Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 193 views

    22 - Province of Camarines Sur Vs CA

    Uploaded by

    Patatas Sayote
    The Province of Camarines Sur passed a resolution authorizing the purchase or expropriation of private land to establish a pilot farm for crops and a housing project for employees. The landowners challenged the expropriation. The Court of Appeals suspended the expropriation until the province obtained approval from the Department of Agrarian Reform. The issue was whether the expropriation was for a public purpose. The Supreme Court ruled the expropriation was valid and for a public purpose, as the pilot farm and housing project would benefit the general public welfare of the province.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    22 - Province of Camarines Sur Vs CA

    Uploaded by

    Patatas Sayote
    193 views1 page
    The Province of Camarines Sur passed a resolution authorizing the purchase or expropriation of private land to establish a pilot farm for crops and a housing project for employees. The landowners challenged the expropriation. The Court of Appeals suspended the expropriation until the province obtained approval from the Department of Agrarian Reform. The issue was whether the expropriation was for a public purpose. The Supreme Court ruled the expropriation was valid and for a public purpose, as the pilot farm and housing project would benefit the general public welfare of the province.

    Original Title

    22 - Province of Camarines Sur vs CA

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Province of Camarines Sur passed a resolution authorizing the purchase or expropriation of private land to establish a pilot farm for crops and a housing project for employees. The landowners challenged the expropriation. The Court of Appeals suspended the expropriation until the province obtained approval from the Department of Agrarian Reform. The issue was whether the expropriation was for a public purpose. The Supreme Court ruled the expropriation was valid and for a public purpose, as the pilot farm and housing project would benefit the general public welfare of the province.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    193 views1 page

    22 - Province of Camarines Sur Vs CA

    Uploaded by

    Patatas Sayote
    The Province of Camarines Sur passed a resolution authorizing the purchase or expropriation of private land to establish a pilot farm for crops and a housing project for employees. The landowners challenged the expropriation. The Court of Appeals suspended the expropriation until the province obtained approval from the Department of Agrarian Reform. The issue was whether the expropriation was for a public purpose. The Supreme Court ruled the expropriation was valid and for a public purpose, as the pilot farm and housing project would benefit the general public welfare of the province.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    (22) Province of Camarines Sur vs.

    CA
    222 SCRA 170 (1993)

    FACTS:
    The Sangguniang Panlalawigan of the Province of Camarines Sur passed a
    resolution authorizing the Provincial Governor to purchase or expropriate property
    contiguous to the provincial capitol site in order to establish a pilot farm for non-food and
    non-traditional agricultural crops and a housing project for provincial government
    employees. The petitioner filed a motion for the issuance of writ of possession. The San
    Joaquins moved to dismiss the complaints on the ground of inadequacy of the price
    offered for their property. The trial court denied the motion and authorized the petitioner
    to take possession of the property upon the deposit with the Clerk of Court. The trial
    court issued a writ of possession. The San Joaquins filed a motion for relief from the
    order and a motion to admit an amended motion to dismiss. Both motions were denied.
    The San Joaquins petitioned before the Court of Appeals. The petitioner, in its
    answer, claimed that it has the authority to initiate the expropriation proceedings under
    Sections 4 and 7 of Local Government Code (B.P. Blg. 337) and that the expropriations
    are for a public purpose. The Solicitor General stated there was no need for the
    approval by the Office of the President of the exercise by the petitioner of the right of
    eminent domain. However, the Solicitor General expressed the view that the petitioner
    must first secure the approval of the Department of Agrarian Reform of the plan to
    expropriate the lands of petitioners for use as a housing project.
    The Court of Appeals set aside the order of the trial court, allowing the Province
    of Camarines Sur to take possession of private respondents’ lands and the order
    denying the admission of the amended motion to dismiss. It also ordered the trial court
    to suspend the expropriation proceedings until after the Petitioner shall have submitted
    the requisite approval of the Department of Agrarian Reform to convert the classification
    of the property of the private respondents from agricultural to non-agricultural land.

    ISSUE:
    Whether the resolution is valid, i.e. the expropriation is for a public purpose or
    public use.

    RULING:
    Yes, the expropriation is for a public purpose, hence the resolution is authorized
    and valid. There has been a shift from the literal to a broader interpretation of “public
    purpose” or “public use” for which the power of eminent domain may be exercised.
    Under the new concept, “public use” means public advantage, convenience or benefit,
    which tends to contribute to the general welfare and the prosperity of the whole
    community, like a resort complex for tourists or housing project. The expropriation of the
    property authorized by the questioned resolution is for a public purpose. The
    establishment of a pilot development center would inure to the direct benefit and
    advantage of the people of the Province of Camarines Sur. Once operational, the center
    would make available to the community invaluable information and technology on
    agriculture, fishery and the cottage industry. Ultimately, the livelihood of the farmers,
    fishermen and craftsmen would be enhanced. The housing project also satisfies the
    public purpose requirement of the Constitution.

    You might also like