CONFLICT OF LAW ON MARRIAGE: more

Depends on the countries view on marriage:

o As a contract lex loci celebrotionis
o As a personal law national law
o In the Philippines both variety. Lex loci celebrationis & national law

ART 26 of CC

GR: Lex loci celebrationis ( ART 17 of cc)

EXCEPTION: Nationality Theory (APPLY ONLY WITH FILIPINO)

Exceptions in art. 26 do not apply to foreigners,

FACTORS OF COL of MARRIAGE:

1. Place of celebration
2. Nationalities of parties

SCENARIO:
1. MARRIAGE ABROAD BY BOTH FOREIGNERS
o GR:LEX LOCI CELEBRATIONIS; DO NOT APPLY EXCEPTIONS in ART 26
o ONLY EXCEPTION: UNIVERSALLY RECOGNIZED INCESTOUS MARRIAGE
2. MARRIAGE OF ALIENS BUT SOLEMNIZED IN PHIL:
o Determined by the laws of the Philippines the placed of celebration consistent with lex loci celebrationis
o EXCEPTION: legal capacity of the foreigners are determined by their NATIONAL LAW.
3. MARRIAGE SOLEMINIZED ABROAD BY FILIPINOS
o GR: Lex Loci celebrationis BUT THE EXCEPTIONS of art. 35:
Par. 1 age
Par 4. Bigamous marriage
Par.5 mistaken identity
Par. 6 by reason of art. 53 you need to comply with prior judicial declaration the marriage is annulled then
you fail to comply with art 40. The subsequent marriage is void. ( READ)
o NOTE: reason that marriage is solemnized by those who has was not qualified or not licensed to conduct marriage
will not affect
4. MARRIAGE of FILIPINOS in the PHIL
o PHIL LAWS
5. MARRIAGE ABROAD BETWEEN AN ALIEN & FILIPINO
o GR: valid abroad then valid here (Art. 26) BUT the FILIPINO is still bound by our national law.
o Situation where it may be valid as to the alien spouse and invalid as to the side of the Filipino
o RULE: our policy is to resolve in favor of marriage to uphold the validity of the marriage for the protection of the
status and rights of the children.
6. MIXED MARRIAGE IN THE PHIL
a. Lex loci celebrationis. Execption is the legal capacity of the alien where it is his national law.

*PROPERTY RELATIONS BETWEEN SPOUSES:

1) MIXED MARRIAGE (FILIPINO & ALIEN) or FILIPINO MARRIAGE IN THE PHIL

a. Gr: Art. 80 of CC absence of any stipulation in marriage settlement, governed by the PHILIPPINE LAW
b. EXCEPTION:
i. Contrary stipulation on the marriage settlement
ii. Both are ALIENS governed others than phil. Law
iii. Extrinsic validity of contracts executed abroad, contract involves a property OUTSIDE the Philippine
reason lex rei sitae
iv. Extrinsic validity of a contract executed in the phil of a property that is located abroad lex rei sitae
c. *WHAT ABOUT THE INTRINSIC VALIDTY OF THE CONTRACT: art. 16 VS 80
i. 80 should not be sweepingly applied for properties located abroad: reason:
1. to apply 80 only in the phil located property is consistent with art. 16 to harmonize both
2. Our court does not have jurisdiction over property located outside

COL ON NULLITY OR ANNULMET OF MARRIAGE:

o use art. 26
o Only two question involved:
a. Which court has jurisdiction over the action of nullity or annulment?
i. It is the court where the party initiating the action is a resident. The reason is practicality.
b. Which law governs the action, such as grounds for nullity and annulment of marriage?
i. Still article 26 applied in reverse. The grounds for nullity is lex loci celebrationis:
SCENARIO:
1. MARRIAGE ABROAD BY BOTH FOREIGNERS
o LEX LOCI CELEBRATIONIS + UNIVERSALLY RECOGNIZED INCESTOUS MARRIAGE
2. MARRIAGE OF ALIENS BUT SOLEMNIZED IN PHIL:
o Lex loci celbrationis + capacity under nationality theory
3. MARRIAGE SOLEMINIZED ABROAD BY FILIPINOS
o Lex Loci celebrationis + art. 26 national law
4. MARRIAGE of FILIPINOS in the PHIL
o PHIL LAWS
5. MARRIAGE ABROAD BETWEEN AN ALIEN & FILIPINO
o LEX LOCI CELEBRATIONIS + NATIONAL LAW
o Situation where it may be valid as to the alien spouse and invalid as to the side of the Filipino
 oRULE: our policy is to resolve in favor of marriage to uphold the validity of the marriage for the protection of the
status and rights of the children.
6. MIXED MARRIAGE IN THE PHIL
o Lex loci celebrationis + Execption is the legal capacity of the alien where it is his national law.

In case a defending party may not be able to be served personally served with summons, the proper remedy is service of
SUMMONS BY PUBLICATION.
Justification is that this involves status therefore is an IN REM proceeding.
Purpose of which is for due process and not to acquire jurisdiction.

COL ON LEGAL SEPARATION:

The law which gives the ground for legal separation is NATIONALITY THEORY.
if MIXED MARRIAGE any of the grounds of both national laws ( a party may invoke any grounds of both national law even
if not a national of such law )

COL ON DIVORCE:
only allowed for both foreign spouse or mixed marriage
*RP vs OBRECIDO reckoning period to determine if the marriage is a mixed marriage is when the divorce decree is
obtained.

FILIPINO SPOUSE: HOW TO REMARRY:

Art. 26 par 2 capacitates the Filipino spouse to remarry of a divorce decree obtained the foreign spouse abroad.
BUT to apply such divorce decree the Filipino spouse must PROVE THE FF:
i. The existence and authenticity of the divorce decree as a matter of fact. HOW: By publication OR certified
true copy with consular authentication.
ii. Demonstrate that the divorce decrees validity and authenticity conforms and complies with the
requirement of the foreign law that issued such decree
iii. Prove that the divorce decree capacitates the alien spouse to remarry. Absolute divorce.

FOREIGN SPOUSE: HOW TO REMARRY IN PHIL:

*CORPUS VS STO. THOMAS CASE:

Foreigner cannot base his action with art. 26 because it applies only to Filipino spouse.

The proper remedy: DEPENDS:

o Previously married to Filipina and obtains a divorce decree abroad two actions:
there is corresponding need to change the records of the local register
1. Recognition of foreign DD under rule 39
2. RULE 108 to reflect corresponding correction or cancellation of entries
BUT THE COURT RULED petitioner may also only FILE an action for RULE 108 which will
rule both on the recognition of such DD & order the corresponding change in the
entries. ONLY FILE 108.

o Previously married not a filipina and obtains a divorce decree abroad rule 39 recognition and
enforcement of foreign judgment. PETITON FOR RECOGNITION OF THE FOREIGN DECREE. simple action
for recognition of foreign judgment
Existence and authenticy of DD
Validyt of DD by showing the FL

COL ON TORT:

GR: LEX LOCI DELECTI COMISI; law of where the torturous act was committed BUT may be filed anywhere so long as
jurisdiction of defendant may acquired or obtained.
EXCEPTION: when tort consists of series of commission occurring in several states. THREE THEORIES:
a. CIVIL LAW THEORY locus delicti is the place where the act BEGAN.
b. COMMON LAW THEORY locus delecti is the place where the EFFECT of the tortuous act occurred.
c. MOST SIGNIFICANT RELATIONSHIP THEORY
i. Applied in the Philippines.
As to the PROCEDURE: lex fori the law of the forum.
As to PRESCRPTION, DEFENSES, KIND AND MEASURE OF DAMAGES: lex loci delecti comisi

COL ON CRIME: few

Six Theories:
o Territoriality theory country where the crime committed exercise jurisdiction over the crime
Adhered by the Philippines. Art. 2 of RPC
Not the same as generality theory generality is expressed in art. 14 of cc, focus who are govern by our
criminal law account as exception immunity of foreign officials. Territoriality focuses on where the crime is
committed exceptions are those of protective theory.
Protective theory states that even if beyond the state but injures the national interest of our state our court
acquires jurisdiction.
a. On Philippine ship
b. Forge or counterfeit Philippine currency
c. Relating to introductuin of countefiet
d. Public official commit act excess of function
e. National security; treason; conspiracy to treason; espionage; corresopondace
 Two kinds of territorialy:
o Subjective crime started inside and completed outside may be tried in the Phil
*Pp VS TULIN
o Objective crime began abroad but completed in the phil may be tried in the Phil
*PP vs BULL
o EXCEPTION:
o PROTECTIVE THEORY ART. 2 RPC
o APPLICABLE LAW ON PIL or TREATY STIPULATION

WHICH COUNTRY HAS JURISDICTION ON VESSELS OF PUBLIC OR PRIVATE MERCHANT VESSEL?

o PUBLIC crime is committed in high seas flag of the vessel is flying. Theory that the vessel is an
extension of the state
o PRIVATE crime is committed in high seas flag of the vessel is flying. Theory that the vessel is an
extension of the state
o PRIVATE within the territorial waters of the Philippines:
o Two rules:
ENGLISH RULE adheres to territoriality. PHIL. court
Exception: internal order or discipline of the vessel or among crew; or petty
crimes committed by members of the crew
CASE: US vs BULL. Norwegin vessel; committed in the phil.
FRENCH RULE adheres to the nationality theory. Triable by the country of the flag
of the ship.
Peace, order and safety of the territory
CASE: US vs WONG: anti- opium law. Accused caught while smoking on
the vessel. The crime maybe tried before our court bec it is an exception. It
affects the the safety, peace and order
of the inhabitants of the territory.

COL OF BUSINESS

3 theories. Disadvantages of the theory

we apply theory incorporation.
Personal law of corp: status, capacity
CORPORATE ACTS not only govern of incorporation BUT also the law of performance. As so far public on concerened it must
be valid for BOTH personal law and law of performance.
Validity of corporate act.
Service of summons or capacity to sue or be sued.

ENFORCEMENT OF FOREIGN JUDGMENT: more

theories that justify enforcement of foreign judgment:

o THEORY OF COMITY allows the enforcement as
courtesy to the other state.
o PRINCIPLE OF RECIPROCITY
based on mutual concession between states. Expressed in the form of treaty.
o THEORY OF VESTED RIGHT
what is being enforced is not the law of the foreign country but only the right derived from that law
o THEORY OF RES JUDICATA
once a judgment is made by one court, it binds all parties in any future proceedings in another state.

Philippines follow the theory of comity. We allow them as a form of respect. As stated in RULE 39.
TWO FORMS OF RECOGNITION/ENFORCEMENT
o ABSOLUTE prohibits re-litigation of the case. Enforcement does not require any positive act in the judgment where
it is sought to be enforced.
o QUALIFIED does not come automatic and calls for court intervention either recognition or enforcement by the
court.

ENFORCEMENT vs RECOGNITION
o ENFORCEMENT Foreign judgment may afford the winning party some affirmative relief or directs the losing party
to do or not to do an act.
Active action. Party files a case whoch Carries an order to enforce the right. Recognition and enforcement of
collection of money.

o RECOGNITION Foreign judgment may come in the form of adjucation of a right without an affirmative act. Ex.
divorce, recognizing legitimation.
Passive action. Party files an action an simply ask the court to recognize or honor the judgment without
asking the court to do an act.

EFFECT OF A FOREIGN JUDMENT IN THE PHIL

 o With respect to a final judgment on a real action and a judgment in rem, conclusive
o Founded on personal action and a personam action, it is a prima facie binding only between parties.
o BUT for BOTH the defendant can question using the grounds to repel as provided in rule 39: (QUALIFIED RES
JURIDICATA)
Lack of jurisdiction
want of Notice
Extrinsic Fraud Collusion
Mistkae of fact or law

*What law will determine when to repel?

One view: FOREIGN LAW. Grounds should be based on the law of country which
rendered the decision:
o Vested right of the party
o Absurd that the country ruling on the merits would account the laws of the court where it
would enforce.
o Supported by cases:
*Boudart vs STATE. Action in personam PHIL LAW used to repel
Second: LAW OF WHERE THE JUDGMENT IS RENDERED (PHIL LAW)
o It is not stated in the rules that foreign law should apply
o Party who filed the case has deemed submitted to the jurisdiction of the laws of the forum
o CASES: (PHIL LAW)
NORTHWEST CASE
NAGARMUL vs BINALBAGAN
ASIAVEST VS ANTONIO HERAS CASE
RULE NOW IS COMPROMISE:
o REMEDY OF PROCEDURE Law where the decision is rendered
o SUBSTANCE where the judgment is to be enforced
o CASES AS TO PROCEDURE:
NORTHWEST CASE. Japan law on summons. Substance phil law. Applied
processual presumption for failure to cite law. There was proper serve of
summon.
ASIAVEST vs ANTONIO HERAS: HONGKONG COURT FIRST CASE
o CASE AS TO MERITS:
NAGARMUL CASE art. 1191 of the cc. ; mistake of law
QUESTION: CAN PHIL COURT CAN GO AS FAR AS DECIDING ON THE MERITS OF A FOREIGN JUDGMENT.
o CASE: FUJIKI vs MIJIARES
Court of the Phil is not supposed to relit iGATE the case. It is limited to the extrinsic issue of the case.
o RECONCILE VS REPEL ground of mistake of fact of law which goes into the merits of the decision

ADDITIONAL GROUND TO REPEL FJ:

*THE 4 grounds of to repel are not exclusive: another excpetion if the judgment RUNS CONTRARY TO PUBLIC POLICY OF THE
FORUM CASE: ASIA VEST BANKERS (2nd batch); only dispostive ruling no justification.

FOREIGN JUDGMENT ENJOYS THE PRESUMPTION OF AUTHENTICITY:

NORMAL JUDGMENT: presumed valid

o Prove it by counsular authentication
DIVORCE DECREE: foreign divorce judgment
o Auntheticty of the divorce decree
o National law of the party obtaining and law allowing the the DD

*CASE MIJARES:

Nature of an action of enforcement on the basis of jurisdiction based on the nature of the judgment to be enforced.

VENUE for a foreign judgment

Where the defendant is located or where the property is located.

Residence of the defendant
Location of the property