Espinocilla v. Bagong Tanyag Homeowners’ Assn., Inc.

(529 SCRA 654)

FACTS: Espinocillo and other petitioners who were former members of the Bagong
Tanyag Homeowners’ Inc (BAHATI), filed an appeal before qweqwewqeethe S.C and
faults the appellate court in not declaring the acts of BAHATI as unconstitutional or
contrary to Art. 13, (Social Justice and Human Rights) sec 9 and sec 10 (under Urban
Land Reform Housing ) in relation to RA 7279-An act to provide a comprehensive and
continuing urban dev’t and housing program, establish a mechanism for its
implementation ad for other purpose.

To give a brief history of the case, the petitioners contended that the property or lots
which was occupied by them, or adjacent to them where they planted crops or made
improvements for some time were subdivided without their consent, reassigned without
due process of law and that their names were omitted in the list as prospective
beneficiaries. They filed a complaint before the HIGC and the HIGC declared that they
were deprived of their property right without due process of law. However upon petition
of the respondents with HIGC, the latter reversed the decision and declared that the acts
of the BAHATI was valid.

ISSUE: WON the Petioners were deprived of their property without due process of law

HELD: The petition fails and the decision of the Court of Appeals is affirmed.

The record shows that the petitioners were given more sufficient notice and opportunity
to be heard before they were removed from the list of prospective beneficiaries and that
even after they were delisted, they were given a new deadline for them to submit
requirements and were sent notices informing them of the consequences of
noncompliance.