SESSION 1 August 11, 2023 approval of the President of the Philippines; that he appealed the action of

Q: If a law is inconsistent with the Constitution, what is the effect? the Shipping Commission to the President of the Philippines and the Cabinet
A: Courts must declare it unconstitutional, then it becomes void. restored him to all his rights under his original contract with the Shipping
Commission; that he had repeatedly demanded from the Pan Oriental
Q: What was the effect of the Spanish and Japanese Occupation on the Shipping Co. the possession of the vessel in question but the latter refused to
Philippine laws? do so.
A: The laws of the occupant remain until ratified. The lower court issued the writ of replevin prayed for by Froilan and by virtue
thereof the Pan Oriental Shipping Co. was divested of its possession of said
According to the Supreme Court the Armed Forces of the occupying state can vessel.
impose its will on the occupied territory and there is no need for a Pan Oriental Shipping Co. filed its answer denying the right of Froilan to the
constitution or a law in order to confirm this power because this is a possession of the said vessel; it alleged that the action of the Cabinet on
necessary consequence of war. In the same manner that the liberating forces restoring Froilan to his rights under his original contract with the Shipping
also have the power to declare the acts of the occupying state as null and Commission was null and void; that, in any event, Froilan had not complied
void. with the conditions precedent imposed by the Cabinet for the restoration of
the law of the occupants prevail his rights to the vessel under the original contract; that it suffered damages
Kasi during Spanish ph is declared under protectorate ng US >> effect ng in the amount of P22,764 for wrongful replevin in the month of February,
treaty of paris 1951, and the sum of P17,651 a month as damages suffered for wrongful
Tas nung japanese maman nung bumalik si McArthur nagdeclare siya na null replevin from March 1, 1951; it alleged that it had incurred necessary and
amd void kaya nga nareinstate ang 1935 consti useful expenses on the vessel amounting to P127,057 and claimed the right
So nakadipende siya sa nananakop to retain said vessel until its useful and necessary expenses had been
reimbursed.
According to the Supreme Court the Armed Forces of the occupying state can Government of the Republic of the Philippines, filed a complaint in
impose its will on the occupied territory and there is no need for a intervention alleging that Froilan had failed to pay to the Shipping
constitution or a law in order to confirm this power because this is a Commission (which name was later changed to Shipping Administration) the
necessary consequence of war. In the same manner that the liberating forces balance due on the purchase price of the vessel in question, the interest
also have the power to declare the acts of the occupying state as null and thereon, and its advances on insurance premium totalling P162,142,
void. excluding the dry-docking expenses incurred on said vessel by the Pan
Oriental Shipping Co.
The Pan Oriental Shipping Co. filed an answer to the complaint in
intervention alleging that the Government of the Republic of the Philippines
Q: State the Case of Ruffy. was obligated to deliver the vessel in question to
A: it by virtue of a contract of bare-boat charter with option to purchase
executed on June 16, 1949, by the latter in favor of the former; it also alleged
Q: How did we come to the institution of the 1987 Constitution? that it had made necessary and useful expenses on the vessel and claimed
A: the right of retention of the vessel.
The Government of the Republic of the Philippines brought the matter of said
Q: Can we sue a city or DPWH? payment and the circumstance surrounding it to the attention of the lower
A: No, this is equivalent to suing the state. The state has state immunity, court "in order that they may be taken into account by this Honorable Court
which means it cannot be sued without its consent. We can only make the in connection with the questions that are not pending before it for
city liable if the courts find them to be liable. determination”
The lower court held that the payment by Froilan to the Board of Liquidators
An unincorporated government agency such as the DPWH is without any constituted a payment and a discharge of Froilan's obligation to the
separate juridical personality of its own and hence enjoys immunity from Government of the Republic of the Philippines and ordered the dismissal of
suit. Even in the exercise of proprietary functions incidental to its primarily the latter's complaint in intervention.
governmental functions, an unincorporated agency still cannot be sued The Government of the Republic of the Philippines filed a motion to dismiss
without its consent. the counterclaim of the Pan Oriental Shipping Co. against it on the ground
that the purpose of said counterclaim was to compel the Government of the
As a general rule, a state may not be sued. However, if it consents, either Republic of the Philippines to deliver the vessel to it in the event that the
expressly or impliedly, then it may be the subject of a suit.34 There is express Government of the Republic of the Philippines recovers the vessel in question
consent when a law, either special or general, so provides. On the other from Froilan.
hand, there is implied consent when the state "enters into a contract or it The lower court dismissed the counterclaim of the Pan Oriental Shipping Co.
itself commences litigation." as prayed for by the Republic of the Philippines. It if from this order of the
lower court dismissing its counterclaim against the Government of the
Q: Amigable v. Cuenca, 43 SCRA 460 Republic of the Philippines.
A:

Q: Froilan vs Pan Oriental Shopping

A:

FERNANDO A. FROILAN, plaintiff, vs. PAN ORIENTAL SHIPPING CO.,

defendant
G. No. L-6060. September 30, 1954
Government of the Republic of the Philippines and ordered the dismissal of
Facts:
the latter's complaint in intervention.
Plaintiff-appellee, Fernando A. Froilan, filed a complaint against the
The Government of the Republic of the Philippines filed a motion to dismiss
defendant-appellant, Pan Oriental Shipping Co., alleging that he purchased
the counterclaim of the Pan Oriental Shipping Co.
from the Shipping Commission the vessel FS- 197 for P200,000, paying
P50,000 down and agreeing to pay the balance in installments; that to secure
Issue:
the payment of the balance of the purchase price, he executed a chattel
Whether the intervention the Government in effect waived its right of no
mortgage of said vessel in favor of the Shipping Commission; that for various
suability.
reason, among them the non- payment of the installments, the Shipping
Commission took possession of said vessel and considered the contract of
Ruling:
sale cancelled; that the Shipping Commission chartered and delivered said
because the moment when the government filed its complaint in
vessel to the defendant-appellant Pan Oriental Shipping Co. subject to the
intervention which in effect waived its right of non-suability.
 automatically acquires, within certain limits, the right to set up whatever
The immunity of the state from suits does not deprive it of the right to sue claims and other defenses he might have against the state.
private parties in its own courts. The state as plaintiff may avail itself of the
different forms of actions open to private litigants. In short, by taking the
initiative in an action against a private party, the state surrenders its It appearing, therefore, that the grounds of the motion to dismiss are well
privileged position and comes down to the level of the defendant. The latter taken, the counterclaim
automatically acquires, within certain limits, the right to set up whatever of the defendant is dismissed, without pronouncement as to costs.
claims and other defenses he might have against the state. The lower court also erred in holding that, as the intervenor had not made
any claim against the
defendant, the latter's counterclaim had no foundation. The complaint in
"WHEREFORE, the defendant respectfully prays that judgment be rendered intervention sought to
ordering the intervenor Republic of the Philippines alternatively to deliver to recover possession of the vessel in question from the plaintiff, and this claim
the defendants the possession of the said vessel, or to comply with its is logically adverse
obligation to the defendant or causing the delivery to the latter of the said to the position assumed by the defendant that it has a better right to said
vessel by recovering the same from plaintiff, with costs. possession than the
The intervenor contends that the complaint in intervention having been plaintiff who alleges in his complaint that he is entitled to recover the vessel
dismissed and no appeal having been taken, the dismissal of said complaint is from the defendant.
tantamount to a judgment. At any rate a counterclaim should be judged by its own allegations, and not
The complaint in intervention did not contain any claim whatsoever against by the averments of
the defendant Pan Oriental Shipping Co.; hence, the counterclaim has no the adverse party. It should be recalled that the defendant's theory is that
foundation. the plaintiff had already
The question as to whether the Court has jurisdiction over the intervenor lost his rights under the contract with the Shipping Administration and that,
with regard to the counterclaim, the Court is of the opinion that it has no on the other hand,
jurisdiction over said intervenor. the defendant is relying on the charter contract executed in its favor by the
intervenor which is
Froilan vs. Pan Oriental Shipping Co. bound to protect the defendant in its possession of the vessel. In other
words, the counterclaim
Citation: calls for specific performance on the part of the intervenor. As to whether
this counterclaim is
G.R L- 6060, September 30, 1954 meritorious is another question which is not now before us.
The other ground for dismissing the defendant's counterclaim is that the
I. State is immune from
suit. This is untenable, because by filing its complaint in intervention the
Facts: Government in effect
waived its right of no suability.
Defendant Pan Oriental took possession of the vessel in question after it had It is however, contended for the intervenor that, if there was at all any
been repossessed by the Shipping Administration and title thereto waiver, it was in favor of
reacquired by the government, following the original purchaser, Fernando the plaintiff against whom the complaint in intervention was
Froilan’s, default in his payment of the unpaid balance and insurance directed. This contention is
premiums for the said vessel. Pan Oriental chartered said vessel and untenable. As already stated, the complaint in intervention was in a sense in
operated the same after it had repaired the vessel and paid the stipulated derogation of the
initial payment, thereby exercising its option to purchase, pursuant to a defendant's claim over the possession of the vessel in question.
bareboat charter contract entered between said company and the Shipping Wherefore, the appealed order is hereby reversed and set aside and the case
Corporation. The Cabinet resolved to restore Froilan to his right sunder the remanded to the
original contract of sale on condition that he shall pay a sum of money upon lower court for further proceedings. So ordered, without costs
delivery of the vessel to him, that he shall continue paying the remaining
installments due, and that he shall assume the expenses incurred for the Q: Mr. A is talking to hi,s father a law maker, asking his father, will there be a
repair and by docking of the vessel. Pan Oriental protested to this restoration possibility, that we wil have btter employment for people and foreign
of Froilan’s right sunder the contract of sale, for the reason that when the investments to come and also allowing Filipinos to be marrying foreigners
vessel was delivered to it, the Shipping Administration had authority to and also filipinos if they are of the same gender? and the father asks, will
dispose of said authority to the property, Froilan having already relinquished there be no possibility, that in one particular district the leaders or the
whatever rights he may have thereon. Froilan paid the required cash of poeple to be elected there will be coming from one famiuly dear father? How
P10,000.00 and as Pan Oriental refused to surrender possession of the vessel, can these things I suggested to you, be made effective?
he filed an action for in the CFI of Manila to recover possession thereof and
have him declared the rightful owner of said property. The Republic of the
Philippines was allowed to intervene in said civil case praying for the
possession of the in order that the chattel mortgage constituted thereon may
be foreclosed. II.

Issue: Whether or not the Republic of the Philippines is immune from suit.

III.

Ruling:

No, because the moment when the government filed its complaint in
intervention which in effect waived its right of non-suability.

The immunity of the state from suits does not deprive it of the right to sue
private parties in its own courts. The state as plaintiff may avail itself of the
different forms of actions open to private litigants. In short, by taking the
initiative in an action against a private party, the state surrenders its
privileged position and comes down to the level of the defendant. The latter