October 25, 2013 Conflicts - Midterm Notes 1 SCOPE OF CONFLICTS OF LAW Problems in Conflicts of Laws Arise Due to the

Concurrence of 2 Factors:!the division of the world into different states or territorial units, each state or unit having different systems of laws; !the presence of a situation containing a foreign element, that is to say, an event or transaction affected by the diverse laws of two or more states or territorial units

Definition Salonga: Private International Law or Conflict of Laws is that part of the law of each state which determines whether in dealing with a factual situation involving a foreign element, the law or judgment of some other state will be recognized or applied in the forum. !Private international law is merely a part of the municipal law of each state. Subject is any factual situation containing any foreign element.!The primary function of this department of law is to determine whether the rules of law or the judgments of some other state or states, and if so, to what extent, should be recognized or applied in the forum.

Function and Object of Conflict of Laws Salonga: The Function of Private International Law is: 3 fold!(1) To prescribe the conditions under which a court or agency is competent to entertain a suit or proceeding involving facts containing a foreign element;!(2) To specify the circumstances in which foreign judgment will be recognized as valid and binding in the forum;!(3) To determine for each class of cases the particular system of law by reference to which the rights of the parties must be ascertained this is the fundamental problem of choice of law.

2 HISTORY & DEV'T OF CONFLICTS OF LAW A. Roman Law Origin The Doctrine of Comitas Gentium: States are not obligated to take note of foreign laws unless imposed by treaty. Doctrine of Pure Territoriality: Laws of every state operate within the territorial limits, and such is binding to all subjects but not beyond those limits.! ! B. Modern Developments i. Neo-statutory system Assumption: 2 or more independent laws are applicable to conflicts problem. Then proceed to device some ethos to determine the law that shall prevail. ii. International system There exist or should exist, a single body of international rules that can and should solve all legal problems that involve a foreign element. iii. Territorial system Only the law of a state applies to persons and things within its territory. Foreign law is not applied in the forum.

2 SOURCES OF CONFLICTS OF LAW A) Direct sources: 1. Codes and statutes 2. treaties and international convention 3. case law 4. international custom 5. constitution B) Indirect sources: 1. natural law 2. works and treaties of jurists and writers

3 JURISDICTION the right of the state to exercise authority over persons and things within its boundaries, subject to certain exceptions and subject to the rights of other states over the property and nationals of the state beyond its boundaries. A. Basis of Exercise of Judicial Jurisdiction 1. jurisdiction over the person: 2. jurisdiction over the property: action in rem purpose of the suit is to affect the interests of all persons in a thing, the state may render through its courts a valid judgment, as long as it has

jurisdiction over the thing even though it may not have personal jurisdiction over the persons whose interests are affected

proceedings quasi in rem purpose is neither to impose a personal liability or obligation upon anyone, not to affect the interests of all persons in a thing but to affect the interests of particular persons in a thing

3. jurisdiction over the subject matter: the power to hear and determine cases of the general class to which the proceedings in question belong and is conferred by the sovereign authority which organizes the court and defines its powers.

B. Ways of Dealing with a Conflicts Problem 1. Dismiss the case: Forum Non Conveniens 1. Non forum convenience!Or it would not entertain the suit if it believes itself to be a serious inconvenient forum, provided that a more convenient forum is available to plaintiff; factors are considered for most convenient forum Whether the forum is one to which the parties may conveniently resort Whether it is in a position to make an intelligent decision as to the law and the facts Whether it has or is likely to have power to enforce its decision (the principle of effectiveness judge has no right to pronounce a judgment if it cannot enforce it) 2. Assume jurisdiction: Apply Internal or Domestic Law 1. where application of domestic law is decreed 2. where there is failure to plead and prove foreign law 3. where a case involves any of the exceptions to the application of the proper foreign law. 1. Querubin v. Querubin 3. Assume jurisdiction: Apply Foreign Law 1. Theory of Comity - This theory asserts that the application of foreign legal systems in cases involving foreign element is proper because their non-application would constitute a disregard of foreign sovereignty ( a lack of comity towards other States).!Comity recognition which one nation allows within the territory to the legislative, executive or judicial acts of another nation having due regard both to international duty and convenience, and to the rights

2.

1.

2. 3.

4. 1.

1.

2.

1.

3.

4.

5. 1. 2.

of its own citizens, or of other persons who are under the protection of its laws.! !2 Interpretations of What Comity Is:!- Hilton case: reciprocity was the basis for extending/refusing recognition to foreign judgment.!- Johnson case: the basis was the persuasiveness of the foreign judgment! ! Protection of Vested Rights Theory - Based on the concept of territoriality under which the court can apply only its own territorial law. Cannot recognize foreign laws/enforce foreign judgments but it is one of the tenets of justice that rights acquired in one country must be recognized and legally protected in others! Loucks v. Standard Oil Co. of NY - "it is a principle of every civilized law that vested rights be protected rights acquired follow the person wherever he goes and must be respected" Gray v. Gray Local Law Theory - A foreign rule cannot be applied unless it has been appropriated by the State of the forum and transformed into a domestic rule.! Modern Theories The most significant relationship theory - the courts instead of regarding as conclusive the parties intention or the place of making or performance, lay emphasis rather upon the law of the place which has the most significant contacts with the matter in dispute. Auten v. Auten: gives the place having the most interest in the problem paramount control over the legal issues arising out of a particular factual context. Interest Analysis - resolve conflicts cases by looking at the policy behind the laws of the involved states and the interest each state has in applying its own law Haag v. Barnes: in determining the law applicable to a contract, the courts willemphasize the law of the place which has the most significant contacts with the matter in dispute (rather than looking to the parties intentions or the place(s) of making or performance).! ! Caver's principle of preference - to be used by the court as guides for decision, for purposes of satisfying the demands of justice in particular instances the functional approach - aims as solutions that are the rational elaboration and application of the policies and purposes underlying specific legal rules and legal systems as a whole. ! choice-influencing considerations - Five Basic Considerations: predictability of results maintenance of interstate and international order

3. 4. 5. 6. 7. !

simplification of the judicial task advancement of the forums governmental interests application of the better rule of law!

comparative approach - brought out their similarities and dissimilarities, examined their purposes and effects, and proposed specific solutions in the context of the needs and requirements of a growing international community. 8. the convenient forum theory - The common law doctrine of forum non conveniens, with its stress oncontacts and fairness, may create a new law of jurisdiction based on!forum conveniens.! ! 9. the harmony of treatment and uniformity of result theory - If to every conflict case the court were to apply only the law of the forum, the result of the suit would depend entirely on where it is instituted. Equal justice under the law requires that the decision be the same wherever the claim is brought. ! Jurisdiction and the Due Process Clauses proceeding in rem service of summons by publication is sufficient because the case is enforced against the rest of the world proceeding in personam personal service of summons or voluntary appearance of the defendant, by himself or counsel, is required proceeding quasi in rem summons by publication is sufficient. NB: a state does not have jurisdiction in the absence of some reasonable basis for exercising it, whether the proceedings are in rem, quasi in rem, or in personam. To be reasonable, the jurisdiction must be based on some minimum contacts that will not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.

4 CHOICE OF LAW this doctrine aims precisely to resolve such issue which of the conflicting legal provisions will control, and to what extent will the legal provisions be applicable in that certain situation. In the case of Gray vs Gray (87 N.H. 82) where one of the spouses filed a case for damages against the husband arising out of personal injury originating while they were driving from their home in New Hampshire to Maine. A conflict arose because the accident happened in Maine, where the provision of law states that spouses cannot maintain any kind of action against each other, and no such prohibition exist in New Hampshire, adding that the couple was married in the latter state. ! The US Supreme court ruled that whatever would be a defense to this action if it had been brought n the state of Maine is a

defense here, although it would not be if the cause of action had arisen in this state. The court further ruled that in the great majority of cases, complaints of conduct are adjusted in the jurisdiction where the conduct took place. It is desirable that the remedy be the same, wherever the action is brought. A. The Correlation Between Jurisdiction and Choice of Law The court selected by the plaintiff must decide both whether it has the jurisdiction to hear the case and, if it has, whether another forum is more suitable (the forum non conveniens issue relates to the problem of forum shopping) for the disposition of the case. Then there would be issue whether a foreign judgment would be recognized. In the Philippines foreign judgments are considered as persuasive evidence when used as jurisprudence, and if such foreign judgment would be used to prove certain facts, then such law should be proven in court. Lastly The court then allocates each aspect of the case as pleaded to its appropriate legal classification. Each such classification has it own choice of law rules but distinguishing between procedural and substantive rules requires care. The court may have adopted a rule of law which prevents it from applying any procedural law other than its own. The court then applies the relevant choice of law rules.

B. Approaches to Choice of Law 1. Traditional Approaches 1. Vested Rights Theory - This is an act done in a foreign jurisdiction gives rise to a right if the laws of that state provides so. The right vests and he can bring suit in any forum he chooses. The forum refers law of the place of the last act necessary to complete the cause of action. If place of the last act creates no legal right, although forum court creates such right if act is done within its territory, it will not enforce the right. 2. Local Law Theory - treats conflicts cases as a purely domestic case that does not involve a foreign element. It has the power of a state to regulate within its territory has no limitation except as imposed by its own positive law. 3. Caver's Principles of Preference - tates that choice-of-law decisions should be made with reference to principles of preference which are conceived to provide a fair accommodation of conflicting state policies and afford fair treatment to the parties. 2. Modern Approaches 1. Most Significant Relationship 1. an approach which identified a plurality of factors that must be considered in the light of choice-of-law principles. Among of

2.

the choice-of-law principles are: (a) the needs of the interstate and international system; (b) relevant policies of the concerned states; (c) relevant policies of other interested states; (d) protection of justified expectations of the parties, (d) basic policies underlying the particular field of law, (e) certainty, predictability and uniformity of result; and the (g) ease in the determination and application of law to be applied. In torts, the contacts to be taken into account are (1) place of injury, (2) place of tortious conduct, domicile, (3) residence or nationality of parties, and (4) place where the relationship between the parties is entered. In contracts, the factual contacts to be taken into account are (a) the law chosen by the parties and in the absence thereof; by (b) the place of contracting (c) the place of negotiation of the contract; (d) the place of performance; and (e) the domicile, residence, nationality, place of incorporation and place of the business of the parties. The contacts should be evaluated based on their relative importance and relevance to the

3.

2.

3.

4.

5.

issue at hand. Interest Analysis - looks at the policy behind the laws of the involved states and the interest each state had in applying its own law. In this theory, there is a need to determine whether both states had a real interest in having their law applied. If only one of the states had an interest in having its law applied, there is a false conflict. In a situation of a false conflict, the forum will apply the substantive law of the interested state. Comparative Analysis - The courts were asked to weigh conflicting interests and apply the law of the state whose interest would be more impaired if its law were not followed. In applying this theory, the law of the country, whose interest will be more impaired if not followed, will be applied by the courts. Functional Analysis - This approach looks into the general policies of the state beyond those reflected in its substantive law and to polices and values relating to effective and harmonious intercourse between states. After determining these policies, court should then weigh the relative strength of a state policy. Choice-Influencing Considerations - considers five major choice-

influencing considerations that would lead the courts to the choiceof-law decision. These are (a) predictability of results, (b) maintenance of interstate and international order, (c) simplification of the judicial task; (d) application of the better rule of law; and (e) advancement of the forums governmental interests. However, there is a problem in determining the better rule of law because the almost every considered its own law as the better and superior one.

5 THE PROBLEM OF CHARACTERIZATION - one-sided conflicts rules which is found in Article 15 of the Civil Code of the Philippines, which provides in effect that Philippine laws relating to family rights and duties, or to the status, condition and legal capacity of persons are binding upon citizens of the Philippines, eve though living abroad. - The second system of all-sided rules is exemplified in Article 16 and partly in Article 17. A. Characterization and the Single-Aspect Method Single-aspect method: followed by PH: Choice of law theories have traditionally concentrated on one element of a situation in order to connect the case to a particular legal community. This is called the single-aspect method wherein, for example, an issue determined as contractual is immediately referred to the place of contracting, while one that it tortious is assigned the law of place where the tort occurred. The obvious goal of this method is to foster simplicity, convenience, and uniformity of results. 2. multi-aspect method: There is a modern approach to choice-of-law which is called the multiaspect method. Here, all important factors of the case, both territorial and nonterritorial, are analyzed and the applicable law is arrived at by rationally elaborating and applying the policies and purposes underlying the particular legal rules that come in question as well as the needs of interstate or international intercourse. Its end is to reach a just resolution for the case at hand. Two theories on Personal Law 1. domiciliary theory - personal laws of a person are determined by his domicile. 2. nationality theory - makes nationality or citizenship as the basis for determining the personal laws of an individual. 1. Subject-Matter Characterization. Characterization is defined as the process by which a court at the beginning of the choice-of-law process assigns a disputed question to an area in substantive law, such as torts, contracts, family law, or property. It is a process lawyers and

judges do as part of legal analysis. In conflict-of-laws situations, characterization becomes a pervasive problem since at least two jurisdictions with divergent laws are involved. There are two types of characterization, the first which calls for classification by a court of a factual situation into a legal category. This is referred to as subjectmatter characterization. It is of appreciable significance in a single-aspect method because the legal category to which an issue is determined is assigned determines the governing law. 2. Substance-Procedure Dichotomy The second type of characterization is the substance-procedure characterization. It directs the court to the extent that it will apply foreign law. As a rule, if the issue is substantive, the court may apply foreign law, but if it is procedural, it is suppose to follow the law of the forum. The difficulty in characterization arises in determining whether the issue is one of substance or procedure. Approaches: (a) Secondary characterization: The process involves the forum making an initial characterization, and on the basis of which determines the law that will apply and afterwards making a determination whether the matter is one of substance or procedure, based on the chosen law. (b) Totality Approach: In contrast to the doctrine of secondary characterization, this approach involves the application of the chosen law in its totality. It provides that foreign law, once chosen, should be applied in its totality except where the forum would unduly hinder or inconvenience itself. B. Depecage Dpeage is a term for the phenomenon where different aspects of a case involving a foreign element may be governed by different system of laws. What Dpeage Does: (1) Dpeage makes a single element of a case to relate to one legal system. (2) Dpeage allows the other relevant interest of the parties to be addressed. (3) Dpeage employs a nuanced single-aspect method by choice. Effect of Dpeage: Dpeage permits the courts to arrive at a functionally sound result without rejecting the methodology of the traditional approach.

Haumschild v. Continental Casualty On November 17, 1956, plaintiff Jacquelyn Haumschild and respondent Le Roy Gleason were married in Lincoln County, Wisconsin, where they had their domicile. On March 10, 1958, such marriage was annulled. On December 19, 1956, the plaintiff was injured while riding in a motor truck driven by Gleason in California. Plaintiff then filed an action against Gleason and Continental Casualty Company to recover damages for personal injury sustained as a result of the motor vehicle accident. The defendants moved for summary judgment dismissing the action on the grounds that under California law, one spouse is immune from suit, and that the plaintiff by her conduct is estopped to assert the invalidity of her marriage to Gleason. The circuit court granted the motion of the defendant, hence an appeal. Issue: What law to what issue should apply? Decision: Whenever the courts of this state are confronted with a conflict of laws problem as which law governs the capacity of one spouse to sue the other in tort, the law to be applied is that of the state of domicile. Hence, the law of the place of accident, California, governs the issue of negligence; while Wisconsin law governs the issue of interspousal immunity. The characterization process was taken one step further by not limiting the classification to the case itself, but likewise, to the issues arising from the case.

Factors considered in Choosing Applicable Law under Dpeage (1) the needs of the interstate and international system; (2) relevant policies of the forum; (3) relevant policies of other interested states and the relative interests of those states in the determination of a particular issue; (4) protection of the justified expectations of the parties; (5) the basic policies underlying the particular field of law; (6) certainty, predictability, and uniformity of results; and (7) ease in the determination of the law to be applied. Dpeage v. Single-Aspect Method Dpeage helps ease the inherent restrictions of the single-aspect method. The courts are not compelled to apply the entirety of a state's law to all aspects of the case, the application of which might produce egregious results. Cutting up the case issue by issue and applying the pertinent laws thereon allows the court to reach a decision that is fair and desirable. ___________________ The situs of a thing, that is, the place where a thing is or is deemed to be

situated. In particular the lex situs is decisive when real rights are involved. !The place where an act has been done, the locus actus, such as the place where a contract has been made, a marriage celebrated, a will signed or a tort committed. The lex loci actus is particularly important in contracts and torts. !The place where an act is intended to come into effect e.g. The place of the performance of contractual duties, or the place where a power of attorney is to be exercised. !The intention of the contracting parties as to the law that should govern their agreement, the lex loci intentions. !The place where judicial or administrative proceedings are instituted or done. The lex fori the law of the forum is particularly important because, as we have seen earlier, matters of procedure not going to the substance of the claim involved are governed by it; and because the lex fori applies whenever the content of the otherwise applicable foreign law is excluded from application in a given case for the reason that it falls under one of the exceptions to the application of foreign law

6 THE PROBLEM OF RENVOI . It is a doctrine under which the court in resorting to foreign law adopts rules of foreign law as to conflicts laws, which rules may in turn refer the court back to the law of the of the forum.1 Stated differently, it is when a jural matter is presented to a forum, the conflicts of laws of which refers to a foreign law, and such foreign law refers the matter back to the forum.! ! Renvoi: Aznar vs. Garcia, G.R. No. L-16749, Jan. 3, 1963 FACTS: Edward Christensen, who at his death was a US citizen but domiciled in the Philippines, left a will, devising unto Maria Helen a certain amount of money and giving the rest of his estate to Maria Lucy. Helen opposed the partition on the ground that she is deprived of her legitime. Her contention is that the law of California directs that the law of the domicile (Philippines) should govern the will. ISSUE: Whether or not the national law or the domiciliary law should apply

HELD: The intrinsic validity of wills is governed by the national law of the decedent. In the present case, the national law of Edward is the laws of California. However, there were two conflicting California laws regarding succession. One is enunciated in In Re Kaufman (which does not provide for legitimes) and another is Art. 946 of the California Civil Code (which provides that the law of the domicile applies). SC held that the national law is Art. 946, which is the conflict of laws rule of California. The reason is that In Re Kaufman applies only to residents while Art. 946 is specific to non-residents. Thus, since Art. 946 contains a referback to Philippine laws (the law of the domicile), then Maria Helen is entitled to her legitime.

Advantages of renvoi Objectives renvoi "Problem of Renvoi" The problem of Renvoi arose from the fact that each State has two sets of laws, its internal or domestic law and its conflicts rules. So when a problem or an issue is allegedly referred to the law of a different State, a question arises of whether such law be referred to as its internal law or its conflicts rules. But what exactly is the problem of Renvoi? When the conflicts rule of the forum refers a matter to the law of another State, is the reference to the entire law, including the corresponding conflicts rule of that other state, or is the reference only to the latters internal law? B. Solutions to the problem of renvoi: A. REJECTION OF RENVOI: The Internal Law Solution. There is no renvoi when this solution is applied, simply because it is actually avoiding, or preventing remission or referral of case to another jurisdiction. The solution suggest to ignore the existence of conflict of rules of foreign jurisdiction. B. ACCEPTANCE OF RENVOI: Single Renvoi Solution. To accept the reference back, the initial reference is directed to the proper foreign law as a whole. This is the most commonly practiced method, most especially in Europe jurisdiction. In the case of Aznar vs. Garcia, the ruling was in favor of the acceptance of renvoi. There's no question that Edward Christensen was an American citizen and domiciled in the Philippines. The court ruled that successional rights and intrinsic validity of the provisions of the will are to be governed by the laws of California, leaving all the discretion to the testator having the right to dispose his property in the manner that he desires.

3. MUTUAL DESISTANCE : Mutual Disclaimer of Jurisdiction Theory. This solution has no initial reference to begin with. The forum courts could foresee that reference would just entail much complications rather than solving the problem, the local court desist from making reference to foreign law and applies lex fori at once. Since this solution refrains or avoids making any reference to the deemed proper court, local conflicts rule is usually neglected and ignored. Forum court sees that foreign law is limited and/or has no applicability, hence refuse to make any reference and will just decide on the case at once by applying local laws. 4. FOREIGN COURT THEORY: Double Renvoi Solution. This solution posits that Philippine court will assume as foreign court. It will act, think and decide the case as foreign court opt to decide. It will resolve in a manner the foreign court will do. The local court shall follow whatever solution is followed by foreign jurisdiction, and it will apply whatever law the foreign court may apply thereto. This solution might lead to endless possibility of references and long docketed case, leaving it more undecided. INAPPLICABILITY OF RENVOI IN FALSE CONFLICTS Bellis v. Bellis Issue: Whether or not the Texas law applies or not.The Texas law will apply. Bellis is a national and domicile of Texas at the time of his death.

11. Even assuming that Texas has a conflict of law rule providing for domiciliary system, it would still not revert back (renvoi) to Philippines court. It would still refer to Texas law. !12. However if Texas law has conflicts rule adopting situs theory, renvoi would arise because the properties in the case are found in the Philippines. 13. In the case, the appellants did not rest on the doctrine of renvoi. Instead, they argued that their case falls under Art. 17 par.3 of the Civil Code.

Prohibitive laws concerning persons, their acts or property, and those which have, for their object, public order, public policy and good customs shall not be rendered ineffective by laws or judgments promulgated, or by determinations or conventions agreed upon in a foreign country.

14. Art. 16 par.2 (nationality rule) of the New Civil Code is a specific provision in itself which must be applied in testate and intestate successions. !15. Bellis is a citizen of Texas. Under Texas law, there are no forced heirs or legitimise. !16. Since the Texas law would apply, the Philippine law on legitime would not apply.

C. Usefulness of Renvoi a. Avoid Unjust Results - it is use to protect the interest of a countrys citizen. Disadvantage to Renvoi If both courts follow the same theory, there would be no end to the case since the courts would be referring back to each other. Various commentators refer to it as revolving doors, a game of lawn tennis. a logical cabinet of mirrors or a circulus inextricabilis

7 NOTICE AND PROOF OF FOREIGN LAW A. Extent of Judicial Notice General rule: Philippine courts are not authorized to take judicial notice of foreign laws.

Exception: 1. Where there are exceptional circumstances when the foreign laws are already within the actual knowledge of the court, such as when they are well and generally known or they have been actually ruled upon in other cases before it and none of the parties concerned claimed otherwise. 2. When the courts are familiar with the specific foreign laws such as Spanish

civil law, common law doctrines and the rules from which Philippine laws are derived. 3. Where a foreign law, such as that of the Nevada law, was proved in accordance with Sections 24 and 25 of Rule 132 of the Rules of Court and introduced as evidence in the probate of the will of a citizen of Nevada, such circumstances justified the Court to take judicial notice of said foreign law. 4. Specialized quasi-judicial agencies may take judicial notice of foreign law, even if the foreign law has not been alleged and proved because the general rule applies only to cases filed in courts which, by reason of their mandated functions, have become familiar with the applicable foreign laws.

B. Proof of foreign law: Foreign laws do not prove themselves in the country, nor can the courts take judicial notice of them. They must be alleged and proved.

In the absence of allegation and proof, the laws of a foreign country will be presumed to be the same as Philippine laws. This presumption is known as: Processual Presumption

Written law may be evidenced by an official publication thereof or by a copy attested by the officers having legal custody of the record or by his deputy.

General Rule (Foreign Documents): Before any foreign document can be admitted in evidence in our courts, such must be duly authenticated. (see Sec. 24-25, Rule 132, ROC).

NB: A mere photo copy of the foreign law, or a foreign document even if duly identified by a knowledgeable person from the foreign country, is not sufficient to prove the foreign law.

Effects of failure to plead and prove foreign law

Alternatives of the court:

1. Dismiss the case for inability to establish a cause of action; 2. Assume the foreign law is the same as the law of the forum; 3. Apply the law of the forum. Suntay vs. Suntay In the absence of proof that the municipal district court of Amoy, China is a probate court and on the Chinese law of procedure in probate matters, it may be presumed that the proceedings in the matter of probating or allowing a will in the Chinese courts are the same as those provided in our laws on the subject.

Collector of Internal Revenue vs. Fisher In the absence of proof, the court is justified in indulging the concept of processual presumption, in presuming that the law of England on this matter is the same as our law.

Board of Commissioners vs. Dela Rosa Every intendment of law or facts leans toward the validity of marriage. Bearing in mind the processual presumption enunciated in various cases, he who asserts that the marriage is not valid under our law bears the burden of proof to present the foreign law.

Factors in deciding whether to apply domestic law or decide the case against the party who has the burden of proving the contents of the foreign law: the degree of public interest involved in the dispute The accessibility of the foreign law materials to the parties The possibility that the plaintiff is merely forum shopping

The similarities between the forum law and foreign law on the issue in point

C. Exceptions to the Application of Foreign Law Exceptions to the Application of Foreign Law General Rule: Principles of comity and reciprocity[1] - That the court or administrative agency should look into the application of foreign law and apply it.

[1] Principles of comity and reciprocity as held in the case of Hilton v. Guyot is neither a matter of absolute obligation, on one hand, nor of mere courtesy and good will, upon the other. But it is the recognition which one nation allows within its territory to the legislative, executive or judicial acts of anaother nation, having due regard both to international duty and convenience, and to the rights of its own citizens or of other persons who are under the protection of its laws. RULE: courts don't take judicial notice of foreign law. The foreign law so invoked must be pleaded and proved, otherwise it is presumed that such foreign law is similar to Philippine law: Written foreign law, to be proved, may be evidenced by an official publication or a coy attested by the officer having legal custody of the record and accompanied with a certificate that such officer has the custody Unwritten foreign law may be proved by oral testimony of expert witnesses or by printed and published books of reports of decisions of the country involved, if proved to be commonly admitted in such courts. Where a Case involves any of the Exceptions to the Application of Foreign Law. Exceptions: The enforcement of the foreign law would run counter to an important public policy of the forum Where the application of the foreign law would infringe good morality as understood in the forum When the foreign law is penal in nature (like Mike Mate!) Where the foreign law is procedural in nature When the question involves immovable property in the forum When the foreign law is fiscal or administrative in nature Where the application of foreign law would involve injustice or injury to the citizens or residents of the forum

 Where the application of foreign law would endanger the vital interests of the state !