Conflict of laws

Saudi- points of contacts (familiarize)

Choice of applicable law- GENERAL RULE: Parties are free to stipulate as to the applicable foreign
law to govern their dispute arising from the contract.

Even if the conflict of rule directs the application of foreign= will not apply if thhere is a local policy in
conflict with such foreign law (Del Soccoro case, and Bank of America case, Aznar case, Velez case)

Agreement of the parties – cadalin

-prescriptive period – did not allow the agreement of the parties because it contravenes a public policy
in the our laws

Traditional view of foregin law is not applied in the forum because:

1. when its enforcement would run counter to some important public policy of the forum(cadalin
case)
2. where its application would lead to an infringement of good morality in the wider sense of the
term, as
understood in the forum (example: slavery)
3. where the foreign law is penal in nature (all penal laws are only enforceable in your territorial
jurisdication general rule)
4. when the FL is procedural in nature (lex fori)
5. when the quesiton relates to an immovable property in the forum
6. when the FL is fiscal or administrative in nature
7. when the application of the foreign law involves injustice or injury to the nationals or residence
of the forum
8. when the application of FL would endanger the foregn relations or vital interests of the states

Lex Fori
-on matters of proceedures= governed by the law of the forum
-purpose: convenience and practicability
-what are these matters

Whether an issue is subtantive or proceedural?

-prescription= sub or proc because it is sui generis
-Government Interest Analysis - the law of the country whose interest is most impaired by failure to
apply its statute should be applied (this is a subject rule- there is no fixed formula)
-immaterial if =there is a burrowing statute (act 190 section 48) but in the cadalin case this provision
has not been repealed (The rule on characterization does not apply where the country in which the case
is filed has a borrowing law which states that if the cause of action in the country where the cause arose
has prescribed, it will also be considered as having prescribed in our country even when local law has a
longer period of prescription)

Center of gravity doctrine

-saudia case
-overal harm was done in the Phillipines
-the delict happened in the Philippines -she was deceived here
-labor- even if the choosen law is the law of the foreign country, the same will not be given effect if it
contravene to the public policy of the country
-"Choice of law problems in conflict of law are resolved by the application of the law of the
jurisdiction- which has the most significant relationship to or contact with event and parties to litigation
and the issue therein)

To prove foreign laws

1. allege and
2. prove
**To be recognized by Philippine courts, foreign laws and judgments must be alleged and proved.

How do you allege? Wildvalley Shipping -state in the pleading and its existence
How to prove a foreign law(a written law)? Sto Tomas vs Corpus/z
1. present an official publication
2. authenticated by the officer having the legal custody of the record, or by his deputy,
3. and accompanied with a certificate that such officer has custody must 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 ( Authenticated by his seal of office)
-Section 24 and 25 rule 132

how about unwritted law?

With respect to unwritten law, the oral testimony of expert witnesses is admissible, as are printed and
public books of reports of decisions of the courts of the country concerned if proved to be commonly
admitted in such court.

A mere xerox copy of the foreign law, or a foreign document, even if duly identified by a
knowledgeable person from the foreign country, is not sufficient to prove the foreign law
-but first you need to prove his expertise

Exceptions
-the rules of authentication as provided for in Section 24 of Rule 132 do not apply to administrative
proceedings before administrative tribunals, where the technical rules of procedure and evidence are
not applicable (Norse Management CP)
-so long as the cardinal rules of due process are observed. The foreign document may be admitted in
evidence, even without such authentication, where the adverse party has copy of the document, who
could easily verify its authenticity and accuracy
-administrative agency task to resolve certain matters (they are not bound by strict technical
requirements of the rules of court)
-when the other party did not object
-when the court is familiar
-the court has actual knowledge of such law

Case
1. Manufacturers Hanover Trust vs Guerrero
2. EDI-staff Builders vs NLRC

What if the foreign law is not properly proven?

-apply the doctrine of processual presumption(1)
-or dissmiss the case (2)
Dacasin vs Dacasin
-can Philippine court acquire jurisdiction of their agreement?

crtic of the processual presumption → Michiano vs Brimo

Chapter III
Citizenship and Domicle

Status and legal capacity of a person is govern by his nationality or citizenship

→ citizenship and nationality can be interchanged In conflict of law

Political law = there is a distinction bet nationality and citizenship

→ nationality is broader than citizenship

Any question as to whether a person is a citizen of a particular state, the law of said state will govern

How is Phil citizenship acquiried

1. Natural persons
• Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of adoption of the 1987 Constitution
• Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the Philippines
• Those born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino mothers, who elect Philippine citizenship upon
reaching the age of majority
• Those who are naturalized in accordance with the law

Modes
1. By blood (jus sanguinis) – natural-born citizens(by birth)
2. By naturalization – naturalized citizens

Bengzon case
Grace Poe case

Doctrine of incorporation
Doctrine of transformation

Dual citizenship vs Dual Allegiance (Manzano vs Mercado)

Dual allegiance= still no definition under the law

Djumantan vs. Domingo

David vs. Agbay

AASJS Calilung vs Datumanong

RA 9225 – applies only to natural born citizens

-Sec. 4.Derivative Citizenship-The unmarried child, whether legitimate, illegitimate or adopted, below
eighteen (18) years of age, of those who re-acquire Philippine citizenship upon effectivity of this Act
shall be deemed citizenship of the Philippines.

Sec. 5.Civil and Political Rights and Liabilities-Those who retain or re-acquire Philippine citizenship
under this Act shall enjoy full civil and political rights and be subject to all attendant liabilities and
responsibilities under existing laws of the Philippines and the following conditions:
(1) Those intending to exercise their right of surffrage must Meet the requirements under Sec. 1, Article
V of the Constitution, Republic Act No. 9189, otherwise known as "The Overseas Absentee Voting Act
of 2003" and other existing laws
(2) Those seeking elective public in the Philippines shall meet the qualification for holding
such public office as required by the Constitution and existing laws and, at the time of the
filing of the certificate of candidacy, make a personal and sworn renunciation of any and all
foreign citizenship before any public officer authorized to administer an oath;cralaw
(3) Those appointed to any public office shall subscribe and swear to an oath of allegiance
to the Republic of the Philippines and its duly constituted authorities prior to their
assumption of office: Provided, That they renounce their oath of allegiance to the country
where they took that oath;cralaw
(4) Those intending to practice their profession in the Philippines shall apply with the
proper authority for a license or permit to engage in such practice; and
(5) That right to vote or be elected or appointed to any public office in the Philippines
cannot be exercised by, or extended to, those who:
(a) are candidates for or are occupying any public office in the country of which
they are naturalized citizens; and/or
(b) are in active service as commissioned or non-commissioned officers in the
armed forces of the country which they are naturalized citizens.

Maquiling vs. COMELEC, April 16,

2013
Arnado vs. COMELEC, August 18,
2015