Midterm Review Flashcards
🟢Introduction🟢
what is a “Land Title”
evidence of owner’s right or extent of interest, by which he can maintain control and as a rule, assert right to the exclusive possession and enjoyment of property
ways to register land
- judicial
a. voluntary (ordinary)
b. compulsory (cadastral) - administrative
registration > judicial > distinguish ordinary & cadastral
ordinary - initiated by private person
cadastral - by the State
registration > administrative agencies
DENR
DAR
NCIP (national commission for indigenous people)
Types of Certificate of Title >
first title ussied by the RD registered under the Torrens system by judicial or administrative proceeding
Original Certificate of Title
Types of Certificate of Title >
titled issued by RD in favor of a transferee. Contains original and owner’s duplicate certificate
TCT
what is a torrens title?
a Cert of Ownership under the torrens system thru the RD naming & declaring the owner of real property, free from ALL liens & encumbrances Except expressly noted or reserved by law otherwise
🟢GOVERNING LAW🟢
enumerate primary sources of legislation governing registration of private lands and lands of public domain in the Philippines
- Public Land Act (CA 141)
- Property Registration Decree ( PD 1529)
- Cadastral Act (2259)
- Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (8371)
Governing Law >
What PD 1529 or Property Registration Decree
A codification of all laws relative to registration of property & supersedes all other laws relative to registration of property
Governing Law >
Indigenous Peoples right ACt (IPRA)
recognizes rights of ownership & possession of indigenous cultural communities (ICC) or indigenous people (IP) to their ancestral domains and their ancestral lands.
for purposes of registartion, IPRA converts ancestral lands into public agricultural lands and members of ICC shall have the option to secure title to their ancestral lands under the provisions of PLA (141)
Governing Law >
Act 2259 or Cadastral Act
Requires title to any lands be titled & adjudicated and has provisions have been carried over to the PRD (1529)
relevance of res judicate in land cases
A final judgment in an ordinary civil case determining the ownership of land is res judicata in a registration proceeding where the parties and the property are the same as in the former case.
attribute of torrens title > incontrovertibility
can tax declarations and tax receipts prevail over a certificate of title?
No,
Sampaco v. Lantud (2011)
tax dec and tax receipts cannot prevail over a certificate of title which is an incontrovertible proof of ownership
🟢LEGAL BASIS & NATURE OF LAND REGISTRATION🟢
thru JP, define the Regalian Doctrine
[note]
provides that all lands whatever classification and other natural resources not appearing to be within private ownership are PRESUMED to belong to the State
consistent with (Art. 12, Sec. 2, 1987 Consti)
Requisites of Res Judiciata
- former judgment must be final
- must have been rendered by a court having JD
- a judgment on the merits
- there must be identity of parties, SM, and CoA
thru JP, distinguish priority rights and ownership rights
IPRA sec 57
“The ICCs/IPs shall have priority rights in the harvesting, extraction, development or exploitation of any natural resources within the ancestral domains”
Cruz. Sec. of DENR
Doctrine: Priority means giving preference
Having priority rights over the natural resources does not necessarily mean ownership rights.
The grant of priority rights
implies that there is a superior entity that owns these resources and this entity has the power to grant preferential rights over the resources to whosoever itself chooses
In the Indigenous People’s Rights Act (IPRA) where it provides in sec. 7(a):
“Right of Ownership. — The right to claim ownership over lands, bodies of water traditionally and actually occupied by ICCs/IPs, sacred places, traditional hunting and fishing grounds, and all improvements made by them at any time within the domains;”
is it violative of the Constitution’s provision enshrined in Art. 12 Sec. 2
” All lands of the public domain, waters, minerals, coal, petroleum, and other mineral oils, all forces of potential energy, fisheries, forests or timber, wildlife, flora and fauna, and other natural resources are owned by the State…” [Regalian Doctrine]
No, IPRA does not grant ownership over natural resources. The right of ICC/IPs includes ownership in the sense that it is defined and limited in Sec 7(a)
IPRA only provides them a limited ownership –utilization of resources in their AD which does NOT include right to dispose/transfer
To prove ownership over ancestral lands, the IP commission will issue a certificate of ancestral land title (CALT) caDomaint (CADT) for domain
IPRA says there should be registration because CALT/DT is proof of grant by the IPRA to the IPs and ICCs
attribute of torrens title > indefeasibility
mr. A fraudulently acquired title to property but B wants to challenge it but A raises up that a torrens title is indefeasibile and cannot be challenged. is the contention correct?
No,
Baguio v. Republic (1999)
Indefeasibility of a title does not attach to titles secured by fraud and misrepresentation
IPRA > distinguish
ancestral lands
ancestral domains
LB: RA 8371 Sec 3(a)(b)
[AD]
- owned as a community like forests, hunting grounds
- refer 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
[AL]
- where they actually build houses
- 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
X, an indigenous person, was issued a Certificate of Ancestral Land Title (CALT) over a parcel of land rich in natural resources. Desiring to sell the land, X approached the Register of Deeds (RD) and submitted the CALT to facilitate the transfer to Y Corporation, a large company interested in the land’s natural resources. Without availing of the proper judicial or administrative proceedings, the RD accepted the CALT, canceled it, and issued a Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) in favor of Y Corporation.
Rule
The transfer is void because the CALT is not a torrens title and the transfer using this certificate should not lead to the issuance of the TCT
When availing of the judicial/administrative, the RD should issue a OCT
XPN to the Regalian doctrine
Native title
ex. Before Spaniards came, the IPs/ICCs were already occupying these lands since time immemorial
page 32: ORIGINAL REGISTRATION
Who may apply for OR?
LB: Sec. 14 PD 1529
- Those who by themselves [or] through their predecessors-in-interest have been in [OCEN] open, continuous, exclusive and notorious [PO] possession and occupation of [A&D] alienable and disposable lands of the public domain under a bona fide claim of ownership since June
12, 1945, [or] earlier - Those who have acquired ownership of private lands by prescription under the provisions of existing laws
- Those who have acquired ownership of private lands [or] abandoned river beds by right of accession [or] accretion under the existing laws.
- Those who have acquired ownership of land in any other manner provided for by law. Where the land is owned in common, all the co-owners shall file the application jointly.
note
This refers to acquiring ownership of land due to natural processes, such as the gradual addition of soil (alluvium) to one’s property caused by a river or stream (accretion), or the drying up of a river bed (abandoned river bed).
What is the doctrine in the case of DENR v. Mayor Yap (Boracay) case
To overturn the presumption of regalian doctrine, the land must be titled by showing;
- P&O (manner [ocen] & period)
- declaration that the land in issue is A&D
the case missed #2 and therefore the petition to title a land will be be denied.
Ong v. Republic
what does OCCUPATION over land mean
it means acts of dominion:
- tax dec
- introduction of improvements
- fencing
- use of land
- hiring of caretaker
Ong v. Republic
what is the legal concept of constructive possession?
describing a situation wherein an individual has actual control over property without having actual physical possession of the same.
For a car, constructive possession would be possession of the car keys.
Ong v. Republic
What is constructive possession For land? how did the SC appreciate that in light of registering?
Sale evidenced by a DOAS is constructive possession however the SC ruled that it is too broad thus requiring occupation
PD 1529 v. RA 11573
which parts of RA amended PD?
11753 sec. 6 & 6 amended PD 1529 the entire section 14. to the effect that;
[1529]
- start as early as June 12, 1945 (sec. 14(1))
[11573]
- 20 years from time applicant sought registration
MEANING
- Applicants no longer need to trace possession as far back as June 12, 1945. Instead, they only need to prove 20 years of OCEN possession & occupation immediately preceding the filing of the application.
so if you register 2025, you must show OCEN P&O since 2005
Malabanan v. Republic (2009)
2 kinds of prescription by which patrimonial property may be acquierd
- [ordinary acquisitive prescription]
acquires ownership of PP (patrimonial property) through;
- possession for at least 10 years,
- in good faith and with
- just title
- [extraordinary acquisitive prescription]
- uninterrupted adverse possession of PP for at least 30 yrs, regardless of good faith or just title, ripens into ownership
Malabanan v. RP (2009)
In order that public domain become patrimonial property, what must comply?
[B]
What is the effect relevant to the case once public domain becomes PP?
[A]
1. The land must be declared alienable and disposable (A&D) by the government.
- There must be an express government manifestation that the land is no longer needed for public service [or] national development.
[B]
The prescriptive period runs for a person to acquire ownership consistent with sec. 14(2) of PD 1529
in the case of Malabanan v. RP (2009), was the land PP?
No,
while the land was expressly declared as A&D, the second requirement which was an expressed declaration that the same was no longer of public use, service, or national wealth development therefore the petitioner could not avail of Sec. 14(2) of PD 1529
Republic v. Pasig Rizal
v.
Malabanan v. RP
distinguish the two insofar as the twin requirements are concerned
Rizal
- the reclassification to A&D was sufficient to fulfill the requirement of “express declaration that the land is PP” because according to MVF Leonen there was never a time the State expressly declared private properties into PP.
Republic v. Pasig Rizal
v.
Malabanan v. RP
- P&O
- Proof that the land is A&D
[Pasig Rizal 2022]
- (20) years immediately before filing of the obligation for confirmation of the imperfect title
- (Sworn Statement) by the Geodetic Engr. of DENR that land is within A&D lands of public domain
[Malabanan 2013]
- On June 12, 1945 or earlier
- Cert/certified copy of reclassification by the legal custodian
A applied in 2010 but it was not
granted by the Court on the basis that they failed to comply with the period required and the proof that the land has been reclassified as A & D.
Can A now go to Court and apply for registration under the new law? Would res judicata apply?
Yes
If pending, what are the guidelines for the application of RA 11583 to the existing or existing pending cases for original registration?
RA 11573 shall apply retroactively to all
applications for judicial confirmation of title which remain pending as of September 1, 2021 or the date when RA 11573 took effect which includes all petitions, pending resolutions in the first instance before all RTC and pending before the CA
page 32: ORIGINAL REGISTRATION
Who may apply for OR?
LB: Sec. 14 PD 1529
- Those who by themselves [or] through their predecessors-in-interest have been in [OCEN] open, continuous, exclusive and notorious [PO] possession and occupation of [A&D] alienable and disposable lands of the public domain under a bona fide claim of ownership since June
12, 1945, [or] earlier - Those who have acquired ownership of private lands by prescription under the provisions of existing laws
- Those who have acquired ownership of private lands [or] abandoned river beds by right of accession [or] accretion under the existing laws.
- Those who have acquired ownership of land in any other manner provided for by law. Where the land is owned in common, all the co-owners shall file the application jointly.
note
This refers to acquiring ownership of land due to natural processes, such as the gradual addition of soil (alluvium) to one’s property caused by a river or stream (accretion), or the drying up of a river bed (abandoned river bed).
What is the doctrine in the case of DENR v. Mayor Yap (Boracay) case
To overturn the presumption of regalian doctrine, the land must be titled by showing;
- P&O (manner [ocen] & period)
- declaration that the land in issue is A&D
the case missed #2 and therefore the petition to title a land will be be denied.
Ong v. Republic
what does OCCUPATION over land mean
it means acts of dominion:
- tax dec
- introduction of improvements
- fencing
- use of land
- hiring of caretaker
Ong v. Republic
what is the legal concept of constructive possession?
describing a situation wherein an individual has actual control over property without having actual physical possession of the same.
For a car, constructive possession would be possession of the car keys.
Ong v. Republic
What is constructive possession For land? how did the SC appreciate that in light of registering?
Sale evidenced by a DOAS is constructive possession however the SC ruled that it is too broad thus requiring occupation
PD 1529 v. RA 11573
which parts of RA amended PD?
11753 sec. 5 & 6 amended PD 1529 the entire section 14. to the effect that;
[1529]
- start as early as June 12, 1945 (sec. 14(1))
[11573]
- 20 years from time applicant sought registration
MEANING
- Applicants no longer need to trace possession as far back as June 12, 1945. Instead, they only need to prove 20 years of OCEN possession & occupation immediately preceding the filing of the application.
so if you register 2025, you must show OCEN P&O since 2005
Malabanan v. Republic (2009)
2 kinds of prescription by which patrimonial property may be acquierd
- [ordinary acquisitive prescription]
acquires ownership of PP (patrimonial property) through;
- possession for at least 10 years,
- in good faith and with
- just title
- [extraordinary acquisitive prescription]
- uninterrupted adverse possession of PP for at least 30 yrs, regardless of good faith or just title, ripens into ownership
Malabanan v. RP (2009)
In order that public domain become patrimonial property, what must comply?
[B]
What is the effect relevant to the case once public domain becomes PP?
[A]
1. The land must be declared alienable and disposable (A&D) by the government.
- There must be an express government manifestation that the land is no longer needed for public service [or] national development.
[B]
The prescriptive period runs for a person to acquire ownership consistent with sec. 14(2) of PD 1529
in the case of Malabanan v. RP (2009), was the land PP?
No,
while the land was expressly declared as A&D, the second requirement which was an expressed declaration that the same was no longer of public use, service, or national wealth development therefore the petitioner could not avail of Sec. 14(2) of PD 1529
Republic v. Pasig Rizal
v.
Malabanan v. RP
distinguish the two insofar as the twin requirements are concerned
Rizal
- the reclassification to A&D was sufficient to fulfill the requirement of “express declaration that the land is PP” because according to MVF Leonen there was never a time the State expressly declared private properties into PP.
Republic v. Pasig Rizal
v.
Malabanan v. RP
- P&O
- Proof that the land is A&D
[Pasig Rizal 2022]
- (20) years immediately before filing of the obligation for confirmation of the imperfect title
- (Sworn Statement) by the Geodetic Engr. of DENR that land is within A&D lands of public domain
[Malabanan 2013]
- On June 12, 1945 or earlier
- Cert/certified copy of reclassification by the legal custodian
A applied in 2010 but it was not
granted by the Court on the basis that they failed to comply with the period required and the proof that the land has been reclassified as A & D.
Can A now go to Court and apply for registration under the new law? Would res judicata apply?
Yes
If pending, what are the guidelines for the application of RA 11583 to the existing or existing pending cases for original registration?
RA 11573 shall apply retroactively to all
applications for judicial confirmation of title which remain pending as of September 1, 2021 or the date when RA 11573 took effect which includes all petitions, pending resolutions in the first instance before all RTC and pending before the CA
who has right over the alluvial deposits?
- Steps in bringing the land under the Torrens System. Memorize the steps.
- survey of the land by the LMB or duly authorized surveyor
- application for registartion in the propert court
- submission of the evidences and other documents in support of application
- original copy of the survey plan
- copy of tax dec
- copy of technical description
- copy of geodetic engr’s cert of good standing
- cert from GE of DENR confiming the land as a&D - setting date of initial hearing
- coc transmits the docsuments to the LRA and transmits the date and place
- publication of notice of filing of application and place of hearing in the official gazette and newspaper of general circulation
- service of mail to interested parties
- promulgation of judgment
- entry of decree of registration to the LRA
10 LRA sends copy to RD
11 transcription of the decree of registartion in the primary entry book - issuance of the onwer’s duplicate copy
title vs. certificate of title differenec
can’t have CoT without title
What if B occupies the alluvial portion for 30 years and then applies title, who has a better right over the land? CLARIFY
B is the rightful owner of the land. Even if that alluvial deposit is owned by A, the answer is acquisitive prescription. Because the land is not yet imprescriptible, not covered by a torrens title (being one of the attribute of a torrens title), it can be subject to acquisitiv prescription! So it
