7/28/2019 EMerritVsGPI.doc

1/2

E. Merrit VS GPI

34 Phil. 311

FACTS:

The case is an appeal by both parties from a judgment of the Court of First

Instance of the city of Manila in favor of the E. Merrit (plaintiff) for the P14, 741

payments for damages by the plaintiff.

The incident happens when the plaintiff is riding a motor cycle going towards the

western part of Calle Padre Faura, at the speed of 10 to 20 miles per hour. Upon

crossing Taft Avenue when the plaintiff was 10 feet from southwestern of the

intersection, the General Hospital Ambulance upon reaching the venue turns into the

right side of the Taft Avenue which was a violation of the ordinance and the Motor

Vehicle Act.

The wrong turn of the ambulance resulted into collision. The plaintiff was

severely injured according to Dr. Saleeby, who examined him on the very same day that

he was taken to the General Hospital. The marks revealed that he had one or more

fractures of the skull and that the grey matter and brain mass had suffered material

injury. The plaintiff right leg ws broken in such a way that the fracture extended to theouter skin in such manner that it might be regarded as double and the wound would be

exposed to infection, for which reason it was of the most serious nature.

The plaintiff, who was the best constructor of wooden building according to the

testimony of his friends, give up his contract which he had for the construction of the Uy

Chao building and had to dissolved the partnership he had with Engineer Wilson due to

in capacitated in making mathematical calculations and the condition of his legs.

The petitioner thinks that there was an error on the first decision because

according to them, the plaintiff was wholly in capacitated for a period of six months, the

hospital only took two months and twenty-one days while the remainder of six months

was spent at home. They found that amount of damages sustained by the plaintiff,

without any fault on his part is P18, 075.

E. Merrit was given the authority to bring suit against the Government of the

Philippines Islands and authorizing the Attorney-General of said Island to appear in the

suit case by the authority of the United States.

ISSUE:

1. Whether or not a State can be sued.

2. Whether or not the court can decide if the state will pay damages to the plaintiff

7/28/2019 EMerritVsGPI.doc

2/2

HELD:

1. Yes, as a general rule, a state cannot be sued by any individual unless it waives

its immunity from suit. In this case, the state waives its right to be sued but it

does not concede its liability to the plaintiff. It merely gives a remedy to enforce

pre exiting liability and submits itself to the jurisdiction of the court, subject to its

right to interpose and lawful defuse.

2. No, According to the court of Spain, the responsibility of the state is limited by

article 1903 to the case where in it acts through a special agent (a special agent,

in the sense which these words are employed in one who receives a definite and

fix order or commission, foreign to the exercise of the duties of his office, then he

is a special official).

The court called upon to determine the case because the court decided that the

case is about government budget which is solely with the Legislative to enact and

appropriate sufficient funds and not with the court.