adr_fulltxt batch 1

8/17/2019 ADR_fulltxt Batch 1

1/207

G.R. No. 135362. December 13, 1999.*

HEIRS OF AUGUSTO L. SALAS, JR., namely: TERESITA D. SALAS forherself and as legal gard!an of "he m!nor FA#RI$E $%RILL D.SALAS, &A. $RISTI'A S. LESA$A, and (ARI'A TERESA D. SALAS,)e"!"!oners, vs. LA*ERAL REALT% $OR*ORATIO', RO$(+A% REALESTATE $OR*ORATIO', SOUTH RIDGE ILLAGE, I'$., &AHARA&IDEELO*&E'T $OR*ORATIO', S)oses THEL&A D

. A#RAJA'O and GREGORIO A#RAJA'O, OS$AR DA$ILLO, S)osesIRGI'IA D. LAA and RODEL LAA, EDUARDO A. A$U'A,FLORA'TE DE LA $RU-, JESUS I$E'TE #. $A*ELLA', and "heREGISTER OF DEEDS FOR LI*A $IT%, res)onden"s.

Remedial Law; Arbitration; Court has recognized arbitration agreementsas valid, binding, enforceable and not contrary to public policy.—In acatena of cases inspired by !stice "a#co#m$s pro%oca&

''''''''''''''''

* ()+ND DII(I+N.

611

+-. 32, D))"/)R 13, 1999 611

Heirs of Augusto L. alas, !r. vs. Laperal Realty Corporation

ti%e dissent in "ega v. an Carlos #illing Co., t0is o!rt 0as reconiedarbitration areements as %a#id, bindin, enforceab#e and not contrary top!b#ic po#icy so m!c0 so t0at 0en t0ere obtains a ritten pro%ision forarbitration 0ic0 is not comp#ied it0, t0e tria# co!rt s0o!#d s!spend t0e

proceedins and order t0e parties to proceed to arbitratioit0 t0e terms of t0eir areement. 4rbitration is t0e a%in disp!te reso#!tion. 7o br!s0 aside a contract!a# areemarbitration in case of disareement beteen parties o!#dbac8ard.

ame; ame; As a contract, the Agreement containing thearbitration, binds the parties thereto, as well as their assig4 s!bmission to arbitration is a contract. 4s s!c0, t0e 4rcontainin t0e stip!#ation on arbitration, binds t0e partiesas t0eir assins and 0eirs. /!t on#y t0ey. etitioners, as 0eand respondent -apera# Rea#ty are certain#y bo!nd by t0erespondent -apera# Rea#ty 0ad assined its ri0ts !nder t0a t0ird party, ma8in t0e former, t0e assinor, and t0e #atassinee, s!c0 assinee o!#d a#so be bo!nd by t0e arbitsince assinment in%o#%es s!c0 transfer of ri0ts as to %eassinee t0e poer to enforce t0em to t0e same e:tent aco!#d 0a%e enforced t0em aainst t0e debtor or in t0is ca0eirs of t0e oriina# party to t0e 4reement.

)7I7I+N for re%ie on certiorari of a decision of t0e o!r

70e facts are stated in t0e opinion of t0e o!rt.

Corpus $ Associates for petitioners.

Luis A. %lagan, !r. for Roc8ay Rea# )state orp. and (i##ae, Inc.

!esus "icente &. Capellan for pri%ate respondents.

Horacio #. 'ascual $ "icente '. Acsay for "ara0ami a

antiago, Cruz $ arte Law ()ces for -apera# Rea#ty

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc22a39ef2fdb9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AJU165/?username=Guest#p320scr8960610001http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc22a39ef2fdb9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AJU165/?username=Guest#p320scr8960610001


2/207

!one '. Liu Chiang for 4bra;ano, -a%a and Daci##o.

612

612 (B, 0e entered into an +ner&ontractor 4reement@ C0ereinafter referred to as t0e 4reement it0 respondent -apera# Rea#tyorporation C0ereinafter referred to as -apera# Rea#ty to render andpro%ide comp#ete C0orionta# constr!ction ser%ices on 0is #and.

+n (eptember 23, 19>>, (a#as, r. e:ec!ted a (pecia# oer of 4ttorney infa%or of respondent -apera# Rea#ty to e:ercise enera# contro#, s!per%isionand manaement of t0e sa#e of 0is #and, for cas0 or on insta##ment basis.

+n !ne 1, 19>9, (a#as, r. #eft 0is 0ome in t0e mornin for a b!siness tripto N!e%a )ci;a. Ee ne%er ret!rned.

+n 4!!st 6, 1996, 7eresita Dia (a#as ?#ed it0 t0e Reiona# 7ria# o!rtof "a8ati ity a %eri?ed petition for t0e dec#aration of pres!mpti%e deat0

of 0er 0!sband, (a#as, r., 0o 0ad t0en been missin for CB years. It as ranted on December 12, 1996.5

"eantime, respondent -apera# Rea#ty s!bdi%ided t0e #andso#d s!bdi%ided portions t0ereof to respondents Roc8ay orporation and (o!t0 Ride i##ae, Inc. on Febr!ary 22, respondent spo!ses

''''''''''''''''

1 4nne: 4 of t0e etition, Ro##o, pp. 19&2.

2 resided by Eon. !de 4%e#ino G. Demetria.

3 Ro##o, p. 32.

@ 4nne: / of t0e etition, Ro##o, p. 22.

5 Decision of /ranc0 59 of t0e Reiona# 7ria# o!rt of "a8R+. No. "&@39@ mar8ed as 4nne: of t0e etition, R

613

+-. 32, D))"/)R 13, 1999

Heirs of Augusto L. alas, !r. vs. Laperal Realty Cor

4bra;ano and -a%a and +scar Daci##o on !ne 2B, 1991 anrespondents )d!ardo ac!na, F#orante de #a r! and es!apa#an on !ne @, 1996 Ca## of 0om are 0ereinafter referespondent #ot b!yers.

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc22a39ef2fdb9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AJU165/?username=Guest#p320scr8960612001http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc22a39ef2fdb9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AJU165/?username=Guest#p320scr8960612002http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc22a39ef2fdb9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AJU165/?username=Guest#p320scr8960612003http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc22a39ef2fdb9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AJU165/?username=Guest#p320scr8960612004http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc22a39ef2fdb9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AJU165/?username=Guest#p320scr8960612005http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc22a39ef2fdb9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AJU165/?username=Guest#p320scr8960612001http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc22a39ef2fdb9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AJU165/?username=Guest#p320scr8960612002http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc22a39ef2fdb9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AJU165/?username=Guest#p320scr8960612003http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc22a39ef2fdb9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AJU165/?username=Guest#p320scr8960612004http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc22a39ef2fdb9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AJU165/?username=Guest#p320scr8960612005


3/207

+n Febr!ary 3, 199>, petitioners as 0eirs of (a#as, r. ?#ed in t0e Reiona# 7ria# o!rt of -ipa ity a omp#aint6 for dec#aration of n!##ity of sa#e,

recon%eyance, cance##ation of contract, acco!ntin and damaes aainst0erein respondents 0ic0 as doc8eted as i%i# ase No. 9>&@B.

+n 4pri# 2@, 199>, respondent -apera# Rea#ty ?#ed a "otion to DismissB ont0e ro!nd t0at petitioners fai#ed to s!bmit t0eir rie%ance to arbitrationas reA!ired !nder 4rtic#e I of t0e 4reement 0ic0 pro%ides=

4R7I-) I. 4R/I7R47I+N.

4## cases of disp!te beteen +N7R47+R and +HN)R$( representati%es0a## be referred to t0e committee represented by=

1. a. +ne representati%e of t0e +HN)R

2. b. +ne representati%e of t0e +N7R47+R

3. c. +ne representati%e acceptab#e to bot0 +HN)R and+N7R47+R.>

+n "ay 5, 199>, respondent spo!ses 4bra;ano and -a%a and respondent

Daci##o ?#ed a oint 4nser it0 o!nter&c#aim and rossc#aim9

prayin fordismissa# of petitioners$ omp#aint for t0e same reason.

+n 4!!st 9, 199>, t0e tria# co!rt iss!ed t0e 0erein assai#ed +rderdismissin petitioners$ omp#aint for noncomp#iance it0 t0e foreoinarbitration c#a!se.

Eence t0is petition.

etitioners ar!e, t0!s=

70e petitioners$ ca!ses of action did not emanate from t0e +ner&ontractor 4reement.

'''''''''''''''''

6 4nne: D of t0e etition, Ro##o, pp. 32&@9.

B 4nne: ) of t0e etition, Ro##o, pp. 5&56.

> +ner&ontractor 4reement, p. 6, Ro##o, p. 2B.

9 4nne: F of t0e etition, Ro##o, pp. 5>&B3.

61@

61@ (


4/207

4 s!bmission to arbitration is a contract.16 4s s!c0, t0e 4reement,containin t0e stip!#ation on arbitration, binds t0e parties t0ereto, as e##as t0eir assins and 0eirs.1B /!t on#y t0ey. etitioners, as 0eirs of (a#as, r.,and respondent -apera# Rea#ty are certain#y bo!nd by t0e 4reement. Ifrespondent -apera# Rea#ty 0ad assined its ri0ts !nder t0e 4reement toa t0ird party, ma8in t0e former, t0e assinor,

'''''''''''''''''

1 etition, pp. B, 9&1, Ro##o, pp. 9, 11&12.

11 "indanao ort#and ement orporation %. "cDono!0 onstr!ctionompany of F#orida, 19 (R4 >>, >15 C196B /enson %. 0an, B> (R4113, 119 C19BB 0!n F! Ind!stries C0i#s., Inc. %. o!rt of 4ppea#s, 26(R4 5@5, 5@9&552 C1992 !romines, Inc. %. o!rt of 4ppea#s, 22 (R42>1, 2>9&29 C1993 Nationa# oer orporation %. o!rt of 4ppea#s, 25@(R4 116, 125 C1996.

12 51 0i#. 9>, 916&92 C192@.

13 /enson %. 0an,supra.

1@

/.F. orporation %. o!rt of 4ppea#s, et a#., 2>> (R4 26B, 2>6 C199>.15 %bid.

16 "ani#a )#ectric ompany %. asay 7ransportation o., 5B 0i#. 6, 63C1932.

1B 4rt. 1311, i%i# ode.

615

+-. 32, D))"/)R 13, 1999 615

Heirs of Augusto L. alas, !r. vs. Laperal Realty Cor

and t0e #atter, t0e assinee, s!c0 assinee o!#d a#so be arbitration pro%ision since assinment in%o#%es s!c0 transto %est in t0e assinee t0e poer to enforce t0em to t0e st0e assinor co!#d 0a%e enforced t0em aainst t0e debtorcase, aainst t0e 0eirs of t0e oriina# party to t0e 4reemrespondents Roc8ay Rea# )state orporation, (o!t0 Rid"a0arami De%e#opment orporation, spo!ses 4bra;ano, s+scar Daci##o, )d!ardo ac!na, F#orante de #a r! and eape##an are not assinees of t0e ri0ts of respondent -a!nder t0e 4reement to de%e#op (a#as, r.$s #and and se## tare, rat0er, b!yers of t0e #and t0at respondent -apera# Ret0e a!t0ority to de%e#op and se## !nder t0e 4reement. 4snot assins contemp#ated in 4rt. 1311 of t0e Ne i%ipro%ides t0at contracts ta8e eect on#y beteen t0e partassins and 0eirs.

etitioners c#aim t0at t0ey s!ered #esion of more t0an ont0e %a#!e of (a#as, r.$s #and 0en respondent -apera# Rea

and so#d portions t0ereof to respondent #ot b!yers. 70!s, action19 aainst bot0 respondent -apera# Rea#ty and respfor rescission of t0e sa#e transactions and recon%eyance ts!bdi%ided #ots. 70ey ar!e t0at rescission, bein t0eir cafa##s !nder t0e e:ception c#a!se in (ec. 2 of Rep!b#ic 4ct Npro%ides t0at s!c0 s!bmission KtoL or contract Kof arbitra%a#id, enforceab#e and irre%ocab#e, save upon such groundlaw for the revocation of any contract .

70e petitioners$ contention is it0o!t merit. For 0i#e rescenera# r!#e, is an arbitrab#e iss!e,2 t0ey im&

''''''''''''''''

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc22a39ef2fdb9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AJU165/?username=Guest#p320scr8960614007http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc22a39ef2fdb9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AJU165/?username=Guest#p320scr8960614008http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc22a39ef2fdb9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AJU165/?username=Guest#p320scr8960615002http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc22a39ef2fdb9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AJU165/?username=Guest#p320scr8960615003http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc22a39ef2fdb9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AJU165/?username=Guest#p320scr8960614007http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc22a39ef2fdb9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AJU165/?username=Guest#p320scr8960614008http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc22a39ef2fdb9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AJU165/?username=Guest#p320scr8960615002http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc22a39ef2fdb9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AJU165/?username=Guest#p320scr8960615003


5/207

1> 7o#entino, 4rt!ro ".,Commentaries and !urisprudence on the Civil Codeof the 'hilippines, o#. 5 C1992, p. 1>>.

19 omp#aint dated Febr!ary 2, 199> mar8ed as 4nne: D of t0e etition,Ro##o, pp. 32&@>.

2 (antiao %. Gona#e, B9 (R4 @9@, 5 C19BB.

616

616 (> (R4 26B K199>L

——oo——


6/207

G.R. No. 120105. March 27, 1998.*

BF CORPORATION, petitioner, vs. COURT OF APPEALS, SHANGRI-LA

PROPERTIES, INC., RUFO B. COLAYCO, ALFREDO C. RAMOS, MAXIMO G.LICAUCO III n! BEN"AMIN C. RAMOS, re#pon!ent#.

Actions; Pleadings and Practice; Certiorari; The special civil action of certiorari may not be

invoked as a substitute for the remedy of appeal. —The rule that the special civil action ocertiorari !a" not #e invo$e% as a su#stitute or the re!e%" o appeal is succinctl" reiterate%in Ongsitco v. Court of Appeals as ollo&s' () ) ). ountless ti!es in the past, this ourt hashel% that +&here appeal is the proper re!e%", certiorari &ill not lie. The &rits o certiorarian% prohi#ition are re!e%ies to correct lac$ or e)cess o -uris%iction or rave a#use o%iscretion e/uivalent to lac$ o -uris%iction co!!itte% #" a lo&er court. +here the proper

re!e%" is appeal, the action or certiorari &ill not #e entertaine%. ) ) ). ertiorari is not are!e%" or errors o -u%!ent. rrors o -u%!ent are correcti#le #" appeal, errors o -uris%iction are revie&a#le #" certiorari. Rule 5 is ver" clear. The e)traor%inar" re!e%ies o certiorari, prohi#ition an% !an%a!us are availa#le onl" &hen +there is no appeal or an"

plain, spee%" an% a%e/uate re!e%" in the or%inar" course o la& ) ) ). That is &h" the" arereerre% to as +e)traor%inar". ) ) ).3

Same; Same; Same; Certiorari will not be issued to cure errors in proceedings or correct

erroneous conclusions of law or fact. —The ourt has li$e&ise rule% that (certiorari &ill not #e issue% to cure errors in procee%ins or correct erroneous conclusions o la& or act. 4slon as a court acts &ithin its -uris%iction, an" allee% errors co!!itte% in the e)ercise o its

-uris%iction &ill a!ount to nothin !ore than errors o -u%!ent &hich are revie&a#le #"ti!el" appeal an% not #" a special civil action o certiorari.3

Same; Same; Same; f a lower court prematurely assumes !urisdiction ov

becomes an error of !urisdiction which is a proper sub!ect of a petition f

is not e)actl" so in the instant case. hile this ourt %oes not %en" the eo the lo&er court over the controvers", the issue pose% #asi

666666666666666

* TR :;RM


7/207

application o the rule that certiorari cannot #e a su#stitute or appeal &ill result in a !aniestailure or !iscarriae o -ustice, the provisions o the Rules o ourt &hich are technicalrules !a" #e rela)e%. 4s &e shall sho& hereun%er, ha% the ourt o 4ppeals %is!isse% the

petition or certiorari, the issue o &hether or not an ar#itration clause e)ists in the contract&oul% not have #een resolve% in accor%ance &ith evi%ence e)tant in the recor% o the case.onse/uentl", this &oul% have resulte% in a -u%icial re-ection o a contractual provisionaree% #" the parties to the contract.

Contracts; Arbitration; %ords and Phrases; $ormal 'e&uirements of an Agreement to

Arbitrate; To )subscribe* means to write underneath" as one+s name; to sign at the end of a

document. —The or!al re/uire!ents o an aree!ent to ar#itrate are thereore theollo&in' ?aA it !ust #e in &ritin an% ?#A it !ust #e su#scri#e% #" the parties or theirrepresentatives. There is no %en"in that the parties entere% into a &ritten contract that &assu#!itte% in evi%ence #eore the lo&er court. To (su#scri#e3 !eans to &rite un%er

29

:etitioners contention that there &as no ar#itration clause #ecause the cosai% provision is part o a (ho%epo%e3 %ocu!ent, is thereore untena#lnot #e containe% in a sinle &ritin. t !a" #e collecte% ro! several %i%o not conlict &ith each other an% &hich, &hen connecte%, sho& the pa

ter!s an% consi%eration, as in contracts entere% into #" correspon%ence. enco!passe% in several instru!ents even thouh ever" instru!ent is not

parties, since it is suicient i the unsine% instru!ents are clearl" i%entan% !a%e part o the sine% instru!ent or instru!ents. ;i!ilarl", a &ritt&hich there are t&o copies, one sine% #" each o the parties, is #in%in e)tent as thouh there ha% #een onl" one cop" o the aree!ent an% #oth

Same; Same; The subscription of the principal agreement effectively cov

documents incorporated by reference therein. —The la& in petitioners lies in its havin se!ente% the various co!ponents o the &hole contra

parties into several parts. This not&ithstan%in, petitioner ironi

270

270 ;=>RM


8/207

an% Ba"ani E. Eernan%o, presi%ent o petitioner corporation. The sa!e aree!ent &as %ul"su#scri#e% #eore notar" pu#lic Nil#erto R. Briones. n other &or%s, the su#scription o the

principal aree!ent eectivel" covere% the other %ocu!ents incorporate% #" reerencetherein.

Same; Same; %ords and Phrases; )'easonableness* is a relative term and the &uestion of

whether the time within which an act has to be done is reasonable depends on attendant

circumstances. —The ar#itration clause provi%es or a (reasona#le ti!e3 &ithin &hich the parties !a" avail o the relie un%er that clause. (Reasona#leness3 is a relative ter! an% the/uestion o &hether the ti!e &ithin &hich an act has to #e %one is reasona#le %epen%s on

atten%ant circu!stances. This ourt in%s that un%er the circu!stances o#tainin in this case,a one!onth perio% ro! the ti!e the parties hel% a conerence on Ful" 12, 199 until privaterespon%ent ;> notiie% petitioner that it &as invo$in the ar#itration clause, is a reasona#leti!e. n%ee%, petitioner !a" not #e aulte% or resortin to the court to clai! &hat &as %ue itun%er the contract. o&ever, &e in% its %enial o the e)istence o the ar#itration clause as anatte!pt to cover up its !isstep in hurrie%l" ilin the co!plaint #eore the lo&er court.

Same; 'epublic Act -/; The potentials of arbitration as one of the alternative dispute

resolution methods that are now rightfully vaunted as )the wave of the future* ininternational relations" is recogni0ed worldwide. —t shoul% #e note% that in this -uris%iction,ar#itration has #een hel% vali% an% constitutional. ven #eore the approval on Fune 19, 195o Repu#lic 4ct No. 87, this ourt has countenance% the settle!ent o %isputes throuhar#itration. Repu#lic 4ct No. 87 &as a%opte% to supple!ent the Ne& ivil o%es

provisions on ar#itration. ts potentials as one o the alternative %ispute resolution !etho%sthat are no& rihtull" vaunte% as (the &ave o the uture3 in international relations, isreconiDe% &orl%&i%e. To #rush asi%e a contractual aree!ent callin or ar#itration

271

:TTro-ect,3 a shoppin !all co!ple) in the it" o Man%alu"on. The conin proress &hen ;> %eci%e% to e)pan% the pro-ect #" enain the servaain. Thus, the parties entere% into an aree!ent or the !ain contract &construction &or$ #ean.

o&ever, petitioner incurre% %ela" in the construction &or$ that ;> conan% su#stantial.31 hase

666666666666666

1 Rollo, p. 75.

272

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc543a01e18e6c2000a0094004f00ee/p/AJV270/?username=Guest#p288scra8960271001http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc543a01e18e6c2000a0094004f00ee/p/AJV270/?username=Guest#p288scra8960271001


9/207

272 ;=>RM propose% the reneotiation o the aree!ent #et&een the!.

onse/uentl", on Ma" 0, 1991, petitioner an% ;> entere% into a &ritten aree!ent%eno!inate% as (4ree!ent or the )ecution o Buil%ers or$ or the ;4 >laDa>ro-ect.3 ;ai% aree!ent &oul% cover the construction &or$ on sai% pro-ect as o Ma" 1,1991 until its eventual co!pletion.

4ccor%in to ;>, petitioner (aile% to co!plete the construction &or$s an% a#an%one% the pro-ect.3 This resulte% in %isaree!ents #et&een the parties as rear%s their respectivelia#ilities un%er the contract. etitioner oppose% sai% !otion clai!in that there &as no or!al contract #et&een the parties althouh the" entere% into an aree!ent %einin their rihts an% o#liations inun%erta$in the pro-ect. t e!phasiDe% that the aree!ent

666666666666666

2 bid ., p. 9.

bid ., p. 7.

H bid .

27

: pointe% out the siniicance o petitioners a%!ie)ecution o the (4rticles o 4ree!ent.3 Thus, on pae I thereo, theB. ola"co, ;> presi%ent, an% Ba"ani Eernan%o, presi%ent o petitioner I7 sho&s that the aree!ent is a pu#lic %ocu!ent %ul" notariDe% on No

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc543a01e18e6c2000a0094004f00ee/p/AJV270/?username=Guest#p288scra8960272001http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc543a01e18e6c2000a0094004f00ee/p/AJV270/?username=Guest#p288scra8960272002http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc543a01e18e6c2000a0094004f00ee/p/AJV270/?username=Guest#p288scra8960272002http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc543a01e18e6c2000a0094004f00ee/p/AJV270/?username=Guest#p288scra8960272003http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc543a01e18e6c2000a0094004f00ee/p/AJV270/?username=Guest#p288scra8960272001http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc543a01e18e6c2000a0094004f00ee/p/AJV270/?username=Guest#p288scra8960272002http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc543a01e18e6c2000a0094004f00ee/p/AJV270/?username=Guest#p288scra8960272003


10/207

Notar" >u#lic Nil#erto R. Briones as %ocu!ent No. H5, pae 70, #oo$ No. @JJ, ;eries o1991 o his notarial reister.5

Thereater, upon a in%in that an ar#itration clause in%ee% e)ists, the lo&er court %enie% the!otion to suspen% procee%ins, thus'

(t appears ro! the sai% %ocu!ent that in the letteraree!ent %ate% Ma" 0, 1991 ?4nne), o!plaintA, plainti BE an% %een%ant ;hanri@a >roperties, nc. aree% upon the ter!san% con%itions o the Buil%ers or$ or the ;4 >laDa >ro-ect ?>hases

666666666666666

5 4nne)es G1 an% G2 o Repl" to rocee%insC Rollo in4G.R. ;> No. H12, pp. 190191.

>resi%e% #" Fu%e o!ino R. Garcia.

27H

27H ;=>RM resi%ent Ruo B. ola"co o ;hanri@a >roperties, nc. an% >resi%ent Ba"ani E.

Eernan%o o BE an% their &itnesses, an% &as thereater ac$no&le%e% #eore Notar" >u#lic

Nil#erto R. Briones o Ma$ati, Metro Manila on Nove!#er 15, 1991. Th Agreement also provides that the ,Contract 7ocuments+ therein listed ,sh

integral part of this Agreement"+ and one of the said documents is the ,Co

Contract+ which contains the Arbitration Clause relied upon by the defen 3otion to Suspend Proceedings.

This ourt notes, ho&ever, that the +on%itions o ontract reerre% to, ollo&in provisions'

+. ontract ocu!ent.

Three copies o the ontract ocu!ents reerre% to in the 4rticles o 4 signed by the parties to the contract an% %istri#ute% to the roperties, nc.

onsi%erin the insistence o the plainti that the sai% on%itions o one)ecute% or sine% #" the parties, an% the ailure o the %een%ants to su#o the sai% %ocu!ent, this ourt entertains serious %ou#t &hether or not

oun% in the sai% on%itions o ontract is #in%in upon the parties to th4ree!ent.3

275

:


11/207

The lo&er court then rule% that, assu!in that the ar#itration clause &as vali% an% #in%in,still, it &as (too late in the %a" or %een%ants to invo$e ar#itration.3 t /uote% the ollo&in

provision o the ar#itration clause'

(Notice o the %e!an% or ar#itration o a %ispute shall #e ile% in &ritin &ith the other part" to the contract an% a cop" ile% &ith the >ro-ect Manaer. The %e!an% or ar#itrationshall #e !a%e &ithin a reasona#le ti!e ater the %ispute has arisen an% atte!pts to settlea!ica#l" have aile%C in no case, ho&ever, shall the %e!an% he !a%e #e later than the ti!e o inal pa"!ent e)cept as other&ise e)pressl" stipulate% in the contract.3

4ainst the a#ove #ac$%rop, the lo&er court oun% that per the Ma" 0, 1991 aree!ent, the pro-ect &as to #e co!plete% #" (too$ possessionan% starte% operations thereo #" openin the sa!e to the pu#lic in Nove!#er, 1991.3 ;>,havin aile% to pa" or the &or$s, petitioner #ille% ;> in the total a!ount o>110,88,101.52, containe% in a %e!an% letter sent #" it to ;> on Ee#ruar" 17, 199. nstea%o pa"in the a!ount %e!an%e%, ;> set up its o&n clai! o >220,000,000.00 an% sche%ule%a conerence on that clai! or Ful" 12, 199. The conerence too$ place #ut it prove% utile.

=pon the a#ove acts, the lo&er court conclu%e%'

(onsi%erin the act that un%er the suppose% 4r#itration lause invo$e% #" %een%ants, it isre/uire% that +Notice o the %e!an% or ar#itration o a %ispute shall #e ile% in &ritin &iththe other part" ) ) ) ) in no case ) ) ) ) later than the ti!e o inal pa"!ent ) ) ) )3 &hichapparentl", ha% elapse%, not onl" #ecause %een%ants ha% ta$en possession o the inishe%&or$s an% the plaintis #illins or the pa"!ent thereo ha% re!aine% pen%in

27

27 ;=>RM rovi%e% al&a"s that in case an" %ispute or %ierence shall arise #et&ee>ro-ect Manaer on his #ehal an% the ontractor, either %urin the prorco!pletion or a#an%on!ent o the or$s as to the construction o this

!atter or thin o &hatsoever nature arisin thereun%er or in connection


12/207

an" !atter or #ein let #" this ontract to the %iscretion o the >ro-ect Manaer or the&ithhol%in #" the >ro

277

:ro-ect Manaer. The demand for amade within a reasonable time after the dispute has arisen and attempts

had failed C in no case, ho&ever, shall the %e!an% #e !a%e later than the

278

278 ;=>RM 220,000,000.00thereon on Ful" 12, 199. ;ai% conerence prove% utile. The ne)t %a", Furespon%ent orporation ile% its co!plaint aainst petitioners. etitioner assins the ollo&in er

(4.


13/207

T 4@; RR N ;;=NG T JTR4


14/207

#$ Corporation vs. Court of Appeals

This is not e)actl" so in the instant case. hile this ourt %oes not %en" the eventual -uris%iction o the lo&er court over the controvers", the issue pose% #asicall" is &hether thelo&er court pre!aturel" assu!e% -uris%iction over it. the lo&er court in%ee% pre!aturel"assu!e% -uris%iction over the case, then it #eco!es an error o -uris%iction &hich is a propersu#-ect o a petition or certiorari #eore the ourt o 4ppeals. 4n% i the lo&er court %oesnot have -uris%iction over the controvers", then an" %ecision or or%er it !a" ren%er !a" #e

annulle% an% set asi%e #" the appellate court.

o&ever, the /uestion o -uris%iction, &hich is a /uestion o la& %epen%s on the%eter!ination o the e)istence o the ar#itration clause, &hich is a /uestion o act. n theinstant case, the lo&er court oun% that there e)ists an ar#itration clause. o&ever, it rule%that in conte!plation o la&, sai% ar#itration clause %oes not e)ist.

The issue, thereore, pose% #eore the ourt o 4ppeals in a petition or certiorari is &hetherthe 4r#itration lause %oes not in act e)ist.


15/207

10 ;ps. Me-ares v. on. Re"es, 2H >hil. 710, 718 ?199A.

282

282 ;=>RM


16/207

parties, since it is suicient i the unsine% instru!ents are clearl" i%entiie% or reerre% toan% !a%e part o the sine% instru!ent or instru!ents. ;i!ilarl", a &ritten aree!ent o&hich there are t&o copies, one sine% #" each o the parties, is #in%in on #oth to the sa!ee)tent as thouh

666666666666666

11 Ga!i%o v. Ne& Bili#i% >risons hil. 100, 10H.

12 2 B


17/207

respon%ent ;> notiie% petitioner that it &as invo$in the ar#itration clause, is a reasona#leti!e. n%ee%, petitioner !a" not #e aulte% or resortin to the court to clai! &hat &as %ue itun%er the contract. o&ever, &e in% its %enial o the e)istence o the ar#itration clause as anatte!pt to cover up its !isstep in hurrie%l" ilin the co!plaint #eore the lo&er court.

n this connection, it #ears stressin that the lo&er court has not lost its -uris%iction over thecase. ;ection 7 o Repu#lic 4ct No. 87 provi%es that procee%ins therein have onl" #eensta"e%. 4ter the special procee%in o ar#itration1 has #een pursue% an% co!plete%, then thelo&er court !a" conir! the a&ar%17 !a%e #" the ar#itrator.

666666666666666

15 M>N @4 T


18/207

G.R. No. 110HH. ece!#er 1, 199.*

EI&R)I(I+N (7))- )N7)R, IN., petitioner, vs. -I" MI" (7))-

/etition at #ar. The 4 has in%ee%

#een i!plea%e%C ho&ever, the 4r#itral 4&ar% &as not ren%ere% #" the 4, #ut rather #"

the 4r#itral Tri#unal. Moreover, un%er ;ection 20 o )ecutive


19/207

factual conclusions" the Tribunal committed an error so egregious as to constitute a grave

abuse of discretion.—4&are o the o#-ective o voluntar" ar#itration in the la#or iel%, in the

construction in%ustr", an% in an" other area or that !atter, the ourt &ill not assist one or the

other or even #oth parties in an" eort to su#vert or %eeat that o#-ective or their private

purposes. The ourt &ill not revie& the actual in%ins o an ar#itral tri#unal upon the artul

alleation that such #o%" ha% (!isapprehen%e% the acts3 an% &ill not pass upon issues

&hich are, at #otto!, issues o act, no !atter ho& cleverl" %isuise% the" !iht #e as (leal

/uestions.3 The parties here ha% recourse to ar#itration an% chose the ar#itrators the!selvesC

the" !ust have ha% coni%ence in such ar#itrators. The ourt &ill not, thereore, per!it the

parties to relitiate #eore it the issues o acts previousl" presente% an% arue% #eore the4r#itral Tri#unal, save onl" &here a ver" clear sho&in is !a%e that, in reachin its actual

conclusions, the 4r#itral Tri#unal co!!itte% an error so ereious an% hurtul to one part" as

to constitute a rave a#use o %iscretion resultin in lac$ or loss o -uris%iction.

>TTetition or Revie& on ertio

1 Nove!#er 1992 4&ar%2 an% 1 Ma" 199 etitioner i>recision entere% into a contract &ith private respon%ent ;t

&hich the latter as ontractor &as to co!plete a >21 Million constructio

the or!er &ithin a perio% o 15 %a"s, i.e. ro! 8 Ma" 1990 to 8

66666666666666

1 Rollo, pp. 29.

2 d." pp. 17181.

d ., pp. 112.

H

d ., pp. 2H2.

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960399001http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960399002http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960399003http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960399004http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960399006http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960399007http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960399007http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960399008http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960399008http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960399009http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960399001http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960399002http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960399003http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960399004http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960399006http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960399007http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960399008http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960399009


20/207

5 d ., p. 2a.

d ., pp. 292.

7 d." pp. H21.

8 d." p. 181a.

9 d." p. 89C Rollo, p. 11.

10 =rent Motions or the ssuance o a Te!porar" Restrainin recision, upon the other han%,

in its 4ns&er an% 4!en%e% 4ns&er, clai!e% actual an% li/ui%ate% %a!aes, rei!#urse!ent

o allee% a%%itional costs it ha% incurre% in or%er to co!plete the pro-ect an% attorne"s ees.

The 4 or!e% an 4r#itral Tri#unal &ith three ?A !e!#ers, t&o ?2A #

no!ination o i>recision an% ;teel Buil%ers, respectivel"C the thir% !e

hair!anA &as appointe% #" the 4 as a co!!on no!inee o the t&o

hair!an &as a la&"er. 4ter the ar#itration procee%in, the 4r#itral Tri

unani!ous 4&ar% %ate% 1 Nove!#er 1992, the %ispositive portion o &

ollo&s'

(RE,H00,

clai!s o the parties aainst each other are %ee!e% co!pensate% an% o pronounce!ent as to costs.

The >arties are en-oine% to a#i%e #" the a&ar%.311

=pon !otions or reconsi%eration ile%, respectivel", #" i>recision an

4r#itral Tri#unal issue% an ,115,285.8.12

n its 4&ar%, the 4r#itral Tri#unal state% that it &as ui%e% #" 4rticles 1

o the ivil o%e. ith such ui%ance, the ar#itrators conclu%e% that ?aA

ault, thouh the Tri#unal coul% not point out &hich o the parties &as th

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960400001http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960401001http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960401001http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960400001http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960401001


21/207

?#A the #reaches #" one part" aecte% the %ischare o the reciprocal o#liations o the other

part". ith !utual ault as a principal pre!ise, the 4r#itral Tri#unal %enie% ?aA petitioners

clai!s or the a%%itional costs allee%l" incurre% to co!plete the pro-ectC an% ?#A private

respon%ents clai! or proit it ha% aile% to earn #ecause o petitioners ta$e over o the

pro-ect.

The Tri#unal then procee%e% to resolve the re!ainin speciic clai!s o the parties. n

%isposin o these !ultiple, %etaile% clai!s, the 4r#itral Tri#unal, in respect o one or !ore

o the respective clai!s o the parties' ?aA averae% out the conlictin a!ounts an%

percentaes clai!e% #" the partiesC1

?#A oun% neither #asis nor -ustiication or a particularclai!C1H ?cA oun% the evi%ence su#!itte% in support o particular clai!s either &ea$ or non

e)istentC15 ?%A too$ account o the a%!issions o lia#ilit" in respect o particular clai!sC1 ?eA

relie% on its o&n e)pertise in resolvin particular clai!sC 17 an% ?A applie% a (principle o

e/uit"3 in re/uirin each part" to #ear its o&n loss resultin or arisin ro! !utual ault or

%ela" ?compensatio moraeA.18

6666666666666

12 d., p. 2.

1 lai!s concernin ontractors lai! No. 1C roressive

BillinC hane etitioner i>recision apparentl" see$s revie& #oth un%er Rule H5 an%

o ourt.19 e %o not in% it necessar" to rule &hich o the t&o' a petitio

Rule H5 or a petition or certiorari un%er Rule 5—is necessar" un%er )

1008, as a!en%e%C this issue &as, in an" case, not s/uarel" raise% #" eith

#een

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960401002http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960401002http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960401003http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960401004http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960401005http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960401006http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960401006http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960401007http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960401007http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960402002http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960402002http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960401002http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960401003http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960401004http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960401005http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960401006http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960401007http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc693087d5b1b9d000a0094004f00ee/p/AKG738/?username=Guest#p228scra8960402002


22/207

66666666666666

lai! No. 25C ontractors lai! No. 27C ontractors lai! No. 28C ontractors lai!

No. 29C ontractors lai! No. 0C etition sai%, inter alia@ )tBhe prevalence of grave abuse of discretion in the Ma" 1,

199 etition un%er Rule H5 is made more manifest in the 8ovember

D" EEF Arbitral Award" the principal resolution su#-ect o the !otion or reconsi%eration

%enie% #" the Ma" 1, 199


23/207

%octrine o estoppel %oes not appl" &ith respect to the re/uire% &ritten or!alities in the

issuance o a chane or%er ) ) )C3

?A

)The e(ceptional circumstances in 'emalante vs. Tibe" G- SC'A D-" where the hil. 25AC ?A &hen the -u%!ent is pre!ise% on a !isapprehension o acts ?e la ruDv. ;osin, 9H >hil. 2, an% astillo vs. 4, 12H ;R4 808AC ?HA &hen the in%ins o act are

conlictin ?Casica v. ?illoseca, 101 >hil. 1205AC ?5A &hen the in%ins are contrar" to the

a%!issions o the parties ? 1vangelista v. Alto Surety, 10 >hil. H01A, an% thereore, the

in%ins o acts o the pu#lic respon%ent in the instant case !a" #e revie&e% #" the

onora#le ;upre!e ourt.320 ?talics partl" supplie% an% partl" in the oriinalA

Ero! the oreoin, petitioner i>recision !a" #e seen to #e !a$in t&o ?2A #asic

aru!ents'

1. Ca etitioner as8s t0is o!rt to correct #ea# errors committed by t0e4rbitra# 7rib!na#, 0ic0 at t0e same time constit!te ra%e ab!se of

discretion amo!ntin to #ac8 of ;!risdiction on t0e part of t0e 4rbitra# 7rib!na# and

2. Cb (0o!#d t0e s!pposed errors petitioner as8s !s to correct bec0aracteried as errors of fact, s!c0 fact!a# errors s0o!#d nonet0e#ess bere%ieed beca!se t0ere as ra%e ab!se of discretion in t0eappreciation of facts and beca!se t0ere as misappre0ension of facts ont0e part of t0e 4rbitra# 7rib!na#.

)ecutive


24/207

&ill not revie& the actual in%ins o an ar#itral tri#unal upon the artul alleation that such

#o%" ha% (!isapprehen%e% the acts3 an% &ill not pass upon issues &hich are, at #otto!,

issues o act, no !atter ho& cleverl" %isuise% the" !iht #e as (leal /uestions.3 The

parties here ha% recourse to ar#itration an% chose the ar#itrators the!selvesC the" !ust have

ha% coni%ence in such ar#itrators. The ourt &ill not, thereore, per!it the parties to

relitiate #eore it the issues o acts previousl" presente% an% arue% #eore the 4r#itral

Tri#unal, save onl" &here a ver" clear sho&in is !a%e that, in

66666666666666

21 ;ee irst three ?A hereas clauses an% ;ection 2 o )ecutive RM ri!ar" ;tructures orp. v. :ictor >. @aDatin, etc., et al., G.R. No.

101258, Ful" 1, 1992 ?unsine% resolutionAC 4.. nterprises, nc. v. onstruction n%ustr"

4r#itration o!!ission, et al., G.R. No. 101HHH, Ee#ruar" 10, 1992 ?un

an% ;i!e ar#" >ilipinas, nc. v. Masalin, 180 ;R4 177 ?1989A.

2 t is a note&orth" that ;ection 2H o R.4. No. 87 $no&n as (4n 4ct t

Ma$in o 4r#itration an% ;u#!ission 4ree!ents, to >rovi%e or the 4

4r#itrators an% the >roce%ure or 4r#itration in ivil ontroversies, an%

?approve% on 29 Fune 195A sets out the ollo&in roun%s or vacatin

(;ec. 2H. Hrounds for vacating award. —n an" one o the ollo&in cas

!a$e an or%er vacatin a&ar% upon the petition o an" part" to the contr part" prove% air!ativel" that in the ar#itration procee%ins'

1. Ca 70e aard as proc!red by corr!ption, fra!d or ot0e

2. Cb 70at t0ere as e%ident partia#ity or corr!ption in t0e of t0em or

3. Cc 70at t0e arbitrators ere !i#ty of miscond!ct in ref!t0e 0earin !pon s!Ocient ca!se s0on, or in ref!sin topertinent and materia# to t0e contro%ersy t0at one or marbitrators as disA!a#i?ed to act as s!c0 !nder section i##f!##y refrained from disc#osin s!c0 disA!a#i?cations omisbe0a%ior by 0ic0 t0e ri0ts of any party 0a%e been pre;!diced or

@. Cd 70at t0e arbitrators e:ceeded t0eir poers, or so impt0em, t0at a m!t!a#, ?na# and de?nite aard !pon t0e ss!bmitted to t0em as not made.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )3

H07

:


25/207

tin at nauht the #asic o#-ective o a voluntar" ar#itration an% &oul% re%uce ar#itration to a

larel" inutile institution.

)a!ination o the >etition at #ar reveals that it is essentiall" an atte!pt to reassert an% re

litiate #eore this ourt the %etaile% or ite!iDe% actual clai!s !a%e #eore the 4r#itral

Tri#unal un%er a eneral aver!ent that the 4r#itral Tri#unal ha% (!isapprehen%e% the acts3

su#!itte% to it. n the present >etition, too, i>recision clai!s that the 4r#itral Tri#unal ha%

co!!itte% rave a#use o %iscretion a!ountin to lac$ o -uris%iction in reachin its actualan% leal conclusions.

The irst (leal issue3 su#!itte% #" the >etition is the clai!e% !isapplication #" the 4r#itral

Tri#unal o the irst an% secon% pararaphs o 4rticle 1191 o the ivil o%e.2H 4rticle 1191

rea%s'

(4rt. 1191. The po&er to rescin% o#liations is i!plie% in reciprocal ones, in case one o the

o#liors shoul% not co!pl" &ith &hat is incu!#ent upon hi!.

The in-ure% part" !a" choose #et&een the ulill!ent an% the rescission o the o#liation,

&ith the pa"!ent o %a!aes in either case. e !a" also see$ rescission, even ater he has

chosen ulill!ent, i the latter shoul% #eco!e i!possi#le.

The court shall %ecree the rescission clai!e%, unless there #e -ust cause authoriDin the i)in

o a perio%.

This is un%erstoo% to #e &ithout pre-u%ice to the rihts o thir% persons &ho have ac/uire%

the thin, in accor%ance &ith articles 185 an% 188 an% the Mortae @a&.3

i>recision conten%s enereticall" that it is the in-ure% part" an% that ;teel Buil%ers &as the

o#lior &ho %i% not co!pl" &ith &hat &as incu!#ent upon it, such that ;teel Buil%ers &as

the part" in %eault an% the entit" uilt" o nelience an% %ela". 4s the in-ure% part", i

>recision !aintains that it !a" choose #et&een the ulill!ent or rescission o the o#liation

in accor%ance &ith 4rticle 1191, an% is entitle% to %a!aes in either case

continues, &hen the contractor ;teel Buil%ers %eaulte% on the 15r% %a"

contract perio%, i>recision opte% or speciic peror!ance an% ave ;t

%a" e)tension perio% &ith &hich to co!plete the pro-ect.

6666666666666

2H >etition, Rollo, pp. 997.

H08

H08 ;=>RM


26/207

procee%e% to enu!erate the aults o each o the parties. recision is that it ha% aile% to ive the contractor ;teel Buil%ers the re/uire%

15%a" notice or ter!ination o the contract.2 This &as clearl" a in%in o act on the part

o the Tri#unal, supporte% #" the circu!stance that per the recor%, petitioner ha% oere% no

proo that it ha% co!plie% &ith such 15%a" notice re/uire% un%er 4rticle 28.01 o the

General on%itions o ontract or!in part o the ontract ocu!ents. >etitioner i

>recisions aru!ent is that a &ritten 4ree!ent %ate% 1 Nove!#er 1990 &ith ;teel

Buil%ers concernin the ta$e over o the pro-ect #" i>recision, constitute% &aiver on the

part o the

6666666666666

25 d." Rollo, pp. 7780.

2 4r#itral 4&ar%, Rollo, p. 15.

H09

:recision asserts

that the 4r#itral Tri#unal %i% not uphol% the (la& #et&een the parties,3 #

su#stitute% the sa!e &ith (its Oo&nP a#sur% inerence an% +opinion on !

petitioner is !erel" %isuisin a actual /uestion as a (leal issue,3 since

realit" as$in this ourt to revie& the ph"sical operations relatin, e..,

carrie% out #" the contractor ;teel Buil%ers an% to %eter!ine &hether suc

accor%ance &ith the Technical ;peciications o the pro-ect. The 4r#itral

i>recisions clai! #" in%in that ;teel Buil%ers ha% co!plie% su#stan

Technical ;peciications. This ourt &ill not preten% that it has the techn

capa#ilit" to revie& the resolution o that actual issue #" the 4r#itral Tr

Einall", the >etition as$s this ourt to (revie& serious errors in the in%in

O4r#itral Tri#unalP.328 n this section o its >etition, i>recision as$s us

ite! o its o&n clai!s &hich the 4r#itral Tri#unal ha% re-ecte% in its 4&

o the contractor ;teel Buil%ers &hich the Tri#unal ha% rante%. n respe

o&ners clai!s an% each ite! o the contractors clai!s, i>recision se

to all appearances the sa!e aru!ents it ha%

66666666666666

27 >etition, Rollo, pp. 8090.

28 d." Rollo, p. 97 et se&.

H10

H10 ;=>RM


27/207

12.2. hane


28/207

29 Rollo, pp. 111112.

H11

:riceA >8,H0,000.00

>roress Billins 5,582,585.55

4%vances !a%e to @i! i!

aA prior to ta$eover 92,781.H5

#A ater the ta$eover

ivil or$s 1,158,51.88

Materials H,21,18.72

@a#or 2,155,77H.79

/uip!ent Rental 1,HH8,208.90

Total 4!ount >ai% or onstruction

@ess' ontract >rice

4 )cess o a!ount pai% over

contract price

B ro-ect

?>2H,12KA


29/207

2,027,18.H0

#. ue to ue" o!!ercial

use% or ; >ro-ect 51,110.H0

4%%itional construction e)penses

a. ncrease in prices since recision is as$in this ourt to pass upon clai!s &hich are either clearl" an% o0o


30/207

petitioner i>recision is as$in this ourt to pass upon clai!s &hich are either clearl" an%

%irectl" actual in nature or re/uire previous %eter!ination o actual issues. This upon the

one han%. =pon the other han%, the ourt consi%ers that petitioner i>recision has aile% to

sho& an" serious errors o la& a!ountin to rave a#use o %iscretion resultin in lac$ o

-uris%iction on the part o the 4r#itral Tri#unal, in either the !etho%s e!plo"e% or the results

reache% #" the 4r#itral Tri#unal, in %isposin o the %etaile% clai!s o the respective parties.

REetition is here#" ;M;; or lac$ o !erit.

osts aainst petitioner.

;< e in% no !erit in the petition. ;ection 1H o Repu#lic 4c$no&n as the 4r#itration @a&, allo&s an" part" to the ar#itration procee%court to ta$e !easures to saeuar% an%Ior conserve an" !atter &hich is %ispute in ar#itration, thus' ;ection 1H. Subpoena and subpoena duces teshall have the po&er to re/uire an" person to atten% a hearin as a &itnethe po&er to su#poena &itnesses an% %ocu!ents &hen the relevanc" o t!aterialit" thereo has #een %e!onstrate% to the ar#itrators. 4r#itrators !retire!ent o an" &itness %urin the testi!on" o an" other &itness. 4ll appointe% in an" controvers" !ust atten% all the hearins in that !atter aalleations an% proos o the partiesC #ut an a&ar% #" the !a-orit" o the!concurrence o all o the! is e)pressl" re/uire% in the su#!ission or con

The ar#itrator or ar#itrators shall have the po&er at an" ti!e, #eore ren%without pre!udice to the rights of any party to petition the court to take m

safeguard andJor conserve any matter which is the sub!ect of the dispute

Same; Same; #anks and #anking; Philippine Clearing


31/207

66666666666666666

* ; No. 29725,

%is!issin the petition or certiorari ile% #" petitioner to annul the t&o the Reional Trial ourt o Ma$ati in ivil ase No. 921H5, the irst, %%en"in petitioners !otion to %is!iss an% the secon%, %ate% enne% #" Fustice eDar . Erancisco an% concurre% in #" Fustices Manancio . Garcia.

2 ;pecial Eith ivision.

Branch 1. >resi%e% #" Fu%e Buenaventura F. Guerrero, no& 4ssociaourt o 4ppeals.

50

50 ;=>RM


32/207

throuh the > or the reason Be"on% Rele!entar" >erio%, i!pl"in that B;Talrea%" treate% the three ?A EBT chec$s as cleare% an% allo&e% the procee%s thereo to #e&ith%ra&n.H EBT %e!an%e% rei!#urse!ent or the returne% chec$s an% in/uire% ro!B;T &hether it ha% per!itte% an" &ith%ra&al o un%s aainst the unun%e% chec$s an% i so, on &hat %ate. B;T, ho&ever, reuse% to !a$e an" rei!#urse!ent an% to provi%eEBT &ith the nee%e% inor!ation.

Thus, on ece!#er 12, 1991, EBT su#!itte% the %ispute or ar#itration #eore the >4r#itration o!!ittee,5 un%er the >s ;upple!entar" Rules on Reional learin to&hich EBT an% B;T are #oun% as participants in the reional clearin operationsa%!inistere% #" the >.

4r#itration ase No. 9109.

bid ., at p. 129.

51

:


33/207

52 ;=>RM etitioners !e!oran%u! &as ile% on Ee#ruar" 17, 1995.

22 Rollo, p. 1H.

2 bid ., at p. 15.

5

:


34/207

" p psee$s to %o, ollo&in >uro!ines. But &ith ut!ost %eerence to the onora#le ;upre!eourt, perhaps >uro!ines !a" have #een %eci%e% on a %ierent actual #asis.

) ) ) ) ) ).30

>etitioner ta$es e)ception to EBTs contention that Puromines cannot !o%i" or reversethe rulins in 8ational Knion $ire nsurance Company of Pittsburg vs. Stolt=8ielsen Philippines" nc."1 an% #engson vs. Chan,2 &here this ourt sus

pen%e% the action ile% pen%in ar#itration, an% arues that (OsPoun% polic" re/uires that the

conclusion o &hether OaP ;upre!e ourt %ecision has or has not reverse% or !o%iie% OaP previous %octrine, shoul% #e let to the ;upre!e ourt itselC until then, the latest pronounce!ent shoul% prevail.3

666666666666666

2H >etitioner reerrin to section 22 o Repu#lic 4ct No. 87.

25 Rollo, p. 18.

2 bid .

27

2 ;R4 17 ?199HA.28 220 ;R4 281 ?199A.

29 211 ;R4 75 ?1992A.

0 Rollo, p. 1H1.

1 18H ;R4 82 ?1990A.

2 78 ;R4 11 ?1977A.

Rollo, p. 20.

5H ;=>RM rivate respon%ent EBT, on the other han%, conten%s that (. . . the caucollection Oo a su! o !one"P can coe)ist in the civil suit an% the ar#itr

citin section 7 o the 4r#itration @a& &hich provi%es or the sta" o thear#itration has #een ha% in accor%ance &ith the ter!s o the aree!ent par#itration. >rivate respon%ent urther asserts that ollo&in section H?A1987 onstitution, the su#se/uent case o Puromines %oes not overturn tearlier cases o 8ational Knion $ire nsurance Company of

666666666666666

H bid ., at p. 2.

5 =n%er the ar#itration s"ste! o the >, an a&ar% results in a !ere a%e#itIcre%it proce%ure.

Rollo, p. 2H. itation o!itte%. e in% no !erit in the petition. ;ection 1H o Repu#lic 4ct 87, other&

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc81083bee695ba000a0094004f00ee/p/AKE444/?username=Guest#p318scra8960563007http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc81083bee695ba000a0094004f00ee/p/AKE444/?username=Guest#p318scra8960563008http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc81083bee695ba000a0094004f00ee/p/AKE444/?username=Guest#p318scra8960563009http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc81083bee695ba000a0094004f00ee/p/AKE444/?username=Guest#p318scra8960563009http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc81083bee695ba000a0094004f00ee/p/AKE444/?username=Guest#p318scra8960563010http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc81083bee695ba000a0094004f00ee/p/AKE444/?username=Guest#p318scra8960563010http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc81083bee695ba000a0094004f00ee/p/AKE444/?username=Guest#p318scra8960564002http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc81083bee695ba000a0094004f00ee/p/AKE444/?username=Guest#p318scra8960564003http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc81083bee695ba000a0094004f00ee/p/AKE444/?username=Guest#p318scra8960564004http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc81083bee695ba000a0094004f00ee/p/AKE444/?username=Guest#p318scra8960563007http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc81083bee695ba000a0094004f00ee/p/AKE444/?username=Guest#p318scra8960563008http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc81083bee695ba000a0094004f00ee/p/AKE444/?username=Guest#p318scra8960563009http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc81083bee695ba000a0094004f00ee/p/AKE444/?username=Guest#p318scra8960563010http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc81083bee695ba000a0094004f00ee/p/AKE444/?username=Guest#p318scra8960564002http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc81083bee695ba000a0094004f00ee/p/AKE444/?username=Guest#p318scra8960564003http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bc81083bee695ba000a0094004f00ee/p/AKE444/?username=Guest#p318scra8960564004


35/207

7 bid .

8 bid ., p. 278.

9 4rticle :, section H?A provi%es'

() ) ) ) ) )C >rovi%e%, that no %octrine or principle o la& lai% %o&n #" the court in a%ecision ren%ere% en banc or in %ivision !a" #e !o%iie% or reverse% e)cept #" the courtsittin en banc.3

55

:RM


36/207

si!pl" rants an ar#itrator the po&er to issue su#poena an% su#poena duces tecum at an"ti!e #eore ren%erin the a&ar%. The e)ercise o such po&er is &ithout pre-u%ice to the rihto a part" to ile a petition in court to saeuar% an" !atter &hich is the su#-ect o the %isputein ar#itration. n the case at #ar, private respon%ent ile% an action or a su! o !one" &ith

pra"er or a &rit o preli!inar" attach!ent. =n%ou#te%l", such action involve% the sa!esu#-ect !atter as that in ar#itration, i.e., the su! o >25,200,000.00 &hich &as allee%l"%eprive% ro! private respon%ent in &hat is $no&n in #an$in as a ($itin sche!e.3o&ever, the civil action &as not a si!ple case o a !one" clai! since private respon%enthas inclu%e% a pra"er or a &rit o preli!inar" attach!ent, &hich is sanctione% #" section 1Ho the 4r#itration @a&.

>etitioner cites the cases o Associated #ank vs. Court of Appeals"H Puromines" nc. vs.Court of Appeals,HH an% 4edesma vs. Court of AppealsH5 in conten%in that (O&Phenar#itration is aree% upon an% suit is ile% &ithout ar#itration havin #een hel% an%ter!inate%, the case that is ile% shoul% #e %is!isse%.3H o&ever, the sai% cases are not in

point. n Associated #ank , &e air!e% the %is!issal o the thir%part" co!plaint ile% #"4ssociate% Ban$ aainst >hilippine o!!ercial nternational Ban$, Ear ast Ban$ Trusto!pan", ;ecurit" Ban$ an% Trust o!pan" an% it"trust Ban$in orporation or lac$ o

-uris%iction, it #ein sho&n that the sai% parties &ere #oun% #" the learin ouse Rules an%

666666666666666

H 2 ;R4 17 ?199HA.

HH 220 ;R4 281 ?199A.

H5 211 ;R4 75 ?1992A. This case involves the application o the atarungang Pambarangay @a& ?>.. 1508A.

H Rollo, p. 18.

57

:


37/207

58 ;=>RM


38/207

G.R. No. 1H18. March 2, 200.*

-" +H)R )NGIN))RING +R+R47I+N, petitioner, vs. 4I7+-

IND


39/207

or the parties to enter into a su#!ission aree!ent #eore the clai!ant !a" invo$e the

-uris%iction o 4.3 The oreoin a!en%!ents in the Rules &ere or!aliDe% #" 4

Resolution Nos. 291 an% 9.

>TT


40/207

H 4ssaile% 4 ecision, pp. 2122C Rollo, pp. H0H1.

5 See >a" te! Nos. 7.01 to 7.2 o the Bill o QuantitiesC Recor%s, pp. 125.

See @etters %ate% March 15, 1985 an% 4pril 25, 1985, pp. H.

7 See @etter %ate% March 7, 1985, p. 2.

8

See @etter %ate% ;epte!#er 0, 198, p. 5.

9 Recor%s, pp. 89.

10 d." pp. 1.

11 d." pp. 2H.

12 >resi%e% #" Fu%e >hinne" . 4ra/uil.

55

:etition.1

The Issues

n its Me!oran%u!, petitioner raises the ollo&in issues or the ourts

(4

hether or not there e)istOsP a controvers"I%ispute #et&een petitioner an

rear%in the interpretation an% i!ple!entation o the ;u#ontract 4re

Ee#ruar" 22, 198 that re/uires prior recourse to voluntar" ar#itrationC

666666666666666

1

Recor%s, p. H1.

1H Transerre% to Ma$ati, Branch H. >resi%e% #" Fu%e elia . >anani

15 4ssaile% 4 ecision, pp. 2021C Rollo, pp. 9H0.

1 This case &as %ee!e% su#!itte% or %ecision on


41/207

43 Power 1ngineering Corporation vs. Capitol ndustrial Construction Hroups" nc.

(B

n the air!ative, &hether or not the re/uire!ents provi%e% in 4rticle O1P o 4

4r#itration Rules rear%in re/uest or ar#itration haOveP #een co!plie% &ithO.P317

The Court’s Ruling

The >etition is un!eritorious.

First Issue:

Whether Dispute Is Arbitrable

>etitioner clai!s that there is no conlict rear%in the interpretation or the i!ple!entation

o the 4ree!ent. Thus, &ithout havin to resort to prior ar#itration, it is entitle% to collect

the value o the services it ren%ere% throuh an or%inar" action or the collection o a su! o

!one" ro! respon%ent.


42/207

(O>etitionerP shall a%here strictl" to the sche%ule relate% to the


43/207

21 d." pp. 78 H8H9. talics supplie%.

22 d." pp. 8 H9.

59

:u#lic or$s an% ih&a"sP.

o&ever, petitioner &ill still #e ull" responsi#le or all i!porte% !aterials an% e/uip!ent.

(4ll e)penses incurre% #" Orespon%entP, #oth in orein an% local currencies in connection

&ith the openin o the letters o cre%it shall #e %e%ucte% ro! the ontract >rices.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

(N. OTRM


44/207

Second Issue:

rior Re!uest for Arbitration

4ccor%in to petitioner, assu!in arguendo that the %ispute is ar#itra#le, the ailure to ile a

or!al re/uest or ar#itration &ith the onstruction n%ustr" 4r#itration o!!ission ?4A

preclu%e% the latter ro! ac/uirin -uris%iction over the /uestion. To #olster its position,

petitioner even cites our rulin in Tesco Services ncorporated v. ?era.0 e are not

persua%e%.

;ection 1 o 4rticle o the old Rules o >roce%ure Governin onstruction 4r#itration

in%ee% re/uire% the su#!ission o a re/uest or ar#itration, as ollo&s'

(;TR


45/207

voluntar" ar#itration, rear%less o &hat oru! the" !a" choose, their aree!ent &ill all

&ithin the -uris%iction o the 4, such that, even i the" speciicall" choose another oru!,

the parties &ill not #e preclu%e% ro! electin to su#!it their %ispute #eore the 4

#ecause this riht has #een veste% upon each part" #" la&, i.e., .


46/207

procee%in is pen%in, upon #ein satisie% that the issue involve% in such suit or procee%in

is reera#le to ar#itration, shall sta" the action or procee%in until an ar#itration has #een ha%

in accor%ance &ith the ter!s o the aree!ent' >rovi%e%, That the applicant or the sta" is not

in %eault in procee%in &ith such ar#itration.3

G.R. No. 152878. Ma" 5, 200.*

RI'AL COMMERCIAL BAN$ING CORPORATION, petitioner, vs. MAG(IN

MAR$ETING CORPORATION, NELSON TIU, BENITO SY n! ANDERSON UY,

re#pon!ent#.

i.e." the filing of answer" reply" answer to counter=claim" including other f

maneuvers" e(cept for the rigmarole of raffling cases which is dispensed filed complaint is automatically assigned to the branch to which the orig

>a complaint that is re=filed leads to the re=enactment of past proceedin

concomitant full attention of the same trial court e(ercising an immacula

!urisdiction and control over the case that was previously dismissed. —<&e see no reason &h" RTBr. 15 o Ma$ati it" shoul% stop short o hon the !erits. There is no su#stantial polic" &orth pursuin #" re/uirinaain the %oc$et ees &hen it has alrea%" %ischare% this o#liation si!u

ilin o the co!plaint or collection o a su! o !one". The proce%ure &hen reile% is the sa!e as thouh it &as initiall" lo%e%, i.e., the ilin

666666666666666

* ;


47/207

pre!udice divests the trial court of !urisdiction over the civil case. —The a%%ition o thesecon% sentence in the secon% pararaph %oes not chane the a#solute nulliication o the%is!issal &ithout pre-u%ice %ecree% in the irst pararaph. The sentence (OPailure on the parto plainti to su#!it the sai% aree!ent shall cause the i!position o pa"!ent o there/uire% %oc$et ees or reilin o this case3 is not a %irective to pa" %oc$et ees #ut onl" astate!ent o the event that !a" result in its i!position. The reason or this is that the trialcourt coul% not have possi#l" !a%e such pa"!ent o#liator" in the sa!e civil case, i.e., ivilase No. 99518, since %oc$et ees are %era"e% onl" ater the %is!issal #eco!es inal an%e)ecutor" an% &hen the civil case is reile%. t !ust #e e!phasiDe% ho&ever that once the

%is!issal attains the attri#ute o inalit", the trial court cannot i!pose leal ees ane& #ecause a inal an% e)ecutor" %is!issal althouh &ithout pre-u%ice %ivests the trial court o -uris%iction over the civil case as &ell as an" resi%ual po&er to or%er an"thin relative to the%is!isse% caseC it &oul% have to &ait until the co!plaint is %oc$ete% once aain.


48/207

or when so re&uired at the pretrial; 9b: if he neglects to prosecute his action for an

unreasonable length of

595

:RM


49/207

solution to the pro#le! as this stae in a civil action is &here issues are si!pliie% an% the%ispute /uic$l" an% enuinel" reconcile%. B" !eans o pretrial, the trial court is ull"e!po&ere% to s&a" the litiants to aree upon so!e air co!pro!ise.

Same; Same; 7ismissing the civil case and compelling the plaintiff to re=file its complaint is

a dangerous" costly and circuitous route that may end up aggravating" not resolving" thedisagreement>inconsiderate dismissals" even if without pre!udice" do not constitute a

panacea nor a solution to the congestion of court dockets.> is!issin the civil case an%co!pellin petitioner to reile its co!plaint is a %anerous, costl" an% circuitous route that

!a" en% up aravatin, not resolvin, the %isaree!ent. This case !anae!ent strate" isrihteninl" %eceptive #ecause it %oes so at the e)pense o petitioner &hose cause o action,

perhaps, !a" have alrea%" #een a%!itte% #" its a%verse parties as sho&n #" three ?A o our?HA %een%ants not &illin to contest petitioners alleations, an% !ore criticall", since thisapproach pro!otes the useless an% than$less %uplication o har% &or$ alrea%" un%erta$en #"the trial court. 4s &e have aptl" o#serve%, (OiPnconsi%erate %is!issals, even i &ithout

pre-u%ice, %o not constitute a panacea nor a solution to the conestion o court %oc$ets. hilethe" len% a %eceptive aura o eicienc" to recor%s o in%ivi%ual -u%es, the" !erel" postponethe ulti!ate rec$onin #et&een the parties. n the a#sence o clear lac$ o !erit or intentionto %ela", -ustice is #etter serve% #" a #rie continuance, trial on the !erits, an% inal%isposition o the cases #eore the court.3

>TT


50/207

d." at p. 7.

5 d." at p. 27.

598

598 ;=>RM lainti is %irecte% to su#!it the co!pro!ise aree!ent &ithin 15 %a"s Eailure on the part o plainti to su#!it the sai% aree!ent shall cause th

pa"!ent o the re/uire% %oc$et ees or reilin o this case.1


51/207

" , p O petitionerP alrea%" approve% %een%ant Ma&in Mar$etin orporations re/uest orrestructurin o its loan o#liations to plainti #ut su#-ect to the ter!s an% con%itionsspeciie% in sai% letter.31H This !otion &as ollo&e% on 5


52/207

666666666666666

18 4 Recor%, pp. 2 .

19 oc$ete% as 4G.R. ;> No. 2102, 'i0al Commercial #anking Corporation v. resi%in Fustice ?no& 4ssociate Fustice o this ourtA Ma. 4licia 4ustriaMartineD an%4ssociate Fustice Fose @. ;a#io, Fr.C Rollo, pp. 25.

01

:


53/207

The petition o RiDal o!!ercial Ban$in orporation is !eritorious. t %irects our attentionto /uestions o su#stance %eci%e% #" the courts a &uo plainl" in a &a" not in accor% &ithapplica#le prece%ents as &ell as the accepte% an% usual course o -u%icial procee%insC itoers special an% i!portant reasons that %e!an% the e)ercise o our po&er o supervisionan% revie&. Eurther!ore, petitioners o#-ections to the procee%ins #elo& enco!pass notonl" the Order o 8 ;epte!#er 2000 #ut inclu%e the conate Orders o the trial court o an%1 Nove!#er 2000. This is evi%ent ro! the pra"er o the instant petition &hich see$s to

reverse an% set asi%e the 7ecision o the appellate court an% to %irect the trial court to procee% &ith the pretrial conerence in ivil ase No. 99518. vi%entl", the su#stantiveissue involve% herein is &hether the procee%ins in the civil case shoul% proress, a /uestion&hich at #otto! e!#roils all the Orders air!e% #" the ourt o 4ppeals.


54/207

si!ilar %irective, i.e., (OtPhe parties are iven a perio% o iteen ?15A %a"s ro! to%a" &ithin&hich to su#!it a o!pro!ise 4ree!ent,3 &as hel% to !ean that (shoul% the parties ail intheir

666666666666666

27 ssue% #" Fu%e Erancisco B. #a"C 4 Recor%, p. 2H.

28

;ee Note 22 at p. 50.

0H

0H ;=>RM


55/207

-uris%iction over the civil case, a act &hich &oul% not have #een possi#le ha% the %is!issal&ithout pre-u%ice #een resuscitate%. ;urel", the court a &uo coul% not have %enie% on

Nove!#er 2000 petitioners !otion to calen%ar ivil ase No. 99518 or pretrial i the%is!issal ha% #een restore% to lie in the !eanti!e. B" then the %is!issal &ithout pre-u%ice&oul% have alrea%" #eco!e inal an% e)ecutor" so as to eectivel" re!ove the civil casero! the %oc$et o the trial court.

The sa!e is true &ith the Order o 1 Nove!#er 2000 %en"in %ue course to petitioners

8otice of Appeal. There &oul% have #een no #asis or such e)ercise o %iscretion #ecause the -uris%iction o the court a &uo over the civil case &oul% have #een %ischare% an% ter!inate% #" the presu!e% %is!issal thereo. Moreover, &e note the roun% or %en"in %ue course tothe appeal' the (RM


56/207

:


57/207

his concurrence &ith the ter!s an% con%itions o the arrane!ent. The !o!entar" la in thecivil case &as aravate% &hen respon%ent Benito ;" or un$no&n an% une)plaine% reasons

pai% no hee% to the a%-ust!ents in the in%e#te%ness althouh curiousl" he has not oppose% #eore this ourt or the courts a &uo petitioners %esire to o ahea% &ith the pretrialconerence.

4%!itte%l", %ela" too$ place in this case #ut it &as not an interruption that shoul% haveentaile% the %is!issal o the co!plaint even i such &as %esinate% as &ithout pre-u%ice. To

constitute a suicient roun% or %is!issal, the inattention o plainti to pursue his cause!ust not onl" #e prolone% #ut also #e unnecessar" an% %ilator" resultin in the trilin o -u%icial processes. n the instant case, the a%-ourn!ent &as not onl" leetin as it laste% lessthan si) ?A !onths #ut &as also %one in oo% aith to acco!!o

09

:


58/207

METRO CONSTRUCTION, INC., petitioner,vs. CHATHAM PROPERTIES, INC.,

re#pon!ent.

Arbitration; Construction ndustry Arbitration Commission 9CAC:; 1(ecutive Order 91O:

The ever increasin variet" o po&ers an% unctions iven to a%!inistratreconiDes the nee% or the active intervention o a%!inistrative aencieor technical $no&le%e an% spee% in countless controversies &hich cannhan%le% #" reular courts. The 4s pri!ar" unction is that o a /uas


59/207

Arbitration; Construction ndustry Arbitration Commission 9CAC:; 1(ecutive Order 91O: 8o. - vests upon the CAC original and e(clusive !urisdiction over disputes arising from"

or connected with" contracts entered into by parties involved in construction in the

Philippines" whether the dispute arises before or after the completion of the contract" or after

the abandonment or breach thereof. —.


60/207

; ; ; ; y g p f provisions on appeal in 1.O. 8o. -" vis==vis Circular 8o. =E and '.A. 8o. EF" was

completely removed with the issuance by the Supreme Court of 'evised Administrative

Circular 8o. =EG and the EE 'ules of Civil Procedure>both categorically include the

CAC in the enumeration of &uasi=!udicial agencies comprehended therein. —4n" re!ainin%ou#t on the proce%ural !utation o the provisions on appeal in .roce%ure. Both cateoricall" inclu%e the 4 in the enu!eration o /uasi-u%icial aenciesco!prehen%e% therein. ;ection o the or!er an% ;ection , Rule H o the latter, e)plicitl"e)pan% the issues that !a" #e raise% in an appeal ro! /uasi-u%icial aencies orinstru!entalities to the ourt o 4ppeals &ithin the perio% an% in the !anner therein

provi%e%. n%isputa#l", the revie& o the 4 a&ar% !a" involve either /uestions o act,o la&, or o act an% la&.

Same; Same; Same; %hile the right to appeal is statutory" the mode or manner by which thisright may be e(ercised is a &uestion of procedure which may be altered and modified

provided that vested rights are not impaired. —There is no controvers" on the principle thatthe riht to appeal is statutor". o&ever, the !o%e or !anner #" &hich this riht !a" #ee)ercise% is a /uestion o proce%ure &hich !a" #e altere% an% !o%iie% provi%e% that veste%rihts are not i!paire%. The ;upre!e ourt is #esto&e% #" the onstitution &ith the po&er

an% preroative, inter alia" to pro!ulate rules concernin plea%ins, practice an% proce%urein all courts, as &ell as to revie& rules o proce%ure o special courts an% /uasi-u%icial #o%ies, &hich, ho&ever, shall re!ain in orce until %isapprove% #" the ;upre!e ourt. This po&er is constitutionall" enshrine% to enhance the in%epen%ence o the ;upre!e ourt.

Same; Same; Same; 8o litigant has a vested right in a particular remedy" which may bechanged by substitution without impairing vested rights>he can have none in rules of

procedure which relate to remedy. —The riht to appeal ro! -u%!ents, a&ar%s, or inalor%ers o the 4 is rante% in .


61/207

Pica0o" #uyco" Tan" $ider 2 Santos or private respon%ent.

701

:TMBR 2H, 2001 701

3etro Construction" nc. vs. Chatham Properties" nc.

4:, FR., C.6.'

The core issue in this case is &hether un%er e)istin la& an% rules the ourt o 4ppeals canalso revie& in%ins o acts o the onstruction n%ustr" 4r#itration o!!ission ?4A.

Respon%ent hatha! >roperties, nc. ?4T4MA an% petitioner Metro onstruction, nc.?MA entere% into a contract or the construction o a !ultistore" #uil%in $no&n as thehatha! ouse locate% at the corner o errera an% :alero ;treets, ;alce%o :illae, Ma$atiit", Metro Manila. n. 4pril 1998, M souht to collect ro! 4T4M a su! o !one"

or unpai% proress #illins an% other chares an% institute% a re/uest or a%-u%ication o itsclai!s &ith the 4. The case &as %oc$ete% as 4 ase No. 1098. The ar#itral tri#unal&as co!pose% o Foven B. Foa/uin as hair!an, an% Be%a G. Ea-ar%o an% @oreto . 4/uinoas !e!#ers.

The preli!inar" conerence #eore the 4 starte% in Fune 1998 an% &as conclu%e% a!onth ater &ith the sinin o the Ter!s o Reerence ?T


62/207

i!ple!ente%, pa"!ent o &hich &ere reco!!en%e% #" ) ) ) R an% approve% #" one o 4T4M; >ro-ect Manaers, Ro!ulo E. ;ua".

H. 5. ro-ect Manaer, Ro!ulo E.;ua", aree% to ive >20,000 per loor or ive ?5A loors, or a total o >100,000.00as #onusIincentive pa" to Ms construction &or$ers or the co!pletion o eachloor on sche%ule. 4T4M rei!#urse% M the a!ount o 50,000.00correspon%in to #onuses a%vance% to its &or$ers #" the latter or the 1Hth, 1th, an%17th loors.

5. . 4T4M; pa"!ents to M totale% >10H,875,792.7, representin pa"!entsor portions o Ms proress #illins an% ) ) ) a%%itional chares.

The parties then stipulate% on the ollo&in issues, aain, as set orth in the T


63/207

neotiation as no #i%%in &as con%ucte%, ) ) ) t &as also reveale% that t&o aree!ents &ereentere% into, one is la#ele% onstruction ontract or the total i)e% a!ount o>50,000,000.00 an% the other a ;upple!ental ontract or an a!ount not to e)cee%575,000,000.00. The

666666666666666

Rollo, 10107.

H ecision o the 4, Rollo, 2725C 4nne) (.3

70H

70H ;=>RM 125,000,000.00.

) ) )

There &as also the a%!itte% act that the contract &as neotiate% an% a&o a co!plete construction plan. n an" case, in support o the total contrM@@


64/207

clai!s ?to #eA Ms shortco!ins, an% Ms aree!ent to sta" on the pro-ect un%er con%itions set #" 4T4M, is #elieve% a !atter o !utual #eneit to #oth parties.

. . That 4T4M; invo$in its rihts un%er the provisions o 4rticle 27 o theconstruction contract is #elieve% out o place as it aile% to o#serve the re/uire% # h 4% M #ili ti


65/207

construction contract is #elieve% out o place, as it aile% to o#serve the re/uire%antece%ent acts #eore it can e)ercise its preroative un%er the sai% contract provision.

H. H. That there is no reason to #elieve, either part" &as in an" &a" uilt" o #a% aith inactin as it %i% on certain relevant !atters. o&ever, this Tri#unal is o the #elie that%ue perhaps to the eaerness on the part particularl" o 4T4M; representativesto ta$e such steps it consi%ere% necessar" to insure co!pletion o the pro-ect &ithinthe perio% %esire% #" 4T4M, it %eviate% ro!

707

:TMBR 2H, 2001 707


so!e enerall" accepte% proce%ures in the construction in%ustr" in %ealin &ith M.


66/207

708

708 ;=>RM 10H,752,58.H2, the su! o >5,750,000.00 &as pai% aterMa" 199 so that as o 2 Ma" 199, 4T4M; total pa"!ent to M &as>99,002,58.H2.

ectivel", thereore, the a!ount %ue M as o 2 Ma" 199 a!ounte% to >2H,005,72.co!pute% as ollo&s'

Total acco!plish!ent as o 2 Ma" 199 at 9H.12K >117,55,000.00

4%% approve% chane or%ers 5,5,091.08

T o t a l >12,008,091.08

@ess pa"!ents up to 2 Ma" 199 99,002,58.H2

2H,005,72. as o 2 Ma" 199, the onl" pa"4T4M to M is the su! o >5,750,000.00 ro! Fune 199 on&ar%M pa"rolls. t is o course note% that 4T4M; suspension o urtM &as #ecause it ha% #een un%erta$in on its o&n, the urther procurean% su#contractin o various phases o &or$s on the pro-ect.

n consi%eration o the a#ove acts, this Tri#unals conclusion that there i!plie% ta$e over o the pro-ect is urther conir!e%. Eurther!ore, this Tconclu%es that the cuto %ate or purposes o %elineatin the inancial o

parties #et&een the! shoul% #e 2 Ma" 199, the %ate &hen 4T4Macco!plish!ent at 9H.10K #ut nevertheless suspen%e% all urther prore

M presente% urther %ocu!entar" evi%ence ?)hi#it A the su#-ect o(>=N@;TNG:@ ;[email protected] n this particular %ocu!ensinatures o representatives o #oth M an% R, M trie% to pr4uust 199 it ha% actuall" attaine% 99.1K &or$ acco!plish!ent. hias o that %ate the pro-ect ha% reache% 99.1K co!pletion, there is no inevi%ence sho&in that M &as responsi#le or such acco!plish!ent. Tactuall" testiie% to #" nr. 4le) Bautista o R, &hen he sai% thaevaluation o the pro-ects co!pletion stae, not necessaril" Ms &or$

This Tri

709

:TMBR 2H, 2001

3etro Construction" nc. vs. Chatham Properties" nc

#unal thereore stan%s ir! on its conclusion that Ms acco!plish!ent is onl" up to thee)tent o 9H.10K5

ith those in%ins, the 4 %ispose% o the speciic !one" clai!s #" either rantin orre%ucin the!


67/207

re%ucin the!. ,02,H98.78 as ollo&s'

1IH ) 1I O?1I10 ) >125,000,000.00A 1KP 1 ) 29H V >,02,H98.78.

666666666666666

5 Rollo, 280285.

710 ;=>RM


68/207

4.5 or$ers Bonus 0

4. ispute% e%uctions 909,H8H.70

4.7 @a#or scalation 1,07,25.00

4.8 4tten%ance Eee 508,12.7

T o t a l >128,9H,209.8

@ess'Total pa"!entste! o T2,518,H17.1

B. 4M ; NTT@ T


69/207

The Tri#unals conclusions are roun%e% entirel" on speculations, sur!ises an% con-ectures.

The 4r#itral Tri#unal rossl" erre% in ailin to consi%er the evi%ence presente% #"4T4M an% the testi!on" o its &itnesses.

The 4r#itral Tri#unal ravel" a#use% its %iscretion in consi%erin ar#itraril" that there &as an

i!plie% ta$eover contrar" to the acts an% evi%ence su#!itte%.

The 4r#itral Tri#unal co!!itte% rave error an% ross !isapprehension o acts in hol%inthat 4T4M is not entitle% to li/ui%ate% %a!aes %espite ailure o M to !eet theoverall sche%ule o co!pletion.

The 4r#itral Tri#unal !aniestl" erre% in hol%in that M is entitle% to its clai! or unpai% proress #illins.

The 4r#itral Tri#unal co!!itte% ross an% reversi#le error in e/uatin the percentae oMs &or$ acco!plish!ent &ith the entire &or$ in place, %espite evi%ence to the contrar".

The 4r#itral Tri#unal ravel" erre% in !a$in 2 Ma" 199 as the cuto %ate or purposeso %elineatin the inancial o#liations o the parties.

The 4r#itral Tri#unal erre% in %en"in 4T4M its clai! or actual %a!aes pursuant to4rticle 27.8 o the onstruction ontract. The acts set orth in 4T4M; 4ns&er &itho!pulsor" ounterclai! as &ell as its %ocu!entar" an% testa!entar" evi%ence &ere notoverturne% or controverte% #" an" contrar" evi%ence.8

n its %ecision o 0 ;epte!#er 1999,9 the ourt o 4ppeals si!pliie% the assine% errorsinto one core issue, na!el", the (propriet"3 o the 4s actual in%ins an% conclusions. n uphol%in

666666666666666

712 ;=>RM


70/207

control o the pro-ect.1

666666666666666

10 See ecision o the ourt o 4ppeals, Rollo, 8890.

11 )hi#it 19Q an% 19RC T;N 5 4uust 1998, 828.

12 T;N, 5 4uust 1998, 8H85.

1 T;N, 19 4uust 19, 1998, 17182.

71

:TMBR 2H, 2001 71


1. . Testi!on" o nr. nante that M personnel &ere constantl" present in the pro-ect an% the (intervention3 ?not ta$eoverA #" 4T4M &as -ustiie% to ensureco!pletion o the pro-ect on ti!e.1H

2. H. ocu!entar" e)hi#its evincin the nature an% e)tent o Ms &or$ %urin theta$eover perio% &hich #elie% its clai!s that it &as not in control o the pro-ect

#ecause o the ta$eover thus'

)hi#it (H3—@etter %ate% is Ee#ruar" 1995 o nr. apunan o R to Fohn @ai oM statin that the ta$eover o %irections or !anae!ent o the iel% operations is interi!,

&ill not #e responsi#le or an" errors or acci%ents that !a" occur %urin perio%,3 in%icatin that r. @ai &as ver" !uch a&are o the interi! perio

)hi#it (H3—@etter %ate% 15 Ee#ruar" 1995 &ritten #" nr. Ben . Rr. @ai containin the reasons or the ta$eover.

)hi#it (843—@etter %ate% 5 ;epte!#er 1995 &ritten #" r. .G. Ta#u-

@aron ?>ro-ect Manaer o MA re/uestin or an enineer o M to ainspector o R to &itness #atchin proce%ures. B" so %oin, r. ac$no&le%e% that r. @ai &as in control o the pro-ect.

)hi#it (83—@etter %ate% H ;epte!#er 1995 #" nr. Ro!ulo R. ;ua"an incentive to the &or$ers o M to e)ert ?theirA #est eort or toppinece!#erC another clear in%ication that r. @ai &as in control o the pro

)hi#it (H3—@etter %ate% H Fanuar" 199 in%icatin that Mr. .T. Goincentive o >1,800,000 on the con%ition that M !eets the ne& sche%uMs acceptance o the incentive oer li$e&ise sho&s that M &as in>ro-ect.

)hi#its (,3 (F,3 (M,3 (N,3 (1,3 (J,3 (L,3 an% (S3—containin re!in%ers to M o its %uties an% shortco!ins, li$e&ise attM &as in control ?oA an% responsi#le or the >ro-ect, althouh !ar$e%

666666666666666

1H T;N, 7 ;epte!#er 1998, 2.

71H

71H ;=>RM


71/207

)hi#its (5,3 (54,3 (5B,3 (5,3 (5,3 (5,3 (5E,3 (5


72/207

perio% stipulate% in the onstruction ontract an% even %espite an e)tension o 5 %a"s ro!the oriinal sche%ule or o the overall sche%ule o co!pletion. OMP shoul% thereore pa"O4T4MP the a!ount o li/ui%ate% %a!aes e/uivalent to >2H,125,000.00 or 19 %a"so %ela" in the overall sche%ule o co!pletion counte% ro! overall co!pletion %ate on Ful"22, 199 up to the %ate o co!pletion on Ee#ruar" 15, 1997, as state% in the ertiicate o


73/207

Balance ue Respon%ent > 2,518,H17.1

#. A3OK8TS Cenalties 1,778,285.HH

B.H. ash >a"!ents in Behal o M 2,21H,715.8

Total 4!ount ue > >28,H5,995.2

C. 81T A3OK8T 7K1 Cen%in 4ppeal, ile% on 1 roce%ure not to !ention R 4 No 7902 as enacte% #" onress

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bcccbda216e58f5000a0094004f00ee/p/AMK703/?username=Guest#p365scra8960716001http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bcccbda216e58f5000a0094004f00ee/p/AMK703/?username=Guest#p365scra8960717001http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bcccbda216e58f5000a0094004f00ee/p/AMK703/?username=Guest#p365scra8960717002http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bcccbda216e58f5000a0094004f00ee/p/AMK703/?username=Guest#p365scra8960716001http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bcccbda216e58f5000a0094004f00ee/p/AMK703/?username=Guest#p365scra8960717001http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e1bcccbda216e58f5000a0094004f00ee/p/AMK703/?username=Guest#p365scra8960717002


74/207

la& !a" #e the su#-ect o an appeal o the 4 s %ecision to the ourt o 4ppeals, it is still.hilippine onstruction n%ustr",3&hich too$ eect on H Ee#ruar" 1985.

718

718 ;=>RM roce%ure, not to !ention R.4. No. 7902, as enacte% #" onress,.


75/207

The parties, ho&ever, %isaree on &hether the su#se/uent ;upre!e ourt issuances onappellate proce%ure an% R.4. No. 7902 re!ove% ro! the ;upre!e ourt its appellate

-uris%iction in ;ection 19 o . These rules shall not appl" to %ecisions an% interlocutor"or%ers o the National @a#or Relations o!!ission or the ;ecretar" o @a#or an%!plo"!ent un%er the @a#or o%e o the >hilippines, the entral Boar% o4ssess!ent 4ppeals, an% other /uasi-u%icial aencies ro! &hich no appeal to thecourts is prescri#e% or allo&e% #" statute.

. . %ho may appeal and where to appeal> The appeal o a part" aecte% #" a inalor%er, %ecision, or -u%!ent o the ourt o Ta) 4ppeals

666666666666666

adr_fulltxt batch 1

Documents