Conflict of Laws

PART ONE: INTRODUCTION

Distinguished from Public International Law

I. Scope and Conflict of Laws: Nature, and other disciplines:
Definition and Importance

Public Private
A. Diversity of Laws, Customs
International International
and Practices
Law Law
PRIL: that part of municipal law which
covers cases with a foreign element. Principally governs Principally governs
states in their individuals in their
Hilton vs. Guyot relationships private transactions
(1895) a m o n g s t which involves a
FACTS: Defendants were sued in France, themselves foreign element
and the French court rendered judgment
against them. Plaintiffs sued defendants As to sources of law:
on the French judgment in the US. The Codified in Art. 38 Generally derived
US court held the French judgment of the Statute of from the internal
conclusive. International Court law of each state
of Justice and not from any
HELD: No law has any effect, of its own “international” law
force, beyond the limits of the extraneous to
sovereignty form which its authority is municipal law
derived. The extent to which the law of
As to persons involved:
one nation, as put in force within its
territory xxx shall be allowed to operate Governs only states Governs individuals
within the dominion of another nation, and internationally- or corporations
depends upon xxx “the comity of r e c o g n i z e d
nations.” organizations

As to transactions:
Comity of nations is the recognition
which one nation allows within its Involves state-to- Relates to private
territory to the legislative, executive or state or transactions
judicial acts of another nation, having g o v e r n m e n t - t o - between individuals
due regard both to international duty government
and convenience, and to the rights of its matters
own citizens or of other persons who are As to remedies:
under the protection of its laws.
In case of violation, All the remedies are
T h e re a s o n a b l e , i f n o t n e c e s s a r y a state may resort provided by
conclusion appears to us to be that to municipal laws of
judgments rendered in France, or in any 1) diplomatic the state, such as
other foreign country, by the laws of protest resort to courts or
2) peaceful means administrative
which our own judgments are reviewable
of settlement tribunals
upon the merits, are not entitled to full
(diplomatic
credit and conclusive effect when sued negotiations,
upon in this country, but are prima facie arbitration or
evidence only of the justice of the conciliation)
plaintiff’s claim. 3) adjudication by
filing a case before
international
B. Definition tribunals
4) use force short
of w a r, or
Second Edition of Jurisprudence: private eventually go to
international law is that part of the law of war
each state or nation which determines
whether, in dealing with a legal situation,
the law of some other state or nation will be
C. Object, Function and Scope
recognized, given effect or applied.
Page 1 of 92
 Conflict of Laws

Object and Function of Conflict of Laws: to their own laws on private matters, the
provide rational and valid rules or guidelines “Statute” was applied to problems of
in deciding cases where the parties, events choice of law.
or transactions are linked to more than one
JD. Statute is classified into:
a. real – applied to immovable
Conflict of law rules aim to promote stability property within the state
and uniformity of solutions provided by the b. personal – followed the person
laws and courts of each state called upon to even outside the domicile and
decide conflicts cases. governed questions on
personal status, capacity and
Scope: covers the entire range of laws as it movables
cuts across the subjects of JD of local courts c. mixed – contracts, if entered
or tribunals, the law on evidence or proof of into by the different nationals
foreign law, the personal law of individuals
and juridical entities, naturalization law, ♦ 16th century, France
laws on domicile and residence, family
r e l a t i o n s , c o n t ra c t s , t o r t s , c r i m e s , Charles Dumoulin – advocated a
corporation law and property law. method to determine what law would
govern contracts between different
nationals
3 Issues in Conflict of Laws:
Bertrand D’Argentre – formulated the
1) Issue of adjudicatory JD: determines the principle of universal succession
circumstances that allow for a legal order to followed in the Spanish Civil Code and
impose upon its judiciary the task of adopted in the Phil. Civil Code
deciding multi-state and multinational
disputes ♦ Netherlands

2) Issue of choice-of-law: refers to the
probable sources from which the applicable
law of the controversy may be derived
3) Recognition and enforcement of foreign
judgments: study of situations which justify
recognition by the forum court of a
judgment rendered by a foreign court or the
enforcement of such within the forum
II. A Brief History and Development of
Conflict of Laws
A. Roman Law
♦ Ius gentium
In PIL, it means the law of nations
It is used in the early Roman
empire to mean the body of rules
developed by the praetor peregrinus to
resolve disputes between foreigners or
between foreigners and Roman citizens
It includes Greek legal doctrines
and concept of bona fides as ius civile
only applies t Roman citizens
Ulrich Huber – first used the term,
conflict of laws
Dutch jurists asserted that State has no
obligation to apply a foreign law unless
imposed by treaty, by comitas gentium
or on consideration of courtesy and
expediency.
Dutch jurists led by Huber developed
territorial principle where the laws of
every state may operate only within its
territorial limit but such sovereign state
may recognize that a law, which
operated in the country of its origin,
shall retain force everywhere provided
that it will not prejudice its subjects.
Comitas Gentium was readily accepted
because of increasing international
transactions.
Ius Commune, applied by Italian and
French jurists, was a supranational law
based on Roman law and which
became the continental European
common law.

♦ Italian City States Nations codified their national laws

The rise of this city states which included conflict of laws
prompted intensive study of conflict of provisions.
laws
- Bartolus: Father of Conflict of Ex. French Civil Code of 1804
Laws; formulated Theory of - became the pattern for Civil
Statutes Codes of Spain, Belgium and
Because Northern Italy was divided Romania
into several city states each having
Page 2 of 92

- n a t i o n a l i ty l a w p r i n c i p l e
(contained in Art. 15 of our
CC) was provided in Art. 3 of
the French Code
♦ 19th Century
Justice Joseph Story – relied on the
European continental theorists’ concept
of territorial sovereignty and founded
conflict of laws on the principle of
comity of nations.
Frederich Carl Von Savigny
- founder of modern private IL
-application of foreign law was not
due to comity but the resultant
benefits for everyone concerned
- advocated situs theory (seat of
legal relationship): every
element
of transaction be governed by the
law of the place with which said
element has the most substantive
connection
Pascuale Mancini
- advanced nationality theory in
matters concerning status,
capacity and private interests of
the individual
B. Modern Developments
♦ Neo-Statutists
- followed Italian theory: when 2 or
more independent laws are
applicable to a Conflict problem,
the method so devised determines
what law shall prevail
♦ Internationalists
- there should be a single body of
rules that can solve problems
involving a foreign element
♦ Territorialists
- law of the State applies to persons
and things within the State,
therefore, no foreign law is
applied.
- Branch: only rights vested or
acquired under foreign law are
recognized in the forum but not
foreign law itself
♦ 1969
- 2nd Restatement of Conflict of
Laws, adopted by American Law
Institute under Prof. William Reese,
proposed that in the absence of
statutory law, law to be applied in
Conflict case, is the law of the
most significant relationship.
Conflict of Laws in the Philippines
Spanish Civil Code enforced in the
Philippines until 1950 contained the
Page 3 of 92
Conflict of Laws
principles adopted from the French Civil
Code (Code of Napoleon) particularly the
nationality law principle. Art 16, par. 1,
which applies lex situs rule was adopted
from Art. 10 of Spanish CC while par. 2
represents the system of universal
succession. Art. 17, par. 1 follows lex loci
contractus. But there was no significant
jurisprudence on the subject.
Conflict of Laws was included in law
curriculum by UP College of Law in 1911
(no less!). Until 1950s, law teachers
predominantly used foreign law books and
decisions by American courts.
In the Bar, it used to be a separate subject
along with PIL but when it was revised, PIL
was included in Pol Law while PRIL was
merged with Civil Law. But, this does not
mean that PRIL is a part of civil law as this
mindview tends to limit the perspective and
scope of analysis required for conflicts
problems.
Now, more problems in Conflict have arisen
esp. with Filipinos engaging in foreign
business transactions, and in international
air transport and foreign tort claims and
labor contracts for OFWs.
III. Sources of Conflict of Laws
A. Codes and Statutes
Conflict of Laws (CL) originated in
continental Europe was most laws were
codified.
Primary sources of law are found in the civil
codes of different countries:
1. Roman code codified principles of ius
gentium.
2. Code of Napoleon contained specific
rule on personal law of individual,
this was followed by several codes
( N e t h e r l a n d s , R o m a n i a , I t a l y,
Portugal, Spain)
3. The German civil Code contained
many provisions on Conflict of
Laws.
4. Switzerland also enacted Laws on
cases involving foreign elements.
5. Greece enacted a Civil Code with CL
rules which became a model in other
countries
6. The Code of Bustamante (in South
America) was patterned after the
Code of Napoleon
Conflict Laws of the Philippines
 Conflict of Laws

Spanish Civil Code was enforced in the 11. IC on the Suppression of Traffic of
Philippines on December 7, 1889 until the Women and Children
Philippine Civil Code’s effectivity on August 12. Convention on World Intellectual
30, 1950 which contained the provisions on Property Organization
conflict of laws of the earlier code. 13. Berne Convention on Protection of
Literary and Artistic Works
Spain’s Code of Commerce, having some 14. Paris Convention on Protection of
provisions on foreign transactions, were Industrial Property.
also enforced in the Philippines on Dec 1,
1888. Although many Hague Conventions on
Private International Law were concluded
One basic source of law is the 1987 since 1951, which dealt with issues on:
Constitution which contains principles on • Personal status
nationality and comity. • Patrimonial family status
• Patrimonial status such as
Special statutes were also enacted to agency and trusts
govern cases with foreign elements, to wit: The Philippines is a signatory to the
Convention on Recognition of Foreign
1. Corporation Code Judgment on Civil and Commercial Matters
2. General Banking Act and has ratified the 1993 Convention in
3. Foreign Currency System Act Respect of Inter-Country Adoption only.
4. Phil Foreign Law Guarantee Corp
5. Retail Business Regulation Act
6. Anti-Dummy Law C. Treatises, Commentaries and
7. Nationalization of Rice and Corn Studies of Learned Societies
Industry Act
In interpreting statutes and codes involving
8. Insurance Code
CL, courts resort to works of distinguished
9. IP Code
jurists and studies of learned societies.
10. Patent Law
11. Trademark Law
Distinguished writers in continental Europe
12. COGSA
include Huber Manreas, Savigny (whose
13. Salvage Law
work was translated into English by
14. Public Service Act
Guthrie), and Weiss.
15. Civil Aeronautics Act
16. Phil Overseas Shipping Act
Distinguished American and English writers,
17. Investment Incentives Act
on the other hand, include Beale, Cavers,
18. Export Incentives Act
Cheatham, Currie, Ehrenzweig, Goodrich,
19. RA 7722
Gussbaum, Story, Wharton, Cheshire,
Graveson.
B. Treaties and International
The American Law Institute published 2
Conventions
studies on CL: Restatement of the Conflict
of Laws and a Second Restatement with
The Philippines has entered into a number William Reese as Reporter.
of treaties and international conventions
which deal with private international law
since it became a Republic. D. Judicial decisions

Some of these treaties/conventions are:
1. Convention on Intl Civil Aviation,
2. Warsaw Convention,
3. Convention on Offenses Committed on
Board Aircraft
4. Convention on the Suppression of
Unlawful
5. Acts against Civil Aviation
6. UN Convention COGSA
7. Convention on Consent to Marriage, etc
8. Convention on Traffic of Persons
9. C o n v e n t i o n o n E l i m i n a t i o n o f
Discrimination against Women
10. Convention on Political Rights of
Women
Page 4 of 92
Decisions of courts are the most important
source of CL rules and form the main bulk
of source of conflict rules.
According to Graveson: “This branch of law
is more completely judge-made than almost
any other. In its application, judges have to
deal with “All Manner of People” more than
any other branch. The claim of justice for
right as a basis for conflict of laws is
supported not only by the terms of the
judicial oath but by judicial dicta in
judgments”.
PART TWO: JURISDICTION AND
CHOICE OF LAW

IV. Jurisdiction
Jurisdiction may mean either a) judicial or
b) legislative jurisdiction. (This part talks of
judicial jurisdiction)
Judicial JD – the power or authority of a
court to try a case, render judgment and
execute it in accordance with law.
Legislative JD – the ability of the state to
promulgate laws and enforce them on all
persons and property within its territory.
4 Major Questions in Analyzing a Conflict of
Laws Problem:
1) Has the court JD over the person
of the defendant or over his
property?
2) Has the court JD over the subject
matter (“competency”)?
3) Has the suit been brought in the
proper venue in cases where a
foreign element is involved?
4) Is there a statute or doctrine under
which a court otherwise qualified
to try the case may or may not
refuse to entertain it?
A. Basis of Exercise of Judicial
Jurisdiction
Bases of Judicial Jurisdiction (3 groups):
1) JD over the person (based on
forum-defendant contacts)
2) JD over the res (based on forum-
property contacts)
3) JD over the subject matter
1. Jurisdiction over the
Person
This is acquired by the voluntary
appearance of a party and his submission to
authority.
Over the person of the plaintiff: acquired
the moment he invokes the aid of the court
by filing a suit.
Over the person of the defendant: acquired
when he enters his appearance or is served
with the legal process within the state.
Page 5 of 92
Conflict of Laws
When he or his lawyer appears in court, he
gives consent to the forum’s exercise of JD
over him, except where the appearance is
for the purpose of protesting the JD over
him.
A non-resident plaintiff who files a suit is
deemed to consent to the court’s exercise of
JD over subsequent proceedings arising out
of his original cause of action
(counterclaims).
JD over the defendant may be had by
personal or substituted service of summons.
Gemperle vs. Schenker
(1967)
FACTS: Paul Schenker (Swiss citizen and
resident) filed a complaint against
Gemperle through his wife Helen
Schenker, for enforcement of subscription
to shares of stock. Gemperle filed a suit
against Paul for damages, saying that
Paul caused allegations to be published
attacking his reputation and bringing him
into public hatred and discredit as a
businessman. Schenker’s defense: court
has no JD over the person of Paul.
HELD: Jurisdiction was acquired by the
lower court over the person of Paul
through service of summons addressed to
him upon Helen, it appearing from the
answer that she is the representative and
attorney-in-fact of her husband in the
civil case.
! Notes!
Jurisdiction:
1) over the person
a) voluntary appearance
b) submission to authority
rule: in substituted service, the premise is
that the defendant is within the territorial
JD of the court
exception: Gemperle case – because Helen
is legally authorized to file a case in behalf
of Paul, she is also authorized to receive
summons
2) over the property
a) in rem – the situs could
“bind the world”
b) quasi in rem
basis of JD: presence of the property within
the territory
3) over the subject-matter - WON the
court has competence to hear the
case and render judgment; the

court’s JD must be properly
invoked (provided for by statute)
_______________
2. Jurisdiction over the
Property
JD over the property results from:
a) seizure of the property under
a legal process
b) the institution of legal
proceedings wherein the
c o u r t ’s p o w e r ove r t h e
property is recognized and
made effective
This kind of JD is referred to as in rem JD;
the situs could “bind the world” and not just
the interest of specific persons.
Basis of exercise of JD: the presence of the
property within the territorial JD of the
forum.
Quasi in rem JD: affects only the interests
of particular persons in that thing (ex.
Quieting of title). (actions against a person
in respect of the res)
In these 2 proceedings, all that due process
requires is that the defendant be given
adequate notice and opportunity to be
heard (which are both met by service of
summons by publication).
Pennoyer vs. Neff
(1878)
FACTS: Neff, a California resident,
owned land in Oregon which was sold
under a Sheriff’s deed to satisfy a money
judgment against him. The service of
summons was made by publication. He is
suing for recovery of said land, alleging
that the sale was invalid for lack of JD of
the Oregon court over him.
HELD: Substituted services by
publication, or in any other authorized
form, may be sufficient to inform parties
of the object of the proceedings taken
where property is once brought under the
control of the court by seizure or some
equivalent act to any proceedings
authorized by law upon such seizure for
its condemnation and sale.
But where the entire object of the action is
to determine the personal rights and
obligations of defendants, that is, where
the suit is merely in personam,
Page 6 of 92
Conflict of Laws
constructive service in this form upon a
non-resident is ineffectual for any
purpose.
The important thing to prove is what kind of
action is involved (to determine sufficiency
of form of service to be used)
International Shoe Co. vs. Washington
(1945)
FACTS: The state of Washington sued
International Shoe Co. (a Delaware
corporation with principal place of
business in Missouri) to collect the tax
laid upon the exercise of the privilege of
employing salesmen within the state.
International Shoe’s defense is that its
activities within the state, consisting
merely of exhibiting samples and
soliciting orders and nothing more, were
not sufficient to manifest its “presence”
there; hence the state courts had no JD
over it.
HELD: The SC of Washington has JD over
International Shoe. Due process requires
only that in order to subject a defendant
to a judgment in personam, if he be not
present within the territory of the forum,
he should have certain minimum contacts
with it, such that the maintenance of the
suit does not offend “traditional notions
of fair play and substantial justice”.
(Minimum contacts so that the suit will
not offend traditional notions of fair
play and substantial justice.)
The demands of due process regarding
the corporation’s “presence” may be met
by such contacts of the corporation with the
state of the forum as to make it reasonable xxx
to require the corporation with defend the
particular suit which is brought there.
Its “presence” can be manifested only by
such activities carried on in its behalf by
those who are authorized to act for it.
Mullane vs. Central Hanover Bank &
Trust Co.
(1950)
FACTS: In an action for judicial
settlement of accounts of Central
Hanover Bank as trustee of a common
trust fund, some of the beneficiaries who
are non-residents of NY were notified
only by publication in a local newspaper.

HELD: When notice is a person’s due,
process which is a mere gesture is NOT
due process. The means employed must
be such as one desirous of actually
informing the absentee might reasonably
adopt to accomplish it. Within the limits
of practicability, notice must be such as is
reasonably calculated to reach interested
parties.
In Mullane, the manner notice was given
should reasonably result in informing the
affected partner; when conditions do not
allow such notice, the form chosen should
not substantially be “less likely to bring
home notice than other of the feasible and
customary substitutes.”
Shaffer vs. Heitner
(1977)
FACTS: Heitner, a non-resident of
Delaware with 1 share of stock in the
Delaware corporation Greyhound, sued
Greyhound and its officers for allegedly
violating its duties. Pursuant to the case,
Heitner filed a motion for sequestration
of the defendants’ stocks in Greyhound.
The stocks, while not physically present
in Delaware, are considered to be there in
view of it being the place of
incorporation.
HELD: The Delaware court cannot
exercise JD just because the stocks are
statutorily present in Delaware. The
property (stocks) is not the subject matter
of the litigation nor is the underlying
cause of action related to the property.
Also, the facts in CAB does not
demonstrate that defendants have
purposefully availed themselves of the
privilege of conducting activities within
the forum state in a way that would
justify bringing them before a Delaware
court.
In Shaffer, the minimum contacts and
fundamental fairness test should be
satisfied regardless of whether the
proceedings are in rem, quasi in rem or in
personam.
Traditional basis for the exercise of judicial
JD is the state’s physical power over
persons and property within its territory;
this is why in in rem proceedings, it can
exercise JD over property situated in the
Page 7 of 92
Conflict of Laws
state regardless of whether it could
otherwise exercise JD over the persons
whose interest would be affected by the
decision.
In the US, there is a shifting trend from
theory of territorial power to considerations
of minimum contacts and fundamental
fairness. This approach demands that there
be forum-transaction contacts that will
make it fundamentally fair to require the
defendant to defend a suit in the forum
regardless of his non-resident status.
Distinction, Shaffer and International Shoe:
while International Shoe requires minimum
contacts between the defendant and the
forum, Shaffer demands that minimum
contacts exist among the forum, defendant
and the cause of action.
The change in the conceptual foundation of
JD from territorial power to fairness does
not significantly affect proceedings in rem,
which are suits where the property itself is
the object of the controversy. The physical
presence of the property within the state
establishes the state’s paramount interest in
adjudicating a claim over it and provides the
necessary minimum contacts.
Long-Arm Statutes
Long-arm statutes specify the kinds of
contacts upon which JD will be asserted.
Some long-arm statutes broadly authorize
courts to assert JD in any case not
inconsistent with the Constitution, leaving it
to the court to define its limitations on a
case-by-case basis.
3. Jurisdiction over the
Subject-matter
Subject-matter JD is allocated among the
courts by constitutional and statutory laws,
according to the nature of the controversy,
thereby determining the competence of the
court to try and decide a case.
It is not enough that a court has a power in
abstract to try and decide the case; it is
necessary that said power be properly
invoked xxx by filing a petition.
Subject-matter JD cannot be conferred by
consent of the parties.
Idonah Perkins vs. Roxas
(1941)
FACTS: Eugene Perkins filed a complaint
against Benguet Consolidated for the

recovery of declared dividends, but
Benguet withheld payment upon the
opposing claim of Idonah Perkins, wife of
Eugene. Idonah sets up a NY judgment
declaring her to be the sole owner of the
Benguet shares and allege that such
judgment is res judicata.
HELD: The CFI has jurisdiction over the
case, despite the presence of the NY
judgment. Whether or not the trial judge
in the course of the proceedings will give
validity and efficacy to the NY judgment
set up by Idonah in her cross-complaint is
a question that goes to the merits of the
controversy and relates to the rights of
the parties as between each other, and not
to the jurisdiction of the court. The fear
that the trial judge may render judgment
annulling the final judgment of the NY
court is not a ground to deny the lower
court of JD. The test of JD is whether or
not the tribunal has power to enter upon
the inquiry, not whether its conclusion in
the course of it is right or wrong.
! Notes!
“Presence”/Jurisdiction:
1) Traditional Views
a) P e n n o y e r – a c t u a l
physical presence
2) Modern Views
a) Int’l. Shoe – contact
between the forum and
the corporation (even in
the absence of an actual
office, etc.)
b) Mullane – disregards strict
distinction between in
rem and in personam
c) Shaffer – minimum
contacts between the
properties and forum;
fundamental fairness test
Long-arm statutes: already identify what
are the bases of JD.
✪
Jurisdiction and choice of law
do not mean the same thing.
_______________
B. Ways of Dealing with a
Conflicts Problem
The court may deal with a conflicts
problem, by:
Page 8 of 92
Conflict of Laws
1) dismissing the case for lack of
jurisdiction or on the ground of
forum non conveniens
2) assuming jurisdiction and applying
either forum or foreign law
1. Dismiss the case
Doctrine of Forum non Conveniens
This doctrine requires the court to dismiss
the case on the ground that the controversy
may be more suitably tried elsewhere. This
phrase literally means “the forum is
inconvenient.”
Reasons for applying forum non
conveniens:
1) to prevent abuse of the court’s
processes (prevent harassment of
defendant, dissuade a non-resident
plaintiff from choosing the forum
because of larger jury verdicts,
etc.)
2) burdensome on the court or
taxpayers (severe backlog of
cases)
3) local machinery is inadequate to
effectuate a right (no way for court
to secure evidence and attendance
of witnesses)
4) avoid global forum shopping
English and Scottish courts have applied
FNC when there was “another available and
more appropriate forum, in which the ends
of justice would be better served in view of
the interests of all parties, by eliminating
the vexatious or oppressive character of the
pending proceedings and by removing any
unfairness to either party which would
result from trial in the forum seized of the
case.”
Heine vs. New York Insurance Co.
(1940)
FACTS: An action for recovery on life
insurance policies made and issued in
Germany was filed by German citizens in
Oregon against a NY corporation.
HELD: The Oregon court may refuse to
exercise JD. The courts of Germany and
New York are open and functioning and
competent to take JD of the controversies,
and service can be made upon the
defendants in either of such JDs. To

require the defendants to defend the
actions in Oregon would impose upon
them great and unnecessary
inconvenience and expense. The courts of
t h i s cou n t r y a re e st a b l i sh e d a n d
maintained primarily to determine
controversies between its citizens and
those having business there, and
manifestly the court may protect itself
against a flood of litigation over contracts
made and to be performed in a foreign
country, where the parties and witnesses
are nonresidents of the forum, and no
reason exists why the liability, if any,
cannot be enforced in the courts of the
country where the cause of action arose,
or in the state where the defendant was
organized and has its principal offices.
In re: Union Carbide
(1986)
FACTS: An industrial disaster in a
chemical plant of Union Carbide in
Bhopal, India caused deaths and injuries
to a number of residents. India enacted
the Bhopal Gas Leak Disaster Act, which
authorized the government (Union of
India) to represent the victims. The UOI
filed a complaint in NY in behalf of the
victims. Union carbide moved to dismiss
on the ground of forum non conveniens.
HELD: Indian courts have JD, not US
courts. Even if UCC has domicile in the
US, this loses significance because it gave
its consent to Indian JD. Moreover, the
findings of the court show that the proof
bearing on the issues to be tried is almost
entirely located in India (principal
witnesses and documents, detailed
designs, implementation of plans, safety
precautions, etc.).
Wing On Company vs. Syyap
(1967)
FACTS: Syyap failed pay Wing On, a NY-
based partnership, its obligation for a
contract of purchase of clothing material.
Wing On filed an action in the Philippines
against Syyap, but Syyap contends that
the trial court should have declined JD on
the ground of forum non conveniens.
HELD: Forum non conveniens is
inapplicable. Unless the balance is
strongly in favor of the defendant, the
plaintiff’s choice of forum should be
rarely disturbed, and furthermore, the
Page 9 of 92
Conflict of Laws
consideration of inadequacy to enforce
the judgment, which is one of the
important factors to be considered in the
application of said principle, would
precisely constitute a problem to the
plaintiff if the local courts decline to
assume JD on the basis of said principle,
considering that defendant is a resident
of the Philippines.
There is no existing catalogue of
circumstances that will justify sustaining
a plea of forum non conveniens but, in
general, both public and private interests
should be weighed.
When the forum is the only state where
JD can be obtained over the defendant
and, in addition, some relation with the
parties exists or when the forum provides
procedural remedies not available in
another state, the forum court may not
resist imposition upon its JD.
Bank of America vs. CA
(2003)
FACTS: The spouses Litonjua are
engaged in the shipping business; they
executed a contract where Bank of
America was made the trustee of their
businesses. But the businesses suffered
losses in the hands of the bank, so the
spouses filed a case for damages for
breach of trust and accounting of
revenues in the Philippines. Bank of
America filed a Motion to Dismiss on the
ground of forum non conveniens.
HELD: While it is within the discretion of
the trial court to abstain from assuming
JD on the ground of forum non conveniens,
it should do so only after vital facts are
established, to determine whether special
circumstances require the court’s
d e s i s t a n c e ; a n d t h e p ro p r i e t y o f
dismissing a case based on this principle
of forum non conveniens requires a factual
determination, hence it is more properly
considered a matter of defense.
The SC also held in Philsec. Investment vs.
CA that the doctrine of FNC should not
be used as a ground for a motion to
dismiss because Sec. 1 Rule 16 of ROC
does not include said doctrine as a
ground.
! Notes!
Forum non conveniens:
1) prevent abuse of court processes

2) burdensome on the court/
taxpayers
3) prevent global forum shopping
✪ FNC is not something that
automatically applies; its
application rests in the sound
discretion of the court
✪ in Wing On vs. Syyap. Prof.
Pangalangan does not agree
with the holding that “unless the
balance is strongly in favor of
the defendant, the plaintiff’s
choice of forum should rarely be
disturbed”, because in the first
place, it was the plaintiff who
chose that forum.
_______________
2. Assume Jurisdiction
When the court assumes JD, it may apply
forum law or foreign law, although forum
law should be applied whenever there is
good reason to do so because the forum
law is the basic law.
Factors which justify the application of
internal law:
1) A specific law of the forum
decrees that internal law
should apply
Examples of this are Art. 16 of Civil Code
(lex nationale governs testate and intestate
succession of the person whose succession
is under consideration); Art. 829 of the Civil
Code (revocation of wills outside RP); and
Art. 819 (prohibition on joint wills by
Filipinos).
✪ Example: prohibitory or
mandatory laws of the forum
2) The proper foreign law was
not properly pleaded and
proved
Our courts may not take judicial cognizance
of any foreign law; hence, failure to plead
and prove foreign law leads to the
presumption that it is the same as forum
law.
✪ Under the Rules of Court, the
foreign law may be proved by:
a) official publication
b) certification form the officer
with official custody, under
seal, and the Phil. Embassy
must certify that such officer
has official custody, etc.: that
Page 10 of 92
Conflict of Laws
it is the law in force at the
time etc., etc.
Fleumer vs. Hix
(1930)
FA C T S : F l e u m e r, t h e s p e c i a l
administrator of the estate of Hix,
appealed the denial of the probate of
Hix’s will, alleging that since the will was
executed in West Virginia by a resident
therein, West Virginia law should govern.
HELD: The courts of the Philippines are
not authorized to take judicial notice of
the laws of the various States of the
American Union. Such laws must be
proved as facts. Here the requirements of
law were not met. There was no showing
that the book from which an extract was
taken was printed or published under the
authority of the state of West Va. as
provided in the Code of Civil Procedure;
nor was the extract from the law attested
by the certificate of the officer having
charge of the original.
Philippine Trust Co. vs. Bohanan
(1960)
FACTS: The will of Bohanan was
admitted to probate; in the probate he
was declared to be a citizen of Nevada. In
the hearing for the proposed project of
partition, Nevada law was not
introduced. Bohanan’s widow questioned
the validity of the will under Philippine
law; however, if Nevada law was to be
applied, the will would be valid.
HELD: The law of Nevada, being a
foreign law, can only be proved in our
courts in the form and manner provided
for by our Rules. However, it has been
found that during the hearing for the
motion of the widow Bohanan for
withdrawal of her share, the foreign law
was introduced in evidence by her
counsel. In addition, the other heirs do
not dispute the provisions of the Nevada
law. Under these circumstances, the
pertinent laws of Nevada can be taken
judicial notice of by the court, without
proof of such law having been offered at
the hearing of the project of partition.
As the validity of the testamentary
dispositions are to be governed by the
national law of the testator, the order of
the court approving the project of

partition in accordance with Nevada law
must be affirmed.
3) The case falls under any of
the exceptions to the
application of foreign law
a) The foreign law is contrary to
an important public policy of
the forum
b) The foreign law is penal in
nature
c) The foreign law is procedural
in nature
d) The foreign law purely fiscal
or administrative in nature
e) The application of the foreign
law will work undeniable
injustice to the citizens of the
forum
f) The case involves real or
personal property situated in
the forum
g) The application of the foreign
law might endanger the vital
interest of the state
h) The foreign law is contrary to
good morals
V. Choice of Law
A. The Correlation between
Jurisdiction and Choice of Law
1) The factors that justify
exercise of judicial jurisdiction
may be the same factors used
to determine choice of law
2) If the forum applies its
internal law because it has a
real interest, the outcome of
the case will be foreordained
by the forum
3) Generally, forum will apply its
internal law so plaintiff will
bring suit where internal law is
favorable to him
A court may exercise jurisdiction but apply
foreign law or not exercise jurisdiction but
the state’s internal law will be applied.
B. Approaches to Choice of Law
All choice of law problems seeks to
determine the (1) legal system to apply
and; (2) extent of its application.
1. Traditional Approaches
- theories that emphasize simplicity,
convenience and uniformity
Page 11 of 92
Conflict of Laws
a. VESTED RIGHT THEORY
- An act done in a foreign
jurisdiction gives rise to a right if
the laws of that state provides so.
The right vests and he can bring
suit in any forum he chooses.
- The forum refers to the law of the
place of the “last act” necessary to
complete the cause of action.
(place of injury).
- The law of the state of the last act
is considered the law applicable to
all substantive issues of the case.
Gray vs. Gray
(1934)
FACTS:
• Wife sued husband for damages in
New Hampshire where they are
residents.
• The personal injuries subject of the
complaint as caused by the H while
driving from New Hamphire to Maine.
• Accident happened in Maine.
• In Maine, spouses are barred from
maintianing an action against each
other while there is no prohibition in
New Hampshire.
HELD: The wife cannot recover. The
effect of the prohibition in Maine is to
divest the W of any cause of action
against H. If there is a conflict between
lex fori and lex loci (the law of the
country where an action is brought), lex
loci governs in torts in respect to the legal
effect and incidents of the act.
The status as spouses is determined by
New Hampshire law but the incidents of
that status is governed by the law of the
place of the transaction (Maine).
Alabama Great Southern Railroad vs.
Carroll
(1892)
FACTS:
• Carroll is an employee of Alabama RR.
Both are residents of Alabama.
• Caroll, who was operating a railroad
from Tennesee, through Alaban to
Mississippi.
• Caroll was injured in Mississippi in the
course of work due to the negligence of
co-EE in Mississippi.
• Mississippi bars the recovery of an
employee against an employee when
 Conflict of Laws

the negligence is caused by a fellow 2) compare carefully the

employee. proffered rule of law & the
result of its application with
• Alabama makes employer absolutely the rule of the forum & its
liable for injuries suffered by the effect
employees in the course of the 3) appraise these results from
employment. the standpoint of justice
between the litigants or of
• Suit was filed in Alabama.
considerations of social policy

HELD: There can be no recovery in one 2. Modern Approaches

sate for injuries to the person sustained in
another unless the infliction of the
a. PLACE OF THE MOST
injuries is actionable under the law of the SIGNIFICANT RELATIONSHIP
state in which the injuries were received. - To determine the above, the
Although it is claimed that the negligent factual contcts of each case are
conduct was done in Alabama, the injury considered in the light of the
sustained creates the cause of action and factors below:
not the negligence. (law of the place of i. needs of the interstate
injury) and intl system
ii. relevant policies of the
Criticisms to the Approach: failure to resolve concerned states
conflicts cases with considerations of policy iii. relevant policies of other
and fairness. interested states
iv. protection of justified
expectations of the
b. LOCAL LAW THEORY parties
- In conflict of laws cases, the court v. basic policies underlying
does not enforce a foreign right the particular field of law
but a right created by its own laws vi. certainty, predictability
by treating the case as a purely and uniformity of result
domestic case that does not vii. ease in the determination
involve a foreign element. and application of law to
- The power of a state to regulate be applied
within its territory has no limitation
except as imposed by its own Examples of application:
positive law i. torts – place of injury,
- criticism: appeals to narrow-mined place of tortious conduct,
who favors an exaggerated local domicile, residence or
policy because a sovereign can do nationality of parties,
as they please, depreciating the place where relationship
practical and equitable is entered
considerations that should control ii. contracts – choice of law
the case. of the parties, place of
contracting, place of
performance, domicile,
c. Caver’s Principles of residence, nationailty,
Preference place of incorporation and
place of business
- The choice-of-law decisions should
b e m a d e w i t h r e fe r e n c e t o
principles of preference which are Auten vs. Auten
conceived to provide a fair (1954)
accommodation of conflicting state
FACTS:
policies and afford fair treatment
• Spouses were married and lived in
to the parties.
- Caver ’s principles have a England.
territorialist bias; it looks to the • Spouses executed support agreement in
place where the significant events NY.
occurred or where the legal • When H failed to pay support, the W
relationship is centered. sued H for legal separation in England
- Court should: on the ground of adultery.
1) s c r u t i n i z e t h e e v e n t / • W sued in NY for enforcement of the
transaction giving rise to the agreement.
issue
Page 12 of 92

• H argued that W’s that legal separation
suit in England is a violation of said
agreement, hence his obligation was
extinguished.
HELD: English law should govern the
parties. England has all the truly
significant contacts while the nexus to NY
is entirely fortuitous.
England is the seat of marital domicile
and the place where W & children were
to be, it has the greatest concern in
defining and regulating the rights and
duties existing under the agreement and
the circumstances that affect it. Whereas
NY is only the place of the agreement and
where the trustee, where moneys will be
paid for the account the W & children,
had his office.
In applying the “grouping of contacts”
theory, courts, instead of regarding as
conclusive the intention of the parties or
the place of making or performance, lay
emphasis rather on the law of the place
which has the most significant contacts
with the matter in dispute.
Haag vs. Barnes
(1961)
FACTS:
• Haag, an NY secretary, bore Barnes, an
Illinois lawyer, an illegitimate child.
• Both parties entered into a support
agreement in Chicago. The agreement
contained a choice of law clause in
favor of Illinois.
• Haag & child went back to live in NY
and filed support action there against
Barnes.
• Howver, under NY law, agreement
bewteen parents of an IC is not binding
unless the same be judically approved
• Barnes defense: Illinois agreement bars
suit.
HELD: Suit is barred by the prior support
agreement. Court found that Illinois has
the most significant contacts. It is what
the parties intended to apply, the place of
performance, the place of business of B &
the agents and the place where support
are being made compared to NY whose
contacts are of less weight & significance.
(place of liaison & residence of H & child)
Page 13 of 92
Conflict of Laws
Criticisms to approach: no standard to
e va l u a t e t h e r e l a t i v e s i g n i f i c a n c e /
importance of each contact such that court
m ay u s e a p p ro a c h t o s u p p o r t a ny
preconceived result without explaining its
real motives.
b. Interest Analysis
b. INTEREST ANALYSIS
- Resolve conflicts cases by looking
at the policy behind the laws of the
involved states and the interest
each state has in applying its own
law.
- Tasks of the court:
1st: determine whether the case
involves a true, false or apparent
conflict (false conflict: only one
state has an actual interest in
having the law applied and the
failure to apply the other state law
will not impair its policy)
2nd: if there is apparent or true
conflict, court should take a
second look on the policies and
interests of the states. If only one
has a real interest, the other is
insubstantial, then there is false
conflict. If both have real interests
in applying their law, then the
apparent conflict is a true conflict.
Babcock vs. Jackson
(1963)
FACTS:
• Babcock & Jackson, NY residents, met a
car accident in Ontario due to Jackson’s
fault.
• When B sued J in NY for damages, J
moved to dismiss it on the ground that
Ontario bars recovery under a guest
statute.
• NY does not have a similar rule.
HELD: B should be allowed to recover.
NY had a greater & more direct interest
than Ontario. NY’s policy is to afford
compensation to a guest against
tortfeasor host while Ontario’s policy is to
prevent fraudulent collusion to the
p re ju di ce of O n t a r i o de f e n da n t s-
insurance companies. Thus, Ontario had
no interest in denying a remedy to a NY
guest against a NY host.
The rule on tort claim is: Where the issue
involves standard of conduct, law of the
place of the tort is controlling, but as to
other issues, court must apply the law of
the state which has the strongest interest
in the resolution of the issue presented.

Criticisms to Approach: not all state
legislatures publish reports that explain the
background and purpose of the laws, thus
court is left to speculate on the purpose of
the law and not all reflected policy or had a
purpose other than to decide cases.
! Notes!
✪ Pangalangan on Interest analysis:
why consider what the state wants
when interests of individuals are in
issue?
c. COMPARATIVE IMPAIRMENT
- subordination of the state
objective which would be least
impaired
- Court should weigh conflicting
interests and apply the law of the
state whose interest would be
more impaired if its laws were not
followed.
d. FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS
- this approach looks into:
1) the general policies of the
state beyond those reflected
in substantive law
2) policies and values reflecting
effective and harmonious
relationship between states
ex. Reciprocity, advancement
o f m u l t i s t a t e a c t i v i t y,
protecting justifiable
expectations, evenhandedness
and effectiveness.
- after determining these policies,
court should then weigh the
relative strength of a state policy
- HOW? Court should consider
whether the law of a state reflects
an “emerging” or “regressing”
policy.
e.CHOICE-INFLUENCING
CONSIDERATIONS
- 5 major choice-influencing
considerations:
1) predictability of results
2) maintenance of interstate and
int’l order
3) simplification of the judicial
task
4) application of the better rule
of law
5) advancement of the forum’s
governmental interest
- court should prefer a law that
make good socioeconomic sense
and are sound in view of present
day conditions
Page 14 of 92
Conflict of Laws
- Criticism: no principled or objective
standard to determine “better
rule”.
! Notes!
Traditional approaches do not consider
policy; all modern approaches look at policy.
______________
VI. The Problem of Characterization
A. Characterization and the
Single-Aspect Method
Single-aspect method: choice of law
theories traditionally concentrated on one
element of a situation to connect case to
particular legal community.
Goal: simplicity, convenience, uniformity
Multi-aspect method: modern approach by
which all important factors (non/territorial)
are analyzed.
The applicable law is arrived at by
elaborating policies & purposes underlying
rules, and the needs of international
intercourse.
Goal: just resolution of case
The Philippines follows single-aspect
method. Our conflicts rules are mostly
found in the Civil Code.
Art 15: Laws relating to family rights &
duties, or to the status, condition and legal
capacity of persons are binding upon
citizens of the Philippines, even though
living abroad.
Art 16: Real property as well as personal
property is subject to the law of the country
where it is situated.
However, intestate and testamentary
succession, both with respect to the order
of succession and to the amount of
successional rights and to the intrinsic
validity of testamentary provisions shall be
regulated by the National law of the person
whose succession is under consideration,
whatever may be the nature of the property
and regardless of the country wherein said
property may be found. (AOI)
Art 17: The forms and solemnities of
contracts, wills, and other public
instruments shall be governed by the laws
of the country in which they are executed.
When the acts referred to are executed
before the diplomatic or consular officials of

the Republic of the Philippines in a foreign
country, the solemnities established by
Philippine laws shall be observed in their
execution.
Prohibitive laws concerning persons, their
acts or property, and those which have for
their object public order, public policy and
good customs shall not be rendered
ineffective by laws or judgments
promulgated, or by determinations or
conventions agreed upon in a foreign
country.
The rules specify geographical location in
accordance with traditional approach. The
problem with this: inherent rigidity, unjust
decisions.
Solution: Characterization, Renvoi, Escape
devices
Characterization: the process by which a
court assigns a disputed question to an area
in substantive law. It is a part of legal
analysis and a pervasive problem since at
least 2 jurisdictions with divergent laws are
involved.
Two Types of Characterization:
1. Subject-matter
Characterization
This calls for classification of a factual
situation into a legal category. It is
significant in a single-aspect method
because the legal category to which an
issue is assigned determines governing law
Gibbs vs. Gov’t. of PI
(1933)
FACTS: Spouses Allison & Eva were
residents & citizens of California owning
parcels of land in Manila. Eva died.
Allison, as administrator files petition to
declare lands in his favor pursuant to
California law. California Civil Code
provides that upon wife’s death previous
to husband, community property belongs
absolutely to husband.
HELD: California Civil Code will not
apply. The law of the place where land is
situated governs its descent, alienation
&transfer & for the effect & construction
of wills & other conveyances.
As mandated by Philippine law, the lands
were acquired as community property in
the conjugal partnership. The wife was
vested with a title equal to that of her
husband. Upon her death, if there are no
Page 15 of 92
Conflict of Laws
obligations of the decedent, her share in
the conjugal property is transmitted to
the heirs by succession.
Though the court was silent on the matter
of characterization, it had the task of
categorizing the issue as one involving:
b) property to be governed by
lex situs, or
c) succession to be governed by
d e c e d e n t ’s n a t i o n a l l a w
(California)
Characterization problems are considered a
threat to traditional choice-of-law theories
whose aims are uniformity & predictability
of results.
Problems:
A) C, is adopted in the Philippines by a
former Filipino citizen and moves to the US
with her adoptive mother, M. By M’s laws, C
will not be an heir. Will C be entitled to an
intestate share in M’s estate?
The court would have to decide whether it
is a Q relating to
1. Legality & effects of adoption:
law of state where legal relationship of
adoption was established or where the
adoption decree was granted shall govern;
or
2. Succession: adopter’s personal
law shall prevail
B) Principal authorizes a person to act as his
agent in another country. Agent commits a
negligent act. What law will determine the
principal’s liability?
It depends on the court’s characterization
of the case as:
1. Contractual: law of the place
where the contract of agency was entered
into; or
2. Tortious: law of the place where
tortuous conduct or injury occurred
2. Substance-Procedure
Dichotomy
Directs the court to the extent it will apply
foreign law.
If issue substantive: court may apply
foreign law
If issue procedural: follow forum law
Why apply forum law to matters of
procedure?

One of the main goals of a rational system
of CL rules: Rights & Duties of parties
arising from a legal situation shall not be
substantially varied because the forum in w/
c action is brought.
Courts of all civilized states now seek to
protect parties, by referring to foreign law,
against a substantial change of position
because of fortuitous circumstance that suit
was brought in that forum.
The means provided for compulsion, or the
limitation upon compulsion are in most
cases of equal practical importance to the
declaration of the validity of the plaintiff’s
claim.
Such all inclusive reference to foreign law is
never made. It would be too burdensome
on the part of the forum and administration
of justice will be delayed. Thus, it is
necessary to limit the scope of reference to
foreign law.
This limitation excludes phases of the case
which make the administration of foreign
law inconvenient or violative of local policy.
In such instances, local rules of the forum
are applied & are classified as matters of
procedure.
Grant vs. Mcauliffe
(1953)
FACTS: Plaintiffs, Grant, et al., (California
residents) were injured in Arizona when
their vehicle collided with that of Pullen’s
(California resident), who died of
accident. The suit against estate of
Pullen filed by Grant to recover damages
was dismissed because under Arizona
law- “a tort action not commenced before
the death of the tortfeasor must be
abated”. But under California law, an
action for tort survives the death of
tortfeasor.
HELD: Survival statutes are procedural.
Thus, California (forum) law applies.
Forum law governs if issue is procedural.
Under California Civil Code the action
out of a wrong resulting to a physical
injury shall not abate because of the death
of the wrongdoer. Plaintiff’s cause of
action survives Pullen’s death.
The reaction to Grant was generally
negative. It was criticized as being based on
an erroneous characterization greatly
influenced by “sympathy”.
Page 16 of 92
Conflict of Laws
Other view: Correct result but arrived at
using dubious method.
Currie: The court availed of one of several
escape devices - characterization. It
characterized the problem differently, such
producing the result previously recognized
as the sound result.
This device is not ideal. It is better if courts
could expressly state the considerations that
helped them determine the results and
indicate clearly how these considerations
will be used in other cases.
No objective standard has been suggested.
An attempt to explain the court decision in
terms of “demands of justice” or “social
policy” would create uncertainty & arouse
criticism.
Procedural issues are governed by forum
law so that the court will not be unduly
burdened by task of studying peculiarities of
another legal system. It must be noted,
though, that some matters cannot be
clearly defined as procedural or substantive.
Two Issues whose classification (as
procedural or substantive) is debatable:
1) Statute of Frauds
It is considered substantive if words of law
relate to forbidding the creation of
obligation. One that forbids the
enforcement of the obligation is
characterized as procedural
Marie vs. Garrison: Defendant maintains
that the NY Statute of Frauds affects the
remedy upon a contract w/in its terms—a
rule prescribing evidence & deemed a rule
of procedure. Garrison claims that rules of
the forum must be followed. Marie claims
that NY law was constructed as a rule of
substance going into existence of contract;
determined by lex loci contractus.
Issue: Whether a contract declared ‘void’ by
a stature still subsists as a contract w/ the
only effect of depriving party of a remedy or
mere evidence.
Held: It was a word of substance because
the statute provided that the contract of
sale of any interest in land shall be void
unless it was in writing ex contrario to a law
stating that ‘no action shall be brought’ of
the requirement was not complied with.
2) Statutes of Limitations (SL) & Borrowing
Statutes
Statutes of limitations are traditionally
classified as ‘procedural’ because they only

barred the legal remedy w/out impairing the
substantive right involved.
Thus, a suit can still be maintained in
another JD w/c has a longer SL. However,
certain SL’s have been classified as
substantive for conflicts purposes if
providing a shorter period for certain claim
types falling w/in wider class covered by the
general SL.
Specificity test: to determine whether an SL
is substantive or procedural.
An SL of a foreign country is treated as
“substantive” when limitation was directed
to newly created liability so specifically as to
warrant saying that it qualified the right
Borrowing statutes
- The filing of the case is barred in
the forum if it is already barred by
the statute of limitations in the
place where the cause of action
arose.
- Purpose: Many states, the
Philippines among others, have
passed borrowing statutes to
eliminate forum-shopping.
However, in the case of Cadalin, the court
said that to enforce the borrowed statute
w o u l d c o n t rave n e p u b l i c p o l i c y o n
protection of labor.
Cadalin vs. POEA Administrator
(1994)
FACTS: Cadalin et al. instituted a class
suit with the POEA for money claims
arising from their recruitment by AIBC
and BRII for pretermination of
employment contracts. Under Bahrain
law where some of the complainants
were deployed, the prescriptive period
for claims arising out of a contract of
employment is one year.
HELD: Even though a law on
prescription may be considered as
substantial or procedural, its
characterization as either becomes
irrelevant when the country of the forum
has a “borrowing statute.” Said statute
has the practical effect of treating the
foreign statute of limitation as one of
substance. Under the ROC of the
Philippines, it is provided that “if by the
laws of the state or country where the
cause of action arose, the action is barred,
it is also barred in the Philippines.” The
Bahrain law on prescription should apply.
Page 17 of 92
Conflict of Laws
However, it cannot be enforced as it
would contravene the public policy on
the protection to labor. Philippine law
will then be applied.
B. Depecage
From depecer, which means “to dissect.”
Different aspects of a case involving a
foreign element may be governed by
different systems of laws.
Von Mehren & Trautman: A man dies
intestate domiciled in state A & w/ movable
properties in State B.
How will the man’s estate be divided?
State A conflict rules refer to laws of
domicile. Intestate law of State B gives the
widow a definite share in the estate of
deceased. But the determination of WON
the woman claiming the share is a “wife” is
referred to family law, not laws on
succession.
Issues of law governing movable properties
& successional rights of spouse are of
primary importance, embodying substance
of claim. Validity of marriage ‘affects
solution because it answers a preliminary or
incidental Q.
The presence of an incidental Q is one
instance which calls for the employment of
depecage.
Merits of Depecage:
This technique allows other relevant
interests of parties to be addressed. Thus, it
permits courts to arrive at a functionally
sound result w/out rejecting the
methodology of the traditional approach.
This nuanced single-aspect method employs
depecage by choice.
Haumschild vs. Continental Casualty
(1959)
FACTS: Haumschild and Gleason were
married in Wisconsin, their domicile.
Haumschild was injured in California
while riding a motor truck driven by
Gleason. Their marriage was later
annulled. An action for recovery of
damages was filed by Haumschild in
Wisconsin. Continental alleges that under
California law, a spouse is immune from
suit by the other spouse.
HELD: The law of the domicile ought to
be applied in any issue of incapacity to
sue based upon family relationship. The

policy reason for denying the capacity to
sue (preventing family discord) more
properly lies within the sphere of family
law, where domicile usually controls the
law to be applied, than it does tort law,
where the place of the injury generally
determines the substantive law which
will govern.
The court decided that the law of the place
of accident (California) governed the issue
of negligence while Wisconsin law governed
the issue of interspousal immunity. The
characterization process was taken one step
further by not limiting the classification to
the case itself but likewise, to the issue
arising from the case.
The 1969 Restatement 2d adopted
depecage & set out a number of factors to
be considered in choosing the applicable
law:
a. needs of interstate & international
system
b. relevant policies of the forum
c. relevant policies of other interested
states & the relative interests of
those states in the determination
of a particular issue
d. protection of the justified
expectations of the parties
e. the basic policies underlying the
particular field of law
f. certainty, predictability, uniformity
of results, and
g. ease in determination & application
of law to be applied
The consideration of any elements &
acceptance by courts of depecage help ease
restrictions of single aspect method.
Courts not compelled to apply entire law to
all aspects of case…that might produce
egregious results. Cutting up the case issue
by issue is fair & reasonable.
But even if a useful tool in modern choice-
of-law analysis, the express reference to
depecage in case law, both in US & the Phil
still uncommon.
VII. The Problem of Renvoi
Page 18 of 92
Conflict of Laws
A. Definition
Renvoi – a procedure whereby a jural
matter presented is referred by the conflict
of laws rules of the forum to a foreign state,
the conflict of laws rule of which, in turn,
refers the matter to the law of the forum or
a third state.
Remission: reference is made back to the
law of the forum
Transmission: reference to a third state
Renvoi has been employed in cases where
the domiciliary and nationality laws are
applied to the same individual in issues
involving succession, domestic relations and
real properties.
Renvoi:
State A State B
Art. 16 Internal law
renvoi Conflict-of-
(remission)
!
B. Various ways of dealing with
the Problem of Renvoi
4 Ways of Dealing with the Problem of
Renvoi (Prof. Griswold):
1) if the conflicts rules of the forum
court refer the case to the law of
another state, it is deemed to
mean only the “internal” law of
that state (internal law: that which
would be applied to a domestic
case that has no conflict-of-laws
complications) – rejects the renvoi
2) the court may accept the renvoi
and refer not just to another
state’s “internal” law but to the
“whole” law (includes choice-of-law
rules applicable in multi-state
cases)
Aznar vs. Garcia
(1963)
FACTS: The will of Edward Christensen,
a domiciliary of the Philippines, was
admitted to probate, and a project of
partition was proposed. Edward’s

illegitimate child opposed the project of
partition on the ground that the
distribution of the estate should be
governed by Philippine law. The lower
court found that Edward was a US
citizen; hence the successional rights and
intrinsic validity of the will should be
governed by California.
HELD: Philippine law should apply. Art.
16 of the Phil. Civil Code provide that the
national law of the decedent governs the
validity of his testamentary dispositions.
Such national law means the law on
conflict of laws of the California code,
which authorizes the reference or return
of the question to the law of the testator’s
domicile. The conflict of laws rule in
California precisely refers back the case,
when a decedent is not domiciled in
California, to the law of his domicile (the
Philippines in the CAB). The Phil. court
must apply its own law as directed in the
conflict of laws rule of the state of the
decedent.
3) by desistance or mutual disclaimer
of JD – The forum court upon
reference to another state’s law
sees that such law is limited in
application to its own national and
has no provision for application to
a non-national.
— Same result as the acceptance
of the renvoi doctrine but the
process used by the forum court is
to desist applying the foreign law.
4) “foreign court” theory (double
renvoi) – the forum court would
assume the same position the
foreign court would take were it
litigated in the foreign state
Disadvantage to renvoi: if both courts follow
the same theory, there would be no end to
the case since the courts would be referring
it back to each other. It gives rise to
situations that have been invariably
described as resembling “revolving doors,” a
“game of lawn tennis,” a “logical cabinet of
mirrors” or a “circulus inextricabilis.”
Annesley, Davidson vs. Annesley
(1926)
FACTS:
• The testatrix, a British subject, died in
France.
• She is domiciled in France according to
English law but not according to
French law
Page 19 of 92
Conflict of Laws
• She made a will in English form
wherein she disposed her property in
favor of her daughter, and stipulated
that she had no intention of
abandoning her domicile in England. If
she was a domiciliary of France, she
could only dispose of 1/3 of her
personal property.
• To determine the domicile of the
testatrix, the French law warrants that
the law of the person’s nationality shall
govern if such foreigner is not legally
domiciled in France.
• However, the English law, refers the
law of the nationality back to France.
HELD: The English court accepted the
revoi and applied its municipal law.
The domicile of the testatrix at the time of
her death was French. Applying English
law, the fact of her residence in France
coupled with animus manendi showed her
intention to abandon her English
domicile even if she had not complied
with the formalities required under
French law to become a French domicile.
According to French municipal law, the
law applicable in the case of a foreigner
not legally domiciled in France is the law
of that person’s nationality, which is
British. But British law refers the question
back to French law, the law of the
domicile. And according to French law,
the French courts, in administering the
movable property of a deceased foreigner
who, according to the law of his country
is domiciled in France, and whose
property must, according to that law, be
applied in accordance with the law of the
country in which he was domiciled, will
apply French municipal law, even if he
had not complied with the French
requirements for acquisition of domicile.
Therefore, the testatrix had power only to
dispose of one-third thereof by her will.
*SINGLE REVOI - where the foreign
court’s rules might return the issue to
the original forum court, the latter shall
accept the first remission and apply its
own internal laws.
*DOUBLE REVOI
! Notes!
Options which the forum court may do:
a) accept the renvoi (apply forum
law)
b) reject the renvoi (apply the
internal law of the foreign state)

c)
desistance/mutual disclaimer
d)
“foreign court” theory (double
renvoi)
- the difficulty with the foreign court
theory is that the forum court will
have to anticipate or guess how
the foreign court will act.
✪ Renvoi is optional, based on the
discretion of the court and the
facts of the case.
_______________
C. Usefulness of Renvoi
Renvoi has been used to avoid unjust
results.
University of Chicago vs. Dater
(1936)
FACTS:
• George Dater and John Price obtained a
loan which was secured by a property
they owned in Chicago.
• Spouses Dater and Spouse Price
executed a trust deed and promissory
notes in favor of the University of
Chicago for the loan.
• The trust mortgage and notes were
signed by the parties in Michigan. But
the said notes were payable in Chicago.
• Upon failure to pay the loan, the
University instituted a suit in Michigan
against spouses Dater and Mrs. Price
(Mr. Price having died earlier), the
court ruled that there was no cause of
action against Mrs. Price, because
under Michigan law a married woman
has no capacity to enter into an
obligation such as this, hence the note
and trust deed were void.
ISSUE: Whether Michigan or Illinois law
should be applied
HELD: Under the law of Illinois, the
capacity of Mrs. Price is governed by
Michigan law (as held in the similar case
of Burr vs. Beckler, where the court said
that since the contract was completed in
Florida, that state governed her capacity
to contract). In this case, the contract was
complete in Michigan, and it governs her
capacity to contract. Since she was not
competent to contract under Michigan
law, her note and trust deed were void.
In the Dater decision, Michigan protected
the interest of a Michigan wife especially
since Illinois disclaimed any desire in
Page 20 of 92
Conflict of Laws
applying its law. Also, uniformity of results
was promoted in spite of discrepancies in
the choice-of-law rules of the involved
states. With renvoi, the Dater decision was
made dependent on substantive law and
not on the incidental law of the forum.
Objections to Renvoi
Critics:
1) renvoi would place the court in a
“perpetually-enclosed circle form
which it would never emerge and
that it would never find a suitable
body of substantive rules to apply
t o a p a r t i c u l a r c a s e .” T h e
theoretical problem presented is
that renvoi is workable only if one
of the states rejects it and that it
achieves harmony of decisions only
if the states concerned do not
agree on applying it the same way.
Griswold: the objection is based on a false
premise; as long as remission is to the
state’s internal law alone there will be a
stop to the “endless chain of reference.”
2) Courts may be unnecessarily
burdened with the task of
identifying the choice-of-law rules
of another state.
Pangalangan: from a practical perspective,
the forum court will not use renvoi if, in the
first place, it cannot ascertain what the
conflict-of-law rules of the foreign state are.
Inapplicability of Renvoi in a False Conflict
US Restatement (Second) of Conflict of
Laws: renvoi to be used when there is a
disinterested forum, to ensure that only the
laws advancing the policies of the interested
states will be applied. If the choice-of-law
rules of the state to which reference is
made refers the case back to the forum
state, the court may use this situation to
determine if both states have an interest in
having their laws applied or if there is
merely a false conflict.
Pfau vs. Trent Aluminum Co.
(1970)
FACTS:
• Trent (a New Jersey domiciliary)
agreed to drive Pfau (a Connecticut
domiciliary) from Iowa to Missouri.
• While in Iowa, Trent’s vehicle collided
with an oncoming vehicle causing
injuries to Pfau.
 Conflict of Laws

• Pfau filed suit in New Jersey against goes to 7 surviving children from
Trent Aluminum Co. (registered owner
his first and second wives
of the car) for the damages he
• When the residuary estate was
sustained while a passenger in Trent’s
distributed equally to the 7 surviving
car.
children, testator ’s 3 illegitimate
• Conneticut repealed its guest statute
children opposed the project for
and now allows guest passengers to
partition since it allegedly deprived
recover from their host-drivers for
them of their legitime.
ordinary negligence.
• However, the trial court ruled that
• New Jersey likewise allows guest
under Art. 16 of the Phil. Civil Code,
passengers to recover from host drivers
the national law of the decedent is to be
in cases of ordinary negligence.
applied in testamentary succession and
• Iowa’s guest statute however provides
the law of Texas did not provide for
that the host-driver is not liable to his
legitimes.
passenger-guest for ordinary
negligence.
HELD: Texas law should apply. The
• Defendant argues that a foreign state’s
decedent was both a national and a
choice of law rule should be applied if
domiciliary of Texas, so that even
substative law were to be applied.
assuming Texas has a conflict of law rule
providing that the law of the domicile
HELD: The substantive law of a state may
should govern, the rule would not result
be applied without also applying its
in a reference back (renvoi) to Philippine
choice-of-law rules.  Choice-of-law
law, but would still refer to Texas law.
analysis is based on governmental
interests, and a nonforum state’s choice-
Nonetheless, if Texas has a conflicts rule,
of-law rule does not relate to its
adopting the rule of lex rei sitae, which
substantive interests in a litigation.  This
calls for the application of the law of the
is particularly true when a state adheres
place where the properties are situated,
to the lex loci rule, which has nothing do
renvoi would arise, where the properties
with the interests of government. 
involved are found in the Philippines. In
Consequently, applying Connecticut’s
the absence of proof as to the conflicts
choice-of-law rule would not promote
rule of Texas, it would be presumed to be
any of its governmental interests in this
the same as our local conflicts rule.
litigation and should not be applied. 

Connecticut and New Jersey law both

allow passenger-guest recovery. It
appears that Connecticut’s substantive
law allowing a guest to recover form his
host’s ordinary negligence would give it a
significant interest in having that law
applied to this case. Since Iowa has no
interest in this litigation, and since the
substantive laws of Connecticut and New
Jersey are the same, this case presents a
false conflict and the Connecticut plaintiff
should have the right to maintain an
action for ordinary negligence in New
Jersey.
Bellis vs. Bellis
(1968)
FACTS:
• Amos Bellis, a citizen and domiciliary
of Texas, executed a will in the PH
distributing his estate in the following
order: $40k to 1st wife; $120 to 3
illegitimate children in the PH or
($40k each) and; the remainder
Page 21 of 92
VIII. Notice and Proof of Foreign Law
A. Extent of Judicial Notice
It is the party whose cause of action or
defense depended upon the foreign law
who has the burden of proving the foreign
law.
Foreign law is treated as a question of fact
that should be properly pleaded and proved
In the Phils., judicial notice may be taken of
a foreign law with which the court is
evidently familiar. (Delgado vs. Republic)
Such familiarity may be because the law is
generally known such as American or
Spanish Law from which Phil law was
derived or the judge had previously ruled
upon it in other cases.
In US, courts are allowed to take judicial
knowledge of the law of sister states.

B. Proof of Foreign Law
Foreign law may be proved by presenting
either of the ff:
1. an official publication of the law
2. a copy of the law attested by the
officer having legal custody of the
record or by his deputy. If the
record is not kept in the
Philippines, it must be
accompanied with a certificate that
such officer has the custody (by
the consular officer of the Phil
embassy in said state and
authenticated by his seal of office)
Proof of documents executed abroad: any
public document executed abroad to be
used in the Phils must be duly authenticated
by the Phil. consul attaching his consular
seal
Depositions of non-residents in a foreign
country: they may be taken—
1) on notice before a secretary of
embassy or legation, consul
general, consul, vice-consul, or
consular agent of the Phils.
2) before such person or officer as
may be appointed by commission
or under letters rogatory.
3) before such person which the
parties have stipulated in writing
PCIB vs. Escolin
(1974)
FACTS:
• Spouses Charles and Linnie are both
citizens of Texas and residents of the
PH.
• Both mutually provided in their wills
that they would bequeath their estates
to each other upon their deaths, subject
to the condition, that upon the death of
whoever of them survived the other,
the remainder of what he/she would
inherit from the other is given to the
brothers and sisters of the latter.
• Linnie died first but no liquidation was
undertaken.
• Allegedly, Charles made statements t
the US inheritance tax authorities that
he had renounced his inheritance from
his spouse in favor of her other heirs
and which was he was supposed to
have ratified in the PH.
• When Charlies died, PCIB was
appointed as administrator of his estate
Page 22 of 92
Conflict of Laws
while Magno was appointed the
administratix of Linnie’s estate.
• Magno administrator sought the
application of Texas law under which
there was no system of legitime.
• PCIB being of the view that under
Texas law, there is a legitime of not less
than 1/4 of the conjugal estate.
HELD: Case remanded for parties to
present proof of the applicable Texas law.
The question of what are the laws of
Texas governing the matters in issue is, in
the first instance, one of fact, not of law.
Elementary is the rule that foreign laws
may not be taken judicial notice of and
have to be proven like any other fact in
dispute between the parties in any
proceeding, with the rare exception in
instances when the said laws are
already within the actual knowledge of
the court, such as when they are well
and generally known or they have
been actually ruled upon in other cases
before it and none of the parties
concerned do not claim otherwise.
In Re Estate of Johnson
(1918)
FACTS:
• Emil Johnsons, a native of Sweden and a
naturalized citizen of the Illinois, US, dies in
Manila, leaving a holographic will signed be
two witnesses only in accordance with the law
of Illinois.
• After the will had been probated, Johnson’s
daughter Ebba Ingeborg moved for the
annulment of the will and commencement of
the intestate proceeding on the ground that
testator was not a resident of Illinois and such
will was not made in conformity with the laws
of the State.
• In the hearing for the probate of the will of J,
alleged to be made in accordance with the laws
of Illinois, TC judge took judicial notice of the
said foreign law.
HELD: Trial court judge erred in taking judicial
notice.
The courts of the Philippines are not
authorized to take judicial notice of the laws of
the various States of the American Union,
although although they may take judicial notice
of the laws enacted by US Congress.
Nor can PH courts take judicial notice of the
same under “matters of public knowledge”. The
proper rule is to require proof of the statutes of
the States of the American Union whenever it is
determinative of the issue/s in PH courts.

Effects of Failure to Plead and Prove Foreign
Law
Forum court may:
1. dismiss the case for inability to
establish cause of action
2. apply law of the forum (courts conclude
that by failing to adduce proof, parties
acquiesce to the application of the
forum law since it is the basic law)
3. assume foreign law is the same as law
of the forum (processual presumption)
First approach: Dismiss the case
Walton vs. Arabian Oil Co.
(1956)
FACTS:
• Walton, a citizen and resident of
ARKANSAS, while defendant company
was a corporation incorporated in
DELAWARE, licensed to do business in
NY, and engaged in extensive business
activities in KSA
• While temporily in Saudi Arabia, the
vehicle driven by Walton collided with
defendant company’s truck.
• In his complaint, Walton did not allege the
Saudi Arabia law nor did he proved the
same during the trial.
• Hence, the trial court ruled in favor of
defendant as he did not take judicial notice
of S. Arabian law.
• Plaintiff, however argues that
HELD: Plaintiff has the burden of proving the
law of Saudi Arabia from which he shall base
his claim because under NewYork law, where
action was instituted, lex loci delicti is the
substantive la applied in tort cases.
A court may not decide a tort suit, based on an
injury sustained in a foreign country, based on
the laws of the foreign country, where neither
party pleads or proves the applicable foreign
law.
Since this case is in federal court on diversity
jurisdiction, the New York conflict of laws rule is
applicable which holds that the law of the place
of the tort is controlling. While New York
procedures allow a judge to take judicial notice
of foreign law (English law) even though neither
party proves it, the judge would be abusing his
discretion if he were to take notice of a foreign
system of laws unfamiliar to our own.
Walton claims that the facts of the incident
establish liability under the most “rudimentary”
principle of tort law. But there can be no
“rudimentary” elements of negligence in the
Page 23 of 92
Conflict of Laws
sense they are universally recognized and
without proof of Saudi law no decision should
have been rendered. New York law requires the
plaintiff to go forward to establish the foreign
law, which he intentionally failed to do.
ο The applicable tort principles necessary to
establish plaintiff’s claim are not
rudimentary. In countries where common
law does not prevail, these principles may
not exist or maybe vastly different.
Second approach: apply forum law when
the parties fail to introduce proof as to the
contents of the foreign law since it is
concluded that parties acquiesced to its
application.
Leary vs. Gledhill
(1951)
FACTS:
• Leary instituted this action in New Jersey
to recover the loan contracted in France
against Gledhill.
• Defendant moved to dismiss on the ground
that Leary’s proof were insufficient as there
is no pleading or proof of the law of France
where the transaction occurred.
HELD: L can recover despite failure to prove
French law. Altho the court recognizes the
fact that France adopts civil law rather than
common law principles, the cause of action of
L may still be pursued, as there are 3
presumptions that the court may apply in the
CAB. These are:
1, French law is the same as law of the
forum
2. French law, like all civilized
countries, recognizes certain
fundamental principles (taking of a
loan creates obligation to repay)
3. By failing to prove French law,
parties acquiesce to apply forum law
The third presumption does not present any
difficulties for it to be universally applied
regardless of the nature of the controversy.
This is more favored by the authorities and
has been followed in Sturm v. Sturm.
In the instant case, Rights of the parties are to
be determined by New Jersey laws which
permit recovery on the facts proven.
Zalamea vs. CA
(1993)
FACTS:

• Spouses Zalamea purchased airline tickets
from the Manila agent of Transworld
Airlines.
• However, on their way back, Mrs Zalamea
and her daughter were constrained to
purchase tickets from another airline.
• Zalamea filed an action against
Transworld Airlines before the RTC
Makati which granted them, among
others, moral damages.
• On appeal, the CA denied award of moral
damages on the ground that overbooking
was an allowed practice in US airlines
hence, there may be no fining of bad faith
imputed to TWA.
HELD: The U.S. law or regulation
allegedly authorizing overbooking has never
been proved. Foreign laws do not prove
themselves nor can the courts take judicial
notice of them. Like any other fact, they must
be alleged and proved. Written law may be
evidenced by an official publication thereof
or by a copy attested by the officer having
the legal custody of the record, or by his
deputy, and accompanied with a certificate
that such officer has custody. The certificate
may be made by a secretary of an embassy or
legation, consul general, consul, vice-
consul, or consular agent or by any officer
in the foreign service of the Philippines
stationed in the foreign country in which
the record is kept, and authenticated by the
seal of his office.
Hence, the CA’s finding that overbooking is
specifically allowed by the US Code of Federal
Regulations has no basis in fact.
ο TWA relied solely on the statement of its
agent that the Code of Fed. Regulations
of Civil Aeronautics Board allows
overbooking.
ο No official publication of the said code
was presented as evidence.
Third approach: processual presumption or
presumed-identity-approach, where the
forum presume that the foreign law is the
same as the forum law.
Miciano vs. Brimo
(1924)
FACTS:
• Juan Miciano, the judicial administrator of
the estate Joseph Brimo, a Turkish
citizen,filed a scheme of partition.
Page 24 of 92
Conflict of Laws
• Oppositor Andre, Brimo’s brother, claimed
that partition based on the testator’s will is
contrary to Turkish law
• However, oppositor failed to prove &
present evidence on the said Turkish law.
HELD: In the absence of evidence on foreign
law, they are to be presumed the same as those
of the Phils. Oppositor, himself, acknowledges
that the foreign law was not proven when he
asked for opportunity to present evidence. He
was granted ample opportunity to present
competent evidence and there was no grave
abuse of discretion when the court refused to
grant him another opportunity.
Suntay vs. Suntay
(1952)
FACTS:
• A will executed in Amoy, China by Jose
Suntay, a citizen and resident of the PH.
• Upon his death, Silvino Suntay, testator’s
son by his second marriage, sought for the
allowance of will which he claimed to have
been filed, recorded and probated in Amoy.
• The court disallowed the probate of the said
will.
HELD: Will cannot be allowed. Silvino was
unable to adduce the necessary proof under
Secs. 1-3 of Rule 78 in order to probate the
will in the Philippines, specifically:
a. the fact that the municipal court of Amoy
is a probate court
b. the procedural law of China regarding
probate of wills
c. the legal requirements for the execution
of a valid will
Although there were unverified answers of the
Consul General of China, his answers are
inadmissible because:
a. he does not qualify as an expert on
Chinese law on probate procedure (usu.
attend to trade matters), and
b. if admitted, the adverse party will be
deprived of their right to cross-examine
him
Thus, in the absence of proof that the
municipal district court of Amoy is a
probate court and on the Chinese law of
procedure in probate matters, it may be
presumed that the proceedings in the
matter of probating or allowing an will in
the Chinese courts are the same as those
provided for in our laws on the subject. It is
a proceeding in rem and for the validity
of such proceedings personal notice or by

publication or both to all interested parties
must be made. Evidence, however, shows that
no such notice were given.
CIR vs. Fisher
(1961)
FACTS:
• Spouses Stevenson. are British subjects
whose marriage took place in the PH.
• When the husband dies, he left his wife as
the soul heir to his estate.
• The CIR concluded that the taxable net
estate is the whole of the decedent’s estate,
it having applied the English law which did
not recognize conjugal partnership between
spouses but instead recognized that all
properties acquired during the marriage
pertain and belong exclusively to the
husband.
HELD: The taxable net estate is reduced to
one half.
The English law cannot be applied. The
pertinent English law that allegedly vests in
husband full ownership of properties acquired
during the marriage was not proved by CIR.
In the absence of proof, the Court is justified
in indulging in “processual presumption” in
presuming that the law of England on the
matter is the same as our law.
Board of Commissioners vs. Dela Rosa
(1991)
FACTS:
• The Commission sought the deportation of
Williuam Gatchalian, an alleged Chinese
citizen.
• The Board claims that marriage of his
grandfather Santiago to his Chinese
grandmother and the marriage of his father
Francisco to his Chinese mother were all
performed in China and which were not
properly proven to be valid according to the
laws of China.
• It is the postulate by petitioners that for the
said marriages to be valid in this country,
it should have been shown that they were
valid by the laws of China wherein the
same were contracted. There being none,
petitioners conclude that the aforesaid
marriages cannot be considered valid.
Hence, Santiago’s children, including
Francisco, followed the citizenship of
their mother, having been born outside
of a valid marriage. Similarly, the
validity of the Francisco’s marriage not
having been demonstrated, William and
Page 25 of 92
Conflict of Laws
Johnson followed the citizenship of their
mother, a Chinese national.
HELD: In the absence of evidence to the
contrary, foreign laws on a particular subject
are presumed to be the same as those of
the Philippines. In the case at bar, there
being no proof of Chinese law relating to
marriage, there arises the presumption that it
is the same as that of Philippine law. The PH
adhere to the presumption of validity of
marriage and he who asserts the marriage is
not valid under our laws bears the burden of
proof to present the foreign law.
In deciding whether to apply forum law or
to rule against the party who failed to prove
the foreign law, the court must consider the
ff factors:
a. degree of public interest involved
b. accessibility of foreign law materials to
the parties
c. possibility that plaintiff is merely forum
shopping
d. similarities between forum law and
foreign law on the issue involved
C. Exceptions to the Application
of Foreign Law
GEN: Under the principles of
comity and reciprocity, the court or
adminsitrative agency should look
into the application if foreign law
and apply it.
EXCEPTION:
1) The foreign law is contrary to an
important public policy of the
forum
2) The foreign law is procedural in
nature
3) Issues are related to property (lex
situs)
4) The issue involved in the
enforcement of foreign claim is
fiscal or administrative
5) Foreign law or judgment is
contrary to Good Morals
6) The application of Foreign law will
work Undeniable Injustice to the
Citizens of the Forum
7) The Foreign law is Penal in
Character
8) The application of the Foreign law
might endanger the Vital Interests
of the State

These exceptions fall under 3 main
categories:
1: when local law expressly so provides
2: when there is failure to plead and
prove the foreign law or judgment
3: when the case falls under the
exceptions to the rule of comity
1. The foreign law is
contrary to an important
public policy of the forum
“public policy”: no subject or citizen can
lawfully commit any act which has a
tendency to be injurious to the public or
against the public good.
“public policy technique”: court declines to
give due course to a claim existing under a
foreign law because it considers the nature
of the claim unconscionable or its
enforcement will violate a fundamental
principle of justice, good morals or some
deep-rooted tradition.
dismissal on the ground of public policy is
not dismissal on the merits and plaintiff can
go elsewhere to file his claim.
Pakistan Intl Airlines v. Ople
(1990)
FACTS:
• 2 Filipino stewardess-employees of PIA
filed a case for illegal dismissal against
their employer in DOLE.
• PIA’s defense is that under the contract of
employment, the parties agreed that the
EE-ER relationship shall be governed by
the contract (which provided that Pakistan
law shall apply) and not the Labor Code.
HELD: Petitioner PIA cannot take refuge
in paragraph 10 of its employment
agreement which specifies, firstly, the law of
Pakistan as the applicable law of the
agreement and, secondly, lays the venue
for settlement of any dispute arising out of
or in connection with the agreement "only
[in] courts of Karachi, Pakistan". The first
clause of paragraph 10 cannot be invoked
to prevent the application of Philippine
labor laws and regulations to the subject
matter of this case, i.e., the employer-
employee relationship between petitioner PIA
and private respondents. We have already
pointed out that that relationship is much
affected with public interest and that the
otherwise applicable Philippine laws and
regulations cannot be rendered illusory by
Page 26 of 92
Conflict of Laws
the parties agreeing upon some other law
to govern their relationship.
Also, PIA did not undertake to plead and
prove the contents of the Pakistan law on the
matter; it must therefore be presumed to be
the same as applicable provisions of Phil law.
Criticisms: courts using public policy
exception can disregard the applicable law
reached and replace it with forum law to
arrive at its desired result without having to
provide the rigorous legal analysis required
to explain the shift. Courts engage in
“intolerable affectation of superior virtue”.
2. The foreign law is
procedural in nature
Procedural or remedial laws are purely
internal matters peculiar only to the State.
It would be impractical for the court to
adopt the procedural machinery of another
state such as rules on venue, forms and
pleadings. Any individual who submits
himself to the jurisdiction of the law of the
forum must follow the forum’s rules of
procedure.
Problem: courts are tasked to characterize
the problem as to whether it is substantive
or procedural law which can be difficult at
times, ex. If issue involves statute of
limitations or statute of frauds
3. Issues are related to
property (lex situs)
The universally-accepted rule is that as to
immovable property, it is governed by the
law of the place where it is located.
Phil Civil Code also applies lex situs to
personal property. It also applies to cases of
sale, exchange, barter, mortgage or any
other form of alienation of property.
3 reasons for the application of lex situs
rule:
a. land & everything attached to it
are within the exclusive control of
the State & its officials are the
ones who can physically deal with
them
b. f o l l o w i n g a p o l i c y - c e n t e r e d
approach, immovables are of
greatest concern to the state in
which they are situated
c. d e m a n d s o f c e r t a i n t y &
convenience

4. The issue involved in the
enforcement of foreign
claim is fiscal or
administrative
State is not obliged to enforce the revenue
law of another.
Revenue laws affect a state in matters as
vital to its interests as penal laws. No court
ought to hear a case which it cannot
prosecute without determining whether
these laws are consonant with its own
notions of what is proper.
Criticism: Tax laws are not passed to punish
people. The person should not be permitted
to escape his obligations in maintaining the
government by crossing state lines.
5. Foreign law or judgment
is contrary to Good Morals
“contra bonos mores” - acts having
mischievous or pernicious consequences or
against true principles of morality.
The determination of what is contra bonos
mores is better left to the forum court trying
a particular case.
Criticism : inherent subjectivity
6. The application of Foreign
law will work Undeniable
Injustice to the Citizens of
the Forum
7. The Foreign law is Penal
in Character
Statute is not “penal” not by what the
statute is called by the legislature but
whether it appears, in its essential character
and effect, a punishment of an offense
against the public.
Penal statutes are all statutes which
command or prohibit certain acts, and
establish penalties for their violation and
even those which, without expressly
prohibiting certain acts, impose a penalty
upon their commission. Revenue laws are
not classed as penal laws although there
are authorities to the contrary.
This exception is partly remedied under the
international law of extradition on the basis
of jurisdictional cooperation and assistance.
GEN: Countries under an
extradition treaty are obliged to
surrender a fugitive from justice,
Page 27 of 92
Conflict of Laws
as the receiving state, to the state
where he escaped.
EX: persons who commits political
and religious offenses are not
extraditable
8. The application of the
Foreign law might
endanger the Vital
Interests of the State
PART THREE: PERSONAL LAW
IX. Nationality
A. Importance of a Personal Law
The individual’s nationality or domicile
serves as permanent connection b/w
individual & state. Thus, what is assigned
him is a personal law allowing courts to
exercise jd or determine the governing
choice-of-law rule on a specific situation or
transaction involving him.
Personal law follows the individual. It
governs transactions affecting him most
(marriage, divorce, legitimacy, capacity to
contract).
The need for personal law arose w/ Italian
Medieval city states. Domicile was the only
relevant basis for personal law.
Law of nationality first used in Napoleon
Code, then in Austrian Code, which said
that laws concerning states & capacity
govern all cities irrespective of residence.
Merits & Demerits of Nationality as Personal
Law
Merits:
1) used to establish link b/w
individual & state, because laws of
each state presumed to be made
for an “ascertained population” .
-since laws considered physical,
moral qualities of citizens, laws
should apply to citizens wherever
they are
2) an individual’s nationality is
easily verifiable from documents.
Demerits:
1) Problems arise with regard to:
a. stateless persons

b. persons with multiple
nationalities
c. states w/ diverse legal systems
having no single national law
2) a person’s ties to his nation may
be so attenuated if he has lived in
another country.
- unreasonable for his national law
to govern him if he has no shared
sense of identity.
Importance of Nationality in the Philippines
Most civil law countries follow the national
law theory.
Phil SC: Nationality law theory is a conflict
of laws theory by virtue of which JD over
the particular subject matter affecting a
person, such as status of a natural born
person, is determined by the latter’s
nationality.
Art 15 CC expresses the nationality
principle.
Art 15: “Laws relating to family rights &
duties, or to status, condition & capacity of
persons are binding upon citizens of the
Philippines even though living abroad.”
This notion that a person’s private rights
should be determined by his political
allegiance & not by his physical location,
owes its origin to the awareness of national
identity born in the French revolution,
B. Determination of Nationality
Each state has prerogative to determine
who are its nationals or citizens by its own
municipal law.
The Hague Convention on Conflict of
National laws: “It is for each state to
determine who are its nationals. This shall
be recognized insofar as consistent w/ int’l.
convention, int’l. customs, & the principles
of law generally recognized w/ regard to
nationality”.
Art 2. Hague Convention: Question on
possession of nationality of a particular
state “shall be determined in accordance w/
the law of that state.
Who are Filipino citizens? (Philippine
Constitution, Art IV)
1) Those who are citizens of
Philippines at time of the adoption
of this Constitution
Page 28 of 92
Conflict of Laws
2) Those whose fathers or mothers
are citizens of the Philippines
3) Those born before January 17,
1973, of Filipino mothers, who
elect Philippine citizenship upon
reaching the age of majority; and
4) Those who are naturalized in
accordance w/ law
1. Natural-born
Citizens
Two principles w/c may be followed:
jus soli: looks to the law of the place of
one’s birth to determine one’s nationality
(followed in many common law countries).
jus sanguinis: rule of descent or blood.
Followed in the Philippines, articulated in
the Constitution.
Natural born citizens: citizens of the
Philippines from birth w/out having to
perform any act to acquire or perfect
citizenship.
Concept broadened by the Constitution to
include “those born before January 17,
1973, of Filipino mothers, who elect
Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age
of majority”.
Talaroc vs. Uy
(1952)
FACTS:
• Uy was elected mayor of Manticao, but
one of the defeated candidates filed a
petition for quo warranto, alleging that
Uy was a Chinese citizen and therefore
ineligible for the office.
• Uy’s contentions were that his father
was subject of Spain and that his
mother ipso facto reacquired her
Filipino citizenship upon the death of
her husband.
HELD: A Filipino woman married to a
Chines ipso facto reacquired her Filipino
citizenship upon her husband’s demise
and that thereafter her minor children’s
nationality automatically followed that of
her mother’s This rule was not changed
by the adoption of jus sanguinis doctirne,
and was in force until CA No. 63 went
i n t o e ff e c t i n 1 9 3 6 , b y w h i c h t h e
legislature, for the first time, provided a
method of regaining Philippine

citizenship by the Filipino women. It
should be noted that when CA 63 was
passed, Ursula had been a widow for 19
years and UY had been of age 3 years,
and that the new law carries no provision
giving it retroactive effect
Co vs. Electoral Tribunal of the House
of Representatives
(1991)
FACTS: Ong Jr. ran as representative of
the 2 nd district of Samar and was
proclaimed the winner. The losing
candidates filed election protests,
claiming that Ong Jr. was not a natural-
born citizen.
HELD: Ong Jr. is a natural-born Filipino.
He could not have been expected to have
formally or in writing elected citizenship
upon reaching majority, because he was
already a citizen. His mother was a
natural-born citizen, and his father was
naturalized when Ong Jr. was only 9
years old. The filing of a sworn statement
or formal declaration is a requirement for
those who still have to elect citizenship.
For those already Filipinos when the time
to elect came up, there are acts of
deliberate choice which cannot be less
binding. Election is both a formal and an
informal process, and it has been held
that participation in election exercises
constitute a positive act of election of
Philippine citizenship.
2. Citizens
Naturalization
Naturalization confers to an alien a
nationality after birth by any means
provided by the law.
In the Philippines, naturalization is by
judicial method, under CA 473, as amended
RA 530.
The naturalization process was relaxed
under Marcos’ regime. Liberal method,
summary inquiry. This, however, is no
longer in force.
Qualifications for Applicants for
Naturalization
1) Petitioner must not be less than 21
years of age on date of hearing of
petition
Page 29 of 92
Conflict of Laws
2) He must have, as a rule, resided in
the Philippines for a continuous
period of not less than 10 years
o Why the 10 yr residence
requirement?
So government can
observe applicant ’s
conduct & ensure he
imbibes principles & spirit
of our Constitution.
o When may period be
reduced to 5 years?
a) applicant honorably held office
under the Phil gov’t. or under
any of its political subdivisions
b) applicant has established a
new industry or introduced a
useful invention in the Phil
c) Married to a Filipino woman
d) Engaged as teacher in a public
or recognized private school
not for exclusive instruction of
children of persons w/
particular nationality in any of
the branches of education for
a period of 2 years
e) Born in the Philippines
3) Must be of good moral character,
& believe in the principles underlying
the Phil Constitution &
must have conducted himself in a
proper & irreproachable manner during
entire period of residence here in his
relations w/ the constituted
g ove r n m e n t a s w e l l a s w / t h e
community in w/c he is living
by
o “Proper & irreproachable”
imposes a higher
standard of morality than
“good moral character”
o How to prove
“irreproachable conduct”?
By competent evidence
such as testimony of 2
character witnesses well
known in community w/
high reputation for
probity.
The law requires moral character of highest
degree. Being merely a “law-abiding citizen
is inadequate.
4) Must own real estate in the Phil
worth not less than P5,000, Phil
currency, or must have lucrative
trade., profession, or lawful
occupation

Yu Kian Chie vs. Republic
(1965)
FACTS: Yu Kian Chie, a Chinese national,
applied for naturalization, but the
Solicitor General opposed the petition on
the ground that Yu failed to prove that he
had a lucrative income.
HELD: The petition should be denied.
His true income (outside of allowances
and bonuses which are merely
contingent) is only P150 a month, which
amount does not come up to the category
of lucrative, especially considering that
he is a married man.
o What does “lucrative trade,
profession, or lawful
occupation” mean?
Substantial gainful employment or
the obtaining of tangible receipts
lucrative employment: appreciable
margin of income over expenses in
order to provide for adequate
support for himself & his family in
case of sickness, unemployment,
disability to work.
o Requirement of ownership of
real property: At odds w/ Art
XII, Sec. 7 Phil Constitution:
“Save in cases of hereditary
succession, no private lands
shall be transferred or
conveyed except to individuals
qualified to acquire or hold
lands of the public domain.”
o Exceptions to prohibition on
ownership of land:
a) Save in cases of
hereditary succession, no private
lands shall be transferred or
conveyed except to individuals
qualified to acquire or hold lands
of the public domain -
Testamentary succession is not
covered by the exception provided
in the Constitution.
b) Sec. 2, BP 185 allowing
a natural-born citizen who lost his
Filipino citizenship to be a
transferee of a private land for
residential purposes (not in excess
of 1,000 sq. m. urban or 1 ha rural
land)
c) SC broadened
exception to prohibition by
applying In Pari Delicto doctrine,
excluding from the ban the alien
vendee who later becomes a
naturalized Filipino
Page 30 of 92
Conflict of Laws
o Additional exceptions thru judicial
decisions have been criticized for
inviting violation of the
Constitution & disregarding a
fundamental policy of allowing no
one to reap benefits from an
unlawful act.
5) Must be able to speak & write
English or Spanish & any one of
the principal Philippine languages
6) Must have enrolled his minor
children of school age in any of
the public schools or recognized
private schools where Phil history,
government & civics are taught
or prescribed as part of curriculum
during entire period of residence
required of him, prior to hearing of
his petition for naturalization as
citizen.
o Children must learn & imbibe
customs, traditions & ideals of
Filipinos so they’ll become law-
abiding citizenship.
o Compliance & affirmative
showing…otherwise, denied.
o Non-compliance because of
insufficient finances: denied.
Disqualification for Naturalization
General Rule: Burden of proving
disqualification is upon the state.
But SC held that petitioner must prove he
has none of disqualifications.
The law must be strictly construed against
applicant because naturalization is a
privilege, not a right.
Possible causes for Disqualification:
1) crime involving moral turpitude (act
of bareness, vileness, depravity in
private and social life in general;
contrary to conduct of honesty,
modesty or good morals)
2) if applicant does not deal with and
receive Filipinos in his home and
visit Filipino homes in a spirit of
friendship and equality without
discrimination
3) applicant’s conduct of keeping wife
and children in a neighboring
country and only visiting them
(lack of sincere desire to embrace
Filipino customs and traditions)

4) if it is not fully established that
applicant’s nation grants reciprocal
rights to Filipino citizens
C. Procedure for Naturalization
The following are the steps for
naturalization:
a) a declaration of intention to
become a citizen must first be
filed, unless the applicant is
exempted from this requirement
(Secs. 5 and 6, Com. Act No. 473).
b) The petition for naturalization must
then be filed (Sec. 8, Com Act No.
473)
c) After publication in the Official
Gazette or newspaper of general
publication the petition will be
heard (Sec. 9, Com. Act No. 473 as
amended)
d) If the petition is approved, there
will be a rehearing two years after
the promulgation of the judgment
awarding naturalization (Sec. 1,
Rep., Act No. 530)
e) The last step will be the taking of
the oath of allegiance to support
and defend the Constitution and
the laws of the Philippines (Sec.
11, Com. Act No. 473, amended)
Declaration of Intention
When: One year before petition is filed
With whom: File with office of the Solicitor
General
How: Declaration under oath of bona fide
intention to become Philippine citizen
Exemptions to Filing of Declaration of
Intention:
1) persons born in the Philippines and
who have received their primary
and secondary education in public
or private schools recognized by
the Government, and not limited to
any race or nationality
2) those who have resided
continuously in the Philippines for
a period of thirty years or more
before filing their application
3) the widow and minor children of
an alien who declared his intention
to become a citizen of the
Page 31 of 92
Conflict of Laws
Philippines and dies before he is
actually naturalized.
Requirement is mandatory, absolute
prerequisite to naturalization. Failure is
fatal. Void for noncompliance with law.
Watt vs. Republic: In cases where petition is
exempt, statement to his exemption and
reasons should appear on the petition so
the public maybe prepared to object to any
evidence on this regard.
Which court has jurisdiction?
RTC of province has exclusive jurisdiction on
which petitioner has resided for at least one
year immediately preceding filing of person.
Effect of Naturalization on Wife and Children
Section 15, C.A. 473 states that::
“Any woman who is now or may hereafter
be married to a citizen of the Philippines,
and who might herself be lawfully
naturalized shall be deemed a citizen of the
Philippines.
Minor children of persons naturalized under
this law who have been born In the
Philippines shall be considered citizens
thereof.
A foreign-born minor child, if in the
Philippines at the time of naturalization of
the parent, shall automatically become a
Philippine citizen, and a foreign-born minor
child, who is not in the Philippines at the
time the parent is naturalized, shall be
deemed a Philippines citizen only during his
minority, unless he begins to reside
permanently in the Philippines when still a
minor, in which case, he will continue to be
a Philippine citizen even after becoming of
age.
A child born outside of the Philippines after
the naturalization of his parent shall be
considered a Philippine citizen, unless within
one year after reaching the age of majority,
he fails to register himself as a Philippine
citizen at the American Consulate of the
country where he resides, and to take the
necessary oath of allegiance.”
Vivo vs. Cloribel
(1968)
FACTS: Chinese wife, Chua and her
minor children arrived in the Phils from
Hkong. Her husband applied for
naturalization in the Phils. Wife and
children applied for indefinite extension
of stay. Sec of Foreign Affairs allowed the
change of their status from temporary

visitors to special non-immigrants for 2
years. Commissioner of Immigration
refused their extension. The Foreign
Affairs Sec. denied their appeal and they
were advised to leave the Phils. Chua
filed action for mandamus to implement
the first ruling of the Secretary but this
was denied. Chua efilled alleging that her
husband will be granted Filipino
citizenship so they were also due for
eventual conversion.
HELD: The wife, under Sec. 15 of the
Revised Naturalization Law, will not
automatically become a Filipino citizen
upon her husband’s naturalization as she
must still show that she possesses all the
qualifications and none of the
disqualifications for naturalization. But
her having misrepresented that she will
stay for a brief period but her intention
was really to stay for a long time,
demonstrated her incapacity to satisfy the
qualifications under Sec. 2 which
provides that she must be of good moral
character and must have conducted
herself in a proper and irreproachable
manner during the entire period of her
stay. She also failed to satisfy the
requirement of continuous residence for
10 years in the Philippines (actual stay:
Oct. 16 ’60 – June ’62)
As to the children: The law requires that
they must be dwelling in the Philippines
at the time of the naturalization of the
parent. Since prior to their father ’s
naturalization, they were already
required to leave the country, they cannot
be said to be lawfully residing here.
Also, they cannot be allowed to extend
their stay. The period of stay of
temporary visitors cannot be extended
without first departing form the Islands.
They cannot also claim that they should
be allowed extension until the father’s
oath taking because their allowed stay
was for a definite period up to a fixed
day.
Moy Ya Lim vs. Commissioner of
Immigration
(1971)
FACTS: In 1961, Lau, a Chinese, was
permitted to stay in the Philippines for 1
month to visit her grandfather. After
repeated extensions, she was allowed to
Page 32 of 92
Conflict of Laws
stay until Feb. 1962. However, on Jan.
1962 she married a Filipino.
Commissioner ordered her to leave and
sought her deportation. Spouses filed
appeal in SC.
HELD: Under Sec. 15 of CA 473, an alien
woman marrying a Filipino, native born
or naturalized, becomes ipso facto a
Filipina provided she is not disqualified
to be a citizen of the Phils under Sec. of
the same law. Likewise, an alien woman
married to an alien who is subsequently
naturalized here follows the Philippine
citizenship of her husband the moment
he takes his oath as Filipino, provided,
that she does not suffer from any of the
disqualifications under Sec. 4.
This ruling reversed a prior decision of the
SC (Burca vs. Republic) which held that the
alien woman married to a Filipino must first
file a petition for citizenship alleging that
she possesses all the qualifications and
none of the disqualifications mandated by
law.
No Judicial Declaration of Philippine
Citizenship
A declaration of Phil citizenship may not be
granted in an action for declaratory relief
nor under the Civil Code provision (Art. 412)
on correction of entry in the Civil Registry.
But the rule was relaxed in later decisions.
A petition for correction of errors in the
entry of the Civil Registry even for a change
of citizenship or status may be granted
provided that an appropriate action is made
wherein all parties who may be affected by
the entries are notified and represented and
there is a full blown adversary proceeding.
Tan Yu vs. Republic: There can be no action
or proceeding for the judicial declaration of
the citizenship of an individual.
D. Loss of Philippine Citizenship
CA 63, as amended by RA 106, provides
that a Filipino citizen may lose his
citizenship in any of the following ways:
1 ) N a t u ra l i z a t i o n i n fo r e i g n
countries
Frivaldo vs. COMELEC
(1989)
FACTS: Frivaldo was elected governor of
Sorsogon and assumed office. The League
of Municipalities of Sorsogon filed for
annulment of his election on the ground
that he is a US citizen and therefor

incapable of holding public office.
Frivaldo admitted that he was a
naturalized US citizen in 1983 but he
underwent naturalization only to protect
himself from then Pres. Marcos. Sol Gen
supported respondent’s contention that
he is a US citizen because he did not
repatriate himself after his naturalization
in the US
HELD: Frivaldo lost his Filipino
citizenship. If Frivaldo really wanted to
disavow his US citizen citizenship &
reacquire Phil. citizenship, he must do so
under our laws. Under CA 63, Phil.
citizenship may be reacquired through:
1. direct act of Congress
2. naturalization
3. repatriation
The alleged forfeiture of US citizenship
because of his active participation in the
elections is between him and the US; it
could not have resulted to automatically
restoring his Filipino citizenship which he
earlier renounced. At most, he could be
said to be a stateless individual. Also,
although the Special Committee to hear
repatriation cases under LOI 270 has not
yet been convened, F should have waited
for such or seek naturalization by
legislative or judicial process.
Frivaldo vs. COMELEC
(1996)
FACTS: Frivaldo took his oath of
allegiance under PD 725 on June 30 ’95,
much later than he filed his certificate of
candidacy. He now claims Filipino
citizenship through a valid repatriation
HELD: Frivaldo reacquired his Filipino
citizenship and is now eligible to assume
the office as governor. Law does not
specify any particular date or time when
candidate must possess citizenship unlike
that of residence and age. It can also be
s a i d t h a t F r i v a l d o ’ s re p a t r i a t i o n
retroacted to the date of his filing his
application in Aug. 1994.
Labo vs. COMELEC
(1989)
FACTS: Labo was elected mayor of
Baguio. Lardizabal filed a petition for quo
warranto alleging that Labo is not a
citizen.COMELEC declared that he was a
citizen but the CID ruled that he is not
Page 33 of 92
Conflict of Laws
since the Australian Govt said that he is
still a naturalized Australian citizen.
HELD: Labo is not a citizen of the Phils
because he lost the same by performing
the ff acts under CA 63:
1. naturalization in a foreign country
2. express renunciation of citizenship
3. subscribing to an oath of allegiance to
support the Consti and laws of a
foreign country.
Even if it is to be assumed that his
naturalization was annulled because his
marriage to an Australian was found to
be bigamous, this does not automatically
restore his citizenship. He must reacquire
i t b y d i re c t a c t o f C o n g re s s , b y
repatriation or by naturalization. None of
these methods were done. Under PD 725,
repatriation may be done by applying
with the Special Committee on
Naturalization and if the application is
approved, applicant must make an oath
of allegiance to the Republic of the Phils
before a certificate of registration is
issued by the CID.
2) Express renunciation of
citizenship
Aznar vs. COMELEC
(1990)
FACTS: Osmeña filed a COC for
provincial governor of Cebu but was
declared ineligible (upon petition of
Aznar) for being a US citizen, as shown
by an Alien Certificate of Registration.
Osmeña alleges that he is a Filipino
citizen being the child of a Filipino,
holder of a Phil. passport, a resident of
the Phils. since birth, and a registered
voter.
HELD: Osmeña is a Filipino citizen.
Aznar failed to present proof that O lost
his citizenship by any of the modes under
CA 63; he merely relied in the Alien
Certificate of Registration in concluding
that O has been a naturalized US citizen.
Phil. courts are only allowed to determine
who are Filipino citizens, but have no
power to determine who are persons
considered as American citizens under
US laws. Also, the mere fact that he has
an ACR does not mean that he is no
longer a Filipino; the renunciation needed
to lose Phil. citizenship must be
“express.”
3) By subscribing to an oath of
allegiance to support the

constitution or laws of a foreign
country upon attaining twenty one
years of age or more, subject to
certain exceptions
4) by rendering service to, or
accepting commission in, the
armed forces of a foreign country,
subject to certain exceptions
5) by having been declared by
competent authority, a deserter of
the Philippine armed forces in time
of war, unless subsequently, a
plenary pardon or amnesty has
been granted
6) in the case of a woman, upon
her marriage to a foreigner, if by
virtue of the laws in force in her
husband’s country, she acquires his
nationality
7) cancellation of the certificate of
naturalization
The Judge may cancel the naturalization
certificate issued and the registration in the
Civil Registry, upon motion made in proper
proceedings by Sol Gen, on any of the
following grounds:
a) if it shown that said naturalization
certificate was obtained
fraudulently or illegally;
b) if the person naturalized shall, w/in
the 5 yrs next following the
issuance of said certificate, return
to his native country or to some
foreign country & establish his
permanent residence there;
Provided that the fact that person
naturalized remain for 1 year in his
native country of former nationality, or
2 years in any country, shall be
considered as prima facie evidence of
his intention of taking up his
permanent residence therein
c) If the petition was made on an
invalid declaration of intention
d) If it is shown that the minor
children of the person failed to
graduate from recognized public or
private high school where the
required subjects are taught,
through the fault of the parents
either by neglecting to support or
by transferring them to another
school.
Page 34 of 92
Conflict of Laws
Certified copy of decree canceling
certificate forwarded to the Office of
the President & the Solicitor General.
e) If it is shown that the naturalized
citizen allowed himself to be used
as dummy in violation of the
Constitution or law requiring
Philippine citizenship as a requisite
for exercise, use or enjoyment of a
right, franchise or privilege.
Only a Grant of Political Privilege:
Judgment directing issuance of certificate of
naturalization is a mere grant of political
privilege. Neither estoppel nor res judicata
may be invoked to bar the state from
initiating an action for cancellation or
nullification of certificate of naturalization
issued.
If shown to have been obtained by fraud or
illegal means, the certificate may be
cancelled. Decision in naturalization case
does not constitute res judicata.
Republic vs. Li Yao
(1992)
FACTS: Li Yao was a naturalized Filipino
citizen, but the Sol Gen filed a petition to
cancel his certificate of naturalization on
the ground that he obtained such
certificate through fraudulent means. One
of the grounds was tax evasion.
HELD: A certification of naturalization
may be cancelled if it was subsequently
discovered to have been obtained by
misleading the court upon any material
fact. And a naturalization proceeding is
not a judicial adversary proceeding, such
that a decision therein is not res judicata as
to any matter that would support a
judgment canceling a certificate of
naturalization on the ground of illegal or
fraudulent procurement thereof.
E. Problems in Applying the
Nationality Principle
1. Dual or Multiple
Citizenship
Each state determines who its nationals are
in accordance w/ the rule in the Hague
Convention on Conflict of National Laws.
Questions on WON a person possesses the
nationality of a certain state are to be
determined in accordance w/ the state’s
internal law.

It is possible that a person can be claimed
as national of 2 or more states.
S i t u a t i o n s w / c m ay r e s u l t t o d u a l
nationality:
Application of jus soli & jus sanguinis
1) Child born of
o parents who are nationals
of country applying jus
sanguinis
o in a country applying jus
soli
has dual nationality
2) Filipino citizen who marries an
alien may acquire citizenship of his
or her spouse if the spouse’s
national law so allows.
But a Filipino citizen who marries an alien
shall retain Philippine citizenship, unless by
his or her act or omission, he is deemed
under the law, to have renounced it by
taking an oath of allegiance to the spouse’s
country or by express renunciation.
3) Another instance of dual or
multiple nationality is the case of
an individual who is naturalized
citizen of another state but has not
effectively renounced his former
nationality.
In determining rights of an individual who
may claim multiple nationality in a third
state, the ICJ applied principle of “effective
nationality.”
Nottebohm Case
(1955)
FACTS: Liechtenstein brought a case
against Guatemala in the ICJ for breach of
its obligations under international law
and asking for reparations in behalf of
Nottebohm. It is the position of
Liechtenstein that Nottebohm acquired
Liechtenstein citizenship which would
entitle him to its diplomatic protection.
HELD: Liechtenstein is not entitled to
extend protection to Nottebohm, because
when N applied for naturalization, there
is nothing to indicate that such
application was motivated by any desire
to dissociate himself from the
Government of his country, Germany. He
had been settled in Guatemala for 34
years, and it was the main seat of his
interests and business activities.
In contrast, his actual connections with
Liechtenstein were extremely tenuous.
Page 35 of 92
Conflict of Laws
No settled abode and no prolonged
residence at the time of application; the
application shows that he was a mere
visitor and his visit is of a transient
character. There is an absence of any
bond of attachment between N and L
and, on the other hand, the existence of a
long-standing and close connection
between him and G, a link which his
naturalization in no way weakened.
Oh Hek How vs. Republic
(1969)
FACTS: Oh Hek How, a Chinese citizen,
applied for naturalization in the
Philippines which was granted. A
certificate of naturalization was issue in
his favor but the Government appealed,
claiming that it was issued before the
Minister of the Interior of Nationalist
China issued the permission for a valid
renunciation of Chinese citizenship. Oh
Hek How argues that such permission is
not among the requirements under our
law for the naturalization of an alien.
HELD: The permission of the Minister of
the Interior of China is required before a
certificate of naturalization can be issued
in favor of Oh Hek How. The question of
how a Chinese citizen may strip himself
of that status is necessarily governed by
the laws of China, not that of the
Philippines. As a consequence, a Chinese
national cannot be naturalized as a citizen
of the Philippines, unless he has complied
with the laws of China requiring previous
permission of its Minister of the Interior
for renunciation of nationality.
2. Statelessness
Understood in two senses:
a) De jure stateless person: refers to
an individual who has been
stripped of his nationality by his
own former government w/out
having opportunity to acquire
another.
Problem of statelessness began
during WW II & worsened under
Nazi regime in Germany & in
USSR.
b) De facto stateless person:
individual possessed of a
nationality but whose country does
not give them protection outside
their own territory.
 Conflict of Laws

- commonly called “refugees”. HELD: K is a stateless person. His

t e s t i m o n y, a s i d e f r o m b e i n g
Vietnam War: Masses of people escaped uncontradicted, is supported by the well-
from Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos without known fact that the ruthlessness of
any travel documents, identity papers or modern dictatorships has scattered
any form of identification normally granted
throughout the world a large number of
by government.
stateless refugees or displaced persons,
without country and without flag.
Conventions to Alleviate Problems of Knowing the history, nature and
Stateless Persons: character of the Soviet dictatorship, it
would be technically fastidious to require
1) 1951 Geneva Convention on Status further evidence of K’s claim that he is
Refugees stateless than his testimony that he owes
no allegiance to the Russian Communist
-provided some basic rights of stateless government and, because he has been at
persons war with it, he fled from Russia to
permanently reside in the Philippines.
2) 1954 UN Conference on the
Elimination or Reduction of Future
Statelessness
X. Domicile
3) Convention on the Reduction of
Statelessness
A. Definition
- enumerates conditions under w/c an
individual would not lose his or her
Municipal law concept of domicile (Art. 50,
nationality upon the risk of becoming
CC):
stateless should a new nationality not be
proved: i.e. divorce, adoption,
natural persons: the place of habitual
naturalization, expatriation.
residence
juridical persons: determined by the law
Convention also prohibits states from
creating or recognizing it; and in its absence
depriving nationals of identity:
shall be understood as the place where
their legal representation or place of
1) as punishment or
business is.
2) as discriminatory instrument for
political, religious or ethnic reasons
Conflict-of-laws definition of domicile
(Restatement): the place with which a
Major objective: Remedy situation of
person has a settled connection for
c h i l d r e n b o r n w / o u t a c q u i r i n g a ny
certain legal purposes, either because his
nationality, i.e. when a child is born in a
home is there or because that place is
country following jus sanguinis principle of
assigned to him by law.
parents who are citizens of a jus soli
country.
Justice Story: the place of true, fixed
permanent home and principal
Convention mandates that:
establishment, and to which, whenever he
*jus sanguinis country grant its nationality
is absent, he has the intention of
to a person born w/in its territory if he
returning.
would otherwise be stateless.
A person may live in a place where he is not
*jus soli country to extend its nationality to
domiciled. To acquire a domicile, there must
a person who would otherwise be
be concurrence of
considered stateless when one of his
1) intention to make it one’s domicile and
parents is a citizen of the contracting state.
2) physical presence.
Kookooritchkin vs. Solicitor General
“ Re s i d e n c e ” s i m p l y r e q u i r e s b o d i l y
(1948)
presence. It is a relatively more permanent
FACTS; Kookooritchkin, a native-born abode of a person, while residence applies
Russian who claims to be a stateless to a temporary stay of a person in a given
refugee, filed a petition for naturalization. place (Koh vs. CA).
The petition was granted, for which the
SolGen appealed, saying that ! Notes!
Kookooritchkin is not a stateless person. Domicile is permanent in nature; it is not as
transient and temporary as residence.

Page 36 of 92

2 Requisites for domicile:
1) physical presence
2) intent – actual intent, not merely floating
intent
✪ In order to establish new domicile,
it is not necessary to prove intent
to stay indefinitely, as long as the
intent to abandon the old domicile
is apparent.
✪ In domicile of choice, intent is
important
✪ In constructive domicile, there is
no intent because the domicile is
chosen by the law for the person
✪ The motive for leaving and the
length of stay in the new domicile
is not relevant in the determination
of domicile of choice
✪ Habitual residence: “bridge”
between residence and domicile
_______________
Caasi vs. CA
(1990)
FACTS: Miguel ran for mayor of Bolinao
and won. His opponent filed a petition
for disqualification, alleging that Miguel
is a green card holder and hence, a
permanent resident of the US and not of
Bolinao.
HELD: Miguel’s possession of a green
card disqualified him from running for
mayor. His application for immigrant
status and his possession of a green card
are conclusive proof that he is a
permanent resident of the US despite his
occasional visits to the Philippines.
A candidate who is a green card holder
must have waived his status as a
permanent resident or immigrant of a
foreign country in order to be qualified to
run for elective office in the Philippines.
In this case, there is no proof that he had
waived his status as a permanent resident
or immigrant of the US before he ran for
election as mayor of Bolinao; hence he
was disqualified to run for that office.
Uytengsu vs. Republic
(1954)
FACTS: Uytengsu was born in the
Philippines of Chinese parents. He went
to the US to study; but in one of his
vacations in the Philippines he applied
for naturalization, during the pendency
Page 37 of 92
Conflict of Laws
of which he returned to the US to finish
his studies. Upon his return, his
application was granted; the Government
appealed the grant because under the law
an applicant for naturalization is required
to reside continuously in the Phils. from
the date of filing of the petition up to the
time of his admission to Philippine
citizenship. Uytengsu’s defense is that
since he has been domiciled in the
Philippines during the period of his
application, he was also a resident for
that period.
HELD: “Residence” and “domicile” each
has, in strict legal parlance, a meaning
distinct and different from each other.
The essential distinction between resident
and domicile is this: the first involves the
intent to leave when the purpose for
which he has taken up abode ceases,
while the other has no such intent, the
abiding is animo manendi. They are not to
be held synonymous; residence is an act,
while domicile is an act coupled with
intent. The question of domicile is not
involved in determining whether a
person is a resident of a state or country.
B. Merits and Demerits of
Domicile
Merits:
1) preferred primary connection
between a person and a state
because it satisfies the very
purpose for having a personal law
(in common law countries) – it
provides an adequate basis for him
to exercise rights therein and the
state to impose duties on him
2) also suitable for countries with a
federal system of government –
the law of the domicile is the law
of the place where the individual
lives
Demerits:
1) one’s domicile is not ascertainable
without first resorting to the courts
to establish whether or not there is
animo manendi
2) the notion of domicile differs
widely in different states (some
distinguish between domicile and
residence; others attribute
different meanings of domicile for
different purposes)

3) if the law of domicile of origin is
given overriding significance, it
m ay c r e a t e t h e p r o b l e m o f
attenuated connection (similar to
the use of nationality as personal
law)
The Philippines follow the nationality law
theory, but there are instances when our
courts refer to the domicile of an individual
in order to determine his rights or
obligations. Example is
1) when the litigant is an alien whose
country of origin follows the domiciliary
principle; or
2) where the situation concerns
stateless persons, or those with dual or
multiple nationalities; or
3) when an alien domiciled in the
Philippines executes a will abroad.
C. General Rules on Domicile
1) No person shall be without a
domicile; his domicile of origin
prevails until the acquisition of a
new one.
2) A person cannot have two
simultaneous domiciles (a person
can have only one domicile for a
given purpose or a given time
under the law of a particular state,
but it should not be assumed that
that determination will be binding
on other states or on the same
state for other purposes).
3) Domicile establishes a connection
between a person and a particular
territorial unit.
4) The burden of proving a change of
domicile is upon whoever alleges
that a change has been secured.
Romualdez-Marcos vs. COMELEC
(1995)
FA C T S : I m e l d a M a rc o s f i l e d h e r
Certificate of Candidacy for
representative of 1st District of Leyte. A
petition to disqualify her was filed on the
ground that she lacked the 1-yr resident
requirement as provided for in the
Constitution. In her COC, she placed “7
months” as length of residence.
Page 38 of 92
Conflict of Laws
HELD: For purposes of election law,
residence is synonymous with domicile.
Mere absence of an individual from his
permanent residence without the
intention to abandon it does not result in
a loss or change of domicile.
While Marcos held various residences for
different purposes during the past four
decades, none of these purposes
unequivocally point to an intention to
abandon her domicile of origin in
Tacloban, Leyte. She did not lose her
domicile of origin upon her marriage to
Pres. Marcos; what she gained was actual
residence.
Ujano vs. Republic
(1966)
FACTS: Ujano was a naturalized US
citizen who returned to the Philippines as
a visitor and petitioned to reacquire
Philippine citizenship. The petition was
denied because he did not have the
required residence.
HELD: Residence, for naturalization
purposes, has been interpreted to mean
the actual or constructive permanent
home or domicile. He cannot be said to
have established his domicile here
although he is actually present because
his allowed stay as a visitor is only
temporary and he must leave when the
purpose of his coming is done.
In re Dorrance’s Estate
(1932)
FA C T S : D o r r a n c e w a s b o r n i n
Pennsylvania. He worked and resided in
New Jersey, transferred to Philadelphia
and then returned to New Jersey. Later he
was able to buy an estate in
Pennsylvania, where he stayed with his
family until his death. During his lifetime
he expressed that he intends to remain a
domiciliary of New Jersey. Pennsylvania
assessed inheritance tax on his estate.
HELD: He was domiciled in
Pennsylvania at the time of his death. A
man cannot retain a domicile in one place
when he has moved to another, and
intends to reside there for the rest of his
life, by any wish, declaration or intent
inconsistent with the facts of where he
actually lives and what he means to do.

D. Kinds of Domicile
3 Kinds of Domicile:
1) Domicile of origin: a person’s
domicile at birth. A legitimate
child’s domicile is that of his father,
while an illegitimate child’s is that
of his mother.
2) Domicile of choice: also called
voluntary domicile, is the place
freely chosen by a person sui juris.
There must be concurrence of
physical presence in the new place
and unqualified intention to make
that place one’s home.
A problem deciding the issue of domicile of
choice is the degree of permanence of
abode.
Difference between domicile of origin and
domicile of choice: lies in a) conditions
necessary for abandonment and b) capacity
for revival.
Reverter or revival doctrine: presumption
that domicile of origin revived once the
domicile of choice is given up, before a new
one is required.
Velilla vs. Posadas
(1935)
FACTS: Velilla, the administrator of the
estate of Moody, appealed the inheritance
tax assessed against the estate on the
ground that the decedent was not
domiciled in the Philippines. Moody
went to Calcutta and Paris before his
death, and he died in India.
HELD: He was a domiciliary of Manila.
Domicile in the Civil Code is defined as
the place of habitual residence, which
was Manila in the CAB. There was no
statement from Moody, oral or written
that he adopted a new domicile while he
was absent from Manila. To establish
abandonment, he must show his
deliberate and provable choice of new
domicile coupled with actual residence
and declared or proved intent that it
should be his permanent abode. This was
not proven.
White vs. Tennant
(1888)
FACTS: White and his wife lived in West
Virginia, but agreed to sell their house
Page 39 of 92
Conflict of Laws
there with the declaration, intent and
purpose of making Pennsylvania their
home. Upon reaching Penn., they had to
go back to West Va. on account of the
wife’s illness but White went to Penn.
everyday to look after his stock. Upon his
death, the administrator paid the whole
of the estate to the widow according to
West Va. law. However, if Penn. law was
applied, ½ of the estate would go to
White’s siblings. The law of his domicile
governs the distribution of his estate.
HELD: Pennsylvania was his domicile at
the time of his death. Two things must
concur to establish domicile—the fact of
residence, and the intention of remaining.
These two must exist in combination.
When one domicile is definitely
abandoned, and a new one selected and
entered upon, length of time is not
important; one day will be sufficient,
provided the animus exists.
3) Constructive domicile: domicile
assigned to persons incapable of
choosing their own domicile by
operation of law. Includes minors,
mentally disabled, married women.
Minors or infants are indubitably incapable
of choosing their own domicile. Their
domicile automatically changes when their
father’s domicile changes. Minors take the
domicile of their mother upon the death of
their father.
A person who has a mental disability is also
assigned a constructive domicile. It is
presumed that a person with a mental
disability cannot acquire a domicile of
choice because of his inherent inability to
decide where to make his home.
Special Problems in Domicile of Choice vis-
à-vis Constructive Domicile
1) domicile of people kept under
physical or legal compulsion
2) domicile of married women
seeking to acquire separate
domicile from their husbands
People under Compulsion: traditional view is
that he is in that place not as a result of his
volition. Examples are military personnel,
prisoners and people with disabilities who
are confined in institutions.
Caraballo vs. Republic

(1962)
FACTS: Caraballo, an American staff
sergeant in the US Air Force stationed in
Clark Air Base, filed a petition for
adoption of a Filipino child. The petition
was denied on the ground that he was
not qualified to adopt, him being a non-
resident alien.
HELD: Actual or physical presence or
stay of a person in a place, not of his free
and voluntary choice and without intent
to remain there indefinitely, does not
make him a resident of the place.
Caraballo is disqualified to adopt because
he is a non-resident alien. His stay in the
Philippines is only temporary, and is
merely the result of his assignment as
staff sergeant.
In recent decisions, courts have held that a
person under compulsion should not be
barred from proving that he has developed
the required unqualified intention to
establish his permanent abode in such
place. The fact of compulsion is reduced to
just one of the factors in determining
whether intent, in fact, exists.
Married Women: based on the concept of
unity of identity of spouses, the wife was
presumed to take the domicile of the
husband.
Go Chen and Go Lek vs. Collector of
Customs
(1932)
FACTS: Tan Bon, a Chinese citizen,
entered the Philippines as the wife of a
Chinese merchant. She asked her minor
children from a previous marriage to join
her here, but they were not allowed entry.
HELD: The minor children cannot enter
the Philippines. A Chinaman’s Chinese
wife and her minor children do not enter
the Philippine Islands through their own
right, but by virtue of the right of the
husband and father. Since Tan Bon did
not enter the Philippines by her own right
but by virtue of her husband, she is not
entitled to bring in her minor children by
another Chinaman who never had legal
residence in the Archipelago. The mere
fact of their being children of Tan Bon
confers on them no right of entry,
inasmuch as she herself did not enter of
her own right, and they cannot base their
right on hers.
Page 40 of 92
Conflict of Laws
De La Vina vs. Villareal and Geopano
(1920)
FACTS: Geopano filed a complaint in CFI
Iloilo against de la Vina, her husband, for
divorce on the ground of infidelity. De la
Vina opposed, saying that CFI Iloilo has
no JD over the case considering that he
resides in Negros, such that Geopano
must also be considered a Negros
resident, because the domicile of the wife
follows that of the husband.
HELD: CFI Iloilo has JD. Where the
husband has given cause for divorce, the
wife may acquire another and separate
domicile from that of her husband.
*There are exceptions to the rule that the
domicile of the wife is determined by that
of her husband, one of which is that the
wife may acquire another and separate
domicile from that of her husband where
the theoretical unity of husband and wife
is dissolved, as it is by the institution of
divorce proceedings; or where the
husband has given cause for divorce; or
where there is a separation of the parties
by agreement, or a permanent separation
due to desertion of the wife by the
husband or attributable to cruel treatment
on the part of the husband; or where
there is a forfeiture by the wife of the
benefit of the husband’s domicile.
Modern view (married women): dispenses
with the presumption that the wife’s
domicile is the same as her husband’s. Each
party establishes his or her own domicile
completely independent of each other. As a
result, the wife need not show that her
husband has given cause for divorce or
legal separation to have a separate
domicile.
XI. Principles on Personal Status and
Capacity
A. Definition
Personal capacity
ο Includes both condition and
capacity
ο Embraces matters as the beginning
and end of personality, capacity to
have rights, capacity to engage in
legal transactions, protection of
personal interests, family relations,

also transactions of family law such
as marriage, divorce, separation,
adoption, legitimation and
emancipation, and succession.
Juridical capacity: fitness of a man to be the
subject of legal relations
Capacity to Act: power to do acts with legal
effects
ART. 37, Civil Code:
Juridical capacity, which is the fitness to be
the subject of legal relations, is inherent in
every natural person and is lost only
through death. Capacity to act, which is the
power to do acts with legal effect, is
acquired and may be lost.
In case of Filipinos, Art. 15 of the CC states
that personal status and capacity follows
the nationality principle.
In case of aliens, courts may refer to their
national law or domiciliary law.
Recto vs. Harden
(1959)
FACTS: H engaged the services of R, as
counsel in her suit against her husband
for support and for preservation of her
rights in the conjugal partnership in
contemplation of a divorce suit. However,
the spouses entered into a compromise
agreement to defeat the claim of R in
attorney’s fees. H moved to dismiss on
the ground of invalidity of the contract of
service because divorce is contrary to Phil
law.
HELD: R should be paid his fees. H
spouses are US citizens and their status
and the dissolution thereof are governed
by the laws of the United States, which
sanction divorce. Therefore, contract is
not contrary to public policy.
B. Legislative Jurisdiction
Distinguished from Judicial
Jurisdiction
Status once established by the personal law
of the party, is given universal recognition.
Status, capacity, and rights and duties,
brought into existence by State A and
conferred in a natural or juridical person
under its jurisdiction, should be recognized
by State B, without any exception or
qualification imposed by the latter, except
by some definite or protected rule of
municipal law.
Page 41 of 92
Conflict of Laws
- Aliens can sue and be sued in our
courts even on issues relating to status
and capacity. However, the applicable
law is their personal law.
Barnuevo vs. Fuster
(1913)
FACTS: Fuster and Yanez separated. After
10 years, Y filed for divorce on the
ground of F’s adultery. Court granted
decree of divorce. Fuster contests
jurisdiction of the court to issue the said
decree.
HELD: Phil court has jurisdiction. The
authority and jurisdiction of courts are
not a matter of private law of persons but
of the public or political law of the nation.
The jurisdiction of courts and other
matters of procedure are of public nature
and are submitted to the territorial
principle.
Note: The doctrine is no longer controlling.
Divorce is considered a violation of public
policy so that courts cannot issue the same.
C. Beginning and End of
Personality
The determination of the exact moment
personality begins is referred to the
individual’s personal law.
Art. 40, CC
Birth determines personality; but the
conceived child shall be considered born for
all purposes that are favorable to it,
provided it be born later with the conditions
specified in the following article.
Art. 41, CC
For civil purposes, the fetus is considered
born if it is alive at the time it is completely
delivered from the mother’s womb.
However, if the fetus had an intra-uterine
life of less than 7 months, it is not deemed
born if it dies within 24 hours after its
complete delivery from the maternal womb
Geluz vs. CA: SC did not allow for recovery
of damages for the injury and death of a
conceived child which is still in the mother’s
womb. Art. 40 cannot be invoked since it
expressly limits the provisional personality
by imposing the condition that the child
should be subsequently born alive.
Civil personality is commenced at birth and
is extinguished by death. A declaration of

death issued by a competent court is
considered valid for all purposes.
Limjoco vs. Intestate Estate of Fragante:
HELD: SC ruled that the estate of a
deceased applicant can be granted a CPC
to avoid injustice or prejudice resulting
from the impossibility of exercising such
legal rights & fulfilling such legal
obligations of the decedent as survived
after his death unless the legal fiction,
that the estate is considered a person, is
indulged.
D. Absence
The domestic laws of states do not treat
absentees alike.
Three ways of dealing with the problem:
1. there is a rebuttable presumption that
a person is dead after he has been
absent for a number of years
2. a person’s unexplained absence is
judicially investigated and established
which results in legal effects similar to
those of death
3. a judicial decree shall have to be issued
declaring a person dead before legal
effects of death can take place
*Phil law follows the rebuttable presumption
(1).
Art. 390, CC
After the absence of 7 years, it being
unknown whether or not the absentee still
lives, he shall be presumed dead for all
purposes, except for those of succession.
The absentee shall not be presumed dead
for the purpose of opening his succession
till after the absence of 10 years. If he
disappeared after the age of 75 years, an
absence of 5 years shall be sufficient in
order that his succession may be opened.
Art. 391, CC
The ff. shall be presumed dead for all
purposes, including the division of estate
among the heirs:
(1) a person on board a vessel lost during
sea voyage, or an airplane which is
missing, who has not been heard of for
4 years since the loss of the vessel or
airplane.
Page 42 of 92
Conflict of Laws
(2) A person in the armed forces who has
taken part in war and has been missing
for 4 years
(3) A person who has been in the danger
of death under other circumstances
and his existence has not been known
for 4 years
However, for specific purposes, our laws
require that a declaration of death be issued
before certain legal effects of death arise
ex. Contracting a subsequent marriage but
the periods are reduced to 2 years.
The legal effects of absence and restrictions
on his capacity are determined by his
personal law.
E. Name
A person’s name is determined by law and
cannot be changed without judicial
intervention.(Art. 376, CC) Case law shows
that courts have allowed petitions on
grounds that the name—
1. is ridiculous or tainted with dishonor or
extremely difficult to pronounce
2. when the change is necessary to avoid
confusion
3. when the right to a new name is a
consequence of change in status
4. a sincere desire to adopt a Filipino
name to erase signs of a former alien
nationality which unduly hamper social
and business life
Confusion as to one’s paternity has been
held to justify the court’s denial of a petition
for change of name.
Whether an alien’s change of name is valid
depends solely on his personal law.
F. Age of Majority
The legal disability and rights attached to
minority are aspects of personal status. It is
the individual’s personal law which
determines whether he has reached the age
of majority.
RA 6809 lowered the age of majority from
21 – 18 years but parental consent for
contracting marriage is still required until
the age of 21.
G. Capacity
A person’s ability to act is governed by his
personal law. Rules on capacity of an
individual to bind himself by contract with

other persons or by unilateral acts are the
very core of the rules that identify his legal
position. The incapacities attached to his
legal status go with him wherever he is.
The general rule on capacity is subject to
several exceptions. These include liability in
tort, which is subject to the law of the place
of the tort and the restrictions on the
contracting capacity of a married woman.
Insular Government vs. Frank
(1909)
FACTS: Insular Govt entered into an
employment contract with Frank in
Illinois when he was still a minor under
Phil law but not under Illinois law. Frank
breached the contract so IG sued him.
HELD: Illinois law should apply. Matters
bearing upon the execution,
interpretation and validity of a contract
are determined by the law of the place
where the contract is made.
! Notes!
This case should have been resolved as a
capacity case instead of as a contract case
(characterization).
PART FOUR: CHOICE OF LAW
PROBLEMS
XII. Choice of Law in Family Relations
Man & woman may decide to marry in a
country other than that of their nationality
& come home. Issue of validity of marriage
& legal consequences may be raised (Legal
consequences such as personal & property
relations, status & rights of children, use of
surname & right to inherit).
Family law is an area of substantive law
which reflects strong policies of state often
based on values highly held by society.
Family relations give rise to grave individual
& societal concerns.
A. Marriage
Family Code Definition:
Art 1. “Marriage is a special contract of
permanent union b/w man & woman
entered into in accordance w/ law for the
establishment of conjugal & family life.
It is the foundation of the family & an
inviolable social institution whose nature,
consequences & incidents are governed by
law & not subject to stipulation except that
Page 43 of 92
Conflict of Laws
marriage settlements may fix property
relations during the marriage w/in limits
provided by this Code.”
Juxtaposed w/ Art15 CC, w/c states that
questions on family rights, duties, status,
conditions & capacity are governed by lex
nationalii, the importance of such definition
is realized.
Marriage is a special contract as
distinguished from an ordinary contract:
1) entered into by a man & a woman
2) both at least 18 years of age
3) solemnized by a person specifically
authorized by law
4) a permanent union unless one
party dies, or marriage is annulled
or declared void in special
circumstances
5) cannot be abrogated, amended or
terminated by one or both parties
at will
6) nature & consequences as well as
incidents are governed by law &
not subject to stipulation by parties
unlike ordinary contracts
7) violation of marital obligations may
give rise to penal or civil sanctions
while breach of conditions of
ordinary contract can be ground
for an action for damages
1. Philippine Policy on
Marriage and the
Family
Art XV. Sec. 2: Marriage as an inviolable
social institution, is the foundation of the
family & shall be protected by the state.
Presumption of validity: The Philippines
establishes a presumption of validity to give
stability to marriage especially in Conflicts
of Law problems.
Art 220. CC. In case of doubt, all
presumptions favor the solidarity of the
family. Thus every intendment of law or
facts lean toward the validity of marriage,
the indissolubility of marriage bonds,
legitimacy of children, the community of
property during marriage…
Goal: Guide courts, strengthen family, &
emphasize state interest in its preservation
2. Extrinsic Validity of
Marriage
This is governed by lex loci celebrationis.

Extrinsic validity covers questions on
formalities or external conduct required of
parties for legally valid marriage.
Art 2. Hague Convention on Celebration &
Recognition of Validity of Marriages: Formal
requirements governed by law of state of
celebration.
General rule: All states recognize as valid
marriages celebrated in foreign countries if
the formalities prescribed there were
complied with.
PHILIPPINES, Formal Requirements of
Marriage
Art 3. FC sets the ff requirements:
1) Authority of solemnizing officer
2) Valid marriage license except in
cases provided in Ch 2 of this title
3) Mariage ceremony w/c takes place
w/ the appearance of contracting
parties before the solemnizing
officer & their personal declaration
that they take each other as
husband & wife in the presence of
not less than 2 witnesses of legal
age
Lex Loci Celebrationis (expressed in Art 26
FC):
“All marriages solemnized outside the
Philippines in accordance w/ the laws in
force in the country where they were
solemnized, and valid there as such, shall
also be valid in this country…”
Adong vs. Cheong Seng Gee
(1922)
FACTS: The late Cheong Boo’s estate is
being claimed by Cheong Seng Gee, who
says that he is the legitimate child of the
decedent with Tan Dit, whom the
decedent allegedly married in China.
HELD: The validity of the Chinese
marriage cannot be recognized. There is
no competent testimony what the laws of
C h i n a i n t h e P ro v i n c e o f A m o y
concerning marriage were in 1895. There
is lacking proof so clear, strong and
u n e q u i v o c a l t o p ro d u c e a m o r a l
conviction of the existence of the alleged
Chinese marriage.
People vs. Mora Dumpo
(1935)
FACTS: Dumpo married Hassan, and
then married Sabdapal without having
her previous marriage annulled. As a
Page 44 of 92
Conflict of Laws
defense to an allegation of bigamy,
Dumpo claimed that her 2nd marriage
was void because her father did not
consent thereto.
HELD: Dumpo is not guilty of bigamy.
The 2nd marriage was null and void
because the consent of her father was not
obtained. It is an essential element of
bigamy that the alleged 2nd marriage,
having all the essential requisites, would
be valid were it not for the existence of
the first.
Wong Woo Yu vs. Vivo
(1935)
FACTS: Wong Woo Yu alleged before the
Board of Special Inquiry that she was
allegedly married to a Filipino, Blas, in a
ceremony in China. The new Board
ordered Wong to be excluded from the
country, on the ground that her marriage
to Blas was bereft of substantial proof.
HELD: Wong should be excluded. Art.15
of our Civil Code provides that the laws
relating to family rights or to the status of
persons are binding upon Philippine
citizens, though living abroad. Even if the
marriage of Wong to Blas before a village
leader is valid in China, the same is not
one of those authorized in our country.
Under Sec. 4 of Gen. Orders 68 (now Art.
71 CC), a marriage contracted outside the
Philippines which is valid under the law
of the country in which it was celebrated
is also valid here; but there was no proof
presented on the applicable law of China.
Therefore it may be presumed to be the
same as our law.
Apt vs. Apt
(1947)
FACTS: The marriage of the Apts (both
Germans) was celebrated in Argentina by
proxy. The wife, a domiciliary of England,
filed a petition for the nullification of
their marriage on the ground that proxy
marriages are not valid in England. It is,
however, valid in Argentina.
HELD: The marriage is valid. The English
law on marriage is locus regis actum. If a
marriage is good by the laws of the
country where it is effected, it is good all
the world over, no matter whether the
proceeding or ceremony which
 Conflict of Laws

constituted marriage according to the law marry a specific person or person of a

of the place would or would not
constitute marriage in the country of
domicile of one or other of the spouses.
Since the marriage was performed in
Buenos Aires and in accordance with its
laws, and since proxy marriage is only a
form of the ceremony and not an essential
requisite, the marriage should be upheld.
determinate class.
What law controls intrinsic requirements?
The parties’ personal laws—either domicile
or nationality.
Municipal laws of each state provides
substantive requirements of marriage.

Philippine Law sets the following

Exceptions to Lex Loci celebrationis: The substantive or essential requisites:
Civil Code (Art 71) enumerates bigamous,
polygamous or incestuous marriages as 1) Legal capacity: must be 18 years
exceptions to the lex loci celebrationis rule. of age & not barred by any
impediment to marry each other
The Family Code (Art 26) widens these
exceptions. 2) Consent freely given: in the
presence of an authorized
A foreign marriage although valid in the solemnizing officer
foreign country where it was entered into
will be void in the Philippines if: Matrimonial consent: Parties are, at least,
not ignorant that the marriage is a
1) either or both parties are below 18 permanent union.
2) it is bigamous or polygamous
3) a subsequent marriage is Mixed marriages: the law that governs
performed w/out recording in the substantive validity is national law of
C i v i l Re g i s t r y & r e g i s t r y o f parties.
Properties the judgment of
annulment or declaration of nullity Art 38. FC.: Though valid in a foreign
of first marriage, the partition o& country certain marriages may be void in
distribution of the properties of the Philippines on grounds of public policy,
the spouses & the delivery of such as the ff:
presumptive legitimes
4) there was a mistake as to identity 1) b/w collateral blood relatives,
of the contracting party whether legitimate or illegitimate
5) one of the contracting parties was up to the 4th civil degree
psychologically incapacitated to 2) b/w step-parents & stepchildren
comply with the essential marital 3) b/w parents-in-law & children-in-
obligations law
6) the marriage is incestuous 4) b/w adopting parent & adopted
7) marriage is void by reason of child
public policy 5) b/w surviving spouse of adopting
parent & adopted child
Note that the exceptions put in issue the 6) b/w surviving spouse of adopted
parties’ capacity to enter into marrriage, child & adopter
thus, relating to a substantive requirement. 7) b/w adopted child & legitimate
child of adopter
Since the personal law of the parties 8) b/w adopted children of same
governs questions of intrinsic validity of adopter
marriages b/w Filipinos abroad, the above 9) b/w parties where one, w/
enumerations are exceptions to the lex loci intention to marry the other, killed
celebrationis precisely because they are the person’s spouse or his or her
controlled by lex nationalii. own spouse

3. Intrinsic Validity of Marriages Between First Cousins:

Marriage
Intrinsic requirements refer to capacity or
general ability of a person to marry, for
instances defined by requirements of age &
parental consent, but it does not refer
clearly to an individual’s being permitted to
Marriage of 1 st cousins is no longer
incestuous but still void ab initio on the
ground of public policy.
It is submitted that our prohibition against
marriage of 1st cousins be limited only to

Page 45 of 92

Filipino nationals because many countries
allow such marriages.
Marriages b/w foreigners whose national
laws allow marriage of 1st cousins should be
considered as valid in the Phil under the
principle that the lex nationalii controls
capacity & presumption in favor of validity
of marriage, as expressed in Art 220.
Hague Convention on validity of Marriages
allows a contracting state to refuse
recognition of the marriage if:
1) one of spouses was already
married (unless marriage has
subsequently become valid by
virtue of dissolution or annulment
of previous marriage)
2) spouses were related to one
another by blood or by adoption,
in the direct line or as brother or
sister
3) one of spouses had not attained
the minimum age required for
marriage nor acquired the
necessary dispensation
4) one of the spouses did not have
the mental capacity to consent
5) one of the spouses did not freely
consent to the marriage
Sottomayor vs. de Barros
(1877)
FACTS: Sottomayor and de Barros are both
Portuguese and first cousins. Under
Portuguese law they are incapable of
contracting marriage. They were married in
London. Sottomayor filed a petition to have
the marriage declared invalid.
HELD: The marriage is invalid. The law of a
country where marriage is solemnized must
decide all questions relating to the validity
of the ceremony by which the marriage is
alleged to have been constituted; but as
regards questions on personal capacity, it
must depend on the law of the domicile,
and if the laws of any country prohibit its
s u b j e c t s w i t h i n c e r t a i n d e g re e s o f
consanguinity from contracting marriage
and treats such as incestuous, this imposes
on the subjects a personal incapacity which
continues to affect them so long as they are
domiciled in said country and renders such
marriage invalid wherever it may have been
solemnized.
In re May’s Estate
(1920)
Page 46 of 92
Conflict of Laws
FACTS: Fannie is Sam’s niece by half
blood; they are both Jewish and NY
residents. NY prohibits marriage between
uncle and niece, so they went to Rhode
Island, where such marriage is also
prohibited except where the parties are
Jewish (the Jewish faith allow such
marriages). After the ceremony they went
back to NY to live there.
HELD: The marriage is valid. The legality
of a marriage between persons sui juris is
to be determined by the law of the place
where it is celebrated. The general
principle is that the rights dependent
upon nuptial contracts are to be
determined by the lex loci, subject to 2
exceptions: 1) cases within the prohibition
of positive law, and 2) cases involving
polygamy or incest in a degree regarded
generally as within the prohibition of
natural law. As to the first exception,
there is no “positive law” in New York
which serves to interdict the marriage in
Rhode Island of Sam and Fannie, and as
to the second exception, their marriage
was not offensive to the public sense of
morality, it being allowed by the Jewish
faith.
Instances Where Recognition of Validity of
Marriage May be Withheld:
Christianity prohibits polygamous &
incestuous marriages but care must be
taken to confine doctrine to cases deemed
incestuous by general consent of all
Christendom.
The state may resort to ultimate escape
device- contravention of a public policy to
w/hold recognition of validity of a foreign
marriage.
Rule: Marriages manifestly incompatible
with the ordre public of the state of
nationality of parties may be refused
recognition.
However, commentators argue that when
the non/existence of marriage is merely a
preliminary Q arising incidentally in a case
involving an issue not profaning mores of
forum (such as tax, property or succession
law) the rule above should not be applied.
In ReDalip Singh: two women claimed that
they were lawfully wedded wives of Singh, a
native of India who died intestate in
California. They claim to have been lawfully
married to him in India over 50 yrs ago
while domiciled there in accordance w/ law
of the Jat community.

Under California laws, only 1st wife
recognized as legal widow. Wives argue that
the polygamous marriages should be held
valid on strength of Art 63 CC: “All
marriages contracted w//out the state, w/c
would be valid by the laws of the country in
w/c the same were contracted are valid in
this state”.
Court, citing English & American cases:
Polygamous marriages can be recognized in
English law “so as to confer on the ‘wives’
the status of a wife for the purposes of Sec.
10 of British Nationality & Status of Aliens
Act or for purposes of succession, & upon
the children the status of legitimacy.
Marriages Celebrated by a Consular Official
Art. 9 of the relevant Hague convention:
Marriage celebrated by a diplomatic agent
or consular official in accordance with his
state law shall be considered valid as long
as it is not prohibited by the state of
celebration
Philippine law: Marriage of Filipino nationals
shall be officiated by Philippine consul
general, consul or vice consul (in w/c case
the formal & extrinsic requirements of a
valid marriage license & due publication &
registration under Philippine law have to be
complied with).
This is said to apply to marriage b/w Filipino
national & an alien provided the alien
complies with marriage requisites under his/
her national law.
Additional requirements for:
1) aliens - submission of a certificate
of legal capacity to contract
marriage issued by diplomatic/
consular office
2) stateless persons or refugees-
submission of affidavit stating
circumstances showing legal
capacity to contract marriage
4. Effects of Marriage
Personal Relations between the Spouses
These include mutual support, fidelity,
respect, cohabitation & right of wife to use
husband’s family name)
What is the governing law? National law of
parties
If spouses are of different nationalities,
generally, the husband’s national law may
Page 47 of 92
Conflict of Laws
prevail as long as it is not contrary to law,
customs, & good morals of the forum.
Art 69 Family Code: Husband & wife have
the right to fix family domicile.
• Court, for compelling reasons, may
exempt spouse from living with the
other.
Djumantan vs. Domingo: Filipino marries
Indonesian. They go to Philippines w/
intention of staying here permanently.
Subject of petition: Effect of marriage on
wife’s right to stay in the Philippines.
There is no law guaranteeing aliens married
to Filipino citizens the right to be admitted,
much less to be given permanent residency,
in the Philippines.
“The fact of marriage by an alien to a
citizen does not withdraw her from
operation of immigration laws governing
admission & exclusion of aliens. Marriage of
an alien woman to Filipino citizen does not
ipso facto make her a Filipino citizen & does
not excuse her from her failure to depart
from the country upon expiration of her
extended stay here as alien”.
Restatement 2nd: The wife who lives w/
her husband has the same domicile as his
unless special circumstances of wife make
such result unreasonable.
But, in Ch VIII on Domicile, some legal
authorities consider the assignment of
constructive domicile to the wife as
invidious discrimination on basis of gender.
Property Relations of Spouses
Hague Conventions on law Applicable to
Matrimonial Property: The internal law
designated by spouses before marriage or
in absence thereof the internal law of state
in w/c both spouses fix their habitual
residence is the governing law on
matrimonial property regimes.
Art 80. Family Code: In the absence of a
c o n t ra r y s t i p u l a t i o n i n a m a r r i a g e
settlement, property relations of spouses
shall be governed by Philippine laws,
regardless of the place of the celebration of
the marriage & their residence.
This rule shall not apply:
1) If both spouses are aliens
2) With respect to the extrinsic validity
of contracts affecting property not
situated in the Philippines & executed
in the country where the property is
located

3) With respect to the extrinsic validity
of contracts entered into in the Phil
but affecting property situated in a
foreign country whose laws require
different formalities for its extrinsic
validity
Art 80 generally follows lex rei sitae.
What law will govern the property relations
of spouses where one is a Filipino citizen 7
the other a foreigner? It would still be
governed by Philippine law.
Change of nationality after Marriage
If one or both spouses change nationality
subsequent to marriage, property regime
remains unchanged because of principle of
immutability.
Hague Convention on Matrimonial Property
Regimes. Art 7: The applicable law
continues notwithstanding any change of
their nationality or habitual residence.
! Notes!
extrinsic validity: refers to formal requisites,
apply lex loci celebrationis
intrinsic validity: refers to essential
requisites, apply personal law of the parties
✪
In Adong and Wong Woo Yu, the
Court did not apply the Philippine
policy of presumption of validity of
marriage.
✪ Question: is a proxy marriage
between Filipinos in a state
allowing such marriages valid?
Pangalangan: Yes, because it is
merely a formal requisite (lex loci
celebrationis apply)
________________
B. Divorce and Separation
Divorce: Absolute or Limited
Absolute: termination of legal relationship
b/w spouses by an act of law.
Limited: (Legal separation) separation form
bed & board w/c does not effect the
dissolution of marital ties. But it modifies
the incidents of marriage by relieving
spouses of duty of living w// each other.
This does not necessarily affect economic
rights & duties since the court may order
one to provide for support. For such
purpose, it is essential that court has JD
over respondent spouse & the property
sought to be affected by decree.
Page 48 of 92
Conflict of Laws
Local law governs legal consequences of
divorce of spouses, nationals of same
country, who marry, are domiciled &
divorce.
If any of above factors connected to
another state… conflicts problem arises.
Divorce jurisdiction:
Basis of JD of some countries: Domicile of
one of the parties or matrimonial domicile
Ratio: Divorce, being a matter of state
concern, should be controlled by “law of
place w/ w/c person is most intimately
concerned, place where he dwells.
Due process requires that forum court have
a substantive contact w/ the relationship w/
c it will decide won to dissolve.
Hague Convention Relating to Divorce &
Separation: The granting of divorce or
separation must comply w/ the national law
of spouses & the law of the place where the
application for divorce is made.
Some laws in PRiL have made
1) the right to separation or divorce
depend on the national law of the
spouses &
2) grounds for divorce subject to law
of forum
provided the parties were domiciled there.
Grounds for divorce are dictated by lex fori.
Thus, many states refuse to recognize
foreign grounds for divorce unless it
corresponds w/ a ground justified by forum
law. This is followed whether the traditional
or policy centered choice of law approach is
used.
1. Divorce decrees
obtained by Filipinos
Divorce decrees obtained abroad have no
validity, not recognized in Philippine
jurisdiction.
BUT a marriage b/w a Filipino & a foreigner
is susceptible to divorce if the divorce was
validly obtained by the alien spouse (Art 26
par 2).
Effects:
1. alien is capacitated to remarry

2. Filipino spouse shall likewise have
the capacity to remarry under
Philippine law
Effect of Provision (Art 26): partial
recognition in the Phil of absolute divorce.
o note: Divorce should be obtained
only by alien spouse. Otherwise,
Art 26 is inapplicable.
o Provision is to remedy the uneven
status of Filipino nationals whose
alien spouses obtained divorce
abroad & remarried while the
Filipino spouse remained married
to them in eyes of Philippine law.
Tenchavez vs. Escaño
(1965)
FACTS: Vicenta and Pastor were married
without the knowledge of her parents.
Vicenta went to the US to obtain a
divorce, which was granted by the
Nevada Court; she married an American
and subsequently acquired American
citizenship. Pastor sued Vicenta for legal
separation and damages. Vicenta’s
defense is that there was a valid divorce
issued by the Nevada court.
HELD: The divorce decree obtained in the
US is not valid, because at the time it was
issued, Vicenta, like Pastor, was still a
Filipino citizen. She was then subject to
Philippine law. Philippine law cannot
recognize a foreign decree of absolute
divorce between Filipino citizens, for this
would violate declared public policy.
Van Dorn vs. Romillo
(1985)
FACTS: Van Dorn, a Filipina, married
American Upton. Ten years later they
were divorced in the US; subsequently,
van Dorn remarried. Upton filed an
a c t i o n a g a i n s t Va n D o r n i n t h e
Philippines, asking for an accounting of
certain alleged conjugal properties.
HELD: The divorce decree is valid and
binding upon Upton. Even if divorce is
not valid in the Philippines for being
contrary to public policy, only Philippine
nationals are covered by the policy
against absolute divorces. Aliens may
obtain divorces abroad, which may be
recognized in the Philippines provided
valid according to their national law.
Page 49 of 92
Conflict of Laws
Pilapil vs. Ibay Somera
(1989)
FACTS: Pilapil and Geiling were married
in Germany, but were later divorced. A
few months later, Geiling filed a
complaint for adultery which was
dismissed; it was refiled by the fiscal.
HELD: Geiling has no legal standing to
commence the adultery case because the
person who initiates the adultery case
must be an offended spouse, meaning he
must still be married to the accused
spouse at the time of the filing of the
complaint. Because of the divorce decree,
Geiling is no longer the husband of
Pilapil; hence he had no more legal
standing to commence the adultery case
(no longer an offended “spouse”).
Quita vs. Court of Appeals
(1998)
FACTS: Quita and Padlan were married
in the Philippines, but Quita filed for
divorce in California which was granted.
She remarried twice after the divorce.
Upon Padlan’s death, Quita made claims
upon his estate as the surviving spouse
and heir of Padlan, alleging that since
Padlan was a Filipino citizen, he
remained married to her in spite of the
divorce decree.
HELD: Quita’s right to inherit from
Padlan depends on her citizenship at the
time the divorce was decreed. If she was
no longer a Filipino citizen at the time of
their divorce, the divorce would be valid
as to her and will be recognized in the
Philippines, and she would lose her right
to inherit.
! Notes!
✪ Tenchavez: 2 Filipinos, divorced
abroad – not recognized in the
Philippines (Art. 15 CC, nationality
principle)
✪ Van Dorn: 1 Filipino, 1 foreigner,
divorced abroad – recognized (Art.
15 CC, estoppel)
✪ Pilapil: 1 Filipino, 1 foreigner –
recognized (nationality principle)
________________
 Conflict of Laws

2. Validity of Foreign
Divorce between The ground occurs Based on defects
Foreigners a f t e r m a r r i a g e present at time of
celebration celebration
Hague Convention on Recognition of
Divorce & Legal Separation:

A foreign divorce will be recognized in all
contracting states if at the date of
institution of proceedings:
a) Respondent or petitioner had his
habitual residence there, or
b) Both spouses were nationals of
this state, or
c) If only the petitioner was a
national, he should have his
habitual residence there
U S F u l l Fa i t h & C r e d i t C l a u s e o f
Constitution: A sister state has the duty to
recognize a divorce pronounced in a sister
state, when both spouses are domiciled
there.
If only the plaintiff is domiciled there: Other
conditions (i.e. service of process to
defendant) must be fulfilled
Effect of Divorce Rendered by a Foreign
Country: not covered by Full faith & credit
clause
o but would be recognized under the
same circumstance that a sister
state’s divorce decree is given
recognition.
paramount consideration: jurisdiction of
foreign court based on parties’ domicile.
Philippine Law on Recognition of Foreign
Divorce Decree: No provision on recognition
of divorce decree b/w non-Filipinos;
o but such will be recognized under
international comity, provided it
does not violate a strongly held
policy of the Philippines
Grounds for Annulment & Nullity:
o States w/ traditional choice-of-law
approach: follow the lex loci
celebrationis
o States w/ policy-centered
approach: follow the law of state
of marital domicile (considered to
have the most significant interest
in status of persons)
In both approaches, lex fori (which is crucial
in divorce) does not play substantial role
because the action turns on the validity of
the marriage.
Note that in either traditional or policy-
centered approaches, lex fori is not used;
recall that lex fori can be used in divorce.
Both lex loci celebrationis and law of marital
domicile can provide jurisdictional basis, but
only one can be a choice-of-law in the
determination of the annulment decree.
Which states can claim adequate
jurisdictional basis to hear a conflicts
annulment or nullity case?
a) state where marriage was
celebrated
b) place of marital domicile
Wheaton vs. Wheaton: Even a court which
acquires personal JD over parties can grant
an annulment case (US case).

C. Annulment and Declaration of

Nullity

Effect: Affects status & domestic relations of

parties.

Distinction from Divorce

Divorce Annulment and

Nullity

Page 50 of 92

Sample conflicts Annulment Case
o M&F, domiciliaries of STATE A, both
18 years old
o marry in STATE B w/out knowledge
of their parents
o suit for annulment was brought in
STATE C (place of M’s residence)
State C can exercise JD over the case but
what is the governing law?
• Traditional choice-of-Law rules: will find
sufficient ground for the challenge
If the lex loci celebrationis
(STATE B) requires parental consent
for a valid marriage
• Most Significant Relationship Approach:
will not yield a ground for annulment.
State C can conclude that since law
of STATE A (state of marital
domicile) gives people their age full
capacity to marry, no ground for
annulment
The Choice of Law rule of STATE C will be
irrelevant
D. Parental Relations
What law determines legitimacy of a child?
Personal law of parents - either domicile or
nationality.
Most countries: father’s personal law
German law: law of head of family
Law on parental relations include:
o Paternity
o Filiation
What law governs legitimacy of child in the
Philippines? National law of the parents.
If parents are of different nationality:
national law of father is controlling.
In the PHILIPPINES:
o Personal law of the child is the
national law of the father if the
child is legitimate or legitimated.
o Personal law of the child is the
national law of the mother if the
child is illegitimate.
o Legitimacy of the child determined
by the national law of the father if
both parents are not Filipino.
In the UNITED STATES:
as per Second Restatement On Legitimacy
of the American Law Institute
Page 51 of 92
Conflict of Laws
o Child is legitimate if this is his
status under the local law where
the parent is domiciled when the
child’s legitimacy is claimed OR
when the parent acknowledged the
child as his own.
Parental Authority over the Child
-from concept of patria potestas of Roman
law
What law controls? Father’s personal law
controls rights & duties of parents &
children.
o Art. 211 FC: Reference to father’s
personal law may result in joint
exercise of parental authority
o Art. 176 FC: Personal law could
grant parental authority to mother
of illegitimate children
Scope of Parental Authority:
1) care & rearing
2) action a parent may file against
another for child custody
3) requirements for parental consent
of child’s marriage
E. Adoption
Definition: The act by which relations of
paternity & affiliation as legally existing b/w
persons not so related by nature.
It is a judicial act w/c creates b/w 2 persons
a relationship similar to that w/c results
from legitimate paternity & affiliation.
Early societies considered it as a means of
perpetuating a house or cult threatened by
extinction.
Original purpose: solace for childless or
people who lost children
Recent time: broader, more humane aim
Social & moral purpose: extend protection
of society (in the person of adopter) to the
orphan.
Thus, persons eligible to adopt expanded
What law governs? lex domicilii
The adoption process affects status of
parties, necessarily governed by lex
domicilii.
What if prospective adoptive parent is
domiciled in one state & the child is

domiciled in another? Twin problems of
jurisdiction and choice-of-law.
o If the main object of adoption is
the welfare of the child, the
personal law of the child is the
best choice-of-law to govern his
rights
o But the personal law of the child
cannot be successfully used to
invoke jurisdiction if his domicile is
merely constructive or if he is a
citizen of a state but he doesn’t
reside there.
Child’s personal law as basis for exercise of
jurisdiction weakened in situations where
child’s domicile is:
o merely constructive, or
o if he is a citizen of a state but he
doesn’t reside there (there is little
basis for court to protect child
interest competently)
The continuous movement of people in &
out of countries should also be factored in.
Can an alien adopt a child in the
Philippines?
General Rule: not allowed
Reason: Different family orientation,
cultures, customs & traditions could pose
problems of adaptation for child.
Exceptions:
o Art 184. Aliens who have some
relationship with the child by
consanguinity or affinity
o which was granted.
RA 8552 (Domestic Adoption Act
Of 1998)
These two introduced significant changes in
adoption law.
Change Pertinent to Conflict Law
1) Aliens who have resided in the
Philippines for 3 years prior to the
date of filing the application for
adoption, and maintains residency
until decree of adoption is granted
QUALIFIED TO ADOPT
2) Other requirements:
a) c e r t i f i c a t i o n o f l e g a l
capacity
b) certification that the State
law would allow entry of
the adoptee as an
adopted child of the
adopter.
Page 52 of 92
Conflict of Laws
These other requirements may be waived if
the adoptee is related by consanguinity or
affinity to the
o adopter, or
o his/ her spouse as specified by
law.
RA 8043:
Before this, adoption of Filipino children by
foreigners was done pursuant to Rules &
Regulations on Foreign Adoption & bilateral
agreements.
RA 8043 regulate the adoption of Filipino
children by
o aliens, or
o Filipino citizens permanently
residing abroad.
RA 8043 was passed in compliance with our
treaty obligation as a signatory to the
Hague Convention on Protection of Children
& Cooperation In Respect of Intercountry
Adoption.
Convention pursues modern concept of
adoption: After possibilities of adoption for
placement of child within state of origin
h ave b e e n e x h a u s t e d , i n t e rc o u n t r y
adoptions may be placed in the best
interest of the child.
Republic of the Philippines vs. CA
(1993)
FACTS: Hughes is married to Lenita, a
Filipina who was later naturalized as an
American citizen. They filed a petition to
adopt the 3 nephews and niece of Lenita,
HELD: Hughes is not qualified to adopt
since he does not fall under the
exceptions in Art. 184 of the Family Code.
While Lenita, as a former Filipino, is
qualified to adopt under that provision,
the adoption decree still cannot be
granted because of the requirement in
Art. 185 that spouses must jointly adopt.
They cannot do this in CAB because
Hughes is not qualified under the law.
Effects Of Adoption
What law governs rights of adopted child &
other effects of legal adption? (law that
governed the creation of adoption)
2 different legal orders depending on which
law governed the creation of adoption:

1) If Personal law of adopter applied
—same law governs effects of
adoption.
2) If personal law of child applied—
such law will cease to regulate the
resulting parent-child relations; it
will yield to the personal law of
adopting parents.
Philippine courts:
o Adoption relates to a civil
rights of adopted child
o Does not effect changes in
political rights, including
eligibility to acquire adopter’s
citizenship
In the Philippines, principles of enforcement
& recognition of a foreign judgment
governs, because the decree granting an
adoption is in the form of a foreign
judgment.
Uggi Lindamand Therkelsen vs.
Republic
(1964)
FACTS: Therkelsen (a German) and his
wife Erlinda (a Filipino), filed a petition
to adopt Erlinda’s natural child. The
application was denied on the ground
that an alien cannot adopt a Filipino
unless the adoption would make the
Filipino minor a citizen of the alien’s
country.
HELD: The application should be
granted. Being a permanent resident here,
Therkelsen is not disqualified to adopt
under our laws; to deny the application
on the above stated ground would be to
impose a further requisite on adoptions
by aliens beyond those required by law.
The citizenship of the adopter is a matter
political, not civil in nature, and the ways
in which it should be conferred lay
outside the ambit of the Civil Code.
Ng Hian vs. Collector of Customs
(1916)
FACTS: Marcosa married Ng Chion Te.
She adopted his 2 children by a previous
marriage and brought one of them to the
Philippines to study. The child, Ng Hian,
was refused entry into the Philippines.
HELD: Ng Hian may enter the
Philippines by virtue of being adopted by
one who has a right to do so. In the case
of Ex Parte Fong Yim, it was held that a
Page 53 of 92
Conflict of Laws
Chinese merchant domiciled in the US
has the right to bring into this country
with his wife minor children legally
adopted by him in China, where it is
shown that the adoption was bona fide,
and that the children have lived as
members of his family and have been
supported by him for several years.
XIII. Choice of Law in Property
A. The Controlling Law
The first issue to resolve in conflicts cases
involving property is whether it is a movable
or an immovable, because upon this
determination will depend the controlling
legal system.
Immovables: regulated by lex situs;
underlying this is the characterization of
immovable property as an isolated object of
rights so that the interests of various
persons are determined by the law of the
place where the land is situated.
The connecting factor is the immovable
itself and not the parties concerned.
Movables: not necessarily governed by the
lex situs; its transfer may be controlled by
the a) lex domicilii, b) lex situs, or c) lex loci
actus (the proper law of transfer).
Lex domicilii: the rights over the movables
are governed by the law of the owner’s
domicile.
Lex situs: the state where the property is
situated has the sole power to decide the
validity and effects of the transfer of
property. Also, the parties’ legitimate
expectations are protected. The rationale
for this is that being physically part of the
country, it should be subject to the laws
thereof. The situs is the place most closely
and significantly related to the issue in
question.
Alternatives to lex domicilii and lex situs:
a) Lex loci actus: law of the place
where the transaction was
completed
b) the proper law of the forum: law of
the state which has the most real
connection with the transfer
In the Philippines, real and personal
property are “subject to the law of the
country where it is situated” (Art. 16 CC). a

problem regarding classification will arise
only when the property is located in a
foreign country which has a law that
distinguishes between real and personal
property.
! Notes!
For real property, there is very little room
for choice of law, because of the emphasis
on lex situs.
Why?
1) Property physically a part of the
particular state, and that state can
exercise JD over it (traditional
approach)
2) There is need for reliable records
(to protect the sanctity of records)
________________
B. Capacity to Transfer or Acquire
Property
This is governed by the law of the place
where the property is located.
Llantino vs. Co Liong Chong
(1990)
FACTS: The Llantinos leased real
property to Chong, a Chinese national
(but subsequently naturalized as a
Filipino), for 60 years. The Llantinos filed
an action to quiet title, claiming that the
lease contract was invalid for
c i rc u m v e n t i n g t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l
prohibition on the acquisition of land by
aliens.
HELD: The lease contract was valid, and
Chong had the right to hold by lease the
property involved although at the time of
execution of the contract, he was still a
Chinese national. In CAB there was no
option to buy the leased property in favor
of Chong. There is nothing in the record
to indicate any scheme to circumvent the
constitutional prohibition.
Aliens are not completely excluded by the
Constitution from use of lands for
residential purposes. Since their residence
in the Philippines is temporary, they may
be granted temporary rights, such as a
lease contract which is not forbidden in
the Constitution. The only instance where
a lease contract may be considered
invalid is where there are circumstances
attendant to its execution which are used
as a scheme to circumvent the
constitutional prohibition.
Page 54 of 92
Conflict of Laws
Cheesman vs. IAC
(1991)
FA C T S : T h o m a s C h e e s m a n ( a n
American) was married to a Filipina,
Criselda. The spouses later separated; but
Thomas brought this action to annul the
sale of real property made by Criselda in
favor of Padilla. He alleged that the sale
is void for lack of his consent. The
property sold was bought by Criselda
using her personal funds, and was
registered in her name only.
HELD: The sale was valid. He has no
capacity to question the sale of the
property by his wife on the theory that in
doing so he is merely exercising the
prerogative of a husband in respect of
conjugal property. This would permit
indirect controversion of the
constitutional prohibition. If the property
were to be declared conjugal, this would
accord to the alien husband an interest
and right over the land, which is not
granted to him under the Constitution.
C. Extrinsic and Intrinsic Validity
of Conveyances
The lex situs law applies to the following:
1) formalities of a contract to convey
property
2) the essential validity of the transfer
(unless the lex intentionis is clearly
established)
3) the effects of the conveyance or
properties
D. Exceptions to the Lex Situs
Rule
3 Exceptions to the Lex Situs rule:
1) where the transaction does not
affect transfer of title to or
ownership of the land (proper law:
lex intentionis or lex voluntatis)
Liljedahl vs. Glassgow
(1921)
FACTS: Bailey secured a debt payable in
Iowa to Liljedahl; as security, he
mortgaged his land in Colorado. Bailey
sold this land to Glassgow, with the
provision in the deed of sale that the
grantee agrees to pay the mortgagee.
Glassgow sold the land to a third party.

Under Iowa law, Glassgow became
bound to pay the mortgage, but not
under Colorado law.
HELD: Iowa law should apply, and
Glassgow should pay Liljedahl.
Instruments of conveyance, as they relate
primarily to title, are to be construed
according to the law of the situs. But
personal covenants or agreements in
instruments of conveyance will be given
effect according to the law of the place
where the same is executed and to be
performed.
2) in contracts where real property is
offered by way of a security for the
performance of an obligation such
as loan, where the security is
merely an accessory contract (the
principal contract is governed by
the rules on ordinary contract,
while the accessory contract on the
land is governed by the rule of lex
situs)
3) testate or intestate succession and
capacity to succeed, which are
governed by the national law of
the decedent
Under a policy-centered approach, the
forum court is not bound to look to the law
of the situs when the situs of the movable
property at the time of the transfer was
insignificant or accidental.
Also, when the issue involves considerations
other than the validity and effect of the
transfer itself, the courts may look to the
law of another state which has a real
interest in applying its law.
Rudow vs. Fogel: since the issue did not
relate to land title but to whether the
conveyance would result in a constructive
trust among family members, the law
applicable is the law of the domicile of the
trustor and trustee instead of the lex situs
of the property.
E. Situs of Certain Properties
1. Situs of Personal
Property for Tax
Purposes
The maxim mobilia sequuntur personam
cannot be applied to limit the right of the
state to tax property within its JD. It yields
to established facts of legal ownership,
actual presence, and control elsewhere, and
Page 55 of 92
Conflict of Laws
cannot be applied if it would result in
inescapable and patent injustice.
2. Situs of Money
Leon vs. Manufacturers Life Insurance:
having been endorsed in an annuity in
Canada under a contract executed in that
country, Canada was the situs of the money,
hence the probate court of Manila has no JD
over the funds.
3. Situs of Debts
2 Kinds of Movable Property:
1) choses in possession – embraces
all types of tangible physical
objects
2) choses in action – refers to
intangible objects
a) mere rights of actions
b) rights represented by a
document (capable of
delivery and susceptible
to negotiation as a
separate legal entity)
Harris vs. Balk
(1905)
FACTS: Harris and Balk are both North
Carolina domiciliaries. Harris owed Balk
a sum of money. When he was in
Baltimore he was served a writ of
garnishment, it appearing that Balk has a
debtor there. He paid pursuant to the
writ, but when he returned to N.
Carolina, Balk sued him for recovery of
his indebtedness. Harris pleaded the
recovery of the Maryland judgment.
HELD: The attachment of Harris’ debt is
valid, and the North Carolina court
should give credit to the Maryland
judgment. The obligation of the debtor to
pay his debt clings to and accompanies
him wherever he goes. He is as much
bound to pay his debt in a foreign state
when therein sued upon his obligation by
his creditor, as he was in the state where
the debt was contracted.
Prof. Beale: this decision did injustice to the
creditor, as he has no power to fix the
personal presence of his debtor at one
place or another. It is unjust to submit the

creditor’s claim to the accident of the
debtor’s presence in one state or another.
4. Situs of Corporate
Shares of Stocks
Under the Corporation Code (Sec. 63),
shares of stock are personal property and
may be transferred by delivery of the
certificate or certificates indorsed by the
owner or his attorney in fact. But such
transfer shall not be valid until recorded in
the books of the corporation in the manner
provided.
CIR vs. Anglo California National Bank
(1960)
FACTS: The Collector of Internal Revenue
assessed deficiency income taxes against
Calamba Sugar Estates for the capital
gains on the sale of Pampanga Sugar
Mills shares of stock. The sales were
conducted in SF, California, and
payments were made there.
HELD: CSE not liable for income tax on
the capital gains. The government cannot
impose income taxes on capital gains
where the sale took place outside its
territorial JD. Foreign corporations may
be levied income taxes only on income
d e r i v e d f ro m s o u rc e s w i t h i n t h e
Philippines. With respect to capital gains,
the place of the sale (which in CAB is
California) is also the place or source of
the capital gain.
F. Patents, Trademarks, Trade
Name, and Copyright
The Philippines is a party to the Union
Convention for the Protection of Industrial
Property; said convention states in Art. 8
that a “trade name shall be protected in all
the countries of the Union without the
obligation of filing of registration, whether
or not it forms part of the trade name.”
Western Equipment and Supply Co. vs.
Reyes; although Western equipment has
not done business in the Philippines, it has
the right to protect its reputation. The right
to the use of the company’s corporate and
trade name is a property right which may
be asserted against the whole world.
RA 8293 (Intellectual Property Code):
applicant cannot register marks “well known
internationally and in the Philippines,
Page 56 of 92
Conflict of Laws
whether or not it is registered here, xxx and
is used for identical or similar goods or
services.”
Under Sec. 3 of the IPC, any foreign
corporation which is a national or
domiciliary of a country which is a party to a
convention, treaty or agreement relating to
intellectual property rights to which the
Philippines is also a party or extends
reciprocal rights to our nationals by law
“shall be entitled to benefits to the extent
necessary to give effect to any provision of
such convention…”
Philips Export vs. CA
(1992)
HELD: A corporation’s right to use its
corporate and trade name is a property
right, a right in rem, which it may assert
and protect against the world in the same
manner as it may protect its tangible
property, real or personal, against
trespass or conversion. It is regarded, to a
certain extent, as a property right and one
which cannot be impaired or defeated by
subsequent appropriation by another
corporation in the same field.
Emerald Garment Mfg. vs. CA
(1995)
FACTS: H. D. Lee Co., a foreign
corporation, filed a petition for
cancellation of registration of the
trademark “Stylistic Mr. Lee” used on
items of clothing by Emerald Garments,
alleging that it so closely resembled H. D.
Lee’s trademark as to cause confusion,
mistake and deception on the public as to
the origin of the goods.
HELD: A foreign corporation may have
the capacity to sue for infringement
irrespective of lack of business activity in
the Philippines on account of Section 21-
A of the Trademark Law but the question
of whether they have an exclusive right
over their symbol as to justify issuance of
the xxx writ will depend on actual use of
their trademarks in the Philippines.
XIV. Choice of Law in Contracts
Contract: meeting of the minds between 2
persons whereby one binds himself, with
respect to the other, to give something or
render some service. Parties are bound not
only to those expressly stipulated but also
to all the consequences which according to

their nature, may be in keeping with good
faith, usage and law.
As a gen. rule, unless provided by
law or in the agreement, a contract is
obligatory in whatever form it may have
been entered into provided that all the
essential requisites for validity are present.
Principal purposes of contract:
1. protect the reasonable expectations of
the parties to the contract
2. s e c u r e s t a b i l i t y i n c o m m e r c i a l
transactions
A. Contracts Involving a Foreign
Element
States, in their municipal laws, have
different rules on the formalities of a
contract, the capacity of parties, and the
essential requisites for the intrinsic validity
of contracts, interpretation and the law
governing execution. Forum court should be
aware if there is a law that parties have in
mind when they entered into a contract.
Interpretations of contracts are applied only
when the lex loci intentionis cannot be
ascertained.
Unlike family law, contract law does not
reflect strong state policies or values.
B. Extrinsic Validity of Contracts
Lex loci celebrationis governs the formal or
extrinsic validity of contracts. A contract is
valid as to form if in accordance with any
form recognized as valid by the law of the
country where made, and that no contract
is valid which is not made in accordance
with the local form.
Art 17, CC
The forms and solemnities of contracts,
wills, and other public instruments shall be
governed by the laws of the country in
which they are executed.
As to Contracts entered into by cablegram,
telex or fax: Art. 1319, CC states that
acceptance made by letter or telegram does
not bind the offeror except from the time it
came to his knowledge. The contract is
presumed to have been entered into the
place where the offer was made.
C. Intrinsic Validity of Contracts
Page 57 of 92
Conflict of Laws
Intrinsic validity refers to nature, contents
and effects of the agreement.
Art. 1318, CC: requisites of a contract
a. consent of the contracting parties
b. object certain
c. cause of the obligation
There are 3 possible laws that will govern
intrinsic validity of contracts:
1. law of the place of the making
2. law of the place of performance
3. law intended by the parties
1. Lex Loci Contractus
This refers to the law of the place where
the contract is made. This is the place
where the last act is done which is
necessary to bring the binding agreement
into being so far as the acts of the parties
are concerned.
Advantages:
a) relative ease in
establishing place of
contracting
b) in applying it consistently,
certainty and stability are
achieved.
Disadvantage: it will lead to unjust results
when the place of making is entirely
incidental or casual and has no significant
relationship with the contract or its
performance.
2. Lex Loci Solutionis
This refers to the law of the place of the
performance. All matters relating to time,
place, manner of performance, sufficiency
of performance and valid excuses for non-
performance are determined by lex loci
solutionis because it is undoubtedly related
to the contract in a significant way.
Macmillan & Bloedel vs. Valderama &
Sons
(1964)
FACTS: Valderama & Sons, thru an n
agent, entered into a contract for
purchase of railroad equipment with
Macmillan in Canada. Valderama failed
to get an import license because the
Import Control Comm failed to act on his
application. Macmillan suffered damages
because it had to cancel the freight
engagement.

HELD: Lex loci solutionis applies. The
general rule governing the validity &
construction of a contract & the rights
and liabilities thereunder is that the law
of the place of performance applies.
In case of conflict in determining validity,
nature and obligation and effect of
contract, lex loci solutionis prevails over lex
loci contractus.
The laws of Canada, which is the place of
performance, should apply. The failure of
the Import Control Comm. to act on the
application of import license cannot
constitute a legal excuse for his failure to
perform his obligations under the
contract.
3. Lex Loci Intentionis
This refers to the law intended by the
parties. When the parties stipulate that the
contract be governed by a specific law, such
will be recognized unless there are cogent
reasons for not doing so e.g. the choice-of-
law provision is contrary to a fundamental
policy of the forum.
Also construction and interpretation of
contracts may be agreed upon by parties.
Art 1306, CC
The contracting parties may establish such
stipulations, clauses, terms and conditions
as they may deem convenient, provided
that they are not contrary to law, morals,
good customs, public order or public policy.
Art, 1370, CC
If the terms of the contract are clear and
leave no doubt upon the intention of the
contracting parties, the literal meaning of
the stipulations shall control.
The law looks at the acts of the parties and
the surrounding circumstances which may
possibly have exerted some influence upon
their actions and then assumes that their
intentions are in harmony with such acts
and circumstances.
Parties are presumed to contemplate to
enter into a valid contract. The court should
apply the law that will sustain the contract.
D. C a p a c i t y t o E n t e r i n t o
Contracts
The capacity to enter into contracts is
governed by the rule on status and capacity
(personal law). In countries that follow the
Page 58 of 92
Conflict of Laws
nationality principle, the national law
prevails (art. 15, CC). In countries that
follow the domiciliary principle, law of their
domicile governs.
E. Choice of law Issues in
Conflicts Contracts Cases
1. Choice of Forum
Clause
The parties may stipulate on the venue of
the suit in case of litigation concerning the
contract.
It is a general rule that plaintiff has the
option to choose the venue where the suit
is to be filed in action in personam.
However, a case arising from the contract
will be litigated only in the forum chosen by
the parties if the choice of forum clause
specifically identifies it as the only venue.
Sec. 80, Sec. 3, Restatement Second. If the
parties have agreed in writing that an action
shall on a controversy be brought only in
another state and it is brought in a court of
this state, the court will dismiss or stay the
action, unless:
1. the court is required by
statute to entertain the action
2. plaintiff cannot secure
effective relief in other state
for reasons other than delay
3. the other state would
substantially be a less
convenient place of trial
4. the agreement as to place of
action was obtained by
misrepresentation, duress,
abuse of economic power or
other unconscionable means
5. it would be unfair or
unreasonable to enforce the
agreement
Compagnie de Commerce vs. Hamburg
Amerika
(1917)
FA C T S : C o m p a g n i e ( f re n c h ) a n d
Hamburg (Germany) entered into a
charter party to transport C’s goods from
Saigon- Europe. Because of the
impending war between France &
Germany, the ship went to Manila
because Saigon is a French port. C filed
for breach of contract. H contested the
jurisdiction of Phil courts to try the case
because the contract had a clause
directing the settlement of disputes first
to a Board of Arbitration in England.

HELD: Phil. courts have jurisdiction. The
parties are free to waive the stipulation if
they so desired.
Phil courts cannot be ousted of their
jurisdiction by the contractual stipulation
in the absence of averment and proof that
under the law of England (place of
contracting), compliance with, or an offer
to comply with such a stipulation
constitutes a condition precedent to the
institution of judicial proceeding for the
enforcement of the contract.
B e s i d e s , H a m b u rg a p p e a re d a n d
answered without objecting to the court’s
jurisdiction; it also sought affirmative
relief.
King Mau vs. Sycip
(1954)
FACTS: King Mau entered into an agency
agreement with the Sycip in New York.
King mau was able to sell 1,000 tons of
coconut oil. KM brought an action to
collect commission from the sale. Sycip
claimed that the Phil court has no
jurisdiction as the contract was entered in
New York.
HELD: Phil court has jurisdiction. A non-
resident may sue a resident in the courts
of this country where the defendant may
be summoned and his property leviable
upon execution in case of a favorable, if
final and executory judgment.
It is a personal action for the collection of
a sum of money which the CFIs have
jurisdiction to try and decide.
HSBC vs. Sherman
(1980)
FACTS: HSBC granted Eastern Book
Supply an overdraft secured by the
directors of the latter. Eastern failed to
pay. HSBC filed suit in RTC. The defense
of the directors is that Phil courts have no
jurisdiction because in the Guarantee
Agreement, it was provided that
Singapore shall have jurisdiction over all
disputes arising therein.
HELD: Phil courts have jurisdiction. The
parties did not stipulate that only the
courts of Singapore, to the exclusion of all
the rest, has jurisdiction. Neither did the
Page 59 of 92
Conflict of Laws
clause in question operate to divest Phil.
courts of jurisdiction.
Jurisdiction is defined as the right of a
State to exercise authority over persons
and things within its boundaries subject
to certain exceptions. This authority is
exclusive within and throughout the
domain of the State.
! Notes!
Pangalangan: HSBC case is disappointing—
why did the courts not recognize the choice
of forum clause? Courts are “turf-
conscious”; for PRIL to progress, there is a
need for each country to give up some of its
exercise of sovereignty.
_______________
2. Contracts with
Arbitration Clause
Puromines vs CA
((1993)
FACTS: Puromines and Philip Bros.
entered into a contract of sale with an
arbitration clause. Puromines filed for
complaint in RTC, Manila. Philip Bros.
filed a MTD on the basis of an arbitration
clause.
HELD: Arbitration clause is valid.
Puromines derives its right from the bill
of lading together with the sales contract
& it is bound by the provisions and terms
of the bill of lading and of the arbitration
clause incorporated in the sales contract.
The courts will look with favor upon such
amicable settlements (arbitration) and
will only interfere with great reluctance
to anticipate or nullify the action of the
arbitrator.
The Bremen vs. Zapata
(1972)
FACTS: Zapata, a Houston company,
entered into a contract of towage with
Unterweser, a German corp. Contract
contained a forum selection clause which
provides that any dispute arising must be
treated before London courts.
Zapata filed a suit in admiralty against
Unterweser for breach of contract and
damages in Florida District Court.
Unterweser filed motion to dismiss for
lack of jurisdiction citing the forum-
selection clause.

HELD: Florida court has no jurisdiction.
As a rule, a forum clause should control
absent a strong showing that it should be
set aside. Court should enforce the forum
clause specifically unless Zapata could
clearly show that
a. enforcement would be unreasonable
and unjust or
b. that the clause was invalid for such
reasons as fraud or overreaching or
c. if enforcement would contravene a
strong public policy of the forum in
which suit is brought, whether
declared by a statute or by judicial
decision or
d. if the chosen forum is seriously
inconvenient for the trial of the
action. But if the parties
contemplated the claimed
inconvenience, it should not be heard
to render the forum clause
unenforceable.
The CAB involves a freely negotiated
international commercial contract
between the parties. As noted, selection of
a London forum was clearly a reasonable
effort to bring vital certainty to this int’l
transaction and to provide a neutral
forum experienced and capable in the
resolution of admiralty litigation.
3. Adhesion Contracts
Adhesion contract is one that is not
negotiated by the parties having been
drafted by the dominant party and usually
embodied in a standardized form. It is
called a contract of adhesion because the
participation of 1 party is limited to affixing
her signature.
Pan Am World Airways vs. Rapadas
(1992)
FACTS: Rapadas’ samsonite was lost and
Pan Am offered to settle the claim for
$160. Rapadas refused and filed an action
in court. The defense of Pan Am is that
the claim is subject to the Notice of
baggage Liability Limitations contained
in the passenger ticket.
HELD: The liability is limited by the
Notice of Baggage liability. Although the
ticket is a contract of adhesion, it does not
offend against the policy of the law
forbidding one from contracting against
his own negligence. The one who adheres
Page 60 of 92
Conflict of Laws
to the contract is in reality free to reject it
entirely. Court finds the provisions in the
plane ticket sufficient to govern the
limitations of liabilities of the airline for
loss of luggage. The passenger, upon
receiving his plane ticket, was expected to
be vigilant insofar as his luggage is
concerned.
PAL vs. CA
(1996)
FACTS: Mejia shipped through PAL 1
microwave oven from San Francisco to
Manila. Upon arrival, she discovered that
the front glass door was broken and the
oven could not be used. Mejia filed action
against PAL. PAL denied liability and
alleged that it acted in conformity with
the Warsaw Convention.
HELD: Although the airway bill is
binding between the parties, the liability
of Pal is not limited on the provisions of
the airway bill. While the Warsaw
Convention is law in the Philippines, the
Philippines being a signatory thereto, it
does not operate as an exclusive
enumeration of the instances when a
carrier shall be liable for breach of
contract or as an absolute limit of the
extent of liability nor does it preclude the
operation of the Civil Code or other
pertinent laws.
Also, the willful misconduct and
insensitivity of the officers of PAL in not
attempting to explain the damage despite
due demand and the unexplained delay
in acting on her claim, amounted to bad
faith and renders unquestionable its
liability for damages.
Specific Instances where court disregarded
the adhesion contract:
1) when the party is not literate in the
language of the contract with
knowledge of what was intended
2) when there is undue advantage
made by a dominant party usually
a huge corporation or a business
monopoly
3) when there is ambiguity in the
adhesion contract, it must be
resolved contra preferentum and in
favor of the party impugning it
4) when it is subversive of public
policy when the weaker party is

imposed upon in dealing with the
dominant bargaining party and is
reduced to the alternative of taking
it or leaving it, completely deprived
of the opportunity to bargain on
equal footing
Sweet Lines vs. Teves: Petitioners assail the
validity of the tickets issued by Sweet Lines.
HELD: The adhesion contract is void. It is
not just and proper to expect that the
passengers examined their tickets from the
crowded counters esp. if there are a
number of conditions in fine print. Also,
shipping companies, esp. inter-island
vessels, possess a virtual monopoly over the
business of transporting the passengers
between ports covered by their franchise.
Lastly, the court took judicial notice of the
fact that these passengers come from low-
income groups and are less literate and who
have little or no choice but to avail of
petitioner’s vessels.
! Notes!
Parties may include any stipulation as long
as such stipulations do not violate public
policy or morals of the forum.
Lessons:
✪ PanAm: not all contracts of
adhesion are against public policy;
balancing of interests (airline vs.
passenger)
✪ PA L v s . C A : w h e n t h e r e i s
ambiguity in adhesion contract,
construe against the drafter.
________________
4. Special Contracts
In sales or barter of goods, the law of the
place where the property is located will
govern (lex situs).
A simple loan granted by financial
institutions is governed by the law of the
permanent place of business. But if granted
by a private individual, it is governed by the
law of the place where the loan was
obtained.
In contracts of pledge, chattel mortgage
and antichresis, the extrinsic and intrinsic
validity of the contracts are governed by lex
situs.
Page 61 of 92
Conflict of Laws
Carriage of Goods by Sea
American President Lines vs. Klepper
(1960)
FACTS: K shipped on board APL’s vessel
personal effects. Because of damage to the
effects, K sued APL. CA affirmed CFI’s
finding of liability but awarded damages
on the basis of the COGSA.
HELD: COGSA does not apply but the
Civil Code. Article 1753 of the Civil Code
provides that the law of the country to
which the goods are to be transported
shall govern the liability of the common
carrier in case of loss, destruction or
deterioration. Under Article 1766, "In all
matters not regulated by this Code, the
rights and obligations of common carriers
shall be governed by the Code of
Commerce and by special laws," and in
the Civil Code there are provisions that
govern said rights and obligations.
Although Section 4 (5) of the Carriage of
Goods by Sea Act states that the carrier
shall not be liable in an amount exceeding
$500.00 per package unless the value of
the goods had been declared by the
shipper and inserted in the bill of lading,
this is merely suppletory to the provisions
of the Civil Code.
Contracts for International Air
Transportation
The Warsaw Convention and amendments
to the same regulate and establish uniform
rules and regulations on the liability of
international airline carriers in cases of
death, injuries of passengers or loss or
damage of cargo. The Phils. became a
member thereof in 1951.
Liabilities of the Carrier:
a. in case of death or wounding- carrier’s
liability is not more than $75,000.
b. The limits do not apply when the
damage is caused by the act or
omission of the carrier, his servants or
agents, done with the intent to cause
d a m a g e o r re c k l e s s l y a n d w i t h
knowledge that damage would
probably result, provided that the agent
was acting within the scope of his
employment.
c. In case of loss or damage to baggage -
$20/kilo for checked baggage and

$400/passenger for unchecked luggage
unless a higher valuation is agreed
upon by the parties
d. Prescription. Action must be brought
within 2 years from date of arrival at
the destination, or from date which the
aircraft ought to have arrived or from
the date on which the transportation
stopped.
e. Venue. Any action for damages may be
brought either in the court of the
1. domicile of the carrier
2. principal place of business
3. place of business where the
contract was made
4. place of destination
5. Successive Carriers. Each of the
successive carriers is bound by the
rules on the Convention and shall
be deemed to be one of the
contracting parties insofar as the
part of the transportation which is
performed under his supervision.
But for goods or baggage, the
passenger or consignor has a right
of action against the first carrier
and the consignee who is entitled
to receive the same, against the
last carrier. They must take action
against the carrier who performed
the transportation during which
the loss, damage or delay took
place.
Lopez vs. Pan Am
(1965)
FACTS: Despite several confirmations,
Sen. Lopez and his family failed to get 1st
class seats and were constrained to board
as tourist passengers of PanAm. CFI,
Rizal awarded damages in their favor.
Pan Am admitted the breach of contract
but not the finding of bad faith
HELD: Pan Am acted in bad faith. Pan
Am misled the Lopezes into believing the
reservations were valid and was
prompted by self-interests in dong the
same (precluding the Lopezes to secure
other tickets). Also, there was negligence
by its employees that were so gross and
reckless as to amount to malice and bad
faith, e.g. erroneous cancellation of
reservation, not confirming reinstatement
of reservation, confirming reservation
even if EE had knowledge that they were
merely waitlisted and not notifying
Lopezes of the cancellation.
KLM Royal Dutch vs. CA
(1975)
Page 62 of 92
Conflict of Laws
FACTS: Mendozas went on a world tour.
KLM issued the tickets for the whole trip.
Their coupon for Aer Lingus was marked
RQ. Thru KLM’s help, reservations were
made in the Aer Lingus flight. Upon
arrival, only the minors were allowed to
board. Mendoza sued for breach of
contract and for damages bec. of the
humiliation they suffered. KLM denied
liability on the basis of Art. 30 of the
Warsaw Convention (successive carriers
liability)
HELD: Art. 30 does not apply and KLM
should be accountable for the tortious act
of Aer Lingus.Art. 30 presupposes either
an accident or delay and not the situation
in CAB. Although the tickets provide that
KLM’s liability for damages is limited to
occurrences in its own airlines, this
provision was printed in very small
letters such that a magnifying glass is
needed to read it. It would be unfair to
charge Mendozas of automatic
knowledge and it is the duty of KLM to
inform them of the conditions prescribed
in the tickets or at least make sure that
they read them before they accepted the
tickets. This it failed to do.
American Airlines vs. CA
(2003)
FACTS: Mendoza bought conjunction
tickets from Singapore Airlines. Although
it was not a participating airline, AA
exchanged the unused portion of the
ticket for a one-way ticket to New York.
However, Mendoza was prevented by
AA’s security officers from boarding until
all the other passengers have boarded. He
sued action for damages against AA in
RTC. AA claimed that the issuance of a
new ticket created a separate contract of
carriage from the one with SA and
therefore, under Art. 28, RTC had no
jurisdiction over the case against AA.
HELD: RTC had jurisdiction; the new
ticket is not considered as separate from
the one issued by SA but the contract of
carriage constitutes a single operation. SA
& AA are members of the IATA and
under the general pool partnership
agreement they act as agents of each
other in the issuance of tickets to
contracted passengers. When AA
exchanged the ticket, it entered it in the
IATA clearing house and undertook to

transport M. It thereby assumed the
obligation to take the place of the
principal carrier originally designated
and constituted itself as an agent of SA.
The number of tickets issued does not
detract from the oneness of the contract of
carriage as long as the parties regard the
contract as a single operation.
Chiok vs. China Airlines
FACTS: Chiok purchased ticket from CAL
exclusively endorsable to PAL. While in
Hkong, his flight was confirmed by both
CAL and PAL attaching their respective
stickers. On the day of his flight to
Manila, he was informed by a PAL
employee that he was not in the
computer list so he was not allowed to
board. Using another CAL ticket, he was
able to return to Manila. C sued CAL.
CAL denied liability as the carriage was
performed by PAL.
HELD: Cal is liable. The ruling in KLM is
applicable. The contract was between
CAL and C, with the former endorsing to
PAL the HK-Mla segment. This can be
treated as a single operation under Art.
15, IATA Rules and Art. 1 of the Warsaw
Convention
Art. 1, Sec. 3 WC: transportation to be
performed by several successive carriers
shall be deemed to be one undivided
transportation, if it has been regarded by
the parties as a single operation, whether
it has been agreed upon under the form
of a single contract or of a series of
contracts.
Art. 15 IATA: carriage to be performed by
several successive carriers under one
ticket, or under a ticket and any
conjunction ticket issued therewith, is
regarded as a single operation.
Pal acted as carrying agent of CAL, thus,
CAL cannot evade liability.
Santos III vs. Northwest Airlines
(1992)
FACTS: Santos bought a roundtrip (SF-
Manila-SF) ticket from NW airlines office
in SF. Despite previous confirmations, he
was informed that he had no reservation
on his trip. He sued NW for damages in
RTC Makati. NW filed MTD for lack of
jurisdiction.
Page 63 of 92
Conflict of Laws
HELD: Phil court has no jurisdiction to
hear the case under Art. 28 of the Warsaw
Convention. This article enumerates the
places where action must be filed, to wit:
1. Domicile – Minnesota, USA (domicile
must be understood in the English
sense – place of incorporation)
2. p r i n c i p a l p l a c e o f b u s i n e s s –
Minnesota
3. place of business where contract is
made – San Francisco
4. place of destination – San Francisco
(not Manila because it was merely an
agreed stopping place, SF is still the
ultimate place of destination
! Notes!
Distinction between KLM and China Air: in
KLM, KLM was the only company the
passenger dealt with; in Chiok, it was
alleged that Chiok himself (passenger)
requested for the PAL booking. It can then
be argued that CAL should not be held
liable.
________________
F. The Applicable law in the
absence of an Effective Choice
According to the 2nd Restatement, in the
absence of an effective choice of law, these
factors will be considered in determining the
state with which contract has its most
significant relationship
1. place of contracting
2. place of negotiating of the contract
3. place of performance
4. situs of the subject matter of the
contract
5. domicile, residence, nationality, place of
incorporation and place of business
6. place under whose local law the
contract will be most effective
Courts should localize the contract by
examining the contacts it has with a state
relative to the cogency to the issue.
Example: For contracts involving liability for
destruction of goods in transit, the state of
the most significant relationship is the state
of destination.
In the absence of an effective choice of law,
courts applying a policy-centered approach
will apply its own law when there are
significant contacts with the transaction.
Once these exist, the forum has a real
interest in applying its own law and such
would not be fundamentally unfair to the
parties. The court should also consider the
legitimate expectations of the parties.

G. Limitations to Choice of Law
1) if the law selected has no
connection at all with the
transaction or the parties
2) if it ousts the jurisdiction which the
court has already acquired over
the parties and the subject matter
3) if it affects a public policy or the
matter is heavily impressed with
public interest
4) in case of confession-of-judgment
clauses (waives the debtors right
to receive notice or authorizes
entry of judgment)
XV. Choice of Law in Wills, Succession
and Administration of Estates
Will or testament: act whereby a person is
permitted, w/ formalities prescribed by law,
to determine to a certain extent the
distribution of his estate to take effect
after his death.
It is a disposition made by a competent
testator in the form prescribed by law of
property over which he has legal power of
disposition
Conflicts of Law Perspective:
Will: an involuntary transfer of property,
because it comes into effect only upon
death of owner. Death is involuntary, thus
making a will is an involuntary transfer of
property.
Wills are governed by the “proper law”
o common law- law of domicile of
testator
o civil law- national law of testator
A. Extrinsic Validity of Wills
Filipino national making a will abroad may
comply with:
o lex nationalii (no express
provision) or
o lex loci celebrationis (Art 17, 815)
Pertinent Conflict-of-law rules:
(referring to law of place where will was
executed as law governing forms &
solemnities of will)
Art 17: The forms and solemnities of
contracts, wills, and other public
instruments shall be governed by the laws
of the country in which they are executed.
Page 64 of 92
Conflict of Laws
When the acts referred to are executed
before the diplomatic or consular officials of
the Republic of the Philippines in a foreign
country, the solemnities established by
Philippine laws shall be observed in their
execution.
Prohibitive laws concerning persons, their
acts or property, and those which have for
their object public order, public policy and
good customs shall not be rendered
ineffective by laws or judgments
promulgated, or by determinations or
conventions agreed upon in a foreign
country.
Art 815: When a Filipino is in a foreign
country, he is authorized to make a will in
any of the forms established by the law of
the country in which he may be. Such will
may be probated in the Philippines. (n)
What is the proper law for wills written
abroad by Filipinos?
(There is no express provision that it is lex
nationalii)
Tolentino:
Art 815 follows general rule of lex loci
celebrationis.
The Civil Code did not mean to invalidate
the will of a Filipino made in conformity w/
Phil law.
Aliens making wills outside the Philippines
are, under Art 816 & 817, permitted to
follow:
o lex nationalii
o lex domicilii
o lex loci celebrationis
Article 816. The will of an alien who is
abroad produces effect in the Philippines if
made with the formalities prescribed by the
law of the place in which he resides, or
according to the formalities observed in his
country, or in conformity with those which
this Code prescribes. (n)
Article 817. A will made in the Philippines by
a citizen or subject of another country,
which is executed in accordance with the
law of the country of which he is a citizen or
subject, and which might be proved and
allowed by the law of his own country, shall
have the same effect as if executed
according to the laws of the Philippines. (n)
It cannot be assumed that the Code places
a Filipino citizen in a worse position than an
alien in relation to our law.

The Code should have expressly stated this
considering general provision in Art 17.
In re Estate of Johnson
(1918)
FACTS: Ebba Ingeborg sought to annul
the probate of the will of his father Emil
Johnson, because the resulting intestacy
would be favorable to her as a sole heir.
She stresses that Section 636 of the Code
Of Civil Procedure should not govern the
will executed by her father in the US,
because the word “state” in the body of
the section is not capitalized (thus not
referring to a State in the US).
HELD: This interpretation is erroneous
because the full phrase “another state or
country”, means that the section refers to
either a State in the US or another
country. The admission of the will to
probate by the CFI of Manila under
Section 636 was therefore correct.
Although the CFI Of Manila most likely
erred in taking judicial notice of Illinois
law when it promulgated that the will
was executed in conformity with the laws
of Illinois, Ebba is now precluded to raise
this issue because the petition to annul
the probate did not allege the difference
between Philippine Law and Illinois law.
Extrinsic Validity of Joint Wills
Art 818. Two or more persons cannot make
a will jointly or in the same instrument,
either for their reciprocal benefit or for the
benefit of a third person.
Joint wills are prohibited on grounds of
public policy, because:
1) a will is a purely personal &
unilateral act & this is defeated if
2 or more persons make their will
in the same instrument
2) the revocable character of a will is
defeated, because if one of
testators revoke the will, the other
testators will have no instrument
left
3) it exposes a testator to undue
influence & may even tempt one
of testators to kill the other
4) when a will is made jointly or in
s a me ins t r ume nt , t he mo re
aggressive spouse is liable to
dictate the terms of the will for
his/her own benefit
Page 65 of 92
Conflict of Laws
- where will is also reciprocal,
either of the spouses who may be
wicked may be tempted to kill the
other.
Joint wills executed by Filipinos in a foreign
country allowing joint wills are expressly
invalidated by law.
Joint wills executed in the Philippines by
aliens (whose laws do not prohibit it): the
law is silent
It is suggested that such will should not be
probated if it affects heirs in the Philippines
(in accordance with the expressed policy in
Art 819).
Extrinsic Validity of Holographic Wills
Art 810: a holographic will is one entirely
written, dated and signed by the hand of
the testator himself. It is not subject to any
other form, need not be witnessed and may
be made in or out of the Philippines.
Art 816 & 817 are also applicable to
holographic wills
Merits:
o simple
o convenient
o does not require
notarization
o guarantees absolute
secrecy
Demerits:
o peculiarly dangerous
o an invitation to forgery
o short statements can
confuse handwriting
experts
Babcock Templeton vs. Rider Babcock
(1928)
FACTS: The will of Jennie Rider Babcock
was executed in California. Babcock
Templeton, being the mother of the three
beneficiaries of the will, stressed that the
laws of California should govern the
probate since Jennie Rider Babcock
acquired domicile in California. William
Rider Babcock opposes this by stressing
that her sister never acquired domicile in
California as her latest domicile was New
York.
HELD: Her domicile was California,
because even though she later left

California for New York, she never
intended to be a New York domiciliary.
The trial court was also correct in
admitting the will for probate under
Section 636 of the Code Of Civil
Procedure, because the length of time of
her residence in and eventual death in the
Philippines did not result into a loss of
her US citizenship. She never intended to
become a Philippine domiciliary, thus
making Section 618 inapplicable to the
will she executed abroad.
B. Intrinsic Validity of Wills
- governed by lex nationalii
Art 16: Real property as well as personal
property is subject to the law of the country
where it is stipulated.
However, intestate and testamentary
successions, both with respect to the order
of succession and to the amount of
successional rights and to the intrinsic
validity of testamentary provisions, shall be
regulated by the national law of the person
whose succession is under consideration,
whatever may be the nature of the property
and regardless of the country wherein said
property may be found. (10a)
Miciano vs. Brimo: Miciano, as the
administrator of the estate of Joseph Brimo,
filed a petition for the partition of the
estate. Andre Brimo opposed the partition
because the will itself was not executed in
accordance with the laws of Turkey, in
violation of Article 10 of the Civil Code.
The Court decided that although Andre
Brimo opposed his brother’s intention to
have Philippine laws apply he was not
deemed to have contested the legacy,
because the choice of law clause in the will
was contrary to law. Our laws apply the lex
nationalii of decedent to determine intrinsic
validity of a will and this law was
purposefully disregarded by decedent. The
Court considered this clause as not imposed
and “shall I no manner prejudice the heir
even if the testator should otherwise
provide.
Criticisms on the Miciano vs. Brimo decision:
Considering the primacy of giving primacy
to the last will and testament of the
decedent, the court should have respected
the wishes of the decedent (i.e. the clause
in the will should not have been annulled)
by applying a policy-centered approach.
Page 66 of 92
Conflict of Laws
Using the most significant relationship
approach, Philippine law would govern
because Joseph Brimo is a Philippine
resident, the properties are in here, and he
made the will here… the only contact with
Turkey is the fact of his nationality.
Under the escape device of “disingenuous
characterization”, the same result could
have resulted without flouting testator’s will.
The court could have characterized the
main issue as one of property and not of
succession, thus making Philippine law the
governing law as the lex rei sitae.
Cayetano vs. Leonidas
(1984)
FACTS: Upon the death of Adoracion
Campos, her father Hermogenes sought
to be declared as owner of the entire
estate as the only compulsory heir. On the
other hand, Nenita Paguia (one of
Adoracion’s sisters) sought the reprobate
of the will executed by Adoracion in the
US. When the trial court allowed probate
of the will in the Philippines,
Hermogenes raised in issue that the
allowance of the will to probate divested
him of his legitime, because the will
preterited him.
HELD: Since the governing law with
respect to the amount of successional
rights is the national law of the decedent,
the governing law of Adoracion’s will is
P e n n s y l v a n i a l a w. A n d s i n c e
Pennsylvania law does not have a system
of legitimes, Hermogenes is therefore not
preterited. Although the Philippines
adopt a system of legitimes as a matter of
public policy, such policy does not extend
to the successional rights of foreigners.
! Notes!
General Rule: the probate court can only
rule on:
1) extrinsic validity
2) due execution
3) testamentary capacity
4) c o m p l i a n c e w i t h r e q u i s i t e s /
solemnities prescribed by law
__________________
C. Interpretation of Wills
Interpretation of wills is to be governed by
lex nationalii.
If terms are clear & unambiguous: lex
intentionis

When there are ambiguous provisions:
intention of party may be inferred by
referring to context of the will & the
testator’s acts.
Article 1371. In order to judge the intention
of the contracting parties, their
contemporaneous and subsequent acts shall
be principally considered. (1282)
Article 1375. Words which may have
different significations shall be understood
in that which is most in keeping with the
nature and object of the contract. (1286)
Presence of ambiguous provisions
Presumptions to help interpretation:
1) The interpretations of such should be
determined in accordance w/ laws &
customs of that state most probably in mind
of testator
2) In case a will admits of different
dispositions, the interpretation by which the
disposition is to be operative shall be
preferred
Article 788. If a testamentary disposition
admits of different interpretations, in case
of doubt, that interpretation by which the
disposition is to be operative shall be
preferred. (n)
D. Revocation
Article 829. A revocation done outside the
Philippines, by a person who does not have
his domicile in this country, is valid when it
is done according to the law of the place
where the will was made, or according to
the law of the place in which the testator
had his domicile at the time; and if the
revocation takes place in this country, when
it is in accordance with the provisions of this
Code. (n)
Revocation:
1. l e x loci
celebrationis
2. lex domicilii
3. according to
our Code
Article 830. No will shall be revoked except
in the following cases:
1) By implication of law; or
2) By some will, codicil, or other
writing executed as provided in
case of wills; or
3) By burning, tearing, canceling, or
obliterating the will with the
intention of revoking it, by the
testator himself, or by some other
person in his presence, and by his
Page 67 of 92
Conflict of Laws
express direction. If burned, torn,
cancelled, or obliterated by some
other person, without the express
direction of the testator, the will
may still be established, and the
estate distributed in accordance
therewith, if its contents, and due
execution, and the fact of its
unauthorized destruction,
cancellation, or obliteration are
established according to the Rules
of Court. (n)
Problem: Testator revokes his will in then
domicile State A and dies in his new
domicile State B. If his revocation under the
laws of State A is invalid under State B laws,
what law will apply?
Common law practice: law of the domicile
at the time of death.
Philippine law: law of the place of
revocation.
! Notes!
Notice that there is a difference in the
applicable law governing revocation of wills
by a person domiciled in the Philippines and
a non-domiciliary:
✪ For domiciliary: the governing law
is the law of the place where the
revocation was made (lex actus)
✪ For non-domiciliary: the governing
law is the law where the will was
executed (lex loci celebrationis)
__________________
E. Probate
Probate: an adjudication that the last will
and testament of a person was executed
with all the formalities required by law
As part of procedural law, probate is
governed by the law of the forum.
But the forum will still have to look at the
foreign law concerning compliance with
extrinsic validity.
Rule 76 Section 9 Grounds for disallowing
will.: The will shall be disallowed in any of
the following cases;
(a) If not executed and attested as required
by law;
(b) If the testator was insane, or otherwise
mentally incapable to make a will, at the
time of its execution;

(c) If it was executed under duress, or the
influence of fear, or threats;
(d) If it was procured by undue and
improper pressure and influence, on the
part of the beneficiary, or of some other
person for his benefit;
(e) If the signature of the testator was
procured by fraud or trick, and he did not
intend that the instrument should be his will
at the time of fixing his signature thereto.
Rule 77
Section 1. Will proved outside Philippines
may be allowed here. Wills proved and
allowed in a foreign country, according to
the laws of such country, may be allowed,
filed, and recorded by the proper Court of
First Instance in the Philippines.
Testamentary capacity is the capacity to
comprehend the nature of the transaction in
which the testator is engaged at the time,
to recollect the property to be disposed of
and the persons who would naturally be
supposed to have claims upon the testator,
and to comprehend the manner in which
the instrument will distribute his property
among the objects of his bounty. (Bugnao
vs. Ubag, 014 SCRA 163)
Rule 77 Section 1 + testamentary capacity -
will made in a foreign country allowed here
in the Philippines !!! (see Article 816)
A will allowed in a foreign country in
accordance with the law of that country
may be allowed in the Philippines… no need
to prove testamentary capacity and due
execution (see Article 817).
Common Law conflicts rules…
1) If the will is valid under the laws of
the last domicile, the will is valid
e ve r y w h e re w i t h re s p e c t t o
movable property
2) but the probate in the last domicile
does not affect real property, as
these will be governed by lex rei
sitae
Suntay vs. Suntay
(1954)
FACTS: Natividad Billian sought to have
the will (executed in the Philippines) of
his husband Jose Suntay probated. The
trial court denied probate because during
the course of the proceedings, the will
was lost. Later, her son Silvino filed a
petition for the probate of a will allegedly
executed by Suntay in China. The trial
court again denied probate, and was
Page 68 of 92
Conflict of Laws
correct in deciding that way, because
there was no proof that:
1. the municipal district court of
Amoy, China, is a probate court
2. there was a law of China on
procedure in the probate or
allowance of wills
3. the legal requirements for the
execution of a valid will in China
in 1931 were satisfied
4. the order of the municipal
district court of Amoy purports
to probate the will
HELD: In the absence of proof that the
municipal district court of Amoy is a
probate court and on the Chinese law of
procedure in probate matters, it may be
presumed that the proceedings in the
matter of probating or allowing a will in
the Chinese courts are the same as those
provided for in our laws on the subject.
Because of this, rules on notice must be
followed. Since Silvino did not cause the
notification of the other heirs, this
petition must fall.
Vda. De Perez vs. Tolete
(1994)
FACTS: Each of the Cunanan spouses
(Jose and Evelyn) executed a will in New
York containing similar provisions on the
presumption of survivorship. When the
entire family perished in a fire that gutted
their home in New York, Rafael as the
named trustee in the will of Jose filed
separate proceedings in New York for the
probate of the wills of his brother and
sister-in-law. Later, Salud Perez (mother
of Evelyn) filed a petition for reprobate in
Bulacan. Rafael opposed by arguing that
Salud was not an heir as per New York
law which must be the law that should
govern the wills as they were executed in
New York. In deciding the matter, the
necessary evidence that should be
submitted are:
(1) the due execution of the will in
accordance with the foreign laws
(2) the testator has his domicile in
the foreign country and not in
the Philippines
(3) the will has been admitted to
probate in such country
(4) the fact that the foreign tribunal
is a probate court
(5) the laws of a foreign country on
procedure and allowance of
wills.

Except for the first and last requirements,
the petitioner submitted all the needed
evidence. Salud failed to submit the 1st
and 5th requirement. While the probate of
a will is a special proceeding wherein
courts should relax the rules on evidence,
the goal is to receive the best evidence of
which the matter is susceptible before a
purported will is probated or denied
probate. Not only that, Salud also failed
to notify the heirs of Jose of the
proceedings.
HELD: The rule that the court having
jurisdiction over the reprobate of a will
shall "cause notice thereof to be given as
in case of an original will presented for
allowance" means that with regard to
notices, the will probated abroad should
be treated as if it were an "original will"
or a will that is presented for probate for
the first time. Accordingly, compliance
with Sections 3 and 4 of Rule 76, which
require publication and notice by mail or
personally to the "known heirs, legatees,
and devisees of the testator resident in
the Philippines" and to the executor are
required.
F. Administration of Estates
Duties of the administrator:
1) to manage and settle the debts of
the decedent (primary purpose)
2) to distribute the residuum of the
estate to the heirs (secondary
purpose)
When the will has been proved or allowed,
it is the duty of the probate court to issue
letters testamentary thereon to the person
so named in the will upon the latter’s
application.
When there is no will, the court may
appoint an administrator.
Two kinds of administrators:
a) domiciliary -power over assets
located in state
b) ancillary- appointed by a foreign
court to look after the properties
located in such foreign state
Tayag vs. Benguet Consolidated Inc.
(1968)
Page 69 of 92
Conflict of Laws
FACTS: BCI stocks owned by the
decedent Idonah Slade Perkins were in
the possession of the domiciliary
administrator County Trust Company Of
New York. Later, the CFI Of Manila
named Renato Tayag as the ancillary
administrator. When Tayag obtained a
court order for the County Trust
Company to deposit the stocks to him,
BCI appealed.
HELD: The appeal must fail. BCI is a
Philippine corporation owing full
allegiance and subject to the unrestricted
jurisdiction of local courts. Its shares of
stock cannot therefore be considered in
any wise as immune from lawful court
orders. The situs of shares of stock is the
place of domicile of the corporation. And
since the power of the ancillary
administrator over shares located here is
beyond question, it follows that the
stocks should be in the possession of
Tayag.
! Notes!
Succession and administration of estates
are governed by different laws:
✪ succession – national law
✪ administration – situs of property
(territorial/JDal)
______________
G. Trusts
Trust: a right of property, real or personal,
held by one party for the benefit of the
other.
The trust contains an express choice-of-law
provision.
The courts usually apply that law in keeping
with the policy of carrying out the intent of
the creator of the trust.
When the trust does not contain an express
choice-of-law provision, the Court will deem
controlling the law that will sustain the
validity of the trust.
Choices-of-law for testamentary trusts:
a) rules governing the intrinsic and
extrinsic validity of wills
b) lex rei sitae with respect to the
property
XVI. Choice of Law in Torts and Crimes

Tort: derived from the French word torquere
or “to twist”. It is an act or omission
producing an injury to another without any
previous existing lawful relation of which
the act or omission may be said to be a
natural outgrowth or incident.
A. Policies behind Conflicts Tort
Law
2 Important Policies underlying substantive
tort law:
1) to deter socially undesirable or
wrongful conduct
2) to rectify the consequences of the
tortuous act by distributing the
losses that result from accident
and products liability
In view of these, the policy behind tort law
will most likely be a strongly held policy of
the state and as result, that state will not
easily displace its own law with the law of
another state.
In determining the applicable law, consider
the policies of: a) upholding the justified
expectation of parties, and b) minimizing
the adverse consequences that might follow
from subjecting a party to the law of more
than one state.
Conflicts torts cases arise:
1) when the tortious conduct and
place of resulting injury are
different and one state imposes
higher standards than the other
state
2) when there are different product
liability laws and varying judicial
interpretations of the extent of
liability
! Notes!
Policies:
1) deter undesirable or wrongful
conduct
2) r e c t i f y c o n s e q u e n c e s – b y
distributing the losses
✪ similarity between family conflicts
cases and torts conflicts cases:
strongly held policies of the state
3 concerns in torts:
1) achieving just and reasonable
results (consider the interest of
both parties
Page 70 of 92
Conflict of Laws
2) societal interest
3) shielding defendant from
unnecessary surprise
Distinguish: “upholding the legitimate
expectations of parties” vs. “shielding
defendant from unnecessary surprise” – the
first is used in contracts cases, the second
is used in torts cases.
Why is the “place of the tort (locus delicti)”
difficult to determine? Different concepts of
locus delicti:
1) civil law: place of tortious conduct
2) common law: place of injury/
vested rights theory
✪ to determine lex loci delicti:
determine whether you are dealing
with a civil law or common law
country
________________
B. Lex loci delicti commissi
Lex loci delicti commissi: the law of the
place where the alleged tort was
committed. It determines the tort liability in
matters affecting conduct and safety.
Difficulty has been encountered in
determining the locus delicti where the
liability producing conduct happens in one
state but the injuries are sustained in
another.
Common law concept of place of wrong:
place where the last event necessary to
make an actor liable for an alleged tort
occurs. It adheres to the vested rights
theory, so that if harm does not take place
then the tort is not completed. Negligence
or omission is not in itself actionable unless
it results in injury to another.
Civil law concept of place of wrong: place
where the tortious conduct was committed.
This is premised on the principle that the
legality or illegality of a person’s act should
be determined by the law of the state
where he is at the time he does such act.
The traditional view (whether the situs of
the tort is the place of conduct or injury) is
that an actor liable by the lex loci delicti is
liable everywhere. Damages arising from
torts committed in one state are actionable
in another state.
Alabama Railroad vs. Carrol: the negligent
infliction of an injury in one state creates a
right of action there, which may be
enforced in any other state or country the
comity of which admits of it.
Loucks vs. Standard Oil Co.

(1913)
FACTS: Loucks, a NY resident, was run
down and killed by Standard Oil
employees in an accident while engaged
in its business. Under Massachusetts law,
the corporation is liable for the death of a
person where the death was caused by
the negligence of the corporation’s
employees while engaged in its business.
However, under NY law, the corporation
is liable for such death where the death
occurred in NY. The action to recover
damages was filed in NY.
HELD: Massachusetts law may be
applied. A tort committed in one state
creates a right of action that may be sued
upon in another unless public policy
forbids. A foreign statute is not law in the
state, but it gives rise to an obligation,
which, if transitory, follows the person
and may be enforced wherever the
person may be found.
C. Modern Theories on Foreign
Tort Liability
1. The Most Significant
Relationship
This theory considers the state’s contacts
with the occurrence and the parties.
Two-fold purpose:
1) identify the interested state
2) evaluate the relevance of these
contacts to the issue in question
The significant-relationship approach does
not call for a mechanical counting of factual
contacts where strength is drawn in
numbers; instead the court localizes the
state of the most significant relation and
assesses the event or transaction in the
light of the relevant policy considerations of
the interested states and these underlying
policies.
Saudi Arabian Airlines vs. CA
(1998)
FACTS: Morada was a flight stewardess
of Saudi Airlines. She was involved in an
attempted rape case, which led to her
conviction of violation of Islamic laws in
Saudi. The Prince of Makkah ruled that
she was wrongfully convicted. However,
she was terminated from her employment
by Saudia.
Page 71 of 92
Conflict of Laws
HELD: The RTC of Manila has JD to try
the case, applying the “state of most
significant relationship rule.” The
following contacts should be considered
in using this rule: place where the injury
occurred, place where the conduct
causing injury occurred, domicile/
residence/nationality/place of business
of the corporation, and place where the
relationship between the parties is
centered.
In CAB, the Philippines had the most
significant contacts. The overall injury
occurred in the Philippines, Morada is a
resident and a Filipina national, Saudia is
a foreign corporation engaged in business
here, and the relationship of the parties is
centered here.
2. Interest Analysis
This approach considers the relevant
concerns the state may have in the case
and its interest in having its law applied on
that issue.
The court should first determine whether
there is a true or false conflict.
False conflict: only one state has an interest
in having its law applied, and failure to
apply the other state’s law would not impair
the policy reflected in that law.
Apparent conflict: more than one state has
an apparent interest in applying its law to
the case.
Prof. Currie: if only one state has a real
interest in the case and the other state’s
interest is insubstantial then there is a false
conflict. However, if both states have a real
interest in applying their law then the
apparent conflict becomes a true conflict.
! Notes!
Problem with Interest Analysis approach:
are the policies of the law always
discernible? Sometimes we merely guess
the policies of the state (because
unarticulated in the law).
________________
3. Cavers’ Principle of
Preference
This principle deals with rules that sanction
some kinds of conduct engaged in by a
defendant in one state and extends the
benefit of this higher standard of conduct
and financial protection to the plaintiff even

if the state of injury does not create
analogous liabilities.
Pangalangan: Since both states consider
that a tort has been committed, the law of
the state which places a higher standard of
conduct should apply. This is true even if
this is the place of tortious conduct and not
the place of injury.
Schmidt vs. Driscoll Hotel
(1957)
FACTS: Schmidt sued Driscoll Hotel for
illegally selling liquor to Sorensen, who
was the driver of a vehicle which turned
over in Wisconsin. Schmidt was a
passenger of that vehicle and sustained
injuries as a result of the accident. The
suit was filed in Minnesota, where the
illegal sale was conducted.
HELD: Minnesota court has jurisdiction,
even if the injury which followed the
illegal sale occurred outside Minnesota.
The Restatement should not be applied
where the plaintiff would have no
remedy against the offending liquor
dealer. Under the principles of equity and
justice, the Minnesota law granting him a
remedy should be applied, considering
that all the parties are residents of
Minnesota, Driscoll Hotel was licensed
under Minnesota law, the violation of
Minnesota law occurred there, and the
wrongful conduct was completed by
Sorensen in Minnesota.
Schmidt illustrates the imposition of liability
under a substantive rule of tort law that has
a strong underlying admonitory policy.
American Contributions to Conflicts Tort Law
The determination of whether the law
where the tort was committed or the law of
the domicile of the parties is the controlling
law is considered one of the major
contributions of American jurisprudence to
international conflicts thought.
Law of the tort: deemed as the proper law
in questions involving regulation of conduct.
Law of the domicile of the parties: governs
in matters that relate to loss-distribution or
financial protection.
! Notes!
In modern approaches, there is a distinction
between true or false conflict.
Page 72 of 92
Conflict of Laws
✪ True conflict: both states have an
interest in having their law applied
✪ “maybe true” conflict
✪ false conflict: no choice necessary
– the court should apply the law of
the only interested state
_______________
D. Foreign Tort Claims
Tortious liability is transitory – the liability
resulting from the tort is deemed personal
to the perpetrator of the wrong, which
follows him wherever he goes.
Compensations may be exacted from him in
any proper tribunal; the right to sue is not
confined to the place where the cause of
action arises.
i. C o n d i t i o n s f o r t h e
enforcement of tort
claims
a) the foreign tort is based on a civil
action and not on a crime
b) the foreign tort is not contrary to
the public policy of the forum
c) the judicial machinery of the forum
is adequate to satisfy the claim
The defendant in a transnational tort is
often sued in a foreign court against his
will; his consent to be sued is not necessary
for the acquisition of jurisdiction by the
court. Hence, questions as to the legitimacy
of the JD and validity of the decision may
arise.
ii. Products liability of
the foreign
manufacturer
Conflicts torts cases arise due to significant
differences in the laws of states on the
basis and extent of liability for defectively
manufactured products.
Asahi Metal Industry vs. Superior Court
of California
(1987)
FACTS: Asahi Metal manufactures tire
valve assemblies in Japan and exports
them, including to a Taiwanese company
which, in turn, incorporates them into
finished tires sold in the US. The driver of
a motorcycle, who had an accident
resulting in injuries to him and death to
his passenger, sued the Taiwanese
company. The Taiwanese company filed a
cross-complaint against Asahi.

HELD: The California court has no JD
over Asahi Metal. The constitutional
touchstone/test of due process is whether
the defendant purposefully established
“minimum contacts” in the forum state.
And “minimum contacts” must have a
basis in some act by which the defendant
purposefully avails itself of the privilege
of conducting activities within the forum
state, thus invoking the benefits and
protections of its laws.
In the CAB, no purposeful availment of
the California market on the part of
Asahi. It does not do business in
California; has no office, agents,
employees, or property in Cal.; does not
advertise or otherwise solicit business
there; and did not create, control, or
employ the distribution system that
brought its valves to California.
Societe Nationale Industrille Aerospatiale vs.
Lee Kui Jak: An Aerospatiale helicopter
crashed in Brunei, killing a passenger who
was a Brunei resident. The administrator of
the estate brought the action in Texas,
where Aerospatiale does business. Held:
Brunei (where the deceased lived and the
helicopter crashed) was the natural forum
for the trial for an action for damages
against the manufacturer of the helicopter,
and it would be oppressive for the plaintiffs
to continue with the Texas proceedings as
Aerospatiale would not be able to pursue
legal proceedings against the Malaysian
company which operates and services the
helicopter.
Bier vs. Mines de Potasse: A Dutch market
gardener filed an action for damages in a
Dutch court against a French mining
company. The Dutch court held that it had
no JD, but the French court held that the
plaintiff could elect where to sue (place of
damage or place of injurious conduct).
Sovereignty as Basis of Jurisdiction
The sovereignty model has been accepted
both to:
a) justify any exercise of jurisdiction
over a defendant present within
the territory, however short (“tag
jurisdiction”)
b) deny enforcement of a foreign
court judgment over a defendant
who was not present within that
court’s jurisdiction
Page 73 of 92
Conflict of Laws
Worldwide Volkswagen Corp. vs.
Woodson
(1980)
FACTS: The spouses Robinson purchased
a car from Seaway Volkswagen in New
York. They met an accident in Oklahoma
and pinned the blame on the defective
design of the car. They brought a suit
against the retailer and distributor in
Oklahoma.
HELD: Oklahoma court has no JD. A state
court may exercise personal JD over a
nonresident defendant only so long as
there exist “minimum contacts” between
the defendant and the forum state. The 2
functions of the concept of minimum
contacts is to protect the defendant
against the burdens of litigating in a
distant or inconvenient forum, and to
ensure that the states, through their
courts, do not reach out beyond the limits
imposed on them by their status as
coequal sovereigns in a federal system.
In CAB, there us a total absence of those
affiliating circumstances that are a
necessary predicate to any exercise of
state-court JD (no activity whatsoever on
Oklahoma; no sales closed nor services
performed there; no availment of the
privileges and benefits of Oklahoma law;
no solicitation of business there).
! Notes!
In Asahi, even if there were minimum
contacts, it failed the reasonableness test.
Criticism of Asahi: “additional acts”
requirement is a reinvention of the stream
of commerce law. The fear is that the court
might go back to pre-International Shoe
standards n JD (requirement of actual
presence).
In Worldwide Volkswagen, the only
requirements for the exercise of JD were
minimum contacts and the reasonableness
test; Asahi did not follow this, and include
an additional requirement (purposeful
availment).
________________
iii. The Alien Tort Act
The Alien Tort Statute granted US district
courts original JD over any civil action by an
alien for a tort committed in violation of the
law of nations or a treaty of the US.

Hilao vs. Estate of Ferdinand Marcos
(1996)
FACTS: A class suit was brought against
Marcos by parties seeking damages for
human-rights abuses committed against
them or their decedents. The Hawaii
district court found for Hilao and ordered
a verdict of almost $2 billion in damages.
The Estate in its appeal, argues that the
Alien Tort Claims Act does not apply to
conduct that occurs abroad, and since the
acts complained of all occurred in the
Phils., the court has no JD
HELD: The court has JD. In a prior appeal
it has been held that subject-matter JD
was not inappropriately exercised even
though the actions xxx occurred outside
the US.
Filartiga vs. Pena-Irala
(1980)
FACTS: Plaintiffs brought an action in the
US against Pena-Irala for wrongfully
causing the death of Dr. Filartiga’s son in
Paraguay.
HELD: The US federal court has JD, on
the basis of the Alien Tort Statute. This
action is undeniably an action by an alien,
for a tort only, committed in violation of
the law of nations. A wrong is recognized
as a violation of the law of nations where
the nations of the world have
demonstrated that the wrong is of
mutual, and not merely several, concern.
*The concept of accountability, if
considered the core of the Alien Torts Act
(as espoused by the US Justice
Department in Trajano vs Marcos), would
be a significant setback to the
advancement of international law.
Guinto vs. Marcos
(1986)
FACTS: Guinto and Suarez filed an action
for damages against Marcos in California
under the Alien Tort Claims Act.
According to Guinto, Marcos’ act of
seizing their film “100 Days in
September” violated their freedom of
speech.
HELD: Test to determine when a
violation of the law of nations has
occurred – there has been a violation by
Page 74 of 92
Conflict of Laws
one or more individuals of those
standards, rules or customs a) affecting
the relationship between states or
between an individual and a foreign
state, and b) used by those states for their
common good and/or dealings inter se. A
violation of the First Amendment right of
free speech does not rise to the level of
such universally recognized rights as to
constitute a violation of the law of
nations.
The Alien Tort Statute justifies exercise of
court JD over completely foreign tort cases
because of the universal evil exemplified by
human rights violations. This is so even
though there are no significant contacts
between the courts and the parties and
events nor substantial state interest in the
case other than a general desire for
compliance with customary international
law. That is why in order for the Alien Tort
Act to apply, there is a need to establish
that the tortious conduct violated an
internationally protected human right.
iv. Philippine Rule on
Foreign Torts
There is no specific statutory law governing
the enforcement of claims for damages
arising form foreign torts. But on the theory
of vested rights the victim of a foreign tort
may decide to file the case in the
Philippines.
It has been suggested that the English Rule
may be followed, such that the tort
committed abroad is actionable in the
country where it was committed and also
under Philippine law.
Two conditions for a case based on a
foreign tort to be filed in the Philippines
(English Rule):
1) the wrong must be of such a
character that it would have been
actionable if committed in the
Philippines
2) the act must not have been
justifiable by the law of the place
where it was done
Time, Inc. vs. Reyes
(1971)
FACTS: Villegas and Enrile filed a
complaint for damages against Time, Inc.
upon an alleged libel arising from a
publication of Time Magazine. Plaintiffs
 Conflict of Laws

filed their action in CFI Rizal. But

according to the applicable law, they may Tr a n s i t o r y i n Local in character;
file the action only in the place of first character; hence the perpetrator of
publication or in the City of Manila (since liability is deemed the wrong can be
they are public officers). personal to the sued only in the
tortfeasor and state wherein he
HELD: The case should be dismissed for make him commits the crime
improper venue. The only alternative amenable to suit in
allowed to the public official is to whatever JD he is
found
prosecute in the place where the
offending article was printed and first
published; but in the CAB the alternative An injury to an An injury to the
was not open to plaintiffs since the individual who may state where it is
offending publication was not printed in be situated in any committed
the Philippines. place

Liability is attached Promulgated to

In Time, Inc., if the court had not
to the perpetrator punish and reform
characterized the issue as jurisdictional, and
to indemnify the the perpetrators
decided the case from a conflicts tort
victim for injuries and deter them and
perspective, it could have taken cognizance
he sustained others from
of the case following the most significant
violating the law
re l a t i o n s a p p ro a c h b e c a u s e o f t h e
significant links between the forum and the
parties. F. Lex loci delicti

! Notes! Under the territorial principle, crimes

In ordinary foreign tort, the court acquiring
JD must be either the place of tortious
conduct or place of injury. In Alien tort
Statute, US courts may acquire JD even if it
is neither the place of tortious conduct nor
place of injury.
“law of nations” (Filartiga): “mutual”
concern – nations consider the act to be
detrimental to all nations; it is a violation of
a law of all countries.
Guinto: violation of law of nations test—
1) the violation affects relationship
between states, or an individual
and a foreign state
2) used by the states for their
common good and/or dealings
inter se
_______________
E. Distinguishing between Torts
and Crimes
committed within the Philippines by all
persons, whether Filipino citizens or aliens,
are prosecuted and penalized under
Philippine law. As a rule, criminal laws of a
state are effective only upon persons who
actually commit the crime within the state’s
territory.
The lex loci delicti or the law of the place
where the crime was committed is the
controlling law since it determines the
specific law by which the criminal is to be
penalized, and designates the state that has
the JD to punish him.
3 Exceptions to the Territorial rule:
1) First Exception: crimes committed
by state officials, diplomatic
representatives and officials of
recognized international
organizations (based on doctrine of
state immunity)

Wylie vs. Rarang

Tort Crime (1992)
FACTS: Wylie and Williams are officers of
the US Navy stationed in the Subic Naval
base, and are in charge of the publication
“Plan of the Day.” Rarang filed an action
for damages against them for libelous
statements published in the POD.

HELD: Wylie and Williams are not

immune from the suit. They are sought to
Page 75 of 92

be held answerable for personal torts in
which the US is not involved; if found
liable, they alone must satisfy the
judgment. The Bases Treaty provision on
immunity could not possibly apply in
this case, as it is presumed that the laws
of the US do not allow the commission of
crimes in the name of official duty. The
general rule is that public officials can be
held personally accountable for acts
claimed to have been performed in
connection with official duties where they
have acted ultra vires or where there is
showing of bad faith.
This immunity for sovereign acts is impliedly
waived when the foreign state and its
officials perform private, commercial or
proprietary acts.
! Notes!
In Rarang, although the publication was
part of the duty of Wylie and Williams, the
goal of the publication of the complaint
would have been achieved without
identifying Rarang by name.
Liang (Huefeng) vs. People
(2000)
FACTS: Liang, a Chinese working at the
ADB, was charged by a fellow worker
with grave oral defamation. The lower
court dismissed the complaint on the
ground that Liang is covered by the
immunity provision under the
Agreement between ADB and the Phil.
Government.
HELD: Liang is not immune from suit.
The immunity under the Agreement is
not absolute, and it only extends to acts
done in official capacity. Slandering a
person could not possibly be covered by
the immunity agreement because our
laws do not allow the commission of a
crime, such as defamation, in the name of
official duty.
2) Second Exception: crimes
committed on board a foreign
vessel even if it is within the
territorial waters of the coastal
state
In the Philippines, our courts will not
acquire JD over offenders nor can Phil. laws
apply as long as the effect of such crime
does not disturb our peace and order.
Page 76 of 92
Conflict of Laws
US vs. Fowler
FACTS: Fowler et al were accused of theft
on board the US vessel Lawton while it
was traveling on the high seas.
HELD: Philippine courts have no
jurisdiction over Fowler. Act 400 granting
JD to RP courts for crimes and offenses
committed on the high seas, apply to ship
or water craft registered or licensed in the
Philippines only. In the CAB, the Lawton
was not registered in the Philippines; it
was a US vessel.
People vs. Wong Cheng
(1922)
FACTS: Wong was charged for having
illegally smoked opium on board an
English vessel Changsa while anchored in
Manila Bay.
HELD: Under the English rule which is
applicable here (it is the prevailing theory
in the US), to smoke opium within our
territorial limits, even though aboard a
foreign merchant ship, is certainly a
b re a c h o f t h e p u b l i c o rd e r h e re
established. It causes such drug to
produce its pernicious effects within our
territory. It seriously contravenes the
purpose that our Legislature had in mind
in enacting the repressive statute, and is
therefore triable in our courts.
US vs. Look Chaw
(1910)
FACTS: Two sacks of opium were found
to be in the control of Look Chaw aboard
the Erroll, an English steamship. A
complaint for possession and sale of
opium was filed against him.
HELD: Philippine courts have
jurisdiction. Although the mere
possession of an article of prohibited use
in the Philippines, aboard a foreign vessel
in transit, in any local port, does not as a
general rule constitute a crime triable by
the courts of the Islands, such vessel
being considered as an extension of its
own nationality, the same rule does not
apply when the article, the use of which
is prohibited in the Islands, is landed
from the vessel upon Philippine soil.
3) Third Exception: crimes which,
although committed by Philippine
nationals abroad, are punishable
 Conflict of Laws

under Philippine law (ex. Art. 2 FACTS: Gray, a stockholder of Insular

RPC) (incorporated in NY) filed an action in
CFI to compel Insular to allow him to
! Notes! examine its books. Sec. 77 of NY Stock
Corp Law only gives the right to
stockholders owning 3% of the capital
Fowler Cheng Look stock of the company. Gray does not own
Chaw the required shares.

HELD: Gray is not entitled to the right to

FLAG US English English
examine the books of Insular. Gray is
bound by the NY law which only gives
LOCATIO High Within Within him the right to receive from the treasurer
N seas RP RP of the corporation a statement of affairs
territoria territorial covering a particular account of all its
l waters waters assets and liabilities. Neither can his
rights be granted under common law
CRIME theft Smoking Possessi absent a showing that:
opium on and a. he seeks information for an honest
selling of purpose or to protect his interest as
opium stockholder
b. he exercises right in good faith and
for a specific and honest purpose not
RESULT No JD Acquired Acquired
merely to satisfy curiosity or for
JD JD
speculative or vexatious purposes.

In RP, we follow the French Rule. Anglo American Theory on Corporations

XVII. Choice of Law Affecting

Corporations and Other Juridical
Entities
A. Corporations
A corporation is an artificial being created
by operation of law, having the right of
succession and the powers, attributes and
properties expressly authorized by law or
incident to its existence.
Foreign corporation – formed under the
laws of a state other than the Phils; such
l aw s a l l o w i n g F i l i p i n o c i t i ze n s a n d
corporations to do business there. It shall
have a right to do business here only after
obtaining a license and a certificate of
authority from the appropriate government
agency.
1. Personal Law of a
Corporation
Bank of Augusta vs. Earle
(1839)
FACTS: Bank of A (incorporated in
Georgia), thru M’Gran bought bills from
Earle in Alabama. Bills were unpaid so
Bank sued Earle. TC ruled that the
Georgian Bank could not exercise power
in Alabama thereby making the contracts
void.
HELD: Bank can exercise its powers in
Alabama and the contracts are therefore
valid. It is well-settled that by the law of
the comity of nations, a corp. created by 1
sovereignty is permitted to make
contracts in another and sue in its courts
and that the same law of comity prevails
in several States of US including
Alabama. Alabama courts have held that
a foreign corp may sue in its courts based
on the comity of nations.

The personal law of the corporation is the

Four Basic (Important) Theories from the
law of the state where it is incorporated. If
case:
the law creating it does not authorize it to
enter into certain contracts, such contracts
1) a corporation, being a creature of
which can be made in other states shall be
law, has no legal status beyond the
void despite the express permission given
bounds of the sovereignty within
by the other state.
which it was created

2) a corporation cannot exercise

ME Gray vs. Insular Lumber Co.
powers not granted by its
(1939)
Page 77 of 92

corporate charter or by the laws of
the state of incorporation
3) no state is under any obligation to
adhere to the doctrine of comity
(every state has the power to
refuse recognition)
4) a state is not obliged to grant to a
foreign corporation the privileges
and immunities common to its
citizens
The power of a foreign corporation depends
upon the laws of the state recognizing it. It
may impose conditions or limitations subject
to a few exceptions as decided by US
courts, to wit:
a) commerce clause – prohibits a
state from imposing conditions on
corporations engaged in interstate
commercial activities and provides
the basis of federal power to
regulate interstate commerce.
b) Since it is considered a “person”,
once allowed to enter a state and
acquire property, it cannot be
discriminated against by domestic
corps
c) Unconstitutional conditions –
forbids a state from requiring the
foreign corporation to give up its
constitutional rights either as a
prerequisite to allowing it to do
business or to avoid being
removed from that state
A foreign corporation, although a person, is
not a citizen entitled to the privileges given
by the state to its individual citizens.
! Notes!
If according to the personal laws of the
corporation, stockholders are given certain
rights, such rights cannot be diminished nor
added upon by the law of the place where
the corporation does business. This is
because such rights are already fixed by the
corporation.
________________
2. Exceptions to the Rule
of Incorporation Test
a. Constitutional and
Statutory Restrictions
A state may, by legislation, exclude a
foreign corp altogether, subject to the
constitutional limitations, or prescribe any
conditions it may see fit as a prerequisite to
Page 78 of 92
Conflict of Laws
the corporation’s right to do business within
its territory.
1987 Phil Constitution:
a. regulates exploration, development
and utilization of natural resources
such that only 60% Filipino-owned
corps may be allowed to engage in
these activities
b. the nation’s marine wealth and the
exclusive economic zone is
reserved exclusively to Filipinos
c. Congress is empowered to reserve
certain areas of investments to 60
% Filipino owned corps or provide
for a higher percentage (e.g. mass
media – 100%)
Pedro Palting vs. San Jose Petroleum
(1966)
FACTS: Palting opposes the tie-up
between San Jose Petroleum (a
Panamanian corp.) and San Jose Oil
(domestic corp.) as being violative of the
Constitution and the Petroleum Act. SJP
claimed that it is entitled to the Parity
Amendment which grants to US citizens
the right to use & exploit natural
resources in the Phils because its
stockholders are US citizens.
HELD: SJP is not covered by the Parity
Agreement. It is not owned or controlled
directly by US citizens. It is owned by
another Panamanian corp., Oil
Investments. Oil Investments on the other
hand is owned by 2 Venezuelan corps.
Even assuming that the stocks of the 2
Venezuelan corps are owned by US
citizens, to hold that the set-up in CAB
falls within the Parity Amendment is to
unduly stretch and strain the language
and intent of the law. There would be
practical impossibility to determine at
any given time the citizenship of the
controlling stock.
b. Control Test During
the War
During wars, courts may pierce the
corporate identity and look into the
nationality of stockholders to determine the
citizenship of the corp.
Filipinas Compania de Seguros vs.
Christern, Huenfeld, Co., Inc.
(1951)

FACTS: Christern (German Co.) filed a
claim against Filipinas (US Co.) for
recovery on fire insurance policies issued
by the latter. F refused to pay claiming
that the policies ceased to be in effect on
the date the US declared was against
Germany. Dir. Of Bureau of Financing
directed F to pay C.
HELD: The policy ceased to be valid and
binding because of the fact that majority
of the stockholders of C are Germans and
it became an enemy corporation when
war was declared. Under Phil Insurance
Code, anyone except a public enemy may
be insured. C is a public enemy at the
time the insurable risk occurred. But C is
entitled to a return of the premiums paid.
! Notes!
Filipinas Compania case was decided that
way because of the government interest
involved.
_______________
Daimler Co. Continental Tire and Rubber
Co.: HELD: An English corporation with an
English secretary but whose shares of stock
are controlled by German nationals was
considered an enemy corporation and
prohibited from trading in England. It ruled
that the company itself was incapable of
loyalty or enmity. These qualities are
attributable only to human beings. The
company therefore had the predominant
character of its shareholders being
Germans.
3. Domicile or Residence
of Foreign
Corporations
Art. 51, CC
When the law creating or recognizing them,
or any other provision, does not fix the
domicile of juridical persons, it is
understood to be
a. the place where legal representation is
established
b. where they exercise their principal
functions
A foreign corp. granted license to do
business here acquires a domicile in the
Phils.
State Investment House vs. Citibank
(1991)
FACTS: CMI obtained loans from
Citibank. CMI defaulted. Citibank filed
petition for involuntary insolvency
Page 79 of 92
Conflict of Laws
against CMI with CFI, Rizal. State
Investment, a creditor of CMI, opposed
claiming that Citibank had no jurisdiction
because the banks are not resident
creditors of CMI.
HELD: The Phil branches of the bank are
residents of the Phils being resident
foreign corporations as defined in the Tax
Code and other Banking Laws. What
effectively makes a foreign corp a
resident corp in the Phils is its actually
being in the Phils and licitly doing
business here (locality of existence) The
grant of license merely gives legitimacy
to its doing business here but it does not
make the corp a resident. Also, the failure
of the bank to aver categorically that they
are residents are not fatal to the cause of
action where it alleged that it is a foreign
bank licensed to do business here.
4. Jurisdiction Over
Foreign Corporations
The dictum that a corporation has force
only in the incorporating state and no
existence outside that state has been
abandoned. The prevailing rule is, with the
consent of a state, a foreign corp. shall be
recognized and will be allowed to transact
business in any state, which gives its
consent.
Requirements for License: Secs. 125-128,
Corpo Code)
a. sworn application
b. copy of articles of incorporation
c. designation of an agent
d. sworn certification of an official of the
incorporating state that a similar right
is given to Filipinos in that state and
that the foreign corp. is in good
standing
e. statement under oath by the official of
the corp. attesting that the corp is
solvent and in sound financial condition
Foreign Corporations doing Business are
Bound by Philippine Law
Art. 129, Corp Code
All foreign corporations lawfully doing
business in the Philippines shall be bound
by all laws, rules and regulations applicable
to domestic corporations.
Exceptions:

1. laws on creation, formation,
organization or dissolution of
corporations
2. laws which fix the relations, liabilities,
responsibilities or duties of
stockholders, members or officers of
the corp to each other
Rule 14, Sec. 14 ROC
Service upon foreign corporations doing
business in the Phils. may be made on the:
1. resident agent
2. in the absence thereof, to the
government official designated by law
or any of its officers or agents within
the Phils
3. on any officer or agent of the corp in
the Phils
*a fourth method is established by case
law: service thru diplomatic channels
5. Right of Foreign
Corporation to bring
Suit
Acquisition of a license by a foreign
corporation is an essential prerequisite for
filing of suit before our courts.
Art. 133, Corp Code states that these
corporations may be sued or proceeded
against before Phil courts or administrative
tribunals on any valid cause of action
recognized under Phil law.
Home Insurance Co. vs. Eastern
Shipping Lines
(1983)
FACTS: Home Insurance was subrogated
to the rights of shippers against eastern
Shipping for damages on cargo. Eastern
refused to pay. HI filed action to recover
sum of money. TC dismissed because HI
failed to prove capacity to sue.
HELD: HI has capacity to sue because at
the time the complaints were filed, it
already had a license to conduct
insurance business in the Phils. Insurance
contracts are not null and void for lack of
license at the time it was entered into. The
Corp. Code is silent on the status of the
said contracts. Also, the object of the law
in requiring registration is to subject the
foreign corp. to the JD of our courts.
Page 80 of 92
Conflict of Laws
Atlantic Mutual Insurance vs. Cebu
Stevedoring
(1966)
FACTS: Cebu Stevedoring carried copra
for Procter & Gamble. Copra were
insured with AMI. Bec. of damages, AMI
sued Cebu Stevedoring. CS filed a MTD
bec. AMI had no capacity to sue. TC ruled
that it must allege that it has a license to
be able to sue.
HELD: Such allegation is unnecessary.
However, AMI’s mere allegation that it is
a foreign corp is not sufficient. It must
state WON it is doing business in the
Phils bec different rules attach to the
same. If it is engaged in business, it must
be licensed to be able to sue. If not so
engaged, the license is not required and it
may sue esp. if it is a single/isolated
transaction.
6. Exceptions to License
Requirement
a. Isolated Transactions
This has been defined as one which is
occasional, incidental and casual, not of a
character to indicate a purpose to engage in
business. It does not constitute “doing
business” under the law.
Eastboard Navigation vs. Ysmael & Co.
(1957)
FACTS: Eastboard was able to secure a
favorable decision from NY arbiters
against J.Y. & Co. It brought an action for
enforcement of a money claim against JY
& Co. in the Phils. JY opposed alleging
that E had no capacity to sue.
HELD: E has capacity to sue. The license
is not necessary because it is not engaged
in business in the Phils. The 2 isolated
transactions do not constitute engaging in
business within the purview of the Corpo
Law.
b. Action to Protect
Tra d e m a r k , Tra d e
Name, Goodwill,
Patent or for Unfair
Competition
Even without a license, a foreign
corporation may file complaint for unfair
competition since it is a suit enjoining the
unfair trader from pursuing the unlawful

competition & for the aggrieved party to
recover damages. This is based on equity
considerations.
Converse Rubber vs. Jacinto Rubber:
FACTS: Converse owns the trademark of
“Converse Chuck Taylor All Star”. Jacinto
manufactures shoes of identical
appearance. Hence, this suit.
HELD: Sec 69 of the Corp Law does not
disqualify Converse from filing the suit
although it is unlicensed to do business
and is not doing business in the Phils.
This is in compliance with the
Convention of Paris for the Protection of
Industrial Property from which the Phils
adheres to and which US is a signatory.
Leviton Industries vs. Salvador
(1982)
FACTS: Leviton Manufacturing (US) sued
Leviton Industries (Phil) for unfair
competition bec. the latter uses the
trademark Leviton. Defendant filed MTD
for failure to allege capacity to sue.
HELD: Plaintiff failed to allege capacity
to sue.
1. All that Leviton Manufacturing
alleged is that it is a foreign
corporation. It should have, in
addition, alleged the ff pursuant to
Sec. 21-a:
a. it registered its trademark with the
Phil. Patent Office or that it is an
assignee of the trademark, and
b. that the country of which it is a
citizen or domiciliary grants to
Filipino corps the same reciprocal
t re a t m e n t , e i t h e r i n a t re a t y,
convention or law.
2. It also violates Sec. 4, Rule 8 of the
Rules of Court, which states that:
Facts showing the capacity of a party
to sue or be sued or the authority of a
party to sue or be sued in a
representative capacity or the legal
existence of an organized association
of persons that is made a party, must
be averred.
c. Agreements Fully
Transacted Outside
the Philippines
Page 81 of 92
Conflict of Laws
A foreign corporation is allowed to maintain
an action on a transaction wholly celebrated
and consummated abroad so as not to
impair the policy of stabilizing commercial
transactions.
Universal Shipping Lines vs IAC
HELD: The private respondent may sue
in the Phils upon the marine insurance
policies to cover international-bound
cargoes shipped by the carrier. It is not
the lack of the license but doing business
without such license which bars a foreign
corporation from access to our courts.
Hang Lung Bank vs. Saulog
(1991)
FACTS: Hang Lung Bank, not doing
business in the Phils, entered into
continuing guarantee agreements with
Cordova Chin San in HongKong for the
debts of Wolder Enterprises. Wolder
defaulted so Hang Lung sued Wolder and
Chin San. No payment was made so it
sued Chin San in RTC, Makati for
enforcement of its money claim. Chin San
moved to dismiss for incapacity to sue.
HELD: A foreign bank not doing business
in the Phils, such as Hang Lung, may sue
a resident for contracts entered and
consummated outside the Phils.
Reasons for rule: if not adopted,
a. it will hamper the growth of
business between Filipinos and
foreigners
b. it will be used as protection by
unscrupulous Filipinos who have
businesses abroad
d. Petition Filed is
Merely a Corollary
Defense in a Suit
against it
Time Inc. vs. Reyes
HELD: The court allowed a foreign corp
is not maintaining a suit in our courts but
is merely defending itself when it files a
complaint for the sole purpose of
preventing the lower court from
exercising jurisdiction over the case. As
such, it is not required to allege its
capacity to sue.
Phil. Columbia Enterprises vs. Lantin
(1971)

FACTS: Katoh & Co. filed a complaint
against Phil Columbian. Phil Columbian
challenged its capacity to sue. TC
deferred the determination of this issue
until trial on the merits. PC opposed
claiming that if it files a counterclaim, it
will be waiving its right to assail the
capacity to sue of Katoh.
HELD: A counterclaim is a complaint
against the plaintiff. It would not be the
foreign corp who will be maintaining a
suit. Therefore, Sec. 69 of the Corp Law
will not apply.
7. Definition and Scope
o f Tr a n s a c t i n g
Business
A foreign corporation may do business,
state consent being presumed, except:
1. where it is prohibited by express
statutory authority or constitutional
enactment
2. where it is seeking to perform acts
which are contrary to public policy
3. where it is seeking to exercise
extraordinary and special franchises
4. where it is seeking to perform acts
which are not authorized by the law of
the state of its incorporation
“Doing Business” (Foreign Investments Act)
- soliciting orders,
- service contracts,
- opening offices whether called “liaison”
offices,
- service was invalid it being a foreign corp
appointing representatives if the latter
stays for at least 180 days,
- participating in the management,
supervision or control of any domestic
business
- and any other act that imply a
continuity of commercial dealings
- and contemplate in the performance of
acts or works
- the progressive prosecution of
commercial gain or of the purpose/
object of the business organization
What is not doing business:
1. mere investment as a shareholder
2. exercising of rights as investor
3. having a nominee director or officer to
represent interests
4. a p p o i n t i n g a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o r
distributor in the Phils which transacts
business in its own name and for its
own accounts
Doing business serves as the basis for
jurisdiction over corps on the theory that
they are present in the state or have
Page 82 of 92
Conflict of Laws
consented to suit by making that state a
major place of business.
Avon Insurance vs. CA
(1997)
HELD: A reinsurance company is not
doing business in a certain state merely
because the property or lives which are
insured by the original insurer company
are located in that state since the
reinsurance contract is usually a separate
and distinct arrangement from the
original contract of insurance, whose
contracted risk is insured in the
reinsurance agreement.
The term “doing business in the Phils”
implies a continuity of commercial
dealings and arrangements and
contemplates, to that extent, the
performance of acts or works or the
exercise of functions normally incident to
and in the progressive prosecution of the
purpose and object of its organization.
Wang Laboratories vs. Mendoza
(1987)
FACTS: Wang Lab (US corp) sells its
products in the Phils thru its exclusive
distributor, Exxbite. ACCRS sued WL for
breach of contract for failure to develop
the software program contracted. WL
filed MTD on the basis of lack of
jurisdiction over its person bec. the
not engaged in business in the Phils.
HELD: WL is “doing business” in the
Phils. It has installed 26 products in the
Phils and has registered its tradename
with PPO. It allowed E to use such
trademark and to advertise the same.
Thus, it cannot be said that the case
involved an isolated or single transaction.
The transaction is not merely incidental
or casual but is of such nature as to
indicate a purpose to do other business in
the State.
CIR vs. JAL
(1991)
FACTS: JAL was assessed deficiency
income tax by CIR for the sales of its
ticketing agent (PAL) in the Phils. JAL
opposed and claimed that as a non-
resident foreign corp. it can only be taxed
on income from Phil sources.

HELD: JAL is a resident foreign
corporation under the Tax Code. For a
foreign corporation to be regarded as
doing business, there must be a
continuity of conduct and intention to
establish a continuous business (i.e.
appointment of a local agent) and not a
temporary one. JAL constituted PAL as a
local agent to sell tickets which is the
lifeblood of airline tickets, the generation
of sales being its paramount objective.
Merrill Lynch Futures vs CA
(1992)
FACTS: Lara spouses entered into a
Futures Customer Agreement with
Merrill Lynch Futures Inc. They become
indebted to it after a loss in the business.
Laras refused to pay and claimed that the
transactions were void because MLFI had
no license to operate as a commodity or
financial futures broker.
HELD: MLFI had the capacity to sue and
Laras are estopped from denying the
same after having done business with it
over many years. The purpose of
applying the doctrine of estoppel is to
prevent persons from taking undue
advantage of a corp’s non-compliance
with the statutes where such person
received benefits under their contract.
Granger vs. Microwave Systems
(1990)
FACTS: Granger (US) sued MSI (Phil) for
recovery of a sum of money. MSI did not
pay and claimed that G had no capacity
to sue bec. it was unlicensed.
HELD: G had no capacity to sue because
of its being an unlicensed foreign corp
doing business in the Phils. Neither does
it fall under the established exceptions.
Granger had the burden of showing that
the finding fell under an exception. The
purpose of requiring license is to enable
Phil courts to exercise jurisdiction over
them. If the foreign corp operates here
without submitting to our laws by
securing a license, they may not be
allowed to invoke our laws for their
protection.
B. Special Corporations
Page 83 of 92
Conflict of Laws
1. Religious Societies and
the Corporation Sole
A religious society, if controlled by aliens, is
not permitted to acquire lands.
A corporation sole is an incorporated office
composed of only one person as in the
cases of the chief archbishop, bishop,
priest, minister or an elder of a religious
sect which may form a corporation sole for
the purpose of managing its affairs,
property and temporalities.
Roman Catholic Administrator vs. LRC
HELD: The 60% Filipino capital
requirement to own lands was not
intended to apply to corporations sole
because it is composed of one person
usually a head or bishop of a diocese but
he is only the administrator and not the
owner of the temporalities. Such are
administered for and in behalf of the
faithful who are Filipino citizens.
2. Transnational
Corporations
Transnational corporations are clusters of
several corporations, each with a separate
entity, existing and spread out in several
countries, but controlled by the
headquarters in a developed state where it
was originally organized.
But the transnational corporations are
established under and governed by each
host country’s national laws.
However, all locally incorporated branches
are joined together by the common control
and management of higher officials in the
home state.
As to liability, the single unit comprising the
cluster is held liable according to the laws of
the host country but the transnational
corporation, in its entirety, is not answerable
to any legal order.
Derivative Jurisdiction over Foreign
Corporations (parent-subsidiary)
2 Important Issues
1. whether ownership by the parent over
the subsidiary’s stock is enough to give
jurisdiction over the subsidiary
2. whether the activities of the subsidiary
in a state will give that state jurisdiction
over he parent corporation
Restatement 2nd:
Jurisdiction over the parent will exist if the
parent controls and dominates the
subsidiary. In determining whether the

separate corporate existence of the
subsidiary has been adequately preserved,
the courts will consider whether the
subsidiary has its own records, assets,
advertising, employees, payroll and
accounting and whether its directors and
headquarters are different form those of the
parent.
In the converse situation, jurisdiction over
the parent may give jurisdiction over the
subsidiary if the separate corporate
existence of each has not been adequately
maintained or if the parent has acted within
the state as the subsidiary’s agent.
C. Partnerships
Partnership is formed by 2 or more persons
who bind themselves to contribute money,
property or industry to a common fund with
the intention of dividing the profits among
themselves.
Phil internal law provides that if the domicile
of the partnership is not identified by the
law creating it, it is deemed domiciled in the
place where it has its legal representation
or where it exercises its principal functions.
What matters are governed by the personal
law of the partnership?
1. nature, attributes and capacity to
contract of the partnership
2. whether or not a partnership has been
constituted (esp. the conditions and
formalities required)
3. determination of WON it requires a
separate juridical personality (Common
law does not consider a partnership a
legal person but civil law endows
partnerships with a separate legal
personality)
4. grounds for dissolution and termination
of partnerships
5. liability of partners esp. if limited
partnership is allowed
What are governed or subject to the law of
the place of business?
1. entitlements and limitations, in general
2. creation of establishments in the state
3. mercantile operations
4. jurisdiction of nations
! Notes!
✪ Domestic Corp.:
a) Can sue
b) Can be sued
✪ Foreign Corps.
1) Doing Business
Page 84 of 92
Conflict of Laws
a. With license – can sue
and be sued
b. Without license – cannot
sue, can be sued
2) Not Doing Business (isolated
transaction) – can sue and be sued
________________
PART FIVE: FOREIGN JUDGMENTS
XVIII: Recognition and Enforcement
of Foreign Judgments
A. Distinction between
Recognition and Enforcement
‘Foreign judgments’- all decisions rendered
outside the forum and encompasses
judgments, decrees & orders of courts of
foreign countries as well as of sister states
in a federal system of gov’t.
Conceptual & Procedural Differences
between Recognition & Enforcement:
Rules on recognition & enforcement are
analogous but there are differences in
conceptual & procedural aspects.
ENFORCEMENT: This happens when a
successful plaintiff fails to enforce judgment
in the forum court so he seeks to carry out
the execution of the judgment in another
state.
This requires the filing of an action and a
new judgment before the properties of the
defendant can be attached.
RECOGNITION: This may arise when a
successful defendant wins and asserts that
decision to preclude the plaintiff from filing
a suit on the same claim in another forum.
It is basically a passive act because it does
not require the filing of an action in another
forum. EX. Decree of divorce.
B. Bases of Recognition and
Enforcement of Foreign
Judgments
1) Comity
According to Cheshire, the theory on comity
mean that in order to maintain reciprocal
treatment from the courts of other
countries, we are compelled to take foreign
judgments as they stand & to give them Full
faith & Credit.
Comity calls for reciprocity between the
concerned jurisdictions. Thus, forum A will
withhold recognition & enforcement of prior
judgment if it comes from Forum B, w/c

does not give same concession to forum A
judgment.
2) “Obligation of foreign judgments”
This doctrine of obligation is derived from
the rigid & unyielding vested rights theory.
Judgment of a foreign court of competent
jurisdiction is considered as imposing a duty
or obligation on the losing litigant.
i.e.:
Forum 1- adjudicates debt owing
to plaintiff
Forum 2- treats F1 judgment as
evidence of debt w/c may be enforced in F2
by an action of debt
Goddard vs. Godard
(1870)
FACTS: Godard (French) obtained a
favorable ruling by a French court arising
on a charter party obligation against Gray
(English). The French court interpreted
the clause “penalty for non-performance
of this agreement, estimated amount of
freight” as a clause that sets the limits to
liability to one voyage between the
parties to the charter party contrary to the
English interpretation. When this French
judgment was sought to be enforced in
England, Gray interposed in defense that
the erroneous French judgement is a bar
to the action for enforcement in England.
HELD: it is not a bar. In England, foreign
judgement are enforced based on the
principle that where a court of competent
jurisdiction has adjudicated a sum of
money to be due from one person to
another, a legal obligation arises to pay
the sum, on which an action of debt to
enforce the judgement may be
maintained and not merely out of
politeness and courtesy to other tribunals
of other countries. Anything that negates
the existence of a legal obligation or
excuses the defendant from performance
is a good defense to the action (ex.
Evidence that court exceeded its
jurisdiction or the judgement was
obtained thru fraud)
C. Policies Underlying
Recognition and Enforcement
1. Res judicata
Many courts recognize & enforce foreign
judgments on ground of res judicata, under
which principle:
Page 85 of 92
Conflict of Laws
a. those who contested an issue
shall be bound by the result &
b. matters once tried & decided
w/ finality in one jurisdiction
shall be considered as settled
b/w the parties
Thus, parties are prevented from litigating
issues already determined by a local
judgment.
In Anglo-American jurisprudence, foreign
judgments are not open to reexamination
on merits when placed in issue before local
courts subject to a few exceptions.
The principle seeks to accomplish the policy
of giving finality to litigation. Public policy
dictates diminishing the judicial energy
invested in deciding suits, encouraging
confidence in court decrees and securing
the legitimate expectations of successful
plaintiff or defendant that he will no longer
be harassed into protecting his interests.
Rule 39 Sec 40:
A foreign judgment of a tribunal of a foreign
country, having jurisdiction to pronounce
judgment renders it conclusive upon the
title to the thing while a judgment against a
person is presumptive evidence of a right as
between the parties & their successors in
interest
2. Merger
It considers the plaintiff’s cause of action as
merged in the judgment. Thus, he may not
relitigate that exact same claim.
3. Bar
This is where a successful defendant
interposes the judgment in his favor to
avert a second action by plaintiff on the
same claim. By direct estoppel, the
relitigation of all matters decided are
precluded
In addition, DOCTRINE OF COLLATERAL
ESTOPPEL renders conclusive all “essential
issues of fact actually litigated in the suit
decided on by the foreign court”.
Distinction between Res Judicata &
Collateral Estoppel
RES JUDICATA- seeks to end litigation by
disallowing suit on the same claim
COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL- concerned with
preclusion by barring relitigation of an issue
already litigated on in a prior proceeding
D. Requisites for Recognition or
Enforcement

1) The foreign judgment was
rendered by a judicial or a quasi-
judicial tribunal which had
jurisdiction over the parties & the
case in the proper judicial
proceeding.
2) The judgment must be valid under
the laws of the court that rendered
it
3) The judgment must be final &
executory to constitute res judicata
in another action
4) The state where the foreign
judgment was obtained allows
recognition or enforcement of
Philippine judgment
5) The judgment must be for a fixed
sum of money
6) The foreign judgment must not be
contrary to the public policy or the
good morals of the country where
it is to be enforced
7) The judgment must not have been
obtained by fraud, collusion,
mistake of fact or mistake
1. The foreign judgment was rendered by a
judicial or a quasi-judicial tribunal having
jurisdiction over the parties & the case in
the proper case
A court validly asserts jurisdiction over
actions in personam based on consent of
parties or relation of the parties or events to
the forum, thus satisfying minimum
standards of fair play & substantial justice.
In in rem proceeding, jurisdiction is based
on the power of the state over the property
found within the territory
Northwest Orient Airlines vs. CA and
C.F. Sharp
(1995)
FACTS: Under contract of agency, NOA
authorized Sharp to sell airline tickets.
Sharp failed to remit the proceeds of the
ticket sales to NOA. The court in Tokyo
failed to serve the writ of summons
against the Sharp branches in Tokyo.
NOA had these writs served in the
Manila main office of Sharp. Despite the
notice, Sharp did not appear at the
hearing. NOA obtained a judgment in its
favor. NOA sought enforce the judgment
Page 86 of 92
Conflict of Laws
in the Philippines. Sharp opposed
claiming that the service of process was
void so the Tokyo Court did not acquire
jurisdiction over it.
HELD: Service of summons by Tokyo
court was valid. A foreign judgment is
presumed to be valid and binding in the
country where it comes, until the contrary
i s s h o w n . T h e re g u l a r i t y o f t h e
proceedings and the giving of due notice
is also presumed. The party attacking has
the burden of overcoming this
presumption. In CAB, SHARP alleged
that the extraterritorial service of
summons is void. However, Sharp failed
to prove the applicable Japanese
procedural law to base its claim since in
matters of procedure, lex fori applies.
Also, Sec. 14 of ROC applies, it allows
service to be made to:
a. r e s i d e n t agent
designated (if it has one,
the designation is
exclusive)
b. i f n o n e , o n t h e
g o v e r n m e n t o ff i c i a l
designated by law
( Insurance
Commissioner – foreign
insurance co.;
Superintendent of Banks
– foreign banking corps.
& SEC – other foreign
corps licensed to do
business in Phils) The
government official shall
transmit the summons
by mail to the principal
office.
c. any of its officers/
agents within the Phils.
Sharp did not designate an agent so
service on govt official or any of its
officers in Japan is allowed. The Court
finds that the service made by Tokyo
court sufficient to fall under service to the
proper govt official.
(Tokyo DC- SC Japan – Ministry of
Foreign Affairs of Japan – Japanese
Embassy – DFA, Phils – RTC – sheriff
delivered summons to principal office)
Boudard vs. Tait
(1939)
 Conflict of Laws

FACTS: Boudard’s husband, employee of

Tait, was killed by co-employees.
Boudard obtained a favorable judgment Somportex vs. Philadelphia Chewing Gum
against Tait who was declared to be in Corp.. Court rejected Philadelphia’s
default in CFI of Hanoi. She filed action contention that a default judgment by the
English courts should not be extended
for execution of Hanoi judgment in CFI
hospitality by American courts.
Manila. Court dismissed for lack of
jurisdiction of Hanoi court over Tait who “In the absence of fraud or collusion, a
was not a resident of French Indo-China. default judgment is as conclusive as
adjudication between the parties as when
HELD: Hanoi court has no jurisdiction rendered after answer & complete contest
over Tait. Jurisdiction in personam, over in open court.
non-residents, in money suits, must be
based upon personal service within the The polestar is whether a reasonable
state that renders the judgment. At the method for notification is employed &
time of the complaint, Tait was not in reasonable opportunity to be heard is given
to the person concerned.”
Hanoi nor were his agents or
representatives. Also, the French law on
Borthwick vs. Castro
service of summons was not applied.
(1987)
Instead of serving a copy to the Atty Gen
FACTS: Borthwick (US) owned real
of the Republic who shall visae the
p ro p e r t i e s i n H a w a i i . H e i s s u e d
original, the summons were served in
promissory notes to Scallon but failed to
Manila to J.M. Shotwell, a representative
pay the same. Scallon sued him in
of Churchill & Tait Inc, which is an entity
Hawaii. B was issued summons while in
entirely different from Tait.
California which process was valid under
Hawaiian law. For failure to enforce the
judgement, S filed action in Phils. B’s
Ramirez vs. Gmur
defense is that the Hawaii court has no
(1918)
jurisdiction over the cause of action and
FACTS: The will of Bischoff contained a
over his person.
statement to the effect that he had no
living forced heirs. Leona Castro,
HELD: Foreign judgements are
Bischoff’s recognized natural daughter,
presumptive evidence of the rights
had 2 sets of children from 2 marriages,
between parties and rejection may be
who claim to be heirs of Bischoff.
justified, among others, by want of
ο first married to Von Kaufmann and
jurisdiction of the issuing authority,
had 3 children but Von Kaufmann
among others. But in CAB, such rejection
obtained divorce on France
was not justified. What Borthwick seeks
ο Castro was remarried to Dr. Mory
in this appeal is a 3rd chance to contest the
and they had 2 children
jurisdiction of the foreign court. In order
to do that, he must show that the
HELD: as to the Mory children – NO, the
declaration of default was incorrect. But
second marriage is void. The right to
Borthwick did not do this. Borthwick was
inherit pertains only to legitimate,
given an opportunity to file his answer in
legitimated and acknowledged natural
the Hawaii court, he was also given a
children. The French decree of divorce is
chance in the CFI, Makati, but he failed to
not valid in the Philippines. French court
do the same.
had no jurisdiction to entertain actions for
dissolution of marriages of performed in
the Phils over persons domiciled here.
2. The judgment must be valid under the
The RULE is that when a court, where laws of the court that rendered it
neither of the spouses are domiciled, and
to which one or both, may resort merely In Pemberto vs. Hughes although there
to obtain decree of divorce, issues such was error in procedure, since the Florida
decree, the divorce is not entitled to court was competent & no substantial
recognition elsewhere. injustice was committed, the English court
did not consider the error as to significantly
As long as the foreign court acquired alter an otherwise valid decree.
jurisdiction, its decisions will not be
disturbed whether it was reached through 3. The judgment must be final & executory
an adversary proceeding or by default. to constitute res judicata in another action
Page 87 of 92

If judgment is interlocutory or provisional in
character w/c ‘contemplates that a fuller
investigation leading to final decision may
later be held, it creates no obligation on the
forum court to recognize it.
Nouvion vs. Freeman
(1889)
FACTS: Nouvion filed an action for
administration of the estate of
Henderson. In order to show that he was
Henderson’s creditor, Nouvion alleged
that he obtained a foreign judgment
establishing Henderson’s indebtedness to
him.
HELD: The Spanish judgment cannot be
sustained because it was not yet final and
conclusive. Where a court of competent
jurisdiction has adjudicated a certain sum
as due from one to another, a legal
obligation arises, on which an action of
debt to enforce judgment may be
maintained. But to come within the terms
of law properly laid down, judgment
must result from an adjudication of a
court of competent jurisdiction, such
judgement being final and conclusive. It
is not sufficient that the judgement puts
an end to and finally settles controversy.
It must e shown that in the court by
which it was pronounced it conclusively
and finally settles forever the existence of
debt of which it is sought to be made
conclusive.
Querubin vs. Querubin
(1950)
FACTS: Following their divorce because
of Margaret’s infidelity, rendered in New
Mexico, their daughter Querubina was
kept in a neutral home. Silvestre then
obtained an interlocutory decree granting
him custody. Margaret had the decree
modified since the she was remarried and
had a stable home for Querubina. When
Silvestre fled to the Philippines with
Querubina, Margaret filed for habeas
corpus. She asserts that the interlocutory
order should be complied with pursuant
to Article 48 Rule 39.
HELD: Her contention is erroneous. A
foreign interlocutory order in favor of
Margaret did not establish a vested right
with respect to rightful custody over
Queribina. The decree is not yet final but
subject to change with the circumstances.
Page 88 of 92
Conflict of Laws
Generally, divorce decree awarding
custody of child to one spouse is
respected by other states but such decree
has no effect in another state as to facts
and conditions occurring subsequently to
date of decree. Court of another state may
award custody otherwise upon proof of
subsequent matters justifying such decree
to the child’s interest.
4. The state where the foreign judgment
was obtained allows recognition or
enforcement of Philippine judgment
In Hilton vs. Guyot, a French judgment was
not recognized by a US court because it
found out that French laws allowed review
of American judgments on the merits. This
ruling is widely criticized because:
ο Instead of being a mutual exchange of
privileges, comity was used as a means
of retaliation.
ο The court in Hilton discriminated
against the litigants on account of the
policies of their governments which
they were in no position to shape and
alter.
ο It can be argued that the task of
formulating policies through reciprocity
is a power misplaced in the judiciary
and should be appropriately wielded by
the other branches of government.
Trautman and Von Mehren point out the
difficulties with the reciprocity requirement.
a. its normal tendency is to
lower rather than raise
the standards of practice
b. t h e p r i v a t e l i t i g a n t s
burdened may not be
closely attached to the
legal order sought to be
changed
c. the administration of
reciprocity clauses can be
complicated esp. where
case law systems are
affected since finding the
exact foreign law that
grants reciprocity is still
nebulous. It is unclear
whether reciprocity is
proved by general
recognition of such or
requires a specific
recognition for a case
identical or analogous to
the one before the court.
Cowans, et al. vs. Teconderoga Pulp and
Paper Co.
(1927)

FACTS: Cowans obtained a Quebec
judgment in their favor for a sum of
money. TPP asserts in defense that this
judgment is not conclusive upon, but
merely a prima facie evidence before the
US courts, pursuant to Quebec law. TPP
alleges that since Quebec law does not
reciprocate as to judgements of NY
courts, NY should also not recognize the
Quebec judgment as adjudications of the
issues.
HELD: This claim of TPP pursuant to the
Hilton vs. Guyot doctrine should not be
followed. Persuasiveness of a foreign
judgment is not dependent upon comity
nor reciprocity. Even without these
principles, a judgment has its own
strength. Following the Hilton vs. Guyot
ruling would deprive a party of the
private rights he has acquired by reason
of a foreign judgement because the
country in whose courts the judgement
was rendered has a different rule of
evidence than what the recognizing court
has and does not give the same effect as
the latter gives to a foreign judgment.
5. The judgment must be for a fixed sum of
money
Unless the foreign judgment specifies
performance or delivery, there is nothing for
the forum court to enforce. In Sadler vs.
Roberis, the English court held that until
taxation, the plaintiff could not enforce his
claim because the Jamaican court decided
that from the sum due him should first be
subtracted the costs incurred by the
defendant which was to be taxed. Hence,
the amount decreed was not fixed.
6. The foreign judgment must not be
contrary to the public policy or the good
morals of the country where it is to be
enforced
Querubin vs. Querubin
(1950)
HELD: It goes against the law, public
policy, and good customs that a mother
who violated her marital vows should
have custody (referring to the fact that
Margaret was having an illicit affair with
another man).
7. The judgment must not have been
obtained by fraud, collusion, mistake of fact
or mistake of law
Whether or not there is fraud is decided by
the court where enforcement of judgment is
Page 89 of 92
Conflict of Laws
sought on the basis of its own internal law.
A problem may arise when the internal law
is not in agreement with the notions of
equity of the foreign state.
Rule 39, Sec. 50
Effect of Foreign Judgment. The effect of a
judgment of a court of a foreign country,
having jurisdiction to pronounce the
judgment is as follows:
a. in case of a judgment
upon a specific thing, the
judgment is conclusive upon the
title to the thing
b. in case of judgment upon
a person, the judgment is a
presumptive evidence of a right as
between the parties and their
s ucc e s s o r s in int e re s t by a
subsequent title; but the judgment
may be repelled by evidence of
want of jurisdiction, want of notice
to the party, collusion, fraud, or
clear mistake of law or fact.
This rule does not refer to intrinsic fraud
which goes to the merits of the case. To
impeach a foreign judgment, fraud must be
“extrinsic, collateral act which vitiates the
most solemn proceedings of the courts of
justice” such as collusion by the parties,
suppression of an important document or
the presentation in evidence of a forged will
or falsified affidavit. Extrinsic fraud signifies
that a party is deprived of his day in court.
Philippine Aluminum vs. FASGI
(1950)
FACTS: FASGI (US) entered into a
distributorship agreement with PAWI
(Phil). PAWI shipped defective goods to
FASGI. FASGI sued PAWI for breach of
contract in US court. They entered into a
settlement but PAWI still failed to pay. US
court issued a certificate of final
judgment upon application by FASGI of
entry of judgment. FASGI was not able to
satisfy the claim in US so it filed a
complaint for enforcement in RTC. RTC
dismissed but CA reversed.
HELD: California court judgment may be
enforced. A judgment for a sum of money
ordered in a foreign court is presumptive
evidence of a right between the parties
and their successors-in-interest, but when
suit for enforcement is filed in Phil court,
the judgment may be repelled by
evidence of want of jurisdiction, want of
notice, fraud, collusion or a clear mistake
of law or fact.

In CAB, PAWI failed to prove that there
was collusion between its counsel, Mr.
Ready, and FASGI in entering into the
settlement and in agreeing to an entry of
judgment against PAWI. PAWI should
have raised the issue before the forum
court in line with the principle of comity
of nations that a court should refrain from
assuming the power to pass upon the
correctness of the application of laws and
evaluation of facts of judgments issued
by foreign courts.
Puyat vs. Zabarte
(2001)
FACTS: Z filed an action to enforce
money judgment rendered by the
Superior Court of California against P.
RTC by summary judgment ordered
Puyat to pay Z pursuant to Judgment of
Stipulation for Entry of Judgment
contained in the Compromise Agreement
between them in the Calif. court. CA held
that P is estopped from assailing the
judgment that had become final.
HELD: The summary judgment is
allowed. Since the present action lodged
in the RTC was for the enforcement of a
foreign judgment, there was no need to
ascertain the rights and obligations of the
parties based on foreign laws or
contracts; the parties needed only to
perform their obligations under the
Compromise Agreement they had
entered into. None of the reasons for
invoking forum non conveniens barred the
RTC from exercising its jurisdiction
(forum shopping, overcrowded dockets,
harassment of defendants, etc.) In CAB,
there was no more need for material
witnesses, no forum shopping or
harassment of Puyat, no inadequacy in
the local machinery to enforce the foreign
judgment and no question raised as to the
application of any foreign law.
E. Grounds for Non-
Recognition
Uniform Money-Judgment Recognition Act
of the US, Section 4:
(a) A f o r e i g n j u d g m e n t i s n o t
conclusive if-
1. The judgment was rendered under a
system which does not provide
impartial tribunals or procedures
compatible with the requirements of
due process of law
Page 90 of 92
Conflict of Laws
2. The foreign court did not have
personal jurisdiction over the defendant
3. The foreign court did not have
jurisdiction over the subject matter
(b) A foreign judgment need not be
recognized if-
1) The defendant in the proceedings
in foreign court did not receive
notice of the proceedings in
sufficient time to enable him to
defend
2) The judgment was obtained by
fraud
3) The cause of action or claim for
relief on which judgment is
based is repugnant to public policy
of the state.
4) The foreign judgment conflicts
with another final & conclusive
judgment.
5) The proceeding in the foreign
country was contrary to an
agreement between the parties
under which the dispute in
question settled otherwise than the
proceeding in that court
6) In the case of jurisdiction based
only on personal service, the
foreign court was a seriously
inconvenient forum for the trial of
the action
Grounds 1-3 under letter b are mandatory &
the last 3 are discretionary.
The ground on non-recognition for lack of
jurisdiction in personam is most debatable.
Most courts consider jurisdiction of foreign
court as appropriate when there are
significant contacts between forum states &
individuals.
The service of summons as the traditional
basis for exercise of jurisdiction has been
eroded.
The ground that “foreign court was
seriously inconvenient” employs doctrine of
forum non conveniens to restrain use of
“presence” as cornerstone of jurisdiction.
Art 23 Hague Convention on Jurisdiction,
Applicable Law, Recognition, Enforcement &
Cooperation in re of Parental Responsibility
& Measures for Protection of Children:
Considering the best interests of child,
recognition of measures directed for
protection of the child or his property may
be refused if such were taken without giving
the child opportunity to be heard or if
contrary to public policy.
Violation of ordre public & nonobservance of
due process are included as grounds for

non-recognition in many Hague
Conventions.
F. Modern Developments in
Enforcement of Foreign
Judgment
1. The Hague Conference on Private IL
Convention on Recognition & Enforcement
of Foreign Judgments in Civil & Commercial
Matters established conditions & requisites
for contracting states to recognize &
enforce each other’s judgment.
Contributions:
a) provisions on applicability of
Convention irrespective of
nationality
b) non-refusal for sole reason that
court of state of origin has applied
a law other than that which would
have been applicable according to
the rules of Private IL of the state
addressed
c) it addresses the question of
whether a default judgment is
subject to enforcement
d) e s t a b l i s h e s r e c o g n i t i o n &
enforcement procedures
The seventh session looked into possibility
of a general convention on recognition &
enforcement of judgments whose chief
benefit will be the relatively uniform
procedure among contracting states.
2. The EEC Convention of 1968
Six countries comprising the European
Economic Community are signatories to
Convention on Jurisdiction of Courts &
Enforcement of Decisions…
The Convention extends to Common Market
area the reach of jurisdictionally improper
for a now available against non-residents
under procedural systems of 4 member
states.
3 . T h e U n i f o r m M o n e y -J u d g m e n t s
Recognition Act
This seeks to inspire more confidence in
stability of American law & bring together
into one statute all common law rules of
recognition from jurisprudence.
What does the act cover?
It is applicable to any foreign country
judgment that is final & conclusive &
enforceable when rendered even though an
appeal is pending or it is subject to appeal.
Page 91 of 92
Conflict of Laws
G. Procedure for Enforcement
The Philippines has adopted the common
law practice of not instantaneously
executing foreign judgment.
MODES OF ENFORCEMENT
A. First Mode: Need for New Judicial Action
Procedure in Philippines
(Compare d t o s imple proc e dure of
exequaure, Philippine mode is protracted &
expensive).
Our laws require that a petition should be
filed in proper court attaching authenticated
copy of foreign judgment to be enforced.
Philippine consul must certify that it had
been rendered by a court of competent
jurisdiction. The petition must comply w/ all
the requisites of an enforceable judgment.
Requirement to file an action anew
Attempt to reconcile the principle of
territorial jurisdiction of courts w/c demands
that the enforcement of a judgment outside
the territory of rendering court must be
placed upon some other basis than the
authority of the rendering court w/c ceased
at its jurisdictional limits- & the principle of
res judicata.
Ingenohl vs. Olsen and Co.
FA C T S : I n g e n o h l o b t a i n e d a H K
judgment declaring it to be the owner of
the trademark against Olsen. Ingenohl
then recovered the sums awarded by the
HK judgment in an action for collection
in Manila. Olsen appealed. The appeal
was granted because the trial court erred
in not taking into account the fact that
Olsen had bought the Ingenohl
trademark in a sale of the same
conducted by the Alien Property
Custodian. Hence this petition by
Ingenohl.
HELD: There is no error on the part of the
HK court. In authoritatively passing upon
the issue of not giving effect to the sale by
the Alien Property Custodian, it cannot
be said that the HK tribunal committed a
wrong decision. The judgment is
unquestionably valid and is binding
between the parties. When the judge who
is the final exponent of that law,
a u t h o r i t a t i v e l y d e c l a re s t h a t t h e
assignment by the Custodian of the assets
of the Manila firm cannot and will not be
 Conflict of Laws

allowed to affect the rights of the party 2) dictates of public policy that there be an
concerned in Hong Kong, the court ruled end to litigation.
that it is not possible for a foreign court to
pronounce his decision wrong.

Procedure in other civil law countries

B. Second Mode: Exequatur - -Summary

proceeding also known as ‘exequatur’
procedure.
Authenticated copy of foreign judgment
need only be accompanied by a certification
from Clerk of Court. Once validated the
foreign judgment has same effect as local
judgment. Example: French formule
executoire, used in France, Italy, Austria

C. Third Mode: Judgment Registration

It may or may not involve judicial

supervision. Authenticated copy of foreign
judgment filed w/ registrar’s office w/ other
proofs required by domestic laws & foreign
judgment is converted into a local one that
is immediately executory.

It is used in Australia, England.

Distinctions between a foreign country & a

sister-state judgment in United States

These differences are premised on possible

absence of principles underlying res judicata
practices within foreign country.

Von Mehren & Trautman: There are

significant differences between the 2 to
justify refusal of a foreign country judgment
even though it could be recognized if
rendered by a sister state:
1) US Constitution clause of full faith
and credit. This substitutes a
federal policy in place of individual
state policies, thus demanding that
sister-state judgments be given
more than minimal preclusive
effects.
2) Judgments of sister-state may be
brought to US Supreme Court for
review
3) Judgments rendered by sister
states are based on legal
procedures & standards similar to
those whose recognition is sought.

On the other hand, a foreign country

judgment may have been decided under
rules that disregard private rights & duties
or fundamental policies that the recognizing
court deem important.

In practice, courts are inclined to give

recognition because of
1) overriding public interest
Page 92 of 92