Parens Patriae

On June 3, 1863 a devastating earthquake occurred in the Philippines. The Spanish Dominions then
provided $400,000.00 as aid for the victims and it was received by the Philippine Treasury. Out of the
aid, $80,000.00 was left untouched; it was then invested in the Monte de Piedad Bank which in turn
invested the amount in jewelries. But when the Philippine government later tried to withdraw the said
amount, the bank cannot provide for the amount. The bank argued that the Philippine government is
not an affected party hence has no right to institute a complaint. Bank argues that the government was
not the intended beneficiary of the said amount

. ISSUE: Whether or not the Philippine government is competent to file a complaint against the
respondent bank?

HELD: The Philippine government is competent to institute action against Monte de Piedad, this is in
accordance with the doctrine of Parens Patriae. The government being the protector of the rights of the
people has the inherent supreme power to enforce such laws that will promote the public interest. No
other party has been entrusted with such right hence as “parents” of the people the government has
the right to take back the money intended for the people.

GP vs Monte de Piedad

Doctrine of Parens Patria

GP VS MONTE DE PIEDAD
G.R. No. L-9959 December 13, 1916
THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, represented by the Treasurer of the Philippine
Islands, plaintiff-appellee,
vs.
EL MONTE DE PIEDAD Y CAJA DE AHORRAS DE MANILA, defendant-appellant.

Facts:
A devastating earthquake took place in the Philippines sometimes in 1863. Contributions amounting to
$400,000 were collected during the Spanish regime for the relief of the victims of an earthquake. Out of
the aid, $80,000.00 was left untouched. The Monte de Piedad, a charitable institution, in need for more
working capital, petitioned the Governor-General for the transfer of $80,000 as a loan.

In June 1893, the Department of Finance called upon the Monte de Piedad to return the $80,000. The
respondent bank declined to comply with this order upon the ground that only the Governor-General of
the Philippine Islands and not the Department of Finance had the right to order the reimbursement.
On account of various petitions of the persons, the Philippine Islands, through the Attorney-General,
bring suit against the Monte de Piedad for a recover of the $80,000, together with interest, for the
benefit of those persons or their heirs. After due trial, judgment was entered in favor of the plaintiff for
the sum of $80,000 gold or its equivalent in Philippine currency, together with legal interest from
February 28, 1912, and the costs of the cause.
The defendant appealed. One of the assignment of errors made by the defendant was to question the
competence of the plaintiff (government) to bring the action, contending that the suit could be instituted
only by the intended beneficiaries themselves or by their heirs.

Issues:
Whether or not the Philippine government is competent to file a complaint against the respondent bank
for the reimbursement of the money of the intended beneficiaries?

Discussions:
In accordance with the doctrine of Parens Patriae. The government being the protector of the rights of
the people has the inherent supreme power to enforce such laws that will promote the public interest.
No other party has been entrusted with such right hence as “parents” of the people the government has
the right to take back the money intended for the people.

Rulings:
Yes. The Supreme Court upheld the right of the Government to file the case as parens patriae in
representation of the legitimate claimants. The legislature or government of the State, as parens patriae,
has the right to enforce all charities of public nature, by virtue of its general superintending authority
over the public interests, where no other person is entrusted with it.

This prerogative of parens patriae is inherent in the supreme power of every State, whether that power
is lodged in a royal person or in the legislature. It is a most beneficient functions, and often necessary to
be exercised in the interest of humanity, and for the prevention of injury to those who cannot protect
themselves. The beneficiaries of charities, who are often in capable of vindicating their rights, and justly
look for protection to the sovereign authority, acting as parens patriae. They show that this beneficient
functions has not ceased to exist under the change of government from a monarchy to a republic; but
that it now resides in the legislative department, ready to be called into exercise whenever required for
the purposes of justice and right, and is a clearly capable of being exercised in cases of charities as in any
other cases whatever.