Natres Midterms Reviewer

NATRES MIDTERMS REVIEWER
1. Magallona vs. Executive Secretary

G.R. No. 187167 | July 16, 2011 consistent with the Constitution and our
national interest. WHEREFORE, we
TOPIC: ARTICLE I - National Territory DISMISS the petition. SO ORDERED.
RA 9522 is a statutory tool to demarcate the

country’s maritime zones and continental shelf
UNCLOS- provides for general obligation of
Under UNCLOS III, not to delineate Philippine
States to protect and preserve the marine
territory.
environment and recognizes the sovereign right
It shortened 1 baseline, optimized the location of of States to exploit their natural resources
some basepoints around the archipelago, and
ARCHIPELAGO DOCTRINE
classified adjacent territories (like the Kalayaan
Island Group and Scarborough Shoal) as regimes
a. Connect the outermost points of our
of islands whose islands generate their own
archipelago with straight baselines and
applicable maritime zones, is constitutional, and
consider all the waters enclosed thereby
in fact, increased the Philippines’ total marine
as internal waters.
space by 145,216 sq. nautical miles.
b. Entire archipelago is regarded as one
UNCLOS III is just an agreement with respect to integrated unit instead of being
environment and maritime resources;it is not a fragmented into so many thousand
mode of acquiring ownership where our ocean islands.
boundaries will be measured. It has nothing to
BASIS OF ARCHIPELAGO DOCTRINE:
with the loss or acquisition or loss of territory.
Had Congress in RA 9522 enclosed the KIG and 1. Part IV, Art 47(1), UNCLOS- “An
Scarborough Shoal as part of the Philippine archipelagic State may draw straight
archipelago, the Philippines would have archipelagic baselines joining the
committed a breach of 2 provisions of UNCLOS outermost points of the outermost islands
III. One provision states that “the drawing of such and drying reefs of the archipelago
baseline shall not depart to any appreciable provided that within such baselines are
extend from the general configuration of the included the main islands and an area in
archipelago. which the ratio of the area of the water to
the area of the land, including atolls, is
DISPOSITIVE PORTION: between 1 to 1 and 9 to 1.”
2. ART 1, 1987 CONSTITUTION

The enactment of UNCLOS III compliant
baselines law for the Philippine archipelago
The waters around, between and
and adjacent areas, as embodied in RA 9522,
connecting the islands of the archipelago,
allows an internationally-recognized
regardless of their breadth and
delimitation of the breadth of the
dimensions, form part of the internal
Philippines’ maritime zones and continental
waters of the PH.
shelf. RA 9522 is therefore a most vital step
on the part of the Philippines in
safeguarding its maritime zones,
1 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
OCEAN BOUNDARIES UNDER UNCLOS
EFFECT WITHOUT THE DOCTRINE

ZONE COVERAGE RIGHTS
a. Will result in the dismemberment of our
INTERNAL Waters on PH- full
archipelago- a. Sibuyan Sea- separated
WATERS landward sovereignty
side of from Visayas b. Palawan- isolated from
baseline FOREIGN- the rest of archipelago
no right of b. Part of PH waters would become
innocent international waters or high seas.- Bohol
passage to Camiguin (distance from shore-shore =
29miles): 5 miles will be international
TERRITORIAL 12mi. PH- full
waters.
SEA (maritime (22kms) sovereignty
belt) from
baseline FOREIGN-
right of
innocent
passage
CONTIGUOUS 12 mi. PH- limited

ZONE (not part (22kms) jurisdiction-
of territory) from enforce
territorial customs,
sea taxation,
pollution laws
EXCLUSIVE 200 mi. PH- sole

ECONOMIC (370 kms) exploitation
ZONE from rights over all
baseline natural
resources
FOREIGN-
navigation,
overflight, lay
submarine
pipes and
cables
CONTINENTA Not to PH- exclusive

L SHELF exceed 350 right to
mi. harvest
(650kms) mineral and
from non-living
baseline material in
subsoil
2 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
2. Henares vs. LTFRB

3. Oposa vs. Factoran
G.R. No. 158290 | Oct. 23, 2006
G.R. No. 101083 | July 30, 1993
TOPIC: ARTICLE II (Principles and State
TOPIC : Art. II, Sec. 16 - Right to Healthful
Policies Sec. 15 - Right to Health)
Ecology
Art II, Sec. 15- The State shall protect and
Sec. 16. The State shall protect and advance the
promote the right to health of the people and
right of the people to a balanced and healthful
instill health consciousness among them.
ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony
of nature.
LTFRB and DOTC cannot be compelled to
require PUVs to use CNG through mandamus,
Petitioners’ personality to sue in behalf of the
since the Constitution and the Clean Air Act are
succeeding generations can only be based on the
both general mandates that do not specifically
concept of intergenerational responsibility (i.e.,
prescribe the use of any kind of fuel, particularly
every generation has a responsibility to the next
the use of CNG by public vehicles.
to preserve that rhythm and harmony for full
enjoyment of a balanced and healthful ecology)
There is no law banning the use of gasoline and
insofar as the right to a balanced and healthful
diesel; the government cannot prohibit that
ecology is concerned.
because the use of which is not prohibited;
regardless of the good effects of cng, they cannot
Locus Standi refers to the legal interest which a
be mandatory.
plaintiff must have in the subject matter of the
suit. Because of the very broadness of the concept
MANDAMUS- is employed to compel the
of “class” here involved—membership in this
performance, when refused, of a ministerial
“class” appears to embrace everyone living in the
duty, this being its main objective. It does not lie
country whether now or in the future —it appears
to require anyone to fulfill contractual obligations
to me that everyone who may be expected to
or to compel a course of conduct, nor to control
benefit from the course of action petitioners seek
or review the exercise of discretion.
to require public respondents to take, is vested
with the necessary locus standi.
DISPOSITIVE PORTION:
TLAs should be cancelled. Sec. 17 carries with it
It appears to us that more properly, the
legislature should provide first the specific the duty to refrain from impairing the
statutory remedy to the complex environment and implies the judicious
environmental problems bared by herein management of the country’s forests.
petitioners before any judicial recourse by Intergenerational responsibility to a balanced and
mandamus is taken. healthful ecology.
WHEREFORE, the petition for the issuance DISPOSITIVE PORTION:

of a writ of mandamus is DISMISSED for WHEREFORE, being impressed with merit, the
lack of merit. SO ORDERED. instant Petition is hereby GRANTED.
3 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
4. Carino vs. Insular Govt. 5. Cruz vs. Sec of DENR

212 US 449 | Feb. 23, 1909
G.R. No 135385 | Dec. 6, 2000
TOPIC : Art. II, Sec. 22 - Right of Indigenous
TOPIC : Art. II, Sec. 22 - Right of Indigenous
People
People
Sec. 22. The State recognizes and promotes the
rights of indigenous cultural communities within DISPOSITIVE PORTION:
the framework of national unity and Decide on merits, not technicalities.
development. Implementation of IPRA: Concept Since the required majority vote cannot be
of ancestral lands or domains; Indigenous obtained
Thye assailed(7-7the [Buena, De
constitutionality Leon,
of the
concept of ownership; Rights to ancestral Gonzaga-Reyes, Melo, Panganiban,
Indigenous Peoples Rights Act, for granting Pardo,
dominion. and Vitug
ownership ― Davide,
of natural Jr., to Bellosillo,
resources indigenous
Kapunan, Mendoza, Puno, Quisumbing,
peoples. The Court ruled that ancestral lands andand
When, as far back as testimony or memory goes, Santiago]), even after the redeliberation,
domains are not lands of public dominion. They the
the land has been held by individuals under a areconstitutionality
private lands ofbelonging
IPRA is upheld.
to the indigenous
claim of private ownership, it will be presumed to peoples by native title, which in their concept of
have been held in the same way from before the private land title, existed irrespective of a royal
Spanish conquest, and never to have been public grant from the State.
land (native title).
The State recognizes and promotes the rights of
Every presumption should be indulged against indigenous cultural communities within the
the US claiming title to land in the Province of framework of national unity and development.
Benguet in the Philippines, which, for more than (Section 22, Article II, 1987 Constitution)
50 years prior to the treaty of peace with Spain of
April 11, 1899 has been held by the present Chief Justice Puno’s Separate Opinion – Used
native Igorot holder and his ancestors under claim Carino as a precedent as well; IPRA recognizes
of private ownership. the ICCs/IPs as a distinct sector, granting them
ownership and possession of their ancestral
A native title to land which for more than 50 domains; customary law traces back to native
years prior to the treaty of peace with Spain, a title. The IPRA recognizes the existence of the
native Igorot and his ancestors have been held in indigenous cultural communities or indigenous
accordance with Igorot custom as private peoples (ICCs/IPs) as a distinct sector in
property and should be recognized by the insular Philippine society. It grants these people the
government although no title has been issued
from the Spanish crown.
4 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
ownership and possession of their ancestral

utilization of natural resources shall be under the
domains and ancestral lands, and defines the
full control and supervision of the State.
extent of these lands and domains. The ownership
given is the indigenous concept of ownership
The State shall protect the nation’s marine wealth
under customary law which traces its origin to
in its archipelagic waters, territorial sea, and
native title.
exclusive economic zone, and reserve its use and
enjoyment exclusively to Filipino citizens.”
Indigenous Cultural Communities or Indigenous
Peoples refer to a group of people or
Section 3. “Lands of the public domain are
homogeneous societies who have continuously
classified into agricultural, forest or timber,
lived as an organized community on communally
mineral lands and national parks. Agricultural
bounded and defined territory. These groups of
lands of the public domain may be further
people have actually occupied, possessed and
classified by law according to the uses to which
utilized their territories under claim of ownership
they may be devoted. Alienable lands of the
since time immemorial.
public domain shall be limited to agricultural
The rights of the ICCs/IPs to their ancestral lands. Private corporations or associations may
domains and ancestral lands may be acquired in not hold such alienable lands of the public
two modes: (1) by native title over both ancestral domain except by lease, for a period not
lands and domains; or (2) by torrens title under exceeding twenty-five years, renewable for not
the Public Land Act and the Land Registration more than twenty-five years, and not to exceed
Act with respect to ancestral lands only. one thousand hectares in area. Citizens of the
Philippines may lease not more than five hundred
Native title refers to ICCs/IPs' pre conquest rights hectares, or acquire not more than twelve
to lands and domains held under a claim of hectares thereof, by purchase, homestead, or
private ownership as far back as memory reaches. grant.”
These lands are deemed never to have been
Section 4. “The Congress shall, as soon as
public lands and are indisputably presumed to
possible, determine, by law, the specific limits of
have been held that way since before the Spanish
forest lands and national parks, marking clearly
Conquest.
their boundaries on the ground. Thereafter, such
forest lands and national parks shall be conserved
ARTICLE XII: NATIONAL ECONOMY and may not be increased nor diminished, except
AND PATRIMONY by law. The Congress shall provide for such
period as it may determine, measures to prohibit
Section 2. “All lands of the public domain,
logging in endangered forests and watershed
waters, minerals, coal, petroleum, and other
areas.”
mineral oils, all forces of potential energy,
fisheries, forests or timber, wildlife, flora and
Section 5. “The State, subject to the provisions of
fauna, and other natural resources are owned by
this Constitution and national development
the State. With the exception of agricultural
policies and programs, shall protect the rights of
lands, all other natural resources shall not be
indigenous cultural communities to their ancestral
alienated. The exploration, development, and
lands to ensure their economic, social, and
cultural well-being.
5 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
6. SJS vs. Atienza

The Congress may provide for the applicability of G.R. No. 156052 | Mar. 7, 2007
customary laws governing property rights or TOPIC : Art. II, Sec. 25 - Local Autonomy
relations in determining the ownership and extent
of ancestral domain.” Ordinance 8027 reclassified the area from
industrial to commercial and directed the owners
Classification of Domains and operators of businesses disallowed under Sec.
(1) Agricultural lands (alienable) 1 to cease and desist from operating their
(2) Forest or Timber lands businesses within 6 months from the date of
(3) Mineral lands effectivity of the ordinance. Among the
(4) National Parks businesses situated in the area are the Pandacan
Terminals of Caltex, Shell and Petron. Mayor has
ANCESTRAL DOMAIN- are all areas a duty to enforce the ordinance. It is his
belonging to ICCs/IPs held under a claim of ministerial duty to do so, unless ordinance be
ownership, occupied or possessed by ICCs/IPs by repealed.
themselves or through their ancestors,
communally or individually since time Mandamus lies to compel a City Mayor to
immemorial, continuously until the present, enforce an ordinance reclassifying an area from
except when interrupted by war, force majeure or industrial to commercial and directing the owners
displacement by force, deceit, stealth or as a and operators of businesses disallowed therein to
consequence of government projects or any other cease and desist from operating their businesses
voluntary dealings with government and/or within 6 months from the date of effectivity of
private individuals or corporations. the ordinance.
ANCESTRAL LANDS- are lands held by the DISPOSITIVE PORTION:

ICCs/IPs under same conditions as ancestral Ordinance No. 8027 was enacted right after the PH, along with th
domains except that these are limited to lands and Towers of the World Trade Center in New York City. The objecti
occur in case of a terrorist attack on the Pandacan Terminals. No r
that these lands are not merely occupied and
possessed but are also utilized by the ICCs/IPs
under claims of individual or traditional group
ownership. These lands include but are not
limited to residential lots, rice terraces or paddies,
private forests, swidden farms and tree lots.
WHEREFORE, GRANTED.
the petitionishereby
Respondent Hon. Jose L. Atienza, Jr., as mayor of the City of Ma

SO ORDERED.
6 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
7. Chavez vs. PEA-AMARI matters of public concern. If you limit that to a

G.R. No. 133250. July 9, 2002 consummated contract, then if the contract is not
TOPIC : Art. III, Sec. 7 - Right to Information consummated, the people will never be able to
exercise their right.
A stipulation in a joint venture agreement that
would transfer the subject reclaimed lands to a 3 categories of information which are “matters of
private corporation is void for being contrary to public concern,” namely:
Sec. 3, Art. XII of the 1987 Constitution.
(1) official records; (2) documents and papers
The commissioners of the 1986 Constitutional pertaining to official acts, transactions and
Commission understood that the right to decisions; and (3) government research data used
information contemplates inclusion of in formulating policies. Constitutional right to
negotiations leading to the consummation of information includes official information on
the transaction. A consummated contract is on-going negotiations before a final contract. The
not a requirement for the exercise of the right information must constitute definite propositions
to information. by the government and should not cover
recognized exceptions like privileged
Atty. Gallant’s discussion:
information, military and diplomatic secrets and
SC held, if you limit the right to the
similar matters affecting national security and
consummated contract, then two things can
public order.
happen (If consummated contract will be
required, 2 things can happen:
➔ Either the citizen cannot exercise their
rights if there is no consummated WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED. The
contract, or it is too late if the contract Public Estates Authority and Amari
was already consummated. Coastal Bay Development Corporation
are PERMANENTLY ENJOINED
If the contract is consummated, that is the only from
time the persons or the citizen can exercise their implementing the Amended Joint Venture
Agreement which is hereby declared NULL
right to information then it might be too late
and VOID ab initio.
already according to the Supreme Court to point
out the defects in the contract or to expose it to
public the defects of the contract especially this
Chavez was saying that the government’s stand to
lose billions of pesos in this arrangement. That is
why he really wanted to know the contents of that
joint venture agreement.
Also the SC said, if on the other hand, you do not

include negotiations that will lead to a
consummated transaction, if the contract is not
eventually concluded or signed then the people
will never exercise their right to information on
7 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
8. Tano vs. Socrates 9. Miners Asso. vs. Factoran

G.R. No. 110249. Aug. 21, 1997
G.R. No. 98332. Jan. 6, 1995
TOPIC : Art. X, Sec. 4 - Power of Supervision
TOPIC : Art. XII, Sec. 1 - Exploration of
over LGUs
Natural Resources
Since one of the devolved powers of LGUs under
The 1987 Constitution does not apply
the LGC is the enforcement of fishery laws in
retroactively to “license, concession or lease”
municipal waters, the ordinance banning the
granted by the government under the 1973
shipment of all live fish and lobster outside
Constitution. Admin Order No. 57 (all existing
Puerto Prinsesa for 5 years and a resolution
mining leases granted after the effectivity of the
prohibiting the catching, gathering, possessing,
1987 Constitution, except small scale mining
buying, selling, and shipment of several species
leases and those pertaining to sand and gravel and
of live marine coral-dwelling aquatic organisms
quarry resources covering an area of 20 hectares
for 5 years, are valid.
or less, shall be converted into production-sharing
agreements within 1 year from its effectivity)
LGC vests municipalities with the power to grant
applies only to all existing mining leases or
fishery privileges in municipal waters and impose
agreements which were granted after the
rentals, fees or charges therefor. The Sanggunians
effectivity of the 1987 Constitution.
are directed to enact ordinances that protect the
environment and impose appropriate penalties for
The State, in the exercise of its police power, may
acts which endanger the environment such as
not be precluded by the constitutional restriction
dynamite fishing and destructive fishing. One of
on non-impairment of contract from altering,
the devolved powers under the Code is the
modifying and amending the mining leases or
enforcement of fishery laws in municipal waters
agreements granted.
including the conservation of mangroves.
Although non-impairment of contracts is a
Important to remember here is that, even Tano
Constitutional prohibition, this is subordinate to
and his co-petitioners, were invoking that they
the exercise of police power by the State. The
were marginalized fishermen and that they have
State should not be placed under straitjacket
rights under Social Justice Clause under Art 13 of
according to the SC just because there is a
the Constitution, we have the right to our
provision against non-impairment of contracts in
livelihood, we are protected by the Constitution.
the Constitution. Otherwise, the State will be
But this has conflict also with the power of the
inutile or unable to respond with the changing
LGU to promulgate their own laws within the
time. Non-impairment clause is subordinate to the
confines of their territorial jurisdiction. And we
exercise of police power of the State.
see that under the general welfare clause of the
Constitution.
8 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
10. Alvarez vs. PICOP 11. Sec. of DENR vs. Yap

G.R. No. 162243. Nov. 29, 2006
G.R. No. 167707 | Oct. 8, 2008
TOPIC : Art. XII, Sec. 1 - Exploration of
TOPIC : Art. XII, Sec. 3 - lands of the public
Natural Resources
domain
Licenses concerning the harvesting of timber in
In keeping with the presumption of state
the country's forests are but a mere privilege
ownership, there must be a positive act of the
granted by the State, and cannot be considered
government, such as an official proclamation,
contracts.
declassifying inalienable public land into
Atty. Gallant’s discussion: disposable land for agricultural or other purposes
About non-impairment of contract clause also; before such land becomes alienable and
according to the SC this is not even a contract so disposable.
there is no reason to apply the ruling in Miners vs
Factoran. As correctly implemented by DENR
There are four types of lands of a public domain:
Sec Alvarez, he did not grant the application for
mineral lands, forest or timber lands, agricultural
conversion of the timber licenses agreement
lands and national parks.. Agricultural lands, this
(TLA) unless they comply with certain
part of public domain can better be developed if
requirements because PICOP have been awarded
they are entrusted to private individuals or
with vast lands as a concessionaire and PICOP
entities for agricultural purposes. But it is not
does not want to comply so when DENR Sec
automatic that agricultural lands can be subject to
Alvarez learned that PICOP has not complied
alienation, there must be a proclamation, a
with their responsibilities under the agreement, he
positive action from who? legislative thru law or
refuses to renew and convert their license
by executive dept thru president- SC cleared that
agreement into integrated forest management
IT IS AN EXECUTIVE PREROGATIVE. This
agreement until they comply with the
power is delegated already to the president.
requirements. DENR Sec was upheld by the SC.
Requisites: 1) it must be agricultural land; 2)
A company that has been fortunate enough to
there has to be a presidential proclamation
have been awarded a vast track of concession by
making this agricultural land alienable and
the government must at least comply with what
disposable.
the law requires.
In the case of Boracay, this is an unclassified
land, no classification yet. Pres. Arroyo classified
some parts of Boracay as agricultural land
making it subject to alienation and disposition.
9 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
NATRES MIDTERMS
12. Alcantara vs. COSLAP 13. Cheesman vs. IAC

G.R. No. 145838 | July 20, 2001
G.R. No. 74833 | Jan. 21, 1991
TOPIC : Art. XII, Sec. 5 - ancestral lands
TOPIC : Art. XII, Sec. 7 - Acquisition of
Private Lands
Petitioner was granted Forest Land Grazing
Lease agreement by the DENR allowing him to
Petitioner, an American citizen, has no
lease a public forest land for grazing purposes.
personality to question the subsequent sale of the
Private respondents sought for its cancellation
property by his wife on the theory that in doing
and the reversion of the area to the B’laan and
so he is merely exercising the prerogative of a
Maguindanao tribes. The land area being claimed
husband in respect of conjugal property. If the
by private respondents belongs to the B’laan
property were to be held conjugal, this would
Indigenous cultural community since they were
accord to the alien husband a substantial interest
in possession of, and were occupying and
and right over the land. This is a right that the
cultivating the same since time immemorial. All
Constitution does not permit him to have.
unappropriated agricultural lands forming
part of the public domain are declared part of A land sold to spouses where one is an alien
the ancestral lands of the indigenous cultural cannot be held to be conjugal property, for to do
groups occupying the same, and these lands are so would be to give the alien spouse a substantial
further declared alienable and disposable, to be interest and right over the land which the
distributed exclusively among the indigenous Constitution prohibits him from having.
cultural group concerned.
The cancellation of an FLGLA that was granted DISPOSITIVE PORTION:

in violation of Sec. 1 of PD No. 410 (which As already observed, the finding that his wife
provides that all unappropriated agricultural lands had used her own money to purchase the
property cannot, and will not, at this stage of
forming part of the public domain are declared
the proceedings be reviewed and
part of the ancestral lands of the indigenous
overturned. But even if it were a fact that
cultural groups occupying the same, and these said wife had used conjugal funds to make
lands are further declared alienable and the acquisition, the considerations just set
disposable, to be distributed exclusively among out militate, on high constitutional grounds,
the members of the indigenous cultural group against his recovering and holding the
concerned) is proper. property so acquired, or any part thereof.
And whether in such an event, he may
A jurisdictional issue, that the indigenous people recover from his wife any share of the money
are entitled to the ancestral lands because they used for the purchase or charge her with
have been in possession since time immemorial unauthorized disposition or expenditure of
of these lands. conjugal funds is not now
inquired into; that would be, in the premises,
a purely academic exercise. An equally
decisive consideration is that
Estelita Padilla is a purchaser in good faith,
both the Trial Court and the Appellate Court
having found that Cheesman’s own conduct
had led her to believe the property to be the
exclusive property of the latter’s wife,
freely
10 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
NATRES MIDTERMS
disposable by her without his consent or CORPORATION to purchase the subject

intervention. An innocent buyer for value, 51% of the shares of the Manila
she is entitled to the protection of the law in Hotel Corporation at P44.00 per share and
her purchase, particularly as against thereafter to execute the necessary
Cheesman, who would assert rights to the agreements and documents to effect
property denied him by both the sale, to issue the necessary clearances
letter and spirit of the Constitution itself. and to do such other acts and deeds as may
be necessary for the purpose.
WHEREFORE, the appealed decision is SO ORDERED.
AFFIRMED, with costs against the
petitioner. SO ORDERED.
GARCIA vs. Board of Investments
G.R. No. 92024 | November 9, 1990
(included sa pointers ni Commsor in
14. Manila Prince Hotel vs. GSIS relation to Filipino First Policy)
G.R. No. 122156 | Feb. 3, 1997
TOPIC:Art. XII, Sec.10 Filipino first policy DOCTRINE: BOI committed grave abuse of
discretion because it repudiates the independent
Provision is a mandatory, positive command
policy of government to run its affairs the way it
which is complete in itself and which needs no
deems best for the national interest. Every
further guidelines or implementing laws or rules
provision of the Constitution on the national
for its enforcement. It is per se judicially
economy and patrimony is infused with the spirit
enforceable. Qualified Filipinos should be
of national interest. The non-alienation of
preferred. An action may be maintained to
national resources, the State full control over the
enforce such right notwithstanding the absence of
development and utilization of contributions to
any legislation on the subject.
the economic growth and general welfare of the
Art. XII, Sec. 10, par. 2 of the 1987 Constitution, country and the regulation of foreign investment
providing for the preference to qualified in accordance to national goals and priorities are
Filipinos, in the grant of rights, privileges, and too explicit not to be noticed and understood.
concessions covering the national economy and
patrimony, is a self-executing provision. FACTS:
The Bataan Petrochemical Corporation (BPC), a
Taiwanese private corporation, applied for
DISPOSITIVE PORTION: registration with the Board of Investments (BOI)
WHEREFORE, respondents GSIS, MANILA in February 1988 as a new domestic producer of
HOTEL CORPORATION, COMMITTEE ON
petrochemicals in the Philippines. It originally
PRIVATIZATION and
specified the province of Bataan as the site for the
OFFICE OF THE
GOVERNMENT proposed investment but later submitted an
CORPORATE COUNSEL are directed to amended application to change the site to
CEASE and DESIST from selling 51% of the Batangas. Unhappy with the change of the site,
shares of the Manila Hotel Corporation Congressman Enrique Garcia requested a copy of
to RENONG BERHAD, and to ACCEPT the BPC’s original and amended application
matching bid documents. The BoI denied the request on the
11 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
NATRES MIDTERMS
basis that the investors in BPC had declined to

The Court, therefore, holds and finds that the BOI
give their consent to the release of the documents
committed a grave abuse of discretion in
requested, and that Article 81 of the Omnibus
approving the transfer of the petrochemical plant
Investments Code protects the confidentiality of
from Bataan to Batangas and authorizing the
these documents absent consent to disclose. The
change of feedstock from naphtha only to
BoI subsequently approved the amended
naphtha and/or LPG for the main reason that the
application without holding a second hearing or
final say is in the investor all other circumstances
publishing notice of the amended application.
to the contrary notwithstanding. No cogent
Garcia filed a petition before the Supreme Court.
advantage to the government has been shown by
this transfer. This is a repudiation of the
ISSUE: WON the BOI committed grave abuse of
independent policy of the government expressed
discretion in yielding to the wishes of the
in numerous laws and the Constitution to run its
investor, national interest notwithstanding.
own affairs the way it deems best for the national
interest.`
RULING:
YES. under Section 10, Article XII of the 1987
One can but remember the words of a great
Constitution, it is the duty of the State to
Filipino leader who in part said he would not
"regulate and exercise authority over foreign
mind having a government run like hell by
investments within its national jurisdiction and in
Filipinos than one subservient to foreign
accordance with its national goals and priorities."
dictation. In this case, it is not even a foreign
The development of a self-reliant and
government but an ordinary investor whom the
independent national economy effectively
BOI allows to dictate what we shall do with our
controlled by Filipinos is mandated in Section
heritage.
19, Article II of the Constitution. A
petrochemical industry is not an ordinary
investment opportunity. It should not be treated
like a garment or embroidery firm, a shoe-making
venture, or even an assembler of cars or
manufacturer of computer chips, where the BOI
reasoning may be accorded fuller faith and credit.
The petrochemical industry is essential to the
national interest.
In this particular BPC venture, not only has the

Government given unprecedented favors, but
through its regulatory agency, the BOI, it
surrenders even the power to make a company
abide by its initial choice, a choice free from any
suspicion of unscrupulous machinations and a
choice which is undoubtedly in the best interests
of the Filipino people.
12 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
NATRES MIDTERMS
15. Corpuz vs. Sps. Gorospe against the law. However, to punish Corpuz, you
G.R. No. 135297 | June 8, 2000 cannot have your cake and eat it too, so that you
TOPIC : Art. XIII - Social Justice Sec. 6 - will not profit from your wrong that you
agrarian reform committed, because you committed a violation of
the law, SC will allow it, even if the mortgage is
The sale, transfer or conveyance of land reform
null and void. Since you foreclosed it and gave it
rights are void in order to prevent a
to Samahang nayon, we will consider that as if
circumvention of agrarian reform laws. However,
the property has been surrendered to the
in the present case, the voluntary surrender or
government. So if it is surrendered to the
waiver of these rights in favor of the Samahang
government, then the objective of the law for the
Nayon is valid because such action is deemed
property remaining with the State, that the
legally permissible conveyance in favor of the
beneficiary didn’t sell is already achieved. That is
government. After the surrender or waiver of said
the decision there.
land reform rights, the DAR, which took control
of the property, validly awarded it to private
respondents. DISPOSITIVE PORTION:
We disagree. Petitioner misconstrued the
The voluntary surrender or waiver of land reform Cocoma ruling because what was prohibited
rights in favor of the Samahang Nayon is valid was the perpetration of the
because such action is deemed a legally tenancy or leasehold relationship between
permissible conveyance in favor of the the landlord and the farmer-beneficiary. The
government, pursuant to PD 27, which provides case did not rule out abandonment or
voluntary surrender by the agricultural
that title to land acquired pursuant to the land
tenant or lessee in favor of the government.
reform program shall not be transferable except
through hereditary succession or to the WHEREFORE, the Petition is hereby
government. DENIED and the assailed Decision and
Resolution AFFIRMED insofar as it
Atty. Gallant’s discussion: dismissed petitioner’s appeal. Costs against
Land reform must be cultivated by farmers petitioner.
because the purpose of land reform is to make the SO ORDERED.
farmers the owner of the land that he cultivates to
improve his economic condition. The law
prohibits the sale of such land within 5 yrs, even
mortgage because in a mortgage if you do not pay
the principal obligation, the mortgagee will
foreclose the property then the property will be
sold at public auction and most likely the
mortgagee will buy the property as the highest
bidder so the property will be now owned by the
mortgagee. This is what happened in the case,
Corpuz mortgaged the property to Gorospe, the
foreclosure is supposed to be null and void. The
SC said that it is null and void because it is
13 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
NATRES MIDTERMS
16. People vs. Maceren electrofishing is not prohibited under the old
G.R. No. L-32166 | Oct. 18, 1977 Fisheries Code.
TOPIC : Art. XIII Social Justice, Sec. 7 -
rights of fishermen A penal statute is strictly construed. While an
administrative agency has the right to make rules
The Fisheries Law does not expressly prohibit and regulations to carry into effect a law already
electro fishing. As electro fishing is not banned enacted, that power should not be confused with
under that law. The Sec of Agriculture and the power to enact a criminal statute. An
Natural Resources and the Commissioner of administrative agency can have only the
Fisheries are powerless to penalize it. Had the administrative or policing powers expressly or by
lawmaking body intended to punish electro necessary implication conferred upon it.
fishing, a penal provision to that effect could
have been easily embodied in the old Fisheries
Law. DISPOSITIVE PORTION:
17. Mustang Lumber vs. CA
Fisheries Administrative Order No. 84-1, WHEREFORE, the lower court’s decision of
G.R. No. 104988 | June 18, 1996
penalizing electro-fishing in freshwater fisheries, June 9, 1970 is set aside for lack of appellate
TOPIC : DEFINITION OF TERMS:
jurisdiction and the order of dismissal
is void since the Sec. of Agriculture and Natural FORESTRY
rendered by the municipal court of Sta. Cruz,
Resources is without authority to issue the same Laguna in Criminal Case No. 5429 is
sans the express prohibition of electro-fishing Lumber is to
affirmed. be understood
Costs de oficio. as processed log and
under the Fisheries Law (NOTE: this was decided timber. The Court said that since the law makes
under the old Fisheries Law, the present law no distinction between raw or processed timber,
[Philippine Fisheries Code of 1998, as amended] neither should we. Hence, Mustang Lumber will
penalizes electro-fishing). still be held liable for illegal logging.
What the law does not punish, the The Revised Forestry Code contains no definition
administrative bodies cannot punish. of either timber or lumber. While the former is
Administrative bodies exercise only delegated included in forest products as defined in
power so they cannot rise higher than the source paragraph (q) of Section 3, the latter is found in
from the law. paragraph (aa) of the same section in the
definition of "Processing plant”. This simply
Electrofishing is not prohibited under the old means that lumber is a processed log or processed
fisheries act but its practice became prominent; forest raw material. Clearly, the Code uses the
term lumber in its ordinary or common usage.
Sec of Agriculture and Natural resources did that
time in order to prosecute those who use
electrofishing, they issued administrative order
prohibiting the use of electrofishing. Maceren
was caught and convicted. He has no other
defense because he was caught in the act. So they
attacked the constitutionality of such
administrative order. The administrative order
issued by the Secretary is invalid because
14 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
NATRES MIDTERMS
18. Yngson vs. Sec. of Agriculture

share of the disputed property are violated,
G.R. No. L-36847 | July 20, 1983
he can pursue the correct action before the
TOPIC : CLASSIFICATION OF LANDS proper lower court.
Timber or forest lands be released as alienable WHEREFORE, the judgment appealed from
and disposable first; the President may establish a is hereby AFFIRMED. The motion for
forest reserve. contempt is also DENIED for lack of merit.
Costs against petitioner-appellant.
The Bureau of Fisheries has no jurisdiction to
administer and dispose of swamplands or
mangrove lands forming part of the public
19. International Hardwood vs. U.P.
domain while such lands are still classified as
G.R. No. 521518 | Aug. 13, 1991
forest land or timberland and not released for
fishery or other purposes. TOPIC: CLASSIFICATION OF LANDS
When the applications were filed by the parties in UP has the right to enjoy and dispose of the land
the instant case, said area was not yet available reserved for them for agricultural purposes,
for fishpond purposes and the same was only without any limitations. Hence, Hardwood has
released for said purpose on January 14, 1954. the correlative duty and obligation to pay for the
DENR then caused the division of the area in forest charges or royalties to the new owner, UP.
question into three portions giving each party an
The Court ruled that when the Republic of the
area of one-third (1/3) of the whole area covered
Philippines ceded and transferred the subject
by their respective applications.
property to UP, it completely removed said
The Court ruled that all five applications were property from the public domain and, more
filed prematurely for the reason that the specifically, in respect to the areas covered by the
mangrove was made available for fishpond timber license of petitioner, removed and
purposes only after the applications had already segregated it from a public forest; thereby
been filed. Thus, there was no land available for divesting itself of its rights and title thereto and
lease permits and conversion into fishponds at the relinquished and conveyed the same to UP as the
time all five applicants filed their applications. It new absolute owner thereof.
is elementary in the law governing the disposition
of lands of the public domain that until timber or Judgment is hereby rendered REVERSING
forest lands are released as disposable and the decision of the trial court; DECLARING
alienable neither the Bureau of Lands nor the that forest charges due from and
Bureau of Fisheries has authority to lease, grant, payable by petitioner for timber cut
sell. pursuant to its License Agreement No. 27-A
(Amendment) within the area ceded and
DISPOSITIVE PORTION: transferred to the University of the
Philippine pursuant to R.A. No. 3990 shall be
The petitioner has failed to show a contempt paid to the University of the Philippines;
of court which we can take cognizance of DECLARING that the University of the
and punish. If any of his Philippines is entitled to supervise, through
property or other rights over his one- its duly appointed personnel, the logging,
felling, and removal of timber within the
15 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
NATRES MIDTERMS
20.Republic vs. Naguiat, 21.Sec. of DENR vs. Yap

G.R. No. 134209 | Jan. 24, 2006 G.R. No. 167707, Oct. 8, 2008
TOPIC : CLASSIFICATION OF LANDS
TOPIC : CLASSIFICATION OF LANDS
Unclassified lands cannot be acquired by adverse
In keeping with the presumption of state
occupation or possession; occupation thereof in
ownership, there must be a positive act of the
the concept of owner, however long, cannot ripen
government, such as an official proclamation,
into private ownership and be registered as title.
declassifying inalienable public land into
A forested land classified as forest area of public
disposable land for agricultural or other purposes
domain does not lose such classification simply
before such land becomes alienable and
because loggers or settlers have stripped it of its
disposable.
cover.
Except for lands already covered by existing
Under Section 6 of the Public Land Act, the
titles, Boracay was an unclassified land of the
prerogative of classifying or reclassifying lands
public domain prior to Proclamation No. 1064.
of the public domain, i.e., from forest or mineral
Such unclassified lands are considered public
to agricultural and vice versa, belongs to the
forest under PD No. 705.
Executive Branch of the government and not the
court. Proc. No. 1801 cannot be deemed the positive act
needed to classify Boracay Island as alienable
DISPOSITIVE PORTION: and disposable land. If President Marcos intended
The foregoing considered, the issue of to classify the island as alienable and disposable
whether or not respondent and her or forest, or both, he would have identified the
predecessor-in-interest have been in open, specific limits of each, as President Arroyo did in
exclusive and continuous possession of the Proclamation No. 1064. This was not done in
parcels of land in question is now of little Proclamation No. 1801.
moment. For, unclassified land, as here,
cannot be acquired by adverse occupation or Notes.—Under the Regalian doctrine, all lands
possession; occupation thereof in the concept not otherwise appearing to be clearly within
of owner, however long, cannot ripen into private ownership are presumed to belong to the
private ownership and be registered as title.
State—unless public land is shown to have been
WHEREFORE, the instant petition is reclassified as alienable or disposable to a private
GRANTED and assailed decision dated May person by the State, it remains part of the
29, 1998 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. inalienable public domain.
CV No. 37001 is REVERSED and SET
ASIDE.
Accordingly, respondent’s application
for original registrationof
In issuing Proclamation No. 1064, the
title in Land Registration Case No.
government has taken the step necessary to
N-25-1 of the Regional Trial Court at Iba,
open up the island to private ownership. This
Zambales, Branch 69, is DENIED.
gesture may not be sufficient to appease
some sectors which view the classification of
the island partially into a forest reserve as
absurd. That the island is
16 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
NATRES MIDTERMS
regulations in the exercise of the powers of the

no longer overrun by trees, however, does not becloud the vision to protect its remaining forest cover and to strike a hea
subordinate officer"
Accordingly, respondent-appellee Secretary of

conservation is progress.
as important as economic Agriculture and Natural Resources has the
authority to revoke, on valid grounds, timber
licenses issued by the Director of Forestry. There
WHEREFORE, judgmentis renderedas being supporting evidence, the revocation of
follows: petitioner- appellant’s timber license was a wise
1. The petition for certiorari in G.R. No. exercise of the power of the respondent-appellee
167707 is GRANTED and the Court of Appeals Decision in CA-G.R.
(Secretary CV No. 71118
of Agriculture REVERSED
and Natural AND SET ASIDE.
Resources)
2. The petition for certiorari in G.R. No. 173775 is DISMISSED for lack of merit.
and therefore, valid.
SO ORDERED.
Thus, “this Court had rigorously adhered to the
principle of conserving forest resources, as
corollary to which the alleged right to them of
private individuals or entities was meticulously
inquired into and more often than not rejected.
22.Tan vs. Director of Forestry
G.R. No. L-24548 | Oct. 27, 1983
TOPIC : Utilization and Management DISPOSITIVE PORTION:
WHEREFORE, IN VIEW OF ALL THE
A timber license is an instrument in which the FOREGOING, THE ORDER APPEALED
State regulates the utilization and disposition of FROM IS HEREBY AFFIRMED IN TOTO.
COSTS AGAINST
forest resources to the end that public welfare is
PETITIONER- APPELLANT.
promoted. A timber license is not a contract
within the purview of due process clause; it is
merely a license or privilege, which can be
validly withdrawn whenever dictated by public
interest or public welfare.
The utilization and disposition of forest resources

is directly under the control and supervision of
the Director of Forestry. However, "while Section
1831 of the Revised Administrative Code
provides that forest products shall be cut,
gathered and removed from any forest only upon
license from the Director of Forestry, it is no less
true that as a subordinate officer, the Director of
Forestry is subject to the control of the
Department Head or the Secretary of Agriculture
and Natural Resources (Sec, 79 [c], Rev. Adm.
Code), who, therefore, may impose reasonable
17 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
NATRES MIDTERMS
23.Oposa vs. Factoran only a license or privilege, which can be validly

G.R. No. 101083 | July 30, 1993 withdrawn whenever dictated by public interest
TOPIC : Utilization and Management or public welfare as in this case.” Even if it is to
be assumed that the same are contracts, the
Petitioners minors assert that they represent their instant case does not involve a law or even an
generation as well as generations yet unborn. We executive issuance declaring the cancellation or
find no difficulty in ruling that they can, for modification of existing timber licenses. Hence,
themselves, for others of their generation and for the non impairment clause cannot as yet be
the succeeding generations, file a class suit. Their invoked
personality to sue in behalf of the succeeding
generations can only be based on the concept of
intergenerational responsibility insofar as the
right to a balanced and healthful ecology is 24.Provident Tree Farms vs.
concerned. Batario G.R. No. 92285, March 28,
1994
A timber license is an instrument by which the
TOPIC : Utilization and Management
State regulates the utilization and disposition
of forest resources to the end that public welfare The only subject of this incentive is a ban against
is promoted. A timber license is not a contract importation of wood and wood products which is
within the purview of the due process clause; it to be enforced by the Bureau of Customs since it
is only a license or privilege, which can be has under the Tariff and Customs Code the
validly withdrawn whenever dictated by public exclusive and original jurisdiction over seizure
interest or public welfare as in this case. and forfeiture cases. To allow regular courts to
direct the Commissioner is a clear interference
Respondent Secretary was aware that as correctly
within the BOC’s jurisdiction.
pointed out by the petitioners, into every timber
license must be read Section 20 of the Forestry The enforcement of importation ban under Sec.
Reform Code which provides: “… Provided, That 36 (I) of the Revised Forestry Code is within the
when the national interest so requires, the exclusive realm of the Bureau of customs. To
President may amend, modify, replace or rescind allow the regular court to direct the commissioner
any contract, concession, permit, licenses or any to impound the imported matches is an
other form of privilege granted herein…” interference with the exclusive jurisdiction of the
Bureau of Customs over seizure and forfeiture
Needless to say, all licenses may thus be revoked
cases. In this case, it is the duty of the Collector
or rescinded by executive action. It is not a
of Customs to exercise jurisdiction over
contract, property or a property right protected by
prohibited importations. Moreover, the
the due process clause of the Constitution. In Tan
Commissioner has the power to promulgate all
vs. Director of Forestry this Court held: ". . . A
rules and regulations necessary to enforce the
timber license is an instrument by which the State
provisions of the Code subject to the approval of
regulates the utilization and disposition of forest
the Secretary of Finance. Where the statute does
resources to the end that public welfare is
not require any particular method, the agency
promoted. A timber license is not a contract
may adopt any reasonable method. In the case,
within the purview of the due process clause; it is
the PTFI’s correspondence with the Bureau
contesting the legality of the importations may
18 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
NATRES MIDTERMS
already take the nature of an administrative

property of a third person not liable for the
proceeding, the pendency of which would
offense.”
preclude the court from interfering with it under
the doctrine of primary jurisdiction.
In this case, the truck, though used to transport
the illegally cut lumber, cannot be confiscated
The pendency of petitioner’s request to the
and forfeited in the event accused therein be
Bureau of Customs for the implementation of the
convicted because the truck owner/driver, Mr.
ban against the importation of matches under the
Dionisio Golpe was not indicted. Hence, there
Forestry Code is impliedly admitted; in fact, it is
was no justification for the respondent Judge not
apparent from the correspondence of counsel for
to release the truck.
petitioner that the Bureau is inclined to sustain
the validity of the importations. Hence, the order
The Court did not find that when the respondent
of the trial court granting the dismissal of the
Judge released the truck after he conducted the
civil case must be upheld.
preliminary investigation and satisfied himself
that there was no reason to continue keeping the
DISPOSITIVE PORTION: truck, he violated Pres. Decree No. 705 and Adm.
Order No. 59. The release of the truck did not
WHEREFORE, finding no reversible error in render nugatory the administrative authority of
the appealed Order of the Regional Trial the DENR Secretary.
Court of Manila in Civil Case No. 89-48836
dated 8 February 1990, the same is
AFFIRMED and, consequently, the instant DISPOSITIVE PORTION:
petition for review is DENIED. The Court takes this opportunity to enjoin the
National Police, the DENR, the prosecutors,
and the members of the bench to coordinate
with each other for a successful campaign
against illegal logging. It behooves all the
Momongan vs. Omipon
25. concerned agencies to seriously strive for the
AM No. MTJ-93-874 | March 14, 1995 attainment of the constitutionally-declared
TOPIC: CRIMINAL OFFENSES AND policy to “protect and advance the right of
PENALTIES the people to a balanced and healthful
ecology in accord with the rhythm and
harmony of nature” in order to preserve our
The confiscation proceedings under AO 59 is
natural resources for the benefit of the
different from the confiscation under the RPC,
generations still to come.
which is an additional penalty imposed in the
event of conviction. WHEREFORE, the complaint is
DISMISSED. SO ORDERED.
According to the Revised Penal Code, Art. 45,
first paragraph: “[E]very penalty imposed for the
commission of a felony shall carry with it the
forfeiture of the proceeds of the crime and the
instrument or tools with which it was
committed.” However, this cannot be done if
such proceeds and instruments or tools
“be the
19 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
NATRES MIDTERMS
26.Mustang Lumber vs. CA 27.People vs. Que

G.R. No. 104988 | June 18, 1996 G.R. No. 120365 | Dec. 17, 1996
TOPIC : CRIMINAL OFFENSES &
TOPIC : CRIMINAL OFFENSES AND
PENALTIES
PENALTIES
Lumber is a processed log or timber, and is thus
There are two (2) distinct and separate offenses
not excluded from the coverage of Sec. 68 of the
punished under Section 68 of P.D. 705, to wit: In
RFC, on penalizing possession thereof without
the first offense, one can raise as a defense the
the required legal documents.
legality of the acts of cutting, gathering,
collecting or removing timber or other forest
The seizure of the petitioner's truck and its cargo
products by presenting the authorization issued
consisting of lauan and almaciga lumber which
by the DENR. In the second offense, however, it
were not accompanied with the required invoices
is immaterial whether the cutting, gathering,
and transporting documents is valid, as it is made
collecting and removal of the forest products is
on a moving vehicle.
legal or not. Mere possession of forest products
without the proper documents consummates the
While lumber is not specifically mentioned in
Sec. 68, it is nonetheless included in the term crime. Thus, accused-appellant's possession of
“timber”. While “timber” is included in the forest the subject lumber without any documentation
products as defined in Sec. 3(q) of PD 705, the clearly constitutes an offense under Section 68 of
lumber is found in Sec. 3(aa) in the definition of P.D. 705.
“processing plant”. This simply means that
lumber is a processed log or forest raw material, Appellant interprets the phrase “existing forest
or timber. laws and regulations” to refer to those laws and
regulations which were already in effect at the
Under Sec. 68-A of PD 705, as amended by EO time of the enactment of E.O. 277. However, the
277, the DENR Secretary or his duly authorized
suggested interpretation is strained and would
representative has jurisdiction to order the
render the law inutile. The phrase should be
confiscation and disposition of all conveyances –
by land, water or air – used in illegally cutting, construed to refer to laws and regulations existing
gathering, removing, possessing or abandoning at the time of possession of timber or other forest
forest products. products. DENR Administrative Order No. 59
series of 1993 specifies the documents required
Punished then in this section are (1) the cutting, for the transport of timber and other forest
gathering, collection, or removal of timber or products. Section 3 of the Administrative Order
other forest products from the places therein provides that the movement of logs, lumber,
mentioned without any authority; and (2) non-timber forest products and wood-based or
possession of timber forest products without the wood based shall be covered with the appropriate
legal documents as required under existing forest Certificates of Origin. The transport of lumber
laws and regulations. shall be accompanied by CLO (Certificate of
Lumber Origin).
20 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
NATRES MIDTERMS
Dagudag vs. Paderanga

28.
1. That courts cannot take cognizance of
AM No. RTJ-06-2017 | June 19, 2008 cases pending before administrative
TOPIC: CRIMINAL OFFENSES AND agencies, under the doctrine of
PENALTIES administrative exhaustion;
2. That also, under the doctrine of primary
The DENR is the agency responsible for the
jurisdiction courts cannot take
enforcement of forestry laws. Section 4 of
cognizance of the cases pending before
Executive Order No.192 states that the DENR
administrative agencies of special
shall be the primary agency responsible for the
competence.
conservation, management, development, and
3. That since the undocumented forest
proper use of the country’s natural resources.
products are in the custody of the DENR,
Section 68 of Presidential Decree No. 705, as
an administrative proceeding may have
amended by Executive Order No. 277, states that
already been commenced;
possessing forest products without the required
4. That the forest products are already in
legal documents is punishable. Section 68-A
custody of law and thus cannot be the
states that the DENR Secretary or his duly
subject of replevin.
authorized representatives may order the
confiscation of any forest product illegally cut,
gathered, removed, possessed, or abandoned. 29. Remman Enterprises vs. Court of
Appeals, G.R. No. 125018 | Apr. 6,
Forest products were confiscated by the
representatives of PNP Regional Maritime Group 2000 TOPIC : UTILIZATION OF
(PNPRMG), DENR and the PH Coast Guard for WATERS -
non-compliance of pertinent documents, and Prohibitions and conditions for use of waters
since no one claimed ownership of the said items
Even assuming that the heavy rains constituted an
for a reasonable time, it was confiscated in favor
act of God, by reason of their negligence, the
of the government. Respondent-judge, in a case
fortuitous event became humanized, rendering
for issuance of writ of replevin, instituted by
appellants liable for the ensuing damages.
plaintiff Edma, issued and decided in favor of the
plaintiff, for the return of the undocumented There exists no natural easement upon the estate
forest products. DENR, CENRO and herein of Lat to receive the waters from Remman’s
petitioner filed a motion to quash the writ of estate. Under Article 637 of the Civil Code, it
replevin but was thereafter denied by herein imposes a natural easement upon the lower estate
respondent. to receive the waters which naturally and without
the intervention of man descend from higher
The DENR is the agency responsible for the
states. The owner of the lower estate cannot
enforcement of forestry laws. That since the case
construct works which will impede this easement;
is for violation of Section 68 of PD 705 as
neither can the owner of the higher estate make
amended by EO 277 is under the jurisdiction of
works which will increase the burden.
DENR. That respondent should have dismissed
the replevin suit outright for ff reasons: A similar provision is found in the Water Code of
the Philippines (P.D. No. 1067), which provides:
21 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
NATRES MIDTERMS
Art. 50. Lower estates are obliged to receive the

30.Lovina vs. Moreno
water which naturally and without the
G.R. No. L-17821 | November 29, 1963
intervention of man flows from the higher estates,
TOPIC : Control of Waters
as well as the stone or earth which they carry
with them. The owner of the lower estate cannot
Residents of Municipality of Macabebe
construct works which will impede this natural
Pampanga had complained to Sec of Public
flow, unless he provides an alternative method of
Works and Communications that appellees had
drainage; neither can the owner of the higher
blocked the "Sapang Bulati", a navigable river in
estate make works which will increase this
Macabebe, Pampanga, and asking that the
natural flow.
obstructions be ordered removed, under the
As based on the above provisions, they impose a provisions of Republic Act No. 2056 (Act
natural easement upon the lower estate to receive prohibiting construction of dams, dikes or any
the waters which naturally and without the other works in public navigable waters). After
intervention of man descend from higher estates. notice and hearing to the parties, the said
However, where the waters which flow from a Secretary found the constructions to be a public
higher estate are those which are artificially nuisance in navigable waters, and, in his decision
collected in man made lagoons, any damage dated 11 August 1959, ordered the land owners,
occasioned thereby entitles the owner of the spouses Lovina to remove five (5) closures of
lower or servient estate to compensation. The Sapang Bulati; otherwise, the Secretary would
collected waters from man made lagoons and pig order their removal at the expense of the
manure are not the waters contemplated by law as respondent. After receipt of the decision, the
waters which naturally and without the respondent filed a petition to restrain the
intervention of man descend from higher states. Secretary from enforcing his decision. The trial
court, after due hearing, granted a permanent
The negligence of REMMAN in maintaining the Injunction, which is now the subject of the
level of waste water in its lagoons has been present appeal.
satisfactorily established. The extent of damages
The position of the plaintiffs-appellees in the
suffered by Lat remains unrebutted; in fact, has
court below was that RA No. 2056 is
been proved.
unconstitutional because it invests the Secretary
of Public Works and Communications with
sweeping, unrestrained, final and unappealable
authority to pass upon the issues of whether
a river or stream is public and navigable, whether
a dam encroaches upon such waters and is
constitutive as a public nuisance, and whether the
law applies to the state of facts, thereby
constituting an alleged unlawful delegation of
judicial power to the Secretary of Public Works
and Communications.
SC sustained the power of the Sec. of Public

Works to order the demolition of any
22 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
NATRES MIDTERMS
construction that impedes the natural flow of

31.Sta. Rosa Realty vs. Court of Appeals
water. The law empowering the Secretary of
G.R. No. 112526 | October 12, 2001
Public Works who ordered the demolition was
questioned, also the constitutionality of the law
TOPIC: Conservation and Protection of
was questioned. But the SC said it is within his
Waters and Watersheds
power, anything that obstructs the natural
flow of the water may be ordered demolished
The protection of watersheds ensures an adequate
because that will be considered as nuisance.
supply of water for future generations and the
R.A. 2056 merely empowers the Secretary to control of flash floods that not only damage
remove unauthorized obstructions or property but cause loss of lives. Protection of
encroachments upon public streams, watersheds is an “intergenerational
constructions that no private person was anyway responsibility” that needs to be answered now.
entitled to make, because the bed of navigable
streams is public property, and ownership thereof
This is a watershed, but registered property in the
is not acquirable by adverse possession.
name of Sta Rosa Realty, which brings to a
It is true that the exercise of the Secretary’s question- if it is a watershed how come it is titled
power under the Act necessarily involves the in the name of a private entity? It is because they
determination of some questions of fact, such as acquired the property before it was declared to be
the existence of the stream and its previous a watershed by DENR because they have
navigable character; but these functions, whether acquired it first even before it was declared as an
judicial or quasi-judicial, are merely incidental to exclusive zone for recreation.
the exercise of the power granted by law to clear
The titling of the property under the name of Sta.
navigable streams of unauthorized obstructions or
Rosa came before it was established that the
encroachments, and authorities are clear that they
property was actually considered as watershed so
are validly conferable upon executive officials
the confirmation of the condition of the property
provided the party affected is given opportunity
as watershed came after the property has already
to be heard, as is expressly required by Republic
been titled under Sta Rosa Realty.
Act No. 2056, section 2.
Being a watershed and not for agriculture, it
cannot longer be subjected to compulsory
acquisition by the government for land reform; if
it will be subjected to compulsory acquisition
then the 200+ hectares will be distributed to the
tenant farmers under the CARP so the watershed
would be affected. (If so, then Sta Rosa could
have been paid because the distribution of
property is an exercise of eminent domain)
Now the second question, what happens now to

the property now that the SC said that this is a
23 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
NATRES MIDTERMS
watershed? Then Sta Rosa Realty can no longer

of the Tanjay Waterworks System, an
utilize this property.
appropriation, utilization, exploitation-the
jurisdiction to hear and decide the dispute in its
DISPOSITIVE PORTION: first instance pertains to the Water Resources
32. Tanjay Water District vs. Council as provided by PD 1067. The CFI only
Hence, during the hearing at DARAB, there has appellate jurisdiction.
Gabaton G.R. No. L-63742 | April 17,
was proof showing that the disputed parcels
1989
of land may be excluded from the compulsory
TOPIC : Administration
acquisition of Waters
coverage of CARP and of its
because
Metro Iloilo Water District vs.
33.
Enforcement
very high slopes.
of the To
Provisions
resolve the
of issue as to
theCode
this true nature of the parcels of land CA G.R. No. 122855 | March 31, 2005
involved in the case at bar, the Court directs TOPIC : Administration of Waters and
the DARAB
Article to conduct
88 of the Water Codea re-evaluation
pronounces of thethe
that Enforcement of the Provisions of PD 1607
issue.
Water Resources Council shall have original
The trial court’s jurisdiction must be upheld
jurisdiction over all disputes relating to the
IN VIEW WHEREOF, the Court SETS where the issue involved is not the settlement of a
appropriation,
ASIDE utilization, exploitation,
water rights dispute, but the enjoyment of a right
development, control and protection
the decision of the Court of Appeals of waters
in
to water use for which a permit was already
within the context
CA-G.R. SP No. of this Code.
27234.
granted.
In lieu thereof,
Inasmuch thefiled
the case Court
byREMANDS the
Tanjay involves, an Atty. Gallant’s discussion:
case to the DARAB
action for injunction with preliminary mandatory
for and
injunction re-evaluation
damages, and
against respondent MOST IMPORTANT POWER OF National
determination of the nature of the parcels
Municipality of Pamplona and its officials to Water Resources Council (NWRC) IS THE
of land involved to resolve the issue of its
prevent them from interfering in the management POWER TO DETERMINE AND ADJUDICATE
WATER RIGHTS AND THIS IS ORIGINAL
JURISDICTION UNDER ART 88 OF WATER
CODE.
In Tanjay, SC sustained the jurisdiction of

NWRC (National Water Resources Board), while
in the case of Metro Iloilo, involving private
respondents that are extracting waters in the City
of Iloilo then selling it to consumers for a fee
without permit within the concession area of
Iloilo, the SC said when the respondents invoked
the doctrine in Tanjay, SC said it is different from
Tanjay because it is the regular courts that has
jurisdiction in the case of Metro Iloilo and not
NWLRC.
In Tanjay, it was not very clear what was the

dispute between the Municipality of Pamplona
and its officials with the water district because it’s
24 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
NATRES MIDTERMS
not stated other than the allegation of Tanjay

to that. But the private entities here were
Water District that the Municipality of Pamplona
extracting water within the concession area of
is interfering with the management of the water
Metro Iloilo without its permit. You cannot do
district.
that because it’s also unfair for Metro Iloilo
because for every water extracted therein, it's
This has something to do with the power of LGU,
Metro Iloilo that pays to the government for its
given under LGC. Under LGC there are some
share to the Local Utilities Administration. So
powers that are devoted to the LGU, and one of
there is no more dispute to be determined by
those powers is the power to create the Local
NWRC.
Water Board and appoint the board members by
Mayor. But the Local Water Board is just a
Now why is it cognizable by the court?
policy making body to supervise not to control
In CivPro you will learn 3 elements of causes of
the operation of the Local Water Districts
action, one is a vested right, 2. An obligation to
because the control over Local Water Districts
observe that right 3. The damages sustained
belong to the Local Utilities Administration. The
because of the violation or non-observance of the
LGU wants to control the operation of the water
right. To illustrate, Metro Iloilo has a right to
district so there is now a dispute over control of
extract water within the city of Iloilo, pursuant to
water. There is still no jurisprudence that
its franchise or concession. So anyone in Iloilo
determines the extent of power of the LGU that
has the obligation to respect that right of Metro
are vested under LGC so on the mistaken belief
Iloilo Water District, but what did the private
that they have control as well, because of their
respondent do, they extracted water without
power to create the Local Water Board, they want
permit from Metro Iloilo thereby violating the
to interfere with the management, they want to
right of Metro Iloilo. So because it sustained
appoint the General Manager of local water
damages, it is actionable by regular courts not by
districts but these are appointed by the Local
NWRC. Metro Iloilo is just exercising their right
Utilities Administration not by the Local Water
under the circumstances.
Board. The General Manager of Local Water
Districts is an ex-officio member of the Local
Water Board that’s why they want to interfere.
And that is why there is now dispute over the
control of waters because it is not clear up to
what extent are the powers of LGU and which
have now to be resolved by the NWRC.
In Metro Iloilo, there is no longer a dispute that

will involve the determination and adjudication
of the NWRC because it has already been
determined to be a concession/franchise that has
already been given to Metro Iloilo. For the water,
the appropriation, utilization and control of the
water within the City of Iloilo has already been
determined and adjudicated by the NWRC to
Metro Iloilo, there is no more contest with respect
25 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
NATRES MIDTERMS
34.Alexandria Condominium vs. LLDA 35. MMDA vs. Concerned Residents of

G.R. No. 169228 | Sept. 11, 2009 Manila Bay, G.R. Nos. 171947, Dec.
TOPIC : Institutional Mechanism
18, 2008 (Decision)
RA 4850, specifically mandating the LLDA to TOPIC : Institutional Mechanism
carry out and make effective the declared
Mandamus lies to compel the MMDA to clean or
national policy of promoting and accelerating
rehabilitate Manila Bay.
the development and balanced growth of
Laguna Lake, empowers the LLDA to compel The complaint by the residents allege that the
petitioner to control and abate its waste water quality of Manila Bay has fallen below the
effluents and impose fines on the latter allowable standards set by law, specifically P.D.
therefore. No. 1152 or the Philippine Environment Code
and that all defendants must be jointly and/or
PhilReally developed, established and
solidarily liable and collectively ordered to clean
constructed Alexandria Condominium
up Manila Bay and to restore its water quality to
Complex from 1987 to 1993. As it was being
class B water fit for swimming, diving and other
built, PhilReally did not turn over the perimeter
forms of contact recreation.
drainage layout of the project. Later on, the
LLDA advised PhilReally that its waste water May be compelled. Sec 17 does not in any way
did not meet the standards set by the state that the government agencies concerned,
government and upon giving notice of such when appropriate, to take such measures as may
violation, directed PhilReally to control its be necessary to meet the prescribed water quality
waste effluents discharged to the Laguna de standards. On the contrary, Sec. 17 requires them
Bay. The doctrine of non-exhaustion of to act even in the absence of a specific pollution
administrative remedies requires that resort incident, as long as water quality has deteriorated
must first be made with the administrative to a degree where its state will adversely affect its
authorities in the resolution of a controversy best usage. This section commands concerned
falling under their jurisdiction before the government agencies, when appropriate, to take
controversy may be elevated to a court of such measures as may be necessary to meet the
justice for review. prescribed water quality standards. The
underlying duty to upgrade the quality of water is
Under EO 149, DENR only has administrative
not conditional on the occurrence of any pollution
power over LLDA. EO 192 created the PAB
incident.
under the Office of the DENR Secretary with
assumed powers and functions of the NPCC
with respect to the adjudication of pollution
cases.
26 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
NATRES MIDTERMS
35. MMDA vs. Concerned Residents of greatly affected biogenically hard-structured

Manila Bay, G.R. Nos. 171947, Feb. communities such as coral reefs and led stress to
15, 2011(Resolution) the marine life in the Mindoro Sea.” This
TOPIC : Institutional Mechanism constitutes “pollution” as defined by law.
The issuance of subsequent resolutions by the Shell is not an agent of the Republic of the
Court is simply an exercise of judicial power Philippines. It is but a service contractor for the
under Art. VIII of the Constitution, because the exploration and development of one of the
execution of the Decision is but an integral part country’s natural gas reserves. While the
of the adjudicative function of the Court. None of Republic appointed Shell as the exclusive party to
the agencies ever questioned the power of the conduct petroleum operations in the
Court to implement the December 18, 2008 Camago-Malampayo area under the States full
Decision nor has any of them raised the alleged control and supervision, it does not follow that
encroachment by the Court over executive Shell has become the States agent within the
functions. meaning of the law.
The writ of continuing mandamus issued means The essence of agency is the agent’s liability to
that until petition-government agencies have represent his principal and bring about business
shown full compliance with the Court orders, the relations between the latter and third persons.
Court exercises continuing jurisdiction over them Shell’s primary obligation under the contract is
until full execution of the judgment. not to represent the Philippine government for the
purpose of transacting business with third
36. Shell Pilipinas vs. Jalos persons. Rather, its contractual commitment is to
G.R. No.179918, Sept. 8, 2010 develop and manage petroleum operations on
behalf of the State.
TOPIC : Water Code: Actions - (Sec. 30)
Pollution cases should first be filed with the

Pollution Adjudication board.
A valid judgment for damages can be made in

favor of Jalos, et al., if the construction and
operation of the pipeline indeed caused fish
decline and eventually led to the fishermen’s loss
of income, as alleged in the complaint.
Although the complaint of Jalos does not use the

word “pollution” in describing the cause of the
alleged fish decline in the Mindoro Sea, it is
unmistakable that Shell’s pipeline produced some
kind of poison or emission that drove the fish
away from the coastal areas. While the complaint
did not specifically attribute to Shell any specific
act of “pollution”, it alleged that “the pipeline
27 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
NATRES MIDTERMS
37. PICOP Resources vs. Base

Metals, G.R. No. 136509, Dec. 6, 2006 LA
TOPIC : Prohibited Acts - (Secs. 20 of NIPAS)
Sec. 19(f) of RA 7586 does not disallow mining 1. FORESTRY REFORM CODE P.D. 705
applications in all forest reserves but only those (May 19, 1975)
proclaimed as watershed forest reserves. ➔ Prohibited acts and Penal provisions
PICOP failed to present any evidence that the STATE POLICY

area covered by the Mining Production Sharing
Agreement is a protected wilderness area 1. To promote the wise utilization,
designated as an initial component of the NIPAS. conservation and development of the
There was likewise no showing that the forest resources of the country, including
declaration of such areas as wilderness came their associated services relating to water
from a law or a presidential order. supply, recreation and wildlife
preservation;
For all those of prohibited acts to be operative, 2. To safeguard the national interest in the
that area has to be proclaimed first as part of the maintenance of a wholesome ecological
protected areas system. All those listed in Sec 20 environment;
will not be prohibited if the areas have not yet 3. To accelerate the rehabilitation of
been proclaimed as protected areas. denuded lands, including those under
private ownership; and
4. To provide a stable forestry agency and a
body of laws and regulations adequate to
achieve the national policy.
DECLARATION OF POLICIES
1. The multiple uses of forest lands shall be

oriented to the development and progress
requirements of the country, the
advancement of science and technology,
and the public welfare;
2. Land classification and survey shall be
systematized and hastened;
3. The establishment of wood-processing
plants shall be encouraged and
rationalized; and
4. The protection, development and
rehabilitation of forest lands shall be
emphasized so as to ensure their
continuity in productive condition.
28 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
NATRES MIDTERMS
CRIMINAL OFFENSES AND PENALTIES

In Mustang Lumber v. CA (1996), while
1. Cutting, Gathering and/or Collecting lumber is not specifically mentioned in Sec.
Timber or Other Products Without License 68, it is nonetheless included in the term
“timber”. While “timber” is included in the
forest products as defined in Sec. 3(q) of PD
2 OFFENSES UNDER SEC 68 of PD 705 705, the lumber is found in Sec. 3(aa) in the
definition of “processing plant”. This simply
Offense 1: Offense 2: Possession
means that lumber is a processed log or
Cutting, gathering, of timber or other
forest raw material, or timber.
collecting, and forest
removing timber or products without the
Under Sec. 68-A of PD 705, as amended by
forest products from legal documents
EO 277, the DENR Secretary or his duly
any forest required under
authorized representative has jurisdiction to
land, or timber from existing forest laws
order the confiscation and disposition of all
alienable or and regulations.
conveyances – by land, water or air – used in
disposable public
illegally cutting, gathering, removing,
land, or from private
possessing or abandoning forest products.
land without
authority.
In Momongan v. Omipon (1995), the
confiscation proceedings under AO 59 is
Defense: Defense:
different from the confiscation under the
Raise legality of acts Good faith is not a
RPC, which is an additional penalty imposed
by presenting the defense, since
in the event of conviction.
authorization issued violation of
by DENR. this law is a mala
prohibita and the
commission of the
a prohibited act is the 2. Unlawful Occupation or Destruction of
crime itself, Forest Lands
regardless of intent.
Sec. 69 of PD 705:
Person liable: In case of partnership,
association, or corporations, the officers who Punishable Act – any person who [1] enters,
ordered the cutting, gathering, occupies, possesses, or makes kaingin for
collecting, and possession shall be liable, and if his own private use or for others any forest
such officers are aliens, they shall in addition land without authority or [2] in any manner
to the penalty, be deported without further
destroys such forest land or part thereof, or
proceeding.
[3] causes any damage to timber stand and
The Court shall further order the confiscation other products and forest growths found
in favor of the government of the timber or any therein.
forest products, cut, gathered, collected,
removed or possessed as well as the The Court shall further order the eviction of
machinery, equipment, implements, and tools the offender from the land and the forfeiture
illegally used in the area where the timber or of the government of all improvements
forest products are found. made and all vehicles, domestic animals and
29 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
NATRES MIDTERMS
equipment of any kind used in the

hunt, capture, or kill any kind of bird, fish,
commission of the offense.
or wild animal life within any area of the
national park system.
In case the offender is a government official
or employee, he shall, in addition to the
5. Survey by Unauthorized Persons
above penalties, be deemed automatically
dismissed from office and permanently Sec. 73 pf PD 705: Any person who shall,
disqualified from holding any elective or without permit to survey from Director,
appointive position. enter any forest lands, whether covered by a
license agreement, lease, license, or permit,
3. Pasturing Livestock
or not, and conduct or undertake a survey
for whatever purpose.
Sec. 70 of PD 705: imprisonment, fine, and
confiscation of livestock and all
6. Misclassification and Survey by
improvement in favor of the government
Government Official or Employee
shall be imposed upon any person, without
Sec. 74 of PD 705: any public officer or
the authority under a lease or permit, graze,
employee who knowingly surveys,
or cause to graze livestock
classifies, or recommends the release of the
forest lands as A&D contrary to the criteria
in forest lands, grazing lands, and A&D
and standards established in this code, or the
lands which have not as yet been disposed
IRR promulgated. The survey, classification
under CA 141. In case the
or release of forest lands shall be null and
offender is a corporation, partnership, or void.
association, the officers and directors
7. Arrest; Institution of Criminal Action
thereof shall be liable.
A forest officer or employee of the FMB
4. Illegal Occupation of National Parks
shall arrest even without warrant any person
System and Recreation Areas and
who has committed or is committing in his
Vandalism Therein
presence any offenses defined in this code.
Sec. 85 of PD 705:
In Mustang Lumber v. CA (1996), the
Punishable act – [1] any person, without seizure of petitioner’s truck and its cargo
permit, occupy for any length of time any consisting of lauan and almaciga lumber
portion of the national park system or shall, which were not accompanied with the
in any manner, cut, destroy, damage, or required invoices and transporting
remove timber or any species of vegetation documents is valid, as it is made on a
of forest cover and other natural resources moving vehicle.
found therein, or shall mutilate, deface or
destroy objects of natural beauty or of scenic
value within areas of national parks. [2] Any
person who, without proper permit shall
30 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
NATRES MIDTERMS
Water Resources Council, hereinafter

2. THE WATER CODE P.D. 1607 referred to as the Council.
(Dec. 31, 1976)
e. Preference in the use and
➔ What is allowed and what is not development of waters shall consider
➔ Tanjay Case current usages and be responsive to
➔ Domestic use of water the changing needs of the country.
➔ Jurisdiction of NWRC
❏ ARTICLE 5. The following belong to
OBJECTIVES (Art 2, PD1607) the State:
1. Establish basic principles and framework a. Rivers and their natural beds;
relating to appropriation, control and
conservation of water resources. b. Continuous or intermittent waters
of springs and brooks running in their
2. Define the extent of rights and
natural beds and the beds themselves;
obligations of water users and owners.
3. Adopt basic law governing the c. Natural lakes and lagoons;
ownership, appropriation, utilization,
exploitation, development, conservation d. All other categories of surface
and protection of water resources. waters such as water owing over
4. Identify administrative agencies that will lands, water from rainfall whether
enforce the Water Code. natural or artificial, and water from
agricultural runoff, seepage and
OWNERSHIP OF WATERS drainage;
❏ ARTICLE 3. The underlying principles of e. Atmospheric water;

this code are:
f. Subterranean or ground waters;
a. All waters belong to the State.
g. Seawater.
b. All waters that belong to the State
❏ ARTICLE 6. The following waters
can not be the subject to acquisitive
found on private lands also belong to
prescription.
the State:
c. The State may allow the use or
a. Continuous or intermittent waters
development of waters by
rising on such lands;
administrative concession.
b. Lakes and lagoons naturally
d. The utilization, exploitation,
occurring on such lands;
development, conservation and
protection of water resources shall be
c. Rain water falling on such lands;
subject to the control and regulation of
the government through the National d. Subterranean or ground waters;
31 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
NATRES MIDTERMS
e. Water in swamps and marshes. f. Livestock raising

g. Industrial
The owner of the land where the water h. Recreational, and
is found may use the same for i. Other purposes
domestic purposes without securing a
permit, provided that such use shall be PURPOSES FOR WHICH WATERS MAY
BE APPROPRIATED:
registered, when required by the
1. DOMESTIC PURPOSES- for drinking,
Council. The Council, however, may
washing, bathing, cooking or other
regulate such use when there is household needs, home gardens, and
wastage, or in times of emergency. watering of lawns or domestic animals.
2. MUNICIPAL PURPOSES- for
NOTE: supplying the water requirements of the
Waters found on private land, but despite that, community.

being said that all waters belong to the State, 3. IRRIGATION- for producing
although this water is found on private land, they agricultural crops.
still belong to the State. Such as waters naturally 4. POWER GENERATION- for
occurring from the land; swamp waters-belong to producing electrical or mechanical
the State. power.
5. FISHERIES- for the propagation
EXCEPTION TO RULE ON PROPERTY- that and culture of fish as a commercial
the owner of the land is also the owner of enterprise.
everything that is above and underneath, such as 6. LIVESTOCK- for large herds or
surface waters (surface rights) flocks of animals raised as a
commercial enterprise.
APPROPRIATION
7. INDUSTRIAL PURPOSES- in
factories, industrial plants and mines,
❏ ARTICLE 9. Waters may be
including the use of water as an
appropriated and used in accordance with
ingredient of a finished product.
the provisions of this Code.
8. RECREATIONAL PURPOSES-
Appropriation of water, as used in this
for swimming pools, bath houses,
Code, is the acquisition of rights over
boating, water skiing, golf courses
the use of waters or the taking or
and other similar facilities in resorts
diverting of waters from a natural
and other places of recreation.
source in the manner and for any
purpose allowed by law. ❏ ARTICLE 12. Waters appropriated for a
particular purpose may be applied for
❏ ARTICLE 10. Water may be
another purpose only upon prior approval
appropriated for the following purposes:
of the Council and on condition that the
a. Domestic new use does not unduly prejudice the
b. Municipal rights of other permittees, or require an
c. Irrigation increase in the volume of water.
d. Power generation
e. Fisheries
32 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
NATRES MIDTERMS
❏ ARTICLE 13. Except as otherwise Board unless a bond as provided for in

herein provided, no person, including Article 88 shall have been posted.
government instrumentalities or
government-owned or controlled Administration of Waters and Enforcement of
corporations, shall appropriate water the Provisions of This Code:
without a water right, which shall be
evidenced by a document known as a ❏ ARTICLE 88. The Council (NWRC)
water permit. shall have original jurisdiction over all
disputes relating to appropriation,
Water right is the privilege granted by the utilization, exploitation, development,
government to appropriate and use water. control, conservation and protection of
waters within the meaning and context of
❏ Use and Development of Waters- we
the provisions of this Code.
determine the preferential use with
accordance with on a case to case basis. The decisions of the Council on water
rights controversies shall be immediately
❏ Section 3. Qualification of Applicants
executory and the enforcement thereof
for Permit/Authority – Only the
may be suspended only when a bond, in
following may file an application with
an amount fixed by the Council to answer
the Board for permit/authority:
for damages occasioned by the suspension
a) Citizens of the Philippines; or stay of execution, shall have been led
by the appealing party, unless the
b) Associations, duly registered suspension is by virtue of an order of a
cooperatives or corporations competent court.
organized under the laws of the
Philippines, at least 60 percent of the All disputes shall be decided within sixty
capital of which is owned by citizens (60) days after the parties submit the same
of the Philippines; for decision or resolution.
c) Government entities and The Council shall have the power to issue
instrumentalities, including writs of execution and enforce its
government-owned and controlled decisions with the assistance of local or
corporations. national police agencies.
❏ ARTICLE 89. The decisions of the

❏ Section 79. Stay of Execution – The
Council on water rights controversies
filing of motion for reconsideration
may be appealed to the Court of First
and/or reinvestigation under the
Instance of the province where the
preceding section or an appeal with the
subject matter of the controversy is
Regional Trial Court under Article 89 of
situated within fteen (15) days from the
the Code shall not stay the execution of
date the party appealing receives a copy
the decision, resolution or order of the
of the decision, on any of the following
grounds: (1) grave abuse of discretion;
33 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
NATRES MIDTERMS
(2) question of law; and (3) questions of

shaping its regulatory profile within
fact and law.
the acceptable boundaries of public
health and environment; etc
3. CLEAN WATER ACT OF

2004- R.A.9275 (March 22, DEFINITION OF TERMS
2004)
➔ To pursue policy of economic growth in a ❏ AGRICULTURAL WASTE- waste
manner consistent with the protection, generated from planting or harvesting of
preservation and revival of the quality of crops, trimming or pruning of plants and
our fresh, brackish and marine waters. wastes or run-off materials from farms or
➔ To achieve this end, the framework for fields;
sustainable development shall be ❏ BULKY WASTE- refers to waste
pursued. As such, it shall be the policy of materials which cannot be appropriately
the State: placed in separate containers because of
either its bulky size, shape;
a) To streamline processes and ❏ SOLID WASTE- all discarded
procedures in the prevention, control household, commercial waste,
and abatement of pollution of the non-hazardous institutional and industrial
country’s water resources; waste.
❏ MINING WASTE- waste resulting from
b) To promote environmental
mining activities, including contaminated
strategies, use of appropriate
soil and debris.
economic instruments and of control
mechanisms for the protection of WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT
water resources; AREA (sec 5)
d) To formulate an integrated water a. DENR, in coordination with National

quality management framework Water Resources Board (NWRB), shall
through proper delegation and designate certain areas as water quality
effective coordination of functions management areas using appropriate
and activities; physiographic units such as watershed,
river basins or water resources regions.
e) To promote commercial and
b. Said management areas shall have
industrial processes and products that
similar hydrological, hydrogeological,
are environment friendly and energy
meteorological or geographic
efficient;
conditions which affect the
physicochemical, biological and
f) To encourage cooperation and
bacteriological reactions and diffusions
self-regulation among citizens and
of pollutants in the water bodies, or
industries through the application of
otherwise share common interest or
incentives and market-based
instruments and to promote the role of
private industrial enterprises in
34 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
NATRES MIDTERMS
face similar development programs,

b. EGF shall finance the maintenance of the
prospects, or problems.
health of the ecosystems and specially
the conservation of watersheds and
MANAGEMENT OF
aquifers affected by the development, and
NON-ATTAINMENT AREAS (sec 6)
the needs of emergency response,
a. DENR, shall designate water bodies or clean-up or 9 rehabilitation of areas that
portions thereof, where specific may be damaged during the program’s or
pollutants from either natural or project’s actual implementation.
non-made source have already exceeded c. Liability for damages shall continue even
water quality guidelines as after the termination of a program or
non-attainment areas for the exceeded project and, until the lapse of a given
pollutants. period indicated in the environmental
b. DENR, shall, in coordination with compliance certificate, as determined by
NWRB, Department of Health (DOH), the Department.
Department of Agriculture (DA),
REWARDS (sec 25)
governing board and other concerned
government agencies and private sectors Rewards, monetary or otherwise, shall be
shall take such measures as may be provided to individuals, private organizations and
necessary to upgrade the quality of such entities, including civil society, that have
water in non-attainment areas to meet undertaken outstanding and innovative projects,
the standards under which it has been technologies, processes and techniques or
classified. activities in water quality management. Said
c. LGUs shall prepare and implement rewards shall be sourced from the Water Quality
contingency plans and other measures Management Fund herein created.
including relocation, whenever
necessary, for the protection of health INCENTIVE SCHEME (sec 26)
and welfare of the residents within
potentially affected areas An incentive scheme is hereby provided for the
purpose of encouraging LGUs, water districts
FINANCIAL LIABILITY OR (WDs), enterprises, or private entities, and
ENVIRONMENTAL REHABILITATION individuals, to develop or undertake an effective
(sec 15) water quality management, or actively participate
in any program geared towards the promotion
a. DENR shall require program and project
thereof as provided in this Act.
proponents to put up an environmental
guarantee fund (EGF) as part of the KINDS OF INCENTIVE:
environmental management plan attached
to the environmental compliance 1. NON-FISCAL INCENTIVE- inclusion
certificate pursuant to Presidential in the Investment Priority Plan:
Decree No. 1586 and its implementing a. Industrial wastewater treatment;
rules and regulations. b. Water pollution control
technology;
35 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
NATRES MIDTERMS
c. Cleaner production and waste

water quality management area action
minimization technology
plan prepare a compliance scheme in,
accordance thereof subject to review and
2. FISCAL INCENTIVES
approval of the governing board.
a. Tax and Duty Exemption on
Imported Capital Equipment
b. Tax Credit on Domestic Capital
4. NATIONAL INTEGRATED
Equipment
PROTECTED AREAS SYSTEM ACT OF
c. Tax and Duty Exemption of
1992 R.A. 7586, June 1, 1992, as amended
Donations, Legacies and Gifts
by R.A. 11038 (EXPANDED NIPAS
ACT, June 22, 2018)
3. FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE
➔ There are now 107 (13 from old law +
a. An incentive scheme is hereby 94 in new law) protected areas as of the
provided for the purpose of date
encouraging LGUs, water ➔ To secure for the Filipino people of
districts (WDs), enterprises, or present and for future generations, the
private entities, and individuals, perpetual existence of all native plants
to develop or undertake an and animals; through the establishment of
effective water quality a comprehensive system of integrated
management, or actively protected areas.
participate in any program
➔ The protected areas have been put under
geared towards the promotion
the control and supervision of the
thereof as provided in this Act.
DENR, through its Biodiversity
4. GRANTS TO LGUs Management Bureau.
a. Cities and municipalities which ❏ DEFINITION:

shall establish or operate NIPAS is the classification and
sewerage facilities may be administration of all designated
entitled to receive grants for the protected areas to maintain essential
purpose of developing technical ecological processes and life-support
capabilities. systems, to preserve genetic diversity, to
ensure sustainable use of resources
INSTITUTIONAL MECHANISMS found therein, and to maintain their
ROLE OF LGUs natural conditions to the greatest extent
possible;
a. Local government units shall share the
responsibility in the management and ❏ CLASSIFICATIONS OF
improvement of water quality within PROTECTED AREAS
their territorial jurisdictions a) NATIONAL PARKS- lands of
b. Each local government unit shall within 6 public domain, primarily designated
months after the establishment of the for the conservation of native plants
36 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
NATRES MIDTERMS
and animals, their associated

game animals, birds and fishes and
habitats and cultural diversity
closed to hunting and fishing
b) NATURAL PARKS- a relatively
i) WILDERNESS AREAS- large
large are not materially altered by
tract of public land maintained
human activity where extractive
essentially in its natural state and
resources uses not allowed and is
protected against introduction of
maintained to protect outstanding
intrusive artifacts
natural and scenic areas of national
j) WATERSHED FOREST
use
RESERVES- land area drained by a
c) NATURAL MONUMENTS- a
stream or fixed body of water and
relatively small area focused on the
its tributaries having a common
protection of small features to
outlet for surface run-off
protect or preserve nationally
significant natural features on DEFINITION OF TERMS
account of their special interest or
unique characteristics ➔ BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY OR
d) PROTECTED LANDSCAPES BIODIVERSITY- refers to the variability
AND SEASCAPES- areas of among living organisms from all sources
including, inter alia, terrestrial, marine and
national significance which are
other aquatic ecosystems and the
characterized by the harmonious
ecological complexes of which they are
interaction of man and land and part; this includes diversity within species,
water while providing opportunities between species and of ecosystems;
for public enjoyment through
recreation etc ➔ BUFFER ZONES- refer to identified
e) NATURAL BIOTIC AREA- an areas outside the boundaries of and
immediately adjacent to designated
area set aside to allow the way of
protected areas that need special
life of societies living in harmony development control in order to avoid or
with the environment to adapt to minimize harm to the protected areas;
modern technology at their pace
f) WILDLIFE SANCTUARY- an ➔ INTEGRATED PROTECTED AREA
area which assures the natural FUND- refers to the special account
established for the purpose of financing
conditions necessary to protect
projects of the NIPAS and individual
nationally significant species protected areas.
g) RESOURCE RESERVES- an
extensive, relatively isolated, and ➔ MULTIPLE-USE ZONE- refers to the
uninhabited area which is difficult area where settlement, traditional and
to access and is designated to sustainable land use including agriculture,
agroforestry, extraction activities may be
protect the natural resources of the
allowed to extent prescribed in the
area for future use protected area management plan
h) GAME REFUGE AND BIRD
SANCTUARIES- a forest land
designated for the protection of
37 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
NATRES MIDTERMS
❏ PROCEDURE FOR INCLUSION IN ❏ Section 4. Section 5 of Republic Act No.

THE SYSTEM
7586 is hereby amended to read as
a. DENR makes a recommendation
follows: "Sec. 5. Establishment and
to the President based on the
views and comments gathered Extent of the System. - The establishment
from public consultations; and operationalization of the System shall
b. President, upon receipt of the involve the following:
DENR recommendation, issues a (a) All areas or islands in the
proclamation establishing the Philippines proclaimed,
proposed protected areas and designated or set aside,
providing for measures for their pursuant to a law, presidential
protection until the time when
decree, presidential proclamation
Congress shall have enacted a
or executive order as national
law finally declaring the
recommended areas as part of the park, game refuge, bird and
System; wildlife sanctuary, wilderness
c. President, upon completion of area, strict nature reserve,
the appropriate review, watershed, mangrove reserve,
recommends to the Senate and fish sanctuary, natural and
the HoR the designations of historical landmark, protected
protected areas or reclassification and managed landscape/
of each area.
seascape are hereby designated
❏ ADMINISTRATION AND as initial components of the
MANAGEMENT OF THE SYSTEM System. The initial components
➔ NIPAS is under the control and of the System shall be governed
administration of DENR through by existing laws, rules, and
BMB (Biodiversity Management regulations, not inconsistent with
Bureau
this Act.
❏ INTEGRATED PROTECTED AREA
FUND ❏ The following parcels of land and/or
➔ To finance the projects and sustaining the bodies of water are hereby established
operation of protected areas and the as protected areas within the
System classification of national park pursuant
➔ Income from fees and charges from the to the Philippine Constitution, such as:
use of resources and facilities of ➔ Tañon Strait in Cebu and
protected areas
Negros Islands (534,589.05
➔ SHARING OF INCOME: 75% PAMB
hectares);
(Protected Area Management Board);
25% general fund for financing the ➔ Kalawit Island
projects of the System ➔ Ticao-Burias Pass in Albay,
Masbate and Sorsogon
provinces (414,244 ha);
➔ Samar Island Natural Park in
Samar (335,105.57 ha);
➔ Siargao Island in Surigao del
Norte (283,974.77 ha);
38 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant
NATRES MIDTERMS
➔ Turtle Island Wildlife and leaving roads and trails;

Sanctuary in Tawi-Tawi littering; possessing or using
(242,958.29 ha); blasting caps or explosives.
➔ Agusan Marsh Wildlife ➔ Occupying or dwelling in any
Sanctuary in Agusan del Sur; public land; building any
and structure, fence or enclosure;
➔ Sarangani Bay in General conducting any business
Santos City (210,887.69 ha). enterprise without permit; and
❏ Also declared as protected areas are: purchasing or leasing lands.
➔ Taal Volcano in Batangas and
Cavite; Ninoy Aquino Parks
and Wildlife Center in
Quezon City; the Chocolate
Hills Natural Monument in
Bohol; Aliwagwag Protected
Landscape in Davao Oriental;
Bulusan Volcano Natural Park
in Sorsogon; Hinulugang
Taktak falls in Rizal; Apo
Reef in Occidental Mindoro;
Las Piñas-Paranaque Wetland
Park; the Panglao Island
Protected Seascape in Bohol;
and Mt. Mayon Natural Park
in Albay.
❏ PROHIBITED ACTS IN THE

PROTECTED AREAS ARE:
➔ poaching and disturbing any
wildlife; hunting, taking or
collecting any wildlife or
by-products; cutting, gathering or
removing timber without permit.
➔ Possessing or transporting any
timber, forest products, wildlife
or by-products; using any fishing
gear and indulging in practice
that destroys marine life;
dumping toxic chemical,
untreated sewage or animal
waste.
➔ The practice of “kaingin,” or
causing forest fires; damaging
39 |kkv
2F | Atty. Gallant

Natres Midterms Reviewer

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Natres Midterms Reviewer

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Natres Midterms Reviewer

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

NATRES MIDTERMS REVIEWER

1. Magallona vs. Executive Secretary

RA 9522 is a statutory tool to demarcate the

2. ART 1, 1987 CONSTITUTION

OCEAN BOUNDARIES UNDER UNCLOS

EFFECT WITHOUT THE DOCTRINE

CONTIGUOUS 12 mi. PH- limited

EXCLUSIVE 200 mi. PH- sole

CONTINENTA Not to PH- exclusive

2. Henares vs. LTFRB

WHEREFORE, the petition for the issuance DISPOSITIVE PORTION:

4. Carino vs. Insular Govt. 5. Cruz vs. Sec of DENR

ownership and possession of their ancestral

6. SJS vs. Atienza

ANCESTRAL LANDS- are lands held by the DISPOSITIVE PORTION:

Respondent Hon. Jose L. Atienza, Jr., as mayor of the City of Ma

7. Chavez vs. PEA-AMARI matters of public concern. If you limit that to a

Also the SC said, if on the other hand, you do not

8. Tano vs. Socrates 9. Miners Asso. vs. Factoran

10. Alvarez vs. PICOP 11. Sec. of DENR vs. Yap

12. Alcantara vs. COSLAP 13. Cheesman vs. IAC

The cancellation of an FLGLA that was granted DISPOSITIVE PORTION:

disposable by her without his consent or CORPORATION to purchase the subject

basis that the investors in BPC had declined to

In this particular BPC venture, not only has the

18. Yngson vs. Sec. of Agriculture

20.Republic vs. Naguiat, 21.Sec. of DENR vs. Yap

regulations in the exercise of the powers of the

Accordingly, respondent-appellee Secretary of

The utilization and disposition of forest resources

23.Oposa vs. Factoran only a license or privilege, which can be validly

already take the nature of an administrative

26.Mustang Lumber vs. CA 27.People vs. Que

Dagudag vs. Paderanga

Art. 50. Lower estates are obliged to receive the

SC sustained the power of the Sec. of Public

construction that impedes the natural flow of

Now the second question, what happens now to

watershed? Then Sta Rosa Realty can no longer

In Tanjay, SC sustained the jurisdiction of

In Tanjay, it was not very clear what was the

not stated other than the allegation of Tanjay

In Metro Iloilo, there is no longer a dispute that

34.Alexandria Condominium vs. LLDA 35. MMDA vs. Concerned Residents of

35. MMDA vs. Concerned Residents of greatly affected biogenically hard-structured

Pollution cases should first be filed with the

A valid judgment for damages can be made in

Although the complaint of Jalos does not use the

37. PICOP Resources vs. Base

PICOP failed to present any evidence that the STATE POLICY

1. The multiple uses of forest lands shall be

CRIMINAL OFFENSES AND PENALTIES

equipment of any kind used in the

Water Resources Council, hereinafter

❏ ARTICLE 3. The underlying principles of e. Atmospheric water;

e. Water in swamps and marshes. f. Livestock raising

Waters found on private land, but despite that, community.

❏ ARTICLE 13. Except as otherwise Board unless a bond as provided for in

❏ ARTICLE 89. The decisions of the