Case Summary (G.R. No. 233988)
Registration and Transfer of Titles
After exclusion, the heirs of Emiliano Cruz registered and received Torrens titles for the lots. They sold them to Spouses Nocom and Spouses Sy Ka Kieng and Rosa Chan, prompting issuance of Transfer Certificates of Title Nos. 74961 and 74962.
Recovery of Possession and Accounting Case
In 2009, Spouses Nocom sued MIAA for recovery of possession and accounting (RTC No. 09-0276), alleging continued occupation without compensation of Lots 2817-B, 2818-B, and 2819-B. MIAA countered that sovereign immunity barred suit and the exclusion motion was void.
RTC and CA Decisions on Rentals and Interest
RTC Parañaque (2015) dismissed recovery but ordered MIAA to pay ₱41.2 million in rentals (1995–2014) at 12% interest and monthly rentals from 2015. CA (2017) affirmed with modifications: total rentals of ₱37.99 million (1995–2013) at 12% interest; ₱3.25 million (2013–2014) at 6%; and monthly rentals from 2015 at 6%.
Issues on Sovereign Immunity and Res Judicata
MIAA argued sovereign immunity and res judicata from the 1991 expropriation judgment preclude respondents’ suit. The Supreme Court held that sovereign immunity is inapplicable when government takes private property for public use without just compensation and deprives owners of remedies. Res judicata fails due to distinct causes of action between expropriation suit and recovery case, and because petitioner itself excluded the lots from expropriation.
Nature of MIAA’s Function: Eminent Domain vs Proprietary Act
The Court rejected MIAA’s characterization of its occupation as a proprietary (jure gestionis) act. As airport operator performing essential public services, MIAA’s use of the lots constituted an exercise of eminent domain (jure imperii), not a commercial lease, and no valid lease contract existed with respondents.
Deprivation of Property and Appropriate Remedy
MIAA’s continued occupation without appropriate expropriation proceedings and without compensation ousted respondents from beneficial enjoyment. Recovery of possession was impractical; the proper remedy is just compensation for taking, rather than rental payments under a lease.
Determination of Just Compensation and Present Value
Just compensation is the fair market value at time of taking (1995) plus interest
Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 233988)
Factual Background
- Subject Lots Nos. 2817, 2818 and 2819 in Ibayo, Parañaque originally owned by Emiliano Cruz.
- January 25, 1982: MIAA filed expropriation (Civ. Case No. 9712-P) for NAIA expansion, seeking additional maintenance and aircraft parking space.
- January 24, 1983: Pasay RTC issued Writ of Possession over all lots in complaint, including Subject Lots.
- June 21, 1991: Makati RTC confirmed expropriation, awarded just compensation at ₱552.00/sq.m. plus 6% interest from 1983 until full payment.
Subsequent Exclusion and Title Registration
- MIAA subdivided each lot into “A” and “B” portions; only Lot 2817-B fell within 150-meter airport clearance.
- While appeal pending, MIAA moved to exclude Lots 2817-A, 2818-A, 2818-B, 2819-A and 2819-B; granted by CA on July 21, 1992.
- Heirs of Cruz filed land registration applications; OCT Nos. 239 (Lots 2817 & 2818) and 246 (Lot 2819) issued in their favor—no appeal by the Republic.
Transfer to Respondents
- Heirs sold Subject Lots to Spouses Nocom and Spouses Kieng & Chan.
- OCT Nos. 239 and 246 cancelled; TCT No. 74961 (Lots 2817 & 2818) and No. 74962 (Lot 2819) issued to Spouses Nocom, Kieng & Chan.
- December 27, 1993: CA affirmed RTC’s just-compensation award; final January 29, 1994.
Civil Actions in Parañaque RTC
- August 12, 2009: Spouses Nocom filed Civ. Case No. 09-0276 for recovery of possession and accounting—claimed MIAA never paid compensation and occupied Lots 2817-B, 2818-B, 2819-B.
- MIAA refused to pay, asserted exclusion motion void, and filed Civ. Case No. 10-0064 for annulment of respondents’ titles.
- Cases consolidated by motion of Spouses Nocom.
Regional Trial Court Decision
- May 11, 2015 RTC Decision:
• Denied recovery of po