Philippine economy

SC voids Ayala Land’s ownership of prime lot in Las Piñas

Rappler.com

This is AI generated summarization, which may have errors. For context, always refer to the full article.

SC voids Ayala Land’s ownership of prime lot in Las Piñas
The property developer says it has filed a motion for reconsideration following the Supreme Court ruling that it is not the rightful owner of a 6.8-hectare lot in Ayala Southvale

MANILA, Philippines – Property giant Ayala Land Incorporated (ALI) lost control of a 6.8-hectare lot of prime land in Las Piñas City following a ruling by the Supreme Court (SC).

The SC, in a ruling issued last July but made public on Monday, October 2, denied ALI’s right to ownership of the lot and declared petitioners Yu Hwa Ping and Mary Gaw, as well as the heirs of Andres Diaz and Josefa Mia, as the rightful owners.

The 6.8-hectare lot, which houses the Southlinks Golf Club and materials depot, is located inside ALI’s Ayala Southvale Village in Las Piñas City.

Ayala Corporation, ALI’s parent firm, acquired the property from Goldenrod Incorporated and Pesala in 1988. ALI gained ownership of the land after its merger with Las Piñas Ventures Incorporated in 1992.

The SC made its decision based on invalid surveys done to register the land nearly 90 years ago.

In coming to the decision, the SC ruled that, “When a land registration decree is marred by severe irregularity that discredits the integrity of the Torrens system, the Court will not think twice in striking down such illegal title in order to protect the public against unscrupulous and illicit land ownership.”

In the Torrens system, transfer of land ownership is done by transfer of land registration rather than by deeds.

Motion for reconsideration

In a disclosure to the Philippine Stock Exchange (PSE) on Monday, ALI said it filed a motion for reconsideration on September 28.

The primary grounds for the appeal, said ALI, include the following:

  • “ALI’s titles can be traced back to Original Certificates of Titles (OCT) that were issued decades prior to the OCTs from which the claimants’ title came from. In particular, ALI’s titles are traced back to OCTs issued in 1950 and 1958 whereas the claimants’ titles are traced back to an OCT issued in 1970.”
  • “Claimants’ predecessors opposed ALI’s application and participated, but lost, in the original land registration proceedings which led to the issuance of decrees for registration in favor of ALI’s predecessors. Thus, claimants are barred by prescription, laches and res judicata.”
  • ALI purchased the properties after an examination of its derivative titles which on their face do not indicate any defect or flaw, thereby making ALI an innocent purchaser for value. 

ALI also pointed out that “it had conducted an investigation of titles to the properties and had no notice of any title or claim that was superior to the titles purchased by ALI.”

As such, the property developer believes that “its titles are superior to the claims of these adverse claimants.”

ALI said it does not expect the legal battle to have “any material effect on [its] business, operations, and financial conditions,” since the lot is less than 1% of its total land bank of 9,852 hectares. – Rappler.com

Add a comment

Sort by

There are no comments yet. Add your comment to start the conversation.

Summarize this article with AI

How does this make you feel?

Loading
Download the Rappler App!