Con Ict of Laws: Notes and Cases

Conflict of Laws

Notes and Cases

Compiled by Rehne Gibb N. Larena | JD-WT-3 | AY 2019-20 | University of San Carlos

Conflict of Laws NOTES

TABLE OF CONTENTS C. Intrinsic validity of wills 22

D. Revocation of wills 22
E Administration of estates 22
I. Introduction and General Principles 4
A. Conflict of laws, defined; its object, function and VI. Conflicts Rules on Property 22
scope 4 A. The Philippine Civil Code and the lex situs rule 22
B. Distinguish from Public International Law 4 B. Exceptions to the lex situs rule 22
C. Importance of Private International Law 4 C. Conflict of laws on real property situated in another
D. Sources of Private International Law 4 country 22
Manila Hotel v NLRC 4 D. Extrinsic and intrinsic validity of conveyances 22
Saudi Arabian Airlines v Morada 4 E. Capacity to transfer or acquire property 22
Hasegawa v Kitamura 6 F. Situs of certain properties 22
G. Distinguished from Property relations of spouses 22
II. Jurisdiction and Choice of Law 7
A. Judicial jurisdiction; types 7 VII. Conflicts Rules on Marriage 22
B. Three (3) ways/methods of disposing Conflict of Law A. Marriage as a contract 22
cases 7 B. Marriage as a status 22
C. Analysis the three (3) ways/methods of disposing C. Philippine law on Extrinsic validity of marriage 22
Conflict of Law cases 7
D. Philippine law on Intrinsic validity of marriage 22
D. Proof and authentication of foreign laws and
E. Effects of marriage 22
documents 7
F. Adoption 22
E. Doctrine of Processual Presumption 7
Cadalin v POEA 7 VIII. Conflicts Rules on Dissolution of Marriage 22
Bank of America v American Realty 8 A. Divorce, legal separation, annulment of marriage,
Del Socorro v Van Wilsem 9 and declaration of nullity of marriage distinguished 22
Edi-Staffbuilders International v NLRC 10 B. Divorce 22
Manufacturers Hanover Trust v Guerrero 11 C. Legal separation 22
Asiavest Limited v CA 12 D. Annulment of marriage 22
F. The problem of characterization 13 E. Declaration of nullity of marriage 22
G. The problem of renvoi 13 IX. Conflicts Rules on Torts and Crimes 23
Aznar v Garcia 13 A. Torts, defined 23
Bellis v Bellis 14 B. Concept of tort in the Philippines 23
Llorente v CA 14 C. Laws governing torts 23
III. Conflicts Rules on Personal Law 15 D. Lex loci delicti commissi 23
A. Theories in determining one’s personal law 15 E. Three(3) theories in determining the locus delicti 23
B. Citizenship and domicile 15 F. Modern theories and rules on tort liability 23
Poe-Llamanzares v Comelec 15 G. Conflict rules on maritime tort 23
San Luis v San Luis 16 H. Foreign tort claims; conditions for enforcement of
tort claims 23
C. Dual citizenship 17
I. Philippines rule on foreign torts 23
D. Statelessness 17
J. Distinguish tort from crime 23
E. Personal status and capacity 17
K. Lex loci delicti 23
Republic v Manalo 18
L. Different theories that determine whether a state or
Van Dorn v Romillo 19 legal system has jurisdiction to take cognizance of
Pilapil v Ibay-Somera 19 criminal cases 23
Silverio v Republic 20 M. Philippine conflict rule on crime 23
IV. Conflicts Rules on Contracts 22 X. Conflicts Rules on Corporation and Partnership 23
A. Extrinsic validity of contracts 22 A. Corporation 23
B. Capacity of parties 22 B. Partnership 23
C. Intrinsic validity of contracts 22
XI. Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgment 23
D. Choice of law by the parties In a contract; exceptions
A. Distinction between Recognition and Enforcement of
22
Foreign Judgment 23
V. Conflicts Rules on Wills and Succession 22 B. Bases of Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign
A. Extrinsic validity of wills 22 Judgment 23
B. Probate of wills 22 C. Philippine Conflicts Rule on Recognition and
Enforcement of Foreign Judgment 23

Based on Syllabus of Atty. Gravador By RGL 2 of 23


D. Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgment

23
E. Value and Conclusiveness of Foreign Judgment 23
F. Jurisdiction over Action for Enforcement of Foreign
Judgment 23
G. Procedure for Enforcement of Foreign Judgment 23



I. Introduction and General Principles ● The Palace Hotel and Mr. Shmidt were not served with

summons and neither participated in the proceedings
A. Conflict of laws, defined; its object, function and before the Labor Arbiter. The Labor Arbiter ruled in
favor of Santos.
scope ● MHC and MHICL appealed arguing that the POEA, not
NLRC, had jurisdiction. The NLRC agreed and
B. Distinguish from Public International Law reversed the LA.
● In his MR, Santos argued that the case was not
cognizable by the POEA as he was not an "overseas
C. Importance of Private International Law contract worker."
● The NLRC granted the MR and reversed itself.
D. Sources of Private International Law

Issue
Manila Hotel v NLRC WON the NLRC had jurisdiction over the illegal dismissal
complaint of Santos over his foreign employer.
GR No 120077, 13 October 2000

Doctrinal Rule Held
Under the rule of forum non conveniens, a Philippine court or NO. The NLRC was a seriously inconvenient forum. The main
agency may assume jurisdiction over the case if it chooses to aspects of the case transpired in two foreign jurisdictions and
do so provided that it: the case involves purely foreign elements. The only link that the
(1) is one to which the parties may conveniently resort to; Philippines has with the case is that respondent Santos is a
(2) is in a position to make an intelligent decision as to the Filipino citizen. The Palace Hotel and MHICL are foreign
corporations. Not all cases involving our citizens can be tried
law and the facts; and
(3) has or is likely to have power to enforce its decision. here.
Santos was directly hired by the Palace Hotel without the
intervention of the POEA or any authorized recruitment agency
Facts of the government.
PARTIES Under the rule of forum non conveniens, a Philippine court or
● In May 1988, private respondent Marcelo Santos was agency may assume jurisdiction over the case if it chooses to
an overseas worker employed as a printer at the do so provided that the Philippine court:
Mazoon Printing Press, Sultanate of Oman. A month (1) is one to which the parties may conveniently resort to;
after, he was directly hired by the Palace Hotel, (2) is in a position to make an intelligent decision as to the
Beijing, People's Republic of China and later law and the facts; and
terminated due to retrenchment. (3) has or is likely to have power to enforce its decision.
● Petitioners are the Manila Hotel Corporation
(hereinafter referred to as "MHC") and the Manila The conditions are unavailing in the case at bar. The
Hotel International Company, Limited (hereinafter inconvenience is compounded by the fact that the proper
referred to as "MHICL"). defendants, the Palace Hotel and MHICL are not nationals of
● MHC was still a GOCC duly organized and existing the Philippines. Neither are they "doing business in the
under the laws of the Philippines. MHICL is a Philippines." Likewise, the main witnesses, Mr. Shmidt and Mr.
corporation duly organized and existing under the Henk are non-residents of the Philippines.
laws of Hong Kong. MHC is an "incorporator" of Neither can an intelligent decision be made as to the law
MHICL, owning 50% of its capital stock. governing the employment contract as such was perfected in
● By virtue of a "management agreement" with the foreign soil. This calls to fore the application of the principle of
Palace Hotel, MHICL trained the personnel and staff of lex loci contractus. The employment contract was not perfected
the Palace Hotel at Beijing. in the Philippines. Santos signified his acceptance by writing a
letter while he was in Oman. This letter was sent to the Palace
Hotel in China.
RELEVANT FACTS
Neither can the NLRC determine the facts surrounding the
● While employed with Mazoon Printing, Santos was alleged illegal dismissal as all acts complained of took place in
offered a job at the Palace Hotel for the same position Beijing.
but with higher compensation. Santos signified his
acceptance of the offer. Even assuming that a proper decision could be reached by the
● Santos then resigned from Mazoon under the pretext NLRC, such would not have any binding effect against the
that he was needed at home to help with the family employer, the Palace Hotel. The Palace Hotel is a corporation
business. incorporated under the laws of China and was not even served
● On June 30, 1988, Santos was deemed resigned from with summons. Jurisdiction over its person was not acquired.
Mazoon. On November 5, he left for Beijing to start
work at the Palace Hotel. He subsequently signed an
amended "employment agreement" with the Palace
Hotel, effective November 5. Disposition
● On August 10, 1989, the Palace Hotel informed Santos WHEREFORE, the Court hereby GRANTS the petition for
by letter signed by Mr. Shmidt that his employment at certiorari and ANNULS the orders and resolutions of the NLRC.
the Hotel print shop would be terminated due to
business reverses brought about by the political
upheaval in China. On September 5, the Palace Hotel
terminated the employment of Santos and paid all Saudi Arabian Airlines v Morada
benefits due him, including his plane fare back to the
Philippines. GR No 122191, 8 October 1998
● Santos then demanded full compensation pursuant to
the employment agreement. After his demand was Doctrinal Rule
rejected, filed a complaint for illegal dismissal with the A factual situation that cuts across territorial lines and is
NLRC. The complaint named MHC, MHICL, the Palace affected by the diverse laws of two or more states is said to
Hotel and Mr. Shmidt as respondents. contain a "foreign element".


As to the choice of applicable law, we note that choice-of-law element, we agree with petitioner that the problem herein could

problems seek to answer two important questions: present a "conflicts" case.
(1) What legal system should control a given situation The forms in which this foreign element may appear are many.
where some of the significant facts occurred in two or The foreign element may simply consist in the fact that one of
more states; and the parties to a contract is an alien or has a foreign domicile, or
(2) to what extent should the chosen legal system that a contract between nationals of one State involves
regulate the situation. properties situated in another State. In other cases, the foreign
element may assume a complex form.

In the instant case, the foreign element consisted in the fact
Facts that Morada is a resident Filipina, and that SAUDIA is a resident
● SAUDIA hired private respondent Milagros Morada as foreign corporation. Also, events did transpire across national
a Flight Attendant for its airlines based in Jeddah, borders. We thus find Morada’s assertion that the case is
Saudi Arabia. purely domestic, imprecise. A conflicts problem presents itself
● While on a lay-over in Jakarta, Indonesia, Morada went here, and the question of jurisdiction confronts the court a quo.
to a disco dance with fellow crew members, Thamer Morada aptly predicated her cause of action on Articles 19 and
and Allah, who were both Saudi nationals.
21 of the New Civil Code.
● Thamer attempted to rape Morada. Both Thamer and
Allah were arrested by Indonesian police.
● SAUDIA asked Morada to negotiate with the (1) YES. Based on the allegations in the Amended Complaint,
Indonesian police for the release of Thamer and Allah read in the light of the Rules of Court on jurisdiction we find that
but she refused. She was then barred from the Jakarta the RTC of Quezon City possesses jurisdiction over the
flights. The two were then released and returned subject matter of the suit.
service. Morada was transferred to Manila.
● Morada was asked to see the the Chief Legal Officer Pragmatic considerations, including the convenience of the
of SAUDIA in Jeddah. There, the latter brought her to parties, also weigh heavily in favor of the RTC Quezon City
the police station where the police took her passport assuming jurisdiction. Paramount is the private interest of the
and questioned her about the Jakarta incident. Due to litigant. Enforceability of a judgment if one is obtained is quite
the pressure, she agreed to drop the case. obvious. Relative advantages and obstacles to a fair trial are
● In a Saudi court, Morada was asked to sign a equally important. Plaintiff may not, by choice of an
document written in Arabic. As it turned out, she inconvenient forum, ‘vex’, ‘harass’, or ‘oppress’ the defendant,
signed a notice to her to appear before the court on e.g. by inflicting upon him needless expense or disturbance.
June 27, 1993. She then returned to Manila. But unless the balance is strongly in favor of the defendant, the
● When asked to return to Jeddah, she was escorted to plaintiff’s choice of forum should rarely be disturbed.
the court where the judge rendered a decision, Weighing the relative claims of the parties, the court a quo
translated to her in English, sentencing her to five found it best to hear the case in the Philippines. Had it refused
months imprisonment and to 286 lashes. Only then to take cognizance of the case, it would be forcing Morada to
did she realize that the Saudi court had tried her, seek remedial action elsewhere, i.e. in Saudi Arabia. That would
together with Thamer and Allah. She then asked the have caused a fundamental unfairness to her.
Philippine Embassy in Jeddah to help her while her
case is on appeal. Similarly, the trial court also possesses jurisdiction over the
persons of the parties herein. By filing her Complaint and
● Her case was dismissed on appeal. Before her return
Amended Complaint with the trial court, Morada has voluntary
to Manila, she was terminated from the service by
SAUDIA. submitted herself to the jurisdiction of the court. The records
show that SAUDIA has filed several motions. SAUDIA has
● Morada filed a Complaint for damages against
effectively submitted to the trial court’s jurisdiction by praying
SAUDIA.
● SAUDIA filed a motion to dismiss mainly on lack of for the dismissal of the Amended Complaint on grounds other
than lack of jurisdiction.
jurisdiction on the basis of Article 21 of the Civil Code,
since the proper law applicable is the law of the
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
(2) YES. Philippine laws should govern the case. As to the
● The RTC denied the motion of SAUDIA. The CA ruled choice of applicable law, we note that choice-of-law problems
that the Philippines is an appropriate forum seek to answer two important questions:
considering that the Amended Complaint’s basis for
recovery of damages is Article 21 of the Civil Code, (a) What legal system should control a given situation
and thus, clearly within the jurisdiction of respondent where some of the significant facts occurred in two or
Court. more states; and
● SAUDIA claims that before us is a conflict of laws that (b) to what extent should the chosen legal system
must be settled at the outset. It maintains that private regulate the situation.
respondent’s claim for alleged abuse of rights Before a choice can be made, it is necessary for us to
occurred in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. It alleges determine under what category a certain set of facts or rules
that the existence of a foreign element qualifies the fall. This process is known as "characterization", or the
instant case for the application of the law of the
"doctrine of qualification". It is the "process of deciding
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, by virtue of the lex loci whether or not the facts relate to the kind of question specified
delicti commissi rule. in a conflicts rule." The purpose of "characterization" is to
enable the forum to select the proper law.
Issue/s Our starting point of analysis here is not a legal relation, but a
factual situation, event, or operative fact. An essential element
(1) WON the RTC has jurisdiction to hear and try the
of conflict rules is the indication of a "test" or "connecting
Complaint of Morada. factor" or "point of contact". Choice-of-law rules invariably
(2) WON Philippine Law should govern in the case. consist of a factual relationship and a connecting factor or
point of contact.
Held These "test factors" or "points of contact" or "connecting
factors" could be any of the following:
PRESENCE OF FOREIGN ELEMENT
(1) The nationality of a person, his domicile, his
There is no dispute that the interplay of events occurred in two residence, his place of sojourn, or his origin;
states, the Philippines and Saudi Arabia. Where the factual (2) the seat of a legal or juridical person, such as a
antecedents satisfactorily establish the existence of a foreign corporation;


(3) the situs of a thing, that is, the place where a thing is, arising out of this case.
or is deemed to be situated. In particular, the lex situs
is decisive when real rights are involved;
(4) the place where an act has been done, the locus Disposition
actus, such as the place where a contract has been WHEREFORE, the instant petition for certiorari is hereby
made, a marriage celebrated, a will signed or a tort DISMISSED.
committed. The lex loci actus is particularly important
in contracts and torts;
(5) the place where an act is intended to come into effect,
e.g., the place of performance of contractual duties, Hasegawa v Kitamura
or the place where a power of attorney is to be
exercised; GR No 149177, 23 November 2007
(6) the intention of the contracting parties as to the law
that should govern their agreement, the lex loci Doctrinal Rule
intentionis; In the judicial resolution of conflicts problems, three
(7) the place where judicial or administrative proceedings consecutive phases are involved:
are instituted or done. The lex fori "the law of the
forum" is particularly important because, as we have (1) jurisdiction,
seen earlier, matters of ‘procedure’ not going to the (2) choice of law, and
substance of the claim involved are governed by it; (3) recognition and enforcement of judgments.
and because the lex fori applies whenever the content Since the principles of lex loci celebrationis and lex contractus,
of the otherwise applicable foreign law is excluded and the “state of the most significant relationship rule” make
from application in a given case for the reason that it reference to the law applicable to a dispute, they are rules
falls under one of the exceptions to the applications of proper for the second phase, the choice of law. If the only issue
foreign law; and in the case is that of jurisdiction, choice-of-law rules are not only
(8) the flag of a ship, which in many cases is decisive of inapplicable but also not yet called for.
practically all legal relationships of the ship and of its
master or owner as such. It also covers contractual
relationships particularly contracts of affreightment. Facts
● Petitioner Nippon Engineering Consultants Co., Ltd.
After a careful study of the pleadings on record, we are (Nippon), a Japanese consultancy firm providing
convinced that there is reasonable basis for Morada's assertion technical and management support in the
that although she was already working in Manila, petitioner infrastructure projects of foreign governments,
brought her to Jeddah on the pretense that she would merely entered into an Independent Contractor Agreement
testify in an investigation of the charges she made against the (ICA) with respondent Minoru Kitamura, a Japanese
two SAUDIA crew members for the attack on her person while national permanently residing in the Philippines.
they were in Jakarta. ● The agreement provides that Kitamura was to extend
professional services to Nippon for a year starting on
Considering that the complaint in the court a quo is one April 1, 1999. Nippon then assigned Kitamura to work
involving torts, the "connecting factor" or "point of contact" as the project manager of the Southern Tagalog
could be the place or places where the tortious conduct or lex Access Road (STAR) Project in the Philippines.
loci actus occurred. And applying the torts principle in a ● When the STAR Project was near completion, the
conflicts case, we find that the Philippines could be said as a DPWH engaged the consultancy services of Nippon,
situs of the tort. This is because it is in the Philippines where on January 28, 2000, this time for the detailed
SAUDIA allegedly deceived Morada. That certain acts or parts engineering and construction supervision of the
of the injury allegedly occurred in another country is of no Bongabon-Baler Road Improvement (BBRI) Project.
moment. For in our view what is important here is the place Kitamura was named as the project manager in the
where the over-all harm or the fatality of the alleged injury to contract's Appendix 3.1.
the person, reputation, social standing and human rights of ● Petitioner Hasegawa, Nippon's general manager for its
complainant, had lodged, according to Morada. All told, it is not International Division, informed Kitamura that the
without basis to identify the Philippines as the situs of the company had no more intention of automatically
alleged tort. renewing his ICA. His services would be engaged by
Moreover, with the widespread criticism of the traditional rule of the company only up to the substantial completion of
lex loci delicti commissi, modern theories and rules on tort the STAR Project on March 31, 2000.
liability have been advanced to offer fresh judicial approaches ● Kitamura then filed a case for specific performance
to arrive at just results. In keeping abreast with the modern and damages with the RTC of Lipa.
theories on tort liability, we find here an occasion to apply the ● Contending that the ICA had been perfected in Japan
"State of the most significant relationship" rule, which in and executed by and between Japanese nationals,
our view should be appropriate to apply now, given the factual Nippon and Hasegawa moved to dismiss the
context of this case. complaint for lack of jurisdiction, following the
principles of lex loci celebrationis and lex contractus.
In applying said principle to determine the State which has the ● The RTC, in denying the motion to dismiss, held that
most significant relationship, the following contacts are to be matters connected with the performance of contracts
taken into account and evaluated according to their relative are regulated by the law prevailing at the place of
importance with respect to the particular issue: performance.
(a) the place where the injury occurred; ● In affirming the RTC, the CA ruled, among others, that
(b) the place where the conduct causing the injury the principle of lex loci celebrationis was not
occurred; applicable to the case, because nowhere in the
(c) the domicile, residence, nationality, place of pleadings was the validity of the written agreement
incorporation and place of business of the parties, and put in issue. The CA thus declared that the RTC was
(d) the place where the relationship, if any, between the correct in applying instead the principle of lex loci
parties is centered. solutionis.
● Petitioners posit that local courts have no substantial
Prescinding from this premise that the Philippines is the situs of relationship to the parties following the [state of the]
the tort complaint of and the place "having the most interest in most significant relationship rule in Private
the problem", we find, by way of recapitulation, that the International Law.
Philippine law on tort liability should have paramount
application to and control in the resolution of the legal issues


Issue (1) dismiss the case, either because of lack of jurisdiction

or refusal to assume jurisdiction over the case;
WON the subject matter jurisdiction of Philippine courts
(2) assume jurisdiction over the case and apply the
in civil cases for specific performance and damages internal law of the forum; or
involving contracts executed outside the country by (3) assume jurisdiction over the case and take into
foreign nationals may be assailed on the principles of lex account or apply the law of some other State or
loci celebrationis, lex contractus, the “state of the most States.
significant relationship rule,” or forum non conveniens.
Neither can the other ground raised, forum non conveniens, be
Held used to deprive the trial court of its jurisdiction herein. First, it is
not a proper basis for a motion to dismiss because Section 1,
NO. The Court finds the invocation of these grounds unsound. Rule 16 of the Rules of Court does not include it as a ground.
In the judicial resolution of conflicts problems, three Second, whether a suit should be entertained or dismissed on
consecutive phases are involved: jurisdiction, choice of law, and the basis of the said doctrine depends largely upon the facts of
recognition and enforcement of judgments. Corresponding to the particular case and is addressed to the sound discretion of
these phases are the following questions: the trial court. In this case, the RTC decided to assume
jurisdiction. Third, the propriety of dismissing a case based on
(1) Where can or should litigation be initiated? this principle requires a factual determination; hence, this
(2) Which law will the court apply? and conflicts principle is more properly considered a matter of
(3) Where can the resulting judgment be enforced? defense.
Jurisdiction considers whether it is fair to cause a defendant to

travel to this state; choice of law asks the further question
whether the application of a substantive law which will Disposition
determine the merits of the case is fair to both parties. WHEREFORE, premises considered, the petition for review on
In this case, only the first phase is at issue — jurisdiction. certiorari is DENIED.
Jurisdiction, however, has various aspects. For a court to validly
exercise its power to adjudicate a controversy, it must have
jurisdiction over the plaintiff or the petitioner, over the
defendant or the respondent, over the subject matter, over the II. Jurisdiction and Choice of Law
issues of the case and, in cases involving property, over the res
or the thing which is the subject of the litigation. In assailing the
trial court's jurisdiction herein, petitioners are actually referring A. Judicial jurisdiction; types
to subject matter jurisdiction.
Jurisdiction over the subject matter in a judicial proceeding is
B. Three (3) ways/methods of disposing Conflict of
conferred by the sovereign authority which establishes and Law cases
organizes the court. It is given only by law and in the manner
prescribed by law. It is further determined by the allegations of C. Analysis the three (3) ways/methods of disposing
the complaint irrespective of whether the plaintiff is entitled to
all or some of the claims asserted therein. To succeed in its Conflict of Law cases
motion for the dismissal of an action for lack of jurisdiction over
the subject matter of the claim, the movant must show that the 1. Dismissing the case, Principle of forum non
court or tribunal cannot act on the matter submitted to it conveniens
because no law grants it the power to adjudicate the claims. 2. Application of internal and domestic law
In the instant case, petitioners, in their motion to dismiss, do not a. Where application of internal law is
claim that the trial court is not properly vested by law with
jurisdiction to hear the subject controversy for, indeed, the case decreed
for specific performance and damages is one not capable of b. Where there is failure to plead and prove
pecuniary estimation and is properly cognizable by the RTC of foreign law
Lipa City.
c. Where the case involves any of the
What they rather raise as grounds to question subject matter
jurisdiction are the principles of lex loci celebrationis and lex exceptions to the application of foreign law
contractus, and the “state of the most significant relationship 3. Application of foreign law and the various
rule.”
Choice-of-Law theories that justify the application
The Court finds the invocation of these grounds unsound. of foreign law
Lex loci celebrationis relates to the “law of the place of the
ceremony” or the law of the place where a contract is made. D. Proof and authentication of foreign laws and
The doctrine of lex contractus or lex loci contractus means the
“law of the place where a contract is executed or to be documents
performed.”
Under the “state of the most significant relationship rule,” to E. Doctrine of Processual Presumption
ascertain what state law to apply to a dispute, the court should
determine which state has the most substantial connection to Cadalin v POEA
the occurrence and the parties. In a case involving a contract, GR No 104776, 12/5/1994, Quiason, J
the court should consider where the contract was made, was
negotiated, was to be performed, and the domicile, place of
Doctrinal Rule
business, or place of incorporation of the parties.
As a general rule, a foreign procedural law will not be applied in
Since these three principles in conflict of laws make reference
the forum. Procedural matters, such as service of process,
to the law applicable to a dispute, they are rules proper for the joinder of actions, period and requisites for appeal, and so
second phase, the choice of law. Necessarily, as the only issue
forth, are governed by the laws of the forum. This is true even if
in this case is that of jurisdiction, choice-of-law rules are not
the action is based upon a foreign substantive law.
only inapplicable but also not yet called for.

When a conflicts case, one involving a foreign element, is
brought before a court or administrative agency, there are three Facts
alternatives open to the latter in disposing of it: ● Bienvenido M. Cadalin, Rolando M. Amul and Donato


B. Evangelista, in their own behalf and on behalf of NLRC: 3 years as per Art 291 of Labor Code.
728 other overseas contract workers (OCWs) instituted
Sol Gen: 1 year as per Amiri Decree No 23 of 1976.
a class suit by filing an "Amended Complaint" with the
POEA for money claims arising from their recruitment ● The claimants are of the view that Article 291 of the
by AIBC and employment by BRII. Labor Code of the Philippines, which was applied by
● BRII is a foreign corporation with headquarters in NLRC, refers only to claims "arising from the
Houston, Texas, and is engaged in construction; while employer's violation of the employee's right as
AIBC is a domestic corporation licensed as a service provided by the Labor Code." They assert that their
contractor to recruit, mobilize and deploy Filipino claims are based on the violation of their employment
workers for overseas employment on behalf of its contracts, as amended by the Amiri Decree No. 23 of
foreign principals. 1976 and therefore the claims may be brought within
● The amended complaint principally sought the ten years as provided by Article 1144 of the Civil Code.
payment of the unexpired portion of the employment ● AIBC and BRII, insist that the actions on the claims
contracts, which was terminated prematurely. have prescribed under the Amiri Decree No. 23 of
● The claimants alleged that AIBC and BRII had waived 1976.
their right to present evidence and had defaulted by
failing to file their answers and to attend the pre-trial
conference. Issue/s
● The complainants-appellants allege that they were (1) Whether it is the Bahrain law on prescription of action
recruited by respondent-appellant AIBC for its based on the Amiri Decree No. 23 of 1976 or a
accredited foreign principal, Brown & Root, on various Philippine law on prescription that shall be the
dates from 1975 to 1983. They were all deployed at governing law.
various projects undertaken by Brown & Root in (2) Whether the prescriptive period governing the filing of
several countries. the claims is three years, as provided by the Labor
● Having been officially processed as OCWs by the Code or ten years, as provided by the Civil Code.
Philippine Government, all the individual complainants

signed standard overseas employment contracts.
Held

NLRC resolved the issues in the following manner: (1) PH LAW. As a general rule, a foreign procedural law will not
be applied in the forum. Procedural matters, such as service of
(1) As to applicable law, NLRC set aside Section 1, Rule process, joinder of actions, period and requisites for appeal,
129 of the 1989 Revised Rules on Evidence governing and so forth, are governed by the laws of the forum. This is true
the pleading and proof of a foreign law and admitted even if the action is based upon a foreign substantive law.
in evidence a simple copy of the Bahrain's Amiri
Decree No. 23 of 1976 (Labour Law for the Private A law on prescription of actions is sui generis in Conflict of
Sector). NLRC agreed with the POEA Administrator Laws in the sense that it may be viewed either as procedural or
that the Amiri Decree No. 23, being more favorable substantive, depending on the characterization given such a
and beneficial to the workers, should form part of the law.
overseas employment contract of the complainants. However, the characterization of a statute into a procedural
NLRC, however, held that the Amiri Decree No. 23 or substantive law becomes irrelevant when the country of
applied only to the claimants, who worked in Bahrain, the forum has a "borrowing statute." Said statute has the
and set aside awards of the POEA Administrator in practical effect of treating the foreign statute of limitation as
favor of the claimants, who worked elsewhere. one of substance. A "borrowing statute" directs the state of the
(2) As to prescription, NLRC ruled that the prescriptive forum to apply the foreign statute of limitations to the pending
period for the filing of the claims of the complainants claims based on a foreign law.
was three years, as provided in Article 291 of the
Labor Code, and not ten years as provided in Article The courts of the forum will not enforce any foreign claim
1144 of the Civil Code nor one year as provided in the obnoxious to the forum's public policy. To enforce the
Amiri Decree No. 23 of 1976. one-year prescriptive period of the Amiri Decree No. 23 of 1976
(3) As to whether the case is a class suit, NLRC agreed as regards the claims in question would contravene the public
with the POEA Administrator that the labor cases policy on the protection to labor.
cannot be treated as a class suit for the simple reason
that not all the complainants worked in Bahrain.
(2) THREE (3) YEARS. Article 291 of the Labor Code of the
(4) As to due process, NLRC found at least three
infractions of the cardinal rules of administrative due Philippines provides the prescriptive period for filing "money
process: namely, (1) the failure of the POEA claims arising from employer-employee relations." The claims in
the cases at bench all arose from the employer-employee
Administrator to consider the evidence presented by
AIBC and BRII; (2) some findings of fact were not relations, which is broader in scope than claims arising from a
supported by substantial evidence; and (3) some of specific law or from the collective bargaining agreement.
the evidence upon which the decision was based
were not disclosed to AIBC and BRII during the
Disposition
hearing.
(5) As to liability of BRII and AIBC, NLRC sustained the The three petitions were filed under Rule 65 of the Revised
ruling of the POEA Administrator that BRII and AIBC Rules of Court on the grounds that NLRC had committed grave
are solidarily liable for the claims of the complainants abuse of discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction in issuing
and held that BRII was the actual employer of the the questioned orders. We find no such abuse of discretion.
complainants, or at the very least, the indirect WHEREFORE, all the three petitions are DISMISSED.
employer, with AIBC as the labor contractor. NLRC also
held that jurisdiction over BRII was acquired by the
POEA Administrator through the summons served on
AIBC, its local agent. Bank of America v American Realty
GR No 133876, 12/29/1999, Buena, J
● Essentially, one of the common issue is on prescription
although the parties disagreed as to the time that Doctrinal Rule
should be embraced within the prescriptive period.
Doctrine of processual presumption states that if the foreign
For the POEA: 10 years as per Art 1144 of CC; law involved is not properly pleaded and proved, our courts will
presume that the foreign law is the same as our local or


domestic or internal law. this purpose, a remedy is deemed chosen upon the filing of the

However, when the foreign law, judgment or contract is contrary suit for collection or upon the filing of the complaint in an action
to a sound and established public policy of the forum, the said for foreclosure of mortgage, pursuant to the provision of Rule
68 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure. As to extrajudicial
foreign law, judgment or order shall not be applied.
foreclosure, such remedy is deemed elected by the mortgage
creditor upon filing of the petition not with any court of justice
Facts but with the Office of the Sheriff of the province where the sale
is to be made.
Does a mortgage-creditor waive its remedy to foreclose the
real estate mortgage constituted over a third party mortgagor’s In the case at bar, petitioner BANTSA only has one cause of
property situated in the Philippines by filing an action for the action which is non-payment of the debt. Nevertheless,
collection of the principal loan before foreign courts? alternative remedies are available for its enjoyment and
exercise. Petitioner then may opt to exercise only one of two
remedies so as not to violate the rule against splitting a cause
● Petitioner Bank of America NT & SA (BANTSA) is an of action.
international banking and financing institution duly The aforequoted ruling in Caltex is the exception rather than
licensed to do business in the Philippines, organized the rule, dictated by the peculiar circumstances obtaining
and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the therein. In the said case, the Supreme Court chastised Caltex
California while private respondent American Realty for making - x x x a mockery of our judicial system when it
Corporation (ARC) is a domestic corporation. initially filed a collection suit then, during the pendency thereof,
● Bank of America International Limited (BAIL), on the foreclosed extrajudicially the mortgaged property which
other hand, is a limited liability company organized secured the indebtedness, and still pursued the collection suit
and existing under the laws of England. to the end." Thus, to prevent a mockery of our judicial system",
● BANTSA and BAIL on several occasions granted three the collection suit had to be nullified because the foreclosure
major multi-million United States (US) Dollar loans to 3 proceedings have already been pursued to their end and can
borrowers all of which are existing under and by virtue no longer be undone.
of the laws of the Republic of Panama and are foreign
affiliates of ARC. In Bachrach, this Court resolved to deny the creditor the
● Due to the default in the payment of the loan remedy of foreclosure after the collection suit was filed,
amortizations, BANTSA and the corporate borrowers considering that the creditor should not be afforded "plural
signed and entered into restructuring agreements. As redress for a single breach of contract."
additional security for the restructured loans, private Notably, it is not the nature of the redress which is crucial but
respondent ARC as third party mortgagor executed the efficacy of the remedy chosen in addressing the creditor’s
two real estate mortgages. cause. Hence, a suit brought before a foreign court having
● Eventually, the corporate borrowers defaulted in the competence and jurisdiction to entertain the action is deemed,
payment of the restructured loans prompting for this purpose, to be within the contemplation of the remedy
petitioner BANTSA to file civil actions before foreign available to the mortgagee-creditor.
courts. There, ARC, being a third party mortgagor, was

not impleaded as party-defendant.
● BANTSA filed before the Office of the Provincial BANTSA alleges that under English Law, which according to
Sheriff of Bulacan, Philippines, an application for petitioner is the governing law with regard to the principal
extrajudicial foreclosure of real estate mortgage. agreements, the mortgagee does not lose its security interest
● ARC filed before the RTC an action for damages by simply filing civil actions for sums of money. In a long line of
against BANTSA for foreclosing extrajudicially the real decisions, this Court adopted the well-imbedded principle in
estate mortgages despite the pendency of civil suits our jurisdiction that there is no judicial notice of any foreign law.
before foreign courts for the collection of the principal A foreign law must be properly pleaded and proved as a fact.
loan. Thus, if the foreign law involved is not properly pleaded and
● The RTC granted the motion for the suspension of the proved, our courts will presume that the foreign law is the
period of redemption filed by ARC since availing of same as our local or domestic or internal law. This is what we
redemption would contradict its claim the the refer to as the doctrine of processual presumption.
foreclosure was illegal. RTC ruled eventually in favor of
However, when the foreign law, judgment or contract is contrary
ARC declaring that the filing in foreign courts by the
to a sound and established public policy of the forum, the said
defendant of collection suits against the principal
foreign law, judgment or order shall not be applied. The public
debtors operated as a waiver of the security of the
policy sought to be protected in the instant case is the principle
mortgages. The CA affirmed.
imbedded in our jurisdiction proscribing the splitting up of a
single cause of action. Clearly then, English Law is not
Issue/s applicable.
(1) WON the petitioner’s act of filing a collection suit

against the principal debtors for the recovery of the (2) YES. We hold that the private respondent is entitled to the
loan before foreign courts constituted a waiver of the award of actual or compensatory damages inasmuch as the act
remedy of foreclosure. of petitioner BANTSA in extrajudicially foreclosing the real
(2) WON the award by the lower court of actual and estate mortgages constituted a clear violation of the rights of
exemplary damages in favor of private respondent herein private respondent ARC, as third-party mortgagor.
ARC, as third-party mortgagor, is proper.

Disposition
Held
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the instant petition is
(1) YES. The rule is now settled that a mortgage creditor may DENIED for lack of merit. The decision of the CA is hereby
elect to waive his security and bring, instead, an ordinary action AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION of the amount awarded as
to recover the indebtedness with the right to execute a exemplary damages.
judgment thereon on all the properties of the debtor, including
the subject matter of the mortgage x x x, subject to the
qualification that if he fails in the remedy by him elected, he
cannot pursue further the remedy he has waived. Del Socorro v Van Wilsem
In our jurisdiction, the remedies available to the mortgage GR No 193707, 12/10/2014, Peralta, J
creditor are deemed alternative and not cumulative. Notably, an
election of one remedy operates as a waiver of the other. For Doctrinal Rule


Under the doctrine of processual presumption, if the domestic or internal law. Thus, since the law of the Netherlands
foreign law involved is not properly pleaded and proved, our as regards the obligation to support has not been properly
courts will presume that the foreign law is the same as our local pleaded and proved in the instant case, it is presumed to be the
or domestic or internal law. same with Philippine law, which enforces the obligation of
parents to support their children and penalizing the
Territoriality principle provides that penal laws and those of
non-compliance therewith.
public security and safety shall be obligatory upon all who live
and sojourn in Philippine territory, subject to the principle of We likewise agree with petitioner that notwithstanding that the
public international law and to treaty stipulations. national law of respondent states that parents have no
obligation to support their children or that such obligation is not

punishable by law, said law would still not find applicability,
Facts when the foreign law, judgment or contract is contrary to a
sound and established public policy of the forum, the said
● Petitioner Norma A. Del Socorro and respondent Ernst
foreign law, judgment or order shall not be applied.
Johan Brinkman Van Wilsem contracted marriage in
Holland on September 25, 1990. They got divorced in
Holland in 1995. At that time, their son, Roderigo, was
(2) YES. Based on the foregoing legal precepts, we find that
only 18 months old. respondent may be made liable under Section 5(e) and (i) of
● Norma alleged that Ernst made a promise to provide
R.A. No. 9262 for unjustly refusing or failing to give support to
monthly support to their son. However, since the
petitioner’s son.
arrival of Norma and her son in the Philippines, Ernst
never gave support to the son. In addition, considering that respondent is currently living in the
● Ernst came to the Philippines and remarried in Philippines, we find strength in petitioner’s claim that the
Pinamungahan, Cebu. Territoriality Principle in criminal law, in relation to Article 14 of
● In 2009, Norma sent a letter demanding for support the New Civil Code, applies to the instant case, which provides
from Ernst. Ernst refused to receive the letter. This that:“[p]enal laws and those of public security and safety shall
prompted Norma to file a complaint against Ernst for be obligatory upon all who live and sojourn in Philippine
violation of Section 5, paragraph E(2) of R.A. No. 9262 territory, subject to the principle of public international law and
for the latter’s unjust refusal to support his minor child. to treaty stipulations.”
● The RTC-Cebu dismissed the instant criminal case As to prescription, the act of denying support to a child under
against Ernst on the ground that the facts charged in Section 5(e)(2) and (i) of R.A. No. 9262 is a continuing offense,
the information do not constitute an offense with which started in 1995 but is still ongoing at present.
respect to the latter who is an alien. Accordingly, the crime charged in the instant case has clearly
Issue/s not prescribed.
(1) WON a foreign national has an obligation to support
his minor child under Philippine law. Disposition
(2) WON a foreign national can be held criminally liable
under R.A. No. 9262 for his unjustified failure to WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED. The Orders of the RTC
support his minor child. are hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE. The case is
REMANDED to the same court to conduct further proceedings
Held based on the merits of the case.
(1) NO. HOWEVER, under the doctrine of processual
presumption, if the foreign law involved is not properly pleaded
and proved, our courts will presume that the foreign law is the
same as our local or domestic or internal law. Having failed to Edi-Sta builders International v NLRC
implead the law of the Netherlands, Ernst is bound by Philippine GR No 145587, 10/26/2007, Velasco, Jr, J
law to support his minor child.
To determine whether or not a person is criminally liable under Doctrinal Rule
R.A. No. 9262, it is imperative that the legal obligation to
Failure to furnish the adverse party with a copy of the appeal is
support exists.
treated only as a formal lapse, an excusable neglect, and
We agree with respondent that petitioner cannot rely on Article hence, not a jurisdictional defect. Accordingly, in such a
195 of the New Civil Code in demanding support from situation, the appeal should not be dismissed; however, it
respondent, who is a foreign citizen, since Article 15 of the New should not be given due course either.
Civil Code stresses the principle of nationality. In other words,

insofar as Philippine laws are concerned, specifically the
provisions of the Family Code on support, the same only Facts
applies to Filipino citizens. By analogy, the same principle ● The CA affirmed the NLRC decision ordering Expertise
applies to foreigners such that they are governed by their Search International (ESI), EDI-Staffbuilders
national law with respect to family rights and duties. The International, Inc. (EDI), and Omar Ahmed Ali Bin Bechr
obligation to give support to a child is a matter that falls under Est. (OAB) jointly and severally to pay private
family rights and duties. respondent, Eleazar S. Gran (Gran) the amount of USD
In international law, the party who wants to have a foreign law 16,150.00 as unpaid salaries.
applied to a dispute or case has the burden of proving the ● EDI is a corporation engaged in recruitment and
foreign law. In the present case, respondent hastily concludes placement of OFWs. ESI is another recruitment agency
that being a national of the Netherlands, he is governed by which collaborated with EDI to process the
such laws on the matter of provision of and capacity to support. documentation and deployment of Gran to Saudi
While respondent pleaded the laws of the Netherlands in Arabia. Gran was an OFW recruited by EDI, and
advancing his position that he is not obliged to support his son, deployed by ESI to work for OAB, in Riyadh.
he never proved the same. It is incumbent upon respondent to ● OAB informed EDI that, from the applicants’ curricula
plead and prove that the national law of the Netherlands does vitae submitted to it for evaluation, it selected Gran for
not impose upon the parents the obligation to support their the position of “Computer Specialist.” After accepting
child. OAB’s offer of employment, Gran signed an
employment contract that granted him a monthly
In view of respondent’s failure to prove the national law of
salary of USD 850.00 for a period of two years.
the Netherlands in his favor, the doctrine of processual
● After only 5 months, Gran's employment was
presumption shall govern. Under this doctrine, if the foreign
terminated. Gran received from OAB the total amount
law involved is not properly pleaded and proved, our courts will
of SR 2,948.00 representing his final pay, and on the
presume that the foreign law is the same as our local or
same day, he executed a Declaration releasing OAB


from any financial obligation. In the case at bar, petitioner failed to show that the order of the

● After his arrival in the Philippines, Gran instituted a company which was violated—the submission of “Daily Activity
complaint with the NLRC for underpayment of Reports”—was part of Gran’s duties as a Computer Specialist.
wages/salaries and illegal dismissal.

● The Labor Arbiter uled that there was neither
underpayment nor illegal dismissal since according to A careful examination of the records revealed that, indeed,
the POEA-Overseas Contract Worker (OCW) OAB’s manner of dismissing Gran fell short of the two notice
Information Sheet, Gran’s monthly salary was USD requirement. While it furnished Gran the written notice
600.00 and that Gran failed to refute EDI’s allegations informing him of his dismissal, it failed to furnish Gran the
on the grounds of his dismissal. written notice apprising him of the charges against him, as
● The NLRC held that EDI’s seemingly harmless transfer prescribed by the Labor Code. Consequently, he was denied
of Gran’s contract to ESI is actually “reprocessing,” the opportunity to respond to said notice. Obviously, Gran was
which is a prohibited transaction under Article 34 (b) of not afforded due process.
the Labor Code.
Disposition
Issue WHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED.
WON Gran’s dismissal is justifiable by reason of incompetence,
insubordination, and disobedience.
Manufacturers Hanover Trust v Guerrero
Held GR No 136804, 2/19/2003, Carpio, J
NO. In illegal dismissal cases, it has been established by
Philippine law and jurisprudence that the employer should Doctrinal Rule
prove that the dismissal of employees or personnel is legal and
just. Foreign laws are not a matter of judicial notice. Like any other
fact, they must be alleged and proven.
In cases involving OFWs, the rights and obligations among and
between the OFW, the local recruiter/agent, and the foreign
employer/principal are governed by the employment contract. Facts
In the present case, the employment contract signed by Gran ● Guerrero filed a complaint for damages against
specifically states that Saudi Labor Laws will govern matters not petitioner Manufacturers Hanover Trust Bank. He
provided for in the contract (e.g. specific causes for termination, sought payment of damages allegedly for (1) illegally
termination procedures, etc.). Being the law intended by the withheld taxes charged against interests on his
parties (lex loci intentiones) to apply to the contract, Saudi checking account with the Bank; (2) a returned check
Labor Laws should govern all matters relating to the termination worth US$18,000.00 due to signature verification
of the employment of Gran. problems; and (3) unauthorized conversion of his
In international law, the party who wants to have a foreign law account.
applied to a dispute or case has the burden of proving the ● In its Answer, the bank alleged that by stipulation
foreign law. The foreign law is treated as a question of fact to Guerrero’s account is governed by New York law and
be properly pleaded and proved as the judge or labor arbiter this law does not permit any of Guerrero’s claims
cannot take judicial notice of a foreign law. He is presumed to except actual damages.
know only domestic or forum law. ● Thus, the Bank filed a Motion for Partial Summary
Judgment seeking the dismissal of Guerrero’s claims
Unfortunately for petitioner, it did not prove the pertinent Saudi for consequential, nominal, temperate, moral and
laws on the matter; thus, the International Law doctrine of exemplary damages as well as attorney’s fees. It
presumed-identity approach or processual presumption contended that the trial should be limited to the issue
comes into play. Where a foreign law is not pleaded or, even if of actual damages.
pleaded, is not proved, the presumption is that foreign law is ● The affidavit of Alyssa Walden, a New York attorney,
the same as ours. Thus, we apply Philippine labor laws in (“Walden affidavit” for brevity) stated that Guerrero’s
determining the issues presented before us. New York bank account stipulated that the governing
In many cases, it has been held that in termination disputes or law is New York law and that this law bars all of
illegal dismissal cases, the employer has the burden of proving Guerrero’s claims except actual damages.
that the dismissal is for just and valid causes; and failure to do ● The RTC denied the Bank’s Motion for Partial
so would necessarily mean that the dismissal was not justified Summary Judgment. The CA sustained the RTC ruling
and therefore illegal. This is consistent with the principle of that the Walden affidavit does not serve as proof of
security of tenure as guaranteed by the Constitution and the New York law and jurisprudence. The CA
reinforced by Article 277 (b) of the Labor Code. considered the New York law and jurisprudence as
public documents defined in Section 19, Rule 132 of
Petitioner’s imputation of incompetence on private respondent the Rules on Evidence.
due to his “insufficient knowledge in programming and zero
knowledge of the ACAD system” based only on the above
mentioned letters, without any other evidence, cannot be given Issue
credence.
WON the Walden affidavit is sufficient proof that the stipulated
An allegation of incompetence should have a factual foreign law bars the claims for damages other than actual
foundation. Incompetence may be shown by weighing it against damages.
a standard, benchmark, or criterion. However, EDI failed to

establish any such bases to show how petitioner found Gran
incompetent. Held
For willful disobedience to be a valid cause for dismissal, the NO. In a motion for summary judgment, the crucial question is:
following twin elements must concur: are the issues raised in the pleadings genuine, sham or
fictitious, as shown by affidavits, depositions or admissions
(1) the employee's assailed conduct must have been
accompanying the motion? A genuine issue means an issue of
willful, that is, characterized by a wrongful and
fact which calls for the presentation of evidence as
perverse attitude; and
distinguished from an issue which is fictitious or contrived so as
(2) the order violated must have been reasonable, lawful,
not to constitute a genuine issue for trial.
made known to the employee and must pertain to the
duties which he had been engaged to discharge. Apparently, facts are asserted in Guerrero’s complaint while


specific denials and affirmative defenses are set out in the the record of the case filed by the plaintiff in Hong
Bank’s answer. Kong against the defendant.
● The trial court held that since the Hong Kong court
There can be no summary judgment where questions of fact
judgment had been duly proved, it is a presumptive
are in issue or where material allegations of the pleadings are
in dispute. The resolution of whether a foreign law allows only evidence of a right as between the parties; hence, the
party impugning it had the burden to prove want of
the recovery of actual damages is a question of fact as far as
jurisdiction over his person. HERAS failed to discharge
the trial court is concerned since foreign laws do not prove
that burden. He did not testify to state categorically
themselves in our courts. Foreign laws are not a matter of
and under oath that he never received summons.
judicial notice. Like any other fact, they must be alleged and
Even his own witness Lousich admitted that HERAS
proven. Certainly, the conflicting allegations as to whether New
York law or Philippine law applies to Guerrero’s claims present a was served with summons in his Quezon City
residence. As to De la Vega’s testimony regarding
clear dispute on material allegations which can be resolved
non-service of summons, the same was hearsay and
only by a trial on the merits.
had no probative value.
Under Section 24 of Rule 132, the record of public documents ● The trial court concluded that the Hong Kong court
of a sovereign authority or tribunal may be proved by (1) an judgment should be recognized and given effect in
official publication thereof or (2) a copy attested by the officer this jurisdiction for failure of HERAS to overcome the
having the legal custody thereof. However, certain cases have legal presumption in favor of the foreign judgment.
admitted exceptions to this rule. These cases involved ● The CA reversed the trial court underscoring the fact
attorneys testifying in open court during the trial in the that a foreign judgment does not of itself have any
Philippines and quoting the particular foreign laws sought to be extraterritorial application. For it to be given effect, the
established. On the other hand, the Walden affidavit was taken foreign tribunal should have acquired jurisdiction over
abroad ex parte and the affiant never testified in open court. the person and the subject matter. If such tribunal has
The Walden affidavit cannot be considered as proof of New not acquired jurisdiction, its judgment is void.
York law on damages not only because it is self-serving but also Summons should have been personally served on
because it does not state the specific New York law on HERAS in Hong Kong, for, as claimed by ASIAVEST,
damages. HERAS was physically present in Hong Kong for nearly
The Bank’s intention in presenting the Walden affidavit is to 14 years. Since there was not even an attempt to serve
prove New York law and jurisprudence. However, because of summons on HERAS in Hong Kong, the Hong Kong
the failure to comply with Section 24 of Rule 132 on how to Supreme Court did not acquire jurisdiction over
prove a foreign law and decisions of foreign courts, the Walden HERAS.
affidavit did not prove the current state of New York law and Issue
jurisprudence. Thus, the Bank has only alleged, but has not
WON the judgment of the Hong Kong Court has been repelled
proved, what New York law and jurisprudence are on the
by evidence of want of jurisdiction, want of notice to the party,
matters at issue.
collusion, fraud or clear mistake of law or fact, such as to
overcome the presumption established in Section 50, Rule 39
Disposition of the Rules of Court in favor of foreign judgments.
WHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED for lack of merit.
Held

YES. Under paragraph (b) of Section 50, Rule 39 of the Rules of
Asiavest Limited v CA Court, which was the governing law at the time this case was
decided by the trial court and respondent Court of Appeals, a
GR No 128803, 9/25/1998, Davide, Jr, J foreign judgment against a person rendered by a court having
jurisdiction to pronounce the judgment is presumptive evidence
Doctrinal Rule of a right as between the parties and their successors in
interest by the subsequent title. However, the judgment may be
The testimony of an expert witness may be allowed to prove a
repelled by evidence of want of jurisdiction, want of notice to
foreign law.
the party, collusion, fraud, or clear mistake of law or fact.

Also, Section 3(n) of Rule 131 of the New Rules of Evidence
Facts provides that in the absence of proof to the contrary, a court, or
● In issue is the enforceability in the Philippines of a judge acting as such, whether in the Philippines or elsewhere,
foreign judgment. is presumed to have acted in the lawful exercise of jurisdiction.
● Asiavest Limited filed a complaint against private Hence, once the authenticity of the foreign judgment is proved,
respondent Antonio Heras praying that the latter be the burden to repel it on grounds provided for in paragraph (b)
ordered to pay to the former the amounts awarded by of Section 50, Rule 39 of the Rules of Court is on the party
the Hong Kong Court Judgment. challenging the foreign judgment -- HERAS in this case.
● The following facts were agreed upon by the parties:
The main argument raised against the Hong Kong judgment is
(1) Heras admits the existence of the judgment
that the Hong Kong Supreme Court did not acquire jurisdiction
but not necessarily the authenticity or validity
over the person of HERAS. This involves the issue of whether
thereof.
summons was properly and validly served on HERAS. It is
(2) Asiavest is not doing business and is not
settled that matters of remedy and procedure such as those
licensed to do business in the Philippines.
relating to the service of process upon the defendant are
and
governed by the lex fori or the law of the forum, i.e., the law of
(3) HERAS "is a resident of New Manila, Quezon
Hong Kong in this case.
City.
● Heras presented two witnesses, namely, Fortunata Lousich testified that the Hong Kong court authorized service of
dela Vega and Russel Warren Lousich. summons on HERAS outside of its jurisdiction, particularly in the
● The gist of Ms. dela Vega’s testimony is to the effect Philippines. He admitted also the existence of an affidavit of
that no writ of summons or copy of a statement of one Jose R. Fernandez of the Sycip Salazar Hernandez &
claim of Asiavest was ever served in the office of the Gatmaitan law firm stating that he (Fernandez) served summons
Navegante Shipping Agency Limited and/or for Heras, on HERAS by leaving a copy with HERAS’s son-in-law. On
and that no service of the writ of summons was either redirect examination, Lousich declared that such service of
served on the defendant at his residence. summons would be valid under Hong Kong laws provided that
● Mr. Lousich was presented as an expert on the laws of it was in accordance with Philippine laws.
Hong Kong, and as a representative of the law office There is, however, nothing in the testimony of Mr. Lousich that
of the defendant’s counsel who made a verification of


touched on the specific law of Hong Kong in respect of service ● The legal grounds of opposition are (a) that the
of summons either in actions in rem or in personam, and where distribution should be governed by the laws of the
the defendant is either a resident or nonresident of Hong Kong. Philippines , and (b) that said order of distribution is
In view of the absence of proof of the Hong Kong law on this contrary thereto insofar as it denies to Helen, one of
particular issue, the presumption of identity or similarity or the two acknowledged natural children, one-half of the
so-called processual presumption shall come into play. It will estate in full ownership.
thus be presumed that the Hong Kong law on the matter is ● It was alleged that the law that should govern the
similar to the Philippine law. estate of the deceased Christensen should not be the
internal law of California alone, but the entire law
It will be helpful to determine first whether the action is in
thereof because several foreign elements are
personam, in rem, or quasi in rem because the rules on service
involved, that the forum is the Philippines and even if
of summons under Rule 14 of the Rules of Court of the
the case were decided in California, Section 946 of
Philippines apply according to the nature of the action.
the California Civil Code, which requires that the
An action in personam is an action against a person on the domicile of the decedent apply, should be applicable.
basis of his personal liability. An action in rem is an action ● The CFI ruled that as Edward E. Christensen was a
against the thing itself instead of against the person. An action citizen of the United States and of the State of
quasi in rem is one wherein an individual is named as California at the time of his death, the successional
defendant and the purpose of the proceeding is to subject his rights and intrinsic validity of the provisions in his will
interest therein to the obligation or lien burdening the property. are to be governed by the law of California, in
In the case at bar, the action filed in Hong Kong against HERAS accordance with which a testator has the right to
was in personam, since it was based on his personal guarantee dispose of his property in the way he desires.
of the obligation of the principal debtor. Before we can apply
the foregoing rules, we must determine first whether HERAS
was a resident of Hong Kong. Issue
WON the intrinsic validity of the testamentary disposition or the
We therefore conclude that the stipulated fact that HERAS "is a
distribution of the estate of the deceased Edward E.
resident of New Manila, Quezon City, Philippines" refers to his
Christensen should be governed by the laws of the Philippines
residence at the time jurisdiction over his person was being
sought by the Hong Kong court. With that stipulation of fact, under the Renvoi Doctrine.
ASIAVEST cannot now claim that HERAS was a resident of
Hong Kong at the time.
Held
Accordingly, since HERAS was not a resident of Hong Kong and
YES. There is no question that Edward E. Christensen was a
the action against him was, indisputably, one in personam, citizen of the United States and of the State of California at the
summons should have been personally served on him in time of his death. But there is also no question that at the time
Hong Kong. The extraterritorial service in the Philippines was of his death he was domiciled in the Philippines.
therefore invalid and did not confer on the Hong Kong court
jurisdiction over his person. It follows that the Hong Kong court The law that governs the Validity of his testamentary
judgment cannot be given force and effect here in the dispositions is defined in Article 16 of the Civil Code . The
Philippines for having been rendered without jurisdiction. application of this article in the case at bar requires the
determination of the meaning of the term "national law" as used
therein, which, in the case at bar, the private law of the State of
Disposition California.
IN VIEW OF ALL THE FOREGOING, judgment is hereby The next question is: "What is the law in California governing
rendered DENYING the petition in this case and AFFIRMING the disposition of personal property? The decision of the court
the assailed judgment of the CA. below, sustains the contention of the executor-appellee that
under the California Probate Code, a testator may dispose of
his property by will in the form and manner he desires.
But appellant invokes the provisions of Article 946 of the Civil
F. The problem of characterization Code of California, which is as follows:
"If there is no law to the contrary, in the place where personal
G. The problem of renvoi property is situated, it is deemed to follow the person of its
owner, and is governed by the law of his domicile."
1. Ways of dealing with the problem The theory of the doctrine of renvoi is that the court of the
2. Reasons for and against Renvoi forum, in determining the question before it, must take into
3. Usefulness of Renvoi account the whole law of the other jurisdiction, but also its rules
as to conflict of laws, and then apply the law to the actual
Aznar v Garcia question which the rules of the other jurisdiction prescribe. This
may be the law of the forum.
GR No L-16749, 1/31/1963, Labrador, J
We note that Article 946 of the California Civil Code as its
conflict of laws rule while the rule applied in In re Kaufman,
Doctrinal Rule
supra, its internal law. If the law on succession and the conflict
The national law mentioned in Article 16 of our Civil Code is the of, law rules of California are to be enforced jointly, each in its
law on conflict of laws. own intended and appropriate sphere, the principle cited In re
Kaufman should apply to citizens living in the State, but Article
946 should apply to such of its citizens as are not domiciled in
Facts California but in other jurisdictions. The rule laid down of
● The CFI directed the executor to reimburse Maria Lucy resorting to the law of the domicile in the determination of
Christensen the amount of P3,600 paid by her to matters with foreign element involved is in accord with the
Helen Christensen Garcia as her legacy, and declaring general principle of American law that the domiciliary law
Maria Lucy Christensen entitled to the residue of the should govern in most matters or rights which follow the person
property to be enjoyed during her lifetime in of the owner.
accordance with the provisions of the will of the As explained in the various authorities, the national law
testator Edward E. Christensen. mentioned in Article 16 of our Civil Code is the law on conflict of
● Opposition to the approval of the project of partition laws in the California Civil Code, i.e., Article 946, which
was filed by Helen, insofar as it deprives her of her authorizes the reference or return of the question to the law of
legitime as an acknowledged natural child. the testator's domicile. The conflict of law rule in California,


Article 946, Civil Code, precisely refers back the case, when a the application of the law of the place where the properties are
decedent is not domiciled in California, to the law of his situated, renvoi would arise, since the properties here involved
domicile, the Philippines in the case at bar. The court of the are found in the Philippines. In the absence, however, of proof
domicile can not and should not refer the case back to as to the conflict of law rule of Texas, it should not be presumed
California; such action would leave the issue incapable of different from ours. Appellants' position is therefore not rested
determination because the case will then be like a football, on the doctrine of renvoi. As stated, they never invoked nor
tossed back and forth between the two states, between the even mentioned it in their arguments. Rather, they argue that
country of which the decedent was a citizen and the country of their case falls under the circumstances mentioned in the third
his domicile. The Philippine court must apply its own law as paragraph of Article 17 in relation to Article 16 of the Civil Code.
directed in the conflict of law rule of the state of the decedent. Article 16, par. 2, and Art. 1039 of the Civil Code, render
We therefore find that as the domicile of the deceased applicable the national law of the decedent, in intestate or
Christensen, a citizen of California , is the Philippines , the testamentary successions, with regard to four items:
validity of the provisions of his will depriving his acknowledged
(a) the order of succession;
natural child, the appellant, should be governed by the
Philippine law, the domicile, pursuant to Art. 946 of the Civil (b) the amount of successional rights;
Code of California, not by the internal law of California. (c) the intrinsic validity of the provisions of the will; and
(d) the capacity to succeed.
Disposition Appellants would however counter that Art. 17, paragraph three,
Wherefore, the decision appealed from is hereby REVERSED of the Civil Code, stating that ?
and the case returned to the lower court with instructions that "Prohibitive laws concerning persons, their acts or property, and
the partition be made as the Philippine law on succession those which have for their object public order, public policy and
provides. good customs shall not be rendered ineffective by laws or
judgments promulgated, or by determinations or conventions
agreed upon in a foreign country."
Bellis v Bellis This is not correct. Whatever public policy or good customs may
be involved in our system of legitimes, Congress has not
GR No L-23678, 6/6/1967, Bengzon, JP, J intended to extend the same to the succession of foreign
nationals. For it has specifically chosen to leave, inter alia, the
Doctrinal Rule amount of successional rights, to the decedent's national law.
Whatever public policy or good customs may be involved in our Specific provisions must prevail over general ones.
system of legitimes, Congress has not intended to extend the prevails as the exception to Art. 16, par. 2 of the Civil Code.
same to the succession of foreign nationals. For it has
The parties admit that the decedent, Amos G. Bellis, was a
specifically chosen to leave, inter alia, the amount of
citizen of the State of Texas, U.S.A., and that under the laws of
successional rights, to the decedent's national law.
Texas, there are no forced heirs or legitimes. Accordingly, since
the intrinsic validity of the provision of the will and the amount
Facts of successional rights are to be determined under Texas law,
the Philippine law on legitimes cannot be applied to the testacy
● Appeal upon a question purely of law. of Amos G. Bellis.
● Amos G. Bellis, born in Texas, was "a citizen of the
State of Texas and of the United States. He had
legitimate and illegitimate children from 2 marriages. Disposition
● On August 5, 1952, Amos executed a will in the
WHEREFORE, the order of the probate court is hereby affirmed
Philippines. In 1958, he died, a resident of San
in toto.
Antonio, Texas. His will was admitted to probate in the
CFI of Manila.
● In the project of partition, the executor - pursuant to

the "Twelfth" clause of the testator's Last Will and Llorente v CA
Testament - divided the residuary estate into seven
equal portions for the benefit of the testator's seven GR No 124371, 11/23/2000, Pardo, J
legitimate children by his first and second marriages.
● Maria Cristina Bellis and Miriam Palma Bellis filed their Doctrinal Rule
respective oppositions to the project of partition on
Intestate and testamentary succession, both with respect to the
the ground that they were deprived of their legitimes
order of succession and to the amount of successional rights
as illegitimate children and, therefore, compulsory
and to the intrinsic validity of testamentary provisions, shall be
heirs of the deceased.
● The CFI overruled the oppositions. Relying upon Art. regulated by the national law of the person whose succession
16 of the Civil Code, it applied the national law of the is under consideration.
decedent, which in this case is Texas law, which did
not provide for legitimes.
Facts
● The RTC declared respondent Alicia F. Llorente, as
Issue co-owner of whatever property she and the deceased
Lorenzo N. Llorente may have acquired during the
WON Texas law or Philippine law should apply in determining
twenty-five (25) years that they lived together as
the existence of legitime.
husband and wife.
● Lorenzo was an enlisted serviceman of the US Navy
Held from 1927-1957.
● In 1937, Lorenzo and petitioner Paula Llorente were
TEXAS LAW. In the present case, it is not disputed that the married in Camarines Sur.
decedent was both a national of Texas and a domicile thereof ● In 1943, Lorenzo was admitted to US citizenship. He
at the time of his death. thereafter discovered Paula was having an affair with
Even assuming Texas has a conflict of law rule providing that his brother.
the domiciliary system (law of the domicile) should govern, the ● The couple drew a written agreement to the effect that
same would not result in a reference back (renvoi) to Philippine Paula's daily maintenance and support would be
law, but would still refer to Texas law. Nonetheless, if Texas has suspended, they would judicially dissolve their
a conflicts rule adopting the situs theory (lex rei sitae) calling for marriage, they would make a separate agreement


regarding their conjugal property acquired during their VALIDITY OF THE WILL

marital life, and Lorenzo would not prosecute Paula for
The clear intent of Lorenzo to bequeath his property to his
adultery. It was duly notarized.
second wife and children by her is glaringly shown in the will he
● They got divorced in 1952 in California.
executed. We do not wish to frustrate his wishes, since he was
● In 1958, Lorenzo married Alicia in Manila. Up to 1985,
a foreigner, not covered by our laws on "family rights and
Lorenzo and Alicia lived together as husband and duties, status, condition and legal capacity."
wife.Their twenty-five (25) year union produced 3
children. Whether the will is intrinsically valid and who shall inherit from
● In 1981, Lorenzo executed a Last Will and Testament Lorenzo are issues best proved by foreign law which must be
where he bequeathed all his property to Alicia and pleaded and proved. Whether the will was executed in
their three children. accordance with the formalities required is answered by
● Lorenzo filed with the RTC a petition for the probate referring to Philippine law. In fact, the will was duly probated.
and allowance of his last will and testament and was
duly admitted in 1984. He died in 1985 before
proceedings could be terminated. Disposition
● Paula filed with the same court a petition for letters of WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED.
administration over Lorenzo's estate in her favor. RTC
In lieu thereof, the Court REVERSES the decision of the
approved.
● The CA modified the RTC decision to the effect that Regional Trial Court and RECOGNIZES as VALID the decree of
divorce granted in favor of the deceased Lorenzo N. Llorente.
Alicia is declared as co-owner of whatever properties
she and the deceased may have acquired during the Further, the Court REMANDS the cases to the court of origin for
25 years of their cohabitation. determination of the intrinsic validity of Lorenzo N. Llorente's
will and determination of the parties' successional rights

allowing proof of foreign law.
Issue
WON the RTC and CA erred in applying Philippine Law as to the
intrinsic validity of the will of Lorenzo Llorente.

III. Conflicts Rules on Personal Law
Held
A. Theories in determining one’s personal law
YES. We do not agree with the decision of the Court of
Appeals. We remand the case to the trial court for ruling on the
intrinsic validity of the will of the deceased.
B. Citizenship and domicile
Poe-Llamanzares v Comelec
APPLICABLE LAW GR No 221697, 3/8/2016, Perez, J
The fact that the late Lorenzo N. Llorente became an American
citizen long before and at the time of: (1) his divorce from Paula; Doctrinal Rule
(2) marriage to Alicia; (3) execution of his will; and (4) death, is Foundlings are presumed to be born from the residents of the
duly established, admitted and undisputed. place where they are found, and are thus natural-born citizens
Thus, as a rule, issues arising from these incidents are of that place following the jus sanguinis principle.
necessarily governed by foreign law.
While the substance of the foreign law was pleaded, the Court Facts
of Appeals did not admit the foreign law. The Court of Appeals
and the trial court called to the fore the renvoi doctrine, where Grace Poe was found abandoned as a newborn infant in the
the case was "referred back" to the law of the decedent's Parish Church of Jaro, Iloilo by a certain Edgardo Militar
domicile, in this case, Philippine law. (Edgardo) on 3 September 1968. Susan Roces and FPJ then
adopted her. Upon reaching the age of majority, she registered
We note that while the trial court stated that the law of New as a voter in San Juan.
York was not sufficiently proven, in the same breath it made the
categorical, albeit equally unproven statement that "American She married a Fil-Am and built a family in the US. On October
law follows the `domiciliary theory' hence, Philippine law applies 2001, she became a naturalized US citizen.
when determining the validity of Lorenzo's will. After the death of her father, she came home to the Philippines
First, there is no such thing as one American law. on 24 May 2005.
Second, there is no showing that the application of the renvoi On 7 July 2006, petitioner took her Oath of Allegiance to the
doctrine is called for or required by New York State law. Republic of the Philippines pursuant to Republic Act (R.A.) No.
9225 or the Citizenship Retention and Re-acquisition Act of
The trial court held that the will was intrinsically invalid since it 2003. Under the same Act, she filed with the Bureau of
contained dispositions in favor of Alice, who in the trial court's Immigration (BI) a sworn petition to reacquire Philippine
opinion was a mere paramour. The Court of Appeals also citizenship together with petitions for derivative citizenship on
disregarded the will. behalf of her three minor children on 10 July 2006. BI acted
favorably 11 days after.
VALIDITY OF FOREIGN DIVORCE She registered as a voter of Barangay Santa Lucia, San Juan
City on 31 August 2006.
In Van Dorn v. Romillo, Jr. we held that owing to the nationality
principle embodied in Article 15 of the Civil Code, only Before assuming her post as MTRCB Chair, she executed an
Philippine nationals are covered by the policy against absolute "Affidavit of Renunciation of Allegiance to the United States of
divorces. The Court ruled that aliens may obtain divorces America and Renunciation of American Citizenship" 20 October
abroad, provided they are valid according to their national law. 2010.
We hold that the divorce obtained by Lorenzo H. Llorente from Desiring to run as Senator, she filed her COC on 2 October
his first wife Paula was valid and recognized in this jurisdiction 2012. In it, she stated that she has been residing in the
as a matter of comity. Now, the effects of this divorce (as to the Philippines for 6 years and 6 months prior to the 13 May 2013
succession to the estate of the decedent) are matters best left elections.
to the determination of the trial court. She aspired to be president in the 2016 elections. In her COC
she stated that her residency up to the day before 9 May 2016
would be ten (10) years and eleven (11) months counted from 24


May 2005. 3. an intention to abandon the old domicile.

Elamparo then filed a petition to deny Poe to run, questioning
To successfully effect a change of domicile, one must
her citizenship and failure to satisfy the residency requirement.
demonstrate an actual removal or an actual change of domicile;
She contends that being a foundling, Poe is not a natural-born a bona fide intention of abandoning the former place of
citizen. As to the residency, Poe is bound by her COC when she residence and establishing a new one and definite acts which
ran for Senator, which means that 3 years after, she would only correspond with the purpose. In other words, there must
have resided for 9 years and 6 months, short of the 10-year basically be animus manendi coupled with animus non
requirement. Also, her residency should be reckoned from July revertendi. The purpose to remain in or at the domicile of
2006 when she reacquired her citizenship. This would fall short choice must be for an indefinite period of time; the change of
by about 2 months. residence must be voluntary; and the residence at the place
COMELEC granted Elamparo’s petition and cancelled the COC chosen for the new domicile must be actual.
of Poe.
Respondents contend that these cases decree that the stay of
an alien former Filipino cannot be counted until he/she obtains
Issue a permanent resident visa or reacquires Philippine citizenship, a
visa free entry under a balikbayan stamp being insufficient.
(1) WON foundlings, such as Poe, are considered
Since petitioner was still an American (without any resident visa)
natural-born citizens.
until her reacquisition of citizenship under R.A. No. 9225, her
(2) WON Poe met the 10-year residency requirement.
stay from 24 May 2005 to 7 July 2006 cannot be counted.

The evidence of petitioner is overwhelming and taken together
Held
leads to no other conclusion that she decided to permanently
(1) YES. The factual issue is not who the parents of petitioner abandon her U.S. residence (selling the house, taking the
are, as their identities are unknown, but whether such parents children from U.S. schools, getting quotes from the freight
are Filipinos. company, notifying the U.S. Post Office of the abandonment of
A number of circumstantial evidence supports the conclusion their address in the U.S., donating excess items to the Salvation
that Poe’s parents were Filipinos. Army, her husband resigning from U.S. employment right after
selling the U.S. house) and permanently relocate to the
During the birth of Poe, at least 99.5% of the population of Iloilo Philippines and actually re-established her residence here on
were Filipinos. 24 May 2005 (securing T.I.N, enrolling her children in Philippine
She has typical Filipino features. schools, buying property here, constructing a residence here,
returning to the Philippines after all trips abroad, her husband
She was abandoned in a Roman Catholic church. getting employed here). Indeed, coupled with her eventual
That probability and the evidence on which it is based are application to reacquire Philippine citizenship and her family's
admissible under Rule 128, Section 4 of the Revised Rules on actual continuous stay in the Philippines over the years, it is
Evidence. clear that when petitioner returned on 24 May 2005 it was for
As a matter of law, foundlings are as a class, natural-born good.
citizens. While the 1935 Constitution's enumeration is silent as
Disposition
to foundlings, there is no restrictive language which would
definitely exclude foundlings either. WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED.
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
San Luis v San Luis
citizenship." In the first place, "having to perform an act" means
that the act must be personally done by the citizen. In this GR No 133743, 2/6/2007, Ynares-Santiago, J
instance, the determination of foundling status is done not by
the child but by the authorities. Doctrinal Rule
Foundlings are likewise citizens under international law. The For purposes of fixing venue under the Rules of Court, the
common thread of the UDHR, UNCRC and ICCPR is to obligate "residence" of a person is his personal, actual or physical
the Philippines to grant nationality from birth and ensure that no habitation, or actual residence or place of abode, which may
child is stateless. The Chief Justice, at the 2 February 2016 Oral not necessarily be his legal residence or domicile provided he
Arguments pointed out that in 166 out of 189 countries resides therein with continuity and consistency. Hence, it is
surveyed (or 87.83%), foundlings are recognized as citizens. possible that a person may have his residence in one place and
These circumstances, including the practice of jus sanguinis domicile in another.
countries, show that it is a generally accepted principle of
international law to presume foundlings as having been born of
nationals of the country in which the foundling is found. Facts
Adopting these legal principles from the 1930 Hague ● Settlement of the estate of Felicisimo T. San Luis.
Convention and the 1961 Convention on Statelessness is During his lifetime, Felicisimo contracted three
rational and reasonable and consistent with the jus sanguinis marriages.
regime in our Constitution. The presumption of natural-born ● After the death of his 1st wife, Felicisimo married Merry
citizenship of foundlings stems from the presumption that their Lee Corwin, an American with whom he had a son,
parents are nationals of the Philippines. As the empirical data Tobias. Corwin however filed for divorce in Hawaii and
provided by the PSA show, that presumption is at more than was issued the decree in 1973.
99% and is a virtual certainty. ● Felicisimo then married respondent Felicidad, in LA,
California. He had no children with the latter but lived
with her for 18 years from the time of their marriage up
(2) YES. Her residency started when she arrived on 24 May to his death in 1992.
2005. When petitioner immigrated to the U.S. in 1991, she lost ● Felicidad then sought the dissolution of their conjugal
her original domicile, which is the Philippines. There are three partnership assets and the settlement of Felicisimo's
requisites to acquire a new domicile: estate. She filed a petition for letters of administration
1. Residence or bodily presence in a new locality; before the RTC of Makati.
● Felicidad alleged that she is the widow, decedent was
2. an intention to remain there; and residing in Alabang at the time of his death, his
surviving heirs are respondent as legal spouse, his six
children by his first marriage, and son by his second


marriage, among other. sense, the term means merely residence, that is, personal
● Petitioner Rodolfo San Luis, one of the children of residence, not legal residence or domicile.
Felicisimo by his first marriage, filed a motion to
THEREFORE, it is incorrect for petitioners to argue that
dismiss on the grounds of improper venue and failure
"residence," for purposes of fixing the venue of the settlement
to state a cause of action. of the estate of Felicisimo, is synonymous with "domicile."
● Rodolfo claimed that the petition for letters of
administration should have been filed in the Province In the instant case, while petitioners established that Felicisimo
of Laguna because this was Felicisimo's place of was domiciled in Sta. Cruz, Laguna, respondent proved that he
residence prior to his death. He further claimed that also maintained a residence in Alabang, Muntinlupa from 1982
respondent has no legal personality to file the petition up to the time of his death.
because she was only a mistress of Felicisimo since
the latter, at the time of his death, was still legally
married to Merry Lee. (2) The significance of the Van Dorn case to the development of
● The RTC denied the motion to dismiss. Felicidad limited recognition of divorce in the Philippines cannot be
submitted documentary evidence showing that while denied. The ruling has long been interpreted as severing
Felicisimo exercised the powers of his public office in marital ties between parties in a mixed marriage and
Laguna, he regularly went home to their house in New capacitating the Filipino spouse to remarry as a necessary
Alabang Village, Alabang. She presented the decree consequence of upholding the validity of a divorce obtained
of absolute divorce issued by the Family Court of the abroad by the alien spouse.
First Circuit, State of Hawaii to prove that the marriage With regard to respondent's marriage to Felicisimo allegedly
of Felicisimo to Merry Lee had already been dissolved. solemnized in California, U.S.A., she submitted photocopies of
● RTC then ruled that Felicidad had legal standing to file the Marriage Certificate and the annotated text of the Family
the petition and that venue was properly laid. Law Act of California which purportedly show that their
● The case was however re-raffled. The RTC then marriage was done in accordance with the said law. As stated
dismissed the petition for letters of administration in Garcia, however, the Court cannot take judicial notice of
holding that the petition should have been filed in Sta. foreign laws as they must be alleged and proved.
Cruz, Laguna and not in Makati since at the time of his
Therefore, this case should be remanded to the trial court for
death, Felicisimo was the duly elected governor and a
further reception of evidence on the divorce decree obtained
resident of the Province of Laguna. It also ruled that
respondent was without legal capacity. by Merry Lee and the marriage of respondent and Felicisimo.
● CA reversed the RTC holding that under Section 1, Even assuming that Felicisimo was not capacitated to marry
Rule 73 of the Rules of Court, the term "place of respondent in 1974, nevertheless, we find that the latter has the
residence" of the decedent, for purposes of fixing the legal personality to file the subject petition for letters of
venue of the settlement of his estate, refers to the administration, as she may be considered the co-owner of
personal, actual or physical habitation, or actual Felicisimo as regards the properties that were acquired through
residence or place of abode of a person as their joint efforts during their cohabitation.
distinguished from legal residence or domicile. It also
In the instant case, respondent would qualify as an interested
held that Felicisimo had legal capacity to marry
person who has a direct interest in the estate of Felicisimo by
respondent by virtue of paragraph 2, Article 26 of the
virtue of their cohabitation, the existence of which was not
Family Code and the rulings in Van Dorn v. Romillo, Jr. denied by petitioners. If she proves the validity of the divorce
and Pilapil v. Ibay-Somera. and Felicisimo's capacity to remarry, but fails to prove that her
● Petitioners claim that a person can only have one
marriage with him was validly performed under the laws of the
domicile at any given time. Since Felicisimo never
U.S.A., then she may be considered as a co-owner under Article
changed his domicile, the petition for letters of
144 of the Civil Code. This provision governs the property
administration should have been filed in Sta. Cruz.
relations between parties who live together as husband and
wife without the benefit of marriage, or their marriage is void
from the beginning.
Issue/s
Meanwhile, if respondent fails to prove the validity of both the
(1) WON venue was properly laid in Makati and not
divorce and the marriage, the applicable provision would be
Laguna.
(2) WON Felicidad, as widow, had legal capacity to file the Article 148 of the Family Code which has filled the hiatus in
Article 144 of the Civil Code by expressly regulating the
subject petition for letters of administration.
property relations of couples living together as husband and
wife but are incapacitated to marry.
Held
YES TO BOTH. Disposition
(1) Under Section 1, Rule 73 of the Rules of Court, the petition for WHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED. The Decision of the Court
letters of administration of the estate of Felicisimo should be of Appeals reinstating and affirming the February 28, 1994
filed in the Regional Trial Court of the province "in which he Order of the Regional Trial Court which denied petitioners'
resides at the time of his death." In the case of Garcia Fule v. motion to dismiss and its October 24, 1994 Order which
Court of Appeals, we laid down the doctrinal rule for dismissed petitioners' motion for reconsideration is AFFIRMED.
determining the residence - as contradistinguished from Let this case be REMANDED to the trial court for further
domicile - of the decedent for purposes of fixing the venue of proceedings.
the settlement of his estate.
This term "resides," like the terms "residing" and "residence," is
elastic and should be interpreted in the light of the object or
purpose of the statute or rule in which it is employed. C. Dual citizenship
Even where the statute uses the word "domicile" still it is
construed as meaning residence and not domicile in the D. Statelessness
technical sense. Some cases make a distinction between the
terms "residence" and "domicile" but as generally used in
statutes fixing venue, the terms are synonymous, and convey
E. Personal status and capacity
the same meaning as the term "inhabitant." In other words,
"resides" should be viewed or understood in its popular sense,
meaning, the personal, actual or physical habitation of a person,
actual residence or place of abode. It signifies physical
presence in a place and actual stay thereat. In this popular


Republic v Manalo
2. Consistent with Articles 15 and 17 of the New Civil
GR No 221029, 4/24/2018, Peralta, J Code, the marital bond between two Filipinos cannot
be dissolved even by an absolute divorce obtained
Doctrinal Rule abroad.
Under the principles of comity, our jurisdiction recognizes a 3. An absolute divorce obtained abroad by a couple,
valid divorce obtained by a spouse of foreign nationality, but who are both aliens, may be recognized in the
the legal effects thereof, e.g., on custody, care and support of Philippines, provided it is consistent with their
the children or property relations of the spouses, must still be respective national laws.
determined by our courts. 4. In mixed marriages involving a Filipino and a foreigner,
the former is allowed to contract a subsequent
marriage in case the absolute divorce is validly
FOREIGN LAWS MUST BE PROVEN. It is well-settled in our obtained abroad by the alien spouse capacitating him
jurisdiction that our courts cannot take judicial notice of foreign or her to remarry.
laws. Like any other facts, they must be alleged and proved. Paragraph 2 of Article 26 confers jurisdiction on Philippine
courts to extend the effect of a foreign divorce decree to a
Filipino spouse without undergoing trial to determine the
Facts validity of the dissolution of the marriage. It authorizes our
● Respondent Marelyn Tanedo Manalo (Manalo) filed a courts to adopt the effects of a foreign divorce decree precisely
petition for cancellation of entry of marriage in the Civil because the Philippines does not allow divorce. Philippine
Registry of San Juan by virtue of a judgment of divorce courts cannot try the case on the merits because it is
rendered by a Japanese court. tantamount to trying a divorce case. Under the principles of
● The RTC set the case for initial hearing. comity, our jurisdiction recognizes a valid divorce obtained by a
● The Amended Petition, which captioned that it is also spouse of foreign nationality, but the legal effects thereof, e.g.,
a petition for recognition and enforcement of foreign on custody, care and support of the children or property
judgment, alleged: relations of the spouses, must still be determined by our courts.
(a) Manalo is previously married in the Now, the Court is tasked to resolve whether, under the same
Philippines to a Japanese national named provision, a Filipino citizen has the capacity to remarry under
YOSHINO MINORO. Philippine law after initiating a divorce proceeding abroad and
(b) A case for divorce was filed by Manalo in obtaining a favorable judgment against his or her alien spouse
Japan and after due proceedings, a divorce who is capacitated to remarry.
decree dated December 6, 2011 was
rendered by the Japanese Court. Both Dacasin v. Dacasin and Van Dorn already recognized a
● Among the documents that were offered and admitted foreign divorce decree that was initiated and obtained by the
were: Filipino spouse and extended its legal effects on the issues of
1. Court Order dated January 25, 2012, finding child custody and property relation, respectively.
the petition and its attachments to be In addition, the fact that a validly obtained foreign divorce
sufficient in form and in substance; initiated by the Filipino spouse can be recognized and given
2. Affidavit of Publication; legal effects in the Philippines is implied from Our rulings in
3. Issues of the Northern Journal dated Fujiki v. Marinay, et al. and Medina v. Koike.
February 21-27, 2012, February 28 - March 5,
2012, and March 6-12, 2012; There is no compelling reason to deviate from the
4. Certificate of Marriage between Manalo and above-mentioned rulings. When this Court recognized a foreign
her former Japanese husband; divorce decree that was initiated and obtained by the Filipino
5. Divorce Decree of the Japanese court; spouse and extended its legal effects on the issues of child
6. Authentication/Certificate issued by the custody and property relation, it should not stop short in
Philippine Consulate General in Osaka, likewise acknowledging that one of the usual and necessary
Japan of the Notification of Divorce; and consequences of absolute divorce is the right to remarry.
7. Acceptance of Certificate of Divorce. Indeed, there is no longer a mutual obligation to live together
● The OSG did not present any controverting evidence and observe fidelity. When the marriage tie is severed and
to rebut the allegations of Manalo. ceased to exist, the civil status and the domestic relation of the
● RTC denied the petition for lack of merit. former spouses change as both of them are freed from the
● CA overturned the RTC holding that Article 26 of the marital bond.
Family Code of the Philippines (Family Code) is Paragraph 2 of Article 26 speaks of "a divorce x x x validly
applicable even if it was Manalo who filed for divorce obtained abroad by the alien spouse capacitating him or her to
against her Japanese husband because the decree remarry. " Based on a clear and plain reading of the provision, it
they obtained makes the latter no longer married to only requires that there be a divorce validly obtained abroad.
the former, capacitating him to remarry. The letter of the law does not demand that the alien spouse
● Cited as similar to this case was Van Dorn v. Judge should be the one who initiated the proceeding wherein the
Romillo, Jr. where the marriage between a foreigner divorce decree was granted. It does not distinguish whether
and a Filipino was dissolved through a divorce filed the Filipino spouse is the petitioner or the respondent in the
abroad by the latter. foreign divorce proceeding. The Court is bound by the words of
Issue the statute; neither can We put words in the mouths of the
lawmaker.
WON the divorce decree obtained by Manalo, a Filipina, abroad
should be recognized. To reiterate, the purpose of Paragraph 2 of Article 26 is to avoid
the absurd situation where the Filipino spouse remains married
to the alien spouse who, after a foreign divorce decree that is
Held effective in the country where it was rendered, is no longer
married to the Filipino spouse. The provision is a corrective
YES. Divorce, the legal dissolution of a lawful union for a cause measure to address an anomaly where the Filipino spouse is
arising after marriage, are of two types: tied to the marriage while the foreign spouse is free to marry
(1) absolute divorce or a vinculo matrimonii, which under the laws of his or her country. Whether the Filipino
terminates the marriage, and spouse initiated the foreign divorce proceeding or not, a
(2) limited divorce or a mensa et thoro, which suspends it favorable decree dissolving the marriage bond and capacitating
and leaves the bond in full force. his or her alien spouse to remarry will have the same result: the
Filipino spouse will effectively be without a husband or wife.
In this jurisdiction, the following rules exist:
Conveniently invoking the nationality principle is erroneous.
1. Philippine law does not provide for absolute divorce;
Such principle, found under Article 15 of the Civil Code, is not
hence, our courts cannot grant it.


an absolute and unbending rule. In fact, the mere existence of parties, and asking that Alice be ordered to render an
Paragraph 2 of Article 26 is a testament that the State may accounting of that business, and that he be declared
provide for an exception thereto. Moreover, blind adherence to with right to manage the conjugal property.
the nationality principle must be disallowed if it would cause ● Alice moved to dismiss the case on the ground that
unjust discrimination and oppression to certain classes of the cause of action is barred by previous judgment in
individuals whose rights are equally protected by law. The the divorce proceedings before the Nevada Court
courts have the duty to enforce the laws of divorce as written wherein respondent had acknowledged that he and
by the Legislature only if they are constitutional. petitioner had "no community property" as of June 11,
1982.
The foregoing notwithstanding, We cannot yet write finis to
● The RTC denied the motion to dismiss.
this controversy by granting Manalo's petition to recognize
● Upton contends that the divorce is not valid and
and enforce the divorce decree rendered by the Japanese
court and to cancel the entry of marriage in the Civil Registry binding in this jurisdiction, the same being contrary to
of San Juan, Metro Manila. local law and public policy.

Jurisprudence has set guidelines before Philippine courts
recognize a foreign judgment relating to the status of a Issue
marriage where one of the parties is a citizen of a foreign WON the divorce decree obtained in Nevada is valid and
country. Presentation solely of the divorce decree will not
binding in our jurisdiction.
suffice. The fact of divorce must still first be proven. Before a
foreign divorce decree can be recognized by our courts, the
party pleading it must prove the divorce as a fact and Held
demonstrate its conformity to the foreign law allowing it.
YES. Aliens may obtain divorces abroad, which may be
Under Sections 24 and 25 of Rule 132, on the other hand, a recognized in the Philippines, provided they are valid according
writing or document may be proven as a public or official record to their national law. In this case, the divorce in Nevada
of a foreign country by either released private respondent from the marriage from the
(1) an official publication or standards of American law, under which divorce dissolves the
(2) a copy thereof attested by the officer having legal marriage.
custody of the document. If the record is not kept in Pursuant to his national law, Upton is no longer the husband of
the Philippines, such copy must be petitioner. He would have no standing to sue in the case below
(a) accompanied by a certificate issued by the as petitioner's husband entitled to exercise control over
proper diplomatic or consular officer in the conjugal assets. As he is bound by the Decision of his own
Philippine foreign service stationed in the country's Court, which validly exercised jurisdiction over him,
foreign country in which the record is kept and whose decision he does not repudiate, he is estopped by
and his own representation before said Court from asserting his
(b) authenticated by the seal of his office. right over the alleged conjugal property.
If the opposing party fails to properly object, as in this case, the
divorce decree is rendered admissible as a written act of the
foreign court. As it appears, the existence of the divorce decree Disposition
was not denied by the OSG; neither was the jurisdiction of the WHEREFORE, the Petition is GRANTED, and respondent Judge
divorce court impeached nor the validity of its proceedings is hereby ordered to dismiss the Complaint.
challenged on the ground of collusion, fraud, or clear mistake of
fact or law, albeit an opportunity to do so.
Nonetheless, the Japanese law on divorce must still be
Pilapil v Ibay-Somera
proved.
GR No 80116, 6/30/1989, Regalado, J
It is well-settled in our jurisdiction that our courts cannot take
judicial notice of foreign laws. Like any other facts, they must be
alleged and proved. Doctrinal Rule
The person who initiates the adultery case must be an offended
spouse, and by this is meant that he is still married to the
Disposition accused spouse, at the time of the filing of the complaint.
WHEREFORE, the petition for review on certiorari is DENIED.
The Decision and Resolution of the Court of Appeals are
AFFIRMED IN PART. The case is REMANDED to the court of Facts
origin for further proceedings and reception of evidence as to ● In 1979, petitioner Imelda Manalaysay Pilapil, a Filipino
the relevant Japanese law on divorce. citizen, and private respondent Erich Ekkchard Geiling,
a German national, were married in Germany.
● Three years thereafter, Geiling initiated a divorce
proceeding against Pilapil in Germany.
Van Dorn v Romillo ● In 1986, the German court promulgated a decree of
GR No 68470, 10/8/1985, Melencio-Herrera, J divorce on the ground of failure of marriage of the
spouses. The custody of the child was granted to
Pilapil.
Doctrinal Rule
● The records show that under German law said court
Aliens may obtain divorces abroad, which may be recognized in was locally and internationally competent for the
the Philippines, provided they are valid according to their divorce proceeding and that the dissolution of said
national law. marriage was legally founded on and authorized by
the applicable law of that foreign jurisdiction.
● More than five months after the issuance of the
Facts divorce decree, Geiling filed two complaints for
● Alice Reyes Van Dorn is a Filipina, while Richard Upton adultery against Pilapil alleging that, while still married
is a US citizen. They were married in Hongkong in to Geiling, Pilapil "had an affair with a certain William
1972 then resided in the Philippines. Chia as early as 1982 and with yet another man named
● They were divorced in Nevada, USA. Alice has Jesus Chua."
remarried in Nevada. ● Pilapil filed a petition with the Secretary of Justice
● Upton filed suit against Alice stating that the latter's asking that the aforesaid resolution of respondent
business, Galleon Shop, is conjugal property of the fiscal be set aside and the cases against her be


dismissed. ● In reversing the RTC, the CA opined that there is no
● Pilapil filed this special civil action for certiorari and law allowing the change of either name or sex in the
prohibition, with a prayer for a temporary restraining certificate of birth on the ground of sex reassignment
order, seeking the annulment of the order of the lower through surgery.
court denying her motion to quash. The petition is

anchored on the main ground that the court is without
jurisdiction "to try and decide the charge of adultery, Issue
which is a private offense that cannot be prosecuted WON Silverio can legally change his name and sex in his birth
de officio (sic), since the purported complainant, a certificate.
foreigner, does not qualify as an offended spouse
having obtained a final divorce decree under his
national law prior to his filing the criminal complaint." Held
NO. The State has an interest in the names borne by individuals
Issue and entities for purposes of identification. A change of name is
a privilege, not a right. Petitions for change of name are
WON Geiling does not qualify as an offended spouse having controlled by statutes.
obtained a final divorce decree under his national law prior to
his filing the criminal complaint. Section 1 of RA 9048 provides "No entry in a civil register shall
be changed or corrected without a judicial order, except for
clerical or typographical errors and change of first name or
Held nickname which can be corrected or changed by the
concerned city or municipal civil registrar or consul general in
YES. The law specifically provides that in prosecutions for
accordance with the provisions of this Act and its implementing
adultery and concubinage the person who can legally file the
rules and regulations."
complaint should be the offended spouse, and nobody else.
RA 9048 likewise provides the grounds for which change of
As cogently argued by petitioner, Article 344 of the Revised first name may be allowed:
Penal Code thus presupposes that the marital relationship is
still subsisting at the time of the institution of the criminal action (1) The petitioner finds the first name or nickname to be
for adultery. This is a logical consequence since the raison ridiculous, tainted with dishonor or extremely difficult
d'etre of said provision of law would be absent where the to write or pronounce;
supposed offended party had ceased to be the spouse of the (2) The new first name or nickname has been habitually
alleged offender at the time of the filing of the criminal case. and continuously used by the petitioner and he has
been publicly known by that first name or nickname in
The person who initiates the adultery case must be an offended
the community; or
spouse, and by this is meant that he is still married to the
(3) The change will avoid confusion.
accused spouse, at the time of the filing of the complaint.
Petitioner’s basis in praying for the change of his first name was
In the present case, the fact that private respondent obtained a his sex reassignment. He intended to make his first name
valid divorce in his country, the Federal Republic of Germany, is
compatible with the sex he thought he transformed himself into
admitted. Said divorce and its legal effects may be recognized
through surgery. However, a change of name does not alter
in the Philippines insofar as private respondent is concerned in
one’s legal capacity or civil status. RA 9048 does not sanction a
view of the nationality principle in our civil law on the matter of
change of first name on the ground of sex reassignment. Rather
status of persons.
than avoiding confusion, changing petitioner’s first name for his
Geiling, being no longer the husband of petitioner, had no legal declared purpose may only create grave complications in the
standing to commence the adultery case under the imposture civil registry and the public interest.
that he was the offended spouse at the time he filed suit.
Before a person can legally change his given name, he must
present proper or reasonable cause or any compelling reason
Disposition justifying such change. In addition, he must show that he will be
prejudiced by the use of his true and official name. In this case,
WHEREFORE, the questioned order denying petitioner's motion he failed to show, or even allege, any prejudice that he might
to quash is SET ASIDE and another one entered DISMISSING suffer as a result of using his true and official name.
the complaint in Criminal Case No. 87-52435 for lack of
jurisdiction.
The determination of a person’s sex appearing in his birth
certificate is a legal issue and the court must look to the
statutes.
Silverio v Republic
Under RA 9048, a correction in the civil registry involving the
GR No 174689, 10/19/2007, Corona, J change of sex is not a mere clerical or typographical error. It is a
substantial change for which the applicable procedure is Rule
Doctrinal Rule 108 of the Rules of Court.
The status of a person in law includes all his personal qualities To correct simply means “to make or set aright; to remove the
and relations, more or less permanent in nature, not ordinarily faults or error from” while to change means “to replace
terminable at his own will. something with something else of the same kind or with
something that serves as a substitute.” The birth certificate of
petitioner contained no error. All entries therein, including those
Facts corresponding to his first name and sex, were all correct. No
correction is necessary.
● Rommel Jacinto Dantes Silverio filed a petition for the
change of his first name and sex in his birth certificate Sex reassignment is not among those acts or events
in the RTC. mentioned in Article 407. Neither is it recognized nor even
● He underwent psychological examination, hormone mentioned by any law, expressly or impliedly.
treatment and breast augmentation. He then “Status” refers to the circumstances affecting the legal situation
underwent sex reassignment surgery in Bangkok, (that is, the sum total of capacities and incapacities) of a person
Thailand. in view of his age, nationality and his family membership.
● From then on, petitioner lived as a female and was in
fact engaged to be married. He then sought to have The status of a person in law includes all his personal
his name in his birth certificate changed from “Rommel qualities and relations, more or less permanent in nature, not
Jacinto” to “Mely,” and his sex from “male” to “female.” ordinarily terminable at his own will, such as his being
● RTC granted the petition of Silverio.


legitimate or illegitimate, or his being married or not.

A person’s sex is an essential factor in marriage and family
relations. It is a part of a person’s legal capacity and civil status.
Under the Civil Register Law, a birth certificate is a historical
record of the facts as they existed at the time of birth. Thus, the
sex of a person is determined at birth, visually done by the birth
attendant (the physician or midwife) by examining the genitals
of the infant. Considering that there is no law legally
recognizing sex reassignment, the determination of a person’s
sex made at the time of his or her birth, if not attended by error,
is immutable.

For these reasons, while petitioner may have succeeded in
altering his body and appearance through the intervention of
modern surgery, no law authorizes the change of entry as to
sex in the civil registry for that reason. Thus, there is no legal
basis for his petition for the correction or change of the entries
in his birth certificate.

Disposition
WHEREFORE, the petition is hereby DENIED.



IV. Conflicts Rules on Contracts VII. Conflicts Rules on Marriage

A. Marriage as a contract
B. Marriage as a status
A. Extrinsic validity of contracts C. Philippine law on Extrinsic validity of marriage
1. Philippine conflict rule on extrinsic validity of
D. Philippine law on Intrinsic validity of marriage
contracts
E. Effects of marriage
B. Capacity of parties
1. Personal relations between spouses
1. Philippine conflict rule on capacity to contract
2. Property relations of spouses
C. Intrinsic validity of contracts
F. Adoption
1. Lex loci contractus

(1) Lex loci voluntatis
(2) Lex loci intentionis VIII. Conflicts Rules on Dissolution of
2. Philippine conflict rule on Intrinsic validity of
Marriage
contracts
A. Divorce, legal separation, annulment of marriage,
D. Choice of law by the parties In a contract;
and declaration of nullity of marriage distinguished
exceptions
B. Divorce
V. Conflicts Rules on Wills and Succession 1. Law governing divorce

2. Divorce between foreign spouses
A. Extrinsic validity of wills 3. Divorce obtained by foreign spouse
4. Divorce by Filipino spouses
B. Probate of wills
C. Legal separation
C. Intrinsic validity of wills
Jurisdiction, Governing Law, Grounds
D. Revocation of wills
D. Annulment of marriage
E Administration of estates Nature, Jurisdiction, Governing Law, Grounds

E. Declaration of nullity of marriage
VI. Conflicts Rules on Property
Nature, Jurisdiction, Governing Law, Grounds
A. The Philippine Civil Code and the lex situs rule
B. Exceptions to the lex situs rule
C. Conflict of laws on real property situated in

another country
D. Extrinsic and intrinsic validity of conveyances
E. Capacity to transfer or acquire property
F. Situs of certain properties

1. Situs of personal property for taxation purposes
2. Situs of money
3. Situs of corporate shares of stocks
G. Distinguished from Property relations of spouses



IX. Conflicts Rules on Torts and Crimes XI. Recognition and Enforcement of
A. Torts, defined
Foreign Judgment
B. Concept of tort in the Philippines A. Distinction between Recognition and

Enforcement of Foreign Judgment
C. Laws governing torts
B. Bases of Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign
D. Lex loci delicti commissi Judgment
E. Three(3) theories in determining the locus delicti C. Philippine Conflicts Rule on Recognition and
Enforcement of Foreign Judgment
F. Modern theories and rules on tort liability
D. Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign
G. Conflict rules on maritime tort Judgment
H. Foreign tort claims; conditions for enforcement of Requisites and Defenses
tort claims
E. Value and Conclusiveness of Foreign Judgment
I. Philippines rule on foreign torts
F. Jurisdiction over Action for Enforcement of
J. Distinguish tort from crime Foreign Judgment
K. Lex loci delicti G. Procedure for Enforcement of Foreign Judgment
L. Different theories that determine whether a state

or legal system has jurisdiction to take cognizance
of criminal cases
M. Philippine conflict rule on crime

X. Conflicts Rules on Corporation and

Partnership
A. Corporation
1. Personal law of corporation
2. Domicile or residence of foreign corporation
3. Jurisdiction over foreign corporation
4. Philippine law on foreign corporation
5. Right of foreign corporation to bring suit
6. Exceptions to the license requirement
7. Definition and scope of 'transacting business'
B. Partnership
1. Personal law of partnership
2. Domicile of partnership


Con Ict of Laws: Notes and Cases

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Con Ict of Laws: Notes and Cases

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Compiled by Rehne Gibb N. Larena | JD-WT-3 | AY 2019-20 | University of San Carlos

Conﬂict of Laws NOTES

TABLE OF CONTENTS C. Intrinsic validity of wills 22

Based on Syllabus of Atty. Gravador By RGL 2 of 23

Conﬂict of Laws NOTES

D. Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgment

Based on Syllabus of Atty. Gravador By RGL 3 of 23

Conﬂict of Laws NOTES

I. Introduction and General Principles ● The Palace Hotel and Mr. Shmidt were not served with

Based on Syllabus of Atty. Gravador By RGL 4 of 23

Conﬂict of Laws NOTES

As to the choice of applicable law, we note that choice-of-law element, we agree with petitioner that the problem herein could

Based on Syllabus of Atty. Gravador By RGL 5 of 23

Conﬂict of Laws NOTES

Based on Syllabus of Atty. Gravador By RGL 6 of 23

Conﬂict of Laws NOTES

Issue (1) dismiss the case, either because of lack of jurisdiction

Based on Syllabus of Atty. Gravador By RGL 7 of 23

Conﬂict of Laws NOTES

Based on Syllabus of Atty. Gravador By RGL 8 of 23

Conﬂict of Laws NOTES

domestic or internal law. this purpose, a remedy is deemed chosen upon the ﬁling of the

(1) WON the petitioner’s act of ﬁling a collection suit

Based on Syllabus of Atty. Gravador By RGL 9 of 23

Conﬂict of Laws NOTES

Based on Syllabus of Atty. Gravador By RGL 10 of 23

Conﬂict of Laws NOTES

from any ﬁnancial obligation. In the case at bar, petitioner failed to show that the order of the

Based on Syllabus of Atty. Gravador By RGL 11 of 23

Conﬂict of Laws NOTES

Based on Syllabus of Atty. Gravador By RGL 12 of 23

Conﬂict of Laws NOTES

Based on Syllabus of Atty. Gravador By RGL 13 of 23

Conﬂict of Laws NOTES

Based on Syllabus of Atty. Gravador By RGL 14 of 23

Conﬂict of Laws NOTES

regarding their conjugal property acquired during their VALIDITY OF THE WILL

Based on Syllabus of Atty. Gravador By RGL 15 of 23

Conﬂict of Laws NOTES

May 2005. 3. an intention to abandon the old domicile.

Based on Syllabus of Atty. Gravador By RGL 16 of 23

Conﬂict of Laws NOTES

Based on Syllabus of Atty. Gravador By RGL 17 of 23

Conﬂict of Laws NOTES

Based on Syllabus of Atty. Gravador By RGL 18 of 23

Conﬂict of Laws NOTES

Based on Syllabus of Atty. Gravador By RGL 19 of 23

Conﬂict of Laws NOTES

Based on Syllabus of Atty. Gravador By RGL 20 of 23

Conﬂict of Laws NOTES

legitimate or illegitimate, or his being married or not.

Based on Syllabus of Atty. Gravador By RGL 21 of 23

Conﬂict of Laws NOTES

IV. Conflicts Rules on Contracts VII. Conflicts Rules on Marriage

V. Conflicts Rules on Wills and Succession 1. Law governing divorce

B. Exceptions to the lex situs rule

C. Conﬂict of laws on real property situated in

D. Extrinsic and intrinsic validity of conveyances

E. Capacity to transfer or acquire property

F. Situs of certain properties

G. Distinguished from Property relations of spouses

Based on Syllabus of Atty. Gravador By RGL 22 of 23