Conflict of Laws: Citizenship and Domicile

A.Nationality Principle
The law of country where a person is a national governs his family rights
and duties, status, condition and legal capacity.
As opposed to domiciliary principle which applies the law of the country
of domicile

B.Citizenship and Modes of Acquisition

Citizenship status of being a citizen of a state who owes allegiance to
the state and is entitled to its protection and to the enjoyment of civil and
political rights therein
WHO ARE CITIZENS:
1. Natural persons
Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of adoption of the
1987 Constitution
Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the Philippines
Those born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino mothers, who elect
Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority
Those who are naturalized in accordance with the law
2. Juridical persons 60% Filipino-owned

2 MODES OF ACQUIRING PHILIPPINE CITIZENSHIP:

Valles vs. COMELEC, G.R. No. 137000, Aug. 9, 2000

FACTS: Rosalind Ybasco Lopez was born on May 16, 1934 in Australia to a
Filipino father and an Australian mother. In 1949, at the age of fifteen, she
left Australia and came to settle in the Philippines, where she later
married a Filipino and has since then participated in the electoral process
not only as a voter but as a candidate, as well. In the May 1998 elections,
she ran for governor but Valles filed a petition for her disqualification as
candidate on the ground that she is an Australian.
ISSUE: Whether or not Rosalind is an Australian or a Filipino
HELD: The Philippine law on citizenship adheres to the principle of jus
sanguinis. Thereunder, a child follows the nationality or citizenship of the
parents regardless of the place of his/her birth, as opposed to the doctrine
of jus soli which determines nationality or citizenship on the basis of place
of birth.
The herein private respondent, Rosalind Ybasco Lopez, is a Filipino citizen,
having been born to a Filipino father. The fact of her being born in
Australia is not tantamount to her losing her Philippine citizenship. If
Australia follows the principle of jus soli, then at most, private respondent
can also claim Australian citizenship resulting to her possession of dual
citizenship. The fact that she holds an Australian passport and alien
registration certificate is an assertion of her Australian citizenship but not
a renunciation of her Philippine citizenship. Moreover, by filing her
certificate of candidacy, she has effectively renounced her Australian
citizenship.
C.Election of Citizenship

By blood (jus sanguinis) natural-born citizens

PROCEDURE:

By naturalization naturalized citizens

Express such intention in a statement to be signed and sworn to by the

party concerned before any officer authorized to administer oath

JUS SANGUINIS

File the sworn statement, together with oath of allegiance to the Philippine
Constitution, with the nearest civil registry

**The election must be made within reasonable time (3 years) from

reaching the age of majority.
D.Dual Citizenship
Dual Citizenship the status of a person who is a citizen of two or more
countries at the same time
WHO MAY POSSESS DUAL CITIZENSHIP:
Those born of Filipino fathers and/or mothers in foreign countries which
follow the principle of jus soli
Those born in the Philippines of Filipino mothers and alien fathers if by the
laws of their fathers country such children are citizens of that country
Those who marry aliens if by the laws of the latters country the former
are considered citizens, unless by their act or omission they are deemed
to have renounced Philippine citizenship
Those who retained or reacquired their Philippine citizenship under RA
9225 after having been naturalized in a foreign country

GENERAL RULE: Dual citizenship is retained.

EXCEPTION: The person expressly renounces his other citizenship by filing
a certificate of candidacy or by accepting an appointive position in
government.

NOTA BENE: Under RA 9225 (effective August 29, 2003), the mere filing
of a certificate of candidacy is no longer deemed an express renunciation
of foreign citizenship in order to run for public office. The candidate for
public office with dual citizenship must (1) take an oath of allegiance and
(2) execute a renunciation of foreign citizenship. However, the foregoing
requirements do not apply to natural-born Filipinos before running for
public office.

DUAL CITIZENSHIP AS GROUND FOR DISQUALIFICATION FROM

OFFICE; FILING OF CERTIFICATE OF CANDIDACY AS EFFECTIVE
RENUNCIATION OF AMERICAN CITIZENSHIP
Mercado vs. Manzano, G.R. No. 135083, May 26, 1999
FACTS: Mercado and Manzano are both running for vice-mayor of Makati
City. Manzano got the highest number of votes but his proclamation was
suspended in view of a pending petition for his disqualification on the
ground that he is an American citizen. Manzano is born in 1955 of Filipino
father and mother. However, since he is born in the US, he is considered
as an American under the jus soli doctrine. Upon his return to the
Philippines, he is registered as a foreigner with the Bureau of Immigration.
ISSUE: Whether or not Manzano is disqualified on ground that he is an
alien
HELD: Manzano is a dual citizen, but his being such does not disqualify
him from running for public office. Under the LGC, what is prohibited is
dual allegiance and not dual citizenship. The two terms are different.
Dual allegiance refers to a situation in which a person simultaneously
owes, by some positive act, loyalty to two or more states. Dual citizenship
arises when, as a result of the concurrent application of the different laws
of two or more states, a person is simultaneously considered a national by
the said states.
Moreover, Manzano is considered to have renounced his American
citizenship by filing his certificate of candidacy.

NOTE: This case doctrine has no more application after the effectivity of
RA 9225 on August 29, 2003.
E.Loss and Reacquisition of Philippine Citizenship

HOW PHILIPPINE CITIZENSHIP IS LOST:

By naturalization in a foreign country (prior to RA 9225)
By express renunciation of citizenship
By subscribing to an oath of allegiance to support the constitution or laws
of a foreign country
By accepting commission in the military, naval or air service of a foreign
country
By cancellation of the certificate of naturalization
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
EXPRESS RENUNCIATION OF PHILIPPINE CITIZENSHIP
Yu vs. Defensor-Santiago, G.R. No. L-83882, Jan. 24, 1989
FACTS: Petitioner is a Portuguese national who acquired Philippine
citizenship by naturalization. However, despite his naturalization, he still
applied for and was issued a Portuguese passport and declared his
nationality as Portuguese in commercial documents he signed.
ISSUE: Whether petitioners acts constitute renunciation of his Philippine
citizenship
HELD: Express renunciation means a renunciation that is made known
distinctly and explicitly and not left to inference or implication. Petitioner,
with full knowledge, and legal capacity, after having renounced his
Portuguese citizenship upon naturalization as a Philippine citizen resumed
or reacquired his prior status as a Portuguese citizen, applied for a
renewal of his Portuguese passport. To the mind of the court the foregoing
acts considered together constitute an express renunciation of petitioners
Philippine citizenship acquired through naturalization.

HOW PHILIPPINE CITIZENSHIP IS REACQUIRED:

By direct act of Congress
By naturalization take the oath of allegiance to the Republic (RA 9225)
By administrative repatriation take the oath of allegiance to the Republic
and register the same in the local civil registry of the place where person
resides or last resided; original citizenship is recovered
REPATRIATION
Bengson III vs. HRET, G.R. No. 142840, May 7, 2001
FACTS: Respondent Cruz was a natural-born Filipino who lost his
Philippine citizenship when he enlisted in the US Marine Corps and
subsequently became a naturalized American. When he returned to the
Philippines, he reacquired his Philippine citizenship through repatriation.
Later, he ran for a seat in Congress and won. But Bengson III questioned
his election into office on the ground that he was not a natural-born
Filipino.
ISSUE: Whether or not Cruzs repatriation resulted in his reacquisition of
his status as natural-born Filipino
HELD: Repatriation results in the recovery of the original nationality. This
means that a naturalized Filipino who lost his citizenship will be restored
to his prior status as a naturalized Filipino citizen. On the other hand, if he
was originally a natural-born citizen before he lost his Philippine
citizenship, he will be restored to his former status as a natural-born
Filipino.
In respondent Cruzs case, he lost his Filipino citizenship when he
rendered service in the Armed Forces of the United States. However, he
subsequently reacquired Philippine citizenship under RA 2630.
Having thus taken the required oath of allegiance to the Republic and

having registered the same in the Civil Registry of Magantarem,

Pangasinan in accordance with the aforecited provision, respondent Cruz
is deemed to have recovered his original status as a natural-born citizen, a
status which he acquired at birth as the son of a Filipino father. It bears
stressing that the act of repatriation allows him to recover, or return to,
his original status before he lost his Philippine citizenship.

GROUNDS FOR CANCELLATION:

Made any false statement or misrepresentation or committed any
violation of law, rules or regulation in connection with the petition for
naturalization
Within 5 years next following the grant of Philippine citizenship,
established permanent residence in a foreign country - covers the wife
and children as well

F. Citizenship by Naturalization
3 MODES OF NATURALIZATION:
Administrative naturalization - available only to aliens born and residing in
the Philippines

Allowed himself to be used as a dummy in violation of any constitutional

or legal provision requiring Philippine citizenship - covers the wife and
children
Committed any act inimical to national security - covers the wife and
children

Judicial naturalization
Legislative naturalization
G. The Lex Domicilii Rule
QUALIFICATIONS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE NATURALIZATION: (RA
9139)
Must be born in the Philippines and residing therein since birth
Must not be less than 18 years old at the time of filing the petition
Must be of good moral character and believes in the underlying principle
of the Constitution and must have conducted himself in an irreproachable
manner during the entire period of residence
Must have received his primary and secondary education in any public
school or private educational institution

Lex domicilii (Domiciliary principle) - the law of the place of domicile

governs
Domicile - place of habitual residence; a place to which, whenever absent
for business or for pleasure, one intends to return, and depends on facts
and circumstances in the sense that they disclose intent
ELEMENTS:
Physical presence
Animus manendi - intention of returning there permanently

Must have a known trade, business, profession or lawful occupation

Must be able to read, write and speak Filipino or any of the dialects of the
Philippines

**The law of the forum governs the standards of domicile. If domicile is

put in issue, the court will apply its own laws to determine the controversy.

Must have mingled with the Filipinos and evinced a sincere desire to learn
and embrace the customs, traditions and ideals of the Filipino people

H. Kinds of Domicile

Residence vs. Domicile

3 KINDS:
Domicile of origin or by birth
Domicile of choice
Domicile by operation of law

I. Rules regarding Domicile

3 RULES:
A man has a domicile somewhere

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 ma have a
residence in one place and a domicile in another. Residence is not
domicile, but domicile is residence coupled with the intention to remain
for an unlimited time. A man can have but one domicile for the same
purpose at any time, but he may have numerous places of residence. His
place of residence is generally his place of domicile, but it is not by any
means necessarily so since no length of residence without intention of
remaining will constitute domicile. (Romualdez-Marcos vs. COMELEC, G.R.
No. 119976, Sept. 18, 1995)

A domicile once established remains until a new one is acquired

A man can have but only one domicile at a time

HOW A NEW DOMICILE IS ACQUIRED:

DOMICILE FOR ELECTION PURPOSES

Romualdez-Marcos vs. COMELEC, supra

**All the foregoing elements must be proved in order to rebut the

presumption of Continuity of Domicile.

FACTS: Petitioner Imelda Marcos filed her certificate of candidacy (COC)

for the position of Representative of the First District of Leyte. She stated
in the COC that she is a resident of the place for seven months. Private
respondent Montejo subsequently filed a Petition for Cancellation and
Disqualification on the ground that Imelda failed to meet the constitutional
requirement of one-year residency. COMELEC granted the Petition for
Disqualification, holding that Imelda is deemed to have abandoned
Tacloban City as her place of domicile when she lived and even voted in
Ilocos and Manila.

J. Domicile and Residence

ISSUE: Whether or not Imelda is deemed to have abandoned her domicile

of origin

Actual removal or actual change of domicile

Bona fide intention of abandoning the former place of residence and
establishing a new one
Acts which correspond with such purpose

Residence - the actual relationship of an individual to a certain place;

physical presence of a person in a given area, community or country

HELD: An individual does not lose his domicile even if he has lived and
maintained residence in different places. Residence implies a factual
relationship to a given place for various purposes. The absence from legal
residence or domicile to pursue a profession, to study or to do other things
of a temporary or semi-permanent nature does not constitute loss of

residence. Thus, the assertion that she could not have been a resident of
Tacloban City since childhood up to the time she filed her certificate of
candidacy because she became a resident of many places flies in the
face of settled jurisprudence in which this Court carefully made
distinctions between (actual) residence and domicile for election
purposes.

K. Nationality and Domicile of Corporations

**The nationality of a private corporation is determined by the character
or citizenship of its controlling stockholders.
**The domicile of a domestic corporation is its principal place of business
(contained in the AOI). For foreign corporations, their domicile is in the
country under whose laws they are incorporated.

was said to be in Manila, the same was also served on Sharps Manila
head office through diplomatic channels. Sharp nevertheless failed to
appear during the hearing and judgment was rendered. Northwest now
filed a case before the Philippine court to enforce the foreign judgment.
ISSUE: Whether or not the Japanese court acquired jurisdiction over the
person of Sharp
HELD: The domicile of a corporation belongs to the state where it was
incorporated. In a strict technical sense, such domicile as a corporation
may have is single in its essence and a corporation can only have one
domicile which is the state of its creation. Nonetheless, a corporation
formed in one state may, for certain purposes, be regarded as a resident
in another state in which it has offices and transacts business.

Grandfather rule - governs the strict application of the ownership of a

corporation (generally 60% Filipino-owned)

In as much as Sharp was admittedly doing business in Japan through its

duly registered branches at the time the collection suit against it was filed,
then in the light of the processual presumption, Sharp may be deemed a
resident of Japan, and, as such, was amenable to the jurisdiction of the
courts therein and may be deemed to have assented to the said courts
lawful methods of serving process.

Control test - a corporation that is at least 60% Filipino-owned is

considered a Filipino for purposes of determining the Filipino ownership of
a corporation whose nationality is put in issue

FOREIGN CORPORATION DOING BUSINESS IN THE PHILIPPINES IS A

RESIDENT

2 TESTS TO DETERMINE FILIPINO CORPORATION:

CORPORATION DOMICILED IN ONE STATE BUT DOING BUSINESS IN

ANOTHER IS A RESIDENT OF THE LATTER
Northwest Orient Airlines, Inc. vs. CA, G.R. No. 112573, Feb. 9, 1995
FACTS: Northwest, a US corporation, and Sharp, a Filipino corporation but
with a branch in Japan, entered into an agreement whereby the former
authorized the latter to sell its air transportation tickets. Sharp, however,
was unable to remit the proceeds of the ticket sales, prompting Northwest
to sue for collection in Japan. Summons was served on Sharps branch
office in Japan but because the manager authorized to receive summons

State Investment House, Inc. vs. Citibank, et al, G.R. No. 7992627, Oct. 17, 1991
FACTS: Consolidated Mines, Inc. (CMI) obtained loans from Citibank, Bank
of America and HSBC, all foreign corporations but with branches in the
Philippines. Meanwhile, State Investment House, Inc. (SIHI) and State
Financing Center, Inc. (SFCI), also creditors of CMI, filed collection suits
against the latter with writs of preliminary attachment. Subsequently, the
three banks jointly filed with the court a petition for involuntary insolvency
of CMI. SHI and SFCI opposed the petition on the ground that the
petitioners are not resident creditors in contemplation of the Insolvency
Law.

ISSUE: Whether or not a foreign corporation with a branch in the

Philippines and doing business therein can be considered a resident
HELD: Foreign corporations duly licensed to do business in the Philippines
are considered residents of the Philippines, as the word is understood in
Sec. 20 of the Insolvency Law, authorizing at least three resident creditors
of the Philippines to file a petition to declare a corporation insolvent. The
Tax Code declares that the term resident foreign corporation applies to
foreign corporation engaged in trade or business within the Philippines as
distinguished from a non-resident foreign corporation which is not

engaged in trade or business within the Philippines. The Offshore Banking

Law sates that: Branches, subsidiaries, affiliates, extension offices or any
other units of corporation or juridical person organized under the laws of
any foreign country operating in the Philippines shall be considered
residents of the Philippines. The General Banking Act places branches
and agencies in the Philippines of foreign banks in the category as
commercial banks, rural banks, stock savings and loan association making
no distinction between the former ad the latter in so far as the terms
banking institutions and banks are used in said Act.