Practice question
A claimant uses Article 1251 to locate payment of a foreign-connected debt but has not established that Philippine law governs the disputed substantive issue. It argues the domestic payment rule itself proves Philippine law must govern all merits. What is the analytical problem?
- There can never be a performance place
- A domestic performance rule cannot by itself eliminate the prior choice-of-law inquiry or select one law for every issue
- Every foreign-connected debt is void
- The court must ignore all contract terms
- Every country’s law applies simultaneously
Legal references
- Civil Code, Article 1251, place of payment and express reservation of venue rules: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1949/ra_386_1949.html
- Hasegawa v. Kitamura, G.R. No. 149177, November 23, 2007, main decision: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/nov2007/gr_149177_2007.html
- Saudi Arabian Airlines v. Rebesencio, G.R. No. 198587, January 14, 2015, main decision: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2015/jan2015/gr_198587_2015.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.