ANGEL MINISTERIO and ASUNCION SADAYA, petitioners, 

vs.
THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF CEBU, Fourth Branch, Presided by the Honorable,
Judge JOSE C. BORROMEO, THE PUBLIC HIGHWAY COMMISSIONER, and THE
AUDITOR GENERAL, respondents.

Facts:

Angel Ministerio and Asuncion Sadaya), filed a complaint with the Court of First Instance in Cebu
for the payment of just compensation for a registered lot with an area of 1045 square meter, alleging that
in 1927, the National Government, through authorized representatives took physical and material
possession of it and used it in widening of the Gorordo Avenue, Cebu City without paying just
compensation and without any written or verbal agreement. The appraisal committee of the City of Cebu
appraising the just price of lot at P50.00 per square meter for a total price of P 52,250.00. There was an
allegation repeated demands for the payment of its price or return of its possession by Ministerio and
Sadaya , but the defendants, Public Highway Commissioner and the Auditor General refused to restore its
possession. The principal defense of the the respondents relied upon the suit is one against the
government.

The lower court decision is that the case is brought against the Public Highway Commissioner and
Auditor General and not against the National Government. Since no compensation was given to the
owner of the land, the case is undoubtedly against the National Government.

Issues:

Is a case against the National Government without its consent be dismissed?

Ruling:
Yes, the government cannot be sued without its consent.
The litigation would result in a financial responsibility of the Government, the liability of the official
sued is not personal and it adversely affected the government.
The case of Syquia vs. Almeda Lopez, when a charge for financial liability to the Government, the
suit be regarded as one against the Government, the courts cannot validly entertained except with the
consent of the Government while in the case of Bureau of Telecommunications vs Aligean, that the State
authorizes legal acts by its officers and unauthorized acts of government officials or officer are not act of
the state. The acts of Public Highway Commissioner and Auditor General is within the capacity of their
duties, then it will be the suit against the Government.
The lower court, instead of dismissing the same, could have passed upon the claims of such. The
relief would be for the Government to make due compensation. When doctrine of government immunity
from suit, gives injustice to its citizen, the doctrine cannot be served.