27.

MUNICIPALITY OF PARANAQUE VS VM REALTY

Facts:
Pursuant to Sangguniang Bayan Resolution No. 93-95, Series of 1993, the
Municipality of Paraaque filed a Complaint for expropriation against V.M. Realty
Corporation, over two parcels of land. Allegedly, the complaint was filed for the purpose of
alleviating the living conditions of the underprivileged by providing homes for the homeless
through a socialized housing project. Petitioner, pursuant to its Sangguniang Bayan
Resolution No. 577, Series of 1991, previously made an offer to enter into a negotiated sale
of the property with private respondent, which the latter did not accept. The RTC authorized
petitioner to take possession of the subject property upon its deposit with the clerk of court
of an amount equivalent to 15% of its fair market value. Private Respondent filed an answer
alleging that (a) the complaint failed to state a cause of action because it was filed pursuant
to a resolution and not to an ordinance as required by RA 7160; and (b) the cause of action,
if any, was barred by a prior judgment or res judicata. On private respondents motion, its
answer was treated as a motion to dismiss. The trial court dismissed the complaint
Issue:
Whether a Local Government Unit can exercise its power of eminent domain
pursuant to a resolution by its law-making body.
Held:
Under Section 19, of the present Local Government Code (RA 7160), it is stated as
the first requisite that LGUs can exercise its power of eminent domain if there is an
ordinance enacted by its legislative body enabling the municipal chief executive. A
resolution is not an ordinance, the former is only an opinion of a law-making body,
the latter is a law. The case cited by Petitioner involves BP 337, which was the previous
Local Government Code, which is obviously no longer in effect. RA 7160 prevails over the
Implementing Rules, the former being the law itself and the latter only an administrative
rule which cannot amend the former.