PDLITICAL LAW
mandate for the creation of a system of
legislation be initiative and referendum
b. A plebiscite is required in the creation,
division, merger, abolition of pro1.-'inr:e. city,
municipality, or baran8jajr DT the suhstantia]
alteration of 113 l:l4:lundarII"r.
HCITE: These are more of reservations of power
be' the people than delegations considering the
fact that Use people 3 l'*E repositories of at]
governmental powers
z. Emergency powers of the Preside nr,
3. Tariffl:l4Jwers of the Presldenl;
4. Delegation to local gavernmenls, and
5. Delegadan to Administrative bundles of the l:HJwer
of suburdlnate legjslatlnn {E'rr.rz and IS'rr.r:q, supra at
162)
F m"11=rn"y P~'IWPt*=
For the delegatlun it' emrrrgenq" powers to the
President to be valid, the Enllnwing requisites must
concur:
1. It is dune dubai fig war or Jlatinnal emecgenqr
2. It must allure the President to exercise such
powers which are necessary and proper in carry
nut a declared national l>nliqr.
3. Suds exercise must be for a limited period nnljr.
HGTE: If the Congress does not expressly take
back: the power by means of a Reoolutlon, the
same she]] :ease upon lls ne1:tAdioummenL
4.
Such exenclse must be subject to Destl'i1:t:lans
presrrlbed by the Congress. f5er:'. 23 {2}, .err_ w,
I 9-8.7" Eonsliturlunl'
TarilTFnwpr*a
The Congress ma].r, by law, authorize the President to
He within specified ]imi13, and subject m such
limitations and res1:r11:t1ons as it may impose, tariff
rates, import and export quotas, tonnage and
wharfage dues, and other duties or imp-osls within the
h'amework of Use national de'ueloplnlent program
the Government [See 28 {2}', Art; w, res?
Constitution]
Pursuant to the Stale P0lil'.'r on ineai out-nnnmy, &\e
fundamental powers of Me Slate 'WETE delegated Lu
local gcl1.re1'11menl3,, subject to nestrictinns imposed by
Enngness. The general law in this regard is the Meal
Government Eyde {LG E}.
The purpose for which the foregoing powers have
been delegated is to enable Ioea] authorities to attend
to local eonoerns in an elTel:ti1.-'e and meaningful
manner, instead of nel!,"'ng red much on the nations]
government, whose attention would otherwise be
diffuse over a multitude of local concerns. Morospe
Pol'lLf4:'oJ Lew 2816 Ed'._ p. 189]
1?
and
. .
Administrative agencies are clothed wI'l"h rule-making
powers. The only requirement is that the regulation
must he germane to the objet and purposes of the
law.
T238 fur 'Walid Ddcgatiun
linmpfetenus Test - The law mud be complete in
llself, setting firth therein the policy to be executed,
carried out, m' implemented by the delegate.
2.SumrMn9 Standard Test - The law must Ex 3
standard, me Iimila of which ave suffl1:ien111.f
determinate ar determinable, to which the delegate
must nonfarm in the perfu-rmanee of his function;
MUTE: For subordinate 1egls'lat:l-on to be valid the
Administrative Code of 198? requires the filing of
rules adapted by the administrat:l1.re agencies with the
up Law Center, in addition to compliance with
completeness test and sufiirdent standard test.
[Quezon cry PTEA Federation. lm; if. D-cpEd', ER Ho.
13920, February 23, 2016, 1. LEI5INEN.]
The fcullllwlng are the Eiindamentalfinherent powers
Dflj'LE SIHIE:
1. Poll be Pnwtr
2. Pnwtr BE Eminent Dnmaln
3. Puwtr 1;\E Taxadu n
Polite power is the power of the state to promote
public welfare by restraining and rlegulatlng the use of
liberty and property.-'_ It is the most pervulvo the least
limitable, and Me most demanding of the three
fl.Lndanlenta] powers of the State.
As an inhere nl attribute of sovereignty which virma]1y
escnends to all public needs, police power grants a
wide panoply of instrument 'Ll'Lroug]1 which the State,
as parents patriot, gives effect to a hast of 113
legulatorjr powers. The power to "regulate" means the
power m protect, faster, promote, preserve, and
consul wi& due regard for e illteresE. Erst and
foremost, of the public, then of the utiilq of it
patrons, {Gerri v. Dec ent of EM E. R.
159?56, :to 1 F, 20o?1
The stare, in order m promote general welfare, may
interfere with persons] liberty, with property, and
with business and occupations. Persons may be
subieeted to all ldnds of 1'estralnt and burdens in
order to secure the gene-ra] eonlfort. health and
p-rosperlty of the state and to d'Lls fundamental aim of
our Government, the rights of the indlvlOual are
suborOlnateO. [Drtlyos and Co., Limited Partnership u:
Feoff Boric and Trust Co, ER No. L-246?l5l. December
4 t97*5ll
UHIVERSITYDF SANrTNTaMAS
FAcul_Tv nr CIVIL LAW
 II. BASIC CZDHCEPTS
Generally, p-alice pnwtr extends to al] the great public
needs. Its particular aspects, however, are the
fnllawing:
PLLI:lllr: health;
z. Public marais;
3. Public safety; and
4. P ubllr: welfare
Requisites for a valid exercise nfpnl is: pnwfr
1. Lawjlirf suhjel:E - The Interest of the public
generally, as distinguished h'nm thus-e of a
particular class, require the exercise of the p-nliee
power; and
2. Lawjirf means - The means employed are
reasonably necessary for ~Lhe accomplishment of
the purpose and not unduly oppressive upon
individuals. [National Development Company and
New .4,gr1!x_ Ina u. PFuJ'1ppine Feremns Bunk, 152
ECRA 259 December JET, 1998]
Q: President Rodrigo Duterte issued Procla motion
Ho. 415 forrnalljr declaring a state of calamity in
Boracay and ordering its closure Mr sis [6]
months. Dn account of this, Boracay residents
Mark Anthony Iqbal and Tltiting lacosalem Filed
Ute present petition alleging that they would
suffer grave and irreparable damage as their
livelihood depends on tourist activities
the
therein. They attacl-Led the ondec on Me ground
that it is an invalid exercise of legislative powers.
is the order invalid?
A: HD. That the assailed governmental measure in this
case is within the scope of police power cannot be
tlisputetl. 'IFe1'ily, the statutes from which the said
measure draws authority and the constil:ul1onaI
provlsl-ons which serve as jE framework are primarily
oonoerned with the environment and health, safety,
and we]]-being of the people, the promotion and
seclurlng of which 3.["'E clearly Iegltimate objectives of
governmental efforts and regltllatlons. The -only
question now is whether the temporary closure of
Boracay as a tourist destination for six monlils
reasonabl}l.r necessary under the circumstances? The
answer is in the aflFlrmatlve.
Tourlst arrivals in the island were eleal'ly far more
than Boracay could handle. Certainly, the closure of
Boracay, albeit temporarily, gave the island its rudi
needed breadte r, and likewise afforded the
government the necessary leeway in us rehabilitation
program. Note that apart from review, evaluation and
amendment of relevant policies, the bulk of the
rehabilitation at:tivit:les involved inspection, testing,
demolition, relocation, and eons1:rLlr:tion. These works
could not have easily been done with tourists present
The rehabilitation works in the Erst plate were not
simple, superlleial or mere eoslnetle but rather qulte
eoniplleated major, and permanent in eha.1'ar:ter as
they were intended to serve as long-term solutions to
the problem [Zabel Duterte, an No. 2.384-5T,
Fedmary 12, 28191
UNIVERSITY DFSANTDTDHRS
202 1 EDLDEN NIJTES
Q: Hotel and motel operators in Manila sought to
declare Drdinance 4670 as unconstitutional for
being unreasonable, thus violative of the dun
process clause. The Drdinanee requires the clients
of hotels, motels and lodging house to run out a
prescribed form in a lobby, open to public view
and in Ute presence of the owner, manager or duly
authorized representative of such hotel, motel or
lodging house. The same law provides that the
premises and facilities of such hotels, motels and
lodging houses would be open for inspection
either be the city Mayor, or Ute Ehiei of Police, or
their duly authorized representatives. It increased
their annual license tees as well. is the ordinance
constitutional?
A; YE"s. The mantle of protectjon associated wltl1 the
due process guaranty does not cover the hate] and
motel operators Thls particular manifestation of a
police power measure b-elng speclflcallif aimed to
safeguard public morals is immune From such
imputation -of nullity resting purely on conjecture and
unsupported bj.r anjrlhing of substance. To hold
otherwise would be to unduly restrict and narrow the
scope of police power which has been properly
characterized as the most essential, insistent and die
least llrnltable of powers, extending as it does "to all
tl'Le great public needs."
There is no question that the challenged ordnance
was precisely enacted to minimize certain practices
hurtful to public morals. The challenged ordinance
then proposes to cheek the clandestine harboring of
transients and guests of these establishments by
requiring leese translenw and gucsw to fill up a
registration form, prepared fm' the purpose, in a lobby
open to pul:allc 1.rlew at all times, and by introducing
several other amendatorjr prnvlsclons calculated to
shatter Use prlvaclr that characterizes the registratzlan
of transient and guests. lu-'[oreo1.rer, the increase in the
licensed fees was intended to discourage
"estatlllshnlenu of the ldnd from operating for
purpose other than legal' and at the same time, to
increase "the income of the clair gnfrernlnent"
4"Ermits-Motors Hotel v. Etty Mayor co' .F-l'.oml8, ca No.
L-24d9'3',j'uly 31, 15l-EF]
Q: The my of Manila enarted Grdinaoee lilo. 7774
entitled, "An Dndinance Prohibiting Short-Time
Admission, Short-Time Admission Rates, and
Wash-Up Rate Srltemes in Hotels, Hotels, ions,
Lodging Houses, Pension Houses, and Similar
Establishmeols in the tiny of Manila." The purpose
of the ordinance is to prohibit motel and inn
operators Iron: offering sbort-time admission, as
well as pro-rated or "wash-up' rates for
abbreviated stays. is die ondinanee a valid
exercise of llolioe power?
A; NIJ. A reasonable relation must ezdst betw'een the
purposes of the measure and the means employed for
its accomplishment, for even under the guise of
protecting the public interest, personal right and
those pertaining to private property will not be
permitted to be arbitrarily invaded. It must also be
18
 PDLITICAL LAW

evident that no other alternative for the

aocompllshment of the purpose less intrusive of
private rights can work. In the present ease, there is
less lntr1.Lslve measures whl-ch can Pe employed such
as curbing but the prostitution and drug use through Eminent domain is the right or power of a sovereign
active police force. The ordlnancle has a lawful state to appropriate private property to particular
purpose but does not have the lawful means hence, uses m promote pubis: welfare. It is an indispensable
ullcolLstltutlona]. 1"l"1"'J-lte Lon: Corporation us E:l'l}r of attribute of sovereignty; a power grounded in the
Manila, G.R Ho. 122846. j'ar:ruaJ':l.-' 20, 2889] primary duly of government to serve the common
need and advance the general welfare. The power of
Q: Are the rates to be charged by utilities like eminent ddmaln is inseparable in sovereignty being
HERALCU subjetttn State regujaiiun? essential to the existence of the State and inherent in
government. [NTC vs. Droviile Delr't Corp., G.R. No.
A: IrEs. The regulation ofrates to be charged by public 223366, August 1, zmr]
utilities is founded upon the police powers of the
Stale, and statutes prescribing rules for the contl'o]
and regulation of public u1:lllties are a valid exercise . . {T-u-c-m
thereof When prlrate property is used for a public
purpose and is affected with public interest it ceases 1. Taking of private pmperqr;
to be juri8.' priuoti only and becomes subject to 2. F11r pu blh: Use;
rlegulatlon. The regulation is to promote the common 3. Just Eonlpensatzian, and
good. As long as use of the property is continued, the 4. Gbserurance of dun! process.
same is subject to public regulation. ['Republic u.
Moulin Electric Eompnny, GR No. 141314, November NDTE: There must be a valid offer to buy the property
15, 2082] and refusal of said offer.
N~l}'l'E: Mall owners and operators cannot be 'I.ralldl],r Power of cmmrnpriatinn as cuerciscd be Eungnrss
compelled to provide free parking to their customers
vs. Power of cxurnuriatinn as exercised lw
because requiring them to provide Free parking space
Iisllirkflrti
to their customers is beyond the scope of police
powers. It unreasonably nessi-cts the right to use
property for business purposes and amounts to
confiscation of property. [DSG u. Ayofo Loud, Inc., SEIU
SCRA are September 18. 2009] [zo14 Barn
Shape ]]D'WEl' is
Requisites Our the valid exercise of pnliee power
pelr1.ras11.re
by the delegate
EHCDTIIPESSIHE

1. Express grant by law; l"'"E"JI'

form pf===p~'=1l1f
2. Must nut be mnwaryf tr: law; and which . Nliflf il'
3. GR: Within terrie rial Iimlls of LGUi needed be the Stale
4 public use. h

(I-'1.-"iJ':l:m u. Elly of Mnrmrafn Luke Tarracu, 41 F

Hurs- Mach
private
F!2d' 633. August IB. 1966) aIJ'ead_=,r
dedicated m public
Thr* *:'nul'fl rauunt illtrr[prp will tlw plcprci'ip of nm .=ult
in [imp .nnwpr' property already
devoted to rellginus
IE the le,g:islatl.Lre decides to acl, Use chnlce of measures w0r5h1p. [Herein 11;
DI' remedies lies within Hs exclusive discre1:i-an, as long Ramirez. 7 Zhu. 41'
as We reqmdsltes for a valid exercise of police power November 24, 190-EJ
have been complied with.
:inn of
Q: -Eau MMDA. Exercise p-nli-c1: pnwl:r7 ne-
cessfty
l
A: HG. The MMDA cannot exerelse police powers
sin-oe its powers are limited m th e formulation;
coordination, regulation, lntplementatlon,
preparation, management, monitoring, setting o
polleies, installing a system, and administration.
Nothlng in RA No. ?924 granted the MMDA police
power, let alone ]egi5]atlve power [NMDA pa Rfnuisitcs Mr a valid taking
Tmchuoria, CAR. Ho. 159554, December 16, 2085]
1. The exprnprlatnr must enter a private property;

UHIVERSITYDF SANrTNTaMAS
19
FAcul_Tv nr CIVIL LAW
 II. BASIC CZDHCEPTS
2. EM:l'l.r must be for move than a momentary
period;
3. EM:r1l.r must be under warrant or color of legal
authority;
4. Property must be devoted to p1.Lb]i1: use or
otherwise informs]]y appropriated DT injuriously
affected; and
5. lJ1:ili2.al:1-on of property most be in such a way as
to oust the owner and deprive him of beneflda]
enjoyment of the pmpertjr. [Republic v. De
Easteffvl, as Ho. L-20528, August 15, I9?4I]
G E : A l l p r i v a t e property capable of nruwnership,
including serf] ces, can be taken.
1.
2. Ehases in aelinn - personal right not reduced in
pdssessien but reed-verable br.f a cult at law such
as right m reee11.l'e. demand nr recover debt,
demand at damages an a cause of at:t:II::n ex
enntmetu nr for a tart or omission ufduty.
NDTE: A chase in acton 15 a p1'npertl.f right in
something intangible, nr which is nut in 1::l11e's
pussessinn but enfurueable through legal or hurt
action ea. cnsfi, .ii right nl'l:lcnnn In mrt or breach
of cnnrmct, a'n entitlement to :ash rejiend, chechen,
money, sal'l:l.r[e.q, Insurance cfnims.
Ilnmain['u-pll -101
1. A11 Cl1'dlJ'1ance is enacted b:.' the local Ieglslalive
ccluncll authclrizlng the local chief exec'LLI1ve, in
behalf of Use LGU, 1c] exenzlse the power of
eminent domain ac pursue exl:l1'nprlall:lnn
2. The power of eminent domain is exercised fur
Public use, purpose or welfare, DI' for the benefit
of the Pam' and the landless;
3. There is payment nfjusl cnmpensadnn; and
4. A valid and definite Dffer has been previously
made to the owner of the pmperq," sought to be
exprl::lprllated., but said offer was not accepted.
[Mun lclpl:l{ary of Paranaqlue H. 1.41. Re1:1J'I.jl." Carp,
292 SER-I1 6541 July211 1998]
Public use does not necessarily mean 'use b-],r the
public at large." Whatever may be benellciallgr
employed for the genera] welfare satisfies the
req ulrement. Moreover, d'Lat only few people benefit
from the exproprladon does not diminish its public-
use character because the notion of public use new
includes the broader notion of indirect public heneflt
or advantage. of-Ionosco' U. 5,4 ER. IG6440, [angry 29,
1956;
UNIVERSITY DFSANTDTDHRS
202 1 EDLDEN NIJTES
l1nm'rptnll*{irarinu'i Elvuttit
Abandons the tradltinnal concept [number of actual
beneficiaries determines public purpose). Public use
now includes d'Le broader nada of indirect publlr:
hnuslng cnmmun ltgl.r. urban land nefnrm and housing
There is a vicarluus advantage to the society.
{'Fii'stream lntematlcnnl .incarpomted u. CO, 284 SERA
?IN, Jl'cnuarII." 2.8'. 1598]
Q: The Republic, through the Dftice of the
Solicitor-General, instituted a complaint for
expropriation of a piece of land in Taguig, alleging
that the National Historical Institute declared said
land as a national historical landmark, because it
was the site of tile birth of [-'eli:u: Manalo, Me
founder of lgle-sia ni Cristi. The Republic Filed an
action to expropriate Me land. Petitioners argued
tliat die expropriation was not for a public
purpose. [s their argument correct?
A; ND. Public use should not be restricted to the
traditional uses. It has been held that places invested
with unusual historical interest is a public use for
which Me power of eminent domain may be
authorized. The purpose in setting up the marker is
essentially to recognize the distinctive contribution of
t:he late Felix Manolo to the culture -of the Philippines,
rather than to commemorate his founding and
leadership of the Iglesia ni Crisco. The practical reality
that .greater benefit may he derived be members of
the Iglesia nl Cristo than Br II:l/ost others could well be
true but such a peculiar advantage steel] remains to he
merely lnc'ldental and secondary in nature. Indeed,
that only a few would actually henel'lt from the
expropriation of property does not necessarily
diminish the essence and character of public use.
l!J5t_Enmlu:nsalinu.
It is the full and fair equliralent of the property taken
from the private owner [owner's le-ss] by the
exp mpriatnr. It is usually the fair market value -{Fl~'l"l.F]
of the property and must include consequential
damages [damages to the other interest of the owner
attributed to the expmpriatienl minus consequential
benefits [increase in the value of cl-ther intenesls
attributed in new use of the farmer prdpertyj.
lusT EDHPENSATICIN = Fmy + wmequenUal
DAMAGES - cunseq uelltlal BENEFITS
NDTE: Ta be just, me compensation must be paid un
time. [2 DDE* and]
Fair Market 'aral11p
The price that may be agreed upon by parties who are
willing but are not compelled to enter bantu a r:nntral:t
of sale. [Sift of Manila I-". Estrada, ER. Nu. F:?49.
September 9, 15131
20
 PDLITICAL LAW
Q: Luc3rEraoe Franco and Elma Gloria Franco were
tb: registered owners of parcels of agricultural
land in Barangay lvlaquioa, Dumangas, lloilo,
covered be Transfer Eertificate of Title Nos. T-
62209, T-622111I and T-51376. The Franoos
voluntarily offered their land to the Dejpartment
of Agrarian Reform for the Eomprehensive
Agrarian Reform Program. The Francos were
initially offered 114,113.75 pesos for just
compensation, but i t w a s later ra ise d t o
739,461.43 pesos upon review. The Franeos
withdrew the compensation but was still
dissatisfied with the amount Hence, the].r filed
before the RTE a complaint for Me determination
of just compensation. The court fixed the iusl
that the Frances were entided to ao additional 5%
cash pajnoent by way of incentive for 'rlfoluntarijjr
offering their lots tor sale. is the Special Agrarian
Eourt's valuation of just compensation using a
variation of the basic general formula provided
for by the DAR correct?
A: HG. While formula prescribed by die
tire
[lepartrnent of Agrarian Reform requires due
consideration, the determination of just compensation
shall still be subject to the final decision of the specie]
agrarian court; In HE exercise of original jurisdiction,
the special agrarian court maj.r deviate from the
formulas lfit can show that the value is not equivalent
to the fair market value at the sine of the taking.
However, any deviation to die basic formula made in
the exercise of judicial discretion nlust be supported
Br a reasoned explanation grounded on the evidence
on record
A computation by a court made in utter and blatant
disregard of the factors spelled out be law and 'Fu' the
implementing rules amount to grave abuse of
discretion. Here, the Special Agrarian Eourt's
CDIT1III'l.ll:3.1IlDI1 of the just compensation resulted in a
"double take up' of tlle market value per tau
declaration of the property. Thls method of valuation
has already been oonsldered in iurlsprudenee as a
departure from the mandate of law and basil:
admlnlstradve guidelines. (Loud Book of' the
PNlll.pp-.ln8 '|.'!. Lucy Grace, so. Ho. 203242, March 12,
2019, nspenraed' b_1.'Jl'. Leonerd'
ER: lust mmpensatlan must be redcaned from the
time of taking or filing of the cnmplalnt, whichever
came Hrsi; WTC vi Ermvlfie Deu't. Co-rp, ER. Ne.
223366, Aug. I, 2:11?1
XPHS:
1. 111 NM vs. Hocoba4Mt 5o4Roy (GR No.
165929, Mgust 24, 2D11]. NAPDEDR in Me
19TD8, undertook the construction of swera]
underground tunnels M be use in diverting We
water How from the Ague River to the
hwroe]emic plane Du November 21, 199,
reswndenu therein sued NMDEDR fm' recovery
of pmperq and damages, alleging that they
21
belatedly discovered that one of the underground
l:LLm1el5. of HPC traversed their land. In that case,
the Eourt adjudged t.l'Lat the value of the property
at the time the property D'll!'llTlE'l"$ initialed lm-'erse
condemnation proceedings should be considered
for purposes of lust oompensatldn for the
following reasons, l.-422:
Compensation that is reckoned an the
market value pret.-'aillng at the time either
when HPC entered DI' when it completed the
tunnel, as NPC suhmlts, would not be just,
for it would compound the gross unfairness
already caused to the owners by hlPIE's
errpropriating the land, and without the prior
knowledge and consent if the Helrs of
Hlacabanglrit l'~IPIII:'s entr'y denied elementary
due process of law to the owners slnee dten
until the owners mnlmencM t.l'Le inverse
condemnation proceedings. The Court is
more concerned with the necessity to
prevent NPC loom unjustly profiting from 113
deliberate acts of denying due process outlaw
to the owners. As a measure of simple 1ustice
and ordinary fairness to thent, therefore,
reckoning just compensation on the 1.ralue at
the time the owners commenced these
inverse condemnation proceedings is
entirely warranted.
2. 111 Notionol Myer CorwmtMn u. Epomu
5olMoiw. 596 Phil. 95?, respondents Mereln
filed 3 complaint for the payment of just
compensation against nnrocon averring that it
had entered and occupy their pipe b1.*
erecting M9-tension uansmlmlon lines and
failed m reasonably compensate them for the
intrusion. For Hs mm NAPMDR countered that
it had already paid just compensation for the
establishment: of the uansmlmion lines by Wmue
of its compliance with the final and executor
decision in Notionoi Power Corporation in.
Pemyros In ruling that the reckoning value of just
compensation is that availing at the time of the
filing of the inverse condemnation proceedings,
t'l'Le Court declared:
To reiterate, NAPD-CDR should have
instituted eminent domain proceedings
before it occupied respondent spouses'
property. Because lt failed to comply with
this duty, respondent spouses were
constrained to file the instant Complaint for
just compensation before the trial court
From the 19'?]s until the present, they were
deprived of Just compensation, while
HAPCIEDR continuously burdened tlheir
property elm lU transmission lines. This
Court cannot allow petitioner to profit from
HE failure to comply with the mandate of the
law. We therefore rule that, to adequately
compensate respondent spouses from the
decades of burden on their property,
UHIVERSITYDF SANrTNTaMAS
FAcul_Tv nr CIVIL LAW
 II. BASIC CZDHCEPTS
nnpaeaa should be made to pay the value
of Lhe property at H12 time of&\e Blind of the
instant Enmplalnt when respondent spouses
made a judicial demand Eur just
Inu-n1pensaliun.
HUTE: The rulings in Mooaborigllcil'
Songkoy and Soludorrs are more in consonance with
the rules of equity than MM Me Rules of Court,
specifically Rule i5-'F run expropriation.
Inverse condemnation has the objective to recover 'Lhe
'ualue of' property taken in fact by 'Lhe governmental
defendant. even though no formal exercise of the
power of eminent domain has been attempted by the
taking agency. :new vs. Heirs of Mokohongkit
slfvwiwrl
I`nn11*m1~rnri=1l Dama+=f1
E 31u151 of injuries directly caused on the residue of
the private prnpe1'tjl,r taken by neaaan afexprdprladan.
Where, for example, tlhe exprerprialar takes duly part
of a parcel of land, leaving Me remainder win an add
shape DJ' area as to be 'u]1't1.lalll.r unusable, the owner
can elalm cans-equentlal damages. {4Slruz and ECrr.rz,
Law, 2015 Ed.)
Q: Sp-nuses Salvador awns a land where a DDE-
smrejr building is erected. Thu said land is subject
to exp mpriatinn wherein the DPW]-[ shall
cnmuum die HLEK extension exiting McArthur
Highway. DPW]-I paid the sp-nuses amounting to
P6-B51i]i]i] which was !;lie fair market value if the
land and building. RTE issued a Writ Ni Possession
in favor of the Republic but decided to pay an
additional amount enrrespending to the capital
gains tax paid by the spouses. The Republic,
represented be DPWH eantested the decision of
the RTC adding the capital gains tax as
eensequential damages in the part Ni Lhe Spouse
Sahfade-r. is the deeisinn -at Me arc cnrreet'
A: HD. lust compensation is defined as the full and fair
equivalent of the property sought to be expropriated
The measure is not the taker's gain but the owner's
loss The compensation, to be Just, must be fair not
only to the owner Out also to the taker. Eonsequenda]
damages are only awarded ifos a result of the
expropriation, the remoanii1.g prop-erty of the owner'
suffers' ,from on impairment or decrease In wrlue. In
this case, no e1.-'idenoe was suOmltted to prove any
impairment or decrease in value of the subject
property as a result of Me expropriation. More
significantly, Elven that the payment of capital gains
tax on the transfer- of the suNiect property has no
etiect on the 1 ncrease or decrease in 1.ra]Lle of the
remaining property, it can hardly Oe considered as
consequential dainages that may be awarded to
respondents. {Repr.rEJlic if. Sis. Sofundoc, so. Ho.
205428. June ?;20/9]
UNIVERSITY DFSANTDTDHRS
202 1 EDLDEN NIJTES
Where Me expmprialdr lakes rnnllr part of a parcel of
land and the remainder, as a nesull of the
enpmpriatinn, is placed in a better Jacatian [such as
Erdnling a street where lt used to be an lnterl-nr ldl].
the owner will enjoy cclnsequenlial benefits whim
should be deducted from the consequential damages.
l"Eru2, Cansrfturaanni Law, 2815 ed., p. 155;
NOTE: If the consequential benefits exceed the
eensequential damages, these items should be
disregarded altogether as the basic value -of the
property s]1L:=uld be paid in every ease. (Rafe 63
Section 6, Rides
Form of uavment
GR: Cumpensatuun has to be paid In money.
KPN: In cases 1n1.-'olvirlg CARP, conlpensat:lon may be
in bands or stocks, fm' II has been held as a non-
traditional exercise of the power of eminent domain.
It is not an ordinary expropriation where only a
specific property of relatiueljr limited area is sought to
be taken by the State from lls owner for a specific and
perhaps local purpose. It is rather a reuoiudonary
kind of expropriation. [Association of' Emf!!
landowners in the Ptldippines, Inc. if. Secmtmj-' of
..4.gr'arian Reform, ER. No. ?8?42, fury 14, 1989]
NUTE: The owner is en'l:I11et1 to the payment of
interest from the time of taking un1:il just
eunipensatinn is aet1.Lall_=,I' paid to him. Taxes paid hi*
him from the time of the taking until the transfer of
tide [which tan only be dune alter actual payment of
just enn'Lpensat1an]. during which he did not enjoy any
beneficial use -of the prnpertyr, are lelnlbursahle he the
expmpriatnr.
Pursuant to Bangkok Sentral fig Pilipinas Eincular Nu.
until full payment, an intemst rate of 6% per annum
should be used in computing Use just mmpensatinn.
[Land Hunk of the Philippines v. Huhabuy, GR. Na
I?23_'iZ. September 16, 2015]
NDTE: The: right to recover just compensation is
enshrined in no less Man our Bill of M94 wmm
states in clear and categorical language that private
property shall not be taken for public use witTLo'LLt Just
compensation. Tllis constitutional mandate cannot be
defeated by statutory piescriptioii. [NPC v. Epi
Eernon:io. o. 8. No. /89127 .4pr'[i' 25, 2812] [2014
BAR]
Rule of the ludiciargr
The Elna] determination of lust compensation is a
judicial function; that the llurisdictlon of the Regional
Trial Court, sitting as Special Agrarian Court, is
original and exclusive, not appellate. (Land Bank vs
Eugenio Dalouta, ER. No. 190004, Ar45l'ust 8. 201To.
22
 PDLITICAL LAW
ER: Non-payment by the government does not ennlle
p1i1.rate owners to recover possession of the property
because exproprladon is an in rem proceeding, not an
ordinary sale, but only ent"1Tle Mem to deman d
payment of the fair mal'ket 1.f glue of the pl'npert'.!,-'.
XPHS:
1. When there is deliberate refusal to pay just
compensation; and
z. GovernmentS failure to pay compensation wit]1lJ1
5 !.-'ears from the finality of the judgment in the
expropriation proceedings. This is in connection
with the principle that the government cannot
keep the property and dishonor the judgment.
(Republic H. Lim, GR. No. I61656.j1.rnc 25, 20[J.'.1T.]
Abandonment of intended use and right of
repurchase
Q: Several parcels of lands located in 1.abug, Cebu
Eicgr were the subject at expropriation
proceedings filed by Lhe Government for the
expansion and improvement of the Lahug Airport.
The lm: rendered iudgioent in favor of the
Government and ordered the Iatner to pay the
landowners the fair market value of the land. The
landowners received Me payment
The other dissatisfied landowners
appealed. Piending appeal, the Air Transportation
Uffiee pro), proposed a ooroproniise settlement
whereby the owners of the lou affected be the
expropriation proceedings would either not
appeal Dl' withdraw their respective appeals in
consideration of a eomrnitnient that the
expropriated Iols would be resold at the price
they were exp ropriated in the event that die ATE
would abandon Me Laltug Airport, pursuant to an
established polio involving similar
eases. Because of this promise, the landowners did
not pursue their appeaL Thereafter, the lot was
transferred and registered Io the name of the
Government The projected improvement and
expansion plan of the old Laltug Airport, however,
was not pursued From the date of' the institution
of rite expropriation proceedings up to Me
present, the puhlie purpose of the said
expropriation [expansion of tile ail'port] was
never actually initiated, realized, or
implemented.
Thus, the landowners initialed a complaint for
the recovery Dr possession and reeonveyanee Ni
ownership of the lands based DD the compromised
agreement they entered into with the ATG. Do Me
former owners have the right m redeem the
property?
A: YES. II is well settled that 'Lhe taking of private
p1'opert1.r by the Governments power of eminent
domain is subject to two mandatory requirements: [1]
that it is for a pa.1't:I1:u]ar public purpose; and [Z} that
just compensation be paid to the property owner.
Those requiremeols partake of the nature of' implied
23
cnnditlln]ls that should be rx:-n1p]ied widl to enable me
cnndcnlnalinn or to keep d18 pmperqr expruprlaled.
More pa rtf-cularlyf, with respect m the element of
public use, the expropriator should commit to use the
property pursuant to the purpose stated in the
petit:lon for expropriation Filed, failing which, lr should
file another petition for the new purpose. If not, it is
then incumbent upon the expropriator to return the
said property to its prl1.rate owner, if the latter desires
to rea-cquire the same. Cltherwise, the iudginent of
expropriation suffers an intrinsic flaw, as lr would
lack one indispensable element for the proper
exercise of the power of eminent domain, namely, the
particular public purpose for which the property will
be devoted. Accordingly, the private property owner
would be denied due process outlaw. and Use Judgment
would violate the property owner's ]':ight to justice,
fairness, and equity. [MIM and Air Tronsportntlon
Qt]ice if. Lozudo, ER No. I?6625, FelJruor:l.= 2.5, 28181'
m o r e In view of the discontinuance of the
proceedings and the eventua] return of the property
la the owners, theme is no need to pay 'just
eompenndon" to them because their property would
not be taken. However, instead of full market value of
the property, the expropriator should compensate the
owners"or the disturhonoe of their property rignafmm
possession is paying to them octuoi or other
oonrrpensotory'
The exprbpriatbr who has taken pdssessibn bf the
p-ruperly subject of expropriation is obliged tb pay
neasunable cnmpensatlbn to the landowner Eur the
period bf such pdssessibn althbugb the proceedings
had been discontinued bn the ground that the public
purpose Eur the emcpruprialibn had meanwhile ceased.
[Republic v. Heirs bf Bbr.b4:l-n_ ER. Hb. 165354, January
12, 2015]
It is the pro-ness by which the government through its
legislative branch, imposes and colley revenues to
defray the necessary expenses of the govern rent, and
la be able to earrj; out, in parlieular, any and all
l:rroJeeE that are supposed to be for the common
good. Simply put, taxation is the method by whleh
these eontributlons are exacted.
In other words, taxation 13:
1. The inherent power of the snverelgn
z. To impose burdens
3. Upon subiecls
4. Within ins 11.Lrlsdletin n
5. For the purpose of raising revenues
6. To carry out the legitimate abJer:13 afgll:l1.fernme:l1l
Lifnblnud Du-ctrine
Taxes 3.l'*E the Iifebland of the al::vernmenL for wlthl::ut
taxes, the gcwernmenl can neither exist our endure. A
UHIVERSITYDF SANrTNTaMAS
FAcul_Tv nr CIVIL LAW