Anda di halaman 1dari 10

INTRODUCTION I.

POLITICAL LAW That branch of public law that deals with the organization and operations of the governmental organs of the State and defines the relations of the State with the inhabitants of its territory. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW The study of the maintenance of the proper balance between authority as represented by the 3 inherent powers of the State and liberty as guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. CONSTITUTION The written instrument enacted by the direct action of the people by which a. the fundamental powers of the government are established, limited and defined, and by which b. those powers are distributed among the several departments for their safe and useful exercise for the benefit of the body politic. Purposes: a. To prescribe a permanent framework of a system of a government b. To assign to the several departments their respective powers and duties c. To establish certain first principles on which the government is founded Types: We have a written, enacted and rigid Constitution a. According to Form 1. Written One whose precepts are embodied in 1 document or set of documents 2. Unwritten Consists of rules which have not been integrated into a single, concrete form but are scattered in various sources including statutes, judicial decisions, publicists commentaries, customs and traditions and certain common law principles. b. According to Origin 1. Conventional Enacted, formally struck off at a definite time and place following a conscious or deliberate effort taken by a constituent body or ruler 2. Cumulative Evolved, is the result of political evolution, not inaugurated at any specific time but changing by accretion rather than by any systematic method c. According to Procedure of Amendment 1. Rigid One that can be amended only by a formal and usually difficult process 2. Flexible One that can be changed by ordinary legislation Qualities of a good written Constitution a. Broad 1. Covers the basics but provides for any contingencies b. Brief 1. Confines to basic principles which will be implemented with legislative details more adjustable to change c. Definite 1. No ambiguity to prevent confusion and division Essential Parts of a good written Constitution a. Constitution of Liberty 1. Bill of Rights (fundamental rights and constitutional limitations on governmental powers as a means to securing those rights b. Constitution of Government 1. Organization, power, duties and functions, limitation on powers, qualifications c. Constitution of Sovereignty 1. Method/procedures in amending or revising the Constitution Constitutional Construction a. Verba Legis 1. Words used in the Constitution must be given their ordinary meaning except where technical terms are employed b. Ratio Legis Est Anima 1. In case of ambiguity, words of the Constitution should be interpreted in accordance with the intent of the framers c. Ut Magis Valeat Quam Pereat 1. In case of conflicting provisions, the Constitution must be interpreted as a whole NOTE: In case of doubt, provisions are held to be self-executing; mandatory rather than directory; and prospective rather than retroactive

II.

III.

DOCTRINE OF CONSTITUTIONAL SUPREMACY The Constitution is the fundamental and supreme law.

INHERENT POWERS OF THE STATE - They are supposed to co-exist with the State.

What happens to the property taken a. Police power

I.

DEFINITIONS POLICE POWER a. power of the State to regulate liberty and property for the promotion of the general welfare POWER OF EMINENT DOMAIN/EXPROPRIATION a. enable the State to forcibly acquire private property, upon payment of just compensation, for some intended public use POWER OF TAXATION a. the State is able to demand from the member of society their proportionate share or contribution in the maintenance of the government Limitations:

1.

destroyed because it is noxious or intended for a noxious purpose

b. Power of eminent domain and power of taxation 1. is intended for a public use or purpose and is therefore wholesome compensation of the person subjected to the police power

a. The exercise of these fundamental 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.

II.

Similarities They are inherent in the State and may be exercised by it without need of express constitutional grant. They are not only necessary but indispensable. The State cannot continue or be effective unless it is able to exercise them. They are methods by which the State interferes with private rights. They all presuppose an equivalent compensation for the private rights interfered with. They are exercised primarily by the legislature. IV. Definition

POLICE POWER

has been defined as the power of promoting the public welfare by restraining and regulating the use of liberty and property. easily outpaces the other two inherent powers as instruments of the State in interfering with private rights. a. The power of Eminent Domain and Taxation involve only property rights. b. By contrast, Police Power regulates not only the property, but more importantly, the liberty of private persons and virtually all the people. It is regarded as infinitely more important than eminent domain or taxation.

III.

Differences/Distinctions: What it regulates a. police power 1. regulates both liberty and property

Police power has been defined as the state authority to enact legislation that may interfere with personal liberty or property in order to promote the general welfare. a. As defined, it consists of 1. 2. an imposition of restraint upon liberty or property, in order to foster the common good. It is not capable of an exact definition but has been, purposely, veiled in general terms to underscore its all-comprehensive embrace.

b. power of eminent domain & power of taxation 1. Who may exercise a. police power & power of taxation 1. may be exercised only by the government affects only property rights

b. power of eminent domain 1. may be exercised by some private entities

V.

Scope Police power regulates not only the property but, more importantly, the liberty of private persons, and virtually all the people. The scope of police power, ever-expanding to meet the exigencies of the times, even to anticipate the future where it could be done provides enough room for an efficient and flexible response to conditions and circumstances thus assuring the greatest benefits. VIII. VII. Limits: It is virtually limitless. Owing to the need to protect society from the inordinate assertion of individual liberty, it has been held that the police power may not be bargained away by virtue of a contract or even a treaty, so long as it is regulated in order to promote the general welfare.

VI.

Characteristics Police power is considered the most pervasive, the least limitable, and the most demanding of the three powers. It may be exercised as long as the activity or the property sought to be regulated has some relevance to the public welfare. a. Pervasive and non-waivable 1. The police power is the pervasive and non-waivable power and authority of the sovereign to secure and promote all the important interests and needs or the public order of the general community.

Who exercises the power? State a. Inherently vested in Congress b. Consequence 1. 2. Delegation a. To Who: 1. 2. 3. To the President To Administrative Bodies To Law making bodies of Local Government Units (LGU) Section 16, RA 7160 LGC Needs no constitutional conferment Limited judicial intervention, because of the Supreme Courts expanded certiorari jurisdiction.

b. Essential, insistent and illimitable 1. The police power of the state has been described as the most essential, insistent and illimitable of powers, which enables it to prohibit all things hurtful to the comfort, safety and welfare of society.

c. Dynamic 1. Police power is a dynamic force that enables the state to meet the exigencies of changing times. There are occasions when the police power of the state may even override a constitutional guaranty, such as that the constitutional provision on non-impairment of contracts must yield to the police power of the state. Police power is dynamic, not static, must move with the moving society it is supposed to regulate. Once exercised, it is not deemed exhausted and may be exercised repeatedly, as often as it is necessary for the protection or the promotion of the public welfare.

b. the power is delegated by Congress c. Consequence: 1. 2. Should be conferred by a statute or law Exercise is limited a. 3. it should be performed in accordance with the mandate of the delegating agency.

2.

Greater elbow room for judicial review.

d. Limits when delegated: 1. 2. There should be express grant by law Must be within territorial limits a. 3. XPN: protect water supply

Police power may sometimes use the taxing power as an implement for the attainment of a legitimate police objective. Eminent domain may also be used as an implement to attain the objective of police power

Must not be contrary to law

a.

Requisites for ordinance to be valid i. ii. iii. iv. v. vi. vii. Must not contravene Consitution or any statute Must not be unfair or oppressive Must not discriminatory be partial or POWER OF EMINENT DOMAIN/EXPROPRIATION the

Must not prohibit but only regulate trade Must not be unreasonable Must be general in application Must be consistent with public policy -

Section 9, Article III Private property will not be taken for public use without just compensation Section 17, Article XII In times of national emergency, when the public interest so requires, the State may, during the emergency and under reasonable terms prescribed by it, temporarily take over or direct the operation of any privately-owned public utility or business affected with public interest. Section 18, Article XII The State may, in the interest of national welfare or defense, establish and operate vital industries and, upon payment of just compensation, transfer to public ownership utilities and other private enterprises to be operated by the Government. Section 4, Article XIII The State shall, by law, undertake an agrarian reform program founded on the right of farmers and regular farmworkers who are landless, to own directly or collectively the lands they till or, in the case of other farmworkers, to receive a just share of the fruits thereof. To this end, the State shall encourage and undertake the just distribution of all agricultural lands, subject to such priorities and reasonable retention limits as the Congress may prescribe, taking into account ecological, developmental, or equity considerations, and subject to the payment of just compensation. In determining retention limits, the State shall respect the right of small landowners. The State shall further provide incentives for voluntary landsharing. Section 9, Article XIII The State shall, by law, and for the common good, undertake, in cooperation with the private sector, a continuing program of urban land reform and housing which will make available at affordable cost, decent housing and basic services to under-privileged and homeless citizens in urban centers and resettlement areas. It shall also promote adequate employment opportunities to such citizens. In the implementation of such program the State shall respect the rights of small property owners.

IX.

Tests for valid exercise Lawful subject a. the subject of the measure is within the scope of the police power, that is, that the activity or property sought to be regulated affects the public welfare. b. If it does, the enjoyment of private rights may be subordinated to the interests of the greater number, in consonance of the principle the welfare of the people is the supreme law. Lawful means a. The means employed are reasonably necessary for the attainment of the object sought to be accomplished and not unduly oppressive upon individuals. b. The lawful objective must be pursued through a lawful method. c. The means employed for the accomplishment of the police objective must pass to the test of reasonableness and conform to the safeguards embodied in the Bill of Rights for the protection of private rights. d. Even if the purpose be within the scope of the police power, the law will still be annulled if the subject is sought to be regulated in violation of the second requirement. e. In Constitutional Law, the end does not justify the means. 1. both the end and the means must be legitimate. Lacking such concurrence, the police measure shall be struck down as an arbitrary intrusion of private rights.

The power of eminent domain results in the taking or appropriation of title to, and possession of, the expropriated property. Eminent domain, also often referred to as expropriation and, with less frequency, as condemnation, is, like police power and taxation, an inherent power of sovereignty. It need not be clothed with any constitutional gear to exist; instead, provisions in our Constitution on the subject are meant more to regulate, rather than to grant, the exercise of the power. Eminent domain is generally so described as "the highest and most exact idea of property remaining in the government" that may be acquired for some public purpose through a method in the nature of a forced purchase by the State. It is a right to take or reassert dominion over property within the state for public use or to meet a public exigency. It is said to be an essential part of governance even in its most primitive form and thus inseparable from sovereignty. Constitutional constraints 1. 2. Public Use Just Compensation

II.

Eminent Domain as Exercised by LGUs Section 19, RA 7160, LGC General Welfare Clause a. A local government unit may, through its chief executive and acting pursuant to an ordinance, exercise the power of eminent domain for public use, or purpose, or welfare for the benefit of the poor and the landless, upon payment of just compensation, pursuant to the provisions of the Constitution and pertinent laws. b. Provided, however, That the power of eminent domain may not be exercised unless a valid and definite offer has been previously made to the owner, and such offer was not accepted: c. Provided, further, That the local government unit may immediately take possession of the property upon the filing of the expropriation proceedings and upon making a deposit with the proper court of at least fifteen percent (15%) of the fair market value of the property based on the current tax declaration of the property to be expropriated: d. Provided, finally, that, the amount to be paid for the expropriated .property shall be determined by the proper court, based on the fair market value at the time of the taking of the property."

III. I. Who may exercise Power of Eminent Domain The power of eminent domain is lodged in the legislative branch of the government. It delegates the exercise thereof to local government units, other public entities and public utility corporations, subject only to Constitutional limitations. Local governments have no inherent power of eminent domain and may exercise it only when expressly authorized by statute. (Masikip vs City of Pasig) The following may exercise the power of expropriation: a. The Congress. b. The President of the Philippines. c. The various local legislative bodies. d. Certain public corporations like the Land Authority and National Housing Authority. e. Quasi-public corporations like Philippine National Railways, the Philippine Long Distance Telephone Co. and the Meralco. IV.

Requisites for valid exercise by LGUs An ordinance is enacted by the local legislative council authorizing the local chief executive, in behalf of the LGU, to exercise the power of eminent domain or pursue expropriation proceedings over a particular private property. The power of eminent domain is exercised for public use, purpose or welfare, or for the benefit of the poor and the landless. There is payment of just compensation, as required under Section 9, Article III of the Constitution, and other pertinent laws. 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.

IMPORTANT: A municipal ordinance is different from a resolution. An ordinance is a law, but a resolution is merely a declaration of the sentiment or opinion of a lawmaking body on a specific matter. An ordinance possesses a general and permanent character, but a resolution is temporary in nature. Additionally, the two are enacted differently a third reading is necessary for an ordinance, but not for a resolution, unless decided otherwise by a majority of all the Sanggunian members. (Municipality of Paranaque vs VM Realty Corp) Res judicata, which finds application in generally all cases and proceedings, cannot bar the right of the State or its agent to expropriate private property.

* destruction from necessity may be validly taken by private individuals; cannot require the conversion of the property taken to public use; nor is there any payment of just compensation

The very nature of eminent domain, as an inherent power of the State, dictates that the right to exercise the power be absolute and unfettered even by a prior judgment or res judicata. The scope of eminent domain is plenary and, like police power, can "reach every form of property which the State might need for public use. All separate interests of individuals in property are held of the government under this tacit agreement or implied reservation

VIII.

the deposit of the amount equivalent to 15 percent of the fair market value of the property to be expropriated based on its current tax declaration.

Stages of Expropriation First Stage a. determination of the authority of the plaintiff to exercise the power of eminent domain and the propriety of its exercise. Second Stage a. determination by the court of "the just compensation for the property sought to be taken."

a. Requisites of res judicata: 1. 2. 3. 4. V. the former judgment must be final; the court that rendered it had jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties; it is a judgment on the merits; and there is between the first and the second actions an identity of parties, subject matter and cause of action. IX.

Requisites for Exercise Genuine necessity a. essentially political when decided by the national legislature and are usually not subject to judicial review b. The foundation of the right to exercise eminent domain is genuine necessity and that necessity must be of public character. Government may not capriciously or arbitrarily choose which private property should be expropriated. (Lagcao vs. Judge Labra) Private property a. this includes real and personal, tangible and intangible properties b. exceptions: money and choses in action c. Private property is subjected to a burden for public use and benefit. (Republic of the Philippines vs. PLDT) d. Private lands rank last in the order of priority for purposes of socialized housing. In the same vein, expropriation proceedings are to be resorted to only when the other modes of acquisition have been exhausted. Compliance with these conditions must be deemed mandatory because these are the only safeguards in securing the right of owners of private property to due process when their property is expropriated for public use. (Filstream International, Inc vs CA) Taking in the constitutional sense a. The power of eminent domain may be exercised although title was not transferred to the expropriator if owner is deprived of the ordinary use of the property for an indefinite length of time (NPC vs Gutierrez) b. imports a physical dispossession of the owner, as when he is ousted from his land or relieved of his watch and his car and is thus deprived of all the beneficial use and enjoyment of his property

Judicial review of the exercise of eminent domain is limited to the following areas of concern: the adequacy of the compensation the necessity of the taking a. When exercised by Congress 1. Political question

b. When delegated 1. VI. Justiciable question

the public use character of the purpose of the taking

Jurisdiction on Expropriation Cases An expropriation suit does not involve the recovery of a sum of money. Rather, it deals with the exercise by the government of its authority and right to take property for public use. As such, it is incapable of pecuniary estimation and should be filed with the regional trial courts (Bardillon vs Barangay Masili of Calamba Laguna) It should be stressed that the primary consideration in an expropriation suit is whether the government or any of its instrumentalities has complied with the requisites for the taking of private property. The subject of an expropriation suit is the government's exercise of eminent domain, a matter that is incapable of pecuniary estimation

VII.

Requisites for Authorized Immediate Entry - LGUs the filing of a complaint for expropriation sufficient in form and substance

c. An ordinance which permanently so restricts the use of property that it cannot be used for any reasonable purpose goes, it is plain, beyond regulation and must be recognized as a taking of the property. The only substantial difference, in such case, between restriction and actual taking, is that the restriction leaves the owner subject to the burden of payment of taxation, while outright confiscation would relieve him of that burden. d. Taking occurs not only when the government actually deprives or dispossesses the property owner of his property or its ordinary use, but also when there is a practical destruction or material impairment of the value of the property. e. A number of circumstances must be present in the "taking" of property for purposes of eminent domain: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Expropriator must enter private property. Entrance must be for more than momentary period. Entrance must be under warrant or color of legal authority. Property must be devoted to public use or otherwise informally appropriated or injuriously affected. Utilization of property for public use must be in such a way as to oust the owner and deprive him of beneficial enjoyment of the property. (Republic vs. Castellvi)

c. GR: market value of property at time it was taken d. XPN: when only a certain part of the property is expropriated, the formula would be: 1. 2. Equation: Just compensation = Fair Market Value + (Consequential Damage Consequential Benefits) Consequential Benefits should not exceed Consequential Damage

e. Concept in which the owner of condemned property is entitled to its market value; f. market value is 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 therefore (NAPOCOR vs. Sps. Chiong) g. IMPORTANT: 1. Judicial prerogative i. ii. determination of payment compensation is a judicial action of just

For public use a. any use directly available to the general public as a matter of right and not merely of forbearance or accommodation b. It is now settled doctrine that the concept of public use is no longer limited to traditional purposes. Here, as elsewhere, the idea that "public use" is strictly limited to clear cases of "use by the public" has been abandoned. The term "public use" has now been held to be synonymous with "public interest," "public benefit," "public welfare," and "public convenience." (Reyes vs. NHA) c. The term "public use," not having been otherwise defined by the constitution, must be considered in its general concept of meeting a public need or a public exigency (Manosca vs CA) iii.

The method of ascertaining just compensation constitutes impermissible encroachment to judicial prerogatives. It tends to render the courts inutile in a matter in which under the Constitution is reserved to it for financial determination. The valuation in the decree may only serve as guiding principle or one of the factors in determining just compensation, but it may not substitute the courts own judgment as to what amount should be awarded and how to arrive at such amount. The executive department or the legislature may make the initial determination but when a party claims a violation of the guarantee in the Bill of Rights that the private party may not be taken for public use without just compensation, no statute, decree, or executive order can mandate that its own determination shall prevail over the courts findings. Much less can the courts be precluded from looking into the justness of the decreed compensation. (EPZA vs. Dulay)

iv.

Payment of just compensation a. full and fair equivalent of the property taken from the private owner by the expropriator b. value of the property at the time of the taking. It means a fair and full equivalent for the loss sustained. All the facts as to the condition of the property and its surroundings, its improvements and capabilities, should be considered.

Rule 67 of the Rules of Court (Expropriation) Section 4. Order of Condemnation. When such a motion is overruled or when any party fails to defend as required by this rule, the court may enter an order of condemnation declaring that the plaintiff has a 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 Section 5. Ascertainment of compensation. Upon the rendition of the order of expropriation, the court shall appoint not more than three (3) competent and disinterested persons as commissioners to ascertain and report to the court the just compensation for the property sought to be taken. The order of appointment shall designate the time and place of the first session of the hearing to be held by the commissioners and specify the time within which their report shall be submitted to the court. Copies of the order shall be served on the parties. Objections to the appointment of any of the commissioners shall be filed with the court within ten (10) days from service, and shall be resolved within thirty (30) days after all the commissioners shall have received copies of the objections. Section 6. Proceedings by commissioners. Before entering upon the performance of their duties, the commissioners shall take and subscribe an oath that they will faithfully perform their duties as commissioners, which oath shall be filed in court with the other proceedings in the case. Evidence may be introduced by either party before the commissioners who are authorized to administer oaths on hearings before them, and the commissioners shall, unless the parties consent to the contrary, after due notice to the parties to attend, view and examine the property sought to be expropriated and its surroundings, and may measure the same, after which either party may, by himself or counsel, argue the case. The commissioners shall assess the consequential damages to the property not taken and deduct from such consequential damages the consequential benefits to be derived by the owner from the public use or purpose of the property taken, the operation of its franchise by the corporation or the carrying on of the business of the corporation or person taking the property. But in no case shall the consequential benefits assessed exceed the consequential damages assessed, or the owner be deprived of the actual value of his property so taken. Section 7. Report by commissioners and judgment thereupon. The court may order the commissioners to report when any particular portion of the real estate shall have been passed upon by them, and may render judgment upon such partial report, and direct the commissioners to proceed with their work as to subsequent portions of the property sought to be expropriated, and may from time to time so deal with such property. The commissioners shall make a full and accurate report to the court of all their proceedings, and such proceedings shall not be effectual until the court shall have accepted their report and rendered judgment in accordance with their recommendations. Except as otherwise expressly ordered by the court, such report shall be filed within sixty (60) days from the date the commissioners were notified of their appointment, which time may be extended in the discretion of the court. Upon the filing of such report, the clerk of the court shall serve copies thereof on all interested parties, with

notice that they are allowed ten (10) days within which to file objections to the findings of the report, if they so desire. Section 8. Action upon commissioners report. Upon the expiration of the period of ten (10) days referred to in the preceding section, or even before the expiration of such period but after all the interested parties have filed their objections to the report or their statement of agreement therewith, the court may, after hearing: 1. 2. accept the report and render judgment in accordance therewith for cause shown, a. b. c. it may recommit the same to the commissioners for further report of facts it may set aside the report and appoint new commissioners; it may accept the report in part and reject it in part; and it may make such order or render such judgment as shall secure to the plaintiff the property essential to the exercise of his right of expropriation, and to the defendant just compensation for the property so taken.

1.

Need to appoint commissioners i. ii. it is mandatory; except for Agrarian Reform This is done by the Court with the assistance of not more than three (3) commissioners. The order fixing the just compensation on the basis of the evidence before, and findings of, the commissioners would be final, too. (Manila Electric Co. vs. Pineda) In the end, court may accept or reject or even modify the valuation given by the commissioners in their report since the determination of just compensation is a judicial prerogative 1. 2. 3. When commissioners applied illegal principles to evidence submitted to them When they have disregarded a clear preponderance of evidence When the amount allowed by commissioners is either grossly inadequate or grossly excessive

iii.

2.

Form of compensation i. GR: money or cash; except bonds

ii.

XPN: Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law, RA 6657, Section 16(e) allows just compensation is the form of 1. Cash or LBP bonds (LBP vs CA)

iii.

full payment of the just compensation had to be made first, conformably to the constitutional requirement, before the title of expropriated property is transferred; compensation in cash or bonds with an accessible bank (Association of Small Landowners vs. Sec. of Agrarian Reform)

3.

Reckoning point of market value of the property i. When Expropriation is exercised by others 1. GR: Section 4, Rule 67 a. date of filing of the complaint or taking whichever is earlier (as long the constitutional requirements for taking are complied)

That the local government unit may immediately take possession of the property upon the filing of the expropriation proceedings and upon making a deposit with the proper court of at least fifteen percent (15%) of the fair market value of the property based on the current tax declaration of the property to be expropriated: Provided finally, That, the amount to be paid for the expropriated property shall be determined by the proper court, based on the fair market value at the time of the taking of the property.

The general rule in determining just compensation in eminent domain is the value of the property as of the date of the filing of the complaint, as follows: Sec. 4. Order of Condemnation. When such a motion is overruled or when any party fails to defend as required by this rule, the court may enter an order of condemnation declaring that the plaintiff has a 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

2.

XPN: where this Court fixed the value of the property as of the date it was taken and not at the date of the commencement of the expropriation proceedings. (NAPOCOR vs. Court of Appeals)

4.

Entitlement of owner to interest i. ii. until full payment; payment of interest accrue; expropriation to pay The owner of private property should be compensated only for what he actually loses; it is not intended that his compensation shall extend beyond his loss or injury. And what he loses is only the actual value of his property at the time it is taken. This is the only way the compensation to be paid can be truly just; i.e., "just" not only to the individual whose property is taken, "but to the public, which is to pay for it." Thus, the value of petitioners' property must be ascertained as of 1960 when it was actually taken. It is as of that time that the real measure of their loss may fairly be adjudged. The value, once fixed, shall earn interest at the legal rate until full payment is effected, conformably with other principles laid down by case law. (Nepomuceno vs. City of Surigao)

ii.

When Expropriation is done by LGU 1. GR: Section 19, RA 7160 a. Based at time of taking

SECTION 19.Eminent Domain. A local government unit may, through its chief executive and acting pursuant to an ordinance, exercise the power of eminent domain for public use, or purpose or welfare for the benefit of the poor and the landless, upon payment of just compensation, pursuant to the provisions of the Constitution and pertinent laws: Provided, however, That the power of eminent domain may not be exercised unless a valid and definite offer has been previously made to the owner, and such offer was not accepted: Provided, further,

iii.

5.

Title to the property i. only vested upon full payment of just compensation of the property

ii.

No piece of land can be finally and irrevocably taken from an unwilling owner until compensation is paid. This is in conformity with the just compensation requirement. (Visayan Refining vs. Camus)

ii.

6.

Right of landowners in case of non-payment of just compensation i. ii. recovery of property within 5 years from the judgment of nonpayment 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. (Republic vs. Vicente Lim) Just compensation is 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."

Section 18. The State may, in the interest of national welfare or defense, establish and operate vital industries and, upon payment of just compensation, transfer to public ownership utilities and other private enterprises to be operated by the Government. i. It is also settled that public interest on the occasion of a national emergency is the primary consideration when the government decides to temporarily take over or direct the operation of a public utility or a business affected with public interest. The nature and extent of the emergency is the measure of the duration of the takeover as well as the terms thereof. It is the State that prescribes such reasonable terms which will guide the implementation of the temporary takeover as dictated by the exigencies of the time. (Lopez vs. PIATCO)

iii.

7.

Right to dismiss the complaint in eminent domain i. ii. right to dismiss is not a matter of right, it needs the court approval Ordinarily, the dismissal of the expropriation case restores possession of the expropriated land to the landowner. However, when possession of the land cannot be turned over to the landowner because it is neither convenient nor feasible anymore to do so, the only remedy available to the aggrieved landowner is to demand payment of just compensation. (NAPOCOR vs. Court of Appeals)

8.

Right to repurchase or re-acquire property i. ii. it depends; if the public purpose has been abandoned had a right to repurchase the same if the purpose for which it was expropriated is ended or abandoned. (Mactan-Cebu International Airport vs. Court of Appeals)

9.

Expropriation under Section 18, Article XII i. Section 17. In times of national emergency, when the public interest so requires, the State may, during the emergency and under reasonable terms prescribed by it, temporarily take over or direct the operation of any privately-owned public utility or business affected with public interest.