Case Digest (G.R. No. L-29802)
Facts:
In Swire Realty Development Corporation v. Jayne Yu, decided on March 9, 2015 under G.R. No. 207133, respondent Jayne Yu and petitioner Swire Realty Development Corporation entered into a Contract to Sell on July 25, 1995 for Unit 3007 of the Palace of Makati, measuring 137.30 square meters, for a total price of ₱7,519,371.80, payable in equal monthly installments until September 24, 1997. Yu also purchased a parking slot for ₱600,000.00, paying its downpayment of ₱20,000.00 on September 24, 1997, when she completed her payment for the condominium unit. Despite full payment, Swire failed to deliver and finish the unit within the agreed period. Respondent filed a Complaint for Rescission of Contract with Damages before the HLURB Expanded NCR Field Office (ENCRFO), which on October 19, 2004 dismissed the rescission claim as a slight breach but ordered Swire to finish the unit, pay ₱100,000.00 compensatory damages (or perform repairs), ₱20,000.00 moral damages, and ₱20,000.00 attorCase Digest (G.R. No. L-29802)
Facts:
- Contract to Sell and Payments
- On July 25, 1995, Swire Realty Development Corporation (petitioner) and Jayne Yu (respondent) executed a Contract to Sell for Unit 3007 of Palace of Makati (137.30 sqm) at a total price of ₱7,519,371.80, payable in equal monthly installments until September 24, 1997.
- Respondent also bought a parking slot for ₱600,000.00; on September 24, 1997, she paid the full contract price for the unit and made a ₱20,000.00 down payment for the slot.
- Failure to Deliver and HLURB Proceedings
- Petitioner failed to finish and deliver the unit by the agreed completion date. On October 19, 2004, the HLURB ENCRFO dismissed respondent’s complaint for rescission, ruling that only substantial breaches justify rescission and instead ordering repairs or compensatory damages (₱100,000), moral damages (₱20,000), and attorney’s fees (₱20,000).
- On March 30, 2006, the HLURB Board of Commissioners reversed the ENCRFO, declared the contract rescinded, ordered refund of ₱7,519,371.80 with 6% interest from extrajudicial demand, awarded attorney’s fees (₱20,000) and an administrative fine (₱10,000); motion for reconsideration was denied on June 14, 2007.
- Appeals to the Office of the President and the Court of Appeals
- Petitioner appealed to the Office of the President (OP) on August 7, 2007; on November 21, 2007, the OP dismissed the appeal as filed out of time. A motion for reconsideration was granted on February 17, 2009, reinstating the ENCRFO decision; respondent’s motion was denied August 18, 2011.
- Respondent then appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA). On January 24, 2013, the CA reversed the OP and reinstated the HLURB Board decision; petitioner’s motion for reconsideration was denied April 30, 2013.
Issues:
- Whether petitioner’s appeal to the Office of the President was timely filed.
- Whether the delay in completion and delivery of the condominium unit constitutes a substantial breach warranting rescission of the Contract to Sell.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)