OSG v. Ayala Land Inc.

GR No. 177056 – Sept 18, 2009

FACTS:

Respondents operate or lease out shopping malls that have parking facilities. The
people that use said facilities are required to pay parking fees by the
respondents. Senate committees conducted an investigation to determine the legality
of said practice which the same found to be against the National Building Code.
Respondents then received an information from various government agencies enjoining
them from collecting parking fees and later a civil case against them. Respondents
argued that the same constitutes undue taking of private property. OSG argues that
the same is implemented in view of public welfare more specifically to ease traffic
congestion. The RTC ruled in favor of the respondents. Hence petition for
certiorari.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the respondents are obligated to provide for free parking to its
consumers and the public.

RULING:

No. Respondents are not obligated to provide for free parking to the people.

Article 1158 of the Civil Code provides that “Obligations derived from law are not
presumed. Only those expressly determined in this Code or in special laws are
demandable, and shall be regulated by the precepts of the law which establishes
them; and as to what has not been foreseen, by the provisions of this Book”.

The court does not agree to the petitioner’s reliance on the National Building Code
as the same does not expressly provide that respondents are required to provide
free parking to the public. Moreover, the court holds that the code regulates
buildings and not traffic congestion. Police power is a power to regulate but not
to confiscate. The OSG’s contention is a deprivation of private property and falls
under eminent domain which requires just compensation. Thus, the RTC decision is
affirmed and petition is dismissed for lack of merit.