CONFLIC OF LAWS JURISDICTION/APPLICABLE LAW/ FOREIGN ELEMENT SAUDI ARABIAN AIRLINES vs.

COURT OF APPEALS and MILAGROS MORADA [G.R. No. 122191. October 8, 1998] FACTS SAUDIA is a foreign corporation doing air-carriage business in the Philippines. Said corporation hired Milagros Morada as a Flight Attendant for its airlines based in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. While on a lay-over in Jakarta, a Saudi Arabian crew members, Thamer and Allah attempted to rape Milagros Morada. While she was rescued, the Saudi Arabian government was successful in deporting back the perpetrators. Several years after the chief legal officer of SAUDIA brought Milagros to Jeddah on the pretense that she would merely testify in an investigation of the charges she made against the two SAUDIA crew members for the attack on her person. As it turned out, she was the one made to face trial for very serious charges, including adultery and violation of Islamic laws and tradition, where she was convicted for the crime of adultery. On appeal,the Prince of Makkah dismissed the case against her and allowed her to leave Saudi Arabia. Shortly before her return to Manila she was terminated from the service by SAUDIA, without her being informed of the cause. Thus, Morada filed a Complaint for damages against SAUDIA citing ART. 19 and 21 of NCC. ISSUE

said to contain a foreign element. The foreign element may simply consist in the fact that one of the parties to a contract is an alien or has a foreign domicile, or that a contract between nationals of one State involves properties situated in another State. In other cases, the foreign element may assume a complex form In the instant case, the foreign element consisted in the fact that private respondent Morada is a resident Philippine national, and that petitioner SAUDIA is a resident foreign corporation. Also, by virtue of the employment of Morada with the petitioner Saudia as a flight stewardess, events did transpire during her many occasions of travel across national borders, particularly from Manila, Philippines to Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, and vice versa, that caused a conflicts situation to arise. Similarly, the trial court also possesses jurisdiction over the persons of the parties herein. By filing her Complaint and Amended Complaint with the trial court, private respondent has voluntary submitted herself to the jurisdiction of the court. The records show that petitioner SAUDIA has filed an answer and several motions praying for the dismissal of Moradas Complaint. Undeniably, petitioner SAUDIA has effectively submitted to the trial courts jurisdiction by praying for the dismissal of the Amended Complaint on grounds other than lack of jurisdiction. AS TO THE APPLICABLE LAW The doctrine of qualification is the process of deciding whether or not the facts relate to the kind of question specified in a conflicts rule. The purpose of characterization is to enable the forum to select the proper law. Factors to determine the applicable law.

I. II.

WHETHER OR NOT RTC HAS JURISDICTION WHETHER OR NOT PHILIPPINE LAW SHOULD GOVERN.

(1) The nationality of a person, his domicile, his residence, his place of sojourn, or his origin; (2) the seat of a legal or juridical person, such as a corporation; (3) 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; (4) 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

HELD IN THE ISSUE OF JURISDICTION: Where the factual antecedents satisfactorily establish the existence of a foreign element, we agree with petitioner that the problem herein 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

committed. The lex loci actus is particularly important in contracts and torts; (5) the place where an act is intended to come into effect, e.g., the place of performance of contractual duties, or the place where a power of attorney is to be exercised; (6) the intention of the contracting parties as to the law that should govern their agreement, the lex loci intentionis; (7) the place where judicial or administrative proceedings are instituted or done. The lex fori or 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 applications of foreign law; and (8) the flag of a ship, which in many cases is decisive of practically all legal relationships of the ship and of its master or owner as such. It also covers contractual relationships particularly contracts of affreightment.[60] (Underscoring ours.) Considering that the complaint in the court a quo is one involving torts, the connecting factor or point of contact could be the place or places where the tortious conduct or lex loci actus occurred. The Philippines could be the situs of the court because it is in the Philippines where petitioner allegedly deceived private respondent, a Filipina residing and working here. According to her, she had honestly believed that petitioner would, in the exercise of its rights and in the performance of its duties, act with justice, give her her due and observe honesty and good faith. That certain acts or parts of the injury allegedly occurred in another country is of no moment. For in our view what is important here is the place where the over-all harm or the fatality of the alleged injury to the person, reputation, social standing and human rights of complainant, had lodged. In applying said principle to determine the State which has the most significant relationship, the following contacts are to be taken into account and evaluated according to their relative importance with respect to the particular issue: (a) the place where the injury occurred;

(b) the place where the conduct causing the injury occurred; (c) the domicile, residence, nationality, place of incorporation and place of business of the parties, and (d) the place where the relationship, if any, between the parties is centered. Prescinding from this premise that the Philippines is the situs of the tort complaint of and the place having the most interest in the problem, we find, by way of recapitulation, that the Philippine law on tort liability should have paramount application to and control in the resolution of the legal issues arising out of this case. Further, we hold that the respondent Regional Trial Court has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter of the complaint; the appropriate venue is in Quezon City, which could properly apply Philippine law.

CONFLIC OF LAWS JURISDICTION/APPLICABLE ELEMENT

LAW/ FOREIGN

Thus, Morada filed a Complaint for damages against SAUDIA citing ART. 19 and 21 of the Civil Code. ISSUE I. WHETHER OR NOT RTC QUEZON CITY HAS JURISDICTION TO HANDLE THE CASE II. WHETHER OR NOT PHILIPPINE LAW SHOULD GOVERN. HELD IN THE ISSUE OF JURISDICTION: 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 element. The foreign element may simply consist in the fact that one of the parties to a contract is an alien or has a foreign domicile, or that a contract between nationals of one State involves properties situated in another State. In other cases, the foreign element may assume a complex form In the instant case, the foreign element consisted in the fact that private respondent Morada is a resident Philippine national, and that petitioner SAUDIA is a resident foreign corporation. Also, by virtue of the employment of Morada with the petitioner Saudia as a flight stewardess, events did transpire during her many occasions of travel across national

borders, particularly from Manila, Philippines to Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, and vice versa, that caused a conflicts situation to arise. Similarly, the trial court also possesses jurisdiction over the persons of the parties herein. By filing her Complaint and Amended Complaint with the trial court, private respondent has voluntary submitted herself to the jurisdiction of the court. The records show that petitioner SAUDIA has filed an answer and several motions praying for the dismissal of Moradas Complaint. Undeniably, petitioner SAUDIA has effectively submitted to the trial courts jurisdiction by praying for the dismissal of the Amended Complaint on grounds other than lack of jurisdiction. AS TO THE APPLICABLE LAW The doctrine of qualification is the process of deciding whether or not the facts relate to the kind of question specified in a conflicts rule. The purpose of characterization is to enable the forum to select the proper law. Factors to determine the applicable law. (1) The nationality of a person, his domicile, his residence, his place of sojourn, or his origin; (2) the seat of a legal or juridical person, such as a corporation;

SAUDI ARABIAN AIRLINES vs. COURT OF APPEALS and MILAGROS MORADA [G.R. No. 122191. October 8, 1998] FACTS SAUDIA is a foreign corporation doing aircarriage business in the Philippines. Said corporation hired Milagros Morada as a Flight Attendant for its airlines based in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. While on a lay-over in Jakarta, a Saudi Arabian crew members, Thamer and Allah attempted to rape Milagros Morada. While she was rescued, the Saudi Arabian government was successful in deporting back the perpetrators.Several years after the chief legal officer of SAUDIA brought Milagros to Jeddah on the pretense that she would merely testify in an investigation of the charges she made against the two SAUDIA crew members. As it turned out, she was the one made to face trial for very serious charges, including adultery and violation of Islamic laws and tradition, where she was convicted for the crime of adultery. On appeal,the Prince of Makkah dismissed the case against her and allowed her to leave Saudi Arabia. Shortly before her return to Manila she was terminated from the service by SAUDIA, without her being informed of the cause.

(3) 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; (4) 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; (5) the place where an act is intended to come into effect, e.g., the place of performance of contractual duties, or the place where a power of attorney is to be exercised; (6) the intention of the contracting parties as to the law that should govern their agreement, the lex loci intentionis; (7) the place where judicial or administrative proceedings are instituted or done. The lex forithe law of the forumis 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 applications of foreign law; and (8) the flag of a ship, which in many cases is decisive of practically all legal relationships of

the ship and of its master or owner as such. It also covers contractual relationships particularly contracts of affreightment.[60] (Underscoring ours.) Considering that the complaint in the court a quo is one involving torts, the connecting factor or point of contact could be the place or places where the tortious conduct or lex loci actus occurred. And applying the torts principle in a conflicts case, we find that the Philippines could be said as a situs of the tort (the place where the alleged tortious conduct took place). This is because it is in the Philippines where petitioner allegedly deceived private respondent, a Filipina residing and working here. According to her, she had honestly believed that petitioner would, in the exercise of its rights and in the performance of its duties, act with justice, give her due and observe honesty and good faith. Instead, petitioner failed to protect her, she claimed. That certain acts or parts of the injury allegedly occurred in another country is of no moment. For in our view what is important here is the place where the over-all harm or the fatality of the alleged injury to the person, reputation, social standing and human rights of complainant, had lodged, according to the plaintiff below (herein private respondent). All told, it is not without basis to identify the Philippines as the situs of the alleged tort.

In applying said principle to determine the State which has the most significant relationship, the following contacts are to be taken into account and evaluated according to their relative importance with respect to the particular issue: (a) the place where the injury occurred; (b) the place where the conduct causing the injury occurred; (c) the domicile, residence, nationality, place of incorporation and place of business of the parties, and (d) the place where the relationship, if any, between the parties is centered. The relationship between the parties was centered here, although it should be stressed that this suit is not based on mere labor law violations. From the record, the claim that the Philippines has the most significant contact with the matter in this dispute,raised by private respondent as plaintiff below against defendant (herein petitioner), in our view, has been properly established. Prescinding from this premise that the Philippines is the situs of the tort complaint of and the place having the most interest in the problem, we find, by way of recapitulation, that the Philippine law on tort liability should have paramount application to and control in the resolution of the legal issues arising out of this case. Further, we hold that the RTC has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter of the complaint;

Characterization process of determining under what category a certain set of facts of rules fall to enable the forum to select the proper law. Steps in Characterization 1. Determination of the facts involved 2. Characterization of the factual question 3. Determination of the Conflicts rule 4. Characterization of the point of contact 5. Characterization of the problem as procedural or substantive 6. Pleading and proving of the proper foreign law 7. Application of the foreign law to the problem Totality Approach 1. Get the law intended 2. Proceed to apply the intended law in its totality including its prescriptive period and its statute of frauds EXCEPTION: if the subject matter governs property located in the Phil, then our own law of prescription must apply. Theories in Characterization 1. Lex Fori forum considers its own concept of characterization 2. Lex Causae forum follows the characterization of the foreign state which is the principal point of contact

3. Universal Analytical Theory Both factors of Fori and Causae is taken into consideration. Characterization comes after a general comparative analytical study of the jurisprudence of all the states involved 4. Dual Theory instead of considering worldwide conceptions, only two concepts enter in the picture which is fori and causae. 5. Autonomous Theory it considers the characterization of the country referred to in the conflicts rule in lex causae. State A refers to C. in State B as lex causae and the conflicts rule in State B refers to State C as the point of contact, it is State C which must be used by A. 6. Totality Theory get the intention and apply it. Status place of an individual in a society, consists of personal qualities and relationships. Capacity part of the status and is the sum of his rights and obligations Personal Law law that attaches to an individual wherever he may go Theories on Personal Law 1. Nationality theory personal law is governed by his nationality 2. Domiciliary the law of the domicile 3. Situs Theory (Eclectic Theory) views the particular place or the situs of an

event where an important element of the problem occurs. Nationality membership in the ethnic, social racial and cultural group Citizenship membership in the political society Renvoi literally means referring back, the problem of renvoi arises when there is doubt as to whether a reference to a foreign law is: 1. a reference to the internal law of said foreign law or 2. a reference to the whole of the foreign law including conflicts rules. An English domiciliary of the Philippines dies in Manila leaving his English child. Succession a rights of the estates of the deceased are governed by his national law. The English conflicts rules is governed by domiciliary law. Solution. 1. Reject the renvoi refer to the English rules on succession 2. Accepts the renvoi refer to the Philippine rules on succession. Single Renvoi or Single Remission. 3. Theory of Desistment Refer to the Mutual disclaimer of the jurisdiction theory. The rule desist on applying the English Law hence, Phil. Law shall apply. 4. Use the Foreign County Theory the Phil court shall put itself in the position of the English court, and whatever the

Difference of accepting renvoi and desisting The process is different, in accepting renvoi, we refer the matter mentally to English Law and English referred it back to us. In Desisting, we found English law inadequate because it is founded on a different basis so we desisted on applying it. Transmission the process of applying the law of a foreign state thru the law of a second foreign state. EXAMPLE: An Italian domiciled in the Philippines dies in England. The case tried in England, refers to domiciliary, it will refer to Phil. Rule, but the Phil. rule refers the matter to the nationality theory which is the Italian Rule. Double Renvoi vs. Transmission 1. Double deals with two countries; transmission three or more countries 2. Double deals with referring back; transmission deals with transmitting.

RULE ON MARRIAGE AS STATUS FACTUAL POINT OF CONTACT Personal Right and National Law of H Obligation of Husband Change of Personality: and Wife a) both have common new personality the new one b)Only one will change the last common nationality c) there was never a common nationality natl law of Husband at the time of marriage Property Relations National law of H IMMUTABILITY IN THE MATRIMONIAL PROP REGIME In governing the property rights of H and W, the natl law of the H shall govern and subs. change in the nationality has no effect

Celebrated in RP Marriage by Proxy

English court will decide, the Phil. Court shall likewise do. It may decide on any of the four solutions. (Baliktad na ang application i.e. reject apply internal rule). Double Renvoi that which occurs when the local court in adopting the foreign court theory discovers that the foreign court accepts the renvoi.

RULE ON STATUS IN GENERAL FACTUAL STATUS POINT OF CONTACT Beginning of Personality National Law Effects of Emancipation National Law Age of majority National Law Use of names National Law Use of titles National Law Absence National Law Presumption of Death Lex fori

RULE ON MARRIAGE AS A CONTRACT a) Bet. Fils lex loci celeb. b) Bet For. lex celeb PROVIDED that it is not highly immoral or incestuous c) Mixed lex celeb PROVIDED that it is not highly immoral or incestuous a) Bet For. natl law PROVIDED that it is not highly immoral or incestuous b) Mixed Natl law Lex loci Celeb. a) performed in the Phil. marriage is void b) performed abroad lex loci celeb.

RULE ON ANNULMENT AND NULLITY OF MAR. FACTUAL STAT. POINT OF CONTACT Grounds for The law alleged to have annulment and been violated, the law of nullity of the place of the celebration marriage RULE ON ABSOLUTE DIVORCE. FACTUAL STAT. POINT OF CONTACT Sought in Phil. Lex Fori (not granted) Sought Abroad a. Bet. Fil natl law (not valid here though valid abroad) b. Bet For. Natl Law c. Mixed apply a and b

Celebrated Abroad

RULE FOR LEGAL SEPARATION Grounds National Law of Parties Adultery Note: if diff nationalities Concubinage the grounds given by both Attempt against Residence Requirement: the life of the If cause occurred outside of other the Phil. one year residence in the Phil. RULE PATERNITY FILIATION, ADOPTION etc. a. legitimate Fs natl law b. Illegitimate Ms natl law unless recognized by F c. determination of whether L or Ill natl law of father Doctrine of Immutability of Status Applies General: Natl law of the F Note: Adoption by a Fililipino does not confer Filipino citizenship on adopted alien. Adoption Paternity Filiations and Over the person a. appointing court court of domicile of ward b. powers of guardian law of the appointing state a. appointing court court where prop is found (lex sitae) b. powers of guardian law of the appointing state

RULES ON OBLICON FACTUAL STAT. POINT OF CONTACT a. Formal or Lex loci celebrationis extrinsic validity Exc: 1. Alienation and encumb of prop lex situs 2. Consular contracts law of RP if made in RP consulates b. Capacity of Natl law, Except. Contracting 1. Alienation and encumb Parties of prop lex situs c. Intrinsic The proper law of the Validity contract or lex contractus meaning the lex loci voluntatis or lex loci intentionis RULES ON TORTS FACTUAL STAT. POINT OF CONTACT a. Liability for Lex Loci Delicti law of the torts place where the delict was committed exc.when 1. torts not penal in char. 2. enforcement wont contravene public policy 3. if judicial machinery is adequate for such enforcement RULES ON CRIMES FACTUAL STAT. POINT OF CONTACT Essential elem. Where the crime of the crime committed

Over the Prop

Guardianship

is

Funerals

Where the body is buried