G.R. No. 209359 . October 17, 2018
METROHEIGHTS SUBDIVISION HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC., PETITIONER, V. CMS CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, TOMASITO T. CRUZ, TITA F. CRUZ, SIMONETTE F. CRUZ, ANGEL T. CRUZ, ERNESTO T. CRUZ AND METROPOLITAN WATERWORKS AND SEWERAGE SYSTEM (MWSS), RESPONDENTS.

FACTS

Petitioner Metroheights Subdivision Homeowners Association, Inc. entered into a contract with respondent MWSS for a new water service connection, funded entirely by its members. This provided a sufficient 24-hour water supply. Subsequently, respondent CMS Construction, under a contract with MWSS for a water rehabilitation project in the area, excavated and laid new pipes. In the process, CMS Construction cut and disconnected petitioner’s separate water service line on Visayas Avenue without petitioner’s prior knowledge or consent. This action left petitioner’s subdivision without water for three days and resulted in the loss of PVC pipes. Petitioner demanded restoration of its original connection and the return of the materials to no avail.
Respondents MWSS and CMS Construction defended their actions by asserting that the cutting and interconnection of pipes were part of the MWSS-approved design for the rehabilitation project, which aimed to improve water distribution for eight subdivisions, including petitioner’s. They claimed the disconnection was temporary and necessary for the infrastructure upgrade, arguing the principle of damnum absque injuria (loss without wrongful act), as the exercise was a legitimate implementation of a public utility project.

ISSUE

Whether respondents MWSS and CMS Construction are jointly and severally liable for damages arising from the unauthorized cutting and disconnection of petitioner’s water service line.

RULING

Yes, respondents are jointly and severally liable. The Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals and reinstated the RTC’s finding of liability, albeit with a modification on the amount of actual damages. The core legal logic rests on the violation of petitioner’s property rights and the absence of good faith or due diligence by respondents. While MWSS has the right to implement projects for public utility, this right is not absolute and must be exercised with justice and with regard for the rights of others. The act of disconnecting petitioner’s independently funded water line without prior notice, consultation, or consent constituted an arbitrary and unlawful encroachment on petitioner’s property. The defense of damnum absque injuria fails because the damage was caused by a wrongful act, not a legitimate exercise of right conducted properly.
The Court found respondents acted in bad faith and in concert. MWSS, as the principal, approved the plans and supervised the project, while CMS Construction, as the contractor, executed the disconnection. Their failure to notify or coordinate with the petitioner, who was a direct stakeholder and end-user, demonstrated a lack of care and constituted actionable negligence. This joint tortious conduct makes them solidarily liable under Article 2194 of the Civil Code. The awarded damages serve to compensate the actual loss (recomputed based on receipt evidence), to serve as an example by way of exemplary damages, and to vindicate petitioner’s rights. Attorney’s fees and litigation costs are also justified. All monetary awards shall earn legal interest from finality until full payment.