Case Digest (G.R. No. 211175)
Facts:
Atty. Reyes G. Geromo, Florencio Buentipo, Jr., Ernaldo Yambot and Lydia Bustamante v. La Paz Housing and Development Corporation and Government Service Insurance System, G.R. No. 211175, January 18, 2017, Supreme Court Second Division, Mendoza, J., writing for the Court. The petition is a Rule 45 Petition for Review on Certiorari contesting the Court of Appeals’ September 26, 2013 Decision and January 29, 2014 Resolution which affirmed the Office of the President’s (OP) January 11, 2012 dismissal of complaints before the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB).Petitioners (buyers) acquired individual housing units in the Adelina 1‑A Subdivision in San Pedro, Laguna from La Paz Housing and Development Corporation (La Paz) via deeds of conditional sale financed by Government Service Insurance System (GSIS). The affected units were located along the old Litlit Creek. Within two years of occupancy (from 1987 onward) notable cracks and signs of settlement appeared; the buyers and the homeowners association requested remedial action from La Paz. La Paz provided P3,000 each to help construct a riprap/retaining wall but denied further liability, attributing damage to the 1990 earthquake and to subsequent renovations by the buyers.
In May–June 2002 the Municipal Engineer and the Mines and Geosciences Bureau (MGB) of the DENR inspected the properties and reported differential settlement and probable hydrocompaction of backfill/alluvial deposits. The petitioners filed complaints with the HLURB (consolidated docketed cases), asserting implied warranty against hidden defects and negligence in building on unstable land. La Paz defended it complied with permits and building standards and pointed to PHILVOLCS’ finding of an active fault portion; GSIS moved to dismiss for lack of cause of action, characterizing itself merely as lender.
The HLURB Arbiter (Aug. 9, 2004) found La Paz liable, ordered repairs or substitution and awarded actual, moral, exemplary damages and attorney’s fees; GSIS was absolved. The HLURB Board of Commissioners reversed the Arbiter (Sept. 12, 2005) for lack of proof of noncompliance with building standards. The petitioners’ motion for reconsideration was denied (Jan. 31, 2006). The OP initially dismissed the appeal for late filing (Dec. 18, 2006), but the Court of Appeals reversed that procedural dismissal (Mar. 31, 2009) and ordered the OP to resolve on the merits. The OP then dismissed on the merits (Jan. 11, 2012). The Court of Appeals affir...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Can petitioners prevail against La Paz for breach of implied warranty against hidden defects (or on the basis of negligence/res ipsa loquitur) despite deeds being conditional sales?
- Is GSIS jointly and severally liable with La Paz for the defective housing units?
- What damages, if any, are recov...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)