You are on page 1of 34

Republic of the Philippines

SUPREME COURT
Manila
EN BANC
G.R. No. L-48321 August 31, 1946
OH CHO, applicant-appellee,
vs.
THE DRECTOR O! LANDS, oppositor-appellant.
Office of the Solicitor General Roman Ozaeta and Assistant
Solicitor General Rafael Amparo for appellant.
Vicente Constantino for appellee.
Ferrier, Gomez and Sotelo and J. T. Chuidian as amici curiae.
PADLLA, J."
This is an appeal from a ju!ment ecreein! the re!istration of a
resiential lot locate in the municipalit" of #uina"an!an, Province
of Ta"abas in the name of the applicant.
The opposition of the $irector of %ans is base on the applicant&s
lac' of title to the lot, an on his is(ualification, as alien, from
ac(uirin! lans of the public omain.
The applicant, )ho is an alien, an his preecessors in interest
have been in open, continuous, e*clusive an notorious possession
of the lot from +,,- to filin! of the application for re!istration on
.anuar" +/, +01-.
The 2olicitor #eneral reiterates the secon objection of the
opponent an as that the lo)er court, committe an error in not
eclarin! null an voi the sale of the lot to the applicant.
The applicant invo'es the %an Re!istration Act 3Act No. 1045, or
shoul it not be applicable to the case, then he )oul appl" for the
benefits of the Public %an Act 3C.A. No. +1+5.
The applicant faile to sho) that he has title to the lot that ma" be
confirme uner the %an Re!istration Act. 6e faile to sho) that
he or an" of his preecessors in interest ha ac(uire the lot from
the #overnment, either b" purchase or b" !rant, uner the la)s,
orers an ecrease promul!ate b" the 2panish #overnment in
the Philippines, or b" possessor" information uner the Mort!a!e
%a) 3section +0, Act 1045. All lans that )ere not ac(uire from the
#overnment, either b" purchase or b" !rant belo) to the public
omain. An e*ception to the rule )oul be an" lan that shoul
have been in the possession of an occupant an of his
preecessors in interest since time immemorial, for such
possession )oul justif" the presumption that the lan ha never
been part of the public omain or that it ha been a private propert"
even before the 2panish con(uest. 3Cari7o vs. nsular#overnment,
8+8 9.2., 110: ;< %a). E., ;01.5 The applicant oes not come
uner the e*ception, for the earliest possession of the lot b" his first
preecessors in interest be!un in +,,-.
As the applicant faile to sho) title to the lot, the ne*t (uestion is
)hether he is entitle to ecree or re!istration of the lot, because
he is alien is(ualifie from ac(uirin! lans of the public omain
3sections 1,, 10, C.A. No. +1+5.
As the applicant faile to sho) the title to the lot, an has invo'e
the provisions of the Public %an Act, it seems unnecessar" to
ma'e pronouncement in this case on the nature or classifications of
the sou!ht to be re!istere.
=t ma" be ar!ue that uner the provisions of the Public %an Act
the applicant immeiate preecessor in interest )oul have been
entitle to a ecree of re!istration of the lot ha the" applie for its
re!istration: an that he havin! purchase or ac(uire it, the ri!ht of
his immeiate preecessor in interest to a ecree of re!istration
must be eeme also to have been ac(uire b" him. The benefits
provie in the Public %an Act for applicant&s immeiate
preecessors in interest shoul compl" )ith the conition preceent
for the !rant of such benefits. The conition preceent is to appl"
for the re!istration of the lan of )hich the" ha been in possession
at least since .ul" 84, +,01. This the applicant&s immeiate
preecessors in interest faile to o. The" i not have an" veste
ri!ht in the lot amountin! to the title )hich )as transmissible to the
applicant. The onl" ri!ht, if it ma" thus be calle, is their possession
of the lot )hich, tac'e to that of their preecessors in interest, ma"
be availe of b" a (ualifie person to appl" for its re!istration but
not b" a person as the applicant )ho is is(ualifie.
=t is ur!e that the sale of the lot to the applicant shoul have been
eclare null an voi. =n a suit bet)een venor an venee for the
annulment of the sale, such pronouncement )oul be necessar", if
the court )ere of the opinion that it is voi. =t is not necessar" in this
case )here the venors o not even object to the application file
b" the venee.
Accorin!l", ju!ment is reverse an the application for
re!istration ismisse, )ithout costs.
!oran, C.J., Feria, "a#lo, $ilado and %en&zon, JJ., concur.
S#$%&%t# O$'('o(s
PER!ECTO, J., concurrin!>
?h Cho, a citi@en of the Republic of China, purchase in +0<, from
Antonio, %uis an Rafael %a!ameo a parcel of lan locate in the
resiential istrict of #uina"an!an, Ta"abas, )hich has been in the
continuous, public, an averse possession of their preecessors in
interest as far bac' as +,,-. on .une +/, +01-, ?h Cho applie for
the re!istration of sai parcel of lan. The $irector of %ans
oppose the application because, amon! other !rouns, the
Constitution prohibits aliens from ac(uirin! public or private
a!ricultural lans.
?ne of the )itnesses for the applicant, on cross-e*amination,
e*pressl" amitte that the lan in (uestion is susceptible of
cultivation an ma" be converte into an orchar or !aren.
Roolfo Ti(uia, inspector of the Bureau of %ans, testif"in! as a
)itness for the !overnment, state that the lan, not)ithstanin!
the use to )hich it is actuall" evote, is a!ricultural lan in
accorance )ith an opinion renere in +0<0 b" the 2ecretar" of
.ustice. The pertinent part of sai opinion, penne b" 2ecretar"
.ose Aba 2antos, later Chief .ustice of the 2upreme Court, is as
follo)s>
+. Ahether or not the Bpublic a!ricultural lanB in section +,
Article C==, of the Constitution ma" be interprete to inclue
resiential, commercial or inustrial lots for purposes of their
isposition.
+. 2ection +, Article C== of the Constitution classifies lans of
the public omain in the Philippines into a!ricultural, timber
an mineral. This is the basic classification aopte since the
enactment of the Act of Con!ress of .ul" +, +0-8, 'no)n as
the Philippine Bill. At the time of the aoption of the
Constitution of the Philippines, the term Ba!ricultural public
lansB ha, therefor, ac(uire a technical meanin! in our
public la)s. The 2upreme Court of the Philippines in the
leain! case of !apa vs. nsular Government, +- Phil., +/;,
hel that the phrase Ba!ricultural public lansB means those
public lans ac(uire from 2pain )hich are neither timber nor
mineral lans. This efinition has been follo)e b" our
2upreme Court in man" subse(uent cases. 3Montano vs. =ns.
#ov&t +8 Phil., ;/8, ;/1: 2antia!o vs. =ns. #ov&t., +8, Phil.,
;0<: =ba7es e Alecoa vs. =ns. #ov&t., +< Phil., +;0: =ns.
#ov&t., vs. Alecoa D Co., +0 Phil., ;-;, ;+4
Mercao vs.Collector of =nternal Revenue, <8 Phil., 8/+, 8/4:
Molina +/;, +,+: .ocson vs. $irector of Eorestr", <0 Phil., ;4-,
;41: an An'ron vs. #overnment of the Philippines, 1- Phil.,
+-, +1.5
Resiential, commercial or inustrial lots formin! part of the
public omain must have to be inclue in one or more of
these classes. Clearl", the" are neither timber nor mineral, of
necessit", therefore, the" must be classifie as a!ricultural.
Fie)e from the another an!le, it has been hel that in
eterminin! )hether lans are a!ricultural or not, the
character of the lans is the test 3?ell vs. $urant 48 N. A.,
;81: %erch vs. Missoula Bric' D Tile Co., +8< p., 8;5. =n other
)ors, it is the susceptibilit" of the lan to cultivation for
a!ricultural or not 32tate vs.2te)art, +0-, p.,+805.
.u!e Pero Ma!salin, of the Court Eirst =nstance of Ta"abas,
renere a ecision on Au!ust +;, +01-, overrulin! the opposition
)ithout must e*planation an ecreein! the re!istration pra"e for
the applicant. The $irector of %ans appeale from the ecision,
an the 2olicitor #eneral appearin! for appellant, maintains that the
applicant, not bein! a citi@en of the Philippines, is is(ualifie to bu"
or ac(uire the parcel of lan in (uestion an that the purchase
mae in (uestion an that the purchase mae in +0<, is null an
voi.
This is the (uestion s(uarel" reversin! to us for ecision. The
majorit", althou!h reversin! the lo)er court&s ecision an
ismissin! the application )ith )e a!ree, abstaine from the
eclarin! null an voi the purchase mae b" ?h Cho in +0<, as
pra"e for the appellant. Ae eem it necessar" to state our opinion
on the important (uestion raise, it must be s(uarel" ecie.
The 2olicitor #eneral ar!ue in his brief as follo)s>
=. The lo'er court erred decreein& the re&istration of the lot in
(uestion in favor of the applicant 'ho, accordin& to his o'n
voluntar) admission, is a citizen of the Chinese Repu#lic.
3a5 The phrase *a&ricultural land* as used in the Act of the
Con&ress of Jul) +, +,-., in the "u#lic /and Act includes
residential lots.
=n this jurisiction lans of public omain suitable for
resiential purposes are consiere a!ricultural lans uner
the Public %an %a). The phrase Ba!ricultural public lansB
has )ell settle juicial efinition. =t )as use for the first time
in the Act of Con!ress of .ul" +, +0-8, 'no)n as the Philippine
Bill. =ts means those public lans ac(uire form 2pain )hich
are neither mineral nor timber lans 3Mapa vs. =nsular
#overnment, +8 Phil., ;/8: =ba7es e Alecoa vs. =nsular
#overnment +< Phil., +;0: Ramos vs. $irector of %ans, <0
Phil., +/;: .ocson vs. $irector of Eorestr", <0 Phil., ;4-:
An'ron vs. #overnment of the Philippine =slans, 1- Phil., +-5.
=n the case of Mapa vs. =nsular #overnment, supra, the
2upreme Court, in efinin! the meanin! an scope of that
phrase from the conte*t of the sections +< an +; of that Act,
sai>
The phrase Ba!ricultural public lansB as efine b" the Act of
Con!ress of .ul" +, +0-8, )hich phrase is also to be foun in
several sections of the Public %an Act 3No. 0845 means those
public lans ac(uire from 2pain )hich are neither mineral
timber lans.
* * * * * * * * *
BAe hol that there is to be foun in the act of Con!ress
a efinition of the phrase Ba!ricultural public lans,B an
after careful consieration of the (uestion )e are
satisfie that onl" efinition )hich e*ists in sai Act is the
efinition aopte b" the court belo). 2ection +< sa"
that the #overnment shall Bma'e an rules an
re!ulations for the lease, sale, or other ispositions of
public lans other than timber or mineral lans,B To our
mins that is onl" efinition that can be sai to be !iven
a!ricultural lans. n other 'ords, that the phrase
*a&ricultural lands* as used in Act 0o. ,.1 means those
pu#lic lands ac(uired from Spain 'hich are not tim#er or
mineral lands. . . .B Mapa vs. =nsular #overnment, +-
Phil., +/;, +/,, +,8, emphasis ae.5
BThis phrase Ba!ricultural public lansB )as subse(uentl"
use in Act No. 084, )hich is the first public lan la) of the
Philippines. As therein use, the phrase )as e*pressl" !iven
b" the Philippine Commission the same meanin! intene for
it b" Con!ress as interprete in the case of !apa vs. nsular
Government,supra. This is a self-evient from a reain! of
section +, +-, <8, an 41 3subsection 4 of Act No. 0845.
Ahenever the phrase Ba!ricultural public lansB is use in an"
of sai sections, it is invariabl" b" the (ualification Bas efine
b" sai Act of Con!ress of .ul" first, nineteen hunre an
t)o.B
BMore speciall", in the case of #a2ez de Aldecoa vs. nsular
Government, supra, the 2upreme Court hel that a resiential
or builin! lot, formin! part of the public omain, is a!ricultural
lan, irrespective of the fact that it is not actuall" use for
purposes of a!riculture for the simple reason that it is
susceptible of cultivation an ma" be converte into a rural
estate, an because )hen a lan is not mineral or forestal in
its nature it must necessaril" be inclue )ithin the
classification of a a!ricultural lan. Because of the special
applicabilit" of the octrine lai o)n in sai case, )e (uote at
some len!th from the ecision therein renere>
BThe (uestion set up in these proceein!s b" virtue of the
appeal interpose b" counsel for .uan =ba7e@ e Alecoa, is
)hether or not a parcel of lan that is susceptible of bein!
cultivate, an ceasin! to be a!ricultural lan, )as converte
into a builin! lot, is subject to the le!al provisions in force
re!arin! #overnment public lans )hich ma" be alienate in
favor of private iniviuals or corporations. . . .
* * * * * * * * *
B6ence, an" parcel of lan or builin! lot is susceptible
of cultivation, an ma" converte into a fiel, an plante
)ith all 'ins of ve!etation : for this reason, )here lan
is not minin! or forestal in its nature, it must necessaril"
be inclue )ithin the classification of a!riculture lan,
not because it is actuall" use for the purposes of
a!riculture, but because it )as ori!inall" a!ricultural an
ma" a!ain become so uner other circumstances:
besies the Act of Con!ress 3of .ul" +, +0-85 contains
onl" three classifications, an ma'es no special
provision )ith respect to builin! lots or urban lan that
have cease to be a!ricultural lan. . . .
* * * * * * * * *
BErom the lan!ua!e of the fore!oin! provisions of the
la), it is euce that, )ith the e*ception of those
comprise )ithin the mineral an timber @one, all lans
o)ne b" 2tate or b" the soverei!n nation are public in
character, an per se alienable an, provie the" are
not estine to the use of public in !eneral or reserve b"
the #overnment in accorance )ith la), the" ma" be
ac(uire b" an" private or juriical person: and
considerin& their ori&in and primitive state and the
&eneral uses to 'hich the) are accorded, the) are called
a&ricultural lands, ur#ans lands and #uildin& lots #ein&
included in this classification for the purpose of
distin&uishin& rural and ur#an estates from mineral and
tim#er lands3 the transformation the) ma) have
under&one is no o#stacle to such classification as the
possessors thereof ma) a&ain convert them into rural
estates.* 3=ba7e@ e Alecoa vs. =nsular #overnment +<
Phil., +4+, +4< +41, +4;, +44: emphasis ae.5.
3#5 4nder the Constitution and Common'ealth Act
0o. +5+ 6"u#lic /and Act7, the phrase 6"u#lic /and
Act7, the phrase *pu#lic a&ricultural land* includes
lands of the pu#lic domain suita#le for residential
purposes.
B2ection +, Article C== of the Constitution, reas as follo)s>
BAll a&ricultural timber, an mineral lands of the pu#lic
domain )aters, minerals, coal, petroleum an other
mineral oils, all forces of potential ener!", an other
natural resources of the Philippines belon! to the 2tate,
an isposition, e*ploitation, evelopment, or utili@ation
shall be limite to citi@ens of the Philippines, or to
corporations or associations at least si*t" per centum of
the capital of )hich is o)ne b" such citi@ens, subject to
an" e*istin! ri!ht, !rant lease, or concession at the time
of the inau!uration of the #overnment establishe uner
this Constitution. Natural resources, )ith the e*ception
of pu#lic a!ricultural lan, shall not be alienate . . .B
3Emphasis ae.5.
B9ner the above-(uote provision, the isposition e*ploitation,
evelopment or utili@ation of the natural resources, includin&
a&ricultural lands of the pu#lic domain is limite to citi@ens of
the Philippines or to the corporations or associations therein
mentione. =t also clearl" appears from sai provision
that natural resources, 'ith the e8ception of pu#lic a&ricultural
land, are not su#9ect to alienation.
B?n November /, +0<4, or more than one "ear after the
aoption of the Constitution, Common)ealth Act No. +1+,
'no)n as the Public %an Act, )as approve. 9ner this Act
the lans of the public have been classifie into three
ivisions> 3a5 alienable or isposable, 3#5 timber, an 3c5
mineral lans. The lans esi!nate alienable or isposable
correspon to lans esi!nate in the Constitution as public
a!ricultural lans, because uner section +, Article C==, public
a!ricultural lans are the onl" natural resources of the countr"
)hich are the onl" natural resources of the countr" )hich are
subject to alienation or eposition.
B2ection 0 of Common)ealth Act No. +1+ provie that the
alienable or isposable public lans shall be classifie,
accorin! to use or purposes to )hich the" are estine, into
a a!ricultural, resiential, commercial, inustrial, etc., lans. At
first blush it )oul seem that uner this classification
resiential lan is ifferent from a!ricultural lan. The
ifference ho)ever, is more apparent than real. &Public
a!ricultural lan & as that phrase is use in the Constitution
means alienable lans of the public omain an therefore this
phrase is e(uivalent to the lans classifie b" the
Common)ealth Act No. +1+ as alienable or isposable. The
classification provie in section 0 is onl" for purposes
aministration an isposition, accorin! to the purposes to
)hich sai lans are especiall" aopte. But not)ithstanin!
this of all sai lans are essentiall" a!ricultural public lans
because onl" a!ricultural public lans are subject to alienation
or isposition uner section +, Article C== of the Constitution. A
contrar" vie) )oul necessaril" create a conflict bet)een
Common)ealth Act No. +1+ an section + of Article C== of the
Constitution, an such conflict shoul be avoie , if possible,
an sai Act construe in the li!ht of the funamental
provisions of the Constitution an in entire harmon" there)ith.
BAnother universal principles applie in consierin!
constitutional (uestion is, that an Act )ill be so
construe, if possible, as to avoi conflict )ith the
Constitution, althou!h such a construction ma" not be
the most obvious or natural one. BThe Court ma" resort
to an implication to sustain a statute, but not to estro"
it.B But the courts cannot !o be"on the province of
le!itimate construction, in orer to save a statute: an
)here the meanin! is plain, )ors cannot to be rea into
it or out of it for that purpose.B 3 + 2utherlan, 2tatutor"
Construction, pp. +<;, +<4.5
B=n vie) of the fact that more than one than one "ear after the
aoption of the Constitution the National Assembl" revise the
Public %an %a) an passe Common)ealth Act No. +1+,
)hich a compilation of the la)s relative to the lans of the
public omain an the amenments thereto, form to the
Constitution.
B:here the le&islature has revised a statute after a
Constitution has #een adopted, such a revision is to #e
re&arded as a le&islative construction that the statute so
revised conforms to the Constitution.B 3;0 C..., ++-8:
emphasis ae.5
BB" the )a" of illustration, let us suppose that a piece or tract
of public lan has been classifie pursuant to section 0 of
Common)ealth Act No. +1+ as resiential lan. =f, b" reason
of this classification, it is maintaine that sai lan has cease
to be a!ricultural public lan, it )ill no lon!er be subject to
alienation or isposition b" reason of the constitutional
provision that onl" a!ricultural lans are alienable: an "et
such resiential lot is alienable uner section ;,, ;0, an 4- of
Common)ealth Act No. +1+ to citi@ens of the Philippines or to
corporations or associations mentione in section +, Article C==
of the Constitution. Therefore, the classification of public
a!ricultural lans into various subivisions is onl" for purposes
of aministration, alienation or isposition, but it oes not
estro" the inherent nature of all such lans as a public
a!ricultural lans.
B3c5 Judicial interpretation of dou#tful clause or phrase use in
the la', controllin&.
BThe juicial interpretation !iven to the phrase Bpublic
a!ricultural lanB is a sufficient authorit" for !ivin! the same
interpretation to the phrase as use in subse(uent le!islation,
an this is especiall" so in vie) of the len!th of time urin!
)hich this interpretation has been maintaine b" the courts.
?n this point 2utherlan has the follo)in! to sa">
BAhen a juicial interpretation has once been put upon a
clause, e*presse in a va!ue manner b" the le!islature,
an ifficult to be unerstoo, that ou!ht of itself to be
sufficient authorit" for aoptin! the same construction.
Buller .., sai> BAe fin solemn etermination of these
oubtful e*pressions in the statute, an as that no) put
another construction has since prevaile, there is no
reason )h" )e shoul no) put another construction of
the act on account of an" suppose chan!e of
convenience.B This rule of construction )ill hol !oo
even if the court be opinion that the practical erroneous:
so that if the matter )ere res inte&ra the court )oul
aopt a ifferent construction. %or Cairns sai> B= thin'
that )ith re!ar to statutes ... it is esirable not so much
that the principle of the ecision shoul be capable at all
times of justification, as that the la) shoul be settle,
an shoul, )hen once settle, be maintaine )ithout
an" an!er of vacillation or uncertaint". B.uicial usa!e
an practice )ill have )ei!ht, an )hen continue for a
lon! time )ill be sustaine thou!h carrie be"on the
pair purport of the statute.B3== %e)is& 2utherlan 2tatutor"
Construction, pp. ,08, ,0<.5 .
BAn important consieration affectin! the )ei!ht of
contemporar" juicial construction is the len!th of time it
has continue. =t is aopte, an erives !reat force
from bein! aopte, soon after the enactment of the la).
=t ma" be, an is presume, that the le!islative sense of
its polic", an of its true scope an meanin!, permeates
the juiciar" an controls its e*position. 6avin! receive
at that time a construction )hich is for the time settle,
accepte, an thereafter follo)e or acte upon, it has
the sanction of the of the authorit" appointe to e*poun
the la), just an correct conclusions, )hen reache,
the" are, moreover, )ithin the stron!est reasons on
)hich foune the ma*im of stare decisis. 2uch a
construction is public !iven, an the subse(uent silence
of the le!islature is stron! evience of ac(uiescence,
thou!h not conclusive. . . . 3== %e)is 2utherlan 2tatutor"
Construction, pp. ,01, ,0;.5
BEurthermore, )hen the phrase Bpublic a!ricultural lanB )as
use in section + of Article C== of the Constitution, it is
presume that it )as so use )ith the same juicial meanin!
therefor !iven to it an therefor the meanin! of the phrase, as
use in the Constitution, inclues resiential lans an
another lans of the public omain, but e*clues mineral an
timber lans.
BAdoption of provisions previousl) construed G ad.
"revious construction #) Courts. G Ahere a statute that
has been construe b" the courts of the last resort has
been reenacte in same, or substantiall" the same,
terms, the le!islature is presume to have been familiar
)ith its construction, an to have aopte it is part of the
la), unless a contrar" intent clearl" appears, or a
ifferent construction is e*pressl" provie for: an the
same rule applies in the construction of a statute
enacte after a similar or co!nate statute has been
juiciall" construe. 2o )here )ors or phrases
emplo"e in a ne) statute have been construe b" the
court to have been use in a particular sense in a
previous statute on the same subject, or one analo!ous
to it, the" are presume, in the a absence of clearl"
e*presse intent to the contrar", to be use in the same
sense in the statute as in the previous statute.B 3;0 C...,
+-4+-+-4<.5.
B/e&islative adoption of 9udicial construction. G =n the
aoption of the coe, the le!islature is presume to have
'no)n the juicial construction )hich have been place
on the former statutes: an therefore the reenactment in
the coe or !eneral revision of provisions substantiall"
the same as those containe in the former statutes is a
le!islative aoption of their 'no)n juicial constructions,
unless a contrar" intent is clearl" manifest. 2o the fact
that the revisers eliminate statutor" lan!ua!e after it
ha been juiciall" construe sho)s that the" ha such
construction in vie).B 3;0 C. .., ++-8.5
B==. The lo'er court erred in not declarin& null and void the
sale of said land to the appellant 6appellee7.
B#rantin! that the lan in (uestion has cease to be a part of
the lans of the public omain b" reason of the lon!
continuous,, public averse possession of the applicant&s
preecessors in interest, an that the latter ha performe all
the conitions essential to a #overnment !rant an )ere
entitle to a certificate of title uner section 1,, subsection 3#5,
of Common)ealth Act No. +1+, still the sale of sai lan of
$ecember ,, +0<,, to the applicant as evience b" E*hibits
B an C, )as null an voi for bein! contrar" to section ;,
Article C== of the Constitution, )hich reas as follo)s>
B2ave in cases of hereitar" succession, no private
a&ricultural land shall #e transferred or assi&nede*cept
to iniviuals, corporations, or associations (ualifie to
ac(uire or hol lans of the public omain of the
Philippines.B
BThe applicant, bein! a Chinese citi@en, is is(ualifie to
ac(uire or hol lans of the public omain 3section +, Article
C== of the Constitution: section +8, 88, 8<, <<, 11, 1,,
Common)ealth Act No. +1+ 5, an conse(uentl" also
is(ualifie to bu" an ac(uire private a!riculture lan.
B=n vie) of the )ell settle juicial meanin! of the phrase
public a!ricultural lan,& as hereinbefore emonstrate, the
phrase &private a!ricultural lan,& as use in the above (uote
provision, can onl" mean lan of private o)nership, )hether
a!ricultural, resiential, commercial or inustrial. An this
necessaril" so, because the phrase &a!ricultural lan use in
the Constitution an in the Public %an %a) must be !iven the
same uniform meanin! to )it, an" lan of the public omain or
an" lan of private o)nership, )hich is neither mineral or
forestal.
BA )or or phrase repeate in a statute )ill bear the
same meanin! throu!hout the statute, unless a ifferent
intention appears. ... Ahere )ors have bein! lon! use
in a technical sense an have been juiciall" construe
to have a certain meanin!, an have been aopte b"
the le!islature as havin! a certain meanin! prior to a
particular statute in )hich the" are use, the rule of
construction re(uires that the )ors use in such statute
shoul be construe accorin! to the sense ma" var"
from the strict literal meanin! of the )ors.B 3==
2utherlan, 2tatutor" Construction., p. /;,.5 .
BThis interpretation is in harmon" )ith the nationalistic polic",
spirit an purpose of our Constitution an la)s, to )it, Hto
conserve an evelop the patrimon" of the nation,& as
solemnl" enunciate in the preamble to the Constitution.
BA narro) an literal interpretation of the phrase &private
a!riculture lan& )oul impair an efeat the nationalistic aim
an !eneral polic" of our la)s an )oul allo) a !raual,
stea", an unlimite accumulation in alien hans of a
substantial portion of our patrimonial estates, to the etriment
of our national soliarit", stabilit", an inepenence. Nothin!
coul prevent the ac(uisition of a !reat portion or the )hole of
a cit" b" subjects of a forei!n po)er. An "et a cit" or urban
area is more strate!ical than a farm or rural lan.
BThe mere literal construction of section in a statute
ou!ht not to prevail if it is oppose to the intention of the
le!islature apparent b" the statute: an if the )ors are
sufficientl" fle*ible to amit of some other construction it
is to be aopte to effectuate that intention. The intent
prevails over the letter, an the letter )ill, if possible be
so rea as to conform to the spirit of the act. Ahile the
intention of the le!islature must be ascertaine from the
)ors use to e*press it, the manifest reason an the
obvious purpose of the la) shoul not be sacrifice to a
liberal interpretation of such )ors.B 3== 2utherlan, 2tat.
Construction, pp. /8+, /88.5
BAe conclue, therefore, that the resiential lot )hich the
applicant see's to re!ister in his name falls )ithin the meanin!
of private a!ricultural lan as this phrase is use in our
Constitution an, conse(uentl", is not subject to ac(uisition b"
forei!ners e*cept b" hereitar" succession.B
The ar!ument hol )ater. =t e*presses a correct interpretation of
the Constitution an the real intent of the Constitutional Convention.
?ne of our fello) members therein, $ele!ate Montilla, sai>
The constitutional precepts that = believe )ill ultimatel" lea us
to our esire !oal are: 3+5 the complete nationali@ation of our
lans an natural resources: 385 the nationali@ation of our
commerce an inustr" compatible )ith !oo international
practices. Aith the complete nationali@ation of our lans an
natural resources it is to be unerstoo that our #o-!iven
birthri!ht shoul be one hunre per cent in Eilipino hans. ...
%ans an natural resources are immovable an as such can
be compare to the vital or!ans of a person&s bo", the lac' of
possession of )hich ma" cause instant eath or the
shortenin! of life. =f )e o not completel" nationali@e these
t)o of our most important belon!in!s, = am afrai that the time
)ill come )hen )e shall be sorr" for the time )e )ere born.
?ur inepenence )ill be just a moc'er", for )hat 'in of
inepenence are )e !oin! to have if a part of our countr" is
not in our hans but in those of forei!nerI 38 Arue!o, The
Eramin! of the Philippine Constitution, p. ;08.5.
Erom the same boo' of $ele!ate Arue!o, )e (uote>
The nationali@ation of the natural resources of the countr" )as
intene 3+5 to insure their conservation for Eilipino posterit":
385 to serve as an instrument of national efense, helpin!
prevent the e*tension into the countr" of forei!n control
throu!h peaceful economic penetration: an 3<5 to prevent
ma'in! the Philippines a source of international conflict )ith
the conse(uent an!er to its internal securit" an
inepenence.
* * * * * * * * *
. . . =n the preface to its report, the committee on
nationali@ation an preservation of lans an other natural
resources sai:
B=nternational complications have often resulte from the
e*istence of alien o)nership of lan an natural resources in a
)ea' countr". Because of this an!er, it is best that aliens
shoul be restricte in the ac(uisition of lan an other natural
resources. An e*ample is affore b" the case of Te*as. This
state )as ori!inall" province of Me*ico. =n orer to secure its
rapi settlements an evelopment, the Me*ican !overnment
offere free lan to settlers in Te*as. Americans respone
more rapil" than the Me*icans, an soon the" or!ani@e a
revolt a!ainst Me*ican rule, an then secure anne*ation to
the 9nite 2tates. A ne) increase of alien lanholin! in
Me*ico has brou!ht about the esire a prevent a repetition of
the Te*as affair. Accorin!l" the Me*ican constitution of +0+/
contains serious limitation on the ri!ht of aliens to hol lans
an mines in Me*ico. The Eilipinos shoul profit from this
e*ample.B
* * * * * * * * *
=t )as primaril" for these reasons that the Convention
approve reail" the propose principle of prohibitin! aliens to
ac(uire, e*ploit, evelop, or utili@e a!ricultural, timber, an
mineral lans of the public omain, )aters minerals, coal,
petroleum, an other mineral oils, all forces of potential
ener!", an other natural resources of the Philippines. Eor the
same reasons the Convention approve e(uall" reail" the
propose principle of prohibitin! the transfer of assi!nment to
aliens of private a!ricultural lan, save in the case of
hereitar" succession. 38 Arue!o, Eramin! of the Philippine
Constitution, pp. 4-1, 4-;, 4-4.5.
All the fore!oin! sho) )h" )e, havin! been a member of the
Constitutional Convention, a!ree )ith 2olicitor #eneral&s position
an concur in the result in this case, althou!h )e )oul !o as far as
the outri!ht pronouncement that the purchase mae b" appelle is
null an voi.
)RONES, M., *o( +u'#( #st%( *o(,o&-#s PARAS .
TUASON, MM., isiente>
El solicitante en este e*peiente pie el re!istro el solar e (ue se
trata como terreno de propiedad privada, " tan solo con caracter
supletorio invoca las isposiciones el capitulo ,.J e la %e" No.
8,/1 sobre terrenos publicos 3Pie@a e E*cepciones, pa!. <.5
Por su parte el $irector e Terrenos se opone a la solicitu en
virtu e tres funamentos, a saber> 3+5 por(ue ni el solicitante ni
sus preecesores en interes pueen emonstrar titulo suficiente
sobre icha parcela e terreno, no habienose a(uirio la misma
ni por titulo e composicion con el Estao bajo la soberania e
Espa7a, ni por titulo e informacion posesoria bajo el Real $ecreto
e +< e Eebrero e +,01: 385 por(ue el citao solar es una porcion
e los terrenos e ominio publico pertenecientes al
Common)ealth e Eilipinas: 3<5 por(ue sieno el solicitante un
ciuaano chino, no esta capacitao bajo las isposiciones e la
Constitucion e Eilipinas para a(uirir terrenos e caracter publico
o privao 3idem, pa!s. ; " 45.
Tanto el solicitante como el $irector e Terrenos practicaron sus
pruebas ante un arbitro nombrao por el .u@!ao e Primera
=nstancia e Ta"abas. Con vista e tales pruebas, el .ue@
Ma!salin, el referio .u@!ao, icto sentencia a favor el
solicitante, e la cual transcribimos las si!uientes porciones
pertinentes>
%a representacion el opositor $irector e Terrenos trata e
probar por meio el testimonio el =nspector el Buro e
Terrenos (ue, el terreno objeto e la solicitu es parte el
ominio publico " aemas el solicitante es ciuaano chino,
pero icho testi!o afirmo (ue el terreno objeto e la presente
solicitu es un solar situao entro e la poblacion el
municipio e #uina"an!a, Ta"abas, " en el mismo e*iste una
casa e materiales fuertes " carecieno e merito esta
oposicion ebe esestimarse la misma.
Por tanto, previa esestimacion e la oposicion el $irector
e Terrenos, se ajuica con sus mejoras la parcela e
terreno objeto e la presente solicitu escrito en el plano
Psu-+-0++/, a favor el solicitante ?h Cho, ciuaano chino,
ma"or e ea, casao con Kee 2hi, " resiente en el
municipio e #uina"an!a, Ta"abas, =slas Eilipinas. 3$ecision,
pa!. ,, Recor on Appeal.5
$e lo transcrito se infiere e una manera for@osa lo si!uiente> 3a5
(ue el tribunal inferior esestimo e plano la oposicion el $irector
e Terrenos funaa en el supuesto e (ue el solar cuestionao es
parte del dominio pu#lico: 3#5 (ue el mismo tribunal recha@o el otro
funamento e la oposicion, esto es, (ue sieno el solicitante
ciuaano chino esta incapacitao bajo nuestra Constitucion para
a(uirir terreno, "a publico, "a privao, aun(ue sea un solar e
caracter urbano: 3c5 (ue, se!un el fallo el Juez a (uo, no sieno
publico el terreno cuestionao, es necesariamente terreno privado.
El $irector e Terrenos, no estano conforme con la sentencia,
apelo e ella para ante el Tribunal e Apelacion " hace en su
ale!ato os se7alamientos e error, nin!uno e los cuales pone en
tela e juicio la calia e privao el terreno cuestionao. El
apelante no plantea nin!una cuestion e hecho: plantea solo una
cuestion e erecho. Por eso (ue en la reconstitucion e este
e*peiente G el ori!inal se (uemo urante la !uerra G no ha
habio necesia e incluir las notas ta(ui!raficas ni las pruebas
ocumentales, " e hecho hemos consierao " eciio este
asunto sin ichas notas " pruebas. El abo!ao Constantino, el
apelao, en la auiencia para la reconstitucion e los autos, hi@o
esta manifestacion: B=n vie) also of the fact that the (uestions
involve here are onl" (uestions of la), this representation )aives
the ri!ht to present the evience presente in the trial court . . . .B
Por su parte, el Procuraor #eneral, al e*planar el caso en
representacion el apelante $irector e Terrenos, principia su
ale!ato con la si!uiente eclaracion>
This appeal is a test case. There are no) several cases of
e*actl" the same nature penin! in the trial courts.
Ahether or not an alien can ac(uire a resiential lot an
re!ister it in his name is the onl) (uestion raise in this appeal
from a ecision of the Court of Eirst =nstance of Ta"abas
)hich sustaine the affirmance an ecree the re!istration of
the sai propert" in favor of the applicant )ho, b" his o)n
voluntar" amission, is a citi@en of the Chinese Republic. This
(uestion is raise in connection )ith the constitutional
provision that no private a!ricultural lan shall be transferre
or assi!ne to forei!ners e*cept in cases of hereitar"
succession. 3Pa!s. +, 8, ale!ato el apelante.5
6abienose apelao e la sentencia para ante el Tribunal e
Apelacion Lpor (ue se elevo este asunto al Tribunal 2upremo, ante
el cual "a estaba peniente aun antes e la !uerra, " sin resolverse
urante la ocupacion japonesaI %a ra@on no consta
especificamente en autos, pero como no se trata e una al@aa el
Tribunal e Apelacaion a la Corte 2uprema, la unica e*plicacion
(ue cabe es (ue a(uel, la percatarse e (ue en la apelacion no se
planteaba mas (ue una cuestion e erecho, oreno, como era e
ri!or, el traslao el asunto a esta Corte por ser e su jurisiccion "
competencia.
6emos estimao necesario sentar las anteriores premisas por(ue
las mismas sirven e base a la ar!umentacion (ue a se!uia
vamos a esenvolver para funamentar esta isiencia.
=. $e lo e*puesto resulta eviente (ue el $irector e Terrenos se ha
opuesto al re!istro solicitao, entre otros funamentos, por(ue el
terreno es pu#lico: (ue el tribunal inferior ha esestimao este
funamento por Bcarecer e merito,B fallano (ue el terreno
es privado: (ue el $irector e Terrenos, en su apelacion ante
nosotros, no cuestiona esta conclusion el .ue@ a (uo, sino (ue
ano por amitio (ue el terreno es e propiea privaa, ar!u"e,
sin embar!o, (ue bajo la seccion ;, Articulo C== e la Constitucion
e Eilipinas el solicitante, por ser e*tranjero, no puee a(uirir
terreno a!ricula privao, estano incluio en este concepto un solar
urbano como el e (ue se trata en este e*peiente. Planteao el
asunto en tales terminos Lpuee esta Corte consierar " resolver
un punto no contenio entre las partes G un punto (ue esta firme
" efinitivamente resuelto " no es objeto e apelacionI $icho e
otra manera> Lpuee esta Corte, como hace la ma"oria en su
opinion, revocar una conclusion el tribunal-inferior (ue no esta
iscutia en el ale!ato el apelanteI LPoemos, en buena le"
procesal, eclarar publico el terreno en cuestion por nuestra propia
iniciativa, cuano el mismo Procuraor #eneral, (ue representa al
Estao, amite en su ale!ato el caracter privao el solar, " solo
suscita una cuestion, e erecho, a saber> (ue bajo nuestra
Constitucion nin!un acto traslativo e ominio a favor e un
e*tranjero es valio, asi se trata e preio urbano, por(ue la frase
Bterreno a!ricola privaoB (e se contiene en la Constitucion abarca
no solo las fincas rusticas sino tambien las urbanasI K, sobre too,
Lpoemos, en e(uia " justicia, consierar " revisar un punto (ue
no solo no esta iscutio por las partes, pues lo an por amitio "
establecio, sino (ue es e erecho " e hecho al propio tiempoI
LMue base tenemos para hacerlo cuano no tenemos elante las
pruebas tanto testificales como ocumentalesI Nuestra
contestacion es, en absoluto, ne!ativo.
%a competencia e esta Corte para revisar las sentencias e los
tribunales inferiores, e las cuales se ha interpuesto apelacion, se
basa en el principio e (ue icha competencia, en su ejercicio,
tiene (ue limitarse a las cuestiones controvertias, " esto se
etermina meiante el se7alamiento e errores (ue el apelante
hace en su ale!ato. El articulo +0 el anti!uo re!lamento e los
proceimientos en este Tribunal 2upremo ecia en su primer
parrafo lo si!uiente>
Ane*o al ale!ato el apelante " en plie!o separao, se
acompa7ara una relacion e los errores e erecho (ue han
e iscutirse. %a especificacion e caa uno e estos errores
se hara por parrafos separaos, con toa claria, e una
manera concisa, " sin incurrir en repeticiones, " seran
numeraos por oren correlativo.
El articulo 8- el mismo re!lamento preceptuaba>
Nin!un error e erecho fuera el relativo a competencia
sobre la materia e un liti!io, sera tomao en consieracion
como no se halle puntuali@ao en la relacion e los errores "
presentao como uno e los funamentos en el ale!ato.
=nterpretano estas isposiciones re!lamentarias, la Corte hi@o en
el asunto e 2antia!o contra Feli8 381 .ur. Eil., <0+5, los si!uientes
pronunciamientos octrinales>
+. APE%AC=?N: EEECT? $E $E.AR $E PRE2ENTAR
RE%AC=?N $E ERR?RE2: RE#%A E=RMEMENTE
E2TAB%EC=$A. G Es re!la establecia por la jurispruencia
e los Tribunales e estas =slas, en virtu e repetias "
uniformes sentencias e esta Corte, la e (ue si en una
apelacione el recurrente ejare e hacer se7alamiento e los
errores en (ue ha"a incurrio el Tribunal inferior, " se limitare
a iscutir cuestiones e hecho en !eneral, no es posible (ue
este Tribunal puea consierar ni revisar la resolucion
aversa a la parte apelante, por el motivo e haberse ictao
contra la le" " el peso e las pruebas, sino (ue es necesario
(ue se se7ale " se especifi(ue el error o errores (ue
eterminaron la ecision apelaa (ue el apelante califica e
ile!al e injusta.
8. d.3 d.: Re!la =!ual a la Aoptaa por los Tribunales e los
Estaos 9nios. G =!ual octrina le!al se halla en
observancia en los Tribunales e los Estaos 9nios e
America el Norte, toa ve@ (ue una manifestacion !eneral e
(ue el .u@!ao erro en ictar sentencia a favor e una e las
partes, no es suficiente como base para (ue la Corte puea
revisar la sentencia apelaa, pues (ue a no ser (ue la
apreciacion hecha por un .ue@ e los hechos ale!aos "
probaos en juicio sea manifestamente contraria al resultao
" peso e las pruebas, el Tribunal e al@aa suela aceptar el
juicio " criterio el .ue@ sobre las cuestiones e hecho, " no
procee revocar sin motivo funao la sentencia apelaa.
3Enri(ue@ contraEnri(ue@, , .ur. Eil., ;/1: Capellania e
Tambobon! contra Antonio, , .ur. Eil., 40<: Paterno contra la
Ciua e Manila, +/ .ur. Eil., 845B 32antia!o contra Eeli*, 81
.ur. Eil., <0+.5
Esta octrina se reitero posteriormente en los si!uientes asuntos>
Tan Me Nio contra Aministraor e Auanas, <1 .ur. Eil., 00;,
004: 6ernae@ contra Montelibano, <1 .ur. Eil., +-++.
%a re!la ;<, seccion 4, el actual re!lamento e los tribunales,
ispone lo si!uiente>
2EC. ;. ;uestions that ma) #e decided. G No error )hich
oes not affect the jurisiction over the subject matter )ill be
consiere unless stated in the assi&nment of errors and
properl) ar&ued in the #rief, save as the court, at its option,
ma" notice plain errors not specifie, an also clerical errors.
No se ira (ue la cuestion e si el terreno cuestionao es publico o
privao, consieraa " resuelta por la ma"oria en su ecision sin
previo se2alamiento de error ni apropiada ar&umentacion en el
ale&ato del "rocurador General, esta comprenia entre las
salveaes e (ue habla la re!la arriba transcrita por(ue ni afecta
a la jurisiccion sobre la materia el liti!io, ni es un Bplain error,B o
Bclerical error.B
2e notara (ue en el anti!uo re!lamento no habia eso e Bplain
errors not specifieB 3errores patentes o manifiestos no
especificaos en el ale!ato5. Pero Lcabe invocar esta reserva en el
caso (ue nos ocupa =nuablemente (ue no, por las si!uientes
ra@ones> 3a5 los autos no emuestran (ue el .ue@ a (uo cometio un
error patente " manifiesto al eclarar en su sentencia (ue el terreno
no es publico sino privao: no tenemos mas remeio (ue aceptar
en su fa@ la conclusion el .ue@ sentenciaor sobre este respecto
por la sencilla ra@on e (ue no tenemos ante nosotros las pruebas
ni testificales ni ocumentales, ", por tanto, no ha" base para
revisar, mucho menos para revocar icha conclusion, habienose
interpretao esta reserva en el sentio e (ue solo se puee tomar
Bconocimiento juicial el error palpable con vista e los autos "
proceimientosB: 3#5 aun amitieno por un momento, a los efectos
e la ar!umentacion, (ue 2u 2e7oria el .ue@ paecio error
palpable al sentar icha conclusion, como (uiera (ue el Procuraor
#eneral no suscita la cuestion en su ale!ato ebe entenerse (ue
ha renunciao a su erecho e hacerlo, optano por funamentar
su caso en otros motivos " ra@ones: por tanto, no estamos
facultaos para consierar motu proprio el supuesto error, pues
evientemente no se trata e un escuio u oversi&ht el
representante el Estao, sino e una renuncia eliberaa, " la
jurispruencia sobre el particular nos ice (ue Bel proposito
sub"acente, funamental e la reserva en la re!la es el e prevenir
el e*travio e la justicia en virtu e un escuio.B 6e a(ui al!unas
autoriaes pertinentes>
"urpose of e8ception as to plain errors. G The proviso in the
rule re(uirin! assi!nments of error, permittin! the court, at its
option, to notice a plain error not assi!ne, B)as an in
intene, in the interest of justice, to reserve to the appellate
court the ri!ht, restin! in public ut", to ta'e co!ni@ance of
palpable error on theface of the record and proceedin&s,
especiall" such as clearl" emonstrate that the suitor has no
cause of action.B 2antaella vs. ?tto E. %an!e Co. 3+;; Ee.,
/+0, /81: ,1 C. C. A., +1;5.
The rules oes not inten that )e are to sift the recor an
eal )ith (uestions )hich are of small importance, but onl" to
notice errors )hich are obvious upon inspection an of a
controllin! character. The underl)in& purpose of this
reservation in the rule is to prevent the miscarria&e of 9ustice
from oversi&ht. Mastvs. 2uperior $rill Co. 3+;1 Ee., 1;, ;+:
,< C. C. A. +;/5.
==. 6asta a(ui hemos esarrollao nuestra ar!umentacion bajo el
supuesto e (ue la calia e privao el terreno liti!ioso no
es controversia 9usticia#le en esta instancia por no estar suscitaa
la cuestion en el ale!ato el Procuraor #eneral ni ser materia e
isputa entre las partes en la apelacion peniente ante nosotros:
por lo (ue, consi!uientemente, no estamos facultaos para revisar,
mucho menos revocar motu proprio la conclusion el tribunal a (uo
sobre el particular. Ahora vamos a laborar bajo otro supuesto G el
e (ue el Procuraor #eneral ha"a hecho el corresponiente
se7alamiento e error " la cuestion este, por tanto, propiamente
planteaa ante esta Corte 2uprema para los efectos e la revision.
%a pre!unta naturalmente en oren es la si!uiente> Lcometio error
el .ue@ a (uo al eclarar " conceptuar como privao el terreno en
cuestion, o es, por el contrario, acertaa su conclusion a este
respectoI 2omos e opinion (ue el .ue@ no cometio error, (ue el
terreno e (ue se trata reune las coniciones juriicas necesarias
para calificarlo como privao " iferenciarlo e una propiea e
ominio publico, " (ue, por tanto, el solicitante tiene sobre la
propiea un titulo confirmable bajo las isposiciones e la %e" e
Re!istro e Terrenos No. 104.
Afirmase en la ecision e la ma"oria (ue el solicitante no ha
poio emostrar (ue el o cual(uiera e sus causantes en erecho
a(uirio el lote el Estao meiante compra o concesion bajo las
le"es, orenan@as " ecretos promul!aos por el #obierno
Espa7ol en Eilipinas, o en virtu e los tramites relativos a
informacion posesoria bajo la le" hipotecaria en tiempo e Espa7a.
$e esto la ma"oria saca la conclusion e (ue el terreno
cuestionao no es privao por(ue, se!un su criterio, Btoos los
terrenos (ue no fueron a(uirios el #obierno 3#obierno Espa7ol,
se (uiere ecir5, "a meiante compra, "a por concesion,
pertenecen al ominio publicoB: " citano como autoria el asunto
clasico e Cari7o contra el #obierno =nsular la ponencia no amite
mas e*cepcion a la re!la (ue el caso en (ue un terreno ha estao
en la posesion el ocupante " e sus preecesores en interes
ese tiempo inmemorial, pues semejante posesion justificaria la
presuncion e (ue el terreno nunca habia sio parte el ominio
publico, o (ue habia sio propiea privaa aun antes e la
con(uista espa7ola.B
%o (ue, en primer lu!ar, no parece correcto es la se!uria con
(ue en la ponencia se afirma (ue el terreno no se a(uirio bajo la
soberania espa7ola en virtu e cual(uiera e los moos
conocios en la le!islacion e entonces, pues como no tenemos
elante las pruebas, no ha" naturalmente manera e comprobar la
certe@a e la proposicion. 2i se tiene en cuenta (ue el $irector
eTerrenos se opuso a la solicitu e re!istro por el funamento e
(ue el terreno es e ominio publico, " (ue el tribunal inferior
esestimo este funamento, la presuncion es (ue la calia e
privao el terreno se probo satisfactoriamente, presuncion (ue
(uea robustecia si se consiera (ue el Procuraor #eneral, al
sostener la apelacion el #obierno, no iscute ni cuestiona en su
ale!ato la conclusion e (ue el referio terreno es e propiea
particular.
Por otro lao, la ma"oria parece ar un caracter emasiao
absoluto " ri!io a la proposicion e (ue Btoos los terrenos (ue no
fueron a(uirios el #obierno 3en tiempo e Espa7a5, meiante
compra o por concesion, pertenecen al ominio publico.B
=nterpretano estrictamente la le", esta Corte 2uprema ene!o el
re!istro solicitao en el celebre asunto e Cari7o contra el
#obierno =nsular (ue cita la ma"oria en su opinion, por eso mismo
(ue se acentua en la ponencia G por el funamento e (ue Cari7o
no puo emostrar titulo e compra, concesion o informacion
posesoria e*peio por el #obierno en tiempo e Espa7a, sieno
por consi!uiente el terreno parte el ominio publico. Pero al
elevarse el asunto en !rao e apelacion a la Corte 2uprema e
los Estaos 9nios, la misma revoco la sentencia e esta Corte,
eclarano el terreno como propiea privaa " ecretano su
re!istro a nombre el solicitante. En la luminosa ponencia el
Ma!istrao 6olmes se sientan conclusiones (ue proclama el
espiritu liberal e a(uel !ran jurista " reafirman con vi!or
emocratico los erechos e propiea e los nativos e estas
=slas sobre sus preios en contra el concepto " teoria feuales e
(ue la Corona e Espa7a era la ue7a absoluta hasta el ultimo
palmo e tierra " e (ue nin!un habitante poia ser ue7o e naa,
a menos (ue tuviese en sus manos un titulo o papel e*peio por
a(uel #obierno. 6e a(ui lo (ue ice el Ma!istrao 6olmes>
Ae come, then, to the (uestion on )hich the case )as
ecie belo) G namel", )hether the plaintiff o)ns the lan.
The position of !overnment, shortl" state, is that 2pain
assume, asserte, an ha title to all the lan in the
Philippines e*cept so far it sa) fit to permit private titles to be
ac(uire: that there )as no prescripcion a!ainst the Cro)n,
an that, if there )as, a ecree of .une 8;, +,,-, re(uire
re!istration )ithin a limite time to ma'e the title !oo: that the
plaintiff&s lan )as not re!istere, an therefore became, if it
)as not al)a"s, public lan: that the 9nite 2tates succeee
to the title of 2pain, an so that the plaintiff has no ri!hts that
the Philippine #overnment is boun to respect.
=f )e suppose for the moment that the !overnment&s
contention is so far correct that the Cro)n of 2pain in form
asserte a title to this lan at the ate of the treat" of Paris, to
)hich the 9nite 2tates succeee, it is not to be assume
)ithout ar!ument that the plaintiff&s case is at an en. =t is true
that 2pain, in its earlier ecrees,Bemboie the universal
feual theor" that all lans )ere hel from the Cro)n, an
perhaps the !eneral attitue of con(uerin! nations to)ar
people not reco!ni@e as entitle to the treatment accore to
those in the same @one of civili@ation )ith themselves. =t is
true, also that, in le!al theor", soverei!nt" is absolute, an
that, as a!ainst forei!n nations, the 9nite 2tates ma" assert,
as 2pain asserte, absolute po)er. But it does not follo' that,
as a&ainst the inha#itants of the "hilippines, the 4nited States
asserts that Spain had such po'er. Ahen theor" is left on one
sie, soverei!nt" is a (uestion of stren!th, an ma" var" in
e!ree. 6o) far a ne) soverei!n shall insist upon the
theoretical relation of the subjects to the hea in the past, an
ho) far it shall reco!ni@e actual facts, are matters for it to
ecie. 39. 2. 2upreme Court Reports, Fol. 8+8, p. ;04.5
Mas aelante se ice lo si!uiente en la citaa sentencia e la Corte
2uprema Eeeral>
=t is true that, b" section +1, the #overnment of the Philippines
is empo)ere to enact rules an prescribe terms for
perfectin! titles to public lans )ere some, but not all, spanish
conitions has been fulfille, an to issue patents to natives
for not more than +4 hectares of public lans actuall"
occupie b" the native or his ancestors before Au!ust +<,
+,0,. But this section perhaps mi!ht be satisfie if confine to
cases )here the occupation )as of lan amitte to be public
lan, an ha not continue for such a len!th of time an
uner such circumstances as to !ive rise to the unerstanin!
that the occupants )ere o)ners at that ate.:e hesitate to
suppose that it 'as intended to declare ever) native 'ho had
not a paper title a trespasser, an to set the claims of all the
)iler tribes afloat.
* * * * * * * * *
=f the applicant&s case is to be trie b" the la) of 2pain, )e o
not iscover such clear proof that it )as bas b" that la) as to
satisf" us that he oes not o)n the lan. To be!in )ith, the
oler ecrees an la)s cite b" the counsel for the plaintiff in
error seem to inicate prett" clearl" that the natives )ere
reco!ni@e as o)nin! some lans, irrespective of an" ro"al
!rant. =n other )ors, 2pain i not assume to convert all the
native inhabitants of the Philippines into trespassers or even
into tenants at )ill. Eor instance, Boo' 1, title +8, %a) +1 of
the Recopilacion de /e)es de las ndias, cite for a contrar"
conclusion in Falenton vs.Murciano 3< Phil., ;</5, )hile it
commans vicero"s an others, )hen it seems proper, to call
for the e*hibition of !rants, irects them to confirm those )ho
hol b" !oo !rants or 9usta prescripcion. =t is true that it
be!ins b" the characteristic assertion of feual overlorship
an the ori!in of all titles in the Nin! or his preecessors. That
)as theor" an iscourse. The fact 'as that titles 'ere
admitted to e8ist that o'ed nothin& to the po'ers of Spain
#e)ond this reco&nition in their #oo<s.
Prescription is mentione a!ain in the ro"al ceula of ?ctober
+;, +/;1, cite in 3< Phil., ;145> BAhere such possessors shall
not be able to prouce title ees, it shall be sufficient if the"
shall sho) that ancient possession, as a vali title b"
prescription.B =t ma" be that this means possession from
before +/--: but, at all events, the principle is amitte. As
prescription, even a!ainst Cro)n lans, )as reco!ni@e b"
the la)s of 2pain, )e see no sufficient reason for hesitatin! to
amit that it )as reco!ni@e in the Philippines in re!ar to
lans over )hich 2pain ha onl) a paper soverei&nt).
=t is true that the lan!ua!e of articles 1 an ; attributes title to
those B)ho ma" proveB possession for the necessar" time,
an )e o not overloo' the ar!ument that this means ma"
prove in re!istration proceein!s. =t ma" be that an En!lish
conve"ancer )oul have recommene an application uner
the fore!oin! ecree, but certainl" it )as not calculate to
conve" to the min of an =!orot chief the notion that ancient
famil" possessions )ere in an!er, if he ha rea ever" )or
of it. The )ors Bma" proveB 3acreiten5, as )ell, or better, in
vie) of the other provisions, mi!ht be ta'en to mean )hen
calle upon to o so in an" liti!ation. There are inications that
re!istration )as e*pecte from all, but none sufficient to sho)
that, for )ant of it, o)nership actuall" !aine )oul be lost.
The effect of the proof, )herever mae, as not to confer title,
but simpl" to establish it, as alrea" conferre b" the ecree, if
not b" earlier la). The ro"al ecree of Eebruar" +<, +,01,
eclarin! forfeite titles that )ere capable of ajustment uner
the ecree of +,,-, for )hich ajustment ha not been
sou!ht, should not #e construed as a confiscation, but as the
)ithra)al of a privile!e. As a matter of fact, the applicant
never )as isturbe. This same ecree is (uote b" the court
of lan re!istration for another reco!nition of the common-la)
prescription of thirt" "ears as still runnin! a!ainst alienable
Cro)n lan.
* * * * * * * * *
. . . 9pon a consieration of the )hole case )e are of opinion
that la) an justice re(uire that the applicant shoul be
!rante )hat he see's, an shoul not be eprive of )hat,
b" the practice an belief of those amon! )hom he live, 'as
his propert), throu&h a refined interpretation of an almost
for&otten la' of Spain. 39. 2. 2upreme Court Reports, Fol.
8+8, pp. ;0/-;00.5
Resulta eviente e la jurispruencia sentaa en el citao asunto
e Cari7o contra el #obierno =nsular (ue cual(uiera (ue fuese la
teoria acerca el superominio feual (ue la Corona e Espa7a
asumia sobre toos los terrenos en Eilipinas, en la practica " en la
realia se reconocia (ue el mero lapso e tiempo en la posesion
38- o <- a7os, se!un el caso5 poia establecer " e hecho
establecia erechos privaos e propiea por 9ustaprescripcion, "
el titulo presuntivo asi a(uirio era para toos los efectos
e(uivalente a una concesion e*presa o un titulo escrito e*peio
por el #obierno. Pero e toas maneras G parafraseano lo icho
por el Ma!istrao 6olmes G aun suponieno (ue Espa7a tenia
semejante soberania o superominio feual sobre toas las tierras
en este archipiela!o, " (ue contra otras naciones los Estaos
9nios, al suceer a Espa7a, afirmaria icha suberania, e ello no
se si!ue (ue contra los habitantes e Eilipinas el #obierno
americano 3ahora la Republica filipina5 tomaria la posicion e (ue
Espa7a tenia tal poer absoluto. 6istoricamente se sabe (ue el
cambio e soberania tuvo el efecto e li(uiar muchas instituciones
" le"es espa7olas (ue vinieron a ser obsoletas, arcaicas en el
nuevo estao e cosas, e incompatibles con el espiritu el nuevo
re!imen. No habia nin!una ra@on para (ue este cambio no
proujese tambien sus saluables efectos en las normas juriicas
el re!imen e la propiea sobre la tierra. Parafraseano otra ve@
al Ma!istrao 6olmes, " aplicano la octrina al presente caso, no
ha" ra@on por (ue, meinate Buna refinaa interpretacion e una
casi olviaa le" e Espa7a,B se consiere como terreno publico lo
(ue evientemente, bajo toos los conceptos " normas, es un
terreno privao.
%a jurispruencia sentaa en el asunto e Cari7o contra el
#obierno =nsular ha venio a establecer la norma, la autoria
basica en los asuntos e re!istro ante nuestros tribunales. Al
socaire e su sentio " tenencia !enuinamente liberal se han
re!istrao bajo el sistema Torrens infinia e terrenos privaos.
En casos mucho menos meritorios (ue el (ue nos ocupa se ha
reconocio por nuestros tribunales el caracter o conicion e
propiea privaa e los terrenos sobre (ue versaban las
solicitues, aplicanose no las habilitaoras " supletorias clausulas
e las le"es sobre terrenos publicos G primeramente la %e" No.
084, espues la No. 8,/1, " finalmente la No. +1+ el
Common)ealth G sino las isposiciones mas estrictas e la %e"
No. 104 sobre re!istro e terrenos privaos, bajo el sistema
Torrens. No e*iste motivo para (ue esa tenencia liberal "
pro!resiva sufra una esviacion en el presente caso.
Pero aun bajo la le!islacion espa7ola interpretaa estrictamente,
creemos (ue el terreno en cuestion es tan privao como el terreno
en el asunto e Cari7o, si no mas. 2e!un la sentencia el inferior
G el unio ato para este e*amen, pues "a se ha icho repetias
veces (ue no tenemos elante las pruebas G Bel terreno objeto e
la presente solicitu era primitivamente e Capitana #ina " (ue
esta estuvo en posesion ese el a7o +,,-, espues paso a ser e
Erancisco Reformao hasta el a7o +,,;, mas tare o sea en +,,4
fue e Claro %a!ameo, a la muerte e este le suceio en la
posesion su viua Eortunata ?le!a e %a!ameo, esta en +080 lo
venio a sus tres hijos Antonio, %uis " Rafael appelliaos
%a!ameo, se!un los E*hibitos E " #, " estos ultimos a su ve@ lo
venieron en +0<, al solicitante ?h Cho, se!un los E*hibitos B +-"
C-+.B B ... Este terreno es un solar resiencial entro e la poblacion
el municipio e #uina"an!an, Ta"abas, " en el mismo e*iste una
casa e materiales fuertes (ue ocupa casi too el terreno ...B 3Pie@a
e E*cepciones, pa!. ,5.
Como se ve, por lo menos ese +,,- habia un conocio
propietario " poseeor el terreno G la Capitana #ina. Ahora bien,
coincie (ue el 8; e .unio e a(uel a7o (ue precisamente cuano
se e*piio el $ecreto Bpara el ajuste " ajuicacion e los terrenos
realen!os ocupaos inebiamente por iniviuos particulares en
las =slas Eilipinas.B 2i bien es cierto (ue el objeto el $ecreto o le"
era el orenar (ue se cumpliesen " practicasen los proceimientos
e ajuste " re!istro escritos en el mismo, " en tal sentio el
re(uirir (ue caa cual obtuviese un ocumento e titulo o, en su
efecto, perer su propiea. Tambien es cierto (ue en el $ecreto
se e*presaban ciertas salveaes (ue paracian enotar (ue estos
tramites formanes no eran e ri!urosa aplicacion a too el muno.
9na e icha salveaes, por ejemplo, proveia 3articulo ;5 (ue,
para toos los efectos le!ales, Btoos a(uellos (ue han estao en
posesion por ciento perioo e tiempo serian consieraos como
ue7os G para terreno cultivao, 8- 8- a7os sin interrupcion, es
suficiente, " para terreno no cultivao, <- a7os.B K el articulo 4
ispone (ue Blas partes interesaas no incluias en los os
articulos anteriores 3los articulos (ue reconocen la prescripcion e
8- " <- a7os5 poran le!ali@ar su posesion, " consi!uientemente
a(uirir pleno ominio sobre ichos terrenos, meiante
proceimientos e ajuste " ajuicacion tramitaos e la si!uiente
manera.B Esta ultima isposicion parece inicar, por sus terminos,
(ue no es aplicable a a(uellos (ue "a han sio eclaraos ue7os
en virtu el simple transcurso e cierto lapso e tiempo
3Vease Cari7o contra #obierno =nsular, supra, ;0,5.
No consta en la sentencia el inferior (ue Capitana #ina se ha"a
aco!io a las isposiciones el referio $ecreto e 8; e .unio e
+,,-, obtenieno un ocumento e titulo para le!ali@ar su
posesion, pero tampoco consta positivamente lo contrario, pues no
tenemos ante nosotros las pruebas. Pero aun suponieno (ue no
se ha"an cumplio los tramites formales prescritos en el $ecreto,
e ello no se si!ue (ue el terreno no era "a privao entonces, pues
la presuncion es (ue no hubo menester e semejante formalia
por(ue la Capitana #ina o sus causantes en erecho "a habian
sio eclaraos ue7os el preio por el mero transcurso e un
lapso e tiempo, a tenor e las salveaes e (ue se ha hecho
mencion. Esta presuncion es tanto mas lo!ica cuanto (ue el
articulo , el $ecreto proveia para el caso e partes (ue no
solicitaban entro el pla@o e un a7o el ajuste " ajuicacion e
terrenos e cu"a posesion isfrutaban inebiamente, " conminaba
(ue el Tesoro Breasumira el ominio el Estao sobre los terrenosB
" venera en subasta la parte (ue no se reserva para si: " no solo
no consta en autos (ue la posesion e Capitata #ina o e sus
causahabientes en erecho se ha"a consierao jamas como ile!al
o (ue el Estao " sus a!entes ha"an aoptao " practicao contra
ellos las ili!encias " proceimientos e (ue trata el cittao articulo
, el $ecreto, sino (ue, por el contrario, consta en la sentencia (ue
ese Capitana #ina en +,,- hubo sucesivas transmisiones e
erechos primeramente a Erancisco Reformao en +,,; " espues
a Claro %a!ameo en +,,4, " a la muerte e este ultimo a su viua
Eortunata ?le!a e %a!ameo, e (uien pase el titulo en virtu e
compraventa a sus hijos Antonio, %uis " Rafael apelliaos
%a!ameo, " la ultima transaccion sobre el solar tuvo lu!ar en
fecha bastante reciente, en +0<,, cuano los ultimamente
nombraos lo venieron a ?h Cho el solicitante en el presente
e*peiente e re!istro. $e too lo cual se euce (ue el solar en
cuestion fue consierao siempre como propiea privaa G por
lomenos alli one la memoria alcan@a G ese +,,- hasta (ue
fenecio la soberania americana en Eilipinas, " (ue ni el Estao ni
sus a!entes se entrometieron jamas en el hecho e su posesion
e*clusiva, continua " publica a titulo e ue7o por iferentes
personas no solo bajo el $ecreto e 8; e .unio e +,,- tantas
veces mencionao, sino aun bajo el $ecreto e +< e Eebrero e
+,01 3informacion posesoria5 (ue fue practicamente el ultimo
ecreto e*peio en las postrimerias e la soberania espa7ola en
relacion con el ajuste " ajuicacion e terrenos realen!os o
publicos. K no se i!a (ue ello habria sio por inavertencia e las
autoriaes, particularmente el Eisco, por(ue tratanose e un
solar situao en la misma poblacion e #uina"an!an, uno e los
pueblos mas anti!uos e la provincia e Ta"abas, es inuable
(ue si no reuniera las coniciones " re(uisitos para ser
conceptuao como propiea privaa " la posesion e sus
ocupantes sucesivos fuese inebia e ile!al, "a los a!entes el
Eisco " Tesoro lo hubiesen prestamente confiscao a tenor el
articulo , "a citao el $ecreto e 8; e .unio e +,,-
3Vease Cari7o contra #obierno =nsular, ut supra ;0,.5 El (ue naa
e esto ha"a acontecio es la mejor prueba e (ue en tiempo e
Espa7a los iferentes " sucesivos ocupantes e este solar "a
tenian titulo ominical perfecto, " es sencillamente absuro, riiculo
(ue ahora, al cabo e 44 a7os, se eclare publico el terreno: " too
Lpor (ue " para (ue G para renir sometimiento, repitieno e
nuevo la sutil ironia el Ma!istrao 6omles, a la Brefinaa
interpretacion e una casi olviaa le" e Espana.B K resulta mas
la futilia e este tario tributo a un anacronismo, a una momia
juriica e un pasao caa ve@ mas remoto, si se consiera (ue
cuano el Ma!istrao 6omes pronuncio su sentencia a toas luces
libera " pro!resiva 38< e Enero e +0-05 estabamos tan solo a
escasamente +- a7os ese la caia e la soberania espa7ola en
Eilipinas mientras (ue ahora (ue se intenta una raical esviacion
el surco tra@ao por la solia reja e icha sentencia estamos "a
casi a meio si!lo e istancia, con pleno ominio republicano
sobre el territorio nacional. Esto no ebiera preocuparnos si no
fuese por(ue esta ecision e ahora puee ser interpretaa como
una abro!acion e tantos preceentes moleaos en la tur(uesa
e la octrina holmesiana, " al propio tiempo como la emarcacion
el punto e partia e una nueva ruta en nuestra jurispruencia
sobre re!istro e terrenos.
2in embar!o, en la opinion e la ma"oria se ice (ue el solicitante
no puee ale!ar con e*ito (ue su lote es terreno privao por(ue la
posesion e su primer preecessor 3Capitana #ina5 comen@o solo
en +,,-, mientras (ue en el asunto e Cari7o contra El !obierno
=nsular, es e*i!e como re(uisito la posesion ese tiempo
inmemorial, posesion (ue, se!un la ma"oria. Bjustificaria la
presuncion e (ue el terreno nunca habia sio parte el ominio
publico, o (ue habia sio propiea privaa aun antes e la
con(uista espa7ola.B No parece sino (ue se (uiere se7alar una
fecha, un a7o, como norma para eterminar la inmemorialidad el
comien@o posesorio. Pero L(ue fecha, (ue a7o seria esteI L+,/-,
&4-, &;-I LNo seria suficiente v. &r. +,/;, &4;, o &;;I En el asunto
e Cari7o la fecha conocia " recoraa e la posesion inicial
poia fijarse alreeor e la mita el si!lo pasao, o sea +,10,
pues se!un las pruebas, Cari7o " sus antecesores habian poseio
el terreno al!o mas e ;- a7os hasta el tratao e Paris G Abril
++, +,00. En el presente caso, ese Capitana #ina hasta (ue el
solicitante presento su solicitu e re!istro el +/ e Enero, +01-,
habian transcurrio 4- a2os: e suerte (ue en cuanto al tiempo e
la posesion ambos casos son ienticos. Con una ventaja a favor
el presente caso, a saber> mientras en el asunto e Cari7o las
tierras objeto e la solicitu eran pasto, en !ran parte, " solo
cultivaas unas cuantas porciones, en el (ue nos ocupa el lote es
urbano, sino en uno e los pueblos mas anti!uos e Eilipinas, con
una casa e materiales fuertes enclavaa en el. Es inne!abl (ue la
posesion e un solar urbano es mas concreta, mas terminante "
mas aversa a too el muno, sin e*cluir el Estao.
Pero aun limitanonos a la posesion bajo la soberania espa7ola
para los efectos e la calificacion el terreno como propiea
privaa, toavia se puee sosener (ue el presente caso es tan
bueno si no mejor (ue el e Cari7o. En el asunto e Cari7o el
punto e partia conocio es alreeor e +,10: en el nuestro,
+,,-, en (ue comen@o la posesion e Capitana #ina, se!un la
sentencia apelaa. Pero esto no (uiere ecir (ue antes e
Capitana #ina el solar no fuese "a finca urbana, habia por al!un
otro como propiea particular. 6a" (ue tener en cuenta (ue se
trata e un solar ubicao en la poblacion e #uina"an!an, uno e
los mas anti!uos en Ta"abas. No tenemos elante la fecha e*acta
e la funacion e icho pueblo, " no tenemos tiempo ahora para
hacer investi!acion historica. Pero afortunaamente hemos lo!rao
salvar e la evastacion causaa por la reciente !uerra una parte
sustancial e nuestra biblioteca privaa, " uno e los libros
salvaos es el celebrao $iccionario #eo!rafico, Estaistico e
6istorico e las =slas Eilipinas publicao en Mari por Er. Manuel
Bu@eta " Er. Eelipe Bravo en +0;-, se!un el pie e imprenta, e
os volumenes. En el 8.J tomo, pp. /- " /+, se a una escripcion
el pueblo e #uina"an!a, con buena copia e atos historicos,
!eo!raficos, sociales " economicos. Comien@a la escripcion e
esta manera> BPueblo con cura " !obernaorcillo, en la =sla e
%u@on, provincia e Ta"abas, ioc, e Nueva caceresB: . . Btiene
como unas +,;-- casas, en !eneral e sencilla construccion,
istin!uienose como e mejor fabrica la casa parro(uial " la
llamaa tribunal e justicia, one esta la carcel. .B Consierano
(ue poemos tomas conocimiento juicial e (ue en tiempo e
Espa7a el municipio " la parro(uia eran la culminacion e un lento
" lar!o proceso e civili@acion " cristiani@acion, poemos, por tanto,
presumir (ue mucho antes e +,;- G ;-, /- o +-- a7os G el
pueblo e #uina"an!an "a era una unia !eo!rafiva, civil "
espiritual, en toa re!la, " con caracteres efinitivos e viabilia
urbana. Tambien cabe perfectamente presumir (ue sus habitantes
poseian sus respectivos solares a titulo e ue7os, al i!ual (ue lo
(ue ocurria en otros municipios ebiamente or!ani@aos. No cabe
presumir (ue el Estao les permitiera ocupar inebiamente sus
solares, sin (ue tomase contra ellos la accion e (ue habla el
articulo , el referio $ecreto e 8; e .unio e +,,-: " "a hemos
visto (ue no consta en autos (ue el solar en cuestion ha"a sio
jamas confiscao por los a!entes el Eisco o Tesoro, o eclaraa
ile!al la posesion sobre el mismo, a tenor e lo orenao en el
mencionao $ecreto. Asi (ue ese cual(uier an!ulo (ue se vea el
presente asunto, cae perfectamente bajo las normas e posesion
inmemorial establecias en el asunto e Cari7o.
===. $emostrao "a (ue el terreno en cuestion es privao, resulta
for@osa la conclusion e (ue el solicitante tiene erecho a (ue se
confirme su titulo bajo las isposiciones e la %e" e Re!istro e
Terrenos No. 104, e acuero con el sistema Torrens. Es octrina
firmemente establecia en esta jurisiccion (ue un e*tranjero tiene
perfecto erecho a (ue se re!istre a su nombre un terreno privao,
bajo el sistema Torrens, " (ue las isposiciones e la le" e
terrenos publicos son inaplicables a terrenos privaos
3veanse A!ari contra #obierno e las =slas Eilipinas, 18 .ur. Eil.,
+;-: Tan Kun!(uip contra $irector e Terrenos, 18 .ur. Eil., +<1:
Central Capi@ contra Ramire@, 1- .ur. Eil., 0845. En el primer
asunto citao el solicitante era un japones llamao =chisu'e A!ari "
la solicitu se estimo por tratarse e un terreno privao, a(uirio
en tiempo e Espa7a meiant composicion con el estao. En el
se!uno asunto el solicitante era un chino " se estimo la solicitu
por la misma ra@on, habienose probao una posesion conocia "
recoraa e <- a 1- a7os con anterioria a la presentacion e la
solicitu, es ecir, un tiempo mas corto (ue el el presente caso.
%o propio suceio en el tercer asunto citao, sieno espa7oles los
ue7os e la finca. Confirmese, por tanto, la sentencia apelaa.

You might also like