G.R. No. 194617 , August 5, 2015
LA TONDEÑA, INC., PETITIONER, VS. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, RESPONDENT.

FACTS

Petitioner La Tondeña, Inc. filed an application for land registration under Section 48(b) of the Public Land Act in relation to Section 14(1) of the Property Registration Decree. The application was denied. Justice Brion, in a Concurring and Dissenting Opinion, concurs with the denial of the petition but dissents from a specific legal interpretation in the main ponencia.

ISSUE

1. Whether La Tondeña failed to comply with the requirements for land registration.
2. Whether, for purposes of registration under Section 48(b) of the Public Land Act, the subject agricultural land needs only to be classified as alienable and disposable (A&D) at the time of the filing of the application, and not necessarily as of June 12, 1945.

RULING

Justice Brion concurs in the denial of the petition based on three grounds: (1) La Tondeña failed to prove the property was already private at the time of its purchase; (2) it could not have acquired any vested right over the property as of 1972 pursuant to Republic Act No. 1942 ; and (3) it failed to prove possession and occupation since June 12, 1945, or earlier.
However, Justice Brion dissents from the ponencia’s ruling that the land needs only to be classified as A&D at the time of the application, not on June 12, 1945. He argues this interpretation, which relies heavily on Heirs of Mario Malabanan v. Republic, is contrary to the Constitution, the Public Land Act, and relevant principles and precedents. He maintains that for confirmation of imperfect title under Section 48(b), the public land must have been classified as alienable and disposable as of the cutoff date of June 12, 1945. His position is based on: (A) Classification being a constitutionally and statutorily required step, as without it, the land remains part of the inalienable public domain; (B) Under Article 530 of the Civil Code, only things susceptible of appropriation may be possessed, and public land cannot be appropriated prior to a declaration of alienability; and (C) Presidential Decree No. 1073 shows the intent to link alienability to the June 12, 1945 cutoff date. He views the ponencia’s interpretation as an unauthorized exercise in policy formulation.