GINMARI M.

OCAMPOS
JD-3A

I.
In 2000, Ben and Jen, both Filipino citizens, were married in
the Philippines. In 2002, they got separated and they went
to Iceland where they obtained a divorce in the same year.
Ben then married Abi, another Filipina, in Iceland on January
2003. They had children, Hansel and Gretel. In 2006, after
failing to hear from Ben, Jen married Ken, and they had a
daughter named Barbie. In 2007, Ben visited the Philippines
where he died.

Questions:
1. Does the divorce obtained by Ben and Jen in Iceland
have any effect?
No, the divorce obtained by Ben and Jen in Iceland
has no effect.
The Philippine law does not recognize divorce in the
country. The laws concerning family rights and duties,
status and condition are binding to the citizens of the
Philippines, even though living abroad.
In the case given, Ben and Jen obtained a divorce in
Iceland. Even though divorce is recognized and valid
in Iceland, in the Philippines, it is invalid and has no
effect in thereof.
2. Is the marriage of Ben and Abi valid?
No, the marriage of Ben and Abi is invalid.
This is because under the law, any subsequent
marriage contracted by a person during the lifetime of
the first spouse with anyone other than his spouse is
void and illegal unless the first marriage is annulled or
dissolved.
In the case given, Ben’s marriage to Jen is not
annulled or dissolved when he married Abi. Therefore,
their marriage is invalid.

3. Is the marriage between Jen and Ken valid?

No, the marriage between Jen and Ken is invalid.
GINMARI M. OCAMPOS
JD-3A

Under the law, any subsequent marriage

contracted by a person during the lifetime of the first
spouse with anyone other than his spouse is void and
illegal unless the first marriage is annulled or
dissolved.
In the case at bar, Jen’s marriage to Ben is not
annulled or dissolved when he married Abi. Therefore,
their marriage is invalid.

II.
On December 1, 2007, Mr. Morgan executed a holographic
will, wherein he gave nothing to his acknowledged
illegitimate child, Kaye. Mr. Morgan left for United States,
passed the licensure exam for physician, resided therein,
and became a naturalized American citizen. He then died in
Florida, USA in 2014. The laws of Florida, USA do not
recognize holographic wills or compulsory heirs.

a. Can the holographic will of Mr. Morgan be admitted to

probate in the Philippines?
Yes, the holographic will of Mr. Morgan can be
admitted to probate in the Philippines.
The law states that a holographic will is not subject
to any form or requirement provided that it is entirely
written, dated and signed by the testator himself and
is recognized in the Philippines.
In the case, Mr. Morgan executed his holographic
will which is recognized in the Philippines; thus, it can
be admitted to probate in the Philippines.

b. Assuming that the will is probated in the Philippines,

can Kaye validly insist that she be given her legitime?
No, Kaye cannot validly insist that she be given her
legitime because she is not considered as a
compulsory heir of Mr. Morgan under the laws of
GINMARI M. OCAMPOS
JD-3A

Florida. Since Mr. Morgan became a naturalized

American citizen, then the laws of Florida will govern
which does not recognized Kaye as an compulsory
heir.
III.
A Korean national and a Filipino national entered into a
contract of services in Malaysia. The services will be
rendered in China. In case of breach, what law will govern?
EXPLAIN with legal basis.
The law of China will govern. This is because
under the law, in cases of breach of contracts, the law
that would govern is that of the party which has the
most significant relationship to the contract. In the
case at hand, China has the most significant
relationship to the contract since the services with be
rendered therein. Therefore, it is the law of China that
will govern.

IV.
Bangbang, a citizen of Philippines, was injured in
Switzerland when Arleni, also a citizen of Philippines, failed
to stop at a stop sign. At the time of the accident, Arleni was
insured by Pharmaloko Bond Insurance Co., a Philippine
Corporation. Bangbang commenced an action in Switzerland
stating a claim under Philippine statute against the
Pharmaloko Bond Insurance Co. The insurance company has
consulted you for a legal advice and asks whether Swiss
Courts will recognize the claim under the Philippine statute.
Please advise.
The Swiss Courts will recognize the claim of
Bangbang under the Philippine statute. This is
because under the law, the law of the place where the
contract is executed will govern if the subject matter
is of the action is of contracts. In this case, the
contract of insurance between Arleni and Pharmaloko
is presumed to have been instituted. Therefore, Swiss
Courts will recognize the claim of Bangbang under the
Philippine statute
GINMARI M. OCAMPOS
JD-3A

V.
What is the status of the reciprocity requirement for foreign
country money judgements?
Philippine case law recognises that recognition
and enforcement of foreign judgments is a generally
accepted principle of international law because of
widespread practice and incorporation of procedures
for recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments
into the norms of law. Accordingly there is uniformity
in the law and procedure within the jurisdiction in
respect of the enforcement of foreign judgments.