Air Transportation Office (ATO) v. Sps. David and Elisea Ramos



Search



Home



Saved

0

16 views



Upload

Sign In

Join

RELATED TITLES

0

Air Transportation Office (ATO) v. Sps. David and Elisea Ramos



Uploaded by gherold benitez



Books



Audiobooks



Magazines



News



Documents



Sheet Music

political law









Save

Embed

Share

Print

Download

Inherent Powers of the State - P, E,

1

of 2

 

City of Manila vs Chinese

Mun. of Meycayayan vs

 Search document



Case Title: Air Transportaon Ofce (ATO) v. Sps. David and Elisea Ramos G.R. no and Date: G.R. No. !"#$% &e'rar %*+ %$ ,onente: -sce ersamin &acts

Sps. Ramos discovered t/at a poron o0 t/eir land (some1/ere in a2io) 1as 'ein2 sed a part o0 t/e rn1a and rnnin2 s/older o0 t/e 3oa4an Airport 1/ic/ is operated ' ATO Someme in ""!+ respondents a2reed to conve t/e s'5ect poron ' deed o0 sale to ATO i consideraon o0 t/e amont o0 ,/p667+!$.$$. 8o1ever+ ATO 0ailed to pa despite repeate ver'al ver'al and 1ri9en 1ri9en demand demands. s. T/s+ T/s+ an acon acon 0or 0or collec collecon on a2ain a2ainst st ATO 1as led ' respondents 'e0ore t/e RTC. ATO;s primar contenon 1as t/at t/e deed o0 sale 1as entere into t/e per0ormance o0 2overnmental 0ncons. RTC rled in 0avor o0 t/e respondents. C afrmed RTC. 8ence+ t/e peon. /et/er ATO cold 'e sed 1it/ot t/e State;s consent.

Rlin2=s SC dismissed t/e peon 0or lac4 o0 merit.

T/e State;s immnit 0rom sit does not e?tend to t/e peoner (ATO) (ATO) 'ecase it is an a2enc o t/e State en2a2ed in an enterprise t/at is 0ar 0rom 'ein2 t/e State;s e?clsive e?clsive prero2ave. T/e C t/ere' correctl appreciated t/e 5ridical c/aracter o0 t/e ATO as an a2enc o0 t/e Governmen not per0ormin2 a prel 2overnmental or soverei2n 0ncon+ 't 1as instead involved in t/ mana2ement and maintenance o0 t/e 3oa4an Airport+ an acvit t/at 1as not t/e e?clsiv prero2ave o0 t/e State in its soverei2n capacit. 8ence+ t/e ATO /ad no claim to t/e  State; Sign up to vote on this title immnit 0rom sit. T/e SC 0rt/er o'serves t/at t/e doctrine o0 soverei2n immnit cannot '  Useful  Not sccess0ll invo4ed invo4ed to de0eat a valid claim 0or compensaon arisin2 0rom t/euseful ta4in2 1it/ot 5 compensaon and 1it/ot t/e proper e?propriaon proceedin2s 'ein2 rst resorted to o0 t/ plain@;s propert.





Home



Saved



Books



Audiobooks



Magazines



News



Documents



Sheet Music



Upload

Sign In

Join



Search



Home



Saved

0

16 views



Sign In

Upload

Join

RELATED TITLES

0

Air Transportation Office (ATO) v. Sps. David and Elisea Ramos



Uploaded by gherold benitez



Books



Audiobooks



Magazines



News



Documents



Sheet Music

political law









Save

Embed

Share

Print

Download

Inherent Powers of the State - P, E,

1

of 2

 

City of Manila vs Chinese

Mun. of Meycayayan vs

 Search document



Soverei2n
You're Reading a Preview Unlock full access with a free trial.

Download With Free Trial

Sign up to vote on this title



Useful

 Not useful







Home



Saved



Books



Audiobooks



Magazines



News



Documents



Sheet Music



Upload

Sign In

Join