Scribd
Upload
340 views1 page

93 - Robern Devt Inc. Vs Quitain Digest

The National Power Corporation filed a complaint for eminent domain against Robern Development Corp. to expropriate a 17,746.50 sq. mtr parcel of land owned by Robern for a low-cost housing project. Robern filed a Motion to Dismiss the complaint, alleging that the choice of property to be expropriated was improper. The court held that Robern's objections should have been alleged in an answer since they require evidence to be presented, and not in a Motion to Dismiss, as dismissal at this stage would deny due process without a full trial on the merits.

Uploaded by

Onireblabas Yor Osicran
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
340 views1 page

93 - Robern Devt Inc. Vs Quitain Digest

The National Power Corporation filed a complaint for eminent domain against Robern Development Corp. to expropriate a 17,746.50 sq. mtr parcel of land owned by Robern for a low-cost housing project. Robern filed a Motion to Dismiss the complaint, alleging that the choice of property to be expropriated was improper. The court held that Robern's objections should have been alleged in an answer since they require evidence to be presented, and not in a Motion to Dismiss, as dismissal at this stage would deny due process without a full trial on the merits.

Uploaded by

Onireblabas Yor Osicran
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

ROBERN DEVELOPMENT CORP. vs. NATIONAL POWER CORP.

[ 315 SCRA 150 (1999)]

Facts:
Robern is the registered owner of a parcel of land with an area of about 17,746.50 sq.
mtrs. Which the National Power Corporation (NPC, for brevity) is seeking to expropriate. The
property forms part of a proposed low-cost housing project in Inawayan, Binugao, Toril, Davao
City.
On June 6, 1997, NPC filed a complaint for eminent domain against Robern. Instead of
filing an answer, Petitioner countered with a Motion to Dismiss, alleging, among other things,
that the choice of property to be expropriated was improper.

Issue:
Whether the Motion to Dismiss should prosper?

Held:
No. The issues raised by Petitioner are affirmative defenses that should be alleged in an
answer, since they require presentation of evidence aliunde. Section 3 of the Rules of Court
provides that “if a defendant has any objections to the filing of or the allegations in the
complaint, or any objection or defense to the taking of his property,” he should include them
in his answer. Naturally, these issues will have to be fully ventilated in a full-blown trial and
hearing. Dismissal of an action upon a motion to dismiss constitutes a denial of due process
if, from a consideration of the pleadings, it appears that there are issues that cannot be decided
without a trial of the case on the merits.

You might also like