Question

Situation:

David, a resident of the Philippines, entered into a contract with an Australian company for the construction of a commercial building in Manila. The contract included a clause that stated any disputes arising from the contract would be subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the Australian courts.

As construction progressed, conflicts arose between David and the Australian company regarding delays and substandard work. David filed a complaint in a Philippine court seeking damages and termination of the contract. The Australian company filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that the Philippine court lacked jurisdiction and that the dispute should be resolved in Australia based on the forum selection clause.

Question:

1. Discuss the concept of jurisdiction in relation to conflicts of laws. What factors would the Philippine court consider in determining whether it has jurisdiction over this dispute? (5 points)
2. Explain the doctrine of forum non conveniens. How would the Philippine court apply this doctrine in deciding whether to accept jurisdiction or defer to the Australian courts? (5 points)