Código Sísmico de Costa Rica:

CHAPTER: CLASSIFICATION OF PUBLIC LANDS Facts:

The subject matters of the case are mangrove swamps with an area of about 66 hectares. Yngson and appellants filed an application for fishpond permit with the Bureau of fisheries. When the application was filed the said area was not yet available for fishpond purposes; however the Director of Bureau of Fisheries issued an order awarding the whole area to Yngson. The appellants appealed the order to the Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources which set aside the order of the Bureau of Fisheries.

Issue:

Whether or not the Bureau of Fisheries may lease or dispose of lands not yet released as alienable and disposable. Held:

It is elementary in the law governing the disposition of lands of the public domain that until timber or forest lands are released as disposable and alienable neither the Bureau of Lands nor the Bureau of Fisheries has authority to lease, grant, sell, or otherwise dispose of these lands for homesteads, sales patents, leases for grazing or other purposes, fishpond leases, and other mode of utilization.

“DIRECTOR OF LANDS and DIRECTOR OF FOREST DEVELOPMENT vs. MARIANO FUNTILAR, MAGDALENA FUNTILAR, HEIRS OF FELIPE ROCETE and INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT”

CASE NO.: L- 68533, 142 SCRA 57

CHAPTER: CLASSIFICATION OF PUBLIC LANDS, p. 204 PONENTE: Gutierrez

FACTS:

In 1972, Mariano Funtilar, Magdalena Funtilar and Heirs of Felipe Rocete applied for the registration of a parcel of land. The land was part of the property originally belonging to Candida Fernandez whose ownership and possession began sometime during her lifetime and extended until 1936 when she died. Present applicants are the grandchildren of Candida. After Candida’s death, her real property was declared in the name of the “heirs of Candida Fernandez”. Sometime in 1940 or 1941, the land was forfeited in favor of the government for failure to pay real estate taxes. It was redeemed in 1942 by Vitaliano Aguirre, one of Candida’s children and administrator. The lot was later partitioned and the disputed lot adjudicated in favor of the applicants and shortly thereafter declared their share for taxation purposes. The Director of Lands, Director of Forest Development, Donansiano Pumaranda, Rafeal Morales and spouses Dominador Lacson and Esperanza Lacson filed their oppositions. On Nov. 26, 1982, trial court rendered declaring the applicants owners of the land. Government alone appealed with the IAC which later affirmed the decision. Hence, this petition.

ISSUE: WON applicants failed to overthrow the presumption that the land is a public land? RULING: petition dismissed

• We are satisfied from the evidence that long before her death in 1935, Candida Fernandez already possessed the disputed property. This possession must be tacked to the possession of her heirs.

• The fact of possession is bolstered by the forfeiture in 1940 of the land in favor of the government. It would be rather absurd under the circumstances of this case to rule that the government would order the forfeiture of property for any payment of real taxes if the property is forest land.

• It is also reasonable to rule that the heirs of Candida Fernandez redeemed the property because they wanted to keep the land of the deceased in the possession of their family, thus continuing their prior possession. From, 1936 and earlier up to 1972 is more than the required period.

• The applicant shoulders the burden of overcoming the presumption that the land sought to be registered forms part of the public domain.

• The land sought to be registered was declared alienable and disposable 33 years ago, Sept 15, 1953. It is not forest land. It has been possessed and cultivated by the applicants and their predecessors for at least 3 generations.

LA BUGAL-B’LAAN TRIBAL ASSOCIATION, INC., petitioners, vs. VICTOR O. RAMOS, Secretary, Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR); HORACIO RAMOS, Director, Mines and Geosciences

Bureau (MGB-DENR); RUBEN TORRES, Executive Secretary; and WMC (PHILIPPINES), INC., respondents.

CASE NO: 445 SCRA 1

CHAPTER: NON REGISTRABLE PROPERTIES PONENTE: J. PANGANIBAN

FACTS:

In a decision dated January 27, 2004, the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional RA 7942 or the Philippine Mining Act of 1995, its IRR and FTAA entered into by the government and Western Mining Corporation Philippines, an Australian Corporation. The Court said, RA 7942 and its IRR are unconstitutional for allowing service contracts that are prohibited by the 1987 Philippine Constitution.

The Court said that the FTAA is a service contract that grants control or beneficial ownership over the nation’s mineral resources to foreign contractors, leaving the sate with nothing but bare title thereto. It was also on this ground that the Court struck down the FTAA between the government and WMCP

Respondents Chamber of Mines of the Philippines and DENR filed a Motion for Reconsideration. ISSUES:

1. Whether or not the case has been rendered moot by the sale of WMC chares in WMCP to Sagittarius (60% of Sagittarius equity is owned by Filipinos and./or Filipino owned corporation while 40% is owned by Indophil resources Inc., an Australian Company) by the subsequent transfer and negotiation of the FTAA from WMCP to Sagittarius.

2. Whether or not the phrase “agreements involving either technical or financial assistance” contained in par. 4 of Sec. 2 of Article XII of Philippine constitution was properly interpreted.

RATIONALE: