G.R. No. L-55273-83 - Rayo vs. Court of 1st Instance of Bulacan

On the night of October 26, 1978, during typhoon "KADING," the National Power Corporation (NPC), through its plant superintendent Benjamin Chavez, opened all three floodgates of the Angat Dam simultaneously and suddenly.
This action caused severe flooding in several towns in Bulacan, with Norzagaray being the worst affected. Approximately one hundred residents died, and properties worth millions of pesos were destroyed or washed away. The flood was unprecedented in the area.

The petitioners, victims of the flood, filed eleven separate complaints for damages against the NPC and Benjamin Chavez before the Court of First Instance of Bulacan, Branch V, Sta. Maria. These cases were docketed as Civil Cases Nos. SM-950, 951, 953, 958, 959, 964, 965, 966, 981, 982, and 983. Though filed separately, the complaints had a common cause of action.
NPC filed separate answers for each complaint, denied material allegations, set forth counterclaims, and asserted as a special affirmative defense that it was performing a purely governmental function in operating the Angat Dam and thus could not be sued without the State’s express consent.

A preliminary hearing was held on NPC’s affirmative defense, treated as a motion to dismiss. Petitioners opposed, arguing NPC was performing proprietary functions and could sue and be sued under Section 3(d) of Republic Act No. 6395.
On December 21, 1979, the trial court issued an order dismissing all complaints against NPC, leaving only Chavez as the defendant. The court held that NPC was performing a governmental function, and tort claims required the State’s consent to sue.
Petitioners filed a motion for reconsideration on August 7, 1980, which the court denied on October 3, 1980, without detailed explanation.
Petitioners then filed the present petition for review on certiorari under Republic Act No. 5440, challenging the orders dismissing the complaints against NPC.

The petition was filed on October 16, 1980. The Court required respondents to comment, but the Solicitor General filed the comment only on April 13, 1981, after extensions.
The Court required simultaneous memoranda from parties; petitioners complied, but the Solicitor General’s memorandum was not filed despite multiple extensions and warnings.
The issues were framed by the parties regarding NPC’s function as governmental or proprietary and whether NPC’s power to sue and be sued extended to tort claims.

Whether the National Power Corporation performs a governmental function in the management and operation of the Angat Dam.
Whether NPC’s power to sue and be sued under its organic charter includes the power to be sued for tort claims.