Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
BATACLAO, Audrey K.
MALASI, Jessie Mae M.
TUDLONG, Sonia Kim C.
2A
2.
A. Meaning
Just compensation is the full and fair equivalent of the property taken from its
owner by the expropriator. The true measure is not the takers gain but the
owners loss. It should be real, substantial and full. ( LBP vs ORilla)
B. Nature
Just compensation is in accordance with justice, fairness and equity due to the
landowner because of the deprivation of his property in the exercise of the Police
Power of the state in expropriating private property under RA 6657.(LBP vs.
Heirs of Domingo)
C. Basis
a. Sec 9 art IIII of the 1987 Constitution which provides that no private
property shall be taken for public use without just compensation.
b. Sec 4 art III of the 1987 Constitution which mandates that the
redistribution of agricultural lands shall be subject to the payment of just
compensation.(LBP vs. Orillla)
3.
Yes, interest may be imposed in the grant of just compensation. Just
compensation does not only cover the full and fair equivalent value of the property but
also, it should be made within reasonable time. In the case, since there was delay in the
payment of the unpaid balance by the LBP, the legal interest of 12% per annum of said
balance from the time of taking up to the time of actual payment shall be included. (HPI
vs. Landbank)
Group 12
BATACLAO, Audrey K.
MALASI, Jessie Mae M.
TUDLONG, Sonia Kim C.
2A
4.
No, the land cannot revert to the landowner.
In FORFOM Dev Corp vs PNR, FORFOM argues that the property taken from it
should be returned because there was neither expropriation case filed by PNR.
It can be gathered from the records that FORFORM accepted the fact of the
taking of its land when negotiated with PNR for just compensation, knowing fully well
that there was no expropriation case filed at all. FORFOMs inaction for almost 18 years
to question the absence of expropriation proceedings and its discussions with PNR as to
how much petitioner shall be paid for its land preclude it from questioning the PNRs
power to expropriate or the public purpose for which the power was exercised. In other
words, it has waived its right and is estopped from assailing the takeover of its land on
the ground that there was no case for expropriation that was commenced by PNR.
It is clear that recovery of possession of the property by the landowner can no
longer be allowed on the grounds of estoppel and, more importantly, of public policy
which imposes upon the public utility the obligation to continue its services to the
public. The non-filing of the case for expropriation will not necessarily lead to the return
of the property to the landowner. What is left to the landowner is the right of [just]
compensation.
(LEGAL BASIS: FORFORM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION VS. PHILIPPINE
NATIONAL RAILWAYS GR No. 124795)
5.
Primary Entry book vs registration book legal bases:
Section 113 PD 1529
Section 42 PD 1529
REGISTRATION BOOK
The registration book is composed of
writs
affecting
and
processes,
proper fees.
The recording is a preliminary process
instruments.