Midterm Cases 381i1a

CASES 1. MIAA vs. City of Pasay, G.R. No. 163072, April 2, 2009 Art. 420 –(taxation not applicable) 2. FELS Energy vs. Province of Batangas, G.R. No. 168557, February 16, 2007 (Real Property –subject of real property tax) 3. Ninfa o vs. Samela, G.R. No. 155055, January 26, 2005 Creek –Public Dominion no one can own (Art. 420) 4. Domalsin vs. Valenciano, G.R. No. 158687 Public Dominion –Kennon Road –Art. 420 Art. 530- only things and rights which are susceptible of being appropriated maybe the object of possession 5. Palattao vs. CA, G.R. No. 131726 May 7, 2002 6. Sps. Ong vs. Parel, G.R. No. 143173, March 28, 2001 7. Soriente vs. Estate of A.E. Concepcion, G.R. No. 160239 8. Sps. Lumbreo vs. Sps Tablada, G.R. No. 165831, February 23, 2007 9. Quevedo vs. CA, G.R. No. 140798, September 19, 2006 10. Spouses Booc vs. Five Star Marketing, Inc. 11. Navarro vs. IAC & Heirs of Sinfrose, G.R. No. 68166, February 12, 1997 12. New Regent Sources Inc. vs. Taguatco Jr., 585 SCRA 329 13. Rosales vs. Castelltort, G.R. No. 157044, 472 SCRA 145 (Art. 448, 526, Possession acquired in good faith) 14. Gaspar Calacala et. Al. vs. Republic of the Phil. et. Al. G.R. No. 154415, July 28, 2005, 464 SCRA 438 (Indispensable Requisites for an Action to Quiet Title) 15. Agnes Gapacan et.al. vs. Maria Gapacan Omipet G.R. No. 148943, August 15, 2002

1

(Question of ownership maybe decided in the original case for quieting of title) 16. Efren Tandog et. Al. vs. Renato Macapagal et. Al. G.R. No. 144208, September 11, 2007 (Evidence required in action to quiet title) 17. Spouses Edesito and Concorcia Ragasa vs. Spouses Roa et.al. G.R. No. 141964, June 30, 2006 Heirs of Domingo Valientes vs. Hon. Ramas et. Al. G.R. No. 157852, December 15, 2010 (Imprescriptibility in filing action for Quieting of Title) 18. Dionisia P. Bagaipo vs. Hon. Court of Appeals et. Al. G.R. No. 116290, December 8, 2000 (Change in the River Course/Accretion) 19. Coronel et al. vs. Florentino Constantino et al. G.R. No. 121069, February 7, 2003 (Enforceability of the Contract executed by a parent co-owner with respect to the shares of her co-heirs children Parties for Declaration of Ownership) 20. Spouses Alexander Cruz & Adelaida Cruz vs. Ellulerio et al. G.R. No. 125233, March 9, 2000 (May a co-owner acquire exclusive ownership over the property held in common, (Art 458, Art. 493) 21. Padilla vs. Magdua G.R. No. 176858, September 15, 2010 -Generosa vs. Prangas-Valera, G.R. No. 166521, August 31, 2006 (Can a co-owner acquired the property co-owned by acquisitive prescription; Jurisdiction; repudiation of co-ownership) 22. Perla G. Patricio vs. Marcelino K. Daro III G.R. No. 170829, November 20, 2006 (When can a co-owner demand partition; right of co-owners to demand partition) 23. Limson vs. Wackwack Condominium Corp. G.R. No. 188802, February 14, 2011

2

(Condo ACT OF 1973, RA 7406) 24. Spouses Si vs. CA et al. G.R. No. 122047, October 12, 2000 (Right of redemption between co-owners) 25. Cruz vs. C.A., G.R. No. 122904, April 15, 2005 (Rights of a co-owner of a specific portion of the property assigned to them in the deed of partition) 26. Iglesia ni Cristo vs. Ponfurada, G.R. No. 168943 Act. 27, 2006 Carandang vs. Heirs of de Guzman, G.R. No 160347, November 29, 2006 (The necessity of authority to represent other co-owners in an action to recover possession of property for ejectment) 27. Rodolfo Santos vs. Ronald C. Manalili et. Al. G.R. No. 157812, November 22, 2005, 475 SCRA 679 (Possession maybe exercised in one owner’s name or in that of another) Art. 524 28. Maria Carlos vs. Republic of the Philippines G.R. No. 164823, August 31, 2005, 468 SCRA 709 (Occupation; Possession maybe had in 2 ways; in the concept of an owner and in the concept of a holder. Art. 525) 29. Gaitero et. Al. vs. Almeria, G.R. No. 181812, June 8, 2011 Ismaquel et. Al. vs. Maria Coprada, G.R. No. 152423, December 15, 2010 (Right of ed owner to recover possession is never barred by laches; person who has a torrens title over a parcel of land is entitled to the possession; ownership & right to recover cannot be defeated by improve oral sale) 30. Rosales et. Al. vs. Castelltort et. Al., G.R. No. 157044, October 5, 2008 Tan vs. Ramirez et. Al., G.R. No. 158929, August 3, 2010 (Possession acquired in good faith) 31. Flores-Cruz vs. Goli Cruz, 600 SCRA 545 (It is no longer true that all cases of recovery of possession or accion publiciana lie with the RTC) 3

32. Aqualab Phil. Vs. Heirs of Pagobo, 603 SCRA 435 (A buyer of real property that is in possession of other person/s other than the seller not a buyer in good faith) 33. Arangote vs. Maglunob, 579 SCRA 620 (Rights under Art. 448 and 546; good faith how to determine) 34. Heirs of the Deceased Spouses Arcella vs. Teodoro, 561 SCRA 545 (Ownership and possession are two (2) entirely different concepts) 35. Canaynay vs. Sarmiento, 79 Phil. 36 (Owner preferential right of possession; TOLERANCE) 36. Dolfin et. Al. vs. Billiones et. Al., G.R. No. 146554, March 17, 2006 (Art 539)- Every possessor has a right to be respected in his possession and should be disturbed therein he shall be protected in or restored to said possession by the mean established by law and the Rules of Court. 37. Spouses Pacero vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 147074, July 15, 2005 (Art. 541)

4