A photo of a part of a portion of the South Road Properties taken in 2020. | CDN file
CEBU CITY, Philippines — The Court of Appeals in Cebu City reaffirmed the validity of the contracts and the legality of the sale of a 45-hectare lot at the city-owned South Road Properties (SRP), which two major real estate conglomerates purchased separately in 2015.
This after the court denied former Mayor Tomas Osmeña’s Very Urgent Omnibus Motion to classify his appeal as a special civil action for certiorari and prohibition. The ruling issued on September 27, 2023, remains in effect, with the court rejecting Osmeña’s motion for reconsideration due to lack of merit.
The resolution was obtained by CDN Digital through the Sangguniang Panlungsod public session agenda, and it was officially endorsed on Wednesday, October 16, 2024.
The court’s resolution, promulgated on August 29, 2024, is a development in Osmeña’s case dating back to 2019, which alleged that the contracts signed by former mayor Michael Rama with the SM-Ayala Consortium and the Filinvest Group were “illegal and undervalued” the property.
READ MORE:
Osmeña to file raps against Rama for SRP lot sale
Lawyer Amando Ligutan, legal counsel of Osmeña, previously said that the lot was sold illegally for P17 billion and could have been worth over P50 billion.
Osmeña argued that the contract was not valid and that Rama did not have the proper authority from the Cebu City Council to complete the sale.
However, the court ruled against Osmeña, stating, “The present case is not a taxpayer’s suit, and the appellant [Osmeña] cannot sue as a taxpayer as his point of contention… are the questionable contracts entered into for the sale of SRP lots.”
The resolution further explained that for a taxpayer suit to proceed, there must be an “illegal disbursement of public funds,” which was deemed absent in this case.
The court stated that “the allegations of the appellant that the subject SRP lots are not private properties… has no basis in facts and law.”
It said that the SRP lots are classified as patrimonial property and that the City Government of Cebu is authorized to sell such property under a valid Sangguniang Panlungsod Resolution No. 13-0418-2014.
The resolution also stated that Osmeña was unable to specify any particular injury he would suffer from the sale.
“The appellant failed to precisely specify what type of injury he would suffer or what particular right or privilege he would be denied by the aforesaid sale of the SRP lots,” it said.