Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
COURSE DESCRIPTION
The course deals primarily with conflict of law rules under Philippine law, and the
relevant principles and case law which deserve the attention of law students, particularly
the areas most frequently asked in the bar exams.
GRADING SYSTEM:
Class standing includes recitations, attendance, quizzes and other written works,
which may be assigned from time to time.
For purposes of marking exams and quizzes (essays), the passing score is 75
points.
COURSE REFERENCE:
Students are not required to buy any book for this class. However, students may
use as course reference, any edition of the following books: “CONFLICT OF LAWS”, by
Jorge R. Coquia and Elizabeth A. Pangalangan; and “PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW”,
by Jovito R. Salonga.
General Principles:
1
Atty. Dela Cruz obtained his Master of Laws in International & Comparative Business law (with Distinction) from the
London Metropolitan University in 2004, and a Single Masters Course (MSc) in International Trade Law from the
University College London, U.K., in 2005 as a Chevening scholar of the British government. In December 2002, he
completed a Fellowship on Leadership and International Relations at the John F. Kennedy School of Government,
Harvard University, USA. In 2001, he obtained his Masters in Public Management degree from the Ateneo School of
Government. He earned his Bachelor of Laws degree (3rd Honors) in 2000 and his AB Legal Management degree (cum
laude) in 1996, both from the University of Santo Tomas as a Rector’s Scholar. He is currently an elected Board Member of
the 2nd District of Bulacan. He is also currently a Senior Partner at the Divina Law Office in Makati City.
Conflict of Laws Syllabus
Atty. Enrique V. dela Cruz, Jr.
A: Part of municipal law of a State which directs its courts and administrative agencies,
when confronted with a legal problem involving foreign element, whether or not they
should apply foreign law/s or not.
A:
1. Monist school – Both subjects are essentially the same, because they manifest a
single concept of law, ultimately addressed to the same individual.
2. Dualist School
Private International
Public International Law
Law
Nature Municipal in character International in character
Sovereign states and other
Persons Involved Private individuals entities possessed of international
personality
Transac- Transactions w/ generally affect
Private transactions b/w
tions public interest; or of interest only
private individuals
Involved to sovereign states
Remedies/ Resort to municipal Remedies may be peaceful or
Sanctions tribunals forcible
A:
Family Code: Articles 10, 21, 26, 35, 36, 37, 38, 80, 96, 184, and 187
Civil Code: Articles 14, 15, 16, 17, 815, 816, 818, 819, 829, 1039, 1319, and 1753
Rules of Court: Rule 14 and 39, Section 48, Rule 131, Section 3 (n), 132, Section 25
2
Conflict of Laws Syllabus
Atty. Enrique V. dela Cruz, Jr.
A: If the court is faced with a case involving a foreign element, it should first determine:
1. Whether it has jurisdiction over the case;
2. If it has no jurisdiction, it should be dismissed on that ground;
3. If it has jurisdiction, the court will determine whether it should assume jurisdiction,
or it should dismiss the case on the ground of forum non conveniens;
4. Once the court has determined it has jurisdiction over the case, it will next
determine whether to apply the internal law of the forum or apply the proper
foreign law.
A: The refusal to assume jurisdiction because it would prove inconvenient for the forum.
Q: What are the Reasons Why a Court Will Dismiss the Case on the Basis of Forum
Non Conveniens?
A: (EDB-CIID)
1. Evidence and witnessess may not be readily available in the forum;
2. Court dockets of the forum are already clogged that would hamper the speedy
administration of justice;
3. The matter can be better tried and decided in another forum;
4. To curb the evils of forum shopping;
5. The forum has no particular interest in the case, as when the parties are not
citizens of the forum or are residents elsewhere;
3
Conflict of Laws Syllabus
Atty. Enrique V. dela Cruz, Jr.
A: ENE
1. Law of forum expressly so provides in its conflicts rule
2. Proper foreign law has not been properly pleaded and proved
3. Case involves any of the exceptions to the application of proper foreign law.
Q: What are the Theories on Why the Foreign Law May be Given Effect?
A:
1. Theory of Comity – Recognition w/c a nation allows w/in its territory, to the
legislative, executive, or judicial acts of another nation, having due regard to
both international duty & convenience and to the rights of its citizens, of other
persons under its protection
Kinds of Comity:
a. Comity based on reciprocity
b. Comity based on the persuasiveness of the foreign judgment
2. Theory of Vested Rights – To enforce not the foreign law or foreign judgment
itself but the simply the vested rights that have been vested under such foreign
law or judgment
3. Theory of Local Law – To apply foreign law, not because it is foreign, but
because our own rules by applying similar rules require us to do so, hence it is
as if the foreign law has become part & parcel of our own local law
4. Theory of Harmony of Law – To apply the foreign law so that wherever a case
is decided, that is, irrespective of the forum, the solution should be
approximately the same, as such, identical or similar problems must have
identical or similar solutions somewhere
5. Theory of Justice - Purpose of all laws is the dispensation of justice, if this can
be attained by applying the proper foreign law, then we must do so
CASES:
Santos III v. Northwest Orient Airlines, Inc., G.R. No. 101538, June 23, 1992
Communications Materials and Design v. CA, G.R. No. 102223, August 22, 1996
First Philippine International Bank v. CA, G.R. No. 115849, January 24, 1996
4
Conflict of Laws Syllabus
Atty. Enrique V. dela Cruz, Jr.
Bank of America v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 120135, March 31, 2003
Phil. Export and Foreign Loan Guarantee Corp., v. V.P. Eusebio Construction, Inc.,
G.R. No. 140047, July 13, 2004
Northwest Orient Airlines, Inc., v. CA, G.R. No. 112573, February 9, 1995
Saudi Arabian Airlines v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 122191, October 8, 1998
Bienvenido M. Cadalin v. POEA, G.R. No. 104776, December 5, 1994
Hasegawa v. Kitamura, G.R. No. 149177. November 23, 2007.
Raytheon International v. Rouzie, G.R. No. 162894. February 26, 2008.
Saudia Airlines v. Rebesencio, G.R. No. 198587. January 14, 2015.
A: Provisions found in a country’s own law which govern factual situations possessed of
foreign element.
Kinds:
a. One-sided rule - Indicates when Philippine internal law will apply (e.g. Art. 15 C.C.)
b. All-sided rule - Indicates when foreign law is to be applied (e.g. Art. 16)
Q: What are the Theories on Personal Law or the Law that Should Govern Status
and Capacity in General?
A:
1. Nationality theory – By virtue of which the status and capacity of an individual are
generally governed by the law of his nationality (Personal theory)
2. Domiciliary theory – States the law of the domicile as the proper determinative law
on status and capacity (Territorial theory)
3. Situs theory – Views the particular place or situs of an event or transaction as
generally the controlling law (Eclectic theory)
Note: In this jurisdiction, we adhere to the Nationality theory (Art 15; 2 nd par., Art 16; also
Art. 1039 C.C.).
Q: What is Domicile?
A: It is the place with which a person has a settled connection for certain legal purposes,
either because his home is there or because that is the place assigned to him by law.
A:
1. No natural person can ever be without a domicile.
2. That a person can have but one domicile at a time.
3. Every natural person, free and sui juris, may establish and change his domicile.
4. A domicile once acquired is retained until a new one is gained.
5. The presumption is in favor of continuance of an existing domicile.
A: CAFI
1. Capacity
2. Actual physical presence in the place chosen
3. Freedom of choice
5
Conflict of Laws Syllabus
Atty. Enrique V. dela Cruz, Jr.
4. Provable intent that it should be one’s fixed and permanent place of abode – one’s
home – that is, there should be “animus manendi” (intent to remain) or “animus
non-revertendi” (intent not to return to the original abode).
A:
Borrowing Statute – Laws of the state on jurisdiction used by another state in deciding
conflicts question involved in the choice of law. It directs the state of the forum to apply the
foreign statute of limitations to the pending claims based on the foreign law and has the
practical effect of treating the foreign statute of limitations as one of substance. It bars the
filing of a suit in the forum if it is already barred by the statute of limitations in the place
where the cause of action arose. Thus, when the country has a borrowing statute, the
characterization of a statute into a procedural or substantive law becomes irrelevant.
Forum Non Conveniens - Principle in private international law that where the ends of
justice strongly indicate that the controversy may be more suitably tried elsewhere, then
jurisdiction should be declined and the parties relegated to relief to be sought in another
forum. (1994 Bar Question)
Long Arm Statute - A legislative act which provides for personal jurisdiction, via
substituted service or process over persons or corporations which are non-residents of the
state and which voluntarily go into the state directly or by agent or communicate with
persons in the state for limited purposes, in actions which concern claims relating to
performance or execution or those purposes; Long-arm statute refers simply to authorized
substituted service.
Where the factual antecedents satisfactory establish the existence of a foreign element,
the problem could present a conflicts case. A factual situation that cuts across territorial
lines and is affected by the diverse laws of two or more states is said to contain a “foreign
element.”
A:
1. Domicile of origin – the domicile of a person’s parents at the time of birth
2. Constructive domicile – domicile established by law after birth in case of persons
under legal disability, regardless of their intention or voluntary act
3. Domicile of Choice – is the place voluntarily chosen by a person sui juris as his
home and to which, whenever he is absent, he has the intention to return
6
Conflict of Laws Syllabus
Atty. Enrique V. dela Cruz, Jr.
CASES:
Paula T. Llorente v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 124371, November 23, 2000
Juan Frivaldo v. COMELEC, 174 SCRA 245 (1989)
Imelda Marcos v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 119976, September 18, 1995
Agapito Aquino v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 120265, September 18, 1995
Asistio v. Aguirre, G.R. No. 191124, April 27, 2010
CITIZENSHIP
General Rule: Under Article 26 of the Family Code, all marriages solemnized outside
the Philippines in accordance with the laws in force in the country where they were
solemnized and valid there as such, is also valid in the Philippines.
7
Conflict of Laws Syllabus
Atty. Enrique V. dela Cruz, Jr.
Exception: If the marriage is void under Philippine law, then the marriage is void even
if it is valid in the country where the marriage was solemnized.
CASES:
Alice Reyes Van Dorn v. Manuel Romillo, G.R. No. L-68470, October 8, 1985
Imelda Pilapil v. Corona Ibay-Somera, G.R. No. 80116, June 30, 1989
Fe Quita v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 124862, December 22, 1998
Republic v. Labrador, G.R. No. 132980, 25 March 1999
Grace Garcia v. Rederick Recio, G.R. No. 138322, October 3, 2001
Republic v. Orbecido III, GR. No. 154380, Oct. 5, 2005
Republic v. Iyoy, G.R. No. 152577, Sept. 21, 2005
De Dios Carlos v. Sandoval, G.R. No. 179922, December 16, 2008
Corpuz v. Santo Tomas, G.R. No. 186571, August 11, 2010
Dacasin v. Dacasin, G.R. No. 168785. February 5, 2010.
Fujiki v. Marinay G.R. No. 196049. June 26, 2013
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES v. LIBERTY D. ALBIOS, G.R. No. 198780. October
16, 2013
Ando v. DFA, G.R. No. 195432. August 27, 2014.
Medina v. Koike, G.R. No. 215723. July 27, 2016.
SUCCESSION
• Art. 816. The will of an alien who is abroad produces effect in the Philippines if
made with the formalities prescribed by the law of the place in which he resides, or
according to the formalities observed in his country, or in conformity with those
which this Code prescribes.
• Art. 817. A will made in the Philippines by a citizen or subject of another country,
which is executed in accordance with the law of the country of which he is a citizen
or subject, and which might be proved and allowed by the law of his own country,
shall have the same effect as if executed according to the laws of the Philippines.
• Probate is an adjudication that the last will and testament of a person was
executed with all the formalities required by law.
• It does not pass upon the validity of the provision of the will. (authentication only)
• The disallownace of a will being essentially procedural in character, the law of the
forum will govern procedural matters.
• However, the court will look into the law of the foreign state where the suit was
made as to whether the extrinsic requirements in the execution of the will have
been complied with (Art. 17, 816 and 817 C.C.).
8
Conflict of Laws Syllabus
Atty. Enrique V. dela Cruz, Jr.
ANS: Yes. The will of an alien who is abroad produces effect in the Philippines if made
with the formalities prescribed by the law of the place in which he resides, or according to
the formalities observed in his country, or in conformity with those which this Code
prescribes. (Art. 816, NCC). Proof that the will conforms to the laws mentioned is
imperative. (Salud Teodoro Vda. De Perez vs. Hon. Tolete, 52 SCAD 46, G.R. No. 76714,
June 2, 1994).
ANS: A will made in a foreign country may be probated in the Philippines after sufficient
proof is presented showing that the will was duly executed in the manner required by law
and that the testator had testamentary capacity at the time he executed the will.
Q. What evidence are necessary for the allowance of wills which have been
probated outside of the Philippines?
ANS: The evidence necessary for the allowance of wills which have been probated
outside of the Philippines are as follows:
(1) the due execution of the will in accordance with the foreign laws;
(2) the testator has his domicile in the foreign country and not in the Philippines;
(3) the will has been admitted to probate in such country;
(4) the fact that the foreign tribunal is a probate court; and
(5) the laws of a foreign country on procedure and allowance of wills (Suntay v.
Suntay, 95 Phil. 500 [1954]; Fluemer v. Hix, 54 Phil. 610 [1930]).
A: A French word which means “referring back”. It is a term used in Conflicts of Laws to
denote the phenomenon where the conflicts rule of the forum makes a reference to a
foreign law, but the foreign law is found to contain a conflict rule that returns or refers back
the matter to the law of the forum.
CASES:
Suntay v. Suntay, G.R. Nos. L-3087 & L-3088. July 31, 1954.
Aznar v. Garcia, G.R. No. L-16749. January 31, 1963.
PCI Bank v. Escolin, G.R. Nos. L-27860 & L-27896. March 29, 1974.
Vda. de Perez v. Tolete, GR No. 76714, June 2, 1994
Llorente v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 124371. November 23, 2000.
Palaganas v. Palaganas, GR No. 169144, January 26, 2011
Q: What Will the Court Do, if it is Confronted with a Case with a “Renvoi” Problem?
A:
1. Reject the renvoi - Here we do not want the referring back to us – so we apply the
foreign internal law.
2. Accept the renvoi - Here we welcome the reference back to us – so we apply our
internal law).
9
Conflict of Laws Syllabus
Atty. Enrique V. dela Cruz, Jr.
4. Make use of the Foreign Court Theory - This means that the Philippine court will
put itself in the position of the foreign court – and whatever the foreign court will
do respecting the case, the Philippine court will do likewise.
A: It is what occurs when the local court, in adopting the foreign court theory, discovers
that the foreign court accepts the renvoi (hence ultimately, it is the foreign internal law that
will be used.
Q: What is Transmission?
A: It is the process of applying the law of a foreign state through the law of a second
foreign state.
Q: What are the Differences between Renvoi (single or double) and Transmission?
A:
Renvoi Transmission
Deals with 2 countries Deals with 3 or more countries
Deals with “referring back” Deals with “referring across” or “transmitting”
REVOCATION OF WILLS
• Being a unilateral and purely personal act, a will is revocable at any time before
the death of the testator. Any waiver or restriction of this right is void (Art. 788).
• Under Art. 829 of the Civil Code, a revocation done outside the Philippines, by a
person who does not have a domicile in this country, is valid when it is done
according to: (i) Lex loci celebrationis or (ii) lex domicilii
• If the revocation is done outside the Philippines by one domiciled here, then the
governing law is either Philippine law or the law of the place of revocation.
TORTS
A: The law of the place where the alleged tort was committed will govern. (lex loci delicti
commissi)
A: The tortuous act gives rise to an obligation which is transitory and follows the person
committing the tortuous act and maybe enforced wherever he may be found.
A: If the tort law of the Philippines embodies a social or economic policy, then the law of
the forum on torts shall be applied. If the Philippines has no concern or interest in the
application of the internal law, and the other State have an interest, apply the law of such
State.
10
Conflict of Laws Syllabus
Atty. Enrique V. dela Cruz, Jr.
Note: The State where an injury has occurred has interest in compensating the injured
party, while the State where the tortfeasor has acted has an interest in regulating the
conduct of persons found in its territory.
CASES:
A:
Recognition of Foreign Judgment Enforcement of Foreign Judgment
The defendant or respondent is presenting the The plaintiff or petitioner wants the court to
foreign judgment merely as a defense, on the positively carry out and make effective the
basis of res judicata foreign judgment
Involves merely the sense of justice Implies a direct act of sovereignty
Does not require either an action or a special Requires a separate action brought precisely
proceeding to make the foreign judgment effective
A:
1. Must be a judgment of a judicial or quasi-judicial agency which is an impartial
tribunal;
2. Defendant must be given a reasonable notice and opportunity to be heard;
3. Must be a judgment on a civil or commercial matter;
4. Must have disposed of the controversy on the merits;
5. Must be final and executory to constitute as res judicata in another action;
6. Must not be contrary to the public policy or good morals of the country where it is
sought to be enforced;
7. Must not be barred by prescription in both states;
8. Must not be obtained by fraud, collusion, mistake of fact or law.
Q: What are the Effects of a Judgment or Final Order of a Foreign Tribunal or Court
in Case the Judgment is Being Sought Enforcement in the Philippine Courts?
A:
1. In case the judgment is on a specific thing – the judgment is conclusive upon the
title of the thing;
CASES:
Asiavest Merchant Bankers v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 110263, July 20, 2001
Philsec Investment Corp., v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 103493, June 19, 1997
11
Conflict of Laws Syllabus
Atty. Enrique V. dela Cruz, Jr.
Phil. Aluminum Wheels v. FASGI Enterprises, G.R. No. 137378, Oct. 12, 2000
Gil Miguel Puyat v. Ron Zabarte, G.R. No. 141536, February 26, 2001
Oil & Natural Gas Commission v. CA, G.R. No. 114323, September 28, 1999
Mijares v. Hon. Ranada, G.R. No. 139325. April 12, 2005
Quasha et al., v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 182013. December 4, 2009
Republic v. Labrador, G.R. No. 132980, 25 March 1999
Corpuz v. Santo Tomas, G.R. No. 186571, August 11, 2010
Dacasin v. Dacasin, G.R. No. 168785. February 5, 2010.
Fujiki v. Marinay G.R. No. 196049. June 26, 2013
12