|
Tuesday, August 16, 2005
High Court orders MCIAA: Return lots to original owners
Since the old Lahug airport ceased to operate, the Supreme Court (SC) has ordered the return of parcels of land in the area to its original owners.
The SC Special Second Division denied the motion for reconsideration of the Mactan-Cebu International Airport Authority (MCIAA), which fought to retain ownership of two lots in the old Lahug airport.
The High Tribunal ruled to return the lots to the heirs of Timoteo Moreno and Maria Rotea, who own 2,355 square meters and 3,097 square meters, respectively.
Predecessor
The MCIAA’s predecessor, the National Airport Corp. (NAC), acquired the lots of Moreno and Rotea in 1947 for P7,065 and P9,291, respectively.
The MCIAA earlier claimed that the state’s power of eminent domain, which gives the government the authority to buy private lands that are needed for public use, is unconditional and that the original owners of the lots should not be given the right to repurchase the property.
Quoting the case of Fery vs. Municipality of Cabanatuan and MCIAA vs. Court of Appeals, the airport authority maintained that the govern-ment’s right to purchase private properties should not be subjected to any limitation or condition.
The MCIAA said the title obtained because of the expropriation of the lot should not, in any way, be impaired.
But the SC ruled that the MCIAA’s argument that the state’s right to exercise eminent domain is unconditional cannot stand in the present case.
This is because the case showed that the MCIAA, through the NAC, assured the owners of the said parcels that their lots would be returned to them when the old Lahug airport ceases to operate.
Indisputable
“The indisputable certainty in the present case is that there was a prior promise by the predecessor (NAC) that the expropriated properties may be recovered by the former owners once the airport is transferred to Mactan, Cebu,” the SC ruling read.
The SC also ruled that the original owners should not be compelled to pay more than the price the government had paid them during the expropriation of the lot in 1947.
The MCIAA earlier said Moreno and Rotea should pay for their lots based on the present prevailing market price of the property, and not the expropriation price in 1947, saying it would be grossly unfair to the MCIAA considering that the lot owners were paid just compensation and that the lots are now worth millions.
Unperturbed
But the High Court said its stand on the amount of repurchase price remains “unperturbed.”
The SC explained that when the State reconveys land, it should not profit from sudden appreciations in land values. It said that in determining the market value, any increase or decrease in market value because of the proposed improvement may not be considered.
“Thus, reconveyance to the original owner shall be for whatever amount he was paid by the government, plus legal interest, whether or not the consideration was based on the land’s highest and best use when the sale to the State occurred.” (GN)
(August 16, 2005 issue)
Write letter to the editor.Click here.
Join the Sun.Star message board.Click here. |
|
[return to top]
[home]
[network page]
|
LOCAL NEWS
BUSINESS
OPINION
SPORTS
LIFESTYLE
FEATURE
SUPERBALITA
WEEKEND
|
