Cjc Conflict of laws tsn 2022
From the lectures of Atty. Jacquiline Brandares-Magdangal
ABPI, SINARIMBO, FURIA, BALDERAS, AND MELCHOR
March 14, 2022
March 14 (part 2, 19:00-38:26)
Before a foreign divorce decree can be
recognized by our courts, the party pleading
it must prove divorce as a fact and
demonstrate its conformity to foreign law
allowing it. Further,
the Court enumerated the matters need to be
proved
1. The divorce decree; and
2. The national law of the alien spouse
For a divorce obtained abroad by the alien
spouse to be recognized in our jurisdiction,
it must be shown that the divorce decree is
valid according to the national law of the
foreigner. Both the divorce decree and the
governing personal law of the alien spouse
who obtained the divorce must be proven.
Under Sections 24 and 25 of Rule 132, on
the other hand, a writing or document may
be proven as a public or official record of a
foreign country by either
(1) an official publication or
(2) a copy thereof attested by the officer
having legal custody of the document.
If the record is not kept in the Philippines,
such copy must be
(a) accompanied by a certificate issued by
the proper diplomatic or consular officer in
the Philippine foreign service stationed in
the foreign country in which the record is
kept and
(b) authenticated by the seal of his office.
Asks the class about the assignment…
Republic v. Manalo (assignment)
G.R. No. 221029 April 24, 2018
1
Marelyn Tanedo Manalo was married to a
Japanese national, Yoshino Minoro.
Manalo filed a case for divorce in Japan
and after due proceedings, a divorce
decree dated December 6, 2011, was
granted. Manalo now wants to cancel the
entry of marriage between her and Minoro
from the Civil Registry and to be allowed
to reuse her maiden surname, Manalo.
According to Article 26, paragraph 2 of
the Family Code,
Where a marriage between a Filipino
citizen and a foreigner is validly
celebrated and a divorce is thereafter
validly obtained abroad by the alien
spouse incapacitating him or her to
remarry, the Filipino spouse shall likewise
have capacity to remarry under Philippine
law.
Issues:
1. Under Article 26, paragraph 2 of the
Family Code, can the Filipino spouse
initiate the divorce instead of the foreign
spouse?
2. Was the divorce obtained by Marelyn
Manalo from Japan valid here in the
Philippines?
Ruling:
1. Yes. The Court ruled that in
interpreting the law, the intent
should be taken into consideration.
According to Justice Alicia
Sempio-Dy, a member of the Civil
Code Revision Committee, the aim
of the amendment is to avoid the
absurd situation of having the
Filipino deemed still married to a
foreign spouse even though the
latter is no longer married to the
former. According to the Supreme
Court, the wording of Article 26,
paragraph 2 of the Family Code
 Cjc Conflict of laws tsn 2022
From the lectures of Atty. Jacquiline Brandares-Magdangal
ABPI, SINARIMBO, FURIA, BALDERAS, AND MELCHOR
requires only that there be a valid
divorce obtained abroad and does
not discriminate as to who should
file the divorce, i.e., whether it is
the Filipino spouse or the foreign
spouse. Also, even if assuming
arguendo that the provision should
be interpreted that the divorce
proceeding should be initiated by
the foreign spouse, the Court will
not follow such interpretation
since doing so would be contrary
to the legislative intent of the law.
In the issue of the application of
Article 15 of the Civil Code in this
case, the Court ruled that even if
Manalo should be bound by the
nationality principle, blind
adherence to it should not be
allowed if it will cause unjust
discrimination and oppression to
certain classes of individuals
whose rights are equally protected
by the law.
The Court also ruled that Article
26 of the Family Code is in
violation of the equal protection
clause. They said that the
limitation provided by Article 26
is based on a superficial, arbitrary,
and whimsical classification. The
violation of the equal protection
clause in this case is shown by the
discrimination against Filipino
spouses who initiated a foreign
divorce proceeding and Filipinos
who obtained a divorce decree
because the foreign spouse had
initiated the divorce proceedings.
Their circumstances are alike, and
making a distinction between them
as regards to the validity of the
divorce decree obtained would
give one undue favor and unjustly
2
discriminate against the other.
The Court also said that it is the
State’s duty not only to strengthen
the solidarity of the Filipino family
but also to defend, among others,
the right of children to special
protection from all forms of
neglect abuse, cruelty, and other
conditions prejudicial to their
development. The State cannot do
this if the application of paragraph
2 of Article 26 of the Family Code
is limited to only those foreign
divorces initiated by the foreign
spouse.
2. The Court cannot determine due to
insufficient evidence.
It has been ruled that foreign laws
must be proven. There are two
basic types of divorces: (1)
absolute divorce or a vinculo
matrimonii, which terminates the
marriage, and (2) limited divorce
or a mensa et thoro, which
suspends it and leaves the bond in
full force.
The presentation solely of the
divorce decree will not suffice to
lead the Court to believe that the
decree is valid or constitutes
absolute divorce. The fact of
divorce must still be proven.
Therefore, the Japanese law on
divorce must still be proved.
In this case, the Court remanded
the case to the court of origin for
further proceedings and reception
of evidence as to the relevant
Japanese law on divorce.
Deposition of Law Practitioner is Not the
Required Proof
 Cjc Conflict of laws tsn 2022
From the lectures of Atty. Jacquiline Brandares-Magdangal
ABPI, SINARIMBO, FURIA, BALDERAS, AND MELCHOR
NEDLLYOD LIJNEN v. GLOW LAKS
ENTERPRISES
G.R. No. 156330, November 19, 2014
Facts: Glow Laks [HK Corporation, Not
Doing Business] had loaded on board at Port
of Manila garments to the Port of Hong
Kong and arrived therein in good condition
was set to be transferred to Panama by
Nedlloyd’s vessels. Upon its unloading in
Panama, however, unauthorized persons
with forged bills of lading secured release of
the goods.
Glow Laks filed a claim for Nedlloyd
[Foreign Corporation, Doing Business, Has
Ship Agent] but to no avail which then
prompted Glow Laks to sue for misdelivery
with RTC Manila for the recovery of amount
with interest.
RTC ruled against Glow Laks finding that
the Panama law was duly proven during the
trial and pursuant to the said law, carriers of
goods destined to any Panama port of entry
have to discharge their loads into the
custody of the Panama Ports Authority to
make effective government collection of
port dues, customs duties, and taxes. The
subsequent withdrawal effected by
unauthorized persons on the strength of
falsified bills of lading does not constitute
misdelivery arising from the fault of the
common carrier.
But CA reversed findings of the RTC and
held that foreign laws were not proven in
the manner provided by Section 24, Rule
3
132 and it cannot be given full faith and
credit. For failure to prove the foreign law
and custom, it is presumed that foreign laws
are the same as our internal law in which
case under Philippine Civil Code, carrier is
still liable.
Issue: Was the foreign law properly pleaded
and proven?
[Note: Requisites already enumerated on
previous page]
Held: Contrary to the contention of the
petitioners, the Panamanian laws,
particularly Law 42 and its Implementing
Order No. 7, were not duly proven in
accordance with Rules of Evidence and as
such, it cannot govern the rights and
obligations of the parties in the case at bar.
(1) Copy of Law Was Not Accompanied by
Certification and Attestation. - While a
photocopy of the Gaceta Official of the
Republica de Panama No. 17.596, the
Spanish text of Law 42 which is the foreign
statute relied upon by the court a quo to
relieve the common carrier from liability,
was presented as evidence during the trial of
the case below, the same however was not
accompanied by the required attestation and
certification.
It is explicitly required by Section 24, Rule
132 of the Revised Rules of Court that a
copy of the statute must be accompanied by
a certificate of the officer who has legal
custody of the records and a certificate made
 Cjc Conflict of laws tsn 2022
From the lectures of Atty. Jacquiline Brandares-Magdangal
ABPI, SINARIMBO, FURIA, BALDERAS, AND MELCHOR
by the secretary of the embassy or legation,
consul general, consul, vice-consular or by
any officer in the foreign service of the
Philippines stationed in the foreign country
and authenticated by the seal of his office.
The latter requirement is not merely a
technicality but is intended to justify the
giving of full faith and credit to the
genuineness of the document in a foreign
country.
(2) Deposition is Not the Proof Required by
Law. - Certainly, the deposition of Mr.
Enrique Cajigas, a maritime law practitioner
in the Republic of Panama, before the
Philippine Consulate in Panama, is not the
certificate contemplated by law. At best, the
deposition can be considered as an opinion
of an expert witness who possess the
required special knowledge on the
Panamanian laws but could not be
recognized as proof of a foreign law, the
deponent not being the custodian of the
statute who can guarantee the genuineness
of the document from a foreign country.
To admit the deposition as proof of a foreign
law is, likewise, a disavowal of the rationale
of Section 24, Rule 132 of the Revised Rules
of Court, which is to ensure authenticity of a
foreign law and its existence so as to justify
its import and legal consequence on the
event or transaction in issue.
(3) Willamette Ruling Not Applicable. - The
above rule, however, admits exceptions, and
the Court in certain cases recognized that
Section 25 does not exclude the presentation
of other competent evidence to prove the
existence of foreign law. In Willamette Iron
4
and Steel Works v. Muzzal, for instance, the
SC allowed the foreign law to be established
on the basis of the testimony in open court
during the trial in the Philippines of an
attorney-at-law in San Francisco, California,
who quoted the particular foreign law sought
to be established. The ruling is peculiar to
the facts. Petitioners cannot invoke the
Willamete ruling to secure affirmative relief
since their so-called expert witness never
appeared during the trial below and his
deposition, that was supposed to establish
the existence of the foreign law, was
obtained ex-parte.
So that is the 3rd reason. In the Willamette,
the attorney appeared before the court, the
attorney before the court during the trial in
the Philippines. In this case of Nedlloyd, the
expert witness Mr. Cajigas did not appear
before the trial. He on executed his
deposition and it was obtained ex parte.
Mere Certifications of Translations Are
Not Sufficient
ATCI v. ETCHIN
G.R. No. 178551, October 11, 2010
Facts: Etchin was hired by ATCI as medical
technologist for Kuwait for 1 year probation
period but for a 2- year contract. She was
terminated before the 2 years for failure to
reach the performance rating. Etchin then
filed with NLRC for illegal dismissal against
ATCI as the local recruitment agency. Under
the Kuwait Civil Service Law, it allows the
 Cjc Conflict of laws tsn 2022
From the lectures of Atty. Jacquiline Brandares-Magdangal
ABPI, SINARIMBO, FURIA, BALDERAS, AND MELCHOR
termination of employment even before the
period agreed upon because one was not
2. a translated copy (Arabic to English) of
able to meet the performance rating.
the termination letter to respondent stating
that she did not pass the probation terms,
without specifying the grounds therefor, and
Issue: Was Kuwaiti Law pleaded and
proven? – No.
3. a translated copy of the certificate of
termination, both of which documents were
Held: (1) Burden of Proof and Question of
certified by Mr. Mustapha Alawi, Head of
Fact. - In international law, the party who
the Department of Foreign Affairs-Office
wants to have a foreign law applied to a
Consular Affairs Islamic Certification and
dispute or case has the burden of proving the
Translation Unit;
foreign law. The foreign law is treated as a
question of fact to be properly pleaded and
proved as the judge or labor arbiter cannot
These documents, whether taken singly or as
take judicial notice of a foreign law. He is
a whole, do not sufficiently prove that
presumed to know only domestic or forum
respondent was validly terminated as a
law.
probationary employee under Kuwaiti civil
service laws. Instead of submitting a copy of
the pertinent Kuwaiti labor laws duly
Unfortunately [if not proved]; the
authenticated and translated by Embassy
International Law doctrine of presumed-
officials thereat, as required under the Rules,
identity approach or processual presumption
what petitioners submitted were mere
comes into play. Where a foreign law is not
certifications attesting only to the
pleaded or, even if pleaded, is not proved,
correctness of the translations of the
the presumption is that foreign law is the
MOA and the termination letter which
same as ours. Thus, we apply Philippine
does not prove at all that Kuwaiti civil
labor laws in determining the issues
service laws differ from Philippine laws
presented before us.
and that under such Kuwaiti laws, Etchin
was validly terminated.

(2) Submitted Documents Were Not the

Proof Required. - To prove the Kuwaiti law,
There is no compliance because what they
petitioners submitted the following:
submitted were mere certification of
translation attesting that the certifications
were correct. It is not the required proof
1. MOA between respondent and the under Sections 24 and 25.
Ministry, as represented by ATCI, which
provides that the employee is subject to a
probationary period of one (1) year and that
the host country’s Civil Service Laws and
Regulations apply;
5
 Cjc Conflict of laws tsn 2022
From the lectures of Atty. Jacquiline Brandares-Magdangal
ABPI, SINARIMBO, FURIA, BALDERAS, AND MELCHOR
What is Substantial Compliance on the
Proof of Foreign Law?
MAKATI SHANGRI-LA v. HARPER
G.R. No. 189998, August 29, 2012
Facts: Christian Harper was murdered
during his stay in the Hotel, his heirs and
wife filed a case for damages against the
Hotel. In order to prove such filiation and
legal standing, they submitted birth
certificate, marriage certificate, and
certificate and Oslo Probate Court that Ellen
Harper was married to the deceased and a
ruling that the wife and child are the
victim’s heirs clothing them with personality
to file the case.
Makati Shangri-La argued that CA’s ruling
that respondents substantially complied with
the rules on the authentication of the proofs
of marriage and filiation set by Section 24
and Section 25 of Rule 132 of the Rules of
Court when they presented the documents,
because the legal custodian did not duly
attest that these were the correct copies of
the originals on file, and because no
certification accompanied the documents
stating that "such officer has custody of the
originals." It contends that respondents did
not competently prove their being Harper’s
surviving heirs by reason of such documents
being hearsay and incompetent.
Issue: Whether or not they were able to
prove with competent evidence the
affirmative allegations in the complaint that
they are the widow and son of Mr. Christian
Harper. – Yes, by substantial compliance.
6
Held: At the minimum, the documents
substantially met the requirements of
Section 24 and Section 25 of Rule 132 as a
condition for their admission as evidence in
default of a showing by petitioner that the
authentication process was tainted with bad
faith. Consequently, the objective of
ensuring the authenticity of the documents
prior to their admission as evidence was
substantially achieved.
There are, indeed, such equitable conditions
attendant here, the foremost of which is that
respondents had gone to great lengths to
submit the documents. As the CA observed,
respondents’ compliance with the
requirements on attestation and
authentication of the documents had not
been easy; they had to contend with many
difficulties (such as the distance of Oslo,
their place of residence, from Stockholm,
Sweden, where the Philippine Consulate had
its office; the volume of transactions in the
offices concerned; and the safe transmission
of the documents to the Philippines). Their
submission of the documents should be
presumed to be in good faith because they
did so in due course. It would be inequitable
if the sincerity of respondents in obtaining
and submitting the documents despite the
difficulties was ignored.
The principle of substantial compliance
recognizes that exigencies and situations
do occasionally demand some flexibility in
the rigid application of the rules of
procedure and the laws. That rules of
procedure may be mandatory in form and
application does not forbid a showing of
substantial compliance under justifiable
 Cjc Conflict of laws tsn 2022
From the lectures of Atty. Jacquiline Brandares-Magdangal
ABPI, SINARIMBO, FURIA, BALDERAS, AND MELCHOR
circumstances, because substantial
compliance does not equate to a disregard of
basic rules. In the interest of substantial
justice, even procedural rules of the most
mandatory character in terms of compliance
are frequently relaxed. Similarly, the
procedural rules should definitely be
liberally construed if strict adherence to their
letter will result in absurdity and in manifest
injustice, or where the merits of a party’s
cause are apparent and outweigh
considerations of non-compliance with
certain formal requirements.
In Makati Shangri-la v. Harper, there were
equitable considerations considered in
deciding to recognize substantial compliance
in that case. They acted in good faith.
In Makati Shangri-la v. Harper, there were
equitable considerations considered in
deciding to recognize substantial compliance
in that case. They acted in good faith. There
was really earnest efforts to comply with the
requirements of the law and there was no
bad faith on their part. There was a ruling on
substantial compliance because the case is
not mainly about the document, it was just to
prove heirship it was not to prove their cause
of action – it is not the same for the petition
for the recognition of foreign judgment or
having a foreign law applied in the case. The
very basis of the cause of action in such
cases is the law or the judgment itself.
Substantial compliance will not be applied if
the case will be where the foreign document
and the foreign law is the basis of the cause
of action. Unless the case is in all fours with
Makati Shangri-la v. Harper (2012),
substantial compliance might not be
invoked.
7
Proving Foreign Law by EXPERT
TESTIMONY OF A WITNESS
WILLAMETTE IRON AND STEEL
WORKS v. MUZZAL
G.R. No. L-42538, May 21, 1935
Facts: Muzzal, a former California
resident, now residing in the Philippines,
was liable for obligations contracted by a
California corporation of which he was a
stockholder at the time the said
obligations were contracted with
Willamette. The basis is Section 322 of
the Civil Code of California which makes
stockholders individually liable for
proportion of all its debts and liabilities to
proportion of shares owned.
Issue: Was the foreign law proved. – Yes.
Held: (1) Presented Attorney-at-Law. -
In order to prove here the foreign law, Mr.
Arthur W. Bolton, an attorney-at-law of
San Francisco, California since 1918,
under oath, quoted verbatim Section 322
of the California Civil Code and stated
that said section was in force at the time
the obligations of the defendant to the
plaintiff were incurred. The evidence
sufficiently established the fact that the
section in question was the law of the
State of California at the time the
obligations were incurred.
 
So this lawyer was presented before our
trial court. So that is why he was
considered expert witness.
(2) Presented in Evidence the
Annotated Civil Code of California. -
Aside from the testimony of Attorney
Bolton Ragland's Annotated Civil Code of
California was presented as evidence.
This book contains that State's Civil Code
 Cjc Conflict of laws tsn 2022
From the lectures of Atty. Jacquiline Brandares-Magdangal
ABPI, SINARIMBO, FURIA, BALDERAS, AND MELCHOR
as adopted March 21, 1872, with the
subsequent official statute amendments to
and including the year 1929.
While the law itself was not presented, the
witness was presented and the annotation
was deemed sufficient.
Note that Willamette was cited in the
more recent case of Nedlloyd, and the
Supreme Court explained why exception
in Willamette is not applicable to the case
of Nedlloyd. It is because in the
Willamettte, the San francisco lawyer was
presented in court while in the case of
Nedloyd, the witness only had a
deposition and it was not made in court in
the Philippines. It was not made ex parte.
The witness in the Willamette never
appeared during the trial below and his
deposition, that was supposed to establish
the existence of the foreign law, was
obtained ex-parte.
CIR v. FISHER
G.R. No. L-11622, January 28, 1961
Facts: CIR questions the exemption made
by the Tax Court in exempting Fisher
from paying inheritance tax on the shares
of stock in the mining corporation. The
Tax Court here used as basis the
reciprocity rule under the NIRC and with
that it applied the exemption as provide by
California Revenue and Taxation Code.
Here, one of the arguments of the CIR
was that the said proviso was not duly
proven.
To prove the pertinent California law,
Attorney Allison Gibbs, counsel for
herein respondents, testified that as an
active member of the California Bar since
1931, he is familiar with the revenue and
8
taxation laws of the State of California. 
When asked by the lower court to state the
pertinent California law as regards
exemption of intangible personal
properties, the witness cited:
✓ article 4, section 13851 (a) and (b) of
the California Internal and Revenue Code
as published in Derring's California Code,
✓ a publication of the Bancroft-Whitney
Company Inc,
✓ and as part of his testimony, a full
quotation of the cited section was offered
in evidence as Exhibits "V-2" by the
respondents.
Issue: Was the law properly pleaded and
proven? – Yes
Held: The Rules of Court prescribes the
manner of proving foreign laws before our
tribunals. However, although we believe it
desirable that these laws be proved in
accordance with said rule, we held in the
case of Willamette Iron and Steel
Works v. Muzzal, 61 Phil. 471, that "a
reading of sections 300 and 301 of our
Code of Civil Procedure (now Rules of
Court) will convince one that these
sections do not exclude the presentation of
other competent evidence to prove the
existence of a foreign law." 
In that case, we considered the testimony
of an attorney-at-law of San Francisco,
California who quoted verbatim a section
of California Civil Code and who stated
that the same was in force at the time the
obligations were contracted, as sufficient
evidence to establish the existence of said
law. In line with this view, we find no
error, therefore, on the part of the Tax
Court in considering the pertinent
California law as proved by respondents'
witness.
 Cjc Conflict of laws tsn 2022
From the lectures of Atty. Jacquiline Brandares-Magdangal
ABPI, SINARIMBO, FURIA, BALDERAS, AND MELCHOR
Must be both Pleaded and Proven
WILDVALLEY SHIPPING v. COURT
OF APPEALS
G.R. No. 119602, October 6, 2000
Facts: PPL’s vessel named Philippine
Roxas ran aground the Orinoco River near
Venezuela and blocked the ingress and
egress which led to blockage, a vessel of
Wildvalley was unable to sail out of port
that day. This prompted them to file a suit
with RTC against PPL for damages in the
form of unearned profits with interest.
Here, Wildvalley argues that the Court of
Appeals had erred in disregarding the
Venezuelan Law despite the fact that the
same has been substantially proved in the
trial court without any objection from PPL
and the objection was interposed belatedly
on appeal.
Issue: Was the Venezuelan law properly
proved?
Held: (1) Only Presented Photocopies. -
We do not dispute the competency of
Capt. Oscar Leon Monzon, the Assistant
Harbor Master and Chief of Pilots at
Puerto Ordaz, Venezuela, to testify on the
existence of the R Pilotage Law of
Venuezuela and Rules Governing
Navigation on Orinoco River . Captain
Monzon has held the aforementioned
posts for eight years. As such he is in
charge of designating the pilots for
maneuvering and navigating the Orinoco
River. He is also in charge of the
documents that come into the office of the
harbour masters.
9
Pilotage Law was published in the Gaceta
Official and a photocopy of the Gaceta
Official was presented in evidence as an
official publication of the Republic of
Venezuela.The Navigation Rules were
published in a book and only a photocopy
of the said rules was likewise presented
as evidence. Both of these documents are
considered in Philippine jurisprudence to
be public documents for they are the
written official acts, or records of the
official acts of the sovereign authority,
official bodies and tribunals, and public
officers of Venezuela.
(2) Certification Requirement, Absent. -
It is not enough that the Gaceta Oficial, or
a book published, was presented as
evidence with Captain Monzon attesting
it. It is also required by Rules of Court
that a certificate that Captain Monzon,
who attested the documents, is the officer
who had legal custody of those records
made by a secretary of the embassy or
legation, consul general, consul, vice
consul or consular agent or by any officer
in the foreign service of the Philippines
stationed in Venezuela, and authenticated
by the seal of his office accompanying the
copy of the public document. No such
certificate could be found in the records of
the case.
(3) Not Pleaded in Court. - At this
juncture, we have to point out that the
Venezuelan law was not pleaded before
the lower court. A foreign law is
considered to be pleaded if there is an
allegation in the pleading about the
existence of the foreign law, its import
and legal consequence on the event or
transaction in issue.
A review of the Complaint revealed that it
was never alleged or invoked despite the
fact that the grounding of the M/V
 Cjc Conflict of laws tsn 2022
From the lectures of Atty. Jacquiline Brandares-Magdangal
ABPI, SINARIMBO, FURIA, BALDERAS, AND MELCHOR
Philippine Roxas occurred within the
territorial jurisdiction of Venezuela. We
reiterate that under the rules of private
international law, a foreign law must be
properly PLEADED AND PROVED. In
the absence of pleading and proof, the
laws of a foreign country, or state, will be
presumed to be the same as our own local
or domestic law and this is known as
processual presumption.`
Discussion:So katanga kaayo nagsturya2
sila about sa valenzuelan law, wala man diay
ghpon gibutang sa complaint. dapat jud
ebutang sa complaint ha.
Although the Captain might be competent to
testify
➢ There was no compliance with Rules
➢ There was no Certification from the
Secretary or the Embassy or Consulate that
the person who attested the document is the
one having legal custody.
With respect to written proof, parole proof is
objectionable, the best evidence is the duly
authenticated copy of the statute.  absence of proof of the Hong Kong law
Testimony of Expert Witness Must be
Complete
ASIAVEST v. COURT OF APPEALS
G.R. No. 128803, September 25, 1998
Purpose of Testimony: To prove the
ground of want of notice to repel the
foreign judgment.
The main argument raised against the
Hong Kong judgment is that the Hong
Kong Supreme Court did not acquire
jurisdiction over the person of HERAS. Is
it a ground to Repel of foreign judgment?
YES. it is a ground, want of jurisdiction.
 It is settled that matters of remedy and
10
procedure such as those relating to the
service of process upon the defendant are
governed by the lex fori or the law of the
forum, i.e., the law of Hong Kong in this
case. HERAS insisted that according to
his witness Mr. Lousich, who was
presented as an expert on Hong Kong
laws, there was no valid service of
summons on him.
We note that there was no objection on
the part of ASIAVEST on the
qualification of Mr. Lousich as an expert
on the Hong Kong law. It must follow
Rule 132, Section 24 and 25.
Nevertheless, the testimony of an expert
witness may be allowed to prove a foreign
law.
There is, however, nothing in the
testimony of Mr. Lousich that touched on
the specific law of Hong Kong in respect
of service of summons either in actions in
rem or in personam, and where the
defendant is either a resident or
nonresident of Hong Kong. In view of the
on this particular issue, the presumption of
identity or similarity or the so-called
processual presumption shall come into
play. It will thus be presumed that the
Hong Kong law on the matter is similar to
the Philippine law Take Note: The
testimony was not complete the expert
witness did not state why there was want
of notice in relation to HK Laws.
So It is a ground to repel the foreign
judgment but the testimony was not
completed.
 Cjc Conflict of laws tsn 2022
From the lectures of Atty. Jacquiline Brandares-Magdangal
ABPI, SINARIMBO, FURIA, BALDERAS, AND MELCHOR
the testimony was not completed and the
expert witness did not state why there was
want of notice in each---  It was not accepted.
A mere affidavit will also not suffice.  A prayer that seeks judicial notice of a rule
In the case of manufacturers hanover v.
guerrero
 The Bank, however, cannot rely on
Willamette Iron and Steel Works v. Muzzal
or Collector of Internal Revenue v. Fisher to
support its cause. These cases involved
attorneys testifying in open court during the
trial in the Philippines and quoting the
particular foreign laws sought to be
established. On the other hand, the Walden
affidavit was taken abroad ex parte and the
affiant never testified in open
court.1a\^/phi1.net The Walden affidavit
cannot be considered as proof of New York
law on damages not only because it is self-
serving but also because it does not state
the specific New York law on damages.
The Walden affidavit states conclusions
from the affiant’s personal interpretation and
opinion of the facts of the case vis a vis the
alleged laws and jurisprudence without
citing any law in particular. The citations in
the Walden affidavit of various U.S. court
decisions do not constitute proof of the
official records or decisions of the U.S.
courts. While the Bank attached copies of
some of the U.S. court decisions cited in the
Walden affidavit, these copies do not
comply with Section 24 of Rule 132 on proof
of official records or decisions of foreign
courts.
The Bank’s intention in presenting the
Walden affidavit is to prove New York law
and jurisprudence. However, because of the
failure to comply with Section 24 of Rule
132 on how to prove a foreign law and
decisions of foreign courts, the Walden
affidavit did not prove the current state of
New York law and jurisprudence. Thus, the
Bank has only alleged, but has not proved,
what New York law and jurisprudence are
on the matters at issue.
11
So this is similar to the case of Medlloyd(?)
of a foreign court is not the proper method
to prove foreign judgment. Please take note
of this case. Government of Hongkong v.
Munoz.
In the last paragraph of the motion for
reconsideration, the petitioner cites the
ruling supposedly handed down by the
Court of Final Appeal of the HKSAR in the
case of B v. The Commissioner of the
Independent Commission Against
Corruption to the effect that the term agent
in Section 9 of the HK.SAR' s Prevention of
Bribery Ordinance (POBO) also covered
public servants in another jurisdiction.On
the basis of such supposed ruling, the
petitioner prays that the exclusion of the
crime of accepting an advantage as an
agent be reversed; and that the Court
should hold Muñoz to be extraditable also
for such crime.
The petitioner's prayer cannot be granted.
To grant it would be to take judicial notice of
the ruling in B v. The Commissioner of the
Independent Commission Against
Corruption. Like all other courts in this
jurisdiction, however, the Court is not at
liberty to take judicial notice of the ruling
without contravening our own rules on
evidence under which foreign judgments
and laws are not considered as matters of a
public or notorious nature that proved
themselves.Verily, foreign judgments and
laws, if relevant, have to be duly alleged
and competently proved like any other
disputed fact.Worthy to remind in this regard
is that the power to take judicial notice is to
be exercised by the courts of the Philippines
with caution, and every reasonable doubt
should be resolved in the negative. Please
take note of that.
An administrative tribunal is justified in
taking judicial notice when technical rules of
 Cjc Conflict of laws tsn 2022
From the lectures of Atty. Jacquiline Brandares-Magdangal
ABPI, SINARIMBO, FURIA, BALDERAS, AND MELCHOR
prrocedure do not strictly apply. So this is
an exception. Okay?
The case of Norse management v. National
Semen Board
In the aforementioned "Employment
Agreement" between petitioners and the
late Napoleon B. Abordo, it is clear that
compensation shall be paid under Philippine
Law or the law of registry of petitioners'
vessel, whichever is greater. Since private
respondent Restituta C. Abordo was offered
P30,000.00 only by the petitioners,
Singapore law was properly applied in this
case.
The "Employment Agreement" is attached
to the Supplemental Complaint of Restituta
C. Abordo and, therefore, it forms part
thereof. As it is familiar with Singapore Law,
the National Seamen Board is justified in
taking judicial notice of and in applying that
law.Furthermore, Article 20, Labor Code of
the Philippines, provides that the National
Seamen Board has original and exclusive
jurisdiction over all matters or cases
including money claims, involving employer-
employee relations, arising out of or by
virtue of any law or contracts involving
Filipino seamen for overseas employment.
Thus, it is safe to assume that the Board is
familiar with pertinent Singapore maritime
laws relative to workmen's compensation.
Moreover, the Board may apply the rule on
judicial notice and, "in administrative
proceedings, the technical rules of
procedure — particularly of evidence —
applied in judicial trials, do not strictly
apply." So that is why this is an exception.
Okay? Because, this is an  administrative
tribunal and technical rules of procedure
particularly rules of evidence do not strictly
apply. So please take note of that case.
What is the Doctrine of Processual
Presumption?
Under the rules on Private International
Law, foreign law must be properly pleaded
and proven as a fact.In the absence of
pleading and proof, the laws of the foreign
12
country or state will be presumed to be the
same as our local or domestic law. This is
known as Processual Presumption. While
the foreign law ws properly pleaded in the
case at bar, it was not proven not in the
manner provided by section 24 R132 of the
ROC. As in the case of Nedlloyd v. Glow
Laks. 
What is the other term for Doctrine of
Processual Presumption? Presumed
identity Approach. 
Edi-Staffbuers v. NLRC
Gran was an OFW and was hired through
EDI as a computer specialist and he was
later on dismissed and made to sign a
quitclaim. Gran filed for Illegal Dismissal. He
was dismissed for incompetence and
alleged subordination. In the present case,
the employment contract signed by Gran
specifically states that Saudi Labor Laws
will govern matters not provided for in the
contract (e.g. specific causes for
termination, termination procedures, etc.).
Being the law 
intended by the parties (lex loci intentiones)
to apply to the contract, Saudi Labor Laws
should govern all matters relating to the
termination of the employment of Gran.
Issue: What is the effect when the law was
not proven?
Held: In international law, the party who
wants to have a foreign law applied to a
dispute or case has the burden of proving
the foreign law. The foreign law is treated as
a question of fact to be properly pleaded
and proved as the judge or labor arbiter
cannot take judicial notice of a foreign law.
He is presumed to know only domestic or
forum law.Unfortunately for petitioner, it did
not prove the pertinent Saudi laws on the
matter; thus, the International Law doctrine 
of presumed-identity approach or
processual presumption comes into play.
Where a foreign law is not pleaded or, even
if pleaded, is not proved, the presumption is
that foreign law is the same as ours. Thus,
 Cjc Conflict of laws tsn 2022
From the lectures of Atty. Jacquiline Brandares-Magdangal
ABPI, SINARIMBO, FURIA, BALDERAS, AND MELCHOR
we apply Philippine labor laws in
determining issues presented before us.
[Illegally dismissed]
But there is an exception to the Processual
Presumption
PCIB v. ESCOLIN
It should be borne in mind that as above-
indicated, the question of what laws of
Texas are governing the matters here in
issue is, in the first instance, one of fact, not
of law. Elementary is the rule that foreign
laws may not be taken  which means that the distribution was
judicial notice of and have to be proven like
any other fact in dispute between the parties
in any proceeding.
With the rare exception in instances when:
1. The said laws are already within the
actual knowledge of the court, such as
when they are well and generally known; or
2. They have been actually ruled upon in
other cases before it and none of the parties
concerned do not claim otherwise
What is Doctrine of Renvoi?
Renvoi
It is a procedure whereby a jural matter
presented is referred by the conflict of laws
rules of the forum to a foreign state, which,
in turn, refers the matter to the law of the
forum, or the third state.
1. Remission. – When reference is made
back to the law of the forum;
2. Transmission – Reference is made to
third state
In Aznar v. Garcia
Facts: Edward E. Christensen executed a
Will in Manila in 1951 where he had
declared that his only descendant was his
daughter Maria Lucy. But added that he
bequeaths a sum of money (P3,600) to
Maria Helen Christensen (respondent) who,
testator explicitly states “notwithstanding the
fact that she was baptized Christensen, is
not in any way related to me, nor has she
13
"been at any time adopted by me”. In
accordance with the provisions of the will,
the executor ratified payment of inly P3,600
to Helen Christensen Garcia and proposed
that the residue of the estate be transferred
to Maria Lucy. 
Helen opposed arguing that the disposition
would deprive her of her legitime as an
acknowledged natural child declared by the
Supreme Court in a previous case and
further argued that the distribution should be
governed by the laws of the Philippines
improper as it deprives her of the legitime.
This is a popular case in succession. 
The court below ruled that the testator was
citizen of US and California at the time of
his death, and the successional rights and
validity of the provisions in his will are to be
governed by the law of California, in
accordance with which a testator has the
right to dispose of his property in the way he
desires, because the right of absolute
dominion of property is sacred and
inviolable.
Governing National Law of Testator
There is no single American Law governing
the validity of testamentary provisions in the
United States, each state has its own
private law applicable to its citizens only and
in force only within the state. The "national
law" indicated in Article 16 of the Civil Code
above quoted cannot, therefore, possibly
mean or apply to any general American law.
So, it can refer to no other than the private
law of the state of which the decedent is a
citizen, in the case at bar, the private law of
the State of California.
What is the law in California governing
disposition of personal 
property?
California Probate Code
A testator may dispose of his property by
will in the form and in the manner he
desires.
 Cjc Conflict of laws tsn 2022
From the lectures of Atty. Jacquiline Brandares-Magdangal
ABPI, SINARIMBO, FURIA, BALDERAS, AND MELCHOR
But here, Helen Christensen Garcia invokes
the:
Civil Code of California, Article 946
If there is no law to the contrary, in the place
where the personal property is situated, it is
deemed to follow the person of its owner,
and is governed by the law of his domicile.
Thus, Garcia here argues that this should
apply, following the Doctrine of Renvoi the
question of the validity of the testamentary
provision in question should be referred
back to the law of the decedent's domicile,
which is the Philippines .
Si Helen Christiensen Garcia is was the
mother of our very close friend. Naa rana
sila diri sa Digos. So tinuod jud ni nga anak
jud ni siya aning Christiensen. Nagkagubot
lang sila kay isa ra iyang gina acknowledge
pero anak jud na sila. Okay?  be decided, especially as the application of
So what law should govern?
Appellees argue that what Article 16 of the
Civil Code of the Philippines pointed out as
the national law is the internal law of
California . But as above explained, the
laws of California have prescribed two sets
of laws for its citizens, one for residents
therein and. another for those domiciled in
other jurisdictions.  provisions of his will depriving his
Reason demands that We should enforce
the California Civil Code, enforce the
conflict of law rules law for the citizens
domiciled abroad. [Since the California
Probate Code involves internal law while the
California Civil Code refers to the conflicts
rule involving a citizen not residing in
California].
If we must enforce the law of California as in
comity we are bound to do, as so declared
in Article 16 of our Civil Code, then we must
enforce the law of California in accordance
with the express mandate thereof and as
above explained, i.e., apply the internal law
for residents therein, and its conflict of laws
rule for those domiciled abroad. The conflict
14
of law rule in California, Article 946, Civil
Code, precisely refers back the case, when
a decedent is not domiciled in California, to
the law of his domicile, the Philippines in the
case at bar. 
So gibalik sa Philippines. So, Doctrine of
Renvoi:
The court of the domicile cannot and should
not refer the case back to California; such
action would leave the issue incapable of
determination because the case will then be
like a football, tossed back and forth
between the two states, between the
country of which the decedent was a citizen
and the country of his domicile. The
Philippine court must apply its own law as
directed in the conflict of law rule of the
state of the decedent, if the question has to
the internal law of California provides no
legitime for children while the Philippine law,
makes natural children legally
acknowledged forced heirs of the parent
recognizing them. [Meaning, Philippine
internal law shall be applied].
We therefore find that as the domicile of the
deceased Christensen, a citizen of
California, is the Philippines , the validity of
acknowledged natural child, the appellant,
should be governed by the Philippine law,
the domicile, pursuant to Art. 946 of the Civil
Code of California, not by the internal law of
California .
In short, nakuha niya iyang 3000. hastang
gamaya pero dugay naman ni, dako nato
siya.
The renvoi doctrine as applied here:
1. Succession Issue – National Law of
Decedent
2. National Law of Decedent – California
Law
3. California Law (Conflict Rule) – Law of
Domicile
 Cjc Conflict of laws tsn 2022
From the lectures of Atty. Jacquiline Brandares-Magdangal
ABPI, SINARIMBO, FURIA, BALDERAS, AND MELCHOR
4. Law of Domicile – Philippine Law
(National Law)
5. Apply Philippine Law (Renvoi Doctrine)
Kay kung dili, magsige silag pasahanay, di
sila mahuman.  It is therefore evident that whatever public
BELLIS v. BELLIS
G.R. No. L-23678, June 06, 1967
Amon G. Bellis was born in Texas and a
citizen of Texas and USA. He had first wife,
Mary E. Mallen with five legitimate children;
and a second wife, Violet Kennedy with
three legitimate children. Amon also had
three illegitimate children. In 1952, Amon G.
Bellis executed a will in the Philippines
which he directed that his distributable
estate should be divided to (1) his first
wife(2) to his three illegitimate children and
(3) the remainder to the other heirs.
In 1958, testator died in Texas and his will
was admitted to probate in CFI Manila in
1958. The executor started to pay the
bequests. In 1964, the executor submitted a
project of partition which included
satisfaction of the legacy of the first wife and
the illegitimate children that is pursuant to
the will. However,the other heirs filed their
oppositions on the ground that they were
deprived of their legitimes as compulsory
heirs of the deceased.
However, the trial court overruled their
oppositions and approved the project
partition relying upon Article 16 applying the
national law of Amon G. Bellis which is the
Texas Law which did not provide for
legitimes.
Whether Texas Law or Philippine Law
should apply.  determined under Texas law, the Philippine
– Texas Law
Article 17 Does Not Intend to Extend
Philippine System of Legitimes to the
Succession of Foreign Nationals -Here,
appellants argue that Article 17, par. 3
15
(prohibitive laws), espousing the idea that
the system of legitimes here in the
Philippines would not be rendered
inoperative because of the absence of
legitimes in Texas Law. This is not the case.
policy or good customs may be involved in
our system of legitimes, Congress has not
intended to extend the same to the
succession of foreign nationals. For it has
chosen to leave, amount of successional
rights, to the decedent's national law.
Specific provisions must prevail over
general ones.
Foreigner’s Will Stating that Philippine Law
Shall Govern And Not his National Law
Shall be Void.Appellants would also point
out that the decedent executed two wills -
one to govern his Texas estate and the
other his Philippine estate rguing from this
that he intended Philippine law to govern his
Philippine estate.Assuming that such was
the decedent's intention in executing a
separate Philippine will, it would notalter the
law, for as this Court ruled in the Miciano v.
Brimo, 50 Phil. 867, 870, a provision in a
foreigner's will to the effect that his
properties shall be distributed in accordance
with Philippine law and not with his national
law, is illegal and void, for his national law
cannot be ignored in regard to those
matters that Article 10 - now Article 16 - of
the Civil Code states said national law
should govern. 
The parties admit that the decedent, Amos
G. Bellis, was a citizen of the State of
Texas, U.S.A., and that under the laws of
Texas, there are no forced heirs or
legitimes. Accordingly, since the intrinsic
validity of the provision of the will and the
amount of successional rights are to be
law on legitimes cannot be applied to the
testacy of Amos G. Bellis.
Please take note: Note: Assuming that
Texas has a conflicts of law rule that 
 Cjc Conflict of laws tsn 2022
From the lectures of Atty. Jacquiline Brandares-Magdangal
ABPI, SINARIMBO, FURIA, BALDERAS, AND MELCHOR
the properties be governed by domicile it is
not argued here that Bellis was domiciled in
Texas, if that was case, the domicile was
Texas. Since the appellants here did not
raise the doctrine of renvoi citing that Texas
has that conflicts of law rule, it cannot be
applied in the case.] That is why this case is
different from Aznar v. Garcia. 

I will continue with Doctrine of Renvoi but

we will stop here. We will have our exam
next week.

16