Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 103 views

    Republic V Jabson

    Uploaded by

    Joyce
    The Supreme Court denied the Jabson family's application to register two lots in their name. While the family had possessed the land since 1909 through inheritance and purchase, they failed to present sufficient evidence that the land was alienable and disposable, as required to claim ownership under the Regalian Doctrine. Specifically, the certification from the Community Environment and Natural Resources Office that the Jabsons submitted was insufficient on its own to establish the land's status, and they did not offer any evidence of official presidential classification of the land during the trial. The Court held that applicants must clearly demonstrate that land derived from the public domain is alienable and disposable in order to register title.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Republic V Jabson

    Uploaded by

    Joyce
    103 views2 pages
    The Supreme Court denied the Jabson family's application to register two lots in their name. While the family had possessed the land since 1909 through inheritance and purchase, they failed to present sufficient evidence that the land was alienable and disposable, as required to claim ownership under the Regalian Doctrine. Specifically, the certification from the Community Environment and Natural Resources Office that the Jabsons submitted was insufficient on its own to establish the land's status, and they did not offer any evidence of official presidential classification of the land during the trial. The Court held that applicants must clearly demonstrate that land derived from the public domain is alienable and disposable in order to register title.

    Original Description:

    Republic v Jabson

    Original Title

    Republic v Jabson

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court denied the Jabson family's application to register two lots in their name. While the family had possessed the land since 1909 through inheritance and purchase, they failed to present sufficient evidence that the land was alienable and disposable, as required to claim ownership under the Regalian Doctrine. Specifically, the certification from the Community Environment and Natural Resources Office that the Jabsons submitted was insufficient on its own to establish the land's status, and they did not offer any evidence of official presidential classification of the land during the trial. The Court held that applicants must clearly demonstrate that land derived from the public domain is alienable and disposable in order to register title.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    103 views2 pages

    Republic V Jabson

    Uploaded by

    Joyce
    The Supreme Court denied the Jabson family's application to register two lots in their name. While the family had possessed the land since 1909 through inheritance and purchase, they failed to present sufficient evidence that the land was alienable and disposable, as required to claim ownership under the Regalian Doctrine. Specifically, the certification from the Community Environment and Natural Resources Office that the Jabsons submitted was insufficient on its own to establish the land's status, and they did not offer any evidence of official presidential classification of the land during the trial. The Court held that applicants must clearly demonstrate that land derived from the public domain is alienable and disposable in order to register title.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 2

    Republic v Jabson

    DOCTRINE: That land has been removed from the scope of the Regalian Doctrine
    and reclassified as part of the public domain's alienable and disposable portion
    cannot be assumed or implied.

    2 lots in Barrio San Jose and Bariio Bagong Katipunnan


    Jabson Family owned land since 1909 – Respondents acquired lots via inheritance
    and purchase from predecessor in interest
    1978, 1st Filing: denied due to failure to comply with reco of land registration
    commission to include complete names and addressed of lessees

    2nd Filing: Siblings lakambini, paraluman, tala and magpuri, filed for registration of
    title before RTC in Pasig

    RTC: ruled in favor of jabson, Jabson purchased and possessed land for more than
    30 years OCEAN in concept of owner, title never disputed by oithers, Jabsons proved
    and established their rights over properties

    CA: set aside RTC cdecision,. The appellate court noted that the rule on confirmation
    of an imperfect title grounded on adverse possession does not apply unless and until
    the subject land has been released in an official proclamation to that effect so that it
    may form part of the disposable lands of the public domain. To this end, the
    applicant must secure a certification from the Government that the land applied for
    is in fact alienable and disposable.

    No evidence presented by jabson showing that land was classified as alienable and
    disposable land of public domain. Mere photocopy of Community Environment and
    Natural Resources Office (CENRO) Certification dated May 14 1998 presented. No
    party indentified such do.

    MR by jbason – Granted by CA, they established adverse possiesion thru exercising


    acts of ownership (construction of houses and leasing to 3rd parties), possession
    since 1944

    ISSUE: DID JABSONS SUFFICIENTLY ESTABLISH REQTS WC WARRANT


    REGISTRATION IN THEIR FAVOR?

    HELD:
    NO. Jabson failed to present during trial evidence estbalishing properties alienable
    and disposable nature. Evidence presented in 1998 was mere photocopy not offered
    in trial and only formed part of record at instance of oppositor not of Jabson. DENR
    certification offered during MR - not offered in evidence, mere afterthought.
    Only president may classifiy lands of public domain into alienable and disposable. C
    Denr certification not sufficient to prove lands alienable nature.

    The general rule prevailing over claims of land is the Regalian Doctrine, which, as
    enshrined in the 1987 Constitution, declares that the State owns all .lands of the
    public domain.30 In other words, land that has not been acquired from the
    government, either by purchase, grant, or any other mode recognized by law,
    belongs to the State as part of the public domain.

    WHAT MUST BE ESTABLISHED


    It is clear from the above-cited provisions that any applicant for registration of title
    to land derived through a public grant must sufficiently establish three things: (a)
    the subject land's alienable and disposable nature; (b) his or her predecessors'
    adverse possession thereof, and ( c) the reckoning date from which such adverse
    possession was under a bona fide claim of ownership, that is, since June 12, 1945 or
    earlier.:

    You might also like