Case Digest (G.R. No. 211356)
Facts:
In Crisostomo B. Aquino v. Municipality of Malay, Aklan, petitioner Crisostomo B. Aquino, president and CEO of Boracay Island West Cove Management Philippines, Inc. (Boracay West Cove), sought on January 7, 2010 a zoning clearance and building permit to construct a three‐storey hotel on a 998 sqm forest land use area in Sitio Diniwid, Barangay Balagab, Boracay Island. Pursuant to Municipal Ordinance No. 2000-131, the Municipal Zoning Administrator denied the application on January 20, 2010, because the proposed site fell within the twenty-five-meter “no-build zone” from the high-water mark. Aquino appealed to the municipal mayor on February 1, 2010, but received no decision. Despite this, Boracay West Cove continued construction and operation. On April 5, 2011, the municipal treasurer sent a Notice of Assessment for unpaid taxes and liabilities, which Aquino offered to settle but was refused. A Cease and Desist Order followed on March 28, 2011, and on June 7, 2011, Mayor John P.Case Digest (G.R. No. 211356)
Facts:
- Parties and Subject Matter
- Petitioner: Crisostomo B. Aquino, president and CEO of Boracay Island West Cove Management Philippines, Inc. (Boracay West Cove)
- Respondents: Municipality of Malay, Aklan (Mayor John P. Yap; Sangguniang Bayan; Municipal Engineer; Municipal Treasurer; Boracay PNP Chief; Boracay Foundation, Inc.; Municipal Auxiliary Police)
- Chronology of Events
- January 7, 2010 – Boracay West Cove applied for zoning clearance and a building permit for a three-storey hotel on a 998 sqm parcel in Sitio Diniwid, Barangay Balabag, Boracay Island under a DENR-issued FLAgT.
- January 20, 2010 – Municipal Zoning Administrator denied zoning clearance: proposed site within the 25-meter “no-build zone” under Municipal Ordinance 2000-131.
- February 1, 2010 – Petitioner appealed denial to the Mayor; no action taken.
- April 5, 2011 – Notice of Assessment for unpaid taxes and liabilities; petitioner’s offer to pay was rejected.
- March 28, 2011 – Cease and Desist Order enjoined resort expansion.
- June 7, 2011 – Executive Order No. 10 issued ordering closure and demolition of the hotel; partially implemented June 10, 2011.
- February 2014 – Further demolitions executed by respondents.
- Procedural History
- Petitioner filed Petition for Certiorari with the Court of Appeals (CA) challenging EO 10 as grave abuse of discretion, violation of due process, conflict with FLAgT, and misjoinder of jurisdiction.
- CA Decision (August 13, 2013) and Resolution (February 3, 2014) dismissed the petition: certiorari improper remedy; declaratory relief proper.
- Petitioner elevated case to the Supreme Court via Petition for Review on Certiorari.
Issues:
- Procedural Issues
- Is certiorari the proper remedy instead of declaratory relief?
- Is declaratory relief still available after enforcement of EO 10?
- Substantive Issues
- Did the Mayor exercise judicial or quasi-judicial functions in issuing EO 10?
- Did EO 10 constitute grave abuse of discretion?
- Was petitioner’s due process right violated by demolition without court order?
- Was the LGU’s refusal to issue permits justified?
- Do FLAgT rights prevail over the municipal no-build zone ordinance?
- Does the DENR have primary jurisdiction over the dispute?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)