hereby 

MODIFIED as Under the Agreement, Werr had the obligation

follows:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary to complete the project within 210 calendar
days from receipt of the Notice of
1) Respondent Werr Corporation International Award/Notice to Proceed on July 22, 2005, or
shall pay petitioner Highlands Prime, Inc. until February 19, 2006.9 For the completion of
liquidated damages in the amount of the project, HPI undertook to pay Werr a lump
THIRD DIVISION P8,969,330.70; sum contract price of P271,797,900.00
inclusive of applicable taxes, supply and
2) Petitioner Highlands Prime, Inc. shall return transportation of materials, and labor.10 It was
G.R. No. 187543, February 08, 2017 to respondent Werr Corporation agreed that this contract price shall be subject
International the balance of its retention to the following payment scheme: (1) HPI shall
WERR CORPORATION money in the amount of P10,955,899.80 pay 20% of the contract price upon the
INTERNATIONAL, Petitioner, v. HIGHLANDS with the right to offset the award for execution of the agreement and the
PRIME, INC., Respondent. liquidated damages in the aforesaid amount presentation of the necessary bonds and
of P8,969,330.70; and insurance required under the contract, and
G.R. No. 187580 shall pay the balance on installments progress
3) The cost of arbitration shall be shared billing subject to recoupment of downpayment
HIGHLANDS PRIME, INC., Petitioner, v. WERR equally by the parties. and retention money;11 (2) HPI shall retain 10%
CORPORATION INTERNATIONAL, Respondent. of the contract price in the form of retention
The rest of the decision stands. bond provided by Werr;12 (3) HPI may deduct
DECISION or set off any sum against monies due Werr,
SO ORDERED.5chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary including expenses for the rectification of
JARDELEZA, J.: Facts defects in the construction project;13 and (4)
HPI has the right to liquidated damages in the
These are consolidated petitions1 seeking to Highlands Prime, Inc. (HPI) and Werr event of delay in the construction of the project
nullify the Court of Appeals' (CA) February 9, Corporation International (Werr) are domestic equivalent to 1/10 of 1% of the contract price
2009 Decision2 and April 16, 2009 corporations engaged in property development for every day of delay.14
Resolution3 in CA-G.R. SP No. 105013. The CA and construction, respectively. For the
modified the August 11, 2008 Decision4 of the construction of 54 residential units contained
Construction Industry Arbitration Commission in three clusters of five-storey condominium Upon HPI's payment of the stipulated 20%
(CIAC) in CIAC Case No. 09- structures, known as "The Horizon-Westridge downpayment in the amount of
2008, viz.:ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary Project," in Tagaytay Midlands Complex, P54,359,580.00, Werr commenced with the
Talisay, Batangas, the project owner, HPI, construction of the project. The contract price
issued a Notice of Award/Notice to Proceed6 to was paid and the retention money was
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the instant
its chosen contractor, Werr, on July 22, 2005. deducted, both in the progress billings. The
petition for review is PARTLY GRANTED. The
Thereafter, the parties executed a General project, however, was not completed on the
assailed Decision dated August 11, 2008 of the
Building Agreement7 (Agreement) on initial completion date of February 19, 2006,
Construction Industry Arbitration Commission
November 17, 2005.8 which led HPI to grant several extensions and a
in CIAC Case No. 09-2008 is
final extension until October 15, 2006. On May

R2 Submission to Arbitration Form of Arbitration Agreement| 1

8, 2006, Werr sought the assistance of HPI to expenses incurred after termination of the expenses.
pay its obligations with its suppliers under a contract. From the retention money of
"Direct Payment Scheme" totaling P25,738,258.01, it deducted (1) P18,762,541.67 From the claims of HPI, the CIAC only deducted
P24,503,500.08, which the latter approved only as payment to the suppliers under the Direct the amounts of (1) P10,903,331.30
up to the amount of P18,762,541.67. The Payment Scheme, and (2) P7,548,729.15 as representing the direct payments made from
amount is to be charged against the additional costs and expenses further broken September 26, 2006 until December 31,
accumulated retention money. As of the last down as follows: (a) P3,336,526.91 2006,27 (2) P3,336,526.91 representing the
billing on October 25, 2006, HPI had already representing the unrecouped portion of the unrecouped retention money, and (3)
paid the amount of P232,940,265.85 20% downpayment; (b) P542,500.00 P542,500.00 representing the unpaid cash
corresponding to 93.18% accomplishment rate representing the remainder of Werr's unpaid advances from the P25,738,258.01 retention
of the project and retained the amount of advances; (c) P629,702.24 for the money. It disallowed the direct payments
P25,738,258.01 as retention bond.15 waterproofing works done by Dubbel charged by HPI in 2007 and 2008 for having
Philippines; and (d) P3,040,000.00 for the been supplied after the termination of the
The project was not completed on the last rectification works performed by A.A. Manahan project, for not corresponding to the list of
extension given. Thus, HPI terminated its Construction after the termination of the suppliers submitted, and for HPI failing to show
contract with Werr on November 28, 2006, contract. Deducting the foregoing from the that Werr requested it to continue payments
which the latter accepted on November 30, accumulated retention money resulted in a even after termination of the Agreement. It also
2006.16 No progress billing was adduced for the deficiency of P573,012.81 in its favor.23 By way disallowed the amount of P629,702.24 for the
period October 28, 2006 until the termination of counterclaim, HPI prayed for the payment of waterproofing works done by Dubbel
of the contract.17 liquidated damages in the amount of Philippines for being works done after the
P11,959,107.60 for the 44-day delay in the termination of the contract. The P3,040,000.00
On October 3, 2007, Werr demanded from HPI completion of the project reckoned from for the rectification works performed after the
payment of the balance of the contract price as October 15, 2006 up to the termination of the termination of the contract was also disallowed
reflected in its financial status report which Agreement on November 28, 2006; for actual because while HPI presented its contract with
showed a conditional net payable amount of damages in the sum of P573,012.81; and for A.A. Manahan Construction for rectification and
P36,078,652.90.18 On January 24, 2007, HPI attorney's fees of P500,000.00 and litigation completion works, it failed to present proof of
informed Werr that based on their records, the expenses of P100,000.00.24 how much was specifically paid for rectification
amount due to the latter as of December 31, works only, as well as the proof of its payment.
2006 is P14,834,926.71.19 This amount was CIAC's Ruling Moreover, prior notice of such defective works
confirmed by Werr.20 Not having received any was not shown to have been given to Werr as
payment, Werr filed a Complaint21 for After due proceedings, the CIAC rendered its required under the Agreement, and even noted
arbitration against HPI before the CIAC to Decision25 on August 11, 2008 where it granted that HPI's project manager approved of the
recover the P14,834,926.71 representing the Werr's claim for the balance of the retention quality of the works up to almost 94%.28
balance of its retention money. money in the amount of P10,955,899.79 and
arbitration costs. It also granted BPI's claim for The CIAC further ruled that Werr incurred only
In its Answer,22 HPI countered that it does not liquidated damages in the amount of 9.327 days of delay. Citing Article 1376 29 of the
owe Werr because the balance of the retention P2,535,059.01 equivalent to 9.327 days of Civil Code and considering the failure of the
money answered for the payments made to delay,26 but denied its counterclaim for Agreement to state otherwise, it applied the
suppliers and for the additional costs and damages, attorney's fees, and litigation industry practice in the construction industry

R2 Submission to Arbitration Form of Arbitration Agreement| 2

that liquidated damages do not accrue after 28, 2006, or 33 days, since the contract prevails suppliers identified in the Direct Payment
achieving substantial compliance. It held that over the industry practice. Thus, the total Scheme even after the termination of the
delay should be counted from October 27, 2006 liquidated damages is P8,969,330.70. As to the contract should be charged against the balance
until the projected date of substantial arbitration costs, it ruled that it is more of the retention money, the same having been
completion. Since the last admitted equitable that it be borne equally by the parties made pursuant to Werr's express instructions;
accomplishment is 93.18% on October 27, since the claims of both were considered and (2) the payments to Dubbel Philippines and the
2006, the period it will take Werr to perform partially granted.34 cost of the contract with A.A. Manahan
the remaining 1.82% is the period of delay. Construction are chargeable to the retention
Based on the past billings, since it took Werr Hence, these consolidated petitions. money, pursuant to the terms of the
5.128 days30 to achieve 1% accomplishment, it Agreement; and (3) the expenses incurred in
will therefore take it 9.327 days to achieve Arguments excess of the retention money should be paid
substantial completion. Thus, the CIAC by Werr as actual damages. These payments,
concluded that the period of delay until Werr argues that the CA erred in modifying the while made after the termination of the
substantial completion of the project is 9.327 CIAC decision on the amount of liquidated contract, were for prior incurred
days. The liquidated damages under the damages and arbitration costs. It insists that obligations.37 HPI also argues that it is not liable
Agreement being 1/10 of 1% of the the appellate court disregarded Articles 1234, for arbitration costs, and reiterates its claims
P271,797,900.00 or P271,797.90 per day of 1235, and 1376 of the Civil Code and the for actual damages, and payment of attorney's
delay, Werr is liable for liquidated damages in industry practice (as evidenced by Clause 52.1 fees and litigation expenses.38
the amount of P2,535,048.95.31 of the Construction Industry Authority of the
Philippines [CIAP] Document No. 101 or the Issues
Since the liquidated damages did not exhaust "General Conditions of Contract for
the balance of the retention money, the CIAC Government Construction" and Article I. Whether the payments made
likewise denied the claim for actual damages.32 to suppliers and contractors
20.11 of CIAP Document No. 102 or the after the termination of the
Thereafter, HPI filed its petition for "Uniform General Conditions of Contract for contract are chargeable
review33 under Rule 43 with the CA on August Private Construction") when it did not apply against the retention money.
28, 2008. the construction industry practice in computing
liquidated damages only until substantial II. Whether the industry practice
CA's Ruling completion of the project, and not until the of computing liquidated 
termination of the contract.35 Werr further damages only up to substantial
TheCA rendered the assailed decision, affirming emphasizes that the CIAC, being an completion  of the project
the CIAC's findings on the allowable charges administrative agency, has expertise on the applies in the computation of
against the retention money, and on the subject matter, and thus, its findings prevail liquidated damages.
attorney's fees and litigation expenses. It, over the appellate court's findings.36 Consequently, whether delay
however, disagreed with the CIAC decision as to should be computed until
the amount of liquidated damages and On the other hand, HPI argues that Werr was termination of the contract or
arbitration costs. According to the CA, delay unjustly enriched when the CA disallowed HPI's until substantial completion of
should be computed from October 27, 2006 recovery of the amounts it paid to suppliers. the project.
until termination of the contract on November HPI claims that: (1) payments made to

R2 Submission to Arbitration Form of Arbitration Agreement| 3

 III. Whether the cost of parties and to which they have confidence, has arbitrators themselves; they must have had
arbitration should be settled the dispute after due confidence in such arbitrators. The Court will
shouldered by both parties. proceedings:ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary not, therefore, permit the parties to relitigate
Voluntary arbitration involves the reference of before it the issues of facts previously
IV. Whether HPI is entitled to a dispute to an impartial body, the members of presented and argued before the Arbitral
attorney's fees and litigation which are chosen by the parties themselves, Tribunal, save only where a very clear showing
expenses. which parties freely consent in advance to is made that, in reaching its factual conclusions,
abide by the arbitral award issued after the Arbitral Tribunal committed an error so
Our Ruling proceedings where both parties had the egregious and hurtful to one party as to
opportunity to be heard. The basic objective is constitute a grave abuse of discretion resulting
We deny the consolidated petitions. to provide a speedy and inexpensive method of in lack or loss of jurisdiction. Prototypical
settling disputes by allowing the parties to examples would be factual conclusions of the
I. Charges against the Retention Money avoid the formalities, delay, expense and Tribunal which resulted in deprivation of one
aggravation which commonly accompany or the other party of a fair opportunity to
Anent the first issue, we emphasize that what is ordinary litigation, especially litigation which present its position before the Arbitral
before us is a petition for review under Rule 45 goes through the entire hierarchy of courts. Tribunal, and an award obtained through fraud
where only questions of law may be Executive Order No. 1008 created an or the corruption of arbitrators. Any other,
raised.39 Factual issues, which involve a review arbitration facility to which the construction more relaxed, rule would result in setting at
of the probative value of the evidence industry in the Philippines can have recourse. naught the basic objective of a voluntary
presented, such as the credibility of witnesses, The Executive Order was enacted to encourage arbitration and would reduce arbitration to a
or the existence or relevance of surrounding the early and expeditious settlement of largely inutile
circumstances and their relation to each other, disputes in the construction industry, a public institution.44chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
may not be raised unless it is shown that the policy the implementation of which is In this case, the issues of whether HPI was able
case falls under recognized exceptions.40 necessary and important for the realization of to prove that payments made to suppliers and
national development goals. to third party contractors are prior incurred
In cases of arbitral awards rendered by the obligations that should be charged against the
CIAC, adherence to this rule is all the more Aware of the objective of voluntary arbitration retention money, and whether HPI incurred
compelling.41 Executive Order No. 1008,42 which in the labor field, in the construction industry, expenses above the retention money that
vests upon the CIAC original and exclusive and in any other area for that matter, the Court warrants actual damages, are issues of facts
jurisdiction over disputes arising from, or will not assist one or the other or even both beyond the review of the Court under Rule 45.
connected with, contracts entered into by parties in any effort to subvert or defeat that
parties involved in construction in the objective for their private purposes. The Court Moreover, even if we consider such factual
Philippines, clearly provides that the arbitral will not review the factual findings of an issues, we are bound by the findings of fact of
award shall be binding upon the parties and arbitral tribunal upon the artful allegation that the CIAC especially when affirmed by the
that it shall be final and inappealable except on such body had "misapprehended the facts" and CA.45 Factual findings by a quasi-judicial body
questions of law which shall be appealable to will not pass upon issues which are, at bottom, like the CIAC, which has acquired expertise
the Supreme Court.43 This rule on the finality of issues of fact, no matter how cleverly disguised because its jurisdiction is confined to specific
an arbitral award is anchored on the premise they might be as "legal questions." The parties matters, are accorded not only with respect but
that an impartial body, freely chosen by the here had recourse to arbitration and chose the even finality if they are supported by

R2 Submission to Arbitration Form of Arbitration Agreement| 4

substantial evidence.46 We recognize that made by the CIAC and the CA. Sundays and
certain cases require the expertise, specialized holidays).51chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
skills, and knowledge of the proper Thus, we affirm the CIAC and CA's findings that Werr, as contractor, urges us to apply the
administrative bodies because technical direct payments charged by HPI in 2007 and construction industry practice that liquidated
matters or intricate questions of facts are 2008 were for materials supplied after the damages do not accrue after the date of
involved.47 termination of the project and did not substantial completion of the project, as
correspond to the list of suppliers submitted; evidenced in CIAP Document No. 102, which
We nevertheless note that factual findings of that the waterproofing works done by Dubbel provides that:ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
the construction arbitrators are not beyond Philippines in the amount of P629,702.24 were 20.11 SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION AND ITS
review, such as when the petitioner for works done after the termination of the EFFECT:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
affirmatively proves the following: (1) the contract that were for the account of the new
award was procured by corruption, fraud, or contractor; and that the rectification works A. [a] There is substantial completion when the
other undue means; (2) there was evident performed after the termination of the contract Contractor completes 95% of the Work,
partiality or corruption of the arbitrators or any worth P3,040,000.00 were not proven to have provided that the remaining work and the
of them; (3) the arbitrators were guilty of been paid, that it was for rectification works performance of the work necessary to complete
misconduct in refusing to hear evidence only, and that prior notice of such defective the Work shall not prevent the normal use of
pertinent and material to the controversy; (4) works as required under the Agreement was the completed portion.
one or more of the arbitrators were disqualified not proven. Accordingly, we affirm that the
to act as such under Section 1048 of Republic balance of the retention money is
x xx
Act No. 87649 and willfully refrained from P10,955,899.79.
disclosing such disqualifications or of any other
D. [a] No liquidated damages for delay beyond
misbehavior by which the rights of any party II. Delay in computing Liquidated Damages
the Completion Time shall accrue after the date
have been materially prejudiced; (5) the
of substantial completion of the Work.
arbitrators exceeded their powers, or so On the other hand, the question on how
imperfectly executed them, that a mutual, final, liquidated damages should be computed based We reject this claim of Werr and find that while
and definite award upon the subject matter on the Agreement and prevailing jurisprudence this industry practice may supplement the
submitted to them was not made; (6) when is a question of law that we may review. Agreement, Werr cannot benefit from it.
there is a very clear showing of grave abuse of
discretion resulting in lack or loss of The pertinent provision on liquidated damages At the outset, we do not agree with the CA that
jurisdiction as when a party was deprived of a is found in clause 41.5 of the industry practice be rejected because
fair opportunity to present its position before Agreement, viz.:ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary liquidated damages is provided in the
the arbitral tribunal or when an award is 41.5. Considering the importance of the timely Agreement, autonomy of contracts prevails, and
obtained through fraud or the corruption of completion of the WORKS on industry practice is completely set aside.
arbitrators; (7) when the findings of the CA are the OWNER'S commitments to its clients, Contracting parties are free to stipulate as to
contrary to those of the CIAC; or (8) when a the CONTRACTOR agrees to pay the terms and conditions of the contract for as
party is deprived of administrative due the OWNER liquidated damages in the amount long as they are not contrary to law, morals,
process.50 However, we do not find that HPI was of 1/10th of 1% of the amount of the Contract good customs, public order or public
able to show any of the exceptions that should price for every day of delay (inclusive of policy.52 Corollary to this rule is that laws are
warrant a review and reversal of the findings deemed written in every contract.53

R2 Submission to Arbitration Form of Arbitration Agreement| 5

 contractor cannot be liable for liquidated
Deemed incorporated into every contract are damages because it already accomplished 9.05 The promulgation and adoption of
the general provisions on obligations and 97.56% of the project.56 We reiterated this Standard Conditions of Contract for the public
interpretation of contracts found in the Civil in Transcept Construction and Management construction and private construction sector
Code. The Civil Code Professionals, Inc. v. Aguilar57 where we ruled which shall have suppletory effect in cases
provides:ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary that since the contractor accomplished 98.16% where there is a conflict in the internal
Art. 1234. If the obligation has been of the project, the project owner is not entitled documents of a constmction contract or in the
substantially performed in good faith, the to the 10% liquidated damages.58 absence of the general conditions of a
obligor may recover as though there had been a construction agreement[.]
strict and complete fulfillment, less damages Considering the foregoing, it was error for the As the standard conditions for contract for
suffered by the obligee. CA to immediately dismiss the application of private construction adopted and promulgated
industry practice on the sole ground that there by the CIAP, CIAP Document No. 102 applies
Art. 1376. The usage or custom of the place is an existing agreement as to liquidated suppletorily to private construction contracts
shall be borne in mind in the interpretation of damages. As expressly stated under Articles to remedy the conflict in the internal
the ambiguities of a contract, and shall fill the 1234 and 1376, and in jurisprudence, the documents of, or to fill in the omissions in, the
omission of stipulations which are ordinarily construction industry's prevailing practice may construction agreement.
established. supplement any ambiguities or omissions in the
stipulations of the contract.
In previous cases, we applied these provisions In this case, clause 41.5 of the Agreement is
in construction agreements to determine undoubtedly a valid stipulation. However, while
Notably, CIAP Document No. 102, by itself, was
whether the project owner is entitled to clause 41.5 requires payment of liquidated
intended to have suppletory effect on private
liquidated damages. We held that substantial damages if there is delay, it is silent as to the
construction contracts. This is evident in CIAP
completion of the project equates to period until when liquidated damages shall run.
Board Resolution No. 1-98,59 which
achievement of 95% project completion which The Agreement does not state that liquidated
states:ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
excuses the contractor from the payment of damages is due until termination of the project;
Sec. 9. Policy-Making Body. - The [CIAP],
liquidated damages. neither does it completely reject that it is only
through the CIAP Executive Office and its due until substantial completion of the project.
various Implementing Agencies, shall
In Diesel Construction Co., Inc. v. UPSI Property This omission in the Agreement may be
continuously monitor and study the operations
Holdings, Inc.,54 we applied Article 1234 of the supplemented by the provisions of the Civil
of the construction industry, both domestic and
Civil Code. In determining what is considered Code, industry practice, and the CIAP Document
overseas operations, to identify its needs,
substantial compliance, we used the CIAP No. 102. Hence, the industry practice that
problems and opportunities, in order to
Document No. 102 as evidence of the substantial compliance excuses the contractor
provide for the pertinent policies and/or
construction industry practice that substantial from payment of liquidated damages applies to
executive action and/or legislative agenda
compliance is equivalent to 95% the Agreement.
necessary to implement plans, programs and
accomplishment rate. In that case, the
measures required to support the sustainable
construction agreement requires the contractor Nonetheless, we find that Werr cannot benefit
development of the construction industry, such
"to pay the owner liquidated damages in the from the effects of substantial compliance.
as but not limited to the
amount equivalent to one-fifth (1/5) of one (1)
following:ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
percent of the total Project cost for each Paragraph A.[a.], Article 20.11 of CIAP
x xx
calendar day of delay."55 We declared that the Document No. 102 requires that the

R2 Submission to Arbitration Form of Arbitration Agreement| 6

contractor completes 95% of the work for there admitted as accomplishment at the last billing the project owner will not incur further costs.
to be substantial completion of the project. is 93.18%. For this reason, even if we adopt the To compute the period of delay when
Also, in those cases where we applied the rule that no liquidated damages shall run after substantial compliance is not yet achieved but
industry practice to supplement the contracts the date of substantial completion of the merely on the assumption that it will eventually
and excused payment from liquidated damages project, Werr cannot claim benefit for it failed be achieved would result in an iniquitous
under Article 1234, the contractors there to meet the condition precedent, i.e., the situation where the project owner will bear the
actually achieved 95% completion of the contractor has successfully proven that it risks and additional costs for the period
project. Neither the CIAC nor the courts actually achieved 95% completion rate. excused from liquidated damages.
assumed as to when substantial compliance
will be achieved by the contractor, but the More importantly, Werr failed to show that it is From the foregoing, we affirm the CA's
contractors offered substantial evidence that the construction industry's practice to project conclusion that the period of delay in
they actually achieved at least 95% completion the date of substantial completion of a project, computing liquidated damages should be
of the project. Thus, the effects of substantial and to compute the period of delay based on reckoned from October 27, 2006 until the
completion only operate to relieve the the rate in past progress billings just as what termination of the contract or for 33 days, and
contractor from the burden of paying the CIAC has done. Consequently, the CIAC not only until the projected substantial
liquidated damages when it has, in reality, erred when it assumed that Werr continued to completion date. Consistent with the CA's
achieved substantial completion of the project. perform works, and if it did, that it performed ruling that liquidated damages did not exceed
them at the rate of accomplishment of the the retention money, we therefore affirm that
While the case before us presents a different previous works in the absence of evidence. HPI did not suffer actual damages in the
scenario, as the contractor here does not amount of P573,012.81.
demand total release from payment of That the effects of substantial completion will
liquidated damages, we find that in order to only apply when actual substantial completion III. Arbitration Costs, Attorney's Fees, and
benefit from the effects of the substantial is reached is apparent when we consider the Litigation Costs
completion of a project, the condition reason behind the rules on substantial
precedent must first be met-the contractor completion of the project found in Section Courts are allowed to adjudge which party may
must successfully prove by substantial evidence 20.11[E] of the CIAP Document No. bear the cost of the suit depending on the
that it actually achieved 95% completion rate of 102, viz.:ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary circumstances of the case.61 Considering the
the project. As such, it is incumbent upon Werr E. The purpose of this Article [ART. 20, WORK; CA's findings that both parties were able to
to show that it had achieved an 20.11: SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION AND ITS recover their claims, and neither was guilty of
accomplishment rate of 95% before or at the EFFECT] is to ensure that the Contractor is paid bad faith, we do not find that the CA erred in
time of the termination of the contract. for Work completed and for the Owner to dividing the arbitration costs between the
retain such portion of the Contract Price which, parties.
Here, there is no dispute that Werr failed to together with the Performance Bond, is
prove that it completed 95% of the project sufficient to complete the Work without We also do not find the need to disturb the
before or at the time of the termination of the additional cost to the Owner. findings as to attorney's fees and expenses of
contract. As found by CIAC, it failed to present litigation, both the CIAC and the CA having
The rules are intended to balance the allocation
evidence as to what accomplishment it found that there is no basis for the award of
and burden of costs between the contractor and
achieved from the time of the last billing until attorney's fees and litigation expenses.62
the project owner so that the contractor still
the termination of the contract.60 What was achieves a return for its completed work, and

R2 Submission to Arbitration Form of Arbitration Agreement| 7

WHEREFORE, the petitions are DENIED. The
Court of Appeals' February 9, 2009 Decision
and April 16, 2009 Resolution are AFFIRMED.
The net award in favor of Werr Corporation
International shall earn interest at the rate of
6% per annum from date of demand on October
3, 2007 until finality of this Decision.
Thereafter, the total amount shall earn interest
from finality of this Decision until fully paid.

SO ORDERED.chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary

Velasco, Jr., (Chairperson), Bersamin, Reyes,

and Caguioa,*JJ., concur.

R2 Submission to Arbitration Form of Arbitration Agreement| 8