SUBJECT: Introduction to Law

TOPIC:

Sunset View Condominium Corporation vs. Campos

 This is a consolidated case. G.R. No. L-52361 & G.R. No. L-52524.
 In Sunset v Aguilar-Bernares Realty, the motion to dismiss the complaint filed by the petitioner for the
collection of assessments levied on the unit against the respondent was granted. The respondent is the
assignee of a unit in the Sunset View Condominium Corporation. The judge opined that the dispute should
be filed with the SEC who has exclusive original jurisdiction on controversies arising between shareholders
of corporation. Respondent had not fully paid the unit.
 In Sunset v Lim Siu Leng, the motion to dismiss the complaint filed by the petitioner for the collection of
overdue accounts on assessments and insurance premiums and interest thereon against Lim Siu Leng
whom was assigned a unit of the same condominium was denied by the City court of Pasay. The
correctness and validity of which is certain to involve a dispute between her and the petitioner
corporation; that she has automatically become, as a purchaser of the condominium unit, a stockholder of
the petitioner. Hence, Respondent appealed to the Court of First Instance. The petitioner filed its
opposition thereto, alleging that the private respondent who had not fully paid for the unit was not the
owner thereof, consequently was not the holder of a separate interest which would make her a
stockholder, and that hence the case was not an intra-corporate dispute. The respondent appealed to the
Court of First Instance. However, the motion to dismiss was denied. The respondent’s subsequent motion
for reconsideration was also denied. The court ordered that the case be ventilated with the SEC

ISSUE
1. Is a purchaser of a condominium unit in the condominium project managed by the petitioner, who has not
yet fully paid the purchase price thereof, automatically a stockholder of the petitioner Condominium
Corporation

2. Is it the regular court or the Securities & Exchange Commission that has jurisdiction over cases for
collection of assessments assessed by the Condominium Corporation on condominium units the full
purchase price of which has not been paid?

RELEVANT LAWS APPLICABLE

RULE

1. No. ownership of a unit is a condition sine qua non to being a shareholder in the condominium
corporation. It follows that a purchaser of a unit who is not yet the owner thereof for not having fully paid
the full purchase price, is not a shareholder By necessary implication, the "separate interest" in a
condominium, which entitles the holder to become automatically a share holder in the
condominium corporation, as provided in Section 2 of the Condominium Act, can be no other
than ownership of a unit. This is so because nobody can be a shareholder unless he is the owner
of a unit and when he ceases to be the owner, he also ceases automatically to be a shareholder.

2. Inasmuch as the private respondents are not shareholders of the petitioner condominium
corporation, the instant case for collection cannot be a "controversy arising out of intracorporate
1
Introduction to Law
Sunset View Condominium vs. Campos by Ian Mangkit
 or partnership relations between and among stockholders, members or associates; between any
or all of them and the corporation, partnership or association of which they are stockholders,
members or associates, respectively" which controversies are under the original and exclusive
jurisdiction of the Securities & Exchange Commission, pursuant to Section 5 (b) of P.D. No. 902-
A. The subject matters of the instant cases according to the allegations of the complaints are
under the jurisdiction of the regular courts

Summary of the Decisions prior to the Instant Case

G.R. No. L-52361 Sunset View Condominium Corporation v Campos, and Aguilar-Bernares Realty

Complaint Filed by Petitioner (Sunset) For the collection of assessments levied on the unit against
 June 22, 1979 Aguilar-Bernares realty
 Court of First Instance, Pasay
Motion to Dismiss by Respondent (Aguilar- Grounds:
Bernares Realty) 1. The complaint does not state a cause of action
 Opposition to this was filed by 2. The court has no jurisdiction over the subject or
Petitioner nature of action
 Motion to dismiss was GRANTED on 3. There is another action pending between the same
Dec. 11, 1979. parties for the same cause
Motion for Reconsideration (Sunset) Motion for reconsideration was denied. Petitioner filed the
 DENIED instant petition for certiorari (this case).

G.R. No. 52524 Sunset View Condominium Corporation v Campos, and Lim Siu Leng

Amended Complaint filed by Petitioner (Sunset) For the collection of overdue accounts on assessments and
 July 16, 1979 insurance premiums and the interest as of March 31, 1979.
 City Court of Pasay
Motion to Dismiss by Respondent (Lim Siu Ground: Lack of jurisdiction, alleging that the amount sought
Leng) to be collected is an assessment.
 Denied, Aug 13, 1979
Opposition by the Petitioner Petitioner alleged that the respondent who had not fully paid
the unit was not the owner thereof, thus, respondent is not a
shareholder.
Respondent filed her answer to the opposition
to the motion to dismiss
 Denied
Motion for Reconsideration by Respondent
 Denied, Sept. 19, 1979
Respondent appealed to the Court of First
Instance for “Motion to Dismiss Appeal”
 Denied
 Order was issued to ventilate the
controversy with the SEC
Motion for Reconsideration by Respondent Motion for reconsideration was denied. Petitioner filed the
 Denied, Jan 14, 1980 instant petition for certiorari (this case).

2
Introduction to Law
Sunset View Condominium vs. Campos by Ian Mangkit