6/30/2021 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly That no proceedings shall be initiated within six (6) months from the time of death of said parent(s). (Italics supplied.) Apparently, the adoption of petitioner by Hayashi may be validly effected in accordance with the provisions of RA 8552. However, the Court disagrees with the RTC's view that adoption decrees involving Filipino citizens obtained abroad cannot be judicially recognized in the Philippines for being contrary to law and public policy. As emphasized by Associate Justice Edgardo L. Delos Santos (Justice Delos Santos), the availability of RA 8552 as a means to adopt petitioner should not automatically foreclose proceedings to recognize his adoption decree obtained under Japanese law. Justice Delos Santos reminds that the principle behind the recognition and enforcement of a foreign judgment derives its force not only from our Rules of Court but from the fact that such act of recognition is considered part of what is considered as the "generally accepted principles of international law."[44] It is characterized as such because aside from the widespread practice among States accepting in principle the need for such recognition and enforcement, the procedure for recognition and enforcement is embodied in the rules of law, whether statutory or jurisprudential, in various foreign jurisdictions.[45] As already established, the adoption by an alien of the legitimate child of his/her Filipino spouse is valid and legal based on Article 184(3) (b) of the Family Code and Section 7(b)(i), Article III of RA 8552. Thus, contrary to the RTC's sweeping conclusion against foreign adoption decrees, the Court finds that the adoption of petitioner by Hayashi, if proven as a fact, can be judicially recognized in the Philippines. Justice Delos Santos aptly propounds that the rules on domestic adoption should not be pitted against the recognition of a foreign adoption decree; instead, the better course of action is to reconcile them and give effect to their respective purposes. Judicial recognition of a foreign judgment is allowed under Section 48, Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, viz.: SEC. 48. Effect of Foreign Judgments or Final Orders. — The effect of a judgment or final order of a tribunal of a foreign country, having jurisdiction to render the judgment or final order is as follows: (a) In case of a judgment or final order upon a specific thing, the judgment or final order is conclusive upon the title to the thing; and (b) In case of a judgment or final order against a person, the judgment or final order is presumptive evidence of a right as between the parties and their successors in interest by a subsequent title. In either case, the judgment or final order may be repelled by evidence of a want of jurisdiction, want of notice to the party, collusion, fraud, or clear mistake of law or fact. (Italics supplied.) To emphasize, the rule states that the foreign judgment against a person is already "presumptive evidence of a right as between the parties." Upon judicial recognition of https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/66689 7/13