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

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 103 views

    Calub and Valencia Vs CA, GR 115364

    Uploaded by

    Luke Verdadero
    The document summarizes a Supreme Court case regarding two vehicles that were seized by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) for transporting illegally sourced lumber. The vehicles' owners filed a complaint for recovery of possession and replevin against DENR officials. The Court ruled that (1) the suit against DENR officials is effectively a suit against the State since the officials were acting within their authority; and (2) the State's consent is required to sue it since DENR officials were performing their official duties in seizing the vehicles without malice or bad faith in accordance with relevant laws.

    Copyright:

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

    Calub and Valencia Vs CA, GR 115364

    Uploaded by

    Luke Verdadero
    103 views2 pages
    The document summarizes a Supreme Court case regarding two vehicles that were seized by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) for transporting illegally sourced lumber. The vehicles' owners filed a complaint for recovery of possession and replevin against DENR officials. The Court ruled that (1) the suit against DENR officials is effectively a suit against the State since the officials were acting within their authority; and (2) the State's consent is required to sue it since DENR officials were performing their official duties in seizing the vehicles without malice or bad faith in accordance with relevant laws.

    Original Title

    Calub and Valencia vs CA, GR 115364

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document summarizes a Supreme Court case regarding two vehicles that were seized by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) for transporting illegally sourced lumber. The vehicles' owners filed a complaint for recovery of possession and replevin against DENR officials. The Court ruled that (1) the suit against DENR officials is effectively a suit against the State since the officials were acting within their authority; and (2) the State's consent is required to sue it since DENR officials were performing their official duties in seizing the vehicles without malice or bad faith in accordance with relevant laws.

    Copyright:

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

    Calub and Valencia Vs CA, GR 115364

    Uploaded by

    Luke Verdadero
    The document summarizes a Supreme Court case regarding two vehicles that were seized by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) for transporting illegally sourced lumber. The vehicles' owners filed a complaint for recovery of possession and replevin against DENR officials. The Court ruled that (1) the suit against DENR officials is effectively a suit against the State since the officials were acting within their authority; and (2) the State's consent is required to sue it since DENR officials were performing their official duties in seizing the vehicles without malice or bad faith in accordance with relevant laws.

    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

    SECOND DIVISION

    G.R. No. 115634             April 27, 2000

    FELIPE CALUB and RICARDO VALENCIA, DEPARTMENT of ENVIRONMENT and


    NATURAL RESOURCES (DENR), CATBALOGAN,SAMAR, petitioners, 
    vs.
    COURT OF APPEALS, MANUELA T. BABALCON, and CONSTANCIO
    ABUGANDA, respondents.

    FACTS:

     On January 28, 1992, the Forest Protection and Law Enforcement Team of the
    Community Environment and Natural Resources Office (CENRO) of the DENR
    apprehended two motor vehicles. Motor Vehicle with Plate No. HAK-733 being
    driven by Pio Gabon and owned by Jose Vargas and Motor Vehicle with Plate
    No. FCN-143 being driven by Constancio Abuganda and owned by Manuela
    Babalcon which are both loaded by illegally-sourced lumber.
     Constancio Abuganda and Pio Gabon, the drivers of the vehicles, failed to
    present proper documents and/or licenses. Thus, the apprehending team seized
    and impounded the vehicles and its load of lumbers.
     On January 31, 1992, the impounded vehicles were forcibly taken by Gabon and
    Abuganda from the custody of the DENR.
     On February 11, 1992, one of the two vehicles, with plate number FCN 143, was
    again apprehended by a composite team of DENR-CENR in Catbalogan.

    Private respondents Manuela Babalcon, the vehicle owner, and Constancio


    Abuganda, the driver, filed a complaint for the recovery of possession of the two
    impounded vehicles with an application for replevin against petitioners before the RTC
    of Catbalogan. The trial court granted the application for replevin and issued the
    corresponding writ in an Order dated April 24, 1992. Petitioners filed a motion to dismiss
    which was denied by the trial court. 

    ISSUE:

    Whether or not the complaint for the recovery of possession of impounded


    vehicles, with an application for replevin a suit against the State.
    RULING:

    Yes. Well established is the doctrine that the State may not be sued without its
    consent. A suit against a public officer for his official acts is, in effect, a suit against the
    State if its purpose is to hold the State ultimately liable. However, the protection
    afforded to public officers by this doctrine generally applies only to activities within the
    scope of their authority in good faith and without willfulness, malice or corruption. In the
    present case, the acts for which the petitioners are being called to account were
    performed by them in the discharge of their official duties.

    In implementing and enforcing Sections 78-A ” Administrative Authority of the


    Department Head or His Duly Authorized Representative to Order Confiscation. — In all
    cases of violation of this Code or other forest laws, rules and regulations, the
    Department Head or his duly authorized representative, may order the confiscation of
    any forest products illegally cut, gathered, removed, or possessed or abandoned, and
    all conveyances used either by land, water or air in the commission of the offense and
    to dispose of the same in accordance with pertinent laws, regulations or policies on the
    matter. “

    And Sec. 89 “ Arrest; Institution of criminal actions. — A forest officer or


    employee of the Bureau Department or any personnel of the Philippine
    Constabulary/Philippine National Police shall arrest even without warrant any person
    who has committed or is committing in his presence any of the offenses defined in this
    Chapter. He shall also seize and confiscate, in favor of the Government, the tools and
    equipment used in committing the offense “

    Through the seizure carried out, petitioners were performing their duties and
    functions as officers of the DENR, and did so within the limits of their authority. There
    was no malice nor bad faith on their part. Hence, a suit against the petitioners who
    represent the DENR is a suit against the State. It cannot prosper without the State's
    consent.

    You might also like