Case Digest (G.R. No. 177807)
Facts:
In the early 1950s, retired Justice Emilio A. Gancayco purchased a 375-square-meter parcel of land at 746 Epifanio delos Santos Avenue (EDSA), Quezon City, covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No. RT114558. On March 27, 1956, the Quezon City Council enacted Ordinance No. 2904 mandating the construction of arcades—4.5 meters wide and 5 meters high—on commercial buildings along designated business zones on EDSA. An arcade was defined as a building portion overhanging the sidewalk serving as pedestrian protection. This ordinance aimed at pedestrian safety and built environment regulation in the absence of a national building code at that time. The ordinance was amended multiple times, but it applied to Justice Gancayco's property. In 1965, Justice Gancayco sought and obtained an exemption from this arcade construction requirement with the condition that he would demolish the arcade enclosure if required in the public interest.In March 2003, the Metropolitan Manila Development
Case Digest (G.R. No. 177807)
Facts:
# Background of the Property
- In the early 1950s, retired Justice Emilio A. Gancayco purchased a 375-square-meter parcel of land located at 746 Epifanio delos Santos Avenue (EDSA), Quezon City, covered by Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) No. RT114558.
# Ordinance No. 2904
- On March 27, 1956, the Quezon City Council enacted Ordinance No. 2904, requiring the construction of arcades for commercial buildings in designated business zones. An arcade is defined as a portion of a building projecting over the sidewalk, providing protection for pedestrians against rain or sun.
- The ordinance mandated that arcades be 4.50 meters wide and 5.00 meters high along EDSA, from Santolan Road to Liberty Avenue and from Central Boulevard to the Botocan transmission line.
- At the time, there was no national building code, so local governments regulated building construction.
# Amendments to the Ordinance
- On August 8, 1960, Ordinance No. 60-4477 exempted properties at the Quezon City-San Juan boundary from constructing arcades.
- Ordinance No. 60-4513 extended the exemption to commercial buildings from Balete Street to Seattle Street.
- Ordinance No. 6603, dated March 1, 1966, reduced the arcade width to three meters for buildings along V. Luna Road, Central District, Quezon City.
# Justice Gancayco's Exemption
- In 1965, Justice Gancayco sought an exemption from Ordinance No. 2904 for a two-storey building he was constructing on his property.
- On February 2, 1966, the City Council granted his request via Resolution No. 7161, S-66, with the condition that he would demolish the arcade enclosure at his own expense if public interest demanded it.
# MMDA's Demolition
- In March 2003, the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA) conducted clearing operations along EDSA pursuant to Metro Manila Council (MMC) Resolution No. 02-28, Series of 2002, which authorized the removal of illegal structures and obstructions.
- On April 28, 2003, the MMDA sent a notice of demolition to Justice Gancayco, alleging that a portion of his building violated the National Building Code in relation to Ordinance No. 2904. He was given 15 days to clear the arcade area.
- Justice Gancayco did not comply, and the MMDA proceeded to demolish the "wing walls" of his building, which was being used as a restaurant.
# Legal Proceedings
- On May 29, 2003, Justice Gancayco filed a Petition with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Quezon City, seeking to prohibit the MMDA and Quezon City from demolishing his property. He argued that the ordinance constituted a taking of private property without due process and just compensation and was discriminatory.
- The RTC ruled in favor of Justice Gancayco, declaring Ordinance No. 2904 unconstitutional and ordering the MMDA to restore the demolished portion of his building.
- The MMDA appealed, and the Court of Appeals (CA) upheld the validity of the ordinance but ruled that the MMDA exceeded its authority in demolishing the property.
Issues:
- Whether Justice Gancayco was estopped from challenging the validity of Ordinance No. 2904.
- Whether Ordinance No. 2904 is constitutional.
- Whether the wing wall of Justice Gancayco's building is a public nuisance.
- Whether the MMDA legally demolished Justice Gancayco's property.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Conclusion:
The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals' decision, upholding the validity of Ordinance No. 2904 but ruling that the MMDA acted beyond its authority in demolishing Justice Gancayco's property. The MMDA was held solely liable for the illegal demolition.
- On March 27, 1956, the Quezon City Council enacted Ordinance No. 2904, requiring the construction of arcades for commercial buildings in designated business zones. An arcade is defined as a portion of a building projecting over the sidewalk, providing protection for pedestrians against rain or sun.
- The ordinance mandated that arcades be 4.50 meters wide and 5.00 meters high along EDSA, from Santolan Road to Liberty Avenue and from Central Boulevard to the Botocan transmission line.
- At the time, there was no national building code, so local governments regulated building construction.
# Amendments to the Ordinance
- On August 8, 1960, Ordinance No. 60-4477 exempted properties at the Quezon City-San Juan boundary from constructing arcades.
- Ordinance No. 60-4513 extended the exemption to commercial buildings from Balete Street to Seattle Street.
- Ordinance No. 6603, dated March 1, 1966, reduced the arcade width to three meters for buildings along V. Luna Road, Central District, Quezon City.
# Justice Gancayco's Exemption
- In 1965, Justice Gancayco sought an exemption from Ordinance No. 2904 for a two-storey building he was constructing on his property.
- On February 2, 1966, the City Council granted his request via Resolution No. 7161, S-66, with the condition that he would demolish the arcade enclosure at his own expense if public interest demanded it.
# MMDA's Demolition
- In March 2003, the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA) conducted clearing operations along EDSA pursuant to Metro Manila Council (MMC) Resolution No. 02-28, Series of 2002, which authorized the removal of illegal structures and obstructions.
- On April 28, 2003, the MMDA sent a notice of demolition to Justice Gancayco, alleging that a portion of his building violated the National Building Code in relation to Ordinance No. 2904. He was given 15 days to clear the arcade area.
- Justice Gancayco did not comply, and the MMDA proceeded to demolish the "wing walls" of his building, which was being used as a restaurant.
# Legal Proceedings
- On May 29, 2003, Justice Gancayco filed a Petition with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Quezon City, seeking to prohibit the MMDA and Quezon City from demolishing his property. He argued that the ordinance constituted a taking of private property without due process and just compensation and was discriminatory.
- The RTC ruled in favor of Justice Gancayco, declaring Ordinance No. 2904 unconstitutional and ordering the MMDA to restore the demolished portion of his building.
- The MMDA appealed, and the Court of Appeals (CA) upheld the validity of the ordinance but ruled that the MMDA exceeded its authority in demolishing the property.
Issues:
- Whether Justice Gancayco was estopped from challenging the validity of Ordinance No. 2904.
- Whether Ordinance No. 2904 is constitutional.
- Whether the wing wall of Justice Gancayco's building is a public nuisance.
- Whether the MMDA legally demolished Justice Gancayco's property.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Conclusion:
The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals' decision, upholding the validity of Ordinance No. 2904 but ruling that the MMDA acted beyond its authority in demolishing Justice Gancayco's property. The MMDA was held solely liable for the illegal demolition.
- In 1965, Justice Gancayco sought an exemption from Ordinance No. 2904 for a two-storey building he was constructing on his property.
- On February 2, 1966, the City Council granted his request via Resolution No. 7161, S-66, with the condition that he would demolish the arcade enclosure at his own expense if public interest demanded it.
# MMDA's Demolition
- In March 2003, the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA) conducted clearing operations along EDSA pursuant to Metro Manila Council (MMC) Resolution No. 02-28, Series of 2002, which authorized the removal of illegal structures and obstructions.
- On April 28, 2003, the MMDA sent a notice of demolition to Justice Gancayco, alleging that a portion of his building violated the National Building Code in relation to Ordinance No. 2904. He was given 15 days to clear the arcade area.
- Justice Gancayco did not comply, and the MMDA proceeded to demolish the "wing walls" of his building, which was being used as a restaurant.
# Legal Proceedings
- On May 29, 2003, Justice Gancayco filed a Petition with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Quezon City, seeking to prohibit the MMDA and Quezon City from demolishing his property. He argued that the ordinance constituted a taking of private property without due process and just compensation and was discriminatory.
- The RTC ruled in favor of Justice Gancayco, declaring Ordinance No. 2904 unconstitutional and ordering the MMDA to restore the demolished portion of his building.
- The MMDA appealed, and the Court of Appeals (CA) upheld the validity of the ordinance but ruled that the MMDA exceeded its authority in demolishing the property.
Issues:
- Whether Justice Gancayco was estopped from challenging the validity of Ordinance No. 2904.
- Whether Ordinance No. 2904 is constitutional.
- Whether the wing wall of Justice Gancayco's building is a public nuisance.
- Whether the MMDA legally demolished Justice Gancayco's property.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Conclusion:
The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals' decision, upholding the validity of Ordinance No. 2904 but ruling that the MMDA acted beyond its authority in demolishing Justice Gancayco's property. The MMDA was held solely liable for the illegal demolition.
- On May 29, 2003, Justice Gancayco filed a Petition with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Quezon City, seeking to prohibit the MMDA and Quezon City from demolishing his property. He argued that the ordinance constituted a taking of private property without due process and just compensation and was discriminatory.
- The RTC ruled in favor of Justice Gancayco, declaring Ordinance No. 2904 unconstitutional and ordering the MMDA to restore the demolished portion of his building.
- The MMDA appealed, and the Court of Appeals (CA) upheld the validity of the ordinance but ruled that the MMDA exceeded its authority in demolishing the property.
Issues:
- Whether Justice Gancayco was estopped from challenging the validity of Ordinance No. 2904.
- Whether Ordinance No. 2904 is constitutional.
- Whether the wing wall of Justice Gancayco's building is a public nuisance.
- Whether the MMDA legally demolished Justice Gancayco's property.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)