LegalPurple

Facts: Respondent executive secretary (Henchanova) authorized importation of 67,000 tons of foreign rice to be purchased from private sources (Burma and Vietnam). Ramon A. Gonzales, a rice planter and president of ilo-ilo palay and corn planters association, filed and averring that in making or attempting to make importation of foreign rice are acting without jurisdiction or in excess of jurisdiction because RA 2207, explicitly prohibits the importation of rice and corn by Rice and Corn Administration or any government agency. Issues: Whether the importation of foreign rice can prosper? Whether the executive secretary acted within his authorities and jurisdiction? Held: The importation of foreign rice may prosper provided that there is an existing or imminent shortage of such commodity of much gravity as to constitute national emergency. This exception however was not present; therefore, the importation of foreign rice cannot prosper. The executive secretary had ...

Facts: The plaintiff filed with the Court of First Instance of Pangasinan, an action to collect a sum of money against the above defendants. He suffered injuries while undergoing a 10-month military training at Camp Floridablanca, Pampanga. He filed a claim under Commonwealth Act 400 and in April 1957 with the Adjutant General’s Office which later disallow his claim for disability benefit. After further demands of the plaintiff, the same Adjutant General’s Office denied the claim, alleging that the Commonwealth Act 400 had already been repealed by RA 610 which took effect January 1, 1950. That by the reason of the injuries suffered by plaintiff, he was deprived of his sight or vision rendering him permanently disabled; and by the reason of unjustified refusal of defendants on the claim, plaintiff was deprived of his disability pension from July 1948 totalling no less than P4,000 at the rate of P20/mo and suffered moral damages and attorney’s fees the amount of P2,000. The Philippine ...

FACTS: The defendant, as Director of the Bureau of Public Works, without authority obtained first from the Court of First Instance of Ilocos Sur, without obtaining first a right of way, and without the consent and knowledge of the plaintiff, and against her express objection unlawfully took possession of portions of the three parcels of land and caused an irrigation canal to be constructed on the portion of the three parcels of land on to the damage and prejudice of the plaintiff. ISSUE: Whether or not this is a suit against the state? RULING: No, the evidence and conceded facts in finding that in the trespass on plaintiff's land defendant committed acts outside the scope of his authority. When he went outside the boundaries of the right of way upon plaintiff's land and damaged it or destroyed its former condition and usefulness, he must be held to have designedly departed from the duties imposed on him by law. Ordinarily the officer or employee committing the tor...

Facts: BPEA (respondents) filed a complaint by an acting prosecutor of the Industrial Court against petitioners BOP (secretary of Department of General Services and Director of BOP). The complaint alleged that both the secretary of DOG and the director of BOP have been engaging in unfair labor practices. Answering the complaint, the petitioners (BOP), denied the charges of unfair labor practices attributed to them and alleged that the BPEA complainants were suspended pending result of administrative investigation against them for breach of Civil Service rules and regulations; that the BOP is not an industrial concern engaged for the purpose of gain but of the republic performing governmental functions. For relief, they prayed that the case be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. But later on January 27, 1959, the trial judge of Industrial Court sustained the jurisdiction of the court on the theory that the functions of the BOP are “exclusively proprietary in nature,” since they receiv...

Facts : The private respondents are suing several officers of the U.S. Air Force station in Clark Air Base in connection with the bidding conducted by them for contracts for barbering services in the said base. On February 24, 1986, The U.S. Air Force through its Western Pacific Contracting Office in Okinawa Area Exchange solicited bids through the contracting officer, James F. Shaw. The Private respondents submitted their bids because they are concessionaire inside the Clark air base for several years, but the bidding was won by the defendant Ramon Dizon with objection of the private respondents because the defendant submitted bidding not mention in the solicitation. Petitioners Yvonne Reeves and Frederic M. Smouse explained that bidding is not awarded to Dizon but an extension of his present contract until August 31, 1986. June 30, 1986 the private respondents file a complaint to RTC to compel PHAX and the petitioners to cancel the award to defendant Dizon and to conduct re-bidding...

Facts : On July 6, 1954, (24) twenty four employees from its dormitory known as Normal Hall of the Philippine Normal College, filled an action in the COF of Manila against the PNC for the recovery of salary differentials and overtime pay. The Solicitor General on behalf of the defendant answers and denies the latter liability. The court ordered it dismissed before the case was tried on the merits, on the ground that neither one of the defendants was a corporation or a juridical entity with capacity to be sued. The plaintiffs took an appeal to Supreme Court, alleging that it was an error to dismiss their case on the ground that, R.A. No. 416 took effect July, 1949 converted PNS to PNC, thus created a Board of Trustees to administer the affairs as a corporation under section 13 of the amended Act 1455 (Corporate Law), with the power “to sue and to be sued in any court.” Issue: Whether or not the PNC as a government corporation can be sued. Held: The state has already given the...

Facts : On August 9, 1976, Ildefonso Santiago through his counsel filed an action for revocation of a Deed of Donation executed by him and his spouse in January of 1971, with the Bureau of Plant Industry as the Donee, in the Court of First Instance of Zamboanga City. Mr. Santiago alleged that the Bureau, contrary to the terms of donation, failed to install lighting facilities and water system on the property and to build an office building and parking lot thereon which should have been constructed and ready for occupancy on before December7, 1974. That because of the circumstances, Mr. Santiago concluded that he was exempt from compliance with an explicit constitutional command, as invoked in the Santos v Santos case, a 1952 decision which is similar. The Court of First Instance dismissed the action in favor of the respondent on the ground that the state cannot be sued without its consent, and Santos v Santos case is discernible. The Solicitor General, Estelito P. Mendoza affirmed ...

FACT: The petitioner Alicia O. Arcega, doing business under the firm name Fairmont Ice Cream Company,” filed a complaint before the court against the respondents Central Bank of the Philippines and Philippine National Bank, for the refund from allegedly unauthorized payment made by her of the 17% special excise tax on foreign exchange. The Central Bank moved to dismiss the complaint on the grounds, among others, that the trial court has no jurisdiction over the subject-matter of the action, because the judgment sought will constitute a financial charge against the Government, and therefore the suit is one against the Government, which cannot prosper without its consent, and in this case no such consent has been given.  The petitioner appealed, but the court dismissed the complaint on the ground set forth in the Central Bank’s motion to dismiss. The petitioner Arcega filed a motion for reconsideration of the resolution to wh...

Facts:  Victoria Amigable is the registered owner of a particular lot. At the back of her Transfer Certificate of Title (1924), there was no annotation in favor of the government of any right or interest in the property. Without prior expropriation or negotiated sale, the government used a portion of the lot for the construction of the Mango and Gorordo Avenues. On 1958, Amigable’s counsel wrote the President of the Philippines, requesting payment of the portion of the said lot. It was disallowed by the Auditor General in his 9th Endorsement. Petitioner then filed in the court a quo a complaint against the Republic of the Philippines and Nicolas Cuenca, in his capacity as Commissioner of Public Highways for the recovery of ownership and possession of the lot. According to the defendants, the action was premature because it was not filed first at the Office of the Auditor General. According to the...