Practice question
A party resists a properly proven foreign judgment solely by saying 'the foreign court should have believed me' without evidence of a §48 defect. Which is correct?
- The statement automatically defeats the judgment.
- Every recognition case is an unrestricted retrial.
- No foreign judgment may ever be defended against.
- The statement is conclusive evidence of fraud.
- Bare dissatisfaction does not itself establish the Rule's grounds for repelling the judgment.
Legal references
- https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/2019-rules-of-civil-procedure.pdf — Supreme Court official2019 Rules, Rule39§§47–48 and Rules57–61.
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2005/apr2005/gr_139325_2005.html — Mijares v Ranada, GR139325, April12 2005, main decision.
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2025/apr2025/gr_272461_2025.html — Ang v Sanchez-Fernandez, GR272461, April21 2025, main decision.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.