6. OSG v. Ayala Land, G.R. No.

177056, September 18, 2009, 600 SCRA 617

Facts: a) The following shopping malls provides parking spaces for different motor
vehicles b) They provide security personnel to protect the vehicles parked in their
parking facilities and maintain order within the area. In turn, they collect the following
parking fees from the persons making use of their parking facilities. c) On weekdays
Ayala Land Incorporated was collecting parking fees of ₱25.00 for the first four hours
and ₱10.00 for every succeeding hour; on weekends, flat rate of ₱25.00 per day d) In
Robinson’s Parking fees are in the amount of ₱20.00 for the first three hours and
₱10.00 for every succeeding hour Flat rate of ₱30.00 per day e) Shangri-La Corporation
collects a Flat rate of ₱30.00 per day f) SM Prime collects parking fees of ₱10.00 to
₱20.00 (depending on whether the parking space is outdoors or indoors) for the first
three hours and 59 minutes, and ₱10.00 for every succeeding hour or fraction thereof
g) The Code merely requires malls to provide parking spaces, without specifying
whether it is free or not, both Committees believe that the reasonable and logical
interpretation of the Code is that the parking spaces are for free h) According to the
OSG collection of parking fees shall not be tolerated considering that countries such as
America where parking spaces provided in malls are free of charge.
Issues: 1.) The Committees find that the collection of parking fees by shopping malls is
contrary to the National Building Code and is therefore [sic] illegal. 2.) After hearing,
judgment be rendered declaring that the practice of respondents in charging parking
fees is violative of the National Building Code and its Implementing Rules and
Regulations and is therefore invalid.

Ruling: No, the total prohibition against the collection by respondents of parking fees
from persons who use the mall parking facilities has no basis in the National Building
Code or its IRR. It Is considered void an denied by the court since there is no clear rule
or law stating that collection of parking fees are illegal. OSG attempted to argue by
using the National Building Code under section 803 which states that the complimentary
parking spaces are required to enhance light and ventilation, that is, to avoid traffic
congestion in areas surrounding the building, which certainly affects the ventilation
within the building itself, which otherwise, the annexed parking spaces would have
served. Free Of-charge parking avoids traffic congestion by ensuring quick and easy
access of legitimate shoppers to off-street parking spaces annexed to the malls, and
thereby removing the vehicles of these legitimate shoppers off the busy streets near the
commercial establishments. Thus the Court is unconvinced, regardless of whether
there's payment of parking fees or not parking spaces in the mall can be full resulting in
vehicle owners parking outside instead. With this it is concluded that the case being
filed is hereby denied.