Abdula vs. Guiani G.R. No.: 118821, February 18, 2000, 326 SCRA 1 FACTS: The case involves a petition for certiorari and prohibition to set aside the warrant of arrest issued by Judge Japal M. Guiani of Branch 14 of the Regional Trial Court of Cotabato City. The petitioners, Mayor Bai Unggie D. Abdula and Odin Abdula, were charged with murder in Criminal Case No. 2376. The murder complaint alleged that the petitioners paid six other individuals for the death of a certain Abdul Dimalen, the former COMELEC Registrar of Kabuntalan, Maguindanao. Initially, the Provincial Prosecutor of Maguindanao dismissed the murder charges against the petitioners and five other respondents due to lack of prima facie evidence. However, a separate information for murder was filed against one of the respondents, Kasan Mama. Subsequently, the case was ordered to be returned to the Provincial Prosecutor for further investigation. After additional evidence was presented, the Provincial Prosecutor found a prima
Merritt vs. Government of the Philippine Islands
GR No. L-11154, March 21 1916, 34 Phil. 311
FACTS:
Plaintiff was involved in an accident concerning him and a General Hospital ambulance resulting in him being incapacitated.
He sustained severe injuries rendering him unable to return to work.
Act No. 2457 was enacted in his favor which reads:
"An act authorizing E. Merritt to bring suit against the Government of the Philippine Islands and authorizing the Attorney-General of said Islands to appear in said suit.
Merritt vs. Government of the Philippine Islands
"Whereas a claim has been filed against the Government of the Philippine Islands by Mr. E. Merritt, of Manila, for damages resulting from a collision between his motorcycle and the ambulance of the General Hospital on March twenty-fifth, nineteen hundred and thirteen;
"Whereas it is not known who is responsible for the accident nor is it possible to determine the amount of damages, if any, to which the claimant is entitled; and
"Whereas the Director of Public Works and the Attorney-General recommend that an act be passed by the Legislature authorizing Mr. E. Merritt to bring suit in the courts against the Government, in order that said questions may be decided: Now, therefore,
"By authority of the United States, be it enacted by the Philippine Legislature, that:
Merritt vs. Government of the Philippine Islands
"SECTION 1. E. Merritt is hereby authorized to bring suit in the Court of First Instance of the city of Manila against the Government of the Philippine Islands in order to fix the responsibility for the collision between his motorcycle and the ambulance of the General Hospital, and to determine the amount of the damages, if any, to which Mr. E. Merritt is entitled on account of said collision, and the attorney-General of the Philippine Islands is hereby authorized and directed to appear at the trial on the behalf of the Government of said Islands, to defend said Government at the same.
"SEC. 2. This Act shall take effect on its passage.
Merritt vs. Government of the Philippine Islands
"Enacted, February 3, 1915."
ISSUE:
Whether or not the State is immune from suit.
HELD:
The accident was due to the negligence of the ambulance’s chauffeur.
Merritt vs. Government of the Philippine Islands
As the negligence was committed by an agent or employee of the government involving tort, the inquiry arises whether the government is legally liable for damages.
The State is not liable for the torts committed by its officers or agents whom it employs, except when expressly made so by legislative enactment.
The government does not undertake to guarantee to any person the fidelity of the officers or agents whom it employs since that would involve it in all its operations in endless embarrassments, difficulties and losses, which would be subversive of the public interest.
Merritt vs. Government of the Philippine Islands
By consenting to be sued, a state simply waives its immunity from suit.
It does not thereby concede its liability or create any cause of action in his favor, or extend his liability to any cause not previously recognized.
It merely gives a remedy to enforce a preexisting liability and submits itself to the jurisdiction of the court, subject to its right to interpose any lawful defense.
Merritt vs. Government of the Philippine Islands
The State is not responsible for the damages suffered by private individuals in consequence of acts performed by its employees in the discharge of the functions pertaining to their office, because neither fault nor negligence can be presumed on the part of the state in the organization of branches in the public service and in the appointment of its agents.
The responsibility of the State is limited to that which it contracts through a special agent, duly empowered by a definite order or commission to perform some act or charged with some definite purpose which gives rise to the claim.
Merritt vs. Government of the Philippine Islands