7/28/2019 Additional Lecture on Ownership Concepts

1/2

Additional lecture:

The enjoyment of the rights of an owner are likewise restricted by law (Art. 19, CC must

be considered in the exercise of a right.)

Thus, the Civil Code on Arts. 430 to 434, to name a few, provide the related restrictions,

as well as other special laws (i.e. Remedial laws on the procedure of recovery.)

Ownership is likewise limited by the State or the laws of the State by the exercise of

police power, power of taxation, and power of eminent domain.

Police power is a limitation on the right of ownership in the sense that

property may be interfered with, even destroyed, if the welfare of the community so

demands it.

Any holder of a property holds it under the implied condition that his

manner of using it shall not be injurious to the enjoyment of others having an

equal right to the enjoyment of their property, nor injurious to the community.

There is no just compensation for properties abated under the police power.

Sec. 2238 of the Revised Administrative Code requires that an ordinance

enacted by a municipality under the general welfare clause should be to provide for the

health and safety, promote the prosperity, improve the morals, p e a c e , g o o d o r d e r ,

c o m f o r t , a n d c o n v e n i e n c e o f t h e m u n i c i p a l i t y a n d t h e i n h a b i t a n t s

thereof, and for the protection of property therein. (Pampanga Bus Co., Inc., et.al. v. Mun. of

Tarlac, GR L-15759, Dec. 30, 1961).

Exercise of police power has been used in:

(1) the abatement of nuisance, whether public or private, whether

n u i s a n c e p e r s e o r n u i s a n c e p e r a c c i d e n s ( I l o i l o c o l d S t o r a g e C o . v .

Council of Iloilo, 24 Phil. 417);

(2) to declare by ordinance, market stalls held by aliens, as vacant, so that

Filipino applicants, may be preferred (Chua Lao, et. al. v. Raymundo, et.al., GR L-12662,

aug. 18, 1958);

(3) to enact the Social Security Law (Roman Catholic Archbishop of Manila v. SocialSecurity Comm., GR L-15045,J a n . 2 0 , 1 96 1 ) a nd

(4) to im plem ent the C om prehens ive A gra r ia n R eform L a w (C A R P)

(Roxas and Co., Inc., v CA, 117 SCAD 589, 321 SCRA 106).

Taxation is the inherent power of the State to raise income or revenue to defray

necessary governmental expenses for a public. Thus, thru taxation, the c o s t o f

g o v e r n i n g i s a p p o r t i o n e d a m o n g t h o s e w h o i n s o m e m e a s u r e a r e

7/28/2019 Additional Lecture on Ownership Concepts

2/2

privileged to enjoy benefits and must consequently bear the burdens of government. Indeed, it has been

said that of all the powers of government, the power of taxation is the strongest for it involves

the power to destroy.

E m i n e n t d o m a i n , o r t h e s u p e r i o r r i g h t o f t h e S t a t e t o o w n

c e r t a i n properties under certain conditions, is a limitation on the right of ownership, andmay be exercised even over private properties of cities and municipalities, and

even over lands registered with a Torrens Title. According to Cooley, it is the right

of the State to acquire private property for public use upon payment of just compensation

(Cooleys Constitutional Limitations, 8thEd., p. 110).

The following are the requisites of eminent domain:

a) The taking must be done by competent authority, that is, the State oreven by municipal corporations, other government entities and public

service corporations:

b) It must be for public use. Public use may be identified with publicbenefit, public utility or public advantage

c) The owner must be paid just compensation at the time of its taking. Thedetermination of just compensation is a judicial function;

d) The requirement of due process of law must be observed. Bothprocedural and substantive due process must be observed.

I nherent ly possessed by the na t iona l leg is la ture , the power of

eminent domain may be validly delegated to local governments, other public entities andpublic utilities (Moday v CA, 79 SCAD 816, 1997).

Eminent domain or expropriation is based on the need for human progress and community

welfare or development. The power of eminent domain is inseparable from sovereignty, or

upon any government exercising sovereigns or quasi-sovereignty powers. (Visayan Refining

Co. v Camus and Paredes, 40 Phil. 550).