100%(1)1 out of 1 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 71 - 72 out of 199 pages.
It is settled that the determination of just compensation is a judicial function. The Department ofAgrarian Reforms's land valuation is only preliminary and is not, by any means, final and conclusiveupon the landowner or any other interested party. LAND BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES v. GLENN Y.ESCANDOR, et.al., G.R. No. 171685, October 11, 2010It is a settled rule that the nature and character of the land at the time of its taking is the principalcriterion for determining how much just compensation should be given to the landowner.MOISESTINIO, JR. AND FRANCIS TINIO v. NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION, G.R. No. 160923,January 24, 2011Just compensation determined in accordance with R.A. 6657, and not P.D. 27 or E.O. 228, isespecially imperative considering that just compensation should be the full and fair equivalent ofthe property taken from its owner by the expropriator, the equivalent being real, substantial, full,and ample. LAND BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES v. MAGIN FERRER, ATTY. RAFAEL VILLAROSA,G.R. No. 172230, February 2, 2011The Land Bank of the Philippines is not merely a nominal party in the determination of justcompensation but an indispensable participant in such proceedings. As such, LBP possessed thelegal personality to institute a petition for determination of just compensation. DAVAO FRUITSCORPORATION v. LAND BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES, G.R. No. 181566, March 09, 2011The proper determination of the same is a matter of transcendental importance. The determinationof just compensation goes beyond the private interests involved; it involves a matter of publicinterest — the proper application of a basic constitutionally-guaranteed right, namely, the right of alandowner to receive just compensation when the government exercises the power of eminentdomain in its agrarian reform program. APO FRUITS CORPORATION AND HIJO PLANTATION, INC.v. LAND BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES, G. R. No. 164195, April 05, 2011The fair market value of the lot should be determined at the time when the parties signed thecompromise agreement and the same was approved because this is tantamount to EPZA impliedlyagreeing to paying the market value in 1993. EXPORT PROCESSING ZONE AUTHORITY v. ESTATEOF SALUD JIMENEZ, et al., G.R. No. 188995, August 24, 2011The Court has already categorically declared in that if the issue of just compensation is not settledprior to the passage of the CARL, it should be computed in accordance with the said law, althoughthe property was acquired under P.D. 27. LAND BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES v. HEIRS OF JESUS S.YUJUICO, et al., G.R. No. 18471, March 21, 2012In the payment of just compensation, the payment of interest shall be made until full payment of theamount adjudged as just compensation for the land. LAND BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES v.PERFECTO OBIAS, et al, G.R. No. 184406, March 14, 2012Just compensation for private agricultural lands acquired by the government under the auspices ofP.D. 27 in relation to E.O. 228 should be computed in accordance with the method set forth underR.A. 6657. DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM, REPRESENTED BY OIC-SECRETARY JOSEMARI B. PONCE, NOW BY SECRETARY NASSER C. PANGANDAMAN v. HEIRS OF ANGEL T.