DOCTRINE OF STATE IMMUNITY

GENERAL RULE ART. XVI, Sec. 3., 1987 Constitution The State may not be sued without its consent.

1. impairment of dignity of the State

BASIS
2. challenge to its supposed infallibility

Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. there can be no legal rights against the authority which makes
the law on which the night depends.
JUSTIFICATION
Additional Justification. demands and inconveniences of litigation will divert time and resources of the
State from more pressing matters demanding its attention to the prejudice of public welfare.

WHO MAY AVAIL OF STATE IMMUNITY

Garcia v. Chief of Staff, 16 SCRA 120 claim for damages filed by

Mariano Garcia for injuries he sustained while undergoing military
Rationale:
training albeit filed against AFP Chief of Staff was actually suits
STATE against the State, which should be dismissed because the State has
State is insulated from jurisdiction of
not given its consent.
courts of justices
 Amigable v. Cuenca, 43 SCRA 360 where government takes away
private property (owned by Victoria Amigable) for public use (road)
without expropriation negotiated sale, aggrieved party may sue
govt. (PH Commissioner, Nicolas Cuenca) without violating the
doctrine of immunity from suit.

Veterans Manpower v. CA, 214 SCRA 286 Veteran Manpowers

claim for damages against PC Chief is suit against the State, since it
was against public officer in the discharge of official governmental
Acts Performed:
functions.
PUBLIC OFFICERS
a) in the discharge of official duties
Festejo v. Fernando, 50 O.G. 1556 Public Works Director Isaias
b) within the scope of their authority
Fernando, who without authority took property owned by Carmen
Festejo and constructed irrigation canal theron, cannot claim that
he is a public agent acting under the color of his office.

Incorporated: consult charter; PNR v. IAC, 217 SCRA 401 Baliwag Transit filed suits against PNR
a) suable if charter says so for damages it sustained arising from vehicular collision arising from
GOVERNMENT regardless of function PNRs negligence. PNR invoked the defense of immunity from suit.
AGENCIES Unincorporated: determine function; HELD: PNR is created to operate transport service which is
a) suable - proprietary essentially a business concern, and thus barred from invoking
b) not suable: governmental immunity from suit.
 Farolan v. CTA, 217 SCRA 298 BOC cannot be held liable for
actual damages which Bagong Buhay Trading sustained with regard
to its missing goods in the custody of BOC for it would violate the
doctrine of sovereign immunity. As an unincorporated government
agency without any separate juridical personality of its own, BOC
enjoys immunity from suit.

Bureau of Printing v. BOPEA, 1 SCRA 340 BOPEA filed with CIR

complaint for unfair labor practices against officials of BOP, who
interposed the defense that BOP has no juridical personality to sue
and be sued. HELD: as an office of the Government, without any
corporate or juridical personality, BOP cannot be sued.

with immunity when sued in Holy See v. Rosario, 238 SCRA 524 Starbright filed complaint for
courts of local State. annulment of sale and damages against the Holy See in connection
with a property owned by the latter which is the subject matter of
FOREIGN STATES
Rationale: par in parem non habet a contract to sell. Trial Court ruled that Holy See shed off its
imperium (an equal has no power sovereign immunity by entering into business contract in question.
over an equal) HELD: Holy See is duly accredited diplomatic mission exempt from
local jurisdiction and entitled to immunities.
 Minucher v. CA, G.R. No. 142396, Feb. 11, 2003 Minucher filed
with immunity when acting suit for damages against Arthur Scalzo, US DEA Agent, who
DIPLOMATIC within the directives of his together with Phil. narcotic agents conducted buy-bust operations
AGENTS government against Minucher. HELD: a US DEA Agent allowed by the Phil.
govt to help contain the problem on the drug traffic, is entitl4ed to
the defense of state immunity from suit.

with immunity: Callado v. IRRI, 244 SCRA 210 Ernesto Callado, driver at IRRI,
figured in vehicular accident while driving an IRRI vehicle and under
INTERNATIONAL
raison detre: assurance of the influence of liquor. He filed complaint before Labor Arbiter for
ORGANIZATIONS
unimpeded performance of their illegal dismissal. IRRI interposed the defense of immunity. HELD:
functions IRRI is an international organization entitled to immunity.
 WAIVER OF IMMUNITY

I. EXPRESS CONSENT

GENERAL LAW Act 3083 (March 16, 1923) DA v. NLRC, 227 SCRA 693 ...may constitute money claims. DA
- Govt. Of P.I. hereby consents and may be sued for money claims based on contract for security
submits to be sued upon any services because of express consent contained in Act. 3038
moneyed claim involving liability
arising from contract, express or Republic v. Feliciano, 148 SCRA 424 Proclamation is not a
implied, which could serve as basis of legislative act. Waiver of immunity can only be made by an act of
civil action between private parties. the legislative body.

Republic v. Purisma, 78 SCRA 470 Whatever counsel for RCA

agreed to had no binding force on the government. The consent, to
be effective, must come from the State acting through a duly
enacted statute.

SPECIAL LAW Act 2457 (Feb. 3, 1915) Merritt v. Govt of P.I., 18 SCRA 1120 in 1913 an ambulance of
- authorizing E. Merritt to bring suit General Hospital called with motorcycle driven by Merritt for
against the Govt of P.I. which he was severely injured. Congress passed Act 2457 in 1915
authorizing him to sue the govt.
 2. IMPLIED CONSENT

STATE Rule: it becomes vulnerable to Froilan v. Pan Oriental Shipping, G.R. No. L-6060, Sept. 30, 1950
COMMENCES counterclaim Govt. Impliedly allowed itself to be sued when it filed complained in
LITIGATION intervention for recovery of a vessel filed by Fernando Froilan.

Republic v. Sandiganbayan, 204 SCRA 212 PCGC filed case against

Bienvenido Tantoco, who filed counterclaim. HELD: PCGC cannot
resist the counterclaim against it. The suggestion that State makes
no implied waiver of immunity by filing suit except when it acts in
its proprietary capacity, is unstoppable; it attempts a distinction
without support in principle or precedent.

STATE ENTERS suable in its proprietary capacity; Mobil Phil. v. Customs Arrastre Service, 18 SCRA 1120 For its
INTO CONTRACT missing shipment, Mobil filed claim for damages against CAS and
not suable in its governmental BOC. HELD: Although arrastre function may be deemed
capacity. proprietary, it is a necessary incident of the primary and
governmental function of BOC, so that engaging in the same does
not necessarily render said Bureau liable to suit.
 SCOPE OF CONTENT

RULE Consent to be sued does not include consent to the execution of judgment against it.

Republic v. Villasor, 54 SCRA 84 Republic filed petition for prohibition against Judge Guillermo Villasor,
who ordered the garnishments of AFP funds deposited with PVB and PNB. HELD: Public funds cannot be
ILLUSTRATIVE the object of garnishment proceeding even if the consent to be sued had been previously granted and the
CASES state liability adjudged. Disbursements of public funds must be covered by corresponding appropriation as
required by law.

PNB v. Pabalan, 83 SCRA 595 Judge Javier Pabalan issued a notice of garnishment of the funds of PVTA
deposited with PNB. Thus, PNB instituted petition for prohibition against Judge Pabalan. HELD: Funds
belonging to government corporations (whose charter provide that they can sue and be sued) that are
deposited with a bank are not exempt from garnishment.

TWO CONCEPTS OF FOREIGN SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY

CLASSICAL Sovereign cannot, without its consent, be sued in the courts of another sovereign.
(Absolute Theory)
CLASSICAL Immunity of sovereign is recognized only with regard to public acts or acts jure imperii of a state, but not
(Absolute Theory) with regard to private acts or acts jure gestionis
 COMMENTS ON RESTRICTIVE THEORY

PROBLEM NOT A Difficulty in characterizing whether a contact of sovereign state with private part is act jure imperii or act
SOLUTION jur gestionis.

Genesis of Entry of sovereign states into purely commercial activities. This is particularly true with respect to
Restrictive Theory communist states, which took control of nationalized business activities and international trading.

ACTS JURE IMPERII (by right of dominion)

Syquia v. Almeda Lopez
1. Lease by foreign government of apartment buildings for use of its military officer. 84 Phil. 312
US v. Ruiz
2. Conduct of public bidding for the repair of wharf at US Naval Station. 136 SCRA 487
Sanders v. Veridano
3. Change of employment status of base employees. 163 SCRA 88

ACTS JURE GESTIONIS (by right of management)

1. Hiring of cook in recreation center at John Hay Air Station to cater to American USA v. Rodrigo
servicemen and the general public.
USA v. Guinto
2. Bidding for operation of barber shops in Clark Air Base. 182 SCRA 644
 SUABILITY v. LIABILITY

SUABILITY The result of express or implied consent of the State to sue.

LIABILITY Determined after hearing based on relevant laws and established facts.

RULE Waiver of immunity concession of liability

Torio v. Fontanilla, 85 SCRA 599 municipality is liable for a tort committed in connection with the
celebration of town fiesta, which was considered as proprietary function.

ILLUSTRATIVE Merritt v. Govt of P.I., 18 SCRA 1120 Merritt albeit allowed to sue by virtue of special law but
CASES was unable to hold defendant liable when it was shown that his injuries were caused by regular
driver of the government.

Palafox v. Prov. Ilocos Norte, G.R. No. L-10659 claim for damages against the province failed
when it was shown that the injury suffered occurred in connection with the repair of streets being
undertaken by the province through its regular agents.