additional ltd

2
 In a d d i t i o n t o t h e t o p i cs d iscu ss ed l a st m e e ti n g ( those a b se n t l a st N o v. 27 w ill reci t e o n th e p r e vi o u s t o p i c), w e w i ll d i scu ss i n D e c. 4 t h e m att e r s (sub st ant i ve p r ov i si on s o f t h e l aw s/ j u r i sp r ud e nce ) i n C h a pt e r s I I I a n d I V o f A m a d o D . A q u i n o ' s L a n d R e g istr a t i o n a n d R e l a t e d P r o ce e d i ng s ( 2 0 0 7 o r latest, i f a ny ) . In c o nn e ction w ith th e n a t u r e o f p ro pe rt y t h a t m ay t h e s u bj ect o f a n a p p licati o n u n d er S e c. 1 4(1) ( 2 ) o f PD152 9 o r S ec. 4 8 (b) o f C A 1 4 1 , ki n d l y r ea d t o o t h e case s o n t h e c l a ssi ca t i o n a n d d e cl a ssi ca t i o n o f p u b l i c l an d s: D i r ec t or of La nd s a nd D i r ec t or of F orest D eve l op m en t v. C A ( 19 84 ) ; R ep ub l ic v. A nim as ( 1974 ) ; R ep ub lic v. C A ( 19 89 ); I nternati on al H ardw oo d a nd V eneer C o. of t he P hi l s. v. U P ( 1991 ) ; D ir e ctor of L an d s v. C A(1984); To t t o c v. IAC(1 9 8 9); R e p u b l ic v. T. A . N . P r o p er t i e s ( 2 0 08 ) ; R ep ub lic v. D e P or kan(1987 ) ;  R ep ub l i c v. H an ove r Worl dw i de Tr ad i ng C orp. ( 20 10 ) ; R e p u blic v. G iel czy k ( 2 0 1 3 ; V i ct o r i a v. R e p u b l i c (20 1 1 ) ; R e p u blic v. N a g uit ( 2 0 0 5 ) ; R ep ub l i c v. M an na P r op ert i es ( 20 05 ) ; R e p u blic v. H e r b i et o ( 2 0 05 ) ; M al ab ananv. R ep ub l i c ( 20 09 ) K i n d l y r e a d t o o t h e case s: R e p u blic v. D o l do l ( 19 9 8 ) ; R ep ub l i c v. R ub y L ee Tsa i ( 20 09 ) ; D e l Rosario-I g ti b e n v. R e p u b li c ( 2 0 0 4 ) ; R ep ub lic v. C A 92 00 1); D e O cam po v . A r l os ( 20 00 ) ; C ruz v. S ecretary of D E NR(20 00 ) ; C ur eg v. I A C ( 19 89 ) ; D e B uy ser v. D ir ec t or of La nd s ( 19 83); R ep ub l ic v. C A ( 19 76 ) ; C ol l ad o v. C A ( 20 02 ) ; H eri cov. D A R ( 19 80 ) ; R ep ub lic v. C A ( 19 93 ) ; D i r ect or of La nd s v. I A C an d A C M E ( 19 86 ) ; R ep ub lic v. S an Lo renzo Devel op m en t C or p. ( 20 07 ) ; R e p u bl i c v. B i b o n i a ( 2 0 05 ) ; Ta n v. R ep u b li c ( 2 0 0 8 ) ; R ep ub l i c v. C A ( 19 87 ) ; R om anCat ho lic A po st olic of Davaov. LR C ( 19 56 ) ; R ep ub l i c v. C A ( 19 94 ) ; R am irez v. V da de R am i r ez ( 1987 ) ; B orromeov. D es ca l l ar ( 20 09 ) ; O ng C hi ng P o v. C A ( 1994.

Upload: cherie-del-rio

Post on 04-Oct-2015

13 views

Category:

Documents


3 download

DESCRIPTION

ltd

TRANSCRIPT

In addition to the topics discussed last meeting (those absent last Nov. 27 will recite on the previous topic), we will discuss inDec. 4the matters (substantive provisions of the laws/jurisprudence) in Chapters III and IV of Amado D. Aquino's Land Registration and Related Proceedings (2007 or latest, if any).

In connection with the nature of property that may the subject of an application under Sec. 14(1) (2) of PD 1529 or Sec. 48 (b) of CA 141, kindly read too the cases on the classification and declassification of public lands:

Director of Lands and Director of Forest Development v. CA (1984); Republic v. Animas (1974); Republic v. CA (1989); International Hardwood and Veneer Co. of the Phils. v. UP (1991); Director of Lands v. CA (1984); Tottoc v. IAC (1989); Republic v. T.A.N. Properties (2008); Republic v. De Porkan (1987); Republic v. Hanover Worldwide Trading Corp. (2010); Republic v. Gielczyk (2013; Victoria v. Republic (2011); Republic v. Naguit (2005); Republic v. Manna Properties (2005); Republic v. Herbieto (2005); Malabanan v. Republic (2009)

Kindly read too the ff cases: Republic v. Doldol (1998); Republic v. Ruby Lee Tsai (2009); Del Rosario-Igtiben v. Republic (2004); Republic v. CA 92001); De Ocampo v. Arlos (2000); Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (2000); Cureg v. IAC (1989); De Buyser v. Director of Lands (1983); Republic v. CA (1976); Collado v. CA (2002); Herico v. DAR (1980); Republic v. CA (1993); Director of Lands v. IAC and ACME (1986); Republic v. San Lorenzo Development Corp. (2007); Republic v. Bibonia (2005); Tan v. Republic (2008); Republic v. CA (1987); Roman Catholic Apostolic of Davao v. LRC (1956);Republic v. CA (1994); Ramirez v. Vda de Ramirez (1987); Borromeo v. Descallar (2009); Ong Ching Po v. CA (1994.