Practice question
A foreign e-retailer deliberately develops a Philippine customer base and repeatedly delivers orders here. Minimum contacts and the Act’s B2C scope are established. It argues that Section 5 both exempts it because it lacks an office and, alternatively, eliminates all procedural requirements in any Philippine proceeding. Which statement is most accurate?
- Both assertions necessarily follow from extraterritorial application
- It cannot rely on absence of legal presence to evade applicable liability, but Section 5 does not itself dispense with every procedural requirement
- Only the first assertion is correct
- Every customer complaint automatically succeeds on the merits
- All foreign e-commerce transactions are unlawful
Legal references
- RA 11967, Section 5: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2023/ra_11967_2023.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.