GR 147076; (June, 2004) (Digest)
G.R. No. 147076; June 17, 2004
METROPOLITAN WATERWORKS AND SEWERAGE SYSTEM, petitioner, vs. ACT THEATER, INC., respondent.
FACTS
The case originated from the consolidation of a criminal case and a civil case. On September 22, 1988, four employees of respondent Act Theater, Inc. were apprehended for allegedly tampering with a water meter. Consequently, petitioner MWSS disconnected the respondent’s water service. The employees were criminally charged, and the respondent filed a civil complaint for injunction with damages against MWSS, alleging the disconnection was arbitrary and done without prior notice, adversely affecting its business operations and sanitation.
The trial court acquitted the employees due to the prosecution’s failure to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. In the civil aspect, it ruled in favor of Act Theater, ordering MWSS to pay actual damages, return a ₱200,000 deposit made for service restoration, and pay attorney’s fees. The Court of Appeals affirmed this decision, prompting MWSS to elevate the case to the Supreme Court via a petition for review on certiorari.
ISSUE
The primary issue is whether MWSS acted lawfully in disconnecting the water service without prior notice, thereby justifying the award of damages against it.
RULING
The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the appellate court’s decision. The Court rejected MWSS’s defense that it was merely exercising its proprietary right under Article 429 of the Civil Code, which grants an owner the right to exclude any person from the enjoyment of property. The Court emphasized that the exercise of any right is not absolute and must conform to the standards set forth in Article 19 of the Civil Code, which requires every person to act with justice, give everyone his due, and observe honesty and good faith.
The legal logic is that while MWSS possessed a right, its manner of exercise was abusive. The disconnection was effected merely a day after the employees’ apprehension and only hours after a notice was sent, which denied Act Theater a meaningful opportunity to be heard or to rectify the situation. This arbitrary act, which compelled the theater to secure an alternative water supply and deposit a large sum for restoration, constituted a legal wrong under Article 19. The award of damages, including reasonable attorney’s fees, was thus proper as Act Theater was compelled to litigate to protect its interests due to MWSS’s unjustified act. The typographical error in the CA decision regarding the attorney’s fees was clarified; the affirmed award was ₱5,000, not ₱500,000.