SC affirms subdivisions can regulate entry into roads even if they were

donated to local government

The Supreme Court (SC) has affirmed that a homeowners’ assocation

“may regulate passage into a subdivision for the safety and security of its
residents,” even if its roads were already donated to the local government.

In a recent 33-page decision, the SC 3rd Division upheld the “No Sticker,
No ID, No Entry” policy of Diamond Homeowners & Residents Association
in Angeles City, Pampanga.

The SC denied the appeal of William G. Kwong Management, Inc., on the

Office of the President (OP) and the Court of Appeals’ (CA) respective
decisions, dated March 24, 2010 and July 5, 2013, in favor of the
homeowners’ association.

Kwong runs three motels inside Diamond Subdivision through his

company. He contested the policy of screening visitors, approved in
December 2006, because it affected his businesses.

The SC, however, gave weight to the subdivision’s security concerns,

which were serious enough to force the city council to pass a 2003
ordinance prohibiting the establishment of new businesses.

Even Kwong admitted in an August 3, 2006 letter to the homeowners’

association that there was a “sharp increase in criminal activities,” although
he only proposed that guard posts with telephone lines be put up.

The SC said Section 31 of Presidential Decree Number 957 recognized the

need for a homeowners’ association to “promote and protect their mutual
interest and assist in their community development.”

It also cited its 1989 decision in the case of Bel Air Village Association, Inc.
v. Dionisio acknowledged the associations’ right of regulation to promote
safety and security and the general welfare of residents.

Meanwhile, the 1995 decision in the case of Spouses Anonuevo v. Court of

Appeals affirmed that ownership of public spaces is with the local
government, while enjoyment, possession and control are with the
homeowners.
Harmonizing these, the SC concluded: “The Policy maintains the public
nature of the subdivision roads. It neither prohibits nor impairs the use of
the roads.”

It noted that the homeowners’ association’s policy merely required the

public to surrender their identification cards and would not totally prevent
their use of the roads. Besides, the association did not claim ownership or
any private right over the roads.

The SC stressed that the policy was not inconsistent with the purpose of
PD 957 to protect the residents’ interest. On the contrary, it said that not
allowing the association to regulate the roads would go against the
intention of the law.

“The donation of the roads to the local government should not be

interpreted in a way contrary to the legislative intent of benefiting the
residents,” read the decision penned by Associate Justice Marvic Leonen.

The SC pointed out that homeowners buy properties inside subdivisions for
better facilities and security.

It also noted that only Kwong protested the policy, even as he had not
proved the damage caused to his businesses.

As an aside, the SC noted that Section 10(d) of the Magna Carta for
Homeowners and Homeowners’ Associations granted such groups the right
to regulate access to or passage through the subdivisions.

The said law did not distinguish whether the roads were donated to the
local government or not. However, the SC did not apply this law anymore
because it was enacted four years after the assailed policy.