Recognition of foreign judgment
The Philippines does not automatically accept foreign judgment deemed valid in the country
where it was decided to be valid under their jurisdiction. It was held that the court cannot give effect to a
foreign judgment that contravenes the Philippines’ laws, customs and public morals (Querubin v
Querubin, 87 Phil. 124 (1950)). A foreign law, even though applicable, must not be recognized if the
foreign law, judgment or contract is contrary to a sound and established public policy of the forum. 1
In Fujiki v. Marinay,
“A foreign judgment relating to the status of a marriage affects the civil status, condition
and legal capacity of its parties. However, the effect of a foreign judgment is not
automatic. To extend the effect of a foreign judgment in the Philippines, Philippine courts
must determine if the foreign judgment is consistent with domestic public policy and
other mandatory laws. Article 15 of the Civil Code provides that "[l]aws relating to
family rights and duties, or to the status, condition and legal capacity of persons are
binding upon citizens of the Philippines, even though living abroad." This is the rule
of lex nationalii in private international law. Thus, the Philippine State may require, for
effectivity in the Philippines, recognition by Philippine courts of a foreign judgment
affecting its citizen, over whom it exercises personal jurisdiction relating to the status,
condition and legal capacity of such citizen.” |2
The public policy defense against enforcement of foreign judgment has been recognized
not only in the Philippines but internationally.3 Under this defense, the court can examine
foreign judgment under local standards. As held in Mijares v. Ranada, 4
“The viability of the public policy defense against the enforcement of a foreign judgment
has been recognized in this jurisdiction. This defense allows for the application of local
standards in reviewing the foreign judgment, especially when such judgment creates only
a presumptive right, as it does in cases wherein the judgment is against a person. The
defense is also recognized within the international sphere, as many civil law nations
adhere to a broad public policy exception which may result in a denial of recognition
when the foreign court, in the light of the choice-of-law rules of the recognizing court,
applied the wrong law to the case. The public policy defense can safeguard against
possible abuses to the easy resort to offshore litigation if it can be demonstrated that the
original claim is noxious to our constitutional values.”
The Supreme Court of the Philippines acknowledged that the public policy defense serves
as a protection from foreign judgments that goes against constitutional values.
1
Agpalo, Conflict of Laws
2
(Fujiki v. Marinay, G.R. No. 196049, [June 26, 2013], 712 PHIL 524-558)
3
Getting the Deal Through: Enforcement of Foreign Judgments 2018, “Philippines”, Ricardo Ma PG Ongkiko,
Anthony RV Jacoba and Trisha Beverly C Flores SyCip. Salazar Hernandez & Gatmaitan
4
(Mijares v. Ranada, G.R. No. 139325, [April 12, 2005], 495 PHIL 372-399)
