Case Digest (G.R. No. 211780)
Facts:
Cezar Yatco Real Estate Services, Inc., GRD Property Resources, Inc., Gamaliel Pascual, Jr., Ma. Lourdes Limjap Pascual, and Aurora Pijuan v. Bel‑Air Village Association, Inc., represented by its President Antonio Guerrero, and the Register of Deeds, G.R. No. 211780, November 21, 2018, Supreme Court Third Division, Leonen, J. (Decision promulgated October 21, 2019). Petitioners (several lot owners and developers) challenged the validity of a vote by the homeowners’ association of Bel‑Air Village (the Association) to extend the Deed Restrictions that were annotated on lot titles. The Deed Restrictions were imposed by Makati Development Corporation when Bel‑Air was developed in the 1950s; they contained a provision that the restrictions “shall remain in force for fifty years from January 15, 1957,” with a further proviso that the Association “may, from time to time, add new ones, amend or abolish particular restrictions or parts thereof by majority rule.”Anticipating the 2007 expiration, the Association formed a committee, circulated proposed amendments, and in October 2006 its board proposed extending the term to August 23, 2032. At a special membership meeting on December 12, 2006, 718 of 934 eligible members attended (including by proxy); of those voting, about 72% approved the extension, 3% rejected it, and 25% abstained. Petitioners, who had voted against the extension, filed a Verified Complaint with the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB) on February 8, 2007, alleging that the 50‑year term was not itself a “restriction” and thus could not be extended, that no valid quorum existed because proxies were not notarized, and that compulsory membership infringed freedom of association.
The HLURB Regional Field Office (May 21, 2008) declared the extension and related resolutions null and void, reasoning that the 50‑year term was only a statement of effectivity and not amendable, and that proxies affecting real rights required notarization. The HLURB Board of Commissioners reversed (Dec. 9, 2008), finding the proviso authorized amendment by majority. The Board denied reconsideration (Jan. 28, 2009). The Office of the President (Executive Secretary) reversed the Board and reinstated the Regional Field Office decision (Dec. 29, 2009), but on reconsideration the Office of the President granted the Association’s motion and reversed itself, reinstating the Board of Commissioners’ decision that the extension was valid (May 19, 2011), and later denied reconsideration (Aug. 9, 2011).
Petitioners appealed to the Court of Appeals, which affirmed the Office of the President’s May 19, 2011 Resolution and upheld the validity of the extension and ...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Can members of Bel‑Air Village Association, Inc., by majority vote, extend the Deed Restrictions’ term of effectivity?
- Was the extension of the Deed Restrictions’ term validly voted upon by a majority of the Association’s members (i.e., were the proxies and the quorum valid)?
- Can petitioners be compelled to maintain membership in the Association despite claims that compulsory membership vi...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)