Title
EPG Construction Co., Inc. vs. Court of Appeals
Case
G.R. No. 103372
Decision Date
Jun 22, 1992
EPG Construction failed to repair defective air-conditioning units in UP Law Library despite guarantee provision, held liable for damages; corporate president absolved.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 103372)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Contractual Relationship and Project Details
    • EPG Construction Co., Inc. (Petitioner) and the University of the Philippines (UP) entered into a contract for the construction of the UP Law Library Building for the stipulated price of P7,545,000.
    • The contract included a guarantee clause requiring EPG to repair any defects for one year from the date of substantial completion and acceptance, and to be liable for collapse within 15 years due to defective construction or materials.
  • Completion and Acceptance of Work
    • The building was formally turned over by EPG to UP.
    • UP issued a certificate of acceptance dated January 13, 1983, certifying that the work was completed satisfactorily and recommending release of retention to EPG.
  • Discovery of Defects and Repair Offers
    • Around July 1983, UP complained about six air-conditioning units on the third floor not cooling properly.
    • EPG agreed to shoulder expenses for repairs amounting to P38,000 but did not proceed with the repair.
    • UP repeated complaints; EPG offered to repair the system for P194,000. UP insisted repairs be free under the guarantee provision; EPG demurred.
    • UP contracted another company to repair the defects for P190,000.
  • Legal Proceedings
    • UP demanded reimbursement and liquidated damages from EPG; demand was rejected.
    • UP sued EPG and its president, Emmanuel P. de Guzman, in the Regional Trial Court (RTC).
    • De Guzman’s motion to dismiss for lack of cause of action was denied.
    • RTC ruled both defendants jointly and severally liable for actual damages (P190,000), liquidated damages (P50,000), attorney’s fees (P10,000), and costs.
    • Petitioners appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA), which affirmed the RTC decision.
    • Petitioners elevated the case to the Supreme Court, raising issues about estoppel, force majeure, and corporate personality.

Issues:

  • Whether UP’s certificate of acceptance estops it from holding EPG liable for defects discovered after acceptance.
  • Whether the defects in the air-conditioning system were caused by force majeure or a fortuitous event (specifically frequent brownouts).
  • Whether Emmanuel P. de Guzman, as president of EPG, can be held solidarily liable with EPG Construction Co., Inc. for the damages awarded.

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. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.