Title
City of Baguio vs. Marcos
Case
G.R. No. L-26100
Decision Date
Feb 28, 1969
Lessees oppose reopening of 1912 cadastral case, claiming leasehold rights; SC upholds their standing, deems publication unnecessary, and validates jurisdiction under RA 931.

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-26100)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Cadastral Proceedings and Petition to Reopen
    • April 12, 1912: Director of Lands institutes Civil Reservation Case No. 1 (GLRO Record No. 211) in the Court of First Instance (CFI) of Baguio to determine status of public lands (Plan Psu-186187).
    • November 13, 1922: Final decision declares the subject parcel public domain.
    • July 25, 1961: Belong Lutes files under Republic Act (R.A.) 931 a petition to reopen the 1912 cadastral proceedings, claiming (a) continuous adverse possession since Spanish times and (b) predecessors’ illiteracy and lack of notice.
  • Opposition and Procedural History in the CFI
    • December 18, 1961: Private petitioners (Francisco G. Joaquin, Sr.; Francisco G. Joaquin, Jr.; Teresita J. Buchholz) register opposition, asserting they hold valid tree-farm leases (1959 forestry agreements) covering portions of the parcel.
    • May 1962: City of Baguio likewise opposes. CFI first bars private petitioners from intervening based on a March 9, 1962 declaratory relief judgment in Yaranon vs. Castrillo (Civil Case No. 946) nullifying their leases, but on September 14, 1962 reverses itself and admits them to cross-examine.
    • August 5, 1963; November 5, 1963; September 17, 1964: CFI dismisses private petitioners’ opposition, rejects their and the City’s motions to dismiss Lutes’s petition, and denies motions for reconsideration.
  • Court of Appeals Proceedings
    • November 13, 1964: City, Reforestation Administration, and private petitioners elevate to the Court of Appeals (CA) by certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus, securing a preliminary injunction.
    • September 30, 1965: CA holds private petitioners not bound by the Yaranon declaratory judgment but rules lessees lack personality under R.A. 931 to oppose reopening. Motion for reconsideration denied May 6, 1966.
  • Proceedings Before the Supreme Court
    • July–August 1966: Respondents move to dismiss the petition; petitioners oppose.
    • August 12, 1966: Supreme Court gives due course to petition for certiorari.

Issues:

  • Personality to Oppose
    • Whether private petitioners, as tree-farm lessees, have standing under R.A. 931 and the Rules of Court to intervene and oppose Lutes’s petition to reopen.
  • Publication Requirement
    • Whether the petition to reopen under R.A. 931 must be published like original cadastral proceedings.
  • Jurisdictional Timeliness
    • Whether Lutes’s July 25, 1961 petition falls within the forty-year period prescribed by R.A. 931, considering possible inconsistency between the title (“decisions rendered within the forty years…”) and Section 1 (“proceedings instituted within the forty years…”).

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.