Conflicts of Law Outline Reviewer Conflicts of Laws - That part of municipal law of a State which directs its courts

and administrative agencies, when confronted with a legal problem involving a foreign element, whether or not they should apply a foreign law/s (Paras). (4) Elements 1. Conflict of laws is part of the municipal law of a state; 2. There is a directive to courts and admin agencies; 3. There is a legal problem involving foreign element; 4. There is either an application or a nonapplication of a foreign law or foreign laws. Distinctions between Conflicts of Law and Public International Law Bases As to nature Persons involved COL Municipal in character Private Individuals PIL International in character Sovereign states; and other entities possessed of an international personality such as the UN org Generally affected by public interest; those in general are of interest only to sovereign States -Peaceful (diplomatic negotiations, tender & exercise of good office, mediation, conciliation) -Judicial arbitration/settlem ent -Forcible (severance of diplomatic relations, retorsions, embargo, pacific blockade, war

Treatises and International Conventions Judicial Decisions International Customs Indirect: Natural Moral Law Work of Writers Kilberg Doctrine It is a rule to the effect that the forum is not bound by the law of the place of injury or death as to the limitations on damages for wrongful act because such rule is procedural and hence the law of the forum governs on this issue. (Northwest Airlines vs. CA) Center of Gravity Doctrine Choice of law problems in conflicts of law are resolved by the application of the law of the jurisdiction which has the most significant relationship to or contact with the event and parties to litigation and issue therein. Forum Non Conveniens A forum may resist imposition upon its jurisdiction even when jurisdiction is authorized by law on the ground that the forum is inconvenient or the ends of justice would be best served by trial in another forum or the controversy may be more suitably tried elsewhere tried elsewhere. It may be manifested in the following ways: 1. The evidence and the witness may not be readily available; 2. The court dockets of the forum may already be clogged to permit additional cases would inevitably hamper the speedy administration of justice; 3. Evils of forum shopping; 4. Forum has no particular interest in the case; 5. The case may be better tried in other courts. The doctrine should generally apply only if the defendant is a corporation Elements: a. The forum State is one to which the parties may conveniently resort to; b. It is in a position to make an intelligent decision as to the law and the facts; and c. It has or is likely to have power to enforce its decision. Jurisdiction In international law, it is often defined as the right of a State to exercise authority over persons and things within its boundaries, subject to certain exceptions. Jurisdiction over the Person 1. Jurisdiction over the person of the plaintiff is acquired from the moment he invokes the aid of

Transactions involved

Private transactions between private individuals Resort to municipal tribunals

Remedies and Sanctions

Sources Direct: Constitutions Codifications Special Laws International


claiming that they have been deprived of the legitime that the laws of the Philippines. If the action is in rem.. 1960 Facts: The testator C. He alleged that the latter s will was executed in Elkins. To this end. He declared in his will that the same was executed in accordance with the laws of the State of Nevada. Shall be regularized by the national law of the person whose succession is in question. he continued to be a citizen of the US and of the state of his particular choice. Bohanan was born in Nebraska and therefore a citizen of that state. Art 10 para 2 of the CC (now par 2. No evidence was introduced showing that the extract from the laws of West Virginia was in force at the time alleged will was executed. 1950. 1690 and as certified to by the Director of National Library. Hence. Such laws must be proved as facts. Pursuant to this article. Charles E. this appeal. The testamentary provisions of the will. West Virginia on November 3. concede them. The children were only given legacies of P6. The court therefore did not err in denying the probate of the will. Nor was the extract from the law attested by the certificate of the officer having charge of the original. The laws of the foreign jurisdiction do not prove themselves in our courts. Here the requirements of the law were not met. Fleumer vs. as provided in Sec 30 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Nevada. p. This kind of jurisdiction of jurisdiction is referred to as in rem jurisdiction.the court and voluntarily submits himself by institution of the suit through proper pleadings 2. allow him to dispose of all of his properties without requiring him to leave any portion of his estate to his wife. Issue: Is it necessary to prove in this jurisdiction the existence of such law in West Virginia as a prerequisite to the allowance and recording of said will. 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 Virginia. Since no right to share in the inheritance in favor of a divorced wife exists to share in the inheritance in favor of a divorced wife exists in the state of Nevada and since there was no conjugal property between the testator and Magdalena C Bohanan. The laws of Nevada of which the deceased was a citizen. which allows a testator to dispose of all his property according to his will. Held: Yes. The existence of such law in West Virginia must be proved.2 1914. Involves the personal status of the plaintiff Philippine Trust Co. Yes. In Re: Estate of Suntay 2 . or at least a citiz en of California where some of his properties were located. vs. therefore are valid.84 as found in West Virginia Code. and that the laws of that state govern. 1925 by Hix who had his residence in that jurisdiction. Bohanan GR L-12105. the petitioner submitted a copy of Section 3868 of Acts 1882. vol. c. and when 3. On April 24. quasi in rem. Personal or Substituted service of summons Jurisdiction over the Property Results either from seizure of the property under a legal process or from the institution of legal proceedings wherein the court s power over the property is recognized and made effective. Notwithstanding his long stay in the Philippines.O. Another form of jurisdiction is quasi in rem which affects only the interests of particular persons in the thing. The courts of the Philippine Islands are not authorized to take judicial notice of the laws of the various states of the American Union. 1944 was admitted to probate in the CFI of Manila. Hix 54 Phil 610 Facts: The petitioner is a special administrator of the estate of Edward Hix.000 each. while the wife received nothing. The Judge of the First Instance however denied the probate of the will on the grounds that Sec 300 and 301 of the Code of Civil Procedure were not complied with. the validity of testamentary dispositions are to be governed by the national law of the testator in this case. 2. annotated by Hogg. the latter can have no legal claim to any portion of the estate left by the testator. Jurisdiction over the person of the defendant is acquired through: a. whatever may be the nature of the property and regardless of the country wherein said property may be found. the will which the testator executed in Manila on April 23. Nevada and remained to be a citizen of that state until his death. in respect to the order of succession as well as to the extent of the successional rights and the intrinsic validity of their provisions. NOTE: Summons by publication is authorized in three cases: 1. January 30. Issues: Is the wife entitled to any share in the estate? Is the failure of the testator to give his children what they are entitled to under Philippine laws valid? Is it necessary to reintroduce the proved Nevada Law? Held: No. Voluntary appearance or b. under the seal of the State of West Virginia as provided in Sec 301. The wife Magdalena C Bohonan and her two children questioned the validity of the testamentary provisions. Art 16 of NCC) provides that legal and testamentary successions.

as a part of the voluntary law of nations. 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. he died in the City of Amoy. Consequently. This petition was denied because of the loss of said will and of insufficiency of the evidence to establish the loss of said will. The petition was remanded to the CFI of Bulacan after the Court overruled the decision on appeal. Silvino Suntay claiming he had found among the files and documents of his father a will in Chinese characters executed and signed by the deceased on January 4. 1931. depends upon the "comity of nations. having due regard both to int'l duty and convenience. Gustave Guyot.000.T. It is the voluntary act of the nation by which it is offered. 1934. Defendants question this decree on many grounds. and to produce a friendly intercourse between the sovereignty to which they belong. foremost of which that French courts gave no force and effect to the duly rendered judgments of US courts against French citizens. After the war. or prejudicial to its interests. residents of New York and trading as co-partners in Paris under the firm name of A. & transients in our land. executive or judicial acts of another nation. · A respect of reciprocity between jurisdictions Respect . China on January 4.95 Phil 500 Facts: Facts: Jose B Suntay. in the legal sense. Theories Why We Should Apply Foreign Laws Theory of Comity foreign law is applied because of its convenience & because we want to give protection to our citizens. leaving properties both in China and the Philippines and nine children by the first marriage and 1 child by the second marriage with Maria Natividad Billian. but the comity of the nation. Fookien Province. What is the effect of the absence of proof to the existence of said law? Held: 1. the authenticated transcript of proceedings held in the municipal district court of Amoy. Guyot Facts: Defendants Henry Hilton and William Libbey. 1931 and filed. >Hilton vs. On Oct 15. The order of the Municipal District court of Amoy China does not purport to probate or allow the will which was the subject of the proceedings.we will not demean the laws and policies of other 3 . the petition was dismissed on February 7. In the absence of proof that the municipal district court of Amoy is a probate court and on Chinese law of procedure in probate matters. 2. The court held the judgment conclusive and entered a decree in favor of the French firm without examination anew the merits of the case." "Comity" . sued Hilton and Libbey on the French judgment in the US Circuit Court for the Southern Distrtict of New York seeking an amount totaling over $195. Has the existence of the said law been proved? 2. which is administered and ascertained in the same way. nor of mere courtesy and good will. that courts of justice have continually acted upon it. recorded and probated in the Amoy District Court a petition praying for the probate of the will executed in the Philippines on November 1929 or of the will executed in Amoy. residents." Notes: · Comity is a general principle of international law that US Supreme Court has a long history of acknowledging. beyond the limits of the sovereignty from which its authority is derived. by which all other principles of municipal law are ascertained and guided. Subsequently. and to the rights of its own citizens or other persons who are under the protection of its laws. 1938. Republic of China. In view thereof. On May 14. liquidator of the French firm. and guided by the same reasoning. It is a recognition which one nation allows within its territory to the legislative. who survived him." "It is not the comity of the courts. is neither a matter of absolute obligation. 1934. Issue: 1. the surviving widow filed a petition in the CFI of Bulacan for the probate of the last will and testament claimed to have been executed and signed in the Philippines on November 1929. The extent to which one nation shall be allowed to operate within the dominion of another nation. the testator is a Filipino Citizen and a resident of the Philippines. Fookien. But it contributes so largely to promote justice between individuals. were sued in France for debts due to a French firm. China cannot be deemed and accepted as proceedings leading to the probate or allowance of a will. "The comity thus extended to other nations is no impeachment of sovereignty. of its own force. Summary of ruling: No law has any effect. Charles Fortich & Co. Stewart & Co. the will ans the alleged probate thereof cannot be said to have been done in accordance with the accepted basic and fundamental concepts and principles followed in the probate and allowance of wills. and is inadmissible when contrary to its policy.

c. this time granting the custody of the child to her. Theory of Vested Rights we seek to enforce not foreign law itself but the rights that have been vested under such foreign law. but because our laws. the wife had married her former paramour and had been able to obtain an amendment for the divorce decree. the solution should be approximately the same. condition and legal capacity of persons are binding upon citizens of the Philippines. cause of action. and. Foreign judgment was rendered by a judicial or a quasi-judicial tribunal which had competent jurisdiction over the parties and the case in the proper judicial proceedings in which the defendant shall have be given reasonable notice and the opportunity to be heard. not to the mother (Old Civil Code). if this can be attained in many cases applying the proper foreign law. The guilty spouse generally loses parental authority except if the child is under 7. under the Philippine law. A year later. in addition to being recognized. When a plaintiff asks the court of one state to carry out and make effective a judgment obtained by him in another state. hence.we apply foreign law not because it is foreign. that is. When the goal is realized. what is involved is the recognition of a foreign judgment. there should be no separation from the mother unless there be compelling reasons therefore (New Civil Code). thus. y All-sided rule when foreign law will apply. irrespective of the forum. It must be a judgment on civil and commercial matters. and. The judgment must be valid according to the court that delivered it. 4 . Foreign judgment must not be contrary to the public policy or the good morals of the State. the Filipino came back to the Philippines with the child. ELEMENTS: The judgment must be: a. subject matter. she brought a petition for the will of habeas corpus in Ilocos Sur. b. Theory of Local Law. by applying similar rules. we must do so. Art 16. require us to do so. the court said that the child could not be brought out of California without judicial permission. Rendered by a competent court. Preference in parental authority is given to the father. an act done in another State may give rise to the existence of a right if the laws of that State crated such right. Theory of Harmony of Laws we have to apply the foreign laws so that wherever a case is decided. A foreign judgment is recognized when it is given the same effect that it has in the state where it was rendered with respect to the parties.countries. 3. identical or similar solutions anywhere & everywhere. To obtain enforcement of this amendment in the Philippines. CC: Laws relating to family rights and duties. Conditions for Recognition of Foreign Judgment 1. Querubin vs. or to the status. b. 2. 5. including Conflict of Laws. The man later obtained a Californian divorce on account of his wife s adultery with another man. Where the foreign judgment is being presented as a defense to the claim of the plaintiff. Judgment must be final and executory to constitute res judicata in another action. the subject matter of the action and the issues involved. there will be harmony of laws Theory of Justice the purpose of all laws. what is involved is the enforcement of a foreign judgment. because we expect other respect ours as well ountries to 4. In the meantime. when Philippine internal law Art 15. However. Issue: May she be awarded with the custody of the child? Held: No. On the Merits Involve the same parties. Final. The custody of the daughter was awarded to the innocent husband. it is as if the foreign law has become part & parcel of our local law. A foreign judgment is enforced when. two important things stand out: a. even though living abroad. is the dispensing of justice. Kinds of Conflict Rules y One-sided rule will apply. CC: Real property as well as personal property is subject to the law of the country where it is stipulated. Nature and Proof of Foreign Judgment Nature of foreign judgment It is imperative that it be proved in accordance with our prescribed rules on the matter. Querubin 47 OG 316 Facts: A Filipino married an American lady with whom he subsequently had a daughter. a party is given affirmative relief to which the judgment entitles him.

set of facts presenting a conflicts problem. whatever may be the nature of the property and regardless of the country wherein said property may be found. 3. Before a person can legally change his given name.2001 when he underwent sex reassignment surgery in Bangkok. Capacity to succeed Point of contract law of the country with which the factual situation is most ultimately connected. 2003.2006. that is.alleging that he is a male transsexual.He created them male and female. anatomically male but feels. the Court of Appeals rendered a decision in favor of the Republic. the trial court rendered a decision in favor of petitioner. he consulted several doctors in the United States. he must show that he will be prejudiced by the use of his true and official name. On February 23. Branch 8. Under the said law. Issue: Whether or not the change of petitioner s name and sex in his birth certificate is allowed under Articles 407 to 413 of the Civil Code. injury or prejudice will be caused to anybody or the community in granting the petition.assignment. The petitioner finds the first name or nickname to be ridiculous tainted with dishonor or extremely difficult to write or pronounce. Rules 103 and 108 of the Rules of Court and RA 9048. hormone treatment and breast augmentation. intestate and testamentary successions. The new first name or nickname has been habitually and continuously used by the petitioner and has been publicly known by that first name or nickname in the community. On August 18. filed a petition for certiorari in the Court of Appeals. He underwent psychological examination. the Republic of the Philippines (Republic). this petition. Or the change will avoid confusion.petitioner lived as a female and was in fact engaged to be married. stating that granting the petition would be more in consonance with the principles of justice and equity. petitioner. Ex.Amihan named the man Malakas (Strong)and the woman Maganda (Beautiful).drugs and counseling with regard to a person s sex? May a person successfully petition for a change of name and sex appearing in the birth certificate to reflect the result of a sex reassignment surgery? Facts: On November 26.the bamboo cracked and slit open. who has always felt. thought and acted like a woman. granting the petition would bring the muchawaited happiness on the part of the petitioner and her fiancé and the realization of their dreams. Law of the nation of the decedent Status and Capacity Silverio vs. that with his sexual re. Composition of Conflict Rules Factual situation . In addition. she suffered from clitoral hypertrophy and was found out that her ovarian structures had 5 . RA 9048 does not sanction a change of first name on the ground of sex reassignment. Thailand. shall be regulated by the national law of the person whose succession is under consideration. and set aside the decision of the trial court. He then sought to have his name in his birth certificate changed from Rommel Jacinto to Mely.He made him in the likeness of God. Feeling trapped in a man s body. he must present proper or reasonable cause or any compelling reason justifying such change. (Genesis 5:1-2) Amihan gazed upon the bamboo reed planted by Bathala and she heard voices coming from inside the bamboo. Hence. both with respect to the order of succession and to the amount of successional rights and to the intrinsic validity of testamentary provisions. From then on. His attempts to transform himself to a woman culminated on January 27.does the law recognize the changes made by a physician using scalpel. petitioner Rommel Jacinto Dantes Silverio filed a petition for the change of his first name and sex in his birth certificate in the RTC of Manila. Petitioner s misfortune to be trapped in a man s body is not his own doing and should not be in any way taken against him. Republic vs. the voices said.Out came two human beings. Held: No.All of a sudden. Oh North Wind!North Wind!Please let us out!. a petition for change of first name or nickname may be allowed in any of the following cases: 1. thru the OSG.She pecked the reed once. In her early was a male and the other was a female. the court believes that no harm.2003. Ex. Cagandahan 565 SCRA 72 Facts: Respondent Jennifer B. It alleged that there is no law allowing the change of entries in the birth certificate by reason of sex alteration. thinks and acts as a female and that he had always identified himself with girls since childhood. Republic When God created man.However. On June 4.(The Legend of Malakas and Maganda) When is a man a man and when is a woman a woman? In particular. On the contrary. Cagandahan was registered as a female in her Certificate of Live Birth. now possesses the physique of a female. 2.then twice. 2002. Likewise. and his sex from male to female.

2. The current state of Philippine statutes apparently compels that a person be classified either as a male or as a female. In the absence of a law on the matter. Life is already difficult for the ordinary person. Status is a matter or public or social interest. the Court will not dictate on Cagandahan concerning a matter so innately private as one s sexuality and lifestyle preferences. the Court affirms as valid and justified the respondent Cagandahan s position and his personal judgment of being a male. Status being a concept of social order cannot easily be terminated at the mere will or desire of the parties concerned. In so ruling the Court do no more than give respect to (1) the diversity of nature. a noman s land for those individuals who are neither truly male nor truly female . the Court considers the compassionate calls for recognition of the various degrees of intersex as variations which should not be subject to outright denial. like taking lifelong medication. and (2) how an individual deals with what nature has handed out.minimized. Cagandahan is the one who has to live with his intersex anatomy. The Court cannot but respect how respondent Cagandahan deals with his unordinary state and thus help make his life easier. but this Court is not controlled by mere appearances when nature itself fundamentally negates such rigid classification. ISSUE: Whether or not the trial court erred in ordering the correction of entries in the birth certificate of respondent Cagandahan HELD: Petition DENIED. it is GENERALLY judicially recognized all over the world. In deciding this case. In the absence of evidence that respondent is an incompetent and in the absence of evidence to show that classifying respondent as a male will harm other members of society who are equally entitled to protection under the law. In other words. like Cagandahan. Kinds of Capacity Capacity to act (active) power to do acts with legal effects. with good reason thinks of his/her sex. 3. Respondent Cagandahan also alleged that she has no breasts or menstrual development. like Cagandahan. Respondent Cagandahan here has simply let nature take its course and has not taken unnatural steps to arrest or interfere with what he was born with. Sexual development in cases of intersex persons makes the gender classification at birth inconclusive. The trial court granted the petition. Thus. Hence. Neither will the Court force respondent to undergo treatment and to take medication in order to fit the mold of a female. To him belongs the human right to the pursuit of happiness and of health. Status is generally supposed to have a universal character: when a certain status is created by law of one country. 6 . she was diagnosed to have Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia (CAH)a condition where persons thus afflicted possess secondary male characteristics because of too much secretion of male hormones (androgen). this instant petition for review. The Court is of the view that where the person is biologically or naturally intersex the determining factor in his gender classification would be what the individual. Status is conferred principally by the state not by the individual. to force his body into the categorical mold of a female but he did not. It is at maturity that the gender of such persons. having reached the age of majority. he has already ordered his life to that of a male. the Court respects Cagandahan s congenital condition and his mature decision to be a male. He could have undergone treatment and taken steps. to him should belong the primordial choice of what courses of action to take along the path of his sexual development and maturation. He chose not to do so. is fixed. The Court will not consider Cagandahan as having erred in not choosing to undergo treatment in order to become or remain as a female. Juridical capacity (passive) fitness to be the subject of legal relations. considering the unique circumstances in this case Characteristics of Status 1. she filed with the Regional Trial Court of Laguna a Petition for Correction of Entries in Birth Certificate such that her gender or sex be changed from female to male and her first name be changed from Jennifer to Jeff. Consequently. she has become a male person. as society commonly currently knows this gender of the human species. Thus. much less on whether or not to undergo medical treatment to reverse the male tendency due to CAH. And accordingly. 4. It has been suggested that there is some middle ground between the sexes. Nature has instead taken its due course in respondent Cagandahan s development to reveal more fully his male characteristics. Cagandahan here thinks of himself as a male and considering that his body produces high levels of male hormones (androgen) there is preponderant biological support for considering him as being male.She then alleged that for all interests and appearances as well as in mind and emotion.

Since he was allegedly born before parents were married. Nationality and Citizenship Nationality membership in an ethnic. CITIZENS BY NATUR ALIZ ATIO N NATURALIZATION -confers to an alien a nationality after birth by any of the means provided by law (in RP: CA 473 as amended) QUALIFICATIONS FOR APPLICANTS OF NATURALIZATION 1. social. Court held that the Constitution does not qualify children to legitimate or illegitimate. AGE: Not less than 21 on date of HEARING the petition (so could file while 20 y. his father being Chinese. His nationality was contested for election purposes. Theories of Personal Law Nationality Theory . effective Feb 11?) 2.) 2. Born before January 17. Domiciliary Theory . Court held that Uy was a Filipino citizen by virtue of being born in the virtue of which the status and capacity of an individual are generally governed by the law of his nationality. he was deemed an illegitimate child. COMELEC: CONSTITUTION DOES NOT QUALIFY CHILDREN TO LEGITIMATE OR ILLEGITIMATE -FPJ alleged to have followed nationality of mom. Citizens of the Philippines IN RP: 1987 CONSTI: ARTICLE 4: WHO ARE FILIPINO CITIZENS? 1. then he acquires citizenship of father which is Filipino 2. Good moral character Believes in the principles underlying the Philippine Consitution Must have conducted himself in a proper and irreproachable manner during the entire period of his residence in RP in his relations w/ the constituted government + community in which he is living 4.JURIDICAL CAPACITY CAPACITY TO ACT fitness to be subject of Power to do acts with legal relations (PASSIVE) legal effects (ACTIVE) Inherent in every natural acquired person Lost only through death May be lost *most of the cases involved are with regards elections because elective public officials from the President down to Governor are required to be natural-born citizens TALAROC V. Situs Theory . obligations. 1987. Naturalized according to law *note: #s 1-3 are considered NATURAL-BORN Citizens 1. as long as the child s father is Filipino. Fathers and mothers are Filipino citizens 3. ECON: Own real estate + in RP + worth NOT LESS THAN p5K + must have some lucrative trade/profession/lawful occupation Personal Law is the law that attaches to an individual wherever he may go. he doesn t have to elect citizenship. This is principally adopted in the RP. NATURA L BO RN CITI ZENS -those who are citizens of a particular state w/o having to perform any act to acquire or perfect citizenship Jus soli principle Jus sanguinis principle Looks to the law of the Rule of descent or blood place of one's birth You're a citizen of the Your citizenship depends place of your birth on your parents Followed in common law Followed in the Philippines countries 7 . Citizenship membership in a political society. Court held that since father was already naturalized before he attained age of majority. & capacity of a person should be governed by the law of his domicile. he already exercised rights which are only attributable to Filipino citizens. the general rule is that real property is governed by the law of the State where it is general.o. rights. CO V. racial and cultural group. 1973 + Filipino mothers + elect Philippine Citizenship upon reaching age of majority 4. Citizens of the Philippines at the time of adoption of the 1987 Constitution (ratification on Feb 2. Besides. and the adoption of the Jus Sanguinis principle did not effect the exclusion of those who were already considered citizens. TECSON V. UY: JUS S OLI APPLIED BEFORE 1 935 CONSTI -Uy was born of Chinese father but of Filipino mother in RP. RESIDENCE: resided in RP + Continuously + not less than 10 years prior to application of the place where property is situated. HRET: CHILDREN OF FILIPINO MOTHERS NEED NOT ELECT FILIPINO CITIZ ENSHIP IF THEY HAD ALREADY ACQUIRED NATIONALITY WHEN FATHER NATURALIZED -Ong s nationality contested. the status. condition.

Married to a Filipino woman long as it did not exceed 1. their word may be taken on its face value >can't be employees of the petitioner >must have known applicant for the period prescribed by law >had opportunity to observe him personally >can attest to the possession of the applicant of the qualifications . Republic) -EVIDENCE: testimony of 2 character witnesses >well known in the community and enjoy such a high reputation for probity (honesty/integrity). and must have known it) 3. unemployment or disability to work -his financial condition must be such as to permit him and the members of his family to live with reasonable comfort. LANGUAGE: able to SPEAK & WRITE English/Spanish/any one of the principal Philippine languages 6. not enough to be a law-abiding citizen (Dy Lam Go vs.g. no private lands shall be transferred or conveyed except to individuals qualified to acquire or hold lands of the public domain" GR: Aliens can't own lands X: 1. 7 SCRA 832: only Filipino citizens can be public school teachers) 5. CA 473) 1. profession or lawful occupation -substantial gainful employment or the obtaining of tangible receipts -appreciable margin of income over expenses in order to provide for adequate support for himself and his family in the event of sickness. REP UBLIC: PROOF OF LUCRATIVE TRADE -Chinese citizen applying for naturalization was held not qualified because he failed to sufficiently prove lucrative trade. BP 185. Engaged as a teacher (public or private . Born in RP *On CHARACTER -requires: +Good Moral character +conducted self in a PROPER + IRREPROACHABLE manner Proper and Irreproachable conduct -higher standard of morality than good moral character -moral character of the highest degree.5. and consistently with the demands of human dignity. since vendee already a Filipino. Established a new industry or introduced a useful invention in RP 3.but not int'l school) for 2 years (note however YEE V.. effective 1982): allowed natural-born citizen who had lost his Filipino citizenship to be a transferee of a private land for residential purposes . in accordance with the prevailing standard of living. Foreigner later naturalized as a Filipino: purpose of prohibition is to prevent the patrimony of our nation for future generations of Filipinos. end would not be frustrated *ON LANGUAGE REQUIREMENTS -not enough that applicant understands *ON MINOR CHILDREN'S EDUCATION REQUIREMENTS Ratio: for the children to learn and imbibe customs and traditions and ideals of Filipinos to prepare them for a life of responsible and law abiding citizenship -should be complied with and proven 8 . Intestate succession (Section 2. it would allow aliens to circumvent the prohibition by paying money to a Philippine landowner in exchange for a devise of a piece of land 2. In pari delicto: vendor (who knew that he was selling to an alien) cannot file suit to void sale to an alien (who cannot own land. honorably held office under Gov't 2. CHILDREN & SCHOOL: enrolled minor children of school age in any PUBLIC or PRIVATE SCHOOL recognized by the Bureau of Private Schools where PHILIPPINE HISTORY GOVERNMENT\ And CIVICS are taught or prescribed as part of the school curriculum during the entire period of the residence required of him (not less than 10 years) PRIOR TO HEARING of his PETITION for naturalization as citizen MORE DISCUSSION: *On 10 yr-continuous residence requirement Ratio: enable government to *observe applicant's conduct *ensure that applicant has imbibed the principles and spirit of our Consti When reduced to 5 years: Applicant (Section 3. profession..000 m2 (urban) 1 ha (rural) Why intestate: if otherwise. he having only a small fixed income and the rest of the amounts he allegedly received were all depended on the profits made by the corporation. proper and irreproachable conduct during the entire period of residence -on consti requirement: not merely recitation BUT BELIEF! *ON ECONOMIC REQUIREMENT >REAL ESTATE worth P5k (min) >lucrative trade. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SCHOOLS. lawful occupation YU KIAN CHIE VS. at this stage of our civilization -regard w/ caution if family business Real estate requirement -at odds with Article XII. (econ requirement continued) Lucrative trade. Section 7 of 1987 Consti: "Save in cases of hereditary succession.e.

did not last long.naturalization." or "Ronald Allan" Poe. of the 1987 Constitution expresses that "No person may be elected President unless he is a natural-born citizen of the Philippines. the only conclusions that could be drawn with some degree of certainty from the documents would be that (1) The parents of FPJ were Allan F. The marriage certificate of Allan F. he could not have transmitted his Filipino citizenship to FPJ. of the Revised Rules of Civil Procedure. The petitions were dismissed. both challenging the jurisdiction of the COMELEC and asserting that. and his father. representing himself to be a natural-born citizen of the Philippines. filed his certificate of candidacy for the position of President of the Republic of the Philippines under the Koalisyon ng Nagkakaisang Pilipino (KNP) Party. of the 1987 Constitution. and (5) At the time of his death on 11 September 1954. Chiang Kai Shek mostly caters Chinese children) Tecson vs. Fornier asseverated. later consolidated with GR 161824. Poe and Bessie Kelley. On 23 January 2004. COMELEC Facts: On 31 December 2003. (4) The father of Allan F. but also deliberate and willful. jus soli. Only two. able to read and write. per Roa vs. the evidence on hand still would preponderate in his favor enough to hold that he cannot be held guilty of having made a material misrepresentation in his certificate of candidacy in violation of Section 78. so as to be allowed to run for the offcie of the President of the Philippines. married Bessie Kelly only a year after the birth of FPJ. Considering the reservations made by the parties on the veracity of some of the entries on the birth certificate of FPJ and the marriage certificate of his parents. Allan Poe. month and year of birth of FPJ appeared to be 20 August 1939 during the regime of the 1935 Constitution. But while the totality of the evidence may not establish conclusively that FPJ is a natural-born citizen of the Philippines. 9 . i." Herein. Fornier has utterly failed to substantiate his case before the Court. res judicata and jus sanguinis had been in vogue. Poe and Bessie Kelley were married to each other on 16 September.e. according to Fornier. jus sanguinis or blood relationship would now become the primary basis of citizenship by birth. and a resident of the Philippines for at least ten years immediately preceding such election. being the son of Lorenzo Pou. on 9 January 2004.-insufficient finances not an excuse for failing to comply with this requirement -initial failure to comply with this requirement is a BAR TO SUBSEQUENT PETITION even if during 2nd petition. and to prove whether or not there has been material misrepresentation. Fornier assailed the decision of the COMELEC before the Supreme Court conformably with Rule 64. Granting.. the latter being an illegitimate child of an alien mother. Through its history. four modes of acquiring citizenship .g. Ronald Allan Kelly Poe. Fornier. his parents were foreigners. the COMELEC dismissed SPA 04-003 for lack of merit. 3 days later. was an American. a Spanish subject. Section 4. a writ of preliminary injunction or any other resolution that would stay the finality and/or execution of the COMELEC resolutions. Poe was a Filipino citizen. notwithstanding the ample opportunity given to the parties to present their position and evidence. Poe and Bessie Kelley. (2) even if no such prior marriage had existed. Victorino X. (3) Allan F. Poe. his date of birth to be 20 August 1939 and his place of birth to be Manila. Collector of Customs (1912). stated his name to be "Fernando Jr. Issue: Whether FPJ was a natural born citizen. a registered voter.. Allan F. and the death certificate of Lorenzo Pou are documents of public record in the custody of a public officer. Secretary of Labor (1947). in the 2004 national elections. as so ruled in RomualdezMarcos vs. Fornier filed his motion for reconsideration. under Article VII. which. (GR 161824) initiated. Lorenzo Poe was 84 years old. his mother. only the Supreme Court had original and exclusive jurisdiction to resolve the basic issue on the case. jus soli and jus sanguinis. Bessie Kelley Poe. nakapag-aral na sa ibang school not under the law) -not allowed if predominantly composed of children of a specific race (e. a petition (SPA 04-003) before the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) to disqualify FPJ and to deny due course or to cancel his certificate of candidacy upon the thesis that FPJ made a material misrepresentation in his certificate of candidacy by claiming to be a natural-born Filipino citizen when in truth. Article VII. On 10 February 2004. in relation to Rule 65. could qualify a person to being a natural-born citizen of the Philippines. the birth certificate of FPJ. that Allan F. With the adoption of the 1935 Constitution and the reversal of Roa in Tan Chong vs. 1940. at least forty years of age on the day of the election. of the Omnibus Election Code. the date. (FPJ). FPJ. The petition likewise prayed for a temporary restraining order. Jus soli. Poe was Lorenzo Poe. paragraph 7. Held: Section 2." is defined to include "those who are citizens of the Philippines from birth without having to perform any act to acquire or perfect their Philippine citizenship. The motion was denied on 6 February 2004 by the COMELEC en banc. was a Spanish national. also known as Fernando Poe. COMELEC. child no longer of school age (meaning." The term "natural-born citizens. The other petitions. The documents have been submitted in evidence by both contending parties during the proceedings before the COMELEC. must not only be material. Jr. Fornier based the allegation of the illegitimate birth of FPJ on two assertions: (1) Allan F. or on 26 January 2004. would include GR 161434 and GR 161634. in relation to Section 74. Poe contracted a prior marriage to a certain Paulita Gomez before his marriage to Bessie Kelley and. In his certificate of candidacy. (2) FPJ was born to them on 20 August 1939.

and then resided in the Philippine Islands. Francisco Rabat. finding no sufficient proof that respondent had renounced her Philippine citizenship. she was married to Leopoldo Lopez. which were the laws in force at the time of her birth. Thus. Telesforo Ybasco. Western Australia. Telesforo s daughter. Broome. before the adoption of this Constitution 10 . private respondent registered herself with the Bureau of Immigration as an Australian national and was issued Alien Certificate of Registration No. Historically. The citizenship of private respondent was once again raised as an issue when she ran for reelection as governor of Davao Oriental in the May 11. the COMELEC s First Division came out with a Resolution dismissing the petition. what served as the Constitution of the Philippines were the principal organic acts by which the United States governed the country. the Comelec en banc dismissed the petition. (2) she was married to a Filipino. 1879 in Daet. Since then. filed a petition for disqualification before the COMELEC. In 1952. The Philippine Bill of 1902 defined Philippine citizens as: SEC. and their children born subsequent thereto. In 1992. an Australian. She served as Provincial Board Member of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Davao Oriental. thereby making her also a Filipino citizen ipso jure under Sec 4 of CA 473. 1934 in Napier Terrace. Issue: WON Rosalind Lopez is a Filipino citizen and therefore qualified to run for public office Held: Yes Ratio: The Philippine law on citizenship adheres to the principle of jus sanguinis. at the Malate Catholic Church in Manila.. is a Filipino citizen. as well. Rosalind Lopez ran for re-election as governor of Davao Oriental. 1998 elections. Cirilo Valles. 4 xxx all inhabitants of the Philippine Islands continuing to reside therein who were Spanish subjects on the eleventh day of April. First Division. Broome. Private respondent s father. to the spouses. as opposed to the doctrine of jus soli which determines nationality or citizenship on the basis of place of birth. she left Australia and came to settle in the Philippines. Petitioner. and Theresa Marquez. Jr. 404695 dated September 19. in a petition for quo warranto. and by virtue of the principle of jus sanguinis she was a Filipino citizen under the 1987 Philippine Constitution. Gil Taojo. there are the COMELEC Resolutions. eighteen hundred and ninety-nine. Among others. except such as shall have elected to preserve their allegiance to the Crown of Spain in accordance with the provisions of the treaty of peace between the United States and Spain signed at Paris December tenth. H700888 on March 3. on the other hand. 1988. a Filipino citizen and native of Daet.Kilosbayan Foundation vs. and (c) She was issued Australian Passport No. herein private respondent Rosalind Ybasco Lopez. a child follows the nationality or citizenship of the parents regardless of the place of his/her birth. this was a year before the 1935 Constitution took into effect and at that time. Telesforo Ybasco was deemed to be a Philippine citizen. 1916. In 1949. Telesforo Ybasco. contesting her Filipino citizenship but the said petition was likewise dismissed by the COMELEC. at the age of fifteen. Camarines Norte. By virtue of the same laws. she applied for the issuance of an Immigrant Certificate of Residence (ICR). The signing into law of the 1935 Philippine Constitution has established the principle of jus sanguinis as basis for the acquisition of Philippine citizenship. Rosalind Lopez was born on May 16. to the spouses. 1988. shall be deemed and held to be citizens of the Philippine Islands and as such entitled to the protection of the United States. (3) and that. 1902 and the Philippine Autonomy Act of August 29. Ermita Valles vs. Western Australia. a Filipino citizen. 1899 and resided therein including their children are deemed to be Philippine citizens. and (4) furthermore. placing reliance on the admitted facts that: (a) In 1988. Under both organic acts. 1992 before the Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs of Australia and her Australian passport was accordingly cancelled as certified to by the Australian Embassy in Manila. alleging as ground therefor her alleged Australian citizenship. Her candidacy was questioned by the herein petitioner. (2) Those born in the Philippine Islands of foreign parents who. Camarines Norte. (b) On even date. under the Philippine Bill of 1902 and the Jones Law. is likewise a citizen of the Philippines. maintains that the private respondent is an Australian citizen. a fact duly evidenced by a certified true copy of an entry in the Registry of Births. The Commission on Elections ruled that private respondent Rosalind Ybasco Lopez is a Filipino citizen and therefore. In the 1995 local elections. she renounced her Australian citizenship on January 15. all inhabitants of the Philippines who were Spanish subjects on April 11. declaring her a Filipino citizen duly qualified to run for the elective position of Davao Oriental governor. Thereunder. These were the Philippine Bill of July 1. she ran for and was elected governor of Davao Oriental. Her election was contested by her opponent. Telesforo Ybasco. COMELEC Facts: Rosalind Ybasco Lopez was born on May 16. to wit: (1) Those who are citizens of the Philippine Islands at the time of the adoption of this Constitution. these laws defined who were deemed to be citizens of the Philippine islands. qualified to run for a public office because (1) her father. was born on January 5. However. Telesforo Ybasco (Filipino) and Theresa Marquez (Australian). eighteen hundred and ninety-eight. she has continuously participated in the electoral process not only as a voter but as a candidate. also known as the Jones Law. 1934 in Napier Terrace. Her opponent.

Thus. a deserter of the Philippine armed forces in time of war. as in the case of Mercado vs. Since private respondent did not lose or renounce her Philippine citizenship. Rosalind Ybasco Lopez. (6) By having been declared by competent authority. is a Filipino citizen. 63. elect Philippine citizenship. effectively removing any disqualification as a dual citizen. In the case of Mercado vs. As held by this court in the case of Aznar. a plenary pardon or amnesty has been granted: and (7) In case of a woman. If Australia follows the principle of jus soli. Under Commonwealth Act No. The filing of a certificate of candidacy sufficed to renounce foreign citizenship. Petitioner s contention that the application of private respondent for an alien certificate of registration. was subsequently retained under the 1973 and 1987 Constitutions. and her Australian passport. the same must be express. still. To buttress this contention. 1997. (2) By express renunciation of citizenship. were mere acts of assertion of her Australian citizenship before she effectively renounced the same. such renunciation must be express. the fact that the private respondent had dual citizenship did not automatically disqualify her from running for a public office. in Mercado vs. one declares that he/she is a Filipino citizen and that he/she will support and defend the Constitution of the Philippines and will 11 . she acquires his nationality. For renunciation to effectively result in the loss of citizenship.had been elected to public office in the Philippine Islands. unless subsequently. In the case of Aznar. the principle of jus sanguinis. upon her marriage. Thus. without performing any act. then at most. Petitioner also maintains that even on the assumption that the private respondent had dual citizenship.she was an Australian and a Filipino. it is enough that they elect Philippine citizenship upon the filing of their certificate of candidacy. and the issuance to her of an Australian passport on March 3. (5) Those who are naturalized in accordance with law. naval or air service of a foreign country. Furthermore. to a foreigner if. only a year before he filed a certificate of candidacy for vicemayor of Makati. Moreover. This is so because in the certificate of candidacy. by virtue of the laws in force in her husband s country. petitioner cited private respondent s application for an Alien Certificate of Registration (ACR) and Immigrant Certificate of Residence (ICR). were just assertions of his American nationality before the termination of his American citizenship. be also a citizen of another state. Manzano. Manzano and COMELEC. under Commonwealth Act 63. Manzano and COMELEC. 1988. (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. and as an involuntary consequence of the conflicting laws of different countries. the Court explained that dual citizenship as a disqualification must refer to citizens with dual allegiance. private respondent had dual citizenship . which confers citizenship by virtue of blood relationship. (5) By cancellation of the certificate of naturalization. she is disqualified to run for governor of Davao Oriental. at the most. it was held that the fact that respondent Manzano was registered as an American citizen in the Bureau of Immigration and Deportation and was holding an American passport on April 22. and that an application for an alien certificate of registration was not tantamount to renunciation of his Philippine citizenship. So also. (3) Those whose fathers are citizens of the Philippines. (4) Those whose mothers are citizens of the Philippines and. In order that citizenship may be lost by renunciation. citing Section 40 of Republic Act 7160 otherwise known as the Local Government Code of 1991. she has nonetheless renounced her Philippine citizenship. Manzano. Petitioner also contends that even on the assumption that the private respondent is a Filipino citizen. to terminate their status as persons with dual citizenship. This issue was put to rest in the case of Aznar vs. having been born to a Filipino father. private respondent can also claim Australian citizenship resulting to her possession of dual citizenship. 1988. the Court ruled that the mere fact that respondent Osmena was a holder of a certificate stating that he is an American did not mean that he is no longer a Filipino. The fact of her being born in Australia is not tantamount to her losing her Philippine citizenship. The application of the herein private respondent for an alien certificate of registration. an application for an alien certificate of registration does not amount to an express renunciation or repudiation of one s citizenship. Section 5 of the 1987 Constitution on dual allegiance. Thus. COMELEC and in the more recent case of Mercado vs. the herein private respondent. is bereft of merit. the Court clarified dual citizenship as used in the Local Government Code and reconciled the same with Article IV. Thus. a Filipino citizen may lose his citizenship: (1) By naturalization in a foreign country. Recognizing situations in which a Filipino citizen may. and her holding of an Australian passport. on September 19. petitioner s claim that respondent must go through the process of repatriation does not hold water. the fact that a child of Filipino parent/s was born in another country has not been included as a ground for losing one s Philippine citizenship. the mere fact that Rosalind Lopez was a holder of an Australian passport and had an alien certificate of registration are not acts constituting an effective renunciation of citizenship and do not militate against her claim of Filipino citizenship. as well. And. it was ruled that for candidates with dual citizenship. (4) By accepting commission in the military. upon reaching the age of majority.

the aforesaid acts were enough to settle the issue of the alleged dual citizenship of Rosalind Ybasco Lopez. such fact alone terminated her Australian citizenship. insanity or marriage in the case of a woman (constructive domicile or domicile by operation of law). he has a HOME there that to which whenever. there should be animus manendi (intent to remain) or animus nonrevertendi (intent not to return). duly registered in the Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs of Australia on May 12. Republic Bengzon III vs. HRET (US Marines Corps. Burca vs. citing the case of Moy Ya Lim Yao vs. the case did not foreclose the weight of prior rulings on citizenship. However.fixed. 2. COMELEC Rules on Domicile 1. operates as an effective renunciation of foreign citizenship. except for certain purposes. on February 11. The evidence adduced by petitioner is substantially the same evidence presented in these two prior cases. the following must be present: 1) a person s citizenship be raised as a material issue in a controversy where said person is a party. With freedom of choice c. which is under oath. too. And Provable intent that it should be one s fixed and permanent place of abode. Manzano (Edu Manzano) Labo vs. the petition cannot prosper. Therefore. 2) the Solicitor General or his authorized representative took active part in the resolution thereof. Indeed. there appears sufficient basis to rely on the prior rulings of the Commission on Elections in SPA. the procedural issue notwithstanding. He insists that the same issue of citizenship may be threshed out anew. the resolution or decision thereon is generally not considered res judicata in any subsequent proceeding challenging the same. legal relations because: 1. Petitioner is correct insofar as the general rule is concerned. 1992. Petitioner maintains further that when citizenship is raised as an issue in judicial or administrative proceedings. It is assigned to him by law AFTER BIRTH on account of legal disability caused for instance by minority. As aptly appreciated by the COMELEC. private respondent executed a Declaration of Renunciation of Australian Citizenship. 5. Since her renunciation was effective. as a result. And. The burden of Proof is on the one who alleges that a change of domicile has taken place. and 3) the finding on citizenship is affirmed by this Court. Such declaration. Once acquired. Then. With actual physical presence d. and from different legal viewpoints 3. the Australian passport of private respondent was cancelled. 95-066 and EPC 92-54 which resolved the issue of citizenship in favor of the herein private respondent. it remains the domicile unless a new one is obtained: a. RTC Tacloban Renvoi A procedure whereby a legal matter is referred by the conflict of laws rules of the forum to a foreign state. By capacitated persons b. Petitioner failed to show any new evidence or supervening event to warrant a reversal of such prior resolutions. Domingo (Marriage) Mercado vs.maintain true faith and allegiance thereto. Commissioner of Immigration. RA 9189 Macalintal vs. Although the general rule was set forth in the case of Moy Ya Lim Yao. COMELEC (Australian Citizenship) RA 9225 AASJS vs. to make the effort easier or simpler. The Court ruled in that case that in order that the doctrine of res judicata may be applied in cases of citizenship. repatriation) RE Application for Admission to the Philippine Bar (Ching) Djumantan vs. Every sui juris may change his domicile 4. It elucidated that reliance may somehow be placed on these antecedent official findings. No. it is significant to note that on January 15 1992. an exception to this general rule was recognized. No natural person must ever be without a domicile 2. COMELEC Romualdez vs. considered on the merits. 1992. However. though not really binding.e. in turn refers the 12 . 3. Marcos vs COMELEC Aquino vs. as certified to by Second Secretary Richard F. it is assigned to him by law at the MOMENT OF BIRTH (domicile of origin). when the herein private respondent filed her certificate of candidacy in 1992. Romualdez. the conflict of laws rule of which. The presumption is in favor of the continuance of domicile. the principle of res judicata generally does not apply in cases hinging on the issue of citizenship. i. petitioner s claim that private respondent must go through the whole process of repatriation holds no water. No person can have two or more domiciles at the same time. in t he case of Burca vs. Munro of the Embassy of Australia in Manila. Republic. Datumanong (Secretary of Justice) RA 9139 Common Wealth Act No 473 Legislative Naturalization Domicile is that place where a person has certain settled.

CA 13 . CA Republic vs. CA Santos vs.matter back to the law of the forum (remission) or a third state (transmission). Bellis vs. RA 8043 Annulment. Declaration of Nullity of Marriage Zamora vs. Recio Perez vs. Bellis Domestic Adoption Act of 1998 Inter Country Adoption Law. CA and Molina Garcia-Recio vs.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful