Scribd
Upload
50 views1 page

Amigable vs. Cuenca

1) The petitioner owned a lot that the government used for road purposes without expropriation proceedings or a negotiated sale. 2) The issue is whether the petitioner can sue the government for damages in lieu of just compensation. 3) The court ruled yes, that when the government takes private property without legal expropriation or sale, the owner can sue for compensation, as immunity from suit cannot allow injustice against citizens.

Uploaded by

Jiha Tanaga
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
50 views1 page

Amigable vs. Cuenca

1) The petitioner owned a lot that the government used for road purposes without expropriation proceedings or a negotiated sale. 2) The issue is whether the petitioner can sue the government for damages in lieu of just compensation. 3) The court ruled yes, that when the government takes private property without legal expropriation or sale, the owner can sue for compensation, as immunity from suit cannot allow injustice against citizens.

Uploaded by

Jiha Tanaga
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

AMIGABLE VS.

CUENCA

Facts:

Petitioner is the registered owner of a lot which, without prior expropriation proceesdins or
negotiated sale, was used by the government. Her counsel wrote the President of the Philippines
requesting payment of the portion of her lot which had been expropriated by the government. She
later filed a case against the Commissioner of Public Highways for recovery of ownership and
possession of the said lot. She also sought payment for compensatory damages, moral damages
and attorney’s fees.

Issue: Whether or not the appellant may properly sue the government for damages in lieu of non-
payment of just compensation

Ruling: Yes

Where the government takes away property from a private landowner for public use without
going through the legal process of expropriation or negotiated sale, the aggrieved party may
properly maintain a suit against the government without violating the doctrine of governmental
immunity from suit. The doctrine of immunity of suit cannot serve as an instrument for
perpetuating 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.

As registered owner, she could bring an action to recover possession of the portion of land in
question at anytime because possession is one of the attributes of ownership. However, since
restoration of possession of said portion by the government is neither convenient nor feasible at
this time because it is now and has been used for road purposes, the only relief available is for the
government to make due compensation which it could and should have done years ago. To
determine the due compensation for the land, the basis should be the price or value thereof at the
time of the taking.

You might also like