Scribd
Upload
67 views1 page

Republic V Ca

1. Respondent Morato obtained a free patent and title to a parcel of land but was prohibited from encumbering the land for 5 years. However, Morato entered into contracts of lease and mortgage within the 5-year period, violating the terms. 2. The land is considered foreshore land as it is submerged during high and low tides, making it part of the public domain. Previous cases established that registration of foreshore land to private individuals can be annulled and such land should remain in the public domain. 3. The Court affirmed the decision that the title should be cancelled and the land returned to the public domain since Morato encumbered the land in violation of the terms

Uploaded by

Rhodz Coyoca Embalsado
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
67 views1 page

Republic V Ca

1. Respondent Morato obtained a free patent and title to a parcel of land but was prohibited from encumbering the land for 5 years. However, Morato entered into contracts of lease and mortgage within the 5-year period, violating the terms. 2. The land is considered foreshore land as it is submerged during high and low tides, making it part of the public domain. Previous cases established that registration of foreshore land to private individuals can be annulled and such land should remain in the public domain. 3. The Court affirmed the decision that the title should be cancelled and the land returned to the public domain since Morato encumbered the land in violation of the terms

Uploaded by

Rhodz Coyoca Embalsado
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

REPUBLIC V.

CA

FACTS:

Respondent Morato filed a free patent application on a parcel of land, which was
approved and issued an original certificate of title. Both the free patent and title
specifically mandate that the land shall not be alienated nor encumbered within 5
years from the date of the issuance of the patent. The District Land Officer, acting
upon reports that Morato had encumbered the land and upon finding that the subject
land is submerged in water during high tide and low tide, filed a complaint for
cancellation of the title and reversion of the parcel of land to the public domain. RTC
dismissed the complaint. CA affirmed.

ISSUE:

1. Whether or not respondent violated the free patent condition prohibiting


encumbering the land within the 5-year period?

2. Whether or not the land is of public domain?

HELD

1. Yes. Public Land Act Sec. 18 provides that…lands acquired under free patent or
homestead provisions shall not be subject to encumbrance or alienation from the date
of approval of the application and for a term of 5 years from and after the date of
issuance of the patent or grant…The contracts of lease and mortgage executed by
Morato constitute an encumbrance as contemplated by section 18 of the Public Land
Act because such contracts impair the use of the property.

2. Yes. Based from the facts, the land is clearly foreshore as it is subject to the ebb
and flow of the tide. When the sea moved towards the estate and the tide invaded it,
the invaded property became foreshore land and passed to the realm of the public
domain. In Government v. Cabangis, the Court annulled the registration of land
subject of cadastral proceedings when the parcel subsequently became foreshore land.
In another case, the Court voided the registration decree of a trial court and held that
said court had no jurisdiction to award foreshore land to any private person or entity.
The subject land in this case, being foreshore land should therefor be returned to the
public domain.

You might also like