Republic v. Tañada
REITERATIONFacts
1. The Antecedents: The Republic of the Philippines initiated a case to revert two parcels of land from spouses Jacinto K. Rafanan and Vicenta L. Rafanan. The lands were originally owned by the plaintiff, acquired from the United States Government as former enemy-owned property under the Philippine Property Act of 1946. These lands were subsequently sold by the Republic's Board of Liquidators to Delfin N. Lopez, who then sold them to Mariano Ho, Sr. Ho, in turn, sold the properties to the Rafanan spouses. 2. Procedural History: The Republic of the Philippines filed Civil Case No. 10630 in the Court of First Instance of Cebu, Branch V, seeking the reversion of the two parcels of land. After the parties submitted a stipulation of facts, the court approved it and rendered a decision dismissing the Republic's complaint. The Republic, as petitioner, is now seeking a review of this decision through a petition for certiorari. 3. The Petition: The Republic's petition for review on certiorari argues that the sale of the two parcels of land by its Board of Liquidators to Delfin N. Lopez was a total nullity because it lacked the required approval of the President of the Philippines, as mandated by Section 4 of Executive Order No. 372 and Sections 79(f) and 567 of the Revised Administrative Code. Furthermore, the Republic contends that the subsequent sale by Lopez to Mariano Ho, and then by Ho to the Rafanan spouses, were also void. The first sale was allegedly void due to the lack of presidential approval, and the subsequent sales were void because Lopez had nothing to convey and because the sale to Ho occurred within the ten-year prohibited period stipulated in Section 8 of R.A. No. 477.
Issue(s)
Whether the sale of the two parcels of land by the Board of Liquidators to Delfin N. Lopez was valid despite the alleged lack of presidential approval. Whether the subsequent transfers of the said parcels of land to Mariano Ho, Sr., and subsequently to the spouses Jacinto K. Rafanan and Vicenta L. Rafanan, were valid. Whether the State is entitled to the reversion of the said parcels of land.
Ruling
The petition is granted. The judgment of the Court of First Instance of Cebu is set aside. The Register of Deeds of Cebu is ordered to cancel the Transfer Certificates of Title issued to the private respondents and to issue new ones in the name of the Republic of the Philippines.
Ratio Decidendi
On the validity of the sale to Delfin N. Lopez: The Court held that the sale of the two parcels of land by the Board of Liquidators to Delfin N. Lopez was void for lack of presidential approval. Executive Order No. 372 explicitly stated that the Board shall, with the approval of the President, dispose of such properties. The deed of sale did not show any such approval. Presidential approval was a positive requirement that must be affirmatively shown, not presumed. Sections 79(F) and 567 of the Revised Administrative Code require deeds of sale of government property to be signed by the President or an authorized official, a requirement not met in this case. On the validity of subsequent transfers: The Court ruled that the subsequent transfers of the lots were likewise void. The sale from Delfin N. Lopez to Mariano Ho, Sr. was void because Lopez had no valid title to convey, and because it was made within the prohibited ten-year period stipulated in Section 8 of R.A. No. 477. Consequently, the transfer from Ho to the Rafanan spouses was also void for the same reasons, as Ho also acquired no valid title from Lopez. On the State's right to reversion: The Court affirmed the State's right to reversion. While acknowledging the ruling in Ras vs. Sua, the Court clarified that the State can institute appropriate proceedings for reversion, and its reacquisition of ownership and possession must be decreed by a competent court. This case, being such a proceeding, established the State's claim. Until the State takes steps to annul the grant and asserts title, the purchaser is not entitled to keep the land against the vendor or its heirs, and in this instance, the State is the ultimate vendor.
Main Doctrine
A sale of former enemy-owned lands by the Board of Liquidators, which requires presidential approval under Executive Order No. 372 and relevant statutes, is void ab initio if such approval is not obtained. Subsequent transfers of such land are also void, and the State may institute proceedings for reversion.