a collections of case digests and laws that can help aspiring law students to become a lawyer
Shauf v. CA, 191 SCRA 713 (1990)
ISSUE: Whether or not private respondents are immune from suit being officers of the US ArmedForces
FACTS: Loida Shauf, a Filipino by origin, filed for damages and equal employment opportunity complaint against Don Detwiler and Anthony Persi, both officers of the Base Education Office at Clark Air Base. The former was allegedly rejected for a position of Guidance Counselor in the said institution because of her sex, color, and origin. The respondents defended that they are immune from suit for acts done made by them inperformance of their official governmental functions.
DECISION: No, the respondents cannot rely on the US blanket of diplomatic immunity for all its acts orthe acts of its agents in the Philippines.
RATIO DECIDENDI: The rule that a state may not be sued without its consent is expressly declared in the Constitution. It also applies to complaints filed against officials of the state for acts allegedly performed by them in the discharge of its duties. However, it is a different matter where the public official is made to account in his capacity as such for acts contrary to law and injurious to the rights of plaintiff. In other words, 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. Here, the respondents were found guilty of discriminating against Shauf on account of her sex, origin and color. Hence, the respondents may be sued in their private and personal capacity.
Leave a Reply.