METROPOLITAN CEBU WATER DISTRICT VS. MACTAN ROCK INDUSTRIES INC. G.R. NO. 172438, JULY 4, 2012   TOPIC/DOCTRINE Section 2.1, Rule 2 of the Construction Industry Arbitration Commission (CIAC) Revised Rules particularly specifies that the CIAC has original and exclusive jurisdiction over construction disputes, whether such disputes arise from or are merely connected with the construction contracts entered into by parties, and whether such disputes arise before or after the completion of the contracts.  The jurisdiction of the Construction Industry Arbitration Commission (CIAC) as a quasi-judicial body is confined to construction disputes, that is, those arising from, or connected to, contracts involving “all on-site works on buildings or altering structures from land clearance through completion including excavation, erection and assembly and installation of components and equipment.” The Court held that the Con...

DPWH VS. CMC/MONARK/PACIFIC/HI-TRI JOINT VENTURE, G.R NO. 179372, SEPTEMBER 13, 2017   TOPIC/DOCTRINE As a general rule, findings of fact of Construction Industry Arbitration Commission (CIAC), a quasi-judicial tribunal which has expertise on matters regarding the construction industry, should be respected and upheld.   FACTS Republic of the Philippines, through the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH), and CMC/Monark/Pacific/Hi-Tri J.V. (the Joint Venture) executed "Contract Agreement for the Construction of Contract Package 6MI-9, Pagadian-Buug Section, Zamboanga del Sur, Sixth Road Project, Road Improvement Component Loan No. 1473-PHI.” The Joint Venture's truck and equipment were set on fire. On March 11, 2003, a bomb exploded at Joint Venture's hatching plant located at Brgy. West Boyogan, Kumalarang, Zamboanga del Sur. According to reports, the bombing incident was caused by members of the Moro Islamic Liberation Front. The Joint Venture m...

METRO RAIL TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT CORP. VS. GAMMON PHILIPPINES, INC., G.R. NO. 200401, JANUARY 17, 2018   TOPIC/DOCTRINE Under the Construction Industry Arbitration Law, arbitral awards are binding and shall be final and unappealable, except on pure questions of law.   FACTS MRTDC was awarded a government contract by way of a Build Lease and Transfer Agreement to undertake the MRT 3 North Triangle Development Project. Among the major components of the Project was the construction of a four level podium structure. MRTDC, through its Project Manager, Parsons Inter Pro Joint Venture, give notice to the Gammon, of the award to it of the contract for the construction of the podium superstructure. Shortly thereafter, MRTDC sent a letter to Gammon, notifying the latter of the suspension of all the undertakings because of the currency crisis at that time. According to Gammon, however, it proceeded to de-water and clean up the Project site. On the other hand, MRTDC claims ...

METRO BOTTLED WATER CORPORATION VS. ANDRADA CONSTRUCTION & DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, INC., G.R. NO. 202430, MARCH 6, 2019   TOPIC/DOCTRINE The general rule is that appeals of arbitral awards by the Construction Industry Arbitration Commission (CIAC) may only be allowed on pure questions of law .   FACTS For this Court’s resolution is a Petition for Review on  Certiorari 7  assailing the March 21, 2012 Decision 8  and June 25, 2012 Resolution 9  of the Court of Appeals, which upheld the April 11, 2002 Arbitral Award  of the Construction Industry Arbitration Commission. The arbitral tribunal had ordered Metro Bottled Water Corporation (Metro Bottled Water) to pay Andrada Construction & Development Corporation, Inc. (Andrada Construction) the amount of P4,607,523.40 with legal interest from November 24, 2000 as unpaid work accomplishment in the construction of its manufacturing plant.   ISSUE Whether petitioner raises a quest...

KOPPEL INC, VS. MAKATI ROTARY CLUB FOUNDATION, INC., G.R. NO. 198075, SEPTEMBER 4, 2013   TOPIC/DOCTRINE Under the doctrine of separability, an arbitration agreement is considered as independent of the main contract. Being a separate contract in itself, the arbitration agreement may thus be invoked regardless of the possible nullity or invalidity of the main contract.   FACTS The dispute between the petitioner and respondent emanates from the rental stipulations of the 2005 Lease Contract. The respondent insists upon the enforceability and validity of such stipulations, whereas, petitioner, in substance, repudiates them. It is from petitioner’s apparent breach of the 2005 Lease Contract that respondent filed the instant unlawful detainer action. The arbitration clause of the 2005 Lease Contract stipulates that “any disagreement” as to the “interpretation, application or execution” of the 2005 Lease Contract ought to be submitted to arbitration. The following ...

J PLUS ASIA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION VS. UTILITY ASSURANCE CORPORATION G.R. No. 199650, June 26, 2013   TOPIC/DOCTRINE On Appeal from CIAC to CA: With the amendments introduced by R.A. No. 7902 and promulgation of the  1997 Rules of Civil Procedure , as amended, the CIAC was included in the enumeration of quasi-judicial agencies whose decisions or awards may be appealed to the CA in a petition for review under  Rule 43 . Such review of the CIAC award may involve either questions of fact, of law, or of fact and law.   FACTS J Plus Asia Development Corporation entered into a Construction Agreement  whereby the latter undertook to build the former’s 72-room condominium/hotel (Condotel Building 25) located at the Fairways & Bluewaters Golf & Resort in Boracay Island, Malay, Aklan. The project, costing P42,000,000.00, was to be completed within one year or 365 days reckoned from the first calendar day after signing of the Notice of Award and Noti...

LANUZA JR. VS. BF CORPORATION G.R. NO. 174938, OCTOBER 1, 2014   TOPIC/DOCTRINE Corporate representatives may be compelled to submit to arbitration proceedings pursuant to a contract entered into by the corporation they represent if there are allegations of bad faith or malice in their acts representing the corporation. Section 31 of the Corporation Code provides the instances when directors, trustees, or officers may become liable for corporate acts.   FACTS In 1993, BF Corporation filed a collection complaint with the Regional Trial Court against Shangri-La and the members of its board of directors: Alfredo C. Ramos, Rufo B. Colayco, Antonio O. Olbes, Gerardo Lanuza, Jr., Maximo G. Licauco III, and Benjamin C. Ramos. BF Corporation alleged in its complaint that on December 11, 1989 and May 30, 1991, it entered into agreements with Shangri-La wherein it undertook to construct for Shangri-La a mall and a multilevel parking structure along EDSA. However, by Octo...

LUZON IRON DEVT GROUP CORP. AND CONSOLIDATED IRON SANDS, LTD. V. BRIDESTONE MINING AND DEVT. CORP. G.R. NO. 220546., DECEMBER 7, 2016   TOPIC/DOCTRINE arbitration agreements are liberally construed in favor of proceeding to arbitration. We adopt the interpretation that would render effective an arbitration clause if the terms of the agreement allow for such interpretation.   FACTS On October 25, 2012, respondents Bridestone Mining and Development Corporation (Bridestone) and Anaconda Mining and Development Corporation (Anaconda) filed separate complaints before the RTC for rescission of contract and damages against petitioners Luzon Iron Development Group Corporation (Luzon Iron) and Consolidated Iron Sands, Ltd. (Consolidated Iron). Both complaints sought the rescission of the Tenement Partnership and Acquisition Agreement (TPAA) entered into by Luzon Iron and Consolidated Iron, on one hand, and Bridestone and Anaconda, on the other, for the assignment of the Ex...

LM POWER ENGINEERING CORP., V. CAPITOL INDUSTRIAL CONSTRUCTION GROUP G.R. NO. 141833, MARCH 26, 2003   TOPIC/DOCTRINE Brushing aside a contractual agreement calling for arbitration between the parties would be a step backward.   FACTS Petitioner LM Power Engineering Corporation and Respondent Capitol Industrial Construction Groups, Inc. entered into a “Subcontract Agreement” involving electrical work at the Third Port of Zamboanga. Respondent took over some of the work contracted to petitioner. Allegedly, the latter had failed to finish it because of its inability to procure materials. Upon completing its task under the Contract, petitioner billed respondent in the amount of P6,711,813.90.8 Contesting the accuracy of the amount of advances and billable accomplishments listed by the former, the latter refused to pay. Respondent also took refuge in the termination clause of the Agreement. That clause allowed it to set off the cost of the work that petitioner had ...

HYGIENIC PACKAGING CORPORATION VS. NUTRI-ASIA, INC ., G.R. NO. 201302, JANUARY 23, 2019   FACTS Hygienic Packaging Corporation (Hygienic) is a domestic corporation that manufactures and sells packaging materials such as plastic bottles. Nutri-Asia, also a domestic corporation, manufactures, and distributes food products such as banana-based and tomato-based condiments, vinegar, soy sauce, and other sauces.  From 1998 to 2009, Hygienic supplied Nutri-Asia with plastic bottles for its banana catsup products. Every transaction was covered by a Purchase Order issued by Nutri-Asia. The Purchase Order contains terms and conditions, among which is an Arbitration clause which provides: “ 13. Arbitration of all disputes arising in connection with this Contract shall be referred to an Arbitration Committee, in accordance with the Philippine Arbitration Law, composed of three members: xxx  For every purchase of plastic containers by Nutri-Asia, Hygienic issues Sales Invoices t...

MURPHY CHU VS. HON. MARIO B. CAPELLAN A.M. NO. MTJ-11-1779, JULY 16, 2012   TOPIC/DOCTRINE Under Section 7 of the 1991 Revised Rules on Summary Procedure, a preliminary conference should be held not later than thirty (30) days after the last answer is filed. The respondent set the case for preliminary conference only on June 24, 2008, i.e., at a time way beyond the required thirty (30)-day period.   FACTS In a verified complaint dated September 14, 2009 filed before the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA), the spouses Murphy and Marinelle P. Chu and ATGAS Traders (complainants) charged Judge Mario B. Capellan (respondent), Assisting Judge of the Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC), Branch 40, Quezon City, with Gross Ignorance of the Law, Partiality and Grave Abuse of Decision The complainants allege that the respondent had no basis to declare them in default because no notice of preliminary conference was issued to them.   They argue that the issuance of a...