Leviste Management System v · G.R. 199353

Petitioner: Leviste Management System
Respondent: Legaspi Towers 200
Citation: G.R. No. 199353
Court: Supreme Court
Division: First Division
Ponente: Leonardo-De Castro, J.
Decided: April 4, 2018

Summary

This consolidated case involved unauthorized construction by condominium unit owner LEMANS of Concession 4 on air space above their unit in Legaspi Towers. The core legal issue was whether Civil Code provisions on builders in good faith apply to condominium properties governed by special legislation. The Supreme Court reversed lower courts, holding that the Condominium Act as special law governs condominium relationships, not general Civil Code provisions. The Court ruled that LEMANS violated the Condominium Act by failing to obtain required consent of registered owners and member approval for the construction. The decision establishes that unauthorized construction in condominium projects must be removed regardless of good faith, as condominium relationships are governed by special statutory and contractual frameworks that supersede general civil law remedies.

Statutes applied

Civil Code, Art. 448

Related cases

Other Philippine cases on the same provisions and issues.

Mercedes Moralidad v. Sps. Diosdado Pernes G.R. No. 152809
Francisco S. Dizon v. Sebastian Gonzaga G.R. No. 138863
Rodolfo Morales v. Court of Appeals (Former Seventeenth Division) G.R. No. 117228
Onesimo Agapito v. Marilyn F. Agapito G.R. No. 255157
Bermon Marketing Communication Corporation v. Spouses Lilia M. Yaco G.R. No. 224552
Mr. v. Mr. G.R. No. 222530
Bank of the Philippine Islands v. Vicente Victor C. Sanchez G.R. No. 179518
Lourdes C. Fernandez v. Norma Villegas G.R. No. 200191

By Intellegal Editorial Board · April 4, 2018

Search Philippine case law on Intellegal →

AI-assisted case analysis — for research only. Verify against the official decision. A research aid, not legal advice; using this page creates no attorney-client relationship. For legal advice, consult a Philippine lawyer. Verify every holding and citation against the official decision (Supreme Court E-Library / Official Gazette) before relying on it.