NXT MTG

- Saudia - think of hte conditions by which the toritous act in one state be the
cause of recovery in another state
- airline cases
> KLM - guatalahara protocol - amendment of the warsaw convention governing
international airlines (citation of the guatalahara protocol is in the librabry -
read it. why? it was concluded by the parties to the warsaw convention after the sc
decided the klm case and it is important to consider because it is cited by the sc,
it would have cited the same provision instead of relying merely on its native
logic)
> China airlines - peculiarity of teh factual setting whereby the passenger
was transferred from economy to first class and yet he wanted to recover;

++++++++time v reyes
++++++++property (+categories of property 414, 415, 416CC) + 2 catecories of
personal property, choses of action and choses of possession; see how it figures
out in the general classification of property
++++++++succession (16par1, 16par2) (correlation on 17par1 on wills in relation to
415416417 of the cc, in addition to 818,819 on joint wills) (focus on aspects
pertaining to conflict situations)

-----------------------------------------

CADALIN
- case good for pril, why? -
- how did the court regard it as procedural?
- court applied public policy when there being no statutory basis
- what about art. 9? - there is a law on borrowing statute (rule 48)
- is application of art 9 good justification by the SC to have used public policy?
- not right.
- rule now on procedure in the ph from the view of pril - can be still
procedural/substantive

VIRJEN

SAUDI ARABIA
- is this a tort case? - yes.
- is this the same as qd? -
- didn't apply lex loci delicti commissi; what is the specific tortious act
committed? - when morada was made to stand to trial without her knowing

lldc
1. that the tortious act was committed in state x
2. but the recovery for damages is sought in state y

possibility
1. in both x and y, the tortious act is not valid; in the sense that damages may be
recovered
2. there has to be in x and y, the same element for the recovery of damages

- lldc is not applicable; it is rare that two states have the same law for the same
tortious act

analysis of saudi arabia

(whether the court resolved this case in the view of pril or not)
- did the court resolve this as a conflict case? -
- choice of law problem (whether ph law or foreign law)
- in cases of conflicts, is the court always compelled to use conflict law? no. may
choose domestic.

- did the court make a specific determination why saudi law does not apply

- did the court explain why it did not apply delicti comissi? no. why? so what is
its importance, why did the court make mention of it?
> tortious act may have been committed in state a but damages is sought to be
recovered in an entirely different state b
> no case to cite re: lex loci delicti, all we have are citation; it is
complex
> guideline: delicti commicci applies if a tortituous act is committed in a
but recovery may be done in a different state; but it is necessary for the recovery
??? | commentators do not tell us it should replicate ??? perfect if same tortious
act is punishable in the second state (sometimes different ata so that's where the
problem is?)

-------
synthesis
general process by which conflic problems may be resolved under pril:
1. JURISDICTION
- w/n court has jurisdiction?
- court may dismiss the case based on forum non convenience
- or simply no jurisdiction on technical grounds under the rules of court
2. if there is jurisdiction - CLASSIFICATION - that the court will determine if the
problem deals with ph law (property, family, contract, etc.) - definite
classification is imp to determine the specific rules to apply
3. CHOICE OF LAW - step to discuss
- ph law or - if ph, court will apply ph law
- foreign law - if foreign, court will require proof of foreign law -> if not
proved, court will resort to processual presumption -> which will lead to the
application that foreign law is similar or identical to PH law so PH LAW APPLIES
=> IN SAUDI, morada was
*doesn't mean foreign law always apply
4. LEX CAUSAE APPLIED
- lex causae - the law that will resolve the case; either foreign or ph law
in relation to the discretion of the court
- the application of the law teh court has chosen to apply

-------------
KLM (judicial prophecy XD)
- how the reasoning of the court relate to the guatalahara protocol?

guata- even if the third party carrier isn't an actual party to the contract,
performs part of the contract of carriage contemplated, then it is considered a
part of the contract