CA ruling gives BGC back to Taguig
FILE- BGC or Bonifacio Global City belongs to Taguig, says the Court of Appeals. INQUIRER FILE PHOTO
The Court of Appeals (CA) on Thursday issued a ruling which in effect will give Taguig City the ownership of the 729-hectare Fort Andres Bonifacio now known as Bonifacio Global City (BGC).
In an 18-page resolution, the appeals court’s former special 6th division through Associate Justice Edwin Sorongon granted Taguig City’s motion to dismiss on the ground of forum shopping the case filed by Makati City.
The CA affirmed the July 2011 decision of the Pasig Regional Trial Court Branch 153 that ruled in favor of Taguig.
The Pasig court, in its ruling, confirmed that the Fort Bonifacio Military Reservation belongs to Taguig City.
It also nullified Proclamation No. 2475 because it altered the boundaries of Taguig in favor of Makati without the benefit of a plebiscite as required under the 1987 Constitution.
Article continues after this advertisementMakati City filed a motion for reconsideration with the Pasig court and also sought to annul the Pasig court’s judgment before the Court of Appeals.
Article continues after this advertisementThe CA reversed the lower court’s decision and ruled in favor of Makati.
The local government of Taguig then elevated the case to the Supreme Court.
The high court modified the CA’s decision and ruled that Makati City is guilty of forum shopping by filing simultaneous remedies before the Pasig court and the Court of Appeals.
SC said Makati “not only vexed courts and an adverse litigant but actually and already given rise to conflicting decisions not only between different courts but even within the Court of Appeals itself.”
The CA in its recent ruling held that it has no recourse but to dismiss Makati City’s bid to reverse the Pasig RTC’s 2011 ruling.
“In this light, and in the absence of any justification on the part of Makati, this Court cannot but draw the conclusion that Makati’s simultaneous availment of the aforementioned reliefs was not a by-product of mere thoughtfulness or negligence but a willful and deliberate act of forum shopping,” the appeals court said.
Concurring with the ruling were Associate Justices Ramon Cruz and Renato Francisco.
