Scribd
Upload
12 views1 page

Ufemia Mercado V. The Municipal President of Macabebe, Pampanga, and The Secretary of Commerce and Communications

The document discusses a case regarding whether a creek is considered public domain property. It details how the creek was originally connected to two bodies of water by excavation and later closed off by the appellant's predecessor to convert it into a fish pond. The court ultimately held that the creek is public domain property based on provisions of the Spanish Civil Code regarding canals, rivers and creeks being for public use.

Uploaded by

Arah Mae Bonilla
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
12 views1 page

Ufemia Mercado V. The Municipal President of Macabebe, Pampanga, and The Secretary of Commerce and Communications

The document discusses a case regarding whether a creek is considered public domain property. It details how the creek was originally connected to two bodies of water by excavation and later closed off by the appellant's predecessor to convert it into a fish pond. The court ultimately held that the creek is public domain property based on provisions of the Spanish Civil Code regarding canals, rivers and creeks being for public use.

Uploaded by

Arah Mae Bonilla
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1/ 1

UFEMIA MERCADO V.

THE MUNICIPAL PRESIDENT OF MACABEBE,


PAMPANGA, and THE SECRETARY OF COMMERCE AND COMMUNICATIONS
G.R. No. L-37986             March 1, 1934

FACTS
Mariano Mercado, the original owner of the hacienda, in order to facilitate the cutting and transportation of
firewood and other products, produced on the said hacienda, towards the Nasi River on the east or towards
Limasan creek on the west, connected the two recesses or bodies of water in question by means of excavation
and, after having so connected them, made other excavations at both ends towards the said directly connecting
both bodies of water, and which later became known as the Batasan-Limasan or Pinac Buñgalun creek.

Said creek or canal already existed at the time of the institution of the registration proceedings wherein
judgment was rendered resulting in the issuance of certificate of title in favor of Romulo Mercado.

Romulo Mercado, the appellant’s (Eufemia Mercado) predecessor in interest, decided to convert the said creek
into a fish pond and with that object in view, in 1928 he closed the two openings thereof towards the Nasi River
on one side and Limasan creek on the other side because residents nearby started using it.

The Secretary of Commerce ordered Romulo Mercado to remove the two dikes which he had constructed at
both ends of the creek. Eufemia Mercado appealed the order of the Secretary of Commerce with the CFI
Pampanga; which later dismissed said appeal, holding the creek in question as property of the public domain.

Issue: Whether the subject creek is of public domain.

Held.

Yes. Creeks are property of public domain. Article 339 provides that canals, rivers, torrents, and
those of a similar character are property of public ownership, and the similarity between rivers,
canals, and creeks undoubtedly obvious on the ground that, as has been stated, a creek is no other
than arm extending from a river.

Articles 339 of the Spanish Civil Code of 1889 provides that property of public ownership includes
“that devoted to public use, such as roads, canals, rivers, torrents, ports and bridges constructed
by the State, riverbanks, shores, roadsteads, and that of a similar character.” Article 407 of the
same Code provides that “

(1) Rivers and their natural channels;

(2) Continuous or intermittent waters from springs or brooks running in then natural channels and
the channels themselves;

(3) Waters rising continuously or intermittently on lands of public

(8) Waters which flow continuously or intermittently from lands belonging to private persons, to the State, to
provinces, or to towns from the moment they leave such lands; xxx” are of public ownership.

Appellant cannot invoke in her favor the Article 408 (5) on the ground that although it is true that the
BatasanLimasan or Pinac Buñgalun creek passes through her hacienda, it is none the less true that it is not
included in any of the kinds of private property therein enumerated. The appellant and her predecessors in
interest, in closing the two openings of the said creek and converting it into a fish pond, not only appropriated
for themselves the channel of the said creek but also the creek itself.

You might also like