Case Digest (G.R. No. L-26400)
Facts:
The case involves Victoria Amigable as the plaintiff-appellant and Nicolas Cuenca, in his capacity as Commissioner of Public Highways, along with the Republic of the Philippines as defendants-appellees. The events leading to this case began with Amigable being the registered owner of Lot No. 639 of the Banilad Estate in Cebu City, as evidenced by Transfer Certificate of Title No. T-18060, which replaced an earlier title issued on February 1, 1924. Notably, there was no annotation indicating any rights or interests of the government on the title. The government, without prior expropriation or negotiated sale, utilized a portion of Amigable's property, measuring 6,167 square meters, for the construction of Mango and Gorordo Avenues. Although these avenues existed in a dilapidated state as early as 1921, formal construction began in 1925.
On March 27, 1958, Amigable's counsel wrote to the President of the Philippines requesting compensation for the land appropriated b...
Case Digest (G.R. No. L-26400)
Facts:
Ownership of the Property:
- Victoria Amigable is the registered owner of Lot No. 639 of the Banilad Estate in Cebu City, as evidenced by Transfer Certificate of Title No. T-18060.
- The title superseded Transfer Certificate of Title No. RT-3272 (T-3435) issued to her on February 1, 1924.
- No annotation in favor of the government appears on the title.
Government Use of the Property:
- Without prior expropriation or negotiated sale, the government used a portion of the lot (6,167 square meters) for the construction of Mango and Gorordo Avenues.
- The avenues were already in existence in 1921 but were in poor condition. The formal construction began in 1925.
Demand for Payment:
- On March 27, 1958, Amigable’s counsel wrote to the President of the Philippines requesting payment for the portion of her lot used by the government.
- The claim was forwarded to the Auditor General, who disallowed it on December 9, 1958.
Filing of the Complaint:
- On February 6, 1959, Amigable filed a complaint in the Court of First Instance of Cebu against the Republic of the Philippines and Nicolas Cuenca, Commissioner of Public Highways.
- She sought recovery of ownership and possession of the 6,167 square meters of land, as well as compensatory damages (P50,000), moral damages (P25,000), attorney’s fees (P5,000), and costs of the suit.
Defendants’ Defenses:
- The defendants argued that:
- The action was premature as the claim was not first filed with the Auditor General.
- The right of action had prescribed.
- The government had not consented to be sued for moral damages, attorney’s fees, and costs.
- The province of Cebu, not the defendants, appropriated the land.
- The defendants argued that:
Trial Court Decision:
- The trial court dismissed the complaint, holding that:
- It lacked jurisdiction over the claim for recovery of possession and ownership due to governmental immunity.
- It had no jurisdiction over the claim for compensatory damages as it was a money claim against the government.
- The claim for moral damages had prescribed, and the government had not consented to be sued.
- The trial court dismissed the complaint, holding that:
Appeal:
- Amigable appealed to the Court of Appeals, which certified the case to the Supreme Court as it involved purely legal issues.
Issue:
- (Unlock)
Ruling:
- (Unlock)
Ratio:
Government Liability for Taking Private Property:
- When the government takes private property for public use without expropriation or negotiated sale, the owner is entitled to compensation. The government’s failure to follow legal procedures does not exempt it from liability.
Governmental Immunity from Suit:
- The doctrine of governmental immunity cannot be invoked to deny a citizen’s right to just compensation. The government implicitly submits to the jurisdiction of the court when it takes property for public use.
Basis for Compensation:
- Compensation should be based on the value of the property at the time of taking. Legal interest is also due from the time of taking until payment is made.
Attorney’s Fees:
- The government is liable for attorney’s fees, as the landowner was forced to litigate to assert her rights.