Case Summary (G.R. No. 183789)
Applicable Law
The laws relevant to the case include Republic Act No. 9136 and various provisions governing public bids and contracts, particularly the regulations concerning the disposition of government assets through public bidding, which are in place to ensure transparency and fairness in transactions involving state property.
Background of the Case
This case arose from a series of contracts and modifications concerning the sale of fly ash from NPC's power plants. Pozzolanic originally secured a right of first refusal concerning the purchase of fly ash from NPC's Batangas plant under a contract executed on October 20, 1987. Following the establishment of PSALM, which assumed NPC's assets, Pozzolanic claimed its right to purchase fly ash from the Sual and Masinloc plants, claiming that PSALM was bound by the previous contractual arrangements. The trial court upheld Pozzolanic’s right but later proceedings raised significant questions about the legality and validity of these arrangements.
Issues Raised
PSALM contended primarily that the trial court lacked jurisdiction after it dismissed certain complaints with prejudice and that the disputed right of first refusal was invalid for being contrary to public policy. The questions of whether fly ash constituted government assets subject to public bidding regulations were central to the appeal.
Court's Ruling on Jurisdiction
The Court determined that PSALM was estopped from contesting the lower court’s jurisdiction after it had invoked it by raising several issues related to the validity of Pozzolanic's right. The court emphasized that a party cannot accept a favorable judgment and later question the court's authority if the outcome is unfavorable.
Validity of the Right of First Refusal
The Court found the right of first refusal granted to Pozzolanic in the Batangas Contract to be invalid, ruling it contradicted public policy related to public bidding. The right effectively circumvented the requirement for competitive bidding, a necessity to prevent favoritism and ensure fair competition. The Court reiterated principles from existing jurisprudence underscoring that any amendments or additional provisions not included in bid documents violate the integrity of the bidding process.
Impact on Subsequent Agreements
Given its conclusion regarding the Batangas Contract's inv
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 183789)
Parties and Background
- Petitioner: Power Sector Assets and Liabilities Management Corporation (PSALM), a government-owned and controlled corporation created under Republic Act No. 9136 (Electric Power Industry Reform Act or EPIRA of 2001), tasked with managing the sale and privatization of NPC's generation assets to liquidate NPC's financial obligations.
- Respondent: Pozzolanic Philippines Incorporated, the Philippine subsidiary of Pozzolanic Australia Pty. Ltd., which perfected fly ash processing technology and originally won public bidding in 1986 to purchase NPC’s fly ash from the Batangas Coal-Fired Thermal Power Plant.
- The Batangas Contract (October 20, 1987) granted Pozzolanic Australia's right of first refusal to purchase fly ash from NPC's existing and future coal-fired power plants.
- Respondent was incorporated in the Philippines in 1989 to take over the rights to the fly ash business.
Contractual and Factual Developments
- Masinloc Coal-Fired Thermal Power Plant started operations in 1998, and respondent began fly ash processing there and entered into an interim contract for one year in 1999 with NPC to buy fly ash.
- The Sual Coal-Fired Power Plant began operation in October 1999, and NPC invited bids for fly ash purchase from Masinloc and Sual plants.
- Respondent asserted its right of first refusal and demanded inclusion of this right in bidding documents; NPC deferred bidding for Masinloc and commenced bidding for Sual but excluded respondent's right in tender documents.
Litigation History
- Respondent filed a complaint seeking enforcement of right of first refusal to allow it to match winning bid prices and be awarded contracts for fly ash purchase from Sual and Masinloc Plants.
- Supplementary complaints impleaded PSALM after its creation under EPIRA as a necessary party.
- A Memorandum of Agreement was executed granting the Provincial Government of Zambales exclusive rights to Masinloc fly ash, prompting further complaints dismissed for forum shopping.
- Subsequent agreements were entered granting respondent exclusive rights to withdraw fly ash from Sual and Masinloc Plants—the Sual Contract (2005) and the Masinloc Contract (2007).
Trial Court Proceedings and Issues Raised
- NPC moved to dismiss complaints as moot and academic due to contracts executed.
- PSALM opposed dismissal and questioned (a) whether fly ash is a government asset subject to public bidding, (b) validity of respondent’s right of first refusal, and (c) whether PSALM is bound by such right.
- The trial court dismissed respondent's Amended Complaint and First Supplementary Complaint