Title
Republic vs. Spouses Nocom
Case
G.R. No. 233988
Decision Date
Nov 15, 2021
MIAA expropriated lots for NAIA expansion, excluding some post-judgment. Owners sought recovery and rentals; SC ruled MIAA liable for just compensation, not rentals, due to improper expropriation.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 233988)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Expropriation Proceedings
    • On January 25, 1982, the Manila International Airport Authority (MIAA) filed Civil Case No. 9712-P to expropriate Lots 2817, 2818, and 2819 in Ibayo, Parañaque, for NAIA expansion.
    • January 24, 1983 – RTC Pasay issued Writ of Possession; 1991 – case transferred to RTC Makati; June 21, 1991 – expropriation confirmed, just compensation fixed at ₱552.00/sqm plus 6% interest from 1983 until full payment.
  • Exclusion, Titling, and Sale
    • While appeal was pending, MIAA subdivided each lot into “-A” and “-B” parcels; moved to exclude all except Lot 2817-B; CA granted motion on July 21, 1992.
    • Heirs of Emiliano Cruz obtained Torrens registration (OCT 239, 246), sold to Spouses Nocom and Spouses Sy–Chan; TCT 74961 and 74962 were issued.
  • Recovery and Annulment Actions
    • August 12, 2009 – Spouses Nocom filed Civil Case No. 09-0276 (Recovery of Possession and Accounting) claiming non-payment of compensation and seeking rentals for Lots 2817-B, 2818-B, and 2819-B.
    • MIAA filed Civil Case No. 10-0064 (Annulment of Titles); both cases consolidated. May 11, 2015 – RTC Parañaque denied recovery of possession but awarded ₱41.24 M rentals + 12% interest; dismissed MIAA’s annulment suit. August 7, 2015 – partial reconsideration excluded Lot 2817-B from owners’ properties.
  • Court of Appeals and Supreme Court Proceedings
    • April 19, 2017 – CA affirmed with modification: total rentals reduced to ₱41.24 M broken into periods, interest rates of 12% and 6%, plus monthly rentals from January 2015.
    • MIAA petitioned the Supreme Court, arguing lack of jurisdiction (sovereign immunity, res judicata), propriety of rental award, and indefeasibility of titles.

Issues:

  • Did the CA commit grave abuse in allowing the civil complaint despite MIAA’s claim of sovereign immunity and res judicata?
  • Was MIAA’s use of the lots an exercise of proprietary (jure gestionis) function entitling it to treat the occupation as a lease?
  • Are the respondents entitled to rental payments and interest, or must MIAA pay just compensation with appropriate interest?

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.