LAND TITLES AND DEEDS  “when, as far back as testimony or memory goes,

(Registration, Issues and Remedies) the land has been held by individuals under a
Justice Oswaldo D. Agcaoili claim of private ownership, it will be presumed to
Philippine Judicial Academy, Supreme Court have been held in the same way from before the
(Author: Property Registration Decree and Related Laws (Land Spanish conquest, and never to have been public
Titles and Deeds); Environmental Reforms and Rules of land.”
Procedure for
Environmental Cases; and Reviewer in Property Registration)

REGISTRATION IS A PROCEEDING IN REM

REGALIAN DOCTRINE  Registration is a proceeding in rem

 Being in rem, such proceedings require
• The Regalian doctrine dictates that all lands of the constructive seizure of the res (land) as against all
public domain belong to the State. (Leonidas v. Vargas, persons, including the state, through (a)
GR No. 201301, Dec. 14, 2017; Republic v. Bantigue, GR publication, (b) posting and (c) service of notice.
No. 162322, March 14, 2012)  The purpose of publication is to (a) confer
 The doctrine has been consistently adopted jurisdiction upon the court over the res, and (b)
under the 1935, 1973, and 1987 Constitutions; it apprise the whole world of the pending
espouses that all lands of the public domain registration case so that they may assert their
belong to the State, and that, as a consequence rights or interests in the land applied for.
thereof, any asserted right of ownership over (Director of Lands v. Court of Appeals and
land necessarily traces back to the State. Abistado, GR No. 102858, July 28, 1997; Sec. 23,
(Republic v. 218418, Nov. 8, 2017; See also: PD No. 1529)
Agcaoili, Property Registration Decree and
Related Laws)
PURPOSE OF REGISTRATION
• Doctrine reflected Art. XII, Sec. 2 of the Constitution: • The dominant objectives of land registration are:
 “Sec. 2. All lands of the public domain, waters,  to establish and certify to the ownership of an
minerals, coal, petroleum, and other mineral oils, absolute and indefeasible title to realty, and to
all forces of potential energy, fisheries, forests or simplify its transfer;
timber, wildlife, flora and fauna, and other  to guarantee the integrity of land titles and to
natural resources are owned by the State. With protect their indefeasibility once the claim of
the exception of agricultural lands, all other ownership is established and recognized;
natural resources shall not be alienated.”  to quiet title to land;
 Simply stated, “all lands of the public domain as well as  to put a stop forever to any question of the
all natural resources enumerated therein, whether on legality of the title;
public or private land, belong to the State.” (CJ Puno)  to decree land titles that shall be final,
irrevocable, and indisputable;
 to relieve the land of the burden of known as
 Exception well as unknown claims;
• An exception to the rule would be any land in  To minimize conflicting claims and stabilize land
possession of an occupant and of his ownership
predecessors in interest since time immemorial,
for such possession would justify the
presumption that the land had never been part
of the public domain or that it had been a
private property even before the Spanish REGISTRATION NOT A MODE OF ACQUIRING OWNERSHIP BUT
conquest. (Oh Cho v. Director of Lands, G.R. No. ONLY A PROCEDURE TO OBTAIN EVIDENCE OF OWNERSHIP
48321, Aug. 31, 1946; Carino vs. Insular
Government, 212 U.S., 449; 53 Law. ed., 594.) • Registration is not a mode of acquiring ownership but is
• In Cruz v. DENR Secretary (G.R. No. 135385, Dec. 6, merely a procedure to establish evidence of title over
2000), seven (7) Justices said that the Regalian theory realty.
does not negate native title to lands held in private  Registration does not vest title.
ownership since time immemorial, citing Carino v.  It does not give the holder any better title than
Insular Government where the US Supreme Court, what he actually has. (Solid State Multi-Products
through Justice Holmes, held that: Corporation v. Development Bank of the
Philippines, GR No. 83383, May 6, 1991).
 But the Torrens system does not furnish a shield for jurisdictional amount of P100,000 pertaining to
fraud first level courts. (Republic v. Bantigue, GR No.
• A certificate of title cannot be used to protect a 162322, March 14, 2012)
usurper from the true owner or be used as a
shield for fraud. • Facts:
• Registration merely creates a prima facie • In 1959, Leonor filed an application for
presumption of the validity of the registration registration with the CFI (RTC) of Rizal. The
and must give way to evidence to the contrary. Director of Lands (DL) opposed. Notices
(Jarantilla v. Jarantilla, GR No. 154586, Dec. 1. were given and the case was set for hearing
2010; Vagilidad v. Vagilidad, GR No. 161136, on May 27, 1960. On Sept. 18, 1961, the
Nov. 16, 2006, 507 SCRA 94) court issued an order dismissing the
application based on a report from the LRC
that a “homestead patent was already
JURISDICTION OVER LAND REGISTRATION CASES AND issued to Julio by the DL during the
SUBSEQUENT PETITIONS pendency of the registration proceedings.”
• Issue:
• Regional trial courts have exclusive jurisdiction over land • Was the court divested of its jurisdiction by
registration cases and all petitions after original a subsequent administrative act consisting
registration. (Sec. 2, PD No. 1529) in the issuance of a homestead patent by
 However, first level courts may be assigned by the DL over the same land subject of the
the SC to hear and determine cadastral or land registration case?
registration cases covering:
(a) Lots where there is no controversy or  Ruling:
opposition, or • No. A land registration court which has
(b) Contested lots the value of which does validly acquired jurisdiction over a parcel of
not exceed P100,000. (Republic v. Bantigue, G.R. land for registration of title thereto cannot
No. 162322, March 14, 2012) be divested of said jurisdiction by a
subsequent administrative act consisting in
 Appeal is taken to the Court of Appeals. the issuance by the Director of Lands of a
homestead patent covering the same parcel
of land.
 The value of the property is ascertained in three ways: • Proceedings for land registration are in rem,
 First, by the affidavit of the claimant; whereas proceedings for acquisition of
 Second, by agreement of the respective homestead patent are not. A homestead
claimants, if there are more than one; or, patent, therefore, does not finally dispose
 Third, from the corresponding tax declaration of of the public or private character of the land
the real property. (Sec. 34, BP 129) as far as courts acting upon proceedings in
• Facts: rem are concerned . (De los Angeles v.
• Bantigue Corp. filed with the RTC an Santos, GR No. L-19615, Dec. 24, 1964)
application for registration over Lot 8060
with an assessed value of P14,920. The RTC
motu proprio remanded the case to the DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE COURT’S GENERAL AND LIMITED
MTC since the assessed value of the land JURISDICTION NOW ELIMINATED
was only P14,920. After hearing, the MTC
granted the application. On appeal,  Sec. 2 of PD No 1529 provides:
Republic argued that the MTC did not • “Courts of First Instance (now Regional Trial
acquire jurisdiction since the selling price of Courts) shall have exclusive jurisdiction over all
the property per deed of sale attached to applications for original registration of titles to
the application was P160,000. lands, including improvements and interest
• Issue: therein and over all petitions filed after original
• Did the MTC properly acquire jurisdiction registration of title, with power to hear and
over the case? determine all questions arising upon such
applications or petitions.”
• Ruling:
 Yes. The value of the land should be determined, • Sec. 2, PD 1529 has eliminated the distinction between
not from the selling price, but from the tax the court’s general and limited jurisdiction.
declaration which stated that the assessed value  Thus, a regional trial court has the authority to
of the land was only P14,920, or below the hear not only applications for original registration
 but also on all petitions filed after original the Torrens system, including subdivision
registration of title. The amendment aims to and consolidation plans of titled lands.
avoid multiplicity of suits and simplify registration (Rodriguez v. Court of Appeals, GR No.
proceedings. 184589, June 13, 2013)
 The court can now hear and decide not only non-
controversial cases but even contentious issues
which before were beyond its competence.  LRA: issuance of decree ministerial
(Lopez v. Querubin, GR No. 155405, March 18,  It is ministerial only in the sense that they act
2015; Lozada v. Bracewell, G No. 179155, April 2, under the orders of the court and the decree
2014; Averia v. Caguioa, GR No. L-65129, Dec. 29, must be in conformity with the decision of the
1986) court. (Gomez v. Court of Appeals, 168 SCRA 503)
 Exception:
 But the duty ceases to be ministerial where the
issuance of decree would result in duplication of
 However, in Bagayas v. Bagayas, GR No. 187308, Sept. titles over the same parcel of land, and thereby
18, 2013, the Court clarified: destroy the integrity, of the Torrens system of
“(T)he prevailing rule is that proceedings registration. (Rodriguez v. CA, supra; Angeles v.
under Section 108 of PD 1529 are summary in Sec. of Justice, GR No. 142549, March 9, 2010)
nature, contemplating corrections or insertions of
mistakes which are only clerical but certainly not
controversial issues. Relief under said legal
provision can only be granted if there is unanimity
among the parties, or that there is no adverse OFFICE OF THE
claim or serious objection on the part of any party REGISTER OF DEEDS
in interest. This is now the controlling precedent,
and the Court should no longer digress from such  There shall be at least one Register of Deeds for each
ruling.” province and city. (Sec. 11, PD 1529)
 Registration means the entry of instruments or
deeds in book or public registry. Registration
LAND REGISTRATION AUTHORITY (LRA) affects and binds the land and operates as
constructive notice to the world. (Aznar Brothers
• Functions of the LRA Administrator: Realty Co. v. Aying, GR No. 144773, May 16,
 Issues decrees of registration 2005)
 Resolves cases elevated en consulta  Registration of instruments affecting registered
 Exercises supervision and control over all clerks land must be done in the proper registry to affect
of court in relation to land registration the land and bind third persons. (Aznar Brothers
 Implements orders or decisions of registration v. Aying, 458 SCRA 496; Guaranteed Homes, Inc.
courts v. Valdez, 577 SCRA 441)
 Verifies and approves subdivision and
consolidation survey plans • Constructive notice
 Extends assistance to the DAR in the “SEC. 52. Constructive notice upon registration. —
implementation of the land reform program; Every conveyance, mortgage, lease, lien,
 Extends assistance to registration courts in attachment, order, judgment, instrument or
ordinary and cadastral registration cases; and entry affecting registered land shall, if registered,
 Acts as central repository of records relative to filed or entered in the Office of the Register of
original registration, including subdivision and Deeds for the province or city where the land to
consolidation plans of titled lands. which it relates lies, be constructive notice to all
persons from the time of such registering, filing,
or entering.”

• But the more important functions of the LRA are:

(1) Issues decrees of registration pursuant to final
judgments of the courts in land
registration proceedings and cause the
issuance by the Register of Deeds of the
corresponding certificates of title;
(2) Is the central repository of records relative to
original registration of lands titled under
• Property registered under the Torrens system remains an unregistered sale is equivalent to registration.
the property of the person in whose name it is (Ching v. Enrile, GR No. 156076, Sept. 17, 2008)
registered, notwithstanding the execution of any deed
of conveyance, unless the corresponding deed is • Between two buyers of the same land, priority is given
registered. to:
 Thus, if a sale is not registered, it is binding only • the first registrant in good faith;
between the seller and the buyer, but it does not • then, the first possessor in good faith; and
affect innocent third persons. • finally, the buyer who in good faith presents the
 Registration shall be made in the office of the oldest title. (Art. 1544, CC)
Register of Deeds for the province or city where • This rule, however, does not apply if the property is not
the land lies. (Sec. 51, PD 1529; Bulaong v. registered under the Torrens system. (Abrigo v. De Vera,
Gonzalez, GR No. 156318, Sept. 5, 2011) 432 SCRA 544)

• One of the principal features of the Torrens system of

registration is that all encumbrances on the land shall be
shown, or at least intimated upon the certificate of title
and a person dealing with the owner of the registered DUTY OF REGISTER OF DEEDS TO REGISTER MINISTERIAL
land is not bound to go behind the certificate and
inquire into transactions, the existence of which is not • When all the requirements for registration of annotation
there intimated. has been complied with, it is ministerial upon the
 The act of registration shall be the operative act Register of Deeds to register the annotation. The Register
to convey or affect the land insofar as third of Deeds is not authorized "to make an appraisal of
persons are concerned, and in all cases the proofs outside of the documents sought to be
registration shall be made in the office of the registered." (Limso v. PNB, GR No. 158622, Jan. 27, 2016)
Register of Deeds for the province or city where • The Register of Deeds may not validly refuse to register a
the land lies. (Sec. 51, PD 1529) deed of sale presented to him for registration.
• The act of registration shall be the operative act to • Whether a document is valid or not, is not for the
convey or affect the land insofar as third persons are Register of Deeds to determine; this function
concerned. (Sec. 51, PD 1529) belongs properly to a court of competent
 Thus, the preference given to a duly registered jurisdiction.
levy on attachment or execution over a prior • Indeed, a RD is entirely precluded by Section 117 of
unregistered sale is well settled. (Chua v. PD No. 1529 from exercising his personal judgment
Gutierrez, GR No. 172316, Dec. 8, 2010) and discretion when confronted with the problem
 A levy on attachment, duly registered, takes of whether to register a deed or instrument on the
preference over a prior unregistered sale. This ground that it is invalid.” (Almirol v. RD of Agusan,
preference is not diminished even by the GR No. L-22486, March 20, 1968)
subsequent registration of the prior sale (Uy v. • The law on registration does not require that only valid
Medina, GR No. 172541, Aug. 9, 2010) instruments shall be registered.
• But registration does not add to validity of document  If the purpose of registration is merely to give
 While registration operates as a notice of the notice, then questions regarding the effect or
instrument to others, it does not add to its invalidity of instruments are expected to be decided
validity nor conveys an invalid instrument into a after, not before, registration.
valid one as between the parties. (Pascua v.  It must follow as a necessary consequence that
Court of Appeals, 401 Phil. 350) registration must first be allowed, and validity or
 Neither does registration amount to a effect litigated afterwards. (Gurbax Singh v. Reyes,
declaration that the instrument recognizes a GR No. L-3970. October 29, 1952)
valid and subsisting interest in the land.
(Agricultural Credit v. Yusay, 107 Phil. 791)
WHEN ISSUE MAY BE ELEVATED BY THE RD
 A levy on attachment, duly registered, takes preference TO THE LRA
over a prior unregistered sale. (Vilbar v. Opinion, GR No. • However, when the RD is in doubt as to the proper step
176043, Jan. 15, 2014) to be taken with respect to any deed or other
 But where a party has knowledge of a prior existing instrument presented to him for registration, he shall
interest, as here, which is unregistered at the time submit the question to the LRA Administrator who shall,
he acquired a right to the same land, his after notice and hearing, enter an order prescribing the
knowledge of that prior unregistered interest has step to be taken on the issue.
the effect of registration as to him. Knowledge of  Any party in interest who does not agree with
the RD may also submit the question for
 resolution to the Administrator, whose decision  The 1973 Constitution provided the following
on the matter shall be binding upon all Registers divisions: agricultural, industrial or commercial,
of Deeds. This administrative remedy must be residential, resettlement, mineral, timber or
resorted to before recourse to the courts. (Sec. forest and grazing lands, and such other classes
117, PD 1529; Almirol v. RD, id.) as may be provided by law.
 The 1987 Constitution reverted to the 1935
Constitution classification - agricultural, forest or
timber, with one addition: national
INSTANCES WHERE THE REGISTER OF DEEDS MAY DEFER parks.(Republic v. AFP Retirement and Separation
REGISTRATION Benefits System, GR No. 180463, Jan. 16, 2013)
 Where there are several copies of the title (as in co-
ownership) but only one is presented.
 Every copy of the duplicate original must contain SECONDARY CLASSIFICATION OF AGRICULTURAL LANDS
identical entries of the transactions, particularly
voluntary ones, otherwise the whole Torrens  The Public Land Act (CA 141) remains the existing
system would cease to be reliable. general law governing the classification and disposition
 The integrity of the Torrens system may be of lands of the public domain. For purpose of
adversely affected if an encumbrance, or outright administration and disposition, A and D lands may be
conveyance, is annotated on only one copy and not further classified according to the use or purpose to
on the others. (Ligon v. Court of Appeals, GR No. which they may be devoted into:
107751, June 1, 1995)  Agricultural;
 Residential, commercial, industrial, or for similar
purposes
 Where there is a pending case involving the character of  Educational, charitable, or other similar
the land or validity of the conveyance. purposes; and
• In such case, registration may well await the  Reservations for townsites and for public and
outcome of the case; meantime the rights of the quasi-public uses. (Sec. 9, CA No. 141).
interested parties could be protected by the filing
of a notice of lis pendens. (Balbin v. Register of
Deeds, GR No. L-20611, May 8, 1969) CATEGORIES OF ALIENABLE AND DISPOSABLE LANDS

 Where required certificates or documents are not  Alienable and disposable (A and D) lands of the State fall
submitted, such as – into two categories, to wit:
 DAR clearance, copy of latest tax declaration, (a) patrimonial lands of the State, or those
certificate of payment of documentary stamp tax classified as lands of private ownership
and capital gains tax, BIR certificate authorizing under Article 425 of the Civil
registration (CAR), tax clearance certificate of Code, without limitation; and
real estate taxes, certificate of payment of (b) lands of the public domain, or the public
transfer tax, secretary’s certificate and articles of lands as provided by the Constitution,
incorporation (in case of a corporation), HLURB but with the limitation that the lands
registration papers and license to sell (in case of must only be agricultural.
a subdivision project), TIN, etc.  Consequently, lands classified as forest or timber,
mineral, or national parks are not susceptible of
alienation or disposition unless they are
PRIMARY CLASSIFICATION OF LANDS OF reclassified as agricultural.
THE PUBLIC DOMAIN • The classification of public lands is an exclusive
• The 1987 Constitution classifies lands of the public prerogative of the executive department, and not the
domain into: courts.
 Agricultural lands,  The President has the exclusive prerogative to
 Forest or timberlands, classify or reclassify public lands into alienable or
 Mineral lands, and disposable, mineral or forest lands. (DENR
 National parks. Secretary v. Yap, GR No. 167707, Oct. 8, 2008)
• Alienable lands of the public domain shall be limited to  In the absence of classification, the land remains
agricultural lands. as unclassified land until it is released for
 Classification of lands under the 1935, 1973 and disposition. (Republic v. Fabio, GR No. 159589,
1987Constitutions Dec. 23, 2008)
 The 1935 Constitution classified lands of the
public domain into agricultural, forest or timber.
  The DENR Secretary, as the alter ego of the
President, is the only other official authorized to  Rivers, waters
approve a land classification.  Rivers and their natural beds, lakes, all categories
of surface waters, atmospheric or subterranean
ground waters, and seawater all belong to the
 Thus, until the Executive Department exercises its State.
prerogative to classify or reclassify lands, or until  Waters found, or rain water falling, on private
Congress or the President declares that the State no lands also belong to the State. (PD 1067, Water
longer intends the land to be used for public service or Code)
for the development of national wealth, the Regalian  ILOILO RIVER – CLEANEST RIVER
Doctrine is applicable. (Republic v. Nicolas, GR No. IN THE PHILIPPINES
181435, Oct. 2, 2017)
• To show that the land is A and D, the application for  LOBOC RIVER CRUISE (BOHOL)
original registration must be accompanied by:
(1) CENRO or PENRO Certification that the land is  INATULA ISLAND, BACUIT BAY
A and D; and
(2) Certified true copy of the original • Forests:
classification approved by the DENR Secretary . • It is "a mass of lands of the public domain which
(Republic v. Ocol, GR No. 208350, Nov. 14, 2016; has not been the subject of the present system of
La Tondeña v. Republic, GR No. 194617, Aug. 5, classification for the determination of which
2015; Republic v. Bantigue, GR No. 162322, lands are needed for forest purpose and which
March 14, 2012; Republic v. T.A.N. Properties, GR are not.“ (Sec. 3(a), PD 705; DENR v. Yap, GR No.
No. 154953, June 26, 2008) 167707, Oct. 8, 2008)
• Absent such classification, land remains unclassified • Unless the land is released as A and D, the rules
until released and rendered open to disposition. (DENR on confirmation of title do not apply.
Secretary v.Yap, GR No. 154953, June 26, 2008): (Amunategui v. Director of Forestry, G.R. No. L-
27873, Nov. 29, 1983)

 PUBLIC LAND DISTINGUISHED FROM GOVERNMNENT

LAND  Mangrove swamps:
 Public land is equivalent to public domain and includes  Mangrove swamps or manglares are forestal and
only such land as may be the subject of disposition. not alienable agricultural land.
 Government land and public land are not synonymous  BFAR has no jurisdiction to dispose of
– the first includes not only the second but also other swamplands or mangrove lands while such lands
lands already reserved or devoted to public use or are still classified as forest lands.
subject to a private right.  Mangrove swamps form part of the public forests
 In sum, the government owns real estate which is part and therefore not subject to disposition until they
of “public lands” and other real estate which is not a are first classified as alienable agricultural land.
part thereof. (Montano v. Insular Government, 12 Phil. (Director of Forestry v. Villareal, 170 SCRA 598)
572)

NON-REGISTRABLE PROPERTIES  Importance of mangroves:

•help to build up land
 Lands for public use or public service • are a nursery for fish, crabs, birds and many other
 Those intended for public use, such as animals
roads, canals, rivers, torrents, ports and • protect seagrasses and coral reefs from being
bridges, etc.; smothered by too much sand.
 Those which, without being for public use, • buffer the coast and protect it from wave action
are intended for some public service or for and storms
the development of the national wealth. • are the source of important fisheries
(Art. 420, CC)  Mineral lands:
• These properties are outside the commerce of men and  Mineral land means any area where mineral
therefore not subject to private appropriation. resources are found.
(Martinez v. Court of Appeals, 56 SCRA 647)  Mineral lands and resources are owned by
•CAVITE EXPRESSWAY the State and their exploration,
•SAN JUANICO BRIDGE development and utilization is subject to
the full control and supervision of the State.
 (Republic v. CA and Dela Rosa, 160 SCRA remained dry even during high tide, hence, it is
228; La Bugal-B’laan v. Ramos, 445 SCRA 1) private land. (Almagro v. Kwan, GR No.
 Possession of mineral land, no matter how 175806,Oct. 20, 2010)
long, does not confer possessory rights.
(Atok Big Wedge v. CA, 193 SCRA 71) EL NIDO, PALAWAN

 National parks:  Puno, J., concurring opinion in Republic v. RREC:

 Land reserved for a national park cannot be “The CCP Complex is the only area in the
registered. Philippines that is fully devoted to the
 Where a certificate of title covers a portion growth and propagation of arts and culture.
of land within the area reserved for park Indeed, it has indeed emerged as a dynamic
purposes, the title should be annuled with force in the promotion of the country's
respect to that portion. (Palomo v. CA, 266 artistic and cultural heritage and the
SCRA 392) development of new and modern art forms.
 For instance, any portion of the Tiwi Hot Through the years, it has helped raise the
Spring National Park cannot be disposed of Filipino consciousness to our nationhood,
under the Public Land Act or Property and in the process, inculcated love for our
Registration Decree. country.”
PUERTO PRINCESA SUBTERRANEAN RIVER
NATIONAL PARK  Lakes:
MT. KANALON NATIONAL PARK  Lakes are neither agricultural nor disposable
lands of the public domain; hence, free patents
 Military or naval reservation: and certificates of title covering portions of the
 Land inside a military (or naval) reservation, like lake are a nullity.
the Fort Bonifacio Military Reservation, cannot  But areas beyond its natural bed, or the
be the object of registration. ground covered by the waters at their
 Unless it had been withdrawn from the highest ordinary depth during the dry
reservation, reclassified and declared as season, may be registered. (Republic v. CA
disposable public land, its status as part of a and Del Rio, 131 SCRA 532)
military reservation remains, even if  The LLDA has exclusive authority to issue
incidentally it is devoted for a purpose permits for the use of the waters of the
other than as a military camp or for Laguna de Bay.
defense. (Republic v. Southside  LAKE PINATUBO
Homeowners Association, 502 SCRA 587)  LAGUNA DE BAY
PHILIPPINE MILITARY ACADEMY
SUBIC BAY NAVAL PORT  Rivers and creeks
ARMED FORCES OF THE PHILIPPINES  Rivers and creeks are parts of the public domain
for public use and not capable of appropriation
 Foreshore lands: or acquisition by prescription.
 A foreshore land is that “strip of land that lies  The ownership of a stream may not be
between the high and low water marks and that acquired under a public land patent and the
is alternately wet and dry according to the flow issuance of the corresponding certificate of
of the tide,” or "that part of the land adjacent to title does not change its public character.
the sea which is alternately covered and left dry (Mateo v. Moreno, 28 SCRA 796)
by the ordinary flow of the tides.” Foreshore  A dried up creek is property of public
lands are inalienable unless declared to be A and dominion. (Fernando v. Acuña, GR No.
D portions of the public domain. (Republic v. CA 161030, Sept. 14, 2011)
and RREC, GR No. 105276, Nov. 25, 1998)  PASIG RIVER FERRY
• Land invaded by the sea is foreshore land
and becomes part of the public domain.  Protected areas:
(Republic v. CA and Morato, 281 SCRA 639)  RA No. 7586 provides for the establishment and
 To qualify as foreshore land, it must be shown that the management of a national integrated protected
land lies between the high and low water marks and is areas system referred to as the “National
alternately wet and dry according to the flow of the tide. Integrated Protected Areas System (NIPAS) Act
(Republic v. Leonor, G.R. No. 161424, 23 December 2009) of 1992”.
 The land's proximity to the waters alone does not  Protected areas are necessary to maintain
automatically make it a foreshore land. The land essential ecological processes and life-
 support systems, to preserve genetic  RA No. 7586 provides for the establishment and
diversity, to ensure sustainable use of management of a national integrated protected
resources found therein. areas system referred to as the “National
 A protected area, like the Bataan Natural Integrated Protected Areas System (NIPAS) Act
Park, is inalienable. of 1992”.
EL NIDO PROTECTED AREA • Protected areas are necessary to maintain
TUBBATAHA REEF MARINE SANCTUARY essential ecological processes and life-
MINALUNGAO NATIONAL PATK support systems, to preserve genetic
diversity, to ensure sustainable use of
 Reservations for public and semi-public purposes resources found therein.
 The President may designate by proclamation • A protected area, like the Bataan Natural
any tract of land of the public domain for the use Park, is inalienable.
of the Republic or its branches, e.g., public or •EL NIDO PROTECTED AREA
semi-public uses like highways, hydroelectric •PUERTO PRINCESA UNDERGROUND RIVER
sites, railroads, irrigation systems, etc. which •CHOCOLATE HILLS, BOHOL
shall be inalienable. •TUBBATAHA REEF MARINE SANCTUARY
 The reserved land shall thereafter remain until •MAYON VOLCANO SPEWING ASHES
otherwise provided by law or proclamation. •MAYON VOLCANO
(Republic, rep. by Mindanao Medical Center v. •MAYON VOLCANO AND THE PALE BLUE MOON
CA, 73 SCRA 146) •PAOAY CHURCH, UNESCO HERITAGE SITE
•THE GREAT PHILIPPINE EAGLE
 National parks
• National Parks of Philippines (Filipino:
Pambansang Liwasan ng Pilipinas) are places of
natural or historical value designated for DISPOSITION OF PROPERTY BY THE STATE
protection and sustainable utilization by the
DENR under the National Integrated Protected • The State possesses not only the right to determine (1)
Areas System Act (1992). what lands may or may not be the subject of disposition,
• As of 2012, there are 240 protected areas in the (2) the size thereof and (3) procedure for the acquisition
Philippines, of which 35 have been classified as of title to land. (Sec. 3-4, Art. XII, Constitution)
National Parks.  For the purpose, the State has adopted the policy
•HUNDRED ISLANDS NATIONAL PARK of multiple land use to the end that the country’s
•MALACAÑANG OF THE NORTH AND PAOAY LAKE natural resources may be rationally explored,
NATIONAL PARK developed, utilized and conserved, and to
•PAOAY CHURCH, UNESCO HERITAGE SITE maintain a rational and orderly balance between
socio-economic growth on one hand and
 Reclaimed lands: environmental protection on the other.
 Submerged areas form part of the public domain;
only when reclaimed from the sea can these • Sec. 4, Art. XII, Constitution, provides:
submerged areas be classified as agricultural  “The Congress shall, as soon as possible,
lands. determine by law the specific limits of forest
 Once reclaimed the government may then lands and national parks, marking clearly their
officially classify these lands as A and D, and boundaries on the ground. Thereafter, such
declare these lands no longer needed for forest lands and national parks shall be
public service. Only then can these lands be conserved and may not be increased nor
considered as A and D lands and within the diminished, except by law. The Congress shall
commerce of men. (Chavez v. PEA, 384 provide, for such period as it may determine,
SCRA 152) measures to prohibit logging in endangered
• Absent two official acts – (a) a classification that forests and watershed areas.” (Sec. 4, id.)
submerged areas are A and D, and (b) a declaration that  Sec. 5, Art. XII, Constitution, provides:
they are not needed for public service - lands reclaimed  “The State, subject to the provisions of this
from the sea are inalienable. Constitution and national development policies
 The Public Estates Authority (PEA), renamed as and programs, shall protect the rights of
Philippine Reclamation Authority (PRA), is the indigenous cultural communities to their
agency authorized to undertake reclamation ancestral lands to ensure their economic, social,
projects. and cultural well-being.
 Protected areas:  The Congress may provide for the applicability of
customary laws governing property rights or
 relations in determining the ownership and the present Public Land Act which is essentially
extent of ancestral domain.” (Sec. 5, id.) the same as Act No. 2874.
• Sec. 3, Art. XII of the Constitution provides:
 “Taking into account the requirements of
conservation, ecology, and development, and  (Present) Public Land Act (CA No. 141)
subject to the requirements of agrarian reform,  Approved on November 7, 1936, it applies to all
the Congress shall determine, by law, the size of lands of the public domain that have been
lands of the public domain which may be officially delimited and classified.
acquired, developed, held, or leased and the  Provides for the different modes of government
conditions therefor.” grant, e.g., homestead, sale, free patent
(administrative legalization), and reservations for
 “Private corporations or associations may not public and semi-public purpose.
hold such alienable lands of the public domain  A certificate of title issued pursuant to a public
except by lease, for a period not exceeding land patent has the same validity and efficacy as
twenty-five years, renewable for not more than a certificate of title issued through ordinary
twenty-five years, and not to exceed one registration proceedings.
thousand hectares in area.  Land Registration Act (Act No. 496)
 Citizens of the Philippines may lease not more  Approved on November 6, 1902, but became
than five hundred hectares, or acquire not more effective on January 1, 1903, it established the
than twelve hectares thereof by purchase, Torrens system.
homestead, or grant.” (Sec. 3, id.)  The “Court of Land Registration” had exclusive
• Area limitations apply only to public lands jurisdiction over all applications for registration.
 As can be clearly gleaned from its language,  Registration under the system did not create a
Section 3, Article XII applies only to lands of the title; it simply confirmed a title already vested.
public domain. Private lands are, therefore,  Proceedings under the Act were in rem,
outside of the prohibitions and limitations stated  Final decrees were regarded as indefeasible and
therein. Thus, the 12-hectare limitation on the could not be reopened except upon a petition for
acquisition of lands under Section 3, Article XII of review within one year after entry of decree.
the 1987 Constitution has no application to  Cadastral Act (Act No. 2259)
private lands. (Republic v. Rovency Realty and  Enacted on February 11, 1913, it is a compulsory
Development Corporation, GR No. 190817, Jan. registration proceeding initiated by the
10, 2018) government to “settle and adjudicate” title to
lands.
 The Director of Lands gives notice to all persons
of the date of survey for them to inform the
LAND REGISTRATION: surveyors of the boundaries of their claims.
HISTORICAL FLASHBACK  Only unregistered lands may be the subject of
 (First) Public Land Act (Act No. 926) survey.
 Passed pursuant to the Philippine Bill of 1902.  All conflicting interests shall be adjudicated by
 Prescribed rules for homesteading, selling and the court and in the absence of successful
leasing portions of the public domain. claimants, the property is declared public land.
 Provided for the issuance of patents to native
settlers, for the establishment of townsites, and  Property Registration Decree (PD No. 1529)
for confirmation of Spanish concessions and  Approved June 11, 1978, the Decree supersedes
grants. and codifies all laws relative to land registration.
 Operated on the assumption that the  It substantially incorporates the substantive and
government’s title to public land sprung from the procedural requirements of Act No. 496 but
Treaty of Paris between Spain and the United includes judicial confirmation of imperfect titles
States. under its Section 14(1).
 It provides remedies for fraudulent registration,
 (Second) Public Land Act (Act No. 2874) including an Assurance Fund to answer for
 Passed in 1919 under the Jones Law. damages.
 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.
 After the passage of the 1935 Constitution, Act
No. 2874 was amended in 1936 by CA No. 141,
 WHO MAY APPLY
REGISTRATION UNDER BASIC PRINCIPLES UNDER SEC. 14(1)
SECTION 14(1), PD 1529
• Requisites for original registration
WHO MAY APPLY (a) Declaration that the (agricultural) land is alienable
 Under Sec. 14(1), PD 1529 and disposable at the time of the application
 “Those who by themselves or their predecessors- for registration, and
in-interest have been in open, continuous, (b) Open and continuous possession in the concept of
exclusive and notorious possession and an owner since June 12, 1945 or earlier.
occupation of alienable and disposable lands of • The computation of the period may include the period of
the public domain under a bona fide claim of adverse possession prior to the declaration that land is
ownership since June 12, 1945, or earlier.” alienable and disposable. (Republic v. Roasa, GR No.
176022, Feb. 2, 2015)

• Requisites
• The land is an agricultural land already classified • The fixed date of June 12, 1945 qualifies possession and
as alienable and disposable (A and D) land “at occupation, not land classification, as alienable and
the time the application for registration is filed.” disposable.
(Malabanan v. Republic, GR No. 179987, April • The agricultural land subject of the application
29, 2009 and Sept. 3. 2013; Mercado v. Valley needs only to be classified as alienable and
Mountain Mines, GR No. 141019, Nov. 23, 2011; disposable as of the time of the application,
Victoria v. Republic, GR No. 179673, June 8, provided the applicant's possession and occupation
2011) of the land dates back to June 12, 1945, or earlier.”
• The applicant must have been in open, (Republic v. Sogod Development Corp., GR No.
continuous, exclusive and notorious possession 175760, Feb. 17, 2016; Malabanan v. Republic,
and occupation (OCENPO) of the land, under a supra)
bona fide claim of ownership.
• Since June 12, 1945, or earlier (Espiritu v.  Proof to show that land is A and D
Republic, GR No. 219070, June 21, 2017;  Applicant must conclusively establish the
Republic v. Local Superior, GR No. 185603, existence of a positive act of the government
Feb.10,2016) such as a presidential proclamation or an
executive order, or an administrative action,
 Rationale of the rule that the land need be classified as investigation reports of the Bureau of Lands
A and D already at the time the application is filed: investigator or a legislative act or statute.
“ If the State, at the time the application is made, Specifically, he must submit the following:
has not yet deemed it proper to release the • CENRO certification that the land is A and
property for alienation or disposition, the D; and
presumption is that the government is still • Certified copy of the original
reserving the right to utilize the property; classification approved by the DENR
hence, the need to preserve its ownership in Secretary. (Gaerlan v. Republic, GR No.
the State irrespective of the length of adverse 192717, March 12, 2014)
possession even in good faith.” (Malabanan v. • The rule is that the above-cited proof must be
Republic, supra). submitted during the trial. (Republic v. T.A,N.
 Possession prior to classification of land as A and D is Properties, supra)
counted in determining length of possession
“Although adverse, open, continuous, and • Exceptions
notorious possession in the concept of an owner • In Republic v. Serrano, GR No. 183063, Feb. 24,
is a conclusion of law to be determined by 2010, Court held that a DENR Regional Technical
courts, it has more to do with a person's belief Director's certification, which is annotated on the
in good faith that he or she has just title to the subdivision plan submitted in evidence,
property that he or she is occupying. It is constitutes substantial compliance with the legal
unrelated to the declaration that land is requirement.
alienable or disposable. A possessor or • In Republic v. Vega, GR No. 177790, Jan. 17, 2011,
occupant of property may, therefore, be a the Court emphasized that the present ruling on
possessor in the concept of an owner PRIOR to substantial compliance applies pro hac vice, i.e.,
the exception shall only apply to applications for
the determination that the property is alienable
registration pending before the trial court PRIOR
and disposable agricultural land.” (Republic v. to its decision in this case.
Roasa, supra)
• Note: In Espiritu v. Republic, GR No. 219070, June 21,  When possession is considered in good faith and with
2017, the Court stressed that he rule on strict compliance just title
enunciated in Republic v. T.A.N. Properties REMAINS to  The good faith of the possessor consists in the
be the governing rule in land registration cases. reasonable belief that the person from whom he
 In Llanes v. Republic, GR No. 177947, Nov. 27, 2008, the received the thing was the owner thereof, and
Court accepted the corrected CENRO Certification even could transmit his ownership. (Art. 1127, Civil
though it was submitted by the Spouses Llanes only Code)
during the appeal in the CA.  For purposes of prescription, there is just title
 In Republic v. San Mateo, GR No. 203560, Nov. when the adverse claimant came into possession
10, 2014, the Court allowed the application of of the property through one of the modes
substantial compliance because there was no recognized by law for the acquisition of
opportunity for the registrant to comply with the ownership or other real rights, but the grantor
Court's ruling in T.A.N. Properties, the trial court was not the owner or could not transmit any
and the CA already having decided the case prior right. (Art. 1129, ibid.)
to the promulgation of T.A.N. Properties. • Prescription distinguished from laches
 Possession is -  Prescription is concerned with the fact of delay,
 Open when it is patent, visible, apparent, laches is concerned with the effect of delay.
notorious and not clandestine;  Prescription is a matter of time; laches is
 Continuous when uninterrupted, unbroken and principally a question of inequity of permitting a
not intermittent or occasional; claim to be enforced, this inequity being founded
 Exclusive when the adverse possessor can show on some change in the condition of the property
exclusive dominion over the land and an or the relation of the parties.
appropriation of it to his own use and benefit;  Prescription is statutory; laches is not. Laches
and applies in equity, whereas prescription applies at
 Notorious when it is so conspicuous that it is law.
generally known and talked of by the public or  Prescription is based on a fixed time, laches is
the people in the neighborhood. (Bienvenido v. not. (Lacamen v. Laruan, GR No. L-27088, July 31,
Gabriel, GR No. 175763, April 11, 2012) 1975.
• Art. 1113 of the CC is the legal foundation for the
application of Sec. 14(2), PD No. 1529:
 “All things which are within the commerce of
REGISTRATION UNDER men are susceptible of prescription, unless
SECTION 14(2), PD 1529 otherwise provided.”
 “Property of the State or any of its subdivisions
 Under Sec. 14(2) not patrimonial in character shall not be the
 “Those who have acquired ownership of private object of prescription.”
lands by prescription under the provisions of
existing laws” • Concept of possession for purposes of prescription
 Possession must be that of owner, and it must be
• Rule on prescription under the Civil Code: public, peaceful and uninterrupted. Acts of a
 Ordinary prescription – 10 years in good faith possessory character by virtue of a license or
 Extraordinary prescription – 30 years mere tolerance are not sufficient.
 The present possessor may complete the period
• But land must be patrimonial property for prescription for prescription by tacking his possession to that
to apply. (Malabanan v. Republic, supra) of his grantor or predecessor-in-interest.
 It is presumed that the present possessor who
was also the possessor at a previous time has
• Land of the public domain becomes private or continued to be in possession during the
patrimonial property when it is - intervening time. (Art. 1138, Civil Code)
• Classified as “alienable and disposable”
agricultural land, and
• Declared by competent authority as “no longer BASIC PRINCIPLES UNDER SEC. 14(2)
intended for public use or public service.” (Art.
422, Civil Code)  Yu Chang v. Republic, GR No. 171726, Feb. 23, 2011
• Only when such land has become patrimonial can the  "[E]ven if possession of the alienable public land
prescriptive period for the acquisition of the property commenced on a date later than June 12, 1945,
begin to run. (Malabanan v. Republic, supra) and such possession being open, continuous and
exclusive, then the possessor may have the right
 to register the land by virtue of Section 14(2) of
the Decree.” • As held in Republic v. Rovency Realty, GR No. 190817,
 The 10- or 30-year period of prescription under Jan. 10, 2018:
Section 14(2) commences to run only from the • Sec. 14(1) refers to registration of title on the
time the land, separately from being declared basis of possession, while Sec. 14(2) entitles the
alienable and disposable, is declared as applicant to the registration of his property on
patrimonial property of the State. the basis of prescription.
 Republic v. Gielczyk, GR No. 179990, Oct. 23, 2013 • Registration under the first mode is extended
 Properties classified as alienable public land may under the aegis of the PD No. 1529 and the
be converted into private or patrimonial property Public Land Act (PLA), while the second mode is
by reason of open, continuous and exclusive made available both by PD No. 1529 and the Civil
possession of at least 30 years. Code. (See also: Canlas v. Republic, GR No.
 Such properties become patrimonial property 200894, Nov. 10, 2014)
with a declaration that (1) these are alienable or
disposable, and (2) the property is already
patrimonial or no longer retained for public use,  (1) Under the Regalian Doctrine, all lands of the public
public service or the development of national domain belong to the State and are inalienable. Lands
wealth. that are not clearly under private ownership are also
 Republic v. East Silverlane, GR No. 186961, Feb. 2012 presumed to belong to the State and, therefore, may
 Sec. 14(2) covers "private property” whereas not be alienated or disposed;
Sec. 14(1) covers "alienable and disposable land."  (2) The following are excepted from the general rule:
 Under Sec. 14(2), the status of the property as (a) If the mode is judicial confirmation of
patrimonial must be first established. imperfect title under Section 48 (b)
 The period of possession preceding the of the Public Land Act, the
classification of the property as patrimonial agricultural land subject of the
cannot be considered in determining the application needs only to be
completion of the prescriptive period. classified as alienable and
 Possession for purposes of prescription must be disposable as of the time of the
"in the concept of an owner, public, peaceful and application, provided the applicant's
uninterrupted". possession and occupation of the
land dated back to June 12, 1945, or
 Republic v. Sese, GR No. 185092, June 4, 2014 earlier.
 The 30-year period of prescription under Section
14 (2) of PD 1529 only begins to run from the (b) If the mode of acquisition is prescription,
moment the property has been converted into whether ordinary or extraordinary,
patrimonial . proof that the land has been already
 The period of possession preceding the converted to private ownership prior to
classification of the property as patrimonial the requisite acquisitive prescriptive
cannot be considered in determining the period is a condition sine qua non in
completion of the prescriptive period. (See also: observance of the law (Article 1113,
Tan v. Republic, GR No.193443, April 16, 2012) Civil Code) that property of the State
not patrimonial in character shall not
be the object of prescription.
 Without satisfying the requisite character and period of
possession since June 12, 1945, or earlier, the land
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN SECS. 14(1) AND 14(2) Sec. 14(1) cannot be considered ipso jure converted to private
property even upon the subsequent declaration of it as
 Registration is based on possession alienable and disposable. Prescription never began to
 Governed by PD 1529 (Property Registration Decree) run against the State, such that the land has remained
and CA 141 (Public Land Act) ineligible for registration under Section 14 (1) of the
 Period of possession is without regard to the Civil Code PRD.
 Sec. 14(2)  Likewise, the land continues to be ineligible for land
 Registration is based on prescription registration under Section 14 (2) of the PRD unless
 Governed by PD 1529 (Property Registration Decree) Congress enacts a law or the President issues a
and Civil Code proclamation declaring the land as no longer intended
 30-year period involves extraordinary prescription under for public service or for the development of the national
the Civil Code, particularly Art. 1113 in relation to Art. wealth.
1137
  There must be a definite abandonment by the
REGISTRATION UNDER government;
SECTION 14(3), PD 1529  The river must continue to exist, i.e., it must not
completely disappear.

 Under Sec. 14(3) • Ownership by right of accretion along river banks

• Under Art. 457, CC, to the owners of land
• “Those who have acquired ownership of private adjoining the banks of rivers belong the accretion
lands or abandoned river beds by right of which they gradually receive from the effects of
accession or accretion under the existing laws.” the current of the waters. Justification:
• To offset the owner’s loss for possible
• Ownership of abandoned river beds by right of erosion of his land due to the current of the
accession: river;
• River beds which are abandoned through the • To compensate him for his burdens arising
natural change in the course of the waters ipso from the subjection of his land to
facto belong to the owners whose lands are encumbrances or legal easements; and
occupied by the new course in proportion to the • Owner is in the best position to cultivate it.
area lost. However, the owners of the adjoining (Cortex v. City of Manila, 10 Phil. 567)
lands shall have the right to acquire the same by
paying the value thereof. The reason is that they • Requisites for the application Art. 457:
are in the best position to utilize the old river bed • That the deposit be gradual and imperceptible;
which is adjacent to their property. (Art. 461, • That it be made through the effects of the
Civil Code) current of the water; and
• That the land where accretion takes place is
• Ownership of abandoned river bed adjacent to the banks of rivers.
• Q. A and B each own land on opposite sides of a • In the absence of evidence that the change in the course
river. The river changed its course, passing of the river was sudden or that it occurred through
though the land of C. Who owns the abandoned avulsion, the presumption is that the change was
river bed? gradual and caused by accretion and erosion.
• A. C, to compensate him for his loss.  The increment does not automatically become
registered land just because the lot which receives such
• Q. But suppose that two owners, C and D, lost accretion is covered by a Torrens title.
portions of their lands, who owns the river bed?  The increment must be placed under the
• A. C and D, in proportion to the area lost. operation of the Torrens system. (Cureg v. IAC,
177 SCRA 313)
 The owners of the affected lands may not compel the  The owner must register the accretion under the
government to restore the river to its former bed, nor Torrens system, otherwise the alluvial property
can they restrain the government from taking steps to may be subject to acquisition through
revert the river or stream to its former courts. prescription by third persons. (Grande v. Court of
 But the owners may themselves undertake the Appeals, 5 SCRA 524)
reversion of the river to its original course, but  A riparian owner does not acquire the additions to his
upon a permit issued by the government. (Art. land caused by special works designed to bring about
58, PD 1067, Water Code) accretion.
 The ownership of the abandoned river bed is  Private persons cannot reclaim land from water
transferred ipso facto to the owners whose lands bodies belonging to the public domain without
are occupied by the new course of the river “to permission from government authorities.
compensate for the loss of the land occupied by  And even if such reclamation is authorized, the
the new bed.” reclaimed land does not automatically belong to
• Requisites for the application of Art. 461: the party reclaiming it as the land may still be the
 The change must be sudden in order that the old subject to the terms of the authority granted.
river may be identified;
 The change of the course must be more or less  The alluvial deposits must NOT be:
permanent, and not temporary overflooding of  artificial and man-made
another’s land.  the result of the transfer of the dike towards the
 The change of the river must be a natural one, river and encroaching upon it
i.e., caused by natural forces (and not by artificial  caused by special works expressly intended or
means) designed to bring about accretion
  caused by special works expressly intended or since time immemorial or for a period of not less
designed to bring about accretion than thirty (30) years immediately preceding the
 portions of the bed of the river (Republic v. Court approval of the Act shall have the option to
of Appeals and Tancinco, GR No. L-61647, Oct. secure title to their ancestral lands under CA No.
12, 1984) 141(Public Land Act) or PD No. 1529 (Property
 As held in City Mayor of Parañaque City v. Ebio, GR No. Registration Decree).
178411, June 23, 2010, alluvial deposits along the banks
of creeks, streams and lakes do not form part of the  Registration of foreshore and offshore areas through
public domain as the alluvial property but automatically “special patents”
belongs to the owner of the estate to which it may have  A “special patent’’ is a form of land grant
been added. whereby the government, by an act of Congress
 But the owner of the adjoining property must or executive order, conveys land in full
register the same under the Torrens system; ownership to the grantee without regard to its
otherwise, the alluvial property may be subject classification. PD No. 1085, issued on February 4,
to acquisition through prescription by third 1977, authorized the issuance of special land
persons. patents for lands reclaimed from foreshore or
 Alluvial formation along the seashore is part of the submerged areas by the Public Reclamation
public domain and, therefore, not open to acquisition by Authority (PRA) under EO No. 380, dated October
adverse possession. 26, 2004, like the Freedom Islands in the offshore
“Art. 4, Lands added to the shore by accretion areas of Manila Bay.
and alluvial deposits caused by the action of the  Reservations for a specific public purpose
sea, form part of the public domain. When they  In Republic, rep. by the Mindanao Medical Center
are no longer washed by the waters of the sea, v. Court of Appeals, Lot No. 1176-B-2, a
and are not necessary for purposes of public reservation for medical site of the Mindanao
utility, or for the establishment of special Medical Center (MMC), was ordered registered in
industries, or for the coast-guard service, the favor of MMC. Respondent Alejandro de Jesus
Government may declare them to be the appealed, claiming that the lot was the subject of
property of the owners of the estate adjacent a sales award earlier issued to his father by the
thereto and as an increment thereof.” (Spanish Director of Lands which ripened into a vested
Law of Waters) right.. The Supreme Court disagreed and ruled
that Proclamation No. 350 legally effected a land
• Until a formal declaration by the government, through grant to the MMC validly sufficient for
the executive or legislature, that the alluvial formation registration. Such grant is constitutive of a “fee
is no longer needed for coast guard service, for public simple” title or absolute title in favor of MMC.
use or for special industries, the same continues to be
part of the public domain not available for private
appropriation of ownership. The land is not subject to REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 48(b),
ordinary prescription as it is outside the sphere of PUBLIC LAND ACT (CA 141)
commerce. • Who may apply
• “Those who by themselves or through their
predecessors in interest have been in open,
REGISTRATION UNDER continuous, exclusive, and notorious possession
SECTION 14(4), PD 1529 and occupation of alienable and disposable lands
of the public domain, under a bona fide claim of
 Under Sec. 14(4) acquisition of ownership, since June 12, 1945,
except when prevented by war or force majeure.
• “Those who have acquired ownership of land in These shall be conclusively presumed to have
any other manner provided for by law.” performed all the conditions essential to a
Government grant and shall be entitled to a
 ILLUSTRATIVE CASES certificate of title under the provisions of this
 Registration under the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act chapter.” (Sec. 48[b], CA 141)
(RA No. 8371)  No material differences between Sec. 14(1) of PD No.
 Under RA No. 8371 (1997), individual members 1529 and Sec. 48(b) of CA No. 141
of cultural communities, with respect to their  While the Public Land Act (PLA) refers to
individually-owned ancestral lands who, by “agricultural lands of the public domain” and the
themselves or through their predecessors-in- Property Registration Decree (PRD) refers to
interest, have been in continuous possession and “alienable and disposable lands of the public
occupation of the same in the concept of owner domain,” the subject lands are of the same type
 since under the Constitution, alienable lands of  RA 1942, dated June 22, 1957, provided for a
the public domain shall be limited to agricultural period of possession for only thirty (30) years.
lands.  But PD 1073, dated Jan. 25, 1977, repealed RA
1942 and required that possession and
Sec. 14(1), PD 1529 occupation should commence on June 12, 1945
 “Those who by themselves or through their (no longer 30 years). (Rep. v. East Silverlane, GR
predecessors-in-interest have been in open, continuous, No. 186961, Feb. 20, 2012; Rep. v. Espinosa, GR
exclusive and notorious possession and occupation of No. 171514, July 18, 2012)
alienable and disposable lands of the public domain
under a bona fide claim of ownership since June 12,
1945, or earlier.”  Resume -
 Sec. 48(b), CA 141  On June 22, 1957, RA 1942 amended Sec. 48 (b)
 “Those who by themselves or through their of the PLA by providing a 30-year prescriptive
predecessors in interest have been in the open, period for judicial confirmation of imperfect title.
continuous, exclusive, and notorious possession and  On January 25, 1977, PD 1073 changed the
occupation of agricultural lands of the public domain, requirement for possession and occupation for
under a bona fide claim of acquisition or ownership, 30 years to possession and occupation since June
except as against the Government, since June 12, 1945.” 12, 1945 or earlier.
 On June 11, 1978, PD 1529 was enacted requiring
 Sec. 48(b), CA 141, as amended by PD 1073, requires possession and occupation since June 12, 1945.
possession since June 12, 1945, or prior thereto.  PD 1073 repealed RA 1942. thus applications
 But the land must already be classified as A and D under Sec. 48 (b) of the PLA filed after the
land at the time the application for registration is promulgation of PD 1073 should allege and prove
filed. (Malabanan vs. CA, GR No. 179987, April possession and occupation since June 12, 1945 or
29, 2009) earlier.
 The mode of acquisition recognized by Section 48(b) of
the Public Land Act and made registrable under Section  However, vested rights acquired under RA No. 1942
14(1) of the Property Registration Decree is through (which required a simple possession for 30 years)
confirmation of an imperfect or incomplete title. cannot be impaired by the subsequent issuance of P.D.
 Both provisions allow confirmation of an No. 1073.
imperfect or incomplete title only if the claimant  Thus, an applicant who, by himself or his
has been in open, continuous, exclusive and predecessors-in-interest, has been, prior to the
notorious possession and occupation (OCENPO) effectivity of P.D. 1073 on January 25, 1977, been
of alienable and disposable (A & D) lands of the in OCENPO of an agricultural land of the public
public domain since June 12, 1945, or earlier. domain for at least 30 years, or at least since
January 24, 1947, may apply for judicial
confirmation of his imperfect or incomplete title
DISTINCTION BETWEEN REGISTRATION UNDER THE PRD AND under Sec. 48(b) of the Public Land Act. (Republic
PLA v. Espinosa, GR No. 171514, July 18, 2012. See
 Under the Property Registration Decree, there also Republic v. East Silverlane, GR No. 186961,
already exists a title which is confirmed by the Feb. 20, 2012)
court  When the conditions specified in Sec. 48(b) of the PLA
 Under the Public Land Act, the presumption is are complied with, the possessor is deemed to have
that the land applied for pertains to the State, acquired, by operation of law, a right to a grant, without
and that the occupants and possessors only claim the necessity of a certificate of title being issued. (Herico
an interest in the same by virtue of their v. Dar, 95 SCRA 437; Republic v. Doldol, supra)
imperfect title or open, continuous, exclusive and  Compliance with all requirements for a
notorious possession and occupaion. (Limcoma government grant ipso jure converts land to
Multi-purpose Cooperative v. Republic, GR No. private property. The land ceases to be of the
167652, July 10, 2007) public domain and is beyond the authority of the
DENR to dispose of it under any of the modes of
 Is mere possession of land for thirty (30) years sufficient disposition under the Public Land Act. (Susi v.
for registration purposes? Razon, 48 Phil. 424)
 The first PLA, or Act 926, required a possession
and occupation for a period of ten (10) years
prior to the effectivity of Act No. 296 on July 26,
1904.
 Concurring opinion of J. Brion in Chang v. Republic, GR  Limited the area applied for to 12 hectares and
No. 171726, Feb. 23, 2011: provided that all pending applications filed
 Section 48 (b) of the Public Land Act is the law before the effectivity of the amendatory Act shall
that recognizes the substantive right of a be treated as having been filed in accordance
possessor and occupant of an alienable and with the provisions thereof.
disposable land of the public domain, while
Section 14 (1) of the Property Registration
Decree recognizes this right by authorizing its REGISTRATION UNDER THE
registration, thus bringing the land within the INDIGENOUS PEOPLES
coverage of the Torrens System. RIGHTS ACT (RA 8371)

• Constitutional provisions
• “The State recognizes and promotes the rights of
AN ACT AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE OF FREE PATENTS TO indigenous cultural communities within the
RESIDENTIAL LANDS framework of national unity and development.”
(RA NO. 10023) (Sec. 2 Art. II)
 Qualifications • The Congress may provide for the applicability of
 Any Filipino citizen who is an actual occupant of a customary law governing property rights or
residential land may apply for a free patent title relations in determining the ownership and
under the following conditions: extent of ancestral domain.” (Sec. 5, par. 2, Art.
 Highly urbanized cities – not to exceed 200 sq. m. XII)
 Other cities - not exceed 500 sq. m.
 First class and second class municipalities - not
exceed 750 sq. m.  Indigenous concept of ownership
 Other municipalities - not to exceed 1,000 sq. m.  The IPRA (RA No. 8371, Oct. 29, 1997) recognizes
 Lands must be zoned as residential areas or townsites the existence of the indigenous cultural
communities or indigenous peoples (ICCs/IPs) as
 Application shall be supported by: a distinct sector in Philippine Society.
 Survey plan and technical description approved  It grants these people the ownership and
by the DENR possession of their ancestral domains and
 Affidavit of two (2) disinterested persons who are ancestral lands, and defines the extent of these
residing in the barangay of the city or lands and domains.
municipality where the land is located, to the  The ownership given is the indigenous concept of
effect that the applicant has, either by himself or ownership under customary law which traces its
through his predecessor-in-interest, actually origin to native title.
resided on and continuously possessed and  Ancestral lands/domains are not deemed part of the
occupied, under a bona fide claim of acquisition lands of the public domain but are private lands
of ownership, the land applied for at least ten belonging to ICCs/IPs who have actually occupied,
(10) years. possessed and utilized their territories under claim of
ownership since time immemorial
 Where to file application  Native title refers to pre-conquest rights which,
 All applications shall be filed with the CENRO of as far back as memory reaches, have been held
the DENR. under claim of private ownership by ICCs/IPs,
 The CENRO shall process the application within have never been public lands and are thus
120 days to include compliance with the required indisputably presumed to have been held that
notices and other legal requirements way since before the Spanish Conquest. (Cruz v.
 The PENRO shall have 5 days to approve or Sec. of DENR, 347 SCA 128)
disapprove the patent.  The National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP)
 The restrictions regarding encumbrances, has the authority to issue certificates of ancestral domain
conveyances, transfers or dispositions imposed in title (CADT) or certificates of ancestral land title (CALT)
Sections 118, 119, 121, 122 and 123 of Chapter XIII,  The recording of CADT and CALT in the Office of
Title VI of CA No. 141 (Public Land Act) shall not apply the Register of Deeds does not result in the
to patents issued under the Act. issuance of Torrens certificate of title.
 What is RA No. 9176 (2002)?  The purpose of registration is simply to apprise
 Extended the period to file an application for the public of the fact of recognition by the NCIP
judicial confirmation of imperfect or incomplete of specific claims to portions of the ancestral
titles to December 31, 2020. domains or ancestral lands.
 Modes of acquisition  In sale of public lands, the land is opened for
 The rights of ICCs/IPs to their ancestral domains bidding; the successful bidder is given right of
and ancestral lands may be acquired in two entry and to cultivate and improve the land.
modes:  Upon cultivation of 1/5 of the land, the applicant
 By native title over both ancestral lands and is given a sales patent.
domains; or  In the case of friar lands, the purchaser becomes
 By Torrens title under the Public Land Act the owner upon issuance of the certificate of sale
(CA No. 141) or the Property Registration in his favor.
Decree (PD No. 1529) with respect to
ancestral lands only.
 Requisites for registration WHO MAY APPLY: CITIZENSHIP REQUIREMENT
• The applicant is a member of an indigenous
cultural group;  On the basis of their capacity “to acquire or holds lands
• He must have been in possession of an of the public domain,” the following may acquire title to
individually-owned ancestral land for not less private lands:
than thirty (30) years;  Filipino citizens
• By operation of law, the land is already classified  Filipino corporations and associations, 60% of
as A and D, even if it has a slope of 18% or over, whose capital are owned by Filipinos (Ang v. Sy
hence, there is no need to submit a separate So, GR No.182252, Aug. 3, 2016)
certification that the land is A and D. (Sec. 12, RA  Aliens by hereditary succession (Sec. 7, Art. XII).
8371)  A natural-born citizen of the Philippines who has
 The rights of ownership over ancestral lands may be lost his Philippine citizenship, may be a
transferred subject to the following limitations: transferee of private land subject to limitations
• Only to members of the same ICCs/IPs; provided by law. (Sec. 8, Id.)
• In accord with customary laws and traditions; • Aliens disqualified from acquiring lands of the public
and domain as well as private lands
• Subject to the right of redemption for a period of  The right to acquire lands of the public domain is
fifteen (15) years if the land was transferred to a reserved only to Filipino citizens or corporations
non-member. at least 60% of the capital of which is owned by
 Ancestral domains belong to all generations and Filipinos.
therefore cannot be sold, disposed or destroyed.  Aliens, whether individuals or corporations, are
disqualified from acquiring lands of the public
domain as well as private lands. (Donton v. Stier,
DISPOSITION OF GR No. 216491, Aug. 23, 2017)
FRIAR LANDS • Who are citizens of the Philippines?
(ACT 1120) • Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the
time of the adoption of the 1987 Constitution;
DISPOSITION OF FRIAR LANDS • Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of
(Example: Banilad Estate, Piedad Estate, Tala Estate, etc.) the Philippines;
 Friar lands are not public lands but private or • Those born before January 17, 1972, of Filipino
patrimonial property of the government. mothers, who elect Philippine citizenship upon
 Friar lands were purchased by the government reaching the age of majority; and
for sale to actual occupants under Act 120 (Friar • Those who are naturalized in accordance with
Lands Act) law. (Art. IV, Constitution)
 The Lands Management Bureau (LMB) shall first
issue a sales certificate to the occupant who shall  Constitutional provisions
pay the purchase price in installments.  Save in cases of hereditary succession, no private
 The purchaser becomes the owner upon the issuance of lands shall be transferred or conveyed except to
the certificate of sale, subject to cancellation in case the individuals, corporations, or associations
price agreed upon is not paid in full qualified to acquire or hold lands of the public
 Upon full payment, the government shall then domain. (Sec. 7, Art. XII)
issue a final deed of conveyance to the purchaser  Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 7 of
 No lease or sale shall be valid until approved by this Article, a natural-born citizen of the
the DENR Secretary (Manotok v. Barque, GR No. Philippines who has lost his Philippine citizenship,
162335, Aug. 24, 2010) may be a transferee of private lands subject to
 Sale of friar lands is different from sale of public lands: limitations provided by law. (Sec. 8, Ibid)
 Area limitations
 Any natural born citizen who has lost his  May the RD validly refuse to register a deed of donation
Philippine citizenship and who has the legal of a residential land executed by a Filipino in favor of an
capacity to enter into a contract may be a unregistered organization, the “Ung Sui Si Temple,”
transferee of a private land up to a maximum operating through three trustees all of Chinese
area of: nationality?
 For investment purposes  Yes. The SC, in Register of Deeds v. Ung Sui Si
• 5,000 square meters - urban land temple, GR No. L-6776, May 21, 1995, held that
• 3 hectares - rural land. (RA No. 7042, as in view of the absolute terms of Sec. 5, Title XIII
amended by RA No. 8179) of the 1935 Constitution (now Sec. 8, Art. XII,
• For residential purposes: 1987 Constitution) that, “save in cases of
• 1,000 square meters – urban land hereditary succession, no private agricultural
• 1 hectare – rural land (BP Blg. 185) land shall be transferred except to individuals,
corporations or associations qualified to acquire
or hold lands of the public domain,” the
 Citizenship Retention and Re-acquisition Act of 2003 Constitution makes no exception to religious
 “ x x x natural-born citizens of the Philippines who groups.
have lost their Philippine citizenship by reason of  Facts: Respondent Sio, a Chinese, bought a 682.5 square
their naturalization as citizens of a foreign country meter land in 1944, during the effectivity of the 1935
are hereby deemed to have re-acquired Philippine Constitution. She registered it in the name of her 3-year
citizenship upon taking the following oath of old ward, Jose. Sio subsequently acquired another lot,
allegiance to the Republic: likewise registered under Jose’s name. Sio kept the titles
 "I _________________, solemnly swear (or herself.
affirm) that I will support and defend the  Unknown to her, Jose was able to obtain a second
Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines owner’s duplicate of both titles and, thereafter, he filed
and obey the laws and legal orders an ejectment suit against Sio for non-payment of
promulgated by the duly constituted rentals. Meantime, Sio filed with the RTC a case for
authorities of the Philippines, and I hereby "Transfer of Trusteeship from the Defendant Jose
declare that I recognize and accept the Norberto Ang to the New Trustee, Tony Ang, with
supreme authority of the Philippines and will Damages,” but this was dismissed by the court.
maintain true faith and allegiance thereto;
and that I impose this obligation upon myself  The CA granted Sy So’s appeal. Jose filed a Rule 45
voluntarily without mental reservation or petition for review.
purpose of evasion." (Sec. 3, RA 9225)  Issue: Whether or not Sio is entitled to the ownership of
 Sec. 3 further provides: properties in question.
 Natural-born citizens of the Philippines who,  Ruling: Under the 1935 Constitution (and also under the
after the effectivity of this Act, become citizens 1987 Constitution), aliens, like Sio, are disqualified from
of a foreign country shall retain their Philippine acquiring lands of the public domain. Not even an
citizenship upon taking the aforesaid oath. implied trust can be permitted on equity considerations.
 Sec. 5 provides: In sales of real estate to aliens, both vendor and the
 Those who retain or re-acquire Philippine vendee are deemed in pari delicto.
citizenship under this Act shall enjoy full civil and  The Court directed the OSG to initiate proceedings for
political rights and be subject to all attendant the reversion of the subject property to the State.
liabilities and responsibilities under existing laws of  Q. Can a Filipino vendor recover land sold to an alien?
the Philippines.  A. Yes. When an agreement is not illegal per se
 Facts: Pedro, a Filipino, bought land from Jose who at the but is merely prohibited and the prohibition is
time of the sale had already complied with the designed for the protection of the plaintiff, he
requirements for registration. Pedro later became a may recover the land, the public policy being to
naturalized Canadian citizen. preserve and maintain the land in the hands of
 Issue: What is the effect of Pedro’s Canadian citizenship Filipino citizens. (Phil. Banking Corp. v. Lui She, 21
on his right to own land in th4e Philippines? SCRA 52; Borromeo v. Descallar, 580 SCA 175;
 Answer: It will not impair his vested right to the land United Church v. Sebastian, 159 SCRA 446)
which he could have validly registered when he was yet a  Note: In Rellosa v. Gaw Chee Hun, 93 Phil. 827,
Filipino citizen. He is also qualified under the terms of the Filipino vendor was in pari delicto with the
Sec. 8, Art. XII, Constitution. (Republic v. CA and Lapiña, alien vendee, hence, recovery was not allowed.
GR No. 108998, Aug. 24, 1994)
 The capacity to own land is determined at the time of its
acquisition and not registration.
 Other illustrative cases on acquisition by aliens OTHER BASIC PRINCIPLES
 Where the land was now in the hands of a
naturalized Filipino, there is no more public  Fullido v. Grilli, GR No. 215014, Feb. 29, 2016
policy to be served by allowing recovery.  Under Section 1 of Article XIII of the 1935
(Barsobia v. Cuenco , 199 Phil. 26), Constitution, natural resources shall not be
 Where land is sold to a Chinese who later sold it alienated, except with respect to public
to a Filipino, the sale can no longer be impugned. agricultural lands and in such cases, the
(Herrera v. Guan, 1 SCRA 406). alienation is limited to Filipino citizens. The
 Chuck, an American, and Cory, a Filipino, prohibition on the transfer of lands to aliens was
acquired land which was registered in the latter’s adopted in the present 1987 Constitution, under
name. Cory sold the land to Mario without Sections 2, 3 and 7 of Article XII thereof.
Chuck’s consent. Valid? Yes. Chuck never Agricultural lands, whether public or private,
acquired any right to the land, he being an alien. include residential, commercial and industrial
(Cheesman v. IAC, 193 SCRA 93) lands.
 The prohibition, however, is not limited to the
sale of lands to foreigners. It also covers leases of
 Facts: lands amounting to the transfer of all or
 Alfred (petitioner), an Australian citizen, was substantially all the rights of dominion. Thus, if
married to Teresita, a Filipino. Lina (respondent), an alien is given not only a lease of, but also an
also a Filipina, was married to Klaus, a German. option to buy, a piece of land by virtue of which
Alfred and Lina met and cohabited in a common- the Filipino owner cannot sell or otherwise
law relationship, during which Alfred acquired real dispose of his property, this to last for 50 years,
properties. Since Alfred was disqualified from then it becomes clear that the arrangement is a
owning lands in the Philippines, Lina was named in virtual transfer of ownership whereby the owner
the deeds of sale as vendee. When their divests himself in stages not only of the right to
relationship turned sour, Alfred sued Lina for the enjoy the land but also of the right to dispose of
recovery of the properties registered in the name of it — rights which constitute ownership.
the latter, claiming that he (Alfred) was the real  Private corporations not qualified to acquire lands of the
owner. public domain
 Issue:  “Private corporations or associations may not
 Will the action prosper? hold (such) alienable lands of the public domain
 Ruling: except by lease, for a period not exceeding 25
 The Court refused to declare Alfred (Australian) as years, renewable for not more than 25 years, and
the owner because of the constitutional not to exceed 1,000 hectares in area.” (Sec. 3,
prohibition. The Court added that being a party to Art. XII, Constitution)
an illegal contract, he could not come to court and  Reason: to encourage economic family-sized farms by
ask to have his illegal objective carried out. One transferring ownership of only a limited area of
who loses his money or property by knowingly alienable lands of the public domain to a qualified
engaging in an illegal contract may not maintain an individual. Available lands are decreasing due to
action for his losses. (Frenzel v. Catito, GR No. GR increasing population.
No. 143958. July 11, 2003)  Exception to the rule
 In Director of Lands v. Intermediate Appellate
Court and Acme Plywood & Veneer Co., Inc., GR
 Facts: No. 73002, Dec. 29, 1986, the Court held that
Felix Ting Ho, a Chinese citizen, acquired a parcel of land “where at the time the corporation acquired the
with the improvements thereon. Upon his death, his land, its predecessor-in-interest had been in
heirs (the petitioners therein) claimed the properties as possession and occupation thereof in the manner
part of the estate of their deceased father, and sought and for the period prescribed by law as to entitle
the partition of said properties among themselves. him to registration in his name, then the
 Issue: Is partition proper? proscription against corporations acquiring
 Ruling: The Court excluded the land and improvements alienable lands of the public domain except
thereon from the estate of Felix Ting Ho, precisely through lease does not apply for the land was no
because he never became the owner thereof in light of longer public land but private property.”
the above-mentioned constitutional prohibition. (Sec. 7,
Art. XII, 1987 Constitution) (Ting Ho. V. Teng Gui, GR No.
G.R. No. 130115, July 16, 2008)
 AFP Retirementt and Separation Benefits System v.
Republic, GR No. 180086, July 2, 2014
 The type of corporation that petitioner is has VESTED RIGHT
nothing to do with the grant of its application for  What is a vested right?
original registration. x x x The prohibition in  It is a right or interest in property that has been
Section 3, Article XII of the Constitution applies fixed and established, and is no longer open to
only to private corporations. Petitioner is a doubt or controversy. (Lucero v. City of Pasig,
government corporation organized under PD No. 508 SCRA 23; Ayog v. Cusi, GR No. L-46729, Nov.
361, as amended by PD No. 1656. 19, 1982)
 An open, continuous, adverse and public
 In Republic v. Iglesia ni Cristo, 591 SCRA 438, the Court possession of property from time immemorial by
held: a private individual confers effective title on said
 A private corporation may validly file an application possessor, whereby the land ceases to be public
for registration over a parcel of land it had acquired and becomes private property. (Susi v. Razon, 48
from a person who had already complied with the Phil. 424)
statutory period of possession. The possession of
INC has been established not only from 1952 and
1959 when it purchased the respective halves of the FORM AND CONTENTS OF APPLICATION
subject lot, but is also tacked to the possession of  “Form and contents. - The application shall be in writing,
its predecessors-in-interest who had been in signed by the applicant or his authorized representative,
possession thereof before June 12, 1945. and under oath. If there is more than one applicant, the
 Corporation sole qualified to acquire real property application shall be signed and sworn to by each.
 Church properties acquired by the incumbent  The application shall contain a description of the land,
head of a corporation sole pass, by operation of and state the civil status of the applicant, and the names
law, upon his death not to his personal heirs but of all occupants and adjoining owners, if known.” (Sec.
to his successor in office. It is created not only to 15, PD No. 1529)
administer the temporalities of the church or
religious society where he belongs, but also to
hold and transmit the same to his successor in WHAT AND WHERE
said office.(Roman Catholic Apostolic TO FILE
Administrator v. Land Registration Commission,
GR No. L-8451, Dec. 20, 1957)  “The application shall be filed with the RTC of the
 In Republic v. IAC and Roman Catholic Bishop of Lucena, province or city where the land lies, with a copy
GR No. 75042, Nov. 29, 1988, the Court held: furnished the Director of Lands. (Sec. 17, ibid.)
“There is no doubt that a corporation sole by the  The applicant may file a single application for two or
nature of its incorporation is vested with the more parcels of land in the same province
right to purchase and hold real estate and  “Amendments which consist in a substantial change in
personal property. It need not therefore be the boundaries or an increase (not decrease) in area
treated as an ordinary private corporation shall be subject to publication and notice as in an
because whether or not it be so treated as original application.” (Sec. 19, ibid.; Benin v. Tuason, GR
such, the Constitutional provision involved will, No. L-26127, June 28, 1974)
nevertheless, be not applicable. The lands
subject of this petition were already private
property at the time the application for DEALINGS WITH LAND
confirmation of title was filed in 1979.” PENDING REGISTRATION
• The Corporation Law also contains the following
provision:  Pending issuance of the decree, the land may be the
• “SEC. 159. - Any corporation sole may purchase subject of dealings (sale, lease, mortgage) in whole or in
and hold real estate and personal property for its part, and the interested party shall submit to the court
church, charitable, benevolent, or educational for consideration the pertinent documents and
purposes, and may receive bequests or gifts for subdivision plan in case only portions of the land are
such purposes. Such corporation may mortgage affected. The application need not be amended. (Sec.
or sell real property held by it upon obtaining an 22, PD 1529; Mendoza v. CA, supra)
order for that purpose from the Court of First  Section 22 of PD No. 1529 expressly allows the
Instance of the province in which the property is disposition of lands subject matter of a registration
situated; x x x ” (Roman Catholic Apostolic proceeding and the subsequent registration thereof in
Administrator v. Land Registration Commission, the name of the person to whom the land was
supra.) conveyed.
  But the pertinent instruments of conveyance the date of the order. The public shall be given
must be presented to the court and that prior notice of the initial hearing of the application for
notice is given to the parties in the land land registration by means of (a) publication; (2)
registration case. mailing; and (c) posting.” (Sec. 23, PD 529)

•
 Thereafter, the court shall either order the land
registered subject to the conveyance or Purpose:
encumbrance, or order that the decree of (a) to confer jurisdiction upon the court, and
registration be issued in the name of the person (b) to apprise the whole world of the case so that
to whom the property was conveyed. (Mendoza they may oppose the application, if
v. Court of Appeals, id.) minded. (Fieldman v. Republic, GR No.
 Facts: 147359, March 28 2008)
 Pending registration, applicant sold the land
applied for. The court issued the decree of
registration in the name of the vendee. Later,
however, alleging failure of the vendee to pay  Publication of the notice of initial hearing
the purchase price of the land, applicant filed a  “Upon receipt of the order of the court setting
motion for reconsideration. The court set aside the time for initial hearing, the LRA shall cause a
the decree holding that it had no jurisdiction to notice of initial hearing to be published once in
order registration to the vendee who was neither the Official Gazette and once in a newspaper of
the applicant nor oppositor in the registration general circulation in the Philippines: Provided,
case. however, That the publication in the Official
 Issue: Gazette shall be sufficient to confer jurisdiction
 Is the trial court correct? Why? upon the court. Said notice shall be addressed to
all persons appearing to have an interest in the
 Ruling: land involved including the adjoining owners so
 No. Section 22 of the PRD expressly authorizes far as known, and ‘to all whom it may concern.’”
the sale (“dealt with”) of the land during the (Sec. 23, ibid.)
pendency of the case and its registration in the
name of the buyer. The application need not be
amended by substituting the "buyer" for the  Constructive seizure of the land effected through:
applicant. Neither does the law require that the (a) publication of the notice of initial hearing in
"buyer" be a party to the case. It is only required the OG and in a newspaper of general
that: (1) the corresponding instrument be circulation, and
presented to the court with a motion that the (b) posting, and
same be considered in relation with the (c) mailing thereof to affected parties. (Sec. 23,
application; and (2) prior notice be given to the PD No. 1529)
parties to the case. (Mendoza v. Court of  But lack of personal notice does not vitiate the
Appeals, supra) proceedings. (Roxas v. Enriquez, 212 SCRA 625)
 Procedure where conveyance involves only a portion of
land:
 No TCT shall be issued by the RD until a plan of Q. The law says that “the notice of initial hearing shall be
the land showing the portions into which it has published once in the OG and once in a newspaper
been subdivided, together with the technical of the general circulation in the Philippines;
description, shall have been verified and provided, however, that the publication in the
approved by the LRA or LMB. Official Gazette shall be sufficient to confer
 Meanwhile, the deed may only be annotated by jurisdiction upon the court.” If the notice was
the RD by way of memorandum on the grantor’s already published in the OG, is there still a need to
certificate of title. (Sec. 58 in relation to Sec. 50, publish the same in a newspaper?
PD No. 1529). A. Yes. Publication in a newspaper is still required to accord
with the due process requirement. (Roxas v. Court of
Appeals, 270 SCRA 309)
PUBLICATION, MAILING
AND NOTICE Q. The RTC failed to issue the order setting the date and hour
 Setting the date and hour of initial hearing of the initial hearing within five (5) days from the
 “The Court shall within 5 days from filing of the filing of the application for registration, as provided
the application, issue an order setting the date in the PRD, did that affect the court's jurisdiction?
and hour of the initial hearing which shall not be A. No. Observance of the five-day period was merely
earlier than 45 days nor later than 90 days from directory, and failure to issue the order within that
 period did not deprive the RTC of its jurisdiction. To • Role of the Solicitor General in registration cases
rule that compliance with the five-day period is  Under the Administrative Code of 1987, the
mandatory would make jurisdiction over the subject Solicitor General shall "[r]epresent the
matter dependent upon the trial court. (Republic v. Government in all land registration and related
Bantigue, GR No. GR No. 162322, March 14, 2012; proceedings."
Republic v. Manna, GR No. 146527, Jan. 31, 2005)  Pursuant to the Regalian doctrine, all lands of the
Q. FATCO filed an application for registration which was set public domain and all other natural resources are
for initial hearing on February 28. However, on owned by the State.
motion of FATCO’s counsel, the hearing was reset  It is the role of the Solicitor General to defend
for April 19? Was there need for the re-publication the interests of the government and to assure
of the notice of initial hearing? that lands of the public domain are adjudicated
A. No more since the Republic and all interested parties were only to qualified applicants or oppositors.
already fully apprised of the pendency of the
application. When the hearing was reset to April 19,
the interested parties, the Republic included, may be • Role of the Solicitor General
deemed to have been given notice thereof. Clearly,  As a rule only court notices and processes
the avowed purpose of Section 23 had already been actually served upon the SG is binding on his
accomplished. (FATCO v. Republic, GR No. 147459, office.
Match 28, 2008)  Deputized officers are under the direction and
control of the SG himself. (NPC v. NLRC, GR No.
Q. The court set the initial hearing on September 3, 1999 and 90933, May 29, 1997).
the hearing was in fact held on that date. While the  The government may appeal an adverse decision
notice of initial hearing was printed in the issue of the despite its not filing any opposition. (Republic v.
Official Gazette, dated August 2, 1999, and officially Tiotioen, GR No. 167215, Oct. 8, 2008; Republic
released on August 10, 1999, it was published in The v. CA and Arquillo, 182 SCRA 290)
Freeman Banat News, a daily newspaper printed in
Cebu City and circulated in the province and cities of
Cebu and in the rest of Visayas and Mindanao, only OPPOSITION
on December 19, 1999, more than three (3) months
after the initial hearing. Was there a valid  Who may properly oppose an application for
publication? registration?
 Any person claiming an interest, whether named
in the notice or not, may appear and file an
A. No. The publication of the notice, way after the date of the opposition on or before the date of initial
initial hearing, is worthless and ineffective. Whoever hearing, or within such further time as may be
read the notice as it was published in The Freeman allowed by the court. The opposition shall state
Banat News and had a claim to the subject lots was all the objections to the application and shall set
deprived of due process for it was already too late forth the interest claimed by the party filing the
for him to appear before the court on the day of the same and apply for the remedy desired, and shall
initial hearing to oppose the application for be signed and sworn to by him or by some other
registration, and to present his claim and evidence in duly authorized person. (Sec 25, PD 1529;
support of such claim. (Republic v. Herbieto, GR No. Director of Lands v. Santiago, GR No. L-41278,
156117, May 26, 2005) April 15, 1988)
Q. Where additional area is included in the original
application for registration, is a new publication  Any person claiming an interest or right of dominion may
necessary? appear and oppose the application for registration.
A. Yes. Publication is one of the essential bases of the  Where no opposition is made, all the allegations
jurisdiction of the court in land registration and in the application for registration shall be held as
cadastral cases. Where no publication has ever been confessed, and the claimant shall be deemed to
made except the initial publication, and this did not have forever lost his right to the land.
include the additional area, the registration court  But the absence of opposition does not justify
had no jurisdiction over said area and its the court into awarding the land to the applicant;
adjudication to the applicant is a nullity. (Philippine he must still submit well-nigh incontrovertible
Manufacturing Co. v. Imperial, GR No. 24908, March proof that he is entitled to registration. (Director
31, 1926) of Lands v. Agustin, 42 Phil. 227)
Q. Is a person who has a pending application for a parcel of clear and convincing evidence that the property
land with the Lands Management Bureau (LMB) involved was acquired by him or his ancestors by any
qualify for the registration of the same land under of the means provided for the proper acquisition of
the Torrens system of registration? public lands, the rule is that the property must be
A. No since the applicant, by the filing of his sales application, held to be a part of the public domain. (Martinez v.
manifestly acknowledges the character of the land Republic, supra)
as a public land under the administration of the Q. Is a motion to dismiss based on res judicata proper in
LMB. Therefore, his possession was not that of an registration proceedings?
owner, as required by law. (Director of Lands v. A. Yes. In Valisno v. Plan (GR No. L-55152, Aug. 19, 1986), the
Santiago, supra.) Court, applying the principle of res judicata,
sustained the applicant’s motion to dismiss the
opposition to his application for registration it
Q. Does the absence of any opposition by the government appearing that the land sought to be registered had
justify the outright registration of the land in favor of been previously litigated between the applicant and
the applicant? the oppositor in a civil case for recovery of
A. No. Notwithstanding the absence of opposition from the possession, resulting in a favorable judgment to the
government, the applicant is not relieved of the applicant. Sec. 34, PD 1529, provides that the Rules
burden of proving the imperfect right or title sought of Court shall be applicable to registration and
to be confirmed. He must show, even though there cadastral cases by analogy or in a suppletory
is no opposition, to the satisfaction of the court, that character. (See also Rule 132)
he is the absolute owner, in fee simple. (Director of
Lands v. Agustin, GR No. 16179, Oct. 6, 1921)  Principle of res judicata
• Order of default  Under the rule of res judicata, a final judgment or
 “If no person appears and answers within the decree on the merits by a court of competent
time allowed, the court shall, upon motion of the jurisdiction is conclusive of the rights of the
applicant, order a default to be recorded and parties or their privies, in all later suits and on all
require the applicant to present evidence. By the points and matters determined in the previous
description in the notice ‘To All Whom It May suit.
Concern,’ all the world are made parties  The principle bars a subsequent suit involving the
defendant and shall be concluded by the default same parties, subject matter, and cause of action.
order. Where an appearance has been entered The rationale for the rule is that "public policy
and an answer filed, a default order shall be requires that controversies must be settled with
entered against persons who did not appear and finality at a given point in time.“ (Topacio v.
answer. (Sec. 26, PD 1529) Banco Filipino, GR No. 157644, Nov. 17, 2010)
Q. May a party declared in default have the right to appeal  Elements of res judicata:
from the judgment by default? (a) former judgment must be final;
A. Yes. A defendant party declared in default retains the right (b) the court which rendered it had jurisdiction over
to appeal from the judgment by default on the the subject matter;
ground that the plaintiff failed to prove the material (c) the judgment must be on the merits;
allegations of the complaint, or that the decision is (d) there must be between the first and the second
contrary to law, even without need of the prior filing actions, identity of parties, subject matter
of a motion to set aside the order of default. and causes of action.
(Martinez v. Republic, GR No.160895, Oct. 30, 2006) • The doctrine does not require absolute but merely
substantial identity of the parties.
• The defense of res judicata may be waived if not set up
Q. What is the consequence of the government not filing any in a motion to dismiss.
opposition to the application for registration?
A. Where the Director of Lands did not oppose the
application and was, by order of the court, declared HEARING
in default, the order should not prejudice the
government since the Republic is usually not  The court shall decide the case within ninety (90) days
estopped by the mistake or error of its officials or from its submission. The court may refer the case or part
agents. (Republic v. Aquino, 205 Phil. 141) thereof to a referee who shall submit his report to the
Q. Who has the burden of proof in land registration cases? court within 15 days after its termination. (Sec. 27, PD
A. The burden of proof in land registration cases is incumbent 1529)
on the applicant who must show that he is the real  Applications for registration shall be heard by the
and absolute owner in fee simple of the land applied regional trial court or, in proper cases, by the first level
for. Unless the applicant succeeds in showing by courts.
 The applicant must show, by “well-nigh incontro- vertible land classification map and the particular issuance or
proof,” and even in the absence of opposition, that he is order which was used as basis for such classification.”)
the absolute owner of the land.
• DENR level of authority on land classification
Q. Is a motion to dismiss proper in a registration case? • Secretary: Land classification and release of
A. Yes, based, for instance, on res judicata. The PRD does not lands of the public domain as alienable and
provide for a pleading similar or corresponding to a disposable (A and D)
motion to dismiss. However, Section 34 provides • Secretary: Sub-classification of forest lands
that the Rules of Court which are not inconsistent according to use
with the provisions of the Decree shall be applicable • PENRO: Issuance of certificate of
to land registration and cadastral cases by analogy classification whether timber land or A
or in a suppletory character and whenever and D – above 50.0 has.
practicable and convenient. (Valisno v. Plan, GR No. • CENRO: Issuance of certificate of
L-55152, Aug. 19, 1986). classification whether timber land or A
and D – below 50.0 has.
 What overt acts may prove possession in the concept of
EVIDENCE OF OWNERSHIP owner?
 Introducing valuable improvements on the land
• The burden of overcoming the presumption of State like fruit-bearing trees;
ownership of lands of the public domain lies on the  Fencing the area
person applying for registration.  Constructing a residential house thereon; and
 The government, in opposing the purported  Declaring the land for taxation purposes.
nature of the land, need not adduce evidence to  In a practical and scientific way of planting, a one-
prove otherwise. hectare land can be planted to 144 coconut trees.
 To overcome the presumption of State  It takes only 10 years for mango trees , and 5 years for
ownership of public dominion lands, the coconuts trees, to begin bearing fruit. Republic v. CA and
applicant must present incontrovertible evidence Chavez, 167 SCRA 150)
that the land subject of the application is
alienable or disposable. (Republic v. Alaminos Ice Q. Both Section 48(b) of the Public Land Act and Section 14(1)
Plant, GR No. 189723, July 11, 2018) of the Property Registration Decree require
“possession and occupation” of the land applied for.
 To prove the classification of the land as A and D, the Explain.
application for original registration must be A. Possession is broader than occupation because it includes
accompanied by: constructive possession. When, therefore, the law
(1) CENRO or PENRO Certification that land is A and adds the word occupation, it seeks to delimit the all
D; and encompassing effect of constructive possession.
(2) Copy of the original classification approved by Taken together with the words open, continuous,
the DENR Secretary and certified as a true exclusive and notorious, the word occupation serves
copy by the legal custodian thereof. to highlight the fact that for an applicant to qualify,
(Republic v. Bantigue, GR No. 162322, his possession must not be a mere fiction. (Republic v.
March 14, 2012; Republic v. Dela Paz, GR Enciso, GR No. 160145, Nov. 11, 2005)
No. 171631, Nov. 5, 2010; Republic v.
T.A.N, 555 SCRA 477)
 (Note: In Gaerlan v. Republic, GR No. 192717, March 12, • Are tax declarations and tax receipts proof of
2014, the Court held that the CENRO/PENRO ownership?
certification is not sufficient evidence of the facts stated • Tax declarations and tax receipts are not
therein). conclusive evidence of ownership but they are a
good indicia of possession in the concept of
 Policy clarification by DENR Memorandum No. 564, owner. (Llanes v. Republic, 572 SCA 258) A tax
dated Nov. 15, 2012 declaration merely prove payment of taxes.
 The DENR clarified that “the issuance of the • But when coupled with actual possession,
certification and the certified copy of the payment of taxes is evidence of great weight and
approved LC Map to prove that the area applied can be the basis of a claim of ownership through
for is indeed classified as A and D is within the prescription. (Republic v. Alconaba, 427 SCRA
competence and jurisdiction of the CENRO.” 611)
 (Note: A separate administrative order was issued • Taxes must be paid annually.
“delegating to the CENRO the authority to issue the
certification and the certified true copy of the approved
Q. The applicant paid all taxes for the period 1946 to 1976 value” for registration purposes. (Republic v.
only in 1976, a few months prior to the filing of the Vera, GR No. L-35778, Jan. 27, 1983)
application for registration. How does this affect the Q. Is the submission of the tracing cloth plan mandatory?
legitimacy of applicant’s claim over the property? A. In the early case of Director of Lands v. Reyes, GR No.L-
A. The payment of taxes on a lump sum basis just before the 27594, Nov. 28, 1975, the Court declared that the
filing of the application for registration may submission of the tracing cloth plan is a statutory
adversely affect the validity of the applicant’s claim requirement of mandatory character.
to the land as said payment, made belatedly and in But later decisions of the Court state that the original
lump sum, taints the sincerity of his claim of tracing cloth plan may be substituted with either the
ownership and indicates that it was resorted only to white print or blue print copy of the plan, duly
lend some semblance of legitimacy to such claim. certified as correct or the correctness of which has
Taxes are supposed to be paid annually. (Republic v. not been overcome by convincing evidence.
CA and Infante-Tayag, GR No. L-61462, July 31, 1984) (Director of Lands v. IAC and Espartinez, GR No. GR
No. 70825, March 11, 1991; Republic v. CA and
• Identity of the land Chavez, GR No. L-62680, Nov. 9, 1988)
• Land must be surveyed to establish its identity,
location and area. Only the LMB Director may Q. In case of conflict between areas and boundaries, which
approve survey plans for original registration prevails?
purposes. (PD 239, July 9, 1973) A. In case of conflict between areas and boundaries, the latter
• There is now no need to present the tracing prevails. What really defines a piece of ground is not
cloth plan of the land. A certified blue print or the area, calculated with more or less certainty,
white print copy of the plan suffices for mentioned in its description, but the boundaries
registration purposes. (Director of Lands v. CA therein laid down, as enclosing the land and
and Iglesia ni Cristo, 158 SCRA 586) indicating its limits. In a contract of sale of land in a
mass, the specific boundaries stated in the contract
• Rule in determining area in case of conflict must control over any statement with respect to the
• What defines a piece of titled property is not the area. (Dichoso v. Court of Appeals, GR No. 55613,
numerical data indicated as the area of the land, Dec. 10, 1990)
but the boundaries or "metes and bounds" of • Possession and occupation as proof of ownership
the property specified in its technical  Possession must be under a claim of ownership.
description as enclosing it and showing its limits.  Acts of a possessory character by one who holds
(Rep. v. CA and Santos, GR No. 116111, Jan. 21, the property by mere tolerance of the owner is
1969, 301 SCRA 366). not in the concept of owner, and do not start the
• What defines a piece of land is not the area, period of prescription.
calculated with more or less certainty  Actual possession consists of acts of dominion of
mentioned in the description, but the such a nature as a party would naturally exercise
boundaries therein laid down, as enclosing the over his own property.
land and indicating its limits. (Balantakbo v. CA,  Occupation delimits the all-encompassing effect
GR No. 108515, Oct. 16, 1995) of constructive possession.

 Importance of a survey plan  Rule of preference in case of conflict of possession

 One of the distinguishing marks of the Torrens  The present possessor shall be preferred;
system is the absolute certainty of the identity of  If there two possessors, the one longer in
a registered land. possession;
 Consequently, the primary purpose of the  If the dates of the possession are the same,
requirement that the land must be first surveyed the one who presents a title; and
is to fix the exact or definite identity of the land.  If both possessors have titles, the court shall
 The survey plots the location, the area and the determine the rightful possessor and owner
boundaries of the property. (De Guzman v. Court of the land. (Art. 538, CC)
of Appeals, GR No, 185757, March2, 2016) • Mere possession will not defeat the title of a holder of
 Only the Lands Management Bureau (LMB) may now registered land. (Eduarte v. CA, 253 SCRA 391)
verify and approve survey plans for original registration  What overt acts may prove possession in the concept of
purposes pursuant to PD No. 239, dated July 9, 1973. owner?
 The Land Registration Authority (LRA) has no  Introducing valuable improvements on the land
authority to approve original survey plans nor to like fruit-bearing trees;
check the correctness thereof. A survey plan  Fencing the area
which is not approved by the Director of Lands  Constructing a residential house thereon; and
(or Regional Technical Director) is “not of much  Declaring the land for taxation purposes.
 In a practical and scientific way of planting, a one- 2016; Paraguya v. Crucillo, GR No. 200265, Dec/
hectare land can be planted to 144 coconut trees. 2. 2013)
 It takes only 10 years for mango trees , and 5 years for
coconuts trees, to begin bearing fruit. Republic v. CA and
Chavez, 167 SCRA 150)  The Supreme Court is not a trier of facts; exceptions:
 when the findings are grounded entirely on
Q. Both Section 48(b) of the Public Land Act and Section 14(1) speculation, surmises or conjectures;
of the Property Registration Decree require  when the inference made is manifestly
“possession and occupation” of the land applied for. mistaken, absurd or impossible;
Explain.  when there is grave abuse of discretion;
A. Possession is broader than occupation because it includes  when the judgment is based on a
constructive possession. When, therefore, the law misapprehension of facts;
adds the word occupation, it seeks to delimit the all  when the findings of facts are conflicting;
encompassing effect of constructive possession.  when in making its findings the CA went beyond
Taken together with the words open, continuous, the issues of the case, or its findings are
exclusive and notorious, the word occupation serves contrary to the admissions of both the appellant
to highlight the fact that for an applicant to qualify, and the appellee;
his possession must not be a mere fiction. (Republic • when the findings are contrary to the trialcourt;
v. Enciso, GR No. 160145, Nov. 11, 2005) • when the findings are conclusions without citation
of specific evidence on which they are based;
• when the facts set forth in the petition as well as
• Are tax declarations and tax receipts proof of in the petitioner’s main and reply briefs are not
ownership? disputed by the respondent;
• Tax declarations and tax receipts are not • when the findings of fact are premised on the
conclusive evidence of ownership but they are a supposed absence of evidence and contradicted
good indicia of possession in the concept of by the evidence on record; and
owner. (Llanes v. Republic, 572 SCA 258) A tax • when the CA manifestly overlooked certain
declaration merely prove payment of taxes. relevant facts not disputed by the parties, which if
• But when coupled with actual possession, properly considered, would justify a different
payment of taxes is evidence of great weight and conclusion. (Tyson’s Super Concrete v. CA, 461
can be the basis of a claim of ownership through SCRA 69)
prescription. (Republic v. Alconaba, 427 SCRA
611)
• Taxes must be paid annually. JUDGMENT
Q. The applicant paid all taxes for the period 1946 to 1976
only in 1976, a few months prior to the filing of the  What are the kinds of judgment?
application for registration. How does this affect the  (1) A judgment in rem is binding upon the whole
legitimacy of applicant’s claim over the property? world, such as a judgment in a land registration
A. The payment of taxes on a lump sum basis just before the case or probate of a will; (2) a judgment in
filing of the application for registration may personam is binding upon the parties and their
adversely affect the validity of the applicant’s claim successors-in-interest but not upon strangers,
to the land as said payment, made belatedly and in and (3) a judgment directing a party to deliver
lump sum, taints the sincerity of his claim of possession of a property to another is in
ownership and indicates that it was resorted only to personam; it is binding only against the parties
lend some semblance of legitimacy to such claim. and their successors-in-interest by title
Taxes are supposed to be paid annually. (Republic v. subsequent to the commencement of the action.
CA and Infante-Tayag, GR No. L-61462, July 31, 1984)  An action for declaration of nullity of title and
 Are Spanish titles efficacious proof of ownership? recovery of ownership of real property, or
 Pursuant to PD No. 892, dated Feb. 16, 1976, reconveyance, is a real action but it is an action in
Spanish titles may no longer be used as evidence pe rsonam, for it binds a particular individual
of land ownership only.(Muñoz v. Yabut, GR No. 142676, June 6,
 The proliferation of dubious Spanish titles have 2011)
raised conflicting claims of ownership and tended  Judgment confirming title
to destabilize the Torrens system of registration.  “All conflicting claims of ownership and interest
 Case study: Intestate Estate of Don Mariano San in the land subject of the application shall be
Pedro y Esteban v. Court of Appeals, 265 SCRA determined by the court. If the court, after
733; Dumanlag v. Blanco, A.C. No. 8825, Aug. 3, considering the evidence and the reports of the
Commissioner of Land Registration and the
 Director of Lands, finds that the applicant or the conveyance, is a real action but it is an action in
oppositor has sufficient title proper for personam, for it only binds the parties impleaded
registration, judgment shall be rendered although it concerns the right to a tangible
confirming the title of the applicant, or the thing.(Muñoz v. Yabut, GR No. 142676, June 6,
oppositor, to the land or portions thereof.” (Sec. 2011)
29, PD 1529)
 The judgment confirms the title of the applicant or the  Execution pending appeal not required
oppositor. Partial judgment is proper where a subdivision  Execution pending appeal is not applicable in a
plan is submitted. (Sec. 28) land registration proceeding and the certificate
 Judgment becomes final after fifteen (15) days of title thereby issued is null and void.
from receipt of notice of the judgment.  A Torrens title issued on the basis of a judgment
 Court retains jurisdiction until after the entry of that is not final is a nullity, as it is violative of the
the final decree of registration. (Gomez v CA, 168 explicit provisions of the Land Registration Act
SCRA 503) which requires that a decree shall be issued only
 Principle of res judicata is applicable to after the decision adjudicating the title becomes
registration proceedings. (Aring v. Original, a6 final and executory, and it is on the basis of said
SCRA 1021) decree that the Register of Deeds concerned
issues the corresponding certificate of title. (Top
 Motion for execution of judgment not required Management v. Fajardo, supra)
 Upon finality of judgment in land registration
cases, the winning party does not file a motion  No period within which decree may be issued
for execution as in ordinary civil actions. Instead,  The fact that no decree has as yet been issued
he files a petition with the court for the issuance cannot divest the applicant of his title to and
of an order directing the LRA to issue a decree of ownership of the land in question. There is
registration, a copy of which is then sent to the nothing in the law that limits the period within
Register of Deeds for inscription in the which the court may issue a decree. The reason is
registration book, and issuance of the original that the judgment is merely declaratory in
certificate of title. character and does not need to be enforced
 The LRA merely issues an order for the issuance against the adverse party. (Del Rosario v.
of a decree of registration and the corresponding Limcaoco, GR No. 177392, Nov. 26, 2012)
certificate of title in the name of such applicant.  From another perspective, the judgment does
(Top Management Programs Corp. v. Fajardo, GR not have to be executed by motion or enforced
No.150462, June 15, 2011) by action within the purview of Rule 39 of the
 No period within which decree may be issued 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure. (Republic v. Nillas,
 The fact that no decree has as yet been issued GR No. 159595, Jan. 23, 2007)
cannot divest the applicant of his title to and
ownership of the land in question. There is
nothing in the law that limits the period within WRIT OF POSSESSION
which the court may issue a decree. The reason is  In what instances may a writ of posession be issued?
that the judgment is merely declaratory in  (a) land registration proceeding which is in rem;
character and does not need to be enforced  (b) extrajudicial foreclosure of realty;
against the adverse party. (Del Rosario v.  (c) judicial foreclosure of mortgage which is a quasi
Limcaoco, GR No. 177392, Nov. 26, 2012) in rem; and
 From another perspective, the judgment does  (d) execution sales.
not have to be executed by motion or enforced  A writ of possession may be issued not only against the
by action within the purview of Rule 39 of the person defeated in the land registration case but also
1997 Rules of Civil Procedure. (Republic v. Nillas, against anyone unlawfully occupying the land during the
GR No. 159595, Jan. 23, 2007) pendency of the proceedings up to the issuance of the
• A judgment in rem is binding upon the whole world, final decree. (Vencilao v. Vano, 182 SCRA 491
such as a judgment in a land registration case or probate  Can the Sheriff unilaterally remove or demolish the
of a will; and a judgment in personam is binding upon improvements?
the parties and their successors-in-interest but not upon  The sheriff cannot remove or demolish the
strangers. improvements except upon special order of the
• A judgment directing a party to deliver court. (Tumibay v. Soro, GR 152016, April 12,
possession of a property to another is in 2010)
personam.  The writ will not issue against persons taking
• An action for declaration of nullity of title and possession after issuance of the final decree.
recovery of ownership of real property, or re-
  The remedy is to file a separate action for  A person who took possession of the land after
forcible entry or detainer, or a reivindicatory final judgment in registration proceedings cannot
action. (Bernas v. Nueva,127 SCA 399) be summarily ousted through a writ of
possession secured by a mere motion and that
 In De la Rosa v. Valdez, GR No. 159101, July 27, 2011, regardless of any title or lack of title of persons to
the Court ruled: hold possession of the land in question, they
 There are ample justifications for the grant by cannot be ousted without giving them their day
the RTC of a writ that places the subject property in court in proper independent proceedings.
in the possession of the spouses Valdez and (Bernas v. Nuevo, 127 SCRA 399)
spouses Malvar for the duration of the trial of  Is failure to vacate a ground for contempt proceedings?
Civil Case No. 00-6015. Sales Patent No. 38713,  Under Section 3 (d), Rule 19, Rules of Court, the
covering the subject property, had already been writ of execution must require the sheriff to
issued to Juan Valdez which makes him, at the deliver the possession of the property to the
very least, the equitable owner of the said party entitled thereto. The sheriff must
property. There is already a request for the dispossess or eject the losing party from the
registration of Sales Patent No. 38713 pending premises and deliver the possession thereof to
before the Registry of Deeds of Marikina City. . the winning party.
....................  If subsequent to such dispossession or ejectment
the losing party enters or attempts to enter into
 The spouses Valdez acknowledge the transfer of or upon the real property, for the purpose of
the subject property to the spouses Malvar. The exercising acts of ownership or possession, or in
spouses Dela Rosa's title is based on TCT No. any manner disturbs the possession of the
451423-A in Cristeta dela Rosa's name, which is person adjudged to be entitled thereto, only then
not registered with the Registry of Deeds of may the loser be charged with and punished for
Marikina City or Antipolo City. TCT No. 451423-A contempt . (Vencilao v. Vano, 182 SCRA 491).
is also traced back to Titulo de Propriedad No. Q. Does failure of the government to file opposition deprive it
4136, which, in the Intestate Estate of the late of right to appeal?
Don Mariano San Pedro y Esteban v. Court of A. No. In Republic v. Tiotioen, GR No. 167215, Oct. 8, 2008,
Appeals, 23 was already declared null and void, the Court held:
and from which no rights could be derived. “ x x x the belated filing of an appeal by the
State, or even its failure to file an
opposition, in a land registration case
 In Tumibay v. Soro, supra, the Court held: because of the mistake or error on the part
 “A judgment for the delivery or restitution of of its officials or agents does not deprive
property is essentially an order to place the the government of its right to appeal from a
prevailing party in possession of the property. If judgment of the court.”
the defendant refuses to surrender possession of
the property to the prevailing party, the sheriff or
other proper officer should oust him. No express DECREE OF REGISTRATION
order to this effect needs to be stated in the
decision; nor is a categorical statement needed in • A decree of registration is an order issued under the
the decision that in such event the sheriff or signature of the Administrator, LRA, in the name of the
other proper officer shall have the authority to court, stating that the land described therein is
remove the improvements on the property if the registered in the name of the applicant or oppositor or
defendant fails to do so within a reasonable claimant as the case may be..
period of time. • Upon issuance of the decree, the Administrator
 The removal of the improvements on the land sends a certified copy thereof, under seal of his
under these circumstances is deemed read into office, to the RD of the province or city where the
the decision, subject only to the issuance of a land lies, and the RD transcribes the decree in a
special order by the court for the removal of the book, called the “Registration Book," in which a
improvements.” leaf, or leaves, in consecutive order shall be
 When is a separate action, not writ of possession, devoted exclusively to each title. The entry made
necessary? by the Register of Deeds in said book constitutes
 When parties against whom a writ of possession the original certificate of title and is signed by him
is sought entered into possession apparently and sealed with the seal of his office.
after the issuance of the final decree, the writ of
possession will not issue.
The decree of registration shall bind the land and quiet title the Register of Deeds of the city or province
thereto, subject to exceptions or liens as may be provided by where the land lies.” (Sec. 39, PD 1529)
law. (Sec. 31, PD No. 1529)  The certificate is an indefeasible evidence of
It shall be conclusive against all persons, including the ownership of the person whose name appears
government and its branches. (Ibid.) therein. (Panganiban v. Dayrit, 464 SCRA 370).
Land becomes registered land only upon the Entry of original certificate of title
transcription of the decree in the book of the Register “Upon receipt by the RD of the original and duplicate
of Deeds, and not on the date of the issuance of the copies of the title, the same shall be entered in the
decree. (Manotok v. CLT Realty, GR No. 123346, day book and shall be numbered, dated, signed and
March 31, 2009) sealed. Said certificate of title shall take effect upon
Q. What is the effect and importance of a decree of the entry thereof. The RD shall then send notice by
registration? mail to the registered owner that his owner’s copy is
A. A decree of registration bars all claims and rights which ready for delivery to him upon payment of legal fees.”
arose or may have existed prior to the decree of (Sec. 40)
registration. By the issuance of the decree, the land “The original certificate of title shall be a true copy of
is bound and title thereto quieted, subject only to the decree of registration. It shall state the names of
exceptions stated in Section 44 of PD No. 1529. the registered owners and their status. If the property
The Torrens title becomes indefeasible and is conjugal the title shall be issued in the names of
incontrovertible one year from the issuance of the both spouses.”
final decree and is generally conclusive evidence of  Contents of a certificate of title
the ownership of the land referred to therein.  Every certificate of title shall set forth the full
(Calalang v. Register of Deeds, GR No. 76265, March names of the registered owners and their status.
11, 1994) If the property belongs to the conjugal
partnership, it shall be issued in the names of
both spouses.
• A registration court has no jurisdiction to decree again  All property of the marriage is presumed to
land already decreed in a prior case. (Laburada v. LRA, belong to the conjugal partnership, unless it be
287 SCRA 333) proved that it pertains exclusively to the husband
 An application for registration of a titled land or to the wife. (Art. 160, CC)
constitutes a collateral attack on the existing  When the property is registered in the name of a
title. (SM Prime Holdings v. Madayag, 578 SCRA spouse only and there is no showing as to when
552) the property was acquired, this indicates that the
 Title is deemed issued upon transcription of the property belongs exclusively to said spouse. (PNB
decree. (Manotok Realty v. CLT, 540 SCRA 304) v, Vitug, 153 SCRA 435)
MAYSILO ESTATE CASE – “LAND OF CAVEAT EMPTOR” • A certificate of title may be an original certificate of title,
Q. When is a certificate of title deemed registered – the date which constitutes a true copy of the decree of
of the issuance of the decree of registration on April registration, or a transfer certificate of title, issued
19, 1917, or the date the decree was transcribed in subsequent to original registration.
the Office of the RD on May 3, 1917? • The title serves as evidence of an indefeasible
A. The original certificate of title is deemed issued on the and incontrovertible title one year after the
DATE THE DECREE OF REGISTRATION IS issuance of the decree of registration by the LRA.
TRANSCRIBED since what stands as the certificate is (Del Prado v. Caballero, GR No. 148225, March 3,
the transcript of the decree of registration made by 2010)
the RD in the registry. (Manotok v. CLT Realty, 540 • A person dealing with registered land need not
SCRA 304) go beyond, but only has to rely on, the title of his
predecessor. (Guaranteed Homes v. Valdez, 577
SCRA 441)
CERTIFICATE OF TITLE

 Issuance of decree and certificate of title DISTINCTION BETWEEN “TITLE” AND “CERTIFICATE OF TITLE”
 “Within 15 days from entry of the judgment, the
court shall direct the LRA Administrator to issue  Title may be defined as that which constitutes a
the decree of registration and prepare the just cause of exclusive possession, or which is the
original and duplicate certificate of title based foundation of ownership of property.
thereon. The original certificate of title, signed by  Certificate of title, on the other hand, is a mere
him, shall be a true copy of the decree, and shall evidence of ownership; it is not the title to the
be sent, together with the owner’s duplicate, to land itself. (Castillo v. Escutin, GR No. 171056,
March 13, 2009, 581 SCRA 258)
 public highway (d) limitation on the use of property
 The Torrens system requires the government to issue a under agrarian reform and public land laws (e) liability to
certificate of title stating that the person named in the attachment or levy on execution (f) taking under eminent
title is the owner of the property described therein, domain proceedings. (Sec. 44, PD No. 1529)
subject to liens and encumbrances annotated on the • Purpose: to give the registered owner an absolutely
title or reserved by law. clean title, not subject to hidden defects or
 The title is indefeasible and imprescriptible and inchoate claims, as well as restrictions except those
all claims to the parcel of land are quieted upon appearing in the certificate or imposed by the law.
issuance of the certificate. (Decaleng v. Phil.  The decree does not relieve the land or the registered
Episcopal Church, GR No. 171209, June 27, 2012) owner from any rights incident to:
 The relation of husband and wife, landlord and
 The placing a parcel of land under the mantle of the tenant;
Torrens system does not mean that ownership thereof  From liability to attachment or levy on execution;
can no longer be disputed.  From liability to any lien of any description
 Ownership is different from a certificate of title, established by law on the land and buildings
the latter only serving as the best proof of thereon; or
ownership over a piece of land.  Change the laws of descent, rights of partition, or
 Mere issuance of the certificate of title in the right to take the same by eminent domain; or
name of any person does not foreclose the  Relieve such land from liability to any assignee in
possibility that the real property may be under insolvency or bankruptcy; or
co-ownership with persons not named in the  Change or affect other rights or liabilities created
certificate, or that the registrant may only be a by law (Sec. 46, PD 1529)
trustee, or that other parties may have acquired
interest over the property subsequent to the
issuance of the certificate of title. (Lacbayan v. VOLUNTARY DEALINGS
Samoy, GR No. 165427, March 21, 2011) WITH REGISTERED LAND
• A certificate of title issued pursuant to administrative
proceedings is as indefeasible as any title issued through  Any registered owner may convey, mortgage, lease or
judicial proceedings – otherwise deal with the land. (Sec. 51. PD No. 1529).
 provided the land is a disposable public land, and  Every conveyance or disposition of registered
becomes incontrovertible one year after the land, if registered, is constructive notice to all
issuance of the patent. (Republic v. Carle, 105 persons from the time of registration. (Sec. 52,
Phil. 1227) PD 1529; Guaranteed Homes v. Valdez, 577 SCA
 A certificate of title based on an emancipation 441)
patent under PD No. 27 also enjoys the same  But knowledge of an unregistered sale is
protection as a certificate issued judicially or equivalent to registration. (Fernandez v. CA, 189
administratively. (Lonoy v. Sec. of Agrarian SCRA 780)
Reform, R No. 175049, Nov. 27, 2008)  Contracts are obligatory in whatever form provided the
essential requisites of consent, object and cause of the
 Rule: title earlier in date prevails obligation is established
 On the assumption that there was regularity in  Donation of real property must be in a public
the registration leading to the eventual issuance instrument to be valid. For a mortgage to be
of subject transfer certificates of title, the better validly constituted, the document must be
approach is to trace the original certificates from recorded.
which the certificates of title in dispute were  Agreements mentioned in the Statute of
derived. Should there be only one common Frauds, to be enforceable, must be in writing
original certificate of title, . . ., the transfer and subscribed by the party charged.
certificate issued on an earlier date along the line  Sale of real estate is valid regardless of form
must prevail, absent any anomaly or irregularity but is effective against third persons only from
tainting the process of registration. (Top date of registration.
Management Programs Corp. v. Fajardo, GR
No.150462, June 15, 2011)  Between two transactions concerning the same land,
the registered transaction prevails over the earlier
unregistered right
STATUTORY LIENS AFFECTING REGISTERED LAND  Thus, where a purchaser files an adverse claim to
• Every registered owner holds title free from registered land only after the same was already
encumbrances except: (a) liens or rights not required by mortgaged to the bank, upon the claim that he
law to be registered (b) unpaid real estate taxes (c) bought the land “long before” the mortgage, the
 right of the bank to the property is superior to  Between two transactions concerning the same
that of the purchaser. (Unchuan v. CA, 161 SCA land, the registered transaction prevails over the
710) earlier unregistered right. (Fudot v. Cattleya, 533
 If two certificates of title purport to include the SCRA 350)
same land, whether wholly or partly, the better
approach is to trace the original certificates from
which the certificates of titles were derived. VOLUNTARY AND INVOLUNTARY REGISTRATION
(Bangis v. Adolfo, GR No. 190875, June 13, 2012)
 Voluntary and involuntary registration distinguished
 Registration of instrument affecting registered land is  Voluntary registration – the purchaser becomes
ministerial on the part of the RD the registered owner upon the (a) filing and entry
 The law on registration does not require that of the deed sale in the day book, (b) surrender of
only valid instruments shall be registered. the owner’s duplicate certificate of title to the RD
(Autocorp v. Court of Appeals, GR 175553, Sept. and (c) payment of registration fees.
8, 2004)  Involuntary registration – registration is complete
 Questions regarding the effect or invalidity of upon filing and entry of the order (e.g., of
instruments are expected to be decided after, attachment, levy upon execution, notice or lis
not before, registration. pendens, etc.) in the day book of the RD, without
 Thus, registration must first be allowed, and the need of presenting the owner’s duplicate.
matter of validity or effect litigated afterwards.  In voluntary registration, such as a sale, mortgage, lease
 But if the RD is in doubt as to the proper action and the like,
to take, he shall elevate the matter en consulta  if the owner's duplicate certificate be not
to the LRA for resolution. (Sec. 117, PD 1529) surrendered and presented, or
• Rule in case of sale of conjugal property  if no payment of registration fees be made within
• Under Art. 124 of the Family Code, the sale of fifteen (15) days, entry in the day book of the
conjugal property requires the consent of both deed of sale does not operate to convey and
husband and wife. affect the land sold.
• The absence of consent of one renders the sale  In involuntary registration, such as an attachment, levy
null and void, including the portion pertaining to upon execution, lis pendens and the like, entry thereof
the spouse who contracted the sale. (Guiang v. in the day book is a sufficient notice to all persons of
Court of Appeals, 353 Phil. 578) such adverse claim. (Bulaong v. Gonzales, GR No.
• Under Art. 173 of the Civil Code, the disposition 156318, Sept. 5, 2011)
of conjugal property without the wife’s consent is
not void but merely voidable, and the wife may
within 10 years ask the court for the annulment
of the contract. JURISDICTION INVOLVING
“TITLE TO, OR POSSESSION OF, REAL PROPERTY”
 Art. 161 of the Civil Code provides that the conjugal
partnership shall be liable for debts and obligations  Regional Trial Courts shall have exclusive original
contracted by the wife for the benefit of the conjugal jurisdiction:
partnership. (Alfredo v. Borras, 404 SCRA 145)  In all civil actions which involve the title to, or
 In a contract of sale, title to the property passes possession of, real property, or any interest
to the vendee upon delivery of the thing sold; in therein, where the assessed value of the
a contract to sell, ownership is, by agreement, property involved exceeds Twenty thousand
reserved in the vendor and is not to pass to the pesos (P20,000,00) or for civil actions in Metro
vendee until full payment of the purchase price. Manila, where such value exceeds Fifty thousand
 Sale of real property in a public instrument is pesos (P50,000.00) except actions for forcible
equivalent to the delivery thereof if the contrary entry into and unlawful detainer of lands or
does not appear. buildings, original jurisdiction over which is
 Dacion en pago is the delivery and transmission of conferred upon the Metropolitan Trial Courts,
ownership of a thing by the debtor to the creditor as an Municipal Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial
accepted equivalent of the performance of t he Courts. (Sec. 19(2), BP 129, amended by RA No.
obligation. 7691)
 Registration in the public registry is notice to the  Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts, and
whole world. Municipal Circuit Trial Courts shall exercise:
 Knowledge of an unregistered sale is equivalent  Exclusive original jurisdiction in all civil actions
to registration. (Fernandez v. CA, 189 SCRA 780) which involve title to, or possession of, real
property, or any interest therein where the
 assessed value of the property or interest therein  Requisites:
does not exceed Twenty thousand pesos (a) petitioner must have an interest in land;
(P20,000.00) or, in civil actions in Metro Manila, (b) petition is based on actual or extrinsic
where such assessed value does not exceed Fifty fraud;
thousand pesos (P50,000.00) exclusive of (c) petition is filed within one year fro the
interest, damages of whatever kind, attorney's issuance of the decree of registration; and
fees, litigation expenses and costs. (Ibid) (d) property has not yet passed to innocent
 Example purchaser for value. (Walstrom v. Mapa, 314
 Actions for cancellation of title and reversion Phil. 527)
belong to the class of cases that "involve the title
to, or possession of, real property, or any interest  Sec. 32, PD No. 1529. Review of Decree provides:
therein" and where the assessed value of the  “The decree of registration shall not be reopened
property exceeds P20,000.00, fall under the or revised by reason of absence, minority, or
jurisdiction of the RTC. (Republic v. Roman other disability of any person adversely affected
Catholic Archbishop, GR No. 192975, Nov. 12, thereby, nor by any proceeding in any court for
2012; Santos v. CA, 214 SCRA 162) reversing judgments, subject, however, to the
right of zany person, including the government
and the branches thereof, deprived of land or of
REMEDIES any estate or interest therein by such
adjudication of confirmation of title obtained by
REVIEW OF DECREE actual fraud, to file in the proper Regional Trial
Court a petition for reopening and review of the
• The remedies are: decree of registration not later than one year
from and after the date of the entry of such
(1) Petition for review of decree under Section 32; decree of registration, but in no case shall such
(2) Action for reconveyance under Sections 53 and petition be entertained by the court where an
96; innocent purchaser for value has acquired the
(3) Action for damages under Section 32; and land or an interest therein, whose rights may be
(4) Claim for compensation against the Assurance prejudiced. Whenever the phrase ‘innocent
Fund under Section 95. purchaser for value’ or an equivalent phrase
occurs in this Decree, it shall be deemed to
include an innocent lessee, mortgagee, or other
 Other remedies include: encumbrancer for value. Upon the expiration of
(1) Action for cancellation and reversion instituted said period of one year, the decree of
by the government, through the registration and the certificate of title shall
Solicitor General, under Section 101 of become incontrovertible. Any person aggrieved
the Public Land Act (CA No. 141); by such decree of registration in any case may
(2) Annulment of judgment under Rule 47 of the pursue his remedy by action for damages against
Rules of Court; and the applicant or any other persons responsible
(3) Criminal prosecution under the Revised Penal for the fraud.”
Code.

Q. Distinguish between extrinsic and intrinsic fraud

A. Extrinsic fraud is the fraudulent act of the successful party
committed outside the trial of a case against the
PETITION FOR REVIEW OF A DECREE defeated party which prevented the latter from
 Explain – what is the remedy of a petition for review? fairly presenting his case.
 In Eland Philippines v. Garcia, GR No. 173289, Feb. Intrinsic fraud refers to acts of a party in a litigation
17, 2010, the Court, citing Agcaoili, “Property during the trial, such as the use of forged
Registration Decree and Related Laws”, held that: instruments or perjured testimony, which did not
 courts may reopen the proceedings where a affect the presentation of the case, but did prevent a
petition for review is filed within one year from fair and just determination of the case. (Palanca v.
the issuance of the decree of registration, American Food Manufacturing, 24 SCRA 819)
based on actual or extrinsic fraud, and the
property has not yet passed to a innocent
purchaser for value.
 Illustrative instances of fraud: Palanca v. American, before the issuance of the decree. (Mun. of Hagonoy v.
supra: Secretary, 73 SCRA 507)
 “Where the unsuccessful party had been • If property is acquired through mistake or fraud, the
prevented from exhibiting fully his case, by fraud person obtaining it is, by force of law, considered a
or deception practiced on him by his opponent, trustee of an implied trust for the benefit of the person
as by keeping him away from court; a false from whom the property comes.
promise of a compromise; or where the  An action for reconveyance based on implied
defendant never had knowledge of the suit, trust prescribes in 10 years as it is an obligation
being kept in ignorance by the acts of the created by law, to be counted from the date of
plaintiff; or where an attorney fraudulently or issuance of the Torrens title over the property.
without authority assumes to represent a party  This rule, however, applies only when the
and connives at his defeat; or where the attorney plaintiff or the person enforcing the trust is not in
regularly employed corruptly sells out his client's possession of the property. (PNB v. Jumanoy, GR
interest to the other side - these, and similar No. 169901, Aug. 3, 2011)
cases, x x x are reasons for which a new suit may
be sustained to set aside and annul the former
judgment or decree, and open the case for a new
and fair hearing.” Q. May an action for reconveyance be filed even before the
issuance of the decree of registration?
A. Yes. In Municipality of Hagonoy v. Secretary of Agriculture
ACTION FOR RECONVEYANCE and Natural Resources, GR No.L-27595, Oct. 26,
1976, the Court explained: “The petition for
• What is an action for reconveyance? reopening of the decree which may be filed within
• It is a legal and equitable remedy granted to the one (1) year from the issuance of the said decree is
rightful landowner, whose land was wrongfully or not the exclusive remedy of, and does not bar any
erroneously registered in the name of another, other remedy to which the aggrieved party may be
to compel the registered owner to transfer or entitled.
reconvey the land to him.
• The action respects the decree of registration as
incontrovertible but seeks the transfer of • Prescription of action for reconveyance
property, wrongfully or erroneously registered in  Action based on fraud – 4 years
another person’s name, to its rightful owner or a  Action based on implied trust – 10 years
person who has a better right. (Alde v. Bernal, GR  Action based on void contract – imprescriptible
No. 169336, March 18, 2010; Ybañez v. IAC, 194  Action to quiet title where plaintiff is in
SCRA 793; Gonzales v. IAC, 157SCRA 587) possession – imprescriptible
• An action for reconveyance is an action in personam • But laches may bar recovery. (Lucas v. Gamponia, 100
• It is filed as an ordinary action in the ordinary courts Phil. 277)
and not with the land registration court. A notice of • Elements of laches
lis pendens may be annotated on the certificate of  Conduct of defendant giving rise to a situation of
title immediately upon the institution of the action which complaint is made and for which the
in court. (Muñoz v. Yabut, GR No. 142676, June 6, complainant seeks a remedy;
2011).  Delay in asserting complainant’s rights despite
• Article 434 of the Civil Code provides that to opportunity to do so;
successfully maintain an action to recover the  Lack of knowledge or notice on the part of
ownership of a real property, the person who claims defendant that complainant would assert his
a better right to it must prove two (2) things: first, right; and
the identity of the land claimed; and second, his  Injury or prejudice to defendant if relief is
title thereto. accorded complainant, or the suit is not held to
be barred.
• Requisites:
 The action is brought by the party in interest  Illustrative cases of laches
after one year from issuance of decree;  Petitioner’s action to recover title and possession
 The registration was procured through actual of the disputed lot was made only after 12 years
fraud; from the registration of the sale to defendant.
 The property has not yet passed to innocent (De la Calzada-Cierras v. CA, 212 SCRA 390)
purchaser for value.  The claimed owner of a lot failed to appear
• A party may file an action for reconveyance of the during the cadastral proceedings, and brought
property of which he has been illegally deprived even
 action to question the judgment only 10 years  An action for reconveyance has sometimes been
later. (Gonzales v. Director of Lands, 52 Phil. 895) treated as an action to quiet title. Requisites:
 Plaintiff did not present his claim against the • Plaintiff has a legal or equitable title or
estate of the deceased wife but did so only four interest in the property
years later against the widower. (Yaptico v. Yulo, • The deed, claim, encumbrance or
57 Phil. 818) proceeding claimed to be casting a cloud on
• An action for reconveyance under a constructive implied his title must be shown to be invalid or
trust in accordance with Article 1456 does not prescribe inoperative despite its prima facie
unless the land is registered or the instrument affecting appearance of validity. (Philville
the same is inscribed in the registry. Development and Housing Corporation v.
 Thus, where the land is unregistered, it is from Bonifacio, GR No. 167391, June 8, 2011)
the date of actual notice of the fraudulent sale
that prescription began to toll. (Cabacungan v. • Quieting of title, illustration:
Laigo, GR No. 175073, Aug. 15, 2011)  Jose who is an agent, in representation of Pedro,
sells the latter’s house to Mario. The deed of sale
• Q. Cite the provision on quieting of title. is executed in a public instrument and there is no
• A. “Art. 476. Whenever there is a cloud on title to real indication that the authority of the agent is not
property or any interest therein, by reason of any in writing. The deed of sale appears to be valid
instrument, record, claim, encumbrance or proceeding and effective on its face.
which is apparently valid or effective but is, in truth and  As the authority of Jose to sell is not in writing,
in fact, invalid, ineffective, voidable, or unenforceable, the sale is void (Art. 1874, CC). Pedro can file a
and may be prejudicial to said title, an action may be suit against the buyer Mario to quiet his title.
brought to remove such cloud or to quiet the title. An (Pineda, Property)
action may also be brought to prevent a cloud from Q. For an action to quiet title to prosper, what indispensable
being cast upon title to real property or any interest requisites must concur?
therein.” A. (1) The plaintiff or complainant has a legal or an equitable
title to or interest in the real property subject of the
action; and
(2) The deed, claim, encumbrance or proceeding claimed to
• Q. What is a cloud on title? be casting cloud on his title must be shown to be in
• A. A "cloud on title" is an outstanding instrument, fact invalid or inoperative despite its prima facie
record, claim, encumbrance or proceeding which is appearance of validity or legal efficacy. (Aquino v.
actually invalid or inoperative, but which may Quiazon, GR No. 201248, March 11,2015; Diaz v.
nevertheless impair or affect injuriously the title to Virata, GR No. 162037, Aug. 7, 2006)
property. The matter complained of must have a prima
facie appearance of validity or legal efficacy. The cloud
on title is a semblance of title which appears in some ACTION FOR
legal form but which is in fact unfounded. The invalidity DAMAGES
or inoperativeness of the instrument is not apparent on
the face of such instrument, and it has to be proved by • After one year from the issuance of the decree, the sole
extrinsic evidence. (Aquino v. Quiazon, GR No. 201248, remedy of the aggrieved party is not to set aside the
March 11, 2015) decree but, respecting it as incontrovertible and no
longer open to review, to bring an ordinary action in the
• Q. What kind of proceeding is an action to quiet title? ordinary court for reconveyance. But if the property has
 A. It is characterized as a proceeding quasi in rem. In an passed into the hands of an innocent purchaser for
action quasi in rem, an individual is named a defendant value, the remedy is an action for damages. (Gonzales v.
and the purpose of the proceeding is to subject his IAC, 157 SCRA 587)
interests to the obligation or loan burdening the • Action for damages must be brought within 10 years
property. Actions quasi in rem deal with the status, from issuance of the questioned certificate of title.
ownership or liability of a particular property but which (Art.1144, CC)
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 Q. When may an action for damages arising from fraudulent
possible claimants. The judgment therein is binding only registration lie?
upon the parties who joined in the action. (Phil-Ville A. When an action for reconveyance is no longer feasible
Development and Housing Corporation v. Bonifacio, GR because the property has already passed to the
No. 167391, June 8, 2011). hands of an innocent purchaser for value, the
aggrieved party can file an action for damages
 against the persons responsible for depriving him of certificate of title thereto remains valid and
his right or interest in the property. (Gonzales v. binding against the whole world. (Tolentino v.
Intermediate Appellate Court, GR No. L-69622, Jan. Laurel, GR No. 181368, Feb.22, 2012)
29, 1988, 157 SCRA 587; Sanjorjo v. Quijano, GR No. • State not bound by prescription
140457, Jan. 19, 2005, 449 SCRA 15)  Under Sec. 91 of the Public Land Act (CA No.
Q. Petitioner filed a complaint for damages against the 141), the LMB Director has continuing authority
registrant, claiming that he is the true owner of the to conduct investigation to determine whether or
property registered in the name of the latter. not public land has been fraudulently awarded or
However, petitioner did not file any opposition to the titled to the end that the corresponding
application for registration. Will the action prosper? certificate of title be cancelled and the land
A. No. A person who has not challenged an application for reverted to the mass public domain. (Piñero v.
registration of land even if the appeal afterwards Director of Lands, 57 SCRA 386)
interposed is based on the right of dominion over the  The indefeasibility of a title is not a bar to an
same land, cannot allege damage or error against the investigation by the State as to how such title has
judgment ordering the registration inasmuch as he been acquired. (Cavile v. Litania-Hong, 581 SCRA
did not allege or pretend to have any right to such 408)
land. (Esconde v. Barlongay, GR No. L-67583, July 31,
1987) • Q. Is reversion the proper remedy where private land
had been subsequently registered?
• A. No. An action for cancellation, not reversion, is
ACTION FOR REVERSION proper where private land had been subsequently titled,
and the party plaintiff in that case is not the government
 Reversion is an action filed by the government, through but the prior rightful owner of the property. (Angeles v.
the Office of the Solicitor General, to restore public land Republic, GR No. 166281, Oct. 27, 2006)
fraudulently awarded and disposed of to private
individuals or corporations to the mass of the public
domain. (Yujuico v. Republic, GR No. 168661, Oct. 26, Q. Plaintiff Republic filed a complaint to declare the free
2007, citing Agcaoili, “Property Registration Decree”) patent and title issued to Isagani null and void and to
• Grounds for reversion order the reversion of the land to the mass of public
 An action for reversion may be instituted by the domain on the ground that the land is a forest land.
government, through the Solicitor General, in all The court dismissed the complaint, holding that OCT
cases where lands of the public domain and the No P-2508 had become indefeasible in view of the
improvements thereon and all lands are held in lapse of the one-year period prescribed under (Sec.
violation of the Constitution (Sec. 35, Chapter XII, 32, Property Registration Decree). Plaintiff appealed.
Title III, EO No. 292), or in cases of fraudulent or Decide.
unlawful inclusion of land in patents or A. The appeal is meritorious. The defense of indefeasibility of
certificates of title. (Republic v. Guerrero, GR No. a certificate of title issued pursuant to a free patent
133168, March 28, 2006) does not lie against the State in an action for
• Reversion suits are utilized to annul titles or patents reversion where the land is a part of a public forest
administratively issued by the Lands Management or of a forest reservation. A patent is void if the
Bureau (LMB). officer who issued the patent had no authority to do
 Actions for cancellation of title and reversion so. Registration should not be a shield of fraud.
belong to the class of cases that "involve the title Prescription cannot be invoked against the State.
to, or possession of, real property, or any interest (Republic v. Animas, GR No. L-37682, March 29,
therein" and where the assessed value of the 1974)
property exceeds P20,000.00 Batas Pambansa
Blg. 129, Sec. 19 (2), fall under the jurisdiction of
the RTC. (Republic v. Roman Catholic Archbishop, CANCELLATION OF
GR No. 192975, Nov. 12, 2012Santos v. CA, 214 TITLE
SCRA 162)
• All actions for the reversion to the government of lands  It is an action initiated by a private party usually in a case
of the public domain or improvements thereon shall be where two titles are issued for the same lot
instituted by the Solicitor General or the officer acting in  Where two titles are issued for the same lot, the
his stead, in the proper courts, in the name of the earlier in date prevails. (Pajomayo v. Manipon, 39
Republic of the Philippines. (Sec. 101, PLA) SCRA 676)
 Unless and until the land is reverted to the State  Land does not revert to the State but is declared
by virtue of a judgment of a court of law in a as lawfully belonging to the party whose title is
direct proceeding for reversion, the Torrens superior over the other.
  But the State is vested with personality to file this o If based on lack of jurisdiction,
action to protect public interest and safeguard petitioner need not allege that the
the Assurance Fund ordinary remedies of new trial or
appeal are no longer available through
no fault of his.
Q. Differentiate an action for reversion from an ordinary o If ground is lack of jurisdiction,
action for cancellation of title. another remedy is certiorari under
A. In contrast to an action for reversion which is filed by the Rule 65 where the CA and SC have
government, through the Solicitor General, an ordinary action concurrent jurisdiction.
for cancellation is initiated by a private property usually in a  In a case for annulment of title, the complaint must
case where there are two titles issued to different persons for allege that the purchaser was aware of the defect in
the same lot. The land does not “revert” to the mass of the the title so that the cause of action against him will be
public domain, as in an action for reversion, but is declared as sufficient.
lawfully belonging to the party whose certificate of title is  Failure to do so is fatal since the court cannot render a
held superior over the other. (Pajomayo v. Manipon, GR No. valid judgment against the purchaser who is presumed
L-33676, June 30, 1971) to be in good faith in acquiring the said property.
Failure to prove, much less impute, bad faith on said
Q. Differentiate an action for reversion from an escheat purchaser would make it impossible for the court to
proceeding. render a valid judgment thereon due to the
A. An action for reversion is slightly different from escheat indefeasibility and conclusiveness of his title. (Cabigas
proceeding, but in its effects they are the same. v. Limbaco, GR No. 175291, July 27, 2011)
They only differ in procedure. Escheat proceedings • Fraud and misrepresentation, as grounds for
may be instituted as a consequence of a violation of cancellation of patent and annulment of title, should
the Constitution which prohibits transfers of private never be presumed, but must be proved by clear and
agricultural lands to aliens, whereas an action for convincing evidence, mere preponderance of evidence
reversion is expressly authorized by the Public Land not being adequate. Fraud is a question of fact which
Act. (Rellosa v. Gaw Chee Hun, GR No. L-1411, Sept. must be proved.
29, 1953)  In Sampaco v. Lantud, GR No. 163551, July 18,
2011, the signatory of the certification, Datu
Samra Andam, A/Adm. Assistant II, Natural
Resources District No. XII-3, Marawi City, was not
ANNULMENT OF JUDGMENT presented in court to testify on the due issuance
of the certification, and to testify on the details
• This is an extraordinary remedy filed with the Court of his certification, particularly the reason why
of Appeals under Rule 47 of the Rules of Court, the said office had no records of the data
where the ordinary remedies of new trial, appeal, contained in OCT No. P-658 or to testify on the
petition for relief or other appropriate remedies are fact of fraud, if any.
no longer available through no fault of the
petitioner.
Judgments or orders of quasi-judicial bodies, e.g., NLRC or • Castigador v. Nicolas, GR No. 184023, March 4, 2013:
DARAB, are not covered by petitions for annulment. allegations of actual fraud -
• "the auction sale of the land is null and void for
• Reversion suits were originally filed with the RTC to lack of actual and personal notice to herein
annul titles or patents administratively issued by the petitioner";
LMB • “the RTC did not comply with the procedure
 But with the effectivity of BP Blg. 129 which gave prescribed in Section 71, PD No. 1529 requiring
the Intermediate Appellate Court (IAC) notice by the Register of Deeds to the registered
jurisdiction over actions for annulment owner as to the issuance of a certificate of sale”;
judgments of RTCs, the Rules of Court • “petitioner was not afforded due process when
promulgated on July 1, 1997 incorporated Rule she was not notified of the proceedings instituted
47 on annulment of judgments or final orders of by respondent for the cancellation of her title.”
the RTCs. (Yujuico v. Republic, 537 SCRA 513) • Fraud is extrinsic where it prevents a party from
 Grounds for annulment: having a trial or from presenting his entire case to
• (a) action is based on extrinsic fraud, filed the court, or where it operates upon matters
within four years from discovery; pertaining not to the judgment itself but to the
• (b) lack of jurisdiction over the person of the manner in which it is procured.
defendant/respondent or over the subject
matter of the action.
• Lack of jurisdiction, illustrative case
 Camitan v. Fidelity Investment (551 SCRA 540) – • Requisites for recovery
where the owner’s duplicate has not been lost
but is in fact existing, the reconstituted title is • As to any person who sustains loss or damage:
null and void since the court never acquired  No negligence on his part, and
jurisdiction over the petition for reconstitution.  Loss or damage was through the omission or
• If the petition is based on extrinsic fraud, the remedy is mistake of the court personnel, or the Register of
subject to a condition precedent, i.e., that the ordinary Deeds or other employees of the Registry in the
remedies of new trial, appeal, petition fort relief are no performance of their duties.
longer available through no fault of petitioner. • As to any person deprived of any land or interest in the
• “Grave abuse of discretion” is not a proper ground for land:
petition for annulment of judgment. (Antonino v. RD,  No negligence on his part;
GR No. 185663, June 20, 2012)  He was deprived of land or interest therein by
the registration by any other person as owner of
 The judgment of the CA shall set aside the such land; or by mistake, omission or
questioned judgment, which is void for lack of misdescription in any owner’s duplicate
jurisdiction, without prejudice to the original certificate, or in any memorandum in the
action being refiled in the proper court. register, or by any cancellation; and
• However, where the judgment or final order  He is barred from bringing an action for the
is set aside on the ground of extrinsic fraud, recovery of such land or interest therein.
the CA may, on motion, order the trial court
to try the case as if a timely motion for new
trial had been granted therein. (Sec. 7, Rule • Defendants in an action against the AF
47)  The Register of Deeds and National Treasurer -
when the action is for recovery for loss or
damage of for deprivation of land or interest
RECOVERY OF DAMAGES FROM THE ASSURANCE FUND therein through fraud, negligence, omission,
mistake or misfeasance of the court personnel,
• Claim against the Assurance Fund the RD or employees of the registry;
 “A person who, without negligence on his part,  The Register of Deeds, the National Treasurer
sustains loss or damage, or is deprived of land or and other persons – for loss or damage or
any estate or interest therein in consequence of deprivation of land or interest therein through
the bringing of the land under the operation of fraud, negligence, mistake or misfeasance of
the Torrens system of arising after original persons other than court personnel, the RD or
registration of land, through fraud or in employees of the registry.
consequence of any error, omission, mistake or • The plaintiff must be the registered owner, or as to
misdescription in any certificate of title or in any holders of transfer certificates of title, that they are
entry or memorandum in the registration book, innocent purchasers in good faith and for value.
and who by the provisions of this Decree is  Action does not lie where the damage or
barred or otherwise precluded under the deprivation of any right or interest in the land
provision of any law from bringing an action for was caused by a breach of trust, express or
the recovery of such land or the estate or implied.
interest therein, may bring an action in any court  The person who claims damages should not have
of competent jurisdiction for the recovery of been negligent in acquiring the property or in
damages to be paid out of the Assurance Fund.” obtaining registration thereof in his name (as
(Sec. 95, PD 1529) where he is aware of a notice of lis pendens
• Public policy dictates that those unjustly deprived of affecting the property)
their rights over real property by reason of the • Illustrative cases
operation of our registration laws be afforded remedies.  National Treasurer v. Perez (131 SCRA 264) –
 Thus, the aggrieved party may file a suit for where respondent could not be awarded
reconveyance of property or a personal action damages since the donation to him was not
for recovery of damages against the party who executed with the formalities of a will and
registered his property through fraud, or in case therefore could not have transferred to him
of his insolvency, an action against the Treasurer ownership of the property.
of the Philippines for recovery of damages from  Treasurer of the Philippines v. CA (153 SCRA
the Assurance Fund. (People v. Cainglet, GR No. 3590) – where respondents acquired no land or
L-21493, April 29, 1966; RD v. Anglo, GR No. any interest in the land as a result of the invalid
171804, Aug. 5, 2015)
 sale to them by the impostor Lawaan Lopez who In Cusi v. Domingo, GR No. 195825, Feb. 27, 2013, the Court
had no title or interest to transfer. held:
• Illustrative cases The registered owner of realty cannot be deprived of
 La Urbana v. Bernardo (62 Phil. 790) – where, her property through fraud, unless a transferee
having knowledge of the pending litigation and acquires the property as an innocent purchaser for
notice of lis pendens affecting the land, it value.
nevertheless proceeded to take the risk of But a transferee who acquires the property covered
purchasing property in litigation. by a reissued owner's copy of the certificate of title (1)
 Fraginal v. Parañal (516 SCA 530) – where without taking the ordinary precautions of honest
property sold to petitioner was a prime land persons in doing business and examining the records
which has been the subject of successive of the proper Registry of Deeds, or (2) who fails to pay
transfers with “unusual haste” which should have the full market value of the property is not considered
triggered petitioner’s curiosity. an innocent purchaser for value.
CRIMINAL PROSECUTION
• The State may criminally prosecute for perjury the party
who obtains registration through fraud, such as by • But under the rule of caveat emptor (buyer beware),
stating false assertions in the application for one who buys without checking the vendor’s title takes
registration, sworn answer, or application for public land all the risks and losses consequent to such failure.
patent. (Dacasin v. CA, 80 SCRA 89)
 Sec. 91 of the PLA provides that “the statements • A mortgage is invalid even in the hands of an
made in the application shall b considered as innocent mortgagee where the title covers non-
essential conditions and parts of any concession, registrable land. (LBP v. Republic,543 SCRA 453)
title, or permit issued on the basis of such
application, and any false statement therein or • Nemo dat quod non habet
omission of facts x x x shall ipso facto produce  No one can give what one does not have.
the cancellation of the concession, title, or  One can sell only what one owns or is authorized
permit granted.” to sell, and the buyer can acquire no more than
what the seller can transfer legally.
• Prior est temporae, prior est in jura
 He who is first in right is preferred in right.
INNOCENT PURCHASER FOR VALUE  Thus, when the thing sold is an immovable, the
one who acquires it and first records it in the
• What is an innocent purchaser for value? Registry of Property, both made in good faith,
 An innocent purchaser for value is one who buys shall be deemed the owner.
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 • A certificate of title is not conclusive where it is the
the purchase or before receiving any notice of product of faulty or fraudulent registration. (Widows
another person’s claim. (Rosales v. Burgos, 577 and Orphans Association, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, 201
SCA 264) SCRA 165), or where the inclusion of land in the
 No petition for review shall be entertained by the certificate of prior date is a mistake. (Legarda v. Saleeby,
court where an innocent purchaser for value has 31 Phil. 590)
acquired the land or an interest therein. (Sec. 32,  But the rule that where two certificates purport
PD 1529) to include the same land, the earlier in date
prevails, is valid only absent any anomaly or
irregularity tainting the process of registration.
• Every person dealing with registered land has a right to (Mathay v. Court of Appeals, 295 SCRA 556)
rely on the correctness of the title and is not obliged to
go beyond the certificate to determine the condition of
the property. (Unchuan v. CA, 161 SCRA 710)
 In a series of transfers, it is enough that the buyer
examines the latest certificate of title and need
not scrutinize each and every title that preceded
it. (Tajonera v. CA, 103 SCRA 467)
 PRINCIPLE OF GOOD FAITH EQUALLY APPLIES TO INNOCENT Appellate Court, 157 SCRA 587; Phil. Coop. Bank
LESSEE OR MORTGAGEE FOR VALUE vs. Carangdang, 139 SCRA 570; Penullar vs. PNB,
120 SCRA 171)
• Under Sec. 32, PD No. 1529, rule of good faith equally
applies to mortgagees or other encumbrancers for value  "The right or lien of an innocent mortgagee for
 Thus, where the Torrens title was issued through value upon the land mortgaged must be
regular registration proceedings, a subsequent respected and protected, even if the mortgagor
order for the cancellation nullification of the title obtained his title through fraud. The remedy of
is not a ground for nullifying the mortgage rights the persons prejudiced is to bring an action for
of the bank. (St. Dominic v. IAC, 151 SCRA 577) damages against those who caused the fraud,
 The right or lien of an innocent mortgagee must and if the latter are insolvent, an action against
be respected even if the mortgagor obtained his the Treasurer of the Philippines may be filed for
title through fraud. (Blanco v. Esquierdo, 110 recovery of damages against the Assurance
Phil. 494) Fund.“ (Citing Blanco v. Esquierdo, 110 Phil. 494)
 The phrase “innocent purchaser for value” in Sec. 32 of
the Property Registration Decree includes an innocent Q. When Pacete procured OCT No. V-16654 in 1961, the
lessee, mortgagee, or other encumbrancer for value. disputed lot was already in possession of Asotigue,
(Unchuan v. Court of Appeals, GR No. 78775, May 31, whose predecessor-in-interest, Sumagad, had been
1988, 161 SCA 710) occupying it since 1958. Is reconveyance to Asotigue
 Good faith, or the lack of it, is a question of proper?
intention. In ascertaining intention, courts are A. Yes. The registration of the lot in favor Pacete, who neither
necessarily controlled by the evidence as to the possessed nor occupied the lot, is wrongful. And
conduct and outward acts by which alone the since Pacete had not yet transferred the lot to an
inward motive may, with safety, be determined. innocent purchaser for value, reconveyance to
(LBP v. Poblete, GR No. 196577, Feb. 25, 2013) Asotigue, the prior possessor, is proper.
• What is the doctrine of “mortgagee in good faith”? Reconveyance is available not only to the legal
 In LBP v. Poblete, GR No. 196577, Feb. 25, 2013, owner of a property but also to the person with a
the Court explained the doctrine of “mortgagee better right. (Pacete v. Asotigue, GR No. 188575,
in good faith" as one based on the rule that Dec. 10, 2012)
buyers or mortgagees dealing with property • Although Art. 2085, CC, requires that the mortgagor
covered by a Torrens certificate of title are not must be the owner of the mortgaged property, the
required to go beyond what appears on the face subsequent declaration that the title is null and void is
of the title. not a ground for nullifying the mortgage right of the
 Thus, despite the fact that the mortgagor is not mortgagee. (Rural Bank of Sariaya v. Yacon, 175 SCRA
the owner of the mortgaged property, his title 62)
being fraudulent, the mortgage contract and any  The right or lien of an innocent mortgagee must
foreclosure sale arising therefrom are given be respected, even if the mortgagor obtained his
effect by reason of public policy. title thereto through fraud.
• Where the certificate of title is in the name of the  The remedy of the person prejudiced is against
mortgagor when the land is mortgaged, the mortgagee those who caused the fraud, or if insolvent, an
has the right to rely on what appears on the certificate action for recovery of damages against the AF.
of title. (Gonzales v. IAC, GR No. 69622, Jan. 29, 1988) (Blanco v. Esquierdo, 110 Phil. 494)
 The right or lien of an innocent mortgagee for  In LBP v. Poblete, supra, the Court held that LBP is not a
value upon the land mortgaged must be mortgagee in good faith because it processed Maniego’s
respected and protected, even if the mortgagor application upon presentation of OCT No. P-12026,
obtained his title thereto thru fraud. (Blanco v. which was still in the name of Poblete. It also ignored
Esquierdo, GR No. L-15182,Dec. 29, 1960). the fact that a certain Kapantay had previously used
 PNB v. CA and Chu Kim Kit, GR No. L-43972, July 24, Poblete's title as collateral in its loan account with LBP.
1990 “When the person applying for the loan is other than the
 "The certificate of title was in the name of the registered owner of the real property being mortgaged, [such
mortgagor when the land was mortgaged to the fact] should have already induced the Bank to make inquiries
PNB. Such being the case, petitioner PNB had the into and confirm [the] authority to mortgage . . . . A person
right to rely on what appeared on the certificate who deliberately ignores a significant fact that could create
of title, and in the absence of anything to excite suspicion in an otherwise reasonable person is not an
suspicion, it was under no obligation to look innocent purchaser for value.” (Citing Bank of Commerce v.
beyond the certificate and investigate the title of San Pablo, GR No. 167848, 27 April 2007)
the mortgagor appearing on the face of the
certificate." (Citing Gonzales vs. Intermediate DOCTRINE OF GOOD FAITH GENERALLY NOT APPLCABLE
 TO BANKS business. (Sunshine Finance v. IAC, GR No. 74070,
Oct. 28, 1991)
• But doctrine of “mortgagee in good faith” is generally • Imbued with public interest, banks “are expected to be
not applicable to banks more cautious than ordinary individuals.”
 It has been consistently held that the rule does  Thus, before approving a loan, the standard
not apply to banks, which are required to practice for banks and other financial institutions
observe a higher standard of diligence. A bank is to conduct an ocular inspection of the property
whose business is impressed with public interest offered to be mortgaged and verify the
is expected to exercise more care and prudence genuineness of the title to determine the real
in its dealings than a private individual, even in owner or owners thereof.
cases involving registered lands. A bank cannot  Failure to do so makes them mortgagees in bad
assume that, simply because the title offered as faith. (Alano v. Planter’s Development Bank, GR
security is on its face free of any encumbrances No. 171628, June 13, 2011)
or lien, it is relieved of the responsibility of taking
further steps to verify the title and inspect the
properties to be mortgaged. (LBP v. Poblete, • A deed of sale which was absolutely simulated is null
supra) and void and does not convey any right that could ripen
• The general rule that a mortgagee need not look beyond into valid title; there being no valid mortgage, there
the title does not apply to banks and other financial could be no valid foreclosure, and the bank cannot be
institutions as greater care and due diligence is required considered as a mortgagee in good faith.
of them.  But where title was issued through regular
 Imbued with public interest, they "are expected proceedings and was given as security for a bank
to be more cautious than ordinary individuals.“ loan, the subsequent declaration of the title as
(Alano v. Planter’s Development Bank, GR No. null and void is not a ground for nullifying the
171628, June 13, 2011) mortgage rights of the bank. (St. Dominic Corp. V.
 The ascertainment of the status or condition of a IAC, 151 SCRA 577; Blanco v. Esquierdo, 110 Phil.
property offered to it as security for a loan must 494)
be a standard and indispensable part of its
operations. (Duque-Rosario v. Banco Filipino
Savings and Mortgage Bank, GR No. 140528, Dec.
7, 2011) A FORGED DEED IS A NULLITY
• Acts showing the bank’s lack of diligence
 Where the bank did not investigate the property  Generally, a forged deed is a nullity and conveys no title,
to ascertain its actual occupants. (It is the even if accompanied by the owner’s duplicate
standard practice of banks, before approving a certificate of title. (Joaquin v. Madrid, 106 Phil. 1060)
loan, to send representatives to the premises of  The registered owner does not lose his title, and
the land to investigate its real owners) neither does the assignee or mortgagee acquire
 Where the bank’s representative concentrated any right to the property. (Bernales v. Sambaan,
only on the appraisal of the property and failed 610 SCRA 90)
to inquire as to who were the then occupants of  The innocent purchaser for value protected by
the property. law is one who purchases a titled land by a virtue
 Where the bank acted with haste in granting the of a deed executed by the registered owner
mortgage loan and did not ascertain the himself, not by a forged deed.
ownership of the land being mortgaged, as well
as the authority of the supposed agent executing • Sec. 53 of PD No. 1529 provides that the subsequent
the mortgage. (LBP v. Poblete, supra) registration of title procured by the presentation of a
• Banks required to exercise greater care forged deed or other instrument is null and void.
 But unlike private individuals, banks (and other  Thus, the subsequent issuance of TCT No. 195812
persons engaged in lending money) are expected gave the petitioner no better right than the
to exercise greater care and prudence in their tainted registration which was the basis for the
dealings for their business is imbued with public issuance of the same title. (Leoveras v. Valdez,
interest. (PNB v. Jumanoy, GR No. 169901, Aug. GR No. 169985, June 15, 2011)
3, 2011; Metrobank v. SLGT Holdings, 533 SCRA
516; Cruz v. Bancom Finance, 379 SCRA 490;  A forged deed is a nullity and conveys no title.
Philippine Trust Company v. Court of Appeals, GR  When the instrument presented for registration is
No. 150318, Nov. 2010) forged, even if accompanied by the owner's
 This principle equally applies to realty duplicate certificate of title, the registered owner
corporations because of the nature of their does not thereby lose his title, and neither does the
 mortgagee acquire any right or title to the property.  Following the principle of indefeasibility of a
It is essential that the mortgagor be the absolute Torrens title, every person dealing with
owner of the property to be mortgaged; otherwise, registered lands may safely rely on the
the mortgage is void. (LBP v. Poblete, GR No. correctness of the certificate of title of the
196577, Feb.25, 2013) vendor/transferor, and he is not required to go
 Where the deed of sale states that the purchase beyond the certificate and inquire into the
price has been paid but in fact has never been paid, circumstances culminating in the vendor's
the deed of sale is void ab initio for lack of acquisition of the property. The rights
consideration. Hence, the corresponding title
issued to the vendee pursuant to the same deed is of innocent third persons who relied on the
likewise void. (Id.) correctness of the certificate of title and acquired
rights over the property covered thereby cannot be
 Cusi v. Domingo, GR No. 195825, Feb. 27, 2013 disregarded and the courts cannot order the
 An impostor succeeded in tricking a court of law cancellation of such certificate for that would impair
into granting his petition for the issuance of a or erode public confidence in the Torrens system of
duplicate owner's copy of the supposedly lost land registration.” (Muñoz v. Yabut, GR No. 142676,
TCT. The impostor then had the TCT cancelled by June 6, 2011. See also: Republic v. Agunoy, 492 Phil.
presenting a purported deed of sale between him 118 (2005), citing cases)
and the registered owners, both of whom had
already been dead for some time, and another
TCT was then issued in the impostor's own name. GENERAL INCIDENTS OF REGISTERED LAND
This issuance in the impostor's own name was • “Every registered owner receiving a certificate of title in
followed by the issuance of yet another TCT in pursuance of a decree of registration, and every
favor of a third party, supposedly the buyer of subsequent purchaser of registered land taking a
the impostor. In turn, the impostor's transferee certificate of title for value and in good faith, shall hold
(already the registered owner in his own name) the same free from all encumbrances except those
mortgaged the noted in said certificate.” (Sec. 44, PD 1529)
• The phrase “innocent purchaser for value”
 the property to Spouses Miguel and Adela includes an innocent lessee, mortgagee, or other
Lazaro, who then caused the annotation of the encumbrancer for value. (Unchuan v. CA, 161
mortgage on the TCT. All the while, the original SCRA 710)
duplicate owner's copy of the TCT remained in
the hands of an heir of the deceased registered
owners with his co-heirs' knowledge and  Statutory liens
consent.  Every registered owner and every subsequent
 The Lazaros, as the mortgagees, claimed good purchaser for value and in good faith shall hold
faith, and urged the Court to find in their favor. the same free from all encumbrances except
But the Court held instead that since the the title those noted in the certificate and any of the
of the property mortgaged to the Lazaros was a following:
second owner's duplicate TCT, which is, in effect  liens, claims or rights under the Constitution
a reconstituted title, this circumstance should and laws; unpaid real estate taxes; any
have alerted them to make the necessary public highway or private way established
investigation, but they did not. by law; any disposition of the property or
limitation on the use thereof by virtue of PD
• But a forged deed may become the root of a valid title 27 or any law on agrarian reform. (Sec. 44,
 A forged deed may become the root of a valid PD 1529)
title in a bona fide purchaser if the certificate has • Meaning of lien, encumbrance
already been transferred from the name of the  “Lien” is a charge on property usually for the
true owner to the name of the forger or the payment of some debt or obligation. It signifies a
name indicated by the forger, and while it legal claim or charge on property, either real or
remained that way, the land was subsequently personal, as a collateral or security for the
sold to an innocent purchaser for value. (Solivel payment of some debt or obligation.
v. Francisco, 170 SCRA 218)  “Encumbrance” is a burden upon land
 For then the vendee had the right to rely upon depreciative of its value, such as a lien,
what appeared in the certificate. (Guaranteed easement, or servitude, which, though adverse to
Homes v. Valdez, 577 SCRA 441) the interest of the landowner, does not conflict
 A void title may become the root of a valid title if the with his conveyance of the land in fee, e.g., a
derivative title was obtained in good faith and for value. mortgage, judgment lien, lease, security interest,
 easement or right of way, accrued and unpaid  In Golloy v. CA (173 SCRA 26), while the lot was
taxes. registered in the name of respondent, petitioners
• Illustrative cases acquired title thereto by possession for 50 years.
 Alienable public lands donated, granted or held • Q. What is laches?
by a branch or subdivision of the government • A. Laches has been defined as the failure or neglect, for
cannot be alienated unless authorized by an unreasonable and unexplained length of time, to do
Congress. (Chavez v. PEA, 384 SCRA 152) that which by exercising due diligence could or should
 Section 44 which subjects the certificate of title have been done earlier; it is negligence or omission to
to public servitudes which may be subsisting, assert a right within a reasonable time, warranting a
does not apply, say, in the case of a road presumption that the party entitled to assert it either
constructed subsequent to the acquisition of the has abandoned it or declined to assert it. Laches is not
land. (Dirgran v. Auditor General, 16 SCRA 762) concerned merely with lapse of time, unlike
 Secs. 118 and 122 of the Public Land Act provide prescription. While the latter deals with the fact of
limitations on the right of the homestead or free delay, laches deals with the effect of unreasonable
patentee to alienate the land subject of the delay. (Cotoner-Zacarias v. Revilla, GR No. 190901, Nov.
patent. 12, 2014)
• Illustrative cases of laches
• In Panganiban v. Dayrit, GR No. 151235, July 28, 2005,
REGISTERED LAND the Court held that even a registered owner of property
NOT SUBJECT TO may be barred from recovering possession of property
PRESCRIPTION by virtue of laches. In this case, petitioners, for forty-five
(45) years, did nothing to assert their right of ownership
 “No title to registered land in derogation of the title of and possession over the subject property.
the registered owner shall be acquired by prescription • In Lola v. Court of Appeals, GR No. GR No. L-46573, Nov.
or adverse possession.” (Sec. 47, PD 1529) 13, 1986,  the Court held that petitioners acquired title
 Title to land, once registered, is imprescriptible. to the land by virtue of the equitable principles of laches
It may not be lost by adverse, open and due to respondent’s failure to assert her claim of
notorious possession. Prescription is unavailing ownership for 32 years.
not only against the registered owner but also
against his hereditary successors.
 The right to recover possession of registered REGISTERED LAND
property is equally imprescriptible since NOT SUBJECT TO
possession is a mere consequence of ownership. COLLATERAL ATTACK
(Republic v. Mendoza, GR No. 185091, Aug. 8,
2010)  A certificate of title cannot be altered, modified or
• A decree of registration is conclusive upon all persons, cancelled except in a direct proceeding filed with the
including the government and all its branches, whether RTC (Sec. 48, PD 1529; Manotok v. Barque, 582 SCRA
or not mentioned by name in the application for 583)
registration or its notice.  Direct attack: when the object of the action is to
 Indeed, title to the land, once registered, is annul or set aside the judgment, or enjoin its
imprescriptible. Adverse possession of real enforcement.
property for the requisite period confers title as  Collateral attack: in an action to obtain a
effectually as any paper title, but such a title different relief, an attack on the judgment is
cannot be acquired against a title registered nevertheless made as an incident thereto.
under the provisions of the Property Registration  A direct attack on title is proper in a counterclaim
Decree. The statute of limitations is merely a bar (Leyson v. Bontuyan, 452 SCRA 94).
to a right of action and does not operate as a
transfer of title at all. (La Corporacion de Padres Q. Petitioner Gan Tan, a Chinese, bought land from the Cebu
v. Crisostomo, GR No. 10031, Dec. 6, 1915) Heights Co. and obtained TCT No. 49978 in his
• But a registered owner may be barred from recovering name. Having lost his title, he filed a petition for
possession by virtue of laches. reconstitution under RA No. 26. The court denied
 In Panganiban v. Gamponia (100 Phil. 277), the since petitioner is an alien. Is the denial of the
petitioners, for 45 years, did nothing to assert petition for reconstitution proper?
their right of ownership and were barred from A. A Torrens title cannot be collaterally attacked. The issue as
recovering possession of the property. to whether an alien is or is not qualified to acquire
 In Agne v. Director of Lands (181 SCRA 7090), the land covered by Torrens title under our Constitution
registered owner’s right to recover possession can only be raised in an action expressly instituted
was lost by inaction for almost 30 years. for that purpose. (Director of Lands v. Gan Tan, GR
 No. L-2664, May 30, 1951; Legarda vs. Saleeby, GR  Section 48 of Presidential Decree No. 1529, also known
No. 8936, Oct. 2, 1915) as the Property Registration Decree, provides that "[a]
Q. Respondents filed a petition with the LRA for the certificate of title shall not be subject to collateral
administrative reconstitution of the TCT No. 210177 attack [. . . and] cannot be altered, modified, or
in the name of Homer Barque. Severino Manotok cancelled except in a direct proceeding in accordance
opposed alleging that the lot covered by the Barque with law". Clearly, the cancellation of the Manotok title
title is part of the land covered by his reconstituted cannot arise incidentally from the administrative
TCT No. RT-22481 [372302]. However, the LRA found proceeding for reconstitution of the Barque title even if
the Manotoc title to have been fraudulently the evidence from that proceeding revealed the
reconstituted, hence, it ordered the reconstitution Manotok title as fake. Nor could it have emerged
of TCT No. 210177 in the name of Barque, but only incidentally in the appellate review of the LRA's
after the cancellation by the proper court of the administrative proceeding.
Manotoc title. On appeal, the CA directed the
cancellation of the Manotok title and the Q. How do you characterize an application for registration of
reconstitution of the Barque title. Was the CA an already titled land?
empowered to annul the Manotok title through the A. The application constitutes a collateral attack on the
petitions raised before it by the Barques and the existing title. The title may be challenged only in a
Manotoks? proceeding for that purpose, not in an application
for registration of a land already registered in the
A. No. Section 48 of PD provides that "[a] certificate of title name of another person. After one year from its
shall not be subject to collateral attack [[. . . and] registration, the title is incontrovertible and is no
cannot be altered, modified, or cancelled except in a longer open to review. (Wee v. Mardo, GR No.
direct proceeding in accordance with law.” The 202414, June 4, 2014)
administrative reconstitution of Torrens titles is
intended for non-controversial cases. Neither the
Court of Appeals nor the LRA has jurisdiction to ADVERSE CLAIM
cancel titles. (Manotok v. Barque, GR No. 162335,
Dec. 18, 2008) • An adverse claim is a type of involuntary dealing
 Reconstitution proceedings are not the venue for designed to protect the interest of a person over a piece
confirmation or adjudication of title. The Court of of real property by apprising third persons that there is a
Appeals does not have original jurisdiction to annul controversy over the ownership of the land.
Torrens titles or to otherwise adjudicate questions over  It seeks to preserve and protect the right of the
ownership of property. adverse claimant during the pendency of the
 If it appears from the records that the subject controversy, where registration of such interest
property is already covered by an existing or right is not otherwise provided for by the
Torrens title in the name of another person, Property Registration Decree. An adverse claim
there is nothing further the LRA can do but to serves as a notice to third persons that any
dismiss the petition. transaction regarding the disputed land is subject
 The only remedy is an action before the RTC for to the outcome of the dispute. (Logarta v.
the cancellation of the existing title, whether by Mangahis, GR No. 213568, July 5, 2016)
the competing claimant or by the OSG on behalf
of the Republic. (Ibid) • Q. May a perfected contract of sale be registered as an
adverse claim?
 Author’s note: In the Court’ resolution dated Aug. 24, • No. Before a notice of adverse claim is registered, it
2010, it held: “The petition for reconstitution of title there must be no other provision for the registration of
filed by the Barques is likewise DENIED. TCT No. RT- the claimant's right in the property. The proper
22481 (372302) in the name of Severino Manotok IV, et procedure then is to register the vendee's right as
al., TCT No. 210177 in the name of Homer L. Barque and prescribed by Sections 51 (“the act of registration shall
Deed of Conveyance No. V-200022 issued to Felicitas B. be the operative act to convey or affect the land insofar
Manahan, are all hereby declared NULL and VOID. The as third persons are concerned”) and 52 of PD 1529,
Register of Deeds of Caloocan City and/or Quezon City and not under Section 70 which is ineffective in
are hereby ordered to CANCEL the said titles. The Court protecting the vendee's right since it does not have the
hereby DECLARES that Lot 823 of the Piedad Estate, effect of a conveyance. (Logarta v. Mangahis, supra)
Quezon City, legally belongs to the NATIONAL
GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, Q. Is a deed of conditional sale registrable as an adverse
without prejudice to the institution of REVERSION claim?
proceedings by the State through the OSG.” A. No. In a deed of conditional sale, ownership is transferred
after the full payment of the installments of the
 purchase price and the execution of an absolute an adverse claim. (Gabriel v. Register of Deeds, 9
deed of sale. It is a dealing affecting less than the SCRA 136)
ownership of property. The rule is tat before a notice  A notice of levy and subsequent sale of property cannot
of adverse claim is registered, it must be shown that prevail over an existing adverse claim earlier inscribed
there is no other provision for the registration of the on the certificate of title covering it. (Martinez v. Garcia,
claimant's alleged right. And pursuant to Section 54 611 SCRA 537)
of PD 1529, all interests in registered land less than  The Register of Deeds cannot unilaterally cancel
ownership shall be registered by filing with the the adverse claim. There must be a hearing for
Register of Deeds the instrument which creates such the purpose. This is in line with the provision
interest. (Sec. 54, PD 1529; Logarta v. Mangahis, “that after cancellation, no second adverse claim
supra) shall be registered by the same claimant.
(Sanjonas v. CA, 258 SCRA 79)
Q. Does the registration of a notice of levy produce  That the foreclosure of mortgage was effected
constructive notice that would bind third persons after the annotation of the adverse claim is of no
despite the failure of the RD to annotate the same in moment since the foreclosure retroacts to the
the certificates of title? date of registration of the mortgage. (Limpin v.
A. Yes.The notice of levy is registered precisely to bind the IAC, 166 SCRA 87)
property and to serve as caution to third persons • Adverse claim is proper where there is no other
who might potentially deal with the property. Entry provision of law for the registration of claimant’s alleged
alone produces the effect of registration, whether right or interest in the property.
the transaction is a voluntary or involuntary one, so • A notice of levy cannot prevail over an existing
long as the registrant had complied with all that was adverse claim inscribed in the certificate of title.
required of him and nothing more remained to be • A claim which arose prior to the date of the
done but a duty incumbent solely on the Register of original registration cannot be entered as adverse
Deeds. (Saberon v. Ventanilla, GR No. 192669, April claim.
21, 2014) • Where the claim is based on a perfected contract
• A person who claims an interest in registered land of sale by the owner of the land, the procedure is
adverse to the registered owner may make a statement to register the contract so that a new transfer
under oath setting forth his alleged right or interest and certificate of title is issued to the vendee-claimant.
how acquired, the number of the certificate of title, (Sec. 57, PD No. 1529)
name of the registered owner and a description of the
land.  A mortgage is valid as between the parties even if
 The statement shall be registered as an adverse unregistered, but registration of a mortgage is
claim and shall be effective for 30 days. indispensable to bind third parties.
 The annotation may be cancelled upon the filing  Prior registration of an adverse claim or notice of
a of a verified petition by the party in interest. lis pendens creates a preference as against a
(Sec. 70, PD 1529) mortgage registered later. The subsequent
registration of a prior mortgage does not
• An adverse claim is designed to protect the right or diminish this preference, which retroacts to the
interest of a person over a piece of real property and date of the notice of adverse claim or lis pendens.
serves as a notice to third persons that someone is (Cruz v. Bancom Finance Corporation, GR No.
claiming an interest in the land or a better right thereto 147788, March 19, 2002)
than the registered owner. (Martinez v. Garcia, GR No.
166536, Feb. 4, 2010)
• An adverse claim based on prescription and adverse
possession cannot be registered because, under
Sec. 47, no title to registered land shall be acquired • An adverse claim is effective for thirty days; but it is not
by prescription or adverse possession. (Estella v. ipso facto cancelled after said period - a separate
Register of Deeds, 106 Phil. 911) petition is necessary. (Sajonas v. Court of Appeals, GR
No. 102377, July 5, 1996)
 The RD cannot unilaterally cancel the adverse
• A sale of land may not be annotated as an adverse claim claim. There must be a hearing for the purpose.
because the law prescribes the remedy of registration of (Diaz-Duarte v. Ong, 298 SCRA 388)
the sale and the issuance to the vendee of a transfer • The adverse claim may be cancelled if it is frivolous
certificate of title. (RD v. Nicandro, 111 Phil. 989; Sec. or vexatious, in which case damages may be
57, PD 1529) adjudged against the adverse claimant.
 The hereditary rights or a person registered
fraudulently in her sister’s name is registrable as
 duplicate certificate, the party in interest may file
SURRENDER OF CERTIFICATE IN INVOLUNTARY DEALINGS a petition the court to compel surrender of the
same to the Register of Deeds. The court, after
• Court may compel surrender of withheld certificate hearing, may order the registered owner or any
 If an attachment or other lien in the nature of an person withholding the duplicate certificate to
involuntary dealing is registered and the surrender the same, and direct
duplicate certificate is not presented, the the entry of a new certificate or memorandum
Register of Deeds shall, within 36 hours, request upon such surrender. If the person withholding
the registered owner to produce his duplicate the certificate is not amenable to the process of
certificate. If he refuses to comply within a the court, or if for any reason the outstanding
reasonable time, the RD shall report the matter owner’s duplicate certificate cannot be delivered,
to the court which shall, after notice, issue an the court may order the annulment of the same
order for the owner to produce his certificate at as well the issuance of a new certificate of title in
the time and place stated and may enforce the lieu thereof. Such new certificate and all
order by suitable process. (Sec. 71, PD 1529) duplicates thereof shall contain a memorandum
 In an action for specific performance with damages of the annulment of the outstanding duplicate.”
based on a contract of sale, a motion may be filed by the • In implementing the involuntary transfer of title of real
purchaser for the issuance of an order to compel the property levied and sold on execution, is it enough for
holder of the duplicate certificate of title to surrender the executing party to file a motion with the court which
the same to the RD. Ligon v. CA, GR No. 107751, June 1, rendered judgment, or does he need to file a separate
1995 action with the Regional Trial Court?
 Even while Sec. 107 of PD 1529 speaks of a  The proper course of action is to file a petition in
petition which can be filed by one who wants to court, rather than merely move, for the issuance
compel another to surrender the certificates of of new titles. This is to afford due process to the
title to the RD, this does not preclude a party to a registered landowner. (Reyes v. Tang Soat Ing, GR
pending case to include as incident therein the No. 185620, Dec. 14, 2011; Padilla v. Philippine
relief stated under Sec. 107, especially if the Producers’ Cooperative Marketing Association,
subject certificates of title to be surrendered are GR No. 141256, Sept. 18, 1995)
intimately connected with the subject matter of
the principal action. This principle is based on
expediency.
• Mortgage lien follows the property mortgaged NOTICE OF
 Any lien annotated on the previous certificates of LIS PENDENS
title which subsists should be incorporated in or
carried over to the new transfer certificates of • Lis pendens, which literally means pending suit, refers to
title. This is true even in the case of a real estate the jurisdiction, power or control which a court acquires
mortgage because pursuant to Art. 2126 of the over property involved in a suit, pending the
Civil Code it directly and immediately subjects continuance of the action, and until final judgment.
the property upon which it is imposed, whoever  Lis pendens is intended (1) to keep the properties
the possessor may be, to the fulfillment of the in litigation within the power of the court until
obligation for whose security it was constituted. the litigation is terminated and to prevent the
 It is inseparable from the property mortgaged as defeat of the judgment or decree by subsequent
it is a right in rem — a lien on the property alienation; and (2) to announce to the whole
whoever its owner may be. Thus, all subsequent world that a particular property is in litigation
purchasers must respect the mortgage whether and serves as a warning that one who acquires
the transfer to them be with or without the an interest over said property does so at his own
consent of the mortgagee, for such mortgage risk, or that he gambles on the result of the
until discharged follows the property. (Ligon v. litigation over said property. (Mr Holdings, Ltd. v.
CA, supra) Bajar, GR No. 153478, Oct. 10, 2012)
SURRENDER OF WITHHELD CETIFICATE • A notice of lis pendens is governed by Sec. 14, Rule 13,
• Sec. 107, PD 1529 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure
 “Sec. 107. Surrender of withheld duplicate  “SEC. 14. Notice of lis pendens. — In an action
certificates. - Where it is necessary to issue a new affecting the title or the right of possession of
certificate pursuant to any involuntary real property, the plaintiff and the defendant,
instrument which divests the title of the when affirmative relief is claimed in his answer,
registered owner or where a voluntary may record in the office of the registry of deeds
instrument cannot be registered because of the of the province in which the property is situated
refusal of the holder to surrender the owner’s a notice of the pendency of the action. Said
 notice shall contain the names of the parties and  Cancellation is proper when filed to molest adverse party
the object of the action or defense, and a or is not necessary to protect the rights of the person
description of the property in that province causing registration.
affected
• Lis pendens is proper in the following cases:
 thereby. Only from the time of filing such notice  Action to recover possession of property;
for record shall a purchaser, or encumbrancer of  Action to quiet title thereto;
the property affected thereby, be deemed to  Action to remove clouds thereon;
have constructive notice of the pendency of the  Action for partition; and
action, and only of its pendency against the  Any other proceedings in court directly affecting
parties designated by their real names. the title to the land or the use or occupation
 The notice of lis pendens hereinabove mentioned thereof or the buildings thereon.
may be cancelled only upon order of the court, • The notice need not be annotated on the owner’s
after proper showing that the notice is for the duplicate certificate of title because the notice is an
purpose of molesting the adverse party, or that it involuntary transaction. Entry in the day book is
is not necessary to protect the rights of the party sufficient. (Yu v. CA, 251 SCRA 509)
who caused it to be recorded."
 A notice of lis pendens is availed of mainly in real • Pacete v. Asotigue, GR No. 188585, Dec. 10, 2012
actions. These actions are:  As a remedy, an action for reconveyance is filed
 (a) an action to recover possession of real estate; as an ordinary action in the ordinary courts of
 (b) an action for partition; and justice and not with the land registration court.
 (c) any other court proceedings that directly Reconveyance is always available as long as the
affect the title to the land or the building thereon property has not passed to an innocent third
or the use or the occupation thereof. person for value.
 Additionally, the annotation of lis pendens also applies to  A notice of lis pendens may thus be annotated on
suits seeking to establish a right to, or an equitable the certificate of title immediately upon the
estate or interest in, a specific real property, or to institution of the action in court. The notice of lis
enforce a lien, a charge or an encumbrance against it. pendens will avoid transfer to an innocent third
 But it does not apply to actions involving title to or any person for value and preserve the claim of the
right or interest in, personal property, such as the subject real owner.
membership shares in a private non-stock corporation. • In case of subsequent sales or transfers, the RD must
(Mr Holdings v. Bajar, supra) carry over the notice of lis pendens on all titles to be
 Lis pendens is not proper in an action for sum of money issued.
 “A notice of lis pendens annotated on the  Transferees of title subject to lis pendens are
cancelled TCT No. 170213 and carried over to bound by the judgment against their
Tan's TCT No. 10206 conferred upon RAM no predecessors. (Selph v. Aguilar, 107 Phil. 443)
rights over the subject property as well as  Before final judgment, the notice may be
petitioner, its successor-in-interest, since CC No. cancelled upon order of the court if the notice is
67381, which RAM, predecessor-in-interest of for the purpose of molesting the adverse party or
petitioner, instituted against Zeñarosa was for if it is not necessary for the protection of the
collection of sum of money with damages — a party who caused its registration; or by the RD
purely personal action. upon verified petition of the party who caused
 Hence, the subsequent levy on execution on the annotation thereof. (Sec. 77)
October 14, 2004 arising from the final money
judgment in favor of petitioner cannot prevail
over the earlier annotated attachment made by
Lorenzo on September 30, 2002 and its • Cancellation of lis pendens
subsequent notice of levy on execution and sale  The power to cancel a notice of lis pendens is
of the property to respondents on January 30, exercised only under exceptional circumstances,
2004, who then took possession. (Gagoomal v. such as: where such circumstances are imputable
Villacorta, GR No. Jan. 18, 2012) to the party who caused the annotation; where
 Purpose: the litigation was unduly prolonged to the
 to protect the rights of the party causing prejudice of the other party because of several
registration, and continuances procured by petitioner; where the
• to advise third persons that they deal with the case which is the basis for the lis pendens
property subject to the result of the case notation was dismissed for non prosequitur on
 A notice of lis pendens neither affects the merits of the the part of the plaintiff; or where judgment was
case nor creates a right or lien. rendered against the party who caused such a
 notation. (J. Casim Construction v. Registrar of issued to the INK despite his argument that the case
Deeds, GR No. 168655, July 2, 2010) involved the “registrability “ of the document. (Ligon v.
CA, 244 SCA 693)
 Thus, the court has jurisdiction over a petition for
AMENDMENT AND ALTERATION OF CERTIFICATES cancellation of encumbrances despite
respondent’s contention that the issue is
• No erasure, alteration, or amendment, shall be made controversial. (PNB v. International Corporate
upon the registration book after the entry of a Bank, 199 SCRA 508).
certificate of title or of a memorandum thereon except • Proceedings under Sec. 108 involve only non-
by order of the proper Regional Trial Court. (Sec. 108, controversial matters
PD 1529)  The enumerated instances for amendment or
 No amendment or alteration shall be made alteration of a certificate of title under Section
except upon order of the court. (Cuyugan v. Sy 108 are non-controversial in nature. They are
Quia, 24 Phil. A567) limited to issues so patently insubstantial as not
 The petition shall be filed in the original case in to be genuine issues. The proceedings
which the decree was entered. (OCA v. Matas, thereunder are summary in nature,
247 SCRA 9) contemplating insertions of mistakes which are
• In Paz v. Republic, GR No. 157367, Nov. 23, 2011, the only clerical, but certainly not controversial
Court held that the amendment and alteration of a issues. (Cabañez v. Solano, GR No. 200180, June ,
certificate of title under Section 108 of P.D. No. 1529 is 2016) Consequently, such issues should be
applicable in seven instances or situations, namely: (a) ventilated in a regular action. (Angeles v. Razon,
when registered interests of any description, whether GR No. L-13679, Oc. 26, 1959)
vested, contingent, expectant, or inchoate, have • Thus, as clarified in Cabañez, supra:
terminated and ceased; (b) when new interests have  “From the foregoing, there is no question that
arisen or been created which do not appear upon the there is a serious objection and an adverse claim
certificate; (c) when any error, omission or mistake was on the part of an interested party x x x (which)
made in entering a certificate or any memorandum necessarily entail litigious and controversial
thereon or on any duplicate certificate; (d) when the matters making it imperative to conduct an
name of any person on the certificate has been exhaustive examination of the factual and legal
changed; (e) when the registered owner has been bases of the parties' respective positions.
married, or, registered as married, the marriage has Certainly, such objective cannot be accomplished
been terminated and no right or interest of heirs or by the court through the abbreviated action
creditors will thereby be affected; (f) when a under Section 108 of PD 1529. A complete
corporation, which owned registered land and has determination of the issues in the present case
been dissolved, has not conveyed the same within can only be achieved if petitioner and his wife are
three years after its dissolution; and (g) when there is impleaded in an adversarial proceeding.”
reasonable ground for the amendment or alteration of • In Bareng vs. Shintoist Shrine (83 SCRA 418 [1978] which
title. involves Secs. 111 and 112 of the Land Registration Act,
• Under Sec. 108, in relation to Sec. 2, PD No. 1529, the substantially similar to Secs. 107 and 108 of the Property
court may now hear both contentions and non- Registration Decree, the Court ruled:
contentious cases.  "Anyway, proceedings undertaken pursuant to
Section 111, as those under Section 112, are
• Section 108 provides that, after notice to all the summary in nature. They are inadequate for the
interested parties, the court may (a) order the issuance litigation of issues properly pertaining to civil
of a new certificate, (b) order the entry or cancellation actions. In other words, controversial questions,
of a memorandum upon a certificate, or (c) grant any such as questions concerning the ownership of
other relief upon such terms and conditions, requiring a registered property, questions of lapse of period
bond if necessary, as it may deem proper. to
 But the court, sitting as a land registration court, register of deeds (sic), or any question where the
has no jurisdiction or authority to reopen the issues involved have become controversial cannot
original decree of registration. The court cannot be threshed out in such proceedings. Where
"impair the title or other interest of a purchaser therefore, controversial issues are raised in
holding a certificate for value and in good faith, proceedings brought under Section 111 or Section
or his heirs or assigns, without his or their written 112, it is the duty of the court sitting as a cadastral
consent.“ (Luzon Surety v. Mirasol, GR No. L- court or land registration court to dismiss the
29313, Jan. 21, 1977) petition and the proper recourse open for the
• The court can compel petitioner to surrender his parties would be to bring up the said questions in
owner’s duplicate certificate so that a new title may be an ordinary civil action, or in the proceeding where
 the incident properly belongs. (Cited in Tiongco v. way it has been when the loss or destruction
Phil. Veterans Bank, GR No. 82782, Aug. 5, 1992) occurred.
 RA 26 presupposes that the property whose title
 Bareng, however, added: is sought to be reconstituted has already been
 “Although the general rule is that a Land brought under the provisions of the Torrens
Registration Court has no power to decide cases System. (Republic v. Tuastumban, GR No.
involving issues properly litigable in ordinary civil 173210, Apri 24, 2009)
actions, yet inasmuch as in this jurisdiction it is • Requisites:
the courts of first instance that also functions as  (a) that the certificate of title had been lost or
courts of land registration, our jurisprudence destroyed;
recognizes exceptions to said rule, where the  (b) that the documents presented by petitioner
parties have acquiesced in submitting the issues are sufficient and proper to warrant
for determination in the registration proceedings, reconstitution of the lost or destroyed certificate
and they are given full opportunity to present of title;
their respective sides and submit their evidence.”  (c) that the petitioner is the registered owner of
(Citing cases) the property or had an interest therein;
 (d) that the certificate of title was in force at the
time it was lost and destroyed; and
REPLACEMENT OF LOST  (e) that the description, area and boundaries of
OR DESTROYED the property are substantially the same as those
CERRTIFICATE OF TITLE contained in the lost or destroyed certificate of
title. (Id.)
• Upon petition of the registered owner or person in • Elements of Reconstitution:
interest, the court may, after notice and hearing, direct • Certificate of title has been lost or destroyed;
the issuance of a new duplicate certificate which shall in • Petitioner is the registered owner or person who
all respects be entitled to like faith and credit as the has an interest therein (the RD is only a nominal
original duplicate. (Sec. 109, PD No. 1529) party); and
• Where the owner’s duplicate copy is not in fact • Certificate of title was in force at the time it was
lost or destroyed, a petition for the purpose is lost or destroyed.(Sec. 110, PD No. 1529)
unwarranted as the court has no jurisdiction over • The petition shall be filed with the RTC of the province
the petition or city where the land lies. (Sec. 12, RA No. 26)
• Procedure • Judicial reconstitution partakes of a land registration
 The registered owner or person in interest shall proceeding and is subject to the jurisdictional
send notice, under oath, of the loss or requirements of publication, mailing and posting. This is
destruction of the owner’s duplicate certificate mandatory. (Sec. 13, RA No. 26; Pinote v. Dulay, GR No.
to the Register of Deeds; and 56694, July 2, 1990)
 The corresponding petition for the replacement  The petition shall be filed with the regional trial
of the lost or destroyed certificate shall then be court of the province or city where the land lies.
filed in court and entitled in the original case in Sec. 108 of PD No, 1529 provides that all
which the decree of registration was entered. petitions or motions after original registration
• Unlike in a petition for reconstitution, there is no shall be filed and entitled in the original case in
requirement for the publication of the petition for which the decree of registration was entered.
replacement of a lost or destroyed certificate . (See also Sec. 2, RA No. 26. Office of the Court
Administrator v. Matas, A.M. No. RTJ-92-836.
August 2, 1995).

RECONSTITUTION OF
LOST OR DESTROYED • Administrative reconstitution of lost or destroyed
CERTIFICATE OF TITLE certificates is governed by RA 6732
 It is available in case of substantial loss or
• The reconstitution of a certificate of title denotes destruction of land titles due fire, flood or other
restoration in the original form and condition of a lost or force majeure. Manotok v. Barque, GR No.
destroyed instrument attesting the title of a person to a 162335, Dec. 18,2008)
piece of land. • Requirements:
 The purpose of the reconstitution of title is to  Number of certificates lost or damaged is at least
have, after observing the procedures prescribed 10% of the total number in possession of the RD.
by law, the title reproduced in exactly the same  In no case shall be number of certificates be less
than 500.
• The administrative reconstitution of Torrens titles is  Sec. 3, RA No. 26 – for reconstitution of a transfer
intended for non-controversial cases, certificate of title.
 or especially where the subject property is not  “Any other document” as a source of
covered by an existing title in favor of a person reconstitution refers to documents similar to
other than the applicant. Such an implication is those previously enumerated in the law under
consonant with the rule that the reconstitution the principle of ejusdem generis. (Republic v. IAC
proceedings are not the venue for confirmation and Kiram, 157 SCRA 62
or adjudication of title, but merely a means by • The non-compliance with the requirements prescribed
which a previously adjudicated title whose in Sections 12 (contents of petition) and 13
original has been lost or destroyed may be (requirements of notice and hearing) of R.A. No. 26 is
reissued to its owner. fatal.
• The LRA has no jurisdiction over a petition for  These requirements and procedure are
reconstitution, where the property is already covered by mandatory. The petition for reconstitution must
a Torrens title. (Manotok v. Barque, supra) allege certain specific jurisdictional facts; the
• If it appears that the subject property is already covered notice of hearing must be published in the
by an existing Torrens title in the name of another Official Gazette and posted in particular places
person, there is nothing further the LRA can do but to and the same sent or notified to specified
dismiss the petition. persons. Sections 12 and 13 of the Act provide
 Upon review, the only relevant inquiry in such specifically the mandatory requirements and
appellate proceeding is on whether or not there procedure to be followed. (Castillo v. Republic,
is a previously existing title covering that GR No. 182980, Jun 22, 2011)
property.  Liberal construction of the Rules of Court does not apply
 Neither the LRA nor the CA at that point may to land registration cases. Indeed, to further underscore
inquire into the validity of the title or the the mandatory character of these jurisdictional
competing claims over the property. The only requirements, the Rules of Court do not apply to land
remedy is an action before the RTC for the registration cases. (Sec. 4, Rule 1 of the 1997 Rules of
cancellation of the existing title, whether by the Civil Procedure)
competing claimant or by the OSG on behalf of  In all cases where the authority of the courts to
the Republic. (Manotok v. Barque, supra) proceed is conferred by a statute, and when the
manner of obtaining jurisdiction is prescribed by
• Sec. 48 of PD No. 1529 provides that "[a] certificate of a statute, the mode of proceeding is mandatory,
title shall not be subject to collateral attack [. . . and] and must be strictly complied with, or the
cannot be altered, modified, or cancelled except in a proceeding will be utterly void. When the trial
direct proceeding in accordance with law". court lacks jurisdiction to take cognizance of a
 Clearly, the cancellation of the Manotok title case, it lacks authority over the whole case and
cannot arise incidentally from the administrative all its aspects. (Castillo v. Republic, GR No.
proceeding for reconstitution of the Barque title 182980, June 22, 2011)
even if the evidence from that proceeding
revealed the Manotok title as fake. Nor could it
have emerged incidentally in the appellate CONSULTA
review of the LRA's administrative proceeding.
 Neither the CA nor the LRA has the power to • When the Register of Deeds is in doubt as to what action
cancel titles. (Manotok v. Barque, supra) should be taken on an instrument presented for
• There is no collateral attack on the title (OCT No. 239) registration, or where ay party does not agree with the
when the reconstiution case (LRC Case No. B-1784) was action taken by the Register of Deeds, the question shall
dismissed by court precisely because the invalidity of be elevated to the LRA Administrator via en consulta for
said certificate of title was already determined with determination. (Sec. 117, PD 1529)
finality by the Supreme Court.  The consulta shall be cancelled (a) upon final
 The decision of the Court declaring OCT No. 239 resolution of the case by the LRA Administrator,
fake, forged, and spurious already bars the or (b) if the consulta is withdrawn by the
reconstitution of said title under the doctrine of petitioner.
res judicata, in the concept of conclusiveness of • The ruling of the LRA shall be conclusive and binding on
judgment. (Layos v. Fil-Estate, GR No. 150470, all RDs, without prejudice to an appeal to the Court of
Aug. 6, 2008) Appeals.
• Sources of reconstitution  A party who does not agree with the action taken
 Sec. 2, RA No. 26 - for reconstitution of an by the LRA is to appeal to the CA, via Rule 43 -
original certificate of title and not by certiorari or prohibition - within 15
 days from notice of the decision or resolution. • The remedy of the person prejudiced is against those
(Calalang v. RD of QC, 231 SCRA 88) who caused the fraud, or if insolvent, an action for
 The administrative remedy must be resorted to recovery of damages against the AF. (Blanco v.
by petitioner before he can have recourse to the Esquierdo, 110 Phil. 494)
courts. (Almirol v. RD of QC, 22 SCRA 1152)  Effect of a forged deed of mortgage
 A forged power of attorney is without force and
effect, and the mortgage constituted by virtue
thereof is also null and void and could not
MORTGAGES AND LEASES prejudice the rights of the registered owner.
(Veloso v. La Urbana, a58Phil. 681)
 The mortgagor must be the owner of the property  An absolutely simulated contract of sale is void
mortgaged. and transfers no ownership right; hence, the
 A mortgage lien is a right in rem which follows property. purported buyer, not being the owner, cannot
 A notice of lis pendens cannot prejudice mortgage validly mortgage the property and neither does
previously registered. the buyer at foreclosure sale acquire any title
 A mortgage is invalid even in the hands of an innocent thereto. (Cruz v. Bancom, 379 SCRA 490)
mortgagee where the title covers non-registrable land. • Redemption
(LBP v. Republic,543 SCRA 453)  The mortgagor has one year within which to
• Where the certificate of title is in the name of the redeem the property from the registration of
mortgagor when the land is mortgaged, the mortgagee sale.
has the right to rely on what appears on the certificate  If no redemption is made within said period, the
of title. (Gonzales v. IAC, GR No. 69622, Jan. 29, 1988) right of the purchaser to the possession of the
 The right or lien of an innocent mortgagee for foreclosed property becomes absolute. He is
value upon the land mortgaged must be entitled to possession following the consolidation
respected and protected, even if the mortgagor of ownership in his name.
obtained his title thereto thru fraud. (Blanco v.  The writ of possession becomes a matter of right
Esquierdo, GR No. L-15182,Dec. 29, 1960). and its issuance to a purchaser in an extrajudicial
• Where the certificate of title is in the name of the foreclosure is merely a ministerial function.
mortgagor when the land is mortgaged, the mortgagee • Writ of possession
has the right to rely on what appears on the certificate  Under Sec. 7 of Act No. 3135, a writ of possession
of title. (Gonzales v. IAC, GR No. 69622, Jan. 29, 1988) may be issued either (a) within the one-year
 The right or lien of an innocent mortgagee for period, upon the filing of a bond, or (b) after the
value upon the land mortgaged must be lapse of the redemption period, without need of
respected and protected, even if the mortgagor a bond.
obtained his title thereto thru fraud. (Blanco v.  The proceeding for the issuance of the writ is ex
Esquierdo, GR No. L-15182,Dec. 29, 1960). parte and is ministerial duty of the court, unless a
• The general rule that a mortgagee need not look beyond third party is actually holding the property
the title does not apply to banks and other financial adversely to the judgment debtor, or where the
institutions as greater care and due diligence is required bid price is unjustifiably higher than the real
of them. Imbued with public interest, they "are amount of the obligation.
expected to be more cautious than ordinary • In extrajudicial foreclosures, the purchaser becomes the
individuals.“ (Alano v. Planter’s Development Bank, GR absolute owner when no redemption is made.
No. 171628, June 13, 2011)  Thus, after consolidation of ownership and
• The ascertainment of the status or condition of a issuance of a new transfer certificate of title in
property offered to it as security for a loan must be a the name of the purchaser, he is entitled to
standard and indispensable part of its operations. possession of the property as a matter of right
(Duque-Rosario v. Banco Filipino Savings and Mortgage under Section 7 (Act 3135), and its issuance by
Bank, GR No. 140528, Dec. 7, 2011) the RTC is a mere ministerial function.
• Although Art. 2085, CC, requires that the mortgagor • But pursuant to Sec. 33, Rule 39, Rules of Court, the
must be the owner of the mortgaged property, the possession of the extrajudicially foreclosed property
subsequent declaration that the title is null and void is shall be withheld from the purchaser if a third-party is
not a ground for nullifying the mortgage right of the actually holding the same adversely to the
mortgagee. (Rural Bank of Sariaya v. Yacon, 175 SCRA mortgagor/debtor. (Madriaga v. China Banking Corp., G
62) No. 192377, July 2, 2012)
• The right or lien of an innocent mortgagee must be • The issuance of the writ may not be stayed by a pending
respected, even if the mortgagor obtained his title action for annulment of the mortgage or the foreclosure
thereto through fraud. itself, without prejudice, of course, to the eventual
outcome of the pending annulment case. (Bank of the
 Philippine Islands v. Tarampi, GR No. 174988, Dec. 10,
2008)  Free patent
• Issuance of the writ is ex parte, summary and and  Applicant is a natural-born citizen who is not the
ministerial. The order of the RTC granting the petition owner of not more than 12 hectares of
for a writ of possession is final which can only be agricultural public land.
questioned on appeal. (San Fernando Rural Bank, Inc. v.  He has occupied and cultivated the land for at
Pampanga Omnibus Development Corporation, GR No. least 30 years, by himself of his predecessors-in-
168088, April 4, 2007) interest;
 He has paid the real estate taxes while the same
has not been occupied by any other person.
REGISTRATION VIA ISSUANCE OF
PUBLIC LAND PATENTS
ISSUANCE OF FREE PATENT TO RESIDENTIAL LANDS (RA NO.
 Registration of Patents 10023)
 Public lands suitable for agriculture can be
disposed of by (a) homestead, (b) sale, (c) lease,  Requirements for a residential free patent:
and (d) confirmation of imperfect or incomplete  Applicant must be a Filipino citizen
titles by (1) judicial legalization or (2)  In actual occupation, residence and continuous
administrative legalization (free patent) possession and occupation of a residential land
 Public land patents when duly registered are  Identified and zoned through an ordinance and not
veritable Torrens titles, entitled to all the needed for public use or public service
safeguards relative thereto  For at least 10 years prior to the filing of the
application
 Homestead patent
 Any citizen of the Philippines may apply for a  Area limitation:
homestead of not exceeding 12 hectares.  Highly urbanized cities – 200 sq. m.
 The applicant must have cultivated and improved  Other cities – 500 sq. m.
at least one-fifth of the land and resided in the  1st and 2nd class municipalities – 750 sq. m.
municipality (or adjacent municipality) where the  Other municipalities – 1,000 sq. m.
land is located for at least one year.
 Once the applicant has complied with all the  Requirements for application:
conditions essential to a government grant, he  Approved plan and technical description
acquires not only a right to a grant but a grant of  Affidavit of two (2) witnesses confirming
the land from the government. possession of applicant for at least 10 years
 Sales patent • Special patents
 A Filipino citizen or lawful age or the head of a  A special patent is issued upon the promulgation
family may apply for the purchase of an of a special law or act of Congress or by the DENR
agricultural public land not to exceed 12 Secretary as authorized by an EO of the
hectares. President.
 The land shall be sold through public bidding, and  Example: Freedom Islands in the Manila Bay area
the land awarded to the highest bidder. to which TCTs were issued to PEA.
 The purchase price may be paid in full or in 10  However, the lands so titled shall not be disposed
installments. unless with the approval of Congress if owned by
 The applicant must cultivate at least one-fifth of the national agency, or by the sanggunian
the land within 5 years from the date of award. concerned through an approved ordinance if
 Direct sale (RA No. 730) owned by LGUS.
 RA No. 730 permits the private sale of not more  Prohibited alienations
than 1,000 square meters for residential  Sec. 118 of CA 141 proscribes the alienation or
purposes. The applicant: encumbrance of land acquired under a free
• Is a Filipino citizen; patent or homestead patent within 5 years from
• Is not the owner of a home lot in the city or the grant of the patent. The policy is to give
municipality; patentee a place where to live with his family
• Has established in good faith his residence  After 5 years but before 25 years from the
on land not needed for public service; issuance of the patent, a homestead may be
• Has constructed his house and actually disposed of subject to the approval of the DENR
resided therein. Secretary; but land covered by a free patent may
be disposed of after 5 years.
  REGISTRATION UNDER SEC. 48(B) OF THE PUBLC LAND “The State recognizes and promotes the rights of
ACT (CA NO. 141) indigenous cultural communities within the framework
“Sec. 48. x x x (b) Those who by themselves or through of national unity and development.” (Sec. 2 Art. II)
their predecessors in interest have been in open, “The State, subject to the provisions of this Constitution
continuous, exclusive, and notorious possession and and national development policies and programs shall
occupation of alienable and disposable lands of the protect the rights of indigenous cultural communities to
public domain, under a bona fide claim of acquisition of their ancestral lands to ensure their economic, social,
ownership;, since June 12, 1945, except when prevented and cultural well-being.
by war or force majeure. These shall be conclusively The Congress may provide for the applicability of
presumed to have performed all the conditions essential customary law governing property rights or relations in
to a Government grant and shall be entitled to a determining the ownership and extent of ancestral
certificate of title under provisions of this chapter.” domain.”
• There are no material differences between Sec. 14(1) of  Indigenous concept of ownership
PD No. 1529 and Sec. 48(b) of CA No. 141.  The IPRA recognizes the existence of the
 While the Public Land Act (PLA) refers to indigenous cultural communities or indigenous
“agricultural lands of the public domain” and the peoples (ICCs/IPs) as a distinct sector in
Property Registration Decree (PRD) refers to Philippine Society.
“alienable and disposable lands of the public  It grants these people the ownership and
domain,” the subject lands are of the same type possession of their ancestral domains and
since under the Constitution, alienable lands of ancestral lands, and defines the extent of these
the public domain shall be limited to agricultural lands and domains.
lands.  The ownership given is the indigenous concept of
• Sec. 48(b), CA 141, as amended by PD 1073, requires ownership under customary law which traces its
possession since June 12, 1945, or prior thereto origin to native title.
• But land need be classified as A and D land at the time • Ancestral lands/domains are not deemed part of the
of the filing of the application for registration ( lands of the public domain but are private lands
Malabanan vs. Court of Appeals, GR No. 179987, April belonging to ICCs/IPs who have actually occupied,
29, 2009) possessed and utilized their territories under claim of
• When the conditions specified in Sec. 48(b) of the PLA ownership since time immemorial.
are complied with, the possessor is deemed to have • Native title refers to pre-conquest rights which, as far
acquired, by operation of law, a right to a grant, without back as memory reaches, have been held under claim of
the necessity of a certificate of title being issued. private ownership by ICCs/IPs, have never been public
• Compliance with all requirements for a government lands and are thus indisputably presumed to have been
grant ipso jure converts land to private property. held that way since before the Spanish Conquest.
• The land ceases to be of the public domain and beyond • The National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP)
the authority of the DENR to dispose of. has the authority to issuer certificates of ancestral
• Registration under Sec. 48(b) of the PLA presumes that domain title (CADT) or certificates of ancestral land title
the land was originally public agricultural land but (CALT).
because of adverse possession since June 12, 1945, the • The recording of CADT and CALT in the Office of the
land has become private. Register of Deeds does not result in the issuance of
• A certificate of title is void when it covers non- Torrens certificate of title.
registrable lands (e.g., forest or timber or mineral lands). • The purpose of registration is simply to apprise the
• Any title issued on non-disposable lots even in the hands public of the fact of recognition by the NCIP of specific
of an alleged innocent purchaser for value, shall be claims to portions of the ancestral domains or ancestral
cancelled. lands.
• Modes of acquisition
 The rights of ICCsIPs to their ancestral domains
and ancestral lands may be acquired in two
modes:
 By native title over both ancestral lands and
domains; or
 By Torrens title under the Public Land Act (CA No.
REGISTRATION UNDER THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLES RIGHTS 141) of the Property Registration Decree (PD No.
ACT 1529) with respect to ancestral lands only.
• Requirements for registration
• Constitutional provisions  The applicant is a member of an indigenous
cultural group;
  He must have been in possession of an  In sale of public lands, the land is opened for
individually-owned ancestral land for not less bidding; the successful bidder is given right of
than thirty (30) years; entry and to cultivate and improve the land.
 By operation of law, the land is already classified  Upon cultivation of 1/5 of the land, the applicant
as A and D, even if it has a slope of 18% or over, is given a sales patent
hence, there is no need to submit a separate In the case of friar lands, the purchaser
certification that the land is A and D. becomes the owner upon issuance of the
• Transfer of land or property rights certificate of sale in his favor.
The rights of ownership over ancestral lands may be
transferred subject to the following limitations:
 Only to members of the same ICCs/IPs; SUBDIVISION AND CONDOMINIUM BUYER’S DECREE (PD 957)
 In accord with customary laws and traditions;
and • Subdivision and Condominium Buyer’s Protective
 Subject to the right of redemption for a period of Decree (PD 957)
fifteen (15) years if the land was transferred to a  Policy: to afford inhabitants the requirements of
non-member. decent human settlement with ample
• Ancestral domains belong to all generations and opportunities for improving their quality of life.
therefore cannot be sold, disposed or destroyed.  Real estate and condominium businesses must be
 CADASTRAL PROCEEDINGS closely supervised and regulated, and penalties imposed
• The purpose is to serve the public interest by requiring on fraudulent practices and manipulations.
that the titles to any unregistered lands “be settled and • PD No. 957 implements the state policy of providing
adjudicated.” decent human settlement to improve the quality of life.
• The government initiates the proceeding so that all • Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB),
private lands in the town are registered in one single formerly NHA and HSRC, has exclusive jurisdiction to
proceeding. regulate real estate and trade business.
• Government surveyors give advance notice to survey • HLURB is a quasi-judicial body with original and
claimants of date of survey to afford them to indicate exclusive authority to hear and decide cases of the
their claims during the survey. following nature:
• After survey, the government files the petition with the  Unsound real estate business practice
RTC so that all claimants and possessors shall be heard  Claims for refund and any other claims filed by
on their claims. subdivision lot or condominium unit buyer
• Jurisdiction of cadastral court over previously titled against the project owner, developer or dealer
lands limited to correction of technical errors in the  Cases involving specific performance of
description of the land. contractual and statutory obligations filed by
• Decision declaring land as public land not a bar to a buyers of subdivision lot or condominium unit
subsequent action for confirmation of title over the • Subdivisions are mandated to maintain and provide
same land. adequate water facilities for their communities. Without
a provision for an alternative water source, the
subdivision developer's alleged sale of the lot where the
DISPOSITION OF FRIAR LANDS community's sole water source was located constituted
a violation of this obligation. Thus, this allegation makes
(Example: Banila Estate, Piedad Estate, Tala Estate, etc.) out a case for an unsound real estate business practice
• Friar lands are not public lands but private or of the subdivision owner and developer. Clearly, the
patrimonial property of the government. case at bar falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of the
• Friar lands were purchased by the government for sale HLURB. (Liwag v. Happy Glen Loop )
to actual occupants under Act No. 1120 (Friar Lands Act)
• The Lands Management Bureau (LMB) shall first issue a • Decision of HLURB appealable to the OP whose decision
sales certificate to the occupant who shall pay the may be elevated to the CA via a petition for review.
purchase price in installments.  HLURB has jurisdiction over cases for collection
• The purchaser becomes the owner upon the issuance of of unpaid installments and damages
the certificate of sale, subject to cancellation in case the  It has no jurisdiction over issues involving ownership or
price agreed upon is not paid in full possession of property
• Upon full payment, the government shall then issue a
final deed of conveyance to the purchaser • Registration of projects, requirements
• No lease or sale shall be valid until approved by the • License to sell, requirements
DENR Secretary (Manotok v. Barque, GR No. 162335,  Absence of license to sell does not render sale
Aug. 24, 2010) void
• Sale of friar lands is different from sale of public lands:
  But developer may be held civilly and criminally  In Lalicon v. NHA, GR No. 185440, July 13, 2011, the
liable Court held:
 Determination of criminal liability lies with the  The Lalicons claim that the NHA unreasonably
courts ignored their letters that asked for consent to the
resale of the subject property. But the NHA had
• A license to sell and performance bond is not required in no obligation to grant the Lalicons' request for
the following transactions: exemption from the five-year restriction as to
 Sale of a subdivision lot resulting from the warrant their proceeding with the sale when
partition of the land among co-owners-heirs such consent was not immediately forthcoming.
 Sale of a subdivision lot by the original. purchaser And the resale without the NHA's consent is a
and any subsequent sale of the same lot. substantial breach. The essence of the
 Sale of a subdivision lot or condominium unit by government's socialized housing program is to
or for account of a mortgagee when necessary to preserve the beneficiary's ownerships for a
liquidate a bona fide debt. reasonable length of time, here at least within
• Foreigners may purchase condominium units and shares five years from the time he acquired it free from
in the condominium corporations up to not more than any encumbrance.
40-% of the total and outstanding capital stock of a
Filipino-owned or controlled corporation.
• The land is owned by the corporation and the unit
owner is simply a member in the corporation. • Foreigners are allowed to purchase condominium units
• The ownership of the land is legally separated from the • Any mortgage of the unit or lot requires approval of
unit itself. HLURB, otherwise mortgage is void
• Registration of dealers, brokers and salesmen • Failure to develop a subdivision may justify non-
• Revocation of registration payment of amortizations by lot buyer
• Procedure: • Buyer may not be ousted for non-payment due to failure
 Hearing of subdivision owner to put up required improvements
 Decision • Owner or developer shall:
 Cease and desist order  Deliver title to buyer upon full payment of lot or
• Registration of contracts unit
• Mortgages  Redeem outstanding mortgage
 With written approval of the HLURB  Secure a right of way to a public road
 With notice to the buyer  Initiate the organization of a homeowners
 Mortgage without knowledge or buyer and association among buyers and residents
approval of HLURB is null and void  Provide adequate roads, alleys and sidewalks
• Illustrative cases  Donate roads and open spaces to city or
 Far East Bank and Trust Co. v. Marquez municipality where project is located
 DBP v. Capulong
• Advertisements
• Time of completion
 Consequence of delay
 Failure to develop a subdivision may justify non-
payment of amortizations by lot buyer
 Failure of seller to deliver condominium unit
entitles buyer to cancel contract

• Issuance of title
 Duty of owner to deliver title
 Duty of owner to redeem outstanding mortgage
 Certificate of title not subject to collateral attack
 Right of way to public road
 Roads, alleys, sidewalks and open spaces (non-
alienable and non-buildable) MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS
 Donations of parks and playgrounds to the city or  The real purpose of the Torrens system of
municipality mandatory; may in turn be donated registration is
to the homeowners association (a) to quiet title to land.
(b) to recognize a valid and subsisting
interest in land.
 (c) to bar innocent third parties from
claiming an interest in the land.  The basis of the rule that the land sought to be
(d) to furnish a shield for fraud. registered is already A and D “at the time the
application for registration is filed” is that:
 The Regalian doctrine embodies the concept that: (a) it is only when the land is classified as A
(a) all alienable and disposable lands of the and D that the State is deemed to have abdicated
public domain belong to the State. its exclusive prerogative over the land.
(b) all lands not clearly within private (b) it is hardly possible to look for witnesses
ownership presumptively belong to the State. who could testify as to the status and condition of
(c) all lands not covered by Spanish titles the land on or before June 12, 1945.
presumptively belong to the State. (c) prior to the classification of the land as A
(d) the King is regarded as the true and only and D, the land still remains part of the forest
source of title. zone, hence, inalienable.
(d) previous rulings of the Supreme Court
• In what instances may first level courts exercise requiring that the land be declared A and D as of
jurisdiction to hear land registration cases? June 12, 1945 are merely obiter dicta.
(a) Where the application is not the subject
of any adverse claim.  Which of the following is incorrect: A Presidential
(b) Where the assessed value of the land proclamation reserving land for a specific public purpose
does not exceed P500,000 as shown by the (a) is valid if already classified as A and D.
affidavit of the applicant or corresponding tax (b) is a matter of judicial notice.
declaration. (c) is an asseveration of Regalian right.
(c) Where the land is not contested, or even (d) is issued in the exercise of the State’s
if contested, has an assessed value not exceeding dominical authority.
P100,000.
(d) Where its exercise is delegated by the  The function of the Register of Deeds to register
Supreme Court. instruments affecting registered land is
ministerial. Accordingly,
 The following may properly interpose an (a) his duty is compellable by mandamus.
opposition to the application for registration: (b) he has no discretion to determine the
(a) a homesteader who has not yet been intrinsic validity of the instrument provided that it
issued his title but has fulfilled all the conditions. is in due form.
required by law for the issuance of patent. (c) his duty is to register the instrument
(b) a foreshore lease applicant. without prejudice to a determination of its
(c) a sales applicant pending issuance of the validity before the proper forum afterwards.
order of award. (d) his duty is to register the instrument
(d) the holder of timber license agreement unless enjoined by the LRA.
duly approved by the DENR.
 Registration is not a mode of acquiring
 What is the prescriptive period for an action for ownership. It is simply a procedure
compensation against the Assurance Fund? (a) to ensure that third parties may not
(a) 4 years. assert any claim or interest in the land thereafter.
(b) 6 years. (b) to establish proof of one’s claim of
(c) 10 years. ownership in the land.
(d) imprescriptible. (c) to remove all liens and encumbrances in
the land.
• PD No. 892, dated February 16, 1976, has (d) to assure the claimant a better title than
outlawed Spanish titles as evidence of ownership what he actually has.
in registration cases. However,
(a) such a title may still be presented in
evidence if accompanied by a survey plan
executed prior to February 16, 1976. • Lot X is registered in the name of “Pedro, married
(b) such a title may still be presented if it is to Maria.” Pedro sells the land to Jose without the
in the nature of a possessory information title. written consent of Maria. May the Register of
(c) such a title is absolutely barred without Deeds refuse registration?
if’s or but’s. (a) No, the land belongs solely to Pedro, the
(d) such a title may still be presented in registered owner.
evidence if accompanied by its English translation.
 (b) Yes, there is nothing in the deed of sale • Foreshore and submerged areas belong to the public
to show that Pedro alone acquired the land in his domain and remain inalienable unless:
own right. (a) reclaimed by appropriate authority
(c) No, the lack of consent of Maria is fatal, (b) declared no longer needed for public service
there being no showing that she is incapacitated (c) declared as alienable lands and no longer
to give her consent to the sale. needed for public service
(d) Yes, the deed of sale does not bear the (d) reclaimed, classified as A and D and further
signature of Maria who is presumed co-owner of declared no longer needed for public service.
the land.

• Registration under the Torrens system is a proceeding in • To show the identity of the land for purposes of
rem. This means that registration, and in line with prevailing rule,
(a) all interested persons are notified of the (a) the submission of the tracing cloth plan
proceedings and have a right to appear in opposition to is mandatory.
the application for registration. (b) the survey plan and technical description
(b) the proceeding is against all known occupants must be approved by the LRA.
and adjoining owners of the land. (c) the submission of a certified copy of the
(c) the proceeding aims generally to bar some blueprint or whiteprint plan as approved by the
individual claim or objection so that certain persons who DENR Regional Executive Director will suffice.
claim an interest in the land are entitled to be heard. (d) the submission of a certified copy of the
(d) the proceeding shall be based on the generally blueprint or whiteprint plan will suffice if the area
accepted principles underlying the Torrens system. does not exceed the Constitutional limit.

 When is a right to property deemed vested?

 The court, in an order dated June 13, 2009, set the initial (a) When the right to its enjoyment, present
hearing of the case on September 25, 2009. Judgment or prospective, has become the property of a
was for the applicant. OSG contends that the notice of particular person.
initial hearing is defective and/or it did not vest the trial (b) When it is no longer subject to question
court with jurisdiction over the case. Is the OSG correct? in any proceeding.
(a) Yes for the initial hearing should have been set (c) When the property was already released
not later than September 11, 2009, or 90 days from from the forest zone at the start of possession in
June 13, 2009. the concept of owner.
(b) No since the issuance and publication of the (d) When it is fixed by a legislative
notice of initial hearing involved a process in which the enactment or municipal ordinance.
applicant has had no participation.
(c) No since the publication of the notice is  If publication of the notice of initial hearing in the
jurisdictional. OG “shall be sufficient to confer jurisdiction upon
(d) No since the notice, as published, already gave the court” (Sec. 23, PD 1529), is there still a need
sufficient notice to all interested parties of the actual to publish the notice in a newspaper?
date of hearing. (a) No more since the law expressly
provides that publication in the OG is sufficient.
(b) Yes because practically no one reads the
• Which of the following may be considered OG anyway.
sufficient to show the prior classification of the (c) No more since it is not fair that the
land as A and D? applicant should be unduly burdened by
(a) Cadastral survey of a municipality additional expenses for publication.
preparatory to the filing of the petition for (d) Yes because publication in the
cadastral proceedings. newspaper is part of procedural due process.
(b) Titling of properties around the land
subject of registration.
(c) Report and recommendation of the
District Forester for the release of the property • Amendments to the application for registration
from the unclassified region. may be allowed. However,
(d) Executive proclamation withdrawing (a) it is not permissible to make
from a reservation a specific area and declaring amendments after the registration of the
the same open for entry, sale or other mode of property has been decreed except upon order of
disposition. the court.
 (b) the amendment is proper only when the (c) to proffer well-nigh incontrovertible
inclusion of additional area is very negligible, or proof of possession since June 12, 1945 or prior
smaller than the original area. thereto.
(c) the amendment must bear the (d) to show full compliance with the
conformity of the Solicitor General as counsel for residence and cultivation requirements by oral
the government in all land registration and documentary evidence.
proceedings.
(d) the amended survey plan must first be  In determining the sufficiency of the evidence in a
approved by the LRA. registration case, the Supreme Court generally may not
re-evaluate the findings of fact of the trial and
 In order that additional area may be included in appellate courts. The recognized exceptions are:
the original area subject of registration, the (a) when the findings of fact are conclusions without
applicant should: citation of specific evidence on which they are based
(a) withdraw his original application and file (b) when the appellate court, in making its findings,
a new one to include the additional area. went beyond the issues in the case.
(b) file a separate application for the (c) when the petitioner disputes the jurisdiction of
additional area. the trial court.
(c) amend his application to include the (d) “a” and “b”.
additional area subject to the requirements of
publication. • The Civil Code provides that accretion belongs to
(d) file a separate application for the the owners of the land adjoining the banks of the
additional area and move for the consolidation of river. It is however necessary that the accretion
said application with the original application for (a) must have taken place for such length of
registration. time as to ipso jure convert the same into private
ownership.
 Petitioner bought registered land on July 5, 2009. At the (b) is made through the effects of the
time he registered the sale on January 5, 2010, a writ of current of the water.
attachment was already inscribed on the vendor’s title (c) is formed by the natural change in the
on August 5, 2009. Which of the following is false? course of the river.
(a) the levy on attachment lost its efficacy by the (d) must have been formed gradually and
subsequent registration of the prior sale. imperceptibly for a period of not less than 10
(b) the levy subordinated the right of petitioner years.
as purchaser.
(c) the attachment remained valid until  The primary purpose of cadastral proceedings is
discharged. (a) to determine conflicting claims of
(d) the execution sale should be upheld because ownership in the area subject of cadastral survey.
it retroacts to the date of levy. (b) to provide a remedy, without any
expense, for the correction of errors in the
• Overt acts of possession may consist in introducing technical description of lands already titled so as
valuable improvements on the property like fruit- to conform to the cadastral survey.
bearing trees. In Republic v. Court of Appeals and (c) to settle and adjudicate title to lands.
Chavez (GR No. L-62680, Nov. 9, 1988), the Court held (d) to determine the priority or relative
that in a practical and scientific way of planting, weight of two or more certificates of title for the
(a) it takes only 5 years for coconut trees and 3 years same land.
for mango trees to begin bearing fruit.
(b) it takes only 10 years for mango trees and 5 years • Land subject of registration may be “dealt with” after
for coconut trees to begin bearing fruit. the filing of the application and before the issuance of
(c) it takes only 3 years for coconut trees and 5 years decree. In case of sale, for instance, it is required that
for mango trees to begin bearing fruit. (a) the buyer is made a party to the case.
(d) it takes only 10 years for coconut trees and 5 (b) the buyer shows proof that he is qualified to
years for mango trees to begin bearing fruit. register the land in his name.
 The capacity to acquire private land is determined (c) the application for registration is amended by
by the capacity substituting the buyer for the applicant.
(a) to convert the land to its maximum (d) the instrument evidencing the transaction is
productivity. presented to the court for appropriate consideration.
(b) to acquire public land.
 •The duty of the LRA Administrator to issue a decree (d) They are owned by the State pursuant to
of registration is ministerial, the reason being that Section 2, Article XII which states that all lands
(a) his refusal would subject him to and all other natural resources are “owned by the
contempt of court. State.”
(b) he is an officer, and acts upon order, of
the court.  Recovery from the Assurance Fund is possible
(c) the winning party has an absolute right (a) when private defendant is insolvent.
to the fruits of the verdict. (b) when plaintiff failed in his action for
(d) the issuance of the decree is an express reconveyance.
component of his official functions. (c) when plaintiff is deprived of any interest
in land on account of bringing land under the
 Pedro applied for the registration of land. The Torrens system.
government opposed. Judgment was rendered in favor (d) when the Register of Deeds failed to
of Pedro, which became final. Thereafter, Pedro sold exercise due care to forestall fraudulent
the land to Jose. Can the government appeal the registration.
judgment?
(a) No because a final judgment can no longer be the • When a deed of sale presented for registration is
subject of appeal. forged,
(b) No because the government is already concluded (a) the registered owner does not lose his
by the judgment, having interposed its opposition to title to the land.
the application for registration. (b) the transferee can recover damages
(c) Yes because the government is not bound by the from the Assurance Fund.
mistakes or errors of its agents. (c) the transferee can ask the true owner to
(d) No because the land is now transferred to a third execute a deed of sale in his favor.
person. (d) the Register of Deeds should elevate the
matter to the LRA via en consulta.
 To avail of a petition for review,
(a) the petitioner must allege facts surrounding the  The burden of proving the status of a purchaser in
trial which prevented a fair and just determination of good faith is discharged
the case. (a) by one who asserts that status.
(b) the petition must be filed within 60 days from the (b) by invoking the legal presumption of
finality of the decision of the court. good faith.
(c) the petitioner must await the expiration of one (c) by proof that the vendor is the true
year from the issuance of the decree of registration. owner of the property sold.
(d) the property has not passed to an innocent (d) by proof that the property was
purchaser for value. unencumbered at the time of the sale.

 An action for reversion filed by the Solicitor  Jose forged the signature of the registered owner,
General is proper where defendant’s title covers Pedro, in a deed of sale purportedly made by the
(a) land consisting of alluvial deposits latter in favor of Mario who paid the full purchase
caused by the action of the sea. price thereof. Is Mario a buyer in good faith?
(b) land which had been previously titled (a) No because as a cautious person he
through cadastral proceedings. should have first determined in the office of the
(c) land subject of irregular reconstitution Register of Deeds who the true owner of the
proceedings. property is.
(d) land forming part of the friar lands (b) No because the forged deed does not
estate.. convey any valid title.
(c) Yes because a buyer of registered land
 What is the concept of ownership of ancestral need not go beyond the four corners of the title
domains? to determine any flaw in the title or ownership of
(a) They are part of the lands of the public his vendor.
domain under the concept of jura regalia. (d) Yes because he has paid the full
(b) They are the private but community purchase price of the land.
property of indigenous peoples. • Pedro sold registered land to an alien. The sale
(c) They, and all natural resources therein, was not registered. Realizing that the sale is
belong in private ownership to indigenous prohibited, Pedro seeks to recover the land from
cultural communities based on native title. the alien vendee. Will the action prosper?
 (a) Yes because the sale is not yet (c) a certification by the LRA that a decree
registered. of registration was in fact issued.
(b) No because both Pedro and the alien (d) none of the above.
vendee are in pari delicto.
(c) No because Pedro is estopped from  Gan Tan lost his title when his house was burned in
impugning the sale. 1995. He filed for reconstitution in 2004. The court
(d) Yes because the prohibition is designed denied the petition based on a BID certification
for the protection of the Filipino vendor. submitted by the OSG that Gan Tan is an alien. In case
of appeal, how should the case be resolved?
• Minerals are discovered underneath Pedro’s titled (a) The appeal should be denied because Gan Tan
property. Who has the right to exploit the being an alien is disqualified from owning
minerals? land in the country.
(a) The government has the absolute right (b) Reconstitution should be ordered because a
to exploit the minerals. Torrens title, as a rule, is irrevocable and
(b) Pedro has the right to exploit the indefeasible.
minerals because he is the absolute owner of the (c) The appeal should be dismissed since petitioner
land. has lost his right to the land on the
(c) Pedro does not have the right to exploit ground of laches.
the minerals because he owns the surface area (d) Reconstitution should be ordered because a
only. Torrens title cannot be collaterally attacked.
(d) The government has the right to exploit
the minerals upon prior expropriation of the
property.  Under the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (RA No.
8371), registration under the Torrens system of
• The purpose of a notice of lis pendens is individually-owned ancestral land requires
(a) to fortify the claim of ownership of the party (a) possession for not less than 30 years
causing the registration thereof. immediately prior to the approval of the law on
(b) to prevent the owner of the property from October 29, 1997.
alienating it while the case is still pending trial. (b) possession since June 12, 1945 or
(c) to advise third persons who purchase the earlier.
property that they do so at their peril. (c) possession for not less than ten (10)
(d) to put the owner on notice that he holds the years in good faith.
property in trust for the person causing the annotation (d) possession for not less than thirty (30)
of the lis pendens. years.

• May an adverse claim of ownership, based on • OCT No. 38621 was decreed in the name of
prescription and adverse possession, be “Pedro Valdez, married to Lita Marquez”.
registered over registered land? Because of the loss of the original copy of the
(a) Yes because adverse claim aims to title, Pedro petitioned the court for
protect the interest of the person claiming reconstitution. During the pendency of the case,
ownership of the land. Lita died. Assuming that the petition is
(b) No because title to registered land is substantiated, the court should issue an order of
imprescriptible. reconstitution:
(c) Yes because the adverse claim serves as (a) in the name of “Pedro Valdez, widower”.
a notice that the adverse claimant has a better (b) in the name of “Pedro Valdez, married
right to the land than the registered owner to Lita Marquez, deceased”.
thereof. (c) in the name of “Pedro Valdez, married to
(d) No because prescription for the Lita Marquez”.
acquisition of title is never presumed. (d) in the name of “Pedro Valdez”.

• Reconstitution denotes reconstruction of a lost or • If the Register of Deeds is unsure whether or not
destroyed original certificate of title. The term an instrument affecting registered land is
“any other document” as a source of registrable, he should
reconstitution may include (a) return the document to the registrant
(a) an order of the court for the issuance of for the reformation of the instrument.
the decree. (b) ask the registrant to elevate the matter
(b) an approved survey plan and technical to the LRA for the resolution of the issue via en
description of the land. consulta.
 (c) himself refer the matter to the LRA for (a) Report the fact of loss to the police and
the determination of the issue. then file a petition for replacement of the lost
(d) advise the registrant to file an adverse title before the court.
claim in the meantime pending further study and (b) Send a notice under oath to the Register
determination of the issue. of Deeds of the province or city where the land
lies as soon as the loss is discovered.
 Every purchaser of registered land – (c) Promptly file with the proper court a
(a) is charged with notice of all liens verified petition for replacement of the lost title.
whether or not annotated on the title, (d) Proceed with the documentation of the
(b) should first investigate to determine the sale and then file a petition for replacement of
condition of the property. the lost title.
(c) may safely rely on the validity of the
title.  In 1995, Pedro, a natural born Filipino, bought an
(d) should cautiously look behind the agricultural land from Jose who has been in
certificate to determine the true owner. possession thereof as owner since 1942. Pedro
migrated to Japan where he acquired Japanese
citizenship. He came back to the Philippines in
• May a Dutch national validly purchase a 2010 and applied for the registration of the land
residential unit in a townhouse project which is now industrial in character. The
constituted under the Condominium Act? government opposed since Pedro is now an alien.
(a) No because aliens, whether individuals Is the opposition valid?
or corporations, are disqualified from acquiring (a) Yes because aliens are disqualified
public lands, hence, they are also disqualified from acquiring lands in the Philippines.
from acquiring private lands. (b) Yes because even privately owned
(b) Yes because for as long as 60% of the unregistered lands are presumed to be
members of the condominium corporation are public lands under the Regalian doctrine.
Filipinos, the remaining members can be (c) No because the land at the time of its
foreigners. acquisition by Pedro is deemed already a
(c) Yes because the unit owner is simply a private land.
member of the condominium corporation and the (d) Yes because industrial lands may only
land remains owned by the condominium be leased to aliens.
corporation.
(d) (b) and (c).
• To secure a loan, Pedro mortgaged his titled property to
 If only a portion of the land covered by a the bank. The mortgage was annotated on the title.
certificate of title is sold by the owner, and the Subsequently, Jose filed suit with the RTC to quiet title
deed is presented for inscription, the Register of and to nullify Pedro’s title. A notice of lis pendens was
Deeds annotated on Pedro’s title. For Pedro’s failure to pay,
(a) shall annotate the deed by way of the property was sold at auction with the bank as
memorandum on the grantor’s certificate of title, successful bidder. Meantime, the RTC rendered
original and duplicate. judgment nullifying Pedro’s title as well as the mortgage
(b) shall not enter any transfer certificate to to the bank. The bank now claims that it is both a
the grantee until a plan of the land showing all mortgagee and buyer in good faith. Is the bank correct?
the portions or lots into which it has been (a) No because the bank is a transferee
subdivided shall have been verified and approved. pendente lite, subject to the results of the
(c) shall issue a new certificate of title to the pending litigation.
grantee for the portion conveyed and at the same (b) No because no valid lien can arise from a
cancel the grantor’s certificate partially with void title as Pedro’s.
respect only to the portion conveyed. (c) Yes because the notice of lis pendens
(d) (a) and (b). cannot affect the mortgage previously registered.
(d) No because Pedro’s title was declared
void, and the mortgage being but an accessory
contract, is also void.
• The registration of an instrument affecting registered
 Pedro decides to sell his property to Jose only to land
discover the loss of his owner's duplicate (a) operates as a notice to all persons at the
certificate of title covering it. What initial time of registering.
recourse should Pedro take? (b) gives effect to the instrument.
 (c) forecloses a judicial declaration of its
invalidity.  The date of the initial hearing of a registration case shall
(d) records an existing title. be not earlier than
(a) 60 days from the date of the order.
• The cancellation of a notice of lis pendens (b) 90 days from the date of the order.
(a) is contingent on the existence of a final (c) 120 days from the date of the order.
judgment. (d) 45 days from the date of the order.
(b) is proper where it appears that the case
has been unnecessarily prolonged. • The remedy available to the interested party for the
(c) may only be made at the instance of the Register of Deeds’ denial of his request for the issuance
adverse party. of a certificate of title pursuant to a court judgment is:
(d) may be made motu proprio by the (a) To cite the RD in contempt.
Register of Deeds if it appears that the notice was (b) To file a mandamus petition versus the RD.
filed to molest the adverse party. (c) To appeal the RD’s denial to the LRA via consulta.
(d) To file administrative charges against the RD with
• Mineral resources are owned by the LRA.
(a) the State, subject to privates rights if any
there be.  Can a deed of donation of a parcel of land by a
(b) the owner of the property where they Filipino citizen to a religious organization whose
are found. trustees are non-Filipinos, be admitted by the RD
(c) the State. for registration?
(d) the indigenous peoples when they are (a) Yes because to disqualify the
found within ancestral domains. corporation would be a violation of its
religious freedom.
 Which of the following statements is not correct: (b) No because land tenure is not
(a) Because the majority of land in the indispensable to the free exercise of
country are agricultural lands, courts have a right religion.
to presume that lands are agricultural unless (c) Yes because the acquisition of the land
shown otherwise. is strictly for religious purposes, i.e., upon
(b) By reason of the rapid growth of timber which to build churches and charitable
or minerals today, lands classified as agricultural institutions.
today may be differently classified tomorrow. (d) Yes because the religious organization
(c) In classifying lands, each case must be has no capital stock, and so the
classified upon the proof in a particular case. Constitutional inhibition does not apply.
(d) When a tract of land has trees upon it, it
is sufficient to declare the legal classification of  Mangrove swamps are not registrable. They are under
the land as forest land. the jurisdiction of the
(a) Bureau of Forest Development.
• Private lands taken by the government for public use (b) Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources.
through expropriation become (c) Department of Environment and Natural
(a) private property. Resources.
(b) public lands. (d) Lands Management Bureau.
(c) patrimonial property.
(d) part of the public domain. • The registration court
(a) must personally hear the parties and
• A cadastral proceeding is initiated by the government. receive their evidence.
Relevantly, (b) may refer the case to the clerk of court
(a) Lands subject of a cadastral survey are for the reception of evidence.
deemed registrable lands. (c) may refer the case to a referee but the
(b) Lands cadastrally surveyed, excluding court may accept or reject his report.
forests, water bodies and other natural (d) may not refer the case to a referee for
resources, are automatically considered A and D hearing because judicial power is vested in the
lands. court itself.
(c) Lands inside a cadastre must be officially  Which statement is correct?
declared A and D to be registrable. (a) Public land is not synonymous with
(d) Lands titled through cadastral public domain.
proceedings cannot be sold within 5 years from (b) Public land includes all lands of
the issuance of the decree. government ownership.
 (c) Government land and public land are (b) has no legal right to oppose the
synonymous terms. application.
(d) The government owns real estate which (c) may join cause with the Solicitor General
is part of the public lands and other real estate by filing his opposition himself .
which is not a part thereof. (d) has the right to oppose if he has
improvements on the land.
• Non-publication of the notice of initial hearing in a
newspaper of general circulation • Where public land is titled by final judgment,
(a) affects the jurisdiction of the court. (a) the actual occupant is not barred from
(b) does not affect the jurisdiction of the filing a petition for relief from judgment.
court. (b) the Director of Lands may conduct an
(c) is not consequential since jurisdiction is investigation to determine whether fraud
acquired by the publication of the notice in the attended the registration.
Official Gazette. (c) the government cannot entertain any
(d) does not affect the applicant’s claim of administrative protests against the judgment.
ownership. (d) the government may file a petition to
reopen the proceedings for insufficient evidence
• An order of general default to prove the private character of the land.
(a) may be modified or amended only
before the presentation of evidence by the • Where no person appears or answers within the time
applicant. allowed,
(b) precludes the filing of a motion for (a) the court shall enter an order of special
reconsideration by the oppositor who is default.
concluded by the default order. (b) an order of default may likely result in a
(c) may be revoked upon motion within 90 judgment favorable to the applicant.
days from the date of the default order. (c) the allegations in the application shall be
(d) does not preclude the party in default held as confessed.
from filing a motion to set aside the default (d) the court may now render judgment
order. either granting or dismissing the application for
registration.
• Under PD No. 1529, the registration court shall decide
the case within how many days from the date the case is  Where there is no publication of the notice of initial
submitted for resolution? hearing,
(a) 90 days. (a) the proceeding is utterly void.
(b) 120 days. (b) personal notice to known adjoining
(c) 1 year. owners may be effected to rectify the omission.
(d) 30 days. (c) lack of publication may be corrected by
publication of the notice before judgment.
• The certification by the LRA that publication, mailing and (d) the proceeding is valid if not contested
posting of the notice of initial hearing have been by the Solicitor General.
complied with
(a) is immaterial to the applicant’s claim of
ownership.  Which of the following is false?
(b) may be considered because of the (a) a judicial foreclosure of mortgage is a quasi in
presumptive regularity in the performance of rem proceeding
official functions. (b) An action to recover a parcel of land is a real
(c) is subject to contrary proof. action and, hence, an action in rem.
(d) is conclusive as to such fact. (c) Suits to quiet title are not technically suits in rem
but are characterized as quasi in rem.
(d) An action to recover a parcel of land is an action
in personam.

• An applicant for a homestead or any other mode of

disposition under the Public Land Act  Lands invaded by the sea
(a) may validly oppose an application for (a) belong to the affected municipality as
registration because of his inchoate interest in municipal waters.
the land. (b) belong the State as maritime waters.
 (c) belong to the State as part of the public (b) that new interests not appearing on
domain. the certificate have arisen.
(d) may be reclaimed by the affected (c) that the corporation which is the
private property owner. registered owner of the land has been
 The Land Registration Authority (LRA), which is the dissolved.
central repository of records relative to registered lands, (d) that the area should be corrected to
is under what office? conform to the new survey tending to
(a) Department of Agrarian Reform. show that the evidence introduced at the
(b) Department of Justice. former hearing was inaccurate.
(c) Office of the President.
(d) Department of Environment and Natural  A Torrens certificate of title
Resources. (a) protects the true owner from the usurper.
(b) permits one to defeat the claim of another.
• To be valid and effective, a notice of lis pendens must be (c) is an effective tool against the commission of
• (a) filed simultaneously with the filing of the action fraud.
subject of the notice. (d) records an existing title.
• (b) annotated on both the duplicate certificate of title
on file with the Register of Deeds and in the possession  An action for reconveyance
of the registered owner. (a) seeks to reopen the registration
• (c) approved by the court in the pending case. proceedings.
• (d) annotated on the original duplicate certificate of (b) respects the decree as incontrovertible
title on file with the Register of Deeds. and no longer open to review.
(c) seeks to nullify defendant’s title to pave
the issuance of a new title to the rightful owner.
 To identify and segregate a portion of the public domain (d) confirms plaintiff’s ownership over the
for the establishment of court houses in the country – property.
(a) The Supreme Court must issue a
Resolution en banc for the purpose.  Under the Administrative Code, the Solicitor
(b) The issuance by the DENR of an General shall “represent the government in all
Administrative Order is sufficient. land registration and related proceedings.” This
(c) The reservation must be established by means that:
a Presidential Proclamation. (a) the SG may deputize any government
(d) There must be a resolution by joint prosecutor to assist him in the case.
houses of Congress. (b) notice of court processes, orders and
decisions received by the prosecutor is
 Land reclaimed by the government may be sold by the notice to the Solicitor General.
government to private parties only (c) the prosecutor may himself withdraw
(a) when it is not needed for public service. the government’s appeal if he finds the
(b) pursuant to a legislative act. same to be without any factual or legal
(c) pursuant to a Presidential proclamation. basis.
(d) when no longer needed for coast guard (d) the prosecutor may enter into a
service. stipulation of facts or compromise with
the applicant.

 The registration of an instrument affecting registered  The period of prescription in an action for reconveyance
land is counted from the
(a) operates as a notice to all persons at the (a) date of the issuance of the title.
time of registering. (b) date of the promulgation of the judgment.
(b) gives effect to the instrument. (c) discovery of the fraud.
(c) forecloses any judicial declaration of its (d) date of issuance of the decree of registration.
invalidity.
(d) puts in issue an instrument previously
registered.
 Which of the following allegations cannot be a  An action for reversion by the State is proper
ground for the amendment or correction of a when defendant’s title covers
certificate of title? (a) land consisting of alluvial deposits
(a) that the registered owner has married. caused by the action of the sea.
 (b) land previously titled through cadastral (b) the title is in the name of both husband
proceedings. and wife.
(c) land within a reservation for public use. (c) the spouses are living together.
(d) (a) and (c). (d) the property was acquired during the
marriage.
 An adverse claim may be recorded in which of the
following instances?  In reconstitution proceedings, which of the
(a) lease over land which could not be following propositions is wrong:
registered because the owner’s duplicate (a) The issuance of a reconstituted title
title was not surrendered. does not determine the issue of
(b) existing claims on the land prior to the ownership.
issuance of the certificate of title. (b) The LRA can motu proprio revoke the
(c) hereditary rights of a person in the land reconstituted title if the lost or destroyed
registered in her sister’s name. title is subsequently found.
(d) (a) and (c). (c) The issuance by the LRA of a
reconstituted title is an administrative
 Opposition to an application for registration must be function.
based on real right or dominion to property. This means (d) The doctrine of res judicata applies to
that – judicial reconstitution.
(a) the oppositor must be able to show title to
the property. • Section 14(1) of PD No. 1529 requires possession
(b) the oppositor must have the legal character and occupation of the land applied for since June
necessary to maintain a registration proceeding 12, 1945. Which of the following propositions is
in his own name. false?
(c) it is enough that the oppositor should appear (a) Occupation is broader than possession
to have an interest in the property. because it includes the latter.
(d) all of the above. (b) Occupation delimits the effect of
constructive possession.
 Under the Water Code, waters found on private (c) Possession means acts of dominion
lands belong the State. Which of the following is which a party would naturally exercise
excluded? over his own property.
(a) continuous or intermittent waters (d) Occupation serves to highlight that
rising on such lands. possession must not be a mere fiction.
(b) lakes and lagoon naturally occurring on
such lands. • An adverse claim is effective for 30 days. To
(c) rain water falling on such lands. render the adverse claim functus officio,
(d) none of the above. (a) the interested party should formally
request the Register of Deeds to cancel the same
 Pedro files an application for registration. upon the expiration of the 30-day period.
However, the land applied for had been (b) no action is necessary since the adverse
previously registered in the name of Jose. What claim automatically lapses upon the expiration of
should Jose do? the 30-day period.
(a) Jose should file an opposition and (c) the interested party should file a petition
present his title during the hearing. in court for the cancellation of the adverse claim.
(b) Jose should file an opposition alleging (d) it is necessary to await the final outcome
that Pedro’s application constitutes a of the case.
collateral attack on his title.
(c) Jose should file a motion to dismiss  Can an adverse claim of ownership over registered land,
based on res judicata. based on acquisitive prescription, be registered?
(d) Jose should file a suit for damages (a) Yes because adverse claim aims to protect the
against Pedro for fraudulently seeking to interest of the person claiming ownership
register land which, he should know, is thereof.
already titled to another. (b) No because title to registered land is
 The presumption in Article 160 of the Civil Code imprescriptible.
that all property of the marriage belongs to the (c) Yes because adverse claim is a notice that the
conjugal partnership applies when adverse claimant has a better right to the land
(a) the “spouses” are legally married. than the registered owner thereof.
 (d) No because acquisitive prescription of title to (d) the property has not passed to an innocent
land can never be presumed. purchaser for value.

 An action for reconveyance based on a void deed  Pedro files a petition for administrative
of sale for lack of consent reconstitution of title, but it appears that the land
(a) prescribes in 10 years. is already titled in the name of Lim. Lim is a
(b) prescribes in 4 years Chinese. What are the options open to the LRA?
(c) is imprescriptible (a) The LRA should order outright the
(d) prescribes in 6 years. cancellation of Lim’s title and proceed to act on
Pedro’s petition for reconstitution.
 A corporation sole may purchase and hold real (b) The LRA should dismiss Pedro’s petition
estate because - pending the filing by the OSG or the competing
(a) the properties acquired by the claimant of an action before the RTC for the
corporation pass upon the death of the cancellation of Lim’s title.
administrator to his heirs who are Filipino (c) The LRA should elevate the matter to the
citizens. Secretary of Justice for advisory opinion.
(b) ownership of said properties fall upon (d) The LRA should defer action on Pedro’s
the church or congregation and not upon the petition pending the results of the action to
incumbent administrator. determine the validity of Lim’s title
(c) the corporation exercises ownership
independently of the nationality of its incumbent • Who is the proper party to file an action for annulment
administrator. or amendment of the title where it appears that the
(d) (b) and (c). Assurance Fund may be held liable for damages due to
the unlawful or erroneous issuance thereof?
 What is the concept of ownership of ancestral (a) the Solicitor General
domains? (b) the LRA Administrator
(a) Ancestral domains are part of the lands (c) the LMB Director
of the public domain under the concept of jura (d) the Register of Deeds
regalia.
(b) Ancestral domains are the private but  The rule that a forged deed may become the root of a
community property of indigenous peoples. valid title
(c) Ancestral domains and all natural (a) does not apply where the owner still holds a
resources therein belong to indigenous cultural valid title over the land.
communities based on native title. (b) applies even where the owner no longer
(d) (a) and (b). holds a valid title to the land.
(c) applies where the forger obtains a title to the
 Land already decreed in an ordinary registration case land and thereafter sells it to another.
cannot again be the subject of a subsequent cadastral (d) (a) and (c).
proceeding because
(a) once land is judicially decreed, the judgment is res  The Assurance Fund is not liable for loss or damage
judicata. caused by which of the following?
(b) the registration in the name of the first owner is (a) Breach of trust, express or implied.
constructive notice to the whole world. (b) Mistake in the resurvey of registered land
(c) to declare the later title valid as against the first would causing expansion of the area.
undermine the efficacy of Torrens system. (c) Error in the subdivision of the land resulting in
(d) all of the above. the increase in area.
(d) all of the above.
 To avail of a petition for review,
(a) the petitioner must allege facts
surrounding the trial which prevented a fair
determination of the case.
(b) the petition must be filed within sixty (60)
days from the finality of the decision of the
registration court.
(c) the petitioner must await the expiration of
one year from the issuance of the decree of  A notice of lis pendens
registration. (a) binds a bona fide purchaser of the property in
dispute.
 (c) creates a right or lien that previously did not property with knowledge of the existence of a third-
exist. party claim before said claim has been decided. Which
(c) binds a purchaser, whether bona fide or not, of the following does not accord with this principle?
of the disputed property. (a) The court may not grant the writ where title is in
(d) is part of the doctrine of notice. doubt.
(b) The prudent course of action is to hold in
abeyance proceedings for the issuance of the
 An action for reconveyance of land valued at P15,000 writ.
should be filed with what court? (c) The true owner must resort to judicial process for
(a) the second level court of the province where the recovery of the property.
the land lies. (d) The interested party should resort to mandamus
(b) the second level court or first level court of since issuance of the writ is ministerial.
the place where defendant resides.
(c) the first level court of the municipality where  An action for reconveyance based on an implied or
the land lies. constructive trust prescribes in how many years from
(d) the second level court of the place where the issuance of the title over the property?
plaintiff resides. (a) 4 years.
(b) imprescriptible.
 Where the object of the plaintiff is to recover possession (c) 10 years.
of real property as owner, the proper action is: (d) 6 years.
(a) forcible entry and detainer.
(b) accion reivindicatoria.  The State may prosecute for perjury the party who
(c) accion publiciana. obtains registration through fraud, such as by stating
(d) declaratory relief. false assertions in the sworn application of applicants?
Thus premised, which of the following is false?
 An action to quiet title to property in the possession of  (a) A judgment on the guilt of the accused would not
the plaintiff is imprescriptible, the reason being that: undermine the indefeasibility of Torrens titles.
(a) he has a continuing right to the aid of a court  (b) To give immunity from prosecution to those
of equity to remove a cloud on his title. successful in deceiving the registration court would be
(b) he may wait until his title is attacked before putting a premium on perjury.
taking steps to vindicate his right.  (c) The prosecution for perjury would amount to an
(c) possession is a continuing right as is the right attack on the validity of the titles which are presumed
to defend such possession. valid.
(d) all of the above.  (d) Any judgment rendered in the criminal case would
leave the titles undisturbed.
 A certificate of title based upon a public land patent
becomes indefeasible within what period?
(a) 5 years after the issuance of the patent.  Laches is the failure or neglect to assert a right within
(b) 1 year from the issuance of the patent. reasonable time. Which is not correct in the following
(c) 1 year from the date of the order of award. statements?
(d) 5 years from the approval of the application. (a) Laches is concerned with the fact of delay.
(b) Laches applies in equity.
• What is the consequence of non-payment by the lot (c) Laches is concerned with the effect of delay.
buyer of installments due for failure of the (d) Laches is not based on a fixed time.
owner/developer to finish the project within the time
agreed upon?
(a) Installments paid shall be forfeited in favor of  The writ of possession may not be issued in which of the
the owner/developer. following?
(b) The buyer may ask for the reimbursement of (a) in a land registration proceeding.
all amounts paid, but without interest. (b) in a petition for reconstitution.
(c) The owner/developer could rescind the (b) in an extrajudicial foreclosure of a realty mortgage.
contract. (c) in a judicial foreclosure of mortgage.
(d) The buyer may suspend further payments
until the owner/development had fulfilled its
obligations.  What options are open to the mortgagee in case the
 A proceeding for the issuance of a writ of possession is a mortgagor dies?
mere incident in the transfer of title, hence, it is (a) waive the mortgage and claim the entire debt
impractical to award possession to a purchaser of from the estate of the mortgagor as an ordinary claim.
 (b) foreclose the mortgage judicially and prove any (a) No. He must file a separate petition in court
deficiency as an ordinary claim. to compel surrender of the same to the RD.
(c)Rely on the mortgage exclusively, foreclosing the (b) Yes, this being a necessary incident in the
same at any time before it is barred by prescription, main case.
without right to file a claim for any deficiency. (c) No. The issue should be threshed out in an
(d) all of the above. ordinary action.
(d) Yes, to avoid multiplicity of suits.
 Within what period may a judgment in a land
registration case be enforced?
(a) Upon motion within 5 years from the date of  Which of the following (sample) allegations in a
entry. defendant’s answer to plaintiff’s complaint for quieting
(b) No further proceeding to enforce the judgment is of title does not constitute a collateral attack on
necessary. plaintiff’s title?
(c) Upon motion within 10 years from the date of (a) that plaintiff is the prior registered
entry. owner of the land.
(d) Upon motion after finality of judgment praying (b) that plaintiff is disqualified to acquire
that LRA be directed to issue the decree of registration. the land since he is not a Filipino citizen.
(c) that plaintiff has no cause of action
 The original certificate of title is issued on the date because the land had been previously sold by
(a) the decree of registration is issued by the LRA. plaintiff to defendant.
(b) the title is given the corresponding number by (d) that plaintiff’s title was improperly
the Register of Deeds. issued for lack of possession of the disputed
(c) the original and duplicate copies are received by property.
the Register of Deeds from the LRA.
(d) the decree of registration is transcribed.  The registration of a broker engaged in selling
subdivision lots may be revoked when
(a) he has made a material false statement in his
 The following are sample allegations of actual application for registration.
fraud which may be the basis of a petition for the (b) he has been guilty of a fraudulent act in the
review of a decree. Which is the most serious? sale of a subdivision lot.
(a) The Solicitor General has not been (c) he has demonstrated his unworthiness as a
furnished with the requisite notices and broker.
copy of the decision granting registration (d) all of the above.
of land within the forest zone.
(b) The applicant failed to show
possession and occupation of the land for  The registration of a broker engaged in selling
the length of time required by law. subdivision lots may be revoked when
(c) The registration court did not have (a) he has made a material false statement in his
jurisdiction over the res because it is non- application for registration.
registrable. (b) he has been guilty of a fraudulent act in the
(d) The prosecutor did not have the sale of a subdivision lot.
authority to withdraw the appeal of the (c) he has demonstrated his unworthiness as a
government. broker.
(d) all of the above.
 Section 5 of PD No. 957 prohibits the sale of a
subdivision lot without an HLURB license.
(a) The subsequent issuance of the license erases
the offense.  Over what cases does HLURB have no jurisdiction?
(b) The invocation of good faith extinguishes (a) Claims for refund by a subdivision buyer.
criminal liability. (b) Determination of the criminal liability of a broker
(c) The crime is regarded as malum prohibitum. selling condominium units without a license.
(d) The determination of liability rests with the (c) unsound real estate practices.
HLURB. (d) cases involving specific performance of
 Can the plaintiff in an action for specific performance contractual obligations filed by subdivision buyers.
compel defendant, in the same action, to surrender the • A homesteader cannot sell the homestead within
duplicate certificate of title to the Register of Deeds (RD) 5 years from the issuance of the patent. Which of
for the registration of the sale? the following situations is not covered by the
prohibition?
 (a) Sale made to the homesteader’s own
son or daughter.
(b) Sale made within the prohibitory period
but conditioned that the sale shall not take effect
until after the expiration of said period.
(c) Sale of a portion of the homestead with
the homesteader keeping a reasonable area for
himself and his family
(d) None of the above.

 Who has jurisdiction over cases involving the

cancellation of registered emancipation patents
(EPs), certificates of land ownership award
(CLOAs), and other titles issued under the
agrarian reform program?
(a) The Secretary of Agrarian Reform.
(b) The Department of Agrarian Reform
Adjudication Board (DARAB).
(c) The ordinary courts of justice.
(d) The RTC acting as a Special Agrarian
Court (SAC).

• Where a tenant farmer appears to have a claim adverse

to the applicant, who among the following need not be
served with the notice of initial hearing?
(a) Director of Fisheries and Aquatic
Resources.
(b) Solicitor General.
(c) Secretary of Agrarian Reform.
(d) Mayor of the city or municipality where
the land is situated.

 No salesman shall engage is selling subdivision lots

unless registered with HLURB. His registration shall
cease when
 (a) he has made a false statement in his
application for registration.
 (b) he has demonstrated his unworthiness to
transact business as such.
 (c) he has violated any provision in his certificate
of registration.
 (d) his employment with a dealer or broker has
terminated.

• Pedro, a lot buyer, filed a complaint against Asia

Development Corporation (ADC) for mortgaging
subdivision lots (including his) without being first
informed of such fact. Which of the following defenses
of ADC is valid?
(a) that the loan to ADC was granted when the
mortgaged property was not yet subdivided.
(b) that the mortgage was constituted prior to
the actual sale of the lot to Pedro.
(c) that the knowledge or consent of the lot
buyer to the mortgage is not required.
(d) none of the above.