Political and Public International Law › Local Governments (RA 7160, as amended by RA 9009 and 11683) › Powers and Administration of Local Government Units (LGU)
3. Liability of LGUs
Torts
- Liability of local government units
Provinces, cities and municipalities shall be liable for damages for the death or injuries suffered by any person by reason of the defective conditions of roads, streets, bridges, public buildings and other public works under their control or supervision [Article 2189, CC].
- Vicarious liability for special agents
The Government is only liable for the acts of its agents, officers and employees, when they act as special agents within the meaning of the provision [Article 2180(6), CC].
Special Agent — One who receives a definite and fixed order or commission, foreign to the exercise of the duties of his office if he is a special official [Merritt v. Government of the Philippine Islands, G.R. No. L-11154, April 16, 1915].
One who performs his regular functions, even if he is called a “special agent”, is not a special agent within the context of Government liability [USA v. Guinto, G.R. No. 76607 (1990)].
- Liability under the Local Government Code
Local government units and their officials are not exempt from liability for death or injury to persons or damage to property [Section 24, LGC].
Special Law — May come in the form of a private bill authorizing a named individual to bring suit on a special claim.
To sue and be sued
LGUs have the power to sue and be sued. Because of the statutory waiver, LGUs are not immune from suit.
The OSG may not be compelled to represent local government units. The LGC vests exclusively authority upon the LGU’s legal officers to be counsels of local government units. Even the employment of a special legal officer is expressly allowed by the law only upon a strict condition that the action or proceeding which involves the component city or municipality is adverse to the provincial government or to another component city or municipality. (OSG v. CA and Municipal Government of Saguiran, G.R. No. 199027, June 9, 2014).
A municipality can be sued for damages arising from injuries sustained by a pedestrian who was hit by a glass pane that fell from a dilapidated window frame of the municipal hall. Under Section 24 of the LGC and Article 2189 of the Civil Code, the municipality is liable for damages arising from injuries to persons by reason of negligence of local government units on the defective condition of the municipal hall, which is under their control and supervision.
Municipal Liability
LGUs and their officials are not exempt from liability for death or injury to persons or damage to property.
Liability on Contracts
Municipal corporations are liable on contracts entered into on their behalf by their duly authorized agents acting within the scope of their authority, provided that the municipal corporations are authorized to enter into said contracts by their charter.
Doctrine of Implied Municipal Liability
A municipality may become obligated upon an implied contract to pay the reasonable value of the benefits accepted or appropriated by it as to which it has the general power to contract. The doctrine applies to all cases where money or other property of a party is received under such circumstances that the general law, independent of an express contract, implies an obligation to do justice with respect to the same.
The doctrine of estoppel cannot be applied as against a municipal corporation to validate a contract which it has no power to make, or which it is authorized to make only under prescribed conditions, within prescribed limitations, or in a prescribed mode or manner, although the corporation has accepted the benefits thereof and the other party has fully performed his part of the agreement, or has expended large sums in preparation for performance. A reason frequently assigned for this rule is that to apply the doctrine of estoppel against a municipality in such a case would be to enable it to do indirectly what it cannot do directly. Also, where a contract is violative of public policy, the municipality executing it cannot be estopped to assert the invalidity of a contract which has ceded away, controlled, or embarrassed its legislative or government powers. (San Diego z Municipalityof Naujan,G.R. L-9920, 1960).
The government is justified to decline payment of the purchase price of illegally cut lumber delivered by a contractor who won a public bidding for the construction of the Navotas Bridge. All contracts, including government contracts, are subject to the police power of the State. Being an inherent attribute of sovereignty, such power is deemed incorporated into the laws of the land, which are part of all contracts, thereby qualifying the obligations arising therefrom. Thus, it is an implied condition in the subject contract for the procurement of materials needed in the repair and construction of the Navotas Bridge that the petitioner as private contractor would comply with pertinent forestry laws and regulations on the cutting and gathering of the lumber she undertook to supply the provincial government.
Liability v. Defense
| LIABILITY | DEFENSE |
| LGUs and local officials are liable in case of: • Death • Injury, or • Damage to property The State is responsible in like manner when it acts through a special agent; but not when the damage has been caused by the official to whom the task done properly pertains.Provinces, cities, and municipalities are liable under Article 2189 of the Civil Code for death or injuries suffered by reason of the defective condition of roads, streets, bridges, public buildings, and other public works under their control or supervision. |
LGUs generally can be sued based on their “charters/laws - power to sue and be sued”Liability under Article 2189 for defective public works under an LGU's control or supervision is not limited to proprietary functions. |
Special Agent: One who receives a definite and fixed order or commission, foreign to the exercise of the duties of his office, so that in representation of the state and being bout to act as agent thereof, he executes the trust confided to him.
In the case where a stage collapsed during a zarzuela, municipal corporations will be liable for the injury sustained by the victims. Under Philippine law, municipalities are political bodies corporate. They are endowed with the faculties of municipal corporations. In their proper corporate name, they may sue, be sued, contract and be contracted with. (Torio v. Fontanilla , G.R. L-29993, 1978).
It was improper to hold the petitioner personally liable for the questioned uncollected special education fund amount. (Demaala v. COA, G.R. 199752, 2015).
The writ was directed at the mayor not in his personal capacity, but in his capacity as a municipal mayor, so that it is not irregular whether it was served upon him during his earlier term or in his subsequent one. (Mayor Marcial Vargas and Engr. Raymundo Del Rosario v. Cajucom, G.R. No. 171095, January 25, 2016).
Authorities
- Civil Code, Art. 2180
- Civil Code, Art. 2189
- Civil Code, Sec. 2189
- Demaala v. COA, G.R. No. 199752, 17 February 2015
- Guadines v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 164891, 6 June 2011
- LGC, Sec. 24
- Local Government Code (LGC), Sec. 24
- Mayor Marcial Vargas v. Cajucom, G.R. No. 171095, 25 January 2016
- Merritt v. Government of the Philippine Islands, G.R. No. L-11154, 16 April 1915
- Office of the Solicitor General v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 199027, 9 June 2014
- San Diego v. Municipality of Naujan, G.R. No. L-9920, 29 February 1960
- Torio v. Rosalina, G.R. No. L-29993, 23 October 1978
- United States of America v. Guinto, G.R. No. 76607, 26 February 1990