Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Conflict of Laws Case Digest Compilation
Conflict of Laws Case Digest Compilation
Extraterritorial Service
FACTS:
In personal actions, if the respondents are residents of the
Cynthia Logarta and Teresa Tormis were the daughters of Luis
order:
Personal Service;
In 1999, Victoria alleged that Cynthia and Teresa with the help
2.
of another sibling defrauded Luis, who was then very ill and
3.
of court.
1.
state; that it was done without Luiss lawyer; that the ratification
2.
such places and for such time as the court may order, in
circumstances.
applicable rules?
correct.
HELD:
Yes. The Supreme Court agreed with the arguments
presented by Teresa. The Supreme Court also emphasized:
There are generally two types of actions: actions in rem and
1.
plaintiff;
2.
1.
2.
3.
FACTS:
tort (the place where the alleged tortious conduct took place).
for help and two of her Arab co-workers were arrested and
detained in Indonesia. Later, Saudia Airlines re-assigned her to
Saudi. She did but to her surprise, she was brought to a Saudi
FACTS:
In 1989, Cesar Urbino, Sr. sued Poro Point Shipping Services
for damages the former incurred when one of the latters ship
ran aground causing losses to Urbino. Urbino impleaded
Banco Do Brasil (BDB), a foreign corporation not engaged in
business in the Philippines nor does it have any office here or
any agent. BDB was impleaded simply because it has a claim
over the sunken ship. BDB however failed to appear multiple
times. Eventually, a judgment was rendered and BDB was
adjudged to pay $300,000.00 in damages in favor of Urbino for
BDB being a nuisance defendant.
BDB assailed the said decision as it argued that there was no
valid service of summons because the summons was issued to
the ambassador of Brazil. Further, the other summons which
HELD:
for other reliefs. The asking for other reliefs effectively asked
Banco Do Brasil.
HELD:
No. Banco Do Brasil is correct. Although the suit is originally in
rem as it was BDBs claim on the sunken ship which was used
as the basis for it being impleaded, the action nevertheless
became an in personam one when Urbino asked for damages
in the said amount. As such, only a personal service of
dismissed.
HELD:
No. The trial court did the proper thing in taking cognizance of
country, and thus, the court cannot acquire jurisdiction over his
person and therefore cannot validly try and decide the case
against him.
Conveniens
FACTS:
matter, the parties, the issues, the property, the res. Also
considers, whether it is fair to cause a defendant to travel
Minoru Kitamura for the latter to head the said project. The ICA
This case is not yet in the second phase because upon the
RTCs taking cognizance of the case, Hasegawa immediately
filed a motion to dismiss, which was denied. He filed a motion
for reconsideration, which was also denied. Then he bypassed
the proper procedure by immediately filing a petition for
FACTS:
In 1984, a Hong Kong court ordered Antonio Heras to pay
US$1.8 million or its equivalent, with interest, to Asiavest Ltd.
Apparently, Heras guaranteed a certain loan in Hong Kong and
the debtor in said loan defaulted hence, the creditor, Asiavest,
ran after Heras. But before said judgment was issued and even
during trial, Heras already left for good Hong Kong and he
officially terminated.
HELD:
the Palace Hotel. The labor arbiter who handled the case ruled
case.
HELD:
judgment.
reasons:
1.
2.
separate entities.
3.
4.
not found therein, the court cannot acquire jurisdiction over his
5.
person and therefore cannot validly try and decide the case
the Philippines;
enforced against the Palace Hotel (in the first place, it was not
served any summons).
The Supreme Court emphasized that under the rule of forum
non conveniens, a Philippine court or agency may assume
jurisdiction over the case if it chooses to do so provided:
(1) that the Philippine court is one to which the parties may
Demetria et al.
FACTS:
the
Bank,
through
its
conservator,
Leonida
FACTS:
was
one
of
them.
Laureano
asked
for
the said Bank, filed a motion for intervention with the trial court.
filed a labor case for illegal dismissal against SAL. But in 1987,
The trial court denied the motion since the trial has been
he withdrew the labor case and instead filed a civil case for
Laureano filed the case here in the Philippines. SAL moved for
HELD:
case.
HELD:
of parties even though the first case is in the name of the bank
HELD:
proof. SAL failed to prove such law hence Philippine law shall
apply. However, the case must be dismissed on the ground of
he only filed the money claim in 1987 or more than three years
FACTS:
342 SCRA 213 Conflict of Laws Private International Law
In February 1993, Hyundai Engineering and Construction Co.,
FACTS:
found.
Where death has resulted from the injury, a lump sum equal
HELD:
No. The two Venezuelan Laws were not duly proven as fact
before the court. Only mere photocopies of the laws were
presented as evidence. For a copy of a foreign public
mandatory:
HELD:
No. The specific Saudi labor laws were not proven in court.
EDI did not present proof as to the existence and the specific
engaged.
pay was merely 2,948 Riyal which is lower than the $850.00
right there and then was removed from his post. The
OF APPEALS
FACTS:
In 1985, the High Court of Malaysia ordered the Philippine
National Construction Corporation (PNCC) to pay $5.1 million
to Asiavest Merchant Bankers (M) Berhad. This was the result
against PNCC in the Philippines. The case was filed with the
the wheels are defective and did not comply with certain US
HELD:
Yes. PNCC failed to prove and substantiate its bare
HELD:
conducted,
following
due
citation
or
voluntary
FACTS:
In 1998, Atty. Benjamin Dacanay went to Canada to seek
medical help. In order for him to take advantage of Canadas
free medical aid program he became a Canadian citizen in
2004. In 2006 however, he re-acquired his Philippine
citizenship pursuant to Republic Act 9225 of the Citizenship
Retention and Re-Acquisition Act of 2003. In the same year, he
returned to the Philippines and he now intends to resume his
practice of law.
ISSUE: Whether or not Benjamin Dacanay may still resume his
practice of law.
HELD:
Approved,
FRANKLIN DRILON
JOSE DE VENECIA JR.
President of the Senate
Speaker of the House of Representative
This Act, which is a consolidation of Senate Bill No. 2130 and
House Bill No. 4720 was finally passed by the the House of
Representatives and Senate on August 25, 2003 and August
26, 2003, respectively.
OSCAR G. YABES
ROBERTO P. NAZARENO
Secretary of Senate
Secretary General
House of Represenatives
Approved: August 29, 2003
GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO
President of the Philippines
LLORENTE VS CA
345 scra 592
Nationality Principle
FACTS:
Lorenzo and petitioner Paula Llorente was married before a
parish priest. Before the outbreak of war, Lorenzo departed for
the United States and Paula was left at the conjugal home.
Lorenzo was naturalized by the United State. After the
liberation of the Philippines he went home and visited his wife
to which he discovered that his wife was pregnant and was
having an adulterous relationship. Lorenzo returned to the US
and filed for divorce. Lorenzo married Alicia LLorente; they
lived together for 25 years and begot 3 children. Lorenzo on
his last will and testament bequeathed all his property to Alicia
and their 3 children. Paula filed a petition for letters
administration over Lorenzos estate. The RTC ruled in favor of
Paula. On appeal, the decision was modified declaring Alicia
as co-owner of whatever properties they have acquired.
Hence, this petition to the Supreme Court.
ISSUES: Whether or not the divorce obtained by Lorenzo
capacitated him to remarry. Who are entitled to inherit from the
late Lorenzo Llorente?
HELD:
In Van Dorn vs Ramillo Jr. the Supreme Court held that owing
that aliens may obtain divorce abroad provided that they are
bigamous.
foreigner.
17, 1942 out of which were born six children. On August 11,
FACTS:
his office.
her for 18 years from the time of their marriage up to his death
cannot
be
given
retroactive
effect
to
validate
More than five months after the issuance of the divorce decree,
Geiling filed two complaints for adultery before the City Fiscal
of Manila alleging in one that, while still married to said Geiling,
Pilapil had an affair with a certain William Chia. The Assistant
Fiscal, after the corresponding investigation, recommended the
dismissal of the cases on the ground of insufficiency of
evidence. However, upon review, the respondent city fiscal
Victor approved a resolution directing the filing of 2 complaint
for adultery against the petitioner. The case entitled PP
Philippines vs. Pilapil and Chia was assigned to the court
presided by the respondent judge Ibay-Somera.
A motion to quash was filed in the same case which was
denied by the respondent. Pilapil filed this special civil action
for certiorari and prohibition, with a prayer for a TRO, seeking
the annulment of the order of the lower court denying her
motion to quash.
As cogently argued by Pilapil, Article 344 of the RPC thus
presupposes that the marital relationship is still subsisting at
the time of the institution of the criminal action for adultery.
ISSUE: Did Geiling have legal capacity at the time of the filing
of the complaint for adultery, considering that it was done after
obtaining a divorce decree?
HELD:
WHEREFORE, the questioned order denying petitioners MTQ
is SET ASIDE and another one entered DISMISSING the
complaint for lack of jurisdiction. The TRO issued in this
case is hereby made permanent.
NO
Under Article 344 of the RPC, the crime of adultery cannot be
prosecuted except upon a sworn written complaint filed by the
offended spouse. It has long since been established, with
unwavering consistency, that compliance with this rule is a
jurisdictional, and not merely a formal, requirement.
Corollary to such exclusive grant of power to the offended
spouse to institute the action, it necessarily follows that such
initiator must have the status, capacity or legal representation
to do so at the time of the filing of the criminal action. This is a
logical consequence since the raison detre of said provision of
law would be absent where the supposed offended party had
ceased to be the spouse of the alleged offender at the time of
the filing of the criminal case.
Stated differently, the inquiry would be whether it is necessary
in the commencement of a criminal action for adultery that the
marital bonds between the complainant and the accused be
unsevered and existing at the time of the institution of the
action by the former against the latter.
In the present case, the fact that private respondent obtained a
valid divorce in his country, the Federal Republic of Germany,
is admitted. Said divorce and its legal effects may be
recognized in the Philippines insofar as private respondent is
concerned in view of the nationality principle in our civil law on
the matter of status of persons Under the same considerations
and rationale, private respondent, being no longer the husband
of petitioner, had no legal standing to commence the adultery
case under the imposture that he was the offended spouse at
the time he filed suit.
REPUBLIC VS IYOY
(G.R. NO. 152577)
FACTS:
The case is a petition for review by the RP represented by the
Office of the Solicitor General on certiorari praying for the
reversal of the decision of the CA dated July 30, 2001 affirming
the judgment of the RTC declaring the marriage of Crasus L.
Iyoy(respondent) and Ada Rosal-Iyoy null and void based on
Article 36.
ISSUE:
(1) Whether or not Blandinas marriage to Arturo void ab initio.
HELD:
HELD:
Details
Category: Civil Law Jurisprudence
FACTS:
provides.
FACTS:
On January 13, 1977, then President Ferdinand E. Marcos
issued Presidential Decree No. 1069 "Prescribing the
Procedure for the Extradition of Persons Who Have Committed
Crimes in a Foreign Country". The Decree is founded on: the
doctrine of incorporation under the Constitution; the mutual
concern for the suppression of crime both in the state where it
was committed and the state where the criminal may have
escaped; the extradition treaty with the Republic of Indonesia
and the intention of the Philippines to enter into similar treaties
with other interested countries; and the need for rules to guide
HELD:
mark.
ISSUE:
Whether or not a trademark causes confusion and is
likely to deceive the public is a question of fact which is to be
resolved by applying the "test of dominancy", meaning, if the
competing trademark contains the main or essential or
dominant features of another by reason of which confusion and
deception are likely to result.
HELD:
The word "LEE" is the most prominent and distinctive
feature of the appellant's trademark and all of the appellee's
"LEE" trademarks. It is the mark which draws the attention of
the buyer and leads him to conclude that the goods originated
from the same manufacturer. The alleged difference is too
insubstantial to be noticeable. The likelihood of confusion is
further made more probable by the fact that both parties are
engaged in the same line of business.
Although
the
Court
decided
in
favor
of
the
FACTS:
FACTS:
UIG and SBMA entered into a Lease and
Development Agreement (LDA) wherein SBMA leased to
UIG the Binictan Golf Course and appurenant facilities
thereto to be transforemed into a world-class 18-hole golf
course/resort. The LDA contained pre-termination clauses
which authorizes SBMA, after due notice to UIG, to
terminate the lease and immediately take possession of
the property if UIG commits a material breach of any of the
contracts conditions. SBMA wrote UIG, calling its attention
to its failure to deliver its various contactual obligations.
UIG imputed the delay to the default of its main contractor,
FF Cruz, but committed itself to comply with its
undertakibngs. The following month, SBMA declared UIG
in default. Six months later, UIG still failed to satisfy its
obligations so SBMA served a letter of pre-termination to
UIG. Shortly thereafter, the golf course was formally
closed and SBMA took possession of the subject
premises.
UIG filed a complaint against SBMA for Injuction and
Damages with prayer for TRO and preliminary injuction.
TC granted UIGs prayer and ordered SBMA to
restore possession of the golf course to UIG. In a
subsequent order, TC denied SBMAs motion to dismiss.
CA upheld UIGs capacity to sue, holding that SBMA
is estopped from questioning its standing. It also held that
ISSUES
1
2
3
RULING:
1. YES. As a general rule, unlicensed foreign non-resident
corporations cannot file suits in the Philippines. A
corporation has legal status only within the state or
territory in which it was organized. For this reason, a
corporation organized in another country has no
personality to file suits in the Philippines. In order to
subject a foreign corporation doing business in the country
to the jurisdiction of our courts, it must acquire a license
from the SEC and appoint an agent for service of process.
Without such license, it cannot institute a suit in the
Philippines. However, after contracting with a foreign
corporation, a domestic firm is estopped from denying the
formers capacity to sue.
3.
4.
ERIKS PTE., LTD. V. COURT OF APPEALS
[February 6, 1997]
Effect of Doing Business in Philippines without a
License: Barred From Access to Courts
FACTS:
1. Petitioner Eriks Pte., Ltd. is a nonresident
foreign corporation engaged in the manufacture and
HELD:
1.The Corporation Code provides:
Section 133. Doing business without a license
No foreign corporation transacting business in the
Philippines without a license, or its successors or
assigns, shall be permitted to maintain or intervene in
any action, suit or proceeding in any court or
administrative agency of the Philippines; but such
corporation may be sued or proceeded against before
Philippine courts or administrative tribunals on any
valid cause of action recognized under Philippine
laws. The aforementioned provision prohibits, not
merely absence of the prescribed license, but it also
bars a foreign corporation doing business in the
Philippines without such license access to our courts.
A foreign corporation without such license is not ipso
facto incapacitated from bringing an action. A license
is necessary only if it is transacting or doing
business in the country.
2. The test to determine whether a foreign company
is doing business in the Philippines, thus: x x x The
true test, however, seems to be whether the foreign
corporation is continuing the body or substance of the
business or enterprise for which it was organized or
whether it has substantially retired from it and turned