Case Title: Air

Transportation
Office (ATO) v.
Sps. David and
Elisea Ramos

G.R. no and D
ate: G.R. No.
1 !"#$
%e&r'ar $
* $ # 11

+onente: ,'stice
-ersamin

%acts
Sps. Ramos
discovered that
a portion of
their land
(somewhere in
Baguio) was
being used as

part of
therunway and
running
shoulder of the
Loakan Airport
which is
operated by
A!. Sometime
in "##$
%respondents

agreed to
convey the
sub&ect portion
by deed of sale
to A! in
consideration of
the amountof
'hp
%"$*.**.
+owever% A!

failed to pay
despite
repeated verbal
and written
demands. hus
% anaction
for collection
against A!
was filed by the
respondents bef

ore the R,.

A!-s primary
contentionwas
that the deed of
sale
was entered
into the
performance of
governmental
functions. R,

ruled in favor of
the
respondents. ,A
affirmed R,.
+ence%
the petition.

ss'e/s
hether A!
could be sued

without the
State-s consent.

R'lin0/s
S, dismissed
the petition for
lack
of merit.he
State-s
immunity from

suit does not

e/tend to the
petitioner
(A!) because
it is an agency
of theState
engaged in an
enterprise that
is far from
being the State-

s e/clusive
prerogative.
he ,A
therebycorrectly
appreciated the
&uridical
character of the
A! as an
agency of the
0overnment not

performing
apurely govern
mental or sove
reign function
% but was inst
ead involved in
the manageme
nt andmaintena
nce of the
Loakan Airport

% an activity
that was not
the e/clusive
prerogative of
the State in
itssovereign
capacity. +ence
% the A! had
no claim to the
State-s

immunity from
suit. he S,
further observe
s that the
doctrine of
sovereign
immunity
cannot be
successfully
invoked to

defeat a valid
claimfor
compensation
arising from the
taking without
&ust
compensation
and without the
proper
e/propriationpro

ceedings being
first resorted to
of the plaintiff-s
property.Lastly
% the issue of
whether or not
the A! could
be sued without
the States
consent has

been
renderedmoot
by the passage
of Republic Act
1o. #2#%
otherwise
known as the
,ivil Aviation
Authority
Act of 3**.

R.A. 1o.
#2# abolished
the A! and
u nder its
ransitory
'rovisions%
R.A. 1o. #2#
established
inplace of the
A! the ,ivil

Aviation
Authority of the
'hilippines
(,AA')% which
thereby
assumed all of
the A!s
powers% duties
and rights%
assets% real

and personal
properties%
funds% and
revenues.
Section 34
of R.A. 1o.
#2#
enumerates the
corporate
powers vested

in the ,AA'%
including the
power to sue
and besued% to
enter into
contracts
of every class%
kind
and description
% to construct

% ac5uire%
own% hold%
operate
%maintain%
administer and
lease personal
and real proper
ties% and to
settle% under
such terms and

conditions most
advantageous
to it% any
claim by or
against it. ith
the ,AA' having
legally
succeededthe
A! pursuant
to R.A. 1o.

#2#% the
obligations that
the A! had
incurred by
virtue of the
deed of salewith
the Ramos
spouses might
now be
enforced

against the
,AA'.