Case Digest (G.R. No. 103882)
Facts:
Civil Case No. 2229-P began on December 19, 1961 before Branch 7 of the Court of First Instance of Rizal (Pasay City) when the Republic of the Philippines (represented by the Solicitor General) sued Pasay City and Republic Real Estate Corporation (“RREC”) for recovery of possession, damages and nullification of Pasay City Ordinance Nos. 121 (May 6, 1958) and 158 (April 21, 1959) and the April 24, 1959 Reclamation Agreement thereunder. Pursuant to Republic Act No. 1899 (June 22, 1957), these ordinances empowered RREC, as Pasay’s attorney-in-fact, to dredge, fill, and reclaim up to 300 hectares of foreshore lands along Manila Bay, to finance the work by lending to the city, and in turn to purchase up to 60% of the reclaimed area at P10.00 per square meter. On April 26, 1962 the trial court issued a writ of preliminary injunction halting the project. In 1965–1967 President Marcos reserved identified parcels of reclaimed land (24.5 ha, later 25.8 ha) under Swo-04-0880 for the CulCase Digest (G.R. No. 103882)
Facts:
- Enabling law and municipal project
- Republic Act No. 1899 (June 22, 1957) authorized chartered cities and municipalities to reclaim “foreshore lands” bordering them and to build docking/harbor facilities.
- On May 6, 1958, Pasay City passed Ordinance No. 121 granting authority to reclaim up to 300 ha of foreshore lands and empowering the Mayor to award contracts.
- On April 21, 1959, Pasay City enacted Ordinance No. 158 amending Ordinance 121 and on April 24, 1959 City Mayor Pablo Cuneta, for Pasay City, signed a Reclamation Agreement with Republic Real Estate Corporation (RREC). Under the Agreement:
- RREC would finance and administer the project as Pasay City’s attorney-in-fact, borrowing exclusively from RREC at 6% interest;
- RREC had an irrevocable option to purchase 60% of reclaimed lands at ₱10/m² upon City Engineer certification of 50 ha reclaimed;
- Contracts and subcontracts were to be publicly bid, and all reclaimed lands belonged to Pasay City, subject to RREC’s option.
- Judicial and executive developments
- On December 19, 1961, the Republic of the Philippines sued Pasay City and RREC in CFI Rizal (Pasay) to annul the ordinances and Agreement, recover possession of Manila Bay, and obtain damages, alleging the project spanned submerged lands and lacked bidding. A preliminary injunction issued April 26, 1962. Pasay City and RREC, joined by intervenors who bought lots from RREC, resisted; the Pasay Law and Conscience Union joined the Republic.
- On March 24, 1972, the trial court:
- Upheld Ordinances 121/158 and the Agreement as valid under RA 1899;
- Dismissed the Republic’s complaint;
- Enjoined RREC/Pasay City to secure DPW approval of plans/specs and conduct public bidding before resuming work; lifting of injunction upon compliance.
- While the appeal was pending, President Marcos issued:
- P.D. No. 3-A (Jan. 11, 1973), declaring all reclamation limited to the national government and ordering existing contracts taken over on a quantum meruit basis;
- P.D. No. 15 (Oct. 5, 1972) and P.D. No. 774 (Aug. 22, 1975), creating the Cultural Center of the Philippines (CCP) and assigning reclaimed lands (approx. 25.8 ha and 50.5 ha, respectively) to it;
- P.D. No. 1084 (Feb. 4, 1977), creating the Public Estates Authority (PEA) to undertake and administer all reclamations.
- On January 28, 1992, the Court of Appeals affirmed the CFI decision with modifications:
- Deleted the public-bidding and DPW-approval requirement as moot;
- Ordered turnover of 21 ha of vacant spaces to Pasay City;
- Sustained RREC’s option to purchase 60% of those 21 ha.
- On April 28, 1992, on RREC/Pasay motion for reconsideration, the CA amended its decision, finding 55 ha reclaimed and ordering turnover of nine CCP-titled lots (35 ha) to Pasay City/RREC.
- In 1997, this Court remanded to the CA for findings on the actual area reclaimed and “open spaces” in the CCP Complex. The CA commissioners’ report reaffirmed a 55 ha reclamation based on certain government letters.
Issues:
- G.R. No. 103882 (Republic and CCP vs. Pasay City/RREC/CA)
- Whether Ordinances 121/158 and the Reclamation Agreement are valid under RA 1899 or ultra vires, and thus void.
- Whether the CA erred in ordering turnover of nine CCP-titled lots to Pasay City and RREC.
- G.R. No. 105276 (Pasay City/RREC vs. Republic/CA)
- Whether P.D. No. 3-A is unconstitutional as an undue delegation/usurpation of legislative power, impairing contracts and depriving property without just compensation or due process.
- Whether Pasay City/RREC are entitled to damages or a larger land award (55 ha) from the Republic.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)