Held
No, the Court of Appeals (CA) is not correct in denying Emer's motion to present additional evidence under Republic Act No. 11573, as this law applies retroactively to pending cases and allows the presentation of such evidence, under Section 7 of RA 11573 and the rulings in Republic Of The Philippines v. Pasig Rizal Co, G.R. No. 213207 (2022) and Dima-Ano v. Republic Of The Philippines, G.R. No. 221553 (2023).
Explanation
Republic Act No. 11573 amended the Property Registration Decree to simplify and clarify the requirements for judicial confirmation of imperfect land titles. Section 14 now requires only proof of open, continuous, exclusive, and notorious possession of alienable and disposable lands for at least twenty years immediately preceding the application, removing the older requirement to prove possession since June 12, 1945. The law also provides that once possession is proven, the applicant is conclusively presumed to have fulfilled all conditions essential to a government grant and is entitled to a certificate of title.
Section 7 of RA 11573 specifies that a certification by a DENR geodetic engineer that the land is alienable and disposable, imprinted on the approved survey plan and containing a sworn statement referencing applicable land classification orders or maps, is sufficient proof of alienability. This replaces the need for more cumbersome proof or government declarations.
The Supreme Court in Republic Of The Philippines v. Pasig Rizal Co clarified that no further government manifestation is needed to prove that the land is no longer retained by the State for public use or development. The Court also directed that courts allow the presentation of additional evidence on land classification status under Section 7 of RA 11573.
In Dima-Ano v. Republic Of The Philippines, the Court confirmed that RA 11573 applies retroactively to all pending applications for judicial confirmation of title as of its effectivity date, including those pending appeal before the Court of Appeals. The Court further instructed that the CA must allow the presentation of additional evidence under Section 7 of RA 11573 to establish the land's alienable and disposable status.
Application to the facts
Emer's application for confirmation of title was filed in June 2020 and was pending before the Court of Appeals as of September 1, 2021, when RA 11573 took effect. Under the Supreme Court's ruling in Dima-Ano, RA 11573 applies retroactively to his case. Therefore, the CA should have allowed Emer's motion to present additional evidence to prove that the land is alienable and disposable, as required by Section 7 of RA 11573.
The trial court's denial of Emer's application for lack of proof of the Secretary of DENR's approval declaring the land alienable and disposable is no longer the controlling standard. RA 11573 provides that a certification by a DENR geodetic engineer imprinted on the survey plan is sufficient proof. Emer's intention to present evidence as required by Section 7 aligns with this standard.
The CA's denial based on the argument that RA 11573 does not apply to cases filed before its effectivity is incorrect because the Supreme Court has ruled that the law applies retroactively to pending cases, including those on appeal. Moreover, the CA's insistence on proof that the land is no longer retained by the State for public use or development is no longer required under the amended law and Supreme Court rulings.
- citation lookup failed (unknown instrument: 'Republic Act No'); used search
- a constitutional provision is among the sources and controls over any conflicting statute
"For purposes of judicial confirmation of imperfect titles filed under Presidential Decree No. 1529, a duly signed certification by a duly designated DENR geodetic engineer that the land is part of alienable and disposable agricultural lands of the public domain is sufficient proof that the land is alienable. Said certification shall be imprinted in the approved survey plan submitted by the applicant in the land registration court. The imprinted certification in the plan shall contain a sworn statement by the geodetic engineer that the land is within the alienable and disposable lands of the public domain and sha…
"Who may apply. The following persons may file at any time, in the proper Regional Trial Court in the province where the land is located, an application for registration of title to land, not exceeding twelve (12) hectares, whether personally or through their duly authorized representatives: Those who by themselves or through their predecessors-in-interest have been in open, continuous, exclusive and notorious possession and occupation of alienable and disposable lands of the public domain not covered by existing certificates of title or patents under a bona fide claim of ownership for at least twenty (20) years…
Section 7 of Republic Act No. 11573 provides that for judicial confirmation of imperfect titles, a certification by a DENR geodetic engineer that the land is part of alienable and disposable agricultural lands, as imprinted in the approved survey plan and accompanied by a sworn statement referencing the relevant land classification documents or map numbers, is sufficient proof that the land is alienable. If copies of certain orders or proclamations are unavailable, it is enough that the Land Classification Map Number, Project Number, and date of release are stated in the sworn statement, confirming the map's existence in the NAMRIA inventory and its use by the DENR as a land classification map (Sec 7, Property Registration Decree and Related Laws).
Section 14 of the Property Registration Decree, as amended by RA No. 11573, allows persons who, by themselves or through their predecessors-in-interest, have been in open, continuous, exclusive, and notorious possession and occupation of alienable and disposable lands of the public domain under a bona fide claim of ownership for at least twenty years immediately preceding the filing of the application, to apply for registration of title. Upon proof of such possession, they are conclusively presumed to have performed all conditions essential to a government grant and are entitled to a certificate of title (Section 14, Property Registration Decree and Related Laws, as amended by RA No. 11573).
Laws retrieved
Everything retrieval surfaced, not only what the answer relied on. Read the ones it quotes.
- Sec 7, Property Registration Decree and Related Laws
- Section 52, The Indigenous Peoples' Rights Act of 1997
- Section 1, Guidelines for Decongesting Holding Jails by Enforcing the Rights of Accused Persons to Bail and to Speedy Trial
- Section 48, Property Registration Decree and Related Laws
- Section 6, The 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines
- Section 14, Property Registration Decree and Related Laws
The Supreme Court in Republic Of The Philippines v. Pasig Rizal Co explained that under the amendments introduced by RA 11573, applicants are no longer required to prove possession since June 12, 1945, but only for at least twenty years immediately preceding the application. The Court further clarified that once the land is classified as alienable and disposable and the required possession is proven, the applicant is conclusively presumed to have performed all conditions essential to a government grant and is entitled to a certificate of title. No further express government manifestation that the land is no longer retained by the State for public use, public service, or the development of national wealth is required (CASE HOLDING — Republic Of The Philippines v. Pasig Rizal Co, G.R. No. 213207 (2022-02-15)).
"RA 11573 shall apply retroactively to all applications for judicial confirmation of title which remain pending as of September 1, 2021, or the date when RA 11573 took effect. These include all applications pending resolution at the first instance before all Regional Trial Courts, and applications pending appeal before the Court of Appeals... In the interest of substantial justice, the Regional Trial Courts and Court of Appeals are hereby directed upon proper motion or motu proprio, to permit the presentation of additional evidence on land classification status based on the parameters set forth in Section 7 of RA…
Cases retrieved
Everything retrieval surfaced, not only what the answer relied on. Read the ones it quotes.