h. Doctrine of Renvoi

Doctrine of Renvoi

Concept

Renvoi arises when a Philippine choice-of-law rule points to foreign law, but that foreign law’s own choice-of-law rule points elsewhere. The question is whether the Philippine court should apply only the foreign law’s substantive rules or also give effect to its reference to another law. A reference back to Philippine law is called remission; a reference to a third country’s law is called transmission. (Aznar v. Christensen)

Governing provisions

Article 16 of the Civil Code subjects the order of succession, the amount of successional rights, the intrinsic validity of testamentary provisions, and capacity to succeed to the national law of the decedent, regardless of the nature or location of the property. That reference to national law may raise a renvoi question if the foreign national law uses a different connecting factor. (Civil Code, Art. 16)

Requisites / Rules

• First, characterize the issue and identify the Philippine choice-of-law rule. Having jurisdiction over the dispute does not, by itself, make Philippine substantive law applicable. (Vda. de Alcañeses v. Alcañeses, G.R. No. 187847, 30 June 2021)¹
• Next, establish the content of the designated foreign law, including any foreign choice-of-law rule on which renvoi depends. If foreign law is not pleaded or proven, it is presumed identical to Philippine law; an unproved foreign rule cannot supply the basis for renvoi. (Orion Savings Bank v. Suzuki, G.R. No. 205487, 12 November 2014)²
• If the proven foreign choice-of-law rule refers the issue back to Philippine law, determine whether to accept that remission for the particular issue. Do not treat renvoi as an automatic instruction to apply Philippine law whenever a foreign element is present. (Aznar v. Christensen)

Key doctrines

In Aznar v. Christensen, the decedent’s national law referred succession to the law of his domicile. The Court accepted the reference back to Philippine law in resolving the successional issue. The case illustrates remission, not a general displacement of Article 16’s nationality rule. (Aznar v. Christensen) (Civil Code, Art. 16)

In Bellis v. Bellis, the Court applied the decedent’s foreign national law to the intrinsic validity of testamentary provisions. Read with Aznar, it underscores the need to determine what the applicable foreign law actually provides rather than presume that every succession problem involving a foreign decedent ends in renvoi. (Bellis v. Bellis) (Aznar v. Christensen)

Bar tip

State the sequence: characterize the issue, identify the Philippine connecting factor, prove the designated foreign law, then check whether its choice-of-law rule refers the issue back. Distinguish a proven remission from processual presumption, which applies when foreign law has not been proved. (Vda. de Alcañeses v. Alcañeses)¹ (Orion Savings Bank v. Suzuki)² (Aznar v. Christensen)