Public Dominion and Patrimonial Property
Civil Code
Art. 420. The following things are property of public dominion:
(1) Those intended for public use, such as roads, canals, rivers,
torrents, ports and bridges constructed by the State, banks, shores,
roadsteads, and others of similar character;
(2) Those which belong to the State, without being for public use,
and are intended for some public service or for the development of
the national wealth.
Based on Paragraph 2 of Art. 420:
(a) For public use — like roads, canals (may be used by ANYBODY).
(b) For public service — like national government buildings,
army rifles, army vessels (may be used only by duly authorized
persons).
(c) For the development of national wealth — like our natural
resources. Forest and mining lands are properties of public dominion
of the third class, i.e., properties for
the development of the national wealth.
Jurisprudence
Public Stream: People v. Jacobo
- The Supreme Court distinguished between public and
private streams; and held that a stream, generally, is only a creek, and
not a river as contemplated under Art. 420 of the Civil Code. It
concluded that it is only after the stream has been declared a PUBLIC
STREAM by the COURTS, that a private person, claiming ownership
thereof, maybe held liable for maintaining an obstruction thereon.
Creek: Maneclang, et al vs IAC
- A creek is a recess or arm extending from a river and
participating in the ebb and flow of the sea. It is a property belonging
to the public domain. It is not susceptible to private appropriation
and acquisitive prescription. As a public water, it cannot be registered
under the Torrens System in the name of any individual.
Shore: Republic of the Philippines vs Lat Vda De Castro, et al
- Shores are properties of the public domain, intended for
public use therefore not registerable.
Torrent: Santos vs Moreno
- Canals constructed by the State and devoted to use are of
public ownership; canals constructed by private persons within
private lands and devoted exclusively for private use must be of
private ownership.
Public Lands: Montano vs Insular Government
- ...that part of Government lands which are thrown open

Art. 421. All other property of the State, which is not of the
character stated in the preceding article, is patrimonial property
Art. 422. Property of public dominion, when no longer intended for
public use or for public service, shall form part of the patrimonial
property of the State.
to private appropriation and settlement by homestead and other like
general laws.
Other cases:
Mun. Of Cavite vs Rojas - Streets and plazas are outside the
commerce of man, since they are properties for public use.
Republic vs Animas - Forest lands as such cannot be registered. The
mere fact that a person has a certificate title over them is unavailing.
Friar Lands: Jacinto vs Director of Lands
- Under the Friar Lands Law (Act No. 1120), they are
intended to be sold to actual settlers and occupants.
Public lands after the same had been declared available for
alienation or disposition: Montano vs Insular Government
- Before the declaration, they are property of
public dominion; as they partake of the nature of property for the
development of the national wealth.
Conversion of Property of Public Dominion to Patrimonial Property
(Entities that may affect the change):
Faustino Ignacio vs Director of Lands – Only the Executive and
possibly the Legislative departments have the authority and power to
make the declaration that any land so gained by the sea is not
necessary for purposes of public utility, or for the establishment of
special industries and or for the Coast Guard Service.
Municipality of Oas vs Roa – When a municipality no longer uses a
public plaza as such, and instead constructs buildings thereon for
storage of government property, or for housing purposes, it is clear

Art. 423. The property of provinces, cities, and municipalities is
divided into property for public use and patrimonial property.
Art. 424. Property for public use, in the provinces, cities, and
municipalities, consist of the provincial roads, city streets, municipal
streets, the squares, fountains, public waters, promenades, and
public works for public service paid for by said provinces, cities, or
municipalities.
All other property possessed by any of them is patrimonial and shall
be governed by this Code, without prejudice to the provisions of
special laws.
that the property has become patrimonial.
Mun. of Hinunang vs Director of Lands – Although a fortress as such is
property of public dominion because it is for public service, still when
it is no longer used as such, it does not necessarily follow that the
State has lost ownership over the same inasmuch as the property is
now considered patrimonial, and therefore still belongs to the state.
Reclaimed Lands: Chavez vs PEA
- These are not plain and simple patches of the earth
as agricultural, timber, or mineral lands, are in the full sense of being
products of nature, but are the result of the intervention of man just
like in the extraction of mineral resources.
Donation by the National Government to a Political Subdivisions:
Mun. Of Catbalogan vs Director of Lands – The National Government
may donate its patrimonial property to a municipality, and the latter
may own the same. When thus donated, the property becomes either
property for public use or patrimonial property, depending on the use
given to the property.
Usage: Salas vs Jarencio
- There being no proof that the lot had been acquired by the
City with its own funds, the presumption is that it was given to it by
the State IN TRUST for the benefit of the inhabitants. Residual control
remained in the State, and therefore the State can lawfully dispose of
the lot.
Rules with respect to Properties for Public Use:
Viuda de Tan Toco vs Mun. Council of Iloilo – Properties used by a
municipal corporation in the exercise of its governmental powers

Art. 425. Property of private ownership, besides the patrimonial
property of the State, provinces, cities, and municipalities, consists
of all property belonging to private persons, either individually or
collectively.
cannot be attached or levied upon.
National Properties May Not Be Registered by a Municipality Under
its Own Name: Mun. of Tigbawan vs Director of Lands
- Properties of public dominion, owned by the National
Government, even if planted upon with trees by a municipality for a
number of years, do not become municipal properties, and may not
therefore be registered by a municipality under its name.
Effect of Possession by Private Persons:
Nalayan, et al vs Nalayan, et al - Possession by private persons since
time immemorial carries the presumption that the land had never
been part of the public domain. An allegation to this effect is a
sufficient averment of private ownership.
Private Lands within a Military Zone:
Inchausti and Co. vs Commanding General – If private lands of a
person should lie within a military zone, said lands do not necessarily
become property of public dominion (public service).
Ownership Evidenced by a Torrens Title:
Zobel vs Mercado – If there is any error in the Torrens title of a person
in the sense that it includes lands belonging to the government, it is
only the government which can properly question that fact, and a
judicial pronouncement is necessary in order to have the proportion
excluded from the Torrens title.
Acquisition by Aliens:
Krivenko vs Register of Deeds – An alien has no right to acquire since
the date of effectivity of the Philippine Constitution, any public or
private agricultural, commercial, or residential lands (except by
hereditary succession); the same rules apply to a foreign corporation,
even if it be a religious and non-stock foreign corporation.