G.R. No. 156364 - Hulst vs. PR Builders, Inc.

Jacobus Bernhard Hulst and spouse Ida Johanna Hulst-Van Ijzeren (Dutch nationals) entered into a Contract to Sell with PR Builders, Inc. for a 210-sqm residential unit in Laurel, Batangas.
Respondent failed to complete the project by June 1995; spouses Hulst filed a complaint for rescission with HLURB (HLRB Case No. IV6-071196-0618).
On April 22, 1997, HLURB Arbiter rendered judgment rescinding the contract and ordering respondent to reimburse P3,187,500.00 purchase price plus 12% interest, and to pay actual, moral, exemplary damages, attorney’s fees and costs.

Wife assigned her rights to petitioner; HLURB issued Writ of Execution (Aug. 21, 1997).
Ex-Officio Sheriff levied first on personal properties, then returned unsatisfied; an Alias Writ issued (Jan. 26, 1999).
On March 23, 1999, 15 parcels of respondent’s land were levied; sale set on April 28, 2000.
Respondent moved to quash levy as excessive; no restraining order issued. Auction proceeded; Holly Properties Realty Corp. bought all parcels for P5,450,653.33; net P5,313,040.00 turned over to petitioner.

On August 28, 2000, HLURB Arbiter and Director set aside the levy, directing sheriff to levy only sufficient property based on fair market value determinants.
Petitioner filed Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition with CA; on October 30, 2002, CA dismissed petition, affirming HLURB order.
Petitioner filed this Rule 45 petition before the Supreme Court challenging CA’s affirmance.

Did the Court of Appeals gravely err in affirming the HLURB Order setting aside the sheriff’s levy on respondent’s properties?
Can foreign nationals contract to acquire real property in the Philippines and what effect does this have on petitioner’s entitlement to recovery?