Title
Abaya vs. Ebdane, Jr.
Case
G.R. No. 167919
Decision Date
Feb 14, 2007
Award of a foreign-funded road project to the lowest bidder exceeding the budget was upheld, as the bidding process predated RA 9184 and followed JBIC guidelines.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 72744-45)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Loan Agreements and Project Background
    • Exchange of Notes (Dec. 27, 1999) between the Governments of Japan and the Philippines provided for two yen loans (Loan I up to ¥79,861,000,000) to finance projects in List A, including the Arterial Road Links Development Project (Phase IV).
    • Loan Agreement No. PH-P204 (Dec. 28, 1999) between JBIC and the Philippine Government allotted ¥15,384,000,000 for Phase IV, covering the Catanduanes Circumferential Road (total ~204.515 km).
  • Contract Package I (CP I) and Bidding
    • CP I: improvement/rehabilitation of San Andres (Codon)–Virac–Jct. Bato–Viga road (79.818 km).
    • Prequalification (Nov.–Dec. 2002): 23 expressions of interest, 8 qualified (1 withdrew), 7 bids opened.
    • Approved Budget for the Contract (ABC): ₱738,710,563.67; three lowest bids:
      • China Road & Bridge Corp.: original ₱993.18 M (34.45% over ABC), corrected ₱952.56 M (28.95% over ABC)
      • Cavite Ideal Intal Const. Devt. Corp.: ₱1,099.93 M (48.90% over ABC)
      • Italian‐Thai Dev’t Pub. Co., Ltd.: ₱1,125.02 M (52.35% over ABC)
    • Consultant’s Bid Evaluation (Apr. 2004) recommended China Road & Bridge as lowest compliant bidder.
    • DPWH BAC Resolution No. PJHL-A-04-012 (May 7, 2004) approved by Acting Secretary Soriquez awarding CP I to China Road & Bridge.
    • Contract executed on Sept. 29, 2004 between DPWH and China Road & Bridge Corp.
  • The Petition
    • Petitioners: Plaridel M. Abaya (taxpayer, ex‐lawmaker), Commodore Plaridel C. Garcia (taxpayer, ex‐military), and PMA a59 Foundation, Inc. (taxpayers).
    • Respondents: DPWH Secretary Ebdane, DBM Secretary Boncodin, DOF Secretary Purisima, Bureau of Treasury Treasurer Lasala, and China Road & Bridge Corp.
    • Relief sought: Certiorari to annul Resolution No. PJHL-A-04-012 and the CP I contract; prohibition against implementation; injunctive relief to stop fund disbursement.
    • Main contention: Award violated RA 9184 (Government Procurement Reform Act) because winning bid exceeded the ABC, rendering the contract void ab initio.

Issues:

  • Do the petitioners, as taxpayers and concerned citizens, have locus standi to challenge the contract award?
  • Does RA 9184 apply to the CP I procurement and, if applied, was the award illegal for exceeding the ABC?
  • Is the CP I contract void ab initio for contravening RA 9184?
  • Are the petitioners entitled to a writ of prohibition to bar implementation of the award and contract?
  • Are the petitioners entitled to injunctive relief against the disbursement of public funds for this project?

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.