Eminent Domain Flashcards
Section 9, Article III of the Constitution provides, “Private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation.” What does the Court say about this provision?
Section 9, Article III is a constitutional grant.
Section 9, Article III exists only to protect the individual’s right to property.
Section 9, Article III exists only to protect the interests of the expropriating authority.
Section 9, Article III merely imposes a limitation on the government’s exercise of the power of eminent domain and provides a measure of protection to the individual’s right to property.
Section 9, Article III merely imposes a limitation on the government’s exercise of the power of eminent domain and provides a measure of protection to the individual’s right to property.
An acquisition of an easement of right of way ________.
Is neither within the contemplation of the power of eminent domain nor police power; an easement of right of way is a sui generis category by itself
Falls within the contemplation of police power because an easement of right of way merely regulates or restricts, to an extent, the use of the property
Falls within the contemplation of the power of eminent domain; real property, through expropriation, may be subjected to an easement of right of way
Is none of the choices
Falls within the contemplation of the power of eminent domain; real property, through expropriation, may be subjected to an easement of right of way
Who may exercise the power of eminent domain?
Congress only
Congress and President only
Congress, President, administrative bodies, and LGUs only
Congress, President, and administrative bodies only
Congress, President, administrative bodies, LGUs, and private enterprises performing public services
Congress, President, administrative bodies, LGUs, and private enterprises performing public services
Which of the following is true about the local government units vis-à-vis the power of eminent domain?
Local government units’ power of eminent domain is only as broad as the legislative branch of the government wants it to be.
Local government units have no power of eminent domain.
Local government units have an inherent power of eminent domain just like the legislative branch of the government.
Local government units’ power of eminent domain is equal to the plenary power vested in the legislative branch of the government.
Local government units’ power of eminent domain is only as broad as the legislative branch of the government wants it to be.
The exercise of the right of eminent domain is strictly construed against the ________.
Property owner
Expropriating power
None of the choices
Both the property owner and expropriating owner
Expropriating power
Does the exercise of the power of eminent domain result in the taking of title to the expropriated property?
It does not always result in such taking.
No, it never results in such taking.
Yes, it always results in such taking.
None of the choices.
It does not always result in such taking.
In Republic v. Castellvi, the Court enumerated the requisites for a valid taking. Which of the following is not a requisite enumerated by the Court in this case?
Entry must be under warrant or color of authority.
The property owner must be given three (3) months to decide whether or not to consent to the expropriation.
Entry must be for more than a momentary period.
The utilization of the property must be in such a way as to oust the owner and deprive him of beneficial enjoyment of the property.
Expropriator must enter a private property.
Property must be devoted to public use or otherwise informally appropriated or injuriously affected.
The property owner must be given three (3) months to decide whether or not to consent to the expropriation.
All of the following statements are correct about the concept of “public use” in the exercise of the power of eminent domain, except ________.
“Public use” is the general concept of meeting public need or public exigency.
The notion that “public use” is strictly limited to clear cases of use by the public has been abandoned.
The term “public use” is synonymous with public interest, public benefit, public welfare, and public convenience.
“Public use” is confined only to actual use by the public in its traditional sense.
“Public use” is confined only to actual use by the public in its traditional sense.
In Municipality of Parañaque v. V.M. Realty Corporation, the Court declared that there was lack of compliance with the Local Government Code. Why did the Court rule this way?
Just compensation was not fully paid to the property owner.
The Municipal Mayor filed a complaint for eminent domain on the basis of an Ordinance passed by the Sangguniang Bayan, but the law requires a Resolution.
The Municipal Mayor is not allowed by law to exercise the power of eminent domain.
The Municipal Mayor filed a complaint for eminent domain on the basis of a Resolution passed by the Sangguniang Bayan, but the law requires an Ordinance.
The Municipal Mayor filed a complaint for eminent domain on the basis of a Resolution passed by the Sangguniang Bayan, but the law requires an Ordinance.
If only a part or portion of a certain property is expropriated, ________.
Just compensation is comprised of the market value of the portion expropriated plus consequential damages to the remaining part of the property, if any.
Just compensation need not be paid to the property owner because only a portion is expropriated.
Just compensation is only limited to the market value of the portion expropriated.
Just compensation is comprised of one-half of the market value of the whole property.
Just compensation is comprised of the market value of the portion expropriated plus consequential damages to the remaining part of the property, if any.
The prerogative of ascertaining what constitutes just compensation belongs to _____.
The property owner
The assessor
The expropriating authority
The court
The court
_______ are to be appointed by the court for the determination of just compensation.
Commissioners
Consultants
Jurors
Assessors
Commissioners,
What is the form of compensation in the exercise of eminent domain?
Compensation is to be paid in money and no other; but in agrarian reform, payment is allowed to made partly in bonds.
Compensation may be paid in money or in kind, at the option of the property owner.
Compensation may be paid in money or in kind, at the option of the expropriator.
Compensation is to be paid in money and no other in any and all cases of expropriation, including cases under agrarian reform.
Compensation is to be paid in money and no other; but in agrarian reform, payment is allowed to made partly in bonds.
Can the property owner reacquire or repurchase the property expropriated?
Yes; such right to reacquire or repurchase the property is available to the property owner in any case and at all times.
No; the property owner can never reacquire or repurchase the property because title to the property is permanently transferred to the expropriating authority and can no longer be reversed.
Yes; but this is depending on the character of the title acquired by the expropriator. For example, if the expropriation is accompanied by a condition that the owner can reacquire or repurchase if the purpose for which the property is expropriated has ceased, then the owner can do so.
No; the property owner can never reacquire or repurchase the property expropriated.
Yes; but this is depending on the character of the title acquired by the expropriator. For example, if the expropriation is accompanied by a condition that the owner can reacquire or repurchase if the purpose for which the property is expropriated has ceased, then the owner can do so.
What is the effect if there is nonpayment of just compensation in expropriation?
Nonpayment of just compensation in an expropriation proceeding does not entitle the property owner to recover the expropriated property but can only demand the payment of the property’s fair market value.
As a general rule, nonpayment of just compensation in an expropriation proceeding does not entitle the property owner to recover the expropriated property but can only demand the payment of the property’s fair market value. As an exception, if the government fails to pay just compensation within 5 years from the finality of judgment, the owner can recover possession.
The property owner can recover the property in any and all cases of nonpayment of just compensation.
There is no such effect if just compensation is not paid because the power of eminent domain is always superior.
As a general rule, nonpayment of just compensation in an expropriation proceeding does not entitle the property owner to recover the expropriated property but can only demand the payment of the property’s fair market value. As an exception, if the government fails to pay just compensation within 5 years from the finality of judgment, the owner can recover possession.
