Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
LAPERAL HELD:
REALTY CORPORATIONG.R. No.
135362December 13, 1999(320 SCRA 610) (1) A submission to arbitration is a contract. As
such, the Agreement, containing thestipulation
FACTS: on arbitration, binds the parties thereto, as well
as their assigns and heirs. Butonly they.
Petitioner Salas Jr. and Respondent Laperal Petitioners, as heirs of Salas Jr., and respondent
Realty Corporation entered into anagreement Laperal Realty Corporation arecertainly bound
for the latter to develop and provide complete by the agreement.(2) The arbitration agreement
construction services on formersland. Petitioner is valid, binding and enforceable and not
executed a special power of attorney in favor of contrary to publicpolicy so much so when there
Respondent Corporation toexercise general obtains a written provision for arbitration which
control, supervision and management of the
is not compliedwith, the trial court should
sale of his land. On June 10,1989 Petitioner left suspend the proceedings and order the parties
his home for a business trip in Nueva Ecija but to proceed toarbitration in accordance with the
never returned again. terms of their agreement. However it would be
Petitioners wife filed a petition for presumptive in theinterest of justice if the trial court hears
death of her husba the complaint against all herein respondents
andadjudicates petitioners rights as against
nd after seven years of absence. The trial court theirs in a singles and complete proceeding.The
granted her petition.On the otherhand, petition is granted the trial court must proceed
Respondent Corporation already subdivided the with the hearing of the case
property owned by SalasJr. to different lot
buyers. The heirs of Salas Jr. filed in the RTC of BF CORPORATION V. CA, 288 SCRA 267 (1998)
Lipa City a Complaint for nullity of sale, Facts:
reconveyance, cancellation of contract and
damages against Laperal RealtyCorporation and Petitioner and respondent Shangri-la
lot buyers. Laperal Realty Corporation filed a Properties, Inc. entered into an
motion to dismiss on theground that the heirs agreementwhereby the latter engaged the
of Salas Jr. failed to submit their grievance to former to construct the main structure of the
arbitration as stated inthe agreement executed "EDSA PlazaProject," a shopping mall complex
by Salas Jr. and Laperal Realty Corporation. The in Mandaluyong. Petitioner incurred delay in
lot buyers alsofiled a motion to dismiss based the constructionwork that SPI considered as
on the same ground. "serious and substantial."
ISSUE:
(1) Whether or not the arbitration clause in the On the other hand, according topetitioner, the
agreement between Salas Jr. andLaperal Realty construction works "progressed in faithful
binds the heirs of the former.(2) Whether or not compliance with the First Agreementuntil a fire
the trial court must dismiss the case or must broke out damaging Phase I" of the Project.
hear the casesimultaneously.
Hence, SPI proposed the re-negotiationof the required that "Notice of the demand for
agreement between them.Petitioner and SPI arbitration of a dispute shall be filed in writing
entered into a written agreement denominated with the other party . . . . in nocase . . . . later
as "Agreement for theExecution of Builder's than the time of final payment . . . "which
Work for the EDSA Plaza Project." Said apparently, had elapsed becausedefendants
agreement would cover theconstruction work have failed to file any written notice of any
on said project as of May 1, 1991 until its demand for arbitration during the saidlong
eventual completion. According toSPI, period of one year and eight months. The CA
petitioner "failed to complete the construction annulled the orders of the RTC.
works and abandoned the project."
Issue: