Civil Law

I. GENERAL PRINCIPLES A. Effect and Applica7on of Laws • General Rule: Ar0cle 4, Civil Code: Laws shall have no retroac0ve effect, unless the contrary is provided. • Excep0ons: ➡ When the law itself provides for its retroac0vity; ➡ When the law is penal in nature and is favorable to the accused who is not a habitual delinquent or recidivist; ➡ When the law is procedural in nature; ➡ When it creates new substan0ve rights; ➡ When the law is cura0ve in nature; ➡ When it is interpreta0ve of other laws. CASE TITLE DOCTRINE

Philippine Na7onal Bank vs. Cayetano A. Tejano G.R. No. 173615 October 16, 2009 It is binding rule, conformably with Ar0cle 4 of the Civil Code, that, generally, laws shall have only a prospec0ve effect and must not be applied retroac0vely in such a way as to apply to pending disputes and cases. This is expressed in the familiar legal maxim lex prospicit, non respicit (the law looks forward and not backward. The ra0onale against retroac0vity is easy to perceive: the retroac0ve applica0on of a law usually divests rights that have already become vested or impairs the obliga0ons of contract and, hence, is uncons0tu0onal.

Marcella-Bobis vs Bobis,336 SCRA 747 (2000)

The accused is prosecuted for the crime of bigamy for not obtaining a judicial declara0on of nullity of his first marriage before entering into another marriage. Ignorance of the existence of ar0cle 40 of the Family Code canno enve be successfully invoked as an excuse. Bernabe vs. Alejo G.R. No. 140500 Jan. 21, 2002 An illegi0mate child filed an ac0on for recogni0on pursuant to ar0cle 285 of the NCC during the effec0vity of the Family Code. illegi0mate children who were s0ll minors at the 0me the Family Code took effect and whose puta0ve parent died during their minority are thus given the right to seek recogni0on (under Ar0cle 285 of the Civil Code) for a period of up to four years from aYaining majority age and this vested right was not impaired or taken away by the passage of the Family Code. Republic vs. Miller G.R. No. 125932 April 21, 1999 Whether or not, an alien, who is qualified to adopt at the 0me of filing the pe00on, can be disqualified by the new provisions of the Family Code. An alien qualified to adopt under the Child and Youth Welfare Code, which was in force at the 0me of the filing of the pe00on, acquired a vested right which could not be affected by the subsequent enactment of a new law disqualifying him. Vested rights include not only legal or equitable 0tle to the enforcement of a demand, but also an exemp0on from new obliga0ons created a[er the right has vested. A7enza vs. Brillantes AM MTJ 92-706 March 29,1995 243 SCRA 32 Ar0cle 40 is applicable to remarriages entered into a[er the effec0vity of the Family Code on August 3, 1988 regardless of the date of the first marriage. The fact that procedural statutes may somehow affect the li0gants' rights may not preclude their retroac0ve applica0on to pending

ac0ons.

Ty vs. Cam G.R. No. 127406 November 27, 2000

The two marriages involved in this case was entered during the effec0vity of the New Civil Code. The Family Code has retroac0ve effect unless there be impairment of vested rights.

B. Publica7on Requirement under Ar7cle 2

• Laws shall take effect a[er fi[een days following the comple0on of their publica0on in the Official GazeYe, unless it is otherwise provided. This Code shall take effect one year a[er such publica0on. • The law comprehends all statutes, including those of local applica0on and private laws which should be published as a condi0on for their effec0vity and shall begin fi[een (15) days a[er publica0on, unless the legislature fixes a different effec0vity date. • Covered by these rules are presiden0al decrees and execu0ve orders promulgated by the President in the exercise of legisla0ve powers, whenever the same are validly delegated by the legislature, or, at present, directly conferred by the Cons0tu0on. Administra0ve rules and regula0ons must also be published if their purpose is to enforce or implement exis0ng laws pursuant also to a valid delega0on. Systems Factors Corp vs NLRC 346 SCRA 149 (2000)

The retroac0ve applica0on of procedural laws is not viola0ve of any right of a person who may feel that he is adversely affected. The reason is that as a general rule, no vested right may aYach nor arise from procedural laws. CASE TITLE DOCTRINE Tanada vs. Tuvera 136 SCRA 27 (1985) Ar0cle 2 of the NCC does not preclude the requirement of publica0on in the Official GazeYe even if the law itself provides for the date of its effec0vity. If the law provides for its own effec0vity date, then it takes effect on the said date, subject to the requirement of publica0on. The clause “unless otherwise provided” refers to the date of effec0vity and not the to the requirement of publica0on itself, which cannot in any event be omiYed. Basa vs. Mercado 61 Phil 632

To be a newspaper of general circula0on, it is enough that it is published for the dissemina0on of local news and general informa0on, that it has bona fide subscrip0on list of paying subscribers, and that it is published at regular intervals.

PASEI vs. Torres G.R. No. 101279 August 6, 1992

Although the ques0oned circulars are a valid exercise of the police power as delegated to the execu0ve branch of Government, they are legally invalid, defec0ve and unenforceable for lack of proper publica0on and filing in the Office of the Na0onal Administra0ve Register as required in Ar0cle 2 of the Civil Code, Ar0cle 5 of the Labor Code and Sec0ons 3(1) and 4, Chapter 2, Book VII of the Administra0ve Code of 1987. Republic vs. Extelcom G.R. No. 147096 January 15, 2002 Thus, publica0on in the Official GazeYe or a newspaper of general circula0on is a condi0on sine qua non before statutes, rules or regula0ons can take effect. There is nothing in the Administra0ve Code of 1987 which implies that the filing of the rules with the UP Law Center is the opera0ve act that gives the rules force and effect.

Feliza de Roy vs. Court of Appeals G.R. No. 80718 January 29, 1988 Contrary to pe00oners' view, there is no law requiring the publica0on of Supreme Court decisions in the Official GazeYe before they can be binding and as a condi0on to their becoming effec0ve. It is the bounden duty of counsel as lawyer in ac0ve law prac0ce to keep abreast of decisions of the Supreme Court par0cularly where issues have been clarified, consistently reiterated, and published in the advance reports of Supreme Court decisions (G. R. s) and in such publica0ons as the Supreme Court Reports Annotated (SCRA) and law journals.

1. JURISDICTION • Jurisdic0on is the right of the State (due to sovereignty) to exercise authority over persons and things within its boundaries, subject to certain excep0ons 2. WAYS OF DEALING WITH A CONFLICT CASE • Conflict of Laws is that part of the law of each state which determines whether in dealing with a factual situa0on involving a foreign element, the law or the judgment of some other state will be recognized or applied in the forum. • The primary func0on of this department of law is to determined whether the rules of law or judgments of some other state or states, and if so, to what extent, should be recognized or applied in the forum. KINDS OF JURISDICTION 1. Jurisdic7on of the Person of the Plain7ff - acquired from the moment he invokes the aid of the court and voluntary submits himself by ins0tu0on of the suit through proper pleadings 2. Jurisdic7on of the Person of the Defendant - acquired by virtue of any of the following: • Voluntary appearance in court • Enters his appearance as defendant unless he makes it clear that the purpose of his appearance is to ques0on the jurisdic0on of the court over his person • Personal service, and if he refuses, the tendering of summons • Subs0tuted service of summons by: • Summons by Publica0on 3. Jurisdic7on over the Subject Mader - the power to hear and determine cases of the general class to which the proceedings in ques0on belong and is conferred by the sovereign authority which organizes the court and defines its powers

4. Jurisdic7on over the Property (Res) - jurisdic0on over the par0cular subject maYer in controversy, regardless of the person who may be interested therein 1. Dismiss the case, either for lack of jurisdic0on or refusal to assume jurisdic0on (forum non conveniens) 2. Assume jurisdic0on and apply the internal law of the forum 3. Assume jurisdic0on and take into account or apply the law of the State or some other State CASE TITLE DOCTRINE Hilton vs. Guyot 159 U.S. 113 (1895) A foreign judgment is not en0tled to full faith and credit when sued upon another na0on, but is a prima facie evidence only of the claim. No sovereign is bound, unless by special compact, to execute within his dominions a judgment rendered by the tribunals of another state, and if execu0on be sought by suit upon the judgment or otherwise, the tribunal in which the suit is brought, or from which execu0on is sought, is on principle at liberty to examine into the merits of such judgment, and to give effect to it or not, as may be found just and equitable. The general comity, u0lity, and convenience of na0ons have, however, established a usage among most civilized states by which the final judgments of foreign courts of competent jurisdic0on are reciprocally carried into execu0on, under certain regula0ons and restric0ons, which differ in different countries.

3. DISMISSAL OF THE CASE DUE TO FORUM NON CONVENIENS Suntay vs. Suntay

95 Phil. 500 (1952)

Facts: Jose Suntay, a Filipino ci0zen, and a resident of the Philippines died in 1934 in Amoy, Fookien Province, China, leaving real and personal proper0es in the Philippines and a house in Amoy. He was survived by his children of the first marriage and his wife and child of the second marriage. The decedent‟s son by the second marriage, claimed that he had found among the files, records and documents of his late father a will and testament in Chinese characters executed and signed by the deceased in 1931 and the same was filed, recorded and probated in the Amoy district court, Fookien Province, China. Should the said will be allowed into probate in the Philippines? Ruling: The fact that the municipal district court of Amoy, China, is a probate court must be proved. The law of China on procedure in the probate or allowance of wills must also be proved. The legal requirements for the execu0on of a valid will in China should also be established by competent evidence. There is no proof on these points. xxx In the absence of proof that the municipal district court of Amoy is a probate court and on the Chinese law of procedure in probate maYers, it may be presumed that the proceedings in the maYer of proba0ng or allowing a will in the Chinese courts are the same as those provided for in our laws. It is a proceeding in rem and for the validity of such proceedings personal no0ce or by publica0on or both to all interested par0es must be made... The evidence shows that no such no0ce was received by the interested par0es residing in the Philippines. The decree appealed from [denying the will into probate by the CFI of Bulacan is affirmed. El Banco Espanol - Filipino vs. Palanca G.R. No. L-11390 March 26, 1918 Jurisdic0on, How Acquired: Jurisdic0on over the property which is the subject of the li0ga0on may result either from a seizure of the property under legal process, whereby it is brought into the actual custody of the law, or it may result from the ins0tu0on of legal proceedings wherein, under special provisions of law, the power of the court over the property is recognized and made effec0ve.

The ac0on to foreclose a mortgage is said to be a proceeding quasi in rem, by which is expressed the idea that while it is not strictly speaking an ac0on in rem yet it partakes of that nature and is substan0ally such.

• Forum non conveniens is a discre0onary power that allows courts to dismiss a case where another court, or forum, is much beYer suited to hear the case. This dismissal does not prevent a plain0ff from refiling his or her case in the more appropriate forum.

• It is impera0ve that the Court should have jurisdic0on over the case prior to exercising the doctrine of forum non conveniens. If the Court has no jurisdic0on over a case involving foreign elements, then the case should be dismissed on the ground of LACK OF JURISDICTION, and not on the basis of forum non conveniens.

4. ASSUMPTION OF JURISDICTION; WHEN MUNICIPAL LAW IS TO BE APPLIED

5. ASSUMPTION OF JURISDICTION; WHEN FOREIGN LAW IS TO BE APPLIED Manila Hotel vs. NLRC

G.R. No. 120077 October 13, 2000

The Supreme Court emphasized that under the rule of forum non conveniens, a Philippine court or agency may assume jurisdic0on over the case if it chooses to do so provided: (1) that the Philippine court is one to which the par0es may conveniently resort to;
 (2) that the Philippine court is in a posi0on to make an intelligent decision as to the law and the facts; and
 (3) that the Philippine court has or is likely to have power to enforce its decision. 1. A specific law of the forum decrees that municipal law should apply. • e.g. Ar0cle 16, Civil Code: cases involving real and personal property are subject to the law of the country where they are situated (lex situs) 2. The proper foreign law was not properly pleaded and proved.

• Our courts cannot take judicial no0ce of foreign laws. Pursuant to the doctrine of processual presump0on, if the proper foreign law is not pleaded and proved as a fact the court has the right to presume that the applicable forum law is the same as the internal law of the forum and should therefore apply the laYer law. 3. The case falls under any of the excep7ons to the applica7on foreign law. • When the foreign law is contrary to an important public policy of the forum • When the foreign law is penal in nature • When the foreign law is procedural in nature • When the foreign law is purely fiscal or administra0ve in nature • When the applica0on of the foreign law will work undeniable jus0ce to the ci0zens of the forum • When the case involves real or personal property situated in the forum • When the applica0on of the foreign law might endanger the foreign rela0ons or vital interest of the State • When the foreign law is contrary to good morals 1. A specific law of the forum decrees that the proper foreign law should apply • e.g. Civil Code, Ar0cle 16, par. 1 (lex situs – law of where the property is located), Ar0cle 16, par. 2 (lex na0onalii – personal law of the decedent), Ar0cle 17 (lex loci celebra0onis – where the contract is executed) 
 2. When another State has the dominant interest in a par7cular act or event, its law should be applied • Law of the State of the Most Significant Rela7onship - Factual contacts of each case are considered in order to arrive at the law of the most significant rela0onship. These contacts differ in each are of substan0ve law. For instance, in torts, the contacts to be taken into account are (a) the place where the injury occurred; (b) the place where the negligent conduct occurred; (c) the domicile, residence or na0onality of the par0es; and (d) the place where the rela0onship between the par0es is entered. In contract cases, the factual contacts include (a) the law chosen by the par0es and in the absence thereof; by (b) the place of contrac0ng; (c) the place of nego0a0on of the contract; (d) the place of performance; and (e) the domicile, residence, na0onality, place of incorpora0on and place of business of the par0es.

7. DÉPAÇAGE KINDS OF CHARACTERIZATION 1. Subject Mader Characteriza7on • A process by which a court, at the beginning of the choice-of-law process, assigns a disputed ques0on to its proper legal category, such as family rela0ons, contracts, succession, property, torts, etc. The legal category to which an issue is assigned determines the governing law. 
 2. Substance-Procedure Characteriza7on • If the issue is substan0ve, the court may apply the proper foreign law. • But if it is procedural, it is supposed to apply the law of the forum. Thus, maYers of service of summons, joinder or spliqng of cause of ac0on, modes of appeal, periods of appeal, etc. are governed by the law of the forum, so as not to unduly burden the court with the study of the peculiari0es and refinements of another legal system. a. Statute of Frauds • The statute is considered as substan0ve, if it forbids the crea0on of an obliga0on. If it forbids the enforcement of the obliga0on, it is categorized as procedural. b. Statute of Limita7ons • By tradi0on, this is classified as procedural because they barred only the legal remedy without impairing the substan0ve right involved. • Note: ✓ The modern trend is to consider the law that the par0es had in mind at the 0me the transac0on took place (lex loci volunta0s / lex loci inten0onis). The intended law would then be applied in its totality, including its Statute of Limita0ons and Statute of Frauds. An excep0on is if the subject maYer of the transac0on is property located in the Philippines, in which case, Philippine law, being the lex situs, applies. ✓ Borrowing statutes – bar the filing of a suit in the forum if it is already barred by the statute of limita0ons in the place where the cause of ac0on arose. CASE TITLE DOCTRINE C a d a l i n v . P O E A Administrator 238 SCRA 721 (1994)

In this case involving money claims filed by Filipinos working in Bahrain, whose employment contracts were terminated prematurely, the Supreme Court noted that Sec0on 48 of Code of Civil Procedure13 is a form of a borrowing statute and by virtue of this Sec0on, the money claims filed by said Filipino workers in Philippine courts were already barred because they were filed beyond the 1-year prescrip0ve period provided in Bahrain‟s Amiri Decree No. 23. However, the Court did not apply Amiri Decree No. 23 because “[t]o enforce the one-year prescrip0ve period of the Amiri Decree No. 23 of 1976 as regards the claims in ques0on would contravene the public policy on the protec0on to labor ... the applicable law on prescrip0on is the Philippine law...” • Depecage is the process of applying rules of different states on the basis of the precise issue involved. The doctrine of depecage involves the separa0on of issues and the applica0on of a dis0nct choice-of-law analysis to each issue.

• For example, A and B, cousins and domiciliaries of Canada, were married in Nevada. A had some proper0es in the Philippines and died intestate in the Philippines while on a year-long vaca0on in the country. The issue on how his proper0es in the Philippines shall be distributed will be governed by Canadian law on succession (lex domicilii), while the issue on the validity of his marriage to B, in rela0on to the issue on whether B is his wife and intestate heir, will be governed by both Nevada law (lex loci celebra0onis) and Canadian law (lex domicilii).

• It is a French word, which means “refer back” or “return”. It is a procedure whereby a jural maYer presented is referred by the conflict-of-laws rules of the forum to a foreign State, the conflict-of-laws rules of which, in turn, refer the maYer back to the law of the forum or a third State. • When the reference is made back to the law of the forum, there is “remission”, while reference to a third State is called “transmission”. WAYS OF DEALING WITH RENVOI 1. Reject the renvoi by applying internal law • If the conflicts rules of the forum court refer the case to the law of another state, it is deemed to mean only the “internal” law of the State. The internal law is that which would be applied to a domes0c case that has no conflict-of-laws complica0ons. 2. Accept the renvoi • Accept the renvoi and refer no just to another state’s internal law but to the whole law which includes choice-of-law rules applicable in mul0-state cases. 3. By desistance or mutual disclaimer of jurisdic7on. This has the same result as acceptance of renvoi, but the process used by the court is to desist applying the foreign law. 4. Use the “foreign court” theory. The forum court would assume the same posi7on the foreign court would take if the case is li7gated in the jurisdic7on of the foreign court.

Aznar vs. Garcia 7 SCRA 95 (1963)

Facts: Decedent Edward Christensen was a ci0zen of California, USA, but domiciled in the Philippines. In his will, he bequeathed P3,600 to Maria Helen Christensen (“Helen”), his illegi0mate daughter, and the residue of his estate to his daughter, Maria Lucy Christensen (“Lucy”). Helen filed opposi0on to the approval of the project of par00on base on the will, insofar as it deprived her of her legi0me as an acknowledged natural child of the decedent, based on Philippine laws.

Ruling: “We note that Ar0cle 946 of the California Civil Code is its conflict of laws rule, while the rule applied in In re Kaufman, supra, its internal law. If the law on succession and the conflict of laws rules of California are to be enforced jointly, each in its own intended and appropriate sphere, the principle cited in In re Kaufman should apply to each of its ci0zens living in the State, but Ar0cle 946 should apply to such of its ci0zens as are not domiciled in California but in other jurisdic0ons. xxx Appellee [Lucy] argue that what Ar0cle 16 of the Civil Code of the Philippines pointed out as the na0onal law is the internal law of California. But as above explained the laws of California have prescribed two sets of laws for its ci0zens, one for residents therein and another for those domiciled in other jurisdic0ons. Reason

demands that We should enforce the California internal law prescribed for its ci7zens residing therein, and enforce the conflict of laws rules for the ci7zens domiciled abroad. xxx It is argued on appellees‟ behalf that the clause „if there is

no law to the contrary in the place where the property is situated‟ in Sec0on 946 of the California Civil Code refers to Ar0cle 16 of the Civil Code of the Philippines and that the law to the contrary in the Philippines is the provision in said Ar0cle 16 that the na0onal law of the deceased should govern. This conten0on cannot be sustained. As explained in the various authori0es cited above, the na7onal law

men7oned in Ar7cle 16 of our Civil Code is the law on conflict of laws in the California Civil Code, i.e., Ar0cle 946, which authorizes the reference or return of

the ques0on to the law of the testator‟s domicile. xxx The court of the domicile cannot and should not refer the case back to California; such ac0on would leave the issue incapable of determina0on because the case will then be like a football, tossed back and forth between the two states, between the country of which the decedent was a ci0zen and the country of his domicile. The Philippine court must apply its own law as directed in the conflict of laws rules of the state of the decedent, if the ques0on has to be decided, especially as the applica0on of the internal law of California provides no legi0me for children while the Philippine law, Arts. 887(4) and 894, Civil Code of the Philippines, makes natural children legally acknowledged forced heirs of the parent recognizing them.

Civil Law Topic Conflict of Laws Rule Noteworthy PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATION

Extrinsic Validity of Marriage

• Lex loci celebra0onis (Art. 26(1), Family Code)

• Excep0ons

1. Marriage between minors

2. Bigamous or polygamous marriages 3. Mistaken iden0ty of the other party 4. Subsequent marriage where judgment of annulment or of absolute nullity of the first marriage, the par00on and distribu0on of the property of the spouses and delivery of the children‟s presump0ve legi0mes w e r e n o t r e c o r d e d i n t h e appropriate civil registry and registries of property

5. Other party is psychologically incapacitated

6. Incestuous marriages

7. Marriages against public policy (Arts. 35(1), (4) – (6), 36, 37 & 38)

• These excep0ons put into issue the capacity of the par0es to enter into the marriage and therefore relate to the substan0ve requirement for marriage. Since the personal law of the par0es, e.g., the na0onal law of Filipinos, governs the ques0ons of intrinsic validity of marriages between the Filipinos abroad, the above enumera0ons are excep0ons to lex loci celebra0onis precisely because they are controlled by lex na0onalii.

• The above formal requisites apply to foreigners who get married in the Philippines. If one or both of the par0es are foreigners, the foreigner must submit a cer0ficate of legal capacity to contract marriage issued by the diploma0c or consular officials of his/her country in the Philippines before he/she can be issued a marriage license. Stateless persons or refugees need only to submit an affidavit sta0ng the circumstances showing such capacity to contract marriage

• As to common law marriages of foreigners who come to the Philippines as husband and wife, it would seem that we should consider the marriage valid if valid under their na0onal law or the law of the place where the rela0onship began. But the marriage must not be contra b o n o s m o re s o r u n i v e rs a l l y considered incestuous.

Intrinsic Validity of Marriage

• Personal Law (Lex Na0onalii or Lex Domicilii)

• Ar0cle 15: Laws rela0ng to family rights and du0es, or to the status, condi0on and legal capacity of persons are binding upon ci0zens of the Philippines, even though living abroad.

• For marriages between aliens that are valid under their personal law, they may be recognized as valid in the Philippines, unless the marriage is universally considered incestuous or highly immoral

• Same rule for mixed marriage under Extrinsic Validity of Marriage

Personal Rela7ons between Spouses

• Ar0cle 15; Personal Law (Lex Na0onalii or Lex Domicilii)

• For mixed marriages, the personal law of the husband will prevail, unless contrary to law, goods customs and morals of the forum. • S u b s e q u e n t c h a n g e o n t h e

na0onality of the spouses are proposed to have the following effects:

1. If both spouses will have the same or common na0onality, the laws where they are na0onals will govern; 2. If only one of the spouse change his

or her na0onality, consider the last common na0onality of the spouses; 3. If there was never a common

na0onality, the na0onal law of the country where the husband is a na0onal governs.

4. The property rela0ons of the spouses are governed by what has been s0pulated by them. It is thus important for the spouses to know what law governs their rela0onship as husband and wife to prevent future disagreement on the maYer.

Property Rela7ons between Spouses

• GOVERNING LAW: in the absence of a

contrary s0pula0on in the marriage seYlement, the property rela0ons of the spouses shall be governed by Philippine laws, regardless of the place of celebra0on of the marriage and their residence. However, this rule shall not apply:

1. where both spouses are aliens; 2. with respect to the extrinsic validity

of contracts affec0ng property not situated in the Philippines and executed in the country where the property is located; and

3. with respect to the extrinsic validity of contracts entered into in the Philippines not affec0ng property situated in a foreign country whose laws require different formali0es for their extrinsic validity. (Art. 80, Family Code)

• For mixed marriages, the personal law of the Filipino spouse will govern, pursuant to Art. 80 of the Family Code. This was the inten0on of the Civil Code Revision CommiYee when it amended Art. 124 of the Civil Code in order to protect the Filipino spouse.

• Under Art. 80 of the Family Code, the property rela0ons of the spouses, regardless of place of celebra0on of the marriage and their residence, shall be governed by the marriage seYlement they have agreed upon before their marriage. In the absence thereof, the system of absolute community shall govern.

• Principle of Immutability: If the

spouses or one of them change their na0onality subsequent to the marriage, their property regime will remain unchanged.

A n n u l m e n t a n d Declara7on of Nullity of Marriage

• Lex loci celebra0onis and Personal law (Lex na0onalii / Lex domicilii)

• (Art. 26(1), Family Code & Art. 15, Civil Code)

• For Filipinos, their na0onal law is considered because though their marriage is valid under lex loci celebra0onis, grounds for its annulment or declara0on of nullity may exist under PH law, such as if the marriage is bigamous or against public policy.

• For mixed marriages, if solemnized here in the Philippines, PH law would be followed for annulment or declara0on of nullity of the marriage. If solemnized abroad and valid under the law where the marriage is solemnized and the personal law of one of the spouses, validity may be recognized here in the Philippines, unless the marriage is universally considered incestuous or highly immoral and therefore, void.

Divorce • Personal law (Lex na0onalii / Lex domicilii) • (Art. 26(2), Family Code & Art. 15, Civil

Code)

• GENERAL RULE: Our courts only observe rela0ve divorce (legal separa0on). Any divorce sought in Philippine courts will not be granted. Filipino couples cannot obtain absolute divorces abroad and neither shall a valid divorce obtained abroad by Filipino couples be recognized here.

• Excep0on to the General Rule: 1. Valid divorce obtained abroad

between foreigners whose na0onal laws allow divorce.

A foreign divorce will be recognized in all contrac0ng states if, at the date of the ins0tu0on of the proceeding: • The respondent or pe00oner had his

habitual residence there, OR

• Both spouses are na0onals of that State, OR

• If only the pe00oner was a na0onal, he should have his habitual residence

2. Where a marriage between a Filipino ci0zen and a foreigner is validly celebrated and a divorce is therea[er validly obtained abroad by the alien spouse capacita0ng him or her to remarry, the Filipino spouse shall have capacity to remarry under Philippine law.

Legal Separa7on • Ar0cle 15; Personal Law (Lex Na0onalii or Lex Domicilii)

• For mixed marriages, the grounds available are those under the personal laws of the spouses (Art. 8, H a g u e C o n v e n 0 o n o n L e g a l Separa0on)

L e g i 7 m a c y , I l l e g i 7 m a c y, a n d Legi7ma7on

• Common personal law (Lex na0onalii / Lex domicilii) of the parents / of the father • Art. 15, Civil Code • If the parents are of the same na0onality – their common personal law (na0onal law or law of domicile) will be applied. • If the parents are of different na0onali0es – personal law of the father governs

• Doctrine of Immutability of Status:

The status of a child (whether legi0mate or illegi0mate) is not affected by a subsequent change of na0onality of the parents. But the rights and du0es of parent and child, or child and parent, would, a[er the parents‟ change of na0onality, be governed by the new na0onal law of the parents.

Rights and Du7es between Parent and Child

• Common personal law (Lex na0onalii / Lex domicilii) of the parents / of the father • Art. 15, Civil Code

• If the child is legi0mate – either the common personal law of the parents or the personal law of the father if the parents are of different na0onali0es governs • If the child is illegi0mate – The personal law of the mother is decisive, UNLESS the child is subsequently recognized by the father, in which case the rules on legi0mate children will be applied

• If the child is illegi0mate, the personal law of the mother governs.

Adop7on and Legal Effects

• Personal law (Lex na0onalii / Lex domicilii) of the adopted

• (RA 8552, Sec0ons 16-18)

• The validity of adop0on at the child‟s domicile or country is recognized in that State and in all others even when the adop0ng parents are domiciled elsewhere or are ci0zens of another country.

• Applicable laws: RA 8552 (Domes0c Adop0on Act of 1998) and RA 8043 (Inter-Country Adop0on Act of 1995) PROPERTY Extrinsic and Intrinsic V a l i d i t y o f t h e Transac7on • Lex Situs/ Lex Rei Sitae • Excep0ons: ✓ Successional Rights - na0onal law of the decedent

✓ Capacity to Succeed - na0onal law of the decedent

✓ Contracts involving Real Property which do not deal with the 0tle thereto - The law intended will be the proper law of the contract ✓ While the validity of the transfer of

land must be determined by the lex situs, the validity of the contract to transfer is determined by the proper law of the contract

• Includes aliena0ons, transfers, mortgages; capacity of contrac0ng p a r 0 e s ; i n t e r p r e t a 0 o n o f documents; effects of ownership; co-ownership; accession; usufruct; lease; easement; quie0ng of 0tle; registra0on; prescrip0on; police power; eminent domain; and taxa0on

• WHEN WILL PH COURT HAS TO SETTLE A PROBLEM IN CLASSIFYING PROPERTY?

• When it is located in a foreign country which has a law that dis0nguished between real and personal property.

WILLS AND SUCCESSION Extrinsic Validity of

Wills

• If the will was executed by a FILIPINO, ABROAD, the governing law is Philippine law OR law of the place where he is execu0ng the will.

• If the will was executed by an ALIEN, ABROAD, the formali0es of his lex na0onalii (law of the country of which he is a ci0zen) must govern; OR law of his domicile; OR lex loci celebra0onis.

• If the will was executed by an ALIEN, in the Philippines, the governing law may be the laws of his country; OR the laws of the Philippines.

• From a conflict of laws perspec0ve, a will is an involuntary transfer of property because although an act of execu0ng one’s will and testament is a voluntary act, that in itself, does not transfer 0tle.

• Filipinos cannot make joint wills, whether executed in the Philippines or abroad (Art. 819, Civil Code) • Joint wills by aliens made abroad

may be recognized as valid in the Philippines if valid according to their personal law or lex loci celebra0onis. But if that joint will is made in the Philippines, it is void for being against public policy.

• Joint wills by an alien and Filipino made abroad may be considered as valid as to the alien (if allowed by his p e r s o n a l l a w o r l e x l o c i celebra0onis), but void as to the Filipino) for being against Philippine public policy. However, if such joint will is made in the Philippines, it is void for being against public policy.

Intrinsic Validity of Wills

• Lex na0onalii – in countries that follow the na0onality theory

• Lex domicilii – in countries that follow the domiciliary theory

• What governs the intrinsic validity of wills in the Philippines? the NCC applies: lex na0onalii of the decedent

• CONFLICT RULES WHEN A PERSON DIES INTESTATE

1. In civil law countries – the na0onal law of the deceased applies

2. In common law countries – the lex domicilii of the deceased at the 0me of death applies with respect to personalty, while the lex situs applies with respect to real property Revoca7on of Wills • Under Art. 829 of the NCC, a revoca0on done outside the Philippines by a person who does not have his domicile here is valid if done according to: • The law of the place where the will was made (lex loci celecbra0onis) or • The law of his domicile at the 0me of revoca0on (lex domicilii) • NOTE: Ignores the law of the place of revoca0on • If the revoca0on is done in the Philippines, it is valid if made in accordance with the provisions of our Civil Code • If the revoca0on is done outside the Philippines by a person who is domiciled here, it is valid if made in accordance with: • Philippine law (lex domicilii) or • Lex loci actus of the revoca0on (the place where the revoca0on was made) Intestate Succession • Personal law of the decedent (Lex na0onalii / Lex domicilii) (Art. 16, Civil Code) Capacity to Succeed • Personal law of the decedent (Lex na0onalii / Lex domicilii) (Art. 16 & 1039, Civil Code)

P r o b a t e a n d Administra7on of Estate • Lex Fori 1. Administra0on is procedural in nature. It is the lex fori (law of the forum) that governs not the law that determines how the estate of the deceased is to be distributed 2. In charge of the administra0on is the

executor or an administrator with a will annexed or an administrator

3. The executor is qualified, and the administrator of the estate is appointed, by the court of the country where the deceased was domiciled at the 0me of his death, or if he was a non-domiciliary, the country where his proper0es are found 4. The rights, powers, and du0es of the

executor or administrator are coextensive with the territorial jurisdic0on of the court that qualified or appointed him

5. Principal domiciliary administra0on v. ancillary administra0on

6. The domiciliary administrator of the estate of a deceased American ci0zen in the US has no power over and is not en0tled to the possession of the stock cer0ficates of shares of stock by the deceased in a Philippine corpora0on, which cer0ficates must be delivered to the ancillary administrator. (Tayag vs. Benguet)

• Wills proved and allowed in a foreign country, according to the law of that country, may be allowed, filed and recorded by the proper court in the Philippines (Rule 77, Sec. 1, Rules of Court)

• The following must be proved: (1) foreign law on formali0es of wills; (2) due execu0on of the will in accordance with the foreign law; (3) the will had been admiYed to probate in said country; (4) the foreign tribunal is a probate court; (5) foreign laws on procedure and allowance of wills were followed; and (6) the testator had his domicile in the foreign country where the will was probated (Vda. de Perez v. Tolete, 232 SCRA 722)

CONTRACTS Extrinsic Validity of

Contracts

• Lex loci celebra0onis (Arts. 17 (1), Civil Code)

• With respect to contracts entered into by cablegram, telex or fax messages between persons in two countries, Art. 139, par. 2 of the Civil Code provides: “Acceptance made by leYer or telegram does not bind the offeror except from the 0me it came to his knowledge. The contract in such case is presumed to have been entered into in the place where the offer was made.”

Capacity of Par7es • Personal law (Lex na0onalii / Lex domicilii) (Arts. 15, Civil Code)

• But if contract involves aliena0on or encumbrance of real or personal proper0es, the governing law is lex situs / lex rei sitae (Art. 16, Civil Code)

Intrinsic Validity of Contracts

• Lex loci contractus • Lex loci solu0onis

• Lex loci volunta0s / inten0onis

• Law of the State of the most significant rela0onship

• There is no specific provision of Philippine law applicable to a conflicts case on intrinsic validity of contracts.

• Hence, the following should be taken into considera0on in using any of the conflict of laws rules on intrinsic validity of contracts:

1. If the place of the making of the contract is en0rely incidental or casual, the mechanical applica0on of lex loci contractus might lead to unjust results.

2. If the contract is to be performed in two or more States with conflic0ng laws on validity of contracts, lex loci solu0onis would not be helpful. 3. Under lex loci volunta0s / inten0onis,

the par0es may s0pulate that their contract be governed by a specific law (Art. 1306, Civil Code on autonomy of contracts25) and such s0pula0on will be recognized. However, they cannot s0pulate to oust the proper courts of their jurisdic0on, contract away provisions of the proper law that are heavily impressed with public interest, or agree on a law that is contrary to the fundamental policy of the forum.

TORTS & DAMAGES Torts • Lex loci delic0 commissi

• Law of the State of the most significant rela0onship

• CHARACTERIZATION OF THE PLACE OF WRONG (locus delic0)

✓ Common law theory – looks to the place where the last event necessary to make an actor liable for an alleged tort occurs (where the injury is sustained) ✓ Civil law theory – view the situs of torts as the place where the tortuous act was

commiYed.

• MODERN THEORIES IN TORT LIABILITY

1. Doctrine of Elec7ve Concurrence – Either the laws of the state where the actor engaged in his conduct and where the injury was incurred may be invoked.

2. Theory of Most Significant Rela7onship – The applicable law shall be the law of the country which has the most significant rela0onship to the situa0on. In determining the state which has the most significant rela0onship, the following factors are to be taken into account: • place where the injury occurred • place of conduct causing the injury • domicile, residence, na0onality, place of incorpora0on and place of business • place where rela0onship between the par0es is centered 3. State-interest Analysis – This principle provides for the following methodology: • Determine false or spurious conflicts (i.e., internal laws of the different states have the same result or when only one state has an interest in applying its tort law. • If there is True Conflict:

• If Interested Forum – apply the law of such State which has greater interest in upholding its tort law.

• If Disinterested Forum – Dismiss on the ground of Non Forum Conveniens. 4. Caver’s Principle of Preference – guideline on which rules on torts may be applied by States in absence of statutory provision: a. Where the State of Injury provides for higher standard of conduct or financial protec0on against injury than the State where the tor0ous act was done, the law of the former shall govern. b. Where the State of injury and conduct provides for lower standard of conduct and financial protec0on than the home State of the person suffering the injury, the law of the State of conduct and injury shall govern.

c. Where the State in which the defendant has acted has established special controls over conduct of the kind in which defendant was engaged, the special controls and benefits must be applied although the State has no rela0onship to the defendant.

d. Where the law in which the rela0onship has its seat imposed higher standard of conduct or financial protec0on than the law of the State of the injury, the former law shall govern.

PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS MARRIAGE Eugenio vs. Velez G.R. No. 85140 May 17, 1990 Philippine Law does not recognize common law marriages. A man and woman not legally married who cohabit for many years as husband and wife, who represent themselves to the public as husband and wife, and who are reputed to be husband and wife in the community where they live may be considered legally married in common law jurisdic0ons but not in the Philippines.

While it is true that our laws do not just brush aside the fact that such rela0onships are present in our society, and that they produce a community of proper0es and interests which is governed by law, authority exists in case law to the effect that such form of co-ownership requires that the man and woman living together must not in any way be incapacitated to contract marriage. In any case, herein pe00oner has a subsis0ng marriage with another woman, a legal impediment which disqualified him from even legally marrying Vitaliana.

Djumantan vs. Domingo G.R. No. 99358

January 30, 1995

The fact of marriage by an alien to a ci0zen does not withdraw her from the opera0on of the immigra0on laws governing the admission and exclusion of aliens. Marriage of an alien woman to a Filipino husband does not ipso facto make her a Filipino ci0zen and does not excuse her from her failure to depart from the country upon the expira0on of her extended stay here as an alien Pilapil vs. Ibay-Somera G.R. No. 80116 June 30, 1989 The law specifically provided that in prosecu0on for adultery and concubinage, the person who can legally file the complaint should be the offended spouse and nobody else. Though in this case, it appeared that private respondent is the offended spouse, the laYer obtained a valid divorce in his country, the Federal Republic of Germany, and said divorce and its legal effects may be recognized in the Philippines in so far as he is concerned. Thus, under the same considera0on and ra0onale, private respondent is no longer the husband of pe00oner and has no legal standing to commence the adultery case under the imposture that he was the offended spouse at the 0me he filed suit.

Garcia vs. Recio G.R. No. 138322 October 2, 2001

The Philippine law does not provide for absolute divorce; hence, our courts cannot grant it. In mixed marriages involving a Filipino and a foreigner, Ar0cle 26 of the Family Code allows the former to contract a subsequent marriage in case the divorce is “validly obtained abroad by the alien spouse capacita0ng him or her to remarry”. A divorce obtained abroad by two aliens, may be recognized in the Philippines, provided it is consistent with their respec0ve laws. Therefore, before our courts can recognize a foreign divorce, the party pleading it must prove the divorce as a fact and demonstrate its conformity to the foreign law allowing it. Corpuz vs. Sto. Tomas G.R. No. 186571 August 11, 2010 The alien spouse cannot claim under the second paragraph of Art 26 of the Family Code because the substan0ve right it establishes is in favour of the Filipino spouse. Only the Filipino spouse can invoke the second par of Art 26 of the Family Code. Republic vs. CA and Bobiles G.R. No. 92326 January 24, 1992 The pe00on for adop0on was filed when the law applicable was PD 603 (Child and Youth Welfare Code), where such pe00on may be filed either of the spouses or both of them. A[er the trial court rendered its favorable decision and while the case was pending on appeal in CA, Family Code took effect where joint adop0on of both spouses is mandatory.

Roehr vs. Rodriguez GR 142820

June 20, 2003


Divorce decree obtained in Germany by alien spouse was recognized. However, the legal effects thereof (custody and support of children) must s0ll be determined by Philippine courts. “Before our courts can give effect of res judicata to a foreign judgment, such as the award of custody to pe00oner by the German court, it must be shown that the par0es opposed to the judgment had been given ample opportunity to do so on grounds allowed under Rule 39, Sec0on 50 of the Rules of Court (now Rule 39, Sec0on 48, 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure)... In the present case, it cannot be said that private respondent was given the opportunity to challenge the judgment of the German court so that there is basis for declaring the judgment as res judicata with regard to the rights of pe00oner to have parental custody of their two children... the divorce decree was issued to pe00oner by virtue of the German Civil Code provision to the effect that when a couple lived separately for three years, the marriage is deemed irrefutably dissolved. The decree did not touch on the issue as to who the offending spouse was. Absent any finding that private respondent is unfit to obtain custody of the children, the trial court was correct in seqng the issue for hearing to determine the issue of parental custody, care, support and educa0on mindful of the best interests of the children. This is in consonance with the provision in the Child and Youth Welfare Code that the child‟s welfare is always the paramount considera0on in all ques0ons concerning his care and custody.”

Noveras vs. Noveras G.R. No. 188289 August 20, 2014

David and Le0cia are US ci0zens who own proper0es in the USA and in the Philippines. Le0cia obtained a decree of divorce from the Superior Court of California in June 2005 wherein the court awarded all the proper0es in the USA to Le0cia. With respect to their proper0es in the Philippines, Le0cia filed a pe00on for judicial separa0on of conjugal proper0es. The Court ruled that even if the Court applies the doctrine of processual presump0on as the lower courts did with respect to the property regime of the par0es, the recogni0on of divorce is en0rely a different maYer because, to begin with, divorce is not recognized between Filipino ci0zens in the Philippines. Absent a valid recogni0on of the divorce decree, it follows that the par0es are s0ll legally married in the Philippines. The trial court thus erred in proceeding directly to liquida0on. PROPERTY Cheesman vs. IAC G.R. No. 74833 January 21, 1991

The fundamental law prohibits the sale to aliens of residen0al land. Sec0on 14, Ar0cle XIV of the 1973 Cons0tu0on ordains that, "Save in cases of hereditary succession, no private land shall be transferred or conveyed except to individuals, corpora0ons, or associa0ons qualified to acquire or hold lands of the public domain." Pe00oner was, of course, charged with knowledge of this prohibi0on. Thus, assuming that it was his inten0on that the lot in ques0on be purchased by him and his wife, he acquired no right whatever over the property by virtue of that purchase; and in aYemp0ng to acquire a right or interest in land, vicariously and clandes0nely, he knowingly violated the Cons0tu0on; the sale as to him was null and void.

WILLS AND SUCCESSION Cayetano vs. Leonidas

129 SCRA 522 (1984)

Facts: Adoracion Campos, an American ci0zen and permanent resident of Pennsylvania, USA, died in Manila while temporarily residing with her sister. She was survived by her father, pe00oner Hermogenes Campos and sisters, private respondents Nenita Paguia, Remedios Lopez and Marieta Medina. Nenita Paguia filed a pe00on for the reprobate of the will of the deceased which was allegedly executed in the US according to the laws of Pennsylvania, which a[er her death was probated and registered in the same State. The court allowed the reprobate of the will in the Philippines and Paguia was appointed administratrix. Pe00oner Campos filed a pe00on to set aside the reprobate of the will on the ground, inter alia, that the reprobate of the will in the Philippines divested him of his legi0me which was reserved by the law for him. Ruling: “This conten0on is without merit. Although on its face, the will appeared to have preterited the pe00oner and thus, the respondent judge should have denied its reprobate outright, the private respondents have sufficiently established that Adoracion was, at the 0me of her death, an American ci0zen and a permanent resident of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A. xxx the law which governs Adoracion Campo's will is the law of Pennsylvania, U.S.A., which is the na0onal law of the decedent. Although the par0es admit that the Pennsylvania law does not provide for legi0mes and that all the estate may be given away by the testatrix to a complete stranger, the pe00oner argues that such law should not apply because it would be contrary to the sound and established public policy and would run counter to the specific provisions of Philippine Law. It is a seYled rule that as regards the intrinsic validity of the provisions of the will, as provided for by Ar0cle 16(2) and 1039 of the Civil Code, the na0onal law of the decedent must apply. This was squarely applied in the case of Bellis v. Bellis (20 SCRA 358) xxx” CONTRACTS King Mau vs. Sycip G.R. No. L-5897 April 23, 1954

The conten0on that as the contract was executed in New York, the Court of First Instance of Manila has no jurisdic0on over this case, is without merit, because a non-resident may sue a resident in the courts of this country where the defendant may be summoned and his property leviable upon execu0on in the case of a favorable, final and executory judgment. It is a personal ac0on for the collec0on of a sum of money which the Courts of First Instance have jurisdic0on to try and decide. There is no conflict of laws involved in the case, because it is only a ques0on of enforcing an obliga0on created by or arising from contract; and unless the enforcement of the contract be against public policy of the forum, it must be enforced.

Hongkong vs. Sherman G.R. No. 72494 August 11, 1989

One basic principle underlies all rules of jurisdic0on in Interna0onal Law: a State does not have jurisdic0on 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 jurisdic0on must be based on some minimum contacts that will not offend tradi0onal no0ons of fair play and substan0al jus0ce. The defense of private respondents that the complaint should have been filed in Singapore is based merely on technicality. The par0es did not thereby s0pulate that only the courts of Singapore, to the exclusion of all the rest, has jurisdic0on. Neither did the clause in ques0on operate to divest Philippine courts of jurisdic0on.

United Airlines vs. Court of Appeals

G.R. No. 124110 April 20, 2001

The doctrine of lex loci contractus, as a general rule, the law of the place where a contract is made or entered into governs with respect to its nature and validity, obliga0on and interpreta0on. This has been said to be the rule even though the place where the contract was made is different from the place where it is to be performed, and par0cularly so, if the place of the making and the place of performance are the same. Hence, the court should apply the law of the place where the airline 0cket was issued, when the passengers are residents and na0onals of the forum and the 0cket is issued in such State by the defendant airline. TORTS AND DAMAGES Loucks vs. Standards 224 N.Y. 99 120 N.E. 198 1918 One state’s penal laws are not enforceable in any other state. Whether a statute is penal depends on the type of liability it creates. Where the penalty is awarded to the state or a member of the public is suing in the interest of the whole community to right a public wrong, the statute and/or recovery is penal. While this statute is penal in the sense that damages are awarded on the basis of the defendant’s conduct rather than the plain0ff’s measure of damages, the right to recover is private and therefore the statute is not penal in the interna0onal sense. The public policy of New York is not violated by the enforcement of the right, as New York recognizes the right of survivors to recover for wrongful death. The fact that the MassachuseYs Statute is different in the way it is enforced does not make the MassachuseYs Statute wrong. The forum may refuse to enforce a right based on a foreign statute only where enforcement would violate an express strong public policy of the forum.

Trajano vs. Marcos 765, 61 USLW 2257

In the amicus brief filed by the US Jus0ce Department, a narrower interpreta0on of the Alien Tort Statute was advocated, excluding cases between aliens for human rights viola0on commiYed within the aliens’ domes0c jurisdic0on. It limited jurisdic0on of US Courts to tort ac0ons to which the United States “might be held accountable to the offended na0on” if it did not extend protec0on of its laws.

Saudi Arabian Airlines vs. CA G.R. No. 122191

October 8, 1998

"State of the most significant rela0onship" – applied; taken into account and evaluated according to their rela0ve importance with respect to the par0cular issue: (a) the place where the injury occurred (b) the place where the conduct causing the injury occurred (c) the domicile, residence, na0onality, place of incorpora0on and place of business of the par0es (d) the place where the rela0onship, if any, between the par0es is centered • private respondent is a resident Filipina na0onal, working here

• pe00oner is a resident foreign corpora0on engaged here in the business of interna0onal air carriage

• Weighing the rela0ve claims of the par0es, the court a quo found it best to hear the case in the Philippines. Had it refused to take cognizance of the case, it would be forcing plain0ff (private respondent now) to seek remedial ac0on elsewhere, i.e. in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia where she no longer maintains substan0al connec0ons. That would have caused a fundamental unfairness to her. Moreover, by hearing the case in the Philippines no unnecessary difficul0es and inconvenience have been shown by either of the par0es.

1. True or False: The doctrine of "processual presump7on" allows the court of the forum to presume that the foreign law applicable to the case is the same as the local or domes7c law. (Bar, 2009) SUGGESTED ANSWER: TRUE. If the foreign law necessary to the resolve an issue is not proven as a fact, the court of the forum may presume that the foreign law is the same as the law of the forum. 2. Give at least two reasons why a court may assume jurisdic7on over a conflict of laws case. SUGGESTED ANSWER: a. Statute theory. There is a domes0c law authorizing the local court to assume jurisdic0on. b. Comity theory. The local court assumes jurisdic0on based on the principle of comity or courtesy. 3. Alden and Stela were both former Filipino ci7zens. They were married in the Philippines but they later migrated to the United States where they were naturalized as American Ci7zens. In their union, they were able to accumulate several real proper7es both in the US and in the Philippines. Unfortunately, they were not blessed with children. In the US, they executed a joint will ins7tu7ng as common heirs to divide their combined estate in equal shares, the five siblings of Alden and the seven siblings of Stela. Alden passed away in 2013 and a year later, Stela also died. The siblings of Alden who were all ci7zens of the US ins7tuted probate proceedings in a US court impleading the siblings of Stela who were all in the Philippines. a. Was the joint will executed by Alden and Stela who were former Filipinos valid? Explain with legal basis. b. Can the joint will produce legal effect in the Philippines with respect to the proper7es of Alden and

Stela found here? If so, how?

c. Is the situa7on presented in Item 1 an example of depecage? (Bar 2015) SUGGESTED ANSWER:

a. The joint will shall be valid if it was executed in accordance with US law. At the 0me of the will’s execu0on, Alden and Stela were US ci0zens. The will of an alien who is abroad produces effect in the Philippines if made with the formali0es prescribed by the place of the law in which he resides, or according to the formali0es observed in his country. Ar0cle 819 of the Civil Code does not apply as it refers specifically to the invalidity of joint wills “executed by Filipinos in a foreign country”.

b. The joint will may produce legal effect in the Philippines f it was validly executed in accordance with the laws of the US. To be given legal effect in the Philippines, it must be probated in this country. Since the will was executed abroad by aliens, it must comply with Ar0cle 17 or Ar0cle 816 of the Civil Code. Under Ar0cle 17, the forms and solemni0es of contracts, wills, and other public instruments shall be governed by the laws of the country in which they are executed. Under Ar0cle 816, the will of an alien who is abroad produces effect in the Philippines if made with the formali0es prescribed by the place of the law in which he resides, or according to the formali0es observed in his country, or in conformity with those which this Code prescribes. Since Alden and Stela were both naturalized American ci0zens at the 0me of the execu0on of the will, they are allowed to execute a will in accordance with the formali0es prescribed by the law of their country, where they reside, or Philippine law.

c. No, the situa0on presented in Item 1 is not an example of depacage. Depacage is a term used where different aspects of a case involving a foreign element may be governed by different systems of law. In this case, only one system of laws governs, that of US law. Under Ar0cle 16 (2) of the Civil Code, 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 na0onal law of the person whose succession is under considera0on, whatever may be the nature of the property and regardless of the country wherein said property may be found. For the will to be probated, it must also

execu0on, the residence of the spouses, and the country where they are na0onals.

4. Sec7on 1 of P.D. No. 755 states: “Sec7on 1. Declara7on of Na7onal Policy. – It is hereby declared that the policy of the State is to provide readily available credit facili7es to the coconut farmers at preferen7al rates; that this policy can be expedi7ously and efficiently realized by the implementa7on of the ‘Agreement for the Acquisi7on of a Commercial Bank for the Benefit of the Coconut Farmers’ executed by the Philippine Coconut Authority, the terms ofwhich ‘Agreement’ are hereby incorporated by reference; x x x” A copy ovhe Agreement was not adached to the Presiden7al Decree. P.D. No. 755 was published in the Official Gazede but the text of the Agreement described in Sec7on 1 was not published. Can the Agreement in ques7on be accorded the status ofa law? Explain. (2016 Bar)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:

No. Sec0on 1 of P.D. No. 755 did not validate the Agreement between PCA and defendant Eduardo M. Cojuangco, Jr. dated May 25, 1975 nor did it give the Agreement the binding force of a law because of the non-publica0on of the said Agreement. According to the Supreme Court in Tanada vs. Tuvera, all statutes, including those of local applica0on and private laws, shall be published as a condi0on for their effec0vity, which shall begin fi[een days a[er publica0on unless a different effec0vity date is fixed by the legislature. Publica0on must be in full or it is no publica0on at all since its purpose is to inform the public of the contents of the laws. Since the Agreement was not published, it cannot be given a binding force and effect of law.

II. HUMAN RELATIONS

A chapter on human rela0ons was formulated to present some basic principles that are to be observed for the righ{ul rela0onship between human beings and the stability of the social order. The lawmaker makes it impera0ve that everyone duly respect the rights of others. Indeed this chapter is calculated to indicate certain norms that spring from the fountain of good conscience. These guides for human should run as golden threads through society, to the end that law may approach its supreme ideal, which is the sway and dominance of jus0ce. Civil Code Ar7cle Stress of the Ar7cle 19 • Ac0ng with jus0ce • The giving to everyone his due • The observance of honesty and good faith • Thus rights must never be abused; the moment they abused, they ceased to be rights. 20 Indemnifica0on of others due to ILLEGAL ACTS 21 Indemnifica0on of others due to IMMORAL ACTS 22 Prohibi0on against Unjust Enrichment

B. Elements of Abuse of Right

C. Prohibi7on against Unjust Enrichment

A right, though by itself legal because recognized or granted by law as such, may become the source of some illegality. When a right is exercised in a manner which does not conform to the norms enshrined in Art. 19 and results in damage to another, a legal wrong is thereby commiYed for which the wrongdoer must be held responsible. This principle is based upon the famous maxim summum jus summa injuria (the abuse of a right is the greatest possible wrong) (Arlegui v. CA, G.R. No. 126437, March 6, 2002). Ra0onale: The exercise of a right ends when the right disappears, and it disappears when it is abused, especially to the prejudice of others. The mask of a right without the spirit of jus0ce which gives it life is repugnant to the modern concept of social law. It cannot be said that a person exercises a right when he unnecessarily prejudices another or offends morals or good customs.

Ar7cle 19 Ar7cle 20 Ar7cle 21

1. There is a legal right or duty; 2. Such duty is exercised in bad

faith;

3. It is for the sole intent of prejudicing or injuring another (Albenson Enterprises Corp. vs CA)

Speaks of the general sanc0on for all other provisions of law which do not specially provide for their own sanc0on

1. There is an act which is legal 2. But which is contrary to morals,

good custom, public order, or public policy

3. The act was done with intent to injure

NOTE: The absence of good faith is essen0al to abuse of right

NOTE: Generally, laws provide for their own sanc0ons and methods of enforcement thereof. Ar0cle 20 applies only in cases where the law does not provide for its own sanc0ons. Hence, Every person who, contrary to law, wilfully or negligently causes damage to another shall indemnify the laYer for the same (Art. 20, NCC). Said ar0cle provides f o r a g e n e r a l s a n c 0 o n – indemnifica0on for damages . In view of the general sanc0on provided for under Art. 20, a person however does not have an absolute right to be indemnified, it is essen0al that some right of his be impaired. Without such, he is not en0tled to indemnifica0on

NOTE: Deals with acts contra bonus

mores or contrary to good morals

and presupposes loss or injury, material or otherwise, which one may suffer as a result of such viola0on.

The ar0cle applies only if:

• Someone acquires or comes into possession of “something” which means delivery or acquisi0on of “things”; and

D. Jurisprudence REQUISITES 1. The defendant has been enriched; 2. The plain0ff has suffered a loss; 3. The enrichment of the defendant is without just or legal ground; and 4. The plain0ff has no other ac0on based on contract, quasi-contract, crime or quasi-delict. REMEDY The remedy is Accion In Rem Verso. It is an ac0on for recovery of what has been paid without just cause.

NOTE: Mistake is not an essen0al element, as opposed to solu0on indebi0 where mistake is an essen0al element.

ACCION IN REM VERSO: It is an ac0on for recovery of what has been paid or delivered without just cause or legal ground. Under Art. 22 of the NCC, if a person acquires or comes into possession of something at the expense of another without just or legal ground through an act or of performance by another or any other means has the obliga0on to return the same. Accion in rem verso can only be availed of if there is no other remedy to enforce it based on contract, quasi- contract, crime or quasi-delict.

WHEN TO AVAIL REMEDY It can only be availed of if there is no other remedy to enforce it based on contract, quasi-contract, crime or quasi-delict.

COMPARED TO SOLUTIO INDEBITI

Mistake is an essen0al element in solu0o indebi0. In accion in rem verso, it is not necessary that there should have been mistake in the payment (Rabuya, 2006). CASE TITLE DOCTRINE Amonoy vs. Gu7errez 351 SCRA 731 (2001) One who merely exercises one’s rights does no ac0onable injury and cannot be held liable for damages. RCPI vs. CA 143 SCRA 657 (1986)

Dionela filed a complaint for damages against RCPI alleging that the defamatory words on the telegram sent to him not only wounded his feelings but also caused him undue embarrassment and affected his business as well as because other people have come to know of said defamatory words. There is a clear case of breach of contract by the pe00oner in adding extraneous and libelous maYers in the message sent to Dionela.

Constan7no vs. Mendez 209 SCRA 18 (1992)

Mere sexual intercourse is not by itself a basis for recovery. Damages could only be awarded if sexual intercourse is not a product of voluntariness and mutual desire.

Gashme Shookat Baksh vs. CA

219 SCRA115 (1993)

Where a man’s promise to marry is in fact the proximate cause of the acceptance of his love by a woman and his representa0on to fulfill that promise therea[er becomes the proximate cause of the giving of herself unto him a sexual congress, proof that he had, in reality, no inten0on of marrying her and that the promise was only a subtle scheme or decep0ve device to en0ce or inveigle her to accept him and to obtain her consent to the sexual act, could jus0fy the award of damages pursuant to ar0cle 21 of the new civil code not because of such promise to marry but because of the fraud and deceit behind it and the wilful injury to her honor and reputa0on which followed therea[er.