Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 14) GR No.132767 - Benigay

    Uploaded by

    Leopoldo, Jr. Blanco
    44 views1 page
    The petitioner's land was taken under the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law and they argued that the Department of Agrarian Reform adjudicators did not have jurisdiction to determine just compensation, claiming this jurisdiction lay with the Regional Trial Court. However, the Supreme Court held that the DAR does have primary jurisdiction to preliminarily determine just compensation for lands taken under the agrarian reform law, though this determination is subject to challenge in courts. The DAR's jurisdiction over agrarian reform matters includes determining just compensation and does not contradict the RTC's jurisdiction over such petitions.

    Original Description:

    -14) GR no.132767 - Benigay

    Original Title

    -14) GR no.132767 - Benigay

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The petitioner's land was taken under the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law and they argued that the Department of Agrarian Reform adjudicators did not have jurisdiction to determine just compensation, claiming this jurisdiction lay with the Regional Trial Court. However, the Supreme Court held that the DAR does have primary jurisdiction to preliminarily determine just compensation for lands taken under the agrarian reform law, though this determination is subject to challenge in courts. The DAR's jurisdiction over agrarian reform matters includes determining just compensation and does not contradict the RTC's jurisdiction over such petitions.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    44 views1 page

    14) GR No.132767 - Benigay

    Uploaded by

    Leopoldo, Jr. Blanco
    The petitioner's land was taken under the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law and they argued that the Department of Agrarian Reform adjudicators did not have jurisdiction to determine just compensation, claiming this jurisdiction lay with the Regional Trial Court. However, the Supreme Court held that the DAR does have primary jurisdiction to preliminarily determine just compensation for lands taken under the agrarian reform law, though this determination is subject to challenge in courts. The DAR's jurisdiction over agrarian reform matters includes determining just compensation and does not contradict the RTC's jurisdiction over such petitions.

    Copyright:

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

    PHIL. VETERANS BANK V.

    CA
    GR no.132767
    18 Jan. 2000

    Facts:
    Petitioner’s land was taken by DAR pursuant to the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law. Petitioner
    contended that DAR adjudicators have no jurisdiction to determine the just compensation for the taking of lands under CARP
    because such jurisdiction is vested in the RTC.

    Issue:
    Whether the DAR or RTC has jurisdiction

    Held:
    DAR has jurisdiction. There is nothing contradictory between the DAR’s primary jurisdiction over “agrarian
    reform matters” and exclusive original jurisdiction over “all matters involving the implementation of agrarian
    reform,” which includes the determination of questions of just compensation, and the RTC’s “original
    and exclusive jurisdiction” over all petitions for the determination of just compensation to the landowner. In accordance
    with settled principles of administrative law, primary jurisdiction is vested in the DAR as an administrative agency to
    determine in a preliminary manner the reasonable compensation to be paid for the lands taken under CARP, but such
    determination is subject to challenge in the courts.

    You might also like