DOCTRINE OF STATE IMMUNITY

CONSTITUTION declares, " the STATE may not be sued without consent"
> its a provision recognizing the sovereign character of the STATE

SOVEREIGN-supreme ruler, ultimate power

STATE- (PERSON|)community of persons more or less numerous,
(TERRITORY)occupying a definite portion of territory,
(GOVERNMENT) having a government of their own
(SOVEREIGNITY)to which the body if inhabitance render obedience and
enjoying freedom from external control.

Proprietary/Ministrant Function is one that a private entity can perform, and is not
uniquely for the benefit of the general public.
Governmental/Constituent Function intimately related to the public interest
as to mandate performance
BASIS
> indiscriminate suit against the State will impair its dignit
> State is infallibility (not capable of being wrong)
> demands and inconveniences of litigation will divert the time and resources of the State,
prejudicing the public welfare
>principle of the sovereign equality of States
>State cannot assert jurisdiction over another (violates the international law)
that will "unduly vex(bother) the peace of nations"

3. SUIT against governmental officers

Public officer may be sued ( do a duty required by law) restrain him
from doing unconstitutional or illegal, or to recover

SANDERS VS Veridiano
Held not aginst the State, State had already discharged its obligation

complainant wanted only was the actual payment of the amount set aside,
which sole responsibility of the defendant. The action was filed against
him only and not against the state.

USA vs GUINTO

4. SUIT against governmental Agencies

suit is not filed against the government itself or its official but against one of its entities
> ascertained whether or not the State as the Principal that may ultimately held liable

A. INCORPORATED agency - has charter of its own that invests it with separate
juridical personality like SSS, UP and City of Manila.
>Rule: suable if its charter say so regardless of the functions its performing
Municipal Corporations example : provinces &cities, are agencies of the
 State when they re engaged in governmental functions and therefore should
enjoy the sovereign immunity
>they can be sue and be sued

BERMOY V PHILIPPINE COLLEGE

B.UNINCORPORATED agency - no separate juridical personality but is merged in the

general machinery of the government like DOJ, Bureau of Mines & Gov Printing Office
> any suit filed against it is necessarily an action against the Phil. Gov.
> suable if proprietary and not if governmental (based on nature of primary function)

BUREAU OF PRINTING VS PRINTING EMPLOYEES

NATIONAL AIRPORTS V TEODORO

5.CONSENT

Waiver of immunity - must observe fairness

State does not often avail itself to take undue advantage of parties that have
legitimate claims
>open voluntarily itself to suit (State may be sued if it gives its consent)

REPUBLIC VS FELICIANO
Forms of Consent
A. Express Consent - manifested either General law (applies to all affecting entire
community/states/people)
or a special law (relating to particular person, community,thing)
express consent to be sued must be embodied in a duly encated statute
(enacted law by
legislature of the government) and not by a mere counsel of the GOV

REPUBLIC VS FELICIANO
MERRIT VS PHILIPPINES

General Law - Act. No. 3083, declaring that the Government of the Philippines
hereby consents and submits to be sued upon any moneyed claim
involving liability arising from contract, express
or implied which could serve as basis ofcivilaction between private parties.

Under Commonwealth ACT No. 327 amended by PD 1445

1. Claim against GOV must be filed with the Commission on Audit (COA)
2. Act upon within 60 days
3. Rejection of the claim , authorize the claimant to alevate the matter to SC
on certiorari(court process seek to review lower court decisions)
4. inn effect sue the STATE with its consent
 Special Law - enacted by the Phil. Legislature authorizing an individual to sue the Philippine
government for injuries sustained whwne motorcycle collided with a government ambulance
B. Implied Consent - given when the STATE itself commences litigation or when it enters into Contract
# it does not apply where the contract relates to the exercise of its sovereign function
example : Naval base devoted to defense both US & Phil; not utilized to
commercials or business purposes

i. COMMENCEMENT TO LITIGATION FROILAN VS PAN ORIENTAL

ii. ENTERING TO CONTRACT US VS RUIZ

US VS GUINTO
REPUBLIC VS SANDIGANBAYAN
iii. NO CONSENT AMIGABLE VS CUENCA
SANTIAGO VS REPUBLIC
Exemption from Legal Requirements
State litigates, either directly or thru its authorized officeers, its not required to put up a bond
for damages, or an appeal bond, since it can be assumed that it is always solvent.
Neither it can be asked to pay the legal fees prescribed in the Rules of Court or the cost of suit
> it has expressly stipulated to pay it or when interest is allowed by an act of the legislature.
Although this rule is not observed where state is engaged in private business

SUABILITY VS LIABILITY
State is suable does not mean liable (in many cases , suable but not liable)
Suability is the result of the express or implied consent of the state to be sued
Liability determined after hearing on the basis of the relevant laws and established facts.

MERRIT VS PHILIPPINES
UP vs Dizon
ance

AYAN

bond

f suit