Legal library › Case digests › Political Law
Case digest · Registration is not a mode of acquiring ownership; cure by transfer to a Filipino
Borromeo vs. Descallar
An Austrian working in Cebu paid for a house and lots in Mandaue City, but the titles came out in his former girlfriend’s name alone. He later sold his rights to a Filipino, who sued to recover the property.
Facts
1984
Wilhelm Jambrich, an Austrian, transferred to Cebu to work at the Naga II Project of the National Power Corporation. He met Antonietta Opalla-Descallar, a separated mother of two boys working as a waitress, and asked her to tutor him in English. They fell in love and lived together.
1985–1987
They moved to their own house and lots at Agro-Macro Subdivision, Mandaue City. The contracts to sell named both of them as buyers, and so did the deed of absolute sale of November 16, 1987. The Register of Deeds refused to register the deed because Jambrich was an alien, so his name was erased, although his signatures remained. The titles were issued in Descallar’s name alone.
April 1991
The relationship ended.
July 1991
Jambrich owed Camilo F. Borromeo about P150,000.00 for a boat engine and accessories. To pay the debt, he sold his rights and interests in the properties to Borromeo for P250,000. When Borromeo tried to register the deed, he found the titles in Descallar’s name and the property already mortgaged.
1991–2003
Borromeo sued Descallar for recovery of real property. The Regional Trial Court of Mandaue City found that Jambrich alone had paid for the properties, declared Borromeo the owner and ordered new titles issued in his name. The Court of Appeals reversed, reasoning that the titles were never in Jambrich’s name, so he had nothing to transfer.
Issue
Who owns the house and lots: Descallar, in whose name alone they were registered, or Borromeo, to whom the alien buyer conveyed his rights?
Ruling
Borromeo. The Court granted the petition, reversed the Court of Appeals and reinstated the trial court’s decision.
The trial court’s factual findings, which even the Court of Appeals did not controvert, showed that Jambrich was the true buyer: he had the means, the installments were paid with his postdated checks, and Descallar herself affirmed under oath that he owned the properties. No co-ownership arose, because she was still married to another when they lived together. Her titles did not make her the owner: registration is not a mode of acquiring ownership, and the rule on indefeasibility does not protect a transferee who is not a holder in good faith and gave no valuable consideration. Jambrich’s purchase, as an alien, would have been declared invalid if challenged, but he conveyed the properties to Borromeo, a Filipino citizen. Under the rule reiterated in <em>United Church Board for World Ministries vs. Sebastian</em>, when land invalidly transferred to an alien is later transferred to a Filipino, the flaw is cured and the transferee’s title is valid.
“As the property in dispute is already in the hands of a qualified person, a Filipino citizen, there would be no more public policy to be protected. The objective of the constitutional provision to keep our lands in Filipino hands has been achieved.”
Doctrine
“It is settled that registration is not a mode of acquiring ownership.” And although an alien cannot validly acquire private land, “if land is invalidly transferred to an alien who subsequently becomes a Filipino citizen or transfers it to a Filipino, the flaw in the original transaction is considered cured and the title of the transferee is rendered valid.” The cure works because the ban aims to keep land in Filipino hands, and that aim is achieved once a qualified Filipino holds the land.
Compare: the alien himself asks for relief
In Muller vs. Muller, G.R. No. 149615, August 29, 2006, it was the alien who went to court, asking to be reimbursed for land titled in his wife’s name, and he lost: “Not even an ownership in trust is allowed.”
Bar tip
Ask who ends up with the land. When the alien buyer himself conveys the land to a Filipino, the defect is cured and the Filipino transferee’s title is valid. Here the land did not go back to the alien, and the titles in the name of a partner who paid nothing did not make her the owner.
Hear it explained
Land Titles Jurisprudence Ep. 4, at 9:15
Follow Forlawssake
Get the next case explainer when it’s out.
New videos and episodes come out on YouTube, Spotify and TikTok. Follow there, and the app tells you when the next one is posted. It’s free.
This digest is general legal information for education, not legal advice, and it is not a substitute for reading the decision. Quoted passages are taken word for word from the full text.