Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Case Digest Republic vs. Marcos 29 Scra 517 2

    Uploaded by

    Oscar E Valero
    465 views1 page
    The Supreme Court ruled that the respondent judge did not have jurisdiction over land claimed by private respondents within a military reservation. While private respondents sought to reopen a cadastral case under RA 931, the Court held that this law did not apply to lands within military reservations, which are governed by a separate law establishing such reservations. As the disputed lands were within an area legally established as a military reservation, the respondent judge lacked jurisdiction to order their registration. The establishment of military reservations is governed by its own law, which provides they are not subject to land registration or claims of private ownership.

    Original Description:

    CASE DIGEST

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The Supreme Court ruled that the respondent judge did not have jurisdiction over land claimed by private respondents within a military reservation. While private respondents sought to reopen a cadastral case under RA 931, the Court held that this law did not apply to lands within military reservations, which are governed by a separate law establishing such reservations. As the disputed lands were within an area legally established as a military reservation, the respondent judge lacked jurisdiction to order their registration. The establishment of military reservations is governed by its own law, which provides they are not subject to land registration or claims of private ownership.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    465 views1 page

    Case Digest Republic vs. Marcos 29 Scra 517 2

    Uploaded by

    Oscar E Valero
    The Supreme Court ruled that the respondent judge did not have jurisdiction over land claimed by private respondents within a military reservation. While private respondents sought to reopen a cadastral case under RA 931, the Court held that this law did not apply to lands within military reservations, which are governed by a separate law establishing such reservations. As the disputed lands were within an area legally established as a military reservation, the respondent judge lacked jurisdiction to order their registration. The establishment of military reservations is governed by its own law, which provides they are not subject to land registration or claims of private ownership.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 1

    Republic vs.

    Judge Pio Marcos, Kosen Piraso et al (219 SCRA 517) Related Topic: Jurisdiction "This is an original action for the issuance of the writs of certiorari and prohibition under Rule 65 of the Revised Rules of Court whereby herein petitioners seek to annul and set aside: (1) The Order denying the Motion to Dismiss filed by the City Fiscal of Baguio City in behalf of oppositors-government agencies, and thus insisting on assuming jurisdiction over the subject matter (a military reservation); (2) The Decisions decreeing the registration of parcels of land within the so-called 'U.S. Fleet Naval Reservation Center' in favor of private respondents Daisy Pacnos; Albino Reyes; and Kosen Piraso, et al...., all issued in Civil Reservation Case entitled 'In the Matter of the Petition for Reopening of Judicial Proceedings, Kosen Piraso, et al., Facts : By virtue of RA 931, private respondents caused the reopening of a cadastral proceedings over parcels of land situated within the so-called 'U.S. Fleet Naval Reservation Center-pursuant to Executive Order No. 5139, during American regime. After independence, the United States relinquished to the Republic of the Philippines all claims to title over the military bases including the aforesaid lots. Judge (Pio Marcos) decreed the registration of the disputed land despite the filing of motion to dismiss the reopening of said cadastral case. Private respondents avers that the land in question, particularly the area decreed in their name, is not part of a military reservation and the proclamation declaring certain areas to be naval reservations of the Government of the United States expressly states that such reservations are "subject to private rights if any there be." Upon the Philippines' becoming independent in 1946, said areas, by virtue of Executive Agreements, reverted to disposable lands administered by the Bureau of Lands of the Republic of the Philippines." Issue: Whether or not Judge Pio Marcos has jurisdiction over the subject matter in the case at bar? Ruling: The defendant's contention that the respondent court, in a cadastral case, has jurisdiction to order the registration of portions of a legally established military reservation cannot be sustained. The establishment of military reservations is governed by Act No. 627 of the Philippine Commission and Section 1 of that Act provides that 'All lands or buildings, or any interest therein, within the Philippine Islands lying within the boundaries of the areas now or hereafter set apart and declared to be military reservations shall be forthwith brought under the operations of the Land Registration Act, (citing Government v. Court of First Instance of Pampanga, a 1926 decision.) Held: Respondent Judge is devoid of jurisdiction to pass upon the claim of private respondents invoking the benefits of Republic Act No. 931. RA 931 provided that all persons "claiming title to parcels of land that have been the object of cadastral proceedings" in actual possession of the same at the time of the survey but unable for some justifiable reason to file their claim in the proper court during the time, limit established by law, "in case such parcels of land on account of their failure to file such claims, have been, or are about to be declared land of the public domain by virtue of judicial proceedings" instituted within the forty-year period next preceding June 20, 1953, the time of the approval of this particular enactment, are granted "the right within five years" from said date to petition for a reopening of the judicial proceedings but "only with respect to such of said parcels of land as have not been alienated, RESERVED, leased, granted, or otherwise provisionally or permanently disposed of by the Government

    You might also like