Cases of reversion

-period of recovery in violation of prohibitive disposal

State not barred by the 5yr prohibitive period

Tipton v IAC
-violated period
-property returned to the State

In actions for reconveyance

-action is imprescriptible if plaintiff in actual possession of property

Obanana vs Boncaros
-precription does not apply to properties obtained thru fraud
-recovery on constructive trust
-presumption: implied trust; with obligation to return

Certificates of Title
-Benin vs Tucson - error in copy from decree to orig cert of title
-error or defect in title (manner of technical description copied) merely a formal defect
-does not nullify orig. certificate of title

as a general rule: owner indicated as married, presumption is property is conjugal

-does not apply to OCT bec. OCT merely confirms title; does not indicate when acquired -
cannot determine whether married or not when acquired
-ie. OCEN during single but confirmed only (registered) during marriage - owned exclusively
-NO LONGER APPLIES BEC. NOW ABSOLUTE COMMUNITY

Contents of Cert of Prop.

-owner, description, etc.

Transfer Cert. of Title or OCT(document itself)

- does not confer ownership; merely confirms ownership
- probative value: best evidence of ownership
-possession of TCT does not necessarily make the holder the owner - if issued by mistake or
oversight
-original owner can recover it
-if by mistake, fraud or oversight a persons name is indicated in the title, he does not become the
owner; have to go through judicial proceeding to correct contents in the title

-the persons named in the title does not become the owner by virtue of the title
Doctrines affecting title
-presumption of validity
-applies only if there is nothing irregular in the document itself
-Albienda vs. CA: erroneous inclusion of 8 ha. portion in certificate of title
-but 1 yr already lapsed; title incontrovertible (and indivisible)
-plus already transferred to an innocent purchaser
-if with the original owner (nottransfered yet), action for reconveyance etc.

-encumbrance only indicated in the cert of title will be recognised

Registered land not subject to prescription

-only prescription, not laches
-prescription is a mode of acquiring

Laches - sleeping on your rights

-while ownership is not divested, laches bars one from recovering possession
-not a mode of divesting ownership
-merely prevents fro exercising right

Collateral attack
-a title cannot be collaterally attacked
-must institute an action for attacking validity of title

note cases not collateral attack

mirror doctrine

forged document - cannot be source of valid title

-but if transferred to purchaser for value and in good faith,
-may be a source of valid title

Owner who was fraudulently divested of property vs. purchaser for value and in good faith

Reconstitution proceeding - RA. 26

-what is lost is the original copy in the records
-mode of restoring: reconstitution proceeding
-take note of jurisdictional requirements: under sec. 13

-publication in the OG, notice, hearing, etc.

-if not met, reconstitution proceeding null and void

-law requires strict compliance due to possibility of fraud
RA. 26 (EXAM)
-list of acceptable evidence for reconstitution

Administrative reconstitution (RA 6732)

-no need for judicial
when does it apply?

2nd owners copy

-no need to file reconstitution
-ex parte petition for issuance of 2nd owners copy
(miscellanrous proceeding)
-summary proceeding
-only 1 hearing
-SolGen need not appear

-original OCT not actually lost

-duplicate copy invalid and void

coverage: up to reconstitution and issuance of 2nd owners copy