Payment for DPWH expropriation suit

ByThe Manila Times

February 1, 2020

Dear PAO,

The Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) filed a complaint

for the expropriation of our property here in Bulacan. Accordingly, this will
be used for the construction of a national highway. Upon filing of the

complaint, the DPWH also prayed for the issuance of a writ of possession.

Although we do not have a lawyer, when we learned of the DPWH’s prayer

for the issuance of a writ of possession, we opposed it because we have not

yet received any payments from the DPWH. Due to this opposition, an

official from the DPWH informed me that they already made a deposit with

the Land Bank of the Philippines, an amount equivalent to the assessed value

of the property. Can the DPWH’s prayer for the issuance of a writ of

possession be now granted in light of the deposit that they made?

Jose

Dear Jose,

The answer to your question is no. In case of expropriation for national

government infrastructure such as the construction of a national highway

herein, the law requires that the government, in order that it will have the
right to enter or take possession, should immediately pay the owner of the
property 100 percent of the market value of the property.

Republic Act (RA) 8974, otherwise known as “An Act to Facilitate the

Acquisition of Right-of-Way, Site or Location for National Government

Infrastructure Projects” dictates the rule in the expropriation for national

government projects, to wit:

“Section 4. Guidelines for Expropriation Proceedings. – Whenever it is

necessary to acquire real property for the right-of-way or location for any

national government infrastructure project through expropriation, the

appropriate implementing agency shall initiate the expropriation proceedings

before the proper court under the following guidelines:

“a. Upon the filing of the complaint, and after due notice to the defendant, the

implementing agency shall immediately pay the owner of the property the

amount equivalent to the sum of (1) one hundred percent (100%) of the value
of the property xxx.” (Emphasis supplied)

In fact, in the case of Republic vs. Gingoyon (GR 166429, Feb. 1, 2006)

penned by Associate Justice Dante Tinga, the Supreme Court said that before
the government can take possession, payment of the value of the property is
indispensable, viz:

“Even assuming that “for” may be construed as not necessarily meaning

“prior to”, it cannot be denied that Rep. Act No. 8974 does require prior

payment to the owner before the Government may acquire possession over
the property to be expropriated.” (Emphasis supplied)

In this query, what was done by the DPWH was merely a deposit of the

amount equivalent to the value of the property, instead of an actual payment

as mandated by the law. Thus, in view of the foregoing law and

jurisprudence, the DPWH cannot yet acquire possession unless it makes an

actual payment.

We hope that we were able to answer your queries. Please be reminded that
this advice is based solely on the facts you have narrated and our appreciation

of the same. Our opinion may vary when other facts are changed or
elaborated.

Editor’s note: Dear PAO is a daily column of the Public Attorney’s Office.
Questions for Chief Acosta may be sent to dearpao@manilatimes.net