Constitutional Law Note 1

JRCMENDOZA LAW ARCHIVES

The Inherent Powers of the States
Judge Singco

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II
(Constitutional Rights and Social Demands)

*** Lecture ***

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
Study of the maintenance of the proper balance between authority as
represented by the 3 inherent powers of the state, and liberty (rights) as
guaranteed by the Bill of Rights
Fundamental powers of the state:
1. Police power
2. Power of eminent domain
3. Power of taxation

Manifestation of sovereignty
Limited by the Constitution
Intrusion to peoples rights

Rights of individuals
Not absolute. It is subject to limitations/regulations by the three fundamental
powers of the State
(See classification of rights)
Separation of Powers
Under the principle, neither the Congress, nor the Judiciary may encroach on
fields allocated to the other branches of government
Each of the three great branches of government has exclusive cognizance of and
is supreme in matters falling within its own constitutionally allocated sphere.
Checks and Balances
One department is allowed to resist encroachments upon its prerogatives or to
rectify mistakes or excesses committed by the other departments
CASE: Marcos vs Manglapus (1989)

Judicial Department
The judicial department (courts) exercises judicial power
Judicial Power
the measure of the allowable scope of judicial action.
(Old 1973 Constitution)
- the power to decide cases and controversies
- the right to determine actual controversies arising between adverse litigants,
duly instituted in courts of proper jurisdiction
- the authority to settle justiciable controversies or disputes involving rights
that are enforceable and demandable before the courts of justice or the
redress of wrongs for violation of such rights.
(Expanded by virtue of the 1987 Constitution)
- Includes the authority "to determine whether or not there has been a grave
abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the
part of any branch or instrumentality of the government"
- The abuse of discretion must be patent and gross as to amount to an
evasion of positive duty or a virtual refusal to perform a duty enjoined by

Page 1 of 14

Constitutional Law Note 1

JRCMENDOZA LAW ARCHIVES
The Inherent Powers of the States
Judge Singco

law, or to act at all in contemplation of law, as where the power is exercised

in an arbitrary and despotic manner by reason of passion or hostility.
Justiciable question
Implies a given right, legally demandable and enforceable, an act or omission
violative of such right, and a remedy granted and sanctioned by law, for said
breach of right.
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, efficacy or practicability of a law, not
legality of a particular measure/act
Judicial Legislation
When the courts limit the application of coverage of a law, or imposes
conditions not provided therein
Judicial Activism
Active participation of court; what used to be passive became active by the
stroke of the pen, legislation be set asude
Requisites for Judicial Review
1.
There must be an actual case or controversy
2.
The question of constitutionality must be raised by the proper party
3.
The constitutional question must be raised at the earliest possible
opportunity
4.
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 assertion of opposite legal claims (there is contrariety of rights)
susceptible of judicial adjudication
A justiciable controversy must be definite and concrete, touching the legal
relations of parties having adverse legal interests
ACTUAL existing; not hypothetical, not futuristic, not anticipating
Exceptions
1. Facial challenge a challenge to a statute in which the plaintiff alleges that
the legislation is always unconstitutional, and therefore void.
- 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.) Vague it is not sufficiently clear. The law must be written in such a way
that the ordinary citizen would understand. Law must state explicitly
what it mandates, and what is enforceable.
Void-for-Vagueness doctrine
The doctrine merely requires a reasonable degree of certainty for the
statute to be upheld, not absolute precision or mathematical exactitude. A
statute is not rendered uncertain and void merely because general terms
are used therein, or because of the employment of terms without defining
them, much less do we have to define every word we use.
b.) Overbreadth when a statute is overly broad; covers all acts
2. As-applied - alleges that a particular application of a statute is
unconstitutional.

Page 2 of 14

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. Sustain the validity
2. 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 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; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; it
affords no protection; it creates no office; it is, in legal contemplation, as inoperative as
though it had never been passed.
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 simply
refuses to recognize it and determines the rights of the parties just as if such statute
had no existence. But certain legal effects of the statute prior to its declaration of
unconstitutionality may be recognized.
Operative Fact Doctrine
Acts done pursuant to a law which was subsequently declared unconstitutional
remain valid, but not when the acts are done after the declaration of
unconstitutionality.
CASES:
Araullo vs Aquino (2014)

Araullo vs Aquino (2015)

Chavez vs Judicial Bar Council (2013)

PROPER PARTY
a.) Actual injury one who has sustained injury
b.) 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, the complainant
cannot have the legal personality to raise the constitutional question
To be a proper party, one must have "legal standing", or locus standi (a right of
appearance in a court of justice on a given question.

Page 3 of 14

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, or will
sustain direct injury as a result.

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;
(2) For taxpayers, there must be a claim of illegal disbursement of public funds
or that the tax measure is unconstitutional;
(3) For voters, there must be a showing of obvious interest in the validity of the
election law in question;
(4) For concerned citizens, there must be a showing that the issues raised are
of transcendental importance which must be settled early; and
(5) For legislators, there must be a claim that the official action complained of
infringes upon their prerogatives as legislators.
EARLIEST OPPORTUNITY
Constitutional questions must be raised at the earliest possible opportunity,
such that if not raised in the pleadings, it cannot be considered at the trial, and
if not considered in the trial, it cannot be considered on appeal

Exceptions:
i.
In criminal cases, the constitutional question can be raised any time in
the discretion of the court
ii.
In civil cases, the constitutional question can be raised at any stage if it
is necessary to the determination of the case itself
iii.
In every case, except where there is estoppels, 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

Constitutional Law Note 1

JRCMENDOZA LAW ARCHIVES
The Inherent Powers of the States
Judge Singco

or value. Generally, courts decline jurisdiction over such case or dismiss it on

ground of mootness
Exceptions: Courts will decide cases, otherwise moot and academic, if:
1. there is a grave violation of the Constitution;
2. the exceptional character of the situation and the paramount public
interest is involved;
3. when the constitutional issue raised requires formulation of
controlling principles to guide the bench, the bar, and the public;
4. 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, 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, 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.
It also imposes safeguards against violations by the government, by individuals, or by
groups of individuals.
The Bill of Rights governs the relationship between the individual and the state. Its
concern is not the relation between individuals, between a private individual and other
individuals. What the Bill of Rights does is to declare some forbidden zones in the
private sphere inaccessible to any power holder. (Sponsorship Speech of
Commissioner Bernas, Record of the Constitutional Commission, Vol. 1, p. 674; July
17, 1986; Emphasis supplied) [People v. Marti (1991)]
It is generally self-executing.
Article III contains the chief protection for human rights but the body of the
Constitution guarantees other rights as well.
The Bill of Rights is designed to preserve the ideals of liberty, equality and security
"against the assaults of opportunism, the expediency of the passing hour, the erosion
of small encroachments, and the scorn and derision of those who have no patience

Page 5 of 14

Constitutional Law Note 1

JRCMENDOZA LAW ARCHIVES
The Inherent Powers of the States
Judge Singco

with general principles." (Justice Cardozo, Nature of Judicial Process, 90-93; Tanada
and Fernando, Constitution of the Philippines, 1952 ed., 71.) [Philippine Blooming
Mills Employees Organization v. Philippine Blooming Mills Co., Inc. (1973)]
In the pithy language of Mr. Justice Robert Jackson, the purpose of the Bill of Rights
is to withdraw "certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place
them beyond the reach of majorities and officials, and to establish them as legal
principles to be applied by the courts. One's rights to life, liberty and property, to free
speech, or free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights
may not be submitted to a vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections." [West
Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624, 638]
B. Classification
1. Civil Rights - 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.
- rights that belong to an individual by virtue of his citizenship in a state or
community (e.g. rights to property, marriage, freedom to contract, equal
protection, etc.)
2. Political Rights - those rights of the citizens which give them the power to
participate, directly or indirectly, in the establishment or administration of
the government.
3. Social and Economic Rights - those rights which are intended to insure
the well-being and economic security of the individual
4. Rights of the Accused - those rights intended for the protection of a person
who is accused of any crime.
C. Doctrine of Preferred Freedom (Hierarchy of Rights)
When the Bill of Rights also protects property rights, the primacy of human rights over
property rights is recognized. Because these freedoms are delicate and vulnerable, 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, they need
breathing space to survive, permitting government regulation only with narrow
specificity. [Philippine Blooming Mills Employees Organization v. Philippine Blooming
Mills Co., Inc (1973)]
If the liberty involved were freedom of the mind or the person, the standard for the
validity of governmental acts is much more rigorous and exacting, but where the
liberty curtailed affects at the most rights of property, the permissible scope of
regulatory measure is wider. [ErmitaMalate Hotel and Motel Operators Association,
Inc. v. City Mayor of Manila (1967)]
Under the present provision, understood in the light of established jurisprudence on
the position of property in the hierarchy of constitutional values, property stands a
good chance of serving and enhancing the life and liberty of all.
Running through various provisions of the Constitution are various provisions to
protect propertybut 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.
[Bernas]
CASES:
Social Justice Society, et. al. vs Atienza, Jr. GR No. 156052, February 13, 2008

Carlos Superdrug Corp v. DSWD, et. al., GR No. 166494, June 29, 2007

PMB Employees Org. vs. PBM Co., Inc., 51 SCRA 189

Page 6 of 14

Constitutional Law Note 1

JRCMENDOZA LAW ARCHIVES
The Inherent Powers of the States
Judge Singco

D. The Fundamental Powers of the State

1. Police power - It is the inherent and plenary power of the state which enables
it to prohibit all that is hurtful to the comfort, safety and welfare of society.
[Ermita-Malate Hotel and Motel Operators Association, Inc. v. Mayor of Manila
(1967)]
2. Power of eminent domain - The power of eminent domain is the inherent right
of the State to condemn private property to public use upon payment of just
compensation. It is also known as the power of expropriation.
3. Power of taxation - It is the enforced proportional contributions from persons
and property, levied by the State by virtue of its sovereignty, for the support of
the government and for all
public needs. It is as broad as the purpose for which it is given.
Similarities, 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

Govt and private

entities

Property taken is

Destroyed

Intended for public use

Compensation
involved is

Intangible; for it
contributed to the
general welfare

Concrete; a full and fair equivalent of

the property expropriated, or
protection and public improvement
for the taxes paid

TAXATION

Govt

LIMITATIONS:
(1) Must not prejudice the Bill of Rights
(2) In libertarian society, 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, and may in proper cases be annulled by the courts of justice

POLICE POWER
Definition. Power of promoting the public welfare by restraining and regulating the
use of liberty and property
Scope.
General Coverage

Page 7 of 14

Constitutional Law Note 1

JRCMENDOZA LAW ARCHIVES
The Inherent Powers of the States
Judge Singco

"The police power of the State," one court has said, "is a power coextensive with selfprotection, and is not inaptly termed the 'law of overruling necessity.' [Rubi v.
Provincial Board (1919)] the state, in order to promote the general welfare, may
interfere with personal liberty, with property, and with business and occupations.
Persons may be subjected to all kinds of restraints and burdens, in order to secure the
general comfort health and prosperity of the state and to this fundamental aim of our
Government, the rights of the individual are subordinated. [Ortigas and Co., Limited
Partnership v. Feati Bank and Trust Co. (1979)]
...has been properly characterized as the most essential, insistent and the least
limitable of powers, [Ermita-Malate Hotel and Motel Operators Assoc. v. Mayor of
Manila (1967) Cf. Ichong v. Hernandez, (1957)] extending as it does "to all the great
public needs."[Noble State Bank v. Haskell, 219
U.S. 412]
Police Power cannot be bargained away through treaty or contract. [Ichong v.
Hernandez (1957)]
Taxation may be used as an implement of police power [Lutz v. Araneta (1955); Tiu v.
Videogram Regulatory Board (1987); Gaston v. Republic Planters Bank (1988);
Osmena v.
Orbos (1993)]
Eminent domain may be used as an implement to attain the police objective
[Association of Small Landowners v. Secretary of Agrarian Reform (1989)]
Police power prevails over contracts. [PNB v. 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.g. 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. must not contravene the Constitution or any statute
2. must not be unfair and oppressive
3. must not be partial and discriminatory
4. must not prohibit, but may regulate, trade
5. 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;
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, the least limitable, and the most demanding of
the three powers
Justification: Salus populi est suprema lex
(2) Dynamic, not static, and must move with the moving society it is supposed to
regulate.
(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, it may also be exercised by the
President and administrative boards, as well as the lawmaking bodies on all
municipal levels, including the barangay.

Page 8 of 14

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, comfort and convenience
maintain peace and order
improve public morals
promote the prosperity and general welfare
insure protection of property

CASE: MMDA vs Garin, GR No. 130239, April 15, 2005

Tests of Police Power

(1) Lawful Subject
The subject of the measure is within the scope of the police power, that
is, the activity sought to be regulated affects the public welfare.
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; that is,
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.
(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. [White Light
Corporation, et al v. City of Manila (2009)]
*** Lecture ***
POWER OF EMINENT DOMAIN

By its power of eminent domain, the govt, upon payment of just compensation,
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)
- Generally, under this concept, private title to land must be traced to some
grant, express or implied, from the Spanish Crown or its successors, the
American Colonial Government, and thereafter, the Philippine Republic
- Capacity of the state to own or acquire property
- The Regalian Doctrine dictates that all lands of the public domain belong
to the State, that the State is the source of any asserted right to ownership
of land and charged with the conservation of such patrimony.
Article 3, Section 9: private property shall not be taken for public use without
just compensation.
This limiting function is in keeping with the philosophy of the Bill of Rights
against the arbitrary exercise of govtl powers to the detriment of individual
rights. Given this function, 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

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 - inherent/presumed in legislation, but when the power is
delegated (e.g. local government units), necessity must be proven.
(3) For public use - Court has adopted a broad definition of public use, following the
U.S. trend
(4) Payment of just compensation
(5) Due process

WHO MAY EXERCISE THE POWER OF EXPROPRIATION:

(1) Congress
(2) President of the Phils.
(3) Various local legislative bodies
(4) Certain public corporations (eg NHA)
(5) Quasi-public corporations (eg PNR, PLDT)
NOTE: General rule: Propriety taking is a political question, therefor the courts cant
review this
What courts can decide: just compensation
But when it is the private entity (a delegate, not the government) exercising the power,
the courts can review
When an LGU appropriates a property that is of public use for another public use, it is
subject to judicial review. What they should do is ask the legislature to pass a special
law.
The right of expropriation is not an inherent power in a municipal corporation, and
before it can exercise the right some law must exist conferring the power upon it.
When the courts come to determine the question, they must only find (a) that a law or
authority exists for the exercise of the right of eminent domain, but (b) also that the
right or authority is being exercised in accordance with the law.
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. An ordinance is enacted by the local legislative council authorizing the local
chief executive, in behalf of the local government unit, to exercise the power of
eminent domain or pursue expropriation proceedings over a particular private
property.
2. The power of eminent domain is exercised for public use, purpose or welfare,
or for the benefit of the poor and the landless.
3. There is payment of just compensation, as required under Section 9, Article
III of the Constitution, and other pertinent laws.
4. A valid and definite offer has been previously made to the owner of the
property sought to be expropriated, but said offer was not accepted.
PRIVATE PROPERTY
Includes real and personal, tangible and intangible properties
SUBJECTS FOR EXPROPRIATION:
Any property but not money.
Services like telecommunications, water, electricity for reason of national
patrimony, general welfare but NOT PERSONAL services
CASE: Republic vs PLDT (1969)
The Republic may, in the exercise of the sovereign power of eminent domain, require
the telephone company to permit interconnection of the government telephone system
and that of the PLDT, as the needs of the government service may require, subject to
the payment of just compensation to
be determined by the court. Nominally, of course, the power of eminent domain results

Page 10 of 14

Constitutional Law Note 1

JRCMENDOZA LAW ARCHIVES
The Inherent Powers of the States
Judge Singco

in the taking or appropriation of title to, and possession of, the expropriated property;
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, without loss of title and possession.
It is unquestionable that real property may, through expropriation, be subjected to an
easement of right of way.
TAKING
Reckoning period: when there is actual taking (possession) or when the
expropriation case was filed, whichever comes first
Trespass without actual eviction of the owner, 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, although he remains in possession of his
property
Not every taking is compensable; eg, a building on the verge of collapse may be
ordered demolished in the interest of public safety, 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, and
whatever damages are sustained by the property owners are regarded as merely
incidental to a proper exertion of such power. The losses sustained are in the
nature of damnum absque injuria.
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, If he suffers more than his aliquot part of
the damages, that is, a special injury over and above that sustained by the rest
of the community, 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, 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. 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, commercial firms, entertainment and service companies,
and other private concerns.
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

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, if that property is sold to private
individuals, 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, 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 takers gain, but the owners 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,
substantial, full and ample
Compensation to be just must be fair to the owner and the expropriator.
Payment in excess of the full and fair equivalent of the loss sustained by the
owner, being prejudicial to the public, will not satisfy the requirement of just
compensation
To ascertain just compensation, the court should determine first the actual or
basic value of the property.
Where the entire property is not expropriated, there should be added to the
basic value the owners CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES after deducting therefrom
the CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS arising from the expropriation. If the
consequential benefits exceed the consequential damages, 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 current value of like properties, its
actual or potential uses, and in the particular case of lands, their size, 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. Interests must be claimed, however,
or are deemed waived. Taxes paid by him from the time of the taking until the
transfer of title, during which he did not enjoy any beneficial use of the
property, are reimbursable by the expropriator
Without prompt payment, compensation cannot be considered just
It should be stressed that title to the property shall not be transferred until
after actual payment of j.c. is made to the owner
CASE: Republic vs Lim (2005)
In summation, while the prevailing doctrine is that "the nonpayment of just
compensation does not entitle the private landowner to recover possession of the
expropriated lots, however, in cases where the government failed to pay just
compensation within five (5) years from the finality of the
judgment in the expropriation proceedings, the owners concerned shall have the right
to recover possession of their property. This is in consonance with the principle that
"the government cannot keep the property and dishonor the judgment." To be sure,
the five-year period limitation will encourage the government to pay just compensation
punctually. This is in keeping with justice and equity. After all, it is the duty of the
government, whenever it takes property from private persons against their will, to
facilitate the payment of just compensation. In Cosculluela v. Court of Appeals, we
defined just compensation as not only the correct determination of the amount to be
paid to the

Page 12 of 14

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.
Without prompt payment, compensation cannot be considered "just."
MARKET VALUE
"that sum of money which a person, desirous but not compelled to buy, and an
owner, willing but not compelled to sell, would agree on as a price to be given
and received therefor.

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, leaving
the remainder with an odd shape or area as to be virtually unusable
CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS
Must be direct and particular, and not merely shared with the rest of the
properties in the area, 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, such as fronting a street where it used to be an interior
lot, the owner will enjoy consequential benefit which should be deducted
from consequential damages
Expropriation proceedings speak of two (2) stages, i.e.:
1.
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. This ends with an order, if not of dismissal of the action, of condemnation [or
order of expropriation] declaring that the plaintiff has the lawful right to take the
property sought to be condemned, for the public use or purpose described in the
complaint, upon the payment of just compensation to be determined as of the date of
the filing of the complaint;
In other words, 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, the court has
no jurisdiction here.
- This will be based on the assessed value (usually the assessor is
the city) without prejudice to just compensation
- This is for general appropriation: Apply RULE 67 of the Rules of
Court. Pay the 10% of the assessed value
- If the property to be expropriated is for national infrastructure
projects (e.g. bridges, road), apply RA 8974. Pay 100% of the BIR
Zonal Valuation (the value placed on real estate properties for
taxation purposes) or fair market value, whichever is higher.

2.
Determination by the court of the just compensation for the property
sought to be taken.
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).
The court is not bound to follow the boards decisions.
For agrarian cases apply RA 6657 (CARP Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program)

Page 13 of 14

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, irrespective of tenurial arrangement.
Assessed value: LGC 7160

Zonal Valuation: RA 8974 (An Act to Facilitate the Acquisition of Right-Of-Way, Site or
Location for National Government Infrastructure Projects and for Other Purposes)

THREE MODES OF PAYMENT

1. Cash/monetary
2. Landbank bonds (the owners can borrow money from
Landbank using bonds as collateral
3. 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, while the prevailing doctrine is that "the nonpayment of just
compensation does not entitle the private landowner to recover possession of the
expropriated lots, however, in cases where the government failed to pay just
compensation within five (5) years from the finality of the
judgment in the expropriation proceedings, the owners concerned shall have the right
to recover possession of their property. This is in consonance with the principle that
"the government cannot keep the property and dishonor the judgment." To be sure,
the five-year period limitation will
encourage the government to pay just compensation punctually. This is in keeping
with justice and equity. After all, it is the duty of the government, whenever it takes
property from private persons against their will, to facilitate the payment of just
compensation. In Cosculluela v. Court of Appeals, 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.
Without prompt payment, compensation cannot be considered "just."
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, not just the owner)

Page 14 of 14