1

510703179.docx510703179.docx

LTD CASE DIGEST

b. SECRETARY OF THE DENR vs. YAP

G.R. No. 173775, 8 October 2008

Facts

The Court of Appeals affirmed RTC Kalibo’s decision to grant the petition for
declaratory relief filed by Boracay Mayor Jose Yap et al. to have a judicial
confirmation of imperfect title or survey of land for titling purposes for the land
they have been occupying in Boracay. Yap et al alleged that Proclamation No.
1801 and PTA Circular No. 3-82 raised doubts on their right to secure titles
over their occupied lands. They declared that they themselves, or through
their predecessors-in-interest, had been in open, continuous, exclusive, and
notorious possession and occupation in Boracay since June 12, 1945, or
earlier since time immemorial. They declared their lands for tax purposes and
paid realty taxes on them. Later in 2006, President Arroyo issued
Proclamation No. 1064 classifying Boracay Island into 400 hectares of
reserved forest land and 628.96 hectares of agricultural land (alienable and
disposable).

Issue

Whether Proclamation No. 1801 and PTA Circular No. 3-82 pose any legal
obstacle for respondents, and all those similarly situated, to acquire title to
their occupied lands in Boracay Island.

Ruling

          The SC ruled against Yap et al. and Sacay et al.

Yes, because the Philippine Bill of 1902, Act No. 926, and Proclamation No.
1801 did not convert portions of Boracay Island into an agricultural
land.  The island remained an unclassified land of the public domain and,
applying the Regalian doctrine, is considered State property. The Regalian
Doctrine dictates that all lands of the public domain belong to the State, that
the State is the source of any asserted right to ownership of land and charged
with the conservation of such patrimony. All lands that have not been acquired
2
510703179.docx510703179.docx

from the government, either by purchase or by grant, belong to the State as

part of the inalienable public domain.

Private claimants’ bid for judicial confirmation of imperfect title, relying on the
Philippine Bill of 1902, Act No. 926, and Proclamation No. 1801, must
fail because of the absence of the second element of alienable and
disposable land.  Their entitlement to a government grant under our present
Public Land Act presupposes that the land possessed and applied for is
already alienable and disposable.   Where the land is not alienable and
disposable, possession of the land, no matter how long, cannot confer
ownership or possessory rights.

It is plain error for petitioners to argue that under the Philippine Bill of 1902
and Public Land Act No. 926, mere possession by private individuals of lands
creates the legal presumption that the lands are alienable and disposable.

Except for lands already covered by existing titles, Boracay was an

unclassified land of the public domain prior to Proclamation No. 1064.  Such
unclassified lands are considered public forest under PD No. 705.

The private claimants cannot apply for judicial confirmation of imperfect

title under Proclamation No. 1064, with respect to those lands which were
classified as agricultural lands.  Private claimants failed to prove the first
element of open, continuous, exclusive, and notorious possession of
their lands in Boracay since June 12, 1945.