implementation of the MMDA's functions.

There is no grant of authority to enact

ordinances and regulations for the general welfare of the inhabitants of the metropolis."

B. Power of Eminent Domain

Definition: The power of eminent domain is the inherent right of the State to
condemnprivate property to public use upon payment of just compensation.

Scope and Limitations: It is well settled that eminent domain is an inherent power of
theState that need not be granted even by the fundamental law. Section 9 of Article III of
theConstitution merely imposes a limit on the government's exercise of this power.
[Republic v.Tagle (1998)].

The repository of eminent domain powers is lodged in the legislature which is exercised
through the enactment of laws.
Delegation of power to expropriate: Delegation of the power may be done through
legislation. Thus under R.A. 7160 (The Local Government Code), the power has been be
delegated to LGUs. Other government entities through the charters creating them also
enjoy
the right to expropriate [Manapat v. CA (2007)]
Requisites for exercise of the power of eminent domain
(1) Private property
(2) Genuine necessity
(3) Taking is for a public purpose
(4) Payment of just compensation
(5) Due process [Manapat v. CA (2007)
Circumstances which may warrant "taking"-
When the owner is deprived of his proprietary rights, there is taking of private property. It
may include
(1) Diminution in value;
(2) Prevention of ordinary use; and
(3) Deprivation of beneficial use.
Cases:
1. Hacienda Luisita, Inc. v. Presidential Agrarian Reform Council, 670 SCRA
392 (2012): award of land under tenancy can be done through a natural person or
collectively through a juridical person; a resolution of an administrative agency has the
effect of a law and can be governed by the operative fact doctrine.
2. Secretary of the Department of Public Works and Highways v. Tecson, 700
SCRA 243 (2013) and Resolution dated 21 April 2015, — SCRA — (G.R.
No. 179334, 21 April 2015): definition and extent of "just compensation"
3. Mactan-Cebu International Airport Authority v. Lozada, Sr., 613 SCRA 618
(2010): limitation on the exercise of power; right of the private property owner
4. Republic v. Heirs of Saturnino Q. Borbon, 745 SCRA 40 (2015):the retirement of the
transmission lines necessarily stripped the expropriation proceedings of the element of
public
use. To continue with the expropriation proceedings despite the definite cessation of the
public purpose of the project would result in the rendition of an invalid judgment in favor
of
the expropriator due to the absence of the essential element of public use.
5. Land Bank of the Philippines vs. Suntay, 662 SCRA 614, G.R. No. 188376
December 14,
2011: the enactments of the Legislature decreed that the money to be paid to the
landowner
as just compensation for the taking of his land is to be taken only from the Agrarian
Reform
Fund As such, the liability is not the personal liability of Land Bank but its liability only
as
the administrator of the ARE In fact, Section 10, Rule 19 of the 2003 DARAB Rules of
Procedure, reiterates that the satisfaction of a judgment for just compensation by writ of
execution should be from the ARF in the custody of Land Bank
Wage