The Philippine Constitution

Delegation of Powers
State Immunity
State Principles and Policies

1. The Ambassador of the Republic of Kafiristan referred to you for handling, the case of the Embassy's
Maintenance Agreement with CBM, a private domestic company engaged in maintenance work. The
Agreement binds CBM, for a defined fee, to maintain the Embassy's elevators, air-conditioning units
and electrical facilities. Section 10 of the Agreement provides that the Agreement shall be governed by
Philippine laws and that any legal action shall be brought before the proper court of Makati. Kafiristan
terminated the Agreement because CBM allegedly did not comply with their agreed maintenance
standards. CBM contested the termination and filed a complaint against Kafiristan before the Regional
Trial Court of Makati. The Ambassador wants you to file a motion to dismiss on the ground of state
immunity from suit and to oppose the position that under Section 10 of the Agreement, Kafiristan
expressly waives its immunity from suit.

Under these facts, can the Embassy successfully invoke immunity from suit?

2. In the last quarter of 2012, about 5,000 container vans of imported goods intended for the Christmas
Season were seized by agents of the Bureau of Customs. The imported goods were released only on
January 10,2013. A group of importers got together and filed an action for damages before the Regional
Trial Court of Manila against the Department of Finance and the Bureau of Customs.

The Bureau of Customs raised the defense of immunity from suit and, alternatively, that liability
should lie with XYZ Corp. which the Bureau had contracted for the lease of ten (10) high powered van
cranes but delivered only five (5) of these cranes, thus causing the delay in its cargo-handling
operations. It appears that the Bureau, despite demand, did not pay XYZ Corp. the Php 1.0 Million
deposit and advance rental required under their contract.

Will the action by the group of importers prosper?

3. The Municipality of Pinatukdao is sued for damages arising from injuries sustained by a pedestrian
who was hit by a glass pane that fell from a dilapidated window frame of the municipal hall. The
municipality files a motion to dismiss the complaint, invoking state immunity from suit.

Resolve the motion with reasons.

4. Several concerned residents of the areas fronting Manila Bay, among them a group of students who
are minors, filed a suit against the Metro Manila Development · Authority (MMDA), the Department
of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), the Department of Health (DOH), the Department of
Agriculture (DA), the Department of Education (DepEd), the Department of Interior and Local
Government (DILG), and a number of other executive agencies, asking the court to order them to
perform their duties relating to the cleanup, rehabilitation and protection of Manila Bay. The complaint
alleges that the continued neglect by defendants and their failure to prevent and abate pollution in
Manila Bay constitute a violation of the petitioners' constitutional right to life, health and a balanced
ecology.

If the defendants assert that the students/petitioners who are minors do not have locus standi to
file the action, is the assertion correct? Explain your answer.

5. A law is passed intended to protect women and children from all forms of violence. When a woman
perceives an act to be an act of violence or a threat of violence against her, she may apply for a Barangay
Protection Order (BPO) to be issued by the Barangay Chairman, which shall have the force and effect
of law. Conrado, against whom a BPO had been issued on petition of his wife, went to court to challenge
the constitutionality of the law. He raises the following grounds:
 [a] The law violates the equal protection clause, because while it extends protection to women
who may be victims of violence by their husbands, it does not extend the same protection to
husbands who may be battered by their wives.

[b] The grant of authority to the Barangay Chairman to issue a Barangay Protection Order (BPO)
constitutes an undue delegation of judicial power, because obviously, the issuance of the BPO
entails the exercise of judicial power.

Are Conrado’s contentions correct? Rule on the contentions.

6. Define the following terms:

a. Jus cogens
b. Self-Executing Provision
c. Quasi-legislative power
d. Doctrine of Royal Prerogative of Dishonesty

7. Differentiate:
a. Completeness Test vs. Sufficient Standard Test
b. Constituent Assembly vs. Constitutional Convention
c. Incorporated Agency vs. Unincorporated Agency
d. Acta jure imperii vs. Acta jure gestionis