VOL.

129, MAY 21, 1984

405
Legal Capacity To Sue
ANNOTATION
LEGAL CAPACITY TO SUE
By
SEVERIANO S. TABIOS

I.Introduction, p. 405
II.Concept of Legal Capacity to Sue, p. 406
III.Specific Limitations on Legal Capacity to Sue, p. 407
A. Legal Personality, p. 407
B. Minority, p. 408
C. Insanity, p. 409
D. Judicial Declaration of Incompetence, p. 409
E. Marriage in the Case of a Woman, p. 411

I. Introduction
In the case of La Chemise Lacoste vs. Hemandas, et. al.,1 which is the subject of
this annotation, the legal capacity of plaintiff, a foreign corporation not doing
business in the Philippines, was challenged before the courts. In that case, the
plaintiff filed a complaint with the NBI alleging that respondent had been violating
Art. 189 of the Revised Penal Code. Upon APPLICATION BY THE NBI, respondent
judge issued a search warrant which it later quashed on the representation of the
respondent. When the case was elevated to the Supreme Court, where respondent
questioned the right of petitioner to sue in Philippine courts, the Supreme Court
declared that as early as 1927, it was and still is, of the view that a foreign cor________________
1 L-63796-97, May 21, 1984.
406
406
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
Legal Capacity To Sue
poration not doing business in the Philippines needs no license to sue before
Philippine courts for infringement of trade mark and unfair competition. This
annotation is intended to explore further the question of legal capacity to sue as a
ground for motion to dismiss.
II Concept of Legal Capacity to Sue
Legal capacity to sue is a ground for motion to dismiss. Under the Revised Rules of
Court, a motion to dismiss may be made when the plaintiff has no legal capacity to
sue.2 For this purpose, it has been ruled that a plaintiff lacks the legal capacity to
sue when he does not have the necessary qualification to appear at the trial, such
as when the plaintiff is not in the full exercise of his civil rights, and when the
plaintiff does not have the character or the representation he claims, which is a
matter of evidence.3 In other words, the term lack of legal capacity to sue means

that either the plaintiff does not have the necessary qualification to appear in the
case or that he does not have the character or representation which he claims.4
The term lack of capacity to sue should not be confused with lack of personality
to sue, as both terms do not mean the same. While the former refers to the fact
that plaintiff is suffering from any disability, the latter refers to the fact that plaintiff
is not a real party in interest. Correspondingly, the first can be a good ground for a
motion to dismiss based on the ground of lack of legal capacity to sue while the
second can be used as a good ground for a motion to dismiss based on the fact that
the complaint does not state a cause of action.5
From the foregoing, it becomes clear that legal capacity is equated with a partys
lack of general disability to sue. It means that the plaintiff is free from such
disability as infancy, insanity, coverture, lack of judicial personality or any other
_________________
2 Rule 16, Sec. 1 (d), Revised Rules of Court.
3 Lunsod vs. Ortega, 46 Phil. 664.
4 Recreation and Amusement Association of the Philippines vs. City of Manila, et. al.,
53 O.G. No. 9, pp. 2767.
5 Casimiro vs. Ruque, 53 O.G. No. 22, p. 8772; Gonzales vs. Alezarbes, 53 O.G. No.
22, p. 8070.
407
VOL. 129, MAY 21, 1984
407
Legal Capacity To Sue
disqualification of a party.6 Thus, an unregistered corporation has no legal capacity
to sue7 in the same manner that a labor union whose name was dropped from the
list of registered labor organizations has no legal capacity to sue.8 Similarly, a minor
not emancipated, or an insane person, or one declared judicially to be incompetent
has no legal capacity to sue, although suit may be brought through the father,
mother, guardian or guardian ad litem appointed by the court.9 Moreover, except in
some instances enumerated in the law, a married woman may not sue or be sued
alone without joining her husband.10
III. Specific Limitations on Legal Capacity to Sue
A. Legal Personality
One without legal personality does not have the capacity to sue. It is for this
purpose that the Revised Rules of Court provides that only natural or juridical
persons or entities authorized by law may be parties in a civil action.11 This means
that a suit brought by one which is not a natural person or juridical entity is a nullity
as when a civil organization not being a juridical entity representing a group of
Filipino citizens trying to become a party in a naturalization proceeding.12 Similarly,
an agency of the government which is not incorporated,13 a labor union whose
name was dropped from the list of registered labor organization14 or a political
party which is not
__________________
6 Rule 3, Secs. 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5, Revised Rules of Court.
7 Recreation & Amusement Association vs. Manila, 55 O.G. 2761.

8 Phil. Land-Air-Sea Labor Union vs. CIR, et. al., L-5664, Sept. 17, 1963.
9 Rule 3, Sec. 5, Revised Rules of Court.
10 Rule 3, Sec. 4, Revised Rules of Court.
11 Rule 3, Sec. 1, Revised Rules of Court.
12 Anti-Chinese/League of the Phil. vs. Felix, et. al., L-998, Feb. 20, 1947.
13 Angat River Irrigation System vs. Angat Workers Union, L-10943, Dec. 28, 1957.
14 Phil. Land-Air-Sea Labor Union, Inc. vs. CIR, et. al., L-5664, Sept. 17, 1963:
408
408
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
Legal Capacity To Sue
incorporated15 cannot sue or be sued. However, the estate of a deceased person is
considered an artificial person for purposes of the settlement and distribution of the
estate16 and for this purpose, it is considered to have a legal personality of its own
independent from that of the heirs.17 Furthermore, it was held that a municipality
has the legal capacity to bring an action to recover damages, losses and injuries
that may be caused to the community of people which it represents.18
B. Minority
Under the Revised Rules of Court, a minor may sue or be sued in the cases provided
by law through his father, mother, guardian, or if he has none, through a guardian
ad litem appointed by the court.19 This means that a minor is restricted from the
exercise of his right. As provided in the New Civil Code, minority is a mere
restriction on the capacity to act but does not exempt the incapacitated person from
certain obligations.20 In other words, the minors capacity to act, which is the power
to do acts with legal effect, is restricted while in the state of minority.21
The restriction imposed by minority ceases upon the attainment of the age of
twenty-one years in which event the person concerned is qualified for all acts of civil
life,22 except in cases specified by the New Civil Code.23 Moreover, a woman above
the age of majority, although below 23 years of age, is already
__________________
15 Nacionalista Party vs. Bautista, L-3452, Dec. 7, 1949.
16 Estate of Mota vs. Concepcion, 56 Phil. 712.
17 Limjoco vs. Intestate of Fragante, 8 Phil. 776.
18 Municipality of Mangaldan vs. Municipality of Manaoag, 38 Phil. 455.
19 Rule 3, Sec. 5, Revised Rules of Court.
20 Art. 38, New Civil Code.
21 Art. 37 in relation to Art. 38, New Civil Code.
22 Art. 402, New Civil Code.
23 Art. 403, New Civil Code which prohibits a woman below 23 years of age from
leaving the parental home without the consent of the father or the mother in whose
company she lives, except to become a wife or when she exercises a profession or
calling, or when the father or mother has contracted a subsequent marriage.
409
VOL. 129, MAY 21, 1984
409
Legal Capacity To Sue

in full possession of her civil rights, which include the right to appear and prosecute
or defend a criminal action.24
C. Insanity
Under the Revised Rules of Court, insanity is among the limitations on the legal
capacity to sue.25 In this regard, the New Civil Code considers insanity as a mere
restriction on the capacity to act26 as the insane person cannot make a valid will or
testament27 nor can he give a valid consent to contracts.28 Moreover, as defined
by the Revised Administrative Code, insanity includes the various forms of mental
disease, either inherited or acquired, in which there is a perversion of mentality, as
where the person is suffering from illusions, hallucinations or delusions, unnatural
exaltation or depression, or insane ideas of persecution or power.29
While the Revised Rules of Court imposes the limitation on the capacity to sue on a
person who is an insane,30 the Supreme Court in determining the existences of the
capacity to act by a person being considered to be an insane declared that a person
who has not been previously declared as incapable is presumed to have the
capacity to act and that capacity is presumed to continue so long as the contrary is
not proved.31 In other words, unless the person is proved to be an insane, his legal
capacity to sue and be sued is not impaired.
D. Judicial Declaration of Incompetence
Under the Rules of Court, an incompetent is a person suffering from the penalty of
civil interdiction or who is a hospitalized leper, prodigal, deaf and dumb who is
unable to read and
________________
24 U.S. vs. Dela Santa, 9 Phil. 22.
25 Rule 3, Section 5, Revised Rules of Court.
26 Art. 38, New Civil Code.
27 Art. 798, New Civil Code.
28 Art. 1327, par. 2, New Civil Code.
29 Sec. 1039, Revised Administrative Code.
30 Rule 3, Sec. 5, Revised Rules of Court.
31 Standard Oil Co. vs. Codina Arenas, 19 Phil. 363.
410
410
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
Legal Capacity To Sue
write, one who is of unsound mind, even through he has some lucid intervals, and a
person not being of unsound mind, but by reason of age, disease, weak mind and
other similar causes, cannot, without outside aid, take care of himself and manage
his property, becoming thereby an easy prey for deceit and exploitation.32 As the
above-mentioned conditions existing in a person appear to limit their capacity to
manage their affairs such that they appear to become easy prey for deceit and
exploitation if not assisted, a guardian may be appointed for them should their
incompetence be judicially determined. The moment a guardian is appointed, the
incompetent may sue or be sued through the guardian,33 as the guardian shall
appear for and represent the ward in all actions and special proceedings, unless
another person be appointed for that purpose.34
It may be noted however that civil interdiction imposed on a person does not need
that he be declared judicially incompetent as civil interdiction itself made him

judicially incompetent as it is an accessory penalty imposed on the person. As an

accessory penalty imposed on offenders sentenced to a principal penalty of not
lower than twelve years,35 civil interdiction shall deprive the offender during the
time of his sentence of the rights of parental authority, or guardianship, either as to
the person or property of any ward, of marital authority, of the right to manage his
property and of the right to dispose of such property by any act or any conveyance
inter vivos.36
With respect to prodigality as the basis of incompetence, the Supreme Court ruled
that the acts of prodigality must show a morbid state of mind and disposition to
spend, waste and lessen the estate to such an extent as is likely to expose the
family to want of support, or to deprive the compulsory heirs of their legitime.37
________________
32 Rule 91, Sec. 2, Revised Rules of Court.
33 Rule 3, Sec. 5, Revised Rules of Court.
34 Rule 96, Sec. 3, Revised Rules of Court.
35 Art. 41, Revised Penal Code.
36 Art. 34, Revised Penal Code.
37 Martinez vs. Martinez, 1 Phil. 182.
411
VOL. 129, MAY 21, 1984
411
Legal Capacity To Sue
E. Marriage in the Case of a Woman
Under the Revised Rules of Court, a married woman may not sue or be sued alone
without joining her husband, except when they are judicially separated; if they have
in fact been separated for at least one year; when there is a separation of property
agreed upon in the marriage settlement; if the administration of all the property in
the marriage has been transferred to her; when the litigation is between the
husband and the wife; if the suit concerns her paraphernal property; when the
action is upon the civil liability arising from a criminal offense; if the litigation is
incidental to the profession, occupation or business in which she is engaged; in any
civil action referred to in articles 25 to 35 of the Civil Code; and in an action upon a
quasi-delict.38 It is to be noted that the provisions of the Revised Rules of Court is a
reiteration of the provisions in the New Civil Code which requires that the husband
must be joined in all suits by or against the wife, except in the cases so
enumerated.39
With respect to suits involving paraphernal property, a married woman may
maintain the action alone as the husband has no interest therein,40 and for that
purpose, the husband is not a necessary party.41 However, in an action filed by a
married woman to recover damages for the use of her real property, it was held that
her husband should have been joined as a necessary party to the action, because
the damages sought will ultimately form part of the assets of their conjugal
partnership.42 Moreover, in instances where the husband has to be joined as a
party to a litigation, failure to join the husband in an action involving the wife is not
a jurisdictional defect as the remedy is to have the husband joined as a party
defendant.43
o0o

__________________
38 Rule 3, Sec. 4, Revised Rules of Court.
39 Art. 113, New Civil Code.
40 Jacinto vs. Salvador, 12 Phil. 376; Ramos vs. Castelo, et. al., 36 Phil. 876;
Bismorte vs. Aldecoa, 17 Phil. 480.
41 Jaranilla, et. al. vs. Gonzales, et. al., 50 O.G. 4756.
42 Quizon vs. Calud, 12 Phil. 109.
43 Pacquing, et. al. vs. Maiquez, et. al., L-8826, May 18, 1956.
[Legal Capacity To Sue, 129 SCRA 405(1984)]