VDA DE URBANO vs.

GSIS/ 367 SCRA 672

Dayle Martin D. Manlod

FACTS

Petitioners mortgaged their property to respondent GSIS to secure a housing loan. As

petitioners failed to pay their load when it fell due, GSIS foreclosed the mortgage.
Petitioner Vda. de Urbano wrote the GSIS Board of Trustees to inform them of her
desire to redeem the subject property and for advice on the procedure for redemption.
GSIS responded advising her to pay the total redemption price of P154, 896.00 on or
before the expiry date of redemption. Unable to find financing to repurchase the
subject property, petitioners requested for re- mortgage through repurchase of the
subject property. Respondent Crsipina dela Cruz commenced negotiations with
respondent GSIS for her purchase of the petitioners' foreclosed property. A Deed of
Absolute Sale over the subject property was executed between GSIS and private
respondent dela Cruz. Having learned about the sale of the subject property to dela
Cruz, petitioner Aurelio Arrienda wrote to the GSIS protesting the said sale and
requesting its reconsideration and recall. Petitioners filed the instant case before the
RTC of Quezon City. The lower court dismissed the complaint. This was affirmed by
the Court of Appeals

ISSUE

Was the GSIS acted in bad faith and violated the constitutional right of information

RULING:

No. GSIS denial of petitioners’ further requests for repurchase of subject property
was based on a factual determination of the petitioners’ financial capacity and the
GSIS charter, PD 1146. Also, GSIS sold the property to dela Cruz only after giving
them one year to repurchase.

The petitioners, on the strength of the Valmonte case, can’t also impute bad faith on
GSIS when it was secretly negotiating with Dela Cruz. In the Valmonte case, the
court held that the constitutional right to information was limited to matters of
public concern to transactions involving public interest.The sale of the property
was not imbued by public interests as it was a purely private transaction. Pets. Can’t
demand to be informed of such public negotiation since they had no interest on the
subject property since they failed to comply with the GSIS terms of repurchase and
the denial to repurchase under the GSIS terms.