III. Citizenship Requirements – Art. XIII-secs.

3, 7,8 10 of the 1987 Constitution

Ting Ho, Jr. v. Teng Gui, G.R. No. 130115. July 16, 2008

Facts: The properties in dispute involved a commercial land covered by Original Certificate of Title No. P-
1064 and Tax Declaration No. 002-2451. On such lot stood 1) a two-storey residential house, 2) a two-
storey commercial building, where the first floor was rented to different persons and the second floor
was Bonanza hotel which was operated by Vicente Teng Gui, 3) and a sari-sari store (formerly and
bakery).

The land was owned by Souses Felix Ting Ho, a Chinese citizen and Leonila Cabasel, a Filipino. They
occupied the aforementioned lot by virtue of the permission granted to the by the U.S. Naval
Reservation Office. The couple hereafter introduced improvements to the land. Later, Felix executed a
deed of absolute sale of the house in favor of Victoria Cabasal, his sister-in-law and also sold the building
to Victoria’s husband, Gregorio Fontela. In turn, the Spouses Victoria and Gregorio sold them to
respondent, Vincent Teng Gui. Felix also executed an Affidavit of Transfer, Relinquishment and
Renouncement of Rights and Interests including the improvements on the land in favor of Vicente.
However, during all the time that the alleged buildings were sold, petitioners and defendant continued
to live there and were under the custody of their parents until their death. Vicente thereafter took
possession of the properties for his own exclusive use and benefit.

Petitioners: Their father was disqualified to own public land which led them to title and tax declare the
properties under Vicente’s name. The properties should form part of the estate of Felix and should be
partitioned equally among siblings.

Respondent: He properly acquired the properties from the respective buyers and has since then been in
possession in the concept of an owner.

Issue: Whether both the lot and the properties erected therein should be included in the estate of the
deceased Felix Ting Ho.

Ruling: The father of petitioners and respondent was a Chinese citizen; therefore, he was disqualified
from acquiring and owning real property in the Philippines. In fact, he was only occupying the subject lot
by virtue of the permission granted him by the U.S Naval Reservation Office. The deceased Felix Ting Ho
was never the owner of the subject lot in light of the constitutional proscription and the respondent did
not at any instance act as the dummy of his father. However, respondent was unable to show that the
simulated sales of th improvements were a valid donation to him.

The two-storey residential house, two-storey residential building and sari-sari store from the part of the
estate of the late Spouses Ting Ho and Leonila Cabasal, entitling the petitioners to a fourth-fifths share
thereof.

Doctrine/Basis of the Ruling: Artile XIII, Section 1 of the 1935 Constitution: All agricultural timber, and
mineral lands of public domain, waters, minerals, coal, petroleum, and other mineral oils, all forces of
potential energy and other natural resources of the Philippines belong to the State, and their
disposition, exploitation, development, or utilization shall be limited to citizens of the Philippines or to
any existing right, grant, lease, concession at the time of the inauguration of the Government
established under this Constitution