Proposed 99-year land lease to foreign investors ‘game-changing’

The Federation of Filipino Chinese Chambers of Commerce and Industry Inc. (FFCCCII) on Wednesday urged lawmakers to immediately pass the 99-Year Land Lease Bill, seen as a “game-changing” reform that will help elevate the country’s global competitiveness and attract “transformative” investments.

In a strongly worded statement, the business group framed the proposal as a “historic opportunity” for the Philippines to align itself with Asia’s top-performing economies by offering long-term land lease options to foreign investors.

The bill seeks to allow qualified foreign investors to lease private land for up to 99 years, a model already adopted by regional neighbors such as Singapore, Malaysia and Indonesia.

“This is not merely a policy adjustment; it is a strategic leap forward, aligning the Philippines with Asia’s most dynamic economies. The time to act is now,” FFCCCII president Victor Lim said.

To address national security and land ownership concerns, the FFCCCII proposed certain safeguards. These include strict oversight by the Department of Trade and Industry and investment promotion agencies, anti-speculation provisions requiring projects to start within three years and compliance with agrarian reform laws.

“Just like Singapore and Hong Kong, we can attract big investments while keeping sovereignty intact,” the FFCCCII said.

Catalyst for industrialization

The group pointed to long-term land lease models in other Southeast Asian countries as catalysts for industrialization and investment. Singapore’s transformation into a global financial and tech hub and Indonesia’s expansion in renewable energy and agro-industrial development were among the examples cited.

The business group said the impact would spread throughout the economy, driving job creation, boosting tax revenues and strengthening local enterprises.

“This reform will help unlock multibillion-dollar investments in advanced manufacturing, tourism, agro-industry, and renewable energy,” the FFCCCII read. “The ripple effect? Millions of high-quality jobs, stronger MSMEs (micro, small and medium enterprises) and higher tax revenues for infrastructure, health care and education,” it added.

The group emphasized that global investors were watching how the Philippines would respond, especially as regional competitors continued to implement pro-investment reforms.

It warned that delays in passing the measure could undermine the country’s competitiveness in the region.

“Global capital flows where policies are welcoming. While Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia and others aggressively court investors, the Philippines cannot afford hesitation,” the statement said.

Source: Inquirer

Purchase money resulting trust

Question:

My parents bought a certain land, but the title was transferred to my brother. We are all living in the house built on said property. When my brother died, his heirs claimed ownership over the property, arguing that their father was the owner as reflected in the Torrens Title. My mother reminded them that their father has no financial capacity to purchase the land. Who is the real owner of said property? Can my parents present proof that my brother is not its real owner?

This is a classic case where legal ownership (as shown in the Torrens Title) and equitable ownership (who actually paid for the property) are in conflict. Here's how the situation breaks down legally and what options may be available:

Legal Context

Under the Torrens system, the person whose name appears on the certificate of title is presumed to be the lawful owner of the property. However, this presumption is not absolute and can be overturned with clear, strong, and convincing evidence.

Key Facts in Your Case

1. Title is under your brothers name – so, on paper, he's the legal owner.

2. Your parents paid for the land – they're claiming they are the true buyers.

3. Everyone lived in the house together – shows cohabitation but not necessarily ownership.

4. Your brother had no financial capacity to purchase the land – this is a critical point if provable.

5. Now that your brother is dead, his heirs are asserting ownership – they are legally standing in his shoes.

   
   

What Your Parents Can Do

Yes, your parents can present evidence to rebut the title in Jeff's name and establish a "resulting trust" or "implied trust." This is a legal concept where:

A trust is presumed in favor of the real buyer (your parents) if they can show they provided the purchase money, and the title was placed in another’s name for convenience or other reasons.

Types of Proof Your Parents Should Gather:

• Receipts or proof of payment (checks, bank withdrawals, sale agreements)

• Deed of sale naming them as the real buyers

• Affidavits from witnesses (e.g., the seller, neighbors, family, etc.)

• Lack of income or financial capacity of Jeff at the time of purchase

• Any written or oral admission by Jeff that he was not the real owner

  
  

Possible Legal Remedies

If amicable settlement fails, your parents may:

1. File a case in court to establish a resulting trust or reconveyance of the property.

2. Argue that Jeff held the title in trust for your parents, not in his own right.

3. Ask the court to order the cancellation of the title in Jeff’s name and issue a new one in your parents’ name.

   
   

Important Caveats

• Statute of limitations may apply depending on how long ago this happened. Usually, it's 10 years from discovery of fraud or denial of the trust.

• The burden of proof is on your parents since the title is not in their name.

• This can be a long and potentially costly legal battle, so legal advice is a must.

Next Steps

1. Consult a lawyer specializing in property or family law.

2. Start collecting any and all documentation that proves your parents paid for the land.

3. Try amicable settlement or mediation with your brother's heirs, if possible.

Source: Ziggurat Real Estate

Your rights after death of your common law partner

Question: My common law wife was previously married, but never had her marriage annulled or nullified. Do I have a claim on the properties we acquired?

In the Philippines, your legal rights to properties acquired during your relationship with your common-law wife depend significantly on her marital status under the law. Here's a breakdown of the legal implications:

1. Her Marriage is Still Valid

If your common-law wife was legally married and never obtained an annulment or nullity of marriage, then:

• Her marriage is still considered valid and subsisting under Philippine law.

• Any relationship with another person (including you) is not legally recognized and is considered an adulterous or bigamous relationship, depending on the circumstances.

  
  

2. Properties Acquired During Your Cohabitation

If you acquired properties together during your 20-year relationship:

Presumption of Co-ownership (but limited)

Under Article 147 of the Family Code, co-ownership rights may apply only if both parties are legally free to marry (i.e., not legally married to someone else). But since she was not free to marry, Article 148 applies:

Article 148 (Family Code) — For relationships where one or both parties are married to someone else:

• Only the properties acquired through the actual joint contribution of money, property, or industry of both parties shall be owned in common in proportion to their contributions.

• You must prove your actual contribution (financial or work/labor).

• If you can show that you contributed to the acquisition, you may have a proportionate claim.

Important Caveats:

• You do not get automatic 50-50 co-ownership as you would in a legal marriage or a common-law union where both parties are free to marry.

• Properties solely in her name, and where you cannot prove contribution, may not be claimable.

What You Should Do:

1. Gather evidence:

   • Receipts, bank records, construction materials, or any proof of monetary or labor contribution.

   • Witness statements if you did substantial work or helped financially.

2. Consult a lawyer:

   • A lawyer can help assess whether you can file a civil case for partition or recovery of your share in properties under Article 148.

3. Avoid prescriptive period issues:

   • There are time limits for asserting claims in court (prescriptive periods), so acting quickly is important.

Summary:

• You may have a claim, but only for properties you helped acquire, and only in proportion to your proven contribution.

• Her existing marriage means your relationship is not protected under typical cohabitation laws.

• Legal help is highly recommended for documenting your contributions and asserting your rights.