G.R. No. 152334 - H.H. Hollero Construction, Inc. vs. Government Service Insurance System

Four petitions (G.R. Nos. 76607, 79470, 80018, 80258) were consolidated by the Supreme Court en banc because all question the doctrine of state immunity as applied to the United States of America and its agents on Philippine soil.
The United States was not formally impleaded in the trial courts but its officers and agents were sued for acts allegedly done in their official capacity; motions to dismiss for lack of consent to suit were denied in each case and temporary restraining orders were issued by this Court.

The Western Pacific Contracting Office solicited bids (February 24, 1986) for barbering concessions in Clark Air Base through PHAX contracting officer James F. Shaw. Private respondents Valencia, Tanglao and del Pilar, long‐time concessionaires, protested the award to Roman Dizon, alleging irregular bids.
They sought in Civil Case No. 4772 in Angeles City RTC a writ of preliminary injunction and cancellation of the award. The court issued an ex parte status quo order; petitioners (PHAX reps Reeves and Smouse) moved to dismiss for state immunity and opposed injunctive relief; both motions were denied.

Fabian Genove was hired as cook at the U.S. Air Force Recreation Center, John Hay Air Station. After evidence that he urinated in soup stock, manager Lamachia suspended him and referred the matter to a board of arbitrators under the collective bargaining agreement. The board unanimously recommended dismissal, effected March 5, 1986.
Genove filed Civil Case No. 829-R(298) in Baguio RTC for damages against Lamachia, Belsa, Orascion and Cartalla. The defendants and the U.S. moved to dismiss, invoking official immunity and lack of U.S. consent; the trial court denied the motion.

Air Force officers Kingi, Dye and Bostick (AFOSI agents) conducted a buy-bust operation at Camp O’Donnell, arrested barracks boy Bautista for violating the Dangerous Drugs Act, testified against him, and thereby caused his dismissal.
Bautista filed Civil Case No. 115-C-87 in Tarlac RTC for damages. A special counsel of the U.S. Office of the Staff Judge Advocate appeared and sought to extend time to plead; eventually petitioners filed an answer and later moved to dismiss for state immunity. The motion was denied.

Private respondents sued U.S. officers and enlisted men (Carns, Rivenburgh, Blevins, Gonzales, Mitchell, Benjamin, et al.) in Civil Case No. 4996, alleging they were beaten, handcuffed, and attacked by dogs under respondents’ control, causing serious injuries.
Defendants contended the incident occurred during a theft arrest, the dogs bit the prisoners in a struggle, and they acted in their official capacity; they moved to dismiss on grounds of immunity, but the court denied the motion.

Each petition sought certiorari and prohibition with preliminary injunction to restrain further trial court proceedings.
Temporary restraining orders were issued: December 11, 1986 (G.R. 76607); October 14, 1987 (G.R. 80018); October 27, 1987 (G.R. 80258).

Whether the suits filed in the RTCs are in effect actions against the United States of America, which has not consented to be sued.
Whether officers and agents of the U.S. Government, acting in their official capacities on Philippine bases, enjoy sovereign immunity under the doctrine of state immunity as incorporated in Philippine law and under the RP-US Military Bases Agreement.
Whether commercial or proprietary activities of the U.S. Government or its agents constitute an implied waiver of sovereign immunity (distinction between jure imperii and jure gestionis).
Whether the individual petitioners, even if acting in a sovereign capacity, are personally liable for torts allegedly committed during the performance of official duties.