Classes of movables

Choses in possession: tangible physical objects

The General rule for choses in possession is that the law of the state where
the property is located at the time of the transaction in question determines
the creation and transfer of interests
Lex rei sitae (Article. 16, CC)

Commerce depends on the protection of the purchaser who

must buy without investigation of the applicable law, at least
not beyond where the goods are located
This is easily seen in cases where the movable is delivered as
part of the transaction, because the situs is the clear focal point
of the transaction however where the delivery is made , it is
suggested that the proper law of the transaction is the law
most significantly related to the issue presented.

EXCEPTION: same as those for real property EXCEPT that in the example
concerning mortgage, the same must be changed to pledge of personal
property)

The goods in transit

- The practice of treating the document of title to the goods as representative
of the goods themselves mitigates the potential difficulties because oin effect
the situs is that of the document of title but Cheshire maintains that no one
law can be made the exclusive arbiter of the disputes arising out of transfer
in goods in transit.

Means of transportation or conveyances

Trains
Motor cars
Vessels
Aircraft
Generally have fixed station or resting places where they are resident even if
the temporarily absent.

Vessels ~Law of the flag (or in some cases, place of registry)

Other means ~Law of the depot (storage place for supplies or
resting place)
Loss, destruction, deterioration - Law of the destination (Article.
1753, CC)
Validity & effect of the seizure of the goods Locus regit actum
(where seized) because said place is their temporary situs
Disposition or alienage of the goods Lex loci volutantis or lex loci
intentionis because here there is a contract
 Choses in action; debts, patents, copyright, goodwill, trademarks, trade
names shares of stocks

equivalent to intangible movables.

They are roughly divided into three classes
1. Debt or simple right of action arising from loans or ordinary
commercial contracts- the law on voluntary transfer of debts is still
unsettled.

First theory: holds that voluntary transfer or assignment of debt should be

governed by the law of the domicile of the owner although modern doctrine
has been abandoned this theory.

Second theory is that the assignment of a debt is governed by the law of the
place where the assignment is executed However the place of the assignment
may be the least important of all points of contract and may be entirely
fortuitous.

Where debtor may be effectively served with summons (usually the

domicile)

2. Negotiable instruments

TWO IMPORTANT QUESTION:

First, What law decides whether a given instrument is a negotiable or not?
Second, What law determines how negotiable instruments and the rights
merged in them are to be transferred and what are the effects of a transfer?
(for example, in the case of a Swedish bill of exchange, Swedish law
determines its negotiability)

3. Corporate stocks or shares

QUESTIONS:
What law governs the transfer of shares of stock?
Where the transfer or assignment has the consequences of the
changing relations of the parties with the corporation, the law of the place of
the incorporation governs because the interest of the stockholders can be
effected only through the corporation itself by a transfer of ownership on the
books as embodied in the corporation code.
SALVACION VS. CENTRAL BANK
KAREN E. SALVACION, minor, thru Federico N. Salvacion, Jr., father and Natural
Guardian, and Spouses FEDERICO N. SALVACION, JR., and EVELINA E.
SALVACION vs. CENTRAL BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES, CHINA BANKING
CORPORATION and GREG BARTELLI y NORTHCOTTG.R. No. 94723 August 21,
1997
FACTS: Greg Bartelli, an American tourist, was arrested for committing four counts
of rape and serious illegal detention against Karen Salvacion. Police recovered from
him several dollar checks and a dollar account in the China Banking Corp. He was,
however, able to escape from prison. In a civil case filed against him, the trial court
awarded Salvacion moral, exemplary and attorneys fees amounting to almost
P1,000,000.00.
Salvacion tried to execute the judgment on the dollar deposit of Bartelli with the
China Banking Corp. but the latter refused arguing that Section 11 of Central Bank
Circular No. 960 exempts foreign currency deposits from attachment, garnishment,
or any other order or process of any court, legislative body, government agency or
any administrative body whatsoever. Salvacion therefore filed this action for
declaratory relief in the Supreme Court.
ISSUE: Should Section 113 of Central Bank Circular No. 960 and Section 8 of
Republic Act No. 6426, as amended by PD 1246, otherwise known as the Foreign
Currency Deposit Act be made applicable to a foreign transient?
HELD: NO.
The provisions of Section 113 of Central Bank Circular No. 960 and PD No. 1246,
insofar as it amends Section 8 of Republic Act No. 6426, are hereby held to be
INAPPLICABLE to this case because of its peculiar circumstances. Respondents are
hereby required to comply with the writ of execution issued in the civil case and to
release to petitioners the dollar deposit of Bartelli in such amount as would satisfy
the judgment.
Supreme Court ruled that the questioned law makes futile the favorable judgment
and award of damages that Salvacion and her parents fully deserve. It then
proceeded to show that the economic basis for the enactment of RA No. 6426 is not
anymore present; and even if it still exists, the questioned law still denies those
entitled to due process of law for being unreasonable and oppressive. The intention
of the law may be good when enacted. The law failed to anticipate the iniquitous
effects producing outright injustice and inequality such as the case before us.
The SC adopted the comment of the Solicitor General who argued that the Offshore
Banking System and the Foreign Currency Deposit System were designed to draw
deposits from foreign lenders and investors and, subsequently, to give the latter
protection. However, the foreign currency deposit made by a transient or a tourist is
not the kind of deposit encouraged by PD Nos. 1034 and 1035 and given incentives
and protection by said laws because such depositor stays only for a few days in the
country and, therefore, will maintain his deposit in the bank only for a short time.
Considering that Bartelli is just a tourist or a transient, he is not entitled to the
protection of Section 113 of Central Bank Circular No. 960 and PD No. 1246 against
attachment, garnishment or other court processes.
Further, the SC said: In fine, the application of the law depends on the extent of its
justice. Eventually, if we rule that the questioned Section 113 of Central Bank
Circular No. 960 which exempts from attachment, garnishment, or any other order
or process of any court, legislative body, government agency or any administrative
body whatsoever, is applicable to a foreign transient, injustice would result
especially to a citizen aggrieved by a foreign guest like accused Greg Bartelli. This
would negate Article 10 of the New Civil Code which provides that in case of doubt
in the interpretation or application of laws, it is presumed that the lawmaking body
intended right and justice to prevail.
___________