The Holy See vs. Rosario, G.R. No. 101949, December 1, 1994

The Holy See vs. Rosario, G.R. No.
101949, December 1, 1994
Facts:
The petition arose from a controversy over a parcel of land, Lot 5-A, located in the Municipality of Paranaque. Said
Lot 5-A is contiguous to Lots 5-B and 5-D registered in the name of Philippine Realty Corp. The three lots were
sold to Licup through an agent. Later, Licup assigned his rights to the sale to respondent Starbright Enterprises
(Starbright). In view of the refusal of the squatters to vacate said lots, a dispute arose as to who of the parties has
the responsibility of evicting and clearing the land of squatters. Thereafter, the Holy See (a foreign state exercising
sovereignty over the Vatican City31) through its Ambassador, the Papal Nuncio, sold Lot 5-A to a third person
(Tropicana Corp.). Lot 5-A was previously acquired by the Holy See by donation from the Archdiocese of Manila for
constructing thereon the official place of residence of the Papal Nuncio. In subsequently selling the lot, no profit
was intended. The Holy See merely wanted to dispose of the same because the squatters living thereon made it
almost impossible for them to use it.
Starbright filed a complaint against the Holy See who pled sovereign/diplomatic immunity. Starbright insists that the
doctrine of non-suability does not apply for the Holy See has divested itself of such cloak when, of its own free will,
it entered into a commercial transaction for the sale of parcel of land located in the Phils. The trial court upheld
Starbright. Hence this petition. Meanwhile, the DFA moved to intervene in behalf of the Holy See, and officially
certified that the Embassy of the Holy See is a duly accredited diplomatic mission to the Republic of the Phils
exempt from local jurisdiction and entitled to all the rights, privileges and immunities of a diplomatic mission or
embassy in this country.
Issue:
The issue in this case is whether the Holy See is entitled to sovereign immunity.
Ruling:
The Republic of the Philippines has accorded the Holy See the status of a foreign sovereign. The Holy See,
through its Ambassador, the Papal Nuncio, has had diplomatic representations with the Philippine
government since 1957 (Rollo, p. 87). This appears to be the universal practice in international relations.
There are two conflicting concepts of sovereign immunity, each widely held and firmly established.
According to the classical or absolute theory, a sovereign cannot, without its consent, be made a
respondent in the courts of another sovereign. According to the newer or restrictive theory, the immunity of
the sovereign is recognized only with regard to public acts or acts jure imperii of a state, but not with regard
to private acts or acts jure gestionis
If the act is in pursuit of a sovereign activity, or an incident thereof, then it is an act jure imperii, especially
when it is not undertaken for gain or profit.
In the case at bench, if petitioner has bought and sold lands in the ordinary course of a real estate business,
surely the said transaction can be categorized as an act jure gestionis. However, petitioner has denied that
the acquisition and subsequent disposal of Lot 5-A were made for profit but claimed that it acquired said
property for the site of its mission or the Apostolic Nunciature in the Philippines. Private respondent failed to
dispute said claim.
Lot 5-A was acquired by petitioner as a donation from the Archdiocese of Manila. The donation was made
not for commercial purpose, but for the use of petitioner to construct thereon the official place of residence
of the Papal Nuncio. The right of a foreign sovereign to acquire property, real or personal, in a receiving
state, necessary for the creation and maintenance of its diplomatic mission, is recognized in the 1961
Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (Arts. 20-22). This treaty was concurred in by the Philippine
Senate and entered into force in the Philippines on November 15, 1965.
The decision to transfer the property and the subsequent disposal thereof are likewise clothed with a
governmental character. Petitioner did not sell Lot 5-A for profit or gain. It merely wanted to dispose off the
same because the squatters living thereon made it almost impossible for petitioner to use it for the purpose
of the donation. The fact that squatters have occupied and are still occupying the lot, and that they
stubbornly refuse to leave the premises, has been admitted by private respondent in its complaint
Private respondent is not left without any legal remedy for the redress of its grievances. Under both Public
International Law and Transnational Law, a person who feels aggrieved by the acts of a foreign sovereign
can ask his own government to espouse his cause through diplomatic channels.
Private respondent can ask the Philippine government, through the Foreign Office, to espouse its claims
against the Holy See. Its first task is to persuade the Philippine government to take up with the Holy See the
validity of its claims. Of course, the Foreign Office shall first make a determination of the impact of its
espousal on the relations between the Philippine government and the Holy See (Young, Remedies of
Private Claimants Against Foreign States, Selected Readings on Protection by Law of Private Foreign
Investments 905, 919 [1964]). Once the Philippine government decides to espouse the claim, the latter
ceases to be a private cause.
WHEREFORE, the petition for certiorari is GRANTED and the complaint in Civil Case No. 90-183 against
petitioner is DISMISSED.

The Holy See vs. Rosario, G.R. No. 101949, December 1, 1994

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Holy See vs. Rosario, G.R. No. 101949, December 1, 1994

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Holy See vs. Rosario, G.R. No. 101949, December 1, 1994

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Holy See vs. Rosario, G.R. No.

101949, December 1, 1994

You might also like