Tuesday, September 26, 2006 Court junks plea to include bank in loan case By Albert B. Lacanlale
CITY OF SAN FERNANDO -- The court has denied a motion filed by Pampanga Third District Representative Rey Aquino and former councilor Noel Tulabut to include the Land Bank of the Philippines (LandBank) among the respondents in the P125-million loan special civil suit they filed against Mayor Oscar Rodriguez and other city officials.
Aside from Rodriguez, other respondents in the case, which questions the legality of the loan agreement between LandBank and the City Government, are Vice Mayor Edwin Santiago and Councilors Nelson Lingat, Jaime Lazatin, Alex Patio, Redentor Halili, Ruperto Dumlao and Amando Santos.
However, Aquino and Tulabut asked for amendment in the case, this time including LandBank as co-respondent of the officials.
The bank is perceived by the respondents to be an indispensable party to the case, according to Regional Trial Court (RTC) Judge Serafin David of Branch 48 in this city.
However, the prayer for amendment to include the bank as additional respondent has no legal basis and will only cause delay in the disposition of the case, according to David.
With his ruling, David dealt another blow to the efforts of Aquino and Tulabut to hinder the release of the P125-million loan proceeds, which the City Government intended for the construction of two-storey school buildings and the wet-section of the Old Public Market.
The issue sprung from City Council Resolution No. 2006-033, which authorized Rodriguez to enter into a loan contract with LandBank using the Special Education Fund (SEF) as collateral.
The petitioners, exerting their rights as taxpayers, filed special civil action for certiorari and prohibition with a prayer for a temporary restraining order (TRO) and/or writ of preliminary injunction pending the final determination of the case.
After several hearings, a TRO was granted, but the court denied the prayer for the issuance of preliminary injunction.
David said the petition is a "substantial amendment," which could only be made upon leave of court. "But such leave may be refused if it appears to the court that the motion was made with intent to delay," he said.
He said that what is sought to be struck down as illegal is Resolution No. 2006-033 and the use of SEF as collateral to the contract between the City Government, as borrower, and the LandBank as lender.
LandBank, the judge explained, can only be considered real party of interest in the case "if the action taken is an ordinary civil action or declaratory relief with injunction."
In the present action, which is certiorari and prohibition against city officials, LandBank cannot be a real nor indispensable party of interest because the contract between the two parties is just a consequence of the resolution being questioned, David said.
The court's final decision on whether the resolution under question is illegal or not will render moot and academic the legality of the contract between LandBank and the City Government.
David said that under such situation, amendment to implead LandBank will no longer be necessary.
Asked for comment, Aquino said he has not received a copy of the court order, but his lawyer will appeal the decision. "We will exhaust all legal means with regard to this case," he said.
(September 26, 2006 issue) Write letter to the editor. Click here. Join the Sun.Star message board. Click here.
