Case Summary (G.R. No. 136492)
Factual Background
Maxima Realty Management and Development Corporation contracted with Parkway Real Estate Development Corporation in April 1990 to buy on installment Unit No. 702 of the Heart Tower Condominium for P3,000,000. Parkway had earlier acquired the unit from Segovia Development Corporation through Masahiko Morishita. The parties agreed that failure to pay installments on their due dates would entitle Parkway to forfeit amounts paid as liquidated damages. Maxima defaulted but obtained several grace periods and paid a total of P1,180,000, leaving a balance of P1,820,000. To enable Maxima to obtain title and secure a loan from Rizal Commercial Banking Corporation (RCBC) for P1,820,000, Parkway with Segovia’s consent executed a Deed of Assignment in favor of Maxima on May 10, 1990; Segovia and Maxima also agreed that Segovia would transfer title directly to Maxima upon payment of P58,114 for transfer and related charges. Maxima failed to pay Segovia the P58,114, Segovia withheld transfer of title, and Parkway, having not received the P1,820,000, cancelled its agreement and the Deed of Assignment.
HLURB Arbiter Proceedings and Decision
Maxima filed a complaint for specific performance with the Office of Appeals, Adjudication and Legal Affairs of the Human Settlements Regulatory Board (HLURB) on May 2, 1991. The HLURB Arbiter, by decision dated December 17, 1992, declared the Deed of Assignment nullified, ordered Parkway to refund P1,180,000 to Maxima, and ordered Segovia to issue the condominium certificate of title in favor of Parkway upon Parkway’s payment of registration fees. The Arbiter made no pronouncement as to costs.
Board of Commissioners Proceedings and Decision
Both Maxima and Parkway appealed to the Board of Commissioners of the HLURB. During the appeal, Maxima offered to pay the outstanding P1,820,000, an offer Parkway accepted; the Board directed Maxima to deliver the amount by manager’s check to Parkway and directed Segovia to transfer title to Maxima. Maxima failed to consummate the payment, and Parkway filed a manifestation to resolve the appeal. On March 14, 1994 the Board modified the Arbiter’s decision: it affirmed nullification of the Deed of Assignment and the order for Segovia to issue title to Parkway, declared forfeiture in favor of Parkway of fifty percent of the total payments made by Maxima as damages and penalty, ordered Parkway to refund the remaining balance to Maxima within thirty days with legal interest thereafter if unpaid, and ordered Segovia to pay Parkway P10,000 as attorneys’ fees. The Board’s order for delivery of title in the name of Parkway was declared final and immediately executory.
Appeal to the Office of the President
Maxima filed an appeal to the Office of the President on May 10, 1994, docketed as O.P. Case No. 5697. Segovia was not served a copy of the Board decision but filed a Reply-Memorandum with the Office of the President contesting the award of attorneys’ fees to Parkway; the Office of the President did not rule upon Segovia’s claim. The Office of the President dismissed Maxima’s appeal for being filed out of time by Order dated June 2, 1998.
Court of Appeals Proceedings
Undeterred, Maxima petitioned the Court of Appeals. Segovia filed a Comment on October 1, 1998 asserting that as original owner-developer it had already consummated sale and transferred title to Parkway. On December 9, 1998 the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 41866 affirmed in toto the Order of the Office of the President dismissing the appeal as late.
Issue Presented
The sole issue presented to the Supreme Court was whether Maxima filed its appeal to the Office of the President within the reglementary period.
Parties' Contentions
Maxima contended that its appeal to the Office of the President was timely and relied upon the HLURB Rules of Procedure which, in their 1994 iteration, provided a thirty-day period to appeal to the Office of the President. Parkway and Segovia maintained that special presidential decrees prescribed a shorter reglementary period and that Maxima’s appeal was filed beyond that period.
Legal Basis and Reasoning
The Court relied on precedent in SGMC Realty Corporation v. Office of the President, G.R. No. 126999, 30 August 2000, which held that appeals from the Board of Commissioners of the HLURB to the Office of the President were governed by the fifteen-day reglementary period set forth in special presidential decrees rather than by the thirty-day period of Administrative Order No. 18, series of 1987 or the thirty-day period in Section 27 of the 1994 HLURB Rules of Procedure. The Court observed that Administrative Order No. 18 authorized a thirty-day period only where no special law provided otherwise, and that presidential decrees providing for a fifteen-day period controlled. Specifically, the Court identified Section 15 of Presidential Decree No. 957 and Section 2 of Presidential Decree No. 1344 as prescribing a fifteen-day period after receipt of a decision for such decisions to become final and executory, with appeals to the Office of the President subject to that shorter period. The Court further noted that the regulatory functions of the National Housing Authority had been transferred to HLURB and that the fifteen-day rule therefore applied to HLURB decisions. Consequent
...continue reading
Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 136492)
Parties and Procedural Posture
- MAXIMA REALTY MANAGEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION was the petitioner before the Court seeking review on certiorari from the Court of Appeals decision in CA-G.R. SP No. 41866.
- PARKWAY REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION represented by Luz Lourdes Fernandez and SEGOVIA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION were the respondents in the petition.
- The petition assailed the December 9, 1998 Decision of the Court of Appeals which affirmed the June 2, 1998 Order of the Office of the President in O.P. Case No. 5697 dismissing petitioner’s appeal as filed out of time.
- The opinion in this Court was penned by Justice Ynares-Santiago and the judgment was concurred in by Chief Justice Davide, Jr., and Justices Panganiban, Carpio, and Azcuna.
Key Factual Allegations
- Segovia Development Corporation originally sold Unit No. 702, Heart Tower Condominium, to Masahiko Morishita who assigned his rights to Parkway Real Estate Development Corporation on October 16, 1989.
- In April 1990, Parkway and MAXIMA REALTY MANAGEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION entered into an installment sale agreement for Unit No. 702 for the purchase price of Three Million Pesos.
- The agreement contained a stipulation that failure to pay any installment on its due date would permit Parkway to forfeit amounts paid as liquidated damages.
- Maxima defaulted but was granted multiple grace periods and paid a total of P1,180,000, leaving a balance of P1,820,000.
- On May 10, 1990, Parkway, with Segovia’s consent, executed a Deed of Assignment of its rights in the unit in favor of Maxima to enable Maxima to secure a P1,820,000 loan from RCBC.
- Maxima failed to pay Segovia P58,114 for transfer fees and related charges, which prevented Segovia from transferring title to Maxima and led Parkway to cancel the sale and the Deed of Assignment.
Procedural History
- Maxima filed a complaint for specific performance with the HLURB Office of Appeals, Adjudication and Legal Affairs on May 2, 1991.
- On December 17, 1992, the HLURB Arbiter declared the Deed of Assignment nullified, ordered Parkway to refund P1,180,000 to Maxima, and directed Segovia to issue title to Parkway upon payment of registration fees.
- Both Maxima and Parkway appealed to the Board of Commissioners of the HLURB; the Board on March 14, 1994 modified the Arbiter’s decision by declaring forfeiture of fifty percent of total payments in favor of Parkway and ordering Segovia to pay Parkway P10,000 as attorneys’ fees.
- Maxima filed an appeal to the Office of the President on May 10, 1994 which the Office dismissed by Order dated June 2, 1998 for being filed out of time, and the Court of Appeals affirmed that dismissal on December 9, 1998.
- Maxima then brought the present pe