ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™  
Main Index Law Library Philippine Laws, Statutes & Codes Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Jurisprudence
BAR REVIEWER ON LABOR LAW 2014 (2nd) Edition - By Prof. Joselito Guianan Chan

 

 
Chan Robles Virtual Law Library
 









 

 
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

 
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

   
November-2011                  

  • [G.R. No. 167449 : November 14, 2011] BRISTOL MYERS SQUIBB [PHILS.] v. NIXON A. BABAN

  • [G.R. No. 190648 : November 14, 2011] HYATT TAXI SERVICES, INC./MR. CESAR LEE/MR. CONSTANCIO RAMOS, JR. V. WILFREDO CERILLO

  • [G.R. No. 194974 : November 14, 2011] DAISY TOLEDO Y CAUPAYAN, FRED BULAWIN Y EROY AND EVELYN TIZON Y AGUSTINES, PETITIONERS -VERSUS- PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, RESPONDENT.

  • [G.R. No. 196974 : November 14, 2011] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. JOMAR MALLILLIN Y BUNCAG

  • [G.R. No. 195966 : November 14, 2011] ATTY. ROSELLER "JACK" MAALAT v. HONORABLE COURT OR APPEALS [18TH DIVISION], CEBU CITY, LORETO VALENZUELA, AND JESSIE CERVANTES, ET AL.

  • [G.R. No. 194840 : November 14, 2011] MARCELO PACHECO v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES

  • [G.R. No. 198558 : November 14, 2011] ARIEL LANTAJO Y CRISTOBAL AND GUILLERMO ALOJAMIENTO Y GUAPIN v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES

  • [G.R. No. 197248 : November 14, 2011] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. ROMULO DUTERTE

  • [G.R. No. 197924 : November 14, 2011] BENITO YAO CHUA AND WILSON GO v. LEONARDO L. VILLALON, ET AL.

  • [G.R. No. 196227 : November 14, 2011] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. SHANEDATU UTOH

  • [G.R. No. 181027 : November 15, 2011] NQSR MANAGEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION VS. EXECUTIVE SECRETARY EDUARDO ERMITA, ET AL.

  • [G.R. No. 191970 : November 15, 2011] ROMMEL APOLINARIO JALOSJOS VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS AND DAN ERASMO, JR.

  • [G.R. No. 193462 : November 15, 2011] DENNIS B. FUNA VS. MANILA ECONOMIC AND CULTURAL OFFICE AND COMMISSION ON AUDIT

  • [G.R. No. 196933 : November 15, 2011] NOLI JOEL IGNAO BERMEO VS. LUZ IGNAO PADAYAO AND COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS [COMELEC]

  • [G.R. No. 197930 : November 15, 2011] EFRAIM C. GENUINO, ET AL. VS. HON. LEILA M. DE LIMA, IN HER CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF JUSTICE, ET AL.

  • [G.R. No. 197878 : November 15, 2011] GEMMA C. DELA CRUZ, ET AL. VS. MANILA ELECTRIC COMPANY [MERALCO], ET AL.

  • [G.R. No. 197778 : November 15, 2011] NASSER DIKI LAGUINDAB VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ET AL.

  • [G.R. No. 197419 : November 15, 2011] JESUS VICENTE H. MAGSAYSAY II VS. EXECUTIVE SECRETARY PAQUITO N. OCHOA, JR.

  • [G.R. No. 196926 : November 15, 2011] JOSE A. ZAMORRO VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, MUNICIPAL BOARD OF CANVASSERS OF MAASIM, SARANGANI AND ARTURO LAWA

  • [G.R No. 196452 : November 15, 2011] MARIA BLANCA KIM B. LOKIN VS. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ELECTORAL TRIBUNAL AND LEOPOLDO N. BATAOIL

  • [G.R. No. 195971 : November 15, 2011] AL-JIHAN R. EDDING VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS AND MIGUEL C. ALAVAR III

  • [G.R. No. 195649 : November 15, 2011] CASAN MACODE MAQUILING VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ROMMEL ARNADO Y CAGOCO AND LINOG G. BALUA

  • [G.R. No. 195378 : November 15, 2011] CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION VS. COURT OF APPEALS AND FRANCISCO SERVITO

  • [G.R. No. 193808 : November 15, 2011] LUIS K. LOKIN, JR. AND TERESITA F. PLANAS VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS AND VIRGINIA S. JOSE, ALLEGEDLY REPRESENTING CITIZENS' BATTLE AGAINST CORRUPTION PARTY LIST, SHERWIN N. TUGNA AND CINCHONA CRUZ-GONZALES

  • [G.R. No. 193719 : November 15, 2011] SAMSON R. PACASUM, SR. VS. ATTY. MARIETTA D. ZAMORANOS

  • [A.M. No. P-04-1787 : November 15, 2011] OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR VS. MS. MAURA D. CAMPANO, CLERK OF COURT, MTC, SAN JOSE, OCCIDENTAL MINDORO, NESTOR S. ROBLES, CLERK OF COURT, MCTC, MAGSAYSAY-RIZAL, CALINTAAN, OCCIDENTAL MINDORO AND YOLANDA A. BONUS, INTERPRETER I, MCTC, MAGSAYSAY-RIZAL-CALINTAAN, OCCIDENTAL MINDORO

  • [G.R. No. 153690 : November 15, 2011] DAVID LU VS. PATERNO LUYM, SR., ET AL.

  • [G.R. Nos. 184461-62 : November 15, 2011] LT. COL. ROGELIO BOAC, ET AL. VS. ERLINDA T. CADAPAN, ET AL.

  • [G.R. Nos. 183711-13 : November 15, 2011] EDITA T. BURGOS VS. PRESIDENT GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO, ET AL.

  • [A.M. No. 14082-Ret. : November 15, 2011] RE: APPLICATION FOR SURVIVORSHIP PENSION BENEFITS OF HON. JUANITO C. RANJO, FORMER DEPUTY COURT ADMINISTRATOR [DCA]

  • [G.R. No. 174788 : November 15, 2011] THE SPECIAL AUDIT TEAM, COMMISSION ON AUDIT v. COURT OF APPEALS AND GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE SYSTEM

  • [G.R. No. 181653 : November 15, 2011] POLICE DIRECTOR GENERAL AVELINO I. RAZON, ET AL., PETITIONERS, VERSUS HON. ALAN PETER S. CAYETANO, ET AL., RESPONDENTS.

  • [G.R. No. 181067 : November 15, 2011] CECILIA ORENA-DRILON, ET AL., PETITIONERS v. HON. RONALDO V. PUNO, ET AL., RESPONDENTS. [ G.R. NO. 181159. NOVEMBER 15, 2011 ] RAOUL ESPERAS, ET AL., PETITIONERS v. HON. EDUARDO ERMITA, ET AL., RESPONDENTS.

  • [G.R. No. 199034 November 15, 2011] GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO v. HON. LEILA M. DE LIMA, IN HER CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, AND RICARDO A. DAVID, JR., IN HIS CAPACITY AS COMMISSIONER OF THE BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION [ G.R. NO. 199046. NOVEMBER 15, 2011 ] JOSE MIGUEL T. ARROYO v. SEC. LEILA M. DE LIMA, IN HER CAPACITY AS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, RICARDO V. PARAS III, IN HIS CAPACITY AS CHIEF STATE COUNSEL, AND RICARDO A. DAVID, JR., IN HIS CAPACITY AS COMMISSIONER, BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION DISSENTING OPINION

  • [G.R. No. 199034, November 15, 2011] GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO, PETITIONER, v. HON. LEILA M. DE LIMA, IN HER CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF JUSTICE, ET AL., RESPONDENTS. [ G.R. NO. 199046. NOVEMBER 15, 2011 ] JOSE MIGUEL T. ARROYO, PETITIONER, v. SECRETARY LEILA M. DE LIMA, IN HER CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF JUSTICE, ET AL., RESPONDENTS. DISSENTING OPINION

  • [G.R. No. 199034 : November 15, 2011] GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO, PETITIONER, -VERSUS- HON. LEILA M. DE LIMA, IN HER CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND RICARDO A. DAVID, JR., IN HIS CAPACITY AS COMMISSIONER OF THE BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION, RESPONDENTS. [ G.R. NO. 199046. NOVEMBER 15, 2011 ] JOSE MIGUEL T. ARROYO, PETITIONER, -VERSUS- HON. LEILA M. DE LIMA, IN HER CAPACITY AS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, RICARDO V. PARAS III, IN HIS CAPACITY AS CHIEF STATE COUNSEL, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND RICARDO A. DAVID, JR., IN HIS CAPACITY AS COMMISSIONER, BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION, RESPONDENTS. TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

  • [G.R. No. 199034 : November 15, 2011] GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO VS. HON. LEILA M. DE LIMA, IN HER CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND RICARDO A. DAVID, JR., IN HIS CAPACITY AS COMMISSIONER OF THE BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION [ G.R. NO. 199046. NOVEMBER 15, 2011 ] JOSE MIGUEL T. ARROYO VS. HON. LEILA M. DE LIMA, IN HER CAPACITY AS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, RICARDO V. PARAS III, IN HIS CAPACITY AS CHIEF STATE COUNSEL, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND RICARDO A. DAVID, JR., IN HIS CAPACITY AS COMMISSIONER, BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION

  • [G.R. No. 195640 (Formerly UDK No. 14455) : November 15, 2011] SUGAR REGULATORY ADMINISTRATION VS. ENCARNACION B. TORMON, ET AL.

  • [G.R. No. 197199 : November 16, 2011] RAFAEL REYES v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES

  • [G.R. Nos. 196922 and 196928-29 : November 16, 2011] SULPICIO LINES, INC. AND SOLID TOWAGE AND LIGHTERAGE CO., INC., ET AL., PETITIONERS V. VINNELL ABORBE, ET AL., UNYON NG MGA MANDARAGAT SA SULPICIO LINES, INC./SOLID STOWAGE AND LIGHTERAGE CO., INC., ET AL. AND ALEXANDER KIAMCO, ET AL., RESPONDENTS.

  • [G.R. No. 147193 : November 16, 2011] SPOUSES ALFREDO G. VELAYO AND JOVITA F. VELAYO v. COURT OF APPEALS, NATY MIRANDA, NATALIO SALONGA, AND REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

  • [G.R. No. 197102 : November 16, 2011] SONNY LAZO Y ADEZA v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES

  • [G.R. No. 195376 : November 16, 2011] SERGIO RAÑA v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES

  • [G.R. No. 198595 : November 16, 2011] ANGELITO GLORIA Y BISARA v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES

  • [G.R. No. 191398 : November 16, 2011] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. BOBBY SALIC Y PAUDAC

  • [G.R. No. 198461 : November 16, 2011] SAN LORENZO RUIZ BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS GROUP, INC. v. TACIANO L. BANGCORO

  • [G.R. No. 199034 : November 18, 2011] GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO V. HON. LEILA M. DE LIMA, IN HER CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, AND RICARDO A. DAVID, JR., IN HIS CAPACITY AS COMMISSIONER OF THE BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION [ G.R. NO. 199046. NOVEMBER 18, 2011 ] JOSE MIGUEL T. ARROYO V. SEC. LEILA M. DE LIMA, IN HER CAPACITY AS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, RICARDO V. PARAS III, IN HIS CAPACITY AS CHIEF STATE COUNSEL, AND RICARDO A. DAVID, JR., IN HIS CAPACITY AS COMMISSIONER, BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION DISSENTING OPINION

  • [G.R. No. 199034 : November 18, 2011] GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO VS. HON. LEILA M. DE LIMA, IN HER CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND RICARDO A. DAVID, JR., IN HIS CAPACITY AS COMMISSIONER OF THE BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION [ G.R. NO. 199046. NOVEMBER 18, 2011 ] JOSE MIGUEL T. ARROYO VS. HON. LEILA M. DE LIMA, IN HER CAPACITY AS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, RICARDO V. PARAS III, IN HIS CAPACITY AS CHIEF STATE COUNSEL, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND RICARDO A. DAVID, JR., IN HIS CAPACITY AS COMMISSIONER, BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION

  • [G.R. No. 197050 : November 21, 2011] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. MINA AKMAD Y MAMOMPON

  • [A.C. No. 8125 : November 21, 2011] TEOFILA JABONITE-ARAO v. ATTY. EMMANUEL C. OPAY

  • [G.R. No. 196241 : November 21, 2011] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. ARIS ALLAWIGAN Y PAGULAYAN

  • [G.R. No. 197547 : November 21, 2011] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. BERLITO MODAR Y MARCELO

  • [G.R. No. 198427 : November 21, 2011] LEE MICHAEL LEONIDAS QUIZON v. FERROTECH STEEL CORPORATION AND BENITO T. KEH

  • [G.R. No. 198236 : November 21, 2011] OLIVER RAPISORA v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES

  • [G.R. No. 194239 : November 22, 2011] WEST TOWER CONDOMINIUM CORPORATION, ON BEHALF OF THE RESIDENTS OF WEST TOWER CONDO., AND IN REPRESENTATION OF BARANGAY BANGKAL, AND OTHERS, INCLUDING MINORS AND GENERATIONS YET UNBORN V. FIRST PHILIPPINE INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION, FIRST GEN CORPORATION AND THEIR RESPECTIVE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND OFFICERS, JOHN DOES AND RICHARD ROES

  • [A.M. No. 07-9-447-RTC : November 22, 2011] REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9436, CREATION AND RATIFICATION OF CITY OF CARCAR IN CEBU AND CREATION OF RTC AND MTCC FOR SAID CITY

  • [G.R. No. 165450 : November 22, 2011] FRANCIS F. YENKO, AS ADMINISTRATOR, & MAYOR JINGGOY E. ESTRADA BOTH OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF SAN JUAN, METRO MANILA, PETITIONERS, v. RAUL NESTOR C. GUNGON, RESPONDENT.

  • [A.M. No. 11-11-199-RTC : November 22, 2011] RE: RENUMBERING OF THE RTC, BRANCH 66, BALER, AURORA OF THE THIRD JUDICIAL REGION

  • [A.M. No. 11-10-194-RTC : November 22, 2011] RE: CLARIFICATION ON THE JURISDICTION OF RTC, BRANCH 7, BAYUGAN CITY, AGUSAN DEL SUR AS DESIGNATED SPECIAL AGRARIAN COURT

  • [A.M. No. 14119-Ret. : November 22, 2011] RE: APPLICATION FOR SURVIVORSHIP PENSION BENEFITS UNDER REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9946 OF MRS. AMELITA M. GROSPE, SURVIVING SPOUSE OF THE LATE NATHANAEL M. GROSPE, FORMER SANDIGANBAYAN ASSOCIATE JUSTICE

  • [G.R. No. 198891 : November 22, 2011] FLORIDA F. MAPILE VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS AND ARTURO T. FRIGILLANA

  • [G.R. No. 177131 : November 22, 2011] BOY SCOUTS OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. COMMISSION ON AUDIT

  • [G.R. NO. 198073 : November 23, 2011] LUCENO JUANICO v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES

  • [G. R. No. 145817 : November 28, 2011] URBAN BANK v. MAGDALENO M. PEÑA

  • [G.R. No. 197426 : November 28, 2011] JOSEPH FLORANTE C. ALVARO, ET AL. v. BIENVENIDO T. CANLAPAN

  • [G.R. No. 197443 : November 28, 2011] SPS. ERNESTO SANTOS AND LOURDES SANTOS v. SPS. RENATO AND PAG-ASA SANTOS

  • [G.R. No. 164181 : November 28, 2011] NISSAN MOTORS PHILS., INC. v. VICTORINO ANGELO

  • [G.R. No. 199082 : November 29, 2011] JOSE MIGUEL T. ARROYO VS. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, HON. LEILA DE LIMA, IN HER CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, HON. SIXTO BRILLANTES, JR., IN HIS CAPACITY AS CHAIRPERSON OF THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS AND THE JOINT DOJ-COMELEC PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION COMMITTEE AND FACT-FINDING TEAM

  • [A.M. No. 11-11-207-RTC : November 29, 2011] RE: REQUEST FOR REFUND OF APPEAL DOCKET FEE PAID TO THE RTC OF LEGASPI CITY RELATIVE TO CAD CASE NO. N-711

  • [G.R. No. 176579 : November 29, 2011] WILSON P. GAMBOA VS. FINANCE SECRETARY MARGARITO B. TEVES, ET AL.

  • [G.R. No. 199179 : November 29, 2011] MARIVIC P. JAVAREZ AND JESSIE A. TABANG VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS AND THE CITY BOARD OF CANVASSERS OF PUERTO PRINCESA CITY, PALAWAN

  • [G.R. No. 199228 : November 29, 2011] ERNIE I. ALTERADO VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS AND JIMMY G. DUREZA

  • [G.R. No. 199149 : November 29, 2011] LIWAYWAY VINZONS-CHATO VS. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ELECTORAL TRIBUNAL AND ELMER E. PANOTES

  • [G.R. No. 197466 : November 29, 2011] JOEL QUIÑO, MARY ANTONETTE DANGOY, JOSEPHINE T. ABING, JOY ANN P. CABATINGAN, TESSA P. CANG, WILFREDO T. CALO, HOMER C. CANEN, JOSE L. CAGANG, ALBERTO CABATINGAN AND FRANCISCO OLIVERIO VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS AND RITCHIE WAGAS

  • [A.M. No. 11-11-206-RTC : November 29, 2011] RE: PETITION OF JUDGE JOSEPHINE ZARATE FERNANDEZ, RTC, BRANCH 76, SAN MATEO, RIZAL FOR RELIEF FROM PROPERTY AND RECORDS ACCOUNTABILITIES DUE TO THE DESTRUCTION CAUSED BY TYPHOON 'ONDOY' ON SEPTEMBER 26, 2009

  • [G.R. No. 198756 : November 29, 2011] BANCO DE ORO, ET AL. VS. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, ET AL.

  • [G.R. No. 199164 : November 29, 2011] EDNA FE R. DANDO VS. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS EN BANC AND KARL BRANDO C. MALIKSI

  • [A.M. No. RTJ-06-1974 (Formerly A.M. OCA IPI No. 05-2226-RTJ) : November 29, 2011] CARMEN P. EDAÑO v. JUDGE FATIMA G. ASDALA, ET AL.

  • [G.R. No. 183711 : November 29, 2011] EDITA T. BURGOS v. GEN. HERMOGENES ESPERON, JR., LT. GEN. ROMEO P. TOLENTINO, MAJ. GEN. JUANITO GOMEZ, MAJ. GEN. DELFIN BANGIT, LT. COL. NOEL CLEMENT, LT. COL. MELQUIADES FELICIANO AND DIRECTOR GENERAL OSCAR CALDERON

  • [A.M. OCA IPI No. 11-182-CA-J : November 29, 2011] ATTY. ELIGIO P. MALLARI V. COURT OF APPEALS JUSTICE APOLINARIO D. BRUSELAS, JR., DIVISION CLERK OF COURT JOSEFINA C. MALLARI, AND ATTY. ANTONIO M. ELICAcO

  •  





     
     



    chanrobles.com - PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT RESOLUTIONS - ON-LINE

    cralaw_scresolutions_separator.NHAD

     

    SECOND DIVISION

    [G.R. No. 198461 : November 16, 2011]

    SAN LORENZO RUIZ BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS GROUP, INC. v. TACIANO L. BANGCORO

    Sirs/Mesdames:

    Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated 16 November 2011  which reads as follows:cralaw

    G.R. No. 198461 (San Lorenzo Ruiz Builders and Developers Group, Inc. v. Taciano L. Bangcoro). - This petition for review seeks to assail the decision of the Court of Appeals (CA), which affirmed the decision of the Office of the President (OP). The OP, in turn, upheld the judgment of the Board of Commissioners of the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB Board) in favor of Taciano Bangcoro's demand for a refund.

    Petitioner San Lorenzo Ruiz Builders and Developers Group. Inc. (San Lorenzo) offered to sell to Taciano a house and lot at Violago Homes, Batasan, Quezon City. On the promise that the house would be constructed within 45 days after initial payment, Taciano paid a total of P210,000.00 as down payment and reservation fee. Despite repeated demands, however, the construction did not begin. This development forced Taciano to file a complaint before the HLURB for the full refund of the payments he had made on the property. Taciano prayed for two alternative reliefs: (1) for refund or (2) to pay the remainder of the amount if San Lorenzo would finish the construction.

    Proceedings before the HLURB

    During the hearings, San Lorenzo counter-argued that Taciano was guilty of breach of contract since he failed to complete the down payment in the amount of P337,000.00. Taciano's default thus entitles San Lorenzo to cancel the Contract to Sell and forfeit the payments made by Taciano.

    The HLURB Arbiter dismissed the complaint for refund; he directed Taciano to update his payments in accordance with the contract to sell, and ordered San Lorenzo to commence the construction of the housing unit.

    San Lorenzo appealed to the HLURB Board which reversed the Arbiter. The HLURB Board ordered San Lorenzo to refund P210,000.00 to Taciano with 6% interest per annum. A subsequent motion for reconsideration was denied.

    On appeal, the OP upheld the HLURB Board's decision.

    Proceedings before the CA

    The CA denied San Lorenzo’s contentions in its petition, for review.

    First, it refused to give credence to San Lorenzo's position that the HLURB Board and the OP erred in ordering the rescission of the contract to sell because Taciano did not interpose an appeal. The CA held that the HLURB Board and the OP did not go beyond the issues raised before them. The CA noted that the necessary consequence of rescission is full refund.

    Second, the CA also refused to give credence to San Lorenzo's contention that the cancellation of the contract resulted in a violation of the constitutional prohibition against impairment of contracts. The CA stated that San Lorenzo's failure to perform its “end of the bargain” justified the rescission of the contract. The CA remarked that although Taciano had suspended payment for the entire amount of the stipulated deposit, San Lorenzo had not erected a single post. Further, the CA highlighted the nature of the contract — one for the sale of a house and lot. Thus, the failure to build the house on the lot is considered a non-performance of the obligation in the contract to sell.

    The Petition for Certiorari

    San Lorenzo's petition focuses on two major points:

    (1) That the CA erred in not holding that the HLURB Arbiter's decision became final and executory insofar as Taciano is concerned since he did not file an appeal. Citing Sps. Custodio v. CA,[1] San Lorenzo argues that "an appellee who has not himself appealed may not obtain from the appellate court any affirmative relief other than what was granted in the decision of the lower court." San Lorenzo opines that the HLURB should not have granted the refund (a more favorable remedy), since the HLURB Arbiter only ordered Taciano to pay the remainder of the amount, and San Lorenzo to finish the construction; and

    (2) That the CA erred in ordering a refund instead of canceling the contract to sell on account of Taciano's breach of his obligations.

    Our Ruling 

    We see no merit in San Lorenzo's first contention. Although Taciano did not appeal from the decision of the HLURB Arbiter, the decision to award, a refund is still proper. The consequence of San Lorenzo's failure to perform its obligations under the contract is necessarily the need to refund the amount Taciano paid. Taciano cannot be denied this relief even though he did not appeal as he earned this relief under the HLURB ruling that he accepted as final with respect to him.

    Further, Custodio is not applicable for two reasons. First, even if Taciano did not appeal, the HLURB is not precluded from awarding a relief to rectify San Lorenzo's failure to comply with its obligations. Second, Custodio did not state that the appellate court cannot grant a more favorable remedy. What Custodio prohibits is an appellee seeking an affirmative relief other than the one granted by the lower court.

    On the second issue, the CA correctly upheld the HLURB and the OP since San Lorenzo absolutely failed to begin the construction of a housing unit. The failure justified Taciano's own refusal to continue paying as he would effectively be paying for an unconstructed house. Taciano's good faith in stopping payment is evident from his original complaint. Principally, he wanted San Lorenzo to finish the construction, and only secondarily did he ask for a refund. He was, in other words, satisfied with the HLURB Arbiter's ruling. San Lorenzo's insistence on rescission in its favor cannot stand under these facts.cralaw

    SO ORDERED.

    Very truly yours, 

    MA. LUISA L. LAUREA
    Division Clerk of Court

    By:

    (Sgd.) TERESITA AQUINO TUAZON
    Deputy Division Clerk of Court

    Endnotes:


    [1] 323 Phil. 575, 584 (1996).


    Back to Home | Back to Main

     

    QUICK SEARCH

    cralaw

               

     



     
      Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
    ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™
     
    RED