Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

SPS. EDMUNDO T. OSEA AND LIGAYA R. OSEA v. ANTONIO G. AMBROSIO

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	GR No. 164789 2009-08-27	CHRISTIAN GENERAL ASSEMBLY v. SPS. AVELINO C. IGNACIO AND PRISCILLA T. IGNACIO BRION, J.
We explained the HLURB's exclusive jurisdiction at length in Sps. Osea v. Ambrosio,[16] where we said: Generally, the extent to which an administrative agency may exercise its powers depends largely, if not wholly, on the provisions of the statute creating or empowering such agency. Presidential Decree (P.D.) No. 1344, "Empowering The National Housing Authority To Issue Writ Of Execution In The Enforcement Of Its Decision Under Presidential Decree No. 957," clarifies and spells out the quasi-judicial dimensions of the grant of jurisdiction to the HLURB in the following specific terms:
	GR No. 131903 2008-06-26	RAGASA v. CA CARPIO, J.
The HLURB is the sole regulatory body for housing and land development.[18] The extent to which an administrative agency may exercise its powers depends on the provisions of the statute creating such agency.[19] Courts will not determine a controversy where the issues for resolution demand the exercise of sound administrative discretion.[20]
	GR No. 131903 2008-06-26	RAGASA v. CA CARPIO, J.
In Osea v. Ambrosio,[26] the Court held that the provisions of PD 957 were intended to encompass all questions relating to subdivisions. This intention was aimed to provide for an appropriate government agency, which is the HLURB, to which all parties aggrieved in the implementation of provisions and the enforcement of contractual rights with respect to said category of real estate may take recourse.