AboitizPower welcomes SC’s final ruling on power plant

ABOITIZ Power Corp. welcomed the Supreme Court’s Nov. 28 notice of judgment denying with finality Salcon Power Corp.’s motion for reconsideration in relation to the 153.1-MW Naga Power Plant Complex in Barangay Colon, City of Naga.

“We are pleased that the Supreme Court has ruled on this issue with finality. The High Court’s decision supports a transparent and fair bidding process that encourages open competition,” said Antonio R. Moraza, AboitizPower president and COO.

Denied

The SC denied with finality the motion for reconsideration of SPC seeking to revise the Oct. 5 resolution of the High Court that reinstated the notice of award of the Naga Power Plant Complex (NPPC) to AboitizPower subsidiary Therma Power Visayas, Inc. (TPVI).

In its Oct. 5 resolution, the High Court ordered the Power Sector Assets and Liabilities Management Corporation (PSALM) to execute the asset purchase agreement and land lease agreement on NPPC in favor of TPVI “with dispatch.”

The SC reiterated that SPC’s right to top, granted in SPC’s lease agreement for the Naga Land-Based Gas Turbine, is “null and void.” The SC also annulled and set aside the asset purchase and land lease agreements that PSALM and SPC executed.

PSALM held the first bidding for the Naga Power Plant in 2013. The first two rounds were declared failed bids as only one bidder, SPC, showed up. TPVI joined the third round and won with a bid of P1.088 billion, higher than SPC’s bid of P858.9 million.

Right to top

PSALM issued a notice of award dated April 30, 2014 in favor of TPVI but it (PSALM) executed SPC’s right to top based on its land lease agreement and asset purchase agreement of the land-based gas turbine plant within the Naga Power Plant Complex.

Then senator Sergio Osmeña III filed a petition for certiorari against PSALM, SPC and TPVI, questioning the inclusion of a right to top and asked the court to cancel the awarding.

The SC upheld the validity of PSALM’s public bidding.

The right to top condition, however, was declared null and void by the SC in its Sept. 28, 2015 decision and reiterated in its Oct. 5, 2016 resolution. (PR)
style="display:block; text-align:center;"
data-ad-layout="in-article"
data-ad-format="fluid"
data-ad-client="ca-pub-2836569479021745"
data-ad-slot="1977900730">



style="display:block; text-align:center;"
data-ad-layout="in-article"
data-ad-format="fluid"
data-ad-client="ca-pub-2836569479021745"
data-ad-slot="4158864647">


VIEW COMMENTS
DISCLAIMER:

SunStar website welcomes friendly debate, but comments posted on this site do not necessarily reflect the views of the SunStar management and its affiliates. SunStar reserves the right to delete, reproduce or modify comments posted here without notice. Posts that are inappropriate will automatically be deleted.


Forum rules:

Do not use obscenity. Some words have been banned. Stick to the topic. Do not veer away from the discussion. Be coherent. Do not shout or use CAPITAL LETTERS!

sunstar.com.ph