CONFLICT OF LAWS

Morillo Notes

Hilton & Libbey question the French Judgment on the ground

CONFLICTS OF LAW that French courts have no force and effect to the duly rendered
MORILLO NOTES judgment of US courts against French citizens.
Atty. Gilbert Andres
RULING: No law has any effect, of its own force, beyond the
limits of the sovereignty from which its authority is derived. The
extent to which the law of one nation, as put in force within its
territory, whether by executive order, by legislative act, or by
judicial decree, shall be allowed to operate within the domination
PART ONE: of another nation, depends upon “the comity of nations.”
INTRODUCTION
When an action is brought in a court of this country, by a citizen
of a foreign country against one of our own citizens, to recover a
sum of money adjudged by a court of that country to be due rom
the defendant to the plaintiff, and the foreign judgment appears
Chapter 1: to have been rendered by a competent court having jurisdiction
SCOPE OF CONFLICT OF LAWS: of the cause and of the parties, said judgment i prima facie
NATURE, DEFINITION AND IMPORTANCE evidence of the truth of the matter adjudged and is conclusive
upon the merits tried in the foreign court unless there is a ground
for impeachment of judgment such as by showing that it was
DIVERSITY OF LAWS AND CUSTOMS: affected (a) by fraud or prejudice; (b) by the principles of
● In the exercise of sovereignty, each state promulgates international law, or (c) by the comity of our own country.
its own laws and develops its own jurisprudence to
govern relations of relations of individuals and juridical In this case, there is want or lack of reciprocity on the part of
entities within its municipal sphere. France as to the effect to be given to the judgments of this and
○ Illustrations: other foreign countries.
■ Transactions entered into in one state have
force and effect in another state which is DEFINITION OF PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW
governed by entirely different laws. These (CONFLICT OF LAWS):
cases are tried and decided in yet other - It is that part of municipal law which governs cases
states with diverse legal systems. involving a foreign element.
■ Marriages and common-law relationships - It is that part of law which comes into play when the
are prevalent with children born of these issue before the court affects some fact or event, or
relationships and properties acquired in transaction that is so closely connected with a foreign
various countries. system of law as to necessitate recourse to that
● The division of the world into many territorial units, system. (Chesire, Private International Law, 1947)
each imposing its own set of laws, and the occurrence - It is the law concerning the rights of persons within the
of events that contain elements significant to more than territory and dominion of one nation, by reason of acts
one legal system give rise to problems that conflict of (private or public) done within the dominion of another
laws or private international law seeks to solve. (p.1, nation. (Hilton vs. Guyot, 159 US 113)
Conflict of Laws, Coquia and Aquiling-Pangalanan,
2000) DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PUBLIC AND PRIVATE
INTERNATIONAL LAW:
COMITY:
- In the legal sense, it is the recognition which one nation PUBLIC PRIVATE
allows within its territory to the legislative, executive or INTERNATIONAL LAW INTERNATIONAL LAW
judicial acts of another nation, having due regard both
to international duty and convenience, and to the rights Nature: Principally governs Nature: Principally governs
of its own citizens or of other persons who are under states in their relationships individuals in their private
the protection of its law. (Hilton vs. Guyot, 159 US 113) amongst themselves except in transactions which involve a
cases involving violations of foreign element (eg. Cutting
- The principles of conflict of laws incorporated in
human rights. across more than one
municipal laws are based on comity of nations, not on municipal law jurisdiction)
the extraterritoriality of the law of a foreign state. (p.2,
Conflict of Laws, Coquia and Aquiling-Pangalanan, Source of Law: Art.38 of the Source of Law: Generally
2000) Statute of the International derived from the internal law
Court of Justice (ie. custom, of each state and not from
HILTON vs. GUYOT treaty, and general principles any “international” law
159 US 113 of law recognized by civilized extraneous to municipal law.
nations and juridical decisions
FACTS: Hilton & Libbey (residents of New York and trading as and teachings of the most
co-partners in Paris under a US firm) were sued in France for highly qualified publicists)
debts due to a French firm. Guyot, a liquidator of the French firm,
sued Hilton & Liberty in the French Court, wherein it won a Exception: Hague Convention
favorable judgment. Thereafter, Guyot sued Hilton & Libbey on the Conflict of Laws
before the US Circuit Court for the enforcement of the French relating to the Form of
Judgment and seeks for the payment totaling to over $195,000. testamentary Dispositions
However, the US Court did not favor Guyot wherein the municipal courts

CONFLICTS OF LAW 1
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes

of the 18 parties signed

thereon shall apply.
PART TWO:
Persons Involved: Only Persons Involved: Individuals JURISDICTION AND CHOICE OF LAW
States and internationally or corporations.
recognized organizations.

Transactions: Involves a Transactions: relates to

Chapter 4:
state-to-state or government Private transactions between
to government matters. individuals.
JURISDICTION

Remedies: A state may resort Remedies: All the remedies JURISDICTION:

to (a) diplomatic protest, are provided by municipal - It is the power or authority of a court to try a case,
peaceful means of settlement laws of the state, such as render judgment, and execute it in accordance with
of international disputes such resort to courts or law.
as diplomatic negotiations, administrative tribunals.
arbitration or conciliation or
adjudication by filing a case
TYPES OF JURISDICTION IN CONFLICT OF LAWS:
before international tribunals; a) Judicial Jurisdiction - the power or authority of a
or the (b) the State may use court to try a case, render a judgment and execute it in
force short of war and accordance with law.
eventually go to war. b) Legislative Jurisdiction - The ability of the State to
promulgate laws and enforce them on all persons and
property within its territory.
OBJECT AND FUNCTION OF CONFLICT OF LAWS:
a) To provide rational and valid rules or guidelines in FOUR MAJOR FACTORS IN ANALYZING CONFLICT OF
deciding cases where either the parties, events or LAWS:
transactions are linked to more than one jurisdiction: 1. Does the court have jurisdiction over the person of the
b) To promote stability and uniformity of solution provided defendant or over his property?
by the laws and courts of each state called upon to 2. Does the court have jurisdiction or competence over
decide conflict cases. (See Sec. 2, Art. II, 1987 the subject matter?
Constitution) 3. Has the suit been brought in the proper venue in cases
where a foreign element is involved?; and
SCOPE OF CONFLICT OF LAWS: 4. Is there a statute or doctrine under which a court
1. Adjudicatory jurisdiction - Determines the otherwise qualified to try the case may or may not
circumstances that allow for a legal order to impose refuse to entertain it?
upon its judiciary the task of deciding multi-state and
multinational disputes.
2. Choice-of-Law - Refers to the probable sources from A. BASIS OF EXERCISE OF JUDICIAL JURISDICTION:
which the applicable law of the controversy may be
derived. BASIS OF EXERCISE OF JUDICIAL JURISDICTION:
3. Recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments
a) Jurisdiction over the person
- Deals with the study of situations which justify b) Jurisdiction over the property; and
recognition by the forum court of a judgment rendered c) Jurisdiction over the subject matter.
by a foreign court or the enforcement of such within
the forum. (p.9, Conflict of Laws, Coquia and
Aquiling-Pangalanan, 2000) 1. Jurisdiction Over the Person:

SOURCES OF CONFLICT OF LAWS:

1. Codes and Statutes CONCEPT:
2. Treaties and International Conventions - Jurisdiction over the person is acquired by the
3. Treatises, Commentaries and Studies of Learned voluntary appearance of a party and his submission
Societies to authority.
4. Judicial Decisions:
ACQUISITION OF JURISDICTION OVER THE PERSON:
1) Over the person of the Plaintiff - Jurisdiction over the
person of the plaintiff is acquired by the courts from the
moment of filing a suit by the plaintiff to the court.
- A non-resident plaintiff who files a suit is
deemed to consent to the court’s exercise of
jurisdiction over subsequent proceedings
arising out of his original cause of action
including counter-claims filed by the
defendant.
2) Over the person of the Defendant:
a) When the defendant enters his appearance or his
lawyer appears in the court EXCEPT if he appears

2 CONFLICTS OF LAW
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
for the purpose of protesting the jurisdiction of the
court; or
b) When the defendant is served with the legal
process within the State (Service of Summons).
(Banco Español Filipino vs. Palanca, 37 Phil. 921;
Santos vs. montesa, Jr., 221 SCRA 15)
SERVICE OF SUMMONS IN PERSON ON DEFENDANT:
● Primary Rule: Whenever practicable, the summons
shall be served by handing a copy thereof to the
defendant in person and informing the defendant that
he or she is being served, or, if he or she refuses to
receive and sign for it, by leaving the summons within
the view and in the presence of the defendant. (Sec. 6,
Rule 14, AM no. 19-10-20-SC)
● Secondary Rule (Substitute Service): If summons
cannot be served personally to the defendant for
justifiable causes within reasonable time after at least 3
attempts on 2 different dates, summons may be serve:
(a) By leaving copies of the summons at the
defendant's residence to a person at least eighteen
(18) years of age and of sufficient discretion
residing therein;
(b) By leaving copies of the summons at the
defendant's office or regular place of business with
some competent person in charge thereof. A
competent person includes, but is not limited to,
one who customarily receives correspondences for
the defendant;
(c) By leaving copies of the summons, if refused entry
upon making his or her authority and purpose
known, with any of the officers of the homeowners'
association or condominium corporation, or its
chief security officer in charge of the community or
the building where the defendant may be found;
and
(d) By sending an electronic mail to the defendant's
electronic mail address, if allowed by the court.
(Sec. 7 Rule 14, Am no. 19-10-20-SC)
(e) Service when the defendant is a domestic
corporation - When the defendant is a corporation,
partnership or association organized under the
laws of the Philippines with a juridical personality,
service may be made on the president, managing
partner, general manager, corporate secretary,
treasurer, or in-house counsel of the corporation
wherever they may be found, or in their absence or
unavailability, on their secretaries. (see Sec 12,
Rule 14, AM no. 19-10-20-SC)
WILLIAM GEMPERLE vs. HELEN SCHENKER
GR no. L-18164, January 23, 1967
FACTS: Paul Schenker, acting through his wife and
attorney-in-fact, Helen Schenker filed with the Court of First
Instance of Rizal, a complaint against herein plaintiff William F.
Gemperle, for the enforcement of Schenker's allegedly initial
subscription to the shares of stock of the Philippines-Swiss
Trading Co., Inc. and the exercise of his alleged pre-emptive
rights to the then unissued original capital stock of said
corporation and the increase thereof, as well as for an
accounting and damages. Alleging that, in connection with said
complaint, Mrs. Schenker had caused to be published some
allegations thereof and other matters, which were impertinent,
irrelevant and immaterial to said case, aside from being false and
derogatory to the reputation, good name and credit of Gemperle,
"with the only purpose of attacking" his" honesty, integrity and
reputation" and of bringing him "into public hatred, discredit,
disrepute and contempt as a man and a businessman",
Gemperle commenced the present action against the Schenkers
for the recovery of P300,000 as damages, P30,000 as attorney's
fees, and costs, in addition to praying for a judgment ordering
Mrs. Schenker "to retract in writing the said defamatory
expressions". In due course, thereafter, the lower court, rendered
the decision above referred to.
RULING: We hold that the lower court had acquired
jurisdiction over Paul Schenker, through service of the
summons addressed to him upon Mrs. Schenker, it appearing
from said answer that she is the representative and
attorney-in-fact of her husband aforementioned civil case No.
Q-2796, which apparently was filed at her behest, in her
aforementioned representative capacity. In other words, Mrs.
Schenker had authority to sue, and had actually sued on
behalf of her husband, so that she was, also, empowered to
represent him in suits filed against him, particularly in a
case, like the of the one at bar, which is consequence of the
action brought by her on his behalf.
2. Jurisdiction Over the Property:
JURISDICTION OVER THE PROPERTY - Results either
from:
a) From the seizure of the property under a legal process;
or
b) From the institution of legal proceedings wherein the
court’s power over the property is recognized and made
effective. (Banco Español Filipino vs. Palanca, 37 Phil.
921)
PROCEEDINGS IN REM; IN PERSONAM; AND QUASI-IN
REM:
In Rem: The action could binds everyone (or binds the
world)
Example: Forfeiture of tangible property and
Registration of Land Title
In The action is against an individual or person.
Personam: Example: Action for Specific Performance
against the debtor by the creditor
Quasi In State’s physical power over property found in its
Rem: territory but affects only the interests of a
particular persons on that thing.
Example: Proceeding to Quiet title to property
wherein the orum may adjudicate that one
claimant’s title to the property in question is
superior to others.
REQUIREMENTS OF DUE PROCESS FOR
PROCEEDINGS IN REM AND QUASI-IN REM:
a) The defendant is given adequate notice; and
b) Opportunity to be heard.
PENNOYER vs. NEFF
95 US 714
Substituted services by publication may be sufficient to inform
parties of the object or proceedings taken:
(1) Where the property is once brought under the control of the
court by seizure or some equivalent act to any proceedings
authorized by law upon such seizure for its condemnation
and sale; odia Legis
CONFLICTS OF LAW 3
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
(2) Where the object of the action is to reach and dispose of
property in the State or of some interest therein, by
enforcing a contract or a lien respecting the same, or to a
partition it among different owners; or
(3) When the public is a party, to condemn and appropriate it
for a public purpose.
A personal judgment is without any validity if it be rendered by a
State court in an action upon a money demand against a
nonresident of the State who was served by a publication of
summons, but upon whom no personal service of process within
the State was made, and who did not appear; and no title to
property passes by a sale under an execution issued upon such
a judgment. kasi makikita ?
-m naman
y
E
The State, having within her territory property of a nonresident,
- n
-
may hold and appropriate it to satisfy the claims of her citizens
e e
against him, and her tribunals may inquire into his obligations to
-
the extent necessary to control the disposition of that property. If
he has no property in the State, there is nothing upon which her
tribunals can adjudicate.
Substituted service by publication, or in any other authorized
form, is sufficient to inform a nonresident of the object of
proceedings taken where property is once brought under the
control of the court by seizure or some equivalent act, but where
the suit is brought to determine his personal rights and
obligations, that is, where it is merely in personam, such service
upon him is ineffectual for any purpose.
Process from the tribunals of one State cannot run into another
State and summon a party there domiciled to respond to
proceedings against him, and publication of process or of notice
within the State in which the tribunal sits cannot create any
greater obligation upon him to appear. Process sent to him out of
the State, and process published within it, are equally unavailing
in proceedings to establish his personal liability.
INTERNATIONAL SHOE CO. vs. WASHINGTON
326 US 310
FACTS: International Shoe Co. was incorporated in Delaware
and had its principal place of business in St. Louis, Missouri.
While the corporation did not have an office in Washington
(“State”), it employed thirteen salesmen, who were residents of
the State and who exhibited product samples to prospective
buyers from the State. The corporation compensated the
salesmen in the form of commissions for any sales from
customers they solicited. Due to these business activities, the
State issued a Notice of Assessment holding the corporation
liable for contributions to the State’s unemployment
compensation fund by virtue of the Washington Unemployment
Compensation Act. Notice was served via mail and personal
service to the Washington salesmen. The corporation refused to
pay, arguing that they were not conducting business in
Washington and thus the State had no jurisdiction over it. They
further argued that the service of notice was insufficient to
constitute due process. The trial court ruled in favor of the State
and the Supreme Court of Washington ruled that there was
sufficient business activity to hold the corporation liable for taxes
to the State. The corporation appealed the decision to the
Supreme Court of the United States. Can a non-resident
corporation's activities in a state make it subject to the
jurisdiction of that state?
RULING: YES, Due process requires only that in order to subject
a defendant to a judgment in personam, if he be not present
within the territory of the forum, he have certain minimum
4 CONFLICTS OF LAW
contacts with it such that the maintenance of the suit does not
offend "traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice."
The activities carried on in the state of Washington on behalf of
the Corporation were neither irregular nor casual. They were
systematic and continuous throughout the years in question.
They resulted in a large volume of interstate business, in the
course of which appellant received the benefits and protection of
the laws of the state, including the right to resort to the courts for
the enforcement of its rights. The obligation which is here sued
upon arose out of those very activities. It is evident that the
operations of the salesmen in Washington established sufficient
contacts or ties with the state to make it reasonable and just,
according to traditional conception of fair play and substantial
justice, to permit the state to enforce the obligations which
appellant has incurred there. Hence we cannot say that the
maintenance of the present suit in the State of Washington
involves an unreasonable or undue procedure. It is enough that
appellant established such contacts with the state that the
particular form of substituted service adopted there gives
reasonable assurance that the notice will be actual.
Due process requires only that in order to subject a defendant to
a judgment in personam, if he is not present within the territory of
the forum, he have certain minimum contacts with it such that
the maintenance of the suit does not offend traditional notions of
fair play and substantial justice.
MULLANE vs. CENTRAL HANOVER BANK & TRUST CO.
399 US 306
FACTS: Central Hanover Bank (a trust company in NY which had
exclusive management and control of a common trust fund
established by it under Sec. 100-c of the NY Banking Law)
petitioned under Sec. 100-c for a judicial settlement of accounts
which would be binding and conclusive as to any matter set forth
therein upon everyone having any interest in the common fund or
in any participating trust.
In this common fund, the NY trust company had invested assets
of numerous small trusts of which it was trustee and of which
some of the beneficiaries were residents, and some
non-residents, of the State. The only notice of this petition given
beneficiaries was by publication in a local newspaper pursuant
to §100-c, NY Banking Law.
RULING: Personal service of written notice within the jurisdiction
is the classic form of notice always adequate in any type of
proceeding. But the vital interest of the State in bringing any
issues as to its fiduciaries to a final settlement can be served
only if interests or claims of individuals who are outside of the
State can somehow be determined. A construction of the Due
Process Clause which would place impossible or impractical
obstacles in the way could not be justified.
But when notice is a person's due, process which is a mere
gesture is not due process. The means employed must be such
as one desirous of actually informing the absentee might
reasonably adopt to accomplish it. The reasonableness, and
hence the constitutional validity of, any chosen method may be
defended on the ground that it is, in itself, reasonably certain to
inform those affected, or, where conditions do not reasonably
permit such notice, that the form chosen is not substantially less
likely to bring home notice than other of the feasible and
customary substitutes.
It would be idle to pretend that publication alone, as prescribed
here, is a reliable means of acquainting interested parties of the
fact that their rights are before the courts. It is not an accident
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
that the greater number of cases reaching this Court on the
question of adequacy of notice have been concerned with
actions founded on process constructively served through local
newspapers.
As to known present beneficiaries of known place of residence,
however, notice by publication stands on a different footing.
Exceptions in the name of necessity do not sweep away the rule
that, within the limits of practicability, notice must be such as is
reasonably calculated to reach interested parties. Where the
names and post office addresses of those affected by a
proceeding are at hand, the reasons disappear for resort to
means less likely than the mails to apprise them of its pendency.
The trustee has on its books the names and addresses of the
income beneficiaries represented by appellant, and we find no
tenable ground for dispensing with a serious effort to inform
them personally of the accounting, at least by ordinary mail to
the record addresses.
We hold the notice of judicial settlement of accounts required by
the New York Banking Law § 100-c(12) is incompatible with the
requirements of the Fourteenth Amendment as a basis for
adjudication depriving known persons whose whereabouts are
also known of substantial property rights.
SHAFFER vs. HEITNER
433 US 186
FACTS: A nonresident of Delaware (Heitner), who owned stock in
a corporation which was incorporated in Delaware but which
maintained its principal office in Arizona, brought a shareholder's
derivative action in the Court of Chancery for New Castle
County, Delaware, naming as defendants the corporation, a
wholly owned subsidiary of the corporation, and 28 present or
former officers of one or both corporations. Pursuant to the
plaintiff's motion under 10 Del C 366, the court sequestered
certain property, primarily stock, of a number of the nonresident
individual defendants. The defendants contended, inter alia, that
they did not have sufficient contacts with Delaware to sustain the
jurisdiction of that state's courts, but the Court of Chancery ruled
that the situs of the stock, which was by Delaware statute
considered to be within that state, provided a sufficient basis for
the exercise of quasi in rem jurisdiction by a Delaware Court. On
appeal, the Delaware Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the
minimum contacts rule was not applicable since the jurisdiction
in the instant case was quasi in rem and founded on the
presence of stock in the state. Must a nonresident have
minimum contacts with the forum state in order for the state
to exercise in rem jurisdiction?
RULING: YES, The Court held that (1) all assertions of state
jurisdiction, including in rem and quasi in rem actions, must be
evaluated according to the minimum contacts standard, and (2)
neither the presence of the nonresident defendants' stock in
Delaware nor the fact that the nonresident defendants were
officers of a Delaware chartered corporation, provided the
requisite contacts to establish the jurisdiction of Delaware
courts.
In support of its ruling, the court held that the minimum contacts
test of International Shoe should have been applied to assertions
of in rem as well as in personam jurisdiction. The court noted
that appellant's seized property did not have sufficient contacts
with the state to support Delaware's assertion of jurisdiction over
appellants. The court further held that appellants had neither
purposefully availed themselves of the privilege of conducting
activities within the state, nor had any reason to expect to be
brought before a Delaware court.
Whether due process is satisfied must depend rather upon the
quality and nature of the activity in relation to the fair and orderly
administration of the laws which it was the purpose of the due
process clause to insure. That clause does not contemplate that
a state may make binding a judgment in personam against an
individual or corporate defendant with which the state has no
contacts, ties, or relations.
Significance of the Above Cases:
● The traditional basis for the exercise of jurisdiction is the
State’s physical power over the person and property
within its territory.
○ State can exercise in personam jurisdiction over
a person who was served with summons while
physically present in the State; and
○ In in rem proceedings, the State can exercise
jurisdiction over property situated in the State
regardless of whether it could otherwise exercise
jurisdiction over the persons whose interest
would be affected by the decision.
● Pennoyer vs. Neff case - the Philippine Court sustains
the rationale in this case. It is important also to
distinguish in Personam and in Rem Proceedings.
● International Shoe vs. Washington case - Due
process requires that a defendant have certain minimum
contacts such that the maintenance have certain
minimum contacts such notions of fair play and
substantial justice.
○ This approach demands that there be a
forum-transaction contacts that will make it
fundamentally fair to require the defendant to
defend a suit in the forum regardless of his
non-resident status
○ Also if an individual or corporation is doing
business in the state, then it may be sued in the
forum even on a claim not arising from its
business activities.
○ A corporation is deemed to have consented to
“service suit” as implied by its presence in
the state through acts of authorized agent.”
→ there are sufficient contacts between the
forum and the defendant that justify the foru’s
exercise of jurisdiction.
● Mullane vs. Central Hanover case - the manner of
notice was given should reasonably result in informing
the affected partner.
○ When conditions do not allow such notice, the
form chosen should not substantially be “less
likely to bring home notice than other of feasible
and customary substitutes.” Only when the
defendant is adequately notified is he given the
opportunity to defend himself and the due
process requirement is met.
● Shaffer vs. Heitner case - defined the other reaches of
permissible exercise of court jurisdiction.
○ The Court held that the minimum contacts and
fundamental fairness test should be satisfied
regardless whether the proceedings are in rem,
quasi-in rem or in personam.
MINIMUM CONTACTS AND FUNDAMENTAL FAIRNESS
TESTS (US theory of territorial power):
● Minimum Contact:
○ Minimum contacts should be present between
the defendant and the forum (International Shoe
case)
CONFLICTS OF LAW 5
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
○ Minimum contact must be present among the
forum defendant and the cause of action.
(Shaffer case)
● Fundamental Fairness:
○ The physical presence of the property within the
state establishes the state’s paramount interest
in adjudicating a claim over it and provides the
necessary minimum contacts.
○ The State’s court would generally be a fair forum
because parties could very well foresee that the
court would exercise jurisdiction based on situs
of the property.
LONG-ARM STATUTES:
- These are statutes that specify the kinds of
minimum contacts between the non-resident
defendant and the forum upon which jurisdiction
will be asserted.
- Examples:
- The commission of tortious act within
the state;
- the celebration of a contract therein; or
- the presence of the property owned by
the defendant.
- If these minimum contacts exist, the court can
exercise jurisdiction because it has a justified
interest in providing the plaintiff with a forum, and
no fundamental unfairness results in subjecting the
defendant to a suit there.
3. Jurisdiction Over the Subject Matter:
CONCEPT OF JURISDICTION OVER THE SUBJECT
MATTER:
- Subject matter jurisdiction is more than the general
power conferred by law to take cognizance of
cases of a general class to which the case belongs.
- It is not conferred by consent of the parties but it is
stipulated by law. (Caluag vs. Pecson, 82 Phil. 8)
IDONAH PERKINS vs. ROXAS
72 Phil. 514 (1941)
FACTS: Respondent Eugene Perkins filed a complaint in the CFI-
Manila against the Benguet Consolidated Mining Company for
the recovery of a sum consisting of dividends which have been
declared and made payable on shares of stock registered in his
name, payment of which was being withheld by the company,
and for the recognition of his right to the control and disposal of
said shares to the exclusion of all others. The company alleged,
by way of defense that the withholding of plaintiff’s right to the
disposal and control of the shares was due to certain demands
made with respect to said shares by the petitioner Idonah
Perkins, and by one Engelhard.
Eugene Perkins included in his modified complaint as parties
defendants petitioner, Idonah Perkins, and Engelhard. Eugene
Perkins prayed that petitioner Idonah Perkins and H. Engelhard
be adjudged without interest in the shares of stock in question
and excluded from any claim they assert thereon. Summons by
publication were served upon the nonresident defendants Idonah
Perkins and Engelhard. Engelhard filed his answer. Petitioner
filed her answer with a cross-complaint in which she sets up a
judgment allegedly obtained by her against respondent Eugene
Perkins, from the SC of the State of New York, wherein it is
6 CONFLICTS OF LAW
declared that she is the sole legal owner and entitled to the
possession and control of the shares of stock in question with all
the cash dividends declared thereon by the Benguet
Consolidated Mining Company.
Idonah Perkins filed a demurrer thereto on the ground that “the
court has no jurisdiction of the subject of the action,” because
the alleged judgment of the SC of the State of New York is res
judicata. Petitioner’s demurrer was overruled, thus this petition.
ISSUE: W/N, in view of the alleged judgment entered in favor of
Idonah Perkins by the SC of NY, and which is claimed by her to
be res judicata on all questions raised by Eugene Perkins, in civil
case in CFI Manila, the local court has jurisdiction over the
subject matter of the action in the said case.
RULING: By jurisdiction over the subject matter is meant the
nature of the cause of action and of the relief sought, and this is
conferred by the sovereign authority which organizes the court,
and is to be sought for in general nature of its powers, or in
authority specially conferred. In the present case, the amended
complaint filed by the respondent, Eugene Perkins alleged calls
for the adjudication of title to certain shares of stock of the
Benguet Consolidated Mining Company and the granting of
affirmative reliefs, which fall within the general jurisdiction of the
CFI- Manila. Similarly CFI- Manila is empowered to adjudicate
the several demands contained in petitioner’s cross-complaint.
Idonah Perkins in her cross-complaint brought suit against
Eugene Perkins and the Benguet Consolidated Mining Company
upon the alleged judgment of the SC of the State of New York
and asked the court below to render judgment enforcing that
New York judgment, and to issue execution thereon. This is a
form of action recognized by section 309 of the Code of Civil
Procedure (now section 47, Rule 39, Rules of Court) and which
falls within the general jurisdiction of the CFI- Manila, to
adjudicate, settle and determine.
The petitioner expresses the fear that the respondent judge may
render judgment “annulling the final, subsisting, valid judgment
rendered and entered in this petitioner’s favor by the courts of
the State of New York, which decision is res judicata on all the
questions constituting the subject matter of civil case” and
argues on the assumption that the respondent judge is without
jurisdiction to take cognizance of the cause. Whether or not the
respondent judge in the course of the proceedings will give
validity and efficacy to the New York judgment set up by the
petitioner in her cross-complaint is a question that goes to the
merits of the controversy and relates to the rights of the parties
as between each other, and not to the jurisdiction or power of
the court.
B. WAYS OF DEALING WITH A
CONFLICTS PROBLEM:
WAYS OF DEALING BY THE COURT WITH A CONFLICT
OF LAW PROBLEM:
1) Dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction or on the
ground of forum non conveniens; or
2) Assume jurisdiction and apply either forum or
foreign law. (p.39, Coquia and
Aguiling-Pangalangan, 2000)
1. Dismiss the Case:
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
In dealing with the Conflict of Laws problem, the court may
dismiss the case due to (1) lack of jurisdiction or (2) on the
ground of forum non conveniens. (p.40, Coquia and
Aguiling-Pangalangan, 2000
DOCTRINE OF FORUM NON CONVENIENS:
- The court may decline to try the case on the
ground that the controversy may be more suitably
tried elsewhere. (p.40, Coquia and
Aguiling-Pangalangan, 2000)
Rationale of the Doctrine:
a) To prevent abuse of the court’s process.
- Ex: (a) When plaintiff made the choice of the forum
primarily to harass defendant by inflicting upon him
unnecessary expense and hardship in pursuing the
remedy; or (b) were a non resident plaintiff chose
the forum because he felt that jury verdicts were
larger than in other fora
b) To avoid global forum shopping, which is the filing of
repetitious suits in courts of different jurisdictions.
- Instead of making a definite choice of forum for
their action, litigants file actions in all available
courts and execute the judgment which is most
favorable to them.
Under the doctrine of forum non conveniens, a Philippine
court in a conflict-of-laws case may assume jurisdiction if it
chooses to do so, provided, that the following requisites
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 decision as to
the law and the facts; and (3) that the Philippine Court has
or is likely to have power to enforce its decision. All these
requisites are present here. (Continental Micronesia vs.
Basso, GR no. 178382-83, September 23, 2015)
Meaning of Forum Shopping - When a party institutes
two or more suits in different courts, either
simultaneously or successively, in order to ask the
courts to rule on the same or related causes and/or to
grant the same or substantially the same reliefs on the
supposition that one or the other court would make a
favorable disposition or increase a party’s chances of
obtaining a favorable decision or action. (Huibonhoa
vs. Concepcion, 497 SCRA 562)
HEINE vs. NEW YORK INSURANCE COMPANY
45 F2d 426 (1940)
FACTS: This is one of the several cases brought against New
York Insurance and Guardian insurance, before the Oregon
Court, to recover on some 240 life insurance policies made and
issued by NY Insurance in Germany (in favor of German citizens
and payable in German Marks). NY Insurance is incorporated in
NY, USA with statutory agents in Oregon. On the other, none of
the plaintiffs to the litigation are residents or inhabitants of USA.
The plaintiffs reside in, and are citizens of, the republic of
Germany.
As a pre-condition for conducting business in Germany,
Insurance Companies are compelled to accede to the
supervision and control of German insurance officials, to invest
the proceedings arising from German policies in German
Securities, and to establish an office there with an agent upon
whom the service can be made.
The action are brought in the name of the insured parties (Heine)
in the US and Germany for amount due or owing under the
policies.
RULING: The courts of Germany and New York are open and
functioning and competent to take jurisdiction of the
controversies, and service can be made upon the defendants in
either of such jurisdictions. To require the defendants to defend
the actions in this district would impose upon them great and
unnecessary inconvenience and expense, and probably compel
them to produce here (three thousand miles from their home
office) numerous records, books, and papers, all of which are in
daily use by it in taking care of current business.
In addition, it would no doubt consume months of the time of
this court to try and dispose of these cases, thus necessarily
disarranging the calendar, resulting in delay, inconvenience, and
expense to other litigants who are entitled to invoke its
jurisdiction.
Under these circumstances, the defendants, while conceding
that the court has jurisdiction of the person and subject-matter,
urges that it should refuse, in its discretion, to exercise such
jurisdiction.
The contract of insurance was made and to be paid there and in
German currency. It is to be construed and given effect
according to the laws of the place where it was made. The
courts of this country are established and maintained primarily to
determine controversies between its own citizens and those
having business there, and manifestly the court may protect itself
against a flood of litigation over contracts made and to be
performed in a foreign country, where the parties and witnesses
are nonresidents of the forum, and no reason exists why the
liability, if any, cannot be enforced in the courts of the country
where the cause of action arose, or in the state where the
defendant was organized and has its principal offices. True, the
courts of New York have declined to exercise jurisdiction over
actions brought on insurance policies similar to those in suit.
IN RE: UNION CARBIDE
634 F. Supp. 842 (SDNY 1986)
FACTS: A chemical plant operated by Union Carbide India
Limited (UCIL) in Bhopal, India released a lethal gas known as
methyl isocyanate, resulting in the deaths of over 2,000 persons
and injuries of over 200,000. Four days after the Bhopal
accident, the first of some 145 purported class actions in federal
district courts in the United States was commenced on behalf of
victims of the disaster. The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict
Litigation assigned the actions to the Southern District of New
York where they became the subject of a consolidated complaint
filed in June 1985.
In the meantime, India enacted the Bhopal Gas Leak Disaster
(Processing of Claims) Act, granting to its government, the Union
of India (UOI) the exclusive right to represent the victims in India
or elsewhere. Thereupon the UOI, purporting to act in the
capacity of parens patriae, and with retainers executed by many
of the victims, filed a complaint in the Southern District of New
York. The UOI's decision to bring suit in the United States was
attributed to the fact that, although numerous lawsuits had been
instituted by victims in India against UCIL, the Indian courts did
not have jurisdiction over Union Carbide Corporation (UCC), the
parent company, which was a defendant in the United States
actions.
The UCC filed a motion to dismiss the actions on grounds of
forum non conveniens, which the Southern District of New York
CONFLICTS OF LAW 7
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
granted it subject to the following conditions:
1. The UCC must consent to the jurisdiction of the Indian
courts and waive defenses based on Statute of Limitations;
and
2. UCC must agree to satisfy the Indian court judgment;
ISSUE: W/N the dismissal of the complaint on the ground of
forum non conveniens is proper?
RULING: The forum non conveniens determination is committed
to the sound discretion of the trial court. It may be reversed only
when there has been a clear abuse of discretion; where the court
has considered all relevant public and private interest factors,
and where its balancing of these factors is reasonable, its
decision deserves substantial deference.
The court held that there was no abuse of discretion in the
district court's dismissal of personal injury actions because all
but a few of the 200,000 individual plaintiffs were Indian citizens
located in India, and defendant had consented to the jurisdiction
of Indian courts. However, the court held that the district
court erred in dismissing the complaint when it imposed a
condition that defendant consent to enforcement of a final Indian
court judgment. The court also found error in the requirement
that defendant consent to granting plaintiffs broad discovery
rights under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure when defendant
was confined to the more limited discovery authorized under
Indian law.
WING ON COMPANY vs. SY-YAP
64 OG 8311 (1967)
FACTS: Syyap & Co (Phil. corporation) rendered through Murray
Kern (it's NY agent) various quantities of clothing material from
Wing On Company (NY Company which does not have a license
to transact business in the Philippines). $22,246 worth of
merchandise was shipped by Syyap. There was a verbal
agreement that Syyap shall pay for the cost of merchandise and
that after its sale, the profit realized would be divided between
Syyap and Wing On.
Syyap paid Wing On $3,500, leaving a balance of $18,700.
Syyap failed to settle the debt or account for and divide the
profits.
Wing On filed a civil case for recovery of sum of money before
the Philippine trial court, which the latter granted it. On the other
hand, Syyap appealed the decision, contending the following:
1) the trial court had no jurisdiction to try the case because
Wing On is not licensed to do business in the Philippines,
and, therefore, has no legal capacity to sue; and
2) the trial court should have declined jurisdiction pursuant to
the principle of forum non conveniens.
ISSUE: W/N the trial court should have declined jurisdiction
pursuant to the principle of forum non conveniens.
RULING: NO, the application of the principle of forum non
conveniens that unless the balance is strongly in favor of the
defendant, the plaintiff’s choice of forum should rarely be
disturbed, and that the consideration of inadequacy to enforce
the judgment which would constitute a problem to the plaintiff if
the local courts decline to assume jurisdiction on the basis of
said principle, considering that the defendant Sy-Yap is a
resident of the Philippines.
The agreement in question involves a purchase of clothing
materials entered in NY, USA. However, the goods were
8 CONFLICTS OF LAW
delivered to and received. and sold in the Philippines.
Considering that Wing On Company (NY Corporation) may sue in
Philippine courts in connection with the transaction in question
and, considering that the present suit arises from said
transaction (which is in the nature of a personal action), the case
may be commenced and tried where the defendant resides or
found, or where the plaintiff resides, at the election of the
plaintiff. Consequently, venue in the instant case was not
improperly laid and the trial did not commit an error of hearing
the case.
In addition, there are no circumstances that will sustain the
argument of forum non conveniens. When the forum is the only
state where jurisdiction can be obtained over the defendant and
some relation with the parties exists or when the forum provides
procedural remedies not available in another state, the forum
court may not resist imposition upon its jurisdiction.
2. Assume Jurisdiction:
A court may choose to assume jurisdiction over a conflict of
laws problem and apply forum or foreign law. (p. 51, Coquia
and Aguiling-Pangalangan, 2000)
FACTORS FOR THE APPLICATION OF INTERNAL
(FORUM) LAW:
1) A specific law of the forum decrees that internal law
should apply:
- Real and personal property subject to the law of
the country where they are situated while intestate
and testamentary succession is governed by lex
nationale of the person whose succession is under
consideration (Art. 16, NCC)
- Revocation done outside the Philippines is valid
according to the law of the place where the will was
made or lex domicilii. (Art. 829, NCC)
- Filipinos are prohibited from making a joint wills
even if it is valid in the country where they were
executed. (Art. 819, NCC)
2) The proper foreign law was not properly pleaded and
proved:
- Philippine courts may not take judicial cognizance
of any foreign law, therefore, failure to plead and
prove foreign law leads to the presumption that it is
the same as forum law. (p.52, Coquia and
Aguiling-Pangalangan, 2000)
- Whenever a copy of a document or record is
attested for the purpose of evidence, the
attestation must state, in substance, that the copy
is a correct copy of the original, or a specific part
thereof, as the case may be. The attestation must
be under the official seal of the attesting officer, if
there be any, or if he or she be the clerk of a court
having a seal, under the seal of such court. (Sec.
25, Rule 132, AM no. 19-08-15-SC)
- Evidence of statements of matters of interest to
persons engaged in an occupation contained in a
list, register, periodical, or other published
compilation is admissible as tending to prove the
truth of any relevant matter so stated if that
compilation is published for use by persons
engaged in that occupation and is generally used
and relied upon by them therein. (Sec. 47, Rule
130, AM no. 19-08-15-SC)
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
FLEUMER vs. HIX
54 Phil. 610
FACTS: Fleumer (Special Administrator of Eduardo Hix’s Estate)
appealed the trial court’s decision in denying probate of a
document alleged to be a will of Hix. Fleumer alleged that the will
was executed in West Virginia, USA, on Nov, 3, 1925, by Hix who
was residing there, and therefore, the laws of West Virginia
should govern the estate proceeding.
Fleumer submitted a copy of Sec. 3868 of Act 1882 as found in
the West Virginia Code and certified by the Director of Phil.
National Library.
ISSUE: W/N the law of West Virginia was properly proven, hence
it should govern the Estate of Eduardo Hix.
RULING: NO, The laws of a foreign jurisdiction do not prove
themselves in our courts. The courts of the Philippine Islands are
not authorized to take American Union, such laws must be
proved as facts. Here the requirements of the law were not met.
There was no was printed or published under the authority of
the State of West Virginia, as provided in section 300 of the
Code of Civil Procedure. Nor was the extract from the law
attested by the certificate of the officer having charge of the
original, under the sale of the State of West Virginia, as
provided in section 301 of the Code of Civil Procedure. No
evidence was introduced to show that the extract from the laws
of West Virginia was in force at the time the alleged will was
executed.
In addition, the due execution of the will was not established.
The only evidence on this point is to be found in the testimony of
Fleumer. Aside from this, there was nothing to indicate that the
will was acknowledged by the testator in the presence of two
competent witnesses, or that these witnesses subscribed the will
in the presence of the testator and of each other as the law of
West Virginia seems to require. On the supposition that the
witnesses to the will reside without the Philippine Islands, it
would then be the duty of Fleumer to prove execution by some
other means (Code of Civil Procedure, sec. 633.)
Doctrine of Processual Presumption (Lex Fori Rule):
- If the application of a foreign law is invoked, that
foreign law must be proved as a fact by the rules of
evidence. In the absence of proof, it is presumed to be
the same as that of the Philippine law, which is the law
of the forum. (Miciano vs. Brimo, 50 Phil. 205)
PHILIPPINE TRUST CO. vs. BOHANAN
106 Phil. 997
FACTS: CFI Manila declared CO.Bohanan to be a citizen of
Nevada, USA in order to admit his will for probate. Philippine
Trust was named as executor of the will and granted by the same
court to “enter upon the execution and performance of its trust.”
In subsequent hearings of the proposed partition of CO
Bohanan’s estate, the Nevada Law was not introduced.
Magdalena Bohanan (widow) and her children questioned the
validity of the CO Bohanan’s Will wherein he gave P90,800 of
P211,600 and 1/2 of all the shares of stocks of several mining
companies to a grandson. That the same shares and same cash
amount is also given to the decedent’s siblings while his children
shall receive P6,000 only each.
ISSUE: W/N Philippine Law shall govern the estate proceedings
of CO Bohanan (who was declared as Nevada, US citizen)?
RULING: NO, The old Civil Code, which is applicable to this case
because the testator died in 1944, expressly provides that
successional rights to personal property are to be earned by the
national law of the person whose succession is in question.
The law of Nevada, being a foreign law can only be proved in our
courts in the form and manner provided for by then Sec. 41, Rule
123, which states “Proof of public or official record. — An official
record or an entry therein, when admissible for any purpose, may
be evidenced by an official publication thereof or by a copy
tested by the officer having the legal custody of the record, or by
his deputy, and accompanied, if the record is not kept in the
Philippines, with a certificate that such officer has the custody. “
The SC have, however, consulted the records of the case in the
court below and we have found that:
(1) during the hearing on October 4, 1954 of the motion of
Magdalena C. Bohanan for withdrawal of P20,000 as her
share, the foreign law, especially Section 9905, Compiled
Nevada Laws. was introduced in evidence by appellant's
(herein) counsel as Exhibits "2".
(2) Again said laws presented by the counsel for the executor
and admitted by the Court as Exhibit "B" during the
hearing of the case on January 23, 1950 before Judge
Rafael Amparo.
(3) In addition, the other appellants, children of the testator, do
not dispute the above-quoted provision of the laws of the
State of Nevada.
Under all the above circumstances, we are constrained to hold
that the pertinent law of Nevada, especially Section 9905 of the
Compiled Nevada Laws of 1925, can be taken judicial notice of
by us, without proof of such law having been offered at the
hearing of the project of partition.
As in accordance with Article 10 of the old Civil Code, the validity
of testamentary dispositions are to be governed by the national
law of the testator, and as it has been decided and it is not
disputed that the national law of the testator is that of the State
of Nevada, already indicated above, which allows a testator to
dispose of all his property according to his will, as in the case at
bar, the order of the court approving the project of partition
made in accordance with the testamentary provisions, must be,
as it is hereby affirmed, with costs against appellants.
3) The case falls under any of the exceptions to the
application of foreign law:
- These are the following exceptions:
(a) When the foreign law is contrary to an
important public policy of the forum;
(b) When the foreign law is penal in nature;
(c) When the foreign law is procedural in nature;
(d) When the foreign law is purely fiscal or
administrative in nature;
(e) When the application of the foreign law will
work undeniable injustice to the citizens of
the forum;
(f) When the case involves real or personal
property situated in the forum;
(g) When the application of the foreign law might
endanger the vital interest of the state;
(h) When the foreign law is contrary to good
morals.
Chapter 5:
CHOICE OF LAW
CHOICE OF LAW:
CONFLICTS OF LAW 9
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
- “A law to determine what law”
- It is the application of the existing legal principles
of Conflict of Laws to determine which law to apply
in a certain set of facts that involve a foreign
element. (Atty. G. Andres, 2022)
All choice of law problems seek to answer 2 important
questions:
a) What legal system should control a case where some
of the significant facts occurred in two or more states?;
and
b) To what extent should the chosen legal system regulate
the situation?
A. CORRELATION BETWEEN JURISDICTION
AND CHOICE OF LAW:
RELEVANCE BETWEEN JURISDICTION AND CHOICE OF
LAW:
1. The factors that will justify the forum court’s exercise of
judicial jurisdiction may be the same factors that will
determine whether it is proper for the forum to apply its
own internal law.
2. If the forum does apply its internal law because it has a
real interest in the case, then the outcome of the case
will be foreordained by the forum where the suit is
brought. The practical effect of this is that the plaintiff
will bring his suit in the state which has a real interest in
applying its internal law.
3. Since the forum will most likely apply its own law rather
than displace it in favor of a foreign law, the plaintiff will
(predictably) bring his claim in the courts of the state
the internal law of which is favorable to him.
DISTINCTION BETWEEN JURISDICTION AND CHOICE
OF LAW:
a) There are cases over which the forum court may
exercise jurisdiction but to which it will not apply its
own law.
b) There are cases over which the forum cannot assume
jurisdiction, although its internal law may be applied as
the proper law.
B. APPROACHES TO CHOICE OF LAW:
1. Traditional Approach:
TRADITIONAL APPROACH:
- Emphasize the principles of simplicity, convenience
and uniformity.
- The choice-of-law rules that are “simple in form
and capable of easy administration, would promote
uniformity of results, enhance predictability and
discourage forum-shopping (Cramton, Currie &
Kay, Conflict of Laws: Cases and Commentaries)
A. VESTED-RIGHTS THEORY:
- An act done in a foreign jurisdiction gives rise to the
existence of a right if the laws of that state provides
so. This right vests in the plaintiff and he carries it
with him to be enforced in any forum he chooses to
bring suit.
10 CONFLICTS OF LAW
- The forum refers to the law of the place of
occurrence of the “last act” necessary to
complete the cause of action.
- If the laws of the state where the last act occurred
create no legal right, there is nothing for the forum to
recognize and enforce, even if its own law creates
such a right.
GRAY vs. GRAY
87 NH 82, 174 AH 508 (1934)
FACTS: Elserce Gray filed an action in New Hampshire for
damages arising out of personal injuries alleged to have been
caused by her husband, Frank Gray, while driving from their
home in New Hampshire to Maine where the accident happened.
In the State of Maine, spouses are barred from maintaining an
action against each other. However, no such prohibition exists in
the State of New Hampshire.
ISSUE: Conflict between Lex Loci (Law of the Place) and Lex Fori
(Law of the Country). [Maine Law vs. New Hampshire Law]
RULING: If there is a conflict between the lex loci and the lex
fori, the former governs in torts the same as in contracts, in
respect to the legal effect and incidents of acts. Therefore
whatever would be a defense to this action if it had been brought
in the state of Maine is a defense here, although it would not be
if the cause of action had arisen in the state of New Hampshire.
Local conduct should be governed by local law. Rules and
conduct have no force to regulate acts done outside the
jurisdiction which made the rules, save as their operation is
enforced by control over parties found within the jurisdiction.
Generally, complaints of conduct are adjusted in the jurisdiction
where the conduct took place. It is desirable that the remedy be
the same, wherever the action is brought.
It is settled that reason, justice and expediency require that
cause of action for foreign torts be dealt herein.
ALABAMA GREAT SOUTHERN vs. CARROLL
97 Ala. 126, 11 So. 803
FACTS: Carroll (resident of Alabama) was a brakeman employed
by Alabama Corporation, a railroad company operating from
Tennessee, through Alabama to Mississippi. The employment
contract was entered in the State of Alabama.
Carrol was injured in Mississippi due to the negligent failure to
spot a defective link between two freight cars which Alabama
Corp.’s employees had the duty to inspect.
Under Mississippi Law, Carroll cannot recover against his
employer (Alabama Corp.) because the negligence was caused
by the act of a “fellow servant.”. On the other hand, Alabama Law
provides that absolute liability is imposed on the company
(Alabama Corp) for injuries suffered by employees in the course
of their employment.
ISSUE: Mississippi Law vs. Alabama Law on Employer’s liability
to its employee due to negligence.
RULING: Mississippi Law is applied. The general rule is that
recovery cannot be made in one state for the injuries to the
person sustained in a different state unless the infliction of the
injuries is actionable under the law of the state where the injuries
were received. In this case, up to the time the train passed from
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
Alabama, no injury had resulted. The Alabama statute has no
efficiency beyond state lines. Only Mississippi could apply
proper jurisdiction over the claim. There may have been a
different result if Carroll had been injured in Alabama but suffered
in Mississippi. As for an argument that the Railroad (Defendant)
was under a contractual duty to Carroll (Plaintiff), which arose in
Alabama, the Alabama law will govern only occurrences of the
employment relationship and not with any specific contractual
obligations.
US SC held that (1) at common law in Alabama and Mississippi,
negligence of railroad employees in inspecting railroad cars
could not be attributed to the company, and the company was
consequently not liable for it, (2) there was no law in Mississippi
that was similar to the Employer's Liability Act of Alabama, (3)
there could be no recovery in Alabama for injuries to the person
sustained in Mississippi unless the infliction of the injuries was
actionable under Mississippi law, (4) negligence of duty
unproductive of damnifying results would not authorize or
support a recovery, (5) no injury resulted in Alabama, and (6) the
action could only be brought under the laws of Mississippi,
where the injury occurred, and the brakeman could not obtain
relief under those laws.
Five Major Defects of Vested-Right Theory:
1) When it is stated by the vested right theorists hat it is
not the foreign law but the rights acquired under it
which is enforced by the courts of other country, there
is at once involved a self-delusion of reasoning;
2) Not all rights acquired under foreign law are protected
elsewhere, nor is their protection always desirable;
3) The protection of rights and other interests is not the
only consideration to be taken into account;
4) The law protects not only vested ‘rights’ constituted
abroad, but often also foreign legal relationships,
capacities or powers out of which rights, or the
extinction of duties and changes or the invalidity of
acts may arise;
5) It is difficult and impracticable to apply the theory
where the material aspects of a transaction or event
touch two or more states equally. (pp.61-62, Salonga,
Private International Law, 1979)
B. LOCAL LAW THEORY:
1) The power of a state to regulate within its territory
has no limitation except such as may be imposed by
its own positive law; and
2) In conflict of laws problems, the court does not
enforce a foreign right but a right created by its own
law treating a case as a purely domestic case that
does not involve a foreign element. (Walter Wheeler
Cook)
Criticism of Local Law Theory - this theory lends to the
“narrow-minded, who may included to depreciate the
practical and equitable consideration that should control the
adjudication of conflict cases in favor of an exaggerated
local policy on the ground that they and the sovereign which
they represent can do as they please. (Yntema, Bases of
Private International Law)
C. CAVER’S PRINCIPLES OF PREFERENCE:
- Choice of law should be determined by
“considerations of justice and social expediency” and
should not be the result of the mechanical application
of a rule or principle of selection. (D.Cavers, A Critique
of the Conflict of Laws Problem)
- When a court is faced with a question whether to
reject the law of the forum and to admit in evidence,
as determinative of an issue in a case before it, a rule
of law of a foreign jurisdiction, it should:
(1) scrutinize the event or transaction giving rise to
the issue before it;
(2) compare carefully the proffered rule of law and
the result which its application might work in the
case at bar with the rule of the forum (or other
competing jurisdiction) and its effect therein; and
(3) appraise these results from the standpoint of
justice between the litigants or of those broader
considerations of social policy which conflicting
laws may evoke.
Criticism of this theory - it shows a “territorial bias”. They
look to the place where the significant events occurred or
where the legal relationship is centered.
2. Modern Approach:
MODERN APPROACH:
- Emphasis on those which relate to “reaching
appropriate results in particular cases.”
A. PLACE OF THE MOST SIGNIFICANT RELATIONSHIP:
- Identifies a plurality of factors and factual contacts in
light of choice of law principles.
- Choice-of-law principles to determine which State is of
the most significant relationship:
(a) the needs of the interstate and international
system;
(b) relevant policies of the concerned states;
(c) the relevant policies of other interested states and
the relative interest of those in the determination of
the particular issue;
(d) the protection of justified expectations of the
parties;
(e) the basic policies underlying the particular field of
law;
(f) certainty, predictability and uniformity of result; and
(g) ease in the determination and the application of the
law to be applied. (Sec. 6, RESTATEMENT, Conflict
of laws, 1971)
However, the above contacts is different in such area of
Substantive Law:
a) In torts - the factual contacts shall be taken in account
of the following:
i) the place where the injury occurred;
ii) the place where the negligent conduct occurred;
iii) the domicile, residence or nationality of the
parties; and
iv) the place where the relationship between the
parties is entered.
b) In contracts - factual contacts includes:
i) the law chosen by the parties and in the absence
thereof;
ii) the place of contracting;
iii) the place of negotiation of the contract;
iv) the place of performance; and
v) the domicile, residence, nationality, place of
incorporation and place of business of the parties.
AUTEN vs. AUTEN
CONFLICTS OF LAW 11
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
308 NY 155, 124 NE 2d 99 (1954)
FACTS: Sps. Margarite and Harold Auten were married in 1917
in England and they lived there until 1931 when Harold deserted
Margarite and their two children to live in New York. In 1933,
Margarite Auten went to New York to execute a separation
agreement with Harold Auten.
Under the said Agreement, Harold shall pay £50 a month through
a New York trustee for the support of his wife and the children.
On the other hand, Margarite shall not bring “any action relating
to their separation.”
Harold failed to give financial support which prompted Margarite
to file a suit for legal separation in England, on the ground of
Adultery. Harold served in New York but he never went to trial
and Margarite received nothing.
In 1947, Margarite filed an action in the New York Court to
enforce the separation agreement. In his defense, Harold argued
that Margarite’s institution of the separation suit in England
operated as a repudiation of the agreement and effected a
forfeiture of her right to any payments under it. The New York
Court, applied the NY Law, which ruled in favor of Harold Auten.
ISSUE: New York Law vs. England Law will apply on the
Separation Agreement between the Sps. Auten
RULING: The English Law must apply. Under the “Grouping of
Contracts” theory, the court (instead of regarding as conclusive
the parties intention or the place of making or performance) lay
emphasis rather upon the law of the place “which has the most
significant contacts with the matter in dispute. This theory or
approach gives to the place “having the most interest in the
problem” paramount control over the legal issues arising out of a
particular factual context, thus allowing the forum to apply the
policy of the jurisdiction “most intimately concerned with the
outcome of the particular litigation.”
In this case, examination of the receptive contacts with NY and
England compels the conclusion that it is English Law which
must be applied to determine the impact and effect to be given
the wife’s institution of the separation suit.
1) The agreement determined and fixed the marital
responsibilities of an English husband and father and
provided for the support and maintenance of the abandoned
wife and children who were to remain in England.
2) It is still in England, as the jurisdiction of marital domicile
and the place where the wife and children were to be, that
has the greatest concern in defining and regulating the rights
and duties existing under that agreement, and in
determining the circumstances that effect a termination or
repudiation of the agreement.
HAAG vs. BARNES
9 NY 2d 554, 175 NE 2d 441, 216 NYS 2d 65 (1961)
FACTS: Norman Barnes (Illinois Lawyer) and Dorothy Haag (New
York Legal Secretary) had a child born out of wedlock. They
entered into a support agreement wherein Norman shall pay
$275/month until the child reaches 16 years old, in exchange,
Norman shall be free from any other obligation. The said
agreement also included a choice of law clause in favor of
Illinois. However, New York law gave no binding effect to such
agreements by parents of an illegitimate child unless it was
judicially approved.
ISSUE: Illinois Law vs. New York Law shall govern the support
12 CONFLICTS OF LAW
agreement between Norman and Dorothy.
RULING: Illinois Law should apply. The agreement recites a
stipulation that it "shall in all respects be interpreted, construed
and governed by the laws of the state of Illinois".
However, even if the parties intention and the place of the
making of the contract are not given decisive effect, they are,
nevertheless, to be given heavy weight in determining which
jurisdiction “has the most significant contacts with the matter in
dispute.” And, when these important factors are taken together
with others of the “significant contacts” in the case, they likewise
point to Illinois law.
Illinois contacts:
(1) Both parties are designated in the agreement as being “of
Chicago, Illinois,” and Norman’s place of business is and
always been in Illinois;
(2) The child was born in Illinois;
(3) The persons designated to act as agents for the principals
(except for a third alternate) are Illinois residents, as are the
attorneys for both parties who drew the agreement; and
(4) All contributions for support always have been, and still are
being, made from Chicago.
On the contrary, New York contacts have less weight and
significance. The only contacts alleged are: (1) the Child and the
mother presently live in New York; and (2) that the “liason” took
place in New York. When these contacts are measured against
the parties’ clearly expressed intention to have their agreement
governed by Illinois law.
B. INTEREST ANALYSIS:
- The resolution of choice-of-law problems is by looking
at the policy behind the laws of the involved states and
the interest each state had in applying its own law.
- Factual contacts alone did not determine the outcome
of a case unless they reflected a state policy which
would be advanced by application of the substantive
state law.
- After the court analyzed the policies reflected by a
state law, it had to determine whether both states had
a real interest in having their law applied, hence, there
was a true conflict. However, if only one of the states
had an interest in having its law applied while the other
did not, there was a false conflict and the forum had to
apply the substantive law of the only interested state.
BABCOCK vs. JACKSON
12 NY 2d 473, 240 NYS 2d 743 (1963)
FACTS: Georgia Babcock and her friends, Mr. and Mrs. William
Jackson, all residents of Rochester, New York, left that city in
Jackson's automobile, Babcock as guest, for a week-end trip to
Canada. Some hours later, as Jackson was driving in the
Province of Ontario, he apparently lost control of the car; it went
off the highway into an adjacent stone wall, and Babcock was
seriously injured. Upon her return to New York, Babcock brought
the present action against William Jackson, alleging negligence
on his part in operating his automobile.
At the time of the accident, there was in force in Ontario a statute
providing that "the owner or driver of a motor vehicle, other than
a vehicle operated in the business of carrying passengers for
compensation, is not liable for any loss or damage resulting from
bodily injury to, or the death of any person being carried in the
motor vehicle." Even though no such bar is recognized under
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
this State's substantive law of torts, defendant Jackson moved
to dismiss the complaint on the ground that the law of the place
where the accident occurred governs and that Ontario's guest
statute barred recovery. The court at Special Term, agreeing with
Jacksons, granted the motion, and the Appellate Division
affirmed the judgment of dismissal without opinion.
ISSUE: W/N Babcock (a guest) is barred from claiming damages
against Sps. Jackson for the injury she sustained. (Ontario,
Canada Law vs. New York, USA Law)
RULING: NO, The Court applied the New York Law. Comparison
of the relative “contacts” and “interests” of New York and Ontario
in this litigation, vis-a-vis the issue here presented, makes it
clear that the concern of New York is unquestionably greater
and more direct and that the interest of Ontario is at best
minimal. The injuries sustained by a New York guest as the
result of the negligence of a New York host in the operation of an
automobile, insured in New York. In contrast, Ontario’s sole
relationship with the occurrence is the adventitious circumstance
that the accident occurred there.
NY’s policy of requiring a tort-feasor to compensate his guest for
injuries caused by his negligence cannot be doubted - NY State’s
Legislature has repeatedly refused to enact a statute denying or
limiting recovery.
Ontario Law’s objective - The object of Ontario’s guest statute is
to prevent the fraudulent assertion of claims by passengers, in
collusion with the drivers, against insurance companies, and the
fraudulent claims intended to be prevented by the statute are
those asserted against Ontario defendants and their insurance
carriers.
obligation. In Maine, Sarah Pratt (Daniel’s spouse) applied for
credit from Milliken & Co. Miliken insisted on a guaranty from
Daniel. He executed the guaranty in Maine under the law of
which a spouse can be surety for the other spouse’s debt. When
they defaulted, Milliken sued Daniel on the guaranty in Maine.
ISSUE: W/N Daniel can be held liable as guaranty?
RULING: YES, Since the contract was complete when Milliken
received Danniel’s guaranty and extended credit on the strength
of his guaranty and since the place of contracting was Maine,
then Daniel was liable.
E. CHOICE-INFLUENCING CONSIDERATIONS:
- Five Major Choice-Influencing consideration that would
lead the courts to the choice-of-law decision in a given
case:
(a) predictability of results;
(b) maintenance of interstate and international order;
(c) simplification of the judicial task;
(d) application of the better rule of law; and
(e) advancement of the forum’s governmental
interests. (Conflicts of Law: More on
Choice-Influencing Considerations, 54 Calif. L.
Rev. 1584, 1966)
- Courts will prefer rules of law whether they are forum
law or another state’s law as long as they make “good
socio-economic sense for the time the court speaks”
and are sound in view of present day conditions. (54
Calif. L. Rev. 1584, 1966)

Chapter 6:
CRITICISM ON INTEREST ANALYSIS APPROACH: THE PROBLEM OF CHARACTERIZATION
- It concerns only with private and not governmental
interest. This method of analyzing choice-of-law
problems is unworkable because it will require the A. CHARACTERIZATION:
court to decide each case on an ad hoc basis,
since the court is required in every case to
ascertain the purpose of each of the potentially DEFINITION OF CHARACTERIZATION:
applicable local law rules in order to determine - It is the process by which a court at the beginning of
which of these rules to apply. (Baxter, Choice of the choice-of-law process assigns a disputed question
Law and the Federal System, 16 Stanford Law to an area in substantive law (ie. torts, contracts, family
Review 1, 1963) law or property).
- In conflict of laws situations, characterization becomes
C. COMPARATIVE IMPAIRMENT: a pervasive problem since at least 2 jurisdictions with
- The courts are asked to weigh conflicting interests and divergent laws are involved. (p.83, Conflict of Laws,
apply the law of the state whose interest would be Coquia and Aquiling-Pangalanan, 2000)
more impaired if its law were not followed. (Baxter,
Choice of Law and the Federal System, 16 Stan. L. SINGLE-ASPECT AND MULTI-ASPECT METHOD (The
Rev. 1, 1963) Problem of Characterization:
SINGLE-ASPECT METHOD: MULTI-ASPECT METHOD:
D. FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS:
- This approach looked into the general policies of the Traditional Method Modern Method
state beyond those reflected in its substantive law and
to policies and values “relating to effective and Concentrates on one element All important factors of the
harmonious intercourse between states.” of a situation in order to case are analyzed and the
- These policies include reciprocity, the connect the case to a applicable law is arrived at by
advancement of multistate activity, protecting particular legal community “rationally elaborating and
justifiable expectations, evenhandedness in applying the policies and
dealing with similar cases and effectiveness. purposes underlying the
particular legal rules that come
in question as well as the
MILLIKEN vs. PRATT needs of inter-state or
125 Mass. 374 (1876) international intercourse.

FACTS: Daniel Pratt is a Massachusett Resident. Under

Massachusetts law, one’s spouse cannot act as surety for one’s Philippines follows the Single-Aspect Method:

CONFLICTS OF LAW 13
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
● 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. (Art. 15, NCC)
● Real property as well as personal property is subject to
the law of the country where it is stipulated. (Art. 16,
par. 1, NCC)
● 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. (Art. 16, last paragraph, NCC)
● 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. (Art. 17, par. 1,
NCC)
● 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. (Art. 17, par. 2, NCC)
● 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. (Art. 17, last paragraph, NCC)
PROBLEM: The above rules specify the geographical
location from where the governing law is found, consistent
with the traditional approach to choice-of-law. The difficulty
in following those territorially-oriented rules is the inherent
rigidly and unjust decisions that may result from their
application.
REMEDY: Courts resorted to “Escape Devices” such as:
a) Characterization;
b) Renvoi;
c) Depecage;
d) Public policy exemption (the ultimate escape
device)
B. TYPES OF CHARACTERIZATION:
TWO TYPES OF CHARACTERIZATION:
1. Subject-Matter Characterization; and
2. Substance-Procedure Dichotomy
1. Subject-Matter Characterization:
SUBJECT-MATTER CHARACTERIZATION:
- It is the classification by a court of a factual
situation into a legal category. (p.84, Conflict of
Laws, Coquia & Pangalanan, 2000)
GIBBS vs. GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINES
39 Phil. 293 (December 23, 1933)
FACTS: Allison Gibbs (citizen of California and domiciled therein)
was the husband of the deceased Eva Hohnson Gibbs. During
their marriage, Sps. Gibbs acquired 3 parcels of land in Manila
14 CONFLICTS OF LAW
which formed part of their conjugal partnership property.
Allison was appointed as administrator of Eva’s estate. During
the intestate proceedings, Allison filed an ex parte petition in
which he alleged that “the parcels of land hereunder described
belong to the conjugal partnership of Allison and Eva Gibbs, and
that in accordance with California Law, the community property
of spouses who are Californian Citizens, upon the death of the
wife previous to that of the husband, belongs absolutely to the
husband without administration.” The court granted said petition
and entered a decree adjudicating Allison to be the sole and
absolute owner of said lands, applying Sec. 1401 of the Civil
Code of California. Alision presented this decree to the register
of Deeds (RTD) of Manila for the issuance of TCT under his name
however, RTD Manila, pursuant to Sec. 1547, Philippine
Administrative Code, denied and declined to accept as binding
the said decree and refused to register the transfer of title of said
property to Allison on the ground that the corresponding
inheritance tax had not been paid.
ISSUE: W/N California Civil Code or the Philippine Administrative
Code should apply.
RULING: Philippine Administrative Code shall apply, It is clear
that the second paragraph of Art. 10, Civil Code of the
Philippines, applies only when a legal or testamentary
succession has taken place in the Philippines in accordance with
the law of the Philippine Islands; and the foreign law is consulted
only in regard to the order of succession or the extent of the
successional rights (Art. 10, second par., Civil Code, can be
invoked only when the deceased was vested with a descentible
interest in property within the jurisdiction of the Philippine
Islands).
Under California Jurisprudence, “real property is subject to the
lex rei sitae, the respective rights of husband and wife in such
property are determined by the law of the place where the
property is situated…” Under this broad principle, the nature and
extent of the title which vested in Eva Gibbs at the time of the
acquisition of the community lands here in question must be
determined in accordance with the lex rei sitae.
Eva Gibbs’ descentible interest in the subject lands was
transmitted to her heirs by virtue of inheritance and this
transmission falls within the language of the Philippine
Administrative Code which levies a tax on inheritances.
2. Substance-Procedure Characterization:
SUBSTANCE-PROCEDURE CHARACTERIZATION:
- It directs the court to the extent it will apply foreign
law.
- If the issue is substantive - the court may
apply foreign law.
- If the issue is procedural - the court must
follow the rule of the forum.
- Rationale:
- the rights and duties of parties
arising from a legal situation shall
not be substantially varied because
of the forum in which an action is
brought to settle disputed
questions arising out of the
situation. For example,
International commerce could
hardly continue if parties were
frequently exposed to the hazards
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
and unknown requirements of
foreign laws.
- to protect parties against a
substantial charge of position
because of the fortuitous
circumstances that suit is brought
in that particular state.
GRANT vs. MCAULIFFE
41 Cal. 2d 859 (1953)
FACTS: Plaintiffs William Grant, Russel Machester and Doyle
Jensen (all California Residents) were injured in a vehicular
accident in Arizona. Their car collided with a car driven by Pullen.
Pullen (also a California resident) died and Frank McAuliffe was
appointed as administrator of Pullen’s estate.
In California, causes of action for negligent torts survive the
death of the tortfeasor and can be maintained against the
administrator or executor of his estate. This prompted Plaintiffs
to bring a suit for damages against Pullen’s estate. On the other
hand, McAuliffe filed a demurrer and moved for abatement of the
claims, arguing that the survival of a cause of action is a matter of
substantive law, and that the courts of California must apply the
law of Arizona governing survival of causes of action. There was
no provision that in the event of the death of a party to a pending
proceeding his personal representative can be substituted as a
party to the action.
The trial court granted the motions, and the plaintiffs appealed.
ISSUE: W/N the survival statute of California Law or the law of
Arizona shall be applied in this tort case?
RULING: California Law shall apply. Survival of causes of action
are governed by the law of the forum. Survival is not an essential
part of the cause of action itself but relates to the procedures
available for the enforcement of the legal claim for damages.
Basically the question is one of the administration of decedents'
estates, which is a purely local proceeding.
The Court held that California, the forum state, shall govern. The
responsibilities of defendant McAuliffe, as administrator of
Pullen's estate, for injuries inflicted by Pullen before his death
were governed by the laws of California state. When all of the
parties were residents of California, and the estate of the
deceased tortfeasor is being administered in California, plaintiffs'
right to prosecute their causes of action is governed by the laws
of this state relating to administration of estates. The Court
reversed the decision granting McAuliffe’s motion, and the
causes were remanded.
Problem in the Grant vs. McAuliffe case:
- One reason is that The decision in the Grant case
was based on an erroneous characterization that was
greatly influenced by “sympathy” factors. (Summer,
Choice of Law Governing Survival of Actions, 9
Hasting LJ, 128)
- Another view states that the said decision was correct
but the method used for the decision is dubious
(p.128, Currie, Selected Essays on the Conflict of
Laws)
STATUTE OF FRAUDS:
● Substantive - statute of frauds is considered as
substantive if the words of the law relate to forbidding
the creation of obligation.
● Procedural - statute of frauds is considered as
procedural if the words of the law relate to forbidding
the enforcement of the obligation.
Statute of Frauds
The following contracts are unenforceable unless ratified, among
other, “Those that do not comply with the Statute of Frauds as
set forth in this number. In the following cases an agreement
hereafter made shall be unenforceable by action, unless the
same, or some note or memorandum, thereof, be in writing, and
subscribed by the party charged, or by his agent; evidence,
therefore, of the agreement cannot be received without the
writing, or a secondary evidence of its contents:
(a) An agreement that by its terms is not to be performed
within a year from the making thereof;
(b) A special promise to answer for the debt, default, or
miscarriage of another;
(c) An agreement made in consideration of marriage,
other than a mutual promise to marry;
(d) An agreement for the sale of goods, chattels or things
in action, at a price not less than five hundred pesos,
unless the buyer accept and receive part of such
goods and chattels, or the evidences, or some of
them, of such things in action or pay at the time some
part of the purchase money; but when a sale is made
by auction and entry is made by the auctioneer in his
sales book, at the time of the sale, of the amount and
kind of property sold, terms of sale, price, names of
the purchasers and person on whose account the sale
is made, it is a sufficient memorandum;
(e) An agreement for the leasing for a longer period than
one year, or for the sale of real property or of an
interest therein;
(f) A representation as to the credit of a third person.”
(Art. 1403(2), NCC)
MARIE vs. GARRISON
13 Abb. N. Cas. 210
Facts: Defendant Garrison maintained that the NY Statute of
Frauds is a rule affecting the remedy upon a contract within its
terms (a rule prescribing evidence and deemed a rule of
procedure). As such, Garrison claimed that the rules of the forum
must be followed.
On the other hand, Marie insisted that the NY law was
constructed as a rule of substance entering into the very
existence of the contract and determined by the ‘lex loci
contractus.’
Issue: W/N a contract declared “void” by a statute still subsists
as a contract with the only effect of depriving the party of a
remedy or a mere word of evidence.
Ruling: NO, It is the word of substance since the statute
provided that the contract of sale of any interest in land shall be
void unless it was in writing ‘ex contraria to a law stating that “no
action shall be brought” if the requirement was not complied
with.
STATUTES OF LIMITATIONS:
● GENERAL RULE: Status of limitations are classified as
“Procedural” because they barred only the legal remedy
without impairing the substantive right involved.
● EXCEPTION: certain statutes of limitations have been
classified as “Substantive” for conflict-of-laws purposes
if they provide a shorter period for certain types of
CONFLICTS OF LAW 15
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
claims that fall within a wider classification covered by a
general statute of limitations.
Specificity Test:
● The test to determine whether a statute of limitation
should be regarded as “Substantive” or “Procedural”
● In a case, a statute of limitations of a foreign country is
treated as “Substantive” when the limitation was
“directed to the newly created liability so specifically as
to warrant saying that it qualified the right.” (Bournias vs.
Atlantic Maritime, 220 F.2d 152)
BORROWING STATUTES:
- Statutes which bars the filing of a suit in the forum if it
is already barred by the statute of limitations in the
place where the cause of action arose. (p.93, Conflict
of Laws, Coquia & Pangalanan, 2000)
- Purpose: to eliminate forum-shopping.
CADALIN vs. POEA ADMINISTRATOR
238 SCRA 721
FACTS: Plaintiffs Bienvenido Cadalin, et al. are Filipino workers
recruited by Asia Int’l Builders Co. (AIBC), a domestic
recruitment corporation, for employment in Bahrain to work for
Brown & Root Int’l Inc. (BRII) which is a foreign corporation with
headquarters in Texas. Plaintiffs instituted a class suit with the
POEA for money claims arising from the unexpired portion of
their employment contract which was prematurely terminated.
They worked in Bahrain for BRII and they filed the suit after 1 yr.
from the termination of their employment contract.
As provided by Art. 156 of the Amiri Decree aka as the Labor
Law of the Private Sector of Bahrain: “a claim arising out of a
contract of employment shall not be actionable after the lapse of
1 year from the date of the expiry of the contract,” it appears that
their suit has prescribed.
Plaintiffs contend that the prescription period should be 10 years
as provided by Art. 1144 of the Civil Code as their claim arises
from a violation of a contract.
The POEA Administrator holds that the 10 year period of
prescription should be applied but the NLRC provides a different
view asserting that Art 291 of the Labor Code of the Phils with
a 3 years prescription period should be applied. The Solicitor
General expressed his personal point of view that the 1 yr period
provided by the Amiri Decree should be applied.
ISSUE: W/N the Bahrain Law on Prescription of Action shall be
the governing law instead of the Philippine law on prescription.
RULING: NO, As a general rule, a foreign procedural law will not
be applied in the forum because procedural matters (such as
service of process, joinder of actions, period and requisites for
appeal) are governed by the laws of the forum.
However, the characterization of a statute into a procedural or
substantive law becomes irrelevant when the country of the
forum has a “borrowing statute.” Said [borrowing] statute has the
practical effect of treating the foreign statute of limitation as one
of substance (substantive law). One form of “borrowing” statute
provides that an action is barred by the laws of the place where
in the forum even though the local statute has not run against it.
Sec. 48, of the (then) Code of Civil Procedure is of this kind,
wherein it provides that “If by the laws of the state or country
where the cause of action arose, the action is barred, it is also
barred in the Philippines.” Sec. 48 has not been repealed nor
16 CONFLICTS OF LAW
amended by the Civil Code of the Philippines.
The courts contends that Bahrain’s law on prescription cannot
be applied because the court will not enforce any foreign claim
that is obnoxious to the forum’s public policy and the 1 yr. rule
on prescription is against public policy on labor as enshrined in
the Phils. Constitution.
The court ruled that the prescription period applicable to the
case should be Art 291 of the Labor Code of the Phils with a 3
years prescription period since the claim arose from labor
employment.
C. DEPECAGE:
DEPECAGE:
- The phenomenon where different aspects of a case
involving a foreign element may be governed by a
different systems of law. (Lipstein, General
Principles of Private International Law)
ILLUSTRATION (Hypothetical Case): A man died intestate who
is a domicile in State A (Japan) and with movable properties
located in State B (Philippines). The conflict rules of State A refer
to the laws of the domicile to determine how the man’s estate
should be divided. The intestate law of State B gives the widow a
definite share in the estate of the deceased. However, the
determination of whether or not the woman who claims a share
in the estate is a “wfie” is referred to family law, not the laws on
succession.
The issues of what law governs movable properties and the
successional rights of a spouse are of primary importance
because they “embody the substance of the claim” while the
validity of the marriage to the deceased “affects the solution
because it answers a preliminary or incidental question. (pp.
214-221, Lipstein, General Principles of Private International Law,
1972)
The presence of an incidental question is one instance which
calls for the employment of depecage.
HAUMSCHILD vs. CONTINENTAL CASUALTY
95 NW 2d 814 (1959)
FACTS: Sps. Jacquelyn Haumschild and Le Roy Gleason were
married in Wisconsin, where they are domiciled. In March 1958,
their marriage was annulled.
In December 1956, Jacquelyn was injured while riding in a motor
truck being driven by Le Roy, which occurred in California.
Jacquelyn filed before the trial court of Wisconsin an action to
recover damages against Le Roy and Continental Casualty
(insurer of the vehicle) for the injuries she sustained. On the other
hand, Le Roy & Continental Casualty moved for the dismissal of
such action because under the California law, one spouse is
immune from suit in tort by the other spouse, and that Jacqulyn
is estopped to assert the invalidity of her marriage to Le Roy.
ISSUE: (Family Law vs. Torts Law). W/N the Law of the State of
Wisconsin shall be applied in this case?
RULING: Whenever the courts of Wisconsin are confronted with
a conflict of laws problem as to which law governs the capacity
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
of one spouse to sue the other in tort, the law to be applied is
that of the state of domicile.
The appellate court (of Wisconsin) found the question to be one
of conflict of laws. The husband and wife were domiciled in
Wisconsin, which was also the forum state. Under Wisconsin
law, the wife was entitled to bring an action against her
husband in tort. However, the accident took place in
California, which did not permit interspousal actions. Thus,
the court said, the issue was whether Wisconsin law or California
law applied. The court noted that in tort cases, the law of the
place of the tort ordinarily applied. But the court determined that
the interspousal immunity issue was more properly one of family
law than tort law. The public policy behind the interspousal
immunity doctrine, the court explained, concerned the potential
damage to the family that might result if spouses were permitted
to sue one another in tort. Thus, the court held that the
determination of whether the doctrine applied should be
made according to the law of the state of domicile.
Accordingly, the court reversed the judgment and remanded the
case.
NOTE: The court decided that the law of the place of accident
California, governed the issue of negligence while Wisconsin law
governed the issue of interspousal immunity.
Chapter 7:
THE PROBLEM OF RENVOI
A. DEFINITION OF RENVOI:
RENVOI; MEANING:
- It is a procedure whereby a jural matter presented
is referred by the conflict of laws rules of the forum
to a foreign state, the conflict of law rule of which in
turn, refers the matter to the law of the forum or a
third state. (p.102, Coquia and Aguiling-
Pangalangan, 2000)
REMISSION AND TRANSMISSION:
REMISSION: TRANSMISSION:
When the reference is made When the reference is made to
back to the law of the forum. a third state.
B. MEANS OF DEALING WITH RENVOI PROBLEMS:
1) FIRST APPROACH: (REJECT RENVOI)
- If the conflict rules of the forum court refer the case to
the law of another state.
- The “Internal” law is that which would be applied to a
domestic case that has no conflict-of-laws
complications.
- The forum in applying the “internal law” rejects the
renvoi.
2) SECOND APPROACH: (ACCEPT RENVOI)
- The court may accept the renvoi and refer not just to
another state’s “internal” law but to the “whole” law
which includes choice-of-law rules applicable in
multi-state cases.
3) THIRD APPROACH: (DESISTANCE
AZNAR vs. GARCIA
117 Phil. 106
FACTS: In accordance to the will executed by Edward
Christensen, the executor-Adolfo Aznar (in his final account and
project of partition) ratified the payment of P3,600 to Maria Helen
Christensen-Garcia (who is an acknowledged natural child of
Edward Christensen), and that the residue of the estate be
transferred to his (Edward’s only) daughter, Maria Lucy
Christensen (Married to Bernard Daney).
Helen Christensen-Garcia filed an opposition to the approval of
the partition, arguing that it deprived her of her legitime as an
acknowledged natural child of Edward Christensen. Moreover,
she argued that the distribution should be governed by
Philippine laws, instead of the law of the State of California, USA.
ISSUE: W/N the estate distribution of Edward Christensen
should be governed by Philippine law? (California law vs.
Philippine Law)
RULING: YES, Philippine law shall govern. The law that governs
the validity of (Edward Christensen’s) testamentary disposition is
under Art. 16, CC of the Philippines. The “national law” indicated
in said Article cannot generally apply to American law but it
refers to the private law of the State where the decedent is a
citizen, in the case at bar, which is the law of the State of
California.
Helen Garcia insists that Art. 946 of the California Code should
be applicable, and 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.
It is argued on appellees' behalf that the clause "if there is no law
to the contrary in the place where the property is situated" in
Sec. 946 of the California Civil Code refers to Article 16 of the
Civil Code of the Philippines and that the law to the contrary in
the Philippines is the provision in said Article 16 that the national
law of the deceased should govern. This contention can not be
sustained. As explained in the various authorities cited above the
national law mentioned in Article 16 of our Civil Code is the law
on conflict of laws in the California Civil Code, i.e., Article 946,
which authorizes the reference or return of the question to the
law of the testator's domicile. The conflict of laws 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. The court of the
domicile can not 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 laws rule of the state of the decedent, if
the question has to be decided, especially as the application of
the internal law of California provides no legitime for children
while the Philippine law, Arts. 887(4) and 894, Civil Code of the
Philippines, makes natural children legally acknowledged forced
heirs of the parent recognizing them.
The SC therefore find that as the domicile of the deceased
Christensen, a citizen of California, is the Philippines, the validity
of the provisions of his will depriving his 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.
OR MUTUAL
DISCLAIMER OF JURISDICTION)
CONFLICTS OF LAW 17
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes

- The forum court upon reference to another state’s law

movable property of a deceased foreigner who, according to the
sees that such law is limited in application to its own law of his country is domiciled in France, and whose property
national and has no provision for application to a must, according to that law, be applied in accordance with the
non-national. law of the country in which he was domiciled, will apply French
- This has the same result as the acceptance of the municipal law, regardless if the deceased had not complied with
renvoi doctrine byt the process used by the forum Art. 13 of the French Civil Code.
court is to desist from applying the foreign law.
NOTE: By employing double renvoi, the English court decided
4) FOURTH APPROACH: (FOREIGN COURT THEORY) the case as a French court would have decided it in accordance
- For instance, the Philippine court would assume the with its own domestic law.
same position the American court would take were the
case litigated in the US. Thus, if the American court
applies American law, the Philippine judge should also C. USEFULNESS OF RENVOI:
apply American law.
- If the American judge decides the case in
accordance with the Philippine law on USEFULNESS OF RENVOI:
succession, the Philippine judge should do the - It is used to avoid unjust results.
same.
UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO vs. DATER
277 Mich. 653 (1936)
DISADVANTAGE OF RENVOI:
FACTS: Negotiations were commenced to secure a loan of
ONE DISADVANTAGE OF RENVOI: $75,000 over a piece of property in Chicago which is owned by
George Dater and John Price who are both from Benton Harbor,
- If both courts follow the same theory, there would be
Michigan. Thereafter, a trust deed and certain promissory notes
no end to the case since the courts would be referring were drawn up with Dater (& his wife, Nelly) and Price (& his wife,
it back to each other, hence, it gave rise to situations Clara), as parties of the first part, and the Chicago Title & Trust
that have been described as “revolving doors” (circulus Company, as trustee and party of the second part. The notes
inextricabilis). were payable in the city of Chicago and at such place as the
legal holder might appoint. The trust mortgage and notes were
sent by mail to the Benton Harbor State Bank for the signature of
ANNESLEY, DAVIDSON vs. ANNESLEY
the parties involved. The papers were signed in Benton Harbor,
95 LJ Ch. 404 (1926)
Michigan and mailed to University of Chicago’s agent in the city
of Chicago where the trust deed was paced on record.
FACTS: The Testatrix (British) died in France. Before her death,
she made a will (English Form) in France which expressly
In January 1929, the loan was actually made and the money paid
stipulates that “I declare that although I have lived in France for
over by check made payable to Mr&Mrs. Dater, and Mr.&Mrs.
many years and own the house and grounds which I now occupy
Price and cashed in Chicago.
it has not been and is not my intention to abandon my domicile
of origin, namely England, and I have not made any application
Few weeks after, John Price died and it is conceded that Mrs.
under the French Civil Code or otherwise for a decree to fix my
Price became the actual and record owner of at least one-half of
domicile in France nor have I done anything to become a
the property after the death of her husband. Subsequently,
naturalized subject of France and I intend to remain a British
foreclosure proceedings were commenced on the property and
subject.” [Note: The case was filed in English Court’]
the property purchased at chancery sale. Suit was filed in
Michigan before the foreclosure suit was completed in Chicago.
Under French law, the testari could only dispose of 1/3 of her
The cause was heard November 7, 1934, and on June 18, 1935,
personal property. However, according to her will, she purported
judgment was rendered in favor of plaintiff-University against
to dispose of the whole of her personal property.
George R. Dater in the amount of $15,536.32 and from which no
appeal has been taken. On the same date judgment was entered
ISSUE: W/N the domicile of the Testatrix at the time of her death
in favor of Clara Price of no cause for action, from which
was French or English?
judgment plaintiff appeals.
RULING: French Law was applied in this case. The English court
It is conceded that under the law of Illinois a married woman is
decided that the domicile of the testatrix at the time of her death
as free to contract as a man, while in Michigan a married woman
was French. Under French Municipal law, the law applicable in
has not the legal capacity to bind herself or her separate estate
the case of a foreigner not legally domiciled in France is the law
by signing these notes.
of that person’s nationality (which is British in this case).
The plaintiff-University contends that the contract was an Illinois
However, if the law of that nationality refers the question back to
contract; that the signing of the notes in Michigan was not the
French law (the law of the domicile), and the question arises, will
final act in the making of the contract, but rather a preliminary
the French law accept this reference back (or renvoi) and apply
step, the delivery of the note being conditional upon defendant's
the French municipal law? Two Opinion arises:
producing a satisfactory title, the approval of the title in Illinois
(1) The renvoi would not be accepted and the French Court
was the last act necessary to make a legal delivery.
will distribute the movables of the testatrix in accordance
with English municipal law; or
ISSUE: W/N Mrs. Price has the capacity to enter into a contract
(2) The French Court would accept the renvoi and distribute it
in the State of Michigan? (Illinois Law vs. Michigan Law)
in accordance with French municipal law.
RULING: The law of the State of Michigan governed this
English court adopted the French law which in administering the
case. The general rule is that the contract, as to its validity,

18 CONFLICTS OF LAW
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
nature, obligation, and interpretation, is to be governed by the
law of the place of performance, none of them can be
regarded as express authority for the application of that rule to
the question of the capacity of a married woman to contract.
Here manual delivery was complete because it was made to a
bank which had been designated by the mortgage for that
purpose. Therefore, it must be held that the capacity of Mrs.
Price is governed by the law of Michigan. Under the law of
Michigan, a married woman cannot bind her separate estate
through personal engagement for the benefit of others.
If by the law of Michigan, Mrs. Price has no personal liability on
the note, recoverable from her separate estate. However,
assuming that the case is governed by the Law of Illinois, the
case is still governed by the ;aw of Michigan pursuant in the
case of Burr vs. Beckler.
OBJECTION TO RENVOI:
● Renvoi would place the court in a “perpetually
enclosed circle from which it would never emerge and
that it would never find a suitable bdy of substantive
rules to apply to a particular case. (In RE: Schneir’s
Estate, 96 NYS 2d. 652)
● Renvoi is workable only if one of the states rejects it
and that it achieves harmony of decisions only if the
states concerned do not agree on applying it the same
way.
● Courts may be unnecessarily burdened with the task of
identifying the choice-of-law rules of another state.
INAPPLICABILITY OF RENVOI IN A FALSE CONFLICT:
- If the choice-of-law rules of the state to which
reference is made refers the case back to the forum
state, the court may use this situation to determine if
both states have an interest in having their laws applied
or if there is merely a false conflict.
- Examples:
(a) Pfau vs. Trent Aluminum Co - NJ Supreme Court
stated that since Connecticut and New Jersey have
identical substantive laws and the third concerned
state (Iowa) had no interest in ensuring that its law
applied, there was false conflict. Hence, renvoi was
inappropriate.
(b) Bellis vs. Bellis - Philippine Supreme Court held
that no renvoi issue arose because the decedent
was a domiciliary and national of only one state.
PFAU vs. TRENT ALUMINUM CO.
55 NJ 511 (1970)
FACTS: Steven Pfau (Connecticut domiciliary) was a student at
Parsons College, Iowa, and Bruce Trent (New Jersey domiciliary)
was also a student of the same college. In 196, Trent agreed to
drive Pfau to Columbia, Missouri in the car registered in New
Jersey in the name of Trent Aluminum Co. (owned by Trent’s
father). After leaving Parsons and while still in Iowa, Bruce
collided with an oncoming vehicle driven by Josep Davis causing
injuries to Pfau.
The Iowa has a guest statute which provides that a host-driver is
not liable to his passenger-guest for ordinary negligence.
Defendants-Trent pleaded, among others, the Iowa guest statute
as a defense. [Note: The case was filed in the New Jersey Court)
ISSUE: W/N the Iowa guest statute is applicable to Pfau’s
action? (Connecticut Law vs. New Jersey Law vs. iowa Law)
RULING: NO, Iowa law was not applied in this case. Connecticut
law permits guest-passengers to recover from their host-drivers
for ordinary negligence. Likewise, New Jersey law allows a
guest-passenger to be compensated by his host-driver in cases
of ordinary negligence. Thus, the substantive laws of
Connecticut and New Jersey are in accord.
After using the government-interest analysis, the NJ Supreme
Court concluded that Iowa has no interest in this case, and since
the substantive law of Connecticut and New Jersey are the
same, this presents a false conflict and Pfau should have the
right to maintain an action for ordinary negligence in our (New
Jersey) court.
In this situation principles of comity, and the equal protection
and privileges and immunities clauses of the Constitution,
dictates that we should afford the Connecticut plaintiff-Pfau the
same protection a New Jersey plaintiff would be given.
BELLIS vs. BELLIS
20 SCRA 359 (1968)
FACTS: Amos Bellis (citizen of Texas, USA) executed a will in the
Philippines. After his death, his will was admitted to probate in
CFI-Manila. In the project of partition, the executor (People’s
Bank) delivered to the Bellis’ illegitimate children their legacies,
and divided the residuary to the legitimate children.
The illegitimate children filed their opposition to the partition on
the ground that they were deprived of their legitime as
compulsory heirs of the deceased under Art. 16 of the Civil Code
of the Philippines. The CFI-Manila applied the national law of the
decedent, which is Texas Law, which did not provide for
legitimes
ISSUE: W/N Texas Law shall govern the estates of the Decedent
Bellis? (Texas Law vs. Philippine Law)
RULING: Law of Texas, USA, shall apply. The Doctrine of Renvoi
is usually present if the decedent is a national of the one country,
and a domicile of another. In the present case, the decent was
both a national of Texas and a domicile thereof at the time f his
death. Even assuming Texas has a conflict of law rule provided
that the law of the domicile should govern, the same would not
result in a reference back (renvoi) to Philippine law, but would still
refer to Texas Law.
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, Art. 16, NCC
states said national law should govern.
Decedent Bellis was a citizen of Texas, USA, and under the law
of Texas, there are no forced heres or legitimes. Since the
intrinsic validity of the provision of the will and the amount of
successional rights are to be determined under Texas law, the
Philippine law on legitimes cannot be applied to the testacy of
decedent Bellis.
Chapter 8:
NOTICE AND PROOF OF FOREIGN LAW
A. EXTENT OF JUDICIAL NOTICE:
CONCEPT OF JUDICIAL NOTICE:
CONFLICTS OF LAW 19
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
- Judicial notice is based on the maxim; “what is known
need not not be proved.” (Jones, The Law on Evidence
in Civil Cases, Vol. 1; p.93, Riano, Evidence (The Bar
Lecture Series), 2022)
- Judicial notice takes the place of proof. (Alzua vs.
Johnson, 21 Phil. 308)
- When the court takes judicial notice of a matter, the
court accepts and recognizes the same without the
necessity of formal proof.
When Judicial Notice is Mandatory:
1. Existence and territorial extent of states;
2. Political history, forms of government and symbols of
nationality of states;
3. Law of nations;
4. Admiralty and maritime courts of the world and their
seals;
5. Political constitution and history of the Philippines;
6. Official acts of the legislative, executive and judicial
departments of the National Government of the
Philippines;
7. Laws of nature;
8. Measure of time; and
9. Geographical divisions. (Sec. 1, Rule 129-A, 2019
Amended Rules of Evidence)
When Judicial Notice is Discretionary:
a) Matters of Public knowledge;
b) Matters which are capable of unquestionable
demonstration; or
c) Matters which ought to be known to judges because of
their judicial functions. (Sec. 2, Rule 129-A, 2019
Amended Rules of Evidence)
PROVING FOREIGN LAW:
- When the court is called upon to decide a case based
on a foreign law, the party whose cause of action or
defense depended upon the foreign law has the burden
of proving the foreign law. Such foreign law is treated
as a question of fact to be properly pleaded and
proved. (p.121, Coquia & Aguiling-Pangalangan, 2000,
citing Beale’s Conflict of Laws)
a. In the Philippines:
- a Judge cannot decide a case on the basis of his
own knowledge and information. He can only act
upon the evidence before his court in the actual
case.
- In a case, Judicial notice may be taken of a
foreign law with which the court is “evidently
familiar.” (Delgado vs. Republic, GR no. L-2546,
January 28, 1950)
b. In the USA:
- Courts are allowed to take judicial knowledge of
the law of sister states as required by the full faith
and credit clause of the US Constitution. (Allstate
Insurance Co. vs. Hague, 449 US 302)
B. PROOF OF FOREIGN LAW:
WAYS TO PROVE FOREIGN LAW:
1. By presenting either of the following:
a. An official publication of the law; or
20 CONFLICTS OF LAW
b. A copy of the law attested by the officer having
the legal custody of the record, or by his deputy.
If such record is not kept in the Philippines, it
must be accompanied with a certificate that such
officer has the custody. (Sec. 24, Rule 132, 2019
Amended Rules on Evidence)
2019 AMENDED RULES ON EVIDENCE:
Proof of Official Record - The record of public documents,
when admissible for any purpose, may be evidenced by (1) an
official publication thereof or (2) by a copy attested by the officer
having the legal custody of the record, or by his or her deputy,
and accompanied, if the record is not kept in the Philippines,
with a certificate that such officer has he custody.
If the office in which the record is kept is in a foreign country,
which is a contracting party to a treaty or convention to which
the Philippines is also a party, or considered a public document
under such treaty or convention, the certificate or its equivalent
shall be in the form prescribed by such treaty or convention
subject to reciprocity granted to public documents originating
from the Philippines.
For documents originating from a foreign country which is not a
contracting party to a treaty or convention, the certificate may be
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 the foreign country
in which the record is kept, and authenticated by the seal of his
or her office.
A document that is accompanied by a certificate or its equivalent
may be presented in evidence without further proof, the
certificate or its equivalent being prima facie evidence of the due
execution and genuineness of the document involved. The
certificate shall not be required when a treaty or convention
between a foreign country and the Philippines has abolished the
requirement, or has exempted the document itself from this
formality. (Sec. 24, Rule 132, 2019 Amended Rules on Evidence)
2. In the case of proof documents executed abroad, it is
mandated by law that any public document executed
abroad to be used in the Philippines must be duly
authenticated by the Philippine Consul attaching his
consular seal.
APOSTILLE CONVENTION
The Apostille Convention on Authentication of Documents took
effect in the Philippines on May 14, 2019. This means that the
DFA will no longer issue Authentication Certificates and instead
will affix an Apostille to public documents for use abroad as
proof of authentication in Apostille-contracting parties.
An apostille certifies “the authenticity of the signature, the
capacity in which the person signing the document has acted
and, where appropriate, the identity of the seal or stamp which it
bears.” (Art. 5, Apostille Convention)
3. Depositions - In a foreign state or country, depositions
may be taken:
a. on notice before a secretary of embassy or
legation, consul general, consul, vice-consul, or
consular agent of the Republic of the Philippines;
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
b. before such person or officer as may be
appointed by commission or under letters
rogatory; or
c. before such person which the parties have
stipulated in writing. (Sec. 11, Rule 23, 2019
Amended Rules on Civil Procedure)
PHIL. COMMERCIAL & INDUSTRIAL BANK vs. ESCOLIN
56 SCRA 266 (1974)
FACTS: Sps. Charles and Linnie Hodges (Citizens of Texas, USA)
provided mutually in their Wills that each of them shall bequeath
all of the remainder of their estate to the surviving spouse. The
wife (Linnie) died first in 1957, however, no liquidation was
undertaken. In 1962l the husband (Charles) died.
Avelina Magno was appointed as Administrator of the estate of
Linnie Hodges while PCIB was appointed as Special
Administrator of the estate of Charles Hodges. Thereafter, two
probate proceedings proceeded jointly.
PCIB claims that Sps. Hodges were both residents of the
Philippines, therefore, the estate left by Linnie Hodges could not
be more than 1/2 of her share of the conjugal partnership in
accordance with Art. 16 of the NCC of the Philippines. On the
other hand, Avalina Magno argued that the applicable law was
Texas Law under which there was no system of legitime, hence,
the estate of Linnie Hodges could not be less than her share or
1/2 of the conjugal partnership properties.
ISSUE: W/N Texas law shall govern the disposition of Linnie’s
estate?
RULING: NO, The existence and effects of foreign laws being
questions of fact, and it being the position of PCIB that the
estate of Linnie, pursuant to Texas Law, should only be 1/4 of the
conjugal estate, such contention constitutes an admission of
fact, and it would be in estoppel in any further proceedings in
these cases to claim that the said estate could be less,
irrespective of what might be proven later to be actually the
provisions of the applicable Texas Law.
It no longer lies in the lips of PCIB to make any claim that under
the laws of Texas, the estate of Linnie Hodges could in any event
be less than 1/4 of the community estate of the Spouses.
The question of what are the laws of Texas governing the matters
here is one of fact (and not of law). The elementary rule is that
foreign laws may not be taken 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 the said
laws are already within the actual knowledge of the court, such
as when they are well and generally known or they have been
actually ruled upon in other cases before it and none of the
parties concerned claim otherwise.
IN RE: ESTATE OF JOHNSON
39 Phil. 156 (1918)
FACTS: Emil Johnson (Swedish native) is a naturalized US citizen
but died in Manila, leaving a Holographic Will. A petition for
probate of Johnson’s will was filed on the ground that Johnson
was a citizen of Illinois, USA, at the time of his death, hence, the
will was duly executed in accordance with Illinois law.
After the said will had been probated, Ebba Ingeborg (Alleged
daughter of Johnson) moved for the annulment of the decree of
probate and commenced an intestate administration of the
estate on the ground that the decedent Johnson was not a
resident of the State of Illinois and that the probated will was not
in accordance with the laws of that State.
ISSUE: W/N the holographic will of the deceased Johnson was
duly executed in accordance with the law of the State of Illinois,
USA.
RULING: NO, It does not affirmatively appear from the
transcription of the testimony adduced in the trial court that any
witness was examined with reference to the law of Illinois on the
subject of the execution of will. The trial judge was satisfied that
the will was properly executed by examining Sec. 1874 of the
Illinois Law, and thereafter, he (trial judge) may have assumed
that he could take judicial notice of the laws of Illinois under Sec.
275 of the Philippine Code of Civil Procedure. If so, he was
mistaken because Sec. 275 only authorizes Philippine courts to
take judicial notice of the acts of the legislative department of
the US, or Acts of the Congress of the US.
The proper rule is to require proof of the Laws of the States of
the American Union whenever their provisions are determinative
of the issues in any action litigated in the Philippines.
Note: Even if the trial court erred in taking judicial notice of
tIllinois law, such error is not available to Enna Ingeborg because
the petition does not state any fact from which it would appear
that the Illinois law is different from what the court found.
EFFECTS OF FAILURE TO PLEAD
AND PROVE FOREIGN LAW:
In the absence of proof of the applicable of the applicable
foreing law, Forum Courts have THREE ALTERNATIVES:
1. Dismiss the the case for inability to establish a cause of
action (Traditional Approach):
- The court rests on the party relying on the foreign law
the burden of introducing proof of the contents of
such law.
- The forum court would (upon proof of law) enforce a
right existing under that foreign law.
WALTON v. ARABIAN AMERICAN OIL CO.
233 F. 2nd. F4 (1956)
FACTS: Leo Walton (Arkansas citizen and resident) who, while
temporarily in Saudi Arabia, was seriously injured when the
vehicle he was driving collided with a truck owned by Arabian
American Oil Company (AAO) which was driven by the latter’s
employee. AAO is a corporation incorporated in Delaware,
licensed to do business in NY and Saudi Arabia.
Walton’s complaint did not alleged relevant Saudi Arabian Law
nor prove or offer to prove such during trial. On the other hand,
AAO did not allege such SA Laws nor prove or offer to prove
such SA Laws. However, there was evidence that might inferred
that under well-established New York decisions, AAO was
negligent and therefore liable to Walton. The trial Judge said that
he would not take judicial notice of Saudi Arabian Law, and he
directed a verdict in favor of AAO and gave judgment against
Walton.
ISSUE: May the trial court take judicial notice of a foreign law
when it was not pleaded?
RULING: NO, The general federal rule is that the “law” of a
foreign country is a fact which must be proved. However, under
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (Rule 43(a), a federal court must
receive evidence of it admissible according to the rules of
CONFLICTS OF LAW 21
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
evidence of the state in which the court sits.
Where comprehension of foreign law is not easy, then, a court
abuses its discretion under that statute perhaps if it takes judicial
notice of foreign law when it is not pleaded, and surely does so
unless the party, who would otherwise have had the burden of
proving that law, has in some way adequately assisted the court
in judicially learning it.
The court found that Walton had the burden of showing, to the
trial court's satisfaction, Saudi Arabian law, but failed to so prove
that law. The court found that, because jurisdiction rested on
diversity of citizenship, New York rules of the conflict of laws
applied, which was that the substantive law applicable to an
alleged tort was the law of the place where the alleged tort
occurred. The court found that it would have been an abuse of
discretion had the trial court taking judicial notice of the foreign
law when it was not pleaded.
2. Apply the law of the forum:
- Parties who fail to introduce proof as to the content
of a foreign law acquiesce to the application of the
forum law.
- Basis: The law of the forum is the basic law and
when the claimed applicable foreign law is not
proved, then the court has no reason to displace the
basic law.
LEARY vs. GLEDHILL
8 N.J. 260 (1951)
FACTS: William Gledhill invited Thomas Leary to visit him in
France. In a conversation in a hotel in Paris, Gledhill told Leary
that he needed $4,000 and that he could raise about $2,000 by
asking his wife to sell a vehicle in the US. Gledhilll asked Leary to
help him but did not mention about selling Leary any shares of
stock.
When Leary returned to Germany, he mailed Gledhill a check
payable to the latter’s order for $1,500 without indicating on the
check or without accompanying a letter as to what the money
was for, and they did not see nor hear from each other.
Leary instituted a suit against Gledhill to recover the alleged loan,
testifying that the check for $1,500 was a personal loan to
Gledhill. On the other hand, Gledhill denied obtaining loan from
Leary and moved for the dismissal of the case on the ground
that Leary’s proofs were insufficient because there is no promise
to repay, no demand for repayment, and no pleading or proof of
the law of France where the transaction occurred.
ISSUE: W/N French was properly pleaded and proved by Leary
to constitute a cause of action against Gledhill?
RULING: YES/NO, CDSCSD
The transaction occurred in France. Our Courts (New Jersey,
USA) may properly take judicial knowledge that France is not a
common law, but rather a civil jurisdiction. It would, therefore, be
inappropriate to presume that the principles of the common law
prevail there. However, this does not mean that Leary must fail in
his cause of action because of the absence of any proof at the
trial as to the applicable French law.
In these circumstances, any one of the other three presumptions
may be indulge in:
(a) that the France law is the same as the law of the Forum;
(b) that the law of France, like all civilized countries,
22 CONFLICTS OF LAW
recognizes certain fundamental principles (eg. the taking
of a loan creates an obligation upon the borrower to make
repayment);
(c) that the parties by failing to prove the law of France have
acquiesced in having their dispute determined by the law
of the forum.
The presumption that in the absence of proof the parties
acquiesce in the application of the law of the forum (be it
statutory or common law) may be universally applied regardless
of the nature of the controversy. This view is favored more by
authorities.
Therefore, in this case, the rights of the parties are to be
determined by the law of New Jersey which unquestionably
permits recovery on the facts proven.
ZALAMEA vs. CA
228 SCRA 27 (1993)
FACTS: Sps. Zalamea and their daughter purchased 3 airline
tickets from Trans-World Airlines (TSA)-Manila Agent. The ticket
of the Sps was purchased with a 75% discount while the
daughter’s ticket was purchased at full price. All tickets were
confirmed in Manila and Re-Confirmed in NY, USA)
On the date of the flight, they were wait-listed because all seats
were taken. Eventually, Mr. Zalamea (while holding his daughter’s
fully-paid ticket) was allowed to board the plane while his wife
and daughter were constrained to purchase tickets from another
airline for their trip back to Manila.
Sps. Zalamea filed an action for damages based on breach of
contract of air carriage against TSA before RTC-Makati where it
ruled in their favor and granted them ticket refund and moral
damages.
On appeal, CA held that moral damages are recoverable only
where there is fraud or bad faith and since it is matter of record
that overbooking of flights is an accepted practice of US airlines,
no fraud or bad faith could be imputed to TSA.
ISSUE: W/N overbooking of flights is allowed in the US, thereby
absolving TSA from being imputed with bad faith or fraud?
RULING: NO, The US law or regulation allegedly authorizing
overbooking has never been proved. Foreign laws do not prove
themselves nor can the courts take judicial notice of them. They
must be alleged and proved.
TSA relied solely on the statement of its Customer Service
Agent, in her deposition that the Code of Federal Regulations of
the Civil Aeronautics Board allows overbooking. Aside from that
statement, no official publication of said code was presented as
evidence. Therefore, CA’s finding that overbooking is specifically
allowed by the US Code of Federal Regulations has not basis in
fact.
3. Assume that the foreign law is the same as the law of
the forum (Doctrine of Processual Presumption);
- Our courts (Philippine Courts) cannot take judicial
notice of foreign law unless they are alleged and
proved. (Garcia vs. Garcia-Recio, 366 SCRA 437)
- A party who wants to have a foreign law applied to a
dispute or case has the burden of proving the foreign
law. (Del Socorro vs. Van Wilsem, GR no. 193707,
December 10, 2014)
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
- In the absence of any statutory requirement to the
contrary, the courts of the forum will not take judicial
notice of the law prevailing in another country.
Foreign law must be alleged and proved. (Sec. 116,
29 Am. Jur, Evidence; Northwest Orient Airlines vs.
CA, 241 SCRA 192)

MICIANO vs. BRIMO

50 Phil. 867 (1924)

FACTS: Juan Miciano (the judicial administrator of the estate of

Deceased Joseph Brimo) filed a scheme of partition which was
opposed by Andre Brimo (one of the Deceased’s brothers). The
opposition was based on the ground that the partition puts into
effect the provisions of the deceased’s will which are not in
accordance with Turkish laws, and are void for violating
Philippine Civil Code (Art. 16, par. 2, NCC).

However, the Oppositor-Andre failed to present any evidence

showing what Turkish laws are violated.

ISSUE: W/N Andre properly show proof that partition violates

Turkish law?

RULING: NO, In the absence of evidence on Foreign laws, they

are presumed to be the same as those of the Philippines. It has
not been proved in these proceedings what the Turkish law that
was violated. The refusal to give the opposite another
opportunity to prove such foreign laws does not constitute an
error.

Therefore, there is no evidence in the record that the nationality

of the testator Joseph Brimo was violated in the testimony
dispositions in question which, not being contrary to our laws in
force, must be complied with and executed.

Note: As a result of failure by the oppositor-brother to prove

Turkish law, the court indulged a presumption that Turkin

C. EXCEPTIONS TO THE APPLICATION

OF FOREIGN LAW:

NOTE: There are instances when the law of the forum must be
applied in spite of the presence of a foreign element. The
exceptions to the application of foreign law falls under three main
categories:
1. When the local law expressly so provides;
2. When there is failure to plead and prove the foreign law
or judgment; and
3. When the case falls under any of the exceptions to the
rule of comity. (p.145, Coquia & Aguiling-Pangalangan,
2000)

EXCEPTIONS TO THE APPLICATION OF FOREIGN LAW:

1. The foreign law is contrary to an important public policy
of the forum;
2. The Foreign Law is Procedural in Nature;
3. Issues are Related to Property (Lex Situs);
4. The Issue Involved in the En;orcement of Foreign Claim
is Fiscal or Administrative:
5. The Foreign Law or Judgment is Contrary to Good
Morals (Contra Bonos Mores);
6. The application of foreign law will work undeniable
injustice to the citizen of the forum;
7. The Foreign Law is Penal in Character;
8. The application of the foreign law might endanger the
vital interest of the State. (See Art. 17, par. 3, NCC)

CONFLICTS OF LAW 23
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes

Philippine Islands of or mothers are citizens or mothers are citizens

foreign parents who, of the Philippines. of the Philippines;
before the adoption of 3. Those who elect 3. Those born before
PART THREE: this Constitution, had Philippine citizenship January 17, 1973, of
been elected to public pursuant to the Filipino mothers, who
PERSONAL LAW office in the Philippine provisions of the elect Philippine
Islands. Constitution of 1935. citizenship upon
3. Those whose fathers 4. Those who are reaching the age or
are citizens of the naturalized in majority; and
Philippines. accordance with law. 4. Those who are
IMPORTANCE OF PERSONAL LAW: 4. Those whose mothers (Art. III) naturalized in
- An individual’s nationality or domicile serves as a are citizens of the accordance with law.
permanent connection between the individual and a Philippines and, upon (Art. IV)
reaching the age of
state. This is the reason for assigning him a personal majority, elect
law which will allow the courts to exercise jurisdiction or Philippine citizenship.
5. Those who are
determine the governing choice-of-law rule on a naturalized in
specific situation or transaction involving him. accordance with law.
- An individual’s personal law follows him wherever he is (Art. IV)

and governs those transactions which affect him most

closely such as marriage, divorce, legitimacy and
capacity to contract. (p.154, Coquia & A. BIRTH (NATURAL-BORN):
Aguiling-Pangalangan, 2000)
NATURAL BORN:
Chapter 9: (1) Natural-born citizens are those who are citizens of the
NATIONALITY AND CITIZENSHIP Philippines from birth without having to perform any act
to acquire or perfect their Philippine citizenship.
(2) Those who elect Philippine citizenship in accordance
IMPORTANCE OF NATIONALITY IN THE PHILIPPINES: with paragraph (3), Section 1, Art. IV shall be deemed
- Most civil law countries follow the national law theory. It natural-born citizens. (Sec. 2, Art. IV, 1987 Constitution)
is the nationality or citizenship of the individual that
regulates his civil status, capacity, condition, his family
rights and duties, laws on succession and capacity to CO vs. ELECTORAL TRIBUNAL
succeed. 199 SCRA 692 (1991)
- Nationality was used to establish the requisite link
FACTS: In 1987 Jose Ong, Jr., ran in the elections for
between an individual and the state because the laws of
representative in the 2nd district of Northern Samar. Ong was
each state were presumed to be made for an proclaimed as the winner. Losing candidates (Balinqui and Co)
“ascertained population”. (p.195, Rabel, Conflict of filed a election protest against Ong, Jr., on the ground that he
Laws, 1958) was not a natural-born citizen of the Philippines.
- The nationality law theory is a conflict of laws theory by
virtue of which jurisdiction over the particular subject In his defense, Jose Ong, Jr., argued the following:
matter affecting a person, such as status of a natural ● In 1985 - His grandfather (Ong Te) arrived in the Philippines
person, is determined by the latter’s nationality. (Ellis vs. from China and established his residence in Laoang, Samar
Republic, 117 Phil. 979) where he obtained a certificate of residence.
● In 1905 - His father (Jose Ong Chuan) was born in China and
Nationality Principle - “Laws relating to family rights and was brought to the Philippines in 1915.
duties, or to status, condition and capacity of persons are ● In 1932 - His father (Jose Ong Chuan) married Agripina Lao, a
binding upon citizens of the Philippines even though living natural-born Filipina.
● In 1948 - He (Jose Ong, Jr.) was born.
abroad.” (Art. 15, NCC)
● In 1955 - CFi-Samar declared Jose Ong Chuan as Filipino
citizen and the latter took his Oath of Allegiance.
WHO ARE FILIPINO CITIZENS?
1. Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of ISSUE: W/N Jose Ong, Jr. is a natural-born Filipino Citizen
the adoption of the 1987 Constitution;
2. Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the RULING: YES, Sec. 2, Art. IV of the Constitution accords
Philippines; natural-born status to children born of Filipino mothers before
3. Those born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino January 17, 1973, if they elect citizenship upon reaching the age
mothers, who elect Philippine citizenship upon of majority. Jose Ong, Jr., was already a Filipino Citizen because
reaching the age or majority; and his mother is a natural-born citizen and his father had been
4. Those who are naturalized in accordance with law. (Art. naturalized when he was only 9 yrs. old.
IV, 1987 Constitution)
Election is both a formal and an informal process. An election of
Philippine citizenship presupposes that the person electing is an
Comparative Table of Filipino Citizenship:
alien, or his status is doubtful because he is a national of 2
1935 Constitution: 1973 Constitution: 1987 Constitution: countries. There is no doubt in this case about Mr. Ong’s being
a Filipino when he turned 21.
1. Those who are citizens 1. Those who are citizens 1. Those who are citizens
of the Philippine of the Philippines at of the Philippines at
Islands at the time of the time of the the time of the
the adoption of this adoption of this adoption of the 1987
WAYS TO DETERMINE NATIONALITY:
Constitution. Constitution. Constitution; a. Jus Soli - the law of the place of one’s birth determines
2. Those born in the 2. Those whose fathers 2. Those whose fathers his/her nationality. (Soli = Soil)

24 CONFLICTS OF LAW
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
b. Jus Sanguinis - a person’s nationality is determined by
the law of his/her parents. (Sanguinis = Blood)
POE-LLAMANZARES vs. COMELEC
GR no. 221697, March 8, 2016
FACTS: Grace Militar was found abandoned as a newborn infant
in the Parish church of Jaro, Iloilo by Edgardo Militar. Militar
reported and registered Grace Poe as a foundling before the Civil
Registrar Office and was, later, a Foundling Certificate upon her.
When Grace was 5 yrs. she was adopted by Ronald Poe (FPJ)
and Jesusa Poe (Susan Roces), and (after the trial court granted
their adoption petition) changed her name to Grace Poe.
In October 2015, Grace Poe filed her COC for Presidency for the
May 2016 Elections, where she declared therein that she is a
‘natural-born’ citizen. Estrella Elamparo, et. al., filed a petition to
deny or cancel her COC on the ground that she cannot be
considered as a natural-born Filipino because she was a
foundling. In addition, since the Philippines adheres to the
principle of jus sanguinis, persons of unknown parentage
(particularly foundlings) cannot be considered natural-born
Filipino citizens since blood relationship is determinative of
natural-born status.
ISSUE: W/N foundlings are considered natural-born citizens of
the Philippines?
RULING: YES, There is a disputable presumption that things
have happened according to the ordinary course of nature and
the ordinary habits of life (Sec. 3(y), Rule 131, Rules on
Evidence).
The Solicitor General offered official statistics from the Philippine
Statistics Authority (PSA) that from 1965 to 1975, the total
number of foreigners born in the Philippines was 15,986 while
the total number of Filipinos born in the country was 10,558,278.
The statistical probability that any child born in the Philippines in
that decade is natural-born Filipino was 99.83%. For her part,
petitioner presented census statistics for Iloilo Province for 1960
and 1970, also from the PSA. In 1960, there were 962,532
Filipinos and 4,734 foreigners in the province; 99.62% of the
population were Filipinos. In 1970, the figures were 1,162,669
Filipinos and 5,304 foreigners, or 99.55%. Also presented were
figures for the child producing ages (15-49). In 1960, there were
230,528 female Filipinos as against 730 female foreigners or
99.68%. In the same year, there were 210,349 Filipino males and
886 male aliens, or 99.58%. In 1970, there were 270,299 Filipino
females versus 1, 190 female aliens, or 99.56%. That same year,
there were 245,740 Filipino males as against only 1,165 male
aliens or 99.53%. COMELEC did not dispute these figures.
Notably, Commissioner Arthur Lim admitted, during the oral
arguments, that at the time Grace Poe was found in 1968, the
majority of the population in Iloilo was Filipino.
Other circumstantial evidence of the nationality of Grace Poe’s
parents are the fact that she was abandoned as an infant in a
Roman Catholic Church in Iloilo City. She also has typical Filipino
features: height, flat nasal bridge, straight black hair, almond
shaped eyes and an oval face.
All of the foregoing evidence, that a person with typical Filipino
features is abandoned in Catholic Church in a municipality where
the population of the Philippines is overwhelmingly Filipinos such
that there would be more than a 99% chance that a child born in
the province would be a Filipino, would indicate more than ample
probability if not statistical certainty, that Grace Poe’s parents
are Filipinos. That probability and the evidence on which it is
based are admissible under Rule 128, Section 4 of the Revised
Rules on Evidence.
Under Article IV, Section 2 "Natural-born citizens are those who
are citizens of the Philippines from birth without having to
perform any act to acquire or perfect their Philippine citizenship."
In the first place, "having to perform an act" means that the act
must be personally done by the citizen. In this instance, the
determination of foundling status is done not by the child but by
the authorities. Secondly, the object of the process is the
determination of the whereabouts of the parents, not the
citizenship of the child. Lastly, the process is certainly not
analogous to naturalization proceedings to acquire Philippine
citizenship, or the election of such citizenship by one born of an
alien father and a Filipino mother under the 1935 Constitution,
which is an act to perfect it.
In this instance, such issue is moot because there is no dispute
that Grace Poe is a foundling, as evidenced by a Foundling
Certificate issued in her favor.
CITIZENSHIP RETENTION AND RE-ACQUISITION ACT
OF 2003:
● Natural-born citizenship by reason of their naturalization
as citizens of a foreign country are hereby deemed to
have re-acquired Philippine citizenship upon taking the
oath of allegiance to the Republic. (Sec. 3, RA 9225)
● Natural born citizens of the Philippines who, after the
effectivity of this Act, become citizens of a foreign
country shall retain their Philippine citizenship upon
taking the aforesaid oath. (Sec. 3, RA 9225)
● Those who retain or re-acquire Philippine citizenship
under this Act shall enjoy full civil and political rights
and be subject to all attendant liabilities and
responsibilities under existing laws of the Philippines
and the following conditions:
1. Those intending to exercise their right of surffrage
must Meet the requirements under Section 1,
Article V of the Constitution, Republic Act No.
9189, otherwise known as "The Overseas
Absentee Voting Act of 2003" and other existing
laws;
2. Those seeking elective public in the Philippines
shall meet the qualification for holding such
public office as required by the Constitution and
existing laws and, at the time of the filing of the
certificate of candidacy, make a personal and
sworn renunciation of any and all foreign
citizenship before any public officer authorized to
administer an oath;
3. Those appointed to any public office shall
subscribe and swear to an oath of allegiance to
the Republic of the Philippines and its duly
constituted authorities prior to their assumption of
office: Provided, That they renounce their oath of
allegiance to the country where they took that
oath;
4. Those intending to practice their profession in the
Philippines shall apply with the proper authority
for a license or permit to engage in such practice;
and
5. That right to vote or be elected or appointed to
any public office in the Philippines cannot be
exercised by, or extended to, those who:
a. are candidates for or are occupying any
public office in the country of which they are
naturalized citizens; and/or
b. are in active service as commissioned or
non-commissioned officers in the armed
CONFLICTS OF LAW 25
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
forces of the country which they are
naturalized citizens. (Sec. 5, RA 9225)
B. NATURALIZATION:
NATURALIZATION:
- It confers to an alien a nationality after birth by any of
the means provided by the law.
QUALIFICATIONS FOR APPLICANT FOR NATURALIZATION:
a. The applicant must be born in the Philippines and
residing therein since birth;
b. The applicant must not be less than eighteen (18) years
of age, at the time of filing of his/her petition;
c. The applicant must be of good moral character and
believes in the underlying principles of the Constitution,
and must have conducted himself/herself in a proper
and irreproachable manner during his/her entire period
of residence in the Philippines in his relation with the
duly constituted government as well as with the
community in which he/she is living;
d. The applicant must have received his/her primary and
secondary education in any public school or private
educational institution duly recognized by the
Department of Education, Culture and Sports, where
Philippine history, government and civics are taught and
prescribed as part of the school curriculum and where
enrollment is not limited to any race or nationality:
Provided, That should he/she have minor children of
school age, he/she must have enrolled them in similar
schools;
e. The applicant must have a known trade, business,
profession or lawful occupation, from which he/she
derives income sufficient for his/her support and if
he/she is married and/or has dependents, also that of
his/her family: Provided, however, That this shall not
apply to applicants who are college degree holders but
are unable to practice their profession because they are
disqualified to do so by reason of their citizenship;
f. The applicant must be able to read, write and speak
Filipino or any of the dialects of the Philippines; and
g. The applicant must have mingled with the Filipinos and
evinced a sincere desire to learn and embrace the
customs, traditions and ideals of the Filipino people.
(Sec. 3, RA 9139)
DISQUALIFICATIONS FOR NATURALIZATION:
1. Those opposed to organized government or affiliated
with any association of group of persons who uphold
and teach doctrines opposing all organized
governments;
2. Those defending or teaching the necessity of or
propriety of violence, personal assault or assassination
for the success or predominance of their ideas;
3. Polygamists or believers in the practice of polygamy;
4. Those convicted of crimes involving moral turpitude;
5. Those suffering from mental alienation or incurable
contagious diseases;
6. Those who, during the period of their residence in the
Philippines, have not mingled socially with Filipinos, or
who have not evinced a sincere desire to learn and
embrace the customs, traditions and ideals of the
Filipinos;
7. Citizens or subjects with whom the Philippines is at war,
during the period of such war; and
26 CONFLICTS OF LAW
8. Citizens or subjects of a foreign country whose laws do
not grant Filipinos the right to be naturalized citizens or
subjects thereof. (Sec. 4, RA 9139)
PROCEDURE FOR NATURALIZATION:
(a) An alien who believes that he has all the qualifications,
and none of the disqualifications, may file an application
for naturalization with the secretariat of the Special
Committee on Naturalization, and a processing fee of
Forty thousand pesos (P40,000.00).
(b) Thereafter, the petition shall be stamped to indicate the
date of filing and a corresponding docket number.
(c) Within fifteen (15) days from the receipt of the petition,
the Committee shall determine whether the petition is
complete in substance and in form.
(d) If such petition is complete, the Committee shall
immediately publish pertinent portions of the petition
indicating the name, qualifications and other personal
circumstances of the applicant, once a week for three
(3) consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general
circulation, and have copies of the petition posted in
any public or conspicuous area.
(e) The Committee shall immediately furnish the
Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA), the Bureau of
Immigration (BI), the civil registrar of the petitioner's
place of residence and tile National Bureau of
Investigation (NBI) copies of the petition and its
supporting documents. These agencies shall have
copies of the petition posted in any public or
conspicuous area in their buildings, offices and
premises, and shall, within thirty (30) days from the
receipt of the petition, submit to the Committee a report
stating whether or not petitioner has any derogatory
record on file or any such relevant and material
information which might be adverse to petitioner's
application for citizenship.
(i) If the petition is found by the Committee
to be wanting in substance and form,
the petition shall be dismissed without
prejudice.
(f) Within sixty (60) days from receipt of the report of the
agencies which were furnished a copy of the petition or
the date of the last publication of the petition,
whichever comes in later, the Committee shall consider
and review all relevant and material information it has
received pertaining to the petition, and may, for the
purpose call the petitioner for interview to ascertain
his/her identity, the authenticity of the petition and its
annexes, and to determine the truthfulness of the
statements and declarations made in the petition and its
annexes.
(i) If the Committee shall have received any
information adverse to the petition, the
Committee shall allow the petitioner to
answer, explain or refute the information.
(g) Thereafter, if the Committee believes, in view of the
facts before it, that the petitioner has all the
qualifications and none of the disqualifications required
for Philippine citizenship under this Act, it shall approve
the petition and henceforth, notify the petitioner of the
fact of such approval. Otherwise, the Committee shall
disapprove the same. (Secs. 7-8, RA 9139)
DERIVATIVE CITIZENSHIP:
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
1. Wife - Any women is now or may be married to a citizen
of the Philippines, and who might herself be lawfully
naturalized shall be deemed a citizen of the Philippines;
2. Minor - Minor children of persons naturalized under this
law who have been in the Philippines shall be
considered citizens thereof;
3. Foreign-Born Minor - A foreign-born minor child, if in
the Philippines at the time of the naturalization of the
parent, shall automatically become a Philippine citizen,
and a foreign-born minor child, who is not in the
Philippines at the time the parent is naturalized, shall be
deemed a Philippine citizen only during his minority,
unless he begins to reside permanently in the
Philippines when still a minor, which case, he will
continue to be a Philippine citizen even after becoming
of age;
4. Child born outside the Philippines - A child born
outside of the Philippines after the naturalization of his
parent shall be considered a Philippine citizen, unless
within 1 year after reaching the age of majority, he fails
to register himself as a Philippine citizen at the
American Consulate of the country where he resides,
and to take the necessary oath of allegiance. (See Sec.
15, Commonwealth Act no. 473)
Derivative Citizenship - The unmarried child, whether
legitimate, illegitimate or adopted, below eighteen (18) years of
age, of those who re-acquire Philippine citizenship upon
effectivity of this Act shall be deemed citizenship of the
Philippines. (Sec. 4, RA 9225)
C. LOSS OF CITIZENSHIP:
HOW TO LOSE PHILIPPINE CITIZENSHIP?
1. By naturalization in foreign countries;
2. By express renunciation of citizenship;
3. By subscribing to an oath of allegiance to support the
constitution or laws of a foreign country upon attaining
21 years of age or more, subject to certain exceptions;
4. By rendering service to, or accepting commission in,
the armed forces of a foreign country, subject to certain
exceptions;
5. By having been declared by competent authority, a
deserter of the Philippine armed forces in time of war,
unless subsequently, a plenary pardon or amnesty has
been granted;
6. In the case of a woman, upon her marriage to a
foreigner, if by virtue of the laws in force in her
husband’s country, she acquires his nationality; and
7. By cancellation of the certification of naturalization due
to any of the following grounds:
a. It was obtained fraudulently or illegally;
b. Person naturalized shall return to his native
country or to some foreign country and
establish his permanent residence therein within
5 years from the issuance of the certificate;
c. Petition was made on an invalid declaration of
intention;
d. Minor children failed to graduate from the
schools required through the fault of their
parents either by neglect to support them or by
transfer to another school;
e. Naturalized citizen allowed himself to be used
as a dummy. (Sec. 18, CA 473; See also Sec.
13, RA 9139)
FRIVALDO vs. COMELEC
174 SCRA 245 (1989)
FACTS: Juan Frivaldo was proclaimed governor-elect of
Sorsogon. League of Municipalities-Sorsogon (LOM-S) filed with
the COMELEC for the annulment of Frivaldo’s election and
proclamation on the ground that he was not a Filipino citizen,
having been naturalized in the US in 1983.
In his Answer, Frivaldo admitted that he was naturalized in the
US but pleaded that he has sought American citizenship only to
protect himself against President Marcosm that his naturalization
was not impressed with voluntariness but was “merely forced
upon himself as a means of survival against the persecution by
Martial Law Dictator’s agents abroad.”
The Solicitor General supported LOM-S’ contention that Frivaldo
was not a Filipino citizen because he had not repatriated himself
after his naturalization as an American citizen. As an alien, he
was disqualified from public office in the Philippines and his
election did not cure this defect.
ISSUE: W/N Frivaldo has reacquired his Filipino citizenship?
RULING: NO, Philippine citizenship may be reacquired:
(a) By direct act of Congress;
(b) By naturalization; or
(c) By repatriation.
Frivaldo claims that he has reacquired Philippines citizenship by
virtue of a valid repatriation. He claims that by actively
participating in the elections in this Philippines, he has
automatically forfeited American citizenship under the laws of the
US. Such laws do not concern the Philippines. The alleged
forfeiture is between him and the USA as his adopted country.
The fact the Frivaldo was elected by the people of Sorsogon
does not excuse his patent violation of the rule limiting public
office and employment only to citizens of this Philippines.
FRIVALDO vs. COMELEC
257 SCRA 727 (1996)
FACTS: Juan Frivaldo won 3 successive elections but was 2
declared to be disqualified by the SC to hold office due to his
alien citizenship. He now claims to have re-assumed his lost
Philippine citizenship thru repatriation.
It was established that he took his oath of allegiance under PD
725 at 2pm on June 30, 1995, much later than the time he filed
his certificate of candidacy (COC).
ISSUE: W/N repatriation of Frivaldo has retroacted to the date of
filing of his application for repatriation?
RULING: YES, It will be noted that the law does not specify any
particular date or time when the candidate must possess
citizenship, unlike that for residence and age. But to remove all
doubts on this important issue, the SC hold that the repatriation
of Frivaldo retroacted to the date of the filing of his application on
August 17, 1994.
D. DUAL OR MULTIPLE CITIZENSHIP:
DUAL OR MULTIPLE CITIZENSHIP:
● An individual can claim nationality from two or more
States because of the rule set in the Hague Convention
CONFLICTS OF LAW 27
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
on Conflict of National Laws which provides that “each
State determines who its own nationals are.” (p.195,
Coquia & Aguiling-Pangalangan, 2000)
● Through the application of the “jus soli” and “jus
sanguinis” principles a child born of parents who are
nationals of a country applying the principle of jus
sanguinis, in a country applying the jus soli principle
has dual nationality.
NOTE: The Philippine Constitution discourages dual or
multiple nationalities by providing that dual allegiance is
inimical to the national interest and shall be dealt with by law.
(Sec. 5, Art. IV, 1987 COnstitution)
EFFECTIVE NATIONALITY PRINCIPLE:
NOTTEBOHM CASE
(Liechtenstein vs. Guatemala)
155 ICJ Rep. 4 (1955)
FACTS: Nottembohm was born and grew up in Germany. At that
time, Germany was at war which prompted Nottebohm to flee
and lived in Guatemala for 34 yrs. While living in Guatemala,
Nottebohm still retains his German Citizenship along with his
family and business ties with it.
After WW2, Nottembohm applied for Liechtenstein citizenship.
Nottebohm had no ties with Liechtenstein but intended to remain
in Guatemala. The naturalization application was approved by
Liechtenstein. After his approval, Nottebohm traveled to
Guatemala and upon his return, he was refused entry because
he was deemed to be a German citizen and his Liechtenstein
citizenship was not honored.
Liechtenstein thereby filed a suit before the ICJ to compel
Guatemala to recognize him as one of its nationals. Guatemala
challenged the validity of Nottebohm’s citizenship because
naturalization was not granted to Mr. Nottebohm in accordance
with the generally recognized principles in regard to nationality
and that Mr. Nottebohm fraudulently obtained his Liechtenstein
nationality.
ISSUE: W/N Guatemala is under obligation to recognize
Nottebohm as Liechtenstein citizen.
RULING: NO, The facts establish the absence of any bond of
attachment between Nottebohm and Liechtenstein and the
existence of a long-standing and close connection between him
and Guatemala, a link which his naturalization in no way
weakened. That naturalization was not based on any real prior
connection with Liechtenstein, nor did it in any way alter the
manner of life of the person upon whom it was conferred in
exceptional circumstances of speed and accommodation. In
both respects, it was lacking in the genuine requisite to an act of
such importance, if it is to be entitled to be respected by a State
in the position of Guatemala. It was granted without regard to the
concept of nationality adopted in international relations.
Issues relating to citizenship are solely the concern of the
granting nation. This is the general rule. But it does not mean
that other states will automatically accept the conferring state’s
designation unless it has acted in conformity with the general
aim of forging a genuine bond between it and its national aim. In
this case, there was no relationship between Liechtenstein and
Nottebohm. The change of nationality was merely a subterfuge
mandated by the war. Under this circumstance, Guatemala was
not forced to recognize it.
28 CONFLICTS OF LAW
OH HEK HOW vs. REPUBLIC
29 SCRA 94 (1969)
FACTS: Oh Hek How having been granted naturalization through
his petition filed a motion alleging that he had complied with the
requirements of Republic Act No. 530 and praying that he be
allowed to take his oath of allegiance as such citizen and issued
the corresponding certificate of naturalization.
On February 9, 1966, the Court of First Instance of Zamboanga
del Norte issued forthwith an order authorizing the taking of said
oath. On that same date, Oh Hek How took it and the certificate
of naturalization was issued to him. The Government seasonably
gave notice of its intention to appeal from said order of February
9, 1966 and filed its record on appeal among the grounds that
the oath was taken prior to judgment having been final and
executory.
ISSUE: W/N a permission to renounce citizenship is necessary
from the Minister of the Interior of Nationalist China.
RULING: YES, It is argued that the permission is not required by
our laws and that the naturalization of an alien, as a citizen of the
Philippines, is governed exclusively by such laws and cannot be
controlled by any foreign law.
However, the question of how a Chinese citizen may strip himself
of that status is necessarily governed —pursuant to Articles 15
and 16 of our Civil Code — by the laws of China, not by those of
the Philippines. As a consequence, a Chinese national cannot be
naturalized as a citizen of the Philippines, unless he has
complied with the laws of Nationalist China requiring previous
permission of its Minister of the Interior for the renunciation of
nationality.
Section 12 of Commonwealth Act No.473 provides, however,
that before the naturalization certificate is issued, the petitioner
shall "solemnly swear," interalia, that he renounces "absolutely
and forever all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince,
potentate" and particularly to the state "of which" he is "a
subject or citizen." The obvious purpose of this requirement is to
divest him of his former nationality, before acquiring Philippine
citizenship, because, otherwise, he would have two nationalities
and owe allegiance to two (2) distinct sovereignties, which our
laws do not permit, except that, pursuant to Republic Act No.
2639, "the acquisition of citizenship by a natural-born Filipino
citizen from one of the Iberian and any friendly democratic
Ibero-American countries shall not produce loss or forfeiture of
his Philippine citizenship, if the law of that country grants the
same privilege to its citizens and such had been agreed upon by
treaty between the Philippines and the foreign country from
which citizenship is acquired."
E. STATELESSNESS:
TWO CONCEPT OF STATELESSNESS:
DE JURE DE FACTO
An individual who has been Individuals possessed of a
stripped of his nationality by his nationality but whose country does
own former government without not give them protection outside
having an opportunity to acquire their own territory. (Aka: Refugees)
another.
NATURALIZATION OF STATELESS PERSONS IN THE
PHILIPPINES:
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
- As long as stateless persons possess all the
qualifications, they can be naturalized as Filipino
citizens without the requirement of reciprocity.
(Kookooritchkin vs. Republic, 81 Phil 435)
KOOKOORITCHKIN vs. SOLICITOR GENERAL
81 Phil. 435 (1945)
FACTS: Eremes Kookooritchkin was a Russian Native who
arrived in the Philippines (as a member of the White Russians
under admiral Stark) in 1923. He married Concepcion Segovia
(Filipino) with whom he had a son, Ronald.
Eremes filed a petition for naturalization with the CFI-Cam Sur,
alleging that he was a stateless refugee in the Philippines,
belonging to no state. The CFI-Cam Sur granted his petition.
Solicitor General appealed the CFI’s decision arguing that
Kookooritchkin failed to show that he has lost his Russian
citizenship under Russian law, and to show that Russia grants to
Filipinos the right to become naturalized citizens or subjects
thereof.
ISSUE: W/N Eremes Kookooritchkin is a Stateless?
RULING: YES, Kookooritchkin’s testimony is supported by a
well-known fact that the ruthlessness of modern dictatorships
has scattered throughout the world a large number of stateless
refugees or displaced persons, without country and without flag.
Kookooritchkin belongs to that group of stateless refugees.
Knowing the history, nature and character of the Soviet
dictatorship, presently the greatest menace to humanity and
civilization. After finding economic security in a remunerative job
in the Philippines, he established a family by marrying a Filipina
and he had a son, and enjoying 25 years of the freedoms and
blessings of our democratic way of life.
Chapter 10:
DOMICILE
A. DEFINITION OF DOMICILE:
DOMICILE:
● Domicile is defined by municipal law.
○ For the exercise of civil rights and the fulfillment of
civil obligations, the domicile of natural persons is
the place of their habitual residence. (Art. 50, CC)
○ For juridical persons, domicile is determined by
the law creating or recognizing it. In the absence
thereof, it shall be understood to be the place
where their legal representation or place of
business is. (Art. 51, NCC)
● Conflict-of-Law definition:
○ Domicile is the place with which a person has
settled connection for certain legal purposes,
either because his home is there or because that
place is assigned to him by law. (Restatement)
○ Domicile the place of his true, fixed permanent
home and principal establishment, and to which,
whenever he is absent, he has the intention of
returning. (J. Story)
● Technician Meaning:
○ Domicile - refers to the permanent abode of a
person
○ Residence - refers to the temporary stay of a
person in a given place. (Koh vs. CA, 70 SCRA
298)
CAASI vs. CA
191 SCRA 229 (1990)
FACTS: Merito Miguel won as the Municipal Mayor of Bolinao,
Pangasinan. HIs rival, Mateo Caasi, filed a case for
disqualification against him on the ground that Miguel was a
green card holder who is a permanent resident of the US and not
of Bolinao.
In his Answer, Miguel admitted that he obtained a green card for
the convenience that he may freely enter the US due to his
periodic medical exams but he claimed that he is a permanent
resident of Bolinao, Pangasinan and voted therein in all previous
elections.
ISSUE: W/N the possession of a green card by Miguel from the
US constitutes an abandonment of his residence in the
Philippines?
RULING: NO, Under Sec. 68, Omnibus Election Code, in order to
be qualified to run for elective office, the candidate who is a
green card holder must have waived his status as a permanent
resident or immigrant of a foreign country. Therefore, his act of
filing a certificate of candidacy for elective office in the
Philippines did not of itself constitute a waiver of his status as a
permanent resident or immigrant of the USA. The waiver of his
green card should be manifested by some act/s independent of
and done prior to filing the candidacy for elective office in this
country. Without such prior waiver, he was disqualified to run for
any elective office.
Miguel’s application for immigrant status and permanent resident
in the US and his possession of a green card attesting to such
status are conclusive proof that he is a permanent resident of the
US despite his occasional visits to the Philippines.
SC conclude that Miguel was disqualified to run for said public
office, hence, his election thereto is null and void.
WHEN PHILIPPINES FOLLOWS THE DOMICILE LAW:
a) If the litigant is an alien who comes from a country
following the domiciliary principle, his personal status,
capacity, condition and family rights are governed by
the law of his domicile;
b) Stateless persons or those with dual or multiple
nationalities, in which case the court will have to refer
to their domicile;
c) When an alien domiciled in the Philippines executes a
will abroad. He may follow the law governing the
formalities of the will in accordance with the law of his
domicile. (pp.212-213, Coquia & Aguiling-Pangalangan,
2000)
B. GENERAL RULES ON DOMICILE:
GENERAL RULES ON DOMICILE:
1. No person shall be without a domicile;
2. A person cannot have two simultaneous domicile:
3. Domicile establishes a connection between a person
and a particular territorial unit;
4. The burden of proving a change of domicile is upon
whoever alleges that a change has been secured.
CONFLICTS OF LAW 29
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
ROMUALDEZ-MARCOS vs. COMELEC
248 SCRA 300 (1995)
FACTS: Imelda Romualdez-Marcos filed her COC for
Representative of the First District of Leyte on March 8, 1995. In
her COC, she stated that her length of residency in Leyte is “7
months.” Circulo Montejo, a candidate for the same position,
filed (with the COMELEC) a Petition for Cancellation and
Disqualification against Imelda because she did not meet the 1
year constitutional requirement for residency for district
representatives, as evidenced by the declarations made by her
in her COC. Imelda filed an Amended COC changing the entry “7
months” to “since childhood” but it was denied for having filed
out of time.
COMELEC ruled in favor of Montejo and canceled Imelda’s COC,
it ruled that Imelda’s claim that she thought what was asked of
her was “actual and physical” presence in Leyte is of no merit.
Moreover, when she returned to the Philippines in 1991, the
residence she chose San Juan, Metro Manila and not Leyte,
therefore, Imelda’s animus revertendi is pointed to Metro Manila
and not Leyte.
ISSUE: W/N Imelda Marcos domicile is Tacloban, Leyte and not
San Juan, Metro Manila?
RULING: YES, For purposes of election law, residence is
synonymous with domicile which imports not only intention to
reside in a fixed place, but also personal presence in that place,
coupled with conduct indicative of such intention.
An individual does not lose his domicile even if he has lived and
maintained residence in different places. The COMELEC was
obviously referring to Imelda’s various places of (actual)
residence, not her domicile.
POE-LLAMANZARES vs. COMELEC
GR no. 221697, March 8, 2016
FACTS:
● Sept. 3, 1968 - Newborn Grace Militar was found abandoned
in front of a Church in Jaro, Iloilo.
● May 13, 1974 - Grace was adopted by Ronald Poe (FPJ) and
Jesusa Sonora (Susan Roces) and her name was changed to
Grace Poe.
● 1998 - Grace moved to the US to pursue College
● October 18, 2001 - Grace became a naturalized American
Citizen and obtained her US Passport the following day.
● April 8, 2004 - Grace went back to the Philippines to support
her father’s (FPJ) candidacy for President in the May 2004
elections.
● July 8, 2004 - Grace returned to the US
● December 13, 2004 - Grace went back to the Philippines
because of her father’s deteriorating medical condition,
which slipped into a coma and eventually died.
● February 3, 2005 - Grace went back to the US.
● May 24, 2005 - Grace came home to the Philippines.
● July 7, 2006 - Grace took her Oath of Allegiance to the
Philippine Republic pursuant to RA 9225
● July 18, 2006 - BI granted Grace’s petition to reacquire her
Filipino citizenship.
● August 31, 2006 - Grace registered as a voter of San Juan
City.
● October 15, 2015 - Grace filed her COC for the Presidency
for the May 2016 Elections.
KINDS OF DOMICILE:
In her COC, Grace declared that her residence in the Philippines
up to the day before May 9, 2016, would be 10 years and 11
30 CONFLICTS OF LAW
months counted from May 24, 2005.
Oppositors filed cases for the cancellation or denial of Grace’s
COC on the ground that she failed to satisfied the 10-year
residency requirement for Presidency because the reckoning
period for computing Grace’s residency in the Philippines should
be from July 18, 2006, which is the date when her petition to
reacquire Philippine citizenship was approved by the BI.
ISSUE: W/N Grace Poe was able to fulfill the 10-year residency
requirement to run as President?
RULING: YES, The Constitution requires presidential candidates
to have ten (10) years' residence in the Philippines before the day
of the elections. Since the forthcoming elections will be held on 9
May 2016, Grace Poe must have been a resident of the
Philippines prior to 9 May 2016 for ten (10) years. In answer to
the requested information of "Period of Residence in the
Philippines up to the day before May 09, 2016," she put in "10
years 11 months" which according to her pleadings in these
cases corresponds to a beginning date of 25 May 2005 when
she returned for good from the U.S.
When Grace Poe immigrated to the U.S. in 1991, she lost her
original domicile, which is the Philippines. There are three
requisites to acquire a new domicile: 1. Residence or bodily
presence in a new locality; 2. an intention to remain there; and 3.
an intention to abandon the old domicile. To successfully effect a
change of domicile, one must demonstrate an actual removal or
an actual change of domicile; a bona fide intention of
abandoning the former place of residence and establishing a
new one and definite acts which correspond with the purpose.
In other words, there must basically be animus manendi coupled
with animus non revertendi. The purpose to remain in or at the
domicile of choice must be for an indefinite period of time; the
change of residence must be voluntary; and the residence at the
place chosen for the new domicile must be actual.
The COMELEC, with the same posture of infallibilism, virtually
ignored a good number of evidenced dates all of which can
evince animus manendi to the Philippines and animus non
revertendi to the United States of America, such as the following:
● Grace Poe returned to the Philippines on 24 May 2005.
(petitioner's] husband however stayed in the USA to finish
pending projects and arrange the sale of their family home.
● Meanwhile she and her children lived with her mother in San
Juan City. Grace Poe enrolled in Philippine Schools.
● Grace Poe traveled briefly to the US in order to supervise the
disposal of some of the family's remaining household
belongings. She returned to the Philippines on 11 March
2006.
● In late March 2006, Grace Poe’s husband informed the
United States Postal Service of the family's abandonment of
their address in the US.
● In April 2006, Grace Poe’s husband resigned from his work in
the US. He returned to the Philippines on 4 May 2006 and
began working for a Philippine company in July 2006.
● In early 2006, Grace Poe and her husband acquired a vacant
lot in Corinthian Hills, where they eventually built their family
home.
C. KINDS OF DOMICILE:
a. Domicile of Origin - a person’s domicile at birth.
- A minor follows the domicile of her parents.
(Romualdez-Marcos vs. Comelec, 248 SCRA 300)
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
b. Domicile of Choice - the place freely chosen by a
person sui juris.
- To successfully effect a change of domicile, one
must demonstrate:
(a) An actual removal from domicile;
(b) A bona fide intention of abandoning the
former place of residence and establishing
a new one; and
(c) Acts which correspond with purpose,
(Romualdez-Marcos vs. Comelec, Supra)
c. Constructive Domicile - domicile is assigned to persons
legally incapable of choosing their own domicile.
- By operation of law, a domicile is assigned to
persons legally incapable of choosing their own
domicile such as minors, mentally disabled, and
married women. (p.231, Coquia & (6) Transactions of family, especially marriage, divorce,
Aguiling-Pangalangan, 2000)
- The remarriage of the surviving parent shall not
affect the parental authority over the
unemancipated children. (Art. 212, FC)
DE LA VINA vs. VILLAREAL AND GEOPANO
41 Phil. 13 (1920)
FACTS: Narcisa Geopano filed a complaint against Diego dela
Vina before the CFI-Iloilo. According to her complaint, she was
the legitimate wife of Diego having been married to him in
Negros Oriental; That Diego, while married to her, had illicit
relationship with Ana Calog. Diego ejected Narcisa from their
conjugal home in Negros Oriental, hence, she has no choice but
to live in Iloilo, where she has established her habitual residence.
Narcisa prayed for a divorce decree.
On his part, Diego filed a petition for certiorari on the ground that
CFI-Iloilo had no jurisdiction to take cognizance of the action for
divorce because he was a resident of Negros Oriental and that
Narcisa (as his wife) is also considered a resident of Negros
Oriental pursuant to the rule that the domicile of the husband is
also the domicile of the wife.
ISSUE: W/N Narcisa could not acquire a residence in Iloilo
before the dissolution of her marriage with Diego?
RULING: NO, The general rule is that the domicile of the wife
follows that of her husband, pursuant to the presumption that,
from the nature of the relation, the home of the one is that of the
other. However, this is not an absolute rule.
The exceptions of the general rule (or the wife may acquire
another and separate domiciple from that of her husband) are on
any of the following:
(1) Where the theoretical unity of the husband and wife s
dissolved, as it is by the institution of divorce proceedings;
(2) Where the husband has given cause for divorce;
(3) Where there is a separation of the parties by agreement, or
a permanent separation due to desertion of the wife by the
husband or attributable to cruel treatment on the part of the
husband; or
(4) Where there has been a forfeiture by the wife of the benefit
of the husband’s domicile.
The case of Narcisa falls under the 2nd exception above (“Where
the husband has given cause for diivorce, the wife may acquire
another and separate domicile from that of her husband”).
Therefore, a married woman may acquire a residence or domicile
separate from that of her husband, during the existence of the
marriage, where the husband has given cause fo divorce.
Chapter 11:
PRINCIPLES ON PERSONAL STATUS AND CAPACITY
DEFINITION OF PERSONAL STATUS:
- It is the general term the includes both condition and
capacity, more specifically it embraces the following
matters:
(1) The beginning and end of human personality;
(2) Capacity to have rights in general;
(3) Capacity to engage in legal transactions;
(4) Protection of personal interests;
(5) Family relations, particularly the relations between
husband and wife, parent and child, guardians and
ward;
separation, adoption, legitimation and
emancipation; and
(7) Succession, Testate and Intestate. (People vs.
Bellamas, 73 OG 1977)
Capacity - often referred to as juridical capacity.
Juridical Capacity: It is the fitness to be the subject of legal
relations, which is inherent in every natural
person and is lost only through death. (Art. 37,
NCC)
Capacity to Act: It is the power to do acts with legal effect, is
acquired and may be lost. (Art. 37, NCC)
Nationality Principle (Lex Nationalii):
● 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. (Art. 15, NCC)
● In determining the status and capacity of a person, it
follows the nationality principle.
BEGINNING AND END OF PERSONALITY:
a) Birth:
● Birth determines personality; but the conceived
child shall be considered born for all purposes that
are favorable to it, provided it be born later with the
conditions specified in the following article. (Art. 40,
NCC)
● For civil purposes, the fetus is considered born if it
is alive at the time it is completely delivered from
the mother's womb. However, if the fetus had an
intra-uterine life of less than seven months, it is not
deemed born if it dies within twenty-four hours
after its complete delivery from the maternal womb.
(Art. 41, NCC)
b) Death:
● A declaration of death issued by a competent court
is considered valid for all purposes. Upon the death
of a person, some of his rights and obligations are
totally extinguished while others are passed on to
his successors. (p.244, Coquia &
Aguiling-Pangalangan, 2000)
● An estate is considered as an “artificial person”. It is
the creation of law for the purpose of enabling a
disposition of the assets to be properly made.
(Limjoco vs. Intestate Estate of Fragante, 80 Phil.
776)
● Death defined under the Organ Donation Act:
- It is the irreversible cessation of circulatory
and respiratory functions or the irreversible
CONFLICTS OF LAW 31
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
cessation of all functions of the entire brain,
including the brain stem. A person shall be
medically and legally dead if either:
(1) In the opinion of the attending
physician, based on the acceptable
standards of medical practice, there is
an absence of natural respiratory and
cardiac functions and, attempts at
resuscitation would not be successful
in restoring those functions. In this
case, death shall be deemed to have
occurred at the time these functions
ceased; or
(2) In the opinion of the consulting
physician, concurred in by the
attending physician, that on the basis
of acceptable standards of medical
practice, there is an irreversible
cessation of all brain functions; and
considering the absence of such
functions, further attempts at
resuscitation or continued supportive
maintenance would not be successful
in resorting such natural functions. In
this case, death shall be deemed to
have occurred at the time when these
conditions first appeared.
- The death of the person shall be determined
in accordance with the acceptable standards
of medical practice and shall be diagnosed
separately by the attending physician and
another consulting physician, both of whom
must be appropriately qualified and suitably
experienced in the care of such parties. The
death shall be recorded in the patient's
medical record. (Sec. 2(j), RA 7170)
ABSENCE:
1. There is a rebuttable presumption that a person is dead
when he has been absent for a number of years;
2. A person’s unexplained absence is judicially
investigated and established which results in legal
effects similar to those of death; and
3. A judicial decree shall have to be issued declaring the
person dead before legal effects of death take place.
Note: The above are three suggested ways of dealing with the
problem of absentees. (p.246, Coquia & Aguiling-Pangalangan,
2000)
CIVIL CODE PROVISIONS ON ABSENCES:
Article 390. After an absence of seven years, it being unknown
whether or not the absentee still lives, he shall be presumed
dead for all purposes, except for those of succession.
The absentee shall not be presumed dead for the purpose of
opening his succession till after an absence of ten years. If he
disappeared after the age of seventy-five years, an absence of
five years shall be sufficient in order that his succession may be
opened.
Article 391. The following shall be presumed dead for all
purposes, including the division of the estate among the heirs:
(1) A person on board a vessel lost during a sea voyage, or an
aeroplane which is missing, who has not been heard of for
32 CONFLICTS OF LAW
four years since the loss of the vessel or aeroplane;
(2) A person in the armed forces who has taken part in war,
and has been missing for four years;
(3) A person who has been in danger of death under other
circumstances and his existence has not been known for
four years.
Article 392. If the absentee appears, or without appearing his
existence is proved, he shall recover his property in the condition
in which it may be found, and the price of any property that may
have been alienated or the property acquired therewith; but he
cannot claim either fruits or rents.
NAME:
- A person’s name is determined by law and cannot be
changed without judicial intervention.
- A person’s name is a reflection of one’s paternity which
will affect the status of a child as legitimate or
illegitimate. (Padilla vs. Republic, 113 SCRA 789)
- Whether an alien’s change of name is valid depends
solely on his personal law. (Padilla vs. Republic, Supra)
CIVIL CODE PROVISIONS ON GOVERNING SURNAMES:
Article 364. Legitimate and legitimated children shall principally
use the surname of the father.
Article 365. An adopted child shall bear the surname of the
adopter.
Article 366. A natural child acknowledged by both parents shall
principally use the surname of the father. If recognized by only
one of the parents, a natural child shall employ the surname of
the recognizing parent.
Article 367. Natural children by legal fiction shall principally
employ the surname of the father.
Article 368. Illegitimate children referred to in article 287 shall
bear the surname of the mother.
Article 369. Children conceived before the decree annulling a
voidable marriage shall principally use the surname of the father.
Article 370. A married woman may use:
(1) Her maiden first name and surname and add her
husband's surname, or
(2) Her maiden first name and her husband's surname or
(3) Her husband's full name, but prefixing a word indicating
that she is his wife, such as "Mrs."
AGE OF MAJORITY:
- It is the individual’s personal law which determines
whether he has reached the age of majority.
- The age of majority in the Philippines is 18 years old.
However, parental consent for contracting marriage is
required until the age of 21. (RA 6809)
CAPACITY:
● General Rule: A person’s ability to act with legal effects
is governed by his personal law. The incapacities
attached to his legal status go with him where he is.
● Exceptions:
○ Torts - subject to the law of the place of the tort.
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
○ Married Woman - subject to the law governing the
personal relations between the spouses and not the
personal law of the wife (in some jurisdictions)
INSULAR GOVERNMENT vs. FRANK:
13 Phil. 236 (1909)
FACTS: Insular Government of the Philippines entered into a
contract with George Frank (American), whereby the latter shall
receive a salary of $1,200 per year as a stenographer of the
former. The contract also provides that in case Frank violated it,
he shall be liable to the Philippine government for the amount
that the latter spent for this travel to the Philippines plus 1/2
salary paid during such period. Frank was paid in advance. After
1 year of service, he left his job and refused to comply with the
terms of the contract.
The Philippine Government filed a suit against Frank before the
SYSTEM or ALGORITHM or FORMAT IN ASSESSING CHOICE-OF-LAWS:
CFI-Manila for recovery. In his defense, Frank alleged that he
was a minor at the time he entered the contract with the
Philippine Government.
ISSUE: W/N Frank, minor who entered into a contract with the
Philippine government, is liable to the Philippine Government
RULING: YES, Matters bearing upon the execution,
interpretation and validity of a contact are determined by the law
of the place where the contract is made. The claim of Frank that
he was an adult when he left Chicago but was a minor when he
entered into a contract in Manila is not tenable.
SC applied the law of the place of contract (or Lex Loci
Contractus) and concluded that Frank was capacitated at the
time he entered into the contract.
CONFLICTS OF LAW 33
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes

● Marriage, as an inviolable social institution, is the

foundation of the family and shall be protected by the
State. (Sec. 2, Art. XV, 1987 Phil. Constitution)
PART FOUR: ● The State recognizes the sanctity of family life and shall
CHOICE OF LAW PROBLEMS protect and strengthen the family as a basic
autonomous social institution. It shall equally protect
the life of the mother and the life of the unborn from
conception. The natural and primary right and duty of
Chapter 12: parents in the rearing of the youth for civic efficiency
CHOICE OF LAW IN FAMILY RELATIONS and the development of moral character shall receive
the support of the Government. (Sec. 12, Art. II, 1987
A man and a woman may decide to marry in a country Constitution)
other than the country of their nationality and then come
home. This issue of the validity of their marriage and the II. EXTRINSIC VALIDITY OF MARRIAGE:
legal consequences that follow recognition there may be ● The determination of the extrinsic validity is referred to
raised. (p. 252, Coquia vs. Aguiling-Pangalangan, 2000) the lex loci celebrationis or law of the place of
celebration.
Some of these legal consequences pertain to the ○ The forms and solemnities of contracts, wills, and
personal and property relations between the parties, the other public instruments shall be governed by the
status and rights of their children, such as the use of the laws of the country in which they are executed.
father’s surname and right to inherit. (p. 252, Coquia vs. (Art. 17, NCC)
Aguiling-Pangalangan, 2000) ○ All marriages solemnized outside the Philippines,
in accordance with the laws in force in the country
where they were solemnized, and valid there as
A. MARRIAGE: such, shall also be valid in this country, except
those prohibited under Articles 35 (1), (4), (5) and
DEFINITION OF MARRIAGE: (6), 36, 37 and 38. (Art. 26, FC)
- Marriage is a special contract of permanent union ● This covers questions relating to the formalities
between a man and a woman entered into in “external conduct required of the parties or of third
accordance with law for the establishment of conjugal persons especially of public officers, necessary to the
and family life. (Art. 1, FC) formation of a legally valid marriage.” (p.254, Coquia &
Aguiling-Pangalangan, 2000)
Marriage distinguished with Ordinary Contracts:
Formal Requisites of Marriage in the Philippines:
MARRIAGE: ORDINARY CONTRACTS 1. Authority of the solemnizing officer;
2. A valid marriage license except in the cases provided
Entered into by a man and a Entered by any person, for in Chapter 2 of this Title; and
woman regardless of sex or gender. 3. A marriage ceremony which takes place with the
appearance of the contracting parties before the
The man and women must Generally, parties to a contract solemnizing officer and their personal declaration that
both be at least 18 yrs. old. must be of legal age. Minors they take each other as husband and wife in the
may enter into a contract, presence of not less than two witnesses of legal age.
provided that they are (Art. 3, FC)
represented by a guardian.

It is solemnized by a person No solemnization ceremony APT vs. APT

authorized by law. needed. (1947) P 127

It is a permanent union unless: Generally, the contract is FACTS: Husband and Wife are German nationals. In 1936, the
a. One of the parties dies; binding until the termination or husband migrated to Argentina as a refugee from the Nazi
b. Marriage is annulled; or fulfillment of the obligation by Regime while the wife was in England. The husband wrote to the
c. Declared void ab initio. one of the parties. wife proposing marriage.

Cannot be abrogated,
amended or terminated at the
will of one or both parties.
The nature, consequences
and incidents are governed by
law.
Violations may give rise to
penal or civil sanctions
I. PHILIPPINE POLICY ON MARRIAGE AND THE FAMILY:
Can be abrogated, amended
or terminated by one or both
of the parties.
The nature, consequences
and incidents are subject to
the stipulations by the parties.
Breach can be a ground for an
action for damages.
While the wife was in England (her domicile) a marriage
ceremony was celebrated in Argentina between her and the
husband, however, the wife was represented by a person who
she named as her representative to contract the marriage.
(Marriage by proxy)
The wife filed before the English court a petition for nullity of the
marriage. It was proved that the ceremony (marriage by proxy)
was valid and effectual by Argentine Law but such is not
recognized by English Law?
ISSUE: W/N marriage by proxy is an essential or formal requisite
of marriage?

34 CONFLICTS OF LAW
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
RULING: The marriage is held to be valid by the English court. If
a marriage is good by the laws of the country where it is
effected, it is good all over the world no matter whether the
proceeding or ceremony which constituted marriage according
to the law of the place would or would not constitute marriage in
the country of domicile of one or other of the spouses. On the
other hand, if such marriage is not recognized in the place where
it is celebrated, there is no marriage anywhere even though the
ceremony or proceeding if conducted in the place of the parties’
domicile would be considered a good marriage.
In this case, the ceremony was performed strictly in accordance
with the law of Argentina, the celebration of marriage by proxy is
a matter of the form of the marriage ceremony or proceeding and
it is not an essential of the marriage. There is no doctrine of
public policy which entitles the English court to hold that the
marriage ceremony (valid where it was performed) is not effective
in England to constitute a valid marriage.
III. INTRINSIC VALIDITY OF MARRIAGE:
● The intrinsic requirements of marriage refer to capacity
or “the general ability of a person to marry, for instance
defined by requirements of age and parental consent,
but it does not refer clearly to an individual’s being
permitted to marry a specific person or a person of a
determined class. (p.262, Coquia & State.
Aguiling-Pangalangan, 2000, citing Rabel)
● These intrinsic requirements are controlled by the
parties’ personal laws which may either be their
domicile or nationality.
Essential Requisites of Marriage in the Philippines:
a) Legal capacity of the contracting parties who must be a
male and a female; and
b) Consent freely given in the presence of the solemnizing
officer. (Art. 2, FC)
Marriages valid in a Foreign Country but Void in the
Philippines on the ground of Public Policy:
1. Between collateral blood relatives, whether legitimate
or illegitimate up to the fourth civil degree;
2. Between step-parents and stepchildren;
3. Between parents-in-law and children-in-law;
4. Between the adopting parent and the adopted child;
5. Between the surviving spouse of the adopting parent
and the adopted child;
6. Between the surviving spouse of the adopted child and
the adopter;
7. Between an adopted child and the legitimate child of
the adopter;
8. Between adopted children of the same adopter; and
9. Between parties where one, with the intention to marry
the other, killed that other person’s spouse or his or her
own spouse. (Art. 38, FC)
IN RE: MAY’S ESTATE
185 NYS 284 (1920)
FACTS: Sam and Fannie May (Both Jewish and residents of New
York) went to Rhode Island to get married. Fannie was Sam’s
niece. Their marriage was valid in Rhode Island but is prohibited
by New York, where they lived as man and wife for 32 years until
Fannie’s death.
ISSUE: W/N the marriage between Uncle and Niece is valid?
RULING: YES, The general principle is that the rights dependent
upon nuptial contracts are to be determined by the lex loci. The
general rule recognizes as valid a marriage considered valid in
the place where it is celebrated. There are two exceptions to that
rule; (1) cases within the prohibition of positive law; and (2) cases
involving polygamy or incest in a degree regarded generally as
within the prohibition of natural law.
The court held that the legality of the marriage had to be
determined by the law of the state where it was celebrated. The
marriage was valid because it was valid under Rhode Island law.
N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 5 did not regulate marriages of New York
domiciliaries that were solemnized in another state and did not
void the husband's marriage even though the marriage would
have been void if performed in New York. As the marriage was
not offensive to the public sense of morality to a degree regarded
with abhorrence, it was not prohibited by natural law.
Dissenting; J. Desmond:
It is undisputed that this uncle and niece were both domiciled in
New York in 1913, when they left New York for the sole purpose
of going to Rhode Island to be married there, and that they were
married in that State conformably to its laws and immediately
returned to New York and ever afterwards resided in this State.
That Rhode Island marriage, between two New York residents,
was, in New York, absolutely void for any and all purposes, by
positive New York law which declares a strong policy of this
IV. EFFECTS OF MARRIAGE:
a) Personal Relations Between the Spouses:
● Person relations between the spouses are
governed by the national law of the parties. (Art. 15,
NCC)
○ Personal relations between the spouses
include mutual fidelity, respect, cohabitation,
support and the right of the wife to use the
husband’s family name. (Arts. 68, 70-71, Civil
Code)
● If the spouses are of different nationalities,
generally, the national law of the husband may
prevail as long as said law is not contrary to law,
customs and good morals of the forum.
b)Property Relations of Spouses:
● The internal law designated by the spouses before
the marriage or in absence thereof, the internal law
of the state in which both spouses fix their first
habitual residence, is the governing law on
matrimonial property regimes. (Arts. 3-4, Hague
Convention on the Law Applicable to Matrimonial
Property Regimes)
● In the Philippines:
○ Gen. Rule: In the absence of a contrary
stipulation in a marriage settlement, the
property relations of the spouses shall be
governed by Philippine laws, regardless of the
place of the celebration of the marriage and
their residence.
○ Exceptions: This law shall not apply:
(1) Where both spouses are aliens;
(2) With respect to the extrinsic validity of
contracts affecting property not situated in
the Philippines and executed in the country
where the property is located; and
(3) With respect to the extrinsic validity of
contracts entered into in the Philippines but
affecting property situated in a foreign
country whose laws require different
CONFLICTS OF LAW 35
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
formalities for its extrinsic validity. (Art. 80,
FC)
B. DIVORCE AND SEPARATION:
Divorce may either be absolute or relative.
Relative Divorce
Absolute Divorce
(Legal Separation):
The termination of the legal Separation from bed and
relationship between the board which does not effect
spouses by an act of law. the dissolution of the marital
ties.
If a man and a woman, both nationals of the same country,
marry and are domiciled and divorced there, most of the
legal consequences of their divorce would be controlled by
local law. But when any one of the above factors is
connected to another state then, a conflicts problem arises.
Most countries exercise divorce jurisdiction on the basis of
domicile of one of the parties or matrimonial domicile. The
rationale is the divorce, being a matter of concern of the
state, should be controlled by the “law of the place with
which the person is most intimately concerned, the place
where he dwelleth and hath his home. (p.275, Coquia &
Aguiling-Pangalangan, 2000)
The grounds for divorce are dictated by the “Lex Fori.”
Hence, many states refuse to recognize a foreign ground for
divorce unless it corresponds with a ground justified by
forum law.
I. DIVORCE DECREES OBTAINED BY FILIPINOS:
● General Rule: Decrees of absolute divorce obtained by
Filipinos abroad have no validity and are not recognized
in the Philippine jurisdiction.
● Exception: A marriage between a Filipino citizen and a
foreigner is susceptible to divorce if the divorce is
“validly obtained abroad by the alien spouse
capacitating him or her to remarry, thus, the Filipino
spouse shall likewise have the capacity to remarry
under the Philippine law. (Art. par. 2, FC)
REPUBLIC vs. MANALO
GR no. 221029, April 21, 2018
FACTS: 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.
ISSUE: W/N a Filipino may initiate a divorce decree instead of
the alien spouse under Art 26, par. 2, Family Code?
RULING: YES, 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.”
36 CONFLICTS OF LAW
The Supreme 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 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
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.
II. VALIDITY OF FOREIGN DIVORCE BETWEEN
FOREIGNERS:
● A foreign divorce will be recognized in all contracting
states if, at the date of the institution of the
proceedings:
(a) The respondent or petitioner had his habitual
residence there;
(b) Both spouses were nationals of that state; or
(c) If only the petitioner was a national, he should have
his habitual residence there.
● While there is no provision of law requiring Philippine
courts to recognize a foreign divorce decree between
non-Filipinos such will be recognized under the
principle of international comity, provided that it does
not violate a strongly held policy of the Philippines.
C. ANNULMENT AND DECLARATION OF NULLITY:
CHOICE-OF-LAW IN ANNULMENT AND DECLARATION
OF RELIEF:
a) Traditional Approach: the grounds for annulment and
nullity follow the Lex Loci Celebrationis.
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
b) Policy-Centered Approach: the applicable law is the
law of the state of marital domicile because it is
considered to have the most significant interest in the
status of the spouses.
NOTE: In both approaches, Lex Fori plays no substantial role
since the action turns on the validity of the marriage. (p.288,
Coquia & Aguiling-Pangalangan, 2000)
D. PARENTAL RELATIONS:
PARENTAL RELATIONS:
- The determination of the legitimacy of a child is
submitted to the personal of the parents which may
either be their domicile or nationality.
- In the Philippines, the legitimacy of a child is governed
by the national law of the parents. If the parents of the
child belong to different nationalities, the legitimacy of
the child is determined by the national law of the father.
(See. Art. 15, NCC)
DETERMINATION OF LEGITIMACY OF A CHILD:
● In the Philippines, the personal law of the illegitimate
child is governed by the national law of the mother. (Art.
165, FC)
○ If the child is later legitimated, the personal law
of the child follows that of the father. (Arts.
163-164, FC)
PARENTAL AUTHORITY OVER THE CHILD:
● The personal law of the father controls the rights and
duties of parents and children, a principle recognized by
most countries.
● The father and the mother shall jointly exercise parental
authority over the persons of their common children. In
case of disagreement, the father's decision shall prevail,
unless there is a judicial order to the contrary. Children
shall always observe respect and reverence towards
their parents and are obliged to obey them as long as
the children are under parental authority. (Art. 211, FC)
● Illegitimate children shall use the surname and shall be
under the parental authority of their mother, and shall
be entitled to support in conformity with the Family
Code. (Art. 176, FC)
● Scope of Parental Authority:
(a) The care for and rearing of the children for “civic
consciousness, efficiency, and the development of
their moral, mental and physical character and
development.
(b) The action a parent may file against the other
parent for custody to the child’s marriage. (p.291,
Coquia & Aguiling-Pangalangan, 2000)
E. ADOPTION:
DEFINITION OF ADOPTION:
- The act by which relations of paternity and affiliation are
recognized as legally existing between persons not so
related by nature. (p.681, Rabel, Conflict of Laws)
- It is a judicial act which creates between two persons a
relationship similar to that which results from legitimate
paternity and affiliations. (Pransik vs. Republic, 98 Phil.
667)
The process of adoption is a matter affecting the status of
the parties and is necessarily governed by the Lex Domicilii
(Law of the Domicile). (p.292, Coquia & Aguiling-
Pangalangan, 2000)
WHO MAY ADOPT?
● General Rule: Aliens are not allowed to adopt Filipino
Children:
○ Rationale: Aliens have very different family
orientation, cultures, customs and traditions which
could pose problems for Filipino children to adapt.
● Exceptions:
○ Under Art. 184, FC, an alien may adopt upon any of
the following conditions:
(a) A former Filipino citizen who seeks to adopt a
relative by consanguinity;
(b) One who seeks to adopt the legitimate child of
his or her Filipino spouse; or
(c) One who is married to a Filipino citizen and
seeks to adopt jointly with his or her spouse a
relative by consanguinity of the latter. (Art. 184,
FC)
○ An alien who has resided in the Philippines for at
least 3 consecutive years prior to the time of filing
the application for adoption and maintains this
residency until the adoption decree is issued. (Sec.
7(b), RA 8552)
○ The adoption of Filipino children by aliens and
Filipino citizens permanently residing abroad. (RA
8043)
EFFECTS OF ADOPTION:
- Philippine courts have declared that adoption relates
to a civil right and does not effect changes in the
political rights of the adopted child including the
child’s eligibility to acquire the citizenship of the
adopter. The decree granting an adoption is in the
form of a foreign judgment, hence, the principles on
recognition and enforcement of foreign judgment
shall govern. (p.297, Coquia & Aguiling-Pangalangan,
2000)
Chapter 13:
CHOICE OF LAW IN PROPERTY
DEFINITION OF PROPERTY:
- All things which are or may be the object of
appropriation are considered either:
(1) Immovable or real property; or
(2) Movable or personal property. (Art. 414, NCC)
A. THE CONTROLLING LAW:
IMMOVABLE PROPERTY: LEX SITUS
- Immovable property is regulated by the Lex Situs.
- Real property is subject to the law of the country where
it is stipulated. (Art. 16, NCC)
MOVABLE PROPERTY:
1) Lex Domicilii:
- The rights over movables were governed by the law
of the owner’s domicile (Mobilia Sequuntur
Personam)
- Rationale: These objects could be moved from
place to place, for purposes of simplicity and
CONFLICTS OF LAW 37
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
convenience they were ascribed the domicile of the
owner. (p.301, Coquia & Aguiling-Pangalangan,
2000)
2) Lex Situs:
- The state where the property is situated has the
sole power to decide the validity and effects of the
transfer of property.
- Real property as well as personal property is
subject to the law of the country where it is
stipulated. (Art. 16, NCC)
3) Lex Loci Actus:
- The law of the place where the transaction was
completed and the proper law of the forum.
- The proper law refers to the law of the state which
has the most real connection with the transfer.
B. CAPACITY TO TRANSFER OR
ACQUIRE PROPERTY:
GOVERNING LAW ON THE CAPACITY TO TRANSFER OR
ACQUIRE PROPERTY:
- The capacity of the person to transfer or acquire real
property is governed by the law of the place where the
property is located. (p.303, Coquia & Aguiling-
Pangalangan, 2000)
LLANTINO vs. CO LIONG CHONG
188 SCRA 592 (1990)
FACTS: Sps. Gregorio & Belinda Llantino are the owners of a
residential land in Catanduanes. In 1954, the leased said land to
Co Liong Chong (Chinese National) for a period of 13 years.
Co Liong Chong was in possession of the property. Knowing that
the lease period will expire in 1967, the Sps. Llantino went to
Chong and informed him about such expiration. In his Answer,
Chong informed the spouses that the leased period is for 60
years, that he constructed a commercial building on the land,
and that he is already a Filipino citizen.
The claim of Chong came as a surprise to the Llantinos because
they did not remember having agreed to a sixty-year lease
agreement as that would virtually make Chong the owner of the
realty which, as a Chinese national, he had no right to own and
neither could he have acquired such ownership after
naturalization subsequent to 1954.
ISSUE: W/N Co Liong Chong had the right to hold by lease the
subject property even though he was a Chinese national at the
time of the execution of the contract?
RULING: YES, A lease to an alien for a reasonable period is
valid. So is an option giving an alien the right to buy real property
on condition that he is granted Philippine citizenship. Aliens are
not completely excluded by the Constitution from use of lands
for residential purposes. Since their residence in the Philippines
is temporary, they may be granted temporary rights such as a
lease contract which is not forbidden by the Constitution. Should
they desire to remain here forever and share our fortune and
misfortune, Filipino citizenship is not impossible to acquire.
It was held that sale of a residential land to an alien which is now
in the hands of a naturalized Filipino citizen is valid.
A contract is the law between the contracting parties, and when
there is nothing in it which is contrary to law, morals, good
38 CONFLICTS OF LAW
customs, public policy or public order, the validity of the contract
must be sustained.
CHEESMAN vs. IAC
193 SCRA 93 (1991)
FACTS: Thomas Cheesman (American) and Criselda Cheesman
(Filipino) were married in 1970 but separated in 1981.
During their marriage (in 1974), A Deed of Sale was executed by
Armando Altares conveying a parcel of unregistered land in favor
of Criselda. Thomas did not object to the transfer made only to
his wife. Thereafter, tax declaration was issued in the name of
Criselda only and assumed management of the land.
In 1981, Criselda sold the land to Estelita Padilla. Thomas
brought a suit against Criselda and Estelita for the annulment of
the sale between them on the ground that the transaction has
been executed without his consent. Criselda argued that the
property sold was paraphernal, purchased exclusive by her
funds, and that Thomas (being an AM\merican citizen) is
disqualified to have any interest over it.
ISSUE: W/N Thomas may claim interest over the said property
sold by Criselda (his ex-wife) without his consent.
RULING: NO, The Philippine Constitution prohibits the sale to
aliens of residential land. Sec. 14, Art. XIV, 1973 Constitution
ordains that “Save in cases of hereditary succession, no private
land shall be transferred or conveyed except to individuals,
corporations, or associations qualified to acquire or hold lands of
the public domain.” Thomas Cheesman was charged with the
knowledge of this prohibition.
Thomas knowingly violated the Constitution and he had no
capacity or personality to question the sale of the subject
property by his wife.
C. EXTRINSIC AND INTRINSIC
VALIDITY OF CONVEYANCE:
GOVERNING LAW ON EXTRINSIC AND INTRINSIC
VALIDITY OF CONVEYANCE:
● The formalities of a contract to convey property are
governed by Lex Situs.
○ Any transfer of property which requires
registration of title cannot be accepted by the
registry of property unless the formal
requirements of the Lex Situs are complied with.
● Lex Situs law applies to the essential validity of the
transfer unless the Lex Intentionis is clearly established.
● The Lex Situs also governs the effects of the
conveyance of properties.
D. EXCEPTIONS TO LEX SITUS RULE:
EXCEPTIONS TO LEX SITUS RULE:
1. Where the transaction does not affect transfer of
title to or ownership of the land:
- In this case, the proper law of the transfer is
governed by lex intentionis or lex voluntatis (law
chosen by the parties).
2. In contracts where real property is offered by way of
a security for the performance of an obligation:
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
- For example; in a Contract of Loan with Real Estate
Mortgage wherein the loan is the principal contract
while the mortgage of the land is an accessory
contract.
- The mortgage of the land is governed by Lex
Situs Rule; and
- THe loan contract is governed by the rules on
ordinary contracts.
3. Testate or intestate succession and capacity to
succeed:
- 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. (Art.
16, par. 2, NCC)
LILJEDAHL vs. GLASSGOW
190 Iowa 827 (1921)
FACTS: Liljedahl helena mortgage on a land in Colorado which
was issued as a security for a loan payable in Iowa. The
mortgagor (Bailey) sold the mortgaged land to Glassgow with a
deed containing a blank space for the insertion of the name of
the grantee and which stated that the “grantee assumed and
agreed to pay the plaintiff’s mortgage.” Glasgow never inserted
his name as grantee but, later on, transferred the deed for
consideration to another.
Liljedahl sues Glassgow as the grantee of the land before the
Iowa District Court, arguing that under Iowa law, Glassgow
became bound to pay the mortgage upon his acceptance of the
deed. In his defense, Glassgow claimed that under Colorado law,
no such liability was imposed upon him since he had never
inserted his name as grantee in the deed.
ISSUE: W/N Glassgow is liable to Liljedahl?
RULING: YES, As a rule, instruments of conveyance (in so far as
they relate primarily or directly to the title) are to be construed
according to the law of Lex Situs. But personal covenants or
agreements in instruments of conveyance will be given effect
according to the law of the place where the same is executed
and to be performed.
Liljedahl and Glassgow were residents of Iowa but the mortgagor
(Bailey) was non-resident of Iowa. The notes/deed executed by
Bailey is that the terms shall be payable at Shenandoah Bank,
Iowa. Some evidence can infer that Glassgow understood the
legal effect of accepting a deed containing the clause in
question. The parties may be presumed to have contracted with
reference to the law of Iowa, where the contract was executed
and to be performed, anf that intended to be bound in
accordance therewith.
E. SITUS OF CERTAIN PROPERTIES:
1. SITUS OF PERSONAL PROPERTY FOR TAX PURPOSES:
- “Mobilia Sequuntur Personam” has been viewed as a
mere “fiction of law” having its origins in
considerations of general convenience and public
policy. It cannot be applied to limit the right of the
state to tax property within its jurisdiction. It yields to
established facts of legal ownership, actual
presence, and control elsewhere, and cannot be
applied if it would result in inescapable and patent
injustice. (Wells Fargo Bank vs. Collector, 70 Phil.
325)
- The sovereign power may lay hands on any and all
persons or property within its borders, and where the
functions of government are departmentalized. The
modern tendency is to make no distinction between
mobility and immobility of property established by
the principles of Lex Situs and Mobilia Sequuuntur
Personam. (Asiatic Petroleum vs. Co Quico, 69 Phil.
433)
ASIATIC PETROLEUM vs. CO QUICO
69 Phil. 433 (1940)
FACTS: Co Quico entered into a contract of agency with Asiatic
Petroleum wherein the former became the sales agent of the
latter, to sell petroleum products and render accounting to the
latter.
When Co Quinco defaulted in paying P2,123, he left for China.
Asiatic filed a complaint to recover the unremitted sum and
prayed for preliminary attachment of Co’s properties before the
Trial Court. The trial later issued such preliminary attachments on
Co’s deposits with Mercantile Bank of China.
Co Quici’s counsel appeared to move for the dismissal of the
proceedings on the ground that the trial had not acquired
jurisdiction over the person of his client, Co Quico. In view of
this, the Trial Court issued an order declaring all the proceedings
to be null and void.
ISSUE: W/N the trial may issue a preliminary attachment on Co
Quian’s deposits with Mercantile Bank of China despite that fact
the Co Quian is not in the Philippines?
RULING: YES, All property within a State is subject to the
jurisdiction of its courts, and they have the right to adjudicate
title thereto, to enforce liens thereupon, whether resident or not.
The sovereign power may lay hands on any and all persons or
property within its borders, and where the functions of
government are departmentalized, what is within the reach of
executive and legislative action, must also be within the reach of
the judiciary. This regard make no distinction between mobility
and immobility of property established by the Lex Situs Principle
and Mobilia Personam Sequuntur Principle.
Co Quian, although he was outside the Philippines at the time of
the action was instituted against him, possessed property found
and located here in the Philippines and that such property was
within the reach of our court.
2. SITUS OF MONEY:
- The situs is where the funds are located physically or
where the institution holding such money is located.
(Leon vs. Manufacturers Life Insurance. 90 Phil. 459)
3. SITUS OF DEBTS:
- The situs of the debt is an issue that remains
unsettled in the Philippines. It is suggested that the
law which governs the contract from which the debt
arises should also govern the transfer of the debt.
(p.317, Coquia & Aguiling-Pangalangan, 2000)
4. SITUS OF CORPORATE SHARES OF STOCKS:
- The capital stock of corporations shall be divided
into shares for which certificates signed by the
president or vice president, countersigned by the
CONFLICTS OF LAW 39
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
secretary or assistant secretary, and sealed with the
seal of the corporation shall be issued in accordance
with the bylaws. Shares of stock so issued are
personal property and may be transferred by
delivery of the certificate or certificates indorsed by
the owner, his attorney-in fact, or any other person
legally authorized to make the transfer. No transfer,
however, shall be valid, except as between the
parties, until the transfer is recorded in the books of
the corporation showing the names of the parties to
the transaction, the date of the transfer, the number
of the certificate or certificates, and the number of
shares transferred. The Commission may require
corporations whose securities are traded in trading
markets and which can reasonably demonstrate their
capability to do so to issue their securities or shares
of stocks in uncertificated or scripless form in
accordance with the rules of the Commission. No
shares of stock against which the corporation holds
any unpaid claim shall be transferable in the books of
the corporation. (Sec. 61, RCC)
Chapter 14:
CHOICE OF LAW IN CONTRACTS
DEFINITION OF CONTRACTS:
- It is the meeting of the minds between two persons
whereby one binds himself, with respect to the other, to
give something or render some service. (Art. 1305,
NCC)
A. CONTRACTS INVOLVING A FOREIGN ELEMENT:
CONTRACTS INVOLVING A FOREIGN ELEMENT:
● The court presented with a contracts case involving a
foreign element must be aware of the likelihood that the
parties may have entered into the contract with a
particular State law in mind, excepting it to govern
questions that may arise from the contract. As a result,
the forum court should be ready to replace its law with
that earlier relied on by the parties.
● Specific provisions in contracts (eg. interpretations of
contracts) are designed to carry out the general policies
of contract law common to all states, and are applied
only when the Lex Loci Intentionis cannot be
ascertained. (pp.329-330, Coquia & Aguiling-
Pangalangan, 2000)
B. EXTRINSIC VALIDITY OF CONTRACTS:
EXTRINSIC VALIDITY OF CONTRACTS:
- The Lex Loci Celebrationis governs the formal or
extrinsic validity of contracts.
- 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. (Art. 17, NCC)
C. INTRINSIC VALIDITY OF CONTRACTS:
INTRINSIC VALIDITY:
40 CONFLICTS OF LAW
- The intrinsic or essential validity refers to the nature,
content and effects of the agreement.
Essential Requisites of a Contract:
(a) Consent of the contracting parties;
(b) Object certain which is the subject matter of the
contract; and
(c) Cause of the obligation which is established. (Art. 1318,
NCC)
GOVERNING LAWS RELATING TO THE INTRINSIC
VALIDITY OF CONTRACTS:
1. Lex Loci Contractus:
- It refers to the law of the place where the contract is
made.
- To determine where the contract is made, look to the
place where the “last act is done which is necessary
to bring the binding agreement into being so far as
the acts of the parties are concerned.”
2. Lex Loci Solutionis:
- It refers to the law of the place of performance.
- All matters relating to the time, place and manner of
performance, sufficiency of performance and valid
excuses for non-performance are determined by Lex
Loci Solutionis.
- This approach is not helpful when the contract
should be performed in two or more states with
conflicting laws on validity of contracts.
3. Lex Intentionis:
- The intrinsic validity of a contract should be
governed by the law intended by the parties.
- This intention may be expressed in a
choice-of-law provision in the contract.
- 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. (Art. 1306, NCC)
MACMILLAN & BLOEDEL vs. TH VALDERAMA & SONS
61 OG. 1696 (1964)
FACTS: TH Valderama & Sons (Philippine Corporation) entered
into a contract in Canada through its agent (Splane) for the
purchase of railroad equipment with Macmillan & Bloedel
(Canadian Corporation). The agreement was that the price and
freight shall be paid by a letter of credit made by Macmillan in
Vancouver, Canada on a certain date. Unfortunately, TH
Valderama failed to procure an import license necessary to open
a letter of credit. As a result, Macmillan was forced to cancel the
freight engagement contract and paid various expenses
amounting to $21,260.59.
Macmillan filed an action for recovery of money against TH
Valderama in the Philippines. In its defense, TH Valderama claims
that they are legally excused from opening a letter of credit
because of the failure of the Import Contract Commission to act
on its import license application. That since its agent (Splane)
was not fully authorized to enter into the contract of sale, the
said freight contract was perfected only upon the acceptance by
TH Valderama of the offer by letter, and, applying the rule of lex
loci contractus, the laws of the Philippines should govern.
ISSUE: Lex Loci Contractus vs. Lex Loci Solutionis
RULING: The Principle of Lex Loci Solutionis is applied in this
case. Accordingly, Splane was fully authorized to act as agent of
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
TH Valderama & Sons. Consequently, when Splane closed the
deal with Macmillan in Canada, the contract was perfected in
Canada.
“If the agent has authority to make a binding contract of sale and
undertakes to do so, it is clear that the place of the executory
contract is the place where he exercises such authority,
notwithstanding the vendor does business in another state and
the stock from which the contract is to be filled is in that state.”
It would appear that the place of performance of the obligations
arising from the contract in the case at bar is Canada. The
contract between Macmillan and TH Valderama was one of sale
f.o.b. Vancouver. In other words, Macmillan was obligated to
bring the goods subject of the sale to Vancouver and load the
same on the ship which was to take them to the Philippines, at
Macmillan’s expense. Therefore, the place of performance is
Vancouver, and, following the rule of Lex Loci Solutionis, the
laws of Canada should apply.
D. CAPACITY TO ENTER INTO CONTRACTS:
CAPACITY TO ENTER:
- The capacity to enter into contracts is governed by the
rules on status and capacity which may either be:
(a) Lex Nationali (See Art. 15, NCC); or
(b) Lex Domicilii
E. CHOICE OF LAW ISSUES IN CONFLICT
CONTRACTS CASES:
1. Choice of Forum Clause:
Under the principle of freedom of contract, parties may
stipulate on the law to govern their contract agreement.
(p.340, Coquia & Aguiling-Pangalangan, 2000)
KING MAU vs. SYCIP
94 Phil. 784 (1954)
FACTS: King Mau Wu is the agent of Francisco Sycip in the sale
of Philippine coconut oil and its derivatives outside (this time in
New York) the Philippines and sha;l be paid 2.5% of the total
actual sale price of sales.
King filed an action to collect P59,000 as his share as agent in
the sale of 1,000 tons of coconut oil emulsion against Francisci
Sycip. In his defense, Sycip contends that the transaction for the
sale of said coconut oil emulsion was not covered by the agency
contract because it was agreed upon in another contract and
that it was an independent and separate transaction for which
King Mau has been duly compensated.
ISSUE: W/N there is a conflict of laws problem in this case?
RULING: NO, There is no conflict of laws involved in this case
because it is only a question of enforcing an obligation created
by or arising from contract; and unless the enforcement of the
contract be against public policy of the forum, it must be
enforced.
A non-resident may sue a resident in the courts of this country
(Philippines) where the defendant may be summoned and his
property leviable upon execution in the case of a favorable, final
and executory judgment. It is a personal action for the collection
of a sum of money which the CFU has jurisdiction to try and
decide.
NOTE: When the Court states that “there is no conflict of laws involved in
this case.” This is a statement which disregards the concept of “conflict of
laws” as encompassing all cases which have at least 1 foreign element.
Since the contract was executed in New York and the parties to which the
coconut oil emulsion was shipped to were also based in New York, then
there are obviously foreign elements that characterize this case as a
conflicts case.
HSBC vs. SHERMAN
176 SCRA 331 (1980)
FACTS: Eastern Book Supply (a company incorporated in
Singapore) was granted by HSBC an overdraft facility in the
amount of 200K Singaporean Dollars. As security, Sherman, et.
al., (Directors of Eastern Book) executed a Joint and Several
Guarantee in favor of HSBC.
When Eastern Book failed to pay its obligation, HSBC demanded
payment of the obligation to Sherman, et. al., pursuant with the
provisions of the Guarantee. When Sherman, et. al., still failed to
pay, HSBC filed a case in RTC-QC. In their Answer, Sherman,
et., al., claimed that Philippine courts have no jurisdiction over
the case because of a stipulation in their Guarantee which states
that “We hereby agree that the courts of the Republic of the
Singapore shall have jurisdiction over all disputes arising under
this guarantee.”
ISSUE: W/N the Choice-Of-Forum Clause in the Guarantee
Contract executed by HSBC and Sherman, et., al., is valid?
RULING: NO, A State does not assume jurisdiction over traveling
sovereign, ambassadors and diplomatic representatives of other
sStates, and foreign military units stationed in or marching
through State territory with the permission of the latter’s
authorities. This authority, which finds its source in the concept
of sovereignty, is exclusive within and throughout the domain of
the State.
In the stipulation clause, the parties did not thereby stipulate that
only the courts of Singapore (to the exclusion of all the rest) has
jurisdiction. Neither did the clause in question operate to divest
Philippine courts of jurisdiction.
2. Contracts with Arbitration Clause:
A multistate or multinational contract that contains an
arbitration clause gives rise to the issue of whether one of
the parties can compel the other to submit to arbitration.
(p.346, Coquia & Aguiling-Pangalangan, 2000)
THE BREMEN vs. ZAPATA OFF-SHORE
407 US 1 (1972)
FACTS: Zapata Off-Shore (Houston-Based Corporation)
contracted Unterweser (German Corporation) for the towing of
Zapata’s drilling rig Chaparral from Louisiana to Italy. The
contract contains a forum-selection clause which provides that
“any dispute arising must be treated before the London Court of
Justice.”
The Bremen (Unterweser’s deep sea tug) left Louisiana with the
Chaparral in tow. While in the gulf of Mexico, a severe storm
arose which seriously damaged the Chaparral. Thereafter,
Zapanta instructed the Bremen to tow its damaged rig to Tampa,
Florida, the nearest port.
CONFLICTS OF LAW 41
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
Zapata commenced an Admiralty Suit in US District Court of
Tampa, Florida, seeking $3,500,000 damages against
Unterweser, alleging negligent towage and breach of contract.
Unterweser invoked the forum clause of the towage contract and
moved to dismiss the suit for lack of jurisdiction.
While the Tampa Court’s decision is pending, Unterweser
commenced an action for breach of the towage contract in the
High Court of Justice of London as provided in the contract.
Zapata appeared to contest jurisdiction but the London Court
conferred its jurisdiction.
Tampa Court denied Unterweser’s motion to dismiss, it holds
that the forum selection clause is unenforceable, reiterating the
traditional view that “agreements in advance of controversy
whose object is to oust the jurisdiction of the courts are contrary
to public policy will not be enforced.”
ISSUE: W/N the forum selection clause between Zapata and
Unterweser is unenforceable?
RULING: NO, A contractual choice-of-forum clause should be
held unenforceable if enforcement would contravene a strong
public policy of the forum in which suit is brought, whether
declared by statute or by judicial decision.
Likewise, Courts have suggested that a forum clause may be
“unreasonable” and unenforceable if the chosen forum is
seriously inconvenient for the trial of the action.
This involves a freely negotiated international commercial
transaction between German and American corporations for
towage of a vessel from the Gulf of Mexico to the Adriatic Sea.
The selection of a London forum was clearly a reasonable effort
to bring vital certainty to this international transaction and to
provide a natural forum experienced and capable in the
resolution of admiralty litigation. Whatever “inconvenience”
Zapata would suffer by being forced to litigate in the contractual
forum as it agreed to do was clearly foreseeable at the time of
contracting.
The US Supreme Court concluded that the forum clause should
control unless Zapanta could clearly show that enforcement
would be unreasonable
3. Adhesion Contracts:
Adhesion Contract - one that is not negotiated by the
parties, having been drafted by the dominant party and
usually embodied in a standardized form. It is called a
contract of adhesion because the only participation of the
other party in the contract is his signature thereto.
Examples:
● Insurance contracts;
● Bills of Lading;
● Contracts of Sale of Land from Real Estate Firms; and
● Airline Tickets
PAN AM WORLD AIRWAYS vs. RAPADAS
209 SCRA 67 (1992)
FACTS: Jose Rapadas was about to board his flight from Guam
to Manila however a Pan Am agent checked his samsonite
attache case. Instead of declaring the contents and value of his
42 CONFLICTS OF LAW
Attache case, Rapades boarded the plane without declaring its
value and contents.
Unfortunately upon arrival in Manila, Rapadas’ attache case
never arrived. Pan Am offered to settle the loss for $160.00 but
Rapadas refused to accept it and filed a complaint for damages
against Pan Am before the Philippine Trial Court, claiming that
the total amount loss was $42,400.
In its Answer, Pan Am asserted that the claim was subject to the
“Notice of Baggage Liability Limitation” clause which forms part
of the passenger’s ticket.
ISSUE: W/N the plane ticket is valid, thereby limiting the liability
of Pan Am against Rapadas?
RULING: YES, The plane ticket is known as a contract of
adhesion wherein one party imposes a ready made form of
contract on the other, as the plane ticket in the case at bar, are
contracts not entirely prohibited. The one who adheres to the
contract is in reality free to reject it entirely; if he adheres, he
gives his consent. WHile contracts of adhesion are not entirely
prohibited, neither is a blind reliance on them encouraged. In the
face of facts and circumstances showing they should be ignored
does not hesitate to rule out blind adherence to their terms.
There was a Notice appearing on page 2 of the airline ticket
stating that the Warsaw Convention governs in case of death or
injury to a passenger or of loss, damage or destruction to a
passenger’s luggage. The Warsaw Convention governs the
availment of the liability limitations where the baggage check is
combined with or incorporated in the passenger ticket which
complies with the provisions of Art. 3, par. 1(c), thereof. In the
case at bar, the baggage check is combined with the passenger
ticket in one document of carriage.
The SC found the provisions in the plane ticket sufficient to
govern the limitations of liabilities of the airline for loss of
luggage. The passenger (upon contracting with the airline and
receiving the plane ticket) was expected to be vigilant insofar as
his luggage is concerned. If the passenger fails to adduce
evidence to overcome the stipulations, he cannot avoid the
application of the liability limitations.
PAL vs. CA
255 SCRA 48 (1996)
FACTS: Gilda Mejia shipped through PAL 1 unit of microwave
oven from San Francisco, CA to Manila. Upon arrival in Manila,
Mejia discovered that the microwave was broken and damaged.
Mejia demanded PAL to reimburse the value of the microwave
oven and transportation fee but PAL ignored it.
Mejia filed a suit for damages against PAL. In its Defense, PAL
alleged that there was no valid cause of action since it acted in
good faith and in compliance with the Warsaw Convention and
had exercised due diligence in the selection, hiring and
supervision of its employees.
ISSUE: W/N PAL is not liable for the damaged microwave oven
of Mejia, pursuant to the Warsaw Convention?
RULING: NO, It should be noted that the airwaybill contains a
simple warning that the shipment is subject to the conditions of
the contract on the dorsal portion thereof regarding the limited
liability of the carrier unless a higher valuation is declared, as well
as the reglementary period within which to submit a written claim
to the carrier in case of damage or loss to the cargo.
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
Granting that the airwaybill is a contract of adhesion, such
contracts are not entirely prohibited and are in fact binding
regardless of whether or not respondent (Mejia) read the
provisions thereof. Having contracted the services of PAL carrier
instead of other airlines, Mejia in effect negotiated the terms of
the contract and thus became bound thereby.
While the Warsaw Convention has the force and effect of law in
the Philippines, the same does not operate as an exclusive
enumeration of the instances when a carrier shall be liable for
breach of contract or as an absolute limit of the extent of liability,
nor does not it preclude the operation of the Civil or other
pertinent laws.
4. Special Contracts:
Special Contracts and Special Rules:
(a) Sales or Barter - the law of the place where the
property is located will govern (Lex Situs). (Art. 16,
NCC);
(b) Simple Loan granted by Financial Institutions - It is
governed by the law of the permanent place of
business.
(c) Simple Loan granted by Private Individuals - It is
governed by the law of place where the loan was
obtained.
(d) Pledge, Chattel Mortgage, and Antichresis - The
extrinsic and intrinsic validity are governed by the Lex
Situs.
CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA:
● The law of the country to which the goods are to be
transported shall govern the liability of the common
carrier for their loss, destruction or deterioration. (Art.
1753, NCC)
● In all matters not regulated by this Code, the rights and
obligations of common carriers shall be governed by
the Code of Commerce and by special laws. (Art. 1766,
NCC)
CONTRACTS FOR INTERNATIONAL AIR TRANSPORTATION:
● The carrier and the passenger may agree by special
contract, to a higher content of the liability for loss or
damage of luggage or cargo.
● If the carrier proves that damage was caused by or
contributed to by negligence of the passenger, the court
may, in accordance with the provisions of the law of the
forum, exonerate the carrier wholly or partly from liability.
● The carrier is liable for damages for loss or damage to
checked in luggage, if the damage took place during the
transportation by air. (Arts. 18020, Warsaw Convention)
● Any action for damages may be brought either:
(a) in the court of the domicile of the carrier
(b) In his principal place of business;
(c) Where he has a place for business through which
the contract has been made; or
(d) Before the court at the place of destination. (Art. 28,
Warsaw Convention)
Note: The procedural rules of the court of the forum shall
apply. (Art. 28, Warsaw Convention)
F. THE APPLICABLE LAW IN THE ABSENCE OF
AN EFFECTIVE CHOICE:
In the absence of an effective choice of law by the parties,
consideration will be given to the following factors in
determining the state with which the contract has its most
significant relationship:
(a) The place of contracting;
(b) The place of negotiating of the contract;
(c) The place of performance;
(d) The situs of the subject matter of the contract;
(e) The domicile, residence, nationality, place of
incorporation and place of business of the parties;
(f) The place under whose local law the contract will be
most effective. (p.377, Coquia &
Aguiling-Pangalangan, 2000)
If the place of contracting, the place of negotiating of
the contract and place of performance are in the same
state → the local of the state ordinarily determines the
validity of the contract., except in the case of usury. (Coquia
& Aguiling-Pangalangan, 2000)
In the absence of an effective choice of law, a forum court
(following a policy-centered approach) will apply its own law
when there are significant contacts with the transaction.
Once such contracts exist, then the forum has a real interest
in applying its own law and such would not be
fundamentally unfair to the parties. (p. 378, Coquia &
Aguiling-Pangalangan, 2000)
G. LIMITATIONS TO CHOICE OF LAW:
LIMITATIONS TO CHOICE OF LAW:
1) The parties may not select a law to govern their
contract if said law selected has no connection at all
with the transaction or the parties.
2) If the law selected should change, the law as changed
will govern. An exception may be made if the change is
so revolutionary that it was never contemplated by the
parties. In this case, the law to govern is that originally
intended.
3) The parties may select the law to govern the contract
but it should not be interpreted to oust the jurisdiction
which the court has already acquired over the parties
and the subject matter.
4) Cognovit Clause (Confession-of-Judgment) - this is
valid only if the parties were of equal bargaining power
and the debtor agreed to it voluntarily and with cogs,
cognovit clauses are severely restricted except for
money judgments.
● In a cognovit clause, the debtor may agree to be
subject to the jurisdiction of a specific court/s in
case he breaches the contract or defaults in
payment.
Chapter 15:
CHOICE OF LAW IN WILLS, SUCCESSION
AND ADMINISTRATION OF ESTATES
WILL OR TESTAMENT:
● It is an act whereby a person is permitted with the
formalities prescribed by law, to determine to a certain
extent the distribution of his estate to take effect after
his death. (Art. 783, NCC)
● It is a disposition made by a competent testator in the
form prescribed by law of property over which he has a
CONFLICTS OF LAW 43
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
legal power of disposition. (Osorio vs. Posadas, 56 Phi.
748)
Since death is involuntary, making a will becomes an
involuntary transfer of property. As such it is governed by
the “proper law” which, in common law countries, is the law
of the domicile of the testator, and in civil law countries, his
national law. (p.380, Coquia & Aguiling-Pangalangan, 2000)
A. EXTRINSIC VALIDITY OF WILLS:
GOVERNING LAW ON EXTRINSIC VALIDITY OF WILLS:
(a) If a Filipino national makes a will abroad, he may
comply with the formalities prescribed under Philippine
law (Lex Nationalii) or those established by the law of
the country where that will is executed (Lex Loci
Celebrationis. (p.380, Coquia & Aguiling-Pangalangan,
2000)
(b) If an Alien makes a will, he/she has three laws to
choose from:
1) His national law (Lex Nationalii);
2) Philippine law (Lex Domicilii); or
3) The law of the place where he makes the will (Lex
Loci Celebrationis).
PHILIPPINE CIVIL CODE PROVISIONS:
- 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. (Art. 17, NCC)
- When a Filipino is in a foreign country, he is authorized
to make a will in any of the forms established by the
law of the country in which he may be. Such will may
be probated in the Philippines. (Art. 815, NCC)
- The will of an alien who is abroad produces effect in
the Philippines if made with the formalities prescribed
by the law of the place in which he resides, or
according to the formalities observed in his country, or
in conformity with those which this Code prescribes.
(Art. 816, NCC)
- A will made in the Philippines by a citizen or subject of
another country, which is executed in accordance with
the law of the country of which he is a citizen or
subject, and which might be proved and allowed by the
law of his own country, shall have the same effect as if
executed according to the laws of the Philippines.(Art.
817, NCC)
JOINT WILLS:
● A joint will refers to when two or more persons make a
will in the same instrument either; (a) for their reciprocal
benefit; or (b) for the benefit of a third person. (Art. 818,
NCC)
● Joint wills whether executed by Filipinos in the
Philippines or abroad (even if such foreign country
allows it) are considered void in the Philippines on the
grounds of public policy (Art. 818, NCC)
○ When a will is made jointly, the spouse who is
more aggressive and dominant can dictate
the terms of the will for his/her benefit or for a
third person. (In Re: Will of Victor Bilbao, 87
Phil. 144)
● However, the law is silent about joint wills executed in
the Philippines by aliens whose national laws do not
prohibit it. The author of the book suggests that said
44 CONFLICTS OF LAW
will should not be probated if it affects heirs in the
Philippines, pursuant with Art. 819, NCC. (p.386,
Coquia & Aguiling-Pangalangan, 2000)
HOLOGRAPHIC WILLS:
● It refers to a will which is entirely written, dated and
signed by the hand of the testator himself. It is not
subject to any other form, need not be witnessed and
may be made in or out of the Philippines. (Art. 810,
NCC)
● The will of an alien who is abroad produces effect in the
Philippines if made with the formalities prescribed by
the law of the place in which he resides, or according to
the formalities observed in his country, or in conformity
with those which the Civil Code prescribes. (Art. 816,
NCC)
● A will made in the Philippines by a citizen or subject of
another country, which is executed in accordance with
the law of the country of which he is a citizen or subject,
and which might be proved and allowed by the law of
his own country, shall have the same effect as if
executed according to the laws of the Philippines. (Art.
817, NCC)
IN RE: ESTATE OF JOHNSON
39 Phil. 156 (1918)
FACTS: Emil Johnson (Swedish native and a naturalized US
citizen) died in Manila, leaving a holographic will disposing of his
estate. A petition was filed with CFI-Manila for the probate of his
will on the ground that John was (at the time of his death) a
citizen of Illinois, USA; and that the will was duly executed in
accordance with the laws of that state and, therefore, could be
properly probated under Sec. 636 of Philippine Code of Civil
Procedure. The CFI-Manila admitted the will for probate and
found that Johnson left his estate to his brother, parents in
Sweden, his daughter (Ebba Ingeborg), his wife, and 5 other
children.
Ebba appeals to annul the decree of probate and put the estate
into intestate administration, this preparing the way for the
establishment of her claim as the sole legitimate heir. She argued
that Sec. 636, Philippine Code of Civil Procedure, is applicable
only to wills of aliens.
ISSUE: W/N the order of probate should be set aside on the
ground that the testator was not a resident of the State of Illinois
and that the will was not made in conformity with the laws of that
State.
RULING: NO, SC is of the opinion that the statement that the
testator was a citizen of the US, naturalized in the State of
Illinois, should be taken to imply that he was a citizen of the
State of Illinois, and the USA.
The court held that upon the date of the execution of the will the
testator was a citizen of the State of Illinois and that the will was
executed in conformity with the laws of that State. In this
connection it should be remembered that the Fourteenth
Amendment to the Constitution of the United States declares, in
its opening words, that all persons naturalized in the United
States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the
United States and of the State wherein they reside.
In this case, Emil H. Johnson was at the time of his death a
citizen of the United States and of the State of Illinois, his will
was provable in the courts of the Philippine Islands, and the
instrument was so executed as to be admissible to probate
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
under the laws of the State of Illinois. Hence, the will was
necessarily and properly admitted to probate.
B. INTRINSIC VALIDITY OF WILLS:
GOVERNING LAW ON INTRINSIC VALIDITY OF WILLS:
- It shall be governed by the National Law of the
Decedent.
- 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. (Art. 16, par. 2, NCC)
C. INTERPRETATION OF WILLS:
GOVERNING CHOICE OF LAW IN THE INTERPRETATION
OF WILLS:
● It must be governed by the rules of interpretation of the
decedent’s national law. (p.393, Coquia &
Aguiling-Pangalangan, 2000)
PRINCIPAL RULES ON INTERPRETATION:
(1) Where the terms are clear and unambiguous - the lex
intentionis (intent of the party/Decedent) should be
followed. (Art. 1370, NCC)
(2) Where there are ambiguous provisions:
(a) The intention of the party can be inferred to the
context of the instrument itself or the testator’s
contemporaneous and subsequent acts. (Art.
1371 & 1375, NCC); or
(b) If none, there are settled presumptions of law may
be resorted to:
(i) It is presumed that such ambiguous
phrases should be determined in
accordance with the laws and
customs of the state most probably in
the mind of the grantor or testator
when he used the word, and with
which he is to be presumed to be
most familiar; and
(ii) It is presumed that in case a Will
admits of different dispositions, the
interpretation by which the disposition
is to be operative shall be preferred.
(Art. 788, NCC)
D. REVOCATION:
When is Revocation made? - A will is revocable at any
time before the death of the testator.
Waiver of the Right to Revoke is Void - Any waiver or
restriction of the right to revoke a will is void. (Art. 828, NCC)
RULES ON REVOCATION:
(a) If the revocation was done outside the Philippines
by a person who does not have a domicile in the
Philippines - the revocation is valid when it is done
according to:
1. The law of the place where the will was made
(Lex Loci Celebrationis); or
2. The law of the place where the testator had his
domicile at that time. (Lex Domicilii).
(b)If the revocation is done outside the Philippines by
one domiciled in the Philippines - either one controls:
1. The law of the Domicile (which is the Philippines);
or
2. The law of the Place of the Revocation (Lex Loci
Actus).
(c) If the revocation takes place in this Philippines -
revocation is valid if it is in accordance with the
provisions of the Philippine Civil Code. (See Arts.
829-834, NCC)
INSTANCES WHEN A WILL IS DEEMED REVOKED:
1. By implication of law;
2. By some will, codicil, or other writing executed as
provided in case of wills; or
3. By burning, tearing, cancelling, or obliterating the
will with the intention of revoking it, by the testator
himself, or by some other person in his presence,
and by his express direction. If burned, torn,
cancelled, or obliterated by some other person,
without the express direction of the testator, the will
may still be established, and the estate distributed
in accordance therewith, if its contents, and due
execution, and the fact of its unauthorized
destruction, cancellation, or obliteration are
established according to the Rules of Court. (Art.
830, NCC)
PROBLEM: When a testator revokes his will in the state
where he is domiciled and then changes his domicile to
another state where he dies. If the revocation of his will was
valid by the laws of the state where he revoked it but invalid
by the laws of the state of domicile at the time of his death,
which law will control the situation?
ANSWER: Common Law countries apply the law of the
domicile at the time of the testator’s death (not the law of
the place of revocation). However, Philippine law clearly
provides the contrary and applies the law of the place of
revocation. (p.395, Coquia & Aguiling-Pangalangan, 2000)
E. PROBATE:
RULE:
The disallowance of a will being essentially procedural in nature,
the law of the forum will govern in procedural matters.
However, the court will look into the law of the foreign state
where the suit was made as to whether the extrinsic
requirements in the execution of the will have been complied
with in view of Arts. 17, 816 and 817, NCC.
PROBATE:
- It is an adjudication that the last will and testament of a
person was executed with all the formalities required by
law. It does not pass upon the validity of the provision
of the will. (Manahan vs. Manahan, 58 Phil. 448)
GROUNDS FOR DISALLOWANCE OF A WILL:
CONFLICTS OF LAW 45
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
(a) If not executed and attested as required by law;
(b) If the testator was insane, or otherwise mentally
incapable to make a will, at the time of its execution;
(c) If it was executed under duress, or the influence of fear,
or threats;
(d) If it was procured by undue and improper pressure and
influence, on the part of the beneficiary, or of some
other person for his benefit;
(e) If the signature of the testator was procured by fraud or
trick, and he did not intend that the instrument should
be his will at the time of fixing his signature thereto.
(Sec. 9, Rule 76, Rules on Special Proceedings)
A will made in the Philippines by a citizen or subject of
another country, which is executed in accordance with the
law of the country of which he is a citizen or subject, and
which might be proved and allowed by the law of his own
country, shall have the same effect as if executed according
to the laws of the Philippines. (Art. 817, NCC)
In contrast, the Common Law Conflicts Rule considers a will
admitted to probate as valid at the last domicile of the
testator as valid everywhere with respect to movable
property.
F. ADMINISTRATION OF ESTATES:
SCOPE OF ADMINISTRATION:
(a) To manage and settle the decedent’s debt; and
(b) To distribute the residue of the estate to the deceased
heir’s.
ADMINISTRATOR:
● The title of a domiciliary administrator is of no
extraterritorial force and extends only to the assets of a
decedent found within the state or country where it was
granted.
● An administrator appointed in one state has no power
over properties in another state or country. An ancillary
administrator is one appointed by the court of the
foreign country where the assets or property are
located. (Leon & Gherri va. ManuLife Insurance, 90 Phil
495)
G. TRUSTS:
TRUST - it is a right of property (real or personal) held by
one party for the benefit of another. (Gayondato vs.
Treasurer of the Philippines, 49 Phil. 244)
A person who establishes a trust is called the trustor; one in
whom confidence is reposed as regards property for the
benefit of another person is known as the trustee; and the
person for whose benefit the trust has been created is
referred to as the beneficiary. (Art. 1440, NCC)
CONFLICT-OF-LAW RULES ON TRUST:
● When the trust contains an express choice-of-law
provision, the courts of the place where the trust is
being administered will apply that law in keeping with
the policy to carry out the intent of the creator of trust.
● In the absence of an express choice-of-law, the courts
will deem controlling the law that will sustain the validity
46 CONFLICTS OF LAW
of the trust, whether that be the state where the trust is
being administered or the state where the decedent
was domiciled. (p.406, Coquia & Aguiling-Pangalangan,
2000)
Chapter 16:
CHOICE OF LAW IN TORTS AND CRIMES
CONCEPT OF TORT:
- It is an act or omission producing an injury to another
without any previous existing lawful relation of which
the act or omission may be said to be a natural
outgrowth or incident. (p.407, Coquia & Aguiling-
Pangalangan, 2000; Robles vs. Castillo, 61 OG 1220)
Tortfeasor - one who, contrary to law, by his act or
omission wilfully or negligently causes damage to another
and shall indemnify the latter for the name. (Arts. 20 and
2176, NCC)
POLICIES BEHIND CONFLICTS TORT LAW:
1. To deter socially undesirable or wrongful conduct; and
2. To rectify the consequences of the tortious act by
disturbing the losses that result from accident and
products liability. (p.407, Coquia & Aguiling-
Pangalangan, 2000)
MODERN THEORIES ON FOREIGN TORT LIABILITY:
1. The Most Significant Relationship:
● It considers the state’s contacts with the
occurrence and the parties such as:
(a) The place where the tortious conduct
occurred;
(b) The place where the injuries were sustained;
(c) The domicile, residence or nationality of the
victim and tortfeasor; and
(d) The place where the relationship of the
parties are centered serves a two-fold
purpose of identifying the interested state
and then evaluating the relevance of these
contacts to the issue in question.
2. Interest Analysis:
● It considers the relevant concerns the state may
have in the case and its interest in having its law
applied on that issue.
● The first task of a court is to determine whether the
case involves a false or true conflict.
○ There is a false conflict if only one state has
an interest in having its law applied and
failure to apply the other state’s law would
not impair the policy reflected in that law.
○ If more than one state has an apparent
interest in applying its law to the case there is
an apparent conflict.
AMERICAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO CONFLICTS TORT LAW:
- The law of the tort is deemed as the proper law in
questions involving regulation of conduct while the law
of the domicile of the parties governs in matters that
relate to loss-distribution or financial protection. (p.423,
Coquia & Aguiling-Pangalangan, 2000)
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
A. LEX LOCI DELICTI COMMISSI:
LEX LOCI DELICTI:
- The law of the place where the alleged tort was
committed determines the tort liability in matters
affecting conduct and safety.
The Common Law concept of place of wrong looks to the
place where the last event necessary to make an actor liable
for an alleged tort occurs. It adheres to the vested rights
theory.
Civil Law Countries view the situs of the tort as the place
where the tortious conduct was committed. This is
presumed on the principle that the legality or illegality of a
person’s act should be determined by the law of the state
where he is at the time he does such act.
The Lex Loci Delicti will not be enforced in the forum court
where the proper law contravenes the law or public policy of
the forum.
B. FOREIGN TORT CLAIMS:
VENUE FOR TORT CLAIMS:
- An action for tort may be brought wherever the
tortfeasor is subject to suit.
A tortious liability means that the liability resulting from the
conduct is “deemed personal to the perpetrator of the
wrong, following him whithersoever he may go, so that
compensations may be exacted from him in any proper
tribunal which may obtain jurisdiction of the defendant’s
person, the right to sue not being confined to the place
where the cause of action arises.” (p.424, Coquia &
Aguiling-Pangalangan, 2000)
1. Conditions for the Enforcement of Tort Claims:
Generally, claims for damages arising from torts
committed abroad may be given due course in the
forum court if:
1. The foreign tort is based on a civil action and not on a
crime;
2. The foreign tort is not contrary to the public policy of
the forum; and
3. The judicial machinery of the forum is adequate to
satisfy the claim.
In case where the law on contracts where the jurisdiction of
the forum court is based on the consent of the parties - the
defendant in a transnational tort is often sued in a foreign
court against his will.
2. Products Liability of the Foreign Manufacturer:
There are differences in the laws of states on the basis
and extent of liability for defectively manufactured products
have led to a number of conflicts tort cases. Such suits may
be based on negligence, strict liability in tort or breach of
warranty against hidden defects.
In a product liability case, the plaintiff purchases a
foreign-made product that is fungible (food) or non-fungible
(blender or oven-toaster). If he (the plaintiff) ingest the
product or uses it in an unaltered condition and in
accordance with the manufacturer’s printed instructions and
suffers injury, he may bring an action against the
manufacturer in his home state.
- Courts of the plaintiff’s home state assume
jurisdiction over the case and apply the forum
law because it has a real interest in allowing its
injured domiciliary to recover damages from an
out-of-state manufacturer. (p.425, Coquia &
Aguiling-Pangalangan, 2000)
SOVEREIGNTY AS BASIS OF JURISDICTION:
● Jurisdiction is an aspect of sovereignty and refers to
judicial, legislative and administrative competence.
● The sovereignty model has been accepted in common
law courts both to justify any exercise of jurisdiction
over a defendant present within the territory; and to
deny enforcement of a foreign court judgment over a
defendant who was not present within that court’s
jurisdiction.
● A state might assert personal jurisdiction over a foreign
corporation that delivers its products into the stream of
commerce with the expectation that they will be
purchased by consumers in the forum State.
(Worldwide Volkswagen vs. Woodson, 444 US 286)
3. The Alien Tort Act:
ALIEN TORT ACT (ATA):
● Enacted in 1789
● It grants US district courts original jurisdiction over any
civil action by an alien for a tort committed in violation
of the law of nations or a treaty of the US.
● Basis: “Compliance with the law of nations was a
fundamental concomitant of Nationhood and the
nation's obligation to comply with a particular legal
duty was supplemented by a moral duty. (Burley, 1989)
● In order for the ATA to apply, there is a need to
establish that the tortious conduct violated an
internationally protected human right.
4. Philippine Rule on Foreign Torts:
On the Theory of Vested Rights, the victim may decide to file
a tort case in the Philippines. The court may give due course
to the said case assuming that the defendant can be served
with summons in the Philippines.
It is suggested that the English Rule may be followed such
that the tort committed abroad is actionable in the country
where it was committed and also under Philippine law.
- Under this rule, there will be no problem of choice of
law because the Philippine law on torts will be applied
wherever the suit is brought. (See Philips vs. Eyre, 40
L.J. Q.B. 28, 1870)
C. DISTINGUISHING BETWEEN TORTS AND CRIMES:
TORT CRIME
CONFLICTS OF LAW 47
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes

Civil Law Criminal Law

Transitory in character, hence,
liability is deemed personal to
the tortfeasor and makes him
amenable to suit in whatever
jurisdiction is found.
Local in nature, hence, the
perpetrator of the wrong can
be sued only in the state
where he commits the crime.
1. Personal Law of a Corporation:
PERSONAL LAW OF A CORPORATION:
- It is the law of the State where its incorporation shall be
its personal law. (Art. 2, RCC)

An injury to an individual who An injury to the state where
may be situated in any place such crime was committed.
Torts law assigns liability to Penal ;aws are promulgated to
the perpetrators in order to punish and reform
indemnify the victim for perpetrators and deter them
injuries to be sustained. and others from violating the
law.
D. LEX LOCI DELICTI:
NULLUM CRIMEN SINE LEGE PRINCIPLE:
- “There is no crime where there is no law punishing it.”
- In order for a person to be punished for an act, such act
should have been made punishable as a crime by law.
This meant that the municipal law of the sovereign state.
(p.457, Coquia & Aguiling-Pangalangan, 2000)
TERRITORIAL PRINCIPLE:
- 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,
NCC)
LEX LOCI DELICTI:
- The law of the place where the crime was committed is
the controlling law.
THREE EXCEPTIONS TO THE TERRITORIAL RULE:
1) Crimes committed by state officials, diplomatic
representatives and officials of recognized international
organization;
2) Crimes committed on board a foreign vessel even if it
is within the territorial waters of the coastal state;
3) Crimes punishable under Philippine law:
Chapter 17:
CHOICE OF LAW AFFECTING CORPORATIONS
AND OTHER JURIDICAL ENTITIES
A. CORPORATIONS:
CORPORATION; DEFINITION:
- It is an artificial being created by operation of law,
having the right of succession and the powers,
attributes and properties expressly authorized by law or
incident to its existence. (Art. 2, RCC)
FOREIGN CORPORATION; MEANING:
- It is one formed, organized or existing under laws other
than those of the Philippines’ and whose laws allow
Filipino citizens and corporations to do business in its
own country or State. (Sec. 140, RCC)
ANGLO-AMERICAN THEORIES ON CORPORATION:
1. A corporation, being a creature of law, has no legal
status beyond the bounds of the sovereignty within
which it was created;
the 2. A corporation cannot exercise powers not granted by its
corporate charter or by the laws of the state of
incorporation;
3. No state is under any obligation to adhere to the
doctrine of comity. Every state has the power to refuse
to recognizee or prevent the foreign corporation from
acting within its jurisdiction; and
4. A state is not obliged to grant to a foreign corporation
the privileges and immunities common to the citizens of
that state. (Bank of Augusta vs. Earle, 38 US 519, 1839)
EXCEPTION TO THE RULE OF INCORPORATION TEST:
(a) Constitutional and Statutory Restrictions - a state
may legislate to exclude a foreign corporation, or
prescribe any conditions it may see fit as pre-requisite
to the corporation’s right to do business within its
territory. (See Sec. 2, Art. XII, 1987 Constitution)
(b) Control Test During War - In war time, the courts may
pierce the veil of a corporate identity and look into the
nationality of the controlling stockholders to determine
the “citizenship” of the corporation. (Filipinas Compania
vs. Christern, 89 Phil. 54)
DOMICILE OR RESIDENCE OF FOREIGN CORPORATION:
- When the law creating or recognizing them, or any
other provision does not fix the domicile of juridical
persons, the same shall be understood to be the place
where their legal representation is established or where
they exercise their principal functions. (Art. 51, NCC)
- A foreign corporation that has been granted a license to
operate in the Philippines acquires domicile in the
Philippines.
MEANING OF “TRANSACTING BUSINESS”:
- It shall include soliciting orders, service contracts,
opening offices, whether called “liaison” offices or
branches; appointing representatives or distributors
domiciled in the Philippines or who in any calendar
year stay in the country for a period or periods totaling
one hundred eighty (180) days or more; participating in
the management, supervision or control of any
domestic business, firm, entity or corporation in the
Philippines; and any other act or acts that imply a
continuity of commercial dealings or arrangements,
and contemplate to that extent the performance of acts
or works, or the exercise of some of the functions
normally incident to, and in progressive prosecution of,
commercial gain or of the purpose and object of the
business organization: Provided, however, That the
phrase “doing business” shall not be deemed to
include mere investment as a shareholder by a foreign
entity in domestic corporations duly registered to do
business, and/or the exercise of rights as such investor;
nor having a nominee director or officer to represent its

48 CONFLICTS OF LAW
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
interests in such corporation; nor appointing a
representative or distributor domiciled in the
Philippines which transacts business in its own name
and for its own account. (Sec. 3(d), RA 7042)

The quantum of activities necessary to establish “doing

business” is determined by the law of the state. The forum
court may consider a corporation “doing business” there if it
were “a community into whose business life the defendant
had significantly entered as determined by the quality,
substantiality, continuity and systematic nature of its
activities. (Seymour & Parke vs. Davis & Co., 423, F.2d 584)

B. PARTNERSHIPS:

PARTNERSHIP:
- By the contract of partnership two or more persons
bind themselves to contribute money, property, or
industry to a common fund, with the intention of
dividing the profits among themselves. Two or more
persons may also form a partnership for the exercise of
a profession. (Art. 1767, NCC)

GOVERNING LAW:
● Philippine internal law provides that if the domicile of
the partnership is not identified by the law creating it, it
is deemed domiciled in the place where it's legal
representation is established or where it exercises its
principal functions. (Art. 51, NCC)
○ ie. A partnership formed in one state but
conducts its main business in another state may
be considered domiciled in the latter.

CONFLICTS OF LAW 49
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes

SUMMARY RULES ON CHOICE-OF-LAW PROBLEMS

CHARACTER: SUBJECT: GOVERNING LAW OR RULE:

FAMILY RELATIONS: Marriage Extrinsic Validity:

General Rule: LEX LOCI CELEBRATIONIS
Exceptions:
(1) Art. 35(1),(4),(5), and (6), Family Code
(2) Art. 36, Family Code
(3) Art. 37, Family Code
(4) Art. 38, Family Code

Intrinsic Validity: PERSONAL LAW

Personal Relations between Spouses: PERSONAL LAW

Property Relations: See Art. 80, Family Code

But it is Generally Lex Situs

Divorce and Separation Lex Fori for Grounds of DIvorce

Legal Separation is Lex Nationalii (See Art. 15, NCC)

Annulment and Declaration Traditional Approach: Lex Loci Celebrationis

of Nullity
Modern Approach: Lex Domicilii (Marital Domicile)

Parental Relations Determination of Legitimacy: Personal Law

Parental Authority: Personal law of the father.

Adoption: Personal law of the child of the adopter and the adoptee
have different nationalities.

PROPERTY: Immovable Properties Lex Situs

Movable Properties Lex Domicilii

Lex Situs

Lex Loci Actus

Property in the Philippines Lex Situs, regardless whether real or personal property

Conveyances Extrinsic Validity: Lex Situs

Intrinsic Validity: Lex Situs unless Lex Intentionis is different and is

proved.

CONTRACTS: Extrinsic Validity Lex Loci Celebrationis unless it is clear that the intention of the
parties provides otherwise.

Intrinsic Validity Lex Contractus

Lex Solutionis

Lex Intentionis

Capacity to Enter into Personal Law

Contract

50 CONFLICTS OF LAW
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
Subject Matter Lex Situs (If the Subject Matter is a real Property)

Interpretation of Contract Lex Intentionis

WILLS, SUCCESSIONS, Extrinsic Validity Filipino who makes a Will Abroad:

ADMINISTRATION OF (a) Nationality Principle
ESTATES: (b) Lex Loci Celebrationis

Alien who makes a Will in the Philippines:

(1) Nationality Principle (Civil Law Countries)
(2) Domiciliary Principle (Common Law Countries)
(3) Lex Loci Celebrationis

Intrinsic Validity Lex Nationalii

Interpretation of Wills Lex Nationalii

However, if it is clear and unambiguous, Lex intentionis shall govern

Revocation If done abroad by the one who is not domiciled in the Philippines:
(a) Lex Loci Celebrationis; or
(b) Lex Domicilii

If done abroad by the one who is domiciled in the Philippines:

(a) Lex Loci Actus;
(b) Lex Domicilii; or
(c) Lex Loci Celebrationis.

If it is done within the Philippines:

- Lex Loci Actus (Hence, Philippine Law)

Probate Lex Fori

Lex Loci Celebrationis

Trusts If there is an effective choice of law → Courts of the place where

the trust is being administered.

If there is no effective choice of law → the law that will sustain the
validity of the trust (place of administration or domicile)

TORTS Lex Fori (Forum Law)

Traditional Approach:
1. Vested Rights Theory

Modern Approaches:
a. The place of the most significant relationship
b. Interest Analysis

CORPORATIONS: Law of the Place where it is incorporated; or

Law of the Place of its Principal Office

CONFLICTS OF LAW 51
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes

- Derived from the vested rights theory (Godard vs.

Gray, LR 6 QB 139, 1870)
- It considers a judgment of a foreign court of
PART FIVE: competent jurisdiction as imposing a duty or
FOREIGN JUDGMENTS: obligation on the losing litigant.
- Ex. If there is an adjudication on the debt owing to
the plaintiff, Forum-2 treats the Forum-1 judgment
FOREIGN JUDGMENT: as evidence of the debt which may be enforced in
- It refers to decisions rendered outside the forum and the Forum-2 by an action of debt.
encompasses judgments, decrees and orders of courts
of foreign countries as well as those of sister states in a C. RES JUDICATA PRINCIPLE:
federal system of government.
- If the successful plaintiff fails to obtain satisfaction of a
judgment in the court which granted it, he may try to DOCTRINE OF RES JUDICATA:
enforce judgment in another state where the defendant ● Those who have contested an issue shall be bound by
can be located. (p.529, Coquia and the result of the contest and that matters once tried and
Aguiling-Pangalangan, 2000) decided with finality in one jurisdiction shall be
considered settled as between the parties. (Baldwin vs.
Iowa State Traveling, 203 US 1244)
Chapter 18: ○ Parties are prevented from litigating issues that
RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT have been determined between them by a valid
OF FOREIGN JUDGMENTS local judgment.
● It seeks to give finality to litigation.
A. DISTINCTION BETWEEN RECOGNITION
AND ENFORCEMENT: Doctrine of Collateral Estoppel Doctrine of Res Judicata

It renders conclusive all “essential It seeks to end litigation by

RECOGNITION:
A passive act of giving effect to a
judgment of Forum-1 without
necessarily filing an action in
Forum-2.
Seek by the Defendant
issues of facts actually litigated in disallowing a suit on the same
ENFORCEMENT: the suit decided on by the foreign claim.
court.
Filing of an action in court.
Concerned with issue preclusion
by barring relitigation of an issue
already litigated on in a prior
proceedings.
Seek by the Plaintiff

Ex. A divorce decree issued in Italy Ex. An action of debt must be

to an Italian gives him the capacity brought in Forum-2 on the
to remarry in the Philippines. Forum-1 judgment and a new
judgment by Forum-2 must be
handed down before the plaintiff
can have properties of the
defendant attached.
B. BASES OF RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT
OF FOREIGN JUDGMENTS
1. COMITY:
- Comity is the recognition which one nation allows
within its territory to the legislative, executive or
judicial acts of another nation, having due regard
both to international duty and convenience, and to
the rights of its own citizens or of other persons
who are under the protection of its laws. (Hilton vs.
Guyot, 159 US 133)
- One effect of recognition based on comity is that it
calls for reciprocity between the concerned
jurisdiction.
- Ie. Forum-A would withhold recognition and
enforcement of the prior judgment if it comes from
Forum-B, a country which does not give the same
concession to a judgment coming from Forum-A
2. THE OBLIGATION OF FOREIGN JUDGMENTS:
EFFORT OF FOREIGN JUDGMENTS OR FINAL ORDERS:
- The effect of a judgment or final order of a tribunal of a
foreign country, having jurisdiction to render the
judgment or final order is as follows:
(a) In case of a judgment or final order upon a specific
thing, the judgment or final order, is conclusive
upon the title to the thing, and
(b) In case of a judgment or final order against a
person, the judgment or final order is presumptive
evidence of a right as between the parties and their
successors in interest by a subsequent title.
- In either case, the judgment or final order may be
repelled by evidence of a want of jurisdiction, want of
notice to the party, collusion, fraud, or clear mistake of
law or fact. (Sec. 48, Rule 39, ROC)
D. REQUISITES FOR RECOGNITION
OR ENFORCEMENT:
REQUISITES FOR RECOGNITION OR ENFORCEMENT:
1. The foreign judgment was rendered by a judicial or a
quasi-tribunal which had jurisdiction over the parties
and the case in the proper judicial proceedings;
2. The judgment must be valid under the laws of the court
that rendered it;
3. The judgment must be final and executory to constitute
res judicata in another action;

52 CONFLICTS OF LAW
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
4. The state where the foreign judgment was obtained
forwarded the same to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan
allows recognition or enforcement of Philippine which forwarded it to the Japanese Embassy in Manila.
judgments; Thereafter, the court processes were delivered to
5. The judgment must be for a fixed sum of money; DFA-Philippines then to the Executive Judge of CFI-Manila who
6. The foreign judgment must not be contrary to the public ordered its deputy sheriff to serve the said summons on Sharp’s
policy or the good morals of the country where it is to Manila Office. This service is equivalent to service on the proper
be enforced; government official under the Philippines Rules of Court.
7. The judgment must not have been obtained by fraud,
collusion, mistake of fact or mistake of law. Therefore, the manner of service of summons to Sharp’s Manila
Office is valid, and Tokyo District Court has acquired jurisdiction
over it.
NORTHWEST ORIENT AIRLINES vs. CA AND C.F. SHARP CO.
241 SCRA 192 (1995)
BOUDARD vs. TAFT
FACTS: Northwest Airlines entered an International Passenger
67 Phil. 170 (1939)
Sales Agency Agreement with CF Sharp, through its Japan
branch, whereby Northwest authorized CF Sharp to sell their
FACTS: Emilie Boudard (widow of Jerome Boudard and guardian
tickets and the latter shall remit the sales.
of their children) has obtained a favorable judgment for collection
of money from CFI-Hanoi, French Indo-China against Stewart
When CF Sharp failed to remit the sales of the tickets, Northwest
Tait. Tait was declared in default for his failure to appear at the
filed a suit for the collection of the unremitted amount before the
trial.
Tokyo District Court. When the Tokyo District Court failed to
serve the writ of summons against CF Sharp’s Japan office, it
The judgment was based on the fact that Jerome Boudard (an
decided to serve the summons at Sharp’s office in Manila, which
employee of Stewart Tait) was killed in Hanoi by co-employee
the latter accepted.
although outside the fulfillment of a duty.
When Sharp (Manila) failed to appear at the hearing, the Tokyo
Emilie Boudard filed a petition with CFI-Manila for the execution
District Court heard the complaint and rendered a judgment
of the Hanoi Judgment but the court dismissed the complaint on
ordering Sharp to Northwest to pay damages. Sharp failed to
the ground of lack of jurisdiction of the Hanoi Court because
appeal and the judgment became final and executory.
Stewart Tait is not a resident of that country.
When Northwest failed to execute the Japan Court’s decision, it
ISSUE: W/N judgment cannot be enforced in the Philippines
filed a suit for its enforcement before RTC-Manila. Sharp Answer,
because the Hanoi Court did not acquire jurisdiction over the
arguing that the Japanese court judgment is null and void
person of Tait?
because such court did not acquire jurisdiction over the person
of the defendant-Sharp. RTC agreed with the contention of
RULING: YES, The French law regarding summons provides that
Sharp and ruled in its favor. On appeal, CA affirmed with the RTC
“Those who have no known residence in France, in the place of
and hold that the process of the court has no extraterritorial
their present residence; if the place is unknown, the writ shall be
effect and no jurisdiction was acquired over the person of the
posted at the main door of the hall of the court where the
defendant by serving him beyond the boundaries of the state.
complaint has been filed; a second copy shall be given to the
Attorney-General of the Republic who shall visae the original.”
ISSUE: W/N the Tokyo District Court acquired jurisdiction over
the person of Sharp when it issued the writ of summons in the
The fundamental rule is that Jurisdiction in personam over
latter’s Manila Head Office?
non-residents, in order to sustain a money judgment, must be
based upon personal service within the state which rendered the
RULING: YES, Matters of remedy and procedure (such as those
judgment.
relating to the service of process upon a defendant) are
governed by the lex fori (forum law) or the internal law of the
The Exhibits show Tait was not in Hanoi during the time
forum. In this case, it is the procedural law. In this case, it is the
summons were served upon him, nor were his employees or
procedural law of Japan where the judgment was rendered that
representatives present. Therefore, CFI_Hanoi did not acquire
determines the validity of the extraterritorial service of process
jurisdiction over the Tait.
on Sharp. In the absence of proof regarding Japanese law, the
presumption of identity or similarity (processual presumption
doctrine) may be invoked.
RAMIREZ vs. GMUR
Since CF Sharp did not present evidence that the assailed 42 Phil. 855 (1918)
extraterritorial service of summons under Japanese Law is
invalid, it is presumed that Japanese procedural law is similar FACTS: Samuel Werthmuller (Swiss native, and a resident of the
with the Philippine law on service of summons on a private Philippines for many years) died in Iloilo in 1913, leaving a will
foreign corporation doing business in the Philippines. Under which dispose of his estate. In the first clause of the will, Samuel
Philippine law, if the defendant is a foreign corporation doing stated that he had no children from his marriage, and he had no
business in the Philippines, service of summons may be made forced heirs. Thus, in making this statement, the testator
on: (Samuel) ignored possible claims of two sets of children that
1) on its resident agent designated in accordance with the law were born to his natural daughter, Leona Castro.
for that purpose;
2) If there is no such resident agent, on the government In 1895, Leona Castro was married to Frederick Kauffman
official designated by law to that effect; or (British) and they have 3 children together (Kauffman’s Sets). In
3) On any of its officers or agents within the Philippines. 1904, Kauffman went to Paris, France to obtain a divorce decree
from Leona under French Law, and the following year it was
Tokyo District Court requested the SC of Japan to cause the granted. In the same year, Leona married Dr. Mory in England,
delivery of the summons to the Philippines. SC-Japan, in turn, and they have two children together (Mory’s Sets).

CONFLICTS OF LAW 53
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
In 1910, Leona Castro died. Both sets of children claimed that
she was the recognized natural daughter of Samuel, and as such
would have been his forced heir had she been alive at the time of
her father’s death. [aka, Leona predeceased her father Samuel)
ISSUE: Kauffman’s Sets vs. Mory’s Sets: Who is entitled to
participate in the inheritance? W/N the divorce decree obtained
in France was valid?
RULING: SC is of the opinion that the decree of divorce upon
which the reliance is placed by the representation of the Mory
children cannot be recognized as valid in the courts of the
Philippines. The French tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain
an action for the dissolution of a marriage contracted in these
Islands by persons domiciled here, such marriage being
indissoluble under the laws then prevailing in this country.
Since the divorced granted by the French Court must be ignored,
it results that the marriage of Dr. Mory and Leona Castro,
celebrated in England, could not legalize their relations.
Therefore, the claims of Mory’s Children to participate in the
estate of Samuel Kauffman must be rejected.
The right to inherit is limited to legitimate, legitimated, and
acknowledged natural children. Since, the Kauffman children are
legitimate children, born in lawful wedlock, they are entitled to
participate in the inheritance.
BORTHWICK vs. CASTRO
152 SCRA 229 (1987)
FACTS: William Borthwick (American living in the Philippines)
owned real property interest in Hawaii. In his business dealing
with Joseph Scallon, Borthwick issued promissory notes which
provided that upon default, the action may be brought for
collection in LA, California, or at Scallon’s option, in Manila or
Honolulu, Hawaii.
When Borthwick failed to pay the sums owing upon the maturity
date but still failed to pay. He was served with summons when
he was in California, pursuant to Hawaiian law allowing service of
process on a person outside the territorial confines of the State.
Borthwick ignored the summons, and a judgment by default was
entered against him.
Scallon came to the Philippines and brought a suit against
Borthwick seeking enforcement of the Hawaiian court judgment.
On the other hand, Borthwoick moved for a new trial on the
ground that the promissory notes did not arise from business
dealings in Hawaii, nor did he own real estate therein. He
contended that the Hawaiian Court judgment is unenforceable in
the Philippines because it was invalid for lack of jurisdiction over
his person.
ISSUE: W/N the Hawaiian Court was able to acquire jurisdiction
over Borthwick?
RULING: YES, A foreign judgment against a person is merely
“presumptive evidence of a right as between the parties,” and
rejection thereof may be justified, among others, “by evidence of
lack of jurisdiction” of the issuing authority.
In the case at bar, the jurisdiction of the Hawaiian Court hinged
entirely on the existence of either of two facts in accordance with
its State laws, (ie. either Borthwick owned real property in
Hawaii; or the promissory notes sued upon resulted from his
business transactions therein).
54 CONFLICTS OF LAW
Scallon’s complaint alleged both facts. Borthwcik was given an
opportunity to answer the complaint and impugn those facts but
he failed to appear and was declared in default. Thus, there is no
evidence in the record of the Hawaii case to lay a conclusion of
lack of jurisdiction, as Borthwich urges.
QUERUBIN vs. QUERUBIN
87 Phil. 124 (1950)
FACTS: Silvestre Querubin (Filipino) married Margaret Querubin
(American) in New Mexico, USA. They had a daughter named,
Querubina. When Silvestre and Margaret got divorced, the
California Court granted custody of Querubina to Silvestre under
an interlocutory order because Margaret was living with another
man. Thereafter, the California Court modified the interlocutory
order and granted the custody of Querubina to Margaret.
Silvestre took Querubina and left for the Philippines to
permanently leave the US, and to protect his child from the
effects of Margaret’s scandalous conduct.
Margaret, through her counsel, presented to the CFI-Philippines
a petition for Habeas Corpus for the custody of Querubina under
the interlocutory decree of the California Court. She claims that
the decree of the California Court granting her the child’s
custody must be complied within the Philippines.
ISSUES:
1. W/N the California Court’s Interlocutory Order granting the
child’s custody to Margaret should be complied in the
Philippines?
2. W/N the judgment of the California Court granting Margaret
the custody of Querubina is against public policy?
RULING:
1. NO, the California Court’s order should not be complied
within the Philippines because the decree is interlocutory, it
cannot be implemented in the Philippines. Where the
judgment is merely interlocutory, the determination of the
question by the Court which rendered it did not settle and
adjudge finally the rights of the parties.
2. YES, Under the Divorce Law, the offending spouse may not
be awarded custody of the minor children. It goes against
the law, public policy and good customs that a mother who
violated her marital vows should have custody. The
Philippine Court cannot give effect to a foreign judgment
that contravenes its laws, customs and public morals.
The Philippine Court cannot grant the petition of a Mother
to have custody of the child who will live under the control
of the man who dishonored her mother and offended her
father because she may get the idea that an unfaithful
mother can keep her child; that she will be impressed with
inferior morals.
E. GROUNDS FOR NON-RECOGNITION:
A. GROUNDS WHEN FOREIGN JUDGMENT IS NOT
CONCLUSIVE:
1. The judgment was rendered under a system which
does not provide impartial tribunals or procedures
compatible with the requirements of due process of
law;
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes
2. The foreign court did not have personal jurisdiction
over the defendant; or
3. The foreign court did not have jurisdiction over the
subject matter. (Sec. 4(a), Uniform Money-Judgment
Recognition Act of the US)
B. MANDATORY GROUNDS FOR NON-RECOGNITION OF
FOREIGN JUDGMENT:
a) The defendant in the proceedings in the foreign court
did not receive notice of the proceedings in sufficient
time to enable him to defend;
b) The judgment was obtained by fraud;
c) The cause of action or claim of relief on which the
judgment is based is repugnant to the public policy of
this state. (Sec. 4(b), Uniform Money-Judgment
Recognition Act of the US)
C. DISCRETIONARY GROUNDS FOR NON-RECOGNITION
OF FOREIGN JUDGMENT:
a) The foreign judgment conflicts with another final and
conclusive judgment;
b) The proceedings in the foreign country was contrary
to an agreement between the parties under which the
dispute in question settled otherwise than the
proceeding in that court; or
c) In the case of jurisdiction based only in personal
service, the foreign court was a seriously
inconvenient forum for the trial of the action. (Sec.
4(b), Uniform Money-Judgment Recognition Act of
the US)
F. MODERN DEVELOPMENTS IN ENFORCEMENT
OF FOREIGN JUDGMENTS:
1. HAGUE CONFERENCE ON PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL
LAW:
● It established the condition and pre-requisites under
which the contracting states would recognize and
enforce each other's judgment.It applies to all foreign
judgments, irrespective of its place of origin,
affecting matters to which the Convention extends,
and directed against a domiciliary or habitual
resident in a contracting state.
● It permits such domiciliary to object to recognition
and enforcement by a contracting state of a foreign
judgment where that judgment was based on an
improper forum.
2. EUROPEAN ECONOMIC COMMUNITY (EEC)
CONVENTION OF 1968:
● It extends to the entire Common Market area the reach
of jurisdictionally improper fora presently available
against non-residents under the procedural systems of
4 member states.
● It permits any of its signatories to include in bilateral
treaties it may enter into with third states, clauses that
protect their domiciliaries against recognition of foreign
judgments that are improperly based. (Art. 2, EEC)
3. UNIFORM FOREIGN MONEY-JUDGMENTS RECOGNITION
ACT:
● It seeks to inspire more confidence in the stability of
American law and coalesce into one statute all the
common law rules of recognition derived from
jurisprudence.
● It is applicable to any foreign country judgment that is
final and conclusive and enforceable when rendered
even though an appeal therefrom is pending or it is
subject to appeal.
● It explicitly excludes judgments from taxes, penalties
and for child or spousal support. (Art. 2, Uniform
Foreign Money-Judgments Recognition Act)
G. PROCEDURE FOR ENFORCEMENT:
1. IN COMMON LAW COUNTRIES:
- When a foreign judgment is recognized, it is not
instantaneously executed as a judgment.
- The Philippines adopted this and our laws require that
a petition should be filed in the proper court attaching
an authenticated copy of the foreign judgment to be
enforced.
- Authentication calls for the Philippine consul assigned
to the country where the foreign judgment was decreed
to certify that had been rendered by a court of
competent jurisdiction.
- Apostille Convention (See also)
2. IN CIVIL LAW COUNTRIES:
- A statute provides for a summary proceeding for
enforcement of foreign judgments.
- Exequatur - A validation proceeding by the court is a
requisite in countries (ie. France, Italy, Switzerland, and
Austria)
- French Civil Procedure calls for an
authenticated copy of the foreign judgment to
be accompanied by a validation certificate or
‘formule executoire’ issued by the clerk of court.
Once validated, the foreign is given the same
effect as a local judgment.
SOME BAR QUESTIONS ON CONFLICT OF LAWS:
2019 BAR
F, a Filipina, married J, a Japanese, in the Philippines. After three
(3) years, they had a falling out and thus, separated. Soon after, F
initiated a divorce petition in Japan which was not opposed by J
because under Japanese law, a grant of divorce will capacitate
him to remarry. F's divorce petition was then granted by the
Japanese court with finality.
May the legal effects of the divorce decree be recognized in
the Philippines, and consequently, capacitate F to remarry
here? Explain. (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: YES, the legal effects of the divorce
decree may be recognized in the Philippines, and consequently,
capacitate F to remarry.
In the case of Republic v. Manalo [G.R. No. 221029, April 24,
2018], the Court held that under Paragraph 2 of Article 26 of the
Family Code, a Filipino citizen has the capacity to remarry under
Philippine law after initiating a divorce proceeding abroad and
obtaining a favorable judgment against his or her alien spouse
who is capacitated to remarry. Here, F initiated a divorce petition
in Japan and obtained a favorable judgment which capacitated
her Japanese husband to remarry. Applying Paragraph 2 of
Article 26 of the Family Code as interpreted in Republic v.
Manalo, the legal effects of the divorce obtained by F may be
recognized in the Philippines which may capacitate F to remarry
CONFLICTS OF LAW 55
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
Morillo Notes

here.

Sources:
1. Conflict of Laws; Cases, Materials, and Comments, by
Jorge Coquia and Elizabeth Aguiling-Pangalangan, 2000
Edition)
2. Rules of Court
3. 2019 Amended Rules on Civil Procedure
4. 2019 Amended Rules on Evidence
5. New Civil Code of the Philippines

56 CONFLICTS OF LAW