MALABANAN VS. REPUBLIC land.

- On 20 February 1998, Mario Malabanan filed - In this regard, Naguit ruled that any
an application for land registration covering possession of agricultural land
a parcel of land identified as Lot 9864-A, prior to its declaration as alienable
Cad-452-D, Silang Cadastre,2 situated in and disposable could be counted in
Barangay Tibig, Silang Cavite, and consisting the reckoning of the period of
of 71,324 square meters. Malabanan claimed possession to perfect title under
that he had purchased the property from the Public Land Act
Eduardo Velazco,3 and that he and his (Commonwealth Act No. 141) and
predecessors-in-interest had been in open, the Property Registration Decree.
notorious, and continuous adverse and
- They point out that the ruling in
peaceful possession of the land for more
Herbieto, to the effect that the
than thirty (30) years
declaration of the land subject of
the application for registration as
- To prove that the property was an alienable and alienable and disposable should also
disposable land of the public domain, Malabanan date back to June 12, 1945 or
presented during trial a certification dated June earlier, was a mere obiter dictum
11, 2001 issued by the Community
(A comment, suggestion, or
Environment and Natural Resources Office
observation made by a judge in an
(CENRO) of the Department of Environment
opinion that is not necessary to
and Natural Resources (DENR), which reads:
resolve the case,) considering that
the land registration proceedings
- RTC GRANTED MALABANAN’S APPLICATION
therein were in fact found and
declared void ab initio for lack of
- (OSG) appealed the judgment to the CA, arguing publication of the notice of initial
that Malabanan had failed to prove that the hearing.
property belonged to the alienable and disposable
land of the public domain, and that the RTC erred in
- petitioners also rely on the ruling in
finding that he had been in possession of the
Republic v. T.A.N. Properties,
property in the manner and for the length of time
Inc. to support their argument that
required by law for confirmation of imperfect title.
the property had been ipso jure
converted into private property
CA REVERSED RTC’S by reason of the open, continuous,
DECISION exclusive and notorious
possession by their predecessors-
in-interest of an alienable land of
Citing the ruling in Republic v. Herbieto the public domain for more than
30 years.
“under Section 14(1) of the Property Registration
Decree, any period of possession prior to the - According to them, what was
classification of the land as alienable and disposable essential was that the property had
was inconsequential and should be excluded from been "converted" into private
the computation of the period of possession. Noting property through prescription at
that the CENRO-DENR certification stated that the the time of the application without
property had been declared alienable and disposable regard to whether the property
only on March 15, 1982, Velazco’s possession prior sought to be registered was
to March 15, 1982 could not be tacked for purposes previously classified as agricultural
of computing Malabanan’s period of possession. land of the public domain.

- Due to Malabanan’s death, his heirs elevate

the case to the SC and contended that:
As earlier stated, we denied the petition for
- The ruling in Republic v. Court of review on certiorari because Malabanan
Appeals and Corazon failed to establish by sufficient evidence
Naguit5 (Naguit) remains the possession and occupation of the property
controlling doctrine especially if the on his part and on the part of his
property involved is agricultural predecessors-in interest since June 12,
1945, or earlier.
 Land is considered of public dominion if it either:

PETITIONERS MR REPUBLIC MOTION (a) is intended for public use; or

FOR PARTIAL
RECONSIDERATION (b) belongs to the State, without being for public
1.petitioners submit that - Republic contends that use, and is intended for some public service or for
the mere classification of the decision has the development of the national wealth.
the land as alienable or enlarged, by
disposable should be implication, the Land belonging to the State that is not of such
deemed sufficient to interpretation of Section character, or although of such character but no
convert it into 14(1) of the Property longer intended for public use or for public service
patrimonial property of Registration Decree forms part of the patrimonial property of the
the State. through judicial State.13 Land that is other than part of the
legislation. patrimonial property of the State, provinces, cities
2.Relying on the rulings and municipalities is of private ownership if it
in Spouses De Ocampo v. 2.It reiterates its view that belongs to a private individual.
Arlos,7 Menguito v. an applicant is entitled to
Republic8 and Republic v. registration only when the Pursuant to the Regalian Doctrine (Jura Regalia),
T.A.N. Properties, land subject of the a legal concept first introduced into the country
Inc.,9 they argue that the application had been from the West by Spain through the Laws of the
reclassification of the declared alienable and Indies and the Royal Cedulas,14 all lands of the
land as alienable or disposable since June 12, public domain belong to the State. 15 This
disposable opened it to 1945 or earlier. means that the State is the source of any
acquisitive prescription asserted right to ownership of land, and is
under the Civil Code; charged with the conservation of such
patrimony.16
3. that Malabanan had
purchased the property All lands not appearing to be clearly under private
from Eduardo Velazco ownership are presumed to belong to the
believing in good faith State. Also, public lands remain part of the
that Velazco and his inalienable land of the public domain unless the
predecessors-in-interest State is shown to have reclassified or
had been the real owners alienated them to private persons
of the land with the right
to validly transmit title  CLASSIFICATION OF LAND
and ownership thereof; ACCORDING TO ALIENABILITY
4. that consequently, the - lands of the public domain were classified
ten-year period into three, namely, agricultural, timber and
prescribed by Article mineral
1134 of the Civil Code, in
relation to Section 14(2)
of the Property
Registration Decree,
applied in their favor; - Section 10, Article XIV of the 1973
and that when Constitution:
Malabanan filed the
application for “classified lands of the public domain into
registration on seven, specifically, agricultural, industrial
February 20, 1998, he or commercial, residential, resettlement,
had already been in mineral, timber or forest, and grazing
possession of the land land, with the reservation that the law might
for almost 16 years provide other classifications.
reckoned from 1982, the
time when the land was The 1987 Constitution adopted the
declared alienable and classification under the 1935 Constitution
disposable by the State. into agricultural, forest or timber, and
mineral, but added national
RULING parks.20 Agricultural lands may be further
classified by law according to the uses to
 CLASSIFICATION OF LAND which they may be devoted.21 The
identification of lands according to their legal
ACCORDING TO OWNERSHIP
 classification is done exclusively by and President declares that the State no
through a positive act of the Executive longer intends the land to be used for
Department.22 public service or for the development of
national wealth, the Regalian Doctrine is
- Based on the foregoing, the Constitution applicable.
places a limit on the type of public land that
may be alienated. Under Section 2, Article  DISPOSITION OF ALIENABLE PUBLIC
XII of the 1987 Constitution, only LANDS
agricultural lands of the public domain
may be alienated; all other natural Sec. 11 of Public Land Act (C.A.No.141)
resources may not be.
1. FOR HOMESTEAD SETTLEMENT

2. BY SALE
- Alienable and disposable lands of the State
fall into two categories, to wit: 3. BY LEASE
(a) patrimonial lands of the State, or those
4. BY CONFIRMATION OF IMPERFECT OR
classified as lands of private ownership under
INCOMPLETE TITLES
Article 425 of the Civil Code,23 without limitation;
and
a. By judicial legalization
(b) lands of the public domain, or the public
lands as provided by the Constitution, but with b. By administrative legalization (free
the limitation that the lands must only be patent)
agricultural.
The core of the controversy herein lies in the
proper interpretation of Section 11(4), in relation
to Section 48(b) of the Public Land Act, which
- Consequently, lands classified as forest or expressly requires possession by a Filipino
timber, mineral, or national parks are not citizen of the land since June 12, 1945, or
susceptible of alienation or disposition earlier, viz:
unless they are reclassified as
agricultural. Section 48. The following-described citizens of
the Philippines, occupying lands of the public
- A positive act of the Government is domain or claiming to own any such lands or an
necessary to enable such interest therein, but whose titles have not been
reclassification,25 and the exclusive perfected or completed, may apply to the Court of
prerogative to classify public lands under First Instance of the province where the land is
existing laws is vested in the Executive located for confirmation of their claims and the
Department, not in the courts. issuance of a certificate of title thereafter, under
the Land Registration Act, to wit:

(b) Those who by themselves or through their

- If, however, public land will be classified as predecessors-in-interest have been in open,
neither agricultural, forest or timber, mineral continuous, exclusive, and notorious
or national park, or when public land is no possession and occupation of alienable and
longer intended for public service or for the disposable lands of the public domain, under
development of the national wealth, thereby a bona fide claim of acquisition of ownership,
effectively removing the land from the ambit since June 12, 1945, or earlier, immediately
of public dominion, a declaration of such preceding the filing of the applications for
conversion must be made in the form of confirmation of title, except when prevented
a law duly enacted by Congress or by a by war or force majeure. These shall be
Presidential proclamation in cases where conclusively presumed to have performed all the
the President is duly authorized by law to conditions essential to a Government grant and
that effect. shall be entitled to a certificate of title under the
provisions of this chapter. (Bold emphasis
supplied)

The use of the descriptive phrase "alienable and

- Thus, until the Executive Department disposable" further limits the coverage of
exercises its prerogative to classify or Section 48(b) to only the agricultural lands of
reclassify lands, or until Congress or the
 insisted that the full legislative intent be
the public domain as set forth in Article XII, respected.
Section 2 of the 1987 Constitution. Bearing in
mind such limitations under the Public Land Act,
the applicant must satisfy the following
requirements in order for his application to - We find, however, that the choice of June
come under Section 14(1) of the Property 12, 1945 as the reckoning point of the
Registration Decree,28 to wit: requisite possession and occupation was
the sole prerogative of Congress, the
1. The applicant, by himself or through his determination of which should best be
predecessor-in-interest, has been in left to the wisdom of the lawmakers.
possession and occupation of the Except that said date qualified the period
property subject of the application; of possession and occupation, no other
legislative intent appears to be
2. The possession and occupation must associated with the fixing of the date of
be open, continuous, exclusive, and June 12, 1945. Accordingly, the Court
notorious; should interpret only the plain and literal
meaning of the law as written by the
3. The possession and occupation must legislators.
be under a bona fide claim of acquisition
of ownership;

4. The possession and occupation must -

have taken place since June 12, 1945, or
earlier; and - Moreover, an examination of Section 48(b)
of the Public Land Act indicates that
5. The property subject of the application Congress prescribed no requirement that
must be an agricultural land of the public the land subject of the registration
domain should have been classified as
agricultural since June 12, 1945, or
- Section 48(b) of the Public Land Act, in earlier. As such, the applicant’s imperfect or
relation to Section 14(1) of the Property incomplete title is derived only from
Registration Decree, presupposes that the possession and occupation since June
land subject of the application for 12, 1945, or earlier. This means that the
registration must have been already character of the property subject of the
classified as agricultural land of the application as alienable and disposable
public domain in order for the provision agricultural land of the public domain
to apply. Thus, absent proof that the land is determines its eligibility for land registration,
already classified as agricultural land of the not the ownership or title over it.
public domain, the Regalian Doctrine
applies, and overcomes the presumption
that the land is alienable and disposable
as laid down in Section 48(b) of the Public - Alienable public land held by a possessor,
Land Act. either personally or through his
predecessors-in-interest, openly,
- However, emphasis is placed on the continuously and exclusively during the
requirement that the classification required prescribed statutory period is converted to
by Section 48(b) of the Public Land Act is private property by the mere lapse or
classification or reclassification of a completion of the period.29
public land as agricultural.

- The dissent stresses that the classification

or reclassification of the land as alienable - In fact, by virtue of this doctrine,
and disposable agricultural land should corporations may now acquire lands of the
likewise have been made on June 12, 1945 public domain for as long as the lands
or earlier, because any possession of the were already converted to private
land prior to such classification or ownership, by operation of law, as a
reclassification produced no legal effects. It result of satisfying the requisite period of
observes that the fixed date of June 12, possession prescribed by the Public Land
1945 could not be minimized or glossed Act.30 It is for this reason that the property
over by mere judicial interpretation or by subject of the application of Malabanan
judicial social policy concerns, and need not be classified as alienable and
 disposable agricultural land of the public or for the development of the national
domain for the entire duration of the wealth.
1âwphi1

requisite period of possession.

- the petitioners failed to present sufficient

evidence to establish that they and their
predecessors-in-interest had been in
possession of the land since June 12,
1945.

- Without satisfying the requisite character

and period of possession - possession and
occupation that is open, continuous,
exclusive, and notorious since June 12,
1945, or earlier - the land cannot be
considered ipso jure converted to private
property even upon the subsequent
declaration of it as alienable and
disposable.

- Prescription never began to run against the

State, such that the land has remained
ineligible for registration under Section
14(1) of the Property Registration Decree.

- land continues to be ineligible for land

registration under Section 14(2) of the
Property Registration Decree unless
Congress enacts a law or the President
issues a proclamation declaring the land
as no longer intended for public service