G.R. No. 216492 - Garin vs. City of Muntinlupa

Artoo P. Garin (petitioner), a resident of Pasig City, intended to build a house in Katarungan Village, Muntinlupa City.
Katarungan Village Homeowners Association, Inc. (respondent) refused to issue a homeowners association clearance to Garin because he was not a member and had not paid assessment fees.
Muntinlupa City Ordinance No. 02-047 (Section 10) required a clearance from the homeowners association as a prerequisite to securing a building permit.

Garin requested clearance from Katarungan but clarified he was not a member.
Katarungan refused clearance until Garin paid fees and joined the association.
Garin filed a Petition for Mandamus with preliminary injunction to compel the City of Muntinlupa to process his building permit application without the homeowners association clearance and challenged the constitutionality of Section 10 of the City Ordinance.
The Regional Trial Court (RTC) denied the injunction and temporarily suspended proceedings pending exhaustion of administrative remedies with the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB).
RTC denied Garin’s motion for reconsideration, emphasizing that the issue was primarily between Garin and Katarungan and that HLURB had jurisdiction over intra-association disputes.
Garin filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari with the Supreme Court.

Petitioner argued the constitutionality of Section 10 could be addressed without exhausting administrative remedies.
He contended the ordinance delegated unbridled authority to the homeowners association and improperly required membership and payment.
Petitioner alleged no privity of contract existed with Katarungan as the deed of sale lacked provisions on automatic membership.
Respondents Katarungan and Muntinlupa City contended the association’s authority was based on Republic Act No. 9904 (Magna Carta for Homeowners and Homeowners’ Associations) and related HLURB resolutions.
They asserted the HLURB had exclusive jurisdiction over intra-association disputes and that the City Ordinance was a valid exercise of police power.
Respondents maintained that petitioner’s remedy was through administrative channels before HLURB and that the RTC’s order was properly appealable via a petition for review.

Whether a Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 is the proper remedy to question the RTC’s Orders suspending the case and denying preliminary injunction.

Whether Petitioner has complied with the requisites for judicial review to question the constitutionality of Section 10 of Muntinlupa City Ordinance No. 02-047.

Whether the RTC erred in ruling that primary jurisdiction over the dispute lies with the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board.

Whether the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board has jurisdiction over disputes between a non-member homeowner and the homeowners’ association.