5G Investment News
  • Top News
  • Economy
  • Forex
  • Investing
  • Stock
  • Editor’s Pick
No Result
View All Result
5G Investment News
  • Top News
  • Economy
  • Forex
  • Investing
  • Stock
  • Editor’s Pick
No Result
View All Result
5G Investment News
No Result
View All Result
Home Stock

CoA told to resolve hotel claims

by
April 2, 2024
in Stock
0
CoA told to resolve hotel claims

THE SUPREME COURT (SC) has ordered the Commission on Audit (CoA) to resolve a hotel owner’s money claims against the Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corporation (PAGCOR) in a consolidated resolution that also reinstated a regional trial court’s ruling determining the cost owed by PAGCOR amounting to over P102 million.

Affirming a 2006 ruling by a Regional Trial Court (RTC), the Supreme Court en banc ordered CoA to settle the money claims made by Silahis International Hotel, Inc. (SIHI), operator of the Grand Boulevard Hotel.

The 2006 RTC Decision sided with the hotel, ordering PAGCOR to pay its restoration dues as it entered into a Contract of Lease on the second and third floors of the hotel for its casino from 2000 to 2004.

After a series of court battles, the SC reinstated the lower court’s decision that entitled SIHI to claim restoration costs from PAGCOR and reversed a 2015 Court of Appeals (CA) decision that voided the RTC ruling on the grounds that a third party — Pacific Wide Holdings Corp. — had an intervening claim as the new owner of the hotel. 

In the 19-page decision penned by Justice Ma. Filomena D. Singh, the SC reversed the 2015 CA decision and determined that Pacific Wide was not an “indispensable party” to the case since the rulings were based on the Contract of Lease between PAGCOR and SIHI, which had expired years before Pacific Wide came into the picture.

As for CoA, the SC determined that “SIHI’s money claim against PAGCOR is now a liquidated claim over which the CoA has jurisdiction.”

While the SC remanded that money claim to CoA, it ruled that CoA’s action of rejecting the money claim determined by the RTC was not a “grave abuse of discretion.”

“The CoA properly denied SIHI’s money claim. SIHI’s claim was anchored on the 2006 RTC Decision, as modified by the 2012 CA Decision, which could not be executed precisely because the 2015 CA Decision nullified it,” it read.

In the end, the SC ruled that “SIHI’s contractual right to receive payment from PAGCOR does not affect Pacific Wide’s later ownership of the leased property.” — Chloe Mari A. Hufana

Previous Post

Baguio booking scam exposed

Next Post

DoH aims for 6,000 health facilities

Next Post
DoH aims for 6,000 health facilities

DoH aims for 6,000 health facilities

Enter Your Information Below To Receive Free Trading Ideas, Latest News And Articles.







    Fill Out & Get More Relevant News





    Stay ahead of the market and unlock exclusive trading insights & timely news. We value your privacy - your information is secure, and you can unsubscribe anytime. Gain an edge with hand-picked trading opportunities, stay informed with market-moving updates, and learn from expert tips & strategies.
    Your information is secure and your privacy is protected. By opting in you agree to receive emails from us. Remember that you can opt-out any time, we hate spam too!

    Recommended

    The challenges of students in Mindanao

    The challenges of students in Mindanao

    July 27, 2025
    LANDBANK powers cashless fare payments in MRT-3

    LANDBANK powers cashless fare payments in MRT-3

    July 26, 2025
    Pushing for the mainstream use of bamboo in construction

    Pushing for the mainstream use of bamboo in construction

    July 26, 2025
    Budget-Friendly Compliance Tips for Growing Operations

    Budget-Friendly Compliance Tips for Growing Operations

    July 25, 2025

    Disclaimer: 5GInvestmentNews.com, its managers, its employees, and assigns (collectively “The Company”) do not make any guarantee or warranty about what is advertised above. Information provided by this website is for research purposes only and should not be considered as personalized financial advice.
    The Company is not affiliated with, nor does it receive compensation from, any specific security. The Company is not registered or licensed by any governing body in any jurisdiction to give investing advice or provide investment recommendation. Any investments recommended here should be taken into consideration only after consulting with your investment advisor and after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company.

    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms & Conditions

    Copyright © 2024 5GInvestmentNews. All Rights Reserved.

    No Result
    View All Result
    • Home
    • Privacy Policy
    • suspicious engagement
    • Terms & Conditions
    • Thank you

    © 2025 JNews - Premium WordPress news & magazine theme by Jegtheme.