Sunteți pe pagina 1din 4

KAZUHIRO HASEGAWA and NIPPON ENGINEERING and recognition and enforcement of judgments. Jurisdiction by them either expressly or implicitly.

either expressly or implicitly. Under the “state of conflicts principle is more properly considered a matter of
CONSULTANTS CO., LTD., vs MINORU KITAMURA & choice of law are 2 distinct concepts. Jurisdiction the most significant relationship rule,” to ascertain what defense.
considers whether it is fair to cause a defendant to travel to state law to apply to a dispute, the court should determine
FACTS: this state; choice of law asks the further question whether which state has the most substantial connection to the Wildvalley Shipping Ltd., vs. CA & Philippine President
Nippon Engineering Consultants (Nippon), a Japanese the application of a substantive law w/c will determine the occurrence and the parties. In a case involving a contract, Lines Inc.
consultancy firm providing technical and management merits of the case is fair to both parties. The power to the court should consider where the contract was made, FACTS: Philippine Roxas, a vessel owned by Philippine
support in the infrastructure projects national permanently exercise jurisdiction does not automatically give a state was negotiated, was to be performed, and the domicile, President Lines arrived in Puerto Ordaz, Venezuela to load
residing in the Philippines. The agreement provides that constitutional authority to apply forum law. While place of business, or place of incorporation of the parties. iron ore. Upon the completion of the loading and when the
Kitamaru was to extend professional services to Nippon for jurisdiction and the choice of the lex fori will often coincide, This rule takes into account several contacts and evaluates vessel was ready to leave port, Mr. Vasquez, an official pilot
a year. Nippon assigned Kitamaru to work as the project the “minimum contacts” for one do not always provide the them according to their relative importance with respect to of Venezuela, was designated by the harbour authorities in
manager of the Southern Tagalog Access Road (STAR) necessary “significant contacts” for the other. The question the particular issue to be resolved. Puerto Ordaz to navigate the Philippine Roxas through the
project. When the STAR project was near completion, of whether the law of a state can be applied to a transaction Orinoco River and he was asked to pilot the said vessel. The
DPWH engaged the consultancy services of Nippon, this is different from the question of whether the courts of that Since these 3 principles in conflict of laws make reference to captain of the Philippine Roxas, Captain Colon, was at the
time for the detailed engineering & construction supervision state have jurisdiction to enter a judgment. the law applicable to a dispute, they are rules proper for the bridge together with the pilot Vasquez, the vessel's third
of the Bongabon-Baler Road Improvement (BBRI) Project. 2nd phase, the choice of law. They determine which state's mate (then the officer on watch), and a helmsman when the
Kitamaru was named as the project manger in the contract. In this case, only the 1st phase is at issue—jurisdiction. law is to be applied in resolving the substantive issues of a vessel left the port. Captain Colon left the bridge when the
Jurisdiction, however, has various aspects. For a court to conflicts problem. Necessarily, as the only issue in this case vessel was under way.
Hasegawa, Nippon’s general manager for its International validly exercise its power to adjudicate a controversy, it is that of jurisdiction, choice-of-law rules are not only
Division, informed Kitamaru that the company had no more must have jurisdiction over the plaintiff/petitioner, over the inapplicable but also not yet called for. The Philippine Roxas experienced some vibrations when it
intention of automatically renewing his ICA. His services defendant/respondent, over the subject matter, over the entered the San Roque Channel. The vessel proceeded on
would be engaged by the company only up to the issues of the case and, in cases involving property, over the Further, Nippon’s premature invocation of choice-of-law its way, with the pilot assuring the watch officer that the
substantial completion of the STAR Project. res or the thing w/c is the subject of the litigation. In rules is exposed by the fact that they have not yet pointed vibration was a result of the shallowness of the channel.
assailing the trial court's jurisdiction herein, Nippon is out any conflict between the laws of Japan and ours. Before Between mile 158 and 157, the vessel again experienced
Kitamaru demanded that he be assigned to the BBRI actually referring to subject matter jurisdiction. determining which law should apply, 1st there should exist a some vibrations and the watch officer called the master to
project. Nippon insisted that Kitamaru’s contract was for a conflict of laws situation requiring the application of the the bridge. The master (captain) checked the position of the
fixed term that had expired. Kitamaru then filed for specific Jurisdiction over the subject matter in a judicial proceeding conflict of laws rules. Also, when the law of a foreign vessel and verified that it was in the centre of the channel.
performance & damages w/ the RTC of Lipa City. Nippon is conferred by the sovereign authority w/c establishes and country is invoked to provide the proper rules for the He ordered Monis, Chief Officer of the President Roxas, to
filed a MTD. organizes the court. It is given only by law and in the solution of a case, the existence of such law must be check all the double bottom tanks.
manner prescribed by law. It is further determined by the pleaded and proved.
Nippon’s contention: The ICA had been perfected in Japan & allegations of the complaint irrespective of whether the The Philippine Roxas ran aground in the Orinoco River, thus
executed by & between Japanese nationals. Thus, the RTC plaintiff is entitled to all or some of the claims asserted It should be noted that when a conflicts case, one involving obstructing the ingress and egress of vessels. As a result of
of Lipa City has no jurisdiction. The claim for improper pre- therein. To succeed in its motion for the dismissal of an a foreign element, is brought before a court or the blockage, the Malandrinon, a vessel owned by
termination of Kitamaru’s ICA could only be heard & action for lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter of the administrative agency, there are 3 alternatives open to the Wildvalley Shipping Company, Ltd., was unable to sail out of
ventilated in the proper courts of Japan following the claim, the movant must show that the court or tribunal latter in disposing of it: (1) dismiss the case, either because Puerto Ordaz on that day.
principles of lex loci celebrationis & lex contractus. cannot act on the matter submitted to it because no law of lack of jurisdiction or refusal to assume jurisdiction over
grants it the power to adjudicate the claims. the case; (2) assume jurisdiction over the case and apply the Subsequently, Wildvalley Shipping Company, Ltd. filed a suit
The RTC denied the motion to dismiss. The CA ruled hat the internal law of the forum; or (3) assume jurisdiction over with the Regional Trial Court of Manila against Philippine
principle of lex loci celebrationis was not applicable to the In the instant case, Nippon, in its MTD, does not claim that the case and take into account or apply the law of some President Lines, Inc. for damages in the form of unearned
case, because nowhere in the pleadings was the validity of the RTC is not properly vested by law w/ jurisdiction to hear other State or States. The court’s power to hear cases and profits, and interest thereon amounting to US $400,000.00
the written agreement put in issue. It held that the RTC was the subject controversy for a civil case for specific controversies is derived from the Constitution and the laws. plus attorney's fees, costs, and expenses of litigation. The
correct in applying the principle of lex loci solutionis. performance & damages is one not capable of pecuniary While it may choose to recognize laws of foreign nations, trial court rendered its decision in favor of the petitioners.
estimation & is properly cognizable by the RTC of Lipa City. the court is not limited by foreign sovereign law short of Both parties appealed: the petitioner appealing the non-
ISSUE: What they rather raise as grounds to question subject treaties or other formal agreements, even in matters award of interest with the private respondent questioning
matter jurisdiction are the principles of lex loci celebrationis regarding rights provided by foreign sovereigns. the decision on the merits of the case.
Whether or not the subject matter jurisdiction of Philippine and lex contractus, and the “state of the most significant
courts in civil cases for specific performance & damages relationship rule.” The Court finds the invocation of these Neither can the other ground raised, forum non conveniens, ISSUE: WON Venezuela law is applicable to the case at bar.
involving contracts executed outside the country by foreign grounds unsound. be used to deprive the RTC of its jurisdiction. 1st, it is not a
nationals may be assailed on the principles of lex loci proper basis for a motion to dismiss because Sec. 1, Rule 16 RULING: No. It is well-settled that foreign laws must be
celebrationis, lex contractus, “the state of the most Lex loci celebrationis relates to the “law of the place of the of the Rules of Court does not include it as a ground. 2nd, properly pleaded and proved as a fact. In the absence of
significant relationship rule,” or forum non conveniens. ceremony” or the law of the place where a contract is whether a suit should be entertained or dismissed on the pleading and proof, the laws of a foreign country, or state,
made. The doctrine of lex contractus or lex loci contractus basis of the said doctrine depends largely upon the facts of will be presumed to be the same as our own local or
HELD: means the “law of the place where a contract is executed or the particular case and is addressed to the sound discretion domestic law and this is known as processual presumption.
to be performed.” It controls the nature, construction, and of the RTC. In this case, the RTC decided to assume
NO. In the judicial resolution of conflicts problems, 3 validity of the contract and it may pertain to the law jurisdiction. 3rd, the propriety of dismissing a case based on A distinction is to be made as to the manner of proving a
consecutive phases are involved: jurisdiction, choice of law, voluntarily agreed upon by the parties or the law intended this principle requires a factual determination; hence, this written and an unwritten law. The former falls under Section
24, Rule 132 of the Rules of Court, as amended, the entire and was a duly accredited pilot in Venezuela in good having the legal custody of the record, or by his deputy, and • Next, the Bank makes much of Guerrero’s failure
provision of which is quoted hereunder. Where the foreign standing when he was engaged. accompanied, if the record is not kept in the Philippines, to submit an opposing affidavit to the Walden Affidavit.
law sought to be proved is "unwritten," the oral testimony with a certificate that such officer has the custody. If the However, the pertinent provision of Rule 35 Sec 3 of the old
of expert witnesses is admissible, as are printed and PROOF OF FOREIGN LAW office in which the record is kept is in a foreign country, the Rules of Court did not make the submission of an opposing
published books of reports of decisions of the courts of the MANUFACTURERS HANOVER TRUST CO. and/or CHEMICAL certificate may be made by a secretary of the embassy or affidavit mandatory. Guerrero need not file an opposing
country concerned if proved to be commonly admitted in BANK vs. RAFAEL MA. GUERRERO legation, consul general, consul, vice consul, or consular affidavit to the Walden affidavit because his complaint itself
such courts. • On May 17, 1994, Guerrero filed a complaint for damages agent or by any officer in the foreign service of the controverts the matters set forth in the Bank’s motion and
against Hanover and/or Chemical Bank (Bank) with the RTC Philippines stationed in the foreign country in which the the Walden affidavit. A party should not be made to deny
Section 24 of Rule 132 of the Rules of Court, as amended, of Manila. record is kept, and authenticated by the seal of his office. matters already averred in his complaint.
provides: • Guerrero sought payment of damages for
"Sec. 24. Proof of official record. -- The record of public a. Illegally withheld taxes charged against interests on his The Walden Affidavit Failed to Prove New York Law and • There being substantial triable issues between the parties,
documents referred to in paragraph (a) of Section 19, when checking account with the Bank Jurisprudence the courts a quo correctly denied the Bank’s motion for
admissible for any purpose, may be evidenced by an official b. A returned check worth $18,000 due to signature • The Bank’s motion for PSJ as supported by the Walden partial summary judgment. There is a need to determine by
publication thereof or by a copy attested by the officer verification problems Affidavit does not demonstrate that Guerrero’s claims are presentation of evidence in a regular trial if the Bank is
having the legal custody of the record, or by his deputy, and c. Unauthorized conversion of his account sham, fictitious or contrived. On the contrary, the Walden guilty of any wrongdoing and if it is liable for damages under
accompanied, if the record is not kept in the Philippines, • The Bank answered that by stipulation, Guerrero’s account affidavit shows that the facts and material allegations as the applicable laws.
with a certificate that such officer has the custody. If the is governed by New York law, and such law does not permit pleaded by the parties are disputed and there are
office in which the record is kept is in a foreign country, the any of Guerrero’s claims except actual damages. substantial triable issues necessitating a formal trial. EDI-STAFFBUILDERS INTERNATIONAL, INC. vs. NLRC and
certificate may be made by a secretary of the embassy or • The Bank filed a Motion for Partial Summary Judgment • Foreign laws are not a matter of judicial notice. Like any ELEAZAR S. GRAN
legation, consul general, consul, vice consul, or consular (PSJ), contending that the trial should be limited to the issue other fact, they must be alleged and proven. Certainly, the FACTS:
agent or by any officer in the foreign service of the of actual damages only. conflicting allegations as to whether New York law or
Philippines stationed in the foreign country in which the • The “Walden Affidavit” was presented by the Bank to Philippine law applies to Guerrero’s claims present a clear After being terminated by OAB, his employer in Saudi
record is kept, and authenticated by the seal of his office." support its Motion for PSJ. dispute on material allegations which can be resolved only Arabaia, Gran received from OAB the total amount of SR
The two Venezuelan Laws (the Pilotage Law of Venezuela • The RTC and CA denied the Bank’s Motion for PSJ, stating by a trial on the merits. 2,948.00 representing his final pay, and on the same day, he
and rules governing the navigation of the Orinoco river) that the Walden Affidavit does not serve as proof of the • The Bank, however, cannot rely on Willamette Iron and executed a Declarationreleasing OAB from any financial
were not duly proven as fact before the court. Only mere New York law and jurisprudence relied on by the Bank to Steel Works v. Muzzal or Collector of Internal Revenue v. obligation or otherwise, towards him.
photocopies of the laws were presented as evidence. For a support its Motion. Fisher to support its cause. These cases involved attorneys
copy of a foreign public document to be admissible, the testifying in open court during the trial in the Philippines Upon arrival in the Philippines, he instituted a complaint
following requisites are mandatory: (1) It must be attested ISSUE: and quoting the particular foreign laws sought to be and the Labor Arbiter ruled that the dismissal was valid.
by the officer having legal custody of the records or by his • WON the Walden Affidavit was sufficient proof of the New established. On the other hand, the Walden Affidavit was Respondents Expertise Search International, Inc., EDI
deputy; and (2) It must be accompanied by a certificate by a York law and jurisprudence relied upon by the Bank in its taken abroad ex parte and the affiant never testified in open Staffbuilders Int’l., Inc. and Omar Ahmed Ali Bin Bechr Est.
secretary of the embassy or legation, consul general, consul, Motion for PSJ? – NO. court. The Walden Affidavit cannot be considered as proof (OAB) are ordered jointly and severally liable by the NLRC to
vice consular or consular agent or foreign service officer, of New York law on damages not only because it is self- pay the complainant Eleazar Gran US$16,150.00r
and with the seal of his office. HELD: serving but also because it does not state the specific New epresenting his salaries for the unexpired portion of his
• NO. The Walden Affidavit failed to prove New York law and York law on damages. contract.
It is not enough that the Gaceta Oficial, or a book published jurisprudence. The SC denied the Bank’s petition for lack of • The Walden Affidavit states conclusions from the affiant’s
by the Ministerio de Comunicaciones of Venezuela, was merit. personal interpretation and opinion of the facts of the case ISSUE:
presented as evidence with Captain Monzon attesting it. It is • The CA considered the New York law and jurisprudence as vis a vis the alleged laws and jurisprudence without citing Whether or not the Declaration signed by Gran did bar him
also required by Section 24 of Rule 132 of the Rules of Court public documents defined in Rule 132 Sec 19 and 24 of the any law in particular. The citations in the Walden Affidavit of from demanding benefits to which he was entitled.
that a certificate that Captain Monzon, who attested the Rules of Evidence, which should be followed in proving various U.S. court decisions do not constitute proof of the
documents, is the officer who had legal custody of those foreign law. official records or decisions of the U.S. courts. RULING:
records made by a secretary of the embassy or legation, • SEC. 19. Classes of Documents. – For the purpose of their • While the Bank attached copies of some of the U.S. court No. First, the salary paid to Gran upon his termination, in
consul general, consul, vice consul or consular agent or by presentation in evidence, documents are either public or decisions cited in the Walden affidavit, these copies do not the amount of SR 2,948.00, is unreasonably low which is
any officer in the foreign service of the Philippines stationed private. comply with Section 24 of Rule 132 on proof of official lower than his monthly salary. Secondly, The Declaration
in Venezuela, and authenticated by the seal of his office records or decisions of foreign courts. reveals that the payment of SR 2,948.00 is actually the
accompanying the copy of the public document. No such Public documents are: • The Bank failed to comply with Section 24 of Rule 132 on payment for Gran’s salary for the services he rendered to
certificate could be found in the records of the case. (a) The written official acts, or records of the official acts of how to prove a foreign law and decisions of foreign courts. OAB as Computer Specialist. Third, The factual
the sovereign authority, official bodies and tribunals, and The Walden Affidavit did not prove the current state of New circumstances surrounding the execution of the Declaration
Failure to prove the foreign laws gives rise to processual public officers, whether of the Philippines, or of a foreign York law and jurisprudence. Thus, the Bank has only alleged, would show that Gran did not voluntarily and freely execute
presumption where the foreign law is deemed to be the country; but has not proved, what New York law and jurisprudence the document. He was just forced as he was told to leave
same as Philippine laws. Under Philippine laws, PPL nor are on the matters at issue. the country and he needed the money. Fourth, the
Captain Colon cannot be held liable for the negligence of • SEC. 24. Proof of official record. – The record of public Declaration is a contract of adhesion which should be
Vasquez. PPL and Colon had shown due diligence in documents referred to in paragraph (a) of Section 19, when It Was Not Mandatory for Guerrero to Submit an Opposing construed against the employer, OAB. An adhesion contract
selecting Vasquez to pilot the vessel. Vasquez is competent admissible for any purpose, may be evidenced by an official Affidavit to the Walden Affidavit is contrary to public policy as it leaves the weaker party—
publication thereof or by a copy attested by the officer the employee—in a “take-it-or-leave-it” situation. Certainly,
the employer is being unjust to the employee as there is no misconduct, EMPLOYER will provide employee with free The Supreme Court held that as a general rule a foreign the complaint in an action for foreclosure of mortgage,
meaningful choice on the part of the employee while the medical attention. If such illness or injury incapacitates the procedural law will not be applied in our country as we pursuant to the provision of Rule 68 of the 1997 Rules of
terms are unreasonably favorable to the employer. EMPLOYEE to the extent the EMPLOYEE's services must be must adopt our own procedural laws. Civil Procedure. As to extrajudicial foreclosure, such remedy
terminated as determined by a qualified physician is deemed elected by the mortgage creditor upon filing of
Also, the Declaration purporting to be a quitclaim and designated by the EMPLOYER and provided such illness or EXCEPTION: the petition not with any court of justice but with the Office
waiver is unenforceable under Philippine laws in the injury was not due in part or whole to his willful act, neglect of the Sheriff of the province where the sale is to be made,
absence of proof of the applicable law of Saudi Arabia. In or misconduct compensation shall be paid to employee in Philippines may adopt foreign procedural law under the in accordance with the provisions of Act No. 3135, as
the absence of proof of the laws of the foreign country accordance with and subject to the limitations of the Borrowing Statute such as Sec. 48 of the Civil Procedure amended by Act No. 4118.
agreed upon to govern said contracts, It is advisable that the Workmen's Compensation Act of the Republic of the Rule stating “if by the laws of the State or country where The English law which rules otherwise cannot be applied in
stipulations be made in English and Tagalog or in the dialect Philippines or the Workmen's Insurance Law of registry of the cause of action arose the action is barred, it is also Philippine jurisdiction because it is against public policy.
known to the employee. There should be two (2) witnesses the vessel whichever is greater. Finally, Article IV of the barred in the Philippines.” Thus, Bahrain law must be
to the execution of the quitclaim who must also sign the Labor Code provides that "all doubts in the implementation applied. However, the court contends that Bahrain’s law on Herald Black Dacasin, petitioner vs. Sharon Del Mundo
quitclaim. The document should be subscribed and sworn to and interpretation of the provisions of this code, including prescription cannot be applied because the court will not Dacasin , respondent
under oath preferably before any administering official of its implementing rules and resolved in favor of labor. enforce any foreign claim that is obnoxious to the forum’s
the Department of Labor and Employment or its regional public policy and the 1 yr. rule on prescription is against
office, the Bureau of Labor Relations, the NLRC or a labor CADALIN vs POEA ADMINISTRATOR 238 SCRA 721 public policy on labor as enshrined in the Phils. Constitution.
On April 1994, petitioner and respondent got married here
attaché in a foreign country. “Borrowing Statute” –
in the Philippines. The following year, respondent got
The court ruled that the prescription period applicable to
pregnant and gave birth to a baby girl whom they named
ORSE MANAGEMENT CO. (PTE) and PACIFIC SEAMEN Ex: Sec. 48, Rule on Civil Procedure – “if by the laws of the the case should be Art 291 of the Labor Code of the Phils
Stephanie. In June of 1999respondent sought and obtained
SERVICES, INC., petitioners, State or country where the cause of action arose the action with a 3 years prescription period since the claim arose
from the Illinois Court a divorce decree against petitioner. In
vs. NATIONAL SEAMEN BOARD, HON. CRESCENCIO M. is barred, it is also barred in the Philippines.” from labor employment.
its ruling, the Illinois court dissolved the marriage and
awarded to the respondent sole custody of Stephanie and
RESTITUTA C. ABORDO, respondents. Facts: BANK OF AMERICA, NT and SA, petitioner, vs. AMERICAN
retained jurisdiction over the case for enforcement
Cadalin et al. are Filipino workers recruited by Asia Int’l REALTY CORPORATION and COURT OF APPEALS,
purposes. On 28th of January 2002, petitioner and
Napoleon B. Abordo, the deceased husband of private Builders Co. (AIBC), a domestic recruitment corporation, for respondents
respondent executed in Manila a contract (Agreement) for
respondent Restituta C. Abordo, was the Second Engineer of employment in Bahrain to work for Brown & Root Int’l Inc. Facts:
the joint custody of Stephanie. Two years after, petitioner
M.T. "Cherry Earl" when he died from an apoplectic stroke in (BRII) which is a foreign corporation with headquarters in (Petitioner Bank of America [organized under English laws]
sued respondent in the Regional TrialCourt of Makati City.
the course of his employment with petitioner NORSE Texas. Plaintiff instituted a class suit with the POEA for granted multi-million dollar loans to affiliate companies of
Petitioner claimed that respondent exercised sole custody
MANAGEMENT COMPANY (PTE). The M.T. "Cherry Earl" is a money claims arising from the unexpired portion of their respondent American Realty Corp. Properties of American
over Stephanie. Respondent sought the dismissal of the
vessel of Singaporean Registry. In her complaint for employment contract which was prematurely terminated. Realty Corp in the Philippines were mortgaged as security.
complaint due to lack of jurisdiction, since Illinois Court hold
compensation benefits filed before the National Seamen They worked in Bahrain for BRII and they filed the suit after When the affiliate companies were not able to pay,
the jurisdiction in enforcing the divorce decree.
Board, private respondent alleged that the amount of 1 yr. from the termination of their employment contract. Petitioner Bank of America filed cases for collection of sum
compensation due her from petitioners should be based on of money [principal loan] in courts in England and in
ISSUE: The question is whether the trial court has
the law where the vessel is registered. Petitioners contend As provided by Art. 156 of the Amiri Decree aka as the Labor Hongkong. The American Realty Corp was not impleaded as
jurisdiction to take cognizance of petitioner’s suit and
that the law of Singapore should not be applied in this case Law of the Private Sector of Bahrain: “a claim arising out of a party-defendant in these cases. Then, Bank of America
enforce the Agreement on the joint custody of the parties’
because the National Seamen Board cannot take judicial a contract of employment shall not be actionable after the brought a case in the Philippines [ Office of the Provincial
notice of the Workmen's Insurance Law of Singapore lapse of 1 year from the date of the expiry of the contract,” Sheriff of Bulacan Philippines] for the foreclosure of the
instead must be based on Board’s Memeorandum Circular it appears that their suit has prescribed. mortgaged properties). RTC ruled for respondent stating
RULING: The trial court has jurisdiction to entertain
No. 25. Ministry of Labor and Employment ordered the that filing for claim for principal loan by petitioner operated
petitioner’s suit but not to enforce the Agreement which is
petitioner to pay jointly and severally the private Plaintiff contends that the prescription period should be 10 as waiver of its right to foreclose mortgage. CA affirmed
void. However, factual and equity considerations militate
respondent. Petitioner appealed to the Ministry of Labor years as provided by Art. 1144 of the Civil Code as their RTC.
against the dismissal of petitioner’s suit and call for the
but same decision. Hence, this petition. claim arise from a violation of a contract.
remand of the case to settle the question of Stephanie’s
Issue: Does a mortgage-creditor waive its remedy to
Issue: Whether or not the law of Singapore ought to be The POEA Administrator holds that the 10 year period of foreclose the real estate mortgage constituted over a third
applied in this case. prescription should be applied but the NLRC provides a party mortgagors property situated in the Philippines by
Subject matter jurisdiction is conferred by law. At the time
different view asserting that Art 291 of the Labor Code of filing an action for the collection of the principal loan before
petitioner filed his suit in the trial court, statutory law vests
Held: The SC denied the petition. It has always been the the Phils with a 3 years prescription period should be foreign courts?
on Regional Trial Courts exclusive original jurisdiction over
policy of this Board, as enunciated in a long line of cases, applied. The Solicitor General expressed his personal point
civil actions incapable of pecuniary estimation. An action
that in cases of valid claims for benefits on account of injury of view that the 1 yr period provided by the Amiri Decree SC Ruling: Yes. Pursuing collection of principal loan means
for specific performance, such as petitioner’s suit to enforce
or death while in the course of employment, the law of the should be applied. waiver of its remedy to foreclose the real estate mortgage.
the Agreement on joint child custody, belongs to this
country in which the vessel is registered shall be considered. In our jurisdiction, the remedies available to the mortgage
species of actions. Thus, jurisdiction-wise, petitioner went
In Section 5(B) of the Employment Agreement between Ruling: creditor are deemed alternative and not cumulative.
to the right court.
petitioner and respondent’s husband states that In the Notably, an election of one remedy operates as a waiver of
Stephanie is now nearly 15 years old, thus removing the
event of illness or injury to Employee arising out of and in the other. For this purpose, a remedy is deemed chosen
case outside of the ambit of the mandatory maternal
the course of his employment and not due to his own willful upon the filing of the suit for collection or upon the filing of
custody regime under Article 213 and bringing it within
coverage of the default standard on child custody employment contract as void and she will be terminated attendant, it would be the height of iniquity to view Complainant was returned there.” Thus, applying the
proceedings – the best interest of the child. As the question due to lack of medical fitness. “ pregnancy as a disability so permanent and immutable that, doctrine of lex loci celebrationis, US laws apply. Also,
of custody is already before the trial court and the child’s it must entail the termination of one's employment. applying lex loci contractus, the Labor Arbiter ruled that the
parents, by executing the Agreement, initially showed 5. )November 8,2007 - Respondents filed a Complaint with parties did not intend to apply Philippine laws.
inclination to share custody, it is in the interest of swift and the Labor Arbiter against Saudia and its officers for illegal • Furthermore, contracts relating to labor and employment
efficient rendition of justice to allow the parties to take dismissal and for underpayment, along with moral and are impressed with public interest. Article 1700 of the Civil The NLRC ruled that the Labor Arbiter acquired jurisdiction
advantage of the court’s jurisdiction, submit evidence on exemplary damages, and attorney's fees. Petitioner Airlines Code provides that "[t]he relation between capital and labor over the case when CMI voluntarily submitted to his office’s
the custodial arrangement best serving Stephanie’s interest, contests the Labor Arbiter’s jurisdiction, as the contract’s are not merely contractual. They are so impressed with jurisdiction by presenting evidence, advancing arguments in
and let the trial court render judgment. This disposition is points referred to foreign law and that Respondents had no public interest that labor contracts must yield to the support of the legality of its acts, and praying for reliefs on
consistent with the settled doctrine that in child custody cause of action since they already voluntarily resigned. common good. the merits of the case.
proceedings, equity may be invoked to serve the child’s best • Pakistan Airlines Ruling: relationship is much affected with
interest. 6) Executive Labor Arbiter dismissed the complaint, but on public interest and that the otherwise applicable Philippine The Court of Appeals ruled that the Labor Arbiter and the
appeal the NLRC reversed the Labor Arbiter’s decision and laws and regulations cannot be rendered illusory by the NLRC had jurisdiction over the subject matter of the case
Saudi Arabia Airlines and Brenda Betia v. denied Petitioner Airlines’ Motion for Reconsideration, parties agreeing upon some other law to govern their and over the parties.
Ma. Jopette Rebesencio, et al. hence the current appeal. relationship.
SUMMARY: Various flight attendants got pregnant while As the present dispute relates to (what the respondents Issue:
working for Saudi Arabia Airlines, to which they requested RELEVANT ISSUE: allege to be) the illegal termination of respondents'
for Maternity leaves. Apparently there was a recently WON the Labor Arbiter and the NLRC has jurisdiction over employment, this case is immutably a matter of public Whether labor tribunals have jurisdiction over the case.
passed Unified Employment Contracts which allowed for Saudi Arabian Airlines and apply Philippine jurisdiction over interest and public policy. Consistent with clear
them to be terminated should they ever be pregnant due to the dispute? YES. Summons were validly served on Saudia pronouncements in law and jurisprudence, Philippine laws Held:
lack of physical fitness. The flight attendants were made to and jurisdiction over it validly acquired. properly find application in and govern this case.
resign upon threat of losing any benefits they might have RATIO: DISPOSITIVE: Yes. The Court ruled that the labor tribunals had jurisdiction
should they have resigned, and thus petition for illegal • No doubt that the pleadings were served to over the parties and the subject matter of the case. The
dismissal; Petitioner Airlines claim that the Labor Arbiter Petitioner Airlines through their counsel, however they Appealed Decision is Affirmed, case is remanded for a employment contract of Basso was replete with references
and NLRC do not have jurisdiction. claim that the NLRC and Labor Arbiter had no jurisdiction detailed computation of the amount to be paid by Saudi to US laws, and that it originated from and was returned to
DOCTRINE: Labor Contracts are a matter of Public Policy, since summons were served to Saudi Airlines Manila and Airlines. the US, do not automatically preclude our labor tribunals
and thus Philippine laws clearly find application in this case. not to them, Saudi Airlines Jeddah. Saudi Airlines Manila from exercising jurisdiction to hear and try this case.
was neither a party to the Cabin attendant contracts nor Continental Micronesia v. Basso
FACTS: funded the Respondents, and it was to Saudi Jeddah that Jurisdiction On the other hand, jurisdiction over the person of CMI was
1) Petitioner Saudi Arabian Airlines is a foreign corporation they filed their resignations. Court ruled however that b y its acquired through the coercive process of service of
established and existing under the Royal Decree No. M/24 own admission, Saudia, while a foreign corporation, has a Facts: summons. CMI never denied that it was served with
of Jeddah, who hired Respondents as flight attendants. After Philippine office, and that under the Foreign Investments Petitioner Continental Micronesia is a foreign corporation summons. CMI has, in fact, voluntarily appeared and
undergoing seminars required by the Philippine Overseas act of 1991, they are a foreign corporation doing business in organized and existing under the laws of and domiciled in participated in the proceedings before the courts. Though a
Employment Administration for deployment overseas, as the Phils and therefore are subject to Philippine jurisdiction. the United States of America. It is licensed to do business in foreign corporation, CMI is licensed to do business in the
well as training modules offered by Saudia, Respondents the Philippines. Respondent, a US citizen residing in the Philippines and has a local business address here. The
became Temporary and then eventually Permanent Flight • Petitioner Airlines also asserts that the Cabin Philippines, accepted an offer to be a General Manager purpose of the law in requiring that foreign corporations
Attendants; they entered into the necessary Cabin Attendant Contracts require the application of the laws of position by Mr. Braden, Managing Director-Asia of doing business in the country be licensed to do so, is to
Attendant Contracts with Saudi. Saudi Arabia rather than those of the Philippines. It claims Continental Airlines. On November 7, 1992, CMI took over subject the foreign corporations to the jurisdiction of our
that the difficulty of ascertaining foreign law calls into the Philippine operations of Continental, with respondent courts.
2) Respondents were released from service on separate operation the principle of forum non conveniens, thereby retaining his position as General Manager. Thereafter,
dates in 2006; claimed that such release was illegal since rendering improper the exercise of jurisdiction by Philippine respondent received a letter from Mr. Schulz, who was then Where the facts establish the existence of foreign elements,
the basis of termination of contract was solely because they tribunals. CMI’s Vice President of Marketing and Sales, informing him the case presents a conflicts-of-laws issue. Under the
were pregnant. They claim that they had informed Saudia of • Court: Forum non conveniens finds no that he has agreed to work in CMI as a consultant on an “as doctrine of forum non conveniens, a Philippine court in a
their respective pregnancies and had gone through the application and does not operate to divest Philippine needed basis.” Respondent wrote a counter-proposal that conflict-of-laws case may assume jurisdiction if it chooses to
necessary procedures to process their maternity leaves and tribunals of jurisdiction and to require the application of was rejected by CMI. do so, provided, that the following requisites are met: (1)
while initially, Saudia had given its approval, they ultimately foreign law. Though Article 1306 of the Civil Code provides that the Philippine Court is one to which the parties may
reneged and rather required them to file for resignation. that Parties may stipulate terms they may deem convenient, Respondent then filed a complaint for illegal dismissal conveniently resort to; (2) that the Philippine Court is in a
Philippine tribunals may not lose sight of considerations of against the petitioner corporation. Alleging the presence of position to make an intelligent decision as to the law and
3) Respondents claim that Petitioner Airlines threatened law, morals, good customs, public order, or public policy foreign elements, CMI filed a Motion to Dismiss on the the facts; and (3) that the Philippine Court has or is likely to
that if they would not resign, they would be terminated that underlie the contract. ground of lack of jurisdiction over the person of CMI and the have power to enforce its decision. All these requisites are
along with loss of benefits, separation pay, and ticket • Article II, Sections 1 and 14 of the 1987 subject matter of the controversy. present here.
discount entitlements; they anchored such on its “Unified Constitution ensures the equal protection of persons, and
Employment Contract for Female Cabin Attendants" which the equality between men and women. Though pregnancy The Labor Arbiter agreed with CMI that the employment
provides that “ if the Air Hostess becomes pregnant at any does present physical limitations that may render difficult contract was executed in the US “since the letter-offer was
time during the term of this contract, this shall render her the performance of functions associated with being a flight under the Texas letterhead and the acceptance of