6. DEL MAR V. PHILIPPINE VETERANS ADM (PVA)

Facts:Del Mar averred that he served during WW II as chief Judge advocate of the Cebu Area Command(a duly recognized guerrilla org.) w/ the rank of major; that he subsequently obtained an honorable discharge from the service on 10/20/46 on a cert. of permanent total physical disability;that upon proper claim presented and after hearing and adjudication, the Phil. Veterans BD granted him a monthly life pension of P50 effective 1/28/47;that in 3/50,the aid Bd,discounted payment of monthly life pension on the ground that his receipt of similar pension from the Us gov’t,thru the US Veterans Admin. by reason of military service rendered in the US in the Far East during the war, precluded him from receiving any further monthly life pension from the Phil. Govt; that he wrote the said BB. Twice, demanding the continued payment of his monthly pension but his demands went unheeded. And petition for mandamus was filed w/ CFI Cebu w/c rendered judgement upholding Del mar’s claim.The PVA argues that the court a quo was w/o jurisdiction to try civil cases bec.it involves a money claim against PVA- a mere agency of the Gov’t performing governmental functions w/ no juridical personality of its own-and,in reality, partakes of an action against the Phil. Gov’t which is immune from suit w/o its consent.

HELD: As a general proposition, the rule on the immunity of the Government from suit w/o its consent holds true in all actions resulting in “adverse consequences on the public treasury,whether in the disbursements of funds or loss pf prop. Needless to say,in such actions,w/c,in effect,constitute suit against the Gov’t, the court has no option but to dismiss them. Nonetheless,the rule admits of an exception. It finds no application where a claimant. As clearly discernible from the circumstances, the case at bar falls under the exception.

19. ACT NO. 3083ACT NO. 3083 - AN ACT DEFINING THE CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS MAY BE SUEDSection 1Complaint against Government. — Subject to the provisions of this Act, the Government of the Philippine Islands hereby consents and submits to be sued upon any moneyed claim involving liability arising from contract, expressed or implied, which could serve as a basis of civil action between private parties. Section 2 A person desiring to avail himself of the privilege herein conferred must show that he has presented his claim to the Insular Auditor 1 and that the latter did not decide the same within two months from the date of its presentation.Section 3Venue. — Original actions brought pursuant to the authority conferred in this Act shall be instituted in the Court of First Instance of the City of Manila or of the province were the claimant resides, at the option of the latter, upon which court exclusive original jurisdiction is hereby conferred to hear and determine such actions. Sec. 4. Actions instituted as aforesaid shall be governed by the same rules of procedure, both original and appellate, as if the litigants were private parties. Sec. 5. When the Government of the Philippine Island is plaintiff in an action instituted in any court of original jurisdiction, the defendant shall have the right to assert therein, by way of set-off or counterclaim in a similar action between private parties.

Sec. 6. Process in actions brought against the Government of the Philippine Islands pursuant to the authority granted in this Act shall be served upon the Attorney-General 2 whose duty it shall be to appear and make defense, either himself or through delegates. Sec. 7. Execution. — No execution shall issue upon any judgment rendered by any court against the Government of the Philippine Islands under the provisions of this Act; but a copy thereof duly certified by the clerk of the Court in which judgment is rendered shall be transmitted by such clerk to the Governor-General, 3 within five days after the same becomes final. Sec. 8. Transmittal of Decision. — The Governor-General, 4 at the commencement of each regular session of the Legislature, 5 shall transmit to that body for appropriate action all decisions so received by him, and if said body determine that payment should be made, it shall appropriate the sum which the Government has been sentenced to pay, including the same in the appropriations for the ensuing year. Sec. 9. This Act shall take effect on its approval.Approved: March 16, 1923.

21. ARTICLE 2180 OF THE CIVIL CODE Art. 2176. Whoever by act or omission causes damage to another, there being

fault or negligence, is obliged to pay for the damage done. Such fault or negligence, if there is no pre-existing contractual relation between the parties, is called a quasi-delict and is governed by the provisions of this Chapter.

Art. 2180. The obligation imposed by Article 2176 is demandable not only for one's own acts or omissions, but also for those of persons for whom one is responsible.

* The father and, in case of his death or incapacity, the mother, are responsible for the damages caused by the minor children who live in their company.

* Guardians are liable for damages caused by the minors or incapacitated persons who are under their authority and live in their company.

* The owners and managers of an establishment or enterprise are likewise responsible for damages caused by their employees in the service of the branches in which the latter are employed or on the occasion of their functions.

* Employers shall be liable for the damages caused by their employees and household helpers acting within the scope of their assigned tasks, even though the former are not engaged in any business or industry.

* The State is responsible in like manner when it acts through a special agent; but not when the damage has been caused by the official to whom the task done properly pertains, in which case what is provided in Article 2176 shall be applicable.

* Lastly, teachers or heads of establishments of arts and trades shall be liable for damages caused by their pupils and students or apprentices, so long as they remain in their custody.

The responsibility treated of in this article shall cease when the persons herein mentioned prove that they observed all the diligence of a good father of a family to prevent damage.

34. MERITT VS. GOVT OF THE PHIL. ISLANDS.

Facts: Meritt, riding in a motorcycle collided with an ambulance of the General Hospital. He was severely injured damaging his efficiency as contractor. The inquiry arises whether the Government is liable for the damages due to the negligence committed by an agent or employee of the government which is the chauffer.

Issue: Whether or not the Government is liable in this case.

Held: No. According to Art. 1903, Paragraph 5 of Civil Code, in a damage case, the responsibility of the State is limited to that which it contracts through a special agent. The evidence showed that the chauffer, who acted negligently, of the ambulance was not such of an agent. The court held that the judgment rests solely with the Legislature and not with the Court.