Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 26 views

    Manila International Airport Authority Vs Court of Appeals

    Uploaded by

    Evangelyn Egusquiza
    This case involves a dispute over whether the Manila International Airport Authority (MIAA) is exempt from real estate taxes on the land and buildings of Ninoy Aquino International Airport. The officers of Parañaque City levied and auctioned off MIAA's property for unpaid taxes. MIAA argued it was exempt as an instrumentality of the government. The Court ruled that MIAA is an instrumentality of the government, not a government-owned corporation, and the airport land and buildings are part of the public dominion utilized for public use and transportation, so they cannot be subject to levy or auction. The case was dismissed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Manila International Airport Authority Vs Court of Appeals

    Uploaded by

    Evangelyn Egusquiza
    26 views2 pages
    This case involves a dispute over whether the Manila International Airport Authority (MIAA) is exempt from real estate taxes on the land and buildings of Ninoy Aquino International Airport. The officers of Parañaque City levied and auctioned off MIAA's property for unpaid taxes. MIAA argued it was exempt as an instrumentality of the government. The Court ruled that MIAA is an instrumentality of the government, not a government-owned corporation, and the airport land and buildings are part of the public dominion utilized for public use and transportation, so they cannot be subject to levy or auction. The case was dismissed.

    Original Title

    Manila International Airport Authority vs Court of Appeals

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case involves a dispute over whether the Manila International Airport Authority (MIAA) is exempt from real estate taxes on the land and buildings of Ninoy Aquino International Airport. The officers of Parañaque City levied and auctioned off MIAA's property for unpaid taxes. MIAA argued it was exempt as an instrumentality of the government. The Court ruled that MIAA is an instrumentality of the government, not a government-owned corporation, and the airport land and buildings are part of the public dominion utilized for public use and transportation, so they cannot be subject to levy or auction. The case was dismissed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    26 views2 pages

    Manila International Airport Authority Vs Court of Appeals

    Uploaded by

    Evangelyn Egusquiza
    This case involves a dispute over whether the Manila International Airport Authority (MIAA) is exempt from real estate taxes on the land and buildings of Ninoy Aquino International Airport. The officers of Parañaque City levied and auctioned off MIAA's property for unpaid taxes. MIAA argued it was exempt as an instrumentality of the government. The Court ruled that MIAA is an instrumentality of the government, not a government-owned corporation, and the airport land and buildings are part of the public dominion utilized for public use and transportation, so they cannot be subject to levy or auction. The case was dismissed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    Manila International Airport Authority vs Court of Appeals

    GR No. 155650,July 20, 2006, 495 SCRA 591


    Facts:
    Manila International Airport Authority (MIAA) is the operator of the Ninoy
    Aquino International Airport located at Paraaque City. The Officers at Paraaque
    City sent notices to MIAA due to real estate tax delinquency. MIAA then settled some
    of the amount. When MIAA failed to settle the entire amount, the officers Paraaque
    City threatened to levy and subject to auction the land and buildings of MIAA which
    they did. MIAA sought for a Temporary Restraining Order from the CA but failed to
    do so within the 60 days reglementary period, so the petition was dismissed. MIAA
    then sought for the TRO but unfortunately the TRO was received by the Paraaque
    City officers 3 hours after the public auction.
    MIAA claims that although the charter provides that the title of the land and
    building are with MIAA still the ownership is with the Republic of the Philippines.
    MIAA also contends that it is an instrumentality of the government and as such
    exempted from real estate tax. That the land and buildings land, the officers of
    Paraaque City claim that MIAA is a government owned and controlled corporation
    therefore not exempted to real estate tax.
    ISSUES:
    Whether or not MIAA is an instrumentality of the government and not the
    government owned and controlled corporation and as such exempted from tax.
    Whether or not the land and buildings of MIAA are part of the public dominion
    and thus cannot be the subject of levy and auction sale.
    RULLINGS:
    Under the local government code, government owned and controlled
    corporations are not exempted from real estate tax. MIAA is not a government
    owned and controlled corporations, for to become one MIAA should either be a stock
    or non stock corporation. MIAA is not a non stock corporations for its capital is not
    divided into shares. It is not a non stock corporation since it has no members. MIAA
    is an instrumentality of the government vested with corporate powers and
    government functions.
    Under the civil code, property may either be under public dominion or private
    ownership.Those under public dominion are owned by the State and are utilitized for
    public use., public service and for the development of national wealth. The ports
    included in the public dominion pertain either to seaports or airports. When
    properties under public dominion cease to be for public use and services, they form
    part of the patrimonial property of the State.
    The court held that the land and buildings are part of the public dominion.
    Since the airport is devoted for public use, for the domestic and international travel
    and transportation. Even if MIAA charge fees, this is for the support for its operation
    and for regulation and does not change the character of the land and buildings of
    MIAA as part of public dominion. As part of public dominion the land and buildings of
    MIAA are outside the commerce of man. To subject them so levy and public auction

    is contrary to public policy. Unless the President issues a proclamation widrawing


    the airport land and buildings from public use, these properties remain to be of
    public dominion and are inalienable. As long as the land and buildings are for the
    public use the ownership is with the Republic of the Philippines. Case dismissed.

    You might also like