Private International Law Case Digests

Continental Micronesia, Inc. (CMI), a foreign corporation organized under US laws and licensed to do business in the Philippines, hired Joseph Basso, a US citizen residing in the Philippines, as General Manager of its Philippine branch. The employment contract was negotiated and accepted in the Philippines but executed through correspondence with the US, containing references to US laws and a termination-at-will clause. In December 1995, CMI informed Basso that he was being terminated effective January 1996 under the termination-at-will provision, initially offering him a consultant position without compensation but with benefits. Basso filed a complaint for illegal dismissal, prompting CMI…

In labor disputes involving foreign elements, Philippine labor tribunals have jurisdiction over termination disputes when the employer is licensed to do business in the Philippines and the employee resides and performs work there, with Philippine law applying as the proper law of the forum under the "most significant relationship" test; termination-at-will provisions are void as contrary to Philippine public policy, and managerial employees may only be dismissed for loss of trust and confidence based on substantial evidence of willful breach, not mere whim or caprice, and only after compliance with the twin notice requirement of procedural due process.

Nippon Engineering Consultants Co., Ltd., a Japanese firm, entered into an Independent Contractor Agreement (ICA) with Minoru Kitamura, a Japanese national permanently residing in the Philippines, for a one-year term starting April 1, 1999. Kitamura was assigned as project manager for the Southern Tagalog Access Road (STAR) Project. When Nippon secured the Bongabon-Baler Road Improvement (BBRI) Project from the DPWH, Kitamura was named project manager in the contract appendix. Nippon subsequently informed Kitamura that his ICA would not be renewed upon its expiration on March 31, 2000. After Nippon refused Kitamura's demand to be assigned to the BBRI Project and replaced him, Kitamura filed…

Choice-of-law principles and the doctrine of forum non conveniens cannot deprive Philippine trial courts of subject matter jurisdiction over a case that is lawfully cognizable by them under statutory law.

Morada was employed by SAUDIA as a flight attendant based in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. In April 1990, while on lay-over in Jakarta, she was allegedly the victim of an attempted rape by fellow Saudi crew members. In 1992-1993, SAUDIA allegedly summoned her to Jeddah and Riyadh under false pretenses, subjected her to police interrogation, and facilitated her prosecution in a Saudi court where she was convicted of adultery and sentenced to imprisonment and lashes. She was later pardoned by the Prince of Makkah but terminated by SAUDIA.

In tort claims involving foreign elements, the State of the most significant relationship rule determines the applicable law; when the overall harm or fatality of the injury lodges in the Philippines and the Philippines has the most significant contacts (residence of the injured party, place where the relationship is centered), Philippine law applies notwithstanding that some tortious acts occurred abroad.

Paul Schenker, a Swiss citizen domiciled in Zurich, Switzerland, authorized his wife, Helen Schenker, to act as his attorney-in-fact in 1952. Acting in that representative capacity, Mrs. Schenker filed Civil Case No. Q-2796 in the Court of First Instance of Rizal against William F. Gemperle to enforce an alleged initial subscription to corporate shares, assert pre-emptive rights, and seek an accounting and damages. In connection with that corporate dispute, Mrs. Schenker allegedly caused the publication of statements that Gemperle characterized as false, immaterial to the underlying case, and damaging to his business reputation and credit. Gemperle subsequently filed the present damages act…

The Court held that a Philippine court acquires jurisdiction over the person of a non-resident alien defendant when summons is served upon an authorized attorney-in-fact who has previously instituted suit on the principal’s behalf in the same forum. Because the agent’s prior authority to litigate inherently extends to receiving service in a directly related action, the principal cannot successfully contest personal jurisdiction, and a corresponding cause of action against the agent remains viable.

The case involves the settlement of the estate of Edward Randolph Hix, who allegedly executed a will in West Virginia. The special administrator of the estate sought to probate the will in the Philippine Islands, requiring the application and proof of West Virginia law.

Foreign laws do not prove themselves in Philippine courts and must be proved as facts; absent proper proof of the foreign law, the due execution of the will, and the testator's domicile, a foreign will cannot be admitted to probate.