Topic: Decisions of Court

Republic vs Gingoyon

Facts:
NAIA 3, a project between the Government and the Philippine International Air
Terminals Co., Inc (PIATCO) was nullified.

Planning to put NAIA 3 facilities into immediate operation, the Government, through
expropriation filed a petition to be entitled of a writ of possession contending that a mere
deposit of the assessed value of the property with an authorized government depository is
enough for the entitlement to said writ (Rule 67 of the Rules of Court).

However, respondents avers that before an entitlement of the writ of possession is

issued, direct payment of just compensation must be made to the builders of the facilities,
citing RA No. 8974 and a related jurisprudence (2004 Resolution in Agan).

Also, RTC issued an Order, the second now assailed before this Court, which appointed
three (3) Commissioners to ascertain the amount of just compensation for the NAIA 3 Complex

Issue:
(a) Whether or not the (1) RA 8974 and (2) 2004 Resolution in Agan be applied in the
decision of this case
(b) Whether or not the RTC was in grave abuse of their discretion appointing the
commissioners in determining just compensation
Held:
Yes.
(a.1) Rep. Act No. 8974 applies in this case, particularly insofar as it requires the
immediate payment by the Government of at least the proffered value of the NAIA 3 facilities
to PIATCO and provides certain valuation standards or methods for the determination of just
compensation
It is apparent that the law and its implementing rules commonly provide for a rule for
the valuation of improvements and/or structures thereupon separate from that of the land on
which such are constructed. Section 2 of Rep. Act No. 8974 itself recognizes that the
improvements or structures on the land may very well be the subject of expropriation
proceedings. Section 4(a), in relation to Section 7 of the law provides for the guidelines for the
valuation of the improvements or structures to be expropriated. Indeed, nothing in the law
would prohibit the application of Section 7, which provides for the valuation method of the
improvements and or structures in the instances wherein it is necessary for the Government to
expropriate only the improvements or structures, as in this case.

Applying Rep. Act No. 8974, the implementation of Writ of Possession in favor of the
Government over NAIA 3 is held in abeyance until PIATCO is directly paid the amount of P3
Billion, representing the proffered value of NAIA 3 under Section 4(c) of the law.
 (a.2) The 2004 Resolution in Agan sets the base requirement that has to be observed
before the Government may take over the NAIA 3, that there must be payment to PIATCO of
just compensation in accordance with law and equity. Any ruling in the present expropriation
case must be conformable to the dictates of the Court as pronounced in the Agan cases.

(b) The RTC is mandated to complete its determination of the just compensation within
sixty (60) days from finality of this Decision. In doing so, the RTC is obliged to comply with 'law
and equity as ordained in Again and the standard set under Implementing Rules of Rep. Act No.
8974 which is the 'replacement cost method as the standard of valuation of structures and
improvements.
There was no grave abuse of discretion attending the RTC Order appointing the
commissioners for the purpose of determining just compensation. The provisions on
commissioners under Rule 67 shall apply insofar as they are not inconsistent with Rep. Act No.
8974, its Implementing Rules, or the rulings of the Court in Agan .