Title
Supreme Court
Land Bank of the Philippines vs. Garcia
Case
G.R. No. 208865
Decision Date
Sep 28, 2020
Garcia contested DAR's low land valuation under CARP. Courts ruled in his favor, using updated data and considering strategic location, affirming judicial discretion in just compensation.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 208865)

Factual Background

In November 1998, Garcia received a memorandum from the Department of Agrarian Reform informing him of the acquisition of his land for distribution to beneficiaries of the agrarian reform program. The government offered Garcia a compensation price of approximately PHP 5.58 per square meter, totaling PHP 647,508.49 for the land. Garcia rejected this offer, asserting that the land should be valued higher based on its location and surrounding market prices. Subsequently, a preliminary determination of just compensation was conducted, but the initial valuation was upheld.

Jurisdiction and Petitions

Garcia, dissatisfied with the outcome, filed a petition for the determination of just compensation against the Department of Agrarian Reform, Land Bank, and certain farmer-beneficiaries before the Regional Trial Court of Iloilo City. The parties agreed on several factual stipulations, including that Garcia previously sold an adjacent lot for PHP 50.00 per square meter and that the subject land’s location significantly enhanced its market value.

Trial Court Decision

The trial court, acting as a Special Agrarian Court, ruled in favor of Garcia and concluded that just compensation should be set at PHP 2,196,367.40. The court determined that Land Bank's appraisal was outdated, relying on sales data from 1987 and 1988 rather than utilizing more recent sales surrounding the area from 1997. The valuation computed by the court considered the strategic location, improvements, and better comparability of Garcia's evidence over the data provided by Land Bank.

Land Bank's Appeal

Land Bank sought reconsideration of the trial court's decision but was unsuccessful. In its appeal to the Court of Appeals, it contended that the trial court erred by considering non-agricultural land values and other subjective factors such as strategic location, which it argued were not permissible under Section 17 of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law.

Court of Appeals Ruling

The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision while determining that Land Bank's use of outdated appraisals did not reflect the market realities as of the date of the government’s notice of coverage. The appellate court characterized the values utilized by Garcia to be closer to the relevant period and accurately reflective of market conditions, stressing that the adjacent properties were still classified as agricultural at the time of the transactions.

Procedural Matters

The appellate ruling indicated that Land Bank’s motion for reconsideration was filed late, which rendered the trial court's decision final and executory. Consequently, the appellate court examined the merits of the claim despite procedural infractions noted by Garcia.

Legal Framework

The key legal consideration revolves around the constitutionality and definitions within the context of eminent domain under Article III, Section 9 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution and the

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.