Case Digest (G.R. No. 189723)
Facts:
Republic of the Philippines v. Alaminos Ice Plant and Cold Storage, Inc., G.R. No. 189723, July 11, 2018, Supreme Court Third Division, Martires, J., writing for the Court. The petition is a Rule 45 petition for review on certiorari by the Republic of the Philippines (through the Office of the Solicitor General) challenging the Court of Appeals decision that affirmed the Regional Trial Court’s grant of original registration to Alaminos Ice Plant and Cold Storage, Inc. (respondent).On 17 August 2004, Alaminos Ice Plant and Cold Storage, Inc. filed an application for original registration under the Torrens system for Lot No. 6411-B (10,000 sq.m.) in Barangay Pogo, Alaminos City, docketed as LRC Case No. A-637 before Branch 54, RTC Alaminos City. The trial record showed an alleged chain of possession from Juan and Leonora Duldulao to their daughter Mary Jane Almazan (tax declarants from 1951–1997), then by sale to Rissa Santos Cai, and finally to respondent in April 2002; respondent fenced the parcel and constructed an ice plant. The Director of Lands, represented by the Solicitor General through the City Prosecutor, presented no evidence in opposition. On 25 October 2005 the RTC granted registration, finding continuous, exclusive, open and notorious possession since 1951 and ordering issuance of title under the Property Registration Decree (Presidential Decree No. 1529).
The Republic, through the Office of the Solicitor General, appealed to the Court of Appeals on 4 November 2008, arguing (1) respondent failed to submit a certification that the land was alienable and disposable, and (2) respondent failed to prove the requisite period of possession. In response, respondent initially argued the land was private and thus need not be classified, but on 20 March 2009 appended to its appellate filings a CENRO (DENR) certification dated 9 March 2009 stating, based on map projection and a 1927 land-classification map, that Lot 6411‑B was within the alienable and disposable area.
Relying on that CENRO certification together with tax declarations and the unc...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the Court of Appeals err, as a procedural matter, in giving evidentiary weight to the CENRO certification that was not formally offered or identified at trial and surfaced only on appeal?
- Did the Court of Appeals err, as a substantive matter, in holding that respondent and its predecessors-in-interest satisfied the requirements for original registration (including the land being alienable and disposable and ...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)