Case Summary (G.R. No. 179987)
Key Dates
• February 20, 1998 – Application for land registration filed.
• March 15, 1982 – Land certified alienable and disposable by DENR.
• December 3, 2002 – RTC grants registration under P.D. 1529 § 14(1).
• February 23, 2007 – Court of Appeals reverses, excludes possession before classification date.
• April 29, 2009 – Supreme Court en banc resolves the petition.
Applicable Law
• 1987 Philippine Constitution (Art. XII, National Economy and Patrimony; Regalian Doctrine).
• Commonwealth Act 141 (Public Land Act), particularly § 48(b) (imperfect title via possession).
• P.D. 1073 (1977 amendment setting possession reckoning date to June 12, 1945).
• P.D. 1529 (Property Registration Decree) § 14(1)–(2).
• R.A. 6940 and R.A. 9176 (extending filing periods).
• Civil Code (Arts. 420–422 on public dominion vs. patrimonial property; Arts. 1113, 1137 on prescription).
Factual Background
Mario Malabanan asserted purchase from a member of the Velazco family and adverse, open, continuous, exclusive, notorious possession under a bona fide claim for over thirty years. A CENRO-DENR certification confirmed the land’s alienable and disposable status in 1982.
Procedural History
• RTC Cavite-Tagaytay (Branch 18) approved registration under P.D. 1529 § 14(1).
• Solicitor General appealed; CA held any possession before March 15, 1982 (classification date) excluded, thereby defeating the thirty-year requirement.
• Heirs of Malabanan brought the case to the Supreme Court en banc.
Issues Presented
- Must alienable and disposable classification date for § 14(1) be June 12, 1945 or may it occur any time before application?
- Does § 14(2) permit original registration of public lands acquired by prescription under the Civil Code?
- In either § 14(1) or § 14(2), are the petitioners entitled to registration?
Section 14(1) Analysis
• § 48(b) of the Public Land Act and § 14(1) P.D. 1529 share identical possession requirements: open, continuous, exclusive, notorious possession under bona fide claim since June 12, 1945 or earlier.
• Classification need only exist at the time of application; “since June 12, 1945” qualifies the possession, not the classification.
• Naguit v. Republic interpreted § 14(1) to allow counting possession even before classification, rejecting Herbieto’s contrary pronouncement as obiter dictum.
• Absurdity of requiring classification by 1945 would render § 14(1) inoperative.
Section 14(2) Analysis
• § 14(2) P.D. 1529 applies only to private lands acquired by prescription under existing law (the Civil Code).
• Under Civil Code Art. 1113, only patrimonial property of the State is subject to prescription; public dominion lands (even if classified as alienable) remain inalienable until expressly converted to patrimonial by law or proclamation (Civil Code Art. 422).
• Prescription (ordinary 10 years with just title and good faith; extraordinary 30 years adverse without titl
Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 179987)
Background
- The case addresses the widespread informal occupation of untitled public lands in the Philippines and the difficulty of bringing them under formal title.
- Petitioners are the heirs of Mario Malabanan, who sought to register under Sections 14(1) and 14(2) of the Property Registration Decree (P.D. No. 1529) a 71,324‐sqm parcel in Silang, Cavite.
- The Supreme Court, sitting en banc, was asked to clarify whether classification and prescription requirements bar their registration bid.
Facts
- February 20, 1998: Mario Malabanan filed with RTC Cavite-Tagaytay (Branch 18) an application to register Lot 9864-A, Cad-452-D in Barangay Tibig, Silang, Cavite.
- He alleged purchase from Eduardo Velazco and over 30 years of open, continuous, exclusive, and notorious adverse possession.
- Testimony traced ownership through the Velazco family inheritance and a 1995 sale by Eduardo Velazco.
- June 11, 2001: CENRO-DENR certificate confirmed the land as alienable and disposable per Map No. 3013 (approved March 15, 1982).
Procedural History
- December 3, 2002: RTC approved the registration application, ordering issuance of title under Act 141, Act 496, and P.D. 1529.
- The Republic, via the OSG, appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA).
- February 23, 2007: CA reversed, ruling possession prior to the land’s 1982 classification cannot count under Sec. 14(1) P.D. 1529.
- Malabanan died; his heirs continued the appeal, invoking Republic v. Naguit.
- November 11, 2008: Supreme Court, en banc, heard oral arguments.
Issues
- Section 14(1) P.D. 1529: Must classification as alienable and disposable date from June 12, 1945, or may it occur any time before filing if possession dates to June 12, 1945 or earlier?
- Section 14(2) P.D. 1529: May alienable and disposable public land be deemed private and acquired by prescription under the Civil Code?
- Registrability of agricultural lands under Sec. 14(2) in relation to Civil Code prescription.
- Whether petitioners may register under Sec. 14(1), Sec. 14(2), or both.
Applicable Law
- Constitution, Art. XII: Regalian doctrine—public domain lands belong to the State; only agricultural lands may be alienable.
- Public Land Act (C.A. 141), as amended by R.A. 1942 and P.D. 1073: classification, disposition modes, confirmation of imperfect title (Sec. 48[b]), filing deadlines (Sec. 47).
- Property Registration Decree (P.D. 1529), Sec. 14(1)–(2): persons entitled to original registration.
- Civil Code, Arts. 420–422, 1113, 1137: classification of public vs. patrimonial property; conditions and periods for acquisitive prescription.
Majority Opinion (Tinga, J.)
- Section 14(1) P.D. and Sec. 48(b) C.A. 141 are substantively identical; the PLA grants the right, the P.D. p