Title
Source: Supreme Court
Cagayan de Oro City Water District vs. Pasal
Case
G.R. No. 202305
Decision Date
Nov 11, 2021
COWD awarded Rio Verde a bulk water supply contract, later disputed by COA for non-compliance with procurement laws. Despite COA's fraud findings and recommendations for criminal charges, the Supreme Court upheld arbitration, citing separability of the arbitration clause and judicial restraint.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 202305)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Formation of the Bulk Water Supply Agreement (BWSA) and Supplemental Agreement
    • Under PD 198, Cagayan de Oro City Water District (COWD) was created in 1973 to manage local water utilities.
    • After public bidding in 2004, COWD and Rio Verde Water Consortium, Inc. (Rio Verde) executed the BWSA on December 23, 2004, and a January 21, 2005 Supplemental Agreement. These contracts provided for:
      • Supply of 50,000–150,000 m³/day of bulk water for 25 years.
      • Initial water rate of ₱10.45/m³, with a parametric price-adjustment formula.
      • An arbitration clause (Article 19) setting out procedures for amicable settlement and final arbitration under Philippine law.
  • Dispute over water-rate adjustment and COA findings
    • In January 2007, Rio Verde began deliveries at 40,000 m³/day, billing at ₱11.52/m³ under the amended formula. COWD contested deviations from the Model Contract.
    • The Office of the Government Corporate Counsel (OGCC) in 2008 advised COWD to reform the BWSA to align with the Model Contract.
    • The Commission on Audit (COA) issued:
      • Notice of Disallowance (Sept. 2008) for payment of ₱132,414,165.40 to Rio Verde.
      • Fraud Audit Observation Memorandum (Nov. 2009), finding bidding irregularities, non-responsiveness of Rio Verde, deviations from the Model Contract, and recommending nullification of the BWSA and criminal charges under RA 3019.
  • Compel-to-arbitrate proceedings before the RTC
    • In March 2011, Rio Verde formally requested price adjustment; COWD refused, citing COA findings. Rio Verde then filed S.P. No. 2011-190 to compel arbitration under Article 19 and Section 6 of RA 876.
    • The Regional Trial Court (Branch 38) issued Orders (Mar. 23 and May 3, 2012) directing COWD to arbitrate, invoking the separability doctrine and competence-competence principle.

Issues:

  • Whether COWD may challenge the RTC’s compel-to-arbitrate orders via certiorari.
  • Whether the RTC gravely abused its discretion by directing arbitration despite the ongoing COA investigation.
  • Whether COA’s recommendation to nullify the BWSA and file criminal/civil charges precludes arbitration.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.