Sunteți pe pagina 1din 3

JOCSON VS SORIANO

Facts: Silvestre Estacion purchased from the Government, lots. He continued to make payments
under his contract, until death. After his death, Valentina Jocson, the surviving widow, taking
advantage of the provisions of section 16 of Act No. 1120, had said lots transferred to her.
Notwithstanding this, the administrator of the estate of Silvestre took possession of the same,
included them in the inventory of the estate and continued to administer the same as a part of the
estate of the deceased.
Issue:

Does Valentina have the right to the title of the subject lands?

Held: Yes, Act 1120 provides that the titles remains with the government until full payment of the
purchase price. Section 16 provides that in case of death of purchaser, prior to completion, his
widow shall be entitled to receive a deed of the land stated in the certificate upon showing that she
has complied with the requirements of law for the purchase of the same. . . ."The character of the
right of Silvestre was analogous to a homesteader. Act No. 926, provides for homesteads. Section 3
provides that "in the event of the death of an applicant for a homestead prior to the issuance of a
patent (title), his widow shall be entitled to have a patent for the land applied for issue to her" upon a
proper showing, and until a final title or patent is issued for the land to the applicant the Government
remains the owner.
Acts Nos. 1120 and 926 were patterned after the laws granting homestead rights and special
privileges under the laws of US and the various states of the Union. Their object is to provide a
home for each citizen of the Government, where his family may shelter and live beyond the reach of
financial misfortune, and to inculcate in individuals those feelings of independence which are
essential to the maintenance of three institutions. Furthermore, the state itself is concerned that the
citizens shall not be divested of a means of support, and reduced to pauperism.
The doctrine announced with reference to the right of the widow in the homestead upon the death of
her husband, does no injustice to the creditors of the deceased, since they have it always in their
power to protect themselves either by refusing credit or by demanding such security as will protect
them from loss.

Francisco Chavez, filed an instant petition raising constitutional issues on the JVA entered by NHA
and R-II Builders, Inc. President Cory Aquino issued MO 161 approving and directing
implementation of the Comprehensive and Integrated Metropolitan Manila Waste Management Plan.
During this time, Smokey Mountain, a wasteland in Tondo, Manila, are being made residence of
many Filipinos living in a subhuman state. The SMDRP consists of Phase I and Phase II. Phase I of
the project involves clearing, levelling-off the dumpsite, and construction of temporary housing units
for the current residents on the cleared and levelled site. Phase II involves the construction of a
fenced incineration area for the on-site disposal of the garbage at the dumpsite. Due to the
recommendations done by the DENR after evaluations done, the JVA was amended and restated
(now ARJVA) to accommodate the design changes and additional work to be done to successfully
implement the project. Subsequently, the Clean Air Act was passed by the legislature which made
the establishment of an incinerator illegal, making the off-site dumpsite at Smokey Mountain
necessary. On August 1, 1998, the project was suspended, to be later reconstituted by President
Estrada in MO No. 33.
On August 27, 2003, the NHA and RBI executed a Memorandum of Agreement whereby both parties
agreed to terminate the JVA and subsequent agreements. During this time, NHA reported that 34
temporary housing structures and 21 permanent housing structures had been turned over by RBI
ISSUES:
Whether the RBI may acquire the subject lands?
Held:
Yes, There must be a law or presidential proclamation officially classifying these reclaimed lands as
alienable or disposable and open to disposition or concession.
1. The reclaimed lands across R-10 were classified alienable and disposable lands of public domain
of the State. First, there were three presidential proclamations classifying the reclaimed lands across
R-10 as alienable or disposable hence open to disposition or concession. These were MO 415
issued by President Aquino, Proclamation No. 39 and Proclamation No. 465 both issued by
President Ramos. Secondly, Special Patents Nos. 3591, 3592, and 3598 issued by the DENR
classified the reclaimed areas as alienable and disposable.
Admittedly, it cannot be said that MO 415, Proclamations Nos. 39 and 465 are explicit declarations
that the lands to be reclaimed are classified as alienable and disposable. We find however that such
conclusion is derived and implicit from the authority given to the NHA to transfer the reclaimed lands
to qualified beneficiaries. In line with the ruling in Chavez v. PEA, the court held that MO 415 and
Proclamations Nos. 39 and 465 cumulatively and jointly taken together with Special Patent Nos.
3591, 3592, and 3598 more than satisfy the requirement in PEA that [t]here must be a law or
presidential proclamation officially classifying these reclaimed lands as alienable or disposable and
open to disposition or concession.
2. Even if it is conceded that there was no explicit declaration that the lands are no longer needed for
public use or public service, there was however an implicit executive declaration that the reclaimed

areas R-10 are not necessary anymore for public use or public service. President Aquino through
MO 415 conveyed the same to the NHA partly for housing project and related commercial/industrial
development intended for disposition to and enjoyment of certain beneficiaries and not the public in
general and partly as enabling component to finance the project. Also, President Ramos, in issuing
Proclamation No. 39, declared, though indirectly, that the reclaimed lands of the Smokey Mountain
project are no longer required for public use or service. In addition, President Ramos issued
Proclamation No. 465 increasing the area to be reclaimed from forty (40) hectares to seventy-nine
(79) hectares, elucidating that said lands are undoubtedly set aside for the beneficiaries of SMDRP
and not the public. MO 415 and Proclamations Nos. 39 and 465 are declarations that proclaimed the
non-use of the reclaimed areas for public use or service as the SMDRP cannot be successfully
implemented without the withdrawal of said lands from public use or service.
3. When Proclamations Nos. 39 and 465 were issued, inalienable lands covered by said
proclamations were converted to alienable and disposable lands of public domain. When the titles to
the reclaimed lands were transferred to the NHA, said alienable and disposable lands of public
domain were automatically classified as lands of the private domain or patrimonial properties of the
State because the NHA is an agency NOT tasked to dispose of alienable or disposable lands of
public domain. The only way it can transfer the reclaimed land in conjunction with its projects and to
attain its goals is when it is automatically converted to patrimonial properties of the State. Being
patrimonial or private properties of the State, then it has the power to sell the same to any qualified
personunder the Constitution, Filipino citizens as private corporations, 60% of which is owned by
Filipino citizens like RBI.
For short there were laws granting alienability or disposability of such properties of public dominion.

S-ar putea să vă placă și