|
THE
Supreme Court’s Second Division has affirmed with
finality its 2007 dismissal of the respective claims of
Celestial Nickel Mining Exploration Corp. and Blue Ridge
Mineral Corp., contending they have preferential rights
over mining claims of Macroasia Corp., a holding firm of
tycoon Lucio Tan, because Macroasia failed to fulfill
its work obligations stipulated in contracts with
petitioners.
The
mining-claim area of at least 1,000 hectares is located
in sitio Linao, Ipilan, Brookes Point, Palawan.
The
Second Division noted that petitioners failed to raise
new arguments to warrant reconsideration of its December
19, 2007, decision, which denied the mining firms’
petition seeking the cancellation of Macroasia’s mining
contracts, including the two mineral-production sharing
agreements (MPSA) granted by former environment
secretary Michael Defensor in favor of Macroasia in
2005.
In its
petition, Celestial and
Blue Ridge argued the Mines and Adjudication Board (MAB) erred when it
overturned the decision of the Panel of Arbitrators (POA)
of the Bureau of Mines finding Macroasia and another
mining firm, Lebach, as having automatically abandoned
their areas and thus lost their rights to the mining
claims.
Blue
Ridge appealed the POA’s decision to the MAB, insisting
it has preferential right not only to the mining claims
of Lebach but of Macroasia, as well.
On the
other hand, Macroasia has reiterated it did not abandon
its mining claims, and even if mining was not listed
among its purposes in its amended articles of
Incorporation, such was nevertheless ratified as a
secondary purpose by its stockholders in subsequent
amendments to the articles of incorporation.
The
Court of Appeals 12th Division, in a decision dated
April 15, 2005, declared Macroasia’s seven mining
contracts as subsisting, and rejected
Blue Ridge claim for preferential right over the mining claims.
It also
upheld the exclusive authority of the DENR to approve,
cancel and revoke mineral agreements. Celestial’s
motion for reconsideration was denied by the CA,
prompting it to elevate the case before the SC.
On the
other hand, the CA 10th Division in a resolution issued
on May 18, 2006, granted Blue Ridge petition and
reinstated the October 24, 2000 decision of the MAB. It
cancelled Macroasia’s lease contracts and granted Blue
Ridge prior and preferential rights.
Macroasia then elevated the Blueridge case to the SC,
questioning the decision of the CA’s 10th Division. |
