col cases for midterms

8/12/2019 COL CASES for Midterms

1/11

Cadalin vs. POEA G.R. No. L-104776, Dec. 5, 1994

GENERAL RULE: A foreign procedural law will not be applied in the forum. EXCEP !"N: #hen the countr$ of the forum ha% a &borrowing %tatute'& the countr$ of

the forum will appl$ the foreign %tatute of limitation%. EXCEP !"N " (E EXCEP !"N: he court of the forum will not enforce an$

foreign claim obno)iou% to the forum*% public polic$.

AC!"#

Cadalin et al. are o+er%ea% contract wor,er% recruited b$ re%pondent-appellant A! C for it%accredited foreign principal' rown / Root' on +ariou% date% from 0123 to 0145. A% %uch' the$were all deplo$ed at +ariou% pro6ect% in %e+eral countrie% in the 7iddle Ea%t a% well a% in8outhea%t A%ia' in !ndone%ia and 7ala$%ia. he ca%e aro%e when their o+er%ea% emplo$ment

contract% were terminated e+en before their e)piration. Under ahrain law' where %ome of thecomplainant% were deplo$ed' the pre%cripti+e period for claim% ari%ing out of a contract ofemplo$ment i% one $ear.

$""%E#

#hether it i% the ahrain law on pre%cription of action ba%ed on the Amiri 9ecree No. 5of 012; or a Philippine law on pre%cription that %hall be the go+erning law

&ELD#

A% a general rule' a foreign procedural law will not be applied in the forum. Procedural matter%'%uch a% %er+ice of proce%%' 6oinder of action%' period and reborrowing %tatute.? 8aid %tatute ha% the practical effect oftreating the foreign %tatute of limitation a% one of %ub%tance. A >borrowing %tatute? direct% the%tate of the forum to appl$ the foreign %tatute of limitation% to the pending claim% ba%ed on aforeign law. #hile there are %e+eral ,ind% of >borrowing %tatute%'? one form pro+ide% that anaction barred b$ the law% of the place where it accrued' will not be enforced in the forum e+enthough the local %tatute ha% not run again%t it. 8ection @4 of our Code of Ci+il Procedure i% of thi%,ind. 8aid 8ection pro+ide%:
http://scire-licet.blogspot.com/2009/02/cadalin-vs-poea.htmlhttp://scire-licet.blogspot.com/2009/02/cadalin-vs-poea.html


2/11

>!f b$ the law% of the %tate or countr$ where the cau%e of action aro%e' the action i% barred' it i%al%o barred in the Philippine !%land%.?

!n the light of the 0142 Con%titution' howe+er' 8ection @4 cannot be enforced e) propio +igorein%ofar a% it ordain% the application in thi% 6uri%diction of 8ection 03; of the Amiri 9ecree No. 5

of 012;.

he court% of the forum will not enforce an$ foreign claim% obno)iou% to the forum % public polic$. o enforce the one-$ear pre%cripti+e period of the Amiri 9ecree No. 5 of 012; a%regard% the claim% in


3/11

he 8upreme Court held that the clau%e in the tran%action too, place in 8ingaporean %etting? and that the Boint and

8e+eral Guarantee contain% a choice-of-forum clau%e' the +er$ e%%ence of due proce%% dictate%that the %tipulation that > tHhi% guarantee and all right%' obligation% and liabilitie% ari%inghereunder %hall be con%trued and determined under and ma$ be enforced in accordance with thelaw% of the Republic of 8ingapore. #e hereb$ agree that the Court% in 8ingapore %hall ha+e

6uri%diction o+er all di%pute% ari%ing under thi% guarantee? be liberall$ con%trued. "ne ba%ic principle underlie% all rule% of 6uri%diction in !nternational Law: a 8tate doe% not ha+e 6uri%dictionin the ab%ence of %ome rea%onable ba%i% for e)erci%ing it' whether the proceeding% are in rem'


4/11


5/11

owned b$ Jilipino% i% inapplicable. #e %ee no point in belaboring whether or not thi% opinion i%correct. #h$ %hould we di%cu%% who can ac he term% re%idence and domicile might well be ta,en to mean the %ame thing' a place of permanent abode. ut domicile' a% ha% been %hown' ha% ac


6/11

continuing onl$ for the particular bu%ine%% in hand' not gi+ing up hi% former >home'? he couldnot be a domiciled New Oor,er. Acnational law? indicated in Article 0; of the Ci+il CodeFcannot'therefore' po%%ibl$ mean or appl$ to an$ general American law. 8o it can refer to no other thanthe pri+ate law of the 8tate of California.

!(e ne8 ; es ion is# /(a is (e la in Cali o)nia ove)nin (e dis osi ion o e)sonal)o e) !f there i% nolaw to the contrar$' in the place where per%onal propert$ i% %ituated' it i% deemed to follow the

per%on of it% owner' and i% go+erned b$ the law of hi% domicile.?

F.!t i% argued on e)ecutor % behalf that a% the decea%ed Chri%ten%en wa% a citi=en of the 8tate ofCalifornia' the internal law thereof %hould go+ern the determination of the +alidit$ of thete%tamentar$ pro+i%ion% of Chri%ten%en % will' %uch law being in force in the 8tate of Californiaof which Chri%ten%en wa% a citi=en. Appellant' on the other hand' in%i%t% that Article 1@; %hould

be applicable' and in accordance therewith and following the doctrine of ren+oi' the Ren+o$er? to %end bac,K or >#eiter+erwei%ung?

Another theor$' ,nown a% the >doctrine of ren+oi'? ha% been ad+anced. he theor$ of thedoctrine of ren+oi i% that the court of the forum' in determining the


7/11

into account the whole law of the other 6uri%diction' but al%o it% rule% a% to conflict of law%' andthen appl$ the law to the actual


8/11

"a di A)a:ian Ai)lines vs. CA G.R. No. 1++191, Oc . , 199

Buri%diction i% ba%ed on allegation% on the pleading

8tate of the 7o%t 8ignificant Relation%hip heor$ Conflict% of Law% Problem Point% of Contact

AC!"#

Plaintiff 7orada i% a flight attendant for defendant 8AU9!A % airline% ba%ed in Beddah. "n April2' 011M' while on a la$-o+er in Ba,arta' !ndone%ia' 7orada became a +ictim of attempted rape

b$ fellow crewmember%' hamer and Allah' who are both 8audi national%. he two weree+entuall$ arre%ted and deported bac, to 8audi Arabia while 7orada wa% tran%ferred to 7anila."n +ariou% date% after the incident' 7orada wa% %ummoned to Beddah b$ her emplo$er in order

to %ign document%' purporting to be %tatement% dropping the ca%e again%t hamer and Allah.(owe+er' it turned out that a ca%e wa% in fact filed again%t her before the 8audi court' which later found her guilt$ of D0 adulter$K D going to a di%co' dancing and li%tening to the mu%ic in+iolation of !%lamic law%K and D5 %ociali=ing with the male crew' in contra+ention of !%lamictradition.

(ence' 7orada filed thi% complaint for damage% ba%ed on Article 0 of the New Ci+il Codeagain%t 8AU9!A and it% countr$ manager.

$""%E#

#hether or not the trial court ha% 6uri%diction o+er the ca%e #hether the proper law applicable i% Philippine law or the law of the Iingdom of 8audi

Arabia #hether or not the ca%e in+ol+e% a confict% problem

&ELD#

!% there a conflict% ca%e

he 8upreme Court held in the affirmati+e.

A factual %ituation that cut% acro%% territorial line% and i% affected b$ the di+er%e law% of two ormore %tate% i% %aid to contain a >foreign element.? he pre%ence of a foreign element i% ine+itable%ince %ocial and economic affair% of indi+idual% and a%%ociation% are rarel$ confined to thegeographic limit% of their birth or conception.

he form% in which thi% foreign element ma$ appear are man$. he foreign element ma$ %impl$
http://scire-licet.blogspot.com/2009/02/saudi-arabian-airlines-vs-ca.htmlhttp://scire-licet.blogspot.com/2009/02/saudi-arabian-airlines-vs-ca.html


9/11

con%i%t in the fact that one of the partie% to a contract i% an alien or ha% a foreign domicile' or thata contract between national% of one 8tate in+ol+e% propertie% %ituated in another 8tate. !n otherca%e%' the foreign element ma$ a%%ume a comple) form.

!n the in%tant ca%e' the foreign element con%i%ted in the fact that pri+ate re%pondent 7orada i% a

re%ident Philippine national' and that petitioner 8AU9!A i% a re%ident foreign corporation. Al%o' b$ +irtue of the emplo$ment of 7orada with the petitioner 8AU9!A a% a flight %tewarde%%'e+ent% did tran%pire during her man$ occa%ion% of tra+el acro%% national border%' particularl$from 7anila' Philippine% to Beddah' 8audi Arabia' and +ice +er%a' that cau%ed a >conflict%?%ituation to ari%e.

Applicabilit$ of Art. 01 and 0' NCC and Buri%diction of ue=on Cit$ R C

he 8upreme Court held that pri+ate re%pondent aptl$ predicated her cau%e of action on Article%01 and 0 of the New Ci+il Code. Although Article 01 merel$ declare% a principle of law' Article0 gi+e% fle%h to it% pro+i%ion%. hu%' +iolation% of Article% 01 and 0 are actionable' with

6udiciall$ enforceable remedie% in the municipal forum.a%ed on the allegation% in the Amended Complaint' read in the light of the Rule% of Court on

6uri%diction' the 8upreme Court found that the RC of ue=on Cit$ po%%e%%e% 6uri%diction o+erthe %ub6ect matter of the %uit. !t% authorit$ to tr$ and hear the ca%e i% pro+ided under 8ection 0 ofRA 2;10. enue wa% al%o held to be proper. Jurthermore' 6uri%diction o+er the per%on of the

plaintiff and defendant were properl$ acdoctrine ofproce%% of deciding whether or not the fact% relate to the ,ind of characteri=ation? i% to enable the forum to %electthe proper law.

"ur %tarting point of anal$%i% here i% not a legal relation' but a factual %ituation' e+ent oroperati+e fact. An e%%ential element of conflict rule% i% the indication of a >te%t? or >connectingfactor? or >point of contact.? Choice-of-law rule% in+ariabl$ con%i%t of factual relation%hip D%ucha% propert$ right' contract claim and a connecting factor or point of contract' %uch a% the %itu% ofthe re%' the place of celebration' the place of performance' or the place of wrongdoing.

Note that one or more circum%tance% ma$ be pre%ent to %er+e a% the po%%ible te%t for thedetermination of the applicable law. he%e >te%t factor%? or >point% of contact? or >connectingfactor%? could be an$ of the following:

1. he nationalit$ of a per%on' hi% domicile' hi% re%idence' hi% place of %o6ourn' or hi% originK


10/11

2. he %eat of a legal or 6uridical per%on' %uch a% a corporationK3. he %itu% of a thing' that i%' the place where a thing i%' or i% deemed to be %ituated. !n

particular' the le) %itu% i% deci%i+e when real right% are in+ol+edK4. he place where an act ha% been done' the locu% actu%' %uch a% the place where a contract

ha% been made' a marriage celebrated' a will %igned or a tort committed. he le) loci

actu% i% particularl$ important in contract% and tort%K5. he place where an act i% intended to come into effect' e.g. the place of performance of

contractual dutie%' or the place where a power of attorne$ i% to be e)erci%edK6. he intention of the contracting partie% a% to the law that %hould go+ern their agreement'

the le) loci intentioni%K7. he place where 6udicial or admini%trati+e proceeding% are in%tituted or done. he le) fori

Q the law of the forum Q i% particularl$ important becau%e' a% we ha+e %een earlier'matter% of procedure not going to the %ub%tance of the claim in+ol+ed are go+erned b$itK and becau%e the le) fori applie% whene+er the content of the otherwi%e applicableforeign law i% e)cluded from application in a gi+en ca%e for the rea%on that it fall% underone of the e)ception% to the application% of foreign lawK and

8. he flag of the %hip' which in man$ ca%e% i% deci%i+e of practicall$ all legal relation%hip%of the %hip and of it% ma%ter or owner a% %uch. !t al%o co+er% contractual relation%hip%

particularl$ contract% of affreightment.?

Con%idering that the complaint in the court a act with 6u%tice' gi+e her her dueand ob%er+e hone%t$ and good faith.? !n%tead' petitioner failed to protect her' %he claimed. hatcertain act% or part% of the in6ur$ allegedl$ occurred in another countr$ i% of no moment. Jor inour +iew what i% important here i% the place where the o+er-all harm or the fatalit$ of the allegedin6ur$ to the per%on' reputation' %ocial %tanding and human right% of the complainant' had lodged'according to the plaintiff below Dherein pri+ate re%pondent . All told' it i% not without ba%i% toidentif$ the Philippine% a% the %itu% of the alleged tort.

7oreo+er' with the wide%pread critici%m of the traditional rule of le) loci delicti commi%%i'modern theorie% and rule% on tort liabilit$ ha+e been ad+anced to offer fre%h 6udicial approache%to arri+e at 6u%t re%ult%. !n ,eeping abrea%t with the modern theorie% on tort liabilit$' we find herean occa%ion to appl$ the >8tate of the mo%t %ignificant relation%hip? rule' which in our +iew%hould be appropriate to appl$ now' gi+en the factual conte)t of thi% ca%e.

!n appl$ing %aid principle to determine the 8tate which ha% the mo%t %ignificant relation%hip' thefollowing contact% are to be ta,en into account and e+aluated according to their relati+eimportance with re%pect to the particular i%%ue: Da the place where the in6ur$ occurredK Db the

place where the conduct cau%ing the in6ur$ occurredK Dc the domicile' re%idence' nationalit$' place of incorporation and place of bu%ine%% of the partie%K and Dd the place where therelation%hip' if an$' between the partie% i% centered.


11/11

"+er-all in6ur$ occurred in the Philippine%

A% alread$ di%cu%%ed' there i% ba%i% for the claim that o+er-all in6ur$ occurred and lodged in thePhilippine%. here i% li,ewi%e no

col cases for midterms

Documents