John Hay developer seeks protection of third party investors
THE Camp John Hay Development Corporation (CJHDEVCO) on Wednesday urged the Court of Appeals to protect the interest of over 1,600 third party investors inside the 247-hectare former American recreational facility in Baguio City.
During the summary hearing conducted by the appeals court’s Special Fifth Division, CJHDEVCO lawyer Gilbert Reyes said the Bases Conversion and Development Authority should be indefinitely enjoined from evicting it as well as its sub-lessees from the property.
“The issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction is warranted to avoid irreparable damage to third party investors who have invested their money in good faith,” he said.
Reyes argued that the final arbitration award issued by the Philippine Dispute Resolution Center Inc. (PDRCI) is binding only between the BCDA and CJHDEVCO, which are the parties in the case and not on their tenants.
He added that CJHDEVCO, the developer of Camp John Hay, is ready to comply with the PDRC’s order for it to vacate the leased premises in exchange for P1.42 billion payment from BCDA provided that the rights of third parties are respected.
“There is no dispute that all the third parties are in good faith and they acquired the property in good faith,” Reyes said during the hearing presided by Associate Justice Noel Tijam.
“They have valid contracts that should be respected by the respondent (BCDA),” the lawyer added.
Associate Justices Myra Garcia-Fernandez and Victoria Isabel Paredes were also present during the proceedings.
Under the original lease agreement it signed with BCDA in 1996, for the purpose of developing Camp John Hay into a wholesome family-oriented public tourism complex, CJHDEVCO has been authorized to sub-lease its properties.
Reyes added that it was also expressly stated under the original lease agreement that the ownership of the improvements will remain with CJHDEVCO until 2046.
Reyes said the demand of BCDA for their tenants to vacate the premises prior to the payment of the arbitral award “was not contemplated in the arbitration panel’s decision.”
The CJHDEVCO also raised the possibility of more suits being filed in connection with the dispute if its prayer for a writ of injunction will not be granted.
Earlier, the appeals court issued a 60-day temporary restraining order (TRO) or until July 19 enjoining the Baguio City Regional Trial Court from evicting CJHDEVCO from the former American recreational facility.
On May 12, 2015, CJHDEVCO filed a petition for certiorari and prohibition with urgent applications for the issuance of a TRO and/or a writ of preliminary injunction against the implementation of the writ of execution dated April 14, 2015 and the notice to vacate dated April 20, 2015 issued by lawyer Linda Montes-Loloy, and Galano, in their capacity as ex-officio sheriff and RTC sheriff.
Prior to this, the arbitral tribunal rendered the final award, rescinding the subject lease agreement due to mutual breach of the parties. In the said final award, petitioner was ordered to vacate the leased property and to promptly deliver the same to BCDA.
On the other hand, the BCDA was also ordered to return to petitioner the amount of P,421,096.052 as advance rentals paid by the latter.
On March 6, 2015, CJHDEVCO filed its verified petition for confirmation of final award before the Baguio RTC which the latter confirmed in toto.
During the pre-execution conference, the parties manifested conflicting positions as to the effect of the final award on the third parties occupying the leased property but the Baguio RTC declined to rule on the effect of it on the third parties.
But the BCDA included the third parties in the implementation of the notice to vacate, prompting the CJHDEVCO to seek redress from the appeals court.
“They (third parties) cannot be bound by this decision; the decision is supposed to be between BCDA and CJHDEVCO, kaya kami di namin pinoprobema siya. Ang problema ang BCDA sinasabi anumang decision damay lahat,” Reyes said.
Reyes said the BCDA should have been the one that raised the issue on the third parties before the court since it admitted that the nature of its case against CJHDEVCO is an ejectment suit.
“Sabi nga ng abugado nila ang mayroon prayer of ejectment eh sila, eh kung mayroon nagpapa-eject at may taong iba dun na hindi yun ang hinabla mo eh kayo dapat ang naghabla . Dun sa mga hinihiling namin eh wala namang ejectment dun,” Reyes noted.
