LAND TITLES (PUBLIC AND PRIVATE LANDS)
The Maura Law of 1894 was partly an amendment of
AUSL 1st Sem., SY 2013-2014
Atty. Josephine R. Santiago Saturday 1-3 Set B
I.INTRODUCTION / OVERVIEW
LAND TITLE is the evidence of the owner’s right or
extent of interest, by which he can maintain control and
as a rule assert right to exclusive possession and
enjoyment of property.
DEED is the instrument in writing by which any real
estate or interest therein is created, alienated,
mortgaged, or assigned, or by which title to any real
estate may be affected in law or equity.
LAND REGISTRATION is a judicial or administrative
proceeding whereby a person’s claim over a particular
land is determined and confirmed or recognized so that
such land and the ownership thereof may be recorded
in a public registry.
TORRENS SYSTEM is a system for registration of land
under which, upon the landowner’s application, the
court may, after appropriate proceedings, direct the
issuance of a certificate of title.
A. History of Land Laws
i. Lynch Article
Spanish Era
1. The indigenous concept of ownership by occupation
and cultivation was recognized early on by the Laws of
the Indies which governed Spanish possessions in the
Philippines and elsewhere.
2. Royal Decree stated that justified long and
continuous possession by the natives qualified them for
title to their cultivated land. Where such possessors
shall not be able to produce title deeds, it shall be
sufficient if they shall show ancient possessions as a
valid title.
3. Royal Cedula Circular declared: the will of the Crown
as expressed in various instructions, royal edicts, orders
and decrees, that the distribution of lands to
conquistadores discoverers, and settlers should never
prejudice the natives and their and-holdings.
4. The Spanish Mortgage Law of 1893 provided for the
systematic registration of land titles and deeds as well
as for possessory claims. Under its provisions owners
who lack recorded title of ownership could have their
interests registered during possessory information
proceeding before informacion posesoria to qualified
applicants. The titulo was merely a record of
possession. It could be converted into a record of
ownership, however, twenty years (later reduced to ten
years) after its date of issue if certain conditions were
met.
5.
the Mortgage Law as well as the Laws of the Indies, as
already amended by previous orders and decrees. This
was the last Spanish land law promulgated in the
Philippines. It required the adjustment or registration of
all agricultural lands, otherwise the lands shall revert to
the state.
6. Under the Treaty of Paris of December 10, 1998,
Spain ceded to the government of the United States all
rights, interests and claims over the national territory of
the Philippines Islands. However, the Treaty was explicit
that the relinquishment and cession cannot in any
respect impair the property rights which by law belong
to peaceful possession.•
Separate Opinion of J. PUNO in Cruz v. Secretary 347
SCRA 128
A. How did Spain acquire the Philippines?
The Philippines passed to Spain by virtue of discovery•
and conquest•. Consequently, all lands became the
exclusive patrimony and dominion of the Spanish
Crown. The Spanish Government took charge of
distributing the lands by issuing royal grants and
concessions to Spaniards, both military and civilian.
Private land titles could only be acquired from the
government either by purchase or by the various modes
of land grants from the Crown.
Separate Opinion of J. KAPUNAN in Cruz v. Secretary
347 SCRA 128
A. How did Spain acquire the Philippines?
When Spain acquired sovereignty over the Philippines
by virtue of its discovery and occupation thereof in the
16th century and the Treaty of Tordesillas of 1494
which it entered into with Portugal, the continents of
Asia, the Americas and Africa were considered as terra
nullius• although already populated by other people.
In the Treaty of Tordesillas, the world was divided
between Spain and Portugal, with the former having
exclusive power to claim all lands and territories west of
the Atlantic Ocean demarcation line.
The discovery and occupation by the European States,
who were then considered as the only members of the
International Community of civilized nations, of lands in
the said continents were deemed sufficient to create
title under International Law.
ii. Land Laws Reference: Atty. Agcaoili book
1) Public Land Act
1. Act No. 926 the first Public Land Act passed in
pursuance of the provisions of the Philippine Bill of
1902. The law governed the disposition of lands of the
public domain. The Public Land Act operated on the
assumption that title to public lands in the Philippine
Islands 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 United States. The term public land referred to
all lands 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.
2. Act No. 2874 the second Public Land Act passed
under the Jones Law. It was more comprehensive in
scope but limited the exploitation of agricultural lands
to Filipinos and Americans and citizens of other
countries which gave Filipinos the same privileges.
3. CA No. 141 amended the second Public Land Act after
the passage of the 1935 Constitution. The present
Public Land Act, which is essentially the same as Act No.
2874. The main difference between the two relates to
the transitory provision on the rights of American
citizens and corporations during the Commonwealth
period at par with Filipino citizen and corporations. CA
No. 141, approved November 7, 1936, applies to lands
of the public domain which have been declared open to
disposition or concession and officially delimited and
classified. It contains provisions on the different modes
of government grant, e.g., homestead, sale, free patent,
and reservations for public and semi-public purpose.
2) Land Registration Act (Act No. 496)
1. The original Land Registration Act (Act No. 496) was
approved on November 6, 1902, but it became effective
on January 1, 1903.
2. It established the Torrens system of registration in
the country.
3. It created a court called the Court of Land
Registration• which had exclusive jurisdiction over all
applications for registration, with power to hear and
determine all questions arising upon such applications.
4. The sole purpose of the law was 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.
5. Registration under the system did not create a title. It
simply confirmed a title already created and vested.
3) Cadastral Act (Act No. 2259)
1.The cadastral system of registration took effect with
the enactment on February 11, 1913 of Act No. 2259.
When, in the opinion 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 an interest therein.
2. 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.
3. Cadastral proceeding is a proceeding in rem, hence,
generally binding upon the whole world.
4) Property Registration Decree (PD No. 1529)
1. On June 11, 1978, PD No. 1529, otherwise known as
the Property Registration Decree, was approved. The
Decree was issued to update the Land Registration Act
and to codify the various laws relative to registration of
property and to facilitate effective implementation of
said laws. It codified and incorporated the following
laws related to property registration:
a. Act 496, The Land Registration Act
b. CA No. 141, The Public Land Act
c. Act 2259, The Cadastral Act
d. Act 3344, System of Registration for
Unregistered Lands
e. Act No. 1508, as amended, The Chattel
Mortgage Law
f. Republic Act No. 26, Reconstitution of
Original Certificates of Title
g. PD 27, Emancipation Patents, Land Reform
Law
2. It supersedes all other laws relative to registration of
property.
3. Judicial proceedings under the Property Registration
Decree, like the old Land Registration Act, are in rem,
and are based on the generally accepted principles
underlying the Torrens system.
4. Jurisdiction over the res is acquired by giving the
public notice of initial hearing by means of
(a) publication, (b) mailing and (c) notice.
5. The Decree created the Land Registration
Commission, now renamed Land Registration Authority,
as the central repository of records relative to original
registration, including subdivision and consolidation
plans of titled lands.
B. The Torrens System
i. Alba v. Dela Cruz, 17 Phil 49 (1910)
The application for the registration is to be in writing,
signed and sworn to by the applicant, or by some
person duly authorized in his behalf. It is to contain,
among other things, the names and addresses of all
occupants of land and of all adjoining owners, if known.
Indeed, the Land Registration Act requires that all
occupants be named in the petition and given notice by
registered mail. However, notice by publication to all
whom it may concern• is considered a sufficient notice.
Under the Land Registration Act, any petition to reopen
a case after a land registration decree had been
rendered cannot lie on account of the absence, infancy,
or other disability of any person affected thereby. It is
only when said decree was obtained by fraud that said
petition will prosper.
ii. Separate Opinion of J. PUNO in Cruz v. Secretary,
347 SCRA 128
Grants of public land were brought under the operation
of the Torrens System under Act 496, or the Land
Registration Law of 1903. Enacted by the Philippine
Commission, Act 496 placed all public and private lands
in the Philippines under the Torrens System.
The Torrens System requires that the Government issue
an official certificate of title attesting to the fact that
the person named is the owner of the property
described therein; subject to such liens and
encumbrances as thereon noted or the law warrants or
reserves.
The certificate of title is indefeasible and
imprescriptible and all claims to the parcel of land are
quieted upon issuance of said certificate. This system
highly facilitates land conveyance and negotiation. Its
object is to do away with the delay, uncertainty, and
expense of the old conveyancing system.
Generally, by Torrens Systems• are meant those
systems 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.
iii. Legarda v. Saleeby, 31 Phil 590 (1915)
The real purpose of the Torrens System is to quiet title
to land; to put a stop forever to any question of the
legality of the title, except claims which were noted at
the time of registration, in the certificate, or which may
arise subsequent thereto.
That being the purpose of the law, it would seem that
once a title is registered the owner may rest secure,
without the necessity of waiting in the portals of the
court, or sitting in the œmirador de su casa, to avoid the
possibility of losing his land.
The registration under the Torrens System, does not
give the owner any better title than he had. The
registration of a particular parcel of land is a bar to
future litigation over the same between the same
parties. It is a notice to the world and no one can plead
ignorance of the registration.
Purposes:
1) To quiet title to the land and to stop forever any
question as to the legality of said title.
2) To relieve the land of unknown claims.
3) To guarantee the integrity of land titles and to
protect their indefeasibility once the claim of ownership
is established and recognized.
4) To give every registered owner complete peace of
mind.
5) To issue a certificate of title to the owner which shall
be the best evidence of his ownership of the land.
6) To avoid conflicts of title in and to real estate and to
facilitate transactions.
iv. D.B.T. Mar-Bay Construction, Inc. v. Panes, 594
SCRA 578 (2009)
While the Torrens system is not a mode of acquiring
title, but merely a system of registration of titles to
lands, justice, and equity demand that the titleholder
should not be made to bear the unfavorable effect of
the mistake or negligence of the State's agents, in the
absence of proof of his complicity in a fraud or of
manifest damage to third persons.
The real purpose of the Torrens system is to quiet title
to land and put a stop forever to any question as to the
legality of the title, except claims that were noted in the
certificate at the time of the registration or that may
arise subsequent thereto. Otherwise, the integrity of
the Torrens system would forever be sullied by the
ineptitude and inefficiency of land registration officials,
who are ordinarily presumed to have regularly
performed their duties.
Thus, where innocent third persons, relying on the
correctness of the certificate of title thus issued, acquire
rights over the property, the court cannot disregard
those rights and order the cancellation of the
certificate. The effect of such outright cancellation will
be to impair public confidence in the certificate of title.
The sanctity of the Torrens system must be preserved;
otherwise, everyone dealing with the property
registered under the system will have to inquire in
every instance on whether the title had been regularly
or irregularly issued, contrary to the evident purpose of
the law. Every person dealing with the registered land
may safely rely on the correctness of the certificate of
title issued therefor, and the law will in no way oblige
him to go behind the certificate to determine the
condition of the property.
v. NOTES TORRENS SYSTEM:
1) Torrens system under Act No. 496, or the Land
Registration Act of 1903 is said to be almost a verbatim
copy of the Massachusetts Land Registration Act of
1898, which, in turn, followed the principles and
procedure of the Torrens system of registration
formulated by Sir Robert Torrens who patterned it after
the Merchant shipping Acts in South Australia.
2) Advantages of the Torrens System:
a) It has substituted security for insecurity.
b) It has reduced the costs of conveyances from pounds
to shillings, and the time occupied from months to days.
c) It has exchange brevity and clearness for obscurity
and verbiage.
d) It has so simplified ordinary dealings that he who has
mastered the three RS (which means Reading, wRiting
and aRithmetic) can transact his own conveyancing.
e) It affords protection against fraud.
f) It has restored to their just value many estates held
under good holding titles but depreciated in
consequence of some blur or technical defect and has
barred the reoccurrence of any similar faults.
3) The main principle of registration is to make
registered titles indefeasible.
4) The element of intention to deprive another of just
rights constitutes the essential characteristics of actual
as distinguished from legal fraud.
5) Proof of constructive fraud is not sufficient to
authorize the Court of Land Registration to reopen a
case and modify its decree. Specific, intentional acts to
deceive and deprive another of his right or in some
manner injure him, must be alleged, and proved; that is
there must be actual or positive fraud as distinguished
from constructive fraud.
II.CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS
A. The Regalian Doctrine
i. Paragraph 1, Section 2, Article XII of the 1987
Constitution:
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.
Under the Regalian doctrine, all lands of the public
domain belong to the State and lands not otherwise
appearing to be clearly within. Private ownership is
presumed to belong to the State. Unless public land is
shown to have been reclassified as alienable or
disposable, and subsequently alienated by the State, it
remains part of the public domain. Occupation or
possession thereof by a person in the concept of owner,
no matter how long cannot ripen in ownership.
ii. Cariño v. Insular Government, 41 Phil 935 (1909)
The court thus laid down the presumption of a certain
title held (1) as far back as testimony or memory went,
and (2) under a claim of private ownership. Land held by
this title is presumed to never have been public land•.
The United States Supreme Court found no proof that
the Spanish decrees did not honor native title. On the
contrary, the decrees discussed in Valenton v.
Murciano case appeared to recognize that the natives
owned some land, irrespective of any royal grant. The
Regalian doctrine declared in the preamble of
the Recopilacion was all theory and discourse• and it
was observed that titles were admitted to exist beyond
the powers of the Crown.
iii. Cruz v. Secretary of Environment, 347 SCRA 128
(2000)
The Regalian Doctrine does not negate native title.
1) Separate Opinion of J. PUNO
Cariño case firmly established a concept of private land
title that existed irrespective of any royal grant from the
State and was based on the strong mandate extended
to the Islands via the Philippine Bill of 1902. The IPRA
recognizes the existence of ICCs /IPs as a distinct sector
in the society. It grants this people the ownership and
possession of their ancestral domains and ancestral
lands and defines the extent of these lands and
domains.
2) Separate Opinion of J. KAPUNAN
Regalian theory does not negate the native title to lands
held in private ownership since time immemorial,
adverting to the landmark case of Cariño v. Insular
Government, where the US SC thru Holmes held:
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 from before the Spanish
conquest, and never to have been public land.
Existence of native title to land, or ownership of land by
Filipinos by virtue of possession under a claim of
ownership since time immemorial and independent of
any grant from the Spanish crown as an exception to
the theory of jure regalia.
iv. Chavez v. Public Estates, 384 SCRA 152
The Regalian Doctrine
The ownership of lands reclaimed from foreshore and
submerged areas is rooted in the Regalian doctrine
which holds that the State owns all lands and waters of
the public domain. Upon the Spanish conquest of the
Philippines, ownership of all lands, territories and
possessions in the Philippines passed to the Spanish
Crown. The King, as the sovereign ruler and
representative of the people, acquired and owned all
lands and territories in the Philippines except those he
disposed of by grant or sale to private individuals.
The 1935, 1973 and 1987 Constitutions adopted the
Regalian doctrine substituting, however, the State, in
lieu of the King as the owner of all lands and waters of
the public domain. The Regalian doctrine is the
foundation of the time-honored principle of land
ownership that all lands that were not acquired from
the Government, either by purchase of by grant, belong
to the public domain.
The foreshore and submerged areas of Manila Bay are
part of the lands of the public domain, waters and other
natural resources and consequently owned by the
State. As such, foreshore and submerged areas shall not
be alienable unless they are classified as agricultural
lands of the public domain.
The mere reclamation of these areas by the PEA does
not convert these inalienable natural resources of the
State into alienable and disposable lands of the public
domain. There must be a law or presidential
proclamation officially classifying these reclaimed lands
as alienable and disposable if the law has reserved them
for some public or quasi- public use.
v. Buenaventura v. Republic, 517 SCRA 271 (2207)
It is true that under the Regalian Doctrine all lands of
the public domain belong to the State and all lands not
otherwise appearing to be clearly within private
ownership are presumed to belong to the State.
However, such presumption is not conclusive. It can be
rebutted by the applicant’s presentation of
incontrovertible evidence showing that the land subject
of the application for registration is alienable and
disposable.
vi. NOTES REGALIAN DOCTRINE:
1) Generally, under the concept of jura regalia, private
title to land must be traced to some grant, express or
implied, from the Spanish Crown or its successors, the
American Colonial government, and thereafter, the
Philippine Republic.
2) In its broad sense, the term jura regalia• refers to
royal rights, or those rights which the King has by virtue
of his prerogatives. In Spanish Law, it refers to a right
which the sovereign has over anything in which a
subject as a right of property or propriedad. These were
rights enjoyed during feudal times by the King as the
sovereign.
3) Jura regalia was therefore nothing more than a
natural fruit of conquest.
4) Regalian Doctrine or Jura Regalia is a Western legal
concept that was first introduced by the Spaniards into
the country through the Laws of the Indies and the
Royal Cedulas.
B. Citizenship Requirement
i. Paragraph 1, Section 2, Article XII of the 1987
Constitution:
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.
ii. Section 7, Article XII of the 1987 Constitution:
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.
iii. Section 8, Article XII of the 1987 Constitution:
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.
iv. Krivenko v. Register of Deeds, 79 Phil 461
Public agricultural lands mentioned in Section 1, Article
XIII of the 1935 Constitution, include residential,
commercial and industrial lands, the Court stated:
Natural resources, with the exception of public
agricultural land, shall not be alienated, and with
respect to public agricultural lands, their alienation is
limited to Filipino Citizens. But this Constitutional
purpose conserving agricultural resources in the hands
of Filipino citizens may easily be defeated by the Filipino
citizens themselves who may alienate their agricultural
lands in favor of aliens.
Thus Section 5, Article XIII of the 1935 Constitution
provides:
Save in cases of hereditary succession, no private
agricultural lands will be transferred or assigned except
to individuals corporations or associations qualified to
acquire or hold lands of the public domain in the
Philippines.
NOTES:
1) In determining whether a parcel of land is
agricultural, the test is not only whether it is actually
agricultural, but also its susceptibility to cultivation for
agricultural purposes.
2) Public Agricultural Lands under Section 1 of Article
XIII (now Section 2, Article XII of the 1987 Constitution)
of the 1935 Constitution classifies lands of public
domain in the Philippines into agricultural, timber and
mineral.
3) Private Agricultural Lands Section 5, Article XIII of the
1935 Constitution
v. Halili v. CA, 287 SCRA 465 (1998)
The landmark case of Krivenko v. Register of
Deeds settled the issue as to who are qualified (and
disqualified) to own public as well as private lands in the
Philippines.
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.
vi. Muller v. Muller, 500 SCRA 65 (2006)
Mr. Muller was aware of the Constitutional prohibition
when he purchased the property. He declared the
property in the name of Mrs. Muller because of said
prohibition. His attempt at subsequently asserting or
claiming a right on the said property cannot be
sustained.
There was no implied trust created. Save for hereditary
succession, an alien’s disqualification is absolute. Not
even an ownership in trust is allowed. Besides, no trust
can result in favor of the party who is guilty of the
fraud. To hold otherwise would allow a circumvention
of the constitutional prohibition.
He who seeks equity must do equity, and he who comes
into equity must come with clean hands. Mr. Muller
cannot seek reimbursement of the funds he used to
purchase the property on the ground of equity where it
is clear that he willingly and knowingly bought the
property despite the constitutional prohibition.
vii. Republic v. CA and Lapiña, 235 SCRA 567
The Court explained that even if the spouses were
already Canadian citizens at the time they applied for
registration, the lots were already private lands, and no
longer formed part of the public domain. They were
already private in character at the time of the purchase
since respondent’s predecessors-in-interest had been in
open, continuous and exclusive possession and
occupation thereof under claim of ownership prior to
June 12, 1945 or since 1937. Moreover, the law
provides that a natural-born citizen of the Philippines
who has lost his Philippine citizenship may be a
transferee of a private land under the terms prescribed
by law.
viii. Amendments to the IRR of RA No. 7042 (FIA of
1991), as amended by RA No. 8179
LIST A: FOREIGN OWNERSHIP IS LIMITED BY MANDATE
OF THE CONSTITUTION AND SPECIFIC LAWS
No Foreign Equity
1) Mass Media except recording (Article XVI, Section 11
of the Constitution; Presidential Memorandum dated 04
May 1994)
2) Services involving the practice of licensed professions
save in cases prescribed by law;(Article XIV, Section 14
of the Constitution; Section 1 of RA No. 5181)
3) Retail Trade (Section 1 of RA No. 1180)
4) Cooperatives (Chapter III, Article 26 of RA No. 6938)
5) Private Security Agencies (Section 4 of RA No. 5487)
6) Small-scale Mining (Section 3 of RA No. 7076)
7) Utilization of Marine Resources in archipelagic
waters, territorial sea, and exclusive economic zone
(Article XII, Section 2 of the Constitution)
8) Ownership, operation, and management of cockpits
(Section 5 of Presidential Decree No. 449)
9) Manufacture, repair, stockpiling and/or distribution
of nuclear weapons (Article II, Section 8 of the
Constitution)
10) Manufacture, repair, stockpiling and/or distribution
of biological, chemical and radiological weapons
(Various treaties to which the Philippines is a signatory
and conventions supported by the Philippines)
Up to Twenty-Five Percent (25%) Foreign Equity
11) Private recruitment, whether for local or overseas
employment (Article 27 of Presidential Decree No. 442)
12) Contracts for the construction and repair of locally
funded public works except:
a. infrastructure/development projects covered in RA
No. 7718; and
b. projects which are foreign funded or assisted and
required to undergo international competitive bidding
Up to Thirty Percent (30%) Foreign Equity
13) Advertising (Article XVI, Section 11 of the
Constitution)
Up to Forty Percent (40%) Foreign Equity
14) Exploration, development, and utilization of natural
resources (Article XII, Section 2 of the Constitution)
15) Ownership of private lands (Article XII, Section 7 of
the Constitution; Chapter 5, Section 22 of
Commonwealth Act No. 141)
16) Operation and management of public utilities
(Article XII, Section 11 of the Constitution; Section 16 of
Commonwealth Act No. 146)
17) Ownership/establishment and administration of
educational institutions (Article XIV, Section 2 of the
Constitution)
18) Engaging in the rice and corn industry (Presidential
Decree No. 194)
19) Financing companies regulated by the Securities and
Exchange Commission (SEC) Section 6 of RA No. 5980)
20) Contracts for the supply of materials, goods and
commodities to government-owned or controlled
corporation, company, agency or municipal corporation
(Section 1 of RA No. 5183)
21) Contracts for the construction of defense-
related structures (e.g., land, air, sea and coastal
defenses, arsenals, barracks, depots, hangars, landing
fields, quarters and hospitals) (Commonwealth Act No.
541)
22) Project proponent and facility operator of a BOT
project requiring a public utilities franchise (Article XII,
Section 11 of the Constitution; Section 2a of RA No.
7718)
23) Private domestic construction contracts (Republic
Act 4566; Article XIV, Section 14 of the Constitution)
LIST B: FOREIGN OWNERSHIP IS LIMITED FOR REASONS
OF SECURITY, DEFENSE, RISK TO HEALTH AND MORALS
AND PROTECTION OF SMALL- AND MEDIUM-
SCALE ENTERPRISES
Up to Forty Percent (40 %) Foreign Equity
1) Manufacture, repair, storage, and/or distribution
used in the manufacture thereof requiring Philippine
National Police (PNP) clearance
2) Manufacture, repair, storage and/or distribution of
products requiring Department of National Defense
(DND) clearance
3) Manufacture and distribution of dangerous drugs (RA
No. 7042 as amended by RA No. 8179)
NOTES:
1) Domestic investments are also prohibited (Article II,
Section 8 of the Constitution; Conventions/Treaties to
which the Philippines is a signatory)
2) Full foreign participation is allowed through financial
or technical assistance agreement with the
President (Article XII, Section 11 of the Constitution)
ix. Citizenship Requirement - Individuals
1) Filipino Citizens
Citizens of the Philippines may lease not more than five
hundred hectares or acquire not more than twelve
hectares of the alienable lands of the public domain, by
purchase, homestead, or grant. (Sec. 3, Article XII,
Constitution)
Citizens may acquire private lands.
2) Former Natural-Born Citizens
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. (Sec. 8,
Article XII, Constitution)
Any natural born citizen who has lost his Philippine
citizenship and who has the legal capacity to enter into
a contract under Philippine laws may be a transferee of
a private land up to a maximum area of five thousand
(5,000) square meters in the case of urban land or three
(3) hectares in the case of rural land to be used by him
for business or other purposes. In the case of married
couples, one of them may avail of the privilege herein
granted: Provided, that if both shall avail of the same,
the total area acquired shall not exceed the maximum
herein fixed.
In case the transferee already owns urban or rural land
for business or other purposes, he shall still be entitled
to be a transferee of additional urban or rural land for
business or other purposes which when added to those
already owned by him shall not exceed the maximum
areas herein authorized.
A transferee under this Act may acquire not more than
two (2) lots which should be situated in different
municipalities or cities anywhere in the Philippines:
Provided, that the total land area thereof shall not
exceed five thousand (5,000) hectares in the case of
rural land for use by him for business or other purposes.
A transferee who has already acquired urban land shall
be disqualified from acquiring rural land area and vice
versa. (Section 10 of RA No. 7042, as amended by RA
No. 8179, dated March 28, 1996, Foreign Investment
Act of 1991, implementing Section 8, Article XII of the
Constitution)
3) Aliens
Alien Individuals may be transferees of private lands
only in cases of hereditary succession. (Sec. 7, Article
XII, Constitution)
C. Corporations
i. Section 3, Article XII of the 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.•
ii. Chavez v. Public Estates, 384 SCRA 152 (2002)
The Constitutional intent, both under the 1973 and
1987 Constitutions, is to transfer ownership of only a
limited area of alienable land of the public domain to a
qualified individual. This constitutional intent is
safeguarded by the provision prohibiting corporations
from acquiring alienable lands of the public domain,
since the vehicle to circumvent the constitutional intent
is removed. The available alienable public lands are
gradually decreasing in the face of an ever-
growing population. The most effective way to insure
faithful adherence to this constitutional intent is to
grant or sell alienable lands of the public domain only to
individuals. This, it would seem, is the practical benefit
arising from the constitutional ban.
If the constitutional intent is to encourage
economic family-size farms, placing the land in the
name of a corporation would be more effective in
preventing the break-up of farmlands. If the farmland is
registered in the name of a corporation, upon the death
of the owner, his heirs would inherit shares in the
corporation instead of subdivide parcels of the
farmland. This would prevent the continuing break-
up of farmlands into smaller and smaller plots from one
generation to the next.
The constitutional ban strengthens the constitutional
limitation on individuals from acquiring more than the
allowed area of alienable lands of the public domain.
Without the constitutional ban, individuals who already
acquired the maximum area of alienable lands of the
public domain could easily set up corporations to
acquire more alienable public lands. The corporation is
a convenient vehicle to circumvent the constitutional
limitation on acquisition by individual of alienable lands
of the public domain.
iii. Director v. IAC and ACME, 146 SCRA 509 (1986)
When natural persons have fulfilled the required
statutory period of possession, the Public Land Act
confers on them a legally sufficient and transferable
title to the land, which are already private lands
because of acquisitive prescription, and which could be
validly transferred or sold to private corporations.
The doctrine of vested rights was articulated by the
Supreme Court in this ruling.
The Supreme Court declared that the purely accidental
circumstance that confirmation proceedings were
brought under the aegis of a subsequent law which
forbids corporations from owning lands of the public
domain cannot defeat a right already vested before that
law came into effect or invalidate transactions then
perfectly valid and proper. The Court emphatically
stated that even the Constitution or subsequent law
cannot impair vested rights.
iv. NOTES - CORPORATIONS:
1) 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.
(Sec. 3, Article XII, Constitution)
2) Corporations or associations — whether citizens or
of citizens and aliens — may not own but may only
hold by lease lands of the public domain. (DOJ Opinion,
1973)
3) However, only corporations or associations at least
60% of the capital stock of which is owned by Filipinos,
and the remainder by foreigners, may own private
lands.
4) Condominium Corporation Owns the Land
Transfers to aliens of a condominium unit may be made
only up to the point where the concomitant transfer of
membership or stockholding in the condominium
corporation would not cause the alien interest in such
corporation to exceed 40% of its entire capital stock.
(Sec 5, Condominium Act)
5) Corporation Leases the Land
Any corporation which is owned 100% by a foreign firm
may establish a "condominium corporation" under R.A.
No. 4726 and set up a condominium project on land
leased for a period not to exceed (50) years. (DOJ
Opinion 1973)
Foreign Investors may lease private lands for a period
not exceeding fifty (50) years, renewable once for a
period of not more than twenty- five (25) years,
provided that the leased area shall be used solely for
the purpose of the investment, and provided further
that the leased premises shall comprise such area as
may reasonably be required for the purpose of the
investment subject however to the Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Law and the Local Government Code.
(Sec. 4, Investor’s Lease Act)
6) Land is Co-owned by the Unit Owners
Where the common areas in the condominium project
are owned by the owners of separate units as co-
owners thereof, no condominium unit therein shall be
conveyed or transferred to persons other than Filipino
citizens, or corporations at least 60% of the capital stock
of which belong to Filipino citizens, except in cases of
hereditary succession. (Sec. 5, Condominium Act)
Only citizens of the Philippines, as individuals, may
acquire both private lands and lands of the public
domain. Therefore, there can be no joint ownership of
such lands between Filipinos and foreign investors as
individuals.
D. CHAPTER 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS
i. SECTION 2. Nature of registration proceedings;
jurisdiction of courts.
Judicial proceedings for the registration of lands
throughout the Philippines shall be in rem and shall be
based on the generally accepted principles underlying
the Torrens system.
Courts of First Instance (now Regional Trial Courts) shall
have exclusive 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. The court through the
clerk of court shall furnish the Land Registration
Commission with two certified copies of all pleadings,
exhibits, orders, and decisions filed or issued in
applications or petitions for land registration, with the
exception of stenographic notes, within five days from
the filing or issuance thereof.
NOTES SECTION 2 of PRD:
1) Registration is not a mode of acquiring ownership but
is merely a procedure to establish evidence of tile over
realty.
2) A certificate of title is not a source of right. It merely
confirms or records a title already existing and vested.
The mere possession thereof does not make one the
true owner of the property.
3) Title is generally defined as the lawful cause or
ground of possessing that which is ours. Title, therefore,
may be defined briefly as that which constitutes a just
cause of exclusive possession, or which is the
foundation of ownership of property, real or
personal. Certificate of title, on the other hand, is a
mere evidence of ownership; it is not the title to the
land itself.
4) Under the Torrens system, a certificate of title may
be:
a. Original Certificate of Title: the first title issued in the
name of the registered owner by the Register of Deeds
covering a parcel of land which had been registered by
virtue of a judicial or administrative proceeding.
b. Transfer Certificate of Title the title issued by the ROD
in favor of the transferee to whom the ownership of the
already registered land had been transferred by virtue
of a sale or other modes of conveyance.
5) Torrens Title is a certificate of ownership issued
under the Torres System, through the Register of
Deeds, naming and declaring the owner of the real
property described therein, free from all liens and
encumbrances except such as may be expressly noted
there or otherwise reserved by law.
6) General Rule: A title once registered cannot be
impugned, altered, changed, modified, enlarged, or
diminished. It shall not be subject to collateral attack.
Exception: Direct proceeding permitted by law, usually
for the protection of innocent third persons.
7) Collateral Attack
A certificate of title shall not be subject to collateral
attack. It cannot be altered, modified, or cancelled
except in a direct proceeding in accordance with
law. (Sec. 48, P.D. 1529)
a. Accion Publiciana, also known as accion plenaria de
posesion, is an ordinary civil proceeding to determine
the better right of possession of realty independent of
title. It refers to an ejectment suit filed after the expiry
of one year from the accrual of the cause of action or
from the unlawful withholding of possession of the
realty. The objective of the plaintiffs in an accion
publiciana is to recover possession only, and not
ownership. However, where the question of ownership
is raised, the courts may pass upon the issue to
determine who has the better right of possession. Such
determination is merely provisional and not conclusive
on the question of ownership.
b. If the petitioner-defendants attack on the validity of
respondent-plaintiffs title, by claiming that fraud
attended its acquisition, is a [prohibited] collateral
attack on the title. It is an attack incidental to the quest
to defend their possession of the properties in an accion
publiciana not in a direct action whose main objective is
to impugn the validity of the judgment granting the
title.
8) Nature of Torrens System:
a. Judicial in character and not merely administrative.
b. Proceeding is in rem (binding upon the whole
world). A proceeding is in rem when the object of the
action is to bar indifferently all who might be minded
making an objection of any sort against the right sought
to be established, and if anyone in the world has a right
to be heard on the strength of alleging facts which, if
true, show an inconsistent interest.
c. Distinguished from proceedings in
personam and quasi in rem:
i. It is a proceeding in personam when the technical
object of the suit is to establish a claim against some
particular person, with a judgment which generally in
theory at least, binds his body, o to bar some individual
claim or objection, so that only certain persons are
entitled to be heard in defense.
ii. On the other hand, actions quasi in rem deal with the
status, ownership, or liability of a particular property
but which are intended to operate on these questions
only as between the particular parties to the
proceedings and not to ascertain or cut off the rights or
interests of all possible claimants. The judgments
therein are binding only upon the parties who joined in
the action.
9) RTC have plenary jurisdiction over land registration
cases as provided in Section 2 of PD 1529. Exception –
Inferior Courts delegated jurisdiction to hear and
determine cadastral or land registration cases in the
following instances:
a. Where the lot sought to be registered is not the
subject of controversy or opposition; or
b. Where the lot is contested but the value thereof
does not exceed P100,000.00, such value to be
ascertained by the affidavit of the claimant or by the
agreement of the respective claimants, if there be more
than one, or from the corresponding tax declaration of
the real property.
10) Actions for forcible entry into and unlawful
detainer of lands or buildings, original jurisdiction over
which is conferred upon the metropolitan trial courts,
municipal trial courts, and municipal circuit trial courts.
11) 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 a cadastral court. The
amendment was aimed at avoiding multiplicity of suits
and the change has simplified registration proceedings.
12) Venue:
a. Real Actions affecting title to or possession of real
property, or an interest therein shall be commenced
and tried in the proper court which has territorial
jurisdiction over the area where the real property
involved, or a portion thereof, is situated.
b. Personal Actions shall be commenced and tried in
the proper court where the plaintiff or any of the
principal defendants resides or in the case of anon-
resident defendant where he may be found, at the
election of the plaintiff.
ii. SECTION 3. Status of other pre-existing land
registration system.
The system of registration under the Spanish Mortgage
Law is hereby discontinued and all lands recorded under
said system which are not yet covered by Torrens title
shall be considered as unregistered lands.
Hereafter, all instruments affecting lands originally
registered under the Spanish Mortgage Law may be
recorded under Section 113 of this Decree, until the
land shall have been brought under the operation of the
Torrens system.
The books or registration for unregistered lands
provided under Section 194 of the Revised
Administrative Code, as amended by Act No. 3344, shall
continue to remain in force; Provided, that all
instruments dealing with unregistered lands shall
henceforth be registered under Section 113 of this
Decree.
E. CHAPTER 2 THE LAND REGISTRATION COMMISSION
AND ITS REGISTRIES OF DEEDS
i. Section 4. Land Registration Commission.
In order to have a more efficient execution of the laws
relative to the registration of lands, geared to the
massive and accelerated land reform and social justice
program of the government, there is created a
commission to be known as the Land Registration
Commission under the executive supervision of the
Department of Justice.
ii. Section 5. Officials and employees of the
Commission.
The Land Registration Commission shall have a chief
and an assistant chief to be known, respectively, as the
Commissioner and the Deputy Commissioner of Land
Registration who shall be appointed by the President.
The Commissioner shall be duly qualified member of
the Philippine Bar with at least ten years of practice in
the legal profession, and shall have the same rank,
compensation and privileges as those of a Judge of the
Court of First Instance. The Deputy Commissioner, who
shall possess the same qualifications as those required
of the Commissioner, shall receive compensation which
shall be three thousand pesos per annum less than that
of the Commissioner. He shall act as Commissioner of
Land Registration during the absence or disability of the
Commissioner and when there is a vacancy in the
position until another person shall have been
designated or appointed in accordance with law. The
Deputy Commissioner shall also perform such other
functions as the Commissioner may assign to him.
They shall be assisted by such number of division chiefs
as may be necessary in the interest of the functioning of
the Commission, by a Special Assistant to the
Commissioner, and by a Chief Geodetic Engineer who
shall each receive compensation at the rate of three
thousand four hundred pesos per annum less than that
of the Deputy Commissioner.
All other officials and employees of the Land
Registration Commission including those of the
Registries of Deeds whose salaries are not herein
provided, shall receive salaries corresponding to the
minimum of their respective upgraded ranges as
provided under paragraph 3.1 of Budget Circular No.
273, plus sixty per centum thereof across the board,
notwithstanding the maximum salary allowed for their
respective civil service eligibilities.
The salaries of officials and employees provided in this
Decree shall be without prejudice to such benefits and
adjustments as may from time to time be granted by
the President or by the legislature to government
employees.
All officials and employees of the Commission except
Registers of Deeds shall be appointed by the Secretary
of Justice upon recommendation of the Commissioner
of Land Registration.
NOTES SECTION 5 of PRD:
1) On June 17, 1954, RA No. 1151 created the Land
Registration Commission (LRC) to provide a more
efficient execution of the existing laws relative to the
registration of lands.
2) LRC exercise supervision and control over all
Registers of Deeds, as well as the clerical and archival
system of the courts of first instance throughout the
Philippines with the reference to the registration of
lands.
3) It was headed by a Commissioner and an Assistant
Commissioner, both appointed by the President with
the consent of the Commission on Appointments.
4) The LRC has been renamed Land Registration
Authority (LRA). It is headed by an Administrator who is
assisted by two (2) Deputy Administrators, all of whom
are appointed by the President upon
the recommendation of the Secretary of Justice. All
other officials of the LRA, except Register of Deeds, are
appointed by the Secretary of Justice upon
recommendation of the Administrator.
5) The LRA is the central repository of records relative
to original registration of lands titled under the Torrens
system, including subdivision and consolidation plans of
titled lands. Specifically, it is responsible for the
issuance of decrees of registration and certificates of
title (original and duplicate) where land is brought for
the first time under the Torrens system.
iii. Section 6. General Functions.
1. The Commissioner of Land Registration shall have
the following functions:
a) 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;
b) Exercise supervision and control over all Registers of
Deeds and other personnel of the Commission;
c) Resolve cases elevated en consulta by, or on appeal
from decision of, Registers of Deeds;
d) 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;
e) 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.
2. The Land Registration Commission shall have the
following functions:
a) 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;
b) Extend assistance to courts in ordinary and cadastral
land registration proceedings;
c) 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.
NOTES SECTION 6 of PRD:
1) LRA Administrator, an executive officer with judicial
rank.
a. Shall have the same rank, compensation, and
privileges as those of a Judge of the Court of First
Instance (RTC).
b. His functions are plainly executive and subject to the
President’s power of supervision and control.
c. He can be investigated and removed only by the
President and not by the Supreme Court.
2) Duty of LRA to issue decree ministerial.
a. While the duty of the LRA officials to issue a decree
of registration is purely ministerial, it is ministerial only
in the sense that they act under the orders of the court
and the decree must be in conformity with the decision
of the court and with the data found in the record, as to
which they have no discretion on the matter.
b. But the issuance by LRA officials of a decree of
registration is not a purely ministerial duty in cases
where they find that such would result to the double
titling of the same parcel of land.
c. The issuance of a decree of registration is part of the
judicial function of courts and is not compellable
by mandamus because it involves the exercise of
discretion.
d. The duty of land registration officials to render
reports is not limited to the period before the court’s
decision becomes final but may extend even after its
finality but not beyond the lapse of one (1) year from
the entry of the decree.
iv. Section 7. Office of the Register of Deeds.
There shall be at least one Register of Deeds for each
province and one for each city. Every Registry with a
yearly average collection of more than sixty thousand
pesos during the last three years shall have one Deputy
Register of Deeds, and every Registry with a yearly
average collection of more than three hundred
thousand pesos during the last three years, shall have
one Deputy Register of Deeds and one second Deputy
Register of Deeds.
The Secretary of Justice shall define the official station
and territorial jurisdiction of each Registry upon the
recommendation of the Commissioner of Land
Registration, with the end in view of making every
registry easily accessible to the people of the
neighboring municipalities.
The province or city shall furnish a suitable space or
building for the office of the Register of Deeds until
such time as the same could be furnished out of
national funds.
NOTES SECTION 7 of PRD:
1) Registry of Property:
a. 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.
b. If the sale is not registered, it is binding only
between the seller and the buyer, but it does not affect
innocent third persons.
c. The Civil Code, in Article 708, provides for the
establishment of a Registry of Property which has for its
object the inscription or annotation of acts and
contracts relating to the ownership and other rights
over immovable property.
d. The original copy of the original certificate of title
shall be filed in the Registry of Deeds.
e. 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 the order of their filing. They shall be
regarded as registered from the time so noted.
2) Registration in general, as the law uses the word,
means any entry made in the books of the Registry,
including both registration in its ordinary and strict
sense, and cancellation, annotation, and even the
marginal notes. In its strict acceptation, it is the entry
made in the Registry which records solemnly and
permanently the right of ownership and other real
rights.
3) When a conveyance has been properly recorded,
such record is constructive notice of its contents and all
interests, legal and equitable, included therein.
4) Effect of Registration:
a. 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.
b. Registration in the public registry is notice to the
whole world.
c. Thus, between two buyers of the same immovable
property registered under the Torrens system, the law
gives ownership priority to:
i. The first registrant in good faith;
ii. Then, the first possessor in good faith; and
iii. Finally, the buyer who in good faith presents the
oldest title.
This rule, however, does not apply if the property is not
registered under the Torrens system.
d. In a case, two certificates of title were issued
covering the very same property derived from two
different land patents, the Court ruled in favor of the
owner who registered his land patent first regardless of
the date of issuance of the said land patent.
v. Section 8. Appointment of Registers of Deeds and
their Deputies and other subordinate personnel;
salaries.
Registers of Deeds shall be appointed by the President
of the Philippines upon recommendation of the
Secretary of Justice. Deputy Registers of Deeds and all
other subordinate personnel of the Registries of Deeds
shall be appointed by the Secretary of Justice upon the
recommendation of the Commissioner of Land
Registration.
The salaries of Registers of Deeds and their Deputies
shall be at the following rates:
1. First Class Registries - The salaries of Registers of
Deeds in first class Registries shall be three thousand
four hundred pesos per annum less than that of the
Deputy Commissioner.
2. Second Class Registries - The salaries of Registers of
Deeds in second class Registries shall be three thousand
four hundred pesos per annum less than those of
Registers of Deeds in first class Registries.
3. Third Class Registries - The salaries of Registers of
Deeds in third class Registries shall be three thousand
four hundred pesos per annum less than those of
Registers of Deeds in second class Registries.
4. The salaries of Deputy Registers of Deeds and
Second Deputy Registers of Deeds - shall be three
thousand four hundred pesos per annum less than
those of their corresponding Registers of Deeds and
Deputy Registers of Deeds, respectively.
The Secretary of Justice, upon recommendation of the
Commissioner of Land Registration, shall cause the
reclassification of Registries based either on workload
or the class of province/city, whichever will result in a
higher classification, for purposes of salary adjustments
in accordance with the rates hereinabove provided.
vi. Section 9. Qualifications of Registers of Deeds and
Deputy Registers of Deeds.
No person shall be appointed Register of Deeds unless
he has been admitted to the practice of law in the
Philippines and shall have been actually engaged in such
practice for at least three years or has been employed
for a like period in any branch of government the
functions of which include the registration of property.
The Deputy Register of Deeds shall be a member of the
Philippine Bar. Provided, however, that no Register of
Deeds or Deputy Register of Deeds holding office as
such upon the passage of this Decree shall by reason
hereof, be removed from office or be demoted to a
lower category or scale of salary except for cause and
upon compliance with due process as provided for by
law.
vii. Section 10. General functions of Registers of
Deeds.
The office of the Register of Deeds constitutes a public
repository of records of instruments affecting registered
or unregistered lands and chattel mortgages in the
province or city wherein such office is situated.
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.
He shall see to it that said instrument bears the proper
documentary and science stamps and that the same are
properly canceled. 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 consultation in accordance with Section
117 of this Decree.
NOTES SECTIONS 8, 9, & 10 of PRD:
1) Office of the Register of Deed:
a. There shall be at least one Register of Deeds for each
province and one for each city.
b. The Secretary of Justice shall define the official
station and territorial jurisdiction of each Registry upon
the recommendation of the LRA Administrator.
c. Registers of Deeds shall be appointed by the
President upon recommendation of the Secretary of
Justice.
d. Deputy Registers of Deeds and all other subordinate
personnel of the Registries of Deeds shall be appointed
by the Secretary of Justice upon the recommendation of
the LRA Administrator.
e. Both the Register of Deeds and Deputy Register of
Deeds must be members of the Bar.
2) Duty of Register of Deeds to register, ministerial.
a. Register of Deeds perform both functions of an
administrative character and functions which are at
least of a quasi-judicial nature.
b. However, the function of a Register of Deeds with
reference to the registration of deeds, encumbrances,
instruments and the like is ministerial in nature.
c. Registration is a mere ministerial act by which a deed,
contract or instrument is sought to be inscribed in the
records of 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. Whether the document is invalid, frivolous
or intended to harass, is not the duty of a Register of
Deeds to decide but is for a court of competent
jurisdiction to determine.
3) Instances where Register of Deeds may deny
registration:
a. Where there are several copies of the title (co-
owner’s duplicate) but only one is presented with the
instrument to be registered.
b. Where the property is presumed to be conjugal, but
the instrument of conveyance bears the signature of
only one spouse.
c. Where there is a pending case in court where the
character of the land and validity of the conveyance are
in issue.
d. Where required certificates or documents are not
submitted.
The refusal by the Register of Deeds to register an
instrument affecting registered land by reason of non-
compliance with certain requirements does not bar
registration if thereafter the defects are cured.
4) Doubtful questions shall be submitted to LRA
Administrator for resolution:
a. A Register of Deeds is precluded from exercising his
personal judgment and discretion when confronted
with the problem of whether to register a deed or
instrument on the ground that it is invalid.
b. When the Register of Deeds is in doubt with regard
to the proper step to be taken or memorandum to be
made in pursuance of any deed, mortgage or other
instrument presented to him for registration, or where
any party in interest does not agree with the action
taken by him with reference to any such deed or
instrument, he shall certify the question to the LRA
Administrator who shall, after notice and hearing, enter
an order prescribing the step to be taken on the
doubtful question.
c. But mandamus does not lie to compel the Register of
Deeds to make registration.
d. The administrative remedy must be resorted to by
the interested party before he can have recourse to the
courts.
5) The act of registration does not validate an
otherwise void contract. While registration operates as
a notice of the deed, contract, or instrument to others,
it does not add to its validity nor converts an invalid
instrument into a valid one as between the parties, not
amounts to a declaration that the instrument
recognizes a valid and subsisting interest in the land.
6) Notice to the Register of Deeds or adverse party.
a) When a writ of preliminary injunction in a cadastral
proceeding is dissolved, the obstacle to the registration
of a deed of sale is removed, but it is no authority for
the court to issue an order for registration of said deed
without notice to the Register of Deeds or to the
adverse party, where the dismissal of the cadastral case
is not yet final.
b) It is one thing for the Register of Deeds, in the
exercise of his ministerial duties under the law, to
register an instrument which in his opinion is
registrable, and quite another thing for the court itself
to order the registration. The former does not
contemplate notice to and hearing of interested parties
such as are required in a judicial proceeding nor carries
with it the solemnity and legal consequences of a court
judgment.
viii. Section 11. Discharge of duties of Register of
Deeds in case of vacancy, etc.
1. Until a regular Register of Deeds shall have been
appointed for a province or city, or in case of vacancy in
the office, or upon the occasion of the absence, illness,
suspension, or inability of the Register of Deeds to
discharge his duties, said duties shall be performed by
the following officials, in the order in which they are
mentioned below, unless the Secretary of Justice
designates another official to act temporarily in his
place:
a) For the province or city where there is a Deputy
Register of Deeds, by said Deputy Register of Deeds, or
by the second Deputy Register of Deeds, should there
be one;
b) For the province or city where there is no Deputy or
second Deputy Register of Deeds, by the Provincial or
City Fiscal, or any Assistant Fiscal designated by the
Provincial or City Fiscal;
2. In case of absence, disability, or suspension of the
Register of Deeds without pay, or in case of vacancy in
the position, the Secretary of Justice may, in his
discretion, authorize the payment of an additional
compensation to the official acting as Register of Deeds,
such additional compensation together with his actual
salary not to exceed the salary authorized for the
position thus filled by him.
3. In case of a newly created province or city and
pending establishment of a Registry of Deeds and the
appointment of a regular Register of Deeds for the new
province or city, the Register of Deeds of the mother
province or city shall be the ex-officio Register of Deeds
for said new province or city.
ix. Section 12. Owner's Index; reports.
There shall be prepared in every Registry an index
system which shall contain the names of all registered
owners alphabetically arranged. For this purpose, an
index card which shall be prepared in the name of each
registered owner which shall contain a list of all lands
registered in his name.
The Register of Deeds shall submit to the Land
Registration Commission within ten days after the
month to which they pertain his monthly reports on
collections and accomplishments. He shall also submit
to the Commission at the end of December of each
year, an annual inventory of all titles and instruments in
his Registry.
x. Section 13. Chief Geodetic Engineer.
There shall be a Chief Geodetic Engineer in the Land
Registration Commission who shall be the technical
adviser of the Commission on all matters involving
surveys and shall be responsible to him for all plats,
plans and works requiring the services of a geodetic
engineer in said office. He shall perform such other
functions as may, from time to time, be assigned to him
by the Commissioner.
NOTES SECTION 13 of PRD:
1) 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.
2) Only the Lands Management Bureau has authority to
approve original survey plans for registration
purposes. There was a need to centralize in one agency,
the function of verifying and approving original survey
plans for all purposes in order to assure compliance
with established standards and minimize irregularities
in the execution of land surveys.
III. CHAPTER 3 - ORIGINAL REGISTRATION
ORDINARY REGISTRATION PROCEEDINGS
A. Who may apply?
Registration under the Property Registration
Decree i. Section 14. Who may apply.
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.
NOTES SECTION 14(1) of PRD:
1) Requisites for registration under Section 14(1)
a. That the land applied for is an agricultural public land
classified as alienable and disposable land at the time;
b. The application for registration is filed with the
proper court;
c. That the applicant, by himself or through
his predecessors-in-interest, has been in open,
continuous, exclusive and notorious possession and
occupation thereof, under a bona fide claim of
ownership; and
d. That such possession and occupation has been
effected since June 12, 1945 or earlier.
2) Land must already be (a) classified as alienable and
disposable land; and (b)possessed and occupied since
June 12, 1945 or earlier at the time of filing of the
application for registration.
a. It need not be classified as alienable and disposable
land of public domain since June 12, 1945. It is sufficient
that the land is already declared as alienable and
disposable land at the time of the application for
registration is filed so as to entitle the possessor to
registration.
3) Steps in Alienation of Public Agricultural Land:
a. It must be shown to have been reclassified
as alienable and disposable• land of the public domain;
b. It 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. (Republic v. CA)
4) With respect to non-agricultural lands like forest
lands, the rules on the confirmation of imperfect title
do not apply unless and until the land classified as
forest land is released in an official proclamation to that
effect so that it may form part of the disposable
agricultural lands of the public domain.
5) Nature of possession must be:
a. Open- It must be known to all. It must not be a
secret or clandestine.
b. Continuous- There must not be any interruption.
c. Exclusive- Land must be possessed by himself or by
his predecessors- in-interest to the exclusion of all
others.
d. Notorious - Use or inhabitance of real property that
is open and obvious to neighbors, leading to a
presumption that the owner has notice of it.
2. Those who have acquired ownership of private lands
by prescription under the provision of existing laws.
NOTES SECTION 14(2) of PRD:
1) Properties of public dominion cannot be acquired by
prescription. No matter how long the possession of the
properties has been, there can be no prescription
against the State regarding property of public domain.
Even a city or municipality cannot acquire them by
prescription as against the State. The exception is
where the law itself so provides. Thus, patrimonial
property of the State may be the subject of acquisition
through prescription.
2) While as a rule, prescription does not run against the
State, the exception is where the law itself expressly
provides.
3) Article 1113 of the Civil Code provides the legal
foundation for the application Section 14(2). It reads:
Art. 1113. All things which are within the commerce of
men are susceptible of prescription, unless otherwise
provide. Property of the State or any of its subdivisions
not patrimonial in character shall not be the object of
prescription.
4) Under the Civil Code, it is clear that where lands of
the public domain are patrimonial and, hence, private in
character, they are susceptible to acquisitive
prescription.
5) Lands of public dominion shall form part of the
patrimonial property of the State when there is a
declaration by the government that these are alienable
or disposable and are no longer intended for public use
or public service. Only when such lands have
become patrimonial can the prescriptive period for the
acquisition of property of the public dominion begin to
run.
6) Thus, where the land is already a private land, the
applicant has the right to register the same under
Section 14(2) even if the possession thereof for the
required prescriptive period commenced on a date later
than June 12, 1945.
7) 2 Kinds of Prescription:
a. Ordinary Acquisitive Prescription- a person acquires
ownership of a patrimonial property through possession
for at least ten (10) years, in good faith and with just
title.
b. Extraordinary acquisitive prescription - a person’s
uninterrupted adverse possession of patrimonial
property for at least thirty (30) years, regardless of good
faith or just title, ripens into ownership pursuant to
Article 1137 of the Civil Code.
8) In sum, for Section 14(2) of the Property Registration
Decree to apply
a) There must be an express declaration by the State
that the public dominion property is no longer intended
for public service or the development of the national
wealth or that the property has been converted into
patrimonial. Without such express declaration, the
property, even if classified as alienable or disposable,
remains property of the public dominion, pursuant to
Article 420 (2) of the Civil Code, and thus incapable of
acquisition by prescription.
b) Such declaration shall be in the form of a law duly
enacted by Congress or a Presidential Proclamation in
cases where the President is duly authorized by law.
9) Prescription Generally:
a. By prescription, one acquires ownership and other
real rights through the lapse of time in the manner and
under the action lay down by law.
b. All things which are within the commerce of men are
susceptible of prescription, unless otherwise provided.
c. Property of the State or any of its subdivisions not
patrimonial in character shall not be the object of
prescription.
d. For purposes of prescription, there is just title when
the adverse claimant came into possession of the
property through one of the modes recognized by law
for the acquisition of ownership or other real rights, but
the grantor was not the owner or could not transmit
any right.
10) Concept of possession for purposes of prescription:
a. Possession in the eyes of the law does not mean that
a man has to have his feet on every square meter of
ground before it can be said that he is in possession.
b. 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.
c. To consolidate prescription, the possession must be
that of owner, and it must be public, peaceful and
uninterrupted.
d. Acts of a possessory character done by virtue of a
license or mere tolerance on the part of the real owner
are not sufficient.
11) Computation of prescription:
a. The present possessor may complete the period
necessary for prescription by tacking his possession to
that of his grantor or predecessor-in-interest.
12) Prescription distinguished from laches:
a. Prescription is concerned with the fact of
delay; Laches is concerned with the effect of delay.
b. Prescription is a matter of time; Laches is principally
a question of inequity of permitting a claim to be
enforced, this inequity being founded on some change
in the condition of the property or the relation of the
parties.
c. Prescription is statutory; Laches is not.
d. Prescription applies at law; Laches applies in equity.
e. Prescription is based on a fixed time; Laches is not.
3. Those who have acquired ownership of private lands
or abandoned riverbeds by right of accession or
accretion under the existing laws.

NOTES SECTION 14(3) of PRD:
1) Accession defined
a. Accession is the right of the owner of a thing, real or
personal, to become the owner of everything which is:
produced thereby, incorporated attached thereto,
Either naturally or artificially.
b. Includes: fruits of, additions to, improvements upon a
thing; building, planting and sowing; alluvion, avulsion,
change of course of rivers, formation of islands.
2) Ownership of abandoned riverbeds by right of
accession:
a. Under Article 461 of the Civil Code, riverbeds which
are abandoned through the natural change in the
course of the water’s ipso facto belong to the owners
whose lands are occupied by the new course in
proportion to the area lost.
b. However, the owners of the lands adjoining the old
bed shall have the right to acquire the same by paying
the value thereof, which value shall not exceed the
value of the area occupied by the new bed.
c. To illustrate: A and B each owns land on opposite
sides of a river. The river changed its course, passing
through the land of C. Who owns the abandoned
riverbed? C, to compensate him for his loss. Now,
suppose that two owners, C and D, lost portions of their
lands. Who owns the riverbed? C and D, in proportion
to the area lost.
d. Law speaks of change of river course. If a river simply
dries up or disappears, the bed left dry will belong to
public dominion (Art 502 of the Civil Code).
3) The requisites for the application of Article 461 of
the Civil Code:
a. The change must be sudden in order that the old
river may be identified;
b. The changing of the course must be more or less
permanent, and not temporary over flooding of
another’s land;
c. The change of the river must be a natural one, i.e.,
caused by natural forces (and not by artificial means);
d. There must be definite abandonment by the
government. (If the government shortly after the
change decides and actually takes steps to bring the
river to its old bed, Article 461 will not apply for, here, it
cannot be said that there was abandonment); and
e. The river must continue to exist, that is, it must not
completely dry up or disappear.
4) Ownership by right of accretion along riverbanks:
a. Article 457 of the Civil Code provides that to the
owners of lands adjoining the banks of rivers belong the
accretion which they gradually receive from the effects
of the current of the waters.
b. In the absence of evidence that the change in the
course of the river was sudden or that it occurred
through avulsion, the presumption is that the change
was gradual and caused by accretion and erosion.
5) 3 Requisites before an accretion is said to have
taken place:
a. That the deposit be gradual and imperceptible;
b. That it be made through the effects of the current of
the water; and
c. That the land where accretion takes place is adjacent
to the banks of rivers.
6) Accretions affecting lands registered under the
Torrens system:
a. In case of diminution of area
Registration does not protect the riparian owner against
diminution of the area of his land through gradual
changes in the course of the adjoining stream;
Accretions which the banks of rivers may gradually
receive from the effect of the current become the
property of the owners of the banks.
b. In case of increase of area
Although alluvion is automatically owned by the
riparian owner, it does not automatically become
registered land, just because the lot which receives such
accretion is covered by a Torrens title;
So, alluvial deposit acquired by a riparian owner of
registered land by accretion may be subjected to
acquisition through prescription by a third person, by
failure of such owner to register such accretion within
the prescribed period.
7) Accretion along the banks of creeks, streams and
lakes:
a. Article 84 of the Spanish Law of Waters of 1866,
which remains in effect, reads:
Art. 84. Accretions deposited gradually upon lands
contiguous to creeks, streams, rivers, and lakes, by
accessions or sediments from the waters thereof,
belong to the owners of such lands.―
b. From the foregoing provisions, alluvial deposits along
the banks of creeks, streams and lakes do not form part
of the public domain as the alluvial property
automatically belongs to the owner of the estate to
which it may have been added.
c. The only restriction is that the owner of the adjoining
property must register the same under the Torrens
system; otherwise, the alluvial property may be subject
to acquisition through prescription by third
persons. (City Mayor of Paranaque City v. Ebio)
8) Alluvion must be the exclusive work of nature:
a. The requirement that the deposit should be due to
the effects of the current of the river is indispensable.
b. Alluvion must be the exclusive work of nature.
c. There must be evidence to prove that the addition to
the property was made gradually through the effects of
the current of the river.
9) Reason for the law on accretion:
a. Compensate the riparian owner for the danger of
loss that he suffers because of the location of his land;
b. Compensate him for the encumbrances and various
kinds of easements to which his property is subject; and
c. Promote the interests of agriculture for the riparian
owner it in the best position to utilize the accretion.
10) Accretion does not automatically become
registered land:
a. Under Article 457 of the Civil Code, the registered
owner of property is considered the lawful owner of the
accretion to his property. But the accretion does not
become automatically registered land just because the
lot which receives it is covered by a Torrens title
thereby making the alluvial property imprescriptible.
b. Ownership of a piece of land is one thing, and
registration under the Torrens system of that ownership
is quite another.
c. Ownership over the accretion received by the land
adjoining a river is governed by the Civil Code.
d. Imprescriptibility of registered land is provided in the
registration law.
11) Where alluvial increment is not registered, it may
be acquired by third persons through prescription:
a. In order that the accretion may be protected by the
rule on imprescriptibility, it is necessary that the same
be brought under the operation of the Torrens system.
b. Where the adjoining land owner does not cause the
registration of the increment to his property, the same
may be acquired by third persons.
12) Alluvial formation along the seashore forms part
of the public domain:
a. In contrast to the rule on accretion, alluvial formation
along the seashore is part of the public domain and,
therefore, not open to acquisition by adverse
possession by private persons.
b. It is outside the commerce of man, unless
otherwise declared by either the executive or
legislative branch of the government.
c. All lands thrown up by the sea and formed
upon the shore by the action of the water,
together with the adjacent sore, belong to the
national domain and are for public uses. The
State shall grant these lands to the adjoining
owners only when they are no longer needed
for the purposes mentioned therein.
4. Those who have acquired ownership of land in any
other manner provided for by law.
NOTES SECTION 14(4) of PRD:
1) Land Grant by Presidential Proclamation
a. The clear implication is that a land grant
having been made by a Presidential
proclamation and by legislative act, the grantee
may apply for the registration of the land and
bring it under the operation of the Torrens
system.
b. Reservation for a specific public purpose by
Presidential proclamation – Lands covered by
reservation are not subject to entry, and no
lawful settlement on them can be acquired.
2) Public Grant - a conveyance of public land by
government to a private individual.
3) Reclamation
a. Filling of submerged land by deliberate act
and reclaiming title thereto
b. Must be initially owned by government.
c. May be subsequently transferred to private
owners.
4) Voluntary Transfer
a. Private grant
b. Voluntary execution of deed of conveyance
c. Contractual relationship between the parties
d. Consensual
5) Involuntary Alienation
a. No consent from the owner of land
b. Forcible acquisition by the State
6) Descent or Devise - Hereditary succession to the
estate of deceased owner.
7) Emancipation Patent / Grant (Certificate of Land
Ownership Award)
a. To ameliorate the sad plight of tenant-farmers
b. Such grant is not transferable except by hereditary
succession.
8) Land acquisition by private corporations:
a. By way of exception, juridical persons may apply for
registration of leased agricultural and disposable lands
not exceeding 1,000 hectares in area for a period of 25
years and renewable for not more than 25 years
(Section 3, Article XII, 1987 Constitution), and except
when the land has been previously acquired by
prescription by a natural person and subsequently
transferred to a juridical entity (in this case, a
corporation may apply for judicial confirmation of title).
b. Purpose of the prohibition (see Chavez v. PEA)
c. Limitation to ownership of land by corporations:
i. Private Lands
1. At least 60% Filipino (Sec. 7, Article XII, 1987
Constitution);
2. Restricted as to extent reasonably necessary to
enable it to carry out purpose for which it was created;
and
3. If engaged in agriculture, it is restricted to 1,024
hectares.
ii. Patrimonial property of the State (Sec. 3, Article XII,
1987 Constitution)
1. Lease (CANNOT own land of the public domain) for
25 years renewable;
2. Limited to 1,000 hectares; and
3. Apply to both Filipinos and foreign corporations.
9) A corporation sole is qualified to apply for
registration
a. A corporation sole is a special form of corporation
usually associated with the clergy.
b. A corporation sole was designed to facilitate the
exercise of the functions of ownership carried on by the
clerics for and on behalf of the church which was
regarded as the property owner.
c. A corporation sole consists of one person only, and
his successors (who will always be one at a time), in
some particular station, who are incorporated by law in
order to give them some legal capacities and
advantages, particularly that of perpetuity, which in
their natural persons they could not have had.
d. A corporation sole is qualified to own and register
private agricultural land.
e. A corporation sole by the nature of its incorporation
is vested with the right to purchase and hold real estate
and personal property.
f. Bishops or archbishops, as the case may be, as
corporations sole are merely administrators of the
church properties that come to their possession, and
which they hold in trust for the church. Thus, church
properties acquired by the incumbent of a corporation
sole pass, by operation of law, upon his death not to his
personal heirs but to his successor in office
Where the land is owned in common, all the co-
owners shall file the application jointly.
NOTES par. 2, SECTION 14 of PRD:
1) Co-owners shall file application jointly:
a. Under Article 493 of the Civil Code, each co-
owner shall have the full ownership of his part and of
the fruits and benefits pertaining thereto, and he may
therefore alienate, assign or mortgage it, and even
substitute another person in its enjoyment, except
when personal rights are involved.
b. But the effect of the alienation or the mortgage, with
respect to the co-owners, shall be limited to the portion
which may be allotted to him in the division upon the
termination of the co-ownership.
c. Since a co-owner cannot be considered a true owner
of a specific portion until division or partition is
effected, he cannot file an application for registration
for the whole area without joining the co-owners as
applicants.
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.
NOTES par. 3, SECTION 14 of PRD:
1) Vendee a retro may file application in his name
a. A sale with pacto de retro transfers the legal title to
the vendee and the vendee is subrogated to all the
rights and actions of the vendor, subject to the
latter’s right of redemption.
b. Having the legal title to the land, the vendee
a retro has therefore a registerable title thereto which
may be the subject of initial registration.
c. The right to redeem the property retained by the
vendor a retro should only be noted in the decree and
certificate of title that may be issued.
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.
NOTES par. 4, SECTION 14 of PRD:
1) Trustee may apply for registration on behalf of his
principal:
a. A trustee on behalf of his principal may apply for
original registration of any land held in trust by him.
b. A person who establishes a trust is called the trustor;
one in whom confidence is reposed as regards property
for the benefit of another known as the trustee; and the
person for whose benefit the trust has been created is
referred to as the beneficiary or cestui que trust.
c. Whoever claims an interest in registered land by
reason of any implied or constructive trust shall file with
the Register of Deeds for registration a sworn
statement containing:
i. a description of the land;
ii. the name of the registered owner; and
iii. a reference to the number of the certificate of title.
d. Such claim shall not affect the title of a purchaser for
value and in good faith before its registration.
ii. Tan v. Republic, G.R. No. 193443, April 16, 2012
Section 14. Who may apply. 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 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 riverbeds 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.
In other words, for one to invoke the provisions
of Section 14(2) and set up acquisitive prescription
against the State, it is primordial that the status of the
property as patrimonial be first established.
Furthermore, the period of possession preceding the
classification of the property as patrimonial cannot be
considered in determining the completion of the
prescriptive period.
iii. Republic v. East Silverlane Realty Development
Corp., 666 SCRA 401
Accordingly, there must be an express declaration by
the State that the public dominion property is no longer
intended for public service or the development of the
national wealth or that the property has been
converted into patrimonial. Without such express
declaration, the property, even if classified as alienable
or disposable, remains property of the public dominion,
pursuant to Article 420(2), and thus incapable of
acquisition by prescription. It is only when such
alienable and disposable lands are expressly declared by
the State to be no longer intended for public service or
for the development of the national wealth that the
period of acquisitive prescription can begin to run. Such
declaration shall be in the form of a law duly enacted by
Congress or a Presidential Proclamation in cases where
the President is duly authorized by law.
iv. Republic v. Candymaker, 492 SCRA 272 (2006)
Applicants for confirmation of imperfect title must,
therefore, prove the following: (a)that the land forms
part of the disposable and alienable agricultural lands of
the public domain; and (b) that they have been in open,
continuous, exclusive, and notorious possession and
occupation of the same under a bona fide claim of
ownership either since time immemorial or since June
12, 1945.
v. Republic v. CA and Naguit, 448 SCRA 442 (2005)
There are three obvious requisites for the filing of an
application for registration of title under Section 14(1)-
that the property in question is alienable and disposable
land of the public domain; that the applicants by
themselves or through their predecessors-in-interest
have been in open, continuous, exclusive and notorious
possession and occupation, and; that such possession is
under a bona fide claim of ownership since June 12,
1945 or earlier.
Although tax declarations and realty tax payment of
property are not conclusive evidence of ownership,
nevertheless, they are good indicia of the possession in
the concept of owner for no one in his right mind would
be paying taxes for a property that is not in his actual or
at least constructive possession. They constitute at least
proof that the holder has a claim of title over the
property. 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. Such
an act strengthens one’s bona fide claim of acquisition
of ownership.
vi. Domingo v. Landicho, 531 SCRA 606 (2007)
Section 14 of P.D. No. 1529 provides that to be entitled
of a land, the applicant must prove that: (a) the land
applied for forms part of the disposable and alienable
agricultural lands of the public domain and (b) he has
been in open, continuous, exclusive and notorious
possession and occupation of the same under a bona
fide claim of ownership either since time immemorial or
since June 12, 1945.
All lands not otherwise appearing to be clearly within
private ownership are presumed to belong to the State,
and unless it has been shown that they have been
reclassified by the State as alienable or disposable to a
private person, they remain part of the inalienable
public domain. To prove that a land is alienable, an
applicant must conclusively establish the existence of a
positive act of government, such as presidential
proclamation or an executive order, or administrative
action, investigation reports of the Bureau of Lands
investigator or a legislative act or statute.
vii. Republic v. CA and Tancinco, 132 SCRA 514 (1984)
Article 457 of the New Civil Code provides:
To the owners of lands adjoining the banks of rivers
belongs the accretion which they gradually receive from
the effects of the current of the waters.
The above-quoted article requires the concurrence of
three requisites before an accretion covered by this
particular provision is said to have taken place. They
are (1) that the deposit be gradual and
imperceptible; (2) that it be made through the effects of
the current of the water; and (3) that the land where
accretion takes place is adjacent to the banks of rivers.
The requirement that the deposit should be due to the
effect of the current of the river is indispensable. This
excludes from Art. 457 of the New Civil Code all
deposits caused by human intervention. Alluvion must
be the exclusive work of nature.
The reason behind the law giving the riparian owner the
right to any land or alluvion deposited by a river is to
compensate him for the danger of loss that he suffers
because of the location of his land. If estates bordering
on rivers are exposed to floods and other evils produced
by the destructive force of the waters and if by virtue of
lawful provisions, said estates are subject to
encumbrances and various kinds of easements, it is
proper that the risk or danger which may prejudice the
owners thereof should be compensated by the right of
accretion. (Cortes v. City of Manila, 10 Phil. 567)
A riparian owner then does not acquire the additions to
his land caused by special works expressly intended or
designed to bring about accretion. Indeed, private
persons cannot, by themselves, reclaim land from water
bodies belonging to the public domain without proper
permission from government authorities. And even if
such reclamation had been authorized, the reclaimed
land does not automatically belong to the party
reclaiming the same as they may still be subject to the
terms of the authority earlier granted.
viii. Buenaventura v. Republic, 517 SCRA 271 (2207)
In the case of Republic v. CA, it becomes crystal clear
from the ruling of the Court that even if the possession
of alienable lands of the public domain commenced
only after June 12, 1945, application for registration of
the said property is still possible by virtue of
Section 14(2) of the Property Registration Decree which
speaks of prescription.
The records, indeed, reveal that petitioners were in
possession of the subject property for more than 30
years, 32 years to be exact, reckoned from the year
1968, when the subject property was finally declared
alienable and disposable by the DENR to the time they
file an application for registration of title over the
subject property on June 5, 2000.
Petitioners’ possession of the subject property since
1968 has been characterized as open, continuous,
exclusive and notorious possession and occupation in
the concept of an owner.
By this, the subject alienable and disposable public land
had been effectively converted into private property
over which petitioners have acquired ownership thru
prescription to which they are entitled to have title thru
registration proceedings.
ix. Heirs of Malabanan v. Republic, 587 SCRA 172
(2009)
Applicants under 14(1) of PD 1529 in relation to sec
48(b) of CA 141 acquire ownership of, and registrable
title to, such lands based on the length and quality of
their possession. It is sufficient that the land be
declared alienable and disposable at the time of the
filing for the application for judicial confirmation of
imperfect title and the land need not be alienable and
disposable during the entire period of possession.
Prescription
Applicants who have acquired ownership of private
lands by prescription under the provisions of the Civil
Code. (Sec. 14(2), P.D. 1529) Possession has to be in the
concept of an owner, public, peaceful and
uninterrupted. (Article 1118, NCC). Ownership is
acquired through uninterrupted adverse possession for
thirty years, without need of title or of good
faith. (Article 1137, NCC)
Lands of the Public Domain are outside the commerce
of man and consequently cannot be acquired through
prescription.
Under 14(2) of PD 1529, applicants acquire ownership
of the lands through prescription in the Civil Code.
However, the applicants may only acquire patrimonial
lands of the public domain, which only become such
after they have been declared alienable and disposable
and there must also be an express government
manifestation that the property is already patrimonial
or no longer retained for public service or the
development of national wealth under Article 422 of
the Civil Code. Only when the land has become
patrimonial property can the prescriptive period for the
acquisition of property of the public dominion begin to
run.
NOTES:
1) Where the land is owned in common, all the co-
owners shall file the application jointly.
2) If the applicant is not a resident of the Philippines,
he shall file with his application an instrument in due
form appointing an agent upon whom service shall be
made.
3) Applications for judicial confirmation of imperfect
through possession shall not extend beyond December
31, 2020.
x. SECTIONS 47, 48, CA 141, as amended
Judicial Confirmation of Imperfect or Incomplete Titles
SECTION 47.
The persons specified in the next following section are
hereby granted time, not to extend beyond December
31, 1987 within which to take advantage of the benefit
of this chapter: Provided, That this extension shall apply
only where the area applied for does not exceed 144
hectares. Provided, further, That the several periods of
time designated by the President in accordance with
section forty-five of this Act shall apply also to the lands
comprised in the provisions of this chapter, but this
section shall not be construed as prohibiting any of said
persons from acting under this chapter at any time prior
to the period fixed by the President.
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:
a) Those who prior to the transfer of sovereignty from
Spain to the prior United States have applied for the
purchase, composition or other form of grant of lands
of the public domain under the laws and royal decrees
then in force and have instituted and prosecuted the
proceedings in connection therewith, but have with or
without default upon their part, or for any other cause,
not received title therefor, if such applicants or grantees
and their heirs have occupied and cultivated said lands
continuously since the filing of their applications.
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 thirty
years immediately preceding the filing of the
application for 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.
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
for at least 30 years shall be entitled to the rights
granted in sub-section (b) hereof.
NOTES Judicial Confirmation of Imperfect or Incomplete
Titles:
1) Governing Provision: Section 48(b), CA No. 141
(Public Land Act)
a. 2 Significant amendments have been introduce by PD
No. 1073:
i. First, agricultural lands was changed to alienable and
disposable lands of the public domain•; and
ii. Second, possession must be since June 12, 1945.
b. As thus amended, Section 48 (b) and (c) of CA No.
141, as amended, reads:
Sec. 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 Regional Trial Court of the province or
city where the land is located for confirmation of their
claims and the issuance of a certificate of title therefor,
under the Property Registration Decree to wit:
Xxx xxx xxx
(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 of ownership,
since June 12, 1945, 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.
(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 alienable and
disposable lands of the public domain, under a bona
fide claim of ownership, since June 12, 1945, shall be
entitled to the rights granted in sub-section (b) hereof.
c. Period of possession: Historical Background
i. The significance of the date June 12, 1945 appears to
have been lost to history. A major concern raised
against this date is that the country was at this time
under Japanese occupation, and for some years after,
was suffering from the uncertainties and instabilities
that World War II brought. Questions were raised on
how one could possibly comply with the June 12, 1945
or earlier occupation/possession requirement of PD
1073 when the then prevailing situation did not legally
or physically permit it. Without the benefit of
congressional records, as the enactment of the law (a
Presidential Decree) was solely through the President’s
lawmaking powers under a regime that permitted it, the
most logical reason or explanation for the date is the
possible impact of the interplay between the old law
and the amendatory law. When PD 1073 was enacted,
the utmost concern, in all probability, was how the law
would affect the application of the old law which
provided for a thirty-year possession period. Counting
30 years backwards from the enactment of PD 1073 on
January 25, 1977, PD 1073 should have provided for a
January 24, 1947cut-off date, but it did not. Instead, it
provided, for unknown reasons, the date June 12, 1945.
ii. The June 12, 1945 cut-off date raised legal concerns;
vested rights acquired under the old law (CA 141, as
amended by RA 1942) providing for a 30-
year possession period could not be impaired by the PD
1073 amendment.
iii. From this perspective, PD 1073 should have thus
provided January 24, 1947 and not June 12, 1945 as
its cut-off date, yet the latter date is the express legal
reality. The reconciliation, as properly defined by
jurisprudence, is that where an applicant has satisfied
the requirements of Section 48 (b) of CA 141, as
amended by RA 1942, prior to the effectivity of PD
1073, the applicant is entitled to perfect his or her title,
even if possession and occupation does not date back to
June 12, 1945.(Concurring and Dissenting Opinion of J.
BRION, Heirs of Mario Malabanan v. Republic, 587 SCRA
172)
d. Section 48 (b) of the Public Land Act on judicial
confirmation of imperfect or incomplete titles has
a counterpart provision in Section 14(1) of the Property
Registration Decree.
e. There are no material differences between Section
14(1) of the Property Registration Decree and Section
48(b) of the Public Land Act, as amended.
i. True, the Public Land Act does refer to agricultural
lands of the public domain, while the Property
Registration Decree uses the term ‘alienable and
disposable lands of the public domain.
ii. It must be noted though that the Constitution
declares that ‘alienable lands of the public domain
shall be limited to agricultural lands.
f. RA No. 9176 extended the period to file application to
December 31, 2020
“On November 13, 2002, RA No. 9176 was enacted:
i. Extending the period to file an application for judicial
confirmation of imperfect or incomplete titles to
December 31, 2020;
ii. Further limiting the area applied for to 12 hectares;
and
iii. Providing that all pending applications filed before
the effectivity of the amendatory Act shall be treated as
having been filed in accordance with the provisions
thereof.
iv. The extension of the period fixed by law for the filing
of the application for registration is not jurisdictional
but is more of a time limitation.
2) Registration proceeding presupposes that the land is
a public agricultural land
a. Public Land Act, as amended, is a special law
specifically applying to agricultural lands of the public
domain.
b. As a rule, no title or right to, or equity in, any lands
of the public domain may be acquired by prescription or
by adverse possession or occupancy except as expressly
provided by law.
c. Registration under Section 48(b) of the PLA (No.
141) presumes that the land was originally public
agricultural land but because of adverse possession
since June 12, 1945, the land has become private.
d. To entitle him to registration under Section 48(b) of
the PLA, the applicant must prove that:
i. The land is alienable public land; and
ii. His possession and occupation has been open,
continuous, exclusive, notorious and in the concept of
owner;
iii. Since June 12, 1945.
e. Title is void where land is inalienable and may be
cancelled even in the hands of an innocent purchaser
for value:
i. A certificate of title is void when it covers property of
public domain classified as forest or timber and mineral
lands.
ii. Any title issued on non-disposable lots even in the
hands of an alleged innocent purchaser for value, shall
be cancelled.
3) Requisites for availment of Chapter VIII only when
the following conditions are met that the possessor of
the land may acquire, by operation of law, a right to a
grant, a government grant, without the necessity of a
certificate of title being issued:•
a. That the land forms part of the disposable and
alienable agricultural lands of the public domain; and
b. That he has been in open, continuous, exclusive and
notorious possession thereof, under a bona fide claim
of ownership, since June 12, 1945.
4) Land must be A and D land at the time the
application for confirmation is filed:
a. Section 48(b) of the PLA (Judicial Confirmation of
Imperfect or Incomplete Title) applies exclusively
to alienable and disposable agricultural lands of the
public domain.
i. Forest or timber lands, mineral lands and lands within
national parks are excluded
b. The right to file the application for registration
derives from a bona fide claim of ownership going back
to June 12, 1945 or earlier, by reason of the claimant’s
open, continuous, exclusive and notorious possession of
alienable and disposable lands of the public domain.
c. Section 48(b) of the PLA does not require that the
land applied for should have been alienable and
disposable during the entire period of possession. It is
sufficient that the land is already classified as alienable
and disposable portion of the public domain at the time
the application is filed.
5) Rule different where land is not registrable as when
it forms part of the public forest:
a. A different rule obtains for lands which are incapable
of registration as when they belong to the category of
forest or timber, mineral lands, and national parks.
b. The reason for this is that, under Section 2, Article XII
of the Constitution, only agricultural lands may be the
subject of alienation.
6) Only A and D(alienable & disposable) lands may be
the subject of confirmation of title:
a. There can be no imperfect title to be confirmed over
lands not yet classified as disposable or alienable.
b. In the absence of such classification, the land
remains unclassified public land until released
therefrom and open to disposition.
c. Indeed, it has been held that the rules on the
confirmation of imperfect title do not apply unless and
until the land classified as, say, forest land is released in
an official proclamation to that effect so that it may
form part of the disposable agricultural lands of the
public domain.
7) Where applicant has acquired a right to a
government grant, application is a mere formality:
a. When the conditions specified in Section 48(b) of the
PLA are complied with, 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.
b. The application for confirmation is a mere formality,
the lack of which does not affect the legal sufficiency of
the tile as would be evidenced by the patent and the
Torrens title to be issued upon the strength of said
patent.
c. For all legal intents and purposes, the land is
segregated from the public domain, because the
beneficiary is 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.
8) Compliance with all requirements for a government
grant ipso jure converts land to private property:
a. Where all the requirements for a government grant
are complied with, i.e.,possession in the manner and for
the period required by law, the land ipso jure ceases to
be public land and becomes private property.
9) Application must conform to the requirements of the
Property Registration Decree:
a. Section 50 of the PLA requires that every person
claiming any lands or interest in lands under Chapter
VIII must in every case present an application to the
RTC, praying that the validity of the alleged title or claim
be inquired into and that a certificate of title be issued
to him under the provisions of PD No. 1529.
b. The application shall conform as nearly as may be in
its material allegations to the requirements of an
application for registration under Section 15 of the
Decree.
10) Hearing:
a. Applications for registration shall be heard in the RTC
or, in proper cases, in a First Level Court, in the same
manner and shall be subject to the same procedure as
established in the Property Registration Decree.
b. Notice of all such applications, together with a plan
of the lands claimed, shall be immediately forwarded to
the Director of Lands, who may appear as a party in
such cases.
c. Prior to the publication for hearing, all of the papers
in said case shall be transmitted by the clerk to the
Solicitor General or officer acting in his stead, in order
that he may, if he deems it advisable for the interests of
the government, investigate all of the facts alleged in
the application or otherwise brought to his attention.
i. The burden is on applicant to prove his positive
averments and not for the government or the private
oppositors to establish a negative proposition insofar as
the applicants’ specific lots are concerned.
ii. He must submit convincing proof of his and
his predecessor-in- interest’s actual, peaceful and
adverse possession in the concept of owner of the lots
during the period required by law.
11) Order for the issuance of a decree:
a. Whenever any judgment of confirmation or other
decree of the court under Chapter VIII of the PLA shall
become final, the clerk of court shall certify that fact to
the Director of Lands, with a certified copy of the
decree of confirmation or judgment of the court and
the plan and technical description of the land.
b. The final decree of the court shall in every case be
the basis for the original certificate of title in favor of
the persons entitled to the property under the
procedure prescribed in the Property Registration
Decree.
12) Land declared public land in a previous registration
case may be the subject of judicial confirmation:
a. In Zara v. Director of Lands, a parcel of land which
had been declared public land in a previous registration
proceeding was again the subject of application by
persons claiming an imperfect title thereto on the basis
of their continuous and adverse possession for more
than thirty years. The trial court dismissed the
application on the ground of res judicata. However, the
Supreme Court reversed the order of dismissal,
holding, that by reason of the claimant’s possession for
thirty years he is conclusively presumed to have
performed all the conditions essential to a Government
grant.
b. Note, however, that in Diaz v. Republic, the Court
ruled that in registration cases filed under the
provisions of the PLA for the judicial confirmation of an
incomplete and imperfect title, an order dismissing an
application for registration and declaring the land as
part of the public domain constitutes res judicata, not
only against the adverse claimant, but also against all
persons.
xi. Republic v. Muñoz, 536 SCRA 108 (2007)
Commonwealth Act No. 141, also known as the Public
Land Act, remains to this day the existing general law
governing the classification and disposition of lands of
the public domain, other than timber and mineral lands.
Section 6 of CA No. 141 empowers the President to
classify lands of the public domain into alienable and
disposable• lands of the public domain, which prior to
such classification are inalienable and outside the
commerce of man. Section 7 of CA No. 141 authorizes
the President to declare what lands are open to
disposition or concession. Section 8 of CA No. 141 states
that the government can declare open for disposition or
concession only lands that are officially delimited and
classified.
To prove that the land subject of an application for
registration is alienable, the 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 land applied for is alienable and
disposable.
xii. Republic v. Herbieto, 459 SCRA 183 (2005)
In Relation to the Public Land Act Under CA 141
The CA overlooked the difference between the Property
Registration Decree and the Public Land Act. Under the
PRD, there already exists a title which is confirmed by
the Court; while under the PLA, the presumption always
is that the land applied for pertains to the State, and
that the occupants and possessors only a claim an
interest in the same by virtue of their imperfect title or
continuous, open and notorious possession [since June
12, 1945 or earlier].
Since the subject lands are alienable and disposable
lands of the public domain, the applicants may acquire
title thereto only under the PLA.
Applicants could not acquire land through adverse
possession since the land was only classified as
alienable in 1963 AND their possession only started in
1950.
(Note: Substantial requirements for public lands are in
the PLA but the procedural requirements are in the
PRD.)
Civil Code provisions on prescription, which is subject to
confirmation under the PRD, in general applies to all
types of land. However, excluded therefrom are lands
of the public domain which are covered by the PLA
[special law v. general law]
xiii. Republic v. Manna Properties, 450 SCRA 247 (2005)
A party to an action has no control over the
Administrator or the Clerk of Court acting as a land
court; he has no right to meddle unduly with the
business of such official in the performance of his
duties. A party cannot intervene in matters within the
exclusive power of the trial court. No fault is
attributable to such party if the trial court errs on
matters within its sole power. It is unfair to punish an
applicant for an act or omission over which the
applicant has neither responsibility nor control,
especially if the applicant has complied with all the
requirements of the law.
NB: Land registration; when periods are merely
directory; applicants not bound by mistakes of courts.
xiv. Republic v. San Lorenzo, 513 SCRA 294 (2007)
The reckoning date under the Public Land Act for the
acquisition of ownership of public lands is June 12, 1945
or earlier, and that evidence of possession from that
date or earlier is essential for a grant of an application
for judicial confirmation of imperfect title.
The law requires that the possession of lands of the
public domain must be from at least June 12, 1945 for
the same to be acquired through judicial confirmation
of imperfect title.
A mere showing of possession for thirty years or more is
not sufficient. It must be shown too, that possession
and occupation had started on June 12, 1945 or earlier.
xv. Republic v. Alconaba, 427 SCRA 611 (2004)
Applicants for confirmation of imperfect title must,
prove the following:
(a) that the land forms part of the disposable and
alienable agricultural lands of the public domain; and
(b) that they have been in open, continuous, exclusive,
and notorious possession and occupation of the same
under a bona fide claim of ownership either since time
immemorial or since 12 June 1945.
Section 48(b) of C.A. No. 141, as amended provides that
persons may file in the proper Court of First
Instance [now Regional Trial Court] an application for
registration of title to land 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.
The law speaks of possession and occupation. Since
these words are separated by the conjunction and, the
clear intention of the law is not to make one
synonymous with the other. Possession is broader than
occupation because it includes constructive possession.
When, therefore, the law adds the word occupation, it
seeks to delimit the all-encompassing effect of
constructive possession. Taken together with the words
open, continuous, exclusive and notorious, the word
occupation serves to highlight the fact that for an
applicant to qualify, his possession must not be a mere
fiction.22 Actual possession of a 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.
xvi. Director of Lands v. Daño, 96 SCRA 161 (1980)
Section 47 of Commonwealth Act No. 141, as amended
by republic Act No. 2061, approved on June 13,1958,
provides:
SEC. 47. The persons specified in the next following
section are hereby granted time not to extend beyond
December thirty-one, nineteen hundred and sixty-
eight within which to take advantage of the benefit of
this chapter: Provided, That the several periods of time
designated by the President in accordance with
section forty-five of this Act shall apply also to the lands
comprised in the provisions of this chapter, but this
section shall not be construed as prohibiting an of said
persons from acting under this chapter at any time prior
to the period fixed by the President.
The "next following section" referred to is section 48 of
Commonwealth Act No. 141, as amended by Republic
Act No. 1942, which reads as follows:
Sec.48. The following described citizens of the
Philippines, occupying lands of the public domain or
claiming to own any such land or an interest therein,
But those 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:
xxxxxx xxx
(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 of ownership, for
at least thirty (30) years immediately preceding the
filing of the application for confirmation of title except
when prevented by was or force majeure, there 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.
The Court agrees with respondent Court that the period
fixed by Section 47 of the Public Land Act CA 141), as
amended, is not jurisdictional but is more of a time
limitation. As such, it is a defense or objection which
should have been set up either in a Motion to Dismiss
or in an Answer. Inasmuch as petitioner had never
pleaded the statute of limitations, he is deemed to have
waived the same.
The rule is that where the defendants never pleaded
the statute of limitations that are deemed to have
waived it and it is error for the lower court to dismiss
the proceeding on that ground.
xvii. Director v. Buyco, 216 SCRA 78 (1992)
As to the matter to be proved, the applicant must
present evidence of an imperfect title such as those
derived from the old Spanish grants. He may also show
that he has been in continuous, open and notorious
possession and occupation of agricultural lands of the
public domain under a bona fide claim of acquisition of
ownership and for the period prescribed under Section
48(b) of the Public Land Act. Simply put, a person who
seeks the registration of title to a piece of land on the
basis of possession by himself and his predecessors-in-
interest must prove his claim by clear and convincing
evidence; he should not rely on the weakness of the
evidence of the oppositors.
As defined, immemorial simply means beyond the reach
of memory, beyond human memory, or time out of
mind. When referring to possession, specifically
"immemorial possession," it means possession of which
no man living has seen the beginning and the existence
of which he has learned from his elders. Such
possession was never present in the case of the private
respondents.
Also, the Court has repeatedly held that the declaration
of ownership for purposes of assessment on the
payment of the tax is not sufficient to prove ownership.
Considering that the private respondents became
American citizens before such filing, it goes without
saying that they had acquired no vested right, consisting
of an imperfect title over to property before they lost
their Philippine citizenship.
xviii. Republic v. CA, 148 SCRA 480 (1987)
A parcel of forest land 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. Moreover, it is well-settled that a
certificate of title is void, when it covers property of
public domain classified as forest or timber and mineral
lands. Any title issued on non- disposable lots even in
the hands of an alleged innocent purchaser for value,
shall be cancelled. Note that in granting titles to the
land in dispute, the lower court counted the period of
possession of private respondents before the same
were released as forest lands for disposition, which
release is tantamount to qualifying the latter to a grant
on said lands while they were still non-disposable.
Thus, under the foregoing rulings, even assuming that
the transferees are innocent purchasers for value, their
titles to said lands derived from the titles of private
respondents which were not validly issued as they cover
lands still a part of the public domain, may be cancelled.
xix. SECTION 12, RA 8371
Registration Under The Indigenous Peoples Rights Act
Section 12. Option to Secure Certificate of Title under
Commonwealth Act 141, as amended, or the Land
Registration Act 496.
Individual members of cultural communities, with
respect to individually-owned ancestral lands who, by
themselves or through their predecessors-in -
interest, have been in continuous possession and
occupation of the same in the concept of owner since
the immemorial or for a period of not less than thirty
(30) years immediately preceding the approval of this
Act and uncontested by the members of the same
ICCs/IPs shall have the option to secure title to their
ancestral lands under the provisions of Commonwealth
Act 141, as amended, or the Land Registration Act 496.
For this purpose, said individually-owned ancestral
lands, which are agricultural in character and actually
used for agricultural, residential, pasture, and tree
farming purposes, including those with a slope of
eighteen percent (18%) or more, are hereby classified
as alienable and disposable agricultural lands.
The option granted under this Section shall be exercised
within twenty (20) years from the approval of this Act.
NOTES REGISTRATION UNDER IPRA:
1) Indigenous Peoples Rights Act:
a. Constitutional Provisions 1987 Constitution:
i. Section 2, Article II
The State recognizes and promotes the rights of
indigenous cultural communities within the framework
of national unity and development.
ii. Section 5, Article XII
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 law governing property rights or relations in
determining the ownership and extent of ancestral
domain.
iii. Section 6, Article XIII
The State shall establish a special agency for disabled
persons for their rehabilitation, self-
development and self-reliance, and their integration
into the mainstream of society.
iv. Section 17, Article XIV
The State shall recognize, respect, and protect the rights
of indigenous cultural communities to preserve and
develop their cultures, traditions, and institutions. It
shall consider these rights in the formulation of national
plans and policies.
v. The foregoing provisions are the cornerstone of the
IPRA which was enacted to recognize and promote all
the rights of the indigenous cultural communities in the
country.
b. Constitutionality of IPRA
i. As the votes were equally divided (7 to 7) and the
necessary majority was not obtained, the case was
redeliberated upon. However, after redeliberation, the
voting remained the same. Accordingly, pursuant to
Rule 56, Section 7 of the Rules of Court, the petition
was dismissed, and the questioned law was deemed
upheld as valid. (Cruz v. Secretary, 347 SCRA 128)
ii. In his separate opinion, Justice Puno said that
the IPRA is a novel piece of legislation. It grants the
ICCs/IPs a distinct kind of ownership over ancestral
domains and ancestral lands. He noted that land titles
do not exist in the indigenous peoples’ economic and
social system. The concept of individual land ownership
under the civil law is alien to them. 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 lands and are private.(Cruz v. Secretary, 347
SCRA 128)
2) Definition of Terms:
a. Indigenous Cultural Communities/Indigenous
Peoples – It refers to a group of people or
homogenous societies identified by self-
ascription and ascription by others, 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 cultures, became
historically differentiated from the majority of
Filipinos.
b. Ancestral Domains – It refers to all areas
generally belonging to 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.
c. Ancestral Lands – It refers to land
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.
d. 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.
e. Time Immemorial It refers to a period of
time when as far back as memory can go,
certain ICCs/IPs are known to have occupied,
possessed in the concept of owner, and utilized
a defined territory devolved to them, by
operation of customary law or inherited from
their ancestors, in accordance with their
customs and traditions.
3) Indigenous Concept of Ownership:
a. The IPRA recognizes the existence of the indigenous
cultural communities or indigenous peoples (ICCs/IPs)
as a distinct sector in Philippine society. It grants these
people the ownership and possession of their ancestral
domains and ancestral lands, and defines the extent of
these lands and domains.
b. The ownership given is the indigenous concept of
ownership under customary law which traces its origin
to native title.
c. Ancestral lands/domains include such concepts of
territories which cover not only the physical
environment but the total environment including the
spiritual and cultural bonds to the areas which the
ICCs/IPs possess, occupy and use and to which they
have claims of ownership.
d. Ancestral lands and ancestral domains are not
deemed part of the lands of the public domain but are
private lands belonging to indigenous cultural
communities or indigenous peoples (ICCs/IPs) who have
actually occupied, possessed and utilized their
territories under claim of ownership since time
immemorial.
4) The IPRA connotes group or communal ownership:
a. By virtue of the communal character of ownership,
the property held in common is meant to benefit the
whole indigenous community and not merely the
individual member.
b. This concept maintains the view that ancestral
domains are the ICCs/IPs private but community
property. It is private simply because it is not part of the
public domain. But its private character ends there.
c. The ancestral domain is owned in common by the
ICCs/IPs and not by one particular person.
d. The domain cannot be transferred, sold or conveyed
to other persons by any one person and belongs to the
ICCs/IPs as a community.
5) Ownership over the natural resources belong to the
State:
a. While ancestral domains and ancestral lands are
considered private in character, it does not necessarily
mean that natural resources found therein belong to
the ICCs/IPs as private property.
b. Justice Kapunan, in Cruz v. Secretary of Environment
and Natural Resources, opines that the mere fact that
Section 3(a) defines ancestral domains to include the
natural resources found therein does not ipso
facto convert the character of such natural resources as
private property of the indigenous people.
c. Justice Puno states that the ICCs/IPs rights over the
natural resources the form of management or
stewardship.
d. ICCs/IPs have priority rights in the exploitation of
natural resources within ancestral domains:
i. ICCs/IPs have priority rights in the harvesting,
extraction, development or exploitation of any natural
resources within ancestral domains.
ii. A non-member of the ICCs/IPs may be allowed to
take part in the development and utilization of the
natural resources for a period not exceeding 25 years
renewable for not more than 25 years.
iii. It is important, however, that a formal written
agreement is entered into with the ICCs/IPs concerned,
or that the community, pursuant to its own decision-
making process, has agreed to allow such operation.
iv. Meanwhile, the NCCIP (National Commission on
Indigenous Peoples) may exercise visitorial powers and
take appropriate action to safeguard the rights of the
ICCs/IPs under the same contract.
e. ICCs/IPs do not lose possession over area covered by
a TLA (Timber License Agreement):
i. Ancestral domains remain as such even when
possession or occupation of the area has been
interrupted by causes provided under the law such as
voluntary dealings entered into by the government and
private individuals/corporation.
6) Delineation and recognition of ancestral domains:
a. Under RA No. 8371, self-delineation is the guiding
principle in the identification and delineation of
ancestral domains. The sworn statement of the elders
as to the scope of the territories and agreements/pacts
made with neighboring ICCs/IPs, if any, will be essential
to the determination of these traditional territories. The
government shall take the necessary steps to identify
lands which the ICCs/IPs concerned traditionally occupy
and guarantee effective protection of their rights of
ownership and possession thereto.
b. Procedures:
i. 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 his law.
ii. 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;
iii. Delineation Paper - 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;
iv. 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 (1) 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/IPs;
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) Write-ups of names and places derived from the
native dialect of the community.
v. Preparation of Maps - On the basis of such
investigation and the findings of fact based thereon, the
Ancestral Domains Office of the NCIP shall prepare a
perimeter map, complete with technical descriptions,
and a description of the natural features and landmarks
embraced therein;
vi. 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;
vii. 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 the
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;
viii. 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 thesubmission 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, 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 selection below.
ix. Turnover of Areas Within Ancestral Domains
Managed by Other Government Agencies - The
Chairperson of the NCIP shall certify that the area
covered is an ancestral domain. The secretaries of the
DAR, DENR, DILG, and DOJ, the Commissioner of NDC,
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;
x. 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 those
identified in the census; and
xi. Registration of CADTs - The NCIP shall register issued
certificates of ancestral domain titles and certificates of
ancestral lands titles before the Register of Deeds in the
place where the property is situated.
c. The NCIP is the agency authorized to issue a
certification precondition in favor of any entity which
desires to undertake operations within the ancestral
domains of the indigenous peoples or whose proposed
projects will affect the ancestral domains.
d. The law does not grant the executive department
the power to delineate and recognize an ancestral
domain claim by mere agreement or compromise.
7) Identification, delineation and certification of
ancestral lands:
a. The allocation of lands within any ancestral domain
to individual or indigenous corporate (family or clan)
claimants shall be left to the ICCs/IPs concerned to
decide in accordance with customs and traditions;
b. Individual and indigenous corporate claimants
of ancestral lands which are not within ancestral
domains may have their claims officially established
byfiling applications for the identification and
delineation of their claims with the Ancestral Domains
Office. An individual or recognized head of a family or
clan may file such application in his behalf or in behalf
of his family or clan, respectively;
c. Proofs of such claims shall accompany the
application form which shall include the testimony
under oath of elders of the community and other
documents directly or indirectly attesting to the
possession or occupation of the areas since time
immemorial by the individual or corporate claimants in
the concept of owners which shall be any of the
authentic documents enumerated under Sec. 52 (d) of
this act, including tax declarations and proofs of
payment of taxes;
d. The Ancestral Domains Office may require from each
ancestral claimant the submission of such other
documents, Sworn Statements and the like, which in its
opinion, may shed light on the veracity of the contents
of the application/claim;
e. Upon receipt of the applications for delineation and
recognition of ancestral land claims, the Ancestral
Domains Office shall cause the publication of the
application and a copy of each document submitted
including a translation in the native language of the
ICCs/IPs concerned 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 the
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
newspapers and radio station are not available
f. Fifteen (15) days after such publication, the Ancestral
Domains Office shall investigate and inspect each
application, and if found to be meritorious, shall cause a
parcellary survey of the area being claimed.
The Ancestral Domains office shall reject any claim that
is deemed patently false or fraudulent after inspection
and verification. 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. In
case of conflicting claims among individual or
indigenous corporate claimants, 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 Sec. 62 of this Act; and
g. The Ancestral Domains Office shall prepare and
submit a report on each and every application surveyed
and delineated to the NCIP, which shall, in turn,
evaluate or corporate (family or clan) claimant over
ancestral lands.
8) Registration of CADTs and CALTs:
a. The NCIP, through the ADO, shall register all CADTs
and CALTs with the Register of Deeds of the place
where the properties are located.
b. The recordings of the CADT and CALT does not result
in the issuance of a
Torrens certificate of title, like a Torrens title issued
through regular registration proceedings.
c. The purpose of registration is simply to apprise the
public of the fact of recognition by the NCIP of specific
claims to portions of ancestral domains or ancestral
lands.
d. It is to be noted that no part of the ancestral
domains may be the subject of alienation or disposition
because these are communally owned although private
in nature.
e. On the other hand, ancestral lands may be the
subject of registration under the Public Land Act or
Property Registration Decree.
f. In the event any part of the ancestral land is the
subject of a subsequent dealing, like sale, mortgage, or
lease, the instrument embodying the transaction,
together with the owners duplicate certificate shall be
presented to the Register of Deeds for him to annotate
the encumbrance created by the instrument on said
title or to issue a new title to the person to whom the
land has been conveyed.
9) Modes of Acquisition:
a. 2 Modes of Acquisition:
i. By Native Title over both ancestral lands and domains:
1.Native title refers to pre-conquest rights to lands and
domains which, as far back as memory reaches, have
been held under a claim of ownership by indigenous
cultural communities. Native title presumes that the
land is private and was never public.
ii. By Torrens Title under the Public Land Act (CA No.
141, as amended) or the Property Registration
Decree (PD No. 1529) with respect to ancestral lands
only:
1. A Torrens certificate of title accumulates in one
document a precise and correct statement of the exact
status of the fee simple title which an owner possesses.
The certificate, once issued, is the evidence of the title
which the owner has. What appears on the title is
controlling on questions of ownership since the
certificate of title is an absolute and indefeasible
evidence of ownership of the property in favor of the
person whose name appears therein.
b. The IPRA converts ancestral land as public agricultural
land for registration purposes:
i. There is no need to secure a separate certification
that the ancestral land is A and D in character, it being
sufficient to show that the land is duly identified,
delineated and certified as such.
ii. Unlike regular registration proceedings where the
applicant must prove possession of public agricultural
land since June 12, 1945 as well as the classification of
the land as A and D land at least at the time the
application for registration is filed, the registration of
ancestral lands is different in the sense that:
1. The applicant is a member of an indigenous cultural
group;
2. He must have been in possession of an individually-
owned ancestral land for not less than thirty (30) years;
and
3. By operation of law (IPRA), the land is already
classified as alienable and disposable (A and D) land,
even if it has a slope of 18% or over, hence, there is no
need to submit a separate certification that the land has
been classified as A and D land.
c. Effect of Registration:
i. A duly issued Torrens certificate of title covering
ancestral lands has the same efficacy, validity and
indefeasibility as any title issued through regular
registration proceedings.
ii. It is generally conclusive evidence of ownership.
iii. The title shall not be subject to collateral attach nor
can it be impugned, altered, changed, modified,
enlarged or diminished except in a direct proceeding
permitted by law.
iv. It is moreover subject to the rule on
imprescriptibility.
v. The land shall not be subject to any burden except
those noted on the certificate.
d. Transfer of Land or Property Rights:
i. The right of ownership and possession of the ICCs/IPs
to their ancestral lands shall be recognized and
protected. These lands may be transferred subject to
the following limitations:
1. Only to the members of the same ICCs/IPs;
2. In accord with customary laws and traditions; and
3. Subject to the right of redemption of the ICCs/IPs for
a period of fifteen (15) years if the land was transferred
to a non- member of the ICCs/IPs.
ii. Unlike the ICCs/IPs private but communal ownership
over ancestral domains which belong to all generations
and therefore cannot be sold, disposed or destroyed,
ownership over the ancestral domains allows the
transfer of ancestral land or property rights thereto to
members of the same group. This is in keeping with the
option given to ICCs/IPs to secure a Torrens title over
the ancestral lands, but not to domains.
e. Generally, no ancestral land shall be opened for
mining operations:
i. No ancestral land shall be opened for mining
operations without the prior consent of the indigenous
cultural community concerned. (Sec. 16 of RA No. 7942,
Philippine Mining Act of 1995)
ii. In the event of an agreement for mining operations,
the royalty payment, upon utilization of the minerals,
shall be agreed upon by the parties, and shall form part
of a trust fund for the socio-economic well- being of the
indigenous cultural community. (Sec. 17 of RA No. 7942,
Philippine Mining Act of 1995)
iii. No ancestral land may be declared as a
people’s small-scale mining area without the prior
consent of the cultural communities concerned. If
ancestral lands are declared as people’s small-
scale mining areas, the members of the cultural
communities therein shall be given priority in the
awarding of small-scale mining contracts. (Section 7 of
RA No. 7076, People’s Small-Scale Mining Act of 1991)
f. Authority of PEZA to issue building permits:
i. By specific provision of law, it is the Philippine
Economic Zone Authority (PEZA) which has authority to
issue building permits for the construction of structures
within the areas owned or administered by it, whether
on public or private lands.
ii. PEZA may require owners of structures built without
said permit to remove such structures.
iii. A certificate of ancestral land claim (CALC) is merely
a registered claim and not a proof of ownership.
10) National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP):
a. Specific powers and functions:
i. Formulation of policies, issuance of rules and
regulations:
1. The NCIP has been granted administrative, quasi-
legislativeand quasi-judicial powers to carry out its
mandate.
2. It is the primary agency charged with the formulation
and implementation of policies, plans, programs and
projects for the economic, social and cultural
development of the ICCs/IPs and to monitor the
implementation thereof.
3. It is mandated to promulgate the necessary rules and
regulations for the implementation of the Act.
ii. Resolution of conflicts:
1. The NCIP is vested with jurisdiction over all claims
and disputes involving the rights of ICCs/IPs.
2. The only condition precedent to the NCIP’s
assumption of jurisdiction over such disputes is that the
parties thereto shall have exhausted all remedies
provided under their customary laws and have obtained
a certification from the Council of Elders/Leaders who
participated in the attempt to settle the dispute that
the same has not been resolved.
3. The NCIP has the authority to decide all appeals from
the decisions and acts of all the various offices within
the Commission.
4. Any decision, order, award or ruling of the NCIP on
any ancestral domain dispute or on any matter
pertaining to the application, implementation,
enforcement and interpretation of the Act may be
brought by a petition for review to the Court of Appeals
within fifteen (15) days from receipt of a copy thereof.
iii. Issuance of CADT/CALT:
1.The NCIP has the authority to issue certificates of
ancestral domain title (CADT) or certificates of ancestral
land title (CALT).
iv. Cancellation of ancestral domain and ancestral land
titles:
1. The NCIP has exclusive and original jurisdiction over
petitions for the cancellation of Certificate of Ancestral
Domain Titles/Certificate of Ancestral Land Titles
(CADTs/CALTs) alleged to have been fraudulently
acquired by, and issued to, any person or community as
provided for under Section 54 of RA No. 8371, provided
that such action is filed within one (1) year from the
date of registration.
2. It should be noted however that jurisdiction over
actions or incidents affecting a certificate of title issued
through registration proceedings is vested in the courts
of justice.
v. Issuance of certification as a precondition to the
grant of permit:
1.The NCIP has the authority to issue the appropriate
certification as a pre-condition to the grant of permit,
lease, grant, or any other similar authority for the
disposition, utilization and management of portions of
the ancestral domain with the consensus approval of
the ICCs/IPs concerned.
vi. Power to cite for contempt, issue restraining
order; Among the other powers of the NCIP are the
following:
1. To promulgate rules and regulations governing the
hearing and disposition of cases filed before it as well as
those pertaining to its internal functions and such rules
and regulations as may be necessary to carry out the
purposes of this Act;
2. To administer oaths, summon the parties to a
controversy, issue subpoenas requiring the attendance
and testimony of witnesses or the production of such
books, papers, contracts, records, agreements, and
other document of similar nature as may be material to
a just determination of the matter under investigation
or hearing conducted in pursuance of this Act;
3. To hold any person in contempt, directly or indirectly,
and impose appropriate penalties therefor; and
4. To enjoin any or all acts involving or arising from any
case pending before it which, if not restrained
forthwith, may cause grave or irreparable damage to
any of the parties to the case or seriously affect social
or economic activity.
b. Regional Hearing Offices:
i. Original and Exclusive Jurisdiction:
1. All disputes and controversies involving ancestral
lands /domains;
2. Violations of the requirement of free and prior and
informed consent of ICCs/IPs;
3. Actions for the enforcement of decisions of ICCs/IPs
involving violations of customary laws or desecration of
ceremonial sites, sacred places, or rituals;
4. Actions for redemption/reconveyance under Section
8(b) of RA No. 8371;
5. And cases analogous to the foregoing.
ii. Original Jurisdiction:
1. Cases affecting
a. property rights
b. claims of ownership
c. hereditary succession
d. and settlement of land disputes between and among
ICCs/IPs that have not been settled under customary
laws
2. Actions for damages arising out of any violation of
Republic Act No. 8371.
c. Ancestral Domains Office:
i. One of the offices under the NCIP;
ii. The ADO shall be responsible for the identification,
delineation and recognition of ancestral lands/domains.
iii. ADO 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 the IPRA.
iv. ADO 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 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.
v. ADO shall likewise perform such other functions as
the NCIP may deem appropriate and necessary.
ADDITIONAL NOTES SEC. 14 of the PRD:
1) System of Registration:
a. There are two systems of registration: one
for registered lands under PD No. 1529 (Property
Registration Decree) and the other for unregistered
lands under Act No. 3344.
b. If a parcel of land covered by a Torrens title is sold,
but the sale is registered under Act No. 3344 and not
under the Property Registration Decree, the sale is not
considered registered.
c. There can be no constructive notice through
registration under Act No. 3344 if the property is
registered under the Torrens system, nor can the
registration be effective for purposes of Article 1544 of
the Civil Code on double sale.
d. The recording of instruments relating to unregistered
lands is governed by Section 113 of PD No. 1529 which
provides that no deed, conveyance, mortgage, lease or
other voluntary instrument affecting land not registered
under the Torrens system shall be valid, except as
between the parties thereto, unless such instrument
shall have been recorded in the office of the Register of
Deeds.
e. The recording, however, shall be without prejudice
to a third party with a better right.
2) Laws governing land registration:
a. Public Land Act (CA No. 141)
i. Approved on November 7, 1936, but which became
effective on December 1, 1936;
ii. Voluntary;
iii. The Public Land Act governs the judicial confirmation
of imperfect or incomplete titles on the basis of
possession and occupation o alienable portions of the
public domain in the manner and for the length of time
required by law;
iv. The relevant provisions are Sections 47 to 57,
Chapter VIII of the Act.
b. Property Registration Decree (PD No. 1529)
i. Issued on June 11, 1978;
ii. Voluntary;
iii. The Property Registration Decree is a codification of
all laws relative to registration of property,
and supersedes all other laws relative to registration of
property•;
iv. It has substantially incorporated the provisions of
Act No. 496, or the Land Registration Act.
c. Cadastral Act (Act No. 2259)
i. Enacted on February 11, 1913;
ii. Compulsory as it is the government itself which
initiates the petition;
iii. Cadastral Act is an offspring of the system of
registration under the Land Registration Act.
iv. It aims to serve public interests by requiring that the
title to any lands be titled and adjudicated•;
v. It may be noted, however, that salient provisions in
the Cadastral Act have now been carried over in the
present Property Registration Decree, particularly in
Sections 35 to 38 of the Decree.
d. Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (RA No. 8371)
i. Approved on October 29, 1997;
ii. Voluntary;
iii. IPRA recognizes the rights of ownership and
possession of indigenous cultural communities or
indigenous peoples (ICCs/IPs) to their ancestral domains
and ancestral land on the basis of native title and
defines the extent of these lands and domains.
iv. For purposes of registration, the IPRA expressly
converts ancestral lands into public agricultural lands,
and individual members of cultural communities, with
respect to their individually-owned ancestral lands, shall
have the option to secure title to their ancestral lands
under the provisions of the Public Land Act of the
Property Registration Decree.
v. This option is limited to ancestral lands only, not
domains, and such lands must be individually, not
communally, owned.
3) Vested rights cannot be impaired by subsequent law:
a. Vested rights may not be impaired without violating
one’s right to due process;
b. A right is vested when the right to enjoyment,
present or prospective, has become the property of
some particular person or persons as a present interest.
c. It is some right or interest in property which has
become fixed and established and is no longer open to
doubt or controversy.
d. A State may not impair vested rights by legislative
enactment by the enactment or by the subsequent
repeal of a municipal ordinance, or by a change in the
constitution of the State, except in a legitimate exercise
of the police power.
B. Forms and Contents Dealing with Land
i. Section 15. Form and Contents.
The application for land registration shall be in writing,
signed by the application 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.
The application, shall, in form, be substantially as
follows:
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT of _________________
The undersigned,___________hereby applies (or apply)
to have the land hereinafter described brought under
the operation of the Property Registration Decree, and
to have the title thereto registered and confirmed:
AND DECLARE . . . . .
1. That the applicants/s is/are the owners of the land
(by virtue of inheritance or deed of sale or conveyance
and/or possession in accordance with Section 14 of said
Decree), together with the building and improvements
thereon, with the exception of the
following:_____________________ which is/are the
property of __________________
residing at __________________ The said land,
consisting of __________________ parcel/s is/are
situated, bounded and described as shown on the plan
and technical descriptions attached hereto and made a
part hereof, with the following
exception:_________________________.
2.That said land at the last assessment for taxation was
assessed at P ____, Philippine currency, and the
buildings and other improvements at P ___________,
Philippine currency.
3.That to the best of my/our knowledge and belief,
there is no mortgage or encumbrance of any kind
whatsoever affecting said land, nor any other person
having any interest therein, legal or equitable, or in
possession, other than as
follows:__________________________________.
4.That the applicant/s has/have acquired said land in
the following manner:
________________________________.
(Note: Refer to Sec. 14 of said Decree. State also
whether the property is conjugal, paraphernal or
exclusive property of the applicant/s)
5.That said land is occupied by the following person:
_________________.
6.That the names in full and addresses, as far as known
to the undersigned, of the owners of all adjoining
properties, of the persons mentioned in paragraphs 3
and 5, and of the persons shown on the plan as
claimants, are as follows:
_________________________________________.
7.That the applicant/s is/are single or married
to____________________ (Note: if marriage has been
legally dissolved, state when and how the marriage
relation terminated.)_______________________.
8.That the applicant's/s' full name, age, citizenship,
residence, and postal address/es is/are as follows:
_______________________________.
9.That (Note: If the land included in the application is
bounded by a public or private way or road, there
should be stated in this paragraph whether or not the
applicant claims any and what land within the limits of
the way or road and whether the applicant desires to
have the line of the way or road determined.)
______________________________.
10.That the following documents are attached hereto
and made a part hereof:
___________________________________.
Signed at ___________________ this
_____________________ day of
____________________, in the year twenty hundred
and ______________________.
__________________________
Applicant
_________________________
(Post Office Address)
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
PROVINCE (OR CITY) OF _______________
On this ___ day of _________,20 ___ personally
appeared before me the above- named
____________________ known to me to be the
person/s who executed the foregoing application and
made oath that the statements therein are true of
his/their knowledge, information and belief.
The Residence Certificate/s __________ of the
applicant/s __________ was/were exhibited to me
being No. _______
issued at _________ dated _______, 20___.
________________________
(Notary Public, or other Officer authorized to administer
oaths)
PTR NO. _________________
NOTES SECTION 15 of PRD:
1) Requisite steps in bringing land under the Torrens
System. Subject to the conditions provided for in
Section 15 of the PRD, application for land registration
shall provide information on the following:
a. Survey of land by the Lands Management Bureau or
a duly licensed private surveyor;
b. Filing of application for registration by the applicant;
c. Setting of the date for the initial hearing of the
application by the court;
d. Transmittal of the application and the date of initial
hearing together with all the documents or other
evidences attached thereto by the Clerk of Court to the
Land Registration Authority;
e. 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;
f. Service by mailing of notice upon contiguous owners,
occupants and those known to have interests in the
property;
g. Posting by the sheriff of the notice in a conspicuous
place on the land and in the bulletin board of the
municipal building or city where the land is situated;
h. Filing of answer to the application by any person
whether named in the notice or not;
i. Hearing of the case by the court;
j. Promulgation of judgment by the court;
k. Issuance of an order for the issuance of a
decree declaring the decision final and instructing the
Land Registration Authority to issue the decree of
confirmation and registration;
l. Entry of the decree of registration in the Land
Registration Authority;
m. Sending of copy of the decree of registration to the
corresponding Register of Deeds; and
n. 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 Register of Deeds, upon payment of the prescribed
fees.
2) Form and contents of the application for registration:
a. Full description of the land as evidenced by a survey
plan duly approved by the Director of Lands, surveyor’s
certificate, and technical description;
b. 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;
c. 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;
d. Assessed value of the land and the buildings and
improvements thereon;
e. Whether or not there are mortgages or
encumbrances of any kind whatsoever affecting the
land, or any other person having any interest therein,
legal or equitable, or in possession, thereof;
f. The manner by which the applicant has acquired the
land (refer to Section14, PD No. 1529);
g. Whether or not the property is conjugal, paraphernal
or exclusive property of the applicant;
h. Names of all occupants of the land, if any;
i. Original muniments of title and other related
documents supporting applicants claim of ownership;
and
i2. Muniments of Title- are instruments or written
evidence which applicant holds or possesses to enable
him to substantiate and prove title to his estate.
k. If the land is bounded by a public or private way or
road, 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.
Section 16. Non-resident applicant.
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.
NOTES SECTION 16 of PRD:
1) Non-resident applicant may be represented by
an attorney-in-fact:
a. A special power of attorney executed before a notary
public or other competent official in a foreign country
cannot be admitted in evidence unless it is duly certified
in accordance with Section 24, Rule 132 of the Rules of
Court, i.e., by the secretary of embassy or
legation, consul general, consul, vice consul or consular
agent or by any officer in the foreign service of the
Philippines stationed in the foreign country in which the
record is kept, and authenticated by the seal of his
office.
Section 17. What and where to file.
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.
NOTES SECTION 17 of PRD:
1) The application for registration must be accompanied
by a survey plan of the land duly approved by the
Director of Lands, together with the claimant’s
muniments of title to prove ownership.
2) No plan or survey may be admitted in land
registration proceedings until approved by the Director
of Lands.
Section 18. Application covering two or more parcels.
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.
Section 19. Amendments.
Amendments to the application including joinder,
substitution, or discontinuance as to parties may be
allowed by the court 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.
NOTES SECTIONS 18 & 19 of PRD:
1) A single application may be filed for two or more
parcels:
a. Where during the pendency of an application for
registration, the applicant sold the property to another
under pacto de retro, but owing to the lapse of the
redemption period, ownership became consolidated in
the vendee, the latter as the new and lawful owner is
entitled to be subrogated in place of the applicant and
may continue the proceedings in the case and finally
obtain title as owner.
2) Substantial amendment of boundaries or area
requires publication and notice:
a. It is not 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 notifications and advertisements
making known to everyone the said alterations and
amendments.
i. Otherwise, the law would be infringed with
respect to the publicity which characterizes the
procedure, and third parties who have not had an
opportunity to present their claims, might be seriously
affected in their rights, through failure of opportune
notice.
b. Publication is one of the essential bases of the
jurisdiction of the court in land registration and
cadastral cases, and additional territory cannot be
included by amendment of the plan without new
publication.
c. 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 to the
registration of the land included in the new plans.
d. If the amendment does not involve an addition, but
on the contrary, a reduction of the original area that
was published, no new publication is required.
Section 20. When land applied for borders on road.
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.
Section 21. Requirement of additional facts and
papers; ocular inspection.
The court may require facts to be stated in the
application in addition to those prescribed by this
Decree not inconsistent therewith and may require the
filing of any additional paper. It may also conduct an
ocular inspection, if necessary.
Section 22. Dealings with land pending original
registration.
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.
NOTES SECTION 22 of PRD:
1) Dealings with the land while its registration is
pending:
a. 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.
b. The applicant or the parties to the transaction ay file
the corresponding motion or manifestation, indicating
the relief desired.
c. In case of transfer of a portion of the land,
the corresponding subdivision plan should also be
presented.
d. Upon notice to the parties, the court shall:
i. Order the land registered subject to the
conveyance or encumbrance created by such
instruments, or
ii. Order that the decree of registration be issued in
the name of the person to whom the property has been
conveyed.
e. It should be noted that the adjudication of land in a
land registration or cadastral proceeding does not
become final, in the sense of incontrovertibility, until
after one year from the entry of the final
decree prepared by the LRA.
f. As long as the final decree has not been entered, and
the one-year period has not elapsed from such entry,
the title is not deemed finally adjudicated and the
decision in the registration proceeding continues to be
under the control of the court.
g. Hence, transactions affecting the property pending
registration should be made known to the court for
appropriate consideration.
2) Dealings or transactions entered into pending
registration do not require amendment of application:
a. Section 22 should be differentiated from Section
19 which refers to amendments to the application by
joinder, substitution or discontinuance of the parties.
b. On the other hand, Section 108 involves amendments
after entry of the certificate of title.
c. Section 22 does not require amendment of the
application, it being sufficient that the court, by motion
or other appropriate pleading, be presented with the
instruments evidencing the transaction, and the
approved subdivision plan where a portion of the land is
conveyed to another.
d. The law does not require that the application for
registration be amended by substituting the buyer• or
the person to whom the property has been conveyed•
for the applicant.
i. Neither does it require that the buyer• or the
person to whom the property has been conveyed• be a
party to the case.
ii. He may thus be a total stranger to the land
registration proceedings.
iii. The only requirements of the law are:
1. That the instrument be presented to the court by the
interested party together with a motion that the same
be considered in relation with the application; and
2. That prior notice be given to the parties to the case.
e. A motion to lift order of general default and motion
under Section 22 may not be filed after the finality of
the judgment in the registration case.
ii. Divina v. CA, 352 SCRA 527 (2001)
Section 15 of P.D. 1529 is explicit in requiring that in the
application for registration of land titles, the application
"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.
As early as Francisco vs. Court of Appeals, 97 SCRA 22
[1980], we emphasized that a mere statement of the
lack of knowledge of the names of the occupants and
adjoining owners is not sufficient but "what search has
been made to find them is necessary."
The trial court was correct when it took notice that
respondent's sister Lydia Gajo- Anonuevo admitted that
she had a conversation with petitioner's cousin elena
Dumalaon about the latter's apprehension that their
land may have been included in respondent's
application for registration of the disputed land.
Respondent's omission of this material information
prevented petitioner from having his day in court.
The trial court in its decision more than amply
supported its conclusion with jurisprudence to the
effect that it is fraud to knowingly omit or conceal a fact
upon which benefit is obtained to the prejudice of a
third person. Such omission cannot but be deliberate
misrepresentation constituting fraud, a basis for
allowing a petition for review of judgment under
Section 38 of Act No. 496, The Land Registration Act.
iii. Republic v. Vda. De Neri, 424 SCRA 676 (2004)
Applicants for land registration are required to append
a survey plan to their application, duly approved by the
Bureau of Lands which is mentioned in Sec. 17. Of the
PD 1529stating that 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 approved by the Bureau of Lands.
The submission of the plan approved by the Director of
the Bureau of Lands is a statutory requirement which is
mandatory in nature. The plan approved by the Land
Registration Commission is of no value. It behooved the
trial court not to take cognizance of any application for
land registration in the absence of a survey plan duly
approved by the Director of the Bureau of Lands
appended thereto.
No plan or survey may be admitted in land registration
proceedings until approved by the Director of Lands.
The submission of the plan is a statutory requirement of
mandatory character. Unless a plan and its technical
description are duly approved by the Director of
Lands, the same are of no value. It is a rule that "void ab
initio• land titles issued cannot ripen into private
ownership therefore, said lands cannot be registered
under the respondents’ name.
iv. Caoibes, Jr. v. Caoibes-Pantoja, 496 SCRA 273 (2006)
The law does not require that the application for
registration be amended by substituting the "buyer" or
the "person to whom the property has been conveyed"
for the applicant. Neither does it require that the
"buyer" or the "person to whom the property has been
conveyed" be a party to the case.
He may thus be a total stranger to the land registration
proceedings. The only requirements of the law are: (1)
that the instrument be presented to the court by the
interested party together with a motion that the same
be considered in relation with the application; and (2)
that prior notice be given to the parties to the case.
Sec. 22 of P.D. 1529 (Property Registration Decree
which became effective on June 11, 1978), provides:
SEC.22. Dealings with land pending original registration.
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 the 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.
v. Republic v. Muñoz, 536 SCRA 108 (2007)
It bears stressing that the constructive seizure of land
accomplished by posting of notices and processes upon
all persons mentioned in notices by means of
publication and sending copies to said persons by
registered mail in effect gives the court jurisdiction over
the lands sought to be registered.
It is true that the best evidence to identify a piece of
land for registration purposes is the original tracing
cloth plan from the Bureau of Lands, but blueprint
copies and other evidence could also provide sufficient
identification.
The Court held in Recto v. Republic that the blueprint
copy of the cloth plan together with the lot’s
technical description duly certified as to their
correctness by the Bureau of Lands are adequate to
identify the land applied for registration.
C. Publication, Opposition and Default
i. Section 23. Notice of initial hearing, publication, etc.
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.
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.
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.
The notice of initial hearing shall, in form, be
substantially as follows:
(Caption and Title)
NOTICE OF INITIAL HEARING
To (here insert the names of all persons appearing to
have an interest and the adjoining owners so far as
known, and to all whom it may concern):
An application (or petition) having been filed in
the above-entitled case by (full name and address)
praying for the registration and confirmation (or for the
settlement and adjudication, in case of petition in
cadastral proceedings) of title to the following
described lands:
(Insert description)
You are hereby served this notice to appear before this
Court at its session to be held at ____________ on
the____ day of_________, 20 ___, at_______ o'clock in
the _________ then and there to present such claims as
you may have to said lands or any portion thereof, and
to submit evidence in support of such claim; and unless
you appear at said Court at the time and place
aforesaid, your default will be recorded and the title to
the lands will be adjudicated and determined in
accordance with law and the evidence before the Court,
and thereafter you will forever be barred from
contesting said application (or petition) or any decree
entered thereon.
Witness, the Hon. ________________ Judge of the
Regional Trial Court of _______ this ____ day
of_____________, in the year 20____.
Attest:
Administrator, Land Registration Authority
NOTES SECTION 23 of PRD:
1) Notice of Initial Hearing
a. The duty and the power to set the hearing date lie
with the land registration court. After an applicant has
filed his application, the law requires the issuance of a
court order setting the initial hearing date. The notice of
initial hearing is signed by the judge and copy of the
notice is mailed by the clerk of court to the LRA. This
involves a process to which the party applicant
absolutely has no participation. (see Republic v. Manna
Properties, Inc.,)
b. Publication
i. Purpose of publication Two-Fold:
1. To confer jurisdiction upon the court over the res,
and
2. 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.
a. Constructive seizure of the land for registration is
effected through publication of the application for
registration and posting and service of notice to
affected parties.
ii. Publication of notice of initial hearing (see Section 23
[1] of the PRD)
iii. Publication in a newspaper is necessary to accord
with due process requirement:
1. While publication of the notice in the Official Gazette
is sufficient to confer jurisdiction upon the
court, publication in a newspaper of general circulation
remains an indispensable procedural
requirement. Couched in mandatory terms, it is a
component of procedural due process and aimed at
giving as wide publicity as possible• so that all persons
having an adverse interest in the land subject of the
registration proceedings may be notified thereof.
Although jurisdiction of the court is not affected, the
fact that publication was not made in a newspaper of
general circulation is material and relevant in assessing
the applicant’s right or title to the land. (Roxas v. Court
of Appeals) (see also Director or Lands v. CA and
Abistado)
iv. Publication in the Official Gazette does not dispense
with the requirement of notice by mailing and posting
1. This is obvious from Section 23 itself which stresses in
detail the requirements of mailing of notices to all
persons named in the petition who, per Section 15,
include owners of adjoining properties, and occupants
of the land.
v. Lack of personal notice does not vitiate the
proceedings
1. A proceeding in rem, dealing with a tangible res, may
be instituted and carried to judgment, without personal
service upon the claimants, for jurisdiction is secured by
the power of the court over the res.
2. Personal notice is not necessary unless required by
the court.
3. see Adez Realty, Inc. v. CA
Vi . Purpose of notice by all three modes
1. 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.
vii. New publication necessary to include additional area
1. The purpose of the new publication is to give notice
to all persons concerned regarding the amended
application.
Without a new publication the registration court cannot
acquire jurisdiction over the area or parcel of land that
is added to the area covered by the original application,
and the decision of the registration court would be a
nullity insofar as the decision concerns the newly
included land.
2. But if the amendment consists in the exclusion of a
portion of the area covered by the original application
and the original plan as previously published, a new
publication is not necessary. In this case, the jurisdiction
of the court over the remaining area is not affected by
the failure of a new publication.
3. Where the identity and area of the claimed property
are not the subject of amendment but merely other
collateral matters, a new publication is not needed.
4. The right of the land registration court to correct an
error of closure is authorized by law, provided such
correction does not include land not included in the
original petition.
viii. Effect of non- or defective publication
1. Where there is no publication of the notice of initial
hearing, the decision of the land registration court is
void.
The requirement of publication is one of the essential
bases of the jurisdiction of the registration court; it is a
jurisdictional requisite.
2. A mere defect of publication deprives the court of
jurisdiction. And when the court a quo lacks jurisdiction
to take cognizance of a case, the same lacks authority
over the whole case and all its aspects.
c. Mailing
i. Mailing to persons named in the application
1. This requirement is mandatory.
ii. Mailing to the Secretary of Public (Works) and
Highways, Governor and Mayor
1. If the applicant requests to have the line of a public
way or road determined.
iii. Mailing to the Secretary of Agrarian Reform, Solicitor
General, Director of Lands, Etc.
1. If the land borders on a river, navigable stream or
shore, or an arm of the sea; or
2. If it otherwise appears that a tenant-farmer, or the
national government, may have a claim adverse to the
applicant.
iv. Role of the Solicitor General
1. In practice, the Solicitor General is invariably
furnished with a copy of the notice of initial hearing.
The reason for this is that under the Administrative
Code of 1987, the Solicitor General is bound to
represent the Government in all land registration and
related proceedings.
2. As a rule, only notices of court proceedings and
related processes actually served upon the Solicitor
General are binding on his office.
3. The Solicitor General, therefore, has control and
supervision• over the special attorney or prosecutor
who has been deputized to appear for him.
4. Service of orders and decision on the OSG, and not
merely on its deputized special attorneys, in court cases
involving land registration and naturalization
proceedings, is mandatory.
5. The Solicitor General is the only legal counsel of the
government in land registration cases and as such, he
alone may withdraw the government’s appeal with
binding effect on the latter.
d. Posting
i. This requirement is also mandatory.
Section 24. Proof of publication and notice.
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.
NOTES SECTION 24 of PRD:
1) The certification by the LRA Administrator as to the
fact of publication and mailing, and that of the sheriff as
to posting, as required by law, are conclusive.
Section 25. Opposition to application in ordinary
proceedings.
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.―
NOTES SECTION 25 of PRD:
1) Requisites for opposing application:
a. For an opposition then to be considered, the
following requisites must concur:
i. The oppositor must have an interest in the land
applied for;
ii. He should state the grounds for his objection as well
as the nature of his claimed interest;
iii. He should indicate the desired relief; and
iv. The opposition should be signed and sworn to by him
or by his duly authorized representative.
b. It has been held, however, that unverified
oppositions in land registration proceedings are
nevertheless sufficient to confer standing in court to
oppositors who may be allowed to verify their
oppositions later on, especially where said defect is
deemed waived by the applicant’s failure to invoke said
requirement seasonably.
c. It was a substantial compliance with the law that
required a formal answer.
2) Nature of interest to support opposition:
a. Opposition to an application for registration of the
title must be based on the right of dominion or some
other real right opposed to the adjudication or
recognition of the ownership of the applicant, whether
it be limited or absolute.
b. To give a person a legal standing to object to the
application for registration, he must make some claim
to the property.
c. All that is necessary to enable one to exert the faculty
of opposition is that he should appear to have an
interest in the property. It is immaterial whether this
interest is in the character of legal owner or is of a
purely equitable nature as where he is the beneficiary in
a trust.
d. A claim merely noted on the survey plan cannot
prevail over the actual decree of registration as
reproduced in the certificate.
e. The phrase claim of ownership• means the
possession of a piece of property with the intention of
claiming it in hostility to the true owner. It is also
defined as a party’s manifest intention to take over
land, regardless of title or right.
3) Failure to file opposition, effect of:
a. Where no answer in writing or any opposition is
made to an application for registration of property, all
the allegations contained in the application shall be held
as confessed by reason of the absence of denial on the
part of the opponent.
b. It has been held that a claimant having failed to
present his answer or objection to the registration of a
parcel of land under the Torrens system or to question
the validity of such registration within a period of one
(1) year after the certificate of title had been issued, is
deemed to have forever lost his right in said land even
granting that he had any right therein.
c. Persons deemed to have legal standing to file
opposition:
i. A homesteader who has not yet been issued his title
but has fulfilled all the conditions required by law for
the issuance of patent;
ii. A purchaser of friar land who is deemed to have an
equitable title to the land even before the issuance of
the patent;
iii. An awardee in a sales application who, by virtue of
the award, is authorized to take possession of the land
to enable him to comply with the requirements for the
issuance of patent;
iv. A person claiming to be in possession of the land and
has applied with the Lands Management Bureau for its
purchase.
d. Private persons may not file opposition for the
Government:
i. A private person may not oppose an application for
registration on behalf of the government on the ground
that the land belongs to the government.
4) Opposition by the Government:
a. Absence of opposition by the government does not
justify outright registration
i. Notwithstanding the absence of opposition from the
government, the applicant in land registration cases is
not relieved of the burden of proving the imperfect
right or title sought to be confirmed.
ii. He must show, even though there is no opposition, to
the satisfaction of the court, that he is the absolute
owner, in fee simple.
iii. It is precisely the character of the land as private
which the applicant has the obligation of establishing.
b. Hearing necessary to determine validity of ownership
claim
i. Under Section 1, Rule 131 of the Rules of Court, each
party, whether applicant or oppositor, must prove his
own affirmative allegations by the amount of evidence
required by law to obtain a favorable judgment.
c. Failure to appear on the day of initial hearing is not a
ground for default where opposition or answer had
been filed.
i. Where an opposition or answer, which is based on
substantial grounds, has been formally filed, it is
improper for the court to declare the oppositor in
default simply because he failed to appear on the day
set for the initial hearing.
d. Government may appeal despite failure of agency to
file opposition
i. The failure of the government agency concerned to
file an opposition to the application for registration or
to appeal from the adverse decision of the registration
court is not fatal.
ii. The reason for this is that the government is usually
not estopped by the mistake or error of its officials or
agents.
iii. It is hornbook law that the principle of estoppel does
not operate against the government for the act of its
agents.
5) Motion to dismiss based on res judicata proper in a
registration proceeding
a. The Property Registration Decree does not provide
for a pleading similar or corresponding to a motion to
dismiss.
b. Two distinct concepts of res judicata:
i. Bar by former judgment; and
1. Res judicata absolutely bars any subsequent action
when the following requisites concur:
a. The former judgment or order was final;
b. It adjudged the pertinent issue or issues on their
merits;
c. It was rendered by a court that had jurisdiction over
the subject matter and the parties; and
d. Between the first and the second actions, there was
identity of parties, of subject matter, and of causes of
action.
Ii. Conclusiveness of judgment
1. Where no identity of causes of action but only
identity of issues exists
2. The rule bars the re-litigation of particular facts or
issues involving the same parties even if raised under
different claims or causes of action.
c. The opposition in a registration case partakes of the
nature of an answer with a counterclaim.
d. Defense of res judicata may be waived if not set up in
a motion to dismiss
i. In a registration case, it was held that the defense
of res judicata when not set up either in a motion to
dismiss or in answer is deemed waived.
ii. It cannot be pleaded for the first time on appeal.
6) Submission of subdivision plan- The registration
court may require the submission by the parties of a
subdivision plan, duly approved by the Director of
Lands, in the following instances:
a. If the opposition or adverse claim covers only a
portion of the lot applied for which is not delimited on
the plan accompanying the application;
b. In case of undivided co-ownership, conflicting claims
of ownership or possession, or overlapping of
boundaries.
Section 26. Order of default; effect.
If no person appears and answers within the time
allowed, the court shall, upon motion of the applicant,
no reason to the contrary appearing, order a default to
be recorded and require the applicant to present
evidence. By the description in the notice "To all Whom
It May Concern", all the world are made parties
defendant and shall be concluded by the default order.
Where an appearance has been entered and an answer
filed, a default order shall be entered against persons
who did not appear and answer.
NOTES SECTION 26 of PRD:
1) Order of default, when entered
a. Order of General Default addressed to the whole
world:
i. If no person appears and answers within the time
allowed, the court shall, upon motion of the applicant,
order a default to be entered and require the applicant
to present evidence. By description in the notice: To all
whom it may concern, all the world are made parties
defendant and shall be concluded by the default order.
b. Order of Special Default “directed only against those
who did not enter their appearance and file answer:
i. When an appearance has been entered and answer
filed, a default order shall be entered against persons
who did not appear and answer.
c. When the court issues an order of default, it is
presumed to have regularly performed its task in
accordance with law especially with regard to notice
requirements.
d. When no answer in writing or any opposition is made
to an application for the registration of a property, all
the allegations contained in the application shall be held
as confessed by reason of the absence thereof.
e. A person who has not challenged an application for
registration cannot allege damage or error against the
judgment ordering registration.
f. But a declaration of default is not a guarantee that
the application for registration will be granted.
g. It is still the burden of the applicant to prove that he
is entitled to registration by well-nigh incontrovertible
proof.
2) Motion to lift order of general default
a. An order of general default is interlocutory in
character, subject to the control of the court, and may
be modified or amended as the court may deem proper
at any time prior to the rendition of judgment.
b. The interests of substantial justice and the speedy
determination of the controversy should be the guiding
principle of the trial court in lifting an order of general
default to allow a party to file an opposition to the
application
c. But the motion to lift the order of general default
should be filed before entry of final judgment.
d. A motion to set aside the order of default filed prior
to the rendition of the judgment on the merits should
be considered with liberality.
3) Party in default can appeal judgment
a. A defendant party declared in default retains the
right to appeal from the judgment by default on the
ground that the plaintiff failed to prove the material
allegations of the complaint, or that the decision is
contrary to law, even without need of the prior filing of
a motion to set aside the order of default.
4) Government not estopped by the mistake or error of
its agents
a. Order of default issued by the court should not
prejudice the Government under the well-known and
settled rule that the Republic, or its Government, is
usually not estopped by the mistake or error on the part
of its officials or agents.
ii. Republic v. San Lorenzo, 513 SCRA 294 (2007)
The duty and the power to set the hearing date lie with
the land registration court. After an applicant has filed
his application, the law requires the issuance of a court
order setting the initial hearing date. The notice of
initial hearing is a court document. The notice of initial
hearing is signed by the judge and copy of the notice is
mailed by the clerk of court to the LRA [Land
Registration Authority]. This involves a process to which
the party applicant absolutely has no participation.
In land registration cases, the applicant must strictly
comply with the jurisdictional requirements.
The Court held that a party to an action has no control
over the Administrator or the Clerk of Court acting as a
land court; he has no right to meddle unduly with the
business of such official in the performance of his
duties. A party cannot intervene in matters within the
exclusive power of the trial court. No fault is
attributable to such party if the trial court errs on
matters within its sole power. It is unfair to punish an
applicant for an act or omission over which the
applicant has neither responsibility nor control,
especially if the applicant has complied with all the
requirements of the law.
It is evident in land registration proceedings that what is
more important than the date on which the initial
hearing is set is the giving of sufficient notice of the
registration proceedings via publication.
iii. Republic v. Herbieto, 459 SCRA 183 (2005)
Publication, Mailing, Posting
The misjoinder of causes of action and parties does not
affect the jurisdiction of the courts to hear and proceed
with the application for registration of the two
respondents who applied for registration on two
separate lands.
The late publication of the Notice of Initial Hearing in
the newspaper of general circulation is tantamount to
no publication at all, having the same ultimate result.
Owing to such defect, the MTC failed to constructively
seize the lands and acquire jurisdiction over the
applications for registration. Therefore, the orders of
the court were void for having been issued by the MTC
without jurisdiction.
NOTE:
The notice of initial hearing shall 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.
The notice of initial hearing shall also be posted 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. (Sec. 24)
iv. Director v. CA and Abistado, 276 SCRA 276 (1997)
It should be noted further that land registration is a
proceeding in rem. Being in rem, such proceeding
requires constructive seizure of the land as against all
persons, including the state, who have rights to or
interests in the property. An in-rem proceeding is
validated essentially through publication. This being so,
the process must strictly be complied with. Otherwise,
persons who may be interested or whose rights may be
adversely affected would be barred from contesting an
application which they had no knowledge of.
The Court ruled that Section 23 of PD No. 1529 indeed
clearly provides that publication in the Official Gazette
suffices to confer jurisdiction upon the land registration
court. However, absent any publication of the notice of
initial hearing in a newspaper of general circulation, the
land registration court cannot validly confirm and
register the title of the applicants.
It may be asked why publication in a newspaper of
general circulation should be deemed mandatory when
the law already requires notice by publication in the
Official Gazette as well as by mailing and posting, all of
which have already been complied with in the case at
hand. The reason is due process and the reality that the
Official Gazette is not as widely read and circulated as
newspapers and is oftentimes delayed in its circulation,
such that the notices published therein may not reach
the interested parties on time, if at all.
v. Adez Realty v. CA, 212 SCRA 623 (1992)
A land registration proceeding is a proceeding in rem,
not in personam, and therefore it is not necessary to
give personal notice to the owners or claimants of the
land sought to be registered, in order to vest the courts
with power and authority over the res. The failure to
give notice does not amount to jurisdictional defect. It is
the publication of such notice that brings in the whole
word as a party in the case and vests the court with
jurisdiction to hear and decide it. Thus, notice of
hearing by proper publication in the Official Gazette is
sufficient to clothe the court with jurisdiction, and the
mere fact that a person purporting to have a legitimate
claim in the property did not receive personal notice is
not sufficient ground to invalidate the proceedings.
D. Hearing, Judgment and Decree of Registration
i. Section 27. Speedy hearing; reference to a referee.
The trial court shall see to it that all registration-
proceedings are disposed or within ninety days from the
date the case is submitted for decision,
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, and the referee shall submit his
report thereon to the Court within fifteen days after the
termination of such hearing. Hearing before a referee
may be held at any convenient place within the
province or city as may be fixed by him and after
reasonable notice thereof shall have been served the
parties concerned. The court may render judgment in
accordance with the report as though the facts have
been found by the judge himself: Provided, however,
that the court may in its discretion accept the report, or
set it aside in whole or in part, or order the case to be
recommitted for further proceedings.
NOTES SECTION 27 of PRD:
1) Hearing Section 27
2) Proof required in registration proceedings,
generally The burden is on applicant to prove his
positive averments and not for the government or the
private oppositors to establish a negative proposition.
He must submit convincing proof of his and his
predecessors-in-interest’s actual, peaceful and adverse
possession in the concept of owner of the lots during
the period required by law. The applicant must show,
even in the absence of opposition, that he is the
absolute owner, fee simple, of such land.
a. Citizenship Requirement
i. The Krivenko doctrine: aliens disqualified from
acquiring public and private lands. (see the case of
Krivenko v. Register of Deeds)
ii. The prohibition is a declaration of imperative national
policy
This fundamental policy of preserving the nation’s lands
for Filipino citizens. Thus, as the rule now stands, the
fundamental law explicitly prohibits non-Filipinos from
acquiring or holding title to private lands, except only by
way of legal succession or if the acquisition was made
by a former natural-born citizen.
i.A natural-born Filipino citizen who has lost his
citizenship may be a transferee of private land(see
Citizenship Requirement Individual under Roman
Numeral II-B[ix],Section 10 of Foreign Investment Act)
iv. Capacity to own land is determined as of the time of
its acquisition and not registration(see Republic v. CA
and Lapiña and Director of Lands v. Buyco)
v. Aliens may lease private lands
1. While aliens are disqualified from acquiring lands of
the public domain, they may however lease private
lands.
2. A lease to an alien for 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.
3. Aliens are not completely excluded by the
Constitution from the use of lands for residential
purposes. They may be granted temporary rights such
as Lease Contract.
vi. Foreigners allowed to purchase condominium units
1. Under RA No. 4726, foreign national can own
Philippine real estate through the purchase of
condominium units or townhouses pursuant to Section
of this Act. (see Roman Numeral II-C [iv] [4])
2.It expressly allows foreigners to acquire condominium
units and shares in condominium corporations up to not
more than 40% of the total and outstanding capital
stock of a Filipino- owned or controlled corporation.
3. Under this set up, the ownership of the land is legally
separated from the unit itself. The land is owned by the
condominium corporation and the unit owner is simply
a member in this condominium corporation. As long as
60% of the members of this condominium corporation
are Filipinos, the remaining members can be foreigners.
4. Considering that the rights and liabilities of the
parties under the contract to sell is covered by the
Condominium Act wherein petitioner as unit owner is
simply a member of the condominium corporation,
then the constitutional proscription against aliens
owning real property does not apply.
vii. Donation in favor of a religious corporation
controlled by non- Filipinos not registrable
1. Section 8, Article XII, 1987 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
acquire or hold lands of the public domain in the
Philippines.
2. The Constitution makes no exception in favor of
religious associations.
3. Such prohibition is not violative of the freedom of
religion guaranteed by the Constitution as the land
ownership is not indispensable to the free exercise and
enjoyment of religious profession or worship.
viii. Land acquired by an American citizen in 1945 can be
registered under the Ordinance appended to the 1935
Constitution
1. While aliens are disqualified to acquire lands under
the 1935 Constitution, the Ordinance appended thereto
provided that until the final withdrawal of the United
States sovereignty over the Philippines, citizens and
corporations of the United States could enjoy all the
same civil rights as Philippine citizens.
2. The 1935 Constitution provides that upon the
proclamation of Philippine Independence (July 4, 1946)
all existing property rights of citizens or corporations of
the United States shall be acknowledged, respected,
and safeguarded to the same extent as property rights
of citizens of the Philippines.
ix. A corporation sole may acquire and register private
agricultural land
1. 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.
2. It is not treated as an ordinary private corporation
because whether or not it be so treated, the
constitutional proscription against private corporations
acquiring public agricultural lands will not apply.
3. The reason for this is that a corporation sole has no
nationality and the framers of the Constitution did not
have in mind the religious corporation sole when they
provided that 60 per centum of the capital thereof be
owned by Filipino citizens.
x. Can a Filipino vendor recover land sold to an alien?
1. The question was answered in the negative in the
early case of Rellosa v. Gaw Chee Hun because the
Filipino vendor was in pari delicto with the alien vendee
2. However, Rellosa was reversed by Philippine Banking
Corporation v. Lui She where the Court declared that
the pari delicto rule may not be applied in said case
since:
a. The original parties who were guilty of a violation of
the fundamental charter have died and have since been
substituted by their administrators to whom it would be
unjust to impute their guilt; and
b. As an exception to the rule on pari delicto, when the
agreement is not illegal per se but is merely prohibited
and the prohibition by law is designed for the
protection of the plaintiff, he may, if public policy is
thereby enhanced, recover what he has paid or
delivered. Public policy referred here is of preserving
lands for Filipinos.
3. If land is invalidly transferred to an alien who
subsequently becomes a Filipino citizen or transfers it to
a Filipino, the flaw in the original transaction is
considered cured and the title of the transferee is
rendered valid. As the property in dispute is already in
the hands of a qualified person, a Filipino citizen, there
would be no more public policy to be protected. The
objective of the constitutional provision to keep our
lands in Filipino hands has been achieved.
xi. Rule restated - On the basis of their capacity to
acquire or hold lands of the public domain, the
following may acquire private lands:
1. Filipino citizens
2. Filipino corporations and association as defined in
Section 2, Article XII of the Constitution; and, by
exception;
3. Aliens, but only by hereditary succession; and
4. A natural-born citizen of the Philippines who has lost
his citizenship under the terms of Section 8, Article
XII of the 1987 Constitution.
a. Filipino citizens can both acquire or
otherwise hold lands of the public domain.
b. Filipino corporations cannot acquire lands of the
public domain but they can hold such lands by modes
other than acquisition, such as lease.
5. NB: A foreign corporation is disqualified to own lands
in the Philippines. It is also disqualified to own rights to
ownership to such lands.
b. Classification of Public Lands
i. Classification of public land is an executive
prerogative CA No. 141 (Public Land Act), as amended,
remains to this day the existing general law governing
the classification and disposition of lands of the public
domain, other than timber and mineral lands. The
classification of public lands is an exclusive prerogative
of the executive department of the government and not
of the courts.
1. System of classification
a. The President is authorized, from time to time, to
classify the lands of the public domain into alienable
and disposable, timber, or mineral lands.
b. Alienable and disposable lands of the public domain
are further classified according to their uses into:
i. Agricultural
ii. Residential, commercial, industrial, or for similar
productive purposes;
iii. Educational, charitable, or other similar purposes; or
iv. Reservations for town sites and for public and quasi-
public uses.
c. The Secretary, Department of Environment and
Natural Resources (DENR), is the only other public
official empowered by law to approve a land
classification and declare such land as alienable and
disposable.
2. Requirements to establish classification
a. Provincial Environment and Natural Resources Office
(PENRO) or Community Environment and Natural
Resources Officer (CENRO) to certify that land is
alienable and disposable (A and D);
b. Applicant must prove that the DENR Secretary had
approved the land classification and released the land
of the public domain as A and D land;
c. That the land falls within the land classification map
as verified through survey by the PENRO or CENRO;
d. The applicant must present a certified copy of the
DENR Secretary’s declaration or the President’s
proclamation classifying the land as alienable and
disposable.
3. Only A and D lands may be the subject of disposition
a. Before the government could alienate or dispose of
lands of the public domain, the President must first
officially classify these lands as alienable and
disposable, and then declare them open to disposition
or cession.
4. Classification of Boracay Island
a. President Arroyo issued Proclamation No. 1064
classifying Boracay Island into 400 hectares of reserved
forest land (protection purposes) and 628.96 hectares
of agricultural land (alienable and disposable).
b. Except for lands already covered by existing titles,
Boracay was an unclassified land of the public domain
prior to Proclamation No. 1064. Under PD No. 705, or
Revised Forestry Code, all unclassified lands are
considered public forest.
5. Public Lands and Governmental Land distinguished
a. A public land is equivalent to public domain. It does
not by any means include all lands of government
ownership, but only so much of said lands as are thrown
open to private appropriation and settlement by
homestead and other like general laws.
b. Government land includes not only public lands but
also other lands of the government already reserved or
devoted to public use or subject to private right.
6. Cadastral survey of a municipality does not
automatically classify lands within the cadastre as A and
D lands
a. A survey made in a cadastral proceeding merely
identifies each lot preparatory to a judicial proceeding
for adjudication of title to any of the land upon claim of
interested parties.
b. Where the subject property is still unclassified,
whatever possession applicants may have had, and,
however long, cannot ripen into private ownership.
ii. Under the Spanish regime, all Crown lands were per
se alienable and subject to adjudication by the
courts unless falling under timber or mineral zones, or
otherwise reserved for some public purpose in
accordance with law.
iii. Burden of proof rests with applicant to overcome
presumption of State ownership
1. Must prove that the land subject of the application
for registration is alienable and disposable;
2. 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; and
3. Applicant must also secure a certification from the
government that the land claimed to have been
possessed for the required number of years is alienable
and disposable.
c. Non-Registrable Properties
1) Those intended for public use, such as roads, rivers,
torrents, ports and bridges constructed by the State,
banks, shores, roadsteads, and others of similar
character;
Article 420 of the Civil Code
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.
Regalian Doctrine under the 1935, 1973 and 1987
Constitution
d. Specific Evidence of Ownership
i. What must the applicant for land registration
prove? DIP
1. Declassification “That the land applied for has been
declassified and is a public agricultural land, alienable
and disposable or otherwise capable of registration;
2. Identity of the land; and
3. Possession and occupation of the land for the length
of time and in the manner required by law.
4. Evidence of Declassification
ii. What may constitute sufficient proof to establish
declassification of land from forest to alienable or
disposable, or agricultural? PAEB- CIL
1. Presidential proclamation
2. Administrative Order issued by the Secretary of
Environment and Natural Resources
3. Executive Order
4. Bureau of Forest Development (BFD) Land
Classification Map
5. Certification by the Director of Forestry, and reports
of District Forester
6. Investigation reports of Bureau of Lands Investigator
7. Legislative Act, or by Statute
Evidence of Identity of Land
iii. What may be presented as proof of the identity of
the land sought to be registered? STTT
1. Survey plan in general
2. Tracing cloth plan and blue print copies of plan
3. Technical description of the land
4. Tax Declarations
iv. In an application for judicial confirmation of
imperfect title, is submission of the original tracing cloth
plan mandatory?
1.Yes. The Supreme Court declared that the submission
of the tracing cloth plan is a statutory requirement of
mandatory
character. The plan of the land must be duly approved
by the Director of Lands, otherwise the same have no
probative value.
Note: However, under LRA Circular 05-2000, only a
certified copy of the original tracing cloth plan need be
forwarded to the LRA. (Agcaoili, Reviewer)
Although mere blueprint copies were presented in court
as evidence, the original tracing cloth plan was attached
to the application for registration and was available to
the court for comparison. Hence, the approval of
registration was proper.
(Republic v. IAC)
v. In case of conflict between areas and boundaries,
which prevails?
1. General Rule: Boundaries prevail over area.
a. Exception: Boundaries relied upon do not identify
land beyond doubt.
Boundaries given in the registration plan do not
coincide with outer boundaries of the land covered and
described in the muniments of title.
Evidence of Possession and Occupation
vi. What may constitute proof of possession?
1. To prove possession, it is not enough to simply
declare one’s possession and that of the applicant’s
predecessors-in-interest to have been adverse,
continuous, open, public, peaceful and in concept of
owner for the required number of years. The applicant
should present specific facts to show such nature of
possession because bare allegations, without more, do
not amount to preponderant evidence that would shift
the burden to the oppositor.(Diaz v. Republic)
vii. What are some specific overt acts of possession
which may substantiate a claim of ownership?
1. Introducing valuable improvements on the property
like fruit- bearing trees;
2. Fencing the area;
3. Constructing a residential house thereon; or
4. Declaring the same for taxation purposes.
Note: Evidence to be admissible must, however, be
credible, substantial and satisfactory (Agcaoili Reviewer)
Note: Evidence to be admissible must, however, be
credible, substantial and satisfactory (Agcaoili Reviewer)
viii. What are insufficient proofs of possession?
1.Mere Casual cultivation of portions of the land by
claimant
Reason: Possession is not exclusive and notorious so as
to give rise to a presumptive grant from the State.
2. Possession of other persons in the land applied for
impugns the exclusive quality of the applicant’s
possession.
3. Mere failure of Fiscal representing the State tocross-
examine the applicant on the claimed possession.
4. Tax declaration of land sought to be registered which
is not in the name of applicant but in the name of the
deceased parents of an oppositor.
Reason: Possession of applicant is not completely
adverse or open, nor is it truly in the concept of an
owner.
5. Holding of property by mere tolerance of the owner
Reason: Holder is not in the concept of owner and
possessory acts no matter how long do not start the
running of the period of prescription.
6. Where applicants tacked their possession to that of
their predecessor-in-interest but they did not present
him as witness or when no proofs of what acts of
ownership and cultivation were performed by the
predecessor.
Reason
Evidence of Private Ownership
ix. What are the proofs of private ownership of land?
1. Spanish title, impending cases.
Note: However, Spanish titles are now inadmissible and
ineffective as proof of ownership in land registration
proceedings filed after Aug. 16, 1976. It is mere indicia
of a claim of ownership that the holder has a claim of
title over the property.
2. Tax declaration and tax payments.
Note: While tax declarations and real estate tax receipts
are not conclusive evidence of ownership, if presented
as documentary evidence coupled with proof of actual
possession for the period required by law of the land,
they are good evidence of ownership.
Even if belatedly declared for taxation purposes, it does
not negate possession especially if there is no other
claimant of the land.
Mere failure of the owner of the land to pay the realty
tax does not warrant a conclusion that there was
abandonment of his right to the property.
3. Other kinds of proof.
E.g. Testimonial evidence (i.e. accretion is on a land
adjacent to a river).
Note: Any evidence that accretion was formed through
human intervention negates the claim.
4.Presidential issuances and legislative acts.
Note: It is constitutive of a fee simple title or absolute
title in favor of the grantee.
x. Are tax declarations or payment of realty tax
conclusive evidence of ownership?
1. No. Tax declarations or realty tax payment of
property are not conclusive evidence of ownership.
However, they are good indicia of possession in the
concept of an owner, for no one in his right mind would
be paying taxes for a property that is not in his actual or
at least constructive possession. They constitute at least
proof that the holder has a claim of title over the
property.
Note: 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. Such
an act strengthens one’s bona fide claim of acquisition
of ownership. (Agcaoili Reviewer; Aquino, p.75-76)
xi. What proofs are insufficient to establish private
ownership or right over land?
1. Compromise agreement among parties to a land
registration case where they have rights and interest
over the land and allocated portions thereof to each of
them.
Note: Assent of Director of Lands and Director of Forest
Management to compromise agreement did not and
could not supply the absence of evidence of title
required of the applicant.
2. Decision in an estate proceeding of a predecessor-in-
interest of an applicant that involves a property over
which the decedent has no transmissible rights, and in
other cases where issue of ownership was not definitely
passed upon.
3. Survey plan of an inalienable land.
Note: Such plan does not convert such land into
alienable land, much less private property.
Section 28. Partial judgment.
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.
Section 29. Judgment confirming title.
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.
NOTES SECTION 28 & 29 of PRD:
1) After due hearing for registration, what will the court
do?
a. If the court, after considering the evidence and report
of the LRA, finds that the applicant or the oppositor has
sufficient title proper for registration, it shall render
judgment confirming the title of the applicant, or the
oppositor, to the land or portions thereof, as the case
may be.
Section 30. When judgment becomes final; duty to
cause issuance of decree.
The judgment rendered in a land registration
proceedings becomes final upon the expiration of thirty
days(now 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.
Section 31. Decree of registration.
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".
NOTES SECTIONS 30 & 31 of PRD:
1)Judgment - It is a decision of court constituting its
opinion after taking into consideration the evidence
submitted.
a. What must a judgment in land registration
proceeding contain?
i. When judgment is rendered in favor of the plaintiff,
the court shall order the entry of a new certificate of
title and the cancellation of the original certificate and
owner’s duplicate of the former registered owner.
b. It becomes final upon the lapse of 15 days counted
from the receipt of notice of the judgment.
c. However, notwithstanding the lapse of the 15-
day period from receipt of judgment by the parties, the
court continues to retain control over the case until the
expiration of one (1) year after the entry of decree of
registration by the LRA.
2) Post-Judgment Incidents
a. Writ of Possession is a writ employed to enforce a
judgment to recover the possession of land,
commanding the sheriff to enter into the land and give
the possession thereof to the person entitled under the
judgment.
Note: It may be issued only pursuant to a decree of
registration in an original land registration proceeding.
b. Writ of Possession order to sheriff to deliver the land
to the successful party litigant; no prescription against:
(1) the loser and (2) anyone unlawfully and adversely
occupying.
i.When writ may not issue: When a party entered into
property after issuance of final decree, is not an
oppositor in registration proceeding, and is in
possession of land for at least 10 years.
c. Writ of Demolition the complement of writ of
possession; to demolish improvements introduced by
oppositor or his successor in interest.
d. How may possession of property be obtained?
i. Possession of the property may be obtained by filing
an ex parte motion with the RTC of the province or
place where the property is situated. Upon filing of the
motion and the required bond, it becomes a ministerial
duty of the court to order the issuance of a writ of
possession in favor of the purchaser. After the
expiration of the 1-year period without redemption
being effected by the property owner, the right of the
purchaser to the possession of the foreclosed property
becomes absolute.
e. Against whom may a writ of possession be issued?
i. In a registration case, a writ of possession may be
issued against:
1. The person who has been defeated in a registration
case; and
2. Any person adversely occupying the land or any
portion thereof during the land registration proceedings
up to the issuance of the final decree.
f. If the court granted the registration, must the
applicant move for the issuance of a writ of possession
in case he is deprived of possession over the land
subject of the registration proceedings?
i. Yes, if it is against:
1. The person who has been defeated in a registration
case; and
2. Any person adversely occupying the land or any
portion thereof during the land registration proceedings
up to the issuance of the final decree.
ii. No, if it is against person who took possession of the
land after final adjudication of the same in a registration
proceeding. In which case, the remedy is file a separate
action for:
1.Unlawful entry;
2.Unlawful detainer;
3.Reinvindicatory action, as the case may be, and only
after a favorable judgment can the prevailing party
secures a writ of possession.
g. Does petition for the issuance of a writ of possession
prescribe?
i. General Rule: No
Exception: If a party has once made use of the benefit
of a writ of possession, he cannot again ask for it, if
afterwards he loses possession of the property obtained
by virtue of the original writ.
3) Means to Recover Possession:
a. Forcible entry
b. Unlawful Detainer
c. Accion Publiciana
d. Accion Reivindicatoria
4) What must a judgment in land registration
proceedings contain?
a. When judgment is rendered in favor of the plaintiff,
the court shall order the entry of a new certificate of
title and the cancellation of the original certificate and
owner’s duplicate of the former registered owner.
5) Decree of Registration - It is a document prepared in
the prescribed form by the LRA Administrator, signed by
him in the name of the court, embodying the final
disposition of the land by the court and such other data
found in the record, including the name and other
personal circumstances of the adjudicate, the technical
description of the property, liens and encumbrances
affecting it, and such other matters as determined by
the court in its judgment.
a. The decree issued by the LRA pursuant to the order
of the court;
b. Binds the land, quiets title thereto, subject only to
such exceptions or liens as may be provided by law;
c. Conclusive upon all persons including the
government.
6)What does a decree of registration cover?
a. Only claimed property,or a portion thereof can be
adjudicated. A land registration court has no jurisdiction
to adjudge a land to a person who has never asserted
any right of ownership thereof.
7) What is the effect of a decree of registration?
a. The decree of registration binds the land, quiets title,
subject only to such exceptions or liens as may be
provided by law.
b. It is conclusive upon all persons including the national
government and all branches thereof. And such
conclusiveness does not cease to exist when the title is
transferred to a successor.
c. Note: Title once registered cannot be impugned,
altered, changed, modified, enlarged or diminished,
except in a direct proceeding permitted by law.
8) What are the effects of the entry of the decree of
registration in the National Land Titles and Deeds
Registration Authority?
a. This serves as the reckoning date to determine the 1-
year period from which one can impugn the validity of
the registration.
b. 1 year after the date of entry, it becomes
incontrovertible, and amendments will not be allowed
except clerical errors. It is deemed conclusive as to the
whole world.
c. Puts an end to litigation.
9) What is decree of confirmation and registration?
a. It is issued by LRA after finality of judgment and
contains technical description of land. It is subject only
to an appeal.
b. It is conclusive evidence of the ownership of the land
referred to therein and becomes indefeasible and
incontrovertible after one year from the issuance of the
decree.
10) Differentiate decree of confirmation and
registration from decree of registration?
a. Decree of registration is issued pursuant to the
Property Registration Decree, where there already
exists a title which is confirmed by the court.
b. Decree of confirmation and registration of title is
issued pursuant to the Public Land Act, where the
presumption always is that the land applied for pertains
to the State, and that the occupants and possessors
only claim an interest in the same by virtue of their
imperfect title or continuous, open and notorious
possession.
11) What is the doctrine of non-collateral attack of a
decree or title?
a. A decree of registration and registered title cannot be
impugned, enlarged, altered, modified, or diminished
either in collateral or direct proceeding, after the lapse
of one year from the date of its entry.
12) Differentiate direct from collateral attack.
 Direct Attack Collateral Attack
The issues are It is made when, in another
raised in a direct action to obtain a different relief,
proceeding in an an attack on the judgment is mad
action instituted as an incident in said action
for that purpose.
e.g. Torrens title is questioned in
the ordinary civil action for
recovery of
possession.
a. In a case for recovery of possession based on
ownership, is a third-party complaint to nullify the title
of the third-party defendant considered a direct attack
on the title?
i. If the object of the third-party complaint is to nullify
the title of the third-party defendant, the third-
party complaint constitutes a direct- attack on the title
because the same is in the nature of an original
complaint for cancellation of title.
b. If an attack is made thru a counterclaim, should it be
disregarded for being a collateral attack?
i. No. A counterclaim is also considered an original
complaint, and as such, the attack on the title is direct
and not collateral.
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.
NOTES:
1) Indefeasibility
After the lapse of one year from the entry of the decree
of registration, said the decree of registration and the
certificate of title issued shall become incontrovertible.
(Sec 32, P.D. 1529)
2) Purchaser in good faith
a. An innocent purchaser for value is one who buys the
property of another without notice that some other
person has a right to or interest in it, and who pays a
full and fair price at the time of the purchase or before
receiving any notice of another person’s claims.
b. When the buyer enters into a contract of sale, he
assumes 2 obligations
i. First, the payment of the consideration; and
ii. Second, the performance of such first obligation in
good faith, and implied obligation but just as binding
and as important as the first.
c. While good faith is presumed, conversely, bad faith
must be established by competent proof by the party
alleging the same.
d. Property Registration Decree guarantees to every
purchaser of registered land in good faith that they can
take and hold the same free from any and all prior
claims, liens and encumbrances except those set forth
on the certificate of title and those expressly mentioned
in the decree as having been preserved against it.
e. Purchaser is not required to explore further than
what title indicates for hidden defects
i. Every person dealing with registered land may safely
rely on the correctness of the certificate of title and is
no longer required to look behind the certificate in
order to determine the actual owner.
ii. But one who buys from one who is not the registered
owner is expected to examine not only the certificate of
title but all factual circumstances necessary for him to
determine if there are any flaws in the title of the
transferor, or in his capacity to transfer the land.
iii. A purchaser of a property cannot be in good faith
where the title thereof shows that it was reconstituted.
iv. In a series of transfers, in order that a purchaser may
be considered in good faith, it is enough that he
examines the latest certificate of title.
f. A purchaser who has knowledge of defect of his
vendor’s title cannot claim good faith.
g. As between two persons in good faith, the lawful
holder of a title is preferred.
i. As between two persons both of whom are in good
faith and both innocent of any negligence, the law must
protect and prefer the lawful holder of registered title
over the transferee of a vendor bereft of any
transmissible rights.
h. Purchaser charged only with notice of liens noted on
the title
i. A person dealing with registered land is only charged
with notice of the burdens on the property which are
noted on the face of the register or the certificate of
title.
ii. This rule however refers only to properties registered
under the Torrens system, not to those under Act No.
3344.
Iii .A person dealing with registered land has a right to
rely on the Torrens certificate of title and to dispense
with the need of inquiring further except when the
party has actual knowledge of facts and circumstances
that would impel a reasonably cautious man to make
such inquiry or when the purchaser has knowledge of a
defect or the lack of title in his vendor or of sufficient
facts to induce a reasonably prudent man to inquire
into the status of the title of the property in litigation.
iv. Article 526 of the Civil Code says that one who is
unaware of any flaw in his title, or mode of acquisition,
by which it is invalidated, shall be deemed a possessor
in good faith. But one who is aware of such flaw is
deemed a possessor in bad faith.
i. Rule of œcaveat emptor• (buyer beware•)
i2. The rule of caveat emptor requires the purchaser to
be aware of the supposed title of the vendor and one
who buys without checking the vendor’s title takes all
the risks and losses consequent to such failure.
j. Sale of property pending litigation
i. The annotation of an adverse claim is a measure
designed to protect the interest of a person over a piece
of real property, and serves as a notice and warning to
third parties dealing with said property that someone is
claiming an interest on the same or may have a better
right than the registered owner thereof.
ii. A bona fide purchaser for value of property at an
auction sale acquires good title as against a prior
transferee of the same property if such transfer was
unrecorded at the time of the auction sale.
iii. The rule of caveat emptor applies to execution sale.
k. Prior registration of a lien
i. Registration is not the operative act for a mortgage to
be binding between the parties. But to third persons, it
is indispensable.
l. Rule of good faith equally applies to mortgagees of
real property
i. The phrase innocent purchaser for value• in Section
32 of the PRD includes an innocent lessee, mortgagee,
or other encumbrancer for value.
ii. The right or lien of an innocent mortgagee for value
upon the land mortgaged must be respected and
protected, even if the mortgagor obtained his title
thereto thru fraud.
iii. Where the bank had exercised the due care
demanded of it relative to real estate loans, it will be
considered an innocent mortgagee for value. Unlike
private individuals, banks are expected to exercise
greater care and prudence in their dealings, including
those involving registered lands.
m. Good faith is a question of fact
i. There is a question of fact when the doubt or
difference arises as to the truth of the falsity of the
statement of facts while a question of law exists when
there is doubt or controversy as to what the law is on a
certain state of facts.
n. Burden of proof
i. The burden of proving the status of a purchaser in
good faith lies upon one who asserts that status and
this onus probandi cannot be discharged by mere
invocation of the legal presumption of good faith.
o. Rule on double sale of property
i. Between two buyers of the same immovable property
registered under the Torrens system, the law gives
ownership priority to:
1. The first registrant in good faith;
2. Then, the first possessor in good faith; and
3. Finally, the buyer who in good faith presents the
oldest title.
ii. This provision, however, does not apply if the
property is not registered under the Torrens system.
p. Principle of prior est temporae, prior est in jura
i. In a situation where not all the requisites are present
which would warrant the application of Article 1544,
the principle of prior tempore, potior jure or he who is
first in time is preferred in right, should apply.
ii. The only essential requisite of this rule is priority in
time; in other words, the only one who can invoke this
is the first vendee.
iii. The principle of first in time, stronger in right gains
greater significance in case of double sale of immovable
property. When the thing sold twice is an immovable,
the one who acquires it and first records it in the
Registry of Property, both made in good faith, shall be
deemed the owner. Verily, the act of registration must
be coupled with good faith.
iv. Knowledge gained by the first buyer of the second
sale cannot defeat the first buyer’s right except only as
provided by the Civil Code and that is where the second
buyer first registers in good faith the second sale ahead
of the first.
Section 33. Appeal from judgment, etc.
The judgment and orders of the court hearing the land
registration case are appealable to the Court of Appeals
or to the Supreme Court in the same manner as in
ordinary actions.
Section 34. Rules of procedure.
The Rules of Court shall, insofar as not inconsistent with
the provision of this Decree, be applicable to land
registration and cadastral cases by analogy or in a
suppletory character and whenever practicable and
convenient.
NOTES SECTIONS 32, 33 & 34 of PRD:
1) What are the remedies of an aggrieved party in
registration proceedings:
a. Relief from judgment
b. Appeal
c. Action for Damages
d. Action for Compensation from the Assurance Fund
e. Action for Reconveyance
f. Cancellation of suits
g. Annulment of judgment
h. New Trial
i. Quieting of Title
j. Petition for Review (of a Decree)
2) Relief from judgment; relief from denial of appeal
a. When a judgment or final order is entered, or any
proceedings is thereafter taken against a party in any
court through, accident, mistake, or excusable
negligence, he may file a petition in such court and in
the same case praying that the judgment, order or
proceeding be set aside.
b. When a judgment or final order is rendered by any
court in a case, and a party thereto, by fraud, accident,
mistake, or excusable negligence, has been prevented
from taking an appeal, he may file a petition in such
court and in the same case praying that the appeal be
given due course.
c. Time for filing petition
i. A petition for relief from judgment or from denial of
appeal under Sections 1 and 2, Rule 38, must be
verified, filed within sixty (60) days after the petitioner
learns of the judgment, final order, or other proceeding
to be set aside, and not more than six (6) months after
such judgment or final order was entered, or such
proceeding was taken.
ii. The date of finality of the judgment or final order
shall be deemed to be the date of its entry.
d. Petition for relief and motion for new
trial/reconsideration are exclusive of each other
i. A party who has filed a timely motion for new trial
cannot file a petition for relief after his motion has been
denied. These two remedies are exclusive of each other.
He should appeal from the judgment and question such
denial.
ii. Relief will not be granted to a party who seeks to be
relieved from the effects of a judgment when the loss of
the remedy at law was due to his own negligence, or a
mistaken mode of procedure.
3) Appeal
a. It must be filed within 15 days from receipt of the
judgment or final order appealed from
b. Under PD 1529, judgments and orders in land
registration cases are appealable to the CA or to the
SC in the same manner as ordinary actions.
c. Who may file an appeal in land registration cases?
i. Only those who participated in the proceedings can
interpose an appeal.
d. In land registration cases, may a party validly move
for execution pending appeal?
i. No. A motion for execution pending appeal is not
applicable to land registration proceedings. The reason
is to protect innocent purchasers.
4) Petition for Review:
a. Requisites:
i. Petitioner has a real right;
ii. He has been deprived thereof;
iii. The deprivation is through fraud (actual/extrinsic);
iv. Petition is filed within 1 year from issuance of the
decree; and
v. The property has not yet passed to an innocent
purchaser for value.
b. In land registration cases, when may a petition for
review may be filed? Any person may file a petition for
review to set aside the decree of registration on the
ground that he was deprived of their opportunity to be
heard in the original registration case not later than 1
year after the entry of the decree.
c. Grounds for filing a petition for review:
i. That a land belonging to a person has been registered
in the name of another or that an interest has been
omitted in the application;
ii. Registration has been procured thru actual fraud;
iii. Petitioner is the owner of the said property or
interest therein;
iv. Property has not been transferred to an innocent
purchaser for value;
v. Action is filed within one year from the issuance ad
entry of the decree of registration; or
vi. Actual fraud must be utilized in the procurement of
the decree and not thereafter.
Note: What is contemplated by law is extrinsic fraud.
5) Reconveyance:
a. Reconveyance is an action seeking to transfer or
reconvey the land from the registered owner to the
rightful owner.
b. Purpose: An action for reconveyance does not aim or
purport to re-open the registration proceedings and set
aside the decree of registration but only to show that
the person who secured the registration of the
questioned property is not the real owner thereof. The
action, while respecting the decree as incontrovertible,
seeks to transfer or reconvey the land from the
registered owner to the rightful owner.
Note: This action may be filed even after the lapse of 1
year from entry of the decree of registration as long as
the property has not been transferred or conveyed to
an innocent purchaser for value.
c. What are the grounds and their corresponding period
for filing an action for reconveyance?
GROUNDS PRESCRIPTIVE PERIOD
4 years from the discovery of the
fraud (deemed to have taken place
from the issuance of the original
certificate of title)
Fraud Note:
The State has an imprescriptible right
to cause the reversion of a piece of
property belonging to the public
domain if title has been acquired
through fraudulent means.
10 years from the date of the
Implied or issuance of the OCT or TCT. It does
Constructive not apply where the person
Trust enforcing the trust is in actual
possession of the property because
he is in effect seeking to quiet title to
the same which is imprescriptible.
Express Not barred by prescription
Trust
Void imprescriptible.
Contract
d. If the ground relied upon for an action for
reconveyance is fraud, what is the period for filing the
same?
i. If ground relied upon is fraud, action may be filed
within 4 years from discovery thereof. Discovery is
deemed to have taken place when said instrument was
registered. It is because registration constitutes
constructive notice to the whole world.
e. May the court cancel the notice of lis pendens even
before final judgment is rendered?
i. A notice of lis pendens may be cancelled even before
final judgment upon proper showing that the notice if
for the purpose of molesting or harassing the adverse
party or that the notice of lis pendens is not necessary
to protect the right of the party who cause it to be
registered.
6) Damages
a. When may an action for damages be resorted to in
land registration cases?
i. It may be resorted to when a petition for review and
an action for reconveyance is no longer possible
because the property has passed to an innocent
purchaser for value and in good faith.
b. When will an action for damages in land registration
cases prescribe?
i. An ordinary action for damages prescribes in ten (10)
years after the issuance of the Torrens title over the
property.
7) Cancellation Suit
a. What is cancellation suit?
i. It is an action for cancellation of title brought by a
private individual, alleging ownership as well as the
defendant’s fraud or mistake, as the case may be, in
successfully obtaining title over a disputed land claimed
by the plaintiff.
b. When is resort to a cancellation suit proper?
i. When two certificates of title are issued to different
persons covering the same parcel of land in whole or in
part;
ii.When certificate of title is issued covering a non-
registrable property; or
iii. Other causes such as when the certificate of title is
issued pursuant to a judgment that is not final or when
it is issued to a person who did not claim and applied
for the registration of the land covered.
c. What are the rules as regards cancellation of
certificates of title belonging to different persons over
the same land?
i. Where two certificates are issued to different persons
covering the same land, the title earlier in date must
prevail. The latter title should be declared null and void
and ordered cancelled.
d. What is meant by prior est temporae, prior est in
jura?
i. It is a principle which means he who is first in time is
preferred in right.
8) New trial or reconsideration
a. Within the period for taking an appeal, 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.
b. If the motion for new trial is granted, the judgment is
set aside; if the motion for reconsideration is granted,
the judgment is merely amended.
c. The period for filing either motion is within the period
for taking, not perfecting, an appeal.
d. Grounds:
i. Fraud, accident, mistake or excusable negligence;
ii. 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;
1. Within the same period, the aggrieved party may also
move for reconsideration upon the grounds that the
damages awarded are excessive, that the evidence is
insufficient to justify the decision or final order or that
decision or final order is contrary to law.
e. Contents:
1. The motion shall be made in writing stating the
ground or grounds therefor, a written notice of which
shall be served by the movant on the adverse party.
2. A pro forma motion for new trial or reconsideration
shall not toll the reglementary period of appeal.
3. No motion for extension of time to file a motion for
new trial or reconsideration shall be allowed.
f. Affidavits of merit
i. A motion for new trial grounded on fraud, accident,
mistake or excusable negligence should ordinarily be
accompanied by two affidavits;
1. One, setting forth the facts and circumstances alleged
to constitute such fraud, accident, mistake, or excusable
negligence;
a. Reason:It is to enable the court to determine if the
movant’s claim of fraud, etc. is not mere conclusion but
is indeed borne out by the relevant facts.
2. And the other, an affidavit setting forth the particular
facts claimed to constitute the movant’s meritorious
cause of action or defense.
a. Reason: Equally evident as 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 causes of action or meritorious defense.
g. Definition of Terms:
i. Fraud to be ground for nullity of a judgment must be
extrinsic to the litigation.
1. Extrinsic fraud- refers to any fraudulent act of the
successful party in a 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.
2. Intrinsic fraud- refers to acts of a party in a litigation
during the trial, such as the use of 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.
ii. Accident or surprise- 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.
iii. Mistake -- It is some unintentional act, omission, or
error arising from ignorance, surprise, imposition or
misplaced confidence.
iv. Excusable neglect- It means a 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.
9) Quieting of Title
a. What is action for quieting of title?
i. It is an action that is brought to remove clouds on the
tile to real property or any interest therein, by reason of
any instrument, record, claim, encumbrance, or
proceeding which is apparently valid or effective but is
in truth and in fact invalid, ineffective, voidable or
unenforceable, and may be prejudicial to said title.
b. Who may file an action to quiet title?
i. Registered owner;
ii. A person who has an equitable right or interest in the
property; or
iii. The State.
c. Note:
i. Criminal action- State may criminally prosecute for
perjury the party who obtains registration through
fraud, such as by stating false assertions in the sworn
answer required of applicants in cadastral proceedings.
ii. Action for damages-Filed in an ordinary action for
damages if the property has passed unto the hands of
an innocent purchaser for value.
10) Remedy in Case of Loss or Destruction of Certificate
of Title:
a. What is the remedy in case a person lost his
certificate of title?
i. It depends.
1. If what is lost is the OCT or TCT - Reconstitution of
certificate of title;
2.If, however, it is the duplicate of the OCT or TCT -
Replacement of lost duplicate certificate of title.
11) Reconstitution of Certificate of Title
a. What is the remedy in case a certificate of title is lost
or destroyed?
i. Remedy is reconstitution of lost or destroyed
certificate of title in the office of Register of Deeds in
accordance with R.A. 26
b. What is reconstitution of certificate of title?
i. The restoration of the instrument which is supposed
to have been lost or destroyed in its original form and
condition, under the custody of Register of Deeds.
c. What is the purpose of reconstitution of title?
i. To have the same reproduced, after proper
proceedings, in the same form they were when the loss
or destruction occurred.
d. Does reconstitution determine ownership of land
covered by a lost or destroyed certificate of title?
i. A reconstituted title, by itself, does not determine or
resolve the ownership of the land covered by the lost or
destroyed title. The reconstitution of a title is simply
the re-issuance of a lost duplicate certificate of title in
its original form and condition. It does not determine or
resolve the ownership of the land covered by the lost or
destroyed title. A reconstituted title, like the original
certificate of title, by itself does not vest ownership of
the land or estate covered thereby.
e. May a writ of possession be issued in a petition for
reconstitution?
i. No, because, reconstitution does not adjudicate
ownership over the property. A writ of possession is
issued to place the applicant-owner in possession.
f. What are the elements of reconstitution of
certificates of title?
i. Certificate has been lost or destroyed;
ii. Petitioner is the registered owner or has an interest
therein; and
iii. Certificate was in force at the time it was lost or
destroyed.
g. What are the jurisdictional requirements in petitions
for reconstitution of title?
i. Notice thereof shall be:
1. Published twice in successive issues of the Official
Gazette;
2. Posted on the main entrance of the provincial
building and of the municipal building of the
municipality or city, where the land is situated; and
3. Sent by registered mail to every person named in said
notice.
Note: The above requirements are mandatory and
jurisdictional
h. What are the kinds of reconstitution of title?
i. Judicial - partakes the nature of a land registration
proceeding in rem. The registered owners, assigns, or
any person having an interest in the property may file a
petition for that purpose with RTC where property is
located. RD is not the proper party to file the petition.
ii. Administrative may be availed of only in case of:
1. Substantial loss or destruction of the original land
titles due to fire, flood, or other force majeure as
determined by the Administrator of the Land
Registration Authority
2. The number of certificates of title lost or damaged
should be at least 10% of the total number in the
possession of the Office of the Register of Deeds
3. In no case shall the number of certificates of title lost
or damaged be less than P500
4. Petitioner must have the duplicate copy of the
certificate of title (RA No. 6732)
12) Replacement of Lost Duplicate Certificate of Title
a. If what is lost or destroyed is the duplicate title, is
reconstitution the proper remedy?
i. No. When the duplicate title of the landowner is lost,
the proper petition is not reconstitution of title, but one
filed with the court for issuance of new title in lieu of
the lost copy.
b. Who are the persons entitled to a Duplicate
Certificate of Title?
i. Registered owner
ii. Each co-owner

c. What are the requirements for the replacement of
lost duplicate certificate of title?
i. Due notice under oath shall be sent by the owner or
by someone is his behalf to the Register of Deeds of the
province or city where the land lies as soon as the loss
or theft is discovered.
ii. Petition for replacement should be filed with the RTC
of the province or city where the land lies.
iii. Notice to Solicitor General by petitioner is not
imposed by law but it is the Register of Deeds who
should request for representation by the Solicitor
General.
iv. A proceeding where the certificate of title was not in
fact lost or destroyed is null and void for lack of
jurisdiction and the newly issued duplicate is null and
void.
13) Amendment or Correction of Title
a. What are the grounds for amendment or correction
of certificate of title?
i. When registered interests of any description, whether
vested, contingent or inchoate have terminated and
cease;
ii. When new interests have arisen or been created
which do not appear upon the certificate;
iii. When any error, omission or mistake was made in
entering a certificate or any memorandum thereon or
on any duplicate certificate;
iv. When the name of any person on the certificate has
been changed;
v. When the registered owner has been married, or
registered as married, the marriage has terminated and
no right or interest of heirs or creditors will thereby be
affected;
vi. When a corporation, which owned registered land
and has been dissolved, has not conveyed the same
within 3 years after its dissolution; or
vii. When there is a reasonable ground for the
amendment or alteration of title.
b. What are the requisites for the amendment or
correction of title?
i. It must be filed in the original case;
ii. By the registered owner or a person in interest;
iii. On grounds enumerated
iv. All parties must be notified;
v. There is unanimity among them; and
vi. Original decree must not be opened.
14) Cancellation of Title
a. What are the grounds for cancellation of title?
i. When title is void;
ii. Title is replaced by one issued under a cadastral
proceeding; or
iii. When condition for its issuance has been violated by
the registered owner.
15) Surrender of Withheld Duplicate Certificate of Title
a. What are the grounds for surrender of withheld
duplicate certificate of title?
i. When it is necessary to issue a new certificate of title
pursuant to any involuntary instrument which divests
the title of the registered owner against his consent;
ii. Where a voluntary instrument cannot be registered
by reason of the refusal or failure of the holder to
surrender the owner’s duplicate certificate of title; or
iii. Where the owner’s duplicate certificate is not
presented for amendment or alteration pursuant to a
court order.
16) Reversion
a. What is meant by reversion?
i. It is an action instituted by the government, through
the Solicitor General, for cancellation of certificate of
title and the consequential reversion of the land
covered thereby to the State.
ii. Note: The difference between reversion suit and
action for declaration of nullity of title is that in the
former, the allegations in the complaint would admit
State ownership of the disputed land. On the other
hand, action for declaration of nullity of title requires
allegation of the plaintiff’s ownership of the contested
lot prior to the issuance of free patent and certificate of
title.
b. When does reversion apply?
i. Generally, reversion applies in all cases where lands of
public domain and the improvements thereon and all
lands are held in violation of the Constitution.
c. What are the grounds for reversion of lands covered
by a patent?
i. Violation of Sections 118, 120, 121 and 122, Public
Land Act (e.g. alienation or sale of homestead executed
within the 5 year prohibitory period)
ii. When land patented and titled is not capable of
registration
iii. Failure of the grantee to comply with the conditions
im posed by law to entitle him to a patent grant
iv. When the area is an expanded area
v. When the land is acquired in violation of the
Constitution (e.g. land acquired by an alien may be
reverted to the State)
ii. Ting v. Heirs of Diego Lirio, 518 scra 334 (2007)
Section 30 of Presidential Decree No. 1529 or the
Property Registration Decree provides:
The judgment rendered in a land registration
proceeding becomes final upon the expiration of thirty
days to be counted from the date of receipt of notice of
the judgment.
In a registration proceeding instituted for the
registration of a private land, with or without
opposition, the judgment of the court confirming the
title of the applicant or oppositor, as the case may be,
and ordering its registration in his name constitutes,
when final, res judicata against the whole world. It
becomes final when no appeal within the reglementary
period is taken from a judgment of confirmation and
registration.
iii. Gomez v. CA, 168 SCRA 503 (1988)
Unlike ordinary civil actions, the adjudication of land in
a cadastral or land registration proceeding does not
become final, in the sense of incontrovertibility until
after the expiration of one (1) year after the entry of the
final decree of registration. The Court, in several
decisions, has held that as long as a final decree has not
been entered by the Land Registration
Commission (now NLTDRA) and the period of one (1)
year has not elapsed from date of entry of such decree,
the title is not finally adjudicated and the decision in the
registration proceeding continues to be under the
control and sound discretion of the court rendering it.
It is a settled rule that a homestead patent, once
registered under the Land Registration Act, becomes
indefeasible and incontrovertible as a Torrens title, and
may no longer be the subject of an investigation for
determination or judgment in cadastral proceeding.
E.CADASTRAL REGISTRATION PROCEEDINGS
A. ORDER FOR SPEEDY SETTLEMENT AND
ADJUDICATION; SURVEY; NOTICES
i. Section 35. Cadastral Survey Preparatory to filing of
petition.
(a) When in the opinion of the President of the
Philippines public interest so requires that title to any
unregistered lands be settled and adjudicated, he may
to this end direct and order the Director of Lands to
cause to be made a cadastral survey of the lands
involved and the plans and technical description thereof
prepared in due form.
(b) Thereupon, the Director of Lands shall give notice to
persons claiming any interest in the lands as well as to
the general public, of the day on which such survey will
begin, giving as fully and accurately as possible the
description of the lands to be surveyed. Such notice
shall be punished once in the Official Gazette, and a
copy of the notice in English or the national language
shall be posted in a conspicuous place on the bulletin
board of the municipal building of the municipality in
which the lands or any portion thereof is situated. A
copy of the notice shall also be sent to the mayor of
such municipality as well as to the barangay captain and
likewise to the Sangguniang Panlalawigan and the
Sangguniang Bayan concerned.
(c) The Geodetic Engineers or other employees of the
Bureau of Lands in charge of the survey shall give notice
reasonably in advance of the date on which the survey
of any portion of such lands is to begin, which notice
shall be posted in the bulletin board of the municipal
building of the municipality or barrio in which the lands
are situated, and shall mark the boundaries of the lands
by monuments set up in proper places thereon. It shall
be lawful for such Geodetic Engineers and other
employees to enter upon the lands whenever necessary
for the purposes of such survey or the placing of
monuments.
(d) It shall be the duty of every person claiming an
interest in the lands to be surveyed, or in any parcel
thereof, to communicate with the Geodetic Engineer
upon his request therefor all information possessed by
such person concerning the boundary lines of any lands
to which he claims title or in which he claims any
interest.
(e) Any person who shall willfully obstruct the making of
any survey undertaken by the Bureau of Lands or by a
licensed Geodetic Engineer duly authorized to conduct
the survey under this Section, or shall maliciously
interfere with the placing of any monument or remove
such monument, or shall destroy or remove any notice
of survey posted on the land pursuant to law, shall be
punished by a fine of not more than one thousand
pesos or by imprisonment for not more than one year,
or both.
B. PETITION; LOT NUMBERS
ii. 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 "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.•
C. ANSWER
iii. Section 37. Answer to petition in cadastral
proceedings.
Any claimant in cadastral proceedings, whether named
in the notice or not, shall appear before the court by
himself or by some other authorized person in his
behalf, and shall file an answer on or before the date of
initial hearing or within such further time as may be
allowed by the court. The answer shall be signed and
sworn to by the claimant or by some other authorized
person in his behalf, and shall state whether the
claimant is married or unmarried, and if married, the
name of the spouse and the date of marriage, his
nationality, residence and postal address, and shall also
contain:
(a) The age of the claimant;
(b) The cadastral number of the lot or lots claimed, as
appearing on the plan filed in the case by the Director
of Lands, or the block and lot numbers, as the case may
be;
(c) The name of the barrio and municipality in which the
lots are situated;
(d) The names and addresses of the owners of the
adjoining lots so far as known to the claimant;
(e) If the claimant is in possession of the lots claimed
and can show no express grant of the land by the
government to him or to his predecessors-in-
interest, the answer shall state the length of time he
has held such possession and the manner in which it has
been acquired, and shall also state the length of time,
as far as known, during which the predecessors, if any,
held possession;
(f) If the claimant is not in possession or occupation of
the land, the answer shall fully set forth the interest
claimed by him and the time and manner of his
acquisition;
(g) If the lots have been assessed for taxation, their last
assessed value; and
(h) The encumbrances, if any, affecting the lots and the
names of adverse claimants, as far as known.
D. HEARING; JUDGMENT; DECREE
iv. Section 38. Hearing, Judgment, Decree.
The trial of the case may occur at any convenient place
within the province in which the lands are situated and
shall be conducted, and orders for default and
confessions entered, in the same manner as in ordinary
land registration proceedings and shall be governed by
the same rules. All conflicting interests shall be
adjudicated by the court and decrees awarded in favor
of the persons entitled to the lands or to parts thereof
and such decrees shall be the basis for issuance of
original certificates of title in favor of said persons and
shall have the same effect as certificates of title granted
on application for registration of land under ordinary
land registration proceedings.
v. Tan Sing Pan v. Republic, 496 SCRA 189 (2006)
Cadastral proceedings, like ordinary registration
proceedings, are proceedings in rem, and are governed
by the usual rules of practice, procedure and
evidence. A cadastral decree and a certificate of title are
issued only after the applicants prove all the requisite
jurisdictional facts: that they are entitled to the claimed
lot; that all parties are heard; and that evidence is
considered.
It is incumbent upon the petitioners to establish by
positive proof that the publication requirement has
been complied with, what with the fact that they are
the ones who stood to be benefited by the adjudication
of the subject lot. Regrettably, they failed to present
proof of publication of the Notice of Initial Hearing.
All told, there being no indication at all from the records
of the case that notice of the Order for Initial Hearing
was published in the Official Gazette and in a
newspaper of general circulation, without which the
trial court did not acquire jurisdiction over the case, the
decision rendered by the 7th MCTC of Atimonan-
Plaridel, Quezon, confirming petitioners' title over the
subject lot is void ab initio for having been rendered
without jurisdiction.
vi. Rodil v. Benedicto, 95 SCRA 137, (1980)
The Court is convinced that the respondent Judge
committed an error in denying the petition for the
issuance of a writ of possession. The findings of the
respondent Judge that a writ of possession cannot be
issued in the cadastral case because the respondents
were not parties in said registration proceedings, or
that they were not occupants of the land during the
registration proceedings prior to the issuance of the
final decree of registration is not supported by the
evidence and law.
The respondent heirs of Alejandro Abes cannot be said
to be strangers to the registration proceedings. A
cadastral proceeding is a proceeding in rem and against
everybody, including the respondents herein, who are
deemed included in the general order of default
entered in the case. Besides, it appears that the said
respondent heirs of
Alejandro Abes filed a petition for the review of the
decree of registration, thereby becoming a direct party
in the registration proceedings by their voluntary
appearance.
The respondent heirs of Alejandro Abes, being in
possession of the lots in questionunlawfully and
adversely, during the registration proceedings, may be
judicially evicted by means of a writ of possession and it
is the duty of the registration court to issue said writ
when asked for by the successful claimant.
The respondents claim that the petition for the issuance
of a writ of possession was filed out of time, the said
petition having been filed more than five years after the
issuance of the final decree of registration.In the case
of Manlapas and Tolentino vs. Lorente, which has not
yet been abandoned, the Court stated that the right of
the applicant or a subsequent purchaser to ask for the
issuance of a writ of possession of the land never
prescribes.
NOTES SECTIONS 35 38 of PRD:
1) What is cadastral registration?
a. It is 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.
2) Nature and purpose of cadastral proceedings
a. The purpose, as stated in Section 35(a), is to serve the
public interest by requiring that the titles to any
unregistered lands be settled and adjudicated.•
b. The piecemeal and isolated registration of lands, so
inadequate in more ways than one, is avoided. The
principal aim is to settle as much as possible all disputes
over land and to remove all clouds over land titles, as
far as practicable, in a community.
c. The object of a cadastral petition is to have the title
to the various lots embraced in the survey be settled
and adjudicated.
d.It is in the nature of a proceeding in rem, promoted by
the Director of Lands, somewhat akin to a judicial
inquiry and investigation leading to a judicial decree.
3) Procedure leading to the adjudication of property
through cadastral proceedings
a. Cadastral survey preparatory to filing of petition
b. Notice of survey and publication
c. Filing of petition for registration
d. Publication
e. Filing of answer
f. Hearing of the petition
g. Judgment; when title deemed vested
i. In the absence of fraud, title to land in a cadastral
proceeding is vested on the owner upon the expiration
of the period to appeal from the decision or
adjudication by the cadastral court, without such appeal
being perfected; and from that time the land becomes
registered property which cannot be lost by adverse
possession. The certificate of tile would then be
necessary for purposes of effecting registration of
subsequent disposition of the land where court
proceedings would no longer be necessary.
4) Actions taken in a cadastral proceeding
a. First - adjudicates ownership in favor of one of the
claimants. This constitutes the decision the judgment
the decree of the court, and speaks in a judicial manner.
b. Second action is the declaration by the court that the
decree is final and its order for the issuance of the
certificate of title by the Administrator of the Land
Registration Authority.
c. Third and last action devolves upon the Land
Registration Authority. This office has been instituted in
order to have a more efficient execution of the laws
relative to the registration of lands• and to issue
decrees of registration pursuant to final judgments of
the courts in land registration proceedings.
5) Only unregistered lands• may be the subject of a
cadastral survey
a. As provided for in Section 35, the law would limit the
cadastral survey to any unregistered lands• such that
private lands are excluded. This interpretation appears
to be reasonable considering that the object of
cadastral proceedings is to settle and adjudicate• to
lands. Private lands are obviously not contemplated
since ownership thereof had already been finally
determined and adjudicated.
6) Lands already titled cannot be the subject of
cadastral proceedings
a. Lands already decreed and registered in an ordinary
registration proceeding cannot again be subject of
adjudication or settlement in a subsequent cadastral
proceeding.
b. A registration court has no jurisdiction to decree
again the registration of land already decreed in an
earlier land registration case and a second decree for
the same land is null and void. This is so because when
once decreed by a court of competent jurisdiction, the
title to land thus determined is already res judicata, and
binding on the whole world, the proceeding being in
rem.
7) Jurisdiction of the cadastral court over previously
titled lands limited to the correction of technical errors
in the description of the land
a. Provided that such corrections do not impair the
substantial rights of the registered owner of his title;
b. The cadastral court has jurisdiction to determine the
priority or relative weight of two or more certificates of
title for the same land.
8) New titles may be issued for private lands within the
cadastral survey
a. No modification or alteration can be permitted to be
made in the Torrens title for the sole purpose of making
the area of the and described therein agree with that
given in the cadastral survey plan
b. The new title issued under the cadastral system to a
person who already holds a valid Torrens title must
include the whole land specified in the latter.
c. A decree entered by the court cannot be considered
as permanent if the limits of the land therein registered
may be changed or the area thereof altered by a
subsequent adjudication by the court.
9) Cadastral answer may not be thrown out upon a
mere motion of adverse claimants
a. Suppressing the presentation of evidence in support
of claims would perpetuate conflicts over lands.
10) Amendment of the plan to include additional
territory
a. An order of a court in a cadastral case amending the
official plan so as to make it include land not previously
included therein is a nullity unless new publication is
made.
b. Publication is one of the essential bases of the
jurisdiction of the court in land registration and
cadastral cases, and additional territory cannot be
included by amendment of the plan without new
publication.
11) When title to land in a cadastral case is vested
a. In a cadastral case, title of ownership on the land is
vested upon the owner upon the expiration of the
period to appeal from the decision or adjudication by
the cadastral court, without such an appeal having been
perfected.
b. In other words, upon the promulgation of the order
issuance of a decree, the land, for all intents and
purposes, had become, from that time, registered
property which could not be acquired by adverse
possession.
c. The certificate of title would then be necessary for
purposes of effecting registration of subsequent
disposition of the land where court proceedings would
no longer be necessary.
d. 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.
12) Decision declaring land as public land not a bar to a
subsequent action for confirmation of title over the
same land
13) Neither prescription nor laches may render
inefficacious a decision in a land registration case
a. In line with the doctrine of the inapplicability of
prescription and laches in registration cases, it has been
held that the failure on the part of the administrative
authorities to do their part in the issuance of the decree
of registration cannot oust the prevailing party from
ownership of the land.
14) Cadastral court has no jurisdiction over a petition
for reconstitution
a. A reconstituted title is ordered issued in an ordinary
civil case, not in a cadastral proceeding for judicial
confirmation of imperfect title over unregistered
property.
15) Neither prescription nor laches may render
inefficacious a judgment in a cadastral case
a. The mere fact that there has been a 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. The rule
is that the failure on the part of the administrative
authorities to do their part in the issuance of the decree
of registration cannot oust the prevailing party from
ownership of the land.
16) Issuance of writ of possession imprescriptible
a. It has been held that where respondent heirs were in
possession of the lots in question, unlawfully and
adversely, during the cadastral proceedings, they may
be judicially evicted by means of a writ of possession,
the issuance of which never prescribes. Respondent
heirs cannot be said to be strangers since a cadastral
proceeding is a proceeding in rem and against
everybody.