LAND TITLES AND DEEDS REVIEWER

1  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

• • • •

• •

•

•

LAND  TITLES  AND  DEEDS   MIDTERM  2014  –  2015     I.   NATURE   OF   REGISTRATION   PROCEEDINGS   AND   JURISDICTION   OF  COURTS     1.  REGALIAN  DOCTRINE     The   Regalian   Doctrine   or   jura   regalia   embody   the   concept   that   all   lands  of  the  public  domain  are  owned  by  the  State.   The  State  is  the  source  of  any  asserted  right  to  ownership  and  charged   with  the  conservation  of  such  patrimony.   All   lands   not   otherwise   appearing   to   be   clearly   within   private   ownership  are  presumed  to  belong  to  the  State.   Basis:   The   theory   of   feudal   system   was   that   the   title   to   the   all   lands   was  originally  held  by  the  King,  and  while  the  use  of  lands  was  granted   out   to   others   who   were   permitted   to   hold   them   under   certain   conditions,  the  King  theoretically  retained  the  title.   It   was   adopted   and   enshrined   in   the   1935,   1973,   and   1987   Constitution.   Article  XII,  Section  2,  1987  Constitution:     “Section   2.   All   lands   of   the   public   domain,   waters,   minerals,   coal,   petroleum,  and  other  mineral  oils,  all  forces  of  potential  energy,  fisheries,   forests  or  timber,  wildlife,  flora  and  fauna,  and  other  natural  resources   are   owned   by   the   State.   With   the   exception   of   agricultural   lands,   all   other   natural   resources   shall   not   be   alienated.   The   exploration,   development,  and  utilization  of  natural  resources  shall  be  under  the  full   control   and   supervision   of   the   State.   The   State   may   directly   undertake   such   activities,   or   it   may   enter   into   co-­‐production,   joint   venture,   or   production-­‐sharing  agreements  with  Filipino  citizens,  or  corporations  or   associations  at  least  sixty  per  centum  of  whose  capital  is  owned  by  such   citizens.  Such  agreements  may  be  for  a  period  not  exceeding  twenty-­‐five   years,   renewable   for   not   more   than   twenty-­‐five   years,   and   under   such   terms  and  conditions  as  may  be  provided  by  law.  In  cases  of  water  rights   for   irrigation,   water   supply   fisheries,   or   industrial   uses   other   than   the   development  of  waterpower,  beneficial  use  may  be  the  measure  and  limit   of  the  grant.     CASE:  Cruz  vs.  Sec.  of  Environment  and  Natural  Resources     The   petitioners,   Isagani   Cruz   and   Cesar   Europa,   challenged   the   constitutionality   of   RA   No.   8371   or   the   IPRA   of   1997,   on   the   ground   that   it   amounts   to   an   unlawful   deprivation   of   the   State’s   ownership   over   lands   of   the   public   domain   and   all   other   natural   resources   therein,   by   recognizing   the   right   of   ownership   of   ICC/IPs   to   their   ancestral  domains  and  lands  on  the  basis  of  native  title.     The  Supreme  Court,  in  a  vote  of  7-­‐7,  upheld  the  constitutionality  of  the   IPRA.   Justice   Kapunan   stated   that   the   Regalian   Doctrine   does   not   negate   native   title   to   lands   held   in   private   ownership   since   time   immemorial   because   those   lands   are   presumed   to   never   have   been   a   public   land.   Moreover,   it   doesn’t   violate   the   Regalian   Doctrine   because   there   is   no   provision   in   the   IPRA   that   grants   ownership   over   natural   resources  within  the  ICC/IPs  ancestral  domain.       CASE:  Secretary  of  DENR  vs.  Yap     This   is   a   consolidated   petition   of   two   groups   of   private   claimants   contending   that   prior   to   Proclamation   No.   1064   issued   by   PGMA   in   2006,   Boracay   Island   was   unclassified   land   of   public   domain,   over   which  they  have  not  acquired  vested  rights  of  ownership.       The   group   of   Sumndad   insist   that   Boracay   Island   is   susceptible   of   private   ownership   by   acquisitive   prescription   under   applicable   laws   classifying   it   as   agricultural   land   and   as   a   tourism   zone   under   Proclamation   No.   1801   and   related   issuances.   For   their   part,   private   claimants   Mayor   Jose   S.   Yap,   Dr.   Orlando   Sacay,   and   Wilfredo   Gelito   assert  that  they  are  entitled  to  judicial  confirmation  of  imperfect  title   under  Proclamation  No.  1064.     The  Supreme  Court  DENIED  the  motions  and  ruled  the  following:     1. Proclamation   No.   1801   or   PTA   Circular   No.   3-­‐82   did   not   convert   the   whole   of   Boracay   into   an   agricultural   land.   There   is   nothing   in   the   law   or   the   Circular,   which   made   Boracay   Island   an   agricultural   land.   Simply   put,   the   proclamation   is   aimed   at   administering   the   islands   for   tourism   and   ecological   purposes.   It   does   not   address   the   areas'  alienability     2. On  the  constitutionality  of  Proclamation  No.  1064,  the  Court   cannot   entertain   private   claimants'   belated   argument   that   President   Arroyo   arrogated   unto   herself   the   Congressional   power  to  classify  forest  lands.  This  is  raised  for  the  first  time   and  it  is  a  collateral  attack  on  the  validity  of  Sections  6  and  7   of   the   Public   Land   Act,   the   basis   of   President   Arroyo's   action.  For  reasons  of  public  policy,  the  constitutionality  of  a   law  cannot  be  attacked  collaterally.      

 

2.  TORRENS  SYSTEM  OF  REGISTRATION     NATURE  OF  TORRENS  SYSTEM     • It  is  a  system  of  registration  of  transactions  with  interest  in  land   whose   declared   object   is,   under   governmental   authority,   to   establish   and   certify   to   the   ownership   of   an   absolute   and   indefeasible  title  to  realty,  and  to  simplify  its  transfer.   • It   is   the   most   effective   measure   to   guarantee   the   integrity   of   land  titles  and  to  protect  their  indefeasibility  once  the  claim  of   ownership  is  established  and  recognized.     PURPOSE  OF  TORRENS  SYSTEM     • To  avoid  possible  conflicts  of  title  in  and  to  real  property   • Facilitate  transactions  by  giving  the  public  the  right  to  rely  upon   the  face  of  the  Torrens  Certificate  of  Title  and;   • To   dispense   with   the   need   of   inquiring   further,   except   when   the   party   concerned   has   actual   knowledge   of   facts   and   circumstances   that   should   impel   a   reasonable   cautious   man   to   make  such  further  inquiry.     ADVANTAGES  OF  TORRENS  SYSTEM     • To  quiet  the  land   • To  accumulate  in  one  document  a  precise  and  correct  statement   of  the  exact  status  of  the  fee  held  by  its  owner   • To   decree   land   title   that   shall   be   final,   irrevocable,   and   sustainable   • To  decree  land  title  which  cannot  be  altered,  modified,  enlarged,   or   diminished   except   in   some   direct,   and   not   collateral   proceeding   • To  relieve  the  land  of  the  burden  of  known  and  unknown  claims   • To   put   a   stop   forever   to   any   question   as   to   the   legality   of   the   title   • To  simplify  ordinary  dealings  over  registered  land   • To  afford  protection  against  fraudulent  transactions   • To  restore  the  just  value  of  land   • To  minimize  conflicting  claims  and  stabilize  land  ownership     3. A   VIEW   OF   PAST   AND   PRESENT   LEGISLATION   ON   LAND   REGISTRATION     THE  PUBLIC  LAND  ACT,  CA  141     • Governed  the  disposition  of  lands  of  the  public  domain   • Prescribed   rules   and   regulations   for   the   homesteading,   selling,   and   leasing   of   portions   of   the   public   domain   of   the   Philippine   Islands   • Prescribed   the   terms   and   conditions   to   enable   persons   to   perfect  their  titles  to  public  lands  in  the  Islands   • Provided   for   the   issuance   of   patents   to   certain   native   settlers   upon  public  lands  for  the  establishment  of  town  sites  and  sale  of   lots   therein,   for   the   completion   of   imperfect   titles,   and   for   the   Islands   • In  short,  this  Act  worked  on  the  assumption  that  title  to  public   lands   in   the   Philippines   remained   in   the   government   and   that   the  government’s  title  to  public  land  sprung  from  the  Treaty  of   Paris   and   other   subsequent   treaties   between   Spain   and   the   US   PUBLIC  LAND   • Referred   to   all   land   of   the   public   domain   whose   title   still   remained   in   the   government   and   are   thrown   open   to   private   appropriation   and   settlement,   and   excluded   the   patrimonial   property  of  the  government  and  the  friar  lands     APPLICATION  OF  CA  141     • Applies  to  all  lands  of  public  domain  which  have  been  declared   open   to   disposition   or   concession   and   officially   delimited   and   classified   • Provisions   on   the   different   modes   of   government   grant— homesteads,   patents,   sales,   and   reservations   for   public   and   semipublic  purpose   • Has   a   chapter   on   judicial   confirmation   of   imperfect   or   incomplete  titles  based  on  acquisitive  prescription     THE  LAND  REGISTRATION  ACT,  ACT  NO.  946     • Established  the  Torrens  system  of  registration  in  the  country   • Court   of   Land   Registration—exclusive   jurisdiction   over   all   applications   for   registration,   with   power   to   hear   and   determine  all  questions  arising  upon  such  applications   • To   bring   land   titles   in   the   Philippines   under   one   comprehensive   and   harmonious   system,   the   cardinal   features   of   which   are   indefeasibility   of   title   and   the   intervention   of   the   State   as   a   prerequisite  to  the  creation  and  transfer  of  titles  and  interests,   with   the   resultant   increase   in   the   use   of   land   as   a   business   asset   by  reason  of  the  greater  certainty  and  security  of  title   • It  doesn’t  create  a  title  nor  vest  one  

1  

2  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

• • •

• •

•

•

• •

•

• • • • •

• •

•

• •

• •

• •

•

It  simply  confirms  a  title  already  created  and  already  vested,  rendering   it  forever  indefeasible.   Judicial   proceedings   were   in   rem   and   based   on   generally   accepted   principles  underlying  the  Torrens  system   Before   the   creation   of   the   Court   of   Land   Registration,   the   jurisdiction   to   determine   the   nature,   quality,   and   extent   of   land   titles,  the  rival  claims  of  contending  parties,  and  the  legality  and   effect  thereof  was  vested  in  the  Courts  of  First  Instance     WITH   THE   PASSAGE   OF   THE   ABOVEMENTIONED   ACT,   TWO   THINGS   OCCURRED  WORTHY  OF  NOTE:     A   court   of   limited   jurisdiction,   with   special   subject   matter,   and   with   only  one  purpose  was  created   By   reason   thereof,   courts   theretofore   of   general,   original,   exclusive   jurisdiction,   were   shun   of   some   of   their   attributes—in   other   words,   powers   were   restricted     THE  CADASTRAL  ACT,  ACT  NO.  2259     When,  in  the  option  of  the  President,  the  public  interest  requires  that   title  to  any  lands  be  settled  and  adjudicated,  he  shall  order  the  Director   of  Lands  to  make  a  survey  thereof,  with  notice  to  all  persons  claiming   interest  therein   Thereafter,  the  Director  of  Lands,  represented  by  the  Solicitor  General,   shall   institute   registration   proceedings   by   filing   a   petition   in   the   proper   court   against   the   holders,   claimants,   possessors,   or   occupants   of  such  lands,  stating  that  the  public  interest  requires  that  the  titles  to   such  lands  be  settled  and  adjudicated   Notice   of   the   filing   of   the   petition   is   published   twice   in   successive   issues  of  the  Official  Gazette   Decree   shall   be   the   basis   for   the   issuance   of   the   certificate   of   title   which  shall  have  the  same  effect  as  a  certificate  of  title  granted  under   the  Property  Registration  Decree   A   cadastral   proceeding   is   in   rem,   hence,   binding   generally   upon   the   whole  world     THE  PROPERTY  REGISTRATION  DECREE,  PD  1529     In  order  to  update  the  Land  Registration  Act   To  codify  the  various  laws  relative  to  the  registration  of  property  and   To  facilitate  effective  implementation  of  said  laws   Supercedes  all  laws  relative  to  the  registration  of  property   RTC:   jurisdiction   over   applications   for   registration   and   all   subsequent   proceedings   relative   thereto,   subject   to   judicial   review   Substantially   incorporated   the   substantive   and   procedural   requirements  of  its  precursor,  the  Land  Registration  Act  of  1902   It   has   expanded   the   coverage   to   include   judicial   combination   of   imperfect   and   incomplete   titles   in   its   Section   14   (1),   cadastral   registration  proceedings  in  Section  35  to  38,  voluntary  proceedings  in   Sections   51   to   68,   involuntary   proceedings   in   Sections   69   to   77,   certificates  of  land  transfer  and  emancipation  patents  issued  pursuant   to   PD   No.   27   in   Sections   104   to   106,   and   reconstruction   of   lost   or   destroyed  original  Torrens  titles  in  Section  110.   Judicial   proceedings   are   in   rem   and   are   based   on   general   principles   underlying  the  Torrens  system     REGISTRATION  UNDER  THE  TORRENS  SYSTEM  IS  A  PROCEEDING  IN   REM     Main  principle  of  registration:  to  make  registered  titles  indefeasible   All   occupants,   adjoining   owners,   adverse   claimants,   and   other   interested  persons  are  notified  of  the  proceedings,  and  have  a  right  to   appear  in  opposition  in  such  application   Proceeding  against  the  whole  world   Proceedings   shall   be   in   rem   and   based   on   generally   accepted   principles  under  the  Torrens  system     4. REGIONAL   TRIAL   COURTS   HAVE   EXCLUSIVE   JURISDICTION   OVER  LAND  REGISTRATION  CASES     PD  No.  1529  was  enacted  on  June  11,  1978.   Section  2  of  PD  No.  1529  provides  that:     “The   Regional   Trial   Court   shall   have   exclusive   jurisdiction   over   all   applications  for     1. ORIGINAL   REGISTRATION   of   title   to   lands,   including  improvements  and  interests  therein,  and;   2. Over   all   petitions   filed   AFTER   ORIGINAL   REGISTRATION  OF  TITLE,  with   power   to   hear   and   determine   all   questions   arising   upon   such   applications  or  petitions.     BEFORE   THE   ENACTMENT   OF   PD   NO.   1529,   the   following   rules   shall  apply:   1. IF   THERE   IS   NO   ADVERSE   CLAIM   OR   SERIOUS   OBJECTION   ON   THE   PART   OF   ANY   PARTY   IN   TEREST,   summary  reliefs,  such  as  an  action  to  compel   the   surrender   of   owner’s   duplicate   certificate   of   title   to   the   Register   of   Deeds,   could   only   be   filed   with   the  

 

2.

Regional   Trial   Court,   sitting   as   a   land   registration   court   IF   THERE   IS   CONTROVERSY   AND/OR   CONTENTIONS,   it   shall   be   an   ordinary   action   or   in   the  case  where  the  incident  property  belonged.  

  Section   34   of   BP   No.   129,   known   as   the   Judiciary   Reorganization   Act   of   1980,   as   amended   by   RA   No.   7691,   approved  March  25,  1994,  grants   to   first   level   courts   –   MTC,   MeTC,  MCTC  -­‐  delegated  jurisdiction  to  hear  and  determine   cadastral   or   land   registration   cases   in   the   following   instances.  

•

  1. 2.

Where  there  is  NO  CONTROVERSY  OR  OPPOSITION,  or   Contested   lots   the   where   the   value   of   which   does   NOT   EXCEED   ONE   HUNDRED   THOUSAND   PESOS   (P100,000.00),   such   value   to   be   ascertained   by   the   affidavit  of  the  claimant  or  by  agreement  of  the  respective   claimants   if   there   are   more   than   one,   or   from   the   corresponding  tax  declaration  of  the  real  property.  Their   decisions   in   these   cases   shall   be   appealable   in   the   same   manner  as  decisions  of  the  Regional  Trial  Courts.  

  Section   33   of   BP   No.   129  provides  that  the  MTC,  MeTC,  MCTC   shall  exercise:     1. Exclusive   original   jurisdiction   over   cases   of   forcible   entry   and   unlawful   detainer:   Provided,   That   when,   in   such   cases,   the   defendant   raises   the   question   of   ownership   in   his   pleadings   and   the   question   of   possession  cannot  be  resolved  without  deciding  the  issue   of  ownership,  the  issue  of  ownership  shall  be  resolved   only  to  determine  the  issue  of  possession.   2. Exclusive   original   jurisdiction   in   all   civil   actions   which   involve   title   to,   or   possession   of,   real   property,   or   any   interest   therein   where   the   assessed   value   of   the   property  or  interest  therein  does  not  exceed  Twenty   thousand   pesos   (P20,000.00)   or,   in   civil   actions   in   Metro   Manila,   where   such   assessed   value   does   not   exceed  Fifty  thousand  pesos  (P50,000.00)   exclusive   of   interest,   damages   of   whatever   kind,   attorney's   fees,   litigation   expenses   and   costs:   Provided,   That   value   of   such  property  shall  be  determined  by  the  assessed  value   of  the  adjacent  lots  

•

  DISTINCTION   BETWEEN   COURT’S   GENERAL   AND   LIMITED   JURISDICTION     The  Court  is  no  longer  fettered  by  its  former  limited  jurisdiction.   It   is   now   authorized   to   hear   and   decide   not   only   non-­‐ controversial   cases   but   also   even   the   contentious   and   substantial  issues,  which  before  were  beyond  its  competence.   The   jurisdiction   of   the   RTC   in   Section   2   of   the   Property   Registration  Decree  is  no  longer  circumscribed  as  it  was  under   Act  No.  496,  the  former  land  registration  law.   The   Decree   has   eliminated   the   distinction   between   the   general   jurisdiction   vested   in   the   RTC   and   the   limited   jurisdiction   conferred   upon   it   by   the   former   law   when   acting   merely   as   cadastral  court.  (Arceo  vs.  Court  of  Appeals)     CASE:  Junio  vs.  Delos  Santos  

•

•

•

•

  Petitioner   Junio   is   the   registered   owner   of   a   parcel   of   land   in   Pangasinan.   Respondent,   Delos   Santos,   alleged   that   Junio,   sold   to  him  1/3  of  petitioners  property.  Junio  denies  having  sold  the   portion   of   his   property   and   filed  an  action  to  cancel  the  adverse   claim  of  Delos  Santos.     The  Court,  in  this  case,  failed  to  conduct  a  speedy  hearing  due  to   the  presence  of  a  controversy.  The  Supreme  Court  ruled  that  the   lower   court,   instead   of   confining   itself   to   the   propriety   of   the   registration   of   the   adverse   claim   should   already   have   decided   the  controversy  between  the  parties  on  the  merits  thereof.     Doctrinal   jurisprudence   holds   that   the   CFI/RTC,   as   a   land   registration   court,   can   entertain   and   dispose   of   the   validity   or   invalidity   of   respondent’s   adverse   claim;   whether   petitioner   is   entitled   or   not   to   a   declaratory   relief.   SC   remanded   the   case   to   the  RTC  to  pass  controversy  on  merits.     -­‐-­‐-­‐  END  OF  PART  I  -­‐-­‐-­‐                      

2  

3  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

•

•

•

•

•

• •

II.   THE   LAND   REGISTRATION   COMMISSION   AND   REGISTRIES   OF   DEEDS       1. THE  LAND  REGISTRATION  AUTHORITY     The  Land  Registration  Authority  was  created  by  virtue  of  PD  No.  1529.  It  is   the   agency   of   the   government   charged   with   the   efficient   execution   of   the   laws   relative   to   the   registration   of   lands,   and   is   under   the   Executive   supervision  of  the  Department  of  Justice   The   LRA   is   headed   by   the   Administrator   and   two   (2)   Deputy   Administrators;  who  are  all  appointed  by  the  President  of  the  Philippines   upon  recommendation  of  the  DOJ  Secretary       FUNCTIONS  OF  THE  AUTHORITY     1. Extend  speedy  and  effective  assistance  to  the  Department  of  Agrarian   Reform,  the  Land  Bank,  and  other  agencies  in  the  implementation  of   the  land  reform  program  of  the  government;   2. Extend   assistance   to   courts   in   ordinary   and   cadastral   land   registration  proceedings;   3. Be   the   CENTRAL   REPOSITORY   OF   RECORDS   relative   to   original   registration   of   lands   titled   under   the   Torrens   system,   including   subdivision  and  consolidation  plans  of  titled  lands.     FUNCTIONS  OF  LRA  ADMINISTRATOR     1. Issue   decrees   of   registration   pursuant   to   final   judgments   of   the   courts   in   land   registration   proceedings   and   cause   the   issuance   by   the   Registers  of  Deeds  of  the  corresponding  certificates  of  title;   2. Exercise   supervision   and   control   over   all   Registers   of   Deeds   and   other  personnel  of  the  Commission;   3. Resolve  cases  elevated  en  consulta  by,  or  on  appeal  from  decision  of,   Registers  of  Deeds;     4. Exercise  executive  supervision  over  all  clerks  of  court  and  personnel   of   the   Courts   of   First   Instance   throughout   the   Philippines   with   respect   to   the   discharge   of   their   duties   and   functions   in   relation   to   the  registration  of  lands;   5. Implement  all  orders,  decisions,  and  decrees  promulgated  relative  to   the   registration   of   lands   and   issue,   subject   to   the   approval   of   the   Secretary   of   Justice,   all   needful   rules   and   regulations   therefor;(f)   Verify   and   approve   subdivision,   consolidation,   and   consolidation-­‐ subdivision   survey   plans   of   properties   titled   under   Act   No.   496   except  those  covered  by  P.D.  No.  957.     The  duty  of  the  LRA’s  Administrator  is  purely  ministerial  in  a  sense  that   they   act   under   the   orders   of   the   court   and   the   decree   must   be   in   conformity  with  the  decision  of  the  Court.   However,  if  they  are  in  doubt  upon  any  point  in  relation  to  the  preparation   and   issuance   of   the   decree,   it   is   their   duty   to   refer   the   matter   to   the   Court.   They   act,   in   this   respect,   as   officials   of   the   Court   since   they   are   specially   called   upon   to   extend   assistance   to   courts   in   ordinary   and   cadastral   land   registration  proceedings.     2. OFFICE  OF  THE  REGISTER  OF  DEEDS     The  Office  of  the  Register  of  Deeds  constitutes  a  PUBLIC  REPOSITORY  OF   RECORDS   of   instruments   affecting   registered   or   unregistered   land   and   chattel  mortgages  in  the  province  of  city  wherein  such  office  is  situated.   There   shall   be   at   least   one   Register   of   Deeds   for   each   province   and   one   for   each  city.   The   Secretary   of   Justice   shall   define   the   official   station   and   territorial   jurisdiction   of   each   Registry   upon   the   recommendation   of   the   Administrator.     FUNCTIONS  AND  DUTIES  OF  RD     1. It   shall   be   the   duty   of   the   Register   of   Deeds   to   immediately   register   an   instrument   presented   for   registration   dealing   with   real   or   personal   property,   which   complies   with   all   the   requisites   for   registration.     2. He  shall  see  to  it  that  said  instrument  bears  the  proper  documentary   and  science  stamps  and  that  the  same  are  properly  canceled.     3. If   the   instrument   is   not   registerable,   he   shall   forthwith   deny   registration   thereof   and   inform   the   presentor   of   such   denial   in   writing,   stating   the   ground   or   reason   therefor,   and   advising   him   of   his   right   to   appeal   by   consulta   in   accordance   with   Section   117   of   this   Decree   4. Prepare   and   keep   index   system,   which   contains   the   names   of   all   registered   owners   alphabetically   arranged   and   all   the   lands   respectively  registered  in  their  names     DUTY  OF  THE  REGISTER  OF  DEEDS  TO  REGISTER,  MINISTERIAL     • He  may  not  validly  refuse  to  register  a  deed  of  sale  presented  to  him   for  registration.   • Whether   a   document   is   valid   or   not   is   not   for   the   Register   of   Deeds  to  determine;  this  function  belongs  properly  to  a  court  of   competent  jurisdiction.  (Almirol  vs.  RD  of  Agusan)   • Hence,   registration   must   first   be   allowed,   and   the   validity   or   effect   thereof  litigated  afterwards.    

 

THE  REGISTY  OF  PROPERTY   REGISTRATION   means   the   entry   of   instruments   or   deeds   in   a   book   or   public   registry.   It   is   the   entry   made   in   the   registry   which   records   solemnly   and   permanently   the   right   of   ownership  and  other  real  rights.   The   registration   of   instruments   affecting   registered   land   must   be   done   in   the   proper   registry,   in   order   to   affect   and   bind   the   land  and,  thus,  operate  as  constructive  notice  to  the  world.   Thus,   if   the   sales   is   not   registered,   it   is   binding   only   between   parties  but  it  does  not  affect  innocent  third  persons  

•

•

• 1.

The  original  copy  of  the  original  certificate  of  title  shall  be  filed   in   the   Registry   of   Deeds.   The   same   shall   be   bound   in   consecutive  order  together  with  similar  certificates  of  title  and   shall  constitute  the  registration  book  for  titled  properties.   Each  Register  of  Deeds  shall  keep  a  primary  entry  book  where   all  instruments  including  copies  of  writs  and  processes  relating   to  registered  land  shall  be  entered  in  order  of  their  filing.   They  shall  be  regarded  as  registered  from  the  time  so  noted.  

2. 3.  

EFFECT  OF  REGISTRATION   Registration   in   the   public   registry   is   NOTICE   TO   THE   WHOLE   WORLD.   The   act   of   registration   shall   be   the   operative   act   to   convey   or   affect   the   land   insofar   as   third   persons   are   concerned,   and   in   all   cases   under   PD   No.   1529,   the   registration   shall   be   made   in   the   office  of  the  Register  of  Deeds  in  the  city  or  province  where  the   land  lies.     INSTANCES   WHERE   THE   REGISTER   OF   DEEDS   MAY   DENY   REGISTRATION     When   there   are   several   copies   of   the   title   but   only   one   is   presented  with  the  instrument  to  be  registered.   When   the   property   is   presumed   to   be   conjugal   but   the   instrument   of   conveyance   bears   the   signature   of   only   one   purpose   When  there  is  a  pending  case  in  court  where  the  character  of  the   land  and  validity  of  the  conveyance  are  in  issue   When  the  instrument  is  not  notarized   When  required  certificates  of  documents  are  not  submitted     CASE:  Baranda  vs.  Gustilo     This  is  originally  a  petition  for  reconstitution  of  Title  filed  with   CFI   of   Iloilo   involving   a   parcel   of   land   known   as   lot   no.   4517   covered   by   OCT   No.   6406   in   the   name   of   Romana   Hitalia.   The   said   OCT   no.   6406   was   cancelled   and   transferred   to   TCT   no.   106098  in  the  names  of  Alfonso  Hitalia  and  Eduardo  Baranda.     SC:   Respondent   Judge   Tito   Gustilo   abused   his   discretion   in   sustaining  the  respondent  Acting  Register  of  Deeds'  stand  that,   the   notice   of   lis   pendens   in   the   certificates   of   titles   of   the   petitioners   over   Lot   No.   4571,   Barbara   Cadastre   cannot   be   cancelled   on   the   ground   of   pendency   of   Civil   Case   No.   15871   with  the  Court  of  Appeals.       The   function   of   the   RD   with   reference   to   the   registration   of   deeds,  encumbrances,  instruments  and  the  like  is  ministerial  in   nature.   The   acting   RD   did   not   have   any   legal   standing   to   file   a   motion   for   reconsideration   of   the   respondent’s   order   directing   him  to  cancel  the  notice  of  lis  pendens  annotated.  

• •

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. •

  •

CASE:  Almirol  vs.  Register  of  Deeds  of  Agusan     Teodoro   Almirol   purchased   a   parcel   of   land   in   Agusan   from   Arcenio   Abalo.   The   land   was   originally   registered   to   “Arcenio   Abalo,   married   to   Nicolasa   Abalo.”   Almirol   went   to   the   RD   to   secure  his  name  in  the  TCT,  however  the  RD  refused  to  register   the  land  because:   1. The   OCT   was   registered   under   Arcenio   and   Nicolasa  Abalo;   2. That  in  a  sale  of  conjugal  property,  acquired  after   the   effectivity   of   the   NCC,   both   spouses   should   sign  the  document;   3. Since   the   wife   has   already   died,   the   surviving   husband   cannot   dispose   of   the   property   without   violating  the  existing  law     Because   of   the   refusal   of   RD,   Almirol   filed   a   petition   for   mandamus   to   compel   the   RD   to   register   the   Deed   of   Sale   and   issue  to  him  the  corresponding  TCT.     SC:   When  the  RD  is  in  doubt  as  to  any  instrument  presented  to   him  for  registration,  all  that  is  supposed  to  do  is  to  submit  and   certify  the  question  to  the  Administrator  of  LRA,  who  shall,  after   notice   and   hearing,   enter   an   order   prescribing   the   steps   to   be   taken  on  the  doubtful  question.     -­‐-­‐-­‐  END  OF  PART  II  -­‐-­‐-­‐  

3  

4  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

•

•

III.  MODES  OF  REGISTERING  LAND  TITLES     1. CITIZENSHIP  REQUIREMENT     CASE:  Krivenko  vs.  Register  of  Deeds       This   is   a   landmark   case   decided   by   the   Philippine   Supreme   Court,   which   further   solidified   the   PROHIBITION   OF   THE   PHILIPPINE   CONSTITUTION   THAT   ALIENS   MAY   NOT   ACQUIRE   PRIVATE   OR   PUBLIC  AGRICULTURAL  LANDS,  INCLUDING  RESIDENTIAL  LANDS.     This  was  the  outcome  of  the  petition  by  Alexander  Krivenko,  an  alien,  who   bought   a   residential   land   in   Manila,   Philippines   on   December   1941.   However,  he  failed  to  register  the  same  due  to  Japan’s  declaration  of  war.   Later   on   in   May   1945,   he   again   sought   the   registration   of   the   same   land   but   the   herein   respondent,   Register   of   Deeds,   denied   the   application   because   as   an   alien,   Krivenko   was   disqualified   to   own   land   pursuant   to   the   laws   of   the   Philippine   jurisdiction.   Krivenko   brought  the  case  to  the  Court  of  First  Instance  of  Manila  which  sustained   the   refusal   of   the   Register   of   Deeds   of   Manila.   He   then   appealed   to   the   Supreme  Court.     During  the  pendency  of  the  appeal,  a  new  circular  by  the  Department  of   Justice   was   released,   instructing   all   registers   of   deeds   to   accept   for   registration  all  transfers  of  residential  lots  to  aliens.  With  the  effect  of  the   circular   swaying   in   his   favor,   Krivenko   thereafter   filed   a   motion   to   withdraw   his   appeal.   However,   the   Supreme   Court   deemed   it   best   to   exercise   its   discretionary   powers   and   denied   Krivenko’s   appeal,   in   order   to   tackle   the   more   pressing   constitutional   issue;   and   in   the   process,   established  itself  as  a  landmark  case  with  regard  to  foreign  ownership  of   lands  in  the  Philippines     The   1935   COMMONWEALTH   CONSTITUTION   served   as   the   main   point   of  reference  in  this  case;  the  following  facts  however,  should  be  noted:     1. The  1943  Constitution  was  already  in  place  at  the  time  this   case  was  penned  in  1947   2. Krivenko  bought  the  property  in  December  1941   3. The   dispute   about   the   registration   and   the   denial   of   such   by  the  register  of  deeds  occurred  in  May  1945.   4. Section   1,   Article   XIII   of   the   1935   Constitution   was   reproduced  verbatim  in  Section  1,  Article  VIII  of  the  1943   Constitution     1935  Constitution:  Article  XIII,  Section  5.  Save  in  cases  of  hereditary   succession,   no   private   agricultural   land   shall   be   transferred   or   assigned   except  to  individuals,  corporations,  or  associations  qualified  to  acquire  or   hold  lands  of  the  public  domain  in  the  Philippines.     1935   Constitution:   Article   XIII,   Section   1.  It  should  be  clear  that  lands  of   the  public  domain  are  by  the  State  first  and  foremost,  but  its  utilization  is   limited   to   Filipino   citizens   only,   or   to   corporations   whose   60%   capital   stock   are   owned   by   Filipinos.   It   is   clear   from   these   phrases   that   the   bent   towards  excluding  foreigners  is  already  evident.     “…Natural  resources,  with  the  exception  of  public  agricultural  land,   shall   not   be   alienated,   and   no   license,   concession,   or   lease   for   the   exploitation,   development,   or   utilization   of   any   of   the   natural   resources  shall  be  granted  for  a  period  exceeding  twenty-­‐five  years,   renewable  for  another  twenty-­‐five  years…     When   Sections   1   and   5   are   read   together,   it   is   therefore   clear   that   aliens   are   prohibited   from   acquiring   lands   in   the   Philippines,   subject   to  exceptions  provided  by  law.     The  penned  decision  referred  to  the  Constitutional  Convention,  specifically   the  report  of  the  Committee  on  Nationalization  and  Preservation  of  Lands   and  other  Natural  Resources,  for  the  purpose  behind  the  principle:     "that  lands,  minerals,  forests,  and  other  natural  resources  constitute   the  exclusive  heritage  of  the  Filipino  nation.  They  should,  therefore,   be  preserved  for  those  under  the  sovereign  authority  of  that  nation   and  for  their  posterity."     The  CA  141,  which  blocked  out  the  right  of  aliens  from  acquiring  property   by   reciprocity;   previously   granted   them   by   the   Public   Land   Act   No.   2874   sections  120  and  121  further  supports  this.     The  Supreme  Court  affirmed  the  act  of  the  Register  of  Deeds  in  denying  the   registration   of   Krivenko’s   land,   and   established   itself   as   a   landmark   case   when   addressing   the   issue   of   foreign   ownership   of   lands   within   the   jurisdiction  of  the  Philippines.     CASE:  Halili  vs  Court  of  Appeals     Simeon  de  Guzman,  American  citizen,  died  intestate  and  the  ownership  of   his  land  went  to  Helen,  his  wife.  Helen  then  executed  a  deed  of   quitclaim   and  assignment  of  rights  and  titles  over  six  (6)  parcels  of  land  in  favor  of   David  Rey,  her  son.  David  Rey  then  sold  the  lands  to  Emiliano  Cataniag.     Petitioners,   adjoining   lot   owners,   questioned   the   validity   and   constitutionality  of  the  conveyances.  

 

SC:  In  fine,  non-­‐Filipinos  cannot  acquire  or  hold  title  to  private   lands   or   to   lands   of   the   public   domain,   except   only   by   way   of   legal  succession.     But   what   is   the   effect   of   a   subsequent   sale   by   the   disqualified   alien   vendee   to   a   qualified   Filipino   citizen?     This   is   not   a   novel   question.   Jurisprudence   is   consistent   that   “if   land   is   invalidly  transferred  to  an  alien  who  subsequently  becomes   a  citizen  or  transfers  it  to  a  citizen,  the  flaw  in  the  original   transaction   is   considered   cured   and   the   title   of   the   transferee  is  rendered  valid.”     ACQUISITION   OF   AGRICULTURAL   LANDS   OF   THE   PUBLIC   DOMAIN  ARE  LIMITED  TO  FILIPINO  CITIZENS     WHO  MAY  ACQUIRE  PRIVATE  LANDS     Ø Filipino  citizens;   Ø Filipino   corporations   and   associations   as   defined   in   Section  2,  Article  XII  of  the  Constitution;  and,  by  exception;   Ø Aliens,  but  only  by  hereditary  succession   Ø A   natural-­‐born   citizen   of   the   Philippines   who   has   lost   his   citizenship  under  the  terms  of  Section  8     o Section   7.   Save   in   cases   of   hereditary   succession,   no  private  lands  shall  be  transferred  or  conveyed   except   to   individuals,   corporations,   or   associations  qualified  to  acquire  or  hold  lands  of   the  public  domain.   o Section   8.   Notwithstanding   the   provisions   of   Section  7  of  this  Article,  a  natural-­‐born  citizen  of   the   Philippines   who   has   lost   his   Philippine   citizenship   may   be   a   transferee   of   private   lands,   subject  to  limitations  provided  by  law.   o “Subject  to  limitations  provided  by  law”   § Maximum   area   of   5000   Sq/m.   in   urban  land;   § 3  hectares  in  case  of  rural  land   § In   case   of   married   couples,   one   of   them   may   avail   of   the   privilege   granted.   § But   if   both   shall   avail   the   same,   the   total   area   acquired   shall   not   exceed  the  maximum  fixed.   o The   area   limitation   does   not   apply   to   natural-­‐ born   citizen   who   has   lost   his   citizenship   but   who   has   “re-­‐acquired”   the   same   under   the   Citizenship   and   Re-­‐acquisition   Act   of   2003   because   the   said   law   grants   him   the   right   to   “enjoy   full   civil   and   political   rights”   upon   the   re-­‐acquisition  of  his  Filipino  citizenship.     • •

Filipino   citizens   can   both   “acquire”   or   otherwise   “hold”   lands  of  public  domain.   Filipino   corporations   cannot   acquire   lands   of   the   public   domain,  BUT   THEY   CAN   HOLD   SUCH   LANDS   BY   MODES   OTHER  THAN  ACQUISITION  SUCH  AS  LEASE  

  ALIENS  MAY  LEASE  PRIVATE  LAND     Ø While   aliens   are   disqualified   from   acquiring   lands   of   the   public   domain,   they   may   however   lease   private   lands.   A   lease  to  an  alien  for  a  reasonable  period  is  valid.   Ø An   alien   may   buy   a   real   property   in   the   Philippines,   on   condition  that  he  is  granted  Philippine  citizenship.     •

CASE:  Llantino  vs.  Co  Liong  Chong     A  Chinese  National,  Co  Liong  Chong,  entered  into  a  contract  with   Filipino  spouses  Gregorio  and  Belinda  Llantino,  for   a   lease  of  a   land   in   the   Philippines   for   60   years.   Co   Liong   Chong   built   a   commercial   establishment   in   the   leased   lot.   During   the   term   of   the  lease  contract,  Co  Liong  Chong  eventually  acquired  Filipino   citizenship,  and  went  by  the  name  Juan  Molina.     The   defendant   was   placed   in   possession   of   the   property   but   knowing   that   the   period   of   the   least   would   end   with   the   year   1967,  petitioners  requested  private  respondent  for  a  conference   but  the  latter  did  not  honor  the  request  and  instead  he  informed   the   petitioners   that   he   had   already   constructed   a   commercial   building   on   the   land   worth   P50,000.00;   that   the   lease   contract   was   for   a   period   of   sixty   (60)   years,   counted   from   1954;   and   that  he  is  already  a  Filipino  citizen.  The  claim  of  Chong  came  as   a   surprise   to   the   Llantinos   because   they   did   not   remember   having   agreed   to   a   sixty-­‐year   lease   agreement   as   that   would   virtually   make   Chong   the   owner   of   the   realty   which,   as   a   Chinese   national,   he   had   no   right   to   own   and   neither   could   he   have   acquired   such   ownership   after   naturalization   subsequent   to  1954.    

4  

5  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

•

•

•

SC:  Under  the  circumstances,  a  lease  to  an  alien  for  a  reasonable  period  is   valid.   So   is   an   option   giving   an   alien   the   right   to   buy   real   property   on   condition   that   he   is   granted   Philippine   citizenship.   Aliens   are   not   completely  excluded  by  the  Constitution  from  use  of  lands  for  residential   purposes.  Since  their  residence  in  the  Philippines  is  temporary,  they  may   be   granted   temporary   rights   such   as   a   lease   contract,   which   is   not   forbidden   by   the   Constitution.   Should   they   desire   to   remain   here   forever   and   share   our   fortune   and   misfortune,   Filipino   citizenship   is   not   impossible  to  acquire.     In   the   case   at   bar,   even   assuming,   arguendo,   that   the   subject   contract   is   prohibited,   the  same  can  no  longer  be  questioned  presently  upon  the   acquisition   by   the   private   respondent   of   Filipino   citizenship.   It   was   held   that   sale   of   a   residential   land   to   an   alien   which   is   now   in   the   hands  of  a  naturalized  Filipino  citizen  is  valid.     CORPORATION   SOLE   MAY   ACQUIRE   AND   REGISTER   PRIVATE   AGRICULTURAL  LAND     Corporation   Sole   -­‐   For   the   purpose   of   administering   and   managing,   as   trustee,   the   affairs,   property   and   temporalities   of   any   religious   denomination,   sect   or   church,   a   corporation   sole   may   be   formed   by   the   chief   archbishop,   bishop,   priest,   minister,   rabbi   or   other   presiding   elder   of   such  religious  denomination,  sect  or  church.     CASE:  Roman  Catholic  Apostolic  Administrator  of  Davao  Inc.  vs  LRC     Mateo   L.   Rodis,   a   Filipino   citizen   and   resident   of   the   City   of   Davao,   executed  a  deed  of  sale  of  a  parcel  of  land  in  favor  of  the  Roman  Catholic   Apostolic   Administrator   of   Davao   Inc.(Roman),   a   corporation   sole   organized   and   existing   in   accordance   with   Philippine   Laws,   with   Msgr.   Clovis  Thibault,  a  Canadian  citizen,  as  actual  incumbent.       The   Register   of   Deeds   of   Davao   for   registration,   having   in   mind   a   previous   resolution   of   the   CFI   in   Carmelite   Nuns   of   Davao   were   made   to   prepare   an   affidavit   to   the   effect   that   60%   of   the   members   of   their   corp.   were   Filipino   citizens  when  they  sought  to  register  in  favor  of  their  congregation  of  deed   of   donation   of   a   parcel   of   land,   required   it   to   submit   a   similar   affidavit   declaring  the  same.     June   28,   1954:   Roman   in   the   letter   expressed   willingness   to   submit   an   affidavit   but   not   in   the   same   tenor   as   the   Carmelite   Nuns   because   it   had   five   incorporators   while   as   a   corporation   sole   it   has   only   one   and   it   was   ownership  through  donation  and  this  was  purchased.     SC:   A   corporation   sole,   which   consists   of   one   person   only,   is   vested   with   the   right   to   purchase   and   hold   real   estate   and   to   register   the   same   in   trust   for   the   faithful   or   members   of   the   religious   society   or   church  for  which  the  corporation  was  organized.     A   corporation   sole   is   not   the   owner   of   the   properties   that   he   may   acquire   but   merely   the   administrator   thereof.   The   properties   pass,   upon   the   death,   not   to   his   personal   heirs   but   to   his   successors   in   office.       In  this  sense,  the  king  is  a  sole  corporation;  so  is  a  bishop,  or  dens,  distinct   from  their  several  chapters       CORPORATION  SOLE     • Composed  of  only  one  persons,  usually  the  head  or  bishop  of  the   diocese,  a  unit  which  is  not  subject  to  expansion  for  the  purpose   of  determining  any  percentage  whatsoever   • Only   the   administrator   and   not   the   owner   of   the   temporalities   located  in  the  territory  comprised  by  said  corporation  sole  and   such   temporalities   are   administered   for   and   on   behalf   of   the   faithful   residing   in   the   diocese   or   territory   of   the   corporation   sole   • Has   no   nationality   and   the   citizenship   of   the   incumbent   and   ordinary  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  operation,  management  or   administration   of   the   corporation   sole,   nor   effects   the   citizenship   of   the   faithful   connected   with   their   respective   dioceses  or  corporation  sole.     Constitution  demands  that  in  the  absence  of  capital  stock,  the  controlling   membership  should  be  composed  of  Filipino  citizens.  There  is  undeniable   proof   that   the   members   of   the   Roman   Catholic   Apostolic   faith   within   the   territory  of  Davao  are  predominantly  Filipino  citizens.     DONATION   IN   FAVOR   OF   A   RELIGIOUS   CORPORATION   CONTROLLED   BY  NON-­‐FILIPINOS  NON  REGISTRABLE     CASE:  Register  of  Deeds  of  Rizal  vs.  Ung  Sui  Temple     A   Filipino   citizen   executed   a   deed   of   donation   in   favor   of   the   Ung   Siu   Si   Temple,  an  unregistered  religious  organization  that  operated  through   three  trustees  all  of  Chinese  nationality.  The  Register  of  Deeds  refused   to   record   the   deed   of   donation   executed   in   due   form   arguing   that   the   Constitution  provides  that  acquisition  of  land  is  limited  to  Filipino  citizens,   or  to  corporations  or  associations  at  least  60%  of  which  is  owned  by  such   citizens.  

 

SC:   Sec.   5,   Art.   13   of   the   Constitution   provides   that   save   in   cases   of   hereditary   succession,   no   private   agricultural   land   shall   be   transferred   or   assigned   except   to   individuals,   corporations,   or   associations   qualified   to   hold   lands   of   the   public   domain   in   the   Philippines.   The   Constitution   does   not   make  any  exception  in  favor  of  religious  associations.     The  fact  that  appellant  has  no  capital  stock  does  not  exempt  it   from   the   Constitutional   inhibition,   since   its   member   are   of   foreign   nationality.   The   purpose   of   the   60%   requirement   is   to   ensure   that   Filipinos   shall   control   corporations   or   associations   allowed   to   acquire   agricultural   lands   or   to   exploit   natural   resources;   and   the   spirit   of   the   Constitution   demands   that   in   the   absence   of   capital   stock,   controlling   membership   should   be   composed  of  Filipino  citizens.     LAND  SOLD  TO  AN  ALIEN  WHICH  IS  NOW  IN  THE  HANDS  OF  A   FILIPINO  MAY  NO  LONGER  BE  ANNULLED     • CASE:  De  Castro  vs.  Tan     Doctrine:   The   sale   of   a   residential   land   to   an   alien   but   now   already  in  the  hand  of  a  naturalized  Filipino  citizen  is  valid.     In  1938,  petitioner  Filomena  de  Castro  sold  a  residential  lot  to  a   Chinese,   Tan   Tai.   Tan   Tai   died   leaving   behind   respondents,   his   widow,  and  children.  Before  his  death,  one  of  his  sons,  Joaquin,   became   a   naturalized   Filipino.   Six   years   after   Tan   Tai’s   death,   his   heirs   executed   an   extra   judicial   settlement   of   estate   with   sale,  whereby  the  disputed  land  was  allotted  to  Joaquin.       The  petitioner  commenced  suit  against  the  heirs  of  Tan  Tai  for   annulment  of  sale  and  alleged  violation  of  the  1935  Constitution   for   selling   land   to   aliens.   The   respondents   moved   to   dismiss   the   case   because   of   lack   of   action   and   due   to   the   fact   that   Joaquin   is   already  a  Filipino  citizen.     SC:   Independently   of   the   doctrine   of   pari   delicto,   the   petitioner   cannot   have   the   sale   annulled   and   recover   the   lot   she   herself   has   sold.   While   the   vendee   was   an   alien   at   the  time  of  the  sale,  the  land  has  since  become  the  property,   of   respondent   Joaquin   Teng,   a   naturalized   Philippine   citizen,  who  is  constitutionally  qualified  to  own  land.     “The   litigated   property   is   now   in   the   hands   of   a   naturalized   Filipino.   A   disqualified   vendee   no   longer   owns   it.   Respondent,   as   a   naturalized   citizen,   was   constitutionally   qualified   to   own   the   subject   property.   There   would   be   no   more   public   policy   to   be   served   in   allowing  petitioner  to  recover  the  land  as  it  is  already  in   the  hands  of  a  qualified  person.”     • CASE:  Republic  vs.  IAC     Doctrine:   A   conveyance   of   a   residential   lot   to   an   alien   prior   to   his  acquisition  of  Filipino  citizenship  is  valid.     Chua   Kim   (aka   Uy   Teng   Be)   was   the   adopted   son   of   Gregorio   Reyes  Uy  Un.  Lot  1  and  2  were  sold  to  Gregorio  by  the  Manosca   spouses,   and   Lot   549   by   Marquez   spouses.   When   Gregorio   died,   Uy  Teng  Be  took  possession  of  the  property.  The  3  subject  lands   later   became   subject   of   a   compromise   agreement   in   litigation   in   Quezon  City,  and  the  court  finds  that  Chua  Kim  has  established   his   registrable   title   over   the   property.   The   Solicitor   General   challenged   the   correctness   of   the   order.   The   CA   affirmed   the   CFI’s  decision,  hence  this  appeal.     The  Republic's  theory  is  that  the  conveyances  to  Chua  Kim  were   made  while  he  was  still  an  alien,  i.e.,  prior  to  his  taking  oath  as  a   naturalized   Philippine   citizen   on   January   7,   1977,   at   a   time   when   he   was   disqualified   to   acquire   ownership   of   land   in   the   Philippines  hence,  his  asserted  titles  are  null  and  void.     SC:   The   conveyances   were   made   before   the   1935   Constitution   went   into   effect:   at   a   time   when   there   was   no   prohibition   against   acquisition   of   private   agricultural   lands   by   aliens.   Gregorio   Reyes   Uy   Un   therefore   acquired   good   title   to   the   lands   thus   purchased   by   him,   and   his   ownership   was   not   at   all   affected  either:   i. By  the  principle  subsequently  enunciated  in  the   1935   Constitution   that   aliens   were   incapacitated   to   acquire   lands   in   the   country,   since   that   constitutional   principle   has   no   retrospective  application,  or     ii. By   his   and   his   successor's   omission   to   procure   the   registration   of   the   property   prior   to   the   coming  into  effect  of  the  Constitution.     The  litigated  property  is  now  in  the  hands  of  a  naturalized   Filipino.   A   disqualified   vendee   no   longer   owns   it.   Respondent,   as   a   naturalized   citizen,   was   constitutionally   qualified  to  own  the  subject  property.  

5  

6  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

•

•

• •

• •

•

Ø

Ø

Ø

RECOVERY  OF  LAND  SOLD  TO  AN  ALIEN     CASE:  Rellosa  vs.  Gaw  Chee  Hun     On   1944,   Dionisio   Rellosa,   a   Filipino,   sold   to   Gaw   Chee   Hun,   a   Chinese,   a   parcel   of   land   with   a   house   erected   on   it,   located   in   Manila.   Both   parties   entered   into   a   lease   contract,   whereby   Rellosa,   the   vendor,   occupied   the   land  under  the  condition  that  Gaw  Chee  obtains  the  approval  of  the  sale  by   the   Japanese   Administration.   Gaw   Chee   did   not   obtain   such   approval.   Rellosa   now   seeks   to   annul   the   sale   and   thelease.   Gaw   Chee,   meanwhile,   contends  that  such  sale  was  absolute  and  conditional,  the  same  not  being   contrary  to  law,  morals  and  public  order.  He  further  states  that  Rellosa  is   estopped  from  asserting  his  ownership  over  the  land,  after  having  leased   the  same  from  Gaw  Chee,  and  thus,  recognizing  Gaw  Chee’s  title  over  the   property.     SC:  A   party   to   an   illegal   contract   cannot   come   into   court   to   have   his   illegal   objects   carried   out.   This   is   the   doctrine   of   In   Pari   Delicto.   Rellosa’s   sale   of   the   land   to   Gaw   Chee,   an   alien   is   against   the   Constitution   and   is   thus   illegal.   The   Commonwealth   Act   provided   that   such  sale  is  not  only  unlawful  but  also  null  and  void  ab  initio,  that  such  will   effect   the   annulling   and   cancelling   of   the   title   originally   issued,   and   reverting  the  property  and  its  improvements  to  the  State.     CASE:  Philippine  Banking  Corporation  vs.  Lui  She     Justiniana,   represented   by   PBC,   and   Wong   Heng,   represented   by   Lui   She,   entered   into   a   contract   of   lease   for   50   years   with   an   option   to   buy,   and   eventually   extended   it   to   99   years   upon   failure   of   Wong   Heng   to   secure   Philippine  nationality.     SC:   Invalidity   of   lease;   if   an   alien   is   given   not   only   a   lease,   but   an   option   to   buy   a   piece   of   land,   by   virtue   of   which   the   Filipino   owner   cannot   sell   or   otherwise  of  his  property,  this  to  last  50  years,  then  it  becomes  clear  that   the  arrangement  is  a  virtual  transfer  of  ownership     2. CLASSIFICATION  OF  PUBLIC  LAND     The  classification  of  public  lands  is  an  EXCLUSIVE   PREROGATIVE   OF   THE   EXECUTIVE  DEPARTMENT  of  the  government  and  not  of  the  courts.     In   the   absence   of   such   classification,   the   land   REMAINS   AS   UNCLASSIFIED  LAND  until  it  is  released  therefrom  and  rendered  open  to   disposition.   CA  No.  141  has,  since  its  enactment  on  NOVEMBER  7,  1936,  governed   the  classification  and  disposition  of  lands  of  the  public  domain.   The   President   is   authorized,   from   time   to   time,   to   classify   the   lands   of   public   domain   into   alienable   and   disposable,   timber,   or   mineral   lands.   Under   Section   6   of   the   Public   Land   Act,   the   President,   through   a   Presidential  Proclamation  or  an  Executive  Order,  can  classify  or  reclassify   land  to  be  included  or  excluded  from  the  public  domain.   The  DENR  Secretary  is  the  ONLY  OTHER  PUBLIC  OFFICIAL  empowered   by   law   to   approve   a   land   classification   and   declare   such   land   as   alienable  and  disposable.     ONLY   ALIENABLE   LAND   OF   THE   PUBLIC   DOMAIN   MAY   BE   THE   SUBJECT  OF  DISPOSITION       SECTION  2,  PUBLIC  LAND  ACT:     “The  provisions  of  this  Act  shall  apply  to  the  lands  of  the  public  domain;   but  timber  and  mineral  lands  shall  be  governed  by  special  laws  and  nothing   in   this   Act   provided   shall   be   understood   or   construed   to   change   or   modify   the   administration   and   disposition   of   the   lands   commonly   called   "friar   lands"  and  those  which,  being  privately  owned,  have  reverted  to  or  become   the   property   of   the   Republic   of   the   Philippines,   which   administration   and   disposition   shall   be   governed   by   the   laws   at   present   in   force   or   which   may   hereafter  be  enacted.     SECTION  6,  PUBLIC  LAND  ACT:   “The   President,   upon   the   recommendation   of   the   Secretary   of   Agriculture   and  Natural  Resources,  shall   from   time   to   time   classify   the   lands   of   the   public  domain  into:   o Alienable  or  disposable;   o Timber,  and   o Mineral  lands,   and   may   at   any   time   and   in   a   like   manner   transfer   such   lands   from   one   class  to  another,  for  the  purposes  of  their  administration  and  disposition.”     SECTION  9,  PUBLIC  LAND  ACT:   For   the   purpose   of   their   administration   and   disposition,   the   lands   of   the   public   domain   alienable   or   open   to   disposition   shall   be   classified,   according  to  the  use  or  purposes  to  which  such  lands  are  destined,  as  follows:   o Agricultural;   o Residential,   commercial,   industrial,   or   for   similar   productive   purposes;   o Educational,  charitable,  or  other  similar  purposes;  and   o Reservations  for  town  sites  and  for  public  and  quasi-­‐public  uses.     The   President,   upon   recommendation   by   the   Secretary   of   Agriculture   and   Natural   Resources,   shall   from   time   to   time   make   the   classifications   provided   for   in   this   section,   and   may,   at   any   time   and   in   a   similar   manner,   transfer   lands  from  one  class  to  another.  

 

SECTION  10,  PUBLIC  LAND  ACT:   “The  words  "alienation,"  "disposition,"  or  "concession,"  as  used  in   this  Act,  shall  mean  any  of  the  methods  authorized  by  this  Act   for   the   acquisition,   lease,   use   or   benefit   of   the   lands   of   the   public  domain  other  than  timber  or  mineral  lands.”     BEFORE   THE   GOVERNMENT   COULD   ALIENATE   OR   DISPOSE   OF  LANDS  OF  THE  PUBLIC  DOMAIN,  THE  PRESIDENT  MUST   FIRST   OFFICIALLY   CLASSIFY   THESE   LANDS   AS   ALIENABLE   OR   DISPOSABLE,   AND   THEN   DECLARE   THEM   OPEN   TO   DISPOSITION  OR  CONCESSION.     CASE:  Chavez  vs  Public  Estates  Authority     The  Public  Estates  Authority  is  the  central  implementing  agency   tasked   to   undertake   reclamation   projects   nationwide.   It   took   over   the   leasing   and   selling   functions   of   the   DENR   insofar   as   reclaimed   or   about   to   be   reclaimed   foreshore   lands   are   concerned.     PEA  sought  the  transfer  to  AMARI,  a  private  corporation,  of  the   ownership   of   77.34   hectares   of   the   Freedom   Islands.   PEA   also   sought  to  have  290.156  hectares  of  submerged  areas  of  Manila   Bay  to  AMARI.     SC:   The   transfer   is   NOT   VALID.   TO   ALLOW   VAST   AREAS   OF   RECLAIMED   LANDS   OF   THE   PUBLIC   DOMAIN   TO   BE   TRANSFERRED   TO   PEA   AS   PRIVATE   LANDS   WILL   SANCTION   A   GROSS   VIOLATION   OF   THE   CONSTITUTIONAL   BAN   ON   PRIVATE   CORPORATIONS   FROM   ACQUIRING   ANY   KIND   OF   ALIENABLE  LAND  OF  THE  PUBLIC  DOMAIN.     The   Supreme   Court   affirmed   that   the   157.84   hectares   of   reclaimed   lands   comprising   the   Freedom   Islands,   now   covered   by  certificates  of  title  in  the  name  of  PEA,  are  alienable  lands  of   the   public   domain.   The   592.15   hectares   of   submerged   areas   of   Manila   Bay   remain   INALIENABLE   NATURAL   RESOURCES   OF   THE   PUBLIC   DOMAIN.  Since  the  Amended  JVA  seeks  to  transfer   to   AMARI,   a   private   corporation,   ownership   of   77.34   hectares   of   the  Freedom  Islands,  such  transfer  is  void  for  being  contrary  to   Section   3,   Article   XII   of   the   1987   Constitution,   which   prohibits   private   corporations   from   acquiring   any   kind   of   alienable   land   of  the  public  domain.  Furthermore,  since  the  Amended  JVA  also   seeks   to   transfer   to   AMARI   ownership   of   290.156   hectares   of   still   submerged   areas   of   Manila   Bay,   such   transfer   is   void   for   being  contrary  to  Section  2,  Article  XII  of  the  1987  Constitution   which   prohibits   the   alienation   of   natural   resources   other   than   agricultural  lands  of  the  public  domain.     Foreshore   and   submerged   areas   shall   not   be   alienated   unless   they   are   classified   as   agricultural   lands   of   the   public   domain.   The  mere  reclamation  of  these  areas  by  the  PEA  doesn’t  convert   these   alienable   natural   resources   of   the   State   to   alienable   or   disposable   lands   of   public   domain.   There   must   be   a   law   or   presidential   proclamation   officially   classifying   reclaimed   lands   as   alienable   or   disposable   and   open   to   disposition   or   concession.     UNTIL  RECLAIMED  BY  THE  SEA,  THESE  SUBMERGED  AREAS   ARE  UNDER  THE  CONSTTUTION,  “WATERS  OWNED  BY  THE   STATE”   FORMING   PART   OF   THE   PUBLIC   DOMAIN   AND   CONSEQUENTLY  INALIENABLE.     ONLY   PHILIPPINE   CITIZENS   ARE   QUALIFIED   TO   BID   FOR   PEA’S   RECLAIMED   FORESHORE   AND   SUBMERGED   ALIENABLE  LANDS  OF  PUBLIC  DOMAIN.   Private   corporations   are   barred   from   bidding   at   the   auction   sale   of   any   kind   of   alienable  land  of  the  public  domain.     CASE:  Bureau  of  Forestry  vs.  CA  and  Gallo  

Ø

•

•

•

  Mercedes   Diago   applied   for   registration   four   parcels   of   land   with   an   area   of   30.5   hectares   situated   in   Iloilo.   Diago   alleged   that   she   herself   occupied   said   parcels   of   land   having   bought   them  from  Jose  Maria  Nava.     The   Director   of   Lands   opposed   said   application   on   the   ground   that   neither   the   applicant   nor   her   predecessors-­‐in-­‐interest   have   sufficient   title   over   the   lands   applied   for,   which   could   be   registered   under   the   Torrens   system   and   that   they   have   never   been  in  OCEN  possession  of  the  said  lands  for  at  least  30  years   prior   to   filing   of   the   application.   The   Director   of   Forestry   also   opposed   on   the   ground   that   certain   portions   of   the   land   are   mangrove  swamps  and  are  within  the  timberland  block  “B”.     Gallo  bought  the  land  from  Diago,  and  took  the  latter’s  position   in  the  case  by  virtue  of  substitution.     SC:   Admittedly   the   controversial   area   is   within   a   timberland   block   as   classification   of   the   municipality   and   certified   to   by   the   Director   of   Forestry   on   February   18,  

6  

7  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

1956   as   lands   needed   for   forest   purposes   and   hence   they   are   portions   of   the   public   domain,   which   cannot   be   the   subject  of  registration  proceedings.  Clearly  therefore  the  land  is   public  land  and  there  is  no  need  for  the  Director  of  Forestry  to   submit   to   the   court   convincing   proofs   that   the   land   in   dispute   is   not   more   valuable   for   agriculture   than   for   forest   purposes,   as   there  was  no  question  of  whether  the  land  is  forest  land  or  not.   Be   it   remembered   that   said   forest   land   had   been   declared   and   certified   as   such   by   the   Director   of   the   Bureau   of   Forestry   on   February  18,  1956,  several  years  before  the  original  applicant  of   the   lands   for   registration   Mercedes   Diago,   filed   it   on   July   11,   1961.     11.1863   hectares   are   coconut   lands   and   admittedly   within   the   disposable  portion  of  the  public  domain.     CASE:  Director  of  Lands  vs.  CA  and  Bisnar     In  1976,  Ibarra  and  Bisnar  filed  their  joint  application  for  the  registration   of  two  parcels  of  land  claiming  that  they  inherited  the  same  and  that  they   had  OCEN  possession  and  occupation  of  the  land  for  80  years.  The  Director   of   Lands   and   the   Director   of   Forestry   opposed   the   application   on   the   ground   that   the   subject   lands   are   part   of   the   timberland,   hence   a   land   of   public  domain.     SC:  Possession  of  forestlands,  however  long,  cannot  ripen  into  private   ownership.   It   emphasized   that   a   positive   act   of   the   government,   particularly  the  Executive  Department,  is  needed  to  declassify  land  which   is   classified   as   forest;   and   to   CONVERT   IT   INTO   ALIENABLE   OR   DISPOSABLE  LAND  FOR  AGRICULTURAL  OR  OTHER  PURPOSES   before   registration  of  which  may  proceed.     Unless   and   until   the   land   classified   as   forest   is   released   in   an   official   proclamation   to   that   effect   so   that   it   may   form   part   of   the   disposable   agricultural   lands   of   the   public   domain,   the   rules   on   confirmation   of   imperfect  title  do  not  apply.     PUBLIC  LANDS  AND  GOVERNMENT  LAND,  DISTINGUISHED     Government   Land   –   includes   public   land   and   other   lands   of   the   government   already   reserved   or   devoted   for   public   use   or   subject   to   private  right   Public  Land  –  used  to  describe  so  much  of  the  national  domain  as  have  not   been  subjected  to  private  right  or  devoted  to  public  use.     CASE:  Montano  vs.  Insular  Government     Isabelo  Montano  presented  a  petition  to  the  Court  of  Land  Registration   for   the   inscription   of   a   piece   of   land   in   the   barrio   of   Libis,   municipality   of   Caloocan,   used   as   a   fishery   having   a   superficial   area   of   10,805   square   meters,  and  bounded  as  set  out  in  the  petition;  its  value  according  to  the   last   assessment   being   $505.05,   United   States   currency.   This   petition   was   opposed   by   the   Solicitor-­‐General   in   behalf   of   the   Director   of   Lands,   and   by   the   entity   known   asObras   Pias   de   la   Sagrada   Mitra,   the   former   on   the   ground  that  the  land  in  question  belonged  to  the  Government  of  the  United   States,   and   the   latter,   that   it   was   the   absolute   owner   of   all   the   dry   land   along  the  eastern  boundary  of  the  said  fishery.     SC:   Accordingly,   "GOVERNMENT   LAND"   AND   "PUBLIC   DOMAIN"   ARE   NOT   SYNONYMOUS   ITEMS.   The   first   includes   not   only   the   second,   but   also  other  lands  of  the  Government  already  reserved  or  devoted  to  public   use  or  subject  to  private  right.  In  other  words,  the  Government  owns  real   estate  which  is  part  of  the  "public  lands"  and  other  real  estate  which  is  not   part  thereof.     It   is   settled   that   the   general   legislation   of   Congress   in   respect   to   public   lands   does   not   extend   to   tide   lands.   It   provided   that   the   scrip   might   be   located   on   the   unoccupied   and   unappropriated   public   lands.   A   marshland  which  is  inundated  by  the  rise  of  tides  belong  to  the  State  and   is  not  susceptible  to  appropriation  by  occupation,  has  no  application  in  the   present   case   inasmuch   as   in   said   case   the   land   subject   matter   of   the   litigation  was  not  yet  titled.     CADASTRAL   SURVEY   OF   MUNICIPALITY   DOES   NOT   AUTOMATICALLY   CLASSIFY  LANDS  WITHIN  THE  CADASTRE  AS  A&D  LANDS     While  a  municipality  has  been  cadastrally  surveyed,  it  does  not  follow  that   all   lands   comprised   therein   are   automatically   released   as   alienable   and   disposable  land.   A  survey  made  in  a  cadastral  proceeding  MERELY  IDENTIFIES  EACH  LOT   PREPARATORY  TO  A  JUDICIAL  PROCEEDING  for  adjudication  of  title  to   any  of  the  lands  upon  claim  of  interested  parties.   Where  the  subject  property  is  still  unclassified,  whatever  possession   applicants   may   have   had,   and,   however   long,   cannot   ripen   into   private  ownership.   Indeed,  until  timber  or  forestland  are  released  as  disposable  and  alienable,   the   government,   through   the   appropriate   agencies,   has   no   authority   to   lease,  grant,  sell,  or  otherwise  dispose  of  these  lands  for  utilization.        

 

3.

NON-­‐REGISTRABLE  PROPERTIES     PROPERTY  OF  PUBLIC  DOMAIN     ART.   420.   THE   FOLLOWING   THINGS   ARE   PROPERTY   OF   PUBLIC  DOMINION:     (1)   THOSE   INTENDED   FOR   PUBLIC   USE,   SUCH   AS   ROADS,   CANALS,   RIVERS,   TORRENTS,   PORTS   AND   BRIDGES   CONSTRUCTED   BY   THE   STATE,   BANKS,   SHORES,  ROADSTEADS,   AND  OTHERS  OF  SIMILAR  CHARACTER;     (2)   THOSE,   WHICH   BELONG   TO   THE   STATE,   WITHOUT   BEING   FOR   PUBLIC   USE,   AND   ARE   INTENDED   FOR   SOME   PUBLIC   SERVICE   OR   FOR   THE   DEVELOPMENT   OF   THE   NATIONAL   WEALTH.     The   mentioned   properties   in   Article   420   are   parts   of   the   public   domain   and   are   intended   for   public   use   or   public   service.  These  are  outside  the  commerce  of  men  and  cannot  be   an  subject  of  appropriation.     Property  of  public  dominion,  when  no  longer  needed  for  public   use   or   public   service,   shall   form   part   of   PATRIMONIAL   PROPERTY.     ART.   421.   ALL   OTHER   PROPERTY   OF   THE   STATE,   WHICH   IS   NOT   OF   THE   CHARACTER   STATED   IN   THE   PRECEDING   ARTICLE,  IS  PATRIMONIAL  PROPERTY.     ART.   422.   PROPERTY   OF   PUBLIC   DOMINION,   WHEN   NO   LONGER  INTENDED  FOR  PUBLIC  USE  OR  FOR  PUBLIC  SERVICE,   SHALL  FORM  PART  OF  THE  PATRIMONIAL  PROPERTY  OF  THE   STATE.       Property   of   public   dominion,   when   no   longer   needed   for   public  use  or  public  service,  shall  form  part  of  the  patrimonial   property  of  the  State.   Public   lands   become   patrimonial   property   not   only   with   a   declaration   that   these   are   alienable   or   disposable.   THERE   MUST   ALSO   BE   AN   EXPRESS   GOVERNMENT   MANIFESTATION   THAT   THE   PROPERTY   IS   ALREADT   PATRIMONIAL   OR   NO   LONGER   RETAINED   FOR   PUBLIC   SERVICE  OR  THE  DEVELOPMENT  OF  NATIONAL  WEALTH.   Patrimonial  properties  may  be  bought  or  sold  or  in  any  manner   utilized   with   the   same   effect   as   properties   owned   by   private   persons.   Private  persons,  through  prescription,  may  acquire  patrimonial   properties  of  the  State.  

•

•

•

•

•

•  

ART.   423.   THE   PROPERTY   OF   PROVINCES,   CITIES,   AND   MUNICIPALITIES  IS  DIVIDED  INTO  PROPERTY  FOR  PUBLIC  USE   AND  PATRIMONIAL  PROPERTY.     ART.   424.   PROPERTY   FOR   PUBLIC   USE,   IN   THE   PROVINCES,   CITIES,   AND   MUNICIPALITIES,   CONSIST   OF   THE   PROVINCIAL   ROADS,   CITY   STREETS,   MUNICIPAL   STREETS,   THE   SQUARES,   FOUNTAINS,   PUBLIC   WATERS,   PROMENADES,   AND   PUBLIC   WORKS   FOR   PUBLIC   SERVICE   PAID   FOR   BY   SAID   PROVINCES,   CITIES,  OR  MUNICIPALITIES.     ALL   OTHER   PROPERTY   POSSESSED   BY   ANY   OF   THEM   IS   PATRIMONIAL   AND   SHALL   BE   GOVERNED   BY   THIS   CODE,   WITHOUT  PREJUDICE  TO  THE  PROVISIONS  OF  SPECIAL  LAWS.     ART.   425.  PROPERTY  OF  PRIVATE  OWNERSHIP,  BESIDES  THE   PATRIMONIAL  PROPERTY  OF  THE  STATE,  PROVINCES,  CITIES,   AND   MUNICIPALITIES,   CONSISTS   OF   ALL   PROPERTY   BELONGING  TO  PRIVATE  PERSONS,  EITHER  INDIVIDUALLY  OR   COLLECTIVELY.     •

CASE:  Laurel  vs.  Garcia  (Important  Case)     These   are   two   petitions   for   prohibition   seeking   to   enjoin   respondents,  their  representatives  and  agents  from  proceeding   with  the  bidding  for  the  sale  of  the  3,179  square  meters  of  land   at  306  Ropponggi,  5-­‐Chome  Minato-­‐ku,  Tokyo,  Japan  scheduled   on  February  21,  1990.     The   subject   property   in   this   case   is   one   of   the   four   (4)   properties  in  Japan  acquired  by  the  Philippine  government   under   the   Reparations   Agreement   entered   into   with   Japan   on   May   9,   1956,   and   is   part   of   the   indemnification   to   the   Filipino   people   for   their   losses   in   life   and   property   and   their  suffering  during  World  War  II.     As   intended,   the   subject   property   became   the   site   of   the   Philippine   Embassy   until   the   latter   was   transferred   to   Nampeidai   on   July   22,   1976.   Due   to   the   failure   of   our   government   to   provide   necessary   funds,   the   Roppongi   property  has  remained  undeveloped  since  that  time.    

7  

8  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

A   proposal   was   presented   to   President   Corazon   C.   Aquino   by   former   Philippine   Ambassador   to   Japan,   Carlos   J.   Valdez,   to   make  the  property  the  subject  of  a  lease  agreement  with  a   Japanese  firm  where,  at  the  end  of  the  lease  period,  all  the   three   leased   buildings   shall   be   occupied   and   used   by   the   Philippine  government.  On  August  11,  1986,  President  Aquino   created   a   committee   to   study   the   disposition/utilization   of   Philippine  government  properties  in  Tokyo  and  Kobe.     On   July   25,   1987,   the   President   issued   Executive   Order   No.   296   entitling   non-­‐Filipino   citizens   or   entities   to   avail   of   reparations’  capital  goods  and  services  in  the  event  of  sale,  lease   or   disposition.   The   four   properties   in   Japan   including   the   Roppongi   were   specifically   mentioned   in   the   first   “Whereas”   clause.     Amidst   opposition   by   various   sectors,   the   Executive   branch   of   the  government  has  been  pushing,  with  great  vigor,  its  decision   to  sell  the  reparations  properties  starting  with  the  Roppongi  lot.   The   property   has   twice   been   set   for   bidding   at   a   minimum   floor   price  at  $225  million.     SC:   As   property   of   public   dominion,   the   Roppongi   lot   is   outside   the   commerce   of   man.   It   cannot   be   alienated.   Its   ownership  is  a  special  collective  ownership  for  general  use  and   enjoyment,  an  application  to  the  satisfaction  of  collective  needs,   and   resides   in   the   social   group.   The   purpose   is   not   to   serve   the   State   as   a   juridical   person,   but   the   citizens;   it   is   intended  for  the  common  and  public  welfare  and  cannot  be   the  object  of  appropriation.     The  Roppongi  property  is  correctly  classified  under  paragraph  2   of   Article   420   of   the   Civil   Code   as   property   belonging   to   the   State  and  intended  for  some  public  service.     THE  FACT  THAT  THE  ROPPONGI  SITE  HAS  NOT  BEEN  USED   FOR   A   LONG   TIME   FOR   ACTUAL   EMBASSY   SERVICE   DOES   NOT   AUTOMATICALLY   CONVERT   IT   TO   PATRIMONIAL   PROPERTY.  Any  such  conversion  happens  only  if  the  property   is  withdrawn  from  public  use.  A  property  continues  to  be  part  of   the   public   domain,   not   available   for   private   appropriation   or   ownership   “until   there   is   a   formal   declaration   on   the   part   of   the   government  to  withdraw  it  from  being  such.       A  mere  transfer  of  the  Philippine  Embassy  to  Nampeidai  in  1976   is   not   relinquishment   of   the   Roppongi   property’s   original   purpose.     EXECUTIVE   ORDER   NO.   296,   THOUGH   ITS   TITLE   DECLARES   AN   “AUTHORITY   TO   SELL”,   DOES   NOT   HAVE   A   PROVISION   IN   THIS   TEXT   EXPRESSLY   AUTHORIZING   THE   SALE   OF   THE   FOUR   PROPERTIES  PROCURED  FROM  JAPAN  FOR  THE  GOVERNMENT   SECTOR.   It   merely   intends   to   make   the   properties   available   to   foreigners   and   not   to   Filipinos   alone   in   case   of   a   sale,   lease   or   other  disposition.  

• •

•

•

•

•

• •

•

  ALIENABLE   AND   DISPOSABLE   LANDS   HELD   BY   GOVERNMENT   ENTITIES   UNDER   SECTION   60,   CA   NO.   141   CANNOT   BE   ALIENATED   WITHOUT  APPROVAL  OF  CONGRESS     The  registration  of  lands  of  the  public  domain  under  the  Torrens  system,   by  itself,  cannot  convert  public  lands  into  private  lands.   Jurisprudence  holding  that  upon  the  grant  of  the  patent  or  issuance  of  the   certificate   of   title   the   alienable   land   of   the   public   domain   automatically   becomes   private   land   CANNOT   APPLY   TO   GOVERNMENT   UNITS   AND   ENTITIES.   The   grant   of   legislative   authority   to   sell   public   lands   in   accordance   with   Sec   60   of   CA   No,   141   does   not   automatically   convert   alienable   lands   of   the   public  domain  into  private  or  patrimonial  lands.   The  alienable  lands  must  be  transferred  to  qualified  private  parties,  or  to   government   entities   not   tasked   to   dispose   public   lands,   before   these   lands   can  become  private  or  patrimonial  lands.   Private  lands  taken  by  the  government  for  public  use  under  its  own   power  of  eminent  domain  become  unquestionably  part  of  the  public   domain.   Nevertheless,  Section  85  of  PD  No.  1529  authorizes  the  Register  of  Deeds   to   issue   IN   THE   NAME   OF   THE   NATIONAL   GOVERNMENT   new   certificates  of  title  covering  such  expropriated  lands.     FOREST  LANDS     Large   track   of   land   covered   with   a   natural   growth   of   trees   and   underbrush;  a  large  wood.   Private  persons  cannot  own  forestlands.  Such   lands   are   not   registrable   and  possession  thereof,  no  matter  how  long,  cannot  convert  the  same   into   private   property,   UNLESS   such   lands   are   reclassified   and   considered  disposable  and  alienable.   “It  is  important  to  preserve  the  forests  for  they  constitute  a  vital  segment   of  any  country’s  natural  resources.  Without  trees,  watersheds  will  dry  up;   rivers  and  lakes,  which  they  supply,  are  emptied  of  their  contents.  The  fish   disappear…”  (Director  of  Forestry  vs.  Munoz)  

 

Timber   licenses,   permits   and   license   agreements   are   the   principal   instruments   by   which   the   State   regulates   the   utilization   and   disposition   of   forest   resources   to   the   end   that   public   welfare   is   promoted.   THESE   LICENSES   ARE   MERELY   PRIVILEGE   GRANTED   BY   THE   STATE   TO   QUALIFIED   ENTITIES   AND   DO   NOT   VEST   IN   THEM   A   PERMANENT   OR   IRREVOCABLE   RIGHT   TO   THE   PARTICULAR   CONCESSION   AREA  AND  THE  FOREST  PRODUCTS  THEREIN.   The   classification   of   land   is   descriptive   of   its   legal   nature,   not   what   it   actually   looks   like.   A   forested   area   classified   as   forestland   of   the   public   domain   does   not   lose   such   classification   simply   because   loggers   or   settlers   may   have   stripped  it  of  its  forest  covers.   In   order   to   be   forestry   or   mineral   land,   the   proof   must   show   that  it  is  more  valuable  for  the  forestry  or  the  mineral,  which  it   contains  than  it,  is  for  agricultural  purposes.     CASE:  Republic  vs.  CA  and  Lastimado     If   the   allegation   of   petitioner   that   the   land   in   question   was   inside  the  military  reservation  at  the  time  it  was  claimed  is  true,   then,  it   cannot   be   the   object   of   any   cadastral   nor   can   it   be   the   object   of   reopening   under   Republic   Act   No.   931.   Similarly,  if  the  land  in  question  indeed  forms  part  of  the  public   forest,   then,   possession   thereof,   however   long,   cannot   convert   it   into  private  property  as  it  is  within  the  exclusive  jurisdiction  of   the  Bureau  of  Forestry  and  beyond  the  power  and  jurisdiction  of   the  Cadastral  Court  to  register  under  the  Torrens  System.     Even  assuming  that  the  government  agencies  can  be  faulted  for   inaction  and  neglect  (although  the  Solicitor  General  claims  that   it  received  no  notice),  yet,  the  same  cannot  operate  to  bar  action   by  the  State  as  it  cannot  be  estopped  by  the  mistake  or  error  of   its   officials   or   agents.   Further,   we   cannot   lose   sight   of   the   cardinal   consideration   that   "the   State   as   persona   in   law   is   the   juridical   entity,   which   is   the   source   of   any   asserted   right   to   ownership   in   land"   under   basic   Constitutional   Precepts,   and   that   it   is   moreover   charged   with   the   conservation   of   such   patrimony.     WATERSHEDS     Watershed   is   a   land   area   drained   by   a   stream   or   fixed   body   of   water   and   its   tributaries   having   a   common   outline   for   surface   runoff.   Watershed   Reservation   is   a   forestland   reservation   established   to   protect   or   improved   the   conditions   of   the   water   yield   thereof   or  reduce  sedimentation.   As   a   matter   of   general   policy,   the   Constitution   expressly   mandates   that   conservation   and   proper   utilization   of   natural  resources,  which  includes  the  country’s  watershed,   be  not  subject  to  registration.     CASE:  Tan  vs.  Director  of  Forestry  

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

  Doctrine:  A  timber  license  is  not  a  contract,  within  the  purview   of  the  due  process  clause;  it  is  only  a  license  of  privilege,  which   can   be   validly   withdrawn   whenever   dictated   by   public   interest   or  public  welfare.     MANGROVE  SWAMPS     Mangrove   is   a   term   applied   to   the   type   of   forest   occurring   on   tidal  flat  along  the  seacoast,  extending  along  streams  where  the   water  is  brackish.   Mangrove   swamps   are   mud   flats,   alternately   washed   and   exposed   by   the   tide,   in   which   grows   various   kindred   plants   which   will   not   live   except   when   watered   by   the   sea,   extending   their  roots  deep  into  the  mud  and  casting  their  seeds,  which  also   germinates  there.   Mangrove   swamps   are   FORESTAL   and   NOT   ALIENABLE   AGRICULTURAL  LAND.     CASE:  Director  of  Forestry  vs.  Villareal  

•

•

•

•

  The   private   respondent   invokes   the   survey   plan   of   the   mangrove   swamps   approved   by   the   Director   of   Lands,   16   to   prove  that  the  land  is  registerable.  It  should  be  plain,  however,   that   the   mere   existence   of   such   a   plan   would   not   have   the   effect   of   converting   the   mangrove   swamps,   as   forest   land,   into   agricultural   land.   Such   approval   is   ineffectual   because   it   is   clearly   in   officious.   The   Director   of   Lands   was   not   authorized  to  act  in  the  premises.  Under  the  aforecited  law,  it   is   the   Director   of   Forestry   who   has   the   authority   to   determine   whether  forest  land  is  more  valuable  for  agricultural  rather  than   forestry   uses,   as   a   basis   for   its   declaration   as   agricultural   land   and  release  for  private  ownership.     It  is  elementary  in  the  law  governing  natural  resources  that   forest   land   cannot   be   owned   by   private   persons.   It   is   not   registerable.  The  adverse  possession,  which  can  be  the  basis  of  a  

8  

9  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

•

•

•

•

• •

• • •

• •

•

• • •

•

•

grant   of   title   in   confirmation   of   imperfect   title   cases,   cannot   commence  until  after  the  forestland  has  been  declared  alienable   and   disposable.   Possession   of   forestland,   no   matter   bow   long   cannot  convert  it  into  private  property.     MINERAL  LANDS     Mineral  land  means  any  area  where  mineral  resources  are  found.  Mineral   resources,  on  the  other  hand,  mean  any  concentration  of  minerals  or  rocks   with  potential  economic  value.   Philippine  Mining  Act  of  1995,  Sec.  4  Ownership  of  Mineral  Resources   “Mineral  resources  are  owned  by  the  State  and  the  exploration,  development,   utilization,   and   processing   thereof   shall   be   under   its   full   control   and   supervision.   The   State   may   directly   undertake   such   activities   or   it   may   enter   into   mineral   agreements   with   contractors.   The   State   shall   recognize   and   protect  the  rights  of  the  indigenous  cultural  communities  to  their  ancestral   lands  as  provided  for  by  the  Constitution.”   Possession   of   mineral   land,   no   matter   how   long,   does   not   confer   possessory   rights.   THUS,   A   CERTIFICATE   OF   TITLE   IS   VOID   WHEN   IT   COVERS   PROPERTY   OF   PUBLIC   DOMAIN   CLASSIFIED   AS   MINERAL   LANDS.   Any   title   issued   over   non-­‐disposable   lots,   even   in   the   hands   of   alleged  innocent  purchaser  for  value,  shall  be  cancelled.   The   right   to   possess   or   own   the   surface   ground   is   separate   and   distinct  from  the  mineral  rights  over  the  same  land.  Thus,  if  a  person  is   the   owner   of   an   agricultural   land   in   which   minerals   are   discovered,   his   ownership   of   such   land   does   not   give   him   the   right   to   extract   or   utilize   the   said  minerals  without  the  permission  of  the  State  to  which  such  minerals   belong.   The  land  must  be  either  completely  mineral  or  completely  agricultural.       CASE:  Atok-­‐Big  Wedge  Mining  Co.  vs.  Court  of  Appeals     The  perfection  of  a  mining  claim  BEFORE  THE  1935  CONSTITUTION  had   the   effect   of   removing   the   land   from   public   domain.   The   perfection   of   a   mining   claim   CONVERTED   THE   PROPERTY   TO   A   MINERAL   LAND   and   under  the  laws  then  in  force  REMOVED  IT  FROM  THE  PUBLIC  DOMAIN.     By   such   act,   the   locators   acquired   exclusive   rights   over   the   land,   against   even   the   government,   without   need   of   any   further   act   as   the   purchase   of   the  land  or  the  obtention  of  a  patent  over  it.  As  the  land  had  become  the   private  property  of  the  locators,  they  had  the  right  to  transfer  the  same.     NATIONAL  PARKS     National  parks  are  inalienable  because  it  belongs  to  the  four  categories  of   lands  of  the  public  domain.   Land  reserved  for  national  park  CANNOT  BE  REGISTERED.   Accordingly,   it   has   been   held   that   where   a   certificate   of   title   covers   a   portion   of   land   within   the   area   reserved   for   park   purposes,   the   titles   should  be  annulled  with  respect  to  said  portion.     MILITARY  AND  NAVAL  RESERVATION     Land   inside   a   military   or   naval   reservation   cannot   be   the   object   of   registration.   To   segregate   portions   of   the   public   domain   as   a   military   reservation,   all   that   is   needed   is   a   Presidential   Proclamation   to   that   effect.   A   court   judgment  is  not  necessary  to  make  the  proclamation  effective  or  valid.     FORESHORE  LANDS  AND  RECLAIMED  LANDS     Foreshore   land   is   that   strip   of   land   that   lies   between   the   high   and   low   water   marks   and   that   it   alternately   wet   and   dry   according   to   the   flow   of   the  tide.   Foreshore   areas   are   that   COVERED   AND   UNCOVERED   by   the   ebb   and   flow  of  the  tide.   Submerged  areas  are  that  PERMANENTLY   UNDER   WATER  regardless  of   the  ebb  and  flow  of  the  tide.   Foreshore  lands  are  lands  of  public  dominion  intended  for  public  use.     DEVELOPMENT   OF   LAW   GOVERNING   FORESHORE/   RECLAIMED   LANDS     Spanish  Law  of  Waters   Ø 1866   Ø Shores,   bays,   coves,   inlets,   and   all   waters   within   the   maritime   zone  of  the  Spanish  territory  belonged  to  the  public  domain  for   public  use   Ø Allows  reclamation;  to  be  owned  by  the  party  who  constructed   such  works  provided  it  is  done  with  government  permission     Act  No.  1654   Ø May  8,  1907   Ø Provided  for  the  LEASE,   BUT   NOT   SALE,  of  reclaimed  lands  of   the  government  to  corporation  or  private  individuals   Ø Private   parties   can   lease   reclaimed   lands   only   if   those   lands   were  no  longer  needed  for  public  purpose   Ø This   act   MANDATED   PUBLIC   BIDDING   in   the   lease   of   reclaimed  lands   Ø Did  not  repeal  Section  5  of  Spanish  Law  of  Waters    

 

Public  Land  Act  (Act.  No.  2874)   Ø November  29,  1919   Ø Section   6   authorized   the   GOVERNOR   GENERAL   to   CLASSIFY   LANDS   OF   PUBLIC   DOMAIN   to   alienable   and  disposable  lands   Ø Section   7   is   to   DECLARE   if   such   lands   are   OPEN   TO   DISPOSITION   Ø Section  8  LIMITED  alienable  and  disposable  lands  only   to   those   lands   which   have   been   “officially   delimited   or   classified”   Ø Empowered   the   Governor   General   to   CLASSIFY   FURTHER  such  disposable  lands  to:   o Government  reclaimed   o Foreshore  or  marshy  lands   o Non-­‐agricultural  lands   Ø The   Governor   General,   before   allowing   the   lease   of   lands   to   private   parties   MUST   FORMALLY   DECLARE   THAT   THE   LANDS   WERE   NOT   NECESSARY   FOR   PUBLIC  SERVICE  

•

  Public  Land  Act  (CA  No.  141)   Ø November  7,  1936   Ø Before   the   government   could   alienate   or   dispose   lands  of  public  domain,  the  following  must  be  done   by  the  president:   o Empowers   the   PRESIDENT   to   classify   lands   of   public   domain   into   ALIENABLE   and   DISPOSABLE  lands   o Authorizes   the   President   to   DECLARE   what   lands   are  open  to  disposition  or  concession   Ø The   government   could   sell   to   PRIVATE   PARTIES   only   those  lands  for  non-­‐agricultural  purposes  not  classified   as   government   reclaimed,   foreshore,   and   marshy,   disposable  lands  of  public  domain.   Ø QUALIFIED   INDIVIDUALS   UNDER   THE   1935   CONSTITUTION  MAY  LEASE  FORESHORE  LANDS.   Ø Section   60   of   CA   141   expressly   requires   Congressional   Authority  before  lads  under  Section  59  could  be  sold  to   private  parties.   Ø Reclamation   can   only   be   done   by   the   National   Government.     LAKES,  NAVIGABLE  RIVERS,  CREEKS,     Lakes,  navigable  rivers,  and  creeks  cannot  be  appropriated  and   registered  under  the  Torrens  system.  All  of  the  abovementioned   form  part  of  the  public  domain.  

•

•  

RESERVATIONS  FOR  PUBLIC  AND  SEMI-­‐PUBLIC  PURPOSES     CA  No.  141,  Sec.  83.       “Upon   the   recommendation   of   the   Secretary   of   Agriculture   and   Natural  Resources,  the  President  may  designate  by  proclamation   any  tract  or  tracts  of  land  of  the  public  domain  as  reservations  for   the  use  of  the  Republic  of  the  Philippines  or  of  any  of  its  branches,   or   of   the   inhabitants   thereof,   in   accordance   with   relations   described   for   this   purpose,   or   for   quasi-­‐public   uses   or   purposes   when   the   public   interest   requires   it,   including   reservations   for   highways,   rights   of   way   for   railroads,   hydraulic   power   sites,   irrigation   systems,   communal   pastures   or   leguas   communales,   public   parks,   public   quarries,   public   fishponds,   workingmen's   village  and  other  improvements  for  the  public  benefit.”     The  President  may  release  the  land  from  the  reservation  at  any   time,   and   hence,   may   be   considered   as   alienable   and   disposable   land  of  public  domain.  

•

•    

-­‐-­‐-­‐  END  OF  PART  III  -­‐-­‐-­‐                                            

9  

10  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

•

•

•

•

•

IV.  JUDICIAL  CONFIRMATION  OF  IMPERFECT  TITLE     APPLICABLE  PROVISIONS  AND  AMENDMENTS     Section  47  and  48  of  the  Public  Land  Act     Ø November  7,  1936   Ø Section   48.   The   following-­‐described   citizens   of   the   Philippines,   occupying   lands   of   the   public   domain   or   claiming   to   own   any   such  lands  or  an  interest  therein,  but  whose  titles  have  not  been   perfected  or  completed,  may  apply  to  the  Court  of  First  Instance   of   the   province   where   the   land   is   located   for   confirmation   of   their   claims   and   the   issuance   of   a   certificate   of   title   therefor,   under  the  Land  Registration  Act  ,  to  wit:     o (b)   Those   who   by   themselves   or   through   their   predecessors   in   interest   have   been   in   open,   continuous,   exclusive,   and   notorious   possession   and   occupation   of   AGRICULTURAL   LANDS   OF   THE   PUBLIC   DOMAIN,   under   a   bona   fide   claim   of   acquisition   or   ownership,  EXCEPT  AS  AGAINST  THE   GOVERNMENT,   SINCE   JULY   26TH,   1894,   except   when   prevented   by   war   or   force   majeure.   These   shall   be   conclusively   presumed   to   have   performed   all   the   conditions  essential  to  a  Government  grant  and  shall   be   entitled   to   a   certificate   of   title   under   the   provisions  of  this  chapter.     Republic  Act  No.  1942     Ø June  22,  1957   Ø Sec   48   (b):   Those   who   by   themselves   or   through   their   predecessors   in   interest   have   been   in   open,   continuous,   exclusive,   and   notorious   possession   and   occupation   of   AGRICULTURAL   LANDS   OF   THE   PUBLIC   DOMAIN,   under   a   bona  fide  claim  of  acquisition  or  ownership,  FOR  AT  LEAST  30   YEARS   IMMEDIATELY   PRECEDING   THE   FILING   OF   THE   APPLICATION   FOR   THE   CONFIRMATION   OF   TITLE,   except   when   prevented   by   war   or   force   majeure.   These   shall   be   conclusively   presumed   to   have   performed   all   the   conditions   essential   to   a   Government   grant   and   shall   be   entitled   to   a   certificate  of  title  under  the  provisions  of  this  chapter.     Republic  Act  No.  3872     Ø June  18,  1964   Ø Members  of  the  national  cultural  minorities  who  by  themselves   through   their   predecessors-­‐in-­‐interest   have   been   in   open,   continuous,  exclusive  and  notorious  possession  and  occupation   of   lands   of   the   public   domain   suitable   to   agriculture,   whether   disposable  or  not,  under  a  bona  fide  claim  of  ownership  FOR  AT   LEAST   30   YEARS,   shall   be   entitled   to   the   rights   granted   in   subsection  (b)  hereof.     Presidential  Decree  No.  1073     Ø January  25,  1977   Ø (b)  Those  who  by  themselves  or  through  their  predecessors-­‐in-­‐ interest  have  been  in  open,  continuous,  exclusive,  and  notorious   possession   and,   occupation   of   ALIENABLE   AND   DISPOSABLE   LANDS   of   the   public   domain,   under   a   bona   fide   claim   of   acquisition   or   ownership,   SINCE   JUNE   12,   1945,   IMMEDIATELY   PRECEDING   THE   FILING   OF   THE   APPLICATION   FOR   CONFIRMATION   OF   TITLE,   except   when   prevented  by  war  or  force  majeure.  Those  shall  be  conclusively   presumed   to   have   performed   all   the   conditions   essential   to   a   government   grant   and   shall   be   entitled   to   a   certificate   of   title   under  the  provisions  of  this  chapter.       Ø (c)   Members   of   the   national   cultural   minorities   who   by   themselves  or  through  their  predecessors-­‐in-­‐interest  have  been   in   open,   continuous,   exclusive   and   notorious   possession   and   occupation   of   lands   of   the   public   domain   suitable   to   agriculture,   whether   disposable   or   not,   UNDER   A   BONA   FIDE   CLAIM   OF   OWNERSHIP   SINCE   JUNE   12,   1945,   shall   be   entitled   to   the   rights  granted  in  subsection  (b)  hereof.     Republic  Act  No.  9176     Ø November  13,  1922   Ø Amended  Section  45  of  the  CA  No.  141     The   time   to   be   fixed   in   the   entire   Archipelago   for   the   filing   of   applications   under   this   Chapter   shall   not   extend   beyond   31   December   2020:   Provided,   that   the   period   shall   apply   only   when   the   area   applied   for   does   not   exceed   twelve   (12)   hectares.     Ø Before,   the   area   that   can   be   subject   of   judicial   confirmation   of   title  is  144  hectares    

 

REQUISITES   FOR   AVAILMENT   OF   JUDICIAL   CONFIRMATION   OF  IMPERFECT  OR  INCOMPLETE  TITLES     • That  the  applicant  is  a  Filipino  citizen   • He   must   have   by   himself,   or   through   his   predecessors   in   interest,  possessed  and  occupied  an  alienable  and  disposable   agricultural  portion  of  the  public  domain   • Such   possession   and   occupation   must   have   been   open,   continuous,  exclusive,  and  notorious,  and  in  the  concept  of  an   owner,  since  June  12,  1945   • The  application  must  be  filed  with  the  proper  court.     COMPLIANCE  WITH  ALL  THE  REQUIREMENTS  OF  SEC  48B  OF   CA  141     • The   possessor   is   deemed   to   have   acquired,   by   operation   of   law,  a  right  to  a  grant,  without  the  necessity  of  a  certificate  of   title  being  issued.   • The   land,   therefore,   ceases   to   be   of   the   public   domain,   and   beyond  the  authority  of  the  Director  to  dispose  of.   • The   application   for   confirmation   is   mere   formality,   the   lack   of   which  does  not  affect  the  legal  sufficiency  of  the  title  as  would   be  evidenced  by  the  patent  and  the  Torrens  title  to  be  issued   upon  the  strength  of  said  patent.     • CASE:  Oh  Cho  vs.  Director  of  Lands     Oh   Cho   is   appealing   from   the   rejection   of   his   application   based   on   disqualification   as   alien   (Chinese)   from   acquiring   lands   of   the   public   domain.   He   had   open,   continuous,   exclusive   and   notorious   possession   of   the   lot   from   1880   to   filing  of  the  application  for  registration  on  January  17,  1940     This   is   an   exception   to   the   rule   that   all   lands   that   were   not   acquired   from   the   government,   either   by   purchase   or   grant,   belong  to  the  public  domain.     That   exception   would   be   “any   land   that   should   have   been   in   the   possession   of   an   occupant   and   of   his   predecessors-­‐in-­‐ interest   SINCE   TIME   IMMEMORIAL,   for   such   possession   would   justify   the   presumption   that   the   land   had   never   been   part   of   the   public   domain   or   that   it   had   been   a   private   property  even  before  the  Spanish  Conquest.       However,   his   immediate   possessor   failed   to   comply   with   the   condition   precedent   to   apply   for   the   registration   of   the   land   of   which   they   had   been   in   possession   at   least   since  July  26,  1894  so  what  was  transferred  to  Oh  Cho  is   merely  possessory  right  which  cannot  ripen  to  ownership   by   prescription   (aliens   disqualified   to   own   by   prescription).       LAND  ACQUISITION  BY  PRIVATE  COMPANIES     • Article  XII,  Section  3,  1987  Constitution     “Lands   of   the   public   domain   are   classified   into   agricultural,   forest   or   timber,   mineral   lands   and   national   parks.   Agricultural   lands   of   the   public   domain   may   be   further   classified   by   law   according   to   the   uses   to   which   they   may   be   devoted.   Alienable   lands  of  the  public  domain  shall  be  limited  to  agricultural  lands.   PRIVATE   CORPORATIONS   OR   ASSOCIATIONS   MAY   NOT   HOLD   SUCH   ALIENABLE   LANDS   OF   THE   PUBLIC   DOMAIN   EXCEPT   BY   LEASE,   FOR   A   PERIOD   NOT   EXCEEDING   TWENTY-­‐FIVE   YEARS,   RENEWABLE   FOR   NOT   MORE   THAN   TWENTY-­‐FIVE   YEARS,   AND   NOT   TO   EXCEED   ONE   THOUSAND   HECTARES   IN   AREA.   Citizens   of   the   Philippines   may  lease  not  more  than  five  hundred  hectares,  or  acquire  not   more  than  twelve  hectares  thereof,  by  purchase,  homestead,  or   grant.     Taking  into  account  the  requirements  of  conservation,  ecology,   and   development,   and   subject   to   the   requirements   of   agrarian   reform,  the  Congress  shall  determine,  by  law,  the  size  of  lands  of   the   public   domain   which   may   be   acquired,   developed,   held,   or   leased  and  the  conditions  therefor.”     • CASE:  Director  of  Lands  vs.  IAC  and  Acme  Plywood     SC:   Acme,   though   a   private   corporation,   was   qualified   to   apply   for   the   judicial   confirmation   of   its   title   under   Section  48(b)  of  the  Public  Land  Act  since  the  property  at   the   time   it   was   purchased   by   it   from   the   Infiels   on   October   29,   1962   was   already   a   PRIVATE   LAND   to   which   they  had  a  legally  sufficient  and  transferrable  title.            

10  

11  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

• • •

•

•

• • •

V.  REGISTRATION  UNDER  THE  PROPERTY  REGISTRATION  DECREE     WHO  MAY  APPLY     Section  14,  PD  No.  1529:   v   The   following   persons   may   file   in   the   proper   Court   of   First   Instance   an   application  for  registration  of  title  to  land,  whether  personally  or  through   their  duly  authorized  representatives:     (1)   Those   who   by   themselves   or   through   their   predecessors-­‐in-­‐ interest   have   been   in   open,   continuous,   exclusive   and   notorious   possession   and   occupation   of   alienable   and   disposable   lands   of   the   public   domain   under   a   bona   fide   claim   of   ownership   since   June   12,   1945,  or  earlier.     (2)   Those   who   have   acquired   ownership   of   private   lands   by   prescription  under  the  provision  of  existing  laws.     (3)   Those   who   have   acquired   ownership   of   private   lands   or   abandoned   river   beds   by   right   of   accession   or   accretion   under   the   existing  laws.     (4)   Those   who   have   acquired   ownership   of   land   in   any   other   manner   provided  for  by  law.     Where   the   land   is   owned   in   common,   all   the   co-­‐owners   shall   file   the   application  jointly.     Where  the  land  has  been  sold  under  pacto  de  retro,  the  vendor  a  retro  may   file   an   application   for   the   original   registration   of   the   land,   provided,   however,   that   should   the   period   for   redemption   expire   during   the   pendency   of   the   registration   proceedings   and   ownership   to   the   property   consolidated   in   the   vendee   a   retro,   the   latter   shall   be   substituted   for   the   applicant  and  may  continue  the  proceedings.     A   trustee   on   behalf   of   his   principal   may   apply   for   original   registration   of   any  land  held  in  trust  by  him,  unless  prohibited  by  the  instrument  creating     the  trust.     REQUISITES  FOR  REGISTRATION  UNDER  14(1)     That   the   land   applied   for   is   an   agricultural   public   land   classified   as   ALIENABLE  AND  DISPOSABLE  LAND  AT  THAT  TIME   The  application  for  registration  is  filed  with  the  PROPER  COURT   That   the   applicant,   by   himself   or   through   his   predecessors-­‐in-­‐interest,   has   been   in   OCEN   possession   and   occupation   thereof,   under   a   bonafide   claim  of  ownership   That  such  possession  and  occupation  has  been  EFFECTED   SINCE   JUNE   12,   1945  OR  EARLIER     v NOTE:  THE  LAW  DOES  NOT  REQUIRE  THAT  THE  LAND  SUBJECT   OF   REGISTRATION   SHOULD   HAVE   BEEN   ALIENABLE   AND   DISPOSABLE  DURING  THE  ENTIRE  PERIOD  OF  POSSESSION,  OR   SINCE   JUNE   12,   1945.   IT   IS   SUFFICIENT   THAT   THE   LAND   IS   ALREADY  DECLARED  AS  ALIENABLE  AND  DISPOSABLE  LAND  AT   THE   TIME   OF   APPLICATION   FOR   REGISTRATION   IS   FILED   SO   AS   TO  ENTITLE  THE  POSSESSOR  TO  REGISTRATION.     SECTION   14(2)   AUTHORIZES   ACQUISITION   OF   OWNERSHIP   BY   PRESCRIPTION     Section   14(2)   allows   qualified   individuals   to   apply   for   the   registration   of   property,   ownership   of   which   he   has   acquired   by   prescription   under   existing  laws.   On  the  other  hand,  among  the  public  domain  lands  that  are  not  susceptible   to  acquisitive  prescription  are  TIMBER  AND  MINERAL  LANDS.   The  Constitution  itself  proscribes  private  ownership  of  timber  and  mineral   lands.   The  prescriptive  period  for  acquisition  of  property  applies  to   patrimonial   properties   of   the   State,  or  those  which  have  been  declared  as  no  longer   intended  for  public  use  or  public  service     TWO   KINDS   OF   PRESCRIPTION   BY   WHICH   A   PATRIMONIAL   PROPERTY  MAY  BE  ACQUIRED     1. ORDINARY   ACQUISITIVE   PRESCRIPTION   –   a   person   acquires   ownership  of  a  patrimonial  property  through  possession  for  at  least   10  years,  in  good  faith,  and  with  just  title     2. EXTRAORDINARY   ACQUISITIVE   PRESCRIPTION   –   a   person’s   UNINTERRUPTED  possession  of  patrimonial  property  for  at  least  30   years,   regardless   of   good   faith   or   just   title,   ripens   into   private   ownership.     v BY   PRESCRIPTION,   ONE   ACQUIRES   OWNERSHIP   AND   OTHER   REAL   RIGHTS   THROUGH   THE   LAPSE   OF   TIME   IN   THE   MANNER   AND  UNDER  THE  ACTION  LAID  DOWN  BY  LAW.     v TO   CONSOLIDATE   PRESCRIPTION,   THE   POSSESSION   MUST   THAT   OF   OWNER,   AND   IT   MUST   BE   PUBLIC,   PEACEFUL   AND  

 

UNINTERRUPTED.   ACTS   OF   A   POSSESSORY   CHARACTER   DONE   BY   VIRTUE   OF   A   LICENSE   OR   MERE   TOLERANCE   ON   THE   PART   OF  THE  REAL  OWNER  ARE  NOT  SUFFICIENT.     ACCRETION  AND  ACCESSION     • The   requirement   that   the   deposit   should   be   due   to   the   effects   of   the  current  of  the  river  is  INDISPENSABLE.   • Alluvion   must   be   the   EXCLUSIVE   WORK   OF   NATURE.   There   must  be  evidence  to  prove  that  the  addition  to  the  property  was   made  gradually  through  the  effects  of  the  current  of  the  river.   • A  riparian  owner  then  does  not  acquire  the  additions  to  his  land   cause  by  special  works  expressly  intended  or  designed  to  bring   about  accretion.   • Private  persons  cannot,  by  themselves,  reclaim  land  from  water   bodies   belonging   to   the   State   without   proper   permission   from   government  authorities.     v ACCRETION   DOES   NOT   AUTOMATICALLY   BECOME   REGISTERED   LAND.   THIS   IS   AKIN   TO   THE  PRINCIPLE  THAT  AN  UNREGISTERED  LAND   PURCHASED   BY   THE   REGISTERED   OWNER   OF   THE   ADJOINING   LAND   DOES   NOT,   BY   EXTENSION,   BECOME   IPSO   FACTO   REGISTERED   LAND.   v WHERE   ALLUVIAL   INCREMENT   IS   NOT   REGISTERED,   IT   MAY   BE   ACQUIRED   BY   THIRD   PERSONS  THROUGH  PRESCRIPTION.     v IF   ALLUVIAL   PROPERTY   IS   NOT   REGISTERED,   THE   INCREMENT   NEVER   BECAME   REGISTERED   PROPERTY,   HENCE,   NOT   SUBJECT   TO   THE   PROTECTION   OF   IMPRESCRIPTIBILITY   OF   REGISTERED   PROPERTY   UNDER   THE   TORRENS   SYSTEM.     ACQUISITION  OF  OWNERSHIP  IN  ANY  MANNER  PROVIDED  BY   LAW   This   is   done   through   grants   of   the   State   by   virtue   of   a   Presidential   Proclamation,   Congressional   grant,   or   any   manner   provided  by  law.     CASE:  International  Hardwood  and  Veneer  Co.  vs.  UP  

•

•

  -­‐-­‐-­‐  END  OF  PART  V  -­‐-­‐-­‐                                                                                              

11  

12  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

VI.  REGISTRATION  UNDER  THE  INDIGENOUS  PEOPLES  RIGHTS  ACT     v RA  No.  8371   v Indigenous  Peoples  Right  Act  of  1997   v October  29,  1997   v The   law   allows   indigenous   peoples   to   obtain   recognition   of   their   right   of   ownership   over   ancestral   lands   and   ancestral   domains  by  virtue  of  NATIVE  TITLE.     CONSTITUTIONAL  PROVISIONS     Section  5,  Article  XII,  1987  Constitution     The   State,   subject   to   the   provisions   of   this   Constitution   and   national   development   policies   and   programs,   shall   protect   the   rights   of   indigenous   cultural   communities   to   their   ancestral   lands   to   ensure   their  economic,  social,  and  cultural  well-­‐being.     The   Congress   may   provide   for   the   applicability   of   customary   laws   governing  property  rights  or  relations  in  determining  the  ownership   and  extent  of  ancestral  domain.     IPRA  DOES  NOT  VIOLATE  THE  REGALIAN  DOCTRINE     • Case:  Cruz  vs.  Secretary  of  Environment  and  Natural  Resources   • Under   the   IPRA,   ancestral   lands   and   ancestral   domains   are   not   deemed  part  of  the  lands  of  the  public  domain  BUT   ARE   PRIVATE   LANDS   BELONGING   TO   ICCs/IPs   who   have   actually   OCCUPIED,   POSSESSED,   and   UTILIZED   THEIR   TERRITORIES   UNDER   A   CLAIM  OF  OWNERSHIP,  SINCE  TIME  IMMEMORIAL.     • The  Court  thus  laid  down  the  principle  of  a  certain  title  held:   o As  far  back  as  testimony  or  memory  went   o Under   a   claim   of   private   ownership   as   presumed   to   never   have  been  public  land     ANCESTRAL  DOMAINS     • Refer   to   all   areas   generally   belonging   to   [Indigenous   Cultural   Communities]   ICCs/IPs   COMPRISING   LANDS,   INLAND   WATERS,   COASTAL   AREAS,   AND   NATURAL   RESOURCES   THEREIN,   HELD   UNDER   A   CLAIM   OF   OWNERSHIP,   OCCUPIED   OR   POSSESSED   BY   ICCS/IPS,   BY   THEMSELVES   OR   THROUGH   THEIR   ANCESTORS,   COMMUNALLY   OR   INDIVIDUALLY   SINCE   TIME   IMMEMORIAL,   CONTINUOUSLY   TO   THE   PRESENT   except   when   interrupted   by   war,   force   majeure   or   displacement   by   force,   deceit,   stealth   or   as   a   consequence   of   government   projects   or   any   other   voluntary   dealings   entered   into   by   government   and   private   individuals/corporations,   and   which   are   necessary   to   ensure   their  economic,  social  and  cultural  welfare.   • It   shall   include   ancestral   lands,   forests,   pasture,   residential,   agricultural   and   other   lands   individually   owned   whether   alienable   and   disposable   or   otherwise,   hunting   grounds,   burial   grounds,   worship   areas,   bodies   of   water,   mineral   and   other   natural   resources,   and   lands   which   may   no   longer   be   exclusively   occupied   by   ICCs/IPs   but   from   which   they   traditionally  had  access  to  for  their  subsistence  and  traditional   activities,   particularly   the   home   ranges   of   ICCs/IPs   who   are   still   nomadic  and/or  shifting  cultivators.”1   • The   law’s   concept   of   ancestral   domains,   therefore,   transcends   physical  and  residential  territories  to  include  areas  of  spiritual,   cultural  and  traditional  practices.     ANCESTRAL  LANDS     • Ancestral   lands,   which   are   part   of   ancestral   domains,   are   defined  in  the  same  Act  as  lands  “OCCUPIED,  POSSESSED  AND   UTILIZED  BY  INDIVIDUALS,  FAMILIES  AND  CLANS  WHO  ARE   MEMBERS   OF   THE   ICCS/IPS   SINCE   TIME   IMMEMORIAL,   by   themselves   or   through   their   predecessors-­‐in-­‐interest,   under   claims   of   individual   or   traditional   group   ownership,   continuously,   to   the   present   except   when   interrupted   by   war,   force   majeure   or   displacement   by   force,   deceit,   stealth   or   as   a   consequence   of   government   projects   and   other   voluntary   dealings   entered   into   by   government   and   private   individuals/corporations,   including,   but   not   limited   to,   residential   lots,   rice   terraces   or   paddies,   private   forests,   swidden  farms  and  tree  lots.     ICCs/  IPs     • It  refers  to  that  group  of  peoples  or  homogenous  societies  who   have   continuously   lived   as   organized   community   on   communally  bounded  and  defined  territory,  and  who  have,   under   claims   of   ownership   since   time   immemorial,   occupied,   possessed,   and   utilized   such   territories,   sharing   common  bonds  of  language,  customs,  traditions,  and  other   distinctive   cultural   traits,  or  who  have,  through  resistance  to   political,   social,   and   cultural   inroads   of   colonization,   non-­‐

 

indigenous   religions   and   culture,   became   historically   different   from  the  majority  of  Filipinos.  

•

•

• •

•

•

•

•

•

•

  NATIVE  TITLE     It  refers  to  pre-­‐conquest  rights  to  lands  and  domains  which,  as   far   back   as   memory   reaches,   have   been   held   under   a   claim   of   private   ownership   by   ICCs/IPs,   have   never   been   public   lands   and   are   thus   indisputably   presumed   to   have   been   held   that   way   since  before  the  Spanish  conquest.     ANCESTRAL  DOMAINS  AND  LANDS  ARE  NOT  PART  OF  PUBLIC   DOMAIN     Under   the   IPRA,   ancestral   domains   and   land   are   not   deemed   part  of  the  lands  of  the  public  domain  but  are  PRIVATE  LANDS   belonging   to   ICCs/IPs   who   have   actually   occupied,   possessed,   and   utilized   their   territories   under   a   claim   of   ownership   since   time  immemorial.     ICCs/IPs’s   RIGHTS   OVER   ANCESTRAL   DOMAINS   ARE   RECOGNIZED  THOUGH  CADTs     The  Certificate  of  Ancestral  Domain  Title  is  evidence  of  private   ownership  of  land  by  native  title.   The   IPRA   categorically   declares   ancestral   lands   and   domains   held   by   native   title   as   NEVER   TO   HAVE   BEEN   PUBLIC  LAND.   Domains   and   lands   held   under   native   title   are,   therefore,   indisputably  presumed  to  have  never  been  public  land  and  are   private.   CADT   is   merely   a   formal   recognition   of   the   rights   of   ICCs/IPs’   rights   of   possession   and   ownership   over   their   ancestral   domain   identified  and  delineated  in  accordance  with  the  IPRA.     RIGHTS  OF  ICCs/IPs  WITH  RESPECT  TO  NATURAL  RESOURCES     The   ICCs/IPs   have   priority   rights   in   the   harvesting,   extraction,   development,   or   exploitation   of   any   natural   resources   within   the  ancestral  domains.   A   non-­‐member   of   the   ICCs/IPs   concerned   may   be   allowed   to   take   part   in   the   development   and   utilization   of   the   natural   resources   for   a   period   of   NOT   EXCEEDING   25   YEARS,   RENEWABLE  for  not  more  than  25  years     HOW  ARE  ANCESTRAL  LANDS  CLASSIFIED  UNDER  IPRA?     For   purposes   of   registration,   the   individually-­‐owned   ancestral   lands   are   classified   as   alienable   and   disposable   land   of   the   public  domain,  provided,  they  are  agricultural  in  character  and   are   actually   used   for   agricultural,   residential,   pasture,   and   tree   farming  purposes.   These   lands   shall   be   classified   as   public   and   agricultural   lands   regardless  of  whether  they  have  a  slope  of  18%  or  more.     RIGHTS  TO  ANCESTRAL  LANDS     SEC.   8.   Rights   to   Ancestral   Lands.    The  right  of  ownership  and   possession   of   the   ICCs   /IPs   to   their   ancestral   lands   shall   be   recognized  and  protected.     a)   Right  to  transfer  land/property.    Such   right   shall   include   the   right   to   transfer   land   or   property   rights   TO/AMONG   MEMBERS   OF  THE  SAME  ICCS/IPS,  subject  to  customary  laws  and  traditions   of  the  community  concerned.     b)   Right   to   Redemption.     In   cases   where   it   is   shown   that   the   transfer   of   land/property   rights   by   virtue   of   any   agreement   or   devise,   to   a   nonmember   of   the   concerned   ICCs/IPs   is   tainted   by   the   vitiated   consent   of   the   ICCs/IPs,   or   is   transferred   for   an   unconscionable  consideration  or  price,  the  transferor  ICC/IP  shall   have  the  right  to  redeem  the  same  within  a  period  not  exceeding   fifteen  (15)  years  from  the  date  of  transfer.     v National  Commission  on  Indigenous  Peoples  (NCIP)   -­‐  refers  to  the  office  created  under  his  Act,  which  shall   be  under  the  Office  of  the   President,  and  which  shall  be   the   primary   government   agency   responsible   for   the   formulation   and   implementation   of   policies,   plans   and   programs  to  recognize,  protect  and  promote  the  rights   of  ICCs/IP   v Ancestral   Domains   Office   (ADO)   -­‐   The   Ancestral   Domain   Office   shall   be   responsible   for   the   identification,   delineation   and   recognition   of   ancestral   lands/domains.   It   shall   also   be   responsible   for   the   management  of  ancestral  lands/domains  in  accordance   with   a   master   plan   as   well   as   the   implementation   of   the   ancestral   domain   rights   of   the   ICCs/IPs   as   provided   in   Chapter  III  of  this  Act.  It  shall  also  issue,  upon  the  free   and  prior  informed  consent  of  the  ICCs/IPs  concerned,   certification   prior   to   the   grant   of   any   license,   lease   or  

12  

13  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

permit   for   the   exploitation   of   natural   resources   affecting   the   interests   of   ICCs/IPs   or   their   ancestral   domains   and   to   assist   the   ICCs/IPs   in   protecting   the   territorial   integrity   of   all   ancestral   domains.   It   shall   likewise   perform   such   other   functions   as   the   Commission  may  deem  appropriate  and  necessary.       DELINEATION  PROCESS     SEC.   52.   Delineation   Process.     The   identification   and   delineation   of   ancestral   domains   shall   be   done   in   accordance   with   the   following   procedures:     a)   Ancestral   Domains   Delineated   Prior   to   this   Act.   The   provisions   hereunder   shall   not   apply   to   ancestral   domains/lands   already   delineated   according   to   DENR   Administrative   Order   No.   2,   series   of   1993,   nor   to   ancestral   lands   and   domains   delineated   under   any   other   community/     ancestral   domain   program   prior   to   the   enactment   of   this   law.   ICCs/IPs   whose   ancestral   lands/domains   were   officially   delineated   prior   to   the   enactment   of   this   law   shall   have   the   right   to   apply   for   the   issuance   of   a   Certificate  of  Ancestral  Domain  Title  (CADT)  over  the  area  without  going   through  the  process  outlined  hereunder;       b)  Petition  for  Delineation.    The  process  of  delineating  a  specific  perimeter   may  be  initiated  by  the  NCIP  with  the  consent  of  the  ICC/IP  concerned,  or   through  a  Petition  for  Delineation  filed  with  the  NCIP,  by  a  majority  of  the   members  of  the  ICCs/IPs;     c)   Delineation   Proper.     The   official   delineation   of   ancestral   domain   boundaries   including   census   of   all   community   members   therein,   shall   be   immediately  undertaken  by  the  Ancestral  Domains  Office  upon  filing  of  the   application   by   the   ICCs/IPs   concerned.   Delineation   will   be   done   in   coordination  with  the  community  concerned  and  shall  at  all  times  include   genuine   involvement   and   participation   by   the   members   of   the   communities  concerned;     d)   Proof   Required.     Proof   of   Ancestral   Domain   Claims   shall   include   the   testimony   of   elders   or   community   under   oath,   and   other   documents   directly  or  indirectly  attesting  to  the  possession  or  occupation  of  the  area   since   time   immemorial   by   such   ICCs/IPs   in   the   concept   of   owners   which   shall  be  any  one  (  I  )  of  the  following  authentic  documents:     1)  Written  accounts  of  the  ICCs/IPs  customs  and  traditions;   2)  Written  accounts  of  the  ICCs/IPs  political  structure  and  institution;   3)   Pictures   showing   long   term   occupation   such   as   those   of   old   improvements,  burial  grounds,  sacred  places  and  old  villages;   4)   Historical   accounts,   including   pacts   and   agreements   concerning   boundaries  entered  into  by  the  ICCs/IPs  concerned  with  other  ICCs/lPs;   5)  Survey  plans  and  sketch  maps;   6)  Anthropological  data;   7)  Genealogical  surveys;   8)   Pictures   and   descriptive   histories   of   traditional   communal   forests   and   hunting  grounds;   9)   Pictures   and   descriptive   histories   of   traditional   landmarks   such   as   mountains,  rivers,  creeks,  ridges,  hills,  terraces  and  the  like;  and   10)   Writeups   of   names   and   places   derived   from   the   native   dialect   of   the   community.     e)  Preparation  of  Maps.    On  the  basis  of  such  investigation  and  the  findings   of   fact   based   thereon,   the   Ancestral   Domains   Office   shall   prepare   a   perimeter  map,  complete  with  technical  descriptions,  and  a  description  of   the  natural  features  and  landmarks  embraced  therein;     f)   Report   of   Investigation   and   Other   Documents.     A   complete   copy   of   the   preliminary  census  and  a  report  of  investigation,  shall  be  prepared  by  the   Ancestral  Domains  Office  of  the  NCIP;     g)   Notice   and   Publication.     A   copy   of   each   document,   including   a   translation   in   the   native   language   of   the   ICCs/IPs   concerned   shall   be   posted  in  a  prominent  place  therein  for  at  least  fifteen  (  15)  days.  A  copy  of   the   document   shall   also   be   posted   at   the   local,   provincial   and   regional   offices   of   the   NCIP,   and   shall   be   published   in   a   newspaper   of   general   circulation   once   a   week   for   two   (2)   consecutive   weeks   to   allow   other   claimants   to   file   opposition   thereto   within   fifteen   (15)   days   from   date   of   such  publication:  Provided,  That  in  areas  where  no  such  newspaper  exists,   broadcasting  in  a  radio  station  will  be  a  valid  substitute:  Provided,  further,   That  mere  posting  shall  be  deemed  sufficient  if  both  newspaper  and  radio   station  are  not  available;     h)Endorsement   to   NCIP.     Within   fifteen   (15)   days   from   publication,  and  of  the  inspection  process,  the  Ancestral  Domains   Office   shall   prepare   a   report   to   the   NCIP   endorsing   a   favorable   action   upon   a   claim   that   is   deemed   to   have   sufficient   proof.   However,   if   the   proof   is   deemed   insufficient,   the   Ancestral   Domains   Office   shall   require   the   submission   of   additional   evidence:   Provided,   That   the  Ancestral  Domains  Office  shall  reject   any   claim   that   is   deemed   patently   false   or   fraudulent   after   inspection   and   verification:   Provided,   further,   That   in   case   of   rejection,   the   Ancestral   Domains   Office   shall   give   the   applicant   due   notice,   copy   furnished   all   concerned,   containing   the   grounds   for   denial.   The   denial   shall   be   appealable   to   the   NCIP:   Provided,   furthermore,   That   in   cases   where   there   are   conflicting   claims  

 

among  ICCs/IPs  on  the  boundaries  of  ancestral  domain  claims,  the   Ancestral   Domains   Office   shall   cause   the   contending   parties   to   meet  and  assist  them  in  coming  up  with  a  preliminary  resolution   of  the  conflict,  without  prejudice  to  its  full  adjudication  according   to  the  section  below.   i)  Turnover  of  Areas  Within  Ancestral  Domains  Managed  by  Other   Government   Agencies.     The   Chairperson   of   the   NCIP   shall   certify   Blat   the   area   covered   is   an   ancestral   domain.   The   secretaries   of   the  Department  of  Agrarian  Reform,  Department  of  Environment   and   Natural   Resources,   Department   of   the   Interior   and   Local   Government,  and  Department  of  Justice,  the  Commissioner  of  the   National   Development   Corporation,   and   any   other   government   agency   claiming   jurisdiction   over   the   area   shall   be   notified   Thereof.   Such   notification   shall   terminate   any   legal   basis   for   the   jurisdiction  previously  claimed;   j)  Issuance  of  CADT.    ICCs/IPs  whose  ancestral  domains  have  been   officially  delineated  and  determined  by  the  NCIP  shall  be  issued  a   CADT   in   the   name   of   the   community   concerned,   containing   a   list   of  all  dose  identified  in  the  census;  and   k)   Registration   of   CADTs.     The   NCIP   shall   register   issued   certificates  of  ancestral  domain  titles  and  certificates  of  ancestral   lands   tides   before   She   Register   of   Deeds   in   the   place   where   the   property  is  situated.                                                                                                                                      

13  

14  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

1. • • •

• • • • • •

•

1. 2. 3. 4.

5. 6.

7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13.

1.

2. 3.

4. 5.

2.

LAND  TITLES  AND  DEEDS   FINALS  2014  –  2015     I.  PROPERTY  REGISTRATION  DECREE  (PD  1529)     FORMS  AND  CONTENT  (Section  15)     The  application  for  land  registration  shall  be  IN  WRITING,     SIGNED  by  the  applicant  or  the  person  duly  authorized  in  his   behalf   and   SWORN   TO   BEFORE   ANY   OFFICER   AUTHORIZED   TO   ADMINISTER   OATHS   for   the   province   or   city   where   the   application  was  actually  signed.     If   there   is   MORE   THAN   ONE   APPLICANT,   the   application     shall  be  signed  and  sworn  to  by  and  in  behalf  of  each.     The   application   shall   CONTAIN   A   DESCRIPTION   OF   THE   LAND  and   shall   state   the   CITIZENSHIP   and   CIVIL   STATUS   OF   THE   APPLICANT,  whether  single  or  married,  and,     if  married,  THE  NAME  OF  THE  WIFE  OR  HUSBAND,  and,     if  the  marriage  has  been  legally  dissolved,  WHEN   AND   HOW   THE  MARRIAGE  RELATION  TERMINATED.     It   shall   also   state   the   FULL  NAMES  AND  ADDRESSES  OF  ALL   OCCUPANTS  OF  THE  LAND  AND  THOSE  OF  THE  ADJOINING   OWNERS,  if  known,  and,     if   not   known,   it   shall   state   the   EXTENT   OF   THE   SEARCH   MADE  to  find  them.     REQUISITES  IN  ORDINARY  LAND  PROCEEDINGS     (13  STEPS)   (SFS  –  TPS  –  FH  –  PIES  –  T)     Survey   of   the   land   by   the   Bureau   of   Lands   of   a   duly   licensed   private  surveyor   Filing  of  application  for  registration  by  the  applicant   Setting   of   date   for   the   INITIAL   HEARING   of   the   application   by  the  Court   Transmittal  of  the  application  and  the  date  of  initial  hearing   together  with  all  the  documents  and  other  evidences  attached   thereto   by   the   Clerk   of   Court   to   the   Land   Registration   Authority   Publication   of   the   notice   of   the   filing   of   the   application   and   date   and   place   of   the   hearing   in   the   Official   Gazette   and   in   a   newspaper  of  general  circulation   Service   by   MAILING   OF   NOTICE   upon   contiguous   owners,   occupants,   and   those   known   to   have   interest   in   the   property   AND   POSTING   by   the   sheriff   of   the   notice   in   a   conspicuous   place   on   the   land   and   in   the   bulletin   board   of   the   municipal   building  where  the  land  is  situated   Filing   of   answer   to   the   application   by  any  person  whether   named  in  the  notice  or  not   Hearing  of  the  case  by  the  Court   Promulgation  of  judgment  by  the  Court   Issuance   of   an   ORDER   FOR   THE   ISSUANCE   of   a   decree   declaring  the  decision  final  and  instructing  the  LRA  to  issue   the  decree  of  confirmation  and  registration   Entry  of  the  decree  of  registration  in  the  LRA   Sending   of   copy   of   the   decree   of   registration   to   the   corresponding  Register  of  Deeds   Transcription   of   the   decree   of   registration   in   the   registration   book   and   the   issuance   of   the   owner’s   duplicate   original   certificate   of   title   to   the   applicant   by   the   RD,   upon   payment  of  prescribed  fees     THE  APPLICATION  SHALL  BE  ACCOMPANIED  BY  THE   FOLLOWING  DOCUMENTS     Original   plan   in   TRACING   CLOTH   or   DIAZO   POLYESTER   FILM,  duly   approved   by   the   Regional   Technical   Director,   Land   Management   Service   of   the   DENR,   a   CERTIFIED   COPY   OF   THE   SAME   SHALL   BE   ATTACHED   TO   THE   DUPLICATE   RECORDS  AND  FORWARDED  TO  THE  LRA   WHITE  OR  BLUE  PRINT  copies  of  the  plan   The   original   and   two   copies   of   the   TECHNICAL   DESCRIPTIONS   CERTIFIED   by   the   Regional   Technical   Director   or   the   official   so   authorized   and   NOT   MERELY   SIGNED  by  the  Geodetic  Engineer  who  prepared  the  plan   A   CERTIFICATE   IN   TRIPLICATE   of   the   Provincial,   City,   or   Municipal  assessor  of  the  assessed  value  of  the  land   All   ORIGINAL   MUNIMENTS   OF   TITLE   OF   THE   APPLICANT   which  prove  his  ownership  of  the  land     *  Under  LRA  Circular  05-­‐2000,  the  original  tracing  cloth  plan  is   no   longer   forwarded   to   the   LRA;   only   a   certified   copy   thereof   need  be  forwarded     NON-­‐RESIDENT  APPLICANT  (Section  16)     • If  the  applicant  is  not  a  resident  of  the  Philippines,   he   shall   file   with   his   application   AN   INSTRUMENT   IN   DUE   FORM  

 

• APPOINTING   AN   AGENT   OR   REPRESENTATIVE   RESIDING  IN  THE  PHILIPPINES,     • giving   his   FULL   NAME   AND   POSTAL   ADDRESS,   and     • shall   therein   agree   that   the   service   of   any   legal   process   in   the   proceedings   under   or   growing   out   of   the   application  made  upon  his  agent  or  representative  shall  be  of   the  same  legal  effect  as  if  made  upon  the  applicant  within   the  Philippines.     • If   the   agent   or   representative   dies,   or   leaves   the   Philippines,   the   applicant   shall   forthwith   make   another   appointment  for  the  substitute,  and,  if  he  fails  to  do  so  the   court  may  dismiss  the  application.   3.   •

•

•

  Ø

Ø

  4.

•

  5.   •

•

WHAT  AND  WHERE  TO  FILE  (Section  17)   The   application   for   land   registration   SHALL   BE   FILED   WITH   THE   COURT   OF   FIRST   INSTANCE   OF   THE   PROVINCE  OR  CITY  WHERE  THE  LAND  IS  SITUATED.   The  applicant  shall  file  together  with  the  application  all   original  muniments  of  titles  or  copies  thereof  and  a   survey   plan   of   the   land   approved   by   the   Bureau   of   Lands.   The  clerk  of  court  SHALL  NOT  ACCEPT  any  application   unless   it   is   shown   that   the   applicant   has   furnished   the   Director  of  Lands  with  a  copy  of  the  application  and  all   annexes.   The   RTC   shall   have   exclusive   original   jurisdiction   over   all   applications   for   ORIGINAL   REGISTRATION   OF   TITLE   TO   LANDS,   including   improvements   and   interests   therein,   and   over   all   petitions   filed   after   original   registration   of   title,   WITH   POWER   TO   HEAR   AND   DETERMINE   ALL   QUESTIONS   ARISING   UPON   SUCH  APPLICATIONS  OR  PETITIONS   As  per  BP  Blg.  129,  MTC  has  jurisdiction  over:   o Where   the   lot   is   not   subject   of   any   controversy  or  opposition   o Where   the   lot   is   contested   but   the   value   thereof   does   not   exceed   P100,000   APPLICATION  COVERING  TWO  PARCELS  OF   LAND  (Section  18)     An  application  may  include  two  or  more  parcels  of  land   belonging   to   the   applicant/s   provided   they   are   situated   within   the   same   province   or   city.  The  court   may  at  any  time  order  an  application  to  be  amended  by   striking  out  one  or  more  of  the  parcels  or  by  a  severance   of  the  application.   AMENDMENTS  (Section  19)   The  court  MAY   ALLOW  amendments  to  the  application   including  joinder,   substitution,   or   discontinuance  as   to  parties  at  any  stage  of  the  proceedings  upon  just  and   reasonable  terms.   Amendments,   which   shall   consist   in   a   substantial   change   in   the   boundaries   or   an   increase   in   area   of   the   land,   applied   for   or   which   involve   the   inclusion   of   an   additional   land   shall   be   subject   to   the   same   requirements   of   publication   and   notice   as   in   an   original  application.  

  Ø

Ø

  6.

•

  7.   •

It   shall   not   be   permissible   to   make   amendments   or   alterations   in   the   description   of   the   land   after   its   publication   in   the   newspapers   and   after   the   registration   of   the   property   has   been   decreed,   without   the   publication   of   new   notification   and   advertisements   making   known   to   everyone   the   said   alterations   and   amendments   If  new  survey  plans  do  not  conform  to  the  plans  earlier   presented   and   affect   the   rights   of   third   persons,   notice   shall   be   given   them   and   an   opportunity   to   present   whatever  opposition  they  may  have     WHEN  LAND  APPLIED  FOR  BORDERS  THE  ROAD   (Section  20)     If   the   application   describes   the   land   as   bounded   by   a   public  or  private  way  or  road,  it  shall  state  whether  or   not  the  applicant  claims  any  and  what  portion  of  the   land   within   the   limits   of   the   way   or   road,   and   whether   the   applicant   desires   to   have   the   line   of   the   way  or  road  determined.   REQUIREMENT  OF  ADDITIONAL  FACTS  (Sec  21)   The   court   may   require   facts   to   be   stated   in   the   application   in   addition   to   those   prescribed   by   this  

14  

15  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

Decree  not  inconsistent  therewith  and  may  require  the   filing   of   any   additional   paper.   It   may   also   conduct   an   ocular  inspection,  if  necessary.   8.   •

Ø

    DEALINGS   WITH   LAND   PENDING   ORIGINAL   REGISTRATION   (Section  22)   After   the   filing   of   the   application   and   before   the   issuance   of   the   decree   of   registration,   the   land   therein   described   may   still   be   the   subject   of   dealings   in   whole   or   in   part,  in  which   case   the   interested   party   shall   present   to   the   court   the   pertinent   instruments   together   with   a   subdivision   plan   approved   by   the   Director   of   Lands   in   case   of   transfer   of   portions  thereof  and  the  court,  after  notice  to  the  parties,  shall   order   such   land   registered   subject   to   the   conveyance   or   encumbrance   created   by   said   instruments,   or   order   that   the   decree   of   registration   be   issued   in   the   name   of   the   person   to   whom  the  property  has  been  conveyed  by  said  instruments.     Section   22   allows   the   land   subject   of   registration   to   be   sold   or   otherwise  encumbered,  but  whatever  may  be  the  nature  of  the   transaction,   the   interested   party   should   submit   to   the   Court   the   pertinent   instruments   evidencing   the   transaction   to   be   considered  in  the  final  adjudication  of  the  case.     II.  PUBLICATION,  OPPOSITION,  DEFAULT     NOTICE  OF  INITIAL  HEARING,  PUBLICATION,  ETC.    

1.   The   court   shall,   within   five   days   from   filing   of   the   application,   ISSUE   AN   ORDER   SETTING   THE   DATE   AND   HOUR   OF   THE   INITIAL     HEARING,   which   SHALL  NOT  BE  EARLIER  THAN  FORTY-­‐FIVE  DAYS   NOR  LATER  THAN  NINETY  DAYS  FROM  THE  DATE  OF  THE  ORDER.       The   public   shall   be   given   notice   of   the   initial   hearing   of   the   application   for  land  registration  by  means  of  (1)  publication;  (2)  mailing;  and  (3)   posting.     1.  By  publication.     Upon   receipt   of   the   order   of   the   court   setting   the   time   for   initial   hearing,   the   Commissioner   of   Land   Registration   shall   cause   notice   of   initial  hearing  to  be  published  once  in  the  Official  Gazette  and  once  in  a     newspaper   of   general   circulation   in   the   Philippines:   Provided,   however,  that  the  publication  in  the  Official  Gazette  shall  be  sufficient   to  confer  jurisdiction  upon  the  court.  Said  notice  shall  be  addressed  to   all  persons  appearing  to  have  an  interest  in  the  land  involved  including   the   adjoining   owners   so   far   as   known,   and   "to   all   whom   it   may   concern".   Said   notice   shall   also   require   all   persons   concerned   to   appear   in   court   at   a   certain   date   and   time   to   show   cause   why   the   prayer  of  said  application  shall  not  be  granted.     v TWO-­‐FOLD  PURPOSES  OF  PUBLICATION   o To   confer   jurisdiction   upon   the   court   over   the   res   o To   apprise   the   whole   world   of   the   pending   registration  case  so  that  they  may  assert  their   rights   or   interests   in   the   land,   if   any,   and   oppose  the  application,  if  so  minded.   v A   party   seeking   registration   of   realty   must   prove   by   satisfactory   and   conclusive   evidence   not   only   his   ownership   thereof  but  the  identity  of  the  same.   v Publication   in   a   newspaper   is   necessary   to   accord   with   due   process  requirement.     v For  non-­‐compliance  with  the  requirement  of  publication,  the   application   may   be   dismissed,   without   prejudice   to   reapplication   in   the   future,   after   all   the   legal   requisites   are   complied  with.   v Publication  in  the  Official  Gazette  does  not  dispense  with  the   requirement  of  notice  by  mailing  and  posting   v Personal  notice  is  not  necessary  unless  required  by  the  Court   v The  purpose  of  the  law  in  requiring  the  giving  of  notice  by  all   three   modes   is   to   strengthen   the   Torrens   system   through   safeguards  to  prevent  anomalous  titling  of  real  property.   v New   publication   is   need   in   case   the   property   sought   to   be   registered  includes  additional  area   v Where  there  is  no  publication  of  the  notice  of  initial  hearing,   the  decision  of  the  land  registration  court  is  void.     2.  By  mailing.     (a)   Mailing   of   notice   to   persons   named   in   the   application.   The   Commissioner   of   Land   Registration   shall   also,   WITHIN   SEVEN   DAYS   AFTER   PUBLICATION   OF   SAID   NOTICE   IN   THE   OFFICIAL   GAZETTE,   as  hereinbefore  provided,  cause  a  copy  of  the  notice  of  initial  hearing   to   be   mailed   to   every   person   named   in   the   notice   whose   address   is   known.     (b)   Mailing   of   notice   to   the   Secretary   of   Public   Highways,   the   Provincial  Governor  and  the  Mayor.  If   the   applicant   requests   to   have   the   line   of   a   public   way   or   road   determined,   the   Commissioner   of   Land   Registration   shall   cause   a   copy   of   said  

 

notice   of   initial   hearing   to   be   mailed   to   the   Secretary   of   Public   Highways,   to   the   Provincial   Governor,   and   to   the   Mayor   of   the   municipality  or  city,  as  the  case  may  be,  in  which  the  land  lies.   (c)   Mailing   of   notice   to   the   Secretary   of   Agrarian   Reform,   the   Solicitor   General,   the   Director   of   Lands,   the   Director   of   Public   Works,  the  Director  of  Forest  Development,  the  Director  of  Mines   and   the   Director   of   Fisheries   and   Aquatic   Resources.   If   the   land   borders  on  a  river,  navigable  stream  or  shore,  or  on  an  arm  of   the  sea  where  a  river  or  harbor  line  has  been  established,  or   on   a   lake,   or   if   it   otherwise   appears   from   the   application   or   the   proceedings  that  a  tenant-­‐farmer  or  the  national  government  may   have   a   claim   adverse   to   that   of   the   applicant,   notice   of   the   initial   hearing   shall   be   given   in   the   same   manner   to   the   Secretary   of   Agrarian   Reform,   the   Solicitor   General,   the   Director   of   Lands,   the   Director   of   Mines   and/or   the   Director   of   Fisheries   and   Aquatic   Resources,  as  may  be  appropriate.     v In   practice,   the   Solicitor   General   is   invariably   furnished   with  a  copy  of  the  notice  of  initial  hearing.  The  reason  for   this   is   that   he   is   bound   to   represent   the   government   in   all   land  registration  and  related  proceedings.   v The   OSG   shall   represent   the   Government   of   the   Philippines,   its   agencies,   and   instrumentalities   and   its   officials   and   agents   in   any   litigation,   proceeding,   investigation  or  matter  requiring  the  services  of  a  lawyer.   v The   Solicitor   General   shall   institute   actions   for   the   reversion   to   the   Government   of   lands   of   the   public   domain  and  improvements  thereon  as  well  as  lands  held   in  violation  of  the  Constitution.   3.  By  posting.   The  Commissioner  of  Land  Registration  shall  also  cause  a  duly   attested  copy  of  the  notice  of  initial  hearing  to   be   posted   by   the   sheriff   of   the   province   or   city,   as   the   case   may   be,   or   by   his   deputy,   in   a   conspicuous   place   on   each   parcel   of   land   included  in  the  application  and  also  in  a  conspicuous  place  on   the   bulletin   board   of   the   municipal   building   of   the   municipality   or   city   in   which   the   land   or   portion   thereof   is   situated,  FOURTEEN  DAYS  AT  LEAST  BEFORE  THE  DATE  OF   INITIAL  HEARING.   The   court   may   also   cause   notice   to   be   served   to   such   other   persons  and  in  such  manner,  as  it  may  deem  proper.     v The  Courts  would  simply  rely  on  the  report  of  the  sheriff   largely   because   of   the   presumption   of   regularity   in   the   performance  of  official  duty.     Ø The   requirement   of   giving   notice   by   all   three   modes   is   mandatory   Ø The  notice  of  initial  hearing  shall  be  signed  by  the  judge  and   a  copy  if  the  notice  is  mailed  to  the  clerk  of  court  to  the  LRA   Ø The  procedure  prescribed  by  PD  No.  1529  in  land  registration   is  IN  REM,  or  one  against  all  persons  who  may  allege  any  right   to  the  land  sought  to  be  registered,  and  the  decree  of  the  Court   granting  registration  is  valid  and  effective  against  all  who  may   have  interest  in  the  land     2. PROOF  OF  PUBLICATION  AND  NOTICE  (Section  24)     The   certification   of   the   Commissioner   of   Land   Registration   and   of   the   sheriff   concerned   to   the   effect   that   the   notice   of   initial   hearing,   as   required   by   law,   has   been   complied   with   shall  be  filed  in  the  case  before  the  date  of  initial  hearing,  and   shall  be  conclusive  proof  of  such  fact.     3. OPPOSITION  TO  APPLICATION  IN  ORDINARY     PROCEEDING  (Section  25)     Any   person   claiming   an   interest,   whether   named   in   the   notice   or   not,  may  appear  and  file  an  opposition  on  or  before  the  date  of   initial  hearing,  or  within  such  further  time  as  may  be  allowed  by   the  court.  THE  OPPOSITION  SHALL  STATE  ALL  THE  OBJECTIONS   TO   THE   APPLICATION   AND   SHALL   SET   FORTH   THE   INTEREST   CLAIMED   BY   THE   PARTY   FILING   THE   SAME   AND   APPLY   FOR   THE   REMEDY  DESIRED,  and  shall  be  signed  and  sworn  to  by  him  or  by   some  other  duly  authorized  person.     If  the  opposition  or  the  adverse  claim  of  any  person  covers  only   a   portion   of   the   lot   and   said   portion   is   not   properly   delimited  on  the  plan  attached  to  the  application,  or  in  case  of   undivided   co-­‐ownership,   conflicting   claims   of   ownership   or   possession,  or  overlapping  of  boundaries,  the   court  may   require   the   parties   to   submit   a   subdivision   plan   duly   approved   by   the  Director  of  Lands.            

15  

16  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

4.

ORDER  OF  DEFAULT,  EFFECT  (Section  26)   v III.  HEARING,  JUDGMENT,  AND  DECREE  OF  REGISTRATION       If  no  person  appears  and  answers  within  the  time  allowed,  the   court   Section  27.  SPEEDY   HEARING;   REFERENCE   TO   A   REFEREE.  The   shall,   upon   motion   of   the   applicant,   no   reason   to   the   contrary   trial   court   shall   see   to   it   that   all   registration-­‐proceedings   are   appearing,   order   a   default   to   be   recorded   and   require   the   disposed  or  within  ninety  days  from  the  date  the  case  is  submitted   applicant   to   present   evidence.   By   the   description   in   the   notice   "To   for  decision,   all   Whom   It   May   Concern",   all   the   world   are   made   parties   defendant     and  shall  be  concluded  by  the  default  order.   The   Court,   if   it   deems   necessary,   may   refer   the   case   or   any   part     thereof  to  a  referee  who  shall  hear  the  parties  and  their  evidence,   Where  an  appearance  has  been  entered  and  an  answer  filed,  a  default   and  the  referee  shall  submit  his  report  thereon  to  the  Court  within   order   shall   be   entered   against   persons   who   did   not   appear   and   fifteen  days  after  the  termination  of  such  hearing.  Hearing  before  a   answer.   referee  may  be  held  at  any  convenient  place  within  the  province  or     city   as   may   be   fixed   by   him   and   after   reasonable   notice   thereof   v REQUISITES  FOR  OPPOSING  APPLICATION   shall   have   been   served   the   parties   concerned.   The   court   may     render  judgment  in  accordance  with  the  report  as  though  the  facts   § The   oppositor   must   have   an   interest   in   the   land   applied   have   been   found   by   the   judge   himself:   Provided,   however,   that   the   for   court   may   in   its   discretion   accept   the   report,   or   set   it   aside   in   § He   should   state   the   grounds   for   his   objection   as   well   as   whole  or  in  part,  or  order  the  case  to  be  recommitted  for  further   the  nature  of  his  claimed  interest   proceedings:   § He  should  indicate  the  desired  relief     § The  opposition  should  be  signed  and  sworn  to  by  him  or   v HEARING   by  his  duly  authorized  representative   § Applications  for  registration  shall  be  heard  in  the  RTC  or     in  first  level  courts   v The  written  appearance  with  opposition  presented  by  petitioner  in  a   § Section   27   aims   to   dispose   of   registration   cases   as   case  was  considered  valid  and  sufficient  to  give  him  legal  standing  in   expeditiously  as  possible  and  hence  the  court  is  required   court  and  entitle  him  to  notice,  as  a  matter  of  right.   to   decide   the   case   within   90   days   from   the   time   it   is   v Opposition   to   an   application   for   registration   of   the   title   must   be   submitted  for  decision.   based  on  the  right  of  dominion  or  some  other  real  right  opposed  to   § The   proof   is   on   the   applicant   to   prove   his   positive   the   adjudication   or   recognition   of   the   ownership   of   the   applicant,   averments   and   not   for   the   government   or   the   private   whether  it  be  limited  or  absolute.   oppositors   to   establish   a   negative   proposition.   He   must   v All   claims   of   third   persons   to   the   property   must   be   asserted   in   the   submit   a   convincing   proof   of   his   and   his   predecessor-­‐in-­‐ registration  proceedings.   interest’s   actual,   peaceful,   and   adverse   possession   in   the   v A   “claim”   merely   noted   on   the   survey   plan   cannot   prevail   over   the   concept  of  owner  of  the  lots  during  the  period  required  by   actual   decree   of   registration   as   reproduced   in   the   certificate.   The   law.   rule   also   is   that   the   owner   of   buildings   and   improvements   should   § No   public   land   can   be   acquired   by   private   persons   claim   them   during   the   proceedings   for   registration   and   the   fact   of   without   any   grant,   express   or   implied,   from   the   ownership,  if  upheld  by  the  Court,  must  be  noted  on  the  face  of  the   government.   The   term   “public   land”   is   uniformly   used   to   certificate.   describe   so   much   of   the   national   domain   under   the   v FAILURE   TO   FILE   OPPOSITION   –   a   claimant   having   failed   to   legislative   power   of   the   Congress   as   has   not   been   present  his  answer  or  objection  to  the  registration  of  a  parcel  of  land   subjected  to  private  right  or  devoted  to  public  use.   under   the   Torrens   system   or   to   question   the   validity   of   such     registration  within  a  period  of  one  year  after  the  certificate  of  title   IV.  SPECIFIC  EVIDENCE  OF  OWNERSHIP   had  been  issued,  is  deemed  to  have  forever  lost  his  right  in  said     land  even  granting  that  he  had  any  right  therein.   1. PROOF  OF  OWNERSHIP       v PERSONS  WITH  LEGAL  STANDING  TO  FILE  OPPOSITION   All   applicants   in   land   registration   proceedings   have   the   burden     of   overcoming   the   presumption   that   the   land   thus   sought   to   § A   HOMESTEADER   who   has   not   yet   been   issued   his   be  registered  forms  part  of  the  public  domain.     title   but   has   fulfilled   all   the   conditions   required   by     law  for  the  issuance  of  the  patent   Unless  the  applicant  succeeds  in  showing  by  clear  and  convincing   § A   PURCHASER   OF   FRIAR   LAND   who   is   deemed   to   evidence   that   he   or   his   ancestors   acquired   the   property   involved   have   an   equitable   title   to   the   land   even   before   the   by   any   means   for   the   proper   acquisition   of   public   lands,   the   issuance  of  the  patent   property  must  be  held  to  be  part  of  public  domain.   § An   AWARDEE   IN   A   SALES   APPLICATION   who,   by     virtue  of  the  award,  is  authorized  to  take  possession   THE   BASIC   PRESUMPTION   IS   THAT   LANDS   OF   WHATEVER   of   the   land   to   enable   him   to   comply   with   the   CLASSIFICATION   BELONG   TO   THE   STATE   AND   EVIDENCE   OF   A   requirements  for  the  issuance  of  patent   LAND  GRANT  MUST  BE  “WELL-­‐NIGH  INCONTROVERTIBLE”.   § A   person   CLAIMING  TO  BE  IN  POSSESSION  OF  THE     LAND   and   has   applied   with   the   Lands   Management   The   applicant   must   present   competent   and   persuasive   proof   to   Bureau  for  its  purchase   substantiate   his   claim;   he   my   not   rely   on   general   statements,   or     mere  conclusions  of  law  other  than  factual  evidence  of  possession   v Private   persons   may   not   file   opposition   for   the   government   on   the   and  title.     ground  that  the  land  belongs  to  the  government.     v Pursuant  to  the  Regalian  Doctrine,  all  land  of  the  public  domain  and   The   mere   initiation   of   an   application   for   registration   of   land   all   other   natural   resources   are   owned   by   the   State,   hence,   it   is   the   under  the  Torrens  system  is   not   proof   that   the   land   is   of   private   burden   of   the   applicant   or   private   oppositor   to   overthrow   the   ownership,  and  not  pertaining  to  public  domain.  It  is  precisely  the   presumption   that   the   land   is   public   land   by   “well-­‐nigh   character   of   the   land   as   private   which   the   applicant   has   the   incontrovertible   proof”   and   he   is   entitled   to   registration   under   the   obligation  of  establishing.   law.     v If   the   Solicitor   General   did   not   initiate   the   opposition   by   the   Ø LANDS  MUST  BE  ALIENABLE  AND  DISPOSABLE   Government,  it  will  be  summarily  dismissed.     v Notwithstanding  the  absence  of  opposition  by  the  government,   Alienable  and  disposable  lands,  or  those  open  for  alienation  or   the  applicant  in  land  registration  cases  is  not  relieved  of  the  burden   disposition,  are  part  of  the  patrimonial  property  of  the  State.   of   proving   the   imperfect   right   or   title   sought   to   be   confirmed.   He     must  show,  even  though  there  is  no  opposition,  to  the  satisfaction  of   Before   any   land   may   be   declassified   from   the   forest   group   and   the  court,  that  he  is  the  absolute  owner,  in  fee  simple.   converted  into  alienable  or  disposable  land  for  agricultural  or   v The   Court   may,   even   in   the   absence   of   any   opposition,   deny   the   other   purposes,   there   must   be   a   positive   act   from   the   registration  of  the  land  under  the  Torrens  system,  upon  the  ground   government.   that   the   facts   presented   did   not   show   that   the   petitioner   is   the     owner,   in   fee   simple,   of   the   land,   which   he   is   attempting   to   have   In   the   absence   of   classification,   the   land   remains   as   registered.   unclassified   land   until   it   is   released   therefrom   and   rendered   v Hearing   is   necessary   in   order   to   determine   the   validity   of   open  for  disposition.     ownership  claim.  The  court  may  refer  the  case  or  any  part  thereof     to  a  REFEREE  who  shall  hear  the  parties  and  their  evidence,  and  the   THE  CLASSIFICATION  OF  PUBLIC  LANDS  IS  AN  EXCLUSIVE   referee   shall   submit   his   report   thereon   to   the   court   within   15   days   PREROGATIVE   OF   THE   EXECUTIVE   DEPARTMENT   AND   after   the   termination   of   such   hearing.   The   court   may   render   NOT  OF  THE  COURTS.   judgment   according   to   the   report   though   the   facts   has   been     found   by   the   judge   himself,   or   order   the   case   recommitted   for     reception  of  additional  evidence.     v Failure   of   the   Director   of   Lands   to   oppose   the   application   for     registration   will   not   justify   the   court   in   adjudicating   the   land     applied  for  as  private  property.  

 

16  

17  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

Ø SECTION   48B   OF   CA   NO.   141   IS   PREMISED   ON   PRIOR   CLASSIFICATION  OF  LAND  AS  ALIENABLE  AND  DISPOSABLE.     Open,   exclusive,   and   undisputed   possession   of   alienable   public   land  for  the  period  prescribed  by  CA  No.  141  ipso   jure   converts   such  land  into  private  land.     Judicial   confirmation   in   such   cases   is   only   a   formality   that   merely  confirms  that  earlier  conversion  of  the  land  into  a  private   land,  the  conversion  having  occurred  in  law  from  the  moment  the   required  period  of  possession  became  complete.     It  is  only  necessary  that  the  land  be  already  classified  as  alienable   and   disposable   land   AT   THE   TIME   OF   FILING   OF   THE   APPLICATION  for  registration.     Ø CLASSIFICATION   OF   AGRICULTURAL   PUBLIC   LAND   AS   A   &   D   RECKONED   AT   THE   TIME   OF   FILING   OF   APPLICATION   FOR   REGISTRATION     It   requires   the   property   sought   to   be   registered   as   already   alienable   and   disposable   at   the   time   the   application   for   registration  of  title  is  filed.     If  the  State,  at  the  time  the  application  is  made,  has  not  yet  deemed   it  proper  to  release  the  property  for  alienation  or  disposition,  the   presumption   is   that   the   government   is   still   reserving   the   right   to   utilize  the  property;  hence,  the  need  to  preserve  its  ownership  in   the  State  irrespective  of  the  length  of  adverse  possession  even  if  in   good  faith.     Ø PROOF  OF  CLASSIFICATION  OF  LAND  AS  A  &  D  (C-­‐LEL-­‐RCC)     • Certification  of  the  Bureau  of  Forest  Development  that  the   land  has  been  released  as  alienable  and  disposable  land   • Land  Classification  Map  showing  that  the  land  lies  within  the   alienable  and  disposable  portion  of  the  public  domain   • Executive  proclamation  withdrawing  from  a  reservation  of  a   specific   area   and   declaring   the   same   open   for   entry,   sale   or   other  mode  of  disposition   • Legislative  act  or  executive  proclamation  reserving  a  portion   of   the   public   domain   for   public   or   quasi-­‐public   use,   which   amounts   to   a   transfer   of   ownership   to   the   grantee   (Case:   International  Hardwood  and  Veneer  Co.  vs  UP)   • Report   of   a   land   inspector   of   the   Bureau   of   Lands   that   the   subject   land   was   found   inside   an   agricultural   zone   and   is   suitable  for  rice  cultivation.  The  classification  is  descriptive  of   its   LEGAL   NATURE   or   status   and   does   not   have   to   be   descriptive  of  what  the  land  really  looks  like.   • Certification   from   the   CENRO   of   the   DENR  stating  that  the   land   subject   of   an   application   is   found   to   be   within   the   alienable   and   disposable   site   per   a   land   classification   project   map   • Certification   by   DENR   Regional   Technical   Director   that   a   lot   constitutes   substantial   compliance   with   the   legal   requirement     Ø CLASSIFICATION  MUST  BE  APPROVED  BY  DENR  SECRETARY     The   applicant   for   land   registration   must   prove   that   the   DENR   Secretary   had   approved   the   land   classification   and   released   the   land  of  the  public  domain  as  alienable  and  disposable,  and  that  the   land   subject   of   the   application   for   registration   falls   within   the   approved   area   per   verification   through   survey   by   the   PENRO   or   CENRO.     2. SURVEY  PLAN     A  survey  plan  serves   to   establish   the   true   identity   of   the   land   to  ensure  that  it  does  not  overlap  a  parcel  of  land  or  a  portion   thereof  already  covered  by  a  previous  land  registration,  and  to   forestall  the  possibility  that  it  will  be  overlapped  by  a  subsequent   registration  of  any  adjoining  land.     A  survey  plan,  standing  alone,  is  not  evidence  of  title.     Section   17   of   PD   1529   requires   that   the   application   for   registration  be  accompanied  with  a  survey  plan  duly  approved  by   the   Director   of   Land   (Regional   Technical   Director   of   the   Lands   Management  Bureau),  together  with  the  applicant’s  muniments  of   title.     Only   the   Lands   Management   Bureau   may   verify   and   approve   survey   plans   for   original   registration   purposes   pursuant   to   PD   No.   239,   dated   July   9,   1973.   The   Land   Registration   Authority   HAS   NO   AUTHORITY   TO   APPROVE   ORIGINAL   SURVEY   PLANS   NOR   TO  CHECK  THE  CORRECTNESS  THEREOF.     The   surveyors   is   duty-­‐bound   to   find   out   themselves   who   are   the   occupants   and   boundary   owners   of   any   land   surveyed   by   them   for   purposes  of  registration.  

 

3.

Ø

Ø

Ø

The   Supreme   Court   declared   that   the   submission   of   the   tracing  cloth  plan  is  a  statutory  requirement  of  MANDATORY   CHARACTER.   However,   by   virtue   of   LRA   Circular   No.   05-­‐2000,   dated   March   8,   2000,   what   is   needed   to   be   forwarded   to   the   LRA   is   only   a   certified   copy   of   the   tracing   cloth   or   Diazo   polyester   film   as   approved   by   the   Regional   Technical   Director.   The   original   of   the   said   plan,   which   is   to   accompany   the   application  for  original  registration,  shall  be  filed  and  retained   by  the  Court.     A  certified  blue  print  or  white  print  copy  of  the  plan  suffices   for   registration   purposes.   The   survey   plan   of   the   land   and   the   technical   description   thereof,   based   on   an   old   cadastral   survey,   satisfy   the   technical   requirement   of   the   tracing   cloth   plan,  which  is  to  identify  with  certainty  the  land  applied  for.     What   defines   a   piece   of   titled   property   is   not   the   numerical   data  indicated  as  the  area  of  the  land,  calculated  with  more  or   less   certainty   mentioned   in   the   technical   description,   BUT   THE   BOUNDARIES   or   “METES   AND   BOUNDS”   OF   THE   PROPERTY  AS  ENCLOSING  IT  AND  SHOWING  ITS  LIMITS.     In  order  that  natural  boundaries  of  land  may  be  accepted  for   the  purpose  of  varying  the  extent  of  the  land,  the  evidence  as   to  such  natural  boundaries  must  be  clear  and  convincing.       POSSESSION  AND  OCCUPATION     The  law  requires  both  “possession  and  occupation”  of  the   land   applied   for   which   the   applicant   must   show   by   “well-­‐nigh   incontrovertible”.     The  Civil  Code  states  that  possession  is  the  holding  of  a  thing   or  the  enjoyment  of  a  right.  Possession   always   includes   the   idea   of   occupation.   It   is   not   necessary   that   the   person   in   possession  should  himself  be  the  occupant.  The  occupancy  can   by   held   by   another   in   his   name.   Without   occupancy,   there   is   no  possession.     Possession,  to  constitute  the  foundation  of  a  prescriptive  right,   must   be   a   possession   UNDER   A   CLAIM   OF   TITLE   OR   OWNERSHIP  or  IT  MUST  BE  ADVERSE.     An  applicant  for  confirmation  of  imperfect  or  incomplete   title   must   show   OCEN   possession   and   occupation   of   the   property   in   question,   under   a   bona   fide   claim   of   acquisition  or  ownership,  since  June  12,  1945.     Acts  of  possessory  character  performed  by  one  who  holds  the   property   by   mere   tolerance   of   the   owner   are   clearly   not   in   the   concept   of   the   owner,   and   such   possessory   acts,   no   matter   how   long   continued,   do   not   start   the   period   of   prescription   running.     Actual  possession  of  land  consists  in  the  manifestation  of  acts   of   dominion   over   it   of   such   a   nature,   as   a   party   would   naturally  exercise  over  his  own  property.       Mere   casual   cultivation   of   portions   of   the   land   by   the   claimant   does   not   constitute   possession   under   claim   of   ownership.  On  the  other  hand,  where  there  is  sufficient  proof   that  the  applicant  and  his  predecessors-­‐in-­‐interest  have  been   in   possession   of   the   land   without   interruption,   cultivating   certain   parts   thereof   and   using   others   for   the   pasture   of   animals,   keeping   them   fenced   in   for   the   purpose   of   preserving   the   trees,   shrubs,   and   bamboo   growing   thereon,   the   registration  of  the  land  is  warranted     TWO  THINGS  PARAMOUNT  IN  POSSESSION   § There  must  be  occupancy,  apprehension  or  taking   § There  must  be  intent  to  possess     RULE   OF   PREFERENCE   IN   CASE   OF   CONFLICT   OF   POSSESSION   § The  present  possessor  shall  be  preferred   § If   there   are   two   possessors,   the   one   longer   in   possession   § If   the   dates   of   the   possession   are   the   same,   the   one  who  presents  a  title   § If   both   possessors   have   title,   the   court   shall   determine   the   rightful   possessor   and   owner   of   the  land     EVIDENCE  OF  OVERT  ACTS  OF  POSSESSION   § Introducing  valuable  improvements  on  the  property   § Fruit-­‐bearing  trees   § Fencing  the  area   § Constructing  a  residential  house   § Declaring  the  house  for  taxation  purpose        

17  

18  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

4.

5.

6.

Ø

Ø

Ø

TAX  DECLARATIONS  AND  TAX  RECEIPTS     They  are  not   conclusive   proof   of   ownership,  but  have  a  strong   probative  value  when  accompanied  by  proof  of  actual  possession,   or  supported  by  other  effective  proof.     The   voluntary   declaration   of   a   piece   of   property   for   taxation   purposes   manifests   not   only   one’s   sincere   and   honest   desire   to   obtain   title   to   the   property   and   announces   his   adverse   claim   against   the   State   and   all   other   interested   parties,   but   also   the   intention  to  contribute  needed  revenues  to  the  government.     Tax   declarations   and   receipts   when   coupled   with   actual   possession   constitute   evidence   of   great   weight   and   can   be   the   basis  of  claim  of  ownership  through  prescription.       Mere   failure   of   the   owner   to   pay   his   taxes   does   not   warrant   a   conclusion   that   there   was   an   abandonment   of   a   right   to   the   property.   The   payment   of   taxes   on   property   does   not   alone   constitute  sufficient  evidence  of  title.     PARTIAL  JUDGMENT  (SECTION  28,  PD  1529)     In   a   case   where   ONLY   A   PORTION   OF   THE   LAND   SUBJECT   OF   REGISTRATION   IS   CONTESTED,   the   court   may   render   partial   judgment  provided  that  a  subdivision  plan  showing  the  contested   and   uncontested   portions   approved   by   the   Director   of   Lands   is   previously  submitted  to  said  court.     JUDGMENT  CONFIRMING  TITLE  (SECTION  29,  PD  1529)     All   conflicting   claims   of   ownership   and   interest   in   the   land   subject  of  the  application  shall  be  determined  by  the  court.   If   the   court,   after   considering   the   evidence   and   the   reports   of   the   Commissioner   of   Land   Registration   and   the   Director   of   Lands,   finds  that  the  applicant  or  the  oppositor  has  sufficient  title  proper   for   registration,   judgment   shall   be   rendered   confirming   the   title   of   the  applicant,  or  the  oppositor,  to  the  land  or  portions  thereof.     Section  29  MANDATES  the  LRA  Administrator  and  the  Director  of   Lands  to  submit  to  the  court  all  necessary   and   relevant   evidence   as   well   as   reports   to   aid   the   court   in   the   determination   of   the   case.     THE  REPORT  MAY  INCLUDE:   § Information  about  the  status  of  the  land  applied  for   § Its  present  classification   § Whether   or   not   the   same   had   been   previously   decreed   as   private  property  or  patented  under  the  Public  Land  Act     The   court   may   also   directly   require   the   DENR   and   the   LRA   to   submit   a   report   on   whether   the   subject   property   has   already   been   registered  and  covered  by  certificates  of  title.     Only   judgments   and   processes   received   by   the   Solicitor   General   bind  the  government.  The  Notice  of  Appearance  shall  be  addressed   to  the  OSG.  Such  notice  makes  it  clear  that  “only  notices  of  orders,   resolutions,   and   decisions   served   on   the   SG   will   bind   the   party   (government/  agency)  concerned.     PRINCIPLE  OF  RES  JUDICATA  APPLICABLE  TO  REGISTRATION   PROCEEDINGS     RES  JUDICATA  –  Where  a  judgment  on  the  merits  rendered  in   a   former   case   is   final   and   executory,   and   was   rendered   by   a   court   of   competent   jurisdiction,   and   that   case   and   the   present   case   involves   the   same   parties,   the   same   parcels   of   land   and   a   similarity   of   causes   of   action,   present   action   is   barred   by   a   prior  action.     The   fact   that   the   grounds   on   which   the   two   cases   are   predicated   are  technically  at  variance  is  IMMATERIAL  if   in   substance   they   aim   the   same   objective:  the  recovery  of  the  title  and  possession   of  the  same  properties.     REQUISITES  OF  RES  JUDICATA     § The  former  judgment  must  be  FINAL   § It   must   have   been   rendered   by   a   COURT   HAVING   JURISDICTION  of  the  subject  matter  and  the  parties   § It  must  be  a  JUDGMENT  OF  THE  MERITS   § The  must  be,  between  the  first  and  second  action:   o Identity  of  parties   o Identity  of  subject  matter   o Identity  of  cause  of  action     A   final   judgment   in   an   ordinary   civil   case   determining   the   ownership   of   a   piece   of   land   is   res   judicata   in   a   registration   proceeding  where  the  parties  and  the  property  are  the  same  as  in   the  former  case.    

 

A  judgment  dismissing  an  application  for  registration  of  land   does  not  constitute  res  judicata,   and   the   unsuccessful   applicant,   or  any  person  deriving  title  from  him,  may  file  another  proceeding   for  the  registration  of  the  same  land.     7. WHEN  JUDGMENT  BECOMES  FINAL  (SECTION  30,  PD1529)     The   judgment   rendered   in   a   land   registration   proceeding   becomes   FINAL  UPON  THE  EXPIRATION  OF  FIFTEEN  DAYS  to  be  counted   from  the  data  of  receipt  of  notice  of  the  judgment.       An   APPEAL   may   be   taken   from   the   judgment   of   the   court   as   in   ordinary  civil  cases.     After  judgment  has  become  final  and  executory,  it  shall  devolve   upon   the   court   to   forthwith   issue   an   order   in   accordance   with   Section   39   of   this   Decree   to   the   Commissioner   for   the   ISSUANCE   OF   THE   DECREE   OF   REGISTRATION   AND   THE   CORRESPONDING  CERTIFICATE  OF  TITLE  in  favor  of  the  person   adjudged  entitled  to  registration.     Ø SEPARATE   PROCEEDING   TO   ENFORCE   JUDGMENT   NOT   NECESSARY  IN  LAND  REGISTRATION     § Appeal  must  be  made  within  15  days  counted  from   the  date  of  receipt  of  the  notice  of  final  order.   § After   the   ownership   has   been   proved   and   confirmed   by   judicial   declaration,   NO   FURTHER   PROCEEDING   TO   ENFORCE   THE   JUDGMENT   IS   NECESSARY,   except   when   the   adverse   or   losing   party   had   been   in   possession   of   the   land   and   the   winning  party  desires  to  oust  him  therefrom.     Ø COURT’S  JURISDICTION     While   the   judgment   of   the   court   becomes   final   15   days   from   the   receipt   of   notice   of   the   judgment,   the   court   nevertheless   retains  jurisdiction  over  the  case  until   after   the  expiration  of   1  year  from  the  issuance  of  the  final  decree  of  registration   by  the  LRA.     IT  IS  ONLY  AFTER  THE  DECREE  OF  REGISTRATION,  WHICH   IS   THE   COPY   OF   THE   ORIGINAL   CERTIFICATE   OF   TITLE   TO   BE  ISSUED  BY  THE  REGISTER  OF  DEEDS,  IS   ISSUED   BY   THE   LRA   THAT   THE   DECISION   OF   THE   COURT   IS   DEEMED   “FINAL”.     After   the   land   has   been   registered,   the   registration   court   ceases   to   have   jurisdiction   over   it   for   any   purpose   and   it   returns  to  the  jurisdiction  of  the  ordinary  courts  of  law  for  all   subsequent  purposes.     Ø WRIT  OF  POSSESSION     A   writ   of   possession   is   EMPLOYED   TO   ENFORCE   A   JUDGMENT   TO   RECOVER   THE   POSSESSION   OF   LAND.   It   commands  the  sheriff  to  enter  the  land  and  give  possession  of   it  to  the  person  entitled  under  the  judgment.     Ø WHEN  CAN  A  WRIT  OF  POSSESSION  BE  ISSUED   § In  a  land  proceeding,  in  rem   § Extrajudicial  foreclosure  of  realty  mortgage   § Judicial   foreclosure   proceeding,   quasi   in   rem,   provided  that  the  mortgagor  is  in  possession  of  the   mortgaged  realty  and  no  third  person,  not  a  party  to   the  foreclosure  suit   § Execution  sales     After   the   registration   of   a   land   is   decreed   in   favor   of   the   applicant,   the   latter,   as   well   as   any   subsequent   purchaser   of   the  property  has  the  right  to  the  title  and  possession  thereof,   and   to   that   end   he   may   ask   the   proper   court   for   the   issuance   of   a   writ   of   possession,   provided   the   same   has   not  been  issued  before.     A   writ   of   possession   may   be   issued   not   only   against   the   defeated   party   in   registration,   but   also   against   anyone   adversely  occupying  the  land  or  any  portion  thereof.     A   person   who   took   possession   of   the   land   after   final   adjudication   of   the   same   in   registration   proceedings   cannot   be   summarily   ousted   through   a   writ   of   possession   secured   by   a   mere   motion   and   that   regardless   of   any   title   or   lack   of   title   of   persons   to   hold   possession   of   the   land   in   question,  they  cannot  be  ousted  without  giving  them  their  day   in  court.  The  remedy  is  to  resort  to  the  courts  and  institute  a   separate  action  for  UNLAWFUL  ENTRY  OR  DETAINER  or  for   REIVINDICATORY  ACTION,  as  the  case  may  be.         If  one  refused  to  vacate,  the  RTC  may  hold  them  in  contempt.      

18  

19  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

8. DECREE  OF  REGISTRATION  (SECTION  31,  PD  1529)     Every   decree   of   registration   issued   by   the   Commissioner   SHALL   BEAR   THE   DATE,   HOUR   AND   MINUTE   OF   ITS   ENTRY,   and   shall   be  signed  by  him.       It  shall  state  whether  the  owner  is  married  or  unmarried,  and  if   married,  the  name  of  the  husband  or  wife:  Provided,  however,  that   if   the   land   adjudicated   by   the   court   is   conjugal   property,   the   decree   shall   be   issued   in   the   name   of   both   spouses.   If   the   owner   is   under   disability,   it   shall   state   the   nature   of   disability,   and   if   a   minor,  his  age.       It   shall   contain   a   description   of   the   land   as   finally   determined   by  the  court,  and  shall  set  forth  the  estate  of  the  owner,  and  also,   in   such   manner   as   to   show   their   relative   priorities,   all   particular   estates,   mortgages,   easements,   liens,   attachments,   and   other   encumbrances,  including  rights  of  tenant-­‐farmers,  if  any,  to  which   the  land  or  owner's  estate  is  subject,  as  well  as  any  other  matters   properly  to  be  determined  in  pursuance  of  this  Decree.     The   decree   of   registration   shall   bind   the   land   and   quiet   title   thereto,   subject   only   to   such   exceptions   or   liens   as   may   be   provided   by   law.   It   shall   be   conclusive   upon   and   against   all   persons,   including   the   National   Government   and   all   branches   thereof,  whether  mentioned  by  name  in  the  application  or  notice,   the  same  being  included  in  the  general  description  "To  all  whom  it   may  concern".     Ø A   DECREE   OF   REGISTRATION   is   an   order   issued   under   the   signature   of   the   Administrator,   LRA,   in   the   name   of   the   court,   stating   that   the   land   described   therein   is   registered   in   the   name   of   the  applicant  or  oppositor  or  claimant  as  the  case  may  be.     Ø STEPS  OF  DECREE  OF  REGISTRATION     § Issuance  of  decree  of  registration   § Administrator   sends   copy   thereof,   under   seal   of   office,   to  the  Register  of  Deeds  of  the  province  where  the  land   lies   § Register   of   Deeds   transcribes   the   decree   in   the   “Registration  Book”  in  consecutive  order     The  entry  made  by  the  Register  of  Deeds  in  said  book  constitutes   the  original  certificate  of  title  and  is  signed  by  him  and  sealed  with   the  seal  of  his  office.     Entry  in  the  proper  registry  and  the  issuance  of  the  corresponding   certificate  of  title  presupposes  that  the  applicant  is  the  owner  and   proprietor  of  the  realty  he  seeks  to  register.     THE  DUTY  OF  THE  LRA  ADMINISTRATOR  IS  MINISTERIAL  AND   HE  IS  ACTING  UNDER  THE  ORDERS  OF  THE  COURT.  The  decree   must  be  in  conformity  with  the  decision  of  the  court  and  with  the   data   found   in   record,   and   the   Administrator   has   no   discretion   on   the  matter.     If   the   Administrator   is   in   doubt   upon   any   point   in   relation   to   the   preparation   and   issuance   of   the   decree,   it   is   his   duty   to   refer   the   matter  to  the  court.  He  acts  as  an  official  of  the  court  and  not  as  an   administrative  official,  and  his  act  is  that  act  of  the  court.     THE   LAND   BECOMES   A   REGISTERED   LAND   ONLY   UPON   TRANSCRIPTION   OF   THE   DECREE   IN   THE   ORIGINAL   REGISTRATION  BOOK  BY  THE  REGISTER  OF  DEEDS,  AND  NOT   ON  THE  DATE  OF  ISSUANCE  OF  THE  DECREE.     A   land   registration   court   has   NO   JURISDICTION   to   order   the   registration  of  land  already  decreed  in  the  name  of  another  in  an   earlier   land   registration   case.   A   second   decree   for   the   same   land   would   be   null   and   void,   since   the   principle   behind   original   registration  is  to  register  the  parcel  of  land  only  once.     An   application   for   registration   of   an   already   titled   land   constitutes   a  collateral  attack  on  the  existing  title,  which  is  not  allowed  by  law.     Cadastral   courts   have   limited   jurisdiction   to   correct   technical   errors   or   determine   which   of   several   conflicting   titles   should   prevail.     A   decree   of   registration   cannot   be   issued   until   after   judgment   becomes   final.   Execution   pending   appeal   is,   therefore,   not   applicable  in  land  registration  proceedings.     Under   the   Torrens   System   of   registration,   the   Torrens   title   becomes  indefeasible  and  incontrovertible  ONE   YEAR   FROM   ITS   FINAL  DECREE.            

 

V.  REMEDIES     Ø Section   32.   Review   of   Decree   of   Registration,   Innocent   Purchaser  for  value     The   decree   of   registration  shall  not   be  reopened   or  revised  by   reason  of  absence,  minority,  or  other  disability  of  any  person   adversely  affected  thereby,  nor  by  any  proceeding  in  any  court   for   reversing   judgments,   subject,   however,   to   the   right   of   any   person,   including   the   government   and   the   branches   thereof,   deprived   of   land   or   of   any   estate   or   interest   therein   by   such   adjudication   or   confirmation   of   title   obtained  by  actual  fraud,  TO  FILE  IN  THE  PROPER  COURT   OF   FIRST   INSTANCE   A   PETITION   FOR   REOPENING   AND   REVIEW   OF   THE   DECREE   OF   REGISTRATION   NOT   LATER   THAN   ONE   YEAR   FROM   AND   AFTER   THE   DATE   OF   THE   ENTRY  OF  SUCH  DECREE  OF  REGISTRATION,  but  in  no  case   shall   such   petition   be   entertained   by   the   court   where   an   innocent   purchaser   for   value   has   acquired   the   land   or   an   interest   therein,   whose   rights   may   be   prejudiced.   Whenever   the   phrase   "innocent   purchaser   for   value"   or   an   equivalent   phrase  occurs  in  this  Decree,  it  shall  be  deemed  to  include  an   innocent  lessee,  mortgagee,  or  other  encumbrancer  for  value.     Upon   the   expiration   of   said   period   of   one   year,   the   decree   of   registration   and   the   certificate   of   title   issued   shall   become   incontrovertible.   Any   person   aggrieved   by   such   decree   of   registration   in   any   case   may   pursue   his   remedy   by   action  for  damages  against  the  applicant  or  any  other  persons   responsible  for  the  fraud.     1. NEW  TRIAL  OR  RECONSIDERATION     Within   the   period   of   taking   an   appeal   (15   days),   the   aggrieved   party   may   move   the   trial   court   to   set   aside   the   judgment   or   final   order   and   grant   a   new   trial   for   one   or   more   of   the   causes   materially  affecting  the  substantial  rights  of  said  party.     Where  a  record  on  appeal  is  required,  the  appellant  shall  file  a   notice   of   appeal   and   a   record   on   appeal   within   30   days   after   notice  of  the  judgment  or  final  order.     GROUNDS  FOR  NEW  TRIAL  OR  RECONSIDERATION     § Fraud,   accident,   mistake   or   excusable   negligence,   which   ordinary   prudence   could   not   have   guarded   against  and  by  reason  of  which  such  aggrieved  party  has   probably  been  impaired  in  his  rights   § Newly   discovered   evidence,  which  he  could  not,  with   reasonable  diligence,  have  discovered,  and  produced  at   the   trial,   and   which   if   presented   would   probably   alter   the  result     CONTENTS  OF  A  MOTION  FOR  NEW  TRIAL     § Must  be  in  writing   § Shall  state  the  ground/s  therefor   § A  written  notice  must  be  served  to  the  adverse  party   § Shall  be  supported  by  affidavits  of  merits   § Shall   be   supported   by   affidavits   of   witnesses   or   duly   authenticated   documents,   which   are   proposed   to   be   introduced  in  evidence     AFFIDAVIT   OF   MERITS   IN   MOTION   FOR   NEW   TRIAL   GROUNDED  ON  FRAUD,  ETC.     § Affidavit   1:   setting   forth   the   facts   and   circumstances   alleged   to   constitute   such   fraud,   accident,  mistake,  or  excusable  negligence   o REASON:   to   enable   the   court   to   determine   if   the   movant’s   claim   of   fraud   is   not   mere   conclusion   but   is   indeed   borne  out  by  the  relevant  facts       § Affidavit   2:   setting   forth   the   particular   facts   claimed   to   constitute   the   movant’s   meritorious   cause  of  action  or  defense.     o REASON:  it  would  be  useless,  a  waste  of   time,   to   set   aside   the   judgment   and   reopen   the   case   to   allow   the   movant   to   adduce   evidence   when   he   has   no   valid   cause  of  action  or  meritorious  defense     Affidavits   of   merit   are   not   necessary   if   the   granting   of   the   motion  for  new  trial  is  not  discretionary  with  the  court  BUT  IS   DEMANDABLE  AS  OF  RIGHT   o Where   the   movant   has   been   deprived   of   his   day   in   court   through   no   fault   or   negligence   on   his   part   because   no   notice   of   hearing   was   furnished   him   in   advance   so  as  to  enable  him  to  prepare  for  trial    

19  

20  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

v

v

v v

§

2.

3.

FRAUD   –   is   a   ground   for   review   or   reopening   decree   of   registration     § EXTRINSIC  FRAUD   –   refers   to   any   fraudulent   act   of   the   successful   party   in   litigation   which   is   committed   outside   the   trial   of   a   case  against  the  defeated  party,   or   his   agents,   attorneys   or   witnesses,   whereby   said   defeated   party   is   prevented   from   presenting   fully   and   fairly  his  side  of  the  case     § INTRINSIC   FRAUD   –   refers   to   acts   of   a   party   in   a   litigation   during   the   trial,   such   as   forged   instruments   or   perjured   testimony,   which   did   not   affect   the   presentation   of   the   case,   but   DID   PREVENT   A   FAIR   AND  JUST  DETERMINATION  OF  THE  CASE     § PRESCRIPTION  =  4  years     ACCIDENT   –   it   must   appear   that   there   was   accident   or   surprise   which  ordinary  prudence  could  not  have  guarded  against,  and  by   reason  of  which  the  party  applying  has  probably  been  impaired  in   his  rights     MISTAKE   –   some   unintentional   act,   omission,   or   error   arising   from  ignorance,  surprise,  imposition  or  misplaced  confidence.       EXCUSABLE  NEGLECT  –  failure  to  take  the  proper  steps  at  the   proper   time,  not  in  consequence  of  the  party’s  own  carelessness,   inattention,  or  willful  disregard  of  the  process  of  the  court,  but  in   consequence   of   some   unexpected   or   unavoidable   hindrance   or   accident,  or  reliance  on  the  care  and  vigilance  of  his  counsel  or  on   promises  made  by  the  adverse  party.     MOTION  FOR  RECONSIDERATION     It   shall   point   out   specifically   the   findings   or   conclusions   of   the   judgment  or  final  order  which  are  not  supported  by  the  evidence   or  which  are  contrary  to  law,  making  express  reference       No  motion  for  extension  of  time  to  file  a  motion  for  new  trial   or  reconsideration  shall  be  allowed.     RELIEF  FROM  JUDGMENT;  RELIEF  FROM  DENIAL     When  an  judgment  or  final  order  is  entered,  and  is  made  through   fraud,   mistake,   etc,   HE   MAY   FILE   A   PETITION   IN   SUCH   COURT   and  in  the  same  case  praying  that  the  JUDGMENT  BE  SET  ASIDE     A  petition  for  relief  of  judgment  or  from  denial  of  appeal  must  be   verified   and   filed   WITHIN   60   DAYS   AFTER   THE   PETITIONER   LEARNS  OF  THE  JUDGMENT,  AND  NOT  MORE  THAN  6  MONTHS     Petition   for   relief   and   motion   for   new   trial   or   consideration   are   exclusive  of  each  other.  A  party  who  has  filed  a  timely  motion  for   new  trial  cannot  file  a  petition  for  relief  after  his  motion  has  been   denied.   He   should   appeal   from   the   judgment   and   question   such   denial.     APPEALS     May   be   taken   from   a   judgment   or   final   order   that   completely   disposes   of   the   case,   or   of   a   particular   matter   therein   when   declared  by  the  Rules  of  Court  to  be  appealable.     NO  APPEAL  MAY  BE  TAKEN  FROM:     § Order  denying  a  motion  for  new  trial/  reconsideration   § An   order   denying   a   petition   for   relief   or   any   similar   motion  seeking  relief  from  judgment   § An  interlocutory  order   § An  order  disallowing  or  dismissing  an  appeal   § An   order   denying   a   motion   to   set   aside   a   judgment   by   consent,  confession  or  compromise  on  ground  of  fraud,   mistake,  or  duress   § An  order  of  execution   § A  judgment  or  final  order  for  or  against  one  or  more  of   several   parties   or   in   separate   claims,   counterclaims,   cross-­‐claims  and  third-­‐party  complaints,  while  the  main   case   is   pending,   unless   the   court   allows   an   appeal   therefrom   § An  order  dismissing  an  action  without  prejudice     MODE  OF  APPEAL     § ORDINARY   APPEAL   –   the   appeal   to   the   Court   of   Appeals   in   cases   decided   by   the   RTC   in   the   exercise   of   its  original  jurisdiction   o Shall  be  taken  by  filing  a  notice  of  appeal  with   the   court   which   rendered   the   judgment   or   final  order  appealed  from  and  serving  a  copy   upon  the  adverse  party    

 

File  first  a  notice   of   appeal   (shall  indicate  the   parties   to   the   appeal,   specify   the   judgment   or   final   order   or   part   thereof   appealed   from,   specify   the   court   to   which   the   appeal   is   being   taken,   and   state   the   material   dates   showing   the  timeliness  of  the  appeal.)   o The  appeal  shall  be  taken  within   fifteen   (15)   days   from   notice   of   the   judgment   or   final   order   appealed   from.   Where   a   record   on   appeal   is   required,   the   appellant   shall   file   a   notice   of   appeal   and   a   record   on   appeal   within   thirty   (30)   days   from   notice   of   the   judgment  or  final  order.   o A   timely   motion   for   new   trial   or   reconsideration   shall   interrupt   the   period   of   appeal.     o No   motion   for   extension   of   time   to   file   a   motion  for  new  trial  or  reconsideration  shall   be  allowed.     PETITION   FOR   REVIEW   –   the   appeal   to   the   Court   of   Appeals   in   cases   decided   by   the   RTC   in   the   exercise   of   its  appellate  jurisdiction  (Rule  42,  Rules  of  Court)   o Filing   a   verified   petition   for   review   with   the   Court  of  Appeals   o Petition   shall   be   filed   and   served   within   fifteen   (15)   days   from   notice   of   the   decision   sought   to   be   reviewed   or   of   the   denial   of   petitioner's   motion   for   new   trial   or   reconsideration   filed   in   due   time   after   judgment   o Upon  proper  motion  and  the  payment  of  the   full   amount   of   the   docket   and   other   lawful   fees   and   the   deposit   for   costs   before   the   expiration   of   the   reglementary   period,   the   Court   of   Appeals   may   grant   an   additional   period  of  fifteen  (15)  days  only  within  which   to  file  the  petition  for  review.   o No  further  extension  shall  be  granted  except   for   the   most   compelling   reason   and   in   no   case  to  exceed  fifteen  (15)  days.     APPEAL   BY   CERTIORARI   -­‐   In   all   cases   where   only   questions   of   law   are   raised   or   involved,   the   appeal   shall   be   to   the   Supreme   Court   by   petition   for   review   on  certiorari  in  accordance  with  the  Rule  45   o A   party   desiring   to   appeal   by  certiorari  from   a  judgment  or  final  order  or  resolution  of  the   Court   of   Appeals,   the   Sandiganbayan,   the   Regional   Trial   Court   or   other   courts   whenever   authorized   by   law,   may   file   with   the   Supreme   Court   a   verified   petition   for   review   on  certiorari.   The   petition   shall   raise   only   questions   of   law   which   must   be   distinctly  set  forth.   o The   petition   shall   be   filed   within   fifteen   (15)   days   from   notice   of   the   judgment   or   final   order   or   resolution   appealed   from,   or  of  the  denial  of  the  petitioner's  motion   for   new   trial   or   reconsideration   filed   in   due  time  after  notice  of  the  judgment.   o On   motion   duly   filed   and   served,   with   full   payment   of   the   docket   and   other   lawful   fees   and   the   deposit   for   costs   before   the   expiration   of   the   reglementary   period,   the   Supreme   Court   may   for   justifiable   reasons   grant   an   extension   of   thirty   (30)   days   only   within  which  to  file  the  petition.   o A  review  is  not  a  matter  of  right,  but  of  sound   judicial   discretion,   and   will   be   granted   only   when   there   are   special   and   important   reasons  thereof.   o

§

§

  PERFECTION  OF  APPEAL  (Section  9,  Rule  41,  ROC)     A   party's   appeal   by   notice   of   appeal   is   deemed   perfected   as   to   him  upon  the  filing  of  the  notice  of  appeal  in  due  time.     A  party's  appeal  by  record  on  appeal  is  deemed  perfected  as  to   him   with   respect   to   the   subject   matter   thereof   upon   the   approval  of  the  record  on  appeal  filed  in  due  time.     In   appeals   by   notice   of   appeal,   the   court   loses   jurisdiction   over   the   case   upon   the   perfection   of   the   appeals   filed   in   due   time   and   the   expiration   of   the   time   to   appeal   of   the   other   parties.     In   appeals   by   record   on   appeal,  the  court  loses  jurisdiction   only  over  the  subject  matter  thereof  upon  the  approval  of  the   records   on   appeal   filed   in   due   time   and   the   expiration   of   the   appeal  of  the  other  parties.  

20  

21  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

In  either  case,  prior  to  the  transmittal  of  the  original  record  or   the   record   on   appeal,   the   court   may   issue   orders   for   the   protection  and  preservation  of  the  rights  of  the  parties  which   do   not   involve   any   matter   litigated   by   the   appeal,   approve   compromises,  permit  appeals  of  indigent  litigants,  order  execution   pending   appeal   in   accordance   with   2   of   Rule   39,   and   allow   withdrawal  of  the  appeal.     REVIEW  OF  DECREE  OF  REGISTRATION     REQUISITES   § The   petitioner   must   have   an   estate   or   interest   in   the   land   § He   must   show   actual   fraud   in   the   procurement   of   the   decree  of  registration   § The   petition   must   be   filed   within   one   year   from   the   issuance  of  the  decree  by  the  LRA   § The   property   has   not   yet   passed   to   an   innocent   purchaser  for  value     A   mere   claim   of   ownership   is   not   sufficient   to   avoid   a   certificate   of   title  obtained  under  the  Torrens  system.  The  proceedings  whereby   such  a  title  is  obtained  are  directed  against  all  persons,  known  or   unknown,   whether   actually   served   or   not,   and   includes   all   who   have   an   interest   in   the   land.   If   they   do   not   appear   and   oppose   the  registration,  such  judgment  is  conclusive.     Must   be   filed   at   any   time   after   the   rendition   of   the   court’s   decision  and  before  the  expiration  of  one  year  from  the  entry   of  the  final  decree  of  registration.  

4.

     

THE  GROUND  FOR  REVIEW  IS  ACTUAL  OR  EXTRINSIC  REVIEW   § § § § § § § §

§

Deliberate   misrepresentation   that   the   lots   are   not   contested  when  in  fact  they  are;   Applying   for   and   obtaining   adjudication   and   registration  in  the  name  of  a  co-­‐owner  of  land  which  he   knows  had  not  been  allotted  to  him  in  the  partition;   Intentionally   concealing   facts,   and   conniving   with   the   land   inspector   to   include   in   the   survey   plan   the   bed   of   navigable  stream;   Willfully  misrepresenting  that  there  are  no  other  claims;   Deliberately  failing  to  notify  the  party  entitled  to  notice;   Inducing   a   claimant   not   to   oppose   the   application   for   registration;   Misrepresentation   by   the   applicant   about   the   identity   of   the  lot  to  the  true  owner  causing  the  latter  to  withdraw   his  opposition;   Failure   of   the   applicant   to   disclose   her   application   for   registration   the   vital   facts   that   her   husband’s   previous   application   for   a   revocable   permit   and   to   purchase   the   lands   in   question   from   the   Bureau   of   Lands   had   been   rejected,   because   the   lands   were   already   reserved   as   a   site  for  school  purposes;   Deliberate   falsehood   that   the   land   were   allegedly   inherited   by   the   applicant   from   her   parents,   which   misled   the   Bureau   of   Lands   into   not   filling   the   opposition   and   thus   effectively   depriving   the   Republic   of  tis  day  in  court.  

  RELIEF  ON  THE  GROUND  OF  FRAUD  WILL  NOT  BE  GRANTED       § §

Where  the  alleged  fraud  goes  into  the  merits  of  the  case,   is  intrinsic  and  not  collateral,  and  has  been  controverted   and  decided   Where   it   appears   that   the   fraud   consisted   in   the   presentation  at  the  trial  of  a  supposed  forged  document,   or  a  false  and  perjured  testimony  

 

5.

A   purchaser   who   has   knowledge   of   defect   of   his   vendor’s   title   cannot  claim  good  faith.  A  purchaser  cannot  close  his  eyes  to  facts,   which  should  put  a  reasonable  man  upon  his  guard,  and  then  claim   that   he   acted   in   good   faith   under   the   belief   that   there   was   no   defect  in  the  title  of  the  vendor.     RECONVEYANCE     Legal  and  equitable  remedy  granted  to  the  rightful  owner  of  land,   which  has  been  wrongfully  or  erroneously  registered  in  the  name   of   another   for   the   purpose   of   compelling   the   latter   to   transfer   or   reconvey  the  land  to  him.     AN   ACTION   FOR   RECONVEYANCE   IS   ONE   THAT   SEEKS   TO   TRANSFER   PROPERTY,   WRONGFULLY   REGISTERED   BY   ANOTHER,  TO  ITS  RIGHTFUL  AND  LEGAL  OWNER.     After  one  year  from  the  date  of  the  decree,  the  sole  remedy  of  the   landowner   whose   property   has   been   wrongfully   or   erroneously   registered   in   another’s   name   is   not   to   set   aside   the   decree,   but   respecting   the   decree   as   incontrovertible   and   no   longer   open   to   review  to  bring  an  ordinary  action  in  court  for  reconveyance.    

 

REQUISITES  FOR  ACTION  OF  RECONVEYANCE     § An   action   must   be   brought   in   the   name   of   a   person   claiming   ownership   or   dominical   right   over   the   land   registered  in  the  name  of  the  defendant   § The  registration  of  the  land  in  he  name  of  the  defendant   was  procured  through  fraud  or  other  illegal  names   § The   property   has   not   yet   passed   to   an   innocent   purchaser  for  value   § The   action   is   filed   after   the   certificate   of   title   had   already   become   final   and   incontrovertible   but   within   four  years  from  the  discovery  of  the  fraud,   or   not   later   than  10  years,  in  case  of  implied  trust     RELEVANT  ALLEGATIONS   § That  the  plaintiff  was  the  owner  of  the  land   § That  the  defendant  had  illegally  dispossessed  him  of  the   same     The  remedy  of  reconveyance  is  available  before  the  issuance  of  the   decree.       An   action   for   reconveyance   is   an  action  in  personam   available   to   a   person   whose   property   has   been   wrongfully   registered   under   the  Torrens  system  in  another’s  name.     The  rule  is  that  the  RTC   have   exclusive   original   jurisdiction  in   all   civil   actions   which   involve   the   title   to   or   any   interest   in   property  where  the  assessed  value  thereof  exceeds  P20,000  or  in   Metropolitan  Manila,  where  such  value  exceeds  P50,000.     Indispensable   parties   must   be   impleaded   in   an   action   for   reconveyance.     Quantum   of   Proof  –  the  established  legal  principle  in  actions  for   annulment  or  reconveyance  of  title  is  that  a  party  seeking  it  should   establish   not   merely   by   preponderance   of   evidence   but   by   clear   and  convincing  evidence  that  the  land  sought  to  be  conveyed  is  his.   Mere  allegation  of  fraud  is  not  enough.     An  action  for  reconveyance  may  be  barred  by  prescription.     PRESCRIPTION   § Based  on  FRAUD  –  4  years  from  discovery  of  fraud   § Based  on  IMPLIED  TRUST  –  10  years   § Based  on  VOID  CONTRACT  –  Imprescriptible   § Action  TO  QUIET  TITLE  where  plaintiff  is  in  possession   –  Imprescriptible   § Reconveyance   of   land   acquired   through   public   land   patents  –  State  is  not  bound  by  prescription     Laches  may  bar  recovery.  The  principle  of  laches  which,  in  effect,   is   one   of   estoppel   because   it   prevents   people   who   have   slept   on   their   rights   from   prejudicing   the   rights   of   third   parties   who   have   placed   reliance   on   the   inaction   of   the   original   patentee   and   his   successors  in  interest.     ELEMENTS  OF  LACHES     § Conduct   on   the   part   of   the   defendant,   or   of   one   under   whom   he   claims,   giving   rise   to   the   situation   complained   of;   § Delay   in   asserting   complainant's   right   after   he   had   knowledge   of   the   defendant's   conduct   and   after   he   has   an  opportunity  to  sue;   § Lack   of   knowledge   or   notice   on   the   part   of   the   defendant   that   the   complainant   would   assert   the   right   on  which  he  bases  his  suit;  and   § Injury  or  prejudice  to  the  defendant  in  the  event  relief  is   accorded  to  the  complainant.     6. ACTION  FOR  DAMAGES     An  action  for  reconveyance  is  not  feasible  where  the  property  has   already  passed  into  the  hands  of  an  innocent  purchaser  for  value.   But   the  interested  party  is  not  without  a  remedy  –  he  can  file   an   action   for   damages   against   the   persons   responsible   for   depriving  him  of  his  right  or  interest  in  the  property.     An  action  for  damages  should  be  brought  within   10   YEARS  from   the  date  of  the  issuance  of  the  questioned  certificate  of  title.       7. ACTION  FOR  REVERSION     It  seeks  to  restore  public  land  fraudulently  awarded  and  disposed   of   to   private   individuals   or   corporations   to   the   mass   of   public   domain.   Only   the   SOLICITOR   GENERAL   may   institute   an   action   for   reversion.     OBJECTIVE   –   cancellation   of   the   certificate   of   title   and   the   resulting  reversion  of  the  land  covered  by  the  title  to  the  State    

21  

22  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

The   Director   of   Lands   has   continuing   authority   to   conduct   investigation,   from   time   to   time;   to   determine   whether   or   not   public  land  has  been  fraudulently  awarded  or  titled  to  the  end  that   the   corresponding   certificate   of   title   be   cancelled   and   the   land   reverted  to  the  public  domain.     8. CANCELLATION  OF  TITLE     An   action   for   cancellation   is   initiated   by   a   private   property   usually   in  a  case  where  there  are  two  titles  issued  to  two  different  persons   for   the   same   lot.   When   one   of   the   two   titles   held   to   be   superior   over  the  other,  one  should  be  declared  null  and  void  and  ordered   cancelled.     9. RECOVERY  FROM  THE  ASSURANCE  FUND     Section  95  provides  a  remedy  where  a  person  who  sustains  loss   or   damage   or   is   deprived   of   any   estate   or   interest   in   land   in   consequence   of   the   operations   of   the   Torrens   system   of   registration,   without   negligence   on   his   part,   may   bring   an   action   for   the   recovery   of   damages   to   be   paid   out   of   the   Assurance   fund     Public  policy  demands  that  those  unjustly  deprived  of  their  rights   over   real   property   by   reason   of   the   operation   of   our   registration   laws  be  afforded  remedies     According  to  the  principles  of  the  Torrens  system,  it  is  a  condition   sine   que   non   that   the   person   who   brings   an   action   for   damages   against   the   Assurance   fund   be   the   registered   owner,   and   as   to   holders   of   transfer   certificates   of   title   that   they   be   innocent   purchasers  in  good  faith  and  for  value     There  must  also  be  a  showing  of  loss  or  damage  or  deprivation  of   any  land  or  interest  thereon  by  the  operation  of  PD1529     Where   plaintiff   is   solely   responsible   for   the   plight   in   which   it   finds   itself,  the  Director  of  Lands  and  the  National  Treasurer  are  exempt   from  any  liability     REQUISITES  FOR  RECOVERY  FROM  THE  ASSURANCE  FUND     § That   a   person   sustains   loss   or   damage,   or   is   deprived   of   any  estate  or  interest  in  land   § On   account   of   bringing   of   land   under   the   operations   of   the   Torrens   system   arising   after   the   original   registration   § Through   fraud,   error,   omission,   mistake,   or   misdescription   in   a   certificate   of   title   or   entry   or   memorandum  in  the  registration   § Without  negligence  on  his  part   § And  is  barred  or  precluded  from  bringing  an  action  for   the  recovery  of  such  land  or  estate  or  interest  therein     10. ANNULMENT  OF  JUDGMENT     A  petition  for  annulment  by  the  Court  of  Appeals  of  judgments  or   final   orders   of   Regional   Trial   Court   for   which   the   ordinary   remedies  of  new  trial,  appeal,  etc.  are  no  longer  available  must  be   based  on  (a)  extrinsic  fraud,  (b)  lack  of  jurisdiction  and  (c)  lack  of   due  process.       A   petition   for   annulment   of   judgment   based   on   extrinsic   fraud   must  be  filed  within  four  (4)  years  from  its  discovery;  and  if  based   on  lack  of  jurisdiction,  before  it  is  barred  by  laches  or  estoppel.     VI.     CADASTRAL  REGISTRATION  PROCEEDINGS       A   proceeding   in   rem,   initiated   by   the   filing   of   a   petition   for   registration   by   the   government,   not   by   the   persons   claiming   ownership   of   the   land   subject   thereof,   and   the   latter   are,   on   the   pain  of  losing  their  claim  thereto,  in  effect  compelled  to  go  to  court   to   make   known   their   claim   or   interest   therein,   and   to   substantiate   such  claim  or  interest.       The   objective   of   the   proceeding   is   the   adjudication   of   title   to   the   lands  or  lots  involved  in  said  proceeding.       PROCEDURE  (NN-­‐CPP-­‐AHDI)     § Notice   of   cadastral   survey   published   once   in   the   Official  Gazette  and  posted  in  a  conspicuous  place;  and   copy  furnished  the  mayor  and  barangay  captain   § Notice   of   date   of   survey   of   the   Land   Management   Bureau   and   posting   in   bulletin   board   of   the   municipal   building   of   the   municipality   or   barrio,   and   shall   mark   the   boundaries   of   the   lands   by   monuments   set   up   in   proper  places   § Cadastral  Survey   o In   the   opinion   of   President   pursuant   to   requirement   of   public   interest,   title   of   land  

 

§

§

within   a   specified   area   needs   to   be   settled   and  adjudicated   o Order   Director   of   Lands   to   make   survey   and   plan   o Director   gives   notice   to   persons   claiming   interest  in  lands  and  to  general  public  of  day   of   survey   published   in   the   Official   Gazette   and   posted   in   conspicuous   place   on   lands   to   be  surveyed   o Geodetic  engineers  commences  survey   o During   survey,   boundaries   are   marked   by   monuments     Filing  of  petition   o After   survey   and   plot   been   made,   Director   represented   by   Sol   Gen   institutes   cadastral   proceeding  by  filing  petition  in  court  against   holders,  claimants,  possessors,  occupants   o Parcel  of  lots  given  their  cadastral  numbers     Publication,  mailing,  and  posting   o Court  to  order  date  of  hearing   o LRA   to   notify   public   by   publishing   notice   once   in   the   Official   Gazette   and   once   in   a   newspaper   of   general   circulation   &   copy   mailed   to   person   whose   address   is   known   &   other   copies   posted   in   conspicuous   place   designated  by  law  

  §

§

§

§

Filing  of  answer   o Any   person   claiming   interest   in   any   part   of   lands   subject   to   petition   is   required   to   file   answer   o Answer  must  give  the  following:   § Age  of  claimant   § Cadastral  number  of  lot  claimed   § Name   of   barrio   or   municipality   where  lot  is  located   § Name  of  owners  of  adjoining  lots   § If  in  possession  &  without  grant   § Number  of  years  in  possession   § If  not  in  possession   § State  interest  claimed   § If  assessed  of  taxation     § Assessed  value   § Any   encumbrances   affecting   said   lots     Hearing  of  the  case   o In  any  convenient  place  where  land  lies   o Like  an  ordinary  RTC  trial   o Conflicting  claims  are  determined   o Lots  claimed  are  awarded  to  persons  entitles,   if  they  could  prove  title   o If   none   could   prove   title,   land   is   declared   public  domain     Decision   o Claimants  are  notified  of  decision   o In   the   absence   of   successful   claimants,   the   property  shall  be  declared  as  public  land.     Issuance  of  decree  and  certificate  of  title   o Upon   order   of   court,   LRA   to   enter   decree   of   registration   o Decree  made  basis  for  issuance  of  OCT   o Decree   is   now   being   directly   prepared   and   issued  on  regulation  forms  of  such  certificate  

  PETITION;  LOT  NUMBERS     SECTION   36.   PETITION   FOR   REGISTRATION.   When   the   lands   have  been  surveyed  or  plotted,  the  Director  of  Lands,  represented   by   the   Solicitor   General,   shall   institute   original   registration   proceedings   by   filing   the   necessary   petition   in   the   Court   of   First   Instance   of   the   place   where   the   land   is   situated  against   the   holders,   claimants,   possessors,   or   occupants   of   such   lands   or   any  part  thereof,  stating  in  substance  that  public  interest  requires   that  the  title  to  such  lands  be  settled  and  adjudicated  and  praying   that  such  titles  be  so  settled  and  adjudicated:     The  petition   SHALL   CONTAIN  a   description  of  the  lands   and   shall   be   accompanied   by   a   plan   thereof,   and   may   contain   such   other   data  as  may  serve  to  furnish  full  notice  to  the  occupants  of  the  lands   and  to  all  persons  who  may  claim  any  right  or  interest  therein.     Where  the  land  consists  of  two  or  more  parcels  held  or  occupied  by   different  persons,  the  plan  shall  indicate  the  boundaries  or  limits  of   the   various   parcels   as   accurately   as   possible.   THE   PARCELS   SHALL   BE   KNOWN   AS   "LOTS"   AND   SHALL   ON   THE   PLAN   FILED   IN   THE   CASE   BE   GIVEN   SEPARATE   NUMBERS   BY   THE   DIRECTOR   OF   LANDS,   WHICH   NUMBERS   SHALL   BE   KNOWN   AS  

22  

23  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

"CADASTRAL   LOT   NUMBERS".   The   lots   situated   within   each   municipality   shall,   as   far   as   practicable,   be   numbered   consecutively  beginning  with  number  "one",  and  only  one  series  of   numbers   shall   be   used   for   that   purpose   in   each   municipality.   However   in   cities   or   townsites,   a   designation   of   the   landholdings   by   blocks   and   lot   numbers   may   be   employed   instead   of   the   designation  by  cadastral  lot  numbers.     The  cadastral  number  of  a  lot  SHALL   NOT   BE   CHANGED   AFTER   FINAL   DECISION   HAS   BEEN   ENTERED   decreasing   the   registration  thereof,  except  by  order  of  court.  Future  subdivisions   of  any  lot  shall  be  designated  by  a  letter  or  letters  of  the  alphabet   added   to   the   cadastral   number   of   the   lot   to   which   the   respective   subdivisions   pertain.   The   letter   with   which   a   subdivision   is   designated   shall   be   known   as   its   "cadastral   letter":   Provided,   however,   that   the   subdivisions   of   cities   or   townsites   may   be   designated  by  blocks  and  lot  numbers.     ACTIONS  TAKEN  IN  CADASTRAL  PROCEEDING     • Adjudicates  ownership  in  favor  of  one  of  the  claimants   • Declaration  by  the  court  that  the  decree  is  final  and  its   order   for   the   issuance   of   the   certificates   of   title   by   the   Administrator  of  the  LRA   • Devolves  upon  the  LRA;  to  issue  decrees  of  registration   pursuant   to   final   judgments   of   the   courts   in   land   registration  proceedings     Land   already   titled   cannot   be   the   subject   of   a   cadastral   proceeding.   A   registration   court   has   no   jurisdiction   to   decree   again   a   registration   of   land   already   decreed   in   an   earlier   land   registration  case  and  a  second  decree  for  the  same  land  is  null  and   void.       The  court  has  no  power  in  a  subsequent  proceeding  to  adjudicate   the   same   title   in   favor   of   another   person.   Furthermore,   the   registration   book   is   a   standing   notice   to   the   world   that   said   property  is  already  registered.     Jurisdiction   of   the   cadastral   court   over   previously   titled   lands   is   limited  to  the  correction  of  technical  errors  in  the  description   of  the  land.     The   judgment   in   a   cadastral   proceeding,   including   the   rendition   of   the  decree,  is   a   judicial   act.  The  judicial  decree  when  final  is  the   basis  of  the  certificate  of  title.  THE  ISSUANCE  OF  THE  DECREE  BY   THE  LRA  IS  A  MINISTERIAL  ACT.       As  a  general  rule,  registration  of  title  under  the  cadastral  system  is   final,   conclusive   and   indisputable,   after   the   lapse   of   the   period   allowed  for  an  appeal.     The   mere   fact   that   there   has   been   delay   in   the   issuance   of   the   corresponding   certificate   of   title   pursuant   to   a   decree   of   registration  in  a  cadastral  case  will  not  render  inefficacious  the   decision  rendered  by  the  court  on  account  of  prescription  or   laches.     VII.     CERTIFICATE  OF  TITLE       A  certificate  of  title  serves  as  evidence  of  an  indefeasible  and   incontrovertible   title   to   the   property   in   favor   of   the   person   whose  name  appears  therein.  After  lapse  of  one  year,  title  to   such  property  can  no  longer  be  contested.       REGISTRATION  DOES  NOT  VEST  TITLE:  IT  IS  NOT  A  MODE  OF   ACQUIRING  OWNERSHIP.  IT  DOES  NOT  GIVE  ANY  PERSON  ANY   BETTER   TITLE   THAN   WHAT   HE   LAWFULLY   HAS.201   REGISTRATION   IS   MERELY   A   SYSTEM   OF   REGISTRATION   OF   TITLES  TO  LANDS.     A   person   dealing   with   registered   land   may   safely   rely   upon   the   correctness   of   the   certificate   of   title   issued   therefor   and   the   law   will  in  no  way  oblige  him  to  go  behind  the  certificate  of  title.  The   validity  and  correctness  of  the  title  is  presumed.     The  rule  on  the  incontrovertibility  of  a  certificate  of  title  upon  the   expiration   of   one   year,   after   the   entry   of   the   decree,   DOES   NOT   APPLY   where   an   action   for   the   cancellation   of   a   patent   and   a   certificate   of   title   issued   pursuant   thereto   is   instituted   on   the   ground   that   they   are   null   and   void   because   the   Director   of   Lands   had  no  jurisdiction  to  issue  them  at  all.     Ø PREPARATION  OF  DECREE  AND  CERTIFICATE  OF  TITLE     § After   the   judgment   directing   the   registration   of   title   to   land   has   become   final,   the   court   shall,   within   fifteen   days   from   entry   of   judgment,   issue   an   order   directing   the   Commissioner   to   issue   the   corresponding   decree   of   registration   and   certificate   of  title.    

 

§

§

§

The  clerk  of  court  shall  send,  within  fifteen  days  from   entry   of   judgment,   CERTIFIED   COPIES   OF   THE   JUDGMENT   and   of   the   order   of   the   court   directing   the   Commissioner   to   issue   the   corresponding   decree   of   registration   and   CERTIFICATE   OF   TITLE,   and   a   certificate   stating   that   the   decision   has   not   been   amended,   reconsidered,   nor   appealed,   and   has   become   final.     Thereupon,   the   Commissioner   shall   cause   to   be   prepared   the   decree   of   registration   as   well   as   the   original   and   duplicate   of   the   corresponding   original   certificate   of   title.  The  original  certificate  of  title  shall   be  a  true  copy  of  the  decree  of  registration.  The  decree   of   registration   shall   be   signed   by   the   Commissioner,   entered  and  filed  in  the  Land  Registration  Commission.     The   original   of   the   original   certificate   of   title   shall   also   be   signed   by   the   Commissioner   and   shall   be   sent,   together   with   the   owner's   duplicate   certificate,   to   the   Register   of   Deeds   of   the   city   or   province   where   the   property  is  situated  for  entry  in  his  registration  book.  

  The  decree  of  registration  shall  bear  the  date,  hour,  and  minute  of   its  entry  and  shall  be  signed  by  the  LRA  Administrator.  (See  Sec31)     As   soon   as   the   decree   of   title   has   been   registered   in   the   office   of   the   Register   of   Deeds,   the   property   included   in   said   decree   shall   become   registered   land,   and   the   certificate   shall   take   effect   upon   the  date  of  the  transcription  of  the  decree.     Memoranda   of   encumbrances   not   admissible   as   proof   of   the   contents   of   the   registered   documents.   The   said   notations   or   memoranda  are,  at  most,  proof  of  the  existence  of  the  transaction   and  judicial  orders  noted  therein,  and  a  notice  to  the  whole  world   of  such  facts.     Where   two   certificates   of   title   are   issued   to   different   persons   covering   the   same   land   in   whole   or   in   part,   the   earlier   in   date   must  prevail  as  between  the  original  parties.     And   in   case   of   successive   registration,   the   person   holding   under   prior   certificate   is   entitled   to   the   land   as   against   the   person   who   relies  on  the  second  certificate.     RULE   IN   DOUBLE   SALE   OF   IMMOVABLE   PROPERTY   -­‐   Between   two  buyers  of  the  same  immovable  property  registered  under  the   Torrens  system,  the  law  gives  ownership  priority  to:   § The  first  registrant  in  good  faith;     § Then,  the  first  possessor  in  good  faith;  and   § Finally,  the  buyer  who  in  good  faith  presents  the  oldest   title.     This   provision,   however,   does   not   apply   if   the   property   is   not   registered  under  the  Torrens  system.     Tax   declarations   cannot   defeat   the   conclusiveness   of   a   certificate   of  title.     Mere   issuance   of   a   certificate   of   title   does   not   foreclose   and   action   to   test   its   validity.   If   a   person   obtains   a   title,   which   includes   mistake   or   oversight,   lands,   which   cannot   be   registered   under  the  Torrens  system,  he  does  not,  by  virtue  of  said  certificate   alone,  become  the  owner  of  the  land  illegally  included.     Ø ENTRY   OF   ORIGINAL   CERTIFICATE   OF   TITLE     Section   40.  Upon  receipt  by  the  Register  of  Deeds  of  the  original   and   duplicate   copies   of   the   original   certificate   of   title   the   same   shall   be   entered   in   his   record   book   and   shall   be   numbered,   dated,   signed   and   sealed   by   the   Register   of   Deeds   with   the   seal  of  his  office.   Said   certificate   of   title   shall   take   effect   upon   the   date   of   entry   thereof.   The   Register   of   Deeds   shall   forthwith   send   notice  by  mail  to  the  registered  owner  that  his  owner's  duplicate  is   ready  for  delivery  to  him  upon  payment  of  legal  fees.     The  certificate  of  title  after  initial  registration  proceeding  is  known   as   the   “Original   Certificate   of   Title”.   Any   subsequent   title   is   a   “Transfer  Certificate  of  Title”.     By   TITLE,   the   law   refers   to   ownership,   which   is   represented   by   the   original   certificate   of   title   or   transfer   certificate   of   title.   It   refers   to   that   upon   which   ownership   is   based.   A   CERTIFICATE  OF   TITLE   is   a   mere   evidence   of   ownership;   it   is   not   the   title   to   the   land.     Ø OWNER’S  DUPLICATE  CERTIFICATE  OF  TITLE     Section   41.   The   owner's   duplicate   certificate   of   title   shall   be   delivered   to   the   registered   owner   or   to   his   duly   authorized   representative.  If  TWO   OR   MORE   PERSONS   ARE   REGISTERED   OWNERS,  one  owner's  duplicate  certificate  may  be  issued  for  the   whole  land,  or  if  the  co-­‐owners  so  desire,  a  separate  duplicate  may   be   issued   to   each   of   them   in   like   form,   but   all   outstanding   certificates   of   title   so   issued   shall   be   surrendered   whenever  

23  

24  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

Ø  

Ø

Ø

the   Register   of   Deeds   shall   register   any   subsequent   voluntary  Ø transaction  affecting  the  whole  land  or  part  thereof  or  any  interest   therein.  The  Register  of  Deeds  shall  note  on  each  certificate  of  title   a  statement  as  to  whom  a  copy  thereof  was  issued.     REGISTRATION  BOOKS   The  original  copy  of  the  original  certificate  of  title  shall  be  filed  in   the   Registry   of   Deeds.   The   same   shall   be   bound   in   consecutive   order   together   with   similar   certificates   of   title   and   shall   constitute   the  registration  book  for  titled  properties     TRANSFER  CERTIFICATE  OF  TITLE     The   subsequent   certificate   of   title   that   may   be   issued   by   the   Register   of   Deeds   pursuant   to   any   voluntary   or   involuntary   instrument  relating  to  the  same  land  shall  be  in  like  form,  entitled   "Transfer  Certificate  of  Title",  and  likewise  issued  in  duplicate.  The   certificate   shall   show   the   number   of   the   next   previous   certificate   covering   the   same   land   and   also   the   fact   that   it   was   originally   registered,   giving   the   record   number,   the   number   of   the   original   certificate   of   title,   and   the   volume   and   page   of   the   registration   book  in  which  the  latter  is  found.       STATUTORY  LIENS  AFFECTING  TITLE     A  certificate  of  title  is  free  from  liens  except  the  following:   § Liens,  claims,  or  rights  existing  or  arising  under  the   laws  or  the  constitution,  which  aren’t  by  law,  required     o A   lien   is   a   charge   on   property   usually   for   the   payment  of  some  debt  or  obligation.   o An   encumbrance   is   a   burden   upon   the   land,   depreciative   of   its   value,   such   as   lien,   easement,  or  servitude,  which,  though  adverse   to   the   interest   of   the   landowner,   does   not   conflict  with  his  conveyance  of  the  land  in  fee.     § Unpaid   real   estate   taxes   levied   or   assessed   within   2   years   immediately   preceding   the   acquisition   of   any   right   over   the   land   -­‐   Superior   lien   in   favor   of   the   government   § Any   public   highway   or   private   way   established   or   recognized   by   the   law,   or   any   government   irrigation   canal  or  lateral  thereof   § Any  disposition  of  the  property  or  limitation  to  the  use   thereof   by   virtue   of   PD   27   or   any   other   law   or   regulation  or  agrarian  reform—  Tenancy  Emancipation   Decree  and  Comprehensive  Agrarian  Reform  Law)     o Tenant   farmer   —   if   not   registered,   5   hectares  and  if  irrigated,  3  hectares   o Landowner   may   retain   an   area   of   not   more   than   7   hectares   if   such   landowner   is   cultivating  such  area  or  will  not  cultivate  it     § Rights  incident  to  the  relation  of  husband  and  wife  and   landlord  and  tenant   § Liability  to  attachment  and  execution   § Liability   to   any   lien   of   any   description   established   by   law   and   the   buildings   thereon   or   an   interest   of   the   owner  of  such  lands  or  buildings   § Rights   incident   to   the   laws   of   descent   or   partition   between  co-­‐owners   § Taking  of  the  property  through  eminent  domain   § Right   to   relieve   the   land   from   liability   to   be   recovered   by   an   assignee   in   insolvency   or   trustee   in   bankruptcy   under  the  laws  relative  to  preferences   § Rights   or   liabilities   created   by   law   and   applicable   to   unregistered  land     COMPREHENSIVE  AGRARIAN  REFORM  LAW   § Landowner  may  not  retain  more  than  5  hectares   § Three   hectares   may   be   allowed   to   each   child   of   the   landowner—   provided   that   he   is   at   least   15   years   old   and   that   he   is   actually   tilling   the   land   or   directly   managing  the  farm     PUBLIC  PATENT   § Land  not  subject  to  any  encumbrance  or  alienation  from   the   date   of   approval   and   for   the   term   of   5   years   from   and  after  the  date  of  issuance  of  the  patent  or  grant     OTHER  STATUTORY  LIENS   § Alienable  lands  of  the  public  domain  granted  or  donated   or  transferred  to  a  province,  municipality,  or  branch  of   the   government   shall   not   be   alienated   or   encumbered   or   otherwise   disposed   of   in   a   manner   affecting   its   title   except  when  authorized  by  Congress      

 

STATEMENT  OF  PERSONAL  CIRCUMSTANCES  IN  THE  COT   §  Full  names  of  the  persons  whose  interest  make  up  the   ownership  of  the  land   § Civil  status   § Names  of  their  respective  spouses,  if  married   § Citizenship   § Residence   § Postal  address   § If  property  is  conjugal,  it  shall  be  issued  to  both  spouses     CONTENTS  OF  A  TRANSFER  CERTIFICATE  OF  TITLE   § Shall   show   the   number   of   the   next   previous   certificate   covering  the  same  land     § The   fact   that   it   was   originally   registered,   giving   the   record  number  of  the  original  certificate  of  title,  and  the   volume  and  page  of  the  registration  book  in  which  it  is   found     Ø GENERAL  INCIDENTS  OF  REGISTERED  LAND     Section   46.   Registered   land   shall   be   subject   to   such   burdens   and   incidents   as   may   arise   by   operation   of   law.   Nothing   contained   in   this   decree   shall   in   any   way   be   construed   to   relieve   registered  land  or  the  owners  thereof  from  any  rights  incident  to   the   relation   of   husband   and   wife,   landlord   and   tenant,   or   from   liability  to  attachment  or  levy  on  execution,  or  from  liability  to  any   lien   of   any   description   established   by   law   on   the   land   and   the   buildings  thereon,  or  on  the  interest  of  the  owner  in  such  land  or   buildings,   or   to   change   the   laws   of   descent,   or   the   rights   of   partition   between   co-­‐owners,   or   the   right   to   take   the   same   by   eminent   domain,   or   to   relieve   such   land   from   liability   to   be   recovered   by   an   assignee   in   insolvency   or   trustee   in   bankruptcy   under  the  laws  relative  to  preferences,  or  to  change  or  affect  in  any   way   other   rights   or   liabilities   created   by   law   and   applicable   to   unregistered  land,  except  as  otherwise  provided  in  this  Decree.     Ø REGISTERED  LAND  NOT  SUBJECT  TO  PRESCRIPTION     Section   47.  No  title  to  registered  land  in  derogation  of  the  title  of   the  registered  owner  shall  be  acquired  by  prescription  or  adverse   possession.     Ø CERTIFICATE  NOT  SUBJECT  TO  COLLATERAL  ATTACK       Section   48.   A   certificate   of   title   shall   not   be   subject   to   collateral   attack.  It  cannot  be  altered,  modified,  or  canceled  except  in  a  direct   proceeding  in  accordance  with  law.     An   action   is   deemed   an   attack   on   a   title   when   the   object   of   the   action   or   proceeding   is   to   nullify   the   title,   and   thus   challenge   the   judgment  pursuant  to  which  the  title  was  decreed.     The  attack  is  DIRECT  when  the  object  of  the  action  is  to  annul  or   set   aside   such   judgment,   or   enjoin   its   enforcement.   On   the   other   hand,  the  attack  is  INDIRECT  OR  COLLATERAL  when,  in  an  action   to   obtain   a   different   relief,   an   attack   on   the   judgment   is   nevertheless  made  as  an  incident  thereof.     Ø SPLITTING  OR  CONSOLIDATION  OF  TITLES     A  registered  owner  of  several  distinct  parcels  of  land  embraced  in   and   covered   by   a   certificate   of   title   desiring   in   lieu   thereof   separate  certificates,  each  containing  one  or  more  parcels,  may  file   a   written   request   for   that   purpose   with   the   Register   of   Deeds   concerned,   and   the   latter,   upon   the   surrender   of   the   owner's   duplicate,   shall   cancel   it   together   with   its   original   and   issue   in   lieu   thereof   separate   certificates   as   desired.   A   registered   owner   of   several  distinct  parcels  of  land  covered  by  separate  certificates  of   title   desiring   to   have   in   lieu   thereof   a   single   certificate   for   the   whole   land,   or   several   certificates   for   the   different   parcels   thereof,   may   also   file   a   written   request   with   the   Register   of   Deeds   concerned,  and  the  latter,  upon  the  surrender  of  the  owner's   duplicates,   shall   cancel   them   together   with   their   originals,   and   issue   in   lieu   thereof   one   or   separate   certificates   as   desired.     Ø SUBDIVISION  AND  CONSOLIDATION  PLANS     Any  owner  subdividing  a  tract  of  registered  land  into  lots  which  do   not   constitute   a   subdivision   project   has   defined   and   provided   for   under   P.D.   No.   957,   shall   file   with   the   Commissioner   of   Land   Registration   or   with   the   Bureau   of   Lands   a   subdivision   plan   of   such   land   on   which   all   boundaries,   streets,   passageways   and   waterways,  if  any,  shall  be  distinctly  and  accurately  delineated.   If  a  subdivision  plan,  be  it  simple  or  complex,  duly  approved  by  the   Commissioner   of   Land   Registration   or   the   Bureau   of   Lands   together   with   the   approved   technical   descriptions   and   the   corresponding   owner's   duplicate   certificate   of   title   is   presented   for   registration,   the   Register   of   Deeds   shall,   without   requiring   further   court   approval   of   said   plan,   register   the   same   in   accordance   with   the   provisions   of   the   Land   Registration   Act,   as   amended:   Provided,   however,   that   the   Register   of   Deeds   shall  

24  

25  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

annotate   on   the   new   certificate   of   title   covering   the   street,   passageway   or   open   space,   a   memorandum   to   the   effect   that   except   by   way   of   donation   in   favor   of   the   national   government,   province,   city   or   municipality,   no   portion   of   any   street,   passageway,   waterway   or   open   space   so   delineated   on   the   plan   shall   be   closed   or   otherwise   disposed   of   by   the   registered   owner   without  the  approval  of  the  Court  of  First  Instance  of  the  province   or  city  in  which  the  land  is  situated.     A   registered   owner   desiring   to   consolidate   several   lots   into   one   or   more,  requiring  new  technical  descriptions,  shall  file  with  the  Land   Registration   Commission,   a   consolidation   plan   on   which   shall   be   shown   the   lots   to   be   affected,   as   they   were   before,   and   as   they   will   appear  after  the  consolidation.  Upon  the  surrender  of  the  owner's   duplicate   certificates   and   the   receipt   of   consolidation   plan   duty   approved   by   the   Commission,   the   Register   of   Deeds   concerned   shall  cancel  the  corresponding  certificates  of  title  and  issue  a  new   one  for  the  consolidated  lots.     The  Commission  may  not  order  or  cause  any  change,  modification,   or  amendment  in  the  contents  of  any  certificate  of  title,  or  of  any   decree   or   plan,   including   the   technical   description   therein,   covering   any   real   property   registered   under   the   Torrens   system,   nor   order   the   cancellation   of   the   said   certificate   of   title   and   the   issuance   of   a   new   one   which   would   result   in   the   enlargement   of   the  area  covered  by  the  certificate  of  title.     VIII.     VOLUNTARY  DEALINGS  WITH  REGISTERED  LANDS     Ø CONVEYANCE  AND  OTHER  DEALINGS  BY  REGISTERED  OWNER     Section   51.   —   An   owner   of   registered   land   MAY   CONVEY,   MORTGAGE,   LEASE,   CHARGE   OR   OTHERWISE   DEAL   WITH   THE   SAME   IN   ACCORDANCE   WITH   EXISTING   LAWS.  He  may  use  such   forms  of  deeds,  mortgages,  leases  or  other  voluntary  instruments   as   are   sufficient   in   law.   But   no   deed,   mortgage,   lease,   or   other   voluntary  instrument,  except  a  will  purporting  to  convey  or  affect   registered  land  shall  take  effect  as  a  conveyance  or  bind  the  land,   but   shall   operate   only   as   a   contract   between   the   parties   and   as   evidence   of   authority   to   the   Register   of   Deeds   to   make   registration.     The  act  of  registration  shall  be  the  operative  act  to  convey  or  affect   the   land   insofar   as   third   persons   are   concerned,   and   in   all   cases   under   this   Decree,   the   registration   shall   be   made   in   the   office   of   the  Register  of  Deeds  for  the  province  or  city  where  the  land  lies.     No   voluntary   instrument   shall   be   registered   by   the   Register   of   Deeds,   unless   the   owner's   duplicate   certificate   is   presented   with   such  instrument,  except  in  cases  expressly  provided  for  in  the  law   (PD  1529)  or  upon  order  of  the  court,  for  cause  shown.     From  the  standpoint  of  third  parties,  a  property  registered  under   the   Torrens   system   remains,   for   all   legal   purposes,   the   property   of   the   person   in   whose   name   it   is   registered,   notwithstanding   the   execution   of   any   deed   of   conveyance,   unless   the   corresponding   deed   is   registered.   Simply   put,   if   a   sale   is   not   registered,   it   is   binding   only   between   the   seller   and   the   buyer,   but   it   does   not   affect  innocent  third  persons.     Ø FORM   IS   IMPORTANT   FOR   VALIDITY,   CONVENIENCE,   AND   ENFORCEABILITY   § General  rule:  form  is  not  important  for  the  validity  of  a   contract   provided   there   is   consent,   subject   matter   and   cause.  This  applies  only  to  consensual  contracts.   § The   sale   of   real   estate,   whether   made   as   a   result   of   private   transaction   or   foreclosure   of   execution   sale,   becomes  legally  effective  against  third  parties  only  from   the  date  of  registration.     Ø DELIVERY   AS   A   MODE   OF   TRANSMISSION,   REAL   OR   CONSTRUCTIVE   ACTUAL   NOTICE   EQUIVALENT   OF   REGISTRATION   § As  between  the  parties  to  a  contract  of  sale,  registration   is  not  necessary  to  make  it  valid  and  effective,  for  actual   notice  is  equivalent  to  registration.   § Even  without  the  act  of  registration,  a  deed  purporting   to   convey   or   affect   registered   land   shall   operate   as   a   contract  between  the  parties   § The   act   of   registration   shall   be   the   operative   act   to   convey   or   affect   the   land   insofar   as   third   persons   are   concerned   § It  is  the  act  of  registration  which  creates  a  constructive   notice  to  the  whole  world  and  binds  third  persons   § Absent  such  registration,  a  conveyance  doesn’t  affect  or   bind  the  land   § Under   the   rule   on   notice,   there   is   a   conclusive   presumption   that   the   purchaser   has   examined   every   instrument  of  record  affecting  the  title   § He   is   charged   with   notice   of   every   fact   shown   by   the   record   and   is   presumed   to   know   every   fact   shown   by  

 

§

§

the  record  and  is  presumed  to  know  every  fact  which  an   examination  of  the  record  would  have  disclosed   Since   it   is   the   act   of   registration   which   transfers   ownership   of   the   land   sold,   it   has   been   held   that   a   subsequent   claimant   cannot   claim   a   better   right   over   the   land   which   had   been   previously   registered   in   the   name  of  another.   A   notice   of   lis   pendens   serves   as   a   warning   to   a   prospective   purchaser   or   encumbrancer   that   the   particular   property   is   in   litigation   and   that   he   should   keep   his   hands   off   the   same,   unless   he   intends   to   gamble  on  the  results  of  the  litigation  

  ACT   OF   REGISTRATION   IS   THE   OPERATIVE   ACT   TO   CONVEY   OR  AFFECT  REGISTERED  LAND   § It  is  the  registration  of  contracts  dealing  with  registered   property   in   the   corresponding   Register   of   Deeds   that   binds  or  affects  third  persons   § Non-­‐compliance   with   the   formal   requirements   doesn’t   adversely   affect   the   validity   of   contract   nor   the   contractual  rights  and  obligations  of  parties   § Registration   is   a   mere   ministerial   act   by   which   a   deed,   contract   or   instrument   is   inscribed   in   the   office   of   the   Register   of   Deeds   and   annotated   at   the   back   of   the   certificate   of   the   title   covering   the   land   subject   of   the   deed,  contract  or  instrument   § PD1529   only   protects   the   holder   in   good   faith,   and   cannot  be  used  as  a  shield  against  frauds     IMPORTANCE  OF  REGISTRATION   § For  a  transaction  as  important  as  the  sale  of  registered   property   of   land,   it   may   be   necessary   to   keep   a   record   thereof     REGISTRATION   OF   DOCUMENT   MINISTERIAL   ON   THE   PART   OF  THE  REGISTER  OF  DEEDS   § The   purpose   of   registering   an   instrument   is   to   give   notice  thereof  to  all  persons   § It  is  not  intended  by  the  proceedings  for  registration  to   seek   to   destroy   or   otherwise   affect   already   registered   rights   over   the   land,   subsisting   or   existing   at   the   time   of   the  registration   § The   law   on   registration   doesn’t   require   that   only   valid   instruments  shall  be  registered   § If   the   purpose   of   registration   is   merely   to   give   notice,   then   questions   regarding   the   effect   or   invalidity   of   the   instruments   are   expected   to   be   decided   after   registration   § An   instrument   which   seeks   the   reformation   of   an   extrajudicial   settlement   of   an   estate   consisting   of   registered  lands  is  a  voluntary  one,  and  since  the  duty  of   the   RD   to   enter   such   instrument   in   his   book   is   purely   ministerial,   his   refusal   to   do   so   is   tantamount   to   an   unlawful   neglect   in   the   performance   of   a   duty   resulting   from   an   office,   trust   or   station,   and   is   a   proper   instance  where  mandamus  will  lie     Ø PRESENTATION  OF  OWNER'S  DUPLICATE  UPON  ENTRY  OF   NEW  CERTIFICATE     No   voluntary   instrument   shall   be   registered   by   the   Register   of   Deeds,   unless   the   owner's   duplicate   certificate   is   presented   with   such   instrument,   except   in   cases   expressly   provided   for   in  this  Decree  or  upon  order  of  the  court,  for  cause  shown.     The  production  of  the  owner's  duplicate  certificate,  whenever   any   voluntary   instrument   is   presented   for   registration,   shall   be   conclusive   authority   from   the   registered   owner   to   the   Register   of   Deeds   to   enter   a   new   certificate   or   to   make   a   memorandum   of   registration   in   accordance   with   such   instrument,   and   the   new   certificate   or   memorandum   shall   be   binding   upon   the   registered   owner   and   upon   all   persons   claiming  under  him,  in  favor  of  every  purchaser  for  value  and   in  good  faith.     In  all  cases  of  registration  procured  by  fraud,  the  owner  may   pursue  all  his  legal  and  equitable  remedies  against  the  parties   to  such  fraud  without  prejudice,  however,  to  the  rights  of  any   innocent   holder   for   value   of   a   certificate   of   title.   After   the   entry   of   the   decree   of   registration   on   the   original   petition   or   application,   any   subsequent   registration   procured   by   the   presentation   of   a   forged   duplicate   certificate   of   title,   or   a   forged  deed  or  other  instrument,  shall  be  null  and  void.     Ø DEALINGS  LESS  THAN  OWNERSHIP,  HOW  REGISTERED.       No  new  certificate  shall  be  entered  or  issued  pursuant  to  any   instrument  which  does  not  divest  the  ownership  or  title  from   the   owner   or   from   the   transferee   of   the   registered   owners.   All   interests   in   registered   land   less   than   ownership   shall   be   registered  by  filing  with  the  Register  of  Deeds  the  instrument   which   creates   or   transfers   or   claims   such   interests   and   by   a  

25  

26  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

Ø

Ø

§

§ § § § §

brief   memorandum   thereof   made   by   the   Register   of   Deeds   upon   the   certificate   of   title,   and   signed   by   him.   A   similar   memorandum   shall   also   be   made   on   the   owner's   duplicate.   The   cancellation   or   extinguishment   of   such   interests   shall   be   registered  in  the  same  manner.     GRANTEE'S  NAME,  NATIONALITY,  ETC.,  TO  BE  STATED       Every   deed   or   other   voluntary   instrument   presented   for   registration  shall  contain  or  have  endorsed  upon  it  the  full  name,   nationality,   residence   and   postal   address   of   the   grantee   or   other   person   acquiring   or   claiming   an   interest   under   such   instrument,   and  every  deed  shall  also  state  whether  the  grantee  is  married  or   unmarried,   and   if   married,   the   name   in   full   of   the   husband   or   wife.   If  the  grantee  is  a  corporation  or  association,  the  instrument   must   contain   a   recital   to   show   that   such   corporation   or   association   is   legally   qualified   to   acquire   private   lands.   Any   change  in  the  residence  or  postal  address  of  such  person  shall  be   endorsed   by   the   Register   of   Deeds   on   the   original   copy   of   the   corresponding   certificate   of   title,   upon   receiving   a   sworn   statement   of   such   change.   All   names   and   addresses   shall   also   be   entered  on  all  certificates.     Notices   and   processed   issued   in   relation   to   registered   land   in   pursuance   of   this   Decree   may   be   served   upon   any   person   in   interest   by   mailing   the   same   to   the   addresses   given,   and   shall   be   binding,   whether   such   person   resides   within   or   without   the   Philippines,  but  the  court  may,  in  its  discretion,  require  further  or   other   notice   to   be   given   in   any   case,   if   in   its   opinion   the   interest   of   justice  so  requires.     PRIMARY  ENTRY  BOOK;  FEES;  CERTIFIED  COPIES.       Each  Register  of  Deeds  shall  keep  a  primary  entry  book  in  which,   upon  payment  of  the  entry  fee,  he  shall  enter,  in  the  order  of  their   reception,  all  instruments  including  copies  of  writs  and  processes   filed  with  him  relating  to  registered  land.  He  shall,  as  a  preliminary   process   in   registration,   note   in   such   book   the   date,   hour   and   minute  of  reception  of  all  instruments,  in  the  order  in  which  they   were  received.  They  shall  be  regarded  as  registered  from  the  time   so   noted,   and   the   memorandum   of   each   instrument,   when   made   on   the   certificate   of   title   to   which   it   refers,   shall   bear   the   same   date:   Provided,   that   the   national   government   as   well   as   the   provincial   and   city   governments   shall   be   exempt   from   the   payment   of   such   fees   in   advance   in   order   to   be   entitled   to   entry   and  registration.     Every   deed   or   other   instrument,   whether   voluntary   or   involuntary,   so   filed   with   the   Register   of   Deeds   shall   be   numbered   and   indexed   and   endorsed   with   a   reference   to   the   proper   certificate   of   title.   All   records   and   papers   relative   to   registered   land   in   the   office   of   the   Register   of   Deeds   shall   be   open   to   the   public   in   the   same   manner   as   court   records,   subject   to   such   reasonable   regulations   as   the   Register   of   Deeds,   under   the   direction   of   the   Commissioner   of   Land   Registration,   may   prescribe.     All  deeds  and  voluntary  instruments  shall  be  presented  with  their   respective  copies  and  shall  be  attested  and  sealed  by  the  Register   of   Deeds,   endorsed   with   the   file   number,   and   copies   may   be   delivered  to  the  person  presenting  them.     Certified   copies   of   all   instruments   filed   and   registered   may   also   be   obtained   from   the   Register   of   Deeds   upon   payment   of   the   prescribed  fees.     The   primary   entry   book   or   day   book   is   a   record   of   all   instruments,  including  copies  of  writs  and  processes,  affecting   registered  lands,  which  are  entered  by  the  RD  in  the  order  of   their  filing,  upon  payment  of  the  proper  fees   The   recording   is   a   preliminary   process   in   registration   and   shall   note  the  date,  hour,  and  minute  of  receipt  of  said  instruments   An  instrument  shall  be  regarded  as  registered  only  from  the  time   it  is  noted   Every  deed  of  instrument  shall  be  numbered  and  endorsed  by  the   RD  with  proper  reference  to  the  certificate  of  title   All  records  and  papers  relative  to  registered  land  shall  be  open  for   examination  by  the  public,  subject  to  such  reasonable  regulations   as  the  RD  may  prescribe   All   deeds   and   voluntary   instruments   and   copies   thereof   shall   be   attested  and  sealed  with  the  RD  and  copies  with  the  corresponding   file  number  shall  be  delivered  to  the  person  presenting  them                    

 

DISTINCTION   BETWEEN   VOLUNTARY   AND   INVOLUNTARY   REGISTRATION     INVOLUNTARY   VOLUNTARY  REGISTRATION   REGISTRATION   An   innocent   purchaser   for   value   of   registered   land   becomes   the   An  entry  thereof— registered   owner   and   in   attachment,  levy,   contemplation   of   law   the   holder   of   a   notice  of  lis  pendens,  etc   certificate   of   title,   the   moment   he   —  in  the   presents   and   files   a   duly   notarized   day  book  is  sufficient   and   valid   deed   of   sale   and   the   same   notice  to  all   is   entered   in   the   day   book   and   at   the   persons  even  if  the   same   time   he   surrenders   or   owner’s   presents   the   owner’s   duplicate   duplicate  certificate  of  title   certificate   of   title   covering   the   land   isn’t   sold   and   pays   the   registration   fees,   presented  to  the  RD   because   what   needs   to   be   done   lies   not  within  his  power  to  perform  

      In   voluntary   registration,   such   as   a   sale,   mortgage,   lease   and   the   like,   if   the   owner's   duplicate   certificate   be   not   surrendered   and   presented   or   if   no   payment   of   registration   fees   be   made   within   fifteen  (15)  days,  entry  in  the  day  book  of  the  deed  of  sale  does  not   operate   to   convey   and   affect   the   land   sold.   In   involuntary   registration,  such  as  an  attachment,  levy  upon  execution,  lis  pendens   and  the  like,  entry  thereof  in  the  daybook  is  a  sufficient  notice  to  all   persons  of  such  adverse  claim.     Ø CONVEYANCE  AND  TRANSFERS     PROCEDURE  IN  REGISTRATION  OF  CONVEYANCES     § An  owner  who  desires  to  convey  the  land  covered  by  his   title   to   another   shall   execute   the   proper   deed   of   conveyance,   in   proper   form,   and   present   the   same,   together  with  the  owner’s  duplicate  certificate  to  the  RD   from  entry  and  registration   § The   RD   shall   enter   in   the   registration   book   the   fact   of   conveyance  and  prepare  a  new  certificate  of  title  in  the   name   of   the   grantee,   the   owner’s   duplicate   of   which   shall  be  delivered  to  him   § The   RD   shall   note   the   date   of   conveyance,   volume   and   page  of  the  registration  book  in  which  the  certificate  is   registered,   and   a   reference   by   number   to   the   last   preceding  certificates     PROCEDURE   WHERE   ONLY   PORTIONS   OF   LAND   ARE   CONVEYED     § The   RD   shall   not   issue   any   Transfer   Certificate   of   Title   to   the   grantee   until   a   plan   of   such   land   showing   the   portion   or   portions   into   which   it   has   been   subdivided   and   the   corresponding   technical   descriptions   shall   have   been  verified  and  approved   § The   deed   of   conveyance   may   in   the   meanwhile   be   annotated   by   way   of   memorandum   on   the   grantor’s   certificate   of   title,   which   shall   serve   as   notice   to   third   persons   on   the   fact   of   conveyance—   to   show   and   recognize   the   grantee’s   title   to   the   portion   thus   conveyed   pending   actual   issuance   to   him   of   the   corresponding  transfer  certificate  of  title   § Upon  approval  of  the  plan  and  technical  descriptions  of   the   specific   portions   into   which   the   land   has   been   subdivided,   the   same   shall   be   filed   with   the   office   of   the   RD   for   annotation   on   the   corresponding   certificate   of   title   § The  RD  shall  issue  a  new  Transfer  Certificate  of  Title  to   the   grantee   for   the   portion   conveyed   to   him   upon   cancellation   of   the   grantor’s   certificate   as   to   said   portion   § But  if  the  grantor  so  desires,  his  certificate  of  title  may   be   totally   cancelled   and   a   new   one   issued   to   him   for   the   remaining  portion  of  the  land   § Pending  approval  of  the  plan,  no  further  registration  or   any   annotation   of   any   deed   or   voluntary   instrument   affecting   the   unsegregated   portion   shall   be   made   by   the   RD  except  where  such  portion  was  purchased  from  the   government  or  any  of  its  instrumentalities     CARRYING   OVER   OF   ENCUMBRANCES   IN   NEW   CERTIFICATE     § Whenever   registered   land   is   conveyed,   all   subsisting   encumbrances   or   annotations   appearing   in   the   registration   book   and   noted   on   the   certificate   of   title   shall   be   carried   over   and   noted   on   the   new   certificate   of   title   except   where   said   encumbrances   or   annotations   are  simultaneously  released  or  discharged      

26  

27  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

Ø

MORTGAGES  AND  LEASES     Section   60.   Mortgage   or   lease   of   registered   land.   Mortgage   and   leases  shall  be  registered  in  the  manner  provided  in  Section  54  of   this  Decree.  The  owner  of  registered  land  may  mortgage  or  lease  it   by   executing   the   deed   in   a   form   sufficient   in   law.   Such   deed   of   mortgage   or   lease   and   all   instruments   which   assign,   extend,   discharge   or   otherwise   deal   with   the   mortgage   or   lease   shall   be   registered,   and   shall   take   effect   upon   the   title   only   from   time   of   registration.     No   mortgagee's   or   lessee's   duplicate   certificate   of   title   shall   hereafter   be   issued   by   the   Registers   of   Deeds,   and   those   issued   prior  to  the  effectivity  of  this  Decree  are  hereby  deemed  canceled   and   the   holders   thereof   shall   immediately   surrender   the   same   to   the  Register  of  Deeds  concerned.     ESSENCE  OF  MORTGAGE     Section  61.  Registration.  Upon  presentation  for  registration  of  the   deed  of  mortgage  or  lease  together  with  the  owner's  duplicate,  the   Register  of  Deeds  shall  enter  upon  the  original  of  the  certificate  of   title   and   also   upon   the   owner's   duplicate   certificate   a   memorandum   thereof,   the   date   and   time   of   filing   and   the   file   number   assigned   to   the   deed,   and   shall   sign   the   said   memorandum.  He  shall  also  note  on  the  deed  the  date  and  time  of   filing   and   a   reference   to   the   volume  and  page  of  the  registration  book  in  which  it  is  registered.     § A   property   has   been   identified   or   set   apart   from   the   mass   of   property   of   the   debtor-­‐mortgagor   as   security   for   the   payment   of   money   or   the   fulfillment   of   obligation   to   answer   the   amount   of   indebtedness,   in   case  of  default  of  payment     RECORDED  MORTGAGE  IS  A  RIGHT  IN  REM     § Recording  puts  the  whole  world  on  constructive  notice   of   its   existence   and   warns   everyone   who   deals   thereafter   with   the   property   on   which   it   was   constituted   that   he   would   have   reckon   with   that   encumbrance   § A  mortgage  is  a  secondary  contract     EFFECT  OF  LIS  PENDENS     § A  notice  of  lis  pendens  is  an  announcement  to  the  whole   world  that  a  particular  real  property  is  in  litigation  and   serves   as   a   warning   that   one   who   acquires   an   interest   over   said   property   does   so   at   his   own   risk,   so   that   he   gambles   on   the   results   of   the   litigation   over   said   property   § It  has  been  held  that  any  subsequent  lien  or  annotation   at   the   back   of   the   certificate   of   title   cannot   in   any   way   prejudice   the   mortgage   previously   registered,   and   the   lots   subject   thereto   pass   to   the   purchaser   at   a   public   auction  sale  free  from  any  lien  or  encumbrance     UNRECORDED   SALE   OF   A   PRIOR   DATE   VS.   RECORDED   MORTGAGE  ON  A  LATER  DATE   § The  unrecorded  sale  of  prior  date  is  preferred   § If   the   original   owner   had   parted   with   his   ownership   of   the  thing  sold  then  he  no  longer  had  the  ownership  and   free  disposal  of  that  thing  so  as  to  be  able  to  mortgage  it   again     RIGHTS  OF  SECOND  MORTGAGE   § Right  to  repurchase  the  subject  property   § Apply   to   the   payment   of   its   credit   the   excess   of   the   proceeds   of   the   sale   after   the   payment   of   the   credit   of   the  first  mortgagee     EFFECT  OF  MORTGAGE  IF  TORRENS  TITLE  IS  NULLIFIED   § That   the   certificate   of   title   issued   is   a   nullity   is   not   in   question   but   whether   the   mortgagee   is   entitled   to   the   protection  accorded  to  an  innocent  purchaser  for  value,   which   includes   one   who   is   an   innocent   mortgagee   for   value   § If  there  was  no  fraud,  negligence,  or  whatnot  on  the  part   of   the   mortgagee   regarding   the   certificate   which   was   later   on   nullified,   then   he   would   be   deemed   to   be   an   innocent   mortgagee   for   value,   with   the   corresponding   rights  relating  to  him       SECTION  62.  DISCHARGE  OR  CANCELLATION     A   mortgage   or   lease   on   registered   land   may   be   discharge   or   canceled  by  means  of  an  instrument  executed  by  the  mortgage  or   lessee   in   a   form   sufficient   in   law,   which   shall   be   filed   with   the   Register   of   Deeds   who   shall   make   the   appropriate   memorandum   upon  the  certificate  of  title.    

 

WHAT  IS  FORECLOSURE?     Process   by   which   a   mortgagee   acquires   an   absolute   title   to   the   property  of  which  he  had  previously  been  the  conditional  owner,   or  upon  which  he  had  previously  a  mere  lien  or  encumbrance     SECTION  63.  FORECLOSURE  OF  MORTGAGE.       If   the   mortgage   was   foreclosed   judicially,   a  certified  copy  of  the   final  order  of  the  court  confirming  the  sale  shall  be  registered  with   the   Register   of   Deeds.   If   no   right   of   redemption   exists,   the   certificate   of   title   of   the   mortgagor   shall   be   canceled,   and   a   new   certificate  issued  in  the  name  of  the  purchaser.     Where   the   right   of   redemption   exists,   the   certificate   of   title   of   the  mortgagor  shall  not  be  canceled,  but  the  certificate  of  sale  and   the   order   confirming   the   sale   shall   be   registered   by   a   brief   memorandum   thereof   made   by   the   Register   of   Deeds   upon   the   certificate   of   title.   In   the   event   the   property   is   redeemed,   the   certificate  or  deed  of  redemption  shall  be  filed  with  the  Register  of   Deeds,   and   a   brief   memorandum   thereof   shall   be   made   by   the   Register  of  Deeds  on  the  certificate  of  title  of  the  mortgagor.     If   the   property   is   not   redeemed,  the  final  deed  of  sale  executed   by  the  sheriff  in  favor  of  the  purchaser  at  a  foreclosure  sale  shall   be   registered   with   the   Register   of   Deeds;   whereupon   the   title   of   the  mortgagor  shall  be  canceled,  and  a  new  certificate  issued  in  the   name  of  the  purchaser.     (b)  If  the  mortgage   was   foreclosed   extrajudicially,  a  certificate   of  sale  executed  by  the  officer  who  conducted  the  sale  shall  be  filed   with   the   Register   of   Deeds   who   shall   make   a   brief   memorandum   thereof  on  the  certificate  of  title.     In   the   event   of   redemption   by   the   mortgagor,   the   same   rule   provided  for  in  the  second  paragraph  of  this  section  shall  apply.     In   case   of   non-­‐redemption,   the   purchaser   at   foreclosure   sale   shall   file   with   the   Register   of   Deeds,   either   a   final   deed   of   sale   executed   by   the   person   authorized   by   virtue   of   the   power   of   attorney   embodied   in   the   deed   of   mortgage,   or   his   sworn   statement   attesting   to   the   fact   of   non-­‐redemption;   whereupon,   the   Register   of   Deeds   shall   issue   a   new   certificate   in   favor   of   the   purchaser   after   the   owner's   duplicate   of   the   certificate   has   been   previously  delivered  and  canceled.     Ø POWER  OF  ATTORNEY;  TRUST     A  special  power  of  attorney  refers  to  the  clear  mandate  specifically   authorizing   the   performance   of   an   act,   and   must   therefore   be   distinguished  from  an  agency  couched  in  general  terms     When   a   piece   of   land   or   any   interest   therein   is   through   an   agent,   the   authority   of   the   latter   shall   be   in   writing,   otherwise   the   sale   shall  be  void     A   special   power   to   sell   excludes   the   power   to   mortgage,   and   a   special  power  to  mortgage  doesn’t  include  the  power  to  sell     TRUST,  DEFINED     A  trust  is  a  fiduciary  relationship  with  respect  to  property,  which   involves  the  existence  of  equitable  duties  imposed  upon  the  holder   of  the  title  to  the  property  to  deal  with  it  for  the  benefit  of  another     A  person  who  establishes  a  trust  is  called  the  trustor  while  the  one   whose   confidence   is   reposed   is   the   trustee,   and   the   person   for   whose   benefits   the   trust   has   been   created   is   referred   to   as   the   beneficiary     It  is  the  right  to  the  beneficial  enjoyment  of  property,  the  legal  title   to  which  is  vested  in  another     NO  TRUST  CAN  RESULT  IN  FAVOR  OF  A  PARTY  WHO  IS  GUILTY   OF  FRAUD  OR  VIOLATES  PUBLIC  POLICY     There   can   be   no   implied   trust   where   the   purchase   is   made   in   violation   of   an   existing   statute   and   in   evasion   of   its   express   provision,   since   no   trust   can   result   in   favor   of   the   party   who   is   guilty  of  the  fraud     NO   PARTICULAR   FORM   REQUIRED   BY   LAW   WITH   REGARD   TRUSTS  PRESCRIPTIVE  PERIOD   § Ten  years  from  the  repudiation  of  the  trust   § It   is   ten   years   because   just   as   a   resulting   trust   is   an   offspring   of   the   law,   so   is   the   corresponding   obligation   to   convey   the   property   and   title   thereto   to   the   true   owner.   § Reckoning  point  of  repudiation  is  from  the  moment  his   possession  thereof  becomes  adverse      

27  

28  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

TRUSTS,  HOW  EXPRESSED  AND  REGISTERED     If  a  deed  or  other  instrument  is  filed  in  order  to  transfer  registered   land   in   trust,   or   upon   any   equitable   condition   or   limitation   expressed  therein,  or  to  create  or  declare  a  trust  or  other  equitable   interests   in   such   land   without   transfer,   the   particulars   of   the   trust,   condition,   limitation   or   other   equitable   interest   shall   not   be   entered  on  the  certificate  but  only  a  memorandum  thereof  shall  be   entered  by  the  words  “in  trust”,  or  “upon  condition”,  or  other  apt   words,   and   by   a   reference   by   number   to   the   instrument   authorizing  or  creating  the  same     A   similar   instrument   shall   be   made   upon   the   original   instrument   creating   or   declaring   the   trust   or   other   equitable   interest   with   a   reference   by   number   to   the   certificate   of   title   to   which   it   relates   and  to  the  volume  and  page  in  the  registration  book  in  which  it  is   registered     No   instrument   which   transfers,   mortgages,   or   in   any   way   deals   with   registered   land   in   trust   shall   be   registered,   unless   the   enabling   power   thereto   is   expressly   conferred   in   the   trust   instrument   or   unless   a   final   judgment   or   order   of   court   of   competent   jurisdiction   has   construed   the   instrument   in   favor   of   the   power,   in   which   case   a   certified   copy   of   such   judgment   or   order  may  be  registered     IF   A   NEW   TRUSTEE   OF   REGISTERED   LAND   IS   APPOINTED   BY   THE   COURT,   A   NEW   CERTIFICATE   MAY   BE   ISSUED   TO   HIM   UPON   PRESENTATION   TO   THE   RD   OF   A   CERTIFIED   COPY   OF   THE  ORDER  OR  JUDICIAL  AGREEMENT  AND  THE  SURRENDER   FOR  CANCELLATION  OF  THE  DUPLICATE  CERTIFICATE     REGISTRATION  OF  CLAIM  BASED  ON  IMPLIED  TRUST     For   the   protection   of   persons   claiming   an   interest   in   registered   land   by   reason   of   an   implied   trust,   he   should   file   with   the   RD   a   sworn  statement   § Containing  the  description  of  the  land   § The  name  of  the  registered  owner   § A  reference  to  the  number  of  the  certificate  of  title     NOTES   ON   VOLUNTARY   DEALINGS   IN   LAND   TITLES   AND   DEEDS     1. Sale,   mortgage,   lease,   special   power   of   attorney   and   trusts   are   examples   of   voluntary   dealings.   They   are   entered   voluntarily  by  the  parties.  Unlike  an  involuntary  dealings,  the   owner   doesn’t   want   the   transaction   to   be   registered.   The   owner   wouldn’t   want   his   property   be   subject   of   an   attachment,  adverse  claim  or  notice  of  lis  pendens.   2. Registration   is   the   necessary   act   for   the   transaction   to   bind   third  parties.   3. Actual   knowledge   is   equivalent   to   registration.   Registration   is   to   give   notice.   If   the   person   knows   about   the   transaction,   it   is  deemed  that  the  transaction  has  been  registered.   4. Registration   should   be   done   in   the   correct   registry.   If   it   is   a   titled   property,   there   is   a   separate   book   for   titled   property.   If   it  is  a  dealing  with  unregistered  property,  there  is  a  different   book  for  unregistered  land.  If  you  register  in  a  different  book,   there  is  no  registration  that  is  valid  as  against  third  persons.   5. The  constructive  notice  mentioned  in  PD1959  is  conclusive.   6. There  is  a  distinction  with  regard  voluntary  and  involuntary   dealings  with  the  effectivity  of  registration.  With  involuntary   dealings,   once   there   is   entry   in   the   day   book   and   paid   the   needed  fees  and  taxes,  the  RD  issues  the  new  title  and  cancels   the   old   one.   Once   there   is   compliance,   the   transaction   is   considered   registered.   With   voluntary   dealings,   entry   in   the   daybook  is  insufficient.   7. Mere   entry   in   the   day   book/primary   book   is   sufficient.   It   is   often   times   that   owners   don’t   want   to   surrender   their   owner’s  duplicate.   8. Carry-­‐over   of   encumbrances.   Suppose   that   you   purchase   property   and   there   was   prior   mortgages   and   notice   of   lis   pendens.   These   encumbrances   will   be   carried   over   to   the   new  certificate  issued  to  the  buyer.   9. Can  you  sell  only  a  portion  of  your  property?  You  can  have  it   annotated.   But   if   the   buyer   would   like   a   separate   title,   then   he   should   submit   a   subdivision   plan,   there   should   be   a   technical  description.  The  old  title  would  be  cancelled  and  a   new  title  issued  covering  the  portion  sold.   10. Basically   the   procedure   of   registration   for   voluntary   dealings   can   be   categorized   into   two—if   it   is   an   absolute   sale   or   mortgage.   If   it   is   a   sale,   the   deed   of   sale   and   title   should   be   submitted.   There   should   also   be   proof   of   payment   of   real   estate   taxes   as   well   as   registration   fees   and   documentary   stamp  taxes.  With  that,  the  Registry  of  Deeds  shall  make  the   corresponding  entry  that  will  cancel  the  old  certificate  of  title   and   issue   a   new   one   in   favor   of   the   buyer.   If   it   is  merely  an  encumbrance  however,  the  document  shall  only   be   presented   to   the   RD,   payment   of   the   corresponding   amount  and  the  corresponding  annotation  done  by  the  RD  is   notice  to  third  persons.  

 

11. If  it  is  judicial  foreclosure,  you  register  the  order  of  the  court   confirming   the   sale.   If   it   is   extrajudicial   foreclosure,   you   register  the  order  of  the  sheriff.   12. For  implied  trusts,  read  the  case  of  Aznar  Brothers.  It  has  two   kinds—resulting   trust   and   constructive   trust.   If   it   is   an   implied   resulting   trust,   prescriptive   period   is   10   years   from   time  of  repudiation.   13. It  is  dependent  on  the  facts  and  circumstances  of  the  case  on   whether   who   would   have   a   better   right,   the   owner   or   the   mortgagee.   But   generally,   when   it   is   through   a   forged   deed,   then  the  owner  would  have  a  better  right  over  the  property.   The  forged  deed  is  a  nullity.  On  the  other  hand,  when  there  is   chain   of   title,   the   innocent   purchaser   in   value   would   have   a   better  right.   14. Doctrine   of   mortgagee   in   good   faith.   If   the   property   is   mortgaged   to   an   innocent   mortgagee,   it   is   possible   that   he   would   have   a   better   right   over   the   property   than   the   real   owner.   15. Even   if   the   title   is   null   and   void,   there   is   still   validity   of   the   mortgage.   The   mortgagee   has   a   right   to   rely   on   the   title,   provided   there   is   nothing   that   would   arise   suspicion   on   the   part  of  the  mortgagee.     IX.     INVOLUNTARY  DEALINGS     SECTION   69.   ATTACHMENTS.   An   attachment,   or   a   copy   of   any   writ,   order   or   process   issued   by   a   court   of   record,   intended   to   create   or   preserve   any   lien,   status,   right,   or   attachment  upon  registered  land,  shall  be  filed  and  registered   in  the  Registry  of  Deeds  for  the  province  or  city  in  which  the   land   lies,   and,   in   addition   to   the   particulars   required   in   such   papers   for   registration,   shall   contain   a   reference   to   the   number   of   the   certificate   of   title   to   be   affected   and   the   registered   owner   or   owners   thereof,   and   also   if   the   attachment,   order,   process   or   lien   is   not   claimed   on   all   the   land   in   any   certificate   of   title   a   description   sufficiently   accurate   for   identification   of   the   land   or   interest   intended   to   be   affected.   A   restraining   order,   injunction   or   mandamus   issued   by   the   court   shall   be   entered   and   registered   on   the   certificate  of  title  affected,  free  of  charge.     NATURE  OF  ATTACHMENT     § Legal  process  of  seizing  another’s  property  in  accordance  with   a  writ  or  judicial  order  for  the  purpose  of  securing  satisfaction   of  a  judgment  yet  to  be  rendered   § Writ   of   attachment   is   used   primarily   to   seize   the   debtor’s   property  to  seize  the  debtor’s  property  in  order  to  secure  the   debt   or   claim   of   the   creditor   in   the   event   that   a   judgment   is   rendered   § Jurisprudence:  a  party  who  delivers  a  notice  of  attachment  to   the  RD  and  pays  the  corresponding  fees  has  a  right  to  presume   that  the  official  would  perform  his  duty  properly   § In   involuntary   registration,   entry   thereof   in   the   daybook  is   sufficient   notice   to   all   persons   of   such   adverse   claim.   The   notice   of   course   has   to   be   annotated   at   the   back   of   the   corresponding  original  certificate  of  title,  but  this  is  an  official   duty   of   the   RD,   which   may   be   presumed   to   have   been   regularly  performed   § DBP  v.  Acting  Registry  of  Deeds:  current  doctrine  thus  seems   to   be   that   entry   alone   produces   the   effect   of   registration,   whether  the  transaction  entered  is  a  voluntary  or  involuntary   one,   so   long   as   the   registrant   has   complied   with   all   that   is   required   of   him   for   purposes   of   entry   and   annotation,   and   nothing  more  remains  to  be  done  but  a  duty  incumbent  solely   on  the  Registry  of  Deeds   § Section   69   states   that   an   attachment   or   any   writ,   order   or   process   intended   to   create   or   preserve   any   lien   upon   registered   land   shall   be   filed   and   registered   in   the   RD   and   shall   contain   a   reference   to   the   number   of   the   certificate   of   title   to   be   affected,   the   registered   owner   thereof   and   a   description  of  the  land  or  interest  therein     GROUNDS  UPON  WHICH  ATTACHMENT  MAY  ISSUE   (Section  1,  Rule  57  of  the  Rules  of  Court)     At   the   commencement   of   the   action   or   at   any   time   before   entry   of   judgment,   a   plaintiff   or   proper   party   may   have   the   property   of   the   adverse   party   attached   as   security   for   the   satisfaction  of  any  judgment  that  may  be  recovered  in,  among   others,  the  following  cases:     § In  an  action  to  recover  the  possession  of  property  unjustly  or   fraudulently  taken,  detained  or  converted,  when  the  property   or  any  part  thereof,  has  been  concealed,  removed  or  disposed   of,   to   prevent   its   being   found   or   taken   by   the   applicant   or   an   authorized  person   § In   an   action   against   a   party   who   has   been   guilty   of   fraud   in   contracting  the  debt  or  incurring  an  obligation  upon  which  the   action  is  brought,  or  in  the  performance  thereof   § In   an   action   against   a   party   who   has   removed   or   disposed   of   his   property,   or   is   about   to   do   so,   with   intent   to   defraud   his  

28  

29  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

creditors   A   PRELIMINARY   ATTACHMENT   may   be   validly   applied   for   and   granted   ex   parte   before   a   defendant   is   summoned  since  the  phrase  “at  the  commencement  of  action”   refers  to  the  date  of  the  filing  of  the  complaint  and  before  the   summons  is  served  on  the  defendant.     REGISTRATION   OF   ATTACHMENT,   WRITS,   AND   RELATED   PROCESSES     § An   attachment,   or   copy   of   writ,   order   or   process   issued   by   the   court   intended   to   create   or   preserve   any   lien,   status,   right   or   attachment   upon   registered   land   shall   be   filed   and   registered   in   the   RD   for   the   province   or   city   where   the   land   lies,   and   in   addition   to   the   particulars   required   in   such   papers   for   registration,   shall   contain  a  reference  to  the  number  of  the  certificate  of  title  affected   and   the   registered   owner   or   owners   thereof,   and   also,   if   the  attachment,  order,  process  or  lien  is  not  claimed  on  all  the  land   in   any   certificate   of   title,   a   description   sufficiently   accurate   for   identification  of  the  land  or  interest  intended  to  be  affected   § A  restraining  order,  injunction,  or  mandamus  issued  by  the  court   shall   be   entered   or   registered   on   the   certificate   of   title   affected,   free  of  charge     KNOWLEDGE   OF   A   PRIOR   UNREGISTERED   INTEREST   IS   EQUIVALENT  TO  REGISTRATION     § In  case  of  conflict  between  a  vendee  and  an  attaching  creditor,  an   attaching   creditor   who   registers   the   order   of   attachment   and   the   sale  of  property  to  him  as  the  highest  bidder  acquires  a  valid  title   to   the   property,   as   against   a   vendee   who   had   previously   bought   the   same   property   from   the   registered   owner   but   who   failed   to   register  his  deed  of  sale   § Registration   is   the   operative   act   that   binds   or   affects   the   land   insofar  as  third  persons  are  concerned—notice  to  the  whole  world   § But   where   a   party   has   knowledge   of   a   prior   existing   interest,   which  is  unregistered  at  the  time  he  acquired  a  right  to  the  same   land,   his   knowledge   of   that   prior   unregistered   interest   has   the   effect  of  registration  as  to  him.  Knowledge  of  an  unregistered  sale   is  equivalent  to  registration     DISCHARGE  OF  ATTACHMENT     § An  attachment  may   be   discharged   upon   giving   a   counterclaim   or   on   the   ground   that   the   same   was   improperly   or   irregularly   issued  or  enforced,  or  that  the  bond  is  insufficient   § By   the   dissolution   of   an   attachment   levied   on   the   defendant’s   property,   through   the   filing   of   the   bond,   the   released   property   becomes  free  and  no  longer  liable  to  the  results  of  the  proceeding   in   which   it   was   attached.   Consequently,   the   act   of   the   defendant,   whose   property   has   been   attached,   in   mortgaging   the   released   property   to   a   third   person,   is   not   a   conveyance   in   fraud   of   creditors,   since   the   transaction   is   legal   and   valid,   and   since   the   presumption  of  fraud  doesn’t  arise  when  there  is  security  in  favor   of  the  creditor     Ø ADVERSE  CLAIM     § Purpose   of   annotating   the   adverse   claim   on   the   title   of   the   disputed   land   is   to   apprise   third   persons   that   there   is   a   controversy   over   the   ownership   of   the   land   and   to   preserve   and   protect   the   right   of   the   adverse   claimant   during   the   pendency   of   the  controversy   § Notice   to   third   persons   that   any   transaction   regarding   the   disputed  land  is  subject  to  the  outcome  of  the  dispute   § Such   is   registered   by   filing   a   sworn   statement   with   the   RD   of   the   province   where   the   property   is   located,   setting   forth   the   basis   of   the   claimed   right   together   with   other   data   pertinent   thereto.   The   registration  of  an  adverse  claim  is  expressly  recognized  under       Ø Section   70.  Where  the  notice  of  adverse  claim  is  sufficient  in  law   and   drawn   up   in   accordance   with   existing   requirements,   it   becomes  the  ministerial  duty  of  the  RD  to  register  the  instrument   without  unnecessary  delay     § While  the  act  of  registration  is  the  operative  act  which  conveys  or   affects   the   land   insofar   as   third   persons   are   concerned,   the   subsequent   sale   of   property   covered   by   a   certificate   of   title   CANNOT  PREVAIL  OVER  AN  ADVERSE  CLAIM,  duly  sworn  to  and   annotated  on  the  certificate  of  title  previous  the  sale   § Section  70  is  divided  into  two  parts—first  refers  to  the  petition  of   the   party   who   claims   any   part   or   interest   in   the   registered   land,   arising  subsequent  to  the  date  of  the  original  registration,  for  the   registration  of  his  adverse  claim,  which  is  a  ministerial  function  of   the   Register   of   Deeds   absent   any   defect   on   the   face   of   the   instrument.   The   second   refers   to   the   petition   filed   in   court   by   a   party   in   interest   for   the   cancellation   of   the   adverse   claim   upon   showing  the  same  isinvalid.     REGISTRATION  OF  ADVERSE  CLAIM     § A   lease   over   a   parcel   of   land   for   a   10-­‐year   period,   which   could   not   be   registered   because   the   owner’s   duplicate   of   title   wasn’t  

 

surrendered,  could  be  registered  as  an  adverse  claim  and  the   owner   couldn’t   be   compelled   to   surrender   the   owner’s   duplicate  of  the  title  to  that  adverse  claim  could  be  annotated   thereon   § If   the   adverse   claim   turns   out   to   be   invalid,   the   owner   could   ask   for   its   cancellation   and,   if   found   to   be   frivolous   or   vexatious,   then   costs   may   be   adjudged   against   the   adverse   claimant.   § The  claim  of  a  person  that  she  has  hereditary  rights  in  the  land   fraudulently   registered   in   his   sister’s   name,   because   the   land   belonged   to   their   mother   whose   estate   is   pending   settlement   in  a  special  proceeding,  is  registrable  as  an  adverse  claim   § Where   a   guardianship   proceeding   is   pending   in   court,   it   is   proper   to   annotate   on   the   title   of   the   land   in   question   the   pendency   of   such   a   proceeding   by   means   of   a   notice   of   lis   pendens  for  the  purpose  of  alerting  anyone  who  might  wish  to   buy   the   land   that   his   purchase   may   be   questioned   later   on.   Since   an   adverse   claim   and   a   notice   of   lis   pendens   have   the   same   purpose,   there   would   be   no   need   of   maintaining   the   adverse   claim.   But   a   notice   of   levy   cannot  prevail  over  an  existing  adverse  claim  inscribed  in  the   certificate  of  title   § The   annotation   of   an   adverse   claim   is   a   measure   designed   to   protect   the   interest   of   a   person   over   a   piece   of   real   property   where   the   registration   of   such   interest   or   right   isn’t   otherwise   provided  for  by  PD1529,  and  serves  as  a  notice  and  warning  to   third   persons   dealing   with   said   property   that   someone   is   claiming   an   interest   on   the   same   or   a   better   right   than   the   registered  owner  thereof   § FOR   THE   SPECIAL   REMEDY   OF   ADVERSE   CLAIM   TO   BE   AVAILED   OF,   IT   MUST   BE   SHOWN   THAT   THERE   IS   NO   OTHER   PROVISION   IN   THE   LAW   FOR   REGISTRATION   OF   THE  CLAIMANT’S  ALLEGED  RIGHT  IN  THE  PROPERTY.   § An   adverse   claim   of   ownership   over   a   parcel   of   land   registered  under  the  Torrens  system  based  on  prescription   and  adverse  possession  cannot  be  registered  as  an  adverse   claim—no  title  to  registered  land  in  derogation  of  the  title   of  the  registered  owner  shall  be  acquired  by  prescription  or   adverse  possession.  Hence,  the  registration  of  such  adverse   claim   will   serve   no   useful   purpose   and   cannot   validly   and   legally  affect  the  parcel  of  land  in  question.     REQUISITES  OF  AN  ADVERSE  CLAIM   § The  adverse  claimant  must  state  the  following  in  writing   o His  alleged  right  or  interest   o How   and   under   whom   such   alleged   right   or   interest  is  acquired   o The   description   of   the   land   in   which   the   right   or  interest  is  claimed   o The  number  of  the  certificate  of  title   § The   statement   must   be   signed   and   sworn   to   before   a   notary   public  or  other  officer  authorized  to  administer  oath   § The  claimant  should  state  his  residence  or  the  place  to  which   all  notices  may  be  served  upon  him     FORECLOSURE   SALE   RETROACTS   TO   REGISTRATION   OF   MORTGAGE   § The   settled   doctrine   is   that   the   effects   of   a   foreclosure   sale   retroact  to  the  date  of  registration  of  the  mortgage.   § Hence,   if   the   adverse   claim   is   registered   only   after   the   annotation   of   the   mortgage   at   the   back   of   the   certificate   of   title,   the   adverse   claim   could   not   effect   the   rights   of   the   mortgagee;  and  the  fact  that  the  foreclosure  of  the  mortgage   and   the   consequent   public   auction   sale   have   been   effected   long  after  the  annotation  of  the  adverse  claim  is  of  no  moment,   because   the   foreclosure   sale   retroacts   to   the   date   of   registration  of  the  mortgage.       Ø SURRENDER   OF   CERTIFICATE   IN   INVOLUNTARY   DEALINGS     Section   71.   Surrender   of   certificate   in   involuntary   dealings.   If   an   attachment   or   other   lien   in   the   nature   of   involuntary   dealing   in   registered   land   is   registered,   and   the   duplicate   certificate   is   not   presented   at   the   time   of   registration,   the   Register   of   Deeds   shall,   within   thirty-­‐six   hours   thereafter,   send   notice   by   mail   to   the   registered   owner,   stating   that   such   paper   has   been   registered,   and   requesting  him  to  send  or  produce  his  duplicate  certificate  so  that  a   memorandum  of  the  attachment  or  other  lien  may  be  made  thereon.   If  the  owner  neglects  or  refuses  to  comply  within  a  reasonable  time,   the   Register   of   Deeds   shall   report   the   matter   to   the   court,   and   it   shall,   after   notice,   enter   an   order   to   the   owner,   to   produce   his   certificate   at   a   time   and   place   named   therein,   and   may   enforce  the  order  by  suitable  process.     COURT  MAY  COMPEL  SURRENDER  OF  CERTIFICATE  OF  TITLE   AS  AN  INCIDENT  IN  THE  MAIN  CASE   § RD   is   authorized   to   require   the   registered   owner   to   produce   the   owner’s   duplicate   certificate   in   order   that   an   attachment   or   other   lien   in   the   nature   of   involuntary   dealing,  may  be  annotated  thereon  

29  

30  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

If   the   owner   refuses   or   neglects   to   comply   within   reasonable   time,  he  shall  report  such  fact  to  the  proper  RTC  which  shall,   after   notice,   direct   the   owner   to   produce   his   certificate   at   a   time  and  place  specified  in  its  order     MORTGAGE  LIEN  FOLLOWS  MORTGAGED  PROPERTY     § Any  lien  annotated  on  the  previous  certificates  of  title,  which   subsists  should  be  incorporated  in  or  carried  over  to  the  new   transfer   certificate   of   title.   This   is   true   even   in   the   case   of   a   real   estate   mortgage   because   pursuant   to   Article   2126   of   the   Civil  Code,  the  mortgage  directly  and  immediately  subjects  the   property   whoever   the   possessor   may   be,   to   the   fulfillment   of   the  obligation  for  whose  security  it  was  constituted   § It  is  inseparable  from  the  property  mortgaged  as  it  is  a  right  in   rem—a  lien  on  the  property  whoever  its  owner  may  be.       DISSOLUTION  OF  ATTACHMENT     Where   an   attachment   or   lien   is   maintained,   or   discharged   or   dissolved   by   any   method   provided   by   law,   the   certificate   or   instrument   for   the   purpose   shall   be   registered   to   give   effect   thereof   If   the   attachment   or   lien   is   maintained,   discharged   or   dissolved   by   the  order  of  the  court,  a  certificate  of  the  Clerk  of  Court  as  to  the   entry  of  such  order  shall  also  be  registered     PURPOSE  OF  REGISTRATION     Purpose   is   to   notify   third   persons   who   may   be   affected   in   their   dealings  with  respect  to  such  property   The   RD   may   properly   deny   the   inscription   of   an   order   of   attachment  or  levy  of  execution  where  the  title  to  the  property  is   not  in  the  name  of  the  judgment  debtor  but  of  another  person,  and   no   evidence   has   been   submitted   that   he   has   any   interest   in   the   property     REGISTRATION  OF  ORDERS  OF  COURT     If   an   attachment   is   continued,   reduced,   dissolved,   or   otherwise   affected  by  an  order,  decision  or  judgment  of  the  court  where  the   action   or   proceedings   in   which   said   attachment   was   made   is   pending   or   by   an   order   of   a   court   having   jurisdiction   thereof,   a   certificate   of   the   entry   of   such   order,   decision   or   judgment   from   the   clerk   of   court   or   the   judge   by   which   such   decision,   order   or   judgment  has  been  rendered  and  under  the  seal  of  the  court,  shall   be   entitled   to   be   registered   upon   presentation   to   the   Register   of   Deeds.     ENFORCEMENT  OF  LIENS  ON  REGISTERED  LAND     Whenever  registered  land  is  solved  on  execution,  or  taken  or  sold   for   taxes   or   for   any   assessment   or   to   enforce   a   lien   of   any   character,  or  for  any  costs  and  charges  incident  to  such  liens,  any   execution   or   copy   of   execution,   any   officer's   return,   or   any   deed,   demand,   certificate,   or   affidavit,   or   other   instrument   made   in   the   course   of   the   proceedings   to   enforce   such   liens   and   required   by   law  to  be  recorded,  shall  be  filed  with  the  Register  of  Deeds  of  the   province   or   city   where   the   land   lies   and   registered   in   the   registration   book,   and   a   memorandum   made   upon   the   proper   certificate  of  title  in  each  case  as  lien  or  encumbrance.     APPLICATION   FOR   NEW   CERTIFICATE   UPON   EXPIRATION   OF   REDEMPTION  PERIOD     Upon   the   expiration   of   the   time,   if   any,   allowed   by   law   for   redemption  after  registered  land  has  been  sold  on  execution  taken   or   sold   for   the   enforcement   of   a   lien   of   any   description,   except   a   mortgage   lien,   the   purchaser   at   such   sale   or   anyone   claiming   under   him   may   petition   the   court   for   the   entry   of   a   new   certificate   of  title  to  him.     Before  the  entry  of  a  new  certificate  of  title,  the  registered  owner   may   pursue   all   legal   and   equitable   remedies   to   impeach   or   annul   such  proceedings.     NOTICE  OF  LIS  PENDENS     No   action   to   recover   possession   of   real   estate,   or   to   quiet   title   thereto,  or  to  remove  clouds  upon  the  title  thereof,  or  for  partition,   or  other  proceedings  of  any  kind  in  court  directly  affecting  the  title   to   land   or   the   use   or   occupation   thereof   or   the   buildings   thereon,   and   no   judgment,   and   no   proceeding   to   vacate   or   reverse   any   judgment,   shall   have   any   effect   upon   registered   land   as   against   persons   other   than   the   parties   thereto,   unless   a   memorandum   or   notice   stating   the   institution   of   such   action   or   proceeding   and   the   court   wherein   the   same   is   pending,   as   well   as   the   date   of   the   institution   thereof,   together   with   a   reference   to   the   number   of   the   certificate  of  title,  and  an  adequate  description  of  the  land  affected   and   the   registered   owner   thereof,   shall   have   been   filed   and   registered.   §

Ø §

§

§ §

Ø

Ø

Ø

Ø

 

NATURE  OF  LIS  PENDENS   § Lis  pendens  literally  means  a  pending  suit   § Doctrine  that  refers  to  the  jurisdiction,  power  or  control   which   a   court   acquires   over   a   property   involved   in   a   suit,   pending   the   continuance   of   the   action,   until   final   judgment     PURPOSE  OF  LIS  PENDENS   § To   protect   the   rights   of   the   party   causing   the   registration  of  the  lis  pendens   § To   advise   third   persons   who   purchase   or   contract   on   the   subject   property   that   they   do   so   at   their   peril   and   subject  to  the  result  of  the  pending  litigation     ü May  involve  actions  that  deal  not  only  with  title  or  possession   of   a   property   but   also   with   the   use   and   occupation   of   a   property   ü The   litigation   must   directly   involve   a   specific   property   which   is  necessarily  affected  by  the  judgment   ü The  notice  of  lis  pendens  is  a  notice  to  the  whole  world  that  a   particular  real  property  is  in  litigation.  The  inscription  serves   as   a   warning   that   one   who   acquires   interest   over   litigated   property   does   so   at   his   own   risk,   or   that   he   gambles   on   the   result  of  the  litigation  over  the  property   ü A   purchaser   who   buys   registered   land   with   full   notice   of   the   fact  that  it  is  in  litigation  between  the  vendor  and  third  party   stands  in  the  shoes  of  his  vendor  and  his  title  is  subject  to  the   incidents  and  results  of  the  pending  litigation     THE  FILING  OF  LIS  PENDENS  IN  EFFECT   § Keeps  the  subject  matter  of  litigation  within  the  power   of   the   court   until   entry   of   final   judgment   so   as   to   prevent  the  defeat  of  the  latter  by  successive  alienations   § Binds  the  purchaser  of  the  land  subject  of  the  litigation   to   the   judgment   or   decree   that   will   be   promulgated   thereon   whether   such   purchaser   is   a   bona   fide   purchaser  or  not   § Doesn’t  create  a  non-­‐existent  right  or  lien   § Purpose   of   this   rule   is   founded   on   public   policy   and   necessity     EFFECT  OF  SUCH  NOTICE   § It   keeps   the   subject   matter   of   the   litigation   within   the   power   of   the   court   until   the   entry   of   final   judgment   so   as   to   prevent   the   defeat   of   the   latter   by   successive   alienations   § It   binds   the   purchaser   of   the   land   subject   of   the   litigation   to   the   judgment   or   decree   that   will   be   promulgated  thereon  whether  such  purchaser  is  a  bona   fide  purchaser  or  not     It   is   not   correct   to   speak   of   it   as   part   of   the   doctrine   of   notice,   the   purchaser  pendent  elite  is  affected  not  by  notice  but  because  the  law   doesn’t   allow   litigating   parties   to   give   to   others,   pending   the   litigation,   rights   to   the   property   in   dispute   so   as   to   prejudice   the   other  party     NOTICE   IS   ONLY   AN   INCIDENT   IN   THE   MAIN   CASE;   MERITS   THEREOF  UNAFFECTED   § A   notice   of   lis   pendens   is   ordinarily   recorded   without   the   intervention   of   the   court   where   the   action   is   pending   § It  is  but  an  incident  in  an  action,  an  extrajudicial  one.  It   doesn’t  affect  the  merits  thereof.     NOTICE  NEED  NOT  BE  ANNOTATED  ON  THE  OWNER’S  COPY   § Annotation   at   the   back   of   the   original   copy   of   the   certificate   of   title   on   file   with   the   RD   is   sufficient   to   constitute   constructive   notice   to   purchasers   or   other   persons  subsequently  dealing  with  the  same  property   § One   who   deals   with   property   subject   of   a   notice   of   lis   pendens  cannot  invoke  the  right  of  a  purchaser  in  good   faith—neither   can   he   acquire   the   rights   better   than   those  of  his  predecessor-­‐in-­‐interest     NOTICE  OF  LIS  PENDENS—WHEN  APPROPRIATE   § Action  to  recover  possession  of  real  property   § Action  to  quiet  title  thereto   § Action  to  remove  cloud  thereon   § Action  for  partition   § Any   other   proceedings   of   any   kind   in   court   directly   affecting   the   title   to   the   land   or   the   use   or   occupation   thereof  or  the  buildings  thereon     NOTICE  NOT  PROPER  IN  THE  FOLLOWING   § Preliminary  attachments   § Proceedings  for  the  probates  of  wills   § Levies  on  execution   § Proceedings  for  the  administration  of  estate  of  deceased   persons   § Proceedings   in   which   the   only   subject   is   the   recovery   of   a  money  judgment  

30  

31  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

Ø § § §

X.       Ø   §

§ §

§

CONTENTS  OF  NOTICE  OF  LIS  PENDENS   § A   statement   of   the   institution   of   an   action   or   proceedings   § The  court  where  the  same  is  pending   § The  date  of  its  institution   § A   reference   to   the   number   of   certificate   of   title   of   the   land   § An   adequate   description   of   the   land   affected   and   its   registered  owner     PRINCIPLE   OF   PRIMUS   TEMPORE,   POTIOR   JURE;   EFFECT   OF   LIS  PENDENS     § The   principle   of   primus   tempore,   potior   jure   gains   greater   significance   in   the   law   on   double   sale   of   immovable  property   § Reliance   on   the   principle   of   constructive   notice   operates  only  such  upon  the  registration  of  the  notice  of   lis  pendens   § More   fundamentally,   a   notice   of   lis   pendens   is   only   a   warning  to  the  prospective  purchaser  or  encumbrancer   that   the   particular   property   is   in   litigation   and   that   he   should  keep  his  hands  off  the  same,  unless  he  intends  to   gamble  on  the  results  of  the  litigation     CARRY  OVER  OF  NOTICE  ON  SUBSEQUENT  TITLES   § In  case  of  subsequent  transfers  or  sales,  the  RD  is  duty   bound  to  carry  over  the  notice  of  lis  pendens  on  all  titles   to  be  issued   § Act   of   RD   in   erasing   notice   of   lis   pendens   is   in   plain   violation   of   his   duty,   constitutes   misfeasance   in   the   performance   of   his   duties   for   which   he   may   be   held   civilly   and   even   criminally   liable   for   any   prejudice   caused   to   innocent   third   persons   and   cannot   affect   those   who   are   protected   by   the   notice   inscribed   in   the   original  title     CANCELLATION  OF  LIS  PENDENS     Ordinarily  a  notice  which  has  been  filed  in  a  proper  case  cannot  be   cancelled  while  the  action  is  pending  and  undetermined,  except  in   cases  expressly  provided  for  by  statute   It  may  be  cancelled  upon  order  by  the  court  or  upon  action  by  the   Register   of   Deeds   at   the   instance   of   the   party   who   caused   the   registration  of  the  notice   While   the   trial   court   has   inherent   power   to   cancel   a   notice   of   lis   pendens,  such  power  is  exercised  under  express  provisions  of  law:   o If   the   annotation   was   for   the   purpose   of   molesting   the   title  of  the  adverse  party   o When  the  annotation  isn’t  necessary  to  protect  the  title   of  the  party  who  caused  it  to  be  recorded     PETITIONS  AND  ACTIONS  AFTER  ORIGINAL  REGISTRATION   REMEDY  WHERE  DUPLICATE  CERTIFICATE  IS  WITHHELD   In   case   the   person   in   possession   of   the   owner’s   duplicate   certificate  refuses  or  fails  to  surrender  the  same  to  the  RD  so  that   any  involuntary  or  voluntary  instrument  may  be  registered  and  a   certificate  issued,  the  party  in  interest  may  file  a  petition  in  court   to  compel  the  surrender  of  the  same  to  the  RD   The   court   after   hearing   may   order   the   registered   owner   or   any   person  withholding  the  duplicate  certificate  and  direct  the  entry  of   a  new  certificate  or  memorandum  upon  such  surrender   If   the   person   withholding   the   certificate   is   not   amenable   to   the   process  of  the  court,  or  if  for  any  reason  the  certificate  cannot  be   delivered,   the   court   may   order   the   annulment   of   said   certificate   and  the  issuance  of  a  new  certificate  of  title  in  lieu  thereof   Such   new   certificate   and   all   duplicates   thereof   shall   contain   a   memorandum  of  the  annulment  of  the  outstanding  duplicate  

  Ø §

§ §

AUTHORITY   OF   COURT   TO   ORDER   THE   SURRENDER   OF   OWNER’S  DUPLICATE  CERTIFICATE     In   order   that   the   court   may   order   the   registered   owner   to   surrender   his   owner’s   duplicate,   it   has   to   determine   upon   the   evidence   presented   by   the   parties   whether   the   registered   owner   had  been  lawfully  divested  of  his  title  thereto   That   of   course   requires   and   involves   of   the   determination   of   the   question  of  title  to  the  registered  property   Section   107   doesn’t   constitute   a   reopening   of   the   decree   entered   as   a   result   of   proceedings   in   rem   for   the   confirmation   of   imperfect   title  under  said  act,  it  cannot  be  deemed  to  contravene  the  purpose   or  aim  of  the  Torrens  system.  

  Ø § §

WHEN  TO  FILE  PETITION  FOR  AMENDMENT  OR  ALTERATION   OF  CERTIFICATE     Whether   vested,   contingent,   expectant   or   inchoate   appearing   on   the  certificate,  have  terminated  and  ceased;  or   That   new   interest   not   appearing   upon   the   certificate   have   arisen   or  been  created;  or  

 

That   an   omission   or   error   was   made   in   entering   a   certificate   or  any  memorandum  thereon,  or,  on  any  duplicate  certificate;   or   § That   the   same   or   any   person   on   the   certificate   has   been   changed;  or   § That  the  registered  owner  has  married,  or,   § If   registered   as   married,   that   the   marriage   has   been   terminated  and  no  right  or  interests  of  heirs  or  creditors  will   thereby  be  affected;  or   § That  a  corporation,  which  owned  registered  land  and  has  been   dissolved  has  not  convened  the  same  within  three  years  after   its  dissolution;  or  upon  any  other  reasonable  ground;     JUDICIAL  RECONSTITUTION  UNDER  REPUBLIC  ACT  26     § Republic  Act  26:  An  Act  Providing  a  Special  Procedure  For  The   Reconstitution   of   Torrens   Certificate   of   Titles   Lost   or   Destroyed   § Reconstitution  of  title  is  an  action  in  rem   § A  judicially  reconstituted  title  has  the  same  validity  and  legal   effect   as   the   original   thereof,   and   isn’t   subject   to   the   reservation   that   it   shall   be   without   prejudice   to   any   party   whose  right  or  interest  in  the  property  was  duly  noted  in  the   original   at   the   time   of   loss   or   destruction   but   which   entry   or   notation  hasn’t  been  made  on  the  reconstituted  title   § The  limitation  that  reconstitution  of  title  should  be  limited  to   the  certificate  as  it  stood  at  the  time  of  its  loss  or  destruction   has  reference  only  to  changes  which  alter  or  affect  title  of  the   registered   owner   and   not   to   mere   liens   and   other   encumbrances     RECONSTITUTION   DENOTES   RESTORATION   OF   THE   LOST   TITLE  IN  ITS  ORIGINAL  FORM  AND  CONDITION   § Purpose   is   to   have   it   reproduced,   after   observing   the   procedure   prescribed   by   law   in   the   same   form   they   where   when  the  loss  or  destruction  occurred   § The   fact   that   the   title   to   the   land   was   lost   doesn’t   mean   that   the  lot  ceased  to  be  a  registered  land  before  the  reconstitution   of  its  title   § As   the   subject   land   didn’t   cease   to   be   titled,   it   cannot   be   acquired  by  acquisitive  prescription   § Reconstitution   is   proper   only   when   it   is   satisfactorily   shown   that   the   title   sought   to   be   reconstituted   is   lost   or   no   longer   available   § Where   the   petition   for   reconstitution   wasn’t   to   restore   a   lost   registered   certificate   of   title   but   to   re-­‐register   and   issue   a   new   certificate   in   the   names   of   petitioner   and   her   deceased   husband,   in   lieu   of   one   originally   registered   in   the   names   of   other  persons,  the  petition  should  be  denied  without  prejudice   to   the   right   of   the   parties   to   take   the   necessary   action   under   Section   51   and   53   of  PD1529   § Republic   Act   26   provides   for   special   procedure   for   the   reconstitution   of   torrens   certificate   of   title   that   are   missing   and  not  fictitious  titles  which  are  existing.  Where  a  certificate   of   title   over   a   parcel   of   land   was   reconstituted   judicially   and   later   it   was   found   that   there   existed   a   previous   certificate   of   title  covering  the  same  land  in  the  name  of  another  person,  the   court   ruled   that   the   existence   of   the   prior   title   ipso   facto   nullified  the  reconstitution  proceedings     SOURCES   OF   RECONSTITUTION   ORIGINAL   CERTIFICATES   OF   TITLE   § The  owner’s  duplicate  certificate  of  title   § The   co-­‐owner’s,   mortgagee’s,   or   lessee’s   duplicate   certificate   of  title   § A  certified  copy  of  the  certificate  of  title,  previously  issued  by   the  RD  or  by  a  legal  custodian  thereof   § An  authenticated  copy  of  the  decree  of  registration  or  patent,   as   the   case   may   be,   pursuant   to   which   the   original   certificate   of  title  was  issued   § A   document,   on   file   with   the   RD,   by   which   the   property,   the   description  of  which  is  given  in  said  document,  is  mortgaged,   leased,   or   encumbered,   or   an   authenticated   copy   of   said   document  showing  that  its  original  has  been  registered   § Any   other   document   which,   in   the   judgment   of   the   court   is   sufficient   and   proper   basis   for   reconstituting   the   lost   or   destroyed  certificate  of  title     FOR  TRANSFER  CERTIFICATE  OF  TITLE   § The  owner’s  duplicate  certificate  of  title   § The   co-­‐owner’s,   mortgagee’s,   or   lessee’s   duplicate   certificate   of  title   § A  certified  copy  of  the  certificate  of  title,  previously  issued  by   the  RD  or  by  a  legal  custodian  thereof   § The   deed   of   transfer   or   other   document,   on   file   in   the   RD,   containing   a   description   of   the   property,   or   an   authenticated   copy   thereof,   showing   that   its   original   had   been   registered,   and   pursuant   to   which   the   lost   or   destroyed   transfer   certificate  of  title  was  issued   § A   document,   on   file   with   the   RD,   by   which   the   property,   the   description  of  which  is  given  in  said  document,  is  mortgaged,   §

31  

32  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

§

§ § §

§ §

§ § § §

leased,   or   encumbered,   or   an   authenticated   copy   of   said   document  showing  that  its  original  has  been  registered   Any   other   document   which,   in   the   judgment   of   the   court   is     sufficient   and   proper   basis   for   reconstituting   the   lost   or   destroyed  certificate  of  title     FOR  LIENS  AND  ENCUMBRANCES   Annotations  or  memoranda  appearing  on  the  owner’s  co-­‐owner’s     mortgagee’s  or  lessee’s  duplicate   Registered   documents   on   file   in   the   RD,   or   authenticated   copies   thereof  showing  that  the  originals  thereof  had  been  registered   Any   other   document   which,   in   the   judgment   of   the   court   is     sufficient   and   proper   basis   for   reconstituting   the   liens   or   encumbrances   affecting   the   property   covered   by   the   lost   or   destroyed  certificate  of  title     MEANING  OF  “ANY  OTHER  DOCUMENT”     § As   per   LRC   circular   #35,   the   signed   duplicate   copy   of   the   petition   to   be   forwarded   to   this   Commission   shall   be   accompanied   by   the   following:     o A   duly   prepared   plan   of   said   parcel   of   land   in   tracing   cloth,   with   2   print   copies   thereof,   prepared   by   the   government   agency   which   issued   the   certified   technical   description,   or   by   a   duly   licensed   Geodetic   Engineer   who   shall   certify   thereon  that  he  prepared  the  same  on  the  basis  of   a   duly   certified   technical   description.   Where   the   plan   as   submitted   is   certified   by   the   government   agency,  which  issued  the  same,  it  is  sufficient  that   the   technical   description   be   prepared   by   a   duly   licensed   Geodetic   Engineer   on   the   basis   of   said   certified  plan.   o The  original,  2  duplicate  copies,  and  a  Xerox  copy   of   the   original   of   the   technical   description   of   the   parcel   of   land   covered   by   the   certificate   of   title,   duly   certified   by   the   authorized   officer   of   the   Bureau   of   Lands   or   the   LRC   who   issued   the   technical  description   o A   signed   copy   of   the   certification   of   the   RD   concerned   that   the   original   of   the   certificate   on   title   on   file   with   the   RD   was   either   lost   or   destroyed,   indicating   the   name   of   the   registered   owner,   if   known   from   the   other   records   in   file   in   said  office.     WHERE  TO  FILE  PETITION;  CONTENTS     Shall   be   filed   by   the   registered   owner,   his   assigns,   or   any   person   having   interest   in   the   property   with   the   proper   RTC   where   the   same  is  based  on  sources  enumerated  earlier   Contents  shall  be  as  followed—   o That   the   owner’s   duplicate   had   been   lost   or   destroyed   o That   no   co-­‐owner’s,   mortgagee’s,   lessee’s,   duplicate   had   been   issued   or,   if   any   had   been   issued,  the  same  had  been  lost  or  destroyed   o The  location,  area  and  boundaries  of  the  property   o The   nature   and   description   of   the   buildings   or   improvements,   if   any,   which   don’t   belong   to   the   owner  of  the  land,  and  the  names  and  addresses  of   the  owners  of  such  buildings  or  improvements     o The   names   and   addresses   of   the   occupants   or   persons   in   possession   of   the   property,   of   the   owners   of   the   adjoining   properties   and   all   persons   who  may  have  any  interest  in  the  property   o A  detailed  description  of  the  encumbrances  if  any,   affecting  the  property   o A   statement   that   no   deeds   or   other   instruments   affecting   the   property   have   been   presented   for   registration,   or   if   there   be   any,   the   registration   thereof  hasn’t  been  accomplished,  as  yet     REQUIREMENTS   OF   NOTICE   BY   PUBLICATION,   POSTING   AND   MAILING     To   be   published   twice,   at   the   expense   of   the   petitioner,   in   successive  issues  of  the  Official  Gazette   To  be  posted  on  the  main  entrance  of  the  provincial  building  and   of   the   municipal   building   of   the   municipality   or   city   in   which   the   land  is  situated   Copy   of   the   notice   to   be   sent   by   registered   mail   or   otherwise,   at   the   expense   of   the   petitioner,   to   every   person   named   therein   whose  address  is  known,  within  30  days  prior  the  date  of  hearing   The   jurisdiction   of   the   court   is   hedged   in   the   forewalls   of   the   petition   and   the   published   notice   of   hearing,   which   define   the   subject  matter  of  the  petition.          

 

ACTION   OF   MANDATORY  

THE  

COURT;  

RECONSTITUTION;  

WHEN  

If  the  court,  after  hearing,  finds  that  the  documents  presented,  as   supported   by   parole   evidence   or   otherwise,   are   sufficient,   and   proper   to   warrant   the   reconstitution   of   the   lost   or   destroyed   certificate  of  title,  xxx  an  order  for  reconstitution  shall  be  issued   The   clerk   of   court   shall   forward   the   order   to   the   RD   and   all   documents  which,  pursuant  to  said  order,  are  to  be  used  as  basis   of  the  reconstitution   If   the   court   finds   that   there   is   no   sufficient   evidence   or   basis   to   justify   the   reconstitution,   the   petition   will   be   dismissed   without   prejudice   to   the   right   of   the   parties   entitled   thereto   to   file   an   application  for  confirmation  of  title   THE   REGISTER   OF   DEEDS   IS   NOT   A   PROPER   PARTY   TO   FILE   THE   PETITION   WRIT   OF   POSSESSION   NOT   PROPER   IN   A   RECONSTITUTION   PROCEEDING   COURTS   ARE   CAUTIONED   IN   GRANTING  PETITIONS  FOR  RECONSTITUTION   ADMINISTRATIVE  RECONSTITUTION     § Can  only  be  availed  of  in  case  of  substantial  loss  or  destruction   of   land   titles   due   to   flood,   fire   or   other   force   majeure   as   determined  by  the  Administrator   § Provided  that  the  titles  lost  or  damages  should  at  least  be  10%   of  the  total  number  in  the  possession  of  the  office  of  the  RD   § That  in  no  case  that  the  number  of  certificates  of  titles  lost  or   damaged  be  less  than  500   § Notice   of   all   hearings   of   the   petition   for   judicial   reconstitution   shall  be  furnished  the  Register  of  Deeds  of  the  place  where  the   land   is   situated   and   to   the   Administrator   of   the   Land   Registration  Authority   § No   judgment   ordering   the   reconstitution   shall   be   final   until   the   lapse   of   15   days   from   receipt   by   the   RD   and   by   the   Administrator   of   the   LRA   of   the   notice   of   order   or   judgment   without  any  appeal  having  been  filed  by  any  such  officials                                                                                                              

32  

33  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

NATURAL  RESOURCES  AND  ENVIRONMENTAL  LAW   ATTY.  ROWELL  ILAGAN   2014-­‐2015     I.  ENVIRONMENTAL  DEGRADATION     It   results   from   the   open   access   status   of   common   goods   like   air,   water,     forests,  and  other  natural  resources.     The  mentality  of  “I  will  get  my  share  without  having  to  pay  for  it;  thus,  in   this   free-­‐for-­‐all,   environmental   degradation   and   natural   resources   depletion  is  inevitable.     NATURAL   RESOURCE  is   any   naturally   occurring   substance   or   feature   of   the  environment  (physical  or  biological)  that,  while  not  created  by  human   effort,  can  be  exploited  by  humans  to  satisfy  their  needs  or  wants.  Many  of   such  resources  are  our  life  line  such  as  water,  air  and  solar  radiation,  which   are  essential  elements  for  the  existence  of  all  the  flora  and  fauna     II.  LEGAL  FRAMEWORK     1) Article  1  –  National  Territory     The   national   territory   comprises   the   Philippine   archipelago,   with   all   the   islands   and   waters   embraced   therein,   and   all   other   territories   over   which   the   Philippines  has  sovereignty  or  jurisdiction,  consisting  of  its  terrestrial,  fluvial   and   aerial   domains,   including   its   territorial   sea,   the   seabed,   the   subsoil,   the   insular   shelves,   and   other   submarine   areas.   The   waters   around,   between,   and   connecting   the   islands   of   the   archipelago,   regardless   of   their   breadth   and   dimensions,  form  part  of  the  internal  waters  of  the  Philippines.     CASE:  MAGALLONA  VS  EXECUTIVE  SECRETARY  ERMITA     In   March   2009,   Republic   Act   9522,   an   act   defining   the   archipelagic   baselines   of   the   Philippines   was   enacted   –   the   law   is   also   known   as   the   Baselines   Law.   This   law   was   meant   to   comply   with   the   terms   of   the   third   United  Nations  Convention  on  the  Law  of  the  Sea  (UNCLOS  III),  ratified  by   the   Philippines   in   February   1984.   Professor   Merlin   Magallona   et   al   questioned  the  validity  of  RA  9522  as  they  contend,  among  others,  that  the   law   decreased   the   national   territory   of   the   Philippines   hence   the   law   is   unconstitutional.     RULING:   No.   The   Supreme   Court   emphasized   that   RA   9522,   or   UNCLOS,   itself   is   not   a   means   to   acquire,   or   lose,   territory.   The   treaty   and   the   baseline   law   have   nothing   to   do   with   the   acquisition,   enlargement,   or   diminution   of   the   Philippine   territory.   What   controls   when   it   comes   to   acquisition   or   loss   of   territory   is   the   international   law   principle   on   occupation,   accretion,   cession   and   prescription   and   NOT   the   execution   of  multilateral  treaties  on  the  regulations  of  sea-­‐use  rights  or  enacting   statutes   to   comply   with   the   treaty’s   terms   to   delimit   maritime   zones   and  continental  shelves.     The   law   did   not   decrease   the   demarcation   of   our   territory.   In   fact   it   increased   it.   Under   the   old   law   amended   by   RA   9522   (RA   3046),   we   adhered  with  the  rectangular  lines  enclosing  the  Philippines.     2) Article  2  –  Declaration  of  State  Principles  and  Policies   a. Section   15  -­‐  The  State  shall  protect  and  promote  the   right   to   health   of   the   people   and   instill   health   consciousness  among  them.     CASE:  HENARES  VS.  LTFRB  AND  DOTC     The  petitioners  challenged  the  Supreme  Court  to  issue  a  writ  of  mandamus   to  LTFRB  and  DOTC  to  require  the  public  utility  vehicles  (PUVs)  to  use  the   compressed  natural  gas  (CNG)  as  an  alternative  fuel  instead  of  gasoline  and   diesel.  The  petitioners  proposed  the  use  of  CNG  to  counter  the  effects.  CNG   is  known  to  be  the  cleanest  fossil  fuel  and  90  percent  less  CO  emissions  and   cuts  hydrocarbon  emission  by  half.  The  petitioners  assert  their  right  to   clean  air  as  stipulated  in  Sec.  4  of  R.  A.  8749  known  as  Philippine  Clean  Air   Act  of  1999  and  Sec.  16  Article  II  of  the  1987  Philippine  Constitution.     The   Solicitor   General,   in   his   comments   for   LTFRB   and   DOTC,   said   that   nothing   in   the   Philippine   Clean   Air   Act   prohibits   the   use   of   gasoline   and   diesel   by   motor   vehicle   owners,   and   more   sadly,   the   said   act   does   not   include  CNG  as  an  alternative  fuel.  Further,  the  Department  of  Environment   and   Natural   Resources   (DENR)   is   the   agency   tasked   to   set   the   emission   standards  for  fuel  use  and  tasked  to  develop  an  action  plan.     RULING:   The   case   is   an   inter-­‐generational   responsibility   and   for   inter-­‐ generational   justice.   The   petition   focuses   on   the   legal   right   of   the   petitioners   for   their   right   to   clean   air.   The   issue   concerned   is   not   only   important  to  the  petitioners  but  also  of  public  concern.       On   the   other   issue,   mandamus   cannot   be   issued   to   LTFRB   and   DOTC   because  it  not  within  the  mandate  of  the  agencies  to  impose  the  use  of   CNG.   Their   mandate   is   to   oversee   that   motor   vehicles   prepare   an   action   plan  and  implement  the  emission  standards  for  motor  vehicles.  The  DENR   is  the  agency  tasked  to  set  the  emission  standards,  and  that  the  legislature   should   first   provide   the   specific   statutory   remedy   to   the   complex   problems   bared   by   the   petitioners   before   any   judicial   recourse   by   mandamus   is   taken.     b. Section   16   -­‐  The  State  shall  protect  and  advance  the   right  of  the  people  to  a  balanced  and  healthful  ecology   in  accord  with  the  rhythm  and  harmony  of  nature.      

 

CASE:  MINORS  OPOSA  VS.  DENR  SECRETARY  FACTORAN     The   case   is   bears   upon   the   right   of   Filipinos   to   a   BALANCED   AND   HEALTHFUL   ECOLOGY,   which   the   petitioners   dramatically   associate   with  the  twin  concepts  of  “INTER-­‐GENERATIONAL   RESPONSIBILITY”   and  “INTER-­‐GENERATIONAL  JUSTICE”.   Plaintiffs   alleged   that   they   are   entitled   to   the   full   benefit;   use   and   enjoyment  of  the  natural  resource  treasure  that  is  the  country's  virgin   tropical   forests.   They   further   asseverate   that   they   represent   their   generation   as   well   as   generations   yet   unborn   and   asserted   that   continued   deforestation   have   caused   a   distortion   and   disturbance   of   the   ecological   balance   and   have   resulted   in   a   host   of   environmental   tragedies.       Plaintiffs   prayed   that   judgment   be   rendered   ordering   the   respondent,   his   agents,   representatives   and   other   persons   acting   in   his   behalf   to   cancel   all   existing   Timber   License   Agreement   (TLA)   in   the   country   and   to  cease  and  desist  from  receiving,  accepting,  processing,  renewing  or   approving  new  TLAs.       RULING:   The   complaint   focuses   on   one   fundamental   legal   right   -­‐-­‐   the   right   to   a   balanced   and   healthful   ecology,   which   is   incorporated   in   Section   16   Article   II   of   the   Constitution.   The   said   right   carries   with   it   the  duty  to  refrain  from  impairing  the  environment  and  implies,  among   many  other  things,  the  judicious  management  and  conservation  of  the   country's   forests.   Section   4   of   E.O.   192   expressly   mandates   the   DENR   to   be   the   primary   government   agency   responsible   for   the   governing   and   supervising   the   exploration,   utilization,   development   and   conservation   of   the   country's   natural   resources.   A  denial  or  violation   of   that   right   by   the   other   who   has   the   correlative   duty   or   obligation   to   respect   or   protect   or   respect   the   same   gives   rise   to   a   cause  of  action.  Petitioners  maintain  that  the  granting  of  the  TLA,   which   they   claim   was   done   with   grave   abuse   of   discretion,   violated   their   right   to   a   balance   and   healthful   ecology.  Hence,  the   full   protection   thereof   requires   that   no   further   TLAs   should   be   renewed  or  granted.     After  careful  examination  of  the  petitioners'  complaint,  the  Court  finds   it  to  be  adequate  enough  to  show,  prima  facie,  the  claimed  violation  of   their  rights.     c. Section   22   -­‐   The   State   recognizes   and   promotes   the   rights   of   indigenous   cultural   communities   within   the   framework  of  national  unity  and  development.     CASE:  CARINO  VS.  INSULAR  GOVERNMENT     The   applicant   and   plaintiff   in   error   is   an   Igorot   of   the   Province   of   Benguet,   where   the   land   lies.   For   more   than   fifty   years   before   the   treaty  of  Paris,  as  back  as  the  findings  go,  the  plaintiff  and  his  ancestors   had   held   the   land   as   owners.   The   Igorots   had   recognized   them   all   as   the  owners,  and  he  had  inherited  or  received  the  land  from  his  father   in  accordance  with  Igorot  custom.  The  Spanish  crown,  however,  issued   no  document,  to  them.  The  question  now  is  whether  the  plaintiff  owns   the  land.     RULING:   it   is   true   that   Spain,   in   its   earlier   decrees,   embodied   the   universal   feudal   theory   that   all   lands   were   held   from   the   Crown,   and   perhaps  the  general  attitude  of  conquering  nations  toward  people  not   recognized  as  entitled  to  the  treatment  accorded  to  those  in  the  same   zone   of   civilization   with   themselves.   But   it   does   not   follow   that,   as   against  the  inhabitants  of  the  Philippines,  the  United  States  asserts  that   Spain  had  such  power.  It  might,  perhaps,  be  proper  and  sufficient  to   say  that  when,  as  far  back  as  testimony  or  memory  goes,  the  land   has  been  held  by  individuals  under  a  claim  of  private  ownership,   it  will  be  presumed  to  have  been  held  in  the  same  way  before  the   Spanish  conquest,  and  never  to  have  been  public  land.     d. Section   25   -­‐   The  State  shall  ensure  the  autonomy  of   local  governments.     CASE:  SJS  VS.  ATIENZA     On  November  20,  2001,  the  Sangguniang  Panlungsod  of  Manila  enacted   Ordinance  No.  8027  and  Atienza  passed  it  the  following  day.  Ordinance   No.   8027   reclassified   the   area   described   therein   from   industrial   to   commercial   and   directed   the   owners   and   operators   of   businesses   disallowed   under   Section   1   to   cease   and   desist   from   operating   their   businesses   within   six   months   from   the   date   of   effectivity   of   the   ordinance.  These  were  the  Pandacan  oil  depots  of  Shell  and  Caltex.     But   the   city   of   Manila   and   the   DOE   entered   into   an   MOU,   which   only   scaled   down   the   property   covered   by   the   depots   and   did   not   stop   their   operations.   In   the   same   resolution,   the   Sanggunian   declared   that   the   MOU   was   effective   only   for   a   period   of   six   months   starting   July   25,   2002.  It  was  extended  to  2003.     Petitioners   filed   for   mandamus   in   SC   urging   the   city   to   implement   Ordinance  8027.  Respondent’s  defense  is  that  Ordinance  No.  8027  has   been   superseded   by   the   MOU   and   the   resolutions   and   that   the   MOU   was  more  of  a  guideline  to  8027.     RULING:   Mandamus   will   not   issue   to   enforce   a   right,   or   to   compel   compliance   with   a   duty,   which   is   questionable   or   over   which   a   substantial   doubt   exists.   Unless   the   right   to   the   relief   sought   is   unclouded,   mandamus   will   not   issue.   When   a   mandamus   proceeding   concerns   a   public   right   and   its   object   is   to   compel   a   public   duty,   the  

33  

34  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

people   who   are   interested   in   the   execution   of   the   laws   are   regarded   as   the   real   parties   in   interest   and   they   need   not   show   any   specific   interest.   Petitioners   are   citizens   of   manila   and   thus   have   a   direct   interest  in  the  ordinances.     On   the   other   hand,   the   Local   Government   Code   imposes   upon   respondent  the  duty,  as  city  mayor,  to  "enforce  all  laws  and  ordinances   relative   to   the   governance   of   the   city.   "One   of   these   is   Ordinance   No.   8027.   As   the   chief   executive   of   the   city,   he   has   the   duty   to   enforce   Ordinance   No.   8027   as   long   as   it   has   not   been   repealed   by   the   Sanggunian  or  annulled  by  the  courts.  He  has  no  other  choice.  It  is  his   ministerial  duty  to  do  so.     These  officers  cannot  refuse  to  perform  their  duty  on  the  ground  of  an   alleged  invalidity  of  the  statute  imposing  the  duty.  The  reason  for  this   is  obvious.  It  might  seriously  hinder  the  transaction  of  public  business   if   these   officers   were   to   be   permitted   in   all   cases   to   question   the   constitutionality   of   statutes   and   ordinances   imposing   duties   upon   them   and   which   have   not   judicially   been   declared   unconstitutional.   Officers  of  the  government  from  the  highest  to  the  lowest  are  creatures   of  the  law  and  are  bound  to  obey  it.     3) Article  3  –  Bill  of  Rights     CASE:  CHAVEZ  VS.  PEA     1.   The   157.84   hectares   of   reclaimed   lands   comprising   the   Freedom   Islands,   now   covered   by   certificates   of   title   in   the   name   of   PEA,   are   alienable   lands   of   the   public   domain.   PEA   may   lease   these   lands   to   private   corporations   but   may   not   sell   or   transfer   ownership   of   these   lands   to   private   corporations.   PEA   may   only   sell   these   lands   to   Philippine   citizens,   subject   to   the   ownership   limitations   in   the   1987   Constitution  and  existing  laws.     2.   The   592.15   hectares   of   submerged   areas   of   Manila   Bay   remain   inalienable   natural   resources   of   the   public   domain   until   classified   as   alienable   or   disposable   lands   open   to   disposition   and   declared   no   longer   needed   for   public   service.   The   government   can   make   such   classification   and   declaration   only   after   PEA   has   reclaimed   these   submerged   areas.   Only   then   can   these   lands   qualify   as   agricultural   lands   of   the   public   domain,   which   are   the   only   natural   resources   the   government  can  alienate.  In  their  present  state,  the  592.15  hectares  of   submerged  areas  are  inalienable  and  outside  the  commerce  of  man.     3.   Since   the   Amended   JVA   seeks   to   transfer   to   AMARI,   a   private   corporation,   ownership   of   77.34   hectares110   of   the   Freedom   Islands,   such  transfer  is  void  for  being  contrary  to  Section  3,  Article  XII  of  the   1987  Constitution  which  prohibits  private  corporations  from  acquiring   any  kind  of  alienable  land  of  the  public  domain.     4.  Since  the  Amended  JVA  also  seeks  to  transfer  to  AMARI  ownership  of   290.156   hectares111   of   still   submerged   areas   of   Manila   Bay,   such   transfer  is  void  for  being  contrary  to  Section  2,  Article  XII  of  the  1987   Constitution  which  prohibits  the  alienation  of  natural  resources  other   than  agricultural  lands  of  the  public  domain.     PEA   may   reclaim   these   submerged   areas.   Thereafter,   the   government   can  classify  the  reclaimed  lands  as  alienable  or  disposable,  and  further   declare  them  no  longer  needed  for  public  service.  Still,  the  transfer  of   such  reclaimed  alienable  lands  of  the  public  domain  to  AMARI  will  be   void   in   view   of   Section   3,   Article   XII   of   the   1987   Constitution,   which   prohibits   private   corporations   from   acquiring   any   kind   of   alienable   land  of  the  public  domain.     4) Article  X  –  Local  Government   a. Section   4   -­‐   The   President   of   the   Philippines   shall   exercise   general   supervision   over   local   governments.   Provinces   with   respect   to   component   cities   and   municipalities,   and   cities   and   municipalities   with   respect   to   component   barangays,   shall   ensure   that   the   acts   of   their   component   units   are   within   the   scope   of   their  prescribed  powers  and  functions.     CASE:  TANO  VS.  SOCRATES     The   Sangguniang   Panlungsod   of   Puerto   Princessa   enacted   ordinance   no.  15-­‐92  banning  the  shipment  of  live  fish  and  lobster  outside  Puerto   Princessa   City   for   a   period   of   5   years.   In   the   same   light,   the   Sangguniang   Panlalawigan   of   Palawan   also   enacted   a   resolution   that   prohibits   the   catching,   gathering,   buying,   selling   and   possessing   and   shipment  of  live  marine  coral  dwelling  aquatic  organisms  for  a  period   of  5  years  within  the  Palawan  waters.  The  petitioners  Airline  Shippers   Association  of  Palawan  together  with  marine  merchants  were  charged   for   violating   the   above   ordinance   and   resolution   by   the   city   and   provincial  governments.  The  petitioners  now  allege  that  they  have  the   preferential   rights   as   marginal   fishermen   granted   with   privileges   provided   in   Section   149   of   the   Local   Government   Code,   invoking   the   invalidity   of   the   above-­‐stated   enactments   as   violative   of   their   preferential  rights.     RULING:  No,  the  enacted  resolution  and  ordinance  of  the  LGU  were  not   violative   of   their   preferential   rights.   The   enactment   of   these   laws   was   a   valid   exercise   of   the   police   power   of   the   LGU   to   protect   public   interests   and   the   public   right   to   a   balanced   and   healthier   ecology.   The   rights   and   privileges   invoked   by   the   petitioners   are   not   absolute.   The   general   welfare   clause   of   the   local   government   code   mandates  for  the  liberal  interpretation  in  giving  the  LGUs  more  power   to   accelerate   economic   development   and   to   upgrade   the   life   of   the  

 

people  in  the  community.  The  LGUs  are  endowed  with  the  power  to   enact   fishery   laws   in   its   municipal   waters,   which   necessarily   includes  the  enactment  of  ordinances  in  order  to  effectively  carry   out  the  enforcement  of  fishery  laws  in  their  local  community.         b. Section   15   -­‐   There   shall   be   created   autonomous   regions   in   Muslim   Mindanao   and   in   the   Cordilleras   consisting   of   provinces,   cities,   municipalities,   and   geographical   areas   sharing   common   and   distinctive   historical   and   cultural   heritage,   economic   and   social   structures,   and   other   relevant   characteristics   within   the   framework   of   this   Constitution   and   the   national   sovereignty   as   well   as   territorial   integrity   of   the   Republic  of  the  Philippines.     CASE:  CHIONGBIAN  VS.  ORBOS     • Congress   passed   the   ORGANIC   ACT   FOR   ARMM,   calling   for   a   plebiscite  in  Mindanao.   • Only   4   provinces   voted   for   the   creation   of   ARMM   (LanaoSur,   Maguindanao,  Sulu,  Tawi2)   • The   other   provinces   who   did   not   vote   for   ARMM   shall   remain   in   the   existing   administrative   regions,   provided   that   the   PRESIDENT   may   by   ADMINISTRATIVE   DETERMINATION,   MERGE  THE  EXISTING  REGIONS.     • So,   President   Cory   issued   EO   429,   which   reorganized   those   regions  who  did  not  vote  for  ARMM.     • Petitioners   are   Congressmen   who   opposed   the   issuance   of   EO   429.   They   claim   that   President   Cory   had   no   authority   to   restructure   new   administrative   regions.   They   insist   that   the   provinces  should  remain  as  they  are.       RULING:  While  the  power  to  merge  regions  is  not  expressly  provided   for   in   the   Constitution,   it   is   a   power   traditionally   lodged   with   the   President,   in   view   of   the   POWER   OF   GENERAL   SUPERVISION   OVER   LOCAL  GOVERNMENTS.  Thus  there  is  no  abdication  by  Congress  of  its   legislative   powers   in   conferring   on   the   President   the   POWER   TO   MERGE  ADMINISTRATIVE  REGIONS.       As  to  the  question  of  STANDARD,  a  legislative  standard  NEED  NOT  BE   EXPRESSED.  IT  MAY  SIMPLY  BE  GATHERED  OR  IMPLIED.  Nor  need  it   be   found   in   the   law   challenged   because   it   may   be   EMBODIED   IN   OTHER   STATUTES   ON   THE   SAME   SUBJECT   as   that   of   the   challenged   legislation.       With   respect   to   the   power   to   merge   existing   administrative   regions,   the  STANDARD  IS  TO  BE  FOUND  IN  THE  SAME  POLICY  underlying  the   grant  o  the  PRESIDENT  in  RA5434,  THE  POWER  TO  REORGANIZE  THE   EXECUTIVE  DEPARTMENT.  Under  said  law,  the  standard  is  “to  promote   simplicity,   economy   and   efficiency   in   the   government,   to   enable   it   to   pursue   programs   consistent   with   national   goals   for   acceleration   socio-­‐ economic   development   and   to   improve   the   service   in   the   transaction   of   public  business.”         Since   the   original   11   administrative   regions   were   established   with   this   same   law/   policy,   it   is   but   logical   to   suppose   that   in   authorizing   the   President   to   merge   by   administrative   determination,   the   existing   regions   (following   the   rejection   of   the   ARMM   by   some   regions),   the   purpose   of   Congress   in   enacting   the   Organic   Act   of   ARMM   was   to   reconstitute   the   original   basis   for   the   organization   of   administrative   regions.       5) Article  XII  –  National  Economy   a. Section   1   -­‐   The  goals  of  the  national  economy  are  a   more   equitable   distribution   of   opportunities,   income,   and   wealth;   a   sustained   increase   in   the   amount   of   goods   and   services   produced   by   the   nation   for   the   benefit   of   the   people;   and   an   expanding   productivity   as   the   key   to   raising   the   quality   of   life   for   all,   especially  the  underprivileged.     The   State   shall   promote   industrialization   and   full   employment  based  on  sound  agricultural  development   and   agrarian   reform,   through   industries   that   make   full   of   efficient   use   of   human   and   natural   resources,   and   which   are   competitive   in   both   domestic   and   foreign   markets.   However,   the   State   shall   protect   Filipino  enterprises  against  unfair  foreign  competition   and  trade  practices.     In  the  pursuit  of  these  goals,  all  sectors  of  the  economy   and   all   region   s   of   the   country   shall   be   given   optimum   opportunity   to   develop.   Private   enterprises,   including   corporations,   cooperatives,   and   similar   collective   organizations,   shall   be   encouraged   to   broaden   the   base  of  their  ownership.     CASE:  MANILA  PRINCE  HOTEL  VS.  GSIS     Pursuant  to  the  privatization  program  of  the  government,  GSIS  decided   to   sell   30-­‐51%   of   the   ManilaHotel  Corporation.   Two   bidders   participated,  MPH  and  Malaysian  Firm  Renong  Berhad.  MPH’s  bid  was   at   P41.58/per   share   while   RB’s   bid   was   at   P44.00/share.   RB   was   the   highest  bidder  hence  it  was  logically  considered  as  the  winning  bidder   but  is  yet  to  be  declared  so.  Pending  declaration,  MPH  matches  RB’s  bid   and   invoked   the   Filipino   First   policy   enshrined   under   par.   2,   Sec.   10,  

34  

35  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

Ø

Ø

Art.  12  of  the  1987  Constitution**,  but  GSIS  refused  to  accept.  In  turn   MPH  filed  a  TRO  to  avoid  the  perfection/consummation  of  the  sale  to   RB.   RB   then   assailed   the   TRO   issued   in   favor   of   MPH   arguing   among   others  that:   1. Par.   2,   Sec.   10,   Art.   12   of   the   1987   Constitution   needs   an   implementing   law   because   it   is   merely   a   statement   of  principle  and  policy  (not  self-­‐executing);   2. Even  if  said  passage  is  self-­‐executing,  Manila  Hotel  does   not  fall  under  national  patrimony.     RULING:   Manila  Hotel  falls   under   national   patrimony.   Patrimony   in   its   plain  and  ordinary  meaning  pertains  to  heritage.  When  the  Constitution   speaks  of  national  patrimony,  it  refers  not  only  to  the  natural  resources   of   the   Philippines,   as   the   Constitution   could   have   very   well   used   the   term  natural  resources,   but   also   to   the  cultural  heritage  of   the   Filipinos.   It  also  refers  to  our  intelligence  in  arts,  sciences  and  letters.  Therefore,   we   should   develop   not   only   our   lands,   forests,   mines   and   other   natural   resources  but  also  the  mental  ability  or  faculty  of  our  people.  Note  that,   for  more  than  8  decades  (9  now)  Manila  Hotel  has  bore  mute  witness   to  the  triumphs  and  failures,  loves  and  frustrations  of  the  Filipinos;  its   existence   is   impressed   with   public   interest;   its   own   historicity   associated   with   our   struggle   for   sovereignty,   independence   and   nationhood.     Herein  resolved  as  well  is  the  term  Qualified  Filipinos  which  not  only   pertains   to   individuals   but   to   corporations   as   well   and   other   juridical   entities/personalities.  The  term  “qualified  Filipinos”  simply  means  that   preference   shall   be   given   to   those   citizens   who   can   make   a   viable   contribution  to  the  common  good,  because  of  credible  competence  and   efficiency.   It   certainly   does   NOT   mandate   the   pampering   and   preferential   treatment   to   Filipino   citizens   or   organizations   that   are   incompetent   or   inefficient,   since   such   an   indiscriminate   preference   would  be  counter  productive  and  inimical  to  the  common  good.     In  the  granting  of  economic  rights,  privileges,  and  concessions,  when  a   choice  has  to  be  made  between  a  “qualified  foreigner”  and  a  “qualified   Filipino,”  the  latter  shall  be  chosen  over  the  former.”       b. Section  2       CASE:  ARANDA  VS.  REPUBLIC     RULING:     Under   the   Regalian   doctrine   which   is   embodied   in   Section   2,   Article   XII   of   the   1987   Constitution,   all   lands   of   the   public   domain   belong   to   the   State,   which   is   the   source   of   any   asserted   right   to   ownership  of  land.  All  lands  not  appearing  to  be  clearly  within  private   ownership  are  presumed  to  belong  to  the  State.    Unless  public  land  is   shown   to   have   been   reclassified   or   alienated   to  a   private   person   by   the   State,   it   remains   part   of   the   inalienable   public   domain.   To   overcome   this   presumption,   incontrovertible   evidence   must   be   established   that   the  land  subject  of  the  application  is  alienable  or  disposable.     To  prove  that  the  land  subject  of  an  application  for  registration  is   alienable,   an   applicant   must   establish   the   existence   of   a   positive   act   of   the   government   such   as   a   presidential   proclamation   or   an   executive  order;  an  administrative  action;  investigation  reports  of   Bureau   of   Lands   investigators;   and   a   legislative   act   or   a   statute.   The  applicant  may  also  secure  a  certification  from  the  Government  that   the  lands  applied  for  are  alienable  and  disposable.     c. Section  3  –  Cruz  vs.  NCIP   d. Section  4  –  Province  of  Rizal  vs.  Executive  Secretary   e. Section  5  –  Alcantara  vs.  Com.  On  Settlement  of  Land   f. Section  7  –  Cheesman  vs.  IAC       6) Article  XIII  –  Social  Justice  and  Human  Rights   a. Section  6  –  Gavino  Corpuz  vs.  Sps.  Gorospe         II.   INSTITUTIONAL   FRAMEWORK   FOR   ENVIRONMENT   AND   NATURAL  RESOURCES     EXECUTIVE  BRANCH     The   national   government   operates   through   more   than   twenty   executive   departments   and   specialized   agencies   to   deliver   basic   services   and   implement   national   policies,   programs,   and   projects,   including  agencies  responsible  for  environment  and  natural  resources,   public   works,   transportation   and   communication,   trade   and   industry,   economic  and  development  planning,  etc.     The  lead  executive  agency  is  the  DENR.  It  is  primarily  responsible  for   the   conservation,   management,   development,   and   proper   use   of   the   country’s   environment   and   natural   resources,   specifically   forest   and   grazing   lands,   mineral   resources,   and   lands   of   the   public   domain,   as   well  as  licensing  and  regulation  of  natural  resources.     CONGRESS  AND  LOCAL  LEGISLATURE     CASE:  MMDA  VS.  CONCERNED  CITIZENS  OF  MANILA  BAY     The   complaint   by   the   residents   alleged   that   the   water   quality   of   the   Manila   Bay   had   fallen   way   below   the   allowable   standards   set   by   law,   specifically   Presidential   Decree   No.   (PD)   1152   or   the   Philippine   Environment    Code  and  that  ALL  defendants  (public  officials)  must  be   jointly   and/or   solidarily   liable   and   collectively   ordered   to   clean   up   Manila   Bay   and   to   restore   its   water   quality   to   class   B,   waters   fit   for   swimming,  diving,  and  other  forms  of  contact  recreation.        

 

RULING:   The   Cleaning   or   Rehabilitation   of   Manila   Bay   can   be   compelled  by  Mandamus.    While  the  implementation  of  the  MMDA's       mandated   tasks   may   entail   a   decision-­‐making   process,   the   enforcement   of   the   law   or   the   very   act   of   doing   what   the   law   exacts   to   be   done   is   ministerial   in   nature   and   may   be   compelled   by   mandamus.     Under   what   other   judicial   discipline   describes   as       “continuing   mandamus,”   the   Court   may,   under   extraordinary   circumstances,  issue  directives  with  the  end  in  view  of  ensuring  that  its   decision   would   not   be   set   to   naught   by   administrative   inaction   or   indifference.     IV.   ENVIRONMENTAL   IMPACT   ASSESSMENT   AND   DEVELOPMENT   PLANNING     Ø PD  NO.  1151  –  PHILIPPINE  ENVIRONMENTAL  POLICY     POLICY   -­‐   It   is   hereby   declared   a   continuing   policy   of   the   State   (a)   to   create,   develop,   maintain   and   improve   conditions   under   which   man   and  nature  can  thrive  in  productive  and  enjoyable  harmony  with  each   other,   (b)   to   fulfill   the   social,   economic   and   other   requirements   of   present   and   future   generations   of   Filipinos,   and   (c)   to   insure   the   attainment   of   an   environmental   quality   that   is   conducive   to   a   life   of   dignity  and  well-­‐being.     ENVIRONMENTAL  IMPACT  STATEMENTS     Pursuant   to   the   above   enunciated   policies   and   goals,   all   agencies   and   instrumentalities   of   the   national   government,   including   government-­‐ owned   or   controlled   corporations,   as   well   as   private   corporations   firms   and   entities   SHALL   PREPARE,   FILE   AND   INCLUDE   IN   EVERY   ACTION,   PROJECT   OR   UNDERTAKING   WHICH   SIGNIFICANTLY   AFFECTS   THE   QUALITY   OF   THE   ENVIRONMENT   A   DETAIL   STATEMENT  ON:   § The   environmental   impact   of   the   proposed   action,   project   or  undertaking   § Any  adverse  environmental  effect  which  cannot  be  avoided   should  the  proposal  be  implemented;   § Alternative  to  the  proposed  action;   § A   determination   that   the   short-­‐term   uses   of   the   resources   of   the   environment   are   consistent   with   the   maintenance   and   enhancement   of   the   long-­‐term   productivity   of   the   same;  and   § Whenever  a  proposal  involve  the  use  of  depletable  or  non-­‐ renewable  resources,  a  finding  must  be  made  that  such  use   and  commitment  are  warranted.     Before   an   environmental   impact   statement   is   issued   by   a   lead   agency,  all   agencies   having   jurisdiction   over,   or   special   expertise   on,   the   subject   matter   involved   shall   comment   on   the   draft   environmental  impact  statement  made  by  the  lead  agency  within   thirty  (30)  days  from  receipt  of  the  same.     Ø DENR  Administrative  Order  No.  2003-­‐30     ENVIRONMENTAL   IMPACT   ASSESSMENT   –   It   is   the   process   that   involves   predicting   and   evaluating   the   likely   impacts   of   a   project   (including   cumulative   impacts)   on   the   environment   during   construction,   commissioning,   operation   and   abandonment.   It   also   includes   designing   appropriate   preventive,   mitigating   and   enhancement  measures  addressing  these  consequences  to  protect  the   environment  and  the  community’s  welfare”.    

       

  EIA  PROCESS  WITHIN  THE  PROJECT  CYCLE     PRESIDENTIAL  PROCLAMATION  OF  ENVIRONMENTALLY  CRITICAL   AREAS  AND  PROJECTS     The   President   of   the   Philippines   may,   on   his   own   initiative   or   upon   recommendation  of  the  National  Environmental  Protection  Council,  by   proclamation   declare   certain   projects,   undertakings   or   area   in   the   country   as   environmentally   critical.   No   person,   partnership   or   corporation   shall   undertake   or   operate   any   such   declared   environmentally   critical   project   or   area   without   first   securing   an   ENVIRONMENTAL   COMPLIANCE   CERTIFICATE   issued   by   the   President  or  his  duly  authorized  representative.  

35  

36  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

• • • •

Areas  with  critical  (steep)  slopes;  

•

Mangrove  areas  supporting  critical  ecological  functions   or  on  which  people  depend  for  livelihood;  and  

Areas  classified  as  prime  agricultural  lands;   Aquifer  recharge  areas;   Water   bodies   used   for   domestic   supply   or   support   of   fish  and  wildlife;  

• Coral  reefs  with  critical  ecological  functions.     Review  Process  for  projects  in  environmentally  critical  areas   Environmental   review   procedures   are   somewhat   different   for   proposed  projects  that  may  be  located  in  ECAs.  The  review  of  the   proposed   development   is   conducted   through   DENR’s   Regional   Offices  and  consists  of  the  following  steps.    

SUMMARY  FLOWCHART  OF  EIA  PROCESS      

 

  OVERVIEW  OF  THE  NATIONAL  EIS  SYSTEM     The   LGU   has   a   critical   role   in   ensuring   that   all   development   projects   in   their   jurisdiction   that   are   classified   as   ECPs   or   located   in   ECAs   are   subjected  to  the  EIA  review  process.  While  not  all  projects  may  require  a   detailed   EIA,   all   proposed   development   activities   should   be   screened   to   decide   which   projects   need   a   detailed   evaluation   of   environmental   impacts.     ENVIRONMENTALLY  CRITICAL  PROJECTS.  

•

Heavy   Industries:   including   non-­‐ferrous   metal   industries,   iron   and   steel   mills,   smelting   plants,   and   petroleum   and   petrochemical   industries,   including   oil   and  gas;  

•

Resource  Extractive   Industries:  including  major  mining   and   quarrying   projects,   forestry   projects   (logging,   major  wood  processing,  introduction  of  exotic  animals   in   public   or   private   forests,   forest   occupancy,   extraction  of  mangrove  products,  grazing),  and  fishery   projects   (dikes   for/and   fishpond   development   projects);  

•

Infrastructure   Projects:   including   major   dams,   major   roads   and   bridges,   major   power   plants   (fossil-­‐fuelled,   nuclear,   coal-­‐fired,   hydroelectric,   geothermal),   and   major  reclamation  projects;  and  

•

Golf   Course   Projects:  golf   courses   and   golf   resorts   are   now  subject  to  EIS  requirements  

•

Other:   Many   other   types   of   coastal   projects   not   explicitly   listed   above   may,   at   the   discretion   of   DENR,   require  an  EIS  if  they  are  considered  ECPs.  Some  likely   examples   include   major   resorts   or   hotels,   airports,   ports,   shoreline   fortifications,   fish   processing   plants,   and  major  military  development.  

  ENVIRONMENTALLY  CRITICAL  AREAS.  

 

•

National  parks,  watershed  reserves,  wildlife  preserves,   and  sanctuaries  declared  by  law;  

• •

Areas  set  aside  as  potential  tourist  spots;  

•

Areas   of   unique   historic,   archaeological,   or   scientific   interest;  

•

Areas  traditionally  occupied  by  indigenous  people  and   cultural  communities;  

•

Areas   frequently   hit   by   natural   calamities   (geologic   hazards,  floods,  typhoons,  volcanic  activity,  etc.);  

Habitats   of   endangered   or   threatened   species   indigenous  to  the  Philippines;  

    CASE:  REPUBLIC  VS.  CITY  OF  DAVAO     On   August   11,   2000,   The   City   of   Davao   filed   an   application   for   a   Certificate  of  Non-­‐  Coverage  (CNC)  for  its  proposed  project,  the  Davao   City  Artica  Sports  Dome,  with  the  Environmental  Management  Bureau   (EMB),  Region  XI.  The  EMB  denied  the  application  after  finding  that  the   proposed  project  was  within  an  environmentally  critical  area  and  ruled   that   the   City   of   Davao   MUST   UNDERGO   THE   ENVIRONMENTAL   IMPACT   ASSESSMENT   PROCESS   TO   SECURE   AN   ENVIRONMENTAL   COMPLIANCE   CERTIFICATE,   before   it   can   proceed   with   the   construction  of  its  project.     RULING:  The  Artica  Sports  Dome  in  Langub  does  not  come  close  to  any   of   the   projects   or   areas   enumerated   above.   Neither   is   it   analogous   to   any  of  them.  It  is  clear,  therefore,  that  the  said  project  is  not  classified   as   environmentally   critical,   or   within   an   environmentally   critical   area.       Consequently,   the   DENR   has   no   choice   but   to   issue   the   Certificate   of   Non-­‐   Coverage.   It   becomes   its   ministerial   duty,   the   performance   of   which   can   be   compelled   by   writ   of   mandamus,   such  as  that  issued  by  the  trial  court  in  the  case  at  bar.               CASE:  BORACAY  FOUNDATION  INC.  VS  PROVINCE  OF  AKLAN     Claiming   that   tourist   arrivals   to   Boracay   would   reach   1   million   in   the   future,   respondent   Province   of   Aklan   planned   to   expand   the   port   facilities   at   Barangay   Caticlan,   Municipality   of   Malay.   Thus,   on   May   7,   2009,   the   Sangguniang   Panlalawigan   of   Aklan   Province   issued   a   resolution,  authorizing  Governor  Carlito  Marquez  to  file  an  application   with   respondent   Philippine   Reclamation   Authority   (PRA)   to   reclaim   the   2.64   hectares   of   foreshore   area   in   Caticlan.   In   the   same   year,   the   Province   deliberated   on   the   possible   expansion   from   its   original   proposed   reclamation   area   of   2.64   hectares   to   forty   (40)   hectares   in   order  to  maximize  the  utilization  of  its  resources.     After   PRA’s   approval,   on   April   27,   2010,   respondent   Department   of   Environment   and   Natural   Resources-­‐Environmental   Management   Bureau-­‐Region   VI   (DENR-­‐EMB   RVI)   issued   to   the   Province   Environmental   Compliance   Certificate-­‐R6-­‐1003-­‐096-­‐7100   (the   questioned  ECC)  for  Phase  1  of  the  Reclamation  Project  to  the  extent  of   2.64   hectares   to   be   done   along   the   Caticlan   side   beside   the   existing   jetty  port.     On   May   17,   2010,   the   Province   finally   entered   into   a   MOA   with   PRA   which  stated  that  the  land  use  development  of  the  reclamation  project   shall   be   for   commercial,   recreational   and   institutional   and   other   applicable   uses.   It   was   at   this   point   that   the   Province   deemed   it   necessary  to  conduct  a  series  of  public  consultation  meetings.     On   the   other   hand,   the   Sangguniang   Barangay   of   Caticlan,   the   Sangguniang   Bayan   of   the   Municipality   of   Malay   and   petitioner   Boracay  Foundation,  Inc.  (BFI),  an  organization  composed  of  some  160   businessmen   and   residents   in   Boracay,   expressed   their   strong   opposition   to   the   reclamation   project   on   environmental,   socio-­‐ economic  and  legal  grounds.  

36  

37  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

Despite   the   opposition,   the   Province   merely   noted   their   objections   and   issued   a   notice   to   the   contractor   on   December   1,   2010   to   commence   with   the   construction   of   the   project.   Thus,   on   June   1,   2011,   BFI   filed   with   the   Supreme   Court   the   instant   Petition   for   Environmental   Protection   Order/Issuance   of   the   Writ   of   Continuing  Mandamus.   Thereafter,   the   Court   issued   a   Temporary   Environmental   Protection   Order   (TEPO)   and   ordered   the   respondents   to   file   their   respective   comments  to  the  petition.     The  Petition  was  premised  on  the  following  grounds,  among  others:   a) The   Province   failed   to   obtain   the   favorable   endorsement  of  the  LGU  concerned;   b) The   Province   failed   to   conduct   the   required   consultation  procedures  as  required  by  the  Local   Government  Code  (LGC).     RULING:   The   Court   found   that   there   was   no   proper,   timely,   and   sufficient  public  consultation  for  the  project.     The   Local   Government   Code   (LGC)   establishes   the   duties   of   national   government   agencies   in   the   maintenance   of   ecological   balance   and   requires   them   to   secure   prior   public   consultations   and   approval   of   local   government   units.   In   Province   of   Rizal   v.   Executive   Secretary,   the   Court   emphasized   that,   under   the   Local   Government   Code,   two   requisites   must   be   met   before   a   national   project   that   affects   the   environmental   and   ecological   balance   of   local   communities   can   be   implemented:   (1)   prior   consultation   with   the   affected  local  communities,  and  (2)  prior  approval  of  the  project  by  the   appropriate   sanggunian.   The   absence   of   either   of   such   mandatory   requirements  will  render  the  project’s  implementation  as  illegal.     Here,  the  Court  classified  the  reclamation  project  as  a  national  project   since   it   affects   the   environmental   and   ecological   balance   of   local   communities.   In   one   ruling,   the   Court   noted   that   such   national   projects   mentioned   in   Section   27   of   the   LGC   include   those   that   may   cause   pollution   and   bring   about   climate   change,   among   others,   such   as   the   reclamation  project  in  this  case.     Also,  DENR  DAO  2003-­‐30  provides  that  project  proponents  should   “initiate   public   consultations   early   in   order   to   ensure   that   environmentally   relevant   concerns   of   stakeholders   are   taken   into   consideration   in   the   EIA   study   and   the   formulation   of   the   management  plan”.     Thus,   the   law   requires   the   Province,   being   the   delegate   of   the   PRA’s   power  to  reclaim  land  in  this  case,  to  conduct  prior  consultations  and   prior   approval.   However,   the   information   dissemination   conducted   months   after   the   ECC   had   already   been   issued   was   insufficient   to   comply  with  the  requirements  under  the  LGC.       Furthermore,   the  lack  of  prior  public  consultation  and  approval  is   not  corrected  by  the  subsequent  endorsement  of  the  reclamation   project   by   the   Sangguniang   Barangay   of   Caticlan   and   the   Sangguniang   Bayan   in   2012,   which   were   both   undoubtedly   achieved  at  the  urging  and  insistence  of  the  Province.     WHAT  IS  A  WRIT  OF  KALIKASAN?      It   is   a   remedy   available   to   a   natural   or   juridical   person,   entity   authorized   by   law,   people’s   organizations,   non-­‐governmental   organization,   or   any   public   interest   group   accredited   by   or   registered   with   any   government   agency,   on   behalf   of   persons   whose   constitutional   right   to   a   balanced   and   healthful   ecology   is   violated,   or   threatened   with   violation   by   an   unlawful   act   or   omission   of   a   public   official   or   employee,   or   private   individual   or   entity   without   involving   environmental   damage   of   such   magnitude   as   to   prejudice   the   life,   health  or  property  of  inhabitants  in  two  or  more  cities  or  provinces.     WHAT  IS  THE  BASIS  OF  THE  WRIT  OF  KALIKASAN?      It   rests   in   Article   II,   Section   16   on   the   Declaration   of   Principles   and   State   Policies   of   the   1987   Constitution,   which   states   that,   “The   State   shall   protect   and   advance   the   right   of   the   people   to   a   balanced   and   healthful  ecology  in  accord  with  the  rhythm  and  harmony  of  nature”.     WHAT  IS  THE  IMPORTANT  FEATURE  OF  THIS  WRIT?   The   magnitude   requirement   with   regards   to   the   destruction   or   imminent   destruction,   which   is   sought   to   be   prevented,   must   be   present.     WHAT  IS  A  WRIT  OF  CONTINUING  MANDAMUS?   It   is   writ   issued   by   a   court   in   an   environmental   case   directing   any   agency   or   instrumentality   of   the   government   or   officer   thereof   to   perform  an  act  or  series  of  acts  decreed  by  final  judgment,  which  shall   remain  effective  until  judgment  is  fully  satisfied.  One  who  is  personally   aggrieved  files  it.    

 

  V.  REVISED  FORESTRY  CODE  (PD  NO.  705)     POLICIES.    The  State  hereby  adopts  the  following  policies:   § The   multiple   uses   of   forest   lands   shall   be   oriented   to   the   development  and  progress  requirements  of  the  country,  the   advancement   of   science   and   technology,   and   the   public   welfare;   § Land   classification   and   survey   shall   be   systematized   and   hastened;   § The   establishment   of   wood-­‐processing   plants   shall   be   encouraged  and  rationalized;  and   § The   protection,   development   and   rehabilitation   of   forest   lands   shall   be   emphasized   so   as   to   ensure   their   continuity   in  productive  condition.     CRIMINAL  OFFENSES  AND  PENALTIES     SECTION   77.   Cutting,   Gathering   and/or   collecting   Timber,   or   Other  Forest  Products  Without  License.  –  Any  person  who  shall  cut,   gather,   collect,   removed   timber   or   other   forest   products   from   any   forest   land,   or   timber   from   alienable   or   disposable   public   land,   or   from   private   land,   without   any   authority,   or   possess   timber   or   other   forest   products  without  the  legal  documents  as  required  under  existing  forest   laws   and   regulations,   shall   be   punished   with   the   penalties   imposed   under  Articles  309  and  310  of  the  Revised  Penal  Code:  Provided,  That   in   the   case   of   partnerships,   associations,   or   corporations,   the   officers   who   ordered   the   cutting,   gathering,   collection   or   possession   shall   be   liable,   and   if   such   officers   are   aliens,   they   shall,   in   addition   to   the   penalty,   be   deported   without   further   proceedings   on   the   part   of   the   Commission  on  Immigration  and  Deportation.     The   court   shall   further   order   the   confiscation   in   favor   of   the   government   of   the   timber   or   any   forest   products   cut,   gathered,   collected,  removed,  or  possessed  as  well  as  the  machinery,  equipment,   implements   and   tools   illegally   used   in   the   area   where   the   timber   or   forest  products  are  found.     SECTION  78.  Unlawful  Occupation  or  Destruction  of  Forest  Lands   and   Grazing   Lands.   –   Any   person   who   enters   and   occupies   or   possesses,  or  makes  kaingin  for  his  own  private  use  or  for  others,  any   forest   land   or   grazing   land   without   authority   under   a   license   agreement,   lease,   license   or   permit,   or   in   any   manner   destroys   such   forest  land  or  grazing  land  or  part  thereof,  or  causes  any  damage  to  the   timber   stand   and   other   products   and   forest   growth   found   therein,   or   who   assists,   aids   or   abets   any   other   person   to   do   so,   or   sets   a   fire,   or   negligently  permits  a  fire  to  be  set  in  any  forest  land  or  grazing  land,  or   refuses   to   vacate   the   area   when   ordered   to   do   so,   pursuant   to   the   provisions   of   Section   53   hereof   shall,   upon   conviction,   be   fined   in   an   amount  of  not  less  than  five  hundred  pesos  (P500.00),  nor  more  than   twenty  thousand  pesos  (P20,000.00)  and  imprisoned  for  not  less  than   six  (6)  months  nor  more  than  two  (2)  years  for  each  such  offense,  and   be   liable   to   the   payment   to   ten   (10)   times   the   rental   fees   and   other   charges   which   would   have   accrued   has   the   occupational   and   use   of   the   land   been   authorized   under   a   license   agreement,   lease,   license   or   permit:   Provided,   That   in   the   case   of   an   offender   found   guilty   of   making   kaingin,   the   penalty   shall   be   imprisonment   for   not   less   than   two  (2)  nor  more  than  four  (4)  years  and  a  fine  equal  to  eight  (8)  times   the   regular   forest   charges   due   on   the   forest   products   destroyed,   without   prejudice   to   the   payment   of   the   full   cost   of   production   of   the   occupied  area  as  determined  by  the  Bureau:  Provided,  further,  That  the   maximum  of  the  penalty  prescribed  herein  shall  be  imposed  upon  the   offender   who   repeats   the   same   offense   and   who   commits   the   same   offense  and  double  the  maximum  of  the  penalty  upon  the  offender  who   commits  the  same  offense  for  the  third  time.     SECTION   79.   Pasturing   Livestock.   –   Imprisonment   for   not   less   than   six  (6)  months  nor  more  than  two  (2)  years  and  a  fine  equal  to  ten  (10)   times   the   regular   rentals   due,   in   addition   to   the   confiscation   of   such   livestock   and   all   improvement   introduced   in   the   area   in   favor   of   the   government,   shall   be   imposed   upon   any   person,   who   shall,   without   authority  under  a  lease  or  permit,  graze  or  cause  to  graze  livestock  in   forest   lands,   grazing   lands   and   alienable   and   disposable   lands   which  

37  

 

38  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

have   not   as   yet   been   disposed   of   in   accordance   with   the   Public   Land   Act;  Provided,  That  in  case  the  offender  is  a  corporation,  partnership  or   association,  the  officers  and  directors  thereof  shall  be  liable.     SECTION   80.   Illegal   Occupation   of   National   Parks   System   and   Recreation   Areas   and   Vandalism   –   Therein.   Any   person   who,   shall,   without   permit,   occupy   for   any   length   of   time   any   portion   of   the   national  parks  system  or  shall,  in  any  manner  cut,  destroy,  damage  or   remove   timber   or   any   species   of   vegetation   or   forest   cover   and   other   natural   resources   found   therein,   or   shall   mutilate,   deface   or   destroy   objects  of  natural  beauty  or  of  scenic  value  within  areas  in  the  national   parks  system,  shall  be  fined  not  less  than  five  hundred  (P500.00)  pesos   or   more   than   twenty   thousand   (P20,000.00)   pesos   exclusive   of   the   value   of   the   thing   damaged.   Provided,   That   if   the   area   requires   rehabilitation   or   restoration   as   determined   by   the   Director,   the   offender   shall   also   be   required   to   restore   or   compensate   or   the   restoration  of  the  damage:     CASE:  PEOPLE  OF  THE  PHILIPPINES  VS.  DATOR  AND  GENOL     RULING:  The  Court  shall  further  order  the  confiscation  in  favor  of  the   government   of   the   timber   or   any   forest   products   cut,   gathered,   collected,   removed,   or   possessed,   as   well   as   the   machinery,   equipment,   implements   and   tools   illegally   used   in   the   area   where   the   timber   or   forest  products  are  found.     Appellant  Telen  contends  that  he  secured  verbal  permission  from  Boy   Leonor,   Officer-­‐in-­‐Charge   of   the   DENR-­‐CENRO   in   Maasin,   Southern   Leyte   before   cutting   the   lumber,   and   that   the   latter   purportedly   assured   him   that   written   permit   was   not   anymore   necessary   before   cutting   soft   lumber,   such   as   the   Antipolo   and   Dita   trees   in   this   case,   from  a  private  track  of  land,  to  be  used  in  renovating  appellant’s  house,   provided  that  he  would  plant  trees  as  replacements  thereof,  which  he   already  did.  It  must  be  underscored  that  the  appellant  stands  charged   with  the  crime  of  violation  of  Section  68  of  Presidential  Decree  No.  705,   a   special   statutory   law,   and   which   crime   is   considered  mala   prohibita.  In   the   prosecution   for   crimes   that   are   considered  mala   prohibita,  the  only  inquiry  is  whether  or  not  the  law  has  been  violated.     The   motive   or   intention   underlying   the   act   of   the   appellant   is   immaterial   for   the   reason   that   his   mere   possession   of   the   confiscated   pieces   of   lumber   without   the   legal   documents   as   required   under   existing  forest  laws  and  regulations  gave  rise  to  his  criminal  liability.     In   any   case,   the   mere   allegation   of   the   appellant   regarding   the   verbal   permission   given   by   Boy   Leonor,   Officer   in   Charge   of   DENR-­‐CENRO,   Maasin,   Southern   Leyte,   is   not   sufficient   to   overturn   the   established   fact  that  he  had  no  legal  documents  to  support  valid  possession  of  the   confiscated  pieces  of  lumber.  It  does  not  appear  from  the  record  of  this   case   that   appellant   exerted   any   effort   during   the   trial   to   avail   of   the   testimony   of   Boy   Leonor   to   corroborate   his   allegation.  Absent   such   corroborative   evidence,   the   trial   court   did   not   commit   an   error   in   disregarding  the  bare  testimony  of  the  appellant  on  this  point,  which  is,   at  best,  self-­‐serving.     VI.  PHILIPPINE  MINING  ACT  OF  1995  (RA  NO.  7942)     The  Implementing  Rules  and  Regulations  (DENR  Administrative  Order   No.96-­‐40)   of   the   Philippine   Mining   Act   of   1995   provides   strict   adherence   to   the   principle   of   SUSTAINABLE   DEVELOPMENT.   This   strategy  mandates  that  the  needs  of  the  present  should  be  met  without   compromising   the   ability   of   the   future   generations   to   meet   their   own   needs,  with  the  view  of  improving  the  quality  of  life,  both  now  and  in   the   future.   Sustainable   development   provides   that   the   use   of   mineral   wealth   shall   be   pro-­‐people   and   pro-­‐environment   in   sustaining   wealth   creation  and  improve  quality  of  life.     AREAS  CLOSED  TO  MINING  APPLICATIONS:     •  Areas  covered  by  valid  and  existing  mining  rights  and  applications;     •   Old   growth   or   virgin   forests,   mossy   forests,   national   parks,   provincial/municipal  forests,  tree  parks,  greenbelts,  game  refuge,  bird   sanctuaries  and  areas  proclaimed  as  marine  reserve/marine  parks  and   sanctuaries  and  areas  proclaimed  as  marine  reserve/marine  parks  and   tourist  zones  as  defined  by  law  and  identified  initial  components  of  the   NIPAS,   and   such   areas   as   expressly   prohibited   thereunder,   as   well   as   under  DENR  Administrative  Order  No.  25,  s.  1992,  and  other  laws;       •   Areas   which   the   Secretary   may   exclude   based,   inter   alia,   or   proper   assessment   of   their   environmental   impacts   and   implications   on   sustainable   land   uses,   such   as   built-­‐up   areas   and   critical   watershed   with   appropriate   barangay/municipal/provincial   Sanggunian   ordinances   specifying   therein   the   location   and   specific   boundaries   of   the  concerned  area;  and       •  Areas  expressly  prohibited  by  law.     THE   FOLLOWING   AREAS   MAY   BE   OPENED   FOR   MINING   OPERATIONS,   THE   APPROVAL   OF   WHICH   ARE   SUBJECT   TO   THE   FOLLOWING  CONDITIONS:     •   Military   and   other   government   reservations,   upon   prior   written   consent  by  the  government  agency  having  jurisdiction  over  such  areas;       •   Areas   near   or   under   public   or   private   buildings,   cemeteries,   and   archaeological   and   historic   sites,   bridges,   highways,   waterways,   railroads,  reservoirs,  dams  and  other  infrastructure  projects,  public  or   private  works,  including  plantations    

 

  or  valuable  crops,  upon  written  consent  of  the  concerned  government   agency  or  private  entity,  subject  to  technical  evaluation  and  validation   by  the  MGB;       •   Areas   covered   by   FTAA   applications,   which   shall   be   opened,   for   quarry   resources   upon   written   consent   of   the   FTAA   applicants/contractors.   However,   mining   applications   for   sand   and   gravel  shall  require  no  such  consent;       •  DENR  Project  areas  upon  prior  consent  from  the  concerned  agency.     SAND  AND  GRAVEL  PERMITS  -­‐   are   issued   for   the   extraction,   removal   and   disposition   of   sand   and   gravel   and   other   loose   or   unconsolidated   materials.   Permits   with   areas   not   exceeding   5   hectares   are   issued   by   the   Provincial   Governor/City   Mayor   while   those   exceeding   5   hectares   but   not   more   than   20   hectares   are   issued   by   the   MGB   Regional   Director.   A   Sand   and   Gravel   Permit   has   a   term   of   5   years   and   renewable  for  like  terms.       QUARRY   RESOURCES   PERMITS   -­‐   In   accordance   with   the   Local   Government  Code  of  1991,  mining  permits  with  areas  not  more  than  5   hectares   have   been   devolved   to   the   Provincial   Governor   or   the   City   Mayor   for   approval   upon   recommendation   of   the   Provincial/City   Mining   Regulatory   Board.   These   include   the   Quarry   Permit,   Guano   Permit,  Gratuitous  Permit  and  Gemstone  Gathering  Permit.     SMALL-­‐SCALE   MINING   PERMITS   -­‐   In   consonance   with   the   Local   Government   Code   and   RA   No.   7076,   small-­‐scale   mining   permits   are   approved   and   issued   by   the   City   Mayor/Provincial   Governor,   upon   recommendation  of  the  Provincial/City  Mining  Regulatory  Board.     MINERAL   PROCESSING   PERMIT   –   a   permit   granting   the   right   to   process  minerals.  It  is  issued  by  the  DENR  Secretary  with  a  term  of  5   years  and  renewable  for  like  terms.     ORE   TRANSPORT   PERMIT   –   no   minerals,   mineral   products   and   by-­‐ products  shall  be  transported  unless  accompanied  by  an  Ore  Transport   Permit.  The  OTP  is  issued  by  the  MGB  Regional  Director  concerned.     CASE:  LA  BUGAL-­‐B’LAAN  TRIBAL  ASSOCIATION  VS.  RAMOS     RA   7942   (The   Philippine   Mining   Act)   took   effect   on   April   9,   1995.   Before  the  effectivity  of  RA  7942,  or  on  March  30,  1995,  the  President   signed   a   Financial   and   Technical   Assistance   Agreement   (FTAA)   with   WMCP,  a  corporation  organized  under  Philippine  laws,  covering  close   to   100,000   hectares   of   land   in   South   Cotabato,   Sultan   Kudarat,   Davao   del   Sur   and   North   Cotabato.   On   August   15,   1995,   the   Environment   Secretary   Victor   Ramos   issued   DENR   Administrative   Order   95-­‐23,   which   was   later   repealed   by   DENR   Administrative   Order   96-­‐40,   adopted  on  December  20,  1996.       Petitioners   prayed   that   RA   7942,   its   implementing   rules,   and   the   FTAA   between   the   government   and   WMCP   be   declared   unconstitutional   on   ground  that  they  allow  fully  foreign  owned  corporations  like  WMCP  to   exploit,   explore   and   develop   Philippine   mineral   resources   in   contravention   of   Article   XII   Section   2   paragraphs   2   and   4   of   the   Charter.       In   January   2001,   WMC   -­‐   a   publicly   listed   Australian   mining   and   exploration   company   -­‐   sold   its   whole   stake   in   WMCP   to   Sagittarius   Mines,   60%   of   which   is   owned   by   Filipinos   while   40%   of   which   is   owned  by  Indophil  Resources,  an  Australian  company.  DENR  approved   the   transfer   and   registration   of   the   FTAA   in   Sagittarius‘   name   but   Lepanto  Consolidated  assailed  the  same.  The  latter  case  is  still  pending   before  the  Court  of  Appeals.       EO   279,   issued   by   former   President   Aquino   on   July   25,   1987,   authorizes   the   DENR   to   accept,   consider   and   evaluate   proposals   from   foreign   owned   corporations   or   foreign   investors   for   contracts   or   agreements  involving  wither  technical  or  financial  assistance  for  large   scale  exploration,  development  and  utilization  of  minerals  which  upon   appropriate   recommendation   of   the   (DENR)   Secretary,   the   President   may   execute   with   the   foreign   proponent.   WMCP   likewise   contended   that   the   annulment   of   the   FTAA   would   violate   a   treaty   between   the   Philippines   and   Australia   which   provides   for   the   protection   of   Australian  investments.       ISSUES:     1. Whether   or   not   the   Philippine   Mining   Act   is   unconstitutional   for   allowing   fully   foreign-­‐owned   corporations   to   exploit   the   Philippine   mineral   resources.     2. Whether  or  not  the  FTAA  between  the  government  and   WMCP   is   a   ―service   contract‖   that   permits   fully   foreign   owned   companies   to   exploit   the   Philippine   mineral  resources.       RULING:   RA   7942   or   the   Philippine   Mining   Act   of   1995   is   unconstitutional   for   permitting   fully   foreign   owned   corporations   to   exploit  the  Philippine  natural  resources.       Article   XII   Section   2   of   the   1987   Constitution   retained   the   Regalian   Doctrine   which   states   that   ―All   lands   of   the   public   domain,   waters,   minerals,   coal,   petroleum,   and   other   minerals,   coal,   petroleum,   and   other   mineral   oils,   all   forces   of   potential   energy,   fisheries,   forests   or   timber,   wildlife,   flora   and   fauna,   and   other   natural   resources   are   owned   by   the   State.‖   The   same   section   also   states   that,   ―the  

38  

39  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

exploration  and  development  and  utilization  of  natural  resources  shall   be  under  the  full  control  and  supervision  of  the  State.       Conspicuously  absent  in  Section  2  is  the  provision  in  the  1935  and   1973   Constitution   authorizing   the   State   to   grant   licenses,   concessions,   or   leases   for   the   exploration,   exploitation,   development,  or  utilization  of  natural  resources.  By  such  omission,   the   utilization   of   inalienable   lands   of   the   public   domain   through   license,   concession   or   lease   is   no   longer   allowed   under   the   1987   Constitution.       Under   the   concession   system,   the   concessionaire   makes   a   direct   equity   investment  for  the  purpose  of  exploiting  a  particular  natural  resource   within   a   given   area.   The   concession   amounts   to   complete   control   by   the   concessionaire   over   the   country‘s   natural   resource,   for   it   is   given   exclusive   and   plenary   rights   to   exploit   a   particular   resource   at   the   point  of  extraction.       The   1987   Constitution,   moreover,   has   deleted   the   phrase   ―management  or  other  forms  of  assistance‖  in  the  1973  Charter.  The   present   Constitution   now   allows   only   ―technical   and   financial   assistance.   The   management   and   the   operation   of   the   mining   activities   by   foreign   contractors,   the   primary   feature   of   the   service   contracts   was   precisely   the   evil   the   drafters   of   the   1987   Constitution  sought  to  avoid.       The   constitutional   provision   allowing   the   President   to   enter   into   FTAAs   is   an   exception   to   the   rule   that   participation   in   the   nation‘s   natural  resources  is  reserved  exclusively  to  Filipinos.  Accordingly,  such   provision   must   be   construed   strictly   against   their   enjoyment   by   non-­‐ Filipinos.   Therefore,   RA   7942   is   invalid   insofar   as   the   said   act   authorizes  service  contracts.  Although  the  statute  employs  the  phrase   ―financial   and   technical   agreements‖   in   accordance   with   the   1987   Constitution,   its   pertinent   provisions   actually   treat   these   agreements   as   service   contracts   that   grant   beneficial   ownership   to   foreign   contractors  contrary  to  the  fundamental  law.       The   underlying   assumption   in   the   provisions   of   the   law   is   that   the   foreign  contractor  manages  the  mineral  resources  just  like  the  foreign   contractor   in   a   service   contract.   By   allowing   foreign   contractors   to   manage   or   operate   all   the   aspects   of   the   mining   operation,   RA   7942   has,  in  effect,  conveyed  beneficial  ownership  over  the  nation‘s  mineral   resources  to  these  contractors,  leaving  the  State  with  nothing  but  bare   title  thereto.       The   same   provisions,   whether   by   design   or   inadvertence,   permit   a   circumvention   of   the   constitutionally   ordained   60-­‐40%   capitalization   requirement   for   corporations   or   associations   engaged   in   the   exploitation,   development   and   utilization   of   Philippine   natural   resources.       When   parts   of   a   statute   are   so   mutually   dependent   and   connected   as   conditions,   considerations,   inducements   or   compensations   for   each   other   as   to   warrant   a   belief   that   the   legislature   intended   them   as   a   whole,   then   if   some   parts   are   unconstitutional,   all   provisions   that   are   thus  dependent,  conditional  or  connected,  must  fail  with  them.       Under   Article   XII   Section   2   of   the   1987   Charter,   foreign   owned   corporations   are   limited   only   to   merely   technical   or   financial   assistance   to   the   State   for   large-­‐scale   exploration,   development   and  utilization  of  minerals,  petroleum  and  other  mineral  oils.       VI.  PHILIPPINE  FISHERIES  CODE  OF  1998  (RA  NO.  8550)     The   State   shall   ensure   the   attainment   of   the   following   objectives   of   the   fishery  sector:       § Conservation,  protection  and  sustained  management  of  the   country's  fishery  and  aquatic  resources;     § Poverty   alleviation   and   the   provision   of   supplementary   livelihood  among  municipal  fisherfolk;     § Improvement   of   productivity   of   aquaculture   within   ecological  limits;     § Optimal  utilization  of  off-­‐shore  and  deep-­‐sea  resources;  and   § Upgrading  of  post-­‐harvest  technology.     SECTION  5.  USE  OF  PHILIPPINE  WATERS       The   use   and   exploitation   of   the   fishery   and   aquatic   resources   in   Philippine   waters   shall   be   reserved   exclusively   to   Filipinos:   Provided,   however,   That   research   and   survey   activities   may   be   allowed   under   strict   regulations,   for   purely   research,   scientific,   technological   and   educational  purposes  that  would  also  benefit  Filipino  citizens.     SECTION  18.  USERS  OF  MUNICIPAL  WATERS     All   fishery   related   activities   in   municipal   waters,   as   defined   in   this   Code,   shall   be   utilized   by   municipal   fisherfolk   and   their   cooperatives/organizations   who   are   listed   as   such   in   the   registry   of   municipal  fisherfolk.       The   municipal   or   city   government,   however,   may,   through   its   local   chief   executive   and   acting   pursuant   to   an   appropriate   ordinance,   authorize   or   permit   small   and   medium   commercial   fishing   vessels   to   operate   within   the   ten   point   one   (10.1)   to   fifteen   (15)   kilometer   area   from   the   shoreline   in   municipal   waters   as   defined   herein,   provided,   that  all  the  following  are  met:      

 

§ § § § §

No  commercial  fishing  in  municipal  waters  with  depth  less   than   seven   (7)   fathoms   as   certified   by   the   appropriate   agency;     Fishing   activities   utilizing   methods   and   gears   that   are   determined   to   be   consistent   with   national   policies   set   by   the  Department;     Prior   consultation,   through   public   hearing,   with   the   M/CFARMC  has  been  conducted;  and     The   applicant   vessel   as   well   as   the   ship   owner,   employer,   captain  and  crew  have  been  certified  by     The   appropriate   agency   as   not   having   violated   this   Code,   environmental  laws  and  related  laws.    

  In   no   case   shall   the   authorization   or   permit   mentioned   above   be   granted   for   fishing   in   bays   as   determined   by   the   Department   to   be   in   an   environmentally   critical   condition   and   during   closed   season   as   provided  for  in  Section  9  of  this  Code.     SECTION   26.   COMMERCIAL   FISHING   VESSEL   LICENSE   AND   OTHER   LICENSES.     The  municipal/city  government  shall  have  jurisdiction  over  municipal   waters   as   defined   in   this   Code.   The   municipal/city   government,   in   consultation  with  the  FARMC  shall  be  responsible  for  the  management,   conservation,   development,   protection,   utilization   and   disposition   of   all  fish  and  fishery/aquatic  resources  within  their  respective  municipal   waters.       The  municipal/city  government  may,  in  consultation  with  the  FARMC,   enact  appropriate  ordinances  for  this  purpose  and  in  accordance  with   the   National   Fisheries   Policy.   The   ordinances   enacted   by   the   municipality   and   component   city   shall   be   reviewed   pursuant   to   Republic   Act   No.   7160   by   the   Sanggunian   of   the   province,   which   has   jurisdiction  over  the  same.       The   LGUs   shall   also   enforce   all   fishery   laws,   rules   and   regulations   as   well  as  valid  fishery  ordinances  enacted  by  the  municipal/city  council.       The   management   of   contiguous   fishery   resources   such   as   bays   which   straddle  several  municipalities,  cities  or  provinces,  shall  be  done  in  an   integrated  manner,  and  shall  not  be  based  on  political  subdivisions  of   municipal   waters   in   order   to   facilitate   their   management   as   single   resource   systems.   The   LGUs,   which   share   or   border   such   resources   may   group   themselves   and   coordinate   with   each   other   to   achieve   the   objectives  of  integrated  fishery  resource  management.  The  Integrated   Fisheries  and  Aquatic  Resources  Management       Councils   (IFARMCs)   established   under   Section   76   of   this   Code   shall   serve   as   the   venues   for   close   collaboration   among   LGUs   in   the   management  of  contiguous  resources.     SECTION   45.   DISPOSITION   OF   THE   PUBLIC   LANDS   FOR   FISHERY   PURPOSES.     Public   lands   such   as   tidal   swamps,   mangroves,   marshes,   foreshore   lands   and   ponds   suitable   for   fishery   operations   shall   not   be   disposed   or  alienated.  Upon  effectivity  of  this  Code,  FLA  may  be  issued  for  public   lands   that   may   be   declared   available   for   fishpond   development   primarily   to   qualified   fisherfolk   cooperatives/associations:   Provided,   however,   That   upon   the   expiration   of   existing   FLAs   the   current   lessees   shall   be   given   priority   and   be   entitled   to   an   extension   of   twenty-­‐five   (25)  years  in  the  utilization  of  their  respective  leased  areas.  Thereafter,   such   FLAs   shall   be   granted   to   any   Filipino   citizen   with   preference,   primarily   to   qualified   fisherfolk   cooperatives/associations   as   well   as   small  and  medium  enterprises  as  defined  under  Republic  Act  No.  8289:   Provided,   further,   That   the   Department   shall   declare   as   reservation,   portions   of   available   public   lands   certified   as   suitable   for   fishpond   purposes   for   fish   sanctuary,   conservation,   and   ecological   purposes:   Provided,   finally,   That   two   (2)   years   after   the   approval   of   this   Act,   no   fish  pens  or  fish  cages  or  fish  traps  shall  be  allowed  in  lakes.       SECTION  46.  LEASE  OF  FISHPONDS.       Fishpond   leased   to   qualified   persons   and   fisherfolk   organizations/cooperatives   shall   be   subject   to   the   following   conditions:       § Areas   leased   for   fishpond   purposes   shall   be   no   more   than   50   hectares   for   individuals   and   250   hectares   for   corporations  or  fisherfolk  organizations;     § The  lease  shall  be  for  a  period  of  twenty-­‐five  (25)  years  and   renewable   for   another   twenty-­‐five   (25)   years:   Provided,   That   in   case   of   the   death   of   the   lessee,   his   spouse   and/or   children,   as   his   heirs,   shall   have   preemptive   rights   to   the   unexpired  term  of  his  Fishpond  Lease  Agreement  subject  to   the   same   terms   and   conditions   provided   herein   provided   that  the  said  heirs  are  qualified;     § Lease   rates   for   fishpond   areas   shall   be   determined   by   the   Department:   Provided,   That   all   fees   collected   shall   be   remitted   to   the   National   Fisheries   Research   and   Development   Institute   and   other   qualified   research   institutions   to   be   used   for   aquaculture   research   development;     § The   area   leased   shall   be   developed   and   producing   on   a   commercial  scale  within  three  (3)  years  from  the  approval   of  the  lease  contract:  Provided,  however,  That  all  areas  not   fully   producing   within   five   (5)   years   from   the   date   of  

39  

40  

DIWATA  NOTES  (LAND,  TITLES,  AND  DEEDS,  2014-­‐2015)  

Although  care  has  been  taken  to  ensure  the  accuracy,  completeness  and  reliability  of  the  information  provided,  kindly  exercise  caution  when  using  this  material.    

 

§ § §

§

approval  of  the  lease  contract  shall  automatically  revert  to   the  public  domain  for  reforestation;     The  fishpond  shall  not  be  subleased,  in  whole  or  in  part,  and   failure   to   comply   with   this   provision   shall   mean   cancellation  of  FLA;     The  transfer  or  assignment  of  rights  to  FLA  shall  be  allowed   only  upon  prior  written  approval  of  the  Department;     The   lessee   shall   undertake   reforestation   for   river   banks,   bays,  streams  and  seashore  fronting  the  dike  of  his  fishpond   subject   to   the   rules   and   regulations   to   be   promulgated   thereon;  and     The   lessee   shall   provide   facilities   that   will   minimize   environmental  pollution,  i.e.,  settling  ponds,  reservoirs,  etc:   Provided,   That   failure   to   comply   with   this   provision   shall   mean  cancellation  of  FLA.  

  SECTION  87.  POACHING  IN  PHILIPPINE  WATERS.       It  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  foreign  person,  corporation  or  entity  to  fish   or  operate  any  fishing  vessel  in  Philippine  waters.       The   entry   of   any   foreign   fishing   vessel   in   Philippine   waters   shall   constitute  a  prima  facie  evidence  that  the  vessel  is  engaged  in  fishing  in   Philippine  waters.       Violation   of   the   above   shall   be   punished   by   a   fine   of   One   hundred   thousand  U.S.  Dollars  (US$100,000.00),  in  addition  to  the  confiscation   of   its   catch,   fishing   equipment   and   fishing   vessel:   Provided,   That   the   Department   is   empowered   to   impose   an   administrative   fine   of   not   less   than   Fifty   thousand   U.S.   Dollars   (US$50,000.00)   but   not   more   than   Two  hundred  thousand  U.S.  Dollars  (US$200,000.00)  or  its  equivalent   in  the  Philippine  currency.     CASE:  TANO  VS.  SOCRATES     The   Sangguniang   Panlungsod   of   Puerto   Princessa   enacted   ordinance   no.  15-­‐92  banning  the  shipment  of  live  fish  and  lobster  outside  Puerto   Princessa   City   for   a   period   of   5   years.   In   the   same   light,   the   Sangguniang   Panlalawigan   of   Palawan   also   enacted   a   resolution   that   prohibits   the   catching,   gathering,   buying,   selling   and   possessing   and   shipment  of  live  marine  coral  dwelling  aquatic  organisms  for  a  period   of   5   years   within   the   Palawan   waters.   The   petitiones   Airline   Shippers  Association  of   Palawan   together   with   marine  merchants  were   charged   for   violating   the   above   ordinance   and   resolution   by   the   city   and   provincial   governments.   The   petitioners   now   allege   that   they   have   the   preferential   rights   as   marginal  fishermen  granted   with   privileges   provided   in   Section   149   of  the   Local   Government   Code,   invoking   the   invalidity   of   the   above-­‐stated   enactments   as   violative   of   their   preferential  rights.     ISSUE:  Whether  or  not  the  enacted  résolutions  and  ordinances  by  the   local  government   units   violative   of   the   preferential   rights   of   the   marginal  fishermen  ?       RULING:  No,  the  enacted  resolution  and  ordinance  of  the  LGU  were  not   violative  of  their  preferential  rights.  The  enactment  of  these  laws  was  a   valid  exercise  of  the  police  power  of  the  LGU  to  protect  public  interests   and  the  public  right  to  a  balanced  and  healthier  ecology.  The  rights  and   privileges   invoked   by   the   petitioners   are   not   absolute.   The   general   welfare   clause   of  the   local  government   code   mandates   for   the   liberal  interpretation  in   giving   the   LGUs   more   power   to  accelerate  economic  development  and   to   upgrade   the   life   of   the   people   in   the   community.   The   LGUs   are   endowed   with   the   power   to   enact   fishery   laws   in   its   municipal   waters,   which   necessarily   includes   the   enactment   of   ordinances   in   order   to   effectively   carry   out   the   enforcement  of  fishery  laws  in  their  local  community.     VIII.  INDUSTRIAL,  AIR,  AND  WATER  POLLUTION     Sec  3,  Paragraph  C,  RA  No.  9724:  Transport   and   traffic   management   which   includes   the   formulation,   coordination   and   monitoring   of   policies,   standards,   programs   and   projects   to   rationalize   the   existing   transport   operations,   infrastructure   requirements,   the   use   of   thoroughfares,   and   promotions   of   safe   and   convenient   movement   of   persons   and   goods:   provision   for   the   mass   transport   system   and   the   institution   of   a   system   to   regulate   road   users;   administration   and   implementation   of   all   irerhe   enforcement   operations,   traffic   engineering   services   and   traffic   education   programs,   including   the   institution  of  a  single  ticketing  system  in  Metropolitan  Manila.     Water  Quality  Management  Area.   -­‐   The   Department,   in   coordination   with  National  Water  Resources  Board  (NWRB),  shall  designate  certain   areas   as   water   quality   management   areas   using   appropriate   physiographic  units  such  as  watershed,  river  basins  or  water  resources   regions.   Said   management   areas   shall   have   similar   hydrological,   hydrogeological,  meteorological  or  geographic  conditions  which  affect   the   physicochemical,   biological   and   bacteriological   reactions   and   diffusions   of   pollutants   in   the   water   bodies,   or   otherwise   share   common   interest   or   face   similar   development   programs,   prospects   or   problems.     Said   management   area   shall   be   governed   by   a   governing   board   composed  of  representatives  of  mayors  and  governors  of  member  local   government   units   (LGUs),   and   representatives   of   relevant   national   government  agencies,  duly  registered  non-­‐governmental  organization,   water   utility   sector,   and   business   sector.   The   Department   representative  shall  chair  the  governing  board.  In  the  case  of  the  LGUs  

 

with  memberships  on  more  than  one  (1)  management  board,  the  LGU   shall   designate   only   one   (1)   single   representative   for   all   the   management  areas  wherein  is  a  member.     The   governing   board   shall   formulate   strategies   to   coordinate   policies   necessary   for   the   effective   implementation   of   this   Act   in   accordance   with   those   established   in   the   framework   and   monitor   the   compliance   with  the  action  plan.     Each  management  area  shall  create  a  multi-­‐sectoral  group  to  establish   and   affect   water   quality   surveillance   and   monitoring   network   including   sampling   schedules   and   other   similar   activities.   The   group   shall   submit   its   report   and   recommendation   to   the   chairman   of   the   governing  board.     A   technical   secretariat   for   each   management   area   is   hereby   created   which   shall   be   part   of   the   department   and   shall   provide   technical   support  to  the  governing  board.  They  shall  be  composed  of  at  least  four   (4)  members  who  shall  have  the  following  minimum  qualifications:   • One  (1)  member  shall  be  a  member  of  the  Philippines  Bar;   • One   (1)   member   shall   be   a   Chemical   Engineer,   Chemist,   Sanitary   Engineer,   Environmental   Engineer   or   Ecologist   or   significant  training  and  experience  in  chemistry;   • One  (1)  member  shall  be  a  Civil  Engineer  or  Hydrologist  or   Significant   training   and   experience   in   closely   related   fields   and  experience  on  ground  water,  respectively;  and   • One   (1)   member   shall   be   a   Geologist,   Biologist,   or   significant  training  and  experience  in  closely  related  fields.     The   areas   within   the   jurisdiction   of   the   Laguna   Lake   Development   Authority   (LLDA)   shall   be   designated   as   one   management   area   under   the   administration   of   LLDA   in   accordance   with   R.A.   No.   4850,   as   amended:   Provided,   However,   That   the   standards   promulgated   pursuant   to   this   Act   and   wastewater   charge   system   established   pursuant  hereof  shall  be  enforced  in  said  area.     CASE:  MMDA  VS.  JANCOM  ENVIRONMENTAL  CORPORATION     Before  us  is  a  motion  for  reconsideration  of  our  decision  dated  January   30,   2002   affirming   the   judgment   of   the   Court   of   Appeals,   which   in   turn   affirmed  that  of  the  regional  trial  court,  declaring  that  there  is  a  valid   and  perfected  waste  management  contract  between  the  Republic  of  the   Philippines   and   JANCOM   Environmental   Corporation,   and   dismissing   the   petition   filed   by   petitioner   Metropolitan   Manila   Development   Authority  for  lack  of  merit.  Petitioner  has  likewise  filed  a  motion  that   the  case  at  bar  be  heard  and  resolved  by  the  Court  en  banc.     RULING:   Lastly,   petitioner   argues   that   the   incineration   technology   provided  in  the  contract  is  prohibited  by  law,  citing  the  Clean  Air  Act  in   support   thereof.This   matter   was   hardly   treated   by   the   two   courts   below,  rendering  it  almost  a  non-­‐issue.The  Court  of  Appeals,  in  its  20-­‐ page   decision,   devoted   two   short   paragraphs   comprising   all   of   three   sentences   to   this   matter   (Rollo,   p.   54).The   regional   trial   court,   for   its   part,  said  that  the  issues  "which  should  be  addressed  are  the  following:   (1)   Is   there   a   perfected   contract   between   the   parties?   and   (2)   Does  certiorari  and/or   prohibition   lie   in   the   case   at   bar?"   (Rollo,   p.   157).We   need   but   repeat   now   that,   as   pointed   out   by   the   appellate   court,  Section  20,  which  provides:     SECTION   20.Ban   on   Incineration.-­‐   Incinertion,   hereby   defined   aas   the   burning   of   municipal,   bio-­‐chemical   and   hazardous   wastes,  which   process   emits  poisonous  and  toxic  fumes,  is  hereby  prohibited:  xxx."     does  not  absolutely  prohibit  incineration  as  a  mode  of  waste  disposal;   rather,   only   those   burning   processes   which   emit   poisonous   and   toxic   fumes  are  banned.     The  rule  that  a  statute  should  be  given  effect  as  a  whole  requires  that   the  statute  be  so  construed  as  to  make  no  part  or  provision  thereof  a   surplusage.  Each  and  every  part  of  the  statute  should  be  given  its  due   effect   and   meaning   in   relation   to   the   rest.   It   is   well   settled   that,   whenever  possible,  a  legal  provision  must  not  beso  construed  as  to  be   a   useless   surplusage   and,   accordingly,   meaningless   in   the   sense   of   adding   nothing   to   the   law   or   having   no   effect   whatsoever   therein.   To   consider   Section   20   of   the   Clean   Air   Act   as   prohibiting   all   forms   of   incineration  would  render  the  phrase  "which  process  emits  poisonous   and  toxic  fumes"  a  useless  surplusage,  which  could  not  have  been  the   intention   of   legislature,   seeing   that   our   learned   legislators   even   took   pains   to   define,   in   Section   5,   Article   II   of   the   Clean   Air   Act   what   poisonous  and  toxic  fumes  are,     Section  5.  Definitions.-­‐  As  used  in  this  Act:     t)  "Poisonous  and  toxic  fumes"  means  any  emissions  and  fumes  which   are   beyond   internationally-­‐accepted   standards,   including   but   not   limited  to  World  Health  Organization  (WHO)  guideline  values;     It  may  not,  thus,  be  argued  that  the  Clean  Air  Act  prohibits  all  forms  of   incineration  as  to  make  the  contract  in  question  violative  of  the  Clean   Air  Act.  This  is  not  to  say,  of  course,  that  the  contract  involved  does  not   in  fact  run  afoul  with  the  Clean  Air  Act.  That  issue  may  still  be  raised  by   the  proper  party  in  a  proper  action.      

40