An independent Philippine legal research libraryRead with context. Verify with confidence.
← Back to library
Court decisionSource checked

Cruz and Europa v. Secretary of Environment and Natural Resources

G.R. No. 135385 · 2000 · Indigenous peoples and ancestral domains

Source checked. The source check identifies the document; it does not verify every transcribed word or its current legal effect. Recovered or scanned text may contain errors. Compare the wording and subsequent history with the linked legal source.

DIGITAL P. 56 / 101
"Art. 11. Customs which are contrary to law, public order or public policy shall not be countenanced." "Art. 12. A custom must be proved as a fact, according to the rules of evidence." [219] Article 78 on marriages between Mohammedans or pagans who live in the non-Christian provinces-- this is now Art. 33 of the Family Code; Art. 118, now Art. 74 of the Family Code on property relations between spouses; Art. 577 on the usufructuary of woodland; Art. 657 on easement of right of way for passage of livestock; Arts. 678, 1315, 1376, 1522, 1564 and 1577. Please see Aquino, Civil Code, vol. 1, p. 25. [220] Castle Bros. v. Gutierrez Hermanos, 11 Phil. 629 [1908]; In Re: Firm Name of Ozaeta Romulo, 92 SCRA 1 [1979]; Yao Kee v. Sy-Gonzales, 167 SCRA 736 [1988]; Please see Aquino, Civil Code, vol. 1, p. 26 for a list of other cases. [221] This situation is analogous to the Muslim code or the Code of Muslim Personal Laws (P.D. 1083) which took effect on February 4, 1977 despite the effectivity of the Civil Code and the Family Code. P.D. 1083 governs persons, family relations and succession among Muslims, the adjudication and settlement of disputes, the organization of the Shari'a courts, etc. [222] Mariflor P. Pagusara, The Kalinga Ili: Cultural-Ecological Reflections on Indigenous Theora and Praxis of Man-Nature Relationship, Dakami Ya Nan Dagami, p. 36, Papers and Proceedings of the 1st Cordillera Muti- Sectoral Land Congress, 11-14 March 1983, Cordillera Consultative Committee [1984]. [223] Section 2, Article XII. [224] A "co-production agreement" is defined as one wherein the government provides input to the mining operation other than the mineral resource-- Section 26 (b), R.A. 7942, the Philippine Mining Act of 1995. [225] A "joint venture agreement" is one where a joint-venture company is organized by the government and the contractor with both parties having equity shares, and the government entitled to a share in the gross output-- Section 26 (c), R.A. 7942. [226] A mineral "production-sharing agreement" is one where the government grants to the contractor the exclusive right to conduct mining operations within a contract area and shares in the gross output. The contractor provides the financing, technology, management and personnel necessary for the implementation of the agreement-- Section 26 (a), R.A. 7942. [227] Section 26, R.A. 7942. [228] Section 3 [d], People's Small-Scale Mining Act of 1991 (R.A. 7076) provides: "Sec. 3 [d] 'Small-scale mining contract' refers to co-production, joint venture or mineral production sharing agreement between the State and a small-scale mining contractor for the small-scale utilization of a plot of mineral land." [229] Section 3 [b], R.A. 7076. [230] NCIP Administrative Order No. 1, Series of 1998. [231] In Republic v. Court of Appeals, 160 SCRA 228, 239 [1988], Cruz, J., ponente, it was declared that if a person is the owner of a piece of agricultural land on which minerals are discovered, his ownership of such land does not give him the right to extract or utilize the said minerals without the permission of the State to which