RCADI v.
LRC and RD of Davao DIGEST
DECEMBER 21, 2016 ~ VBDIAZ
TOPIC: Nationality of a corporation
Roman Catholic Apostolic Administrator of Davao, Inc. v. The Land
Registration Commission and the Register of Deeds of Davao City,
G.R. No. L-8451, December 20,1957
Facts:
On October 4, 1954, Mateo L. Rodis, a Filipino citizen and resident of the City
of Davao, executed a deed of sale of a parcel of land located in the same city
covered by Transfer Certificate No. 2263, in favor of the Roman Catholic
Apostolic Administrator of Davao Inc.,(RCADI) is corporation sole organized
and existing in accordance with Philippine Laws, with Msgr. Clovis Thibault, a
Canadian citizen, as actual incumbent. Registry of Deeds Davao (RD) required
RCADI to submit affidavit declaring that 60% of its members were Filipino
Citizens. As the RD entertained some doubts as to the registerability of the
deed of sale, the matter was referred to the Land Registration Commissioner
(LRC) en consulta for resolution. LRC hold that pursuant to provisions of
sections 1 and 5 of Article XII of the Philippine Constitution, RCADI is not
qualified to acquire land in the Philippines in the absence of proof that at leat
60% of the capital, properties or assets of the RCADI is actually owned or
controlled by Filipino citizens. LRC also denied the registration of the Deed of
Sale in the absence of proof of compliance with such requisite. RCADI’s
Motion for Reconsideration was denied. Aggrieved, the latter filed a petition
for mandamus.
Issue:
Whether or not the Universal Roman Catholic Apostolic Church in the
Philippines, or better still, the corporation sole named the Roman Catholic
Apostolic Administrator of Davao, Inc., is qualified to acquire private
agricultural lands in the Philippines pursuant to the provisions of Article XIII
of the Constitution.
Ruling:
RCADI is qualified.
While it is true and We have to concede that in the profession of their faith,
the Roman Pontiff is the supreme head; that in the religious matters, in the
exercise of their belief, the Catholic congregation of the faithful throughout the
world seeks the guidance and direction of their Spiritual Father in the Vatican,
yet it cannot be said that there is a merger of personalities resultant therein.
Neither can it be said that the political and civil rights of the faithful, inherent
or acquired under the laws of their country, are affected by that relationship
with the Pope. The fact that the Roman Catholic Church in almost every
country springs from that society that saw its beginning in Europe and the fact
that the clergy of this faith derive their authorities and receive orders from the
Holy See do not give or bestow the citizenship of the Pope upon these
branches. Citizenship is a political right which cannot be acquired by a sort of
“radiation”. We have to realize that although there is a fraternity among all the
catholic countries and the dioceses therein all over the globe, the universality
that the word “catholic” implies, merely characterize their faith, a uniformity
in the practice and the interpretation of their dogma and in the exercise of
their belief, but certainly they are separate and independent from one another
in jurisdiction, governed by different laws under which they are incorporated,
and entirely independent on the others in the management and ownership of
their temporalities. To allow theory that the Roman Catholic Churches all over
the world follow the citizenship of their Supreme Head, the Pontifical Father,
would lead to the absurdity of finding the citizens of a country who embrace
the Catholic faith and become members of that religious society, likewise
citizens of the Vatican or of Italy. And this is more so if We consider that the
Pope himself may be an Italian or national of any other country of the world.
The same thing be said with regard to the nationality or citizenship of the
corporation sole created under the laws of the Philippines, which is not altered
by the change of citizenship of the incumbent bishops or head of said
corporation sole.
We must therefore, declare that although a branch of the Universal Roman
Catholic Apostolic Church, every Roman Catholic Church in different
countries, if it exercises its mission and is lawfully incorporated in accordance
with the laws of the country where it is located, is considered an entity or
person with all the rights and privileges granted to such artificial being under
the laws of that country, separate and distinct from the personality of the
Roman Pontiff or the Holy See, without prejudice to its religious relations with
the latter which are governed by the Canon Law or their rules and regulations.
It has been shown before that: (1) the corporation sole, unlike the ordinary
corporations which are formed by no less than 5 incorporators, is composed of
only one persons, usually the head or bishop of the diocese, a unit which is not
subject to expansion for the purpose of determining any percentage
whatsoever; (2) the corporation sole is only the administrator and not the
owner of the temporalities located in the territory comprised by said
corporation sole; (3) such temporalities are administered for and on behalf of
the faithful residing in the diocese or territory of the corporation sole; and (4)
the latter, as such, has no nationality and the citizenship of the incumbent
Ordinary has nothing to do with the operation, management or administration
of the corporation sole, nor effects the citizenship of the faithful connected
with their respective dioceses or corporation sole.
In view of these peculiarities of the corporation sole, it would seem obvious
that when the specific provision of the Constitution invoked by respondent
Commissioner (section 1, Art. XIII), was under consideration, the framers of
the same did not have in mind or overlooked this particular form of
corporation. If this were so, as the facts and circumstances already indicated
tend to prove it to be so, then the inescapable conclusion would be that this
requirement of at least 60 per cent of Filipino capital was never intended to
apply to corporations sole, and the existence or not a vested right becomes
unquestionably immaterial.
