12 REPUBLIC v. PARANAQUE

#12 REPUBLIC v.
CITY OF PARANAQUE
G.R. No. 191109,
July 18, 2012
FACTS:
The Public Estates Authority (PEA) is a government corporation created by virtue of PD 1084 (Creating the Public
Estates Authority, Defining its Powers and Functions, Providing Funds Therefor and For Other Purposes) which took
effect on February 4, 1977 to provide a coordinated, economical and efficient reclamation of lands, and the
administration and operation of lands belonging to, managed and/or operated by, the government with the object of
maximizing their utilization and hastening their development consistent with public interest. On February 14, 1979, by
virtue of (E.O.) No. 525 issued by then President Ferdinand Marcos, PEA was designated as the agency primarily
responsible for integrating, directing and coordinating all reclamation projects for and on behalf of the National
Government. On 2004 President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo issued E.O.No. 380 transforming PEA into PRA, which
shall perform all the powers and functions of the PEA relating to reclamation activities. By virtue of its mandate, PRA
reclaimed several portions of the foreshore and offshore areas of Manila Bay, including those located in Parañaque
City.
On February 19, 2003, then Parañaque City Treasurer Liberato M. Carabeo (Carabeo) issued Warrants of Levy on
PRA’s reclaimed properties (Central Business Park and Barangay San Dionisio) located in Parañaque City based on
the assessment for delinquent real property taxes made by then Parañaque City Assessor Soledad Medina Cue for tax
years 2001 and 2002. PRA filed a petition for prohibition with prayer for temporary restraining order (TRO) and/or
writ of preliminary injunction against Carabeo before the RTC. After due hearing, the RTC issued an order denying
PRA’s petition for the issuance of a TRO. The RTC rendered its decision dismissing PRA’s petition ruling that PRA
was not exempt from payment of real property taxes, because it was a GOCC under PD 1084. Not in conformity, PRA
filed this petition for certiorari assailing the RTC Order stating that petitioner is an incorporated instrumentality of the
national government and is, therefore, exempt from payment of real property tax and that the trial court gravely erred
in failing to consider that reclaimed lands are part of the public domain and, hence, exempt from real property tax.
ISSUE: Whether PRA is an incorporated instrumentality of the National government and is therefore, exempt from
payment of real property tax under Sections 234 (a) and 133 (a) of RA 7160?
HELD: Yes. It is a Government Instrumentality.
A GOCC must be "organized as a stock or non-stock corporation” while an instrumentality is vested by law with
corporate powers. Likewise, when the law makes a government instrumentality operationally autonomous, the
instrumentality remains part of the National Government machinery although not integrated with the department
framework. When the law vests in a government instrumentality corporate powers, the instrumentality does not
necessarily become a corporation. Unless the government instrumentality is organized as a stock or non-stock
corporation, it remains a government instrumentality exercising not only governmental but also corporate powers.
Many government instrumentalities are vested with corporate powers but they do not become stock or non-stock
corporations, which is a necessary condition before an agency or instrumentality is deemed a GOCC.
It is clear from Section 234 that real property owned by the Republic of the Philippines (the Republic) is exempt from
real property tax unless the beneficial use thereof has been granted to a taxable person. In this case, there is no proof
that PRA granted the beneficial use of the subject reclaimed lands to a taxable entity. There is no showing on record
either that PRA leased the subject reclaimed properties to a private taxable entity.
The Court agrees with PRA that the subject reclaimed lands are still part of the public domain, owned by the State
and, therefore, exempt from payment of real estate taxes.
1|Page

12 REPUBLIC v. PARANAQUE

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

12 REPUBLIC v. PARANAQUE

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

12 REPUBLIC v. PARANAQUE

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

#12 REPUBLIC v.

HELD: Yes. It is a Government Instrumentality.

You might also like