Amigable is the registered owner of a lot which, without prior expropriation proceedings or negotiated sale, was used by the government. She filed a case against cuenca, the commissioner of public highways, for recovery of ownership and possession of the said lot. The defendant said that the case was premature, barred by prescription, and the government did not give its consent to be sued.
Amigable is the registered owner of a lot which, without prior expropriation proceedings or negotiated sale, was used by the government. She filed a case against cuenca, the commissioner of public highways, for recovery of ownership and possession of the said lot. The defendant said that the case was premature, barred by prescription, and the government did not give its consent to be sued.
Amigable is the registered owner of a lot which, without prior expropriation proceedings or negotiated sale, was used by the government. She filed a case against cuenca, the commissioner of public highways, for recovery of ownership and possession of the said lot. The defendant said that the case was premature, barred by prescription, and the government did not give its consent to be sued.
FACTS: Victoria Amigable is the is the registered owner of a lot which, without prior expropriation proceedings or negotiated sale, was used by the government. Amigable's counsel wrote the President of the Philippines requesting payment of the portion of her lot which had been expropriated by the government. Amigable later filed a case against Cuenca, the Commissioner of Public Highways, for recovery of ownership and possession of the said lot. She also sought payme nt for compensatory damages, moral damages and attorney's fees. The defendant said that the case was premature, barred by prescription, and the government did not give its consent to be sued. ISSUE: W/N the appellant may properly sue the government. HELD: Where the government takes away property from a private landowner for publ ic use without going through the legal process of expropriation or negotiated sa le, the aggrieved party may properly maintain a suit against the government with out violating the doctrine of governmental immunity from suit. The doctrine of immunity from suit cannot serve as an instrument for perpetratin g an injustice to a citizen. The only relief available is for the government to make due compensation which it could and should have done years ago. To determin e just compensation of the land, the basis should be the price or value at the t ime of the taking.