In this unofficial dissenting opinion, the author opposes the J.Y. Interpretation No.652, which allows the authority to cancel its decision of compensation, when the decision has found to be unlawfully unjust after the expropriation has been executed. According the motto: whenever there is an expropriation, there shall be compensation, the compensation must be paid to the landowner within three months after the determination of the confirmation in special circumstances as provided in Article 22 of A.E.D.(Act of Eminent Domain). The J.Y. Interpretation No. 516, shall still be applicable in this case. The author has criticized the reasoning of this Interpretation for its incorrectly empowering the canceling duty of authority, is based on the reverent regulations of A.P.L.(Administrative Procedural Law). As the A.E.D. has been enacted in 2000, the rules regulating the expropriation shall be this Act exclusively instead of A.P.L. The legislation body should amend the A.E.D. in order to create a more constitutional legal order of Eminent Domain.