The Land Registration Law has been studied by illustrious specialists in the field, and just to mention a few, Dr. Manuel Ramón Ruiz Tejada, with his “Study on Real Estate Property”, which served as reference text for many years in Law faculty, to the illustrious JA Bonilla Atiles, who publishes his study with the name “Land Law in the Dominican Republic”, and to Mr. Arístides Álvarez Sánchez who publishes his “Land Law Study”.
A registered right and its relationship with the jurisdiction of the Land Court:
First, I would like to point out that Article 271 of the former Land Registry Act, replaced by the current Real Estate Registry Act, in an attempt by the Dominican legislature to modernize the system, which reads as follows: “As far as possible, this law Shall be interpreted in accordance with the spirit of the same. But nothing contained therein may be considered in the sense of releasing, altering, or in any way affecting the other rights and obligations established by other laws, except, of course, what has otherwise been specifically determined by it.”
Let us return for a moment to the civil code and stop in the sale contract governed by articles 1582 to 1673, since for the purposes of this law, articles 1674 to 1685 has been specifically suppressed by the law in its article 175. Article 1582 defines sale as a contract by which one agrees to give one thing and another to pay it. Article 189 of the Law of Land Registry repeats almost verbatim the part in fine of said article 1582. Article 1583 of the Civil Code states that “The sale is perfect between the parties, and ownership is acquired right by the buyer, With respect to the seller, from the moment in which the thing is agreed upon and the price, even if the first has not been delivered or paid. “It is the consensual nature of the contract of sale. However, Articles 185 and 186 of the Land Registry Act prescribe: “After a right has been the subject of the first registration, any voluntary act (contracts: sale, (1582 c. Civil and 194, 195 Law 1542) (1702 c. Civil) anticresis (2085 c. Civil) use privileges (c. Civil 2103) mortgage (2114 c. Civil) servitudes (c.civ. And 198 L. 1542) enfiteusis 198 Law 1542); Or compulsory, adjudication of award (712 c. Pr. Civ) that relates to those same rights will only take effect, in accordance with this law, from the moment in which its registration is practiced in the office of the Registrar of corresponding titles ” . And it adds the 186: Consequently, they are subject to the formality of the registry, … a) Any conventional act whose purpose is: to alienate, assign or in any way transfer registered rights; Any act constituting a mortgage, privilege, (real property rights) lease, (personal right) servitude, usufruct, antichresis or other legally established liens; And any act involving the release, cancellation, waiver, limitation or reduction of those same rights; B) Any irrevocable judgment, decision, or decision rendered by any court or court whose purpose is: to award, transfer, divide, subdivide, tax, restrict, release, reduce or extinguish registered rights; C) The acts of attachment, denunciation of the same and other acts related to said procedure, whose registration, annotation or mention required by law for unregistered buildings, must also be registered, that is to say, that it is not only prohibited The existence of mortgages hidden in registered land, but does not produce any real right, principal or accessory, or dismemberment of the property (emphyteusis, use, enjoyment, room) that affects it if it is not registered in the Register of Corresponding titles.
But we have raised the problem to refer to a more important aspect derived from articles 185 and 186, but especially from 185, which, to a greater understanding, we will allow to repeat: “After a right has been the subject of the first registration, Any voluntary or compulsory act related to those same rights shall only take effect, in accordance with this law, from the moment of its registration in the office of the corresponding Registrar. Article 1 of Law 1542 establishes that this law … shall aim to register all the lands that form the territory of the Republic, the improvements built or promoted on them, and all the real rights that may affect them … “but the Same law distinguishes between registered land and registered rights. A registered land is one that has been subject to cadastral sanitation, and that, in accordance with Article 6, the Registration Decree has been transcribed in extenso in the Record Book of the corresponding Registrar’s Office; And a litigation on registered rights is the one that has as its object “the cancellation, modification of an inscription that has been made in accordance with articles 185 and 186 that according to article 7 of the Law of Land Registry is the one that attributes Exclusive competence to know: … 4 ° of the litis on registered rights; that is to say, the rights that derive from any voluntary or forced act that the parties celebrate, after a right has been object of the first registry; But if a contract has not been registered in the Registrar’s Office, pursuant to Article 185, it cannot generate a litigation on registered rights … because in the light of Article 174 what the law does not want is that there are real rights ( Main or accessories) hidden, except of course “1º. Any road or public road that the law establishes, when the Certificate does not indicate the border of these; 2º. All the rights and easements that exist or are acquired in favor of public service companies, autonomous of the State. From the above we can affirm that the Land Tribunal and the ordinary courts have been making an erroneous application of article 7, paragraph 4to. Of the law, when considering as litigation on registered rights the answers that arise between individuals with grounds of contracts that have not been registered, even if these conventions refer to registered lands.
The best example can be found in the fact that all actions based on tenancy contracts that have not been registered in the title registry in accordance with article 186 are within the jurisdiction of the court of first instance and the court of first instance Instance, when it comes to the actions foreseen in article 3 of Decree 4807; In this sense, the Supreme Court of Justice, in its judgment of January 1971, considered: “that in the case it is a demand in the resolution of a sales contract, pursued by the buyer on the grounds that the seller has not complied With the obligation to transfer the property, as well as the payment of improvements fomented in the property sold and in reparation of damages; Which, as is immediately noticed in the case before us, neither the right of ownership nor any other real right, whether the real property itself or the improvements in the one built, is involved, but is simply imputed to a Contractor has not fulfilled one of the obligations assumed in the contract, and in that temperament is requested the resolution or termination of the contract prevailing under the provisions of article 1184 of the civil code; That the fact that the property subject to the contract is registered does not change the nature of the actions carried out by the plaintiff, which are personal in nature and come within the jurisdiction of ordinary courts.