[ G.R. No. 225925, June 14, 2021 ]
MANUELITO P. JUGUETA, PETITIONER, VS. ARTHUR J. LEDESMA AND BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF PARAÑAQUE SOUTH ADMIRAL VILLAGE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC. (PSAVHAI), RESPONDENTS.
CONCURRING OPINION
CAGUIOA, J.:
The ponencia resolves to dismiss the above-captioned Petition on the ground that the Resolution dated November 26, 2008 issued by the Board of Commissioners of the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB-BOC) is already final and executory.
According to the ponencia, it is the Court of Appeals (CA) which has appellate jurisdiction over the decisions, resolutions, and orders of the HLURB-BOC issued in the exercise of its exclusive original jurisdiction over intra-association disputes. Hence, petitioner Manuelito P. Jugueta (Jugueta) failed to avail of the correct appellate remedy when he filed his appeal with the Office of the President (OP). The ponencia explains:
With regard to the appeal of cases decided by the HLURB that are not included in Section 1 of P.D. 1344, it is the CA that has appellate jurisdiction. As a rule, appeals from the judgment or final rulings of quasi-judicial agencies are appealable to the CA via petition for review under Rule 43 of the Rules of Court. The HLURB is a quasi-judicial agency exercising quasi-judicial powers or functions. It has the authority to resolve real estate management cases and homeowners' association cases.
Noticeably, in the present case, Jugueta filed his appeal involving an intra-association dispute to the OP instead of the CA.
To allay any confusion in the appellate jurisdiction of HLURB cases, it is worthy to highlight Section 20 of Republic Act No. (R.A.) 9904, which explicitly states the appellate procedure for intra[-]association disputes decided by the [HLURB-BOC] is vested in the CA. Section 20 of R.A. 9904 provides that:
Section 20. Duties and Responsibilities of the HLURB. – In addition to the powers, authorities and responsibilities vested in it by Republic Act No. 8763, Presidential Decree No. 902-A, Batas Pambansa Blg. 68 and Executive Order No. 535, Series of 1981, as amended, the HLURB shall:
x x x x
(d) Hear and decide intra-association and/or inter-association controversies and/or conflicts, without prejudice to filing civil and criminal cases by the parties concerned before the regular courts: Provided, That all decisions of the HLURB are appealable directly to the Court of Appeals; x x x
Although R.A. 9904 took effect on July 10. 2010, while the appeal of Jugueta in the OP remained pending, the cited provision is consistent with the issuances governing the appellate jurisdiction [over] HLURB decisions/order[s] such as Rule 43 of the Rules, the 2004 HLURB Rules of Procedure, and P.D. 1344 at the time he filed his appeal to the OP. The exclusive appellate jurisdiction over intra-association disputes decided by the HLURB is clearly vested in the CA. x x x1 (Emphasis, italics and underscoring in the original)
I agree that appellate jurisdiction over HLURB-BOC decisions, orders, and resolutions on intra-association disputes had been vested with the CA even before the passage of Republic Act No. (R.A.) 9904.2 However, I respectfully submit that such jurisdiction primarily stems from Presidential Decree No. (P.D.) 902-A,3 as amended by Batas Pambansa Blg. (B.P.) 129.4 To my mind, the applicable rules of procedure cited in the ponencia do not confer such appellate jurisdiction with the CA. Rather, they merely confirm what is statutorily provided under the aforesaid law.
I expound.
Jurisdiction over the subject matter is vested by the Constitution or by law, and not by the parties to an action. It cannot be conferred by the consent or acquiescence of the parties, or by the erroneous belief of the court, quasi-judicial office, or government agency that it exists.5 Hence, to determine the proper appellate remedy in this case, it is useful to trace the laws conferring jurisdiction over intra-association disputes involving homeowners' associations.
Jurisdiction under P.D. 902-A
The exclusive original jurisdiction to hear and decide cases involving all kinds of registered associations was originally conferred by law with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) through P.D. 902-A issued on March 11, 1976, thus:
SECTION 5. In addition to the regulatory and adjudicative functions of the Securities and Exchange Commission over corporations, partnerships and other forms of associations registered with it as expressly granted under existing laws and decrees, it shall have original and exclusive jurisdiction to hear and decide cases involving:
x x x x
(b) Controversies arising out of intra-corporate or partnership relations, between and among stockholders, members, or associates; between any or all of them and the corporation, partnership or association of which they are stockholders, members or associates, respectively; and between such corporation, partnership or association and the state insofar as it concerns their individual franchise or right to exist as such entity;
x x x x
SECTION 6. In order to effectively exercise such jurisdiction, the Commission shall possess the following powers:
x x x x
In the exercise of the foregoing authority and jurisdiction of the Commission, hearings shall be conducted by the Commission or by a Commissioner or by such other bodies, boards, committees and/or any officer as may be created or designated by the Commission for the purpose. The decision, ruling or order of any such Commissioner, bodies, boards, committees and/or officer may be appealed to the Commission sitting en banc within thirty (30) days after receipt by the appellant of notice of such decision, ruling or order. The Commission shall promulgate rules of procedures to govern the proceedings, hearings and appeals of cases falling within its jurisdiction.
The aggrieved party may appeal the order, decision or ruling of the Commission sitting en banc to the Supreme Court by petition for petition for review in accordance with the pertinent provisions of the Rules of Court. (Emphasis supplied)
Shortly after the issuance of P.D. 902-A, the CA was created under B.P. 129. B.P. 129 vested the CA with exclusive appellate jurisdiction over "all final judgments, decisions, resolutions, orders or awards of Regional Trial Courts and quasi-judicial agencies, instrumentalities, boards or commissions,"6 including the SEC. B.P. 129 thus had the effect of amending Section 6 of P.D. 902-A by making the orders, decisions, and rulings of the SEC in the exercise of its original and exclusive jurisdiction appealable to the CA instead of the Supreme Court.
Jurisdiction under E.O. 535
On June 2, 1978, President Ferdinand E. Marcos issued P.D. 13967 which created the Department of Human Settlements (DHS). Section 14 of P.D. 1396 placed several agencies under the supervision of the DHS, among which was the Home Financing Commission (HFC), hence:
SECTION 14. Corporations, Authorities and Agencies Under the Supervision of the Department. – The following corporations, authorities and agencies are hereby placed under the supervision of the Department and their respective charters are correspondingly amended to the extent that the pertinent provisions thereof are inconsistent with the provisions of this Decree. The specific amendments to be affected in the respective charters of the affected corporations and authorities shall be provided for in the Letters of Implementation to be issued by the President to implement this Decree, which legal issuance shall form part of this Decree.
x x x x
(c) Home Financing Commission
x x x x (Emphasis and underscoring supplied)
Pursuant to the authority under Section 14 of P.D. 1396, President Marcos later issued Executive Order No. (E.O.) 5358 which transferred the original and exclusive jurisdiction of the SEC over controversies involving homeowners' associations to HFC. HFC was subsequently renamed as the Home Insurance Guaranty Corporation (HIGC), and later the HLURB.
The Court traced these developments in Jaka Investments Corporation v. Urdaneta Village Association, Inc.:9
In Maria Luisa Park Association, Inc. v. Almendras, this Court discussed the scope of the [HLURB's] jurisdiction at length:
We agree with the trial court that the instant controversy falls squarely within the exclusive and original jurisdiction of the [HIGC], now HLURB.
Originally, administrative supervision over homeowners' associations was vested by law with the [SEC]. However, pursuant to [E.O.] 535, the HIGC assumed the regulatory and adjudicative functions of the SEC over homeowners' associations. Section 2 of [E.O.] 535 provides:
2. In addition to the powers and functions vested under the Home Financing Act, the Corporation, shall have among others, the following additional powers:
(a) x x x and exercise all the powers, authorities and responsibilities that are vested on the Securities and Exchange Commission with respect to homeowners associations, the provision of Act 1459, as amended by P.D. 902-A, to the contrary notwithstanding;
(b) To regulate and supervise the activities and operations of all houseowners associations registered in accordance therewith.
x x x x
Moreover, by virtue of this amendatory law, the HIGC also assumed the SEC's original and exclusive jurisdiction under Section 5 of [P.D.] 902-A to hear and decide cases involving:
b) Controversies arising out of intra-corporate or partnership relations, between and among stockholders, members, or associates; between any and/or all of them and the corporation, partnership or association of which they are stockholders, members or associates, respectively; and between such corporation, partnership or association and the state insofar as it concerns their individual franchise or right to exist as such entity.
x x x x
Later on, the above[-]mentioned powers and responsibilities, which had been vested in the HIGC with respect to homeowners' associations, were transferred to the HLURB pursuant to [R.A.] 8763, entitled "Home Guaranty Corporation Act of 2000."10 (Italics in the original; citation omitted)
The HLURB is thus vested with exclusive original jurisdiction to hear and decide controversies involving homeowners' associations, including intra-association disputes, or those controversies (i) between and among members of the association; (ii) between any and/or all of them and the association of which they are members; and (iii) between the association and the state insofar as the controversy concerns its right to exist as a corporate entity.11
Jurisdiction under P. D. 1344
In addition to its exclusive original jurisdiction over controversies involving homeowners' associations, the HLURB is also vested with exclusive original jurisdiction over cases involving unsound real estate practices, specific performance, and refund claims against real estate project owners, developers, dealers, brokers, and salesmen (special real estate cases). Such jurisdiction was originally vested by law with the National Housing Authority (NHA) under P.D. 134412 issued on April 2, 1978, thus:
SECTION 1. In the exercise of its functions to regulate the real estate trade and business and in addition to its powers provided for in Presidential Decree No. 957, the National Housing Authority shall have exclusive jurisdiction to hear and decide cases of the following nature:
A. Unsound real estate business practices;
B. Claims involving refund and any other claims filed by subdivision lot or condominium unit buyer against the project owner, developer, dealer, broker or salesman; and
C. Cases involving specific performance of contractual and statutory obligations filed by buyers of subdivision lot or condominium unit against the owner, developer, dealer, broker or salesman.
SECTION 2. The decision of the [NHA] shall become final and executory after the lapse of fifteen (15) days from the date of its receipt.ℒαwρhi৷ It is appealable only to the President of the Philippines and in the event the appeal is filed and the decision is not reversed and/or amended within a period of thirty (30) days, the decision is deemed affirmed. Proof of the appeal of the decision must be furnished the [NHA]. (Emphasis supplied)
Subsequently, President Marcos issued P.D. 141613 granting unto himself the authority to reorganize the administrative structure of the national government. Pursuant thereto, he issued E.O. 64814 which transferred the regulatory functions of the NHA to the Human Settlements Regulatory Commission (HSRC), hence:
SECTION 8. Transfer of Functions. – The regulatory functions of the [NHA] pursuant to Presidential Decree Nos. 957, 1216, 1344 and other related laws are hereby transferred to the [HSRC] x x x. Among these regulatory functions are: x x x (11) Hear and decide cases on unsound real estate business practices; claims involving refund filed against project owners, developers, dealers, brokers or salesmen and cases of specific performance. (Emphasis supplied)
Later still, HSRC was renamed as the HLURB under E.O. 90.15
The CA has appellate jurisdiction over
the decisions, orders, and resolutions
issued by the HLURB on cases
involving homeowners' associations.
Proceeding from the foregoing, a clear distinction must therefore be drawn between the decisions, orders, and resolutions of the HLURB rendered in special real estate cases, and those rendered in connection with disputes involving homeowners' associations. This distinction determines the proper appellate remedy that may be resorted to by the parties involved.
As discussed, appellate jurisdiction over decisions rendered by the HLURB in special real estate cases is statutorily vested with the OP under Section 2 of P.D. 1344. On the other hand, appellate jurisdiction over HLURB's decisions on disputes involving homeowners' associations is vested with the CA. Prior to the enactment of R.A. 9904, such jurisdiction had already been vested by P.D. 902-A, as amended by B.P. 129. At present, it is explicitly provided under R.A. 9904.
To this end, this case serves as an appropriate vehicle to emphasize that appellate jurisdiction over disputes involving homeowners' associations had already been statutorily vested with the CA even before the enactment of R.A. 9904. This would lend guidance in the resolution of appeals originating from the HLURB which had been filed before R.A. 9904 took effect, considering that the latter statute had only been recently issued.ℒαwρhi৷
Footnotes
1 Ponencia, pp. 9-10.
2 AN ACT PROVIDING FOR A MAGNA CARTA FOR HOMEOWNERS AND HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATIONS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES, otherwise known as the "MAGNA CARTA FOR HOMEOWNERS AND HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION," January 7, 2010.
3 REORGANIZATION OF THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION WITH ADDITIONAL POWERS AND PLACING THE SAID AGENCY UNDER THE ADMINISTRATIVE SUPERVISION OF THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT, March 11, 1976.
4 AN ACT REORGANIZING THE JUDICIARY, APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES, otherwise known as "THE JUDICIARY REORGANIZATION ACT OF 1980," August 14, 1981.
5 Power Sector Assets and Liabilities Management Corporation v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, G.R. No. 198146, August 8, 2017, 835 SCRA 235, 258.
6 B.P. 129, Sec. 9(3).
7 CREATING THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SETTLEMENTS AND THE HUMAN SETTLEMENT DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR, AND ACCORDINGLY AMENDING CERTAIN PRESIDENTIAL DECREES, June 2, 1978.
8 AMENDING THE CHARTER OF THE HOME FINANCING COMMISSION, RENAMING IT AS HOME FINANCING CORPORATION, ENLARGING ITS POWERS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES, May 3, 1979.
9 G.R.Nos. 204187 & 206606, April 1, 2019, 899 SCRA 300.
10 Id. at 317-319.
11 Id. at 319-320.
12 EMPOWERING THE NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY TO ISSUE WRIT OF EXECUTION IN THE ENFORCEMENT OF ITS DECISION UNDER PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NO. 957, April 2, 1978.
13 GRANTING CONTINUING AUTHORITY TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE PHILIPPINES TO REORGANIZE THE NATIONAL GOVERNMENT, June 9, 1978.
14 REORGANIZING THE HUMAN SETTLEMENTS REGULATORY COMMISSION, otherwise known as the "CHARTER OF THE HUMAN SETTLEMENTS REGULATORY COMMISSION," February 7, 1981.
15 IDENTIFYING THE GOVERNMENT AGENCIES ESSENTIAL FOR THE NATIONAL SHELTER PROGRAM AND DEFINING THEIR MANDATES, CREATING THE HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT COORDINATING COUNCIL, RATIONALIZING FUNDING SOURCES AND LENDING MECHANISMS FOR HOME MORTGAGES AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES, December 17, 1986.
The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation
