Digest

DIRECTOR OF LANDS V IAC J. Narvasa | GR No. 73002, Dec 29, 1986 Facts: ● ●

● ●

● ● ● ●

This case started when ACME Plywood, sought to register 5 parcels of land. The Director of Land opposes the registration. Acme Plywood & Veneer Co., Inc., a corp. represented by Mr. Rodolfo Nazario, acquired from Mariano and Acer Infiel, members of the Dumagat tribe 5 parcels of land Possession of the Infiels over the land dates back before the Philippines was discovered by Magellan Land sought to be registered is a private land pursuant to RA 3872 granting absolute ownership to members of the non-Christian Tribes on land occupied by them or their ancestral lands, whether with the alienable or disposable public land or within the public domain Acme Plywood & Veneer Co. Inc., has introduced more than P45M worth of improvements Ownership and possession of the land sought to be registered was duly recognized by the government. IAC affirmed CFI and ruled in favor of ACME Director of Land’s Contention ○ The land is of public domain. ○ Corporations are prohibited by the 1973 Constitution (the Constitution in effect that time) to hold lands of public domain except in lease not exceeding 1,000 hectares.

●

●

Whether or not the constitutional prohibition against their acquisition by private corporations or associations applies? ●

●

●

●

Issues: 1. Whether or not the land is already a private land -> Yes 2. Whether or not the constitutional prohibition against acquisition by private corporations or associations applies -> No ● Ruling: Whether or not the land is already a private land? ● The land is already private land not only in right to a grant but by operation of law. ● The SC further said that for the grant to be honored by the court, it is not necessary that they have a certificate of title, an application for registration is sufficient for the grant to be honored.

“The application for confirmation is mere formality, the lack of which does not affect the legal sufficiency of the title as would be evidenced by the patent and the Torrens Title to be issued upon the strength of said patent” “The effect of the proof, wherever made, was not to confer title, but simply to establish it, as already conferred by the decree, if not by earlier law”

The SC held in this case that the constitutional prohibition does not apply because the land was already a private land to which the Infiels, who are members of the Dumagat Tribe, have a legal, sufficient and transferrable title over the land on October 29, 1962 when ACME acquired it from them. Since the land acquired by the private corporation is a private land to begin with then ACME has a perfect right to make such acquisition. The only limitation imposed to the corporations when the acquisition was made was that they could not hold or lease public agricultural lands in excess of 1,0124 hectares. The SC said that there is no need to dwell on the 1935 or the 1973 Constitution as contended by the Director of Land because the land is already converted to private land. And there is no prohibition whether in the 1935 or 1973 Constitution on the acquisition of private corporations over private lands. The 1973 Constitution and the present 1987 Constitution only gives a prohibition on private corporations in their acquiring lands of the public domain, meaning your agricultural lands. Now the INFIELS in the evidence that was presented by Acme proved that the INFIELS were already in possession since time immemorial, even before Magellan discovered the Philippines. So even before the Spaniards discovered the Philippines, it was already private property. So if the land has already been converted to private land, then the private corporation may own that land because there is no prohibition on the acquisition of a private corporation on private lands.