CONFLICT OF LAW

Midterm Reviewer
By Olive Cachapero
Note: See Private international law vs. Public international
law
JURISDICTION
1)

Jurisdiction over the person (see CivPro notes) - in

personam jurisdiction

2)

Jurisdiction over the res (property) in rem

jurisdiction
a) Seizure of the property
b) Institution of legal proceedings

HASEGAWA vs. KITAMURA

For a court to validly exercise its power to adjudicate a
controversy, it must have
a) jurisdiction over the plaintiff or the petitioner,
b) over the defendant or the respondent,
c) over the subject matter,
d) over the issues of the case and,
e) in cases involving property, over the res or the thing which
is the subject of the litigation. In assailing the trial court's
jurisdiction herein, petitioners are actually referring to
subject matter jurisdiction.
Jurisdiction over the subject matter in a judicial
proceeding is conferred by the sovereign authority which
establishes and organizes the court. It is given only by law and
in the manner prescribed by law. It is further determined by
the allegations of the complaint irrespective of whether the
plaintiff is entitled to all or some of the claims asserted therein.
To succeed in its motion for the dismissal of an action for lack
of jurisdiction over the subject matter of the claim, the movant
must show that the court or tribunal cannot act on the matter
submitted to it because no law grants it the power to adjudicate
the claims.
Rules on Choice of Law (determine which state's law is to
be applied in resolving the substantive issues of a conflicts
problem)
a) Lex loci celebrationis relates to the law of the place of
the ceremony or the law of the place where a contract is
made.
b)

The doctrine of lex contractus or lex loci contractus

means the law of the place where a contract is executed or
to be performed. It controls the nature, construction, and
validity of the contract and it may pertain to the law
voluntarily agreed upon by the parties or the law intended
by them either expressly or implicitly.

c)

Under the state of the most significant relationship

rule, to ascertain what state law to apply to a dispute, the
court should determine which state has the most
substantial connection to the occurrence and the parties.
This rule takes into account several contacts and evaluates
them according to their relative importance with respect to
the particular issue to be resolved. In a case involving a
contract, the court should consider
where the contract was made,
was negotiated,
was to be performed, and

the domicile,
place of business, or
place of incorporation of the parties.

It should be noted that when a conflicts case, one involving a

foreign element, is brought before a court or administrative
agency, there are three alternatives open to the latter in
disposing of it:
1) dismiss the case, either because of lack of jurisdiction or
refusal to assume jurisdiction over the case;
2) assume jurisdiction over the case and apply the internal
law of the forum; or
3) assume jurisdiction over the case and take into account or
apply the law of some other State or States.
Forum non conveniens
a) First, it is not a proper basis for a motion to dismiss
because Section 1, Rule 16 of the Rules of Court does not
include it as a ground.
b) Second, whether a suit should be entertained or dismissed
on the basis of the said doctrine depends largely upon the
facts of the particular case and is addressed to the sound
discretion of the trial court.
c) Third, the propriety of dismissing a case based on this
principle requires a factual determination; hence, this
conflicts principle is more properly considered a matter of
defense.
TYPES OF JUDICIAL JURISDICTION AND BASES
FOR ITS EXERCISE
DE JOYA vs. JUDGE PLACIDO C. MARQUEZ (2006)
Requisites for the exercise of jurisdiction and how the court
acquires such jurisdiction:
a) Jurisdiction over the plaintiff or petitioner: This is
acquired by the filing of the complaint, petition or
initiatory pleading before the court by the plaintiff or
petitioner.
b) Jurisdiction
over
the
defendant
or
respondent: This is acquired by the voluntary
appearance or submission by the defendant or respondent
to the court or by coercive process issued by the court to
him, generally by the service of summons.
c) Jurisdiction over the subject matter: This is
conferred by law and, unlike jurisdiction over the parties,
cannot be conferred on the court by the voluntary act or
agreement of the parties.
d) Jurisdiction over the issues of the case: This is
determined and conferred by the pleadings filed in the
case by the parties, or by their agreement in a pre-trial
order or stipulation, or, at times by their implied consent
as by the failure of a party to object to evidence on an issue
not covered by the pleadings, as provided in Sec. 5, Rule
10.
e) Jurisdiction over the res: This is acquired by the
actual or constructive seizure by the court of the thing in
question, thus placing it in custodia legis, as in attachment
or garnishment; or by provision of law which recognizes in
the court the power to deal with the property or subject
matter within its territorial jurisdiction, as in land
registration proceedings or suits involving civil status or
real property in the Philippines of a non-resident
defendant.

Justice Regalado continues to explain:

In two cases, the court acquires jurisdiction to try the case,
even if it has not acquired jurisdiction over the person of a
nonresident defendant, as long as it has jurisdiction over
the res, as when the action involves the personal status of the
plaintiff or property in the Philippines in which the defendant
claims an interest. In such cases, the service of summons by
publication and notice to the defendant is merely to comply
with due process requirements.
Again, there is no exceptional reason in this case to allow
petitioner to obtain relief from the courts without submitting to
its jurisdiction. On the contrary, his continued refusal to
submit to the courts jurisdiction should give this Court more
reason to uphold the action of the respondent judge. The
purpose of a warrant of arrest is to place the accused under the
custody of the law to hold him for trial of the charges against
him. His evasive stance shows an intent to circumvent and
frustrate the object of this legal process. It should be
remembered that he who invokes the courts jurisdiction must
first submit to its jurisdiction.

1) Jurisdiction over the Subject Matter

Conferred by law

PERKINS VS. ROXAS, 1941

Idonah Slade Perkins in her cross-complaint brought suit
against Eugene Arthur Perkins and the Benguet
Consolidated Mining Company upon the alleged judgment
of the Supreme Court of the State of New York and asked
the CFI to render judgment enforcing that New York
judgment, and to issue execution thereon. This is a form of
action recognized by section 309 of the Code of Civil
Procedure (now section 47, Rule 39, Rules of Court) and
which falls within the general jurisdiction of the CFI of
Manila, to adjudicate, settle and determine.
Whether or not the respondent judge in the course of the
proceedings will give validity and efficacy to the New York
judgment set up by the petitioner in her cross-complaint is
a question that goes to the merits of the controversy and
relates to the rights of the parties as between each other,
and not to the jurisdiction or power of the court. The test
of jurisdiction 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. If its decision is erroneous,
its judgment case be reversed on appeal; but its
determination of the question, which the petitioner here
anticipates and seeks to prevent, is the exercise by that
court and the rightful exercise of its jurisdiction.
REYES vs. DIAZ, 1941
Jurisdiction over the subject-matter is the power to
hear and determine cases of the general class to which the
proceedings in question belong and is conferred by the
sovereign authority which organizes the court and defines
its powers.
Jurisdiction over the issue may be conferred by
consent either express or implied of the parties.
Although an issue is not duly pleaded, it may validly be
tried and decided if no timely objection is made thereto by
the parties. This cannot be done when jurisdiction over the
subject-matter is involved.

JURISDICTION OVER THE PERSONS (Plaintiff &

Defendant)
Rule 14, Secs. 6 & 7, 1997 Rules of Court)
PANTALEON vs. ASUNCION, 1959
In an action strictly in personam, like the one at
bar, personal service of summons, within the forum, is
essential to the acquisition of jurisdiction over the person
of the defendant, who does not voluntarily submit himself
to the authority of the court. In other words, summons by
publication cannot consistently with the due process
clause in the Bill of Rights confer upon the court
jurisdiction over said defendant.
Due process of law requires personal service to support a
personal judgment, and, when the proceeding is strictly in
personam brought to determine the personal rights and
obligations of the parties, personal service within the state
or a voluntary appearance in the case is essential to the
acquisition of jurisdiction so as to constitute compliance
with the constitutional requirement of due process. . . .
Although a state legislature has more control over the form
of service on its own residents than nonresidents, it has
been held that in action in personam . . . service by
publication on resident defendants, who are personally
within the state and can be found therein is not "due
process of law", and a statute allowing it is
unconstitutional.
GEMPERLE vs. SCHENKER (1967)
JURISDICTION OVER A NON-RESIDENT DEFENDANT;
SERVICE OF SUMMONS UPON AN ATTORNEY-IN-FACT;
EFFECT. Where a non-resident alien had constituted his
wife as his attorney-in-fact had authorized her to sue, and the
latter in fact had sued on his behalf, and as a result thereof a
suit was brought against him and a service of summons
addressed to him on the latter case was served personally on
his wife, his attorney-in-fact; the court had acquired
jurisdiction over his person, he having empowered her to sue,
so that she was also in effect empowered to represent him in
suits filed against him.
SEQUITO vs. LETRONDO (1959)
Taking into consideration all the circumstances of the case, we
are of the opinion that the appearance of the attorneys in
behalf of the minors in the action is equivalent to service. The
denial by the minors of having authorized said attorneys to
represent them may be conceded but such denial does not
destroy the presumption that the services of the attorneys had
been engaged by the guardian ad litem not only to represent
her but also the minors.
PHILSEC INVESTMENT, et. Al. vs. CA (1997)
Nor is the trial courts refusal to take cognizance of the
case justifiable under the principle of forum non
conveniens. First, a motion to dismiss is limited to the
grounds under Rule 16, 1, which does not include forum
non conveniens. The propriety of dismissing a case based
on this principle requires a factual determination, hence, it
is more properly considered a matter of defense. Second,
while it is within the discretion of the trial court to abstain
from assuming jurisdiction on this ground, it should do so
only after vital facts are established, to determine whether
special circumstances require the courts desistance.
In this case, the trial court abstained from taking
jurisdiction solely on the basis of the pleadings filed by
private respondents in connection with the motion to
dismiss. It failed to consider that one of the plaintiffs
(PHILSEC) is a domestic corporation and one of the
2

defendants (Ventura Ducat) is a Filipino, and that it was

the extinguishment of the latters debt which was the
object of the transaction under litigation. The trial court
arbitrarily dismissed the case even after finding that Ducat
was not a party in the U.S. case.
Third. It was error we think for the Court of Appeals and
the trial court to hold that jurisdiction over 1488, Inc. and
Daic could not be obtained because this is an action
in personam and summons were served by extraterritorial
service. Rule 14, 17 on extraterritorial service provides that
service of summons on a non-resident defendant may be
effected out of the Philippines by leave of Court where,
among others, the property of the defendant has been
attached within the Philippines. It is not disputed that the
properties, real and personal, of the private respondents
had been attached prior to service of summons under the
Order of the trial court dated April 20, 1987.
JURISDICTION OVER THE RES

The traditional basis for the exercise of judicial jurisdiction

is the states physical power over persons and property
within its territory.
Modern approach; Minimum Contacts 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.
Likewise, where an individual or corporation is doing
business in the state, then it may be sued in the forum
even on a claim not arising from its business activities.
A corporation is deemed to have consented to service
and suit as implied by its presence in the state
through acts of authorized agents.

with the forum state can enable a court in that state to exert
personal jurisdiction over a party consistent with the Due
Process clause. A casual presence of a corporation or its agent
in a state in single or isolated incidents is not enough to
establish jurisdiction. Acts of agents of the corporation,
because of the nature, quality, and circumstances of their
commission, may be deemed sufficient. Consent may be
implied from the corporations presence and activities in the
state through the acts of authorized agents. The activities
carried on by defendant corporation in Washington were
systematic and continuous rather than irregular or casual. The
defendant received the benefits and protection of the laws of
the state and is subject to jurisdiction there.
JURISDICTION OVER THE ISSUES OF THE CASE
DE JOYA vs. PLACIDO (supra)
REYES vs. DIAZ (supra)
BERNABE vs. VERGARA 1942
Jurisdiction over the issue is being conferred by the pleadings.
Jurisdiction over the issue, unlike jurisdiction over the subjectmatter, may be conferred by consent either express or implied
of the parties. Although an issue is not duly pleaded it may
validly be tried and decided if no timely objection is made
thereto by the parties. Where, for instance, an issue is not duly
pleaded in the complaint, the defendant cannot be said to have
been served with process as to that issue. At any rate, whether
or not the court has jurisdiction over a specific issue is a
question that requires nothing except an examination of the
pleadings, and this function is without such importance as to
call for the intervention of this court.

PENNOYER vs. NEFF 95 us 714 (1878)

see printed digest
MULLANE VS. CENTRAL HANOVER BANK & TRUST
CO., TRUSTEE, ET. AL (1950)
see printed digest
SHAFFER VS. HEITNER 422 US 186 (1977)
see printed digest
INTERNATIONAL SHOE vs. WASHINGTON (1945)
Defendant was an out of state company that employed
salesmen within the state of Washington. Washington sued
Defendant to recover unpaid unemployment taxes and served
Defendant in two ways: (1) by mail and (2) by serving one of its
salesmen within the state. Defendant appealed from a verdict
for Washington, claiming that Washington had no personal
jurisdiction over Defendant. International Shoe had conducted
systematic and continuous business operations in
Washington. A large volume of interstate business for the
defendant was created through its agents within the state and
the corporation received the benefits and protection of
Washingtons laws. International Shoe had established agents
in the state permanently.
In order for a state to exercise personal jurisdiction over a
defendant, the defendant must have such minimum contacts
with the state so that exercising jurisdiction over the defendant
would not offend traditional notions of fair play and
substantial justice.
International Shoes activities in Washington made it subject to
personal jurisdiction in Washington courts. Minimum contacts

SERVICE OF SUMMONS
1)
2)
3)

Personal Service or Substituted Service

Panteleon vs. Asuncion (supra)
Service by publication (Rule 14, Sec. 15)
Extraterritorial Service (Rule 14, Sec. 15)

Sec. 6. Service in person on defendant. Whenever practicable,

the summons shall be served by handing a copy thereof to the
defendant in person, or, if he refuses to receive and sign for it,
by tendering it to him.
Sec. 7. Substituted service. If, for justifiable causes, the
defendant cannot be served within a reasonable time as
provided in the preceding section, service may be effected
a) by leaving copies of the summons at the defendant's
residence with some person of suitable age and discretion
then residing therein, or
b) by leaving the copies at defendant's office or regular place
of business with some competent person in charge thereof.
Sec. 15. Extraterritorial service. When the defendant does not
reside and is not found in the Philippines, and the action
affects the personal status of the plaintiff or relates to, or the
subject of which is, property within the Philippines, in which
the defendant has or claims a lien or interest, actual or
contingent, or in which the relief demanded consists, wholly or
in part, in excluding the defendant from any interest therein, or
the property of the defendant has been attached within the
Philippines, service may, by leave of court, be effected out of
the Philippines by personal service as under section 6; or by
publication in a newspaper of general circulation in such places
and for such time as the court may order, in which case a copy
3

of the summons and order of the court shall be sent by

registered mail to the last known address of the defendant, or
in any other manner the court may deem sufficient. Any order
granting such leave shall specify a reasonable time, which shall
not be less than sixty (60) days after notice, within which the
defendant must answer.
DAVAO LIGHT vs. CA, GR 93262, 1991
see digest
WAYS OF DEALING WITH A CONFLICTS OF LAW
PROBLEM
1)
2)

Dismiss the case on the ground of forum non conveniens

Assume jurisdiction - A court may choose to assume
jurisdiction over a conflicts problem and apply forum or
foreign law. However, the basic law is the law of the
forum.

Factors that will justify the application of internal law:

1) A specific law of the forum decrees that the IL should
apply;
2) The proper foreign law was not properly pleaded and
proved must strictly comply with Sections 24 and 25,
Rule 132.
3) The case falls under any of the exceptions to the
application of foreign law. (see discussion below)
DOCTRINE OF FORUM NON CONVENIENS
Even if the court assumes jurisdiction over the parties and
the subject matter, it may decline to try the case on the
ground that the controversy may be more suitably tried
elsewhere.
There
is
another
available
and
more
appropriate/convenient forum, 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 woul result from trial in
the forum seized of the case.
To avoid forum shopping
HEINE vs. NEW YORK INSURACE CO. (1940)
NY court may invoke forum non conveniens (FNC). The courts
of Germany and NY are open and functioning and competent
to take jurisdiction of the controversies, and service can be
made upon the defendants in either such jurisdictions. To
require the defendants to defend the actions in Oregon would
impose upon them great and unnecessary inconvenience and
expense.

The court who has jurisdiction may:

a) Retain jurisdiction
b) May, in the exercise of a sound discretion, decline to
do so, as the circumstances suggest example courts
refused to entertain jurisdiction of COA arising in a
foreign jurisdiction, where both parties are nonresidents, and there is no reason why the liability, if
any, cannot be enforced in the courts of the country
where the COA arose, or in the state where the
defendant was organized and has its principal office.

MANILA HOTEL CORP VS NLRC (2000)

Under the rule of forum non conveniens, a Philippine court
or agency may assume jurisdiction over the case if it chooses to
do so provided:
1) that the Philippine court is one to which the parties may
conveniently resort to;
2) that the Philippine court is in a position to make an
intelligent decision as to the law and the facts; and
3) that the Philippine court has or is likely to have power to
enforce its decision.
Not Convenient.-- We fail to see how the NLRC is a
convenient forum given that all the incidents of the case - from
the time of recruitment, to employment to dismissal occurred
outside the Philippines. The inconvenience is compounded by
the fact that the proper defendants, the Palace Hotel and
MHICL are not nationals of the Philippines. Neither are they
doing business in the Philippines. Likewise, the main
witnesses, Mr. Shmidt and Mr. Henk are non-residents of the
Philippines.
JUDICIAL CHOICE OF LAW
APPROACHES TO CHOICE OF LAW
1) Traditional Approaches
a) Vested-rights theory
b) Local Law theory
c) Cavers Principles of preference
2)

Modern Approaches
a) Most significant relationship approach - supra
b) Interest analysis factual contacts alone do not
determine the outcome of a case unless they reflected
a state policy which would advanced by application of
the substantive state law; determined by state policy
and policy behind e laws
c) Comparative Impairment apply the law of the
state whose interest would be more impaired if its
laws were not followed.
d) Functional Analysis looks into the general
policies of the state and values relating to effective
and harmonious intercourse between states.
e) Choice-Influencing Considerations apply the
better rule
TRADITIONAL APPROACHES

Simple in form and capable of easy administration, would

promote uniformity of result, enhance predictability and
discourage forum-shopping.
Vested-rights theory: An act done in a foreign jurisdiction
gives rise to the existence of a right if the laws of that state
provides so. The right vests in the plaintiff and he carries it
with him to be enforced in any forum he chooses to bring suit.
The forum refers to the law of the place of
occurrence of the last act necessary to complete
the COA, which is considered as the law applicable to
all substantive issues of the case.
GRAY v. GRAY (1934)
Wife filed an action in New Hampshire for damages arising out
of personal injuries caused by her husband while driving from
their home in NH to Maine where the accident happened.
4

Maine place of occurrence (lex loci- law of the

place); spouses are barred from maintaining action
against each other
NH domicile/residence; forum (lex fori); spouses
are allowed

Held: Maine law applies with the theory that it is not merely
that there is a prohibition of suit, but that the acts complained
of do not give rise to any COA. Complaints of conduct are
adjusted in the jurisdiction where the conduct took place. It
is desirable that the remedy be the same, wherever the action is
brought.
ALABAMA GREAT SOUTHER RR CO. vs. CARROLL
(1892)

Carroll resident of Alabama; employed by Alabama Corp

Alabama corp operated a railroad from Tennessee,

through Alabama to Mississippi

Employment contract entered into in Alabama

Carroll was injured in Mississippi as a result of an alleged

negligent failure to spot a defective link between two
freight cars which Alabama corps employees were under
duty to inspect.

Mississipi Law- Carroll could not recover against ER

because of the negligent act of a fellow servant.

Alabama Law Absolute liability to the company for

injuries suffered by EE is the course of their employment

Forum Alabama
Issue: Since the injury happened in Mississippi, hence it is in
that State where the COA arose, which law applies?
Mississippi law as the law of the place of injury.
Held: Alabama law state: Where a personal injury is received
in Alabama by a servant or EE Hence, the injury must be
inflicted in Alabama. The duties and liabilities of the parties do
not spring from the contract between them (as regards the
allegation of the law of the place where the contract was made
this is not applicable here).
Note: There can be no recovery in one State for injuries to the
persons sustained in another unless the infliction of the
injuries is actionable under the law of the State in which they
were received.
MODERN APPROACHES
Most significant relationship approach
center of gravity or the grouping of contacts theory
AUTEN vs. AUTEN
Did away with the automatic application of the law where the
contract was made
NY LAW
ENGLISH LAW - applies
Where contract was executed British subj
Where money (subj of Married in England
contract) is paid thru a Wife and children live in
trustee
England; family lived there for
14 yrs
English currency, etc.
HAAG vs. BARNES
NY LAW
Mother and child live here
Liaison took place here

ILLINOIS LAW - applies

Forum
Choice of law as designated in

the contract
Place of business of Barnes
(natural father)
Child (to be given support
accdg to the subj contract)
born in Illinois
Where support is given
Lawyers from here
Interest Analysis
BABCOCK vs. JACKSON (1963)

Spouses Jackson and Babcock (guest passenger), all

residents of NY, were bound to Canada, and met an
accident in Ontario. Babcock was badly injured and filed a
case against Jackson

Jackson invoked the law of the place of the accident which

is Ontario which bars recovery

Law of Ontario driver/owner of vehicle is not liable for

loss or damage resulting from bodily injury to a person
being carried in that vehicle unless it is operated in the
business of carrying passengers for compensation

NY law/policy requires tort-feasor to compensate his

guest for injuries caused by his negligence
Held: NY law was applied as it was where the guest-host
relationship arose and where the trip began and ended. Ontario
here was not interested in applying its law. NY here has a
stronger interest as compared to the minimal interest of
Ontario. The application of the NY law advanced the policy
reflected in that law, while the failure to apply Ontario law did
not impair the policy behind the law.
Note: If the question is WON defendant was negligent (did not
follow rule of the road prescribed by the place, the law of the
place of tort (Ontario) would apply. But the issue here is
whether a guest is barred from recovering damages which
looks into the rights and liabilities of the parties which stem
from their guest-host relationship which should not vary from
as the automobile shifts from place to place.
CHARACTERIZATION OF THE COA
Court assigns a disputed question to an area in substantive law
2 types:
1) Subject-matter characterization classification of a factual
situation into a legal category
2) Substance-procedure dichotomy directs the court to the
extent it will apply foreign law
a) Substantive foreign law (ex. domiciliary law)
b) Procedural forum law
GIBBS vs. GOVT OF THE PHIL
Second par. of Art. 17 can be invoked only when the deceased
was vested with a descendible interest in property within the
jurisdiction of the Philippine Islands.
Characterization and the Single Aspect Method
GRANT VS. MAULIFFE (1953)
In actions on torts occurring abroad, the forum courts
determine the substantive matters inherent in the cause of
action by adopting as their own the law of the place where
the tortious acts occurred, unless it is contrary to the
public policy of this state. But the forum does not adopt as
5

its own the procedural law of the place where the tortious
acts occur.
Issue: Whether survival of causes of action is procedural
or substantive for conflict of laws purposes. Procedural
Held: We have concluded that survival of causes of
action should be governed by the law of the forum.
Survival is not an essential part of the cause of action itself
but relates to the procedures available for the enforcement
of the legal claim for damages.

CADALIN vs. POEAs ADMINISTRATOR (1994)

GR: A foreign procedural law will not be applied in the forum.
Procedural matters, such as service of process, joinder of
actions, period and requisites for appeal, and so forth, are
governed by the laws of the forum. This is true even if the
action is based upon a foreign substantive law.

A law on prescription of actions is sui generis in Conflict

of Laws in the sense that it may be viewed either as
procedural
or
substantive,
depending
on
the
characterization given such a law.
Thus in Bournias v. Atlantic Maritime Company, the
American court applied the statute of limitations of New
York, instead of the Panamanian law, after finding that
there was no showing that the Panamanian law on
prescription was intended to be substantive. Being
considered merely a procedural law even in Panama, it has
to give way to the law of the forum on prescription of
actions.

E: However, the characterization of a statute into a procedural

or substantive law becomes irrelevant when the country of the
forum has a "borrowing statute." Said statute has the practical
effect of treating the foreign statute of limitation as one of
substance. A "borrowing statute" directs the state of the
forum to apply the foreign statute of limitations to the pending
claims based on a foreign law. While there are several kinds of
"borrowing statutes," one form provides that an action barred
by the laws of the place where it accrued, will not be enforced
in the forum even though the local statute has not run against
it.
The U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held that the
Panamanian Law was procedural as it was not "specifically
intended to be substantive," hence, the prescriptive period
provided in the law of the forum should apply. The Court
observed: . . . And where, as here, we are dealing with a
statute of limitations of a foreign country, and it is not
clear on the face of the statute that its purpose was to limit
the enforceability, outside as well as within the foreign
country concerned, of the substantive rights to which the
statute pertains, we think that as a yardstick for
determining whether that was the purpose this test is the
most satisfactory one.
E to E: The courts of the forum will not enforce any foreign
claim obnoxious to the forum's public policy
Rules on Choice of Law (Cadalin Case):
The parties to a contract may select the law by which it is
to be governed. In such a case, the foreign law is adopted
as a "system" to regulate the relations of the parties,
including questions of their capacity to enter into the
contract, the formalities to be observed by them, matters
of performance, and so forth.
Instead of adopting the entire mass of the foreign law, the
parties may just agree that specific provisions of a foreign
statute shall be deemed incorporated into their contract

"as a set of terms." By such reference to the provisions of

the foreign law, the contract does not become a foreign
contract to be governed by the foreign law. The said law
does not operate as a statute but as a set of contractual
terms deemed written in the contract
The choice of law must, however, bear some relationship
to the parties or their transaction.

DEPECAGE
to dissect
Different aspects of a case involving a foreign element may
be governed by different systems of law.
The presence of incidental question calls for employment
of depecage
RENVOI
Article 15. Laws relating to family rights and duties, or to the
status, condition and legal capacity of persons are binding
upon citizens of the Philippines, even though living abroad.
Article 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.
Article 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.
Article 1039. Capacity to succeed is governed by the law of
the nation of the decedent.
Renvoi - A jural matter is presented which the conflict-of-laws
rule of the forum refers to a foreign law, the conflict-of-laws
rule of which, in turn, refers the matter back again to the law of
the forum. This is renvoi in the narrower sense.
1) Remission reference is made back to the law of the
forum
2) Transmission reference to a third state
False conflict where renvoi is inappropriate: In case of
identical substantive law or when the other state is not
interested in ensuring the application of its law.

NOTE: Art. 16 (par 2) and Art. 1039 of the Civil Code of the
Philippines: National Law applies in intestate or
testamentary successions with regard to four items:
1) Order of succession
2) Amount of successional rights
3) Intrinsic validity of the provisions of the will
4) Capacity to succeed
AZNAR vs. GARCIA (1963)
Testator is a US citizen, resident of California at the time
of his death, and domiciled in the Philippines
Will was executed in Manila
Forum Court CFI Davao
Rules: Law that governs the validity of his testamentary
dispositions according to Art. 16 of the Civil Code of the
Philippines is the national law of the testator which is the law
of the State of California.
Renvoi in this case: The law of California refers back the
question of the validity of the testamentary provision to the law
of the decedents domicile, which is the Philippine law. The
Philippine court must apply its own law as directed in the
conflict of laws rule of the state of the decedent.
ANNESLEY vs. ANNESLEY (1926)
Question of which law is applicable to the personal estate
of a deceased whose domicile of origin is England but
whose domicile of choice is France, where she was a
resident at the time of her death.
Forum court English court
Double Renvoi in this case: English law considers decedent
as having acquired domicile in France. Hence, the law that
applies is the domiciliary law of the decedent. French law refers
back the case to her nationality because she is, under the
French law, not considered as a legal domicile of France.
Hence, the English court decided the case as a French court
would have decided it in accordance with its (French) law.
It would be single renvoi if: English court having accepted
renvoi, it applies the English internal law.
UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO vs. DATER (1936)
The validity, nature, obligation, and interpretation of a
contract is to be governed by the law of the place of
performance.
BELLIS vs. BELLIS (1967)
Testator is a Texan national and a resident of Texas at the
time of his death
Executed the will in the Philippines
Forum CFI Manila
No conflict of law arose since decedent was both a national
of Texas and a domicile thereof at the time of his death.
Hence, the Texan law applies. Such law does not provide
for legitimes.

PERSONAL LAW OF THE PARTIES

NATIONALITY
Art. 15, CC supra
Art. 2, Hague Convention on Conflict of Nationality
Laws. Any question as to whether a person possesses the
nationality of a particular State shall be determined in
accordance with the law of that State.
Art IV, Constitution. Citizenship
SECTION 1. The following are citizens of the Philippines:
1) Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of the
adoption of this Constitution;
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 with law.
Sec 2. Natural-born citizens are those who are citizens of the
Philippines from birth without having to perform any act to
acquire or perfect their Philippine citizenship. Those who elect
Philippine citizenship in accordance with paragraph (3),
Section 1 hereof shall be deemed natural-born citizens.
Sec 3. Philippine citizenship may be lost or reacquired in the
manner provided by law.
Sec 4. Citizens of the Philippines who marry aliens shall retain
their citizenship, unless by their act or omission they are
deemed, under the law, to have renounced it.
Sec 5. Dual allegiance of citizens is inimical to the national
interest and shall be dealt with by law.
RA 8171. An Act Providing For The Repatriation Of Filipino
Women Who Have Lost Their Philippine Citizenship By
Marriage To Aliens And Of Natural-Born Filipinos.
Repatriation shall be effected by taking the necessary oath
of allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines and
registration in the proper civil registry and in the Bureau
or Immigration. The Bureau of Immigration shall
thereupon cancel the pertinent alien certificate of
registration and issue the certificate of identification as
Filipino citizen to the repatriated citizen.
RA 9225. "Citizenship Retention and Re-acquisition
Act of 2003
Natural-born citizenship by reason of their naturalization
as citizens of a foreign country are hereby deemed to have
re-acquired Philippine citizenship upon taking the
following oath of allegiance to the Republic: xxx.

An individuals nationality or domicile serves as a

permanent connection between the individual and a state.
National Law
An individuals personal law follows him wherever he is
and governs those transactions which affect him most
closely such as:
Marriage
Divorce
Legitimacy and capacity to contract
7

Merits of Nationality as Personal Law

Such law is made for an ascertained population, since
lawmakers considered the physical and moral qualities of
the citizens awareness of national identity
Individuals nationality is easily verifiable from documents
Demerits of Nationality as Personal Law:
Does not solve problems relating to individuals who are
stateless as well as those with multiple nationalities
Does not offer any decisive solution in states with diverse
legal system such as the US since there is no single
national law
Person is a non-resident
Natural-born citizens those who are citizens of the
Philippines without having to perform any act to acquire or
perfect citizenship
NATURALIZATION
Naturalization confers to an alien a nationality after birth by
any of the means provided by the law.
Qualifications for Applicants of Naturalization:
1) Petitioner must not be less than 21 yo on the date of the
hearing of the petition for naturalization as citizen
2) Must have, as a rule, resided in the Phil for a continuous
period of not less than 10 years
3) Must have a good moral character, and believe I the
principles underlying the Phil Consti, and must have
conducted himself in a proper and irreproachable manner
during the entire period of his residence in the Phil in his
relations with the constituted gov as well as with the
community in which he is living
4) Must own real estate in the Phil worth not less than P5K,
Phil currency, or must have some lucrative trade,
profession, or lawful occupation
5) Must be able to speak and write English or Spanish and
any one of the principal Phil languages
6) Must have enrolled his minor children of school age in any
of the public schools or private schools recognized by the
Bureau of Private Schools where Phil history, gov, and
civics are taught or prescribed as part of the school
curriculum during the entire period of the residence
required of him, prior to the hearing of his petition
TALAROC vs. UY (1952)
Uy, who was 3 years old at the time, automatically followed the
Filipino citizenship of his mother and is a citizen of the
Philippines by the mere fact of his birth (in the Philippines)
following the jus soli principle which was prevailing at the
time. Uys mother was a Filipino citizen who acquired the
Chinese citizenship of her husband upon her coverture
(marriage with her Chinese husband). But upon the demise of
her husband, she reverted ipso facto to being a Filipino citizen.
The marriage of an American woman with an alien conferred
his nationality upon her during coverture; that upon the
dissolution of the marriage by death of the husband, the wife
reverted, ipso facto, to her former status, unless her conduct or
acts showed that she elected to retain the nationality of her
husband, and that where the widowed mother herself thus
reacquired her former nationality, her children, she being their
natural guardian, should follow her nationality with
the proviso that they may elect for themselves upon reaching
majority.

MERCADO vs. MANZANO (1999)

Dual allegiance refers to the situation in which a person
simultaneously owes, by some positive act, loyalty to two
or more states. While dual citizenship is involuntary, dual
allegiance is the result of an individuals volition.
Persons with mere dual citizenship do not fall under this
disqualification (to run for public office). Unlike those with
dual allegiance, who must, therefore, be subject to strict
process with respect to the termination of their status, for
candidates with dual citizenship, it should suffice if, upon
the filing of their certificates of candidacy, they elect
Philippine citizenship to terminate their status as persons
with dual citizenship considering that their condition is
the unavoidable consequence of conflicting laws of
different states. It may be that, from the point of view of
the foreign state and of its laws, such an individual has not
effectively renounced his foreign citizenship.
By filing a certificate of candidacy when he ran for his
present post, private respondent elected Philippine
citizenship and in effect renounced his American
citizenship. The filing of such certificate of candidacy
sufficed to renounce his American citizenship, effectively
removing any disqualification he might have as a dual
citizen.
Every certificate of candidacy contains an oath of
allegiance to the Philippine Government.
CO vs. ELECTORAL TRIBUNAL OF THE HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVVES (1991)
To expect the respondent to have formally or in writing
elected citizenship when he came of age is to ask for the
unnatural and unnecessary. The reason is obvious. He was
already a citizen. Not only was his mother a natural born
citizen but his father had been naturalized when the
respondent was only nine (9) years old. He could not have
divined when he came of age that in 1973 and 1987 the
Constitution would be amended to require him to have
filed a sworn statement in 1969 electing citizenship inspite
of his already having been a citizen since 1957. In 1969,
election through a sworn statement would have been an
unusual and unnecessary procedure for one who had been
a citizen since he was nine years old.
The filing of 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. Entering a profession open only to Filipinos,
serving in public office where citizenship is a qualification,
voting during election time, running for public office, and
other categorical acts of similar nature are themselves
formal manifestations of choice for these persons.
It was the law itself that had already elected Philippine
citizenship for protestee by declaring him as such.
FRIVALDO vs. COMELEC (1996)
In repatriation the applicant is a former natural-born
Filipino who is merely seeking to reacquire his previous
citizenship.
Reacquisition of Philippine Citizenship by:
a) Direct act of Congress
b) Naturalization
c) Repatriation

DOMICILE
Article 50. For the exercise of civil rights and the fulfillment
of civil obligations, the domicile of natural persons is the place
of their habitual residence.
Kinds of domicile:
1) Domicile of origin I persons domicile at birth.

Legitimate child that of his father

Illegitimate child that of his mother

Upon emancipation, the child may acquire a domicile

of choice

Presumption is in favour of continuance

2)

Domicile of choice also called voluntary domicile, is

the place freely chosen by a person sui generis. Requires
the concurrence of physical presence + unqualified
intention to make the new place ones home.
RESIDENCE

UYTENGSU vs. REPUBLIC (1954)

The question arose whether, having been domiciled in the
Philippines for over 30 years, he could be naturalized as a
citizen of the Philippines, without a previous declaration of
intention, in view of section 6 of Commonwealth Act No. 473
(as amended by Commonwealth Act No. 535), exempting from
such requirement "those who have resided in the Philippines
continuously for a period of thirty years or more, before filing
their application." This Court decided the question in the
negative, upon the ground that "actual and substantial
residence within the Philippines, not legal residence", or
"domicile," along, is essential to the enjoyment of the benefits
of said exemption.
DOMICILE
permanent abode; domicile
denotes a fixed permanent
residence to which when
absent, one has the intention
of returning.
Intention + physical presence
Animo manendi (intent to
remain)

RESIDENCE
Temporary stay in a given
place

Bodily presence
Intends to leave when purpose
for abode ceases

CAASI vs. CA (1990)

Despite his vigorous disclaimer, Miguel's immigration to the
United States in 1984 constituted an abandonment of his
domicile and residence in the Philippines. For he did not go to
the United States merely to visit his children or his doctor
there; he entered the limited States with the intention to have
there permanently as evidenced by his application for an
immigrant's (not a visitor's or tourist's) visa. Based on that
application of his, he was issued by the U.S. Government the
requisite green card or authority to reside there permanently.
ROMUALDEZ-MARCOS vs. COMELC (1995)
To successfully effect a change of domicile, one must
demonstrate:
1) An actual removal or an actual change of domicile;
2) A bona fide intention of abandoning the former place of
residence and establishing a new one; and
3) Acts which correspond with the purpose.

SALUDO vs. AMERICAN EXPRESS INTL (2006)

Residence is used to indicate a place of abode, whether
permanent or temporary; domicile denotes a fixed permanent
residence to which when absent, one has the intention of
returning. A man may have a residence in one place and a
domicile in another. Residence is not domicile, but domicile is
residence coupled with intention to remain for an unlimited
time. A man can have but one domicile for one and the same
purpose at any time, but he may have numerous places of
residence. His place of residence generally is his place of
domicile, but is not by any means, necessarily so since no
length of residence without intention of remaining will
constitute domicile.
LIMBONA vs. COMELEC (2009)
The term residence as used in the election law is synonymous
with domicile, which imports not only intention to reside in a
fixed place but also personal presence in that place, coupled
with conduct indicative of such intention. The manifest intent
of the law in fixing a residence qualification is to exclude a
stranger or newcomer, unacquainted with the conditions and
needs of a community and not identified with the latter, from
an elective office to serve that community.
STATUS & CAPACITY
Follows the nationality principle (Art. 15, CC).
Natural Persons
Article 40. 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.
Article 41. For civil purposes, the foetus is considered born if
it is alive at the time it is completely delivered from the
mother's womb. However, if the foetus had an intra-uterine life
of less than seven months, it is not deemed born if it dies
within twenty-four hours after its complete delivery from the
maternal womb.
Article 42. Civil personality is extinguished by death.
The effect of death upon the rights and obligations of the
deceased is determined by law, by contract and by will.
"Art. 234, FC as amended by RA 6809. Emancipation takes
place by the attainment of majority. Unless otherwise provided,
majority commences at the age of eighteen years.
Article 5, PD 603. Commencement of Civil Personality. The civil personality of the child shall commence from the time
of his conception, for all purposes favorable to him, subject to
the requirements of Article 41 of the Civil Code.
Personal status includes both condition and capacity, and
more specifically embraces such matters as the
Beginning and end of human personality
Capacity to have rights in general
Capacity to engage in legal transactions
Protection of personal interests
Family relations
husband & wife;
parent & child;
9

guardian & ward;

transactions of family law: marriage, divorce,
separation, adoption, legitimation and emancipation,
and succession

JURIDICAL CAPACITY
(Capacity)
Fitness of a man to be the
subject of legal relations

CAPACITY TO ACT

Power to do acts with juridical

effect; acquired and may be
lost
The union of both produces complete civil capacity

Note:
Aliens can sue and be sued in our courts subject to Phil
procedural law even on matters relating to their status and
capacity. However, the law to be applied by our courts in
determining their status and capacity is their personal law.
Civil personality is commenced at birth and is
extinguished by death.
Before birth, the foetus is not a person, but merely a part
of the internal organ of the mother. However, because of
the expectancy that it may be bon, the law protects it and
reserves its rights, making its legal existence, if it should
be born alive, retroact to the moment of conception.
GELUZ v. CA (1961)
The aborted child has no juridical personality.
Since an action for pecuniary damages on account of
personal injury or death pertains primarily to the one
injured, it is easy to see that if no action for such damages
could be instituted on behalf of the unborn child on
account of the injuries it received, no such right of action
could derivatively accrue to its parents or heirs.

INSULAR GOVT vs. FRANK

A person who is an adult under his personal law (US Law)
enters into a contract which will be performed in a foreign
country (Phil) the law of which considers him a minor he is
fully qualified to enter into such contract because the law that
applies is the law of the place where the contract was made.

In fact, even if a cause of action did accrue on behalf of the

unborn child, the same was extinguished by its pre-natal
death, since no transmission to anyone can take place
from on that lacked juridical personality (or juridical
capacity as distinguished from capacity to act). It is no
answer to invoke the provisional personality of a conceived
child (conceptus pro nato habetur) under Article 40 of the
Civil Code, because that same article expressly limits such
provisional personality by imposing the condition that the
child should be subsequently born alive: "provided it be
born later with the condition specified in the following
article". In the present case, there is no dispute that the
child was dead when separated from its mother's womb
(aborted).
This is not to say that the parents are not entitled to collect
any damages at all. But such damages must be those
inflicted directly upon them, as distinguished from the
injury or violation of the rights of the deceased, his right to
life and physical integrity. Because the parents cannot
expect either help, support or services from an unborn
child, they would normally be limited to moral damages
for the illegal arrest of the normal development of the spes
hominis that was the foetus, i.e., on account of distress and
anguish attendant to its loss, and the disappointment of
their parental expectations (Civ. Code Art. 2217), as well as
to exemplary damages, if the circumstances should
warrant them (Art. 2230).

NOTICE & PROOF OF FOREIGN LAW

Rule 132. How to prove foreign law
Sec. 24. Proof of official record. The record of public
documents referred to in paragraph (a) of Section 19, when
admissible for any purpose, may be evidenced by:
a) an official publication thereof or
b) by a copy attested by the officer having the legal custody of
the record, or by his deputy, and accompanied, if the
record is not kept in the Philippines, with a certificate that
such officer has the custody.
If the office in which the record is kept is in foreign
country, the certificate may be made by a secretary of
the embassy or legation, consul general, consul, vice
consul, or consular agent or by any officer in the
foreign service of the Philippines stationed in the
foreign country in which the record is kept, and
authenticated by the seal of his office.
Sec. 25. What attestation of copy must state.
Whenever a copy of a document or record is attested for
the purpose of evidence, the attestation must state, in
substance, that the copy is a correct copy of the original, or
a specific part thereof, as the case may be.
The attestation must be under the official seal of the
attesting officer, if there be any, or if he be the clerk of a
court having a seal, under the seal of such court.

EXTENT OF JUDICIAL NOTICE

Such foreign law (FL) is treated as a question of fact to be

properly pleaded and proved in conformity to the law of
evidence of the state where it is presented.

GR: The judge is not authorized to take judicial notice of a FL

and is presumed to know only domestic law.
E: The court held that judicial notice may be taken of a FL
with which the court is evidently familiar or has actual
knowledge of because the FL is:
a) Generally known such as Spanish or American law
from which Phil law was derived, or
b) The judge had previously ruled upon it in other cases

PROOF OF FOREIGN LAW

The party whose COA or defense depended upon the

foreign law has the burden of proving the FL.

1)

Question of Fact existence of the law and WON it is

applicable
Question of Law implications and extent of
application

2)

10

Doctrine of Processual Presumption (presumed-identity

approach)
MICIANO vs. BRIMO (1924)
In the absence of evidence on the FL, it is presumed to be
the same as that of the Philippines.
It is discretionary with the trial court WON to give the
oppositor another opportunity to prove the FL
IN RE ESTATE OF JOHNSON (1918)
In order to effectively oppose a probate court from taking
judicial notice of a FL, the petition must at least state any fact
from which it would appear that the law of Illinois is different
from what the court found, and that the appellant must raise a
question as regards the error of the court taking judicial notice
of a FL not pleaded and proved.

SUMMARY OF RULES
LAW APPLICABLE
Forum
National
Law
Law/
Domiciliary
Law
(residence)
Procedural
matter
Statute
of
Limitation
Survival
COA

of

Remedy
EXCEPTIONS TO THE APPLICATION OF FOREIGN
LAW
(Forum Law applies)
PPPG-FIRE
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)

Foreign law is contrary to an important public policy of

the forum
Foreign law is penal in nature
Foreign law is procedural I nature
Foreign law is purely fiscal or administrative in nature a
State is not obliged to enforce the revenue (tax) law of
another
When the application of the foreign law will work
undeniable injustice to the citizens of the forum
When the case involves real or personal property situated
in the forum (lex situs rule applies)
When the application of the foreign law might endanger
the vital interest of the state
When the foreign law is contrary to good morals

PAKISTAN INTL AIRLINES vs. OPLE (1990)

Application of the FL is contrary to the public policy on the
right to security of tenure of employees. An employer-employee
relationship is affected with public interest and that the
Philippine laws and regulations cannot be rendered illusory by
the parties agreeing on the application of the FL exclusively.

Admissibility
of evidence

Family rights
and
duties
Status
capacity of the
person
Substantive
matter
Rights
and
liabilities
Condition
&
legal
Capacity
to
succeed
Intestate and
testamentary
successions:
(national law)
order
of
succession
and
amount of
succession
al rights
intrinsic
validity of
testamenta
ry
provisions
Interspousal
immunity
as
issue
on
marital status
Family
relations
National law:
Civil status
capacity
condition
family rights &
duties
laws
on
succession
capacity
to
succeed

Lex loci
(law of the
place)
x. where
tort
happened
torts
&
contracts,
in respect
to the legal
effects and
incidents of
acts
issue
involving
standards
of conduct
Tort

creation
and extent
of
tort
liability;
substantive
right
of
parties in
an action in
tort

Others

Real
or
personal
property
(where
situated);
rights in the
property;
extent of the
title vested
The
forms
and
solemnities of
contracts,
wills,
and
other public
instruments
(laws of the
country
in
which
they
are executed)
Execution,
interpretation
and validity
of contract
law of the
place where
the contract
was made
Matters
connected
with
performance
law of the
place where
contract is to
be
performed.

11