METRO CONSTRUCTION, INC. vs. CHATHAM PROPERTIES, INC.

(G.R. NO. 141897, September 24, 2001)

FACTS:
Respondent, Chatham Properties, Inc. (CHATHAM) and petitioner, Metro
Construction, Inc. (MCI) entered into a contract for the construction of the multistorey building known as the Chatham House. The preliminary conference before
the CIAC started in June 1998 and was concluded a month after with the signing of
the Terms of Reference (TOR) of the Case.
The CIAC rendered a decision for the adjudication of MCIs claims in order to
collect from CHATHAM the sum of money for the unpaid progress billings and other
charges. The CIAC listed up all the amounts due to MCI and added up and the total
payment is deducted from therein. The Tribunal did not consider the evidence that
was presented to them by CHATHAM in order to compute the amount that was due
to MCI.
CHATHAM filed a petition for review with the Court of Appeals alleging that
the CIAC gravely erred when it did not consider all the pieces of evidence that were
presented to them by the respondents.
The Court of Appeals reversed the decision of the CIAC and claimed that MCI
failed to complete the project in pursuance to the construction agreement that was
signed by the parties.
The MCI filed the instant petition for review to challenge the decision of the
Court of Appeals.

ISSUE:
Whether the Court of Appeals may reverse the decision of the Supreme
Court.

RULING:
Yes, Under Sec. 1, 2, and 3 of Rule 43 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure,
Sec. 3 of the Rules of Civil Procedure states that an appeal under the Rule may be
taken to the Court of Appeals within the period and in the manner provided there,
whether the appeal involves question of fact, of law, or mixed questions of fact and
law while the latter included the CIAC in its enumeration of the quasi-judicial
agencies.
The right to appeal from judgments, awards, or final orders of the CIAC is
granted in E.O. No. 1008. The procedure for the exercise or application of this right

was initially
subsequently
on Procedure
be exercised,

outlined in E.O. No. 1008. While R. A. No. 7902 and circulars

issued by the Supreme Court and its amendments to the 1997 Rules
effectively modified the manner by which the right to appeal ought to
nothing in these changes impaired vested rights.

PhilRock v. Construction Industry Arbitration Commission (G.R. No. 132848-49

Facts:
The Cid spouses, herein private respondents, purchased ready-mix concrete
from the petitioner, PhilRock, Inc. The concrete delivered by the petitioner was
found out to be of substandard quality which resulted to the structures being built
with such cement developing cracks and honeycombs.
Thereafter, preliminary conferences were held among the parties and their
appointed arbitrators. At these conferences, disagreements arose as to whether
moral and exemplary damages and tort should be included as an issue along with
breach of contract, and whether the seven officers and engineers of Philrock who
are not parties to the Agreement to Arbitrate should be included in the arbitration
proceedings. No common ground could be reached by the parties.
Before the CA, petitioner filed a Petition for Review contesting the jurisdiction
of the CIAC and assailing the propriety of the monetary awards in favor of
respondent spouses
Issue:
Whether or not the CIAC could take jurisdiction over the case of respondent
spouses and petitioner after it had been dismissed by both the RTC and CIAC.
Ruling:
The petition has no merit. Section 4 of EO 1008 expressly vests in the CIAC
original and exclusive jurisdiction over disputes arising from or connected with
construction contracts entered into by parties that have agreed to submit their
disputes to voluntary arbitration. Especially since the parties submitted themselves
to the jurisdiction of the Commission by virtue of their Agreement to Arbitrate.
After submitting itself to arbitration proceedings and actively participating
therein, petitioner is estopped from assailing the jurisdiction of the CIAC, merely
because the latter rendered an adverse decision.