Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 140 views

    Amigable Vs Cuenca

    Uploaded by

    aquino_joh
    The plaintiff filed a complaint against the government and its commissioner for the recovery of ownership and possession of part of her land that was used by the government to construct roads without expropriation or negotiated sale. The trial court dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction, stating the government cannot be sued without its consent. The Supreme Court ruled that (1) the plaintiff can properly sue the government in this case without violating governmental immunity; (2) governmental immunity cannot be used to perpetrate injustice against a citizen; and (3) by taking property for public use subject to just compensation, the government submits to court jurisdiction in such matters. Therefore, the plaintiff remains the registered owner of the entire lot and can file a case to recover possession

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    Amigable Vs Cuenca

    Uploaded by

    aquino_joh
    140 views1 page
    The plaintiff filed a complaint against the government and its commissioner for the recovery of ownership and possession of part of her land that was used by the government to construct roads without expropriation or negotiated sale. The trial court dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction, stating the government cannot be sued without its consent. The Supreme Court ruled that (1) the plaintiff can properly sue the government in this case without violating governmental immunity; (2) governmental immunity cannot be used to perpetrate injustice against a citizen; and (3) by taking property for public use subject to just compensation, the government submits to court jurisdiction in such matters. Therefore, the plaintiff remains the registered owner of the entire lot and can file a case to recover possession

    Original Description:

    Amigable vs Cuenca

    Original Title

    Amigable vs Cuenca

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The plaintiff filed a complaint against the government and its commissioner for the recovery of ownership and possession of part of her land that was used by the government to construct roads without expropriation or negotiated sale. The trial court dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction, stating the government cannot be sued without its consent. The Supreme Court ruled that (1) the plaintiff can properly sue the government in this case without violating governmental immunity; (2) governmental immunity cannot be used to perpetrate injustice against a citizen; and (3) by taking property for public use subject to just compensation, the government submits to court jurisdiction in such matters. Therefore, the plaintiff remains the registered owner of the entire lot and can file a case to recover possession

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    140 views1 page

    Amigable Vs Cuenca

    Uploaded by

    aquino_joh
    The plaintiff filed a complaint against the government and its commissioner for the recovery of ownership and possession of part of her land that was used by the government to construct roads without expropriation or negotiated sale. The trial court dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction, stating the government cannot be sued without its consent. The Supreme Court ruled that (1) the plaintiff can properly sue the government in this case without violating governmental immunity; (2) governmental immunity cannot be used to perpetrate injustice against a citizen; and (3) by taking property for public use subject to just compensation, the government submits to court jurisdiction in such matters. Therefore, the plaintiff remains the registered owner of the entire lot and can file a case to recover possession

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Amigable vs Cuenca

    GR L-26400 February 29, 1972


    Facts
    This is an appeal from the e!ision of the "ourt of First #nstan!e of "ebu in its "i$il "ase %o& R-'977,
    ismissin( the plaintiff)s !omplaint
    *i!toria +mi(able, the appellant herein, is the re(istere o,ner of Lot %o& 6-9 of the .anila /state in "ebu
    "ity& %o annotation in fa$or of the (o$ernment of any ri(ht or interest in the property appears at the ba!0 of
    the !ertifi!ate&
    1ithout prior e2propriation or ne(otiate sale, the (o$ernment use a portion of sai lot, ,ith an area of
    6,167 s3uare meters, for the !onstru!tion of the 4an(o an Gororo +$enues&
    +mi(able5s !ounsel ,rote to the 6resient an re3uestin( payment of the portion of her lot ,hi!h ha been
    appropriate by the (o$ernment ,hi!h ,as isallo,e by the +uitor General
    +mi(able file a !omplaint a(ainst the Republi! of the 6hilippines an %i!olas "uen!a, in his !apa!ity as
    "ommissioner of 6ubli! 7i(h,ays, for the re!o$ery of o,nership an possession the lan plus ama(es
    The trial !ourt renere its e!ision holin( that it ha no 8urisi!tion o$er the plaintiff)s !ause of a!tion for
    the re!o$ery of possession an o,nership of the portion of her lot in 3uestion on the (roun that the
    (o$ernment !annot be sue ,ithout its !onsent&
    +!!orin(ly, the !omplaint ,as ismisse& 9nable to se!ure a re!onsieration, the plaintiff appeale to the
    "ourt of +ppeals, ,hi!h subse3uently !ertifie the !ase to the :", there bein( no 3uestion of fa!t in$ol$e&
    Issue
    1hether or not the appellant may properly sue the (o$ernment&
    Held
    ;es& 1here the (o$ernment ta0es a,ay property from a pri$ate lano,ner for publi! use ,ithout (oin(
    throu(h the le(al pro!ess of e2propriation or ne(otiate sale, the a((rie$e party may properly maintain a
    suit a(ainst the (o$ernment ,ithout thereby $iolatin( the o!trine of (o$ernmental immunity from suit
    ,ithout its !onsent&
    The o!trine of (o$ernmental immunity from suit !annot ser$e as an instrument for perpetratin( an in8usti!e
    on a !iti<en&
    #t is not too mu!h to say that ,hen the (o$ernment ta0es any property for publi! use, ,hi!h is !onitione
    upon the payment of 8ust !ompensation, to be 8ui!ially as!ertaine, it ma0es manifest that it submits to the
    8urisi!tion of a !ourt& There is no thou(ht then that the o!trine of immunity from suit !oul still be
    appropriately in$o0e&
    "onsierin( that no annotation in fa$or of the (o$ernment appears at the ba!0 of her !ertifi!ate of title an
    that she has not e2e!ute any ee of !on$eyan!e of any portion of her lot to the (o$ernment, the appellant
    remains the o,ner of the ,hole lot& +s re(istere o,ner, she !oul brin( an a!tion to re!o$er possession of
    the portion of lan in 3uestion at anytime be!ause possession is one of the attributes of o,nership

    You might also like