Cases in Ministerial and Proprietary Functions of The State

Co Kim Chan v.
Valdez Tan Keh and Dizon
Facts:
Japanese Forces invaded Manila and declared occupation under Martial Law the next day. They permitted
all laws in force under Commonwealth as well as executive and judicial commissions to continue and take
effect. Philippine Executive Commission was the civil government issued by the Commander-in-Chief, and
Jorge Vargas was the appointed chairman, instructed to proceed coordination of the existing central
government. Republic of the Philippines was inaugurated on October 14, 1943 but there was no
substantial change effected. On October 23, 1944, General Douglas McArthur proclaimed:
 Commonwealth government of the Philippines was inaugurated and under government of USA
 Laws existing in the statute books of Commonwealth of the Philippines, and regulations are in fuul
force in areas free of enemy occupation
 Other laws of any other government are null and void
Manila was liberated on February 3, 1945 and the Constitution restored to Commonwealth on February
27, 1945.
Issues:
W/N the judicial acts and proceedings of courst existing in Philippines under Philippine Executive
Commision were good and valid
W/N proclamation of Gen. McArthur has invalidated all judgments and judicial acts and proceedings of
said court
W/N said judicial acts or proceedings been invalid within present courts of Commonwealth may continue
pending cases in said Courts at the time Philippines was reoccupied by US and Filipino forces
Ruling:
Proceedings of a de facto government are good and valid. The Philippines under Japanese occupation is a
de facto government. Philippine Executive Commission was civil and run by Filipinos. Having a Republic of
the Philippines was a scheme of Japan in order to garner cooperation or at least neutrality of Filipinos in
their cause.
The judicial government is not of political complexion. The subsequent conqueror (America) has the right
to abrogate most of the acts of the occupier such as the rules, laws, regulations, and other processes other
than the judicial of the government established by belligerent occupants. McArthur’s words in his
proclamation were “the processes of any other government and not judicial processes.” To declare them
null and void would tantamount to suspending in said Courts the rights and actions of national territory
during the military occupation thereof by enemy.
The invader did not take administration of Justice into his own hands, but continues the ordinary courts
or tribunal to administer the laws of the country which he is enjoined. Laws in force by ordinary courts
are allowed to remain unless abolished.
PVTA v. CIR
Facts:
Private respondents filed a petition wherein they alleged their employment relating the overtime services
in excess of the 8 hours per day and failure to pay overtime compensation on Dec. 20, 1966. PVTA denied
the allegations and raised special defenses of lack of a cause of action and lack of the jurisdiction of the
CIR for the said case for PVTA was only exercising its governmental functions and not propriety.
Issues:
W/N laissez faire is applicable
W/N governmental functions of petitioner can militate against respondent court assuming jurisdiction
over labor dispute
Ruling:
Laissez faire hardly commanded an authoritative position in the Philippines for the Constitutional
Convention rejected the doctrine for it has entrusted the government the responsibility of coping with
social and economic problems with commensurate power of control over economic affairs.
CIR has exclusive jurisdiction over cases which involves protecting the rights of people, which includes the
8-hr Labor Rule.
GOVERNMENT OF PHILIPPINE ISLANDS v. MONTE DE PIEDAD
Facts:
On June 3, 1863 an earthquake hit the Philippine islands. The Philippine Treasury received $400,000 given
by inhabitants of Spanish Dominion for relief of those damaged by the calamity. The relief board allotted
$365,708.50 to various sufferers. Monte de Piedad petitioned the return of $80,000 in installments of
$20,000. Act No. 2109 empowered the Treasurer of Philippine Islands to bring suit against Monte de
Piedad to recover the $80,000 together with interest for the benefit of the persons and the heirs of the
beneficiary of the victims of calamity.
Issue:
W/N subrogated Spanish government has the right to recover trust funds given loaned by former
sovereign.
Ruling:
Defendant was wrong when they declared the sum as a donation for it was given to them as a loan without
interest by the Spanish government. Contention is untenable for the charity was funded by donations for
the earthquake sufferers and not for ecclesiastical pious work. The Sovereign will was enacted through
legislation, where the State served as the parens patriae. State practicing parens patriae filed the
complaint on behalf of the persons for it would be impractical for the beneficiaries to institute an action
individually, thus the government assumed control of the fund and devote it to the object for which it was
originally designated.

Cases in Ministerial and Proprietary Functions of The State

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

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

Cases in Ministerial and Proprietary Functions of The State

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Co Kim Chan v.

Valdez Tan Keh and Dizon

W/N laissez faire is applicable

GOVERNMENT OF PHILIPPINE ISLANDS v. MONTE DE PIEDAD

You might also like