ROMUALDEZ-MARCOS vs. COMELEC G.R. No. 119976, September 18, 1995 FACTS: Petitioner Imelda RomualdezMar o!

"iled #er $erti"i ate o" $andida % &$'$( "or t#e po!ition o" Repre!entati)e o" t#e *ir!t +i!tri t o" ,e%te, !tatin- t#at !#e i! 7-mont#! re!ident in t#e !aid di!tri t. Pri)ate re!pondent Monte.o, in umbent Repre!entati)e and a andidate "or t#e !ame

po!ition, "iled a Petition "or $an ellation and +i!/uali"i ation, alle-in- t#at petitioner did not meet t#e on!titutional one-%ear re!iden % re/uirement. Petitioner t#u! amended #er $'$, #an-in0!e)en1 mont#! to 0!in e #ild#ood.1 2#e pro)in ial ele tion !uper)i!or re"u!ed to admit t#e amended $'$ "or t#e rea!on t#at it 3a! "iled out o" time. Petitioner, t#u!, "iled #er amended $'$ 3it# $'M4,4$ in di)i!ion.

2#e $'M4,4$ Se ond +i)i!ion "ound t#e petition "or di!/uali"i ation meritoriou! and !tru 5 o"" t#e amended a! 3ell a! ori-inal $'$!. In rulint#u!, $'M4,4$ in di)i!ion "ound t#at 3#en petitioner #o!e to !ta% in Ilo o! and later on in Manila, oupled 3it# #er intention to !ta% t#ere b% re-i!terin- a! a )oter t#ere and e6pre!!l% de larint#at !#e i! a re!ident o" t#at pla e, !#e i! deemed to #a)e abandoned 2a loban $it%, 3#ere !#e !pent #er #ild#ood and ! #ool da%!, a! #er pla e

o" domi ile. 2#e $'M4,4$ en ban a""irmed t#i! rulin-. +urin- t#e penden % o" t#e di!/uali"i ation a!e, petitioner 3on in t#e ele tion. 7ut t#e $'M4,4$ !u!pended #er pro lamation. ISSUES: 1. 8#et#er or not petitioner 3a! a re!ident, "or ele tion purpo!e!, o" t#e *ir!t +i!tri t o" ,e%te "or a period o" one

%ear at t#e time o" t#e Ma% 9, 1995 ele tion!. 9. 8#et#er or not t#e $'M4,4$ properl% e6er i!ed it! .uri!di tion in di!/uali"%inpetitioner out!ide t#e period mandated b% t#e 'mnibu! 4le tion $ode "or di!/uali"i ation a!e! under :rti le 78 o" t#e !aid $ode. ;( 8#et#er or not t#e <ou!e o" Repre!entati)e! 4le toral 2ribunal a!!umed e6 lu!i)e .uri!di tion o)er t#e /ue!tion o" petitioner=! /uali"i ation!

a"ter t#e ele tion!. HELD:

Ma%

8,

1995

Domicile vs. Residence In 'n- )!. Republi , t#i! ourt too5 t#e on ept o" domi ile to mean anindi)idual=! >permanent #ome>, >a pla e to 3#i #, 3#ene)er ab!ent "or bu!ine!! or "or plea!ure, one intend! to return, and depend! on "a t! and ir um!tan e! in t#e !en!e

t#at t#e% di! lo!e intent.> 7a!ed on t#e "ore-oin-, domi ile in lude! t#e t3in element! o" >t#e "a t o" re!idin- or p#%!i al pre!en e in a "i6ed pla e> and animu! manendi, or t#e intention o" returnin- t#ere permanentl%. Re!iden e, in it! ordinar% on eption, implie! t#e "a tual relation!#ip o" an indi)idual to a ertain pla e. It i! t#e p#%!i al pre!en e o" a per!on in a -i)en area, ommunit% or ountr%. 2#e e!!ential di!tin tion bet3een

re!iden e and domi ile in la3 i! t#at re!iden e in)ol)e! t#e intent to lea)e 3#en t#e purpo!e "or 3#i # t#e re!ident #a! ta5en up #i! abode end!. 'ne ma% !ee5 a pla e "or purpo!e! !u # a! plea!ure, bu!ine!!, or #ealt#. I" a per!on=! intent be to remain, it be ome! #i! domi ile? i" #i! intent i! to lea)e a! !oon a! #i! purpo!e i! e!tabli!#ed it i! re!iden e. It i! t#u!, /uite per"e tl% normal "or an indi)idual to #a)e di""erent re!iden e! in )ariou! pla e!. <o3e)er, a per!on an onl%

#a)e a !in-le domi ile, unle!!, "or )ariou! rea!on!, #e !u e!!"ull% abandon! #i! domi ile in "a)or o" anot#er domi ile o" #oi e. In @%ten-!u )!. Republi , 3e laid t#i! di!tin tion /uite learl%A 2#ere i! a di""eren e bet3een domi ile and re!iden e. >Re!iden e> i! u!ed to indi ate a pla e o" abode, 3#et#er permanent or temporar%? >domi ile> denote! a "i6ed permanent re!iden e to 3#i #, 3#en ab!ent, one #a! t#e intention o" returnin-. : man

ma% #a)e a re!iden e in one pla e and a domi ile in anot#er. Re!iden e i! not domi ile, but domi ile i! re!iden e oupled 3it# t#e intention to remain "or an unlimited time. : man an #a)e but one domi ile "or t#e !ame purpo!e at an% time, but #e ma% #a)e numerou! pla e! o" re!iden e. <i! pla e o" re!iden e i! -enerall% #i! pla e o" domi ile, but it i! not b% an% mean! ne e!!aril% !o !in e no len-t# o" re!iden e 3it#out intention o" remainin3ill on!titute domi ile.

1. B4S. Imelda RomualdezMar o! 3a! a re!ident o" t#e *ir!t +i!tri t o" ,e%te "or ele tion purpo!e!, and t#ere"ore po!!e!!ed t#e ne e!!ar% re!iden e /uali"i ation! to run in ,e%te a! a andidate "or a !eat in t#e <ou!e o" Repre!entati)e! "or t#e "ollo3in- rea!on!A a. Minor "ollo3! t#e domi ile o" #i! parent!. :! domi ile, on e a /uired i! retained until

a ne3 one i! -ained, it "ollo3! t#at in !pite o" t#e "a t o" petitioner=! bein- born in Manila, 2a loban, ,e%te 3a! #er domi ile o" ori-in b% operation o" la3. 2#i! domi ile 3a! e!tabli!#ed 3#en #er "at#er brou-#t #i! "amil% ba 5 to ,e%te. b. +omi ile o" ori-in i! not ea!il% lo!t. 2o !u e!!"ull% e""e t a #an-e o" domi ile, one mu!t demon!trateA

1. :n a tual remo)al or an a tual #an-e o" domi ile? 9. : bona "ide intention o" abandonin- t#e "ormer pla e o" re!iden e and e!tabli!#in- a ne3 one? and ;. : t! 3#i # orre!pond 3it# t#e purpo!e. In t#e ab!en e o" lear and po!iti)e proo" ba!ed on t#e!e riteria, t#e re!iden e o" ori-in !#ould be deemed to ontinue. 'nl% 3it# e)iden e !#o3inon urren e o" all t#ree re/uirement! an t#e pre!umption o" ontinuit% or

re!iden e be rebutted, "or a #an-e o" re!iden e re/uire! an a tual and deliberate abandonment, and one annot #a)e t3o le-al re!iden e! at t#e !ame time. Petitioner #eld )ariou! re!iden e! "or di""erent purpo!e! durin- t#e la!t "our de ade!. None o" t#e!e purpo!e! une/ui)o all% point to an intention to abandon #er domi ile o" ori-in in 2a loban, ,e%te.

. It annot be orre tl% ar-ued t#at petitioner lo!t #er domi ile o" ori-in b% operation o" la3 a! a re!ult o" #er marria-e to t#e late Pre!ident *erdinand 4. Mar o! in 1959. C: 3i"e doe! not automati all% -ain t#e #u!bandD! domi ile.E 8#at petitioner -ained upon marria-e 3a! a tual re!iden e. S#e did not lo!e #er domi ile o" ori-in. 2#e term re!iden e ma% mean one t#in- in i)il la3 &or under t#e $i)il $ode( and /uite anot#er t#in- in politi al la3. 8#at

!tand! lear i! t#at in!o"ar a! t#e $i)il $ode i! on erneda""e tint#e ri-#t! and obli-ation! o" #u!band and 3i"e F t#e term re!iden e !#ould onl% be interpreted to mean >a tual re!iden e.> 2#e ine! apable on lu!ion deri)ed "rom t#i! unambi-uou! i)il la3 delineation t#ere"ore, i! t#at 3#en petitioner married t#e "ormer Pre!ident in 195G, !#e 5ept #er domi ile o" ori-in and merel% -ained a ne3 #ome, not a domicilium necessarium.

d. 4)en a!!umin- "or t#e !a5e o" ar-ument t#at petitioner -ained a ne3 >domi ile> a"ter #er marria-e and onl% a /uired a ri-#t to #oo!e a ne3 one a"ter #er #u!band died, petitioner=! a t! "ollo3in- #er return to t#e ountr% learl% indi ate t#at !#e not onl% impliedl% but e6pre!!l% #o!e #er domi ile o" ori-in &a!!umin- t#i! 3a! lo!t b% operation o" la3( a! #er domi ile. 2#i! > #oi e> 3a! une/ui)o all% e6pre!!ed in #er letter! to t#e $#airman

o" t#e P$GG 3#en petitioner !ou-#t t#e P$GG=! permi!!ion to >re#abilitate &our( an e!tral #ou!e in 2a loban and *arm in 'lot, ,e%te. . . to ma5e t#em li)able "or t#e Mar o! "amil% to #a)e a #ome in our #omeland.> *urt#ermore, petitioner obtained #er re!iden e erti"i ate in 1999 in 2a loban, ,e%te, 3#ile li)in- in #er brot#er=! #ou!e, an a t 3#i # !upport! t#e domi iliar% intention learl% mani"e!ted in #er letter! to t#e P$GG $#airman.

Effect C"se

of

Dis !"lific"tion

9. It i! a !ettled do trine t#at a !tatute re/uirin- rendition o" .ud-ment 3it#in a !pe i"ied time i! -enerall% on!trued to be merel% dire tor%, >!o t#at non- omplian e 3it# t#em doe! not in)alidate t#e .ud-ment on t#e t#eor% t#at i" t#e !tatute #ad intended !u # re!ult it 3ould #a)e learl% indi ated it.> 2#e di""eren e bet3een a mandator% and a

dire tor% pro)i!ion i! o"ten made on -round! o" ne e!!it%. In an% e)ent, 3it# t#e ena tment o" Se tion! 6 and 7 o" R.:. 66G6 in relation to Se tion 78 o" 7.P. 881, it i! e)ident t#at t#e re!pondent $ommi!!ion doe! not lo!e .uri!di tion to #ear and de ide a pendin- di!/uali"i ation a!e under Se tion 78 o" 7.P. 881 e)en a"ter t#e ele tion!. Section #. Effect of Dis !"lific"tion C"se. - :n% andidate 3#o #a! been

de lared b% "inal .ud-ment to be di!/uali"ied !#all not be )oted "or, and t#e )ote! a!t "or #im !#all not be ounted. I" "or an% rea!on a andidate i! not de lared b% "inal .ud-ment be"ore an ele tion to be di!/uali"ied and #e i! )oted "or and re ei)e! t#e 3inninnumber o" )ote! in !u # ele tion, t#e$ourt or $ommi!!ion !#all ontinue 3it# t#e trial and #earin- o" t#e a tion, in/uir%, or prote!t and, upon motion o" t#e omplainant or an% inter)enor, ma% durin- t#e

penden % t#ereo" order t#e !u!pen!ion o" t#e pro lamation o" !u # andidate 3#ene)er t#e e)iden e o" #i! -uilt i! !tron-. HRET $!%isdiction ;. <R42=! .uri!di tion a! t#e !ole .ud-e o" all onte!t! relatin- to t#e ele tion!, return! and /uali"i ation! o" member! o" $on-re!! be-in! onl% a"ter a andidate #a! be ome a member o" t#e <ou!e o" Repre!entati)e!.

Petitioner not bein- a member o" t#e <ou!e o" Repre!entati)e!, it i! ob)iou! t#at t#e <R42 at t#i! point #a! no .uri!di tion o)er t#e /ue!tion. DOMINO VS. COMELEC Petitioners: Juan Domino Respondent: Commission on Elections, Grafilo, Java, et. al. Facts: - On 25 arc! "##$, petitioner Domino filed !is certificate of

candidac% for t!e position of Representative of t!e &one &e'islative District of t!e Province of (aran'ani indicatin' in t!at !e !ad resided in t!e constituenc% )!ere !e see*s to +e elected for one ,"- %ear and t)o ,2mont!s immediatel% precedin' t!e election. - On arc! ./, "##$, private respondents filed )it! t!e CO E&EC a Petition to Cancel Certificate of Candidac% a'ainst Domino. - 0ccordin' to respondents, Domino is not a resident nor a re'istered voter of t!e province of (aran'ani. - 1or !is defense, DO 23O maintains t!at !e !ad complied )it! t!e one-

%ear residence re4uirement and t!at !e !as +een residin' in (aran'ani since Januar% "##5. - On 6 a% "##$, t!e CO E&EC 2nd Division promul'ated a resolution declarin' DO 23O dis4ualified as candidate for t!e position of representative of t!e lone district of (aran'ani for lac* of t!e one-%ear residence re4uirement and li*e)ise ordered t!e cancellation of !is certificate of candidac%. - On "" a% "##$, t!e da% of t!e election, t!e CO E&EC issued (upplemental Omni+us Resolution 3o. ./76, orderin' t!at t!e votes cast for DO 23O +e counted +ut to

suspend t!e proclamation if )innin', considerin' t!at t!e Resolution dis4ualif%in' !im as candidate !ad not %et +ecome final and e8ecutor%. - 9!e result of t!e election, per (tatement of :otes certified +% t!e C!airman of t!e Provincial ;oard of Canvassers, s!o)s t!at DO 23O 'arnered t!e !i'!est num+er of votes over !is opponents for t!e position of Con'ressman of t!e Province of (aran'ani. - On "5 a% "##$, DO 23O filed a motion for reconsideration of t!e Resolution dated 6 a% "##$, )!ic! )as denied +% t!e CO E&EC en +anc in its decision dated 2# a% "##$.

- Domino pra%ed: for Petition for Certiorari )it! pra%er for Preliminar% andator% 2n<unction alle'in', in t!e main, t!at t!e CO E&EC committed 'rave a+use of discretion amountin' to e8cess or lac* of <urisdiction )!en it ruled t!at !e did not meet t!e one-%ear residence re4uirement. - 9!e candidate )!o 'at!ered t!e second !i'!est num+er of votes intervened in t!e case and said t!at s!e s!ould +e declared as a )inner since Domino )as dis4ualified from runnin' for t!e position. Issues:

a. =!et!er or not t!e <ud'ment of t!e etropolitan 9rial Court of >ue?on Cit% declarin' petitioner as resident of (aran'ani and not of >ue?on Cit% is final, conclusive and +indin' upon t!e )!ole )orld, includin' t!e Commission on Elections. +. =!et!er or not petitioner !erein !as resided in t!e su+<ect con'ressional district for at least one ,"- %ear immediatel% precedin' t!e a% "", "##$ elections@ and c. =!et!er or not respondent CO E&EC !as <urisdiction over t!e

petition a 4uo for t!e dis4ualification of petitioner. Held: a. 9!e contention of DO 23O t!at t!e decision of t!e etropolitan 9rial Court of >ue?on Cit% in t!e e8clusion proceedin's declarin' !im a resident of t!e Province of (aran'ani and not of >ue?on Cit% is final and conclusive upon t!e CO E&EC cannot +e sustained. 9!e etropolitan 9rial Court of >ue?on Cit% in its "$ Januar% decision

e8ceeded its <urisdiction )!en it declared DO 23O a resident of t!e Province of (aran'ani, approved and ordered t!e transfer of !is voterAs. 2t is not )it!in t!e competence of t!e trial court, in an e8clusion proceedin's, to declare t!e c!allen'ed voter a resident of anot!er municipalit%. 9!e <urisdiction of t!e lo)er court over e8clusion cases is limited onl% to determinin' t!e ri'!t of voter to remain in t!e list of voters or to declare t!at t!e c!allen'ed voter is not 4ualified to vote in t!e precinct in )!ic! !e is re'istered, specif%in' t!e 'round of t!e voterAs dis4ualification.

+. 3o. Be did not meet t!e residenc% re4uirement. 0 personAs CdomicileD once esta+lis!ed is considered to continue and )ill not +e deemed lost until a ne) one is esta+lis!ed. 9o successfull% effect a c!an'e of domicile one must demonstrate an actual removal or an actual c!an'e of domicile@ a +ona fide intention of a+andonin' t!e former place of residence and esta+lis!in' a ne) one and definite acts )!ic! correspond )it! t!e purpose. 2n ot!er )ords, t!ere must +asicall% +e animus manendi coupled )it! animus non revertendi.

9!e purpose to remain in or at t!e domicile of c!oice must +e for an indefinite period of time@ t!e c!an'e of residence must +e voluntar%@ and t!e residence at t!e place c!osen for t!e ne) domicile must +e actual. 9!e lease contract entered into sometime in Januar% "##5, does not ade4uatel% support a c!an'e of domicile. 9!e lease contract ma% +e indicative of DO 23OAs intention to reside in (aran'ani +ut it does not en'ender t!e *ind of permanenc% re4uired to prove a+andonment of oneAs ori'inal domicile ,2locos (ur to >ue?on Cit%-.

=!ile, DominoAs intention to esta+lis! residence in (aran'ani can +e 'leaned from t!e fact t!at +e +ou'!t t!e !ouse !e )as rentin' on 3ovem+er 7, "##5, t!at !e sou'!t cancellation of !is previous re'istration in >ue?on Cit% on 22 Octo+er "##5, and t!at !e applied for transfer of re'istration from >ue?on Cit% to (aran'ani +% reason of c!an'e of residence on ./ 0u'ust "##5, DO 23O still falls s!ort of t!e one %ear residenc% re4uirement under t!e Constitution.. c. DO 23OAs contention t!at t!e CO E&EC !as no <urisdiction in t!e

present petition is +ereft ,lac*in'- of merit. 9!e CO E&EC, under (ec. 5$, 0rt. 2E of t!e Omni+us Election Code, !as <urisdiction over a petition to den% due course to or cancel certificate of candidac%. 9!e fact of o+tainin' t!e !i'!est num+er of votes in an election does not automaticall% vest t!e position in t!e )innin' candidate. 0 candidate must +e proclaimed and must !ave ta*en !is oat! of office +efore !e can +e considered a mem+er of t!e Bouse of Representatives.

Considerin' t!at DO 23O !as not +een proclaimed as Con'ressmanelect in t!e &one Con'ressional District of t!e Province of (aran'ani !e cannot +e deemed a mem+er of t!e Bouse of Representative. Bence, it is t!e CO E&EC and not t!e Electoral 9ri+unal )!ic! !as <urisdiction over t!e issue of !is ineli'i+ilit% as a candidate. Issue of the Intervenor: 2t is no) settled doctrine t!at t!e candidate )!o o+tains t!e second !i'!est num+er of votes ma% not +e

proclaimed )inner in case t!e )innin' candidate is dis4ualified. 2n ever% election, t!e peopleAs c!oice is t!e paramount consideration and t!eir e8pressed )ill must, at all times, +e 'iven effect. =!en t!e ma<orit% spea*s and elects into office a candidate +% 'ivin' t!e !i'!est num+er of votes cast in t!e election for t!at office, no one can +e declared elected in !is place. 2t )ould +e e8tremel% repu'nant to t!e +asic concept of t!e constitutionall% 'uaranteed ri'!t to suffra'e if a candidate )!o !as not ac4uired t!e

ma<orit% or pluralit% of votes is proclaimed a )inner and imposed as t!e representative of a constituenc%, t!e ma<orit% of )!ic! !ave positivel% declared t!rou'! t!eir +allots t!at t!e% do not c!oose !im. 9!e petition of Domino is denied. 9!e resolution of t!e CO E&EC en banc is affirmed. Fnder: 1undamental Principles on Constitutional &a) and t!e ;ill of Ri'!ts United Airlines vs. Uy G.R. No. 127768, Nov. 19, 1999

INTERNATIONAL LAW: Applicability o t!e "a#sa$ %o&ve&tio&: the Convention's provisions do not regulate or e !lude lia"ility #or other "rea!hes o# !ontra!t "y the !arrier or $is!ondu!t o# its o##i!ers and e$ployees% or #or so$e parti!ular or e !eptional type o# da$age. Neither $ay the Convention "e invo&ed to 'usti#y the disregard o# so$e e traordinary sort o# da$age resulting to a passenger and pre!lude re!overy there#or "eyond the li$its set "y said Convention. Li&e(ise% (e have held that the

Convention does not pre!lude the operation o# the Civil Code and other pertinent la(s. It does not regulate% $u!h less e e$pt% the !arrier #ro$ lia"ility #or da$ages #or violating the rights o# its passengers under the !ontra!t o# !arriage% espe!ially i# (ill#ul $is!ondu!t on the part o# the !arrier's e$ployees is #ound or esta"lished FA%'(: O!to"er )*% )+,+ - Respondent Willie Uy is a passenger o# petitioner United Airlines% "ound #ro$ .an /ran!is!o to 0anila.

While in .an /ran!is!o% it (as #ound that one pie!e o# his luggage (as over the $a i$u$ (eight allo(an!e o# 12 &g. per "ag. A United Airlines e$ployee re"u&ed hi$ and in a loud voi!e% in #ront o# the $illing !ro(d% ordered hi$ to repa!& his things a!!ordingly. Wishing not to !reate a s!ene% Willie did as as&ed. Un#ortunately% his luggage (as still over(eight so the airline "illed hi$ over(eight !harges. Willie o##ered to pay the !harges (ith a 0is!ellaneous Charge Order 30CO4 or an airline pre5paid !redit "ut the sa$e e$ployee% and an airline

supervisor% re#used to honor it% !ontending that there (ere dis!repan!ies in the #igures. Thus% Willie (as #or!ed to pay the !harges (ith his A$eri!an E press !redit !ard. Upon arrival in 0anila% Willie dis!overed that one o# his "ags had "een slashed and its !ontents% a$ounting to U.67%*)2.22% stolen. O!to"er )8% )+,+ - he sent his #irst letter o# de$and to United Airlines. The airline did not re#ute Willie9s allegations and $ailed a !he!& representing pay$ent o# his loss "ased on the $a i$u$ lia"ility o# U.6+.12 per pound. Willie%

thin&ing the a$ount to "e grossly inade:uate to !o$pensate hi$ #or his losses as (ell as #or the indignities he (as su"'e!ted to% sent t(o $ore letters to petitioner airline% one dated ;anuary <% )++2 and the other dated O!to"er =,% )++)% de$anding out5o#5!ourt settle$ent o# >)%222%222.22. ;une +% )++= - Willie #iled a !o$plaint #or da$ages "e#ore the >hilippine !ourts. ?e had t(o !auses o# a!tion: 3)4 the sha""y and hu$iliating treat$ent he re!eived #ro$ petitioner9s e$ployees at the .an /ran!is!o Airport (hi!h !aused

hi$ e tre$e e$"arrass$ent and so!ial hu$iliation@ and 3=4 the slashing o# his luggage and the loss o# personal e##e!ts a$ounting to U.67%*)2.22. /or its part% United Airlines $oved to dis$iss the !o$plaint on the ground that it (as #iled out o# ti$e. Under Art. =+ o# the Warsa( Convention% the right to da$ages shall "e e tinguished i# an a!tion is not "rought (ithin = years. ?o(ever% the se!ond paragraph o# the said provision stated that the $ethod o# !al!ulating the period o# li$itation shall "e deter$ined "y the la( o# the !ourt to (hi!h the

!ase is su"$itted. It is Willie9s position that our rules on interruption o# pres!riptive period should apply. When he sent his letters o# de$and% the =5year period (as tolled% giving hi$ a$ple ti$e to #ile his !o$plaint. The trial !ourt ordered the dis$issal o# the !ase% holding that Art. =+3=4 re#ers not to the lo!al #oru$9s rules in interrupting the pres!riptive period "ut only to the rules o# deter$ining the ti$e in (hi!h the a!tion (as dee$ed !o$$en!ed 3$eaning A#iledB4. Willie #iled his $otion #or re!onsideration o# the order

o# dis$issal only on the )<th day. The trial !ourt denied his $otion and = days later Willie #iled his noti!e o# appeal. United Airlines this ti$e !ontended that the noti!e o# appeal (as #iled "eyond the )75day regle$entary period and should there#ore "e dis$issed. The CA% ho(ever% too& !ogniCan!e o# the !ase in the interest o# 'usti!e and ruled in #avour o# respondent. ?en!e% this petition #or !ertiorari. I(()*: "!et!e# o# &ot t!e actio& o# da+a,es is ba##ed by t!e lapse o t!e 2-yea# p#esc#iptive pe#iod u&de# A#t. 29

t!e

"a#sa$

%o&ve&tio&

H*./: .upre$e Court held that although the =5year pres!riptive period under the Warsa( Convention has lapsed% it did not pre!lude the appli!ation o# other pertinent provisions o# the Civil Code. Thus% the a!tion #or da$ages !ould still "e #iled "ased on tort (hi!h !an "e #iled (ithin < years #ro$ the ti$e !ause o# a!tion a!!rued. As #or the a!tion pertaining to the loss o# the !ontents o# the luggage%

(hile it (as (ell (ithin the "ounds o# the Warsa( Convention% the .upre$e Court #ound that there (as an e !eption to the appli!a"ility o# the =5year pres!riptive period - that is (hen the airline e$ployed delaying ta!ti!s and gave the passenger the run5around. Appli!a"ility o# the Warsa( Convention: Courts have dis!retion (hether to apply the$ or not Within our 'urisdi!tion (e have held that the Warsa( Convention !an "e applied% or ignored% depending on the pe!uliar #a!ts

presented "y ea!h !ase. Thus% (e have ruled that the Convention's provisions do not regulate or e !lude lia"ility #or other "rea!hes o# !ontra!t "y the !arrier or $is!ondu!t o# its o##i!ers and e$ployees% or #or so$e parti!ular or e !eptional type o# da$age. Neither $ay the Convention "e invo&ed to 'usti#y the disregard o# so$e e traordinary sort o# da$age resulting to a passenger and pre!lude re!overy there#or "eyond the li$its set "y said Convention. Li&e(ise% (e have held that the Convention does not pre!lude the operation o# the Civil Code and

other pertinent la(s. It does not regulate% $u!h less e e$pt% the !arrier #ro$ lia"ility #or da$ages #or violating the rights o# its passengers under the !ontra!t o# !arriage% espe!ially i# (ill#ul $is!ondu!t on the part o# the !arrier's e$ployees is #ound or esta"lished. Respondent's !o$plaint reveals that he is suing on t(o 3=4 !auses o# a!tion: 3a4 the sha""y and hu$iliating treat$ent he re!eived #ro$ petitioner's e$ployees at the .an /ran!is!o Airport (hi!h !aused hi$ e tre$e e$"arrass$ent and so!ial

hu$iliation@ and% 3"4 the slashing o# his luggage and the loss o# his personal e##e!ts a$ounting to U. 67%*)2.22. While his se!ond !ause o# a!tion 5 an a!tion #or da$ages arising #ro$ the#t or da$age to property or goods 5 is (ell (ithin the "ounds o# the Warsa( Convention% his #irst !ause o# a!tion 5an a!tion #or da$ages arising #ro$ the $is!ondu!t o# the airline e$ployees and the violation o# respondent's rights as passenger 5 !learly is not. A!tion #or da$ages arising #ro$

the $is!ondu!t o# the airline e$ployees and the violation o# the respondent9s rights as passengers is !overed under the Civil Code Conse:uently% inso#ar as the #irst !ause o# a!tion is !on!erned% respondent's #ailure to #ile his !o$plaint (ithin the t(o 3=45year li$itation o# the Warsa( Convention does not "ar his a!tion sin!e petitioner airline $ay still "e held lia"le #or "rea!h o# other provisions o# the Civil Code (hi!h pres!ri"e a di##erent period or pro!edure #or instituting the a!tion% spe!i#i!ally% Art. ))<8 thereo#

(hi!h pres!ri"es #our 3<4 years #or #iling an a!tion "ased on torts. E !eption to the Appli!ation o# the =5year pres!riptive period: When airline e$ployed delaying ta!ti!s As #or respondent's se!ond !ause o# a!tion% indeed the travau preparatories o# the Warsa( Convention reveal that the delegates thereto intended the t(o 3=45year li$itation in!orporated in Art. =+ as an a"solute "ar to suit and not to "e $ade su"'e!t to the various tolling provisions o# the la(s o# the #oru$. This there#ore #ore!loses the appli!ation o# our

o(n rules on interruption o# pres!riptive periods. Arti!le =+% par. 3=4% (as intended only to let lo!al la(s deter$ine (hether an a!tion had "een !o$$en!ed (ithin the t(o 3=45year period% and (ithin our 'urisdi!tion an a!tion shall "e dee$ed !o$$en!ed upon the #iling o# a !o$plaint. .in!e it is indisputa"le that respondent #iled the present a!tion "eyond the t(o 3=45year ti$e #ra$e his se!ond !ause o# a!tion $ust "e "arred. Nonetheless% it !annot "e dou"ted that respondent e erted e##orts to i$$ediately !onvey his loss to petitioner% even e$ployed the servi!es o# t(o 3=4 la(yers to

#ollo( up his !lai$s% and that the #iling o# the a!tion itsel# (as delayed "e!ause o# petitioner's evasion. Derily% respondent #iled his !o$plaint $ore than t(o 3=4 years later% "eyond the period o# li$itation pres!ri"ed "y the Warsa( Convention #or #iling a !lai$ #or da$ages. ?o(ever% it is o"vious that respondent (as #orestalled #ro$ i$$ediately #iling an a!tion "e!ause petitioner airline gave hi$ the runaround% ans(ering his letters "ut not giving in to his de$ands. True% respondent should have already

#iled an a!tion at the #irst instan!e (hen his !lai$s (ere denied "y petitioner "ut the sa$e !ould only "e due to his desire to $a&e an out5o#5!ourt settle$ent #or (hi!h he !annot "e #aulted. ?en!e% despite the e press $andate o# Art. =+ o# the Warsa( Convention that an a!tion #or da$ages should "e #iled (ithin t(o 3=4 years #ro$ the arrival at the pla!e o# destination% su!h rule shall not "e applied in the instant !ase "e!ause o# the delaying ta!ti!s e$ployed "y petitioner airline itsel#. Thus% private respondent's se!ond !ause o# a!tion !annot "e !onsidered as ti$e5"arred under

Art. =+ o# the Warsa( Convention. W?ERE/ORE% the assailed Ee!ision o# the Court o# Appeals reversing and setting aside the appealed order o# the trial !ourt granting the $otion to dis$iss the !o$plaint% as (ell as its Resolution denying re!onsideration% is A//IR0EE. Let the re!ords o# the !ase "e re$anded to the !ourt o# origin #or #urther pro!eedings ta&ing its "earings #ro$ this dis:uisition. .O OREEREE.

A+e#ica& Ai#li&es vs %ou#t o Appeals 811=2)2

) Dote

327 scra 482 Contract of Carriage >rivate respondent A$adeo .eno pur!hased #ro$ .ingapore Airlines

in 0anila !on'un!tion ti!&ets. In Feneva% the petitioner de!ided to #orego his trip to Copenhagen% and go straight to Ne( Gor&% private respondent e !hanged the unused portion o# the !on'un!tion ti!&et #ro$ International Air Transport Asso!iation !learing house in Feneva. >rivate respondent #iled an a!tion #or da$ages "e#ore the RTC o# Ce"u #or the alleged e$"arrass$ent and $ental anguish he su##ered at the Feneva Airport (hen the petitioner9s se!urity o##i!ers prevented hi$ #ro$ "oarding the plane% detained hi$ #or a"out an hour and allo(ed

hi$ to "oard the plane only a#ter all the passengers have "oarded. I(()*: Whether or not the >hilippine !ourts have 'urisdi!tion over the a!tion #or da$ages. H*./: The .upre$e Court ruled that the !ase (as properly #iled in the >hilippines. It held that the petitioner a!ted as an agent o# the .ingapore Airlines under IATA rules and as an agent o# the prin!ipal !arrier the petitioner $ay "e held lia"le under !ontra!t o# !arriage in 0anila.

.>OU.E. HALA0EA D.. CA .eave a co++e&t S&OUSES ZALAMEA "nd LIA'A ZALAMEA vs. CA "nd TRA'S(ORLD AIRLI'ES) I'C. *.R. 'o. +,-./0 'ovem1e% +2) +33/ FACTS: Petitioners-spouses Cesar Galamea and (ut!ira Galamea, and t!eir dau'!ter, &iana purc!ased . airline tic*ets from t!e anila a'ent of respondent 9rans=orld 0irlines, 2nc. for a fli'!t to 3e) Hor* to &os 0n'eles. 9!e tic*ets of petitionersspouses )ere purc!ased at a discount

of 55I )!ile t!at of t!eir dau'!ter )as a full fare tic*et. 0ll t!ree tic*ets represented confirmed reservations. On t!e appointed date, !o)ever, petitioners c!ec*ed in +ut )ere placed on t!e )ait-list +ecause t!e num+er of passen'ers )!o !ad c!ec*ed in +efore t!em !ad alread% ta*en all t!e seats availa+le on t!e fli'!t. Out of t!e 72 names on t!e )ait list, t!e first 22 names )ere eventuall% allo)ed to +oard t!e fli'!t to &os 0n'eles, includin' petitioner Cesar Galamea. 9!e t)o ot!ers )ere not a+le to fl%. 9!ose !oldin' full-fare tic*ets )ere 'iven first priorit% amon' t!e )aitlisted passen'ers. r. Galamea, )!o )as !oldin' t!e full-fare tic*et of !is

dau'!ter, )as allo)ed to +oard t!e plane@ )!ile !is )ife and dau'!ter, )!o presented t!e discounted tic*ets )ere denied +oardin'. Even in t!e ne8t 9=0 fli'!t to &os 0n'eles rs. Galamea and !er dau'!ter, could not +e accommodated +ecause it )as also full% +oo*ed. 9!us, t!e% )ere constrained to +oo* in anot!er fli'!t and purc!ased t)o tic*ets from 0merican 0irlines. Fpon t!eir arrival in t!e P!ilippines, petitioners filed an action for dama'es +ased on +reac! of contract of air carria'e +efore t!e R9C- a*ati. 9!e lo)er court ruled in favor of petitioners . C0 !eld t!at moral dama'es are recovera+le in a dama'e

suit predicated upon a +reac! of contract of carria'e onl% )!ere t!ere is fraud or +ad fait!. (ince it is a matter of record t!at over+oo*in' of fli'!ts is a common and accepted practice of airlines in t!e Fnited (tates and is specificall% allo)ed under t!e Code of 1ederal Re'ulations +% t!e Civil 0eronautics ;oard, no fraud nor +ad fait! could +e imputed on respondent 9rans=orld 0irlines. 9!us petitioners raised t!e case on petition for revie) on certiorari. ISSUE4 =O3 9=G acted )it! +ad fait! and )ould entitle Galameas to oral and E8amplar% dama'es.

RULI'*: 9!e F.(. la) or re'ulation alle'edl% aut!ori?in' over+oo*in' !as never +een proved. 1orei'n la)s do not prove t!emselves nor can t!e courts ta*e <udicial notice of t!em. &i*e an% ot!er fact, t!e% must +e alle'ed and proved. =ritten la) ma% +e evidenced +% an official pu+lication t!ereof or +% a cop% attested +% t!e officer !avin' t!e le'al custod% of t!e record, or +% !is deput%, and accompanied )it! a certificate t!at suc! officer !as custod%. 9!e certificate ma% +e made +% a secretar% of an em+ass% or le'ation, consul 'eneral, consul, viceconsul, or consular a'ent or +% an% officer in t!e forei'n service of t!e

P!ilippines stationed in t!e forei'n countr% in )!ic! t!e record is *ept, and aut!enticated +% t!e seal of !is office. Respondent 9=0 relied solel% on t!e statement of s. G)endol%n &at!er, its customer service a'ent, in !er deposition t!at t!e Code of 1ederal Re'ulations of t!e Civil 0eronautics ;oard allo)s over+oo*in'. 3o official pu+lication of said code )as presented as evidence. 9!us, respondent courtAs findin' t!at over+oo*in' is specificall% allo)ed +% t!e F( Code of 1ederal Re'ulations !as no +asis in fact. Even if t!e claimed F.(. Code of 1ederal Re'ulations does e8ist, t!e

same is not applica+le to t!e case at +ar in accordance )it! t!e principle of le8 loci contractus )!ic! re4uire t!at t!e la) of t!e place )!ere t!e airline tic*et )as issued s!ould +e applied +% t!e court )!ere t!e passen'ers are residents and nationals of t!e forum and t!e tic*et is issued in suc! (tate +% t!e defendant airline. (ince t!e tic*ets )ere sold and issued in t!e P!ilippines, t!e applica+le la) in t!is case )ould +e P!ilippine la). E8istin' <urisprudence e8plicitl% states t!at over+oo*in' amounts to +ad fait!, entitlin' t!e passen'ers concerned to an a)ard of moral dama'es. 2n 0litalia 0ir)a%s v. Court of 0ppeals, )!ere passen'ers )it! confirmed

+oo*in's )ere refused carria'e on t!e last minute, t!is Court !eld t!at )!en an airline issues a tic*et to a passen'er confirmed on a particular fli'!t, on a certain date, a contract of carria'e arises, and t!e passen'er !as ever% ri'!t to e8pect t!at !e )ould fl% on t!at fli'!t and on t!at date. 2f !e does not, t!en t!e carrier opens itself to a suit for +reac! of contract of carria'e. =!ere an airline !ad deli+eratel% over+oo*ed, it too* t!e ris* of !avin' to deprive some passen'ers of t!eir seats in case all of t!em )ould s!o) up for t!e c!ec* in. 1or t!e indi'nit% and inconvenience of +ein' refused a confirmed seat on t!e last minute, said

passen'er is entitled to an a)ard of moral dama'es. 1or a contract of carria'e 'enerates a relation attended )it! pu+lic dut% J a dut% to provide pu+lic service and convenience to its passen'ers )!ic! must +e paramount to self-interest or enric!ment. Respondent 9=0 is still 'uilt% of +ad fait! in not informin' its passen'ers +efore!and t!at it could +reac! t!e contract of carria'e even if t!e% !ave confirmed tic*ets if t!ere )as over+oo*in'. Respondent 9=0 s!ould !ave incorporated stipulations on over+oo*in' on t!e tic*ets issued or to properl% inform its passen'ers

a+out t!ese policies so t!at t!e latter )ould +e prepared for suc! eventualit% or )ould !ave t!e c!oice to ride )it! anot!er airline. Respondent 9=0 )as also 'uilt% of not informin' its passen'ers of its alle'ed polic% of 'ivin' less priorit% to discounted tic*ets. 3eit!er did it present an% ar'ument of su+stance to s!o) t!at petitioners )ere dul% apprised of t!e over+oo*ed condition of t!e fli'!t or t!at t!ere is a !ierarc!% of +oardin' priorities in +oo*in' passen'ers. 2t is evident t!at petitioners !ad t!e ri'!t to rel% upon t!e assurance of respondent 9=0, t!ru its a'ent in anila, t!en in 3e) Hor*, t!at t!eir tic*ets represented

confirmed seats )it!out an% 4ualification. 9!e failure of respondent 9=0 to so inform t!em )!en it could easil% !ave done so t!ere+% ena+lin' respondent to !old on to t!em as passen'ers up to t!e last minute amounts to +ad fait!. Evidentl%, respondent 9=0 placed its self-interest over t!e ri'!ts of petitioners under t!eir contracts of carria'e. (uc! conscious disre'ard of petitionersA ri'!ts ma*es respondent 9=0 lia+le for moral dama'es. 9o deter +reac! of contracts +% respondent 9=0 in similar fas!ion in t!e future, )e ad<ud'e respondent 9=0 lia+le for e8emplar% dama'es, as )ell.

2n t!e case of 0litalia 0ir)a%s v. Court of 0ppeals, t!is Court e8plicitl% !eld t!at a passen'er is entitled to +e reim+ursed for t!e cost of t!e tic*ets !e !ad to +u% for a fli'!t to anot!er airline. 9!us, instead of simpl% +ein' refunded for t!e cost of t!e unused 9=0 tic*ets, petitioners s!ould +e a)arded t!e actual cost of t!eir fli'!t from 3e) Hor* to &os 0n'eles. =BERE1ORE, t!e petition is !ere+% GR039ED and t!e decision of t!e respondent Court of 0ppeals is !ere+% OD212ED Triple Eight Integrated .ervi!es% In!. vs. NLRC

G.R. No. 129081, /ece+be# 2, 1998

LAIOR LAW: /isease as G#ou&d o# /is+issal, #e3uisites: 3)4 the disease $ust "e su!h that e$ployee9s !ontinued e$ploy$ent is prohi"ited "y la( or pre'udi!ial to his health as (ell as to the health o# his !o5e$ployees@ and 3=4 there $ust "e a !erti#i!ation "y !o$petent pu"li! authority that the disease is o# su!h nature or at su!h a stage that it !annot "e !ured (ithin a period o# 8 $onths (ith proper $edi!al treat$ent.

LAIOR LAW: sa$e@ The re:uire$ent #or a $edi!al !erti#i!ate under Arti!le =,< o# the La"or Code !annot "e dispensed (ith@ other(ise% it (ould san!tion the unilateral and ar"itrary deter$ination "y the e$ployer o# the gravity or e tent o# the e$ployee9s illness and thus de#eat the pu"li! poli!y on the prote!tion o# la"or. >RIDATE INTERNATIONAL LAW: .e4 .oci %o&t#actus: Esta"lished is the rule that lex loci contractus 3the la( o# the pla!e (here the !ontra!t is $ade4 governs in this 'urisdi!tion. There is no

:uestion that the !ontra!t o# e$ploy$ent in this !ase (as per#e!ted here in the >hilippines. >RIDATE INTERNATIONAL LAW: .a$ o t!e Fo#u+ vis-avis 5ublic 5olicy: .ettled is the rule that the !ourts o# the #oru$ (ill not en#or!e any #oreign !lai$ o"no ious to the #oru$9s pu"li! poli!y. ?ere in the >hilippines%e$ploy$ent agree$ents are $ore than !ontra!tual in nature. The Constitution itsel#% in Arti!le JIII .e!tion *% guarantees the spe!ial prote!tion o# (or&ers.

FA%'(: Osdana% a /ilipino !itiCen% (as re!ruited "y Triple Eight #or e$ploy$ent (ith the latter9s prin!ipal% Ful# Catering Co$pany3FCC4% a #ir$ "ased in the Kingdo$ o# .audi Ara"ia. The e$ploy$ent !ontra!t 3originally as A#ood serverB "ut later !hanged to A(aitressB4 (as e e!uted in the >hilippines "ut (as to "e per#or$ed in Riyadh. On!e in Riyadh% ho(ever% Osdana (as $ade to per#or$ strenuous tas&s 3(ashing dishes% 'anitorial (or&4%

(hi!h (ere not in!luded in her designation as a (aitress. Ie!ause o# the long hours and strenuous nature o# her (or&% she su##ered #ro$ Carpal Tunnel .yndro$e% #or (hi!h she had to undergo surgery. Iut during her (ee&s o# !on#ine$ent at the hospital #or her re!overy% she (as not given any salary. And a#ter she (as dis!harged #ro$ the hospital% FCC suddenly dis$issed her #ro$ (or&% allegedly on the ground o# illness. .he (as not given any separation pay nor (as she paid her salaries #or the periods (hen she (as not allo(ed to (or&. Thus% upon her return to the >hilippines%

she #iled a !o$plaint against Triple Eight% praying #or unpaid and underpaid salaries% a$ong others. The LA ruled in her #avour% (hi!h ruling NLRC a##ir$ed. ?en!e% this petition #or !ertiorari. I(()*:

"!et!e# o# &ot 6sda&a $as ille,ally dis+issed I so, $!et!e# o# &ot s!e is e&titled to a$a#d o# sala#ies o# t!e u&e4pi#ed po#tio& o t!e co&t#act

H*./: The petition $ust #ail.

Eisease as a Fround #or Eis$issal Under Arti!le =,< o# the La"or Code and the O$ni"us Rules I$ple$enting the La"or Code% #or disease to "e a valid ground #or ter$ination% the #ollo(ing re:uisites $ust "e present: ). The disease $ust "e su!h that e$ployee9s !ontinued e$ploy$ent is prohi"ited "y la( or pre'udi!ial to his health as

(ell as to the health o# his !o5 e$ployees =. There $ust "e a !erti#i!ation "y !o$petent pu"li! authority that the disease is o# su!h nature or at su!h a stage that it !annot "e !ured (ithin a period o# 8 $onths (ith proper $edi!al treat$ent

In the #irst pla!e% Osdana9s !ontinued e$ploy$ent despite her illness (as not prohi"ited "y la( nor (as it pre'udi!ial to her health% as (ell as that o# her !o5 e$ployees. In #a!t% the $edi!al report issued a#ter her se!ond

operation stated that Ashe had very good i$prove$ent o# the sy$pto$s.B Iesides% ACarpal Tunnel .yndro$eB is not a !ontagious disease. On the $edi!al !erti#i!ate re:uire$ent% petitioner erroneously argues that Aprivate respondent (as e$ployed in .audi Ara"ia and not here in the >hilippines. ?en!e% there (as a physi!al i$possi"ility to se!ure #ro$ a >hilippine pu"li! health authority the alluded $edi!al !erti#i!ate that pu"li! respondent9s illness (ill not "e !ured (ithin a period o# si $onths.B

>etitioner entirely $isses the point% as !ounsel #or private respondent states in the Co$$ent. The rule si$ply pres!ri"es a A!erti#i!ation "y a !o$petent pu"li! health authorityB and not a A>hilippine pu"li! health authority.B I#% indeed% Osdana (as physi!ally un#it to !ontinue her e$ploy$ent% her e$ployer !ould have easily o"tained a !erti#i!ation to that e##e!t #ro$ a !o$petent pu"li! health authority in .audi Ara"ia% there"y heading o## any !o$plaint #or illegal dis$issal.

The re:uire$ent #or a $edi!al !erti#i!ate under Arti!le =,< o# the La"or Code !annot "e dispensed (ith@ other(ise% it (ould san!tion the unilateral and ar"itrary deter$ination "y the e$ployer o# the gravity or e tent o# the e$ployee9s illness and thus de#eat the pu"li! poli!y on the prote!tion o# la"or. As the Court o"served in >rieto v. NLRC% AThe Court is not una(are o# the $any a"uses su##ered "y our overseas (or&ers in the #oreign land (here they have ventured% usually (ith heavy hearts% in pursuit o# a $ore #ul#illing #uture. Irea!h o# !ontra!t% $altreat$ent% rape% insu##i!ient

nourish$ent% su"5hu$an lodgings% insults and other #or$s o# de"ase$ent% are only a #e( o# the inhu$ane a!ts to (hi!h they are su"'e!ted "y their #oreign e$ployers% (ho pro"a"ly #eel they !an do as they please in their !ountry. While these (or&ers $ay indeed have relatively little de#ense against e ploitation (hile they are a"road% that disadvantage $ust not !ontinueto "urden the$ (hen they return to their o(n territory to voi!e their $uted !o$plaint. There is no reason (hy% in their o(n land% the prote!tion o# our o(n la(s !annot "e e tended to the$ in #ull $easure #or the redress o#

their

grievan!es.B

Whi!h la( should apply: Lex Loci Contractus >etitioner li&e(ise atte$pts to sidestep the $edi!al !erti#i!ate re:uire$ent "y !ontending that sin!e Osdana (as (or&ing in .audi Ara"ia% her e$ploy$ent (as su"'e!t to the la(s o# the host !ountry. Apparently% petitioner hopes to $a&e it appear that the la"or la(s o# .audi Ara"ia do not re:uire any !erti#i!ation "y a !o$petent pu"li! health authority in the dis$issal o# e$ployees due to illness.

Again% petitioner9s argu$ent is (ithout $erit. /irst% esta"lished is the rule that lex loci contractus 3the la( o# the pla!e (here the !ontra!t is $ade4 governs in this 'urisdi!tion. There is no :uestion that the !ontra!t o# e$ploy$ent in this !ase (as per#e!ted here in the >hilippines. There#ore% the La"or Code% its i$ple$enting rules and regulations% and other la(s a##e!ting la"or apply in this !ase. /urther$ore% settled is the rule that the !ourts o# the #oru$ (ill not en#or!e any #oreign !lai$

o"no ious to the #oru$9spu"li! poli!y. ?ere in the >hilippines% e$ploy$ent agree$ents are $ore than !ontra!tual in nature. The Constitutionitsel#% in Arti!le JIII .e!tion *% guarantees the spe!ial prote!tion o# (or&ers. This pu"li! poli!y should "e "orne in $ind in this !ase "e!ause to allo( #oreign e$ployers to deter$ine #or and "y the$selves (hether an overseas !ontra!t (or&er $ay "e dis$issed on the ground o# illness (ould en!ourage illegal or ar"itrary pre5ter$ination o# e$ploy$ent !ontra!ts.

A(ard o# .alaries granted "ut redu!ed In the !ase at "ar% (hile it (ould appear that the e$ploy$ent !ontra!t approved "y the >OEA (as only #or a period o# t(elve $onths% Osdana9s a!tual stint (ith the #oreign prin!ipal lasted #or one year and seven5and5a5hal# $onths. It $ay "e in#erred% there#ore% that the e$ployer rene(ed her e$ploy$ent !ontra!t #or another year. Thus% the a(ard #or the une pired portion o# the !ontra!t should have "een U.6)%=82 3U.6=,2 < L $onths4

or its e:uivalent in >hilippine pesos% not U.6=%<++ as ad'udged "y the la"or ar"iter and a##ir$ed "y the NLRC. As #or the a(ard #or unpaid salaries and di##erential a$ounting to U.6)%218 representing seven $onths9 unpaid salaries and one $onth underpaid salary% the sa$e is proper "e!ause% as !orre!tly pointed out "y Osdana% the Ano (or&% no payB rule relied upon "y petitioner does not apply in this !ase. In the #irst pla!e% the #a!t that she had not (or&ed #ro$ ;une ), to August ==% )++* and then #ro$ ;anuary =< to April =+% )++<%

(as due to her illness (hi!h (as !learly (or&5related. .e!ond% #ro$ August =* to O!to"er 7% )++*% Osdana a!tually (or&ed as #ood server and !oo& #or seven days a (ee& at the ?ota Iani Ta$ee$ ?ospital% "ut (as not paid any salary #or the said period. /inally% #ro$ O!to"er 8 to O!to"er =*% )++*% she (as !on#ined to :uarters and (as not given any (or& #or no reason at all. 0oral Ea$ages redu!ed granted "ut

No(% (ith respe!t to the a(ard o# $oral and e e$plary da$ages%

the sa$e is li&e(ise proper "ut should "e redu!ed. Worth reiterating is the rule that $oral da$ages are re!overa"le (here the dis$issal o# the e$ployee (as attended "y "ad #aith or #raud or !onstituted an a!t oppressive to la"or% or (as done in a $anner !ontrary to $orals% good !usto$s% or pu"li! poli!y. Li&e(ise% e e$plary da$ages $ay "e a(arded i# the dis$issal (as e##e!ted in a (anton% oppressive or $alevolent $anner. A!!ording to the #a!ts o# the !ase as stated "y pu"li! respondent% Osdana (as $ade to per#or$ su!h

$enial !hores% as dish(ashing and 'anitorial (or&% a$ong others% !ontrary to her 'o" designation as (aitress. .he (as also $ade to (or& long hours (ithout overti$e pay. Ie!ause o# su!h arduous (or&ing !onditions% she developed Carpal Tunnel .yndro$e. ?er illness (as su!h that she had to undergo surgery t(i!e. .in!e her e$ployer deter$ined #or itsel# that she (as no longer #it to !ontinue (or&ing% they sent her ho$e posthaste (ithout as $u!h as separation pay or !o$pensation #or the $onths (hen she (as una"le to (or& "e!ause o# her illness. .in!e the e$ployer is

dee$ed to have a!ted in "ad #aith% the a(ard #or attorney9s #ees is li&e(ise upheld. Ba!n v. Court of 0ppeals K266 (CR0 5.5 ,Januar% 22, "##5-L Jurisdiction Over 1orei'n Corporation Doin' ;usiness in t!e P!ilippines =it!out a &icense 1acts: Petitioner is a 1ilipino citi?en doin' +usiness under t!e name of CBa!n- anilaD. Private respondent ; = is a non-resident corporation incorporated in German%. Petitioner e8ecuted in favor of private respondent a CDeed of 0ssi'nment )it! a (pecial Po)er of 0ttorne%D

)!ic! constituted petitioner as t!e e8clusive dealer of private respondent as lon' as t!e assi'nment of its trademar* and device su+sisted. Bo)ever, no formal contract )as dra)n +et)een t!e t)o parties. 9!ereafter, petitioner )as informed t!at ; = )as arran'in' to 'rant t!e e8clusive dealers!ip of ; = cars and products to Colum+ia otors Corp. ,C C-. ; = e8pressed dissatisfaction )it! various aspect of petitionerAs +usiness +ut nonet!eless also e8pressed )illin'ness to continue +usiness relations )it! petitioner on t!e +asis of a standard ; = contract ot!er)ise, if said offer )as unaccepta+le to petitioner t!en ; =

)ould terminate petitionerAs e8clusive dealers!ip. Petitioner refused ; =s offer in )!ic! case ; = )it!dre) its alternative offer and terminated petitionerAs e8clusive dealers!ip. Petitioner t!erefore filed an action for specific performance and dama'es a'ainst ; = to compel it to continue t!e e8clusive dealers!ip. ; = moved to dismiss t!e case contendin' t!at t!e trial court did not ac4uire <urisdiction over it t!rou'! t!e service of summons on D92 +ecause ; = is a forei'n corporation and is not doin' +usiness in t!e P!ilippines. 9!e trial court deferred t!e resolution of t!e motion for dismissal until after trial on t!e merits for t!e reason t!at

t!e 'rounds advanced +% ; = did not seem indu+ita+le. ; = appealed said order to t!e C0. 9!e C0 resolved t!at ; = )as not doin' +usiness in t!e countr% and t!erefore <urisdiction over it could not !ave +een ac4uired t!rou'! t!e service of summons on D92 and it dismissed t!e petition. 2ssue: =M3 ; = is doin' +usiness in t!e P!ilippines so as to ena+le t!e court to ac4uire <urisdiction over it t!rou'! t!e service of summons on t!e D92. Be2d: R0 5/72 enumerates )!at acts are considered as Cdoin' +usinessD. (ection .,d- enumeratin' suc! acts includes t!e p!rase Cappointin'

representatives or distri+utors in t!e P!ilippinesD +ut not )!en t!e representative or distri+utor CtransactsD +usiness in !is o)n name for !is o)n account. 2n t!e case at +ar, petitioner is private respondent ; =As a'ent and not merel% a +ro*er. 9!e record reveals t!at private respondent e8ercised control over petitionerAs activities as a dealer and made re'ular inspections of petitionerAs premises to enforce its standards. (ince ; = is considered as doin' +usiness in t!e P!ilippines, t!e trial court validl% ac4uired <urisdiction over it +% virtue of t!e service of summons on t!e D92. 1urt!ermore, it is no) settled t!at, for

purposes of !avin' summons served on a forei'n corporation in accordance )it! t!e Rules of Court, it is sufficient t!at it +e alle'ed in t!e complaint t!at t!e forei'n corporation is doin' +usiness in t!e P!ilippines. 9!e court need not 'o +e%ond t!e alle'ations in t!e complaint in order to determine )!et!er or not it ac4uired <urisdiction. (uc! determination t!at t!e forei'n corporation is doin' +usiness in t!e P!ilippines is onl% tentative and onl% for t!e purpose of ena+lin' t!e court to ac4uire <urisdiction. 0 contrar% determination ma% +e made +ased on t!e courtAs findin's or evidence presented

AFILENT D.. INTEFRATEE .ILICON .eave a co++e&t :GI,4N2 24$<N','GI4S SING:P'R4 &P24( ,2+., )!. IN24GR:24+ SI,I$'N 24$<N','GB P<I,IPPIN4S $'RP et al G.R. No. 15G618 :pril 1G, 9HHG FACTSA Petitioner :-ilent i! a "orei-n orporation, 3#i #, b% it! o3n admi!!ion, i! not li en!ed to do bu!ine!! in t#e P#ilippine!. Re!pondent Inte-rated Sili on i! a pri)ate dome!ti orporation, 1HHI

"orei-n o3ned, 3#i # i! en-a-ed in t#e bu!ine!! o" manu"a turin- and a!!emblinele troni ! omponent!. 2#e .uridi al relation amont#e )ariou! partie! in t#i! a!e an be tra ed to a 5-%ear Jalue :dded :!!embl% Ser)i e! :-reement &J::S:(, bet3een Inte-rated Sili on and <P-Sin-apore. @nder t#e term! o" t#e J::S:, Inte-rated Sili on 3a! to lo all% manu"a ture and a!!emble "iber opti ! "or e6port to <P-Sin-apore. <PSin-apore, "or it! part, 3a! to

on!i-n ra3 material! to Inte-rated Sili on. 2#e J::S: #ad a "i)e-%ear term 3it# a pro)i!ion "or annual rene3al b% mutual 3ritten on!ent. ,ater, 3it# t#e on!ent o" Inte-rated Sili on, <P-Sin-apore a!!i-ned all it! ri-#t! and obli-ation! in t#e J::S: to :-ilent. ,ater, Inte-rated Sili on "iled a omplaint "or 0Spe i"i Per"orman e and +ama-e!1 a-ain!t :-ilent and it! o""i er!. It alle-ed t#at :-ilent brea #ed t#e partie!D oral

a-reement to e6tend t#e J::S:. :-ilent "iled a !eparate omplaint a-ain!t Inte-rated Sili on "or 0Spe i"i Per"orman e, Re o)er% o" Po!!e!!ion, and Sum o" Mone% 3it# Reple)in, Preliminar% Mandator% In.un tion, and +ama-e!1. Re!pondent! "iled a M2+ in t#e 9nd a!e, on t#e -round! o" la 5 o" :-ilentD! le-al apa it% to !ue? liti! pendentia? "orum !#oppin-? and "ailure to !tate a au!e o" a tion.

2#e trial ourt denied t#e M2+ and -ranted petitioner :-ilentD! appli ation "or a 3rit o" reple)in. 8it#out "ilin- a MR, re!pondent! "iled a petition "or ertiorari 3it# t#e $:. 2#e $: -ranted re!pondent!D petition "or ertiorari, !et a!ide t#e a!!ailed 'rder o" t#e trial ourt &den%in- t#e M2+( and ordered t#e di!mi!!al o" t#e 9nd a!e. <en e, t#e in!tant petition. ISSUEA 8'N an unli en!ed "orei-n orporation not doinbu!ine!! in t#e P#ilippine!

la 5! t#e le-al apa it% to "ile !uit. HELDA 2#e petition i! GR:N24+. 2#e +e i!ion o" t#e $: 3#i # di!mi!!ed t#e 9nd a!e i! R4J4RS4+ and S42 :SI+4. 2#e 'rder den%in- t#e M2+ i! R4INS2:24+. :-ilentD! appli ation "or a 8rit o" Reple)in i! GR:N24+. N' : "orei-n orporation 3it#out a li en!e i! not ip!o "a to in apa itated "rom brin-in- an a tion in P#ilippine ourt!. : li en!e i! ne e!!ar%

onl% i" a "orei-n orporation i! 0tran!a tin-1 or 0doinbu!ine!!1 in t#e ountr%. 2#e $orporation $ode pro)ide!A Se . 1;;. +oin- bu!ine!! 3it#out a li en!e. F No "orei-n orporation tran!a tinbu!ine!! in t#e P#ilippine! 3it#out a li en!e, or it! !u e!!or! or a!!i-n!, !#all be permitted to maintain or inter)ene in an% a tion, !uit or pro eedin- in an% ourt or admini!trati)e a-en % o" t#e P#ilippine!? but !u # orporation ma% be !ued or pro eeded a-ain!t be"ore

P#ilippine ourt! or admini!trati)e tribunal! on an% )alid au!e o" a tion re o-nized under P#ilippine la3!. 2#e a"orementioned pro)i!ion pre)ent! an unli en!ed "orei-n orporation 0doin- bu!ine!!1 in t#e P#ilippine! "rom a e!!in- our ourt!. CIn a number o" a!e!, #o3e)er, 3e #a)e #eld t#at an unli en!ed "orei-n orporation doin- bu!ine!! in t#e P#ilippine! ma% brin- !uit in P#ilippine ourt! a-ain!t a P#ilippine itizen or entit% 3#o

#ad ontra ted 3it# and bene"ited "rom !aid orporation. Su # a !uit i! premi!ed on t#e do trine o" e!toppel. : part% i! e!topped "rom #allen-in- t#e per!onalit% o" a orporation a"ter #a)in- a 5no3led-ed t#e !ame b% enterin- into a ontra t 3it# it. 2#i! do trine o" e!toppel to den% orporate e6i!ten e and apa it% applie! to "orei-n a! 3ell a! dome!ti orporation!. 2#e appli ation o" t#i! prin iple pre)ent! a per!on ontra tin- 3it# a "orei-n orporation "rom later

ta5in- ad)anta-e o" it! non omplian e 3it# t#e !tatute! #ie"l% in a!e! 3#ere !u # per!on #a! re ei)ed t#e bene"it! o" t#e ontra t.E 2#e prin iple! re-ardin- t#e ri-#t o" a "orei-n orporation to brin- !uit in P#ilippine ourt! ma% t#u! be onden!ed in "our !tatement!A i" a "orei-n orporation doe! bu!ine!! in t#e P#ilippine! 3it#out a li en!e, it annot !ue be"ore t#e P#ilippine ourt!? i" a "orei-n orporation i! not doin- bu!ine!! in t#e

P#ilippine!, it need! no li en!e to !ue be"ore P#ilippine ourt! on an i!olated tran!a tion or on a au!e o" a tion entirel% independent o" an% bu!ine!! tran!a tion? i" a "orei-n orporation doe! bu!ine!! in t#e P#ilippine! 3it#out a li en!e, a P#ilippine itizen or entit% 3#i # #a! ontra ted 3it# !aid orporation ma% be e!topped "rom #allen-in- t#e "orei-n orporationD! orporate per!onalit% in a !uit brou-#t be"ore P#ilippine ourt!? and

i" a "orei-n orporation doe! bu!ine!! in t#e P#ilippine! 3it# t#e re/uired li en!e, it an !ue be"ore P#ilippine ourt! on an% tran!a tion. KK 2#e #allen-e to :-ilentD! le-al apa it% to "ile !uit #in-e! on 3#et#er or not it i! doin- bu!ine!! in t#e P#ilippine!. <o3e)er, t#ere i! no de"initi)e rule on 3#at on!titute! 0doin-1, 0en-a-inin1, or 0tran!a tin-1 bu!ine!! in t#e P#ilippine!. 2#e $orporation $ode it!el" i!

!ilent a! to 3#at a t! on!titute doin- or tran!a tinbu!ine!! in t#e P#ilippine!. CLuri!pruden e #a! it, #o3e)er, t#at t#e term >implie! a ontinuit% o" ommer ial dealin-! and arran-ement!, and ontemplate!, to t#at e6tent, t#e per"orman e o" a t! or 3or5! or t#e e6er i!e o" !ome o" t#e "un tion! normall% in ident to or in pro-re!!i)e pro!e ution o" t#e purpo!e and !ub.e t o" it! or-anization.>

In t#e Ment#olatum a!e t#i! $ourt di! our!ed on t#e t3o -eneral te!t! to determine 3#et#er or not a "orei-n orporation an be on!idered a! >doin- bu!ine!!> in t#e P#ilippine!. 2#e "ir!t o" t#e!e i! t#e !ub!tan e te!t, t#u!A 2#e true te!t C"or doinbu!ine!!E, #o3e)er, !eem! to be 3#et#er t#e "orei-n orporation i! ontinuin- t#e bod% o" t#e bu!ine!! or enterpri!e "or 3#i # it 3a! or-anized or 3#et#er it #a! !ub!tantiall% retired "rom it and turned it o)er to anot#er.

2#e !e ond te!t i! t#e ontinuit% te!t, e6pre!!ed t#u!A 2#e term Cdoin- bu!ine!!E implie! a ontinuit% o" ommer ial dealin-! and arran-ement!, and ontemplate!, to t#at e6tent, t#e per"orman e o" a t! or 3or5! or t#e e6er i!e o" !ome o" t#e "un tion! normall% in ident to, and in t#e pro-re!!i)e pro!e ution o", t#e purpo!e and ob.e t o" it! or-anization.E KK 2#e *orei-n In)e!tment! : t

o" 1991 &t#e 0*I:1? Republi : t No. 7HG9, a! amended(, de"ine! 0doin- bu!ine!!1 a! "ollo3!A Se . ;, par. &d(. 2#e p#ra!e 0doin- bu!ine!!1 !#all in lude !oli itin- order!, !er)i e ontra t!, openin- o""i e!, 3#et#er alled 0liai!on1 o""i e! or bran #e!? appointinrepre!entati)e! or di!tributor! domi iled in t#e P#ilippine! or 3#o in an% alendar %ear !ta% in t#e ountr% "or a period or period! totalin- one #undred ei-#t% &18H( da%! or more? parti ipatin- in t#e

mana-ement, !uper)i!ion or ontrol o" an% dome!ti bu!ine!!, "irm, entit%, or orporation in t#e P#ilippine!? and an% ot#er a t or a t! t#at impl% a ontinuit% o" ommer ial dealin-! or arran-ement!, and ontemplate to t#at e6tent t#e per"orman e o" a t! or 3or5!, or t#e e6er i!e o" !ome o" t#e "un tion! normall% in ident to, and in t#e pro-re!!i)e pro!e ution o", ommer ial -ain or o" t#e purpo!e and ob.e t o" t#e bu!ine!! or-anization.

:n anal%!i! o" t#e rele)ant a!e la3, in on.un tion 3it# Se 1 o" t#e IRR o" t#e *I: &a! amended b% R: 8179(, 3ould demon!trate t#at t#e a t! enumerated in t#e J::S: do not on!titute 0doinbu!ine!!1 in t#e P#ilippine!. 2#e !aid pro)i!ion pro)ide! t#at t#e "ollo3in- !#all not be deemed 0doin- bu!ine!!1A &1( Mere in)e!tment a! a !#are#older b% a "orei-n entit% in dome!ti orporation! dul% re-i!tered to do bu!ine!!, andMor t#e e6er i!e o" ri-#t! a! !u # in)e!tor?

&9( <a)in- a nominee dire tor or o""i er to repre!ent it! intere!t in !u # orporation? &;( :ppointin- a repre!entati)e or di!tributor domi iled in t#e P#ilippine! 3#i # tran!a t! bu!ine!! in t#e repre!entati)eD! or di!tributorD! o3n name and a ount? &G( 2#e publi ation o" a -eneral ad)erti!ement t#rou-# an% print or broad a!t media? &5( Maintainin- a !to 5 o" -ood! in t#e P#ilippine! !olel%

"or t#e purpo!e o" #a)in- t#e !ame pro e!!ed b% anot#er entit% in t#e P#ilippine!? &6( $on!i-nment b% a "orei-n entit% o" e/uipment 3it# a lo al ompan% to be u!ed in t#e pro e!!in- o" produ t! "or e6port? &7( $olle tin- in"ormation in t#e P#ilippine!? and &8( Per"ormin- !er)i e! au6iliar% to an e6i!tini!olated ontra t o" !ale 3#i # are not on a ontinuin- ba!i!, !u # a! in!tallin- in t#e P#ilippine! ma #iner% it #a!

manu"a tured or e6ported to t#e P#ilippine!, !er)i in- t#e !ame, trainin- dome!ti 3or5er! to operate it, and !imilar in idental !er)i e!. 7% and lar-e, to on!titute 0doin- bu!ine!!1, t#e a ti)it% to be underta5en in t#e P#ilippine! i! one t#at i! "or pro"it-ma5in-. 7% t#e lear term! o" t#e J::S:, :-ilentD! a ti)itie! in t#e P#ilippine! 3ere on"ined to &1( maintainin- a !to 5 o" -ood! in t#e P#ilippine! !olel% "or t#e purpo!e o" #a)in- t#e !ame pro e!!ed b% Inte-rated

Sili on? and &9( on!i-nment o" e/uipment 3it# Inte-rated Sili on to be u!ed in t#e pro e!!in- o" produ t! "or e6port. :! !u #, 3e #old t#at, ba!ed on t#e e)iden e pre!ented t#u! "ar, :-ilent annot be deemed to be 0doin- bu!ine!!1 in t#e P#ilippine!. Re!pondent!D ontention t#at :-ilent la 5! t#e le-al apa it% to "ile !uit i! t#ere"ore de)oid o" merit. :! a "orei-n orporation not doinbu!ine!! in t#e P#ilippine!, it needed no li en!e be"ore it an !ue be"ore our ourt!.