2012

CASE TITLE: Republic vs City of Paranaque

GR # & DATE: GR No. 191109 July 18, 2012

TOPIC : Property of the State

Facts:
The Public Estates Authority (PEA) is a government corporation created by virtue of Presidential Decree
(P.D.) No. 1084 On February 14, 1979, by virtue of Executive Order (E.O.) No. 525 issued by then President
Ferdinand Marcos, PEA was designated as the agency primarily responsible for integrating, directing and
coordinating all reclamation projects for and on behalf of the National Government.
On October 26, 2004, then President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo issued E.O. No. 380 transforming PEA into
PRA, which shall perform all the powers and functions of the PEA relating to reclamation activities.
By virtue of its mandate, PRA reclaimed several portions of the foreshore and offshore areas of Manila Bay,
including those located in Parañaque City, and was issued Original Certificates of Title (OCT Nos. 180, 202,
206, 207, 289, 557, and 559) and Transfer Certificates of Titles over the reclaimed lands.
On February 19, 2003, then Parañaque City Treasurer issued Warrants of Levy on PRA's reclaimed
properties located in Parañaque City based on the assessment for delinquent real property taxes made by
then Parañaque City Assessor Soledad Medina Cue for tax years 2001 and 2002.
On January 8, 2010, the RTC rendered its decision dismissing PRA's petition. In ruling that PRA was not
exempt from payment of real property.
PRA explains that reclaimed lands are part of the public domain, owned by the State, thus, exempt from
the payment of real estate taxes. Reclaimed lands retain their inherent potential as areas for public use or
public service. While the subject reclaimed lands are still in its... hands, these lands remain public lands and
form part of the public domain. Hence, the assessment of real property taxes made on said lands, as well
as the levy thereon, and the public sale thereof on April 7, 2003, including the issuance of the certificates
of sale in favor of... the respondent Parañaque City, are invalid and of no force and effect.

ISSUE: Whether the Trial Court erred when it failed to consider that reclaimed lands are part of the public
domain.

HELD: The Court finds merit in the petition.

Reclaimed lands such as the subject lands in issue are reserved lands for public use. They are properties of
public dominion. The ownership of such lands remains with the State unless they are withdrawn by law or
presidential proclamation from public use. The mere reclamation of these areas by PEA does not convert
these inalienable natural resources of the State into alienable or disposable lands of the public domain.
There must be... a law or presidential proclamation officially classifying these reclaimed lands as alienable
or disposable and open to disposition or concession. Moreover, these reclaimed lands cannot be classified
as alienable or disposable if the law has reserved them for some public or... quasi-public use.
Thus, the assessment, levy and foreclosure made on the subject reclaimed lands by respondent, as well as
the issuances of certificates of... title in favor of respondent, are without basis.