Case Digest Negotiable Instruments ClassFull description
law, obligations, oblicon, case digestFull description
Philippine Merchant and Marine School vs Court of Appeals
CasesFull description
ADR CaseFull description
Mariategui vs CA Case Digest
political law reviewFull description
Case Digest for Laguna Transportation vs SSS
Natural resources and Environmental Law case digest
Case DigestFull description
Case in Negotiable InstrumentsFull description
Lee Tek Sheng vs CA GR 115402Full description
Abello vs. CIR & CA (Case Digest)
digested cases
SSS vs. CA (120 SCRA 707)
FACTS: Spouses David and Socorro Cruz, applied and granted granted a real estate loan by the SSS with residential lot located at Pateros, Rizal as collateral. The spouses Cruz complied with their monthly payments. When delayed were incurred in t heir monthly payments SSS filed a petition for foreclosure o f their real estate mortgage executed by the spouses Cruz on the ground that the spouses Cruz defaulted in payment, Pursuant for these application for foreclosure notices were published on the second notice the counsel for spouses Cruz sent a letter to SSS informing the latter that his clients are up to date in their payment of the monthly amortization and the SSS should discontinued the publication of the notices of foreclosure. This request remain unheaded, this spouses Cruz filed an action for damages against SSS before RTC in Rizal. SSS invoking its immunity from suit being an agency of t he government performing government function. The trial court and court of appeal nevertheless awarded damages in favor of spouses Cruz which was affirmed by court of appeal, Hence this petition.
ISSUE: Whether or not SSS is immune from suit.
HELD: Negative.. The SSS has a distinct legal personality and it can be sued for damages. The SSS does not enjoy immunity from suit by express statutory consent.
It has corporated power separate and distinct from the government. SSS own organic act specifically provides that it can sue and be sued in court. These words “sue and be sued” embrace all civil process incident to a legal action. So that even assuming that the SS S, as it claims, enjoys immunity from suit as an entity performing gover nmental function, by virtue of the explicit provision of the aforecited enabling law, the government must be deemed to have waived immunity in respect of the SSS, although it does not thereby concede its liability that statutory law has given to the private citizen a remedy for the enforcement and prote ction of his rights. The SSS thereby has been required to submit to the jurisdiction of the court; subject to its right to interpose any lawful defense.
