Dear PAO,
I am not familiar with the history of the land which my parents are claiming from Kumags. The latter allegedly said that he owns the land because he bought the same from Mark. Kumags presented a deed of sale of unregistered land to prove the transaction. My father told Kumags that Mark cannot sell the land to him because he is not the owner. Kumags, however, claimed that he is a buyer in good faith because he did not know that Mark has no capacity to sell the land so his claim must prevail over that of my father. Is Kumags correct? Is a buyer in good faith?
Acerbai

Dear Acerbai,
A buyer in good faith is not required to look beyond the four corners of a title. This implies, however, that the subject of the sale must be a registered land. In Uy v. Fule, et al., GR 164961, June 30, 2014, which was penned by Chief Justice Lucas Bersamin, the Supreme Court defined a buyer in good faith as:

“A buyer for value in good faith is one who buys property of another, without notice that some other person has a right to, or interest in, such property and pays full and fair price for the same, at the time of such purchase, or before he has notice of the claim or interest of some other persons in the property. He buys the property with the well-founded belief that the person from whom he receives the thing had title to the property and capacity to convey it.”
Correlative thereto, Article 526 of the New Civil Code also provides that:

“He is deemed a possessor in good faith who is not aware that there exists in his title or mode of acquisition any flaw which invalidates it.
“He is deemed a possessor in bad faith who possesses in any case contrary to the foregoing.

“Mistake upon a doubtful or difficult question of law may be the basis of good faith.”
The defense of a buyer in good faith finds no application when the land is unregistered. This was the pronouncement of the Supreme Court in Daclag and Daclag v. Macahilig, et al., GR 159578, July 28, 2008, penned by Associate Justice Ma. Alicia Austria-Martinez, which held that:

“[T]he issue of good faith or bad faith of the buyer is relevant only where the subject of the sale is registered land and the purchaser is buying the same from the registered owner whose title to the land is clean x x x in such case the purchaser who relies on the clean title of the registered owner is protected if he is a purchaser in good faith for value. Since the properties in question are unregistered lands, petitioners as subsequent buyers thereof did so at their peril. Their claim of having bought the land in good faith, i.e., without notice that some other person has a right to or interest in the property, would not protect them if it turns out, as it actually did in this case, that their seller did not own the property at the time of the sale.”

Applying the above-quoted decision to your situation, Kumags’ claim of being a buyer in good faith is of no moment, since the land that is involved in this case is not yet registered. His claim that he bought the land from Mark without any knowledge that another person like your father has a right or interest in the property cannot protect him. Thus, he may not be considered a buyer in good faith under the given set of facts.

We hope that we were able to answer your queries. This advice was based solely on the facts you have narrated and our appreciation of the same. Our opinion may vary when other facts are changed or elaborated.
Thank you for your continued trust and support.

Editor’s note: Dear PAO is a daily column of the Public Attorney’s Office. Questions for Chief Acosta may be sent to [email protected]