MAKATI CITY’s legal officer and spokesman yesterday asserted that the latest Court of Appeals (CA) ruling does not unequivocally give victory to Taguig City on their jurisdictional bout over the highly developed Bonifacio Global City (BGC) complex.

Lawyer Michael Arthur R. Camiña, in a statement, said while they have yet to receive a copy of the Oct. 5 CA decision, media reports indicate that the country’s second highest court merely ruled on the issue of forum shopping, which has also been previously decided upon by the Supreme Court.

“The Court of Appeals decision mentioned in media reports today did not rule on the legal and historical evidence presented by Makati to support its rightful claim over BGC, which was upheld in another decision by the CA,” Mr. Camiña said.

“The said CA decision did not categorically rule in favor of Taguig. As pointed out by the separate CA decision upholding Makati’s ownership of BGC, Taguig not only failed to present concrete evidence to support its claim but presented fake and spurious documents to the courts,” he added.

The CA, in its five-page resolution promulgated last Oct. 3, upheld a previous CA decision issued March 8 granting Taguig’s motion to dismiss Makati’s claim based on forum shopping, wherein a party seeks several judicial remedies in different courts.

Makati filed a motion for reconsideration on the March 8 decision, which was dismissed in the Oct. 6 ruling.

The CA stated that “we found nothing novel in the other arguments that were propounded in Makati’s Motion for Reconsideration.”

“These were but a rehash of the issues and arguments raised in its previous pleadings which have already been passed upon and duly addressed in our March 8, 2017 Resolution, and which are unsubstantial to warrant a reconsideration thereof… Wherefore, premises considered, defendant-appellant City of Makati’s Motion for Reconsideration is denied for lack of merit,” reads the decision penned by Associate Justice Edwin D. Sorongon with concurrence from Associate Justices Ramon A. Cruz and Renato C. Francisco.

The latest CA ruling notes that Makati “avers, among others, that the issues herein are of transcendental importance involving public interests that require the liberal interpretation and application of the rules.”

“Makati insists that this case should not be dismissed based on the premise that the Supreme Court in the case of City of Taguig v. City of Makati, did not order for its dismissal,” the resolution noted, “It (Makati) also insists that its previous counsels merely committed an honest mistake in availing of various remedies.”

Therefore, the Appeals court noted: “On the claim that it disclosed to the courts all of its pending cases, Makati subscribes that such honest mistake does not warrant the dismissal of this appeal.”

However, the court also pointed out that “Taguig counters that the rule prohibiting forum shopping is not a mere technicality that may be disregarded by Makati at will to suit its convenience.”

“Taguig adds that the rule against forum shopping and the cause or consequences arising from the violation thereof are already a substantial right vested on the part of Taguig to pray for the dismissal of all infringing actions or cases of Makati including this appeal.”

“Taguig posits that Makati’s acts of forum shopping revealed its bad faith in handling this territorial issue,” the CA said. — Andrea Louise E. San Juan

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR