FILE- BGC or Bonifacio Global City belongs to Taguig, says the Court of Appeals. INQUIRER FILE PHOTO
The Court of Appeals (CA)聽on Thursday聽issued a ruling which in effect will give Taguig City the ownership of the 729-hectare Fort Andres Bonifacio now known as Bonifacio Global City (BGC).
In an 18-page resolution, the appeals court鈥檚 former special 6th division through Associate Justice Edwin Sorongon granted Taguig City鈥檚 motion to dismiss on the ground of forum shopping the case filed by Makati City.
The CA affirmed the July 2011 decision of the Pasig Regional Trial Court Branch 153 that ruled in favor of Taguig.
The Pasig court, in its ruling, confirmed that the Fort Bonifacio Military Reservation belongs to Taguig City.
It also nullified Proclamation No. 2475 because it altered the boundaries of Taguig in favor of Makati without the benefit of a plebiscite as required under the 1987 Constitution.
Makati City filed a motion for reconsideration with the Pasig court and also sought to annul the Pasig court鈥檚 judgment before the Court of Appeals.
The CA reversed the lower court鈥檚 decision and ruled in favor of Makati.
The local government of Taguig then elevated the case to the Supreme Court.
The high court modified the CA鈥檚 decision and ruled that Makati City is guilty of forum shopping by filing simultaneous remedies before the Pasig court and the Court of Appeals.
SC said Makati 鈥渘ot only vexed courts and an adverse litigant but actually and already given rise to conflicting decisions not only between different courts but even within the Court of Appeals itself.鈥�
The CA in its recent ruling held that it has no recourse but to dismiss Makati City鈥檚 bid to reverse the Pasig RTC鈥檚 2011 ruling.
鈥淚n this light, and in the absence of any justification on the part of Makati, this Court cannot but draw the conclusion that Makati鈥檚 simultaneous availment of the aforementioned reliefs was not a by-product of mere thoughtfulness or negligence but a willful and deliberate act of forum shopping,鈥� the appeals court said.
Concurring with the ruling were Associate Justices Ramon Cruz and Renato Francisco.