CONFLICT OF LAWS

PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW entities possessed of

international personality.
As to transactions involved
GENERAL PRINCIPLES Private transactions with Transactions generally
private individuals. affect public interest; or of
Private international law interest only to sovereign
states.
It is a part of municipal law of a state which directs its As to remedies and sanctions
courts and administrative agencies, when confronted Resort to municipal Remedies may be peaceful
with a legal problem involving foreign element, whether tribunals. or forcible.
or not they should apply the foreign law.
Sources of Philippine conflict rules
Conflict of laws
1. Family Code
It is the inconsistency or difference between the laws of Arts. 10, 21, 26, 35, 36, 37, 38, 80, 96, 184, and
different states or countries, arising in the case of 187
persons who have acquired rights, incurred obligations, 2. Civil Code
injuries or damages, or made contracts, within the Arts. 14, 15, 16, 17, 815, 816, 818, 819, 829,
territory of two or more jurisdictions. (Black’s Law 1039, 1319, and 1753
Dictionary, Fifth Edition) 3. Penal Code
Art. 2
Functions of private international law 4. Corporation Code
Sec. 133 – Doing business without a license
1. Prescribes conditions under which a court or 5. 1987 Constitution
agency is competent to entertain proceedings Art. IV and Art. 5, Sec. 1
with foreign elements; 6. Rules of Court
2. Specifies the circumstances in which foreign Rule 14 and 39, Sec. 48; Rule 131, Sec. 3 (n);
judgment will be recognized as valid and Rule 132, Secs. 24 and 25.
binding in the forum; and
3. Determines the particular system of law for Territoriality Principle
each class of cases to ascertain the rights of the
parties. (Paras, 1990) Penal laws and those of public security and safety shall
be obligatory upon all who live or sojourn in the
Elements of Conflict of laws Philippines, subject to the principles of international law
and treaty stipulations. (NCC, Article 14)
1. Legal problem or case involving foreign
element; Nationality principle

Foreign element – a factual situation cutting
across territorial lines, affected by diverse laws
of two or more states.
2. Primary function is to determine whether the
law or judgments of other state/s will govern
and if so the extent if its recognition or
application in the forum. (Coquia, 2000)
Private International Law v. Public International law
Laws relating to family rights and duties or to the status,
condition, and legal capacity of persons are binding upon
citizens of the Philippines, even though living abroad.
(NCC, Article 15)
Lex rei sitae
Real property as well as personal property is subject to
the law of the country where it is situated. (NCC, Article
16)

Two views: Lex loci celebrationis

1. Monist school – Both subjects are essentially the The forms and solemnities of contracts, wills, and other
same, because they manifest a single concept of public instruments shall be governed by the laws of the
law, ultimately addressed to the same country in which they are executed. (NCC, Article 17)
individual.

2. Dualist School – This school of thought JURISDICTION AND CHOICE OF LAW

differentiates private and public international
law in the following manner: JURISDCTION

Private International law Public International law GR: It is the right of a State to exercise authority over
As to nature persons and things within its boundaries.
Municipal in character International in character
As to persons involved Rules to follow when the court is confronted with a
Private individuals Sovereign states and other case involving a foreign element

If the court is faced with a case involving a foreign
element, it should first determine:
1. Whether it has jurisdiction over the case;
2. If it has no jurisdiction, it should be dismissed
on that ground;
3. If it has jurisdiction, the court will determine
whether it should assume jurisdiction, or it
should dismiss the case on the ground of forum
non-convenience; and
4. Once the court has determined it has
jurisdiction over the case, it will next determine
whether to apply the internal law of the forum
or apply the proper foreign law.
Forum Non Conveniens
It refers to the refusal to assume jurisdiction because it
would prove inconvenient for the forum.
Grounds for dismissal of the case on the basis of
forum non conveniens
1. Evidence and witnesses may not be readily
available in the forum;
2. Court dockets of the forum are already clogged
that would hamper the speedy administration
of justice;
3. The matter can be better tried and decided in
another forum;
4. To curb the evils of forum shopping;
5. The forum has no particular interest in the
case, as when the parties are not citizens of the
forum or are residents elsewhere;
6. Inadequacy of the local judicial machinery in
effectuating the right sought to be enforced;
and
7. Difficulty in ascertaining the foreign law
applicable.
When can internal or domestic law be applied
1. Law of the forum expressly so provides in its
conflicts rule;
2. Proper foreign law has not been properly
pleaded and proved;
3. Case involves any of the exceptions to the
application of the foreign law.
Instances:
1. When the foreign law, judgment or
contract is:
a. Contrary to sound and established
policy of the forum;
b. Contrary to almost universally
conceded principles of morality
(contra bonus mores);
c. Involves procedural matters;
d. Purely fiscal or administrative
matters; and
e. Involves real or personal property
situated in the forum.
2. When the application of the foreign law,
judgment or contract:
a. May work undeniable justice to the
citizens/residents of the forum; and
b. May work against vital interests &
national security of the state of the
forum.
Doctrine of Processual Presumption of Law
Where a foreign law is not pleaded or, even if pleaded, is
not proved, the court of the forum may presume that the
foreign law applicable to the case is the same as the local
or domestic law.
Foreign laws do not prove themselves in our jurisdiction
and our courts are not authorized to takejudicial notice
of them. Like any other fact, they must be alleged and
proved.
A Philippine court may take judicial notice of a foreign
law, as when the laws are already within its actual
knowledge, such as when they are well and generally
known or they have been actually ruled upon in other
cases before it and none of the parties concerned claim
otherwise. (PCIB v. Escolin, G.R Nos. L-27860 & 27896,
September 30, 1975)
How to prove a foreign law
Under Sections 24 and 25 of Rule 132 of the Rules of
Court, a writing or document may be proven as a public
or official record of a foreign country by either:
1. An official publication; or
2. A copy thereof attested by the officer having
legal custody of the document. If the record is
not kept in the Philippines, such copy must be
(a) accompanied by a certificate issued by the
proper diplomatic or consular officer in the
Philippine Foreign Service stationed in the
foreign country in which the record is kept and
(b) authenticated by the seal of his office.
CHOICE OF LAW
Important questions that choice-of-law problems
seeks to answer
1. What legal system should control a given
situation where some of the significant facts
occurred in two or more states; and
2. To what extent should the chosen system
regulate the situation. (Saudi Arabian Airlines v.
CA, G.R. No. 122191, October 8, 1998)
NOTE: Foreign law has no extraterritorial effect and any
exception to this right must be traced to the consent of
the nation.
Theories on why the foreign law may be given effect
1. Theory of Comity – The application of foreign
legal systems in cases involving foreign
element is proper, otherwise, the non-
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
application would constitute a disregard of
foreign sovereignty or lack of comity towards
other States.
Comity – It is the recognition which one state
allows within its territory to the legislative,
executive, or judicial acts of another state,
having due regard both to international duty
and convenience and to the rights of its own
citizens or of other persons who are under the
protection of its laws. (Agpalo. 2004)
Kinds:
a. Comity based on reciprocity; and
b. Comity based on the persuasiveness of the
foreign judgment.
2. Theory of Vested Rights – Courts enforce not
the foreign law or foreign judgment but the
rights vested under such law or judgment.
Thus, rights acquired in one country must be
recognized and legally protected in other
countries.
3. Theory of Local Law – This involves the
appropriation of a foreign rule by the State of
the forum and transforming it into a domestic
rule. A foreign law is applied because our own
law, by applying a similar rule, requires us to
do so, as if the foreign law as become part of
our internal or domestic law.
4. Theory of Harmony of Law – Identical or
similar problems should be given identical and
similar solutions, thus resulting in harmony of
laws. The application of the same or similar
solution prevents the bad practice of forum
shopping.
5. Theory of Justice – Choice of law should be
determined by considerations of justice and
social expediency and should not be the result
of mechanical application of the rule or
principle of selection.
CHARACTERIZATION
CONFLICT RULES
These are provisions found in our own law which govern
factual situations possessed of foreign element. It is
usually expressed in the form of an abstract proposition
that a given legal question is governed by the law of a
particular country (which may be an internal law or the
proper foreign law), to be ascertained in the manner
indicated in the provision. (Sempio-diy, 2004)
Kinds of conflict rules
1. One-sided Rule – indicates when Philippine
law will apply;
e.g., Articles 15 and 818 of the Civil Code only
apply to Filipinos.
2. All-sided Rule – indicates when foreign law is
to be applied.
Characterization (Doctrine of Qualification or
Classification)
It is the process of deciding whether or not the facts
relate to the kind of question specified in a conflits rule.
(Saudi Arabian Airlines v. CA, G.R. No. 122191, October 8,
1998)
Steps in characterization
1. The determination of facts involved;
2. The characterization of factual situation;
3. The determination of conflicts rule which is
to be applied;
4. The characterization of the point of contact
where the connecting factor;
5. The characterization of the problem as
procedural or substantive;
6. The pleading and proving of the proper
foreign law; and
7. The application of the proper foreign law to
the problem. (Paras, 1990)
---
Q: A (a Filipino construction firm) and the Iraqi
Government entered into a service contract for the
construction of building in Iraq. The service contract
contained no express choice of the law that would
govern it. The contract was secured by a
performance bond issued by B (a domestic
corporation). For A’s faliure to complete the project,
B paid the bond. B claimed reimbursement but A
failed to pay. Thus a case was filed. Should Philippine
law govern in determining B's default?
A: YES. In this case, the laws of Iraq bear substantial
connection to the transaction, since one of the parties is
the Iraqi Government and the place of performance is in
Iraq. Hence, the issue of whether B defaulted in its
obligations may be determined by the laws of Iraq.
However, since that foreign law was not properly
pleaded or proved, the presumption of identity or
similarity, otherwise known as the processual
presumption, comes into play. Where foreign law is not
pleaded or, even if pleaded, is not proved, the
presumption is that foreign law is the same as ours.
(Philippine Export and Foreign Loan Guarantee
Corporation v. V.P. Eusebio Construction, Inc. Et Al, G.R.
No. 140047, July 13, 2004)
---
Q: A, a foreign corporation, won a collection case in
Japan against B, a domestic corporation doing
business in Japan. A filed a suit for enforcement of
the judgment in the RTC of Manila. B assails the
judgment on the ground that the Japanese court did
not validly acquire jurisdiction over B’s person since
B was served with summons in the Philippines and
not in Japan. Is B correct?

A: NO. It is settled that matters of remedy and
procedure such as those relating to the service of process
upon a defendant are governed by the lex fori or the
internal law of the forum. In this case, it is the procedural
law of Japan where the judgment was rendered that
determines the validity of the extraterritorial service of
process on B. As to what this law is a question of fact, not
of law. It may not be taken judicial notice of and must be
pleaded and proved like any other fact. B did not present
evidence as to what that Japanese procedural law is and
to show that under it, the assailed extraterritorial service
is invalid. Accordingly, the presumption of validity and
regularity of the service of summons and the decision
thereafter rendered by the Japanese court must stand.
(Northwest Orient Airlines, Inc. v. Court of Appeals and C.F.
Sharp & Company Inc., G.R. No. 112573, February 9, 1995)
DOMICILE AND CITIZENSHIP
CITIZENSHIP
Personal law
The law which attaches to a person wherever he may go
and generally governs his status, capacity, condition,
family relations, and the consequences of his actuations.
(Sempio-Diy, 2004)
Theories of Personal Law
1. Nationality Theory or Personal Theory – The
status and capacity of a person are determined by
the law of his nationality or national law. (Sempio-
Diy, 2004)
NOTE: The Philippines follows the Nationality
Theory.
2. Domiciliary Theory or Territorial Theory – The
status and capacity of a person are determined by
the law of his domicile (Ibid.).
3. Situs or Eclectic Theory – The particular place or
situs of an event or transaction is generally the
controlling law. (Ibid.)
Problems in applying the nationality principle in
dual or multiple citizenship
It arises from the concurrent application of jus soli and
jus sanguinis at birth or from a refusal of certain States to
accept a full application of the doctrine of expatriation,
from marriage, or from a formal and voluntary act.
1. In matters of status, a person is usually
considered by the forum as exclusively its own
national. His additional foreign nationality is
disregarded.
2. In case litigation arises in third country, the law
most consistently applied is that of the country
of which the person is not onl a national but
where he also has his domicile or habitual
residence, or in the absence thereof, his
residence.
Theory of effective nationality
A third state shall recognize exclusively in its territory
either the nationality of the country of which one is
habitually and principally a resident, or the nationality of
the country with which in the circumstances one appears
to be in act most closely connected. (Hague Convention
on Conflict Nationality Laws, Art. 5)
---
Q: What are the effects of marriages of: 1) a citizen to
an alien; and 2) an alien to a citizen on their spouses
and children?
A: The following are the effects:
1. Filipino citizens who marry aliens retain their
citizenship, unless by their act or omission, they are
deemed, under the law, to have renounced it. (1987
Constitution, Art. IV, Sec. 4)
2. Sec. 15 of the Revised Naturalization Law provides
that a foreign woman who marries a Filipino citizen
becomes a Filipino citizen provided she possesses
all the qualifications and none of the
disqualifications for naturalization. Sec. 15 was
obviously to accord to an alien woman, by reason of
her marriage to a Filipino, a privilege not similarly
granted to other aliens. On the other hand, a foreign
man who marries a Filipino citizen does not acquire
Philippine citizenship. But under Sec. 3 of the same
law, in such a case, the residence requirement for
naturalization will be reduced from 10 to 5 years.
Under Sec. 1(2), Art. IV of the Constitution, the
children of an alien and a Filipino citizen are citizens
of the Philippines. (Moy Ya Lim Yao “Alias” Edilberto
Aguinaldo Lim and Lau Yuen Yeung v. Commissioner
of Immigration, G.R. No. L-21289, October 4, 1971)
---
Q: Is dual citizenship a ground for disqualification
from running for any elective position under the
Local Government Code?
A: NO. Dual citizenship is different from dual allegiance.
The phrase “dual citizenship” in R.A. 7160 must be
understood as referring to “dual allegiance,” and persons
with dual citizenship do not fall under this
disqualification. Dual citizenship is involuntary - it arises
out of circumstances like birth or marriage; while dual
allegiance is a result of a person’s volition. It is a
situation wherein a person simultaneously owes, by
some positive act, loyalty to 2 or more states.
Also, Manzano upon filing his certificate for candidacy
have elected Philippine citizenship thus terminating his
dual citizenship. He made these statements: “I am a
Filipino citizen…natural born. I am not a permanent
resident of, or immigrant to, a foreign country. I am
eligible for the office I seek to be elected…I will support
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
the Constitution of the Philippines and will maintain true
faith and allegiance thereto…,” thus the filing sufficed to
renounce his American citizenship. (Mercado v. Manzano
& COMELEC, G.R. No. 135083 May 26, 1999)
---
Q: Cruz was born in Tarlac, of Filipino parents
making him a natural-born citizen of the Philippines.
However, he lost his Philippine citizenship when he
was enlisted in the U.S. Marine Corps and took an
oath of allegiance to the U.S.A, thereby becoming an
American citizen. Cruz reacquired his Philippine
citizenship through repatriation under R.A. 2630. He
ran for and was elected as the Representative of the
Second District of Pangasinan in the 1998 elections.
He won over Bengson III. Subsequently, Bengson
filed a disqualification case with the HRET claiming
that respondent Cruz was not qualified to become a
member of the House of Representatives since he is
not a natural-born citizen as required under Art. VI,
Sec. 6 of the Constitution. The HRET dismissed the
petition for quo warranto and declared respondent
Cruz was duly elected as a Representative. The HRET
also denied Bengson’s motion for reconsideration.
Can Cruz, a natural-born Filipino who became an
American citizen, still be considered a natural-born
Filipino upon his reacquisition of Philippine
citizenship?
A: YES. Cruz can still be considered a natural-born
Filipino upon his reacquisition of Philippine citizenship.
He may have lost his Filipino citizenship when he
rendered service in the Armed Forces of the United
States. However, he subsequently reacquired Philippine
citizenship under R.A. No. 2630, Sec. 1, which
provides: ”Any person who had lost his Philippine
citizenship by rendering service to, or accepting
commission in, the Armed Forces of the United States, or
after separation from the Armed Forces of the United
States, acquired United States citizenship, may reacquire
Philippine citizenship by taking an oath of allegiance to
the Republic of the Philippines and registering the same
with Local Civil Registry in the place where he resides or
last resided in the Philippines. The said oath of allegiance
shall contain a renunciation of any other citizenship.”
Cruz upon taking the required oath of allegiance to the
Republic and having registered the same in the Civil
Registry of Mangatarem, Pangasinan in accordance with
the aforecited provision, is deemed to have recovered his
original status as a natural-born citizen, a status which
he acquired at birth as the son of a Filipino father. It
bears stressing that the act of repatriation allows him to
recover, or return to, his original status before he lost his
Philippine citizenship. (Bengson v. HRET and Cruz, G.R.
No. 142840. May 7, 2001)
DOMICILE
It is the place with which a person has a settled
connection for certain legal purposes, either because his
home is there or because that is the place assigned to
him by law.
Domiciliary or Territorial Theory/Lex Domicilii
The individual’s private rights, condition, status, and
capacity are determined by the law of his domicile.
It is adopted mostly by common law countries with
population consisting of different nationalities. Their
unity may be achieved by adopting the law of their
domicile.
Fundamental principles of domicile
1. No person shall be without a domicile;
2. A person cannot have two simultaneous
domiciles;
3. Every natural person, as long as he is free and
sui juris, may establish and change his domicile
at his pleasure;
4. A domicile, once acquired, is retained unless a
new one is gained;
5. The presumption is in favor of continuance of
domicile; the burden of proof is on the one who
alleges that change of domicile has taken place;
6. To acquire a fresh domicile, residence and
intention must concur; to retain an existing
domicile, either residence there or intention to
remain must be present; to abandon a domicile,
residence in a new place and intention to
abandon the old place must concur. (Gallego v.
Verra, G.R. No. L-48641, November 24, 1941)
Essential requisites needed in order to acquire a
domicile of choice
1. Capacity;
2. Actual physical presence in the place chosen;
3. Freedom of choice; and
4. Provable intent that it should be one’s fixed and
permanent place of abode — one’s home — hat
is, there should be “animus manendi” (intent to
remain) or “animus non-revertendi” (intent not
to return to the original abode).
Legal classifications of domicile
1. Domicile of origin – It is the domicile of a
person’s parents at the time of birth.
2. Constructive domicile – It is the domicile
established by law after birth in case of persons
under legal disability, regardless of their
intention or voluntary act.
Rules in determining the domicile of a person
A minor follows the domicile of his parents. (Imelda
Romualdez-Marcos v. Comelec, G.R. No. 119976,
September 18, 1995)
His domicile of origin is
that of his parents at the
time of his birth.
If the child is legitimate
If parents are separated,
the domicile of the
custodial parent.
 His domicile of origin is voidable when the marriage is
If the child is that of the mother at the valid. However, after
illegitimate time of his birth. annulment, the wife can
freely select her own
The domicile of his father domicile of choice.
If the child is at the time of his birth
legitimated controls. The wife can have a
domicile separate from
If the marriage is void
the husband.
RULES IN DETERMINING
ONE’S CONSTRUCTIVE DOMICILE OTHER PERSONS
His domicile is the one he
MINORS had possessed prior to
Convict or prisoner
1. If legitimate, the domicile of both parents. his incarceration.

In case of disagreement, that of the father, Their domicile is their

unless there is a judicial order to the contrary. domicile before their
Soldiers
enlistment.
2. If illegitimate, the domicile of the mother.
Their domicile is the one
3. In case of absence or death of either parent, they had before they
the domicile of the present parent. were assigned
Public officials or
elsewhere, unless they
employees abroad
Even in case of remarriage of the surviving voluntarily adopt their
(diplomats, etc.)
parent, still, his/her domicile determines the place of employment as
constructive domicile of the minor child. their permanent
residence.
4. If the child is adopted, the domicile of choice of
the adopter is the child’s constructive ---
domicile.
Q: Does leasing a condominium unit show an
INSANES, IDIOTS, IMBECILES intention to establish not just a residence but a
The law assigns their domicile to them: domicile of choice?

1. If they are below the age of majority, the rules A: NO. While a lease contract may be indicative of the
on minors apply to them. petitioner’s intention to reside in a place, it does not
engender the kind of permanency required to prove
2. If they are of age and have guardians, they abandonment of one’s original domicile.
follow the domicile of choice of their
guardians. To successfully effect a change of domicile, petitioner
must prove an actual removal or an actual change of
3. If they are of age and have no guardians, their domicile; and a bona fide intention of abandoning the
constructive domicile is their domicile of former place of residence and establishing a new one
choice before they became insane. and definite acts which correspond with the purpose. In
the absence of clear and positive proof, the domicile of
MARRIED WOMEN origin should be deemed to continue. (Agapito Aquino V.
1. The constructive COMELEC, Move Makati, Mateo Bedon and Juanito Icaro,
domicile of the wife is G.R. No. 120265, September 18, 1995)
the domicile of both ---
spouses, unless the law Q: Echiverri filed a petition to exclude Asistio from
allows the wife to have the permanent list of voters of Caloocan City on the
a separate domicile for ground that Asistio is not a resident of thereof as the
valid and compelling address stated in the latter’s Certificate of Candidacy
reasons. for Mayor in 2010 elections did not exist. In defense,
Asistio alleged that he mistakenly relied on the
If the marriage is valid address stated in the contract of lease with his
2. If there is legal
separation, the wife lessor. Should Asistio be excluded from the
can have her own permanent list of voters for failure to comply with
domicile of choice. the residency required by law?

3. If there is a separation A: NO. The residency requirement of a voter is at least

de facto, the wife can one year in the Philippines and at least six months in the
also have a separate place where the person intends to vote. Residence, as
domicile. used in the law pre-scribing the qualifications for
If the marriage is Apply the same rules suffrage and for elective office, is doctrinally settled to
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
mean domicile, importing not only an intention to reside
in a fixed place but also personal presence in that place,
coupled with conduct indicative of such intention
inferable from a person’s acts, activities, and utterances.
Domicile denotes a fixed permanent residence where,
when absent for business or pleasure, or for like reasons,
one intends to return. In the consideration of
circumstances obtaining in each particular case, three
rules must be borne in mind, namely: (1) that a person
must have a residence or domicile somewhere; (2) once
established, it remains until a new one is acquired; and
(3) that a person can have but one residence or domicile
at a time.
Asistio has always been a resident of Caloocan City for
more than 72 years. Asistio served in public office of
Caloocan City in 1992, 1995, 1998, 2004, and 2007. In all
of these occasions, Asistio cast his vote in the same city.
Taking these circumstances, it cannot be denied that
Asistio has qualified, and continues to qualify, as a voter
of Caloocan city. There is no showing that he has
established, or that he had consciously and voluntarily
abandoned his residence in Caloocan City. Thus, he
should remain in the list of permanent voters of
Caloocan City. (Luis Asistio v. Hon. Thelma Canlas
Trinidad-Pe Aguirre, G.R. No. 191124, April 27, 2010)
5. Marriage contracted by any party who, at the
time of the celebration, was psychologically
incapacitated to comply with the essential
marital obligations of marriage; (FC, Art. 36)
6. Incestuous marriage; (FC, Art. 37) and
7. Void ab initio marriages for reasons of public
policy. (FC, Art. 38)
Effect of laws, judgments promulgated or
conventions agreed upon in a foreign country on
Philippine prohibitive laws
GR: Prohibitive laws concerning persons, their acts, or
property and laws which have for their object public
order, public policy or good customs are not rendered
ineffective by laws, judgments promulgated or
conventions agreed upon in foreign country.
XPN: Art. 26(2) of the FC on mixed marriages where the
foreigner obtained a divorce decree abroad and was
thereby capacitated to remarry.
Even though divorce is not recognized in the Philippines
as a mode of terminating marriage, still the marriage is
terminated by virtue of a judgment of divorce and
issuance of a divorce decree by a foreign court.

FAMILY LAW AND PERSONAL CAPACITY Requirements for the application of Art. 26(2) of the
FC
Applicable Civil Code provisions
1. It must be a case of mixed marriage (one party
1. Laws relating to family rights and duties, or to is Filipino and the other is an alien);
the status, condition, and legal capacity of 2. The divorce must be obtained by the alien
persons are binding upon citizens of the spouse and not by the Filipino spouse; and
Philippines, even though living abroad; (NCC, 3. The divorce obtained by the alien spouse must
Art. 15) and capacitate him or her to remarry. (Rabuya,
2. All marriages solemnized outside the 2009)
Philippines in accordance with the laws in force
in the country where they were solemnized, Law that governs the validity of marriage in case of
and valid there as such, shall also be valid in mixed marriages
this country, except those prohibited under
Arts. 35(1), (4), (5) and (6), 36, 37, and 38. (FC, If the marriage is valid
Art. 26) under the national law of
one spouse while void
GR: Under Art. 26 of the FC, all marriages solemnized under the national law of
outside the Philippines in accordance with the laws in the other, the validity of
Marriage between a
force in the country where they were solemnized and the marriage should be
Filipino and foreigner
valid there as such, are also valid in the Philippines. upheld, unless the
ABROAD
marriage is universally
XPN: If the marriage is void under Philippine law, then incestuous or highly
marriage is void even if it is valid in the country where immoral (the same rule as
the marriage was solemnized, viz: to foreigners who get
married abroad).
1. Those contracted by any party below 18 years The national law of the
of age even with the consent of parents or Marriage between a Filipino — Philippine law
Filipino and a should be followed —
guardians; [FC, Art. 35 (1)]
foreigner in the otherwise the country’s
2. Those bigamous or polygamous marriages not PHILIPPINES public policy would be
falling under Art. 41, FC; [FC, Art. 35 (4)] violated.
3. Those contracted through mistake of one Ipso facto becomes a
contracting party as to the identity of the other; Alien woman who Filipino citizen if she
[FC, Art. 35 (5)] marries a Filipino possesses none of the
4. Those subsequent marriages that are void husband disqualifications for
naturalization.
under Art. 53, FC; [FC, Art. 35 (6)]
Law that governs the personal relations of the Pledge,
spouses chattel
mortgage,
Lex situs Lex situs Lex situs
GR: The personal relations of the spouses are governed real estate
by the national law of the husband. mortgage,
antichresis
XPN: Change of nationalities of the spouses — governing
law. (NCC, Art. 15) Lex loci
voluntatis
Effects: Personal
Contract of Lex loci or
law of the
loan: mutuum celebrationis lex loci
1. If the spouses have the same nationality but parties
intentionis
they acquire a new nationality by their
common act – Their new national law will
govern their personal relations. Contract of
2. If the husband alone changes his nationality loan: Lex situs Lex situs Lex situs
after the marriage – The law of the last commodatum
common nationality of the spouses would
govern.
3. If the spouses retain their different Lease of
nationalities after the marriage – National service,
law of both spouses should govern. agency,
guaranty,
Lex loci
suretyship
Personal voluntatis
CONTRACTS Lex loci
law of the or
NOTE: Agency celebrationis
parties lex loci
The extrinsic or formal validity of contracts is to alienate or
intentionis
governed by lex loci celebrationis or lex loci contractus. encumber
(NCC, Art. 17) real property
is governed
Lex loci contractus by lex situs

It means “the law of the contract;” the law that governs

the intrinsic validity of a contract. Personal
Lex loci Lex loci
law of the
celebrationis voluntatis
It may be determined either through; parties

1. Lex voluntatis or the law specifically stipulated by Liability for loss, destruction,
the parties in their contract; or deterioration of goods in transit: law of
2. Lex intentionis or the law intended by the parties in destination of goods. (NCC, Art. 1753)
the absence of an express stipulation.
If COGSA applies, limitation on liability
Law that governs the validity of contracts applies, unless the shipper declares
Contract of value of goods and inserts such
Capacity transportatio declaration in the bill of lading.
Extrinsic Intrinsic
Contract of n or carriage
validity validity (render of
parties Contract for air transportation
services) (Warsaw Convention)
Barter, sale,
donation 1. The liability of the airline in case of
Lex situs Lex situs Lex situs death, injury to passengers, or loss or
damage to cargo is governed by
Lease of Warsaw Convention.
property:
Lex situs Lex situs Lex situs 2. If there was malice, gross negligence,
creates real
rights or bad faith, or improper
discrimination, carrier is liable for
damages beyond those limited by
Lease of Lex Warsaw Convention.
property: Personal voluntatis
Lex loci NOTE: If a contract involves encumbrance of property,
does not law of the or
celebrationis real or personal, apply lex situs. If personal contracts, law
create real parties lex loci
rights intentionis on contracts will apply.
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
SUCCESSION
Applicable Civil Code provisions
1. Real property as well as personal property is
subject to the law of the country where it is
situated.
However, intestate and testamentary
successions, both with respect to the order of
succession and to the amount of successional
rights and to the intrinsic validity of
testamentary provisions, shall be regulated by
the national law of the person whose
succession is under consideration, whatever
may be the nature of the property and
regardless of the country wherein said
property may be found. (NCC, Art. 16)
NOTE: Capacity to succeed is governed by the
national law of the decedent. (NCC, Art. 1039)
2. The will of an alien who is abroad produces
effect in the Philippines if made with the
formalities prescribed by the law of the place in
which he resides, or according to the
formalities observed in his country, or in
conformity with those which this Code
prescribes. (NCC, Art. 816)
NOTE: Proof that the will conforms to the laws
mentioned is imperative. (Salud Teodoro Vda.
De Perez v. Hon. Tolete, G.R. No. 76714, June 2,
1994)
3. A will made in the Philippines by a citizen or
subject of another country, which is executed in
accordance with the law of the country of
which he is a citizen or subject, and which
might be proved and allowed by the law of his
own country, shall have the same effect as if
executed according to the laws of the
Philippines. (NCC, Art. 817)
NOTE: Probate is an adjudication that the last
will and testament of a person was executed
with all the formalities required by law. It does
not pass upon the validity of the provisions of
the will. The disallowance of a will being
essentially procedural in character, the law of
the forum will govern the procedural matters.
However, the court will look into the law of the
foreign state where the suit was made as to
whether the extrinsic requirements in the
execution of the will have been complied with.
4. Joint wills executed by Filipinos in a foreign
country shall not be valid in the Philippines,
even though authorized by the laws of the
country where they may have been executed.
(NCC, Art. 819)
---
Q: How can a will executed abroad be made effective
in the Philippines?
A: A will made in a foreign country may be probated in
the Philippines after sufficient proof is presented
showing that the will was duly executed in the manner
required by law and that the testator had capacity at the
same time he executed the will.
---
Evidence necessary for the allowance of wills
probated outside the Philippines
1. Due execution of the will in accordance with
the foreign laws;
2. The testator has his domicile in the foreign
country and not in the Philippines;
3. The will has bee admitted to probate in such
country;
4. The fact that the foreign tribunal is a probate
court; and
5. The laws of the foreign country on procedure
and allowance of wills. (Suntay v. Suntay, G.R.
No. 132524, December 29, 1998)
RENVOI
A procedure whereby a jural matter presented is
referred by the conflict of laws rules of the forum to a
foreign state, the conflict of laws rules of which in turn
refers the matter back to the law of the forum (remission)
or a third state (transmission). (Coquia, 2000) Thus, it is
clear that renvoi can arise only from conlict rules and not
from internal rules.
---
Q: What will the Court do if it is confronted with a
case with a “Renvoi” Problem?
A:
1. Reject the renvoi – If the conflict rules of the forum
refer later the case to the law of another state, it is
deemed to mean only the internal law of that state.
Thus, the court will apply the foreign law. (Paras,
1990)
2. Accept the renvoi – If the conflict rules of the forum
refer the case to the law of another state, it is
deemed to include the totality of the foreign law
(internal law and conflict of law rules). Thus the
court will recognize the referrance back and apply
the local law.
3. Follow the Theory of Desisment – Also referred to as
Mutual Disclaimer of Jurisdiction Theory. The forum
court, upon reference to another state’s law, sees
that such law is limited in application to its own
nationals domiciled in its territory and has no
provision for application to nationals domiciled
outside of the territory. Hence the local court will
apply the local law.
NOTE: This has the same result as the acceptance of
 the renvoi doctrine but the forum court is to desist
applying the foreign law. (Ibid.)
4. Make use of the Foreign Court Theory – whatever the
foreign court will do respecting the case, the forum
court will do likewise.
---
Double Renvoi
It is what occurs when the local court, in adopting the
foreign court theory, discovers that the foreign court
accepts the renvoi. (Sempio-diy, 2004)
Transmission
It is the process of applying the law of a foreign state
through the law of a second foreign state. It is not the
same as renvoi because renvoi involves two laws while
transmission involves three laws. (Paras, 1990)
Renvoi v. Transmission
Renvoi Transmission
Deals with 2 countries Deals with 3 or more
countries
Deals with “referring Deals with “referring
back” across” or “transmitting”
---
Q: Linnie, an American citizen from Texas, died in the
Philippines, leaving certain properties therein and in
the U.S. In her will, she left her entire estate to her
husband, Charles but upon Charle’s death, the entire
estate shall be turned over to her brother and sister.
Magno was appointed as the estate’s administratrix.
When Charles died, Magno was temporarily
appointed as the administratrix of his estate. When
Charles’ will was later found, a petition for probate
was filed for the said will. Then, PCIB took over the
administration of Charles’ estate. The two
administrators (PCIB and Magno) differed in the law
that must govern the settlement of Linnie’s estate.
What law shall apply Philippine law or Texas law?
A: The SC remanded the case back to the lower court.
Both parties failed to adduce proof as to the law of Texas.
Further, the SC held that for what the Texas law is on the
matter, is a question of fact to be resolved by the
evidence that would be presented in the probate court.
The SC, however, emphasized that Texas law at the time
of Linnie’s death is the law applicable. As to whether the
law of Texas refers the matter back to Philippine laws
must be proven by evidence presented before the court.
(Philippine Commercial and Industrial Bank v. Hon.
Venicio Escolin, G.R. Nos. L-27860 and L-27896 March 29,
1974).
---
Q: Can a will executed by a foreigner abroad be
probated in the Philippines although it has not been
previously probated and allowed in such foreign
country?
A: YES. The law does not prohibit the probate of wills
executed by foreigners abroad although the same have
not as yet been probated and allowed in the countries of
their execution.
A foreign will can be given legal effects in our
jurisdiction. The Civil Code states that the will of an alien
who is abroad produces effect in the Philippines if made
in accordance with the formalities prescribed by the law
of the place where he resides, or according to the
formalities observed in his country. (Palaganas v.
Palaganas, G.R. No. 169144, January 26, 2011)
REVOCATION OF WILLS
Rules if a person dies testate
1. If revocation takes place in the Philippines,
whether the testator is domiciled in the
Philippines or in some other country, it is valid
if in accordance with Philippine laws.
2. If revocation takes place outside the Philippines
by a testator domiciled in the Philippines, it is
valid when it is in accordance with the laws of
the Philippines.
3. Revocation done outside the Philippines, by a
testator who does not have his domicile in this
country, is valid when it is done according to
the:
a. Law of the place where the will was made;
or
b. Law of the place where the testator had his
domicile at the time of revocation.
Rule if a person dies intestate
Follow lex nationali or the law of the nationality of the
decedent.
CRIMES
Territoriality Principle
Penal laws and those of public security and safety shall
be obligatory upon all who live or sojourn in the
Philippines, subject to the principles of international law
and treaty stipulations. (NCC, Article 14)
Extra-territoriality
Penal statutes may find application even outside the
territorial jurisdiction of an enacting state pursuant to
treaty obligations and general principles of international
law. An example of extra-territoriality is Art. 2 of the
RPC.
---
Q: May a Filipino convicted of a crime abroad serve
his sentence in the Philippines?
A: NO. Under the territoriality principle, a crime is
punishable only in the territorial jurisdiction where it
 CONFLICT OF LAWS
was committed. Allowing a Filipino convicted abroad to
serve sentence in the Philippines will be tantamount to
recognizing and enforcing a foreign judgment which is
penal in nature.
---
Protective Theory
Any state whose national interests are adversely affected
by the crime may protect itself by prosecuting and
punishing the offender. The Philippines adheres to this
theory to a limited extent.
If the tort law of the Philippines embodies a social or
economic policy, then the law of the forum on torts shall
be applied.
If the Philippines has no concern or interest in the
application of the internal law, and the other State has an
interest, apply the law of such State.
NOTE: The state where an injury has occurred has
interest in compensating the injured party, while the
state where the tortfeasor acted has an interest in
regulating the conduct of persons found in its territory.

States claim extraterritorial criminal jurisdiction to RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT OF FOREIGN

punish crimes committed abroad which are prejudicial JUDGMENT
to their national security or vital interests, even where
the offenses are perpetrated by non-nationals. Recognition of foreign Enforcement of foreign
Jurisdiction is vested in the state whose national judgment judgment
interests are injured or national security compromised. The defendant or the The plaintiff or petitioner
respondent is presenting wants the court to
Universality Principle the foreign judgment positively carry out and
merely as a defense, on make effective the
A state has extraterritorial jurisdiction over all crimes the basis of res judicata. foreign judgment.
regardless of where they are committed or who
committed them, whether nationals or non-nationals.
Invokes merely the sense Implies an act of
This is, however, generally forbidden under international
of justice. sovereignty.
law. Jurisdiction is vested with the state which has
custody of offender who committed universal crimes
Needs no proceeding or Requires a separate
such as piracy, genocide, etc.
action but implies that action brought precisely
the same has already to make the foreign
Bigamy is punishable only when committed in the
been filed against the judgment effective.
Philippines
defendant who is
invoking the foreign
Our penal laws apply to all crimes committed within
judgment.
Philippine territory. Consequently, crimes committed
outside the territory of the Philippines are not within the
Recognition is a passive Enforcement is an active
jurisdiction of Philippine authorities to prosecute,
effect of foreign recognition and
subject only to certain exceptions. Because of this
judgment. implementation of the
principle, a criminal case for bigamy cannot be filed
foreign judgment from
against a Filipino who contracted a second or bigamous
the local court, rendering
marriages abroad.
the foreign judgment and
seeking its enforecement
by the sheriff on
TORTS accordance with the
Rules of Court.
GR: Lex loci delicti comissior the law of the place where
the tort was committed will govern. Requisites for recognition or enforcement of a
foreign judgment
Reason: The state where the social disturbance occurred
has the primary duty to redress the wrong and 1. The defendant must have been given
determine the effects of the injury; to compensate the reasonable notice and opportunity to be heard;
victim for the damage or injury suffered. 2. There is adequate proof of foreign judgment;
3. The foreign judgment must have disposed of
Obligation Theory the controversy on the merits and must be res
judicata, i.e., judgment on the merits is final,
The tortiuous act gives rise to an obligation, which is issued by a foreign court having jurisdiction
transitory and follows the person committing the over the subject matter and parties, and there
tortiuous act and may be enforced wherever he may be was identity of parties, subject matter, and the
found. (Coquia, 2000) cause of action;
4. It must not be barred by prescription both in
Philippine conflict rules on tort problems the state where it was promulgated and where
it is sought to be enforced;
5. If it is for a sum of money, it must be fixed;
 6. It must not be contrary to the public policy or
good morals of the country where it is to be
enforced;
7. It must not have been obtained by fraud,
collusion, mistake of fact or law;
8. It must be a judgment in civil or commercial
matters, including questions of status, not on a
criminal, revenue, or administrative matter;
and
9. The state where it was obtained allows
recognition or enforcement of Philippine
judgments.
Effects of a final judgment or order of a foreign
tribunal or court sought to be enforced in Philippine
Courts
1. In case the judgment is upon a specific thing, the
judgment or final order is conclusive upon the title
to the thing; and
2. In case it is against a person, the judgment or final
order is presumptive evidence of a right as between
the parties and their successors in interest by a
subsequent title.
NOTE: In either case, the judgment or final order may be
repelled by evidence of want of jurisdiction, want of
notice to a party, collusion, fraud or clear mistake of law
or fact. (ROC, Rule 39, Sec. 48)
---
Q: The Special Sixth Division of the Court of Appeals
refused to recognize the Entry of Appearance of Quasha
Law Office as the new counsel of Legend International
Resorts, Limited (LIRL). It said that the appointment of
LIRL’s joint and several liquidators were made pursuant
to an Order of the Hong Kong Court. Since it was a
foreign judgment, Philippine Courts could not take
judicial notice thereof as the final orders of foreign
tribunals could only be enforced in the Philippines after
appropriate proceedings. The CA concluded that it was
only Picazo Law Office is the only counsel entitled to
represent and file pleadings for and on behalf of
petitioner LIRL. Quasha Law Office and LIRL then filed a
special civil action for Certiorari under Rule 65 seeking
to reverse and set aside on the ground of grave abuse of
discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction the
Special Sixth Division of the CA. Did the special CA
Division gravely abuse its discretion in considering the
Orders of the HongKong Court appointing liquidators for
LIRL involved enforcement and recognition of a foreign
judgment?
A: NO. It has already been settled in the aforesaid two
Decisions that the Orders of the Hong Kong Court
appointing liquidators for petitioner LIRL did not involve
the enforcement of a foreign judgment. The act of
terminating the legal services of private respondent
Picazo Law Office and engaging in its place petitioner
Quasha Law Office was a mere exercise of petitioner
LIRLs prerogative, through its appointed liquidators,
which was an internal affair that required no prior
recognition in a separate action. There was no
enforcement of a foreign judgment when one of the
appointed liquidators terminated the legal services of
private respondent Picazo Law Office and engaged in its
stead petitioner Quasha Law Office to be the duly
authorized counsel of petitioner LIRL. What is involved
is the prerogative of petitioner LIRL, through its duly
authorized representative — which, in this case, is its
appointed liquidators — to terminate and engage the
services of a counsel, which is an internal affair that
requires no prior recognition in a separate action.
(Quasha Ancheta Pea et al v. the Special Sixth Division of
the Court of Appeals, GR No. 182013, December 4, 2009)
---
Q: Does the second paragraph of Article 26 of the
Family Code extend to aliens the right to petition for
the recognition of a foreign divorce decree?
A: YES. While the general rule is that the alien spouse
can claim no right under the second paragraph of Art. 26
of the FC as the substantive right it establishes is in favor
of the Filipino spouse, the foreign divorce decree is
presumptive evidence of a right that clothes the party
with legal interest to petition for its recognition in this
jurisdiction. Divorce obtained by an alien abroad may be
recognized in the Philippines, provided the divorce is
valid according to his or her national law. The foreign
divorce decree itself, after its authenticity and
conformity with the alien’s national law have been duly
proven according to our rules of evidence, serves as a
presumptive evidence of right in favor of Gerbert,
pursuant to Sec. 48, Rule 39 of the ROC which provides
for the effect of foreign judgments.
---
Ruling with regard to the annotation of decree on
marriage certificate
While the law requires the entry of the divorce decree in
the civil registry, the law and the sub-mission of the
decree by themselves do not ipso facto authorize the
decree’s registration. The law should be read in relation
with the requirement of a judicial recognition of the
foreign judgment before it can be given res judicata
effect. In the context of the present case, no judicial order
as yet exists recognizing the foreign divorce decree.
Thus, the Pasig City Civil Registry Office acted totally out
of turn and without authority of law when it annotated
the Canadian divorce decree on Gerbert and Daisylyn’s
marriage certificate, on the strength alone of the foreign
decree presented by Gerbert. For being contrary to law,
the registration of the foreign divorce decree without the
requisite judicial recognition is patently void and cannot
produce any legal effect. (Corpuz v. Sto. Tomas and the
Solicitor General, G.R. No. 186571, August 11, 2010)