Title
Benguet Consolidated, Inc. vs. Republic
Case
G.R. No. 71412
Decision Date
Aug 15, 1986
The Republic expropriated Benguet Consolidated’s mining claims for the Philippine Military Academy, with compensation fixed at P7,532.46 plus interest. The Supreme Court upheld the condemnation as lawful and the compensation as just.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 71412)

Background of the Case

In 1958, the Republic filed a complaint for expropriation before the Court of First Instance of Benguet and Baguio, asserting the need for land occupied by the petitioner since May 1950. The Republic claimed it had made substantial investments in the property, amounting to over P3,000,000. It determined that the fair market value of the properties affected was P532,371.40, according to an appraisal committee.

Petitioner’s Position

Benguet Consolidated, Inc. opposed the expropriation, arguing that the Republic had neither occupied nor made improvements on the claimant’s mining areas. The petitioner maintained that the rugged terrain of their claims made the area unsuitable for military use. They further contended that the authority to expropriate pertained to privately owned lands and claimed the process was unlawful since their mineral claims were private property.

Court's Initial Findings and Motions

On December 28, 1955, the trial court recognized the Republic’s right to expropriate the minerals located on the petitioner's claims, which prompted the petitioner to file various motions, asserting their challenge to the order of condemnation. The trial court clarified in 1960 that Benguet had not waived its right to contest the condemnation.

Proceedings of the Board of Commissioners

A Board of Commissioners was formed to assess just compensation. After several hearings, the Board recommended P43,703.37 as compensation for all defendants. However, after further proceedings, the trial court's decision on July 5, 1973, failed to explicitly include the compensation to be awarded to the petitioner, prompting more motions for clarification by Benguet Consolidated.

Appellate Court Ruling

The Intermediate Appellate Court reversed the trial court's decision on June 28, 1985, stating the condemnation of Benguet's mining claims was justifiable under the powers of eminent domain. The appellate court also rejected the compensation awarded by the trial court and established P7,532.46 as the just compensation for Benguet's claims, based on their classification and assessed values.

Petitioner’s Justification and Legal Arguments

The petitioner argued against the appellate decision asserting that the compensation was inadequate, labeling it absurdly low. They contended that their mineral claims were perfected since 1933, which segregated them from the public domain. The case referenced established precedents regarding the rights associated with mining claims and the government’s obligation to provide just compensation upon expropriation.

Court’s Reiteration of Eminent Domain Principles

The court emphasized that the power of eminent domain encompasses all forms of property, including mineral rights, and acknowledged that the government is required to provide just compensation when exercising this power. The court reaffirmed that the petitioner’s claims still fell within the realm of private property despite their prior classification and may be publicly condemned for the determined public use.

Procedural Concerns Addressed

The case addressed procedural arguments regarding whether the court could issue an order of condemnation prior to resolving the motion to dismiss. While the petitioner claimed this was improper, the court noted that the proceedings had been influenced by negotiations aimed at a settlement and ultimately deemed the petitioner had not sufficiently protected their rights.

Just Compensation Assessment

Regarding the recommended compensation, the appellate court upheld the assessment made by the Board of Commissioners, which also included a comprehensive evaluation of the mi

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.