RECOGNITION AND

ENFORCEMENT OF
FOREIGN
JUDGMENTS

Reporter:
Ms. Richie dela Cruz Arandia

Foreign Judgment
O A foreign judgment is recognized when it is given the same
effect that it has in the state where it was rendered with
respect to the parties, the subject matter of the action and
the issues involved. Where the foreign judgment is being
presented as a defense to the claim of the plaintiff, what is
involved is the recognition of a foreign judgment.

O A foreign judgment is enforced when, in addition to being
recognized, a party is given affirmative relief to which the
judgment entitles him. When a plaintiff asks the court of
one state to carry out and make effective a judgment
obtained by him in another state, what is involved is the
enforcement of a foreign judgment.

General Rule
O In the absence of a special compact, no sovereign is
bond to give effect within its dominion to a
judgment rendered by a tribunal of another country

O Absence of compact, treaties and convention
Philippines is not bound to recognize and enforce
foreign judgment

O The benefit of this principle equally inures to all
independent and sovereign states
Requisites of Valid Judgment
Sec92 US Reinstatement of the
Law 2
nd
Conflict of Laws
O Jurisdiction of the state
O Reasonable method of notification is employed
and opportunity to be heard if afforded to
persons affect
O Judgment rendered by competent court
O Compliance with such requirements of state
rendition as necessary for the valid exercise by
the court
Philippine requisites for recognition and
enforcement of Foreign Judgment

1. Foreign judgment was rendered by a judicial or a quasi-judicial
tribunal which had competent Jurisdiction over the parties and the
case in the proper judicial proceedings in which the defendant shall
have be given reasonable notice and the opportunity to be heard.

2. It must be a judgment on civil and commercial matters.

3. The judgment must be valid according to the court that delivered it;

4. Judgment must be final and executory to constitute res judicatain
another action;
ELEMENTS: The judgment must be
a. Final
b. Rendered by a competent court
c. On the Merits
d. Involve

5. Foreign judgment must not be contrary to the public policy
or the good morals of the State where it is to be enforced;
and

6. There must be NO:
a. Lack of jurisdiction
b. Want of notice
c. Collusion
d. Clear mistake of law or fact

7. The foreign judgment must not be barred by prescription
under the law of the State in which it was promulgated
Enforcement of foreign judgment Recognition of foreign judgment
Means that the plaintiff or petitioner
wants the court to positively carry out
and make effective the foreign
judgment
Means that eh defendant or
respondent is presenting the foreign
judgment on the basis of res judicata
Implies an act of sovereignty Involves merely a sense of justice
Requires separate action or proceeding
brought precisely to make foreign
judgment effective
Being a matter of defense, recognition
needs no action or proceeding but
implies that an action or proceeding
has already been filed against the
defendant who is invoking the foreign
judgment
Enforcement cannot exist without
recognition
Recognition does not need or does not
require enforcement
Reasons for recognizing or
enforcing foreign judgment
O Comity, utility and convenience of nations have
been established by which final judgments of
foreign courts are reciprocally respected and
rendered efficacious.
Supreme Court
In this jurisdiction, a valid judgment rendered by a
foreign tribunal may be recognized insofar as the immediate parties
and underlying cause of action are concerned so long as it is
convincingly shown that there has been an opportunity or a full
and fair hearing before a court of competent jurisdiction; that trial
upon regular proceedings had been conducted, following due
citations or voluntary appearance of the defendant and a system of
jurisprudence likely to secure an impartial administration of justice;
and that there is nothing to indicate either a prejudice in court and
in the system of laws under which it is sitting or fraud in procuring
the judgment. A foreign judgment us presumed to be valid and
binding in the country from where it comes, until a contrary
showing, on the basis of presumption of regularity of proceedings
and the giving of due notice in foreign forum.
1. Comity
O Not absolute right on the part of prevailing
party to require our courts to enforce a foreign
judgment rendered in his favor by foreign court.
O If contrary to
O Public policy
O Morals
O Mandatory law
O Rights of citizens and persons under its protection
Our courts will refuse to recognize or enforce the foreign
judgment
2. Reciprocity
O If foreign court accords recognition or gives effect to
Philippine judgment out country will similarly extend
recognition or grant effect to the foreign judgment

Example: Law extend INTELLECTUAL
PROPERTY rights or affords remedies
against UNFAIR COMPETITION to
nationals of another country. Philippines
reciprocally recognized or gives effect in
our country
3. Create obligation to pay a
debt and entitles prevailing
party to vested rights
O Enforced in any country where the defendant is found or
property against which the judgment may be executed.

The term vested rights expresses the concept of a fives,
absolute, complete and unconditional right

Foreign judgment is not a vested right because a judgment
against person in only presumptive of a right as between the
parties and their successors in interest by subsequent title,
and the judgment may be repelled by want of jurisdiction,
notice, fraud , collusion and clear mistake of law

4. Res Judicata
O Issues raised in foreign judgment shout not be relitigated anew in
another country.

O Refer to final judgment on the merits by a court of competent
jurisdiction is conclusive of the rights of the parties or their privies
in all later suits on points and matters determined in the former suit
filed in a foreign country

O A matter adjudged; a thing judicially acted upon or decided; a thing
or matter settled by judgment.

O Rule that a final judgment or decree on the merits by a court of
competent jurisdiction is conclusive of the rights of the parties or
their privies in all later suit s on points and matters determined in
the former suit.

Recognition of foreign
judgment; res judicata as bar
O Where a party in a foreign judgment files
another action in the Philippines against the
other party therein and the latter resists such
action, he is raising res judicata as a defense or a
bar to such situation of another action in this
country. If courts sustain such defense, they are
actually recognizing the foreign judgment and
giving it effect in this country.
Grounds of Res judicata
1. Public policy and necessity , which makes it
the interest of the state that there should be an
end to litigation Republicae ut sit litum

1. Hardship on the individual that he should be
vexed twice for the same cause Nemo his vexari
et eadem causa

Is Foreign Judgment Res
Judicata?
O Enforcement of foreign judgment necessarily
includes its recognition
O The court cannot enforce the judgment by
granting affirmative reliefs without recognizing
it as valid
O Recognition does not necessarily imply
enforcement in the send that no affirmative
relief is prayed for, as when it is presented as a
defense to defeat the claim of the plaintiff.
Example: Plaintiff complaint against
defendant for a sum of money filed in New York
U.S.A, had been dismissed and the defendant held
free from liability in a judgment on the merits that
had become final rendered by the New York court
, or competent jurisdiction over the subject matter
and the parties, the defendant if sued again by the
plaintiffs for the same cause in the Philippines can
plead Res Judicata as a defense to defeat plaintiff s
complaint.
Perkins vs. Benguet
Consolidated Mining Co.
Where, in litigation in a court of first instance of Manila, to
settle property rights as between husband and wife, involving among
other things, a large block of stock in the Philippine corporation, the
husband finally obtained judgment declaring him entitled to the
stock and accrued dividend s thereon as administrator of the
conjugal partnership, but, instead of relying on such judgment, he
stated another action in New York state again litigating the right to
such stock as against his wife, who this time succeeded on appeal in
being adjudged owner, which decision was regarded as res judicata in
still further litigation between spouses in Califonia, the husband mist
be regarded as having abandoned his rights under the Philippine
judgment and as precluded, by his conduct and the doctrine of Res
judicata, from seeking their enforcement.
Judgment not Res Judicata
without opportunity to repel it.
Where there are two cases filed, one in a
foreign country and another our country, involving the
same set if facts and against the same or substantially
the same parties, the judgment in the foreign court
rendered while the case in the country is pending does
not constitute res judicata as basis for its enforcement
without giving the losing party the opportunity to show
that the foreign judgment is vitiated by want of
jurisdiction, want of notice to the party, collusion,
fraud or clear mistake of law or fact and only the court
shall gave ruled that the foreign judgment is free from
any of such defects.
Effects of foreign judgments.

O Under the Rules of Court, in case of a judgment
against a specific thing, the judgment is conclusive upon
the title of the thing.

O In case of a judgment against a person, the judgment is
presumptive evidence of a right as between the parties
and their successors-in interest by a subsequent title; but
the judgment may be repelled by evidence of want of
jurisdiction, want of notice to the party, collusion, or
clear mistake of law or fact.

Effects of foreign judgments in the
Philippines under Rules of Court

Sec. 48, Rule 39, 1997 Rules on Civil Procedure provides:
O The effect of foreign judgment or final order of a foreign country,
having jurisdiction to render the judgment or final order is as
follows:
a. In case of a judgment or final order upon a specific
thing, the judgment or final order is conclusive upon the
title to the thing and
b. In case of a judgment or final order against a person, the
judgment or final order is presumptive evidence of a
right as between the parties and their successors in
interest by a subsequent title
O In either case, the judgment or final order may be repelled by
evidence of a want of jurisdiction, want of notice to the party,
collusion, fraud, or clear mistake of law or fact.

Requirements for giving effect
to foreign judgment
O Judgment or final orders of tribunal
O Having jurisdiction to render the judgment or final order
O Judgment on
Subject matter- nature of the cause of action and relief
sought which is vested by law and which is
not acquired consent or acquiescence of the
parties not the unilateral assumption thereof by a
tribunal.
Person (Petitioner /Plaintiff) acquired by the latters filling of the initiatory
pleading and paying required docket fees
(Respondent / Defendant) service of summons or by voluntary
submission to the authority of court.
Nature of Action jurisdiction over such action are the allegations of
the complaint and the character of the relief sought
and not by the defenses raised by defendant in his
answer.
O Judgment must not be against the local law, good morals and public policy
Reasons why a local court in the Philippines may
refuse to recognize or enforce a foreign judgment

1. The requisite proof of the foreign judgment may not have
been presented
a. The manner of proving a foreign judgment is the same
as proving a foreign law

2. The foreign judgment may contravene a recognized and
established policy in our country

3. The administration of justice in the country where the
judgment came from may be shockingly corrupt or not
beyond reproach


5. The judgment must be res judicata:
a. The judgment must be final
b. Foreign court must have jurisdiction over subject matter and parties
c. The judgment must be on the merits; and
d. There was identity of parties, subject matter, and cause of action


Grounds to repel foreign
judgment
1. Want of jurisdiction
The foreign count must have acquired
jurisdiction over the person of the defendant either by
his the voluntary appearance or by proper service of
summons upon him. If the action filed against him in
an action in personam and he is non resident of the
foreign country, the foreign court cannot acquire
jurisdiction over his person, absent any voluntary
appearance, otherwise the judgment against him is null
an void and cannot be recognized in the country .
Boudard vs. Trait
The defendant was surd for the sum of money in
court of Hanoi, French Indo-China, who was a non-resident
of the said country and who was not. At the time in that
country. He was declared in default and default judgment was
rendered against him. The prevailing party filed an action in
our country to enforce the judgment, which the trial court
dismissed because the defendant was not a resident of Hanoi.
The Supreme Court sustained the dismissal because the
defendant was a non resident of Hanoi and the fundamental
rule is that jurisdiction in personam, over non residents, so as to
sustain a money judgment, must be based upon personal
service within the state which renders the judgment which
was not done.
2. Want of notice to the party
as applied to judicial proceedings. The requirements of
due process are satisfied if the following conditions are
present
a. There must be a court or tribunal clothed with
judicial power to heat and determine the matter
before it
b. Jurisdiction must be lawful acquired over the
person of the defendant or over the property
which is the subject of the proceedings
c. The defendant must be given the opportunity to be
heard
d. Judgment mist be rendered upon lawful hearing.
3. Fraud
There is extrinsic fraud, as ground therefor,
where it is one the effect of which prevents a
party from having a trial, or real contest or from
presenting all of his case to the court; where it
operates upon matters, not pertaining to the
judgment itself, but to the matter in which it was
procured so that there is no fair submission of the
controversy.
Straight Times vs. Court of
Appeals
Under Section 2 Rule 47 of the Rules of
Court, a final judgment may be annulled upon
either of two grounds 1. Extrinsic Fraud and 2.
Lack of jurisdiction. We rule that there was no
extrinsic fraud, but that the trial court had no
jurisdiction to render the assailed judgment
O Intrinsic Fraud refers to acts of a party in a
litigation during the trial, such as the use of
forged instruments or perjured testimony which
dud not affect the presentation of the case but
did prevent a fair and just determination of the
case. Were not this the rule, there would be no
end to litigation, perjury being of such common
occurrence in trial and it is the business of the
other party to meet and repel his opponents
perjured evidence.
Philippine Aluminum Wheels
Inc. vs. PASGI Enterprises
Fraud, to render the enforcement within this jurisdiction of a
foreign judgment, must be extrinsic i.e fraud based on facts
not controverted or resolved in the case where judgment is
rendered, or that which would go to the jurisdiction of the
court or would deprive the party against whom judgment is
rendered a chanced to defend the action to which he has
meritorious case if defense. In fine, intrinsic fraud, that is, fraud
which goes to the very existence of the cause of action-such as
fraud in obtaining consent to a contract is deemed already
adjudged, and it, therefore, cannot militate against the
recognition or enforcement of the foreign judgment
4. Collusion
Similar to fraud practice by one of the party against
the or the party, so as to defeat the latter in the case.
Collusion may however refer to mutual fraud of
both parties, to secure a judgment they mutually
desire either for ore against one party, in such
instance, there is violation of the right to due
process of the party who lost the case

Example:
When the partys lawyer connives at his defeat
or corruptly sells out his clients interest or the
successful party had induces the losing party to commit
professional delinquency of infidelity.

Legal separation, annulment of marriage or
divorce means an agreement between husband and
wife for ne of them to commit or be represented in the
court as having committed, a matrimonial offense or to
suppress evidence of a valid defense for the purpose
of enabling the other to obtain a legal separation, or
annulment of marriage which may be express or
implied from the acts of the parties.
6. Mistake of law or in fact
A mistake of law raises a question of law;
and there is a question of law when there is doubt as
to that the law is on a certain state of facts, or
whether the conclusion drawn from the facts is
correct. Hence, a mistake of law is the incorrect
application of law on a given facts. It is one which
warrants a review of the proceedings or vitiated the
proceedings ad warrants the reversal of the
judgment.
A mistake of fact raises a question of fact,
and there is question of fact when the doubt or
difference arises as to the truth or falsehood of alleged
facts; or when the query necessarily invites calibration
of the whole evidence considering mainly the
credibility of the witnesses, existence and relevancy to
specific surrounding circumstance, their relation to
each other and to the whole, and the probabilities of a
situation. A mistake of fact refers to mistaken
judgment or incorrect belief as to the existence of
effect of matters of fact, or to the misapplication or
misapprehension of the facts. The court commits
mistake of fact when it overlooked, ignored or
misinterpreted certain facts which, if considered would
alter the result of the case.
Villoria vs. Administator of
Veterans Affairs
It was shown that in a guardianship proceeding
then pending in a lower court, the US Veterans'
Administration ruled a motion for the refund of certain
sum of money paid to the minor under guardianship,
alleging that the lower court had previously granted it
petition to consider deceased father as no entitled to guerilla
benefits according to a determination arrived at by its main
office in the US. The motion was denied . In seeking
reconsideration of such order, the administrator relied on an
American federal statute making his decisions final and
conclusive on all questions of law or fact Precluding any
other American official to examine the matter anew, except
a judge or judges of the US court
Thank you!
-THE END-