Joey Ross Maputi | USJR Law

Miciano v Brimo
[G.R. No. 22595. November 1, 1924.]

Facts:
The partition of the estate left by the deceased Joseph G. Brimo is in question in this case.
The judicial administrator of this estate filed a scheme of partition. Andre Brimo, one of
the brothers of the deceased, opposed it. The appellant's opposition is based on the fact
that the partition in question puts into effect the provisions of Joseph G. Brimo's will
which are not in accordance with the laws of his Turkish nationality, for which reason they
are void as being in violation of article 10 of the Civil Code.

Issue:
WON the Turkish Law will apply as to the testamentary disposition of the remained
estate.

Ruling:
YES. Art. 10 of Civil Code (Old Civil Code) provides that: "Nevertheless, legal and
testamentary successions, in respect to the order of succession as well as to the amount of
the successional rights and the intrinsic validity of their provisions, shall be regulated by the
national law of the person whose succession is in question, whatever may be the nature of
the property or the country in which it may be situated." But the fact is that the oppositor
did not prove that said testamentary dispositions are not in accordance with the Turkish
laws, inasmuch as he did not present any evidence showing what the Turkish laws are on
the matter, and in the absence of evidence on such laws, they are presumed to be the
same as those of the Philippines.
Joey Ross Maputi | USJR Law

Laurel v Garcia
[G.R. No. 92013. July 25, 1990.]

Facts:
The Philippine Government through an Executive Order issued by President Corazon
Aquino intended to dispose the 4 properties located in Japan due to inability to maintain
its buildings and additional income for the Government. Petitioner Laurel asserts that the
Roppongi property and the related lots were acquired as part of the reparations from the
Japanese government for diplomatic and consular use by the Philippine government.
Vice-President Laurel states that the Roppongi property is classified as one of public
dominion, and not of private ownership under Article 420 of the Civil Code. The
respondents, for their part, refute the petitioner's contention by saying that the subject
property is not governed by our Civil Code but by the laws of Japan where the property is
located. They rely upon the rule of lex situs which is used in determining the applicable
law regarding the acquisition, transfer and devolution of the title to a property. They also
invoke Opinion No. 21, Series of 1988, dated January 27, 1988 of the Secretary of Justice
which used the lex situs in explaining the inapplicability of Philippine law regarding a
property situated in Japan.

Issue:
WON a conflict of laws arises with regard to real property.

Ruling:
NO. A conflict of law situation arises only when: (1) There is a dispute over the title or
ownership of an immovable, such that the capacity to take and transfer immovables, the
formalities of conveyance, the essential validity and effect of the transfer, or the
interpretation and effect of a conveyance, are to be determined and (2) A foreign law on
land ownership and its conveyance is asserted to conflict with a domestic law on the same
matters. Hence, the need to determine which law should apply.

In the instant case, none of the above elements exists. The issues are not concerned with
validity of ownership or title. There is no question that the property belongs to the
Philippines. The issue is the authority of the respondent officials to validly dispose of
property belonging to the State. And the validity of the procedures adopted to effect its
sale. This is governed by Philippine Law. The rule of lex situs does not apply. The assertion
that the opinion of the Secretary of Justice sheds light on the relevance of the lex situs
rule is misplaced. The opinion does not tackle the alienability of the real properties
procured through reparations nor the existence in what body of the authority to sell
them.
Joey Ross Maputi | USJR Law

In conclusion, the property is inalienable as it is part of public domain and outside the
commerce of men and no conflict of laws to speak of.