1.
What legal system should control a case
where some of the significant facts
occurred in 2 or more states?
2. To what extent should the chosen legal
system regulate the situation?
Traditional Approach:
1 Vested-Rights theory: an act done in a
foreign jurisdiction gives rise to the
existence of a right if the laws of the state
provides so. This right vests in the plaintiff
and he carries it with him to be enforced in
any forum he chooses to bring suit. The
forum refers to the law of the place of the
occurrence of the last act necessary to
complete the cause of action. Hence, if the
laws of the state where the last act
occurred create no legal right, there is
nothing for the forum to recognize and
enforce, even if its own law creates such a
right. Furthermore, the law of the state of
the last act is considered the law
applicable to all substantive issues of the
case.
(See: Gray vs Gray, Alabama Great southern
R.R Co. vs Carroll)
Modern Approaches:
Most significant relationship - an approach
which identified a plurality of factors that must
be considered in the light of choice-of-law
principles.
Among theses choice-of-law principles were:
a) the needs of the interstate and
international system
b) relevant policies of the concerned states
c) the relevant policies of other interested
states and the relative interest of those in
the determination of the particular issue
Chapter V
Choice of Law
A. The correlation between Jurisdiction
and Choice of law:
The exercise of jurisdiction and choice of law
decisions are related in 3 important ways:
a. The factors that will justify the forum courts
exercise of judicial jurisdiction may be the
same factors that will determine whether or
not it is proper for the forum to apply its
own internal law.
b. If the forum does apply its internal law
because it has a real interest in the case,
then the outcome of the case will be
foreordained by the forum where the suit is
brought. The practical effect of this is that
the plaintiff will bring his suit in the state
which has a real interest in applying its
internal law.
c. Since in practice the forum will most likely
apply its own law rather than displace it in
favor of a foreign law, the plaintiff will
predictably bring his claim in the courts of
the state the internal law of which is
favorable to him.
Jurisdiction and choice of law are 2 distinct
concepts. There are cases over which the
forum courts may exercise jurisdiction but to
which it will not apply its own law. On the other
hand, there are cases over which the forum
cannot assume jurisdiction, although its
internal law may be applied as the proper law.
B. Approaches to choice of law:
All choice of law problems seek to answer 2
important questions:
Single-aspect: concentrating on one element
of a situation in order to connect the case to a
particular legal community.
Example:
Contractual - referred to the place of
contracting
Tort - where the tort occured.
Multi-aspect method: All important factors of
the case both territorial and non-territorial, are
analyzed and the applicable law is arrived at
by rationally elaborating and applying the
policies and purposes underlying the particular
legal rules that come in question as well as the
needs of interstate or international
intercourse.
Philippine follows the single-aspect method:
Art 15 NCC:
Art 16 NCC:
Art 17 NCC:
These rules specify the geographical location
from where the governing law is found,
consistent with the traditional approach to
choice-of-law. To avoid any unjust decisions,
courts have resorted to characterization and
renvoi which operates as escape devices.
2 types of charaterization: 1) Subject-matter
Characterization, 2) Substance-Procedure
Dichotomy.
1 Subject-matter Characterization: it is of
appreciable significance in a single-aspect
method because the legal category to
which an issue is assigned determines the
governing law.
d) the protection of justified expectations of
the parties
e) the basic policies underlying the particular
field of law
f) certainty, predictability and uniformity of
result
g) ease in the determination and the
application of the law to be applied.
To determined which was the state of the most
significant relationship, the factual contacts of
each case were considered in the light of the
above principles The contacts, however,
differed in each of substantive law.
In Torts, the contacts to be taken into account
were:
a) the place where the injury occured
h) the place where the negligent conduct
occurred
i) the domicile, residence or nationality of the
parties
j) the place where the relationship between
the parties is entered
In Contract cases, the factual contacts include:
a) the law chosen by the parties and in the
absence thereof;
k) the place of contracting
l) the place of negotiation of the contract
m) the place of performance
n) the domicile, residence, nationality, place
of incorporation and place of business of
the parties.
Chapter VI
The Problem of Characterization
A Characterization and the single-aspect
method:

Statute of limitations were classified as
procedural because they barred only the
legal remedy without impairing the substantive
right involved.
In order to determine whether a foreign statute
of limitations should be regarded as
substantive or procedural, US courts have considered a menace to the traditional choice-
applied the specificity test. Jurisprudence
states that a statute of limitations of a foreign
country is treated as substantive when the
limitation was directed to the newly created
liability so specifically as to warrant saying that
it qualified the right.
Nonetheless, in order to eliminate forum-
shopping, many states including the
Philippines, have passed borrowing statutes
which bar the filing of a suit in the forum if it is
already barred by the statute of limitations in
the place where the cause of action arose.
(see: Cadalin vs POEA Administrator case)
B. DEPECAGE (Dissect):
Term for the phenomenon where different
aspects of a case involving a foreign element
may be governed by different systems of laws.
Example:
A man who dies intestate domiciled in State A
and with movable properties in State B. The
conflict rules of State A refer to the laws of the
domicile to determine how the mans estate
should be divided. The intestate law of State B
gives the widow a definite share in the estate
of the deceased. However, the determination
of whether or not the woman who claims a
share in the estate is a wife is referred to
family law, not the laws on succession.
3. Substance-Procedure Dichotomy: directs
the court to the extent it will apply foreign
law. If the issue is substantive, the court
may apply foreign law but if its procedural,
it is suppose to follow the law of the forum.
Note: Characterization problems are
of-law theories that aim for uniformity and
predictability of results. For instance, take the
issue of whether or not an adopted child is
entitled to an intestate share in her parents
estate. If the child who is adopted in the
Philippines by a former Filipino citizen has
moved to the US with her adoptive mother by
whose laws she will not be an heir, the court
would have to decide whether it is a question
relating to the legality and effects of adoption
or to succession. If it is the former, the
governing law is the law of the state where the
legal relationship of adoption was established
or where the adoption decree was granted. If it
is the latter, the adoptors personal law
prevails. Likewise, when a person authorizes
another to act as his agent in another country
and when the agent acting as such commits a
negligent act, the liability of the principal will be
determined depending on the courts
characterization of the case as contractual
(where the contract of agency was entered
into), or tortious (where the tortious conduct or
injury occurred).
Statute of Frauds:
Statute of Frauds is considered as substantive
if the words of the law relate to forbidding the
creation of obligation. In contrast, one that
forbids the enforcement of the obligation is
categorized as procedural.
Statutes of limitations and Borrowing Statutes:
1st: if the conflict 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 domestic case that has no conflict-
of-laws complications. The forum court in
applying this internal law rejects the renvoi.
2nd: The court may accept the renvoi and refer
not just to another states internal law but to
the whole law which includes choice-of-law
rules applicable in multi-state cases.
3rd: By desistance or mutual disclaimer of
jurisdiction. The forum court upon reference to
another states law sees that such law is
limited in application to its own national and
has no provision for application to a non-
national.
This Theory has the same result as the
acceptance of the renvoi doctrine but the
process used by the forum court is to desist
applying the foreign law. Hence, as in the
Aznar case, Philippine law would be applied.
4th: Called the foreign court theory.
According to this view, if applied hypothetically
in Aznar, the Philippine court would assume
the same position the American court would
take were the case litigated in the U.S. Thus, if
the American court applies American law, the
Philippine judge should also apply American
law. If the American judge decided the case in
accordance with the Philippine law on
succession, the Philippine judge should do the
same.
There is one serious disadvantage to renvoi. If
both courts follow the same theory, there
would be no end to the case since the courts
would be referring it back to each other.
The issues of what laws govern movable
properties and successional rights of a spouse
are of primary importance because they
embody the substance of the claim while the
validity of the marriage to the deceased
affects the solution because it answers a
preliminary or incidental question. The
presence of an incidental question is one
instance which calls for the employment of
depecage.
Since a single element of a case is made to
relate it to one legal system, the depecage
technique allows the other relevant interests of
the parties to be addressed. The effect is to
permit the court to arrive at a functionally
sound result without rejecting the methodology
of the traditional approach.
Chapter VII
The problem of Renvoi
A. Definition: Renvoi is a procedure whereby a
jural matter presented is referred by the conflict
of laws rules of the forum to a foreign state, the
conflict of laws rule of which, in turn, refers the
matter to the law of the forum or a 3rd state.
When reference is made back to the law of the
forum, there is a remission while reference to
a 3rd state is called transmission.
Renvoi has been employed in cases where the
domiciliary and nationality laws are applied to
the same individual in issues involving
succession, domestic relations and real
properties.
Various ways of dealing with the problem of
renvoi:
In the Philippines, the traditional rule is that a
judge cannot decide a case on the basis of his
own knowledge and information. He can only
act upon the evidence before his court in the
actual case.
This rule was relax in Delgado vs Republic
( GR L-2546, 28 January 1950 ) where the
court held that judicial notice may be taken of
a foreign law with which the court is evidently
familiar. Familiarity with the foreign law may be
because the law is generally known such as a
Spanish or American law from which
Philippines law was derived or the judge had
previously ruled upon it in other cases.
B. Proof of Foreign Law:
Foreign law may be proved by presenting
either of the following:
1 An official publication of the law;
4. A copy of the law attested by the officer
having the legal custody of the record, or
by his deputy. If such record is not kept in
the Philippines, it must be accompanied
with a certificate that such officer has the
custody.
In the case of proof documents executed
abroad, it is mandated by law that any public
document executed abroad to be used in the
Philippines must be duly authenticated by the
Philippine consul attaching his consular seal.
This mandatory requirement must 1st be
complied with before such document will be
received by the court.
In some case, it may be necessary to take
depositions of non-residents.
In a foreign state or county, depositions may
be taken:
Inapplicability of Renvoi in a False Conflict:
Conflict of laws provides for the use of renvoi
when there is a disinterested forum, in order to
ensure that only the laws advancing the
policies of the interested states will be applied.
If the choice-of-law rules of the state which
reference is made refers the case back to the
forum state, the court may use this situation to
determine if both states have an interest in
having their laws applied or if there is merely a
false conflict.
In Pfau vs Trent Aluminum Co., the New
Jersey Supreme Court stated that since
Connectivut and New Jersey have identical
substantive laws and the 3rd concerned state,
Iowa, had no interest in ensuring that its law
applied, there was false conflict. Hence, renvoi
was inappropriate.
Chapter VIII
Notice and Proof of Foreign Law:
A. Extent of Judicial Notice:
When the court is called upon to decide a case
based on a foreign law the common law
practice, which has been adopted in the
Philippines, is that the party whose cause of
action or defense depended upon the foreign
law has the burden of proving the foreign law.
Such foreign law is treated as a question of
fact to be properly pleaded and proved in
conformity with the law of evidence of the state
where it is presented. The rationale is that a
judge is not authorized to take judicial notice of
a foreign law and is presumed to know only
domestic law.
requiring proof of foreign law and held that the
respondent courts finding that such law, which
was pleaded but not proven, excused private
respondents conduct, has no basis in fact.
The 3rd consequence of failure to establish
foregin law is for the forum to presume that the
foreign law is the same as forum law. This is
otherwise known as processual presumption
or the presumed-identity approach.
C. Exceptions to the application of foreign law:
In General:
1 When the local law expressly so provides;
7. When there is failure to plead and prove
the foreign law or judgement;
8. When the case falls under any of the
exceptions to the rule of comity.
Some of the exceptions are stated in Art 17,
paragraph 3.
1 The foreign law is contrary to an
important public policy of the forum -
Public policy had been defined as a
principle of law which holds that no subject
or citizen can lawfully commit any act
which has a tendency to be injurious to the
public or against the public good. The
public policy technique refers to a situation
in which the court declines to give due
course to a claim existing under a foreign
law because it considers the nature of the
claim unconscionable or its enforcement
would violate a fundamental principle of
justice, some prevalent conception of good
morals, some deep rooted tradition of the
commonwealth. Dismissal of a case on
grounds of public policy is not a dismissal
on the merits and the plaintiff can go
elsewhere to file another suit. The
Philippine Supreme Court applied a public
a. On notice before a secretary of embassy or
legation, consul general, consul, vice-
consul, or consular agent of the Republic
of the Philippines;
d. Before such person or officer as may be
appointed by commission or under letter
rogatory;
e. Before such person which the parties have
stipulated in writing.
Effects of failure to plead and prove Foreign
law:
In the absence of proof of the applicable
foreign law, forum courts have 3 alternatives:
1 to dismiss the case for inability to establish
a cause of action
5. to assume that the foreign law is the same
as the law of the forum
6. to apply the law of the forum
Note:
The 1st option open to the court is to rest on
the party relying on the foreign law the burden
of introducing proof of the contents of such
law. This is considered the traditional approach
wherein the forum court would, upon proof of
law, enforce a right existing under that foreign
law. Hence, failure to prove its content results
in failure to establish a prima facie case.
Another approach is to conclude that parties
who fail to introduce proof as to the content of
a foreign law acquiesce to the application of
the forum law. This proceeds from the theory
that the basic law is the law of the forum and
when the claimed applicable foreign law is not
proved, then the court has no reason to
displace the basic law.
In the recent Philippine case of Zalamea vs
CA, the court rigorously applied the rule
 natural that the latters law should be
applied by the courts of other States.
Second, following a policy-centered
approach, immovables are of greatest
concern to the state in which they are
situated. Third, reason is found in the
demands of certainty and convenience.
11. The issue Involved in the Enforcement
of Foreign Claim is Fiscal or
Administrative - It is the general view that
a State is not obliged to enforce the
revenue law of another. This reasoning had
led courts to deny enforcement of tax
claims brought by foreign countries on
local residents. Judge Learned Hand in
Moore vs Mitchell said: Revenue laws fall
within the same reasoning (as penal laws);
they affect a state in matters as vital to its
existence as its criminal laws. No court
ought to undertake an inquiry which it
cannot prosecute without determining
whether these laws are consonant with its
own notions of what is proper.
12. The foreign law or Judgement is
Contrary to Good Morals (Contra Bonos
Mores) - American courts have loosely
define contra bonos mores as acts having
mischievous or pernicious consequences
or against true principle of morality. Under
this category falls acts such as hiring for
killing, bribery of public officers and
marriage between ascendants and
descendants. Nonetheless, the
determination of what is contra bonos
mores is better left to the forum court trying
to a particular case. It is however, subject ti
the same criticisms as the public policy
exception due to its inherent subjectivity.
13. The application of foreign law will work
undeniable injustice to the citizen of the
forum.
14. The foreign law is Penal in character -
The restatement of Conflict of laws states
that a penalty is a sum of money exacted
interest standard in not allowing a foreign
law to be applied in a contract even if the
parties have agreed on said foreign law.
9. The foreign law is procedural in Nature -
It would be impractical for the court of the
forum to adopt the procedural machinery of
another state such as rules on venue,
forms, pleadings and service of processes,
rules of evidence, and competency of
witnesses. Any individual who submits
himself to the jurisdiction of the law of the
forum must follow the forums rules of
procedure. He cannot invoke another law
of procedure to take advantage of the
adverse party. In conflict-of-laws cases,
however, one problem that might confront
the judge is the proper characterization of
the foreign law as to whether its
substantive or procedural law. For
example, the rules on Statute of Limitations
and Statute of Frauds are considered
substantive law in civil law countries while
common law states consider them as
procedural in character.
10. Issues are Related to Property (Lex
situs) - The universally-accepted rule is
that the questions relating to immovable
property are governed by the law of the
place where it is located. The Philippine
Civil Code also includes personal property
under lex situs rule. The code provides:
Real property as well as personal property
is subject to the law of the country where it
is situated. The lex situs rule applies in
cases of sale, exchange, barter, mortgage
or any form of alienation of property. There
are 3 reasons why the lex situs governs
property. First, land and everything
attached to it are within the exclusive
control of the State, and the officials of the
State are the only one who can lawfully
deal with them physically. Since interest in
immovables cannot be affected without the
consent of the State of the situs, it is
marriage, divorce, legitimacy and capacity to
contract.
It is the nationality or citizenship of the
individual that regulates his civil status,
capacity, condition, his family rights and duties,
laws on succession and capacity to succeed.
The nationality law theory, according to the
Philippine SC, is a conflict of laws theory by
virtue of which jurisdiction over the particular
subject matter affecting a person such as
status of a natural person, is determined by the
latters nationality.
The nationality principle is expressed in Article
15 of the civil code which states: Laws
relating to family rights and duties, or to status,
condition and capacity of persons are binding
upon citizens of the philippines even though
living abroad .
DETERMINATION OF NATIONALITY:
Under Hague Convention on Conflict of
National Laws states that: it is for each State
to determine who are its nationals. This law
shall be recognized by other States insofar as
it is consistent with international convention,
international customs, and the principles of law
generally recognized with regard to nationality.
Art 2 of the Hague Convention also states that
questions as to whether a person possesses
the nationality of a particular State shall be
determined in accordance with the law of that
State.
Art IV of the Philippine constitution 1987
enumerates who are filipino citizens:
**
as punishment for a civil wrong as
distinguished from compensation for the
loss suffered by the injured party.
Statutory liabilities for wrongful death, and
for a corporate directors misconduct are
not penalties because the money satisfies
a pre-existing claim or right. The conflict-of-
laws principle that a State does not enforce
the penal laws of another state is partly
remedied under the international law of
extradition on the basis of jurisdictional
cooperation and assistance among states
in the enforcement of their criminal laws. If
an individual who is indicted for a penal
offense or a convict serving sentence
escapes to another country, under an
extradition treaty, the state that receives
the fugitive from justice is legally obliged to
surrender him to the state from where he
escaped. It is generally accepted, however,
that a person who commits political or
religous offenses is not extraditable.
1. The application of the foreign law might
endanger the vital interest of the State.
PERSONAL LAW:
Chapter IX
Nationality
IMPORTANCE OF A PERSONAL LAW:
An individuals nationality or domicile serves
as a permanent connection between the
individual and a state. This is the reason for
assigning him a personal law which will allow
the courts to exercise jurisdiction or determine
the governing choice-of-law rule on a specific
situation or transaction involving him.
An individuals personal law follows him
wherever he is and governs those transactions
which affect him most closely such as
(b) He must have, as a rule, resided in the
Philippines for a continuos period of not
less than 10 years.
The minimum 10-year residence requirement
is to enable the government to observe the
applicants conduct and to ensure that he has
imbibed the principles and spirit of our
Constitution.
However, this period may be reduced to five-
years in any of the ff cases:
1 If the applicant has honorably held office
under the Government of the Philippines or
under any of the provinces, cities,
municipalities, or political subdivisions
thereof;
15. If he has established a new industry or
introduced a useful invention in the
Philippines;
16. If he is married to a Filipino woman;
17. If he had been engaged as a teacher in a
public or recognized private school not
established for the exclusive instruction of
children of persons of a particular
nationality or race in any of the branches of
education or industry for a period of 2
years;
18. If he was born in the Philippines ( Sec. 3,
Commonwealth Act 473 )
(c) He must be of good moral character, and
believe in the principles underlying the
Philippine
Constitution, and must have conducted himself
in a proper able and irreproachable manner
during the entire period of his residence in the
Philippines in his relations with the constituted
government as well as with community in
which he is living.
(d) He must own real estate in the Philippines
worth not less than P5,000.00, Philippine
1 NATURAL-BORN CITIZENS:
An Individua may be considered a natural-born
citizen following the principles of jus sanguinis
and jus soli.
Jus soli - which looks to the law of the place
ones birth to determine ones nationality.
Jus sanguinis - rule of descent or blood.
( Philippine applies this one )
Natural-born citizens are those who are
citizens of the Philippines from birth without
having to perform any act to acquire or perfect
citizenship. The concept of natural-born citizen
was broadened under Article IV, Section 1 to 3
of the 1987 Constitution by including: Those
who are citizens of the Philippines at the time
of the adoption of this Constitution; Those
whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the
Philippines; and Those born before January
17, 1973, of Filipino mothers, who elect
Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of
majority.
2. CITIZENS BY NATURALIZATION:
Naturalization confers to an alien a nationality
after birth by any means provided by the law.
In the Philippines, naturalization is by judicial
method under Commonwealth Act 473 as
amended by RA 530.
Qualifications for Applicants for Naturalization:
The following are the qualifications for
naturalization:
(a) The petitioner must not be less than 21
years of age on the date of the hearing of
the petition;
 Constitution and the laws of the
Philippines.
D. LOSS OF PHILIPPINE CITIZENSHIP:
Commonwealth No. 63 as amended by RA
106:
E. PROBLEMS IN APPLYING THE
NATIONALITY PRINCIPLE:
1 DUAL OR MULTIPLE CITIZENSHIP:
In view of the rule set in the Hague Convention
on Conflict of National Laws, each State
determines who its own nationals are. Any
question as to whether or not a person
possesses the nationality of a particular State
shall be determined in accordance with the
States internal law. Hence, it is possible that
an individual can be claimed as a national of 2
or more States.
Through the application of the jus soli and jus
sanguinis principles a child born of parents
who are nationals of a country applying the
principle of jus sanguinis, in a country applying
the jus soli principle has dual nationality. A
filipino citizen who marries an alien may
acquire the citizenship of his or her spouse if
the spouses national law so allows. A filipino
citizen, however, who marries an alien shall
retain Philippine citizenship, unless by his or
her act or omission, he is deemed under the
law, to have renounced it by taking an oath of
allegiance to the spouses country or by
express renunciation. Another instance of dual
or multiple nationality is the case of an
individual who is naturalized citizen of another
state but has not effectively renounced his
former nationality.
The Philippine Constitution discourage dual or
multiple nationalities by providing that dual
currency, or must have some lucrative trade,
profession, or lawful occupation.
(e) He must be able to speak and write English
or Spanish and any one of the principal
Philippine languages.
(f) He must have enrolled his minor children of
school age in any of the public schools or
private schools recognized by the Bureau of
Private Schools where Philippine history,
government, and civics are taught or
prescribed as part of the school curriculum
during the entire period of the residence
required of him, prior to the hearing of his
petition for naturalization as citizen. ( Sec. 2,
Commonwealth Act 473 )
Disqualifications for Naturalization:
GR: State has the burden of proving the
disqualification of an applicant for Philippine
citizenship. In several decisions however, the
Philippine SC held that petitioner must prove
that he has none of the disqualifications.
C. PROCEDURE FOR NATURALIZATION:
a) A declaration of intention to become a
citizen must 1st be filed, unless the
applicant is exempted from this
requirement.
o) The petition for naturalization must then be
filed.
p) After publication in the Official Gazzette or
newspaper of general publication the
petition will be heard
q) If the petition is approved, there will be a
rehearing 2 years after the promulgation of
the judgement awarding naturalization
r) The last step will be the taking of the oath
of allegiance to support and defend the
instrument for political, religious, or ethnic
reasons.
A major objective of the Convention is to
remedy the situation of children born without
acquiring any nationality. Thus, arises when a
child is born in a country following the jus
sanguinis principle of parents who are citizens
of a jus soli country.
The convention mandates that the jus
sanguinis country grant its nationality to a
person born within its territory if he would
otherwise be stateless, and the jus soli country
to extend its nationality to a person who would
otherwise be considered stateless when one of
his parents is a citizen of the contracting state.
As long as stateless persons possess all the
qualifications, they can be naturalized as
Philippine citizens without the requirement of
reciprocity.
CHAPTER X:
DOMICILE:
The municipal law concept of domicile is stated
in Art 50 of the Civil Code which reads: For
the exercise of civil rights and the fulfillment of
civil obligations, the domicile of natural
persons is the place of their habitual
residence.
For judicial persons, domicile is determined by
the law creating or recognizing it. In the
absence thereof it shall be understood to be
the place where their legal representation or
place of business is.
Under conflict-of-laws definition of domicile is
set forth by the restatement as the place with
which a person has settled connection for
certain legal purposes, either because his
allegiance is inimical to the national interest
and shall be dealt with by law.
In case the determination of the rights of an
individual who may claim multiple nationality in
a 3rd state, the International Court of justice
applied the principle of effective nationality.
2. STATELESSNESS:
Statelessness is understood in 2 senses.
de jure statelessness refers to an individual
who has been stripped of his nationality by his
own former government without having an
opportunity to acquire another. The problem of
statelessness began during World War II and
became more serious under the Nazi regime in
Germany and in USSR.
De facto stateless persons are individuals
possessed of a nationality but whose country
does not give them protection outside their
own territory. They are commonly referred to
as refugees.
To alleviate the problems of stateless persons,
the 1951 Geneva Convention on the Status of
refugees was concluded and ratified by 54
states which provided some basic rights of
stateless persons. In 1954, the United Nations
Conference on the Elimination or Reduction of
Future Statelessness was convened and in,
1961, adopted a Convention on the reduction
of the Statelessness. The convention
enumerates those conditions such as
marriage, divorce, adoption, naturalization,
expatriation, under which an individual would
not lose his or her nationality upon the risk of
becoming stateless should a new nationality
not be provided. The convention also prohibits
states from depriving their nationals of their
identity as punishment or as discriminatory
so diluted that it no longer serves as a valid
basis for personal law.
Although the Philippines follows the nationality
law theory, there are instances when our court
refer to the domicile of an individual in order to
determine his rights or obligations. For
example, in cases where the litigants is an
alien who comes from a country following the
domiciliary principle, his personal status,
capacity, condition and family rights are
governed by the law of his domicile. A second
possible situation concerns stateless persons
or those with dual or multiple nationalities, in
which case the court will have to refer to their
domicile. A third situation is when an alien
domiciled in the Philippines executes a will
abroad. He may follow the law governing
formalities of the will in accordance with the
law of his domicile. Similarly, in a revocation of
a will outside the Philippines, the validity of
said revocation must be in accordance with the
law of the domicile of the testator as provided
for by Art 829 of the Civil Code.
C. GENERAL RULES ON DOMICILE:
1st rule: No person shall be without a domicile.
Hence, a persons domicile of origin prevails
until he acquires a new domicile.
2nd: A person cannot have 2 simultaneous
domiciles since the very purpose for identifying
ones domicile is to establish a connection
between the person and a definite legal
system.
3rd: it establishes a connection between a
person and a particular territorial unit.
4th: The burden of proving a change of
domicile is upon whoever alleges that a
change has been secured. Without
overwhelming evidence to show a change of
home is there or because that place is
assigned to him by law.
To acquire a domicile, there must be
concurrence of intention to make it ones
domicile and physical presence, while
residence simply requires bodily presence of
an inhabitant in a given place.
B. MERITS AND DEMERITS OF DOMICILE:
In common law countries, domicile is the
preferred primary connection between a
person and a state because it satisfies the
very purpose for having a personal law. The
relationship between an individual and the
place where he establishes his permanent
home provides an adequate basis for him to
exercise rights therein and the state to impose
duties on him.
Domicile is also suitable for countries with a
federal system of government, since the law of
the domicile is the law of the place where the
individual lives. However, it has 3 significant
demerits.
First, ones domicile is not ascertainable
without first resorting to the courts to establish
whether or not there is animo manendi.
Second, the notion of domicile differs widely
with some states distinguishing between
residence and domicile or attributing different
meanings of domicile for different purposes.
Third, if the law of the domicile of origin is
given overriding significance, then it may
create the same problem of attenuated
connection we saw in the use of nationality as
personal law. Why should the law imposed at
birth, independent of ones free choice, be
given weight when the person has no
significant ties with and possibly feels only
repugnance for that state? in such a situation,
the individuals relation with the state has been
domicile of choice is given up and before a
new one is acquired.
As long as there is no intention to return to the
old domicile, a new domicile is created,
whether the intention to remain is for the rest
of ones life, or for an indefinite period or for
the time being at least. Likewise, the length of
time the person has actually lived in the new
domicile is irrelevant after it is established that
a new domicile has been selected and entered
upon.
Similarly, the motive that prompted the person
to change his domicile is immaterial in
determining whether or not a new domicile has
been acquired. Once proved that the person
established his permanent abode in the new
place, the courts will not weight the ethical
values of his motives. Motives are relevant
only to gauge the geniuses of the intent to
acquire a new domicile.
* kapag sa succession, yung kung sino, at
hanggang magkano, nationality law, pero
with respect to , pagkukunin mo na yung
property, subject na sya sa law where it is
situated, duh! lupa and property ng country
yun kaya may rights sila dun, yung wala
lang, is kung sino magmamana, pero yung
disposition sa state na - regalian doctrine
domicile, the courts will decide in favor of the
continuance of an existing domicile.
D. KINDS OF DOMICILE:
3 kinds of Domicile, namely:
Domicile of origin, choice, and constructive
domicile.
Domicile of origin - refers to a persons
domicile at birth. Traditionally, a legitimate
childs domicile of origin is that of his father
and an illegitimate childs is that of his mother.
Upon emancipation, the child may acquire a
domicile of choice.
Domicile of choice - which is also called
voluntary domicile, is the place freely chosen
by a person sui juiris. To acquire a domicile of
choice there must be concurrence of physical
presence in the new place and unqualified
intention to make that place ones home.
Note: Domicile of origin is not lost by mere
abandonment and remains until replaced by a
domicile of choice. On the other hand, since
domicile of choice is acquired upon
concurrence of animo et facto, it is deemed
extinguished by removal of intent even prior to
the acquisition of a new domicile. Corollary to
this is the capacity for revival of the domicile of
origin. It is presumed to be revived once the