Nelia Montoya, respondent, is an American citizen who, at the time material to this case, was
employed as an identification (I.D.) checker at the U.S. Navy Exchange (NEX) at the Joint
United States Military Assistance Group (JUSMAG) headquarters in Quezon City.
Respondents body and belongings were searched by Yong Kennedy, also an ID checker,
upon the instruction of the store manager, Ms. Maxine Bradford while she was already at the
parking area in the presence of the defendant and numerous curious onlookers;
she was informed by the defendant that the search is to be made on all Jusmag employees
that day; but checking the records, its only she.
Montoya formally protested the illegal search on February 14, 1987 in a letter addressed to
Mr. R.L. Roynon; but no action was undertaken by the said officer;
Process:
-
Montoya filed complaint with RTC-Cavite for damages due to the oppressive and
discriminatory acts committed by the latter in excess of her authority as store manager
Bradford filed two (2) motions for extension of time to file her Answer which were both
granted by the trial court, but instead of answering, she, together with USA, filed Motion to
Dismiss on ff. grounds:
o
(This) action is in effect a suit against the United States of America, a foreign
sovereign immune from suit without its consent for the cause of action pleaded in the
complaint; and
Bradford, in ordering the search upon her person and belongings outside the NEX
JUSMAG store in the presence of onlookers, had committed an improper, unlawful
and highly discriminatory act against a Filipino employee and had exceeded the
scope of her authority
having exceeded her authority, Bradford cannot rely on the sovereign immunity of the
public petitioner because her liability is personal
Philippine courts are vested with jurisdiction over the case because Bradford is a
civilian employee who had committed the challenged act outside the U.S. Military
Bases; such act is not one of those exempted from the jurisdiction of Philippine
courts
Philippine courts can inquire into the factual circumstances of the case to determine
whether or not Bradford had acted within or outside the scope of her authority.
They exchanged replies until Bradford was declared in default for failure to answer, so
Montoya presented her evidence ex-parte. This default also showed admission of truth of
allegation.
ISSUES: whether or not the trial court committed grave abuse of discretion in denying the motion to
dismiss based on the following grounds:
-
the complaint in Civil Case No. 224-87 is in effect a suit against the public petitioner, a
foreign sovereign immune from suit which has not given consent to such suit and
Bradford is immune from suit for acts done by her in the performance of her official functions
as manager of the U.S. Navy Exchange of JUSMAG pursuant to the Philippines-United
States Military Assistance Agreement of 1947 and the Military Bases Agreement of 1947, as
amended.
Montoya has a sufficient and viable cause of action that Bradford acted not only outside the
scope of her authority or more specifically, in her private capacity but also outside the
territory where she exercises such authority, that is, outside the NEX-JUSMAG
particularly, at the parking area which has not been shown to form part of the facility of which
she was the manager..
the doctrine of immunity from suit will not apply and may not be invoked where the public
official is being sued in his private and personal capacity as an ordinary citizen. The cloak of
protection afforded the officers and agents of the government is removed the moment they
are sued in their individual capacity. This situation usually arises where the public official acts
without authority or in excess of the powers vested in him. agents and officials of the United
States armed forces stationed in Clark Air Base are no exception to this rule.