CONFLICTS OF LAW

Public Conflict of Laws

ATTY. RAMOS-GABRIEL
International Law
GENERAL PRINCIPLES
What is International Law?
Nature International in General rule:
character National or
❖ Body of rules and principles recognized by nations
municipal in
as binding in their relations with one another.
character.
Exception: Rules of
2 Branches of International law:
COL become
international in
1. Public International Law – body of rules and
character when
principles which regulates the relations of states
embodied in a
and other entities possessing international
convention
personality, and governs their conduct affecting
the interests of the international entity as a whole
Sources Based on: Based on domestic
1. International or municipal laws
2. Private International Law / Conflict of Laws – is
conventions
that part of Municipal law of a State which directs
2. International
its courts and administrative agencies, when
Customs
confronted with a legal problem involving a
3. General
foreign element, whether or not to apply a foreign
principles of
law or foreign laws.
law
4. Teachings of
What are entities who have an international legal most highly
personality? qualified
publicists of
❖ are those who have rights and obligations under various nations
international law. These are non-states like the
U.N. Subjects General rule: Private individuals
Sovereign states and respecting acts or
3 Elements of Conflict of Laws: other entities transactions which
possessing involve a foreign
1. Merely part of the municipal law international element
2. The subject is any factual situation containing a personality.
foreign element Exception:
3. The primary function is to determine what law Individuals subject to
should be applied in the forum. the ICC

Conflict of Laws as distinguished from Domestic Law: Transactions Public interests, Private transaction
Involved generally, interests between private
❖ A Conflict of Laws case always has a foreign pertaining to individuals
element, while municipal/domestic law has none. sovereign states

What is Foreign Element? Remedies Peaceful: diplomatic Resort to

and negotiation, tender & municipal
❖ A factual situation that cuts across territorial lines sanctions exercise of good tribunals
and is thus affected by the diverse laws of two or offices, mediation,
more states. (Saudi Arabian Airlines vs. CA) inquiry &
❖ ex. Nationality - when a foreigner marries a conciliation,
Filipino citizen. arbitration, judicial
settlement by ICJ,
reference to regional
agencies.

Forcible: severance
of diplomatic
relations, retorsions,
reprisals, embargo,
boycott,

COOL 22-23 - BUNGAY | MAUR | MAGPANTAY 1

 3. Multilateral Treaties and International
non-intercourse,
Conventions (Ex. Warsaw Convention of 1929,
pacific blockades,
Hague Conference on Private International Law)
collective measures
4. Bilateral Treaties (Between two states)
under the UN
5. Case law
Charter, and war
6. International Customs; Law of Nations (Ex. Lex
loci celebracionis)
Subject of Conflict of Laws: 7. The Constitution

❖ Private individuals respecting acts or transactions ➢ Indirect Sources:

which involve a foreign element.
3-Fold Function of COL:
1. To prescribe the conditions under which a court or
agency is competent to entertain a suit or
proceeding involving facts containing a foreign
element. (Deals with issue of jurisdiction)
2. To determine for each class of cases the particular
system of law by reference to which the rights of
the parties must be ascertained. (The choice of law
principle)
3. To specify the circumstances in which foreign
judgment will be recognized as valid and binding
in the forum. (Possible recognition of foreign
judgment)
History
Theory of Statutes:
❖ was formulated to solve the conflicts brought
about by growing wealth and progress in trade
and commerce during the 1300.
Real Statutes:
1. Natural Law – presupposes a body of rules that is
of universal validity.
2. Works and treatises of jurists and writers like
Savigny and Story.
JURISDICTION
BASES OF JURISDICTION
Domestic Law
- the authority of the courts to try and decide cases
- Also known as Legislative Jurisdiction
International Law
- The competence of the state to prescribe rules of
conduct, enforce its legal processes, and
adjudicate controversies or claims, within its
boundaries.
- It is defined as the right of the state to exercise
authority over persons or things within its around
the subject to certain exceptions
- State sovereignty is the source of its jurisdiction to
enact laws, enforce its legal passes, and to
adjudicate the controversies or cases within its
boundaries
- Sovereignty is exclusive within and
throughout the domain of the state or
within its territory

❖ are laws applied particularly to immovables Three (3) categories of jurisdiction in transnational
within the territory. cases (Restatement of the Foreign Relations Law of the
United States)
Personal Statutes: 1. Jurisdiction to prescribe - state’s ability to make
its law applicable to persons, conduct, relations, or
❖ are applied to and followed by a person outside interests within its territory.
his domicile. Ex. Laws on the personal status of a 2. Jurisdiction to adjudicate - state’s ability to
person (married or not) subject persons or things to the passes of its
courts or administrative tribunals
Mixed Statutes: 3. Jurisdiction to enforce - state’s ability to use or
compel compliance, or to punish non-compliance
❖ laws of dubious nature which are made to apply to within its laws or regulations
contracts. What is their purpose (prescribe, adjudicate) if the courts
of the state does not have the jurisdiction to enforce its
Sources of COL: laws and processes?

➢ Primary Sources: DIFFERENT BASIS OF JURISDICTION

1. Codifications
2. Special legislation (Ex. General Banking Act,
Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, Foreign Investments
Act of 1991)
1. Territoriality principle
● The state may exercise jurisdiction only within its
territory
● It is when the state may regulate both civil and
criminal matters within its sovereign borders

COOL 22-23 - BUNGAY | MAUR | MAGPANTAY 2

● Usually used in criminal offense, but not strictly
limited to criminal cases only
● In the Philippines, do we adhere to the
territoriality principle respecting penal laws? Yes.
Penal laws and those of public security and safety
shall be obligatory upon all who live or sojourn in
the Philippine territory, subject to the principles of
public international law and to treaty stipulations.
(Art. 14, Civil Code)
● XPN: extraterritoriality principle - the state may
exercise jurisdiction even it is beyond its
territorial boundaries under its extraterritorial
jurisdiction
Two forms of extraterritorial jurisdiction
1. Foreigners may be exempted in the laws
of the state (even if the crime is
committed in the Philippines)
2. The state may exercise jurisdiction of its
nationals even when it is committed
abroad, in the exclusion of the state where
the act was committed (e.g. a Filipino
national committed misconduct while in
the US. Under the extraterritoriality
principle, the state may exercise its
extraterritorial jurisdiction over the
misconduct of the person committed in
the US)
When foreigners are exempted from the operation
of the laws of the Philippines
- Sovereign immunity (e.g. when the
president of the certain state committed a
crime here in the Philippines - ph cannot
exercise jurisdiction over that; under the
vienna convention on diplomatic relations
- when acts were committed abroad by
diplomatic consuls, they cannot be
prosecuted abroad; crime committed in
an armed vessel in a foreign country -
jurisdiction cannot be exercised since it is
the extension of the territory of the state
of that vessel. However, if it is a
merchant/trading vessel, or a cruise line
docked here in the ph, ph can exercise
jurisdiction because when a vessel enters
the port of another, it subjects itself to
that territory and laws of that state)
● Do penal laws have an extraterritorial effect?
YES.
✦ ART. 2, RPC:
1. Offenses committed while on a Philippine
ship or airship
2. Forge or counterfeit any coin or currency
note of the Philippine islands or
obligations and securities issued by the
Government of the Philippine Islands
3. Acts connected with the introduction into
these islands of the obligations and
securities mentioned in the presiding
number
4. While being public officers or employees,
should commit an offense in the exercise
of their functions
5. Should commit any of the crimes against
national security and the law of nationals,
defined in Title One of Book Two of RPC.
(Piracy)
✦ Expanded anti-trafficking in Persons of
2012 - the law itself provides for its
extraterritorial effect; if committed by a Filipino
citizen, permanent resident of the Philippines, or if
the crime has been committed even outside of the
Philippines
✦ Anti-terrorism law
2. Nationality principle
● The state has jurisdiction over its nationals
anywhere in the world since they are entitled to
the protection of the state wherever they may be.
● Applicable to persons, corporations organized
under its laws
● REASON: nationals of the state has the duty to
obey the law of that state, even if they are outside
the state
● ART. 15, CIVIL CODE
Laws relating to 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. (Also known as Personal
laws, which is applicable to the nationals of the
Philippines wherever they may be found)
3. Protective principle
● The state has jurisdiction over acts committed
abroad that are prejudicial to the national's
security or vital interests of the state, whether the
act is committed by its nationals or non-nationals.
● Act was committed outside the state’s territory
● Falls under the protective principle because the
acts are prejudicial to the national’s security or
vital interests of the state
● E.g. acts committed under Article 2 of the RPC
(XPN: #3)
4. Universality Principle
● The state has jurisdiction over offenses which
attend the international community as a whole
and is considered as criminal offense in all
countries.
● Crime committed against all nations
● Harmful to the international community itself, or
international order may be prosecuted by any
state, provided that there is some sort of
connection to that state
● A national court may prosecute individuals for
serious crimes against international laws
COOL 22-23 - BUNGAY | MAUR | MAGPANTAY 3
 E.g. Piracy, genocide, crimes against humanity,
terrorism (as long as it is harmful to the state, the
national court may exercise jurisdiction)
● Instances when national courts may exercise
universal jurisdiction only when the state has
legislation recognizing the relevant crimes in
authorizing its prosecution under international
law
E.g. international convention on financing of
terrorism (Anti-money Laundering Act was
amended, wherein the act of terrorism and
funding of terrorists are now included as illegal
activities covered - the result of international
convention)
● UNIVERSAL JURISDICTION - any state may
exercise jurisdiction over an individual who
commits certain heinous crimes even when no
other recognized basis of jurisdiction exists
● Crimes considered as Offenses against
International Communities
✦ Nuremberg trials
- military tribunals (purpose is to
prosecute prominent german officers for
crimes committed during WW2)
- What is then important in this trial? It
created international jurisprudence on
the constitution of tribunals having
jurisdiction over international crimes. It
also categorized against international law
(Crimes against humanity, genocide,
torture)
✦ Terrorism
✦ Genocide
✦ Human Trafficking
5. Principle of Passive Personality
● The state may exercise jurisdiction against foreign
nationals who commit acts of injury against its
nationals within the territory of another states
● Elements
○ Crime committed by a foreign national;
○ Committed in the territory of another
state
○ Committed outside of the territorial
jurisdiction of the state that intents to
exercise jurisdiction over the offense
● What is then the connection? The act committed
injured its nationals of that state
● Usually applied to:
○ Acts of terrorism
○ Other organized attacks of other nationals
by reason of their nationality
FILARTIGA V. PENA-IRALA
Doctrine: For the purpose of the Alien Tort Statute, torture
may be considered to violate law of nations. The
prohibition against torture has become part of customary
international law. Various United Nations declarations such
as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the 1975
Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Torture
further portrays the fact that prohibition against torture
has become part of the vast majority of nations and this is
the reason why this court concluded that torture violates
the law of nations.
Summary: the act was not committed within the US
territory, however, the US Court took cognizance of the
case because of the principle that torture is considered as a
violation of the law of the nations. In this case, it was stated
that for the purposes of civil liability, torture is similar to a
pirate, an enemy of all mankind. Hence, universal
jurisdiction was exercised by the US in this case.
US V. FAWAZ YUNIS
The federal government may prosecute an airline hijacker
even if the hijacking’s only connection with the US was the
presence of Americans on board the plane. There must be
jurisdiction under both international and domestic law in
order for jurisdiction to exist in the situation of this case.
International law relates to its intent to do so.
International law recognizes several bases for a nation to
give extraterritorial application to its laws. One is the
universal principle. Some acts are considered to be so
heinous and contrary to civilization that any court may
assert jurisdiction. The acts that fall within this category
are mainly defined by international conventions. The
universal principle applies because numerous conventions
condemn hijacking and hostage-taking. The passive
personal principle is also relevant, which applies to
offenses against a nation’s citizens abroad. The US has
been slow to recognize this principle, but it is now
generally agreed upon. International law having been
disposed of on this issue, domestic law must now be
discussed. The Hostage Taking Law, at subsection
(b)(1)(A), clearly includes an offender that has seized or
detained a US citizen. The language could not be plainer.
With regard to the Destruction of Aircraft Act and the
Federal Aviation Act, 18 U.S.C. A31, the law was intended to
apply only when the aircraft in question either began or
ended its flight in the US. Since the flight in question did
not do this, the Act does not apply. Motion denied in part;
granted in part.
NOTE: #2-5 can be taken as an exception to the
territoriality principle, but in their own right, they may be
also the basis of jurisdiction
JUDICIAL JURISDICTION
WHEN MAY COURTS VALIDLY EXERCISE JURISDICTION?
1. Jurisdiction over the subject matter
- Power or authority of the courts to hear
and decide cases of a general class
- How is it conferred? By the Constitution
or by law.
- Closely tied up with jurisdiction over the
remedy
- E.g. the family court, RTC Manila has
jurisdiction over the specific case such as
petitions for annulment. With that, the
COOL 22-23 - BUNGAY | MAUR | MAGPANTAY 4
 Court also has jurisdiction to issue a
certificate of annulment, settle the
property of the spouses, and custody of
the children (in case of remedy)
- May be conferred by the consent of the
parties through their voluntary
submission of courts? NO. The
Jurisdiction is conferred by law, by the
consent of the parties, by their voluntary
submission to the courts, it is not
conferred by jurisprudence, it is not
acquired through administrative cases or
court orders, it is not acquired by
stipulation, signs.
- However, laches or estoppel may apply to
issues of jurisdiction
2. Jurisdiction over the res
- The power of the court over an object or
thing that is being litigated, regardless of
the persons who may be interested
therein regardless of the owner of the
property.
- How is it acquired? By actually or
constructively seizing the thing under
court’s custody
- - immovable: constructive seizure of the
property is sufficient.
3. Jurisdiction over the parties
- Competence of the party to render a
decision to bind the parties to sue
- How is it acquired? Distinguish whether
the case is a civil case or criminal case
- CIVIL:
- PETITIONER: as soon as they file
their complaints for petitions, the
court acquires jurisdiction over
the complainant or petitioner.
- DEFENDANT or RESPONDENT:
valid service of summons, or
through voluntary submission
(participates in the trial)
- CRIMINAL:
- COMPLAINANT: upon the filing of
the complaint/information
- DEFENDANT or ACCUSED:
voluntary submission through
appearance or arrest of the
accused
4. Jurisdiction over the remedy
Why is it that the courts must acquire jurisdiction over
all these things so they can validly hear a case? The
case may be dismissed in case the court invalidly hears a
case.
KINDS OF ACTION
1. In personam - one which has for its object a
judgment against the person
- Purpose: to impose a personal liability or
obligation against the defendant or the
respondent
- E.g. the plaintiff seeks the recovery of
personal property against the defendant
- E.g. a plaintiff files an action for an
enforcement of a contract against a
particular defendant
- E.g. plaintiff filed an action for the
recovery of damages against particular
defendant
2. In rem - an action against the thing itself
- Purpose of the suit is not imposed a
personal liability against the defendant,
but to affect the interest of all persons in a
thing
- Jurisdiction over the thing is necessary in
action in rem. After the determination of
the action, whatever decision the court
issued in that case, it binds the whole
world
- E.g. registration of land title
3. Quasi in rem - an action that affect the interests
of particular persons in a thing
- Requirement: a matter of due process
- E.g. action for the foreclosure of mortgage
- It involves a specific property, however, in
this case, it only affects the interest of the
parties to that case
- E.g. quieting of title - it involves an
immovable property, but it only affects
the interest of the parties to that
particular case, not binding to the entire
world.
What is the importance of determining the nature of
the action? Because the rules on service of summons
under the ROC would apply according to the nature of the
action.
HOW IS SUMMONS SERVED
1. In personam - by personal service or substituted
service
2. In rem - by publication
3. Quasi in rem - by publication (however, summons
must be given to the defendant as a matter of due
process)
INSTANCES WHEN SUMMONS BY PUBLICATION IS
AUTHORIZED
1. If the action is in rem
2. If the action is quasi in rem
3. If the action involves the personal status of the
plaintiff (e.g. declaration of nullity of marriage,
case of Rayray v. Lee)
INSTANCES WHEN EXTRATERRITORIAL SERVICE OF
SUMMONS IS AUTHORIZED
IN CASE OF A NON-RESIDENT DEFENDANT AND:
1. If the action is in rem
COOL 22-23 - BUNGAY | MAUR | MAGPANTAY 5
 2. If the action is quasi in rem
3. If the action involves the personal status of the
plaintiff (in rem)
HOW IS EXTRATERRITORIAL SERVICE OF SUMMONS
DONE?
1. Personal service out of the country;
2. As provided for in international conventions to
which the Philippines is a party;
3. Publication in a newspaper of general circulation,
in which case a copy of the summons and order of
the court shall be sent by registered mail to the
last known address of the defendant; or
4. Any other manner the court may deem sufficient
NOTE: Extraterritorial service of summons is done with
leave of court
Regardless of the type of action, whether in personam, in
rem, quasi in rem, the preferred mode of service of
summons must be personal service.
Can a court acquire jurisdiction over a non-resident
defendant in an action in personam? NO. When the
action is in personam, the defendant is a non-resident, and
that defendant does not submit voluntarily to the authority
of the jurisdiction over the court, personal service of
summons within the state is necessary in order to acquire
jurisdiction over the non-resident defendant.
SC ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 251-2020
Guidelines on the Implementation in the Philippines of
the Hague Service Convention on the Service Abroad of
Judicial Documents in Civil and Commercial Matters
- Extraterritorial service of court documents has
been standardized for all state parties in the
convention (the Philippines is a state party in the
convention)
CERTAIN CONDITIONS IN ORDER FOR THE CONVENTION
TO APPLY:
1. A document is to be transmitted from one state
party for service to another state party;
- e.g . if the document is to be transmitted
by a state who is not a party to the
convention - not allowed.
2. The address of the intended recipient in the
receiving state party is known;
3. The document to be served is a judicial document;
and (subject to judicial action)
4. The document to be served relates to a civil or
commercial matter.
- Criminal case not included
- Protection to the accused is given under
the hague convention
Office of the Court Administration
- Central Authority for the Philippines
- Receives all requests from requesting states
- Once the OCA receives the request, it will transmit
those requests accordingly.
All Justices and Clerks of Collegiate Courts, and Judges
of lower courts who are competent to forward the
request or extraterritorial service
- Forwarding authority for the Philippines
(Civil/Commercial Case) to the other state party
- Depending on where the case is pending
RULE 14, SEC. 9
Service consistent with international conventions. - Service
may be made through methods which are consistent with
established international conventions to which the
Philippines is a party
PERKINS VS. DIZON
The action thus brought is quasi in rem, for while the
judgment that may be rendered therein is not a strictly a
judgment in rem, it fixes and settles the title to the
property in controversy and to that extent partakes of the
nature of the judgment in rem. The action being in quasi in
rem, the trial court has jurisdiction over the person of the
non-resident. In order to satisfy the constitutional
requirement of due process, summons has been served
upon by publication, the relief that may be granted by the
Philippine court must be confined to the res, it having no
jurisdiction to render a personal judgment against the
non-resident.
RAYRAY V. CHAE KYUNG LEE
This is an action is rem, for it concerns the status of the
parties herein, and status affects or binds the whole world.
The res in the present case is the relation between said
parties, or their marriage tie. Jurisdiction over the same
depends upon the nationality or domicile of the parties,
not the place of celebration of marriage, or the locus
celebrationis. Plaintiff here is a citizen of the Philippines,
domiciled therein. His status is, therefore, subject to our
jurisdiction, on both counts. The fact that the defendant
was and is a non-resident alien does not deprive the lower
court of its jurisdiction to pass upon the validity of her
marriage to plaintiff.
GOMEZ V. CA
When the defendant in an action in personam is a
non-resident who does not voluntarily submit himself
to the authority of the court, personal service of
summons within the State is essential to the
acquisition of jurisdiction over his person. This cannot
be done if the defendant is not physically present in the
country, and thus, the court cannot acquire jurisdiction
over his person and therefore cannot validly try and decide
the case against him.
Civil Case No. CEB-11103 is an action in personam because
it is an action against persons, namely, herein respondents,
on the basis of their personal liability. As such, personal
service of summons upon the defendants is essential in
order for the court to acquire jurisdiction over their
persons.
COOL 22-23 - BUNGAY | MAUR | MAGPANTAY 6
 CHOICE OF FORUM
METHODS OF DISPOSING COL CASES:
1. Dismiss the case – lack of jurisdiction or refusal to
assume jurisdiction
2. Assume jurisdiction – apply the internal law of the
forum
3. Assume jurisdiction – apply the law of a foreign
State
3 PHASES IN THE RESOLUTION OF COL PROBLEM:
1. Determination of jurisdiction – it answers the
question where litigation should be initiated.
Concerns the authority of the court to take
cognizance of the case.
2. Determination of choice of law – answers the
question what law the court will apply. This refers
to the applicable law to the problem whether
domestic law or the law of some other state
(foreign law).
3. Recognition and enforcement of judgment –
answers where, how and what extend judgment
can be enforced. This concerns the enforcement of
decisions and judgments of foreign courts in
another jurisdiction.
Jurisdiction and Choice of law are two distinct concepts.
The power to exercise jurisdiction does not automatically
mean that the court should use the law of the forum.
❖ Why are the 3 phases important?
➢ The defenses that may be raised by the parties
may be different from one phase to another. Ex.
Lex loci celebracionis, it is a defense available
under the 2nd phase.
➢ The determination of a conflict of laws problem is
a process, hence the phases. The only exception
is when the case is directly filed for recognition
and enforcement of a judgment of a foreign
court. But when a case involving a COL is initially
filed before a forum court, it has to go through a
process. The court has to determine if it has
jurisdiction, once it determines it is a convenient
forum and opted to exercise jurisdiction then it
can go to the 2nd phase, which is the determination
of choice of law. Then after application of the law,
enforcement of judgment follows.
MINIMUM CONTACT:
➢ A State does not have jurisdiction in the absence of
some reasonable basis for exercising it, whether
the proceedings are in rem, quasi in rem or in
personam. To be reasonable, the jurisdiction must
be based on some minimum contacts that will not
offend traditional notions of fair play and
substantial justice. (HSBC vs. Jack Robert Sherman)
FORUM NON CONVENIENS: (THE FORUM IS NOT
CONVENIENT)
➢ In the case of Puyat vs. Zabarte, The SC laid down
the instances where a court may desist from
exercising jurisdictions or the principles of forum
non conveniens may be invoked.
❖ Under the principle of forum non conveniens, even
if the exercise of jurisdiction is authorized by law,
courts may nonetheless refuse to entertain a case
for any of the following practical reasons:
1. The belief that the matter can be better tried and
decided elsewhere, either because the main
aspects of the case transpired in a foreign
jurisdiction or the material witnesses have their
residence there;
2. The belief that the non-resident plaintiff sought
the forum, a practice known as forum shopping,
merely to secure procedural advantages or to
convey or harass the defendant;
3. The unwillingness to extend local judicial facilities
to non-residents or aliens when the dockets may
already be overcrowded;
4. The inadequacy of the local judicial machinery for
effectuating the right sought to be maintained; and
5. The difficulty of ascertaining foreign law.
FACTORS THAT SHOULD BE TAKEN INTO
CONSIDERATION IN DETERMINING THE MOST
CONVENIENT FORUM:
1. Whether the forum is one to which the parties
may conveniently resort (Ex. Both plaintiff and
respondent are residents of the Philippines even if
what is applicable is foreign law)
2. Whether it is in a position to make an intelligent
decision as to the law and the facts.
3. Whether it has or is likely to have power to
enforce its decision (Principle of Effectiveness)
➢ Whether a case should be entertained or
dismissed depends on the discretion of the court,
it is not ministerial. Because in the first place the
court has jurisdiction. The issue is whether it is a
convenient forum. The court always has
jurisdiction over the subject matter, parties, issues,
res, and remedy.
➢ A case may be dismissed on the ground of forum
non conveniens when the court is satisfied when
there is some other available forum having
jurisdiction, and that is the most appropriate
forum for trial of the case. If there is no other
available forum then it is not prudent for the court
to dismiss the case on the ground of forum non
conveniens.
COMMUNICATIONS MATERIALS AND DESIGN VS. CA
Thus, having acquired jurisdiction, it is now for the
COOL 22-23 - BUNGAY | MAUR | MAGPANTAY 7
Philippine Court, based on the facts of the case, whether to
give due course to the suit or dismiss it, on the principle of
forum non conveniens. Hence, the Philippine Court may
refuse to assume jurisdiction in spite of its having acquired
jurisdiction. Conversely, the court may assume jurisdiction
over the case if it chooses to do so; provided, hat the
following requirements are met:
1. That the Philippine Court is one to which the
parties may conveniently resort to;
2. That the Philippine Court is in a position to
make an intelligent decisions as to the law and
the facts; and,
3. That the Philippine Court has or is likely to
have power to enforce its decision.
➢ In this case, in stating that the principle of forum
non conveniens should not be applied the SC
elucidated on the 3 factors above in determining
the most convenient forum.
MANILA HOTEL CORP VS. NLRC
The NLRC was a seriously inconvenient forum. The main
aspects of the case transpired in two foreign jurisdictions
and the case involves purely foreign elements. The only
link that the Philippines has with the case is that
respondent Santos is a Filipino Citizen. The Palace Hotel
and MHICL are foreign corporations. Not all cases involving
our citizens can be tried here.
Under the rule of forum non conveniens, a Philippine court
or agency may assume jurisdiction over the case if it
chooses to do provided: 1) That the Philippine Court is
one to which the parties may conveniently resort to; 2)
That the Philippine Court is in a position to make an
intelligent decisions as to the law and the facts; and, 3)
That the Philippine Court has or is likely to have power
to enforce its decision. The conditions are unavailing in
the case at bar.
➢ The NLRC here has no power to determine the
applicable law since the contract was not made in
the Philippines. It also has no power to determine
the facts of the case because all the acts
complained of took place in another jurisdiction.
Another note to take of is the existence of a POEA
contract, in this case there was no such contract as
Santos was directly hired by Palace Hotel without
intervention of our gov’t, POEA, or POEA contract.
The presence of a POEA contract makes it so that
the local agency in the Philippines may be sued by
the complainant in case of breach of the POEA
contract.
PUYAT VS. ZABARTE
Refer above for the doctrine. This an example of a case
which is one for enforcement of foreign judgment. As to the
issue that was raised by the petitioner that the Court will
have difficulty ascertaining California law, according to the
SC this is already for enforcement of foreign judgment.
There is no need to ascertain again the rights and
obligations of the parties based on foreign law because it
has already been adjudicated by a foreign tribunal.
PACIFIC CONSULTANTS INTERNATIONAL ASIA, INC. VS.
SCHONFELD
Petitioners’ insistence on the application of the principle of
forum non conveniens must be rejected. The bare fact that
respondent is a Canadian citizen and was a repatriate does
not warrant the application of the principle for the
following reasons:
First: The Labor Code of the Philippines does not include
forum non conveniens as a ground for the dismissal of the
complaints.
Second: The propriety of dismissing a case based on this
principle requires a factual determination; hence, it is
properly considered as defense.
Third: In Bank of America, NT&SA, Bank of Amera
International, Ltd. vs. CA, the court held that a Philippine
court or agency may assume jurisdiction over the case if it
chooses to do provided: 1) That the Philippine Court is
one to which the parties may conveniently resort to; 2)
That the Philippine Court is in a position to make an
intelligent decisions as to the law and the facts; and, 3)
That the Philippine Court has or is likely to have power
to enforce its decision. The SC held all the requirements
are present in this case.
HASEGAWA VS. KITAMURA
In the judicial resolution of conflicts problems, three
consecutive phases are involved: jurisdiction, choice of
law, and recognition and enforcement of judgments.
Corresponding to these phases are the following
questions: 1. Where can or should litigation be
initiated? 2. Which law will the court apply? And 3.
Where can the resulting judgment be enforced?
It should be noted that when a conflicts case, one involving
a foreign element, is brought before a court or
administrative agency, there are three alternatives open to
the latter in disposing of it: (1) dismiss the case, either
because of lack of jurisdiction or refusal to assume
jurisdiction over the case; (2) assume jurisdiction over the
case and apply the internal law of the forum; or (3) assume
jurisdiction over the case and take into account or apply
the law of some other State or States.
Here, the petitioners moved to dismiss the complaint for
lack of jurisdiction claiming as grounds the principles of lex
loci celebracionis and lex contractus and later on on appeal
the petitioners added the grounds of forum non conveniens
and the principle of the state of the most significant
relationship rule. The RTC dismissed. The SC among
others, discussed the different phases. According to the SC,
this case was still in the first phase, the resolution of
whether the court has jurisdiction or is a convenient
forum. The grounds relied upon by the petitioners before
the RTC (lex loci celebracionis, lex contractus) are defenses
COOL 22-23 - BUNGAY | MAUR | MAGPANTAY 8
applicable only to the 2nd phase (choice of law), the same is
true for the principle of the state of the most significant
relationship rule. As regards to the principle of forum non
conveniens, the SC sustained the denial of the motion to
dismiss by the RTC stating that the principle of forum non
conveniens cannot deprived the trial court of its
jurisdiction because it is not one of the grounds for a
motion to dismiss, it requires a factual determination by
the court before it can determine whether the principle of
forum non conveniens is proper under the facts of the case.
It is properly a matter of defense not a ground for a motion
to dismiss.
RAYTHEON INTERNATIONAL VS. ROUZIE
Where a conflicts-of-laws problem is filed in a Philippine
court and where the court has jurisdiction over the subject
matter, the partis and the res, it may or can proceed to try
the case even if the rules of conflict-of-laws or the
convenience of the parties point to a foreign forum. This is
an exercise of sovereign prerogative of the country where
the case is filed.
That the subject contract included a stipulation that the
same shall be governed by the laws of the State of
Conecticut does not suggest that the Philppine courts, or
any other foreign tribunal for that matter, are precluded
from hearing the civil action. Jurisdiction and choice of law
are two distinct concepts.
❖ The choice of law in a contract does not preclude
the assumption of jurisdiction by the forum court
because the two phases are distinct from each
other.
❖ As to the forum of non-conveniens, the SC said
that it requires a factual determination amd it is a
matter of defense, the RTC is correct in denying
the omnibus motion.
PHILIPPINE NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION
VS. ASLAVEST MERCHANT BANKERS (M) BERHAD
Forum non conveniens literally translates to ‘the forum is
inconvenient.’ This doctrine applies in conflicts of law
cases. It gives courts the choice of not assuming
jurisdiction when it appears that it is not the most
convenient forum and the parties may seek redress in
another one. It is a device designed to frustrate illicit
means for securing advantages and vexing litigants that
would otherwise be possible if the venue of litigation or
dispute resolution were left entirely to the whim of either
party.
Puyat v. Zabarte enumerated practical reasons when courts
may refuse to entertain a case even though the exercise of
jurisdiction is authorized by law:
1. The belief that the matter can be better tried and
decided elsewhere, either because the main
aspects of the case transpired in a foreign
jurisdiction or the material witnesses have their
residence there;
2. The belief that the non-resident plaintiff sought
the forum shopping, merely to secure procedural
advantages or to convey or harass the defendant;
3. Th unwillingness to extend local judicial facilities
to non-residents or aliens when the docket may
already be overcrowded;
4. The inadequacy of the local judicial machinery for
effectuating the right sought to be maintained; and
5. The difficulty of ascertaining foreign law.
CONTINENTAL MICRONESIA, INC VS. BASSO
Where the facts establish the existence of foreign elements.
The case presents a conflict-of-laws issue. The foreign
element in a case may appear in different forms, such as in
this case, where one of the parties is an alien and the other
is domiciled in another state.
In resolving the conflicts problem, courts should ask the
following questions:
1. Under the law, do I have jurisdiction over the
subject matter and the parties to this case?
2. If the answer is yes, is this a convenient forum to
the parties in light of the facts?
3. If the answer is yes, what is the conflicts rule for
this particular problem>
4. If the conflicts rul points to a foreign law, has said
law been properly pleaded and proved by the one
invoking it?
5. If so, is the application or enforcement of the
foreign law in the forum one of the basic
exceptions to the application of foreign law? In
short, is there any strong policy or vital interest of
the forum that is at stake in this case and which
should preclude the application of foreign law?
SAUDI ARABIAN AIRLINES VS. REBESENCIO
A choice of law governing the validity of contracts, or the
interpretation of its provisions does not necessarily imply
forum non conveniens. Choice of law and forum non
conveniens are entirely different matters.
Choice of law provisions are an offshoot of the
fundamental principle of autonomy of contracts. Art. 1306
of the Civil Code firmly ensconces this: ART. 1306. The
contracting parties may establish such stipulations,
clauses, terms and conditions as they may deem
convenient provided, they are not contrary to law, morals,
good customs, public order, or public policy.
In contrast, forum non conveniens, is a device akin to the
rule against forum shopping. It is designed to frustrate
illicit means for securing advantages and vexing litigants
that would otherwise be possible if the venue of litigation
(or dispute resolution) were left entirely to the whim of
either party.
- In this case, the SC explained the nature of forum
non conveniens and distinguished the 2 phases, the
choice of forum and the choice of law phase.
COOL 22-23 - BUNGAY | MAUR | MAGPANTAY 9
PIONEER CONCRETE PHILIPPINES, INC. VS. TODARO
reiteration of the principles already discussed.
ACT OF STATE DOCTRINE:
➢ Every sovereign state is bound to respect the
independence of every other state, and the courts
of one country will not sit in judgment on the acts
of the government of another, done within its
territory. Redress of grievances by reasons of such
acts must be obtained through the means open to
be availed of by sovereign powers as between
themselves.
➢ The act of state doctrine is one of the methods by
which States prevent their national courts from
deciding disputes which relate to the internal
affairs of another State… It is an avoidance
technique that is directly related to a State’s
obligation to respect the independence and
equality of other States by not requiring them to
submit to adjudication in a national court or to
settlement of their disputes without their consent.
(PCGG vs. Sandiganbayan citing Underhill vs.
Hernandez)
REPUBLIC VS. MARCOS
Acts of State. The classification of certain acts as “acts of
state” with the consequence that their validity will be
treated as beyond judicial review is a pragmatic device.
The purpose of the device is to keep the judiciary from
embroiling the courts and the country in the affairs of the
foreign nation whose acts are challenged.
Minimally viewed, the classification keeps a court from
making pronouncements on matters over which it has no
power; maximally interpreted, the classification prevents
the embarrassment of a court offending a foreign
government that is extant at the time of the suit.
A court passes on the validity of an “act of state” intrudes
into the domain of political branches.
In this case, the Republic of the Philippines filed a case
against the Marcoses with a foreign court. The Marcoses
raised the defense of Act of State doctrine and the political
question doctrine, among others, which were denied by the
US court. According to the US court, the acts committed by
the Marcoses does not fall under Act of State. The
commission of crimes such as bribe taking, theft,
embezzlement, among others, conspiracy to do those
crimes do not involve political question and are not
considered Act of State.
PCGG VS. SANDIGAYAN
The parameters of the use of the act of state doctrine were
clarified in Banco nacional de Cuba vs. Sabbatino. There, the
U.S. SC held that international law does not require the
application of this doctrine, nor does it forbid the
application of the rule even if it is claimed that the act of
state in question violated international law. Moreover, due
to the doctrine’s peculiar nation-to-nation character, in
practice the usual method for an individual to seek relief is
to exhaust local remedies and then repair to the executive
authorities of his own state to persuade them to champion
his claim in diplomacy or before an international tribunal.
Even assuming that international law requires the
application of the act of state doctrine, the Sandiganbayan
will not examine and review the freeze orders of the
concerned Swiss officials. The Sandiganbayan will not
require the Swiss officials to submit to its adjudication nor
will it settle dispute involving said officials. The
Sandiganbayan will only review and examine the propriety
of maintaining PCGG’s position with respect to Officeco’s
accounts with BTAG for the purpose of further determining
the propriety of issuing a writ against the PCGG and the
OSG.
➢ In this case the SC defined the Act of State
doctrine.
❖ How to distinguish acts of state from private acts
of defendant?
USA VS. MANUEL NORIEGA
Where a court is faced with the issue of extraterritorial
jurisdiction, the analysis to be applied is 1) whether the US
has the power to reach the conduct in question under
traditional principles of international law; and 2) whether
the statutes under which the defendant is charged are
intended to have extraterritorial effect.
The US has long possessed the ability to attach criminal
consequences to acts occurring outside this country which
produces effects within the US. The US has a strong
interest in halting the flow of illicit drugs across its
borders.
In this case, the defendant raised the defenses of head of
state immunity as well as diplomatic immunity which were
denied by the US court. The US court likewise
distinguished the acts of state from its private acts, the
performance of crimes as in this case, the violation of their
drugs law were not acts of state but are private acts of
individuals.
CHOICE OF LAW
PHASES IN THE RESOLUTION OF A COL PROBLEM
1. Determination of jurisdiction - concerns the
jurisdiction of the court to take cognizance of the
case whether to exercise jurisdiction or not.
2. Determination of the choice of law
3. Recognition and enforcement of judgment -
concerns the enforcement of foreign laws and
judgments in another jurisdiction.
CHOICE OF LAW:
- It is the determination of the law that will be
applied by the court in a particular conflict of law
COOL 22-23 - BUNGAY | MAUR | MAGPANTAY 10
 situation.
- What are the choices available to the court?
❖ The court has the option whether to apply
the internal law of the forum or to apply a
foreign law. (what legal system to utilize
= whether domestic law, law of the forum
or foreign law)
TWO IMPORTANT QUESTIONS UNDER CHOICE OF LAW:
1. What legal system should control a given situation
where some of the significant facts occurred in
two or more states?
2. To what extent should the chosen legal system
regulate the situation?
TESTS IN DETERMINING APPLICABLE LAW
A. Characterization
1. Identification of the legal issues from the
facts of the case
2. Pinpoint the branch of law implicated in
the problem
3. Determine whether there is a conflict of
laws problem by the presence of a foreign
element
4. If yes, employ applicable conflict of laws
doctrines in determining the applicable
law
5. If none, apply the law prevailing in the
forum
B. Connecting factors
1. Analyze which jurisdiction has the most
connection to the case
i.e. the nationality of the parties, the
location of the act or event, the terms of
the agreement or contract, and other
matters
2. Once the legal system is identified, the
applicable branch of law in that legal
system will then be applied in resolving
dispute
CHOICE OF APPLICABLE LAW
✦ Principle of Party Autonomy in Contracts
➢ Parties to a contract may stipulate the applicable
law which will govern their contractual relations.
Art. 1306. The contracting parties may establish such
stipulations, clauses, terms and conditions as they may
deem convenient, provided they are not contrary to law,
morals, good customs, public order, or public policy
❖ When a conflict of law situation involves a contract
that has a choice of law provision, how should that
provision be construed? Should it govern at all
times?
➢ Chosen law shall apply, however, Art 1306
specifically provides for the exception
❖ For the chosen law to be applicable, it must have a
substantial relationship to the parties or the
transaction.
➢ Ex. both parties are residents and the
contract was executed in the Philippines,
the parties stipulated that the law to be
applied is the law of Singapore. Here,
there is no minimum contact at all. Thus,
the chosen law should not govern.
❖ For the chosen law to be applicable, there must
be a reasonable basis for the chosen law.
INSTANCES WHEN LAW OF THE FORUM SHOULD BE
APPLIED
1. Where the application of internal law is decreed
➢ this is determined by the law, ex. When
the land involved is located in the forum,
lex rei sitae would govern
2. Where there is failure to plead and prove the
foreign law - Doctrine of Processual Presumption
➢ If the foreign law is not properly pleaded
and proved, the presumption is that the
foreign law is the sam as the local or
internal law of the forum.
3. Where a case involves any of the exceptions to the
application of foreign law
EXCEPTIONS TO THE APPLICATION OF FOREIGN LAW
1. When the enforcement of the foreign law would
run encounter to an important public policy of the
forum
2. Where the application of the foreign law would
infringe good morality as understood in the forum
3. When the foreign law is penal in nature
4. Where the foreign law is procedural in nature
5. When the question involves immovable property
in the forum
6. When the foreign law is fiscal or administrative in
nature
7. Where the application of foreign law would
involve injustice or injury to the citizens or
residents of the forum
8. Where the application of foreign law would
endanger the vital interests of the States.
PAKISTAN INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES V. OPLE
A contract freely entered into should, of course, be
respected, as PIA argues, since a contract is the law
between the parties. The principle of party autonomy in
contracts is not, however, an absolute principle. The rule in
Article 1306, of our Civil Code is that the contracting
parties may establish such stipulations as they may deem
convenient, "provided they are not contrary to law, morals,
good customs, public order or public policy." Thus,
counter-balancing the principle of autonomy of contracting
parties is the equally general rule that provisions of
applicable law, especially provisions relating to matters
affected with public policy, are deemed written into the
contract.
COOL 22-23 - BUNGAY | MAUR | MAGPANTAY 11
 ❖ The two tests in determining applicable law can be
used simultaneously. It does not exclude one from
the other. When you use characterization, you can
also use connecting factors.
ZALAMEA V. CA AND TRANSWORLD AIRLINES
There was fraud or bad faith on the part of respondent
airline when it did not allow petitioners to board their
flight for Los Angeles in spite of confirmed tickets cannot
be disputed. The U.S. law or regulation allegedly
authorizing overbooking has never been proved.
Even if the claimed U.S. Code of Federal Regulations does
exist, the same is not applicable to the case at bar in
accordance with the principle of lex loci contractus which
require that the law of the place where the airline ticket
was issued should be applied by the court where the
passengers are residents and nationals of the forum and
the ticket is issued in such State by the defendant
airline.Since the tickets were sold and issued in the
Philippines, the applicable law in this case would be
Philippine law.
UNITED AIRLINES V. CA
Zalamea vs. Court of Appeals: this Court applied the
doctrine of lex loci contractus. According to the doctrine, as
a general rule, the law of the place where a contract is
made or entered into governs with respect to its nature
and validity, obligation and interpretation. This has been
said to be the rule even though the place where the
contract was made is different from the place where it is to
be performed, and particularly so, if the place of the
making and the place of performance are the same. Hence,
the court should apply the law of the place where the
airline ticket was issued, when the passengers are
residents and nationals of the forum and the ticket is
issued in such State by the defendant airline.
HASEGAWA V. KITAMURA
Analytically, jurisdiction and choice of law are two distinct
concepts. Jurisdiction considers whether it is fair to cause a
defendant to travel to this state; choice of law asks the
further question whether the application of a substantive
law which will determine the merits of the case is fair to
both parties. The power to exercise jurisdiction does not
automatically give a state constitutional authority to apply
forum law. While jurisdiction and the choice of the lex fori
will often coincide, the "minimum contacts" for one do not
always provide the necessary "significant contacts" for the
other. The question of whether the law of a state can be
applied to a transaction is different from the question of
whether the courts of that state have jurisdiction to enter a
judgment.
SAUDI ARABIAN AIRLINES V. CA (IMPORTANT CASE)
As to the choice of applicable law, we note that
choice-of-law problems seek to answer two important
questions: (1) What legal system should control a given
situation where some of the significant facts occurred in
two or more states; and (2) to what extent should the
chosen legal system regulate the situation.
Before a choice can be made, it is necessary for us to
determine under what category a certain set of facts or
rules fall. This process is known as "characterization", or
the "doctrine of qualification". It is the "process of deciding
whether or not the facts relate to the kind of question
specified in a conflicts rule." The purpose of
"characterization" is to enable the forum to select the
proper law.
Our starting point of analysis here is not a legal relation,
but a factual situation, event, or operative fact. An essential
element of conflict rules is the indication of a "test" or
"connecting factor" or "point of contact". Choice-of-law
rules invariably consist of a factual relationship (such as
property right, contract claim) and a connecting factor or
point of contact, such as the situs of the res, the place of
celebration, the place of performance, or the place of
wrongdoing.
ARTS. 14-17, CIVIL CODE
Article 14. Penal laws and those of public security and
safety shall be obligatory upon all who live or sojourn in
the Philippine territory, subject to the principles of public
international law and to treaty stipulations.
The basis of Art. 14 is territorial sovereignty. Please take
note of the exceptions (protective principle, universality
principle, principle of passive personality, theory of
extraterritoriality which includes sovereign and diplomatic
immunity.
Article 15. Laws relating to 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.
NOTE: Philippines adheres to the nationality theory
(Article 15)
❖ What are personal laws?
Defined in Art. 15 of CC.
THEORIES ON PERSONAL LAW
1. Domiciliary Theory - personal laws of a person
are determined by his domicile
2. Nationality Theory - nationality/citizenship as
the basis of the personal law of an individual
Domiciliary and Nationality of a person are also bases of
jurisdiction in terms of personal law.
Theory is the basis of jurisdiction when we talk about
penal laws.
Article 16. Real property as well as personal property
is subject to the law of the country where it is stipulated.
COOL 22-23 - BUNGAY | MAUR | MAGPANTAY 12

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.
PRINCIPLE OF LEX REI SITAE - Real property as well as
personal property is subject to the law of the country
where it is situated
EXCEPTIONS UNDER ART. 16
- In intestate and testamentary succession
1. Order of succession
2. The amount of successional rights,
whether in intestate or testamentary
succession
3. Intrinsic validity of the provisions of the
will
These shall be regulated by the national law of the person
who’s succession is under consideration whether personal
or real property and regardless of where the property is
found.
Article 17. The forms and solemnities of contracts,
wills, and other public instruments shall be governed by
the laws of the country in which they are executed.
When the acts referred to are executed before the
diplomatic or consular officials of the Republic of the
Philippines in a foreign country, the solemnities
established by Philippine laws shall be observed in their
execution.
Prohibitive laws concerning persons, their acts or
property, and those which have for their object public
order, public policy and good customs shall not be
rendered ineffective by laws or judgments promulgated, or
by determinations or conventions agreed upon in a foreign
country.
PRINCIPLE OF LEX LOCI CELEBRATIONIS - The forms and
solemnities of contracts, wills, and other public
instruments shall be governed by the laws of the country in
which they are executed.
Ex. A will is executed by A in the US, he is a Filipino citizen
domiciled in the US, It is valid when it is in accordance with
the law of the US because it was executed in the US.
❖ What law governs acts or contracts executed
before diplomatic consular officials of the PH?
➢ Philippine law (under Par. 2 of Art. 17 of
CC)
➢ Any contract made in a foreign country as
long as made before PH diplomatic and
consular officials must conform with the
solemnities under the Philippine Laws.
WHY? Because under the rules of
international law, the state where the
diplomatic and consular officials are
located waives its jurisdiction over the
premises of the diplomatic office of
another country located in their country.
❖ Exceptions to the application of foreign law,
foreign judgments, determinations or conventions
agreed upon in a foreign country can be found in
Art, 17, par 3 of CC.
DEL SOCORRO V. VAN WILSEM
To determine whether or not a person is criminally liable
under RA 9262, it is imperative that the legal obligation to
support exists. Petitioner invokes Article 195 of the Family
Code, which provides for the parent’s obligation to support
his child.
Petitioner cannot rely on Article 195 of the Family Code in
demanding support from respondent, who is a foreign
citizen, since Article 15 of the New Civil Code stresses the
principle of nationality. The provisions of the Family Code
on support applies only to Filipino citizens. Foreigners are
governed by their national law with respect to family rights
and duties. However, while respondent pleaded the laws of
the Netherlands in advancing his position that he is obliged
to support his son, he never proved the same.
❖ In this case there is a public policy which is
involved and accordingly, the foreign law cannot
be applied considering that it is against public
policies (it violated the policy on splitting of
causes of action, it also violated the policy on
protection of minors)
LLORENTE V. CA
Under the Nationality principle in Article 15 of the Civil
Code, only Philippine nationals are covered by the policy
against absolute divorces. Thus, aliens may obtain divorces
abroad, provided they are valid according to their national
law. The divorce obtained by Lorenzo was valid and
recognized in this jurisdiction.
Whether the will is intrinsically valid and who shall inherit
from Lorenzo are issues best proved by foreign law which
must be pleaded and proved. Whether the will was
executed in accordance with the formalities required is
answered by referring to Philippine law.
❖ In this case the SC remanded the case to the RTC
to determine the intrinsic validity of the will and
to determine as to who shall inherit from Lorenzo.
COOL 22-23 - BUNGAY | MAUR | MAGPANTAY 13
DACASIN V. DACASIN
The agreement is not only void ab initio for being contrary
to law, it has been repudiated by the mother when she
refused to allow joint custody by the father.

Nor can petitioner rely on the divorce decree’s alleged

invalidity because the divorce was obtained by his Filipino
spouse - to support the Agreement’s enforceability.

Pursuant to his national law, Petitioner is no longer the

husband of respondent. As he is bound by the Decision of
his own country’s Court which issued the divorce decree. A
foreign divorce decree carries as much validity against the
alien divorcee in this jurisdiction as it does in the
jurisdiction of the alien’s nationality, irrespective of who
obtained the divorce.

LAVADIA V. HEIRS OF JUAN LUCES LUNA

Conformably with the nationality rule, however, the
divorce, even if voluntarily obtained abroad, did not
dissolve the marriage between Atty. Luna and Eugenia. The
mere execution of the Agreement by Atty. Luna and
Eugenia did not per se dissolve and liquidate their conjugal
partnership of gains. The husband and the wife may agree
upon the dissolution of the conjugal partnership during the
marriage, subject to judicial approval.

ORION SAVINGS BANK V. SUZUKI

It is a universal principle that real or immovable property
is exclusively subject to the laws of the country or state
where it is located.The reason is found in the very nature
of immovable property — its immobility. Immovables are
part of the country and so closely connected to it that all
rights over them have their natural center of gravity there.

All matters concerning the titleand disposition ofreal

property are determined by what is known as the lex loci
rei sitae, which can alone prescribe the mode by which a
title canpass from one person to another, or by which an
interest therein can be gained or lost.This general principle
includes all rules governing the descent, alienation and
transfer of immovable property and the validity, effect and
construction of wills and other conveyances.

❖ The SC held that Suzuki was able to prove that the

property was sold to him through him sufficient
evidence, however, in the part of Orion was not
able to prove the authenticity of the Dacion En
Pago. SC ruled in favor of Suzuki (case of bubble
sale).

COOL 22-23 - BUNGAY | MAUR | MAGPANTAY 14