Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • G.R. No. 143377 February 20, 2001 - SHIPSIDE

    Uploaded by

    inmotion
    48 views2 pages
    G.R. No. 143377 February 20, 2001 - SHIPSIDE

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    G.R. No. 143377 February 20, 2001 - SHIPSIDE

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    48 views2 pages

    G.R. No. 143377 February 20, 2001 - SHIPSIDE

    Uploaded by

    inmotion
    G.R. No. 143377 February 20, 2001 - SHIPSIDE

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 2
    sniarz02 SHIPSIDE INCORPORATED vs. THE HON, COURT OF APPEALS [Special Former Twellth Division], HON. REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, CPA-LAWYER PHILIPPINES AUGUST 4,2019 ATTY. ALDRIN JOSE M.CANA,CPA — CASE DIGEST SHIPSIDE INCORPORATED vs . THE HON. COURT OF APPEALS [Special Former Twelfth Division], HON. REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 26 (San Fernando City, La Union) & The REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES G.R. No. 143377. February 20, 2001 FACTS: Original Certificate of Title No. 0-381 was issued in favor of Rafael Galvez, over four parcels of land — Lot 1, 2,3 and 4 where lots 1 and 4 conveyed by him in favor of Filipina Mamaril, Cleopatra Llana, Regina Bustos, and Erlinda Balatbat in a deed of sale. On August 16, 1960, Mamaril, et al. sold the same lots to Lepanto Consolidated Mining Company and the latter in turn conveyed the property to Petitioner Shipside Incorporated Unknown to Lepanto Consolidated Mining Company, the CFI of La Union, Second Judicial District, issued an Order in Land Registration Case No. N-361 (LRC Record No. N-14012) entitled “Rafael Galvez, Applicant, Eliza Bustos, et al., Parties-In-Interest; Republic of the Philippines, Movant” OCT No. 0-381 was already declared null and void and was ordered cancelled. Rafael Galvez filed his motion for reconsideration against the order issued by the trial court declaring, OCT No. 0-381 null and void. The motion was denied. On appeal, the Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the Republic certifying that its decision became final and executory on October 23, 1973. 24 years after, the Office of the Solicitor General received a letter from Mr. Victor G. Floresca, Vice- President, John Hay Poro Point Development Corporation, stating that the aforementioned orders and decision of the trial court in L.R.C. No. N-361 have not been executed. The led for complaint for revival of judgment and cancellation of titles. Petitioner Shipside, Inc. moved to dismiss the complaint, alleging that the respondent Republic was not the real party-in-interest and that the cause of action was already barred by prescription. The trial court denied petitioner's motion to dismiss and its motion for reconsideration was likewise turned down. ISSUE: Whether or not the Republic may still for revival of judgment. HELD: tps :Megalopinion854088452.wordpress.com/2018108/04/shipside-incorporated-v the-hon-courtot-appeals-speciakformer-tweli-dvsion-non-regio.. 1/2 11912021 SHIPSIDE INCORPORATED vs. THE HON. COURT OF APPEALS [Special Former Twolh Division), HON. REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, NO. While itis true that prescription does not run against the State, the same may not be invoked by the government in this case since it is no longer interested in the subject matter. While Camp Wallance may have belonged to the government at the time Galvez’ title was ordered cancelled, the same no longer holds true today. RA 7277 created Bases Conversion and Development Authority (BSDA). With the transfer of Camp Wallance to the BCDA, the government has no longer a right or protect. ‘The rule that prescription does not run against the State does not apply to corporations or artificial bodies created by the State for special purposes, it being said that when the title of the Republic has been divested, its grantees, although artificial bodies of its own creation, are in the same category as ordinary persons. REPORT THIS AD The Bases Conversion Development Authority (BCDA), created under R.A. 7227, performs functions which are basically proprietary in nature. The promotion of economic and social development of Central Luzon, in particular, and the country’s goal for enhancement, in general, do not make BCDA equivalent to Government. Other corporations, such as $88, GSIS, NIA, although performing functions aimed at promoting public interest and public welfare, are not invested with government attributes. Consequently, the Republic was not a real party in interest and it may not institute the instant action. Nor may it raise the defense of imprescriptibility, the same being applicable only in cases where the government is a party in interest. Being the owner of the areas covered by Camp Wallace, it was the BCDA, not the Government, which stood to be benefited if the land covered by TCT No. T-5710 issued in the name of petitioner was cancelled. Published by Atty. Aldrin Jose M. Cana, CPA ~ a practicing lawyer in the Philippines and a Certified Public Accountant by profession. His key areas of practice are Labor, Criminal, Civil and Taxation. He graduated as Cum Laude in New Era University back in 2012 and as Class 2018 Salutatorian in San Beda College Alabang - School of Law. He is also a proud member and finance officer of Iglesia ni Cristo. View all posts by Atty, Aldrin Jose M. Cana, CPA BLOG AT WORDPRESS.CO! ‘tps:egalopinion8 54088452 wordpress. comi2018108/04/shipsde-incorporated-vs-the-hon-

    You might also like