|
Wednesday, December 21, 2005
High court lets gov't run new airport terminal
MANILA -- The government won the bid to operate the Ninoy Aquino International Airport (Naia) Terminal 3, at a price of over P3 billion to be paid to the Philippine International Air Terminals Company Inc. (Piatco).
Piatco had won the bid to construct the facility.
Voting 11-4, the Supreme Court en banc lifted the temporary restraining order (TRO) it issued to prevent the release of over P3 billion that government deposited for the expropriation of Terminal 3.
In an en banc decision penned by Associate Justice Dante Tinga, the high court upheld the January 4 resolution of Pasay City Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 117 presiding Judge Henrick Gingoyon who ruled that the issuance of a writ of possession was pursuant to Republic Act (RA) 8974 and not Section 2, Rule 67 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure.
The SC also ordered the Pasay court to determine within 60 days from the finality of the decision the just compensation that government must pay to Piatco.
"The court has the duty to implement Republic Act (RA) 8974 and to direct compliance with the requirement of immediate payment in this case. Accordingly, the writ of possession dated December 21, 2004 should be held in abeyance pending proof of actual payment by the government to Piatco of the proffered value of the Naia 3 facilities, which totals P3,002,125,000," the SC added.
Under Rule 67, before government can take possession of the property to be expropriated, the deposit of an amount equivalent to the assessed value of the property for taxation purposes is sufficient for the time being, until the conclusion of the court proceedings where both parties shall have proven their claims and the court shall have made a factual determination of the price property.
RA 8974 or An Act to Facilitate the Acquisition of Right-of-Way, Site or Location for National Government Infrastructure Projects and For Other Purposes), on the other hand, requires 100 percent payment to the property owner to be entitled to a writ of possession.
"Once the government pays Piatco the amount of the proffered value of P3 billion, it will be entitled to the writ of possession," the SC said.
Gingoyon, using RA 8974 as basis, ordered the Land Bank to immediately release the amount of US$62.3 million to Piatco, which the lower court said was "specifically made available by the government for the purpose of expropriation" and which would be deducted from the amount of just compensation due to Piatco as determined by the RTC.
The SC said the P3 billion would have to be paid pending the determination of the actual and just compensation due to Piatco.
In ruling against the government, the high court said allowing Rule 67 to be applied on the present case would be in contrast to its 2003 decision voiding for being contrary to law and public policy the concession for the build-operate-and-transfer arrangement of the Naia 3 entered into between the government and Piatco.
The agreement authorized Piatco to build Naia 3, as well as a franchise to operate and maintain the terminal during the concession period of 25 years.
The contracts, however, were nullified reportedly because Paircargo Consortium, predecessor of Piatco, did not possess the requisite financial capacity when it was awarded the Naia 3 contract and that the agreement was contrary to public policy.
The government, in its petition for review filed before the SC, argued that Gingoyon erred when he ordered the immediate release of the amount of US$62.3 million to Piatco considering that the assessed value of Naia 3 facilities was only P3 billion.
The SC explained that the amount of US$62.3 million was based on the certification issued by Land Bank-Baclaran branch that the government maintained a total balance amounting to such amount.
But, the high tribunal noted, the actual representation of the amount "is not clear" although the government claims in its memorandum that the entire amount was made available as a "guaranty fund for the final and executory judgment of the writ of possession."
"One could readily conclude that the entire amount of US$62.3 million was intended by the government to answer for whatever guaranties may be rewired for the purpose of the expropriation complaint," the court said.
The SC also upheld the legality of the January 7 resolution of the lower court appointing three commissioners to determine the amount of just compensation for the Naia 3 without prior consultation with the government and Piatco.
"Nothing in Rule 67 or Republic Act 8974 requires the RTC to consult with the parties in the expropriation case on who should be appointed as commissioners. Neither does the court feel that such a requirement should be imposed in this case," the court added.
The court also junked the petition of the government for Gingoyon to inhibit himself from the case. (ECV/Sunnex)
(December 21, 2005 issue)
Write letter to the editor. Click here.
Join the Sun.Star message board. Click here. |
|
|
|
[return to top]
[home]
|
|
