a collections of case digests and laws that can help aspiring law students to become a lawyer.
Republic v. De Knecht, GR 87351, 12 February 1990
On February 20, 1979 the Republic of the Philippines filed an expropriation proceeding proceedings against the owners of the houses, which includes Cristina De Knecht, standing along Fernando Rein-Del Pan streets. On March 19, 1979, de Knecht filed a motion to dismiss alleging lack of jurisdiction, pendency of appeal, prematureness of the complaint and arbitrary and erroneous valuation of the property. In June 1979, the republic filed a motion for the issuance of a writ of possession of the property to be expropriated on the grounds that it already made the required deposit with the Philippine National Bank (PNB) of 10% of the amount of compensation stated in the complaint in which the lower court granted. On July 1979, de Knecht filed a petition for certiorari and prohibition against the lower court. On October 30, 1980, the Supreme Court rendered granting the petition for certiorari and prohibition. On September 2, 1983, the Republic filed a motion to dismiss said case due to the enactment of the Batas Pambansa Blg. 340 expropriating the same properties and for the same purpose.
Whether or not an expropriation proceeding that was determined by final judgement may be the subject of a subsequent legislation for expropriation
Yes, the property may be the subject of a subsequent legislation for expropriation even if there is already a final judgement dismissing the same. While it is true that said final judgment on the subject becomes the law of the case between the parties, it is equally true that the right of the Republic to take private properties for public use upon the payment of just compensation is so provided in the Constitution and our laws. Such expropriation proceedings may be undertaken by the Republic not only by voluntary negotiation with the land owners but also by taking appropriate court action and by legislation.