MANILA, Philippines – The Sandiganbayan upheld the government’s right to a property recovered from a crony of the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos, throwing out a claim from a third party asserting rights to a parcel of land in Cagayan province that was forfeited in favor of the state in 2015.
In a five-page resolution, the Sandiganbayan’s Second Division held that the buyer, third-party claimant Benito Dy, did not have the rights to the property since the sale happened while the land’s ownership was still disputed.
The anti-graft court said that Dy took a gamble when he bought the property in an auction amid the pending court action.
“A notice of is pendens is an announcement to the whole world that a particular real property is in litigation, serving as a warning that one who acquires an interest over said property does so at his or her own risk, or that he or she gambles on the result of the litigation,” the Sandiganbayan said.
The property was previously listed as an asset of Taggat Industries Incorporated and Alfonso Lim Sr., who were both respondents in Civil Case No. 0030.
The Sandiganbayan already ruled in December 2015 that parcels of land owned by Taggat were part of the ill-gotten wealth of Lim, and forfeited in favor of the government along with hundreds of hectares of land in Rizal and Batangas.
Lim was accused in 1987 of using his connections to Marcos to amass ill-gotten wealth by securing more than 533,880 hectares of timber concessions – way beyond the maximum allowable area of 100,000 hectares allowed by the 1973 Constitution.
In that case, the Presidential Commission on Good Government sought tracts of land in Rizal measuring 4.96 hectares, and four properties in Claveria, Cagayan measuring 8.1 hectares, 6 hectares, 2 hectares, and 0.82 listed under Taggat.
The court said this was the second time in two years that Dy had asked it to award in his favor properties of Taggat Industries that government already recovered.
Dy already lost in a previous attempt involving a different lot in Claveria, Cagayan after the Sandiganbayan denied his claims.
“It is perplexing that Dy… has filed a second motion identical to the first. Did he expect a different outcome? It is imperative that litigants should not be allowed to file identical motions repeatedly, speculating on the possible change of opinion,” the court said.
The court issued a “stern warning” that further attempts to file “identical and superfluous motions” will result in penalties.
The decision was written by Associate Justice Arthur Malabaguio with Associate Justices Geraldine Faith Econg and Edgardo Caldona concurring. – Rappler.com
