Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 459 views

    Festejo vs. Fernando PDF

    Uploaded by

    Jona Carmeli Calibuso
    This document summarizes a Supreme Court case from 1954 regarding state immunity. It involves a petition filed by Carmen Festejo against Isaias Fernando, the Director of the Bureau of Public Works. Without obtaining permission or consent, Fernando took possession of portions of Festejo's land to construct an irrigation canal. The issue was whether Fernando could claim state immunity as the director of a government agency. The Supreme Court ruled that he could not invoke state immunity because he exceeded his authority as a public officer by taking the land without permission. Public officers who act beyond their lawful functions may be sued personally and cannot claim state immunity as a defense.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Festejo vs. Fernando PDF

    Uploaded by

    Jona Carmeli Calibuso
    459 views2 pages
    This document summarizes a Supreme Court case from 1954 regarding state immunity. It involves a petition filed by Carmen Festejo against Isaias Fernando, the Director of the Bureau of Public Works. Without obtaining permission or consent, Fernando took possession of portions of Festejo's land to construct an irrigation canal. The issue was whether Fernando could claim state immunity as the director of a government agency. The Supreme Court ruled that he could not invoke state immunity because he exceeded his authority as a public officer by taking the land without permission. Public officers who act beyond their lawful functions may be sued personally and cannot claim state immunity as a defense.

    Original Title

    6. Festejo vs. Fernando.pdf

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document summarizes a Supreme Court case from 1954 regarding state immunity. It involves a petition filed by Carmen Festejo against Isaias Fernando, the Director of the Bureau of Public Works. Without obtaining permission or consent, Fernando took possession of portions of Festejo's land to construct an irrigation canal. The issue was whether Fernando could claim state immunity as the director of a government agency. The Supreme Court ruled that he could not invoke state immunity because he exceeded his authority as a public officer by taking the land without permission. Public officers who act beyond their lawful functions may be sued personally and cannot claim state immunity as a defense.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    459 views2 pages

    Festejo vs. Fernando PDF

    Uploaded by

    Jona Carmeli Calibuso
    This document summarizes a Supreme Court case from 1954 regarding state immunity. It involves a petition filed by Carmen Festejo against Isaias Fernando, the Director of the Bureau of Public Works. Without obtaining permission or consent, Fernando took possession of portions of Festejo's land to construct an irrigation canal. The issue was whether Fernando could claim state immunity as the director of a government agency. The Supreme Court ruled that he could not invoke state immunity because he exceeded his authority as a public officer by taking the land without permission. Public officers who act beyond their lawful functions may be sued personally and cannot claim state immunity as a defense.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 2

    CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I - 2020

    CALIBUSO, JONA CARMELI

    Carmen Festejo
    vs. Isaias Fernando, Director of Bureau of Public Works

    G.R. No. L-5156. March 11, 1954

    STATE IMMUNITY
    PUBLIC OFFICER – excess of their function – will be sued in their personal
    capacity and therefore cannot invoke the doctrine of state immunity.

    Nature of the Case: Before the Court is a Petition for Review on Certiorari under
    Rule 45 of the Rules of Court, assailing the Decision2cralaw of the Court of Appeals in
    C.A.-G.R. CV No. 82268, dated 25 September 2006.

    SC Decision:
    WHEREFORE, the Court GRANTS the petition and REVERSES the decision of the Court of
    Appeals in CA-G.R. CV 82404 dated November 20, 2006. Respondent Efren Jalos, et
    al's complaint for damages against Shell Philippines Exploration B.V. in Civil Case P-
    1818-03 of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 41, Pinamalayan, Oriental Mindoro is
    ordered DISMISSED without prejudice to its refiling with the Pollution Adjudication
    Board or PAB.

    Facts:

     The defendant, as Director of the Bureau of Public Works, without authority


    obtained first from the Court of First Instance of Ilocos Sur, without obtaining
    first a right of way, and without the consent and knowledge of the plaintiff , and
    against her express objection, unlawfully took possession of 'portions of
    the three parcels of land described above, and caused an irrigation canal
    to be constructed on the portion of the three parcels of land on or about the
    month of February 1951 the aggregate area being 24,179 square meters to the
    damage and prejudice of the plaintiif."

    Issue: WON the defendant Director of the Bureau of Public Works is covered by the
    doctrine of the state immunity. (NO)

    Ruling: NO. "Ordinarily the officer or employee committing the tort is


    personally liable therefor, and may be sued as any other citizen and held
    answerable for whatever injury or damage results from his tortious act. If
    an officer, even while acting under color of his office, exceeds the power
    conferred on him by law, he cannot shelter himself under the plea that he is
    a public agent.

    It is a general rule that an officer-executive, administrative quasi-


    judicial, ministerial, or otherwise who acts outside the scope of his
    jurisdiction and without authorization of law may thereby render himself
    amenable to personal liability in a civil suit. If he exceeds the power
    conferred on him by law, he cannot shelter himself by the plea that he is a
    CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I - 2020
    CALIBUSO, JONA CARMELI

    public agent acting under color of his office, and not personally. In the eye of
    the law, his acts then are wholly without authority."

    You might also like