By Anthony Jacoba, Partner; Carlo Sebastian Chua, Associate; Jerard Emmanuel Afable, Associate, Ocampo & Suralvo Law Offices
Published in Asia Business Law Journal, January/February 2026 issue (posted online March 2026).
In Vallacar Transit Inc v Yanson Jr (25 November 2025), the Philippine Supreme Court formally adopted the “fugitive disentitlement doctrine”. The respondent, who had left the country before a warrant was issued against him in a carnapping case, was held not entitled to ask the court for relief while he remained a fugitive.
The authors trace the doctrine to US case law, where it was first applied in criminal cases and later extended to civil cases, on the reasoning that a fugitive should not use the courts while defying them. They show that the Court found support for it in existing Philippine rules and decisions, including rule 124, section 8 of the Rules of Court. Under the ruling, an accused who leaves the country knowing that charges have been filed and a warrant issued is treated as a fugitive from justice.
The article closes by noting a pending petition before the Supreme Court by a former lawmaker who is abroad and facing arrest warrants. The authors expect that case to show the limits of the doctrine’s scope.
This article was first published in Asia Business Law Journal, January/February 2026 issue (posted online March 2026).