Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 312 views

    Acquisitive Prescription (Marcelo Vs Court of Appeals)

    Uploaded by

    AnsaiMendoza
    Flores claims ownership of 7,540 square meters of land through ordinary acquisitive prescription. The Court of Appeals found that Flores acquired ownership, as his possession since 1969 was in good faith, with just title, and public, peaceful, and uninterrupted for over 10 years. The heirs of Marcelo argue the land was always owned by their parents. The issue is whether Flores acquired ownership through acquisitive prescription.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Acquisitive Prescription (Marcelo Vs Court of Appeals)

    Uploaded by

    AnsaiMendoza
    312 views7 pages
    Flores claims ownership of 7,540 square meters of land through ordinary acquisitive prescription. The Court of Appeals found that Flores acquired ownership, as his possession since 1969 was in good faith, with just title, and public, peaceful, and uninterrupted for over 10 years. The heirs of Marcelo argue the land was always owned by their parents. The issue is whether Flores acquired ownership through acquisitive prescription.

    Original Description:

    Property Case (PPT)

    Original Title

    Acquisitive Prescription (Marcelo vs Court of Appeals)

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Flores claims ownership of 7,540 square meters of land through ordinary acquisitive prescription. The Court of Appeals found that Flores acquired ownership, as his possession since 1969 was in good faith, with just title, and public, peaceful, and uninterrupted for over 10 years. The heirs of Marcelo argue the land was always owned by their parents. The issue is whether Flores acquired ownership through acquisitive prescription.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    312 views7 pages

    Acquisitive Prescription (Marcelo Vs Court of Appeals)

    Uploaded by

    AnsaiMendoza
    Flores claims ownership of 7,540 square meters of land through ordinary acquisitive prescription. The Court of Appeals found that Flores acquired ownership, as his possession since 1969 was in good faith, with just title, and public, peaceful, and uninterrupted for over 10 years. The heirs of Marcelo argue the land was always owned by their parents. The issue is whether Flores acquired ownership through acquisitive prescription.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    of 7

    MARCELO vs

    COURT OF APPEALS
    [Acquisitive Prescription]
    Whether or not Flores has acquired
    ownership of the disputed land (the
    “parang”) by ordinary acquisitive
    prescription

    ISSUE
    ARTICLE 714
    The ownership of a piece of land cannot be acquired by occupation.
    ARTICLE 1118
    Possession has to be in the concept of an owner, public, peaceful and
    uninterrupted.
    ARTICLE 1134
    Ownership and other real rights over immovable property are
    acquired by ordinary prescription through possession of ten years.

    RULE
    1960: “Kasulatan ng Partisyon sa Labas
    ng Hukuman at Bilihang Patulayan’, they
    sold the property covering 6,000 sq.m. to
    Sarmientos Fernando Cruz

    1961: The adjoining property, the ‘parang’


    Lot 3098 with an area of 7,856 square meters was
    Owner: Sps Marcelo declared by Cruz in his name: increasing
    Continuous possession: since 1939
    Tax Declaration No. 2882 Cruz his landholding to 13,856 sq.m.

    Heirs of Marcelo 1968: The land with area of 13,856 sq.m.


    discovered in 1967 that was sold to Servando Flores (Kasulatang
    a portion of Lot 3098 Bilihan)
    had been encroached
    by Fernando Cruz
    (relocation survey: Flores 1969: Flores immediately took possession
    7,540 sq.m.) of the entire area in the concept of an
    owner and hold it in that capacity for
    almost 14 years before the petition was
    filed by the heirs of Marcelo

    ANALYSIS (Facts) RTC: Heirs of Marcelo


    CA: Cruz and Florendo
    HEIRS OF MARCELO COURT OF APPEALS
     Ownership of the adjoining property by
     Flores never acquired the 7,540 sq.m. Cruz originated from an extrajudicial
    lawfully – the property sold by partition with sale executed in 1960 by
    Sarmiento to Cruz under the Sarmiento and Cruz. The Kasulatan
    Kasulatan covers only the “palayero” pertained not only to the “palyero” but also
    or riceland (about 6,000 sq.m.) and to the “parang”. Although not included in
    the “parang” (7,856 sq.m) has not the tax declaration, it was contained in their
    been included. Kasulatan that it includes the “parang”.

     The 7,540 sq.m. formed part of the  After the execution of the deed of sale, Cruz
    property of Marcelos’ parents in their declared both parcels for tax purposes in
    1960 in the Office of the Provincial
    possession since 1939.
    Assessor, and a new Tax Declaration was
    issued in his name for the entire 13,856
    sq.m.

    ANALYSIS (Arguments)
    Whether or not Flores has acquired
    ownership of the disputed land by
    ordinary acquisitive prescription
    Yes. Flores acquired possession of the disputed The requirements for
    portion of land by ordinary acquisitive ORDINARY ACQUISITIVE
    prescription. Acquisitive prescription is a mode of
    acquiring ownership by a possessor through the
    PRESCRIPTION have indeed
    requisite lapse of time. In order to ripen into been met.
    ownership, possession must be in the concept of
    an owner, public, peaceful and uninterrupted.
    Acquisitive prescription of dominion and other Possession of things must be:
    real rights may be ordinary or extraordinary. 1. in good faith, and
    2. with just title

    CONCLUSION
    There is an ordinary acquisitive prescription in this case.
    • Servando Flores took possession of the controverted portion in good faith
    and with just title. This is so because the said portion of 7,540 square
    meters was an integral part of that bigger tract of land which he bought
    from Fernando Cruz under public document.

    • As mentioned in the document of sale executed in 1968, the disputed


    portion referred to as “parang” was included in the sale to appellant Flores
    since at the time of the sale, the whole area consisting of the riceland and
    pasture land was already covered by a tax declaration in the name of
    Fernando Cruz and further surveyed in his favor.

    • Hence, Flores’ possession of the entire parcel which includes the portion
    sought to be recovered by the heirs of Marcelo was not only in the concept
    of an owner but also public, peaceful and uninterrupted.

    CONCLUSION

    You might also like