6custom (the conflicts of law rules of

m

 

mm

° 6conventions each state)
6 put subtitles on the essay part 6general principles of IL X: if the conflict is governed by
6judicial decisions treaty
6keep it short
6teachings of the most highly
6don͛t forget the legal basis qualified publicists
6remember the doctrine of cases Persons involved 6States 6individuals
6review PFR 6IO 6corporations
6individuals
Transactions governed State to state (public) Private
Remedies 1.Diplomatic Protest 1. Courts
2.Peaceful means of settlement 2. Tribunals
INTRODUCTION
of international disputes
a. diplomatic negotiations
I: S COP E OF CON FLI CT OF LA WS : ITS NA TU R E, D EFINI TI ON AN D IMP OR TAN C E b. arbitration
c. conciliation
DIV ERS ITY O F LA WS A N D C UST OM S 3. adjudication by filing case
-division of world into many independent states with own laws + occurrence of events that contains before Int͛l tribunals
elements significant to more than 1 legal system = conflict of laws 4. war
-adoption/incorporation of principles of PRIL in municipal law is based on COMITY
HILTON V.GUYOT: DEFINITION OF COMITY °
 m




 


Y
Y 
Y
 Y
Y
Y
Y 
Y 
YY
Y

Y Y

Y Y
Y Municipal Law Conflict of Law
Y
Y
 YY



Y
YY 
YY Y
Y Y
Y
Y Y
Y
Y No foreign element Involves foreign element
 YY


Y
Y 
YY
Y Y Y
Y Y Y
YY
Y
Y

 Y
Y



Y OBJ EC T, F U NC TI ON A ND SC OPE
6COMITY
-neither a matter of absolute obligation nor mere courtesy and good will 





-RECOGNITION WHICH ONE NATION ALLOWS WITHIN ITS TERRITORY -protection of rational expectations
͙OF THE LEGISLATIVE -stability and uniformity of solutions
͙EXECUTIVE
͙OR JUDICIAL ACTS  m
OF ANOTHER NATION, -almost all subjects!
HAVING DUE REGARD BOTH TO
...INTERNATIONAL DUTY AND CONVENIENCE II. HIS T OR Y
͙AND TO THE RIGHTS OF ITS OWN CITIZENS OR OF OTHER PERSONS WHO ARE UNDER THE PROTECTION
OF ITS LAWS
EAP Critique: why make private litigants suffer for the policy of their state? It͛s not their fault that their ROMA N LA W OR IGI N
country only gives foreign judgments prima facie effect. 



  

 

1.Y Jus Gentium: laws of nations applied to disputes involving foreigners
DEF I NI TIO N (OF P RIL) 2.Y Jus Civile: Applied to Roman Citizens
Italy: since divided into many city-states
-law concerning the rights of persons within the territory and dominion of one nation, by reason of acts,
ð ARTOLUS (father of PRIL) developed THEORY of STATUTES which was used to resolve conflict of law
private or public, done within the dominion of another nation [HILTON V. GUYOT]
issues
Statute Classifications
m
m

1.Y 


Y  (real statutes): immovable properties
PIL PRIL
2.Y 


Y 
  (personal statutes): personal status, capacity, movables
Applicability of

Y
 Relationships of states among Relationship of individuals in 3.Y 


Y! 
 (mixed statutes): contracts ʹ depend on where entered
and

Y

 themselves their private transactions which ?




involve a foreign element CHARLES DUMOULIN: CONTRACTS BETWEEN DIFFERENT NATIONALS
Sources of Law A38: ICJ GR: Internal law of each state

1|P R I L F i n a l s R e v i e w e r _ P a n g a l a n g a n
BERTRAND D'ARGENTE: PRINCIPLE OF UNIVERSAL SUCCESSION C. Treatieses, Commentaries, and Studies of Learned Scholars


  D. Judicial Decisions
BURGUDNOU, RODENBERG, ULRICH HUBER (first used CONFLICT OF LAWS)
TERRITORIAL PRINCIPLE JURISDICTION AND CHOICE OF LAW
GR: laws of every state may operate ONLY WITHIN THE TERRITORIAL LIMIT OF SUCH STATE
X: may recognize laws of another country PROVIDED that it will not prejudice the subjects of the IV . JU R IS DIC TI ON
sovereign whose recognition is sought
Judicial Jurisdiction: power or authority of a court to
...try a case
MOD ER N DEV ELOP M EN TS
͙render judgment
*Neostatutists: when two or more independent laws are applicable to a conflict of laws problem, the ͙and execute it in accordance with law
method so devised determines what law shall prevail Legislative jurisdiction: ability of the state to
*Internationalists: there should be a  Y" YY
 that can solve problems involving foreign ͙promulgate laws
element ͙enforce them
*Territorialists: law of the State applied to persons and things within the State, no foreign law should be On all persons and property within its territory
applied
-branch: only rights 
 Y
Y#
 under a foreign law are recognized but not the foreign law itself ¦°  


*nd Restatement, William Reese: the law to be applied in a conflict of laws case is the law of the 
Y 1. Jurisdiction over person of defendant/property
   
Y

 Y 2. Jurisdiction over subject matter (competency)
*CAVERS, CURRIE AND EHRENZWEIG: policy-centered approaches 3. Proper Venue
4. Forum non Conveniens



 

m
Article 15: Philippine laws applicable to Filipino citizens wherever they are if it involves (Y
) : BAS IS OF E XERC IS E OF J UR IS DIC T IO N
KY Family rights and duties
KY Status 1.Y Jurisdiction over the person of the defendant (forum-defendant contacts)
KY Condition 2.Y Jurisdiction over the property (Forum-property contacts)
KY Legal capacity of persons 3.Y Jurisdiction over the subject matter
Article 16(1): àY
 rule
>Real and Personal property governed by law where it is located   ° m 
Article 16(): Universal succession Venue (R4) Summons (R14)
>national law of the decedent applies
͙wherever property located Real Actions: action affecting title to or possession Action in Rem: Actions, the judgment of which
͙testate or intestate of real property or any interest therein affects the whole world.
͙when it involves:
KY Order of succession Personal Actions: all other actions Action in Personam: Actions, the judgment of
KY Amount of successional rights (legitimes?) which affects only the parties to the action
KY Intrinsic validity of testamentary provisions
Article 17: Y Y


Y
ÚY Laws of the country in which they are executed (Y Y


): forms and solemnities 1. J U RI SD IC T ION OV ER TH E P ERSO N
(formal requisites) Generally͙
ÚY If acts executed before RP diplomatic or consular officials: apply Philippine Law a.Y voluntary appearance
ÚY Prohibitive laws of RP not rendered ineffective by foreign laws or judgments (prohibitive: b.Y submission to authority
public order, public policy, good customs)

m
 
m



III. S OU R CES O F C ONF LIC TS O F L AW -when the plaintiff invokes the aid of the court

m
 




A. Codes and Statutes 1.Y Enters appearance
-usually Civil Codes X: if special appearance: just protest jurisdiction of court
-in RP: there are special laws also applicable 2.Y If non-resident who is 
Y
Y 
Y
Y

 Y  Y 
Y : court already
B. Treaties and International Conventions acquired jurisdiction over him

|P R I L F i n a l s R e v i e w e r _ P a n g a l a n g a n
 3.Y Served with legal process (Rule 14, Rules of Court)
2.Ygovernment official
r
Y Y
Y r
Y Y
Y designated by law
3.Yany of the officers or
Natural persons 1. personal service 1. personal service (see left) agents w/n RP
-defendant who may -deliver summons + copy of complaint . substituted service
be: to defendant a. extraterritorial service 3. Public Corp RP: Solgen Hmmm͙
1. defendant -tender summons + copy of complaint -only for the following situations: LGU: executive head, other
2. prisoner . substituted service actions involve officer/s as law or court may
3. entity w/o juridical -only resorted to when: a. personal status of plaintiff direct
personality a. justifiable causes b. relates to, or the subject of w/c, is
4. minors and b. cannot serve defendant w/n propertyY$Y Y Y$Y  
YY
GEMPERLE V.SCHENKER : SERVICE OF SUMMONS TO ATTORNEY IN FACT
incompetents reasonable time  Y
Y Y
Y
Y


5. resident temporarily c. all reasonable diligent efforts have
out of RP been exerted
6. defendant cannot ð  leave copies at
be found + does not 6defendant͛s residence: person then
reside in RP residing therein w/sufficient age and
7. defendant unknown discretion
6OR office/regular place of business:
person in charge thereof
FOR 7 (unknown defendant)
-w/leave of court, service by
publication in a newspaper of general
circulation
FOR 5 and 6 ʹ extraterritorial service
-w/leave of court
1. personal service outside RP
2. by publication + send through
registered mail to the last known
address the copy of the summons
3. any manner the court deems
sufficient
Juridical persons
1. DOMESTIC CORP (corporations, 1. personal service on (6
partnership, association organized persons only ʹ list exclusive):
under RP Laws) a. President
b. GM
c. Managing Partner
d. Corporate Secretary
e. Corporate Treasurer
f. In house counsel
ð no substituted service!
2. FPJE Personal service ON
(successive)
1.Yresident agent designated
in accordance w/law
c. relief demanded consists of
excluding the defendant from any
interest in the property in RP
d. property of defendant in RP
attached w/n RP
Service by publication?
Extraterritorial? But domestic
nga eh so din a sha
nonresident+not found in RP
Extraterritorial service
-Nonresident filed a suit through resident agent (wife). Defendant filed a counterclaim against
nonresident, service of summons made through the resident agent/attorney in fact. Court held that the
court could exercise jurisdiction because
2. J U RI SD IC T ION OV ER TH E PR OPE RTY
a.Y Seizure of property under a legal process
b.Y Institution of legal proceedings wherein the court's power over the property is recognized and
made effective
-basis of exercise of jurisdiction: presence of the property within the territorial jurisdiction of the forum
uasi In rem: based on state's physical power over the property found within its territory BUT affects
only interests of particular persons in that thing
e.g. action to quiet title to property: the claimant's title to the property in question is superior to others
In Proceedings IN REM and UASI IN REM: as long as there is adequate notice + opportunity to be
heard, okay na! this can be done through publication
PENNOYER V.NEFF: IF NO JURISDICTION OVER THE PERS ON OF THE DEFENDANT IN INITIAL
SUIT, NO JURISDICTION MAY E ACUIRED OVER THE DEFENDANT͛S PROPER TY FOR
EXECUTION OF JUDGMENT
-Plaintiff filed suit against nonresident defendant, made summons through publication in a local
newspaper. Judgment rendered ifo plaintiff, execution of judgment over property of nonresident
defendant found in the forum granted. Defendant contested the execution of judgment. Court held that
as the first judgment is void (no jurisdiction over the person of the defendant), order for the
enforcement of said judgment also void.
ACTIONS IN PERS ONAM: object of the action is to determine the personal rights and obligations of
the defendants
-if non resident: process from the tribunals of one state CANNOT run into another state, and summon
parties there domiciled to leave its territory and respond to proceedings against them. Nor can
Publication. ʹ dapat personal service made or if through publication, published in a newspaper where
defendant could see that he is being summoned
*PEDE SU STITU TED SERVICE Y PU LICATION IFF (PR OCEEDINGS IN REM)
1. Property is once brought under the control of the court by seizure or some equivalent act to any
proceedings authorized by law upon such seizure for its condemnation and sale
2. Object of the action is to reach and dispose of the property in the State or of some interest therein, by
enforcing a contract or a lien respecting the same
3. Or to partition the property in the state among different owners
4. When the public is a party, to condemn and appropriate it for a public purpose

a|P R I L F i n a l s R e v i e w e r _ P a n g a l a n g a n
 WA YS OF DEA LI NG W ITH C ON FL IC TS PR OBLE M
INTERNATIONAL SHOE CO. V.WASHINGTON: MINIMUM CONTACTS, FUNDAMENTAL
FAIRNESS, PRESENCE 1. Dismiss the case
-Foreign Private Juridical Entity does business in Washington through its salesmen. Washington wanted a. No jurisdiction
to tax the FPJE͛s transactions inside Washington, made summons to its agents in Washington. FPJE b. Has jurisdiction, but dismisses it anyway based on FORUM NON CONVENIENS
contested court͛s jurisdiction. Court held that jurisdiction over it properly exercised, because summons 2. Assume Jurisdiction - decides on the merits
were made to its agents (minimum contacts). a. Apply forum law (local law)
DEFENDANT SHOULD HAVE CERTAIN MINIMUM CONTACTS WITH THE FORUM SUCH THAT THE b. Apply Foreign law
MAINTENANCE OF THE SUIT DOES NOT OFFEND "TRADITIONAL NOTIONS OF FAIR PLAY AND
SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE [Milliken v.Meyer]
1. DI SM IS S C AS E: FOR UM NON C O NVE NI EN S
-PRESENCE OF A CORPORATION (CORPORATE PERSONALITY IS A FICTION): its presence without, as well
as within a state of its origin can be manifested ONLY BY ACTIVITIES carried on in its behalf by those who -the controversy may be more suitable to be tried elsewhere
are authorized to act for it ð  

 
mm



SHAFFER V.HEITNER: MINIMUM CONTACTS ETWEEN FORUM, DEFENDANT AND COA
-Officers of corporation sued for antitrust liabilities, plaintiff wanted attachment of certificate of stocks
of the directors (which are located outside the forum). Court held that it is not enough minimum
contacts for the corporation to be incorporated in the forum and the defendants being its officers when
the defendants reside outside the forum and the certificate of stocks subject of the relief prayed for are
outside the forum as well.
-Minimum contacts and fundamental fairness test should be satisfied regardless of the action being in
rem, quasi in rem, or in personam. Minimum contacts should not only exist among the forum and the


a. plaintiff chose the forum to harass defendant (unnecessary hardships and expenses)
b. forum chosen merely for larger jury verdicts (note that this ground alone is not enough to invoke
forum non conveniens)
c. exercise of jurisdiction is burdensome on the courts and taxpayers
d. the forum has no link or interest in the litigation
e. forum has inadequate machinery to enforce the remedy prayed for
f. if undertook global forum shopping
m 


defendant, but also as to the COA 6relative ease of access to source of proof
6Availability of compulsory process for attendance of unwilling witnesses
MULLANE V.CENTRAL HANNOVER: ADEUATE NOTICE S TANDARD 6cost of obtaining and attendance off willing witnesses
-Trust company wanted judicial settlement of its assets, only published notices w/n forum even if it knew 6possibility of viewing the premises if appropriate
the addresses of the beneficiaries who had interests in the proceedings. Court held that there should 6all other practical problems that make trial of a case easy, expeditious, and inexpensive
have been adequate notice resorted to for the proceedings to be valid.
STANDARD FOR ADEQUATE NOTICE: the means employed must be such as one desirous of actually m





informing the absentee might reasonably adopt to accomplish it. The reasonableness and constitutional 6administrative difficulties encountered when courts are congested
validity of any chosen method may be defended on the ground that it is in itself reasonably certain to 6jury duty: burden on community
inform those affected 6appropriateness of having the trial in a court that is familiar with the applicable state law rather than
getting another forum enmeshed in a complicated conflict-of-laws problem




-the state would determine what kind of minimum contacts would be sufficient for its court to exercise 


 
    


jurisdiction over a dispute. Its exercise of jurisdiction is justified with the interest of providing the
plaintiff a forum and no fundamental unfairness results
3. J U RI SD IC T ION OV ER TH E S UBJ EC T MA TTE R (C OMP ET ENC E)
-subject matter refers to the nature of the controversy.
-it is conferred by law or statute, and cannot be fixed by consent of the parties
PERKINS V.ROXAS
-plaintiff prayed that he be adjudged the sole owner of shares. Defendant invokes a foreign judgment
making her the sole owner of the shares. Court held that it could exercise jurisdiction over the subject
matter (as to the ownership of the shares) and a question of res judicata, it goes to the merits of the case
but not to the jurisdiction of the court over the subject matter so it does not divest the court of
jurisdiction
¦|P R I L F i n a l s R e v i e w e r _ P a n g a l a n g a n
6when the forum is the only state where jurisdiction over defendant can be obtained
6when the forum provides procedural remedies not available in another state
HEINE V.NY INSURANCE CO: COUR T͛S DISCR ETION TO APPLY FOR UM NON CONVENIENS
WHEN OTH PAR TIES ARE NONRESIDENTS
-Corporation did business in Germany. Its German customers sued them in the place of incorporation.
Court held that since several factors made it inconvenient for it to try the case, dismiss the case based on

YY Y
-The court has discretion to exercise jurisdiction. The courts have repeatedly refused, in their discretion,
to entertain jurisdiction in COA arising in a foreign jurisdiction, WHERE BOTH PARTIES ARE
NONRESIDENTS OF THE FORUM
-The courts of this country are established and maintained primarily to determine controversies between
its own citizens and those having business there, and manifestly the court may protect itself against a
flood of litigation over contracts made and to be performed in a foreign country͙
IN RE: UNION CAR IDE: APPLY FORUM NON CONVENIENS WHEN THERE IS ANOTHER
ADEUATE FORUM
UCC͛s plant in India leaked gas, causing many deaths and injuries to Indian nationals. Indian nationals
filed suit in place of incorporation of the corporation of UCC. Court dismissed the actions because Indian
courts had more adequate means to try the case.
FLEUMER V.HIX: SHOULD PR OVE FOREIGN LAW PROPERLY
-administrator of decedent wanted the latter͛s will to be probated in RP. Will allegedly executed in
accordance with W. Virginia law, as evidenced by a copy of the applicable law certified by the Director of
the National Library. Court held that the foreign law was not properly proven so probate of the will not
allowed.

WINGðON V.SYYAP: APPLY FORUM NON CONVENIENS WHEN THE FORUM IS STR ONGLY IN PHILIPPINE TRUST V. OHANAN: JN IF FOR EIGN LAW PROVEN PREVIOUSLY IN EAR LY
FAVOR OF DEFENDANT STAGES OF CAS E
-PFJE entered contract with domestic corp abroad but since domestic corp defaulted, FPJE sued it in RP. In previous proceedings of the case, the applicable foreign law was already duly proven. Court held that
Domestic corp invoked forum non conveniens. Court held that it would not apply forum non conveniens as the applicable foreign law was already duly proven, they could now take judicial notice of said law.
Y
Y
YY"Y
Y 
Y Y

Y Y
YY
Y  

  




 mm

%&'(Y )'*+(Yàr%Y*Y
2. ASS U ME J UR IS DIC TIO N (1) contrary to an important public policy of the forum
-apply law of the forum, specifically in the following situations: (2) penal in nature
a. Specific forum law/internal law makes forum law/internal law applicable (3) procedural in nature
b. Proper foreign law not properly pleaded (4) purely fiscal/administrative in nature
c. when foreign law cannot be applied (5) (will) work undeniable injustice to the citizens of the forum
(6) case involves real/personal property situated in theforum
m    °
°  °
mm

 (7) application of foreign law might endanger vital interest of the state (forum)
 
  ° m (8) contrary to good morals
Article 16:
if dispute involves property in RP: apply RP͛s laws: lex situs V . CH OI CE OF LA W
if dispute involves decedent who is national of RP: apply RP Law: lex nationale
Article 8 :
When will subject of the proceedings made in RP: validity of revocation dependent on RP Laws (even if C ORRELA TI ON BE T WEE N J UR IS DIC TIO N A ND C H OIC E OF LA W
revocation done outside RP)
Article 81 : 1.Y Same factors may be considered for the exercise of jurisdiction and the choice of applicable
If joint wills enforced in RP: even if made outside RP, RP would consider it void law
2.Y If forum law applies its own law because it has interest in the dispute, then the plaintiff, to

m m  



m m
m

m  secure the application of forum law, would bring the case before a forum which has interest
-no judicial notice of foreign laws in the dispute
-has to prove foreign laws 3.Y Forum exercising jurisdiction usually applies forum law so plaintiff could choose the law which
-if none proven, by application of PROCESSUAL PRESUMPTION, forum law is made applicable is more favorable to him and then bring the suit before the forum of that law
6note that it doesn͛t necessarily follow that the forum would exercise jurisdiction, and would apply
Section ¦, Rule 1a: how to prove foreign laws forum laws
If the office in which the record is kept is in foreign country,
the certificate (that such officer has custody) may be made by APPR OAC H E S TO C H O IC E OF L AW
͙a secretary of the embassy or legation,


  

͙consul general, 1.Y Justice
͙ consul, 2.Y Predictability
͙vice consul, or
͙consular agent or 
  

   

͙by any officer in the foreign service of the Philippines stationed in the foreign country in which the 1.Y Traditional approach
record is kept, 2.Y Modern approach
and authenticated by the seal of his office.

Section 5, Rule 1a: content of attestation

that the copy is a correct copy of the original,
or a specific part thereof, as the case may be.

5|P R I L F i n a l s R e v i e w e r _ P a n g a l a n g a n
TRA DI TIO NAL A PPR OAC H
-emphasize principles of simplicity, convenience and uniformity

Name Author Content Case where applied Critique


 
 Joseph Beale (1st
  restatement)
-an act done in a foreign jurisdiction gives rise to the GRAY V. GRAY: applied law where the injury was
existence of a right if the laws of that state provides so, and
this right is vested on the plaintiff and he could enforce it in
any forum he chooses to bring suit.
-LAW of THE PLACE OF OCCURRENCE OF THE LAST ACT
necessary to complete the COA determines WON a right was
vested
1. failure to resolve conflicts cases with reference to
done (in this case, applied Maine law which barred considerations of   and 

spouses from filing suits v.the other) 2. Counterintuitive, arbitrary
-H and W are residents of New Hampshire but when
they drove to Maine, they got into an accident, Dr. Jovito Salonga:
causing injuries to W. W sued H but Maine (place a.Y Self-delusion of reasoning: when say that it is NOT
where last act done) did not allow W and H to sue the foreign law but the rights under it which are
each other, no COA arises. Court held that since the enforced by the courts
place where the last act to give rise to the COA does b.Y Not all rights acquired under foreign law are
not allow a COA to rise between H and W, W can͛t protected elsewhere, their protection not always
sue husband. desirable
6Local conduct should be governed by local law. c.Y Protection of rights and interests not the only factors
Rules and conduct have no force to regulate acts to be considered
done outside the jurisdiction which made the rules, d.Y Not only protect vested rights but also foreign legal
save as their operation is enforced by control over relationships which may result to extinction of duties
parties found within the jurisdiction͙ and charges or invalidity of acts
e.Y Difficult to apply when the material aspect of a
ALA AMA GREAT SOU THERN RR CO. transactions equally touch two or more states
V.CARROLL: applied the law where the injury was
sustained (in this case, the law of Mississippi which
prohibits an EE from claiming damages from ER
when damage caused by negligence of other co-EE)
-EE sued ER for injury inflicted in Mississippi based
on Alabama law. EE and ER and all other significant
contacts are in Alabama. Court held that since no
COA if case brought before Mississippi, then no
vested rights which may be enforced in Alabama.
-there can be no recovery in one State for injuries to
the person sustained in another unless the infliction
of the injuries is actionable under the law of the
State in which they were received



 Walter Wheeler 1.Y the power of a state to regulate w/n its territory has no It tends to the "narrow-minded who may be inclined to

  Cook limitations EXCEPT such as may be imposed by its OWN depreciate the practical and equitable consideration that
POSITIVE LAW should control the adjudication of conflict cases in favor
2.Y In conflict of laws problems the court does not enforce a of an exaggerated local policy on the ground that they
foreign right but

 
 and the sovereign which they represent can do as they





  
 that does not please"
involve a foreign element

m
 m
  David Caver -choice of law should be determined by considerations of

m
   and 
 and should not be the result of

6|P R I L F i n a l s R e v i e w e r _ P a n g a l a n g a n
 the mechanical application of a rule or principle of selection
-steps that must be done by the court:
1.Y Scrutinize the event or transaction
2.Y Compare carefully the profferred rule of law + result
wich its application might work (v.rules of forum)
3.Y Appraise results from standpoint of justice and social
policy
-principle of preference: conceived to provide a fair
accommodation of conflicting state policies and afford fair
treatment to the parties caught up in conflicting state
policies
-territorialist: look to the place where the significant events
occurred or where the legal relationship is centered

MOD ER N APP ROAC H E S

-relate to reaching appropriate results in particular cases
Name Author Content Case where applied Critique

m
 
 Willis Reese (2nd -plurality of factors: AUTEN V. AU TEN: "CENTER OF GRAVITY", 6used to support virtually any result, hamper sound
° 
 
 

 Restatement) (a) the needs of the interstate and international systems "PLACE OF THE MOST SIGNIFICANT CONTACTS ", development of common law



 m (b)relevant policies of the concerned states "GROUPING OF CONTACTS "
© relevant policies of other interested states and the
relative interest of those in the determination of the
particular issue
(d)the protection of justified expectations of the parties
(e) the basic policies underlying the particular field of law
(f) certainty, predictability, and uniformity of result
(g) ease in the determination and the application of the
law to be applied
Consider RELEVANT and IMPORTANT factual contacts!
Depends on the relative importance and relevance to the
issue at hand

Torts:
1.Y Place where injury occurred
2.Y Place where the negligent conduct occurred
3.Y Domicile, residence or nationality of the parties
4.Y Place where the relationship between the parties is
entered
6how to determine (standard) which of the contacts
-the place where there were more factual contacts was were significant and how to evaluate relative
England, as the only contact with US is the execution of importance of a group of contacts
the contract, and it only happened in US because the
husband was in US
-gives the place HAVING THE MOST INTEREST IN THE
PROBLEM paramount control over the legal issues
arising out of a particular factual context, thus allowing
the forum to apply the policy of the jurisdiction most
intimately concerned with the outcome of the
particular litigation
-enables court not only to reflect the relative interests
of several jurisdictions involved, but also to gie effect
to the probable intention of the parties
HAAG V. ARNES: in this case, the place where there
were more factual contacts was Ilinois (the home of
the dad)

Contracts:
5.Y Law chosen by the parties and in the absence thereof
6.Y Place of contracting
7.Y Place of negotiation of the contract
8.Y Place of performance

7|P R I L F i n a l s R e v i e w e r _ P a n g a l a n g a n
 9.Y Domicile, residence, or nationality, or place of
incorporation and place of business of parties




  
 -look at the policy behind the laws of the involved states and obcock v. Jackson: application of NY Law advanced 6conflicts cases were ordinarily concerned only with
the interest each state had in applying its own law the policy reflected in that law, while the failure to private and not governmental interests
-factual contacts alone did not determine the outcome of a apply Ontario law did not impair the policy behind the 6unworkable, it will require the court to decide each
case UNLESS they reflected a state policy which would be law. case in an ad hoc basis
advanced by application of the substantive state law 6not all state legislatures published committee
ðdetermine which state had the real interest in having its law reports that explained the background and purpose of
applied the laws - courts speculate
6not all laws reflected policy or had a purpose other
than to decide cases

 °m
 William Baxter ðsubordination of the state objective which would be least
°m °

 impaired
-courts weigh conflicting interests and apply the law of the
state whose interest would be more impaired if its law were
not followed





 Donald -after determining the concerned jurisdiction or interested Miliken v. Pratt (1981)


  Trautman and state Facts: Daniel Pratt, resident of Massachusetts, was
Arthur Von -looked into: sued by Miliken and Co. as a guaranty on his wife's
Mehren > the general policies of the state beyond those loan, as required by the company.
reflected in its substantive law -loan executed in Maine
>policies and values relating to effective and
Massachusetts law Maine Law
harmonious intercourse between states
e.g. 6reciprocity
Spouse can't act as Spouse can be a surety
6advancement of multistate activity
surety for the other's for the other's debt
6protecting justifiable expectations
obligation
6evenhandedness in dealing with similar cases
6effectiveness -suit brought in Maine
-then consider the relative strength of a state policy (policy- HELD: DANIEL LIABLE
weighing) -contract was complete when Miliken received Daniel's
guaranty and extended credit on the strength of his
guaranty
-place of contracting was Maine

Trautman and Von Mehren comments: at the time the

decision was made, restrictive policy on the right of
women was on the wane in Massachusetts so at that
time, the contract was made not based on a strongly
held policy.
-functional analysis: consider WON the law of a state
reflects an "emerging" or "regressing" policy

 ð Robert Leflar (1) predictability of results absence of principled and objective standards by




 (2) maintenance of interstate and international order which superiority of law over another may be

 

 (3) simplification of judicial task determined.
(4) application of the better rule of law
(5) advancement of the forum's governmental interests

8|P R I L F i n a l s R e v i e w e r _ P a n g a l a n g a n

V I: T HE P R O LE M OF CHAR AC TER IZ ATI ON
C H ARAC TE RI ZA TIO N A ND TH E SI NGL E-A SP EC T M ETH O D
SingleðAspect method
Concentrate on 1 element of a
situation in order to connect the case
to a particular legal community
e.g. issue as CONTRACTUAL: place of
contracting
TORTIUS: law of place where the tort
occurred
Foster simplicity, convenience, and
uniformity of results
-courts would prefer rules of law whether they are forum law
or another state's law as long as they make "good
socioeconmic sense for the time the court speaks and are
sound in view of present day conditions
MultiðAspect Method
All important factors of the case, both territorial and non-
territorial, are analyzed
Applicable law arrived at by rationally elaborating and applying
...the policies and purposes underlying the particular legal rules
that come in question
...as well as the needs of interstate or international intercourse
Reach a just solution for case
1.Y Subject matter characterization
2.Y Substance-procedure Dichotomy
SUBJ EC T MA TTE R C H A RAC T ER IZ AT ION
-classification by a court of a factual situation into a legal category
GI S V. GOV͛T OF PI: APPLICATION OF CHARACTERIZATION
-In accordance with California law, when one of the spouses die, the properties of the conjugal
partnership would redound to the surviving spouse, and this is being enforced by the surviving spouse
with regard properties in RP. Register of Deeds refused to register the properties in the name of the
surviving spouse, he failing to pay the inheritance tax allegedly due. Court characterized the dispute into
an issue involving property, thus, applied lex rei sitae instead of lex nationali (which is applicable to
succession issues).
SUB STA NC E -PROC ED URE DIC H O TOM Y
-determine first WON the issue is substantive or procedural, then applicable law
SUBSTANTIVE: apply the foreign law that may be applicable
PROCEDURAL: apply forum law
-YY
YY Y


/YY
6m ð


6 to protect parties from a situation where their legal situation changes just because of the forum in
Art15: NATIONAL LAW applies if
which an action is brought
>family rights and duties
6 so that the orderly administration of justice would not be hampered and delayed
>status, condition and legal capacity of persons
Art16(1): à',Y*- applies to properties
GRANT V. MCAULIFFE: SURVIVAL OF COA PR OCEDURAL
Art16(2): NATIONAL LAW of decedent if
-Tortfeasor died before a suit was filed against him. The place where the tort happened did not allow
>order of succession
claims to be filed against tortfeasor after death while forum does. Court held that since the survival of
>amount of successional rights
COA is a matter of procedure, forum law would apply.
>intrinsic validity of testamentary provisions
-Survival is not an essential part of the COA itself but relates to the procedures available for the
Art17: à',Yà)*Y'à'.r-*)(* for formalities
enforcement of the legal claim of damages.
Critique: instead of applying the law of the place of tort, decision was influenced by sympathy factors
m  ð





-inherent rigidity
-problem with substance-procedure dichotomy: there are parts of law where substance and procedure
-unjust decisions
are hard to separate:
How to avoid: Escape Devices
?


  
1.Y Characterization
Substantive: forbid creation of obligation
2.Y Renvoi
Procedural: forbid enforcement of obligation
6in RP: Procedural: only forbids enforcement of obligation but if these conditions not complied with, i.e.
Characterization: the process by which the court at the beginning of the choice-of-law process assigns a
transactions not in writing, other evidence may be admitted if allowed by the other party to prove the
disputed question to an area of substantive law
transaction.
MARIE V. GARRISON: IF FOR IDS THE CREATION OF THE O LIGATION, SU STANTIVE

m 
 

:

|P R I L F i n a l s R e v i e w e r _ P a n g a l a n g a n
-Contract entered by the two parties, but not in writing. In applying the statute of frauds, the statute V II. TH E P R O LEM OF R ENV OI
here forbids the creation of a right (by declaring void a contract in interest in land not in writing) as
opposed to one which prohibits an action to be brought to enforce the contract. Therefore, the law of
the place where the contract was created (lex loci contractus) apply. DEF I NI TIO N

 



 
°



-procedure whereby a jural matter presented is referred by the conflict of laws rules of the forum to a
m
ʹ only bars legal remedy w/o impairing substantive right involved
foreign state, the conflict of laws rules of which, in turn, refers the matter back to the law of the forum
 
if shorter period provided when generally statute of limitations provide for a longer
or a third state
period




  
 SPECIFICITY Test
ð 
OURNIAS V. ATLANTIC MARITIME: SPECIFICITY TEST
ͻ REMISSION: reference back to the law of the forum
Statute of Limitations substantive when the limitation is directed to the newly created liability so
ͻ TRANSMISSION: reference to a 3rd state
specifically as to warrant saying it qualified the right
ð 
 

 
6where domiciliary and nationality laws are applied to the same individual in issues involving
-bars the filing of a suit in a forum if it is already barred by the statute of limitations in the place where
>succession
the COA arose
>domestic relations
-but this was not applied in RP case͙
>real properties
CADALIN V. POEA: ORROWING S TATUTES NOT APPLICA LE IF IT WOULD CONTRAVENE
PU LIC POLICY OF THE FORUM
-the EEs who were employed in Bahrain wanted to claim against their recruitment agency and employer V AR IOU S W AYS O F DEA LING WI TH TH E P R O LEM OF R ENV OI
but there was a dispute as to the applicable statue of limitations, as the Bahrain law only provides 1 year 4 possible ways
to bring suit, while in RP laws, it may either be 10 years based on the NCC or 3 years based on Labor 1. Reject Renvoi: Refer the case to the internal law of another state (thus, no reference to another state
Code. Court held that Philippine law applicable (yet to determine if NCC or Labor Code), as the once the internal laws of the other state is applied)
application of the 1 year prescriptive period would be contrary to RP͛s public policy for the protection of . Accept renvoi: refer case to the whole law of another state (which would include the other state͛s
labor conflicts of law rules)

DÉP AÇ AG E / DE -PA -S AJ / AZNAR V. GAR CIA: ONCE REFERRED ACK, NO NEED TO REFER TO ANOTHER LAW
Will of a Californian citizen domiciled in RP granted only P3600 to the acknowledged natural child while
-phenomenon where different aspects of a case involving a foreign element may be governed by
the rest of the estate went to the other daughter so probate of the said will contested by the
different systems of laws
acknowledged natural daughter, alleging that the law of the Philippines should be applied. Court
-presence of the incidental question calls for the employment of depacage
referred case to national law of decedent (successional rights) which in turn referred case to law of
-allows other relevant interests of the parties to be addressed in a single-aspect method
domicile (PRIL rule in national law) and the court stopped there, as not doing otherwise ͞would leave the
issue incapable of determination because the case will then be like a football, tossed back and forth
HAUMSCHILD V. CONTINENTAL CASUALTY: TORTS AND CAP ACITY OF SP OUSES TO SUE
between the two states, between the country of which the decedent was a citizen and the country of his
The spouses, married in Wisconsin, met a mishap in California, then marriage later annulled. Law of the
domicile."
tort does not allow suits between spouses while law of the domicile (which applies to family law) allows

 
suits to so proceed. Court characterized the issue as to capacity of spouses to sue as a family law
Forum: RP
problem, thus, applied law of the domicile.
RP referred case to Lex Nationali: California (governs successional rights and intrinsic validity of the
nd provisions of the will ʹ here, Californian citizen)
2 Restatement: factors to consider in choosing applicable law:
-in California: no legitime; but if whole law, includes conflicts of law rules of California which refers the
a.Y Needs of interstate and international system
case to the law of the domicile of the decedent: Philippines
b.Y Relevant policies of the forum
-law of the domicile now is the internal law of the domicile. Should not refer to another foreign law
c.Y Relevant policies of other interested states and the relative interests of those states
d.Y Protection of justified expectations of parties
a. Desistance/mutual disclaimer of jurisdiction: forum refers to foreign law but finds that the latter only
e.Y Basic polices underlying fields of law
applies to its nationals, thus, forum laws would be applied instead
f.Y Certainty, predictability, uniformity of results (CPU)
¦. ͞Foreign court͟ theory: the forum would apply the law that the foreign court would apply (instead of
g.Y Ease in determination and application of the law to be applied
referring the case to another court, the forum court would assume the position of the foreign court)

10 | P R I L F i n a l s R e v i e w e r _ P a n g a l a n g a n
ANNESLEY, DAVIDSON V. ANNESLEY: FOREIGN COUR T THEORY: DOU LE R ENVOI
Decedent resided in France but did not acquire domicile there as required by their own laws. Executed
will where she disposed more than 1/3 of her will ifo of daughter. Will to be probated in English courts.
English courts assumed what French courts would have done, thus, applied French laws.
How renvoi applied
English court (forum) referred case to law of domicile (France)
French court referred case to law of nationality (England)
English court referred the case back to the law of domicile ʹ then assumed what the French courts would
have done ʹ and this is to apply own law
USE FUL NE SS O F RE NVOI
-avoid unjust results
UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO V. DATER: STATES APPLY RENVOI TO PR OTECT INTER EST OF
CITIZENS
-Widow of a debtor who owns ½ of the mortgaged land was being held liable for the mortgage (her half
is being enforced upon). If law of place of celebration applied, she would not be liable as she had no
capacity to enter into an obligation in that state. If the law of place of performance applied, she would
be liable. Court held that if law of the place of performance would be applied, the law of the place of
͙so whatever law applicable (except if it involves property in RP): Texas law applies
V III. NO TI CE AND P R O OF OF F OR EI GN LAW
EXT EN T O F J UD IC I AL NO TIC E
6Who has burden of proof: the party relying upon the foreign law as COA or defense
6Foreign law as question of fact: needs to be properly pleaded and proved in conformity with the law of
evidence of the state where it is presented
Why: can͛t take JN; Judge presumed to know only domestic/internal law
m
GR: Judge only decide a case based on his own knowledge and on the evidence presented before him in
the actual case
X: if the foreign law is EVIDENTLY FAMILIAR [DELGADO V. REPU LIC] ʹ
i.e. Spanish or American law
Foreign law previously ruled upon by the judge in other cases
execution of the contract would still be applicable so in the end, the widow was absolved from liability.  
-EAP: with renvoi, decided case based on substantive law, not on incidental law of the forum -can take JN of sister states͛ laws (based on the FULL FAITH AND CREDENCE CLAUSE in the Consti)





  PRO OF OF F ORE IG N L A W
1. Workable only if one state rejects it or states do not have same method of applying it
 
>flaw of objection: only applies when states involved does not refer to internal law of one of the states
1.Y An official publication of the law
2. Burden on the courts to determine the Conflicts of Law rules of another forum
2.Y Copy of the law
>but forum court would not use renvoi if it cannot ascertain the Conflicts of law rules of another state
͙attested by the officer having the legal custody of the record, or his deputy
If record is not kept in RP: it must be accompanied by a certification that such officer has the

mm


 
 





custody:
-apply renvoi only if there are conflicting interests of states ʹ if the other state is disinterested, then no

need to resort to their laws.
?
¦
PFAU V. TRENT ALUMINUM: FALSE CONFLICT S O R ENVOI INAPPLICA LE
Section ¦, Rule 1a: how to prove foreign laws
-Students in Iowa but domiciled elsewhere involved in a car vehicle mishap in Iowa. Law of the domicile
If the office in which the record is kept is in foreign country,
of both parties allows guests to recover from host for injuries sustained but Iowa does not. Court held
the certificate (that such officer has custody) may be made by
that as Iowa does not have interest in applying its laws, no need to resort to renvoi (law of the place of
͙a secretary of the embassy or legation,
domicile of plaintiff refers case to law of the place where the tort happened).
͙consul general,
͙ consul,
ELLIS V. ELLIS: FALSE CONFLICT WHEN DECEDENT NATIONAL AND DOMICILIARY OF
͙vice consul, or
SAME S TATE
͙consular agent or
-Decedent was born in Texas and has his domicile there. He executed a will, merely giving P40k each to
͙by any officer in the foreign service of the Philippines stationed in the foreign country in which the
his illegitimate children and to first wife, then the rest would redound to his legitimate children. So
record is kept,
illegitimate argue the applicability of foreign law (RP law alleged to be applicable so no impairment of
and authenticated by the seal of his office.
legitime allowed).Court held that renvoi not applicable, as both law of domicile and law of nationality is
the same.
 

 
 :
If applied renvoi
1.Y Documents executed abroad
Forum court (RP): apply law of nationality (in accordance with Art16(2)
2.Y Depositions taken in foreign countries
National law: Texas law
-not Texas law proven ʹ so assume that Texas law refers to
  
  
??
6law of domicile: Texas
a. On NOTICE:
6law of nationality: Texas Law
...secretary of embassy/legation

11 | P R I L F i n a l s R e v i e w e r _ P a n g a l a n g a n
͙consul general LEARY V. GLEDHILL: ACUIES CENCE OF APPLICATION OF FORUM LAW
͙consul -Plaintiff sued defendant in US court upon an obligation made in France, without showing French law.
͙vice consul Court held that even if there͛s no showing of French law, the parties are now deemed to have
͙consular agent of RP acquiesced to the application of the foreign law upon failure to prove foreign law.
b. Person/officer appointed by COMMISSION or under letters rogatory
c. Person which parties have stipulated IN WRITING ZALAMEA V. CA: APPLIED FORUM LAW U T ON ASIS THAT LEX LOCI CONTRACTUS
APPLICA LE IN CONTRACTS
PCI V. ESCOLIN: ES TOPPEL IN PROVING FOREIGN LAWS -Zalameas were bumped off their flight which was contracted in RP but the excuse of the airline is that
-H and W, both nationals of Texas, executed in their wills that they made each other the beneficiary of overbooking is allowed under US laws (as testified by one of its employees). Court held that since the
each͛s estate upon each͛s death, with the remainder of each estate accruing to each͛s heirs. W died first applicable US law was not duly proven, it cannot be taken JN. But since this is a contract, lex loci
but no liquidation made so upon death of H, administrators of the estates of H & W are scrambling on contractus applicable ʹ RP Law. In accordance w/ RP law, overbooking amounts to BF so the Zalameas
how to settle the estate. The administrator for the husband though already argued the application of RP are entitled to damages.
law ʹ thus limited the estate of the wife to ½ of the conjugal estate. Court held that since both are Texan -what is required to be able to prove foreign law:
nationals, and national laws determine successional rights, the parties should prove the applicable Texan 6official publication
Law as it cannot take JN of it. However, as the administrator of the H͛s estate already argued that ½ of 6copy of the written law attested by the officers having the legal custody of the record, or his deputy +
the estate belongs to the W, it cannot now assert that according to Texan law, W͛s estate is less than certificate that such officer has custody + seal of the office of the officer who made the certification
that. >who can make the certification:
͙secretary of an embassy or legation
IN RE ESTATE OF JOHNSON: NO JN ASED MER ELY ON AN ANNOTATION OF THE FOR EIGN ͙consul general
LAW ͙consul
-decedent was a national of Illinois at time of death, though resident of RP. Will was probated allegedly ͙vice consul
according to Illinois law, with TC taking JN of Illinois law as shown from a copy of an annotation. ͙consular agent
Daughter contested the probate of the will, alleging that it was not made in accordance with Illinois law ͙any officer in the foreign service of the Philippines
but failed to show any evidence to the contrary. Court held that even if the TC erred in taking JN as it
would require proof, the daughter did not present evidence to the contrary so opposition of the Cf. Warsaw Convention (see discussion later)
daughter not granted. Under venue in Warsaw: Art8
1. Court of the place of domicile of the carrier

 

m

m   

 2. Court of the principal place of business of the carrier
1.Y Dismiss the case for inability to establish a COA
2.Y Assume that the foreign law is the same as forum law (processual presumption)
3.Y Apply law of the forum
1. DI SM IS S TH E C A SE (TR AD IT IO NAL A PPRO AC H )
-forum would, upon proof of law, enforce a right existing under the foreign law (vested rights) so failure
to prove its contents is failure to establish a prima facie case
WALTON V. ARAMCO: FAILURE TO PROV E FOREIGN LAW = DISMISS CASE; PR OCESSUAL
PRESUMPTION APPLIED ONLY IF S AME LEGAL SYSTEM (I.E. COMMON LAW)
-US citizen who was injured while working in Saudi Arabia sued its employer in US for damages arising
from Tort but it was dismissed because of failure to prove Saudi Arabian law. Court held that lex loci
delicti applies, thus, US citizen need to prove COA using Saudi Arabian laws and failure to do so would
lead to dismissal of his case. US Court did not allow processual presumption because Saudi Arabia is not
a common law country.
2. APPL Y FOR UM L AW
-upon failure to prove foreign law, parties deemed to have acquiesced to the application of local law
which is the default law applied by the forum
1 | P R I L F i n a l s R e v i e w e r _ P a n g a l a n g a n
3. Court where the transaction occurred
4. Court of the place of destination
3. APPL Y PROC ESS UAL P RES U MPT IO N/ ͞ PRE SU ME D- ID EN TI TY APPR OAC H ͟
-presume that foreign law is the same as forum law
MICIANO V. RIMO: PROCESSUAL PRESUMPTION APPLIED
-Turkish who was a resident of the Philippines at the time of death. He specified in his will that he
wanted RP laws to apply as to the partition of the property. Court held that lex nationali should apply (in
accordance with NCC) but since no proof of what Turkish laws provide, presume that it͛s the same with
RP laws
EAP: the court could have just used ͞most significant relationships͟ approach to apply RP laws instead of
flouting the testator͛s intention
SUNTAY V. SUNTAY: FAILED TO PROVE THAT WILL WAS DULY PR O ATED S O APPLIED
PROCESSUAL PRESUMPTION
nd
-Filipino decedent allegedly made 2 wills, the 2 will allegedly probated in China. Court held that as the
petitioner failed to prove that the court which allegedly probated the will is a probate court and also
failed to prove the applicable laws on allowance of will, the will may not be deemed as probated in the
foreign court. Applied processual presumption, thus, court concluded that there was no probate of the
will, there being no notice to all interested parties.
 -in effect, the court judges the wisdom and soundness of the law applicable
CIR V. FISHER: APPLICATION OF PR OCESSUAL PRESUMP TION IN TAX CAS ES
-British spouses had conjugal properties in RP. When H died, W filed a return wherein she only based the
taxes on ½ of the estate, applying RP law. Court held that national law of the decedent should be 2. FORE IG N LA W IS P ROC E DUR AL I N N ATU RE
applied, however, since it was not proved, assume that RP law the same with English law, therefore, only m



½ of the conjugal estate taxed, that ½ being the only part of the decedent in the conjugal property. -forms of remedies in order that courts applying them are able to administer justice
-main consideration why forum law applied if dispute is procedural: JUDICIAL CONVENIENCE
CID V. DELA R OSA: PROCESSUAL PRESUMPTION IF CASE INVOLVES SOLIDARITY OF FAMILY -impractical for the forum to apply procedural rules of another state
-William Gatchalian was being deported, allegedly because he failed to prove the legality of his -problem: procedural-substantive dichotomy problems in statute of frauds and statute of limitations
grandfather and father͛s marriages. Court held that he was a Filipino citizen, with the presumption ifo of
solidarity of the family and validity of marriages.
3. IS SU ES AR E RELA TE D TO PRO PER TY ( FOU ND IN TH E FOR UM)
-In RP (Art16.1): lex situs applies both to real and personal property
EXC EP TI ON S TO TH E A PPL IC AT IO N O F FOR EIG N LA W
GR: apply the applicable foreign law 

 
m m

Basis: comity and reciprocity a. Land and everything attached to it are w/n the exclusive control of the state: only State officials can
X: 3 (Y0


) lawfully deal with them physically - their consent necessary
a. Specific forum law/internal law makes forum law/internal law applicable b. Immovables are of greatest concern to state
b. Proper foreign law not properly pleaded c. Demands of certainty and convenience
c. when foreign law cannot be applied
rd
Under 3 : when foreign law CANNOT be applied 4. IS SU ES I NVOLV ED I N TH E E NF ORC E ME NT OF FORE IG N C L AI M IS F ISC AL OR
Art 17(3): can͛t apply foreign law if it violates: AD MI NI STR AT IVE
KY Public order GR: state is not obliged to enforce the revenue law of another
KY Public policy e.g. ANCO DE RAZIL V. AC ISRAEL COMMUNITY CO: court deny enforcement of tax claims by
foreign countries on local residents
KY Good customs





!m


 



1. C O NT RAR Y TO AN IM PORT AN T PU BLIC POL IC Y OF TH E FOR U M MOOR E V. MITCHELL: Revenue laws fall within the same reasoning (as penal laws); they affect a state
in matters as vital to its existence as its criminal laws. No court ought to undertake an inquiry which it
m  
cannot prosecute w/o determining whether these laws are consonant w/ its own notions of what is
-principle of law which holds that no subject or citizens can lawfully commit any act which has a
proper
tendency to be 
 


 .




"m


m  


m  
Tax laws are not passed to punish people. Its an obligation of the citizen who enjoys the protection of
-situation in which the court declines to give due course to a claim existing under a foreign law
government to share the expense of maintaining the government.
..because it considers the nature of the claim unconscionable
or its enforcement would "violate a
>fundamental principle of justice, 5. FORE IG N LA W/J U DGM EN T IS C O NTR ARY T O G OOD MOR ALS () ( -r Y.) ()  Y!)  ')
>some prevalent concept of good morals,
-as there is no fixed definition of what is contrary to good morals, it being subjected to the discretion of
>some deep-rooted tradition of the commonwealth.
the forum court, it is criticized for being inherently subjective
-dismissal through this method is technically not dismissal on the merits BUT in reality, plaintiff cannot
6. Application of foreign law = undeniable injustice to citizens of forum
get jurisdiction in any other court
7. foreign law penal in character
8. application of foreign law might endanger vital interests of state
PAKISTAN INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES V. OPLE: LA OR INVESTED W/ PU LIC P OLICY
-PIA entered into a contract w/ Filipina stewardess containing a clause which made Pakistani laws
PERSONAL LAW
applicable, and that any dispute should be brought only to Karachi courts. Court held that since labor is
invested with public policy, it cannot be defeated by contractual stipulations and must be protected.
IX. N ATI ONALI T Y
Critiques to public policy technique:
-no rigorous level of analysis: courts just resort to it and could easily disregard applicable law

1a | P R I L F i n a l s R e v i e w e r _ P a n g a l a n g a n
A. I MPO RTA NC E OF P ER SON AL LA W 2. Fathers and mothers are Filipino citizens
3. Born before January 17, 1973 + Filipino mothers + elect Philippine Citizenship upon reaching age of
-permanent connection between an individual and a state majority
4. Naturalized according to law
m 


 6note: #s 1-3 are considered NATURAL-BORN Citizens
-follows an individual wherever he is
-governs transactions which most closely affects the individual
e.g. Marriage 1. NA TUR AL BOR N C IT I ZE NS
Divorce -those who are citizens of a particular state w/o having to perform any act to acquire or perfect
Legitimacy citizenship
Capacity to contract
 Jus soli principle Jus sanguinis principle
°

°
 




m



Looks to the law of the place of one's birth Rule of descent or blood
Merits Demerits
6Establish requisite link between individual and 6does not solve problems relating to You're a citizen of the place of your birth Your citizenship depends on your parents
state >stateless persons
6Each state presumed to make laws based on the >individuals with multiple nationalities Followed in common law countries Followed in the Philippines
population͛s physical and moral qualities 6no decisive solution in diverse legal systems (like
6most of the cases involved are with regards elections because elective public officials from the
6easy to determine nationality of individual by US)
checking documents 6person͛s ties may be attenuated, no shared President down to Governor are required to be natural-born citizens
identity with the nation/state
TALAR OC V. UY: JUS S OLI APPLIED EFORE 1 a5 CONS TI
6in RP: national law = personal law
-Uy was born of Chinese father but of Filipino mother in RP. His nationality was contested for election
purposes. Court held that Uy was a Filipino citizen by virtue of being born in the Philippines, and the
°m 

 






m
mm

adoption of the Jus Sanguinis principle did not effect the exclusion of those who were already considered






citizens. Besides, he already exercised rights which are only attributable to Filipino citizens.
-nationality/citizenship of the individual regulates
6civil status
CO V. HR ET: CHILDREN OF FILIPINO MOTHERS NEED NOT ELECT FILIPINO CITIZENSHIP IF
6capacity
THEY HAD ALREADY ACUIRED NATIONALITY WHEN FATHER NATURALIZED
6condition
-Ong͛s nationality contested, his father being Chinese. Court held that since father was already
6family rights and duties
naturalized before he attained age of majority, he doesn͛t have to elect citizenship.
6successional rights
6capacity to succeed
TECSON V. COMELEC: CONSTITUTION DOES NOT UALIFY CHILDR EN TO LEGITIMATE OR
-origin: French where person͛s private rights determined by political allegiance
ILLEGITIMATE
Cf. Art15: national law of Filipino citizens apply even if they are abroad
-FPJ alleged to have followed nationality of mom. Since he was allegedly born before parents were
Art16: national law of decedent applies as to order of succession, successional rights and intrinsic validity
married, he was deemed an illegitimate child. Court held that the Constitution does not qualify children
of wills
to legitimate or illegitimate, as long as the child͛s father is Filipino, then he acquires citizenship of father
which is Filipino
m
m



 m





PRIL POLI LAW
same Citizens: enjoy full political and civil rights 2. C IT IZ EN S BY N AT URAL I ZAT IO N
Nationals: owe allegiance to the state, entitled to






state͛s protection -confers to an alien a nationality
after birth
DET ER MI NA TIO N OF NAT IO NAL ITY by any of the means provided by law (in RP: CA 473 as amended)
-depends on the municipal laws of each state [Hague Convention on Conflict of National Laws]
 
 

 mm


 







m?



¦ 
m


# 1. AGE: Not less than 21 on date of HEARING the petition (so could file while 20 y.o.)
2. RESIDENCE: resided in RP + Continuously + not less than 10 years prior to application
1. Citizens of the Philippines at the time of adoption of the 1987 Constitution (ratification on Feb 2, 1987;
3. Good moral character
effective Feb 11?)

1¦ | P R I L F i n a l s R e v i e w e r _ P a n g a l a n g a n
Believes in the principles underlying the Philippine Consitution
Must have conducted himself in a proper and irreproachable manner during the entire period of his
residence in RP in his relations w/ the constituted government + community in which he is living
4. ECON: Own real estate + in RP + worth NOT LESS THAN p5K
+ must have some lucrative trade/profession/lawful occupation
5. LANGUAGE: able to SPEAK & WRITE English/Spanish/any one of the principal Philippine languages

-Chinese citizen applying for naturalization was held not qualified because he failed to sufficiently prove
lucrative trade, he having only a small fixed income and the rest of the amounts he allegedly received
were all depended on the profits made by the corporation.
(econ requirement continued)


 


  

6. CHILDREN & SCHOOL: enrolled minor children of school age -substantial gainful employment or the obtaining of tangible receipts
͙in any PUBLIC or PRIVATE SCHOOL recognized by the Bureau of Private Schools -appreciable margin of income over expenses in order to provide for adequate support for himself and
͙where PHILIPPINE HISTORY his family in the event of sickness, unemployment or disability to work
GOVERNMENT\ -his financial condition must be such as to permit him and the members of his family to live with
And CIVICS are taught or prescribed as part of the school curriculum reasonable comfort, in accordance with the prevailing standard of living, and consistently with the
͙during the entire period of the residence required of him (not less than 10 years) demands of human dignity, at this stage of our civilization
͙PRIOR TO HEARING of his PETITION for naturalization as citizen -regard w/ caution if family business

°   
 
 

6 ?ð   -at odds with Article XII, Section 7 of 1987 Consti: "Save in cases of hereditary succession, no private

 enable government to lands shall be transferred or conveyed except to individuals qualified to acquire or hold lands of the
6observe applicant's conduct public domain"
6ensure that applicant has imbibed the principles and spirit of our Consti
$
  Applicant͙ (Section 3, CA 473) GR: Aliens can't own lands
1. honorably held office under Gov't X:
2. Established a new industry or introduced a useful invention in RP 1. Intestate succession (Section 2, BP 185, effective 1982): allowed natural-born citizen who had lost his
3. Married to a Filipino woman Filipino citizenship to be a transferee of a private land for residential purposes
4. Engaged as a teacher (public or private - but not int'l school) for 2 years ...as long as it did not exceed 1,000 m2 (urban)
(note however YEE V. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SCHOOLS, 7 SCRA 832: only Filipino citizens can be 1 ha (rural)
public school teachers) Why intestate: if otherwise, it would allow aliens to circumvent the prohibition by paying money to a
5. Born in RP Philippine landowner in exchange for a devise of a piece of land
. In pari delicto: vendor (who knew that he was selling to an alien) cannot file suit to void sale to an
6 
 alien (who cannot own land, and must have known it)
-requires: a. Foreigner later naturalized as a Filipino: purpose of prohibition is to prevent the patrimony of our
+Good Moral character nation for future generations of Filipinos; since vendee already a Filipino, end would not be frustrated
+conducted self in a PROPER + IRREPROACHABLE manner
m
 

  *ON LANGUAGE REUIREMENTS
-higher standard of morality than good moral character -not enough that applicant understands
-moral character of the highest degree, not enough to be a law-abiding citizen (Dy Lam Go vs. Republic)
-EVIDENCE: testimony of 2 character witnesses *ON MINOR CHILDREN'S EDUCATION REUIREMENTS
>well known in the community and enjoy such a high reputation for probity (honesty/integrity), their 
 for the children to learn and imbibe customs and traditions and ideals of Filipinos to prepare them
word may be taken on its face value for a life of responsible and law abiding citizenship
>can't be employees of the petitioner -should be complied with and proven
>must have known applicant for the period prescribed by law -insufficient finances not an excuse for failing to comply with this requirement
>had opportunity to observe him personally -initial failure to comply with this requirement is a BAR TO SUBSEQUENT PETITION even if during 2nd
>can attest to the possession of the applicant of the qualifications - e.g. proper and irreproachable petition, child no longer of school age (meaning, nakapag-aral na sa ibang school not under the law)
conduct during the entire period of residence -not allowed if predominantly composed of children of a specific race (e.g. Chiang Kai Shek mostly caters
-on consti requirement: not merely recitation BUT BELIEF! Chinese children)

6

°  °

 DI SQ UAL IF IC AT IO N FOR N AT URA LI ZA TIO N
>REAL ESTATE worth P5k (min)
>lucrative trade, profession, lawful occupation GR: state that has the burden of proving disqualification of applicant for citizenship
X: if applicant claims that he is Filipino, has burden of proof͙weird to actually
YU KIAN CHIE VS. REPU LIC: PR OOF OF LU CRATIV E TRADE ¦
 
  - The following cannot be naturalized as Philippine citizens:

15 | P R I L F i n a l s R e v i e w e r _ P a n g a l a n g a n
1. Persons opposed to organized government or affiliated with any association or group of persons who
uphold and teach doctrines opposing all organized governments;
2. Persons defending or teaching the necessity or propriety of violence, personal assault, or assassination
for the success and predominance of their ideas;
3. Polygamists or believers in the practice of polygamy;
4. Persons convicted of crimes involving moral turpitude;
5. Persons suffering from mental alienation or incurable contagious diseases;
6. Persons who, during the period of their residence in the Philippines, have not mingled socially with the
Filipinos, or who have not evinced a sincere desire to learn and embrace the customs, traditions, and
ideals of the Filipinos;
7. Citizens or subjects of nations with whom the United States 2and the Philippines are at war, during the
period of such war;
8. Citizens or subjects of a foreign country other than the United States 3whose laws do not grant
Filipinos the right to become naturalized citizens or subjects thereof.
PROC E DUR E FOR NAT UR ALI ZA TIO N
1. File declaration of intention to become a citizen (unless exempted)
2. File petition for naturalization
3. Publication: in OG or newspaper of general publication
4. Hear petition
5. If approved: rehearing after 2 years after promulgation of judgment awarding naturalization
6. Take oath of allegiance to support and defend Consti + Philippine laws


  
WHEN: 1 year prior to filing of petition
WHERE: w/ OSG
CONTENTS: it is his bona fide intention to become a citizen of RP

 2. Express renunciation of citizenship
1. Born in RP + received primary and secondary education in public schools/private schools recognized by
Government, not limited to any race or nationality
2. Resided continuously in RP for min 30 years before filing their petition
3. Widow and minor children of an applicant for naturalization who died pending petition for
naturalization
-if exempted, still has to file a statement as to his exemption and the reasons therefor to apprise the
public, especially those officers charged with notice of the application, of the reasons advanced to
support exemption claim, to prepare them to contest it - FAILURE TO DO SO IS FATAL
!*()Y&*à '(Y
a. Born in RP: considered RP Citizen
b. Born outside RP, in RP at time of naturalization of parent: AUTOMATIC RP citizen
c. Born outside RP, not in RP at time of naturalization of parent: deemed RP Citizen ONLY during minority
-considered to continue being such after being of age if he begins to permanently reside in RP while still
a minor
d. Born outside RP, AFTER naturalization of parent: considered RP Citizen IFF
6w/n 1 year after reaching age of majority͙
6registers as a Philippine Citizen AT THE AMERICAN CONSULATE of the country where he resides
6takes necessary oath of allegiance
VIVO V. CLORI EL: WIFE OF APPLICANT FOR NATURALIZATION S HOULD ALSO E
UALIFIED HERSELF FOR NATURALIZATION
-wife and children of applicant for naturalization was to be deported, so argued that they would soon be
naturalized too by virtue of the granting of naturalization by husband. Court held that the wife should
separately be qualified for naturalization and the children should have dwelled in the Philippines for
naturalization to be granted, but as in this case they were not so qualified, they can be deported.
MO YA LIM VS. COMMISSIONER OF IMMIGRATION: MARRIAGE TO A FILIPINO MAKES HER
A FILIPINO CITIZEN
-Chinese woman stayed here temporarily to visit relative but got married. Court held that by virtue of
her marriage, she is now a Filipino citizen (note: reversed)
URCA V. R EPU LIC: NO JUDICIAL DECLARATION OF CITIZENSHIP
-foreigner should still apply
LOSS OF PH IL IPP IN E C IT IZ E NSH I P
CA 63, amended by RA 106: ways through which a Filipino may lose his citizenship:
1. naturalization in foreign countries
3. Upon reaching 21 years or more, subscribing to an oath of allegiance to support the constitution or
laws of a foreign country, subject to exceptions
4. Rendering service/accepting commission in armed forces of a foreign country
5. Having declared by competent authority a DESERTER of AFP in time of war, unless plenary pardon or
amnesty granted
6. WOMAN: marriage to a foreigner (if laws of her husband makes her their national)
7. Cancellation of certificate of naturalization
PROBL EM S IN A PPL YI NG N AT ION ALI TY PR I NC IPL E
 
m


: RTC of the province in which petitioner has resided for at least 1 year
immediately preceding the filing of the petition
-RTC has exclusive jurisdiction
1. DU AL OR M ULT IPL E C IT IZ EN SH I P

 





 




?$¦
 Hague Convention on Conflict of National Laws: each state determines who its own nationals are
%* '/Y -so it is possible that in accordance with the internal laws of 2 states, an individual is considered a citizen
-married (before or after naturalization of husband/citizen of Philippines) of both states
-herself lawfully qualified to be naturalized (issue: WON comply with Qualifications ONLY or both e.g.
QUALIFICATIONS and DISQUALIFICATIONS) - application of jus soli and jus sanguinis: country of parents apply jus sanguinis, country where born
apply jus soli

16 | P R I L F i n a l s R e v i e w e r _ P a n g a l a n g a n
- Filipino citizen marries an alien whose laws provide that the spouse of their citizens also becomes their UYTENGSU V. REPU LIC: RESIDENCE AND DOMICILE DIFFERENT IN TERMS OF
citizens (but note, as in Aznar's case: if no express renunciation on the part of the Filipino, still NATURALIZATION
considered a Filipino Citizen) -applicant for naturalization filed application while on vacation from studying abroad. Court held that he
- Naturalized in another state but no express renunciation of the native state is not qualified even if he resided in RP for more than 30 years because actual and substantial residence
required.
Article IV, Section 5: Discourage dual or multiple nationalities: dual allegiance is inimical to the national
Residence Domicile
interest and shall be dealt withby law
"Effective Nationality": test to determine rights of an individual who may claim multiple nationality in a
Involves intent to leave when the purpose for which he has taken up his No intent to leave, but
third state
abode ceases : animo manendi
6pleasure
NOTTE OHM CAS E: GENUINE LINK CASE
6business
-Although naturalized in Liechtenstein, he had no genuine link with the state so the state cannot protect
6health
his interests
-when there are some issues which are to be determined by one's state laws, apply the law of the Place from which one's departure is indefinite as to time, definite as to
effective nationality purpose and for which purpose he has made the place his


Y.

Act Act + intent

2. STA TEL ES SN ES S

   : a temporary place of remaining : home
1.Y De Jure: individual is stripped of his nationality by his own government w/o the opportunity
to acquire a new one
2.Y De Facto: still a national but whose country of nationality cannot protect him outside the MER IT S AN D D EM ERI TS OF DO MIC I LE
territory
Merits Demerits
e.g. War refugees
KOOKOORITCHKIN V. SOLGEN: STATELESS PERS ONS DOESN͛T REUIRE THAT THEIR 6More useful in commonlaw countries 6not easily ascertainable (as requires
COUNTRY EXTEND RECIPROCAL RIGHTS TO FILIPINOS RE: NATURALIZATION 6serves as adequate basis for the exercise of rights determination of animus manendi)
-former citizen of Empire of Russia fled to Manila due to the revolt of the Bolsheviks, and has disowned and for the state to impose duties on him 6different notions of domicile
any allegiance to the new Soviet Union. Court held that he is not required to show that his former state 6connection with domicile may be attenuated
extends the same right to acquire citizenship as he is already a stateless person.
When LAW of DOMICILE resorted to:
1.Y Where litigant = alien + dispute involves
X. D OMI CIL E a.Y Personal status
b.Y Capacity
c.Y Family rights
DEF I NI TIO N
(so instead of national law in A15, law of domicile if alien involved)
  2.Y Stateless persons/ persons with dual or multiple nationalities
ðMUNICIPAL LAW: 3.Y Wills executed by r\esident aliens (basically replace national law as to successional rights͙in
6natural persons (Art 60, NCC): For exercise of civil rights and fulfillment of civil obligations = PLACE OF A15 with law of domicile)
HABITUAL RESIDENCE 4.Y Revocation of wills outside RP: validity of revocation
6Juridical persons (Art51, NCC):
GR: determined by the LAW CREATING OR RECOGNIZING IT
GEN ERAL R ULE S ON D OM IC IL E
(if none): PLACE WHERE THEIR LEGAL REPRESENTATION/PLACE OF BUSINESS
1.Y no person shall be w/o a domicile
-CONFLICT OF LAWS: 2.Y A person cannot have 2 simultaneous domicile since the 
Y
Y
Y 
 Y1Y
6Technical meaning:   Y Y
Y
" YY
Y"
Y
Y
Y YY  
YY
.
(1) intention to make it one's domicile But since different notions of domicile in different courts:
(2) physical presence A person can have only one domicile for a given purpose or a given time under the law of a
particular state, but it should not be assumed that that determination will be binding on other
Vs. RESIDENCE: bodily presence enough states or on the same state for other purposes (domicile relative to the purpose)
3.Y Domicile establishes a connection between a person and a particular territorial unit

17 | P R I L F i n a l s R e v i e w e r _ P a n g a l a n g a n
 4.Y The burden of proving a change of domicile is upon whoever alleges that a change has been
Less easily shaken
secured. (favor continuance of existing domicile)
Not lost by mere abandonment an remains until Acquired upon concurrence of amimo et facto (fact
ROMUALDEZðMAR COS CASE: DOMICILE OF ORIGIN NOT EASILY LOST
replaced by a domicile of choice and intention)
-Mrs. Marcos allegedly was not qualified because she failed to satisfy the residence requirements. Court
Deemed extinguished by removal of intent even prior
held that residence = domicile in election law, and her domicile is not lost merely by living somewhere
to acquisition of a new domicile
else.
>domicile of origin is presumed to have been revived
- domicile of origin is not easily lost, must demonstrate:
(
)
6actual removal from domicile
6bona fide intention of abandoning the former place of residence and establishing a new one 
 violates fundamental principle of domicile: a person retains his old
6acts w/c corresponds w/ purpose
UJANO V. REPU LIC: RESIDENCY R EUIREMENT IN NATURALIZATION
-a former Filipino citizen naturalized as a US citizen went back to US and applied for reacquisition of
citizenship. Court held that he is deemed not to have complied with the residency requirement because

°

 
 ° 
  
an alien who has been admitted into this country as a temporary visitor, either for business or pleasure,
or for reasons of health, though actually present in this country CANNOT BE SAID TO HAVE ESTABLISHED
HIS DOMICILE HERE BECAUSE THE PERIOD OF HIS STAY IS ONLY TEMPORARY IN NATURE AD MUST LEAVE
WHEN THE PURPOSE OF HIS COMING IS ACCOMPLISHED.
IN RE: DORRANCE ES TATE: MOTIVE DOES NOT V OID DOMICILE
-owner of Campbell soup was alleged to have established a domicile in Pennsylvania but he intended to
establish domicile in another place. Court held that the expression of intention to have a domicile in
another place does not void the fact that he has performed acts establishing actual presence in that
state and has intention to stay in another place.
KI ND S OF DO M IC IL E
domicile until a new domicile of choice is secured and established upon concurrence of fact and
intention
-applied by US courts when person en route to his domicile of origin
m
*degree of permanence of abode
-kaya state intention in the negative: as long as there is NO INTENTION to return to the old domicile, a
new domicile is created, whether the intention to remain is for the rest of one's life or for an indefinite
period or for the time being at least
*length of time and motive that prompted a person to change his domicile: irrelevant in determining
WON a new domicile has been acquired
-motive only relevant to gauge the genuineness of the intent to acquire a new domicile
VELILIA V. POSADAS (LEPROS Y CASE): LENGTH OF TIME DETERMINATIVE OF DOMICILE
-a guy with Leprosy who was a resident of the Philippines and had stocks here went to Paris and Calcutta
for treatment and wrote that he intend to leave the Philippines. Upon his death, his property are being
taxed by RP, saying that his domicile is still RP. Court held that even if he intended to leave his domicile
in RP, his actual stay in India and in Paris are merely temporary and would not constitute the presence


 required to establish a new domicile
1.Y Domicile of Origin -abandonment of one's domicile: there must be deliberate and provable choice of a new domicile,
2.Y Domicile of Choice coupled with 
Y

 in the place chosen, with a declared or provable intent that it should be
3.Y Constructive Domicile one's fixed and permanent place of abode, one's home.

1. DO MIC ILE OF OR IG IN
-person's domicile at birth
>legitimate child: follow domicile of father
>illegitimate child: follow domicile of mother
2. DO MIC ILE F C H OIC E/VOL UN TAR Y DO MIC ILE
-place freely chosen by a person  Y
 (emancipated)
-concurrence of:
1. Physical presence in the new place
2. Unqualified intention to make that place one's home
Domicile of origin
Vs.
WHITE VS. TENANT: LENGTH OF STAY NOT DETERMINATIVE OF DOMICILE, AS LONG AS
INTENT CLEARLY ESTA LISHED
-H & W intended to leave old domicile, even sold their house and transferred all their belongings to the
new intended domicile. However, W got sick in new domicile so W stayed in old domicile while in the
day, H tended to their flock in the new domicile. H died instead of W. Question was the applicable law
for successional rights ʹ domicile of decedent ʹ whether the old or the new domicile. Court held that the
new domicile, though length of stay there not that long, was clearly established when intent to establish
new domicile established.
3. C O NS TRUC TIV E DO MIC ILE
Domicile of choice -domicile assigned by operation of law

Staunchest presumption in favor of its a.Y Minors

continuance, -follows domicile of their parent:
More enduring, LEGIT: father

18 | P R I L F i n a l s R e v i e w e r _ P a n g a l a n g a n
 ILLEGIT: mother - Capacity to engage in legal transactions
AFTER DEATH OF FATHER: mother - Protection of personal interests
AFTER DEATH OF FATHER, MOTHER REMARRIES: now, under A212, FC, even after - Family relations:
mother remarries, no effect on parental authority so minors still follow domicile of their § Husband and wife
mother § Parent and child
...BEFORE:Art 328 (1) provides that if widow mother remarries, she loses parental § Guardian and ward
autorithy over her kids) - kids retained the domicile they had before his widowed mother - Transactions of family law:
remarried until he voluntarily changed it upon reaching majority age § Marriage
-basis: parental authority § Divorce
§ Separation
b.Y Persons with Mental Disability (idiot/insane) § Adoption
GR: if with mental disability, cannot acquire domicile of choice because of inherent inability to § Legitimation
decide where to make his home § emancipation
X: if it is shown that a person with mental disability is capable of understanding his act and its - Succession
consequences = can acquire domicile of choice, though not competent to enter into all -taken from ROMAN DOCTRINE OF
aspects of civil life 

Y "


/ freedom


Y 

/ citizenship
m 
m
°
 ° 
   

Y  / position as head of the house/ free person subject to the pater familia
?m  
-no freedom of choice so cannot have domicile of choice 






e.g. Military personnel
JURIDICAL CAPACITY CAPACITY TO ACT
prisoners
persons with disabilities
Y
Y
Y"Y"
YYY

Y r*2'Y 
Y
Y Y
Y
YY
Yr-*2'Y
CARA ALLO V. REPU LIC: MILITARY PERSONNEL CAN͛ T ACUIRE RESIDENCE *

Y Y
Y

Y
Y #
 Y
-Military personnel assigned in Clark airbase wanted to adopt a Filipino child. Court held that since the
law requires that an alien be a resident alien, and since he cannot acquire residence if he did not à
YY

Y 
Y !Y"Y
Y
voluntarily chose his residence, then not qualified to adopt.
6note however that new cases rule that persons deemed to be under compulsion could now establish a Art15: National laws determine personal status and capacity of Filipinos even if abroad
permanent abode once prove the intention to do so and was not merely compel to stay at the place So if aliens: depend what the PRIL rules of their nation provide (WON national law or law of domicile)

°
 RECTO V. HARDEN (STATUS AND DISSOLUTION OF MARRIAGE DETERMINED Y NATIONAL
Before: wife follows domicile of husband LAW)
Now: Art69, FC: both husband and wife fix family domicile. In case of disagreement, 

Y Y   -US citizens wanted to acquire divorce, W procured services of Filipino lawyer. Lawyer now collects AF
but W now argues that the contract to defend her in preparation for divorce unlawful in RP, so cannot be
DELA VINA V. VILLAREAL: W CAN ES TA LISH DOMICILE SEP ARATE FROM H enforced here. Court held that as the parties who were to acquire divorce are allowed to do so under
-H brought kerida in family domicile so W left him, filed divorce in place of new domicile. Court held that their national law, then the contract is enforceable.
w͛s domicile need not be the same as her H͛s if H gave cause for divorce.
6note: if this case decided using modern view, no need to show that H gave cause for divorce as each LEGI SLA TIV E V S. J U DIC IAL J UR IS DIC TIO N
spouse may establish separate domicile
6Status, once established by the personal law of the party, is given universal recognition. Other states
cannot add nor diminish the status (UNIVERSALITY OF STATUS)
XI. P R IN CIP LES O N P ER S ONAL S TA TU S AN D CAP A CI TY 6if aliens sue before RP courts
JUDICIAL JURISDICTION: apply procedural rules relevant to status and capacity
LEGISLATIVE JURISDICTION: apply personal law of the alien to determine status and capacity
DEF I NI TIO N
(so RP courts can exercise jurisdiction over disputes but would use personal law of the aliens to
m



general term determine the status and capacity of the aliens)
-includes both condition and capacity
-embraces: ARNUEVO V. FUSTER: DIV ORCE DECR EE GRANTED Y RP COURTS
- Beginning and end of human personality -Spanish subjects married in Spain wanted to acquire divorce in RP. Court held that they could validly
- Capacity to have rights in general issue a divorce decree even if it was not allowed under RP laws. RP Courts could exercise judicial

1 |P R I L F i n a l s R e v i e w e r _ P a n g a l a n g a n
jurisdiction over the case (which court would acquire jurisdiction, what procedure should be observed) 5YrY
YY"
YYY
Y 
YYYY
YY
Y Y Y  YYY
Y"Y
but not RP laws but Spanish laws (so no Legislative jurisdiction over the dispute) 
YY
Y8Y
Y Y
YYY
YY
Y
Y
6note: if decided now, Court could not issue divorce decree because it͛s against public policy 9YrY
Y Y
Y
 Y
YYY
4Y

Y Y
Y YY"Y  Y
Y8Y
Y
:YrY
YYY"Y Y 
YY 
Y 
Y

Y

Y Y Y 
YY
Y"Y
BEGI N NI NG A ND E N D O F PER SO NAL IT Y 4Y
Y8Y
Y
Family Code Presumptions (for purposes of Marriage):



personal law 
¦?Y
  Y
Y3Y
Y
Y8Y
Y
Y
Y8Y
Y
Y Y

Y
Y9Y
Y
m birth determines personality ;"
Y
YY

Y
Y

Y 


YY
Y
 Y
Y
Y 

YY

Y
 
YY
Y"
YY$Y$Y
Y"#
Y

Y Y Y"Y 
Y


  

¦ð¦?

6 If born normal (9 months): if born alive at time completely delivered from mother's womb (even if dies Summary of periods
later after a few hours) GR: 7 years (for all other purposes)
6 If w/ intra-uterine life of less than 7 months: alive at least 24 hours after complete delivery from X:
maternal womb 1. Succession
6 If fetus: considered a person for all purposes favorable to it, provided it be born later (depends on the GR: 10 years
intra-uterine life - see above) X: if lost when above 75 y.o.: 5 years
2. Special circumstances: 4 years:
GELUZ V. CA: A OR TED FETUS NOT CONSIDERED A PERSON EVEN FOR PURPOSES a. On board a vessel lost during a sea voyage, not been heard of
ENEFICIAL TO IT SINCE IT IS NOT ORN ALIVE b. On board a plane which is missing, not been heard of
-W had 3 abortions performed by defendant doctor. H sued doctor for damages sustained because of c. Was in the armed forces and has taken part in war, missing
taking of life of unborn child. Court held that the aborted fetus is not considered born for purposes d. Has been in danger of death under other circumstances, existence not been known
beneficial to it because it is not born alive. Plus no damages could accrue to the parents, but parents may 3. For purposes of contracting a subsequent marriage
have a separate COA for damages to them for distress and anguish for loss of child. However, no GR: 4 years
damages awarded because H knew of abortion. X: 2 years



 °

upon death (irrelevant if national law or law of domicile) 

 


Effect of death: some rights may be extinguished, some may be passed on to heirs 6legal effects of absence
6restrictions on the absentee's capacity to act
LIMJOCO V. INTES TATE ESTATE OF FRAGRANTE: ESTATE MAY E DEEMED A PERSON
-Decedent had pending application for CPC before he died. Court held that the CPC may be awarded to
NA ME
any ͞person͟, and that person may be a natural person or a juridical person.
-in RP: name cannot be changed w/o judicial intervention
ABSE NC E 6NCC: rules on what surnames to use
6ROC: procedure on how to change name, as amended by RA 9048
-steps to deal w/ absence:
1. There's a rebuttable presumption that a person is dead when he has been absent for a number of  ° 





 


m



years 1. Ridiculous or tainted w/ dishonor or extremely difficult to pronounce
2. A person's unexplained absence is judicially investigated and established which results in legal effects 2. Change is necessary to avoid confusion
similar to those of death 3. The right to a new name is a consequence of a change in status
3. A judicial decree shall have to be issued declaring the person dead before legal effects of death take 4. Sincere desire to adopt a Filipino name to erase signs of a former alien nationality w/c unduly hamper
place social and business life

Civil Code Presumptions: Personal law determines WON person can validly change name


Yr

Y
Y"YY3Y
Y
Y" Y4Y

Y
Y
Y
Y"
Y
Y YYY
"Y
 Y  Y
YY
Y
Y
Y
YY Y
AGE OF MAJ OR ITY
-Y"
YY
Y"Y
 Y  Y
Y
Y
YY Y Y Y
Y

YY"Y
Y56Y
Y*YY 
 Y

Y
YYY37Y
YY"YY7Y
YY"Y  
Y Y

Y -determined by personal law


Y Y YY"Y Y -effects of emancipation:


?Y-Y YY"Y
 Y  Y
YY
Y  Y
Y   YY
Y

Y - Parental authority ceases
Y
Y
/Y - Now qualified and responsible for all acts of civil life
Exceptions: A46, PD 603

0 | P R I L F i n a l s R e v i e w e r _ P a n g a l a n g a n
-RA 6809: age of majority lowered to 18 from 21 BUT parental consent still needed for marriages of ͙in the presence of a solemnizing officer and 2 witnesses of legal age
couples below 21 -that they take each other as husband and wife

C APAC I TY TO AC T AS A SPECIAL CONTRACT:

(1) entered by a man and a woman
GR: governed by  

 because it is in the best position to decide what RESTRICTIONS may be (2) contracting parties must be at least 18 years of age
imposed on the individual (3) solemnized by a person specially authorized by law
-restrictions determine legal position of the person (4) a permanent union
6INCAPACITIES ATTACHED TO THE LEGAL STATUS OF AN INDIVIDUAL GO W/ HIM WHEREVER HE IS unless one of the parties dies
(because it depends on his personal law) Or marriage is annulled or declared void in special circumstances
- But all persons must first ascertain the legal capacity of the other party before contracting (5) it cannot be abrogated, amended or terminated by one or both parties at will
with him (but this is nearly impossible) (6) the nature and consequences as well as the incidents are governed by law and not subject to
X: stipulation by the parties (will of the parties not paramount)
1. TORT: law of the place of the tort (7) violation of marital obligations may give rise to penal or civil sanctions (unlike ordinary contracts,
2. MARRIED WOMEN: some jurisdictions subject restrictions on the capacity of married women to which at most could lead to action for damages)
contract - does not follow personal law of the wife but the law which govern the marital relations of the
spouses
3. A person may be capacitated to act in accordance with his personal law but the place where the PH ILI PP IN E POL IC Y ON MARR IAG E A ND TH E FA MIL Y
contract is to be performed does not consider him capable of contracting ArtXV, Sec, 1 87 Consti: Marriage as an inviolable social institution is the foundation of the family and
shall be protected by the state.
INSULAR GOV͛T V. FRANK: DISPUTES AS TO VALIDITY OF CONTRACT DETERMINED Y LEX
LOCI CONTRACTUS Art220, NCC: Presumption of validity of marriage
-Frank was capacitated to enter contract in own state, but not in RP. He defaulted, so RP wants to "In case of doubt,
enforce the contract but Frank alleged as defense that he is not capacitated to enter contract in RP. All presumptions favor the solidarity of the family.
Court held that the validity of the contract is determined by lex loci contractus, and since the contract Thus every intendment of law or facts leans towad the
was executed in US where he has capacity to contract. ͻ Validity of marriage
6note however that if this case was decided using personal law, the same result would have been ͻ The indissolubility of marriage bonds
acquired. ͻ The legitimacy of children
ͻ The community of property during marriage
CHOICE OF LAW PROBLEMS ͻ The authority of parents over their children
ͻ And the validity of defense for any member of the family in case of unlawful aggression
XII. CH OI CE O F LAW IN FA MILY R EL ATI ONS

 
    
-reflects strong policies of the state anchored on values and mores highly held by society ͻ Solidarity of the family
ͻ Importance of family
MARR IA GE ͻ Paramount interest of the state in preserving it

Art1, FC: Marriage defined

-a special contract EXTR I NS IC V ALI DI TY OF MARR IA GE
-of permanent union
-between a man and a woman Extrinsic validity Intrinsic validity
-entered into in accordance with law
-for the establishment of conjugal and family life. Lex loci celebrationis/law of the place of celebration (as also mentioned in ART, Personal law of the
-It is the foundation of the family HAGUE CONVENTION ON CELE RATION AND RECOGNITION OF THE VALIDITY OF parties
-and an inviolable social institution whose nature, consequences, and incidents are governed by law and MARRIAGES)
not subject to stipulation,
Except that marriage settlements may fix the property relations during the marriage within limits Art6, FC:
provided by this Code "all marriages solemnized outside the Philippines
In accordance with the laws in force in the country where they were solemnized
Art15, NCC: Family rights and duties [of Filipinos] determined by national law And valid there as such,
AS A CONTRACT: a mere declaration by the contracting parties

1 | P R I L F i n a l s R e v i e w e r _ P a n g a l a n g a n
 CC:
Shall also be valid in this country."
1. Bigamous
2. Polygamous
Formalities Capacity of the
3. Incestuous
External conduct required of the parties or 3p necessary to the formation of a parties to marry
legally valid marriage (see it later)
FC (adds):
a. If under aged (below 18)
Art3, FC: Formal requirements of marriage:
b. Bigamous/polygamous
1.Y Authority of solemnizing officer
c. Subsequent marriage after annulment/declaration of nullity w/o recording in Civil Registry and
2.Y Valid marriage license except in cases provided in Chapter 2
Registry of properties the JUDGMENT, the partition and distribution of properties of spouses and
3.Y Marriage ceremony:
delivery of children's presumptive legitimes
a.Y Appearance of the contracting parties before the solemnizing officer
d. Mistake in identity of contracting parties
b.Y Personal declaration that they take each other as husband and wife
e. Psychological incapacity
in the presence of not less than 2 witnesses of legal age
f. Marriage is incestuous
g. Void by reason of public policy
ADONG V. CHEONG SENG GEE: SHOULD PR OVE THAT MARRIAGE VALID AS TO FOR MAL
REUISITES IN FOREIGN COUNTRY FOR IT TO E RECOGNIZED AS VALID IN RP
nd IN TRI NS IC V AL ID ITY O F MA RRI AGE
-Chinese marriage alleged to make the alleged 2 marriage bigamous. Court held that since the Chinese
nd  

marriage was not duly proven, alleged 2 marriage not bigamous.
-how to establish a valid foreign marriage: -capacity/general ability of a person to marry (age, parental consent)
a. Prove existence of foreign law as a question of fact -controlled by personal law
b. Prove the alleged foreign marriage by convincing evidence
In RP:
PEOPLE V. MORA DUMPO: FORMAL R EUISITES OF MARRIAGE S HOULD E COMPLIED 1. At least 18 years old
WITH 2. Not barred by any impediment to marry each other
-Bigamy case filed against a mora but mora asserted a defense that the formal requisites were not 3. Consent freely given in the presence of authorized solemnizing officer
nd
complied with. Court held that since formal requisites not complied with, the 2 marriage was not valid, MATRIMONIAL CONSENT: parties are not ignorant that the marriage is a permanent union
thus no bigamy.
 ° 

 m
m



WONG WOO V. VIV O: PR OCESSUAL PRESUMP TION MAY E USED IN PLACE OF FOREIGN 1. Collateral BLOOD relatives, legit or illegit, up to 4th civil degree (includes 1st cousins͙)
LAW 2. Step-parents and stepchildren
-Chinese woman admitted to RP allegedly because she was the wife of a Filipino. Marriage in China not 3. Parents-in-law and children-in-law
proven to be valid under Chinese laws. Court held that applying processual presumption, the person who 4. Adopting parent and adopted child
solemnized the marriage is not a person authorized by law so the Chinese marriage was not deemed as 5. Surviving spouse of adopting parent and adopted child
valid. 6. Surviving spose of adopted child and adopter
7. Adopted child and legitimate child of adopter
APT V. APT: PR OXY MARRIAGE = FORMALITY OF MARRIAGE 8. Adopted children of same adopter
-Proxy marriage celebrated in Argentina where it was allowed between German nationals. Court held 9. Between parties where one killed the spouse of the other so that the latter would be his or her spouse
that the marriage was valid because Argentian law, lex loci celebrationis, allows such marriage
ceremony. °

 ?   
-used to be incestuous and void but now not deemed incestuous BUT STILL VOID for being against public
There may be instances where even if the marriage is allowed to be celebrated in accordance with the policy
law of the state (extrinsic requisites all complied with), the marriage is still void for lack of capacity to the -not considered void in some countries, it's even allowed under the Code of Canon Law of the Catholic
parties to contract the marriage (intrinsic requisites) in accordance with their personal laws. This is Church PROVIDED there's DISPENSATION + it's allowed in the country
allowed though because: -since capacity to marry is governed by lex nationalii in RP + presumption of validity of marriage, if the
first cousins who got married are foreigners and their law allows such marriage, then it should be
Extrinsic validity Intrinsic validity considered valid
SOTTOMAYOR V. DE ARROS: VALIDITY OF MARRIAGE ETWEEN 1ST COUSINS
Lex loci celebrationis Lex nationalii
DETERMINED Y PERS ONAL LAW
Examples:

 | P R I L F i n a l s R e v i e w e r _ P a n g a l a n g a n
 st
-Portuguese 1 cousins married in London. Court held that since personal law of parties (Portuguese law) EFF EC T OF M ARR IAG ES
st
does not allow marriages between 1 cousins, marriage is void. Although London (place of the
celebration of marriage) allows marriage between first cousins, lex loci celebrationis only governs formal m 

    
requisites of marriage and capacity to marry refers to intrinsic validity of marriage  

 
6mutual fidelity
IN RE MAY͛S ESTATE: FOLLOWED LEX LOCI CONTRACTUS EVEN IF NO CAPACITY TO MARRY 6mutual respect
-Uncle and niece domiciled in NY where marriage between them are penalized and prohibited got 6cohabitation
married in Rhodes Island under Jewish tradition (where marriage allowed). Court held that since the 6support
marriage is not prohibited by positive law (NY law cannot govern marriage outside its jurisdiction) and its 6right of wife to use the husband's family name
not against natural law, then marriage valid. --governed by NATIONAL LAW

m
m
m   


 
-an excuse a state may use to deem a marriage void GR: national law of husband
GR: marriages which are manifestly incompatible w/ the 

Y"  of the state of which the parties are X: contrary to law, customs, good morals of the forum
nationals may be refused recognition.
X: the existence or non-existence of the foreign marriage is merely a PRELIMINARY QUESTION that ART 69, FC: Both husband and wife has right to fix family domicile (so W does not have to follow
arises incidentally (issue does not profane the mores of the forum - tax, property, succession) automatically what H would want)

IN RE: DALIP SINGH: POLYGAMOUS MARRIAGE MERELY INCIDENTAL UES TION IN
DETERMINING SU CCESSIONAL RIGHTS
-Indian married 2 wives, order of marriage not ascertainable and having 2 wives allowed under Indian
law. Court held that since the main issue is the determination of the successional rights of the wives and
not the validity of their marriages, the marriages are valid and both of them deemed to have
successional rights.
DJUMANTAN V. DOMINGO: ACUISITION OF DOMICILE OF WIFE NOT AU TOMATICALLY
DEPENDENT ON HUS AND͛S DOMICILE
-Indonesian W married Filipino H, thus, joined him here. But since overstaying, she was to be deported.
Court held that she would be deported, her marriage to a Filipino not automatically conferring upon her
the right to permanent residency in RP and not automatically withdrawing her from operation of
immigration laws.

° 
 
 

   m m



 m 
ART9, Hague Convention on Validity of Marriages: HAGUE CONVENTION ON THE LAW APPLICABLE TO MATRIMONIAL PROPERTY REGIMES:
marriage celebrated by a diplomatic agent/consular official 1. internal law designated by spouses before marriage (prenuptial agreement)
͙in accordance w/ his state law (State A's) 2. If #1 none: internal law of the state in which both spouses fix their 1st habitual residence
͙shall be considered VALID
͙as long as it is not prohibited by the state of celebration (State B) m
GR: Property relations of spouses governed by RP Law regardless of place of celebration of marriage and
m
°

  
 
  their residence (even if they went abroad to celebrate marriage, even if they stayed there)

 
 X:
ͻ Consul general 1. Both spouses are ALIENS
ͻ Consul 2. Extrinsic validity of contracts: property located outside RP (in State A) + contract executed in state A
ͻ Vice consul 3. Extrinsic validity of contracts: property in State A whose laws require different formalities for extrinsic
-formal and intrinsic requirements under RP law will have to be followed validity of contracts + contract executed in RP
Formal: ͙generally follow lex rei situs (as stated in Article 16, NCC)
Ø Valid marriage license ͙as long as at least 1 of the spouses is Filipino (if both are aliens, then under exception!)
Ø Due publication and registration ͙PRINCIPLE OF IMMUTABILITY: even if the Filipino changed nationality after marriage, property regime
will remain unchanged - in accordance w/ ART7, HAGUE CONVENTION ON MATRIMONIAL PROPERTY
If 1 party is an Alien: REGIMES: the applicable law continues notwithstanding any change of nationality or habitual residence
Ø Alien should comply with marriage requisites under his national law
Ø Should submit a certificate of legal capacity to contract marriage issue by his diplomatic or consular DIVO RC E A ND S EPA RAT IO N
office
DIVORCE
If it concerns Stateless persons/ refugees: instead of certificate from diplomatic/consular office, submit
1. Absolute: termination of the legal relationship between spouses by an act of law
an affidavit stating the circumstances showing such legal capacity to contract marriage
2. Relative divorce/ legal separation: separation from bead and board
-does not effect the dissolution of the marital ties
-relieve spouses of duty of living w/ each other

a | P R I L F i n a l s R e v i e w e r _ P a n g a l a n g a n
 nd
-not necessarily affect economic rights and duties: court may order one to provide for the still no FC, validity of foreign laws established by jurisprudence, thus 2 marriage is deemed to have
support of the other or of their common children    
 
  been terminated.
   % 

REPU LIC V. O RECIDO: DIV ORCE O TAINED Y NATURALIZED FORMER FILIPINO
m
   -W was naturalized, obtained divorce of Filipino spouse. Court held that A26.2,FC applicable also to
ͻ Recognition of the divorce decree instances where one of Filipino spouses become naturalized then obtains divorce. Reckoning point is the
ͻ Division of marital property citizenship at the time of divorce.
ͻ Claim to custody of the children
ͻ Provisions for the support of a dependent spouse and children
2. V ALI DI TY OF FORE IG N D IVORC E B ET WEE N FO RE IGN ERS
DIVORCE JURISDICTION: domicile of one of the parties (Matrimonial domicile): reasons why: Contracting state would recognize divorce if [Hague Convention]:
-divorce, being a matter of concern of the state, should be controlled by the law of the place w/ w/c the a.Y Parties had habitual residence at the contracting state which would recognize divorce
person is most intimately concerned, the place where he dwelleth and hath his home b.Y Both spouses were nationals of the contracting state; or
-substantial contact w/ relationship c.Y Petitioner of divorce national + resident

GROUNDS FOR DIVORCE: lex fori (determined by the law of the forum) In RP: RP courts could recognize foreign divorce between foreigners as long as not violative of public
policy of RP

1. DIV ORC E D EC RE ES OB TA IN ED BY FIL IP INO S

AN NUL ME NT A N D DEC L ARA TI ON OF NUL LIT Y
-not valid
-not recognized in RP -status and domestic relations of parties
-BUT if it is between Filipino + alien: Alien can obtain divorce if susceptible to it (ONLY THE ALIEN CAN
OBTAIN THE DIVORCE, NOT THE FILIPINO) mm




°

 


°




 




Effect: Alien, as well as Filipino, can remarry Grounds: exists at the time of celebration of marriage
ART6, FC IF TRADITIONAL APPROACH: lex loci celebrationis determine applicable law
- partial recognition of absolute divorce in RP IF POLICY-CENTERED/MOST SIGNIFICANT CONTACTS APPROACH: law of the marital domicile
-remedies the situation wherein even if Filipino is already divorced from Alien spouse and alien spouse
has already remarried, Filipino still remains married to the said alien spouse under RP law PARE NT AL REL AT ION S


° 

TENCHAVEZ V. ESCANO: DIVOR CE O TAINED Y FILIPINO CITIZENS
-depends on the personal law of the parents
-Former Filipino citizen married obtained divorce while still a Filipino citizen and got naturalized only
-usu: personal law of the father - and this is shared by many for "preservation of the stability of the
after divorce obtained. Court held divorce decree obtained by Filipino citizens not valid, but if obtained it
family"
after being naturalized, may be valid.
INCLUDES
VAN DORN V. R OMILO: FOREIGN DIVOR CE DISSOLVES COMMUNITY PROPERTY
6 Paternity -Civil status of the father/mother w/ respect to the child begotten by him (or her)
-Foreigner who filed for divorce sues for accounting of the conjugal property. Court held that divorce
6Filiation - status of the child in relation to his parents
decree dissolved conjugal property, thus, nothing more to account.

m
PILAPIL V. I AYðSOMERA: FOREIGN DIV ORCE DISSOLVES MARITAL TIES
Legitimacy of child
-Foreigner who obtained divorce decree sued ex-wife for adultery. Court held that since marital ties
-same nationality: national law of parents
dissolved, no longer any ground for adultery.
ð 

 


 
?$

UITA V. CA: DETERMINE WHEN NATURALIZED TO DETERMINE WON DIV ORCE ALLOWED
-former Filipino wife divorced husband but not clear WON she was already naturalized when she did. DET ER MI NA TIO N OF LE GIT I MAC Y O F A C H ILD
Court remanded the case to determine WON she obtained divorce decree when she was still a Filipino
ART 16a: TYPES OF FILIATION
(thus, divorce void) or when she was already a US Citizen (divorce valid)
a.Y By Nature: legitimate or illegitimate
b.Y By adoption
SAN LUIS V. SAN LUIS: VALIDITY OF FOREIGN DIVOR CE PRIOR TO FC
st nd ART 16¦: KINDS OF LEGITIMATE CHILDREN
-decedent contracted 3 marriages: 1 marriage W predeceased him; 2 marriage foreigner W divorced
rd a.Y CONCEIVED AND ORN NATURALLY
him; 3 wife spent end of his days with him but marriage not duly proven. Court held that even if there͛s
ðduring the marriage

¦ | P R I L F i n a l s R e v i e w e r _ P a n g a l a n g a n
b.Y CONCEIVED AS A RESULT OF ARTIFICIAL INSEMINATION
Who's sperm: m   m

 
 
 ° 

þY HusbandY Problem: if adopter and adoptee had different domiciles, which would exercise jurisdiction? What law
þY DonorY would be applied?
þY othY GR: Child's personal law determine validity of adoption, regardless of jurisdiction
Conditions: -why: main object is to provide for the welfare of the child, ensure that his interest is well-protected
i.Both H & W should execute and sign a WRITTEN INSTRUMENT authorizing or ratifying the -problem: when personal law does not create substantial contacts with child (law of domicile but child is
insemination merely constructively domiciled in that place or law of nationality but the child does not actually reside
ii.The instrument should be made BEFORE the birth of the child in the state considering him a national), thus the court in that state whose law is applicable cannot
iii.The instrument should be recorded in the Civil Registry together w/ the birth certificate of the competently protect the interests of the child
child --so use Adopter's personal law

ART 165: ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN 






 m

m


#
-born outside a valid marriage GR: no
Why? Different family orientation, cultures, customs and traditions ʹ may be hard for Filipino child to
m 

   adapt to completely strange environment
Legitimate: governed by the personal law of the father X: aliens (usually former Filipinos naturalized to another citizenship) have some relationship with the
Illegitimate: governed by the personal law of the mother child




°

  
  
 
 
Sec 87: LAWS GOVERNING LEGITIMACY Domestic Adoption
child legitimate if considered as legitimate under local law of the state where either 1.Y legal age
a. Parent domiciled when child's legitimacy is claimed to have been created 2.Y in possession of full civil capacity and legal rights
b. Child domiciled when parent acknowledged child as his own 3.Y good moral character
Sec 88: INCIDENTS OF LEGITIMACY CREATED Y FOREIGN LAW 4.Y not convicted of any crime of moral turpitude
-same treatment by forum - forum recognizes the status recognized by the foreign law 5.Y emotionally and psychologically capable of caring for children
6.Y 16 years min age gap (except if biological parent/spouse of biological parent)
7.Y in a position to support and care for children
PARE NT AL AU TH OR ITY OV ER TH E C H IL D 8.Y country has diplomatic relations w/ RP
-derived from Roman concept 

Y

 9.Y residence requirement for 3 continuous years prior to application
-usually  

 
 determines rights and duties of parents and children 10.Y maintains residence in RP pending application
-in RP: ART21, FC: JOINT PARENTAL AUTHORITY by mother and father 11.Y certified by his diplomatic or consular office to have legal capacity to adopt in his country
12.Y certification that his country allows adoptee to enter as his adopted child
Scope of parental authority: additional requirement if INTERCOUNTRY ADOPTION:
ͻ Care for and rearing of the children for civic consciousness͙ 13.Y if married, spouse should also adopt except if the spouse is the biological parent of the adoptee
ͻ Action a parent may file vs. other parent for custody 14.Y has undergone counseling from accredited counselor
ͻ Requirements for parental consent to child's marriage 15.Y agrees to uphold basic rights of child
ͻ Discipline and chastisement - though restrained by law and practices

  m


-governed by the law which created adoption
ADO PTI ON
  the act by which relations of paternity and affiliation are recognized as legally existing between UGGI LIND AMAND THERKELSEN V. R EPU LIC ADOP TION ONLY R ELATES TO CIVIL RIGHTS
persons not so related by nature -JDRC denied petition for adoption on the ground that the country of the Danish adopter does not confer
-judicial act which creates between 2 persons a relationship similar to that which results from legitimate same citizenship to the adoptee. Court held that it is not within the province of civil law to determine
paternity and affiliation how or when citizenship in a foreign state is to be acquired


 
 XIII. CH OI CE O F LAW IN P R OP ER TY
B4: supply solace to those who had no children so that the void which existed in childless homes may be
filed The Controlling Law
NOW: extend to orphan or indigent child the protection of society in the person of adopter Depends on the nature of the property ʹ Real or Personal

5 | P R I L F i n a l s R e v i e w e r _ P a n g a l a n g a n
 Immovable Movable EXC EP TI ON S TO TH E LE X SI TU S RUL E
1. Transaction does not affect transfer of title to or ownership of the land
Lex situs: rights, interests May be: -lex intentionis or lex voluntatis
of various person are Lex domicili ( 
  
/
Y Y"Y Y
Y 2. When transaction is merely an accessory to a principal contract
determined by the law of Y
YY  
Y
Y
 
Y
Y
YY"Y

 Y
YY Y 3. Succession
the place where the land is
 -personal law
situated lex situs:
-

Y
/ the state has the sole power to decide the validity and
effects of the transfer of property 1. TRA NS AC TI ON DOE S NOT AFF EC T TR AN SF ER OF T ITL E TO OR O WN ERSH IP OF TH E
 ;

 Y

/ parties expect their transaction would be LAN D
governed by the law of the place where the property is located
-Y 

  or Y



 
 (law of the place where the transaction was completed)
m
 
 law of the state which has the most real
LILJEDAHL V. GLASSGOW: LEX INTENTIONIS APPLY IF NO TRANSFER OF TITLE OR
connections with the transfer
OWNERSHIP
-Property in Colorado mortgaged in Iowa. The transferees of the property were obligated to assume the
In RP: mortgage in accordance with lex loci contractus but only when they filled up the deed of assignment in
ART¦1¦: property is anything that may be an object of appropriation accordance with lex situs. Court held that the parties intended the lex loci contractus to govern the
ART 16: irrelevant if real or personal property (as regards nationals) - lex situs applies transaction, and there being no effect as to the title to the property then it would apply.
Problem: what if the place where the property is located distinguishes between rules
applicable to real and personal property and the applicable law is not their law?
 2. WH E N TR AN SAC T IO N IS MER ELY A N AC C ES SOR Y TO A PR INC IPAL C O NTR AC T
m

 # Apply: law on contracts govern the principal contract
ͻ Being physically part of the country, it [the property] should be subject to the laws thereof.
ͻ The situs is the place most closely and significally related to the issue in question
ͻ Increase in the amount and variety of personal property not connected w/ the person of the owner, so 3. SUC C E SS IO N: C APAC ITY TO SUC C E E D PROP ERT Y
adopt lex situs even with movables. -lex nationali/domicile (personal law of the decedent)


  
C AP AC IT Y TO TR AN SF ER OR AC Q UI RE PR OPER TY
6if situs is merely incidental: apply most significant relationship approach
-governed by LAW OF THE PLACE WHERE THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED: LEX SITUS
6note: exception to the GR on capacity (because capacity to enter into contracts is usually governed by
SIT US O F C ERT AI N PROP ERT IE S
Lex nationali/domicile)
1. SI TUS O F PER SO NAL PR OPE RTY F OR TA X PUR POS ES
LLANTINO V. CO LIONG CHONG: LEASE TO ALIENS VALID -STATE has right to tax property w/n its jurisdiction
-Filipinos leased to a Chinese citizen who later became naturalized Filipino citizen land. Court held that -can't be applied if it would result in inescapable and patent injustice
the lease is valid even if it was to an alien because what consti prohibits is the transfer of ownership to -lex situs: where it is located
aliens. Nevertheless, if there was indeed transfer, Court mentioned (obiter) that since naturalized
Filipino citizen, then can already acquire properties.
2. SI TUS O F MO NE Y
CHEESMAN V. IAC: ALIEN H CANNOT HAVE INTEREST IN CONJUGAL PROP ERTY -lex situs: where it is located
-Alien H contests that W disposed of an allegedly conjugal property without his consent. Court held that LEON V. MANUFACTURERS LIEF INSURANCE CO.: SITUS OF MONEY EVIDENCED Y CHECK IS
it is prohibited in the Consti that foreigners own land so Alien H cannot own land. STILL WHERE IT IS LOCATED
-Probably the plaintiff wanted to attach the checks dealt in the RP branch of the insurance company but
EXTR I NS IC A N D I NTR IN SIC VAL I DIT Y OF C ON VEY ANC ES the Court held that since the checks were made in Canada, and the money funding the checks were in
Canada, then the situs of money is in Canada, not in RP
Formalities (extrinsic) Essential validity (intrinsic)

lex situs GR: lex situs 3. SI TUS O F DE BT S

-treated as a question of contract and not of property X: lex intentionis clearly established -still UNSETTLED in RP

6 | P R I L F i n a l s R e v i e w e r _ P a n g a l a n g a n
-suggested that the law w/c governs the contract from which the debt arises should govern the transfer not doing business in RP. Court held that right to protect trade name can be brought against whole
of the debt world.
  
 
1.      all kinds of TANGIBLE PHYSICAL OBJECTS XIV . CH OIC E OF L AW IN C ON TR A CTS
  
INTANGIBLE objects
a. Mere rights of action: debt arising from a loan Principal purposes of contract law:
b. Rights represented by a document: capable of delivery, susceptible to negotiation as a separate 1. Protect reasonable expectations of the parties to the contract
legal entity 2. Secure stability in Commercial Transactions

HARRIS V. ALK: CAN COLLECT FR OM DE TOR WHEREV ER HE IS C ONTR AC TS INVO LVI NG A FO REI GN EL EM EN T
-Debtor in North Carolina was ordered to pay debt to the creditor͛s creditor in Maryland. Court held that
6different states, different rules in
his payment to the creditor͛s creditor is extinguishment of his debt to the creditor as the Maryland court
>formalities of contract
could validly enforce the obligation on him.
>Capacity of parties
6critiques: makes situs of debt subject to the location of the defendant, which may be prejudicial to
>essential requisites for intrinsic validity of contracts
interests of the creditor
>interpretation of contracts
>law governing execution
4. SI TUS O F C ORPOR AT E STOC KS
Corpo Code, Section 6a: Certificate of Stocks evidences ownership of stocks ʹ may be transferred Applicable law: lex loci intentionis
CIR V. ANGLO CALIFORNIA NATIONAL ANK: SITUS OF SHARES SEPARATE FR OM SITUS OF
THE TRANS FER OF SHARES EXTR I NS IC V ALI DI TY FO C O NTR AC TS
-Shares of stock of a domestic corporation sold in a transaction abroad which is being taxed by CIR. Court ;àY Y"

 Y
held that CIR cannot tax the transaction involving the certificate of stocks because the transaction
-as stated in Art17, NCC
occurred outside the country. Y

Y
/ the place governs the act
6  

Situs of shares: where stocks are located

 
 
  

Situs of transfer: where transaction occurred Art1319,NCC: Lex loci celebrationis is where the offer is made (though not binding on the offerree unless
it comes into his knowledge)
PAT EN TS, T RA DE MAR KS , TRA DE NA ME, C O PYR IGH T
Paris Convention of 18 a (Union Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property) IN TRI NS IC V AL ID ITY O F C O NT RAC T S
-RP became a party to it on September 1965    


-protects TRADE NAME in all countries of the Union w/o obligation of registration, WON it forms part of   ?
?
the trade name
a. Consent
b. Object
RA 8 a: INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CODE OF 1 8 c. Consideration
-established the Intellectual Property Ofice
-does not allow corps to register as their trade names those which are



 
 
 
1. Well known internationally and in the RP, WON registered in RP (already used as a mark by some 1. Lex Loci Contractus (place of making contract)
other person) 2. Lex Loci Solutionis (place of performance)
2. Used for identical or similar goods or services 3. Lex Loci Intentionis (place intended by parties)
-allows a corporation w/c may not be engaged in business or is not registered in RP to still file suit (civil
or administrative) to protect its trade name (note: only owners of registered marks in RP can recover
damages for trademark infringement) 1. L EX LOC I C O NT RAC T US (L AW O F TH E PL AC E OF M AK IN G)
TEST: look at the place where the last act is done w/c is necessary to bring the binding agreement into
PHILIPS EXP ORT V VS. CA: RIGHT TO ENFORCE TRADEMARK INFRINGES GRANTED EV EN IF being so far as the acts of the parties are concerned
NOT DOING USINESS IN RP ADVANTAGE:
-Foreign corporation filed TM infringement suit vs. domestic corporation (for using similar trade name in ͻ Relative ease in establishing the place of contracting
similar goods and services) and one of defenses interposed is the lack of capacity to sue of a corporation ͻ The principal purposes of contract which are certainty and stability are achieved
DISADVANTAGE:

7 | P R I L F i n a l s R e v i e w e r _ P a n g a l a n g a n
 ͻ If place merely incidental, no significant relationship with the contract or its performance -Dispute brought before RP even if the contract provided that any dispute should be brought before
England. Court held that RP courts would not be divested of jurisdiction unless it be shown that initiating
proceedings in the chosen venue is a condition precedent before any action may be brought in other
2. L EX LOC I SOL UTI ON IS (L AW O F TH E PL AC E OF P ERFO RM ANC E) venues.
Scope:
ͻ Time HS C V. SHERMAN: VENUE SHOULD E EXCLUSIVE TO DIVEST OTHER COUR TS OF
ͻ Place JURISDICTION
ͻ Manner of performance -Defendants are in RP so HSBC sued them here but as a defense, they argued that the contract stipulates
ͻ Sufficiency of performance venue as SG. Court held that RP courts would not be divested of jurisdiction since the forum clause does
ͻ Valid excuses for nonperformance not provide that the venue stipulated is the exclusive venue for all disputes.
Advantage:
ͻ Always connected to the contract in a significant way
Disadvantage: 2. ARB ITR ATI ON C LA US ES
ͻ Gives extraterritorial effect to the laws of the former state (where the contract was made) -now considered valid under Philippine jurisdiction, as long as it would not prevent resort to courts
ͻ Not helpful when the contract should be performed in 2 or more states w/ conflicting laws PUROMINES VS. CA: AR ITRATION CLAUSES NOW VALID IN RP
on validity GR: courts would look w/ favor upon amicable settlements and will only interfere w/ great reluctance to
anticipate or nullify the action of arbitration
X: agreement absolutely closes the doors of the courts against the parties (contract void)
3. L EX LOC I IN TE NT IO NIS
-law intended by the parties to apply
-may be indicated in the choice of law provisions of the contract 3. ADH ESI ON C LA US ES
>Art1306,NCC: parties may put choice-of-law provisions as long as not contrary to law, morals, good -one not negotiated by the parties, drafted by the dominant party and usually embodied in standardized
customs, public order and public policy form
6intention of the parties may also be adjudged from their contemporaneous and subsequent acts. -The only participation of the other party is in affixing her signature or adhering thereto.
-"take it or leave it" contract
C APAC I TY TO E NT ER I NTO C O NTR AC T S e.g.
Ø Insurance contracts
-governed by the rules on status and capacity = PERSONAL LAW of the parties Ø Bills of lading
6cf: Insular Gov't vs. Frank: the court should have looked at the capacity of Frank to contract (but the Ø Contracts of sale of land from real estate firms
result would have been the same anyway) Ø Airline tickets

C H OIC E OF LA W I SS UES IN C O NFL IC TS C O NTR AC T S C A SE S
-freedom to contract vs. validity of the provisions they had placed in the contracts
PAN AM WORLD VS. RAPADAS: ADHESION CLAUSE VALID UPON ACCEPTANCE OF TICKET
Short summary: Rapadas, who was reluctant to check in his attache case, was compelled to do so. His
attache case was lost by Pan Am. Pan Am admitted liability, but claimed that its liability was limited by
the Warsaw Convention, which was made applicable to Rapadas by virtue of a clause in the airplane
 




ticket. Court held that although the ticket was an adhesion contract which should not be blindly adhered
1. Choice of forum clause/venue of litigation
to, the passenger was deemed to have accepted its terms and thus are bound by its terms. However,
2. Arbitration Clauses
court increased PanAm's liability, considering the luggage as an unchecked luggage.
3. Adhesion clauses
PAL VS. CA: APPLICATION OF PROVISIONS OF ADHESION CONTRACT SHOU LD E
INTERPRETED AS ED ON FAIR PLAY AND EUITY
1. C H O IC E OF F ORU M C LA USE/ ST IP ULAT E VE NUE
Short Summary: Mejia has asked PAL to ship her Microwave oven from SF to MLA but upon arrival, the
GR: plaintiff has option to choose the venue where the suit is to be filed in action in personam
front glass door was broken and damaged. Mejia claimed for damages from PAL but PAL disclaimed any
X: if forum clause: apply forum clause only if it is specifically identified as the only venue
liability, arguing that the claims were filed beyond the reglementary periods and no higher valuation was
>COMPAGNIE DE COMMERCE VS. HAM URG AMERIKA: forum clause not applied because it was
declared by the passenger. The court held that although the air waybill was binding upon Mejia, the
not shown that it was a condition precedent for the enforcement of the contract
application of the provisions in the said adhesion contract should be interpreted by the court based on
>HS C CASE: the choice of forum clause did not expressly stipulate on the court of only one state to
equity and fairplay. In this case, PAL is still liable because of its indifference (failure to explain why the
the exclusion of the rest
microwave glass was broken) and it cannot be exculpated on pure technicality and bureaucratic
subterfuge (on the reglementary period)
COMPAGNIE DE COMMER CE V. HAM URG AMERICA: VENUE SHOULD E A CONDITION
PRECEDENT

8 | P R I L F i n a l s R e v i e w e r _ P a n g a l a n g a n
4. S PEC I AL C ON TRAC TS -in this case, ONLY Valid if parties had equal bargaining power
Sale/barter: law of situs of property sold
Loan with financial institution: law of permanent place of business XV . CH OIC E OF L AW IN WILLS , S U C CES S I ON AND ADMINIS TR A TION OF ES TA TE
Loan with private individual: place where loan obtained (lex loci celebrationis) -PRIL perspective: INVOLUNTARY TRANSFER
Pledge/CM/Antichresis: lex situs Why? You voluntarily make a will but you do not die voluntarily (unless nagsuicide ka). Since properties
are transferred only after death through the will, it's considered an involuntary transfer
 
American President Lines v. Klepper: COGSA provisions merely suppletory to law of destination of goods
-Lift containing all the personal effects of plaintiff crashed and were spilled and scattered in the pier. A. EX TR IN SIC VAL ID IT Y OF W ILL S
Defendant wanted to limit the liability based on COGSA. Court held that law of the place of destination -law of the place where the will was executed (lex loci celebrationis)
governs liability of common carrier, i.e. RP laws, and COGSA merely suppletory (but still limited liability in -issue: lugi ba Filipino on what law may be used???
accordance with COGSA)
Filipinos abroad Aliens abroad



 





 

m 





Art 17 + Art 815, NCC Art 816 and Art 817
SCOPE: all international transportation
Determine liability of international air transportation carrier
RP law RP Law
When liable:
Law of the place where the will was made Law of the place where the will was made
6for loss or damage
Their own national law
>checked luggage during air transportation: US $20 per kilo
>unchecked luggage: US $400 per passenger
But since Art 815 lang ang applicable talaga on making So mukhang lugi ang Filipino kasi sa Aliens their
6for death or personal injury: up to US $75,000
wills, it might be interpreted that RP law cannot be will may be validated using either of 3 choices
6procedural rules: lex fori
applied of law
6Note that COGSA not made applicable if the damages claimed were based on
KY Malice
KY bad faith IN RE: ESTATE OF JOHNSON: SHOULD PR OVE THE FOREIGN LAW APPLICA LE
KY discriminatory acts -Daughter contests that the will was not made in accordance with the national law of the decedent.
KY improper conduct Court held that since she failed to show what the law applicable contains, then the will would be
KY gross negligence admitted to probate.
͙of employees of the air transport carrier
-jurisdiction in Warsaw Convention: where to file action 

 

 




1.Y Domicile of carrier In RP: Void: against public policy
2.Y Principal place of business
3.Y Place of business where transaction occurred 

 

 
m 


4.Y Place of destination  
 
m 


5.Y Domicile of plaintiff (Montreal Convention) 1. In writing (Art. 804, CC)
SANTOS V. NORTHWEST: COGSA VENUE IS JURISDICTIONAL 2. In a language or dialect known to the testator (Art. 804, CC)
3. Entirely written, dated, and signed by the hand of the testator himself (Art. 810, CC)

APPLICABLE LAW IN ABSENCE OF EFFECTIVE CHOICE O COCK V. O COCK: AS TO RESIDENT ALIENS, DOMICILE DETERMINES NATIONALITY
-determine most significant relationship -Decedent executed will allegedly according to the law of her domicile. Court held that law of domicile
-protect legitimate expectations of parties would apply.

LIMITATIONS TO CHOICE OF LAW IN TRI NS IC V AL ID ITY O F W ILLS

6public interest Art 16(2): national law of decedent

 


 

  °


  CAYETANO V. LEONIDAS: CITIZENSHIP AT TIME OF DEATH DETER MINES APPLICA LE LAW
-debtor agrees to be subject to the jurisdiction of a specific court in case he breaches the -former Filipina decedent gave all properties to sisters, none to father. Court held that no preterition
contract/defaults in payment since the national law of the decedent at the time of death does not require legitimes.
-waives debtor͛s right to receive notice, court could render judgment against him

 |P R I L F i n a l s R e v i e w e r _ P a n g a l a n g a n
IN TERP RET AT IO N O F W ILL S (d) If it was procured by undue and improper pressure and influence, on the part of the beneficiary, or
of some other person for his benefit;
-national law of decedent/ law of domicile (e) If the signature of the testator was procured by fraud or trick, and he did not intend that the
instrument should be his will at the time of fixing his signature thereto.
° 

GR: where terms clear and unambiguous, lex intentionis should be followed (A1370) ð 
 
X: ambiguous: intention of the party or the exact meaning may be inferred by 1. Will duly executed in manner required by law
ͻ referring to the context of the instrument itself 2. Testator had testamentary capacity at the time of execution of will
ͻ Referring to testator's contemporaneous and subsequent acts in keeping with the nature of the TESTAMENTARY CAPAITY: capacity to comprehend the nature of the transaction in which the testator is
document engaged at the time, to recollect the property to be disposed of and the persons who would naturally be
supposed to have claims upon the testator, and to comprehend the manner in which the instrument will
m °m

 distribute his property among the objects of his bounty [Jocson v. jocson]
ͻ Interpretations of ambiguous phrase should be determined accordance w/ the laws and customs of the
state most probably in the mind of the grantor or testator when he used the words, and which he is ð 


 


  
&  
presumed to be most familiar [SPECIFIC LAW IN MIND] ?
ͻ Different dispositions: interpretation by which dispositions would be operative shall be preferred ͻ should be filed and recorded in the proper RTC
[interpret for validity] ͻ Due execution and testamentary capacity of testator does not need to be proved again (note: sabi ni
Sir B it should still undergo probate proceedings in RP)
REVOC A TIO N
?

' 

  m   
m  
Art. 828: will revocable at any time before the death of testator
...by a citizen or subject of another country,
>>>cannot waive or restrict right to revoke a will
...which is executed in accordance with the law of the country of which he is a citizen or subject,
Art. 829:
...and which might be proved and allowed by the law of his own country,

 m%  m
 
shall have the same effect as if executed according to the laws of the Philippines.
1. Law of the place where will was made (lex loci celebrationis)
2. Law of the place where testator had his domicle (lex domicili)



 m% m
- Movable properties: will admitted to probate valid at the last domicile of the testator as valid
1. Law of the domicile
everywhere
2. Law of the place of revocation
- Immovable properties: probate of the will in his last domicile does not affect the conveyance of land
which is subject to lex situs
Art 830: When wills deemed revoked in RP:
1. By implication of law
SUNTAY V. SUNTAY: SHOULD PROV E FORUM LAW AT PLACE WHERE WILL WAS PRO ATED
2. By some will, codicil, or other writing, executed as provided in the case of wills
TO E ADMITTED IN RP
3. By burning, tearing, cancelling, or obliterating the will with the intention of revoking it, by
-allegedly, will was probated in China but did not show evidence of laws of China applicable to the
the testator himself, or by some other persons in his presence and by his express direction
probation of will + that court is a probate court. Court held will cannot be admitted as probated in RP

PROBA TE
AD MI NI STR AT ION O F ES TAT E
-adjudication that the last will and testament of a person was executed with all the formalities required
-forum law
by law
F. Administration of Estate
-authentication of the will
1. manage and settle decedent's debts
-merely procedural: follow law of the forum
2. Distribute the residuum of the estate to the deceased's heirs
BUT: look at foreign law if suit made as to extrinsic requirements in the execution of the will



 
  
#
For the protection of creditors, incidentally only for the distribution of the estate
When will shall be disallowed (rule 76, section 9, ROC):
(a) If not executed and attested as required by law;
 
   

 
#
(b) If the testator was insane, or otherwise mentally incapable to make a will, at the time of its
Only as regards properties w/n 1 state
execution;
ANCILIARY ADMINISTRATOR: one appointed by the court of the foreign country where the assets or
(c) If it was executed under duress, or the influence of fear, or threats;
property are located

a0 | P R I L F i n a l s R e v i e w e r _ P a n g a l a n g a n
TAYAG V. MCI: ANCILIARY ADMINIS TRATOR VS. PRINCIPAL ADMINISTRATOR
-Contest between who between anciliary administrator and principal administrator would have authority
to administer properties in RP. Court held that whoever has control of the assets should have authority
to administer the same.
-Principal vs. Ancillary administration:
Principal administration: that which is granted in the jurisdiction of the decedent's last domicile
Ancillary administration: any other administration
Why? A grant of administration does not ex proprio vigore (by its own force) have any effect beyond the
limits of the country in which it is granted.
When proper? When a person dies leaving property in a country other than that of his last domicile
TRU STS


-right of property, real or personal, held by one party for the benefit of another
-may be created by deed during the lifetime of the settler or by will
PRIL problem: When properties are located in places other than where the trustor is domiciled and
where the trust was made - does the effect of that trust extend extraterritorially?
ͻ Validity
ͻ Essential propriety of the trust
ͻ Compliance with formalities
Choiceðofðlaw provision: courts of the place where trust is being administered will normally apply the
chosen law (carry out intent of the trustor)
>if none: follow the law that will sustain the validity of the trust
Achieving decisional harmony
6on Justified expectations: in torts cases, the parties to an accident could not have relied on a particular
state law since accidents are fortuitous (thus, no intent to have one law applicable eh di naman nya
plinano)
-BUT they may nevertheless have anticipated that they may be held liable for some future act and insure
against it
-Corp: may expect that the laws of the state where it had continuous and systematic business activities
to be applicable in particular circumstances, but no way of complying w/ various laws w/o
reincorporating in each state
>>>court should lessen adverse effects of applying laws of several states on parties
 
-when tortuous conduct and place of resulting injury different + one state imposes higher standards than
the other state
-when there's difference in product liability laws and varying judicial interpretations of extent of liability
LE X L OC I D ELIC TI C O MM IS SI (LA W O F TH E PLAC E WH E RE TH E ALLEG ED TO RT W AS
C OMM IT TE D)
-determines the tort liability in matters affecting conduct and safety
-Rules w/c regulate conduct w/n state's borders: traffic rules, speed limits
-PROBLEM: when the acts which would produce the injury happens in one state but the injury happens
in another

Testamentary trusts :: contained in a will :: follow the law of the place to which extrinsic validity of the "Place of the wrong"
will depend (usu. Lex loci contractus)
But since it involves properties: lex situs common law concept Civil law concept

-looks at the place where

Y
Y
Y
Y
Y -place where the


Y 
YY
XV I. CH OIC E OF L AW IN T OR TS AND CR IMES 4YY

Y "Y
YY Y


Y
. 

 -adheres to the vested rights theory so that if the -premised on the principle that the legality or
-derived from French word torquere [to twist] harm does not take place then the tort is not illegality of a person's act should be determined
-an act or omission producing an injury to another w/ any previous existing lawful relation of which the completed. by the law of the state where he is at the time
act or omission may be said to be a natural outgrowth or incident -Negligence or omission is not in itself actionable he does such act
unless it results in injury to another
POL IC I ES BEH IN D C ON FL IC TS TO RT LA W Place where injury incurred Place where tortious conduct made

  
6but regardless, the traditional view is that

 
      
 
a. Deter socially undesirable or wrongful conduct
>vested rights: damages arising from torts committed in one state are actionable in another state
b. Rectify the consequences of the tortuous act by distributing the losses that result from accident and
>limits:
products liability
ͻ When the forum court's public policy or law is contravened by the proper law
-most likely to be a strongly held policy of the state - the state would not easily displace its law w/ the
ͻ When the forum does not impose liability on said tortuios act - but this is not a violation of public
law of another state
policy of the forum

 
 
 specific policy behind substantive tort law should be evaluated in the
LOUCKS V. STANDARD OIL CO. ( ROUGHT EFORE NY COURTS )
light of the needs of interstate and international systems
Loucks killed in Massachusetts by negligent act of Standard Oil's employees. However, his heirs are
e.g. policy of upholding justified expectations of the parties
residents of NY, so they brought action before NY courts. NY courts now resolves WON the action may
Minimize the adverse consequences of subjecting party to law of more than 1 state
be enforced in NY using Massachusetts law as COA.NY Court held that it was not against NY's public
Discouraging forum shopping

a1 | P R I L F i n a l s R e v i e w e r _ P a n g a l a n g a n
policy to allow the enforcement of a right of action which was granted by a foreign law to the claimants Driscoll Hotel illegally sold liquor to Sorrensen in Minnesota, causing the latter to be drunk so that the
as they had a vested right which the court should help protect. automobile driven by him wherein Schmidt was a passenger, turned over and thus caused injuries to
Schmidt in Wisconsin. MTD for lack of COA: the law does not punish acts the result of which happened in
MO DE RN TH EOR IES O N FOR EI GN TO RT LI ABI LIT Y another state. Court held that since all the parties involved are residents of Minnesota and the violation
of the respondent occurred in Minnesota, its wrongful conduct was complete in Minnesota, the plaintiff,
1. TH E MO ST S IG NI FIC A NT R ELA TIO NSH IP who is also a resident of Minnesota, should be allowed to recover.
-consider state's contacts w/ the occurrence and the parties:
§ Place where the injuries were sustained FO REI GN TO RT C LA IM S
§ Domicile of the victim/tortfeasor
]
  
  

 ]
§ Residence of the victim/tortfeasor
-liability resulting from the conduct is "deemed personal to the perpetrator of the wrong, following him
§ Nationality of the victim/tortfeasor
wherever he may go, so that compensation may be extracted from him in any proper tribunal which may
§ Place where the relationship of the parties are centered
obtain jurisdiction of the defendant's person
-after considering state's contacts:
-right to sue not confined in the place where the COA arises
a. Identify the interested state
-in short: AN ACTION FOR TORT MAY BE BROUGHT WHEREVER THE TORTFEASOR IS SUBJECT TO SUIT
b. Evaluate the relevance of the contacts to the issue in question
-not mechanical counting of factual contacts BUT localizing the state of the most significant relation and
assess the event or transaction in the light of the relevant policy considerations of the interested states 1. C O N DIT IO NS F OR TH E E NFO RC E ME NT OF TO RT C LA IM S
and underlying policies
When foreign tort given due course in the forum court:
a. The foreign tort is based on a civil action and not on a crime
O COCK V. JACSON: APPLIED INTERES T ANALYSIS APPROACH
b. The foreign tort is not contrary to the public policy of the forum
-application of NY Law advanced the policy reflected in that law, while the failure to apply Ontario law
c. The judicial machinery of the forum is adequate to satisfy the claim
did not impair the policy behind the law.
Problem: defendant often sued in a foreign court against his will
§ Problem of legitimacy of the jurisdiction
SAUDI ARA IAN AIRLINES VS. CA: APPLIED SIGNIFICANT RELATIONS TES T TO JUS TIFY
§ Problem of validity of the decision
JURISDICTION OF COURTS
-Filipina Stewardess of SAUDIA attempted to be raped by Saudi Arabian nationals who were employees
of SAUDIA was, although already staying in RP, called back to Saudi just to be sentenced with adultery 2. PRO DUC T S LI ABIL IT Y OF TH E F ORE IG N MA NU FAC T UR ER
and then was dismissed by SAUDIA. Court held that RP had most significant contacts to justify exercise of
Problem: differences in the laws of states on the
jurisdiction.
§ Basis
§ Extent
2. IN TER ES T AN ALY SI S APP ROAC H ͙of liability for defectively manufactured products
-considers the relevant concerns that the state may have in the case and its interest in having its laws
Different basis of liability:
applied on that issue
ͻ Negligence
-Determine WON there's a true or false conflict
ͻ Strict liability
False conflict: if only 1 state has an interest in having its law applied and failure to apply the other state's
ͻ Breach of warranty against hidden defects
law would not impair the policy reflected in that law
True/Apparent conflict: if more than one state has an apparent interest in applying its law to the case
ASAHI METAL INDUS TRY V. SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIF: PURPOSEFUL AVAILMENT TES T
-take a second look at the policies and interests of the concerned states
Californian citizen sued Taiwanese company for product liability, allegedly because there's a defect in
Cf. Bobcock v. Jackson
the make of the motorcycle. Taiwanese company sued Japanese company (Asahi) for indemnification.
Court held that there was no minimum contact for the Californian court to exert jurisdiction over the
3. C AVER 'S TH IRD P RI NC I PLE OF P REF ERE NC E IN TO RTS Japanese company for the claim of the Taiwanese company.
-deals w/ rules that sanction some kind of conduct engaged in by a defendant in 1 state and extends the
  

      


benefit of this higher standard of conduct and financial protection to the plaintiff even if the state of
-judicial, legislative and administrative competence
injury does not create analogous liabilities
-problem: when one state exercises jurisdiction over a person who is not its national
-apply law of the state which impose higher standards of conduct
-Common law courts: used the SOVEREIGNTY MODEL to either
1. Justify the exercise of jurisdiction over a defendant present w/n the territory, however short (tag
SCHMIDT V. DRISCOLL HOTEL
jurisdiction)

a | P R I L F i n a l s R e v i e w e r _ P a n g a l a n g a n
2. Deny enforcement of a foreign court judgment over a defendant who was not present w/n the court's    
jurisdiction -Tort committed abroad, as long as COA accrues at place of tort, is actionable both in
a. state of commission
WORLDWIDE V OLKSWAGEN CORP ORATION V. CHARLES WOODS ON: REAS ONA LENESS b. forum state
AND FORESEEA ILITY OF EING SUED NOT ENOUGH
-suit brought before lex loci delicti but the defendants had no contacts there. Court held that Jurisdiction TIMES V. REYES: COULD HAVE RULED PRIL UT NO!
cannot be justified based on forseeability that the vehicles sold by the defendants would reach the place -applied venue imposed by law in case of libel of public officials
of tort but minimum contacts should still be followed.
TORT S V S. C R IM ES
3. ALI EN T ORT AC T
TORT CRIME
-based on the principle of transitory tort, it is a statute in US which allows foreigners to sue individuals
for violations of law of nations (i.e. torture, summary execution, disappearances) Transitory: may be punished wherever the tortfeasor is located Territorial
-suit can be filed against:
1. Government official acting under colorable title Individual is the victim State is the offended party
2. Private individual
3. State, if only it has waived its immunity from suits Indemnify the victim Punish and reform
4. Corporations
-far more success in filing suits against public officials (although they claim that these were under state
acts) LEX LOC I DEL IC TI
GR: punish if commit crime w/n territory
    - problems on enforcement
ͻ Forum non conveniens
1. Conduct in a state had effects in another state
ͻ Act of state 2. Conduct and effect in state A but person liable fleed to another state
ͻ No proximate cause (esp. in UNOCAL and Chevron) X to territorial rule: even if w/n territory, cannot apply municipallaw
ACTA: Both place of injury and place of conduct are not in the forum state; only connection is that the
defendant is there (and so is the plaintiff) 1. R EC ALL O F SA TE OF FIC IAL S (DOC TRI NE O F ST ATE I M MU NI TY )- O NL Y APPL IE S TO
Critique: extraterritorial application of US law over conduct committed outside US STA TE AC T S
LIANG V. PEOPLE: IMMUNITY ONLY IN OFFICIAL CAPACITY
HILAO V. ESTATE OF FERDINAND MARCOS
-ADB consultant defamed employee. Court held that the invoked immunity only applies to acts made in
-victims of torture, disappearances and summary execution during Marcos era sued Marcos in Hawaii.
official capacity, not to crimes.
Court held that even if acts occurred within the RP, it is still covered; that equitable tolling of the statute
of limitations should be allowed; that command responsibility must be applied; and that no need to
exhaust domestic remedies available. 2. C R IM ES C O MM IT TE D O N BO ARD FORE IG N V ES SEL
UNCLOS: if on board foreign ship, ship is not w/n internal waters but on territorial sea
FILARTIGA V. PENAðIRALA: OFFICIAL TOR TURE NOW VIOLATION OF LAW OF NATIONS
-court could exercise jurisdiction if it affects peace and order of coastal state
-Filartiga sued Pena for kidnapping, torturing and killing his son. Court held that official torture is now
prohibited by the law of nations and that it being a violation of law of nations, it cannot be considered an
US v. Fowler: Coastal state cannot exercise jurisdiction on high seas
act of state.
-Defendant stole bottles of wine in high seas. Court held that coastal state cannot exercise jurisdiction,
crime being committed in the high seas and the law invoked allows coastal state to exercise jurisdiction
GUINTO V. MARCOS: VIOLATIONS OF FREE SPEECH NOT VIOLATION OF LAW OF NATIONS
only when the ship is registered in RP
-plaintiff sued Marcos for confiscation of documentary/film. Court held that it is not protected by ACTA,
it not being a violation of the law of nations.
P v. Wong Cheng: violation w/n territorial waters may be prosecuted in coastal state
-smoked opium while ship anchored in Manila bay. Court held that he may be made liable.
4. PH IL IPP IN E RUL E ON F ORE IGN TORT S
US v. Look Chaw: Coastal state can exercise jurisdiction when ship is landed
6if follow vested rights: even if tort made abroad, COA that may accrue in another state may be brought
-government officials landed a foreign ship and found opium. Court held that exercise of coastal state
to RP
valid as the vessel was already landed.


aa | P R I L F i n a l s R e v i e w e r _ P a n g a l a n g a n
3. C R IM ES WH IC H M AY H AVE B EE N C O M MI TTE D OU TS ID E ST AT E͛S J UR IS D IC TIO N B UT -Since the corporation was deemed an enemy corporation, it cannot recover insurance proceeds. But the
premium it paid should be returned.
UN DER O W N L A W, S TAT E C O UL D ST ILL EX ERC ISE J UR IS D IC TI O N
Art2,RPC:these are threats to national interest
DOM IC I LE OR RE SI DE NC E OF FORE IG N C O RPOR AT IO N
Art51, NCC: Domicile of Corporations determined by:
XV II. CH OIC E OF L AW AF FE C TING C OR P OR ATI ONS AND OTH ER JU R IDI CAL EN TITI ES 6Law creating it
6Law recognizing it
C ORPORA TI ON S If none:
-place of legal representation
PE RSO NAL L AW O F A C ORPOR AT IO N -place where principal functions are exercised
-law of the state where it was incorporated (rule of incorporation)
Why? It͛s an artificial being, rights and powers of which are determined by the law creating it 6acquisition of license to do business in RP: corporation creates a domicile in RP

ME GR AY V. INSULAR LUM ER: APPLY LAW OF INCORPOR ATION AS TO RIGHTS AND

J URIS D IC TI ON OVE R FOR EIG N C ORPO RAT IO NS
O LIGATIONS OF CORPORATIONS
-SH wanted to inspect books of the corporation but was not allowed in the place of incorporation so filed 


 


 ð




mandamus in RP. Court held that as the corporation is not obliged to show SH the books of the -with the consent of a state (by its issuance of a license), a foreign corporation shall be recognized and
corporation in accordance with the law of its incorporation, the SH cannot be allowed to inspect the will be allowed to transact business in any state which gives its consent
same in another forum. 
  
 m 


 

 m
mm




° 

 
 m 

 GR: Foreign corporation bound by law applicable to domestic corporations
1.Y Corporation, being a creature of law, has no legal status beyond the bounds of sovereignty within X: Provisions for
which it was created 6creation
-if corporation acts within another state, should first secure consent of that state (usually by 6formation
obtaining license to do business there) 6organization
2.Y A corporation cannot exercise powers not granted by its corporate charter or by the law of the 6dissolution
state of incorporation 6fix liabilities
3.Y No state is under any obligation to adhere to the doctrine of comity (because all these redound to the existence of the corporation ʹ determined by the law which created it)
4.Y A state is not obliged to grant to a foreign corporation the privilege and immunities common to
the citizen of that state
A corporation is not a citizen. RIGH T OF FORE IG N C O RPOR AT ION TO BRI NG S UI T
w/ license + doing business: can sue
EXC EPT IO NS TO TH E RUL E OF I NC ORP ORA TIO N TE ST w/o license + not doing business: can sue
W/o license + doing business: CANNOT SUE
1. C O NS TI TU TIO NAL A N D ST ATU TOR Y R ES TRIC TIO NS
6In RP (consti): corporations, in order to deal with natural resources, should have equity distribution of HOME INSURANCE V. EAS TERN SHIPPING LINES: LICENSE REUIREMENT REUIRED ONLY
60-40 AT TIME OF FILING SUIT
6State may determine areas of investment that may be reserved to the citizens of the state -COA arised when corp did not have licensed yet. Court held that since corporation obtained license
before it sued, it can now be allowed to bring the suit.
PALTING V. SAN JOSE P ETR OLEUM: EUITY IMPOSITIONS
-Corporation cannot do business in mining because it failed to comply with the equity requirements ATLANTIC MU TUAL INSURANCE V. CE U STEVEDORING: CAPACITY TO SUE MUST E
imposed by the constitution and even by the Parity Amendments SPECIFICALLY ALLEGED
Corporation sues but merely alleged that it͛s a foreign corporation. Court held that capacity to sue must
be specifically alleged.
2. C O NT ROL TE ST D UR ING WAR
-the courts may pierce the veil of corporate identity: the nationality of the controlling stockholders EXC EP TI ON S TO TH E LIC EN SE R EQ UIR EM EN T
would be deemed to be the nationality of the corporation
Filipinas Compania de Seguros v. Christern: Enemy Corporation A. I SOLA TE D TRA NS AC T ION S
-occasional, incidental, casual

a¦ | P R I L F i n a l s R e v i e w e r _ P a n g a l a n g a n
-no purpose to engage in business >law of place of creation affects:
B.AC T IO N TO PRO TEC T T RA DE MAR K, T RA DE N AM E, GOO D WIL L , P AT EN T O R FOR 6 legal capacity to contract
6conditions and formalities for existence
UN FA IR C O MP ET IT ION
6dissolution and termination
-in accordance w/ Paris Convention
6liability of partners
C . AGRE EM EN TS F ULLY T RA NS AC TE D OU TSI D E R P >Law of domicile: entitlement and limits
-policy of stabilizing commercial transactions: allow foreign corporations to enforce rights vested on
them abroad even if no license to do business in RP
D. P ETI TI ON F ILE D M EREL Y A C OROLL ARY DEF EN SE I N A S UI T A GAI NS T IT XVIII. ENFORCEMENT AND RECOGNITION OF JUDGMENTS
-corporation is defendant, so can file counterclaim

DEF I NI TIO N A ND SC O PE OF T RA NS AC TI NG B USI N ESS DISTINCTION

GR: presumed that can do business Enforcement: needs positive act
X: Recognition: no need for positive act for the effects to be applicable
1. prohibited by law/consti
2. acts contrary to public policy
3. Extraordinary and special franchise BASIS
4. Not authorized by law of the state of incorporation
1. Comity
2. Vested rights of winning plaintiff
Test if doing usiness: quality, substantiality, continuity, and systematic nature of activities
Other basis: res judicata
-even if isolated, if not merely incidental or casual but indicate purpose to do business, deemed to
KY To protect expectations of parties
constitute doing business [WANG LA OR ATORIES V. MENDOZA]
KY To put an end to litigation

REVOC A TIO N OF LIC EN SE TO T RA NS AC T BU SI NE SS

POLICIES UNDER RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT
Grounds in Corpo Code
Principle of Preclusion ʹ res judicata
Effect of Failure to Secure License to Transact Business -can͛t reexamine judgment already decided on the merits
KY Can͛t sue BUT CAN BE SUED
KY Contracts entered by it valid only as to them but unenforceable m  

6conclusive upon title to thing (in rem)
6presumptive as to rights between parties and successors in interest (in personam)
SPEC IAL C ORP ORA TIO NS

1. R ELI GIO US C OR PORA TI ON S AN D C ORPO RAT IO NS SO LE MERGER

Religious Corporations: if controlling interests are foreigners, can͛t own land -plaintiff͛s COA merged with the judgment, he may not relitigate that exact claim
Corporation Sole: even if controlling interest is a foreigner, can still own land because land only held in BAR
trust for the benefit of Filipino citizens -if defendant absolved, he cannot be sued again for same COA
DIRECT ESTOPPEL
2. TRA NS NA TIO NA L C O RPOR AT ION S -all matters decided are precluded from being tried again
-law of host country applies to its branches RES JUDICATA
 -same claim, can͛t be brought again against same parties

  COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL
6Can have jurisdiction over subsidiary: if can acquire jurisdiction over parent and parent controls -preclude same parties from relitigating issues collaterally decided in an earlier case
subsidiary
6Can have jurisdiction over parent if can acquire jurisdiction over the subsidiary and the subsidiary is
REQ UI SI TES F OR REC OG N ITI ON OR E NF ORC E ME NT
wholly controlled by the parent
1. Foreign judgment rendered by court with jurisdiction
3. Partnerships -even if default judgment
-if created in RP, does business abroad: 2. Judgment valid under court͛s laws

a5 | P R I L F i n a l s R e v i e w e r _ P a n g a l a n g a n
3. Judgment final and executor ʹ not interlocutory Beginning and end of personality Personal law
4. State where judgment rendered allows recognition and enforcement of RP judgment
-comity Absence No uniform rule, just uniform principles
-difficulties: would not be able to enforce judgment if the national͛s state does not extend same right
-imposes burden on the parties when it͛s not within their control Legal effects of absence Personal law
5. Judgment must fix sum of money awarded
6. Judgment must not be contrary to public policy where sought to be enforced Restrictions on absentee's capacity to act Personal law
7. Judgment not obtained through
Conditions for changing name Personal law
6 fraud
6 collusion Effects of lowering age of majority Personal law
6 mistake of fact
6 mistake of law Capacity to act Personal law


 

 

 Tort Law of place of tort
Judgment not conclusive
1. Judgment rendered by partial court Some married woman Follow law governing marital relations
2. No jurisdiction over defendant
Extrinsic validity of marriage Lex loci celebrationis
3. NO jurisdiction over subject matter
Cannot be recognized Intrinsic validity of marriage Personal law (lex nationalii/domicili)
Mandatory
1. No sufficient notice to the defendant Personal relations of spouses Personal law
2. Judgment obtained through fraud
3. Repugnant to public policy Right to Support Personal Law

Effects of marriage if different Personal law of husband

PROC E DUR E FOR E NF ORC E ME NT OF FORE IG N J UDG ME NT nationalities
_file authenticated copy of the foreign judgment
Property relations between spouses Internal Law designated by parties
Authentication: court which rendered judgment ha competent jurisdiction
Law of habitual residence of the family

  If in RP
1. Principle of territorial jurisdiction If Filipinos: national law
2. Principle of res judicata X:
Both spouses are aliens
m   
 °

 Property found outside RP, regardless if contract is executed in RP or
1. Exequatur outside RP (as to extrinsic validity)
-summary proceeding wherein authenticated copy of the foreign judgment + valid certificate issued by IF mixed nationalities
clerk of court merely filed, then given same effect as foreign judgment 6as long as 1 of the parties is Filipino, Philippine law would apply
2. Judgment registration 6if mixed but none Filipino, then not required that Philippine law apply
-file with registrar͛s office
-action is converted into a local one immediately executor Jurisdiction for divorce Domicile of parties + substantive contacts
3. Common law method: what is done in RP
-Still receive evidence to prove validity of the foreign judgment Establishment of Domicile bet spouses FC: Both establish family domicile, then court would decide if they disagree
-wife can now establish own domicile separate from husband

Personal capacity Personal law Grounds for divorce Lex fori

Capacity to contract Personal law Grounds for annulment/declaration of If traditional approach: lex loci celbrationis
nullity If policy-centered approach: law of state of marital domicile
Juridical capacity Personal law
Legitimacy of Child (paternity/filiation) Personal law of father
Status Personal law RP: national law of the father

a6 | P R I L F i n a l s R e v i e w e r _ P a n g a l a n g a n
Personal law of Child LEGIT: Father Loan w/ financial institution Law of permanent residence of financial institution
ILLEGIT: Mother
(parang Constructive domicile rin ng minor) Personal loan Lex celebrationis

Parental Authority over Child
Process of Adoption
RP: national law of spouses Common carrier liability Law of place of destination of goods
If mixed: usually personal law of father
Extrinsic Validity of WILLS Lex loci celebrationis
Lex domicili
GR: lex domicili/personal law of adoptee Intrinsic Validity of Wills Personal law
X: if child's domicile is merely constructive, attenuated
-apply lex domicili/personal law of adopter as to the validity of the process Interpretation of Wills Lex intentionis
of adoption Personal law

Effects of Adoption Law which created the adoption Validity of Revocation 
 m%  m
 
1. Law of the place where will was made (lex loci celebrationis)
Real Property Lex situs 2. Law of the place where testator had his domicle (lex domicili)

 m% m
Personal Property RP: Lex situs 1. Law of the domicile
Lex Domicili: because it's difficult to anticipate where they would be 2. Law of the place of revocation
located
Proper law Probate of Will GR: Forum law
Lex loci actus: where the transaction was completed X: intrinsic validity required to be checked: law of decedent

Capacity to transfer property Lex situs (not personal law even if it's capacity!) Administration of Estate Forum law (procedural)

Formalities as to transfer of property Lex situs Jurisdiction of administrator Principal administrator:

Anciliary administrator
Intrinsic validity of transfer GR: Lex situs
X: lex intentionis if it can be established Trust Law that will sustain the validity of the trust

Exceptions to lex situs rule
Situs of property for tax purposes
Situs of debt
Contracts
1. Transaction does not affect transfer of title to or ownership of the land: Torts Traditional: Lex loci commissi
lex intentionis or lex voluntatis Modern: most significant contacts
2. When transaction is merely an accessory to a principal contract: lex loci
contractus Crimes Lex loci commissi ONLY - nulum crimen sine lege
3. Succession: personal law
Personal law of Corporations Law of place where made/ law which created it
Lex situs: tax laws of situs applies
Rights and obligations of corporations Law which created corporation
Still undecided and SH
But in HARRIS v. BALK: where the debtor is located
Domicile/residence of foreign Place indicated in charter
Lex loci intentionis corporation If none: where place of rep/principal functions exercised

Extrinsic validity of contract Lex loci celebrationis (where it was made)

Intrinsic Validity



 
 
 
1. Lex Loci Contractus (place of making contract)
2. Lex Loci Solutionis (place of performance)
3. Lex Loci Intentionis (place intended by parties)

Capacity to enter into contracts Personal law

Sale/barter Lex situs

Mortgage/pledge/antichresis Lex situs (though sabi sa Liljedahl lex intentionis͙)

a7 | P R I L F i n a l s R e v i e w e r _ P a n g a l a n g a n