Scribd
Upload
40 views

Sangguniang Panlungsod NG Baguio City v. Jadewell Parking Systems Corporation G.R. No. 160025, April 23, 2014 Sereno, CJ. Facts

The Supreme Court ruled that there was no valid rescission of the Memorandum of Agreement between Jadewell Parking Systems Corporation and the City of Baguio. The MOA authorized Jadewell to install and manage parking meters in Baguio City. While Jadewell failed to comply with some provisions of the MOA, such as obtaining necessary permits, the City did not establish that these failures amounted to a substantial breach justifying unilateral rescission. Neither the trial court nor the appellate court clearly explained why they found Jadewell to be in breach of the MOA. Therefore, the City was not entitled to rescind the agreement.

Uploaded by

Michael Vincent Bautista
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
40 views

Sangguniang Panlungsod NG Baguio City v. Jadewell Parking Systems Corporation G.R. No. 160025, April 23, 2014 Sereno, CJ. Facts

The Supreme Court ruled that there was no valid rescission of the Memorandum of Agreement between Jadewell Parking Systems Corporation and the City of Baguio. The MOA authorized Jadewell to install and manage parking meters in Baguio City. While Jadewell failed to comply with some provisions of the MOA, such as obtaining necessary permits, the City did not establish that these failures amounted to a substantial breach justifying unilateral rescission. Neither the trial court nor the appellate court clearly explained why they found Jadewell to be in breach of the MOA. Therefore, the City was not entitled to rescind the agreement.

Uploaded by

Michael Vincent Bautista
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Sangguniang Panlungsod Ng Baguio City v.

Jadewell Parking Systems


Corporation
G.R. No. 160025, April 23, 2014

Sereno, CJ.

Facts:

The Sanggunian passed Resolution authorizing the City Mayor of Baguio


to negotiate and enter into a Memorandum of Agreement with Jadewell for the
installation of its proposed DG4S parking technology. Sanggunian enacted a
City Ordinance outlining the rules and policy on the privatization of the
administration of on-street parking in the city streets of Baguio. For this
purpose, the City of Baguio authorized the intervention of a private operator for
the regulation, charging and collection of parking fees and the installation of
modern parking meters, among others. An invitation to bid for the proposed
regulation of on-street parking and installation of parking meters on Baguio
City‘s streets was published. Four interested bidders submitted their
proposals, but three were disqualified. The bid of Jadewell was the only one not
disqualified; hence, it was awarded the project. The MOA was finally executed
between Jadewell and the City of Baguio for the installation, management and
operation of the DG4S P&D parking meters. Jadewell began to mobilize and
take over the parking facilities at the Ganza/Burnham Park area. Around this
time, questions arose regarding the compliance by Jadewell with the provisions
of the MOA, notably on matters such as obtaining the recommendation from
the DPWH for the installation of the parking meters and the legality of the
collection of parking fees being done by its parking attendants prior to the
installation of the parking meters at Burnham Park.

Issue:

Whether there was a valid rescission.

Ruling:

None. The MOA does not specifically provide for the exact number of
parking meters to be installed by Jadewell pursuant to the parties’ objective in
regulating parking in the city. Nevertheless, 100 parking spaces were allotted
as mentioned in Annex A of the MOA. The agreement also obligates Jadewell to
have its parking attendants deputized by the DOTC-LTO so that they shall
have the authority to enforce traffic rules and regulations in the regulated
areas. Despite the enumeration of the faults of Jadewell, there was no
substantial breach committed by Jadewell to justify a unilateral rescission of
the MOA. Unfortunately, neither the RTC nor the CA provided a clear basis for
their rulings on the extent of the breach of the MOA by Jadewell. Save from
reiterating the Sanggunian‘s litany of violations said to be committed by
Jadewell, there was no testimony on record to prove such facts and no
indication as to whether the RTC or CA dismissed them or took them at face
value. Whatever the extent of breach of contract that Jadewell may have
committed – and the enumeration of Jadewell‘s alleged faults in Resolution 37
is quite extensive – the City of Baguio was still duty-bound to establish the
alleged breach.

You might also like