9/26/2016

G.R. No. 211356, September 29, 2014 - CRISOSTOMO B. AQUINO, Petitioner, v. MUNICIPALITY OF MALAY, AKLAN, REPRESENTED BY HON. MA

|chanrobles.com

ChanRoblesVirtualLawLibrary

Like

Tweet

ChanRoblesOnLineBarReview

Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 2014 > September 2014 Decisions > G.R. No. 211356,
September29,2014CRISOSTOMOB.AQUINO,Petitioner,v.MUNICIPALITYOFMALAY,AKLAN,REPRESENTED
BYHON.MAYORJOHNP.YAP,SANGGUNIANGBAYANOFMALAY,AKLAN,REPRESENTEDBYHON.EZELFLORES,
DANTE PASUGUIRON, ROWEN AGUIRRE, WILBEC GELITO, JUPITER GALLENERO, OFFICE OF THE MUNICIPAL
ENGINEER, OFFICE OF THE MUNICIPAL TREASURER, BORACAY PNP CHIEF, BORACAY FOUNDATION, INC.,
REPRESENTEDBYNENETTEGRAF,MUNICIPALAUXILIARYPOLICE,ANDJOHNANDJANEDOES,Respondents.:

G.R.No.211356,September29,2014CRISOSTOMOB.AQUINO,Petitioner,v.MUNICIPALITYOF
MALAY,AKLAN,REPRESENTEDBYHON.MAYORJOHNP.YAP,SANGGUNIANGBAYANOFMALAY,AKLAN,
REPRESENTEDBYHON.EZELFLORES,DANTEPASUGUIRON,ROWENAGUIRRE,WILBECGELITO,
JUPITERGALLENERO,OFFICEOFTHEMUNICIPALENGINEER,OFFICEOFTHEMUNICIPALTREASURER,
BORACAYPNPCHIEF,BORACAYFOUNDATION,INC.,REPRESENTEDBYNENETTEGRAF,MUNICIPAL
AUXILIARYPOLICE,ANDJOHNANDJANEDOES,Respondents.

THIRDDIVISION
G.R.No.211356,September29,2014
CRISOSTOMOB.AQUINO,Petitioner,v.MUNICIPALITYOFMALAY,AKLAN,REPRESENTEDBY
HON.MAYORJOHNP.YAP,SANGGUNIANGBAYANOFMALAY,AKLAN,REPRESENTEDBYHON.
EZELFLORES,DANTEPASUGUIRON,ROWENAGUIRRE,WILBECGELITO,JUPITER
GALLENERO,OFFICEOFTHEMUNICIPALENGINEER,OFFICEOFTHEMUNICIPALTREASURER,
BORACAYPNPCHIEF,BORACAYFOUNDATION,INC.,REPRESENTEDBYNENETTEGRAF,
MUNICIPALAUXILIARYPOLICE,ANDJOHNANDJANEDOES,Respondents.
DECISION
VELASCOJR.,J.:
NatureoftheCase

DebtKollectCompany,Inc.

Before the Court is a Petition for Review on Certiorari challenging the Decision1 and the Resolution of
the Court of Appeals (CA) in CAG.R. SP No. 120042 dated August 13, 2013 and February 3, 2014,
respectively. The assailed rulings denied Crisostomo Aquinos Petition for Certiorari for not being the
properremedytoquestiontheissuanceandimplementationofExecutiveOrderNo.10,Seriesof2011
(EO10),orderingthedemolitionofhishotelestablishment.
TheFacts
Petitioner is the president and chief executive officer of Boracay Island West Cove Management
Philippines, Inc. (Boracay West Cove). On January 7, 2010, the company applied for a zoning
compliancewiththemunicipalgovernmentofMalay,Aklan.2Whilethecompanywasalreadyoperating
aresortinthearea,theapplicationsoughttheissuanceofabuildingpermitcoveringtheconstructionof
a threestorey hotel over a parcel of land measuring 998 sqm. located in Sitio Diniwid, Barangay
Balagab, Boracay Island, Malay, Aklan, which is covered by a Forest Land Use Agreement for Tourism
Purposes(FLAgT)issuedbytheDepartmentofEnvironmentandNaturalResources(DENR)infavorof
BoracayWestCove.

ChanRoblesIntellectualProperty
Division

Through a Decision on Zoning dated January 20, 2010, the Municipal Zoning Administrator denied
petitionersapplicationonthegroundthattheproposedconstructionsitewaswithinthenobuildzone
demarcatedinMunicipalOrdinance2000131(Ordinance).3AsprovidedintheOrdinance:
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary

SECTION2.DefinitionofTerms.AsusedinthisOrdinance,thefollowingwords,terms
andphrasesshallmeanasfollows:
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary

xxxx
(b) No Build Zone the space twentyfive (25) meters from the edge of the mean high
watermarkmeasuredinland

http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2014septemberdecisions.php?id=771

1/9

9/26/2016

G.R. No. 211356, September 29, 2014 - CRISOSTOMO B. AQUINO, Petitioner, v. MUNICIPALITY OF MALAY, AKLAN, REPRESENTED BY HON. MA
xxxx
SECTION3.Nobuildingorstructureofanykindwhethertemporaryorpermanentshall
be allowed to be set up, erected or constructed on the beaches around the Island of
Boracay and in its offshore waters. During the conduct of special activities or special
events, the Sangguniang Bayan may, through a Resolution, authorize the Office of the
MayortoissueSpecialPermitsforconstructionoftemporarystructuresonthebeachfor
thedurationofthespecialactivityasembodiedintheResolution.
Induetime,petitionerappealedthedenialactiontotheOfficeoftheMayoronFebruary1,2010.
OnMay13,2010,petitionerfolloweduphisappealthroughaletterbutnoactionwasevertakenbythe
respondentmayor.OnApril5,2011,however,aNoticeofAssessmentwassenttopetitioneraskingfor
the settlement of Boracay West Coves unpaid taxes and other liabilities under pain of a
recommendation for closure in view of its continuous commercial operation since 2009 sans the
necessary zoning clearance, building permit, and business and mayors permit. In reply, petitioner
expressedwillingnesstosettlethecompanysobligations,butthemunicipaltreasurerrefusedtoaccept
thetenderedpayment.Meanwhile,petitionercontinuedwiththeconstruction,expansion,andoperation
oftheresorthotel.
Subsequently,onMarch28,2011,aCeaseandDesistOrderwasissuedbythemunicipalgovernment,
enjoining the expansion of the resort, and on June 7, 2011, the Office of the Mayor of Malay, Aklan
issuedtheassailedEO10,orderingtheclosureanddemolitionofBoracayWestCoveshotel.
EO 10 was partially implemented on June 10, 2011. Thereafter, two more instances followed wherein
respondentsdemolishedtheimprovementsintroducedbyBoracayWestCove,themostrecentofwhich
wasmadeinFebruary2014.
Allegingthattheorderwasissuedandexecutedwithgraveabuseofdiscretion,petitionerfiledaPetition
for Certiorari with prayer for injunctive relief with the CA. He argued that judicial proceedings should
first be conducted before the respondent mayor could order the demolition of the companys
establishment that Boracay West Cove was granted a FLAgT by the DENR, which bestowed the
companytherighttoconstructpermanentimprovementsontheareainquestionthatsincetheareais
aforestland,itistheDENRandnotthemunicipalityofMalay,oranyotherlocalgovernmentunitfor
that matterthat has primary jurisdiction over the area, and that the Regional Executive Director of
DENRRegion6hadofficiallyissuedanopinionregardingthelegalissuesinvolvedinthepresentcase
thattheOrdinanceadmitsofexceptionsandlastly,thatitisthemayorwhoshouldbeblamedfornot
issuingthenecessaryclearancesinthecompanysfavor.
Inrebuttal,respondentscontendedthattheFLAgTdoesnotexcusethecompanyfromcomplyingwith
the Ordinance and Presidential Decree No. 1096 (PD 1096), otherwise known as the National Building
CodeofthePhilippines.Respondentsalsoarguedthatthedemolitionneedednocourtorderbecausethe
municipalmayorhastheexpresspowerundertheLocalGovernmentCode(LGC)toordertheremoval
ofillegallyconstructedbuildings.

RulingoftheCourtofAppeals

September-2014 Jurisprudence

G.R.No.205800,September10,2014MICROSOFT
CORPORATION AND ADOBE SYSTEMS INCORPORATED,
Petitioners, v. SAMIR FARAJALLAH, VIRGILIO D.C.
HERCE,RACHELP.FOLLOSCO,JESUSITOG.MORALLOS,
AND MA. GERALDINE S. GARCIA (DIRECTORS AND
OFFICERS OF NEW FIELDS (ASIA PACIFIC), INC.),
Respondents.

In its assailed Decision dated August 13, 2013, the CA dismissed the petition solely on procedural
ground, i.e., the special writ of certiorari can only be directed against a tribunal, board, or officer
exercisingjudicialorquasijudicialfunctionsandsincetheissuanceofEO10wasdoneintheexerciseof
executive functions, and not of judicial or quasijudicial functions, certiorari will not lie. Instead, the
properremedyforthepetitioner,accordingtotheCA,istofileapetitionfordeclaratoryreliefwiththe
RegionalTrialCourt.
Petitioner sought reconsideration but this was denied by the CA on February 3, 2014 through the
challengedResolution.Hence,theinstantpetitionraisingargumentsonbothprocedureandsubstance.
TheIssues
Strippedtotheessentials,thepivotalissuesintheextantcaseareasfollows:

chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary

Theproprietyunderthepremisesofthefilingofapetitionforcertiorariinsteadofapetition
fordeclaratoryrelief
a.Whetherornotdeclaratoryreliefisstillavailabletopetitioner
b. Whether or not the CA correctly ruled that the respondent mayor was performing neither a
judicialnorquasijudicialfunctionwhenheorderedtheclosureanddemolitionofBoracayWest
Coveshotel

G.R.No.201237,September03,2014PHILIPPINE
TOURISTERS, INC. and/or ALEJANDRO R. YAGUE, JR.,
Petitioners,v.MASTRANSITWORKERSUNIONANGLO
KMU*ANDITSMEMBERS,REPRESENTEDBYABRAHAM
TUMALA,JR.,Respondents.
G.R. No. 199388, September 03, 2014 OMNI
HAULING SERVICES, INC., LOLITA FRANCO, and
ANICETO FRANCO, Petitioners, v. BERNARDO BON,
ROBERTO TORTOLES, ROMEO TORRES, RODELLO*
RAMOS, RICARDO DELOS SANTOS, JUANITO BON,
ELENCIO ARTASTE,** CARLITO VOLOSO, ROMEL
TORRES, ROBERT AVILA, EDUARDO BAUTISTA, MARTY
VOLOSO, OSCAR JABEL, RICKY AMORANTO, BERNARD
OSINAGA, EDUARDO BON, JERRY EDUARCE, and
FEDERICOBRAZIL,Respondents.

Whether or not respondent mayor committed grave abuse of discretion when he issued EO
10
a.Whether or not petitioners right to due process was violated when the respondent mayor
orderedtheclosureanddemolitionofBoracayWestCoveshotelwithoutfirstconductingjudicial
proceedings
b. WhetherornottheLGUsrefusaltoissuepetitionerthenecessarybuildingpermitandclearances
wasjustified
c. WhetherornotpetitionersrightsundertheFLAgTprevailoverthemunicipalordinanceproviding
foranobuildzoneand

G.R. No. 197329, September 08, 2014 NATIONAL

POWERCORPORATION,Petitioner,v.LUISSAMARAND
MAGDALENASAMAR,Respondents.

ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary

d. WhetherornottheDENRhasprimaryjurisdictionoverthecontroversy,nottheLGU.

G.R. No. 205298, September 10, 2014 LEOPOLDO

QUINTOS Y DEL AMOR, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES,Respondent.

TheCourtsRuling

A.C. No. 7474, September 09, 2014 PRESIDING

JUDGE JOSE L. MADRID, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT,
BRANCH 51, SORSOGON CITY, Complainant, v. ATTY.
JUANS.DEALCA,Respondent.

Wedenythepetition.

G.R. No. 199139, September 09, 2014 ELSIE S.

CAUSING, Petitioner, v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS
ANDHERNAND.BIRON,SR.,Respondents.

a.Declaratoryreliefnolongerviable

G.R. No. 197336, September 03, 2014

CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. ROLANDO CORDERO,
Respondent.

Certiorari,notdeclaratoryrelief,istheproperremedy

Resolvingfirsttheproceduralaspectofthecase,Wefindmeritinpetitionerscontentionthatthespecial
writofcertiorari,andnotdeclaratoryrelief,istheproperremedyforassailingEO10.Asprovidedunder

http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2014septemberdecisions.php?id=771

2/9

9/26/2016

G.R. No. 211356, September 29, 2014 - CRISOSTOMO B. AQUINO, Petitioner, v. MUNICIPALITY OF MALAY, AKLAN, REPRESENTED BY HON. MA
Sec.1,Rule63oftheRulesofCourt:

chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary

G.R. No. 195549, September 03, 2014

WILLAWARE PRODUCTS CORPORATION, Petitioner, v.
JESICHRIS
MANUFACTURING
CORPORATION,
Respondent.

SECTION1.Whomayfilepetition.Anypersoninterestedunderadeed,will,contractor
other written instrument, whose rights are affected by a statute, executive order or
regulation, ordinance or any other governmental regulation may, before breach or
violation thereof, bring an action in the appropriate Regional Trial Court to determine
any question of construction or validity arising, and for a declaration of his rights or
duties,thereunder.xxx(emphasisadded)

G.R. No. 183360, September 08, 2014 ROLANDO

C. DE LA PAZ,*, Petitioner, v. L & J DEVELOPMENT
COMPANY,Respondent.
G.R.No.196182,September01,2014ECEREALTY
AND DEVELOPMENT INC., Petitioner, v. RACHEL G.
MANDAP,Respondent.
G.R. No. 178837, September 01, 2014 COLEGIO
DE SAN JUAN DE LETRAN, Petitioner, v. ISIDRA DELA
ROSAMERIS,Respondent.
G.R. No. 198139, September 08, 2014 NATIONAL
POWER CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. FELICISIMO
TARCELOANDHEIRSOFCOMIASANTOS,Respondents.

An action for declaratory relief presupposes that there has been no actual breach of the instruments
involvedoroftherightsarisingthereunder.Sincethepurposeofanactionfordeclaratoryreliefisto
secureanauthoritativestatementoftherightsandobligationsofthepartiesunderastatute,deed,or
contractfortheirguidanceintheenforcementthereof,orcompliancetherewith,andnottosettleissues
arising from an alleged breach thereof, it may be entertained before the breach or violation of the
statute,deedorcontracttowhichitrefers.Apetitionfordeclaratoryreliefgivesapracticalremedyfor
endingcontroversiesthathavenotreachedthestatewhereanotherreliefisimmediatelyavailableand
suppliestheneedforaformofactionthatwillsetcontroversiesatrestbeforetheyleadtoarepudiation
ofobligations,aninvasionofrights,andacommissionofwrongs.4
cralawlawlibrary

A.C. No. 10196, September 09, 2014 MELODY R.

NERY, Complainant, v. ATTY. GLICERIO A. SAMPANA,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 194507, September 08, 2014 FEDERAL
BUILDERS,
INC.,
Petitioner,
v.
FOUNDATION
SPECIALISTS, INC., Respondent. G.R. NO. 194621
FOUNDATION SPECIALISTS, INC., Petitioner, v.
FEDERALBUILDERS,INC.,Respondent.

In the case at bar, the petition for declaratory relief became unavailable by EO 10s enforcement and
implementation.Theclosureanddemolitionofthehotelrenderedfutileanypossibleguidelinesthatmay
beissuedbythetrialcourtforcarryingoutthedirectivesinthechallengedEO10.Indubitably,theCA
erredwhenitruledthatdeclaratoryreliefistheproperremedygivensuchasituation.
b.Petitionercorrectlyresortedtocertiorari
Ontheproprietyoffilingapetitionforcertiorari,Sec.1,Rule65oftheRulesofCourtprovides:

chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary

G.R.No.204233,September03,2014RICARDOA.
DALUSONG, Petitioner, v. EAGLE CLARC SHIPPING
PHILIPPINES,INC.,NORFIELDOFFSHOREAS,AND/OR
CAPT. LEOPOLDO T. ARCILLAR, AND COURT OF
APPEALS,Respondents.

Section1.Petitionforcertiorari.Whenanytribunal,boardorofficerexercisingjudicial
orquasijudicialfunctionshasactedwithoutorinexcessofitsorhisjurisdiction,orwith
grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction, and there is no
appeal, or any plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law, a
personaggrievedtherebymayfileaverifiedpetitioninthepropercourt,allegingthefacts
with certainty and praying that judgment be rendered annulling or modifying the
proceedingsofsuchtribunal,boardorofficer,andgrantingsuchincidentalreliefsaslaw
andjusticemayrequire.xxx

G.R. No. 197174, September 10, 2014 FRANCLER

P. ONDE, Petitioner, v. THE OFFICE OF THE LOCAL
CIVILREGISTRAROFLASPIASCITY,Respondent.
A.C.No.8637,September15,2014IMELDACATO
GADDI, Complainant, v. ATTY. LOPE M. VELASCO,
Respondent.

For certiorari to prosper, the petitioner must establish the concurrence of the following requisites,
namely:
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary

G.R. No. 178733, September 15, 2014 ELISA

ANGELES, Petitioner, v. HON. COURT OF APPEALS,
OFFICERINCHARGE MARILOU C. MARTIN, DEPUTY
SHERIFF JOSELITO SP ASTORGA, MARCO BOCO, AND
JOHN DOES, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF PASIG,
BRANCH268,Respondents.

1. The writ is directed against a tribunal, board, or officer exercising judicial or quasijudicial
functions
2. Suchtribunal,board,orofficerhasactedwithoutorinexcessofjurisdiction,orwithgraveabuse
ofdiscretionamountingtolackorexcessofjurisdictionand

G.R.No.194946,September03,2014PEOPLEOF
THE PHILIPPINES, PlaintiffAppellee, v. ECO YABA Y
BASAA.K.A.PLOK,AccusedAppellant.
G.R. No. 205357, September 02, 2014 GMA
NETWORK, INC., Petitioner, v. COMMISSION ON
ELECTIONS, RESPONDENT. SENATOR ALAN PETER
COMPAERO S. CAYETANO, PetitionerIntervenor.
G.R. NO. 205374 ABC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION,
Petitioner,
v.
COMMISSION
ON
ELECTIONS,
Respondent.
G.R.
NO.
205592

MANILA
BROADCASTING COMPANY, INC. AND NEWSOUNDS
BROADCASTING NETWORK, INC., Petitioner, v.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, Respondent. G.R. NO.
205852 KAPISANAN NG MGA BRODKASTER NG
PILIPINAS (KBP) AND ABSCBN CORPORATION,
Petitioners,
v.
COMMISSION
ON
ELECTIONS,
Respondent. G.R. NO. 206360 RADIO MINDANAO
NETWORK, INC., Petitioner, v. COMMISSION ON
ELECTIONS,Respondent.
G.R.No.199898,September03,2014PEOPLEOF
THE PHILIPPINES, PlaintiffAppellee, v. LEO DE LA
TRINIDADYOBALLES,AccusedAppellant.
G.R.No.157583,September10,2014FRUMENCIO
E.PULGAR,Petitioner,v.THEREGIONALTRIALCOURT
OF MAUBAN, QUEZON, BRANCH 64, QUEZON POWER
(PHILIPPINES)
LIMITED,
CO.,
PROVINCE
OF
QUEZON,ANDDEPARTMENTOFFINANCE,Respondents.
G.R. No. 198656, September 08, 2014 NANCY S.
MONTINOLA, Petitioner, v. PHILIPPINE AIRLINES,
Respondent.

ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary

3. Thereisnoappealoranyplainspeedy,andadequateremedyintheordinarycourseoflaw.5
Guiltyofreiteration,theCAimmediatelydismissedthePetitionforCertiorariupondeterminingthatthe
first element is wantingthat respondent mayor was allegedly not exercising judicial or quasijudicial
functionswhenheissuedEO10.
Wearenotpersuaded.
TheCAfellintoatrapwhenitruledthatamayor,anofficerfromtheexecutivedepartment,exercises
anexecutivefunctionwheneverheissuesanExecutiveOrder.Thisistadtoopresumptiveforitisthe
nature of the act to be performed, rather than of the office, board, or body which performs it, that
determineswhetherornotaparticularactisadischargeofjudicialorquasijudicialfunctions.Thefirst
requirementforcertiorariissatisfiediftheofficersactjudiciallyinmakingtheirdecision,whatevermay
betheirpubliccharacter.6
cralawlawlibrary

Itisnotessentialthatthechallengedproceedingsshouldbestrictlyandtechnicallyjudicial,inthesense
inwhichthatwordisusedwhenappliedtocourtsofjustice,butitissufficientiftheyarequasijudicial.7
Tocontrast,apartyissaidtobeexercisingajudicialfunctionwhere he has the power to determine
what the law is and what legal rights of the parties are, and then undertakes to determine these
questionsandadjudicateupontherightsoftheparties,whereasquasijudicialfunctionisatermwhich
applies to the actions, discretion, etc., of public administrative officers or bodies x x x required to
investigatefactsorascertaintheexistenceoffacts,holdhearings,anddrawconclusionsfromthemasa
basisfortheirofficialactionandtoexercisediscretionofajudicialnature.8
cralawlawlibrary

Inthecaseatbench,theassailedEO10wasissuedupontherespondentmayorsfindingthatBoracay
WestCovesconstruction,expansion,andoperationofitshotelinMalay,Aklanisillegal.Suchafinding
of illegality required the respondent mayors exercise of quasijudicial functions, against which the
specialwritofcertiorarimaylie.AproposheretoisOurrulinginCityEngineerofBaguiov.Baniqued:9
cralawlawlibrary

A.C. No. 9925, September 17, 2014 MARIANO R.

CRISTOBAL,Complainant,v.ATTY.RONALDOE.RENTA,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 212705, September 10, 2014 ROBERTO
CO,Petitioner,v.KENGHUANJERRYYEUNGANDEMMA
YEUNG,Respondents.

There is no gainsaying that a city mayor is an executive official nor is the matter of
issuingdemolitionnoticesorordersnotaministerialone.Indeterminingwhetherornota
structure is illegal or it should be demolished, property rights are involved thereby
needing notices and opportunity to be heard as provided for in the constitutionally
guaranteed right of due process. In pursuit of these functions, the city mayor has to
exercisequasijudicialpowers.

A.C. No. 7184, September 17, 2014 FELIPE B.

ALMAZAN, SR., Complainant, v. ATTY. MARCELO B.
SUERTEFELIPE,Respondent.

Withtheforegoingdiscussion,theCAerredinrulingthattherespondentmayorwasmerelyexercising
hisexecutivefunctions,forclearly,thefirstrequisiteforthespecialwrithasbeensatisfied.

G.R. No. 190198, September 17, 2014

COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Petitioner, v.
CE LUZON GEOTHERMAL POWER COMPANY, INC.,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 184000, September 17, 2014 PUERTO
AZULLAND,INC.,Petitioner,v.PACIFICWIDEREALTY
DEVELOPMENTCORPORATION,Respondent.
G.R. No. 197857, September 10, 2014 SPOUSES
FRANCISCO SIERRA (SUBSTITUTED BY DONATO,

Asidefromthefirstrequisite,Welikewiseholdthatthethirdelement,i.e.,theunavailabilityofaplain,
speedy, or adequate remedy, is also present herein. While it may be argued that, under the LGC,
Executive Orders issued by mayors are subject to review by provincial governors,10 this cannot be
consideredasanadequateremedygiventheexigenciesofpetitionerspredicament.
Inalitanyofcases,Wehaveheldthatitisinadequacy,notthemereabsenceofallotherlegalremedies
and the danger of failure of justice without the writ, that must usually determine the propriety of
certiorari . A remedy is plain, speedy and adequate if it will promptly relieve the petitioner from the
injurious effects of the judgment, order, or resolution of the lower court or agency. It is understood,
then, that a litigant need not mark time by resorting to the less speedy remedy of appeal in order to

http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2014septemberdecisions.php?id=771

3/9

9/26/2016

G.R. No. 211356, September 29, 2014 - CRISOSTOMO B. AQUINO, Petitioner, v. MUNICIPALITY OF MALAY, AKLAN, REPRESENTED BY HON. MA

TERESITA, TEODORA, LORENZA, LUCINA, IMELDA,

VILMA, AND MILAGROS SIERRA) AND ANTONINA
SANTOS, SPOUSES ROSARIO SIERRA AND EUSEBIO
CALUMA LEYVA, AND SPOUSES SALOME SIERRA AND
FELIX
GATLABAYAN
(SUBSTITUTED
BY
BUENAVENTURA, ELPIDIO, PAULINO, CATALINA,
GREGORIO, AND EDGARDO GATLABAYAN, LORETO
REILLO,
FERMINA
PEREGRINA,
AND
NIDA
HASHIMOTO), Petitioners, v. PAIC SAVINGS AND
MORTGAGEBANK,INC.,Respondent.

haveanorderannulledandsetasideforbeingpatentlyvoidforfailureofthetrialcourttocomplywith
theRulesofCourt.11

A.M. No. P133102 [Formerly OCA I.P.I. No. 07

2562P], September 08, 2014 JOSE S. VILLANUEVA,
Complainant,v.ATTY.PAULINOI.SAGUYOD,CLERKOF
COURT VI, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 6,
PANIQUI,TARLAC,Respondent.

Inlightoftheforegoing,theCAshouldhaveproceededtograbthebullbyitshornsanddeterminethe
existenceofthesecondelementofcertiorariwhetherornottherewasgraveabuseofdiscretionon
thepartofrespondents.

G.R. No. 176121, September 22, 2014 SPOUSES

TEODORICOANDPACITAROSETE,Petitioners,v.FELIX
AND/OR MARIETTA BRIONES, SPOUSES JOSE AND
REMEDIOS ROSETE, AND NEORIMSE AND FELICITAS
CORPUZ,Respondents.
G.R.No.206912,September10,2014PEOPLEOF
THEPHILIPPINES,PlaintiffAppellee,v.DEMOSTHENES
BONTUYAN,AccusedAppellant.
G.R.No.189850,September22,2014PEOPLEOF
THE PHILIPPINES, PlaintiffAppellee, v. REYNALDO
TORRES, JAY TORRES, BOBBY TORRES @ ROBERTO
TORRES Y NAVA, BRION, AND RONNIE TORRES,
Accused,BOBBYTORRES@ROBERTOTORRESYNAVA,
AccusedAppellant.
G.R. No. 174353, September 10, 2014 NESTOR
CHING AND ANDREW WELLINGTON, Petitioners, v.
SUBIC BAY GOLF AND COUNTRY CLUB, INC., HU HO
HSIU LIEN ALIAS SUSAN HU, HU TSUNG CHIEH ALIAS
JACK HU, HU TSUNG HUI, HU TSUNG TZU AND
REYNALDR.SUAREZ,Respondents.
G.R. No. 188773, September 10, 2014 HEIRS OF
VALENTIN
BASBAS,
ANSELMA
B.
ENDRINAL,
GERTRUDES BASBAS, RUFINA BASBAS, CEFERINA B.
CARTECIANO, ANACLETO BASBAS, ARSENIA BASBAS,
ANASTACIO BASBAS, BEDACIO BASBAS, TEODOCIA B.
OCAMPO, SEGUNDO C. BASBAS, MARIA B. RAMOS AND
EUGENIO BASBAS IN REPRESENTATION OF PEDRO
BASBAS HERINO T. BASBAS AND NESTOR T. BASBAS
INREPRESENTATIONOFLUCASBASBASADELAIDAB.
FLORENTINO, RODRIGO BASBAS, FELIX BASBAS, JR.,
TEODULO BASBAS, ANDRESITO BASBAS, LARRY
BASBAS AND JOEY BASBAS IN REPRESENTATION OF
FELIX BASBAS, SR., VICTOR BEATO, ALIPIO BEATO,
EUTIQUIO BEATO, JULIANA B. DIAZ, PABLO BEATO
AND ALEJANDRO BEATO IN REPRESENTATION OF
REMIGIA B. BEATO, AS REPRESENTED BY RODRIGO
BASBAS, Petitioners, v. RICARDO BASBAS AS
REPRESENTEDBYEUGENIOBASBAS,Respondents.
G.R. No. 176697, September 10, 2014 CESAR V.
AREZA AND LOLITA B. AREZA, Petitioners, v. EXPRESS
SAVINGS BANK, INC. AND MICHAEL POTENCIANO,
Respondents.
G.R. No. 197486, September 10, 2014 RENATO L.
DELFINO, SR. (DECEASED), REPRESENTED BY HIS
HEIRS, NAMELY: GRACIA DELFINO, GREGORIO A.
DELFINO, MA. ISABEL A. DELFINO, RENATO A.
DELFINO, JR., MA. REGINA DELFINO ROSELLA, MA.
GRACIAA.DELFINO,MARIANOA.DELFINO,MA.LUISA
DELFINO GREGORIO AND REV. FR. GABRIEL A.
DELFINO, Petitioners, v. AVELINO K. ANASAO AND
ANGEL K. ANASAO (DECEASED AND REPRESENTED BY
HISSOLEHEIR,SIXTOC.ANASAO),Respondents.

cralawlawlibrary

Beforeapplyingthisdoctrine,itmustfirstbeborneinmindthatrespondentsinthiscasehavealready
taken measures towards implementing EO 10. In fact, substantial segments of the hotel have already
beendemolishedpursuanttothemayorsdirective.Itisthenunderstandablewhypetitionerprayedfor
the issuance of an injunctive writa provisional remedy that would otherwise have been unavailable
had he sought a reversal from the office of the provincial governor of Aklan. Evidently, petitioner
correctlysawtheurgentneedforjudicialinterventionviacertiorari.

UponOurfindingthatapetitionforcertiorariunderRule65istheappropriateremedy,Wewillproceed
toresolvethecoreissuesinviewoftheurgencyofthereliefsprayedforinthepetition.
Respondentsdidnotcommitgraveabuseofdiscretion
a.Thehotelsclassificationasanuisance
Article694oftheCivilCodedefinesnuisanceasanyact,omission,establishment,business,condition
orproperty,oranythingelsethat(1)injuresorendangersthehealthorsafetyofothers(2)annoysor
offendsthesenses(3)shocks,defiesordisregardsdecencyormorality(4)obstructsorinterfereswith
thefreepassageofanypublichighwayorstreet,oranybodyofwateror(5)hindersorimpairstheuse
ofproperty.12
cralawlawlibrary

Inestablishinganobuildzonethroughlocallegislation,theLGUeffectivelymadeadeterminationthat
constructionstherein,withoutfirstsecuringexemptionsfromthelocalcouncil,qualifyasnuisancesfor
theyposeathreattopublicsafety.Nobuildzonesareintendedfortheprotectionofthepublicbecause
the stability of the grounds foundation is adversely affected by the nearby body of water. The ever
present threat of high rising storm surges also justifies the ban on permanent constructions near the
shoreline.Indeed,theareasexposuretopotentialgeohazardscannotbeignoredandampleprotection
totheresidentsofMalay,Aklanshouldbeafforded.
Challenging the validity of the public respondents actuations, petitioner posits that the hotel cannot
summarilybeabatedbecauseitisnotanuisanceperse,giventhehundredmillionpesoworthofcapital
infusedintheventure.CitingAsilo,Jr.v.People,13petitioneralsoarguesthatrespondentsshouldhave
firstsecuredacourtorderbeforeproceedingwiththedemolition.
Preliminarily, We agree with petitioners posture that the property involved cannot be classified as a
nuisanceperse,butnotforthereasonhesooffers.Propertyvaluation,afterall,isnotthelitmustest
for such a determination. More controlling is the propertys nature and conditions, which should be
evaluatedtoseeifitqualifiesasanuisanceasdefinedunderthelaw.
Asjurisprudenceelucidates,nuisancesareoftwokinds:nuisanceperseandnuisanceperaccidens.The
firstisrecognizedasanuisanceunderanyandallcircumstances,becauseitconstitutesadirectmenace
to public health or safety, and, for that reason, may be abated summarily under the undefined law of
necessity. The second is that which depends upon certain conditions and circumstances, and its
existence being a question of fact, it cannot be abated without due hearing thereon in a tribunal
authorizedtodecidewhethersuchathingdoesinlawconstituteanuisance.14
cralawlawlibrary

In the case at bar, the hotel, in itself, cannot be considered as a nuisance perse since this type of
nuisanceisgenerallydefinedasanact,occupation,orstructure,whichisanuisanceatalltimesand
under any circumstances, regardless of location or surrounding.15 Here, it is merely the hotels
particular incidentits locationand not its inherent qualities that rendered it a nuisance. Otherwise
stated, had it not been constructed in the no build zone, Boracay West Cove could have secured the
necessary permits without issue. As such, petitioner is correct that the hotel is not a nuisance perse,
buttoOurmind,itisstillanuisanceperaccidens.
b.Respondentmayorhasthepowertoorderthedemolitionofillegalconstructions
Generally, LGUs have no power to declare a particular thing as a nuisance unless such a thing is a
nuisanceperse.16SoitwasheldinACEnterprisesv.FrabellePropertiesCorp:17
cralawlawlibrary

Weagreewithpetitionerscontentionthat,underSection447(a)(3)(i)ofR.A.No.7160,
otherwise known as the Local Government Code, the Sangguniang Panglungsod is
empoweredtoenactordinancesdeclaring,preventingorabatingnoiseandotherformsof
nuisance. It bears stressing, however, that the Sangguniang Bayan cannot declare a
particularthingasanuisanceperseandorderitscondemnation.Itdoesnothavethe
powertofind,asafact,thataparticularthingisanuisancewhensuchthingis
not a nuisance per se nor can it authorize the extrajudicial condemnation and
destructionofthatasanuisancewhichinitsnature,situationoruseisnotsuch.
Thosethingsmustbedeterminedandresolvedintheordinarycourtsoflaw.Ifa
thing,beinfact,anuisanceduetothemannerofitsoperation,thatquestioncannotbe
determinedbyamereresolutionoftheSangguniangBayan.(emphasissupplied)

G.R.No.193426,September29,2014SUBICBAY
LEGEND RESORTS AND CASINOS, INC., Petitioner, v.
BERNARDC.FERNANDEZ,Respondent.
G.R. No. 176020, September 29, 2014 HEIRS OF
TELESFORO JULAO, NAMELY, ANITA VDA. DE
ENRIQUEZ, SONIA J. TOLENTINO AND RODERICK
JULAO, Petitioners, v. SPOUSES ALEJANDRO AND
MORENITADEJESUS,Respondents.
A.C. No. 7337, September 29, 2014 ROLANDO
VIRAY, Complainant, v. ATTY. EUGENIO T. SANICAS,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 204160, September 22, 2014 SPOUSES
MICHELLE M. NOYNAY AND NOEL S. NOYNAY,
Petitioners,
v.
CITIHOMES
BUILDER
AND
DEVELOPMENT,INC.,Respondent.
G.R.No.202701,September10,2014PEOPLEOF
THE PHILIPPINES, PlaintiffAppellee, v. EDILBERTO
BALIBAY Y LABIS AND MARICEL BALIBAY BIJAAN,
DefendantAppellants.
G.R. No. 178911, September 17, 2014 EDUARDO
D. MONSANTO, DECOROSO D. MONSANTO, SR., AND
REV. FR. PASCUAL D. MONSANTO, JR., Petitioners, v.
LEONCIO
LIM
AND
LORENZO
DE
GUZMAN,
Respondents.

Despitethehotelsclassificationasanuisanceperaccidens,however,Westillfindinthiscasethatthe
LGU may nevertheless properly order the hotels demolition. This is because, in the exercise of police
power and the general welfare clause,18 property rights of individuals may be subjected to restraints
andburdensinordertofulfilltheobjectivesofthegovernment.Otherwisestated,thegovernmentmay
enactlegislationthatmayinterferewithpersonalliberty,property,lawfulbusinessesandoccupationsto
promotethegeneralwelfare.19
cralawlawlibrary

One such piece of legislation is the LGC, which authorizes city and municipal governments, acting
through their local chief executives, to issue demolition orders. Under existing laws, the office of the
mayorisgivenpowersnotonlyrelativetoitsfunctionastheexecutiveofficialofthetownithasalso
beenendowedwithauthoritytohearissuesinvolvingpropertyrightsofindividualsandtocomeoutwith
an effective order or resolution thereon.20 Pertinent herein is Sec. 444 (b)(3)(vi) of the LGC, which
empoweredthemayortoordertheclosureandremovalofillegallyconstructedestablishmentsforfailing
tosecurethenecessarypermits,towit:

G.R. No. 195289, September 24, 2014

ROBINSONS BANK CORPORATION (FORMERLY THE
ROYALBANKOFSCOTLAND[PHILS.],INC.),Petitioner,
v. HON. SAMUEL H. GAERLAN, HON. HAKIM S.
ABDULWAHID AND HON. RICARDO R. ROSARIO, IN

chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary

Section444.TheChiefExecutive:Powers,Duties,FunctionsandCompensation.
xxxx
(b)Forefficient,effectiveandeconomicalgovernancethepurposeofwhichisthegeneral
welfare of the municipality and its inhabitants pursuant to Section 16 of this Code, the
municipalmayorshall:
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary

http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2014septemberdecisions.php?id=771

4/9

9/26/2016

G.R. No. 211356, September 29, 2014 - CRISOSTOMO B. AQUINO, Petitioner, v. MUNICIPALITY OF MALAY, AKLAN, REPRESENTED BY HON. MA
xxxx

THEIR
CAPACITY
AS
ASSOCIATE
JUSTICES
RESPECTIVELYOFTHETENTHDIVISIONOFTHECOURT
OF APPEALS, AND TRADE AND INVESTMENT
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF THE PHILIPPINES,
Respondents.

(3) Initiate and maximize the generation of resources and revenues, and
apply the same to the implementation of development plans, program
objectives and priorities as provided for under Section 18 of this Code,
particularly those resources and revenues programmed for agroindustrial
development and countrywide growth and progress, and relative thereto,
shall:

G.R. No. 181921, September 17, 2014

INTERORIENT
MARITIME
ENTERPRISES,
INC.,
Petitioner,v.VICTORM.CREERIII,Respondent.

chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary

xxxx

A.M. No. 201021SC, September 30, 2014 Re:

ANONYMOUS LETTERCOMPLAINT ON THE ALLEGED
INVOLVEMENT AND FOR ENGAGING IN THE BUSINESS
OFLENDINGMONEYATUSURIOUSRATESOFINTEREST
OF MS. DOLORES T. LOPEZ, SC CHIEF JUDICIAL STAFF
OFFICER, AND MR. FERNANDO M. MONTALVO, SC
SUPERVISING JUDICIAL STAFF OFFICER, CHECKS
DISBURSEMENT DIVISION, FISCAL MANAGEMENT AND
BUDGETOFFICE.

(vi) Require owners of illegally constructed houses,

buildings or other structures to obtain the necessary
permit, subject to such fines and penalties as may be
imposed by law or ordinance, or to make necessary
changes in the construction of the same when said
constructionviolatesanylaworordinance,ortoorder
the demolition or removal of said house, building or
structure within the period prescribed by law or
ordinance.(emphasissupplied)

G.R.No.207950,September22,2014PEOPLEOF
THE PHILIPPINES, PlaintiffAppellee, v. MARK JASON
CHAVEZYBITANCORALIASNOY,AccusedAppellant.
A.M. No. 200823SC, September 30, 2014
ALLEGED LOSS OF VARIOUS BOXES OF COPY PAPER
DURING THEIR TRANSFER FROM THE PROPERTY
DIVISION, OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
(OAS), TO THE VARIOUS ROOMS OF THE PHILIPPINE
JUDICIAL ACADEMY. [A.M. No. 2014025Ret.]
RELEASE OF COMPULSORY RETIREMENT BENEFITS
UNDER R.A. NO. 8291 OF MR. ISIDRO P. AUSTRIA,
FORMER SUPPLY OFFICER II, PHILIPPINE JUDICIAL
ACADEMY,SUPREMECOURT.

c.Requirementsfortheexerciseofthepowerarepresent

i.Illegalityofstructures

In the case at bar, petitioner admittedly failed to secure the necessary permits, clearances, and
exemptions before the construction, expansion, and operation of Boracay Wet Coves hotel in Malay,
Aklan.Torecall,petitionerdeclaredthattheapplicationforzoningcompliancewasstillpendingwiththe
officeofthemayoreventhoughconstructionandoperationwerealreadyongoingatthesametime.As
such,itcouldnolongerbedeniedthatpetitioneropenlyviolatedMunicipalOrdinance2000131,which
provides:
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary

G.R. No. 202733, September 30, 2014

DEVELOPMENT BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioner,
v. COMMISSION ON AUDIT, JANEL D. NACION,
DIRECTOR IV, LEGAL SERVICES SECTOR OF COA, AND
THE SUPERVISING AUDITOR OF THE DEVELOPMENT
BANKOFTHEPHILIPPINES,Respondents.

SECTION9.PermitsandClearances.
(a) No building or structure shall be allowed to start construction unless a
BuildingPermitthereforehasbeendulyissuedbytheOfficeoftheMunicipal
Engineer. Once issued, the building owner or any person in charge of the
construction shall display on the lot or on the building undergoing construction a
placardcontainingtheBuildingPermitNumberandthedateofitsissue.Theoffice
oftheMunicipalEngineershallnotissueanybuildingpermitunless:

A.M. No. P143260 (Formerly A.M. No. 12238

RTC ), September 16, 2014 OFFICE OF THE COURT
ADMINISTRATOR, Complainant, v. EDGAR S. CRUZ,
CLERK III, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 52,
GUAGUA,PAMPANGA,Respondent.

1. The proposed construction has been duly issued a Zoning Clearance

bytheOfficeoftheMunicipalZoningOfficer
2. TheproposedconstructionhasbeendulyendorsedbytheSangguniangBayan
throughaLetterofEndorsement.

G.R.No.210658,September17,2014PEOPLEOF
THE PHILIPPINES, PlaintiffAppellee, v. PRIMO P.
JAPSONALIASLONGLONG,AccusedAppellant.

(b) Only buildings/structures which has complied with all the requirements for its
constructionasverifiedtobytheBuildingInspectorandtheSangguniangBayanshall
beissuedaCertificateofOccupancybytheOfficeoftheMunicipalEngineer.
(c) No Business or Mayors Permit shall be issued to businesses being
undertakenonbuildingsorstructureswhichwerenotissuedacertificateof
OccupancybeginningJanuary2001andthereafter.

G.R.No.187144,September17,2014CARMENT.
GAHOL, SUBSTITUTED BY HER HEIRS, RICARDO T.
GAHOL, MARIA ESTER GAHOL PEREZ, JOSE MARI T.
GAHOL,
LUISITO
T.
GAHOL
AND
ALCREJ
CORPORATION,
Petitioners,
v.
ESPERANZA
COBARRUBIAS,Respondent.
G.R. No. 191712, September 17, 2014 EDITA S.
BUENO AND MILAGROS E. QUINAJON, Petitioners, v.
OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN, NAPOLEON S.
RONQUILLO, JR., EDNA G. RAA AND ROMEO G.
REFRUTO,Respondents.

xxxx
SECTION10.Penalties.
xxxx

G.R. No. 204755, September 17, 2014 SOLEDAD

TRIA, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
Respondent.

(e) Any building, structure, or contraption erected in any public place within the
MunicipalityofMalaysuchasbutnotlimitedtostreets,thoroughfares,sidewalks,plazas,
beachesorinanyotherpublicplaceareherebydeclaredasnuisanceandillegalstructure.
Suchbuildingstructureorcontraptionshallbedemolishedbytheownerthereof
oranyofhisauthorizedrepresentativewithinten(10)daysfromreceiptofthe
notice to demolish. Failure or refusal on the part of the owner or any of his
authorized representative to demolish the illegal structure within the period
herein above specified shall automatically authorize the government of the
Municipality of Malay to demolish the same, gather and keep the construction
materialsofthedemolishedstructure.(emphasissupplied)

G.R. No. 189863, September 17, 2014 PEDRO

LIBANG, JR., Petitioner, v. INDOCHINA SHIP
MANAGEMENT INC., MR. MIGUEL SANTOS AND
MAJESTICCARRIERS,INC.,Respondents.
A.C. No. 9115, September 17, 2014 REBECCA
MARIE UY YUPANGCONAKPIL, Complainant, v. ATTY.
ROBERTOL.UY,Respondent.
G.R.No.201644,September24,2014PEOPLEOF
THEPHILIPPINES,Petitioner,v.JOSEC.GOANDAIDA
C.DELAROSA,Respondents.
G.R. No. 206555, September 17, 2014 ATTY.
FORTUNATO PAGDANGANAN, JR., ATTY. ABIGAIL D.
SUAREZ,ANDEUGENIOA.VILLANUEVA,Petitioners,v.
FLORENTINOP.SARMIENTO,Respondent.

G.R. No. 188909, September 17, 2014 REPUBLIC

OF THE PHILIPPINES, REPRESENTED BY THE OFFICE
OF THE PRESIDENT, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
AND HIGHWAYS AND PRESIDENTIAL ANTIGRAFT
COMMISSION, Petitioners, v. FLORENDO B. ARIAS,
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF EQUIPMENT,
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS AND HIGHWAYS,
Respondent.
G.R.No.158583,September10,2014ROSALIEL.
GARGOLES, Petitioner, v. REYLITA S. DEL ROSARIO,
DOING BUSINESS UNDER THE NAME AND STYLE JAY
ANNE'SONEHOURPHOTOSHOP,Respondent.

Petitioner cannot justify his position by passing the blame onto the respondent mayor and the latters
failure to act on his appeal for this does not, in any way, imply that petitioner can proceed with his
infrastructure projects. On the contrary, this only means that the decision of the zoning
administrator denying the application still stands and that petitioner acquired no right to
constructonthenobuildzone.Theillegalityoftheconstructioncannotbecuredbymerelytendering
paymentforthenecessaryfeesandpermitssincetheLGUsrefusalrestsonvalidgrounds.
Insteadoftakingthelawintohisownhands,petitionercouldhavefiled,asanalternative,apetitionfor
mandamustocompeltherespondentmayortoexercisediscretionandresolvethecontroversypending
beforehisoffice.Thereisindeedanexceptiontotherulethatmattersinvolvingjudgmentanddiscretion
are beyond the reach of a writ of mandamus, for such writ may be issued to compel action in those
matters,whenrefused.Whetherornotthedecisionwouldbefororagainstpetitionerwouldbeforthe
respondentmayortodecide,forwhilemandamusmaybeinvokedtocompeltheexerciseofdiscretion,
itcannotcompelsuchdiscretiontobeexercisedinaparticularway.21Whatwouldhavebeenimportant
was for the respondent mayor to immediately resolve the case for petitioner to be able to go through
themotionsthatthezoningclearanceapplicationprocessentailed.
Alas,petitioneroptedtodefythezoningadministratorsruling.Heconsciouslychosetoviolatenotonly
the Ordinance but also Sec. 301 of PD 1096, laying down the requirement of building permits, which
provides:
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary

G.R. No. 158150, September 10, 2014 AGRIEX

CO., LTD., Petitioner, v. HON. TITUS B. VILLANUEVA,
COMMISSIONER, BUREAU OF CUSTOMS (NOW
REPLACED BY HON. ANTONIO M. BERNARDO), AND
HON. BILLY C. BIBIT, COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, PORT
OF SUBIC (NOW REPLACED BY HON. EMELITO
VILLARUZ),Respondents.

Section 301. Building Permits. No person, firm or corporation, including any agency or
instrumentality of the government shall erect, construct, alter, repair, move, convert or
demolishanybuildingorstructureorcausethesametobedonewithoutfirstobtaininga
buildingpermitthereforfromtheBuildingOfficialassignedintheplacewherethesubject
buildingislocatedorthebuildingworkistobedone.

G.R.No.182794,September08,2014PEOPLEOF
THE PHILIPPINES, PlaintiffAppellee, v. BOBBY

This twin violation of law and ordinance warranted the LGUs invocation of Sec. 444 (b)(3)(vi) of the

http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2014septemberdecisions.php?id=771

5/9

9/26/2016

G.R. No. 211356, September 29, 2014 - CRISOSTOMO B. AQUINO, Petitioner, v. MUNICIPALITY OF MALAY, AKLAN, REPRESENTED BY HON. MA

BELGAR,AccusedAppellant.
G.R.No.206510,September16,2014MOSTREV.
PEDRO D. ARIGO, Vicar Apostolic of Puerto Princesa
D.D.MOSTREV.DEOGRACIASS.INIGUEZ,JR.,Bishop
Emeritus ofCaloocan, FRANCES Q. QUIMPO, CLEMENTE
G.BAUTISTA,JR.,KalikasanPNE,MARIACAROLINAP.
ARAULLO, RENATO M. REYES, JR., BagongAlyansang
Makabayan, HON. NERI JAVIER COLMENARES,
BayanMuna Partylist, ROLAND G. SIMBULAN, PH.D.,
Junk VFAMovement, TERESITA R. PEREZ, PH.D., HON.
RAYMONDV.PALATINO,KabataanPartylist,PETERSJ.
GONZALES,Pamalakaya,GIOVANNIA.TAPANG,PH.D.,
Agham, ELMER C. LABOG, Kilusang Mayo Uno, JOAN
MAYE.SALVADOR,Gabriela,JOSEENRIQUEA.AFRICA,
THERESA A. CONCEPCION, MARY JOAN A. GUAN,
NESTOR T. BAGUINON, PH.D., A. EDSEL F. TUPAZ,
Petitioners, v. SCOTT H. SWIFT in his capacity as
Commander of the U.S. 7th Fleet, MARK A. RICE in his
capacity as Commanding Officer of the USS Guardian,
PRESIDENTBENIGNOS.AQUINOIIIinhiscapacityas
CommanderinChief of the Armed Forces of the
Philippines, HON. ALBERT F. DEL ROSARIO, Secretary,
DepartmentofForeignAffairs,HON.PAQUITOOCHOA,
JR., Executive Secretary, Office of the President, HON.
VOLTAIRE T. GAZMIN, Secretary, Department of
National Defense, HON. RAMON JESUS P. PAJE,
Secretary, Department of Environment and Natural
Resources, VICE ADMIRAL JOSE LUIS M. ALANO,
PhilippineNavyFlagOfficerinCommand,ArmedForces
of the Philippines, ADMIRAL RODOLFO D. ISORENA,
Commandant, Philippine Coast Guard, COMMODORE
ENRICO EFREN EVANGELISTA, Philippine Coast Guard
Palawan, MAJOR GEN. VIRGILIO O. DOMINGO,
Commandant of Armed Forces of the Philippines
Commandand LT. GEN. TERRY G. ROBLING, US Marine
Corps Forces, Pacific and Balikatan 2013 Exercise Co
Director,Respondents.

LGC,whichpowerisseparateanddistinctfromthepowertosummarilyabatenuisancesperse.Under
thelaw,insofarasillegalconstructionsareconcerned,themayorcan,aftersatisfyingtherequirement
ofduenoticeandhearing,ordertheirclosureanddemolition.
ii.Observanceofproceduraldueprocessrights
Inthecaseatbench,thedueprocessrequirementisdeemedtohavebeensufficientlycompliedwith.
First,basicistherulethatpublicofficersenjoythepresumptionofregularityintheperformanceoftheir
duties.22 The burden is on the petitioner herein to prove that Boracay West Cove was deprived of the
opportunity to be heard before EO 10 was issued. Regrettably, copies of the Cease and Desist Order
issuedbytheLGUandoftheassailedEO10itselfwereneverattachedtothepetitionbeforethisCourt,
whichdocumentscouldhavereadilyshedlightonwhetherornotpetitionerhasbeenaccordedthe10
day grace period provided in Section 10 of the Ordinance. In view of this fact, the presumption of
regularitymustbesustained.Second,asquotedbypetitionerinhispetitionbeforetheCA,theassailed
EO 10 states that petitioner received notices from the municipality government on March 7 and 28,
2011,requiringBoracayWestCovetocomplywiththezoningordinanceandyetitfailedtodoso.23If
such was the case, the grace period can be deemed observed and the establishment was already ripe
forclosureanddemolitionbythetimeEO10wasissuedinJune.Third, the observance of the 10day
allowancefortheownertodemolishthehotelwasneverquestionedbypetitionersothereisnoneedto
discussthesame.Verily,theonlygroundsinvokedbypetitionerincryingdueprocessviolationare(1)
the absence of a court order prior to demolition and (2) the municipal governments exercise of
jurisdiction over the controversy instead of the DENR. Therefore, it can no longer be belatedly argued
that the 10day grace period was not observed because to entertain the same would result in the
violationoftherespondentsowndueprocessrights.
Given the presence of the requirements under Sec. 444 (b)(3)(vi) of the LGC, whether the building
constitutedanuisanceperseoranuisanceperaccidensbecomesimmaterial.Thehotelwasdemolished
notexactlybecauseitisanuisancebutbecauseitfailedtocomplywiththelegalrequirementspriorto
construction. It just so happened that, in the case at bar, the hotels incident that qualified it as a
nuisance per accidensits being constructed within the no build zonefurther resulted in the non
issuance of the necessary permits and clearances, which is a ground for demolition under the LGC.
Underthepremises,acourtorderthatisrequiredundernormalcircumstancesisherebydispensedwith.
d.TheFLAgTcannotprevailoverthemunicipalordinanceandPD1096
PetitionernextdirectsourattentiontothefollowingFLAgTprovision:

chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary

A.C. No. 10438, September 23, 2014 CF SHARP

CREW MANAGEMENT INCORPORATED, Complainant, v.
NICOLASC.TORRES,Respondent.

VII. The SECOND PARTY may construct permanent and/or temporary improvements or
infrastructure in the FLAgT Area necessary and appropriate for its development for
tourism purposes pursuant to the approved SMP. Permanent Improvements refer to
access roads, and buildings or structures which adhere to the ground in a fixed and
permanentmanner.Ontheotherhand,TemporaryImprovementsincludethosewhich
are detachable from the foundation or the ground introduced by the SECOND PARTY in
theFLAgTAreaandwhichtheSECONDPARTYmayremoveordismantleuponexpiration
orcancellationofthisAGREEMENTxxx.24

G.R.No.209286,September23,2014LINADELA
PEA JALOVER, GEORGIE A. HUISO AND VELVET
BARQUIN ZAMORA, Petitioners, v. JOHN HENRY R.
OSMEA
AND
COMMISSION
ON
ELECTIONS
(COMELEC),Respondents.
G.R. No. 182424, September 22, 2014 NENITA
CARGANILLO, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES,Respondent.
G.R.No.192957,September29,2014EMMANUEL
B. MORAN, JR., (DECEASED), SUBSTITUTED BY HIS
WIDOW, CONCORDIA V. MORAN, Petitioner, v. OFFICE
OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE PHILIPPINES, AS
REPRESENTED BY THE HONORABLE EXECUTIVE
SECRETARYEDUARDOR.ERMITAANDPGACARS,INC.,
Respondents.

chanrobleslaw

Taken in conjunction with the exceptions laid down in Sections 6 and 8 of the Ordinance, petitioner
argues that Boracay West Cove is exempted from securing permits from the LGU. Said exceptions
read:
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary

SECTION 6. No building or structure shall be allowed to be constructed on a slope

Twenty Five Percent (25%) or higher unless provided with soil erosion protective
structuresandauthorizedbytheDepartmentofEnvironmentandNaturalResources.

G.R.No.199133,September29,2014ESPERANZA
TUMPAG,SUBSTITUTEDBYHERSON,PABLITOTUMPAG
BELNAS, JR., Petitioner, v. SAMUEL TUMPAG,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 179654, September 22, 2014 HACIENDA
LEDDY/RICARDOGAMBOA,JR.,Petitioner,v.PAQUITO
VILLEGAS,Respondent.
G.R. No. 206599, September 29, 2014 680 HOME
APPLIANCES, INC., Petitioner, v. THE HONORABLE
COURT OF APPEALS, THE HONORABLE MARYANN E.
CORPUSMAALAC, IN HER CAPACITY AS THE
PRESIDINGJUDGEOFTHEREGIONALTRIALCOURTOF
MAKATI CITY, BRANCH 141, ATTY. ENGRACIO
ESCASINAS,JR.,INHISCAPACITYASTHEEXOFFICIO
SHERIFF/CLERK OF COURT VII, OFFICE OF THE CLERK
OF COURT, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, MAKATI CITY,
FIRST SOVEREIGN ASSET MANAGEMENT (SPVAMC),
INC.ANDALDANCOMERLMAR,INC.,Respondents.

xxxx
SECTION8.Nobuildingorstructureshallbeallowedtobeconstructedonaswampor
other waterclogged areas unless authorized by the Department of Environment and
NaturalResources.
Accordingtopetitioner,thefactthatitwasissuedaFLAgTconstitutessufficientauthorizationfromthe
DENRtoproceedwiththeconstructionofthethreestoreyhotel.
Theargumentdoesnotpersuade.
The rights granted to petitioner under the FLAgT are not unbridled. Forestlands, although under the
management of the DENR, are not exempt from the territorial application of municipal laws, for local
government units legitimately exercise their powers of government over their defined territorial
jurisdiction.
Furthermore,theconditionssetforthintheFLAgTandthelimitationscircumscribedintheordinanceare
notmutuallyexclusiveandare,infact,cumulative.AssourcedfromSec.447(a)(5)(i)oftheLGC:
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary

G.R. No. 198538, September 29, 2014 EXOCET

SECURITY AND ALLIED SERVICES CORPORATION
AND/OR MA. TERESA MARCELO, Petitioner, v.
ARMANDOD.SERRANO,Respondent.

Section447.Powers,Duties,FunctionsandCompensation.
(a) The sangguniang bayan, as the legislative body of the municipality, shall enact
ordinances, approve resolutions and appropriate funds for the general welfare of the
municipality and its inhabitants pursuant to Section 16 of this Code and in the proper
exerciseofthecorporatepowersofthemunicipalityasprovidedforunderSection22of
thisCode,andshall:

G.R. No. 192398, September 29, 2014

COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Petitioner, v.
PILIPINAS
SHELL
PETROLEUM
CORPORATION,
Respondent.

chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary

A.M. No. SB1421J [Formerly A.M. No. 131006

SB], September 23, 2014 RE: ALLEGATIONS MADE
UNDER OATH AT THE SENATE BLUE RIBBON
COMMITTEE HEARING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 26, 2013
AGAINST ASSOCIATE JUSTICE GREGORY S. ONG,
SANDIGANBAYAN

xxxx
(5) Approve ordinances which shall ensure the efficient and effective
deliveryofthebasicservicesandfacilitiesasprovidedforunderSection17
ofthisCode,andinadditiontosaidservicesandfacilities,shall:
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary

(i) Provide for the establishment, maintenance,

protection, and conservation of communal forests and
watersheds, tree parks, greenbelts, mangroves, and other
similar forest development projects x x x. (emphasis
added)

G.R.No.204369,September17,2014ENRIQUETA
M. LOCSIN, Petitioner, v. BERNARDO HIZON, CARLOS
HIZON, SPS. JOSE MANUEL & LOURDES GUEVARA,
Respondents.
G.R. No. 202666, September 29, 2014 RHONDA
AVE S. VIVARES AND SPS. MARGARITA AND DAVID
SUZARA, Petitioners, v. ST. THERESAS COLLEGE,
MYLENE RHEZA T. ESCUDERO, AND JOHN DOES,
Respondents.

Thus,asidefromcomplyingwiththeprovisionsintheFLAgTgrantedbytheDENR,itwasincumbenton
petitioner to likewise comply with the no build zone restriction under Municipal Ordinance 2000131,
whichwasalreadyinforceevenbeforetheFLAgTwasenteredinto.Onthispoint,itiswelltostressthat
Sections6and8oftheOrdinancedonotexemptpetitionerfromcomplyingwiththerestrictionssince
these provisions adverted to grant exemptions from the ban on constructions on slopes and swamps,

http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2014septemberdecisions.php?id=771

6/9

9/26/2016

G.R. No. 211356, September 29, 2014 - CRISOSTOMO B. AQUINO, Petitioner, v. MUNICIPALITY OF MALAY, AKLAN, REPRESENTED BY HON. MA

G.R. No. 157633, September 10, 2014

NORTHWEST AIRLINES, INC., Petitioner, v. MA.
CONCEPCIONM.DELROSARIO,Respondent.
G.R.No.202066,September30,2014CBKPOWER
COMPANY LIMITED, Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF
INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent. G.R. NO. 205353
CBK POWER COMPANY LIMITED, Petitioner, v.
COMMISSIONEROFINTERNALREVENUE,Respondent.
G.R. No. 152334, September 24, 2014 H.H.
HOLLERO CONSTRUCTION, INC., Petitioner, v.
GOVERNMENTSERVICEINSURANCESYSTEMANDPOOL
OFMACHINERYINSURERS,Respondents.
G.R.No.200077,September17,2014PEOPLEOF
THEPHILIPPINES,PlaintiffAppellee,v.ADELRAMOSY
ABELLANA,AccusedAppellant.

notonthenobuildzone.
Additionally, the FLAgT does not excuse petitioner from complying with PD 1096. As correctly pointed
outbyrespondents,theagreementcannotandwillnotamendorchangethelawbecausealegislative
act cannot be altered by mere contractual agreement. Hence, petitioner has no valid reason for its
failuretosecureabuildingpermitpursuanttoSec.301oftheNationalBuildingCode.
e.TheDENRdoesnothaveprimaryjurisdictionoverthecontroversy
Lastly, in ascribing grave abuse of discretion on the part of the respondent mayor, petitioner argued
thatthehotelsiteisaforestlandundertheprimaryjurisdictionoftheDENR.Assuch,themeritsofthe
case should have been passed upon by the agency and not by the LGU. In the alternative, petitioner
explainsthatevenifjurisdictionoverthematterhasbeendevolvedinfavoroftheLGU,theDENRstill
hasthepowerofreviewandsupervisionovertheformersrulings.Ascitedbythepetitioner,theLGC
reads:
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary

Section17.BasicServicesandFacilities.

G.R.No.208716,September24,2014PEOPLEOF
THE PHILIPPINES, PlaintiffAppellee, v. ELADIO B.
LUMAHOALIASATTUMPANG,AccusedAppellant.

xxxx
(b)Suchbasicservicesandfacilitiesinclude,butarenotlimitedto,thefollowing:

G.R. No. 199780, September 24, 2014

GOVERNMENT
SERVICE
INSURANCE
SYSTEM,
Petitioner,v.JOSEM.CAPACITE,Respondent.

chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary

xxxx
(2)ForaMunicipality:

A.M. No. P133130 [Formerly OCA I.P.I. No. 11

3668P],September22,2014OFFICEOFTHECOURT
ADMINISTRATOR, Petitioner, v. MAY F. HERNANDEZ,
CLERKIII,REGIONALTRIALCOURT,BRANCH199,LAS
PIASCITY,Respondent.

chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary

xxxx
(ii) Pursuant to national policies and subject to supervision,
control and review of the DENR, implementation of
communitybased forestry projects which include integrated
social forestry programs and similar projects management
andcontrolofcommunalforestswithanareanotexceeding
fifty (50) square kilometers establishment of tree parks,
greenbelts, and similar forest development projects.
(emphasisadded)

G.R. No. 182770, September 17, 2014 WPM

INTERNATIONAL TRADING, INC. AND WARLITO P.
MANLAPAZ, Petitioners, v. FE CORAZON LABAYEN,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 192973, September 29, 2014 PEDRITO
DELA TORRE, Petitioner, v. DR. ARTURO IMBUIDO,
DRA.NORMAIMBUIDOintheircapacityasownersand
operators of DIVINE SPIRIT GENERAL HOSPITAL
AND/ORDR.NESTORPASAMBA,Respondents.
G.R. No. 202354, September 24, 2014 AMADA C.
ZACARIAS, Petitioner, v. VICTORIA ANACAY, EDNA
ANACAY,
CYNTHIA
ANACAYGUISIC,
ANGELITO
ANACAY,JERMILISRAEL,JIMMYROYISRAELANDALL
OTHERPERSONSCLAIMINGAUTHORITYUNDERTHEM,
Respondents.
G.R.No.173168,September29,2014PHILIPPINE
AMANAH
BANK
(NOW
ALAMANAH
ISLAMIC
INVESTMENT BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES, ALSO
KNOWN
AS
ISLAMIC
BANK),
Petitioner,
v.
EVANGELISTACONTRERAS,Respondent.
G.R. No. 200065, September 24, 2014 CAPITAL
SHOES FACTORY, LTD., Petitioner, v. TRAVELER KIDS,
INC.,Respondent.
G.R.No.195889,September24,2014PHILIPPINE
NATIONAL BANK, Petitioner, v. SPOUSES EDUARDO
ANDMA.ROSARIOTAJONERAANDEDUAROSAREALTY
DEVELOPMENT,INC.,Respondents.
G.R. No. 211356, September 29, 2014
CRISOSTOMOB.AQUINO,Petitioner,v.MUNICIPALITY
OF MALAY, AKLAN, REPRESENTED BY HON. MAYOR
JOHN P. YAP, SANGGUNIANG BAYAN OF MALAY,
AKLAN, REPRESENTED BY HON. EZEL FLORES, DANTE
PASUGUIRON, ROWEN AGUIRRE, WILBEC GELITO,
JUPITER GALLENERO, OFFICE OF THE MUNICIPAL
ENGINEER, OFFICE OF THE MUNICIPAL TREASURER,
BORACAY PNP CHIEF, BORACAY FOUNDATION, INC.,
REPRESENTED BY NENETTE GRAF, MUNICIPAL
AUXILIARY POLICE, AND JOHN AND JANE DOES,
Respondents.
G.R. No. 205561, September 24, 2014 DIONISIO
B. COLOMA, JR., Petitioner, v. HON. SANDIGANBAYAN
(THIRDDIVISION)ANDPEOPLEOFTHEPHILIPPINES,
Respondents.

Petitionerhasmademuchofthefactthatinlinewiththisprovision,theDENRRegion6hadissuedan
opinionfavourabletopetitioner.25Topetitioner,theadvertedopinioneffectivelyreversedthefindingsof
therespondentmayorthatthestructureintroducedwasillegallyconstructed.
Wedisagree.
Inallegingthatthecaseconcernsthedevelopmentandtheproperuseofthecountrysenvironmentand
naturalresources,petitionerisskirtingtheprincipalissue,whichisBoracayWestCovesnoncompliance
with the permit, clearance, and zoning requirements for building constructions under national and
municipal laws. He downplays Boracay West Coves omission in a bid to justify ousting the LGU of
jurisdictionoverthecaseandtransferringthesametotheDENR.Heattemptstoblowtheissueoutof
proportion when it all boils down to whether or not the construction of the threestorey hotel was
supportedbythenecessarydocumentaryrequirements.
Basedonlawandjurisprudence,theofficeofthemayorhasquasijudicialpowerstoordertheclosing
and demolition of establishments. This power granted by the LGC, as earlier explained, We believe, is
not the same power devolved in favor of the LGU under Sec. 17 (b)(2)(ii), as abovequoted, which is
subjecttoreviewbytheDENR.Thefactthatthebuildingtobedemolishedislocatedwithinaforestland
undertheadministrationoftheDENRisofnomoment,forwhatisinvolvedherein,strictlyspeaking,is
not an issue on environmental protection, conservation of natural resources, and the maintenance of
ecological balance, but the legality or illegality of the structure. Rather than treating this as an
environmentalissuethen,focusshouldnotbedivertedfromtherootcauseofthisdebaclecompliance.
Ultimately, the purported power of review by a regional office of the DENR over respondents actions
exercised through an instrumentality of an exparte opinion, in this case, finds no sufficient basis. At
best,thelegalopinionrendered,thoughperhapsinformative,isnotconclusiveonthecourtsandshould
betakenwithagrainofsalt.
WHEREFORE,inviewoftheforegoing,thepetitionisherebyDENIED for lack of merit. The Decision
and the Resolution of the Court of Appeals in CAG.R. SP No. 120042 dated August 13, 2013 and
February3,2014,respectively,areherebyAFFIRMED.
SOORDERED.

cralawred

Peralta,Villarama,Jr.,Reyes,andJardeleza,JJ.,concur.
Endnotes:

G.R. No. 209195, September 17, 2014 MANUEL J.

JIMENEZ, JR., Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES,Respondent.G.R.NO.209215PEOPLE
OF THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. MANUEL J.
JIMENEZ,JR.,Respondent.
G.R. No. 195594, September 29, 2014 REPUBLIC
OF THE PHILIPPINES, REPRESENTED BY THE
NATIONAL IRRIGATION ADMINISTRATION, Petitioner,
v. SPOUSES ROGELIO LAZO AND DOLORES LAZO,
Respondents.
G.R. No. 200566, September 17, 2014 JEBSEN
MARITIME INC., APEX MARITIME SHIP MANAGEMENT
CO.LLC.,AND/ORESTANISLAOSANTIAGO,Petitioners,
v.WILFREDOE.RAVENA,Respondent.

1Rollo,

pp. 4960. Penned by Associate Justice Carmelita SalandananManahan and

concurred in by Associate Justices Ramon Paul L. Hernando and Ma. Luisa C. Quijano
Padilla.
2Id.at65.
3Id.at196198.
4PhilVille Development and Housing Corporation v. Bonifacio, G.R. No. 167391, June 8,

2011,631SCRA327,350351.

5Yusayv.CourtofAppeals,G.R.No.156684,April6,2011,647SCRA269,276277.
6TheMunicipalCouncilofLemery,Batangasv.TheProvincialBoardofBatangas,56Phil.

G.R. No. 180290, September 29, 2014

COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Petitioner, v.
PHILIPPINENATIONALBANK,Respondent.

260(1931).

G.R.No.167454,September24,2014EMERITUC.
BARUT, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
Respondent.

8Galictov.Aquino,G.R.No.193978,February28,2012,667SCRA150,167.

G.R. No. 191237, September 24, 2014 ROBERT

KUA, CAROLINE N. KUA, AND MA. TERESITA N. KUA,

http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2014septemberdecisions.php?id=771

7Id.

9G.R.No.150270,November26,2008,571SCRA617,633.
10Section30.ReviewofExecutiveOrders.

7/9

9/26/2016

G.R. No. 211356, September 29, 2014 - CRISOSTOMO B. AQUINO, Petitioner, v. MUNICIPALITY OF MALAY, AKLAN, REPRESENTED BY HON. MA

Petitioners,
v.
GREGORIO
SACUPAYO
MAXIMINIANOPANERIO,Respondents.

AND

A.M. No. MTJ131837 [formerly OCA IPI No. 12

2463MTJ], September 24, 2014 CONRADO ABE
LOPEZ, REPRESENTED BY ATTY. ROMUALDO JUBAY,
Complainant, v. JUDGE ROGELIO S. LUCMAYON,
MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT IN CITIES, BRANCH 1,
MANDAUECITY,CEBU,Respondent.
G.R.No.198314,September24,2014PEOPLEOF
THE PHILIPPINES, PlaintiffAppellee, v. RICHARD
GUINTOYSANANDRES,AccusedAppellant.
G.R. No. 185345, September 10, 2014 RONNIE L.
ABING, Petitioner, v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS
COMMISSION, ALLIED BANKING CORPORATION,
FACILITATORS GENERAL SERVICES AND MARILAG
BUSINESS AND INDUSTRIAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES,
INC.,Respondents.
G.R.No.173632,September29,2014AMBROSIO
ROTAIRO (SUBSTITUTED BY HIS SPOUSE MARIA
RONSAYRO ROTAIRO, AND HIS CHILDREN FELINA
ROTAIRO, ERLINDA ROTAIRO CRUZ, EUDOSIA
ROTAIRO CRIZALDO, NIEVES ROTAIRO TUBIG,
REMEDIOS ROTAIRO MACAHILIG, FELISA ROTAIRO
LEGASPI, JOSEFINA ROTAIRO TORREVILLAS, AND
CRISENCIO R. ROTAIRO, MARCIANA TIBAY, EUGENIO
PUNZALAN,ANDVICENTEDELROSARIO,Petitioners,v.
ROVIRA ALCANTARA AND VICTOR ALCANTARA,
Respondents.
G.R.No.194176,September10,2014LIMUELLC.
NARCISO, OMAR C. MATUGUINA, ERIC MATUGUINA,
AZENITH
MAGASO,
LILIBETH
MASCARIAS,
LUTGARDO
OGAMA,
LOLITO
COLLAMAT,
IRIS
MATUGUINA AND ELMER BANILAD, CARLOS B.
MATUGUINA, JR., BIBIANO ESTRERA, JR., PEDRO
LINABOG, BOBBY ALQUEZA, SANTIAGO ATIS, MARLON
DAMAYO, CASINILLO NESTRO, BERNARDITO DACAN,
SABINIANO PATATAG, JOLLYBOY MONICIT, RODRIGO
DAYDAY,REYESTRERA,CRESENCIOCASIO,DOMINICO
AVILA, ERVERT RICAZA, ENRIQUE PANTILGAN,
JONARDENE.GONZAGA,RENATOCASIO,BENNYBOOC,
DUA CORSINO, RANILO IGOT, NARCISO PATERNO,
ROBERTO RABAL, JULITO MONSALES, LEOPOLDO
MONGUEZ, JR., ROWEL NEIGAS, EPIFANIO PIAMIL,
LOUIE JUDILLAS AND MANUEL CENIZA, Petitioners, v.
PACIFIC TRADERS & MANUFACTURING CORPORATION
(PTMC)/TABOK
WORKERS
MULTIPURPOSE
COOPERATIVE(TWMPC),Respondents.
G.R. No. 195443, September 17, 2014 JUANARIO
G. CAMPIT, Petitioner, v. ISIDRA B. GRIPA, PEDRO
BARDIAGA, AND SEVERINO BARDIAGA, REPRESENTED
BYHISSONROLANDOBARDIAGA,Respondents.
G.R.No.196508,September24,2014LEONARDO
A. VILLALON AND ERLINDA TALDEVILLALON,
Petitioners,v.AMELIACHAN,Respondent.
G.R. No. 185267, September 17, 2014 CESAR T.
QUIAMBAO AND ERIC C. PILAPIL, Petitioners, v.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, ADERITO Z. YUJUICO
ANDBONIFACIOC.SUMBILLA,Respondents.
G.R. No. 187621, September 24, 2014 MOUNT
CARMEL
COLLEGE
EMPLOYEES
UNION
(MCCEU)/RUMOLO S. BASCAR, MARIBEL TESALUNA,
ROLANDO TESALUNA, KENNETH BENIGNOS, MARILYN
MANGULABNAN, EMELINA I. NACIONAL, JODELYN
REBOTON,EVERSITAS.BASCAR,MAEBAYLEN,ERNAE.
MAHILUM,EVELYNR.ANTONES,Petitioners,v.MOUNT
CARMELCOLLEGE,INCORPORATED,Respondent.

(a) Except as otherwise provided under the Constitution and special statutes, the
governor shall review all executive orders promulgated by the component city or
municipal mayor within his jurisdiction. The city or municipal mayor shall review all
executive orders promulgated by the punong barangay within his jurisdiction. Copies of
suchordersshallbeforwardedtothegovernororthecityormunicipalmayor,asthecase
may be, within three (3) days from their issuance. In all instances of review, the local
chief executive concerned shall ensure that such executive orders are within the powers
grantedbylawandinconformitywithprovincial,city,ormunicipalordinances.
(b) If the governor or the city or municipal mayor fails to act on said executive orders
withinthirty(30)daysaftertheirsubmission,thesameshallbedeemedconsistentwith
lawandthereforevalid.
11Heirs of Spouses Teofilo M. Reterta and Elisa Reterta v. Spouses Lorenzo Mores and

VirginiaLopez,G.R.No.159941,August17,2011,655SCRA580,594595citingJacav.
Davao Lumber Company, G.R. No. L25771, March 29, 1982, 113 SCRA 107, 129,
Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company, Inc. v. National Wages and Productivity
Commission, G.R. No. 144322, February 6, 2007, 514 SCRA 346, and Lu Ym v. Nabua,
G.R.No.161309,February23,2005,452SCRA298,311.
12Gancayov.CityGovernmentofQuezon,G.R.No.177807,October11,2011,658SCRA

853,867.

13G.R.Nos.15901718,159059,March9,2011,645SCRA41.
14Salaov.Santos,67Phil.550(1939).
152J.C.S.Sangco,TortsandDamages893(1994).
16ACEnterprisesv.FrabellePropertiesCorp., G.R. No. 166744, November 2, 2006, 506

SCRA625,660661.
17Id.

18Section16.GeneralWelfare.Everylocalgovernmentunitshallexercisethepowers

expressly granted, those necessarily implied therefrom, as well as powers necessary,

appropriate, or incidental for its efficient and effective governance, and those which are
essential to the promotion of the general welfare. Within their respective territorial
jurisdictions, local government units shall ensure and support, among other things, the
preservationandenrichmentofculture,promotehealthandsafety,enhancetherightof
thepeopletoabalancedecology,encourageandsupportthedevelopmentofappropriate
and selfreliant scientific and technological capabilities, improve public morals, enhance
economic prosperity and social justice, promote full employment among their residents,
maintainpeaceandorder,andpreservethecomfortandconvenienceoftheirinhabitants.
19Gancayov.CityGovernmentofQuezon,supranote12,at864865.
20CityEngineerofBaguiov.Baniqued,supranote9,at633.
21Amantev.Hidalgo,67Phil.338(1939).
22RulesofCourt,Rule131,Sec.3(m).
23Rollo,p.88.
24Id.at191.
25Id.at144.

Adsby Google
Adsby Google
Adsby Google

1.GR15
1.GRHotel
1.CaseGR

2.LawGR
3.GRHotel
2.CourtCases
3.GRV
2.GRNo
3.CourtGR

G.R.No.183345,September17,2014MA.GRACIA
HAO AND DANNY HAO, Petitioners, v. PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES,Respondent.

BacktoHome|BacktoMain

G.R. No. 187401, September 17, 2014 MA.

ROSARIO P. CAMPOS, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES
AND
FIRST
WOMENS
CREDIT
CORPORATION,Respondents.

QUICKSEARCH

4.CourtCases
4.CaseGR
4.LawCases

1901

1902

1903

1904

1905

1906

1907

1908

1909

1910

1911

1912

1913

1914

1915

1916

1917

1918

1919

1920

1921

1922

1923

1924

1925

1926

1927

1928

1929

1930

1931

1932

1933

1934

1935

1936

1937

1938

1939

1940

1941

1942

1943

1944

1945

1946

1947

1948

1949

1950

1951

1952

1953

1954

1955

1956

1957

1958

1959

1960

1961

1962

1963

1964

1965

1966

1967

1968

1969

1970

1971

1972

G.R.No.172843,September24,2014ALFREDOL.
VILLAMOR, JR., Petitioner, v. JOHN S. UMALE, IN
SUBSTITUTION OF HERNANDO F. BALMORES,
Respondent. G.R. NO. 172881 RODIVAL E. REYES,
HANS M. PALMA AND DOROTEO M. PANGILINAN,
Petitioners,v.HERNANDOF.BALMORES,Respondent.

1973

1974

1975

1976

1977

1978

1979

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

G.R. No. 200729, September 29, 2014 TEMIC

AUTOMOTIVE (PHILIPPINES), INC., Petitioner, v.
RENATOM.CANTOS,Respondent.

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2013

2014

2015

2016

G.R.No.180144,September24,2014LEONARDO
BOGNOT, Petitioner, v. RRI LENDING CORPORATION,
REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER, DARIO J.
BERNARDEZ,Respondent.
G.R.No.200055,September10,2014STANDARD
INSURANCE CO., INC., Petitioner, v. ARNOLD
CUARESMAANDJERRYB.CUARESMA,Respondents.
G.R.No.202838,September17,2014PEOPLEOF
THE PHILIPPINES, PlaintiffAppellee, v. JULITO
GERANDOY,AccusedAppellant.

2012

A.M. No. RTJ082140 (Formerly A.M. No. 00286

RTC), October 07, 2014 OFFICE OF THE COURT

http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2014septemberdecisions.php?id=771

8/9

9/26/2016

G.R. No. 211356, September 29, 2014 - CRISOSTOMO B. AQUINO, Petitioner, v. MUNICIPALITY OF MALAY, AKLAN, REPRESENTED BY HON. MA

ADMINISTRATOR, Complainant, v. EXECUTIVE JUDGE

OWEN B. AMOR, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, DAET,
CAMARINESNORTE,Respondent.

A.M. No. RTJ142394 (Formerly OCA IPI No. 12

3847RTJ), September 01, 2014 GEORGE T. CHUA,
Complainant, v. JUDGE FORTUNITO L. MADRONA,
Respondent.
G.R.No.189812,September01,2014PEOPLEOF
THE PHILIPPINES, PlaintiffAppellee, v. REYNALDO
BATURI,AccusedAppellant.
G.R. No. 200729, September 29, 2014 TEMIC
AUTOMOTIVE (PHILIPPINES), INC., Petitioner, v.
RENATOM.CANTOS,Respondent.

Copyright19982016ChanRoblesPublishingCompany

|Disclaimer|EmailRestrictions

http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2014septemberdecisions.php?id=771

ChanRoblesVirtualLawLibrary|chanrobles.com

RED

9/9