Case Digest (G.R. No. 211301)
Facts:
Park Developers Incorporated, Reynaldo Jesus B. Pasco, Sr., Rolando Golla, Nenita B. Pasco, Julito Caparas, Teresa Caparas and Constancio Bernardo v. Elizabeth D. Daclan, G.R. No. 211301, November 27, 2019, Supreme Court Second Division, Inting, J., writing for the Court.
On September 24, 2003, Elizabeth D. Daclan purchased from Park Developers Incorporated (PDI) a family estate memorial lot at Sanctuary Memorial Park, Naic, Cavite, by executing an "Application for Continual Use" with a total contract price of P708,000.00 payable in 36 monthly installments; by the time litigation began she had paid P457,760.74. In 2005 she learned from the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB) that it had not issued a Certificate of Registration or License to Sell in favor of PDI.
On January 13, 2006, Daclan filed a civil action for annulment of contract with damages against PDI and its corporate officers (the other petitioners). On March 31, 2011, Branch 67, Regional Trial Court (RTC), Pasig City rendered judgment annulling the Application for Continual Use, ordering petitioners, jointly and solidarily, to return P457,760.74 plus legal interest, and awarding moral damages (P50,000), exemplary damages (P50,000), and attorney’s fees (P100,000). The RTC denied Daclan’s compulsory counterclaim.
Petitioners filed a notice of appeal under Section 2(a), Rule 41 of the Rules of Court; the RTC gave the appeal due course on July 11, 2011. Their sole assignment of error contested the RTC’s jurisdiction, arguing that the HLURB—not the RTC—had primary jurisdiction over disputes concerning memorial lots. On August 12, 2013, the Court of Appeals (CA) dismissed the appeal under Section 2, Rule 50 of the Rules of Court because it raised only a pure question of law; the CA’s dismissal was affirmed by its February 10, 2014 resolution denying reconsideration.
Petitioners then filed a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 before the Supreme Court seeking to set aside the CA Dec...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Was the Court of Appeals correct in dismissing petitioners' appeal pursuant to Section 2, Rule 50 of the Rules of Court on the ground that it raised only questions of law?
- Does the HLURB (now the Human Settlements Adjudication Commission/HSAC) have primary or exclusive jurisdiction over actions to annul contracts for the purchase or continual use of memorial lots for lack of a certificate of registration/license to sell and absence of improvements?
- Is the RTC judgment annulling the Application for Continual Use and awarding restitution, moral and exemplary damages,...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)