Ynot vs. IACQuestions the validity of EO requiring permits for interprovincial transfer of carabao, to regulate indiscriminate slaughter.According to SC: End is justifiable, i.e., to protect farm animals. However, the means is not reasonable. The permit required will not prevent indiscriminateslaughter; instead, slaughtering should be regulated. The means must pass thetest of arbitrariness.POWER OF EMINENT DOMAINPower of expropriation: forced sale (extraordinary), it is not resorted to if owner agrees to sell, lease or pay for damages caused1. Private Property==> all kinds of private property==> except money and choice in action- because just compensation comes in the form of money- choice in action is nontransferable==> real, personal, tangible, intangibleex. franchise - takes over a corporationChurch property - even with separation of church and state==> those already expropriated can still be subjected to expropriation, providedthat it is done directly by Congress. However, it does not prohibit the Congress to delegate.2. Taking==> physical dispossession==> and also that property is subject to burden (like you should plant only riceand not trees since your land is in the middle of electric lines so that it would not hinder with the wiring of electricity)==> as such, the moment your property is subjected to any of the 2 modes of taking (mentioned above) ,then it constitutes
.Republic vs. PLDTIssue: The right of the Bureau of Telecommunications to demand interconnection between the government telephone system and that of the PLDT, so that the formercould make use of the lines and facilities of the PLDTHeld: There is valid taking, although the parties cannot be coerced to enter into a contract, where no agreement has been had between them. But the taking ofthe power lines is similar to that of taking of property although it is in reality an imposition of burden upon the company. Either way, private property is still being subject to a burden for public use or benefit.When Taking is Not Compensable* If the taking is done under the police power and the property is destroyed because it is noxious or for a noxious purpose.* E.g. 1. PLDT diggings for telephone lines: store owners affected- no taking-exercise of police power- the business or land has not been taken- damage without injury (damnum absque injuria)* E.g. 2. A building on the verge of collapse may be ordered demolished in the interest of public safety, the owner will not be entitled to payment of just compensation.* E.g. 3 A railroad company is allowed to operate along a street, resulting inthe depreciation of the properties alongside it because of smoke, soot, gases,noise* In all these cases, police power is exercised to improve general welfare. Losses sustained are merely incidental. Compensation is only the altruistic feeling.