Case Digest (G.R. No. 194239)
Facts:
West Tower Condominium Corporation, on behalf of the Residents of West Tower Condominium and in representation of Barangay Bangkal, and others, including minors and generations yet unborn, v. First Philippine Industrial Corporation, First Gen Corporation and their respective Board of Directors and Officers, John Does, and Richard Does, G.R. No. 194239, June 16, 2015, the Supreme Court En Banc, Velasco Jr., J., writing for the Court.Respondent First Philippine Industrial Corporation (FPIC) operated two long-distance oil pipelines—the White Oil Pipeline (WOPL) and the Black Oil Pipeline (BOPL)—transporting a substantial portion of Metro Manila’s petroleum needs. In mid-2010 residents of West Tower Condominium smelled fuel; a leak was discovered in the condominium basement on July 10, 2010 and was later traced by UP–NIGS to the WOPL. The leak forced evacuation of residents, shutdown of power at West Tower and remedial works by the condominium which eventually set up treatment to separate fuel from wastewater.
On November 15, 2010 West Tower Condominium Corporation filed a petition for the issuance of a writ of kalikasan on behalf of affected residents and surrounding communities, seeking among other reliefs a cease-and-desist order, inspection/replacement of the 117-km WOPL, environmental rehabilitation, periodic reports, and a special trust fund; petitioners also sought temporary restraint on pipeline operation. On November 19, 2010 the Court issued a Writ of Kalikasan and a Temporary Environmental Protection Order (TEPO) enjoining FPIC and First Gen Corporation (FGC) from operating the WOPL and directing structural checks and a report within 60 days.
FPIC initially denied liability but submitted returns and, on January 21, 2011, a Report on Pipeline Integrity Check describing testing and preventive measures (pressure tests, in-line inspections, cathodic protection, patrols, isolation valves, etc.). FGC denied ownership/operation of the pipelines and filed its compliance report. Petitioners filed civil and criminal complaints arising from the leak. The Court clarified on May 31, 2011 that the writ/TEPO covered only the WOPL and allowed resumption of the BOPL; petitioners challenged that clarification and moved to enjoin the BOPL reopening.
To expedite resolution the Supreme Court remanded the case to the Court of Appeals (CA) by Resolution dated November 22, 2011 to conduct hearings and submit a report and recommendation. The CA held conferences, appointed amici curiae for technical assistance, conducted an ocular inspection (April 15, 2011) and, after hearings, submitted a 156-page Report and Recommendation dated December 21, 2012 proposing (inter alia) that FPIC obtain a DOE certification that the WOPL is safe for commercial operation (considering appropriate leak-detection systems and replacement of patched segments), that some intervenors be impleaded, that a special trust fund be denied for lack of basis, and that FGC and individual directors not be held liable under the TEPO (without prejudice to civil/criminal proceedings).
The Supreme Court in a July 30, 2013 Resolution adopted the CA recommendation that FPIC secure DOE certification before resuming the WOPL, and directed DOE to consult DOST on leak-detection systems. DOE issued a Certification on October 25, 2013 stating that, based on FPIC’s Pipeline Integrity Management System and consultations with DOST, the WOPL was safe to resume commercial operations subject to monitoring, validation and specific conditions. DOE later (August 5, 2014) furnished the Court a detailed letter enumerating preparatory activities, test-run procedures, and commissioning steps (including expanded borehole monitoring, pig runs, mass-balance computations, instrument calibration, and inter-agency witnessing) that it recommended before reopening.
Given the technical questions, the Court reviewed the CA report, DOE certification and letter, the parties’ submissions and amici reports, and solicited further comments. On June 16, 2015 the Supreme Court issued its decision adopting the CA report with modifications: it confirmed the standing of West Tower residents and other intervenors with juridical personality, denied the...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Do petitioners (West Tower Condominium Corporation, West Tower residents, and intervening organizations) have the legal capacity and are they real parties-in-interest to maintain the petition for a writ of kalikasan?
- Should the Court convert the Temporary Environmental Protection Order into a Permanent Environmental Protection Order (or otherwise permit or enjoin the reopening of the WOPL) in light of the DOE certification and related administrative findings?
- Should a special trust fund be created by respondents to answer for similar future contingencies?
- May First Gen Corporation and the individual directors and officers of FPIC and FGC be held liable under the ...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)