This case has been cited 4 times or more.
|
2013-09-18 |
PERLAS-BERNABE, J. |
||||
| It must be pointed out that LRC Nos. 08-34 and 08-35 praying that judgment be rendered directing the Registry of Deeds of Tarlac to include petitioner's name, those of her heirs and successors-in-interest as registered owners to the extent of one-third of the lands covered by TCT Nos. 375657 and 375658, were predicated on the theory[43] that Section 108 of PD 1529 is a mode of directly attacking the certificates of title issued to the Bagayas brothers. On the contrary, however, the Court observes that the amendment of TCT Nos. 375657 and 375658 under Section 108 of PD 1529 is actually not the direct attack on said certificates of title contemplated under Section 48[44] of the same law. Jurisprudence instructs that an action or proceeding is deemed to be an attack on a certificate of title when its objective is to nullify the same, thereby challenging the judgment pursuant to which the certificate of title was decreed.[45] Corollary thereto, it is a well-known doctrine that the issue as to whether the certificate of title was procured by falsification or fraud can only be raised in an action expressly instituted for such purpose. As explicated in Borbajo v. Hidden View Homeowners, Inc.:[46] | |||||
|
2012-01-18 |
SERENO, J. |
||||
| It is settled in jurisprudence that a Torrens certificate of title cannot be the subject of collateral attack.[27] Such attack must be direct and not by a collateral proceeding.[28] It is a well-established doctrine that the title represented by the certificate cannot be changed, altered, modified, enlarged, or diminished in a collateral proceeding.[29] Considering that this is an unlawful detainer case wherein the sole issue to be decided is possession de facto rather than possession de jure, a collateral attack by herein respondents on petitioner's title is proscribed. | |||||
|
2009-01-20 |
PUNO, C.J. |
||||
| Injunction, as a preservative remedy, aims to protect substantive rights and interests.[27] To be entitled to a writ of injunction, the complainant must establish the following requisites: (1) there must be a right in esse or the existence of a right to be protected; and (2) the act against which injunction is to be directed is a violation of such right.[28] The grant of the writ is conditioned on the existence of the complainant's clear legal right, which means one clearly founded in or granted by law or is "enforceable as a matter of law."[29] | |||||
|
2008-02-19 |
CORONA, J. |
||||
| Indeed, a decree of registration or patent and the certificate of title issued pursuant thereto may be attacked on the ground of falsification or fraud within one year from the date of their issuance. Such an attack must be direct and not by a collateral proceeding.[23] The rationale is this:xxx [The] public should be able to rely on a registered title. The Torrens System was adopted in this country because it was believed to be the most effective measure to guarantee the integrity of land titles and to protect their indefeasibility once the claim of ownership is established and recognized.[24] | |||||