Practice question
A transaction made wholly abroad has direct, substantial and reasonably foreseeable effects on Philippine commerce. Parties claim that offshore signing alone excludes every merger-prohibition inquiry under the Act. Which is correct?
- Foreign signing always creates complete immunity
- Only Philippine ink can trigger the Act
- Corporate labels determine territorial reach conclusively
- Section 3 expressly reaches international trade with the stipulated Philippine effects, so offshore execution alone does not defeat the inquiry.
- Every foreign transaction is automatically prohibited without analysis
Legal references
- Philippine Competition Act, RA 10667, Sections 3 and 20-23: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2015/ra_10667_2015.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.