CONFLICT OF LAWS - Notes
CONFLICT OF LAWS - Notes
CONFLICT OF LAWS - Notes
It is that part of the municipal law of a state which directs its courts It is anything which is not domestic and has a foreign
and administrative agencies, when confronted with a legal problem component to it.
involving a foreign element, whether or not they should apply a It can be a foreigner, a foreign corporation, an incident
foreign law or foreign laws. happening in a foreign country, or a foreign law chosen by
the parties.
It is the law which comes into play when the issue before the court
affects some fact or event, or transaction that is closely connected
with a foreign system of law, as to necessitate recourse to that Saudi Arabia Airlines vs CA
system.
Foreign Elements: (1) The defendant, SAUDIA, is a foreign
It is that part of the law of each state or nation which determines corporation doing business in the Philippines. (2) By virtue of
whether, in dealing with a legal situation, the law of some other state petitioner’s employment as stewardess, events transpired during
or nation will be recognized, given effect, or applied. travel across the national borders (Manila to Jeddah and vice
versa).
ELEMENTS IN THE DEFINITION
Where the factual antecedents satisfactorily establish the
existence of a foreign element, we agree with petitioner that the
1. Conflict of laws is part of the municipal laws of a state. problem herein
2. There is a directive to courts and administrative agencies. could present a "conflicts" case.
3. There is a legal problem involving a foreign element.
4. There is either an application or non-application of a A factual situation that cuts across territorial lines and is affected
foreign law or foreign laws. by the diverse laws of two or more states is said to contain a
"foreign element". The presence of a foreign element is
(1) Conflict of laws is part of the municipal laws of a state inevitable since social and economic affairs of individuals and
associations are rarely
BASIS CONFLICT OF LAW OF NATIONS confined to the geographic limits of their birth or conception.
LAWS
The forms in which this foreign element may appear are many.
Nature Municipal in International in
The foreign element may simply consist in the fact that one of
character character
the parties to a contract is an alien or has a foreign domicile, or
Persons involved Dealt with by Involves sovereign that a contract between nationals of one State involves
private individuals states and other properties situated in another State. In other cases, the foreign
entities possessing element may assume a complex form.
international
personality In the instant case, the foreign element consisted in the fact that
Transactions Private Generally affected private respondent Morada is a resident Philippine national, and
involved transactions by public interest; that
between private those in general petitioner SAUDIA is a resident foreign corporation. Also, by
individuals are of interest only virtue of the employment of Morada with the petitioner Saudia as
to sovereign states a flight stewardess, events did transpire during her many
Remedies and Resort to municipal May be peaceful or occasions of travel across national borders, particularly from
sanctions tribunals forcible Manila, Philippines to Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, and vice versa, that
caused a "conflicts" situation to arise.
Sanctions under public international law
Peaceful – which includes diplomatic negotiation, tender We thus find private respondent's assertion that the case is
and exercise of good offices, mediation, inquiry and purely domestic, imprecise. A conflicts problem presents itself
conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement by ICJ and here, and the question of jurisdiction confronts the court a quo.
reference to regional agencies
Forcible – which includes severance of diplomatic
relations, retorsions, reprisals, embargo, boycott, non-
Hasegawa vs Kitamura
intercourse, pacific blockades, collective measures under
the UN Charter, and war
Foreign Elements: (1) Petitioner, Nippon, is a Japanese
consultancy firm (2) Respondent, Kitamura, is a Japanese
Conflict of Laws is not part of International Law national permanently residing in the Philippines (3) the
Independent Contractor Agreement (ICA) was perfected in
Although it is sometimes thought of as part of International law Japan
because of the presence of foreign element in a given problem, it is
not international in character but it is part of the municipal law of It should be noted that when a conflicts case, one involving a
each state. By municipal law in Conflict Laws is meant the internal or foreign element, is brought before a court or administrative
local law of each state (Sempio-Diy). agency, there are three alternatives open to the latter in
disposing of it: (1) dismiss the case, either because of lack of
(2) There is a directive to courts and administrative agencies jurisdiction or refusal to assume jurisdiction over the case; (2)
assume jurisdiction over the case and apply the internal law of
the forum; or (3) assume jurisdiction over the case and take into
Administrative agencies are sometimes called upon to decide or
account or apply the law of some other State or States. The
resolve conflicts problems such as the DFA, BID, and SEC. The
court’s power to hear cases and controversies is derived from
same may also be applied in quasi-judicial bodies like the NLRC. the Constitution and the laws. While it may choose to recognize
However, their determination of a conflict of law problem is only in a laws of foreign nations, the court is not limited by foreign
preliminary manner. It means that the ultimate recourse may be had
1
BAM 2020
CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER
sovereign law short of treaties or other formal agreements, even determine the merits of the case is fair to both parties. The
in matters regarding rights provided by foreign sovereigns. power to exercise jurisdiction does not automatically give a state
constitutional authority to apply forum law. While jurisdiction and
the choice of the lex fori will often coincide, the "minimum
contacts" for one do not always provide the necessary
Continental Micronesia vs Basso "significant contacts" for the other. The question of whether the
law of a state can be applied to a transaction is different from the
Foreign elements: (1) Petitioner, CMI, is a foreign corporation, question of whether the courts of that state have jurisdiction to
licensed to do business in the Philippines (2) Basso is a US enter a judgment.
citizen who resided in the Philippines prior to his death.
In this case, only the first phase is at issue—jurisdiction.
We agree with CMI that there is a conflict-of-laws issue that Jurisdiction, however, has various aspects. For a court to validly
needs to be resolved first. Where the facts establish the exercise its power to adjudicate a controversy, it must have
existence of foreign jurisdiction over the plaintiff or the petitioner, over the defendant
elements, the case presents a conflict-of-laws issue. The foreign or the respondent, over the subject matter, over the issues of the
element in a case nay appear in different forms, such as in this case and, in cases involving property, over the res or the thing
case, which is the subject of the litigation. In assailing the trial court's
where one of the parties s an alien and the other is domiciled in jurisdiction herein, petitioners are actually referring to subject
another state. matter jurisdiction.
Direct source – bilateral and multilateral treatises and Continental Micronesia VS Basso
international conventions, constitutions, condifications and
statutes, judicial decisions and international customs. In resolving the conflicts problem, courts should ask the following
questions:
Indirect sources – natural moral law, writings and treatises of
1. "Under the law, do I have jurisdiction over the subject matter
thinkers and famous writers and jurists on the subject.
and the parties to this case?
What is a Conflict of Laws case? 2. "If the answer is yes, is this a convenient forum to the parties,
in light of the facts?
It is any case which involves facts occurring in more than one state
or nation, so that in deciding the case, it is necessary to make a 3. "If the answer is yes, what is the conflicts rule for this
choice between the laws of different states or countries. particular problem?
PHASES IN CONFLICT RESOLUTION 4. "If the conflicts rule points to a foreign law, has said law been
properly pleaded and proved by the one invoking it?
Hasegawa VS Kitamura 5. "If so, is the application or enforcement of the foreign law in
the forum one of the basic exceptions to the application of
In the judicial resolution of conflicts problems, three consecutive foreign law? In short, is there any strong policy or vital interest of
phases are involved: jurisdiction, choice of law, and recognition the forum that is at stake in this case and which should preclude
and enforcement of judgments. Corresponding to these phases the application of foreign law?
are the following questions: (1) Where can or should litigation be
initiated? (2) Which law will the court apply? and (3) Where can
the resulting judgment be enforced? JURISDICTION
Analytically, jurisdiction and choice of law are two distinct How does one deal with a problem in Conflict of Laws?
concepts. Jurisdiction considers whether it is fair to cause a
defendant to travel to this state; choice of law asks the further
question whether the application of a substantive law which will The first step is to determine if the court has JURISDICTION.
2
BAM 2020
CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER
Since these three principles in conflict of laws make reference to The records show that petitioner SAUDIA has filed several
the law applicable to a dispute, they are rules proper for the motions praying for the dismissal of Morada's Amended
second phase, the choice of law. Necessarily, as the only issue Complaint. What is very patent and explicit from the motions
in this case is that of jurisdiction, choice-of-law rules are not only filed, is that SAUDIA prayed for other reliefs under the premises.
inapplicable but also not yet called for. Undeniably, petitioner SAUDIA has effectively submitted to the
trial court's jurisdiction by praying for the dismissal of the
Amended Complaint on grounds other than lack of jurisdiction.
Jurisdiction is defined as the power and authority of the courts to Banco de Brasil vs CA
hear, try and decide cases. Jurisdiction over the subject matter is
conferred by the Constitution or by law and by the material Extrajudicial service of summons apply only where the action is
allegations in the complaint, regardless of whether or not the in rem, an action against the thing itself instead of against the
3
BAM 2020
CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER
person, or in an action quasi in rem, where an individual is Insurance Commissioner in the case of a foreign insurance
named as defendant and the purpose of the proceeding is to company; (b) the Superintendent of Banks, in the case of a
subject his interest therein to the obligation or loan burdening the foreign banking corporation; and (c) the Securities and
property. This is so inasmuch as, in in rem and quasi in rem Exchange Commission, in the case of other foreign corporations
actions, jurisdiction over the person of the defendant is not a duly licensed to do business in the Philippines. Whenever
prerequisite to confer jurisdiction on the court provided that the service of process is so made, the government office or official
court acquires jurisdiction over the res. served shall transmit by mail a copy of the summons or other
legal process to the corporation at its home or principal office.
However, where the action is in personam, one brought against The sending of such copy is a necessary part of the service.
a person on the basis of his personal liability, jurisdiction over (AMENDED ROC)
the person of the defendant is necessary for the court to validly
try and decide the case. When the defendant is a non-resident, In as much as SHARP was admittedly doing business in Japan
personal service of summons within the state is essential to the through its four duly registered branches at the time the
acquisition of jurisdiction over the person. This cannot be done, collection suit against it was filed, then in the light of the
however, if the defendant is not physically present in the country, processual presumption, SHARP may be deemed a resident of
and thus, the court cannot acquire jurisdiction over his person Japan, and, as such, was amenable to the jurisdiction of the
and therefore cannot validly try and decide the case against him. courts therein and may be deemed to have assented to the said
courts' lawful methods of serving process.
It must be stressed that any relief granted in rem or quasi in rem
actions must be confined to the res, and the court cannot lawfully Accordingly, the extraterritorial service of summons on it by the
render a personal judgment against the defendant. Clearly, the Japanese Court was valid not only under the processual
publication of summons effected by private respondent is invalid presumption but also because of the presumption of regularity of
and ineffective for the trial court to acquire jurisdiction over the performance of official duty.
person of petitioner, since by seeking to recover damages from
petitioner for the alleged commission of an injury to his person or
property caused by petitioner's being a nuisance defendant,
private respondent's action became in personam. Bearing in Valmonte vs CA
mind the in personam nature of the action, personal or, if not
possible, substituted service of summons on petitioner, and not No walid service of summon.
extraterritorial service, is necessary to confer jurisdiction over the
person of petitioner and validly hold it liable to private Private respondent's action, which is for partition and accounting
respondent for damages. Thus, the trial court had no jurisdiction under Rule 69, is in the nature of an action quasi in rem. Such
to award damages. an action is essentially for the purpose of affecting the
defendant's interest in a specific property and not to render a
judgment against him.
Northwest Orient Airlines vs CA We hold it cannot. This mode of service, like the first two, must
be made outside the Philippines, such as through the Philippine
Applying it (processual presumption, the Japanese law on the Embassy in the foreign country where the defendant resides.
matter is presumed to be similar with the Philippine law on Moreover, there are several reasons why the service of
service of summons on a private foreign corporation doing summons on Atty. Alfredo D. Valmonte cannot be considered a
business in the Philippines. valid service of summons on petitioner Lourdes A. Valmonte. In
the first place, service of summons on petitioner Alfredo D.
Section 14, Rule 14 of the Rules of Court provides that if the Valmonte was not made upon the order of the court as required
defendant is a foreign corporation doing business in the by Rule 14, §17 and certainly was not a mode deemed sufficient
Philippines, service may be made: (1) on its resident agent by the court which in fact refused to consider the service to be
designated in accordance with law for that purpose, or, (2) if valid and on that basis declare petitioner Lourdes A. Valmonte in
there is no such resident agent, on the government official default for her failure to file an answer.
designated by law to that effect; or (3) on any of its officers or
agents within the Philippines. In the second place, service in the attempted manner on
If the foreign corporation has designated an agent to receive petitioner was not made upon prior leave of the trial court as
summons, the designation is exclusive, and service of summons required also in Rule 14, §17. As provided in §19, such leave
is without force and gives the court no jurisdiction unless made must be applied for by motion in writing, supported by affidavit of
upon him. the plaintiff or some person on his behalf and setting forth the
grounds for the application.
Where the corporation has no such agent, service shall be made Finally, and most importantly, because there was no order
on the government official designated by law, to wit: (a) the granting such leave, petitioner Lourdes A. Valmonte was not
4
BAM 2020
CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER
A distinction, however, must be made with regard to service of SEC. 7. Substituted service. — If, for justifiable causes, the
summons on respondents Adolfo Trocino and Mariano Trocino. defendant cannot be served within a reasonable time as
Adolfo Trocino, as records show, is already a resident of Ohio, provided in the preceding section, service may be effected (a) by
U.S.A. for 25 years. Being a non-resident, the court cannot leaving copies of the summons at the defendant’s residence with
acquire jurisdiction over his person and validly try and decide the some person of suitable age and discretion then residing
case against him. therein, or (b) by leaving the copies at defendant’s office or
regular place of business with some competent person in charge
On the other hand, Mariano Trocino has been in Talibon, Bohol thereof.
since 1986. To validly acquire jurisdiction over his person,
summons must be served on him personally, or through Strict compliance with the mode of service is required in order
substituted service, upon showing of impossibility of personal that the court may acquire jurisdiction over the person of the
service. Such impossibility, and why efforts exerted towards defendant. The statutory requirement of substituted service must
personal service failed, should be explained in the proof of be followed faithfully and strictly and any substituted service
service. The pertinent facts and circumstances attendant to the other than that authorized by the statute is rendered ineffective.
service of summons must be stated in the proof of service or
Officer’s Return. Failure to do so would invalidate all subsequent As gleaned from the said return, there is no showing that as of
proceedings on jurisdictional grounds. April 5, 1999, the house where the Sheriff found Oscar Layno
was the latter’s residence or that of the respondent herein.
In the present case, the process server served the summons Neither is there any showing that the Sheriff tried to ascertain
and copies of the complaint on respondents Jacob, Jesus, Jr., where the residence of the respondent was on the said date. It
Adolfo, Mariano, Consolacion, Alice and Racheal, through their turned out that the occupant of the house was a lessor, Eduardo
mother, Caridad Trocino. The return did not contain any Gonzales, and that Oscar Layno was in the premises only to
particulars as to the impossibility of personal service on Mariano collect the rentals from him. The service of the summons on a
Trocino within a reasonable time. Such improper service renders person at a place where he was a visitor is not considered to
the same ineffective. have been left at the residence or place or abode, where he has
another place at which he ordinarily stays and to which he
Due process of law requires personal service to support a intends to return.
personal judgment, and, when the proceeding is strictly in
personam brought to determine the personal rights and In sum, then, the respondent was not validly served with
obligations of the parties, personal service within the state or a summons and the complaint by substituted service. Hence, the
voluntary appearance in the case is essential to the acquisition MTC failed to acquire jurisdiction over the person of the
of jurisdiction so as to constitute compliance with the respondent; as such, the decision of the MTC is null and void.
constitutional requirement of due process.
5
BAM 2020
CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER
stated with more particularity and detail on the number of petitioner, and this is not possible in the present case because
attempts made at personal service, dates and times of the the petitioner is a non-resident and is not found within the
attempts, inquiries to locate defendant, names of occupants of Philippines. Respondent’s allegation in its Amended Complaint
the alleged residence, and the reasons for failure should be that petitioner had personal property within the Philippines in the
included in the Return to satisfactorily show the efforts form of shares of stock in PEIP did not make the Civil Case fall
undertaken. That such efforts were made to personally serve under any of the four instances mentioned in Section 15, Rule 14
summons on defendant, and those resulted in failure, would of the Rules of Court, as to convert the action in personam to an
prove impossibility of prompt personal service. action in rem or quasi in rem and, subsequently, make the
extraterritorial service of summons upon the petitioner valid.
Where, by the local law, substituted or constructive service is in
certain situations authorized in the place of personal service Likewise, respondent’s prayer in its Amended Complaint for the
when the latter is inconvenient or impossible, a strict and literal issuance of a writ of attachment over petitioner’s purported
compliance with the provisions of the law must be shown in shares of stock in PEIP located within the Philippines was
order to support the judgment based on such substituted or denied by the court a quo. Respondent’s Motion for
constructive service. Jurisdiction is not to be assumed and Reconsideration of the said Order was likewise denied by the
exercised on the general ground that the subject matter of the RTC. Evidently, petitioner’s alleged personal property within the
suit is within the power of the court. The inquiry must be as to Philippines had not been attached; hence, the case for collection
whether the requisites of the statute have been complied with, of sum of money and damages, remains an action in personam.
and such compliance must appear on the record. The fact that As a result, the extraterritorial service of summons was not
the defendant had actual knowledge of attempted service does validly effected by the RTC against the petitioner, and the RTC
not render the service effectual if in fact the process was not thus failed to acquire jurisdiction over the person of the
served in accordance with the requirements of the statute. petitioner. The RTC is therefore bereft of any authority to act
upon the Complaint filed before it by the respondent insofar as
Due to non-compliance with the prerequisites for valid the petitioner is concerned.
substituted service, the proceedings held before the trial court
perforce must be annulled. As a rule, even if the service of summons upon the defendant or
respondent in a civil case is defective, the court can still acquire
jurisdiction over his person when he voluntary appears in court
or submits himself to its authority. Nonetheless, voluntary
Fong vs Velayo appearance, as a mode of acquiring jurisdiction over the person
of the defendant, is likewise inapplicable in this case. It is settled
Summons to Nonresident Defendant but subsequently that a party who makes a special appearance in court for the
found in the Philippines purpose of challenging the jurisdiction of said court, based on
Action in Personam the invalidity of the service of summons, cannot be considered to
have voluntarily submitted himself to the jurisdiction of the court.
Petitioner's bare allegation that the statement in the "Officer's In the present case, petitioner has been consistent in all its
Return that she was personally served summons is inaccurate" pleadings in assailing the service of summons upon it and the
is not sufficient. A process server's certificate of service is prima jurisdiction of the RTC over its person.
facie evidence of the facts as set out in the certificate. Between
the claim of non-receipt of summons by a party against the In sum, this Court finds that the petitioner did not submit itself
assertion of an official whose duty is to send notices, the latter voluntarily to the authority of the court a quo; and in the absence
assertion is fortified by the presumption that official duty has of valid service of summons, the RTC utterly failed to acquire
been regularly performed. To overcome the presumption of jurisdiction over the person of the petitioner.
regularity of performance of official functions in favor of such
Officer's Return, the evidence against it must be clear and
convincing. Petitioner having been unable to come forward with TAKE NOTE of the amendment to the ROC (Rule 14) as to
the requisite quantum of proof to the contrary, the presumption voluntary appearance!
of regularity of performance on the part of the process server
stands.
Pioneer vs Guadiz
In this case, petitioner failed to show that her failure to file an
answer was due to fraud, accident, mistake or excusable Summons to Foreign Juridical Entity doing business in the
neglect. Except for her bare unsupported allegation that the Philippines
summons were only thrown to her at the elevator, petitioner did
not present any competent evidence to justify the setting aside of When summons is served on a foreign juridical entity, there are
the order of default. three prescribed ways: (1) service on its resident agent
designated in accordance with law for that purpose, (2) service
on the government official designated by law to receive
summons if the corporation does not have a resident agent, and
Perkin vs Dakila (3) service on any of the corporation’s officers or agents within
the Philippines.
Summons to Non-resident
Action in Personam In the present case, service of summons on PIL failed to follow
any of the prescribed processes. PIL had no resident agent in
The objective sought in complaint was to establish a claim the Philippines. Summons was not served on the Securities and
against petitioner for its alleged unilateral termination of Exchange Commission (SEC), the designated government
Distribution Agreement. Hence it is an action in personam agency, since PIL is not registered with the SEC. Summons for
because it is an action against persons, namely, herein PIL was served on De Leon, Klepzig’s Executive Assistant.
petitioner, on the basis of its personal liability. As such, personal Klepzig is PIL’s "agent within the Philippines" because PIL
service of summons upon the [petitioner] is essential in order for authorized Klepzig to notify Todaro of the cessation of his
the court to acquire of jurisdiction over its person. consultancy (Annexes "H" and "I"). The authority given by PIL to
Klepzig to notify Todaro implies that Klepzig was likewise
Thus, being an action in personam, personal service of authorized to receive Todaro’s response to PIL’s notice. Todaro
summons within the Philippines is necessary in order for the responded to PIL’s notice by filing a complaint before the trial
RTC to validly acquire jurisdiction over the person of the
6
BAM 2020
CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER
court. of the summons intended for the defendant that must be left with
the person of suitable age and discretion residing in the house of
However, summons was not served personally on Klepzig as the defendant. Compliance with the rules regarding the service
agent of PIL. Instead, summons was served on De Leon, of summons is as important as the issue of due process as that
Klepzig’s Executive Assistant. In this instance, De Leon was not of jurisdiction.
PIL’s agent but a mere employee of Klepzig. In effect, the sheriff
resorted to substituted service. For symmetry, we apply the rule In this case, the Sheriff's Return stated that private respondent
on substituted service of summons on a natural person and we was out of the country; thus, the service of summons was made
find that no reason was given to justify the service of PIL’s at her residence with her husband, Alfredo P. Agudo,
summons on De Leon. acknowledging receipt thereof. Alfredo was presumably of
suitable age and discretion, who was residing in that place and,
Thus, we rule that PIL transacted business in the Philippines and therefore, was competent to receive the summons on private
Klepzig was its agent within the Philippines. However, there was respondent's behalf.
improper service of summons on PIL since summons was not
served personally on Klepzig. Notably, private respondent makes no issue as to the fact that
the place where the summons was served was her residence,
though she was temporarily out of the country at that time, and
that Alfredo is her husband. Statements by Private Respondent’s
Palma vs Judge Galvez counsel establish the fact that private respondent had knowledge
of the case filed against her, and that her husband had told her
The RTC found that since private respondent was abroad at the about the case as Alfredo even engaged the services of her
time of the service of summons, she was a resident who was counsel.
temporarily out of the country; thus, service of summons may be
made only by publication. In addition, we agree with petitioner that the RTC had indeed
acquired jurisdiction over the person of private respondent when
We do not agree. the latter's counsel entered his appearance on private
respondent's behalf, without qualification and without
In Montefalcon v. Vasquez, we said that because Section 16 of questioning the propriety of the service of summons, and even
Rule 14 uses the words "may" and "also," it is not mandatory. filed two Motions for Extension of Time to File Answer. In effect,
Other methods of service of summons allowed under the Rules private respondent, through counsel, had already invoked the
may also be availed of by the serving officer on a defendant- RTC’s jurisdiction over her person by praying that the motions
resident who is temporarily out of the Philippines. Thus, if a for extension of time to file answer be granted. We have held
resident defendant is temporarily out of the country, any of the that the filing of motions seeking affirmative relief, such as, to
following modes of service may be resorted to: (1) substituted admit answer, for additional time to file answer, for
service set forth in section 7 ( formerly Section 8), Rule 14; (2) reconsideration of a default judgment, and to lift order of default
personal service outside the country, with leave of court; (3) with motion for reconsideration, are considered voluntary
service by publication, also with leave of court; or (4) in any other submission to the jurisdiction of the court. When private
manner the court may deem sufficient. respondent earlier invoked the jurisdiction of the RTC to secure
affirmative relief in her motions for additional time to file answer,
In Montalban v. Maximo, we held that substituted service of she voluntarily submitted to the jurisdiction of the RTC and is
summons under the present Section 7, Rule 14 of the Rules of thereby estopped from asserting otherwise.
Court in a suit in personam against residents of the Philippines
temporarily absent therefrom is the normal method of service of
summons that will confer jurisdiction on the court over such
defendant. In the same case, we expounded on the rationale in NM Rothschild & Sons vs Lepanto Consolidated Mining
providing for substituted service as the normal mode of service Company
for residents temporarily out of the Philippines.
Since the action involved in the case at bar is in personam and
x x x A man temporarily absent from this country leaves a since the defendant, petitioner Rothschild/Investec, does not
definite place of residence, a dwelling where he lives, a local reside and is not found in the Philippines, the Philippine courts
base, so to speak, to which any inquiry about him may be cannot try any case against it because of the impossibility of
directed and where he is bound to return. Where one temporarily acquiring jurisdiction over its person unless it voluntarily appears
absents himself, he leaves his affairs in the hands of one who in court.
may be reasonably expected to act in his place and stead; to do
all that is necessary to protect his interests; and to communicate In this regard, respondent vigorously argues that petitioner
with him from time to time any incident of importance that may should be held to have voluntarily appeared before the trial court
affect him or his business or his affairs. It is usual for such a man when it prayed for, and was actually afforded, specific reliefs
to leave at his home or with his business associates information from the trial court.
as to where he may be contacted in the event a question that
affects him crops up. If he does not do what is expected of him, Evidently, by seeking affirmative relief other than dismissal of the
and a case comes up in court against him, he cannot just raise case, respondents manifested their voluntary submission to the
his voice and say that he is not subject to the processes of our court's jurisdiction. It is well-settled that the active participation of
courts. He cannot stop a suit from being filed against him upon a a party in the proceedings is tantamount to an invocation of the
claim that he cannot be summoned at his dwelling house or court's jurisdiction and a willingness to abide by the resolution of
residence or his office or regular place of business. the case, and will bar said party from later on impugning the
court's jurisdiction.
Considering that private respondent was temporarily out of the
country, the summons and complaint may be validly served on
her through substituted service under Section 7, Rule 14 of the
Rules of Court. Express Padala (Italia) vs Ocampo
We have held that a dwelling, house or residence refers to the Substituted service is improper under the facts of this case.
place where the person named in the summons is living at the Substituted service presupposes that the place where the
time when the service is made, even though he may be summons is being served is the defendant's current residence or
temporarily out of the country at the time. It is, thus, the service office/regular place of business. Thus, where the defendant
7
BAM 2020
CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER
neither resides nor holds office in the address stated in the JURISDICTION OVER THE RES
summons, substituted service cannot be resorted to.
This is jurisdiction over the particular subject matter in controversy,
Based on the sheriffs report, it is clear that Ocampo no longer
resides in San Bernardo Village, Darasa, Tanauan, Batangas. regardless of the persons who may be interested therein.
Not being a resident of the address where the summons was This may be acquired by:
served, the substituted service of summons is ineffective. coercive seizure of the property through attachment
Accordingly, the RTC did not acquire jurisdiction over the person proceedings, or
of Ocampo. through the institution of legal proceedings wherein the
court’s power over the property is recognized and made
BDO Remittance's reliance on Palma v. Galvez is misplaced for effective
the simple reason that the case involved service of summons to
a person who is temporarily out of the country. In this case,
however, Ocampo's sojourn in Italy cannot be classified as In Rem Quasi In Rem In Personam
temporary considering that she already resides there, albeit her When the action affects the personal The action is
precise address was not known. Modes of service of summons status of the person; against
must be strictly followed in order that the court may acquire the persons or
jurisdiction over the person of the defendant. The purpose of this When the action relates to or the subject affect
is to afford the defendant an opportunity to be heard on the claim of which is, property within the Phil., in the parties alone,
against him. BDO Remittance is not totally without recourse, as which the defendant has or claims a lien and not the whole
the rules allow summons by publication and extraterritorial or interest, actual or contingent; world
service. Unlike substituted service, however, these are
extraordinary modes which require leave of court. When the action relates to or the subject E.g.
of which is, property within the Philippines Support,
The service of summons is a vital and indispensable ingredient in which the relief demanded consists, Forcible entry,
of a defendant's constitutional right to due process. As a rule, if a wholly or in part, in excluding the unlawful detainer,
defendant has not been validly summoned, the court acquires no defendant from any interest therein; or specific
jurisdiction over his person, and a judgment rendered against performance,
him is void. Since the RTC never acquired jurisdiction over the When the property of the defendant has collection cases
person of Ocampo, the judgment rendered by the court could not been attached within the
be considered binding upon her. Philippines.
Given the circumstances in the case at bench, We find that FORUM NON CONVENIENS
resort to substituted service was warranted since the
impossibility of personal service is clearly apparent. It simply means that the forum is not convenient.
It is a concept originating in common law (Saudia case).
A perusal of the Officer's Return detailing the circumstances
It emerged to deter the practice of “global forum shopping”
surrounding the service of the second alias Summons shows
that the requirements for a valid substituted service of summons (or parallel litigation), i.e. to prevent non-resident litigants
were substantially complied with. from choosing the forum or the place wherein to bring their
suit for malicious reasons (Bank of America/Saudia case).
Substituted service of summons was resorted to by leaving the It is a deferential gesture to the tribunals of another
copy of the Alias Summons at the company's office through its sovereign (Saudia case).
employee, MS. LORIE FERNANDEZ, however, she refused to It cannot be raised as a ground in a Motion to Dismiss. It is
acknowledge receipt of the process. more properly considered as a matter of defense. A court
should renounce jurisdiction only “after vital facts are
Based on the facts, there was a deliberate plan of Carson's for established”…
its officers not to receive the Summons. It is a legal maneuver However, it must be raised at the earliest possible
that is in derogation of the rules on Summons. We cannot opportunity, otherwise, it shall be deemed waived (Saudia
tolerate that.
case).
It does not go into the jurisdiction of the court to try the
The facts now show that the responsible officers did not intend to
receive the alias Summons through substituted service. The case. Thus, under this principle, even if jurisdiction is
Summons is considered validly served. authorized by law, courts may nonetheless refuse to
entertain the case for any of the established reasons.
In any event, even if We concede the invalidity of the substituted It is different from choice of law (Saudia case).
service, such is of little significance in view of the fact that the
RTC had already acquired jurisdiction over Carson early on due When “convenient”?
to its voluntary submission to the jurisdiction of the court. 1. The Philippine court is one to which the parties may
conveniently resort to;
Carson voluntarily submitted to the jurisdiction of the RTC when 2. The Philippine court is in a position to make an intelligent
it filed, through Atty. Roxas, the Appearance and Motion decision as to the law and the facts;
acknowledging Carson's receipt of the Summons and seeking 3. The Philippine court has or likely to have power to enforce
additional time to file its responsive pleading. As noted by the
its decision.
CA, Carson failed to indicate therein that the Appearance and
Motion was being filed by way of a conditional appearance to
question the regularity of the service of summons. Thus, by When “inconvenient”?
securing the affirmative relief of additional time to file its When the said conditions are unavailing. (Manila Hotel
responsive pleading, Carson effectively voluntarily submitted to case).
the jurisdiction of the RTC. (a) When there is a belief that the matter can better be
tried and decided elsewhere, either because the main
8
BAM 2020
CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER
9
BAM 2020
CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER
10
BAM 2020
CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER
averments of the foreign elements in the instant case are not Continental Micronesia vs Basso
sufficient to oust the trial court of its jurisdiction over Civil Case
No. No. 1192-BG and the parties involved. Moreover, the Under the doctrine of forum non conveniens, a Philippine court in
propriety of dismissing a case based on the principle of forum a conflict-of-laws case may assume jurisdiction if it chooses to
non conveniens requires a factual determination; hence, it is do so, provided, that the following requisites are met: (1) that the
more properly considered as a matter of defense. While it is Philippine Court is one to which the parties may conveniently
within the discretion of the trial court to abstain from assuming resort to; (2) that the Philippine Court is in a position to make an
jurisdiction on this ground, it should do so only after vital facts intelligent decision as to the law andthe facts; and (3) that the
are established, to determine whether special circumstances Philippine Court has or is likely to have power to enforce its
require the court’s desistance. decision. All these requisites are present here.
11
BAM 2020
CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER
12
BAM 2020
CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER
13
BAM 2020
CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER
Under this broad principle, the nature and extent of the title
In the matter of characterization, the court in the case of Gibbs was
which vested in Mrs. Gibbs at the time of the acquisition of the
community lands here in question must be determined in faced with the task of categorizing the issue as one involving real
accordance with the lex rei sitae. property to be governed by the lex situs, or one involved in
succession, to be governed by the national law of the decedent, a
citizen of California USA.
It is admitted that the Philippine lands here in question were
acquired as community property of the conjugal partnership of
SUBSTANCE-PROCEDURE CHARACTERIZATION
the appellee and his wife. Under the law of the Philippine
- substantive ↔ foreign law;
Islands, she was vested of a title equal to that of her husband.
Article 1407 of the Civil Code provides: - procedural ↔ law of the forum (Cadalin case)
- Directs the court to the extent it will apply foreign law; if
the issue is substantive the court may apply foreign law
All the property of the spouses shall be deemed but if it is procedural, it is supposed to follow the law of the
partnership property in the absence of proof that it forum
belongs exclusively to the husband or to the wife.
Article 1395 provides:
Cadalin vs POEA Administrator
"The conjugal partnership shall be governed by the rules of law
applicable to the contract of partnership in all matters in which First to be determined is whether it is the Bahrain law on
such rules do not conflict with the express provisions of this prescription of action based on the Amiri Decree No. 23 of 1976
chapter." Article 1414 provides that "the husband may dispose or a Philippine law on prescription that shall be the governing
by will of his half only of the property of the conjugal law.
partnership." Article 1426 provides that upon dissolution of the
conjugal partnership and after inventory and liquidation, "the net Article 156 of the Amiri Decree No. 23 of 1976 provides:
remainder of the partnership property shall be divided share and
share alike between the husband and wife, or their respective A claim arising out of a contract of employment shall not be
heirs." Under the provisions of the Civil Code and the actionable after the lapse of one year from the date of the expiry
jurisprudence prevailing here, the wife, upon the acquisition of of the contract. (G.R. Nos. 105029-31, Rollo, p. 226).
any conjugal property, becomes immediately vested with an
interest and title therein equal to that of her husband, subject to As a general rule, a foreign procedural law will not be applied in
the power of management and disposition which the law vests in the forum. Procedural matters, such as service of process,
the husband. Immediately upon her death, if there are no joinder of actions, period and requisites for appeal, and so forth,
obligations of the decedent, as is true in the present case, her are governed by the laws of the forum. This is true even if the
share in the conjugal property is transmitted to her heirs by action is based upon a foreign substantive law (Restatement of
succession. (Articles 657, 659, 661, Civil Code; the Conflict of Laws, Sec. 685; Salonga, Private International
cf. also Coronel vs. Ona, 33 Phil., 456, 469.) Law, 131 [1979]).
14
BAM 2020
CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER
The courts of the forum will not enforce any foreign claim Section 4, Rule 2 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure is
obnoxious to the forum's public policy (Canadian Northern pertinent — If two or more suits are instituted on the basis of the
Railway Co. v. Eggen, 252 U.S. 553, 40 S. Ct. 402, 64 L. ed. 713 same cause of action, the filing of one or a judgment upon the
[1920]). To enforce the one-year prescriptive period of the Amiri merits in any one is available as a ground for the dismissal of the
Decree No. 23 of 1976 as regards the claims in question would others.
contravene the public policy on the protection to labor.
Moreover, foreign law should not be applied when its application
would work undeniable injustice to the citizens or residents of the
NOTE: The ruling in the case of Cadalin is similar to LWV forum. To give justice is the most important function of law;
Construction Case. hence, a law, or judgment or contract that is obviously unjust
negates the fundamental principles of Conflict of Laws.
Instances when the law of the forum is applied
When the forum law decrees application of internal law; Clearly then, English Law is not applicable.
When the foreign law was not properly pleaded and
proved; This case is an example of when foreign law was not applicable
When the foreign law is contrary to an important public because it was contrary to public policy of the forum.
policy of the forum;
When the foreign law is penal in nature; Instances when the foreign law is applied
When the foreign law involves procedural matters; When the law of the forum expressly so provides in its
When the foreign law is purely fiscal or administrative in conflict rules (as when there is a borrowing statute);
nature; When agreed upon by the parties (as when there is a
When the application of the foreign law will work choice-of-law clause, choice-of-forum clause, or a
undeniable injustice to the citizens of the forum; cognovit clause);
When the case involves real or personal property situated When no instances justifying the application of internal law
in the forum; of the forum to the conflict case may be validly invoked.
When the application of the foreign law might endanger
the vital interest of the state; 2. AS A CONTRACTUAL
When the foreign law is contrary to good morals.
STIPULATION
US Restatement of Law, Second. SECTION 187. Law of the state
Bank of America, NT ans SA vs CA chosen by the parties
Incidentally, BANTSA alleges that under English Law, which 1. The law of the state chosen by the parties to govern their
according to petitioner is the governing law with regard to the contractual rights and duties will be applied if the particular
principal agreements, the mortgagee does not lose its security issue is one which the parties could have resolved by an
interest by simply filing civil actions for sums of money. explicit provision in their agreement directed to that issue.
2. The law of the state chosen by the parties to govern their
We rule in the negative. contractual rights and duties will be applied, even if the
particular issue is one which the parties could not have
This argument shows desperation on the part of petitioner to resolved by an explicit provision in their agreement
rivet its crumbling cause. In the case at bench, Philippine law directed to that issue, unless either:
shall apply notwithstanding the evidence presented by petitioner
a. the chosen state has no substantial relationship
to prove the English law on the matter.
to the parties or the transaction and there is no
In a long line of decisions, this Court adopted the well-imbedded other reasonable basis for the parties' choice; or
principle in our jurisdiction that there is no judicial notice of any b. application of the law of the chosen state would
foreign law. A foreign law must be properly pleaded and proved be contrary to a fundamental policy of a state
as a fact. Thus, if the foreign law involved is not properly pleaded which has a materially greater interest than the
and proved, our courts will presume that the foreign law is the chosen state in the determination of the
same as our local or domestic or internal law. This is what we particular issue and which, under the rule of
refer to as the doctrine of processual presumption. Section 188, would be the state of the
applicable law in the absence of an effective
In the instant case, assuming arguendo that the English Law on choice of law by the parties.
the matter were properly pleaded and proved in accordance with 3. In the absence of a contrary indication of intention, the
Section 24, Rule 132 of the Rules of Court and the jurisprudence reference is to the local law of the state of the chosen law.
laid down in Yao Kee, et al. vs. Sy-Gonzales, said foreign law
would still not find applicability.
The principle of autonomy of contracts allows parties to stipulate the
Thus, when the foreign law, judgment or contract is contrary to a law that shall govern their contractual relations.
sound and established public policy of the forum, the said foreign
law, judgment or order shall not be applied. If not specified, the chosen law will normally apply to the following:
1. Interpretation;
15
BAM 2020
CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER
2. Rights and obligations arising from the contract; If the case is much affected with public interest… the
3. Performance and the consequences of non-performance, otherwise applicable Philippine laws and regulations
including the assessment of damages; cannot be rendered illusory by the parties agreeing upon
4. The various ways of extinguishing obligations, and the some other law to govern their relationship
prescription and limitation of periods;
5. Validity and the consequences of invalidity of the contract; ADHESION
6. Burden of proof and legal presumptions; It is one that is not negotiated by the parties, having been
7. Pre-contractual obligations drafted by the dominant party and usually embodied in a
standardized form.
The only participation of the other party is in affixing
Saudia vs Rebesencio his/her signature or adhering thereto.
A “take it or leave it” contract.
Contractual choice of law provisions factor into transnational When there is an undue advantage made by a dominant
litigation and dispute resolution in one of or in a combination of party, the principle of autonomy does not apply and the
four ways: court may not recognize the law stipulated in the contract
(1) procedures for settling disputes, e.g., arbitration;
and instead invoke public interest or public policy.
(2) forum, i.e., venue;
Any ambiguity therein will be resolved in favor of the party
(3) governing law; and
(4) basis for interpretation. impugning it.
Forum non conveniens relates to, but is not subsumed by, the What is the applicable law in the absence of effective choice of
second of these. Likewise, contractual choice of law is not law?
determinative of jurisdiction. Stipulating on the laws of a given Section 188. Law governing in absence of effective choice by the
jurisdiction as the governing law of a contract does not preclude parties.
the exercise of jurisdiction by tribunals elsewhere. The reverse is
equally true: The assumption of jurisdiction by tribunals does not (1) The rights and duties of the parties with respect to an issue in
ipso facto mean that it cannot apply and rule on the basis of the contract are determined by the local law of the state which, with
parties' stipulation. respect to that issue, has the most significant relationship to the
transaction and the parties under the principles stated in Section 6.
Our law on contracts recognizes the validity of contractual choice
of law provisions. Where such provisions exist, Philippine (2) In the absence of an effective choice of law by the parties (see
tribunals, acting as the forum court, generally defer to the Section 187), the contacts to be taken into account in applying the
parties' articulated choice. principles of Section 6 to determine the law applicable to an issue
include:
This is consistent with the fundamental principle of autonomy of
contracts. Article 1306 of the Civil Code expressly provides that (a) the place of contracting,
"the contracting parties may establish 'such stipulations, clauses,
terms and conditions as they may deem convenient." (b) the place of negotiation of the contract,
Nevertheless, while a Philippine tribunal (acting as the forum
court) is called upon to respect the parties' choice of governing (c) the place of performance,
law, such respect must not be so permissive as to lose sight of
considerations of law, morals, good customs, public order, or (d) the location of the subject matter of the contract, and
public policy that underlie the contract central to the controversy.
(e) the domicile, residence, nationality, place of incorporation and
Petitioner PIA cannot take refuge in paragraph 10 of its place of business of the parties.
employment agreement which specifies, firstly, the law of
Pakistan as the applicable law of the agreement, and, secondly, These contacts are to be evaluated according to their relative
lays the venue for settlement of any dispute arising out of or in importance with respect to the particular issue.
connection with the agreement "only [in] courts of Karachi,
Pakistan". The first clause of paragraph 10 cannot be invoked to Xxx
prevent the application of Philippine labor laws and'regulations to
the subject matter of this case, i.e., the employer-employee “Under the state of the most significant relationship rule, to ascertain
relationship between petitioner PIA and private respondents. We what state law to apply to a dispute, the court should determine
have already pointed out that the relationship is much affected which state has the most substantial connection to the occurrence
with public interest and that the otherwise applicable Philippine
and the parties. In a case involving a contract, the court should
laws and regulations cannot be rendered illusory by the parties
agreeing upon some other law to govern their relationship. . . consider where the contract was made, was negotiated, was to be
Under these circumstances, paragraph 10 of the employment performed, and the domicile, place of business, or place of
agreement cannot be given effect so as to oust Philippine incorporation of the parties. This rule takes into account several
agencies and courts of the jurisdiction vested upon them by contacts and evaluates them according
Philippine law. to their relative importance with respect to the particular issue to be
resolved.” (Hasegawa v. Kutamura)
17
BAM 2020
CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER
18
BAM 2020
CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER
or state, will be presumed to be the same as our own local or that the National Seamen Board has original and exclusive
domestic law and this is known as processual presumption. jurisdiction over all matters or cases including money claims,
involving employer-employee relations, arising out of or by virtue
of any law or contracts involving Filipino seamen for overseas
employment. Thus, it is safe to assume that the Board is familiar
Edi-Staff Builders vs NLRC with pertinent Singapore maritime laws relative to workmen's
compensation. Moreover, the Board may apply the rule on
In cases involving OFWs, the rights and obligations among and judicial notice and, "in administrative proceedings, the technical
between the OFW, the local recruiter/agent, and the foreign rules of procedure — particularly of evidence — applied in
employer/principal are governed by the employment contract. A judicial trials, do not strictly apply."
contract freely entered into is considered law between the
parties; and hence, should be respected. In formulating the
contract, the parties may establish such stipulations, clauses,
terms and conditions as they may deem convenient, provided HSBC vs Sherman
they are not contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order,
or public policy. While it is true that "the transaction took place in Singaporean
setting" and that the Joint and Several Guarantee contains a
In the present case, the employment contract signed by Gran choice-of-forum clause, the very essence of due process
specifically states that Saudi Labor Laws will govern matters not dictates that the stipulation that "[t]his guarantee and all rights,
provided for in the contract (e.g. specific causes for termination, obligations and liabilities arising hereunder shall be construed
termination procedures, etc.). Being the law intended by the and determined under and may be enforced in accordance with
parties (lex loci intentiones) to apply to the contract, Saudi Labor the laws of the Republic of Singapore. We hereby agree that the
Laws should govern all matters relating to the termination of the Courts in Singapore shall have jurisdiction over all disputes
employment of Gran. In international law, the party who wants to arising under this guarantee" be liberally construed. One basic
have a foreign law applied to a dispute or case has the burden of principle underlies all rules of jurisdiction in International Law: a
proving the foreign law. The foreign law is treated as a question State does not have jurisdiction in the absence of some
of fact to be properly pleaded and proved as the judge or labor reasonable basis for exercising it, whether the proceedings are
arbiter cannot take judicial notice of a foreign law. He is in rem quasi in rem or in personam. To be reasonable, the
presumed to know only domestic or forum law. jurisdiction must be based on some minimum contacts that will
not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice
Unfortunately for petitioner, it did not prove the pertinent Saudi (J. Salonga, Private International Law, 1981, p. 46). Indeed, as
laws on the matter; thus, the International Law doctrine of pointed-out by petitioner BANK at the outset, the instant case
presumed-identity approach or processual presumption comes presents a very odd situation. In the ordinary habits of life,
into play.Where a foreign law is not pleaded or, even if pleaded, anyone would be disinclined to litigate before a foreign tribunal,
is not proved, the presumption is that foreign law is the same as with more reason as a defendant. However, in this case, private
ours. Thus, we apply Philippine labor laws in determining the respondents are Philippine residents (a fact which was not
issues presented before us. disputed by them) who would rather face a complaint against
them before a foreign court and in the process incur
As to the quitclaim considerable expenses, not to mention inconvenience, than to
have a Philippine court try and resolve the case. Private
The court a quo is correct in its finding that the Declaration is a respondents' stance is hardly comprehensible, unless their
contract of adhesion which should be construed against the ultimate intent is to evade, or at least delay, the payment of a
employer, OAB. An adhesion contract is contrary to public policy just obligation.
as it leaves the weaker party—the employee—in a "take-it-or-
leave-it" situation. Certainly, the employer is being unjust to the The defense of private respondents that the complaint should
employee as there is no meaningful choice on the part of the have been filed in Singapore is based merely on technicality.
employee while the terms are unreasonably favorable to the They did not even claim, much less prove, that the filing of the
employer. action here will cause them any unnecessary trouble, damage,
or expense. On the other hand, there is no showing that
Thus, the Declaration purporting to be a quitclaim and waiver is petitioner BANK filed the action here just to harass private
unenforceable under Philippine laws in the absence of proof of respondents.
the applicable law of Saudi Arabia.
Norse Management vs National Seamen Board Philippine law does not provide for absolute divorce; hence, our
courts cannot grant it. A marriage between two Filipinos cannot
In the aforementioned "Employment Agreement" between be dissolved even by a divorce obtained abroad, because of
petitioners and the late Napoleon B. Abordo, it is clear that Articles 15 and 17 of the Civil Code. In mixed marriages
compensation shall be paid under Philippine Law or the law of involving a Filipino and a foreigner, Article 26 of the Family Code
registry of petitioners' vessel, whichever is greater. Since private allows the former to contract a subsequent marriage in case the
respondent Restituta C. Abordo was offered P30,000.00 only by divorce is "validly obtained abroad by the alien spouse
the petitioners, Singapore law was properly applied in this case. capacitating him or her to remarry." A divorce obtained abroad
by a couple, who are both aliens, may be recognized in the
The "Employment Agreement" is attached to the Supplemental Philippines, provided it is consistent with their respective national
Complaint of Restituta C. Abordo and, therefore, it forms part laws.
thereof. As it is familiar with Singapore Law, the National
Seamen Board is justified in taking judicial notice of and in A comparison between marriage and divorce, as far as pleading
applying that law. and proof are concerned, can be made. Van Dorn v. Romillo Jr.
decrees that "aliens may obtain divorces abroad, which may be
Furthermore, Article 20, Labor Code of the Philippines, provides recognized in the Philippines, provided they are valid according
19
BAM 2020
CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER
to their national law." Therefore, before a foreign divorce decree The resolution of whether a foreign law allows only the recovery
can be recognized by our courts, the party pleading it must prove of actual damages is a question of fact as far as the trial court is
the divorce as a fact and demonstrate its conformity to the concerned since foreign laws do not prove themselves in our
foreign law allowing it. Presentation solely of the divorce decree courts. Foreign laws are not a matter of judicial notice. Like any
is insufficient. other fact, they must be alleged and proven. Certainly, the
conflicting allegations as to whether New York law or Philippine
Divorce as a Question of Fact law applies to Guerrero’s claims present a clear dispute on
material allegations which can be resolved only by a trial on the
Before a foreign judgment is given presumptive evidentiary merits.
value, the document must first be presented and admitted in
evidence. A divorce obtained abroad is proven by the divorce Under Section 24 of Rule 132, the record of public documents of
decree itself. Indeed the best evidence of a judgment is the a sovereign authority or tribunal may be proved by (1) an official
judgment itself. The decree purports to be a written act or record publication thereof or (2) a copy attested by the officer having
of an act of an officially body or tribunal of a foreign country. the legal custody thereof. Such official publication or copy must
be accompanied, if the record is not kept in the Philippines, with
Under Sections 24 and 25 of Rule 132, on the other hand, a a certificate that the attesting officer has the legal custody
writing or document may be proven as a public or official record thereof. The certificate may be issued by any of the authorized
of a foreign country by either (1) an official publication or (2) a Philippine embassy or consular officials stationed in the foreign
copy thereof attested by the officer having legal custody of the country in which the record is kept, and authenticated by the seal
document. If the record is not kept in the Philippines, such copy of his office. The attestation must state, in substance, that the
must be (a) accompanied by a certificate issued by the proper copy is a correct copy of the original, or a specific part thereof,
diplomatic or consular officer in the Philippine foreign service as the case may be, and must be under the official seal of the
stationed in the foreign country in which the record is kept and attesting officer.
(b) authenticated by the seal of his office.
Certain exceptions to this rule were recognized in Asiavest
The divorce decree between respondent and Editha Samson Limited v. Court of Appeals.
appears to be an authentic one issued by an Australian family
court. However, appearance is not sufficient; compliance with The Bank, however, cannot rely on Willamette Iron and Steel
the aforemetioned rules on evidence must be demonstrated. Works v. Muzzal or Collector of Internal Revenue v. Fisher to
support its cause. These cases involved attorneys testifying in
Fortunately for respondent's cause, when the divorce decree of open court during the trial in the Philippines and quoting the
May 18, 1989 was submitted in evidence, counsel for petitioner particular foreign laws sought to be established. On the other
objected, not to its admissibility, but only to the fact that it had hand, the Walden affidavit was taken abroad ex parte and the
not been registered in the Local Civil Registry of Cabanatuan affiant never testified in open court. The Walden affidavit cannot
City. The trial court ruled that it was admissible, subject to be considered as proof of New York law on damages not only
petitioner's qualification. Hence, it was admitted in evidence and because it is self-serving but also because it does not state the
accorded weight by the judge. Indeed, petitioner's failure to specific New York law on damages.
object properly rendered the divorce decree admissible as a
written act of the Family Court of Sydney, Australia. The Walden affidavit states conclusions from the affiant’s
personal interpretation and opinion of the facts of the case vis a
Compliance with the quoted articles (11, 13 and 52) of the vis the alleged laws and jurisprudence without citing any law in
Family Code is not necessary; respondent was no longer bound particular. The citations in the Walden affidavit of various U.S.
by Philippine personal laws after he acquired Australian court decisions do not constitute proof of the official records or
citizenship in 1992. Naturalization is the legal act of adopting an decisions of the U.S. courts. While the Bank attached copies of
alien and clothing him with the political and civil rights belonging some of the U.S. court decisions cited in the Walden affidavit,
to a citizen. Naturalized citizens, freed from the protective cloak these copies do not comply with Section 24 of Rule 132 on proof
of their former states, don the attires of their adoptive countries. of official records or decisions of foreign courts.
By becoming an Australian, respondent severed his allegiance to
the Philippines and the vinculum juris that had tied him to The Bank’s intention in presenting the Walden affidavit is to
Philippine personal laws. prove New York law and jurisprudence. However, because of the
failure to comply with Section 24 of Rule 132 on how to prove a
Burden of Proving Australian Law foreign law and decisions of foreign courts, the Walden affidavit
did not prove the current state of New York law and
The burden of proof lies with "the party who alleges the jurisprudence. Thus, the Bank has only alleged, but has not
existence of a fact or thing necessary in the prosecution or proved, what New York law and jurisprudence are on the matters
defense of an action." In civil cases, plaintiffs have the burden of at issue.
proving the material allegations of the complaint when those are
denied by the answer; and defendants have the burden of
proving the material allegations in their answer when they
introduce new matters. Since the divorce was a defense raised ATCI vs Echin
by respondent, the burden of proving the pertinent Australian law
validating it falls squarely upon him. As to petitioners’ contentions that Philippine labor laws on
probationary employment are not applicable since it was
It is well-settled in our jurisdiction that our courts cannot take expressly provided in respondent’s employment contract, which
judicial notice of foreign laws. Like any other facts, they must be she voluntarily entered into, that the terms of her engagement
alleged and proved. Australian marital laws are not among those shall be governed by prevailing Kuwaiti Civil Service Laws and
matters that judges are supposed to know by reason of their Regulations as in fact POEA Rules accord respect to such rules,
judicial function. The power of judicial notice must be exercised customs and practices of the host country, the same was not
with caution, and every reasonable doubt upon the subject substantiated.
should be resolved in the negative.
Indeed, a contract freely entered into is considered the law
between the parties who can establish stipulations, clauses,
terms and conditions as they may deem convenient, including
Manufacturers Hanover vs Guerrero the laws which they wish to govern their respective obligations,
as long as they are not contrary to law, morals, good customs,
20
BAM 2020
CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER
public order or public policy. another country." This means that the foreign judgment and its
authenticity must beproven as facts under our rules on evidence,
It is hornbook principle, however, that the party invoking the together with the alien’s applicable national law to show the
application of a foreign law has the burden of proving the law, effect of the judgment on the alien himself or herself. The
under the doctrine of processual presumption which, in this case, recognition may be made in an action instituted specifically for
petitioners failed to discharge. (This case cited EDI-Staffbuilders the purpose or in another action where a party invokes the
Int’l., v. NLRC) foreign decree as an integral aspect of his claim or defense.
Instead of submitting a copy of the pertinent Kuwaiti labor laws The requirements of presenting the foreign divorce decree and
duly authenticated and translated by Embassy officials thereat, the national law of the foreigner must comply with our Rules of
as required under the Rules, what petitioners submitted were Evidence. Specifically, for Philippine courts to recognize a
mere certifications attesting only to the correctness of the foreign judgment relating to the status of a marriage, a copy of
translations of the MOA and the termination letter which does not the foreign judgment may be admitted in evidence and proven as
prove at all that Kuwaiti civil service laws differ from Philippine a fact under Rule 132, Sections 24 and 25, in relation to Rule 39,
laws and that under such Kuwaiti laws, respondent was validly Section 48(b) of the Rules of Court.
terminated.
Under Section 24 of Rule 132, the record of public documents of
a sovereign authority or tribunal may be proved by: (1) an official
publication thereof or (2) a copy attested by the officer having
Catalan vs Catalan-Lee the legal custody thereof. Such official publication or copy must
beaccompanied, if the record is not kept in the Philippines, with a
In Van Dorn v. Romillo, Jr. we held that owing to the nationality certificate that the attesting officer has the legal custody thereof.
principle embodied in Article 15 of the Civil Code, only Philippine The certificate may be issued by any of the authorized Philippine
nationals are covered by the policy against absolute divorces, embassy or consular officials stationed in the foreign country in
the same being considered contrary to our concept of public which the record is kept, and authenticated by the seal of his
policy and morality. In the same case, the Court ruled that aliens office. The attestation must state, in substance, that the copy is a
may obtain divorces abroad, provided they are valid according to correct copy of the original, or a specific part thereof, asthe case
their national law. may be, and must be under the official seal of the attesting
officer.
Citing this landmark case, the Court held in Quita v. Court of
Appeals, that once proven that respondent was no longer a Section 25 of the same Rule states that whenever a copy of a
Filipino citizen when he obtained the divorce from petitioner, the document or record is attested for the purpose of evidence, the
ruling in Van Dorn would become applicable and petitioner could attestation must state, in substance, that the copy is a correct
"very well lose her right to inherit" from him. copy of the original, or a specific part thereof, as the case may
be. The attestation must be under the official seal of the attesting
In Pilapil v. Ibay-Somera, we recognized the divorce obtained by officer, if there be any, or if hebe the clerk of a court having a
the respondent in his country, the Federal Republic of Germany. seal, under the seal of such court.
There, we stated that divorce and its legal effects may be
recognized in the Philippines insofar as respondent is concerned Based on the records, only the divorce decree was presented in
in view of the nationality principle in our civil law on the status of evidence. The required certificates to prove its authenticity, as
persons. well as the pertinent California law on divorce were not
presented.
For failing to apply these doctrines, the decision of the Court of
Appeals must be reversed. We hold that the divorce obtained by It may be noted that in Bayot v. Court of Appeals, we relaxed the
Lorenzo H. Llorente from his first wife Paula was valid and requirement on certification where we held that "[petitioner
recognized in this jurisdiction as a matter of comity. xxx therein] was clearly an American citizenwhen she secured the
divorce and that divorce is recognized and allowed in any of the
Nonetheless, the fact of divorce must still first be proven as we States of the Union, the presentation of a copy of foreign divorce
have enunciated in Garcia v. Recio decree duly authenticatedby the foreign court issuing said
decree is, as here, sufficient." In this case however, it appears
It appears that the trial court no longer required petitioner to that there is no seal from the office where the divorce decree
prove the validity of Orlando’s divorce under the laws of the was obtained.
United States and the marriage between petitioner and the
deceased. Thus, there is a need to remand the proceedings to Even if we apply the doctrine of processual presumption as the
the trial court for further reception of evidence to establish the lower courts did with respect to the property regime of the
fact of divorce. parties, the recognition of divorce is entirely a different matter
because, to begin with, divorce is not recognized between
Should petitioner prove the validity of the divorce and the Filipino citizens in the Philippines. Absent a valid recognition of
subsequent marriage, she has the preferential right to be issued the divorce decree, it follows that the parties are still legally
the letters of administration over the estate. Otherwise, letters of married in the Philippines. The trial court thus erred in
administration may be issued to respondent, who is undisputedly proceeding directly to liquidation.
the daughter or next of kin of the deceased, in accordance with
Sec. 6 of Rule 78 of the Revised Rules of Court.
For a copy of a foreign public document to be admissible, the
following requisites are mandatory:
1. it must be attested by the officer having legal custody of
Noveras vs Noveras the records or by his deputy; and
2. it must be accompanied by a certificate by a secretary of
In Corpuz v. Sto. Tomas,13 we stated that: the embassy or legation, consul general, consul, vice-
consular or consular agent or foreign service officer, and
The starting point in any recognition of a foreign divorce
with the seal of his office.
judgment is the acknowledgment that our courts do not take
judicial notice of foreign judgments and laws. Justice Herrera
explained that, as a rule, "no sovereign is bound to give effect Such official publication or copy must be accompanied, if the record
within its dominion to a judgment rendered by a tribunal of is not kept in the Philippines, with a certificate that the attesting
officer has the legal custody thereof. The certificate may be issued
21
BAM 2020
CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER
22
BAM 2020
CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER
provisions of Section 78 of the Probate Court Act (Norway), and absurdity and in manifest injustice, or where the merits of a
the above substitute guardian has agreed to the private division party’s cause are apparent and outweigh considerations of non-
of the estate. compliance with certain formal requirements. It is more in accord
with justice that a party-litigant is given the fullest opportunity to
The following heir and substitute guardian will undertake the establish the merits of his claim or defense than for him to lose
private division of the estate: his life, liberty, honor or property on mere technicalities. Truly,
Ellen Johanne Harper Christopher S. Harper the rules of procedure are intended to promote substantial
This probate court certificate relates to the entire estate. justice, not to defeat it, and should not be applied in a very rigid
Oslo Probate Court, 18 February 2000. and technical sense.
23
BAM 2020
CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER
alleged and competently proved like any other disputed fact. Puyat vs Zabarte
(Cited the case of Noveras v. Noveras)
Petitioner alleges that jurisdiction over Case No. C21-00265,
which involved partnership interest, was vested in the Securities
RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT OF FOREIGN and Exchange Commission, not in the Superior Court of
California, County of Contra Costa.
JUDGMENT
We disagree. In the absence of proof of California law on the
jurisdiction of courts, we presume that such law, if any, is similar
Philippine Aluminum vs FASGI to Philippine law. We base this conclusion on the presumption of
identity or similarity, also known as processual presumption.
Generally, in the absence of a special compact, no sovereign is The Complaint, which respondent filed with the trial court, was
bound to give effect within its dominion to a judgment rendered for the enforcement of a foreign judgment. He alleged therein
by a tribunal of another country; however, the rules of comity, that the action of the foreign court was for the collection of a sum
utility and convenience of nations have established a usage of money, breach of promissory notes, and damages.
among civilized states by which final judgments of foreign courts
of competent jurisdiction are reciprocally respected and rendered In our jurisdiction, such a case falls under the jurisdiction of civil
efficacious under certain conditions that may vary in different courts, not of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
countries. The jurisdiction of the latter is exclusively over matters
enumerated in Section 5, PD 902-A, prior to its latest
In this jurisdiction, a valid judgment rendered by a foreign amendment. If the foreign court did not really have jurisdiction
tribunal may be recognized insofar as the immediate parties and over the case, as petitioner claims, it would have been very easy
the underlying cause of action are concerned so long as it is for him to show this. Since jurisdiction is determined by the
convincingly shown that there has been an opportunity for a full allegations in a complaint, he only had to submit a copy of the
and fair hearing before a court of competent jurisdiction; that trial complaint filed with the foreign court. Clearly, this issue did not
upon regular proceedings has been conducted, following due warrant trial.
citation or voluntary appearance of the defendant and under a
system of jurisprudence likely to secure an impartial
administration of justice; and that there is nothing to indicate
either a prejudice in court and in the system of laws under which St Aviation Services vs Grand Intl Airways
it is sitting or fraud in procuring the judgment. A foreign judgment
is presumed to be valid and binding in the country from which it Generally, in the absence of a special contract, no sovereign is
comes, until a contrary showing, on the basis of a presumption bound to give effect within its dominion to a judgment rendered
of regularity of proceedings and the giving of due notice in the by a tribunal of another country; however, under the rules of
foreign forum. Rule 39, section 48 of the Rules of Court of the comity, utility and convenience, nations have established a
Philippines provides: usage among civilized states by which final judgments of foreign
courts of competent jurisdiction are reciprocally respected and
Sec. 48. Effect of foreign judgments or final orders - The effect of rendered efficacious under certain conditions that may vary in
a judgment or final order of a tribunal of a foreign country, having different countries.1 Certainly, the Philippine legal system has
jurisdiction to render the judgment or final order is as follows: long ago accepted into its jurisprudence and procedural rules the
viability of an action for enforcement of foreign judgment, as well
xxxx as the requisites for such valid enforcement, as derived from
internationally accepted doctrines.
(b) In case of a judgment or final order against a person, the
judgment or final order is presumptive evidence of a right as The conditions for the recognition and enforcement of a foreign
between the parties and their successors-in-interest by a judgment in our legal system are contained in Section 48, Rule
subsequent title. 39 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended, thus:
In either case, the judgment or final order may be repelled by SEC. 48. Effect of foreign judgments. – The effect of a judgment
evidence a want of jurisdiction, want of notice to the party, or final order of a tribunal of a foreign country, having jurisdiction
collusion, fraud, or clear mistake of law or fact. to render the judgment or final order is as follows:
If PAWI were indeed hoodwinked by Mr. Ready who purportedly (a) In case of a judgment or final order upon a specific thing, the
acted in collusion with FASGI, it should have aptly raised the judgment or final order is conclusive upon the title to the thing;
issue before the forum which issued the judgment in line with the and
principle of international comity that a court of another
jurisdiction should refrain, as a matter of propriety and fairness, (b) In case of a judgment or final order against a person, the
from so assuming the power of passing judgment on the judgment or final order is presumptive evidence of a right as
correctness of the application of law and the evaluation of the between the parties and their successors in interest by a
facts of the judgment issued by another tribunal. subsequent title;
Fraud, to hinder the enforcement within this jurisdiction of a In either case, the judgment or final order may be repelled by
foreign judgment, must be extrinsic, i.e., fraud based on facts not evidence of a want of jurisdiction, want of notice to the party,
controverted or resolved in the case where judgment is collusion, fraud, or clear mistake of law or fact.
rendered, or that which would go to the jurisdiction of the court or
would deprive the party against whom judgment is rendered a Under the above Rule, a foreign judgment or order against a
chance to defend the action to which he has a meritorious case person is merely presumptive evidence of a right as between the
or defense. In fine, intrinsic fraud, that is, fraud which goes to the parties. It may be repelled, among others, by want of jurisdiction
very existence of the cause of action - such as fraud in obtaining of the issuing authority or by want of notice to the party against
the consent to a contract - is deemed already adjudged, and it, whom it is enforced. The party attacking a foreign judgment has
therefore, cannot militate against the recognition or enforcement the burden of overcoming the presumption of its validity.
of the foreign judgment.
Respondent, in assailing the validity of the judgment sought to
be enforced, contends that the service of summons is void and
that the Singapore court did not acquire jurisdiction over it.
24
BAM 2020
CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER
Generally, matters of remedy and procedure such as those recognized in the Philippines, provided the divorce is valid
relating to the service of process upon a defendant are governed according to his or her national law.27
by the lex fori or the internal law of the forum, which in this case
is the law of Singapore. Here, petitioner moved for leave of court The starting point in any recognition of a foreign divorce
to serve a copy of the Writ of Summons outside Singapore. In an judgment is the acknowledgment that our courts do not take
Order dated December 24, 1997, the Singapore High Court judicial notice of foreign judgments and laws. Justice Herrera
granted "leave to serve a copy of the Writ of Summons on the explained that, as a rule, "no sovereign is bound to give effect
Defendant by a method of service authorized by the law of the within its dominion to a judgment rendered by a tribunal of
Philippines for service of any originating process issued by the another country."28 This means that the foreign judgment and its
Philippines at ground floor, APMC Building, 136 Amorsolo corner authenticity must be proven as facts under our rules on
Gamboa Street, 1229 Makati City, or elsewhere in the evidence, together with the alien’s applicable national law to
Philippines." This service of summons outside Singapore is in show the effect of the judgment on the alien himself or herself.29
accordance with Order 11, r. 4(2) of the Rules of Court 19966 of The recognition may be made in an action instituted specifically
Singapore. for the purpose or in another action where a party invokes the
foreign decree as an integral aspect of his claim or defense.
In the Philippines, jurisdiction over a party is acquired by service
of summons by the sheriff, his deputy or other proper court In Gerbert’s case, since both the foreign divorce decree and the
officer either personally by handing a copy thereof to the national law of the alien, recognizing his or her capacity to obtain
defendant or by substituted service. In this case, the Writ of a divorce, purport to be official acts of a sovereign authority,
Summons issued by the Singapore High Court was served upon Section 24, Rule 132 of the Rules of Court comes into play. This
respondent at its office located at Mercure Hotel (formerly Village Section requires proof, either by (1) official publications or (2)
Hotel), MIA Road, Pasay City. The Sheriff's Return shows that it copies attested by the officer having legal custody of the
was received on May 2, 1998 by Joyce T. Austria, Secretary of documents. If the copies of official records are not kept in the
the General Manager of respondent company. But respondent Philippines, these must be (a) accompanied by a certificate
completely ignored the summons, hence, it was declared in issued by the proper diplomatic or consular officer in the
default. Philippine foreign service stationed in the foreign country in
which the record is kept and (b) authenticated by the seal of his
Considering that the Writ of Summons was served upon office.
respondent in accordance with our Rules, jurisdiction was
acquired by the Singapore High Court over its person. Clearly, The records show that Gerbert attached to his petition a copy of
the judgment of default rendered by that court against the divorce decree, as well as the required certificates proving its
respondent is valid. authenticity,30 but failed to include a copy of the Canadian law
on divorce.31 Under this situation, we can, at this point, simply
dismiss the petition for insufficiency of supporting evidence,
ATCI vs ETCHIN unless we deem it more appropriate to remand the case to the
RTC to determine whether the divorce decree is consistent with
-citing EDI-Staffbuilders Case the Canadian divorce law.
25
BAM 2020
CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER
Moreover, notwithstanding Article 26 of the Family Code, SEC. 48. Effect of foreign judgments or final orders. - The effect
Philippine courts already have jurisdiction to extend the effect of of a judgment or final order of a tribunal of a foreign country,
a foreign judgment in the Philippines to the extent that the having jurisdiction to render the judgment or final order is as
foreign judgment does not contravene domestic public policy. A follows:
critical difference between the case of a foreign divorce decree
and a foreign judgment nullifying a bigamous marriage is that (a) In case of a judgment or final order upon a specific thing, the
bigamy, as a ground for the nullity of marriage, is fully consistent judgment or final order is conclusive upon the title to the thing;
with Philippine public policy as expressed in Article 35(4) of the and
Family Code and Article 349 of the Revised Penal Code. The
Filipino spouse has the option to undergo full trial by filing a (b) In case of a judgment or final order against a person, the
petition for declaration of nullity of marriage under A.M. No. 02- judgment or final order is presumptive evidence of a right as
11-10-SC, but this is not the only remedy available to him or her. between the parties and their successors in interest by a
Philippine courts have jurisdiction to recognize a foreign subsequent title.
judgment nullifying a bigamous marriage, without prejudice to a
criminal prosecution for bigamy. In either case, the judgment or final order may be repelled by
evidence of a want of jurisdiction, want of notice to the party,
In the recognition of foreign judgments, Philippine courts are collusion, fraud, or clear mistake of law or fact.
incompetent to substitute their judgment on how a case was
decided under foreign law. They cannot decide on the "family As the foregoing jurisprudence had established, recognition and
rights and duties, or on the status, condition and legal capacity" enforcement of a foreign judgment or final order requires only
of the foreign citizen who is a party to the foreign judgment. proof of fact of the said judgment or final order. In an action in
Thus, Philippine courts are limited to the question of whether to personam, as in the case at bar, the foreign judgment or final
extend the effect of a foreign judgment in the Philippines. In a order enjoys the disputable presumption of validity. It is the party
foreign judgment relating to the status of a marriage involving a attacking the foreign judgment or final order that is tasked with
citizen of a foreign country, Philippine courts only decide whether the burden of overcoming its presumptive validity.38 A foreign
to extend its effect to the Filipino party, under the rule of lex judgment or final order may only be repelled on grounds external
nationalii expressed in Article 15 of the Civil Code. to its merits, particularly, want of jurisdiction, want of notice to
26
BAM 2020
CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER
28
BAM 2020
CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER
court would do. If it accepts the so-called renvoi doctrine, it will follow
the latter course, thus applying its own law. the intrinsic validity of the provisions of the will; and (d) the
capacity to succeed.
This is one type of renvoi. A jural matter is presented which the
conflict-of-laws rule of the forum refers to a foreign law, the conflict- Appellants would however counter that Art. 17, paragraph three,
of-laws rule of which, in turn, refers the matter back again to the law of the Civil Code, stating that —
of the forum. This is renvoi in the narrower sense. The German term
Prohibitive laws concerning persons, their acts or property, and
for this judicial process is 'Ruckverweisung.'" (Harvard Law Review,
those which have for their object public order, public policy and
Vol. 31, pp. 523-571.) good customs shall not be rendered ineffective by laws or
judgments promulgated, or by determinations or conventions
After a decision has been arrived at that a foreign law is to be agreed upon in a foreign country.
resorted to as governing a particular case, the further question may
arise: Are the rules as to the conflict of laws contained in such prevails as the exception to Art. 16, par. 2 of the Civil Code
foreign law also to be resorted to? This is a question which, while it afore-quoted. This is not correct. Precisely, Congress deleted
has been considered by the courts in but a few instances, has been the phrase, "notwithstanding the provisions of this and the next
the subject of frequent discussion by textwriters and essayists; and preceding article" when they incorporated Art. 11 of the old Civil
the doctrine involved has been descriptively designated by them as Code as Art. 17 of the new Civil Code, while reproducing without
the "Renvoyer" to send back, or the "Ruchversweisung", or the substantial change the second paragraph of Art. 10 of the old
"Weiterverweisung", since an affirmative answer to the question Civil Code as Art. 16 in the new. It must have been their purpose
to make the second paragraph of Art. 16 a specific provision in
postulated and the operation of the adoption of the foreign law in toto
itself which must be applied in testate and intestate succession.
would in many cases result in returning the main controversy to be
As further indication of this legislative intent, Congress added a
decided according to the law of the forum. ... (16 C.J.S. 872.) new provision, under Art. 1039, which decrees that capacity to
succeed is to be governed by the national law of the decedent.
Another theory, known as the "doctrine of renvoi", has been
advanced. The theory of the doctrine of renvoi is that the court of the It is therefore evident that whatever public policy or good
forum, in determining the question before it, must take into account customs may be involved in our System of legitimes, Congress
the whole law of the other jurisdiction, but also its rules as to conflict has not intended to extend the same to the succession of foreign
of laws, and then apply the law to the actual question which the rules nationals. For it has specifically chosen to leave, inter alia, the
of the other jurisdiction prescribe. This may be the law of the forum. amount of successional rights, to the decedent's national law.
The doctrine of the renvoi has generally been repudiated by the Specific provisions must prevail over general ones.
American authorities.
The parties admit that the decedent, Amos G. Bellis, was a
citizen of the State of Texas, U.S.A., and that under the laws of
The scope of the theory of renvoi has also been defined and the
Texas, there are no forced heirs or legitimes. Accordingly, since
reasons for its application in a country explained by Prof. Lorenzen
the intrinsic validity of the provision of the will and the amount of
in an article in the Yale Law Journal, Vol. 27, 1917-1918, pp. 529- successional rights are to be determined under Texas law, the
531. The pertinent parts of the article are quoted herein below: Philippine law on legitimes cannot be applied to the testacy of
Amos G. Bellis.
The recognition of the renvoi theory implies that the rules of the
conflict of laws are to be understood as incorporating not only the
ordinary or internal law of the foreign state or country, but its rules of
the conflict of laws as well. According to this theory 'the law of a Gibbs vs Govt of Philippine Islands
country' means the whole of its law.
The trial court found that under the law of California, upon the
death of the wife, the entire community property without
Bellis vs Bellis administration belongs to the surviving husband; that he is the
absolute owner of all the community property from the moment
In this regard, the parties do not submit the case on, nor even of the death of his wife, not by virtue of succession or by virtue of
discuss, the doctrine of renvoi, applied by this Court in Aznar v. her death, but by virtue of the fact that when the death of the
Christensen Garcia, L-16749, January 31, 1963. Said doctrine is wife precedes that of the husband he acquires the community
usually pertinent where the decedent is a national of one property, not as an heir or as the beneficiary of his deceased
country, and a domicile of another. In the present case, it is not wife, but because she never had more than an inchoate interest
disputed that the decedent was both a national of Texas and a or expentancy which is extinguished upon her death. Quoting the
domicile thereof at the time of his death.2 So that even assuming case of Estate of Klumpke (167 Cal., 415, 419), the court said:
Texas has a conflict of law rule providing that the domiciliary "The decisions under this section (1401 Civil Code of California)
system (law of the domicile) should govern, the same would not are uniform to the effect that the husband does not take the
result in a reference back (renvoi) to Philippine law, but would community property upon the death of the wife by succession,
still refer to Texas law. Nonetheless, if Texas has a conflicts rule but that he holds it all from the moment of her death as though
adopting the situs theory (lex rei sitae) calling for the application required by himself. ... It never belonged to the estate of the
of the law of the place where the properties are situated, renvoi deceased wife."
would arise, since the properties here involved are found in the
Philippines. In the absence, however, of proof as to the conflict The argument of the appellee apparently leads to this dilemma:
of law rule of Texas, it should not be presumed different from If he takes nothing by succession from his deceased wife, how
ours.3 Appellants' position is therefore not rested on the doctrine can the second paragraph of article 10 be invoked? Can the
of renvoi. As stated, they never invoked nor even mentioned it in appellee be heard to say that there is a legal succession under
their arguments. Rather, they argue that their case falls under the law of the Philippine Islands and no legal succession under
the circumstances mentioned in the third paragraph of Article 17 the law of California? It seems clear that the second paragraph
in relation to Article 16 of the Civil Code. of article 10 applies only when a legal or testamentary
succession has taken place in the Philippines and in accordance
Article 16, par. 2, and Art. 1039 of the Civil Code, render with the law of the Philippine Islands; and the foreign law is
applicable the national law of the decedent, in intestate or consulted only in regard to the order of succession or the extent
testamentary successions, with regard to four items: (a) the of the successional rights; in other words, the second paragraph
order of succession; (b) the amount of successional rights; (e) of article 10 can be invoked only when the deceased was vested
with a descendible interest in property within the jurisdiction of
29
BAM 2020
CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER
the Philippine Islands. would be regulated by section 1386 of the Civil Code of
California which was in effect at the time of the death of Mrs.
In the case of Clarke vs. Clarke, the court said: Gibbs.
It is principle firmly established that to the law of the state in The record does not show what the proper amount of the
which the land is situated we must look for the rules which inheritance tax in this case would be nor that the appellee
govern its descent, alienation, and transfer, and for the effect (petitioner below) in any way challenged the power of the
and construction of wills and other conveyances. This Government to levy an inheritance tax or the validity of the
fundamental principle is stated in the first paragraph of article 10 statute under which the register of deeds refused to issue a
of our Civil Code as follows: "Personal property is subject to the certificate of transfer reciting that the appellee is the exclusive
laws of the nation of the owner thereof; real property to the laws owner of the Philippine lands included in the three certificates of
of the country in which it is situated.’ title here involved.
In accord with the rule that real property is subject to the lex rei Miciano vs Brimo
sitae, the respective rights of husband and wife in such property,
in the absence of an antenuptial contract, are determined by the But the fact is that the oppositor did not prove that said
law of the place where the property is situated, irrespective of testimentary dispositions are not in accordance with the Turkish
the domicile of the parties or to the place where the marriage laws, inasmuch as he did not present any evidence showing
was celebrated. 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
Under this broad principle, the nature and extent of the title those of the Philippines. (Lim and Lim vs. Collector of Customs,
which vested in Mrs. Gibbs at the time of the acquisition of the 36 Phil., 472.)
community lands here in question must be determined in
accordance with the lex rei sitae. It has not been proved in these proceedings what the Turkish
laws are. He, himself, acknowledges it when he desires to be
It is admitted that the Philippine lands here in question were given an opportunity to present evidence on this point; so much
acquired as community property of the conjugal partnership of so that he assigns as an error of the court in not having deferred
the appellee and his wife. Under the law of the Philippine the approval of the scheme of partition until the receipt of certain
Islands, she was vested of a title equal to that of her husband. testimony requested regarding the Turkish laws on the matter.
Article 1407 of the Civil Code provides:
The refusal to give the oppositor another opportunity to prove
All the property of the spouses shall be deemed partnership such laws does not constitute an error. It is discretionary with the
property in the absence of proof that it belongs exclusively to the trial court, and, taking into consideration that the oppositor was
husband or to the wife. Article 1395 provides: granted ample opportunity to introduce competent evidence, we
find no abuse of discretion on the part of the court in this
"The conjugal partnership shall be governed by the rules of law particular. There is, therefore, no evidence in the record that the
applicable to the contract of partnership in all matters in which national law of the testator Joseph G. Brimo was violated in the
such rules do not conflict with the express provisions of this testamentary dispositions in question which, not being contrary
chapter." Article 1414 provides that "the husband may dispose to our laws in force, must be complied with and executed.
by will of his half only of the property of the conjugal
partnership." Article 1426 provides that upon dissolution of the
conjugal partnership and after inventory and liquidation, "the net
remainder of the partnership property shall be divided share and
share alike between the husband and wife, or their respective
heirs." Under the provisions of the Civil Code and the
jurisprudence prevailing here, the wife, upon the acquisition of
any conjugal property, becomes immediately vested with an
interest and title therein equal to that of her husband, subject to
the power of management and disposition which the law vests in
the husband. Immediately upon her death, if there are no
obligations of the decedent, as is true in the present case, her
share in the conjugal property is transmitted to her heirs by
succession.
It results that the wife of the appellee was, by the law of the
Philippine Islands, vested of a descendible interest, equal to that
of her husband, in the Philippine lands covered by certificates of
title Nos. 20880, 28336 and 28331, from the date of their
acquisition to the date of her death. That appellee himself
believed that his wife was vested of such a title and interest in
manifest from the second of said certificates, No. 28336, dated
May 14, 1927, introduced by him in evidence, in which it is
certified that "the spouses Allison D. Gibbs and Eva Johnson
Gibbs are the owners in fee simple of the conjugal lands therein
described."
30
BAM 2020
CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER
31
BAM 2020
CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER
32
BAM 2020
CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER
APPENDIX 1
OLD NEW
Section 1. Clerk to issue summons – Upon the filing of the complaint and Section 1. Clerk to issue summons. — Unless the complaint is on its
the payment of the requisite legal fees, the clerk of court shall forthwith face dismissible under Section 1, Rule 9, the court shall, within five
issue the corresponding summons to the defendants. (5) calendar days from receipt of the initiatory pleading and proof of
payment of the requisite legal fees, direct the clerk of court to issue
the corresponding summons to the defendants. (1a)
Section 2. Contents – The summons shall be directed to the defendant, Section 2. Contents. — The summons shall be directed to the defendant,
signed by the clerk of court under seal, and contain: (a) the name of the signed by the clerk of court under seal, and contain:
court and the names of the parties to the action; (b) a direction that the (a) The name of the court and the names of the parties to the action;
defendant answer within the time fixed by these Rules; (c) a notice that (b) When authorized by the court upon ex parte motion, an
unless the defendant so answers, plaintiff will take judgment by default authorization for the plaintiff to serve summons to the defendant;
and may be granted the relief applied for. (c) A direction that the defendant answer within the time fixed by these
Rules; and
A copy of the complaint and order for appointment of guardian ad litem, if (d) A notice that unless the defendant so answers, plaintiff will take
any, shall be attached to the original and each copy of the summons. judgment by default and may be granted the relief applied for.
A copy of the complaint and order for appointment of guardian ad litem, if
any, shall be attached to the original and each copy of the summons.
(2a)
Section 3. By whom served. – The summons may be served by the Section 3. By whom served. — The summons may be served by the
Sheriff, his deputy, or other proper court officer, or for justifiable reasons sheriff, his or her deputy, or other proper court officer, and in case of
by any suitable person authorized by the court issuing the summons. failure of service of summons by them, the court may authorize the
plaintiff - to serve the summons - together with the sheriff.
In cases where summons is to be served outside the judicial region
of the court where the case is pending, the plaintiff shall be
authorized to cause the service of summons.
If the plaintiff is a juridical entity, it shall notify the court, in writing,
and name its authorized representative therein, attaching a board
resolution or secretary’s certificate thereto, as the case may be,
stating that such representative is duly authorized to serve the
summons on behalf of the plaintiff.
If the plaintiff misrepresents that the defendant was served
summons, and it is later proved that no summons was served, the
case shall be dismissed with prejudice, the proceedings shall be
nullified, and the plaintiff shall be meted appropriate sanctions.
If summons is returned without being served on any or all the
defendants, the court shall order the plaintiff to cause the service of
summons by other means available under the Rules.
Failure to comply with the order shall cause the dismissal of the
initiatory pleading without prejudice. (3a)
33