DEFINITION OF FOREIGN LAWS - 19 PJP 21 (2024)

Date Published:
  1. RECOMMENDED CITATION: DELA PEÑA, Mark Angelo S. (2024), “Definition of Foreign Laws,” 19 PJP 21, available at <insert link> (last accessed on <date>).
  2. PJP UNDOCKETED: This content is yet to be be peer reviewed and has not yet received any favorable recommendation for citation. It may or may not be queued up for citation recommendation or peer review. Caution is advised.
  3. CONTACT US: For immediate action on requests, comments, concerns, suggestions, and other forms of feedback, please message us on Facebook at www.m.me/projectjuris.

In the Philippine legal system foreign laws are those promulgated, issues or enacted by a country other than the Philippines.

For purposes of private international law and from the viewpoint of the Philippines, the term “municipal law” refers to the laws of the Philippines. On the other hand, the laws of a country other than the Philippines are “foreign laws.” In other words, French laws are the municipal laws of France and Philippine laws are foreign laws in the eyes of French legal system.

In international law, a party who desires to have a foreign law applied to a dispute or case has the burden of proving the existence and contents of such foreign law. This is because foreign laws are treated under Philippine law as questions of fact, not questions of law, to be properly pleaded and proved as the judge or arbiter cannot and does not have the power or discretion to take judicial notice of a foreign law.[1] A person is presumed to know only domestic or forum law.[2]

If a party who relies thereon fails to prove the pertinent laws on the matter, the international law doctrine of presumed-identity approach or processual presumption comes into play. Where a foreign law is not pleaded or, even if pleaded, is not proved, the presumption is that foreign law is the same as Philippine law. Thus, courts must apply Philippine laws in determining the issues presented before them.[3]

[1] ATCI OVERSEAS CORPORATION v. ECHIN, 647 Phil. 43, 49-50 (G.R. No. 178551, October 11, 2010) [Per J. Carpio Morales, Third Division].

[2] KUCSKAR v. SEKITO, JR., 891 Phil. 398 (G.R. No. 237449, December 02, 2020) [Per J. Lopez, Second Division].

[3] Ibid.