Title
Ka Kuen Chua vs. Colorite Marketing Corp.
Case
G.R. No. 193969-70
Decision Date
Jul 5, 2017
Dispute over construction delay caused by soil erosion, Hold Order, and shared liability; KKCA ordered to complete project, liquidated damages reduced, and claims for lost rentals denied.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 193969-70)

Contractual Agreement and Stipulations

KKCA and Colorite entered into a construction contract for a four-storey residential/commercial building priced at Php33 million. The contract provided:

  • Project commencement within seven days of notice to proceed and completion within 365 days calculated from the seventh day after the down payment release.
  • Liquidated damages of Php10,000 per calendar day for delay beyond the allowed completion date.
  • A maximum allowed slippage of 73 calendar days, beyond which Colorite could terminate the contract.
  • Provision for Colorite to take over and complete the project with costs to be deducted from KKCA’s payments.
  • Complementary provisions in Addendum #01 and #02, adding excavation and soil protection works within KKCA’s scope.

Excavation Incident and Resulting Delay

Excavation began on January 10, 2004, contracted by Colorite to WE Construction Company (WCC). On January 17, 2004, erosion caused damage to adjacent Hontiveros family property, inciting a formal complaint and the issuance of a Hold Order by Makati City officials on January 22, 2004, halting excavation activities until restoration was complete. Restoration finalized in October 2005. However, the Hontiveros family’s quitclaim necessary for lifting the Hold Order was not executed, resulting in continued suspension of construction and a delay totaling 878 days by the time of Colorite’s damages demand in 2007.

Claims and Counterclaims

Colorite sought:

  • Liquidated damages of Php8,780,000 and Php10,000 per additional day of delay,
  • Loss of rental income amounting to Php13,345,481,
  • Attorney’s fees of Php500,000 and litigation expenses of Php300,000.

KKCA contested:

  • That the completion period was suspended due to the Hold Order,
  • Colorite’s failure to pay 70% of restoration costs and soil protection expenses,
  • Their limited liability as excavation was subcontracted, not directly performed by KKCA,
  • Their entitlement to reimbursement for soil protection works, design fee, and maintenance costs,
  • Denial of Colorite’s claims for rental loss and liquidated damages as lacking basis.

CIAC Decision

The Construction Industry Arbitration Commission:

  • Held Colorite entitled to 50% of the liquidated damages claim (Php4,390,000) due to shared blame for delay.
  • Denied claims for rental income loss, attorney's fees, and litigation expenses.
  • Recognized KKCA's entitlement to partial reimbursement for soil protection works, design fees, and partial restoration and maintenance costs.
  • Denied KKCA’s claims for moral, exemplary damages, and attorney’s fees.
  • Ordered parties to bear their arbitration costs respectively.

Court of Appeals Ruling

The Court of Appeals modified and affirmed the CIAC ruling:

  • Upheld Colorite’s right to 50% of liquidated damages and denial of other claims.
  • Confirmed KKCA’s claims for soil protection works and design fees; denied claims for increased material costs and damages.
  • Ordered Colorite to pay Php550,000 towards restoration costs (net of Php150,000 advance), share 50% of maintenance costs, and reimburse KKCA Php50,000 for the Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC) permit.
  • Directed KKCA to complete the project, secure the Hontiveros quitclaim, and assist in lifting the Hold Order.
  • Found that Colorite partially contributed to delay by failing to fulfill its restoration cost commitment and not exercising its right to terminate and complete the project by other means.
  • Both parties found liable for the delay but without bad faith; thus, moral and exemplary damages, costs, and attorneys' fees were denied.

Supreme Court Analysis on Liability for Erosion

  • KKCA accepted responsibility for excavation and soil protection works under Addendum #01, thus liable for erosion damage.
  • WCC, although subcontracted by Colorite prior to contract signing, was under KKCA’s supervision from commencement; thus, KKCA liable for WCC's acts per contract.
  • Colorite’s presence in restoration meetings does not constitute assumption of WCC’s liabilities or waiver of contract provisions.
  • KKCA’s failure to provide adequate soil protection before erosion, and its late remedial works, demonstrate negligence.
  • The erosion directly caused the Hold Order and consequent delay.

Cause of Delay and Parties’ Fault

  • KKCA’s negligence in soil protection was the proximate cause of erosion and project delay.
  • Colorite was partly at fault due to inaction in pursuing contract termination or lifting the Hold Order expeditiously, violating good faith and diligence under Articles 19 and 2203 of the Civil Code.
  • The delay extended beyond the time restoration was completed due to KKCA’s failure to secure the Hontiveros quitclaim and lift the Hold Order, obligations under Article XIII of the contract.
  • There was no conclusive agreement that Colorite was to share restoration costs; thus, Colorite is not liable for the restoration cost share.

Contractual Scope and Cost Responsibility

  • Excavation works and soil protection are part of KKCA’s contractual scope per Addendum #01 notwithstanding prior subcontractor arrangements and pre-bid minutes.
  • Stipulated contract terms and addenda control over prior bid proposals, per Civil Code Article 1370 on clear contract terms.
  • Colorite must reimburse KKCA for design fees and ECC permit costs, with legal interest.
  • KKCA shall bear all maintenance costs up to April 30, 2006; thereafter, maintenance costs shall be shared equally.

Liquidated Damages Award

  • Liquidated damages of Php10,000 per calendar day for delay is valid as stipulated under Article V of the contract and Civil Code Article 2226.
  • The total delay includes 421 days from March 6, 2005 (original completion deadline plus allowed slippage) to April 30, 2006 (including six months for decision on contract termination), totaling Php4,210,000.
  • Further damages for delay beyond April 30, 2006 are not awarded due to Colorite’s contributory fault and inaction.
  • No interest on liquidated damages prior to finality of this decision to avoid inequitable enrichment.

Contract Completion and Price Escalation

  • KKCA is ordered to complete the project, securing necessary quitclaims and lifting the Hold Order.
  • The escalation clause remains applicable as the contract continues in effect; price adjustments beyond contract period are not automatically justified.
  • Increase in construction cost due to delay is a compensable actual damage but unquantified.
  • Given mutual fault, the parties shall share the increase in constru


    ...continue reading

    Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
    Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.