This case has been cited 10 times or more.
|
2012-11-12 |
BERSAMIN, J. |
||||
| Indeed, under the Regalian doctrine, all lands not otherwise appearing to be clearly within private ownership are presumed to belong to the State.[30] No public land can be acquired by private persons without any grant, express or implied, from the Government. It is indispensable, therefore, that there is a showing of a title from the State.[31] Occupation of public land in the concept of owner, no matter how long, cannot ripen into ownership and be registered as a title.[32] | |||||
|
2010-07-07 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| The right of the Republic to institute an action for reversion is rooted in the Regalian doctrine. Under the Regalian doctrine, all lands of the public domain belong to the State, and that the State is the source of any asserted right to ownership in land and charged with the conservation of such patrimony. This same doctrine also states that all lands not otherwise appearing to be clearly within private ownership are presumed to belong to the State.[140] It is incorporated in the 1987 Philippine Constitution under Article XII, Section 2 which declares "[a]ll lands of the public domain, waters, minerals, coal, petroleum, and other mineral oils, all forces of potential energy, fisheries, forests or timber, wildlife, flora and fauna, and other natural resources are owned by the State. x x x" No public land can be acquired by private persons without any grant, express or implied, from the government; it is indispensable that there be a showing of the title from the State.[141] | |||||
|
2010-02-02 |
CORONA, J. |
||||
| However, it is true that forest lands may be registered when they have been reclassified as alienable by the President in a clear and categorical manner (upon the recommendation of the proper department head who has the authority to classify the lands of the public domain into alienable or disposable, timber and mineral lands)[34] coupled with possession by the claimant as well as that of her predecessors-in-interest. Unfortunately for petitioner, she was not able to produce such evidence. Accordingly, her occupation thereof, and that of her predecessors-in-interest, could not have ripened into ownership of the subject land. This is because prior to the conversion of forest land as alienable land, any occupation or possession thereof cannot be counted in reckoning compliance with the thirty-year possession requirement under Commonwealth Act 141 (CA 141) or the Public Land Act.[35] This was our ruling in Almeda v. CA.[36] The rules on the confirmation of imperfect titles do not apply unless and until the land classified as forest land is released through an official proclamation to that effect. Then and only then will it form part of the disposable agricultural lands of the public domain.[37] | |||||
|
2006-07-20 |
CALLEJO, SR., J. |
||||
| Under the Regalian doctrine, all lands not otherwise appearing to be clearly within private ownership are presumed to belong to the State. The presumption is that lands of whatever classification belong to the State.[22] Unless public land is shown to have been reclassified as alienable or disposable to a private person by the State, it remains part of the inalienable public domain. Property of the public domain is beyond the commerce of man and not susceptible of private appropriation and acquisitive prescription. Occupation thereof in the concept of owner no matter how long cannot ripen into ownership and be registered as a title.[23] The statute of limitations with regard to public agricultural lands does not operate against the State unless the occupant proves possession and occupation of the same after a claim of ownership for the required number of years to constitute a grant from the State.[24] | |||||
|
2006-06-22 |
CALLEJO, SR., J. |
||||
| Under the Regalian doctrine, all lands not otherwise appearing to be clearly within private ownership are presumed to belong to the State. The presumption is that lands of whatever classification belong to the State.[65] Unless public land is shown to have been reclassified as alienable or disposable to a private person by the State, it remains part of the inalienable public domain. Property of the public domain is beyond the commerce of man and not susceptible of private appropriation and acquisitive prescription. Occupation thereof in the concept of owner no matter how long cannot ripen into ownership and be registered as a title.[66] The statute of limitations with regard to public agricultural lands does not operate against the State unless the occupant proves possession and occupation of the same after a claim of ownership for the required number of years to constitute a grant from the State.[67] | |||||
|
2005-11-25 |
PANGANIBAN, J. |
||||
| Land that has not been acquired from the government, either by purchase or by grant, belongs to the State as part of the public domain.[16] For this reason, imperfect titles to agricultural lands are subjected to rigorous scrutiny before judicial confirmation is granted.[17] In the same manner, persons claiming the protection of "private rights" in order to exclude their lands from military reservations must show by clear and convincing evidence that the pieces of property in question have been acquired by a legal method of acquiring public lands.[18] | |||||
|
2000-11-20 |
PARDO, J. |
||||
| In other words, "no public land can be acquired by private persons without any grant, express or implied from the government; it is indispensable that there be a showing of a title from the state."[8] | |||||