G.R. No. L-29304 – 146 Phil. 236 – 35 SCRA 224 – Political Law – Constitutional Law – State Immunity From Suit – Waiver of Immunity – Consent by Law
In 1967, Carabao, Inc. (CI) delivered to the Agricultural Productivity Commission (APC) 300 fire extinguishers but the APC failed to pay them. In June 1967, CI filed a claim before the Auditor General but CI’s claim was unacted upon. As a result, CI sued APC before CFI Rizal. CFI Rizal dismissed the claim for lack of jurisdiction (APC / State is immune from suit).
CI argued that under Act 3083 (AN ACT DEFINING THE CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS MAY BE SUED), the State may be sued if the Auditor General fails to act on a claim for more than sixty days.
ISSUE: Whether or not CI is correct.
HELD: No. Act 3083 was already repealed by Commonwealth Act 327 which excludes judicial courts from resolving money claims against the State.
So what is CI’s remedy for the failure of the Auditor General to act on its claim?
File a petition for mandamus. Nevertheless, it appears that the Auditor General belatedly acted on the claim. The claim was denied because there was no contract and the price of the fire extinguishers was exorbitant.
