PERTINENT FACTS:

In 1940s, there was a parcel of land owned by private persons as evidenced by

tax declarations there being no certificate of title in their favor.
In 1960s, a law was passed which became the charter of a certain city.
Pursuant to that law, all foreshore lands and submerged lands shall belong, if not
turned over, to the city.
Despite the declaration, the heirs continued to pay for the certificate of tax
declaration of the said parcel of land.
ISSUE:
Who has a better right? The heirs of the land by virtue of their tax declaration, or
the city pursuant to its charter?
FIRST VIEW (Our View):
The city has a better right.
i. The charter provides that all foreshore lands and submerged lands shall
belong, if not turned over, to the city. Since the charter says so, it must be the law
pursuant to the principle that a charter is the citys constitution.
Legal Basis:
a. Governing Law (Republic Act No. 5519 otherwise known as An Act
Creating the City of Mandaue)
Charters, ordinances, and codes are essential to identifying the powers,
privileges, rules, and regulations of a municipality or county. More
specifically, cities and counties have some type of charter, which defines
their terms of existence. In addition, the charter is the city or countys
constitution, and the starting point for all other regulations. 1 . As the citys
constitution, the charter creates the city, defines its boundaries, provides
its system of government, and defines the powers and duties of its
officials.2
1 Peter j. Egler, What Gives Cities And Counties The Authority To Create Charters,
Ordinances, And Codes?, Teachable Moments For Students, 1 (2001).
2 http://www.ph.net/htdocs/government/phil/loc-gov/

In the case at hand, R.A. 5519 provides that all foreshore lands and
submerged lands shall belong, if not turned over, to the city. Therefore, it
shall be accorded with respect and finality. Where the law is clear, there is
only room for application.
b. Jurisprudence
ii. Tax declaration is just a proof of possession, not ownership.
Legal Basis:
a. Governing Law
b. Jurisprudence
1.

Republic vs. de la Paz (G.R. No. 171631, November 15, 2010)

Well settled is the rule that tax declarations and receipts are
not conclusive evidence of ownership or of the right to
possess land when not supported by any other evidence.
The fact that the disputed property may have been declared
for taxation purposes in the names of the applicants for
registration or of their predecessors-in-interest does not
necessarily prove ownership. They are merely indicia of a
claim of ownership.

2.

Spouses Nicanor Magno and Caridad Magno vs. Heirs of Pablo

Parulan (G. R. No. 183916, April 25, 2012)
A mere tax declaration cannot defeat a certificate of title.

3.

of

Republic of the Philippines vs. Metro Index Realty and

Development Corporation
It is well-settled that tax declarations are mere bases for
inferring possession. They must be coupled with proof
actual possession for them to constitute "well-nigh
incontrovertible" evidence of a claim of
ownership.

SECOND VIEW (Opponents View):

The heirs have a better right.
i. Laws should not impair vested rights.
Rebuttal:
ii. Law on Prescription
Rebuttal: