Corinthian Gardens Assn. v. Tanjangco
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Respondents-spouses Tanjangco own Lots 68 and 69, managed by petitioner Corinthian Gardens Association, Inc. (Corinthian). Respondents-spouses Cuaso own adjacent Lot 65. Corinthian referred Engr. De Dios to the Cuasos for a relocation survey before their house construction. Corinthian conducted periodic ocular inspections during construction. The Cuasos' perimeter fence encroached on the Tanjangcos' Lot 69 by 87 square meters. Procedural History: The Tanjangcos filed a suit against the Cuasos for Recovery of Possession with Damages. The Cuasos filed a Third-Party Complaint against Corinthian, C.B. Paraz & Construction Co., Inc. (C.B. Paraz), and Engr. De Dios, alleging negligence. The RTC ruled in favor of the Tanjangcos, finding the Cuasos builders in good faith but ordering options for sale or demolition. The RTC also found C.B. Paraz negligent and ordered it to pay damages, but dismissed the third-party complaint against Corinthian and Engr. De Dios. The CA reversed the RTC, finding the Cuasos in bad faith, allowing demolition, and ordering them to pay rentals, damages, and attorney's fees. The CA also found Corinthian, C.B. Paraz, and Engr. De Dios negligent and ordered them to contribute to the judgment sums. The Petition: Corinthian filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari seeking to reverse the CA Decision, arguing it was not negligent in approving the Cuasos' building plans and that the CA erred in increasing the rental amount. The Cuasos, having failed to appeal the CA decision, sought to adopt Corinthian's motion for reconsideration and later prayed for a TRO/preliminary injunction to enjoin the demolition of their fence, which was denied by the Supreme Court.
Issue(s)
Whether Corinthian Gardens Association, Inc. is legally liable to pay 5% of the judgment money to the Spouses Tanjangco due to the encroachment by the Spouses Cuaso. Whether the Court of Appeals had a legal basis to unilaterally increase the monthly rental from P2,000.00 to P10,000.00 without proof and prayer from the Tanjangcos.
Ruling
The petition is denied, and the Decision of the Court of Appeals is affirmed. Corinthian Gardens Association, Inc. is held liable for negligence, and the award of damages and rentals by the CA is sustained.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of Corinthian's liability for encroachment: The Court affirmed the CA's finding that Corinthian was negligent. The Court reiterated that a negligent act is one where a reasonably prudent person in the same circumstances would foresee an appreciable risk of harm to others. Corinthian's claim that its approval was merely a "table inspection" and did not involve actual site measurement was rejected as a premium on negligence. The Court emphasized that Corinthian's Manual of Rules and Regulations applied to all members, and its approval of building plans, even if limited to a "table inspection," was still an approval tainted with negligence. The posting of a builder's cash bond and the collection of pre-construction fees created obligations on Corinthian to ensure compliance, and it could not "wash its hands" of responsibility. By approving the plans and conducting inspections, Corinthian assured the Cuasos that everything was in order, and its failure to prevent the encroachment constituted negligence that contributed to the injury suffered by the Tanjangcos. On the issue of the increase in monthly rentals: The Court found no cogent reason to disturb the monthly rental fixed by the CA. While courts may fix reasonable rent for the use of disputed property, this must be based on evidence adduced by the parties. However, both the RTC and the CA found that rent was due to the Tanjangcos because they were deprived of possession and use of their property. The Court noted that the Tanjangcos were deprived of their property for more than two decades. Citing Spouses Catungal v. Hao, the Court considered the increase in rentals reasonable given the particular circumstances, including the prolonged deprivation of property and the value of the lot in a prime subdivision. The CA's consideration of the lot's value and the duration of deprivation was deemed a reasonable basis for the increased rental amount, even if not explicitly prayed for in the initial complaint, as courts can take judicial notice of general increases in real estate rentals.
Main Doctrine
A homeowners' association that approves building plans without proper verification and fails to ensure compliance with its own rules and regulations can be held liable for damages arising from encroachments caused by constructions within the subdivision, as such inaction constitutes negligence under the principle of quasi-delict.