You are on page 1of 1

1) SARASOLA v.

TRINIDAD

Facts: Gregorio Sarasola filed a complaint for injunction to restrain Wenceslao Trinidad, the Collector of
Internal Revenue from the alleged illegal collection of taxes. CIR interposed a demurrer to the complaint stating
that under Section 1578 of the Administrative Code, injunction is not available to restrain collection of tax. CIR
also alleged the complaint did not entitle the plaintiff to the relief demanded as under Section 1579, it disallows
interest on the internal revenue taxes in the sum alleged to have been illegally collected. The judge of CFI
Manila sustained the demurrer, basing his decision from the case of Churchill v Rafferty. Sarsola argued that
the provisions under Sec 1578-1579 are unconstitutional.

Issue: Whether an interest can be imposed against the State in cases of recovery of taxes illegally collected.

Ruling: YES. It is well settled both on principle and authority that interest is not to be awarded against a
sovereign government unless its consent has been manifested by an Act of its Legislature or by a lawful
contract of its executive officers. If there be doubt upon the subject, that doubt must be resolved in favor of the
State. The state never pays interest unless she expressly engages to do so.

Our own statute not only does not authorize interest but negatives the payment of interest. The law is valid,
or that Sarasola has not proven such a case of irreparable injury as would warrant the issuance of the
extraordinary writ of execution.

2)

You might also like