CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER

I. Conflict of Laws / Private International Law

C. Conflict Rules
i. Characterization
Saudi Arabian Airline vs. CA

A. Basis, Definition, and Sources

Cheatham, Elliot (1941)
Conflict of Laws or, as it is sometimes called, Private
International Law, is the law principally directed to the
transactions between individuals sketched above, whether
inter- or intra-national.
"The system of laws, known as conflict of laws or private
international law, is administered by national courts and is a
part of the national system of administration of justice.
Nevertheless, in the discharge of this duty the national
courts fulfill an international function analogous to that
fulfilled by prize courts, which are national courts. . . . The
rule applied is, it is true, a part of the national system of law,
but the obligation to apply the rule identical with that of the
foreign jurisdiction is none the less an international law
obligation which rests upon the state." "
Hilton vs. Guyot
Doctrine: No law has any effect, of its own force, beyond
the limits of the sovereignty from which its authority is
derived. The extent to which the law of one nation, as put in
force within its territory - whether by executive order, by
legislative act, or by judicial decree shall be allowed to
operate within the dominion of another nation - depends
upon the comity of nations. A foreign judgment is not
entitled to full faith and credit when sued upon another
nation, but is a prima facie evidence only of the claim.
Comity of Nations
- is a recognition of fundamental legal concepts that
nations share. It stems from mutual convenience as
well as respect and is essential to the success of
international relations. This body of rules does not
form part of International Law; however, it is
important for public policy reasons. (source)
B. Distinction from
International Law

and

Relationship

with

Public

Public International Law

the body of legal rules which apply between
sovereign states and such other entities as have been
granted international personalities.

Before a choice can be made, it is necessary for us to

determine under what category a certain set of facts or
rules fall. This process is known as characterization,
or the doctrine of qualification. It is the process of
deciding whether or not the facts relate to the kind of
question specified in a conflicts rule. The purpose of
characterization is to enable the forum to select the
proper law.
Our starting point of analysis here is not a legal
relation, but a factual situation, event, or operative fact.
An essential element of conflict rules is the indication
of a test or connecting factor or point of contact.
Choice-of-law rules invariably consist of a factual
relationship (such as property right, contract claim) and
a connecting factor or point of contact, such as the situs
of the res, the place of celebration, the place of
performance, or the place of wrongdoing.
Note that one or more circumstances may be present to
serve as the possible test for the determination of the
applicable law. These test factors or points of
contact or connecting factors could be any of the
following:
(1) The nationality of a person, his domicile, his
residence, his place of sojourn, or his origin;
(2) the seat of a legal or juridical person, such as a
corporation;
(3) the situs of a thing, that is, the place where a thing
is, or is deemed to be situated. In particular, the lex
situs is decisive when real rights are involved;
(4) the place where an act has been done, the locus
actus, such as the place where a contract has been
made, a marriage celebrated, a will signed or a tort
committed. The lex loci actus is particularly important
in contracts and torts;
(5) the place where an act is intended to come into
effect, e.g., the place of performance of contractual
duties, or the place where a power of attorney is to be
exercised;
(6) the intention of the contracting parties as to the law
that should govern their agreement, the lex loci
intentionis;

Based on Atty. Johanna Lorenzos Syllabus

CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER

(7) the place where judicial or administrative
proceedings are instituted or done. The lex forithe
law of the forumis particularly important because, as
we have seen earlier, matters of procedure not going
to the substance of the claim involved are governed by
it; and because the lex fori applies whenever the content
of the otherwise applicable foreign law is excluded
from application in a given case for the reason that it
falls under one of the exceptions to the applications of
foreign law; and
(8) the flag of a ship, which in many cases is decisive of
practically all legal relationships of the ship and of its
master or owner as such. It also covers contractual
relationships particularly contracts of affreightment.

Llorente vs. CA
However, intestate and testamentary succession, 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.
But the hasty disregard of both the RTC and CA of
Lorenzos Will by calling to the fore the RENVOI
doctrine, claiming that American law follows
domiciliary rule is unjustified. There is no such thing as
American law for the whole nation of the US, for the
country comprises of a group of States, each State
having its own applicable law, enforceable only within
that state.
Renvoi Doctrine
- The Doctrine of Renvoi is a legal doctrine which
applies when a court is faced with a conflict of law
and must consider the law of another state,
referred to as private international law ("PIL")
rules. This can apply when considering foreign
issues arising in succession planning and in
administering estates.
- Renvoi takes place when the conflicts rule of the
forum makes a reference to a foreign law, but the
foreign law is found to contain a conflict rule that
returns or refers the matter back to the law of the
forum
- The theory of the doctrine of renvoi is that the
court of the forum, in determining the question

before it, must take into account the whole law of

the other jurisdiction, but also its rules as to
conflict of laws, and then apply the law to the
actual question which the rules of the other
jurisdiction prescribe. This may be the law of the
forum.
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 country' means the
whole of its law. (G.R. No. L-16749)
LWV Construction vs. Dupo
As a general rule, a foreign procedural law will not
be applied in the forum. Procedural matters, such
as service of process, joinder of actions, period and
requisites for appeal, and so forth, are governed by
the laws of the forum. This is true even if the
action is based upon a foreign substantive law
(Restatement of the Conflict of Laws, Sec. 685;
Salonga, Private International Law

ii. Preliminary Question

The doctrine is that if the forum finds that a "main" or
"principal" question turns upon the decision of a
"preliminary" question, the conflict-of-laws rule of the
jurisdiction looked to upon the principal question should
govern the preliminary question.
II. Resolution of Conflicts Problems
A. Jurisdiction
i. Subject matter
St. Aviation Services v. Grand International
Airways
Generally, in the absence of a special contract, no
sovereign is bound to give effect within its
dominion to a judgment rendered by a tribunal of
another country; however, under the rules of
comity, utility and convenience, nations have
established a usage among civilized states by
which final judgments of foreign courts of
competent jurisdiction are reciprocally respected
and rendered efficacious under certain conditions
that may vary in different countries. Certainly, the
Philippine legal system has long ago accepted into

Based on Atty. Johanna Lorenzos Syllabus

CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER

its jurisprudence and procedural rules the viability
of an action for enforcement of foreign judgment,
as well as the requisites for such valid enforcement,
as derived from internationally accepted doctrines.

the person of a resident defendant who does not

voluntarily appear in court can be acquired by
personal service of summons as provided under
Section 7, Rule 14 of the Rules of Court. If he
cannot be personally served with summons within
a reasonable time, substituted service may be made
in accordance with Section 8 of said Rule. If he is
temporarily out of the country, any of the following
modes of service may be resorted to: (1)
substituted service set forth in Section 8; 21 (2)
personal service outside the country, with leave of
court; (3) service by publication, also with leave of
court; 22 or (4) any other manner the court may
deem sufficient

The conditions for the recognition and enforcement

of a foreign judgment in our legal system are
contained in Section 48, Rule 39 of the 1997 Rules
of Civil Procedure, as amended, thus:
SEC. 48. Effect of foreign judgments. The effect
of a judgment or final order of a tribunal of a
foreign country, having jurisdiction to render the
judgment or final order is as follows:
(a) In case of a judgment or final order upon a
specific thing, the judgment or final order is
conclusive upon the title to the thing; and

However, in an action in personam wherein the

defendant is a non-resident who does not
voluntarily submit himself to the authority of the
court, personal service of summons within the state
is essential to the acquisition of jurisdiction over
her person. This method of service is possible if
such defendant is physically present in the country.
If he is not found therein, the court cannot acquire
jurisdiction over his person and therefore cannot
validly try and decide the case against him.

(b) In case of a judgment or final order 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;
In either case, the judgment or final order may be
repelled by evidence of a want of jurisdiction, want of
notice to the party, collusion, fraud, or clear mistake of
law or fact.
iii. Res

Sps. Belen v. Chavez

On one hand, courts acquire jurisdiction over the

plaintiffs upon the filing of the complaint. On the other
hand, jurisdiction over the defendants in a civil case is
acquired either through the service of summons upon
them or through their voluntary appearance in court and
their submission to its authority. As a rule, if defendants
have not been summoned, the court acquires no
jurisdiction over their person, and a judgment rendered
against them is null and void. To be bound by a
decision, a party should first be subject to the courts
jurisdiction

ii. Personal
Asiavest Limited v. CA
In an action in personam, jurisdiction over the
person of the defendant is necessary for the court to
validly try and decide the case. Jurisdiction over

Perkins vs. Dizon

When and how does Philippine court acquire jurisdiction
over a non-resident defendant in connection with the latters
property located in the Philippines?
The general rule is that a suit against a non-resident cannot
be entertained by a Philippine court. Where, however, the
action is in rem or quasi in rem in connection with property
located in the Philippines, the court acquires jurisdiction
over the res, and its jurisdiction over the person of the nonresident is non-essential. In order that the court may
exercise power over the res, it is not necessary that the court
should take actual custody of the property, potential custody
thereof being sufficient. There is potential custody when,
from the nature of the action brought, the power of the court
over the property is impliedly recognized by law In an
action in rem or quasi in rem against a non-resident
defendant, jurisdiction over his person is non-essential, and
if the law requires in such case that the summons upon the

Based on Atty. Johanna Lorenzos Syllabus

CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER

defendant be served by publication, it is merely to satisfy
the constitutional requirement of due process.
Asiavest Limited v. CA
On the other hand, in a proceeding in rem or quasi
in rem, jurisdiction over the person of the
defendant is not a prerequisite to confer jurisdiction
on the court provided that the court acquires
jurisdiction over the res. Nonetheless summons
must be served upon the defendant not for the
purpose of vesting the court with jurisdiction but
merely for satisfying the due process requirements.
B. Choice of Law
i. Relationship with Jurisdiction
Pakistan International Airline v. Ople
Art 1306 of the Civil Code provides: The contracting parties
may establish such stipulations, clauses, terms and
conditions as they may deem convenient, provided they are
not contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order, or
public policy.
The governing principle is that parties may not contract
away applicable provisions of law especially peremptory
provisions dealing with matters heavily impressed with
public interest. The law relating to labor and employment is
clearly such an area and parties are not at liberty to insulate
themselves and their relationships from the impact of labor
laws and regulations by simply contracting with each other.
Any ambiguity in the overseas-employment contracts
should be interpreted against the parties that drafted it.
Article 1377 of the Civil Code of the Philippines provides:
The interpretation of obscure words or stipulations in a
contract shall not favor the party who caused the obscurity.
Said rule of interpretation is applicable to contracts of
adhesion where there is already a prepared form containing
the stipulations of the employment contract and the
employees merely take it or leave it. The presumption is
that there was an imposition by one party against the other
and that the employees signed the contracts out of necessity
that reduced their bargaining power.

system to regulate the relations of the parties, including

questions of their capacity to enter into the contract, the
formalities to be observed by them, matters of performance,
and so forth. Instead of adopting the entire mass of the
foreign law, the parties may just agree that specific
provisions of a foreign statute shall be deemed incorporated
into their contract as a set of terms. By such reference to
the provisions of the foreign law, the contract does not
become a foreign contract to be governed by the foreign
law. The said law does not operate as a statute but as a set of
contractual terms deemed written in the contract.
ii. Place of most significant relationship
In applying said principle to determine the State which has
the most significant relationship, the following contacts are
to be taken into account and evaluated according to their
relative importance with respect to the particular issue:
(a) the place where the injury occurred;
(b) the place where the conduct causing the injury occurred;
(c) the domicile, residence, nationality, place of
incorporation and place of business of the parties, and
(d) the place where the relationship, if any, between the
parties is centered.
C. Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments
Rules of Court, Rule 39, Sec. 48
Section 48.
Effect of foreign judgments or final
orders. The effect of a judgment or final order of a
tribunal of a foreign country, having jurisdiction to render
the judgment or final order is as follows:
(a)
In case of a judgment or final order upon a specific
thing, the judgment or final order, is conclusive upon the
title to the thing, and
(b)
In case of a judgment or final order 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.
In either case, the judgment or final order may be repelled
by evidence of a want of jurisdiction, want of notice to the
party, collusion, fraud, or clear mistake of law or fact

The parties to a contract may select the law by which it is to

be governed. In such a case, the foreign law is adopted as a

Based on Atty. Johanna Lorenzos Syllabus

CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER

Mijares v. Raada
33 of B.P.129 refers to instances wherein the cause of
action or subject matter pertains to an assertion of rights
over property or a sum of money. But here, the subject
matter is the foreign judgment itself. 16 of B.P.129 reveals
that the complaint for enforcement of judgment even if
capable of pecuniary estimation would fall under the
jurisdiction of the RTCs. Thus, the Complaint to enforce the
US District Court judgment is one capable of pecuniary
estimations but at the same time, it is also an action based
on judgment against an estate, thus placing it beyond the
ambit of 7(a) of Rule 141. What governs the proper
computation of the filing fees over Complaints for the
enforcement of foreign judgments is 7(b)(3), involving
other actions not involving property.
III. Dealing with a Conflicts Problem
A. Assumption of Jurisdiction and Judicial Resolution
a. Applicable law: law of the forum or foreign law?
1. Proof of foreign law
2. When foreign law cannot be applied
Rules of Court, Rule 130, Sec. 45
Section 45.
Commercial lists and the like.
Evidence of statements of matters of interest to persons
engaged in an occupation contained in a list, register,
periodical, or other published compilation is admissible as
tending to prove the truth of any relevant matter so stated if
that compilation is published for use by persons engaged in
that occupation and is generally used and relied upon by
them therein.
Rule 132, Sec. 24
Section 24.
Proof of official record. The record of
public documents referred to in paragraph (a) of Section 19,
when admissible for any purpose, may be evidenced by an
official publication thereof or by a copy attested by the
officer having the legal custody of the record, or by his
deputy, and accompanied, if the record is not kept in the
Philippines, with a certificate that such officer has the
custody. If the office in which the record is kept is in foreign
country, the certificate may be made by a secretary of the
embassy or legation, consul general, consul, vice consul, or
consular agent or by any officer in the foreign service of the
Philippines stationed in the foreign country in which the
record is kept, and authenticated by the seal of his office.

Fluemer v. Hix
The laws of a foreign jurisdiction do not prove themselves
in our courts.The courts of the Philippine Islands are not
authorized to take American Union. Such laws must be
proved as facts.
Aznar v. Garcia
Sec. 16. Residence is a term used with many shades of
meaning from mere temporary presence to the most
permanent abode. Generally, however, it is used to denote
something more than mere physical presence. (Goodrich on
Conflict of Laws, p. 29)
The terms "'residence" and "domicile" might well be taken
to mean the same thing, a place of permanent abode. But
domicile, as has been shown, has acquired a technical
meaning. Thus one may be domiciled in a place where he
has never been. And he may reside in a place where he has
no domicile. The man with two homes, between which he
divides his time, certainly resides in each one, while living
in it. But if he went on business which would require his
presence for several weeks or months, he might properly be
said to have sufficient connection with the place to be called
a resident.
The theory of the doctrine of renvoi is that the court of the
forum, in determining the question before it, must take into
account the whole law of the other jurisdiction, but also its
rules as to conflict of laws, and then apply the law to the
actual question which the rules of the other jurisdiction
prescribe. This may be the law of the forum.
When a man dies leaving personal property in one or more
states, and leaves a will directing the manner of distribution
of the property, the law of the state where he was domiciled
at the time of his death will be looked to in deciding legal
questions about the will, almost as completely as the law of
situs is consulted in questions about the devise of land.
The rules of the domicile are recognized as controlling by
the Conflict of Laws rules at the situs of the property, and
the reason for the recognition as in the case of intestate
succession, is the general convenience of the doctrine.

Even if the claimed U.S. Code of Federal Regulations does

exist, the same is not applicable to the case at bar in
accordance with the principle of lex loci contractus which
require that the law of the place where the airline ticket was

Based on Atty. Johanna Lorenzos Syllabus

CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER

issued should be applied by the court where the passengers
are residents and nationals of the forum and the ticket is
issued in such State by the defendant airline. Since the
tickets were sold and issued in the Philippines, the
applicable law in this case would be Philippine law.
Bank of America, NT v. American Realty Corp
A foreign law must be properly pleaded and proved as a
fact. Thus, if the foreign law involved is not properly
pleaded and proved, our courts will presume that the foreign
law is the same as our local or domestic or internal law. This
is what we refer to as the doctrine of processual
presumption.
Thus, when the foreign law, judgment or contract is contrary
to a sound and established public policy of the forum, the
said foreign law, judgment or order shall not be applied.
Additionally, prohibitive laws concerning persons, their acts
or property, and those which have for their object public
order, public policy and good customs shall not be rendered
ineffective by laws or judgments promulgated, or by
determinations or conventions agreed upon in a foreign
country.
The public policy sought to be protected in the instant case
is the principle imbedded in our jurisdiction proscribing the
splitting up of a single cause of action.
Section 4, Rule 2 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure is
pertinent If two or more suits are instituted on the basis of the same
cause of action, the filing of one or a judgment upon the
merits in any one is available as a ground for the dismissal
of the others.
Moreover, foreign law should not be applied when its
application would work undeniable injustice to the citizens
or residents of the forum. To give justice is the most
important function of law; hence, a law, or judgment or
contract that is obviously unjust negates the fundamental
principles of Conflict of Laws.
Wildvalley Shipping v. CA

judicial notice of them. Like any other fact, they must be

alleged and proved.
A distinction is to be made as to the manner of proving a
written and an unwritten law. The former falls under Section
24, Rule 132 of the Rules of Court, as amended, the entire
provision of which is quoted hereunder. Where the foreign
law sought to be proved is "unwritten," the oral testimony of
expert witnesses is admissible, as are printed and published
books of reports of decisions of the courts of the country
concerned if proved to be commonly admitted in such
courts.
Section 24 of Rule 132 of the Rules of Court, as amended,
provides:
"Sec. 24. Proof of official record. -- The record of public
documents referred to in paragraph (a) of Section 19, when
admissible for any purpose, may be evidenced by an official
publication thereof or by a copy attested by the officer
having the legal custody of the record, or by his deputy, and
accompanied, if the record is not kept in the Philippines,
with a certificate that such officer has the custody. If the
office in which the record is kept is in a foreign country, the
certificate may be made by a secretary of the embassy or
legation, consul general, consul, vice consul, or consular
agent or by any officer in the foreign service of the
Philippines stationed in the foreign country in which the
record is kept, and authenticated by the seal of his office."
When a foreign statute is involved, the best evidence rule
requires that it be proved by a duly authenticated copy of
the statute.
A foreign law is considered to be pleaded if there is an
allegation in the pleading about the existence of the foreign
law, its import and legal consequence on the event or
transaction in issue.
We reiterate that under the rules of private international law,
a foreign law must be properly pleaded and proved as a fact.
In the absence of pleading and proof, the laws of a foreign
country, or state, will be presumed to be the same as our
own local or domestic law and this is known as processual
presumption

It is well-settled that foreign laws do not prove themselves

in our jurisdiction and our courts are not authorized to take

Based on Atty. Johanna Lorenzos Syllabus

CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER

B. Dismissal of Case
i. Doctrine of forum non conveniens
C. Renvoi

IV. Personal Law

A. Nationality
1987 Constitution, Article IV
Section 1. The following are citizens of the
Philippines:

Manila Hotel Corp. v. NLRC

Under the rule of forum non conveniens, a Philippine court
or agency may assume jurisdiction over the case if it
chooses to do so provided:
(1) that the Philippine court is one to which the parties may
conveniently resort to;
(2) that the Philippine court is in a position to make an
intelligent decision as to the law and the facts; and
(3) that the Philippine court has or is likely to have power to
enforce its decision.

[1] Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the

time of the adoption of this Constitution;
[2] Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of
the Philippines;
[3] Those born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino
mothers, who elect Philippine citizenship upon
reaching the age of majority; and
[4] Those who are naturalized in accordance with
law.

Pioneer v. Todaro,
The doctrine of forum non conveniens, literally meaning
the forum is inconvenient, emerged in private international
law to deter the practice of global forum shopping, that is to
prevent non-resident litigants from choosing the forum or
place wherein to bring their suit for malicious reasons, such
as to secure procedural advantages, to annoy and harass the
defendant, to avoid overcrowded dockets, or to select a
more friendly venue. Under this doctrine, a court, in
conflicts of law cases, may refuse impositions on its
jurisdiction where it is not the most "convenient" or
available forum and the parties are not precluded from
seeking remedies elsewhere.
Whether a suit should be entertained or dismissed on the
basis of said doctrine depends largely upon the facts of the
particular case and is addressed to the sound discretion of
the trial court. In the case of Communication Materials and
Design, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, this Court held that "xxx
[a] Philippine Court may assume jurisdiction over the case
if it chooses to do so; provided, that the following requisites
are met:
(1) that the Philippine Court is one to which the parties may
conveniently resort to;
(2) that the Philippine Court is in a position to make an
intelligent decision as to the law and the facts; and,
(3) that the Philippine Court has or is likely to have power
to enforce its decision."

Section 2. Natural-born citizens are those who are

citizens of the Philippines from birth without
having to perform any act to acquire or perfect
their Philippine citizenship. Those who elect
Philippine citizenship in accordance with
paragraph (3), Section 1 hereof shall be deemed
natural-born citizens.
Section 3. Philippine citizenship may be lost or
reacquired in the manner provided by law.
Section 4. Citizens of the Philippines who marry
aliens shall retain their citizenship, unless by their
act or omission, they are deemed, under the law, to
have renounced it.
Section 5. Dual allegiance of citizens is inimical to
the national interest and shall be dealt with by law.
i.

Dual or multiple citizenship

o Mercado v. Manzano
In its resolution, dated May 7, 1998, the Second Division of
the COMELEC granted the petition of Mamaril and ordered
the cancellation of the certificate of candidacy of private
respondent on the ground that he is a dual citizen and, under
40(d) of the Local Government Code, persons with dual
citizenship are disqualified from running for any elective
position.

The COMELECs Second Division said:

What is presented before the Commission is a petition for
disqualification of Eduardo Barrios Manzano as candidate
for the office of Vice-Mayor of Makati City in the May 11,

Based on Atty. Johanna Lorenzos Syllabus

CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER

1998 elections. The petition is based on the ground that the
respondent is an American citizen based on the record of the
Bureau of Immigration and misrepresented himself as a
natural-born Filipino citizen.
To begin with, dual citizenship is different from dual
allegiance. The former arises when, as a result of the
concurrent application of the different laws of two or more
states, a person is simultaneously considered a national by
the said states. For instance, such a situation may arise
when a person whose parents are citizens of a state which
adheres to the principle of jus sanguinis is born in a state
which follows the doctrine of jus soli. Such a person, ipso
facto and without any voluntary act on his part, is
concurrently considered a citizen of both states.
There may be other situations in which a citizen of the
Philippines may, without performing any act, be also a
citizen of another state; but the above cases are clearly
possible given the constitutional provisions on citizenship.
Dual allegiance, on the other hand, refers to the situation in
which a person simultaneously owes, by some positive act,
loyalty to two or more states. While dual citizenship is
involuntary, dual allegiance is the result of an individuals
volition.
Clearly, in including 5 in Article IV on citizenship, the
concern of the Constitutional Commission was not with dual
citizens per se but with naturalized citizens who maintain
their allegiance to their countries of origin even after their
naturalization. Hence, the phrase dual citizenship in R.A.
No. 7160, 40(d) and in R.A. No. 7854, 20 must be
understood as referring to dual allegiance. Consequently,
persons with mere dual citizenship do not fall under this
disqualification. Unlike those with dual allegiance, who
must, therefore, be subject to strict process with respect to
the termination of their status, for candidates with dual
citizenship, it should suffice if, upon the filing of their
certificates of candidacy, they elect Philippine citizenship to
terminate their status as persons with dual citizenship
considering that their condition is the unavoidable
consequence of conflicting laws of different states

AASJS v. Datumanong

Two situations exist -- the retention of foreign

citizenship, and the reacquisition of Philippine
citizenship. In this case, he observed that there are two
citizenships and therefore, two allegiances. He pointed
out that under the Constitution, dual allegiance is
inimical to public interest. He thereafter asked whether
with the creation of dual allegiance by reason of
retention of foreign citizenship and the reacquisition of
Philippine citizenship, there will now be a violation of
the Constitution.
It is clear that the intent of the legislature in drafting
Rep. Act No. 9225 is to do away with the provision in
Commonwealth Act No. 635 which takes away
Philippine citizenship from natural-born Filipinos who
become naturalized citizens of other countries. What
Rep. Act No. 9225 does is allow dual citizenship to
natural-born Filipino citizens who have lost Philippine
citizenship by reason of their naturalization as citizens
of a foreign country. On its face, it does not recognize
dual allegiance. By swearing to the supreme authority
of the Republic, the person implicitly renounces his
foreign citizenship. Plainly, from Section 3, Rep. Act
No. 9225 stayed clear out of the problem of dual
allegiance and shifted the burden of confronting the
issue of whether or not there is dual allegiance to the
concerned foreign country. What happens to the other
citizenship was not made a concern of Rep. Act No.
9225.
In Sections 2 and 3 of Rep. Act No. 9225, the framers
were not concerned with dual citizenship per se, but
with the status of naturalized citizens who maintain
their allegiance to their countries of origin even after
their naturalization.
ii. Statelessness
Kookooritchkin v. Solicitor General
Appellant contends that the lower court erred in
finding appellee stateless and not a Russian citizen
and in not finding that he has failed to establish
that he is not disqualified for Philippine citizenship
under section 4 (h) of the Revised Naturalization
Law.
The controversy centers on the question as to whether
petitioner is a Russian citizen or is stateless.

Based on Atty. Johanna Lorenzos Syllabus

CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER

Petitioner testified categorically that he is not a Russian
citizen and that he has no citizenship. His testimony
supports the lower court's pronouncement that petitioner is a
stateless refugee in this country.
Appellant points out that petitioner stated in his petition for
naturalization that he is citizen or subject of the Empire of
Russia, but the Empire of Russia has ceased to exist since
the Czars were overthrown in 1917 by the Bolshevists, and
the petitioner disclaims allegiance or connection with the
Soviet Government established after the overthrow of the
Czarist Government.
We do not believe that the lower court erred in pronouncing
appellee stateless. Appellee's testimony, besides being
uncontradicted, is supported by the well-known fact that the
ruthlessness of modern dictatorship has scattered throughout
the world a large number of stateless refugees or displaced
persons, without country and without flag. Petitioner
belongs to that group of stateless refugees.
Knowing, as all cultured persons all over the world ought to
know, the history, nature and character of the Soviet
dictatorship, presently the greatest menace to humanity and
civilization, it would be technically fastidious to require
further evidence of petitioner's claim that he is stateless than
his testimony that he owes no allegiance to the Russian
Communist Government and, is because he has been at war
with it, he fled from Russia to permanently reside in the
Philippines. After finding in this country economic security
in a remunerative job, establishing a family by marrying a
Filipina with whom he has a son, and enjoying for 25 years
the freedoms and blessings of our democratic way of life
it would be beyond comprehension to support that the
petitioner could feel any bond of attachment to the Soviet
dictatorship.
B. Domicile
Velilla v. Posadas
Our Civil Code (art. 40) defines the domicile of natural
persons as "the place of their usual residence." The record
before us leaves no doubt in our minds that the "usual
residence" of this unfortunate man, whom appellant
describes as a "fugitive" and "outcast", was in Manila where
he had lived and toiled for more than a quarter of a century,
rather than in any foreign country he visited during his
wanderings up to the date of his death in Calcutta. To effect
the abandonment of ones domicile, there must be a

deliberate and provable choice of a new domicile, coupled

with actual residence in the place chosen, with a declared or
provable intent that it should be ones fixed and permanent
place of abode, ones home. There is a complete dearth of
evidence in the record that Moody ever established a new
domicile in a foreign country.
Marcos vs. Comelec
In election cases, the term "residence" has always been
considered as synonymous with "domicile" which imports
not only the intention to reside in a fixed place but also
personal presence in-that place, coupled with conduct
indicative of such intention. Domicile denotes a fixed
permanent residence to which when absent for business or
pleasure, or for like reasons, one intends to return.

How one acquires a new domicile by choice. There must

concur:
(1) Residence or bodily presence in the new locality;
(2) Intention to remain there; and
(3) Intention to abandon the old domicile.
In other words there must basically be animus manendi (The
intention of remaining) with animus non revertendi (no
intention to return).
Pure intention to reside in that place is not sufficient, there
must likewise be conduct indicative of such intention.
There is a difference between domicile and residence.
"Residence" is used to indicate a place of abode, whether
permanent or temporary; "domicile" denotes a fixed
permanent residence to which, when absent, one has the
intention of returning. A man may have a residence in one
place and a domicile in another. Residence is not domicile,
but domicile is residence coupled with the intention to
remain for an unlimited time. A man can have but one
domicile for the same purpose at any time, but he may have
numerous places of residence. His place of residence is
generally his place of domicile, but it is not by any means
necessarily so since no length of residence without intention
of remaining will constitute domicile.
For political purposes the concepts of residence and
domicile are dictated by the peculiar criteria of political
laws. As these concepts have evolved in our election law,
what has clearly and unequivocally emerged is the fact that

Based on Atty. Johanna Lorenzos Syllabus

CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER

residence for election purposes is used synonymously with
domicile.
V. Personal Status and Capacity
A. Contracts
NCC
Art. 15. 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.
Art. 17. The forms and solemnities of contracts, wills, and
other public instruments shall be governed by the laws of
the country in which they are executed.
When the acts referred to are executed before the diplomatic
or consular officials of the Republic of the Philippines in a
foreign country, the solemnities established by Philippine
laws shall be observed in their execution.
Prohibitive laws concerning persons, their acts or property,
and those which have, for their object, public order, public
policy and good customs shall not be rendered ineffective
by laws or judgments promulgated, or by determinations or
conventions agreed upon in a foreign country.
Art. 50. For the exercise of civil rights and the fulfillment of
civil obligations, the domicile of natural persons is the place
of their habitual residence.
Art. 51. When the law creating or recognizing them, or any
other provision does not fix the domicile of juridical
persons, the same shall be understood to be the place where
their legal representation is established or where they
exercise their principal functions.
Art. 1306. The contracting parties may establish such
stipulations, clauses, terms and conditions as they may deem
convenient, provided they are not contrary to law, morals,
good customs, public order, or public policy.

i. Extrinsic validity
ii. Intrinsic validity

Insular Government v. Frank

Mr. Frank being fully qualified to enter into a contract at the

place and time the contract was made, he cannot therefore
plead infancy as a defense at the place where the contract is
being enforced. Although Mr. Frank was still a minor under
Philippine laws, he was nevertheless considered an adult
under the laws of the state of Illinois, the place where the
contract was made.
No rule is better settled in law than that matters bearing
upon the execution, interpretation and validity of a contract
are determined by the law of the place where the contract is
made. Matters connected to its performance are regulated
by the law prevailing at the place of its performance.
Matters respecting a remedy, such as bringing of a suit,
admissibility of evidence, and statutes of limitations, depend
upon the law of the place where the suit is brought.
Although generally, capacity of the parties to enter into a
contract is governed by national law. This is one case not
involving real property which was decided by our Supreme
Court, where instead of national law, what should determine
capacity to enter into a contract is the lex loci celebrationis.
In the instant case whether it is the place where the contract
was made or Franks nationality, the result would be the
same. However, as suggested by the mentioned author, for
the conflicts rule in capacity in general, national law of the
parties is controlling.

Zalamea v. CA
Foreign laws do not prove themselves nor can the court take
judicial notice of them. Like any other fact, they must be
alleged and proved. Written law may be evidenced by an
official publication thereof or by a copy attested by the
officers having legal custody of the record, or by his deputy
and accompanied with a certificate that such officer has
custody. The certificate may be made by a secretary of an
embassy or legation, consul-general, consul, vice-consul, or
consular agent or by any officer in the foreign service of the
Phil. stationed in the foreign country in which the record is
kept and authenticated by the seal of his office.
Even if the claimed U.S. Code of Federal Regulations does
exist, the same is not applicable to the case at bar in
accordance with the principle of lex loci contractus which
require that the law of the place where the airline ticket was
issued should be applied by the court where the passengers
are residents and nationals of the forum and the ticket is

Based on Atty. Johanna Lorenzos Syllabus

10

CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER

issued in such State by the defendant airline. Since the
tickets were sold and issued in the Philippines, the
applicable law in this case would be Philippine law
Hasegawa v. Kitamura
Lex loci celebrationis relates to the law of the place of
the ceremony or the law of the place where a contract is
made. The doctrine of lex contractus or lex loci contractus
means the law of the place where a contract is executed or
to be performed. It controls the nature, construction, and
validity of the contract and it may pertain to the law
voluntarily agreed upon by the parties or the law intended
by them either expressly or implicitly.
Under the state of the most significant relationship rule,
to ascertain what state law to apply to a dispute, the court
should determine which state has the most substantial
connection to the occurrence and the parties. In a case
involving a contract, the court should consider where the
contract was made, was negotiated, was to be performed,
and the domicile, place of business, or place of
incorporation of the parties. This rule takes into account
several contacts and evaluates them according to their
relative importance with respect to the particular issue to be
resolved. Since these 3 principles in conflict of laws make
reference to the law applicable to a dispute, they are rules
proper for the 2nd phase, the choice of law. They determine
which state's law is to be applied in resolving the
substantive issues of a conflicts problem.
Before determining which law should apply, 1st there should
exist a conflict of laws situation requiring the application of
the conflict of laws rules. Also, when the law of a foreign
country is invoked to provide the proper rules for the
solution of a case, the existence of such law must be pleaded
and proved. It should be noted that when a conflicts case,
one involving a foreign element, is brought before a court or
administrative agency, there are 3 alternatives open to the
latter in disposing of it:
(1) dismiss the case, either because of lack of 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 account
or apply the law of some other State or States.
The courts power to hear cases and controversies is derived
from the Constitution and the laws. While it may choose to

recognize laws of foreign nations, the court is not limited by

foreign sovereign law short of treaties or other formal
agreements, even in matters regarding rights provided by
foreign sovereigns. Neither can the other ground raised,
forum non conveniens, be used to deprive the RTC of its
jurisdiction.
1. Different governing laws
iii. Arbitration clauses
Pakistan International Airline v. Ople
Art 1306 of the Civil Code provides: The contracting parties
may establish such stipulations, clauses, terms and
conditions as they may deem convenient, provided they are
not contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order, or
public policy.
The governing principle is that parties may not contract
away applicable provisions of law especially peremptory
provisions dealing with matters heavily impressed with
public interest. The law relating to labor and employment is
clearly such an area and parties are not at liberty to insulate
themselves and their relationships from the impact of labor
laws and regulations by simply contracting with each other.
It is thus necessary to appraise the contractual provisions
invoked by petitioner PIA in terms of their consistency with
applicable Philippine law and regulations.
iv. Warsaw Convention

Lhuillier v. British Airways

It is settled that the Warsaw Convention has the
force and effect of law in this country, [the
Philippines]. In Santos III v. Northwest Orient
Airlines, 210 SCRA 256 (1992), we held that: The
Republic of the Philippines is a party to the
Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules
Relating to International Transportation by Air,
otherwise known as the Warsaw Convention. It
took effect on February 13, 1933. The Convention
was concurred in by the Senate, through its
Resolution No. 19, on May 16, 1950. The
Philippine instrument of accession was signed by
President Elpidio Quirino on October 13, 1950, and
was deposited with the Polish government on
November 9, 1950. The Convention became
applicable to the Philippines on February 9, 1951.
On September 23, 1955, President Ramon
Magsaysay issued Proclamation No. 201, declaring

Based on Atty. Johanna Lorenzos Syllabus

11

CONFLICT OF LAWS REVIEWER

our formal adherence thereto, to the end
same and every article and clause thereof
observed and fulfille d in good faith
Republic of the Philippines and the
thereof.

that the
may be
by the
citizens

The Convention is thus a treaty commitment voluntarily

assumed by the Philippine government and, as such, has the
force and effect of law in this country
B. Property
Civil Code, Art. 16, 17
Art. 16. Real property as well as personal property is
subject to the law of the country where it is stipulated.
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.
Art. 17. The forms and solemnities of contracts, wills, and
other public instruments shall be governed by the laws of
the country in which they are executed.
When the acts referred to are executed before the diplomatic
or consular officials of the Republic of the Philippines in a
foreign country, the solemnities established by Philippine
laws shall be observed in their execution.
Prohibitive laws concerning persons, their acts or property,
and those which have, for their object, public order, public
policy and good customs shall not be rendered ineffective
by laws or judgments promulgated, or by determinations or
conventions agreed upon in a foreign country.

Philip Morris v. CA
Protection due to absence of actual use of the
emblem in the local market. Registration of
trademark cannot be deemed conclusive as to the
actual use of such trademark in local commerce.
Registration does not confer upon the registrant an
absolute right to the registered mark. It merely
constitutes prima facie evidence that the registrant
is the owner of theregistered mark. Evidence of
non-usage of the mark rebuts the presumption of
trademark ownership.
We stress that registration in the Philippines of
trademarks does not ipso facto convey an absolute
right or exclusive ownership thereof.
Trademark is a creation of use
Actual use is a pre-requisite to exclusive ownership
Registration is only an administrative confirmation
of the existence of the right of ownership of the
mark it does not perfect such right; actual use
thereof is the perfecting ingredient

Mighty Corporation v. Gallo Winery,

Sps. Alcantara vs. Nido
The Supreme Court ruled that according to Article 1318 of
the Civil Code, the requisitesfor a valid contract are:
1.) consent of the contracting parties;
2.) object certain which is the subjectmatter of the contract;
3.) cause of the obligation which is established.
In the case at bar, the respondent did not have the written
authority to enter into a contract to sell the lot. As the
consent of Revelen, the real owner of the lot, was not
obtained n writing as required by law, no contract was
perfected. Hence, the petitioners failed to validly acquire the
lot.

Based on Atty. Johanna Lorenzos Syllabus

12