Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 47 views

    SAUDIA v. CA

    Uploaded by

    Ayana Dela Cruz
    1) Milagros Morada, a Filipino flight attendant for Saudi Arabian Airlines (SAUDIA), was raped by two Saudi crew members in Jakarta, Indonesia. She was pressured to drop charges and was later tried in absentia in Saudi Arabia for adultery and violating Islamic laws. 2) The issue is whether the Regional Trial Court in Quezon City, Philippines has jurisdiction over Morada's civil case against SAUDIA, or if the Saudi Arabian court has jurisdiction given the foreign elements involved. 3) The court ruled that it has jurisdiction, as Morada is a Philippine national and SAUDIA is a foreign corporation, and the events occurred across national

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    SAUDIA v. CA

    Uploaded by

    Ayana Dela Cruz
    47 views2 pages
    1) Milagros Morada, a Filipino flight attendant for Saudi Arabian Airlines (SAUDIA), was raped by two Saudi crew members in Jakarta, Indonesia. She was pressured to drop charges and was later tried in absentia in Saudi Arabia for adultery and violating Islamic laws. 2) The issue is whether the Regional Trial Court in Quezon City, Philippines has jurisdiction over Morada's civil case against SAUDIA, or if the Saudi Arabian court has jurisdiction given the foreign elements involved. 3) The court ruled that it has jurisdiction, as Morada is a Philippine national and SAUDIA is a foreign corporation, and the events occurred across national

    Original Description:

    -

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) Milagros Morada, a Filipino flight attendant for Saudi Arabian Airlines (SAUDIA), was raped by two Saudi crew members in Jakarta, Indonesia. She was pressured to drop charges and was later tried in absentia in Saudi Arabia for adultery and violating Islamic laws. 2) The issue is whether the Regional Trial Court in Quezon City, Philippines has jurisdiction over Morada's civil case against SAUDIA, or if the Saudi Arabian court has jurisdiction given the foreign elements involved. 3) The court ruled that it has jurisdiction, as Morada is a Philippine national and SAUDIA is a foreign corporation, and the events occurred across national

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    47 views2 pages

    SAUDIA v. CA

    Uploaded by

    Ayana Dela Cruz
    1) Milagros Morada, a Filipino flight attendant for Saudi Arabian Airlines (SAUDIA), was raped by two Saudi crew members in Jakarta, Indonesia. She was pressured to drop charges and was later tried in absentia in Saudi Arabia for adultery and violating Islamic laws. 2) The issue is whether the Regional Trial Court in Quezon City, Philippines has jurisdiction over Morada's civil case against SAUDIA, or if the Saudi Arabian court has jurisdiction given the foreign elements involved. 3) The court ruled that it has jurisdiction, as Morada is a Philippine national and SAUDIA is a foreign corporation, and the events occurred across national

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    SAUDI ARABIAN AIRLINES VS.

    COURT OF APPEALS,

    FACTS:Herein private respondent Milagros P. Morada is a flight attendant for


    petitioner SAUDIA airlines, where the former was tried to be raped by Thamer
    and Allah AlGazzawi, both Sauidi nationals and fellow crew member, after a night
    of dancing in their hotel while in Jakarta, Indonesia. She was rescued. After two
    weeks of detention the accused were both deported to Saudi and they were
    reinstated by Saudia. She was pressured by police officers to make a statement
    and to drop the case against the accused; in return she will then be allowed to
    return to Manila and retrieved her passport. For the second time, she was asked
    by her superiors to again appear before the Saudi court. Without her
    knowledge, she was already tried by Saudi court together with the accused and
    was sentenced to five months imprisonment and to 286 lashes in connection with
    Jakarta rape incident. The court found her guilty of (1) adultery; (2) going to a
    disco, dancing and listening to the music in violation of Islamic laws; and (3)
    socializing with the male crew, in contravention of Islamic tradition.

    ISSUE/S: WHETHER OR NOT the QC Regional Trial Court has jurisdiction to


    hear and try the civil case based on Article 21 of the New Civil Code or the
    Kingdom of Saudi Arabia court though there is the existence of foreign element.

    RULING: The forms in which a foreign element may appear are many, such as
    the fact that one party is a resident Philippine national, and that the other is a
    resident foreign corporation. The forms in which this foreign element may appear
    are many. The foreign element may simply consist in the fact that one of the
    parties to a contract is an alien or has a foreign domicile, or that a contract
    between nationals of one State involves properties situated in another State. In
    other cases, the foreign element may assume a complex form. In the instant
    case, the foreign element consisted in the fact that private respondent Morada is
    a resident Philippine national, and that petitioner SAUDIA is a resident foreign
    corporation. Also, by virtue of the employment of Morada with the petitioner
    SAUDIA as a flight stewardess, events did transpire during her many occasions
    of travel across national borders, particularly from Manila, Philippines to Jeddah,
    Saudi Arabia, and vice versa, that caused a “conflicts” situation to arise.

    The forms in which a foreign element may appear are many, such as the fact that
    one party is a resident Philippine national, and that the other is a resident foreign
    corporation. The forms in which this foreign element may appear are many. The
    foreign element may simply consist in the fact that one of the parties to a contract
    is an alien or has a foreign domicile, or that a contract between nationals of one
    State involves properties situated in another State. In other cases, the foreign
    element may assume a complex form. In the instant case, the foreign element
    consisted in the fact that private respondent Morada is a resident Philippine
    national, and that petitioner SAUDIA is a resident foreign corporation. Also, by
    virtue of the employment of Morada with the petitioner SAUDIA as a flight
    stewardess, events did transpire during her many occasions of travel across
    national borders, particularly from Manila, Philippines to Jeddah, Saudi Arabia,
    and vice versa, that caused a “conflicts” situation to arise.

    Where the factual antecedents satisfactorily establish the existence of a foreign


    element, the problem could present a “conflicts” case. Where the factual
    antecedents satisfactorily establish the existence of a foreign element, we agree
    with petitioner that the problem herein could present a “conflicts” case. A factual
    situation that cuts across territorial lines and is affected by the diverse laws of
    two or more states is said to contain a “foreign element.” The presence of a
    foreign element is inevitable since social and economic affairs of individuals and
    associations are rarely confined to the geographic limits of their birth or
    conception.

    You might also like