Update on Land Registration Law
-
Upload
denise-capacio-lirio -
Category
Documents
-
view
240 -
download
3
Transcript of Update on Land Registration Law
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
1/66
AN UPDATE ON THE LAW
LAND TITLES AND DEEDS
ATTY LINDA L. MALENAB-HORNILLA
Undersecretary, Department of Justice
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
2/66
ORIGINAL REGISTRATION OF LAND
UNDER THE TORRENS SYSTEM
Private lands may be brought under theoperation of the Torrens System LandRegistration thru: (1) ordinary or voluntaryland registration proceedings under Act No.496 and Sections 14 to 33 ofP. D. No. 1529,and under Section 48(b) of C.A. No. 141, asamended, otherwise known as the Public Land
Act, (2) compulsory proceedings under ActNo. 2259, otherwise known as the Cadastral Actof 1913, and (3) Sections 35 to 38 of P. D. No.1529. (cadastral)
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
3/66
ORIGINAL REGISTRATION OF LAND
UNDER THE TORRENS SYSTEM
Public lands granted by way ofhomestead,sales or free patent under the Public Land Actare likewise brought under the Torrens System
upon registration of the patent and issuance ofthe corresponding certificate of title by theRegister of Deeds. Registration of such landsunder the Torrens System is automatic andcompulsory. The same could be said of an
emancipation patent issued by the Departmentof Agrarian Reform when such patent covers anunregistered private agricultural land devoted torice and corn, by virtue ofP. D. No. 266.
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
4/66
Who applies?
In an ordinary land registration proceedingsunder Act 496 and Sections 14-33, P. D. No.1529, only those who claim to own the land
in fee simple may apply, i.e., those whoacquired ownership of the land by titulo real(royal grant), titulo de composicion con el estado(adjustment title), titulo de concession especial(special grant), titulo de compra (title bypurchase during the Spanish Colonial Period, orthru the different forms of accession under theCivil Code and special laws, like accretion,avulsion, abandonment of river bed, formation of
lands in non navigable rivers and reclamation.
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
5/66
ORIGINAL REGISTRATION OF LAND
UNDER THE TORRENS SYSTEM
the use of Spanish titles as evidence in
land registration proceedings is proscribed
by P. D. No. 892 as February 16, 1976
Spanish titles are now hard to find and if
there is any it would probably be of doubtfulgenuineness or validity.
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
6/66
ORIGINAL REGISTRATION OF LAND
UNDER THE TORRENS SYSTEM
Most, if not all, ordinary applications for land registrationis based on possession and occupation, tax declarationand tax realty receipts, and nothing more. Taxdeclaration and realty tax receipts are not evidence of a
grant of land from the State.
The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that they arenot conclusive evidence of ownership. Nevertheless theSupreme Court has also consistently held that they aregood indicia of possession in the concept of an owner.[Ramos-Balallo vs. Ramos, 470 SCRA 533 (January 23,2006)]
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
7/66
IMPERFECT/INCOMPLETE
TITLE
The title to the land is imperfect or incomplete,invoke Section 48(b) of C. A. no. 141, asamended, otherwise known as the Public Land
Act, which provides: citizens of the Philippines, occupying the lands
of the public domain or claiming to own suchlands or an interest therein, but whose title have
not been perfected or completed, may apply tothe Court of First Instance of the province wherethe land is located for confirmation of theirclaims and the issuance of a certificate of titleunder the Land Registration Act
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
8/66
Judicialconfirmationorlegalization
ofimperfectorincompletetitle
This is referred to as judicial confirmation
or legalization of imperfect or incompletetitle to public agricultural lands under
Section 48(b) of the Public Land Act.
it requires the concurrence of the following
elements, to wit;
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
9/66
Judicialconfirmationorlegalizationof
imperfectorincompletetitle
The applicant must be a Filipino citizen. This is inkeeping with the provision of Section 2, Article XIIof the 1987 Constitution which limits theacquisition and enjoyment of our naturalresources to Filipino citizens. However, inDirector of Lands vs. Lapena, the Supreme Courtheld that there is nothing to prevent a foreignnational from applying for judicial confirmation ofthe imperfect title to a tract of land that hepurchased while he was still a Filipino from onewho had been in possession and occupation ofthe land for the period and to the mannerprescribed by Section 48(b) of the Public Land
Act, for then the land has ceased to be publicland.
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
10/66
Judicialconfirmationorlegalization
ofimperfectorincompletetitle
a private corporation may file anapplication for judicial confirmation ofimperfect title under Section 48(b) of the
Public Land Act for the reason thatalienable and disposable public land heldby a possessor, personally or through hispredecessor-in-interest, openlycontinuously and exclusively for theprescribed statutory period is converted toprivate property by mere lapse orcompletion of said period, ipso jure.
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
11/66
Judicialconfirmationorlegalization
ofimperfectorincompletetitle
The proceedings would not originally convert
the land from public to private land but only
confirm such a conversion already affectedby operation of law from the moment the
required period of possession became
complete. [Director of Lands vs. AcmePlywood and Veneer Corp. & IAC, 146
SCRA 509.
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
12/66
Judicialconfirmationorlegalization
ofimperfectorincompletetitle
PERIOD AND CHARACTER OF
POSSESSION AND OCCUPATION
The applicant has been in open, continuous,
exclusive and notorious possession under
a bona fide claim of acquisition of
ownership since June 12, 1945.
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
13/66
Judicialconfirmationorlegalization
ofimperfectorincompletetitle
The area applied for shall not exceed 144hectares.
The land has been classified as alienableand disposable.
The application must be filed not later thanDecember 31, 2020. [See also Republic vs.
Estonilo, 476 SCRA 265 (November 25,2005); Republic vs. Enciso, 474 SCRA 700(November 11, 2005); Carlos vs. Republic,468 SCRA 709, (August 31, 2005)]
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
14/66
CADASTRAL PROCEEDINGS
THE TITLE OF OWNERSHIP ON THE LAND ISVESTED UPON THE OWNER UPON EXPIRATION OFTHE PERIOD TO APPEAL FROM THE DECISION OR
ADJUDICATION BY THE CADASTRAL COURT
The land had become a registered property which couldnot be acquired by adverse possession and, therefore,beyond the jurisdiction of the Land Management Bureau,to subject it to a free patent. The free patent issued bythe DENR and the certificate of the title issued by the
Register of Deeds are null and void. [Calimpong vs.Heirs of Filomena Gumela, 468 SCRA 441 (March 31,2006), citing De la Merced vs. CA, 5 SCRA 240]
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
15/66
CADASTRAL PROCEEDINGS
The President of the Philippines or his alter ego,the Director of Lands, has no authority to grant afree patent for land that has ceased to be a
public land and has passed to privateownership; and a title so issued is null and void.The nullity arises not from the fraud or deceit,but from the fact that the land is not under the
jurisdiction of the Bureau of Lands. [Calimpong
vs. Heirs of Filomena Gumela, 468 SCRA 441(March 31, 2006), citing De la Merced vs. CA, 5SCRA 240]
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
16/66
REMEDIES OF AGGRIEVED PARTIES IN
LAND REGISTRATION PROCEEDINGS
1. PETITION TO REVIEW OR REOPEN A
DECREE OF REGISTRATION
Section 38 of Act 496 recognizes the
right of a person deprived of land to
institute an action to reopen or revise the
decree of registration obtained by actual
fraud.
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
17/66
REMEDIES OF AGGRIEVED PARTIES IN
LAND REGISTRATION PROCEEDINGS
Fraud is two kinds: actual or constructive.
Actual or positive fraud proceeds from anintentional deception practiced by means of the
misrepresentation or concealment of a materialfact.
Constructive fraud is construed as a fraudbecause of its detrimental effect on public
interests and public or private confidence, eventhough the act is not done with an actual designto commit positive fraud or injury upon otherpersons
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
18/66
REMEDIES OF AGGRIEVED PARTIES IN
LAND REGISTRATION PROCEEDINGS
Prescription does not run against the State
and the latter may still bring an action, evenafter the lapse of one year, for the
reversion of the land to the public domain,
of land which have been fraudulently
granted to private individuals. [Republic vs.Guerrero, 485 SCRA 424 (March 28,
2006)]
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
19/66
REMEDIES OF AGGRIEVED PARTIES IN
LAND REGISTRATION PROCEEDINGS
2. ACTION FOR RECONVEYANCE - In action
for reconveyance, a decree of registration is
respected as incontrovertible. What is soughtinstead is the transfer of the property or its title
which has been wrongfully or erroneously
registered in another person's name, to its
rightful or legal owner, or to one who has a
better right. [Naval vs. CA, 483 SCRA 102
(February 22, 2006)]
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
20/66
REMEDIES OF AGGRIEVED PARTIES IN
LAND REGISTRATION PROCEEDINGS
An action for reconveyance does not prescribedwhen the plaintiff is in possession of the land tobe reconveyed. [Naval vs. CA, 483 SCRA 102(February 22, 2006); see also Cuizon vs.Remoto, 472 SCRA 274 (October 11, 2005)]
The fraudulent registration of a parcel holds theperson in whose name the land is registered asa mere trustee of an implied trust for the benefitof the person from whom the property comes.
Registration alone without good faith is notsufficient. Good faith must concur withregistration for such prior right to be enforceable.[Portes, Sr. vs. Arcala, 468 SCRA 343 9august30, 2005)]
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
21/66
PRESUMPTIVE INDEFEASIBILITY,
CONCLUSIVENESS AND INCONTOVERTIBILITY
OF A TORRENS TITLE
T.C.T. No. M-19968 and T.C.T. No. 19973,being genuine and valid, on their face, areincontrovertible, indefeasible and conclusive
against the petitioners and the whole world.Thus, the unregistered deed of sale and thesubdivision contract upon which petitioners rely,cannot prevail over the certificate of title in thename of Cruz. To hold otherwise is to defeat the
primary object of the Torrens System which is tomake the Torrens title indefeasible and validagainst the whole world. [Santos vs. Cruz, 484SCRA 66 (March 3, 2006)]
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
22/66
EXCEPTION TO THE RULE OF
INDEFEASIBILITY OF A TORRENS TITLE
A title emanating from a free patent which
was secured through fraud and
misrepresentation does not become
indefeasible, precisely because the patent
from whence the title sprung is itself void
and of no effect whatsoever. [Heirs of
Carlos Alcaraz vs. Republic 464 SCRA280 (July 28, 2005)]
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
23/66
PRESUMPTIVE INDEFEASIBILITY,
CONCLUSIVENESS AND INCONTOVERTIBILITY
OF A TORRENS TITLE
If a property covered by a Torrens title is
involved, the presumptive conclusiveness of
such title should be given due weight, and in the
absence of strong compelling evidence to thecontrary, the holder thereof should be
considered the owner of the property in
controversy until his title is nullified or modified in
an appropriate ordinary action. [Pacioles, Jr.vs. Chuatoco-Ching, 466 SCRA 90 (August 9,
2005)]
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
24/66
IMPRESCRIPTIBILITY OF TORRENS
TITLE
It is not disputed that at the core of thiscontroversy is a parcel of land registered underthe Torrens system. In a long line of cases, we
have consistently ruled that lands covered by atitle cannot be acquired by prescription or byadverse possession. So it is that in NataliaRealty Corp. vs. Vallez, et al., we held that aclaim of acquisitive prescription is baseless
when the land involved is a registered landbecause of Article 1126 of the Civil Code andSection 47 ofP.D. No. 1529. [Ragudo vs.Fabella Estate tenants Association, Inc., 466
SCRA 136(August 9, 2005)]
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
25/66
PRESUMPTIVE INDEFEASIBILITY,
CONCLUSIVENESS AND INCONTOVERTIBILITY
OF A TORRENS TITLE
But a party's alleged possession of atransfer certificate of title and actualpossession of subject land, although
strong proof of ownership, are notnecessarily conclusive where the assertionof the proprietary rights is founded on adubious claim of ownership. [Estate of
Salvador Serra vs. Heirs ofPrimitivoHernaez, 466 SRCA 120 (August 9, 2005);see also Bejoc vs. Cabreros, 464 SCRA 78(July 22, 2005)]
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
26/66
A VOID TITLE MAYBE THE SOURCE OF A VALID
TITLE IN THE HANDS OF AN INNOCENT
PURCHASER FOR VALUE
If the evidence show that the free patent andO.C.T. issued to petitioners' predecessors-in-interest is valid and/or Lot No. 89 is not inside
T.C.T. No. 257152, then judgment should berendered in favor of petitioners; and whether thelatter acted in good faith or bad faith, will nolonger be a decisive issue in the case. On theother hand, if the title of petitioners'
predecessors-in -interest is declared void, thedefense of good faith may still be available topetitioners' who claim to be purchasers in goodfaith and for value. [Tan vs. Dela Vega, 484
SCRA 538 (March 10, 2006)]
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
27/66
A TORRENS TITLE IS NOT SUBJECT TO
COLLATERAL ATTACK
It is well settled that the Torrens title cannot becollaterally attacked; the issue on the validity oftitle, i.e., whether or not it was fraudulently issued
can only be raised in an action expresslyinstituted for the purpose. It has been invariablystated that the real purpose of the TorrensSystem is to quiet title to land to stop forever anyquestion as to its legality. Once a title is
registered, the owner may rest secure, withoutthe necessity of waiting in the portals of thecourt, or sitting in the mirador a su casa toavoid the possibility of losing his hand.
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
28/66
A TORRENS TITLE IS NOT SUBJECT
TO COLLATERAL ATTACK
Respondents application for registration of a parcel ofland already covered by a Torrens title is actually acollateral attack against petitioners title, not permittedunder the principle of indefeasibility of a Torrens title.
A decree of registration that has become final shall bedeemed conclusive not only on the questions actuallycontested and determined, but also upon matters thatmight be litigated or decided in the land registration
proceedings. Thus, it is too late for the respondents toquestion petitioners titles considering that the certificatesof title issued to the latter have become incontrovertibleafter the lapse of one (1) year from the date ofregistration. [Fil-estate Management, Inc. Supra]
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
29/66
POSSESSION OF TITLED PROPERTY ADVERSE
TO REGISTERD OWNER IS NECESSARILY
TAINTED WITH BAD FAITH
Good faith consists in the belief of the builderthat the land he is building on is his and hisignorance of any defect or flaw in his title. In the
instant case, when the verification survey reportcame to the petitioners knowledge, their goodfaith ceased. The survey report is a profession ofencroachment of respondents titled property. Itis doctrinal in land registration law that
possession of titled property adverse to theregistered owner is necessarily tainted with badfaith [Cajayon vs. Batuyong, 482 SCRA 461(February 16, 2006)]
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
30/66
CONTINUING, SPECIAL AND LIMITED JURISDICTION OF
THE LAND REGISTRATION COURT OVER
PETITIONS FILED AFTER ORIGINAL
REGISTRATION OF TITLE
The Regional Trial Court has the authority to act,not only on the application for original registrationof title to land, but also on all petitions filed after
original registration of title. The Court of Appeals,therefore, erred on ruling that the Regional TrialCourt, Branch 255, Las Pinas City, has no
jurisdiction over LRC Case No. M-228 on theground that the land subject to respondents
application for registration was already registeredin the Registry of Deeds of Las Pinas City. [Fil-Estate Management, Inc. vs. Trono, 482 SCRA578(February 17, 2006)]
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
31/66
REGALIAN DOCTRINE; FOREST LAND
NON-REGISTRABLE AS PRIVATE
LANDS; HOMESTEAD
Under the Regalian Doctrine, all lands ofthe public domain belong to State, andthose lands not appearing to be clearly
within private ownership are presumed tobelong to the state. Lands of the publicdomain are classified into agricultural,forest or timber, mineral lands and national
parks. Alienable and disposable lands ofthe public domain shall be limited toagricultural lands.
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
32/66
REGALIAN DOCTRINE; FOREST LAND
NON-REGISTRABLE AS PRIVATE LANDS;
HOMESTEAD
C. A. No. 141 (1936) or the Public Land
Act, as amended by P.D. 1073 (1977),
remains to be the general law governing
the classification and disposition of
alienable lands of the public domain It
enumerates the different modes of
acquisition of these lands and prescribesthe terms and conditions to enable private
persons to perfect their title to them.
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
33/66
HOMESTEAD
A homestead patent is one of the modes to acquire titleto public lands suitable for agricultural purposes. Underthe Public Land Act, a homestead patent is one issuedto any citizen of this country, 18 years of age or head offamily, and who is not the owner of more than 24hectares of land in the country. To be qualified, the
applicant must show that he has resided continuouslyfor at least one (1) year in the municipality where theland is situated and must have cultivated at least one-fifth of the land applied for. [Ramos-Balallo vs. Ramos,479 SCRA 533 (January 23, 2006)]
A homestead patent once registered under the LandRegistration Act becomes as indefeasible as a Torrenstitle. [Portes Sr. vs. Arcala, Supra]
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
34/66
FOREST LAND
Public forest lands or forest reserves, unlessdeclassified and released by positive act of theGovernment so that they may form part of thedisposable lands of the public domain, are not
capable of private appropriation. The rules onconfirmation of imperfect title do not apply.Forests, in the context of both the Public Land
Act and the Constitution classifying lands of thepublic domain into agricultural, forest or timber,
mineral lands and national parks, do notnecessarily refer to a large tract of wooded landor an expense covered by dense growth of treesor underbrush. (Republic vs. Naguiat, 479SCRA 585 (January 24, 2006)
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
35/66
FORESHORE LAND
Foreshore land has been defined as that which liesbetween the high and low watermarks, and that is
alternately wet and dry according to the flow of the
tide. In other words, it is that strip of land between
high and low water, the land left dry by the flux andre-flux of the tide. In the present case, although
corners 3 and 4 of lot 2833 have been shown to
adjoin the sea, they have not been proven to be
covered by water during high tide. Hence, the
property cannot be considered foreshore land.
[Republic vs. Lensico, 466 SCRA 361 (August 9,
2005)]
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
36/66
PROBATIVE VALUE OF A TAX
DECLARATION
Time and again, we have held that
although tax declarations or realty tax
payments are not conclusive evidence of
ownership, nevertheless, they are goodindicia of possession in the context of an
owner, for no one is in his right mind would
be paying taxes for a property that is not inhis actual or at least constructive
possession. (Ramos-Balallo vs. Ramos,
479 SCRA 533 (Jan. 23, 2006)
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
37/66
Quieting of Title
The settled rule is that an action for quieting of title isimprescriptible, as in the instant case, where the personseeking relief is in the possession of the disputedproperty. A person in actual possession of a piece of
land under claim of ownership may wait until hispossession is disturbed or his title is attacked beforetaking any step to vindicate his right, and that theundisturbed possession gives him the continuing right toseek the aid of the Court of Equity to ascertain and
determine the nature of the adverse claim of a third partyand its effect on his title.
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
38/66
Payment of taxes
Only a positive and categorical assertion of theirsupposed rights against petitioners would rule out theapplication of laches. It means taking the initiative byinstituting means to wrest possession. Respondents
payment of taxes alone, without possession, couldhardly be considered as an exercise of ownership. Whatstands out is their overwhelming passivity by allowingpetitioners to exercise acts of ownership and to enjoy thefruits of the litigated lot for 32 years without any
interference. (Rumarate vs. Hernandez, 487 SCRA 317[April 18, 2006])
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
39/66
Effective Possession
The statement of an immediate neighbor
of a disputed property as to who heobserved was in effective possession of
the same commands great weight and
respect. (Buduhan vs. Pakurao, 483
SCRA 116 (Feb. 22, 2006)]
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
40/66
JUDICIAL RECONSTITUTION OF LOST
OR DESTROYED ORIGINAL CERTIFICATE
OF TITLE
Jurisprudence dictates that the
jurisdictional requirements must becomplied with before the court can act on
the petition and grant the reconstitution
of title prayed for.
The petitioner to prove compliance with
the following requirements:
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
41/66
NOTICE OF PETITION
Publication
The notice of petition be published at theexpense of the petitioner twice in
successive issues in the Official Gazette,and posted in the main entrance of theprovincial building and the municipalbuilding of the municipality or city in whichthe land is located at least thirty (30) daysprior to the date of hearing
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
42/66
Jurisdictional Requirements
The notice must state the number of the lost or
destroyed certificate of title, if known, the name
of the registered owner, the name of the
occupants and persons in possession of theproperty, the owner of adjoining properties and
all other interested parties, the location, area,
and boundaries of the property ad the date on
which all persons having any interest thereinmust appear and file their claim or objection to
the petition.
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
43/66
Jurisdictional Requirements
The notice must state the number of the lost or
destroyed certificate of title, if known, the name
of the registered owner, the name of the
occupants and persons in possession of theproperty, the owner of adjoining properties and
all other interested parties, the location, area,
and boundaries of the property ad the date on
which all persons having any interest thereinmust appear and file their claim or objection to
the petition.
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
44/66
Jurisdictional Requirements
A copy of the notice must also be sent, by
registered mail or otherwise, at the
expense of the petitioner, to every person
named (i.e. the occupants or persons in
possession of the property, the owner of
adjoining properties and al other interested
parties whose address is known, at least30 days prior to the date of the hearing;
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
45/66
Jurisdictional Requirements
At the hearing, the petitioner must submit
proof of publication, posting and service of
notice as directed by the court.
The non-observance of the requirement
invalidates the reconstitution
proceedings in the trial court.
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
46/66
Jurisdictional Requirements
The purposes of the stringent and mandatorycharacter of the legal requirements ofpublication, posting and mailing are tosafeguard against spurious and unfoundedland ownership claim, to apprise all interestedparties of the existence of such action and givethem enough time to intervene in theproceeding. Substantial compliance with the
jurisdictional requirements is not enough.[Govt of the Phil. Vs. Aballe, 435 SCRA 308(Mar 24, 2006)]
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
47/66
Judicial Reconstitution
In case the reconstitution is to be made
exclusively from source enumerated in Section 2
(f), (any other doc) the petition shall beaccompanied by a plan and technical description
of the property duly approved by the General
Land Registration Office, or with a certified copy
of the description taken from the prior certificateof title covering the same property. [Cabello vs.
Republic, 467 SCRA 330 (Aug. 18, 2005)]
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
48/66
PETITION FOR ISSUANCE OF REPLACEMENT OF A LOST
OWNERS DUPLICATE CERTIFICATE OF TITLE AND
RECONSTITUTION OF LOST ORIGINAL CERTIFICATE OF
TITLE ON FILE WITH THE REGISTER OF DEEDS
The applicable law in applying for a replacementof and owners duplicate certificate of title is P.D.1529 (Section 109); R.A. No. 26 applies only incases of reconstitution of lost original certificateon file with the Register of Deeds.
When the reconstituted certificate is void, thecourt that rendered the decision has no
jurisdiction.
No valid transfer certificate of title can issuefrom a void T.C.T., unless an innocent purchaserfor value had intervened.
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
49/66
JUDICIAL RECONSTITUTION
As a rule, the annotation of an affidavit of loss
on a reconstituted certificate might be defective
and inferior to an already existing certificate of
title. The remedy to nullify an order granting
reconstitution is a petition for annulment under
Rule 47 of the Rules of Court. [Eastworld Motor
Industries Corp. vs. Skunac Corp., 478 SCRA420 (Dec. 16, 2005)]
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
50/66
the only issues to be resolved In a petition for issuance
of a second owners duplicate copy of the certificate of
title in replacement of a lost one
Whether o not the original owners
duplicate copy of the certificate of titlehad indeed been lost.
Whether the petitioner seeking the
issuance of a new owners duplicate title
is the registered owner or another
person-in-interest.
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
51/66
UNDER THE TORRENS SYSTEM, REGISTRATION IS
THE OPERATIVE ACTTHAT AFFECTS AND CONVEYS
THE LAND INSOFAR AS THIRD PERSONS ARE
CONCERNED Respondents contention that the
unregistered buyers rights over theproperty is superior to that of the judgment
obligor has not basis. The fact that thecontracts to buy and sell are unregisteredand the properties in question are still inthe name of the respondent underline the
fact that the sales are not absolute. [DSMConstruction and Development Corp. vs.CA, 478 SCRA 618 (Dec. 19, 2005)]
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
52/66
IMMUNITY OF A TORRENS TITLE FROM
COLLATERAL ATTACK
An action is deemed as an attack on a titlewhen the object of the action or proceeding is tonullify the title, and thus challenge the judgmentpursuant to which the title is decreed. A third
party complaint is in the nature of an originalcomplaint. The third party complaint for thecancellation of transfer certificate of title, being inthe nature of an original complaint forcancellation of transfer certificate of title, it
therefore constitutes a direct attack of suchTCT. [Sarmiento vs. CA, 479 SCRA 99, (Sept.16, 2005)]
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
53/66
IMMUNITY OF A TORRENS TITLE FROM
COLLATERAL ATTACK
An action is deemed as an attack on a title whenthe object of the action or proceeding is to nullifythe title, and thus challenge the judgmentpursuant to which the title is decreed.
A third party complaint is in the nature of anoriginal complaint. The third party complaint forthe cancellation of transfer certificate of title,being in the nature of an original complaint forcancellation of transfer certificate of title, ittherefore constitutes a direct attack of suchTCT. [Sarmiento vs. CA, 479 SCRA 99, (Sept.16, 2005)]
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
54/66
MIRROR PRINCIPLE OF THE
TORRENS SYSTEM
When dealing with land that is registered andtitled, buyers are not required by law to inquirefurther than what the Torrens certificateindicates on its face.
The presence of anything that excites orarouses suspicion should then prompt the buyerto look beyond the vendors certificate andinvestigate the title appearing on the face of that
certificate. [Domingo vs. Reed, 477 SCRA 227,(Dec. 9, 2005); Planters Development Bank vs.Garcia, 477 SCRA 185 (Dec. 9, 2005)]
MIRROR PRINCIPLE OF THE
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
55/66
MIRROR PRINCIPLE OF THE
TORRENS SYSTEM
However, thisruledoesnotapply
to banks. Banksarerequiredto
exercisemorecareandprudence
thanprivateindividualsindealing
evenwithregisteredproperties
fortheirbusinessisaffectedwith
publicinterest. (Keppel BankPhilippines, Inc. vs. Adao, 473 SCRA 372
(Oct. 19, 2005)]
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
56/66
ADMINISTRATIVE RECONSTITUTION OF
CERTIFICATE OF TITLE
The LRA properly ruled that thereconstitution officer should have confinedhimself to the owner's duplicate certificate
of title prior to the reconstitution. Section 3of Republic Act No. 26 clearly provides:Section 3: Transfer certificates of titlesshall be reconstituted from such of the
sources hereunder enumerated as may beavailable in the following order (a) theowner's duplicate of the certificate of title."
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
57/66
ADMINISTRATIVE RECONSTITUTION OF
CERTIFICATE OF TITLE
Since respondents' source of reconstitution isthe owner's duplicate certificate of title, there isno need for the reconstituting officer to requirethe submission of the plan, much less deny thepetition on the ground that the submitted planappears to be spurious. By enumerating thehierarchy of sources to be used for thereconstitution, it is the intent of the law to give
more weight and preference to the owner'sduplicate certificate of title over the otherenumerated sources."
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
58/66
ADMINISTRATIVE RECONSTITUTION OF
CERTIFICATE OF TITLE
"The factual finding of the LRA that respondents' title isauthentic, genuine, valid, and existing, while petitioners'title is sham and spurious, as affirmed by the twodivisions of the Court of Appeals, is conclusive before
this Court." "In reconstitution proceedings, the LRA is bound to
determine from the evidence submitted which betweenor among the titles is genuine and existing to enable it todecide whether to deny or approved the petition. Without
such authority, the LRA would be a mere robotic agencyclothed only with mechanical powers." [Manotok IV vs.Heirs of Homer Barque, 477 SCRA 339 (December 12,2005)]
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
59/66
DISSENTING OPINION REGISTERED BY
JUSTICE CARPIO
The majority opinion patently violates Section 48
ofP.D. No. 1529 which expressly states that a
Torrens title cannot be canceled except in a
direct proceeding in accordance with law. Onlythe proper trial court in an action directly
attacking the validity of a Torrens title can cancel
a Torrens title after trial on the merits.
The reconstitution of a certificate of title is farfrom being a ministerial act.
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
60/66
DISSENTING OPINION REGISTERED
BY JUSTICE CARPIO
In accordance with paragraph 8 of LRA Circular No. 13,the reconstituting officer or the register of deeds shallissue an order of reconstitution only after appropriateverification which means that he must be convinced that
the certificate of title is genuine and not spurious. Thus,the reconstituting officer must go beyond the owners co-owner's duplicate certificate of title to determine whetherthe title is genuine. The process of verification allows thereconstituting officer to counter check with other
government agencies to determine the validity of the titleto be reconstituted.
DISSENTING OPINION REGISTERED
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
61/66
DISSENTING OPINION REGISTERED
BY JUSTICE CARPIO
The LRA has jurisdiction to review on appealdecisions on petitions for reconstitution.However, it is not within its powers and functionsto declare a title void. The LRA, in its 24 June1998 Resolution, recognized that only theRegional Trial Court could declare a titlefraudulently reconstituted. Clearly, LRA's
jurisdiction to act on petitions for administrative
reconstitution does not include the power todeclare a title sham so spurious or to order thecancellation of a certificate title.
DISSENTING OPINION REGISTERED
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
62/66
DISSENTING OPINION REGISTERED
BY JUSTICE CARPIO
The LRA exceeded its jurisdiction when itdeclared that Manotok, et. al's title is shamand spurious. The LRA itself
acknowledged that only the RTC coulddeclare a title fraudulently reconstituted.By ruling on the validity of Manotok et al'stitle, the LRA assumed the function of the
RTC. The LRA also preempted whateverdecision the RTC may render on thematter.
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
63/66
DISSENTING OPINION REGISTERED
BY JUSTICE CARPIO
Respondent relies solely on its reconstituted titlewhich, by itself, does not determine or resolvethe ownership of land covered by the lost ordestroyed title. The reconstitution of a title issimply the re-issuance of a lost duplicatecertificate of title in its original form andcondition. It does not determine or resolve theownership of land covered by the lost or
destroyed title. A reconstituted title, like theoriginal certificate of title, by itself does not vestownership of the land or estate covered thereby.
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
64/66
DISSENTING OPINION REGISTERED
BY JUSTICE CARPIO
The determination of the authenticity of documents andveracity of the claims of both parties requires a trial onthe merits. The LRA exceeded its jurisdiction when itmade a conclusive finding on the validity of the titles ofthe parties. Such function falls under the exclusive
original jurisdiction of the RTC under Section 19 of BP.Blg. 129. The Court of Appeals should not have resolvedthe factual issues by adopting as its own the LRA'sfinding. The Court accords respect, if not finality, tofactual findings of an administrative body. However, thisrule does not apply when the administrative body has no
jurisdiction to make a conclusive factual findingparticularly when the findings might conflict with findingsof the tribunal or agency which has jurisdiction on thematter. [Monotok IV vs. Heirs of Homer Barque, Supra]
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
65/66
ADVERSE CLAIMS
The general rule is that a person dealing withregistered land is not required to go behind theregister to determine the condition of theproperty. However, such person is charged withnotice of the burden on the property which isnoted on the face of the register or certificate oftitle. A person who deals with registered land isbound by the liens and encumbrances including
adverse claim annotated therein. [NavotasIndustrial Corp. vs. Cruz, 469 SCRA 530(September 12, 2005)]
-
8/6/2019 Update on Land Registration Law
66/66
THANK YOU FOR LISTENING
HAVE A GOOD DAY
THANK YOU FOR LISTENING
HAVE A GOOD DAY