Artates v.

Urbi
Doctrine: ILLICIT PER ACCIDENS: The provision against the alienation or encumbrance of
public lands granted within five years from the issuance of the patent, it has been held, is
mandatory; a sale made in violation thereof is null and void and produces no effect whatsoever.
Facts: The petitioners in this case are spouses Lino Artates and Manuela Pojas, who are holders
of a homestead. The respondent, Urbi, on the contrary, was a victim of physical injuries, the
culprit of which is one of the petitioners, Lino Artates.
The case arose because the petitioner spouses filed a complaint to nullify the public sale
conducted by the Provincial Sheriff to satisfy a judgment against Lino Artates.
The petitioner claims that the sale of the homestead to satisfy indebtedness violates the
provision of the Public Land law exempting said property from execution for any debt contracted
within five years from the date of the issuance of the patent.
Issue: Is the sale valid?
Held: A same made in violation of the Public Land law is null and void and produces no effect
whatsoever. Though it may be a limitation on the right of ownership of the grantee, the salutary
purpose of the provision cannot be denied: it is to preserve and keep for the homesteader or his
family the land given to him gratuitously by the State, so that being a property owner, he may
become and remain a contented and useful member of our society.