Republic v. Borbon
REITERATIONFacts
1. The Antecedents: The National Power Corporation (NAPOCOR) initiated expropriation proceedings to acquire an easement of right of way over a 6,326 square meter portion of a 14,257 square meter property owned by the heirs of Saturnino Q. Borbon in Batangas City. NAPOCOR entered the property in February 1993 to construct transmission lines for its power project, allegedly without prior negotiation or consent, and without payment for destroyed fruit trees. The heirs contended that the transmission lines rendered the entire property inutile and sought compensation for the whole property, valuing it as industrial land. 2. Procedural History: NAPOCOR filed its complaint for expropriation on May 26, 1995. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) appointed commissioners who submitted conflicting reports on the property's classification and value. The RTC, adopting the joint report, ruled that the property was industrial land at the time of taking and ordered NAPOCOR to pay just compensation for the entire 14,257 square meters at P550.00 per square meter, plus legal interest. NAPOCOR appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA), which affirmed the RTC's decision but modified it to award compensation only for the occupied 6,326 square meters at the same rate. 3. The Petition: While the case was pending appeal before the Supreme Court, NAPOCOR filed a Manifestation and Motion to Discontinue Expropriation Proceedings. NAPOCOR argued that the transmission lines on the property had been retired, rendering the expropriation no longer necessary for public purpose, and thus the proceedings should be dismissed pursuant to Section 4, Rule 67 of the Rules of Court. NAPOCOR prayed for the discontinuance of the proceedings under just and equitable terms, suggesting a remand for determination of compensation for damages suffered by the respondents during the period of occupation.
Issue(s)
Whether the expropriation proceedings should be discontinued or dismissed pending appeal, considering the cessation of public use. Whether NAPOCOR is liable for damages to the respondents for its entry and occupation of the property, even if the expropriation proceedings are discontinued.
Ruling
The Court granted NAPOCOR's motion to discontinue the expropriation proceedings due to the cessation of public use. However, it remanded the case to the Regional Trial Court for further proceedings to determine and award actual or compensatory damages to the respondents for the disturbance of their property rights from the time of NAPOCOR's entry until the restoration of possession, considering the destruction of fruit trees and the impairment of the property's use.
Ratio Decidendi
On the discontinuance of expropriation proceedings: The Court held that the discontinuance of expropriation proceedings at the instance of the expropriator is proper when the property is no longer needed for public use. The power of eminent domain is conditioned on the existence of a public purpose and the payment of just compensation. When the public purpose ceases to exist, the expropriation proceedings must fail. The Court cited Metropolitan Water District v. De los Angeles to emphasize that it is the duty of the court, at any stage of the proceedings, to dismiss the action if it appears that the expropriation is no longer for public use. In this case, NAPOCOR's admission and supporting documents established that the transmission lines were retired, thus stripping the expropriation of its public use element. The Court granted the motion to discontinue, but subject to just and equitable terms. On the liability for damages: The Court ruled that even though the expropriation proceedings were discontinued, NAPOCOR must compensate the respondents for the disturbance of their property rights. NAPOCOR entered the property without consent and without paying just compensation or making the required deposit. The destruction of fruit trees and the division of the property, rendering it inutile, constituted a "taking" in the constitutional sense, even without formal expropriation. The Court clarified that in such cases, the owner is deprived of the ordinary and beneficial use of their property or its value is materially impaired. Therefore, the discontinuance of the proceedings converts the case into an action for damages, requiring NAPOCOR to pay actual or compensatory damages for the period of dispossession and the harm caused.
Main Doctrine
An expropriator who has taken possession of property is obliged to pay reasonable compensation for the period of possession, even if expropriation proceedings are discontinued due to the cessation of public purpose. The discontinuance converts the case into an action for damages.