Case Digest (G.R. No. L-11024)
Facts:
Heirs of Tunged v. Sta. Lucia Realty and Development, Inc. and Baguio Properties, Inc., G.R. No. 231737, March 06, 2018, the Supreme Court En Banc, Tijam, J., writing for the Court.
Petitioners are heirs of Tunged (named in the caption) and members of the Ibaloi indigenous people; respondents are Sta. Lucia Realty and Development, Inc. (a real estate developer) and Baguio Properties, Inc. (a lot owner/manager claiming Torrens title over portions of the disputed land). Petitioners filed Environmental Case No. 8548-R in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Baguio City, Branch V, styled as an enforcement action for alleged violations of the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA, R.A. No. 8371), PD 1586 (environmental impact statement system), and other laws, with prayers for an ex parte 72-hour Environmental Protection Order (EPO), permanent injunctive relief, recognition of petitioners’ rights as IPs to the ancestral land, restoration of denuded areas, and damages.
The RTC dismissed the complaint for lack of jurisdiction in its Order dated March 2, 2017, reasoning that formal recognition of ancestral-domain rights was within the exclusive jurisdiction of the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) under Section 11 of the IPRA and that petitioners’ prayer essentially sought recognition of ownership (i.e., an action premature pending NCIP proceedings), so petitioners lacked legal personality under A.M. No. 09-6-8-SC (the Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases) which requires suit by a real party in interest. Petitioners’ motion for reconsideration was denied by the RTC in its April 3, 2017 Order. The assailed dismissal thus prompted this Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court seeking nullification of the RTC Orders and reinstatement of Environmental Case No. 8548-R.
In their complaint petitioners alleged long possession and ownership “since time immemorial,” supported by testimonial and documentary evidence and by a pending NCIP petition for Issuance of Certificate of Ancestral Land Titles (CALT). They also alleged respondents’ earthmoving activities caused destruction of vegetation and violated the respondents’ Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC) and PD 1586. Respondents, invoking Torrens titles, argued the complaint was a collateral attack on their title. The Supreme Court noted relevant legal instruments: Section 66, IPRA (jurisdiction of NCIP), A.M. No. 09-6-8-SC (Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases, including Sec. 4 on who may file and the verified-complaint requirement in Sec. 3), AO No. 23-2008...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Was the court a quo’s outright dismissal of Environmental Case No. 8548‑R for lack of jurisdiction proper?...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)