Land Title and Deeds - guarantee the integrity of the land titles, protect their
indefeasibility, to quiet title or to put a stop to any question of its
Concept of Jura Regalia
Generally, under the concept of jura regalia, private title to land
must be traced to some grant, express or implied, from the Spanish
Crown or its successors, the American Colonial government, and
thereafter, the Philippine Republic
The capacity of the State to own or acquire property is the State’s
power of dominium. This was the foundation for the early Spanish
decrees embracing the feudal theory of jura regalia.
The Regalian doctrine is enshrined in the present and previous
Constitutions. The 1987 Constitution, like the 1935 and 1973
Constitutions, embodies the principle of State ownership of lands
and all other natural resources in Section 2 of Article XII on “National
Economy and Patrimony,” to wit: (Read Codal)
The present Constitution provides that, except for agricultural lands
of the public domain which alone may be alienated, forest or
timber, and mineral lands, as well as all other natural resources
must remain with the State, the exploration, development and
utilization of which shall be subject to its full control and supervision
albeit allowing it to enter into co-production, joint venture or
production sharing agreements, or into agreements with foreign-
owned corporations involving technical or financial assistance for
large-scale exploration, development and utilization.
The doctrine does not negate “native title.”
In Cruz v. Secretary of Environment and Natural Resources,
petitioners challenged the constitutionality of RA No. 8371,
otherwise known as the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act of 1997
(IPRA), on the ground that it amounts to an unlawful deprivation of
the State’s ownership over lands of the public domain and all other
natural resources therein, by recognizing the right of ownership of
Indigenous Cultural Communities or Indigenous Peoples (ICCs/IPs) to
their ancestral domains and ancestral lands on the basis of native
title.
Accordingly, pursuant to Section 7, Rule 56 of the Rules of Court,
the petition was dismissed, and the validity of the law, deemed
upheld.
Justice Kapunan, voting to dismiss the petition, stated that the
Regalian theory does not negate native title to lands held in private
ownership since time immemorial
Jurisprudence has institutionalized the recognition of the existence
of native title to land, or ownership of land by Filipinos by virtue of
possession under a claim of ownership since time immemorial and
independent of any grant from the Spanish Crown, as an exception
to the theory of jura regalia.
The Torrens System
- solution to the problem of simplification of title to land
- those systems of registration of transactions with interest in land
whose declared object is, under governmental authority, to
establish and certify to the ownership of an absolute and
indefeasible title to realty, and to simplify the transfer.
- titles registered thereunder are indefeasible
Purpose of the Torrens System
legality. The purpose of the system is to decree titles that shall be
final, irrevocable, and indisputable. The objective is to obviate
possible conflicts of title. It gives the owner a complete peace of
mind.
‘Mirror Doctrine’ – ‘every person dealing with registered
land may safely rely on the correctness of the certificate of
title issued therefor and is in no way obliged to go beyond
the certificate to determine the condition of the property.
Encumbrances shall be noted in the certificate.
Registration is not a mode of acquiring ownership
- Registration does not create or vest title. It is merely a procedure
to establish evidence of title over realty. Thus, mere possession
thereof does not make one the true owner of the property.
Rule on Double Registration
-Priority of registration is the settled rule.
-Legarda v. Saleeby, ‘the owner of the earliest certificate is the
owner of the land.
Distinction between “title” and “certificate of title”
Title – the lawful cause or ground of possessing that which
is ours. In other words, it is the foundation of ownership of
property. The just cause of exclusive possession.
Certificate of Title – a mere evidence of ownership
Advantages of the Torrens System
-security; reduced cost and time of conveyance; clearness and
brevity; simplified ordinary dealings; protection against fraud.
Why is registration under Torrens system considered a proceeding
in rem?
Is is a proceeding against the whole world. All occupants, adjoining
owners, adverse claimants, and other interested persons are
notified of the proceedings, and have a right to appear in opposition
in such application
Note: Jurisdiction in rem cannot be acquired unless there be
constructive seizure of the land through publication and service of
notice.
A View of Legislations on Land Registration
(1) The Public Land Act, CA 141
First Public Land Act (Act 926)
This Act worked on the assumption that title to public lands in the
Philippines remained in the government and that the government’s
title to public land sprung from the Treaty of Paris and other
subsequent treaties between Spain and the US
Prescribed rules and regulations for the homesteading, selling, and
leasing of portions of the public domain of the Philippine Islands
Prescribed the terms and conditions to enable persons to perfect
their titles to public lands in the Islands
Second Public Land Act (Act 2874)
More comprehensive in scope but limited the exploitation of
agricultural lands to Filipinos and Americans and other countries
giving the same privilege.
Present
Applies to lands of public domain which have been declared open to
disposition and concession and officially classified.
Sec. 48 (b) and (c) declares who may apply for judicial confirmation
of imperfect or incomplete titles. The application under this law
must be filed to the RTC of the province where the land is located.
Who may?
Those who by themselves or through their predecessors in
interest (also applies to members of national cultural
minorities) have been in open, continuous, exclusive, and
notorious possession and occupation of alienable and
disposable lands of public domain under a bona fide claim
of acquisition of ownership since June 12, 1945, except
when prevented by war or force majeure.
(2) The Land Registration Act (Act No. 496)
Established the Torrens system of registration in the country.
Created Court of Land Registration—exclusive jurisdiction over all
applications for registration, with power to hear and determine all
questions arising upon such applications. Sole purpose is bring land
titles in the Philippines under one comprehensive and harmonious
system
Before the creation of the Court of Land Registration, the jurisdiction
to determine the nature, quality, and extent of land titles, the rival
claims of contending parties, and the legality and effect thereof was
vested in the Courts of First Instance
Under this Act, notably:
1. A court of limited jurisdiction, with special subject matter, and
with only one purpose was created
2. By reason thereof, courts theretofore of general, original,
exclusive jurisdiction, were shone of some of their attributes—in
other words, powers were restricted
(3) The Cadastral Act No. 2259
Public interest requires that titles to such lands be settled and
adjudicated. Here the Director of Lands is to make a survey, with
notice to all persons claiming interest of a land. Thereafter, the
Director of Lands, represented by the Solicitor General, shall
institute registration proceedings by filing a petition in the proper
court against the holders, claimants, possessors, or occupants of
such lands
(4) The Property Registration Decree (PD No. 1529)
Purposes: Update the Land Registration Act; to codify various laws
relating to the registration of property, facilitate effective
implementation of said laws. Supersedes all laws relative to land
registration.
Substantially incorporated the substantive and procedural
requirements of its precursor, the Land Registration Act. It also
expanded its coverage to include judicial confirmation of imperfect
or incomplete titles.
Sec. 14 (1) to (4) of PD No. 1529. Enumerates who may apply for
registration and the conditions necessary.
(1) those who by themselves or through their predecessors-
in-interest OCENPO AD lands of the public domain
(2) those who have acquired ownership of private lands by
prescription under the provisions of existing laws
(3) those who have acquired ownership of private lands or
abandoned river beds by right of accession or accretion
under the existing laws.
(4) those who have acquired ownership of land in any other
manner provided for by aw.
Regional Trial Courts have plenary jurisdiction over land
registration cases: Sec 2, PD 1529 on matters involving land
registration; petition for amendments – Sec. 108
Note: First level courts have delegated jurisdiction to hear
and determine cadastral or land registration cases under
following instances:
a. the lot sought to be registered is not the
subject of controversy or opposition; or
b. where even if the lot is contested but the
value thereof does not exceed 100,000 Php.
Appealable to the CA.
Jurisdiction in Civil Cases involving title to Property
RTC shall exercise exclusive original jurisdiction in all civil actions
which involve the title to, or possession to, real property, or any
interest therein, where the assessed value of the property exceeds
P20,000, or for civil actions in Metro Manila, where such value
exceeds P50,000, except actions for forcible entry into and unlawful
detainer of lands or buildings, original jurisdiction over which is
conferred upon the MTC, MCTC, MMTC
What determines jurisdiction are the allegations in the complaint
and the reliefs prayed for—where the ultimate objective of the
plaintiff is to obtain title to property, it should be filed in the proper
court having jurisdiction over the assessed value of the property.
SC Administrative Circular No. 6-93-A
- Cadastral or land registration cases filed before the
effectivity of the Admin. Circular but where hearing hasn’t
yet commenced, shall be transferred by the Executive
Judge of the RTC having jurisdiction over the cases to the
Executive Judge of the appropriate Metropolitan Trial
court, Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Municipal Trial Court
or Municipal Circuit Trial Court for the required raffle
among the branches of the Court under his administrative
supervision
- Where trial has already commenced as of the date of the
effectivity of the Admin circular shall remain with the
courts. However, by agreement of the parties, such cases
may be transferred to the appropriate MTC, MCTC
Section 2 of PD No. 1529 has eliminated the distinction
between the court’s general and limited jurisdiction.
Aimed at avoiding multiplicity of suits, the change has
simplified registration proceedings by conferring upon the
regional trial courts the authority to act not only on
applications for original registration but also over all petitions
filed after original registration of title, with power to hear and
determine all questions arising upon such applications or
petitions.
Court is no longer fettered by its former limited jurisdiction and
is now authorized to hear and decide not only non-
 controversial cases but even the contentious issues.
SEC 3. Status of other pre-existing land registration system.
1. Registration under the Spanish Mortgage Law discontinued
On February 16, 1976, PD 892 was issued decreeing the
discontinuance of the system of registration under the Spanish
Mortgage Law and the use of Spanish titles as evidence in land
registration proceedings. It was needed to do so since recording
under this system was practically nil and has become obsolete
Sec 3 of PD 1529 reiterates the discontinuance of the system of
registration under the Spanish Mortgage Law—provides also that
the books of registration for unregistered lands under Section 194 of
Administrative Code, as amended by Act 3344, shall continue to be
in force, but all instruments dealing with unregistered lands shall
henceforth be registered under Section 113 of the Decree. Any
recording under Section 113 shall be without prejudice to a third
person with a better right
2. Spanish Title no longer used as evidence of land ownership
By express provision of PD No. 892, spanish titles may no longer be
used as evidence of land ownership in all registration proceeding.
Reason: proliferation of dubious Spanish titles which have raised
conflicting claims.
Titulo de Propriedad No. 4136; the “fantastic” claim of the
Mariano San Pedro Heirs
Intestate Estate of Don Mariano San Pedro v CA – case is
about a claim of the said heirs of a vast tract of land. The
case started as a petition for letters of administration over
the intestate estate of the late Mariano San Pedro y
Esteban. The estate is supposedly covered by the Titulo, a
Spanish adjustment title (composicion con el estado). On
August 30, 1976, a motion for intervention and opposition
to the petition was filed by the Republic of the Philippines
Lower court – held the titulo valid and declared the heirs
as entitled to inherit the intestate estate left by the
deceased.
On MR – The court declared titulo de propriedad no. 4136
null and void.
On Court of Appeals – the petitioners’ appeal was
dismissed. Titulo de Propriedad No. 4136 is invalid on the
following grounds: (a) non-production of the original of
the subject title; (b) inadmissibility of the photostat copies
of the title; and (c) non-registration of the subject Spanish
Title under Act No. 496 or the Land Registration Act.
SC – “… by virtue of PD No. 892 the system of registration
under the Spanish Mortgage Law was abolished and all
holders of Spanish titles or grants should cause their lands
covered thereby to be registered under the Land
Registration Act within (6) months from the date of
effectivity of said decree… non compliance therewith will
result in a reclassification of their lands.
3. Registration of instruments affecting titled lands under Act No.
3344 ineffective against third persons
Where property registered under the Torrens system is sold but the
sale is registered not under the Property Registration Decree but
under Act No. 3344, the sale is considered not registered and
effective for purposes of Article 1544 of the Civil Code on double
sales.
In Naawan Community Rural Bank v. Court of Appeals,81 the Court
upheld the right of a party who had registered the sale of land under
the Property Registration Decree, as opposed to another who had
registered a deed of final conveyance under Act No. 3344. In that
case, the “priority in time” principle was not applied, because the
land was already covered by the Torrens system at the time the
conveyance was registered under said Act.
Under Act No. 3344, registration of instruments affecting
unregistered lands is “without prejudice to a third party with a
better right.” The phrase has been held to mean that the mere
registration of a sale in one’s favor does not give him any right over
the land if the vendor was not anymore the owner of the land
having previously sold the same to somebody else even if the earlier
sale was unrecorded.
Chapter II
THE LAND REGISTRATION COMMISSION AND ITS REGISTRIES OF
DEEDS
Sec. 4 – Land Registration Commission; Sec. 5 – Officials and
employees of the Commission; Sec. 6 – General Functions
1. The Land Registration Commission has been renamed the Land
Registration Authority.
Purpose: to provide a more efficient execution of existing laws
relative to the registration of lands. The Commission exercised
supervision and control over all Register of Deeds, as well as the
clerical and archival system of the courts of first instance throughout
the Philippines with reference to the registration of lands.
Headed by an Administrator with two Deputy Administrators, all
appointed by the President upon the recommendation of the SoJ. All
other officials of LRA, except Register of Deeds, are appointed by the
SoJ upon recommendation of the Administrator
LRA – it is primarily the CENTRAL REPOSITORY OF RECORDS relative
to original registration of lands titled under the Torrens System.
Functions of the Authority
The Land Registration Authority shall have the following
functions:
(a) Extend speedy and effective assistance to the
Department of Agrarian Reform, the Land Bank, and other
agencies in the implementation of the land reform
program of the government;
(b) Extend assistance to courts in ordinary and cadastral
land registration proceedings;
 (c) Be the central repository of records relative to original
registration of lands titled under the Torrens system,
including subdivision and consolidation plans of titled
lands.
Functions of the Administrator
The LRA Administrator shall have the following functions:
(a) Issue decrees of registration pursuant to final judgments of the
courts in land registration proceedings and cause the issuance by the
Registers of Deeds of the corresponding certificates of title;
(b) Exercise supervision and control over all Registers of Deeds and
other personnel of the Commission;
(c) Resolve cases elevated en consulta by, or on appeal from
decision of Registers of Deeds;
(d) Exercise executive supervision over all clerks of court and
personnel of the Courts of First Instance throughout the Philippines
with respect to the discharge of their duties and functions in relation
to the registration of lands;
(e) Implement all orders, decisions, and decrees promulgated
relative to the registration of lands and issue, subject to the approval
of the Secretary of Justice, all needful rules and regulations therefor;
(f) Verify and approve subdivision, consolidation, and consolidation-
subdivision survey plans of properties titled under Act No. 496
except those covered by PD No. 957.
2. LRA Administrator, an executive officer with judicial rank
His functions are plainly executive subject to the President’s power
of supervision and control. He can be investigated and removed only
by the President.
3. The Duty of the LRA to issue decree is ministerial
It is ministerial only in the sense that they act under the orders of
the court and the decree must be in conformity with the decision of
the court and with the data found in the record, as to which they
have no discretion on the matter. (Refer to Admin Notes for
‘ministerial’)
Sec. 7. Office of the Register of Deeds
1. The Registry of Property
Has for its object the inscription or annotation of acts and contracts
relating to the ownership and other rights over immovable property.
Why is it needed? The registration of instruments affecting
registered lands must be done in the proper registry, in order to
affect and bind the land and, thus, operate as a constructive notice
to the world.
2. Registration
It is the ministerial act by which a deed, contract, or instrument is
inscribed in the records of the Office of the Register of Deeds and
annotated on the back of the TCT covering the land subject of the
deed, contract, or instrument.
Registration generally means any ENTRY made in the BOOKS of the
REGISTRY, which RECORDS solemnly and permanently the right of
ownership and other real rights.
3. Effect of Registration
It becomes constructive notice to all persons. If registration was
done in bad faith, it is as if no registration was made at all. Note:
Actual knowledge amounts to registration.
Note: If a sale is not registered, it is binding only between the seller
and the buyer, but it does not affect innocent third persons.
Thus, between two buyers of the same immovable property
registered under the Torrens system, the law gives ownership
priority to: (1) first registrant in good faith; (2) then, the first
possessor in good faith; and (3) finally, the buyer who in good faith
presents the oldest title.
Sec. 8. Appointment of Register of Deeds and their Deputies and
other subordinate personnel; salaries.
Office of the Register of Deeds
There shall be at least one RoD for each province and one for each
city. SoJ defines the official station and territorial jurisdiction of each
Registry upon the recommendation of the LRA Administrator. Note:
RoD and deputy RoD must be members of the Bar.
The duty of RoD to register is ministerial with reference to
registration of deeds, encumbrances and instruments. (He may not
validly refuse to register a deed of sale presented to him for
registration)
The law on registration does no require that only valid instruments
shall be registered. The invalidity of the document is not the concern
of a RoD to decide, but it is for a court of competent jurisdiction to
determine.
It is the duty of a RoD to see to it that a document presented for
registration is regular and in due form. But he has no authority to
inquire into the intrinsic validity of a document based upon proofs
aliunde.
Instances where RoD may DENY registration:
1. Where there are several copies of the title (co-owner’s duplicate)
but only one is presented with the instrument to be registered.
2. Where the property is presumed to be conjugal but the instrument
of conveyance bears the signature of only one spouse.
Note: in case the CoT shows that the property is registered
in the name of the husband only and there is no evidence
that would show that said property was acquired during
the marriage with his wife, the contention that the same
property is conjugal cannot be sustained.
3. Where there is a pending case in court where the character of the
land and validity of the conveyance are in issue.
4. Where required certificates or documents are not submitted.
 Note: Example of documents required (DAR clearance,
copy of latest tax declaration, certificate of payment of
documentary stamp tax and capital gains tax, BIR
certificate authorizing registration, tax clearance
certificate of real estate taxes, certificate of payment of
transfer tax…)
Doubtful questions shall be submitted to LRA Administrator for
resolution via consulta
A Register of Deeds is precluded from exercising his personal
judgment and discretion when confronted with the problem of
whether to register a deed or instrument on the ground that it is
invalid.
When in doubt, all that he is supposed to do is to submit and certify
the question to the LRA Administrator who shall, after notice and
hearing, enter an order prescribing the step to be taken on the
doubtful question.
Corollarily, where any party in interest does not agree with the
action taken by the Register of Deeds with reference to any
instrument submitted to him for registration, the question shall be
submitted to the LRA Administrator who shall thereafter “enter an
order prescribing the step to be taken or memorandum to be
made,” which shall be “conclusive and binding upon all Registers of
Deeds.” This administrative remedy must be resorted to by the
interested party before he can have recourse to the courts
In other words, if the instrument is denied registration, it is the duty
of the RoD to notify the interested party, setting forth the defects of
the instrument or legal grounds relied upon, and advising him that if
he is not agreeable to the ruling, he may, without withdrawing the
instrument, elevate the matter by consulta to the LRA.
But mandamus does not lie to compel the RoD to make registration.
The administrative remedy must be resorted to by the interested
party before he can have recourse to the courts.
Registration does not validate an otherwise invalid instrument
The act of registration does not validate an otherwise void contract.
The registration of a void deed is not an impediment to a declaration
by the courts of its invalidity.
Notice to the RoD or adverse party
It is one thing for the Register of Deeds, in the exercise of his
ministerial duties under the law, to register an instrument which in
his opinion is registrable, and quite another thing for the court itself
to order the registration. The former does not contemplate no- tice
to and hearing of interested parties such as are required in a judicial
proceeding nor carry with it the solemnity and legal consequences
of a court judgment.
Sec. 11. Discharge of duties of Register of Deeds in case of vacancy,
etc.; Sec. 12. Owner’s Index; reports; Sec. 13. Chief Geodetic
Engineer
Importance of survey plan
Survey is the process by which a parcel of land is measure and its
boundaries and contents ascertained.
A survey plan serves to establish the true identity of the land to
ensure that it does not overlap a parcel of land or a portion thereof
already covered by a previous land registration, and to forestall the
possibility that it will be overlapped by a subsequent registration of
any adjoining land.
In overlapping of titles disputes, it has always been the practice for
the court to appoint a surveyor from the government land agencies.
LRA or DENR – as commissioner.
Land Management Bureau – has the authority to approve original
survey plans
Chapter III
ORIGINAL REGISTRATION
I. Ordinary Registration Proceedings
Sec. 14. Who may apply - …
SEC. 14. Who may apply. — The following persons may file in the
proper Court of First Instance an application for registration of title
to land, whether personally or through their duly authorized
representatives:
(1) Those who by themselves or through their predecessors- in-
interest have been in open, continuous, exclusive and notorious
possession and occupation of alienable and disposable lands of the
public domain under a bona fide claim of ownership since June 12,
1945, or earlier.
(2) Those who have acquired ownership of private lands by
prescription under the provisions of existing laws.
(3) Those who have acquired ownership of private lands or
abandoned river beds by right of accession or accretion under the
existing laws.
(4) Those who have acquired ownership of land in any other
manner provided for by law.
Where the land is owned in common, all the co-owners shall file
the application jointly.
Where the land has been sold under pacto de retro, the vendor a
retro may file an application for the original registration of the
land, provided, however, that should the period for redemption
expire during the pendency of the registration proceedings and
ownership to the property consolidated in the vendee a retro, the
latter shall be substituted for the applicant and may continue the
proceedings.
“Registration” means any entry made in the books of the registry,
including both registration in its ordinary and strict sense, and
cancellation, annotation, and even marginal notes. In its strict
acceptation, it is the entry made in the registry which records
solemnly and permanently the right of ownership and other real
rights.
Quick Review:
Laws governing land registration.
The State has control over the real property within its limits. The
conditions of ownership of real estate within the State, whether the
owner be a stranger or a citizen, is subject to its rules, concerning
the holding, transfer, liability to obligations, private or public, and
the modes of establishing title thereto, and for the purpose of
determining these questions, the State may provide any reasonable
rules or procedure. The State possesses not only the right to deter-
mine how title to real estate may be acquired and proved, but it is
also within its legislative capacity to establish the method of
procedure.
The primary sources of legislation governing the registration of
private lands and lands of the public domain are:
(1) Public Land Act (CA No. 141)
The Public Land Act governs the judicial confirmation of imperfect or
incomplete titles on the basis of possession and occupation of
alienable portions of the public domain in the manner and for the
length of time required by law. The relevant provisions are Sections
47 to 57, Chapter VIII of the Act.
(2) Property Registration Decree (PD No. 1529)
The Property Registration Decree is a codification of all laws relative
to registration of property, and “supersedes all other laws relative to
registration of property.”10 It has substantially incorporated the
provisions of Act No. 496, or the Land Registration Act. Section 14,
paragraphs (1) to (4), enumerates the persons who may apply for
registration and the conditions therefor.
(3) Cadastral Act (Act No. 2259)
The Cadastral Act is an offspring of the system of registration under
the Land Registration Act. It aims to serve public interests by
requiring that “the title to any lands be titled and adjudicated.” It
may be noted, however, that salient provisions in the Cadastral Act
have now been carried over in the present Property Registration
Decree, particularly in Sections 35 to 38 of the Decree.
(4) Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (RA No. 8371)
The Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA), approved October 29,
1997, recognizes the rights of ownership and possession of
indigenous cultural communities or indigenous peoples (ICCs/IPs) to
their ancestral domains and ancestral lands on the basis of native
title, and defines the extent of these lands and domains. For
purposes of registration, the IPRA expressly converts ancestral lands
into public agricultural lands, and individual members of cultural
communities, with respect to their individually-owned ancestral
lands, shall have the option to secure title to their ancestral lands
under the provisions of the Public Land Act or the Property
Registration Decree. This option is limited to ancestral lands only,
not domains, and such lands must be individually, not communally,
owned.
(A) Registration Under the Property Registration Decree
Co-owners shall file application jointly
“… since under the Civil Code, a co-owner cannot be considered a
true owner of a specific portion until division or partition is effected,
he cannot file an application for registration for the whole area
without joining the co-owners as applicants.
Vendee a retro may file application in his name
-right of redemption by the vendor shall be noted in the decree and
CoT that may be issued.
Trustee may apply for registration in behalf of his principal
Registration under Section 14(1)
Here, the right to file the application for registration derives from a
bona fide claim of ownership going back to June 12, 1945 or earlier,
by reason of claimants OCEN PO AD lands of public domain in the
concept of owner… without regard to whether the land was
susceptible to private ownership at that time.
14(1) requires:
 the land applied for is an agricultural public land already
classified as AD at the time of the filing of the application
for registration.
 the applicant, by himself or through his predecessors-in-
interest, has been in OCENPO under a bona fide claim of
ownership.
 such PO must have commenced since June 12, 1945, or
earlier
NOTE (Exam Area): The law imposes no requirement that land
should have been declared A and D agricultural land as early as June
12, 1945. What is important in computing the period of possession is
that the land has already been declared alienable and disposable AT
THE TIME of the application for registration. Upon satisfaction of
this requirement, the computation of the period may include the
period of adverse possession prior to the declaration that land is AD.
Remember This: Republic v CA and Naguit 448 SCRA 442, the issue
here was whether it is necessary under 14(1) that the subject be first
classified as AD before the applicant’s possession under a bona fide
claim of ownership. SC said NO. 14(1) merely requires the property
sought to be registered as already AD “at the time of the
application for registration of title is filed.”
Note: “… to prove a land subject of an application for registration is
alienable, an applicant must establish the existence of a positive act
of the government such as presidential proclamation or an executive
order…”
Note: “A mere surveyor has no authority to reclassify lands of the
public domain. The declaration must come from the Pres. Or the
Secretary of the DENR.
Note: “It is an elementary rule that forest lands cannot be owned by
private persons, possession of it now matter how long cannot ripen
into ownership.
In the case of Malabanan v Republic: “reiterated that the law does
not require that the land subject of registration should have been A
and D during the entire period of possession, or since June 12, 1945.
It is sufficient that the land is already declared as A and D at the time
of the application for registration is filed so as to entitle the
possessor to registration. But in this case the application for
registration was dismissed. Why?
There is no substantive evidence to establish that Malabanan or
petitioners as his PII have been in possession of the prop since June
12, 1945. The earliest trace of possession they presented wa a Tax
Declaration in 1948. Therefore, they cannot avail of registration
under 14(1).
-The land needs only to be classified as AD as of the time of the
application, provided that the applicants possession and occupation
dates back to June 12, 1945 or earlier.
Classification of land according to ownership
Public Dominion – public use, intended for some public service or
for the development of the national wealth
-Patrimonial property, property of the State in its private
capacity
Private Ownership
Classification according to alienability
Whether or not the land of the public domain is alienable or
disposable primarily rests on the classification of public lands under
our Constitution: Agricultural, forest or timber, mineral, national
parks.
Possession and Occupation
… the intent behind the use of “possession” in conjunction with
“occupation” is to emphasize the need for actual possession and not
just constructive or fictional possession”
Possession is broader than occupation. Possession must not be a
mere fiction. Actual possession of a land consists in manifestation of
acts of dominion over it.
Summary of requirements under 14(1):
Malabanan V. Republic
 The applicant by himself or through his p-i-i, has been in
possession and occupation of the property subject of the
application;
 The PO must be OCEN
 The PO must be under a bona fide claim of acquisition of
ownership
 The PO must have taken place since “the day” or earlier;
and
 The prop subject of the application must be an agricultural
land (meaning AD) of the public domain.
Registration under Section 14(2)
Rule: Properties of public domain cannot be acquired by prescription.
No matter how long the possession, there can be no prescription
against the State regarding the property of public domain. The
exception is when the law itself so provides. But patrimonial
property of the State, can be.
Section 14(1) and 14(2) are clearly different animals. 14(1) covers
“AD land” while 14(2) covers “private property”. The distinction
between the two provi lies with the inapplicability of prescription to
alienable and disposable lands.
Prescription
Art. 1113. All things which are within the commerce of men are
susceptible of prescription, unless otherwise provided. Property of
the State or any of its subdivisions not patrimonial in character shall
not be the object of prescription.
In prescription, one acquires ownership and other real rights
through the lapse of time in the manner and under the action laid
down by law.
In Malabanan, the Court ruled that the declaration of AD
was not enough, there must be an express declaration that
the public dominion property was no longer intended for
public service or the development of national wealth…
that the property had been converted into patrimonial.
Acquisitive prescription may either be:
Ordinary – requires possession in gf and w/ just title for the time
fixed by law. Possession of at least 10 years.
Extraordinary – uninterrupted adverse possession of patrimonial
property for at least 30 years, regardless of faith or just title. Ripens
into ownership pursuant to 1137 of CC.
When can you say that there is good faith? When there is a
reasonable belief that the person from whom he received the thing
was the owner thereof, and could transmit his ownership.
When can you say that there is just title? When the adverse
claimant came into possession of the property through one of the
modes recognized by law for the acquisition of ownership or other
real rights, but the grantor was not or could not really transmit the
right.
Acquisitive Prescription requisites:
In order to ripen into ownership, the possession must be in the
concept of an owner, public, peaceful, and uninterrupted (OPPU).
Open – patent, visible, apparent, notorious, and not clandestine
Continuous – uninterrupted, unbroken, and not intermittent
Exclusive – can show exclusive dominion
Notorious – when it is so conspicuous that it is generally known by
the public or the people in the neighborhood.
Note: Possession in the contemplation of the law does not mean
that a man has to have his feet on every square meter of the ground
in order to be considered in possession. Acts of dominion suffices.
General rule: the possession and cultivation of a portion of tract of
land under claim of ownership is a constructive possession of all, if
the remainder is not in adverse possession of another.
Note: acts of mere tolerance on the part of the real owner are not
sufficient.
Note: as learned in property class, the computation of the period of
prescription includes the possession of his grantor or p-i-i. also,
recall presumption of continued possession.
In 14(2), it is primordial that the status of the property as
patrimonial be first established.
In Espiritu v. Republic, requisites under 14(2)
 Land is an AD, and patrimonial
  The applicant and p-i-i have been in possession of the land
for at least 10 years in gf w/ jt, or for at least 30, regardless
of gf and jt
 The period commences from the time the property is
declared as patrimonial

Differences between 14(1) and 14(2)

(1) – refers to registration of title on the basis of possession; (2) –
entitles the applicant to the registration of property on the basis of
prescription.

(1) - PLA, PD 1059; (2) – PD 1059

(1) – AD lands; (2) – “private property”

(1) – OCEN PO; (2) – silent as to the required nature of possession,

however for purposes of presc. it must be OPPU.
Acts which do not constitute an effective interruption:
 Mere notice of adverse claim
 The acts of declaring again the property for tax purposes
and obtaining a Torrens CoT in one’s name cannot defeat
another’s right of ownership through acquisitive presc.
 A protest filed before an administrative agency and even
the decision resulting from it cannot effectively toll the
running of the period of acquisitive prescription.

Only cases filed before the courts may judicial summons be issued,
and thus, interrupt possession.