DOMICILE
DEFINITION
Municipal Law Definition
a. It is stated in our Civil Code
b. Natural persons: Place of their
habitual residence. (Art. 50, NCC)
c. Juridical person: Determined by
the law creating or recognizing it.
In the absence thereof, where
their legal representation or place
of business is. (Art. 51, NCC)
RESIDENCE V.S. DOMICILE
Residence
Physical Presence
Temporary stay of a person
Basic Definition of Domicile: Domicile = Physical Presence + Intention to Remain
Private International Law or
Conflicts of Law Definition
a. Restatement definition: Place with
which a person has a settled
connection for certain legal
purposes, either because his
home is there or because that
place is assigned to him by law.
b. Justice Story: Place of his true,
fixed permanent home and
principal establishment, and to
which, whenever he is absent, he
has the intention of returning.
Domicile
Intention + Physical Presence
Permanent abode of a person
 Expanded Definition of Domicile based on Uytengsu v. Republic Case:

Domicile = Physical or Bodily Presence + Intention to Remain + Act

JURISPRUDENCE

Case Law Ruling

Caasi v. Court of Appeals (1990 Case) Respondent Miguel was disqualified to

run for local elective office because he
was a permanent US resident and
resided in Bolinao less than a year as
required by the law.

Uytengsu v. Republic (1954 Case) Supreme court ruled that domicile

Residence = Act + Intent to Leave
Domicile = Act + Intent to Remain
(Animo Manendi)
alone is essential to the enjoyment of
the benefits granted by law. His
naturalization application is denied for
residing continuously in the Philippines
from the date of filing of petition up to
the time of his admission to Philippine
citizenship.

CAASI V.S. COURT OF APPEALS

Facts: Petitioner Mateo Caasi and respondent Merito Miguel were both elective
officials for the position in the municipality of Bolinao Pangasinan. Private
respondent Miguel was elected in the local elections but was opposed by filing a
petition for disaqualification by the petitioner because Miguel is a green card holder
and in effect, a permanent resident of the United States of America. Miguel
admitted the allegations but he denied being a permanent resident of the United
States. He obtained his greencard for convenience in order to freely enter the
United States for his periodic medical exam and to visit his children there. The
COMELEC dismissed the petition stating that the possession of a green card does
not sufficiently establish that he has abandoned his residence in the Philippines. The
Court of Appeals set aside the decision of the Regional Trial Court in proceeding with
the case. Hence, an appeal before the Supreme Court.

Issue: Should Merito Miguel be considered to have waived his status as permanent
resident or immigrant to the United States which in effect entitle him to qualify as
an elective official be sought in the Municipality of Bolinao Pangasinan?

Held. No. The Supreme Court set aside the decision of the COMELEC and the
Court of Appeals.

Ratio: Under the Omnibus Election Code, any person shall not be qualified to run
for any elective office unless such person has waived his status as permanent
resident or immigrant of a foreign country in accordance with the requirement
provided in the election laws. Here, his act of filing does not constitute a waiver of
his status as a permanent resident or immigrant of the United States. Though he
admitted that he holds a green card, there is a bare proof that he waived his status
as such before he ran for election as municipal mayor. Hence, he is disqualified to
become a candidate for that office.

MERITS AND DEMERITS OF DOMICILE

Merits Demerits

The very purpose of having a personal a. Ones domicile is not ascertainable

law is satisified. without first resorting to the courts to
establish whether or not there is intent
 to remain.

Example: Stateless person or those with
dual or multiple nationalities
b. Notion of domicile differs widely with
some states distinguishing between
residence and domicle or attributing
different meanings of domicile for
different purpose.

c. If the law of the domicile of origin is

given overriding significance, then it
may create the same problem of weak
force or effect in the use of nationality
as personal law.

GENERAL RULES ON DOMICILE

First Rule: General Application is that no person shall be without a

domicile.

Second Rule: A person cannot have two simultaneous domicile.

Third Rule: Domicile establishes a connection between a person and a

particular territorial unit.

Fourth Rule: He is the one who alleges has the burden of proving that a
change of domicile has been secured.

JURISPRUDENCE
 Case Law Ruling

Romualdez-Marcos v. COMELEC (1995 Domicile of origin is not lost by result of

Case) marriage because a minor follows the
domicile of her parents and a domicile
of origin is not lost.

Ujano v. Republic (1966 Case) A temporary visitor is not considered as

a ground for reacquiring a Philippine
citizenship.

In Re Dorrances Estate (1932 Case: A mans desire to retain a domicile of

Foreign Case) choice in one state prevails over the
intention to make a new home
manifested by an actual removal to the
new residence in another state and
accompanied by a manner of living.

KINDS OF DOMICILE

Kinds
Domicile of origin
Domicile of choice
Constructive domicile
Definition
It refers to a persons domicile at birth
It is also called voluntary domicile. It is
the place freely chosen by a person sui
juris.
It is assigned to persons by operation of
law to those incapable of choosing their
own domicile.
 JURISPRUDENCE

Case Law Ruling

Velilla v. Posadas (1935 Case) Petitioner is domiciled in the Philippine

Island at the time of his death because
there was no deliberate and provable
choice of a new domicile, coupled with
actual residence in the place chosen,
with declared or provable intent that it
should be ones fixed and permanent
place of abode, ones home.

White v. Tenant (1888 Case: Foreign Momentary presence in the new

Case) domicile was sufficient compliance with
the presence requirement in this case
because there was an intention to make
the new domicile as the his permanent
residence.

Caballo v. Repubic (1962 Case) A non-resident citizen cannot adopt a

child because the State protects and
insures welfare for the childs best
interest.

Go Chen and Go Lek v. Collector of A Chinese widow who is admitted to

Customs of Cebu (1932 Case) and acquitted a residence in the
Philippines as the wife of a Chinese
merchant, her second husband, was not
entitled to bring in her minor children
 by her first marriage.

De La Vina v. Villareal and Geopano A married woman may acquire a

(1920 Case) residence or domicile separate from
that of her husband, during the
existence of the marriage, where the
husband has given cause for divorce.

Question:

A has both properties in Laguna and in Manila. He lives in Manila every weekdays
because of the proximity of his workplace. During weekends, As intention to remain
in Laguna is to visit his family after a weekdays work from Manila. Where is his
domicile?

Suggested answer:

As domicile is in Laguna. Jurisprudence provides that for a domicile to be present,

there must be bodily presence, act and intention to remain. In this case, the act,
bodily presence, and intention to remain with his family, As manifests that his
domicile is in Laguna.