Case Summary (G.R. No. L-13798)
Factual Background
In April 1953, Cipriano E. Unson filed a lawsuit to annul the aforementioned ordinance and the lease granted to the Genato Commercial Corporation. He argued that the construction of the building impaired public access, particularly affecting students from the nearby Mapa High School and cutting off the exit from his property. Unson asserted that the ordinance was null and void and pursued an injunction against the ongoing construction.
Previous Decisions and Legal Findings
The initial ruling from the Manila court was unfavorable to Unson, prompting him to appeal the decision. The Supreme Court subsequently ruled in favor of Unson, declaring both the lease and the ordinance invalid based on Article 638 of the Civil Code, which stipulates the public’s right to use riverbanks for navigation and other purposes. The court concluded that Genato’s building obstructed this public right, and thus both the ordinance and the lease could not stand.
Execution of Judgment
After the Supreme Court's ruling became final, Unson sought to have the lower court issue a writ of execution, compelling Genato Commercial to remove the building erected on the leased property. However, Genato contested the order, claiming that the judgment did not explicitly require the demolition of the structure. The Manila court, nonetheless, proceeded to grant Unson's request for execution.
Appeal and Legal Implications
Following the issuance of the execution order, Genato Commercial Corporation appealed, reiterating their argument that the court's decision did not compel them to demolish the building. The Supreme Court referenced the precedent set in Perez vs. Evite, indicating that a judgment encompasses not only its explicit terms but also any necessary implications that arise from it. The court highlighted that Genato chose not to present a valid defense regarding their right to maintain the building if the ordinance was found invalid.
Applicability of Civil Code Provisions
Genato's arguments rested on several articles of the New Civil Code, specifically Articles 448, 546, and 548. However, the Supreme Court found these inapplicable in the context of the current case, emphasizing that Unson was not the owner of the land as the City of Manila had not appealed the matter. Furthermore, the specific articles invoked by Genato pertained to situations where a claimant
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. L-13798)
Case Background
- The case involves Cipriano E. Unson as the petitioner and appellee against Hon. Arsenio H. Lacson and Genato Commercial Corporation as respondents and appellants.
- The appeal concerns the legal consequences of a prior judgment rendered in G.R. No. L-7909, dated January 8, 1957.
- Unson initiated the lawsuit in April 1953, contesting Ordinance No. 3470 passed by the City of Manila, which permitted Genato Commercial Corporation to lease a certain lot and construct a building thereon.
- The lot in question was part of Callejon del Carmen, which the ordinance converted from public use to patrimonial property available for private leasing.
Legal Contentions
- Unson's primary objection to the ordinance was based on his ownership of an adjacent lot and building, which he claimed was adversely affected by Genato Commercial's construction.
- He argued that the construction obstructed access to his property, endangering the students of Mapa High School located in his building.
- Unson sought legal remedies that included the annulment of Ordinance No. 3470, the lease, and the building permit, as well as an injunction against further construction.
Court Proceedings
- The Court of First Instance of Manila ruled against Unson, prompting him to appeal to the Supreme Court.
- The Supreme Court ultimately ruled