If you ever find yourself being a defendant in an expropriation case, you enter a process that is less about resisting the taking itself and more about ensuring that the compensation offered truly reflects the value of what is being taken. 

When the government exercises its inherent power to take private property for public use and purpose, it does so with full intention to effect the taking and provide just compensation. 

An action for expropriation starts with the filing of a complaint, which shall state with certainty the property sought to be taken and the right and purpose of expropriation, among others. As the property owner objects to the expropriation proceeding, you may file an answer, which shall specifically state the objections and defenses to the taking of your property. 

However, you should keep in mind that although Rule 67 Section 3 allows you to raise all your allegations –  including objections and defenses in an answer, it does not allow you to allege any counterclaimagainst the expropriator, nor a cross-claim against a co-defendant, nor a third-party complaint against another person who is not a defendant. 

Rule 67 Section 3 is a lengthy provision, but it provides a lot of information that you may need to know:

Section 3. Defenses and objections. — If a defendant has no objection or defense to the action or the taking of his property, he may file and serve a notice of appearance and a manifestation to that effect, specifically designating or identifying the property in which he claims to be interested, within the time stated in the summons. Thereafter, he shall be entitled to notice of all proceedings affecting the same.

If a defendant has any objection to the filing of or the allegations in the complaint, or any objection or defense to the taking of his property, he shall serve his answer within the time stated in the summons. The answer shall specifically designate or identify the property in which he claims to have an interest, state the nature and extent of the interest claimed, and adduce all his objections and defenses to the taking of his property. No counterclaim, cross-claim or third-party complaint shall be alleged or allowed in the answer or any subsequent pleading.

A defendant waives all defenses and objections not so alleged but the court, in the interest of justice, may permit amendments to the answer to be made not later than ten (10) days from the filing thereof. However, at the trial of the issue of just compensation whether or not a defendant has previously appeared or answered, he may present evidence as to the amount of the compensation to be paid for his property, and he may share in the distribution of the award. 

The rule that no counterclaims may be filed in an expropriation case means that a property owner cannot assert any claim against the expropriator within the same proceeding. You cannot claim for damages in an expropriation case. 

In an expropriation case, the determination of just compensation is a judicial prerogative. It is the court that determines the true amount of just compensation to fully indemnify the property owner.

The Supreme Court, in Evergreen Manufacturing Corporation v. Republic¹ has defined just compensation as:

“Just compensation, in expropriation cases, is defined as the full and fair equivalent of the loss of the property taken from its owner by the expropriator. Its true measure is not the taker’s gain, but the owner’s loss. The word “just” is used to modify the meaning of the word “compensation” to convey the idea that the equivalent to be given for the property to be taken shall be real, substantial, full and ample. It has been consistently held, moreover, that though the determination of just compensation in expropriation proceedings is essentially a judicial prerogative, the appointment of commissioners to ascertain just compensation for the property sought to be taken is a mandatory requirement nonetheless. ”

The Court will determine the value of just compensation and is guided by the well-established doctrine that it must be the full and fair equivalent of the loss of the property taken from you. 

When the government exercises its inherent power of eminent domain over a property, the owner no longer needs to allege every item of damage resulting from the taking. There is no need to specify the crops and plants lost, quantify the value of the house, or enumerate other losses. No counterclaim needed. It is already the duty of the Court to determine the appropriate amount of just compensation and to ensure that the property owner is fully indemnified for the loss sustained.

1. Evergreen Manufacturing Corporation v. Republic, G.R. Nos. 218628 and 218631, September 6, 2017, 839 SCRA 200, 215
   ↩︎