Eminent Domain

Process of Exercising Expropriation

1.
2.
3.
4.

Filing of a verified complaint

Shall state the right and purpose of expropriation
Describe the real and personal property
Joining of the interested parties

Note: If the title to any property sought to be expropriated appears to be in the Republic
although occupied by respondents or if the title is obscure or doubtful so that the plaintif
cannot with accuracy or certainty specify who are the real owners, averment to that efect
shall be made in the complaint.
Responsibility of the Government
The condemnor should commit to the use of the property pursuant to the purpose it stated
in the petition, failing which it should file another petition for the new purpose.
If not, the condemnor is obliged to return the property
Exercise of eminent domain by local government units
1. Ordinance
2. Just compensation
3. Power of eminent domain may not be exercised unless a valid and definite ofer has been
previously made to the owner and such ofer was not accepted.
4. LGU may immediately take possession of the property upon making a deposit with the
proper court of at least 15% of the fair market value of the property based on the current tax
declaration of the property to be expropriated
Service of Summons
1. The defendant shall be served summons. (Sec 3. Rule 67 ROC)
The defendants are not limited to the owners of the property condemned. They include all
other persons owning, occupying or claiming to own the property.
Court with jurisdiction
1. RTC
Defenses and Objections
1. If the Defendant has no objection or defense to the action or taking of his property
Ans: He may file and serve a notice of appearance and a manifestion to that efect.
2. If the defendant has objection
Ans: File an answer within the time stated in the summons.
* No counterclaim, cross-claim or third party complaint shall be alleged or allowed in the
answer or any subsequent pleading

Waiver of defenses
1. A defendant waives all defenses and objection not so alleged in the court .
Exception: But the court in the interest of justice may permit amend ments to the answer to
be made not later than 10 days from filing there of.
2. At the trial of just compensation, whether or not a defendant has previously appeared or
answered he may present evidence as to the amount of the compensation to be paid for his
property and he may share in the distribution of the award.
Remedy when some defenses are omitted
1. seek to leave to amend the answer within 10 days from the filing thereof.
RA 8974 An Act to Facilitate the
Acquisition of Right of Way, Site or
Location
for
National
Government
Infrastructure Projects and For Other
purposes
1. Government is required to make
immediate payment to the property
owner upon the filing of the complaint
2. Market value of the property as stated
in the tax declaratio

Sec 67 Rules of Court

1. An initial deposit with an authorized

government depositary

2. Deposit must be equivalent to the

assessed value of the property for
purposes of taxation.

Appeal
The order of expropriation is appealable
But appeal shall not prevent the court from determining just compensation to be paid. (Sec 4
Rule 67)
Reversed
The appellate court renders a decision ordering the RTC to enforce the restoration.

Jesus is Lord Christian School Foundation vs City of Pasig

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 ofer has been previously made to the owner of the property sought to
be expropriated, but said ofer was not accepted.[47]
Valid and Definite Ofer
Article 35 of the Rules and Regulations Implementing the Local Government Code provides:
ARTICLE 35. Ofer to Buy and Contract of Sale. (a) The ofer to buy private property for public
use or purpose shall be in writing. It shall specify the property sought to be acquired, the
reasons for its acquisition, and the price ofered.
(b) If the owner or owners accept the ofer in its entirety, a contract of sale shall be executed
and payment forthwith made.
(c) If the owner or owners are willing to sell their property but at a price higher than that
ofered to them, the local chief executive shall call them to a conference for the purpose of
reaching an agreement on the selling price. The chairman of the appropriation or finance
committee of the sanggunian, or in his absence, any member of the sanggunian duly chosen
as its representative, shall participate in the conference. When an agreement is reached by
the parties, a contract of sale shall be drawn and executed.
(d) The contract of sale shall be supported by the following documents:
(1) Resolution of the sanggunian authorizing the local chief executive to enter into a contract
of sale. The resolution shall specify the terms and conditions to be embodied in the contract;
(2) Ordinance appropriating the amount specified in the contract; and
(3) Certification of the local treasurer as to availability of funds together with a statement
that such fund shall not be disbursed or spent for any purpose other than to pay for the
purchase of the property involved.
Foreclosure of Real Estate Mortgage
When is foreclosure proper
1. The default of the debtor must first be established. Such default occurs when payment is
not made after a valid demand, unless the contract between the parties carries with it a
stipulation that demand is not necessary for default to arise.
Alternative remedies of the creditor
a) To file an action for collection of sum of money
b) To foreclose the mortgage if one has been constituted
Court with jurisdiction
1. RTC
Allegattions in a complaint for foreclosure
a) The date and due execution of the mortgage

b) The assignments of the mortgage if any

c) The names and residences of the mortgagor and mortgagee
d) A description of the mortgaged property
e) A statement of the date of note and other docurmetary evidence of the obligation secured
by the mortgage
f) The amount claimed to be unpaid thereon.
g) Names of the person with interest
Judgment on foreclosure
TC finds that the matters set forth in the complaint is true
a) Ascertainment of the amount due to the plaintif upon the mortgage debt or obligation
including interest and other charges as approved by the court as well as costs.
b) Judgment for the sum found due
c) Order that the amount found to be paid to the court or to the judgment oblige within a
period of not less than 90 days nor more than 120 days from entry of judgment
d) Admonition that in default of such paymen the property shall be sold at public auction to
satisfy the judgment.
Equity of redemption
This is simply the right of the defendant mortgagor to extinguish the mortgage and retain
ownership of the property by paying the secured debt within the 90-day period after the
judgment becomes final, in accordance with Rule 68, or even after the foreclosure sale but
prior to its confirmation. (Limpin vs CA)
(Dayot vs Shell Company)
Sec. 33. Deed and possession to be given at expiration of redemption period; by whom
executed or given.

Upon the expiration of the right of redemption, the purchaser or redemptioner

shall be substituted to and acquire all the rights, title, interest and claim of the
judgment obligor to the property at the time of levy. The possession of the
property shall be given to the purchaser or last redemptioner by the same officer
unless a third party is actually holding the property adversely to the judgment
obligor.
(Sulit vs CA)
Hence, it is the mortgagees duty to return any surplus in the selling price to the mortgagor.
Perforce, a mortgagee who exercises the power of sale contained in a mortgage is
considered a custodian of the fund, and, being bound to apply it properly, is liable to the
persons entitled thereto if he fails to do so. And even though the mortgagee is not strictly
considered a trustee in a purely equitable sense, but as far as concerns the unconsumed
balance, the mortgagee is deemed a trustee for the mortgagor or owner of the equity of
redemption.
Thus the mortgagee is not yet allowed to a writ of possession

(Saguan vs PBC)
A writ of possession is an order enforcing a judgment to allow a persons recovery of
possession of real or personal property. An instance when a writ of possession may issue is
under Act No. 3135, as amended by Act No. 4118, on extrajudicial foreclosure of real estate
mortgage. Sections 6 and 7 of the said Act provides that a writ of possession may be issued
either (1) within the one-year redemption period, upon the filing of a bond, or (2) after the
lapse of the redemption period, without need of a bond.
In Sulit, the plea for a writ of possession was made during the redemption period and title to
the property had not, as yet, been consolidated in favor of the purchaser in the foreclosure
sale. In stark contrast, the herein petitioners failed to exercise their right of redemption
within the one-year reglementary period provided under Section 6 of Act No. 3135, as
amended, and ownership over the properties was consolidated in, and corresponding titles
issued in favor of, the respondent.
Monzon vs Addio Properties
Unlike Rule 68, which governs judicial foreclosure sales, neither Act No. 3135 as amended,
nor A.M. No. 99-10-05-0 grants to junior encumbrancers the right to receive the balance of
the purchase price. The only right given to second mortgagees in said issuances is the right
to redeem the foreclosed property pursuant to Section 6 of Act No. 3135, as amended by Act
No. 4118.
In view of the foregoing discussions, the SC finds that respondents do not have a cause of
action against Atty. Ana Liza Luna for the delivery of the subject amounts on the basis of
Section 4, Rule 68 of the Rules of Court, for the reason that the foregoing Rule does not
apply to extrajudicial foreclosure of mortgages.
Union Bank vs CA
The rationale therefor is that even in cases where an appeal is taken from a judgment
dismissing an action on the merits, the appeal does not suspend the judgment, hence the
general rule applies that a temporary injunction terminates automatically on the dismissal of
the action.
We disagree with the appellate courts observation that consolidation deprived private
respondents of their property without due process. It is settled that the buyer in a
foreclosure sale becomes the absolute owner of the property purchased if it is not redeemed
during the period of one year after the registration of the sale. Consolidation took place as a
matter of right since there was no redemption of the foreclosed property and the TRO
expired upon dismissal of the complaint.
UNIONBANK need not have informed private respondent that it was consolidating its title
over the property, upon the expiration of the redemption period, without the judgment
debtor having made use of his right of redemption, the ownership of the property sold
becomes consolidated in the purchaser. Notice to the mortgagors and with more reason, to
private respondents who are not even parties to the mortgage contract nor to the
extrajudicial sale is not necessary.
Ardiente vs Provincial Sherif - It is settled that personal notice to the mortgagor in extrajudicial foreclosure proceedings is not necessary, hence, not a ground to set aside the
foreclosure sale.
BPI Family Savings Bank vs Sps Veloso

The general rule in redemption is that it is not sufficient that a person ofering to redeem
manifests his desire to do so.
The statement of intention must be accompanied by an actual and simultaneous tender of
payment. This constitutes the exercise of the right to repurchase. There must be an
unequivocal tender of payment for the full amount of the repurchase price. Otherwise, the
ofer to redeem is inefectual. Bona fide redemption necessarily implies a reasonable and
valid tender of the entire repurchase price, otherwise the rule on the redemption period
fixed by law can easily be circumvented.
Consequently, in this case, the ofer by respondents on July 24, 1986 to redeem the
foreclosed properties for P1,872,935 and the subsequent consignation in court ofP1,500,000
on August 27, 1986, while made within the period of redemption, was inefective since the
amount ofered and actually consigned not only did not include the interest but was in fact
also way below the P2,782,554.66 paid by the highest bidder/purchaser of the properties
during the auction sale.
Partition
- Seperation, division and assignment of a thing held in common by those to whom it may
belong
Instances when a co-owner may not demand partition at any time when
a) Agreement (Not exceeding 10 years)
b) Prohibitted by the donor (Not exceeding 20 years)
c) Parition prohibited by law
d) When property is not subject to a physical division and to do so would render it
unserviceable for which it is inded
e) Condition has not been fulfilled
Prescription does not run in favor of a co-owner or co heir against his co-owner or co heirs as
long as there is a recognition of the co-ownership expreslly or impliedly.
Jurisdiction
RTC
Who may file an action for partition
1. Co-owner
All co-owners must be joined. The action will not lie without joinder of all the parties having
interest in the property.
Forcible Entry
1. Accion Interdictal Summary action for either forcible entry or for unlawful detained
* Must be brought within 1 year from date of actual entry (Forcible entry)
* Must be brought within 1 year from the date of last demand. (Unlawful detainer)

2. Acction publiciana a plenary action for recovery of the right to possess when the
dispossession has lasted for more than 1 year
( Ordinary Civil Proceeding)

3. Acction Reivindicatoria where by plaintif alleges ownership over a parcel of land and
seeks full recovery of its full possesion
Sec 17. Judgment
If the judgment is rendered in favor of the plaintif
a) Restitution
b) Payment of the sum justly due as arrears of rent or as reasonable compensation for the
use and occupation of the premises, attorneys fees and costs.
In favor of the defendant
a) Recover his costs if the court finds that the allegations in the complaint are true.
How to stay immediate execution of the judgment
1. Perfect an appeal
2. File a supersedeas bond to pay for the rents, damages and costs down to the time the
judgment appealed from
and
3. Deposit periodically with RTC during the pendency of the appeal, the adjudged amount of
the rent due under the contract or if there be no contract , the reasonable value of the use
and occupation of the premises.
Where to appeal
RTC
Prohibition
Is an extraordinary writ commanding a tribunal, board , officer, or person whether
exercising functions that are judicial, quasijudicial or ministerial to desist from further
proceedings when such are conducted without or in excess of its jurisdiction or with grave
abuse its discretion, there being no appeal or any other plain, speedy and adequate
remedy in the ordinary course of law.
Purpose:
To desist from further proceedings in the action.
Requisites

a) The impugned act must be that of a tribunal, corporation, board or person exercising
judicial, quasi-judicial or ministerial
b) Must have acted with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of
jurisdiction.
c) There is no appeal or any other plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the course of law.
d) Accompanied by certificate true copy of the judgment or order

Prohibition distinguished from certiorari

A writ of prohibition is directed to the tribunal itself commanding it to desist from further
proceeding with the case.
A writ of certiorari is directed to the action of the court which is soight to be annulled
Mandamus
Mandamus is an extraordinary writ commanding a tribunal to do an act required to be done:
a) When it or he unlawfully neglects the performance of an act which the law specifically
enjoins as a duty and there is no other plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the course of
law.
b) It is also available when one unlawfully excludes another from the use and enjoyment of a
right or office to which such other is entitled and there is no other plain speedy and
adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law
When not available
Not available to direct the exercise of a judgment or discretion in a particular way
Requisites
(a) The plaintif has a clear legal right to act demanded
(b) It must be the duty of the defendant to perform the act because it is mandated by law
(C ) The defendant unlawfully neglects the performance of the duty enjoined by law
d) The act to be performed is ministerial not discretionary
e) There is no appeal or any other plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course
of law
Duty is ministerial when it demands no special judgment, discretion or skill. It is one which
nothing is left to discretion and is a simple and definite duty imposed by law.
When Mandamus may lie to compel discretionary acts
1. When the act sought to be performed involves the exercise of discretion, the respondent
may only be directed by mandamus to act but not to act in one way or the other

Kant Wong Et Al vs PCGG

General rule: In the performance of an official duty or act involving discretion, the
corresponding official can only be directed by mandamus to act but not to act one way or
the other, "yet it is not accurate to say that the writ will never issue to control his discretion.
T
Exception: in cases of gross abuse of discretion, manifest injustice, or palpable excess of
authority.

Quo Warranto
An action against a person who usurps, intrudes into or unlawfully holds
public office, position or franchise

or exercises a

Commenced
2. Commenced in the name of the Republic of the Philippines
Quo warranto distinguished from mandamus
Quo warranto is brought against the holder of the office who is the person claiming the office
as against the petitioner
Mandamus is brought against the person who excludes the petitioner.
Against whom petition may be brought
1. Person Said person is one who usurps, intrudes into or unlawfully holds or exercises a
public office, position or franchise
2. Public officer- an officer who does or sufers an act which by provision of law constitutes a
ground for forfeiture of his office
3. Association one which acts a corporation within the Philippines without being legally
incorporated or without lawful authority to do so
Who may commence the petition
1. Solicitor General
2. Public Prosecutor
3. Private person
When the action must be commenced by the government
1. When directed by the president of the Philippines

2. When upon complaint

3. Govt has good reason to believe that any case specified in the rules can be established as
proof.
When private individual may commence the action
1. The person authorized to file the same is the one who claims to be entitled to a public
office or position which was usurped or unlawfully held or exercised by another person
Jurisdiction and Venue
SC, CA AND RTC
If it is brought in the Regional Trial Court it shall be that which has jurisdiction over the
territorial area where the respondent or respondents resides
However, when the action is commenced by the Solicitor General the petition may be
brought in the RTC of Manila, CA and Sc
Period for filing
An action for quo warranto by reason of ouster from a public office shall be filed within 1
year after the cause of such ouster or right of the petitioner to hold such office or position
arose.
Judgment in quo warranto proceedings
1. In case of usurpation of a public office
a) Respondent shall be ousted and excluded from office
b) The petitioner or relator as the case may be shall recover his costs
c) Such further judgment determining the respective rights in and to the public office,
position or franchise of all the parties to the action as justice requires
Rights of persons adjudged entitled to public office
1. The person adjudged to be entitled to public office may exercise the following rights after
taking his oath of office and executing the required bond:
a) Take upon himself the execution of the office
b) Immediately thereafter deman of the respondent all the books and papers in the
respondents custody or control appertaining to the office to which the judgment relates.
2. If the respondent refuses or neglects to deliver any book or paper pursuant to such
deman he may be punished.
3. May also recover damages
Period to claim damages
1. If peritioner is adjudged to be entitled to the office he may sue for damages against the
alleged usurper within 1 year from the entry of judgment establishing his right to office in
question.
Quo Warranto against corporation

1. The petition may be brought only against a defacto corporation not a dejure corporation
Defacto corporation is one which in good faith calims to be a corporation being organized
pursuant to a valid law and assumes corporate powers because it was issued ad certificate
of incorporation