Mateo Cariño vs the Insular Government
1
Mateo Cariño vs The Insular Government (December 1906) January 29, 2012 7 Phil 132 – Civil Law – Land Titles and Deeds – Ancestral Domain – Ancestral Land Claim Political Law – Regalian Doctrine On June 23, 1903, Mateo Cariño went to the Court of Land Registration (CLR) to petition his inscription as the owner of a 146 hectare land he’s been possessing in the then municipality of Baguio. Mateo only presented possessory information and no other documentation. The State opposed the petition averring that the land is part of the US military reservation. The CLR ruled in favor of Mateo. The State appealed. Mateo lost. Mateo averred that a grant should be given to him by reason of immemorial use and occupation as in the previous cases Cansino vs Valdez and Tiglao vs Government; and that the right of the State over said land has prescribed. ISSUE: Whether or not Mateo is the rightful owner of the land by virtue of his possession of it for some time. HELD: No. The statute of limitations did not run against the government. The government is still the absolute owner of the land (regalian doctrine). Further, Mateo’s possession of the land has not been of such a character as to require the presumption of a grant. No one has lived upon it for many years. It was never used for anything but pasturage of animals, except insignificant portions thereof, and since the insurrection against Spain it has apparently not been used by Cariño for any purpose. While the State has always recognized the right of the occupant to a deed if he proves a possession for a sufficient length of time, yet it has always insisted that he must make that proof before the proper administrative officers, and obtain from them his deed, and until he did the State remained the absolute owner.
-
Upload
shila-tabanao-visitacion -
Category
Documents
-
view
18 -
download
2
description
law
Transcript of Mateo Cariño vs the Insular Government
Mateo Cario vs The Insular Government (December 1906)January 29, 20127 Phil 132 Civil Law Land Titles and Deeds Ancestral Domain Ancestral Land ClaimPolitical Law Regalian DoctrineOn June 23, 1903, Mateo Cario went to the Court of Land Registration (CLR) to petition his inscription as the owner of a 146 hectare land hes been possessing in the then municipality of Baguio. Mateo only presented possessory information and no other documentation. The State opposed the petition averring thatthe landis part of the US militaryreservation. The CLR ruled in favor of Mateo. The State appealed. Mateo lost. Mateo averred that a grant should be given to him by reason of immemorial use and occupation as in the previous casesCansino vs ValdezandTiglao vs Government;and that the right of the State over said land has prescribed.ISSUE:Whether or not Mateo is the rightful owner ofthe landby virtue of his possession of it for some time.HELD:No. The statute of limitations did not run against the government. The government is still the absolute owner ofthe land(regalian doctrine). Further, Mateos possession ofthe landhas not been of such a character as to require the presumption of a grant. No one has lived upon it for many years. It was never used for anything but pasturage of animals, except insignificant portions thereof, and since the insurrection against Spain it has apparently not been used by Cariofor any purpose.While the State has always recognized the right of the occupant to a deed if he proves a possession for a sufficient length of time, yet it has always insisted that he must make that proof before the proper administrative officers, and obtain from them his deed, and until he did the State remained the absolute owner.
