Macario bought a titled lot from Ramon, got the title and took possession of the lot. Since Macario did not have the money to pay the taxes, fees and registration expenses, he was not able to register the Deed of Absolute Sale. Upon advice, he merely executed an Affidavit of Adverse Claim and had it annotated at the back of the title. A few years after, he received a Notice of Levy on Attachment and Writ of Execution in favor of Alex. The notice, writ and certificate of sale were annotated at the back of the title still in Ramon’s name. Alex contends that since the Affidavit of Adverse Claim is effective only for 30 days from the date of its registration, then its validity has expired. Macario posits that the annotation of his adverse claim is notice to the whole world of his purchase of the lot in question. Who has the superior right over the disputed property – Macario or Alex? Explain. (5%)
Suggested answer only. Not an official answer and not legal advice.
Macario has the superior right over the disputed property. Under Section 70 of Presidential Decree 1529 and Sajonas versus Court of Appeals, an adverse claim does not automatically lose its validity after thirty
Unlock the full Civil Law answers365 days of full access. GCash, Maya and card accepted.
This is not an official scoring system and carries no weight with the Supreme Court or any bar review provider. It measures how much of the suggested answer's wording your response covers, not whether your reasoning is correct. For practice only.
Quick check
Under Section 70 of Presidential Decree No. 1529, what is the legal effect of an Affidavit of Adverse Claim annotated on a Torrens title?
An adverse claim serves as notice to the whole world of an interest in registered land.
According to the Supreme Court ruling in Sajonas v. Court of Appeals, when does an annotated adverse claim lose its legal efficacy?
An adverse claim remains effective until cancelled by a formal court order.
What is the status of a Notice of Levy on Attachment annotated after an Affidavit of Adverse Claim was already registered on the title?
A Notice of Levy registered after an adverse claim is subordinate to the prior annotated claim.
How may a registered owner or interested party validly remove an annotated adverse claim from a certificate of title?
Choices available with full access.
Why did Macario's right over the disputed lot prevail over Alex's notice of levy and execution sale?
Choices available with full access.
Learn more about these topics
1. Adverse Claim Duration
Under Section 70 of Presidential Decree No. 1529, known as the Property Registration Decree, an adverse claim is a notice to the world that a non-registered owner asserts an interest or right in registered real property. Although the statute mentions a period of thirty days, the landmark doctrine in Sajonas v. Court of Appeals clarifies that an adverse claim does not automatically lapse or expire after thirty days. The annotation remains subsisting and effective as a notice to all third persons until a formal petition for its cancellation is filed in court and granted by judicial decree.
2. Notice of Levy
An attachment, levy, or execution registered on a certificate of title binds only whatever interest the judgment debtor retains in the property at the time of attachment. Where a prior sale was executed and an adverse claim was annotated before the registration of a notice of levy, the judgment creditor is charged with constructive notice of the prior transaction. The lien acquired by the levying creditor remains subject and subordinate to the pre-existing adverse claim and equitable interest of the prior purchaser.
3. Judicial Cancellation Rule
To remove an adverse claim from a certificate of title, the registered owner or party-in-interest must file a petition with the proper Regional Trial Court under Section 70 of Presidential Decree No. 1529. Without a hearing and a final court order directing the Register of Deeds to cancel the annotation, the adverse claim continues to serve as constructive notice. Consequently, a subsequent levying creditor cannot claim the status of a purchaser in good faith or override the prior rights of the adverse claimant.