Mathay, Jr. v. Macalincag
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: These consolidated cases involve challenges to the validity of schedules of market values for real properties in Quezon City, Pasig, and Makati, which formed the basis for increased real estate tax assessments. Petitioners argued that these schedules were prepared in violation of statutory requirements, leading to oppressive and excessive tax increases. Procedural History: The cases originated with separate petitions for prohibition filed in the Supreme Court by Ismael Mathay, Jr. (G.R. No. 97618), Rufino S. Javier (G.R. No. 97760), and Consuelo Puyat-Reyes (G.R. No. 102319). The Supreme Court, exercising its certiorari jurisdiction, referred these cases to the Central Board of Assessment Appeals (CBAA) for hearing and determination of the factual issues. The CBAA subsequently rendered decisions in each case, declaring the schedules of market values void. The Supreme Court reviewed these decisions and agreed with the CBAA's findings. The Petition: The core of the petitions in all three cases was the assertion that the schedules of market values were prepared solely by the respective City or Municipal Assessors, contrary to Section 9 of Presidential Decree No. 921. This decree mandates that such schedules for the Metropolitan Manila Area be prepared jointly by the City Assessors of the designated districts, with the City Assessor of Manila acting as Chairman. Petitioners contended that this procedural defect rendered the schedules illegal and void, along with the subsequent tax assessments and collections based upon them. The petitions sought to perpetually enjoin the implementation of these allegedly unlawful assessments and taxes.
Issue(s)
Whether the Schedules of Market Values for real properties in Quezon City, Pasig, and Makati were prepared in compliance with Section 9 of Presidential Decree No. 921. Whether Executive Order No. 392 repealed Presidential Decree No. 921 regarding the joint preparation of market value schedules. Whether the approval of the Schedule of Market Values by an Undersecretary of Finance, instead of the Secretary, renders it void. Whether the compromise agreements in the Makati case were legally valid.
Ruling
The Supreme Court affirmed the decisions of the Central Board of Assessment Appeals, declaring the Schedules of Market Values for Quezon City, Pasig, and Makati null and void and unenforceable. The Court ordered the respondents to act accordingly. The compromise agreements in the Makati case were also declared void.
Ratio Decidendi
On the compliance with Section 9 of P.D. 921: The Court held that Section 9 of P.D. 921 is specific and mandatory, requiring the joint preparation of the Schedule of Market Values by the City Assessors of the Metropolitan Manila Area districts, with the City Assessor of Manila as Chairman. The undisputed fact that the City Assessor of Quezon City solely prepared the schedule, without the participation of other City Assessors, rendered it illegal and void. This principle was applied consistently to the cases of Pasig and Makati, where the respective Municipal Assessors also prepared the schedules independently. The Court emphasized that the law does not distinguish between general revisions or selective revaluations, and where the law does not distinguish, courts should not distinguish. The review by a Technical Review Panel did not validate the void schedule. On the effect of Executive Order No. 392: The Court reiterated that laws are repealed only by subsequent ones, and an executive order cannot repeal a legislative act like P.D. 921. Even if Executive Order No. 392 abolished the Metropolitan Manila Commission, it did not affect the life of P.D. 921 or the assessment districts and committees created therein. The Court noted that E.O. 392 contained no repealing clause and no specific provision relative to the preparation of schedules of values, thus Section 9 of P.D. 921 remained the controlling provision. This ruling was consistent across all three cases, reinforcing the continued validity of P.D. 921. On the approval of the Schedule of Market Values: The Court found it immaterial whether the Schedule of Market Values should have been approved by the Secretary of Finance or an Undersecretary, as the primary issue was the illegality of its preparation. The Court stated that an illegal act confers no rights and creates no duties, and is as if it had never existed. Therefore, the Schedule of Market Values, being void from its preparation, could not be validated by any subsequent approval, rendering the realty tax rates based on it also void and unenforceable. On the compromise agreements in the Makati case: The Board declared the compromise agreements in the Makati case to have no legal basis and to be unacceptable under Article 1306 of the Civil Code. The Supreme Court agreed with this finding, further reinforcing the void nature of the underlying Schedule of Market Values.
Main Doctrine
The Schedule of Market Values for real properties within the Metropolitan Manila Area must be prepared jointly by the City Assessors of the designated districts, as mandated by Section 9 of Presidential Decree No. 921. A schedule prepared solely by one City Assessor is illegal and void.