudice resulting from the impossibility of exercising such legal
rights & fulfilling such legal obligations of the decedent as survived after his death unless the legal
fiction, that the estate is considered a person, is indulged.
D. Absence
The domestic laws of states do not treat absentees alike.
Three ways of dealing with the problem:
1. there is a rebuttable presumption that a person is dead after he has been absent for a number of years
2. a person’s unexplained absence is judicially investigated and established which results in legal effects
similar to those of death
3. a judicial decree shall have to be issued declaring a person dead before legal effects of death can take
place
*Phil law follows the rebuttable presumption (1).
Art. 390, CC
After the absence of 7 years, it being unknown whether or not the absentee still lives, he shall be
presumed dead for all purposes, except for those of succession.
The absentee shall not be presumed dead for the purpose of opening his succession till after the
absence of 10 years. If he disappeared after the age of 75 years, an absence of 5 years shall be
sufficient in order that his succession may be opened.
Art. 391, CC
The ff. shall be presumed dead for all purposes, including the division of estate among the heirs:
(1) a person on board a vessel lost during sea voyage, or an airplane which is missing, who has
not been heard of for 2 years since the loss of the vessel or airplane.
(2) A person in the armed forces who has taken part in war and has been missing for 2 years
(3) A person who has been in the danger of death under other circumstances and his existence has
not been known for 2 years
However, for specific purposes, our laws require that a declaration of death be issued before certain legal
effects of death arise ex. Contracting a subsequent marriage but the periods are reduced to 2 years.
The legal effects of absence and restrictions on his capacity are determined by his personal law.
E. Name
A person’s name is determined by law and cannot be changed without judicial intervention.(Art. 376, CC)
Case law shows that courts have allowed petitions on grounds that the name—
51
1. is ridiculous or tainted with dishonor or extremely difficult to pronounce

2. when the change is necessary to avoid confusion
3. when the right to a new name is a consequence of change in status
4. a sincere desire to adopt a Filipino name to erase signs of a former alien nationality which unduly
hamper social and business life
Confusion as to one’s paternity has been held to justify the court’s denial of a petition for change of name.
Whether an alien’s change of name is valid depends solely on his personal law.
F. Age of Majority
The legal disability and rights attached to minority are aspects of personal status. It is the individual’s
personal law which determines whether he has reached the age of majority.
RA 6809 lowered the age of majority from 21 – 18 years but parental consent for contracting marriage is
still required until the age of 21.
G. Capacity
A person’s ability to act is governed by his personal law. Rules on capacity of an individual to bind himself
by contract with other persons or by unilateral acts are the very core of the rules that identify his legal
position. The incapacities attached to his legal status go with him wherever he is.
The general rule on capacity is subject to several exceptions. These include liability in tort, which is subject
to the law of the place of the tort and the restrictions on the contracting capacity of a married woman.
Insular Government vs. Frank

(1909)
FACTS: Insular Govt entered into an employment contract with Frank in Illinois when he was still a
minor under Phil law but not under Illinois law. Frank breached the contract so IG sued him.
HELD: Illinois law should apply. Matters bearing upon the execution, interpretation and validity of a
contract are determined by the law of the place where the contract is made.
This case should have been resolved as a capacity case instead of as a contract case (characterization).
PART FOUR: CHOICE OF LAW PROBLEMS
XII. Choice of Law in Family Relations
Man & woman may decide to marry in a country other than that of their nationality & come home. Issue of
validity of marriage & legal consequences may be raised (Legal consequences such as personal & property
relations, status & rights of children, use of surname & right to inherit).
Family law is an area of substantive law which reflects strong policies of state often based on values highly
held by society. Family relations give rise to grave individual & societal concerns.
A. Marriage
Family Code Definition:
52
Art 1. “Marriage is a special contract of permanent union b/w man & woman entered into in accordance w/
law for the establishment of conjugal & family life.
It is the foundation of the family & an inviolable social institution whose nature, consequences & incidents
are governed by law & not subject to stipulation except that marriage settlements may fix property relations
during the marriage w/in limits provided by this Code.”
Juxtaposed w/ Art15 CC, w/c states that questions on family rights, duties, status, conditions & capacity are
governed by lex nationalii, the importance of such definition is realized.
Marriage is a special contract as distinguished from an ordinary contract:
1) entered into by a man & a woman

2) both at least 18 years of age
3) solemnized by a person specifically authorized by law
4) a permanent union unless one party dies, or marriage is annulled or declared void in special
circumstances
5) cannot be abrogated, amended or terminated by one or both parties at will
6) nature & consequences as well as incidents are governed by law & not subject to stipulation by
parties unlike ordinary contracts
7) violation of marital obligations may give rise to penal or civil sanctions while breach of conditions of
ordinary contract can be ground for an action for damages
1. Philippine Policy on Marriage and the Family
Art XV. Sec. 2: Marriage as an inviolable social institution, is the foundation of the family & shall be
protected by the state.
Presumption of validity: The Philippines establishes a presumption of validity to give stability to marriage
especially in Conflicts of Law problems.
Art 220. CC. In case of doubt, all presumptions favor the solidarity of the family. Thus every intendment of
law or facts lean toward the validity of marriage, the indissolubility of marriage bonds, legitimacy of
children, the community of property during marriage…
Goal: Guide courts, strengthen family, & emphasize state interest in its preservation
2. Extrinsic Validity of Marriage
This is governed by lex loci celebrationis.
Extrinsic validity covers questions on formalities or external conduct required of parties for legally valid
marriage.
Art 2. Hague Convention on Celebration & Recognition of Validity of Marriages: Formal requirements
governed by law of state of celebration.
General rule: All states recognize as valid marriages celebrated in foreign countries if the formalities
prescribed there were complied with.
PHILIPPINES, Formal Requirements of Marriage
Art 3. FC sets the ff requirements:
1) Authority of solemnizing officer

2) Valid marriage license except in cases provided in Ch 2 of this title
3) Mariage ceremony w/c takes place w/ the appearance of contracting parties before the solemnizing
officer & their personal declaration that they take each other as husband & wife in the presence of
not less than 2 witnesses of legal age
53
Lex Loci Celebrationis (expressed in Art 26 FC):

“All marriages solemnized outside the Philippines in accordance w/ the laws in force in the country where
they were solemnized, and valid there as such, shall also be valid in this country…”
Adong vs. Cheong Seng Gee

(1922)
FACTS: The late Cheong Boo’s estate is being claimed by Cheong Seng Gee, who says that he is the
legitimate child of the decedent with Tan Dit, whom the decedent allegedly married in China.
HELD: The validity of the Chinese marriage cannot be recognized. There is no competent testimony
what the laws of China in the Province of Amoy concerning marriage were in 1895. There is lacking
proof so clear, strong and unequivocal to produce a moral conviction of the existence of the alleged
Chinese marriage.
People vs. Mora Dumpo

(1935)
FACTS: Dumpo married Hassan, and then married Sabdapal without having her previous marriage
annulled. As a defense to an allegation of bigamy, Dumpo claimed that her 2 nd marriage was void
because her father did not consent thereto.
HELD: Dumpo is not guilty of bigamy. The 2nd marriage was null and void because the consent of her
father was not obtained. It is an essential element of bigamy that the alleged 2 nd marriage, having all
the essential requisites, would be valid were it not for the existence of the first.
Wong Woo Yu vs. Vivo

(1935)
FACTS: Wong Woo Yu alleged before the Board of Special Inquiry that she was allegedly married to a
Filipino, Blas, in a ceremony in China. The new Board ordered Wong to be excluded from the country,
on the ground that her marriage to Blas was bereft of substantial proof.
HELD: Wong should be excluded. Art.15 of our Civil Code provides that the laws relating to family
rights or to the status of persons are binding upon Philippine citizens, though living abroad. Even if
the marriage of Wong to Blas before a village leader is valid in China, the same is not one of those
authorized in our country. Under Sec. 4 of Gen. Orders 68 (now Art. 71 CC), a marriage contracted
outside the Philippines which is valid under the law of the country in which it was celebrated is also
valid here; but there was no proof presented on the applicable law of China. Therefore it may be
presumed to be the same as our law.
Apt vs. Apt

(1947)
FACTS: The marriage of the Apts (both Germans) was celebrated in Argentina by proxy. The wife, a
domiciliary of England, filed a petition for the nullification of their marriage on the ground that proxy
marriages are not valid in England. It is, however, valid in Argentina.
HELD: The marriage is valid. The English law on marriage is locus regis actum. If a marriage is good by
the laws of the country where it is effected, it is good all the world over, no matter whether the
proceeding or ceremony which constituted marriage according to the law of the place would or would
not constitute marriage in the country of domicile of one or other of the spouses. Since the marriage
54
was performed in Buenos Aires and in accordance with its laws, and since proxy marriage is only a
form of the ceremony and not an essential requisite, the marriage should be upheld.
Exceptions to Lex Loci celebrationis: The Civil Code (Art 71) enumerates bigamous, polygamous or
incestuous marriages as exceptions to the lex loci celebrationis rule.
The Family Code (Art 26) widens these exceptions.
A foreign marriage although valid in the foreign country where it was entered into will be void in the
Philippines if:
1) either or both parties are below 18

2) it is bigamous or polygamous
3) a subsequent marriage is performed w/out recording in the Civil Registry & registry of Properties
the judgment of annulment or declaration of nullity of first marriage, the partition o& distribution of
the properties of the spouses & the delivery of presumptive legitimes
4) there was a mistake as to identity of the contracting party
5) one of the contracting parties was psychologically incapacitated to comply with the essential
marital obligations
6) the marriage is incestuous
7) marriage is void by reason of public policy
Note that the exceptions put in issue the parties’ capacity to enter into marrriage, thus, relating to a
substantive requirement.
Since the personal law of the parties governs questions of intrinsic validity of marriages b/w Filipinos
abroad, the above enumerations are exceptions to the lex loci celebrationis precisely because they are
controlled by lex nationalii.
3. Intrinsic Validity of Marriage
Intrinsic requirements refer to capacity or general ability of a person to marry, for instances defined by
requirements of age & parental consent, but it does not refer clearly to an individual’s being permitted to
marry a specific person or person of a determinate class.
What law controls intrinsic requirements?
The parties’ personal laws—either domicile or nationality.
Municipal laws of each state provides substantive requirements of marriage.
Philippine Law sets the following substantive or essential requisites:
1) Legal capacity: must be 18 years of age & not barred by any impediment to marry each other
2) Consent freely given: in the presence of an authorized solemnizing officer
Matrimonial consent: Parties are, at least, not ignorant that the marriage is a permanent union.
Mixed marriages: the law that governs substantive validity is national law of parties.
Art 38. FC.: Though valid in a foreign country certain marriages may be void in the Philippines on grounds
of public policy, such as the ff:
1) b/w collateral blood relatives, whether legitimate or illegitimate up to the 4th civil degree
2) b/w step-parents & stepchildren
3) b/w parents-in-law & children-in-law
55
4) b/w adopting parent & adopted child

5) b/w surviving spouse of adopting parent & adopted child
6) b/w surviving spouse of adopted child & adopter
7) b/w adopted child & legitimate child of adopter
8) b/w adopted children of same adopter
9) b/w parties where one, w/ intention to marry the other, killed the person’s spouse or his or her
own spouse
Marriages Between First Cousins:
Marriage of 1st cousins is no longer incestuous but still void ab initio on the ground of public policy.
It is submitted that our prohibition against marriage of 1st cousins be limited only to Filipino nationals
because many countries allow such marriages.
Marriages b/w foreigners whose national laws allow marriage of 1 st cousins should be considered as valid in
the Phil under the principle that the lex nationalii controls capacity & presumption in favor of validity of
marriage, as expressed in Art 220.
Hague Convention on validity of Marriages allows a contracting state to refuse recognition of the marriage
if:
1) one of spouses was already married (unless marriage has subsequently become valid by virtue of
dissolution or annulment of previous marriage)
2) spouses were related to one another by blood or by adoption, in the direct line or as brother or
sister
3) one of spouses had not attained the minimum age required for marriage nor acquired the
necessary dispensation
4) one of the spouses did not have the mental capacity to consent
5) one of the spouses did not freely consent to the marriage
Sottomayor vs. de Barros

(1877)
FACTS: Sottomayor and de Barros are both Portuguese and first cousins. Under Portuguese law they are
incapable of contracting marriage. They were married in London. Sottomayor filed a petition to have the
marriage declared invalid.
HELD: The marriage is invalid. The law of a country where marriage is solemnized must decide all
questions relating to the validity of the ceremony by which the marriage is alleged to have been constituted;
but as regards questions on personal capacity, it must depend on the law of the domicile, and if the laws of
any country prohibit its subjects within certain degrees of consanguinity from contracting marriage and
treats such as incestuous, this imposes on the subjects a personal incapacity which continues to affect them
so long as they are domiciled in said country and renders such marriage invalid wherever it may have been
solemnized.
In re May’s Estate
(1920)
FACTS: Fannie is Sam’s niece by half blood; they are both Jewish and NY residents. NY prohibits
marriage between uncle and niece, so they went to Rhode Island, where such marriage is also
prohibited except where the parties are Jewish (the Jewish faith allow such marriages). After the
ceremony they went back to NY to live there.
56
HELD: The marriage is valid. The legality of a marriage between persons sui juris is to be determined
by the law of the place where it is celebrated. The general principle is that the rights dependent upon
nuptial contracts are to be determined by the lex loci, subject to 2 exceptions: 1) cases within the
prohibition of positive law, and 2) cases involving polygamy or incest in a degree regarded generally
as within the prohibition of natural law. As to the first exception, there is no “positive law” in New
York which serves to interdict the marriage in Rhode Island of Sam and Fannie, and as to the second
exception, their marriage was not offensive to the public sense of morality, it being allowed by the
Jewish faith.
Instances Where Recognition of Validity of Marriage May be Withheld:
Christianity prohibits polygamous & incestuous marriages but care must be taken to confine doctrine to
cases deemed incestuous by general consent of all Christendom.
The state may resort to ultimate escape device- contravention of a public policy to w/hold recognition of
validity of a foreign marriage.
Rule: Marriages manifestly incompatible with the ordre public of the state of nationality of parties may be
refused recognition.
However, commentators argue that when the non/existence of marriage is merely a preliminary Q arising
incidentally in a case involving an issue not profaning mores of forum (such as tax, property or succession
law) the rule above should not be applied.
In ReDalip Singh: two women claimed that they were lawfully wedded wives of Singh, a native of India who
died intestate in California. They claim to have been lawfully married to him in India over 50 yrs ago while
domiciled there in accordance w/ law of the Jat community.
Under California laws, only 1st wife recognized as legal widow. Wives argue that the polygamous marriages
should be held valid on strength of Art 63 CC: “All marriages contracted w//out the state, w/c would be
valid by the laws of the country in w/c the same were contracted are valid in this state”.
Court, citing English & American cases: Polygamous marriages can be recognized in English law “so as to
confer on the ‘wives’ the status of a wife for the purposes of Sec. 10 of British Nationality & Status of Aliens
Act or for purposes of succession, & upon the children the status of legitimacy.
Marriages Celebrated by a Consular Official

Art. 9 of the relevant Hague convention: Marriage celebrated by a diplomatic agent or consular official in
accordance with his state law shall be considered valid as long as it is not prohibited by the state of
celebration
Philippine law: Marriage of Filipino nationals shall be officiated by Philippine consul general, consul or vice
consul (in w/c case the formal & extrinsic requirements of a valid marriage license & due publication &
registration under Philippine law have to be complied with).
This is said to apply to marriage b/w Filipino national & an alien provided the alien complies with marriage
requisites under his/her national law.
Additional requirements for:
1) aliens - submission of a certificate of legal capacity to contract marriage issued by

diplomatic/consular office
2) stateless persons or refugees- submission of affidavit stating circumstances showing legal capacity
to contract marriage
57
4. Effects of Marriage
Personal Relations between the Spouses
These include mutual support, fidelity, respect, cohabitation & right of wife to use husband’s family name)
What is the governing law? National law of parties
If spouses are of different nationalities, generally, the husband’s national law may prevail as long as it is not
contrary to law, customs, & good morals of the forum.
Art 69 Family Code: Husband & wife have the right to fix family domicile.
 Court, for compelling reasons, may exempt spouse from living with the other.
Djumantan vs. Domingo: Filipino marries Indonesian. They go to Philippines w/ intention of staying here
permanently. Subject of petition: Effect of marriage on wife’s right to stay in the Philippines.
There is no law guaranteeing aliens married to Filipino citizens the right to be admitted, much less to be
given permanent residency, in the Philippines.
“The fact of marriage by an alien to a citizen does not withdraw her from operation of immigration laws
governing admission & exclusion of aliens. Marriage of an alien woman to Filipino citizen does not ipso facto
make her a Filipino citizen & does not excuse her from her failure to depart from the country upon
expiration of her extended stay here as alien”.
Restatement 2nd: The wife who lives w/ her husband has the same domicile as his unless special
circumstances of wife make such result unreasonable.
But, in Ch VIII on Domicile, some legal authorities consider the assignment of constructive domicile to the
wife as invidious discrimination on basis of gender.
Property Relations of Spouses
Hague Conventions on law Applicable to Matrimonial Property: The internal law designated by spouses
before marriage or in absence thereof the internal law of state in w/c both spouses fix their habitual
residence is the governing law on matrimonial property regimes.
Art 80. Family Code: In the absence of a contrary stipulation in a marriage settlement, property relations of
spouses shall be governed by Philippine laws, regardless of the place of the celebration of the marriage &
their residence.
This rule shall not apply:
1) If both spouses are aliens
2) With respect to the extrinsic validity of contracts affecting property not situated in the Philippines &
executed in the country where the property is located
3) With respect to the extrinsic validity of contracts entered into in the Phil but affecting property
situated in a foreign country whose laws require different formalities for its extrinsic validity
Art 80 generally follows lex rei sitae.
What law will govern the property relations of spouses where one is a Filipino citizen 7 the other a
foreigner? It would still be governed by Philippine law.
Change of nationality after Marriage

If one or both spouses change nationality subsequent to marriage, property regime remains unchanged
because of principle of immutability.
58
Hague Convention on Matrimonial Property Regimes. Art 7 : The applicable law continues notwithstanding
any change of their nationality or habitual residence.
extrinsic validity: refers to formal requisites, apply lex loci celebrationis
intrinsic validity: refers to essential requisites, apply personal law of the parties
 In Adong and Wong Woo Yu, the Court did not apply the Philippine policy of presumption of
validity of marriage.
 Question: is a proxy marriage between Filipinos in a state allowing such marriages valid?
Pangalangan: Yes, because it is merely a formal requisite (lex loci celebrationis apply)
________________
B. Divorce and Separation
Divorce: Absolute or Limited
Absolute: termination of legal relationship b/w spouses by an act of law.
Limited: (Legal separation) separation form bed & board w/c does not effect the dissolution of marital ties.
But it modifies the incidents of marriage by relieving spouses of duty of living w// each other.
This does not necessarily affect economic rights & duties since the court may order one to provide for
support. For such purpose, it is essential that court has JD over respondent spouse & the property sought to
be affected by decree.
Local law governs legal consequences of divorce of spouses, nationals of same country, who marry, are
domiciled & divorce.
If any of above factors connected to another state… conflicts problem arises.
Divorce jurisdiction:
Basis of JD of some countries: Domicile of one of the parties or matrimonial domicile
Ratio: Divorce, being a matter of state concern, should be controlled by “law of place w/ w/c person is
most intimately concerned, place where he dwells.
Due process requires that forum court have a substantive contact w/ the relationship w/c it will decide won
to dissolve.
Hague Convention Relating to Divorce & Separation: The granting of divorce or separation must comply w/
the national law of spouses & the law of the place where the application for divorce is made.
Some laws in PRiL have made
1) the right to separation or divorce depend on the national law of the spouses &
2) grounds for divorce subject to law of forum

provided the parties were domiciled there.
Grounds for divorce are dictated by lex fori. Thus, many states refuse to recognize foreign grounds for
divorce unless it corresponds w/ a ground justified by forum law. This is followed whether the traditional or
policy centered choice of law approach is used.
59
1. Divorce decrees obtained by Filipinos
Divorce decrees obtained abroad have no validity, not recognized in Philippine jurisdiction.
BUT a marriage b/w a Filipino & a foreigner is susceptible to divorce if the divorce was validly obtained by
the alien spouse (Art 26 par 2).
Effects:
1. alien is capacitated to remarry
2. Filipino spouse shall likewise have the capacity to remarry under Philippine law
Effect of Provision (Art 26): partial recognition in the Phil of absolute divorce.
o note: Divorce should be obtained only by alien spouse. Otherwise, Art 26 is inapplicable.
o Provision is to remedy the uneven status of Filipino nationals whose alien spouses obtained divorce
abroad & remarried while the Filipino spouse remained married to them in eyes of Philippine law.
Tenchavez vs. Escaño-- my report

(1965)
FACTS: Vicenta and Pastor were married without the knowledge of her parents. Vicenta went to the
US to obtain a divorce, which was granted by the Nevada Court; she married an American and
subsequently acquired American citizenship. Pastor sued Vicenta for legal separation and damages.
Vicenta’s defense is that there was a valid divorce issued by the Nevada court.
HELD: The divorce decree obtained in the US is not valid, because at the time it was issued, Vicenta,
like Pastor, was still a Filipino citizen. She was then subject to Philippine law. Philippine law cannot
recognize a foreign decree of absolute divorce between Filipino citizens, for this would violate
declared public policy.
Van Dorn vs. Romillo

(1985)
FACTS: Van Dorn, a Filipina, married American Upton. Ten years later they were divorced in the US;
subsequently, van Dorn remarried. Upton filed an action against Van Dorn in the Philippines, asking
for an accounting of certain alleged conjugal properties.
HELD: The divorce decree is valid and binding upon Upton. Even if divorce is not valid in the
Philippines for being contrary to public policy, only Philippine nationals are covered by the policy
against absolute divorces. Aliens may obtain divorces abroad, which may be recognized in the
Philippines provided valid according to their national law.
Pilapil vs. Ibay Somera

(1989)
FACTS: Pilapil and Geiling were married in Germany, but were later divorced. A few months later,
Geiling filed a complaint for adultery which was dismissed; it was refiled by the fiscal.
60
HELD: Geiling has no legal standing to commence the adultery case because the person who initiates
the adultery case must be an offended spouse, meaning he must still be married to the accused spouse
at the time of the filing of the complaint. Because of the divorce decree, Geiling is no longer the
husband of Pilapil; hence he had no more legal standing to commence the adultery case (no longer an
offended “spouse”).
Quita vs. Court of Appeals

(1998)
FACTS: Quita and Padlan were married in the Philippines, but Quita filed for divorce in California
which was granted. She remarried twice after the divorce. Upon Padlan’s death, Quita made claims
upon his estate as the surviving spouse and heir of Padlan, alleging that since Padlan was a Filipino
citizen, he remained married to her in spite of the divorce decree.
HELD: Quita’s right to inherit from Padlan depends on her citizenship at the time the divorce was
decreed. If she was no longer a Filipino citizen at the time of their divorce, the divorce would be valid
as to her and will be recognized in the Philippines, and she would lose her right to inherit.
 Tenchavez: 2 Filipinos, divorced abroad – not recognized in the Philippines (Art. 15 CC, nationality
principle)
 Van Dorn: 1 Filipino, 1 foreigner, divorced abroad – recognized (Art. 15 CC, estoppel)
 Pilapil: 1 Filipino, 1 foreigner – recognized (nationality principle)
________________
2. Validity of Foreign Divorce between Foreigners
Hague Convention on Recognition of Divorce & Legal Separation:
A foreign divorce will be recognized in all contracting states if at the date of institution of proceedings:
a) Respondent or petitioner had his habitual residence there, or
b) Both spouses were nationals of this state, or
c) If only the petitioner was a national, he should have his habitual residence there
US Full Faith & Credit Clause of Constitution: A sister state has the duty to recognize a divorce pronounced
in a sister state, when both spouses are domiciled there.
If only the plaintiff is domiciled there: Other conditions (i.e. service of process to defendant) must be
fulfilled
Effect of Divorce Rendered by a Foreign Country: not covered by Full faith & credit clause
o but would be recognized under the same circumstance that a sister state’s divorce decree is given
recognition.
paramount consideration: jurisdiction of foreign court based on parties’ domicile.
Philippine Law on Recognition of Foreign Divorce Decree: No provision on recognition of divorce decree b/w
non-Filipinos;
o but such will be recognized under international comity, provided it does not violate a strongly held
policy of the Philippines
C. Annulment and Declaration of Nullity
61
Effect: Affects status & domestic relations of parties.
Distinction from Divorce
Divorce Annulment and

Nullity
The ground occurs Based on defects

after marriage present at time of
celebration celebration
Grounds for Annulment & Nullity:
o States w/ traditional choice-of-law approach: follow the lex loci celebrationis
o States w/ policy-centered approach: follow the law of state of marital domicile (considered to have
the most significant interest in status of persons)
In both approaches, lex fori (which is crucial in divorce) does not play substantial role because the action
turns on the validity of the marriage.
Note that in either traditional or policy-centered approaches, lex fori is not used; recall that lex fori can be
used in divorce.
Both lex loci celebrationis and law of marital domicile can provide jurisdictional basis, but only one can be a
choice-of-law in the determination of the annulment decree.
Which states can claim adequate jurisdictional basis to hear a conflicts annulment or nullity case?
a) state where marriage was celebrated
b) place of marital domicile
Wheaton vs. Wheaton: Even a court which acquires personal JD over parties can grant an annulment case
(US case).
62
Sample conflicts Annulment Case

o M&F, domiciliaries of STATE A, both 18 years
old
o marry in STATE B w/out knowledge of their
parents
o suit for annulment was brought in STATE C
(place of M’s residence)
State C can exercise JD over the case but what is the

governing law?
 Traditional choice-of-Law rules: will find sufficient

ground for the challenge
If the lex loci celebrationis
(STATE B) requires parental consent for a
valid marriage
 Most Significant Relationship Approach: will not

yield a ground for annulment.
State C can conclude that since law of STATE
A (state of marital domicile) gives people
their age full capacity to marry, no ground for
annulment
The Choice of Law rule of STATE C will be irrelevant
D. Parental Relations
What law determines legitimacy of a child? Personal law of parents - either domicile or nationality.
Most countries: father’s personal law

German law: law of head of family
Law on parental relations include:

o Paternity
o Filiation
What law governs legitimacy of child in the Philippines? National law of the parents.
If parents are of different nationality: national law of father is controlling.
In the PHILIPPINES:
o Personal law of the child is the national law of the father if the child is legitimate or legitimated.
o Personal law of the child is the national law of the mother if the child is illegitimate.
o Legitimacy of the child determined by the national law of the father if both parents are not Filipino.
In the UNITED STATES:

as per Second Restatement On Legitimacy of the American Law Institute
o Child is legitimate if this is his status under the local law where the parent is domiciled when the
child’s legitimacy is claimed OR when the parent acknowledged the child as his own.
Parental Authority over the Child

-from concept of patria potestas of Roman law
63
What law controls? Father’s personal law controls rights & duties of parents & children.
o Art. 211 FC: Reference to father’s personal law may result in joint exercise of parental authority
o Art. 176 FC: Personal law could grant parental authority to mother of illegitimate children
Scope of Parental Authority:
1) care & rearing
2) action a parent may file against another for child custody
3) requirements for parental consent of child’s marriage
E. Adoption
Definition: The act by which relations of paternity & affiliation as legally existing b/w persons not so related
by nature.
It is a judicial act w/c creates b/w 2 persons a relationship similar to that w/c results from legitimate
paternity & affiliation.
Early societies considered it as a means of perpetuating a house or cult threatened by extinction.
Original purpose: solace for childless or people who lost children
Recent time: broader, more humane aim
Social & moral purpose: extend protection of society (in the person of adopter) to the orphan.
Thus, persons eligible to adopt expanded
What law governs? lex domicilii

The adoption process affects status of parties, necessarily governed by lex domicilii.
What if prospective adoptive parent is domiciled in one state & the child is domiciled in another? Twin
problems of jurisdiction and choice-of-law.
o If the main object of adoption is the welfare of the child, the personal law of the child is the best
choice-of-law to govern his rights
o But the personal law of the child cannot be successfully used to invoke jurisdiction if his domicile is
merely constructive or if he is a citizen of a state but he doesn’t reside there.
Child’s personal law as basis for exercise of jurisdiction weakened in situations where child’s domicile is:
o merely constructive, or
o if he is a citizen of a state but he doesn’t reside there (there is little basis for court to protect child
interest competently)
The continuous movement of people in & out of countries should also be factored in.
Can an alien adopt a child in the Philippines?

General Rule: not allowed
Reason: Different family orientation, cultures, customs & traditions could pose problems of adaptation for
child.
Exceptions:
o Art 184. Aliens who have some relationship with the child by consanguinity or affinity
o RA 8552 (Domestic Adoption Act Of 1998)
64
These two introduced significant changes in adoption law.
Change Pertinent to Conflict Law
1) Aliens who have resided in the Philippines for 3 years prior to the date of filing the application for
adoption, and maintains residency until decree of adoption is granted QUALIFIED TO ADOPT
2) Other requirements:
a) certification of legal capacity
b) certification that the State law would allow entry of the adoptee as an adopted child of
the adopter.
These other requirements may be waived if the adoptee is related by consanguinity or affinity to the
o adopter, or
o his/ her spouse as specified by law.
RA 8043:
Before this, adoption of Filipino children by foreigners was done pursuant to Rules & Regulations on Foreign
Adoption & bilateral agreements.
RA 8043 regulate the adoption of Filipino children by

o aliens, or
o Filipino citizens permanently residing abroad.
RA 8043 was passed in compliance with our treaty obligation as a signatory to the Hague Convention on
Protection of Children & Cooperation In Respect of Intercountry Adoption.
Convention pursues modern concept of adoption: After possibilities of adoption for placement of child within
state of origin have been exhausted, intercountry adoptions may be placed in the best interest of the child.
Republic of the Philippines vs. CA

(1993)
FACTS: Hughes is married to Lenita, a Filipina who was later naturalized as an American citizen.
They filed a petition to adopt the 3 nephews and niece of Lenita, which was granted.
HELD: Hughes is not qualified to adopt since he does not fall under the exceptions in Art. 184 of the
Family Code. While Lenita, as a former Filipino, is qualified to adopt under that provision, the
adoption decree still cannot be granted because of the requirement in Art. 185 that spouses must
jointly adopt. They cannot do this in CAB because Hughes is not qualified under the law.
Effects Of Adoption
What law governs rights of adopted child & other effects of legal adption? (law that governed the creation
of adoption)
2 different legal orders depending on which law governed the creation of adoption:
1) If Personal law of adopter applied—same law governs effects of adoption.
2) If personal law of child applied—such law will cease to regulate the resulting parent-child relations;
it will yield to the personal law of adopting parents.
Philippine courts:
o Adoption relates to a civil rights of adopted child
65
o Does not effect changes in political rights, including eligibility to acquire adopter’s citizenship
In the Philippines, principles of enforcement & recognition of a foreign judgment governs, because the
decree granting an adoption is in the form of a foreign judgment.
Uggi Lindamand Therkelsen vs. Republic

(1964)
FACTS: Therkelsen (a German) and his wife Erlinda (a Filipino), filed a petition to adopt Erlinda’s
natural child. The application was denied on the ground that an alien cannot adopt a Filipino unless
the adoption would make the Filipino minor a citizen of the alien’s country.
HELD: The application should be granted. Being a permanent resident here, Therkelsen is not
disqualified to adopt under our laws; to deny the application on the above stated ground would be to
impose a further requisite on adoptions by aliens beyond those required by law. The citizenship of the
adopter is a matter political, not civil in nature, and the ways in which it should be conferred lay
outside the ambit of the Civil Code.
Ng Hian vs. Collector of Customs

(1916)
FACTS: Marcosa married Ng Chion Te. She adopted his 2 children by a previous marriage and
brought one of them to the Philippines to study. The child, Ng Hian, was refused entry into the
Philippines.
HELD: Ng Hian may enter the Philippines by virtue of being adopted by one who has a right to do so.
In the case of Ex Parte Fong Yim, it was held that a Chinese merchant domiciled in the US has the right
to bring into this country with his wife minor children legally adopted by him in China, where it is
shown that the adoption was bona fide, and that the children have lived as members of his family and
have been supported by him for several years.
XIII. Choice of Law in Property
A. The Controlling Law
The first issue to resolve in conflicts cases involving property is whether it is a movable or an immovable,
because upon this determination will depend the controlling legal system.
Immovables: regulated by lex situs; underlying this is the characterization of immovable property as an
isolated object of rights so that the interests of various persons are determined by the law of the place
where the land is situated.
The connecting factor is the immovable itself and not the parties concerned.
Movables: not necessarily governed by the lex situs; its transfer may be controlled by the a) lex domicilii, b)
lex situs, or c) lex loci actus (the proper law of transfer).
Lex domicilii: the rights over the movables are governed by the law of the owner’s domicile.
Lex situs: the state where the property is situated has the sole power to decide the validity and effects of
the transfer of property. Also, the parties’ legitimate expectations are protected. The rationale for this is that
being physically part of the country, it should be subject to the laws thereof. The situs is the place most
closely and significantly related to the issue in question.
66
Alternatives to lex domicilii and lex situs:
a) Lex loci actus: law of the place where the transaction was completed
b) the proper law of the forum: law of the state which has the most real connection with the transfer
In the Philippines, real and personal property are “subject to the law of the country where it is situated”
(Art. 16 CC). a problem regarding classification will arise only when the property is located in a foreign
country which has a law that distinguishes between real and personal property.
For real property, there is very little room for choice of law, because of the emphasis on lex situs.
Why?
1) Property physically a part of the particular state, and that state can exercise JD over it (traditional
approach)
2) There is need for reliable records (to protect the sanctity of records)
________________
B. Capacity to Transfer or Acquire Property
This is governed by the law of the place where the property is located.
Llantino vs. Co Liong Chong

(1990)
FACTS: The Llantinos leased real property to Chong, a Chinese national (but subsequently naturalized
as a Filipino), for 60 years. The Llantinos filed an action to quiet title, claiming that the lease contract
was invalid for circumventing the constitutional prohibition on the acquisition of land by aliens.
HELD: The lease contract was valid, and Chong had the right to hold by lease the property involved
although at the time of execution of the contract, he was still a Chinese national. In CAB there was no
option to buy the leased property in favor of Chong. There is nothing in the record to indicate any
scheme to circumvent the constitutional prohibition.
Aliens are not completely excluded by the Constitution from use of lands for residential purposes.
Since their residence in the Philippines is temporary, they may be granted temporary rights, such as a
lease contract which is not forbidden in the Constitution. The only instance where a lease contract may
be considered invalid is where there are circumstances attendant to its execution which are used as a
scheme to circumvent the constitutional prohibition.
Cheesman vs. IAC

(1991)
FACTS: Thomas Cheesman (an American) was married to a Filipina, Criselda. The spouses later
separated; but Thomas brought this action to annul the sale of real property made by Criselda in favor
of Padilla. He alleged that the sale is void for lack of his consent. The property sold was bought by
Criselda using her personal funds, and was registered in her name only.
HELD: The sale was valid. He has no capacity to question the sale of the property by his wife on the
theory that in doing so he is merely exercising the prerogative of a husband in respect of conjugal
property. This would permit indirect controversion of the constitutional prohibition. If the property
were to be declared conjugal, this would accord to the alien husband an interest and right over the
land, which is not granted to him under the Constitution.
67
C. Extrinsic and Intrinsic Validity of Conveyances
The lex situs law applies to the following:
1) formalities of a contract to convey property
2) the essential validity of the transfer (unless the lex intentionis is clearly established)
3) the effects of the conveyance or properties
D. Exceptions to the Lex Situs Rule
3 Exceptions to the Lex Situs rule:
1) where the transaction does not affect transfer of title to or ownership of the land (proper law: lex
intentionis or lex voluntatis)
Liljedahl vs. Glassgow

(1921)
FACTS: Bailey secured a debt payable in Iowa to Liljedahl; as security, he mortgaged his land in
Colorado. Bailey sold this land to Glassgow, with the provision in the deed of sale that the grantee
agrees to pay the mortgagee. Glassgow sold the land to a third party. Under Iowa law, Glassgow
became bound to pay the mortgage, but not under Colorado law.
HELD: Iowa law should apply, and Glassgow should pay Liljedahl. Instruments of conveyance, as
they relate primarily to title, are to be construed according to the law of the situs. But personal
covenants or agreements in instruments of conveyance will be given effect according to the law of the
place where the same is executed and to be performed.
2) in contracts where real property is offered by way of a security for the performance of an
obligation such as loan, where the security is merely an accessory contract (the principal contract
is governed by the rules on ordinary contract, while the accessory contract on the land is governed
by the rule of lex situs)
3) testate or intestate succession and capacity to succeed, which are governed by the national law of
the decedent
Under a policy-centered approach, the forum court is not bound to look to the law of the situs when the
situs of the movable property at the time of the transfer was insignificant or accidental.
Also, when the issue involves considerations other than the validity and effect of the transfer itself, the
courts may look to the law of another state which has a real interest in applying its law.
Rudow vs. Fogel: since the issue did not relate to land title but to whether the conveyance would result in a
constructive trust among family members, the law applicable is the law of the domicile of the trustor and
trustee instead of the lex situs of the property.
E. Situs of Certain Properties
1. Situs of Personal Property for Tax Purposes
68
The maxim mobilia sequuntur personam cannot be applied to limit the right of the state to tax property
within its JD. It yields to established facts of legal ownership, actual presence, and control elsewhere, and
cannot be applied if it would result in inescapable and patent injustice.
2. Situs of Money
Leon vs. Manufacturers Life Insurance: having been endorsed in an annuity in Canada under a contract
executed in that country, Canada was the situs of the money, hence the probate court of Manila has no JD
over the funds.
3. Situs of Debts
2 Kinds of Movable Property:
1) choses in possession – embraces all types of tangible physical objects
2) choses in action – refers to intangible objects
a) mere rights of actions

b) rights represented by a document (capable of delivery and susceptible to negotiation as a
separate legal entity)
Harris vs. Balk

(1905)
FACTS: Harris and Balk are both North Carolina domiciliaries. Harris owed Balk a sum of money.
When he was in Baltimore he was served a writ of garnishment, it appearing that Balk has a debtor
there. He paid pursuant to the writ, but when he returned to N. Carolina, Balk sued him for recovery
of his indebtedness. Harris pleaded the recovery of the Maryland judgment.
HELD: The attachment of Harris’ debt is valid, and the North Carolina court should give credit to the
Maryland judgment. The obligation of the debtor to pay his debt clings to and accompanies him
wherever he goes. He is as much bound to pay his debt in a foreign state when therein sued upon his
obligation by his creditor, as he was in the state where the debt was contracted.
Prof. Beale: this decision did injustice to the creditor, as he has no power to fix the personal presence of his
debtor at one place or another. It is unjust to submit the creditor’s claim to the accident of the debtor’s
presence in one state or another.
4. Situs of Corporate Shares of Stocks
Under the Corporation Code (Sec. 63), shares of stock are personal property and may be transferred by
delivery of the certificate or certificates indorsed by the owner or his attorney in fact. But such transfer shall
not be valid until recorded in the books of the corporation in the manner provided.
CIR vs. Anglo California National Bank

(1960)
FACTS: The Collector of Internal Revenue assessed deficiency income taxes against Calamba Sugar
Estates for the capital gains on the sale of Pampanga Sugar Mills shares of stock. The sales were
conducted in SF, California, and payments were made there.
69
HELD: CSE not liable for income tax on the capital gains. The government cannot impose income taxes
on capital gains where the sale took place outside its territorial JD. Foreign corporations may be levied
income taxes only on income derived from sources within the Philippines. With respect to capital
gains, the place of the sale (which in CAB is California) is also the place or source of the capital gain.
F. Patents, Trademarks, Trade Name, and Copyright
The Philippines is a party to the Union Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property; said convention
states in Art. 8 that a “trade name shall be protected in all the countries of the Union without the obligation
of filing of registration, whether or not it forms part of the trade name.”
Western Equipment and Supply Co. vs. Reyes; although Western equipment has not done business in the
Philippines, it has the right to protect its reputation. The right to the use of the company’s corporate and
trade name is a property right which may be asserted against the whole world.
RA 8293 (Intellectual Property Code): applicant cannot register marks “well known internationally and in the
Philippines, whether or not it is registered here, xxx and is used for identical or similar goods or services.”
Under Sec. 3 of the IPC, any foreign corporation which is a national or domiciliary of a country which is a
party to a convention, treaty or agreement relating to intellectual property rights to which the Philippines is
also a party or extends reciprocal rights to our nationals by law “shall be entitled to benefits to the extent
necessary to give effect to any provision of such convention…”
Philips Export vs. CA

(1992)
HELD: A corporation’s right to use its corporate and trade name is a property right, a right in rem,
which it may assert and protect against the world in the same manner as it may protect its tangible
property, real or personal, against trespass or conversion. It is regarded, to a certain extent, as a
property right and one which cannot be impaired or defeated by subsequent appropriation by another
corporation in the same field.
Emerald Garment Mfg. vs. CA

(1995)
FACTS: H. D. Lee Co., a foreign corporation, filed a petition for cancellation of registration of the
trademark “Stylistic Mr. Lee” used on items of clothing by Emerald Garments, alleging that it so
closely resembled H. D. Lee’s trademark as to cause confusion, mistake and deception on the public as
to the origin of the goods.
HELD: A foreign corporation may have the capacity to sue for infringement irrespective of lack of
business activity in the Philippines on account of Section 21-A of the Trademark Law but the question
of whether they have an exclusive right over their symbol as to justify issuance of the xxx writ will
depend on actual use of their trademarks in the Philippines.
XIV. Choice of Law in Contracts
Contract: meeting of the minds between 2 persons whereby one binds himself, with respect to the other, to
give something or render some service. Parties are bound not only to those expressly stipulated but also to
all the consequences which according to their nature, may be in keeping with good faith, usage and law.
As a gen. rule, unless provided by law or in the agreement, a contract is obligatory in whatever
form it may have been entered into provided that all the essential requisites for validity are present.
70
Principal purposes of contract:

1. protect the reasonable expectations of the parties to the contract
2. secure stability in commercial transactions
A. Contracts Involving a Foreign Element
States, in their municipal laws, have different rules on the formalities of a contract, the capacity of parties,
and the essential requisites for the intrinsic validity of contracts, interpretation and the law governing
execution. Forum court should be aware if there is a law that parties have in mind when they entered into a
contract.
Interpretations of contracts are applied only when the lex loci intentionis cannot be ascertained.
Unlike family law, contract law does not reflect strong state policies or values.
B. Extrinsic Validity of Contracts
Lex loci celebrationis governs the formal or extrinsic validity of contracts. A contract is valid as to form if in
accordance with any form recognized as valid by the law of the country where made, and that no contract is
valid which is not made in accordance with the local form.
Art 17, CC
The forms and solemnities of contracts, wills, and other public instruments shall be governed by the laws of
the country in which they are executed.
As to Contracts entered into by cablegram, telex or fax: Art. 1319, CC states that acceptance made by letter
or telegram does not bind the offeror except from the time it came to his knowledge. The contract is
presumed to have been entered into the place where the offer was made.
C. Intrinsic Validity of Contracts
Intrinsic validity refers to nature, contents and effects of the agreement.
Art. 1318, CC: requisites of a contract

a. consent of the contracting parties
b. object certain
c. cause of the obligation
There are 3 possible laws that will govern intrinsic validity of contracts:
1. law of the place of the making
2. law of the place of performance
3. law intended by the parties
1. Lex Loci Contractus
This refers to the law of the place where the contract is made. This is the place where the last act is done
which is necessary to bring the binding agreement into being so far as the acts of the parties are concerned.
Advantages:
a) relative ease in establishing place of contracting
71
b) in applying it consistently, certainty and stability are achieved.
Disadvantage: it will lead to unjust results when the place of making is entirely incidental or casual and has
no significant relationship with the contract or its performance.
2. Lex Loci Solutionis
This refers to the law of the place of the performance. All matters relating to time, place, manner of
performance, sufficiency of performance and valid excuses for non-performance are determined by lex loci
solutionis because it is undoubtedly related to the contract in a significant way.
Macmillan & Bloedel vs. Valderama & Sons

(1964)
FACTS: Valderama & Sons, thru an n agent, entered into a contract for purchase of railroad equipment
with Macmillan in Canada. Valderama failed to get an import license because the Import Control
Comm failed to act on his application. Macmillan suffered damages because it had to cancel the freight
engagement.
HELD: Lex loci solutionis applies. The general rule governing the validity & construction of a contract &
the rights and liabilities thereunder is that the law of the place of performance applies.
In case of conflict in determining validity, nature and obligation and effect of contract, lex loci solutionis
prevails over lex loci contractus.
The laws of Canada, which is the place of performance, should apply. The failure of the Import
Control Comm. to act on the application of import license cannot constitute a legal excuse for his
failure to perform his obligations under the contract.
3. Lex Loci Intentionis
This refers to the law intended by the parties. When the parties stipulate that the contract be governed by a
specific law, such will be recognized unless there are cogent reasons for not doing so e.g. the choice-of-law
provision is contrary to a fundamental policy of the forum.
Also construction and interpretation of contracts may be agreed upon by parties.
Art 1306, CC
The contracting parties may establish such stipulations, clauses, terms and conditions as they may deem
convenient, provided that they are not contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order or public policy.
Art, 1370, CC
If the terms of the contract are clear and leave no doubt upon the intention of the contracting parties, the
literal meaning of the stipulations shall control.
The law looks at the acts of the parties and the surrounding circumstances which may possibly have exerted
some influence upon their actions and then assumes that their intentions are in harmony with such acts and
circumstances.
Parties are presumed to contemplate to enter into a valid contract. The court should apply the law that will
sustain the contract.
D. Capacity to Enter into Contracts
72
The capacity to enter into contracts is governed by the rule on status and capacity (personal law). In
countries that follow the nationality principle, the national law prevails (art. 15, CC). In countries that follow
the domiciliary principle, law of their domicile governs.
E. Choice of law Issues in Conflicts Contracts Cases
1. Choice of Forum Clause
The parties may stipulate on the venue of the suit in case of litigation concerning the contract.
It is a general rule that plaintiff has the option to choose the venue where the suit is to be filed in action in
personam. However, a case arising from the contract will be litigated only in the forum chosen by the
parties if the choice of forum clause specifically identifies it as the only venue.
Sec. 80, Sec. 3, Restatement Second. If the parties have agreed in writing that an action shall on a
controversy be brought only in another state and it is brought in a court of this state, the court will dismiss
or stay the action, unless:
1. the court is required by statute to entertain the action

2. plaintiff cannot secure effective relief in other state for reasons other than delay
3. the other state would substantially be a less convenient place of trial
4. the agreement as to place of action was obtained by misrepresentation, duress, abuse of
economic power or other unconscionable means
5. it would be unfair or unreasonable to enforce the agreement
Compagnie de Commerce vs. Hamburg Amerika
(1917)
FACTS: Compagnie (french) and Hamburg (Germany) entered into a charter party to transport C’s
goods from Saigon- Europe. Because of the impending war between France & Germany, the ship went
to Manila because Saigon is a French port. C filed for breach of contract. H contested the jurisdiction of
Phil courts to try the case because the contract had a clause directing the settlement of disputes first to
a Board of Arbitration in England.
HELD: Phil. courts have jurisdiction. The parties are free to waive the stipulation if they so desired.
Phil courts cannot be ousted of their jurisdiction by the contractual stipulation in the absence of
averment and proof that under the law of England (place of contracting), compliance with, or an offer
to comply with such a stipulation constitutes a condition precedent to the institution of judicial
proceeding for the enforcement of the contract.
Besides, Hamburg appeared and answered without objecting to the court’s jurisdiction; it also sought
affirmative relief.
King Mau vs. Sycip

(1954)
FACTS: King Mau entered into an agency agreement with the Sycip in New York. King mau was able
to sell 1,000 tons of coconut oil. KM brought an action to collect commission from the sale. Sycip
claimed that the Phil court has no jurisdiction as the contract was entered in New York.
HELD: Phil court has jurisdiction. A non-resident may sue a resident in the courts of this country
where the defendant may be summoned and his property leviable upon execution in case of a
favorable, if final and executory judgment.
It is a personal action for the collection of a sum of money which the CFIs have jurisdiction to try and
decide.
73
HSBC vs. Sherman

(1980)
FACTS: HSBC granted Eastern Book Supply an overdraft secured by the directors of the latter. Eastern
failed to pay. HSBC filed suit in RTC. The defense of the directors is that Phil courts have no
jurisdiction because in the Guarantee Agreement, it was provided that Singapore shall have
jurisdiction over all disputes arising therein.
HELD: Phil courts have jurisdiction. The parties did not stipulate that only the courts of Singapore, to
the exclusion of all the rest, has jurisdiction. Neither did the clause in question operate to divest Phil.
courts of jurisdiction.
Jurisdiction is defined as the right of a State to exercise authority over persons and things within its
boundaries subject to certain exceptions. This authority is exclusive within and throughout the domain
of the State.
Pangalangan: HSBC case is disappointing—why did the courts not recognize the choice of forum clause?
Courts are “turf-conscious”; for PRIL to progress, there is a need for each country to give up some of its
exercise of sovereignty.
_______________
2. Contracts with Arbitration Clause
Puromines vs CA
((1993)
FACTS: Puromines and Philip Bros. entered into a contract of sale with an arbitration clause.
Puromines filed for complaint in RTC, Manila. Philip Bros. filed a MTD on the basis of an arbitration
clause.
HELD: Arbitration clause is valid. Puromines derives its right from the bill of lading together with the
sales contract & it is bound by the provisions and terms of the bill of lading and of the arbitration
clause incorporated in the sales contract.
The courts will look with favor upon such amicable settlements (arbitration) and will only interfere
with great reluctance to anticipate or nullify the action of the arbitrator.
The Bremen vs. Zapata
(1972)
FACTS: Zapata, a Houston company, entered into a contract of towage with Unterweser, a German
corp. Contract contained a forum selection clause which provides that any dispute arising must be
treated before London courts.
Zapata filed a suit in admiralty against Unterweser for breach of contract and damages in Florida
District Court. Unterweser filed motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction citing the forum-selection
clause.
HELD: Florida court has no jurisdiction. As a rule, a forum clause should control absent a strong
showing that it should be set aside. Court should enforce the forum clause specifically unless Zapata
could clearly show that
a. enforcement would be unreasonable and unjust or

b. that the clause was invalid for such reasons as fraud or overreaching or
74
c. if enforcement would contravene a strong public policy of the forum in which suit is brought,
whether declared by a statute or by judicial decision or
d. if the chosen forum is seriously inconvenient for the trial of the action. But if the parties
contemplated the claimed inconvenience, it should not be heard to render the forum clause
unenforceable.
The CAB involves a freely negotiated international commercial contract between the parties. As noted,
selection of a London forum was clearly a reasonable effort to bring vital certainty to this int’l
transaction and to provide a neutral forum experienced and capable in the resolution of admiralty
litigation.
3. Adhesion Contracts
Adhesion contract is one that is not negotiated by the parties having been drafted by the dominant party
and usually embodied in a standardized form. It is called a contract of adhesion because the participation of
1 party is limited to affixing her signature.
Pan Am World Airways vs. Rapadas

(1992)
FACTS: Rapadas’ samsonite was lost and Pan Am offered to settle the claim for $160. Rapadas refused
and filed an action in court. The defense of Pan Am is that the claim is subject to the Notice of baggage
Liability Limitations contained in the passenger ticket.
HELD: The liability is limited by the Notice of Baggage liability. Although the ticket is a contract of
adhesion, it does not offend against the policy of the law forbidding one from contracting against his
own negligence. The one who adheres to the contract is in reality free to reject it entirely. Court finds
the provisions in the plane ticket sufficient to govern the limitations of liabilities of the airline for loss
of luggage. The passenger, upon receiving his plane ticket, was expected to be vigilant insofar as his
luggage is concerned.
PAL vs. CA
(1996)
FACTS: Mejia shipped through PAL 1 microwave oven from San Francisco to Manila. Upon arrival,
she discovered that the front glass door was broken and the oven could not be used. Mejia filed action
against PAL. PAL denied liability and alleged that it acted in conformity with the Warsaw
Convention.
HELD: Although the airway bill is binding between the parties, the liability of Pal is not limited on the
provisions of the airway bill. While the Warsaw Convention is law in the Philippines, the Philippines
being a signatory thereto, it does not operate as an exclusive enumeration of the instances when a
carrier shall be liable for breach of contract or as an absolute limit of the extent of liability nor does it
preclude the operation of the Civil Code or other pertinent laws.
Also, the willful misconduct and insensitivity of the officers of PAL in not attempting to explain the
damage despite due demand and the unexplained delay in acting on her claim, amounted to bad faith
and renders unquestionable its liability for damages.
Specific Instances where court disregarded the adhesion contract:

1) when the party is not literate in the language of the contract with knowledge of what was
intended
75
2) when there is undue advantage made by a dominant party usually a huge corporation or a
business monopoly
3) when there is ambiguity in the adhesion contract, it must be resolved contra preferentum and in
favor of the party impugning it
4) when it is subversive of public policy when the weaker party is imposed upon in dealing with the
dominant bargaining party and is reduced to the alternative of taking it or leaving it, completely
deprived of the opportunity to bargain on equal footing
Sweet Lines vs. Teves: Petitioners assail the validity of the tickets issued by Sweet Lines.
HELD: The adhesion contract is void. It is not just and proper to expect that the passengers examined their
tickets from the crowded counters esp. if there are a number of conditions in fine print. Also, shipping
companies, esp. inter-island vessels, possess a virtual monopoly over the business of transporting the
passengers between ports covered by their franchise. Lastly, the court took judicial notice of the fact that
these passengers come from low-income groups and are less literate and who have little or no choice but to
avail of petitioner’s vessels.
Parties may include any stipulation as long as such stipulations do not violate public policy or morals of the
forum.
Lessons:
 PanAm: not all contracts of adhesion are against public policy; balancing of interests (airline vs.
passenger)
 PAL vs. CA: when there is ambiguity in adhesion contract, construe against the drafter.
________________
4. Special Contracts
In sales or barter of goods, the law of the place where the property is located will govern ( lex situs).
A simple loan granted by financial institutions is governed by the law of the permanent place of business.
But if granted by a private individual, it is governed by the law of the place where the loan was obtained.
In contracts of pledge, chattel mortgage and antichresis, the extrinsic and intrinsic validity of the contracts
are governed by lex situs.
Carriage of Goods by Sea
American President Lines vs. Klepper

(1960)
FACTS: K shipped on board APL’s vessel personal effects. Because of damage to the effects, K sued
APL. CA affirmed CFI’s finding of liability but awarded damages on the basis of the COGSA.
HELD: COGSA does not apply but the Civil Code. Article 1753 of the Civil Code provides that the law
of the country to which the goods are to be transported shall govern the liability of the common carrier
in case of loss, destruction or deterioration. Under Article 1766, "In all matters not regulated by this
Code, the rights and obligations of common carriers shall be governed by the Code of Commerce and
76
by special laws," and in the Civil Code there are provisions that govern said rights and obligations.
Although Section 4 (5) of the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act states that the carrier shall not be liable in
an amount exceeding $500.00 per package unless the value of the goods had been declared by the
shipper and inserted in the bill of lading, this is merely suppletory to the provisions of the Civil Code.
Contracts for International Air Transportation
The Warsaw Convention and amendments to the same regulate and establish uniform rules and regulations
on the liability of international airline carriers in cases of death, injuries of passengers or loss or damage of
cargo. The Phils. became a member thereof in 1951.
Liabilities of the Carrier:
a. in case of death or wounding- carrier’s liability is not more than $75,000.

b. The limits do not apply when the damage is caused by the act or omission of the carrier, his servants or
agents, done with the intent to cause damage or recklessly and with knowledge that damage would
probably result, provided that the agent was acting within the scope of his employment.
c. In case of loss or damage to baggage - $20/kilo for checked baggage and $400/passenger for
unchecked luggage unless a higher valuation is agreed upon by the parties
d. Prescription. Action must be brought within 2 years from date of arrival at the destination, or from date
which the aircraft ought to have arrived or from the date on which the transportation stopped.
e. Venue. Any action for damages may be brought either in the court of the
1. domicile of the carrier
2. principal place of business
3. place of business where the contract was made
4. place of destination
5. Successive Carriers. Each of the successive carriers is bound by the rules on the Convention and
shall be deemed to be one of the contracting parties insofar as the part of the transportation which
is performed under his supervision. But for goods or baggage, the passenger or consignor has a
right of action against the first carrier and the consignee who is entitled to receive the same,
against the last carrier. They must take action against the carrier who performed the transportation
during which the loss, damage or delay took place.
Lopez vs. Pan Am

(1965)
FACTS: Despite several confirmations, Sen. Lopez and his family failed to get 1 st class seats and were
constrained to board as tourist passengers of PanAm. CFI, Rizal awarded damages in their favor. Pan
Am admitted the breach of contract but not the finding of bad faith
HELD: Pan Am acted in bad faith. Pan Am misled the Lopezes into believing the reservations were
valid and was prompted by self-interests in dong the same (precluding the Lopezes to secure other
tickets). Also, there was negligence by its employees that were so gross and reckless as to amount to
malice and bad faith, e.g. erroneous cancellation of reservation, not confirming reinstatement of
reservation, confirming reservation even if EE had knowledge that they were merely waitlisted and
not notifying Lopezes of the cancellation.
KLM Royal Dutch vs. CA

(1975)
FACTS: Mendozas went on a world tour. KLM issued the tickets for the whole trip. Their coupon for
Aer Lingus was marked RQ. Thru KLM’s help, reservations were made in the Aer Lingus flight. Upon
arrival, only the minors were allowed to board. Mendoza sued for breach of contract and for damages
77
bec. of the humiliation they suffered. KLM denied liability on the basis of Art. 30 of the Warsaw
Convention (successive carriers liability)
HELD: Art. 30 does not apply and KLM should be accountable for the tortious act of Aer Lingus.Art.
30 presupposes either an accident or delay and not the situation in CAB. Although the tickets provide
that KLM’s liability for damages is limited to occurrences in its own airlines, this provision was
printed in very small letters such that a magnifying glass is needed to read it. It would be unfair to
charge Mendozas of automatic knowledge and it is the duty of KLM to inform them of the conditions
prescribed in the tickets or at least make sure that they read them before they accepted the tickets. This
it failed to do.
American Airlines vs. CA

(2003)
FACTS: Mendoza bought conjunction tickets from Singapore Airlines. Although it was not a
participating airline, AA exchanged the unused portion of the ticket for a one-way ticket to New York.
However, Mendoza was prevented by AA’s security officers from boarding until all the other
passengers have boarded. He sued action for damages against AA in RTC. AA claimed that the
issuance of a new ticket created a separate contract of carriage from the one with SA and therefore,
under Art. 28, RTC had no jurisdiction over the case against AA.
HELD: RTC had jurisdiction; the new ticket is not considered as separate from the one issued by SA
but the contract of carriage constitutes a single operation. SA & AA are members of the IATA and
under the general pool partnership agreement they act as agents of each other in the issuance of tickets
to contracted passengers. When AA exchanged the ticket, it entered it in the IATA clearing house and
undertook to transport M. It thereby assumed the obligation to take the place of the principal carrier
originally designated and constituted itself as an agent of SA. The number of tickets issued does not
detract from the oneness of the contract of carriage as long as the parties regard the contract as a single
operation.
Chiok vs. China Airlines

FACTS: Chiok purchased ticket from CAL exclusively endorsable to PAL. While in Hkong, his flight
was confirmed by both CAL and PAL attaching their respective stickers. On the day of his flight to
Manila, he was informed by a PAL employee that he was not in the computer list so he was not
allowed to board. Using another CAL ticket, he was able to return to Manila. C sued CAL. CAL denied
liability as the carriage was performed by PAL.
HELD: Cal is liable. The ruling in KLM is applicable. The contract was between CAL and C, with the
former endorsing to PAL the HK-Mla segment. This can be treated as a single operation under Art. 15,
IATA Rules and Art. 1 of the Warsaw Convention
Art. 1, Sec. 3 WC: transportation to be performed by several successive carriers shall be deemed to be
one undivided transportation, if it has been regarded by the parties as a single operation, whether it
has been agreed upon under the form of a single contract or of a series of contracts.
Art. 15 IATA: carriage to be performed by several successive carriers under one ticket, or under a
ticket and any conjunction ticket issued therewith, is regarded as a single operation.
Pal acted as carrying agent of CAL, thus, CAL cannot evade liability.
Santos III vs. Northwest Airlines

(1992)
78
FACTS: Santos bought a roundtrip (SF-Manila-SF) ticket from NW airlines office in SF. Despite
previous confirmations, he was informed that he had no reservation on his trip. He sued NW for
damages in RTC Makati. NW filed MTD for lack of jurisdiction.
HELD: Phil court has no jurisdiction to hear the case under Art. 28 of the Warsaw Convention. This
article enumerates the places where action must be filed, to wit:
1. Domicile – Minnesota, USA (domicile must be understood in the English sense – place of
incorporation)
2. principal place of business – Minnesota
3. place of business where contract is made – San Francisco
4. place of destination – San Francisco (not Manila because it was merely an agreed stopping place,
SF is still the ultimate place of destination
Distinction between KLM and China Air: in KLM, KLM was the only company the passenger dealt with; in
Chiok, it was alleged that Chiok himself (passenger) requested for the PAL booking. It can then be argued
that CAL should not be held liable.
________________
F. The Applicable law in the absence of an Effective Choice
According to the 2nd Restatement, in the absence of an effective choice of law, these factors will be
considered in determining the state with which contract has its most significant relationship
1. place of contracting
2. place of negotiating of the contract
3. place of performance
4. situs of the subject matter of the contract
5. domicile, residence, nationality, place of incorporation and place of business
6. place under whose local law the contract will be most effective
Courts should localize the contract by examining the contacts it has with a state relative to the cogency to
the issue. Example: For contracts involving liability for destruction of goods in transit, the state of the most
significant relationship is the state of destination.
In the absence of an effective choice of law, courts applying a policy-centered approach will apply its own
law when there are significant contacts with the transaction. Once these exist, the forum has a real interest
in applying its own law and such would not be fundamentally unfair to the parties. The court should also
consider the legitimate expectations of the parties.
G. Limitations to Choice of Law
1) if the law selected has no connection at all with the transaction or the parties
2) if it ousts the jurisdiction which the court has already acquired over the parties and the subject
matter
3) if it affects a public policy or the matter is heavily impressed with public interest
4) in case of confession-of-judgment clauses (waives the debtors right to receive notice or authorizes
entry of judgment)
XV. Choice of Law in Wills, Succession and Administration of Estates
79
Will or testament: act whereby a person is permitted, w/ formalities prescribed by law, to determine to a
certain extent the distribution of his estate to take effect after his death.
It is a disposition made by a competent testator in the form prescribed by law of property over which he has
legal power of disposition
Conflicts of Law Perspective:

Will: an involuntary transfer of property, because it comes into effect only upon death of owner. Death is
involuntary, thus making a will is an involuntary transfer of property.
Wills are governed by the “proper law”

o common law- law of domicile of testator
o civil law- national law of testator
A. Extrinsic Validity of Wills
Filipino national making a will abroad may comply with:

o lex nationalii (no express provision) or
o lex loci celebrationis (Art 17, 815)
Pertinent Conflict-of-law rules:

(referring to law of place where will was executed as law governing forms & solemnities of will)
Art 17: The forms and solemnities of contracts, wills, and other public instruments shall be governed by the
laws of the country in which they are executed.
When the acts referred to are executed before the diplomatic or consular officials of the Republic of the
Philippines in a foreign country, the solemnities established by Philippine laws shall be observed in their
execution.
Prohibitive laws concerning persons, their acts or property, and those which have for their object public
order, public policy and good customs shall not be rendered ineffective by laws or judgments promulgated,
or by determinations or conventions agreed upon in a foreign country.
Art 815: When a Filipino is in a foreign country, he is authorized to make a will in any of the forms
established by the law of the country in which he may be. Such will may be probated in the Philippines. (n)
What is the proper law for wills written abroad by Filipinos?

(There is no express provision that it is lex nationalii)
Tolentino:
Art 815 follows general rule of lex loci celebrationis.
The Civil Code did not mean to invalidate the will of a Filipino made in conformity w/ Phil law.
Aliens making wills outside the Philippines are, under Art 816 & 817, permitted to follow:
o lex nationalii
o lex domicilii
o lex loci celebrationis
Article 816. The will of an alien who is abroad produces effect in the Philippines if made with the formalities
prescribed by the law of the place in which he resides, or according to the formalities observed in his
country, or in conformity with those which this Code prescribes. (n)
Article 817. A will made in the Philippines by a citizen or subject of another country, which is executed in
accordance with the law of the country of which he is a citizen or subject, and which might be proved and
80
allowed by the law of his own country, shall have the same effect as if executed according to the laws of
the Philippines. (n)
It cannot be assumed that the Code places a Filipino citizen in a worse position than an alien in relation to
our law.
The Code should have expressly stated this considering general provision in Art 17.
In re Estate of Johnson
(1918)
FACTS: Ebba Ingeborg sought to annul the probate of the will of his father Emil Johnson, because the
resulting intestacy would be favorable to her as a sole heir. She stresses that Section 636 of the Code Of
Civil Procedure should not govern the will executed by her father in the US, because the word “state”
in the body of the section is not capitalized (thus not referring to a State in the US).
HELD: This interpretation is erroneous because the full phrase “another state or country”, means that
the section refers to either a State in the US or another country. The admission of the will to probate by
the CFI of Manila under Section 636 was therefore correct. Although the CFI Of Manila most likely
erred in taking judicial notice of Illinois law when it promulgated that the will was executed in
conformity with the laws of Illinois, Ebba is now precluded to raise this issue because the petition to
annul the probate did not allege the difference between Philippine Law and Illinois law.
Extrinsic Validity of Joint Wills
Art 818. Two or more persons cannot make a will jointly or in the same instrument, either for their
reciprocal benefit or for the benefit of a third person.
Joint wills are prohibited on grounds of public policy, because:
1) a will is a purely personal & unilateral act & this is defeated if 2 or more persons make their will in
the same instrument
2) the revocable character of a will is defeated, because if one of testators revoke the will, the other
testators will have no instrument left
3) it exposes a testator to undue influence & may even tempt one of testators to kill the other
4) when a will is made jointly or in same instrument, the more aggressive spouse is liable to dictate
the terms of the will for his/her own benefit
- where will is also reciprocal, either of the spouses who may be wicked may be tempted to kill the
other.
Joint wills executed by Filipinos in a foreign country allowing joint wills are expressly invalidated by law.
Joint wills executed in the Philippines by aliens (whose laws do not prohibit it): the law is silent
It is suggested that such will should not be probated if it affects heirs in the Philippines (in accordance with
the expressed policy in Art 819).
Extrinsic Validity of Holographic Wills
Art 810: a holographic will is one entirely written, dated and signed by the hand of the testator himself. It is
not subject to any other form, need not be witnessed and may be made in or out of the Philippines.
81
Art 816 & 817 are also applicable to holographic wills
Merits:
o simple
o convenient
o does not require notarization
o guarantees absolute secrecy
Demerits:
o peculiarly dangerous
o an invitation to forgery
o short statements can confuse handwriting experts
Babcock Templeton vs. Rider Babcock

(1928)
FACTS: The will of Jennie Rider Babcock was executed in California. Babcock Templeton, being the
mother of the three beneficiaries of the will, stressed that the laws of California should govern the
probate since Jennie Rider Babcock acquired domicile in California. William Rider Babcock opposes
this by stressing that her sister never acquired domicile in California as her latest domicile was New
York.
HELD: Her domicile was California, because even though she later left California for New York, she
never intended to be a New York domiciliary. The trial court was also correct in admitting the will for
probate under Section 636 of the Code Of Civil Procedure, because the length of time of her residence
in and eventual death in the Philippines did not result into a loss of her US citizenship. She never
intended to become a Philippine domiciliary, thus making Section 618 inapplicable to the will she
executed abroad.
B. Intrinsic Validity of Wills
- governed by lex nationalii
Art 16: Real property as well as personal property is subject to the law of the country where it is stipulated.
However, intestate and testamentary successions, both with respect to the order of succession and to the
amount of successional rights and to the intrinsic validity of testamentary provisions, shall be regulated by
the national law of the person whose succession is under consideration, whatever may be the nature of the
property and regardless of the country wherein said property may be found. (10a)
Miciano vs. Brimo: Miciano, as the administrator of the estate of Joseph Brimo, filed a petition for the
partition of the estate. Andre Brimo opposed the partition because the will itself was not executed in
accordance with the laws of Turkey, in violation of Article 10 of the Civil Code.
The Court decided that although Andre Brimo opposed his brother’s intention to have Philippine laws apply
he was not deemed to have contested the legacy, because the choice of law clause in the will was contrary
to law. Our laws apply the lex nationalii of decedent to determine intrinsic validity of a will and this law was
purposefully disregarded by decedent. The Court considered this clause as not imposed and “shall I no
manner prejudice the heir even if the testator should otherwise provide.
Criticisms on the Miciano vs. Brimo decision:
Considering the primacy of giving primacy to the last will and testament of the decedent, the court should
have respected the wishes of the decedent (i.e. the clause in the will should not have been annulled) by
applying a policy-centered approach.
82
Using the most significant relationship approach, Philippine law would govern because Joseph Brimo is a
Philippine resident, the properties are in here, and he made the will here… the only contact with Turkey is
the fact of his nationality.
Under the escape device of “disingenuous characterization”, the same result could have resulted without
flouting testator’s will. The court could have characterized the main issue as one of property and not of
succession, thus making Philippine law the governing law as the lex rei sitae.
Cayetano vs. Leonidas

(1984)
FACTS: Upon the death of Adoracion Campos, her father Hermogenes sought to be declared as owner
of the entire estate as the only compulsory heir. On the other hand, Nenita Paguia (one of Adoracion’s
sisters) sought the reprobate of the will executed by Adoracion in the US. When the trial court allowed
probate of the will in the Philippines, Hermogenes raised in issue that the allowance of the will to
probate divested him of his legitime, because the will preterited him.
HELD: Since the governing law with respect to the amount of successional rights is the national law of
the decedent, the governing law of Adoracion’s will is Pennsylvania law. And since Pennsylvania law
does not have a system of legitimes, Hermogenes is therefore not preterited. Although the Philippines
adopt a system of legitimes as a matter of public policy, such policy does not extend to the
successional rights of foreigners.
General Rule: the probate court can only rule on:

1) extrinsic validity
2) due execution
3) testamentary capacity
4) compliance with requisites/solemnities prescribed by law
__________________
C. Interpretation of Wills
Interpretation of wills is to be governed by lex nationalii.
If terms are clear & unambiguous: lex intentionis
When there are ambiguous provisions: intention of party may be inferred by referring to context of the will
& the testator’s acts.
Article 1371. In order to judge the intention of the contracting parties, their contemporaneous and
subsequent acts shall be principally considered. (1282)
Article 1375. Words which may have different significations shall be understood in that which is most in
keeping with the nature and object of the contract. (1286)
Presence of ambiguous provisions

Presumptions to help interpretation:
1) The interpretations of such should be determined in accordance w/ laws & customs of that state most
probably in mind of testator
2) In case a will admits of different dispositions, the interpretation by which the disposition is to be
operative shall be preferred
83
Article 788. If a testamentary disposition admits of different interpretations, in case of doubt, that
interpretation by which the disposition is to be operative shall be preferred. (n)
D. Revocation
Article 829. A revocation done outside the Philippines, by a person who does not have his domicile in this
country, is valid when it is done according to the law of the place where the will was made, or according to
the law of the place in which the testator had his domicile at the time; and if the revocation takes place in
this country, when it is in accordance with the provisions of this Code. (n)
Revocation:
1. lex loci celebrationis
2. lex domicilii
3. according to our Code
Article 830. No will shall be revoked except in the following cases:

1) By implication of law; or
2) By some will, codicil, or other writing executed as provided in case of wills; or
3) By burning, tearing, canceling, or obliterating the will with the intention of revoking it, by the
testator himself, or by some other person in his presence, and by his express direction. If burned,
torn, cancelled, or obliterated by some other person, without the express direction of the testator,
the will may still be established, and the estate distributed in accordance therewith, if its contents,
and due execution, and the fact of its unauthorized destruction, cancellation, or obliteration are
established according to the Rules of Court. (n)
Problem: Testator revokes his will in then domicile State A and dies in his new domicile State B. If his
revocation under the laws of State A is invalid under State B laws, what law will apply?
Common law practice: law of the domicile at the time of death.
Philippine law: law of the place of revocation.
Notice that there is a difference in the applicable law governing revocation of wills by a person domiciled in
the Philippines and a non-domiciliary:
 For domiciliary: the governing law is the law of the place where the revocation was made (lex
actus)
 For non-domiciliary: the governing law is the law where the will was executed (lex loci
celebrationis)
__________________
E. Probate
Probate: an adjudication that the last will and testament of a person was executed with all the formalities
required by law
As part of procedural law, probate is governed by the law of the forum.
But the forum will still have to look at the foreign law concerning compliance with extrinsic validity.
Rule 76 Section 9 Grounds for disallowing will.: The will shall be disallowed in any of the following cases;
(a) If not executed and attested as required by law;
84
(b) If the testator was insane, or otherwise mentally incapable to make a will, at the time of its execution;
(c) If it was executed under duress, or the influence of fear, or threats;
(d) If it was procured by undue and improper pressure and influence, on the part of the beneficiary, or of
some other person for his benefit;
(e) If the signature of the testator was procured by fraud or trick, and he did not intend that the instrument
should be his will at the time of fixing his signature thereto.
Rule 77
Section 1. Will proved outside Philippines may be allowed here. Wills proved and allowed in a foreign
country, according to the laws of such country, may be allowed, filed, and recorded by the proper Court of
First Instance in the Philippines.
Testamentary capacity is the capacity to comprehend the nature of the transaction in which the testator is
engaged at the time, to recollect the property to be disposed of and the persons who would naturally be
supposed to have claims upon the testator, and to comprehend the manner in which the instrument will
distribute his property among the objects of his bounty. (Bugnao vs. Ubag, 014 SCRA 163)
Rule 77 Section 1 + testamentary capacity - will made in a foreign country allowed here in the Philippines !!!
(see Article 816)
A will allowed in a foreign country in accordance with the law of that country may be allowed in the
Philippines… no need to prove testamentary capacity and due execution (see Article 817).
Common Law conflicts rules…

1) If the will is valid under the laws of the last domicile, the will is valid everywhere with respect to
movable property
2) but the probate in the last domicile does not affect real property, as these will be governed by lex
rei sitae
Suntay vs. Suntay

(1954)
FACTS: Natividad Billian sought to have the will (executed in the Philippines) of his husband Jose
Suntay probated. The trial court denied probate because during the course of the proceedings, the will
was lost. Later, her son Silvino filed a petition for the probate of a will allegedly executed by Suntay in
China. The trial court again denied probate, and was correct in deciding that way, because there was
no proof that:
1. the municipal district court of Amoy, China, is a probate court
2. there was a law of China on procedure in the probate or allowance of wills
3. the legal requirements for the execution of a valid will in China in 1931 were satisfied
4. the order of the municipal district court of Amoy purports to probate the will
HELD: In the absence of proof that the municipal district court of Amoy is a probate court and on the
Chinese law of procedure in probate matters, it may be presumed that the proceedings in the matter of
probating or allowing a will in the Chinese courts are the same as those provided for in our laws on
the subject. Because of this, rules on notice must be followed. Since Silvino did not cause the
notification of the other heirs, this petition must fall.
Vda. De Perez vs. Tolete

(1994)
FACTS: Each of the Cunanan spouses (Jose and Evelyn) executed a will in New York containing
similar provisions on the presumption of survivorship. When the entire family perished in a fire that
85
gutted their home in New York, Rafael as the named trustee in the will of Jose filed separate
proceedings in New York for the probate of the wills of his brother and sister-in-law. Later, Salud
Perez (mother of Evelyn) filed a petition for reprobate in Bulacan. Rafael opposed by arguing that
Salud was not an heir as per New York law which must be the law that should govern the wills as they
were executed in New York. In deciding the matter, the necessary evidence that should be submitted
are:
(1) the due execution of the will in accordance with the foreign laws
(2) the testator has his domicile in the foreign country and not in the Philippines
(3) the will has been admitted to probate in such country
(4) the fact that the foreign tribunal is a probate court
(5) the laws of a foreign country on procedure and allowance of wills.
Except for the first and last requirements, the petitioner submitted all the needed evidence. Salud
failed to submit the 1st and 5th requirement. While the probate of a will is a special proceeding wherein
courts should relax the rules on evidence, the goal is to receive the best evidence of which the matter is
susceptible before a purported will is probated or denied probate. Not only that, Salud also failed to
notify the heirs of Jose of the proceedings.
HELD: The rule that the court having jurisdiction over the reprobate of a will shall "cause notice
thereof to be given as in case of an original will presented for allowance" means that with regard to
notices, the will probated abroad should be treated as if it were an "original will" or a will that is
presented for probate for the first time. Accordingly, compliance with Sections 3 and 4 of Rule 76,
which require publication and notice by mail or personally to the "known heirs, legatees, and devisees
of the testator resident in the Philippines" and to the executor are required.
F. Administration of Estates
Duties of the administrator:
1) to manage and settle the debts of the decedent (primary purpose)

2) to distribute the residuum of the estate to the heirs (secondary purpose)
When the will has been proved or allowed, it is the duty of the probate court to issue letters testamentary
thereon to the person so named in the will upon the latter’s application.
When there is no will, the court may appoint an administrator.
Two kinds of administrators:
a) domiciliary -power over assets located in state
b) ancillary- appointed by a foreign court to look after the properties located in such foreign state
Tayag vs. Benguet Consolidated Inc.

(1968)
FACTS: BCI stocks owned by the decedent Idonah Slade Perkins were in the possession of the
domiciliary administrator County Trust Company Of New York. Later, the CFI Of Manila named
Renato Tayag as the ancillary administrator. When Tayag obtained a court order for the County Trust
Company to deposit the stocks to him, BCI appealed.
HELD: The appeal must fail. BCI is a Philippine corporation owing full allegiance and subject to the
unrestricted jurisdiction of local courts. Its shares of stock cannot therefore be considered in any wise
as immune from lawful court orders. The situs of shares of stock is the place of domicile of the
86
corporation. And since the power of the ancillary administrator over shares located here is beyond
question, it follows that the stocks should be in the possession of Tayag.
Succession and administration of estates are governed by different laws:

 succession – national law
 administration – situs of property (territorial/JDal)
______________
G. Trusts
Trust: a right of property, real or personal, held by one party for the benefit of the other.
The trust contains an express choice-of-law provision.
The courts usually apply that law in keeping with the policy of carrying out the intent of the creator of the
trust.
When the trust does not contain an express choice-of-law provision, the Court will deem controlling the law
that will sustain the validity of the trust.
Choices-of-law for testamentary trusts:
a) rules governing the intrinsic and extrinsic validity of wills
b) lex rei sitae with respect to the property
XVI. Choice of Law in Torts and Crimes
Tort: derived from the French word torquere or “to twist”. It is an act or omission producing an injury to
another without any previous existing lawful relation of which the act or omission may be said to be a
natural outgrowth or incident.
A. Policies behind Conflicts Tort Law
2 Important Policies underlying substantive tort law:
1) to deter socially undesirable or wrongful conduct
2) to rectify the consequences of the tortuous act by distributing the losses that result from accident
and products liability
In view of these, the policy behind tort law will most likely be a strongly held policy of the state and as
result, that state will not easily displace its own law with the law of another state.
In determining the applicable law, consider the policies of: a) upholding the justified expectation of parties,
and b) minimizing the adverse consequences that might follow from subjecting a party to the law of more
than one state.
Conflicts torts cases arise:
1) when the tortious conduct and place of resulting injury are different and one state imposes higher
standards than the other state
87
2) when there are different product liability laws and varying judicial interpretations of the extent of
liability
Policies:
1) deter undesirable or wrongful conduct
2) rectify consequences – by distributing the losses
 similarity between family conflicts cases and torts conflicts cases: strongly held policies of the state
3 concerns in torts:
1) achieving just and reasonable results (consider the interest of both parties
2) societal interest
3) shielding defendant from unnecessary surprise
Distinguish: “upholding the legitimate expectations of parties” vs. “shielding defendant from unnecessary
surprise” – the first is used in contracts cases, the second is used in torts cases.
Why is the “place of the tort (locus delicti)” difficult to determine? Different concepts of locus delicti:
1) civil law: place of tortious conduct
2) common law: place of injury/vested rights theory
 to determine lex loci delicti: determine whether you are dealing with a civil law or common law
country
________________
B. Lex loci delicti commissi
Lex loci delicti commissi: the law of the place where the alleged tort was committed. It determines the tort
liability in matters affecting conduct and safety.
Difficulty has been encountered in determining the locus delicti where the liability producing conduct
happens in one state but the injuries are sustained in another.
Common law concept of place of wrong: place where the last event necessary to make an actor liable for an
alleged tort occurs. It adheres to the vested rights theory, so that if harm does not take place then the tort
is not completed. Negligence or omission is not in itself actionable unless it results in injury to another.
Civil law concept of place of wrong: place where the tortious conduct was committed. This is premised on
the principle that the legality or illegality of a person’s act should be determined by the law of the state
where he is at the time he does such act.
The traditional view (whether the situs of the tort is the place of conduct or injury) is that an actor liable by
the lex loci delicti is liable everywhere. Damages arising from torts committed in one state are actionable in
another state.
Alabama Railroad vs. Carrol: the negligent infliction of an injury in one state creates a right of action there,
which may be enforced in any other state or country the comity of which admits of it.
Loucks vs. Standard Oil Co.

(1913)
FACTS: Loucks, a NY resident, was run down and killed by Standard Oil employees in an accident
while engaged in its business. Under Massachusetts law, the corporation is liable for the death of a
person where the death was caused by the negligence of the corporation’s employees while engaged
in its business. However, under NY law, the corporation is liable for such death where the death
occurred in NY. The action to recover damages was filed in NY.
88
HELD: Massachusetts law may be applied. A tort committed in one state creates a right of action that
may be sued upon in another unless public policy forbids. A foreign statute is not law in the state, but
it gives rise to an obligation, which, if transitory, follows the person and may be enforced wherever the
person may be found.
C. Modern Theories on Foreign Tort Liability
1. The Most Significant Relationship
This theory considers the state’s contacts with the occurrence and the parties.
Two-fold purpose:
1) identify the interested state
2) evaluate the relevance of these contacts to the issue in question
The significant-relationship approach does not call for a mechanical counting of factual contacts where
strength is drawn in numbers; instead the court localizes the state of the most significant relation and
assesses the event or transaction in the light of the relevant policy considerations of the interested states
and these underlying policies.
Saudi Arabian Airlines vs. CA

(1998)
FACTS: Morada was a flight stewardess of Saudi Airlines. She was involved in an attempted rape
case, which led to her conviction of violation of Islamic laws in Saudi. The Prince of Makkah ruled that
she was wrongfully convicted. However, she was terminated from her employment by Saudia.
HELD: The RTC of Manila has JD to try the case, applying the “state of most significant relationship
rule.” The following contacts should be considered in using this rule: place where the injury occurred,
place where the conduct causing injury occurred, domicile/residence/nationality/place of business of
the corporation, and place where the relationship between the parties is centered.
In CAB, the Philippines had the most significant contacts. The overall injury occurred in the
Philippines, Morada is a resident and a Filipina national, Saudia is a foreign corporation engaged in
business here, and the relationship of the parties is centered here.
2. Interest Analysis
This approach considers the relevant concerns the state may have in the case and its interest in having its
law applied on that issue.
The court should first determine whether there is a true or false conflict.
False conflict: only one state has an interest in having its law applied, and failure to apply the other state’s
law would not impair the policy reflected in that law.
Apparent conflict: more than one state has an apparent interest in applying its law to the case.
Prof. Currie: if only one state has a real interest in the case and the other state’s interest is insubstantial
then there is a false conflict. However, if both states have a real interest in applying their law then the
apparent conflict becomes a true conflict.
89
Problem with Interest Analysis approach: are the policies of the law always discernible? Sometimes we
merely guess the policies of the state (because unarticulated in the law).
________________
3. Cavers’ Principle of Preference
This principle deals with rules that sanction some kinds of conduct engaged in by a defendant in one state
and extends the benefit of this higher standard of conduct and financial protection to the plaintiff even if the
state of injury does not create analogous liabilities.
Pangalangan: Since both states consider that a tort has been committed, the law of the state which places a
higher standard of conduct should apply. This is true even if this is the place of tortious conduct and not the
place of injury.
Schmidt vs. Driscoll Hotel

(1957)
FACTS: Schmidt sued Driscoll Hotel for illegally selling liquor to Sorensen, who was the driver of a
vehicle which turned over in Wisconsin. Schmidt was a passenger of that vehicle and sustained
injuries as a result of the accident. The suit was filed in Minnesota, where the illegal sale was
conducted.
HELD: Minnesota court has jurisdiction, even if the injury which followed the illegal sale occurred
outside Minnesota. The Restatement should not be applied where the plaintiff would have no remedy
against the offending liquor dealer. Under the principles of equity and justice, the Minnesota law
granting him a remedy should be applied, considering that all the parties are residents of Minnesota,
Driscoll Hotel was licensed under Minnesota law, the violation of Minnesota law occurred there, and
the wrongful conduct was completed by Sorensen in Minnesota.
Schmidt illustrates the imposition of liability under a substantive rule of tort law that has a strong underlying
admonitory policy.
American Contributions to Conflicts Tort Law
The determination of whether the law where the tort was committed or the law of the domicile of the
parties is the controlling law is considered one of the major contributions of American jurisprudence to
international conflicts thought.
Law of the tort: deemed as the proper law in questions involving regulation of conduct.
Law of the domicile of the parties: governs in matters that relate to loss-distribution or financial protection.
In modern approaches, there is a distinction between true or false conflict.
 True conflict: both states have an interest in having their law applied
 “maybe true” conflict
 false conflict: no choice necessary – the court should apply the law of the only interested state
_______________
D. Foreign Tort Claims
Tortious liability is transitory – the liability resulting from the tort is deemed personal to the perpetrator of
the wrong, which follows him wherever he goes. Compensations may be exacted from him in any proper
tribunal; the right to sue is not confined to the place where the cause of action arises.
90
i. Conditions for the enforcement of tort claims
a) the foreign tort is based on a civil action and not on a crime
b) the foreign tort is not contrary to the public policy of the forum
c) the judicial machinery of the forum is adequate to satisfy the claim
The defendant in a transnational tort is often sued in a foreign court against his will; his consent to be sued
is not necessary for the acquisition of jurisdiction by the court. Hence, questions as to the legitimacy of the
JD and validity of the decision may arise.
ii. Products liability of the foreign manufacturer
Conflicts torts cases arise due to significant differences in the laws of states on the basis and extent of
liability for defectively manufactured products.
Asahi Metal Industry vs. Superior Court of California

(1987)
FACTS: Asahi Metal manufactures tire valve assemblies in Japan and exports them, including to a
Taiwanese company which, in turn, incorporates them into finished tires sold in the US. The driver of
a motorcycle, who had an accident resulting in injuries to him and death to his passenger, sued the
Taiwanese company. The Taiwanese company filed a cross-complaint against Asahi.
HELD: The California court has no JD over Asahi Metal. The constitutional touchstone/test of due
process is whether the defendant purposefully established “minimum contacts” in the forum state.
And “minimum contacts” must have a basis in some act by which the defendant purposefully avails
itself of the privilege of conducting activities within the forum state, thus invoking the benefits and
protections of its laws.
In the CAB, no purposeful availment of the California market on the part of Asahi. It does not do
business in California; has no office, agents, employees, or property in Cal.; does not advertise or
otherwise solicit business there; and did not create, control, or employ the distribution system that
brought its valves to California.
Societe Nationale Industrille Aerospatiale vs. Lee Kui Jak: An Aerospatiale helicopter crashed in Brunei,
killing a passenger who was a Brunei resident. The administrator of the estate brought the action in Texas,
where Aerospatiale does business. Held: Brunei (where the deceased lived and the helicopter crashed) was
the natural forum for the trial for an action for damages against the manufacturer of the helicopter, and it
would be oppressive for the plaintiffs to continue with the Texas proceedings as Aerospatiale would not be
able to pursue legal proceedings against the Malaysian company which operates and services the helicopter.
Bier vs. Mines de Potasse: A Dutch market gardener filed an action for damages in a Dutch court against a
French mining company. The Dutch court held that it had no JD, but the French court held that the plaintiff
could elect where to sue (place of damage or place of injurious conduct).
Sovereignty as Basis of Jurisdiction
The sovereignty model has been accepted both to:

a) justify any exercise of jurisdiction over a defendant present within the territory, however short
(“tag jurisdiction”)
b) deny enforcement of a foreign court judgment over a defendant who was not present within that
court’s jurisdiction
91
Worldwide Volkswagen Corp. vs. Woodson

(1980)
FACTS: The spouses Robinson purchased a car from Seaway Volkswagen in New York. They met an
accident in Oklahoma and pinned the blame on the defective design of the car. They brought a suit
against the retailer and distributor in Oklahoma.
HELD: Oklahoma court has no JD. A state court may exercise personal JD over a nonresident
defendant only so long as there exist “minimum contacts” between the defendant and the forum state.
The 2 functions of the concept of minimum contacts is to protect the defendant against the burdens of
litigating in a distant or inconvenient forum, and to ensure that the states, through their courts, do not
reach out beyond the limits imposed on them by their status as coequal sovereigns in a federal system.
In CAB, there us a total absence of those affiliating circumstances that are a necessary predicate to any
exercise of state-court JD (no activity whatsoever on Oklahoma; no sales closed nor services performed
there; no availment of the privileges and benefits of Oklahoma law; no solicitation of business there).
In Asahi, even if there were minimum contacts, it failed the reasonableness test.
Criticism of Asahi: “additional acts” requirement is a reinvention of the stream of commerce law. The fear is
that the court might go back to pre-International Shoe standards n JD (requirement of actual presence).
In Worldwide Volkswagen, the only requirements for the exercise of JD were minimum contacts and the
reasonableness test; Asahi did not follow this, and include an additional requirement (purposeful availment).
________________
iii. The Alien Tort Act
The Alien Tort Statute granted US district courts original JD over any civil action by an alien for a tort
committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the US.
Hilao vs. Estate of Ferdinand Marcos

(1996)
FACTS: A class suit was brought against Marcos by parties seeking damages for human-rights abuses
committed against them or their decedents. The Hawaii district court found for Hilao and ordered a
verdict of almost $2 billion in damages. The Estate in its appeal, argues that the Alien Tort Claims Act
does not apply to conduct that occurs abroad, and since the acts complained of all occurred in the
Phils., the court has no JD
HELD: The court has JD. In a prior appeal it has been held that subject-matter JD was not
inappropriately exercised even though the actions xxx occurred outside the US.
Filartiga vs. Pena-Irala

(1980)
FACTS: Plaintiffs brought an action in the US against Pena-Irala for wrongfully causing the death of
Dr. Filartiga’s son in Paraguay.
HELD: The US federal court has JD, on the basis of the Alien Tort Statute. This action is undeniably an
action by an alien, for a tort only, committed in violation of the law of nations. A wrong is recognized
as a violation of the law of nations where the nations of the world have demonstrated that the wrong
is of mutual, and not merely several, concern.
92
*The concept of accountability, if considered the core of the Alien Torts Act (as espoused by the US
Justice Department in Trajano vs Marcos), would be a significant setback to the advancement of
international law.
Guinto vs. Marcos

(1986)
FACTS: Guinto and Suarez filed an action for damages against Marcos in California under the Alien
Tort Claims Act. According to Guinto, Marcos’ act of seizing their film “100 Days in September”
violated their freedom of speech.
HELD: Test to determine when a violation of the law of nations has occurred – there has been a
violation by one or more individuals of those standards, rules or customs a) affecting the relationship
between states or between an individual and a foreign state, and b) used by those states for their
common good and/or dealings inter se. A violation of the First Amendment right of free speech does
not rise to the level of such universally recognized rights as to constitute a violation of the law of
nations.
The Alien Tort Statute justifies exercise of court JD over completely foreign tort cases because of the
universal evil exemplified by human rights violations. This is so even though there are no significant
contacts between the courts and the parties and events nor substantial state interest in the case other than
a general desire for compliance with customary international law. That is why in order for the Alien Tort Act
to apply, there is a need to establish that the tortious conduct violated an internationally protected human
right.
iv. Philippine Rule on Foreign Torts
There is no specific statutory law governing the enforcement of claims for damages arising form foreign
torts. But on the theory of vested rights the victim of a foreign tort may decide to file the case in the
Philippines.
It has been suggested that the English Rule may be followed, such that the tort committed abroad is
actionable in the country where it was committed and also under Philippine law.
Two conditions for a case based on a foreign tort to be filed in the Philippines (English Rule):
1) the wrong must be of such a character that it would have been actionable if committed in the
Philippines
2) the act must not have been justifiable by the law of the place where it was done
Time, Inc. vs. Reyes

(1971)
FACTS: Villegas and Enrile filed a complaint for damages against Time, Inc. upon an alleged libel
arising from a publication of Time Magazine. Plaintiffs filed their action in CFI Rizal. But according to
the applicable law, they may file the action only in the place of first publication or in the City of Manila
(since they are public officers).
HELD: The case should be dismissed for improper venue. The only alternative allowed to the public
official is to prosecute in the place where the offending article was printed and first published; but in
the CAB the alternative was not open to plaintiffs since the offending publication was not printed in
the Philippines.
93
In Time, Inc., if the court had not characterized the issue as jurisdictional, and decided the case from a
conflicts tort perspective, it could have taken cognizance of the case following the most significant relations
approach because of the significant links between the forum and the parties.
In ordinary foreign tort, the court acquiring JD must be either the place of tortious conduct or place of
injury. In Alien tort Statute, US courts may acquire JD even if it is neither the place of tortious conduct nor
place of injury.
“law of nations” (Filartiga): “mutual” concern – nations consider the act to be detrimental to all nations; it is
a violation of a law of all countries.
Guinto: violation of law of nations test—

1) the violation affects relationship between states, or an individual and a foreign state
2) used by the states for their common good and/or dealings inter se
_______________
E. Distinguishing between Torts and Crimes
Tort Crime
Transitory in character; Local in character; the

hence liability is perpetrator of the
deemed personal to wrong can be sued
the tortfeasor and only in the state
make him amenable to wherein he commits
suit in whatever JD he the crime
is found
An injury to an An injury to the state

individual who may be where it is committed
situated in any place
Liability is attached to Promulgated to punish

the perpetrator to and reform the
indemnify the victim perpetrators and deter
for injuries he them and others from
sustained violating the law
F. Lex loci delicti
Under the territorial principle, crimes committed within the Philippines by all persons, whether Filipino
citizens or aliens, are prosecuted and penalized under Philippine law. As a rule, criminal laws of a state are
effective only upon persons who actually commit the crime within the state’s territory.
The lex loci delicti or the law of the place where the crime was committed is the controlling law since it
determines the specific law by which the criminal is to be penalized, and designates the state that has the
JD to punish him.
3 Exceptions to the Territorial rule:
1) First Exception: crimes committed by state officials, diplomatic representatives and officials of
recognized international organizations (based on doctrine of state immunity)
94
Wylie vs. Rarang

(1992)
FACTS: Wylie and Williams are officers of the US Navy stationed in the Subic Naval base, and are in
charge of the publication “Plan of the Day.” Rarang filed an action for damages against them for
libelous statements published in the POD.
HELD: Wylie and Williams are not immune from the suit. They are sought to be held answerable for
personal torts in which the US is not involved; if found liable, they alone must satisfy the judgment.
The Bases Treaty provision on immunity could not possibly apply in this case, as it is presumed that
the laws of the US do not allow the commission of crimes in the name of official duty. The general rule
is that public officials can be held personally accountable for acts claimed to have been performed in
connection with official duties where they have acted ultra vires or where there is showing of bad faith.
This immunity for sovereign acts is impliedly waived when the foreign state and its officials perform private,
commercial or proprietary acts.
In Rarang, although the publication was part of the duty of Wylie and Williams, the goal of the publication
of the complaint would have been achieved without identifying Rarang by name.
Liang (Huefeng) vs. People

(2000)
FACTS: Liang, a Chinese working at the ADB, was charged by a fellow worker with grave oral
defamation. The lower court dismissed the complaint on the ground that Liang is covered by the
immunity provision under the Agreement between ADB and the Phil. Government.
HELD: Liang is not immune from suit. The immunity under the Agreement is not absolute, and it only
extends to acts done in official capacity. Slandering a person could not possibly be covered by the
immunity agreement because our laws do not allow the commission of a crime, such as defamation, in
the name of official duty.
2) Second Exception: crimes committed on board a foreign vessel even if it is within the territorial
waters of the coastal state
In the Philippines, our courts will not acquire JD over offenders nor can Phil. laws apply as long as the effect
of such crime does not disturb our peace and order.
US vs. Fowler
FACTS: Fowler et al were accused of theft on board the US vessel Lawton while it was traveling on the
high seas.
HELD: Philippine courts have no jurisdiction over Fowler. Act 400 granting JD to RP courts for crimes
and offenses committed on the high seas, apply to ship or water craft registered or licensed in the
Philippines only. In the CAB, the Lawton was not registered in the Philippines; it was a US vessel.
People vs. Wong Cheng

(1922)
FACTS: Wong was charged for having illegally smoked opium on board an English vessel Changsa
while anchored in Manila Bay.
95
HELD: Under the English rule which is applicable here (it is the prevailing theory in the US), to smoke
opium within our territorial limits, even though aboard a foreign merchant ship, is certainly a breach
of the public order here established. It causes such drug to produce its pernicious effects within our
territory. It seriously contravenes the purpose that our Legislature had in mind in enacting the
repressive statute, and is therefore triable in our courts.
US vs. Look Chaw

(1910)
FACTS: Two sacks of opium were found to be in the control of Look Chaw aboard the Erroll, an
English steamship. A complaint for possession and sale of opium was filed against him.
HELD: Philippine courts have jurisdiction. Although the mere possession of an article of prohibited
use in the Philippines, aboard a foreign vessel in transit, in any local port, does not as a general rule
constitute a crime triable by the courts of the Islands, such vessel being considered as an extension of
its own nationality, the same rule does not apply when the article, the use of which is prohibited in the
Islands, is landed from the vessel upon Philippine soil.
3) Third Exception: crimes which, although committed by Philippine nationals abroad, are punishable
under Philippine law (ex. Art. 2 RPC)
Fowler Cheng Look

Chaw
FLAG US English English
LOCATION High seas Within RP Within RP

territorial territorial
waters waters
CRIME theft Smoking Possession

opium and selling
of opium
RESULT No JD Acquired Acquired

JD JD
In RP, we follow the French Rule.
XVII. Choice of Law Affecting Corporations and Other Juridical Entities
A. Corporations
A corporation is an artificial being created by operation of law, having the right of succession and the
powers, attributes and properties expressly authorized by law or incident to its existence.
Foreign corporation – formed under the laws of a state other than the Phils; such laws allowing Filipino
citizens and corporations to do business there. It shall have a right to do business here only after obtaining
a license and a certificate of authority from the appropriate government agency.
1. Personal Law of a Corporation
96
The personal law of the corporation is the law of the state where it is incorporated. If the law creating it
does not authorize it to enter into certain contracts, such contracts which can be made in other states shall
be void despite the express permission given by the other state.
ME Gray vs. Insular Lumber Co.

(1939)
FACTS: Gray, a stockholder of Insular (incorporated in NY) filed an action in CFI to compel Insular to
allow him to examine its books. Sec. 77 of NY Stock Corp Law only gives the right to stockholders
owning 3% of the capital stock of the company. Gray does not own the required shares.
HELD: Gray is not entitled to the right to examine the books of Insular. Gray is bound by the NY law
which only gives him the right to receive from the treasurer of the corporation a statement of affairs
covering a particular account of all its assets and liabilities. Neither can his rights be granted under
common law absent a showing that:
a. he seeks information for an honest purpose or to protect his interest as stockholder
b. he exercises right in good faith and for a specific and honest purpose not merely to satisfy
curiosity or for speculative or vexatious purposes.
Anglo American Theory on Corporations
Bank of Augusta vs. Earle

(1839)
FACTS: Bank of A (incorporated in Georgia), thru M’Gran bought bills from Earle in Alabama. Bills
were unpaid so Bank sued Earle. TC ruled that the Georgian Bank could not exercise power in
Alabama thereby making the contracts void.
HELD: Bank can exercise its powers in Alabama and the contracts are therefore valid. It is well-settled
that by the law of the comity of nations, a corp. created by 1 sovereignty is permitted to make contracts
in another and sue in its courts and that the same law of comity prevails in several States of US
including Alabama. Alabama courts have held that a foreign corp may sue in its courts based on the
comity of nations.
Four Basic (Important) Theories from the case:
1) a corporation, being a creature of law, has no legal status beyond the bounds of the sovereignty
within which it was created
2) a corporation cannot exercise powers not granted by its corporate charter or by the laws of the
state of incorporation
3) no state is under any obligation to adhere to the doctrine of comity (every state has the power to
refuse recognition)
4) a state is not obliged to grant to a foreign corporation the privileges and immunities common to its
citizens
The power of a foreign corporation depends upon the laws of the state recognizing it. It may impose
conditions or limitations subject to a few exceptions as decided by US courts, to wit:
a) commerce clause – prohibits a state from imposing conditions on corporations engaged in

interstate commercial activities and provides the basis of federal power to regulate interstate
commerce.
b) Since it is considered a “person”, once allowed to enter a state and acquire property, it cannot be
discriminated against by domestic corps
97
c) Unconstitutional conditions – forbids a state from requiring the foreign corporation to give up its
constitutional rights either as a prerequisite to allowing it to do business or to avoid being removed
from that state
A foreign corporation, although a person, is not a citizen entitled to the privileges given by the state to its
individual citizens.
If according to the personal laws of the corporation, stockholders are given certain rights, such rights
cannot be diminished nor added upon by the law of the place where the corporation does business. This is
because such rights are already fixed by the corporation.
________________
2. Exceptions to the Rule of Incorporation Test
a. Constitutional and Statutory Restrictions
A state may, by legislation, exclude a foreign corp altogether, subject to the constitutional limitations, or
prescribe any conditions it may see fit as a prerequisite to the corporation’s right to do business within its
territory.
1987 Phil Constitution:
a. regulates exploration, development and utilization of natural resources such that only 60% Filipino-
owned corps may be allowed to engage in these activities
b. the nation’s marine wealth and the exclusive economic zone is reserved exclusively to Filipinos
c. Congress is empowered to reserve certain areas of investments to 60 % Filipino owned corps or
provide for a higher percentage (e.g. mass media – 100%)
Pedro Palting vs. San Jose Petroleum

(1966)
FACTS: Palting opposes the tie-up between San Jose Petroleum (a Panamanian corp.) and San Jose
Oil (domestic corp.) as being violative of the Constitution and the Petroleum Act. SJP claimed that it is
entitled to the Parity Amendment which grants to US citizens the right to use & exploit natural
resources in the Phils because its stockholders are US citizens.
HELD: SJP is not covered by the Parity Agreement. It is not owned or controlled directly by US
citizens. It is owned by another Panamanian corp., Oil Investments. Oil Investments on the other hand
is owned by 2 Venezuelan corps. Even assuming that the stocks of the 2 Venezuelan corps are owned
by US citizens, to hold that the set-up in CAB falls within the Parity Amendment is to unduly stretch
and strain the language and intent of the law. There would be practical impossibility to determine at
any given time the citizenship of the controlling stock.
b. Control Test During the War
During wars, courts may pierce the corporate identity and look into the nationality of stockholders to
determine the citizenship of the corp.
Filipinas Compania de Seguros vs. Christern, Huenfeld, Co., Inc.

(1951)
FACTS: Christern (German Co.) filed a claim against Filipinas (US Co.) for recovery on fire insurance
policies issued by the latter. F refused to pay claiming that the policies ceased to be in effect on the
date the US declared was against Germany. Dir. Of Bureau of Financing directed F to pay C.
98
HELD: The policy ceased to be valid and binding because of the fact that majority of the stockholders
of C are Germans and it became an enemy corporation when war was declared. Under Phil Insurance
Code, anyone except a public enemy may be insured. C is a public enemy at the time the insurable risk
occurred. But C is entitled to a return of the premiums paid.
Filipinas Compania case was decided that way because of the government interest involved.
_______________
Daimler Co. Continental Tire and Rubber Co.: HELD: An English corporation with an English secretary but
whose shares of stock are controlled by German nationals was considered an enemy corporation and
prohibited from trading in England. It ruled that the company itself was incapable of loyalty or enmity.
These qualities are attributable only to human beings. The company therefore had the predominant
character of its shareholders being Germans.
3. Domicile or Residence of Foreign Corporations
Art. 51, CC
When the law creating or recognizing them, or any other provision, does not fix the domicile of juridical
persons, it is understood to be
a. the place where legal representation is established
b. where they exercise their principal functions
A foreign corp. granted license to do business here acquires a domicile in the Phils.
State Investment House vs. Citibank

(1991)
FACTS: CMI obtained loans from Citibank. CMI defaulted. Citibank filed petition for involuntary
insolvency against CMI with CFI, Rizal. State Investment, a creditor of CMI, opposed claiming that
Citibank had no jurisdiction because the banks are not resident creditors of CMI.
HELD: The Phil branches of the bank are residents of the Phils being resident foreign corporations as
defined in the Tax Code and other Banking Laws. What effectively makes a foreign corp a resident
corp in the Phils is its actually being in the Phils and licitly doing business here (locality of existence)
The grant of license merely gives legitimacy to its doing business here but it does not make the corp a
resident. Also, the failure of the bank to aver categorically that they are residents are not fatal to the
cause of action where it alleged that it is a foreign bank licensed to do business here.
4. Jurisdiction Over Foreign Corporations
The dictum that a corporation has force only in the incorporating state and no existence outside that state
has been abandoned. The prevailing rule is, with the consent of a state, a foreign corp. shall be recognized
and will be allowed to transact business in any state, which gives its consent.
Requirements for License: Secs. 125-128, Corpo Code)

a. sworn application
b. copy of articles of incorporation
c. designation of an agent
99
d. sworn certification of an official of the incorporating state that a similar right is given to Filipinos in that
state and that the foreign corp. is in good standing
e. statement under oath by the official of the corp. attesting that the corp is solvent and in sound financial
condition
Foreign Corporations doing Business are Bound by Philippine Law
Art. 129, Corp Code

All foreign corporations lawfully doing business in the Philippines shall be bound by all laws, rules and
regulations applicable to domestic corporations.
Exceptions:
1. laws on creation, formation, organization or dissolution of corporations
2. laws which fix the relations, liabilities, responsibilities or duties of stockholders, members or officers of
the corp to each other
Rule 14, Sec. 14 ROC

Service upon foreign corporations doing business in the Phils. may be made on the:
1. resident agent
2. in the absence thereof, to the government official designated by law or any of its officers or agents
within the Phils
3. on any officer or agent of the corp in the Phils
*a fourth method is established by case law: service thru diplomatic channels
5. Right of Foreign Corporation to bring Suit
Acquisition of a license by a foreign corporation is an essential prerequisite for filing of suit before our
courts.
Art. 133, Corp Code states that these corporations may be sued or proceeded against before Phil courts or
administrative tribunals on any valid cause of action recognized under Phil law.
Home Insurance Co. vs. Eastern Shipping Lines

(1983)
FACTS: Home Insurance was subrogated to the rights of shippers against eastern Shipping for damages
on cargo. Eastern refused to pay. HI filed action to recover sum of money. TC dismissed because HI
failed to prove capacity to sue.
HELD: HI has capacity to sue because at the time the complaints were filed, it already had a license to
conduct insurance business in the Phils. Insurance contracts are not null and void for lack of license at
the time it was entered into. The Corp. Code is silent on the status of the said contracts. Also, the object
of the law in requiring registration is to subject the foreign corp. to the JD of our courts.
Atlantic Mutual Insurance vs. Cebu Stevedoring

(1966)
FACTS: Cebu Stevedoring carried copra for Procter & Gamble. Copra were insured with AMI. Bec. of
damages, AMI sued Cebu Stevedoring. CS filed a MTD bec. AMI had no capacity to sue. TC ruled that
it must allege that it has a license to be able to sue.
100
HELD: Such allegation is unnecessary. However, AMI’s mere allegation that it is a foreign corp is not
sufficient. It must state WON it is doing business in the Phils bec different rules attach to the same. If it
is engaged in business, it must be licensed to be able to sue. If not so engaged, the license is not
required and it may sue esp. if it is a single/isolated transaction.
6. Exceptions to License Requirement
a. Isolated Transactions
This has been defined as one which is occasional, incidental and casual, not of a character to indicate a
purpose to engage in business. It does not constitute “doing business” under the law.
Eastboard Navigation vs. Ysmael & Co.

(1957)
FACTS: Eastboard was able to secure a favorable decision from NY arbiters against J.Y. & Co. It
brought an action for enforcement of a money claim against JY & Co. in the Phils. JY opposed alleging
that E had no capacity to sue.
HELD: E has capacity to sue. The license is not necessary because it is not engaged in business in the
Phils. The 2 isolated transactions do not constitute engaging in business within the purview of the
Corpo Law.
b. Action to Protect Trademark, Trade Name, Goodwill, Patent or for Unfair Competition
Even without a license, a foreign corporation may file complaint for unfair competition since it is a suit
enjoining the unfair trader from pursuing the unlawful competition & for the aggrieved party to recover
damages. This is based on equity considerations.
Converse Rubber vs. Jacinto Rubber:

FACTS: Converse owns the trademark of “Converse Chuck Taylor All Star”. Jacinto manufactures
shoes of identical appearance. Hence, this suit.
HELD: Sec 69 of the Corp Law does not disqualify Converse from filing the suit although it is
unlicensed to do business and is not doing business in the Phils. This is in compliance with the
Convention of Paris for the Protection of Industrial Property from which the Phils adheres to and
which US is a signatory.
Leviton Industries vs. Salvador

(1982)
FACTS: Leviton Manufacturing (US) sued Leviton Industries (Phil) for unfair competition bec. the
latter uses the trademark Leviton. Defendant filed MTD for failure to allege capacity to sue.
HELD: Plaintiff failed to allege capacity to sue.

1. All that Leviton Manufacturing alleged is that it is a foreign corporation. It should have, in
addition, alleged the ff pursuant to Sec. 21-a:
a. it registered its trademark with the Phil. Patent Office or that it is an assignee of the trademark,
and
b. that the country of which it is a citizen or domiciliary grants to Filipino corps the same reciprocal
treatment, either in a treaty, convention or law.
2. It also violates Sec. 4, Rule 8 of the Rules of Court, which states that:
101
Facts showing the capacity of a party to sue or be sued or the authority of a party to sue or be sued
in a representative capacity or the legal existence of an organized association of persons that is
made a party, must be averred.
c. Agreements Fully Transacted Outside the Philippines
A foreign corporation is allowed to maintain an action on a transaction wholly celebrated and consummated
abroad so as not to impair the policy of stabilizing commercial transactions.
Universal Shipping Lines vs IAC

HELD: The private respondent may sue in the Phils upon the marine insurance policies to cover
international-bound cargoes shipped by the carrier. It is not the lack of the license but doing business
without such license which bars a foreign corporation from access to our courts.
Hang Lung Bank vs. Saulog

(1991)
FACTS: Hang Lung Bank, not doing business in the Phils, entered into continuing guarantee
agreements with Cordova Chin San in HongKong for the debts of Wolder Enterprises. Wolder
defaulted so Hang Lung sued Wolder and Chin San. No payment was made so it sued Chin San in
RTC, Makati for enforcement of its money claim. Chin San moved to dismiss for incapacity to sue.
HELD: A foreign bank not doing business in the Phils, such as Hang Lung, may sue a resident for
contracts entered and consummated outside the Phils.
Reasons for rule: if not adopted,
a. it will hamper the growth of business between Filipinos and foreigners
b. it will be used as protection by unscrupulous Filipinos who have businesses abroad
d. Petition Filed is Merely a Corollary Defense in a Suit against it
Time Inc. vs. Reyes

HELD: The court allowed a foreign corp is not maintaining a suit in our courts but is merely defending
itself when it files a complaint for the sole purpose of preventing the lower court from exercising
jurisdiction over the case. As such, it is not required to allege its capacity to sue.
Phil. Columbia Enterprises vs. Lantin

(1971)
FACTS: Katoh & Co. filed a complaint against Phil Columbian. Phil Columbian challenged its capacity
to sue. TC deferred the determination of this issue until trial on the merits. PC opposed claiming that if
it files a counterclaim, it will be waiving its right to assail the capacity to sue of Katoh.
HELD: A counterclaim is a complaint against the plaintiff. It would not be the foreign corp who will be
maintaining a suit. Therefore, Sec. 69 of the Corp Law will not apply.
7. Definition and Scope of Transacting Business
A foreign corporation may do business, state consent being presumed, except:

1. where it is prohibited by express statutory authority or constitutional enactment
2. where it is seeking to perform acts which are contrary to public policy
3. where it is seeking to exercise extraordinary and special franchises
4. where it is seeking to perform acts which are not authorized by the law of the state of its incorporation
102
“Doing Business” (Foreign Investments Act)

- soliciting orders,
- service contracts,
- opening offices whether called “liaison” offices,
- appointing representatives if the latter stays for at least 180 days,
- participating in the management, supervision or control of any domestic business
- and any other act that imply a continuity of commercial dealings
- and contemplate in the performance of acts or works
- the progressive prosecution of commercial gain or of the purpose/object of the business organization
What is not doing business:

1. mere investment as a shareholder
2. exercising of rights as investor
3. having a nominee director or officer to represent interests
4. appointing a representative or distributor in the Phils which transacts business in its own name and for
its own accounts
Doing business serves as the basis for jurisdiction over corps on the theory that they are present in the
state or have consented to suit by making that state a major place of business.
Avon Insurance vs. CA

(1997)
HELD: A reinsurance company is not doing business in a certain state merely because the property or
lives which are insured by the original insurer company are located in that state since the reinsurance
contract is usually a separate and distinct arrangement from the original contract of insurance, whose
contracted risk is insured in the reinsurance agreement.
The term “doing business in the Phils” implies a continuity of commercial dealings and arrangements
and contemplates, to that extent, the performance of acts or works or the exercise of functions
normally incident to and in the progressive prosecution of the purpose and object of its organization.
Wang Laboratories vs. Mendoza

(1987)
FACTS: Wang Lab (US corp) sells its products in the Phils thru its exclusive distributor, Exxbite.
ACCRS sued WL for breach of contract for failure to develop the software program contracted. WL
filed MTD on the basis of lack of jurisdiction over its person bec. the service was invalid it being a
foreign corp not engaged in business in the Phils.
HELD: WL is “doing business” in the Phils. It has installed 26 products in the Phils and has registered
its tradename with PPO. It allowed E to use such trademark and to advertise the same.
Thus, it cannot be said that the case involved an isolated or single transaction. The transaction is not
merely incidental or casual but is of such nature as to indicate a purpose to do other business in the
State.
CIR vs. JAL

(1991)
FACTS: JAL was assessed deficiency income tax by CIR for the sales of its ticketing agent (PAL) in the
Phils. JAL opposed and claimed that as a non-resident foreign corp. it can only be taxed on income
from Phil sources.
HELD: JAL is a resident foreign corporation under the Tax Code. For a foreign corporation to be
regarded as doing business, there must be a continuity of conduct and intention to establish a
103
continuous business (i.e. appointment of a local agent) and not a temporary one. JAL constituted PAL
as a local agent to sell tickets which is the lifeblood of airline tickets, the generation of sales being its
paramount objective.
Merrill Lynch Futures vs CA

(1992)
FACTS: Lara spouses entered into a Futures Customer Agreement with Merrill Lynch Futures Inc.
They become indebted to it after a loss in the business. Laras refused to pay and claimed that the
transactions were void because MLFI had no license to operate as a commodity or financial futures
broker.
HELD: MLFI had the capacity to sue and Laras are estopped from denying the same after having done
business with it over many years. The purpose of applying the doctrine of estoppel is to prevent
persons from taking undue advantage of a corp’s non-compliance with the statutes where such person
received benefits under their contract.
Granger vs. Microwave Systems

(1990)
FACTS: Granger (US) sued MSI (Phil) for recovery of a sum of money. MSI did not pay and claimed
that G had no capacity to sue bec. it was unlicensed.
HELD: G had no capacity to sue because of its being an unlicensed foreign corp doing business in the
Phils. Neither does it fall under the established exceptions. Granger had the burden of showing that
the finding fell under an exception. The purpose of requiring license is to enable Phil courts to exercise
jurisdiction over them. If the foreign corp operates here without submitting to our laws by securing a
license, they may not be allowed to invoke our laws for their protection.
B. Special Corporations
1. Religious Societies and the Corporation Sole

A religious society, if controlled by aliens, is not permitted to acquire lands.
A corporation sole is an incorporated office composed of only one person as in the cases of the chief
archbishop, bishop, priest, minister or an elder of a religious sect which may form a corporation sole for the
purpose of managing its affairs, property and temporalities.
Roman Catholic Administrator vs. LRC

HELD: The 60% Filipino capital requirement to own lands was not intended to apply to corporations
sole because it is composed of one person usually a head or bishop of a diocese but he is only the
administrator and not the owner of the temporalities. Such are administered for and in behalf of the
faithful who are Filipino citizens.
2. Transnational Corporations
Transnational corporations are clusters of several corporations, each with a separate entity, existing and
spread out in several countries, but controlled by the headquarters in a developed state where it was
originally organized.
But the transnational corporations are established under and governed by each host country’s national laws.
104
However, all locally incorporated branches are joined together by the common control and management of
higher officials in the home state.
As to liability, the single unit comprising the cluster is held liable according to the laws of the host country
but the transnational corporation, in its entirety, is not answerable to any legal order.
Derivative Jurisdiction over Foreign Corporations (parent-subsidiary)

2 Important Issues
1. whether ownership by the parent over the subsidiary’s stock is enough to give jurisdiction over the
subsidiary
2. whether the activities of the subsidiary in a state will give that state jurisdiction over he parent
corporation
Restatement 2nd:
Jurisdiction over the parent will exist if the parent controls and dominates the subsidiary. In determining
whether the separate corporate existence of the subsidiary has been adequately preserved, the courts will
consider whether the subsidiary has its own records, assets, advertising, employees, payroll and accounting
and whether its directors and headquarters are different form those of the parent.
In the converse situation, jurisdiction over the parent may give jurisdiction over the subsidiary if the
separate corporate existence of each has not been adequately maintained or if the parent has acted within
the state as the subsidiary’s agent.
C. Partnerships
Partnership is formed by 2 or more persons who bind themselves to contribute money, property or industry
to a common fund with the intention of dividing the profits among themselves.
Phil internal law provides that if the domicile of the partnership is not identified by the law creating it, it is
deemed domiciled in the place where it has its legal representation or where it exercises its principal
functions.
What matters are governed by the personal law of the partnership?

1. nature, attributes and capacity to contract of the partnership
2. whether or not a partnership has been constituted (esp. the conditions and formalities required)
3. determination of WON it requires a separate juridical personality (Common law does not consider a
partnership a legal person but civil law endows partnerships with a separate legal personality)
4. grounds for dissolution and termination of partnerships
5. liability of partners esp. if limited partnership is allowed
What are governed or subject to the law of the place of business?
1. entitlements and limitations, in general

2. creation of establishments in the state
3. mercantile operations
4. jurisdiction of nations
 Domestic Corp.:
a) Can sue
b) Can be sued
 Foreign Corps.
1) Doing Business
a. With license – can sue and be sued
b. Without license – cannot sue, can be sued
105
2) Not Doing Business (isolated transaction) – can sue and be sued

________________
PART FIVE: FOREIGN JUDGMENTS
XVIII: Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments
A. Distinction between Recognition and Enforcement
‘Foreign judgments’- all decisions rendered outside the forum and encompasses judgments, decrees &
orders of courts of foreign countries as well as of sister states in a federal system of gov’t.
Conceptual & Procedural Differences between Recognition & Enforcement:

Rules on recognition & enforcement are analogous but there are differences in conceptual & procedural
aspects.
ENFORCEMENT: This happens when a successful plaintiff fails to enforce judgment in the forum court so he
seeks to carry out the execution of the judgment in another state.
This requires the filing of an action and a new judgment before the properties of the defendant can be
attached.
RECOGNITION: This may arise when a successful defendant wins and asserts that decision to preclude the
plaintiff from filing a suit on the same claim in another forum. It is basically a passive act because it does
not require the filing of an action in another forum. EX. Decree of divorce.
B. Bases of Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments
1) Comity
According to Cheshire, the theory on comity mean that in order to maintain reciprocal treatment from the
courts of other countries, we are compelled to take foreign judgments as they stand & to give them Full
faith & Credit.
Comity calls for reciprocity between the concerned jurisdictions. Thus, forum A will withhold recognition &
enforcement of prior judgment if it comes from Forum B, w/c does not give same concession to forum A
judgment.
2) “Obligation of foreign judgments”
This doctrine of obligation is derived from the rigid & unyielding vested rights theory.
Judgment of a foreign court of competent jurisdiction is considered as imposing a duty or obligation on the
losing litigant.
i.e.:
Forum 1- adjudicates debt owing to plaintiff
Forum 2- treats F1 judgment as evidence of debt w/c may be enforced in F2 by an action of debt
Goddard vs. Godard

(1870)
FACTS: Godard (French) obtained a favorable ruling by a French court arising on a charter party
obligation against Gray (English). The French court interpreted the clause “penalty for non-
performance of this agreement, estimated amount of freight” as a clause that sets the limits to liability
to one voyage between the parties to the charter party contrary to the English interpretation. When
this French judgment was sought to be enforced in England, Gray interposed in defense that the
erroneous French judgement is a bar to the action for enforcement in England.
106
HELD: it is not a bar. In England, foreign judgement are enforced based on the principle that where a
court of competent jurisdiction has adjudicated a sum of money to be due from one person to another,
a legal obligation arises to pay the sum, on which an action of debt to enforce the judgement may be
maintained and not merely out of politeness and courtesy to other tribunals of other countries.
Anything that negates the existence of a legal obligation or excuses the defendant from performance is
a good defense to the action (ex. Evidence that court exceeded its jurisdiction or the judgement was
obtained thru fraud)
C. Policies Underlying Recognition and Enforcement
1. Res judicata
Many courts recognize & enforce foreign judgments on ground of res judicata, under which principle:
a. those who contested an issue shall be bound by the result &
b. matters once tried & decided w/ finality in one jurisdiction shall be considered as settled b/w
the parties
Thus, parties are prevented from litigating issues already determined by a local judgment.
In Anglo-American jurisprudence, foreign judgments are not open to reexamination on merits when placed
in issue before local courts subject to a few exceptions.
The principle seeks to accomplish the policy of giving finality to litigation. Public policy dictates diminishing
the judicial energy invested in deciding suits, encouraging confidence in court decrees and securing the
legitimate expectations of successful plaintiff or defendant that he will no longer be harassed into protecting
his interests.
Rule 39 Sec 40:

A foreign judgment of a tribunal of a foreign country, having jurisdiction to pronounce judgment renders it
conclusive upon the title to the thing while a judgment against a person is presumptive evidence of a right
as between the parties & their successors in interest
2. Merger
It considers the plaintiff’s cause of action as merged in the judgment. Thus, he may not relitigate that exact
same claim.
3. Bar
This is where a successful defendant interposes the judgment in his favor to avert a second action by
plaintiff on the same claim. By direct estoppel, the relitigation of all matters decided are precluded
In addition, DOCTRINE OF COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL renders conclusive all “essential issues of fact actually
litigated in the suit decided on by the foreign court”.
Distinction between Res Judicata & Collateral Estoppel
RES JUDICATA- seeks to end litigation by disallowing suit on the same claim
COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL- concerned with preclusion by barring relitigation of an issue already litigated on in
a prior proceeding
D. Requisites for Recognition or Enforcement
1) The foreign judgment was rendered by a judicial or a quasi-judicial tribunal which had jurisdiction
over the parties & the case in the proper judicial proceeding.
107
2) The judgment must be valid under the laws of the court that rendered it
3) The judgment must be final & executory to constitute res judicata in another action
4) The state where the foreign judgment was obtained allows recognition or enforcement of Philippine
judgment
5) The judgment must be for a fixed sum of money
6) The foreign judgment must not be contrary to the public policy or the good morals of the country
where it is to be enforced
7) The judgment must not have been obtained by fraud, collusion, mistake of fact or mistake
1. The foreign judgment was rendered by a judicial or a quasi-judicial tribunal having jurisdiction over the
parties & the case in the proper case
A court validly asserts jurisdiction over actions in personam based on consent of parties or relation of the
parties or events to the forum, thus satisfying minimum standards of fair play & substantial justice.
In in rem proceeding, jurisdiction is based on the power of the state over the property found within the
territory
Northwest Orient Airlines vs. CA and C.F. Sharp

(1995)
FACTS: Under contract of agency, NOA authorized Sharp to sell airline tickets. Sharp failed to remit
the proceeds of the ticket sales to NOA. The court in Tokyo failed to serve the writ of summons against
the Sharp branches in Tokyo. NOA had these writs served in the Manila main office of Sharp. Despite
the notice, Sharp did not appear at the hearing. NOA obtained a judgment in its favor. NOA sought
enforce the judgment in the Philippines. Sharp opposed claiming that the service of process was void
so the Tokyo Court did not acquire jurisdiction over it.
HELD: Service of summons by Tokyo court was valid. A foreign judgment is presumed to be valid
and binding in the country where it comes, until the contrary is shown. The regularity of the
proceedings and the giving of due notice is also presumed. The party attacking has the burden of
overcoming this presumption. In CAB, SHARP alleged that the extraterritorial service of summons is
void. However, Sharp failed to prove the applicable Japanese procedural law to base its claim since in
matters of procedure, lex fori applies. Also, Sec. 14 of ROC applies, it allows service to be made to:
a. resident agent designated (if it has one, the designation is exclusive)
b. if none, on the government official designated by law ( Insurance Commissioner –
foreign insurance co.; Superintendent of Banks – foreign banking corps. & SEC –
other foreign corps licensed to do business in Phils) The government official shall
transmit the summons by mail to the principal office.
c. any of its officers/agents within the Phils.
Sharp did not designate an agent so service on govt official or any of its officers in Japan is allowed.
The Court finds that the service made by Tokyo court sufficient to fall under service to the proper govt
official.
(Tokyo DC- SC Japan – Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan – Japanese Embassy – DFA, Phils – RTC –
sheriff delivered summons to principal office)
108
Boudard vs. Tait

(1939)
FACTS: Boudard’s husband, employee of Tait, was killed by co-employees. Boudard obtained a
favorable judgment against Tait who was declared to be in default in CFI of Hanoi. She filed action for
execution of Hanoi judgment in CFI Manila. Court dismissed for lack of jurisdiction of Hanoi court
over Tait who was not a resident of French Indo-China.
HELD: Hanoi court has no jurisdiction over Tait. Jurisdiction in personam, over non-residents, in
money suits, must be based upon personal service within the state that renders the judgment. At the
time of the complaint, Tait was not in Hanoi nor were his agents or representatives. Also, the French
law on service of summons was not applied. Instead of serving a copy to the Atty Gen of the Republic
who shall visae the original, the summons were served in Manila to J.M. Shotwell, a representative of
Churchill & Tait Inc, which is an entity entirely different from Tait.
Ramirez vs. Gmur

(1918)
FACTS: The will of Bischoff contained a statement to the effect that he had no living forced heirs.
Leona Castro, Bischoff’s recognized natural daughter, had 2 sets of children from 2 marriages, who
claim to be heirs of Bischoff.
 first married to Von Kaufmann and had 3 children but Von Kaufmann obtained divorce on France
 Castro was remarried to Dr. Mory and they had 2 children
HELD: as to the Mory children – NO, the second marriage is void. The right to inherit pertains only to
legitimate, legitimated and acknowledged natural children. The French decree of divorce is not valid
in the Philippines. French court had no jurisdiction to entertain actions for dissolution of marriages of
performed in the Phils over persons domiciled here. The RULE is that when a court, where neither of
the spouses are domiciled, and to which one or both, may resort merely to obtain decree of divorce,
issues such decree, the divorce is not entitled to recognition elsewhere.
As long as the foreign court acquired jurisdiction, its decisions will not be disturbed whether it was reached
through an adversary proceeding or by default.
Somportex vs. Philadelphia Chewing Gum Corp.. Court rejected Philadelphia’s contention that a default
judgment by the English courts should not be extended hospitality by American courts.
“In the absence of fraud or collusion, a default judgment is as conclusive as adjudication between the
parties as when rendered after answer & complete contest in open court.
The polestar is whether a reasonable method for notification is employed & reasonable opportunity to be
heard is given to the person concerned.”
Borthwick vs. Castro

(1987)
FACTS: Borthwick (US) owned real properties in Hawaii. He issued promissory notes to Scallon but
failed to pay the same. Scallon sued him in Hawaii. B was issued summons while in California which
process was valid under Hawaiian law. For failure to enforce the judgement, S filed action in Phils. B’s
defense is that the Hawaii court has no jurisdiction over the cause of action and over his person.
HELD: Foreign judgements are presumptive evidence of the rights between parties and rejection may
be justified, among others, by want of jurisdiction of the issuing authority, among others. But in CAB,
such rejection was not justified. What Borthwick seeks in this appeal is a 3rd chance to contest the
jurisdiction of the foreign court. In order to do that, he must show that the declaration of default was
109
incorrect. But Borthwick did not do this. Borthwick was given an opportunity to file his answer in the
Hawaii court, he was also given a chance in the CFI, Makati, but he failed to do the same.
2. The judgment must be valid under the laws of the court that rendered it
In Pemberto vs. Hughes although there was error in procedure, since the Florida court was competent & no
substantial injustice was committed, the English court did not consider the error as to significantly alter an
otherwise valid decree.
3. The judgment must be final & executory to constitute res judicata in another action
If judgment is interlocutory or provisional in character w/c ‘contemplates that a fuller investigation leading
to final decision may later be held, it creates no obligation on the forum court to recognize it.
Nouvion vs. Freeman

(1889)
FACTS: Nouvion filed an action for administration of the estate of Henderson. In order to show that
he was Henderson’s creditor, Nouvion alleged that he obtained a foreign judgment establishing
Henderson’s indebtedness to him.
HELD: The Spanish judgment cannot be sustained because it was not yet final and conclusive. Where
a court of competent jurisdiction has adjudicated a certain sum as due from one to another, a legal
obligation arises, on which an action of debt to enforce judgment may be maintained. But to come
within the terms of law properly laid down, judgment must result from an adjudication of a court of
competent jurisdiction, such judgement being final and conclusive. It is not sufficient that the
judgement puts an end to and finally settles controversy. It must e shown that in the court by which it
was pronounced it conclusively and finally settles forever the existence of debt of which it is sought to
be made conclusive.
Querubin vs. Querubin

(1950)
FACTS: Following their divorce because of Margaret’s infidelity, rendered in New Mexico, their
daughter Querubina was kept in a neutral home. Silvestre then obtained an interlocutory decree
granting him custody. Margaret had the decree modified since the she was remarried and had a stable
home for Querubina. When Silvestre fled to the Philippines with Querubina, Margaret filed for habeas
corpus. She asserts that the interlocutory order should be complied with pursuant to Article 48 Rule
39.
HELD: Her contention is erroneous. A foreign interlocutory order in favor of Margaret did not
establish a vested right with respect to rightful custody over Queribina. The decree is not yet final but
subject to change with the circumstances. Generally, divorce decree awarding custody of child to one
spouse is respected by other states but such decree has no effect in another state as to facts and
conditions occurring subsequently to date of decree. Court of another state may award custody
otherwise upon proof of subsequent matters justifying such decree to the child’s interest.
4. The state where the foreign judgment was obtained allows recognition or enforcement of Philippine
judgment
In Hilton vs. Guyot, a French judgment was not recognized by a US court because it found out that French
laws allowed review of American judgments on the merits. This ruling is widely criticized because:
 Instead of being a mutual exchange of privileges, comity was used as a means of retaliation.
110
 The court in Hilton discriminated against the litigants on account of the policies of their governments
which they were in no position to shape and alter.
 It can be argued that the task of formulating policies through reciprocity is a power misplaced in the
judiciary and should be appropriately wielded by the other branches of government.
Trautman and Von Mehren point out the difficulties with the reciprocity requirement.
a. its normal tendency is to lower rather than raise the standards of practice
b. the private litigants burdened may not be closely attached to the legal order sought to be
changed
c. the administration of reciprocity clauses can be complicated esp. where case law systems
are affected since finding the exact foreign law that grants reciprocity is still nebulous. It
is unclear whether reciprocity is proved by general recognition of such or requires a
specific recognition for a case identical or analogous to the one before the court.
Cowans, et al. vs. Teconderoga Pulp and Paper Co.

(1927)
FACTS: Cowans obtained a Quebec judgment in their favor for a sum of money. TPP asserts in
defense that this judgment is not conclusive upon, but merely a prima facie evidence before the US
courts, pursuant to Quebec law. TPP alleges that since Quebec law does not reciprocate as to
judgements of NY courts, NY should also not recognize the Quebec judgment as adjudications of the
issues.
HELD: This claim of TPP pursuant to the Hilton vs. Guyot doctrine should not be followed.
Persuasiveness of a foreign judgment is not dependent upon comity nor reciprocity. Even without
these principles, a judgment has its own strength. Following the Hilton vs. Guyot ruling would
deprive a party of the private rights he has acquired by reason of a foreign judgement because the
country in whose courts the judgement was rendered has a different rule of evidence than what the
recognizing court has and does not give the same effect as the latter gives to a foreign judgment.
5. The judgment must be for a fixed sum of money
Unless the foreign judgment specifies performance or delivery, there is nothing for the forum court to
enforce. In Sadler vs. Roberis, the English court held that until taxation, the plaintiff could not enforce his
claim because the Jamaican court decided that from the sum due him should first be subtracted the costs
incurred by the defendant which was to be taxed. Hence, the amount decreed was not fixed.
6. The foreign judgment must not be contrary to the public policy or the good morals of the country where
it is to be enforced
Querubin vs. Querubin

(1950)
HELD: It goes against the law, public policy, and good customs that a mother who violated her marital
vows should have custody (referring to the fact that Margaret was having an illicit affair with another
man).
7. The judgment must not have been obtained by fraud, collusion, mistake of fact or mistake of law
Whether or not there is fraud is decided by the court where enforcement of judgment is sought on the basis
of its own internal law. A problem may arise when the internal law is not in agreement with the notions of
equity of the foreign state.
Rule 39, Sec. 50

Effect of Foreign Judgment. The effect of a judgment of a court of a foreign country, having jurisdiction to
pronounce the judgment is as follows:
a. in case of a judgment upon a specific thing, the judgment is conclusive upon the title to
the thing
111
b. in case of judgment upon a person, the judgment is a presumptive evidence of a right as

between the parties and their successors in interest by a subsequent title; but the judgment may
be repelled by evidence of want of jurisdiction, want of notice to the party, collusion, fraud, or
clear mistake of law or fact.
This rule does not refer to intrinsic fraud which goes to the merits of the case. To impeach a foreign
judgment, fraud must be “extrinsic, collateral act which vitiates the most solemn proceedings of the courts
of justice” such as collusion by the parties, suppression of an important document or the presentation in
evidence of a forged will or falsified affidavit. Extrinsic fraud signifies that a party is deprived of his day in
court.
Philippine Aluminum vs. FASGI

(1950)
FACTS: FASGI (US) entered into a distributorship agreement with PAWI (Phil). PAWI shipped
defective goods to FASGI. FASGI sued PAWI for breach of contract in US court. They entered into a
settlement but PAWI still failed to pay. US court issued a certificate of final judgment upon application
by FASGI of entry of judgment. FASGI was not able to satisfy the claim in US so it filed a complaint for
enforcement in RTC. RTC dismissed but CA reversed.
HELD: California court judgment may be enforced. A judgment for a sum of money ordered in a
foreign court is presumptive evidence of a right between the parties and their successors-in-interest,
but when suit for enforcement is filed in Phil court, the judgment may be repelled by evidence of want
of jurisdiction, want of notice, fraud, collusion or a clear mistake of law or fact.
In CAB, PAWI failed to prove that there was collusion between its counsel, Mr. Ready, and FASGI in
entering into the settlement and in agreeing to an entry of judgment against PAWI. PAWI should have
raised the issue before the forum court in line with the principle of comity of nations that a court
should refrain from assuming the power to pass upon the correctness of the application of laws and
evaluation of facts of judgments issued by foreign courts.
Puyat vs. Zabarte

(2001)
FACTS: Z filed an action to enforce money judgment rendered by the Superior Court of California
against P. RTC by summary judgment ordered Puyat to pay Z pursuant to Judgment of Stipulation for
Entry of Judgment contained in the Compromise Agreement between them in the Calif. court. CA held
that P is estopped from assailing the judgment that had become final.
HELD: The summary judgment is allowed. Since the present action lodged in the RTC was for the
enforcement of a foreign judgment, there was no need to ascertain the rights and obligations of the
parties based on foreign laws or contracts; the parties needed only to perform their obligations under
the Compromise Agreement they had entered into. None of the reasons for invoking forum non
conveniens barred the RTC from exercising its jurisdiction (forum shopping, overcrowded dockets,
harassment of defendants, etc.) In CAB, there was no more need for material witnesses, no forum
shopping or harassment of Puyat, no inadequacy in the local machinery to enforce the foreign
judgment and no question raised as to the application of any foreign law.
E. Grounds for Non-Recognition
Uniform Money-Judgment Recognition Act of the US, Section 4:
(a) A foreign judgment is not conclusive if-

1. The judgment was rendered under a system which does not provide impartial tribunals or procedures
compatible with the requirements of due process of law
2. The foreign court did not have personal jurisdiction over the defendant
112
3. The foreign court did not have jurisdiction over the subject matter
(b) A foreign judgment need not be recognized if-

1) The defendant in the proceedings in foreign court did not receive notice of the proceedings in
sufficient time to enable him to defend
2) The judgment was obtained by fraud
3) The cause of action or claim for relief on which judgment is based is repugnant to public
policy of the state.
4) The foreign judgment conflicts with another final & conclusive judgment.
5) The proceeding in the foreign country was contrary to an agreement between the parties under
which the dispute in question settled otherwise than the proceeding in that court
6) In the case of jurisdiction based only on personal service, the foreign court was a seriously
inconvenient forum for the trial of the action
Grounds 1-3 under letter b are mandatory & the last 3 are discretionary.
The ground on non-recognition for lack of jurisdiction in personam is most debatable. Most courts
consider jurisdiction of foreign court as appropriate when there are significant contacts between forum
states & individuals.
The service of summons as the traditional basis for exercise of jurisdiction has been eroded.
The ground that “foreign court was seriously inconvenient” employs doctrine of forum non conveniens to
restrain use of “presence” as cornerstone of jurisdiction.
Art 23 Hague Convention on Jurisdiction, Applicable Law, Recognition, Enforcement & Cooperation in re of
Parental Responsibility & Measures for Protection of Children:
Considering the best interests of child, recognition of measures directed for protection of the child or his
property may be refused if such were taken without giving the child opportunity to be heard or if contrary to
public policy.
Violation of ordre public & nonobservance of due process are included as grounds for non-recognition in
many Hague Conventions.
F. Modern Developments in Enforcement of Foreign Judgment
1. The Hague Conference on Private IL Convention on Recognition & Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in
Civil & Commercial Matters established conditions & requisites for contracting states to recognize & enforce
each other’s judgment.
Contributions:
a) provisions on applicability of Convention irrespective of nationality
b) non-refusal for sole reason that court of state of origin has applied a law other than that which
would have been applicable according to the rules of Private IL of the state addressed
c) it addresses the question of whether a default judgment is subject to enforcement
d) establishes recognition & enforcement procedures
The seventh session looked into possibility of a general convention on recognition & enforcement of
judgments whose chief benefit will be the relatively uniform procedure among contracting states.
2. The EEC Convention of 1968
Six countries comprising the European Economic Community are signatories to Convention on Jurisdiction of
Courts & Enforcement of Decisions…
The Convention extends to Common Market area the reach of jurisdictionally improper for a now available
against non-residents under procedural systems of 4 member states.
113
3. The Uniform Money-Judgments Recognition Act
This seeks to inspire more confidence in stability of American law & bring together into one statute all
common law rules of recognition from jurisprudence.
What does the act cover?
It is applicable to any foreign country judgment that is final & conclusive & enforceable when rendered even
though an appeal is pending or it is subject to appeal.
G. Procedure for Enforcement
The Philippines has adopted the common law practice of not instantaneously executing foreign judgment.
MODES OF ENFORCEMENT
A. First Mode: Need for New Judicial Action
Procedure in Philippines
(Compared to simple procedure of exequaure, Philippine mode is protracted & expensive).
Our laws require that a petition should be filed in proper court attaching authenticated copy of foreign
judgment to be enforced.
Philippine consul must certify that it had been rendered by a court of competent jurisdiction. The petition
must comply w/ all the requisites of an enforceable judgment.
Requirement to file an action anew
Attempt to reconcile the principle of territorial jurisdiction of courts w/c demands that the enforcement of a
judgment outside the territory of rendering court must be placed upon some other basis than the authority
of the rendering court w/c ceased at its jurisdictional limits- & the principle of res judicata.
Ingenohl vs. Olsen and Co.

FACTS: Ingenohl obtained a HK judgment declaring it to be the owner of the trademark against Olsen.
Ingenohl then recovered the sums awarded by the HK judgment in an action for collection in Manila.
Olsen appealed. The appeal was granted because the trial court erred in not taking into account the
fact that Olsen had bought the Ingenohl trademark in a sale of the same conducted by the Alien
Property Custodian. Hence this petition by Ingenohl.
HELD: There is no error on the part of the HK court. In authoritatively passing upon the issue of not
giving effect to the sale by the Alien Property Custodian, it cannot be said that the HK tribunal
committed a wrong decision. The judgment is unquestionably valid and is binding between the
parties. When the judge who is the final exponent of that law, authoritatively declares that the
assignment by the Custodian of the assets of the Manila firm cannot and will not be allowed to affect
the rights of the party concerned in Hong Kong, the court ruled that it is not possible for a foreign
court to pronounce his decision wrong.
Procedure in other civil law countries
B. Second Mode: Exequatur - -Summary proceeding also known as ‘exequatur’ procedure.

Authenticated copy of foreign judgment need only be accompanied by a certification from Clerk of Court.
Once validated the foreign judgment has same effect as local judgment. Example: French formule
executoire, used in France, Italy, Austria
C. Third Mode: Judgment Registration
114
It may or may not involve judicial supervision. Authenticated copy of foreign judgment filed w/ registrar’s
office w/ other proofs required by domestic laws & foreign judgment is converted into a local one that is
immediately executory.
It is used in Australia, England.
Distinctions between a foreign country & a sister-state judgment in United States
These differences are premised on possible absence of principles underlying res judicata practices within
foreign country.
Von Mehren & Trautman: There are significant differences between the 2 to justify refusal of a foreign
country judgment even though it could be recognized if rendered by a sister state:
1) US Constitution clause of full faith and credit. This substitutes a federal policy in place of individual
state policies, thus demanding that sister-state judgments be given more than minimal preclusive
effects.
2) Judgments of sister-state may be brought to US Supreme Court for review
3) Judgments rendered by sister states are based on legal procedures & standards similar to those
whose recognition is sought.
On the other hand, a foreign country judgment may have been decided under rules that disregard private
rights & duties or fundamental policies that the recognizing court deem important.
In practice, courts are inclined to give recognition because of

1) overriding public interest
2) dictates of public policy that there be an end to litigation.
115
116

COURSE OUTLINE ON CONFLICT OF LAWS

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

COURSE OUTLINE ON CONFLICT OF LAWS

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

COURSE OUTLINE IN CONFLICT OF LAWS

By: Atty. Enrique V. dela Cruz, Jr.

By: Atty. Enrique V. dela Cruz, Jr.1

PART ONE: INTRODUCTION

I. Scope and Conflict of Laws: Nature, Definition and Importance

A. Diversity of Laws, Customs and Practices

Hilton vs. Guyot

Distinguished from Public International Law and other disciplines:

Public International Private

Principally governs Principally governs

C. Object, Function and Scope

3 Issues in Conflict of Laws:

II. A Brief History and Development of Conflict of Laws

 Italian City States

Statute is classified into:

 16th century, France

Ulrich Huber – first used the term, conflict of laws

Comitas Gentium was readily accepted because of increasing international transactions.

Ex. French Civil Code of 1804

Frederich Carl Von Savigny

Conflict of Laws in the Philippines

III. Sources of Conflict of Laws

A. Codes and Statutes

1. Roman code codified principles of ius gentium.

Conflict Laws of the Philippines

B. Treaties and International Conventions

Some of these treaties/conventions are:

1. Convention on Intl Civil Aviation,

C. Treatises, Commentaries and Studies of Learned Societies

PART TWO: JURISDICTION AND CHOICE OF LAW

4 Major Questions in Analyzing a Conflict of Laws Problem:

2) Has the court JD over the subject matter (“competency”)?

A. Basis of Exercise of Judicial Jurisdiction

Bases of Judicial Jurisdiction (3 groups):

1) JD over the person (based on forum-defendant contacts)

2) JD over the res (based on forum-property contacts)

3) JD over the subject matter

1. Jurisdiction over the Person

JD over the defendant may be had by personal or substituted service of summons.

Gemperle vs. Schenker

2) over the property

basis of JD: presence of the property within the territory

2. Jurisdiction over the Property

JD over the property results from:

a) seizure of the property under a legal process

Pennoyer vs. Neff

International Shoe Co. vs. Washington

Mullane vs. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.

Shaffer vs. Heitner

3. Jurisdiction over the Subject-matter

Subject-matter JD cannot be conferred by consent of the parties.

Idonah Perkins vs. Roxas

b) Mullane – disregards strict distinction between in rem and in personam

Long-arm statutes: already identify what are the bases of JD.

 Jurisdiction and choice of law do not mean the same thing.

B. Ways of Dealing with a Conflicts Problem

The court may deal with a conflicts problem, by:

2) assuming jurisdiction and applying either forum or foreign law

1. Dismiss the case

Doctrine of Forum non Conveniens

Reasons for applying forum non conveniens:

2) burdensome on the court or taxpayers (severe backlog of cases)

4) avoid global forum shopping