Title
Supreme Court
President of Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints vs. BTL Construction Corp.
Case
G.R. No. 176439
Decision Date
Jan 15, 2014
COJCOLDS and BTL disputed construction delays, unpaid balances, and overpayments; SC ruled partial liability for both, adjusting claims and denying attorney’s fees.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 30076)

Facts of the Case

On January 10, 2000, COJCOLDS and BTL executed a construction contract for the development of a meetinghouse facility priced at P12,680,000. The construction period was projected from January 15 to September 15, 2000. However, various challenges—including adverse weather, power interruptions, and changes in the construction plans—delayed the project's completion. After facing financial setbacks from another project, BTL requested permission to bill COJCOLDS based on partial completion percentages, which COJCOLDS granted. Eventually, BTL ceased operations on the Medina Project due to its financial hardships, prompting COJCOLDS to terminate their contract and hire Vigor Construction to finish the project.

CIAC Ruling

On November 12, 2003, BTL filed a complaint with the Construction Industry Arbitration Commission (CIAC), claiming over P28 million in damages across several categories, including unpaid balances and costs incurred for additional work. COJCOLDS counterclaimed for liquidated damages due to BTL's delays and expenses made to BTL's suppliers. The CIAC ultimately decided on April 27, 2004, finding both parties partly at fault and awarding COJCOLDS to pay BTL an unpaid balance while also imposing liquidated damages on BTL.

Court of Appeals Ruling

COJCOLDS appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA), which issued a modified decision on August 15, 2006. The CA ordered COJCOLDS to pay BTL the full unpaid balance of the contract price, along with the 10% retention money, while also determining that BTL owed COJCOLDS significantly increased liquidated damages due to an extended delay in project completion.

Legal Issues

Several significant legal issues arose for resolution:

  1. Whether the retention money is distinct from the unpaid balance of the contract price.
  2. Liability for additional works carried out by BTL.
  3. The extent of delays caused by BTL and resulting liquidated damages.
  4. Responsibility for cost overruns incurred due to BTL's delays.
  5. Overpayments made by COJCOLDS under change orders.
  6. The awarding of attorney's fees and litigation costs.

Court’s Ruling on First Issue

The Court acknowledged COJCOLDS' obligation to pay BTL the unpaid contract balance and the retention money. However, it aligned with COJCOLDS' argument that the retention money merely constituted part of the unpaid balance, rejecting the premise that these were separate liabilities under the contract.

Court’s Ruling on Additional Work Costs

BTL argued for additional compensation, asserting that the installation of a concrete retaining wall was not initially included in the contract. However, the Court found insufficient written authorization for these changes. The construction plan included the wall, leading the Court to rule against BTL’s claim for additional costs related to it and other works under the change orders.

Court’s Ruling on Delays and Liquidated Damages

BTL’s delay in the project was confirmed, leading the Court to analyze the delays more closely. The CA had initially determined a delay of 142 days, and after reviewing the conditions surrounding extension requests, the Court confirmed this period. Hence, BTL was held liable for liquidated damages calculated based on the duration of the delay.

Court’s Ruling on Cost Overruns and Overpayments

The C

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.