Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

LAND BANK OF PHILIPPINES v. CONRADO O. COLARINA

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	GR No. 171836 2014-08-11	DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM v. SUSIE IRENE GALLE DEL CASTILLO, J.
LBP likewise filed a Reply,[62] echoing the DAR's contention that Galle's option for the judicial determination of just compensation for her estate has long prescribed due to her failure to file a case within the 15-day period prescribed by Rule XIII, Section 11 of the 1994 DARAB Rules of Procedure; that her filing of Civil Case No. 4574 could not have tolled the 15-day period; that her subsequent filing of Civil Case No. 4436-2K3 was improper and constituted forum- shopping, and violated the principle of res judicata as regards the final and executory October 15, 1996 DARAB Decision in DARAB Case No. JC-RIX-ZAMBO-0011-CO; that the SAC failed to observe the proper formula in fixing just compensation, as required under DAR AO 6, as amended by AO 11; that it was erroneous for the CA to apply the pronouncement in Apo Fruits Corporation v. Court of Appeals[63] in awarding just compensation to Galle without the benefit of applying the formula in DAR AO 6, since the ruling in said case is merely pro hac vice; that the applicable cases would be Land Bank of the Philippines v. Spouses Banal,[64] Land Bank of the Philippines v. Gallego, Jr.,[65] Land Bank of the Philippines v. Lim;[66] Land Bank of the Philippines v. Suntay;[67] Land Bank of the Philippines v. Heirs of Eleuterio Cruz;[68] Land Bank of the Philippines v. Dumlao;[69] Allied Banking Corporation v. Land Bank of the Philippines;[70] and Land Bank of the Philippines v. Colarina,[71] which mandate the application of the DAR AO 6 formula.
	GR No. 160143 2014-07-02	LAND BANK OF PHILIPPINES v. BENECIO EUSEBIO BRION, J.
Equally settled, however, in jurisprudence is the RTC-SAC's duty to consider the factors enumerated under Section 17 of R.A. No. 6657 and the DAR formula that embodies these factors in determining just compensation. Our rulings in Land Bank of the Philippines v. Sps. Banal,[34] Landbank of the Philippines v. Celada,[35] Land Bank of the Philippines v. Colarina,[36] and Land Bank of the Philipines v. Lim,[37] to name a few, were clear that the RTC-SAC must consider the factors mentioned by Section 17, including the formula prescribed by the DAR's administrative orders in determining just compensation.
	GR No. 172551 2014-01-15	LAND BANK OF PHILIPPINES v. YATCO AGRICULTURAL ENTERPRISES BRION, J.
We stressed the RTC-SAC's duty to apply the DAR formula in determining just compensation in Landbank of the Philippines v. Celada[31] and reiterated this same ruling in Land Bank of the Philippines v. Lim,[32] Land Bank of the Philippines v. Luciano,[33] and Land Bank of the Philippines v. Colarina,[34] to name a few.