Dagudag v. Paderanga A.M. No.

RTJ-06-2017, June 19, 2008, 555 SCRA 217

Syllabus: Forest products, conveyances and effects which were seized by DENR officials pursuant to PD
No. 705 are considered in custodia legis and cannot be the subject of an action for replevin.

FACTS:

To avoid inspection by the DENR, the cargoes were erroneously labeled as cassava meal and corn grains.
As required by DAO No. 07-94, the crew of the MV General Ricarte failed to present the Certificate of
Origin and other relevant shipping documentation covering forest goods. Following proper notification,
the unlawful forest resources were confiscated in favor of the state.

One certain Roger Edma requested that a writ of replevin be granted directing that defendants
DENR, CENRO, Gen. Dagudag, and the others to surrender the forest products with him and requested
verdict be awarded. During trial for the writ of replevin, Judge Paderanga exhibited clear favoritism for
Edma. Sheriff Reynaldo Salceda has been instructed to take control of some forest products.

General Dagudag recently submitted the sworn statement with Office of the Court
Administrator, alleging Judge Paderanga of profound ignorance of the facts with unseemly behavior.

ISSUE:

If the issue of the writ of replevin is appropriate.

RULING:

No. The issue of the writ of replevin was unconstitutional.

Considering three reasons, Judge Paderanga must have rejected the replevin claim completely.
Initially, previously stated in Factoran, Jr. v. Court of Appeals, courts never involve consideration of
issues remaining through government authority underneath the notion of limitation of governmental
means. Moreover, the Supreme Court decided in Dy v. Court of Appeals and Paat vs. Court of Appeals
that what a party should finish appropriate governmental options prior resorting to the courts.

The Court held that all actions seeking to recover forest products in the custody of the
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) shall be directed to that agency – not the
courts. In Dy, the Court found that Edma did not resort to any administrative remedy but instead filed a
complaint for replevin and damages.

Under the doctrine of primary jurisdiction, a court cannot take cognizance of cases pending
before administrative agencies of special competence. The complaint for replevin itself stated that
members of DENR's TaskForce Sagip Kalikasan took over the Forest Products and brought them to the
DENR CommunityEnvironment and Natural Resource Office.

The natural forests confiscated by the Philippines' Department of Environment and Natural
Resources (DENR) are also not entitled to replevin because there was a breach of the Revised Forestry
Code. Secondly, the natural forests are already in custodia legis and thus cannot be the topic of Replevin
as they are protected by law.