This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2013-07-01 |
PERALTA, J. |
||||
| When elevated to the CA,[14] the appellate court did not agree with the RTC and found instead that the doctrine of state immunity from suit is not applicable, because the recovery of compensation is the only relief available to the landowner. To deny such relief would undeniably cause injustice to the landowner. Besides, petitioner Contreras, in fact, had earlier offered the payment of compensation although at a lower rate. Thus, the CA reversed and set aside the dismissal of the complaint and, consequently, remanded the case to the trial court for the purpose of determining the just compensation to which respondents are entitled to recover from the government.[15] With the finality of the aforesaid decision, trial proceeded in the RTC. | |||||
|
2013-07-01 |
PERALTA, J. |
||||
| To be sure, the pre-trial order explicitly defines and limits the issues to be tried and controls the subsequent course of the action unless modified before trial to prevent manifest injustice.[26] | |||||