State Immunity

General exception: State cannot be sued.

Exception: if it gives its consent

Types of consent:
1. Expressly – by general law that allows for suits to be filed against by the government or by
special law which would allow in one instance a suit being filed against the government (ex. All
case against Merit British government)

Suability vs. liability

State may allow itself to be sued in order to provide an opportunity for the person suing to
prove whether he really has a case or not. To prove whether the government is liable or not.
Suability does not automatically translate to liability.

2. Implied – (1) may be when the government is the one who initiates the case.
- (2) if the government entered a contract relative to a commercial undertaking or one
related to proprietary functions of the government. It used to as an orbiter that whenever
the state enters in the contract it descends to the level of an individual therefore would
open itself up to the possibility of a suit however, in the case of USA vs. Ruiz this was
clarified. So, the mere act of entering in to a contract is not enough. It must be in regard to a
proprietary function of the government such that if the contract has something to do with
governmental functions, then state immunity is still available.
- (3) if the government would create a GOCC and rest it the power to sue and be sue so that
case the government is in effect trying to create a different entity. It might be owned by the
government, but it does not partake of the governmental immunity. So that GOCC even if it
is government owned would have a distinct personality and which than make it amenable
the possibility of suits.

Can the defense of state immunity be circumvented by not naming the government or its agencies
instead simply naming the officials?
- No, it does not necessarily avoid the defense of state immunity if the defendant name is the
official instead of the government or its agencies because if those officials have been acting
in their official capacity such that any judgement would require the government to take an
affirmative action such as to spend or have to pay the judge the liability pursuant to the
judgment then that would invoke state immunity. However if the officials are suit in their
personal capacity then they cannot invoke state immunity because the state is supposed to
be represented by officials who act in accordance with their legal mandate. So when they
exceed their authorities they commit illegal acts then they are suit in their own capacity and
there’s no occasion to speak of state immunity.

In regards to judgement – WRIT OF EXECUTION – after the finality of the judgement. The same however
does not apply when it comes to the government. Even if the government might have consented to be
sued and even if after trial the government found to be liable the same does not authorize the court to
execute the writ of execution. Why?
- Because money could only be appropriated by act of congress. The money belonging to the
government cannot be touched by anybody else. If there is no appropriation so there is no
authority for the funds of the government to be disbursed for any purpose even if its for the
satisfaction of a judgement. So the successful litigant would have to wait for Congress to
appropriate the funds. Without Congress acting on the matter he cannot do anything else.

Liable is an LGU?
- The successful litigant can ask for WRIT OF MANDAMUS to compel the LGU to enact the
ordinance to appropriate the funds to satisfy the judgement. This cannot be done if it comes
to Congress because Congress is independent and other the principle or doctrine of
separation of powers the courts cannot compel Congress to do anything.

DELEGATION OF POWER

Exceptions:
1. Emergency powers – Emergency powers belong to legislative precs

SEPARATION OF POWER
Separation of powers refers to the division of government responsibilities into distinct branches to limit
any one branch from exercising the core functions of another.

Jurisprudence – each department of the government has exclusive cognizance of matters within its
jurisdiction and is supreme within its own sphere.

System of Checks & Balances

Each of the three branches of government can limit the exercise of power of the other.

Veto – the power of the President to refuse to approve a bill and, thus, prevent its enactment into law.

Principle of Blending of Powers

Blending of powers is sharing of powers of the different departments of government whereby one
department helps and coordinates with the other in the exercise of a particular power, function or
responsibility.

Enactment of General appropriation law

President (preparation of budget) – Congress (bill) – President (approval)

Amnesty
President (grant) – Congress (majority)

COMELEC
ROLE OF JUDICIARY

Power to impeach – executive

Power to try and decide impeachment cases – judiciary
Power to investigate – legislative

Doctrine of implication -