Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 2K views

    21 Jusmag v. NLRC

    Uploaded by

    Rem Serrano
    This case discusses the doctrine of immunity from suit for agencies of foreign governments. The Joint United States Military Assistance Group (JUSMAG) claimed immunity from a complaint filed by a dismissed employee. The Supreme Court ruled that JUSMAG, as an agency of the United States performing governmental functions, was immune from suit because the United States did not waive or consent to the suit. International law recognizes the immunity of states from judicial jurisdiction or suits in other states without consent. However, this immunity is now restricted to sovereign/governmental activities and not commercial activities of foreign states.

    Copyright:

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

    21 Jusmag v. NLRC

    Uploaded by

    Rem Serrano
    2K views2 pages
    This case discusses the doctrine of immunity from suit for agencies of foreign governments. The Joint United States Military Assistance Group (JUSMAG) claimed immunity from a complaint filed by a dismissed employee. The Supreme Court ruled that JUSMAG, as an agency of the United States performing governmental functions, was immune from suit because the United States did not waive or consent to the suit. International law recognizes the immunity of states from judicial jurisdiction or suits in other states without consent. However, this immunity is now restricted to sovereign/governmental activities and not commercial activities of foreign states.

    Original Description:

    PIL

    Original Title

    21 Jusmag v. Nlrc

    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 case discusses the doctrine of immunity from suit for agencies of foreign governments. The Joint United States Military Assistance Group (JUSMAG) claimed immunity from a complaint filed by a dismissed employee. The Supreme Court ruled that JUSMAG, as an agency of the United States performing governmental functions, was immune from suit because the United States did not waive or consent to the suit. International law recognizes the immunity of states from judicial jurisdiction or suits in other states without consent. However, this immunity is now restricted to sovereign/governmental activities and not commercial activities of foreign states.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    2K views2 pages

    21 Jusmag v. NLRC

    Uploaded by

    Rem Serrano
    This case discusses the doctrine of immunity from suit for agencies of foreign governments. The Joint United States Military Assistance Group (JUSMAG) claimed immunity from a complaint filed by a dismissed employee. The Supreme Court ruled that JUSMAG, as an agency of the United States performing governmental functions, was immune from suit because the United States did not waive or consent to the suit. International law recognizes the immunity of states from judicial jurisdiction or suits in other states without consent. However, this immunity is now restricted to sovereign/governmental activities and not commercial activities of foreign states.

    Copyright:

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

    JUSMAG Philippines v.

    NLRC
    GR No. 108813, 15 December 1994

    DOCTRINES:

    A suit against JUSMAG is one against the United States Government, and in the
    absence of any waiver or consent of the latter to the suit, the complaint against JUSMAG
    cannot prosper
    Immunity of State from suit is one of the universally recognized principles of international
    law that the Philippines recognizes and adopts as part of the law of the land

    FACTS:

    Joint United States Military Assistance Group (JUSMAG) assails the January 29, 1993
    Resolution of the NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION (public respondent), in
    NLRC NCR CASE NO. 00-03-02092-92, reversing the July 30, 1991 Order of the Labor
    Arbiter, and ordering the latter to assume jurisdiction over the complaint for illegal
    dismissal filed by FLORENCIO SACRAMENTO (private respondent) against petitioner.

    Private respondent was one of the seventy-four (74) security assistance support
    personnel (SASP) working at JUSMAG-Philippines. He had been with JUSMAG from
    December 18, 1969, until his dismissal on April 27, 1992. When dismissed, he held the
    position of Illustrator 2 and was the incumbent President of JUSMAG PHILIPPINES-
    FILIPINO CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION (JPFCEA), a labor organization duly
    registered with the Department of Labor and Employment. His services were terminated
    allegedly due to the abolition of his position. He was also advised that he was under
    administrative leave until April 27, 1992, although the same was not charged against his
    leave.

    On March 31, 1992, private respondent filed a complaint with the Department of Labor
    and Employment on the ground that he was illegally suspended and dismissed from
    service by JUSMAG. He asked for his reinstatement. JUSMAG then filed a Motion to
    Dismiss invoking its immunity from suit as an agency of the United States. It further
    alleged lack of employer-employee relationship and that it has no juridical personality to
    sue and be sued.

    ISSUE:

    Whether JUSMAG was immune from suit as an agency of the United States.

    RATIO:
    YES, from the foregoing, it is apparent that when JUSMAG took the services of private
    respondent, it was performing a governmental function on behalf of the United States
    pursuant to the Military Assistance Agreement dated March 21, 1947. Hence, we agree
    with petitioner that the suit is, in effect, one against the United States Government, albeit
    it was not impleaded in the complaint. Considering that the United States has not waived
    or consented to the suit, the complaint against JUSMAG cannot prosper.
    In this jurisdiction, we recognize and adopt the generally accepted principles of
    international law as part of the law of the land. Immunity of State from suit is one of these
    universally recognized principles. In international law, immunity is commonly
    understood as the exemption of the state and its organs from the judicial jurisdiction of
    another state. This is anchored on the principle of the sovereign equality of states under
    which one state cannot assert jurisdiction over another in violation of the maxim par in
    parem non habet imperium (an equal has no power over an equal)

    The doctrine of state immunity from suit has undergone further metamorphosis. The
    view evolved that the existence of a contract does not, per se, mean that sovereign
    states may, at all times, be sued in local courts. The complexity of relationships between
    sovereign states, brought about by their increasing commercial activities, mothered a
    more restrictive application of the doctrine. Thus, in United States of America vs. Ruiz,
    we clarified that our pronouncement in Harry Lyons, supra, with respect to the waiver of
    State immunity, was obiter and has no value as an imperative authority. As it stands
    now, the application of the doctrine of immunity from suit has been restricted to
    sovereign or governmental activities (jure imperii). The mantle of state immunity cannot
    be extended to commercial, private and proprietary acts (jure gestionis).

    You might also like