Practice question
An owner directly petitions the Supreme Court, alleging that a revised assessment is confiscatory because it greatly exceeds the prior value. Resolving the claim requires sales data and expert testimony. The owner labels the dispute purely legal and cites transcendental importance. Under Pisón’s main opinion, what is the central procedural problem?
- The factual valuation dispute requires the proper administrative and fact-finding route; its label does not justify bypassing those remedies and the court hierarchy
- Every increase is automatically unconstitutional
- The Supreme Court must take evidence whenever transcendental importance is alleged
- The LBAA cannot hear valuation evidence
- Payment alone always establishes a constitutional violation
Legal references
- https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1991/ra_7160_1991.html — RA 7160, sections 226–231 and 252
- https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2024/ra_12001_2024.html — RA 12001, sections 14, 35 and 38
- https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/70361 — Pisón v. City of Iloilo, G.R. No. 272170, January 28, 2026, main opinion
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.