Sie sind auf Seite 1von 9

UNIVERSITY OF SAN JOSE RECOLETOS School of Law School Year 2017 - 2018 1 st Semester

COURSE SYLLABUS

Course Title: CONFLICT OF LAWS

No. of u nits: 2 units

Instructor :

Atty. Julius Christian Reyes

I. COURSE DESCRIPTION:

The study of Conflict of Laws have become relevant due to the growing inter - dependence of many states in busi ness and commercial activities. Most of these business transactions involve individuals from different states that cut across territorial lines and call for the application of d ifferent municipal laws . This course will study on legal transactions involving foreign elements with emphasis on the choice of law, including problems on Jurisdiction, Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign J udgments. This course will deeply study on Phil ippine Internal Laws that governs conflict of law situations, such as, Citizenship and Domicile, Nationality and Domicile of Corporations, Contracts, Wills and Succession, Property, Torts and Damages, Divorce, Declaration of Nullity of Marriage , Annulment, Trademarks, Patents and Copyrights and Judicial Jurisdiction, Forum Convenience, Venue and Summons.

At the end of the course, the students are expected to learn the different rules on conflict of laws and the students are expected to have acquired gainfu l insights and understanding on Private International Law. The students are expected to interpret properly the legal provisions of the law and apply the said learning s in answering bar questions and legal problems .

II. TEACHING METHODOLOGY

§ Lecture - reci tation

§ Case Analysis

§ Practical Class Analysis

III. INSTRUCTION

The student s are instructed to read the chapter/s assigned on a particular week/session. During the class , the professor will conduct lecture and recitation. The students are expected to ha ve read and have grasp ed through on the topic/subtopics assigned thereto . Case analysis will be made simultaneously based on the assigned Supreme Court decide d cases .

IV. COURSE OUTLINE

WEEK/SESSION

TOPICS/SUBTOPICS

Preliminary Period

A. Definition: Conflict of Laws

P Week 1 Chapt ers I and II

 

Peculiar Terms to Conflict of Laws

B. Application of Conflict of Laws in the Philippines

Introduction to Conflict of Laws And Choice of Law

C. Foreign Element

 

Saudi Arabian Airlines vs. Court of Appeals 297 SCRA 469 ( 1998)

 

D. Ways of Dealing with Conflict of Laws Cases:

 

Jurisdiction

Choice of Law

Enforcement of Judgment

Cases:

Phases in Conflicts Resolution

 

Hasegawa vs. Kitamura, G.R. No. 149177, November 23, 2007

Raytheon International, Inc. vs. Rouzie, Jr. G.R. No. 162 894, February 26, 2008

HSBC vs. Sherman 176 SCRA 331

P. Week s 2 - 3

A.

Characterization and Points of Contracts

Continuation of Chapter II Choice of Law

Saudi Arabian Airlines vs. Court of Appeals 297 SCRA 469 (1998)

B.

Choice of Applicab le Law Cases:

 

Aznar vs. Garcia, January 31, 1963

Bellis vs. Bellis, June 6, 1967

Cadalin et. Al. vs. POEA Administrator, December, 5, 1994

Bank of America NT & Asia vs. American Realty Corp., December 29, 1999, 321 SCRA 659

Dacasin vs. Dacasin, Febru ary 5,

 

2010

 

Hasegawa vs. Kitamura, G.R. No. 149177, November 23, 2007

Zapanta vs. Local Civil Registrar of Davao 237 SCRA 25

Norma A. Del Socorro vs. Ernest Johan Van Wilsen, December 10,

 

2014

B.

Agreement of the Parties

Cadalin vs. POEA 238 SCRA 721

Hongkon g and Shanghai Banking Corp. vs. Sherman 176 SCRA 331

C.

Substance vs. Procedural Principle

 

D. Center of Gravity Doctrine

E. Renvoi

 
 

Aznar vs. Garcia,

F. Lex Fori

G. Applicability of Philippine Law and its Exceptions

 

Bank of America vs. American Realty Corp. 321 SCRA 659

H. Proof and Authentication of Foreign Law

 

Wildvalley Shipping vs. CA, October 6, 2000

Manufacturers Hanover Trust Co. vs. Guerrero, February 19, 2003

Edi - staff Builders International vs. NLRC, October 26, 2007

Exceptions: Norse Management Co. vs. National Se amen Board, September 30, 1982

P Week 4

A. The Nationality Principle

B. Citizenship and Modes of Acquisition

Chapter III Citizenship and Domicle

 

Bengzon III vs. HRET, May 7, 2001

Poe - Llamanzares vs. COMELEC, March 8, 2016

 

Djumantan vs. Domingo

C. Election of Citi zenship

D. Dual Citizenship

E. Loss and Reacquisition of Filipino Citizenship

 

Mercado vs. Manzano, 307 SCRA 630

Valles vs. COMELEC 337 SCRA 543

Yu vs. Defensor - Santiago, 169 SCRA

 

363

 

Board of Immigration Commissioner vs. Go, 25 SCRA 890

F. Eligibility for Elective Office

 

Ugdoracion, Jr. vs. COMELEC

Tecson vs. COMELEC, March 3, 2004

G. RA 9225: Citizenship Retention and Re -

acquisition Act

 

Jacot vs. Dal, November 27, 2008

Sobejana - Condon vs. COMELEC, August 10, 2012

Maquiling vs. COMELEC, April 16,

 

2013

 

Arnado vs. COMELE C, August 18,

 

2015

 

Reacquisition vs. Retention: David vs. Agbay, March 18, 2015

H. Practice of Profession

In re: Petition to re - acquire the

   

privilege to practice law in the Philippines, July 24, 2012

DOMICILE

 

I. Lex Domicilii Rule

J. Kinds of Domicile

K. Rules on Do micile and Residence

Romualdez - Marcos vs. COMELEC, 248 SCRA 300

Jalosjos vs. COMELEC, April 24, 2012

Caballero vs. COMELEC, September 22, 2015

Caasi vs. CA, November 8, 1990

Coquilla vs. COMELEC, July 31, 2002

L. RA 9189, as amended by RA 10590 “ An act prov iding for a System of Overseas Absentee Voting by Qualified Citizens of the Philippines Abroad.

M. Venue in Estate Proceedings

Jao vs. CA, May 29, 2002

San Luis vs. San Luis, February 6,

 

2007

PRELIM EXAM

 

Midterm

Corporation:

 

M Week 5 CHAPTER V

A. Conflict Problems on Corporation

B. Domestic and Foreign Corporation

Joint Venture Agreements

Related Laws:

 

Retail Trade Liberalization Act

RA 7042, Foreign Investment Act of

 

1991

o

E.O. 184 (Promulgating the 10 th Regular Foreign Investment Negative Lis t

Cases:

Narra Nickel Mining & Dev. Corp. vs.

 

Redmont Capital Consolidated Mining Corp. April 21, 2014, G.R. No.

195580

DOJ Opinion 20 Series of 2015

Roy III vs. Herbosa, Nov. 22, 2016 G.R. No. 207246

Contract

 

A. Law on Contract

B. Choice of Law by the Parti es in a

   

Contract

Korean Technologies Co., Ltd. Vs. Lerma, G.R. No. 143581, January 7,

2008.

Bagong Filipinas Overseas Corp. vs. NLRC 135 SCRA 278

Pakistan International Airlines vs. Ople 190 SCRA 90 (1990)

United Airlines, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 124110, April 20,

 

2001.

C. Exceptions to law chosen by the Parties

D. Decapage

 

Buchanan vs. Doe, 431 S.E. 2d 289

E. No Agreement as to Choice of Law

F. Lex Loci Contractus or Place of Performance

Triple Eight Integrated Services vs. NLRC, 299 SCRA 469

Hasegawa vs. Kitamura, Novemer 23, 2007

G. Warsaw Convention

Santos III vs. Northwest Orient Airlines 210 SCRA 256

United Airlines vs. Uy 318 SCRA 576

M

Week 6

Wills and Succession

 

A. Extrinsic and Intrinsic Validity of Wills

CHAPTER VI

 

Vda. De Perez vs. Tolete, 232 SCRA

 

722

 

Miciano vs. Brimo, 50 PHIL 867

B. Probate of Wills

C. Law on Successional Rights

M

Week 7

Property

 

CHAPTER VII

A. Law of the Country where the Property is Situated ( Lex Loci or Lex Loci Rei Sitae)

B. Conflict of Laws in Real Property situated in another country

Laurel vs. Garcia 187 SCRA 797

The Holy See vs. Rosario

C. Personal Property

Tayag vs. Benguet Consolidated, November 29, 1968

D. Philippine Law on Ownership of Real Property

 

Sec. 7, Article XII, 1987 Constitution

Ramirez vs. Vda. de Ramirez, 111 SCRA 70 4

Matthews vs. Taylor, June 22, 2009

   

Cheesman vs. IAC, 193 SCRA 93

Llantino vs. Co Liong Chong, 188 SCRA 592

E.

Property Rights of Foreigners Living in with Filipino Citizens

Elena Buenaventura Muller vs. Helmut Muller, G.R. No. 149615, August 2006

Borromeo v s. Descallar, February 24,

 

2009

 

MIDTERM EXAM

 

M W eek s 8 - 9 CHAPTER VII

A. Law Governing Torts

 

Saudi Arabian Airlines vs. Court of Appeals, 297 SCRA 469

TORTS AND DAMAGES

a. Lex loci comi s i i

 

Wildvalley Shipping Co., vs. CA

 

342

SCRA 213

 

b. State of the Most Signif icant Contract Rule

 

Saudi Arabian Airlines vs. CA, supra

 

c. Agreement of the Parties as to Applicable Law

 

Norse Management Co. vs. NSB,

 

117

SCRA 487

 

Suzara vs. Benipayo 176 SCRA

 

465

B. Overseas Employment of Filipino Workers

 

a)

The Kilberg Doctrine

 

Eastern Shipping Lines vs. POEA,

 

170

SCRA 54

 

b)

Carriage of Good By Sea Act

 

Mitsui O.S.K. Lines vs. CA, 287 SCRA 366

 

c)

Law of Country of Registry of Vessel

 

People vs. Wong Cheng, 46 PHIL. 729

National Dev. Co. vs. CA 164 SCRA 593

 

d)

Criminal Jurisdiction

 

AAA vs. BBB, G.R. No. 212 448, Jan. 11, 2018

 

e)

Limited Liability Clause

 

Everett Steamship Corp. vs. CA

 

297

SCRA 593

 

f)

Lex Loci Delicti vs. Most Significant Relationship

 

Babcock vs. Jackson, 12 N.Y. 2d 473, 1963

M Week 10

A. Foreign Marriages of Filipino

B. Foreign Divorces obtained by Filipinos abroad

Marriage, Divorce Declaration of Nullity of Marriage, Annulm ent of Voidable Marriage and Legal Separation

 

Republic vs. Marelyn Manalo, April 24, 2018

C. Foreign Divorces obtained by foreigners married to Filipinos

   

Van Dorn vs. Romillo, 139 SCRA 159

Pilapil vs. Ibay - Somera, 174 SCRA

 

653

D. Foreign Divorces obtained by Filipinos

 

who had been naturalized in other countries and who had divorced their Filipino wives thereafter.

Republic vs. Iyoy, September 21,

 

2005

 

Llorente vs. CA and Llorente November 23, 2000

Republic vs. Orbecido, October 5,

 

2005

 

Roehr vs. Rodgriguez, June 20, 2003

Corpuz vs.Tirol - Sto. Tomas, August 11, 2010.

Fujiki vs. Marinay, June 26, 2013

Week 11

A. Rights of Foreign Nationals

B. Legal Remedies of Foreign Nationals

TRADEMARKS, PATENTS AND COPYRIGHTS

C. Infringement of Trademarks

D. Infringement of Trade Name

E. Unfair Competition

F. Well - Known Trademarks

 

Fredco Manufacturing vs. Harvard University, G.R. No. 185917, June 1,

 

2011

G. Patents

 

H. Copyrights

Week 12

Juris diction, Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgment A. Jurisdiction

a. Actions in personam or in rem

Judicial Jurisdiction, Forum Non Convenience, Venue, Summons

 

Bancodo Brasil vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 121576, June 16, 2000

 

b. Forum Non Conveniens

 

Bank of America NT and SA vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 120135, Ma rch 31, 2003.

Pioneer Concrete Philippines, Inc. vs. Todaro, G.R. No. 154830, June 08, 2007.

B.

Foreign Judgment and Res Judicata

   

Perkins vs. Benguet

Consolidated Mining 93 Phil.

1034

Perkins vs. Roxas 72 Phil. 514

C. Effect of Foreign Judgment and Requirement s

 

Mijares vs. Ranada, G.R. No. 139235, April 12, 2005

Oil and Natural Gas Commission vs. CA, G.R. No. 114323, July 23, 1998

Philsec Investment vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 103493, June 19, 1997.

D. Repelling a Foreign Judgment

F Week 13

A. Law of the Case

International Legal Signification of Doctrines as Applied 1

Marcos Jr. vs. Rep. of the Philippines, 671 SCRA 280

B. Lex Fori

 

Northwest Airlines, Inc. vs. CA, 241 SCRA 192

C. Forum Shopping

D. Sui Generis

E. International Law, part of the National Laws

Week 14

A. Extradition

 

Wright vs. CA 235 SCRA 341

Inte r - Country Relations and Specialized Agencies

Government of the US vs. Purganan, Sept. 24, 2002

Secretary of Justice vs. Lantion, 343 SCRA 377

B. Immunity from Suit

C. Immunity of Specialized Agencies and their Officials

 

Int ernational Catholic Migration Commission vs. Calleja, 190 SCRA

 

130

FINAL EXAM

 

III. REFERENCES AND MATERIALS

Agpalo, Ruben E . Conflict of Laws (Private International Law) . Manila, Philippines Rex Bookstore, 200 4 ed.

Benito, Galahad R.A. Conflict of La ws. Manila, Philippines, Rex Bookstore, 2016.

1 Aguilar, Narciso M. Conflict of Laws, 2013 ed. Central Bookstore, Quezon City, Philippines. 2013.

Aguilar, Narciso M. Conflict of Laws. Quezon City, Philippines , Central Bookstore, 2013 ed.

Please note that the professor reserv e s the right to amend and provide additional cases and other reading materials .

IV. CRITERIA FOR GRADING

Students will be assessed through series of examinations and class activities, which are divided into two (2) components , to wit: Major Examinations and Class Standing Activities . Major Examinations include Prelim, Midterm and Fi nal Examination s. Class standing activitie s include the following: q uizzes, graded recitation, attendance and case digest. Grade is c omputed as follows:

Major Examination (70%)

Activity

Row Score (sample only)

Equivalent Grade

Prelim

100/100

1.0

Midte rm

100/100

1.0

Finals

100/100

1.0

Average

   

Class Standing (30%)

Activity

Score

 

Equivalent

Remarks

Attendance

10

     

Quizzes

4

0

 

Quizzes are divided into Prelim, Midterm and Finals

Graded Oral Examination

20

     

Case Digest

30

   

10 points per term

Total

100

/100

1.

0

 

Computation of the Final Grade:

Final Grade: = Average Equivalent Grade for Major Exam * 70% (A) = Equivalent Grade for Class Standing * 30% (B)

Final Grade = A + B ;

Temporary Midterm Grade is based on the average equivalent grade for Prelim an d Midterm Major Examinations only.

V. COURSE POLICY

University and School of Law policies are fully implemented in the class;