Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Republic v. Kabacan, Inc. Et. Al., G.R. No. 185124, January 25, 2012 Facts
Republic v. Kabacan, Inc. Et. Al., G.R. No. 185124, January 25, 2012 Facts
FACTS:
The National Irrigation Administration (NIA) filed with the RTC a complaint for
expropriation of land. RTC adopted the findings of the committee despite the objections
of NIA to the inclusion of the value of the excavated soil in the computation of the value
of the land. The RTC ruled for expropriation. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial
court’s decision with modification.
Respondents argued that NIA had no authority to expropriate portions of their land,
because it was not a sovereign political entity; that it was not necessary to expropriate
their properties; that NIAs valuation of their expropriated properties was inaccurate; and
that NIA never negotiated with the landowners before taking their properties for the
project, causing permanent and irreparable damages to their properties.
ISSUE:
Whether or not the CA erred in affirming the RTC's finding of just compensation of the
land and the improvements thereon based on the report of the commissioners.
RULING:
The Court also upheld the CA ruling, which deleted the inclusion of the value of the
excavated soil in the payment for just compensation. There is no legal basis to separate
the value of the excavated soil from that of the expropriated properties, contrary to what
the trial court did.
In the context of expropriation proceedings, the soil has no value separate from that of
the expropriated land. Just compensation ordinarily refers to the value of the land to
compensate for what the owner actually loses. Such value could only be that which
prevailed at the time of the taking.