MARIANO OUANO et al. v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES et al.

/ MACTAN-CEBU INTERNATIONAL
AIRPORT (MCIAA) v. RICARDO L. INOCIAN, et al.

G.R. Nos. 168770 & 168812, 9 February 2011, First Division (Velasco, Jr., J.)

The following are two (2) consolidated cases whereby the respective owners and successors-ininterest.
They pray for the reconveyance of their respective properties subjected to expropriation in favor of the
government for the expansion of Lahug Airport for public use. Their claim for reconveyance is based on
the alleged promise of the National Airport Corporation (NAC), Mactan-Cebu International Airport
Authority’s (MCIAA) predecessor agency, that should the Lahug Airport expansion project do not push
through or once the Lahug Airport closes or its operations transferred to Mactan-Cebu Airport, they are
assured the right to repurchase their land.

When the Lahug Airport was closed and transferred its operations with MCIAA, the latter refused to
honor the said agreement. Hence, Ouanos and Inocians filed their respective complaints against the
latter. MCIAA averred that the claim of the Ouanos and the Inocians regarding the alleged verbal
assurance of the NAC negotiating team that they can reacquire their landholdings is already barred by
the Statute of Frauds. Hence, this petition was filed.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the Ouanos and Inocians have the right to repurchase their properties pursuant to the
verbal agreement with the government’s negotiating team assuring them of its reacquisition should the
public purpose for which the properties were used ceases.

RULING:

Yes. The taking of a private land in expropriation proceedings is always conditioned on its continued
devotion to its public purpose. As a necessary corollary, once the purpose is terminated or peremptorily
abandoned, then the former owner, if he so desires, may seek its reversion, subject of course to the
return, at the very least, of the just compensation received.

Given the foregoing disquisitions, equity and justice demand the reconveyance by MCIAA of the litigated
lands in question to the Ouanos and Inocians. In the same token, justice and fair play also dictate that
the Ouanos and Inocian return to MCIAA what they received as just compensation for the expropriation
of their respective properties plus legal interest to be computed from default, which in this case should
run from the time MCIAA complies with the reconveyance obligation. They must likewise pay MCIAA the
necessary expenses it might have incurred in sustaining their respective lots and the monetary value of
its services in managing the lots in question to the extent that they, as private owners, were benefited
thereby.