“To recall, Section 7(a) provides for two separate rights of an association member: (1) the right to avail of and enjoy basic community services and facilities; and (2) the right to use common areas. However, Section 22(b) mentions the first right and notably omits the second. In particular, Section 22(b) provides that it is prohibited ‘[t]o deprive any homeowner of his/her right to avail of or enjoy basic community services and facilities’ when such homeowner has paid the necessary dues.

“The corollary of this rule is that where such association member has been declared delinquent for nonpayment of dues, the right to avail of or enjoy basic community services and facilities under Section 7(a) may be denied. Clearly, the right to use the common areas was omitted in Section 22(b). Following the settled rule in statutory construction, this omission must be considered intentional.

“Further, considering that the provisions of a statute must be harmonized, the interpretation of Section 22(b), in relation to Section 7(a), presents a valid limitation on the right of homeowners’ associations to impose sanctions on delinquent, nonpaying members under Sections 9 and 10(1).

“Fourth, an association member, once declared delinquent for nonpayment of dues, still retains the ‘full right’ to use common areas such as the roads under Section 7(a). Indeed, the omission in Section 22(b) simultaneously limits the right of a homeowners association to impose sanctions and preserves a right in favor of delinquent members. “Moreover, given the literal interpretation of ‘full,’ the ‘full right’ to use common areas such as the roads indicates that the same may be enjoyed to its fullest extent. Clearly, then, the ‘full right’ to use the roads necessarily includes the right to use them freely for mobile transportation and the delivery of basic goods.

“Having delineated the rules on the respective rights of a homeowners association and its delinquent members under Republic Act 9904, the Court shall now discuss the validity of the subject sanctions based on the foregoing rules. As discussed, interpreting Section 22(b) in relation to Section 7(a), a homeowners association may sanction its delinquent, nonpaying members by depriving them of the right to avail of or enjoy basic community services and facilities.

“However, such sanctions may not deprive delinquent members of their right to use common areas, such as the roads. At this point, it is noteworthy that the other sanctions imposed by [the homeowners association] — such as the banning of grass-cutting and maintenance within five meters of the delinquent members’ property and the reduction of the frequency of garbage collection to once every two weeks — restrict the delinquent members’ right to avail of and enjoy basic services and facilities.

“These are allowed under Republic Act 9904. However, the subject sanctions violate Republic Act 9904 because they clearly restrict the use of the roads for mobile transportation and the delivery of basic goods.

“To recall, the subject sanctions ban the use of the roads to deliver basic goods, such as food and gas, to the residence of the spouses Retirado. They also prohibit the use of the roads for the entry of the spouses’ guests and the entry of empty taxis, tricycles, and Grab vehicles to pick up the spouses from their residence. Applying the rule above, petitioners violated the full right of the spouses to use the roads under Section 7(a) of Republic Act 9904.”

The facts and redacted quoted portion of the decision are from SC GR 278137.