Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 12



1ST SEMESTER SY 2018- 2019


Instructor: ENRIQUE V. DELA CRUZ, JR.1


The course deals primarily with conflict of law rules under Philippine law, and the
relevant principles and case law which deserve the attention of law students, particularly
the areas most frequently asked in the bar exams.

The course begins with a discussion of the general principles of private

international law and the corresponding cases, which provide an overview of the entire
subject matter. A detail treatment of the different subject areas will follow, including the
concepts of jurisdiction, choice of law, choice of forum, characterization, nationality,
domicile, renvoi, personal status and capacity, family law, contracts, international trade,
conflict laws in torts, foreign corporations, and enforcement of foreign judgment.


Class Standing 25%

Preliminary Examinations 35%
Final Examinations 40%

 Class standing includes recitations, attendance, quizzes and other written works,
which may be assigned from time to time.
 For purposes of marking exams and quizzes (essays), the passing score is 75


Students are not required to buy any book for this class. However, students may
use as course reference, any edition of the following books: “CONFLICT OF LAWS”, by
Jorge R. Coquia and Elizabeth A. Pangalangan; and “PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW”,
by Jovito R. Salonga.


General Principles:

Q: What is Private International Law?

Atty. Dela Cruz obtained his Master of Laws in International & Comparative Business law (with Distinction) from the
London Metropolitan University in 2004, and a Single Masters Course (MSc) in International Trade Law from the
University College London, U.K., in 2005 as a Chevening scholar of the British government. In December 2002, he
completed a Fellowship on Leadership and International Relations at the John F. Kennedy School of Government,
Harvard University, USA. In 2001, he obtained his Masters in Public Management degree from the Ateneo School of
Government. He earned his Bachelor of Laws degree (3rd Honors) in 2000 and his AB Legal Management degree (cum
laude) in 1996, both from the University of Santo Tomas as a Rector’s Scholar. He is currently an elected Board Member of
the 2nd District of Bulacan. He is also currently a Senior Partner at the Divina Law Office in Makati City.
Conflict of Laws Syllabus
Atty. Enrique V. dela Cruz, Jr.

A: Part of municipal law of a State which directs its courts and administrative agencies,
when confronted with a legal problem involving foreign element, whether or not they
should apply foreign law/s or not.

Q: What are the Functions of Private International Law?

1. Determination of which country has jurisdiction
2. Applicability of a particular place of either the local or foreign law
3. Determination of the force, validity & effectiveness of a foreign judgment

Q: How is Private Distinguished from Public International Law?

1. Monist school – Both subjects are essentially the same, because they manifest a
single concept of law, ultimately addressed to the same individual.

2. Dualist School

Private International
Public International Law
Nature Municipal in character International in character
Sovereign states and other
Persons Involved Private individuals entities possessed of international
Transac- Transactions w/ generally affect
Private transactions b/w
tions public interest; or of interest only
private individuals
Involved to sovereign states
Remedies/ Resort to municipal Remedies may be peaceful or
Sanctions tribunals forcible

Q: What are the sources of Philippine Conflict Rules?


Family Code: Articles 10, 21, 26, 35, 36, 37, 38, 80, 96, 184, and 187

Civil Code: Articles 14, 15, 16, 17, 815, 816, 818, 819, 829, 1039, 1319, and 1753

Penal Code: Article 2

Corporation Code: Section 133 – Doing Business Without License

Constitution: Art. IV and Art. V, Section 1

Rules of Court: Rule 14 and 39, Section 48, Rule 131, Section 3 (n), 132, Section 25

Article Defining Points

14 Territoriality Principle
“Penal laws and those of public security and safety shall be obligatory upon all who
live or sojourn in the Philippines, subject to the principles of international law and
treaty stipulations.”
15 Nationality Principle
“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
16 Lex Rei Sitae
“Real property as well as personal property is subject to the law of the country where
it is situated.”

Conflict of Laws Syllabus
Atty. Enrique V. dela Cruz, Jr.

17 Lex Loci Celebrationis

“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.”
21,FC When either or both of the parties to a marriage are aliens, it is necessary, before
securing marriage license, to provide themselves w/ certificate of legal capacity to
contract marriage.
26,FC All marriages solemnized outside Philippines in accord w/ the law in force in the
country where they are solemnized, and valid there as such, shall also be valid here
except those prohibited under Arts 35 (1), (4), (5), (6), 36,37, 38 of FC.
80,FC In absence of contrary stipulation in a marriage settlement, property relations of
spouses shall be governed by Philippine laws regardless of the place of the
celebration of marriage& their residence
815 The will of a Filipino in a foreign country, provided he is authorized to make a will in
any of the forms established in the country where he is, may be probated in the
816 Will of an alien produces effect in the Philippines if made w/ formalities prescribed by
law of the place where he resides, or of his own country, or of the Civil Code of the
817 If an alien makes a will in the Philippines in accord w/ formalities prescribed by the
laws of his country, his will shall have same effect as if executed according to
Philippine laws
819 Joint wills executed by Filipinos in a foreign country will not be valid
829 Revocation of will done outside Philippines by person who does not have his domicile
here is valid when done according to the law of the place where testator had his
domicile at the time
1039 Capacity to succeed is governed by decedent’s national law
1753 Law of the country to w/c goods are to be transported shall govern the liability of the
common carrier for their loss, destruction or deterioration

Jurisdiction, Choice of Law, Lex Contractus and Forum Non Conveniens

Q: What Will the Court Do if it is Confronted with a Case Involving a Foreign


A: If the court is faced with a case involving a foreign element, it should first determine:
1. Whether it has jurisdiction over the case;
2. If it has no jurisdiction, it should be dismissed on that ground;
3. If it has jurisdiction, the court will determine whether it should assume jurisdiction,
or it should dismiss the case on the ground of forum non conveniens;
4. Once the court has determined it has jurisdiction over the case, it will next
determine whether to apply the internal law of the forum or apply the proper
foreign law.

Q: What is Forum Non Conveniens?

A: The refusal to assume jurisdiction because it would prove inconvenient for the forum.

Q: What are the Reasons Why a Court Will Dismiss the Case on the Basis of Forum
Non Conveniens?

1. Evidence and witnessess may not be readily available in the forum;
2. Court dockets of the forum are already clogged that would hamper the speedy
administration of justice;
3. The matter can be better tried and decided in another forum;
4. To curb the evils of forum shopping;
5. The forum has no particular interest in the case, as when the parties are not
citizens of the forum or are residents elsewhere;

Conflict of Laws Syllabus
Atty. Enrique V. dela Cruz, Jr.

6. Inadequacy of the local judicial machinery in effectuating the right sought to be

7. Difficulty in ascertaining the foreign law applicable.

Q: When Can Internal or Domestic law Be Applied?

1. Law of forum expressly so provides in its conflicts rule
2. Proper foreign law has not been properly pleaded and proved
3. Case involves any of the exceptions to the application of proper foreign law.

When the foreign law, judgment or contract is: CCPP-FRIN

a. Contrary to sound and established policy of the forum
b. Contrary to almost universally conceded principles of morality (contra
bonos mores)
c. Involves procedural matters
d. Involves penal laws, contracts, judgments
e. Purely fiscal or administrative matters
f. Involves real or personal property situated in the forum

When application of the foreign law, judgment or contract:

g. May work undeniable injustice to the citizens/residents of the forum
h. May work against vital interests & national security of the state of the forum

Q: What are the Theories on Why the Foreign Law May be Given Effect?

1. Theory of Comity – Recognition w/c a nation allows w/in its territory, to the
legislative, executive, or judicial acts of another nation, having due regard to
both international duty & convenience and to the rights of its citizens, of other
persons under its protection

Kinds of Comity:
a. Comity based on reciprocity
b. Comity based on the persuasiveness of the foreign judgment

2. Theory of Vested Rights – To enforce not the foreign law or foreign judgment
itself but the simply the vested rights that have been vested under such foreign
law or judgment

3. Theory of Local Law – To apply foreign law, not because it is foreign, but
because our own rules by applying similar rules require us to do so, hence it is
as if the foreign law has become part & parcel of our own local law

4. Theory of Harmony of Law – To apply the foreign law so that wherever a case
is decided, that is, irrespective of the forum, the solution should be
approximately the same, as such, identical or similar problems must have
identical or similar solutions somewhere

5. Theory of Justice - Purpose of all laws is the dispensation of justice, if this can
be attained by applying the proper foreign law, then we must do so


 Santos III v. Northwest Orient Airlines, Inc., G.R. No. 101538, June 23, 1992
 Communications Materials and Design v. CA, G.R. No. 102223, August 22, 1996
 First Philippine International Bank v. CA, G.R. No. 115849, January 24, 1996

Conflict of Laws Syllabus
Atty. Enrique V. dela Cruz, Jr.

 Bank of America v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 120135, March 31, 2003
 Phil. Export and Foreign Loan Guarantee Corp., v. V.P. Eusebio Construction, Inc.,
G.R. No. 140047, July 13, 2004
 Northwest Orient Airlines, Inc., v. CA, G.R. No. 112573, February 9, 1995
 Saudi Arabian Airlines v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 122191, October 8, 1998
 Bienvenido M. Cadalin v. POEA, G.R. No. 104776, December 5, 1994
 Hasegawa v. Kitamura, G.R. No. 149177. November 23, 2007.
 Raytheon International v. Rouzie, G.R. No. 162894. February 26, 2008.
 Saudia Airlines v. Rebesencio, G.R. No. 198587. January 14, 2015.

Characterization, Nationality, Domicile, and Renvoi

Q: What are Conflict Rules?

A: Provisions found in a country’s own law which govern factual situations possessed of
foreign element.

a. One-sided rule - Indicates when Philippine internal law will apply (e.g. Art. 15 C.C.)
b. All-sided rule - Indicates when foreign law is to be applied (e.g. Art. 16)

Q: What are the Theories on Personal Law or the Law that Should Govern Status
and Capacity in General?

1. Nationality theory – By virtue of which the status and capacity of an individual are
generally governed by the law of his nationality (Personal theory)
2. Domiciliary theory – States the law of the domicile as the proper determinative law
on status and capacity (Territorial theory)
3. Situs theory – Views the particular place or situs of an event or transaction as
generally the controlling law (Eclectic theory)

Note: In this jurisdiction, we adhere to the Nationality theory (Art 15; 2 nd par., Art 16; also
Art. 1039 C.C.).

Q: What is Domicile?

A: It is the place with which a person has a settled connection for certain legal purposes,
either because his home is there or because that is the place assigned to him by law.

Q: What are the Basic Principles of Domicile?

1. No natural person can ever be without a domicile.
2. That a person can have but one domicile at a time.
3. Every natural person, free and sui juris, may establish and change his domicile.
4. A domicile once acquired is retained until a new one is gained.
5. The presumption is in favor of continuance of an existing domicile.

Q: What are the 4 Essential Requisites Needed in Order to Acquire a Domicile of


1. Capacity
2. Actual physical presence in the place chosen
3. Freedom of choice

Conflict of Laws Syllabus
Atty. Enrique V. dela Cruz, Jr.

4. Provable intent that it should be one’s fixed and permanent place of abode – one’s
home – that is, there should be “animus manendi” (intent to remain) or “animus
non-revertendi” (intent not to return to the original abode).

Q: Define: Cognovit, Borrowing Statute, Characterization, Doctrine of Forum Non-

Conveniens, Long Arm Statute, Conflicts Case.


Cognovit - Confession of judgment whereby a portion of the complaint is confessed by

the defendant who denies the rest thereof.

Borrowing Statute – Laws of the state on jurisdiction used by another state in deciding
conflicts question involved in the choice of law. It directs the state of the forum to apply the
foreign statute of limitations to the pending claims based on the foreign law and has the
practical effect of treating the foreign statute of limitations as one of substance. It bars the
filing of a suit in the forum if it is already barred by the statute of limitations in the place
where the cause of action arose. Thus, when the country has a borrowing statute, the
characterization of a statute into a procedural or substantive law becomes irrelevant.

Characterization - Otherwise called classification or qualification. It is the process of

assigning a disputed question to its correct legal category. (1994 Bar Question)

Forum Non Conveniens - Principle in private international law that where the ends of
justice strongly indicate that the controversy may be more suitably tried elsewhere, then
jurisdiction should be declined and the parties relegated to relief to be sought in another
forum. (1994 Bar Question)

Long Arm Statute - A legislative act which provides for personal jurisdiction, via
substituted service or process over persons or corporations which are non-residents of the
state and which voluntarily go into the state directly or by agent or communicate with
persons in the state for limited purposes, in actions which concern claims relating to
performance or execution or those purposes; Long-arm statute refers simply to authorized
substituted service.

Where the factual antecedents satisfactory establish the existence of a foreign element,
the problem could present a conflicts case. A factual situation that cuts across territorial
lines and is affected by the diverse laws of two or more states is said to contain a “foreign




Acquired at birth Given after birth
Applies only to infants Refers to all those who lack capacity to choose
their domicile: infants, idiots and the insane.
Never changes May change from time to time.

Q: What are the Legal Classifications of Domicile?

1. Domicile of origin – the domicile of a person’s parents at the time of birth
2. Constructive domicile – domicile established by law after birth in case of persons
under legal disability, regardless of their intention or voluntary act
3. Domicile of Choice – is the place voluntarily chosen by a person sui juris as his
home and to which, whenever he is absent, he has the intention to return

Conflict of Laws Syllabus
Atty. Enrique V. dela Cruz, Jr.


 Paula T. Llorente v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 124371, November 23, 2000
 Juan Frivaldo v. COMELEC, 174 SCRA 245 (1989)
 Imelda Marcos v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 119976, September 18, 1995
 Agapito Aquino v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 120265, September 18, 1995
 Asistio v. Aguirre, G.R. No. 191124, April 27, 2010


 Article IV, 1987 Constitution

 Moy Ya Lim Yao v. Commissioner of Immigration, 41 SCRA 292.

 In Re: Ching, Bar Matter No. 914, October 01, 1999.
 Co v. HRET, G.R. Nos. 92191-92. July 30, 1991.
 Frivaldo v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 120295. June 28, 1996.
 Mercado v. Manzano, 307 SCRA 630.
 Bengson III v. HRET, G.R. No. 142840. May 7, 2001.
 Tecson v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 161434, March 03, 2004.
 Cordora v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 176947, February 19, 2009
 Japson v. COMELEC, G.R .No. 180088, Jan. 19,2009
 Nestor A. Jacot v. Rogen T. Dal and COMELEC, G.R. No. 179848, Nov.27, 2008
 Mercado v. Manzano, 307 SCRA 630 (1999)
 Valles v. COMELEC, 337 SCRA 543 (2000)
 Macalintal v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 157013. July 10, 2003
 Teodora Sobejana-Condon v. COMELEC, GR No. 198742, August 10, 2012
 Republic v. Sagun, 666 SCRA 321 (2012)
 Rommel Jalosjos v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 191970, April 24, 2012
 Svetlana Jalosjos v. COMELEC, G.R. NO. 193314. FEBRUARY 26, 2013
 REYES v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 207264. June 25, 2013.
 Maquiling v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 195649. April 16, 2013
 David v. Agbay, 753 SCRA 526 (2015)
 Poe-Llamanzares v. Commission on Elections, – SCRA – (G.R. Nos. 221697, etc., 8
March 2016, and, 5 April 2016)


Art. 26. FAMILY CODE. All marriages solemnized outside the

Philippines in accordance with the laws in force in the country
where they were solemnized, and valid there as such, shall also be
valid in this country, except those prohibited under Articles 35(1),
(4), (5), and (6), 36, 37, and 38.

 General Rule: Under Article 26 of the Family Code, all marriages solemnized outside
the Philippines in accordance with the laws in force in the country where they were
solemnized and valid there as such, is also valid in the Philippines.

Conflict of Laws Syllabus
Atty. Enrique V. dela Cruz, Jr.

 Exception: If the marriage is void under Philippine law, then the marriage is void even
if it is valid in the country where the marriage was solemnized.


 Alice Reyes Van Dorn v. Manuel Romillo, G.R. No. L-68470, October 8, 1985
 Imelda Pilapil v. Corona Ibay-Somera, G.R. No. 80116, June 30, 1989
 Fe Quita v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 124862, December 22, 1998
 Republic v. Labrador, G.R. No. 132980, 25 March 1999
 Grace Garcia v. Rederick Recio, G.R. No. 138322, October 3, 2001
 Republic v. Orbecido III, GR. No. 154380, Oct. 5, 2005
 Republic v. Iyoy, G.R. No. 152577, Sept. 21, 2005
 De Dios Carlos v. Sandoval, G.R. No. 179922, December 16, 2008
 Corpuz v. Santo Tomas, G.R. No. 186571, August 11, 2010
 Dacasin v. Dacasin, G.R. No. 168785. February 5, 2010.
 Fujiki v. Marinay G.R. No. 196049. June 26, 2013
16, 2013
 Ando v. DFA, G.R. No. 195432. August 27, 2014.
 Medina v. Koike, G.R. No. 215723. July 27, 2016.


Art. 16, CIVIL CODE. Real property as well as personal

property is subject to the law of the country where it is stipulated.

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 wherein said property may be found.

• Art. 816. The will of an alien who is abroad produces effect in the Philippines if
made with the formalities prescribed by the law of the place in which he resides, or
according to the formalities observed in his country, or in conformity with those
which this Code prescribes.

• Art. 817. A will made in the Philippines by a citizen or subject of another country,
which is executed in accordance with the law of the country of which he is a citizen
or subject, and which might be proved and allowed by the law of his own country,
shall have the same effect as if executed according to the laws of the Philippines.

• Probate is an adjudication that the last will and testament of a person was
executed with all the formalities required by law.

• It does not pass upon the validity of the provision of the will. (authentication only)

• The disallownace of a will being essentially procedural in character, the law of the
forum will govern procedural matters.

• However, the court will look into the law of the foreign state where the suit was
made as to whether the extrinsic requirements in the execution of the will have
been complied with (Art. 17, 816 and 817 C.C.).

Conflict of Laws Syllabus
Atty. Enrique V. dela Cruz, Jr.

Q. May a will of an alien produce effect in the Philippines? Explain.

ANS: Yes. The will of an alien who is abroad produces effect in the Philippines if made
with the formalities prescribed by the law of the place in which he resides, or according to
the formalities observed in his country, or in conformity with those which this Code
prescribes. (Art. 816, NCC). Proof that the will conforms to the laws mentioned is
imperative. (Salud Teodoro Vda. De Perez vs. Hon. Tolete, 52 SCAD 46, G.R. No. 76714,
June 2, 1994).

Q. How can a will executed abroad be made effective in the Philippines?

ANS: A will made in a foreign country may be probated in the Philippines after sufficient
proof is presented showing that the will was duly executed in the manner required by law
and that the testator had testamentary capacity at the time he executed the will.

Q. What evidence are necessary for the allowance of wills which have been
probated outside of the Philippines?

ANS: The evidence necessary for the allowance of wills which have been probated
outside of the Philippines are as follows:
(1) the due execution of the will in accordance with the foreign laws;
(2) the testator has his domicile in the foreign country and not in the Philippines;
(3) the will has been admitted to probate in such country;
(4) the fact that the foreign tribunal is a probate court; and
(5) the laws of a foreign country on procedure and allowance of wills (Suntay v.
Suntay, 95 Phil. 500 [1954]; Fluemer v. Hix, 54 Phil. 610 [1930]).

Q: What is the Meaning of “Renvoi”?

A: A French word which means “referring back”. It is a term used in Conflicts of Laws to
denote the phenomenon where the conflicts rule of the forum makes a reference to a
foreign law, but the foreign law is found to contain a conflict rule that returns or refers back
the matter to the law of the forum.


 Suntay v. Suntay, G.R. Nos. L-3087 & L-3088. July 31, 1954.
 Aznar v. Garcia, G.R. No. L-16749. January 31, 1963.
 PCI Bank v. Escolin, G.R. Nos. L-27860 & L-27896. March 29, 1974.
 Vda. de Perez v. Tolete, GR No. 76714, June 2, 1994
 Llorente v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 124371. November 23, 2000.
 Palaganas v. Palaganas, GR No. 169144, January 26, 2011

Q: What Will the Court Do, if it is Confronted with a Case with a “Renvoi” Problem?

1. Reject the renvoi - Here we do not want the referring back to us – so we apply the
foreign internal law.

2. Accept the renvoi - Here we welcome the reference back to us – so we apply our
internal law).

3. Follow the Theory of Desistment - Also referred to as Mutual Disclaimer of

Jurisdiction Theory - hence we follow our own internal law.

Conflict of Laws Syllabus
Atty. Enrique V. dela Cruz, Jr.

4. Make use of the Foreign Court Theory - This means that the Philippine court will
put itself in the position of the foreign court – and whatever the foreign court will
do respecting the case, the Philippine court will do likewise.

Q: What is Double Renvoi?

A: It is what occurs when the local court, in adopting the foreign court theory, discovers
that the foreign court accepts the renvoi (hence ultimately, it is the foreign internal law that
will be used.

Q: What is Transmission?

A: It is the process of applying the law of a foreign state through the law of a second
foreign state.

Q: What are the Differences between Renvoi (single or double) and Transmission?

Renvoi Transmission
Deals with 2 countries Deals with 3 or more countries
Deals with “referring back” Deals with “referring across” or “transmitting”


• Being a unilateral and purely personal act, a will is revocable at any time before
the death of the testator. Any waiver or restriction of this right is void (Art. 788).

• Under Art. 829 of the Civil Code, a revocation done outside the Philippines, by a
person who does not have a domicile in this country, is valid when it is done
according to: (i) Lex loci celebrationis or (ii) lex domicilii

• If the revocation is done outside the Philippines by one domiciled here, then the
governing law is either Philippine law or the law of the place of revocation.

• If the revocation takes place in the Philippines (regardless of nationality), then

Philippine law will apply.


Q: What Law Governs Liability for Torts?

A: The law of the place where the alleged tort was committed will govern. (lex loci delicti

Q: What is the Obligation Theory?

A: The tortuous act gives rise to an obligation which is transitory and follows the person
committing the tortuous act and maybe enforced wherever he may be found.

Q: What is the Philippine Rule Regarding Tort Problems Brought in this


A: If the tort law of the Philippines embodies a social or economic policy, then the law of
the forum on torts shall be applied. If the Philippines has no concern or interest in the
application of the internal law, and the other State have an interest, apply the law of such

Conflict of Laws Syllabus
Atty. Enrique V. dela Cruz, Jr.

Note: The State where an injury has occurred has interest in compensating the injured
party, while the State where the tortfeasor has acted has an interest in regulating the
conduct of persons found in its territory.


 Mapa v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 122308. July 8, 1997.

 Saudi Arabian Airlines v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 122191. October 8, 1998.
 Philippine Employ Services and Resources, Inc. v. Joseph Paramio, et al., G.R. No.
144786. April 15, 2004.
 Continental Micronesia v. Basso, G.R. Nos. 178382-83. September 23, 2015.
 Saudia Airlines v. Rebesencio, G.R. No. 198587. January 14, 2015.


Q: Distinguish Recognition from Enforcement of Foreign Judgment?

Recognition of Foreign Judgment Enforcement of Foreign Judgment
The defendant or respondent is presenting the The plaintiff or petitioner wants the court to
foreign judgment merely as a defense, on the positively carry out and make effective the
basis of res judicata foreign judgment
Involves merely the sense of justice Implies a direct act of sovereignty
Does not require either an action or a special Requires a separate action brought precisely
proceeding to make the foreign judgment effective

Q: What are the Requisites for Recognition or Enforcement of a Foreign Judgment?

1. Must be a judgment of a judicial or quasi-judicial agency which is an impartial
2. Defendant must be given a reasonable notice and opportunity to be heard;
3. Must be a judgment on a civil or commercial matter;
4. Must have disposed of the controversy on the merits;
5. Must be final and executory to constitute as res judicata in another action;
6. Must not be contrary to the public policy or good morals of the country where it is
sought to be enforced;
7. Must not be barred by prescription in both states;
8. Must not be obtained by fraud, collusion, mistake of fact or law.

Q: What are the Effects of a Judgment or Final Order of a Foreign Tribunal or Court
in Case the Judgment is Being Sought Enforcement in the Philippine Courts?

1. In case the judgment is on a specific thing – the judgment is conclusive upon the
title of the thing;

2. In case the judgment is against a person – the judgment is a presumptive

evidence of a right between the parties and their successors in interest by a
subsequent title, which may be repelled by evidence of want of jurisdiction, want
of notice to the other party, collusion, fraud, or clear mistake of law or fact.


 Asiavest Merchant Bankers v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 110263, July 20, 2001
 Philsec Investment Corp., v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 103493, June 19, 1997

Conflict of Laws Syllabus
Atty. Enrique V. dela Cruz, Jr.

 Phil. Aluminum Wheels v. FASGI Enterprises, G.R. No. 137378, Oct. 12, 2000
 Gil Miguel Puyat v. Ron Zabarte, G.R. No. 141536, February 26, 2001
 Oil & Natural Gas Commission v. CA, G.R. No. 114323, September 28, 1999
 Mijares v. Hon. Ranada, G.R. No. 139325. April 12, 2005
 Quasha et al., v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 182013. December 4, 2009
 Republic v. Labrador, G.R. No. 132980, 25 March 1999
 Corpuz v. Santo Tomas, G.R. No. 186571, August 11, 2010
 Dacasin v. Dacasin, G.R. No. 168785. February 5, 2010.
 Fujiki v. Marinay G.R. No. 196049. June 26, 2013