3. Section 7. Private Land Ownership:Matthews vs. Taylor, G.R.

164584, June 22,

2009Facts: On June 20, 1988. Respondent Benjamin Taylor, a British, married a Fi
lipina named Joselyn Taylor. Eventually, theybought a lot. The transaction was s
aid to be financed by Benjamin. Joselyn and Benjamin constructed improvements an
d made aninn to the said lot. Permits and licenses were secured for the establis
hment. Three years passed and their relationship turned sourand Joselyn ran away
with Philip Matthews. On July 20, 1992, Joselyn as lessor and petitioner Philip
Matthews as lessee, entered into an Agreement of Lease (Agreement)involving the
Boracay property for a period of 25 years, with an annual rental of P12,000.00.
The agreement was signed by theparties and executed before a Notary Public. Pet
itioner thereafter took possession of the property and renamed the resort as Mus
icGarden Resort.Claiming that the Agreement was null and void since it was enter
ed into by Joselyn without his (Benjamin s) consent, Benjamininstituted an action
for Declaration of Nullity of Agreement of Lease with Damages against Joselyn an
d the petitioner.Issue: Can an alien husband nullify a lease contract entered in
to by his Filipina wife over a land bought during their marriage?Ruling: The rul
e is clear and inflexible: aliens are absolutely not allowed to acquire public o
r private lands in the Philippines, saveonly in constitutionally recognized exce
ptions. There is no rule more settled than this constitutional prohibition, as m
ore and morealiens attempt to circumvent the provision by trying to own lands th
rough another. Benjamin has no right to nullify the Agreement of Lease between J
oselyn and petitioner. Benjamin, being an alien, isabsolutely prohibited from ac
quiring private and public lands in the Philippines. Considering that Joselyn ap
peared to be thedesignated ?vendee? in the Deed of Sale of said property, she ac
quired sole ownership thereto. This is true even if we sustainBenjamin s claim tha
t he provided the funds for such acquisition. By entering into such contract kno
wing that it was illegal, noimplied trust was created in his favor; no reimburse
ment for his expenses can be allowed; and no declaration can be made that thesub
ject property was part of the conjugal/community property of the spouses. In any
event, he had and has no capacity orpersonality to question the subsequent leas
e of the Boracay property by his wife on the theory that in so doing, he was mer
elyexercising the prerogative of a husband in respect of conjugal property.1998
BAR:Express your agreement or disagreement with any of the following statements.
Begin your answer with the statement: "IAGREE" or "DISAGREE" as the case may be
.1. Anyone, whether Individual, corporation or association, qualified to acquire
private lands is also qualified to acquire public landsin the Philippines.2. A
religious corporation is qualified to have lands in the Philippines on which it
may build Its church and make otherimprovements provided these are actually, dir
ectly and exclusively used for religious purposes.3. A religious corporation can
not lease private lands In the Philippines.4. A religious corporation can acquir
e private lands in the Philippines provided all its members are citizens of the
Philippines.5. A foreign corporation can only lease private lands in the Philipp
ines.SUGGESTED ANSWER:1.) I disagree. Under Section 7, Article XII of the Consti
tution, a corporation or association which is sixty percent owned by Filipinocit
izens can acquire private land, because it can lease public land and can therefo
re hold public land. However, it cannot acquirepublic land. Under Section 3, Art
icle XII of the Constitution, private corporations and associations can only lea
se and cannot acquirepublic land. Under Section 8, Article XII of the Constituti
on, a natural-born Filipino citizen who lost his Philippine citizenship mayacqui
re private land only and cannot acquire public land.2.) I disagree. The mere fac
t that a corporation is religious does not entitle it to own public land. As hel
d In Register of Deeds vs.UngSiu Si Temple, 97 Phil. 58, 61, land tenure is not
indispensable to the free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession ofworsh
ip. The religious corporation can own private land only if it is at least sixty
per cent owned by Filipino citizens.3.) I disagree. Under Section 1 of President
ial Decree No. 471, corporations and associations owned by aliens are allowed to
leaseprivate lands up to twenty-five years, renewable for another period of twe
nty-five years upon agreement of the lessor and the lessee.Hence, even if the re
ligious corporation is owned by aliens, it can lease private lands.4.) I disagre
e. For a corporation to qualify to acquire private lands in the Philippines, und

er Section 7, Article Xn of the Constitutionin relation to Section 2, Article XI

I of the Constitution, only sixty per cent (60%) of the corporation is required
to be owned byFilipino citizens for it to qualify to acquire private lands.5.) I
agree. A foreign corporation can lease private lands only and cannot lease publ
ic land. Under Section 2, Article XII of theConstitution, the exploration, devel
opment and utilization of public lands may be undertaken through co-production.
Joint ventureor production-sharing agreements only with Filipino citizen or corp
orations or associations which are at least sixty per cent ownedby Filipino citi
zen.2009 BAR: True or FalseAliens are absolutely prohibited from owning private
lands in the Philippines.SUGGESTED ANSWER:False, Aliens may own private lands in
the Philippines if they acquire the property through hereditary succession. Als
o, natural-bornFilipino citizen who lost their Philippine citizenship may be tra
nsferees of private lands, subject to limitations provided by law.2011 BAR: Alth
ea, a Filipino citizen, bought a lot in the Philippines in 1975. Herpredecessors
-in-interest have been in open, continuous, exclusive and notoriouspossession of
the lot since 1940, in the concept of owner. In 1988, Altheabecame a naturalize
d Australian citizen. Is she qualified to apply for registrationof the lot in he
r name? The answer is CA. Yes, provided she acquires back her Filipino citizensh
ip.B. No, except when it can be proved that Australia has a counterpart domestic