Facts:: Manila Hotel V NLRC G.R. No. 120077, October 13, 2000

CONFLICT OF LAWS (2020) CASE DIGEST ATTY.
WALDEMAR GRAVADOR
EH401
MANILA HOTEL v NLRC at the Palace Hotel print shop would be terminated
G.R. No. 120077, October 13, 2000 due to business reverses brought about by the
political upheaval in China. The Palace Hotel
FACTS: terminated the employment of Santos and paid all
benefits due him, including his plane fare back to
Private respondent Santos was an overseas worker the Philippines. Santos was repatriated to the
employed as a printer at the Mazoon Printing Press, Philippines.
Sultanate of Oman. Subsequently he was directly
hired by the Palace Hotel, Beijing, People’s Republic Santos filed a complaint for illegal dismissal with
of China and later terminated due to retrenchment. the Arbitration Branch, NCR, NLRC. He prayed for
Petitioners are the Manila Hotel Corporation an award of AD, ED and AF for. The complaint
(“MHC”) and the Manila Hotel International named MHC, MHICL, the Palace Hotel and Mr.
Company, Limited (“MHICL”). Shmidt as respondents. The Palace Hotel and Mr.
Shmidt were not served with summons and neither
When the case was filed in 1990, MHC was still a participated in the proceedings before the LA.
government-owned and controlled corporation
duly organized and existing under the laws of the The LA decided the case against petitioners.
Philippines. MHICL is a corporation duly organized Petitioners appealed to the NLRC, arguing that the
and existing under the laws of Hong Kong. MHC is POEA, not the NLRC had jurisdiction over the case.
an “incorporator” of MHICL, owning 50% of its The NLRC promulgated a resolution, stating that
capital stock. the appealed Decision be declared null and void for
want of jurisdiction.
By virtue of a “management agreement” with the
Palace Hotel, MHICL trained the personnel and staff Santos moved for reconsideration of the afore-
of the Palace Hotel at Beijing, China. quoted resolution. He argued that the case was not
cognizable by the POEA as he was not an “overseas
During his employment with the Mazoon Printing contract worker. The NLRC granted the motion and
Press, respondent Santos received a letter from Mr. reversed itself. The NLRC directed another LA to
Shmidt, General Manager, Palace Hotel, Beijing, hear the case on the question of whether private
China. Mr. Schmidt informed respondent Santos respondent was retrenched or dismissed. The La
that he was recommended by one Buenio, a friend found that Santos was illegally dismissed from
of his. Mr. Shmidt offered respondent Santos the employment and recommended that he be paid
same position as printer, but with a higher monthly actual damages equivalent to his salaries for the
salary and increased benefits. Respondent Santos unexpired portion of his contract. The NLRC ruled
wrote to Mr. Shmidt and signified his acceptance of in favor of private respondent. Petitioners filed an
the offer. MR arguing that the LA’s recommendation had no
basis in law and in fact, however it was denied.
The Palace Hotel Manager, Mr. Henk mailed a ready Hence, this petition.
to sign employment contract to respondent Santos.
Santos resigned from the Mazoon Printing Press. ISSUE:
Santos wrote the Palace Hotel and acknowledged
Mr. Henk’s letter. The employment contract stated Is the NLRC a proper forum to decide this case?
that his employment would be for a period of two
years. He then started to work at the Palace Hotel. HELD:
Subsequently, respondent Santos signed an Petition granted; the orders and resolutions of the
amended “employment agreement” with the Palace NLRC are annulled.
Hotel. In the contract, Mr. Shmidt represented the
Palace Hotel. The Vice President (Operations and Forum Non-Conveniens
Development) of petitioner MHICL Cergueda
signed the employment agreement under the word The NLRC was a seriously inconvenient forum.
“noted”. We note that the main aspects of the case
After working in the Palace hotel for less than 1 transpired in two foreign jurisdictions and the case
year, the Palace Hotel informed respondent Santos involves purely foreign elements. The only link that
by letter signed by Mr. Shmidt that his employment the Philippines has with the case is that Santos is a
Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

Read the Full Text
CONFLICT OF LAWS (2020) CASE DIGEST ATTY. WALDEMAR GRAVADOR
EH401
Filipino citizen. The Palace Hotel and MHICL are was not in a position to determine whether the
foreign corporations. Not all cases involving our Tiannamen Square incident truly adversely
citizens can be tried here. affected operations of the Palace Hotel as to justify
Santos’ retrenchment.
The employment contract. — Respondent Santos
was hired directly by the Palace Hotel, a foreign Principle of effectiveness, no power to execute
employer, through correspondence sent to the decision. — Even assuming that a proper decision
Sultanate of Oman, where respondent Santos was could be reached by the NLRC, such would not have
then employed. He was hired without the any binding effect against the employer, the Palace
intervention of the POEA or any authorized Hotel. The Palace Hotel is a corporation
recruitment agency of the government. incorporated under the laws of China and was not
even served with summons. Jurisdiction over its
Under the rule of forum non conveniens, a person was not acquired.
Philippine court or agency may assume jurisdiction
over the case if it chooses to do so provided: This is not to say that Philippine courts and
agencies have no power to solve controversies
 that the Philippine court is one to which involving foreign employers. Neither are we saying
the parties may conveniently resort to; that we do not have power over an employment
contract executed in a foreign country. If Santos
 that the Philippine court is in a position to were an “overseas contract worker”, a Philippine
make an intelligent decision as to the law forum, specifically the POEA, not the NLRC, would
and the facts;and protect him. He is not an “overseas contract
worker” a fact which he admits with conviction.
 that the Philippine court has or is likely to __
have power to enforce its decision. Even assuming that the NLRC was the proper
forum, even on the merits, the NLRC’s decision
The conditions are unavailing in the case at bar. cannot be sustained.
Not Convenient. — We fail to see how the NLRC is MHC Not Liable
a convenient forum given that all the incidents of
the case — from the time of recruitment, to Even if we assume two things: (1) that the NLRC
employment to dismissal occurred outside the had jurisdiction over the case, and (2) that MHICL
Philippines. The inconvenience is compounded by was liable for Santos’ retrenchment, still MHC, as a
the fact that the proper defendants, the Palace separate and distinct juridical entity cannot be held
Hotel and MHICL are not nationals of the liable.
Philippines. Neither .are they “doing business in the
Philippines.” Likewise, the main witnesses, Mr. True, MHC is an incorporator of MHICL and owns
Shmidt and Mr. Henk are non-residents of the 50% of its capital stock. However, this is not
Philippines. enough to pierce the veil of corporate fiction
between MHICL and MHC. In Traders Royal Bank v.
No power to determine applicable law. — Neither CA, we held that “the mere ownership by a single
can an intelligent decision be made as to the law stockholder or by another corporation of all or
governing the employment contract as such was nearly all of the capital stock of a corporation is not
perfected in foreign soil. This calls to fore the of itself a sufficient reason for disregarding the
application of the principle of lex loci contractus fiction of separate corporate personalities.”
(the law of the place where the contract was made).
The employment contract was not perfected in the It is basic that a corporation has a personality
Philippines. Santos signified his acceptance by separate and distinct from those composing it as
writing a letter while he was in the Republic of well as from that of any other legal entity to which
Oman. This letter was sent to the Palace Hotel in the it may be related. Clear and convincing evidence is
People’s Republic of China. needed to pierce the veil of corporate fiction. In this
No power to determine the facts. — Neither can the case, we find no evidence to show that MHICL and
NLRC determine the facts surrounding the alleged MHC are one and the same entity.
illegal dismissal as all acts complained of took place
in Beijing, People’s Republic of China. The NLRC III. MHICL not Liable

Read the Full Text
EH401
jurisdiction over respondent’s claim in the NLRC

Santos predicates MHICL’s liability on the fact that case. In all the cases under the exclusive and
MHICL “signed” his employment contract with the original jurisdiction of the LA, an employer-
Palace Hotel. This fact fails to persuade us. employee relationship is an indispensable
jurisdictional requirement.
First, we note that the Vice President (Operations
and Development) of MHICL, Cergueda signed the Saudi Arabian Airlines V. CA
employment contract as a mere witness. He merely G.R. No. 122191, October 8, 1998
signed under the word “noted”.
Laws Applicable: Art 19 and 21 of Civil Code
When one “notes” a contract, one is not expressing
his agreement or approval, as a party would. In Lessons Applicable: Conflict of Laws, factual
Sichangco v. Board of Commissioners of situation, connecting factor, characterization,
Immigration, the Court recognized that the term choice of law, State of the most significant
“noted” means that the person so noting has merely relationship
taken cognizance of the existence of an act or
declaration, without exercising a judicious FACTS:
deliberation or rendering a decision on the matter.
Second, and more importantly, there was no Saudi Arabian Airlines (SAUDIA), foreign airlines
existing employer-employee relationship between corporation doing business in the Philippines and
Santos and MHICL. In determining the existence of may be served summons in agent in Makati, hired
an employer-employee relationship, the following Milagros P. Morada as a flight attendant for its
elements are considered: airlines based in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
 the selection and engagement of the April 27, 1990:

employee
 the payment of wages While on a lay-over in Jakarta, Indonesia, Morada
 the power to dismiss; and went to a disco dance with fellow crew members
 the power to control employee’s conduct. Thamer Al-Gazzawi and Allah Al-Gazzawi, both
Saudi nationals. It was almost morning when they
MHICL did not have and did not exercise any of the returned to their hotels so they agreed to have
aforementioned powers. It did not select breakfast together at the room of Thamer. Shortly
respondent Santos as an employee for the Palace after Allah left the room, Thamer attempted to rape
Hotel. He was referred to the Palace Hotel by his Morada.
friend, Buenio. MHICL did not engage respondent
Santos to work. The terms of employment were Fortunately, a room boy and several security
negotiated and finalized through correspondence personnel heard her cries for help and rescued
between Santos, Mr. Schmidt and Mr. Henk, who her. Indonesian police arrested Thamer and Allah
were officers and representatives of the Palace Al-Gazzawi, the latter as an accomplice.
Hotel and not MHICL. Neither did Santos adduce
any proof that MHICL had the power to control his When Morada returned to Jeddah, SAUDIA officials
conduct. Finally, it was the Palace Hotel, through interrogated her about the Jakarta incident and
Mr. Schmidt and not MHICL that terminated requested her to go back to Jakarta to help arrange
respondent Santos’ services. the release of Thamer and Allah. In Jakarta,
SAUDIA Legal Officers negotiated with the police
Likewise, there is no evidence to show that the for the immediate release of the detained crew
Palace Hotel and MHICL are one and the same members but did not succeed.
entity. The fact that the Palace Hotel is a member of
the “Manila Hotel Group” is not enough to pierce Afraid that she might be tricked into something she
the corporate veil between MHICL and the Palace did not want because of her inability to understand
Hotel. the local dialect, Morado refused to cooperate and
Considering that the NLRC was forum non- declined to sign a blank paper and a document
conveniens and considering further that no written in the local dialect. Eventually, SAUDIA
employer-employee relationship existed between allowed Morada to return to Jeddah but barred her
MHICL, MHC and Santos, the LA clearly had no from the Jakarta flights.

Read the Full Text
EH401
music in violation of Islamic laws and (3)

Indonesian authorities agreed to deport Thamer socializing with the male crew, in
and Allah and they were again put in contravention of Islamic tradition.
service. While, Morada was transferred to Manila.
Failing to seek the assistance of her employer,
January 14, 1992: Morada was asked to see Mr. Ali SAUDIA, she asked the Philippine Embassy in
Meniewy, Chief Legal Officer of SAUDIA, in Jeddah, Jeddah to help her while her case is on appeal. She
Saudi Arabia. He brought her to the police station continued to work on the domestic flight of
where the police took her passport and questioned SAUDIA, while Thamer and Allah continued to
her about the Jakarta incident. The police serve in the international flights.
pressured her to drop the case against Thamer and
Allah. Not until she agreed to do so did the police Because she was wrongfully convicted, the Prince
return her passport and allowed her to catch the of Makkah dismissed the case against her and
afternoon flight out of Jeddah. allowed her to leave Saudi Arabia. Before her
return to Manila, she was terminated from the
June 16, 1993: service by SAUDIA, without her being informed of
the cause.
Morada, while in Riyadh Saudi Arabia, was not
allowed to board the plane to Manila and instead November 23, 1993:
ordered to take a later flight to Jeddah to see Mr.
Miniewy. Khalid of the SAUDIA office brought her Morada filed a Complaint for damages against
to a Saudi court where she was asked to sign a SAUDIA, and Khaled Al-Balawi, its country
document written in Arabic. They told her that this manager.
was necessary to close the case against Thamer and
Allah but it was actually a notice for her to appear January 19, 1994:
before the court on June 27, 1993. Plaintiff then
returned to Manila. SAUDIA filed an Omnibus Motion To Dismiss on
following grounds:
June 27, 1993:
(1) That the Complaint states no cause of action
SAUDIA's Manila manager, Aslam Saleemi, assured against SAUDIA
Morada that the investigation was routinary and
that it posed no danger to her so she reported to (2) That defendant Al-Balawi is not a real party in
Miniewy in Jeddah for further investigation. She interest
was brought to the Saudi court.
(3) That the claim or demand set forth in the
June 28, 1993: Complaint has been waived, abandoned or
otherwise extinguished and (4) that the trial court
Saudi judge interrogated Morada through an has no jurisdiction to try the case.
interpreter about the Jakarta incident for an hour
and let her go. SAUDIA officers forbidden her to After opposition to the motion to dismiss by
take flight. She was told to go the Inflight Service Morada and reply by SAUDIA, Morada filed an
Office where her passport was taken and they told Amended Complaint dropping Al-Balawi. SAUDIA
her to remain in Jeddah, at the crew quarters, until filed its Manifestation, Motion to Dismiss Amended
further orders. Complaint, subsequently motion for
reconsideration which were all denied.
July 3, 1993:
SAUDIA filed its Petition for Certiorari and
She was brought to court again and to her Prohibition with Prayer for Issuance of Writ of
astonishment and shock, rendered a decision, Preliminary Injunction and/or Temporary
translated to her in English, sentencing her to five Restraining Order with the Court of Appeals. TRO
months imprisonment and to 286 lashes. The was granted but Writ of Preliminary Injunction was
court tried her, together with Thamer and denied.
Allah, and found her guilty of (1) adultery (2)
going to a disco, dancing and listening to the

Read the Full Text
EH401
Ruling of the Court of Appeals

Here, the foreign element comes from the fact that
Philippines is an appropriate forum considering the plaintiff, Morada was a resident Philippine
that the Amended Complaint's basis for recovery of National while SAUDIA is a resident foreign
damages is Article 21 of the Civil Code, and thus, corporation. Moreover, through Morada's
clearly within the jurisdiction of respondent Court. employment as a flight stewardess of SAUDIA, the
It further held that certiorari is not the proper occurrences surrounding the case transpired while
remedy in a denial of a Motion to Dismiss, she was on her travels which was across national
inasmuch as the petitioner should have proceeded borders. This caused a "conflicts" situation to arise.
to trial, and in case of an adverse ruling, find
recourse in an appeal. Jurisdiction
SAUDIA filed its Supplemental Petition for Review Weighing the relative claims of the parties, the
with Prayer for Temporary Restraining Order that court found it best to hear the case in the
it is a conflict of laws that must be settled at the Philippines. If it refused to take cognizance of the
outset: case, it would be forcing Morada to seek remedial
action elsewhere, i.e. in the Kingdom of Saudi
Morada's claim for alleged abuse of rights occurred Arabia where she no longer maintains substantial
in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. connections. That would have caused a
fundamental unfairness to her.
Existence of a foreign element qualifies the instant
case for the application of the law of the Kingdom Moreover, by hearing the case in the Philippines no
of Saudi Arabia, by virtue of the lex loci delicti unnecessary difficulties and inconvenience have
commissi rule. been shown by either of the parties. The choice of
forum of the Morada should be upheld.
Morada:
Similarly, the trial court has also acquired
Amended Complaint is based on Articles 19 and 21 jurisdiction over the persons of the parties in this
of the Civil Code which is a matter of domestic law case. By filing her Complaint and Amended
Complaint with the trial court, Morada has
ISSUE: voluntary submitted herself to the jurisdiction of
the court. Similarly, SAUDIA has filed several
Whether or not the RTC of Quezon City has motions asking the court for relief. This indicates
jurisdiction over the case and it is the proper forum that SAUDIA indeed has submitted to the
for recovery of damages under Art. 21 of the Civil jurisdiction of the trial court.
Code which should govern.
Choice-of-laws
HELD:
As to the choice of applicable law, we note that
YES. the petition for certiorari is hereby choice-of-law problems seek to answer two
DISMISSED. REMANDED to RTC of Quezon City, important questions:
Branch 89 for further proceedings
 What legal system should control a given
Conflict of Laws situation where some of the significant
facts occurred in two or more states; and
There is a foreign element in this case, hence, it
involves a conflict of laws question.  To what extent should the chosen legal
system regulate the situation.
Foreign elements may appear in different forms. It
may simply consist of the fact that one of the Although ideally, all choice-of-law theories should
parties to the contract is an alien or has a foreign intrinsically advance both notions of justice and
domicile or that a contract between nationals of predictability, they do not always do so. The forum
one State involves properties situated in another is then faced with the problem of deciding which of
State. In other cases, the foreign element may these two important values should be stressed.
assume a complex form.

Read the Full Text
EH401
Before a choice can be made, it is necessary for us identify the Philippines as the situs of the alleged
to determine under what category a certain set of tort.
facts or rules fall. This process is known as
"characterization", or the "doctrine of In applying said principle to determine the State
qualification". It is the "process of deciding whether which has the most significant relationship, the
or not the facts relate to the kind of question following contacts are to be taken into account and
specified in a conflicts rule." The purpose of evaluated according to their relative importance
"characterization" is to enable the forum to select with respect to the particular issue:
the proper law.
(a) the place where the injury occurred;
An essential element of conflict rules is the
indication of a "test" or "connecting factor" or (b) the place where the conduct causing the injury
"point of contact". Choice-of-law rules invariably occurred;
consist of a factual relationship (such as property
right, contract claim) and a connecting factor or (c) the domicile, residence, nationality, place of
point of contact, such as the situs of the res, the incorporation and place of business of the parties,
place of celebration, the place of performance, or and
the place of wrongdoing.
(d) the place where the relationship, if any,
Lex Loci Actus between the parties is centered
(4) the place where an act has been done, the locus As already discussed, there is basis for the claim
actus, such as the place where a contract has been that over-all injury occurred and lodged in the
made, a marriage celebrated, a will signed or a tort Philippines. There is likewise no question that
committed. The lex loci actus is particularly private respondent is a resident Filipina national,
important in contracts and torts. working with petitioner, a resident foreign
corporation engaged here in the business of
Considering that the complaint in the court a quo is international air carriage.
one involving torts, the "connecting factor" or
"point of contact" could be the place or places Thus, the "relationship" between the parties was
where the tortious conduct or lex loci actus centered here, although it should be stressed that
occurred. And applying the torts principle in a this suit is not based on mere labor law violations.
conflicts case, we find that the Philippines could be From the record, the claim that the Philippines has
said as a situs of the tort (the place where the the most significant contact with the matter in this
alleged tortious conduct took place). dispute, raised by private respondent as plaintiff
below against defendant (herein petitioner), in our
This is because it is in the Philippines where view, has been properly established.
petitioner allegedly deceived private respondent, a
Filipina residing and working here. Petitioner's insistence that since private
respondent instituted this suit, she has the burden
According to her, she had honestly believed that of pleading and proving the applicable Saudi law on
petitioner would, in the exercise of its rights and in the matter is untenable. As aptly said by private
the performance of its duties, "act with justice, give respondent, she has "no obligation to plead and
her due and observe honesty and good faith." prove the law of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia since
Instead, petitioner failed to protect her, she her cause of action is based on Articles 19 and 21"
claimed. of the Civil Code of the Philippines.
That certain acts or parts of the injury allegedly In her Amended Complaint and subsequent
occurred in another country is of no moment. What pleadings, she never alleged that Saudi law should
is important here is the place where the over- govern this case. And as correctly held by the
all harm or the totality of the alleged injury to respondent appellate court, considering that it was
the person, reputation, social standing and the petitioner who was invoking the applicability of
human rights of complainant, had lodged, the law of Saudi Arabia, then the burden was on it
according to the plaintiff below (herein private to plead and to establish what the law of Saudi
respondent). All told, it is not without basis to Arabia is.

Read the Full Text
EH401
HASEGAWA v. KITAMURA
G.R. No. 149177, November 23, 2007 The ICA had been perfected in Japan and
executed by and between Japanese nationals.
PARTIES The claim of improper pre-termination of
Petitioners: respondent’s ICA could only be heard and
ventilated in the proper courts of Japan following
Kazuhiro Hasegawa – Nippon’s general manager the principles of lex loci celebrationis and lex
for its International Division. contractus.
Nippon Engineering Consultants Co. Ltd. RTC:

(Nippon) – a Japanese consultancy firm providing
technical and management support in the This court denied the motion to dismiss by the
infrastructure projects of foreign governments. petitioner by stating that the matters connected
with the performance of contracts are regulated by
Respondent: the law prevailing at the place of performance
(lex loci solutionis). It also subsequently denied
Minoru Kitamura – Japanese national the petitioner’s MR.
permanently residing in the Philippines.
Thus, because of the denial of the RTC, the
FACTS petitioner filed the first Petition for Certiorari
under rule 65 with the CA which was then
Petitioner Nippon entered into an Independent dismissed due to procedural grounds – lack of
Contractor Agreement (ICA) with respondent statement of material dates and insufficient
Kitamura. The agreement was that the respondent verification and certification against forum
will provide professional services to Nippon for a shopping. A second Petition for Certiorari was
year and was then subsequently assigned to work then filed with the complete requirements.
as a project manager of the Southern Tagalog
Access Road (STAR) Project in the Philippines. CA:
Later, the DPWH engaged the consultancy services This court found no GAD in the RTC’s denial of the
of Nippon for the detailed engineering and motion to dismiss. It ruled by stating that the
construction supervision of the Bongabon-Baler principle of lex loci celebrationis was not
Road Improvement (BBRI) Project wherein the applicable to the case, because nowhere in the
respondent was named project manager in the pleadings was the validity of the written
contract. agreement put in issue. Petitioner’s MR was also
subsequently denied by the CA.
However, petitioner Hasegawa informed the
respondent that the company had no more Thus, petitioner instituted the instant Petition for
intention of automatically renewing his ICA. His Review on Certiorari with the SC.
contract will be done only up to the substantial
completion of STAR which is just in time for the ISSUE
ICA’s expiry.
Whether the subject matter jurisdiction of the
Due to the impending unemployment, the Philippine Courts in civil cases for specific
respondent negotiated with the petitioner and performance and damages involving contracts
requested that he be assigned to the BBRI project executed outside the country by foreign nationals
but the latter rejected the former’s request. may be assailed by the principles of lex loci
celebrationis, lex contractus, the “state of the
This prompted respondent Kitamura to file a civil most significant relationship rule”, or non forum
case for specific performance and damages with conveniens.
the RTC of Lipa City.
RULING:
Petitioners then moved for the dismissal of the
complaint for lack of jurisdiction. They asserted NO.
that:

Read the Full Text
EH401
It was discussed by the SC that in the judicial civil case for specific performance & damages is
resolution of conflicts problems, 3 consecutive one not capable of pecuniary estimation & is
phases are involved: properly cognizable by the RTC of Lipa City.
 jurisdiction What they rather raise as grounds to question

 choice of law subject matter jurisdiction are the principles of lex
 recognition and enforcement of judgments loci celebrationis and lex contractus, and the “state
of the most significant relationship rule.”
Jurisdiction & choice of law are 2 distinct
concepts. Jurisdiction considers whether it is fair The Court finds the invocation of these grounds
to cause a defendant to travel to this state; choice of unsound.
law asks the further question whether the
application of a substantive law w/c will determine Lex loci celebrationis relates to the “law of the
the merits of the case is fair to both parties. place of the ceremony” or the law of the place
where a contract is made. The doctrine of lex
The power to exercise jurisdiction does not contractus or lex loci contractus means the “law
automatically give a state constitutional authority of the place where a contract is executed or to be
to apply forum law. While jurisdiction and the performed.” It controls the nature, construction,
choice of the lex fori will often coincide, the and validity of the contract and it may pertain to
“minimum contacts” for one do not always provide the law voluntarily agreed upon by the parties or
the necessary “significant contacts” for the other. the law intended by them either expressly or
The question of whether the law of a state can be implicitly. Under the “state of the most significant
applied to a transaction is different from the relationship rule,” to ascertain what state law to
question of whether the courts of that state have apply to a dispute, the court should determine
jurisdiction to enter a judgment. which state has the most substantial connection to
the occurrence and the parties.
In this case, only the 1st phase is at issue—
jurisdiction. Jurisdiction, however, has various In a case involving a contract, the court should
aspects. For a court to validly exercise its power to consider where the contract was made, was
adjudicate a controversy, it must have jurisdiction negotiated, was to be performed, and the domicile,
over the plaintiff/petitioner, over the place of business, or place of incorporation of the
defendant/respondent, over the subject matter, parties. This rule takes into account several
over the issues of the case and, in cases involving contacts and evaluates them according to their
property, over the res or the thing w/c is the subject relative importance with respect to the particular
of the litigation. In assailing the trial court's issue to be resolved.
jurisdiction herein, Nippon is actually referring
to subject matter jurisdiction. Since these 3 principles in conflict of laws make
reference to the law applicable to a dispute,
Jurisdiction over the subject matter in a judicial they are rules proper for the 2nd phase, the
proceeding is conferred by the sovereign authority choice of law. They determine which state's law is
w/c establishes and organizes the court. It is given to be applied in resolving the substantive issues of
only by law and in the manner prescribed by law. It a conflicts problem. Necessarily, as the only issue
is further determined by the allegations of the in this case is that of jurisdiction, choice-of-law
complaint irrespective of whether the plaintiff is rules are not only inapplicable but also not yet
entitled to all or some of the claims asserted called for.
therein. To succeed in its motion for the dismissal
of an action for lack of jurisdiction over the subject Further, Nippon’s premature invocation of choice-
matter of the claim, the movant must show that the of-law rules is exposed by the fact that they have
court or tribunal cannot act on the matter not yet pointed out any conflict between the laws
submitted to it because no law grants it the power of Japan and ours. Before determining which law
to adjudicate the claims. should apply, 1st there should exist a conflict of
laws situation requiring the application of the
In the instant case, Nippon, in its MTD, does not conflict of laws rules. Also, when the law of a
claim that the RTC is not properly vested by law w/ foreign country is invoked to provide the proper
jurisdiction to hear the subject controversy for a

Read the Full Text
EH401
rules for the solution of a case, the existence of such procedural or substantive, depending on the
law must be pleaded and proved. characterization.
It should be noted that when a conflicts case, one The characterization becomes irrelevant when the
involving a foreign element, is brought before a country of the forum has a “borrowing statute”.
court or administrative agency, there are 3 This statute directs the state of the forum to apply
alternatives open to the latter in disposing of it: (1) the foreign statute of limitations to the pending
dismiss the case, either because of lack of claims based on a foreign law.
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 Facts:
jurisdiction over the case and take into account or
apply the law of some other State or States. Cadalin and 1,767 (originally 728) other overseas
contract workers instituted a class suit with the
The court’s power to hear cases and controversies Philippine Overseas Employment Administration
is derived from the Constitution and the laws. (POEA) for money claims from their recruitment by
While it may choose to recognize laws of foreign AIBC and employment by BRII. (AIBC and BRII
nations, the court is not limited by foreign respondents)
sovereign law short of treaties or other formal
agreements, even in matters regarding rights BRII is a foreign corporation based in Houston,
provided by foreign sovereigns. Texas engaged in the business of construction;
while AIBC is a domestic corporation licensed as a
Neither can the other ground raised, forum non service contractor to recruit, mobilize, and deploy
conveniens, be used to deprive the RTC of its Filipino workers for overseas employment on
jurisdiction. behalf of its foreign principals.
First, it is not a proper basis for a motion to dismiss The complaint sought for the payment of the:
because Sec. 1, Rule 16 of the Rules of Court does
not include it as a ground. Second, whether a suit  Unexpired portion of the employment
should be entertained or dismissed on the basis of contracts, which was prematurely
the said doctrine depends largely upon the facts of terminated;
the particular case and is addressed to the sound
discretion of the RTC. In this case, the RTC decided  Payment of interest of the earnings of the
to assume jurisdiction. Third, the propriety of Travel and Reserved Fund;
dismissing a case based on this principle requires a
factual determination; hence, this conflicts  interest on all unpaid benefits such as area
principle is more properly considered a matter of wage and salary differential pay;
defense.
 Fringe benefits;
Cadalin vs. POEA,
G.R. No. 104776, December 5, 1994  Refund of SSS premiums;
(taas pa kesa sa ako height ang kaso, so, issues and  Refund of withholding tax; and
facts relevant to conflict ra ang gibutang, mostly
procedural ang facts [civ pro] so advice nako basaha  Penalties for committing prohibited
nalang full text, daghan man mog time, so if mag ask practices.
si torney og sikot2 ma slay gyapon ninyo, make this
as your guide nala, okay?!) TL;DR facts
Principle: *This case actually involves, claim of workers
working in different parts of the world. But the main
As a general rule, a foreign procedural law will not focus in the case are those workers working in
be applied in the forum. This is true even if the Bahrain covered under the Amiri Decree. The
action is based upon a foreign substantive law.
Prescription laws are sui generis that it may be

Read the Full Text
EH401
respondents, urged that the claims had already The NLRC disagreed with the POEA that the 3 year
prescribed. prescriptive period applies only to money claims
recoverable under the Labor Code as the law gives
POEA Ruling no such indication. The cause of action cannot be
said that it was a violation of the employment
POEA Administrator rendered a decision in favor of contract. The 1 year prescriptive period cannot
only 324 claimants. POEA opined that Article 291 apply because it is a procedural statute. The
of the Labor Code applies when the claims arise procedural law of the forum shall apply.
from the employer’s violation of the employee’s
right provided in the said code. What was violated The NLRC dismissed 94 claims for having
was the Amiri Decree, which amended the workers' prescribed and ordered respondents to pay the 149
contracts. Respondents failed to follow the said complainants for their claims. 19 were set aside as
decree. Hence the 10 year prescriptive period of they were not working in Bahrain, and all other
the Civil Code will apply. claims were dismissed for lack of substantial
evidence.
Claimants filed in the NLRC a Manifestational
Motion praying that all the 1,767 claimants be Arguments of Each Party by Petition:
awarded with their money claims for failure of
private respondents to file their answers. G.R. No. 104776 and 104911-14
NLRC Ruling: Claimants contended that NLRC gravely abused its

discretion in applying the 3 year prescriptive
The NLRC rendered a decision on these following period under the Labor Code, and not the 10 year
issues (relevant lang): prescriptive period under the Civil Code. (no
justification was given).
Whether or not complainants are entitled to the
benefits of the Amiri Decree No. 23 of Bahrain. Respondents countered that the Labor Code as a
special law prevails over the Civil Code, a general
Yes it should form part of the overseas employment law, so the 3 year period applies.
contract of the complainants since it is more
favorable to them. However the decree only applies G.R. No. 105029-32
to workers stationed in Bahrain.
Respondents contended that the employment
Whether or not the claims under the Amiri Decree contracts will be enforced not the Amiri Decree.
No. 23 of Bahrain have prescribed. However, assuming the Amiri Decree applies, the
one year period to claim had already lapsed. To
The NLRC ruled that the prescriptive period for filing bolster this argument, there is in force in the
the claim was 3 years under Article 291 of the Labor Philippines a “borrowing statute”.
Code, and not 10 years under Article 1144 of the Civil
Code nor 1 year under the Amiri Decree. Issue:
Whether or not the case qualifies as a class suit. Whether or not the law on prescription of Bahrain
law based on the Amiri Decree No. 23 of 1976 will
The NLRC ruled that it does not qualify as a class suit apply.
as not all the complainants worked in Bahrain and
therefore, not a subject matter of the action; it is not Ruling:
of common or general interest to all the
complainants. The law of Bahrain will not apply as it contravenes
public policy
It also ruled that BRII and AIBC are solidarily liable
for the claims as BRII was the actual employer and No. As a general rule, a foreign procedural law will
AIBC as the labor contractor. Moreover, not be applied in the forum. This is true even if the
jurisdiction over BRII was acquired by the POEA action is based upon a foreign substantive law.
through the summons served on AIBC’s local agent. Prescription laws are sui generis that it may be

Read the Full Text
EH401
procedural or substantive, depending on the party making the ambiguity shall not be favored;
characterization. and besides contracts of adhesion are construed
against the one making it. So the Supreme COurt
The characterization becomes irrelevant when the interpreted it against respondents so the workers
country of the forum has a “borrowing statute”. benefited from the law with the higher benefits.
This statute directs the state of the forum to apply
the foreign statute of limitations to the pending The ambiguous stipulation:
claims based on a foreign law.
“....total remuneration and benefits do not fall below
One form provides that an action barred by the that of the host country regulation or custom, it
laws of the place where it accrued, will not be being understood that should applicable laws
enforced in the forum even though the local statute establish that fringe benefits, or other such benefits
has not run against it. If by the laws of the state or additional to the compensation herein agreed
country where the cause of action arose, the action cannot be waived, Employee agrees that such
is barred, it is also barred in the Philippines. compensation will be adjusted downward so that the
total compensation hereunder, plus the non-
However, the courts of the forum will not enforce waivable benefits shall be equivalent to the
any foreign claim if it contravenes public policy. To compensation herein agreed"
enforce the 1 year claim would contravene the
public policy on the protection of labor. No class suit
The 3 years prescriptive period under the Labor Code A class suit is proper where the subject matter of
applies the controversy is one of common or general
interest to many and the parties are so numerous
The claim is the cases at bench all arose from the that it is impracticable to bring them all before the
employer-employee relations, which is broader in court.
scope than claims arising from a specific law or
from the collective bargaining agreement. (If CBA - In the present case there were workers who were
Civil Code; EE - Labor Code) not working in Bahrain, only those who were
working in Bahrain are entitled to file their claims
Side Discussion: in a class suit. However, It appears that each
claimant is only interested in collecting his own
NLRC correctly applied the greater benefits of the claims. A
Amiri Decree No. 23 of 1976. (There was an claimants has no concern in protecting the
argument by the respondents that benefits under the interests of the other claimants as shown by the
employment contract should be enforced) fact that hundreds of them have abandoned their
co-claimants and have entered into separate
The overseas-employment contracts, which were compromise settlements of their respective claims.
prepared by AIBC and BRII themselves, provided
that the laws of the host country became applicable A principle basic to the concept of "class suit" is that
to said contracts if they offer terms and conditions plaintiffs brought on the record must fairly
more favorable that those stipulated therein. The represent and protect the interests of the others.
overseas-employment contracts in question as
adopting the provisions of the Amiri Decree No. 23 Bank of America, NT and SA vs. American
of 1976 as part and parcel thereof. Realty Corp. & CA
G.R. No. 133876, Dec. 29, 1999
By such reference to the provisions of the foreign
law, the contract does not become a foreign PRINCIPLE:
contract to be governed by the foreign law. The said
law does not operate as a statute but as a set of When the foreign law, judgment, or contract, even if
contractual terms deemed written in the contract. applicable pursuant to the COL rules, is contrary to a
sound and established public policy of the forum, the
*This happened because there was an ambiguous said foreign law, judgment or order shall not be
stipulation in the contract, and the said contract was applied.
a contract of adhesion. Basic in contracts that the

Read the Full Text
EH401
FACTS:
The rule provides that a single cause of action may
Bank of America NT & SA (BANTSA) is an allow a party to resort to two or more remedies but
international banking and financing institution because there is only one cause of action, the resort
duly licensed to do business in the Philippines, to these remedies should be on an alternative basis
organized and existing under and by virtue of the and not cumulative. If the party avails of one
laws of the State of California, while respondent remedy arising from one single cause of action, he
American Realty Corporation (ARC) is a is deemed to have abandoned the other remedies.
domestic corporation.
The bank argued that in all the loan contracts
Bank of America International Limited (BAIL), between the bank and the borrowers, it is
on the other hand, is a limited liability company stipulated that any dispute that may arise out of the
organized and existing under the laws of England. transaction should be governed by the laws of
England. Under English law, splitting a single
BANTSA and BAIL on several occasions granted cause of action is not prohibited and thus the
three major multi-million US Dollar loans to three creditor may resort to both remedies: to file an
corporate borrowers, all of which are existing action for collection and, at the same time, enforce
under and by virtue of the laws of the Republic of the security.
Panama and are foreign affiliates of private
respondent. Additionally, petitioner submits that a waiver of
the remedy of foreclosure requires the
Due to the default in the payment of the loan concurrence of two requisites: an ordinary civil
amortizations, BANTSA and the corporate action for collection should be filed and
borrowers signed and entered into restructuring subsequently a final judgment be correspondingly
agreements. As additional security for the rendered therein.
restructured loans, private respondent ARC as
third party mortgagor executed two real estate After trial, the lower court rendered a decision
mortgages over its parcels of land including declaring that the filing in foreign courts by the
improvements in Bulacan. bank of collection suits against the principal
debtors operated as a waiver of the security of the
Even with the restructuring agreement, the 3 mortgages.
corporate borrowers still failed to pay which
prompted petitioner BANTSA to file civil actions for The CA affirmed the assailed decision of the lower
the collection of the principal loan before foreign court.
courts in England and Hong Kong. ARC, being a
third party mortgagor, was not impleaded as party- ISSUE:
defendant.
WON the requisites of filing the action for collection
Petitioner BANTSA also filed before the Office of and rendition of final judgment should concur?
the Provincial Sheriff of Bulacan an application for
extrajudicial foreclosure of real estate mortgage WON the foreign law (English Law ITCAB) should
despite the pendency of the collection suit. The be applied. (related to the topic)
mortgaged real properties were then sold at public
auction in an extrajudicial foreclosure sale with RULING:
Integrated Credit and Corporation Services. Co
(ICCS) as the highest bidder. 1. No. In our jurisdiction, the remedies available to
the mortgage creditor are deemed alternative and
Because of the action of the petitioner, ARC not cumulative. An election of one remedy operates
instituted an action for damages, alleging that it as a waiver of the other.
was illegal for the Bank of America to still foreclose
the mortgage when it already decided to collect Accordingly, petitioner, by the expediency of filing
the unpaid loan by filing a collection suit before four civil suits before foreign courts, necessarily
the courts in England and Hongkong, invoking the abandoned the remedy to foreclose the real estate
rule enforced in the Philippines which prohibits mortgages constituted over the properties of third-
the splitting of a single cause of action.

Read the Full Text
EH401
party mortgagor and herein private respondent By filing the four civil actions and by eventually
ARC. foreclosing extra-judicially the mortgages,
petitioner in effect transgressed the rules against
Incidentally, BANTSA alleges that under English splitting a cause of action well enshrined in
Law, which according to petitioner is the governing jurisprudence and our statute books. Clearly then,
law with regard to the principal agreements, the English Law is not applicable.
mortgagee does not lose its security interest by
simply filing civil actions for sums of money.
DEL SOCORRO VS. VAN WILSEM
2. NO. The Philippine law shall be applied GR. NO. 193707, DECEMBER 10, 2014
notwithstanding the evidence presented by
petitioner to prove the English law on the matter. Principles:
A foreign law must be properly pleaded and proved 1. Family rights and duties are governed by the
as a fact. Thus, if the foreign law involved is not national law of the person.
properly pleaded and proved, our courts will 2. GR: Foreign laws in order to be applicable,
presume that the foreign law is the same as our should be properly pleaded and proven in our
local or domestic or internal law. This is what we courts.
refer to as the doctrine of processual Exc: Even if properly pleaded and proven, if foreign
presumption. laws are contrary to public policy of the forum, the
same should not be applied.
Assuming arguendo that the English Law on the 3. Doctrine of Processual Presumption
matter were properly pleaded and proved in
accordance with Section 24, Rule 132 of the Rules Facts:
of Court and the jurisprudence, said foreign law
would still not find applicability for being Petitioner (woman) and respondent (ex-husband)
contrary to a sound and established public were married in Holland on September 25, 1990.
policy of the forum. Petitioner gave birth to their son who was a minor
upon filing of the case against respondent.
Additionally, prohibitive laws concerning persons, Eventually, their marriage bond ended on July 19,
their acts or property, and those which have for 1995 by virtue of a Divorce Decree issued by the
their object public order, public policy and good appropriate Court of Holland. Petitioner together
customs shall not be rendered ineffective by laws with her son returned to Cebu City. According to
or judgments promulgated, or by determinations the petitioner, respondent made a promise to
or conventions agreed upon in a foreign country. provide support to their son in the amount of
17,500 pesos monthly. However, respondent failed
The public policy sought to be protected in the to keep his promise. Upon finding out that
instant case is the principle imbedded in our respondent got married in Cebu City, petitioner
jurisdiction proscribing the splitting up of a single filed a case against respondent under the
cause of action. Section 4, Rule 2 of the 1997 provisions of RA 9262 (VAWC) for the latter’s
Rules of Civil Procedure provides: "If two or more unjust refusal to provide support in favor of their
suits are instituted on the basis of the same cause of son. Petitioner contends that under Article 195 of
action, the filing of one or a judgment upon the the Family Code, respondent is obliged to support
merits in any one is available as a ground for the his son.
dismissal of the others." (splitting of a single cause
of action) Decision of Trial Court:
Moreover, foreign law should not be applied when The trial court then dismissed the case on the
its application would work undeniable injustice to ground that the information filed against did not
the citizens or residents of the forum. To give constitute an offense on the ground that he is an
justice is the most important function of law; hence, alien.
a law, or judgment or contract that is obviously
unjust negates the fundamental principles of Trial Court on denying the MR:
Conflict of Laws.

Read the Full Text
EH401
Reiterates its ruling that since the accused is a same as our local or domestic or internal law. As
foreign national he is not subject to our national such, it is now presumed that the laws of the
law (The Family Code) in regard to a parent's duty foreign country are the same as that of our laws and
and obligation to give support to his child. therefore respondent is obliged to provide support
to his minor son.
*CA not involved because issue involves pure
question of law. Further, even if respondent successfully pleaded
and proved foreign laws which do not obliged him
Respondent’s Arguments: to provide support to his son, such should not be
applied. According to our laws, when the foreign
no sufficient and clear basis presented by law, judgment or contract is contrary to a sound
petitioner that she, as well as her minor son, are and established public policy of the forum, the said
entitled to financial support. He added that by foreign law, judgment or order shall not be applied.
reason of the Divorce Decree, he is not obligated to Moreover, foreign law should not be applied when
petitioner for any financial support its application would work undeniable injustice to
the citizens or residents of the forum. To give
Issue: justice is the most important function of law; hence,
a law, or judgment or contract that is obviously
WON an alien is obliged to support his minor child? unjust negates the fundamental principles of
Conflict of Laws.
Ruling:
Additional notes:
Yes. Respondent is obliged to support his minor
child under Philippine Law. -Respondent can be held liable under RA 9262
applying territoriality principle of criminal law
Petitioner however is mistaken in relying Article which applies to all persons living and sojourning
195 of the Family Code in demanding support from in the Philippines.
respondent since Article 15 of the Civil Code -Prescription does not apply since in the case at bar
stresses the principle of Nationality. The obligation failure to provide support is a continuing crime.
to provide support is a part of Family rights and -Respondent is liable only for support of the child,
duties. As such, with respect to the provisions of not his ex-wife.
the Family Code, it only applies to Filipino Citizens.
With respect to the respondent, the law that EDI-STAFFBUILDERS vs NLRC
applies to him would be the laws of his country GR. NO. 136804, FEBRUARY 19, 2013
with respect to family rights and duties. This does
not conclude however that respondent is not FACTS:
obliged to support his son.
Petitioner EDI, a recruitment and placement
In international law, the party who wants to have a agency, upon request of Omar Ahmed Ali Bin Bechr
foreign law applied to a dispute or case has the (OAB), a company in Saudi Arabia, sent to the latter
burden of proving the foreign law. As such, CVs from which OAB can choose a computer
respondent has the burden in proving that the laws specialist. Eleazar Gran was selected.
of his country do not oblige him to support his son.
In this case, respondent only pleaded the laws of Gran signed an employment contract that granted
his country (Holland) but failed to prove the same. him a monthly salary of USD 850.00 for a period of
Further, the courts do not take judicial notices of two years. He was then deployed to Riyadh. But 5
the laws of a foreign country. The alien alleging the months into his service, Gran received a
same has the burden of proving it. termination letter with the grounds mentioned
therefor:
Since respondent failed to prove the laws of his 1. Non-compliance to contract requirements by the
country which do not oblige him to provide recruitment agency primarily on your salary and
support. The doctrine of processual presumption contract duration.
shall be applied. Under this doctrine, if the foreign 2. Non-compliance to pre-qualification
law involved is not properly pleaded and proved, requirements by the recruitment agency
our courts will presume that the foreign law is the

Read the Full Text
EH401
3. Insubordination or disobedience to Top intended by the parties (lex loci intentiones) to

Management Order and/or instructions (non- apply to the contract, Saudi Labor Laws should
submittal of daily activity reports despite several govern all matters relating to the termination of the
instructions). employment of Gran.
Gran filed a complaint for underpayment of
wages/salaries and illegal dismissal. In international law, the party who wants to
have a foreign law applied to a dispute or case
LA: Dismissed complaint. Gran (1) did not submit has the burden of proving the foreign law. The
a single activity report of his daily activity as foreign law is treated as a question of fact to be
dictated by company policy; (2) not qualified for properly pleaded and proved as the judge or
the job as computer specialist due to his labor arbiter cannot take judicial notice of a
insufficient knowledge in programming and lack of foreign law. He is presumed to know only
knowledge in ACAD system; (3) refused to follow domestic or forum law.
management's instruction for him to gain more
knowledge of the job to prove his worth as Unfortunately for petitioner, it did not prove the
computer specialist. pertinent Saudi laws on the matter; thus, the
International Law doctrine of presumed-identity
NLRC: approach or processual presumption comes into
play. Where a foreign law is not pleaded or, even if
reversed the decision of LA. Gran was not afforded pleaded, is not proved, the presumption is that
the required notice and investigation of his foreign law is the same as ours. Thus, we apply
offenses. Philippine labor laws in determining the issues
presented before us.
CA:
MANUFACTURERS HANOVER TRUST CO. v
EDI failed to prove that private respondent was RAFAEL MA. GUERRERO
terminated for a valid cause and in accordance with G.R. 136804, February 19, 2003
due process; x x x no evidence was presented to
show how and why Gran was considered to be FACTS:
incompetent. The court held that since the law Respondent Guerrero filed a complaint for
requires the recruitment agencies to subject OFWs damages against petitioner Manufacturers
to trade tests before deployment, Gran must have Hanover Trust Co. and/or Chemical Bank (The
been competent and qualified; otherwise, he would Bank) with the RTC. Guerrero sought payment of
not have been hired and deployed abroad. damages allegedly for:
ISSUE:  Illegally withheld taxes charged against

interests on his checking account with The
W/N Gran's dismissal is justifiable by reason of Bank;
incompetence, insubordination, and disobedience
 Returned check due to signature
HELD: verification problems; and
NO, SC applied PH labor laws. In cases involving  Unauthorized conversion of his account.
OFWs, the rights and obligations among and
between the OFW, the local recruiter/agent, and The Bank in its answer alleged that by stipulation,
the foreign employer/principal are governed by Guerrero’s account is governed by New York law
the employment contract. A contract freely entered and this law does not permit any of Guerrero’s
into is considered law between the parties; and claim except of actual damages. Thus, a Motion for
hence, should be respected. x x x Partial Summary Judgment was filed seeking the
dismissal of Guerrero’s claims and that trial should
In the present case, the employment contract be limited to the issue of actual damages. The
signed by Gran specifically states that Saudi Labor affidavit of Alyssa Walden, a New York attorney
Laws will govern matters not provided for in the supported the the Bank’s motion. The Walden
contract (e.g. specific causes for termination, Affidavit stated that Guerrero’s New York bank
termination procedures, etc.). Being the law account stipulated that the governing law is New

Read the Full Text
EH401
York Law and that this law bars all of his claims do not prove themselves in our courts. Foreign
except actual damages. Guerrero opposed said laws are not a matter of judicial notice. Like any
motion. other fact, they must be alleged and proven.
Certainly, the conflicting allegations as to whether
The RTC denied the Motion for Partial Summary New York law or Philippine law applies to
Judgment. Guerrero's claims present a clear dispute on
material allegations which can be resolved only by
The CA sustained the RTC orders denying the a trial on the merits.|||
motion. The Walden Affidavit does not serve as proof
of the New York law and Jurisprudence. It is Certain exceptions to Rule 24 of Rule 132 were
considered as a public document under Section 19, recognized in Asiavest Limited v. Court of Appeals.
Rule 132 of Rules of Evidence and thus, procedure The Bank, however, cannot rely thereon to support
outlined in section 24, Rule 132 should be followed its cause. These cases involved attorneys testifying
in proving foreign law. in open court during the trial in the Philippines and
quoting the particular foreign laws sought to be
ISSUE/S: established. On the other hand, the Walden
affidavit was taken abroad ex parte and the affiant
WON the Walden Affidavit was sufficient proof of never testified in open court. The Walden affidavit
the New York law and jurisprudence for the Motion cannot be considered as proof of New York law on
for Partial Summary Judgment be granted. damages not only because it is self-serving but also
because it does not state the specific New York law
WON Guerrero admitted the averments in the on damages.|||
Bank's motion for partial summary judgment and
the Walden affidavit for failure to submit an The Walden affidavit states conclusions from the
opposing affidavit. affiant's personal interpretation and opinion of the
facts of the case vis a vis the alleged laws and
RULING: jurisprudence without citing any law in particular.
The citations in the Walden affidavit of various U.S.
No. The Walden Affidavit failed to prove New York court decisions do not constitute proof of the
law and jurisprudence. ||| official records or decisions of the U.S. courts. While
the Bank attached copies of some of the U.S. court
In a motion for summary judgment, the crucial decisions cited in the Walden affidavit, these copies
question is: are the issues raised in the do not comply with Section 24 of Rule 132 on proof
pleadings genuine, sham or fictitious, as shown of official records or decisions of foreign courts.|||
by affidavits, depositions or admissions
accompanying the motion?|| The Bank makes much of Guerrero's failure to
submit an opposing affidavit to the Walden
Petitioner's motion for summary judgment is not affidavit. However, the pertinent provision of
proper as it does not demonstrate that Section 3, Rule 35 of the old Rules of Court did not
respondent's claims are sham, fictitious, or make the submission of an opposing affidavit
contrived. There can be no summary judgment mandatory.
where material allegations of the pleadings are in
dispute and can be resolved only by trial on the Guerrero cannot be said to have admitted the
merits. On the alleged foreign law applicable, the averments in the Bank's motion for partial
Walden affidavit and attached US court decisions summary judgment and the Walden affidavit just
therein are not proper substantiation thereof for because he failed to file an opposing affidavit.
failure to comply with Sec. 24, Rule 132 on proof of Guerrero opposed the motion for partial summary
foreign laws, records, and decisions.||| judgment, although he did not present an opposing
affidavit. Guerrero did not admit, expressly or
There can be no summary judgment where impliedly, the veracity of the statements in the
questions of fact are in issue or where material Walden affidavit. The Bank still had the burden of
allegations of the pleadings are in dispute. The proving New York law and jurisprudence even if
resolution of whether a foreign law allows only the Guerrero did not present an opposing affidavit. As
recovery of actual damages is a question of fact as the party moving for summary judgment, the Bank
far as the trial court is concerned since foreign laws has the burden of clearly demonstrating the

Read the Full Text
EH401
absence of any genuine issue of fact and that any The Court of Appeals agreed with the trial court
doubt as to the existence of such issue is resolved that matters of remedy and procedure such as
against the movant. ||| those relating to service of summons upon the
defendant are governed by the lex fori, which was,
ASIAVEST LIMITED vs. THE COURT OF in this case, the law of Hong Kong.
APPEALS
G.R. No. 128803, September 25, 1998 It then stressed that where the action is in
personam and the defendant is in the Philippines,
FACTS: the summons should be personally served on the
defendant. Heras was physically present in Hong
Plaintiff Asiavest Limited filed a complaint against Kong for nearly 14 years. There was not even an
the defendant Antonio Heras praying that he be attempt to serve summons on HERAS therein, thus,
ordered to pay to the plaintiff the amounts the Hong Kong Supreme Court did not acquire
awarded by the Hong Kong Court Judgment. The jurisdiction over his person.
action filed in Hong Kong against Heras was in
personam, since it was based on his personal ISSUE:
guarantee of the obligation of the principal debtor.
At the pre-trial conference, the parties agreed on WON Hong Kong acquired jurisdiction over the
the following stipulations of facts: person of Heras.
1. The defendant admits the existence of the WON the Hong Kong Court Judgment is enforceable
judgment dated December 28, 1984 as well as its in the Philippines.
amendment dated April 13, 1987, but not
necessarily the authenticity or validity thereof; RULING:
2. The plaintiff is not doing business and is not No.

licensed to do business in the Philippines;
During the trial, Mr. Lousich was presented as an
3. The residence of defendant, Antonio Heras, is expert on the laws of Hong Kong, and as a
New Manila, Quezon City. representative of the law office of the defendant's
counsel who made a verification of the record of
The trial court held that since the Hong Kong court the case filed by the plaintiff in Hong Kong against
judgment had been duly proved, it is a presumptive the defendant as well as the procedure in serving
evidence of a right as between the parties. Hence, Court processes in Hong Kong. He testified that the
the party impugning it had the burden to prove Hong Kong court authorized service of summons
want of jurisdiction over his person. HERAS failed on HERAS outside of its jurisdiction, particularly in
to discharge that burden. He did not testify to state the Philippines. He also declared that such service
categorically and under oath that he never received of summons would be valid under Hong Kong laws
summons. The Hong Kong court judgment should provided that it was in accordance with Philippine
be recognized and given effect in this jurisdiction laws.
for failure of HERAS to overcome the legal
presumption in favor of the foreign judgment. Jurisprudence provides that testimony of an expert
witness may be allowed to prove a foreign law.
Heras appealed the decision to the CA. However, nothing in the testimony of Mr. Lousich
touched on the specific law of Hong Kong in respect
The CA rendered its decision reversing the decision of service of summons either in actions in rem or in
of the trial court and dismissing ASIAVEST's personam, and where the defendant is either a
complaint without prejudice. It underscored the resident or nonresident of Hong Kong. In view of
fact that a foreign judgment does not of itself have the absence of proof of the Hong Kong law on this
any extraterritorial application. For it to be given particular issue, the presumption of identity or
effect, the foreign tribunal should have acquired similarity or the so-called processual presumption
jurisdiction over the person and the subject matter. shall come into play. It will thus be presumed that
If such tribunal has not acquired jurisdiction, its the Hong Kong law on the matter is similar to the
judgment is void. Philippine law.

Read the Full Text
EH401
In an action in personam, jurisdiction over the

person of the defendant is necessary for the court
to validly try and decide the case. Significantly, in
the pre-trial conference, the parties came up with
stipulations of facts, among which was that "the
residence of defendant, Antonio Heras, is New
Manila, Quezon City."|||
With that stipulation of fact, ASIAVEST cannot now

claim that HERAS was a resident of Hong Kong at
the time. The summons should have been
personally served on him in Hong Kong. The
extraterritorial service in the Philippines was
therefore invalid and did not confer on the Hong
Kong court jurisdiction over his person. It follows
that the Hong Kong court judgment cannot be given
force and effect here in the Philippines for having
been rendered without jurisdiction.
No.
Under paragraph (b) of Section 50, Rule 39 of the

Rules of Court, which was the governing law at the
time this case was decided by the trial court and
respondent Court of Appeals, a foreign judgment
against a person rendered by a court having
jurisdiction to pronounce the judgment is
presumptive evidence of a right as between the
parties and their successors in interest by the
subsequent title. However, the judgment may be
repelled by evidence of want of jurisdiction, want
of notice to the party, collusion, fraud, or clear
mistake of law or fact.
The extraterritorial service in the Philippines was

therefore invalid and did not confer on the Hong
Kong court jurisdiction over his person. It follows
that the Hong Kong court judgment cannot be given
force and effect here in the Philippines for having
been rendered without jurisdiction. On the same
note, Heras was also an absentee, hence, he should
have been served with summons in the same
manner as a non-resident not found in Hong Kong.
Section 17, Rule 14 of the Rules of Court providing
for extraterritorial service will not apply because
the suit against him was in personam. Neither can
we apply Section 18, which allows extraterritorial
service on a resident defendant who is temporarily
absent from the country, because even if Heras be
considered as a resident of Hong Kong, the
undisputed fact remains that he left Hong Kong not
only temporarily but for good.

Read the Full Text
EH401
Alice Van Dorn v. Hon. Romillo and Richard

Upton Whether the complaint should be dismissed due to
G.R. No. L-68470, October 8, 1985 the effect of foreign divorce on the parties?
FACTS: RULING:
Petitioner Alice Reyes Van Dorn (Alice) is a citizen Yes, the court ruled in favor of Alice.
of the Philippines while private respondent
Richard Upton (Richard) is a citizen of the United It is true that owing to the nationality principle
States. They were married in Hongkong. After the embodied in Article 15 of the Civil Code, Philippine
marriage, they established their residence in the nationals are covered by the policy against
Philippines that they begot two children. absolute divorces the same being considered
Eventually, the parties divorced in Nevada, United contrary to our concept of public policy and
States on the ground of incompatibility in morality. However, aliens may obtain divorces
understanding. Then, Alice has re-married also in abroad, which may be recognized in the
Nevada, this time to Theodore Van Dorn. Philippines, provided they are valid according to
their national law. In this case, the divorce in
Richard filed suit against petitioner in Civil Case Nevada released private respondent from the
stating that Alice’s business in Ermita, Manila, (the marriage from the standards of American law,
Galleon Shop) is conjugal property of the parties, under which divorce dissolves the marriage.
and asking that Alice be ordered to render an
accounting of that business, and that Richard be Thus, pursuant to his national law, Richard is no
declared with right to manage the conjugal longer the husband of Alice. He would have no
property. standing to sue in the case as petitioner's
husband entitled to exercise control over conjugal
Alice moved to dismiss the case on the ground that assets. As he is bound by the Decision of his own
the cause of action is barred by previous country's Court, which validly exercised
judgment in the divorce proceedings before the jurisdiction over him, and whose decision he does
Nevada Court wherein respondent had not repudiate, he is estopped by his own
acknowledged that he and petitioner had "no representation before said Court from asserting his
community property.” right over the alleged conjugal property.
The RTC denied the Motion to Dismiss on the To maintain, as private respondent does, that,
ground that the property involved is located in the under our laws, petitioner has to be considered still
Philippines so that the Divorce Decree has no married to private respondent and still subject to a
bearing in the case. wife's obligations under Article 109, et. seq. of the
Civil Code cannot be just. Alice should not be
Alice’s Arguments: obliged to live together with, observe respect and
fidelity, and render support to Richard. The latter
1. Richard is estopped from laying claim on should not continue to be one of her heirs with
the alleged conjugal property because of the possible rights to conjugal property. She should not
representation he made in the divorce be discriminated against in her own country if the
proceedings before the American Court that ends of justice are to be served.
they had no community of property.
2. The Galleon Shop was not established Note: Alice initiated the divorce in Nevada.
through conjugal funds; and that Richard's
claim is barred by prior judgment. Pilapil v. Judge Ibay-Somera
G.R. No. 80116, June 30, 1989
Richard’s Contention:
FACTS:
The divorce is not valid and binding in this
jurisdiction, the same being contrary to local law Petitioner Imelda Manalaysay Pilapil, a Filipino
and public policy. citizen, and private respondent Erich Ekkehard
Geiling, a German national, were married before
Issue: the Registrar of Births, Marriages and Deaths at

Read the Full Text
EH401
Friedensweiler in the Federal Republic of Germany.

The couple lived together for some time in Malate, NO. The law specifically provides that in
Manila where their only child, Isabella Pilapil prosecutions for adultery and concubinage the
Geiling, was born on April 20, 1980. person who can legally file the complaint should be
the offended spouse, and nobody else. Corollary to
Thereafter, marital discord set in followed by a such exclusive grant of power to the offended
separation de facto between them. After about spouse to institute the action, it necessarily follows
three and a half years of marriage, Geiling initiated that such initiator must have the status, capacity or
a divorce proceeding against Pilapil in Germany legal representation to do so at the time of the filing
before the Schoneberg Local Court in January 1983. of the criminal action.
He claimed that there was failure of their marriage In the present case, the fact that Geiling obtained a
and that they had been living apart since April valid divorce in his country, the Federal Republic of
1982. Germany, is admitted. Said divorce and its legal
effects may be recognized in the Philippines insofar
On January 15, 1986, Division 20 of the Schoneberg as Geiling is concerned in view of the nationality
Local Court, Federal Republic of Germany, principle in our civil law on the matter of status of
promulgated a decree of divorce on the ground of persons.
failure of marriage of the spouses. The custody of
the child was granted to Pilapil Under the same considerations and rationale,
Geiling, being no longer the husband of Pilapil, had
The records show that under German law said no legal standing to commence the adultery case
court was locally and internationally competent for under the imposture that he was the offended
the divorce proceeding and that the dissolution of spouse at the time he filed suit
said marriage was legally founded on and
authorized by the applicable law of that foreign The allegation of Geiling that he could not have
jurisdiction. brought this case before the decree of divorce for
lack of knowledge, even if true, is of no legal
On June 27, 1986, or more than five months after significance or consequence in this case. When said
the issuance of the divorce decree, Geiling filed two Geiling initiated the divorce proceeding, he
complaints for adultery before the City Fiscal of obviously knew that there would no longer be a
Manila alleging that, while still married to said family nor marriage vows to protect once a
Geiling, Pilapil "had an affair with a certain William dissolution of the marriage is decreed. Neither
Chia as early as 1982 and with yet another man would there be a danger of introducing spurious
named Jesus Chua sometime in 1983". The heirs into the family, which is said to be one of the
complaints were filed accordingly. reasons for the particular formulation of our law on
adultery.
Pilapil filed this special civil action for certiorari
and prohibition seeking the annulment of the order OTHER DISCUSSIONS:
of the lower court denying her motion to quash.
The petition is anchored on the main ground that American jurisprudence, on cases involving
the court is without jurisdiction "to try and decide statutes in that jurisdiction which are in pari
the charge of adultery, which is a private offense materia with ours, yields the rule that after a
that cannot be prosecuted de officio (sic), since the divorce has been decreed, the innocent spouse no
purported complainant, a foreigner, does not longer has the right to institute proceedings
qualify as an offended spouse having obtained a against the offenders where the statute provides
final divorce decree under his national law prior to that the innocent spouse shall have the exclusive
his filing the criminal complaint." right to institute a prosecution for adultery
ISSUE: United States vs. Mata cannot be successfully relied

upon by private respondent. In applying Article
Whether or not respondent Geiling can prosecute 433 of the old Penal Code, substantially the same as
petitioner Pilapil for adultery after the issuance of Article 333 of the Revised Penal Code, which
the divorce in Germany punished adultery "although the marriage be
afterwards declared void", the Court merely stated
RULING: that "the lawmakers intended to declare

Read the Full Text
EH401
adulterous the infidelity of a married woman to her

marital vows, even though it should be made to Whether or not the divorce decree rendered by the
appear that she is entitled to have her marriage Japanese Court, which was applied by Manalo is
contract declared null and void, until and unless valid and recognized here in the Philippines.
she actually secures a formal judicial declaration to
that effect" RULING:
Republic vs. Manalo YES.

G.R. No. 221029, April 24, 2018
Article 26, paragraph 2 of the Family Code only
Super landmark na case. Nindot ni siya e full text requires that there be a divorce validly obtained
actually per kindda lengthy. abroad
FACTS: Art. 26. All marriages solemnized outside the

Philippines, in accordance with the laws in force in
Marelyn Manalo, filed a petition for cancellation of the country where they were solemnized, and valid
entry of marriage, by virtue of a judgment of there as such, shall also be valid in this country,
divorce rendered by a Japanese court. Manalo was except those prohibited under Articles 35 (1), (4), (5)
married to Yoshino Minoro, a case for divorce was and (6), 3637 and 38. (17a)
filed by her in Japan and a divorce decree was
rendered by the Japanese Court. Where a marriage between a Filipino citizen and
a foreigner is validly celebrated and a divorce is
At present, they are no longer living together. She thereafter validly obtained abroad by the alien
filed a petition to cancel their entry of marriage in spouse capacitating him or her to remarry, the
order that it would not appear anymore that Filipino spouse shall have capacity to remarry
petitioner is still married to the said Japanese under Philippine law.
national who is no longer her husband or is no
longer married to her; furthermore, in the event Based on a clear and plain reading of the provision,
that petitioner decides to be remarried, she shall it only requires that there be a divorce validly
not be bothered and disturbed by said entry of obtained abroad. The law does not require that the
marriage, and she be allowed to use her maiden alien spouse should be the one to initiate the
surname, MANALO. divorce. It does not distinguish whether the
Filipino spouse is the petitioner or the respondent.
RULING OF THE TRIAL COURT: The court is bound by the words of the statute;
neither can the courts put words in the mouth of
The trial court denied the petition, and ruled that the lawmakers. The legislature is presumed to
the divorce obtained abroad should not be know the meaning of the words, to have used
recognized, as Art. 15 of the New Civil Code, does words advisedly, and to have expressed its intent
not afford Filipinos the right to file for a divorce, by the use of such words as are found in the statute.
unless they are naturalized as citizens of another Verba legis non est recedendum, or from the words
country. of a statute there should be no departure.
RULING OF THE COURT OF APPEALS: The subject provision should not make any
distinction.
The Court of Appeals overturned the decision, and
held that Art. 26 of the Family Code is applicable The purpose of the provision is to avoid the absurd
even if it was Manalo who initiated the divorce situation where the Filipino spouse remains
against her Japanese husband. It ruled that the married to an alien spouse, who after a foreign
meaning of the law should be based on the intent of decree that is effective in the country where it was
the lawmakers and in view of the legislative intent married, is no longer married. It is a corrective
behind Article 26, it would be the height of injustice measure to address an anomaly where the Filipino
to consider Manalo as still married to the Japanese spouse is tied to the marriage while the foreign
national, who, in turn, is no longer married to her. spouse is free to marry under the laws of his or her
country.
ISSUE:

Read the Full Text
EH401
A Filipino who initiated a foreign divorce he or she should be governed with whatever law he
proceeding is in the same place and in like or she chooses.
circumstance as a Filipino who is at the receiving
end of an alien initiated proceeding. Whether the Manalo must still prove the Japanese law allowing
Filipino spouse initiated the foreign divorce divorce
proceeding or not, a favorable decree dissolving
the marriage bond and capacitating his or her alien Jurisprudence has set guidelines before Philippine
spouse to remarry will have the same result: the courts recognize a foreign judgment relating to the
Filipino spouse will effectively be without a status of a marriage where one of the parties is a
husband or wife. citizen of a foreign country. Presentation solely of
the divorce decree will not suffice. The fact of
There is no real and substantial difference between divorce must still first be proven. A divorce
a Filipino who initiated a foreign divorce obtained abroad is proven by the divorce decree
proceedings and a Filipino who obtained a divorce itself. Indeed the best evidence of a judgment is the
decree upon the instance of the alien spouse. judgment itself. The decree purports to be a written
act or record of an act of an official body or tribunal
The provision violates one of the essential of a foreign country.
requisites of the equal protection clause.
Particularly, the limitation of the provision only to Under Sections 24 and 25 of Rule 132, on the other
a foreign divorce decree initiated by the alien hand, a writing or document may be proven as a
spouse is unreasonable as it is based on superficial, public or official record of a foreign country by
arbitrary, and whimsical classification. Blind either:
adherence to the nationality principle must be
disallowed if it would cause unjust discrimination (1) An official publication or
and oppression to certain classes of individuals (2) A copy thereof attested by the officer
whose rights are equally protected by law. having legal custody of the document. If
the record is not kept in the Philippines,
There is no real and substantial difference between such copy must be:
a Filipino who initiated a foreign divorce
proceedings and a Filipino who obtained a divorce (a) Accompanied by a certificate
decree upon the instance of his or her alien spouse. issued by the proper diplomatic
In the eyes of the Philippine and foreign laws, both or consular officer in the
are considered as Filipinos who have the same Philippine foreign service
rights and obligations in an alien land. stationed in the foreign country in
which the record is kept and
The circumstances surrounding them are alike.
Were it not for Paragraph 2 of Article 26, both are (b) Authenticated by the seal of
still married to their foreigner spouses who are no his office.
longer their wives/husbands. Hence, to make a
distinction between them based merely on the Presented by Manalo in the courts, were:
superficial difference of whether they initiated the
divorce proceedings or not is utterly unfair. Indeed, 1) Decision of the Japanese Court
the treatment gives undue favor to one and allowing the divorce;
unjustly discriminate against the other.
2) The Authentication/Certificate
Further, the differentiation in Paragraph 2 of issued by the Philippine
Article 26 is arbitrary. There is inequality in Consulate General in Osaka, Japan
treatment because a foreign divorce decree that of the Decree of Divorce; and
was initiated and obtained by a Filipino citizen
against his or her alien spouse would not be 3) Acceptance of Certificate of
recognized even if based on grounds similar to Divorce by Petitioner and the
Articles 35, 36, 37 and 38 of the Family Code. In Japanese national.
filing for divorce based on these grounds, the
Filipino spouse cannot be accused of invoking Even if the divorce decree was not denied by the
foreign law at whim, tantamount to insisting that OSG. It is well-settled in our jurisdiction that our

Read the Full Text
EH401
courts cannot take judicial notice of foreign laws. by pure lust or profit. The court also took judicial
Since the divorce was raised by Manalo, the burden notice of the fact that Filipinos are relatively more
of proving the pertinent Japanese law validating it, forbearing and conservative in nature and that
as well as her former husband's capacity to they are more often the victims or at the losing end
remarry, fall squarely upon her. Japanese laws on of mixed marriages. Finally, it is not for the court to
persons and family relations are not among those prejudge the motive behind a Filipino's decision to
matters that Filipino judges are supposed to know marry an alien national. @anisah
by reason of their judicial function.
Any attempt to regulate their lifestyle would go
Cases was remanded for Manalo to prove the said into the realm of their right to privacy and would
Japanese Law. raise serious constitutional questions. Love,
though the ideal consideration in a marriage
Pwede na mo mo stop here! contract, is not the only valid cause for marriage.
Other considerations, not precluded by law, may
Additional points raised: validly support a marriage.
The 1987 Constitution expresses that marriage, as Separation of the Church and State
an inviolable social institution, is the foundation of
the family and shall be protected by the State. None of our laws should be based on any religious
Nevertheless, it was not meant to be a general law, doctrine, or teaching; otherwise, the
prohibition on divorce as pointed out during the separation of Church and State will be violated. The
1986 Constitutional Commission deliberations. Roman Catholic Church can neither impose its
beliefs and convictions on the State and the rest of
The liberal interpretation of Paragraph 2 of Article the citizenry nor can it demand that the nation
26 does not encourage Filipinos to marry foreigners, follow its beliefs, even if it sincerely believes that
opening the flooodgate to the indiscriminate they are good for the country.
practice of Filipinos marrying foreign nationals or
initiating divorce proceedings against their alien The declared State policy that marriage, as an
spouses. inviolable social institution, is the foundation of the
family and shall be protected by the State, should not
Malipay daw ang mga katkat ani, pero ana SC be read in total isolation but must be harmonized
speculative ra daw ni kay walai factual basis gi with other constitutional provisions.
present. Lol so g lang mag tambay sa TGI or sa
Starbucks. Aside from strengthening the solidarity of the
Filipino family, the State is equally mandated to
The court adheres to the presumption of good faith actively promote its total development. It is also
in this jurisdiction. Under the rules on evidence, it obligated to defend, among others, the right of
is disputably presumed (i.e., satisfactory if children to special protection from all forms of
uncontradicted and overcome by other evidence) neglect, abuse, cruelty, exploitation, and other
that a person is innocent of crime or wrong, that a conditions prejudicial to their development.
person intends the ordinary consequences of his
voluntary acts, that a person takes ordinary care of It is recognized that not all marriages are made in
his concerns, that acquiescence resulted from a heaven and that imperfect humans more often than
belief that the thing acquiesced in was conformable not create imperfect unions. Living in a flawed
to the law and fact, that a man and woman world, the unfortunate reality for some is that the
deporting themselves as husband and wife have attainment of the individual's full human potential
entered into a lawful contract of marriage, and that and self-fulfillment is not found and achieved in the
the law has been obeyed. context of a marriage. Thus, it is hypocritical to
safeguard the quantity of existing marriages and, at
It is whimsical to easily attribute any illegal, the same time, brush aside the truth that some of
irregular or immoral conduct on the part of a them are of rotten quality.
Filipino just because he or she opted to marry a
foreigner instead of a fellow Filipino. It is presumed
that interracial unions are entered into out of
genuine love and affection, rather than prompted

Read the Full Text
EH401
Silverio vs. Republic Whether or not petitioner is entitled to the

GR No. 174689, October 19, 2007 relief asked for.
FACTS: RULING:
Petitioner Rommel Jacinto Dantes Silverio filed a No.

petition for the change of his first name and sex in
his birth certificate in the Regional Trial Court of A PERSON'S FIRST NAME CANNOT BE CHANGED ON
Manila and impleaded the civil registrar of Manila THE GROUND OF SEX REASSIGNMENT
as respondent. Petitioner alleged in his petition
that he was born in the City of Manila to the The Court of Appeals rendered a decision in favor
spouses Melecio Petines Silverio and Anita Aquino of the Republic. It ruled that the trial court's
Dantes on April 4, 1962. His name was registered decision lacked legal basis. There is no law allowing
as "Rommel Jacinto Dantes Silverio" in his the change of either name or sex in the certificate
certificate of live birth (birth certificate). His sex of birth on the ground of sex reassignment through
was registered as "male." surgery. Petitioner essentially claims that the
change of his name and sex in his birth certificate is
He further alleged that he is a male transsexual, allowed under Articles 407 to 413 of the Civil Code,
that is, "anatomically male but feels, thinks and acts Rules 103 and 108 of the Rules of Court and RA
as a female" and that he had always identified 9048. He invoked his sex reassignment as the
himself with girls since childhood. Feeling trapped ground for his petition for change of name and sex.
in a man's body, he consulted several doctors in the Petitioner believes that after having acquired the
United States. He underwent psychological physical features of a female, he became entitled to
examination, hormone treatment and breast the civil registry changes sought. The Court
augmentation. His attempts to transform himself to disagree.
a "woman" culminated when he underwent sex
reassignment surgery in Bangkok, Thailand. ART. 376. No person can change his name or
surname without judicial authority.
From then on, petitioner lived as a female and was
in fact engaged to be married. He then sought to This Civil Code provision was amended by RA 9048
have his name in his birth certificate changed from (Clerical Error Law). In particular, Section 1 of RA
"Rommel Jacinto" to "Mely," and his sex from 9048. In sum, the remedy and the proceedings
"male" to "female." During trial, petitioner testified regulating change of first name are primarily
for himself. He also presented as witnesses his administrative in nature, not judicial. RA 9048
American fiancé, Richard and P. Edel Dr. Reysio- likewise provides the grounds for which change of
Cruz, Jr., the plastic and reconstruction surgeon in first name may be allowed:
the Philippines who examined and issued him a
medical certificate attesting that petitioner had in SECTION 4. Grounds for Change of First Name or
fact undergone the sex reassignment surgery. Nickname. — The petition for change of first name
or nickname may be allowed in any of the following
The trial court rendered a decision in favor of cases:
petitioner. The court’s pronouncement as such is (1) The petitioner finds the first name or nickname
that the petitioner filed the present petition not to to be ridiculous, tainted with dishonor or extremely
evade any law or judgment or any infraction difficult to write or pronounce;
thereof or for any unlawful motive but solely for
the purpose of making his birth records compatible (2) The new first name or nickname has been
with his present sex. The Republic of the habitually and continuously used by the petitioner
Philippines (Republic), thru the OSG, filed a and he has been publicly known by that first name or
petition for certiorari in the Court of Appeals. It nickname in the community; or
alleged that there is no law allowing the change of (3) The change will avoid confusion.
entries in the birth certificate by reason of sex
alteration. RA 9048 does not sanction a change of first name
on the ground of sex reassignment. Before a person
ISSUE: can legally change his given name, he must present
proper or reasonable cause or any compelling

Read the Full Text
EH401
reason justifying such change. In addition, he must determination of a person's sex made at the time of
show that he will be prejudiced by the use of his his or her birth, if not attended by error, is
true and official name. In this case, he failed to immutable. For these reasons, while petitioner may
show, or even allege, any prejudice that he might have succeeded in altering his body and
suffer as a result of using his true and official name. appearance through the intervention of modern
The petition in the trial court in so far as it prayed surgery, no law authorizes the change of entry as to
for the change of petitioner's first name was not sex in the civil registry for that reason. Thus, there
within that court's primary jurisdiction as the is no legal basis for his petition for the correction
petition should have been filed with the local civil or change of the entries in his birth certificate.
registrar concerned, assuming it could be legally
done. It was an improper remedy because the NEITHER MAY ENTRIES IN THE BIRTH
proper remedy was administrative under RA 9048. CERTIFICATE AS TO FIRST NAME OR SEX BE
CHANGED ON THE GROUND OF EQUITY
NO LAW ALLOWS THE CHANGE OF ENTRY IN THE The changes sought by petitioner will have serious
BIRTH CERTIFICATE AS TO SEX ON THE GROUND and wide-ranging legal and public policy
OF SEX REASSIGNMENT consequences. First, even the trial court itself
found that the petition was but petitioner's first
The determination of a person's sex appearing in step towards his eventual marriage to his male
his birth certificate is a legal issue and the court Fiancé. However, marriage, one of the most sacred
must look to the statutes. The correction or change social institutions, is a special contract of
of such matters can now be made through permanent union between a man and a woman.
administrative proceedings and without the need One of its essential requisites is the legal capacity
for a judicial order. In effect, RA 9048 removed of the contracting parties who must be a male and
from the ambit of Rule 108 of the Rules of Court the a female. Such will substantially reconfigure and
correction of such errors. Rule 108 now applies greatly alter the laws on marriage and family
only to substantial changes and corrections in relations. It is true that Article 9 of the Civil Code
entries in the civil register. Under RA 9048, a mandates that "[n]o judge or court shall decline to
correction in the civil registry involving the change render judgment by reason of the silence, obscurity
of sex is not a mere clerical or typographical error. or insufficiency of the law." However, it is not a
It is a substantial change for which the applicable license for courts to engage in judicial legislation.
procedure is Rule 108 of the Rules of Court. The The duty of the courts is to apply or interpret the
entries envisaged in Article 412 of the Civil Code law, not to make or amend it.
and correctable under Rule 108 of the Rules of
Court are those provided in Articles 407 and 408 of
the Civil Code.
The acts, events or factual errors contemplated

under Article 407 of the Civil Code include even
those that occur after birth. However, no
reasonable interpretation of the Article 407 of the
Civil Code can justify the conclusion that it covers
the correction on the ground of sex reassignment.
A person's sex is an essential factor in marriage and
family relations. It is a part of a person's legal
capacity and civil status. There is no such special
law in the Philippines governing sex reassignment
and its effects. This is fatal to petitioner's cause.
Under the Civil Register Law, a birth certificate is a

historical record of the facts as they existed at the
time of birth. Thus, the sex of a person is
determined at birth, visually done by the birth
attendant (the physician or midwife) by examining
the genitals of the infant. Considering that there is
no law legally recognizing sex reassignment, the

Read the Full Text
EH401
Hi tag-as kaayo ang digests sorry kay tag-as kaayo qualified Filipino contractors to secure the
ang cases, then actually na leave out nana ang performance of approved service contracts abroad.
uban issues nga dili related sa Conflict. Cheers!
Philguarantee approved contractors’ bond.
- Conflict Team However, SOB wants bond to be secured by
Rafidain Bank (government bank of Iraq). Rafidain
Philippine Export and Foreign Loan Guarantee issued the bonds. Rafidain wants to be counter-
Corp v. Eusebio Corp. guaranteed. So, it was counter-guarantee by Al Ahli
G.R. No. 140047, July 13, 2004 Bank (Kuwaiti Bank). Al Ahli also wants to be
counter-guaranteed. It was counter-guaranteed by
FACTS: Philguarantee. (3 Layers of Guarantee):
Petitioner Philippine Export and Foreign Loan 3plex & VPECI -> Philguarantee -> Al Ahli ->
Guarantee Corporation (Philguarantee) sought Rafidain -> SOB
reimbursement from the respondents of the sum of
money it paid to Al Ahli Bank of Kuwait pursuant to Because of the delay in construction, bonds were
a guarantee it issued for respondent V.P. Eusebio extended as there were about to expire.
Construction, Inc. (VPECI).
As of March 1986, the status of the Project was 51%
The State Organization of Buildings (SOB), Ministry accomplished, meaning the structures were
of Housing and Construction, Baghdad, Iraq already finished.
awarded the construction of the Institute of
Physical Therapy–Medical Rehabilitation Center, On 26 October 1986, Al Ahli Bank of Kuwait sent a
Phase II, in Baghdad, Iraq, (hereinafter the Project) telex call to the petitioner demanding full payment
to Ajyal Trading and Contracting Company of its performance bond counter-guarantee.
(hereinafter Ajyal), a firm duly licensed with the
Kuwait Chamber of Commerce for a total contract Upon receiving a copy of that telex message,
price of ID5,416,089/046 (or about respondent VPECI requested Iraq Trade and
US$18,739,668). Economic Development Minister Mohammad
Fadhi Hussein to recall the telex call on the
3-Plex International, Inc. (hereinafter 3-Plex), a performance guarantee for being a drastic action in
local contractor engaged in construction business, contravention of its mutual agreement with the
entered into a joint venture agreement with Ajyal latter that (1) the imposition of penalty would be
wherein the former undertook the execution of the held in abeyance until the completion of the
entire Project, while the latter would be entitled to project; and (2) the time extension would be open,
a commission of 4% of the contract price. Later, depending on the developments on the
respondent 3-Plex, not being accredited by or negotiations for a foreign loan to finance the
registered with the Philippine Overseas completion of the project. It also wrote SOB
Construction Board (POCB), assigned and protesting the call for lack of factual or legal basis,
transferred all its rights and interests under the since the failure to complete the Project was due to
joint venture agreement to VPECI, a construction (1) the Iraqi government's lack of foreign exchange
and engineering firm duly registered with the with which to pay its (VPECI's) accomplishments
POCB. However, on 2 May 1981, 3-Plex and VPECI and (2) SOB's noncompliance for the past several
entered into an agreement that the execution of the years with the provision in the contract that 75%
Project would be under their joint management. of the billings would be paid in US dollars.
Subsequently, or on 19 November 1986,
The SOB required the contractors to submit (1) a respondent VPECI advised the petitioner not to pay
performance bond of representing 5% of the total yet Al Ahli Bank because efforts were being exerted
contract price and (2) an advance payment bond for the amicable settlement of the Project.
representing 10% of the advance payment to be
released upon signing of the contract. 3-Plex and The petitioner received another telex message
VPECI applied for the issuance of a guarantee with from Al Ahli Bank stating that it had already paid to
petitioner Philguarantee, a government financial Rafidain Bank the sum of US$876,564 under its
institution empowered to issue guarantees for letter of guarantee, and demanding reimbursement

Read the Full Text
EH401
by the petitioner of what it paid to the latter bank In consideration of your issuing the above
plus interest thereon and related expenses. performance guarantee/counterguarantee, we
hereby unconditionally and irrevocably guarantee,
VPECI requested the Central Bank to hold in under our Ref. No. LG-81-194 F to pay you on your
abeyance the payment by the petitioner "to allow first written or telex demand Iraq Dinars Two
the diplomatic machinery to take its course, for Hundred Seventy One Thousand Eight Hundred
otherwise, the Philippine government, through the Eight and fils six hundred ten (ID271,808/610)
Philguarantee and the Central Bank, would become representing 100% of the performance bond
instruments of the Iraqi Government in required of V.P. EUSEBIO for the construction of
consummating a clear act of injustice and inequity the Physical Therapy Institute, Phase II, Baghdad,
committed against a Filipino contractor. Iraq, plus interest and other incidental expenses
related thereto.
The Central Bank authorized the remittance for its
account of the amount of US$876,564 to Al Ahli In the event of default by V.P. EUSEBIO, we shall pay
Bank representing full payment of the performance you 100% of the obligation unpaid but in no case
counter-guarantee for VPECI's project in Iraq. The shall such amount exceed Iraq Dinars (ID)
petitioner thus paid the amount of US$876,564 to 271,808/610 plus interest and other incidental
Al Ahli Bank of Kuwait and US$59,129.83 expenses . . .
representing interest and penalty charges
demanded by the latter bank. As a guaranty, it is still characterized by its
subsidiary and conditional quality because it does
Petitioner sent to the respondents separate letters not take effect until the fulfillment of the condition,
demanding full payment of the amount plus namely, that the principal obligor should fail in his
accruing interest, penalty charges, and 10% obligation at the time and in the form he bound
attorney's fees pursuant to their joint and solidary himself. In other words, an unconditional
obligations under the deed of undertaking and guarantee is still subject to the condition that the
surety bond. When the respondents failed to pay, principal debtor should default in his obligation
the petitioner filed a civil case for collection of a first before resort to the guarantor could be had. A
sum of money against the respondents before the conditional guaranty, as opposed to an
RTC. unconditional guaranty, is one which depends
upon some extraneous event, beyond the mere
ISSUE: default of the principal, and generally upon notice
of the principal's default and reasonable diligence
Whether the petitioner is entitled to in exhausting proper remedies against the
reimbursement of what it paid to Al Ahli Bank of principal.
Kuwait based on the deed of undertaking and
surety bond from the respondents. It appearing that Letter of Guarantee merely stated
that in the event of default by respondent VPECI the
RULING: petitioner shall pay, the obligation assumed by the
petitioner was simply that of an unconditional
No guaranty, not conditional guaranty. But as earlier
ruled the fact that petitioner's guaranty is
Petitioner is a guarantor, not a surety. unconditional does not make it a surety. Besides,
surety is never presumed. A party should not be
By guaranty a person, called the guarantor, binds considered a surety where the contract itself
himself to the creditor to fulfill the obligation of the stipulates that he is acting only as a guarantor. It is
principal debtor in case the latter should fail to do only when the guarantor binds himself solidarily
so. If a person binds himself solidarily with the with the principal debtor that the contract becomes
principal debtor, the contract is called suretyship. one of suretyship.
In determining petitioner's status, it is necessary to Pertinent Ruling: Respondent is not in default.

read Letter of Guarantee, which provides in part as
follows: A corollary issue is what law should be applied in
determining whether the respondent contractor
has defaulted in the performance of its obligations

Read the Full Text
EH401
under the service contract. The question of Our law, specifically Article 1169, last paragraph, of
whether there is a breach of an agreement, which the Civil Code, provides: "In reciprocal obligations,
includes default or mora, pertains to the essential neither party incurs in delay if the other party does
or intrinsic validity of a contract. not comply or is not ready to comply in a proper
manner with what is incumbent upon him." Default
No conflicts rule on essential validity of contracts is or mora on the part of the debtor is the delay in the
expressly provided for in our laws. The rule fulfillment of the prestation by reason of a cause
followed by most legal systems, however, is that imputable to the former. It is the non-fulfillment of
the intrinsic validity of a contract must be governed an obligation with respect to time.
by the lex contractus or "proper law of the It is undisputed that only 51.7% of the total work
contract." This is the law voluntarily agreed upon had been accomplished. The 48.3% unfinished
by the parties (the lex loci voluntatis) or the law portion consisted in the purchase and installation
intended by them either expressly or implicitly of electro-mechanical equipment and materials,
(the lex loci intentionis). The law selected may be which were available from foreign suppliers, thus
implied from such factors as substantial requiring US
connection with the transaction, or the nationality
or domicile of the parties. Philippine courts would Dollars for their importation. The monthly billings
do well to adopt the first and most basic rule in and payments made by SOB reveal that the
most legal systems, namely, to allow the parties to agreement between the parties was a periodic
select the law applicable to their contract, subject payment by the Project owner to the contractor
to the limitation that it is not against the law, depending on the percentage of accomplishment
morals, or public policy of the forum and that the within the period. The payments were, in turn, to
chosen law must bear a substantive relationship to be used by the contractor to finance the subsequent
the transaction. phase of the work. However, as explained by VPECI
in its letter to the Department of Foreign Affairs
It must be noted that the service contract between (DFA), the payment by SOB purely in Dinars
SOB and VPECI contains no express choice of the adversely affected the completion of the project.
law that would govern it. In the United States and
Europe, the two rules that now seem to have NB: There was an ongoing Iran-Iraq war which
emerged as "kings of the hill" are (1) the parties prevented SOB from setting the foreign exchange
may choose the governing law; and (2) in the rate (Iraqi Dinar to USD)
absence of such a choice, the applicable law is that
of the State that "has the most significant As found by both the Court of Appeals and the trial
relationship to the transaction and the parties." court, the delay or the noncompletion of the Project
Another authority proposed that all matters was caused by factors not imputable to the
relating to the time, place, and manner of respondent contractor. It was rather due mainly to
performance and valid excuses for non- the persistent violations by SOB of the terms and
performance are determined by the law of the conditions of the contract, particularly its failure to
place of performance or lex loci solutionis, which is pay 75% of the accomplished work in US Dollars.
useful because it is undoubtedly always connected Indeed, where one of the parties to a contract does
to the contract in a significant way. not perform in a proper manner the prestation
which he is bound to perform under the contract,
In this case, the laws of Iraq bear substantial he is not entitled to demand the performance of the
connection to the transaction, since one of the other party. A party does not incur in delay if the
parties is the Iraqi Government and the place of other party fails to perform the obligation
performance is in Iraq. Hence, the issue of whether incumbent upon him. Indeed, where one of the
respondent VPECI defaulted in its obligations may parties to a contract does not perform in a proper
be determined by the laws of Iraq. However, since manner the prestation which he is bound to
that foreign law was not properly pleaded or perform under the contract, he is not entitled to
proved, the presumption of identity or similarity, demand the performance of the other party. A
otherwise known as the processual presumption, party does not incur in delay if the other party fails
comes into play. Where foreign law is not pleaded to perform the obligation incumbent upon him.
or, even if pleaded, is not proved, the presumption
is that foreign law is the same as ours. In order that the debtor may be in default it is
necessary that the following requisites be present:

Read the Full Text
EH401
(1) that the obligation be demandable and already It is clear that the payment made by the petitioner
liquidated; (2) that the debtor delays performance; guarantor did not in any way benefit the principal
and (3) that the creditor requires the performance debtor, given the project status and the conditions
because it must appear that the tolerance or obtaining at the Project site at that time. Moreover,
benevolence of the creditor must have ended. the respondent contractor was found to have valid
defenses against SOB, which are fully supported by
As stated earlier, SOB cannot yet demand complete evidence and which have been meritoriously set up
performance from VPECI because it has not yet against the paying guarantor, the petitioner in this
itself performed its obligation in a proper manner, case. And even if the deed of undertaking and the
particularly the payment of the 75% of the cost of surety bond secured petitioner's guaranty, the
the Project in US Dollars. The VPECI cannot yet be petitioner is precluded from enforcing the same by
said to have incurred in delay. Even assuming that reason of the petitioner's undue payment on the
there was delay and that the delay was attributable guaranty. Rights under the deed of undertaking
to VPECI, still the effects of that delay ceased upon and the surety bond do not arise because these
the renunciation by the creditor, SOB, which could contracts depend on the validity of the
be implied when the latter granted several enforcement of the guaranty.
extensions of time to the former. Besides, no
demand has yet been made by SOB against the The petitioner guarantor should have waited for
respondent contractor. Demand is generally the natural course of guaranty: the debtor VPECI
necessary even if a period has been fixed in the should have, in the first place, defaulted in its
obligation. And default generally begins from the obligation and that the creditor SOB should have
moment the creditor demands judicially or first made a demand from the principal debtor. It is
extrajudicially the performance of the obligation. only when the debtor does not or cannot pay, in
Without such demand, the effects of default. whole or in part, that the guarantor should pay.
When the petitioner guarantor in this case paid
Moreover, the petitioner as a guarantor is entitled against the will of the debtor VPECI, the debtor
to the benefit of excussion, that is, it cannot be VPECI may set up against it defenses available
compelled to pay the creditor SOB unless the against the creditor SOB at the time of payment.
property of the debtor VPECI has been exhausted This is the hard lesson that the petitioner must
and all legal remedies against the said debtor have learn.
been resorted to by the creditor. It could also set up
compensation as regards what the creditor SOB Continental Micronesia vs. Joseph Basso
may owe the principal debtor VPECI. In this case, G.R. No. 178382-83, September 23, 2015
however, the petitioner has clearly waived these
rights and remedies by making the payment of an *This is a labor case, but gi disregard lang nako ang
obligation that was yet to be shown to be rightfully issues about it. Conflict issues ra ang naa diri.
due the creditor and demandable of the principal
debtor. FACTS:
Petitioner cannot secure reimbursement from Continental Micronesia (CMI) is a foreign

Respondent. corporation organized and existing under the laws
in the US. It is licensed to do business here in the
As a rule, a guarantor who pays for a debtor should Philippines. Basso, a US citizen, resided in the
be indemnified by the latter and would be legally Philippines prior to his death. Basso was offered a
subrogated to the rights which the creditor has General Manager position of the Philippine Branch
against the debtor. However, a person who makes of Continental Airlines, he accepted this offer. CMI
payment without the knowledge or against the will took over the Philippine operations of Continental.
of the debtor has the right to recover only insofar
as the payment has been beneficial to the debtor. If Basso received a letter from CMI’s Vice President,
the obligation was subject to defenses on the part informing Basso that he has agreed to work in CMI
of the debtor, the same defenses which could have as a consultant on an “as needed basis”, that he will
been set up against the creditor can be set up not earn any monetary compensation, and that he
against the paying guarantor. will be terminated at will upon a 30 day notice. He
offered a counter-proposal but was rejected, thus
he was terminated.

Read the Full Text
EH401
Basso filed a complaint for Illegal Dismissal. CMI ISSUE:

filed a motion to dismiss alleging the existence of
foreign elements; lack of jurisdiction over the Whether or not the labor tribunals had jurisdiction
person of CMI and the subject matter. The Labor over the parties and the subject matter.
Arbiter granted the motion, applying the doctrine
of lex loci contractus and that the terms of the RULING:
contract did not intend to apply the Labor Code.
However, the NLRC remanded back the case to YES.
settle the issue on jurisdiction.
The labor tribunals had jurisdiction over the
RULING OF THE LABOR ARBITER: parties and the subject matter (Jurisdiction)
The Labor Arbiter dismissed the case for lack of There is a conflict-of-laws issue that needs to be
jurisdiction. The employment contract was resolved. The facts established the existence of
executed in the US. Applying lex loci celebracionis, foreign elements. The employment contract of
US laws apply. Lex loci contractus also applies as Basso was replete with reference to US laws, and
the parties did not intend to apply Philippine Laws. that it originated form and was returned to the US,
The contract was prepared in contemplation of do not automatically preclude our labor tribunals
Texas or US laws as there was a payment of US from exercising jurisdiction to hear and try the
Federal and Home State income taxes and on case.
termination by 30-day prior notice.
The case stemmed from an illegal dismissal
It was also ruled that Basso was terminated for a complaint. The Labor Code, vests original and
valid cause for a series of acts that constitute exclusive jurisdiction to hear and decide cases
breach of trust and loss of confidence. involving termination disputes to the Labor
Arbiter. With this, both Labor Arbiter and NLRC
RULING OF THE NLRC: have jurisdiction over the subject matter.
The NLRC did not agree with the Labor Arbiter that The Labor Arbiter acquired jurisdiction over the
it has no jurisdiction over the controversy. It ruled person of Basso, despite its citizenship, when he
that it acquired jurisdiction over the case when CMI filed the illegal dismissal complaint. CMI was
voluntarily submitted to his office’s jurisdiction by served also with summon, which they never
presenting evidence, advancing arguments in denied. Moreover, CMI voluntarily appeared and
support of the legality of its acts, and praying for participated in the proceedings. CMI, a foreign
reliefs on the merits of the case. corporation, is licensed to do business here in the
Philippines and has a local business address here.
However, the NLRC agreed that Basso was The purpose of this is to subject the foreign
dismissed for just and valid cause on the ground of corporations to the jurisdictions of our courts.
breach of trust and confidence. Mere existence of a
basis for believing that such employee has The Philippines is a convenient forum (Forum non
breached the trust of his employer suffices. But, conveniens)
due process was not complied with.
Basso may conveniently resort to our labor
RULING OF THE COURT OF APPEALS: tribunals as he and CMI had physical presence in
the Philippines during the duration of the trial. CMI
The Court of Appeals ruled that the Labor Arbiter has a Philippine branch, while Basso was residing
and NLRC had jurisdiction over the subject matter here. Our labor tribunals can also make intelligent
of the case and over the parties. The case filed is a decision as to the law and facts. The incidents of the
termination dispute that is cognizable under our case happened in the Philippines. The alleged loss
labor tribunals. Jurisdiction over the person the of trust and confidence happened here and Basso’s
person was acquired when Basso filed the dismissal also took place here.
complaint and CMI was served with summons.
However, the allegations of loss of trust and The law of the Philippines will apply (Choice-of-
confidence were not established. law)

Read the Full Text
EH401
with Saudia. They were separated from service

CMI argued pursuant to the principles of lex loci because they were pregnant.
celebracionis and lex loci contractus, US law will
apply. The contract originated and was returned in They had processed their materniaty leaves but it
the US, and the contract of employment makes was disproved and they were required to file their
reference to US laws, showing the intention of the resignation letters. If they will not resign, they will
parties that US laws will apply. It was asserted that be deemed terminated, losing various benefits.
the US Railway Labor Act sanctions termination-at- Saudia anchored their termination based on their
will provisions in an employment contract. Unified Contract, which states:
However, as connecting factors pointed out, ….that if an Air hostess becomes pregnant at
Philippine law is the applicable law, Basso, any time during the term of this contract,
although a US citizen, was a resident here from the this shall render here employment contract
time he was hired by CMI and up until his death. as void and she will be terminated due to
CMI has a license to do business in the Philippines lack of medical fitness.
and maintains a branch here, where Basso was
hired to work, the contract of employment which is They tendered their resignation letters for the fear
purely consensual was perfected in the Philippines, of losing some benefits. The filed a complaint
the place of performance of Basso’s duties was in against Saudia for illegal dismissal. Saudia assailed
the Philippines and the alleged prohibited acts of the jurisdiction of the Labor Arbiter for forum non
Basso were committed here. Clearly, the conveniens.
Philippines is the state with the most significant
relationship. RULING OF THE LABOR ARBITER:
It is also noted that a foreign law, judgment, or The Labor Arbiter dismissed the complaint for lack
contract contrary to a sound and established public of jurisdiction,
policy of the forum shall not be applied.
Termination-at-will is anathema to the public RULING OF THE NLRC:
policies on labor protection espoused by our laws
and Constitution, which dictates that no worker NLRC reversed the ruling. The complainants were
shall be dismissed except for just and authorized OFW’s which the Labor Arbiter and NLRC has
causes provided by law and after observing due jurisdiction to hear and decide their illegal
process. Hence, it should not be applied. termination. On the matter of forum non
conveniens, it ntoed that there were no special
Finally, our courts cannot take judicial notice of any circumstances that warranted its abstention from
foreign law. Here, the US law may have been exercising jurisdiction.
properly pleaded but it was not proved in the labor
tribunals. Here, processual presumption applies, RULING OF THE COURT OF APPEALS:
which gives operation to our own laws here in the
Philippines. The Court of Appeals modified the award of
separation and backwages.
Saudia Arabian Airlines (SAUDIA) vs.
Resbesencio ISSUE:
G.R. No. 198587, January 14, 2015
Whether the Labor Arbiter and the NLRC may
*daghanag problema aning Saudia oy exercise jurisdiction over Saudia and apply
Philippine law in adjudicating the present dispute.
FACTS:
RULING:
Saudia is a foreign corporation established and
existing under the laws of Jeddah, Kingdom of YES.
Saudi Arabia. It has a Philippine office. Ma. Jopette,
Montassah, Rouen, and Loraine (respondents) Summons were validly served on Saudia
were recruited and hired by Saudia as flight
attendants, through a Cabin Attendant contract

Read the Full Text
EH401
Saudia claimed that the Labor Arbiter and NLRC Furthermore, two (2) factors weigh into a court's
had no jurisdiction over it because summons were appraisal of the balance of interests inhering in a
never served on it but on “Saudia Manila”. “Saudia dispute: First, the vinculum which the parties and
Jeddah” was the employer of respondents and not their relation have to a given jurisdiction; and
“Saudia Manila” as Manila was never a party to the second, the public interest that must animate a
Cabin Attendant contract, it was Jeddah that tribunal, in its capacity as an agent of the sovereign,
provided the salaries and benefits of respondents, in choosing to assume or decline jurisdiction. The
and it was Jeddah that respondents filed their first is more concerned with the parties, their
resignations. personal circumstances, and private interests; the
second concerns itself with the state and the
However, by its own admission Saudia, while a greater social order.
foreign corporation, has a Philippine office. There
is no real distinction between Jeddah and Manila, Contractual choice of law provisions factor into
the latter being nothing more than Saudia’s local transnational litigation and dispute resolution in
office. Service of summons to Manila sufficed to one of or in a combination of four ways: (1)
vest Saudia’s person in Philippine tribunals. procedures for settling disputes, e.g., arbitration;
(2) forum, i.e., venue; (3) governing law; and (4)
Forum non conveniens and Choice of law basis for interpretation. Forum non conveniens
relates to, but is not subsumed by, the second of
Saudia claims that the difficulty of ascertaining these.
foreign law calls into operation the principle of
forum non conveniens, thereby rendering improper Likewise, contractual choice of law is not
the exercise of jurisdiction by Philippines determinative of jurisdiction. Stipulating on the
Tribunals. They are not in a position to make laws of a given jurisdiction as the governing law of
intelligent decision as to the law and the facts as the a contract does not preclude the exercise of
contracts require the application of the laws of jurisdiction by tribunals elsewhere. The reverse is
Saudia Arabia. Choice of law and forum non equally true: The assumption of jurisdiction by
conveniens are entirely different matters. tribunals does not ipso facto mean that it cannot
apply and rule on the basis of the parties'
Choice of law provisions are an offshoot of the stipulation.
fundamental principle of autonomy of contracts. In
contrast, forum non conveniens is a device akin to Forum Non Conveniens cannot apply in the case
the rule against forum shopping. It is designed to
frustrate illicit means for securing advantages and The case at bar does not entail a preponderance of
vexing litigants that would otherwise be possible if linkages that favour a foreign jurisdiction.
the venue of litigation were left entirely to the
whim of either party. 1) There is no basis for concluding that the
case can be more conveniently tried
Forum non conveniens relates to forum, not to the elsewhere. As established earlier, Saudia is
choice of the governing law. This concept may doing business in the Philippines. For their
ultimately result in the application of the foreign part, all four (4) respondents are Filipino
law is merely an incident to its application. Any citizens maintaining residence in the
evaluation of the propriety of contracting parties' Philippines and, apart from their previous
choice of a forum and its incidents must grapple employment with Saudia, have no other
with two (2) considerations: connection to the Kingdom of Saudi
Arabia. It would even be to respondents'
1) The availability and adequacy of inconvenience if this case were to be tried
recourse to a foreign tribunal; and elsewhere.
2) The question of where, as between the 2) The records are bereft of any indication
forum court and a foreign court, the that respondents filed their Complaint in
balance of interests inhering in a dispute an effort to engage in forum shopping or to
weighs more heavily. vex and inconvenience Saudia.

Read the Full Text
EH401
3) No indication of "unwillingness to considerations of law, morals, good customs, public

extend local judicial facilities to non- order, or public policy that underlie the contract
residents or aliens." That Saudia has central to the controversy.
managed to bring the present controversy.
Article II, Section 14 of the 1987 Constitution
4) It cannot be said that the local judicial provides that "the State . . . shall ensure the
machinery is inadequate for effectuating fundamental equality before the law of women and
the right sought to be maintained. men." Contrasted with Article II, Section 1 of the
Summons was properly served on Saudia 1987 Constitution's statement that "no person
and jurisdiction over its person was shall . . . be denied the equal protection of the laws,"
validly acquired. Article II, Section 14 exhorts the State to "ensure."
This does not only mean that the Philippines shall
5) There is not even room for considering not countenance nor lend legal recognition and
foreign law. Philippine law properly approbation to measures that discriminate on the
governs the present dispute. basis of one's being male or female. It imposes an
obligation to actively engage in securing the
Even if we were to assume, for the sake of fundamental equality of men and women.
discussion, that it is the laws of Saudi Arabia which
should apply, it does not follow that Philippine Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of
tribunals should refrain from exercising Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), which
jurisdiction. It is not so much the mere applicability forms part to the law of our land defines
of foreign law which calls into operation forum non “discrimination against women” as:
conveniens. Rather, what justifies a court's
desistance from exercising jurisdiction is the Any distinction, exclusion or restriction
difficulty of ascertaining foreign law or the inability made on the basis of sex which has the effect
of a Philippine Court to make an intelligent decision or purpose of impairing or nullifying the
as to the law. recognition, enjoyment or exercise by
women, irrespective of their marital status,
Consistent with lex loci intentionis, to the extent on a basis of equality of men and women, of
that it is proper and practicable (i.e., "to make an human rights and fundamental freedoms in
intelligent decision"), Philippine tribunals may the political, economic, social, cultural, civil
apply the foreign law selected by the parties. In or any other field.
fact, in this case, respondents themselves have
made averments as to the laws of Saudi Arabia. In The constitutional exhortation to ensure
their Comment, respondents write: fundamental equality, as illumined by its enabling
law, the CEDAW, must inform and animate all the
Under the Labor Laws of Saudi Arabia and actions of all personalities acting on behalf of the
the Philippines it is illegal and unlawful to State. It is, therefore, the bounden duty of this
terminate the employment of any woman court, in rendering judgment on the disputes
by virtue of pregnancy. The law in Saudi brought before it, to ensure that no discrimination
Arabia is even more harsh and strict in that is heaped upon women on the mere basis of their
no employer can terminate the employment being women.
of a female worker or give her a warning of
the same while on Maternity Leave, Saudia's policy entails the termination of
employment of Flight attendants who become
Saudias contract is against public policy pregnant. At the risk of stating the obvious,
pregnancy is an occurrence that pertains
Our law on contracts recognizes the validity of specifically to women. Saudia's policy excludes
contractual choice of law provisions. Where such from and restricts employment on the basis of no
provisions exist, Philippine tribunals, acting as the other consideration but sex.
forum court, generally defer to the parties'
articulated choice. While a Philippine tribunal The Court did not lose sight of the reality that
(acting as the forum court) is called upon to respect pregnancy does present physical limitations that
the parties' choice of governing law, such respect may render difficult the performance of functions
must not be so permissive as to lose sight of associated with being a Flight attendant.

Read the Full Text
EH401
Nevertheless, it would be the height of iniquity to vacation leave and sick leave pay before the Labor
view pregnancy as a disability so permanent and Arbiter (LA).
immutable that it must entail the termination of
one's employment. It is clear to us that any He claimed that SNC-Lavalin still owed him unpaid
individual, regardless of gender, may be subject to salaries equivalent to the three-month unexpired
exigencies that limit the performance of functions. portion of his contract and asserted that the latter
However, the Court failed to appreciate how never offered any valid reason for his early
pregnancy could be such an impairing occurrence termination and that he was not given enough
that it leaves no other recourse but the complete notice regarding the same. He also insisted that the
termination of the means through which a woman petitioners must prove the applicability of
earns a living. Canadian law before the same could be applied to
his employment contract.
Contracts relating to labor and employment are
impressed with public interest The petitioner denied the charge of illegal
dismissal against them. They relied on a copy of the
Article 1700 of the Civil Code provides that “the Employment Standards Act (ESA) of Ontario, which
relation between capital and labor are not merely was duly authenticated by the Canadian authorities
contractual. They are so impressed with public and certified by the Philippine Embassy. They
interest that labor contracts must yield to the insisted that all of Arriola's employment
common good. Philippine laws and regulations documents were processed in Canada, not to
cannot be rendered illusory by the parties agreeing mention that SNC Lavalin's office was in Ontario,
upon some other law to govern their relationship. the principle of lex loci celebrationis was
applicable. Hence, they insisted that Canadian laws
As the present dispute relates to the illegal governed the contract.
termination of respondents' employment, this case
is immutably a matter of public interest and public The said foreign law did not require any ground for
policy. Consistent with clear pronouncements in early termination of employment, and the only
law and jurisprudence, Philippine laws properly requirement was the written notice of termination.
find application in and govern this case. Even if Philippine laws should apply, Arriola would
still be validly dismissed because domestic law
Industrial Personnel & Management Services, recognized retrenchment and redundancy as legal
Inc. vs. De Vera grounds for termination.
G.R. No. 205703, March 7, 2016 The Labor Arbiter (LA) dismissed the complaint of
Arriola, while the NLRC reversed the LA's ruling
FACTS: stating the Filipino workers are protected by our
labor laws wherever they may be working. The
Petitioner Industrial Personnel & Management petitioners filed a petition for certiorari before the
Services, Inc. (IPAMS) is a local placement agency CA arguing that it should be the ESA, or the Ontario
duly organized and existing under Philippine laws. labor law, that should be applied in Arriola's
Petitioner SNC Lavalin Engineers & Contractors, employment contract, but the Court of Appeals
Inc. (SNC-Lavalin) is the principal of IPAMS, a affirmed NLRC. Hence, this petition.
Canadian company with business interests in
several countries. ISSUE:
Respondent Alberto Arriola, a licensed general Whether or not Canadian law shall be applied to
surgeon in the Philippines, was hired by SNC- this case.
Lavalin, through its local manning agency, IPAMS,
as a safety officer in its Ambatovy Project site in RULING:
Madagascar. After three months, Arriola received a
notice of pre-termination of employment due to NO, Canadian Law cannot be applied. The
diminishing workload in the area of his expertise contracting parties may establish such stipulations,
and the unavailability of alternative assignments. clauses, terms and conditions as they may deem
Consequently, Arriola was repatriated and he filed convenient, provided they are not contrary to law,
a complaint against the petitioners for illegal morals, good customs, public order, or public
dismissal and non-payment of overtime pay, policy.

Read the Full Text
EH401
employee of tenure provided by both the

The foreign law invoked is contrary to the Constitution and the Labor Code. In a host of cases,
Constitution and the Labor Code, violative of the the Court has upheld the employee's right to
employee’s right to security of tenure. As a rule, security of tenure in the face of oppressive
Philippine laws apply even to overseas management behavior and management
employment contracts. This rule is rooted in the prerogative. Security of tenure is a right which
constitutional provision of Section 3, Article XIII cannot be denied on mere speculation of any
that the State shall afford full protection to labor, unclear and nebulous basis. Furthermore, not only
whether local or overseas. Hence, even if the OFW do these provisions collide with the right to
has his employment abroad, it does not strip him of security of tenure, but they also deprive the
his rights to security of tenure, humane conditions employee of his constitutional right to due process
of work and a living wage under our Constitution. by denying him of any notice of termination and the
As an exception, the parties may agree that a opportunity to be heard.
foreign law shall govern the employment contract.
A synthesis of the existing laws and jurisprudence Augusto Benedicto Santos III, represented by
reveals that this exception is subject to the his father and legal guardian, Augusto
following requisites: Benedicto Santos, vs. Northwest Orient
Airlines
That it is expressly stipulated in the overseas G.R. No. 101538, June 23, 1982
employment contract that a specific foreign law
shall govern; FACTS:
That the foreign law invoked must be proven This case involves the proper interpretation of
before the courts pursuant to the Philippine rules Article 28(1) of the Warsaw Convention, reading as
on evidence; follows:
Art. 28. (1) An action for damage must be brought
That the foreign law stipulated in the overseas at the option of the plaintiff, in the territory of one
employment contract must not be contrary to law, of the High Contracting Parties, either before the
morals, good customs, public order, or public court of the domicile of the carrier or of his
policy of the Philippines; and principal place of business, or where he has a place
That the overseas employment contract must be of business through which the contract has been
processed through the POEA. made, or before the court at the place of
destination.
Lacking any one of the four requisites would
invalidate the application of the foreign law, and The petitioner is a minor and a resident of the
the Philippine law shall govern the overseas Philippines. Private respondent Northwest Orient
employment contract. Airlines (NOA) is a foreign corporation with
principal office in Minnesota, U.S.A., and licensed to
In the present case, even though an authenticated do business and maintain a branch office in the
copy of the ESA was submitted, it did not mean that Philippines. Petitioner purchased from NOA a
said foreign law could be automatically applied to round-trip ticket in San Francisco, U.S.A., for his
this case. flight from San Francisco to Manila via Tokyo and
back. The scheduled departure date from Tokyo
The petitioners failed to comply with the first was indicated therein. However, no date was
requisite because no foreign law was expressly specified for his return to San Francisco.
stipulated in the overseas employment contract
with Arriola. The petitioners did not directly cite He checked in at the NOA counter in the San
any specific provision or stipulation in the said Francisco airport for his scheduled departure to
labor contract which indicated the applicability of Manila. Despite a previous confirmation and re-
the Canadian labor laws or the ESA. They failed to confirmation, he was informed that he had no
show on the face of the contract that a foreign law reservation for his flight from Tokyo to Manila. He
was agreed upon by the parties. therefore had to be wait-listed. He then sued NOA
for damages in the Regional Trial Court of Makati.
The provisions of the ESA are also patently
inconsistent with the right to security of an

Read the Full Text
EH401
NOA herein moved to dismiss the complaint on the which actions for damages may be brought is
ground of lack of jurisdiction. They contended that arbitrary and irrational and thus violates the due
the complaint could be instituted only in the process and equal protection clauses.
territory of one of the High Contracting Parties,
before: It is well-settled that courts will assume
jurisdiction over a constitutional question only if it
1. the court of the domicile of the carrier; is shown that the essential requisites of a judicial
2. the court of its principal place of business; inquiry into such a question are first satisfied.
3. the court where it has a place of business through
which the contract had been made; There must be an actual case or controversy
4. the court of the place of destination. involving a conflict of legal rights susceptible of
judicial determination; the constitutional question
NOA contended that the Philippines was not its must have been opportunely raised by the proper
domicile nor was this its principal place of party; and the resolution of the question is
business. Neither was the petitioner's ticket issued unavoidably necessary to the decision of the case
in this country nor was his destination Manila but itself.
San Francisco in the United States.
The treaty which is the subject matter of this
RULING OF THE TRIAL COURT: petition was a joint legislative-executive act. The
presumption is that it was first carefully studied
Granted the motion and dismissed the case. and determined to be constitutional before it was
adopted and given the force of law in this country.
RULING OF THE COURT OF APPEALS: The petitioner's allegations are not convincing
enough to overcome this presumption.
Affirmed the decision of the RTC. Petitioner’s Contention (B): Petitioner invoked the
doctrine of rebus sic stantibus.
ISSUES:
According to Jessup, "this doctrine constitutes an
Whether or not Article 28(1) of the Warsaw attempt to formulate a legal principle which would
Convention violates the constitutional guarantees justify non-performance of a treaty obligation if the
of due process and equal protection. (No) conditions with relation to which the parties
contracted have changed so materially and so
Whether or not Philippine courts has jurisdiction unexpectedly as to create a situation in which the
over the case. (NONE. Most related to topic) exaction of performance would be unreasonable."
The key element of this doctrine is the vital change
Whether or not Article 24 of the Civil Code on the in the condition of the contracting parties that they
protection of minors may be invoked. (No) could not have foreseen at the time the treaty was
concluded.
RULING:
It is true that at the time the Warsaw Convention
No. The Warsaw Convention is not was drafted, the airline industry was still in its
unconstitutional. infancy. However, that circumstance alone is not
The Republic of the Philippines is a party to the sufficient justification for the rejection of the treaty
Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules at this time. The changes recited by the petitioner
Relating to International Transportation by Air, were, realistically, not entirely unforeseen
otherwise known as the Warsaw Convention. The although they were expected in a general sense
Convention is thus a treaty commitment only. The Convention itself, anticipated such
voluntarily assumed by the Philippine government developments as contained in Article 41. But the
and, as such, has the force and effect of law in this more important consideration is that the treaty has
country. not been rejected by the Philippine government.
The doctrine of rebus sic stantibus does not
Petitioner’s Contention (A): No substantial operate automatically to render the treaty
distinction between a person who purchases a ticket inoperative. There is a necessity for a formal act of
in Manila and a person who purchases his ticket in rejection, usually made by the head of State, with a
San Francisco. The classification of the places in

Read the Full Text
EH401
statement of the reasons why compliance with the distinct matters. Jurisdiction may not be conferred
treaty is no longer required. by consent or waiver upon a court which otherwise
would have no jurisdiction over the subject-matter
However, the treaty may be denounced even of an action; but the venue of an action as fixed by
without an expressed justification for this action. statute may be changed by the consent of the
Such denunciation is authorized under its Article parties and an objection that the plaintiff brought
39. But obviously, rejection of the treaty, whether his suit in the wrong county may be waived by the
on the ground of rebus sic stantibus or pursuant to failure of the defendant to make a timely objection.
Article 39, is not a function of the courts but of the Rules as to jurisdiction can never be left to the
other branches of government. This is a political consent or agreement of the parties, whether or not
act. The conclusion and renunciation of treaties is a prohibition exists against their alteration.
the prerogative of the political departments and
may not be usurped by the judiciary. A number of reasons tends to support the
characterization of Article 28(1) as a jurisdiction
Petitioner’s Contention (C): Petitioner claims that and not a venue provision:
the lower court erred in ruling that the plaintiff must
sue in the United States, because this would deny him First, the wording of Article 32, which indicates the
the right to access to our courts. places where the action for damage "must" be
brought, underscores the mandatory nature of
The constitutional guaranty of access to courts Article 28(1). Second, this characterization is
refers only to courts with appropriate jurisdiction consistent with one of the objectives of the
as defined by law. It does not mean that a person Convention, which is to "regulate in a uniform
can go to any court for redress of his grievances manner the conditions of international
regardless of the nature or value of his claim. If the transportation by air." Third, the Convention does
petitioner is barred from filing his complaint not contain any provision prescribing rules of
before our courts, it is because they are not vested jurisdiction other than Article 28(1), which means
with the appropriate jurisdiction under the that the phrase "rules as to jurisdiction" used in
Warsaw Convention, which is part of the law of our Article 32 must refer only to Article 28(1).
land.
Where the matter is governed by the Warsaw
None. The Philippine Courts has no jurisdiction. Convention, jurisdiction takes on a dual concept.
Jurisdiction in the international sense must be
Petitioner’s contention: lower court erred in not established in accordance with Article 28(1) of the
ruling that Article 28(1) of the Warsaw Convention Warsaw Convention, following which the
is a rule merely of venue and was waived by jurisdiction of a particular court must be
defendant when it did not move to dismiss on the established pursuant to the applicable domestic
ground of improper venue. law. Only after the question of which court has
By its own terms, the Convention applies to all jurisdiction is determined will the issue of venue be
international transportation of persons performed taken up. This second question shall be governed
by aircraft for hire. Whether the transportation is by the law of the court to which the case is
"international" is determined by the contract of the submitted.
parties, which in the case of passengers is the
ticket. When the contract of carriage provides for The place of destination, within the meaning of the
the transportation of the passenger between Warsaw Convention, is determined by the terms of
certain designated terminals "within the territories the contract of carriage or, specifically in this case,
of two High Contracting Parties," the provisions of the ticket between the passenger and the carrier.
the Convention automatically apply and Examination of the petitioner's ticket shows that
exclusively govern the rights and liabilities of the his ultimate destination is San Francisco. Although
airline and its passenger. The flight involved in the the date of the return fight was left open, the
case at bar is international and thus subject to the contract of carriage between the parties indicates
Warsaw Convention. that NOA was bound to transport the petitioner to
San Francisco from Manila. Manila should therefore
Whether Article 28(1) refers to jurisdiction or only be considered merely an agreed stopping place and
to venue is a question over which authorities are not the destination.
sharply divided. Venue and jurisdiction are entirely

Read the Full Text
EH401
Article 1(2) also draws a distinction between a provision in the Convention which defines that
"destination" and an "agreed stopping place." It is jurisdiction. Article 22 23 merely fixes the
the "destination" and not an "agreed stopping monetary ceiling for the liability of the carrier in
place" that controls for purposes of ascertaining cases covered by the Convention. If the carrier is
jurisdiction under the Convention. The contract is indeed guilty of willful misconduct, it can avail
a single undivided operation, beginning with the itself of the limitations set forth in this article. But
place of departure and ending with the ultimate this can be done only if the action has first been
destination. commenced properly under the rules on
jurisdiction set forth in Article 28 (1).
Petitioner’s contention: The petitioner argues that
the Warsaw Convention was originally written in Article 24 cannot be applied in the case at bar.
French and that in interpreting its provisions,
American courts have taken the broad view that the The provision assumes that the court is vested with
French legal meaning must govern. In French, he jurisdiction to rule in favor of the disadvantaged
says, the "domicile" of the carrier means every place minor. As already explained, such jurisdiction is
where it has a branch office. absent in the case at bar.
Notably, the domicile of the carrier is only one of CONCLUSION:

the places where the complaint is allowed to be
filed under Article 28(1). The plaintiff's request to A number of countries have signified their concern
adopt this basis of jurisdiction is in effect a request over the problem of citizens being denied access to
to create a new jurisdictional standard for the their own courts because of the restrictive
Convention. There is no suggestion in the treaty provision of Article 28(1) of the Warsaw
that French law was intended to govern the Convention. Among these is the United States,
meaning of Warsaw's terms, nor have we found any which has proposed an amendment that would
indication to this effect in its legislative history or enable the passenger to sue in his own domicile if
from our study of its application and interpretation the carrier does business in that jurisdiction. The
by other courts. proposal was incorporated in the Guatemala
Protocol amending the Warsaw Convention but it
Petitioner’s contention: The petitioner claims that is still ineffective because it has not yet been
the lower court erred in not ruling that Art. 28(1) of ratified by the required minimum number of
the Warsaw Convention does not apply to actions contracting parties.
based on tort. Pending such ratification, the petitioner will still
The petitioner alleges that the gravamen of the have to file his complaint only in any of the four
complaint is that private respondent acted places designated by Article 28(1) of the Warsaw
arbitrarily and in bad faith, discriminated against Convention. The proposed amendment bolsters the
the petitioner, and committed a willful misconduct ruling of this Court that a citizen does not
because it canceled his confirmed reservation and necessarily have the right to sue in his own courts
gave his reserved seat to someone who had no simply because the defendant airline has a place of
better right to it. In short, the private respondent business in his country. WHEREFORE, the petition
committed a tort. Such allegation, he submits, is DENIED.
removes the present case from the coverage of the
Warsaw Convention. This position is negated by Sabena Belgian Airlines v. Court of Appeals
Husserl v. Swiss Air Transport Company, where the G.R. No. 104685, March 14, 1996
article in question was interpreted. The allegation
of willful misconduct resulting in a tort is FACTS:
insufficient to exclude the case from the
comprehension of the Warsaw Convention. Plaintiff Ma. Paula San Agustin, herein private
respondent, was a passenger on board Flight SN
The petitioner has apparently misconstrued the 284 of defendant airline originating from
import of Article 25(1) of the Convention. It is Casablanca to Brussels, Belgium on her way back to
understood under this article that the court called Manila. She checked in her luggage which
upon to determine the applicability of the contained her valuables, namely: jewelries valued
limitation provision must first be vested with the at $2,350.00; clothes $1,500.00; shoes/bag $150;
appropriate jurisdiction. Article 28(1) is the accessories $75; luggage itself $10.00; or a total of

Read the Full Text
EH401
$4,265.00, for which she was issued Tag No. 71423. not include in his checked baggage, and the carrier
She stayed overnight in Brussels and her luggage may refuse to carry as checked baggage, fragile or
was left on board Flight SN 284. perishable articles, money, jewelry, precious
metals, negotiable papers, securities or other
She arrived at Manila International Airport and valuables.”
immediately submitted her Tag No. 71423 but her
luggage was missing. She was advised to ISSUE:
accomplish and submit a property Irregularity
Report which she submitted and filed on the same Whether or not the airline is liable for the lost
day but when her luggage could not be found, she luggage.
filed a formal complaint with defendant’s Local
Manager. RULING:
Subsequently, plaintiff was furnished copies of Yes

telexes of defendant’s Brussel’s Office that the
latter found her luggage and that they have broken Fault or negligence consists in the omission of that
the locks for identification. Plaintiff was assured by diligence which is demanded by the nature of an
the defendant that it has notified its Manila Office obligation and corresponds with the circumstances
that the luggage will be shipped to Manila. But of the person, of the time, and of the place. When
unfortunately plaintiff was informed that the the source of an obligation is derived from a
luggage was lost for the second time. contract, the mere breach or non-fulfillment of
the prestation gives rise to the presumption of
Plaintiff demanded from the defendant the money fault on the part of the obligor. This rule is not
value of the luggage and its contents or its exchange different in the case of common carriers in the
value, but defendant refused to settle the carriage of goods which, indeed, are bound to
claim. Defendant asserts in its Answer and its observe not just the due diligence of a good father
evidence tend to show that while it admits that the of a family but that of “extraordinary” care in the
plaintiff was a passenger with a piece of checked in vigilance over the goods.
luggage, the loss of the luggage was due to
plaintiff’s sole if not contributory negligence. The only exceptions to the foregoing extraordinary
responsibility of the common carrier is when the
Defenses: Petitioner airline company, in loss, destruction, or deterioration of the goods is
contending that the alleged negligence of private due to any of the following causes:
respondent should be considered the primary
cause for the loss of her luggage, avers that, despite (1) Flood, storm, earthquake, lightning, or other
her awareness that the flight ticket had been natural disaster or calamity;
confirmed only for Casablanca and Brussels, and (2) Act of the public enemy in war, whether
that her flight from Brussels to Manila had yet international or civil;
to be confirmed, she did not retrieve the (3) Act or omission of the shipper or owner of the
luggage upon arrival in Brussels. Petitioner goods;
insists that private respondent, being a seasoned (4) The character of the goods or defects in the
international traveler, must have likewise been packing or in the containers;
familiar with the standard provisions contained in (5) Order or act of competent public authority.’
her flight ticket that items of value are required to
be hand-carried by the passenger and that the Not one of the above excepted causes obtains in
liability of the airline or loss, delay or damage to this case.
baggage would be limited, in any event, to only
US$20.00 per kilo unless a higher value is declared The airline cannot invoke the tort doctrine of
in advance and corresponding additional charges proximate cause because the private respondent’s
are paid thereon. At the Casablanca International luggage was lost while it was in the custody of
Airport, private respondent, in checking in her petitioner. The “loss of said baggage not only once
luggage, evidently did not declare its contents or by twice,” said the appellate court, “underscores
value, pursuant to Section 5(c), Article IX, of the the wanton negligence and lack of care” on the part
General Conditions of Carriage (Warsaw of the carrier. The above findings foreclose
Convention), which states that: “Passengers shall whatever rights petitioner might have had to the

Read the Full Text
EH401
possible limitation of liabilities enjoyed by obligation, including moral and exemplary

international air carriers under the Warsaw damages.
Convention.
In Alitalia vs. Intermediate Appellate Court, the

Court held that “the Warsaw Convention however
denies to the carrier availment ‘of the provisions
which exclude or limit his liability, if the damage is
caused by his willful misconduct or by such default
on his part as, in accordance with the law of the
court seized of the case, is considered to be
equivalent to willful misconduct,’ or ‘if the damage
is (similarly) caused x x x by any agent of the carrier
acting within the scope of his employment.’
The Hague Protocol amended the Warsaw

Convention by removing the provision that if the
airline took all necessary steps to avoid the
damage, it could exculpate itself completely, and
declaring the stated limits of liability not applicable
‘if it is proved that the damage resulted from an act
or omission of the carrier, its servants or agents,
done with intent to cause damage or recklessly and
with knowledge that damage would probably
result.’ The same deletion was effected by the
Montreal Agreement of 1966, with the result that a
passenger could recover unlimited damages upon
proof of wilful misconduct.
The Convention does not thus operate as an

exclusive enumeration of the instances of an
airline’s liability, or as an absolute limit of the
extent of that liability. It should be deemed a limit
of liability only in those cases where the cause of
the death or injury to person, or destruction, loss
or damage to property or delay in its transport is
not attributable to or attended by any willful
misconduct, bad faith, recklessness or
otherwise improper conduct on the part of any
official or employee for which the carrier is
responsible, and there is otherwise no special
or extraordinary form of resulting injury.
Pertinent Ruling: The Court thus sees no error in

the preponderant application to the instant case by
the appellate court, as well as by the trial court, of
the usual rules on the extent of recoverable
damages beyond the Warsaw limitations. Under
domestic law and jurisprudence (the Philippines
being the country of destination), the attendance
of gross negligence (given the equivalent of fraud
or bad faith) holds the common carrier liable for all
damages which can be reasonably attributed,
although unforeseen, to the nonperformance of the

Read the Full Text
EH401 TALA NATION
Minciano vs. Brimo Ruling:

G.R. No. 22595, November 1, 1924
YES. The national law shall govern.
Facts:
HOWEVER, the law of Turkey was not proven by
Joseph G. Brimo (decedent), a citizen of Turkey, the opponent. There was no evidence that the
died and left a partition of the estate. Juan Miciano, scheme of partition violated the decedent’s
the judicial administrator of the estate filed a national law. Thus, they were presumed to be the
scheme of partition. same as those of the Philippines.
However, Andre Brimo, one of the brothers of the YES. The provision is void.
deceased, opposed it. He assigned as error the:
This was based on the issue (second assignment of
1. Approval of said scheme of partition error above) as to the exclusion of the opponent as
a legatee, inasmuch as he is one of the persons
2. Denial of his participation in the designated in such will. The second clause of the
inheritance will states that:
a. because the provision in the will "Second. I likewise desire to state that although, by
was contrary to the law wherein law, I am a Turkish citizen, this citizenship having
the national law shall govern the been conferred upon me by conquest and not by
testamentary dispositions of the free choice, nor by nationality and, on the other
decedent’s will hand, having resided for a considerable length of
time in the Philippine Islands where I succeeded in
3. Denial of MR for the order approving the acquiring all of the property that I now possess, it
partition is my wish that the distribution of my property
and everything in connection with this, my will,
4. The declaration that the Turkish laws be made and disposed of in accordance with the
are impertinent to this cause, and the laws in force in the Philippine Islands,
failure to postpone the approval of the requesting all of my relatives to respect this wish,
scheme of partition and the delivery of the otherwise, I annul and cancel beforehand
deceased’s business to Pietro Lanza until whatever disposition found in this will
the receipt of the depositions requested in favorable to the person or persons who fail to
reference to Turkish laws. comply with this request."
(kana ako mga gibold ang importante – bati So the institution of legatees in this will is
pagkasuwat ang kaso giatay katag kaayo) conditioned that the instituted legatees must
respect the testator’s will to distribute his
Basically, his opposition is based on the fact that property, not in accordance with the laws of his
the partition in question puts into effect the nationality, but in accordance with the laws of the
provisions of the decedent’s will which are not Philippines.
in accordance with the laws of his Turkish
nationality, for which reason they are void as However, such condition is void, being contrary to
being in violation of Article 10 of the Civil Code law because it expressly ignores the testator’s
(Second par., Article 16 sa NCC) national law when, according to Article 10 of the
Civil Code (par. 2, Article 16 of NCC), such national
Issue: law of the testator is the one to govern his
testamentary dispositions. In effect, the provision
1. WON the national law of the testator is the is deemed unwritten.
one to govern his testamentary
disposition. Thus, the exclusion of the oppositor as legatee is
void as it was done pursuant to a void stipulation.
2. WON the provision in the will regarding
the denial of the opponent’s participation
in the inheritance is void.
BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

Read the Full Text
EH401 TALA NATION
Estate of C.O. Bohanan v. Edward, Mary Lydia, dispositions are to be governed by the national law
and Magdalena Bohanan of the testator, and as it has been decided and it is
G.R. No. L-12105, January 30, 1960 not disputed that the national law of the testator is
that of the State of Nevada.
Facts:
The old Civil Code, which is applicable to this case
Court of First Instance of Manila admitted to because the testator died in 1944, expressly
probate a last will and testament of C. O. Bohanan, provides that successional rights to personal
executed by him in Manila. In the said order, the property are to be governed by the national law of
court made the following findings: the person whose succession is in question.
He was born in Nebraska and therefore a citizen of The court below refused to recognize the claim of
that state, or at least a citizen of California where the widow on the ground that the laws of Nevada,
some of his properties are located. of which the deceased was a citizen, allow him to
dispose of all of his properties without requiring
Notwithstanding the long residence of the him to leave any portion of his estate to his wife.
decedent in the Philippines, his stay here was Section 9905 of Nevada Compiled Laws of 1925
merely temporary, and he continued and remained provides:
to be a citizen of the United States and of the state
of his particular choice, which is Nevada, as stated "Every person over the age of eighteen years, of
in his will. His permanent residence or domicile in sound mind, may, by last will, dispose of all his or
the United States depended upon his personal her estate, real and personal, the same being
intent or desire, and he selected Nevada as his chargeable with the payment of the testator's
domicile and therefore at the time of his death, he debts."
was a citizen of that state. As stated in the will,
Philippine Trust Company is appointed as It is not disputed that the laws of Nevada allow a
executor. testator to dispose of all his properties by will. It
does not appear that at the time of the hearing of
The executor filed a project of partition, making, in the project of partition, the above-quoted provision
accordance with the provisions of the will: the total was introduced in evidence, as it was the executor's
estate (after deducting administration expenses) of duty to do. The law of Nevada, being a foreign law,
P211,639.33 in cash, the testator gave his grandson can only be proved in our courts in the form and
P90,819.67 and one-half of all shares of stock of manner provided for by our Rules, which are as
several mining companies and to his brother and follows:
sister the same amount. To his children he gave a
legacy of only P6,000 each, or a total of P12,000. "SEC. 41. Proof of public or official record.
(Wife has no share) — An official record or an entry therein, when
admissible for any purpose, may be
The wife Magdalena C. Bohanan and her two evidenced by an official publication thereof or by a
children question the validity of the testamentary copy attested by the officer having the legal
provisions disposing of the estate in the manner custody of the record, or by his deputy, and
above indicated, claiming that they have been accompanied, if the record is not kept in the
deprived of the legitime that the laws of the forum Philippines, with a certificate that
concede to them. such officer has the custody." . . . (Rule 123)
Issue: We have, however, consulted the records of the

case in the court below and we have found that
Whether or not the wife and children are entitled during the hearing of the motion of Magdalena C.
to their legitime according to the law of the forum Bohanan for withdrawal of P20,000 as her share,
(Philippine Law). the foreign law, especially Section 9905, Compiled
Nevada Laws, was introduced in evidence by
Held: appellants' (herein) counsel. Again, said law was
presented by the counsel for the executor and
No, As in accordance with Article 10 of the old Civil admitted by the Court as Exhibit "B" during the
Code (NCC Art. 16), the validity of testamentary hearing of the case.

Read the Full Text
EH401 TALA NATION
testament was presented, probated, allowed and

In addition, the other appellants, children of the registered with the Registry of Wills at the County
testator, do not dispute the above-quoted of Philadelphia, USA and Clement McLaughlin was
provision of the laws of the State of Nevada. Under appointed as administrator. And thus, Nenita
all the above circumstances, we are constrained to prayed for her appointment as administratrix of
hold that the pertinent law of Nevada, especially the estate of the properties located here in the
Section 9905 of the Compiled Nevada Laws of Philippines.
1925, can be taken judicial notice of by us, without
proof of such law having been offered at the Hermogenes filed an opposition to the reprobate
hearing of the project of partition. alleging the will in question is a forgery. The
intrinsic provisions (American Laws) of the will are
Notes: null and void and even if such are invoked, it still
could not apply as they would work injustice and
1. Objection of Magdalena were filed during injury to him. However, Hermogenes through Atty.
the submission of Project of Partition. Loyola filed a Motion to Dismiss Opposition (With
Waiver of Rights or Interests). He also filed another
2. Testator and Magdalena secured a divorce manifestation confirming the withdrawal of his
decree in Nevada, USA. It was recognized opposition and acknowledging the same to be his
in the Philippines prior to testator’s death. voluntary act and deed.
3. While the case was involving the estate Hence, ex-parte presentation of evidence for the
was pending, Magdalena filed a motion to reprobate was made. Therafter, it was admitted to
withdraw Php 20,000 from her share in and allowed probate in the Philippines and Nenita
the conjugal property. was appointed administratrix of the estate.
Hermogenes then filed a petition for relief for the
4. A court order, which became final, stated order to be set aside on the ground that withdrawal
that there was no community property of his opposition was secured through fraudulent
acquired by the testator and Magdalena means. That it was inserted among the papers
during their marriage. which he signed and that the lawyer who filed such
opposition is not his counsel of record. And another
Cayetano v Leonidas motion entitled “Motion to Vacate and/or Set Aside
G.R. No. 54919, May 30, 1984 the Order and/or dimiss the case for lack of
jurisdiction”.
Facts:
Hermogenes died and left a will appointing Polly
Adoracion Campos, an American Citizen and had a Cayetano as the executrix. She therefore filed a
permanent residence at Philadelphia, motion to substitute in the instant case.
Pennsylvania, USA died in the Philippines leaving
properties here and abroad. She was temporarily Issues:
residing with her sister at Malate, Manila at the
time of her death. The surviving heirs herein are WHETHER OR NOT HERMOGENES WAS
her father, petitioner Hermogenes Campos and her DIVESTED LEGITIME RESERVED BY LAW FOR
sisters, private respondents Nenita, Remedios and HIM. (NO)
Marieta. Hermogenes was the only compulsory
heir so he executed an Affidavit of Adjudication Whether or not CFI Manila has jurisdiction to the
whereby he adjudicated unto himself the case. (YES)
ownership of the entire estate of Adoracion.
Whether or not the respondent judge acted with
Nenita filed a petition for reprobate of a will of the grave abuse of discretion. (NO)
deceased Adoracion. She alleged that the will was
executed in the US, that Adoracion was an Ruling:
American Citizen at the time of her death,
permanent resident of USA and that her will was NO. PENNSYLVANIA, USA LAWS APPLY.
made according to the laws of Pennsylvania, USA.
Also, after her death herein, the last will and

Read the Full Text
EH401 TALA NATION
Private respondents have sufficiently established

Adoracion was at the time of her death, an
American Citizen and a permanent resident of USA.
Under Article 16 and Article 1039 of the Civil
Code, the law that governs Adoracion’s will is
the law of Pennsylvania, USA which is the
NATIONAL LAW of the decedent.
Pennsylvania laws does not provide for legitimes

and that estate may even be given away to a
complete stranger. However, Petitioner argues
such law should not apply because it would be
contrary to public policy of the Philippine Law.
However, it is a settled rule that as regards to
intrinsic validity of the provisions of a will, the
national law of the decedent must apply.
YES. CFI MANILA HAS JURISDICTION.
Rule 73, Section 1 of the Rules of Court provides

that “...if he is an inhabitant of a foreign country, the
CFI of any province in which he had estate” has
jurisdiction.
The settlement of the estate of Adoracion was

correctly filed with the CFI of Manila where she had
an estate therein. The contention of petitioner that
Adoracion was a usual resident of Cavite and thus
CFI Cavite should have jurisdiction is untenable.
Moreover, petitioner is now estopped from
questioning the jurisdiction of the probate court. A
party cannot invoke the jurisdiction of the court to
secure affirmative relief, against his opponent and
after failing to obtain such relief, repudiate or
question the same.
NO GRAVE ABUSE OF DISCRETION.
No proof was adduced to support the contention

that the motion to withdraw was secured through
fraudulent means and that Atty. Loyola at the time
of filing motion was the substitute lawyer for
petitioner and thus, the counsel on record. Also,
there was a manifestation later filed confirming the
Motion to Dismiss Opposition. Repudiation of
inheritance valid.
Respondent judge acted correctly in hearing the

probate of the will ex-parte, there being no other
opposition.

Read the Full Text

Facts:: Manila Hotel V NLRC G.R. No. 120077, October 13, 2000

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Facts:: Manila Hotel V NLRC G.R. No. 120077, October 13, 2000

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Facts:: Manila Hotel V NLRC G.R. No. 120077, October 13, 2000

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CONFLICT OF LAWS (2020) CASE DIGEST ATTY.

Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

jurisdiction over respondent’s claim in the NLRC

 the selection and engagement of the April 27, 1990:

Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

music in violation of Islamic laws and (3)

Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

Ruling of the Court of Appeals

Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

Nippon Engineering Consultants Co. Ltd. RTC:

Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

 jurisdiction What they rather raise as grounds to question

Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

NLRC Ruling: Claimants contended that NLRC gravely abused its

Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

3. Insubordination or disobedience to Top intended by the parties (lex loci intentiones) to

ISSUE:  Illegally withheld taxes charged against

Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

2. The plaintiff is not doing business and is not No.

Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

In an action in personam, jurisdiction over the

With that stipulation of fact, ASIAVEST cannot now

Under paragraph (b) of Section 50, Rule 39 of the

The extraterritorial service in the Philippines was

Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

Alice Van Dorn v. Hon. Romillo and Richard

Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

Friedensweiler in the Federal Republic of Germany.

ISSUE: United States vs. Mata cannot be successfully relied

Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

adulterous the infidelity of a married woman to her

Republic vs. Manalo YES.

FACTS: Art. 26. All marriages solemnized outside the

Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

Silverio vs. Republic Whether or not petitioner is entitled to the

Petitioner Rommel Jacinto Dantes Silverio filed a No.

Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

The acts, events or factual errors contemplated

Under the Civil Register Law, a birth certificate is a

Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

In determining petitioner's status, it is necessary to Pertinent Ruling: Respondent is not in default.

Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

Petitioner cannot secure reimbursement from Continental Micronesia (CMI) is a foreign

Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

Basso filed a complaint for Illegal Dismissal. CMI ISSUE:

Estanuts by BEANIZA|CADELEÑA|ESTAVILLA|MELENDEZ|SABUSAY UNIVERSITY OF SAN CARLOS

with Saudia. They were separated from service