Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Conflict of Laws Digests
Conflict of Laws Digests
1. Hilton vs Guyot given by the judgment nation. Since the Court in Hilton found that French
Hilton v. Guyot courts would not have enforced or executed a judgment rendered in this
Brief Fact Summary country, it therefore held that the French judgment at issue should be
Hilton (Plaintiff) and Libbey (Plaintiff) appealed from a federal district court nonconclusive here.
holding that a French court judgment against them for amounts allegedly XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
owed to a French firm was enforceable without retrial on the merits. Hilton v. Guyot
Synopsis of Rule of Law Hilton v. Guyot, 159 U.S. 113 (1895), was a United States Supreme
No law has any effect, of its own force, beyond the limits of the sovereignty Court case where the Court ruled that the recognition and enforceability of a
from which its authority is derived. foreign judgment rested on the "comity of nations," namely whether there
Facts would be any reciprocity and mutual recognition by the foreign jurisdiction
Hilton (Plaintiff) and Libbey (Plaintiff), New York citizens trading in Paris, from which the judgment was issued.[1]
were sued in France by Guyot (Defendant), the administrator of a French Hilton established the fundamental basis for the recognition and enforcement
firm, for sums allegedly owed to that firm. The Plaintiffs appeared and of foreign judgments in the United States,[2] remaining "the most detailed
litigated the merits in the French proceeding. The French court rendered a exposition of any American court" on this principle.[3] It is also viewed as the
judgment against them that was affirmed by a higher court and became quintessential statement of comity in international law,[4] and is one of the
final. Defendant then sought to enforce that judgment in federal district earliest decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court to assert that international law
court in New York. That court held the judgment enforceable without retrial is part of U.S. law.[5]
on the merits. The Plaintiffs then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. Background
Issue Hilton and Libbey, U.S. citizens conducting business in Paris, France, were
Do laws have any effect, of their own force, beyond the limits of the sued in French court by Guyot, the administrator of a French firm, for sums
sovereignty from which its authority is derived? allegedly owed to that firm. They appeared and litigated the merits before the
Held French court, which rendered a judgment against them that was affirmed by
(Gray, J.) No. No law has any effect, of its own force, beyond the limits of a higher court and became final. Guyot sought to enforce that judgment in
the sovereignty from which its authority is derived. No sovereign is bound, federal district court in New York, which held that the French judgment was
unless by special compact, to execute within his dominions a judgment enforceable without retrial on the merits. Hilton and Libbey subsequently
rendered by the tribunals of another state, and if execution be sought by suit appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
upon the judgment or otherwise, the tribunal in which the suit is brought, or XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
from which execution is sought, is, on principle, at liberty to examine into the Opinion of the Court
merits of such judgment, and to give effect to it or not, as may be found just The central question before the Court was whether a judgment had force
and equitable. However, the general comity, utility and convenience of beyond the limits of the sovereign jurisdiction from which its authority
nations have established a usage among most civilized states, by which the derived. In finding that there was no applicable treaty or domestic statute
final judgments of foreign courts of competent jurisdiction are reciprocally from which an answer could be derived, the Court determined that it was
carried into execution, under certain regulations and restrictions, which differ incumbent on the judiciary to ascertain the law, based on guidance from
in different countries. Additionally, judgments rendered in France, or in any "judicial decisions, from the works of jurists and commentators, and from the
foreign country, by the laws of which our own judgments are reviewable upon acts and usages of civilized nations."
the merits, are not entitled to full credit and conclusive effect when sued upon In an opinion authored by Justice Horace Gray, the Court, drawing upon both
in this country, but are prima facie evidence only of the justice of the domestic and international legal sources, concluded that whether any foreign
plaintiffs’ claim. Reversed. judgment was to be enforced in the U.S. rested on whether there was comity
Dissent between the U.S. and the foreign jurisdiction in question. In articulating this
(Fuller, C.J.)Â The doctrine of res judicata should be applicable to domestic position, the Court set forth the general standard for making this
judgments as well as to foreign judgments, and rests on the same general determination and for what defined international comity.
ground of public policy that there should be an end of litigation. No law has any effect, of its own force, beyond the limits of the sovereignty
Discussion from which its authority is derived. The extent to which the law of one nation,
The Court’s decision in Hilton v. Guyot reflects the traditional rule of as put in force within its territory, whether by executive order, by legislative
reciprocity. According to this concept, foreign nation judgments were act, or by judicial decree, shall be allowed to operate within the dominion of
another nation, depends upon what our greatest jurists have been content to
call 'the comity of nations.' Although the phrase has been often criticised, no FACTS:
satisfactory substitute has been suggested. Saudi Arabian Airlines (SAUDIA), foreign airlines corporation doing business
'Comity,' in the legal sense, is neither a matter of absolute obligation, on the in the Philippines and may be served summons in agent in Makati, hired
one hand, nor of mere courtesy and good will, upon the other. But it is the Milagros P. Morada as a flight attendant for its airlines based in Jeddah,
recognition which one nation allows within its territory to the legislative, Saudi Arabia.
executive or judicial acts of another nation, having due regard both to April 27, 1990: While on a lay-over in Jakarta, Indonesia, Morada went to a
international duty and convenience, and to the rights of its own citizens, or of disco dance with fellow crew members Thamer Al-Gazzawi and Allah Al-
other persons who are under the protection of its laws. [6] Gazzawi, both Saudi nationals. It was almost morning when they returned to
Applying this standard, the Court reasoned, after examining relevant French their hotels so they agreed to have breakfast together at the room of
laws and judicial decisions, that a French court would not have recognized a Thamer. Shortly after Allah left the room, Thamer attempted to rape Morada.
foreign judgment without having first considered its merits. Therefore, based Fortunately, a roomboy and several security personnel heard her cries for
on the notion of reciprocity derived from international comity, U.S. courts help and rescued her. Indonesian police arrested Thamer and Allah Al-
should similarly examine the merits of any judgment prior to ruling on its Gazzawi, the latter as an accomplice.
enforcement. The judgment of the U.S. circuit court was subsequently When Morada returned to Jeddah, SAUDIA officials interrogated her about
reversed and the case remanded for retrial. the Jakarta incident and requested her to go back to Jakarta to help arrange
The Court's opinion is notable for drawing heavily from international legal the release of Thamer and Allah. In Jakarta, SAUDIA Legal Officers
sources, specifically the laws and practices of over a dozen nations all over negotiated with the police for the immediate release of the detained crew
the world regarding the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments. members but did not succeed. Afraid that she might be tricked into
Thus, Hilton was one of the first Supreme Court cases to apply customary something she did not want because of her inability to understand the local
international law—the prevailing practices of states—in making its dialect, Morado refused to cooperate and declined to sign a blank paper and
determination as to non-U.S. judgments: a document written in the local dialect. Eventually, SAUDIA allowed Morada
It appears, therefore, that there is hardly a civilized nation on either continent, to return to Jeddah but barred her from the Jakarta flights.
which, by its general law, allows conclusive effect to an executory foreign Indonesian authorities agreed to deport Thamer and Allah and they were
judgment for the recovery of money. In France, and in a few smaller States again put in service. While, Morada was transferred to Manila.
— Norway, Portugal, Greece, Monaco, and Hayti — the merits of the January 14, 1992: Morada was asked to see Mr. Ali Meniewy, Chief Legal
controversy are reviewed, as of course, allowing to the foreign judgment, at Officer of SAUDIA, in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. He brought her to the police
the most, no more effect than of being prima facie evidence of the justice of station where the police took her passport and questioned her about the
the claim. In the great majority of the countries on the continent of Europe — Jakarta incident. The police pressured her to drop the case against Thamer
in Belgium, Holland, Denmark, Sweden, Germany, in many cantons of and Allah. Not until she agreed to do so did the police return her passport
Switzerland, in Russia and Poland, in Roumania, in Austria and Hungary, and allowed her to catch the afternoon flight out of Jeddah.
(perhaps in Italy,) and in Spain — as well as in Egypt, in Mexico, and in a June 16, 1993: Morada, while in Riyadh Saudi Arabia, was not allowed to
great part of South America, the judgment rendered in a foreign country is board the plane to Manila and instead ordered to take a later flight to Jeddah
allowed the same effect only as the courts of that country allow to the to see Mr. Miniewy. Khalid of the SAUDIA office brought her to a Saudi court
judgments of the country in which the judgment in question is sought to be where she was asked to sign a document written in Arabic. They told her that
executed. this was necessary to close the case against Thamer and Allah but it was
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX actually a notice for her to appear before the court on June 27,
2. Saudi Arabian Airlines vs Court of Appeals 1993. Plaintiff then returned to Manila.
Conflicts Of Laws Case Digest: Saudi Arabian Airlines V. CA June 27, 1993: SAUDIA's Manila manager, Aslam Saleemi, assured Morada
that the investigation was routinary and that it posed no danger to her so she
G.R. No. 122191 October 8, 1998 reported to Miniewy in Jeddah for further investigation. She was brought to
the Saudi court.
Laws Applicable: Art 19 and 21 of Civil Code June 28, 1993: Saudi judge interrogated Morada through an interpreter about
the Jakarta incident for an hour and let her go. SAUDIA officers forbidden
Lessons Applicable: Conflict of Laws, factual situation, connecting factor, her to take flight. She was told to go the Inflight Service Office where her
characterization, choice of law, State of the most significant relationship
passport was taken and they told her to remain in Jeddah, at the crew Morada: Amended Complaint is based on Articles 19 and 21 of the Civil
quarters, until further orders. Code which is a matter of domestic law
July 3, 1993: She was brought to court again and to her astonishment and
shock, rendered a decision, translated to her in English, sentencing her to ISSUE: W/N the RTC of Quezon City has jurisdiction over the case and it is
five months imprisonment and to 286 lashes. The court tried her, together the proper forum for recovery of damages under Art. 21 of the Civil Code
with Thamer and Allah, and found her guilty of (1) adultery (2) going to a which should govern.
disco, dancing and listening to the music in violation of Islamic laws and (3)
socializing with the male crew, in contravention of Islamic tradition. HELD: YES. petition for certiorari is hereby DISMISSED. REMANDED to
Failing to seek the assistance of her employer, SAUDIA, she asked the RTC of Quezon City, Branch 89 for further proceedings
Philippine Embassy in Jeddah to help her while her case is on appeal. She Where the factual antecedents satisfactorily establish the existence of a
continued to workon the domestic flight of SAUDIA, while Thamer and Allah foreign element, the problem could present a "conflicts" case
continued to serve in the international flights. A factual situation that cuts across territorial lines and is affected by the
Because she was wrongfully convicted, the Prince of Makkah dismissed the diverse laws of two or more states is said to contain a "foreign element".
case against her and allowed her to leave Saudi Arabia. Before her return to o Morada is a resident Philippine national
Manila, she was terminated from the service by SAUDIA, without her being o SAUDIA is a resident foreign corporation
informed of the cause. o by virtue of the employment of Morada with the SAUDIA as a flight
November 23, 1993: Morada filed a Complaint for damages against SAUDIA, stewardess, events did transpire during her many occasions of travel across
and Khaled Al-Balawi, its country manager. national borders, particularly from Manila, Philippines to Jeddah, Saudi
January 19, 1994: SAUDIA filed an Omnibus Motion To Dismiss on following Arabia, and vice versa, that caused a "conflicts" situation to arise
grounds: (1) that the Complaint states no cause of action against SAUDIA (2) Forms of foreign element:
that defendant Al-Balawi is not a real party in interest (3) that the claim or o Simple: one of the parties to a contract is an alien or has a foreign
demand set forth in the Complaint has been waived, abandoned or otherwise domicile, or that a contract between nationals of one State involves
extinguished and (4) that the trial court has no jurisdiction to try the case. properties situated in another State
After opposition to the motion to dismiss by Morada and reply by SAUDIA, o Complex
Morada filed an Amended Complaint dropping Al-Balawi. SAUDIA filed its Violations of Articles 19 and 21 are actionable, with judicially enforceable
Manifestation, Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint, subsequently motion remedies in the municipal forum. RTC of Quezon City possesses jurisdiction
for reconsideration which were all denied. over the subject matter of the suit.
SAUDIA filed its Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition with Prayer for Pragmatic considerations, including the convenience of the parties, also
Issuance of Writ of Preliminary Injunction and/or Temporary Restraining weigh heavily in favor of the RTC Quezon City assuming jurisdiction:
Order with the Court of Appeals. TRO was granted but Writ of Preliminary o private interest of the litigant
Injunction was denied. o enforceability of a judgment if one is obtained
CA: Philippines is an appropriate forum considering that the Amended o relative advantages and obstacles to a fair trial
Complaint's basis for recovery of damages is Article 21 of the Civil Code, and § Plaintiff may not, by choice of an inconvenient forum, "vex", "harass", or
thus, clearly within the jurisdiction of respondent Court. It further held that "oppress" the defendant, e.g. by inflicting upon him needless expense or
certiorari is not the proper remedy in a denial of a Motion to Dismiss, disturbance. but unless the balance is strongly in favor of the defendant, the
inasmuch as the petitioner should have proceeded to trial, and in case of an plaintiffs choice of forum should rarely be disturbed.
adverse ruling, find recourse in an appeal. Weighing the relative claims of the parties, the court a quo found it best to
SAUDIA filed its Supplemental Petition for Review with Prayer for Temporary hear the case in the Philippines. Had it refused to take cognizance of the
Restraining Order: case, it would be forcing plaintiff (private respondent now) to seek remedial
o It is a conflict of laws that must be settled at the outset: action elsewhere, i.e. in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia where she no longer
§ Morada's claim for alleged abuse of rights occurred in the Kingdom of maintains substantial connections. That would have caused a fundamental
Saudi Arabia. unfairness to her. Moreover, by hearing the case in the Philippines no
§ Existence of a foreign element qualifies the instant case for the application unnecessary difficulties and inconvenience have been shown by either of the
of the law of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, by virtue of the lex loci delicti parties.
commissi rule. Trial court possesses jurisdiction over the persons of the parties
o By filing her Complaint and Amended Complaint with the trial court, applies whenever the content of the otherwise applicable foreign law is
private respondent has voluntary submitted herself to the jurisdiction of the excluded from application in a given case for the reason that it falls under
court one of the exceptions to the applications of foreign law; and
o SAUDIA has effectively submitted to the trial court's jurisdiction by § (8) the flag of a ship, which in many cases is decisive of practically all legal
praying for the dismissal of the Amended Complaint on grounds other than relationships of the ship and of its master or owner as such. It also covers
lack of jurisdiction. contractual relationships particularly contracts of affreightment
As to the choice of applicable law, it seeks to answer 2 important questions: Note that one or more circumstances may be present to serve as the
o (1) What legal system should control a given situation where some of the possible test for the determination of the applicable law.
significant facts occurred in two or more states Based on pleadings on record, including allegations in the Amended
o (2) to what extent should the chosen legal system regulate the situation Complaint:
Although ideally, all choice-of-law theories should intrinsically advance both o Morada was made to face trial for very serious charges, including
notions of justice and predictability, they do not always do so. The forum is adultery and violation of Islamic laws and tradition
then faced with the problem of deciding which of these two important values o SAUDIA may have acted beyond its duties as employer by handing over
should be stressed. the person of Morada to Jeddah officials which contributed to and amplified
Before a choice can be made, it is necessary for us to determine under what or even proximately caused additional humiliation, misery and suffering. It
category a certain set of facts or rules fall also took advantage of the trust, confidence and faith in the guise of authority
o "characterization" or the "doctrine of qualification” as employer.
§ process of deciding whether or not the facts relate to the kind of question o Conviction and imprisonment was wrongful but injury or harm was
specified in a conflicts rule inflicted upon her person and reputation which must be compensated or
§ purpose: to enable the forum to select the proper law redress for the wrong doing
Choice-of-law rules invariably consist of: (essential element of conflict rules) Complaint involving torts
o factual situation/relationship or operative fact (such as property right, "connecting factor" or "point of contact" - place or places where the tortious
contract claim); and conduct or lex loci actus occurred = Philippines where SAUDIA deceived
§ starting point of analysis Morada, a Filipina residing and working here.
o test or connecting factor or point of contact (such as the situs of the res, "State of the most significant relationship" – applied
the place of celebration, the place of performance, or the place of o taken into account and evaluated according to their relative importance
wrongdoing) – could be: with respect to the particular issue:
§ (1) The nationality of a person, his domicile, his residence, his place of § (a) the place where the injury occurred
sojourn, or his origin § (b) the place where the conduct causing the injury occurred
§ (2) the seat of a legal or juridical person, such as a corporation § (c) the domicile, residence, nationality, place of incorporation and place of
§ (3) the situs of a thing, that is, the place where a thing is, or is deemed to business of the parties
be situated. In particular, the lex situs is decisive when real rights are § (d) the place where the relationship, if any, between the parties is centered
involved v private respondent is a resident Filipina national, working here
§ (4) the place where an act has been done, the locus actus, such as the v a resident foreign corporation engaged here in the business of
place where a contract has been made, a marriage celebrated, a will signed international air carriage.
or a tort committed. The lex loci actus is particularly important in contracts XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
and torts
§ (5) the place where an act is intended to come into effect, e.g., the place of SAUDI ARABIAN AIRLINES VS. COURT OF APPEALS,
performance of contractual duties, or the place where a power of attorney is 297 SCRA 469
to be exercised 1998
§ (6) the intention of the contracting parties as to the law that should govern
their agreement, the lex loci intentionis; FACTS:
§ (7) the place where judicial or administrative proceedings are instituted or
done. The lex fori — the law of the forum — is particularly important Herein private respondent Milagros P. Morada is a flight attendant for
because, as we have seen earlier, matters of "procedure" not going to the petitioner SAUDIA airlines, where the former was tried to be raped by
substance of the claim involved are governed by it; and because the lex fori Thamer and Allah AlGazzawi, both Sauidi nationals and fellow crew member,
after a night of dancing in their hotel while in Jakarta, Indonesia. She was transpire during her many occasions of travel across national borders,
rescued. After two weeks of detention the accused were both deported to particularly from Manila, Philippines to Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, and vice versa,
Saudi and they were reinstated by Saudia. She was pressured by police that caused a “conflicts” situation to arise.
officers to make a statement and to drop the case against the accused; in
return she will then be allowed to return to Manila and retrieved her passport.
For the second time, she was asked by her superiors to again appear before Where the factual antecedents satisfactorily establish the existence of a
the Saudi court. Without her knowledge, she was already tried by Saudi foreign element, the problem could present a “conflicts” case. Where the
court together with the accused and was sentenced to five months factual antecedents satisfactorily establish the existence of a foreign
imprisonment and to 286 lashes in connection with Jakarta rape incident. element, we agree with petitioner that the problem herein could present a
The court found her guilty of (1) adultery; (2) going to a disco, dancing and “conflicts” case. A factual situation that cuts across territorial lines and is
listening to the music in violation of Islamic laws; and (3) socializing with the affected by the diverse laws of two or more states is said to contain a “foreign
male crew, in contravention of Islamic tradition. element.” The presence of a foreign element is inevitable since social and
economic affairs of individuals and associations are rarely confined to the
ISSUE/S: WHETHER OR NOT the QC Regional Trial Court has geographic limits of their birth or conception.
jurisdiction to hear and try the civil case based on Article 21 of the New Civil XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Code or the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia court though there is the existence of
foreign element.
3. Bellis vs Bellis, G.R. No. L-23678 June 6, 1967
RULING: TESTATE ESTATE OF AMOS G. BELLIS, deceased, PEOPLE’S BANK &
TRUST COMPANY,
The forms in which a foreign element may appear are many, such as the fact executor, MARIA CRISTINA BELLIS and MIRIAM PALMA BELLIS,
that one party is a resident Philippine national, and that the other is a oppositors-appellants, VS.
resident foreign corporation. The forms in which this foreign element may EDWARD A. BELLIS, ET. AL., heir-appellees
appear are many. The foreign element may simply consist in the fact that one G.R. No. L-23678 June 6, 1967
of the parties to a contract is an alien or has a foreign domicile, or that a
contract between nationals of one State involves properties situated in FACTS:
another State. In other cases, the foreign element may assume a complex Amos Bellis, born in Texas, was a citizen of the State of Texas and of the
form. In the instant case, the foreign element consisted in the fact that private United States. He had 5 legitimate children with his wife, Mary Mallen, whom
respondent Morada is a resident Philippine national, and that petitioner he had divorced, 3 legitimate children with his 2nd wife, Violet Kennedy and
SAUDIA is a resident foreign corporation. Also, by virtue of the employment finally, 3 illegitimate children.
of Morada with the petitioner SAUDIA as a flight stewardess, events did
transpire during her many occasions of travel across national borders, Prior to his death, Amos Bellis executed a will in the Philippines in which his
particularly from Manila, Philippines to Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, and vice versa, distributable estate should be divided in trust in the following order and
that caused a “conflicts” situation to arise. manner:
The forms in which a foreign element may appear are many, such as the fact a. $240,000 to his 1st wife Mary Mallen;
that one party is a resident Philippine national, and that the other is a b. P120,000 to his 3 illegitimate children at P40,000 each;
resident foreign corporation. The forms in which this foreign element may c. The remainder shall go to his surviving children by his 1st and 2nd wives,
appear are many. The foreign element may simply consist in the fact that one in equal shares.
of the parties to a contract is an alien or has a foreign domicile, or that a
contract between nationals of one State involves properties situated in Subsequently, Amos Bellis died a resident of San Antonio, Texas, USA. His
another State. In other cases, the foreign element may assume a complex will was admitted to probate in the Philippines. The People’s Bank and Trust
form. In the instant case, the foreign element consisted in the fact that private Company, an executor of the will, paid the entire bequest therein.
respondent Morada is a resident Philippine national, and that petitioner
SAUDIA is a resident foreign corporation. Also, by virtue of the employment Preparatory to closing its administration, the executor submitted and filed its
of Morada with the petitioner SAUDIA as a flight stewardess, events did “Executor’s Final Account, Report of Administration and Project of Partition”
where it reported, inter alia, the satisfaction of the legacy of Mary Mallen by
the shares of stock amounting to $240,000 delivered to her, and the legacies Amos G. Bellis was a citizen of the State of Texas and of the United States.
of the 3 illegitimate children in the amount of P40,000 each or a total of He had five legitimate children with his first wife (whom he divorced), three
P120,000. In the project partition, the executor divided the residuary estate legitimate children with his second wife (who survived him) and, finally, three
into 7 equal portions illegitimate children.
for the benefit of the testator’s 7 legitimate children by his 1st and 2nd
marriages. 6 years prior Amos Bellis’ death, he executed two(2) wills, apportioning the
remainder of his estate and properties to his seven surviving children. The
Among the 3 illegitimate children, Mari Cristina and Miriam Palma Bellis filed appellants filed their oppositions to the project of partition claiming that they
their respective opposition to the project partition on the ground that they have been deprived of their legitimes to which they were entitled according to
were deprived of their legitimates as illegitimate children. the Philippine law. Appellants argued that the deceased wanted his
Philippine estate to be governed by the Philippine law, thus the creation of
The lower court denied their respective motions for reconsideration. two separate wills.
ISSUE: ISSUE:
Whether Texan Law of Philippine Law must apply.
RULING: Whether or not the Philippine law be applied in the case in the determination
It is not disputed that the decedent was both a national of Texas and a of the illegitimate children’s successional rights
domicile thereof at the time of his death. So that even assuming Texan has a
conflict of law rule providing that the same would not result in a reference RULING:
back (renvoi) to Philippine Law, but would still refer to Texas Law.
Court ruled that provision in a foreigner’s will to the effect that his properties
Nonetheless, if Texas has conflict rule adopting the situs theory (lex rei sitae) shall be distributed in accordance with Philippine law and not with his
calling for the application of the law of the place where the properties are national law, is illegal and void, for his national law cannot be ignored in view
situated, renvoi would arise, since the properties here involved are found in of those matters that Article 10 — now Article 16 — of the Civil Code states
the Philippines. In the absence, however of proofs as to the conflict of law said national law should govern.
rule of Texas, it should not be presumed different from our appellants,
position is therefore not rested on the doctrine of renvoi. Where the testator was a citizen of Texas and domiciled in Texas, the
intrinsic validity of his will should be governed by his national law. Since
The parties admit that the decedent, Amos Bellis, was a citizen of the State Texas law does not require legitimes, then his will, which deprived his
of Texas, USA and that under the Laws of Texas, there are no forced heirs or illegitimate children of the legitimes, is valid.
legitimates. Accordingly, since the intrinsic validity of the provision of the will
and the amount of successional rights has to be determined under Texas
The Supreme Court held that the illegitimate children are not entitled to the
Law, the Philippine Law on legitimates can not be applied to the testate of
legitimes under the texas law, which is the national law of the deceased.
Amos Bellis.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
4. CASE DIGEST: BELLIS VS. BELLIS
1 Reply 4. GOVERNMENT VS. FRANK
MARCH 28, 2013 ~ VBDIAZ
G.R. No. L-23678 (June 6, 1967) THE GOVT OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS vs. FRANK
G. R. No. 2935
Testate of Amos Bellis vs. Edward A. Bellis, et al March 23, 1909
FACTS: In 1903, in the city of Chicago, Illinois, Frank entered into a contract
FACTS: for a period of 2 years with the Plaintiff, by which Frank was to receive a
salary as a stenographer in the service of the said Plaintiff, and in addition
thereto was to be paid in advance the expenses incurred in traveling from the 2. NO; The Defendant alleged in his special defense that he was a minor and
said city of Chicago to Manila, and one-half salary during said period of therefore the contract could not be enforced against him. The record
travel. discloses that, at the time the contract was entered into in the State of Illinois,
he was an adult under the laws of that State and had full authority to
Said contract contained a provision that in case of a violation of its terms on contract. Frank claims that, by reason of the fact that, under that laws of the
the part of Frank, he should become liable to the Plaintiff for the amount Philippine Islands at the time the contract was made, made persons in said
expended by the Government by way of expenses incurred in traveling from Islands did not reach their majority until they had attained the age of 23
Chicago to Manila and the one-half salary paid during such period. years, he was not liable under said contract, contending that the laws of the
Frank entered upon the performance of his contract and was paid half-salary Philippine Islands governed.
from the date until the date of his arrival in the Philippine Islands. It is not disputed — upon the contrary the fact is admitted — that at the time
Thereafter, Frank left the service of the Plaintiff and refused to make a further and place of the making of the contract in question the Defendant had full
compliance with the terms of the contract. capacity to make the same. No rule is better settled in law than that matters
bearing upon the execution, interpretation and validity of a contract are
The Plaintiff commenced an action in the CFI-Manila to recover from Frank determined b the law of the place where the contract is made. Matters
the sum of money, which amount the Plaintiff claimed had been paid to Frank connected with its performance are regulated by the law prevailing at the
as expenses incurred in traveling from Chicago to Manila, and as half-salary place of performance. Matters respecting a remedy, such as the bringing of
for the period consumed in travel. suit, admissibility of evidence, and statutes of limitations, depend upon the
It was expressly agreed between the parties to said contract that Laws No. law of the place where the suit is brought.
80 and No. 224 should constitute a part of said contract. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
The Defendant filed a general denial and a special defense, alleging in his
special defense that Civil Laws (NATIONALITY PRINCIPLE)
(1) the Government of the Philippine Islands had amended Laws No. 80 and Gantuangco, Gilianne Kathryn L.
No. 224 and had thereby materially altered the said contract, and also that
(2) he was a minor at the time the contract was entered into and was The Government of the Philippines Islands vs George I. Frank
therefore not responsible under the law.
the lower court rendered a judgment against Frank and in favor of the G. R. No. 2935. March 23, 1909
Plaintiff for the sum of 265. 90 dollars
ISSUE:
ISSUE:
1. Did the amendment of the laws altered the tenor of the contract entered WON a contract entered into by a US citizen, when he was
into between Plaintiff and Defendant? considered as an adult in his country (USA) yet a minor in the Philippines, at
2. Can the defendant allege minority/infancy? which time that he entered into the contract, is valid and enforceable under
the Philippine laws.
HELD: the judgment of the lower court is affirmed
1. NO; It may be said that the mere fact that the legislative department of the RULING:
Government of the Philippine Islands had amended said Acts No. 80 and No.
224 by Acts No. 643 and No. 1040 did not have the effect of changing the YES.
terms of the contract made between the Plaintiff and the Defendant. The
legislative department of the Government is expressly prohibited by section 5 Mr. Frank being fully qualified to enter into a contract at the place
of the Act of Congress of 1902 from altering or changing the terms of a and time the contract was made, he cannot therefore plead infancy as a
contract. The right which the Defendant had acquired by virtue of Acts No. 80 defense at the place where the contract is being enforced. Although Mr.
and No. 224 had not been changed in any respect by the fact that said laws Frank was still a minor under Philippine laws, he was nevertheless
had been amended. These acts, constituting the terms of the contract, still considered an adult under the laws of the state of Illinois,the place where the
constituted a part of said contract and were enforceable in favor of the contract was made. No rule is better settled in law than that matters bearing
Defendant. upon the execution, interpretation and validity of a contract are determined
by the law of the place where the contract is made. Matters connected to its On October 2, 1984, the POEA Administrator denied the “Motion to Strike
performance are regulated by the law prevailing at the place of its Out of the Records” filed by AIBC but required the claimants to correct the
performance. Matters respecting a remedy, such as bringing of a suit, deficiencies in the complaint pointed out.
admissibility of evidence, and statutes of limitations, depend upon the law of
the place where the suit is brought. AIB and BRII kept on filing Motion for Extension of Time to file their answer.
The POEA kept on granting such motions.
Although generally, capacity of the parties to enter into a contract is
governed by national law. This is one case not involving real property which On November 14, 1984, claimants filed an opposition to the motions for
was decided by our Supreme Court, where instead of national law, what extension of time and asked that AIBC and BRII declared in default for failure
should determine capacity to enter into a contract is the lex loci celebrationis. to file their answers.
According to Conflict of Laws writer Edgardo Paras, Frank’s capacity should
be judged by his national law and not by the law of the place where the On December 27, 1984, the POEA Administrator issued an order directing
contract was entered into. In the instant case whether it is the place where AIBC and BRII to file their answers within ten days from receipt of the order.
the contract was made or Frank’s nationality, the result would be the same.
However, as suggested by the mentioned author, for the conflicts rule in (at madami pang motions ang na-file, new complainants joined the case, ang
capacity in general, national law of the parties is daming inavail na remedies ng both parties)
controlling. On June 19, 1987, AIBC finally submitted its answer to the complaint. At the
xXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX same hearing, the parties were given a period of 15 days from said date
XXXXXX within which to submit their respective position papers. On February 24,
1988, AIBC and BRII submitted position paper. On October 27, 1988, AIBC
5. CADALIN ET AL VS. POEA ET AL and BRII filed a “Consolidated Reply,” POEA Adminitartor rendered his
decision which awarded the amount of $824, 652.44 in favor of only 324
FACTS: complainants. Claimants submitted their “Appeal Memorandum For Partial
This is a consolidation of 3 cases of SPECIAL CIVIL ACTIONS in the Appeal” from the decision of the POEA. AIBC also filed its MR and/or appeal
Supreme Court for Certiorari. in addition to the “Notice of Appeal” filed earlier.
On June 6, 1984, Cadalin, Amul and Evangelista, in their own behalf and on NLRC promulgated its Resolution, modifying the decision of the POEA. The
behalf of 728 other OCWs instituted a class suit by filing an “Amended resolution removed some of the benefits awarded in favor of the claimants.
Complaint” with the POEA for money claims arising from their recruitment by NLRC denied all the MRs. Hence, these petitions filed by the claimants and
ASIA INTERNATIONAL BUILDERS CORPORATION (AIBC) and by AlBC and BRII.
employment by BROWN & ROOT INTERNATIONAL, INC (BRI) which is a
foreign corporation with headquarters in Houston, Texas, and is engaged in The case rooted from the Labor Law enacted by Bahrain where most of the
construction; while AIBC is a domestic corporation licensed as a service complainants were deployed. His Majesty Ise Bin Selman Al Kaifa, Amir of
contractor to recruit, mobilize and deploy Filipino workers for overseas Bahrain, issued his Amiri Decree No. 23 on June 16, 1176, otherwise known
employment on behalf of its foreign principals. re the Labour Law for the Private Sector. Some of the provision of Amiri
Decree No. 23 that are relevant to the claims of the complainants-appellants
The amended complaint sought the payment of the unexpired portion of the are as follows:
employment contracts, which was terminated prematurely, and secondarily,
the payment of the interest of the earnings of the Travel and Reserved Fund; “Art. 79: x x x A worker shall receive payment for each extra hour equivalent
interest on all the unpaid benefits; area wage and salary differential pay; to his wage entitlement increased by a minimum of twenty-rive per centurn
fringe benefits; reimbursement of SSS and premium not remitted to the SSS; thereof for hours worked during the day; and by a minimum off fifty per
refund of withholding tax not remitted to the BIR; penalties for committing centurn thereof for hours worked during the night which shall be deemed to
prohibited practices; as well as the suspension of the license of AIBC and the being from seven o’clock in the evening until seven o’clock in the morning .”
accreditation of BRII
Art. 80: Friday shall be deemed to be a weekly day of rest on full pay.
If employee worked, 150% of his normal wage shall be paid to him x x x.”
NLRC applied the Amiri Deere, No. 23 of 1976, which provides for greater
Art. 81; x x x When conditions of work require the worker to work on any benefits than those stipulated in the overseas-employment contracts of the
official holiday, he shall be paid an additional sum equivalent to 150% of his claimants. It was of the belief that where the laws of the host country are
normal wage.” more favorable and beneficial to the workers, then the laws of the host
country shall form part of the overseas employment contract. It approved the
Art. 84: Every worker who has completed one year’s continuous service with observation of the POEA Administrator that in labor proceedings, all doubts
his employer shall be entitled to Laos on full pay for a period of not less than in the implementation of the provisions of the Labor Code and its
21 days for each year increased to a period not less than 28 days after five implementing regulations shall be resolved in favor of labor.
continuous years of service.”
The overseas-employment contracts, which were prepared by AIBC and BRII
A worker shall be entitled to such leave upon a quantum meruit in respect of themselves, provided that the laws of the host country became applicable to
the proportion of his service in that year.” said contracts if they offer terms and conditions more favorable than those
stipulated therein. However there was a part of the employment contract
Art. 107: A contract of employment made for a period of indefinite duration which provides that the compensation of the employee may be “adjusted
may be terminated by either party thereto after giving the other party prior downward so that the total computation plus the non-waivable benefits shall
notice before such termination, in writing, in respect of monthly paid workers be equivalent to the compensation” therein agree,’ another part of the same
and fifteen days’ notice in respect of other workers. The party terminating a provision categorically states “that total remuneration and benefits do not fall
contract without the required notice shall pay to the other party compensation below that of the host country regulation and custom.”
equivalent to the amount of wages payable to the worker for the period of
such notice or the unexpired portion thereof.” Any ambiguity in the overseas-employment contracts should be interpreted
against AIBC and BRII, the parties that drafted it. Article 1377 of the Civil
Art. Ill: x x x the employer concerned shall pay to such worker, upon Code of the Philippines provides:
termination of employment, a leaving indemnity for the period of his ‘The interpretation of obscure words or stipulations in a contract shall not
employment calculated on the basis of fifteen days’ wages for each year of favor the party who caused the obscurity.”
the first three years of service and of one month’s wages for each year of
service thereafter. Such worker shall be entitled to payment of leaving Said rule of interpretation is applicable to contracts of adhesion where there
indemnity upon a quantum meruit in proportion to the period of his service is already a prepared form containing the stipulations of the employment
completed within a year.” contract and the employees merely “take it or leave it.” The presumption is
that there was an imposition by one party against the other and that the
ISSUE: employees signed the contracts out of necessity that reduced their
bargaining power.
1. WON the foreign law should govern or the contract of the We read the overseas employment contracts in question as adopting the
parties.(WON the complainants who have worked in Bahrain are entitled to provisions of the Amiri Decree No. 23 of 1976 as part and parcel thereof. The
the above-mentioned benefits provided by Amiri Decree No. 23 of Bahrain). parties to a contract may select the law by which it is to be governed. In such
a case, the foreign law is adopted as a “system” to regulate the relations of
2. WON the Bahrain Law should apply in the case. (Assuming it is the parties, including questions of their capacity to enter into the contract, the
applicable WON complainants’ claim for the benefits provided therein have formalities to be observed by them, matters of performance, and so forth.
prescribed.) Instead of adopting the entire mass of the foreign law, the parties may just
agree that specific provisions of a foreign statute shall be deemed
RULING: incorporated into their contract “as a set of terms.” By such reference to the
provisions of the foreign law, the contract does not become a foreign contract
1. NLRC set aside Section 1, Rule 129 of the 1989 Revised Rules on to be governed by the foreign law. The said law does not operate as a statute
Evidence governing the pleading and proof of a foreign law and admitted in but as a set of contractual terms deemed written in the contract.
evidence a simple copy of the Bahrain’s Amiri Decree No. 23 of 1976
(Labour Law for the Private Sector). A basic policy of contract is to protect the expectation of the parties. Such
party expectation is protected by giving effect to the parties’ own choice of
the applicable law. The choice of law must, however, bear some relationship procedural law even in Panama, it has to give way to the law of the forum
the parties or their transaction. There is no question that the contracts sought (local Court) on prescription of actions.
to be enforced by claimants have a direct connection with the Bahrain law
because the services were rendered in that country. However the characterization of a statute into a procedural or substantive law
becomes irrelevant when the country of the forum (local Court) has a
2. NLRC ruled that the prescriptive period for the filing of the claims of “borrowing statute.” Said statute has the practical effect of treating the foreign
the complainants was 3 years, as provided in Article 291 of the Labor Code statute of limitation as one of substance. A “borrowing statute” directs the
of the Philippines, and not ten years as provided in Article 1144 of the Civil state of the forum (local Court) to apply the foreign statute of limitations to the
Code of the Philippines nor one year as provided in the Amiri Decree No. 23 pending claims based on a foreign law. While there are several kinds of
of 1976. “borrowing statutes,” one form provides that an action barred by the laws of
the place where it accrued will not be enforced in the forum even though the
Article 156 of the Amiri Decree No. 23 of 1976 provides: local statute was not run against it.
“A claim arising out of a contract of employment shall not actionable after the
lapse of one year from the date of the expiry of the Contract”. Section 48 of Code of Civil Procedure is of this kind. It provides: “If by the
laws of the state or country where the cause of action arose, the action is
As a general rule, a foreign procedural law will not be applied in the forum barred, it is also barred in the Philippine Islands.”
(local court), Procedural matters, such as service of process, joinder of
actions, period and requisites for appeal, and so forth, are governed by the Section 48 has not been repealed or amended by the Civil Code of the
laws of the forum. This is true even if the action is based upon a foreign Philippines. In the light of the 1987 Constitution, however, Section 48
substantive law. cannot be enforced ex proprio vigore insofar as it ordains the application in
this jurisdiction of Section 156 of the Amiri Decree No. 23 of 1976.
A law on prescription of actions is sui generis in Conflict of Laws in the sense
that it may be viewed either as procedural or substantive, depending on the The courts of the forum (local Court) will not enforce any foreign claim
characterization given such a law. In Bournias v. Atlantic Maritime Company obnoxious to the forum’s public policy. To enforce the one-year prescriptive
(220 F. 2d. 152, 2d Cir. [1955]), where the issue was the applicability of the period of the Amiri Decree No. 23 of 1976 as regards the claims in question
Panama Labor Code in a case filed in the State of New York for claims would contravene the public policy on the protection to labor.
arising from said Code, the claims would have prescribed under the In the Declaration of Principles and State Policies, the 1987 Constitution
Panamanian Law but not under the Statute of Limitations of New York. The emphasized that:“The state shall promote social justice in all phases of
U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held that the Panamanian Law was procedural national development” (Sec. 10).
as it was not “specifically intended to be substantive,” hence, the prescriptive ‘The state affirms labor as a primary social economic force. It shall protect
period provided in the law of the forum should apply. The Court observed: “. . the rights of workers and promote their welfare” (Sec. 18).
. we are dealing with a statute of limitations of a foreign country, and it is not In Article XIII on Social Justice and Human Rights, the 1987 Constitution
clear on the face of the statute that its purpose was to limit the enforceability, provides:
outside as well as within the foreign country concerned, of the substantive “Sec. 3. The State shall afford full protection to labor, local and overseas,
rights to which the statute pertains. We think that as a yardstick for organized and unorganized, and promote full employment and equality of
determining whether that was the purpose, this test is the most satisfactory employment opportunities for all.”
one. Thus, the applicable law on prescription is the Philippine law.
The next question is whether the prescriptive period governing the filing of
The Court further noted: “Applying that test here it appears to us that the the claims is 3 years, as provided by the Labor Code or 10 years, as
libellant is entitled to succeed, for the respondents have failed to satisfy us provided by the Civil Code of the Philippines.
that the Panamanian period of limitation in question was specifically aimed
against the particular rights which the libellant seeks to enforce. The Panama Article 1144 of the Civil Code of the Philippines provides:
Labor Code is a statute having broad objectives.” The American court “The following actions must be brought within ten years from the time the
applied the statute of limitations of New York, instead of the Panamanian right of action accross:
law, after finding that there was no showing that the Panamanian law on
prescription was intended to be substantive. Being considered merely a
(1) Upon a written contract; (2) Upon an obligation created by law; (3) Upon a
judgment” and was granted by HSBC Singapore branch an overdraft facility in the
In this case, the claim for pay differentials is primarily anchored on the written
maximum amount of Singapore dollars 200,000 with interest at 3% over
contracts between the litigants, the ten-year prescriptive period provided by
Art. 1144(l) of the New Civil Code should govern. HSBC prime rate, payable monthly, on amounts due under said overdraft
3. NO. A class suit is proper where the subject matter of the controversy is facility.
one of common or general interest to many and the parties are so numerous
that it is impracticable to bring them all before the court. When all the claims As a security for the repayment by the COMPANY of sums advanced by
are for benefits granted under the Bahrain law many of the claimants worked
outside Bahrain. Some of the claimants were deployed in Indonesia under HSBC to it through the aforesaid overdraft facility, in 1982, both private
different terms and condition of employment. respondents and a certain Lowe, all of whom were directors of the
Inasmuch as the First requirement of a class suit is not present (common or COMPANY at such time, executed a Joint and Several Guarantee in favor of
general interest based on the Amiri Decree of the State of Bahrain), it is only
logical that only those who worked in Bahrain shall be entitled to rile their HSBC whereby private respondents and Lowe agreed to pay, jointly and
claims in a class suit.
severally, on demand all sums owed by the COMPANY to petitioner BANK
While there are common defendants (AIBC and BRII) and the nature of the
under the aforestated overdraft facility.
claims is the same (for employee’s benefits), there is no common question of
law or fact. While some claims are based on the Amiri Law of Bahrain, many
of the claimants never worked in that country, but were deployed elsewhere.
Thus, each claimant is interested only in his own demand and not in the The Joint and Several Guarantee provides, inter alia, that:
claims of the other employees of defendants. A claimant has no concern in
protecting the interests of the other claimants as shown by the fact, that This guarantee and all rights, obligations and liabilities arising hereunder
hundreds of them have abandoned their co-claimants and have entered into shall be construed and determined under and may be enforced in
separate compromise settlements of their respective claims. The claimants
who worked in Bahrain can not be allowed to sue in a class suit in a judicial accordance with the laws of the Republic of Singapore. We hereby agree
proceeding.
that the Courts of Singapore shall have jurisdiction over all disputes arising
WHEREFORE, all the three petitioners are DISMISSED.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX under this guarantee. …
6. HSBC VS. SHERMAN
The COMPANY failed to pay its obligation. Thus, HSBC demanded payment
MARCH 28, 2013 ~ VBDIAZ
and inasmuch as the private respondents still failed to pay, HSBC filed A
HONGKONG AND SHANGHAI BANKING CORPORATION (HSBC) vs.
complaint for collection of a sum of money against private respondents
SHERMAN et al
Sherman and Reloj before RTC of Quezon City.
G.R. No. 72494
Private respondents filed an MTD on the ground of lack of jurisdiction over
August 11, 1989
the subject matter. The trial court denied the motion. They then filed before
FACTS: It appears that sometime in 1981, Eastern Book Supply Service
the respondent IAC a petition for prohibition with preliminary injunction and/or
PTE, Ltd. (COMPANY), a company incorporated in Singapore applied with
prayer for a restraining order. The IAC rendered a decision enjoining the Anent the claim that Davao City had been stipulated as the venue, suffice it
RTC Quezon City from taking further cognizance of the case and to dismiss to say that a stipulation as to venue does not preclude the filing of suits in the
the same for filing with the proper court of Singapore which is the proper residence of plaintiff or defendant under Section 2 (b), Rule 4, ROC, in the
forum. MR denied, hence this petition. absence of qualifying or restrictive words in the agreement which would
indicate that the place named is the only venue agreed upon by the parties.
ISSUE: Do Philippine courts have jurisdiction over the suit, vis-a-vis the Applying the foregoing to the case at bar, the parties did not thereby stipulate
Guarantee stipulation regarding jurisdiction? that only the courts of Singapore, to the exclusion of all the rest, has
HELD: YES jurisdiction. Neither did the clause in question operate to divest Philippine
One basic principle underlies all rules of jurisdiction in International Law: a courts of jurisdiction. In International Law, jurisdiction is often defined as the
State does not have jurisdiction in the absence of some reasonable basis for light of a State to exercise authority over persons and things within its
exercising it, whether the proceedings are in rem quasi in rem or in boundaries subject to certain exceptions. Thus, a State does not assume
personam. To be reasonable, the jurisdiction must be based on some jurisdiction over travelling sovereigns, ambassadors and diplomatic
minimum contacts that will not offend traditional notions of fair play and representatives of other States, and foreign military units stationed in or
substantial justice marching through State territory with the permission of the latter’s authorities.
The defense of private respondents that the complaint should have been filed This authority, which finds its source in the concept of sovereignty, is
in Singapore is based merely on technicality. They did not even claim, much exclusive within and throughout the domain of the State. A State is
less prove, that the filing of the action here will cause them any unnecessary competent to take hold of any judicial matter it sees fit by making its courts
trouble, damage, or expense. On the other hand, there is no showing that and agencies assume jurisdiction over all kinds of cases brought before them
petitioner BANK filed the action here just to harass private respondents.
NOTES:
** The respondent IAC likewise ruled that:
Thus, the IAC should not have relied on such principle. While it is true that “the transaction took place in Singaporean setting” and
that the Joint and Several Guarantee contains a choice-of-forum clause, the
very essence of due process dictates that the stipulation that “[t]his
guarantee and all rights, obligations and liabilities arising hereunder shall be
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX construed and determined under and may be enforced in accordance with
the laws of the Republic of Singapore. We hereby agree that the Courts in
Singapore shall have jurisdiction over all disputes arising under this
HSBC vs. Sherman guarantee” be liberally construed. One basic principle underlies all rules of
G.R. No. 72494, Aug. 11, 1989 jurisdiction in International Law: a State does not have jurisdiction in the
absence of some reasonable basis for exercising it, whether the proceedings
o Choice-of-forum clause are in rem, quasi in rem, or in personam. To be reasonable, the jurisdiction
o Jurisdiction and Venue must be based on some minimum contacts that will not offend traditional
o Parties can stipulate as to their choice of venue. But if the stipulation is not notions of fair play and substantial justice. Indeed, as pointed-out by
restrictive, it shall be treated as merely permissive and will not bar the other petitioner BANK at the outset, the instant case presents a very odd situation.
party from airing the case in a different forum which has jurisdiction over the In the ordinary habits of life, anyone would be disinclined to litigate before a
subject matter. foreign tribunal, with more reason as a defendant. However, in this case,
private respondents are Philippine residents (a fact which was not disputed
FACTS: by them) who would rather face a complaint against them before a foreign
court and in the process incur considerable expenses, not to mention
Sometime in 1981, Eastern Book Supply PTE, Ltd. (Company), a company inconvenience, than to have a Philippine court try and resolve the case.
incorporated in Singapore, applied with and was granted by the Singapore Private respondents' stance is hardly comprehensible, unless their ultimate
Branch of HSBC an overdraft facility. To secure the overdraft facility, private intent is to evade, or at least delay, the payment of a just obligation.
respondents who were directors of the Company executed a Joint and
Several Guarantee in favour of HSBC, which provides that: The defense of private respondents that the complaint should have been filed
in Singapore is based merely on technicality. They did not even claim, much
“This guarantee and all rights, obligations and liabilities arising hereunder less prove, that the filing of the action here will cause them any unnecessary
shall be construed and determined under and may be enforced in trouble, damage, or expense. On the other hand, there is no showing that
accordance with the laws of the Republic of Singapore. We hereby agree petitioner BANK filed the action here just to harass private respondents.
that the Courts of Singapore shall have jurisdiction over all disputes arising
under this guarantee….” 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
However, when the Company failed to pay its obligation, HSBC filed this operate to divest Philippine courts of jurisdiction. In International Law,
action with the Philippine courts. In a Motion to Dismiss, the private jurisdiction is often defined as the light of a State to exercise authority over
respondents raised the abovementioned provision of the Joint and Several persons and things within its boundaries subject to certain exceptions. Thus,
Guarantee. The trial court affirmed the plaintiffs but CA reversed, citing said a State does not assume jurisdiction over travelling sovereigns,
provision as basis. ambassadors and diplomatic representatives of other States, and foreign
military units stationed in or marching through State territory with the
ISSUE: 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
o Whether or not Philippine courts have jurisdiction over the suit the State. A State is competent to take hold of any judicial matter it sees fit
by making its courts and agencies assume jurisdiction over all kinds of cases
HELD: brought before them.
While it is true that “the transaction took place in Singaporean setting” and
Minimum Contract: Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation vs. Jack that the Joint and Several Guarantee contains a choice-of-forum clause, the
Robert Sherman G.R. No. 7249411 August 1989 Medialdea, J: very essence of due process dictates that thestipulation be liberally
construed. One basic principle underlies all rules of jurisdiction in
Facts InternationalLaw: a State does not have jurisdiction in the absence of some
: Eastern Book Supply Service PTE, Ltd., a company incorporated in reasonable basis for exercising it,whether the proceedings are in rem, quasi
Singapore applied with, and was granted by, the Hongkong and Shanghai in rem or in personam. To be reasonable, the jurisdictionmust be based on
Banking Corporation Singapore branch an overdraft facility in the maximum some minimum contacts that will not offend traditional notions of fair play
amount of Singapore dollars 200,000.00 (which amount was subsequently andsubstantial justice.
increased to Singapore dollar 375,000.00). As a security for the repayment
by the COMPANY of the sum advanced, Jack Robert Sherman and Deodato XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Reloj, herein private respondents, and a certain Robin de Clive Lowe, all of
whom were directors of said COMPANY at such time, executed a Joint and 7. El Banco Espanol-Filipino vs. Vicente Palanca G.R. No. L-11390,
Several Guarantee in favor of petitioner BANK whereby they agreed to pay, March 26, 1918
jointly and severally, on demand all sums owed by the COMPANY to El Banco Espanol-Filipino vs. Palanca
petitioner BANK under the aforestated overdraft facility. The Joint and G.R. No. L-11390, March 26, 1918
Several Guarantee provides that:" This guarantee and all rights, obligations
and liabilities arising hereunder shall be construed and determined under and * JURISDICTION, HOW ACQUIRED: Jurisdiction over the property which is
may be enforced in accordance with the laws of the Republic of Singapore. the subject of the litigation may result either from a seizure of the property
We hereby agree that the Courts of Singapore shall have jurisdiction overall under legal process, whereby it is brought into the actual custody of the law,
disputes arising under this guarantee . . ."The COMPANY failed to pay its or it may result from the institution of legal proceedings wherein, under
obligation. Thus, petitioner BANK demanded payment from the private special provisions of law, the power of the court over the property is
respondents, conformably with the provisions of the Joint and Several recognized and made effective.
Guarantee. Inasmuch as the private respondents still failed to pay, petitioner * The action to foreclose a mortgage is said to be a proceeding quasi in rem,
BANK filed a civil case for a collection of a sum of money against Sherman by which is expressed the idea that while it is not strictly speaking an action
and Reloj before the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City. In turn, the private in rem yet it partakes of that nature and is substantially such.
respondents filed a motion to dismiss on the ground of lack of jurisdiction * DUE PROCESS IN FORECLOSURE PROCEEDINGS: Property is always
over the subject matter of the complaint and over the persons of the assumed to be in the possession of its owner, in person or by agent; and he
defendants, but, it was denied. Subsequently, the court granted the petition may be safely held, under certain conditions, to be affected with knowledge
for prohibition with preliminary injunction. Hence, this petition for review on that proceedings have been instituted for its condemnation and sale.
certiorari.
Issue FACTS:
: Whether or not Philippine courts have jurisdiction over the suit.
Engracio Palanca Tanquinyeng y Limquingco mortgaged various parcels of
Held real property in Manila to El Banco Espanol-Filipino. Afterwards, Engracio
: Yes. The parties did not stipulate that only the courts of Singapore, to the returned to China and there he died on January 29, 1810 without returning
exclusion of all the rest,has jurisdiction. Neither did the clause in question again to the Philippines. The mortgagor then instituted foreclosure
operate to divest Philippine courts of jurisdiction. InInternational Law, proceeding but since defendant is a non-resident, it was necessary to give
jurisdiction is often defined as the right of a State to exercise authority over notice by publication. The Clerk of Court was also directed to send copy of
personsand things within its boundaries subject to certain exceptions. This the summons to the defendant’s last known address, which is in Amoy,
authority, which finds its source inthe concept of sovereignty, is exclusive China. It is not shown whether the Clerk complied with this requirement.
within and throughout the domain of the State. A State iscompetent to take Nevertheless, after publication in a newspaper of the City of Manila, the
hold of any judicial matter it sees fit by making its courts and agencies cause proceeded and judgment by default was rendered. The decision was
assume jurisdiction over all kinds of cases brought before them. likewise published and afterwards sale by public auction was held with the
bank as the highest bidder. On August 7, 1908, this sale was confirmed by
the court. However, about seven years after the confirmation of this sale, a illustration of what we term potential jurisdiction over the res, is found in the
motion was made by Vicente Palanca, as administrator of the estate of the proceeding to register the title of land under our system for the registration of
original defendant, wherein the applicant requested the court to set aside the land. Here the court, without taking actual physical control over the property
order of default and the judgment, and to vacate all the proceedings assumes, at the instance of some person claiming to be owner, to exercise a
subsequent thereto. The basis of this application was that the order of default jurisdiction in rem over the property and to adjudicate the title in favor of the
and the judgment rendered thereon were void because the court had never petitioner against all the world.
acquired jurisdiction over the defendant or over the subject of the action.
In the terminology of American law the action to foreclose a mortgage is said
ISSUE: to be a proceeding quasi in rem, by which is expressed the idea that while it
is not strictly speaking an action in rem yet it partakes of that nature and is
* Whether or not the lower court acquired jurisdiction over the defendant and substantially such. The expression "action in rem" is, in its narrow
the subject matter of the action application, used only with reference to certain proceedings in courts of
* Whether or not due process of law was observed admiralty wherein the property alone is treated as responsible for the claim or
obligation upon which the proceedings are based. The action quasi rem
differs from the true action in rem in the circumstance that in the former an
RULING: individual is named as defendant, and the purpose of the proceeding is to
subject his interest therein to the obligation or lien burdening the property. All
On Jurisdiction proceedings having for their sole object the sale or other disposition of the
property of the defendant, whether by attachment, foreclosure, or other form
The word “jurisdiction” is used in several different, though related, senses of remedy, are in a general way thus designated. The judgment entered in
since it may have reference (1) to the authority of the court to entertain a these proceedings is conclusive only between the parties.
particular kind of action or to administer a particular kind of relief, or it may
refer to the power of the court over the parties, or (2) over the property which
is the subject to the litigation. It is true that in proceedings of this character, if the defendant for whom
publication is made appears, the action becomes as to him a personal action
The sovereign authority which organizes a court determines the nature and and is conducted as such. This, however, does not affect the proposition that
extent of its powers in general and thus fixes its competency or jurisdiction where the defendant fails to appear the action is quasi in rem; and it should
with reference to the actions which it may entertain and the relief it may therefore be considered with reference to the principles governing actions in
grant. rem.
against the Benguet Consolidated Mining Company for the recovery of a sum
ISSUE:
consisting of dividends which have been declared and made payable on
WON in view of the alleged judgment entered in favor of the petitioner by the
shares of stock registered in his name, payment of which was being withheld
SC of New York and which is claimed by her to be res judicata on all
by the company, and for the recognition of his right to the control and
questions raised by the respondent, Eugene Perkins, the local court has
disposal of said shares to the exclusion of all others. The company alleged,
jurisdiction over the subject matter of the action.
by way of defense that the withholding of plaintiff’s right to the disposal and
RULING:
control of the shares was due to certain demands made with respect to said
By jurisdiction over the subject matter is meant the nature of the cause of
shares by the petitioner Idonah Perkins, and by one Engelhard.
action and of the relief sought, and this is conferred by the sovereign
Eugene Perkins included in his modified complaint as parties defendants
authority which organizes the court, and is to be sought for in general nature
petitioner, Idonah Perkins, and Engelhard. Eugene Perkins prayed that
of its powers, or in authority specially conferred. In the present case, the
petitioner Idonah Perkins and H. Engelhard be adjudged without interest in
amended complaint filed by the respondent, Eugene Perkins alleged calls for
the shares of stock in question and excluded from any claim they assert
the adjudication of title to certain shares of stock of the Benguet
Consolidated Mining Company and the granting of affirmative reliefs, which but its determination of the question, which the petitioner here anticipates
fall within the general jurisdiction of the CFI- Manila. Similarly CFI- Manila is and seeks to prevent, is the exercise by that court and the rightful exercise of
crosscomplaint.
Idonah Perkins in her crosscomplaint brought suit against Eugene Perkins Petition denied.
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.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
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
13. First Philippine International Bank vs. CA Case Digest GR 115849 ;
the general jurisdiction of the CFI- Manila, to adjudicate, settle and
January 24, 1996 ; 252 SCRA 259
determine.
DOCTRINE/S:
The petitioner expresses the fear that the respondent judge may render
judge in the course of the proceedings will give validity and efficacy to the
FACTS: The Bank has been under conservatorship since 1984. It is the
New York judgment set up by the petitioner in her cross-complaint is a
owner of 6 parcels of land. The Bank had an agreement with Demetria to
question that goes to the merits of the controversy and relates to the rights of
purchase the parcels of land. The said agreement was made by Demetria
the parties as between each other, and not to the jurisdiction or power of the
with the Bank’s manager, Rivera. Thereafter, they had a series of letters
court. The test of jurisdiction is whether or not the tribunal has power to enter
consisting of offers, counter-offers and acceptance of the counter- offer by
upon the inquiry, not whether its conclusion in the course of it is right or
Demetria. Later however, the Bank, through its conservator, Encarnacion,
wrong. If its decision is erroneous, its judgment can be reversed on appeal;
sought the repudiation of the agreement as it alleged that Rivera was not
authorized to enter into such an agreement. Hence there was no valid ISSUE/S: 1) WON there is forum shopping. 2) WON there was a perfected
contract of sale. Subsequently, Demetria sued the Bank. The RTC ruled in contract. 3) WON the contract is enforceable 4) WON the conservator may
favor of Demetria. The Bank filed an appeal with the Court of Appeals. revoke a perfected and enforceable contract. 5) WON SC should review
Meanwhile, Henry Co, who holds 80% shares of stocks with the said Bank, questions of fact
filed a motion for intervention with the trial court which was denied since the
HELD: 1) YES. Forum-shopping is whenever, as a result of an adverse
trial has been concluded already and the case is now pending appeal. opinion in one forum, a party seeks a favorable opinion (other than by appeal
or certiorari) in another. Forum shopping exists where the elements of litis
Subsequently, Henry Co, filed a separate civil case against Ejercito as pendentia are present namely: (1) identity of parties, or at least such parties
as represent the same interests in both actions, as well as (2) identity of
successor-in-interest (assignee) of Demetria seeking to have the purported
rights asserted and relief prayed for, (3) the relief being founded on the same
contract of sale be declared unenforceable against the Bank. Ejercito argued facts, and the (4) identity on the two preceding particulars is such that any
judgment rendered in the other action, will, regardless of which party is
that the second case constitutes forum shopping since it was barred by litis successful, amount to res adjudicata in the action under consideration.
pendentia by virtue of the case then pending in the Court of Appeals. But In the instant case, there is forum shopping because there exist identity of
parties or interests represented, identity of rights or causes and identity of
petitioners explain that there is no forum-shopping because in the “First reliefs sought between the first case and the second case. There is identity of
Case” from which this proceeding arose, the Bank was impleaded as a parties even though the first case is in the name of the bank as
defendant, whereas in the “Second Case” it was the plaintiff. The Bank also defendant, and the second case is in the name of Henry Co as plaintiff since
argued the following: (1) that there contract of sale was not yet perfected the rule applies even if the the defendant in the first case becomes the
since it lacks cosent since the Bank did not make a counter-offer; (2) that the plaintiff in the second case. Furthermore, allegations of the complaint in the
contract is unenforceable since there is no note, memorandum or writing Second Case show that the stockholders are bringing a "derivative suit".
subscribed by the Bank to evidence such contract; (3) that the conservator Being a derivative suit would mean that Henry Co in filing the case is really
has the power to revoke or overrule actions of the management or the board representing the Bank. So, whether they sued "derivatively" or directly, there
of directors of a bank under Section 28-A of Republic Act No. 265 hence the is undeniably an identity of interests/entity represented. There is also identity
conservator can revoke the said contract between the Bank and Demetria; of relief being sought since both cases seeks to enable the petitioner Bank to
and (4) that respondent Court's Decision as "fraught with findings and escape from the obligation to sell the property to respondent.
conclusions which were not only contrary to the evidence on record but have
2) YES. Article 1318 of the Civil Code enumerates the requisites of a valid
no bases at all" hence questions of fact must be reviewed by SC.
and perfected contract as follows: "(1) Consent of the contracting parties; (2)
Object certain which is the subject matter of the contract; (3) Cause of the
obligation which is established." In this case, there is consent since there between the Bank and Demetria then such act of the conservator would
was meeting of the minds between the parties as shown by the fact that the consist as a violation of the non-impairment clause in the Constitution.
bank made a counter-offer after the Demetria made an offer to them. This
counteroffer was accepted by Demetria. The object of the subject contract is 5) NO. The general rule is that the Supreme Court can only review questions
the 6 parcels of land. The cause of the obligation for the petitioner bank is the of law. This is provided under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court. The exceptions
Php 5.5M that Demetria will pay for the land while the cause of the obligation to this rule are as follows: finding grounded entirely on speculation, surmises
for Demetria is the capacity to own the subject land. or conjectures; when the inference made is manifestly absurd, mistaken or
3) YES. A contract of sale is binding in whatever form it may have been facts; when the judgment is premised on a misapprehension of facts; when
entered into. Hence, the letters constitute sufficient memoranda — since they the findings went beyond the issues of the case and the same are contrary to
include the names of the parties, the terms and conditions of the contract, the the admissions of both appellant and appellee. In the instant case, it is quite
price and a description of the property as the object of the contract. evident that the legal conclusions arrived at from the findings of fact by the
lower courts are valid and correct. Hence this Court cannot disturb these
4) NO. Section 28-A of Republic Act No. 265 (otherwise known as the findings to fit the conclusion the peititoner Bank is espousing.
Central Bank Act) merely gives the conservator power to revoke contracts
that are, under existing law, deemed to be defective — i.e., void, voidable, Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
the bank, (the reorganization of) the management thereof and (the In the matter Estate of Edward Randolph Hix, deceased.
A.W. FLUEMER, petitioner-appellant,
restoration of) its viability." Such powers cannot extend to the post-facto vs.
ANNIE COUSHING HIX, oppositor-appellee.
repudiation of perfected transactions, otherwise they would infringe against
the non-impairment clause of the Constitution. Hence, the conservator must MALCOLM, J.:
exercise his powers without violating the non-impariment clause in the FACTS: Fleumer, the special administrator of the estate of Edward Randolph
Hix appealed from a decision of Judge of First Instance Tuason denying the
constitution. If the conservator in this case would revoke the valid contract
probate of the document alleged to by the last will and testament of the
deceased. Appellee is not authorized to carry on this appeal. We think,
however, that the appellant, who appears to have been the moving party in
these proceedings, was a "person interested in the allowance or part of the evidence the documents attached to the petition. One of these
disallowance of a will by a Court of First Instance," and so should be documents discloses that a paper writing purporting to be the was presented
permitted to appeal to the Supreme Court from the disallowance of the will for probate on June 8, 1929, to the clerk of Randolph Country, State of West
(Code of Civil Procedure, sec. 781, as amended; Villanueva vs. De Leon Virginia, in vacation, and was duly proven by the oaths of Dana Wamsley
[1925], 42 Phil., 780). and Joseph L. MAdden, the subscribing witnesses thereto , and ordered to
be recorded and filed. It was shown by another document that, in vacation,
It is theory of the petitioner that the alleged will was executed in on June 8, 1929, the clerk of court of Randolph Country, West Virginia,
Elkins, West Virginia, on November 3, 1925, by Hix who had his residence in appointed Claude W. Maxwell as administrator, cum testamento annexo, of
that jurisdiction, and that the laws of West Verginia Code, Annotated, by the estate of Edward Randolph Hix, deceased. In this connection, it is to be
Hogg, Charles E., and as certified to by the Director of the National Library, noted that the application for the probate of the will in the Philippines was
should govern. filed on February 20, 1929, while the proceedings in West Virginia appear to
have been initiated on June 8, 1929. These facts are strongly indicative of an
ISSUE: Whether or not the laws of West Virginia should govern. intention to make the Philippines the principal administration and West
Virginia the ancillary administration. However this may be, no attempt has
been made to comply with Civil Procedure, for no hearing on the question of
RULING: The laws of a foreign jurisdiction do not prove themselves in our the allowance of a will said to have been proved and allowed in West Virginia
courts. the courts of the Philippine Islands are not authorized to take has been requested. There is no showing that the deceased left any property
American Union. Such laws must be proved as facts.(In re Estate of Johnson at any place other than the Philippine Islands and no contention that he left
[1918], 39 Phil., 156.) Here the requirements of the law were not met. There any in West Virginia.
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
Reference has been made by the parties to a divorce purported to
the extract from the law attested by the certificate of the officer having charge
have been awarded Edward Randolph Hix from Annie Cousins Hix on
of the original, under the sale of the State of West Virginia, as provided in
October 8, 1925, in the State of West specific pronouncements on the validity
section 301 of the Code of Civil Procedure. No evidence was introduced to
or validity of this alleged divorce.
show that the extract from the laws of West Virginia was in force at the time
the alleged will was executed.
For all of the foregoing, the judgment appealed from will be affirmed,
with the costs of this instance against the appellant.
Note: 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 the
petitioner. Aside from this, there was nothing to indicate that the will was XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
acknowledged by the testator in the presence of two competent witnesses, of
that these witnesses subscribed the will in the presence of the testator and of 15. Davao Light v. CA
each other as the law of West Virginia seems to require. On the supposition Gr No. 93262 Dec 29, 1991
that the witnesses to the will reside without the Philippine Islands, it would
then the duty of the petitioner to prove execution by some other means Facts:
(Code of Civil Procedure, sec. 633.) Davao Light filed a complaint for sum of money against Queensland Hotel
and Teodorico Adarna. The complaint contained an ex parte application for a
It was also necessary for the petitioner to prove that the testator had writ of preliminary attachment. The Judge granted and issued the writ of
his domicile in West Virginia and not establish this fact consisted of the attachment and the sheriff served the summon against Queensland Hotel.
recitals in the CATHY will and the testimony of the petitioner. Also in The respondents contend that the preliminary attachment should not have
beginning administration proceedings originally in the Philippine Islands, the been issued because the court has not yet acquired jurisdiction over the
petitioner violated his own theory by attempting to have the principal person of the defendants.
administration in the Philippine Islands.
Issue:
Whether the writ of preliminary attachment may issue ex parte against a
While the appeal pending submission in this court, the attorney for
the appellant presented an unverified petition asking the court to accept as defendant before acquisition of jurisdiction of the latter’s person by service of
summons or his voluntary submission to the court’s authority?
Held: Arguments for the Plaintiff
No. The plaintiff may apply for and obtain a writ of preliminary attachment As the US courts have jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties,
upon fulfilment of the pertinent requisites laid down by law and that he may they have no choice but to try the case.
do so at any time, either before or after service of summons on the
defendant. Issue
Whether or not the US courts may dismiss the case on the ground of forum
The court declared that nothing in the RoC makes notice and hearing non conveniens.
indispensable and mandatory requisites for the issuance of the writ of
attachment, the only pre requisite is that the court be satisfied, upon Held
consideration of the affidavit of the applicant or of some other person who Yes. Under the circumstances, the case may be more suitably tried before
personally knows the facts that a sufficient cause of actions exists, that the German courts.
case is one of those mentioned in sec 1 rule 57, that there is no other
sufficient security for the claim sought to be enforced by the action, and that Ratio Decidendi
the amount due to the applicant, or the value of the property the possession The courts in both jurisdictions are competent to try the case and summons
of which he is entitled to recover, is as much as the sum for which the order may be served upon the insurance companies in both jurisdictions. Requiring
of attachment is granted above all legal counterclaims. If the court be so the insurance companies to defend their interests in the US would subject
satisfied, the order of attachment shall be granted, and the writ shall issue them to great and unnecessary inconvenience and expenses, including the
upon the applicant’s posting of bond executed to the adverse party in an possibility of having to bring documentary evidence all the way from their
amount to be fixed by the judge not exceeding the plaintiff’s claim, office in Germany. Moreover, trying the case in the US additionally burden
conditioned that the latter will pay all the costs which may be adjudged to the the courts in that jurisdiction, to the detriment of other litigants. The
adverse party and all damages which he may sustain by reason of the assumption of jurisdiction over a case the cause of action of which arose
attachment, if the court shall finally adjudge that the applicant was not from another jurisdiction and wherein both parties are non-residents is
entitled thereto. discretionary upon the court.