Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 648 views

    Reyes Vs Balde

    Uploaded by

    Gel Diaz
    The Supreme Court ruled that the Construction Industry Arbitration Commission (CIAC) has jurisdiction over the dispute between Charles Bernard Reyes and the respondent-spouses. [1] Reyes filed a complaint in regular court over a construction project dispute, but the contract contained an arbitration clause. [2] The CIAC denied Reyes' motion to dismiss, finding the dispute fell under the CIAC's exclusive jurisdiction according to the Construction Industry Arbitration Law. [3] The Supreme Court affirmed, noting the arbitration clause in the contract required the parties to submit all disputes to the CIAC.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Reyes Vs Balde

    Uploaded by

    Gel Diaz
    648 views2 pages
    The Supreme Court ruled that the Construction Industry Arbitration Commission (CIAC) has jurisdiction over the dispute between Charles Bernard Reyes and the respondent-spouses. [1] Reyes filed a complaint in regular court over a construction project dispute, but the contract contained an arbitration clause. [2] The CIAC denied Reyes' motion to dismiss, finding the dispute fell under the CIAC's exclusive jurisdiction according to the Construction Industry Arbitration Law. [3] The Supreme Court affirmed, noting the arbitration clause in the contract required the parties to submit all disputes to the CIAC.

    Original Description:

    Case Digest

    Original Title

    Reyes vs Balde

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court ruled that the Construction Industry Arbitration Commission (CIAC) has jurisdiction over the dispute between Charles Bernard Reyes and the respondent-spouses. [1] Reyes filed a complaint in regular court over a construction project dispute, but the contract contained an arbitration clause. [2] The CIAC denied Reyes' motion to dismiss, finding the dispute fell under the CIAC's exclusive jurisdiction according to the Construction Industry Arbitration Law. [3] The Supreme Court affirmed, noting the arbitration clause in the contract required the parties to submit all disputes to the CIAC.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    648 views2 pages

    Reyes Vs Balde

    Uploaded by

    Gel Diaz
    The Supreme Court ruled that the Construction Industry Arbitration Commission (CIAC) has jurisdiction over the dispute between Charles Bernard Reyes and the respondent-spouses. [1] Reyes filed a complaint in regular court over a construction project dispute, but the contract contained an arbitration clause. [2] The CIAC denied Reyes' motion to dismiss, finding the dispute fell under the CIAC's exclusive jurisdiction according to the Construction Industry Arbitration Law. [3] The Supreme Court affirmed, noting the arbitration clause in the contract required the parties to submit all disputes to the CIAC.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 2

    CHARLES BERNARD H. REYES vs.

    ANTONIO YULO BALDE II


    G.R. No. 168384 August 7, 2006
    FIRST DIVISION YNARES-SANTIA GO, J.:

    FACTS:

    Respondent-spouses Cesar and Carmelita Esquig entered into a Design-Build Construction


    Agreement with petitioner Charles Bernard H. Reyes, doing business under the name and
    style of CBH Reyes Architects, for the architectural design and construction of a 2-storey
    residence in Tahanan Village, Paranaque City.

    When respondent left for the United States, they designated their co-respondent, Rosemarie
    Papas as their representative. Allegedly, Papas meddled with the construction works by
    demanding changes and additional works which entailed additional cost; refused to pay
    petitioner's progress billing and the salary of the laborers; and worse, wrote the Board of
    Directors of Tahanan Village Homeowner's Association requesting for the cancellation of the
    contractor's work permit.

    Thus, petitioner filed a complaint for Accounting, Collection of Sum of Money, Rescission of
    Contract with Damages against spouses Esquig and Rosemarie Papas with the RTC of
    Muntinlupa City. Respondents that RTC has no jurisdiction over the case since the Design-
    Build Construction Agreement contained an arbitration clause, thus any dispute arising
    therefrom should be brought before the CIAC.

    Respondents also filed a complaint before the CIAC against the petitioner. Petitioner filed with
    the CIAC a motion to dismiss on grounds of lack of jurisdiction to hear. The CIAC denied
    petitioner's motion to dismiss, holding that since the Design-Build Construction Agreement
    contained an arbitration clause, any dispute arising from said contract is within CIAC's
    jurisdiction. Meanwhile, the RTC of Muntinlupa City, held that it has jurisdiction over the
    complaint for accounting, rescission of contract and damages.

    ISSUE:

    Whether the CIAC may take cognizance over the case considering that it involved issues
    purely civil in nature and does not involve construction dispute nor require the resolution of
    highly technical issues.

    HELD:

    The Supreme Court ruled that CIAC may take cognizance of the case. Section 4 of E.O. No.
    1008 "Construction Industry Arbitration Law" provides:

    SECTION 4. Jurisdiction. - The CIAC shall have original and exclusive jurisdiction over
    disputes arising from, or connected with contracts entered into by parties involved in
    construction in the Philippines, whether the dispute arises before or after the completion of the
    contract, or after the abandonment or breach thereof. These disputes may involve government or
    private contracts. For the Board to acquire jurisdiction, the parties to a dispute must agree to
    submit the same to voluntary arbitration.
    Xxx
    In the case at bar, the action is rooted on alleged violations of the agreement, it is embraced by
    the term " construction dispute". The Design-Build Construction Agreement mutually entered
    into by the parties contain an arbitration clause, to wit:

    ARTICLE 10. ARBITRATION.


    All questions in dispute under the Agreement shall be submitted in accordance with the
    provisions of Philippine Law on Arbitration and provided for in Article 2042 of the New Civil
    Code of the Philippines and the provisions of Republic Act No. 876.
    Clearly, the presence of the arbitration clause in the parties' contract vests jurisdiction on the
    CIAC on all controversies arising from such contract. The arbitral clause in the agreement is a
    commitment by the parties to submit to arbitration the disputes covered therein. Because that
    clause is binding, they are expected to abide by it in good faith. Where the jurisdiction of CIAC
    is properly invoked, the failure or refusal of herein petitioner to arbitrate shall not affect the
    proceedings. Arbitration proceedings shall continue notwithstanding the absence or lack of
    participation of petitioner, and the award shall be made after receiving the evidence of the
    claimant

    You might also like