Diversity of Laws, Customs and Hilton v.
ilton v. Guyot Subject matter: New York circuit court’s judgment in favor
Practices
Basis of Exercise of Judicial
Jurisdiction – Jurisdiction Over the
Person
Basis of Exercise of Judicial
Jurisdiction – Jurisdiction Over the
Property
No law has any effect, of its own force, beyond the limits
of Guyot, liquidator of the French firm Charles Fortich &
Co., without reexamining the merits of the case in an
action seeking the enforcement of a French judgment
brought by him against Hilton and Libbey, residents of
New York
Held: Reversed. Judgments rendered in a foreign counry,
by the laws of which our own judgments are reviewable
upon the merits, are not entitled to full credit and
conclusive effect when sued upon in this country, but are
prima facie evidence only of the justice of the plaintiff’s
claim.
Dissent: Doctrine of res judicata applicable to foreign
judgments.
Gemperle v. Subject matter: Action for damages filed by Gemperle
Schenker against Paul Schenker, a citizen and resident of
Switzerland, for causing to be published allegation that
damaged his reputation
Summons: Served with summons through his legal
representative and wife, Helen Schenker, a resident of the
Philippines
Held: Jurisdiction over Paul Schenker acquired.
Pennoyer v. Neff Subject matter: Action to recover land filed by Neff,
resident of California, against Pennoyer, to recover land in
Oregon, which was sold pursuant to an Oregon default
judgment against Neff in favor of Mitchell, an Oregon
lawyer, for attorney’s fees
Summons: Served by publication in an Oregon newspaper
Held: Jurisdiction over Neff not acquired. Sale invalid.
International Shoe Subject matter: Notice of assessment by Washington on
Co, v. Washington International Shoe, a Delaware corporation with its
principal place business in Missouri, for failure to pay
contributions to the unemployment fund
Notice: Served upon a salesman employed by International
Shoe in Washington
Held: Jurisdiction over International Shoe acquired. Due
process requires only that, in order to subject a defendant
to a judgment in personam, if he be not present within the
territory of the forum, he have certain minimum contacts
with it such that the maintenance of the suit does not
offend "traditional notions of fair play and substantial
justice." Consent may be implied from the corporation’s
presence and activities in the state through the acts of
authorized agents.
Mullane v. Central Subject matter: A judicial settlement of accounts filed by
Hanover Bank & Central Hanover Bank, a trust company in New York
of the sovereignty from which its authority is derived.
The extent to which the law of one nation, as put in force
within its territory, whether by executive order, by
legislative act, or by judicial decree, shall be allowed to
operate within the dominion of another nation, depends
upon what our greatest jurists have been content to call
'the comity of nations.'
‘Comity,’ in the legal sense, is neither a matter of
absolute obligation, on the one hand, nor of mere
courtesy and good will, upon the other. But it is the
recognition which one nation allows within its territory
to the legislative, executive or judicial acts of another
nation, having due regard both to international duty and
convenience, and to the rights of its own citizens, or of
other persons who are under the protection of its laws.
Helen Schenker had authority to sue and had actually
sued, on behalf of her husband, so that she was, also,
empowered to represent him in suits filed against him,
particularly in a case, like the one at bar, which is a
consequence of the action brought by her on his behalf.
Substituted service by publication, or in any other
authorized form, is sufficient to inform a nonresident of
the object of proceedings taken where property is once
brought under the control of the court by seizure or some
equivalent act, but where the suit is brought to
determine his personal rights and obligations, that is,
where it is merely in personam, such service upon him is
ineffectual for any purpose.
"Presence" in the state in this sense has never been
doubted when the activities of the corporation there have
not only been continuous and systematic, but also give
rise to the liabilities sued on, even though no consent to
be sued or authorization to an agent to accept service of
process has been given. Conversely, it has been generally
recognized that the casual presence of the corporate
agent, or even his conduct of single or isolated items of
activities in a state in the corporation's behalf, are not
enough to subject it to suit on causes of action
unconnected with the activities there. To require the
corporation in such circumstances to defend the suit
away from its home or other jurisdiction where it carries
on more substantial activities has been thought to lay
too great and unreasonable a burden on the corporation
to comport with due process.
The 14th Amendment’s requirement of due process does
not depend upon the classification of actions as in rem,

Basis of Exercise of Judicial
Jurisdiction – Jurisdiction Over the
Subject Matter
Trust Co., Trustee, which had exclusive management and control of a common
et al. trust fund
Notice: Publication in a local newspaper, which was the
minimum compliance with the New York Banking Law
Held: Jurisdiction over non-resident beneficiaries not
acquired. The requirement of due process was not met by
the New York Banking Law.
Shaffer v. Heitner Subject matter: Ex parte sequestration of shares of
Greyhound stock owned by individual defendants in
connection with a shareholder’s derivative suit filed by
Heitner in Delaware against the Greyhound Corporation,
incorporated in Delaware with principal place of business
in Arizona, and corporate officers of the corporations,
alleging activities in Oregon that resulted in substantial
civil and criminal antitrust liabilities
Notice: Publication in a newspaper
Held: Jurisdiction over individual residents not acquired.
When the only contact the defendant has with the forum
state is the location of property as defined by statute in the
forum state, the forum lacks personal jurisdiction over the
defendant unless the minimum contacts test of
International Shoe is satisfied.
Kawasaki Port Subject matter: Complaint for injunction and/or
Service Corp., et al declaratory relief filed by C.F. Sharp & Co, a Philippine
v. Amores, et al. corporation, against creditors of C.F. Sharp Kabushiki
Kaisha, a Japanese corporation on the ground that it is a
separate and independent corporation, and is not liable for
the obligations and liabilities of C.F. Sharp Kabushiki
Kaisha
Summons: Extraterritorial service of summons
Held: Jurisdiction over the creditors not acquired. The
complaint was one purely for injunction and is thus a
personal action as well as an action in personam. As a
personal action, personal or substituted service of
summons on the defendants, not extraterritorial service, is
necessary to confer jurisdiction on the court.
Idonah Perkins v. Subject matter: Demurrer filed by Idonah Perkins in
Roxas connection with a complaint filed by Eugene Arthur
Perkins for recovery of dividends on the shares of Benguet
Consolidated Mining Company stocks registered in his
name, on the ground that CFI Manila has no jurisdiction
to annul, amend, reverse, or modify the judgment of SC of
New York declaring her to be the sole owner of the shares
constitutes res judicata
Held: Denied. Eugene’s action for adjudication of title to
certain shares of stock and Idonah’s cross-complaint to
enforce the New York judgment fall within the general
jurisdiction of CFI Manila.
in personam, or quasi in rem. The reasonableness, and
hence the constitutional validity of, any chosen method
may be defended on the ground that it is, in itself,
reasonably certain to inform those affected, or, where
conditions do not reasonably permit such notice, that the
form chosen is not substantially less likely to bring home
notice than other of the feasible and customary
substitutes.
Having property in a state does not give the state
jurisdiction over causes of action unrelated to the
property unless the person also passes the minimum
contacts test articulated in the International Shoe
decision. If it is unconstitutional to exercise jurisdiction
over the person directly then it should be
unconstitutional to assert jurisdiction indirectly. In the
instant quasi in rem action, the property now serving as
the basis for state court jurisdiction is completely
unrelated to the plaintiff's cause of action, the presence
of the property alone, i.e., absent other ties among the
defendant, the state, and the litigation, would not
support the state's jurisdiction.
NB Minimum contacts and fundamental fairness test
should be satisfied regardless of whether the proceedings
are in rem, quasi in rem, or in personam.
Extraterritorial service of summons is proper only in
four instances, namely: (1) when the action affects the
personal status of the plaintiffs; (2) when the action
relates to, or the subject of which is, property within the
Philippines, in which the defendant has or claims a lien
or interest, actual or contingent; (3) when the relief
demanded in such action consists, wholly or in part, in
excluding the defendant from any interest in property
located in the Philippines; and (4) when the defendant
non-resident's property has been attached within the
Philippines.
By jurisdiction over the subject matter is meant the
nature of the cause of action and of the relief sought, and
this is conferred by the sovereign authority which
organizes the court, and is to be sought for in general
nature of its powers, or in authority specially conferred.
Ways of Dealing With a Conflicts
Problem – Dismiss the Case –
Forum Non Conveniens
Heine v. New York Subject matter: Oregon court’s decision to dismiss the
Insurance Company actions to recover on some 240 life insurance policies made
and issued by the defendants, incorporated in New York,
in Germany filed by the German beneficiaries, on the
ground of forum non conveniens
Held: Affirmed The courts have repeatedly refused, in
their discretion, to entertain jurisdiction of causes of
action arising in a foreign jurisdiction, where both parties
are nonresidents of the forum.
In Re: Union Subject matter: US court’s decision, upon the motion of
Carbide Union Carbide Corporation, to dismiss actions for damages
for injuries caused by a gas leak which occurred at the
plan of Union Carbide in Bhopal, India filed by the Indian
government on behalf of the victims, on the ground of
forum non conveniens
Held: Affirmed. As to the conditions imposed by the US
court: (1) UCC shall consent to submit to the jurisdiction of
the courts of India, and shall waive defenses based upon
the statute of limitations – valid; (2) Union Carbide shall
agree to satisfy any judgment rendered against it by an
Indian court, which comport with the minimal
requirements of due process – invalid; and (3) UCC shall
be subject to discovery – invalid.
Wing On Company Subject matter: Lower court’s decision ruling in favor of
v. Syyap Wing, a New York corporation, in an action for recovery of
a sum of money filed by it against Syyap & Co., a domestic
corporation, representing the profits realized from the sale
of Syyap of Wing On’s merchandise
Held: Affirmed.
Bank of America v. Subject matter: Lower court’s decision denying the
CA defendant banks’ motion to dismiss the action for
accounting and damages filed by Litonjuas, which alleged
that the banks breached their fiduciary duties as trustees
and/or were guilty of negligence and that the banks did not
fully render an account of all the income derived from the
operation of the vessels as well as of the proceeds of the
subsequent foreclosure sale
Held: Affirmed. The Philippine Court may assume
jurisdiction and need not dismiss the case on the ground of
forum non conveniens.
Raytheon v. Rouzie, Subject matter: Lower court’s decision denying the
Jr. Raytheon’s motion to dismiss the civil case for damages
filed by Rouzie in connection with a service contact
entered into it with Brand Marine Services Inc., a
Connecticut corporation, and Raytheon
Held: Affirmed. On the matter of jurisdiction over a
conflicts-of-laws problem where the case is filed in a
Philippine court and where the court has jurisdiction over
the subject matter, the parties and the res, it may or can
The courts of Germany and New York are open and
functioning and competent to take jurisdiction of the
controversies, and service can be made upon the
defendants in either of such jurisdictions. To require the
defendants to defend the actions in this district would
impose upon them great and unnecessary inconvenience
and expense, and probably compel them to produce here
(three thousand miles from their home office) numerous
records, books, and papers, all of which are in daily use
by it in taking care of current business.
As to the conditions, the first is valid in order to secure
the viability of the Indian courts as alternate fora. The
second is problematic as it gives the impression that in
foreign judgments the UCC's consent is necessary in
order for the judgement of the Indian courts to be
enforceable in New York. The laws of New York, in fact,
recognizes that a judgment rendered by a foreign court
may be enforced in that State except if such judgment
was rendered in violation of due process or without
jurisdiction over the person of the defendant. The third
condition is likewise invalid. Basic justice dictates that
both parties must be given equal access to evidence in
each other's possession. Hence, both parties may be
subjected to the modes of discovery under the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure on equal terms subject to
approval by Indian courts.
The facts surrounding the present case do not warrant
the application of the principle of forum non conveniens.
Unless the balance is strongly in favor of the defendant,
the plaintiff's choice of forum should rarely be disturbed.
A Philippine court may assume jurisdiction over the case
if it chooses to do so, provided that the following
requisites are met: (1) that the Philippine Court is one to
which the parties may conveniently resort to; (2) that the
Philippine Court is in a position 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.
A choice-of-law clause does not preclude the exercise of
jurisdiction by Philippine courts. Jurisdiction considers
whether it is fair to cause a defendant to travel to this
state; choice of law asks the further question whether
the application of a substantive law which will
determine the merits of the case is fair to both parties.
The choice of law stipulation will become relevant only
when the substantive issues of the instant case develop,
that is, after hearing on the merits proceeds before the
trial court.

Assume Jurisdiction – Apply Forum
Law – The proper forum law was
not properly pleaded and proved
Traditional Approaches – Vested
Rights Theory
Modern Approaches – Place of Most
Significant Relationship
proceed to try the case even if the rules of conflict-of-laws
or the convenience of the parties point to a foreign forum.
This is an exercise of sovereign prerogative of the country
where the case is filed.
Fleumer v. Hix Subject matter: Probate of a will of Hix, resident of West
Virginia
Held: Denied. The laws of a foreign jurisdiction do not
prove themselves in our courts. The courts of the
Philippine Islands are not authorized to take judicial
notice of American laws. Such laws must be proven as
facts.
Philippine Trust Co. Subject matter: Opposition to the project of partition of the
v. Bohanan estate of C.O. Bohanan, a citizen of Nevada, USA, filed by
the decedent’s widow and her two children on the ground
that they were deprived of their legitimes
Held: Affirmed. Even if Nevada law not proved in this
stage of the proceeding, it was taken judicial notice of
because Philippine Trust Co. already produced Section
9905 of the Compiled Nevada laws twice before the courts
below. As Nevada law does not impose compulsory heirs,
project partition valid.
Gray v. Gray Subject matter: New Hampshire trial court’s decision
dismissing the action for damages filed by Gray against
her husband for injuries caused by a vehicular accident
which occurred in Maine, on the ground that under Maine
law, spouses are barred from maintaining an action
against each other
Held: Affirmed. The incidents of the status of husband and
wife are those prescribed by the law of the place where the
tort occurred, i.e., Maine law.
Alabama Great Subject matter: Action for damages filed with Alabama
Southern R.R. Co. v. trial court by Carroll against employer Alabama Great
Carroll Southern for injuries caused by an alleged negligent
failure of its employees to spot a defective link between
two freight cars, which occurred in Mississippi
Held: Dismissed. Under Mississippi law, Carroll cannot
recover against his employer for negligence caused by the
act of a fellow servant.
Auten v. Auten Subject matter: Action to enforce a separation agreement
filed with the New York trial court by Mrs. Auten against
Mr. Auten for failure to give financial support
Held: English law should be applied to determine the
effect to be given the wife's institution of the separation
suit in England. The parties were married in England, had
children there and lived there as a family. The husband
had willfully deserted and abandoned the wife and
children in England. The sole purpose of the wife's trip to
Here the requirements of the law were not met. There
was no showing that the book from which an extract was
taken was printed or published under the authority of
the State of West Virginia, as provided in section 300 of
the Code of Civil Procedure. Nor was the extract from
the law attested by the certificate of the officer having
charge of the original, under the sale of the State of West
Virginia, as provided in section 301 of the Code of Civil
Procedure. No evidence was introduced to show that the
extract from the laws of West Virginia was in force at the
time the alleged will was executed.
During the October 1954 hearing of the Motion of
Magdalena Bohanan for withdrawal of their P20k share,
Nevada Law was introduced as Exhibit 2. During the
January 1950 hearing, law was presented as Exhibit.
Children and widow did not dispute the provisions of the
laws of State of Nevada. Thus, the court decided to take
judicial notice of the Nevada law, as presented in the
earlier stages of the case.
If there is a conflict between the lex loci and the lex fori,
the former governs in orts the same as in contracts, in
respect to the legal effect and incidents of acts. An
examination of the Maine law shows that the rule on
spousal incapacity to sue if not merely a prohibition of
suit, but that the acts complained of do not give rise to
any cause of action. There has been no breach of legal
duty. Local conduct should be governed by local law.
There can be no recovery in one state for injuries to the
person sustained in another unless the infliction of the
injuries is actionable under the law of the state in which
they were received. The fact which created the right to
sue, the injury transpired in Mississippi. Whether a
cause of action arose and existed at all, or not, must be
determined by the law which obtained at the time and
place when and where the fact which is relied on to
justify a recovery transpired.
Under the "center of gravity" or "grouping of contacts,"
the courts, instead of regarding as conclusive the parties'
intention or the place of making or performance, lay
emphasis rather upon the law of the place "which has
the most significant contacts with the matter in dispute".
Although this "grouping of contacts" theory may,
perhaps, afford less certainty and predictability than the
rigid general rules, the merit of its approach is that it
gives to the place "having the most interest in the
problem" paramount control over the legal issues arising

Modern Approaches – Interest
Analysis
Modern Approaches – Functional
Analysis
New York was to arrange for defendant to agree to support
his family. The agreement was drawn with an
understanding that the wife and children would live in
England. The only relation of New York with the matter is
that it is the place where the agreement was made.
Haag v. Barnes Subject matter: Action for additional support filed with the
New York trial court by Haag against Barnes
Held: Illinois law should apply. Thus, the support
agreement entered into by the parties under Illinois law is
a bar to the present action for support. Contrasted with
Illinois contacts [(1) both parties are designated in the
agreement as being "of Chicago, Illinois", and the
defendant's place of business is and always has been in
Illinois; (2) the child was born in Illinois; (3) the persons
designated to act as agents for the principals (except for a
third alternate) are Illinois residents, as are the attorneys
for both parties who drew the agreement; and (4) all
contributions for support always have been, and still are
being, made from Chicago], the New York contacts are of
far less weight and significance (place where the plaintiffs
resided).
Babcock v. Johnson Subject matter: New York trial court’s decision granting
Jackson’s motion to dismiss the action for damages filed by
Babcock against him for injuries caused by a vehicular
accident which occurred in Ontario, Canada, on the
ground that the law of the place of the accident governs
and the Ontario guest statute bars recovery
Held: Reversed. There is no reason why all issues arising
out of a tort claim must be resolved by reference to the law
of the same jurisdiction. Where the issue involves
standards of conduct, it is more than likely that it is the
law of the place of the tort which will be controlling
(Ontario law) but the disposition of other issues must turn,
as does the issue of the standard of conduct itself, on the
law of the jurisdiction which has the strongest interest in
the resolution of the particular issue presented (New York
law).
Dissenting: The present case makes substantial changes in
the law of torts. Attempts to make the law or public policy
of New York prevail over the laws and policies of other
states where citizens of New York are concerned are
simply a form of extraterritoriality.
Milliken v. Pratt Subject matter: An action to enforce liability of Mrs. Pratt,
a domiciliary of Massachusetts, USA, under a guaranty
entered into in Maine upon the default of her husband
Held: The guaranty is properly enforceable in
Massachusetts notwithstanding that at the time of the
signing under Massachusetts law, a married woman was
incapable of acting as surety for her husband. No such
incapacity existed in Maine.
out of a particular factual context, thus allowing the
forum to apply the policy of the jurisdiction "most
intimately concerned with the outcome of [the] particular
litigation.”
The agreement, in so many words, recites that it "shall
in all respects be interpreted, construed and governed by
the laws of the State of Illinois" and, since it was also
drawn and signed by the complainant in Illinois, the
traditional conflicts rule would, without doubt, treat
these factors as conclusive and result in applying Illinois
law. But, even if the parties' intention and the place of
the making of the contract are not given decisive effect,
they are nevertheless to be given heavy weight in
determining which jurisdiction “has the most significant
contacts with the matter in dispute." When these
contacts are measured against the parties' clearly
expressed intention to have their agreement governed by
Illinois law and the more numerous and more
substantial Illinois contacts, it may not be gainsaid that
the "center of gravity" of this agreement is Illinois.
Comparison of the relative "contacts" and "interests" of
New York and Ontario in this litigation, vis-a-vis the
issue here presented, makes it clear that the concern of
New York is unquestionably the greater and more direct
and that the interest of Ontario is at best minimal. New
York's policy of requiring a tort-feasor to compensate his
guest for injuries caused by his negligence cannot be
doubted. Per contra, Ontario has no conceivable interest
in denying a remedy to a New York guest against his
New York host for injuries suffered in Ontario by reason
of conduct which was tortious under Ontario law. The
object of Ontario's guest statute, it has been said, is "to
prevent the fraudulent assertion of claims by
passengers, in collusion with the drivers, against
insurance companies" and, quite obviously, the
fraudulent claims intended to be prevented by the
statute are those asserted against Ontario defendants
and their insurance carriers, not New York defendants
and their insurance carriers.
NB The application of the New York law advanced the
policy reflected in that law, while the failure to apply
Ontario law did not impair the policy behind the law.
A contract’s validity is to be determined by the law of the
state where the contract was made. If a contract was
valid in one state, then it is valid and enforceable in
every state. If enforcement is sought in the courts of a
state where such contracts are held invalid, it is still
enforceable unless the contract is immoral in nature.
NB If the incapacity of a married woman were a
universal and unchanging situation, then enforcement of
this contract in Massachusetts might be denied. But the

Subject-Matter Characterization
Substance-Procedure Dichotomy
Borrowing Statutes
Depecage
Gibbs v. Subject matter: Petition filed by the husband of the
Government of deceased Eva Johnson Gibbs, a citizen and domiciliary of
Philippine Islands California, USA, for an order requiring the Register of
Deeds to issue titles to the petitioner without requiring
payment of any inheritance tax on the ground that under
California law, the community property of spouses upon
the death of the wife, belongs, absolutely to the husband
without administration
Held: Denied. Under Philippine law, the descendible
interest of the decedent n the lands as transmitted to her
heirs by virtue of inheritance, thus subject to an
inheritance tax.
Grant v. Mcauliffe Subject matter: California trial court’s order granting
administrator McAuliffe’s motion to dismiss the complaint
for damages filed by plaintiffs against the estate of Pullen
for injuries in a vehicular accident occurring in Arizona,
based on Arizona law under which a tort action which has
not been commenced before the death of the tortfeasor
must be abated
Held: Reversed. Remanded for further proceedings.
California law applies, which provides that causes of
action for negligent torts survive the death of the
tortfeasor and can be maintained against the
administrator of his estate.
Cadalin v. POEA Subject matter: Class suit for money claims arising from
Administrator the unexpired portion of their employment contract which
was prematurely terminated against AIBC (recruitment
agency) and BRII (employer) filed by petitioners who were
deployed in Bahrain
Held: The prescription period applicable is that provided
under the Labor Code of the Philippines, i.e., within 3
years from the time the cause of action accrued, not
Bahrain law.
LWV Costruction v. Subject matter: Complaint for payment of service award
Dupo against LWV Construction filed by petitioner who was
deployed in Saudi Arabia
Held: The prescription period applicable is that provided
under the Labor Code of the Philippines, i.e., within 3
years from the time the cause of action accrued, not the
Saudi Arabia law.
Haumschild v. Subject matter: Wisconsin trial court’s decision granting
Continental the motion of Gleason for summary judgment dismissing
Casualty the action for damages filed against him by Haumschild
for injuries caused by a vehicular accident which occurred
in California on the grounds that under Califronia law,
one spouse is immune from a tort suit by the other spouse
contractual capacity of women is constantly expanding
and, in fact, Massachusetts has subsequently allowed
married women to enter into such contracts.
In accord with the rule that real property is subject to
the lex rei sitae, the respective rights of husband and
wife in such property, in the absence of an antenuptial
contract, are determined by the law of the place where
the property is situated, irrespective of the domicile of
the parties or to the place where the marriage was
celebrated.
NB SC was faced witht the task of categorizing the issue
as on involving real property (lex situs – Philippine law),
or one involving succession (national law – California
law). It chose the former.
Survival of causes of action should be governed by the
law of the forum. Survival is not an essential part of the
cause of action itself but relates to the procedures
available for the enforcement of the legal claim of
damages.
NB The reaction to Grant was negative as having been
based on an erroneous characterization that was greatly
influenced by sympathy factors in the case.
General rule: A foreign procedural law will not be
applied in the forum. Procedural matters are governed
by the laws of the forum. This is true even if the action is
based upon a foreign substantive law.
Exception: Borrowing statute, which directs the state of
the forum to apply the foreign statute limitations to the
pending claims based on a foreign law.
Exception to the exception: The courts of the forum will
not enforce any foreign claim obnoxious to the forum’s
public policy.
In this case, to enforce the one-year prescription period
of the foreign law as regard the claims in question would
contravene the public policy on the protection to labor.
The policy denying capacity to sue properly lies in the
sphere of family law, where domicile usually controls the
law to be applied, compared to tort law, where the law of
the place of injury generally determines the governing
substantive law. As to any issue of incapacity based on
family relationship, the domicile law governs. The law
where the injury occurred did not control the issue of
interspousal immunity.

Various Ways of Dealing With the
Problem of Renvoi – Refer not just
to the internal law of another state,
but to the whole law, thereby
accepting the renvoi
Various Ways of Dealing With the
Problem of Renvoi – Foreign court
theory
Usefulness of Renvoi
Inapplicability of Renvoi in a False
Conflict
Proof of Foreign Law
Held: Reversed. The law of the place where the accident
took place governed the issue of negligence (California
law), while the law of their domicile governed the issue of
interspousal immunity (Wisconsin law).
Aznar v. Garcia Subject matter: Opposition to the project of partition of the
estate of Christensen, a citizen of California, US and
domiciled in the Philippines, on the ground that the
distribution should be governed by Philippine law where
the system of legitimes exists
Held: Partition should be done in accordance with
Philippine law. Natural children legally acknowledged are
forced heirs of the parent recognizing them.
Annesley, Davidson Subject matter: Probate of the will executed in France by
v. Annesley Mrs. Annesley, a British citizen and domiciled in France
according to British law but not according the French law,
disposing her entire personal property in favor of her
daughter
Held: Intrinsic validity of testamentary dispositions
governed by French law. The testatrix could only dispose
of one-third of her personal property.
University of Subject matter: Complaint for enforcement of liability
Chicago v. Dater against Mrs. Price, a citizen of Michigan, USA on a trust
agreement and notes completed in Michigan and payable
in Illinois
Held: Mrs. Price absolved from liability. The case is
governed by Michigan law wherein a married woman
cannot bind her separate estate through personal
engagement for the benefit of others.
Pfau v. Trent Subject matter: Action for damages filed with New Jersey
Aluminum Co. trial court by Pfau, a domiciliary of Connecticut, USA
against Trent, a domiciliary of New Jersey, USA for
injuries caused by a vehicular accident occurring in Iowa
Held: Pfau has the right to maintain an action for ordinary
negligence.
Bellis v. Bellis Subject matter: Opposition to the project of partition of the
estate of Bellis, a citizen and domiciliary of Texas, USA, by
the illegitimate children of the decedent on the ground
that they were deprived of their legitime
Held: Affirmed. The Texas laws do not provide for
legitimes.
Philippine Subject matter: The will of Mrs. Hodges, a citizen of Texas,
Commercial USA domiciled in the Philippines, providing that upon the
Industrial Bank v. death of the surviving spouse, the remainder of what he
Escolin inherited would be bequeathed to the brothers and sisters
of the earlier deceased spouse
(1) The law of the forum (Philippine law) provides that
the national law governs the intrinsic validity of
testamentary dispositions (California law).
(2) The national law (California law) provides that
domiciliary law governs (Philippine law).
NB SC accepted the renvoi and applied forum law. As a
result, justice to the natural children of the decedent was
given by granting them their legitimes.
(1) The law of the forum (British law) determined the
domiciliary of Mrs. Annesley as France.
(2) The domiciliary law (French law) provides that
national law governs the intrinsic validity of
testamentary dispositions (British law).
(3) The national law (British law) provides that the
domiciliary law governs French law).
NB The English court applied double renvoi and decided
to apply French law. If the domiciliary law refers to the
national law, the law of the nationality will apply. If as
in this case, the national law refers back to the
domiciliary law, the domiciliary law will be applied.
(1) The law of the forum (Michigan law) provides that
the capacity of Mrs. Price to enter into such obligation is
governed by the law of the place of performance (Illinois
law).
(2) The law of the place of performance (Illinois law)
provides that the law of the place where the contract was
completed governs (Michigan law).
NB By accepting renvoi, Michigan protected the interest
of a Michigan wife and promoted uniformity of results.
There is no reason for applying Connecticut’s choice-of-
law rule, i.e., lex loci delicti, thus Iowa guest statute
would be applicable. To do so would frustrate the very
goals interest analysis. Since Iowa has no interest in the
litigation, and since the substantive laws of Connecticut
and New Jersey are the same, there is a false conflict.
There is a false conflict because the decedent was a
domiciliary and national of only one state. The doctrine
of renvoi is pertinent when the decedent is a national of
one country and a domicile of another. In the absence of
proof of what their conflict of laws is, it should be
presumed that the foreign law in terms of conflicts of law
is no different from ours.
The question of what are the laws of Texas governing the
matters here in issue is one of fact, not of law. Foreign
laws may not be taken judicial notice of and have to be
proved like any other fact in dispute between the parties
in any proceeding.

Effects of Failure to Plead and
Prove Foreign Law – To dismiss
the case for inability to establish a
cause of action
Effects of Failure to Plead and
Prove Foreign Law – To apply the
law of the forum
Effects of Failure to Plead and
Prove Foreign Law – To assume
that the foreign law is the same as
the law of the forum
Held: Remanded. Both parties failed to adduce proof as to
Texas law.
In Re Estate of Subject matter: The probate of the will of Johnson, a
Johnson citizen of Illinois, USA, allowed by the trial court upon the
assumption that it could take judicial notice of Illinois law
Held: Affirmed. Oppositor failed to adduce proof that
conclusions as to Illinois law were wrong.
Walton v. Arabian Subject matter: The New York trial court’s dismissal of
American Oil Co. Walton’s complaint against Arabian American Oil Co. for
injuries in an vehicular accident which occurred in Saudi
Arabia for failure to allege nor prove Saudi Arabian law
Held: Affirmed. Plaintiff had the burden of showing, to the
trial court’s satisfaction, Saudi Arabian law.
Leary v. Gledhill Subject matter: The New Jersey trial court’s decision
permitting Leary to recover from Gledhill a loan entered
into them in France upon the presumption that French
law is in common with that of other civilized countries
which recognizes a liability to make repayment
Held: Affirmed upon the presumption that in the absence
of proof the parties acquiesce in the application of the law
of the forum.
Zalamea v. CA Subject matter: CA’s decision holding that moral damages
are not recoverable by the Zalameas for Trans-World
Airlines, Inc’s overbooking of flights, which was allowed by
the US Code of Federal Regulations
Held: Reversed. The U.S. law or regulation allegedly
authorizing overbooking has never been proved.
Miciano v. Brimo Subject matter: Lower court’s approval of the scheme of
partition of the estate left by Joseph G. Brimo, a Turkish
national, in accordance with Philippine law
Held: Affirmed. Oppositor failed to prove Turkish law.
NB The use of the most significant relationship approach
would have led the court to arrive at the same conclusion
without flouting the testator’s express wish that
Philippine law be applied.
Suntay v. Suntay Subject matter: The lower court’s disallowance of a will of
Jose B. Suntay executed in China probated by a district
court in Amoy
Held: Affirmed. Petitioners failed to adduce the necessary
proof in order to probate the will in the Philippines.
Section 275 of the Code of Civil Procedure authorizes the
courts to take judicial notice of the Acts of the US
Congress, not the laws of various states across the US.
Where comprehension of foreign law is not easy, a court
abuses its discretion if it takes judicial notice of foreign
law when it is not pleaded, unless the party, who would
otherwise have had the burden of proving that law, has
in some way adequately assisted the court in judicially
learning it.
When the rules of law of a foreign country is not pleaded
and proved, three presumptions may be indulged in: (1)
that the foreign law is the same as the las of the forum;
(2) that the foreign law, like all civilized countries,
recognizes certain fundamental principles, e.g., that the
taking of a loan creates an obligation upon the borrower
to make repayment; or (3) that the parties by failing to
prove the foreign law have acquiesced in having their
disputes determined by the law of the forum.
Foreign laws do not prove themselves nor can the courts
take judicial notice of them. Like any other fact, they
must be alleged and proved. Written law may be
evidenced by an official publication thereof or by a copy
attested by the officer having the legal custody of the
record, or by his deputy, and accompanied with a
certificate that such officer has custody. The certificate
may be made by a secretary of an embassy or legation,
consul general, consul, vice-consul, or consular agent or
by any officer in the foreign service of the Philippines
stationed in the foreign country in which the record is
kept, and authenticated by the seal of his office.
In the absence of evidence on foreign laws on succession
which conflict with our own, any foreign law will be
presumed to be the same as those of the Philippines.
In order to probate the will proved and allowed in a
foreign country, the following must be proved: (1) the
fact that the municipal court of Amoy is a probate court;
(2) the law of China on procedure in the probate or
allowance of wills; and (3) the legal requirements for the
execution of a valid will in China.

Exceptions to the Application of
Foreign Law – The foreign law is
contrary to an important public
policy of the forum
Natural-Born Citizens
Collector of Internal Subject matter: CTA’s decision assessing estate tax only
Revenue v. Fisher on one-half of the property of the Spouses Stevenson, who
are both British subjects, applying the civil code’s
presumption that they have adopted the system of
conjugal partnership
Held. Affirmed. The pertinent English law that allegedly
vests in the decedent husband full ownership of the
properties acquired during the marriage has not been
proven by the CIR.
Board of Subject matter: Deportation proceedings against William
Commissioners v Gatchalian, an alleged Chinese citizen, having failed to
Dela Rosa adduce proof that the marriages of his grandfather and
father in China were valid by the laws of China
Held: Gatchalian is not an alien. As the assailed marriages
are valid, he follows the citizenship of his father.
Pakistan Subject matter: Filipino stewardess-employees’ complaint
International against PIA for illegal dismissal notwithstanding their
Airlines Corporation contract of employment reserving the right to terminate
v. Ople them at any time to PIA, and providing a choice of law
clause (Pakistan law) and choice of forum clause (courts of
Pakistan)
Held: Pakistan law cannot be invoked to prevent the
application of Philippine labor laws.
NB The court also used the minimum contacts theory in
order to show Philippine courts and administrative
agencies as the proper forum.
Talaroc v. Uy Subject matter: Quo warranto proceeding alleging that
elected Mayor of Manticao, Misamis Oriental Uy is a
Chinese citizen
Held: Uy declared a Filipino citizen. He followed the
citizenship of his mother who reacquired her Filipino
citizenship upon the death of her Spanish husband.
Co v. Electoral Subject matter: Election protests alleging that elected
Tribunal of the congressman of the 2nd district of Northern Samar Jose
House of Ong, Jr., whose mother is a natural-born Filipina and
Representatives whose father is a Chinese who was subsequently
naturalized, is not a natural born citizen of the Philippines
Held: Ong declared a natural born citizen He was born
before January 17, 1973, of a Filipino mother, who elected
Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority.
Dissenting: Under the 1935 Constitution which was
enforced at the time of private respondent’s birth, only
In the absence of such proof, it may be presumed that
the proceedings in the matter of probating or allowing a
will in the Chinese courts are the same as those provided
for in our laws on the subject.
In the absence of proof, the court is justified in indulging
in “processual presumption” in presuming that the law of
England on this matter is the same as our law.
In the absence of evidence to the contrary, foreign laws
on a particular subject are presumed to be the same as
those of the Philippines. In the case at bar, there being
no proof of Chinese law relating to marriage, there arises
the presumption that it is the same as that of Philippine
law. In the Philippines, there is a presumption of the
validity of a marriage. He who asserts that the marriage
is not valid under our law bears the burden of proof to
present the foreign law.
The employer-employee relationship is affected with
public interest, such that applicable Philippine labor
laws and regulations cannot be rendered illusory by the
agreement of the parties.
In abrogating the doctrine laid down in the Roa case,
promulgated on October 30, 1912, i.e., principle of jus
soli, by making the jus sanguinis the predominating
principle in the determination of Philippine citizenship,
the 1934 Constitutional Convention did not intend to
exclude those who were citizens of the Philippines by
judicial declaration at the adoption of the Constitution.
The Court interprets Section 1, Paragraph 3 above as
applying not only to those who elect Philippine
citizenship after February 2, 1987 but also to those who,
having been born of Filipino mothers, elected citizenship
before that date. The provision was enacted to correct
the anomalous situation where one born of a Filipino
father and an alien mother was automatically granted
the status of a natural born citizen, while one born of a
Filipino mother and an alien father would still have to
elect Philippine citizenship. It is unnecessary to formally
elect citizenship in writing. The exercise of the right of

Qualifications for Applicants for
Naturalization – He must own real
estate in the Philippines worth not
less than P5,000, Philippine
currency, or must have some
lucrative trade, profession, or
lawful occupation
Effect of Naturalization on Wife
and Children
Loss of Philippine Citizenship –
Naturalization in foreign countries
those whose fathers were citizens of the Philippines were
considered Filipino citizens.
Tecson v. Comelec Subject matter: Petition to disqualify Fernando Poe, Jr. as
presidential candidate alleging that he made a material
misrepresentation in his COC by claiming to be a natural-
born Filipino citizen since he followed the citizenship of his
American mother as he was an illegitimate child
Held: FPJ declared a natural born citizen. The evidence
presented by FPJ prove his filiation to a Filipino father.
Poe-Llamanzares v. Subject matter: Petition with Comelec to deny due course
Comelec to the filing of Grace Poe’s COC as presidential candidate
alleging that she made a material misrepresentation in his
COC by claiming to be a natural-born Filipino citizen since
she was a foundling
Held: Grace Poe declared a natural born citizen.
Foundlings are a class of natural-born citizens.
Yu Kian Chie v. Subject matter: Lower court’s decision granting Yu Kian
Republic Chie’s petition for naturalization
Held. Reversed. Yu does not have a lucrative income.
Vivo v. Cloribel Subject matter: Petition for mandamus filed by the Chua
Pic Luan to implement the extension of their stay
authorized by the Secretary of Foreign Affairs contending
that they were due for eventual conversion as Filipino
citizens by virtue of the grant of Tuy’s petition for
naturalization
Held: Denied. The Secretay had no power to extend the
stay of the Uys. The naturalization of Tuy did not
automatically naturalize his wife and 2 minor children.
Moy Ya Lim Yao v. Subject matter: Action for injunction filed by Moy Ya Lim
Commissioner of Yan to restrain the Commissioner of Immigration from
Immigration ordering her to leave the Philippines contending that her
marriage to a Filipino made her ipso facto Filipino
Held: Granted. Aliens who legitimately acquire Filipino
citizenship have the right to stay in the Philippines
permanently or not, as they may choose.
Frivaldo v. Comelec Subject matter: Petition for annulment of Frivaldo’s
election as governor of the province of Sorsogon on the
ground that he was not a Filipino citizen having been
naturalized in the US
suffrage and participation in election exercises
constituted a positive election of Philippine citizenship.
The provisions of the civil code that create a clear bias
against illegitimacy should only govern private relations
and not unduly impede or impinge on the domain of the
political law. There is little, if any, to indicate that the
legitimate or illegitimate civil status of an individual
would also affect his political rights or, in general, his
relationship to the state. In enumerating who are
citizens of the Philippines, the Constitution does not
distinguish between legitimate and illegitimate children.
Delegate Rafols presented an amendment to include
foundlings; but this amendment was defeated primarily
because the Convention believed that the cases, being
too few to warrant the inclusion of a provision in the
Constitution to apply to them, should be governed by
statutory legislation. Moreover, it was believed that the
rules of international law were already clear to the effect
that foundlings followed the nationality of the place
where they were found, thereby making unnecessary the
inclusion in the Constitution of the proposed
amendment.
In considering whether an applicant for naturalization
has a lucrative income, allowances and bonuses which
may or may not be given to him as where they spring
from purely voluntary actuations of his employer
conditioned to the circumstances that the employer was
making profits, should not be added to his basic salary.
The wife does not automatically become a Filipino citizen
on account of her marriage to a naturalized Filipino
citizen, since she must first prove that she possesses all
the qualifications and none of the disqualifications for
naturalization. Foreign born minor children are
extended citizenship if dwelling in the Philippines at the
time of naturalization of the parent.
For an alien woman who marries a Filipino to become
herself a Filipino citizen, there is no need for any
naturalization proceeding because she becomes a
Filipino ipso facto from the time of such marriage,
provided she does not suffer any of the disqualifications
NB Moy Ya Lim reversed Burca v. Republic, which held
that the alien woman must still prove that she possessed
the requisite qualifications in a naturalization
proceeding.
US laws do not concern us here. The alleged forfeiture is
between him and the United States as his adopted
country. Even if he did lose his naturalized American
citizenship, such forfeiture did not and could not have
the effect of automatically restoring his citizenship in the
Philippines that he had earlier renounced. If he wanted

Loss of Philippine Citizenship –
Express renunciation of citizenship
Loss of Philippine Citizenship –
Cancellation of the certification of
naturalization
Problems in Applying the
Nationality Principle – Dual or
Multiple Citizenship
Held: Frivaldo declared not a citizen of the Philippines. No
valid repatriation.
NB The subsequent repatriation of Frivaldo retroacted to
the date of the filing of his application so as to make
Frivaldo a citizen on the date of election.
Labo, Jr. v. Comelec Subject matter: Quo warranto proceeding alleging the
elected mayor of Baguio City Labo, Jr. lost his Philippine
citizenship when he married an Australian citizen and
took an oath of allegiance
Held: Labo, Jr. declared not a citizen of the Philippines.
NB In the subsequent case, Labo, Jr. still failed to prove
that he has reacquired his Philippine citizenship. A mere
application for repatriation does not amount to an
automatic reacquisition of citizenship.
Aznar v. Comelec Subject matter: Petition for disqualification of Lito
Osmena on the ground that he is not a Filipino citizen,
being a citizen of USA as evidenced by an Alien Certificate
Registration
Held: By virtue of his being the son of a Filipino father,
the presumption that Osmena is a Filipino remains.
Republic v. Li Yao Subject matter: Cancellation of William Li Yao’s certificate
of naturalization on the ground that he obtained his
naturalization through fraudulent means because he
evaded payment of lawful taxes due to the government
Held: Affirmed.
Nottebohm Case Subject matter: Liechtenstein’s petition asking the ICJ
(Liechtenstein v. declare Guatemala in breach of their obligations under
Guatemala) international law in refusing entry to Nottebohm, a
German citizen who later became a naturalized citizen of
Liechtenstein
Held: Guatemala is under no obligation to recognize the
nationality granted to Nottebohm by Liechtenstein. It was
granted without regard to the concept of nationality
adopted in international relations.
Oh Hek How v. Subject matter: Petition for naturalization filed by Oh Hek
Republic Haw without securing from the Minister of the Interior of
Nationalist China the permission required by the laws
thereof for a valid renunciation of his Chinese citizenship
Held: Permission is necessary. A Chinese citizen cannot be
naturalized as a Filipino citizen unless he has complied
with the laws of Nationalist China.
Mercado v. Subject matter: Petition for disqualification filed against
Manzano elected Vice Mayor of Makati Edu Manzano on the ground
that he was a dual citizen of the Philippines and the US
to disavow his American citizenship and reacquire
Philippine citizenship, he should have done so in
accordance with the laws of our country.
Even if it be assumed that his naturalization in
Australia was annulled after it was found that his
marriage to the Australian citizen was bigamous, that
circumstance alone did not automatically restore his
Philippine citizenship. His divestiture of Australian
citizenship does not concern us here. That is a matter
between him and his adopted country. What we must
consider is the fact that he voluntarily and freely
rejected Philippine citizenship and willingly and
knowingly embraced the citizenship of a foreign country.
Petitioner failed to prove that Osmena lost his
Philippine citizenship. The mere fact that he has a
Certificate stating that he is an American does not mean
the he is not still a Filipino. The renunciation needed to
lose Philippine Citizenship must be express.
A certification of naturalization may be cancelled if it is
subsequently discovered that the applicant therefor
obtained it by misleading the court upon any material
fact. A naturalization proceeding is not a judicial
adversary proceeding, the decision rendered therein, not
constituting res judicata. It is a mere grant of political
privilege.
Although the Court stated that it is the sovereign right
of all states to determine its own citizens and criteria for
becoming one in municipal law, such a process would
have to be scrutinized on the international plane where
the question is of diplomatic protection. ICJ upheld the
principle of effective nationality, where the national
must prove a meaningful connection to the state in
question. Nottebohm solicited Liechtenstein nationality
with the sole object of acquiring the status of a neutral
national, and without any genuine intention to establish
a durable link between Liechtenstein and himself.
Before the naturalization certificate is issued, the
petitioner shall "solemnly swear," inter alia, that he
renounces "absolutely and forever all allegiance and
fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate" and particularly
to the state "of which" he is "a subject or citizen." The
obvious purpose of this requirement is to divest him of
his former nationality, before acquiring Philippine
citizenship. The question of how a Chinese citizen may
strip himself of that status is necessarily governed by
the laws of China, not by those of the Philippines.
Dual citizenship in the Local Government Code must be
understood as referring to dual allegiance. Consequently,

Held: Dismissed. Manzano was a dual citizen and it was
enough for him to renounce his American citizenship, and
elect his Filipino citizenship, at the time of his filing of
candidacy.
Problems in Applying the Kookooritchkin v. Subject matter: Petition for naturalization filed by
Nationality Principle – Solicitor General Kookooritchkin, who was born in Russia but now a
Statelessness stateless refugee
Held: Affirmed. Knowing the history, nature and character
of the Soviet dictatorship, it would be technically
fastidious to require further evidence of petitioner's claim
that he is stateless than his testimony that he owes no
allegiance to the Russian Communist Government and, is
because he has been at war with it, he fled from Russia to
permanently reside in the Philippines.
Definition Caasi v. CA Subject matter: Petition for disqualification filed against
elected Municipal Mayor of Bolinao Pangasinan Merito
Miguel on the ground that he was a green card holder,
hence a permanent resident of America and not of Bolinao
Held: Miguel disqualified. He did not possess the
qualification of residence in the municipality where he
intends to run for elective office for at least 1 year at the
time of filing his certificate of candidacy.
Uytengsu v. Subject matter: Application for naturalization filed by
Republic Uytengsu, born of Chinese parents, who returned to the
US for a post-graduate studies pending his application
Held: Reversed. Uytengsu did not possess the qualification
of residence in the Philippines from the date of filing of the
petition up to the time of his admission to Philippine
citizenship.
General Rules on Domicile Romualdez-Marcos Subject matter: Petition for cancellation of COC and
v. Comelec disqualification filed against Imelda Marcos alleging that
she did not meet the requirement of one-year residency
preceding the election for Representative of the First
District of Leyte
Held: Reversed. Imelda was a resident of the First District
of Leyte for election purposes. Her domicile of origin is
Tacloban.
Dissenting:
Padilla: The candidate’s intent and actual presence must
satisfy the length of time prescribed. The purpose is to be
familiar with the environment and problems of a district.
Regalado: Imelda acquired her husband’s domicile of
origin in Batac, Ilocos Norte and correspondingly lost her
own domicile of origin in Tacloban City.
Davide, Jr.: After the husband’s death the wife has a right
to elect her own domicile, but she retains the last domicile
of her husband until she makes an actual change. Note
that what is revived is not her domicile of origin but her
power to acquire her own domicile.
persons with mere dual citizenship do not fall under this
disqualification.
As long as stateless persons possess all the
qualifications, they can be naturalized as Philippine
citizens without the requirement of reciprocity
Miguel’s application for immigrant status and
permanent residence in the US and his possession of a
green card attesting to such status are conclusive proof
that he is a permanent resident of the US. Absent clear
evidence that he made an irrevocable waiver of his
immigrant status or that he surrendered his green card
to the appropriate US authorities before he ran for
mayor of Bolinao, he was disqualified to run for said
public office, hence, his election was null and void.
The question of domicile is not involved in determining
whether a person is a resident of a state or country. The
essential distinction between residence and domicile is
this: the first involves the intent to leave when the
purpose for which he has taken up his abode ceases; and
the other has no such intent, the abiding is animo
manendi.
Residence is used synonymously with domicile for
election purposes. It is the fact of residence, not a
statement in the COC which ought to be decisive in
determining whether or not an individual has satisfied
the constitutional requirement. A minor follows domicile
of her parents. A wife does not automatically gain the
husband’s domicile. When Imelda married late President
Marcos in 1954, she kept her domicile of origin and
merely gained a new residence. Assuming that Imelda
gained a new domicile after her marriage and acquired
right to choose a new one only after the death of Pres.
Marcos, her actions upon returning to the country
clearly indicated that she chose Tacloban, her domicile of
origin, as her domicile of choice.

Domicile of Choice
Special Problems in Domicile of
Choice vis-à-vis Constructive
Domicile – People Under
Compulsion
Special Problems in Domicile of
Choice vis-à-vis Constructive
Domicile – Married Women
Ujano v. Republic Subject matter: Petition for reacquisition of Philippine
citizenship filed by Melecia Ujano, a naturalized American
who was admitted for temporary stay in the Philippines
Held: Affirmed. Ujano did not possess the qualification of
residence in the Philippines at least six months before he
applies for naturalization.
In Re Dorrance’s Subject matter: New Jersey lower court’s decision setting
Estate aside Pennsylvania’s appraisement of the estate of
Dorrance for transfer of inheritance tax on the ground that
he stated his intention in his will to remain domiciled in
New Jersey for the purpose of avoiding payment of
substantial taxes
Held: Reversed. The legal domicile of Dorrace is
Pennsylvania, and accordingly there is due an inheritance
transfer tax.
Velilla v. Posadas Subject matter: Petition filed by the administrator of the
estate of Moody, a US citizen who came to the Philippines
and engaged in business here for around 26 years, arguing
that no inheritance tax may be levied upon the estate
because he was not legally domiciled in the Philippines on
the day of his death as evidenced by his declaration of
intention not to return to Manila
Held: The estate of Moody, who is domiciled in the
Philippines, is properly subjected to inheritance tax by the
BIR.
White v. Tennant Subject matter: Opposition of the distribution of the estate
of Michael White by administrator Tennant, claiming that
Pennsylvania law, where the wife would have been
entitled to only one-half of the estate and the brothers and
sisters of the decedent would be entitled to the other half,
should apply instead of West Virginia law
Held: White is domiciled in Pennsylvania. The laws of that
state must control the distribution of his personal state.
Caraballo v. Subject matter: Petition for adoption filed by Ricardo
Republic Caraballo, and American citizen enlisted in the US Air
Force assigned in Clark Air Base
Held: Denied. Being a non-resident alien, Caraballo was
not qualified to adopt.
Go Chen and Go Subject matter: CFI’s order permitting Tan Bon’s minor
Lek v. Collector of children of her first marriage to remain in the Philippine
Custom of Cebu Islands following her admittance in the Philippines as the
wife of a Chinese merchant, her second husband
The residence requirement in cases of naturalization has
already been interpreted to mean domicile. A place in a
state where he lives and stays permanently, and to
which he intends to return after a temporary absence, no
matter how long, i.e., animus manendi, is his domicile.
An alien who has been admitted into this country as a
temporary visitor though actually present in this country
cannot be said to have established his domicile here.
As regard the determination of domicile, a person’s
expression of desire may not supersede the effect of his
conduct. A man cannot retain a domicile in one place
when he has moved to another, and intends to reside
there for the rest of his life, by any wish, declaration, or
intent inconsistent with the dominant facts of where he
actually lives and what actually means to do.
There is no evidence of any affirmative factors that prove
the establishment of a legal domicile in Paris. His short
stay of three months in Paris is consistent with the view
that he was a transient in Paris for the purpose of
receiving treatments for leprosy. The motive that caused
his departure was merely to evade confinement in the
Culion Leper Colony.
NB The case wrongfully considered length of time and
motive in determining the domicile of choice.
White, the decedent, abandoned his residence in West
Virginia with the intention and purpose not only of not
returning to it, but for the expressed purpose of making
a fixed place in the state of Pennsylvania his home for an
indefinite time. The character of the residence is of no
importance; and if domicile has once existed, mere
temporary absence will not destroy it, however long
continued. When one domicile is definitely abandoned,
and a new one selected and entered upon, length of time
is not important; one day will be sufficient, provided the
animus exists.
A person is deemed a resident of a place in a country or
state where he has his abode and lives there
permanently. It is a place chosen by him freely and
voluntarily, although he may later on change his mind
and live elsewhere. Actual or physical presence or stay of
a person in a place, not of his free and voluntary choice
and without intent to remain there indefinitely, does not
make him a resident of the place.
The ground of the wife’s right of entry is the principle
that a man’s domicile is also the domicile of his wife and
minor children, and that he is duty bound to protect,
support, and keep them in his company. A Chinaman’s
Chinese wife and her minor children, then, do not enter
the Philippine Islands through their own right, but by
 Held. Reversed. The minor children being children of their
mother’s second husband, they are not entitled to enter.
De la Vina v. Subject matter: Petition for certiorari filed by De la Vina,
Villareal and defendant in a complaint praying for a decree of divorce
Geopano filed by Geopano in CFI Iloilo alleging that the he
committed adultery, on the ground that CFI Iloilo had no
jurisdiction because Geopano follows the residence of De la
Vina, which is Negros Oriental
Held: CFI Iloilo has jurisdiction.
NC SC decided the case consistent with the traditional
view, so the wife had to show justification for leaving her
husband. The modern view altogether dispenses with any
presumption that the wife’s domicile is the same as he
husband’s.
Definition Recto v. Harden Subject matter: Motion asking for attorney’s fees filed by
Claro M. Recto against Mrs. Harden under a contract of
professional services engaged by the latter to secure an
increase in the amount of support she was receiving and
preserve her rights in the properties of the conjugal
partnership, in contemplation of the divorce suit which she
intended to file
virtue of the right of the husband and their father,
unless the Chinese wife belongs to the privileged class.
General Rule: Domicile of the wife follows that of her
husband. This rule is founded upon the theoretic identity
of person and of interest between the husband and the
wife, and the presumption that, from the nature of the
relation, the home of the one is that of the other.
Exceptions: The wife may acquire another and seperate
domicile from that of her husband where the theoretical
unity of husband and wife is dissolved, as it is by the
institution of divorce proceedings; or where the husband
has given cause for divorce; or where there is a
separation of the parties by agreement, or a permanent
separation due to desertion of the wife by the husband or
attributable to cruel treatment on the part of the
husband; or where there has been a forfeiture by the
wife of the benefit of the husband's domicile.
The contract’s purpose was not to secure a divorce but
merely sought to protect the interest of Mrs. Harden in
the conjugal partnership. Inasmuch as the Spouses
Harden are US citizens, their status and the dissolution
thereof are governed by the laws of the US, which
sanction divorce.

Held: the contract of professional services between Mrs.

Legislative Jurisdiction
Distinguished from Judicial
Jurisdiction
Capacity
Harden and Recto is not contrary to law, morals, good
customs, public order or public policy.
Barnuevo v. Fuster Subject matter: Action for divorce filed by Constanza
Yanez against Gabriel Fuster, both Spanish citizens, in
the CFI of Manila on the ground of adultery
Held: CFI had jurisdiction.
NB Since our laws do not recognize absolute divorce, our
courts no longer try actions for divorce even if brought by
persons whose national laws allow it. Divorce is considered
a violation of public policy.
Insular Government Subject matter: Action to recover from Frank, a US citizen,
v. Frank based on a contract of employment of the latter as a
stenographer to serve in the Philippines entered into in
Illinois
Held: Frank being fully qualified to enter into the contract
at the place and time the contract was made (Illinois law),
he cannot plead infancy as a defense at the place where
the contract is being enforced (Philippine law).
The authority of jurisdictional power of courts to decree
a divorce is not comprised within the personal status of
the husband and wife. The whole theory of the statutes
and of the rights which belong to everyone does not go
beyond the sphere of private law. The authority and
jurisdiction of the courts are not a matter of the private
law of persons, but of the public or political law of the
nation. The jurisdiction of courts and other questions
relating to procedure are considered to be of a public
nature and consequently are generally submitted to the
territorial principle.
No rule is better settled in law than that matters
bearing upon the execution, interpretation and validity
of a contract are determined by the law of the place
where the contract is made. Matters connected with its
performance are regulated by the law prevailing at the
place of performance. Matters respecting a remedy, such
as the bringing of suit, admissibility of evidence, and
statutes of limitations, depend upon the law of the place
where the suit is brought.

NB SC applied the law of the place of contract or lex loci

contractus and concluded that Frank was capacitated at
the time he entered into the contract. This same result
would have been achieved had the court applied Frank’s
national law in deciding whether or not he had capacity to
contract. This is a case of improper characterization, i.e.,
contract case instead of capacity to contract case.