PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW

UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES

COLLEGE OF LAW
Second Semester, 2015-2016
Atty. Ron P. Salo, LLB, LLM
Course Description:
The course discusses Private International Law, a part of law which comes into operation
whenever the court is faced with a claim that contains a foreign element (a fact, event or
transaction that is so clearly connected with a foreign system of law as to necessitate recourse to
that system).
It has three (3) distinct but interrelated objects. First is the determination of the forum courts
jurisdiction to try the case, and if it has, whether to assume it. Second is the forum courts choice
of the applicable system of law to ascertain the rights of the parties. Third is the recognition and
enforcement of foreign judgments, and deals with the study of situations which justify recognition
by the forum court of a judgment rendered by a foreign court or its enforcement.

I.

Definition, Nature, Scope and Sources of Private International Law

A. Meaning of Foreign Law
B. Brief History and Development of Private International Law
C. Sources of Private International Law
D. Private International Law vs. Public International Law

II.

Jurisdiction
A. Definition
Hasegawa, et al. vs. Kitamura, G.R. No. 149177, November 23, 2007
B. Types of Judicial Jurisdiction and Bases for its Exercise
De Joya vs. Judge Placido C. Marquez, G.R. No. 162416, January 31, 2006
1. Jurisdiction over the Subject Matter Judiciary Act of 1948; Batas Pambansa Blg.
129 as amended by Rep. Act 7691
Perkins vs. Roxas, G.R. No. 47517, June 27, 1941
Reyes vs. Diaz, G.R. No. L-48754, November 26, 1941
2. Jurisdiction over the Person (Plaintiff & Defendant) Rule 14, Secs. 6 & 7, 1997
Rules of Court
Pantaleon vs. Asuncion, G.R. No. L-13141, May 22, 1959
Gemperle vs. Schenker, G.R. No. L-18164, January 23, 1967
Sequito vs. Letrondo, G.R. No. L-11588, July 20, 1959
1

Jaranilla vs. Gonzales, G.R. No. L-5629, October 11, 1954

Philsec Investment, et al vs. CA, GR No. 103493, June 19, 1997
3. Jurisdiction over the Res
Pennoyer vs. Neff, 95 US 714 (1878)
Mullane vs. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co., Trustee, et al., 399 US 306 (1950)
Shaffer vs. Heitner, 433 U.S. 186 (1977)
4. Jurisdiction over the Issues of the Case
De Joya vs. Judge Placido C. Marquez, G.R. No. 162416, supra.
Reyes vs. Diaz, G.R. No. L-48754, supra.
Bernabe vs. Vergara, G.R. No. L-48652, September 16, 1942
C. Service of Summons
1. Personal Service or Substituted Service Rule 14, Sec. 6 & 7, 1997 Rules of
Court
Pantaleon vs. Asuncion, supra.
2. Service by Publication Rule 14, Sec. 15, 1997 Rules of Court
3. Extraterritorial Service Rule 15, Sec. 15, 1997 Rules of Court
Davao Light vs. CA, G.R. No. 93262, December 29, 1991
D. Ways of Dealing with a Conflicts of Law Problem
1. Dismiss the Case
i.

Doctrine of Forum Non Conveniens

Heine vs. New York Insurance Company, 45 F2d 426 (1940)

In re: Union Carbide Corporation, 634 F. Supp. 842 (S.D.N.Y. 1986)
First Philippine International Bank vs. CA, G.R. No. 115849, January 24, 1996
Manila Hotel Corp. vs. NLRC, G.R. No. 120077, October 13, 2000
Hasegawa, et al. vs. Kitamura, supra. (2007)
2. Assume Jurisdiction
Hasegawa, et al. vs. Kitamura, supra. (2007)
i.

Application of Internal Law

ii. Application of Foreign Law

Theories on the Application of Foreign Law
Fleumer vs. Hix, G.R. No. L-32636, March 17, 1930
Philippine Trust Co vs. Bohanan, G.R. No. L-12105, January 30, 1960
2

III.

Judicial Choice of Law

A. Approaches to Choice of Law
1. Traditional Approaches
Gray vs. Gray, 87 N.H. 82 (1934)
Alabama Great Southern R.R. Co. vs. Carrol, 97 Ala. 126, 11 So. 803
2. Modern Approaches
Auten vs. Auten, 308 N.Y. 155 (1954)
Haag vs. Barnes, 9 N.Y. 2d 554 (1961)
Babcock vs. Jackson, 12 N.Y. 2d 473 (1963)
B. Characterization of the Cause of Action
1. Characterization and the Single Aspect Method Arts. 15, 16, & 17, NNC
Gibbs vs. Govt of PI, G.R. No. L-35694, December 23, 1933
Grant vs. Mcauliffe, 41 Cal. 2d 859 (1953)
Cadalin vs. POEA Administrator, G.R. No. L-104776 December 5, 1994
2. Depecage
Haumschild vs. Continental Casualty, 7 Wis. 2d 130 (1959)
C. Renvoi
Aznar vs. Garcia, G.R. No. L-16749, January 31, 1963
Annesley vs. Annesley, 95 LJ Ch. 404 (1926)
University of Chicago vs. Dater, 277 Mich. 653 (1936)
Bellis vs. Bellis, G.R. No. L-23678, June 6, 1967
D. Substance and Procedure
1.
2.
3.
4.

Difference between Substance and Procedure

Applicable Law on Procedure
Applicable Law on Substance
Applicable Law on Evidence

E. Personal Law of the Parties

1. Nationality Art. 15, NCC; Art. 2 Hague Convention on Conflict of Nationality
Laws; Article IV of the 1987 Philippine Constitution; RA 8171; RA 9225
Talaroc vs. Uy, G.R. No. L-5397, September 26, 1952
Mercado vs. Manzano, G.R. No. 135083, May 26, 1999
Co vs. Electoral Tribunal of the House of Representatives, G.R. Nos. 92191-92
July 30, 1991
Frivaldo vs. COMELEC, G.R. No. 120295, June 28, 1996
3

2. Domicile Art. 50, NCC

Uytengsu vs. Republic, G.R. No. L-6379, September 29, 1954
Caasi vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 88831, November 8, 1990
Romualdez-Marcos vs. COMELEC, G.R. No. 119976 September 18, 1995
Saludo vs. American Express International, G.R. No. 159507, April 19, 2006
Limbona vs. COMELEC, G.R. No. 186006, October 16, 2009
3. Residence
Uytengsu vs. Republic, supra.
Saludo vs. American Express International, supra.
Limbona vs. COMELEC, supra.
F. Status and Capacity Arts. 40, 41 & 42, FC; Art. 243, FC as amended by RA 6809;
Art. 5, PD 603; Art. 42, NCC
Recto vs. Harden, G.R. No. L-22174, July 21, 1967
De Jesus vs. Syquia, G.R. No. L-39110, November 28, 1933
Geluz vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-16439, July 20, 1961
Insular Government vs. Frank, 13 Phil. 236 (1909)
G. Notice and Proof of Foreign Law
1. Extent of Judicial Notice
2. Proof of Foreign Law
a. Foreign Law: A Question of Fact
b. Proving Foreign Law
Philippine Commercial and Industrial Bank vs. Escolin, G.R. Nos. L-27860 and L27896 March 29, 1974
In re Estate of Johnson, G.R. No. L-12767, November 16, 1918
Miciano vs. Brimo, 50 Phil. 887 (1924).
Board of Commissioners (CID) vs. Dela Rosa, G.R. Nos. 95122-23, May 31, 1991
3. Exceptions to the Application of Foreign Law
a. Foreign Law is Contrary to an Important Public Policy of the Forum
Pakistan International Airlines vs. Ople, G.R. No. 61594, September 28, 1990
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.

Foreign Law is Procedural in Nature

Issues are Related to Property (Lex Situs)
Foreign Law Pertains to Revenue
Foreign Law is Penal in Character
Foreign Law is Contrary to Good Morals (Contra Bonos Mores)
Application of the Foreign Law will work Injustice to the Citizens of the Forum
Application of the Foreign Law might endanger the Vital Interests of the State
of the Forum
4

--------------------------------------------MIDTERM EXAMINATION -------------------------------------------------H. Choice of Law Problems

1. Family Relations
a. Marriage Arts. 1, 2, 10, 26 FC; Art. XV, Sec. 2, 1987 Constitution
i. Extrinsic Validity of Marriage
Adong vs. Cheong Seng Gee, G.R. No. 18081, March 3, 1922
People vs. Mura Dumpo, G.R. No. L-42581,October 2, 1935
Wong Woo Yu vs. Vivo, G.R. No. L-21076, March 31, 1965
ii. Intrinsic Validity of Marriage
In Re Mays Estate, 185, N.Y.S. 284 (1920)
Rayray vs. Chae Kyung Lee, G.R. No. L-18176, October 26, 1966
b. Divorce and Separation Art. 26, FC
Tenchavez vs. Escano, G.R. No. L-19671, November 29, 1965
Van Dorn vs. Romillo, G.R. No. L-68470, October 8, 1985
Pilapil vs. Ibay-Somera, G.R. No. 80116 June 30, 1989
Quita vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 124862 December 22, 1998
c. Annulment and Declaration of Nullity Art. 26, FC; Rule 14, Sec. 15, 1997
Rules of Court
d. Parental Relations Arts. 163, 164, 165, 287 and 288, FC
e. Status of Children Arts. 15, 164, 165, FC
f.

Adoption Title VII, FC; RA 8043; RA 8552

Republic vs. CA and Bobiles, G.R. No. 92326 January 24, 1992
Uggi Lindamand Therkelsen vs. Republic, G.R. No. L-21951, November 27,
1964

2. Property Art. 15, NCC

a. Capacity of the party to transfer or acquire property
Llantino vs. Co Liong Chong, G.R. No. L-29663, August 20, 1990
Cheesman vs. Intermediate Appellate Court, G.R. No. 74833, January 21,
1991
b. Extrinsic and Intrinsic Validity of Conveyances
c. Lex Situs Rule Art. 15, FC
5

i.

Situs of Certain properties

Constructive situs Art. 1753, NCC
Vessels

ii. Exceptions to Lex Situs Rule

Lex intentiones or lex voluntates

Liljedahl vs. Glassgow, 190 Iowa 827 (1921)

Real property offered as security

3. Wills, Succession and Administration of Estates Arts. 17 & 815, NCC

a. Capacity of the Decedent and the Successor Art. 16, par. 2 & 1039, NCC
Cayetano vs. Leonidas, G.R. No. L-54919, May 30, 1984
b. Extrinsic Validity of Wills
In re Estate of Johnson, supra.
Babcock Templeton vs. Rider Babcock, G.R. No. L-28328, October 2, 1928.
c. Intrinsic Validity of Wills
Miciano vs. Brimo, supra.
Bellis vs. Bellis, supra.
Cayetano vs. Leonidas, supra.
d. Interpretation of Wills Arts. 1370, 1378, 788-792, NCC
e. Revocation Art. 829, NCC
f.

Probate Rule 77, Sec. 1, Revised Rules of Court

Suntay vs. Suntay, G.R. Nos. L-3087 and L-3088, July 31, 1954
Vda. De Perez vs. Tolete, G.R. No. 76714, June 2, 1994

g. Administration of Estates Rule 78, Sec. 4 & Rule 79, Sec. 5, Rules of Court
Tayag vs. Benguet Consolidated Inc., G.R. No. L-23145, November 29, 1968
4. Contracts
a. Capacity to Enter Into Contracts Art. 15, NCC
b. Extrinsic Validity of Contracts Art. 17, NCC
c. Intrinsic Validity of Contracts
i.

Lex Loci Contractus

6

ii. Lex Loci Solutionis

Macmillan & Bloedel vs. T.H. Valderama and Sons, 61 OG 1696 (1964)
iii. Lex Loci Intentiones
d. Doctrine of the Proper Law Restatement Second Sec. 187 & 188
i.

Party Autonomy: Law of the State Chosen by the Parties

Vita Food Products vs. Unus Shipping [1939] 63 Ll, L. Rep. 21
Amin Rasheed Shipping Corp. vs. Kuwait Insurance [1983] 2 Lloyds Rep.
365

Choice of the Forum Clause

Compagnie de Commerce vs. Hamburg Amerika, G.R. No. L-10986,
March 31, 1917
King Mau vs. Sycip, G.R. No. L-5897, April 23, 1954
Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation vs. Sherman, G.R. No.
72494, August 11, 1989

Contracts with Arbitration Clause

Puromines vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 91228, March 22, 1993.
The Bremen, et al. vs. Zapata Off-Shore Company, 407 U.S. 1 (1972)

Adhesion Contracts
Pan Am World Airways vs. Rapadas, G.R. No. 60673, May 19, 1992
Philippine Airlines vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 119641 May 17, 1996

Special Contracts
o

Carriage of Goods by Sea

American President Lines, Ltd. vs. Klepper, G.R. No. L-19004,
June 30, 1964

International Air Transportation

Santos III vs. Northwest Orient Airlines, G.R. No. 101538, June
23, 1992

ii.

Law Governing in the Absence of Effective Choice by the Parties

Whitworth Street Estates vs. Miller [1970] 1 Lloyds Rep. 269

iii.

Limitations to Party Autonomy

7

Pakistan International Airlines vs. Ople, G.R. No. 61594, September 28,
1990
Ralli Bro. vs. Companie Naviera Sota y Aznar [1920] 2K.B. 287 [C.A.]- 85
5. Torts and Crimes Art. 20 & 2176, NCC; Article 2, RPC; Article 27, UNCLOS
a. Lex Loci Delicti
Loucks vs. Standards Oil Co., 224 N.Y. 99, N.E. 198 (1913)
b. Modern Theories on Foreign Tort Liability
Saudi Arabian Airlines vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 122191, October 8,
1998
Babcock vs. Jackson, supra.
c. Foreign Tort Claims
Asahi Metal Industry Co. vs. Superior Court of California, 480 US 102 (1987)
d. Distinguishing between Torts and Crimes
6. Corporations and other Juridical Entities Article 51, NCC; Sec. 14, Corporation
Code
a. Corporations
i.

Personal Law of a Corporation

M.E. Gray vs. Insular Lumber Company, G.R. No. L-45144, April 3, 1939

ii. Exceptions to the Rule of Incorporation Test

Pedro Palting vs. San Jose Petroleum, Inc., G.R. No. L-14441, December
17, 1966
Filipinas Compania de Seguras vs. Christern, Huenefeld & Co., Inc., G.R.
No. L-2294, May 25, 1951
iii. Domicile or residence of Foreign Corporation
State Investment House, Inc. vs. Citibank, G.R. Nos. 79926-27, October
17, 1991
b. Special corporations
c. Partnerships
IV.

Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgment and Arbitral Awards Rule

132, Sec. 25, Rules of Court; Rule 48, Sec. 39, Rules of Court
A. Distinction between Recognition and Enforcement
8

Perkins vs. Benguet Consolidated Mining Co.,

B. Bases of Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgment
Godard vs. Gray, L.R. 6 Q.B. 139 (1870)
C. Policies Underlying Recognition and Enforcement
D. Requisites for Recognition
Northwest Orient Airlines, Inc.vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 112573, February 9,
1995
Boudard vs. Tait, G.R. No. L-45193, April 5, 1939
E. Enforcement of Foreign Judgment and Arbitral Awards
-------------------------------------------------- FINAL EXAMINATION ---------------------------------------------References:
1. Laws:
Constitution: Art. IV and Art. V, Section 1
Civil Code: Articles 14, 15, 16, 17, 815, 816, 818, 819, 829, 1039, 1319, and 1753
Rules of Court: Rule 14 and 39, Section 48, Rule 131, Section 3 (n), 132, Section
25
Family Code: Articles 10, 21, 26, 35, 36, 37, 38, 80, 96, 184, and 187
Revised Penal Code: Article 2
Corporation Code: Section 133
2. Restatement Second: Conflict of Laws, Secs. 187 and 188
3. Convention on the Recognition of Foreign Judgment on Civil and Commercial Matters
and 1993 Convention in Respect of Inter-Country Adoption
4. Various Cases
5. Chesire & Norths Private International Law, North & Fawcett, 13th Edition (2004)
6. Conflict of Laws, Coquia & Aguiling-Pagalangan (2000)
7. Handbook on Conflict of Laws, Sempio-Diy (2004)

Teaching Methods/Strategies:
A question-and-answer format will be primarily employed to determine whether the
student read and understood the provisions of the law, the commentaries and the decisions
of the Court. Lectures, group discussions and visual aids may be used when applicable.
There shall be a midterm and final examination to test the knowledge and understanding of
the students.
Grading Criteria:
Mid-term Exam:
Recitations:

30%
30%
9

Final Exam:

40%
000

10