TYPES OF JURISDNICTION (MANIFESTATION OF

SOVEREIGNTY)
1. TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION
Territorial jurisdiction is the authority of the State to have
all persons and things within its territorial limits to be
completely subject to its control and protection.
Art. 14 Civil Code-- Penal laws and those of public security and
safety shall be obligatory upon all who live or sojourn in the
Philippine territory, subject to the principles of public international
law and to treaty stipulations.
>Penal laws are obligatory to even non Filipino citizens
(Obligatory Force of Penal Laws)
>1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic relations exempts
diplomatic agents/give them immunity
> e.g. immunity via treaty -- Phil-US Military Bases Agreement

2. PERSONAL JURISDICTION
Personal jurisdiction is the authority of the state over its
nationals, their persons, property, and acts,
whether within or outside its territory. The Civil
Code provision that prohibitory and mandatory laws
follow citizens wherever they go is an example.
Civil Code Article 15. Laws relating to family rights and duties,
or to the status, condition and legal capacity of persons are
binding upon citizens of the Philippines, even though living
abroad. (9a)
CC Article 16. Real property as well as personal property is
subject to the law of the country where it is stipulated.
However, intestate and testamentary successions, both with
respect to the order of succession and to the amount of
successional rights and to the intrinsic validity of testamentary
provisions, shall be regulated by the national law of the person
whose succession is under consideration, whatever may be the
nature of the property and regardless of the country wherein said
property may be found. (10a)
CC Article 17. The forms and solemnities of contracts, wills, and
other public instruments shall be governed by the laws of the
country in which they are executed. When the acts referred to are
executed before the diplomatic or consular officials of the
Republic of the Philippines in a foreign country, the solemnities
established by Philippine laws shall be observed in their
execution. Prohibitive laws concerning persons, their acts or
property, and those which have for their object public order,
public policy and good customs shall not be rendered ineffective
by laws or judgments promulgated, or by determinations or
conventions agreed upon in a foreign country. (11a)

3. EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION
Extraterritorial jurisdiction is the authority of the State
over persons, things or acts, outside its territorial
limits by reason of their effects to its territory. Art.
2 of the RPC is a classic example of this.
By agreement w/ other states, a state may establish its
legal institutions outside its territorial limits. Thus if a
state does not have sufficient confidence in the
administration of justice and the system of law obtaining
in a particular country, it may enter into a treaty for the
establishment of its own courts in the latter country
where its citizens or nationals may be tried.
Regardless of treaty or agreement,

however, a state has full authority to adopt rules

intended to apply to persons, whether citizens or
aliens, and things found in the territory of other states or
on the high seas under certain conditions. Of course, the
actual enforcement of rules intended to have
extraterritorial effect may be accomplished only when the
persons concerned are found w/in the territorial
jurisdiction of the state. To enforce them in the territorial
limits of another state would be to violate the sovereignty
of the latter, unless this state gives its consent thereto.
Thus, we have Art. 2 of the
Revised Penal Code:
RPC Article 2. Application of its provisions. 1. Should commit an offense while on a Philippine ship or airship
2. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency note of the
Philippine Islands or obligations and securities issued by the
Government of the Philippine Islands;
3. Should be liable for acts connected with the introduction into
these islands of the obligations and securities mentioned in the
presiding number;
4. While being public officers or employees, should commit an
offense in the exercise of their functions; or
5. Should commit any of the crimes against national security and
the law of nations, defined in Title One of Book Two of this Code.

SUABILITY OF THE STATE

1987 Constitution Art. XVI, Sec. 3. The State may not be
sued without its consent.
The doctrine is also available to foreign States
insofar as they are sought to be sued in the courts of the
local State. The added basis in this case is the principle
of the sovereign equality of States, under w/c one State
cannot assert jurisdiction over another in violation of the
maxim par in parem non habet imperium. To do so would
"unduly vex the peace of nations." (Cruz.)
Exceptions to the Nonsuability Rule:
(1) where a claimant institutes an action against a
functionary who fails to comply w/ his statutory
duty to release the amount claimed from the public
funds already appropriated by statute for the
benefit of the said claimant
Del Mar v. Philippine Veterans Adm (PVA), 51 SCRA 340
(1973)
(2) where the public official is being sued in his
private and personal capacity as an ordinary
citizen
Shauf v CA, 191 SCRA 713 (1990)
(3) public officials, having been found to have
acted beyond the scope of their authority, may be
held liable for damages
Republic v Sandoval, 220 SCRA 124 (1993)
(4) When the Government Gives its Consent
How consent is given--The consent to be sued, in order to
be effective, must come from the State, acting through a
duly enacted statute. Waiver of state immunity can only
be made by an act of legislative body.

(5) Quasi-Delicts commited by Special Agents

(6) GOCCs (government-owned or controlled
corporations)
(7)COUNTERCLAIM
Express consent:
(1) Money claims arising from contracts, express or
implied.
>Act No. 3083. An Act Defining the Conditions under
which the Government of the Philippines may be Sued.
Sec. 1. 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 a
basis of civil action between private parties.
Sec. 2. A person desiring to avail himself of the privilege must
show that he has presented his claim to the Commission on Audit
and that the latter did not decide the same within two months
from the date of its presentation.
Sec. 3. Original actions brought pursuant to the authority
conferred in this Act shall be instituted in the RTC Manila or of the
province where 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 Philippines 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
Philippines pursuant to the authority granted in this Act shall be
served upon the Solicitor-General whose duty it shall be to appear
and make defense, either himself or through delegates.
Sec. 7. No execution shall issue upon any judgment rendered by
any court against the Government of the Philippines 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 President of the Philippines,
within five days after the same becomes final.
Sec. 8. The President of the Philippines, at the commencement of
each regular session of the Legislature, 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 Approval March 16, 1923.

Com. Act 327. An Act Fixing the Time within which the
Auditor General shall Render His Decisions and
Prescribing the Manner of Appeal Therefrom.
Sec. 1. In all cases involving the settlement of accounts
or claims, other than those of accountable officers, the Auditor
General shall act and decide the same within sixty days, exclusive
of Sundays and holidays, after their presentation. If said accounts
or claims need reference to other persons, office or offices, xx
counted from the last comment necessary to a proper decision is

received by him. With respect to the accounts of accountable

officers, the Auditor General shall act on the same within one
hundred days after their submission, Sundays and holidays
excepted. In case of accounts or claims already submitted to but
still pending decision by the Auditor General on or before the
approval of this Act, the periods provided in this section shall
commence from the date of such approval.
Sec. 2. The party aggrieved by the final decision of the
Auditor General in the settlement of an account or claim may,
within thirty days from receipt of the decision, take an appeal in
writing:
(a) xxx
(b) To the President of the Philippines, or
(c) To the Supreme Court of the Philippines, if the
appellant is a private person or entity.
If there are more than one appellant, all appeals shall
be taken to the same authority resorted to by the first appellant.
From a decision adversely affecting the interests of the
Government, the appeal may be taken by the proper head of the
department or in case of local governments by the head of the
office or branch of the Government immediately concerned. The
appeal shall specifically set forth the particular action of the
Auditor General to which exception is taken with the reasons and
authorities relied on for reversing such decision.
Sec. 3. This Act shall take effect upon its approval. June 18, 1938.

Implied consent:
(1) When the government enters into business
contracts
When the government is in the performance of
governmental function (jure imperii), even if it
enters into a contract with private persons, it cannot be
sued without its consent.
Thus in United States v Ruiz, 136 SCRA 487 (1985). a
contract for the repair of wharves and piers at the naval
base in Subic was held to be in line with the
governmental function of the US Government and so the
immunity existed.
>>But when the government enters into commercial
contracts and descends to the status of ordinary
persons (jure gestioni), it can be sued like any other
person.
In Malong v PNR, 138 SCRA 63 (1985), it was held that
when the state organized the Philippine National Railway,
it divested itself of its sovereign capacity, and so became
liable for damages that arose from the death of one who
fell from an overloaded train.
Scope of consent
(1) Under Act No.3083
Sec. 1. Subject to the provisions of this Act, 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 a basis of civil action between
private parties.

When a money judgment is given against the

government, the ordinary rule for execution would not

apply, for the consent of the government to be sued is

only up to the point of judgment. If it does not pay, it
cannot be compelled to pay by attachment or otherwise
(how does one attach the Quezon bridge?)
The procedure is for one to furnish the Office of the
President with the decision so it could include the
amount in the budget for the next year as the
basis for appropriation (since there can be no
disbursement of public funds except in pursuance
of law).
If the judge nonetheless issues a writ of execution against
government funds or property, no ordinary civil action
can be filed against the judge, unless there is a showing
of malice. But, a reinstatement of the funds to
government accounts and refund by the private party can
be ordered. (Commissioner of Public Highways v San
Diego, 31 SCRA 616 (1970), reiterating the case of Alsua
v Johnson.)
(2) Under a charter
When consent to be sued is provided by the charter, the
consent does not stop with the rendition, but goes up to
the satisfaction of the judgment.
In PNB v CIR, 81 SCRA 314 (1978), the SC held that since the
PHHC had the capacity to be sued, any judgment against it could
be enforced by a writ of execution, and its funds could even be
garnished.
PNB v CIR, 81 SCRA 314 (1978), supra.

Measure of recovery
When property has been unlawfully taken by the
government so that it is now compelled to make
payment, the measure of recovery is the fair market
value of the property at the time of taking (Ministerio v
CFI, 40 SCRA 464).
The value of the peso in relation to the dollar at the time
of taking cannot be considered. For Art 1250 of the Civil
Code concerning supervening inflation has no application
in eminent domain cases, being applicable only to
contractual obligations [Commissioner of Public Highways
v Burgos, 96 SCRA 831 (1980)]. Ultimately, the face
value of the peso then is the amount to be paid now.
(5) Quasi-Delicts commited by Special Agents
CC 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 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 Art.
2176 shall be applicable.

CC 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. (ibid.)

> Art. 2180 of the Civil Code allows a suit against

the government for quasi-delicts committed by the
government when acting through special agents
(those performing non-regular functions)
>But if the tortious act was committed by a regular
employee, the injured party could only bring a suit
for damages against the employee in his personal
capacity.
(6) GOCCs (government-owned or controlled
corporations)
When the government creates a corporation, it invariably
provides this corporation a separate entity and with the
capacity to sue and be sued. If the government entity is
given the capacity to be sued, the suit encompasses any
kind of action, including one from tort.
SSS V. CA, 120 SCRA 707 (1983)
(7)COUNTERCLAIM
If the Govt. files a complaint, defendant may file a
counterclaim against it <Froilan vs Oriental Pan Shipping,
12 SCRA 276, GR L-6060 (Sept. 30, 1950)>
GOVERNMENT
Government is that institution or aggregate of institutions
by which an independent society makes and carries out
those rules of action which are necessary to enable men
to live in a social state or which are imposed upon the
people forming that society by those who possess the
power or authority of prescribing them. Government is
the aggregate of authorities which rule a society. (US v
Dorr, 2 Phil 332, 339).
TWO KINDS OF FUNCTIONS
(1)the constituent -Constituent functions constitute the
very bonds of society and are therefore compulsory.
(2)the ministrant. -Ministrant functions are those
undertaken to advance the general interests of society,
such as public works, public charity, and regulation of
trade and industry. These functions are merely optional
Parens Patriae
One of the important tasks of the govt is to act for the
State as parens patriae, or guardian of the rights of the
people. This prerogative of parens patriae is inherent in
the supreme power every State, whether that power is
lodged in a royal person or in the legislature, and has no
affinity to those arbitrary powers which are sometimes
exerted by irresponsible monarchs to the great detriment
of the people and the destruction of their liberties (Cruz)

De Jure & De Facto Governments

A de jure govt has rightful title but no power or control,
either bec. this has been withdrawn from it or bec. it has
not yet actually entered into the exercise thereof. A de
facto govt, on the other hand, is a govt of fact, that is, it
actually exercises power or control but w/o legal title.
The three kinds of de facto govt are as follows:
(1) The govt that gets possession and control of, or
usurps, by force or by the voice of the majority, the
rightful legal govt and maintans itself against the will of
the latter.
(2) That established as an independent govt by the
inhabitants of a country who rise in insurrection against
the parent state.
(3) That which is established and maintained by military
forces who invade and occupy a territory of the enemey
in the course of war, and w/c is denominated as a govt of
paramount force, like the Second Republic of the Phils.
established by the Japanese belligerent.
The characteristics of this kind of de facto govt
are:
(a) Its existence is maintained by active military power
w/in the territories, and against the rightful authority of
an established and lawful govt.
(b) During its existence, it must necessarily be obeyed in
civil matters by private citizens who, by acts of obedience
rendered in submission to such force, do not become
responsible, as wrongdoers, for those acts, though not
warranted by the laws of the rightful govt.
Adherence to International Law
1987 Consti; Art 2; Section 2. The Philippines renounces
war as an instrument of national policy, adopts the
generally accepted principles of international law as part
of the law of the land and adheres to the policy of peace,
equality, justice, freedom, cooperation, and amity with all
nations.
(Tanada vs Angara)
Supremacy of Civilian Authority
1987 Consti; Art 2; Section 3. Civilian authority is, at all times,
supreme over the military. The Armed Forces of the Philippines is
the protector of the people and the State. Its goal is to secure the
sovereignty of the State and the integrity of the national territory.
1987 Consti; Art 7; Section 18. The President shall be the
Commander-in-Chief of all armed forces of the Philippines and
whenever it becomes necessary, he may call out such armed
forces to prevent or suppress lawless violence, invasion or
rebellion. In case of invasion or rebellion, when the public safety

requires it, he may, for a period not exceeding sixty days,

suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus or place the
Philippines or any part thereof under martial law. Within fortyeight hours from the proclamation of martial law or the
suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, the
President shall submit a report in person or in writing to the
Congress. The Congress, voting jointly, by a vote of at least a
majority of all its Members in regular or special session, may
revoke such proclamation or suspension, which revocation shall
not be set aside by the President. Upon the initiative of the
President, the Congress may, in the same manner, extend such
proclamation or suspension for a period to be determined by the
Congress, if the invasion or rebellion shall persist and public
safety requires it.
The Congress, if not in session, shall, within twenty-four hours
following such proclamation or suspension, convene in
accordance with its rules without need of a call.
The Supreme Court may review, in an appropriate proceeding
filed by any citizen, the sufficiency of the factual basis of the
proclamation of martial law or the suspension of the privilege of
the writ or the extension thereof, and must promulgate its
decision thereon within thirty days from its filing.
A state of martial law does not suspend the operation of the
Constitution, nor supplant the functioning of the civil courts or
legislative assemblies, nor authorize the conferment of
jurisdiction on military courts and agencies over civilians where
civil courts are able to function, nor automatically suspend the
privilege of the writ.

The suspension of the privilege of the writ shall

apply only to persons judicially charged for
rebellion or offenses inherent in or directly
connected with invasion.
During the suspension of the privilege of the writ, any
person thus arrested or detained shall be judicially
charged within three days, otherwise he shall be
released.
Gudani vs Senga

Separation of Church and State

Art. II, Sec. 6. The separation of the Church and State shall be
inviolable.
Art. III, Sec. 5. No law shall be made respecting an
establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise
thereof. The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession
and worship, without discrimination or preference, shall forever
be allowed. No religious test shall be required for the exercise of
civil or political rights.
Art. IX, C, Sec. 2(5) xxx Religious denominations and sects shall
not be registered (as a political party, organization, or coalition by
the COMELEC).
Art. VI, Sec. 5(2) The party-list representatives shall constitute

twenty per centum of the total number of representatives

including those under the party list. For three consecutive terms
after the ratification of this Constitution, one-half of the seats
allocated to the party-list representatives shall be filled, as
provided by law, by selection or election from the labor, peasant,
urban poor, indigenous cultural communities, women, youth, and
such other sectors as may be provided by law, except the
religious sector.

Exceptions:
Art. VI, Sec. 28(3). Charitable institutions, churches, parsonages
or convents appurtenant thereto, mosques, non-profit cemeteries,
and all lands, buildings, and improvements, actually, directly, and
exclusively used for religious, charitable, or educational purposes
shall be exempt from taxation.
Sec. 29(2). No public money or property shall be appropriated,
applied, paid or employed directly or indirectly, for the use,
benefit, or support of any sect, church, denomination, sectarian
institution, or system of religion, or of any priest, preacher,
minister, or other religious teacher, or dignitary as such, except
when such priest, preacher, minister, or dignitary is assigned to
the Armed Forces of the Philippines, or any penal institution, or
government orphanage or leprosarium.
Art. XIV, Sec. 3(3). At the option expressed in writing by the
parents or guardians, religion shall be allowed to be taught to
their children or wards in public elementary and high schools
within the regular class hours by instructors designated or
approved by the religious authorities of the religion to which the
children or wards belong, without additional cost to the
Government.
Sec. 4(2). Educational institutions, other than those established
by religious groups and mission boards, shall be owned solely by
citizens of the Philippines or corporations or associations at least
60% of the capital of which is owned by such citizens. The
Congress may, however, require increased Filipino equity
participation in all educational institutions.

>The control and administration of educational

institutions shall be vested in citizens of the Philippines.
>No educational institutions shall be established
exclusively for aliens and no group of aliens shall
comprise more than 1/3 of the enrollment in any school.
The provisions of this subsection shall not apply to
schools established for foreign diplomatic personnel and
their dependents and, unless otherwise provided by law,
for other foreign temporary residents.
<Everson vs Board of Education>