Republic of the Philippines, represented by Air Transportation Office, versus

Sarabia
Facts:
In 1956, ATO justly expropriated a portion of the property of Sarabia
ATO took possession and control of the portion of respondents property
ATO utili!ed the property for parkin" area, control to#er, airport fire rescue
station, ter$inal, and %& of '(' a)iation security
ATO assured respondents pay$ent* %o#e)er, the parties did not a"ree on the a$ount
for just co$pensation*
In 199+, ,epublic filed #ith ,T- an action for the expropriation of the whole
property
In 1999, ,T- appointed co$$issioners to ascertain just co$pensation
-o$$issioners sub$itted report
On hearin", the court re.uired ATO to pro)e that portions not occupied by the
"o)ern$ent is still needed for public purpose* ATO did not present e)idence as
they countered there #as no need to do so, bein" that al$ost 1/0 of the entire
property has already been de)oted to public purpose
,T- held a"ainst ATO, rulin" that the additional area sub$itted for expropriation is
not needed by ATO for public purpose
,T- adopted co$$issioners report #hich fixed the just co$pensation using the
current market value of the lot in 1999 1at the ti$e of the issuance of the #rit of
possession 2 because this is the ti$e of le"al ac.uisition of property3*
ATO filed a notice of appeal and record on appeal, the entire records #ere then
trans$itted to the -A* -A affir$ed ,T- decision* 4, #as denied* ', under ,ule 55
#as filed*
ATO contends that the just co$pensation fixed by the trial court based on the
$arket )alue of the property after the co$$ence$ent of the expropriation
proceedin"s contradicts established jurisprudence
ATO also contends that the just co$pensation for the entire lot should be fixed in
the a$ount based on its assessed )alue in 1956
Issue:
6O( just co$pensation should be reckoned fro$ the ti$e of actual takin" or at the
issuance of the #rit of possession
6O( just co$pensation for the entire property should be fixed in the a$ount based on
its assessed )alue in 1956
Held:
1* S- a"rees #ith ATO* It said that the )alue of the property as it #as #hen the
"o)ern$ent took possession of the land represents its true )alue for just co$pensation,
not as of the ti$e of the institution of the expropriation proceedin"*
0* S- disa"reed #ith ATO* It ruled that there is nothin" on record that ATO occupied the
re$ainin" portion of the property 1back in 1956, only a portion of the lot #as occupied3*
To add to that, neither did it e)er present proof that said unoccupied portion is necessary
for public use*
Therefore, the 'etition is 'A,TIA778 9,A(T:; 2 -A decision is $odified in the sense
that it #as #ron" in co$putin" just co$pensation based on the $arket )alue at the ti$e
of the issuance of the #rit of possession*