ATCI OVERSEAS CORPORATION, AMALIA G. IKDAL and MINISTRY OF PUBLIC HEALTH-KUWAIT vs.

MA. JOSEFA ECHIN

G.R. No. 178551 October 11, 2010

FACTS:

Respondent Echin was hired by petitioner ATCI in behalf of its principal co-petitioner, Ministry of
Public Health of Kuwait, for the position of medical technologist under a two-year contract. Within a
year, Respondent was terminated for not passing the probationary period which was under the
Memorandum of Agreement. Ministry denied respondent‘s request and she returned to the
Philippines shouldering her own fare. Respondent filed with the NLRC a complaint against ATCI for
illegal dismissal. Labor Arbiter rendered judgment in favor of respondent and ordered ATCI to pay
her, her salary for the three months unexpired portion of the contract. ATCI appealed Labor Arbiter‘s
decision, however, NLRC affirmed the latter‘s decision and denied petitioner ATCI‘s motion for
reconsideration. Petitioner appealed to the Court Appeals contending that their principal being a
foreign government agency is immune from suit, and as such, immunity extended to them. Appellate
Court affirmed NLRC‘s decision. It noted that under the law, a private employment agency shall
assume all responsibilities for the implementation of the contract of employment of an overseas
worker; hence, it can be sued jointly and severally with the foreign principal for any violation of the
recruitment agreement or contract of employment. Petitioner‘s motion for reconsideration was
denied; hence, this present petition.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the Memorandum of Agreement which provided for the Kuwaits Civil Service Board
Employment Contract No. 2 has a binding effect.

HELD:

The petition is DENIED.

RATIO:

No. The petitioners’ contention that Philippine labor laws on probationary employment are not
applicable since it was expressly provided in respondents employment contract was not
substantiated. It is hornbook principle, that the party invoking the application of a foreign law has
the burden of proving the law, under the doctrine of processual presumption which, in this case,
petitioners failed to discharge. It was held in EDI-Staffbuilders Intl., v. NLRC that, in international law,
the party who wants to have a foreign law applied to a dispute or case has the burden of proving the
foreign law. The foreign law is treated as a question of fact to be properly pleaded and proved as the
judge or labor arbiter cannot take judicial notice of a foreign law. He is presumed to know only
domestic or forum law. The Philippines does not take judicial notice of foreign laws, hence, they
must not only be alleged; they must be proven. To prove a foreign law, the party invoking it must
present a copy thereof and comply with Sections 24 and 25 of Rule 132 of the Revised Rules of
Court. The petitioners submit documents that whether taken singly or as a whole, do not sufficiently
prove that respondent was validly terminated as a probationary employee under Kuwaiti civil service
laws. For it to have a binding effect, the petitioners should prove and present the pertinent Kuwaiti
labor laws duly authenticated and translated by Embassy officials.