BANAAG, Jane Therese C.

Persons and Family Relations

JD 1-1A Case Digests – Conflict of Laws (Arts. 14-18)

Nationality principle in divorces filed abroad

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. MARELYN TANEDO MANALO

G.R. No. 221029. April 24, 2018

PERALTA, J.

CASE DOCTRINE:
Blind adherence to the nationality principle must be disallowed if it would cause unjust
discrimination and oppression to certain classes of individuals whose rights are equally protected
by law.

FACTS:
1. Statement of characters
Respondent, Marelyn Tanedo Manalo, is previously married in the Philippines to Yoshino Minoro,
a Japanese national. Manalo filed for a case for divorce in Japan and after due proceedings, a
divorce decree was rendered by the Japanese Court.

The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) entered its appearance for petitioner, Republic of the
Philippines.

2. Statement of the case

This is a petition for review on certiorari. It seeks to reverse and set aside the resolution of the
Court of Appeals (CA), who ruled in favor of Manalo.

3. Statement of the facts

Respondent filed for a petition for cancellation of Entry of marriage in the Civil Registry of San
Juan, Metro Manila, by virtue of a judgment of the aforementioned divorce decree.

The RTC denied Manalo’s petition. It opined that under Article 15 of the New Civil Code, the
Philippine law does not afford Filipinos the right to file for a divorce whether they are married to
Filipinos or to foreigners.

On appeal, the CA overturned the RTC decision. It held that Article 26 of the Family Code of the
Philippines (Family Code) is applicable even if it was Manalo who filed for divorce against her
Japanese husband. The fact that it was Manalo who filed the divorce case is inconsequential. The
BANAAG, Jane Therese C. Persons and Family Relations
JD 1-1A Case Digests – Conflict of Laws (Arts. 14-18)

OSG filed a motion for reconsideration, but was denied by the CA; hence, this petition being raised
to the Supreme Court (SC).

ISSUE:
Is the divorce obtained by Manalo in Japan valid under Philippine laws?

RULING:
The SC cannot determine the validity of Manalo’s divorce obtained in Japan due to insufficient
evidence.

Article 15 of the Civil Code of the Philippines provides that “laws relating to family rights and duties
or to the status, condition and legal capacity of persons are binding upon citizens of the
Philippines, even though living abroad.”

Meanwhile, Paragraph 2 of Article 26 of the Family Code states that “Where a marriage between
a Filipino citizen and a foreigner is validly celebrated and a divorce is thereafter validly obtained
abroad by the alien spouse capacitating him or her to remarry, the Filipino spouse shall have
capacity to remarry under Philippine law.”

Here, the SC held that invoking the nationality principle under Art. 15 is erroneous. Such principle
is not an absolute and unbending rule. In fact, the mere existence of Paragraph 2 of Article 26 is
a testament that the State may provide for an exception thereto. Furthermore, aliens may obtain
divorces abroad, which may be recognized in the Philippines, provided they are valid according
to their national law.

However, the Court cannot yet grant Manalo's petition to recognize and enforce the divorce
decree rendered by the Japanese court. The Japanese law on divorce must still be proved, as
these are not among those matters that Filipino judges are supposed to know by reason of their
judicial function.

Wherefore, the petition for review on certiorari is denied and the CA resolutions are partially
affirmed. The case is remanded to the court of origin for further proceedings and reception of
evidence as to the relevant Japanese law on divorce.
BANAAG, Jane Therese C. Persons and Family Relations
JD 1-1A Case Digests – Conflict of Laws (Arts. 14-18)

Renvoi doctrine in testamentary provisions

IN THE MATTER OF THE TESTATE ESTATE OF EDWARD E. CHRISTENSEN, DECEASED.

ADOLFO C. AZNAR, and LUCY CHRISTENSEN, vs. HELEN CHRISTENSEN GARCIA
G.R No. L-16749 January 31, 1963

LABRADOR, J.:

CASE DOCTRINE:
The Philippine Court must apply its own law as directed in the conflict of laws rule of the state of
the decedent.

FACTS:
1. Statement of Characters
The deceased Edward E. Christensen was a citizen of the United States and of the State of
California at the time of his death but was domiciled in the Philippines during such time. He
executed a will in the Philippines declaring Maria Lucy Christensen, heir-appellee, as his only
child who is entitled to the residue of all his property.

Meanwhile, he ratified the payment of only P3,600 to oppositor-appellant, Helen Christensen

Garcia, an acknowledged natural child of the deceased as declared by the Supreme Court in a
previous case.

2. Statement of the Case

This is an appeal from a decision of the Court of First Instance of Davao. It approved, among
other things, the final accounts of the executor.

3. Statement of Facts
Opposition to the approval of the project of partition was filed by Christensen Garcia, who alleged
that the law that should govern the estate of the deceased Christensen should be the entire law
of California because several foreign elements are involved. Further, it was contended that
Section 946 of the California Civil Code, which requires that the domicile of the decedent, in this
case the Philippines, should apply.
BANAAG, Jane Therese C. Persons and Family Relations
JD 1-1A Case Digests – Conflict of Laws (Arts. 14-18)

On the other hand, appellee argued that the internal law of the State of California should apply
since the deceased was a citizen thereof. Such internal law dictates that a testator has the right
to dispose of his property in the way he desires.

The lower court ruled that in favor of the heir-appellee. Oppositor, filed various motions for
reconsideration, but these were denied. Hence, this appeal.

ISSUE:
Is the testamentary distribution of the estate of the deceased governed by the laws of the
Philippines?

RULING:
Yes. The law that governs the validity of his testamentary dispositions is defined in Article 16 of
the Civil Code of the Philippines, which is as follows:

“Real property as well as personal property is subject to the law of the country where it is situated.

However, intestate and testamentary successions, both with respect to the order of succession
and to the amount of successional rights and to the intrinsic validity of testamentary provisions,
shall be regulated by the national law of the person whose succession is under consideration,
whatever may be the nature of the property and regardless of the country where said property
may be found.”

In the case at bar, the Supreme Court ruled that the “national law” indiciated in the above-quoted
provision cannot apply to any general American law since each state of the Union of America has
its own private law applicable to its citizens only and in force only within the state. Hence, the
national law of the deceased can refer only to the private law of the State of California, specifically
Art. 946 of the California Civil Code. Under such provision, when a person is not domiciled in
California, the case is precisely referred back to the law of his domicile, the Philippines in the case
at bar.

Therefore, the case shall then be returned to the lower court with instructions that the partition be
made as the Philippine law on succession provides.
BANAAG, Jane Therese C. Persons and Family Relations
JD 1-1A Case Digests – Conflict of Laws (Arts. 14-18)

Lex loci intentiones when foreign law not proven

EDI-STAFFBUILDERS INTERNATIONAL, INC. vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS

COMMISSION and ELEAZAR S. GRAN
G.R. No. 145587, October 26, 2007

VELASCO, JR., J.:

CASE DOCTRINE:
In international law, the party who wants to have a foreign law applied to a dispute or case has
the burden of proving the foreign law. The foreign law is treated as a question of fact to be properly
pleaded and proved as the judge or labor arbiter cannot take judicial notice of a foreign law.

FACTS:
1. Statement of Characters
Petitioner EDI-Staffbuilders International, Inc. (EDI) is a corporation engaged in recruitment and
placement of Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs). Expertise Search International (ESI) is another
recruitment agency which collaborated with EDI to process the documentation and deployment
of private respondent to Saudi Arabia.

Private respondent, Eleazer S. Gran, was an OFW recruited by EDI, and deployed by ESI to work
for Omar Ahmed Ali Bin Bechr Est. (OAB), in Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

2. Statement of the Case

This is a Petition for Review on Certiorari seeking to set aside the decision of the Court of Appeals.
The CA affirmed the decision and resolution rendered by the National Labor Relations
Commission (NLRC) Third Division. The NLRC ordered ESI, EDI, and OAB jointly and severally
to pay Gran the amount of USD 16,150.00 as unpaid salaries.

3. Statement of Facts
After Gran had been working for about five months for OAB, his employment was terminated
based on the following grounds: (1) non-compliance to contract requirements by the recruitment
agency primarily on salary and contract duration: (2) non-compliance to pre-qualification
requirements by the recruitment agency; and (3) insubordination or disobedience to top
BANAAG, Jane Therese C. Persons and Family Relations
JD 1-1A Case Digests – Conflict of Laws (Arts. 14-18)

management order and/or instructions, specifically, the non-submittal of daily activity reports
despite several instructions).

After his arrival in the Philippines, Gran instituted a complaint against ESI/EDI and OAB inter alia,
with the NLRC for underpayment of wages/salaries and illegal dismissal. Petitioner EDI claims
that it had proven that Gran was legally dismissed due to incompetence and insubordination or
disobedience.

ISSUE:
Shall Saudi Labor Laws govern all matters relating to the termination of the employment of Gran?

RULING:
No, the petitioner did not prove the pertinent Saudi laws on the matter.

Under the principle of lex loci intentiones enshrined in Article 17 of the Civil Code of the
Philippines, the forms and solemnities of contracts, wills, and other public instruments shall be
governed by the laws of the country in which they are executed.

In the present case, the employment contract signed by Gran specifically states that Saudi Labor
Laws will govern matters not provided for in the contract, such as matters related to termination.
However, since Saudi Labor Laws were not proven in court, the International Law doctrine of
presumed-identity approach or processual presumption comes into play. Where a foreign law is
not pleaded or, even if pleaded, is not proved, the presumption is that foreign law is the same as
that of the Philippines’.

Thus, the Supreme Court applied Philippine labor laws in determining the issues presented before
them. Under such laws, Gran is entitled to the twin elements of willfull disobedience which was
alleged as the valid cause of his dismissal. EDI failed to discharge the burden of proving Gran's
insubordination or willful disobedience.

Thus, under Philippine labor laws, petitioner failed to prove that Gran was justifiably dismissed
due to incompetence, insubordination, or willful disobedience. The petition is denied.