Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

MUNICIPALITY OF PARAÑAQUE v. V.M. REALTY CORPORATION

This case has been cited 2 times or more.

	GR No. 156684 2011-04-06	SPS. ANTONIO v. CA BERSAMIN, J.
A resolution like Resolution No. 552 that merely expresses the sentiment of the Sangguniang Panglungsod is not sufficient for the purpose of initiating an expropriation proceeding. Indeed, in Municipality of Parañaque v. V.M. Realty Corporation,[12] a case in which the Municipality of Parañaque based its complaint for expropriation on a resolution, not an ordinance, the Court ruled so: The power of eminent domain is lodged in the legislative branch of government, which may delegate the exercise thereof to LGUs, other public entities and public utilities. An LGU may therefore exercise the power to expropriate private property only when authorized by Congress and subject to the latter's control and restraints, imposed "through the law conferring the power or in other legislations." In this case, Section 19 of RA 7160, which delegates to LGUs the power of eminent domain, also lays down the parameters for its exercise. It provides as follows:
	GR No. 124779 2005-11-29	DANILO ANTONIO v. ISAGANI A. GERONIMO TINGA, J.
In the instant case, no ordinance was passed by the Sangguniang Bayan of Antipolo. In its stead were Resolution Nos. 61-95 and 88-95. It has been categorically stated in the cases of Municipality of Paranaque v. V.M. Realty Corporation[17] and Heirs of Suguitan v. City of Mandaluyong[18] that a local government unit cannot authorize an expropriation of private property through a mere resolution of its lawmaking body, thus:We are not convinced by petitioner's insistence that the terms "resolution" and "ordinance" are synonymous. A municipal ordinance is different from a resolution. An ordinance is a law, but a resolution is merely a declaration of the sentiment or opinion of a lawmaking body on a specific matter. An ordinance possesses a general and permanent character, but a resolution is temporary in nature. Additionally, the two are enacted differently a third reading is necessary for an ordinance, but not for a resolution, unless decided otherwise by a majority of all the Sanggunian members.