Practice question
A telecommunications company proposes a public connectivity project and invokes the amended Right-of-Way Act to take a farmer's land. Its corporate purpose includes internet services, but it admits that neither its franchise nor any other law grants it eminent-domain power. It has sent a purchase offer that the farmer refused. It claims the project's usefulness and the Act's reference to connectivity are sufficient. Which conclusion is best?
- Its corporate purpose supplies the missing power
- Refusal of the offer automatically grants condemnation authority
- Every internet company has inherent eminent-domain power
- Public usefulness eliminates the need for legal authority
- The stated facts do not establish the legal eminent-domain grant required for a covered private entity
Legal references
- Republic Act No. 10752, Sections 3 and 4, as amended by Republic Act No. 12289, Sections 3 and 4: https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/2/99855
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.