Republic of the Philippines VS Soriano, G. R. No.

211666, Feb 25, 2015

Facts: Soriano's lot was sought to be used for the construction of NLEX, Valenzuela city. On
October 10, 2010, DPWH filed an expropriation complaint against Soriano before the RTC
Valenzuela and deposited the amount of Php 420,000, the zonal value of the land based on
the certification released by BIR Reg. No. 5.

On November 15, 2013, RTC rendered its decision and ordered, inter alia, Petitioner DPWH
to pay Soriano just compensation of PHP 2,100 per square meter or PHP 420, 000 for the
200 square meter with legal interest of 12 percent per annum from the taking of the
subjected land. Also included therein is the award for consequential damages.

In a motion for reconsideration by DPWH to lower the interest, RTC reduced the interest to 6
percent based on Article 2209 of the Civil Code since the interest is awarded not as a loan or
forbearance of money but indemnity for damages for the delay in payment.

Additionally, DPWH contended that no interest must be included since they didnot delay in
paying the just compensation. Interest is awarded if the taking precedes the payment of just
compensation.

Issue: WHETHER OR NOT RESPONDENT IS NOT ENTITLED TO THE LEGAL INTEREST

OF 6% PER ANNUM ON THE AMOUNT OF JUST COMPENSATION OF THE SUBJECT
PROPERTY AS THERE WAS NO DELAY ON THE PART OF PETITIONER?

RULING:

1. The valuation used by the trial court is the certification of the zonal value of the subjected
land released by the BIR rather than the tax declaration valuing only php400 per square
meter.

2. The court determined the payment of the just compensation considering:

a. The time of the taking of the land vís-a-vìs the time of the payment of just compensation.

Since DPWH paid the just compensation on January 24, 2011, or 4 months before the taking
or the issuance of the Writ of Possession and of Expropriation, only the zonal value must be
given, to the exclusion of interests. There was no delay.

b. Its zonal value.

The trial court used the zonal value of the lot from the BIR rather than the lot's tax
declaration.

C. Whether or not only a portion thereof or the whole area was taken.

No consequential damages can be awarded. It can only be awarded if only a portion of the
land was expropriated. In this case, the whole lot was taken. No remaining property suffered
from impairment or decrease of value.

3. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the DWPH's contentions that award of interests and
consequential damages was improper.