Case Digest (G.R. No. 218341)
Facts:
Fort Bonifacio Development Corporation v. Manuel M. Domingo, G.R. No. 218341, December 07, 2022, the Supreme Court Third Division, Gaerlan, J., writing for the Court. Petitioner is Fort Bonifacio Development Corporation (FBDC); respondent is Manuel M. Domingo; the dispute arises from a Trade Contract between FBDC and MS Maxco Company, Inc.On June 5, 2000, FBDC and MS Maxco entered into a Trade Contract for structural and partial architectural works on the Bonifacio Ridge Condominium Project. The contract provided for a 5% retention money, to be withheld for one year after practical completion (defect-liability period January–December 2005). Clause 19.1 prohibited MS Maxco from assigning any rights, obligations or liabilities under the contract without FBDC’s written consent.
MS Maxco encountered multiple third‑party claims and garnishments: a CIAC enforcement (Asia‑Con Builders), an NLRC case (Nicolas Consigna), and an RTC Makati enforcement (Concrete Masters, Inc.). Because of defects and delays, FBDC terminated the Trade Contract by letter dated August 24, 2004, engaged another contractor, and deducted completion/rectification expenses from the retention money while acknowledging MS Maxco was still entitled to payment for work already done.
MS Maxco executed a notarized Deed of Assignment on February 28, 2005, assigning P804,068.21 of its receivables from FBDC to Domingo. Domingo notified FBDC in April/October 2005 and demanded payment from the retention money; FBDC refused, citing lack of maturity of the retention and pending garnishment orders. FBDC paid the garnishing creditors P5,850,916.72 and advanced P1,567,779.12 for rectification, producing aggregate deductions that, according to FBDC’s accounting, exhausted the retention (retention P17,237,060.83; total liabilities/deductions P17,418,695.84).
Domingo filed a Complaint for Collection on February 7, 2006 in the RTC of Pasay City (Civil Case No. 06‑0200‑CFM) against MS Maxco and FBDC. FBDC moved to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction among other grounds; the motion was denied and the Court (RTC) proceeded to trial. On December 18, 2009, the RTC rendered judgment declaring Domingo the successful party as regards MS Maxco and directing FBDC to secure P804,068.21 in the retention money in Domingo’s favor as preferred creditor and awarding the amount with interest.
FBDC appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA). In a Decision dated November 20, 2014 (CA‑G.R. CV No. 96338), the CA dismissed the appeal, modified the RTC decision by holding FBDC liable to pay Domingo P804,068.21 with legal interest from the date of finality as actual or compensatory damages, and deleted certain prono...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Is FBDC liable to pay Manuel M. Domingo the amount of P804,068.21 representing a portion of the retention money subject of the Deed of Assignment?
- If not, is the Deed of Assignment enforceable against FBDC without FBDC’s written consent and/or notwithstanding the exhaustion...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)