Title
EPG Construction Co. vs. Vigilar
Case
G.R. No. 131544
Decision Date
Mar 16, 2001
Construction firms completed additional housing units for DPWH without written contracts or appropriations. Despite void contracts, SC ruled in favor of petitioners under quantum meruit, directing COA to determine compensation for unpaid work.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 131544)

Facts of the Case

In 1983, the Ministry of Human Settlement initiated a housing project in Pasig City based on a Memorandum of Agreement with the Ministry of Public Works and Highways, which included the construction of 145 housing units. Subsequently, individual contracts were entered into between the DPWH and the petitioners, covering approximately two-thirds of the project. After fulfilling the basic contract requirements, the petitioners, based on verbal assurances from the DPWH Undersecretary, undertook additional construction work without formal contracts or appropriations, leading to an unpaid balance of ₱5,918,315.63 for these additional efforts.

Administrative Actions and Legal Proceedings

The contractors’ claims for payment were recommended by the DPWH Assistant Secretary, though classified under quantum meruit, necessitating the approval of the Commission on Audit (COA). The COA indicated that payment could only proceed if funds were available. Although budgetary allocations were eventually made for the claimed amount, the DPWH Secretary denied the payment on the grounds of the absence of appropriated funds and valid contracts.

Legal Issues and Contentions

The core legal issue centers on whether the petitioners are entitled to compensation for additional work performed under circumstances deemed to create "implied contracts" absent the necessary legal compliance. The respondent argues that these implied contracts are void due to the lack of appropriations and written agreements, thus inferring that the government bears no liability for such claims due to statutory violations.

Court’s Analysis and Rulings

The Court agreed that the absence of proper appropriations made the implied contracts void as they did not comply with the stipulations of the Administrative Code of 1987 regarding public contracts. However, the Court emphasized the importance of ensuring substantial justice, invoking the principle of quantum meruit to justify compensation for the contractors based on the work they accomplished in good faith, believing that appropriate funding would ultimately materialize.

Precedent Consideration

The Court referenced previous decisions such as Eslao vs. Commission on Audit and Royal Trust Construction vs. COA, where contractors were allowed to recover costs on a quantum meruit basis even when legal stipulations were not strictly followed. It established that while the contracts were void, the work completed conferred benefits upon the public and government without formal challenges at the time of execution.

State Immunity Argument

The respondent’s invocation of State immunity from lawsuits was dismissed, noting exceptions when the avoidance of

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.