Case Digest (G.R. No. 180206) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
In The City Government of Baguio City v. Atty. Brain Masweng, et al. (G.R. No. 180206, February 4, 2009), petitioners—represented by Mayor Reinaldo Bautista, Jr., the Anti-Squatting Committee (Atty. Melchor Carlos R. Rabanes), the City Buildings and Architecture Office (Oscar Flores) and the Public Order and Safety Office (Emmanuel Reyes)—sought certiorari relief from the Court of Appeals. They challenged the NCIP-CAR Regional Hearing Office’s issuance of temporary restraining orders (TROs) dated October 16 and 19, 2006, and a preliminary injunction dated November 10, 2006, in Case No. 31-CAR-06. These writs enjoined enforcement of three Demolition Orders issued by former Baguio City Mayor Braulio D. Yaranon on September 19, 2006, which directed the dismantling of structures built without permits by Lazaro Bawas, Alexander Ampaguey, Sr., and Narciso Basatan on a portion of the Busol Watershed Reservation at Aurora Hill, Baguio City, in violation of Presidential Decree No. 705, P Case Digest (G.R. No. 180206) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Parties and Background
- Petitioners: City Government of Baguio City (Mayor Reinaldo Bautista, Jr.), Anti-Squatting Committee, City Buildings and Architecture Office, Public Order and Safety Office
- Respondents: Atty. Brain Masweng (NCIP‐CAR Regional Officer), Elvin Gumangan, Narciso Basatan, Lazaro Bawas
- Chronology of Events
- Issuance of Demolition Orders (September 2006)
- Three Demolition Orders by Mayor Yaranon for illegal structures on Busol Watershed Reservation
- Violations cited: lack of building permits; breach of PD 705, PD 1096, RA 7279
- Petition for Injunction before NCIP‐CAR (October 2006)
- Private respondents claimed ancestral land rights recognized under Proclamation No. 15 (1922)
- Filed for TRO and preliminary injunction to stop demolition
- NCIP Actions
- TROs issued on October 16 and 19, 2006 restraining demolition enforcement for 20 days
- Resolution (November 10, 2006) granting preliminary injunction upon P10,000 bond each
- Court of Appeals Proceedings
- Petition for certiorari by City Government
- CA decision (April 16, 2007) and resolution (September 11, 2007)
- Affirmed NCIP jurisdiction and injunctive relief
- Held Baguio City not exempt from IPRA
- Contentions of the Parties
- Petitioners’ Arguments
- NCIP lacks jurisdiction to entertain main injunction actions
- Baguio City exempt under IPRA Sec. 78; reservation inalienable; rights contingent/non‐existent
- Demolition orders valid exercise of police power
- Private Respondents’ Arguments
- NCIP has original and exclusive jurisdiction over ancestral land disputes
- IPRA covers Baguio City and recognizes native title as never public land
- Proclamation No. 15 recognized ancestral claims; judicial/executive acknowledgment
Issues:
- Jurisdictional Scope
- Does the NCIP have original and exclusive jurisdiction to hear and decide a petition for injunction over alleged ancestral lands?
- Validity of Ancestral Land Claim and Injunctive Relief
- Were private respondents’ ancestral rights recognized such that injunctive relief against demolition is warranted?
- Does Proclamation No. 15 confer vested rights conflicting with the forest reservation status?
- Applicability of IPRA to Baguio City
- Is Baguio City exempt from IPRA’s coverage and NCIP jurisdiction under Sec. 78 of the Act?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)