Scribd
Upload
671 views2 pages

Metroheights Subdivision Homeowners Assn. v. CMS Construction

This case involved a homeowners association whose new water connection was unexpectedly cut off by a construction company, CMS Construction, for 3 days without notice or consent while doing work for the water utility, MWSS, in a neighboring subdivision. The trial court found CMS and MWSS jointly liable for damages for acting in bad faith. However, the court of appeals reversed, finding their actions were within their rights and duties to manage the water system. The Supreme Court ruled that CMS and MWSS disregarded the standards of Article 19 of the Civil Code by cutting off the connection without consent, causing prejudice, and not acting with justice, honesty or good faith. CMS and MWSS were liable for damages.

Uploaded by

LGU CANDIJAY
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
671 views2 pages

Metroheights Subdivision Homeowners Assn. v. CMS Construction

This case involved a homeowners association whose new water connection was unexpectedly cut off by a construction company, CMS Construction, for 3 days without notice or consent while doing work for the water utility, MWSS, in a neighboring subdivision. The trial court found CMS and MWSS jointly liable for damages for acting in bad faith. However, the court of appeals reversed, finding their actions were within their rights and duties to manage the water system. The Supreme Court ruled that CMS and MWSS disregarded the standards of Article 19 of the Civil Code by cutting off the connection without consent, causing prejudice, and not acting with justice, honesty or good faith. CMS and MWSS were liable for damages.

Uploaded by

LGU CANDIJAY
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Metroheights Subdivision Homeowners Assn. v.

CMS Construction,
G.R. No. 209359
October 17, 2018

Facts:

Petitioner, Metroheights Subdivision Homeowners Assn., sought, among others, the assistance
of respondent MWSS to address the insufficient supply of water in its subdivision. Thus, a contract was
entered into between petitioner and MWSS with CMS Construction as contractor for the improvement
and upgrade a new water service connection, with the cost of which was solely shouldered by
contribution from petitioner's members. Months after, there was already a sufficient and strong water
pressure twenty-four (24) hours a day in the petitioner's subdivision.

However, sometime in a week after or so, respondent CMS Construction made diggings and
excavations, and started to lay water pipes along Fisheries Street and Morning Star Drive in Sanville
Subdivision, Quezon City, petitioner's neighboring subdivision which, in the process, unilaterally cut-off
and disconnected the latter's new and separate water service connection on Visayas Avenue causing the
homeowners waterless for 3 days.

Now feeling aggrieved, petitioners argued that respondent CMS Construction’s actions (digging
and excavating) were with the knowledge and consent of respondent MWSS but then without the
petitioner's knowledge and consent. Respondents averred that it is not true that they started laying
water pipes along the Morning Star Drive water pipeline by unilaterally cutting off and disconnecting
petitioner's existing water pipeline.
 
The RTC found, among others, that respondents did not have the authority to simply cut,
disconnect and transfer petitioner's water supply with impunity, without notice to or without getting its
consent; and that respondents acted in concert and in bad faith, which made them jointly and severally
liable for damages. It found that respondents' claim of damnum absque injuria was not tenable.

The CA, however, reversed the RTC decision saying that the respondents' actions were merely
consequential to the exercise of their rights and obligations to manage and maintain the water supply
system, an exercise which includes water rehabilitation and improvement within the area, pursuant to a
prior agreement for the water supply system; and that the alleged abuse of right was not sufficiently
established.

Issue:

WON the respondents’ action a disregard of the standards set by article 19 of the Civil Code.

Ruling:

Yes. Respondents' actions were done in total disregard of the standards set by Article 19 of the
New Civil Code which entitles petitioner to damages.

In its ruling, SC noted the respondents’ admission that the inconvenience of the temporary
stoppage of water supply in petitioner's area was highly inevitable in the process of changing
petitioner's water pipe size crossing the bridge up to Visayas Avenue where the tapping source is
connected. Notwithstanding, respondents proceeded with the cutting off and disconnection of
petitioner's water connection without the latter's consent and notification thereby causing prejudice or
injury to the petitioner's members because of the unexpected water loss for three (3) days.

Article 19 of the New Civil Code sets the standard in the exercise of one's rights and in the
performance of one's duties, i.e., he must act with justice, give everyone his due, and observe honesty
and good faith. "The exercise of a right ends when the right disappears, and it disappears when it is
abused, especially to the prejudice of others.

Respondents MWSS and CMS Construction should be held liable for damages.

You might also like