Title
Land Bank of the Philippines vs. Cacayuran
Case
G.R. No. 191667
Decision Date
Apr 17, 2013
Agoo Municipality's loan agreements with Land Bank, secured by public plaza collateral, were declared null and void due to ultra vires acts, invalid resolutions, and violation of public dominion laws.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 191667)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Redevelopment Plan and First Loan
    • From 2005 to 2006, the Sangguniang Bayan (SB) of Agoo passed resolutions to implement a multi-phased Redevelopment Plan for Agoo Public Plaza, including Imelda Garden and Rizal Monument.
    • SB Resolution No. 68-2005 (April 19, 2005), ratified by Resolution No. 139-2005 (October 4, 2005), authorized Mayor Eriguel to obtain a ₱4,000,000 loan from Land Bank, to mortgage the 2,323.75 sqm Plaza Lot as collateral, and to assign a portion of the Municipality’s IRA and project income.
    • On November 21, 2005, Land Bank granted the First Loan; proceeds funded construction of ten kiosks in Imelda Garden, which were subsequently rented out.
  • Phase II and Second Loan
    • SB Resolution No. 58-2006 (March 7, 2006), ratified by Resolution No. 128-2006 (September 5, 2006), approved construction of a commercial center on the Plaza Lot, authorized a second loan under the same securities.
    • On October 20, 2006, Land Bank granted the Second Loan of ₱28,000,000; construction completed, later known as Agoo People’s Center (APC).
  • Public Opposition and Taxpayer’s Complaint
    • Resident Eduardo Cacayuran led a signature campaign and filed a Manifesto and December 8, 2006 letter requesting certified copies of resolutions and loan agreements, alleging irregularity and desecration of public park.
    • Unable to obtain documents, Cacayuran, invoking taxpayer status, filed a Complaint (December 2006) against Land Bank and SB members, assailing the validity of the Subject Loans and collateralization of public-dominion property.
  • Judicial Proceedings
    • RTC Decision (April 10, 2007): declared the Subject Loans null and void, held SB resolutions ultra vires, and ruled the Plaza Lot cannot be mortgaged.
    • CA Decision (March 26, 2010): affirmed with modification (exempting Vice Mayor from personal liability), upheld Cacayuran’s standing, invalidity of resolutions, public-dominion status of Plaza Lot, and ultra vires nature of the loans.
    • Land Bank filed this Petition for Review on Certiorari before the Supreme Court.

Issues:

  • Whether Eduardo Cacayuran, as a taxpayer, has standing to challenge the Subject Loans.
  • Whether the SB Resolutions authorizing the loans were validly passed under the Local Government Code.
  • Whether the Subject Loans are ultra vires and thus void.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.