PROPERTY REGISTRATION

UPDATES, CONFLICTS
AND REMEDIES

JUSTICE OSWALDO D. AGCAOILI

Philippine Judicial Academy
(Author of “Property
Registration Decree (Land Titles
REGALIAN DOCTRINE
• Under the Regalian doctrine, all lands of the
public domain belong to the State, and that
the State is the source of any asserted right
to ownership of land and charged with the
conservation of such patrimony.
• Also, the doctrine states that all lands not
otherwise appearing to be clearly within
private ownership are presumed to
belong to the State.
• Consequently, the person applying for
registration has the burden of proof to
overcome the presumption of ownership
of lands of the public domain. (Central
Mindanao Unhiversity v. Republic, GR No.
• The Regalian doctrine is reflected in Art. XII,
Sec. 2 of the Constitution:
• Sec. 2. All lands of the public domain,
waters, minerals, coal, petroleum, and
other mineral oils, all forces of potential
energy, fisheries, forests or timber,
wildlife, flora and fauna, and other
natural resources are owned by the State.
With the exception of agricultural lands,
all other natural resources shall not be
alienated.”
• Presumption of State ownership must be
overcome by a positive act of government
– To overcome the presumption of State
ownership, the applicant must establish
through incontrovertible evidence that
the land sought to be registered is
alienable or disposable based on a
positive act of the government. (CMU v.
Reublic, supra; Republic v. Remnan
Enterprises, Inc., GR No. 199310, Feb. 19,
2014; Republic v. Bantigue, GR No.
162322, March 14, 2012; See also: Agcaoili,
“Property Registration Decree and Related
Laws.”)
• To prove that a land is alienable, the
existence of a positive act of the government,
such as presidential proclamation or an
executive order; an administrative action;
investigation reports of Bureau of Lands
investigators; and a legislative act or a
statute declaring the land as alienable and
disposable must be established. (Republic v.
Cortez, GR No. 197472, Sept. 7, 2015)
• Hence, a public land remains part of the
inalienable public domain unless it is
shown to have been reclassified and
alienated by the State to a private person.
(Ibid)
NATURE OF REGISTRATION
PROCEEDINGS
• Registration not a mode of acquiring
ownership
– Registration is not a mode of acquiring
ownership but is merely a procedure to
establish evidence of title over realty - a
system of registration of titles to lands.
• Registration is a proceeding in rem
– Judicial proceedings for the registration of
lands shall be in rem and based on
generally accepted principles underlying
the Torrens system. (Sec. 2, PD 1529)
Jurisdiction in rem is acquired by the
constructive seizure of the land through
publication, service of notice and posting.
• Purpose: to quiet title to land
– The purpose of registration is to quiet title
to land; to put a stop forever to any
question as to the legality of the title,
except claims which are noted in the
certificate; to decree land titles that shall
be final, irrevocable, and indisputable;
and to relieve the land of the burden of
known as well as unknown claims.
• But the Torrens system does not furnish
a shield for fraud, nor permit one to
enrich himself at the expense of others.
(Rodriguez v. Lim, 459 SCRA 412;
Manlapat v. Court of Appeals, GR No.
JURISDICTION
• Regional trial courts have plenary
jurisdiction over land registration cases and
all petitions after original registration. (Sec.
2, PD No. 1529)
⚫ However, first level courts may be
assigned by the SC to hear and determine
cadastral or land registration cases:
⚫ (a) Where there is no opposition, or
⚫ (b) Over contested lots, the value of
which does not exceed P100,000. (Sec. 34,
BP Blg. 129; Republic v. Bantigue, GR No.
162322, March 14, 2012)
⚫ Appeal is taken to the Court of Appeals.
• The value of the property is ascertained
in three ways:
– First, by the affidavit of the claimant;
– Second, by agreement of the respective
claimants, if there are more than one;
or,
– Third, from the corresponding tax
declaration of the real property. (Sec.
34, BP 129)
• Facts:
– Bantigue Corp. filed with the RTC an
application for registration over Lot 8060
with an assessed value of P14,920.
However, the RTC motu proprio remanded
the case to the MTC since the assessed
value of the land is only P14,920. After
hearing, the MTC granted the application.
The Republic appealed arguing that the
MTC did not acquire jurisdiction since the
selling price of the property per deed of
sale attached to the application is
P160,000.
• Issue:
• Ruling:
– Yes. The value of the land is determined,
not from the selling price, but from the
tax declaration which, in this case, stated
that the assessed value of the land is only
P14,920, or below the jurisdictional
amount of P100,000 pertaining to first
level courts. (Republic v. Bantigue, GR No.
162322, March 14, 2012)
• Is there need for a formal assignment/
delegation by the SC before 1st level courts
may exercise jurisdiction? Bantigue stresses:
• “The delegated jurisdiction of the MTC over
cadastral and land registration cases is
indeed set forth in the Judiciary
Reorganization Act, x x x ”
• “(T)he MTC has delegated jurisdiction in
cadastral and land registration cases in two
instances: first, where there is no controversy
or opposition; or, second, over contested lots,
the value of which does not exceed P100,000.”
• Clearly, the law itself, Section 34 of BP
Blg.129, aleady provides the specific instances
when first level courts may exercise their
delegated jurisdiction.
• Facts:
– In 1959, Leonor De los Santos filed an
application for registration with the CFI of
Rizal. The Director of Lands opposed. Notices
were given and the case was set for hearing
on May 27, 1960. On Sept. 18, 1961, the court
issued an order dismissing the application on
the basis of a report from the LRC that a
“homestead patent was issued (to Julio
Delgado)by the Director of Lands during the
pendency of the registration proceedings.”
• Issue:
• Was the court divested of its jurisdiction by a
subsequent administrative act consisting in
the issuance by the Director of Lands of a
homestead patent covering the same land
• Ruling:
– No. In her application for registration, De los
Santos alleged, among other matters, that she
is the owner in fee simple of the land. Since
the existence or non-existence of applicant’s
registrable title is decisive of the validity or
nullity of the homestead patent, the court’s
jurisdiction could not have been divested by
the homestead patent's issuance.
– Proceedings for land registration are in rem,
whereas proceedings for acquisition of
homestead patent are not. A homestead
patent, therefore, does not finally dispose of
the public or private character of the land as
far as courts acting upon proceedings in rem
 DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE
COURT’S GENERAL JURISDICTION
(AS REGULAR RTC) AND LIMITED
JURISDICTION (AS REGISTRATION
COURT) NOW ELIMINATED
• Sec. 2, PD 1529 has eliminated the
distinction between the court’s general
jurisdiction and limited jurisdiction.
– Thus, a regional trial court has the
authority to hear not only applications for
original registration but also on all
petitions filed after original registration of
title. The amendment aims to avoid
multiplicity of suits and simplify
registration proceedings.
– The court can now hear and decide not
only non-controversial cases but even
contentious issues which before were
beyond its competence. (Lozada v.
• As stressed in Lozada v. Bracewell, (April 2,
2014): t
• “With the passage of Sec. 2. PD 1529, the
distinction between the general
jurisdiction vested in the RTC and the
limited jurisdiction conferred upon it as a
cadastral court was eliminated. RTCs now
have the power to hear and determine
all questions, even contentious and
substantial ones, arising from applications
for original registration of titles to
lands and petitions filed after such
registration.”
LAND REGISTRATION
AUTHORITY (LRA)
• Functions of the LRA
– Issues decrees of registration
– Resolves cases elevated en consulta
– Exercises supervision and control over all
clerks of court in relation to land
registration
– Implements orders or decisions of
registration courts
– Verifies and approves subdivision and
consolidation survey plans
• Functions of the LRA:
– Extends assistance to the DAR in the
implementation of the land reform
program;
– Extends assistance to registration courts
in ordinary and cadastral registration
cases; and
– Acts as central repository of records
relative to original registration, including
subdivision and consolidation plans of
titled lands.
• LRA: issuance of decree ministerial
– It is ministerial only in the sense that the
LRA acts under the orders of the court
and the decree must be in conformity
with the decision of the court. (Gomez v.
Court of Appeals, 168 SCRA 503)
– But the duty ceases to be ministerial
where the issuance of decree would result
in double titling of lands. (Angeles v. Sec.
of Justice, GR No. 142549, March 9, 2010)
 OFFICE OF THE
REGISTER OF DEEDS
• Register of Deeds; constructive notice
• There shall be at least one Register of
Deeds for each province and city. (Sec. 7,
PD 1529)
• Every instrument affecting registered
land shall, if registered in the Office of
the Register of Deeds, be constructive
notice to all persons. (Sec. 52, PD 1529;
(Aznar Brothers v. Aying, 458 SCRA 496)
• But this rule does not apply if the
property is not registered under the
Torrens system. (Abrigo v. De Vera, 432
SCRA 544)
• Rule on priority
– Registration in the public registry is notice
to the whole world. (Guaranteed Homes v.
Valdez (577 SCRA 441) Thus, between two
buyers of the same land, priority is given
to:
• the first registrant in good faith;
• then, the first possessor in good faith;
and
• finally, the buyer who in good faith
presents the oldest title. (Art. 1544, CC)
 DUTY OF REGISTER OF
DEEDS TO REGISTER
MINISTERIAL; CONSULTA
• There shall be at least one Register of Deeds
for each province and city. (Sec. 7, PD 1529)
– Registration means the entry of
instruments or deeds in book or public
registry.
– Registration of instruments affecting
registered land must be done in the
proper registry to affect the land and bind
third persons. (Aznar Brothers v. Aying,
458 SCRA 496; Guaranteed Homes, Inc. v.
Valdez, 577 SCRA 441)
• General functions of the Register of Deeds
• “It shall be the duty of the Register of Deeds
to immediately register an instrument
presented for registration dealing with real
or personal property which complies with all
the requisites for registration. He shall see to
it that said instrument bears the proper
documentary science stamps and that the
same are properly canceled. If the instrument
is not registrable, he shall forthwith deny
registration thereof and inform the presentor
of such denial in writing, stating the ground
or reason therefor, and advising him of his
right to appeal by consulta in accordance
with Section 117 of this Decree.”
• The aforementioned duty of the Register of
Deeds is ministerial in nature.
• A purely ministerial act or duty is one that an
officer or tribunal performs in a given state
of facts, in a prescribed manner, in obedience
to the mandate of a legal authority, without
regard to or the exercise of his own judgment
upon the propriety or impropriety of the act
done.
• If the law imposes a duty upon a public
officer and gives him the right to decide how
or when the duty shall be performed, such
duty is discretionary, not ministerial. The
duty is ministerial only when its discharge
requires neither the exercise of official
• Duty of RD to register instruments affecting
registered land is ministerial
• [W]hether the document is invalid,
frivolous or intended to harass, is not the
duty of a Register of Deeds to decide, but a
court of competent jurisdiction, and that it
is his concern to see whether the
documents sought to be registered
conform with the formal and legal
requirements for such documents.
(Campugan v. Tolentino, A.C. No. 8261,
March 11, 2015; Gabriel v. Register of
Deeds, GR No. G.R. No. L-17956, Sept. 30,
1963; Gurbax Singh v. Reyes, 92 Phil. 182;
• Registration must first be allowed and the
validity or effect thereof litigated
afterwards.
• But if the RD is in doubt as to the action
taken, or where the interested party does
not agree with the action taken by him,
the RD shall certify the question to the
LRA via consulta for resolution. (Sec. 117,
PD 1529; Soriano v. Fernandez, GR No.
168157, Aug. 19, 2015)
 INSTANCES WHERE RD MAY HOLD
REGISTRATION
Where there are several copies of the title (as
in co-ownership) but only one is presented.
• Every copy of the duplicate original must
contain identical entries of the transactions,
particularly voluntary ones, otherwise the
whole Torrens system would cease to be
reliable.
• The integrity of the Torrens system may be
adversely affected if an encumbrance, or
outright conveyance, is annotated on only
one copy and not on the others.
Where the property is presumed
conjugal but the document bears the
signature of only one spouse.
• Under Art. 160 of the CC, all property of
the marriage is presumed to belong to the
conjugal partnership, unless it be proved
that it pertains exclusively to the husband
or to the wife.
• Proof of acquisition during the marriage
is an essential condition for the operation
of the presumption in favor of the
conjugal partnership. (Dela Peña v. Avila,
GR No. 187490, Feb. 8, 2012; De Leon v. De
Leon, GR No. 185063, July 23, 2009)
• But where there is no showing as to when
the property was acquired, the fact, for
instance, that the title is in the name of
“Celia A. Santos, married to Mario Santos”
means that the property belongs
exclusively to the wife, Celia.
• Proof of acquisition during the marriage
is a condition sine qua non for the
operation of the presumption in favor of
the conjugal partnership. (Dela Peña v.
Avila, supra)
• Under the Family Code (Aug. 3, 1988), the
sale of a conjugal property requires the
consent of both the husband and the wife.
The absence of the consent of one renders
the sale null and void.
• A void contract cannot be ratified. (Guiang
v. CA, GR No. 125172, June 26, 1998. Note:
SC affirmed decision of CA composed of JJ.
Jaguros, Adefuin and Agcaoili)
• Without the consent of his wife, Marcelino
constituted a real estate mortgage on the
subject property, which formed part of
their conjugal partnership. Valid? No.
(Homeowners Savings & Loan Bank v.
• Just like the rule in absolute community of
property, if the husband, without knowledge
and consent of the wife, sells conjugal
property, such sale is void.
• However, if the sale was with the
knowledge but without the approval of
the wife, thereby resulting in a
disagreement, such sale is annullable at
the instance of the wife who is given five
(5) years from the date of the contract to
institute the case. (Ravina v. Villa Abrille,
GR No. 160708, Oct. 16, 2009)
 Where there is a pending case
involving the character of the land or
validity of the conveyance
• In such case, registration may well await
the outcome of the case; meantime the
rights of the interested parties could be
protected by the filing of a notice of lis
pendens. (Balbin v. Register of Deeds, 28
SCRA 12)
Where required certificates or documents
are not submitted, such as –
– DAR clearance, copy of latest tax
declaration, certificate of payment of
documentary stamp tax and capital gains
tax, BIR certificate authorizing
registration (CAR), tax clearance
certificate of real estate taxes, certificate
of payment of transfer tax, secretary’s
certificate and articles of incorporation (in
case of a corporation), HLURB registration
papers and license to sell (in case of a
subdivision project), TIN, etc.
 REGISTRATION IN THE
PUBLIC REGISTRY IS NOTICE
TO THE WHOLE WORLD
• Sec. 52 of PD No. 1529 provides:
• SECTION 52. Constructive notice upon
registration. — Every conveyance,
mortgage, lease, lien, attachment, order,
judgment, instrument or entry affecting
registered land shall, if registered, filed or
entered in the Office of the Register of
Deeds for the province or city where the
land to which it relates lies, be
constructive notice to all persons from the
time of such registering, filing, or entering.
•  
• The act of registration shall be the operative
act to convey or affect the land insofar as
third persons are concerned
– Thus, in case of conflict between a vendee
and an attaching creditor, an attaching
creditor who registers the order of
attachment and the sale of the property to
him as the highest bidder acquires a valid
title to the property as against a vendee
who had previously bought the same
property from the same owner but who
failed to register his deed of sale. (Ching v.
Enrile, GR No. 156076, Sept. 17, 2008;
Vilbar v. Opinion, GR No. 176043, Jan. 15,
PRIMARY CLASSIFICATION
OF LANDS
OF THE PUBLIC DOMAIN
• The 1987 Constitution classifies lands of
the public domain into:
– Agricultural lands,
– Forest or timberlands,
– Mineral lands, and
– National parks.
• Alienable lands of the public domain
shall be limited to agricultural lands.
• All lands not appearing to be clearly within
private ownership are presumed to belong
to the State.
• Accordingly, all public lands not shown to
have been reclassified or released as
alienable agricultural land or alienated to a
private person by the State remain part of the
alienable public domain.
• To prove that the land subject of an
application for registration is alienable, the
applicant must establish the existence of a
positive act of the government such as a
presidential proclamation or an executive
order, an administrative action, investigation
reports of Bureau of Lands investigators, and
• Who may classify lands
• The President, through a presidential
proclamation or executive order, can
classify or reclassify land to be included
or excluded from the public domain.
• The DENR Secretary is likewise
empowered by law to approve a land
classification and declare such land as
alienable and disposable. (Fortuna v.
Republic, GR No. 173423, March 5, 2014)
• Congress may also classify lands through
a legislative act. (Republic v. Cortez, GR No.
197472, Sept. 7, 2015)
• Since 1919, courts were no longer free to
determine the classification of lands.
• Prior rghts of individuals must be respected
• But while the government has the prerogative
to classify lands of the public domain, the
primary right of a private individual who
possessed and cultivated the land in good faith
much prior to such classification must be
recognized and should not be prejudiced by
after-events which could not have been
anticipated. (Saad Agro-Industries, Inc. v.
Republic, GR No. 152570, Sept. 27, 2006, per
Tinga, J.))
• The Government, in the first instance may, by
reservation, decide for itself what portions of
public land shall be considered forestry land,
unless private interests have intervened before
such reservation is made. (Republic v. Court of
• Alienable and disposable (A and D) lands of
the State fall into two categories, to wit:
• (a) patrimonial lands of the State, or those
classified as lands of private ownership
under Article 425 of the Civil Code,
without limitation; and
• (b) lands of the public domain, or the
public lands as provided by the
Constitution, but with the limitation that
the lands must only be agricultural.
• Consequently, lands classified as forest or
timber, mineral, or national parks are not
susceptible of alienation or disposition
unless they are reclassified as agricultural.
 SECONDARY
CLASSIFICATION OF
AGRICULTURAL LANDS
• CA No. 141, or the Public Land Act, as
amended by PD No. 1073, is the existing
general law governing the classification and
disposition of lands of the public domain,
other than timber and mineral lands.
For purpose of administration and disposition,
A and D lands may be further classified
according to the use or purpose to which
they may be devoted:
• Agricultural;
• Residential, commercial, industrial, or for
similar purposes
• Educational, charitable, or other similar
purposes; and
• Reservations for townsites and for public
• Per the Public Land Act, alienable and
disposable public lands suitable for
agricultural purposes can be disposed of
only as follows:
1. For homestead settlement;
2. By sale;
3. By lease; and
4. By confirmation of imperfect or
incomplete titles:
(a) By judicial legalization;
(b) By administrative legalization (free
patent).
NON-REGISTRABLE
PROPERTIES
 Lands for public use or public service
• Those intended for public use, such as
roads, canals, rivers, torrents, ports and
bridges, etc.;
• Those which, without being for public use,
are intended for some public service or for
the development of the national wealth.
(Art. 420, CC)
• These properties are outside the commerce
of men and therefore not subject to private
appropriation. (Martinez v. Court of Appeals,
56 SCRA 647)
CAVITE EXPRESSWAY
JONES BRIDGE
Rivers, waters:
– Rivers and their natural beds, lakes, all
categories of surface waters, atmospheric
or subterranean ground waters, and
seawater all belong to the State. (Art. V,
PD 1067)
– Waters found, or rain water falling, on
private lands also belong to the State. (Art.
VI, id.)
CAGAYAN RIVER
Reservations for public and semi-public
purposes
• The President may designate by
proclamation any tract of land of the
public domain for the use of the Republic
or its branches, e.g., public or semi-public
uses like highways, hydroelectric sites,
railroads, irrigation systems, etc. which
shall be inalienable. (Sec. 83, CA No. 141)
• Reserved lands are withdrawn from sale
or settlement and are inalienable and not
subject to occupation, entry, sale, lease or
other disposition (Sec. 88, ibid; CMU v.
Republic, supra), until otherwise provided
• Reservations for public or quasi-public uses:
(1) are non-alienable and non-disposable
(Sec. 88 in relation to Sec. 8, C. No. 141), and
(2) remain public domain lands until they
are actually disposed of in favor of private
persons.
• In other words, lands of the public
domain classified as reservations remain
to be property of the public dominion
until withdrawn from the public or quasi-
public use for which they have been
reserved, by act of Congress or by
proclamation of the President, or
otherwise positively declared to have
LA MESA WATERSHED RESERVATION
• Watersheds generally are outside the
commerce of man.
• The Constitution expressly mandates the
conservation and proper utilization of
natural resources, which includes the
country’s watershed. (Sta. Rosa Realty
Development Corporation v. Court of
Appeals, GR No. 112526, Oct. 12, 2001)
LA MESA DAM AND ECOPARK
 Mangrove swamps
Mangrove swamps form part of the public
forests and, therefore, not subject to
disposition until and unless they are first
released as forest land and classified as
alienable agricultural land.
– The Fisheries Code makes it unlawful for
any person to convert mangroves into
fishponds or for any other purposes.

•  
ENVIRONMENTALISTS CHECKING THE
MANGROVES
School site reservations
• Land reserved for a school site under Sec.
83, CA No. 141, shall not be subject to
occupation, entry, sale, lease, or other
disposition until again declared alienable
by proclamation of the President. (Central
Mindanao University v. Republic, GR
No.195026, Feb. 22, 2016).
• It remains to be property of the public
dominion until withdrawn from the
public or quasi-public use for which they
have been reserved, by act of Congress or
by proclamation of the President, or
otherwise positively declared to have
been converted to patrimonial property.
Forests:
– Forest is a large tract of land covered with
a natural growth of trees and underbrush.
– The classification is descriptive of its legal
nature or status and does not have to be
descriptive of what the land actually looks
like. (DENR Sec. v. Yap, GR No. 167707, Oct.
8, 2008)
– Unless and until the land classified as
forest is released as A and D, the rules of
confirmation of title do not apply.
(Amunategui v. Director of Forestry, 126
SCRA 69)
Mineral lands:
– Mineral land means any area where
mineral resources are found.
– Mineral lands and resources are owned
by the State and their exploration,
development and utilization is subject to
the full control and supervision of the
State. (Republic v. CA and Dela Rosa, 160
SCRA 228; La Bugal-B’laan v. Ramos, 445
SCRA 1)
– Possession of mineral land, no matter how
long, does not confer possessory rights.
(Atok Big Wedge v. CA, 193 SCRA 71)
OPEN PIT MINING
Military or naval reservation:
– Land inside a military (or naval)
reservation, like the Fort Bonifacio Military
Reservation, cannot be the object of
registration unless it had been withdrawn
from the reservation and declared as A and
D land.
– It remains part of a military reservation
even if incidentally it is devoted for a
purpose other than as a military camp.
– Moreover, the 1987 Constitution forbids
private corporations from acquiring any
kind of alienable land of the public domain,
except through lease for a limited period.
(Republic v. Southside, 502 SCRA 587)
PHILIPPINE NAVY HEADQUARTERS
Reservations for public/national parks
• Land reserved for park purposes is not
registrable. (Palomo v. Court of Appeals
GR No. 95608, Jan. 21, 1997)
• Where a certificate of title covers a
portion of land within the area reserved
for park purposes, the title should be
annuled with respect to that portion.
(Palomo v. CA, 266 SCRA 392)
• For instance, the Tiwi Hot Spring
National Park cannot be disposed of
under the Public Land Act or Property
Registration Decree.
Foreshore lands:
– A foreshore land is that “strip of land that
lies between the high and low water
marks and that is alternately wet and dry
according to the flow of the tide,“ or "that
part of the land adjacent to the sea which
is alternately covered and left dry by the
ordinary flow of the tides.” Foreshore
lands are inalienable unless declared to
be A and D portions of the public domain.
(Republic v. RREC, 299 SCRA 199)
– Land invaded by the sea is foreshore land
and becomes part of the public domain.
(Republic v. CA and Morato, 281 SCRA 639)
• Puno, J., concurring opinion in Republic v.
RREC:
– “The CCP is a ‘non-municipal public
corporation’ established for the primary
purpose of propagating arts and culture in
the Philippines. It was created to awaken the
consciousness of the Filipino people to their
artistic and cultural heritage, and encourage
them to assist in its preservation, promotion,
enhancement and development. The CCP
Complex was established as a worthy venue
for Filipino artists to express their art and for
the people to appreciate art and the Filipino
culture. But more than its peso and centavo
Reclaimed lands:
– Submerged areas form part of the public
domain; only when reclaimed from the
sea can these submerged areas be
classified as agricultural lands.
– Once reclaimed the government may then
officially classify these lands as A and D,
and declare these lands no longer needed
for public service. Only then can these
lands be considered as A and D lands and
within the commerce of men. (Chavez v.
PEA, 384 SCRA 152)
Lakes:
– Lakes are neither agricultural nor
disposable lands of the public domain;
hence, free patents and certificates of title
covering portions of the lake are a nullity.
– But areas beyond its natural bed, or the
ground covered by the waters at their
highest ordinary depth during the dry
season, may be registered. (Republic v. CA
and De Rio, 131 SCRA 532)
LAGUNA LAKE
Protected areas:
• RA No. 7586 provides for the
establishment and management of a
national integrated protected areas
system referred to as the “National
Integrated Protected Areas System Act of
1992.”
• Protected areas are necessary to maintain
essential ecological processes and life-
support systems, to preserve genetic
diversity, to ensure sustainable use of
resources found therein.
• A protected area, like the Bataan Natural
Park, is inalienable.
BOHOL CHOCOLATE HILLS
MT. AMUYAO, 3 RD HIGHEST PHIL.
MOUNTAIN
REGISTRATION UNDER
THE PROPERTY
REGISTRATION DECREE
(PD 1529)
• Who may apply?
• Under Sec. 14(1)
– “Those who by themselves or 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.”
• Requisites
• The applicant must be a Filipino citizen.
• The land must be an agricultural land,
already classified as alienable and
disposable (A and D) land at the time of
the filing of the application (Malabanan v.
CA, GR No. 179987, April 29, 2009, Sept. 3,
2013; Mercado v. Valley Mountain Mines,
GR No. 141019, Nov. 23, 2011)
• Applicant must have been in open,
continuous, exclusive and notorious
possession and occupation (OCENCO) of
• Tersely put, under Section 14 (1) of PD 1529,
the property in question is alienable and
disposable land of the public domain; the
applicant by himself or through his
predecessors-in-interest have been in open,
continuous, exclusive and notorious
possession and occupation thereto; and such
possession is under a bona fide claim of
ownership since June 12, 1945, or earlier.
(Republic v. Alba, GR No. 169710, Aug. 19,
2015).
• In Republic v. Alconaba (G.R. No. 155012,
April 14, 2004), it was explained that the
intent behind the law's use of the terms
• Campos v. Republic, GR No. 184371, March 5,
2014, stresses:
• “We emphasize that since the effectivity of
P.D. No. 1073 13 on January 25, 1977, it
must be shown that possession and
occupation of the land sought to be
registered by the applicant himself or
through his predecessors-in-interest,
started on June 12, 1945 or earlier, which
totally conforms to the requirement
under Section 14 (1) of P.D. No 1529. A
mere showing of possession and
occupation for thirty (30) years or more is
• Rationale for the rule that the land need be
classified as A and D already at the time the
application is filed:
– “If the State, at the time the application is
made, has not yet deemed it proper to
release the property for alienation or
disposition, the presumption is that the
government is still reserving the right to
utilize the property; hence, the need to
preserve its ownership in the State
irrespective of the length of adverse
possession even in good faith.”
• Possession is -
– Open when it is patent, visible, apparent,
notorious and not clandestine;
– Continuous when uninterrupted,
unbroken and not intermittent or
occasional;
– Exclusive when the adverse possessor can
show exclusive dominion over the land
and an appropriation of it to his own use
and benefit; and
– Notorious when it is so conspicuous that it
is generally known and talked of by the
public or the people in the neighborhood.
(Bienvenido v. Gabriel, GR No. 175763,
• Under Sec. 14(2)
– “Those who have acquired ownership of
private lands by prescription under the
provisions of existing laws”
• Rule on prescription:
▪ Ordinary prescription – 10 years in good
faith
▪ Extraordinary prescription – 30 years
• But land must be patrimonial property for
prescription to apply. (Malabanan v.
Republic, supra)
• Lands of the public domain shall form part
of the patrimonial property of the State when
there is a declaration that:
• These lands are alienable or disposable,
and
• Are no longer intended for public use or
public service.
• Only when such lands have become
patrimonial can the prescriptive period for
the acquisition of the property begin to
run. (Malabanan v. CA, supra; Republic v.
• The Court in Republic v. Sese, GR No. 185092,
June 4, 2014, explicated:
– “The applicant must be able to show that the
State, in addition to the said classification,
expressly declared through either a law
enacted by Congress or a proclamation issued
by the President that the subject land is no
longer retained for public service or the
development of the national wealth or that
the property has been converted into
patrimonial. Consequently, without an
express declaration by the State, the land
remains to be a property of public dominion
and, hence, not susceptible to acquisition by
virtue of prescription.”
• Concept of possession for purposes of
prescription
• Possession must be that of owner, and it
must be public, peaceful and
uninterrupted. Acts of a possessory
character by virtue of a license or mere
tolerance are not sufficient.
• The present possessor may complete the
period for prescription by tacking his
possession to that of his grantor or
predecessor-in-interest.
• It is presumed that the present possessor
who was also the possessor at a previous
time has continued to be in possession
• Distinction between Sec. 14(1) and Sec. 14(2):
• Under Sec. 14(1), there must be proof
showing that the land had already been
classified as alienable and disposable at
the time the application is filed.
• Under Sec. 14(2), there must be proof that
the land had already been converted to
patrimonial property (no longer intended
for public service or the development of
the national wealth) at the start of
possession. (Republic v. Zuburban Realty,
GR No. 164408, March 24, 2014)
• Under Sec. 14(3)

• “Those who have acquired ownership

of private lands or abandoned river
beds by right of accession or accretion
under the existing laws.”
• Ownership of abandoned river beds by right
of accession:
▪ Under Article 461 of the Civil Code, river
beds which are abandoned through the
natural change in the course of the waters
ipso facto belong to the owners whose
lands are occupied by the new course in
proportion to the area lost. However, the
owners of the adjoining lands shall have
the right to acquire the same by paying
the value thereof. The reason is that they
are in the best position to utilize the old
river bed which is adjacent to their
• The owners of the affected lands may not
compel the government to restore the river
to its former bed, nor can they restrain the
government from taking steps to revert the
river or stream to its former courts.
• But the owners may themselves
undertake the reversion of the river to its
original course, but upon a permit issued
by the government. (Art. 58, PD 1067,
Water Code)
• The ownership of the abandoned river
bed is transferred ipso facto to the owners
whose lands are occupied by the new
course of the river “to compensate for the
• Requisites for the application of Art. 461:
• The change must be sudden in order that
the old river may be identified;
• The change of the course must be more or
less permanent, and not temporary
overflooding of another’s land.
• The change of the river must be a natural
one, i.e., caused by natural forces (and not
by artificial means)
• There must be a definite abandonment by
the government;
• The river must continue to exist, i.e., it must
not completely disappear.
• Ownership by right of accretion
• Under Art. 457, CC, to the owners of land
adjoining the banks of rivers belong the
accretion which they gradually receive
from the effects of the current of the
waters. Justification:
• To offset the owner’s loss for possible
erosion of his land due to the current of
the river;
• To compensate him for his burdens
arising from the subjection of his land
to encumbrances or legal easements;
and
• The owner must register the accretion under
the Torrens system, otherwise the alluvial
property may be subject to acquisition
through prescription by third persons.
(Grande v. Court of Appeals, 5 SCRA 524)
• The increment does not automatically
become registered land just because the lot
which receives such accretion is covered by
a Torrens title. It must be placed under the
operation of the Torrens system. (Cureg v.
IAC, 177 SCRA 313)
• Requisites for the application Art. 457:
• That the deposit be gradual and
imperceptible;
• That it be made through the effects of the
current of the water; and
• That the land where accretion takes place
is adjacent to the banks of rivers.
• In the absence of evidence that the change
in the course of the river was sudden or that
it occurred through avulsion, the
presumption is that the change was gradual
• Alluvial formation along the seashore is part
of the public domain and, therefore, not
open to acquisition by adverse possession.
“Art. 4. Lands added to the shore by
accretion and alluvial deposits caused by
the action of the sea, form part of the
public domain. When they are no longer
washed by the waters of the sea, and are
not necessary for purposes of public
utility, or for the establishment of special
industries, or for the coast-guard service,
the Government may declare them to be
the property of the owners of the estate
adjacent thereto and as an increment
• Until a formal declaration by the
government, through the executive or
legislature, that the alluvial formation is no
longer needed for coast guard service, for
public use or for special industries, the same
continues to be part of the public domain
not available for private appropriation of
ownership.
• The land is not subject to ordinary
prescription as it is outside the sphere of
commerce.
• Under Sec. 14(4)

• “Those who have acquired ownership of

land in any other manner provided for by
law.”

• In Republic, rep. by the Mindanao Medical

Center v. Court of Appeals (GR No. L-40912,
Sept. 30, 1976), the SC held that
Proclamation No. 350 legally effected a land
grant for medical purposes to the Mindanao
Medical Center validly sufficient for initial
registration under the Land Registration Act.
• What and where to file
• The application for land registration shall
be filed with the RTC of the province or
city where the land is situated. The
applicant shall file together with the
application all original muniments of
titles or copies thereof and a survey plan
of the land approved by the Lands
Management Bureau. (Sec. 17, PD 1529)
• An application may include two or more
parcels of land belonging to the applicant/
s provided they are situated within the
same province or city. (Sec. 18, ibid.)
• Amendments
• Amendments to the application including
joinder, substitution, or discontinuance as
to parties may be allowed by the court at
any stage of the proceedings upon just
and reasonable terms.
• Amendments which shall consist in a
substantial change in the boundaries or
an increase in area of the land applied for
or which involve the inclusion of an
additional land shall be subject to the
same requirements of publication and
notice as in an original application. (Sec.
DEALINGS WITH LAND
PENDING ORIGINAL
REGISTRATION
• Dealings with land pending original
registration
• After the filing of the application and before
the issuance of the decree of registration,
the land may still be the subject of dealings
in whole or in part, in which case the
interested party shall present to the court
the pertinent instruments together with a
subdivision plan approved by the Director
of Lands in case of transfer of portions
thereof, and the court, after notice to the
parties, shall order such land registered
subject to the conveyance or encumbrance
created by said instruments, or order that
the decree of registration be issued in the
• Sec. 22 of PD 1529 allows the disposition of
lands subject matter of a registration
proceeding and the subsequent registration
thereof in the name of the person to whom
the land was conveyed.
• The buyer of the property may be a total
stranger to the case and it is not even
required for him to substitute the original
applicant in order that the decree of
registration may be issued in his name.
• The only requirements are: (1) that the
instrument be presented to the court by
the interested party together with a
motion that the same be considered in
 REGISTRATION UNDER
SECTION 48(b),
PUBLIC LAND ACT (CA 141)
• Who may apply
• “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
acquisition of ownership, since June 12,
1945, except when prevented by war or
force majeure. These shall be conclusively
presumed to have performed all the
conditions essential to a Government
grant and shall be entitled to a certificate
• No material differences between Sec. 14(1)
of PD No. 1529 and Sec. 48(b) of CA No. 141
– While the Public Land Act (PLA) refers to
“agricultural lands of the public domain”
and the Property Registration Decree
(PRD) refers to “alienable and disposable
lands of the public domain,” the subject
lands are of the same type since under the
Constitution, alienable lands of the public
domain shall be limited to agricultural
lands.
• Sec. 14(1), PD 1529 • Sec. 48(b), CA 141
• “Those who by • “Those who by
themselves or themselves or
through their through their
predecessors-in- predecessors in
interest have been in interest have been in
open, continuous, the open, continuous,
exclusive and exclusive, and
notorious possession notorious possession
and occupation of and occupation of
alienable and agricultural lands of
disposable lands of the public domain,
the public domain under a bona fide
under a bona fide claim of acquisition
claim of ownership or ownership, except
• RA No. 10023, dated March 9, 2010,
authorizes issuance of a free patent title to
residential lands subject to the following
(maximum) area limitations:
– (1) Highly urbanized cities, 200 square meters
– (2) Other cities, 500 square meters
– (3) Municipalities (first and
second class), 750 square meters
– (4) All other municipalities, 1,000 square
meters
• Land must be within a residential zone,
covered by a survey plan approved by the
DENR, and actually possessed and occupied
by the applicant for at least ten (10) years as
shown by the affidavits of residents of the
• The CENRO is mandated to process the
application within one hundred and twenty
(120) days to include compliance with the
required notices and other legal requirements,
and forward his recommendation to the
Provincial Environment and Natural Resources
Office (PENRO), who shall have five (5) days to
approve or disapprove the patent. In case of
approval, patent shall be issued; in case of
conflicting claims among different claimants,
the parties may seek the proper judicial
remedies. (Sec. 6, ibid.)
• The restrictions regarding encumbrances,
conveyances, transfers or dispositions imposed
in Sections 118, 119, 121, 122 and 123 of Chapter
XIII, Title VI of Commonwealth Act No. 141, as
• Developments in the law as to possession
• The first PLA, or Act 926, required a
possession and occupation for a period of
ten (10) years prior to the effectivity of Act
No. 2874 on July 26, 1904 or on July 26,
1894.
• The 10-years possession was adopted in
the PLA until it was amended by RA 1942
on June 22, 1957 which required
possession for thirty (30) years.
• But with the effectivity of PD 1073 on May
9, 1977, possession and occupation should
now commence on June 12, 1945. (Rep. v.
East Silverlane, GR No. 186961, Feb. 20,
• But PD 1073 cannot impair vested rights
• Vested rights acquired under Sec. 48(b) of
the PLA (as amended by RA 1942) must be
respected.
• Thus, an applicant who, prior to the
effectivity of PD 1973 on May 9, 1977 (not
Jan. 25, 1977), has been in OCENPO, for at
least 30 years, or at least since May 8,
1947, as required under RA 1942, may
apply for judicial confirmation of
imperfect or incomplete title under.
(Fortuna v. v. Republic, GR No. 173423,
March 5, 2014)
• The Court however clarified in La
WHO MAY APPLY:
CITIZENSHIP
REQUIREMENT
• The capacity to acquire private land is made
dependent upon the capacity to acquire or
hold lands of the public domain.
– Private land may be transferred or
conveyed only to individuals or entities
"qualified to acquire lands of the public
domain." The 1987 Constitution reserved
the right to participate in the disposition,
exploitation, development and utilization of
lands of the public domain for Filipino
citizens or corporations at least 60 percent
of the capital of which is owned by Filipinos.
Aliens, whether individuals or corporations,
have been disqualified from acquiring
public lands; hence, they have also been
• On the basis of their capacity “to acquire or
holds lands of the public domain,” the
following may acquire private lands:
• Filipino citizens
• Filipino corporations and associations,
60% of whose capital are owned by
Filipinos
• Aliens by hereditary succession
• A natural born citizen who has lost his
citizenship may be transferee of private
lands subject to area limitations (Sec. 8,
Art. XII)
• Aliens are disqualified from acquiring
public and private lands. (Hulst v. PR
• The capacity to own land is determined at
the time of its acquisition and not
registration.
– Example: Pedro, a Filipino, bought land
with an area of 5 has. from Jose who at
the time of the sale had already complied
with the requirements for registration.
Pedro later became a naturalized
Canadian citizen.
– Pedro’s subsequent acquisition of
Canadian citizenship will not impair his
vested right to the land which he could
have validly registered when he was yet a
Filipino citizen. He is also qualified under
• Constitutional provisions
• Save in cases of hereditary succession, no
private lands shall be transferred or
conveyed except to individuals,
corporations, ort associations qualified to
acquire or hold lands of the public
domain. (Sec. 7, Art. XII)
• Notwithstanding the provisions of Section
7 of this Article, a natural-born citizen of
the Philippines who has lost his Philippine
citizenship may be a transferee of private
lands, subject to limitations provided by
law. (Sec. 8, Ibid)
•
• Area limitations

• For business or other purposes (RA 7042

as amended by RA 8179)
• Urban land – 5,000 square meters
• Rural land – 3 hectares.

• For residence purposes (BP 185)

• Urban land – 1,000 square meters
• Rural land – 1 hectare
• Private corporations not qualified
– “Private corporations or associations may
not hold (such) alienable lands of the
public domain except by lease, for a
period not exceeding 25 years, renewable
for not more than 25 years, and not to
exceed 1,000 hectares in area.” (Sec. 3, Art.
XII, Constitution)
• Reason: to encourage economic family-sized
farms by transferring ownership of only a
limited area of alienable lands of the public
domain to a qualified individual. Available
lands are decreasing due to increasing
population.
• But the rule does not apply where at the
time the corporation acquired the land, the
same was already private land as when it
was possessed by its predecessor in the
manner and for such length of time as to
entitle the latter to registration.
– If the predecessors-in-interest of the
corporation have been in possession of
the land in question since June 12, 1945,
or earlier, then it may rightfully apply for
confirmation of title to the land. That
vested right has to be respected. (Republic
v. Intermediate Appellate Court and ACME,
146 SCRA 509)
• Corporation sole
• A corporation sole is vested with the
right to hold real estate and personal
property. (Roman Catholic Apostolic v.
LRC, 102 Phil. 596)
• It is created not only to administer the
temporalities of the church or religious
society where the administrator (bishop
or archbishop) belongs but also to hold
and transmit the same to his successor in
office.
• Upon the death of the administrator,
church properties pass, by operation of
law, not to his heirs but to his successor
CITIZENSHIP RETENTION
AND RE-ACQUISITION ACT
(RA NO. 9225)
• Retention of Philippine citizenship
• Under Sec. 3 of the Act, natural-born citizens
of the Philippines who have lost their
Philippine citizenship by reason of their
naturalization as citizens of a foreign country
are deemed to have “re-acquired” Philippine
citizenship upon taking the oath of allegiance:

• "I _________________, solemnly swear (or

affirm) that I will support and defend the
Constitution of the Republic of the
Philippines and obey the laws and legal
orders promulgated by the duly constituted
authorities of the Philippines, and I hereby
declare that I recognize and accept the
supreme authority of the Philippines and
• But natural-born citizens of the Philippines
who, after the effectivity of the Act, become
citizens of a foreign country shall “retain”
their Philippine citizenship upon taking the
aforesaid oath
• Those who retain or re-acquire Philippine
citizenship under the Act shall enjoy full
civil and political rights and be subject to
all attendant liabilities and
responsibilities under existing laws of the
Philippines. (Sec. 5)
• Is a former Filipino who became a citizen
of a foreign country, and who buys
property after having “re-acquired” his
• Facts:
• Pedro, a natural born Filipino, became a
Canadian citizen before the effectivity of RA
9225 on August 29, 2003. On April 12, 2007,
he filed a Miscellaneous Sales Application
(MSA) over the subject land with the CENRO,
representing himself as a Filipino citizen
when he was in fact already a Canadian
citizen. Pedro re-acquired his Filipino
citizenship under RA 9225 only on Oct. 11,
2007. He was therefore charged with
falsification of public documents. He
defense is that since he is deemed to have
“re-acquired” his Philippine citizenship
under said law, he could not be held
criminally liable for falsification.
• Ruling:
– No. The law distinguishes between those
natural-born Filipinos who became foreign
citizens before and after the effectivity of
RA 9225 in 2003. For those who were
naturalized in a foreign country before
2003, they shall be deemed to have “re-
acquired” their Philippine citizenship
(which was deemed lost pursuant to CA 63).
But for those who became foreign citizens
after RA 9225 took effect, they shall “retain”
Philippine citizenship if they took the oath
of allegiance under the new law. Here,
Pedro filed his MSA on April 12, 2007, or
before he re-acquired his Philippine
citizenship. (David v. Agbay, GR No. 199113,
• Q. Can a Filipino vendor recover land sold to
an alien?
– A. Yes. When an agreement is not illegal
per se but is merely prohibited and the
prohibition is designed for the protection
of the plaintiff, he may recover the land,
the public policy being to preserve and
maintain the land in the hands of Filipino
citizens. (Phil. Banking Corp. v. Lui She, 21
SCRA 52; Borromeo v. Descallar, 580 SCA
175; United Church v. Sebastian, 159 SCRA
446)
Note: In Rellosa v. Gaw Chee Hun, 93 Phil.
827, the Filipino vendor was in pari
delicto with the alien vendee, hence,
• Other illustrative cases on acquisition by
aliens
• Where the land was now in the hands of a
naturalized Filipino, there is no more
public policy to be served by allowing
recovery. (Barsobia v. Cuenco , 199 Phil. 26),
• Where land is sold to a Chinese who later
sold it to a Filipino, the sale can no longer
be impugned. (Herrera v. Guan, 1 SCRA 406).
• Chuck, an American, and Cory, a Filipino,
acquired land which was registered in the
latter’s name. Cory sold the land to Mario
without Chuck’s consent. Valid? Yes. Chuck
never acquired any right to the land, he
being an alien. (Cheesman v. IAC, 193 SCRA
• Ting Ho, a Chinese citizen, acquired a
parcel of land, with the improvements
thereon. Upon his death, his heirs claimed
the properties as part of the estate of their
deceased father. The Court, however,
excluded the land and improvements
from the estate of Ting Ho, being an alien,
because he never became the owner
thereof. (Ting Ho. v. Teng Gui, GR No.
130115, July 16, 2008)
• Petitioner, an Australian, was married to
Teresita Santos; while respondent, a
Filipina, was married to Klaus Muller.
Petitioner and respondent met and
cohabited in a common-law relationship,
during which petitioner acquired real
properties; but since he was an alien,
respondent's name appeared as the vendee
in the deeds of sale. When their
relationship turned sour, petitioner filed an
action for the recovery of the real
properties from respondent.
• The Court denied his petition because he
was an alien, adding that being a party to
an illegal contract, he could not come to
• Elena, a Filipino, and Helmut, a German,
were married in Germany. During their
marriage, Helmut purchased a parcel of
land in Antipolo City which was registered
in Elena’s name. They eventually
separated, prompting Helmut to file a
petition for separation of property.
Specifically, Helmut prayed for
reimbursement of the money he paid for
the acquisition of the property.
• The Court ruled that Helmut being an
alien, he was prohibited from owning
land in the Philippines. (Muller v. Muller,
G.R. No. 149615, August 29, 2006)
• In 1988, Benjamin married Joselyn, 17-
year-old Filipina. During their marriage,
Joselyn bought a lot for P129,000. The sale
was financed by Benjamin. Meantime,
Jocelyn leased the property to Matthew
without Benjamin’s consent; hence, the
latter filed suit to annul the lease contract.
Is a lease agreement of a parcel of land
entered into by a Filipino wife (Jocelyn)
without the consent of her British
husband (Benjamin) valid?
• The Court held that Benjamin, being an
alien, has no right to nullify the
agreement. No implied trust was created
in his favor; nor can reimbursement for
• May the RD validly refuse to register a deed
of donation of a residential land executed by a
Filipino in favor of an unregistered
organization, the “Ung Sui Si Temple,”
operating through three trustees all of Chinese
nationality?
– Yes. The SC, in Register of Deeds v. Ung Sui Si
temple, GR No. L-6776, May 21, 1995, held that
Sec. 5, Title XIII of the 1935 Constitution (now
Sec. 8, Art. XII, 1987 Constitution) that, “save
in cases of hereditary succession, no private
agricultural land shall be transferred except
to individuals, corporations or associations
qualified to acquire or hold lands of the
public domain,” the Constitution makes no
EVIDENCE OF
OWNERSHIP
• The application for original registration must
be accompanied by:
(1) CENRO or PENRO Certification that
land is A and D; and
(2) Copy of the original classification
approved by the DENR Secretary and
certified as a true copy by the legal
custodian thereof. (Republic v. Bantigue, GR
No. 162322, March 14, 2012; Republic v.
Dela Paz, GR No. 171631, Nov. 5, 2010;
Republic v. T.A.N, 555 SCRA 477)
Note: In Gaerlan v. Republic, GR No. 192717,
March 12, 2014, the Court held that the CENRO/
PENRO certification is not sufficient evidence
of the facts stated therein).
• In Republic v. Aboitiz, GR No. 174626, Oct.
23, 2013, the Court emphasized:
• “Strangely, the Court cannot find any
evidence to show the subject land's alienable
and disposable character, except for a CENRO
certification submitted by Aboitiz. x x x In
Republic v. Hanover Worldwide Trading
Corporation, the Court declared that the
CENRO is not the official repository or legal
custodian of the issuances of the DENR
Secretary declaring the alienability and
disposability of public lands. Thus, the
CENRO Certification should be accompanied
by an official publication of the DENR
Secretary's issuance declaring the land
• Policy clarification by DENR Memorandum
No. 564, dated Nov. 15, 2012
• The DENR clarified that “the issuance of
the certification and the certified copy of
the approved LC Map to prove that the
area applied for is indeed classified as A
and D is within the competence and
jurisdiction of the CENRO.”
• Note: A separate administrative order
was issued “delegating to the CENRO the
authority to issue the certification and the
certified true copy of the approved land
classification map and the particular
issuance or order which was used as
• DENR level of authority on land classification
• Secretary: Land classification and release
of lands of the public domain as alienable
and disposable (A and D)
• Secretary: Sub-classification of forest
lands according to use
• PENRO: Issuance of certificate whether
timber land or A and D – above 50.0
has.
• CENRO: Issuance of certificate whether
timber land or A and D – below 50.0 has.
• Identity of the land
• Land must be surveyed to establish its
identity, location and area. Only the LMB
Director may approve survey plans for
original registration purposes. (PD 239,
July 9, 1973)
• There is now no need to present the
tracing cloth plan of the land. A certified
blue print or white print copy of the plan
suffices for registration purposes.
(Director of Lands v. CA and Iglesia ni
Cristo, 158 SCRA 586)
• Rule in determining area in case of conflict
– What defines a piece of titled property is
not the numerical data indicated as the
area of the land, but the boundaries or
"metes and bounds" of the property
specified in its technical description as
enclosing it and showing its limits. (Rep. v.
CA and Santos, GR No. 116111, Jan. 21,
1969, 301 SCRA 366).
– What defines a piece of land is not the
area, calculated with more or less
certainty mentioned in the description,
but the boundaries therein laid down, as
enclosing the land and indicating its limits.
• Possession and occupation
⚫ Possession must be under a claim of
ownership.
⚫ Acts of a possessory character by one who
holds the property by mere tolerance of
the owner is not in the concept of owner,
and do not start the period of prescription.
⚫ Actual possession consists of acts of
dominion of such a nature as a party
would naturally exercise over his own
property
⚫ Occupation delimits the all-encompassing
effect of constructive possession.
• Overt acts of possession may consist in:
• Introducing valuable improvements on
the land like fruit-bearing trees;
• Fencing the area
• Constructing a residential house thereon;
and
• Declaring the land for taxation purposes.
• In a practical and scientific way of planting,
a one-hectare land can be planted to 144
coconut trees.
• It takes only 10 years for mango trees , and 5
years
• for coconuts trees, to begin bearing fruit.
(Republic v. CA and Chavez, 167 SCRA 150)
• Rule of preference in case of conflict of
possession
• The present possessor shall be preferred;
• If there two possessors, the one longer in
possession;
• If the dates of the possession are the same,
the one who presents a title; and
• If both possessors have titles, the court
shall determine the rightful possessor and
owner of the land. (Art. 538, CC)
• Mere possession will not defeat the title of a
holder of registered land. (Eduarte v. CA, 253
SCRA 391)
• Tax declarations and tax receipts
• Tax declarations and tax receipts are not
conclusive evidence of ownership but
they are a good indicia of possession in
the concept of owner. (Llanes v. Republic,
572 SCA 258) A tax declaration merely
prove payment of taxes.
• But when coupled with actual possession,
payment of taxes is evidence of great
weight and can be the basis of a claim of
ownership through prescription.
(Republic v. Alconaba, 427 SCRA 611)
• Taxes must be paid annually.
• Spanish titles no longer efficacious as proof
of ownership
• Pursuant to PD No. 892, dated Feb. 16,
1976, Spanish titles may no longer be used
as evidence of land ownership
• The proliferation of dubious Spanish titles
have raised conflicting claims of
ownership and tended to destabilize the
Torrens system of registration.
• Case study: Intestate Estate of Don
Mariano San Pedro y Esteban v. Court of
Appeals, 265 SCRA 733.
HEARING
• Hearing
– The court shall decide the case within 90 days
from its submission.
– The court may refer the case or part thereof
to a referee who shall submit his report to the
court within 15 days after its termination.
– Applications for registration shall be heard
by the regional trial court or, in proper cases,
by the first level courts.
– The applicant must show, by “well-nigh
incontro- vertible proof,” and even in the
absence of opposition, that he is the absolute
owner of the land.
EVIDENCE OF
OWNERSHIP
• Proof that land is A and D
– Certification of the BFD that land has
been released as A and D
– LC Map showing that the land is within
the A and D portion of the public domain
y
– Executive proclamation withdrawing a
specific portion from a reservation and
declaring same open for disposition.
– Legislative or executive proclamation
reserving a portion of the public domain
for public or quasi-public use.
• The application for original registration
must be accompanied by:
(1) CENRO or PENRO Certification that
land is A and D; and
(2) Copy of the original classification
approved by the DENR Secretary and
certified as a true copy by the legal
custodian thereof. (Republic v. Bantigue,
GR No. 162322, March 14, 2012; Republic
v. Dela Paz, GR No. 171631, Nov. 5, 2010;
Republic v. T.A.N, 555 SCRA 477)
• Policy clarification by DENR
Memorandum No. 564, dated Nov. 15,
2012
– The issuance of the certification and the
certified copy of the approved LC Map to
prove that the area applied for is indeed
classified as A and D is “within the
competence and jurisdiction of the CENRO.”
– A separate administrative order has been
issued “delegating to the CENRO the
authority to issue the certification and the
certified true copy of the approved land
classification map and the particular
issuance or order which was used as
• DENR level of authority on land classification
– Secretary: Land classification and release
of lands of the public domain as alienable
and disposable (A and D)
– Secretary: Sub-classification of forest
lands according to use
– PENRO: Issuance of certificate whether
timber land or A and D – above 50.0 has.
– CENRO: Issuance of certificate whether
timber land or A and D – below 50.0 has.
• Identity of the land
– Land must be surveyed to establish its
identity, location and area. Only the LMB
Director may approve survey plans for
original registration purposes. (PD 239,
July 9, 1973)
– There is now no need to present the
tracing cloth plan of the land. A certified
blue print or white print copy of the
plan suffices for registration purposes.
(Director of Lands v. CA and Iglesia ni
Cristo, 158 SCRA 586)
• What defines a piece of titled property is not
the numerical data indicated as the area of
the land, but the boundaries or "metes and
bounds" of the property specified in its
technical description as enclosing it and
showing its limits. (Rep. v. CA and Santos, GR
No. 116111, Jan. 21, 1969, 301 SCRA 366).
• What defines a piece of land is not the area,
calculated with more or less certainty
mentioned in the description, but the
boundaries therein laid down, as enclosing
the land and indicating its limits.
(Balantakbo v. CA, GR No. 108515, Oct. 16,
• In overlapping of titles disputes, it has
always been the practice for the court to
appoint a surveyor from the government
land agencies — the LRA or the DENR — to
act as commissioner.
• Survey is the process by which a parcel of
land is measured and its boundaries and
contents ascertained; also a map, plat or
statement of the result of such survey, with
the courses and distances and the quantity
of the land.
• A case of overlapping of boundaries or
encroachment depends on a reliable, if not
accurate, verification survey. (Pabaus v.
• Possession and occupation
⚫ Possession must be under a claim of
ownership.
⚫ Acts of a possessory character by one
who holds the property by mere
tolerance of the owner is not in the
concept of owner, and do not start the
period of prescription.
⚫ Actual possession consists of acts of
dominion of such a nature as a party
would naturally exercise over his own
property
⚫ Occupation delimits the all-
• Rule of preference in case of conflict of
possession
• The present possessor shall be
preferred;
• If there two possessors, the one longer
in possession;
• If the dates of the possession are the
same, the one who presents a title; and
• If both possessors have titles, the court
shall determine the rightful possessor
and owner of the land. (Art. 538, CC)
• Mere possession will not defeat the title of a
holder of registered land. (Eduarte v. CA, 253
SCRA 391)
• Overt acts of possession may consist in:
• Introducing valuable improvements on the
land like fruit-bearing trees;
• Fencing the area
• Constructing a residential house thereon; and
• Declaring the land for taxation purposes.
• In a practical and scientific way of planting,
a one-hectare land can be planted to 144
coconut trees.
• It takes only 10 years for mango trees , and 5
years for coconuts trees, to begin bearing
fruit. Republic v. CA and Chavez, 167 SCRA
150)
• Supreme Court is not a trier of facts;
exceptions:
– (1) when the findings are grounded
entirely on speculation, surmises or
conjectures; (2) when the inference made
is manifestly mistaken, absurd or
impossible; (3) when there is grave abuse
of discretion; (4) when the judgment is
based on a misapprehension of facts; (5)
when the findings of facts are conflicting;
(6) when in making its findings the CA
went beyond the issues of the case, or its
findings are contrary to the admissions of
both the appellant and the appellee;
– (7) when the findings are contrary to the
trial court; (8) when the findings are
conclusions without citation of specific
evidence on which they are based; (9)
when the facts set forth in the petition as 
well as in the petitioner’s main and reply
briefs are not disputed by the respondent;
(10) when the findings of fact are
premised on the supposed absence of
evidence and contradicted by the 
evidence on record; and (11) when the CA
manifestly overlooked certain relevant
facts not disputed by the parties, which if
properly considered, would justify a
• Tax declarations and tax receipts
– Tax declarations and tax receipts are
not conclusive evidence of ownership
but they are a good indicia of
possession in the concept of owner.
(Llanes v. Republic, 572 SCA 258) A tax
declaration merely prove payment of
taxes.
– When coupled with actual possession,
payment of taxes is evidence of great
weight and can be the basis of a claim
of ownership through prescription.
(Republic v. Alconaba, 427 SCRA 611)
– Taxes must be paid annually.
• Spanish titles no longer efficacious as
proof of ownership
– Pursuant to PD No. 892, dated Feb. 16,
1976, Spanish titles may no longer be used
as evidence of land ownership
– The proliferation of dubious Spanish titles
have raised conflicting claims of
ownership and tended to destabilize the
Torrens system of registration.
– Case study: Intestate Estate of Don
Mariano San Pedro y Esteban v. Court of
Appeals, 265 SCRA 733.
JUDGMENT
• The judgment confirms the title of the
applicant or the oppositor. Partial judgment
is proper where a subdivision plan is
submitted. (Sec. 28)
• Judgment becomes final after 15 days from
receipt of notice of the judgment.
• Court retains jurisdiction until after the
entry of the final decree of registration.
(Gomez v CA, 168 SCRA 503)
• Principle of res judicata is applicable to
registration proceedings. (Aring v. Original,
a6 SCRA 1021)
• A judgment in rem is binding upon the
whole world, such as a judgment in a land
registration case or probate of a will; and a
judgment in personam is binding upon the
parties and their successors-in-interest but
not upon strangers.
– A judgment directing a party to deliver
possession of a property to another is in
personam.
– An action for declaration of nullity of title
and recovery of ownership of real property,
or re-conveyance, is a real action but it is an
action in personam, for it only binds the
parties impleaded although it concerns the
• Motion for execution of judgment not
required
• Upon finality of judgment in land registration
cases, the winning party does not file a motion
for execution as in ordinary civil actions.
Instead, he files a petition with the land
registration court for the issuance of an order
directing the Land Registration Authority to
issue a decree of registration, a copy of which
is then sent to the Register of Deeds for
inscription in the registration book, and
issuance of the original certificate of title.
• The LRA merely issues an order for the
issuance of a decree of registration and the
corresponding certificate of title in the name
• Execution pending appeal not required
– Execution pending appeal is not applicable in
a land registration proceeding and the
certificate of title thereby issued is null and
void.
– A Torrens title issued on the basis of a
judgment that is not final is a nullity, as it is
violative of the explicit provisions of the
Land Registration Act which requires that a
decree shall be issued only after the decision
adjudicating the title becomes final and
executory, and it is on the basis of said decree
that the Register of Deeds concerned issues
the corresponding certificate of title. ( Top
• No period within which decree may be
issued
– The fact that no decree has as yet been issued
cannot divest the applicant of his title to and
ownership of the land in question. There is
nothing in the law that limits the period within
which the court may issue a decree. The
reason is that the judgment is merely
declaratory in character and does not need to
be enforced against the adverse party. (Del
Rosario v. Limcaoco, GR No. 177392, Nov. 26,
2012)
– From another perspective, the judgment does
not have to be executed by motion or enforced
by action within the purview of Rule 39 of the
Kinds of judgment
– (1) A judgment in rem is binding upon the whole
world, such as a judgment in a land registration
case or probate of a will; (2) a judgment in
personam is binding upon the parties and their
successors-in-interest but not upon strangers, and
(3) a judgment directing a party to deliver
possession of a property to another is in
personam; it is binding only against the parties
and their successors-in-interest by title
subsequent to the commencement of the action.
– An action for declaration of nullity of title and
recovery of ownership of real property, or
reconveyance, is a real action but it is an action in
personam, for it binds a particular individual only
 DECREE OF
REGISTRATION
• The decree of registration shall bind the
land and quiet title thereto, subject to
exceptions or liens as may be provided by
law. (Sec. 31, PD No. 1529)
• It shall be conclusive against all persons,
including the government and its
branches. (Ibid.)
• Land becomes registered land only upon
the transcription of the decree in the book
of the Register of Deeds, and not on the
date of the issuance of the decree.
(Manotok v. CLT Realty,
• GR No. 123346, March 31, 2009)
• Title is deemed issued upon transcription of
the decree. (Manotok Realty v. CLT, 540 SCRA
304)
• A registration court has no jurisdiction to
decree again land already decreed in a prior
case. (Laburada v. LRA, 287 SCRA 333)
• An application for registration of a titled
land constitutes a collateral attack on the
existing title. (SM Prime Holdings v.
Madayag, 578 SCRA 552)
• Maysilo Estate Case – “Land of Caveat
Emptor”
– Issue: When is a certificate of title deemed
registered – the date of the issuance of the
decree of registration (April 19, 1917), or
the date the decree was transcribed in the
Office of the RD (May 3, 1917)?
– Held: The original certificate of title is
issued on the date the decree of
registration is transcribed since what
stands as the certificate is the transcript
of the decree of registration made by the
RD in the registry. (Manotok v. CLT Realty,
540 SCRA 304)
CERTIFICATE OF TITLE
• Issuance of decree and cetificate of title
– Within 15 days from entry of the
judgment, the court shall direct the LRA
Administrator to issue the decree of
registration and prepare the original and
duplicate certificate of title based thereon.
The original certificate of title, signed by
him, shall be a true copy of the decree,
and shall be sent, together with the
owner’s duplicate, to the Register of
Deeds of the city or province where the
land lies. (Sec. 39, PD 1529)
• A certificate of title may be an original
certificate of title, which constitutes a true
copy of the decree of registration, or a
transfer certificate of title, issued
subsequent to original registration.
• The title serves as evidence of an
indefeasible and incontrovertible title one
year after the issuance of the decree of
registration by the LRA. (Del Prado v.
Caballero, GR No. 148225, March 3, 2010;
Panganiban v. Dayrit, 464 SCRA 370)
• A person dealing with registered land
need not go beyond, but only has to rely
• A certificate of title issued pursuant to
adminis- trative proceedings is as
indefeasible as any title issued through
judicial proceedings provided the land is a
disposable public land, and becomes
incontrovertible one year after the issuance
of the patent. (Republic v. Carle, 105 Phil.
1227)
• A certificate of title based on an
emancipation patent under PD No. 27 also
enjoys the same protection as a certificate
issued judicially or administratively. (Lonoy
v. Sec. of Agrarian Reform, GR No. 175049,
STATUTORY LANDS
AFFECTING TITLE
• Every registered owner receiving a
certificate of title in pursuance of a decree of
registration, and every subsequent
purchaser of registered land taking a
certificate of title for value and in good faith,
shall hold the same free from all
encumbrances except those noted in said
certificate and any of the following
encumbrances which may be subsisting,
namely:
• First. Liens, claims or rights arising or
existing under the laws and Constitution
which are not by law required to appear
of record in the Registry of Deeds in order
• Second. Unpaid real estate taxes levied
and assessed within two years
immediately preceding the acquisition of
any right over the land by an innocent
purchaser for value.
• Third. Any public highway or private way
established or recognized by law
• Fourth. Any disposition of the property or
limitation on the use thereof by virtue of,
or pursuant to, Presidential Decree No. 27
or any other law or regulations on
agrarian reform.
REGISTERED LAND
NOT SUBJECT TO
PRESCRIPTION
• “No title to registered land in derogation
of the title of the registered owner shall be
acquired by prescription or adverse
possession.” (Sec. 47, PD 1529)
• Titile to land once registered, is
imprescriptible. It may not be lost by
adverse, open and notorious possession.

• The right to recover possession of

registered property is equally
imprescriptible since possession is a
mere consequence of ownership.
(Repulic v. Mendoza, GR No. 185091,
Aug. 8, 2010)
• But a registered owner may be barred from
recovering possession by virtue of laches.
• In Panganiban v. Gamponia (100 Phil. 277),
petitioners, for 45 years, did nothing to
assert their right of ownership and were
barred from recovering possession of the
property.
• In Agne v. Director of Lands (181 SCRA
7090), the registered owner’s right to
recover possession was lost by inaction
for almost 30 years.
• In Golloy v. CA (173 SCRA 26), while the lot
was registered in the name of respondent,
petitioners acquired title thereto by
 REGISTERED LAND
NOT SUBJECT TO
COLLATERAL ATTACK
• A certificate of title cannot be altered,
modified or cancelled except in a direct
proceeding filed with the RTC (Sec. 48, PD
1529; Manotok v. Barque, 582 SCRA 583)
• Direct attack: when the object of the
action is to annul or set aside the
judgment, or enjoin its enforcement.
• Collateral attack: in an action to obtain
a different relief, an attack on the
judgment is nevertheless made as an
incident thereto.
• A direct attack on title is proper in a
counterclaim (Leyson v. Bontuyan, 452
• Collateral attack, illustrative cases
– Director of Lands v. Gan Tan (89 Phil. 184)
- where the decision of the lower court
denying reconstitution because petitioner
is allegedly an alien was reversed, the
Supreme Court holding that the issue is a
collateral attack on the title and should be
raised only a direct action.
– Oño v. Lim (614 SCRA 514) – where it was
held that there is no collateral attack
when respondent asserted that the title in
the name of petitioner’s predecessor had
become inoperative due to the prior
conveyance of the land in favor of
VOLUNTARY DEALINGS
WITH REGISTERED LAND
• An owner of registered land may convey,
mortgage, lease, or otherwise deal with the
same in accordance with laws.
• He may use such forms of deeds, mortgages,
leases or other voluntary instruments as
are sufficient in law. But no deed, mortgage,
lease, or other voluntary instrument, except
a will x x x shall take effect as a conveyance
or bind the land, but shall operate only as a
contract between the parties and as
evidence of authority to the Register of
Deeds to make registration.
• The act of registration shall be the operative
act to convey or affect the land insofar as
• Every conveyance, mortgage, lease, lien,
attachment, x x x shall, if registered in the
office of the Register of Deeds, be
constructive notice to all persons from the
time of such registering, filing or entering.
(Sec, 52, ibid.)
– No voluntary instrument shall be registered
by the Register of Deeds, unless the owner's
duplicate certificate is presented with such
instrument, x x x.
– The production of the owner's duplicate
certificate, whenever any voluntary
instrument is presented for registration, shall
be conclusive authority from the registered
DEALINGS LESS THAN
OWNERSHIP, HOW
REGISTERED
• No new certificate shall be entered or issued
pursuant to any instrument which does not
divest the ownership or title from the owner
or from the transferee of the registered
owners.
– All interests in registered land less than
ownership shall be registered by filing with
the Register of Deeds the instrument which
creates or transfers or claims such interests
and by a brief memorandum thereof made by
the Register of Deeds upon the certificate of
title, and signed by him. A similar
memorandum shall also be made on the
owner's duplicate. The cancellation or
• Each Register of Deeds shall keep a primary
entry book in which, upon payment of the
entry fee, he shall enter, in the order of their
reception, all instruments including copies
of writs and processes filed with him
relating to registered land.
– They shall be regarded as registered from
the time so noted, and the memorandum
of each instrument, when made on the
certificate of title to which it refers, shall
bear the same date.
– All records and papers relative to
registered land in the office of the Register
of Deeds shall be open to the public in the
CONVEYANCES AND
TRANSFERS
• An owner desiring to convey his registered
land in fee simple shall execute and register
a deed of conveyance. The RD shall
thereafter make out in the registration book
a new certificate of title to the grantee and
shall prepare and deliver to him an owner's
duplicate certificate. (Sec. 57, ibid)
– If a deed of conveyance is for a part only of
the land, the RD shall not enter any transfer
certificate until a plan of such land showing
all the portions or lots into which it has been
subdivided and the corresponding technical
descriptions shall have been verified and
approved pursuant to Section 50 of this
Decree. Meanwhile, such deed may only be
• Upon the approval of the plan and technical
descriptions, the original of the plan,
together with a certified copy of the
technical descriptions shall be filed with the
RD for annotation in the corresponding
certificate of title and thereupon a new
certificate of title to the grantee for the
portion conveyed. (Sec. 58, ibid.)
– If, at the time of any transfer, subsisting
encumbrances or annotations appear in
the registration book, they shall be carried
over and stated in the new certificate or
certificates, except so far as they may be
simultaneously released or discharged.
INVOLUNTARY DEALINGS
ADVERSE CLAIM
• When adverse claim may be registered
• A person who claims an interest in
registered land adverse to the registered
owner may make a statement under oath
setting forth his alleged right or interest and
how acquired, the number of the certificate
of title, name of the registered owner and a
description of the land.
• The statement shall be registered as an
adverse claim and shall be effective for 30
days.
• The annotation may be cancelled upon
the filing a of a verified petition by the
party in interest. (Sec. 70, PD 1529)
• An adverse claim is designed to protect the
right or interest of a person over a piece of
real property and serves as a notice to third
persons that someone is claiming an interest
in the land or a better right thereto than the
registered owner. (Martinez v. Garcia, GR No.
166536, Feb. 4, 2010)
• Adverse claim is proper where there is no
other provision of law for the registration
of claimant’s alleged right or interest in the
property.
• Thus, an adverse claim based on
prescription and adverse possession
cannot be registered because, under Sec. 47,
no title to registered land shall be acquired
by prescription or adverse possession.
(Estella v. Register of Deeds, 106 Phil. 911)
• A sale of land may not be annotated as an
adverse claim because the law prescribes
the remedy of registration of the sale and
the issuance to the vendee of a transfer
certificate of title. (RD v. Nicandro, 111 Phil.
989; Sec. 57, PD 1529)
• But hereditary rights of a person
fraudulently registered in her sister’s
• An adverse claim is effective for 30 days; but
it is not ipso facto cancelled after said period
- a separate petition is necessary. (Sajonas v.
Court of Appeals, GR No. 102377, July 5, 1996)
– The RD cannot unilaterally cancel the
adverse claim. There must be a hearing
for the purpose. (Diaz-Duarte v. Ong, 298
SCRA 388)
– The adverse claim may be cancelled if it is
frivolous or vexatious, in which case
damages may be adjudged against the
adverse claimant.
 NOTICE OF
LIS PENDENS
• Literally, lis pendens means a pending suit. It
refers to the jurisdiction, power or control
which a court acquires over property
involved in a suit, pending the continuance
of the action, and until final judgment.
• The suit must involve the title to or
possession of property. The inscription
serves a warning that one who acquires an
interest in litigated land does so at his own
risk, and is subject to the outcome of the
litigation.
• Is a notice of lis pendens appropriate in an
action for nullification of marriage?
– “An action for annulment of marriage
may be the subject of lis pendens because
if the petition is granted by the court the
conjugal partnership is dissolved and
liquidated and the properties divided
between the spouses. Hence, the
properties are directly affected in the
proceeedings.” (LRA Consulta No. 2201)
• Lis pendens is proper in the following cases:
⚫ Action to recover possession of property;
⚫ Action to quiet title thereto;
⚫ Action to remove clouds thereon;
⚫ Action for partition; and
⚫ Any other proceedings in court directly
affecting the title to the land or the use or
occupation thereof or the buildings
thereon.
• The notice need not be annotated on the
owner’s duplicate certificate of title
because the notice is an involuntary
transaction. Entry in the day book is
• Purpose:
• to protect the rights of the party causing
registration, and
• to advise third persons that they deal with
the property subject to the result of the case
• A notice of lis pendens neither affects the
merits of the case nor creates a right or lien.
• Cancellation is proper when filed to molest
adverse party or is not necessary to protect
the rights of the person causing registration.
• Cancellation of lis pendens
• Before final judgment, the notice may be
cancelled upon order of the court if the
notice (a) is for the purpose of molesting
the adverse party or (b) if it is not
necessary for the protection of the party
who caused its registration. The
cancellation is a mere incident in the
action, and may be ordered by the court
having jurisdiction of it at any given time.
(Casim v. RD, GR No. 168655, July 2, 2010)
• The notice may also be cancelled by the
RD upon verified petition of the party who
caused the annotation thereof. (Sec. 77)
• Cancellation of lis pendens, grounds
• The power to cancel a notice of lis pendens
is exercised only under exceptional
circumstances, such as: where such
circumstances are imputable to the party
who caused the annotation; where the
litigation was unduly prolonged to the
prejudice of the other party because of
several continuances procured by
petitioner; where the case which is the
basis for the lis pendens notation was
dismissed for non prosequitur on the part
of the plaintiff; or where judgment was
rendered against the party who caused
REMEDIES
• In all cases of registration procured by fraud,
the owner may pursue all his legal and
equitable remedies against the parties to
such fraud without prejudice, however, to
the rights of any innocent holder for value
of a certificate of title.
• After the entry of the decree of
registration on the original petition or
application, any subsequent registration
procured by the presentation of a forged
duplicate certificate of title, or a forged
deed or other instrument, shall be null and
void. (Sec. 5s, ibid.)
REVIEW OF DECREE
• In Eland Philippines v. Garcia, GR No.
173289, Feb. 17, 2010, the Court, citing
Agcaoili, “Property Registration Decree and
Related Laws”, held that:
• courts may reopen the proceedings
where a petition for review is filed
within one year from the issuance of the
decree of registration, based on actual or
extrinsic fraud.
• Requisites:
(a) petitioner must have an interest in
land;
(b) petition is based on actual or extrinsic
fraud;
(c) petition is filed within one year from
the issuance of the decree of registration;
and
(d) property has not yet passed to
innocent purchaser for value. (Walstrom v.
Mapa, 314 Phil. 527)
⚫ Extrinsic fraud is the fraudulent act of the
successful party committed outside the
trial of a case against the defeated party
which prevented the latter from fairly
presenting his case.
⚫ Intrinsic fraud refers to acts of a party in a
litigation during the trial, such as the use
of forged instruments or perjured
testimony, which did not affect the
presentation of the case, but did prevent a
fair and just determination of the case.
(Palanca v. American Food Manufacturing,
24 SCRA 819)
⚫ The fraud must have prevented a party
 ACTION FOR
RECONVEYANCE
• Reconveyance
– It is a legal and equitable remedy granted
to the rightful landowner, whose land was
wrongfully or erroneously registered in
the name of another, to compel the
registered owner to transfer or reconvey
the land to him.
– The action respects the decree of
registration as incontrovertible but seeks
the transfer of property, wrongfully or
erroneously registered in another
person’s name, to its rightful owner or a
person who has a better right. (Alde v.
Bernal, GR No. 169336, March 18, 2010;
• An action for reconveyance is an ordinary
action involving “title” to land, and should
be filed in the courts where the land or
portion thereof is situated. (Sec. 1, Rule 4;
Latorre v. Latorre, GR No. 183026, March 20,
2010; Republic v. Mangatora, GR No. 170375,
July 7, 2010)
• In civil actions involving title to or
interest in property, jurisdiction rests
with the RTC where the assessed value of
the property exceeds P20,000 (or, P50,000
in Metro Manila).
• The action is in personam and is binding
only on persons impleaded. (Ching v. CA,
• Requisites
• Action is brought by the party in interest
after one year from issuance of decree;
• Registration was procured through actual
fraud;
• Property has not yet passed to innocent
purchaser for value.
• But a party may file an action for
reconveyance of the property of which he has
been illegally deprived even before the
issuance of the decree. (Mun. of Hagonoy v.
Secretary, 73 SCRA 507)
• Meantime, a notice of lis pendens may be
annotated on the certificate of title
immediately upon the institution of the
action in court. (Muñoz v. Yabut, GR No.
142676, June 6, 2011).
• Art. 434 of the CC provides that to
successfully maintain an action to recover
the ownership of a real property, the
person who claims a better right to it must
prove, first, the identity of the land
claimed; and second, his title thereto.
• Pacete v. Asotigue, GR No. 188575, Dec. 10,
2012
– Facts: When Pacete procured OCT No.
V-16654 in 1961, the disputed lot was already
in possession of Asotigue, whose predecessor-
in-interest, Sumagad, had been occupying it
since 1958.
– Issue: Is reconveyance in favor of Asotigue
proper?
– Held: Yes. The registration of Asotigue's lot in
favor of Pacete, who neither possessed nor
occupied it, is wrongful. Since Pacete had
not yet transferred the lot to an innocent
purchaser for value, an action for
reconveyance is proper. Reconveyance is
• Quieting of title
• An action for reconveyance has sometimes
been treated as an action to quiet title.
Requisites:
• Plaintiff has a legal or equitable title or
interest in the property
• The deed, claim, encumbrance or
proceeding claimed to be casting a
cloud on his title must be shown to be
invalid or inoperative despite its prima
facie appearance of validity. (Philville
Development and Housing Corporation
v. Bonifacio, GR No. 167391, June 8,
• Quieting of title, illustration:
• Jose who is an agent, in representation of
Pedro, sells the latter’s house to Mario.
The deed of sale is executed in a public
instrument and there is no indication that
the authority of the agent is not in writing.
The deed of sale appears to be valid and
effective on its face.
• As the authority of Jose to sell is, in fact,
not in writing, the sale is void (Art. 1874,
CC). Pedro can file a suit against the buyer
Mario to quiet his title. (Pineda, Property)
• Prescription of action for reconveyance
– Action based on fraud – 4 years
– Action based on implied trust – 10 years
– Action based on void contract –
imprescriptible
– Action to quiet title where plaintiff is in
possession – imprescriptible
• But laches may bar recovery. (Lucas v.
Gamponia, 100 Phil. 277)
ACTION FOR
DAMAGES
• After one year from the issuance of the
decree, the sole remedy of the aggrieved
party is not to set aside the decree but,
respecting it as incontrovertible and no
longer open to review, to bring an ordinary
action in the ordinary court for
reconveyance.
• But if the property has passed into the hands
of an innocent purchaser for value, the
remedy is an action for damages. (Gonzales v.
IAC, 157 SCRA 587)
• Action for damages must be brought within
REVERSION
– Reversion is an action filed by the
government, through the Office of the
Solicitor General, to restore public land
fraudulently awarded and disposed of to
private individuals or corporations to the
mass of the public domain. (Yujuico v.
Republic, GR No. 168661, Oct. 26, 2007, citing
Agcaoili, “Property Registration Decree”)
– Ground: in all cases where lands of the
public domain are held in violation of the
Constitution.
• All actions for the reversion to the
Government of lands of the public domain
or improvements thereon shall be instituted
by the Solicitor General or the officer acting
in his stead, in the proper courts, in the
name of the Republic of the Philippines. (Sec.
101, PLA)
– But unless and until the land is reverted
to the State by virtue of a judgment of a
court of law in a direct proceeding for
reversion, the Torrens certificate of title
thereto remains valid and binding against
the whole world. (Tolentino v. Laurel, GR
No. 181368, Feb.22, 2012)
• The RTC may properly take cognizance of
reversion suits which do not call for an
annulment of judgment of the RTC acting as
a land registration court.
• Actions for cancellation of title and
reversion belong to the class of cases that
"involve the title to, or possession of, real
property, or any interest therein,” and
where the assessed value of the property
exceeds P20,000.00, fall under the
jurisdiction of the RTC. (Rep. v. Roman
Catholic Archbishop, GR No. 192975, Nov.
12, 2012; Santos v. CA, GR No. 61218, Sept.
• Reversion suits were originally filed with the
RTC to annul titles or patents
administratively issued by the LMB.
– But with the effectivity of BP Blg. 129
which gave the Intermediate Appellate
Court (IAC), now Court of Appeals,
jurisdiction over actions for annulment
judgments of RTCs, the Rules of Court
promulgated on July 1, 1997 incorporated
Rule 47 on annulment of judgments or
final orders of the RTCs. (Yujuico v.
Republic, 537 SCRA 513)
• State not bound by prescription or
estoppel
– Under Sec. 91 of the PLA (CA No. 141), the
LMB Director has continuing authority to
conduct investigation to determine
whether or not public land has been
fraudulently awarded or titled to the end
that the corresponding certificate of title
be cancelled and the land reverted to the
mass public domain. (Piñero v. Director of
Lands, 57 SCRA 386)
– The indefeasibility of a title is not a bar to
an investigation by the State as to how
such title has been acquired. (Cavile v.
• But while the general rule is that the State is
immune from estoppel, this concept is
understood to refer to acts and mistakes of
its officials especially those which are
irregular.
• In Rep. v. CA and Santos, GR No. 116111,
Jan. 21, 1999), for nearly twenty years
(starting from the issuance of St. Jude's
titles in 1966 up to the filing of the
complaint in 1985), the government failed
to correct and recover the alleged
increase in the land area of St. Jude’s
property. It was held that the
government’s prolonged inaction strongly
CANCELLATION
OF TITLE
• Cancellation of title is an action initiated by
a private party usually in a case where two
titles are issued for the same lot.
• Where two titles are issued for the
same lot, the earlier in date prevails.
(Pajomayo v. Manipon, 39 SCRA 676)
• Land does not revert to the State but is
declared as lawfully belonging to the
party whose title is superior over the
other.
• But the State is vested with personality
to file the action to protect public
interest and safeguard the Assurance
Fund.
• Actions for cancellation of title,
reconveyance and reversion belong to the
class of cases that "involve the title to, or
possession of, real property, or any interest
therein."
• Where the assessed value of the property
exceeds P20,000.00 (BPBlg. 129, Sec. 19 [2]),
the actin falls under the jurisdiction of the
RTC. (Rep. v. Roman Catholic Archbishop,
GR No. 192975, Nov. 12, 2012; Santos v. CA,
214 SCRA 162)
ANNULMENT OF
JUDGMENT
• This is an extraordinary remedy filed with
the Court of Appeals under Rule 47 of the
Rules of Court, where the ordinary remedies
of new trial, appeal, petition for relief or
other appropriate remedies are no longer
available through no fault of the petitioner.
• Judgments or orders of quasi-judicial
bodies, e.g., NLRC or DARAB, are not
covered by petitions for annulment.
⚫ Grounds for annulment:
(a) action is based on extrinsic fraud, filed
within four years from discovery;
(b) lack of jurisdiction over the person of
the defendant/respondent or over the
subject matter of the action.
• If based on lack of jurisdiction, petitioner
need not allege that the ordinary remedies
of new trial or appeal are no longer
available through no fault of his.
• If ground is lack of jurisdiction, another
remedy is certiorari under Rule 65 where
the CA and SC have concurrent jurisdiction.
RECOVERY OF DAMAGES
FROM THE ASSURANCE
FUND
– A person who sustains loss or damage, or is
deprived of any land or interest therein by
the operation of the Torrens system after
original registration, without negligence on
his part, is entitled to recover damages from
the Assurance Fund. (Sec. 95, PD No. 1529)
• But the plaintiff who holds a certificate of
title must be an innocent purchaser for
value.
• The action must be brought within 6 years
from the time right of action accrues
• Requisites for recovery
• As to any person who sustains loss or
damage:
– No negligence on his part, and
– Loss or damage was through the
omission or mistake of the court
personnel, or the Register of Deeds or
other employees of the Registry in the
performance of their duties.
• As to any person deprived of any land or
interest in the land:
• No negligence on his part;
• He was deprived of land or interest
therein by the registration by any other
person as owner of such land; or by
mistake , omission or misdescription in
any owner’s duplicate certificate, or in
any memorandum in the register, or by
any cancellation; and
• He is barred from bringing an action for
the recovery of such land or interest
therein.
• Illustrative cases
• National Treasurer v. Perez (131 SCRA 264)
– where respondent could not be awarded
damages since the donation to him was
not executed with the formalities of a will
and therefore could not have transferred
to him ownership of the property.
• Treasurer of the Philippines v. CA (153
SCRA 3590) – where respondents acquired
no land or any interest in the land as a
result of the invalid sale to them by the
impostor Lawaan Lopez who had no title
or interest to transfer.
• Illustrative cases
• La Urbana v. Bernardo (62 Phil. 790) –
where, having knowledge of the pending
litigation and notice of lis pendens
affecting the land, it nevertheless
proceeded to take the risk of purchasing
property in litigation.
• Fraginal v. Parañal (516 SCA 530) – where
property sold to petitioner was a prime
land which has been the subject of
successive transfers with “unusual haste”
which should have triggered petitioner’s
curiosity.
 CRIMINAL
PROSECUTION
• The State may criminally prosecute for
perjury the party who obtains
registration through fraud, such as by
stating false assertions in the application
for registration, sworn answer, or
application for public land patent.
– Sec. 91 of the PLA provides that “the
statements made in the application shall b
considered as essential conditions and
parts of any concession, title, or permit
issued on the basis of such application,
and any false statement therein or
omission of facts x x x shall ipso facto
 A FORGED DEED IS A
NULLITY, BUT IT MAY
BECOME THE ROOT OF A
VALID TITLE
⚫ Forged deed is a nullity
⚫ Generally, a forged deed is a nullity and
conveys no title, even if accompanied by
the owner’s duplicate certificate of title.
(Joaquin v. Madrid, 106 Phil. 1060)
⚫ The registered owner does not lose his title,
and neither does the assignee or
mortgagee acquire any right to the
property. (Bernales v. Sambaan, 610 SCRA
90)
⚫ The innocent purchaser for value
protected by law is one who purchases a
titled land by a virtue of a deed executed
by the registered owner himself, not by a
• But a forged deed may become the root of
a valid title
• A forged deed may become the root of a
valid title in a bona fide purchaser if the
certificate has already been transferred
from the name of the true owner to the
name of the forger or the name indicated
by the forger, and while it remained that
way, the land was subsequently sold to an
innocent purchaser for value. (Solivel v.
Francisco, 170 SCRA 218)
• For then the vendee had the right to rely
upon what appeared in the certificate.
(Guaranteed Homes v. Valdez, 577 SCRA
• Muñoz v. Yabut, GR No. 142676, June 6, 2011:
• “A void title may become the root of a
valid title if the derivative title was
obtained in good faith and for value.
Following the principle of indefeasibility
of a Torrens title, every person dealing
with registered lands may safely rely on
the correctness of the certificate of title of
the vendor/transferor, and he is not
required to go beyond the certificate and
inquire into the circumstances
culminating in the vendor's acquisition of
the property. The rights
– of innocent third persons who relied on
the correctness of the certificate of title
and acquired rights over the property
covered thereby cannot be disregarded
and the courts cannot order the
cancellation of such certificate for that
would impair or erode public confidence
in the Torrens system of land registration.
” (See also: Republic v. Agunoy, 492 Phil.
118 [2005], citing cases)
• Remedy of party defrauded – action for
damages
• The right or lien of an innocent mortgagee
for value upon the land mortgage must be
respected and protected, even if the
mortgagor obtained his title through
fraud.
• The remedy of the persons prejudiced is
to bring an action for damages against
those who caused the fraud, and if the
latter are insolvent, an action against the
Treasurer of the Philippines may be filed
for the recovery of damages against the
Assurance Fund. (PNB v. CA and Chuy Kim
INNOCENT PURCHASER
FOR VALUE
• Innocent purchaser for value
• An innocent purchaser for value is one
who buys the property of another without
notice that some other person has a right
to or interest in it, and who pays a full and
fair price at the time of the purchase or
before receiving any notice of another
person’s claim. (Rosales v. Burgos, 577 SCA
264)
• But “in no case shall such (petition for
review) be entertained by the court where
an innocent purchaser for value has
acquired the land or an interest therein,
whose rights may be prejudiced.” (Sec. 32,
• In Rep. V. CA and Santos, GR No. 116111, Jan.
21, 1999, private respondents bought the
"expanded" lots in good faith, relying on the
clean certificates of St. Jude, which had no
notice of any flaw in them either. Held: It is
only fair and reasonable to apply the
equitable principle of estoppel by laches
against the government to avoid an injustice
to the innocent purchasers for value.
Respondents did not have to go behind the
titles to verify their contents or search for
hidden defects or inchoate rights that could
defeat their rights to said lots. They are only
charged with notice of the liens and
• Every person dealing with registered land
has a right to rely on the correctness of the
title and is not obliged to go beyond the
certificate to determine the condition of the
property. (Unchuan v. CA, 161 SCRA 710)
– In a series of transfers, it is enough that
the buyer examines the latest certificate
of title and need not scrutinize each and
every title that preceded it. (Tajonera v. CA,
103 SCRA 467)
• Rule of caveat emptor (buyer beware) - one
who buys without checking the vendor’s title
takes all the risks and losses consequent to
such failure. (Dacasin v. CA, 80 SCRA 89)
• Nemo dat quod non habet
• No one can give what one does not
have.
• One can sell only what one owns or is
authorized to sell, and the buyer can
acquire no more than what the seller
can transfer legally.
• Prior est temporae, prior est in jura
• He who is first in right is preferred in
right.
• Thus, when the thing sold is an
immovable, the one who acquires it
and first records it in the Registry of
• Basic principles
• The rule that where two certificates purport
to include the same land, the earlier in date
prevails, is valid only absent any anomaly or
irregularity tainting the process of
registration. (Mathay v. Court of Appeals,
295 SCRA 556) A certificate of title is not
conclusive where it is the product of faulty
or fraudulent registration. (Widows and
Orphans Association, Inc. v. Court of Appeals,
201 SCRA 165)
– Where the inclusion of land in the
certificate of prior date is a mistake, the
mistake may be rectified by holding the
• Rule of good faith equally applies to
mortgagees (or other encumbrancers for
value) (Sec. 32, PD No. 1529)
– Thus, where the Torrens title was issued
through regular registration proceedings,
a subsequent order for the cancellation
nullification of the title is not a ground for
nullifying the mortgage rights of the bank.
(St. Dominic v. IAC, 151 SCRA 577)
– The right or lien of an innocent mortgagee
must be respected even if the mortgagor
obtained his title through fraud. (Blanco v.
Esquierdo, 110 Phil. 494)
• Banks should exercise greater care in their
business dealings
– But unlike private individuals, banks (and
other persons engaged in lending money)
are expected to exercise greater care and
prudence in their dealings for their
business is invested with public interest.
(Metrobank v. SLGT Holdings, 533 SCRA
516; Cruz v. Bancom Finance, 379 SCRA
490)
– Good faith is a question of fact; the
burden of proving the status of a buyer or
mortgagee in good faith rests with the
person asserting that status. (Sigaya v.
• A mortgage is valid as between the parties
even if unregistered, but registration of a
mortgage is indispensable to bind third
parties.
• Prior registration of an adverse claim or
notice of lis pendens creates a preference
as against a mortgage registered later.
• The subsequent registration of a prior
mortgage does not diminish this
preference, which retroacts to the date of
the notice of adverse claim or lis pendens.
(Cruz v. Bancom Finance Corporation, GR
No. 147788, March 19, 2002)
• A deed of sale which was absolutely
simulated is null and void and does not
convey any right that could ripen into valid
title; there being no valid mortgage, there
could be no valid foreclosure, and the bank
cannot be considered as a mortgagee in good
faith.
• Where title was issued through regular
proceedings and was given as security for
a bank loan, the subsequent declaration of
the title as null and void is not a ground
for nullifying the mortgage rights of the
bank. (St. Dominic Corp. V. IAC, 151 SCRA
577; Blanco v. Esquierdo, 110 Phil. 494)
PETITIONS AND ACTIONS
AFTER ORIGINAL
REGISTRATION
AMENDMENT AND
ALTERATION OF
CERTIFICATES
• Pursutant to Sec. 8, PD 1529, no erasure,
alteration, or amendment, shall be made
upon the registration book after the entry of
a certificate of title or of a memorandum
thereon except by order of the proper
Regional Trial Court. (Sec. 108, PD 1529;
Cuyugan v. Sy Quia, 24 Phil. A567)
• The petition shall be filed in the original
case in which the decree was entered.
(OCA v. Matas, 247 SCRA 9)
• Grounds for amendment
• That registered interests have terminated;
• That new interests have been created;
• That an omission or error was made in
entering a certificate or any
memorandum thereon;
• That the registered owner has married, or
that the marriage has been terminated;
• That a corporation which owned
registered land has been dissolved;
• Upon any other reasonable ground.
• Under Sec. 108, in relation to Sec. 2, PD No.
1529, the registration court may now hear
both contentions and non-contentious cases.
• Thus, the court has jurisdiction over a
petition for cancellation of encumbrances
despite respondent’s contention that the
issue is controversial. (PNB v.
International Corporate Bank, 199 SCRA
508).
• The court can compel petitioner to
surrender his owner’s duplicate certificate
so that a new title may be issued to the
proper party despite his argument that
the case involved the “registrability” of
REPLACEMENT OF LOST
OR DESTROYED
CERTIFICATE OF TITLE
• Procedure
⚫ The registered owner or person in
interest shall send first a notice, under
oath, of the loss or destruction of the
owner’s duplicate certificate to the
Register of Deeds; a mere affidavit of loss
attached to the petition is insufficient.
(New Durawood v. CA, GR No. 111732,
Feb. 20, 1996)
⚫ The corresponding petition for the
replacement of the lost or destroyed
certificate shall then be filed in court and
entitled in the original case in which the
decree of registration was entered. (Sec.
• But where the title was issued pursuant to
a public land patent, the petition shall be
filed with the proper court as a
miscellaneous case. (OCA v. Matas, AM No.
RTJ-92-836, Aug. 2, 1995)
• Unlike in a petition for reconstitution
under Sec. 110 of PD 1529, there is no
requirement for the publication of the
petition for replacement of a lost or
destroyed certificate under Sec. 109 of
the Decree.
• After notice and hearing, the court may
direct the issuance of a new duplicate
 RECONSTITUTION OF
LOST OR DESTROYED
CERTIFICATE OF TITLE
• Sec. 110 of PD 1529, as amended by RA 6732,
allows the reconstitution of lost or destroyed
original Torrens title either judicially,
pursuant to the special procedure laid down
in RA 26, or administratively, in accordance
with the provisions of R.A. No. 6732.
(Republic v. Camacho, GR No. 185604, June
13, 2013)
– The purpose of such a proceeding is
merely to have the certificate of title
reproduced, after proper proceedings, in
the same form it was in when its loss or
destruction occurred. (Id.)
• The reconstitution of a certificate of title
denotes restoration in the original form and
condition of a lost or destroyed instrument
attesting the title of a person to a piece of
land.
– RA 26 presupposes that the property
whose title is sought to be reconstituted
has already been brought under the
provisions of the Torrens System.
(Republic v. Tuastumban, GR No. 173210,
Apri 24, 2009)
• Judicial reconstitution partakes of a land
registration proceeding and is subject to
the jurisdictional requirements of
publication, mailing and posting. This is
mandatory. (Sec. 13, RA No. 26; Pinote v.
Dulay, GR No. 56694, July 2, 1990)
– Sec. 108 of PD No, 1529 provides that all
petitions or motions after original
registration shall be filed and entitled in
the original case in which the decree of
registration was entered. (See also Sec.
2, RA No. 26; OCA v. Matas, AM No.
RTJ-92-836, Aug. 2, 1995).
• Requisites of reconstitution:
• Certificate of title has been lost or
destroyed;
• Petitioner is the registered owner or
person who has an interest therein
(the RD is only a nominal party); and
• Certificate of title was in force at the
time it was lost or destroyed.(Sec. 110,
PD No. 1529)
• The petition shall be filed with the RTC of
• Reconstitution denotes restoration of the
certificate in its original form and
condition. (Republic v. Tuastumban, 586
SCRA 600)
– Where there exists a previously issued
title which is allegedly fraudulent, the
remedy is to first directly assail the
validity thereof before the proper court.
(Manotok v. Barque, 574 SCRA 468)
• Sources of reconstitution
• Sec. 2, RA No. 26 - for reconstitution of
an original certificate of title
• Sec. 3, RA No. 26 – for reconstitution of a
transfer certificate of title.
• “Any other document” as a source of
reconstitution refers to documents
similar to those previously enumerated
in the law under the principle of
ejusdem generis. (Republic v. IAC and
Kiram, 157 SCRA 62
• The non-compliance with the requirements
prescribed in Sections 12 (contents of
petition) and 13 (requirements of notice and
hearing) of RA 26 is fatal.
• These requirements and procedure are
mandatory. The petition for reconstitution
must allege certain specific jurisdictional
facts; the notice of hearing must be
published in the Official Gazette and
posted in particular places; and the same
sent or notified to specified persons.
Sections 12 and 13 of the Act provide the
mandatory requirements to be followed.
(Castillo v. Republic, GR No. 182980, Jun
ADMINISTRATIVE
RECONSTITUTION
• Administrtative reconstitution of lost or
destroyed certificates is governed by RA
6732.
• It is available in case of substantial loss
or destruction of land titles due fire, flood
or other force majeure.
• Requirements:
– Number of certificates lost or damaged
is at least 10% of the total number in
possession of the RD.
– In no case shall be number of
certificates be less than 500.
• Absence of opposition by OSG to petition not
controlling
– The absence of opposition from
government agencies is of no controlling
significance because the State cannot be
estopped by the omission, mistake or
error of its officials or agents.
– Neither is the Republic barred from
assailing the decision granting the petition
for reconstitution if, on the basis of the
law and the evidence on record, such
petition has no merit. (Republic v. Lorenzo,
GR No. 172338, Dec. 10, 2012)
CONSULTA
• When the Register of Deeds is in doubt as
to what action should be taken on an
instrument presented for registration, or
where ay party does not agree with the
action taken by the Register of Deeds, the
question shall be elevated to the LRA
Administrator via en consulta for
determination. (Sec. 117, PD 1529;
Soriano v. Fernandez, GR No. 168157, Aug.
19, 2015)
• The consulta shall be cancelled (a) upon
final resolution of the case by the LRA
Administrator, or (b) if the consulta is
withdrawn by the petitioner.
• The ruling of the LRA shall be conclusive
and binding on all RDs, without prejudice to
an appeal to the Court of Appeals. (Soriano v.
Fernandez, GR No. 168157, Aug. 19, 2015)
– A party who does not agree with the
action taken by the LRA is to appeal to the
CA, via Rule 43 - and not by certiorari or
prohibition - within 15 days from notice of
the decision or resolution. (Calalang v. RD
of QC, 231 SCRA 88)
– The administrative remedy must be
resorted to by petitioner before he can
have recourse to the courts. (Almirol v. RD
of QC, 22 SCRA 1152)
MULTIPLE CHOICE
QUESTIONS
• The purpose of registration is:
(a) to quiet title to land.
(b) to recognize a valid and subsisting
interest in land.
(c) to bar third parties from claiming any
interest in the land.
(d) to furnish a shield for fraud.
• Which of the following may be the subject of
alienation?
(a) mineral lands
(b) national parks
(c) forest lands
(d) agricultural lands
• The following may classify lands of the
public domain as alienable and disposable:
(a) Congress
(b) The President
(c) The DENR Secretary
(d) All of the above
• Where land is brought for the first time
under the Torrens system, the
corresponding survey must be approved by
the:
(a) LRA Administrator
(b) DENR Secretary
(c) DAR Secretary
(d) LMB (Regional Technical) Director
• A plenary action to determine the better
right of possession or possession de jure,
filed after one year from unlawful
dispossession, is referred to as:
(a) Accion publiciana
(b) Accion reivindicatoria
(c) Accion interdictal
(d) Quieting of title
• The registration of an instrument
affecting registered land
(a) operates as a notice to all
persons at the time of registering.
(b) gives effect to the instrument.
(c) forecloses any judicial
declaration of its invalidity.
(d) puts in issue an instrument
previously registered.
• The remedy of the interested party if the
Register of Deeds refuses to issue a
certificate of title pursuant to a court
judgment is:
(a) To cite the RD in contempt.
(b) To file a mandamus petition versus
the RD.
(c) To appeal the RD’s denial to the LRA
via consulta.
(d) To file administrative charges against
the RD with the LRA.
• Which is incorrect?
(a) Patrimonial property of the state, when
no longer intended for public use or for
public service, shall become property of
public dominion.
(b) All property of the state, which is not of
public dominion, is patrimonial property.
(c)Property of provinces, cities and
municipalities is divided into property for
public use and patrimonial property.
(d) Property is either of public dominion or
of private ownership.
• An action to recover real property based on
ownership is referred to as:
(a) Quieting of title
(b) Action interdictal
(c) Accion publiciana
(d) Action reivindicatoria
• The Regalian doctrine embodies the
concept that:
(a) all lands when classified as A and D
belong to the State.
(b) all lands not clearly within private
ownership presumptively belong to the
State.
(c) all lands not covered by Spanish titles
presumptively belong to the State.
(d) the King is regarded as the true and
only source of title.
• In what instances may first level courts
exercise jurisdiction to hear land
registration cases?
(a) Where the application is not the
subject of any opposition.
(b) Where the assessed value of the land
does not exceed P500,000.
(c) Where the land is not contested, or
even if contested, has an assessed value
not exceeding P100,000.
(d) Where its exercise is delegated by the
RTC.
• A Torrens title can be attacked only for
fraud within what period after the date of
issuance of the decree of registration?
(a) Within four years
(b) Within three years
(c) Within two years
(d) Within one year
• An application for registration of land
already covered by a duly registered title:
(a) may be duly heard to determine who has
the better right of ownership to the land.
(b) will not prosper because of stare decisis.
(c) is a collateral attack on the prior title.
(d) should upon motion of the first
registrant be dismissed outright for
being a harrasment suit.
• What is the prescriptive period for an
action for compensation against the
Assurance Fund?
(a) 4 years.
(b) 6 years.
(c) 10 years.
(d) imprescriptible.
• PD No. 892, dated February 16, 1976, has
outlawed Spanish titles as evidence of
ownership in registration cases, but
(a) such a title may still be presented in
evidence if accompanied by a survey plan
executed prior to February 16, 1976.
(b) such a title is absolutely barred without
if’s or but’s.
(c) such a title may still be presented if it is
in the nature of a possessory information
title.
(d) such a title may still be presented in
evidence if accompanied by its English
translation.
⚫ The rationale for the rule that the land sought
to be registered is already A and D “at the time
the application for registration is filed” is that:
(a) it is only when the land is classified as A and
D that the State is deemed to have abdicated
its exclusive prerogative over the land.
(b) it is hardly possible to look for witnesses
who could testify as to the status and
condition of the land on or before June 12,
1945.
(c) prior to the classification of the land as A
and D, the land still remains part of the forest
zone, hence, inalienable.
(d) previous rulings of the Supreme Court
requiring that the land be declared A and D as
of June 12, 1945 are merely obiter dicta.
• The function of the Register of Deeds to
register instruments affecting registered
land is ministerial, hence
(a) his duty is compellable by mandamus.
(b) he has no discretion to determine the
intrinsic validity of the instrument
provided that it is a public insgtrument.
(c) his duty is to register the instrument
without prejudice to a determination of its
validity before the proper forum
afterwards.
(d) his duty is to register the instrument
unless enjoined by the LRA.
• Registration is not a mode of acquiring
ownership but simply a procedure
(a) to establish evidence of one’s claim
of ownership in the land.
(b) to ensure that third parties may
not assert any claim or interest in the land
thereafter.
(c) to remove all liens and
encumbrances in the land.
(d) to assure the claimant a better title
than what he actually has.
• Lot X is registered in the name of
“Pedro, married to Maria.” Can Pedro
sell the land to Jose without the written
consent of Maria?
(a) Yes, Pedro is the sole owner, there
being no showing as to when the land
was acquired.
(b) No because the property is
presumed conjugal.
(c) No, the lack of consent of Maria is
fatal, there being no showing that she is
incapacitated to give her consent to the
sale.
(d) None of the above.
• Registration under the Torrens system is
a proceeding in rem. This means that
(a) all interested persons are
constructively notified of the proceedings
and have a right to appear and oppose
the application for registration.
(b) the proceeding is against all known
occupants and adjoining owners of the
land.
(c) the proceeding aims to grant
certain persons who claim an interest in
the land the right to be heard.
(d) “b” and “c”.
• Which of the following may be considered
sufficient to show the classification of the
land as A and D?
(a) The cadastral survey of a
municipality preparatory to the filing of the
petition for cadastral proceedings.
(b) The titling of properties around the
land subject of registration.
(c) The report and recommendation of
the District Forester for the release of the
property from the unclassified region.
(d) An executive proclamation
withdrawing from a reservation a specific
area and declaring the same open for entry,
⚫ Under Sec. 23, PD 1529, publication of the
notice of initial hearing in the OG “shall be
sufficient to confer jurisdiction upon the
court.” If there was such publication, is there
still a need to publish the notice in a
newspaper of general circulation?
(a) No more since the law expressly
provides that publication in the OG is
sufficient.
(b) Yes because practically no one reads
the OG anyway.
(c) No more since it is not fair that the
applicant should be unduly burdened by
additional expenses for publication.
(d) Yes because publication in the
• To be registrable, the land:
– (a) must already be classified as A and D
at the time the application for registration
is filed.
– (b) must be classified as A and D as of June
12, 1945.
– (c) must have been already classified as A
and D for not less than 30 years prior to
the filing of the application.
– (d) none of the above.
⚫ In order that additional area may be the
subject of registration, the applicant should:
(a) withdraw his original application and
file a new one to include the additional area.
(b) file a separate application for the
additional area.
(c) amend his application to include the
additional area but subject to the
requirements of publication.
(d) file a separate application for the
additional area and move for the
consolidation of said application with the
original application for registration.
• Overt acts of possession may consist in
introducing valuable improvements on the
property like fruit-bearing trees. In Republic
v. Court of Appeals and Chavez (GR No.
L-62680, Nov. 9, 1988), the Court held that in
a practical and scientific way of planting,
(a) it takes only 5 years for coconut trees
and 3 years for mango trees to begin bearing
fruit.
(b) it takes only 10 years for mango trees
and 5 years for coconut trees to begin
bearing fruit.
(c) it takes only 3 years for coconut trees
and 5 years for mango trees to begin bearing
fruit.
• The capacity to acquire private land is
determined by the capacity
(a) to convert the land to its maximum
productivity.
(b) to acquire public land.
(c) to proffer well-nigh incontrovertible
proof of possession since June 12, 1945 or
prior thereto.
(d) to show full compliance with the
residence and cultivation requirements of
the law.
• The Civil Code provides that accretion
belongs to the owners of the land adjoining
the banks of the river. It is however
necessary that the accretion
(a) must have taken place for such length
of time as to ipso jure convert the same
into private ownership.
(b) is made through the effects of the
current of the water.
(c) is formed by the natural change in the
course of the river.
(d) must have been formed gradually and
imperceptibly for a period of not less than
10 years.
• The duty of the LRA Administrator to
issue a decree of registration is
ministerial, the reason being that
(a) his refusal would subject him to
contempt of court.
(b) he is an officer, and acts upon
order, of the court.
(c) the winning party has an absolute
right to the fruits of the verdict.
(d) the issuance of the decree is an
express component of his official
functions.
⚫ Pedro applied for the registration of land. The
government opposed. Judgment was rendered
in favor of Pedro, which became final.
Thereafter, Pedro sold the land to Jose. Can
the government appeal the judgment?
(a) No because a final judgment can no
longer be the subject of appeal.
(b) No because the government is already
concluded by the judgment as oppositor.
(c) Yes because the government is not
bound by the mistakes or errors of its agents.
(d) No because the land is now transferred
to a third person.
• To avail of a petition for review,
(a) the petitioner must allege facts
surrounding the trial which prevented a
fair and just determination of the case.
(b) the petition must be filed within 60
days from the finality of the decision of the
court.
(c) the petitioner must await the
expiration of one year from the issuance of
the decree of registration.
(d) the property has not passed to an
innocent purchaser for value.
• An action for reversion filed by the
Solicitor General is proper where
defendant’s title covers
(a) land consisting of alluvial deposits
caused by the action of the sea.
(b) land which had been previously
titled through cadastral proceedings.
(c) land subject of irregular
reconstitution proceedings.
(d) land forming part of the friar lands
estate.
• Recovery from the Assurance Fund is
possible
(a) when private defendant is
insolvent.
(b) when plaintiff failed in his action
for reconveyance.
(c) when plaintiff has been deprived
of an interest in land on account of
bringing the land under the Torrens
system.
(d) when the Register of Deeds failed
to exercise due care to forestall
• When a deed of sale presented for
registration is forged,
(a) the registered owner does not lose his
title to the land.
(b) the transferee can recover damages
from the Assurance Fund.
(c) the transferee can ask the true owner
to execute a deed of sale in his favor.
(d) the Register of Deeds should elevate
the matter to the LRA via en consulta.
• A plenary action to recover ownership
which necessarily includes recovery of
possession is referred to as:
(a) Action for quieting of title
(b) Accion interdictal
(c) Accion publiciana
(d) Accion reivindicatoria
• The burden of proving the status of a
purchaser in good faith is discharged
(a) by one who asserts that status.
(b) by invoking the legal presumption
of good faith.
(c) by proof that the vendor is the true
owner of the property sold.
(d) by proof that the property was
unencumbered at the time of the sale.
• Jose forged the signature of the registered
owner, Pedro, in a deed of sale purportedly
made by Pedro to Mario who paid the full
purchase price of the land. Is Mario a
buyer in good faith?
(a) No because as a cautious person he
should have first determined in the office
of the Register of Deeds who the true
owner of the property is.
(b) No because the forged deed does not
convey any valid title to the vendee.
(c) Yes because a buyer of registered land
need not go beyond the four corners of the
title to determine any flaw in the title of
his vendor.
• Pedro sold registered land to an alien. The
sale was not registered. Realizing that the
sale is prohibited, Pedro seeks to recover
the land from the alien vendee. Will the
action prosper?
(a) Yes because the sale is not yet
registered.
(b) No because both Pedro and the alien
vendee are in pari delicto.
(c) No because Pedro is estopped from
impugning the sale.
(d) Yes because the prohibition is designed
for the protection of the Filipino vendor.
• An action for reversion by the State is
proper when defendant’s title covers
(a) land consisting of alluvial deposits
caused by the action of the sea.
(b) land previously titled through
cadastral proceedings.
(c) land within a reservation for
public use.
(d) (a) and (c).
• Minerals are discovered underneath
Pedro’s titled property. Who has the right
to exploit the minerals?
(a) The government has the absolute
right to exploit the minerals.
(b) Pedro has the right to exploit the
minerals because he is the absolute owner
of the land.
(c) Pedro has the right to exploit the
minerals as owner of the land and anything
underneath it.
(d) The government has the right to
exploit the minerals upon prior
expropriation of the property.
• The purpose of a notice of lis pendens is
(a) to fortify the claim of ownership of
the party causing the registration thereof.
(b) to prevent the owner of the
property from alienating it while the case
is still pending trial.
(c) to advise third persons who
purchase the property that they do so at
their peril.
(d) to put the owner on notice that he
holds the property in trust for the person
causing the annotation of the lis pendens.
• May an adverse claim of ownership, based
on prescription and adverse possession, be
registered over registered land?
(a) Yes because adverse claim aims to
protect the interest of the person claiming
ownership of the land.
(b) No because title to registered land is
imprescriptible.
(c) Yes because the adverse claim serves
as a notice that the adverse claimant has a
better right to the land than the registered
owner thereof.
(d) No because prescription for the
acquisition of title is never presumed.
• Reconstitution denotes reconstruction of a
lost or destroyed original certificate of
title. The term “any other document” as a
source of reconstitution may include
(a) an order of the court for the
issuance of the decree.
(b) an approved survey plan and
technical description of the land.
(c) a certification by the LRA that a
decree of registration was in fact issued.
(d) none of the above.
⚫ Gan Tan lost his title when his house was
burned in 1995. He filed for reconstitution in
2004. The court denied the petition based on a
BID certification submitted by the OSG that
Gan Tan is an alien. In case of appeal, how
should the case be resolved?
(a) The appeal should be denied because Gan
Tan being an alien is disqualified from
owning land in the country.
(b) Reconstitution should be ordered because a
Torrens title, as a rule, is irrevocable and
indefeasible.
(c) The appeal should be dismissed since
petitioner has lost his right to the land on
the ground of laches.
• OCT No. 38621 was decreed in the name of
“Pedro Valdez, married to Lita Marquez”.
Because of the loss of the original copy of the
title, Pedro petitioned the court for
reconstitution. During the pendency of the
case, Lita died. Assuming that the petition is
substantiated, the court should issue an
order of reconstitution:
(a) in the name of “Pedro Valdez,
widower”.
(b) in the name of “Pedro Valdez,
married to Lita Marquez, deceased”.
(c) in the name of “Pedro Valdez, married
to Lita Marquez”.
• If the Register of Deeds is unsure whether or
not an instrument affecting registered land is
registrable, he should
(a) return the document to the registrant
for the reformation of the instrument.
(b) ask the registrant to elevate the
matter to the LRA for the resolution of the
issue via en consulta.
(c) himself refer the matter to the LRA
for the determination of the issue.
(d) advise the registrant to file an
adverse claim in the meantime pending
further study and determination of the issue.
• Every purchaser of registered land –
(a) is charged with notice of all liens
whether or not annotated on the title,
(b) should first investigate to
determine the condition of the property.
(c) may safely rely on the validity of
the title.
(d) should cautiously look behind the
certificate to determine the true owner.
⚫ May a Dutch national validly purchase a
residential unit in a townhouse project
constituted under the Condominium Act?
(a) No because aliens, whether individuals
or corporations, are disqualified from
acquiring public lands, hence, they are also
disqualified from acquiring private lands.
(b) Yes because for as long as 60% of the
members of the condominium corporation are
Filipinos, the remaining members can be
foreigners.
(c) Yes because the unit owner is simply a
member of the condominium corporation and
the land remains owned by the condominium
corporation.
(d) (b) and (c).
⚫ If only a portion of the land covered by a
certificate of title is sold by the owner, and the
deed is presented for inscription, the Register
of Deeds
(a) shall annotate the deed by way of
memorandum on the grantor’s certificate of
title, original and duplicate.
(b) shall not enter any transfer certificate
to the grantee until a plan of the land showing
all the portions or lots into which it has been
subdivided shall have been verified and
approved.
(c) shall issue a new certificate of title to
the grantee for the portion conveyed and at the
same cancel the grantor’s certificate partially
with respect only to the portion conveyed.
(d) (a) and (b).
⚫ Pedro decides to sell his property to Jose
only to discover the loss of his owner's
duplicate certificate of title covering it. What
initial recourse should Pedro take?
(a) Report the fact of loss to the police and
then file a petition for replacement of the
lost title before the court.
(b) Send a notice under oath to the
Register of Deeds of the province or city
where the land lies as soon as the loss is
discovered.
(c) Promptly file with the proper court a
verified petition for replacement of the lost
title.
(d) Proceed with the documentation of the
sale and then file a petition for replacement
⚫ In 1995, Pedro, a natural born Filipino, bought
an agricultural land from Jose who had been
in possession thereof as owner since 1942.
Pedro migrated to Japan where he acquired
Japanese citizenship. He came back to the
Philippines in 2010 and applied for the
registration of the land, now industrial in
character. The government opposed since
Pedro is an alien. Is the opposition valid?
(a) Yes because aliens are disqualified from
acquiring lands in the Philippines.
(b) Yes because even privately owned
unregistered lands are presumed public lands
under the Regalian doctrine.
(c) No because the land at the time of its
acquisition by Pedro is deemed already a
• The registration of an instrument
affecting registered land
(a) operates as a notice to all
persons at the time of registering.
(b) gives effect to the instrument.
(c) forecloses a judicial declaration
of its invalidity.
(d) records an existing title.
• The cancellation of a notice of lis
pendens
(a) is contingent on the existence of a
final judgment.
(b) is proper where it appears that the
case has been unnecessarily prolonged.
(c) may only be made at the instance
of the adverse party.
(d) may be made motu proprio by the
Register of Deeds if it appears that the
notice was filed to molest the adverse
party.
• Mineral resources are owned by
(a) the State, subject to privates
rights if any there be.
(b) the owner of the property
where they are found.
(c) the State.
(d) the indigenous peoples when
they are found within ancestral
domains.
• Which of the following statements is not
correct:
(a) Because the majority of land in the
country are agricultural lands, courts have
a right to presume that lands are
agricultural unless shown otherwise.
(b) By reason of the rapid growth of
timber or minerals today, lands classified as
agricultural today may be differently
classified tomorrow.
(c) In classifying lands, each case must
be classified upon the proof in a particular
case.
(d) When a tract of land has trees upon
• Private land taken by the government for
public use through expropriation
becomes
(a) private property of the State.
(b) public land.
(c) patrimonial property.
(d) part of the public domain.
• The date of the initial hearing of a
registration case shall not be earlier than
(a) 45 days from the date of the
order.
(b) 60 days from the date of the order.
(c) 120 days from the date of the
order.
(d) 90 days from the date of the
order.
• Can a deed of donation of a parcel of land by
a Filipino citizen to a religious organization
whose trustees are non-Filipinos, be
admitted by the RD for registration?
(a) Yes because to disqualify the corporation
would be a violation of its religious freedom.
(b) No because land tenure is not indispensable
to the free exercise of religion.
(c) Yes because the acquisition of the land is
strictly for religious purposes, i.e., upon which
to build churches and charitable institutions.
(d) Yes because the religious organization has
no capital stock, and so the Constitutional
inhibition does not apply.
• Mangrove swamps are not registrable.
They are under the jurisdiction of the
(a) Bureau of Forest Development.
(b) Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic
Resources.
(c) Department of Environment and
Natural Resources.
(d) Lands Management Bureau.
• The registration court
(a) must personally hear the parties
and receive their evidence.
(b) may refer the case to the clerk of
court for the reception of evidence.
(c) may refer the case to a referee
but the court may accept or reject his
report.
(d) may not refer the case to a
referee for hearing because judicial
power is vested in the court itself.
• Which statement is correct?
(a) Public land is not synonymous
with public domain.
(b) Public land includes all lands of
government ownership.
(c) Government land and public
land are synonymous terms.
(d) The government owns real
estate which is part of the public lands
and other real estate which is not a
part thereof.
• Under PD No. 1529, the registration court
shall decide the case within how many
days from the date the case is submitted
for resolution?
(a) 90 days.
(b) 120 days.
(c) 1 year.
(d) 30 days.
• The certification by the LRA that
publication, mailing and posting of the
notice of initial hearing have been
complied with
(a) is immaterial to the applicant’s
claim of ownership.
(b) may be considered because of
the presumptive regularity in the
performance of official functions.
(c) is subject to contrary proof.
(d) is conclusive as to such fact.
⚫ Where no person appears or answers
within the time allowed,
(a) the court shall enter an order of
special default.
(b) an order of default may likely
result in a judgment favorable to the
applicant.
(c) the allegations in the application
shall be held as confessed.
(d) the court may now render
judgment either granting or dismissing
the application for registration .
• Where there is no publication of the
notice of initial hearing,
(a) the proceeding is utterly void.
(b) personal notice to known
adjoining owners may be made to
rectify the omission.
(c) the notice may be published at
ay time before judgment.
(d) the proceeding is valid if not
contested by the Solicitor General.
• Which of the following is false?
(a) a judicial foreclosure of mortgage is a
quasi in rem proceeding
(b) An action to recover a parcel of land
is a real action and an action in rem.
(c) Suits to quiet title are not technically
suits in rem but are characterized as
quasi in rem.
(d) An action to recover a parcel of land
is an action in personam.
• Lands invaded by the sea
(a) belong to the affected
municipality as municipal waters.
(b) belong the State as maritime
waters.
(c) belong to the State as part of the
public domain.
(d) may be reclaimed by the
affected private property owner.
• The Land Registration Authority (LRA),
which is the central repository of records
relative to registered lands, is under what
office?
(a) Department of Agrarian Reform.
(b) Department of Justice.
(c) Office of the President.
(d) Department of Environment and
Natural Resources.
• To be valid and effective, a notice of lis
pendens must be
(a) filed simultaneously with the filing
of the action subject of the notice.
(b) annotated on both the duplicate
certificate of title on file with the Register
of Deeds and in the possession of the
registered owner.
(c) approved by the court in the
pending case.
(d) annotated on the original duplicate
certificate of title on file with the Register
of Deeds.
⚫ Which of the following allegations cannot
be a ground for the amendment or
correction of a certificate of title?
(a) that the registered owner has
married.
(b) that new interests not appearing on
the certificate have arisen.
(c) that the corporation which is the
registered owner of the land has been
dissolved.
(d) that the area should be corrected to
conform to the new survey.
• A Torrens certificate of title
(a) protects the true owner from the
usurper.
(b) permits one to defeat the claim of
another.
(c) is an effective tool against the
commission of fraud.
(d) records an existing title.
• An action for reconveyance
(a) seeks to reopen the registration
proceedings.
(b) respects the decree as
incontrovertible and no longer open to
review.
(c) seeks to nullify defendant’s title to
pave the issuance of a new title to the
rightful owner.
(d) confirms plaintiff’s ownership
over the property.
• Under the Administrative Code, the Solicitor
General shall “represent the government in
all land registration and related proceedings.
” Which of the following is false?
(a) the SG may deputize any government
prosecutor to assist him in the case.
(b) the SG is bound by notice of court orders
and decisions received by the deputized
prosecutor for purposes of counting the period
to appeal.
(c) the SG may withdraw the government’s
appeal if he finds the same to be without basis.
(d) the SG may not interpose any opposition to
the application for registration.
• The period of prescription in an action
for reconveyance is counted from the
(a) date of the issuance of the title.
(b) date of the promulgation of the
judgment.
(c) discovery of the fraud.
(d) date of issuance of the decree of
registration.
• An adverse claim may be recorded in
which of the following instances?
(a) lease over land which could not be
registered because the owner’s
duplicate title was not surrendered.
(b) existing claims on the land prior to
the issuance of the certificate of title.
(c) hereditary rights of a person in the
land registered in her sister’s name.
(d) (a) and (c).
• Opposition to an application for
registration must be based on real right or
dominion to property. This means that –
(a) the oppositor must be able to show
title to the property.
(b) the oppositor must have the legal
character necessary to maintain a
registration proceeding in his own name.
(c) it is enough that the oppositor
should appear to have an interest in the
property.
(d) all of the above.
• Under the Water Code, waters found on
private lands belong the State. Which of
the following is excluded?
(a) continuous or intermittent waters
rising on such lands.
(b) lakes and lagoon naturally
occurring on such lands.
(c) rain water falling on such lands.
(d) none of the above.
• Pedro files an application for registration.
However, the land applied for had been
previously registered in the name of Jose.
What should Jose do?
(a) Jose should file an opposition and
present his title during the hearing.
(b) Jose should file an opposition alleging
that Pedro’s application constitutes a
collateral attack on his title.
(c) Jose should file a motion to dismiss
based on res judicata.
(d) Jose should file a suit for damages
against Pedro for fraudulently seeking to
register land which, he should know, is
already titled to another.
• The presumption in Article 160 of the
Civil Code that all property of the
marriage belongs to the conjugal
partnership applies when
(a) the “spouses” are legally married.
(b) the title is in the name of both
husband and wife.
(c) the spouses are living together.
(d) the property was acquired during
the marriage.
• In reconstitution proceedings, which of
the following propositions is wrong:
(a) The issuance of a reconstituted title
does not determine the issue of
ownership.
(b) The LRA can motu proprio revoke
the reconstituted title if the lost or
destroyed title is subsequently found.
(c) The issuance by the LRA of a
reconstituted title is an administrative
function.
(d) The doctrine of res judicata applies
to judicial reconstitution.
• Section 14(1) of PD No. 1529 requires
possession and occupation of the land
applied for since June 12, 1945. Which of the
following propositions is false?
(a) Occupation is broader than possession
because it includes the latter.
(b) Occupation delimits the effect of
constructive possession.
(c) Possession means acts of dominion
which a party would naturally exercise over
his own property.
(d) Occupation serves to highlight that
possession must not be a mere fiction.
• An adverse claim is effective for 30 days.
To render the adverse claim functus officio,
(a) the interested party should formally
request the Register of Deeds to cancel the
same upon the expiration of the 30-day
period.
(b) no action is necessary since the
adverse claim automatically lapses upon
the expiration of the 30-day period.
(c) the interested party should file a
petition in court for the cancellation of the
adverse claim.
(d) it is necessary to await the final
outcome of the case.
• Can an adverse claim of ownership over
registered land, based on acquisitive
prescription, be registered?
(a) Yes because adverse claim aims to
protect the interest of the person
claiming ownership thereof.
(b) No because title to registered land is
imprescriptible.
(c) Yes because adverse claim is a notice
that the adverse claimant has a better
right to the land than the registered
owner thereof.
(d) No because acquisitive prescription
of title to land can never be presumed.
• An action for reconveyance based on a
void deed of sale for lack of consent
(a) prescribes in 10 years.
(b) prescribes in 4 years
(c) is imprescriptible
(d) prescribes in 6 years.
• A corporation sole may purchase and
hold real estate because -
(a) the properties acquired by the
corporation pass upon the death of the
administrator to his heirs who are
Filipino citizens.
(b) ownership of said properties fall
upon the church or congregation and not
upon the incumbent administrator.
(c) the corporation exercises ownership
independently of the nationality of its
incumbent administrator.
(d) (b) and (c).
• Land already decreed in an ordinary
registration case cannot again be the
subject of a subsequent cadastral
proceeding because
(a) once land is judicially decreed, the
judgment is res judicata.
(b) the registration in the name of the
first owner is constructive notice to the
whole world.
(c) to declare the later title valid as
against the first would undermine the
efficacy of Torrens system.
(d) all of the above.
• Pedro files a petition for administrative
reconstitution of title, but it appears that
the land is already titled in the name of
Lim, a Chinese. What are the options open
to the LRA?
(a) LRA should order outright the
cancellation of Lim’s title and act on
Pedro’s petition for reconstitution.
(b) LRA should dismiss Pedro’s
petition pending the filing by the OSG
or the competing claimant of an
action before the RTC for the
cancellation of Lim’s title.
(c) LRA should elevate the matter to
• Who is the proper party to file an action for
annulment or amendment of the title where
it appears that the Assurance Fund may be
held liable for damages due to the unlawful
or erroneous issuance thereof?
(a) the Solicitor General
(b) the LRA Administrator
(c) the LMB Director
(d) the Register of Deeds
• The rule that a forged deed may become
the root of a valid title
(a) does not apply where the owner
still holds a valid title over the land.
(b) applies even where the owner no
longer holds a valid title to the land.
(c) applies where the forger obtains a
title to the land and thereafter sells it
to another.
(d) (a) and (c).
• The Assurance Fund is not liable for loss
or damage caused by which of the
following?
(a) Breach of trust, express or implied.
(b) Mistake in the resurvey of
registered land causing expansion of
the area.
(c) Error in the subdivision of the land
resulting in the increase in area.
(d) all of the above.
• A notice of lis pendens
(a) binds a bona fide purchaser of the
property in dispute.
(c) creates a right or lien that
previously did not exist.
(c) binds a purchaser, whether bona
fide or not, of the disputed property.
(d) is part of the doctrine of notice.
• The original certificate of title is deemed
issued on the date
(a) the decree of registration is issued
by the LRA.
(b) the title is given the corresponding
number by the Register of Deeds.
(c) the original and duplicate copies
are received by the Register of Deeds
from the LRA.
(d) the decree of registration is
transcribed in the day book of the
Register or Deeds.
• A certificate of title based upon a public
land patent becomes indefeasible within
what period?
(a) 5 years after the issuance of the
patent.
(b) 1 year from the issuance of the
patent.
(c) 1 year from the date of the order of
award.
(d) 5 years from the approval of the
application.
• An action for reconveyance based on an
implied or constructive trust prescribes
in how many years from the issuance of
the title over the property?
(a) 4 years.
(b) imprescriptible.
(c) 10 years.
(d) 6 years.
• Where the object of the plaintiff is to
recover possession of real property as
owner, the proper action is:
(a) forcible entry and detainer.
(b) accion reivindicatoria.
(c) accion publiciana.
(d) declaratory relief.
• Laches is the failure or neglect to assert a
right within reasonable time. Which is
not correct in the following statements?
(a) Laches is concerned with the fact of
delay.
(b) Laches applies in equity.
(c) Laches is concerned with the effect of
delay.
(d) Laches is not based on a fixed time.
• Within what period may a judgment in a
land registration case be enforced?
(a) Upon motion within 5 years from
the date of entry.
(b) No further proceeding to enforce
the judgment is necessary.
(c) Upon motion within 10 years from
the date of entry.
(d) Upon motion after finality of
judgment praying that LRA be directed to
issue the decree of registration.
• The writ of possession may not be issued
in which of the following?
(a) in a land registration proceeding.
(b) in a petition for reconstitution.
(c) in an extrajudicial foreclosure of a
realty mortgage.
(d) in a judicial foreclosure of mortgage.
⚫ An action for reconveyance of land valued at
P18,000 should be filed with what court?
(a) the RTC of the province where the
land lies.
(b) the MTC of the place where plaintiff
resides.
(c) the MTC of the place where the land
lies.
(d) the RTC or MTC of the place where
plaintiff resides at his option.
• An action to quiet title to property in the
possession of the plaintiff is
imprescriptible, the reason being that:
(a) he has a continuing right to the aid
of a court of equity to remove a cloud
on his title.
(b) he may wait until his title is
attacked before taking steps to
vindicate his right.
(c) possession is a continuing right as
is the right to defend such possession.
(d) all of the above.
• The State may prosecute for perjury
the party who obtains registration
through fraud, such as by stating false
assertions in the sworn application of
applicants? Thus premised, which of
the following is false?
• (a) A judgment on the guilt of the
accused would not undermine the
indefeasibility of Torrens titles.
• (b) To give immunity from prosecution
to those successful in deceiving the
registration court would be putting a
premium on perjury.
• The following things are property of public
dominion:
(a) Foreshore lands
(b) The Philippine vessel M/V Alcaraz
(c) The Macarthur highway in Luzon.
(d) All of the above.
 THANK YOU AND
GOOD LUCK
Justice Oswaldo D. Agcaoili
Philippine Judicial Academy
Supreme Court
MULTIPLE CHOICE
QUESTIONS
Thank you and good
day!
Justice Oswaldo D. Agcaoili
Philja, Supreme Court
MORTGAGES AND LEASES
• Characterstics of mortgage
• It is a real right. A mortgage binds a
purchaser who knows of its existence or if
the mortgage was registered.
• It is an accessory contract. If the principal
obligation is void, the mortgage is also void.
• It is indivisible. For example, A and B
mortgaged their land to C. While the
mortgage debt was pending, A and B
partitioned the land between them, and A
paid his share of the debt. Is the mortgage
on A’s share of the land extinguished? No,
because the mortgage is indivisible.
• It is inseparable. The mortgage adheres to
the property regardless of who its owner
may subsequently be. 
• It is a real property. A mortgage on real
property is by itself real property also. 
• It is a limitation on ownership. A mortgage
encumbers, but does not end ownership,
and may thus be foreclosed.
• Mortgage is a right in rem which follows the
property
• The mortgage is inseparable from the property
mortgaged as it is a right in rem — a lien on the
property whoever its owner may be.
• It subsists notwithstanding a change in
ownership; in short, the personality of the
owner is disregarded.
• Thus, all subsequent purchasers must respect
the mortgage whether the transfer to them be
with or without the consent of the mortgagee,
for such mortgage until discharged follows the
property.
•  
• Mortgagor must be the owner of the
property
• The must be the absolute owner of the
property as required by Art. 2085 of the Civil
Code, otherwise the mortgage is void.
– A mortgagee has no right to eject the
occupants of the property mortgaged. This
is so because a mortgage passes no title to
the mortgagee. Indeed, by mortgaging a
piece of property, a debtor merely
subjects it to lien but ownership thereof is
not parted with.
•  
• Where the certificate of title is in the name
of the mortgagor when the land is
mortgaged, the mortgagee has the right to
rely on what appears on the certificate of
title. (Gonzales v. IAC, GR No. 69622, Jan. 29,
1988)
– The right or lien of an innocent mortgagee
for value upon the land mortgaged must
be respected and protected, even if the
mortgagor obtained his title thereto thru
fraud. (Blanco v. Esquierdo, GR No.
L-15182,Dec. 29, 1960).
• A contract of sale with right to repurchase
shall be presumed to be an equitable
mortgage in any of the following cases:
– When the price of the sale is unusually
inadequate;
– When the vendor remains in possession as
lessee or otherwise;
– When upon or after the expiration of the
right to repurchase another instrument
extending the period of redemption or
granting a new period is executed;
•  
– When the purchaser retains for himself a
part of the purchase price;
– When the vendor binds himself to pay the
taxes on the thing sold; and,
– In any other case where it may be fairly
inferred that the real intention of the parties
is that the transaction shall secure the
payment of a debt or the performance of any
other obligation.
• For a presumption of an equitable mortgage to
arise, two requisites must be satisfied, namely:
(a) that the parties entered into a contract
denominated as a contract of sale, and (b) that
their intention was to secure an existing debt
• Mortgagee in good faith
– The phrase “innocent purchaser for value” in
Section 32 of the Property Registration
Decree includes an innocent lessee,
mortgagee or other encumbrancer for value.
– Under this doctrine, even if the mortgagor is
not the owner of the mortgaged property, the
mortgage contract and any foreclosure sale
arising therefrom are given effect by reason
of public policy.
– Hence, even if the mortgagor is not the
rightful owner of, or does not have a valid
title to, the mortgaged property, the
mortgagee in good faith is, nonetheless,
• Illustrative cases
• In Blanco v. Esquierdo (110 Phil. 494), the land
was originally registered in the name of the
"Heirs of Maximiano Blanco" but upon
Maximo’s death, his common law wife,
Fructuosa Esquierdo, extrajudicially
adjudicated the entire land to herself, obtained
title in her name and then mortgaged the land
to the bank. The bank had the right to rely on
what appeared in the certificate and, in the
absence of anything to excite suspicion, was
under no obligation to look beyond the
certificate and investigate. Being thus an
innocent mortgagee for value, its lien upon the
land mortgaged must be respected even if the
• In Gonzales v. Intermediate Appellate Court (157
SCRA 187), when the certificate of title in the
name of the Panzo spouses was submitted to the
bank as mortgagee, it was free from any lien or
encumbrance. The mortgage was registered
with the Register of Deeds on May 28, 1971. The
certificate of title was in the name of the
mortgagors. An ejectment case was
subsequently filed by petitioner against the
Panzo spouses which was annotated as a lis
pendens at the back of the title only on March
29, 1973. Is the bank an innocent mortgagee
and buyer for value in good faith? The Court
held in the affirmative since the subsequent
notice of lis pendens cannot in any way
• In Mahinay v. Gako (GR No. 165338, Nov. 28,
2011), the Court ruled that when a
mortgagee relies upon what appears on the
face of a Torrens title and lends money in all
good faith on the basis of the title in the
name of the mortgagor, only thereafter to
learn that the latter's title was defective,
being thus an innocent mortgagee for value,
his or her right or lien upon the land
mortgaged must be respected and protected.
– The rationale for this ruling is, if the rule
were otherwise public confidence in the
certificate of title would be impaired as
everyone dealing with property registered
⚫ Although Art. 2085, CC, requires that the
mortgagor must be the owner of the
mortgaged property, the subsequent
declaration that the title is null and void is
not a ground for nullifying the mortgage
right of the mortgagee. (Rural Bank of
Sariaya v. Yacon, 175 SCRA 62)
⚫ The remedy of the person prejudiced is
against those who caused the fraud, or if
insolvent, an action for recovery of damages
against the Assurance Fund. (Blanco v.
Esquierdo, 110 Phil. 494)
• Effect of a forged deed of mortgage
– A forged power of attorney is without
force and effect, and the mortgage
constituted by virtue thereof is also null
and void and could not prejudice the
rights of the registered owner. (Veloso v.
La Urbana, a58Phil. 681)
– An absolutely simulated contract of sale is
void and transfers no ownership right;
hence, the purported buyer, not being the
owner, cannot validly mortgage the
property and neither does the buyer at
foreclosure sale acquire any title thereto.
(Cruz v. Bancom, 379 SCRA 490)
• Higher standard of care requiree of banks
• The general rule that a mortgagee need not
look beyond the title does not apply to banks
and other financial institutions as greater
care and due diligence is required of them.
Imbued with public interest, they "are
expected to be more cautious than ordinary
individuals.“ (Alano v. Planter’s
Development Bank, GR No. 171628, June 13,
2011)
– The ascertainment of the status or condition
of a property offered to it as security for a
loan must be a standard and indispensable
part of its operations. (Duque-Rosario v.
• Remedies of a secured creditor
– A secured creditor may institute against
the mortgage debtor either (a) a personal
action for the collection of the debt, (b) a
real action to judicially foreclose the real
estate mortgage, or (c) an extrajudicial
judicial foreclosure of the mortgage.
– The remedies, however, are alternative,
not cumulative, and the election or use of
one remedy operate as a waiver of the
others
• Foreclosure of mortgage
– Certain requisites must be established
before a creditor can proceed to an
extrajudicial foreclosure, namely:
• first, there must have been the failure to
pay the loan obtained from the mortgagee-
creditor;
• second, the loan obligation must be
secured by a real estate mortgage; and
• third, the mortgagee-creditor has the right
to foreclose the real estate mortgage either
judicially or extrajudicially. (Sycamore
Ventures Corporation v. Metrobank, GR No.
173183, Nov. 18, 2013)
• Redemption
– The mortgagor has one year within which
to redeem the property from the
registration of sale.
– If no redemption is made within said
period, the right of the purchaser to the
possession of the foreclosed property
becomes absolute. He is entitled to
possession following the consolidation of
ownership in his name.
– The writ of possession becomes a matter
of right and its issuance to a purchaser in
an extrajudicial foreclosure is merely a
WRIT OF POSSESSION
• Writ of possession
– Under Sec. 7 of Act No. 3135, a writ of
possession may be issued either (a) within
the one-year period, upon the filing of a
bond, or (b) after the lapse of the
redemption period, without need of a
bond.
– The proceeding for the issuance of the
writ is ex parte and is ministerial duty of
the court, unless a third party is actually
holding the property adversely to the
judgment debtor, or where the bid price is
unjustifiably higher than the real amount
• In extrajudicial foreclosures, the purchaser
becomes the absolute owner when no
redemption is made.
– Thus, after consolidation of ownership and
issuance of a new transfer certificate of title
in the name of the purchaser, he is entitled to
possession of the property as a matter of
right under Section 7 (Act 3135), and its
issuance by the RTC is a mere ministerial
function.
• But pursuant to Sec. 33, Rule 39, Rules of
Court, the possession of the extrajudicially
foreclosed property shall be withheld from
the purchaser if a third-party is actually
• The issuance of the writ may not be stayed
by a pending action for annulment of the
mortgage or the foreclosure itself, without
prejudice, of course, to the eventual
outcome of the pending annulment case.
(Bank of the Philippine Islands v. Tarampi,
GR No. 174988, Dec. 10, 2008)
• Issuance of the writ is ex parte, summary
and and ministerial. The order of the RTC
granting the petition for a writ of possession
is final which can only be questioned on
appeal. (San Fernando Rural Bank, Inc. v.
Pampanga Omnibus Development
Corporation, GR No. 168088, April 4, 2007)
ADMINISTRATIVE TITLING
VIA ISSUANCE OF
PATENTS
• Registration of Patents
– Public lands suitable for agriculture
can be disposed of by (a) homestead,
(b) sale, (c) lease, and (d) confirmation
of imperfect or incomplete titles by (1)
judicial legalization or (2)
administrative legalization (free
patent)
– Public land patents when duly
registered are veritable Torrens titles,
entitled to all the safeguards relative
thereto
• Homestead patent
– Any citizen of the Philippines may
apply for a homestead of not exceeding
12 hectares.
– The applicant must have cultivated and
improved at least one-fifth of the land
and resided in the municipality (or
adjacent municipality) where the land
is located for at least one year.
– Once the applicant has complied with
all the conditions essential to a
government grant, he acquires not only
a right to a grant but a grant of the land
from the government.
• Sales patent
– A Filipino citizen or lawful age or the
head of a family may apply for the
purchase of an agricultural public land
not to exceed 12 hectares.
– The land shall be sold through public
bidding, and the land awarded to the
highest bidder.
– The purchase price may be paid in full
or in 10 installments.
– The applicant must cultivate at least one-
fifth of the land within 5 years from the
date of award.
• Direct sale (RA No. 730)
– RA No. 730 permits the private sale of not
more than 1,000 square meters for
residential purposes. The applicant:
• Is a Filipino citizen;
• Is not the owner of a home lot in the
city or municipality;
• Has established in good faith his
residence on land not needed for public
service;
• Has constructed his house and actually
resided therein.
• Free patent
– Applicant is a natural-born citizen who
is not the owner of not more than 12
hectares of agricultural public land.
– He has occupied and cultivated the
land for at least 30 years, by himself of
his predecessors-in-interest;
– He has paid the real estate taxes while
the same has not been occupied by any
other person.
 ISSUANCE OF FREE PATENT TO
RESIDENTIAL LANDS (RA NO. 10023)
– Requirements for a residential free patent:
• Applicant must be a Filipino citizen
• In actual occupation, residence and
continuous possession and occupation of
a residential land
• Identified and zoned through an
ordinance and not needed for public use
or public service
• For at least 10 years prior to the filing of
the application
• Area limitation:
– Highly urbanized cities – 200 sq. m.
– Other cities – 500 sq. m.
– 1st and 2 nd class municipalities – 750 sq.
m.
– Other municipalities – 1,000 sq. m.

• Requirements for application:

– Approved plan and technical
description
– Affidavit of two (2) witnesses
confirming possession of applicant for
• Special patents
– A special patent is issued upon the
promulgation of a special law or act of
Congress or by the DENR Secretary as
authorized by an EO of the President.
– Example: Freedom Islands in the Manila
Bay area to which TCTs were issued to
PEA.
– However, the lands so titled shall not be
disposed unless with the approval of
Congress if owned by the national
agency, or by the sanggunian concerned
through an approved ordinance if
• Prohibited alienations
– Sec. 118 of CA 141 proscribes the
alienation or encumbrance of land
acquired under a free patent or
homestead patent within 5 years from
the grant of the patent. The policy is to
give patentee a place where to live with
his family
– After 5 years but before 25 years from
the issuance of the patent, a homestead
may be disposed of subject to the
approval of the DENR Secretary; but
 REGISTRATION UNDER SEC. 48(B) OF
THE PUBLC LAND ACT (CA NO. 141)
“Sec. 48. x x x (b) 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 acquisition
of ownership;, since June 12, 1945, except
when prevented by war or force majeure.
These shall be conclusively presumed to have
performed all the conditions essential to a
Government grant and shall be entitled to a
certificate of title under provisions of this
• There are no material differences
between Sec. 14(1) of PD No. 1529 and
Sec. 48(b) of CA No. 141.
– While the Public Land Act (PLA) refers to
“agricultural lands of the public domain”
and the Property Registration Decree
(PRD) refers to “alienable and disposable
lands of the public domain,” the subject
lands are of the same type since under the
Constitution, alienable lands of the public
domain shall be limited to agricultural
lands.
• Sec. 48(b), CA 141, as amended by PD
1073, requires possession since June
12, 1945, or prior thereto
• But land need be classified as A and D
land at the time of the filing of the
application for registration (
Malabanan vs. Court of Appeals, GR No.
179987, April 29, 2009)
• When the conditions specified in Sec.
48(b) of the PLA are complied with, the
possessor is deemed to have acquired, by
operation of law, a right to a grant,
without the necessity of a certificate of
title being issued.
• Compliance with all requirements for a
government grant ipso jure converts land
to private property.
• The land ceases to be of the public
domain and beyond the authority of the
DENR to dispose of.
• Registration under Sec. 48(b) of the PLA
presumes that the land was originally
public agricultural land but because of
adverse possession since June 12, 1945,
the land has become private.
• A certificate of title is void when it covers
non-registrable lands (e.g., forest or
timber or mineral lands).
• Any title issued on non-disposable lots
even in the hands of an alleged innocent
purchaser for value, shall be cancelled.
Thank you and good
day!

Justice Oswaldo D. Agcaoili

Philja, Supreme Court
REGISTRATION UNDER
THE INDIGENOUS
PEOPLES RIGHTS ACT
(RA 8371)
• Constitutional provisions

“The State recognizes and promotes the

rights of indigenous cultural
communities within the framework of
national unity and development.” (Sec. 2
Art. II)
 “The State, subject to the provisions of
this Constitution and national
development policies and programs shall
protect the rights of indigenous cultural
communities to their ancestral lands to
ensure their economic, social, and
cultural well-being.
The Congress may provide for the
applicability of customary law governing
property rights or relations in
determining the ownership and extent of
ancestral domain.”
• Indigenous concept of ownership
– The IPRA recognizes the existence of
the indigenous cultural communities or
indigenous peoples (ICCs/IPs) as a
distinct sector in Philippine Society.
– It grants these people the ownership
and possession of their ancestral
domains and ancestral lands, and
defines the extent of these lands and
domains.
– The ownership given is the indigenous
concept of ownership under customary
law which traces its origin to native
• Ancestral lands/domains are not deemed
part of the lands of the public domain but
are private lands belonging to ICCs/IPs who
have actually occupied, possessed and
utilized their territories under claim of
ownership since time immemorial.
• Native title refers to pre-conquest rights
which, as far back as memory reaches,
have been held under claim of private
ownership by ICCs/IPs, have never been
public lands and are thus indisputably
presumed to have been held that way since
before the Spanish Conquest.
• The National Commission on Indigenous
Peoples (NCIP) has the authority to issuer
certificates of ancestral domain title
(CADT) or certificates of ancestral land
title (CALT).
• The recording of CADT and CALT in the
Office of the Register of Deeds does not
result in the issuance of Torrens
certificate of title.
• The purpose of registration is simply to
apprise the public of the fact of
recognition by the NCIP of specific claims
• Modes of acquisition
– The rights of ICCsIPs to their ancestral
domains and ancestral lands may be
acquired in two modes:
▪ By native title over both ancestral lands
and domains; or
▪ By Torrens title under the Public Land
Act (CA No. 141) of the Property
Registration Decree (PD No. 1529) with
respect to ancestral lands only.
• Requirements for registration
– The applicant is a member of an
indigenous cultural group;
– He must have been in possession of an
individually-owned ancestral land for
not less than thirty (30) years;
– By operation of law, the land is already
classified as A and D, even if it has a
slope of 18% or over, hence, there is no
need to submit a separate certification
that the land is A and D.
• Transfer of land or property rights
The rights of ownership over ancestral
lands may be transferred subject to the
following limitations:
– Only to members of the same ICCs/IPs;
– In accord with customary laws and
traditions; and
– Subject to the right of redemption for a
period of fifteen (15) years if the land
was transferred to a non-member.
• Ancestral domains belong to all
generations and therefore cannot be sold,
disposed or destroyed.
 CADASTRAL PROCEEDINGS
• The purpose is to serve the public interest
by requiring that the titles to any
unregistered lands “be settled and
adjudicated.”
• The government initiates the proceeding
so that all private lands in the town are
registered in one single proceeding.
• Government surveyors give advance
notice to survey claimants of date of
survey to afford them to indicate their
claims during the survey.
• After survey, the government files the
petition with the RTC so that all
claimants and possessors shall be
heard on their claims.
• Jurisdiction of cadastral court over
previously titled lands limited to
correction of technical errors in the
description of the land.
• Decision declaring land as public land
not a bar to a subsequent action for
confirmation of title over the same
land.
• Initially, the land registration court has
jurisdiction over the land applied for at the
time of the filing of the application.
• But if the court determines at the trial, in the
exercise of its jurisdiction, that the land
applied for is not registrable, as where it is
yet within the forest zone, then it has no
jurisdiction to order its registration and
must perforce dismiss the application.
(Yujuico v. Republic, 537 SCRA 513; City of
Dumaguete v. Phil. Ports Authority, GR No.
168973, Aug. 24, 2011).
• The RTC may properly take cognizance of
reversion suits which do not call for an
annulment of judgment of the RTC acting as
a land registration court.
• Actions for cancellation of title, reconveyance
and reversion belong to the class of cases
that "involve the title to, or possession of,
real property, or any interest therein" and
where the assessed value of the property
exceeds P20,000.00 Batas Pambansa Blg. 129,
Sec. 19 (2), fall under the jurisdiction of the
RTC. (Republic v. Roman Catholic
Archbishop, GR No. 192975, Nov. 12, 2012;
ADMINISTRATIVE TITLING
UNDER THE PUBLIC LAND
ACT (CA NO. 141)
 GENERAL PRINCIPLES
• Regalian doctrine – all lands and all other
natural resources are owned by the State.
• No public land can be acquired by private
persons without any grant, express or
implied from the government.
• Only those lands shall be declared open to
disposition or concession which have been
officially delimited and classified and, when
practicable, surveyed, and which have not
been reserved for public or quasi-public
uses, nor appropriated by the government,
nor in any manner become private property.
• Land remains unclassified land until it is
released therefrom and rendered open to
disposition.  
• The classification of public lands is a
function of the executive branch of
government.  
• For purposes of their administration and
disposition, lands of the public domain
which are alienable or open to disposition
may be further classified as: (a) agricultural,
(b) residential, commercial, industrial, or for
similar productive purposes, (c) educational,
charitable, or other similar purposes, and
(d) reservations for townsites and for public
OVERVIEW
• Functions of the DENR Secretary, LMB
Director
• Under the RAC of 1987, the DENR
Secretaryexercises exclusive jurisdiction
on the management and disposition of all
lands of the public domain as well as
classification, classification, surveying and
titling of lands.
• Pursuant to EO No. 192, the newly created
Lands Management Bureau (LMB) has
absorbed the functions and powers of the
Bureau of Lands except those line
functions and powers which were
transferred to the regional field offices.
• The LMB Director shall advise the DENR
• Jurisdiction as to questions of possession
• The jurisdiction of the DENR over public
lands does not negate the authority of
courts of justice to resolve questions of
possession and their decisions stand in
the meantime that the DENR itself has not
settled the respective rights of public land
claimants.
• But once the DENR has decided,
particularly with the grant of a public
land patent for instance and issuance of
the corresponding certificate of title, its
decision prevails.
• CA No. 141 (Public Land Act) governs
disposition of public lands
– The Public Land Act (CA No. 141, as
amended, Nov. 7, 1936), compiled the then
existing laws on lands of the public
domain, and remains to this day the
existing general law governing the
classification and disposition of lands of
the public domain other than timber and
mineral lands.
– The Public Land Act applies only to lands
of the public domain.
• Decisions of the Regional Executive Director
as to questions of fact shall be conclusive
when approved by the DENR Secretary.
• But said decisions may be annulled or
reviewed in a direct proceeding and not
collaterally as when the issue involves a
question of law or is based upon a
misconstruction of the law, or when the
conclusions drawn by the Secretary on
appeal from the facts found are erroneous
or not warranted by law.  (Firmalo v.
Tutaan, GR No. L-35408, Oct. 27, 1973;
Alfafara v. Mapa, GR No. L-7042, May 28,
1954)
• Classification of lands an exclusive executive
prerogative
• For purposes of the administration and
disposition of alienable or disposable
public lands, the President, upon
recommendation of the Secretary of
Environment and Natural Resources, shall
from time to time declare what lands are
open to disposition or concession under
the Act.
• Section 6 of the Public Land Act classifies
lands of the public domain into alienable
or disposable, timber, and mineral lands.
• The classification is a prerogative of the
• Classification for purposes of administration
and disposition
• For purposes of their administration and
disposition, A and D lands of the public
domain may be further classified as:
(a) agricultural,
(b) residential, commercial, industrial, or
for similar productive purposes,
(c) educational, charitable, or other similar
purposes, and
(d) reservations for townsites and for public
and quasi-public uses.
• Disposition of lands for residential, etc.
purposes
• Lands are classified as: (a) lands
reclaimed by the government by dredging,
filling, or other means (b) foreshore (c)
marshy lands or lands covered with water
bordering upon the shores or banks of
navigable lakes or rivers, and (d) lands
not included in any of the foregoing
classes.
• The lands comprised in classes (a) and (b)
shall be disposed by lease only.   Lands
comprised in classes (c) and (d) may be
sold.
• Modes of disposition
(1) For homestead settlement
(2) By sale
(3) By lease
(4) By confirmation of imperfect or incomplete
title
(a)By judicial legalization
(b) By administrative legalization (free
patent)
 
• Homestead
• Any citizen of the Philippines over the age
of eighteen years, or the head of a family,
may enter a homestead of not exceeding
twelve hectares of agricultural land of the
public domain.
• The applicant must have cultivated and
improved at least one-fifth of the land
continuously since the approval of the
application and resided for at least one
year in the municipality in which the land
is located or municipality adjacent thereto.
(Sec. 12, CA No. 141)
• Effect of compliance with requirements
• When a homesteader has complied with
all the terms and conditions which entitle
him to a patent for a tract of public land,
he acquires a vested interest therein, and
is to be regarded as the equitable owner
thereof.
• The execution and delivery of the patent,
after the right to a particular parcel of
land has become complete, are the mere
ministerial acts of the officer charged with
that duty.
• Free patent
– Any natural-born citizen of the
Philippines who is not the owner of more
than 12 hectares and who, for at least 30
years, has continuously occupied and
cultivated, by himself or through his
predecessors-in-interest a tract of
agricultural public land, and who shall
have paid the real estate tax thereon shall
be entitled to have a free patent issued to
him for such tract of land not to exceed
twelve 12 hectares. (Sec. 44, ibid. as
amended by RA No. 782 and RA No. 6940,
approved March 28, 1990; Del Rosario-
• RA No. 10023, dated March 9, 2010,
authorizes issuance of free patent titles to
zoned residential lands under the following
requirements:
• Survey plan and technical description 
• Affidavit of two 2 persons who are
residents of the barangay that the
applicant has actually resided on, and
actually possessed and occupied, the land
applied for, under a bona fide claim of
ownership, for at least 10 years, and has
complied with the other requirements
prescribed by the Act
• Area limitations
• In highly urbanized cities - not exceed two
hundred (200) square meters;
• In other cities - not exceed five hundred
(500) square meters;
• In first class and second class
municipalities - not exceed seven hundred
fifty (750) square meters; and
• In all other municipalities - not exceed
one thousand (1,000) square meters:
• Sales patent
• Any citizen of the Philippines of lawful
age or the head of a family may purchase
any tract of public agricultural land not to
exceed twelve hectares which shall be
sold thru sealed bidding. The land shall be
awarded to the highest bidder, but the
applicant may equal the highest bid.
• The purchaser shall have not less than
one-fifth of the land cultivated within five
years from the date of the award, and
pays the full purchase price or in not
more than ten equal annual installments
from the date of the award. (Secs. 22, 26
• Approval of application authorizes applicant
to take possession
– The approval of a sales application merely
authorizes the applicant to take
possession of the land so that he could
comply with the requirements prescribed
by law before a final patent could be
issued in his favor.
– What divests the government of title to
the land is the issuance of the sales patent
and its subsequent registration with the
Register of Deeds.
• Direct sale under RA No. 730
• RA No. 730 permits the direct sale of
public lands for residential purposes to
qualified applicants. The applicant must:
(a) be a Filipino citizen of legal age;
(b) not the owner of a home lot in the
municipality or city in which he resides;
(c) has established in good faith his
residence on a parcel of public land
which is not needed for public service;
and
(d) has constructed his house and
actually resided therein.
•  
• Sale of lands within military reservations
• Pursuant to RA No. 274,  lands within
military reservations, when declared by
the President as no longer needed for
military purposes, may be subdivided by
the Director of Lands, and thereafter sold
to persons qualified to acquire
agricultural public lands under the Public
Land Act, with priority given to bona fide
occupants and then to war veterans.
• Lands for educational, charitable and other
similar purposes
– Lands for educational, charitable and
similar purposes may be sold or leased,
under the same conditions as the sale or
lease of agricultural public lands, for the
purpose of founding a cemetery, church,
college, school, university, or other
institutions for educational, charitable, or
philanthropical purposes or scientific
research, the area to be such as may
actually and reasonably be necessary to
carry out such purposes.
– The DENR Secretary may order the sale to
be made without public auction, at a price
• Lease
• Any citizen of lawful age of the Philippines,
and any corporation or association of
which at least sixty per centum of the
capital stock or of any interest in said
capital stock belongs wholly to citizens of
the Philippines, and which is organized and
constituted under the laws of the
Philippines, may lease any tract of
agricultural public land available for lease
under the provisions of this Act, not
exceeding a total of one thousand and
twenty-four hectares.
• If the land leased is adapted to and be
devoted for grazing purposes, an area not
• Reservations for public or quasi-public
purposes
• Upon the recommendation of the DENR
Secretary, the President may designate by
proclamation any tract or tracts of land of the
public domain as reservations for the use of
the Republic of the Philippines or of any of its
branches, or of the inhabitants thereof, in
accordance with regulations prescribed for
this purpose, or for quasi-public uses or
purposes when the public interest requires it.
(Sec. 83, CA No. 141)
• A certified copy of every proclamation of the
President shall be forwarded to the Director
of Lands for record purposes, and a copy of
• Special patents
– A special patent is a “patent to grant, cede,
and convey full ownership of alienable
and disposable lands formerly covered by
a reservation or lands of the public
domain” and is issued upon the
“promulgation of a special law or act of
Congress or by the Secretary of
Environment and Natural Resources as
authorized by an Executive Order of the
President.”
– Example: Freedom Islands located in the
Manila Bay and pursuant to which the
Register of Deeds issued TCT Nos. 7309,
• Friar lands
• Friar lands were purchased by the
government for sale to actual occupants
under the provisions of Act No. 1120, or
the Friar Lands Act, dated April 26, 1904.
These lands are not public lands but
private or patrimonial property of the
government.
• The conveyance or certificate of sale
executed in favor of a buyer or purchaser
is a conveyance of the ownership of the
property. Upon full payment, the
government shall issue a final deed of
conveyance in favor of the purchaser,
ADMINISTRATIVE TITLING
UNDER THE PUBLIC LAND
ACT (CA NO. 141)
 GENERAL PRINCIPLES
• Regalian doctrine – all lands and all other
natural resources are owned by the State.
• No public land can be acquired by private
persons without any grant, express or
implied from the government.
• Only those lands shall be declared open to
disposition or concession which have been
officially delimited and classified and, when
practicable, surveyed, and which have not
been reserved for public or quasi-public
uses, nor appropriated by the government,
nor in any manner become private property.
• Land remains unclassified land until it is
released therefrom and rendered open to
disposition.  
• The classification of public lands is a
function of the executive branch of
government.  
• For purposes of their administration and
disposition, lands of the public domain
which are alienable or open to disposition
may be further classified as: (a) agricultural,
(b) residential, commercial, industrial, or for
similar productive purposes, (c) educational,
charitable, or other similar purposes, and
(d) reservations for townsites and for public
OVERVIEW
• Functions of the DENR Secretary, LMB
Director
• Under the RAC of 1987, the DENR
Secretaryexercises exclusive jurisdiction
on the management and disposition of all
lands of the public domain as well as
classification, classification, surveying and
titling of lands.
• Pursuant to EO No. 192, the newly created
Lands Management Bureau (LMB) has
absorbed the functions and powers of the
Bureau of Lands except those line
functions and powers which were
transferred to the regional field offices.
• The LMB Director shall advise the DENR
• Jurisdiction as to questions of possession
• The jurisdiction of the DENR over public
lands does not negate the authority of
courts of justice to resolve questions of
possession and their decisions stand in
the meantime that the DENR itself has not
settled the respective rights of public land
claimants.
• But once the DENR has decided,
particularly with the grant of a public
land patent for instance and issuance of
the corresponding certificate of title, its
decision prevails.
• CA No. 141 (Public Land Act) governs
disposition of public lands
– The Public Land Act (CA No. 141, as
amended, Nov. 7, 1936), compiled the then
existing laws on lands of the public
domain, and remains to this day the
existing general law governing the
classification and disposition of lands of
the public domain other than timber and
mineral lands.
– The Public Land Act applies only to lands
of the public domain.
• Decisions of the Regional Executive Director
as to questions of fact shall be conclusive
when approved by the DENR Secretary.
• But said decisions may be annulled or
reviewed in a direct proceeding and not
collaterally as when the issue involves a
question of law or is based upon a
misconstruction of the law, or when the
conclusions drawn by the Secretary on
appeal from the facts found are erroneous
or not warranted by law.  (Firmalo v.
Tutaan, GR No. L-35408, Oct. 27, 1973;
Alfafara v. Mapa, GR No. L-7042, May 28,
1954)
• Classification of lands an exclusive executive
prerogative
• For purposes of the administration and
disposition of alienable or disposable
public lands, the President, upon
recommendation of the Secretary of
Environment and Natural Resources, shall
from time to time declare what lands are
open to disposition or concession under
the Act.
• Section 6 of the Public Land Act classifies
lands of the public domain into alienable
or disposable, timber, and mineral lands.
• The classification is a prerogative of the
• Classification for purposes of administration
and disposition
• For purposes of their administration and
disposition, A and D lands of the public
domain may be further classified as:
(a) agricultural,
(b) residential, commercial, industrial, or
for similar productive purposes,
(c) educational, charitable, or other similar
purposes, and
(d) reservations for townsites and for public
and quasi-public uses.
• Disposition of lands for residential, etc.
purposes
• Lands are classified as: (a) lands
reclaimed by the government by dredging,
filling, or other means (b) foreshore (c)
marshy lands or lands covered with water
bordering upon the shores or banks of
navigable lakes or rivers, and (d) lands
not included in any of the foregoing
classes.
• The lands comprised in classes (a) and (b)
shall be disposed by lease only.   Lands
comprised in classes (c) and (d) may be
sold.
• Modes of disposition
(1) For homestead settlement
(2) By sale
(3) By lease
(4) By confirmation of imperfect or incomplete
title
(a)By judicial legalization
(b) By administrative legalization (free
patent)
 
• Homestead
• Any citizen of the Philippines over the age
of eighteen years, or the head of a family,
may enter a homestead of not exceeding
twelve hectares of agricultural land of the
public domain.
• The applicant must have cultivated and
improved at least one-fifth of the land
continuously since the approval of the
application and resided for at least one
year in the municipality in which the land
is located or municipality adjacent thereto.
(Sec. 12, CA No. 141)
• Effect of compliance with requirements
• When a homesteader has complied with
all the terms and conditions which entitle
him to a patent for a tract of public land,
he acquires a vested interest therein, and
is to be regarded as the equitable owner
thereof.
• The execution and delivery of the patent,
after the right to a particular parcel of
land has become complete, are the mere
ministerial acts of the officer charged with
that duty.
• Free patent
– Any natural-born citizen of the
Philippines who is not the owner of more
than 12 hectares and who, for at least 30
years, has continuously occupied and
cultivated, by himself or through his
predecessors-in-interest a tract of
agricultural public land, and who shall
have paid the real estate tax thereon shall
be entitled to have a free patent issued to
him for such tract of land not to exceed
twelve 12 hectares. (Sec. 44, ibid. as
amended by RA No. 782 and RA No. 6940,
approved March 28, 1990; Del Rosario-
• RA No. 10023, dated March 9, 2010,
authorizes issuance of free patent titles to
zoned residential lands under the following
requirements:
• Survey plan and technical description 
• Affidavit of two 2 persons who are
residents of the barangay that the
applicant has actually resided on, and
actually possessed and occupied, the land
applied for, under a bona fide claim of
ownership, for at least 10 years, and has
complied with the other requirements
prescribed by the Act
• Area limitations
• In highly urbanized cities - not exceed two
hundred (200) square meters;
• In other cities - not exceed five hundred
(500) square meters;
• In first class and second class
municipalities - not exceed seven hundred
fifty (750) square meters; and
• In all other municipalities - not exceed
one thousand (1,000) square meters:
• Sales patent
• Any citizen of the Philippines of lawful
age or the head of a family may purchase
any tract of public agricultural land not to
exceed twelve hectares which shall be
sold thru sealed bidding. The land shall be
awarded to the highest bidder, but the
applicant may equal the highest bid.
• The purchaser shall have not less than
one-fifth of the land cultivated within five
years from the date of the award, and
pays the full purchase price or in not
more than ten equal annual installments
from the date of the award. (Secs. 22, 26
• Approval of application authorizes applicant
to take possession
– The approval of a sales application merely
authorizes the applicant to take
possession of the land so that he could
comply with the requirements prescribed
by law before a final patent could be
issued in his favor.
– What divests the government of title to
the land is the issuance of the sales patent
and its subsequent registration with the
Register of Deeds.
• Direct sale under RA No. 730
• RA No. 730 permits the direct sale of
public lands for residential purposes to
qualified applicants. The applicant must:
(a) be a Filipino citizen of legal age;
(b) not the owner of a home lot in the
municipality or city in which he resides;
(c) has established in good faith his
residence on a parcel of public land
which is not needed for public service;
and
(d) has constructed his house and
actually resided therein.
•  
• Sale of lands within military reservations
• Pursuant to RA No. 274,  lands within
military reservations, when declared by
the President as no longer needed for
military purposes, may be subdivided by
the Director of Lands, and thereafter sold
to persons qualified to acquire
agricultural public lands under the Public
Land Act, with priority given to bona fide
occupants and then to war veterans.
• Lands for educational, charitable and other
similar purposes
– Lands for educational, charitable and
similar purposes may be sold or leased,
under the same conditions as the sale or
lease of agricultural public lands, for the
purpose of founding a cemetery, church,
college, school, university, or other
institutions for educational, charitable, or
philanthropical purposes or scientific
research, the area to be such as may
actually and reasonably be necessary to
carry out such purposes.
– The DENR Secretary may order the sale to
be made without public auction, at a price
• Lease
• Any citizen of lawful age of the Philippines,
and any corporation or association of
which at least sixty per centum of the
capital stock or of any interest in said
capital stock belongs wholly to citizens of
the Philippines, and which is organized and
constituted under the laws of the
Philippines, may lease any tract of
agricultural public land available for lease
under the provisions of this Act, not
exceeding a total of one thousand and
twenty-four hectares.
• If the land leased is adapted to and be
devoted for grazing purposes, an area not
• Reservations for public or quasi-public
purposes
• Upon the recommendation of the DENR
Secretary, the President may designate by
proclamation any tract or tracts of land of the
public domain as reservations for the use of
the Republic of the Philippines or of any of its
branches, or of the inhabitants thereof, in
accordance with regulations prescribed for
this purpose, or for quasi-public uses or
purposes when the public interest requires it.
(Sec. 83, CA No. 141)
• A certified copy of every proclamation of the
President shall be forwarded to the Director
of Lands for record purposes, and a copy of
• Special patents
– A special patent is a “patent to grant, cede,
and convey full ownership of alienable
and disposable lands formerly covered by
a reservation or lands of the public
domain” and is issued upon the
“promulgation of a special law or act of
Congress or by the Secretary of
Environment and Natural Resources as
authorized by an Executive Order of the
President.”
– Example: Freedom Islands located in the
Manila Bay and pursuant to which the
Register of Deeds issued TCT Nos. 7309,
• Friar lands
• Friar lands were purchased by the
government for sale to actual occupants
under the provisions of Act No. 1120, or
the Friar Lands Act, dated April 26, 1904.
These lands are not public lands but
private or patrimonial property of the
government.
• The conveyance or certificate of sale
executed in favor of a buyer or purchaser
is a conveyance of the ownership of the
property. Upon full payment, the
government shall issue a final deed of
conveyance in favor of the purchaser,