Law Innovations (Philippines)

Updates in Philippine law, upgrades for the Filipino lawyer

Posts Tagged ‘updates’

International Chamber of Commerce Revises Arbitration Costs

Posted by Oli Reyes on April 27, 2010

A heads up from our friend and emerging international arbitration specialist Jun Bautista. For those involved in arbitration practice, some important news out there. The International Chamber of Commerce, the largest business organization in the world and one of the leading providers of arbitration services worldwide, will be revising its arbitration costs effective 1 May 2010. This will be the first time since January of 2008 that the ICC will be revising its arbitration costs.

From the ICC website, an overview of the revised costing:

“The revision does not change ICC’s traditional method of calculating administrative costs and arbitrators’ fees on the basis of the amount in dispute. However, the rates applicable to each ‘slice’ of the amount in dispute have been adjusted. An increase averaging 0.14 of a percentage point has been applied to most slices…As an example of changes resulting from the new scales, the advance on costs requested in a case valued at US$ 1 million submitted to a sole arbitrator might rise to US$ 61,093 from US$ 56,485 presently, and the advance in a case valued at US$ 25 million submitted to a tribunal of three arbitrators, to US$ 480,989 instead of US$ 447,730 presently (these examples do not include arbitrators’ expenses)”

The revised costs, as reflected in Appendix III of the ICC Rules of Arbitration, may be found here (PDF).

Advertisements

Posted in Foreign law, Procedural | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

When Grandparents May Be Liable for Legal Support to Grandchildren

Posted by Oli Reyes on November 14, 2009

May grandparents be liable to provide legal support to their grandchildren even if the children already receive support from their father (who himself is the son of said grandparents)? The Supreme Court, in Spouses Lim v. Lim (G.R. No. 163209, 30 October 2009), ruled that grandparents may be so liable under the Civil Code under particular circumstances.

The case arose after the son of the petitioner-spouses saw his wife and three school-age kids leave him after he was caught “in a compromising position” with another woman. In the subsequent petition for support, it was not only the son, but also the paternal grandparents (the petitioner-spouses) who were sued. A determinative factor that led the Supreme Court to rule that even the grandparents were liable to support their grandchildren (though not to their estranged daughter-in-law) was the finding that the husband was able to provide support of only 6,000 pesos a month, which was insufficient to meet his children’s basic needs, and the fact that the wife herself was “unable to discharge her obligation to provide sufficient legal support to her children, then all school-bound.”

Some brief passages from the Court’s decision reveal the rationale behind this ruling:

Relying on provisions found in Title IX of the Civil Code, as amended, on Parental Authority, petitioners theorize that their liability is activated only upon default of parental authority, conceivably either by its termination or suspension during the children’s minority. Because at the time respondents sued for support, Cheryl and Edward exercised parental authority over their children, petitioners submit that the obligation to support the latter’s offspring ends with them.

Neither the text of the law nor the teaching of jurisprudence supports this severe constriction of the scope of familial obligation to give support. In the first place, the governing text are the relevant provisions in Title VIII of the Civil Code, as amended, on Support, not the provisions in Title IX on Parental Authority. While both areas share a common ground in that parental authority encompasses the obligation to provide legal support, they differ in other concerns including the duration of the obligation and its concurrence among relatives of differing degrees. Thus, although the obligation to provide support arising from parental authority ends upon the emancipation of the child, the same obligation arising from spousal and general familial ties ideally lasts during the obligee’s lifetime.. Also, while parental authority under Title IX (and the correlative parental rights) pertains to parents, passing to ascendants only upon its termination or suspension, the obligation to provide legal support passes on to ascendants  not only upon default of the parents but also for the latter’s inability to provide sufficient support.

Posted in Jurisprudence Updates | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »