Taking under the power of eminent domain may

be defined as entering upon private property for

more than a momentary period, and, under the
warrant or color of legal authority, devoting it to a
public use, or otherwise informally appropriating or
injuriously affecting it in such a way as substantially
to oust the owner and deprive him of all beneficial
enjoyment thereof. In relation to our Taal Victims
Relocation project, According to People vs Castelvi,
Five circumstances or requisites must be present in
order to qualify “taking as an exercise of eminent
domain.

1. The expropriator must enter a private property

2. The entrance into the private property must be for
more than a momentary period
3. The entry must be into the property should be
under warrant or color of legal authority
4. The property must be devoted to public use or
otherwise informally appropriated or injuriously
affected
5. 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.
(Republic vs Castelvi, GR No. L-20620).

In the context of our proposal eg. Taal Victims

Relocation Project, we, the LGU believe that it is
deemed necessary for the general welfare of the
victims of the said natural calamity to be relocated to
the safest and decent place as possible permanently
in a legal manner and one way of doing so is by the
virtue of the Municipal Ordinance enacted by the
local legislative council through the chief executive
which allow us to seize and take private properties
for the general welfare of the people who are victims
or calamity in relation to Article III, Section 9 of the
Constitution which states that “private property shall
not be taken for public use without just
compensation.” This is the most important
protection of property rights in the Constitution
because it ensures that if the government takes away
a person’s property to benefit the society like the
Taal calamity victims, then they should pay just
compensation to the owner of the land that they will
confiscate. The principal purpose of the guarantee is
to “bar the Government from forcing some people
alone to bear public burdens which, in all fairness
and justice, should be borne by the public as a
whole.

There are 2 different types of taking:

1. Possessory taking which occurs when the
government confiscates or physically occupies
property
2. Regulatory taking occurs when the government’s
regulation leaves no reasonable economically viable
use of the property (City of Manila vs Laguio GR
No 118127

In our proposed Taal Victims Relocation

Project, we use the “possessory taking” since the
victims of calamity will physically occupy the
property after taking it.

Denial of economically beneficial use is taking

This pertains to a regulation which denies all
economically beneficial or productive use of the
land which require compensation under the “takings
clause”. Hence this is not applicable in our
relocation project because again, the land will be
used for building houses for the Taal victims.

Restriction on the use of property is taking

A restriction on use of property may also
constitute a “taking” if not reasonably necessary to
the effectuation of a substantial public purpose or if
it has an unduly harsh impact on the distinct
investment-backed expectations of the owner ( City
of Manila vs Laguio GR No 118127). The LGU and
the government prioritize the general welfare of the
Taal victims even if it cost the potential business of
the land owner.

State to forcibly take private property

 Eminent domain is the power of the State to
forcibly take private property for public use upon
payment or just compensation. It refers to the
inherent power of the state to seize a citizen’s
private property, or rights in private property,
without the owner’s consent. The property is taken
either for government use or by delegation to third
parties who will devote it to “public use.” The LGU
or the government has the right to take the private
property for the relocation of the Taal victims
forcibly if it is necessary provided that the owner
will be given the just compensation.