Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1908 > January 1908 Decisions > G.R. No. L-3013 January 24, 1908 - ROMAN CATHOLIC v. MUN. IN THE PROV. OF ILOCOS SUR

010 Phil 1:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

FIRST DIVISION

[G.R. No. L-3013. January 24, 1908. ]

THE ROMAN CATHOLIC APOSTOLIC CHURCH, ET AL., Plaintiffs, v. CERTAIN MUNICIPALITIES IN THE PROVINCE OF ILOCOS SUR, ET AL., Defendants.

Hartigan, Rohde and Gutierrez for plaintiffs.

Attorney-General Araneta and Buencamino & Diokno, for Defendants.

SYLLABUS


1. REALTY; CHURCH PROPERTY; POSSESSION IN GOOD FAITH. — Where land belonging to the Roman Catholic is temporarily abandoned because of war, and is then occupied by one who has no right or title thereto, he is not a possessor in good faith and can not lawfully claim the structures erected thereon. (Arts. 362 and 433, Civil Code.)


D E C I S I O N


WILLARD, J. :


This is an original action brought in this court by virtue of the provisions of Act No., 1376. It is in all respects similar to the case of The Roman Catholic Church v. The Municipalities of the Province of Tarlac. 1

It is therefore by the court adjudged and decreed that this action be dismissed without costs as to all of the defendants except the municipalities of Dolores, La Paz, Candon and Santa Cruz, and except as to the defendants, Gregorio Aglipay, Rosalio Eduarte, Elipio Blanco, Benigno de Lara, and Candido Gironella.

It is further adjudged and decreed that all of the property described in the complaint be eliminated therefrom except that which is hereinafter described, and as to the property thus eliminated this court makes no determination in regard to the rights of the parties to this action in relation thereto.

In reference to the municipality of Dolores, the evidence shows that the plaintiffs are not entitled to recover the building called by them in their complaint "a convent." It is proved to our satisfaction that this building was erected and has been used as a municipal building. Three churches have been built upon the lot originally dedicated to that purpose, the last one having been constructed about two years ago. With this construction the plaintiffs had nothing to do. That the plaintiffs are entitled to the possession of the lot and land can not be questioned. However, the present building was constructed by persons who have presented no written or other evidence of ownership. They simply took possession of the property when its former possessors were compelled to abandon it by reason of war. They can not be considered as possessors in good faith. (Art. 433, Civil Code). Not being possessors in good faith, they are not entitled to the structure erected upon the land not their own. (Art. 362, Civil Code).

We have said that the last church was constructed upon the site of the former churches. The evidence is in conflict upon this point, but we think it sustains our conclusion. However, that may be, it would of course follow that, if in fact the present building is not upon the lot in question, the plaintiffs would have no interest whatever therein.

[Here follows the formal part of the judgment, which is omitted. ]

So ordered.

Arellano, C.J., Torres, Mapa and Tracey, JJ., concur.

Separate Opinions


CARSON, J., with whom concurs JONHSON, J., concurring:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

I agree with the conclusion except in as far as they rest on the finding that the possession of those persons who built the newly erected church in the municipality of Dolores was not possession "in good faith" (de buena fe); and that they, therefore, lose all rights which are guaranteed to possessors in good faith under the provisions of the Civil Code.

It is admitted that this Church was erected within the last two years by voluntary subscriptions of the adherents of the Aglipayan Church; it appears that they did so with the consent and permission of the municipality of Dolores, which was at that time in actual possession of the land on which it was built, and that the municipality claimed the right of possession of this land by virtue of the treaty of Paris, and the grant of the control of public property in the Philippines acquired by the United States under that treaty, to the Government of the Philippine Islands, for the benefit of the people of these Islands.

I agree with the majority opinion that contention is not well founded, but article 433 of the Civil Code provides that he shall be deemed to be a possessor in good faith who is not aware that there is a defect in his title or in the mode whereby he acquired possession which invalidates it, and article 434 provides that in such cases good faith must always be presumed and the burden of proof is on him who alleges bad faith.

There is not a scintilla of proof of bad faith in the record, and indeed, that question never was raised. I am unable to understand on what basis the court holds that those persons who built the church and are now in possession knew that the municipality did not have the right to possession of the land and the power to authorize them to build thereon, and without proof of such knowledge the foregoing provisions of the Civil Code forbid the presumption of bad faith. The question of good faith does not rest on the final decision of the courts as to the soundness of the title, but, as provided in article 433, on the knowledge or lack of knowledge of the party in possession of a defect in his title.

Endnotes:



1. 9 Phil. Rep., 450.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






January-1908 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-3133 January 2, 1908 - ROMAN CATHOLIC APOSTOLIC CHURCH v. MUNICIPALITIES OF CUYAPO

    009 Phil 457

  • G.R. No. L-3736 January 2, 1908 - ALEXANDER DRAGON v. CARMEN DE LA CAVADA DE ENRIQUEZ

    009 Phil 461

  • G.R. No. L-3771 January 2, 1908 - PEDRO P. ROXAS v. ALEJANDRO, ET AL.

    009 Phil 475

  • G.R. No. L-3889 January 2, 1908 - JOSEFA VARELA v. ANTONIO MATUTE

    009 Phil 479

  • G.R. No. L-3890 January 2, 1908 - JOSEFA VARELA v. JOSEPHINE FINNICK

    009 Phil 482

  • G.R. No. L-3196 January 6, 1908 - CARMEN ZAMORA GONZAGA Y PILAR v. PEDRO MARTINEZ

    009 Phil 489

  • G.R. No. L-3777 January 6, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. NICOLASA PASCUAL

    009 Phil 491

  • G.R. No. L-2080 January 7, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. FELIX MELLIZA

    009 Phil 496

  • G.R. No. L-3631 January 8, 1908 - WARNER v. ROMAN JAUCIAN

    009 Phil 503

  • G.R. No. L-3987 January 8, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. LORENZO TUPAS

    009 Phil 506

  • G.R. No. L-3997 January 8, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. AGAPITO LAZADA

    009 Phil 509

  • G.R. No. L-3282 January 9, 1908 - RICARDO AGUADO v. CITY OF MANILA

    009 Phil 513

  • G.R. No. L-3603 January 9, 1908 - DIEGO RUGUIAN v. ROMAN RUGUIAN

    009 Phil 527

  • G.R. No. L-4023 January 9, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. BENITO MANANSALA

    009 Phil 529

  • G.R. No. L-4070 January 9, 1908 - JOSE R. INFANTE v. CATALINA MONTEMAYOR

    009 Phil 530

  • G.R. No. L-3687 January 10, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. JOHN HAZLEY

    009 Phil 533

  • G.R. No. L-3772 January 10, 1908 - LAURENTE BALDOVINO v. PEDRO AMENOS

    009 Phil 537

  • G.R. No. L-3956 January 10, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. EMILIO CARRERO

    009 Phil 544

  • G.R. No. L-4044 January 10, 1908 - W. H. SAMMONS v. MACARIO FAVILA

    009 Phil 552

  • G.R. No. L-3866 January 11, 1908 - E. B. MERCHANT v. INTERNATIONAL BANKING CORP.

    009 Phil 554

  • G.R. No. L-3834 January 13, 1908 - ISODORA GACRAMA v. MARIA LOZADA

    009 Phil 560

  • G.R. No. L-4046 January 13, 1908 - PEDRO CASIMIRO v. JOSE FERNANDEZ

    009 Phil 562

  • G.R. No. L-4183 January 13, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. ANDRES SORIANO

    009 Phil 564

  • G.R. No. L-4204 January 13, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. SIA TAO, ET AL.

    009 Phil 565

  • G.R. No. L-4387 January 13, 1908 - VICENTE PRIOLO v. PEDRO PRIOLO

    009 Phil 566

  • G.R. No. L-3592 January 14, 1908 - DALMACIO FRANCISCO v. GERONIMO TABADA

    009 Phil 568

  • G.R. No. L-3970 January 14, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. BONIFACIO BUNSALAN

    009 Phil 571

  • G.R. No. L-3981 January 14, 1908 - UNITED STATES, ET AL. v. GASPAR ALVIR

    009 Phil 576

  • G.R. No. L-3731 January 15, 1908 - J. T. CASSELLS v. ROBERT R. REID, ET AL.

    009 Phil 580

  • G.R. No. L-3764 January 15, 1908 - LUISA PEÑA v. W. H. MITCHELL

    009 Phil 587

  • G.R. No. L-3859 January 15, 1908 - UNITED STATES, ET AL v. FELIX ARLANTE

    009 Phil 595

  • G.R. No. L-4184 January 15, 1908 - LUCILA BOYDON v. MATEO ANTONIO FELIX

    009 Phil 597

  • G.R. No. L-2625 January 16, 1908 - JOSE ITURRALDE v. RAMON MAGCAUAS

    009 Phil 599

  • G.R. No. L-2797 January 16, 1908 - JOSE ITURRALDE v. ANTONIO GARDUÑO

    009 Phil 605

  • G.R. No. L-3784 January 16, 1908 - ANTONIO ALVAREZ v. INSULAR GOVERNMENT

    009 Phil 608

  • G.R. No. L-4034 January 16, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. CIRIACO EMPEINADO

    009 Phil 613

  • G.R. No. L-3595 January 17, 1908 - DOMINGO LEDESMA v. GREGORIO MARCOS

    009 Phil 618

  • G.R. No. L-3800 January 17, 1908 - MARCELA PERIZUELO ET AL. v. TEODORO S. BENEDICTO ET AL.

    009 Phil 621

  • G.R. No. L-3802 and L-3804 January 17, 1908 - TOMAS SUNICO v. FRANCISCO CHUIDIAN

    009 Phil 625

  • G.R. No. L-4036 January 17, 1908 - H. J. ANDREWS v. JUAN MORENTE ROSARIO

    009 Phil 634

  • G.R. No. L-3833 January 18, 1908 - JUAN AZARRAGA v. JOSE RODRIGUEZ

    009 Phil 637

  • G.R. No. L-3993 January 18, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. TEOFILO ALGURRA

    009 Phil 644

  • G.R. No. L-4188 January 18, 1908 - EMILE H. JOHNSON v. SANCHO BALANTACBO

    009 Phil 647

  • G.R. No. L-3940 January 20, 1908 - MILLER v. HENRY M. JONES

    009 Phil 648

  • G.R. No. L-4149 January 20, 1908 - ENRIQUE F. SOMES v. RAFAEL MOLINA Y SALVADOR

    009 Phil 653

  • G.R. No. L-3934 January 21, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. AMBROSIO ESTABILLO, ET AL.

    009 Phil 668

  • G.R. No. L-2554 January 22, 1908 - ANTONIO MINA v. VICTORINO LUSTINA

    009 Phil 678

  • G.R. No. L-3155 January 22, 1908 - JOHN BORDMAN v. INSULAR GOVERNMENT

    009 Phil 679

  • G.R. No. L-3355 January 22, 1908 - BONIFACIO MENDOZA v. FRANCISCO NABONG

    009 Phil 681

  • G.R. No. L-4019 January 22, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. JOSE DIMAYUGA

    009 Phil 687

  • G.R. No. L-3015 January 23, 1908 - ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH v. MUNICIPALITIES IN PROV. OF ORIENTAL NEGROS

    009 Phil 691

  • G.R. No. L-3888 January 23, 1908 - HENRY W. ELIOT v. CATALINA MONTEMAYOR, ET AL.

    009 Phil 693

  • G.R. No. L-3013 January 24, 1908 - ROMAN CATHOLIC v. MUN. IN THE PROV. OF ILOCOS SUR

    010 Phil 1

  • G.R. No. L-3705 January 24, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. FELIX BOQUILON

    010 Phil 4

  • G.R. No. L-3008 January 25, 1908 - ROMAN CATHOLIC v. MUN. IN THE PROV. OF ILOILO

    010 Phil 8

  • G.R. No. L-3502 January 25, 1908 - RAFAEL ENRIQUEZ v. FLORENCIA VICTORIA

    010 Phil 10

  • G.R. No. L-3538 January 25, 1908 - LA SOCIEDAD "GERMINAL v. MANUEL NUBLA

    010 Phil 18

  • G.R. No. L-3782 January 25, 1908 - ANTONIO ZARAGOZA v. RAMON M. DE VIADEMONTE

    010 Phil 23

  • G.R. No. L-4029 January 25, 1908 - IN RE: DOMINGA BUTALID

    010 Phil 27

  • G.R. No. L-4153 January 25, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. PABLO GUEVARA

    010 Phil 37

  • G.R. No. L-3857 January 28, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. MANUEL DA SILVA

    010 Phil 39

  • G.R. No. L-3874 January 28, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. EMILIO LEYVA

    010 Phil 43

  • G.R. No. L-3947 January 28, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. SIMEON AGRAVANTE

    010 Phil 46

  • G.R. No. L-3533 January 29, 1908 - JUAN TUASON v. CEFERINO DOMINGO LIM

    010 Phil 50

  • G.R. No. 3673 January 29, 1908 - MARIANO GUERERRO v. ANTONIO MIGUEL

    010 Phil 52

  • G.R. No. L-4030 January 29, 1908 - MARIA ANIVERSARIO v. FLORENCIO TERNATE

    010 Phil 53

  • G.R. No. L-3481 January 30, 1908 - GABINO PISARRILLO v. VICENTE LADIA

    010 Phil 58

  • G.R. No. L-4010 January 30, 1908 - VICTOR RAVAGO v. MACARIO BACUD

    010 Phil 60

  • G.R. No. L-4273 January 30, 1908 - VICENTA FABIE Y GUTIERREZ v. CITY OF MANILA

    010 Phil 64

  • G.R. No. L-3832 January 31, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. ISAIAS GONZALEZ

    010 Phil 66

  • G.R. No. L-3882 January 31, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. MARTIN RUBIO CO-PINCO

    010 Phil 69