DOCTRINE IN OWNERSHIP OF LANDS

DOCTRINE IN OWNERSHIP OF LANDS

REGALIAN DOCTRINE

Director of Lands vs. IAC
219 SCRA 339

Under the Regalian doctrine all lands not otherwise appearing to be clearly within private ownership are presumed to belong to the state.

Oh cho vs. Director of Lands
75 Phil. 890 [1946]

The standing presumption is that all lands belong to the public domain of the State, unless acquired from the Government either by purchase or by grant, except lands possessed by an accupant and his predecessors since the time of immemorial, for such possession would justify the presumption that the land had never been part of the public domain, or that it had been private property even before the Spanish conquest.

Cruz vs. Secretary
G.R. No. 135385
Dec. 6, 2005

Nature of Possession by Natives

Ancestral lands and ancestral domains are not part of lands in public domain. The right of the native does not include natural resources, what is given is priority rights, not exclusive rights. State not preclude from into agreements with private entities.

De Ocampo vs. Arlos
G.R. No. 135527
October 19, 2000

Under the Public Land Act as amended, only titles to alienable and disposable lands of the public domain may be judicially confirmed. Unless a public land is reclassified and declared as such, occupation thereof in the concept of owner, no matter how long ago, cannot confer ownership or possessory rights.

Lee Hong Hok vs. David
150-C Phil. 542 [1972]

No public land can be acquired by private persons without any grant, express or implied from the government; it is indispensable that there be a showing of a title from the state.

Ramos-Bulalio vs. Ramos
Jan 23, 2006

Alienable land of public domain is limited to agricultural land. Homestead patent is one of the modes to acquire title to public lands suitable for agricultural purposes.

Jacinto vs. Director of Lands
49 Phil. 853

Friar lands under the Friar Lands Law (Act No. 1120). They are intended to be sold to actual settlers and occupants.

Cebu Oxygen and Acetylene Co. Inc. vs. Judge Bercilles
66 SCRA 481


The City Council of Cebu, through resulting in its transformation into a patrimonial property. The charter of City of Cebu (R.A. 3857) had authorized the City Council to close any road and street, etc. and allowing the City to use the withdrawn property from public use, for any other lawful purpose.

See: Article 422, 423, 424, 426 of the Civil Code

KRIVENKO DOCTRINE

Krivenko vs. Register of Deeds
44 Off. Gaz. 471

Aliens have no right to acquire any public or private land or private agricultural, commercial, or residential lands (except by hereditary succession).

EXCEPTION TO KREVINKO DOCTRINE

Ching Po vs. Court of Appeals
239 SCRA 341

Non-Filipinos cannot acquire or hold title to private land or to lands of the public domain, except by way of legal succession as general rule.

But what is the effect of a subsequent sale by the disqualified alien vendee to a qualified Filipino citizen?

If the land is invalidly transferred to an alien who subsequently becomes a citizen or transfers it to a citizen, the flaw in the original transaction is considered cured and the title of the transferee is rendered valid.

De Castro vs. Tan

A residential lot was sold to a Chinese. Upon his death, his widow and children executed an extrajudicial settlement, whereby said lot was allotted to one of his sons who became a naturalized Filipino. The Court did not allow the original vendor to have the sale annulled to recover the property, for the reason that the land has since become the property of a naturalized Filipino citizen who is constitutionally qualified to own land.

RIGHTS OF THE NATURAL-BORN FILIPINO WHO HAVE LOST THEIR
CITIZENSHIP TO ACQUIRE LANDS

Under R.A. 8179, former natural-born Filipino citizens may acquire land under this following:

1.) 5,000 sq. m. - Urban Lands
2.) 3,000 sq. m. - Agricultural Lands

For business or other purposes