Source: https://www.scribd.com/document/332653498/Mendoza-Notes
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 12:01:22+00:00

Document:
is supreme in matters falling within its own constitutionally allocated sphere.
 the measure of the allowable scope of judicial action.
redress of wrongs for violation of such rights.
part of any branch or instrumentality of the government"
not hypothetical. b. as where the power is exercised in an arbitrary and despotic manner by reason of passion or hostility. Facial challenge – a challenge to a statute in which the plaintiff alleges that the legislation is always unconstitutional. The law must be written in such a way that the ordinary citizen would understand. Justiciable question  Implies a given right. efficacy or practicability of a law. an assertion of opposite legal claims (there is contrariety of rights) susceptible of judicial adjudication  A justiciable controversy must be definite and concrete. Page 2 of 14 . for said breach of right. and what is enforceable.) Vague –it is not sufficiently clear. not anticipating Exceptions 1. legislation be set asude Requisites for Judicial Review 1.invalidation of the statute "on its face" the court can decide on the constitutionality of the law even when it has not yet been applied based on two grounds: a. or to act at all in contemplation of law. much less do we have to define every word we use. not legality of a particular measure/act Judicial Legislation  When the courts limit the application of coverage of a law. A statute is not rendered uncertain and void merely because general terms are used therein. what used to be passive became active – by the stroke of the pen.) Overbreadth – when a statute is overly broad. The decision of the constitutional question must be necessary to the determination of the case itself ACTUAL CASE OR CONTROVERSY  Involves a conflict of legal rights (which are legally demandable and enforceable). an act or omission violative of such right.alleges that a particular application of a statute is unconstitutional. not futuristic. legally demandable and enforceable.Constitutional Law Note 1 JRCMENDOZA LAW ARCHIVES The Inherent Powers of the States Judge Singco law. and a remedy granted and sanctioned by law. There must be an actual case or controversy 2. touching the legal relations of parties having adverse legal interests  ACTUAL – existing. Political question  A question of policy  Where the matter falls under the discretion of another department or especially the people themselves  Considerations affecting the wisdom. covers all acts 2. Void-for-Vagueness doctrine The doctrine merely requires a reasonable degree of certainty for the statute to be upheld. or because of the employment of terms without defining them. . The constitutional question must be raised at the earliest possible opportunity 4. and therefore void. Law must state explicitly what it mandates. not absolute precision or mathematical exactitude. or imposes conditions not provided therein Judicial Activism  Active participation of court. As-applied . The question of constitutionality must be raised by the proper party 3.
or locus standi (a right of appearance in a court of justice on a given question. but not when the acts are done after the declaration of unconstitutionality.  Modern view Under this view. the court in passing upon the question of constitutionality does not annul or repeal the statute if it finds it in conflict with the Constitution. It would remain in the book of statute CASE: Pamil vs Teleron (1978) Note: The RTC can declare a law unconstitutional but the Supreme Court can reverse the decision Effects: when the law is declared unconstitutional  Orthodox view An unconstitutional act is not a law. CASES: Araullo vs Aquino (2014) Araullo vs Aquino (2015) Chavez vs Judicial Bar Council (2013) PROPER PARTY a.) Potential injury – one who is in immediate danger of sustaining an injury as a result of the act complained of  Until and unless such actual or potential injury is established.Constitutional Law Note 1 JRCMENDOZA LAW ARCHIVES The Inherent Powers of the States Judge Singco CASE: Disini vs Secretary of Justice (2014) Two Kinds of Decision of Court: 1. Declare unconstitutional Required Votes to declare the unconstitutionality of a law (requires quorum of 8 justices) General rule (provided its quorum) 50% + 1 Sitting en banc = at least 8 (out of 15) If not met. sustain the validity of the law. It simply refuses to recognize it and determines the rights of the parties just as if such statute had no existence.  Operative Fact Doctrine Acts done pursuant to a law which was subsequently declared unconstitutional remain valid. it imposes no duties. it affords no protection. Sustain the validity 2. it confers no rights. as inoperative as though it had never been passed. Page 3 of 14 . it is. one must have "legal standing". it creates no office. the complainant cannot have the legal personality to raise the constitutional question  To be a proper party. But certain legal effects of the statute prior to its declaration of unconstitutionality may be recognized.) Actual injury – one who has sustained injury b. in legal contemplation.
there must be a claim that the official action complained of infringes upon their prerogatives as legislators. (3) For voters. In civil cases. In criminal cases. except where there is estoppels. it cannot be considered on appeal  Exceptions: i. (4) For concerned citizens. (2) For taxpayers. and (5) For legislators. there must be a claim of illegal disbursement of public funds or that the tax measure is unconstitutional. the constitutional question can be raised any time in the discretion of the court ii. the constitutional question can be raised at any stage if it involves the jurisdiction of the court Moot and Academic  A moot case is one that ceases to present a justiciable controversy by virtue of supervening events. so that a declaration thereon would be of no practical use Page 4 of 14 . or will sustain direct injury as a result. it cannot be considered at the trial. CASES: Oposa vs Factoran (1993) Kilosbayan vs Morato (1995) Integrated Bar of the Philippines vs Zamora (2000) Kilosbayan vs Executive Secretary Ermita (and Ong) (2007) Drilon vs Ermita (2006) People vs Vera (1937) Exceptions to the direct injury test: (1) The cases involve constitutional issues. there must be a showing of obvious interest in the validity of the election law in question. the constitutional question can be raised at any stage if it is necessary to the determination of the case itself iii. In every case. there must be a showing that the issues raised are of transcendental importance which must be settled early. such that if not raised in the pleadings.Constitutional Law Note 1 JRCMENDOZA LAW ARCHIVES The Inherent Powers of the States Judge Singco  Direct injury test – a person who impugns the validity of a statute must have a personal and substantial interest in the case such that he has sustained. and if not considered in the trial. EARLIEST OPPORTUNITY  Constitutional questions must be raised at the earliest possible opportunity.
the case is capable of repetition yet evading review CASES: Pomento vs Estrada (2010) Province of North Cotabato vs GRP (Bangsamoro MOA-AD) (2008) Ampatuan vs Puno (2011) NECESSITY OF DECIDING CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTION  By the doctrine of separation of powers. What the Bill of Rights does is to declare some forbidden zones in the private sphere inaccessible to any power holder. 674. courts decline jurisdiction over such case or dismiss it on ground of mootness Exceptions: Courts will decide cases. July 17. otherwise moot and academic. Article III contains the chief protection for human rights but the body of the Constitution guarantees other rights as well. if: 1. 2. Marti (1991)] It is generally self-executing. Its concern is not the relation between individuals. 1. Emphasis supplied) [People v. 1986. and the scorn and derision of those who have no patience Page 5 of 14 . it enjoins upon each department a proper respect for the acts of the other departments  The theory is that as the joint act of the legislative and executive authorities. Generally.” (Sponsorship Speech of Commissioner Bernas. the expediency of the passing hour. and the public. the erosion of small encroachments. or by groups of individuals. 4. when the constitutional issue raised requires formulation of controlling principles to guide the bench. by individuals. Vol. the exceptional character of the situation and the paramount public interest is involved. The Bill of Rights is designed to preserve the ideals of liberty. “The Bill of Rights governs the relationship between the individual and the state. Record of the Constitutional Commission. equality and security "against the assaults of opportunism. the bar. p. 3. between a private individual and other individuals. there is a grave violation of the Constitution. It also imposes safeguards against violations by the government.Constitutional Law Note 1 JRCMENDOZA LAW ARCHIVES The Inherent Powers of the States Judge Singco or value. a law is supposed to have been carefully studied and determined to be constitutional before it was finally enacted CASES: OSG vs Ayala (2009) *** Syllabus *** GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS A. Introduction: Concept and Origin of the Bill of Rights IN GENERAL It is a declaration and enumeration of a person's fundamental civil and political rights.
166494. Inc. Doctrine of Preferred Freedom (Hierarchy of Rights) When the Bill of Rights also protects property rights. GR No. 90-93. [Bernas] CASES: Social Justice Society.. . Classification 1. the permissible scope of regulatory measure is wider.. the primacy of human rights over property rights is recognized. Justice Robert Jackson. freedom to contract.S. 638] B.rights that belong to an individual by virtue of his citizenship in a state or community (e. 1952 ed. al. liberty and property. etc.g. to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials. Social and Economic Rights . or free press. 156052.." [West Virginia State Board of Education v. Inc. Inc (1973)] If the liberty involved were freedom of the mind or the person. Barnette. Philippine Blooming Mills Co. Philippine Blooming Mills Co. June 29. C. DSWD. Political Rights . but where the liberty curtailed affects at the most rights of property. 2007 PMB Employees Org.those rights which are intended to insure the well-being and economic security of the individual 4. GR No. directly or indirectly. Inc. freedom of worship and assembly. vs Atienza. al. PBM Co.those rights which the law will enforce at the instance of private individuals for the purpose of securing to them the enjoyment of their means of livelihood.. Jr.) 2. understood in the light of established jurisprudence on the position of property in the hierarchy of constitutional values. equal protection. [ErmitaMalate Hotel and Motel Operators Association. to free speech. v.” [Philippine Blooming Mills Employees Organization v.” they “need breathing space to survive. property stands a good chance of serving and enhancing the life and liberty of all. 624. One's rights to life. et. marriage. et. and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts. as well as supremely precious in our society” and the “threat of sanctions may deter their exercise almost as potently as the actual application of sanctions.those rights of the citizens which give them the power to participate. Civil Rights . rights to property. the standard for the validity of governmental acts is much more rigorous and exacting.those rights intended for the protection of a person who is accused of any crime. vs. 71.. 51 SCRA 189 Page 6 of 14 . Rights of the Accused .” permitting government regulation only “with narrow specificity.Constitutional Law Note 1 JRCMENDOZA LAW ARCHIVES The Inherent Powers of the States Judge Singco with general principles. Running through various provisions of the Constitution are various provisions to protect property—but always with the explicit or implicit reminder that property has a social dimension and that the right to property is weighted with a social obligation. Constitution of the Philippines. Nature of Judicial Process. 319 U. 2008 Carlos Superdrug Corp v." (Justice Cardozo..) [Philippine Blooming Mills Employees Organization v. 3. Because these freedoms are “delicate and vulnerable. (1973)] In the pithy language of Mr. Tanada and Fernando. in the establishment or administration of the government. they depend on the outcome of no elections. the purpose of the Bill of Rights is to withdraw "certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy. and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to a vote. February 13. City Mayor of Manila (1967)] Under the present provision.
Similarities.It is the enforced proportional contributions from persons and property.It is the inherent and plenary power of the state which enables it to prohibit all that is hurtful to the comfort.Constitutional Law Note 1 JRCMENDOZA LAW ARCHIVES The Inherent Powers of the States Judge Singco D. [Ermita-Malate Hotel and Motel Operators Association. presumption is in favor of private rights and against the attempts of the State to interfere with them (3) Exercise of powers is subject at all times to the limitations and requirements of the Constitution. Differences and Limitations SIMILARITIES: (1) Inherent in the state (They are inherent powers because they belong to the very essence of government and without them no government can exist) (2) Indispensable (3) Methods by which the State interfere with private rights (4) Have equivalent compensation for the private rights interfered with (5) Exercised primarily by the legislature DIFFERENCES: POLICE EMINENT DOMAIN Regulates Liberty and property Property rights Exercised by Govt Gov’t and private entities Property taken is… Destroyed Intended for public use Compensation involved is… Intangible. or protection and public improvement for the taxes paid TAXATION Govt LIMITATIONS: (1) Must not prejudice the Bill of Rights (2) In libertarian society. v. for it contributed to the general welfare Concrete.The power of eminent domain is the inherent right of the State to condemn private property to public use upon payment of just compensation. Power of eminent domain . for the support of the government and for all public needs. Police power . It is as broad as the purpose for which it is given. General Coverage Page 7 of 14 . Mayor of Manila (1967)] 2. Inc. Power of promoting the public welfare by restraining and regulating the use of liberty and property Scope. safety and welfare of society. 3. It is also known as the power of expropriation. and may in proper cases be annulled by the courts of justice POLICE POWER Definition. The Fundamental Powers of the State 1. levied by the State by virtue of its sovereignty. a full and fair equivalent of the property expropriated. Power of taxation .
must not be partial and discriminatory 4. Feati Bank and Trust Co. (3) May use taxing power as an implement for the attainment of a legitimate police objective Who exercises said power?  Police power is lodged primarily in the national legislature  By virtue of valid delegation of legislative power. v. RA 7160) within territorial limits (for LGU's) must not be contrary to law (City Government of Quezon City vs Ericta) for municipal ordinances 1. Osmena v. (1979)] . Hernandez. Hernandez (1957)] Taxation may be used as an implement of police power [Lutz v.S. as well as the lawmaking bodies on all municipal levels. Araneta (1955). it may also be exercised by the President and administrative boards. not static. Republic Planters Bank (1988). Office of the President (1996)] Specific Coverage (1) Public Health (2) Public Morals (3) Public Safety (4) Public Welfare Additional limitations (when exercised by delegate) [Nachura Reviewer]:     express grant by law (e.has been properly characterized as the most essential. 412] Police Power cannot be bargained away through treaty or contract." one court has said. [Ermita-Malate Hotel and Motel Operators Assoc. Gaston v. and must move with the moving society it is supposed to regulate.. Ichong v. Limited Partnership v. must not be unreasonable must be general in application and consistent with public policy Basis Justification of existence: • Salus populi est suprema lex – the welfare of the people is the supreme law. must not prohibit. [Ortigas and Co. the least limitable. Persons may be subjected to all kinds of restraints and burdens. Mayor of Manila (1967) Cf. and the most demanding of the three powers  Justification: Salus populi est suprema lex (2) Dynamic.. Videogram Regulatory Board (1987). trade 5. in order to promote the general welfare."[Noble State Bank v.. and is not inaptly termed the 'law of overruling necessity. with property. must not be unfair and oppressive 3. • Sic utere tuo ut alienum non laedas – a person must use his own property so as not to injure another Characteristics (1) Considered the most pervasive. in order to secure the general comfort health and prosperity of the state and to this fundamental aim of our Government.Constitutional Law Note 1 JRCMENDOZA LAW ARCHIVES The Inherent Powers of the States Judge Singco "The police power of the State.g. Haskell. Orbos (1993)] Eminent domain may be used as an implement to attain the police objective [Association of Small Landowners v. including the barangay. must not contravene the Constitution or any statute 2. Secretary of Agrarian Reform (1989)] Police power prevails over contracts. may interfere with personal liberty. 219 U. Page 8 of 14 . Tiu v. but may regulate. [PNB v. the rights of the individual are subordinated. [Ichong v. Provincial Board (1919)] …the state.' [Rubi v. and with business and occupations. insistent and the least limitable of powers. "is a power coextensive with selfprotection. (1957)] extending as it does "to all the great public needs.
the Philippine Republic . the govt. from the Spanish Crown or its successors. et al v. that is. express or implied. the provision should therefore be strictly interpreted against the expropriator and liberally in favor of the property owner There is no need to exercise eminent domain when the owner voluntarily sells his property Page 9 of 14 . that the State is the source of any asserted right to ownership of land and charged with the conservation of such patrimony. both the end and the means must be legitimate  The means employed for the accomplishment of the police objective must pass the test of reasonableness and conform to the safeguards embodied in the Bill of Rights for the protection of private rights. City of Manila (2009)] *** Lecture *** POWER OF EMINENT DOMAIN      By its power of eminent domain. Article 3. Section 9: “private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation”. GR No. upon payment of just compensation. under this concept. April 15.Constitutional Law Note 1 JRCMENDOZA LAW ARCHIVES The Inherent Powers of the States Judge Singco  Municipal govts exercise this power by enacting ordinances and issuing regulations to  provide for the health. safety. [White Light Corporation. and thereafter. Given this function. (3) Least Restrictions of Individual Rights  It must also be evident that no other alternative for the accomplishment of the purpose less intrusive of private rights can work. comfort and convenience  maintain peace and order  improve public morals  promote the prosperity and general welfare  insure protection of property CASE: MMDA vs Garin. private title to land must be traced to some grant.  Based on the time-honored principle that the welfare of the people is the supreme law  The interests of the public require the exercise of police power (2) Lawful Means  The means employed are reasonably necessary for the accomplishment of the purpose and not unduly oppressive upon individuals  The lawful objective must be pursued through a lawful method. the activity sought to be regulated affects the public welfare. This limiting function is in keeping with the philosophy of the Bill of Rights against the arbitrary exercise of govt’l powers to the detriment of individual rights. 130239.Generally.The Regalian Doctrine dictates that all lands of the public domain belong to the State. the American Colonial Government. that is. forcibly acquire the needed property in order to devote it to the intended public use Based on the Regalian Doctrine (reason why people cant refuse) .Capacity of the state to own or acquire property . 2005 Tests of Police Power (1) Lawful Subject  The subject of the measure is within the scope of the police power.
4. water. What they should do is ask the legislature to pass a special law. There is payment of just compensation. but said offer was not accepted. electricity for reason of national patrimony. The Court declared that the following requisites for the valid exercise of the power of eminent domain by a local government unit must be complied with: 1. PRIVATE PROPERTY  Includes real and personal. (3) For public use . subject to the payment of just compensation to be determined by the court. A valid and definite offer has been previously made to the owner of the property sought to be expropriated. as the needs of the government service may require. but when the power is delegated (e. or for the benefit of the poor and the landless. as required under Section 9. to exercise the power of eminent domain or pursue expropriation proceedings over a particular private property. When the courts come to determine the question. and before it can exercise the right some law must exist conferring the power upon it.” following the U. therefor the courts cant review this What courts can decide: just compensation But when it is the private entity (a delegate.Constitutional Law Note 1 JRCMENDOZA LAW ARCHIVES The Inherent Powers of the States Judge Singco REQUISITES (in the exercise): (1) Private property (2) Genuine necessity .S. and other pertinent laws. Article III of the Constitution. local government units). PLDT) NOTE: General rule: Propriety taking is a political question. it is subject to judicial review. general welfare but NOT PERSONAL services CASE: Republic vs PLDT (1969) The Republic may. tangible and intangible properties SUBJECTS FOR EXPROPRIATION:  Any property but not money. of course. in behalf of the local government unit. trend (4) Payment of just compensation (5) Due process WHO MAY EXERCISE THE POWER OF EXPROPRIATION: (1) Congress (2) President of the Phils. Nominally. purpose or welfare. they must only find (a) that a law or authority exists for the exercise of the right of eminent domain. not the government) exercising the power.inherent/presumed in legislation.Court has adopted a broad definition of “public use.  Services like telecommunications. 2. necessity must be proven. The power of eminent domain is exercised for public use. but (b) also that the right or authority is being exercised in accordance with the law. the courts can review When an LGU appropriates a property that is of public use for another public use. in the exercise of the sovereign power of eminent domain. The right of expropriation is not an inherent power in a municipal corporation. the power of eminent domain results Page 10 of 14 . An ordinance is enacted by the local legislative council authorizing the local chief executive.g. 3. (3) Various local legislative bodies (4) Certain public corporations (eg NHA) (5) Quasi-public corporations (eg PNR. require the telephone company to permit interconnection of the government telephone system and that of the PLDT.
The important thing is that any member of the general public can demand the right to use the converted property for his direct and personal convenience  Note: The expropriation of private land for slum clearance and urban development is for a public purpose even if the developed area is later sold to private homeowners.Constitutional Law Note 1 JRCMENDOZA LAW ARCHIVES The Inherent Powers of the States Judge Singco in the taking or appropriation of title to. whichever comes first  Trespass without actual eviction of the owner.  As long as the prejudice suffered by the individual property owner is shared in common with the rest of the community  He is paid with just compensation. commercial firms. a building on the verge of collapse may be ordered demolished in the interest of public safety. It is unquestionable that real property may. the expropriated property. and the owner will not be entitled to payment for the loss he has sustained even if he has been completely deprived of his property  A valid exercise of police power is aimed at improving the general welfare. If he suffers more than his aliquot part of the damages. although he remains in possession of his property  Not every taking is compensable. a special injury over and above that sustained by the rest of the community. be subjected to an easement of right of way. without loss of title and possession. but no cogent reason appears why the said power may not be availed of to impose only a burden upon the owner of condemned property. eg. through expropriation. “TAKING”  Reckoning period: when there is actual taking (possession) or when the expropriation case was filed. and other private concerns. and whatever damages are sustained by the property owners are regarded as merely incidental to a proper exertion of such power. he will be entitled to payment of the corresponding compensation REQUISITES OF TAKING IN EMINENT DOMAIN: (1) expropriator must enter a private property (2) entry must be for more than a momentary period (3) entry must be under warrant or color of legal authority (issuance of writ of possession by the court) (4) property must be devoted to public use or otherwise informally appropriated or injuriously affected (5) utilization of the property for public use must be in such a way as to oust the owner and deprive him of beneficial enjoyment of the property PUBLIC USE  means any use directly available to the general public as a matter of right  where the expropriated property is converted into a plaza/park/airfield/highway. material impairment of the value of the property or prevention of the ordinary uses for which the property was intended  Owner is entitled to compensation. The losses sustained are in the nature of damnum absque injuria. it thereby becomes res communes making it subject to the direct enjoyment by any and all members of the public indiscriminately  it does not matter whether the direct use of the expropriated property by the public be for free or for a fee. entertainment and service companies. that is.  Relocation of informal settlers  Golf course (justification: tourism= money goes to economy: anything that is for public utility that will benefit the economy is considered public use) Page 11 of 14 . and possession of.
while the prevailing doctrine is that "the nonpayment of just compensation does not entitle the private landowner to recover possession of the expropriated lots. their size. the owner can recover JUST COMPENSATION  A full and fair equivalent of the property taken from the private owner by the expropriator  Intended to indemnify the owner fully for the loss he has sustained as a result of the expropriation  The measure of this compensation is not the taker’s gain. it is the duty of the government.Constitutional Law Note 1 JRCMENDOZA LAW ARCHIVES The Inherent Powers of the States Judge Singco  Cemetery to be converted to a condominium NOTE: General rule: When a property is taken for public use and there are no conditions stipulated as to what its supposed to be. however. Payment in excess of the full and fair equivalent of the loss sustained by the owner. being prejudicial to the public. If the consequential benefits exceed the consequential damages. This is in keeping with justice and equity. but the owner’s loss  The word “just” is used to intensify the meaning of “compensation” to convey the idea that the equivalent to be rendered for the property taken shall be real. Court of Appeals. these items should be disregarded altogether as the basic value of the property should be paid in every case  Among the factors to be considered in arriving at the fair market value of the property are the cost of acquisition. the five-year period limitation will encourage the government to pay just compensation punctually. Interests must be claimed.c. or are deemed waived. we defined just compensation as not only the correct determination of the amount to be paid to the Page 12 of 14 . Taxes paid by him from the time of the taking until the transfer of title. This is in consonance with the principle that "the government cannot keep the property and dishonor the judgment. and in the particular case of lands. the court should determine first the actual or basic value of the property. however. its actual or potential uses. during which he did not enjoy any beneficial use of the property. After all. shape or location and the tax declaration thereon  The owner is entitled to payment of interest from the time of the taking until just compensation is actually paid to him. whenever it takes property from private persons against their will. the current value of like properties. the previous owner (whom the State bought the property from) cannot recover the land or propery Exception: When the taking is for a specific purpose but later it was abandoned. in cases where the government failed to pay just compensation within five (5) years from the finality of the judgment in the expropriation proceedings. is made to the owner CASE: Republic vs Lim (2005) In summation. will not satisfy the requirement of just compensation  To ascertain just compensation. full and ample  Compensation to be just must be fair to the owner and the expropriator. to facilitate the payment of just compensation. the owners concerned shall have the right to recover possession of their property. are reimbursable by the expropriator  Without prompt payment. In Cosculluela v. there should be added to the basic value the owner’s CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES after deducting therefrom the CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS arising from the expropriation. if that property is sold to private individuals." To be sure.  Where the entire property is not expropriated. substantial. compensation cannot be considered just  It should be stressed that title to the property shall not be transferred until after actual payment of j.
of condemnation [or order of expropriation] declaring that the plaintiff has the lawful right to take the property sought to be condemned. For agrarian cases apply RA 6657 (CARP – Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program) Page 13 of 14 . desirous but not compelled to buy. as where there is a general appreciation of land values because of the public use to which condemned properties are devoted o Example: whereby the remainder is as a result of expropriation placed in a better location. This ends with an order. and not merely shared with the rest of the properties in the area. Determination of the authority of the plaintiff to exercise the power of eminent domain and the propriety of its exercise in the context of the facts involved in the suit. road). Pay 100% of the BIR Zonal Valuation (the value placed on real estate properties for taxation purposes) or fair market value. this is the stage where the court will determine whether to issue writ of possession to the government  Questions: is this for public use? What was the provisional basis?  Provisional just compensation – unlike in just compensation.g.If the property to be expropriated is for national infrastructure projects (e.Constitutional Law Note 1 JRCMENDOZA LAW ARCHIVES The Inherent Powers of the States Judge Singco property owner but also the payment of the property within a reasonable time. . willing but not compelled to sell. upon the payment of just compensation to be determined as of the date of the filing of the complaint. Without prompt payment. apply RA 8974. such as fronting a street where it used to be an interior lot. whichever is higher." MARKET VALUE  "that sum of money which a person.This is for general appropriation: Apply RULE 67 of the Rules of Court. i.  In other words. 2.” CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES  Consist of injuries directly caused on the residue of the private property taken by reason of the expropriation o Example: the expropriator takes only a part of the parcel of land. if not of dismissal of the action. for the public use or purpose described in the complaint. the court has no jurisdiction here. and an owner. bridges. would agree on as a price to be given and received therefor. Determination by the court of the just compensation for the property sought to be taken. Pay the 10% of the assessed value .  The court is not bound to follow the board’s decisions. leaving the remainder with an odd shape or area as to be virtually unusable CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS  Must be direct and particular.: 1.  Appointment of Board of Commissioners (Representatives coming from government and property owners) to determine what is just compensation instead of the court hearing of every case (which is very tedious).This will be based on the assessed value (usually the assessor is the city) without prejudice to just compensation . compensation cannot be considered "just. the owner will enjoy consequential benefit which should be deducted from consequential damages Expropriation proceedings speak of two (2) stages.e.
Assessed value: LGC 7160  Zonal Valuation: RA 8974 (An Act to Facilitate the Acquisition of Right-Of-Way. not just the owner) Page 14 of 14 . Tax Credit Note: if there is unreasonable delay for payment of just compensation there must be payment of interest (this is not some sort of indemnification) CASE: Republic vs Lim In summation. After all.Constitutional Law Note 1 JRCMENDOZA LAW ARCHIVES The Inherent Powers of the States Judge Singco the redistribution of public and private agricultural lands to farmers and farmworkers who are landless. however. it is the duty of the government. whenever it takes property from private persons against their will." Note: the principle of Res Judicata (final judgment) is not applicable for just compensation Only the court will decide what is public use Due process: there will be hearing and prompt payment Equal protection: apply to all agricultural lands Eminent domain prevails over contracts Anyone who gets damage from eminent domain can ask for a just compensation (the lessee can do so. we defined just compensation as not only the correct determination of the amount to be paid to the property owner but also the payment of the property within a reasonable time. This is in consonance with the principle that "the government cannot keep the property and dishonor the judgment. Site or Location for National Government Infrastructure Projects and for Other Purposes)  THREE MODES OF PAYMENT 1. the five-year period limitation will encourage the government to pay just compensation punctually. This is in keeping with justice and equity. in cases where the government failed to pay just compensation within five (5) years from the finality of the judgment in the expropriation proceedings. Court of Appeals. Without prompt payment. to facilitate the payment of just compensation." To be sure. Landbank bonds (the owners can borrow money from Landbank using bonds as collateral 3. In Cosculluela v. compensation cannot be considered "just. the owners concerned shall have the right to recover possession of their property. Cash/monetary 2. irrespective of tenurial arrangement. while the prevailing doctrine is that "the nonpayment of just compensation does not entitle the private landowner to recover possession of the expropriated lots.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.