Case Summary (G.R. No. 134269)
Trial Court Injunction Proceedings
– In October 1992 AAVA sued for injunction in RTC Makati (Civil Case No. 92-2950), alleging breach of the Deed of Restrictions and violation of zoning (MMC No. 81-01) and barangay parking ordinance.
– RTC Makati (July 1994) enjoined operation beyond two nursery/kindergarten classrooms and awarded attorney’s fees.
– On motion, RTC reversed itself (March 1995), holding Muntinlupa’s rezoning (Ordinance No. 91-39) validly impaired the contract by legitimate exercise of police power.
Court of Appeals Reinstatement of Injunction
– AAVA appealed. In November 1997, the CA set aside RTC’s reversal and reinstated the July 1994 injunction, finding no conflict between the “institutional” zoning classification and the preparatory-only restriction.
Zoning Ordinance Correction Dispute
– Muntinlupa SB Resolution No. 94-179 corrected a typographical error in Ordinance No. 91-39, reclassifying the subject lot as “institutional.” HLURB deferred action for public hearing; the Office of the President declared the correction valid without hearing.
– CA in August 2000 affirmed validity of Resolution No. 94-179 but vacated the President’s pronouncement that the Deed of Restrictions had been nullified by the zoning ordinance.
Issues Presented
- Validity of Muntinlupa Resolution No. 94-179 as a mere typographical correction exempt from hearing requirements.
- Denial of intervention by special-needs students (Aquino, et al.) in the CA injunction case.
- Whether petitioners must be enjoined from operating a grade school, and whether rezoning or equitable estoppel invalidates the Deed of Restrictions.
Ruling on Validity of Resolution No. 94-179
– Resolution No. 94-179’s whereas clauses and official zoning maps demonstrate a clear typographical correction: only Block 3 was ever shown as institutional.
– As a corrective act by the local legislature itself, it did not require notice/hearing under MMC Resolution No. 12, Series 1991.
– Presidential approval and MMC conformity endorse the correction; HLURB’s contrary ruling was properly set aside.
Ruling on Intervention by Aquino, et al.
– Their February 1998 motion to intervene came after RTC and CA final decisions. Their interest in full-inclusion grade-school enrollment was already moot; no reversible error in CA’s denial under Rule 19, Sec. 2 (intervention before rendition of judgment).
Ruling on Injunction and Deed of Restrictions
– The Deed of Restrictions limits use to a preparatory school without specifying classroom count. The two-classroom limit derives from MMC No. 81-01 and is separate from the covenant.
– Reclassification to an institutional zone does not conflict with the preparatory-o
Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 134269)
Facts
- In 1984 Ayala Land, Inc. (ALI) sold a parcel in Ayala Alabang Village; in 1987 the spouses Alfonso acquired it under TCT No. 149166, subject to a Deed of Restrictions limiting its use “exclusively” to a preparatory (nursery & kindergarten) school, with installations for administration, playground, and vehicle garage.
- ALI entrusted enforcement of those restrictions to the Ayala Alabang Village Association (AAVA).
- 1989: The Learning Child Center (TLC) opened as a nursery and kindergarten. 1991: TLC expanded to include a grade-school program, the School of the Holy Cross.
- AAVA protested continued operation of the grade school and excess classrooms under Metro Manila Commission Ordinance No. 81-01 (R-1 zoning: nursery & kindergarten limited to two classrooms) and Barangay Ordinance No. 03 (parking ban on < 8 m streets), demanding cessation.
Procedural Antecedents: Injunction Case
- Oct. 13, 1992: AAVA sued TLC and the Alfonsos in RTC Makati (Civil Case No. 92-2950) for breach of Deed of Restrictions, MMC Ordinance No. 81-01, and Barangay Ordinance No. 03; adjacent owners intervened for same relief and damages.
- July 22, 1994: RTC granted injunction; ordered TLC to cease grade-school operations and limit nursery/kindergarten to two classrooms; awarded P20,000 attorney’s fees; dismissed intervention for lack of proof.
- Aug. 19, 1994: TLC and Alfonsos moved for reconsideration, citing Muntinlupa Zoning Ordinance No. 91-39 reclassification to institutional.
- Mar. 1, 1995: RTC set aside its July 1994 decision; dismissed both complaints; held reclassification valid under police power (Ortigas doctrine).
- AAVA’s appeal: Nov. 11, 1997 CA Decision reinstated July 22, 1994 RTC injunction; July 2, 1998 CA Resolution denied motions for reconsideration and intervention by Aquino, et al.
Procedural Antecedents: Zoning Ordinance Case
- Oct. 3, 1994: Muntinlupa Sangguniang Bayan adopted Resolution No. 94-179 correcting a typographical error in Ordinance No. 91-39 (“Block 1” → “Block 3” for the subject lot in Appendix B).
- Dec. 1, 1994: Municipality petitioned HLURB for approval; AAVA and adjacent owners opposed.
- June 26, 1995: HLURB remanded Resolution No. 94-179 for public hearings under MMC Resolution No. 12 (Uniform Rezoning Guidelines).
- July 27, 1999: Office of the President