Thursday, March 30, 2006

Conflict of Laws - Final Exams

Let me share our finals exam in Conflicts of Laws given by Atty. Reymon Fabros:
.
1. Marvin filed a civil suit in the Philippines against Jolina citing in his complaint a provision of law in Hong Kong. After Marvin rested his case, he realized that he failed to prove the provisions of the law he was invoking. In his memorandum, Marvin insisted that the Hong Kong provision shuld be applied considering that Hong Kong is just one hour away from plane, our courts can take cognizance of the said provision of law. Is Marvin correct? What will you do with the case?
.
2. A, a former filipino citizen died intestate. He left all his properties, a 10-hectare industrial lot located in the Philippines to B, his only son who now resides in California. Prior to his death, A was already an American citizen and was residing with his son in California. C, a brother of A, contested the fitness of B to inherit from his father considering that a foreigner cannot own real properties in the Philippines. A posited that since it is his capacity that is in issue, the law of California should prevail. Render a legal opinion on the matter.
.
3. Jang Geum, a naturalized Filipino, got married to Jung Jung, a Korean national. Their marriage was celebrated in Hong Kong, but on their fifth anniversary, they again had a wedding ceremony in Korea. Assuming the law in Korea allows an agreement to govern the properties of the spouse to be entered even after the marriage, and the spouses agreed on an "absolute separation of property" regime, may Jang Geum insist in Philippine Courts that their properties in the Philippines be considered as forming part of the absolute community of property? Why?
.
4. Yao, a black African guy, got married to Ming, a Filipino born of a Chinese father. Before migrating to Africa, Ming worked as a waitress in Ma Mon Luk. When Ming was fired because the customers were turned off by her name (some arguing that because her name gives the impression that Ma Mon Luk's siopao is made from cat's meat), they went to live in Africa. Ming did not adopt the citizenship of her husband though. When Kobe, their first child was born, Yao was denying that the child is his. Ming argues that Yao has no proof that the child is not his. Ming considers Yao unfair and unreasonable for suspecting that he is not the father of Kobe simply because Hobe is white and has natural blonde hair. If you are the judge, how will you rule the case of yao? Explain.
.
Any answers?

No comments:

Post a Comment