Conflict of Laws

Atty. Santiago

NAVARRO, Bea Czarina B.

17-334

Q1: Should the marriage between X and Y be recognized in the Philippines? Why or why
not?

No, the marriage between X and Y should not be recognized. The extrinsic validity of a marriage
is governed by lex loci celebrationis. On the other hand, its intrinsic validity is governed by lex
nationalii. Here, since X is Filipino, and since the marriage between X and Y is sought to be
recognized in the Philippines, Philippine law will apply. According to Article 26 of the Family
Code which only governs extrinsic validity, “all marriages solemnized outside the Philippines, in
accordance with the laws in force in the country where they were solemnized, and valid there as
such, shall also be valid in this country.” As to the intrinsic validity of marriage, Article 1 of the
Family Code governs, as this is the lex nationalii of X. The definition of marriage expressly
states that marriage is between a man and a woman. Combine this with Article 15 of the Civil
Code, which states that “the law of nationality governs family rights and duties, or to the status,
condition and legal capacity of persons are binding upon citizens of the Philippines, even though
living abroad.” Hence, the marriage between X and Y cannot be recognized in the Philippines.

Q2: Is J a Filipino citizen? Why or why not?

Yes, J is a Filipino citizen. In asking whether or not J is a Filipino citizen, Philippine law would
apply. There are two theories on whether it is the place or ancestry that is determinative of
citizenship: (1) jus soli, where if both in a country, a person is a citizen of the same (Tan Chong
v Sec of Labor) and (2) jus sanguinis or citizenship by blood, where one follows the citizenship
of his parents. In the Philippines, jus sanguinis is followed as embodied in the Constitution.
According to Article IV, Section 1 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution, the following are citizens
of the Philippines: (1) Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the 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 with law. Thus,
to determine if J is a Filipino, the nationality of her father and her mother must be considered.

J’s father is X, a Filipino. It was established by the birth certificate. Article 172 of the Family
Code provides that the filiation of legitimate children is established by the record of birth
appearing in the civil registrar, to wit: “ART. 172. The filiation of legitimate children is established
by any of the following: (1) The record of birth appearing in the civil register or a final judgment;
or (2) An admission of legitimate filiation in a public document or a private handwritten
instrument and signed by the parent concerned.” With this fact alone, we can conclude that J is
a Filipino because his father, X, as established by his birth certificate is a Filipino.

Q3: Who are the parents of J? Explain why.

The legal parents of J are X and B. In this case, it is UK law on surrogacy that should apply
since J was born in United Kingdom.

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Acts and UK Nationality Legislation states the
surrogate mother is the mother of the child. Also, it is stated therein that if the surrogate is
married or in a civil partnership, her spouse or civil partner will be the child’s second parent at
birth, unless they did not consent. In such a case, the child has no father for the purposes of
nationality legislation. However, legal parenthood can be transferred through parental order or
 Conflict of Laws
Atty. Santiago

adoption after the child is born. If there is a disagreement on who the child’s legal parents
should be, the courts will make a decision according to the best interests of the child. In this
case, B was not married at the time when she gave birth to J. Also, there is no legal relationship
between B and her boyfriend, D. There being no court issuance of a parental order or adoption
proceedings undertaken by Y as regards J, B remains her legal mother, as the woman who
carried and gave birth to her. On the other hand, X as the father of J signed on her birth
certificate.

Q4: Is J a legitimate child of her parents? Why or why not?

No. J is not a legitimate child of her parents. Applying Article 15 of the Civil Code, a conflicts
rule, to determine whether or not a child is legitimate we have to look into the national law of the
Father. X, the father of J, is a Filipino. Therefore, the applicable law is Philippine law.

According to Article 165 of the Family Code, a child born out of wedlock is an illegitimate child.
There was no marriage to speak of as the parents of J, who are X and B, did not subsequently
enter into a valid marriage. Therefore, J is an illegitimate child, being born out of wedlock.

Q5: Is the suicide note a valid will? Why or why not?

Yes, the suicide note is a valid will. According to Article 17 of the Civil Code, “the extrinsic
validity of a purported will is governed by the laws of the country in which they are executed.”
The suicide note was executed by X in the Philippines. Therefore, Philippine law on wills shall
apply. Article 810 of the Civil Code also states that. “A will is considered a holographic will when
it is entirely written, dated, and signed by the hand of the testator himself.” In this case, X
executed a holographic will in the form of the suicide note. The law does not require it to be in
any form as long as it is written, dated and signed by the testator. On the other hand, with
regard to the intrinsic validity of the will, X, being Filipino, the Philippine law at the time of the
death of X shall govern. Article 800 of the Civil Code states that “the law presumes that every
person is of sound mind, in the absence of proof to the contrary.” Therefore, despite the fact that
X was depressed during the time that he executed the will, it cannot be concluded that X lacked
testamentary capacity to make a will. According to Article 799 of the Civil Code, it is sufficient
that the testator was able at the time of making the will to know the “nature of the estate to be
disposed of, the proper objects of his bounty, and the character of the testamentary act.”

Q6: Who should inherit the BGC Property? Explain.

G should inherit the BGC Property. As stated in Article 16 of the Civil Code, “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.” Here, applying the theory of effective nationality, English law will apply.

It can be seen, however, that under the conflict rules of England and Wales concerning wills and
succession, in cases of intestate succession, the law of the jurisdiction in which the property is
located applies to succession to immovable property. Y died without leaving a will and BGC
condominium unit which is an immovable property is in the Philippines. Thus, Philippine law will
govern.
 Conflict of Laws
Atty. Santiago

According to Article 978 of the Civil Code, as a general rule, the descendants of the deceased
are the first to be considered as to inheriting the properties of the deceased excluding all others.
In this case, G is the illegitimate descendant of Y from his prior marriage with H being born out
of wedlock. Hence, G should inherit the property.

As to X and Y, Article 998 provides that “if a widow or widower survives with illegitimate
children, such widow or widower shall be entitled to one-half of the inheritance, and the
illegitimate children or their descendants, whether legitimate or illegitimate, to the other half.
However, in this case, they are not considered married in the Philippine jurisdiction because
their marriage is contrary to public policy. Hence, no inheritance can be attributed to X as a
surviving spouse.

Q7: Who should inherit the Newport Property? Explain.

It is J and G that should inherit the Newport Property. As stated earlier, the will of X is valid.
According to the Civil Code, the intrinsic validity of the provisions of the will is governed by the
lex nationalii of the decedent. This is a conflicts rule. Since X is a Filipino citizen, successional
rights will be according to Philippine law. According to Article 842, disposition of properties by
will can be made to any person having capacity to succeed.

Now, we look into the capacity to succeed. Article 1039 of the Civil Code states that “capacity to
succeed is governed by the law of the nation of the decedent.” Hence, the capacity to succeed
of J, G and Sparkle is also determined the Philippine law. According to Article 37 of the 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.” Applying Article 37, Sparkle being an animal
is not a natural person. Hence, it does not have any capacity to succeed. Only J and G may
inherit.

Q8: Who should inherit the Ortigas Property?

J and G should inherit the property. Here, the national law of Y is either Taiwanese law or UK
law. Using the theory of effective nationality, UK law should apply. According to UK law, the
succession to immovable property of an intestate is governed by the law of the country where
the immovable property is situated. But Philippine law applies the nationality principle under
Article 16, paragraph 2 of the Civil Code. Here, there is renvoi. Applying Philippine law, G, as
compulsory heir, would succeed. As to the testamentary heirs, as stated in Q7, since the will is
valid, and only J and G has the capacity to succeed, we apply the provisions of the will.

Q9: Who should inherit the London Property? Explain.

J and G should inherit the London Property. Applying the theory of effective nationality, English
law must be used since Y is both a national and resident of England. Also, the property is
located in London. The facts provide that Y died without a will. Under the Administration of
Estates Act of 1925, if the intestate decedent is survived by the spouse or civil partner and he
leaves an issue, the surviving spouse or civil partner shall take the personal chattels absolutely
and the real estate shall be divided into one half between the spouse or civil partner and the
issue.

In this case, when Y died, he was survived by his civil partner, X, and his illegitimate child G. J
cannot be considered an heir since she is a stranger to Y under the Surrogacy Arrangements
 Conflict of Laws
Atty. Santiago

Act and Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act of 2008. Applying the Administration of Estates
Act, X and G shall be entitled to their share of one half each in the London Property.

As to the death of X, Philippine laws on succession will apply since he is a Filipino citizen at the
time of his death. Before X died, he made a holographic will leaving all of his properties to J, G,
and Sparkle. Since sparkle, an animal, cannot inherit, X’s share in the London property was
devised to J and G in equal shares. Thus, it is J and G who shall inherit the London Property.

Q10: If J dies from COVID-19, who would be her heirs, if any? Explain.

The only heir of J is B.

First, we should determine which law will apply. In this case, Philippine law should apply. J,
here, has multiple nationalities: Filipino, Taiwanese, and British. J is Filipino as discussed in Q2.
J is Taiwanese because B, her mother, is a national of the Taiwan applying the Nationality Act
of Taiwan. J is also since when she was born, her father settled in the United Kingdom applying
the British Nationality Act 1981. According to the Civil Code of the Philippines, the national law
of the decedent governs successional rights. On the other hand, under the Family Reform Act
1987 of United Kingdom and the Civil Code of Taiwan, no conflicts rules are provided as to the
governing law of the decedent as to successional rights. Thus, the Civil Code of the Philippines
will apply.

Article 887 of the Civil Code enumerates who are the compulsory heirs and the rules as to each,
to wit: “(1) Legitimate children and descendants, with respect to their legitimate parents and
ascendants; (2) In default of the foregoing, legitimate parents and ascendants, with respect to
their legitimate children and descendants; (3) The widow or widower; (4) Acknowledged natural
children, and natural children by legal fiction; (5) Other illegitimate children referred to in article
287. Compulsory heirs mentioned in Nos. 3, 4, and 5 are not excluded by those in Nos. 1 and 2;
neither do they exclude one another. In all cases of illegitimate children, their filiation must be
duly proved. The father or mother of illegitimate children of the three classes mentioned, shall
inherit from them in the manner and to the extent established by this Code.” Also, according to
Article 993 of the Civil Code, “if an illegitimate child should die without issue, either legitimate or
illegitimate, his father or mother shall succeed to his entire estate; and if the child's filiation is
duly proved as to both parents, who are both living, they shall inherit from him share and share
alike.” In this case, with J being an illegitimate child, J’s parents X and B fall within the ambit of
the compulsory heirs under Art. 887 and under Art. 993 of the Civil Code. With J having no
descendants and with X being deceased, B would be entitled to succeed J as her sole
illegitimate parent.

With regard to testamentary heirs, there was no mention of the making of a will. There are also
no intestate heirs applying Article 1007 of the Civil Code. G is not J’s half-blood brother since
they do not share a parent.