Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Legal Opinion Cnppo Deed of Exchange 1
Legal Opinion Cnppo Deed of Exchange 1
MEMORANDUM
1. Reference:
a. Memorandum from C, REU5 dated January 8, 2024 with subject
Proposed Deed of Exchange of a portion of the PNP Real Property
inside the Camp Wenceslao Q Vinzons Sr located at Daet,
Camarines Norte and lot owned by Marilyn R Cada, et. al.;
2. This pertains to your request for further legal opinion as to the legality to enter
into contract by the PNP through Deed of Exchange considering that the
aforesaid real property was covered with TCT in the name of the Republic of the
Philippines (RP) represented by the Secretary of National Defense.
Page 1 of 3
3. After carefully evaluating the documents attached and perusing the pertinent
laws, rules, and regulations relative to this, the undersigned interposes some
opinions and recommendations.
4. Section 88 of Republic Act No. 6975 known as the “Department of Interior and
Local Government Act of 1991” mentions of Transfer, Merger and Absorption of
Offices and Personnel. All properties, equipment, finances of the transferred
and absorbed agencies, including their respective accountabilities, are
hereby transferred to the Department.
The heads of the various bureaus and offices created under this Act shall, within
six (6) months from the effectivity of this Act, recommended the organizational
structure and staffing pattern of their bureaus, and offices for approval by the
Secretary.
Page 2 of 3
(DILG). The transfer, merger and/or absorption of any government
office/unit concerned shall include the functions, appropriations, funds,
records, equipment, facilities, choses in action, rights, other assets, and
liabilities, if any, of the transferred Office/unit as well as the personnel
thereof xxx.” The above provision therefore supports the legal personality of the
PNP to enter into a Deed of Exchange concerning the subject property.
6. In the case of Leoncio Lee Tek Sheng vs. Court of Appeals, et.al. GR No.
115402, July 15, 1998 specifically mention the difference between ownership and
Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT). The TCT is only the best proof of ownership of
a piece of land. 7 Besides, the certificate cannot always be considered as
conclusive evidence of ownership. Mere issuance of the certificate of title in the
name of any person does not foreclose the possibility that the real property may
be under co-ownership with persons not named in the certificate or that the
registrant may only be a trustee or that other parties may have acquired interest
subsequent to the issuance of the certificate of title. To repeat, registration is not
the equivalent of title, but is only the best evidence thereof. Title as a concept of
ownership should not be confused with the certificate of title as evidence of such
ownership although both are interchangeably used.
The above citation bears stressing that upon absorption of the PC INP by the
PNP, the latter took possession of the said property by express provision of the
law, therefore the PNP has a legal standing and personality to enter into contract
of Deed of Exchange even though the property was covered with TCT in the
Name of the Republic of the Philippines duly represented by the Secretary of
National Defense.
7. The legal comment laid upon is derived solely on the documents and narrations
submitted in which the appreciation of the same is derived thereat. This legal
comment may vary when the facts are changed and attachments are integrated.
8. Foregoing premises considered; this office is of the view that the aforesaid
opinion/s be considered and is of recommendation that a Case Conference be
conducted to further resolve the matter at hand.
9. Respectfully submitted.
Page 3 of 3