Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

This case has been cited 2 times or more.

	GR No. 181792 2014-04-21	STAR SPECIAL WATCHMAN v. PUERTO PRINCESA CITY MENDOZA, J.
The same ruling was arrived at in the more recent case of Spouses Ciriaco and Arminda Ortega v. City of Cebu.[26]
	GR No. 186192 2010-08-25	HEIRS OF MATEO PIDACAN v. AIR TRANSPORTATION OFFICE NACHURA, J.
Well-settled in this jurisdiction that the determination of just compensation is a judicial prerogative.[20] Thus, in Export Processing Zone Authority v. Judge Dulay,[21] we declared: The determination of "just compensation" in eminent domain cases is a judicial function. The executive department or the legislature may make the initial determinations but when a party claims a violation of the guarantee in the Bill of Rights that private property may not be taken for public use without just compensation, no statute, decree, or executive order can mandate that its own determination shall prevail over the court's findings. Much less can the courts be precluded from looking into the "just-ness" of the decreed compensation.