Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Part V - Foreign Judgments - Coggle Diagram
Part V - Foreign Judgments
XVIII. Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments
- Foreign judgments refer to all decisions rendered outside the forum. It includes all judgments, decrees and orders of:
Foreign Courts
Sister States, if in a federal system.
A. Distinction between recognition and enforcement
B. Bases of recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments
-
Comity
Obligation of Foreign Judgments - Anchored on the Vested Rights Theory.
C. Policies underlying recognition and enforcement
-
D. Requisites for recognition or enforcement
-
Jurisdiction
- The foreign judgment was rendered by a judicial or a quasi-judicial tribunal which had jurisdiction over the parties and the case in the proper judicial proceedings.
Foreign; Valid
- The judgment must be valid under the laws of the court that rendered it.
Final & Executory
- The judgment must be final and executory to constitute res judicata in another action
Comity
- The state where the foreign judgment was obtained allows recognition or enforcement of Philippine judgments.
Fixed Sum
- The judgment must be for a fixed sum of money
Not Contrary
- The foreign judgment must not be contrary to the public policy or the good morals of the country where it is to be enforced.
No Fraud
- The judgment must not have been obtained by fraud, collusion mistake of fact or mistake of law.
St. Aviation Services v. Grand International Airways
E. Grounds for non-recognition
- Cites Sec. 4 of the Uniform Foreign Money-Judgmentse Recognition Act of the United States.
F. Modern developments in enforcement of foreign judgments
- Most countries rely on Judiciary to give or withhold recognition. But, modern efforts to use treaties and multilateral conventions to regulate recognition and enforcement practices.
The Hague Conference on PRIL
The 2019 Hague Convention on Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters
- Grounds for Refusal/Recognition of Foreign Judgment
1 more item...
Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters
- Established the conditions and prerequisites under which the contracting states would recognize and enforce each other’s judgments.
3 more items...
**G. Procedure for Enforcement Supreme Court Rules on
Procedure for Enforcement
- In common law countries, once recognized, foreign judgment not instantaneously executed as a judgment.
This has been adopted in the Philippines.
1 more item...
Action for Support and Petitions for Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign decisions on Judgments on Support, AM 21-03-02 (2021)**
The action for support shall be filed with the Family Court, single-sala, or multiple-sala court handling family cases which has territorial jurisdiction over the place where the child or the one to give support actually resides. If the one to give support does not reside in the Philippines, or if his or her whereabouts are unknown, the action shall be filed in the court where the plaintiff resides, or where any property of the defendant is located in the Philippines.
incorporate provisions of the 2019 Amendments to the 1997 Revised Rules of Civil Procedure, such as pleadings allowed, parts and contents of a pleading, prohibition of a motion to dismiss except on certain grounds, summons, effect of failure to plead, pre-trial, and trial. However, certain periods for compliance were shortened due to the urgent nature of support actions, such as the period to file an answer (15 calendar days from service of summons, or, in cases where plaintiff files an amended complaint, 15 calendar days after being served with a copy thereof), set pre-trial (not later than 30 calendar days from the filing of the last responsive pleading), present evidence (30 calendar days each for plaintiff and defendant), and render judgment (30 calendar days upon admission of evidence).
Also incorporated are the guidelines in fixing child and spousal support under the Proposed Rule on Provisional Orders (A.M. No. 02-11-12-SC dated 4 March 2003).
only pleadings allowed to be filed are the: a.) complaint, b.) the answer thereto which may contain a compulsory counterclaim and/or cross-claim; and c.) the answer to such counterclaim and/or cross-claim.
No motion to dismiss the complaint shall be allowed except on the ground:
of lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter;
that another action is pending between the same parties for the same cause;
and that the cause of action is barred by a prior judgment; provided
however, that any other ground that might warrant a dismissal of the case may be raised as an affirmative defense in the answer.
1 more item...
Mandatory Grounds for Non-Recognition
-
The defendant in the proceedings in the foreign court did not receive notice of the proceedings in sufficient time to enable him to defend;
The judgment was obtained by fraud;
The [cause of action] [claim for relief] on which the judgment is based is repugnant to the public policy of this state;
EAP - No. 1 is most debatable . Most courts consider jurisdiction of foreign court to be appropriate where there are significant contacts between the forum state and the individuals, events or transactions.
Originally founded on traditional basis of presence of party in the state which has long been eroded.
Furthermore, the last ground of inconvenient forum further restricts the use of presence as the cornerstone for exercise of jurisdiction.
Additional Grounds in the Hague Convention
-
Convention on Jurisdiction, Applicable Law, Recognition, Enforcement and cooperation in respect of parental responsibility and measures for the protection of Children. Found in Art. 23 thereof.
Provides that recognition of measures directed tot he protection of the person/property of the child may be refused if they were taken without the child having been given opportunity to be heard
Or, where public policy exception applies, taking into account best interests of the child, among other reasons.
Violation of the Ordre Public - Of the recognizing state
Failure to comply with the due process requirements.
Discretionary Grounds for Non-Recognition
- Foreign Judgment need not be recognized if:
(4) The judgment conflicts with another final and conclusive judgment;
(5) The proceeding in the foreign court was contrary to an agreement between the parties under which the dispute in question was to be settled otherwise than by proceedings in that court; or
(6) In the case of jurisdiction based only on personal service, the foreign court was a seriously inconvenient forum for the trial of the action.
Jurisdiction
- The foreign judgment was rendered by a judicial or a quasi-judicial tribunal which had jurisdiction over the parties and the case in the proper judicial proceedings.
Jurisdiction in Personam
- There must be either:
Consent of the parties; or
Relation of the parties or events to the forum (International Shoe: satisfy minimum standards of fair play and substantial justice)
Jurisdiction in Rem
- power of the state over property found within the territory.
Where there is an egregious disregard for due process, the foreign judgment will be denied recognition and enforcement.
Nature of Foreign Court Proceedings
- So long as the foreign court acquired jurisdiction, regardless if adversarial proceeding or by default, the decision is deemed valid.
Default judgment is conclusive as adjudication rendered in open court after trial.
Test - whether a reasonable method of notification is employed and reasonable opportunity to be heard is afforded to the person
affected
Meanwhile, in actions in rem or quasi in rem, jurisdiction over the person of the defendant is not a prerequisite to confer jurisdiction on the court provided that the court acquires jurisdiction over the res, although summons must be served upon the defendant in order to satisfy the due process requirements
Foreign; Valid
- The judgment must be valid under the laws of the court that rendered it.
Applicable Case; Pemberto v. Hughes
-
Summons was served on Mrs. Pemberto in Florida, but she was only given 9 days to answer instead of the statutory 10.
Judgment was rendered against her and an action for enforcement filed before an English court.
Pemberto asserted that the decree was invalid.
The English court held that since no substantial injustice was caused to petitioner, all the court could look to is the finality of the judgment and the jurisdiction of the court.
Competence to entertain the sort of case which it did deal with; and
Competence to require the defendant to appear before it.
The error in procedure was not significant enough to alter an otherwise valid decree.
a
3. Final and Executory
- final and executory to constitute res judicata in another action.
Distinguished from Interlocutory/Provisional Orders
- An interlocutory order is one which contemplates that a fuller investigation leading to a final decision may later be held.
Creates no obligation on the forum court to recognize or enforce it.a
Ex. Order denying motion to dismiss/motion to quash.
Comity
- The state where the foreign judgment was obtained allows recognition or enforcement of Philippine judgments.
2 more items...
Basis
- Res Judicata. For the following reasons:
Those who have contested an issue shall be bound by the result of the contest.
Matters once tried and decided with finality in one jurisdiction shall be considered settled as between the parties.
Anglo-American jurisprudence: Foreign judgments are not open to reexamination on the merits when placed in issue before local courts.
Rule is subject to a few exceptions.
Policy Basis
-
To give finality to litigation
To protect the legitimate expectations of the parties
Res Judicata in the Philippines
- Rule 39.40 of the Rules of Court. (Now 39.48)
Similar Concepts
-
Merger
- considers the cause of action as merged in the judgment.
Bar
- when a successful defendant interposes the judgment in his favor to avert a second action by the plaintiff on the same claim.
Estoppel
- Direct, Collateral
Estoppel -
Direct Estoppel
- the relitigation of all matters decided are precluded.
Collateral Estoppel
- all essential issues of fact actually litigated in the suit decided on by the foreign court are rendered conclusive.
Concerned with issue preclusion by barring relitigation on an issue already litigated on in a prior proceeding.
Compare with res judicata which seeks to end litigation by disallowing a suit on the same claim.
Section 48. Effect of foreign judgments or final orders
. — The effect of a judgment or final order of a tribunal of a foreign country, having jurisdiction to render the judgment or final order is as follows:
(a) In case of a judgment or final order upon a specific thing, the judgment or final order, is conclusive upon the title to the thing, and
(b) In case of a judgment or final order against a person, the judgment or final order is presumptive evidence of a right as between the parties and their successors in interest by a subsequent title.
In either case, the judgment or final order may be repelled by evidence of a want of jurisdiction, want of notice to the party, collusion, fraud, or clear mistake of law or fact. (50a)
Comity (Hilton v. Guyot)
- According to Cheshire, to obtain reciprocal treatment from the courts of other countries, we are compelled to take foreign judgments as they stand and to give them full faith and credit.
Effect
- Reciprocity among the jurisdictions involved.
Obligation of Foreign Judgments/Vested Rights -
Here, a judgment of a foreign court imposes a duty or obligation on the losing litigant.
Ex. Judgment on debt owing to plaintiff is handed down by F1. F2 considers this judgment as evidence of the debt. Thus, an action may be brought in F2 to enforce it.
Effect of Foreign Judgment -
Plaintiff Successful/Satisfaction or Enforcement
- If the successful plaintiff fails to obtain satisfaction of a judgment in the court which granted it, he may try to enforce it in another state where the defendant can be located.
Here, this requires the filing of an action in the 2nd forum. Thus, there must be new judgment in 2nd state before the decision may be enforced.
Defendant Successful/Recognition
- If the defendant wins and asserts that decision to preclude plaintiff from suing on the same cause of action in another court, he is asking for recognition of the original judgment.
Here, not necessarily require a filing of an action in the 2nd state.
Note Micronesia v. Basso
- modern approach to choice of law, applying interest analysis and Hasegawa.
EAP - But, did not add 6th step of w/n there is legal basis for refusal to recognize and enforce the foreign judgment.
Presumption that it is recognized by virtue of comity. Thus, to not recognize needs a legal basis.
Cites HCCH Overview of Judgments - Pointed out cross-border circulation of judgments raises legal issues concerning recognition and enforcement of judgments - led to enactment of bilateral, regional and international instruments to remedy this situation.
Scope of the term Judgment
- All decisions on the merits, given by a court, whatever it may be called. Includes, under certain conditions, a court's determination of costs or expenses.
Distinction between recognition and enforcement
-
Recognition - Passive act. But considered res judicata as upon recognition, has the effect of domesticating the judgment. Thus, res judicata as regards other related issues over the same issues.
Enforcement - Alien to inherent principles of sovereignty. Necessitates filing of an action in court or, some formal decision of enforcement such as exequatur.
Q. Which is this recognition or enforcement?
- Art. 21 submission of certificate of legal capacity before marriage license may be obtained.
EAP - This is recognition, recognition of legal capacity. Similar to divorce.
But, if Filipino Citizen who wants to remarry, then there must be an enforcement of a foreign divorce decree because need of filing of a petition and must be pleaded and proven (including law upon which judgment was based). But, if foreigner wants to remarry, then only recognition.
Emphasis on Art. 4 of the Hague Convention on Recognition and Enforcement
-
Recite St. Aviation v. Grand International Airways
Q. When is substituted service done? - Under RoC - Sec. 7. Substituted service. — If, for justifiable causes, the defendant cannot be served within a reasonable time as provided in the preceding section, service may be effected (a) by leaving copies of the summons at the defendant's residence with some person of suitable age and discretion then residing therein, or (b) by leaving the copies at defendant's office or regular place of business with some competent person in charge thereof.
EAP - In the case, the manager of Grand International was a competent person.
Recite Sps. Belen v. Chavez
- Court had jurisdiction not because of service, but because of voluntary appearance of Atty. Alcantara
Two Stages of Jurisdiction
- Recognition can be seen in two stages, namely:
Direct/Competence Directe
- Proceedings before the court that renders the original decision, called the rendering court.
Case filed in Forum A - Forum A determines w/n jurisdiction (adjudicatory) - Will not hear unless it does.
Indirect Jurisdiction
- Court where judgment rendered by competance direct is sought to be
recognized or enforced.
EAP - Indirect, because can't do anything about the case but, will not recognize it if the rendering court had no jurisdiction.
Treaty Obligations
- NY Convention of 1967. PH Party here, provides for reciprocal recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in the convention's signatory states.
No other recognition treaty to which a PH is party to.
EAP - but, we were message of the Hague Conference which prepared the convention on the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments relating to civil or commercial matters.
Exclusive to Civil or Commercial matters. Does not apply to things which generally have their own conventions:
IP, privacy, legal capacity/status, natural persons
Principles underlying Rule 39.48
- Principle of Correctness and Repose.
Correctness - Expresses the concern that legal justice, as understood by society in both substantive and procedural terms be done.
Repose - Recognizes inherent imperfection of human knowledge and institutions and the need to end litigation.
EP: There must be a balance between the principle of correctness and that of repose. Because:
Assigning absolute value to correctness - Enormous social and economic burden, unduly rewarding disputations and undermining transactions and relations essential to economic life.
Repose Emphasis -Would require that full and absolute finality be given toe very determination. but, experience of failure of justice in an individual cases is universal. Thus, would be fundamentally unjust.
This is why enforcement outside, essentially a second chance to inquire into jurisdiction of the court with direct jurisdiction.
Policy of Preclusion
- Supports the principle of repose. Consensus in all legal systems that there must be a limit to repetitive ligation of claims.
Denying preclusive effects to a foreign judgment results in higher costs and produces a significantly greater likelihood that the entire matter will be fully re-litigated.
In recognizing a foreign judgment, PH courts do not review the merits of the case.
It seeks to protect party expectations resulting from previous litigation, to safeguard against the harassment of defendants, to insure that the task of courts not be increased by never-ending litigation of the same disputes and to promote rest and quietness.
Grounds for Refusal of Recognition/Enforcement