{ "id": "nexus-sen-1-0034-608278", "citation": "Res. 00477-2014 Tribunal Agrario", "section": "nexus_decisions", "doc_type": "court_decision", "title_es": "Improcedencia de información posesoria sobre terrenos en zona marítimo terrestre y humedales", "title_en": "Information of possession denied for lands in maritime-terrestrial zone and wetlands", "summary_es": "La Asociación Agrícola Canaan solicitó, mediante proceso de información posesoria, la inscripción en el Registro Público de una finca de 294 hectáreas ubicada en el Cantón de Osa, colindante con el Río Sierpe. La jueza de primera instancia rechazó las diligencias al encontrar que el inmueble traslapaba parcialmente con una finca inscrita y, además, un 17 % del terreno se ubicaba dentro de la Reserva Forestal Golfo Dulce sin que se acreditara posesión decenal previa a su creación en 1978. La asociación apeló argumentando que el 83 % del terreno quedaba fuera de dicha reserva y que la posesión sí se remontaba más de diez años antes de la creación de la zona protegida. El Tribunal Agrario confirmó el rechazo de las diligencias, pero precisó la fundamentación: la mayor parte del terreno se localiza dentro del Humedal Nacional Térraba-Sierpe (83 %) y en áreas de manglar, las cuales constituyen zona marítimo terrestre de dominio público. De acuerdo con la Ley 6043 sobre la Zona Marítimo Terrestre, estos terrenos demaniales son inalienables e imprescriptibles y, por tanto, no pueden ser objeto de información posesoria ni de apropiación particular. El tribunal subrayó que el plano catastral presentado incluye terrenos de la zona pública, la zona restringida y los manglares, por lo que la solicitud resultaba jurídicamente inviable.", "summary_en": "The Agricultural Association Canaan sought, through a possessory information proceeding, to register a 294-hectare property in the Canton of Osa, adjacent to the Sierpe River. The trial judge dismissed the proceedings, finding that the property partially overlapped with a previously registered estate and that 17 % of the land lay within the Golfo Dulce Forest Reserve without proof of possession that predated the reserve's creation in 1978. The association appealed, arguing that 83 % of the property was outside the reserve and that possession had preceded the protected area by more than ten years. The Agrarian Tribunal upheld the dismissal but on different grounds: the majority of the land was located within the Térraba-Sierpe National Wetland (83 %) and in mangrove areas, which form part of the maritime-terrestrial zone and thus are public domain property. Under Law 6043 on the Maritime-Terrestrial Zone, these demanial lands are inalienable and imprescriptible, so they cannot be the subject of possessory information proceedings or private appropriation. The court stressed that the submitted cadastral plan included areas of the public zone, the restricted zone, and mangroves, rendering the application legally untenable.", "court_or_agency": "Tribunal Agrario", "date": "13/06/2014", "year": "2014", "topic_ids": [ "property-and-titling" ], "primary_topic_id": "property-and-titling", "es_concept_hints": [ "zona marítimo terrestre", "demanialidad", "información posesoria", "manglar", "dominio público", "inalienable", "imprescriptible", "ría" ], "article_citations": [], "keywords_es": [ "información posesoria", "zona marítimo terrestre", "humedal Térraba-Sierpe", "manglar", "dominio público", "demanialidad", "inalienable", "imprescriptible", "Reserva Forestal Golfo Dulce", "Tribunal Agrario" ], "keywords_en": [ "possessory information", "maritime-terrestrial zone", "Térraba-Sierpe wetland", "mangrove", "public domain", "demaniality", "inalienable", "imprescriptible", "Golfo Dulce Forest Reserve", "Agrarian Tribunal" ], "excerpt_es": "De lo anteriormente expuesto por la Sala Constitucional se desprende que hay una serie de terrenos que se encuentran comprendidos dentro de la zona marítima terrestre, y que no son susceptibles de ser objeto de información posesoria, dada su naturaleza de demanialidad (artículo 7 de la ley en cita). De lo anterior se desprende los primeros 50 metros son zona pública y se encuentran graficados en el plano de cita, y es denominada \"zona inalienable\". Sin embargo, el oficio citado señala, que hay otra porción que está incluida en el levantamiento catastral que es parte de la zona restringida, y ello debido al fenómeno de las mareas que afecta al Río Sierpe. es decir,ubicado en la colindancia este del bien, tiene influencia de mareas y en consecuencia el fundo o parte de este se encuentra dentro de los 200 metros dada esa particularidad, además de que abarca zonas de manglar y sus áreas contiguas. Al tenor del ordinal 7 de la Ley sobre a Zona Marítima Terrestre y las razones dadas se ha de confirmar el rechazo de las presentes diligencias tomando en consideración todo lo aquí expuesto.", "excerpt_en": "From the foregoing it is evident that there are a number of lands situated within the maritime-terrestrial zone which, given their public domain character, are not amenable to possessory information proceedings (Art. 7 of the cited law). The first 50 meters constitute the public zone and are drawn on the referenced plan, designated as the 'inalienable zone.' However, the cited official communication indicates that there is another portion included in the cadastral survey which forms part of the restricted zone, due to the tidal influence affecting the Sierpe River. That is to say, the property's eastern boundary is subject to tidal influence, and consequently the land, or part thereof, falls within the 200-meter zone because of that characteristic, in addition to encompassing mangrove areas and their contiguous zones. Pursuant to Article 7 of the Maritime-Terrestrial Zone Law and the reasons set forth, the dismissal of these proceedings must be confirmed, taking into account all that has been set out herein.", "outcome": { "label_en": "Denied", "label_es": "Sin lugar", "summary_en": "The Agrarian Tribunal upheld the resolution denying the possessory information because the lands lie within the maritime-terrestrial zone, a wetland, and mangroves—inalienable and imprescriptible public domain property.", "summary_es": "El Tribunal Agrario confirmó la resolución que rechazó la información posesoria por recaer los terrenos en zona marítimo terrestre, humedal y manglar, bienes de dominio público inalienables e imprescriptibles." }, "pull_quotes": [ { "context": "Considerando III, citando el Art. 7 de la Ley 6043", "quote_en": "Lands located within the maritime-terrestrial zone may not be the subject of possessory informations, and private individuals may not appropriate them or legalize them in their name through this or any other means.", "quote_es": "Los terrenos situados en la zona marítimo terrestre no pueden ser objeto de informaciones posesorias y los particulares no podrán apropiarse de ellos ni legalizarlos a su nombre, por éste u otro medio." }, { "context": "Considerando IV", "quote_en": "The land adjoins the Sierpe River to the north and the El Porvenir lagoon to the west... the areas included encompass the estuaries of the Sierpe River, mangrove areas, and areas adjacent to mangroves that also form part of the maritime-terrestrial zone, which cannot be claimed or possessed, as they are demanial lands.", "quote_es": "Dicho terreno colinda al norte con el río Sierpe y al oeste con la laguna el Porvenir... se incluyen áreas que contemplan las rías del Río Sierpe, áreas de manglar y áreas contiguas a los manglares que también forman parte de la zona marítimo terrestre, los cuales no pueden ser objeto de denuncio o posesión, pues se trata de terrenos demaniales." } ], "cites": [ { "id": "norm-11950", "citation": "Ley 276", "title_en": "Water Law", "title_es": "Ley de Aguas", "doc_type": "law", "date": "27/08/1942", "year": "1942" }, { "id": "norm-18579", "citation": "Decreto Ejecutivo 7841", "title_en": "Maritime-Terrestrial Zone Law Regulation", "title_es": "Reglamento a la Ley sobre la Zona Marítimo Terrestre", "doc_type": "executive_decree", "date": "16/12/1977", "year": "1977" }, { "id": "norm-32006", "citation": "Ley 6043", "title_en": "Maritime Terrestrial Zone Law", "title_es": "Ley sobre la Zona Marítimo Terrestre", "doc_type": "law", "date": "02/03/1977", "year": "1977" }, { "id": "norm-32840", "citation": "Ley 2825", "title_en": "Land and Colonization Law", "title_es": "Ley de Tierras y Colonización", "doc_type": "law", "date": "14/10/1961", "year": "1961" }, { "id": "norm-41661", "citation": "Ley 7575", "title_en": "Forestry Law", "title_es": "Ley Forestal", "doc_type": "law", "date": "13/02/1996", "year": "1996" } ], "cited_by": [ { "id": "norm-11950", "citation": "Ley 276", "title_en": "Water Law", "title_es": "Ley de Aguas", "doc_type": "law", "date": "27/08/1942", "year": "1942" }, { "id": "norm-18579", "citation": "Decreto Ejecutivo 7841", "title_en": "Maritime-Terrestrial Zone Law Regulation", "title_es": "Reglamento a la Ley sobre la Zona Marítimo Terrestre", "doc_type": "executive_decree", "date": "16/12/1977", "year": "1977" }, { "id": "norm-32006", "citation": "Ley 6043", "title_en": "Maritime Terrestrial Zone Law", "title_es": "Ley sobre la Zona Marítimo Terrestre", "doc_type": "law", "date": "02/03/1977", "year": "1977" }, { "id": "norm-32840", "citation": "Ley 2825", "title_en": "Land and Colonization Law", "title_es": "Ley de Tierras y Colonización", "doc_type": "law", "date": "14/10/1961", "year": "1961" }, { "id": "norm-41661", "citation": "Ley 7575", "title_en": "Forestry Law", "title_es": "Ley Forestal", "doc_type": "law", "date": "13/02/1996", "year": "1996" } ], "references": { "internal": [], "external": [] }, "source_url": "https://nexuspj.poder-judicial.go.cr/document/sen-1-0034-608278", "tier": 2, "is_environmental": true, "_editorial_citation_count": 0, "regulations_by_article": null, "amendments_by_article": null, "dictamen_by_article": null, "concordancias_by_article": null, "afectaciones_by_article": null, "resoluciones_by_article": null, "cited_by_votos": [], "cited_norms": [], "cited_norms_inverted": [ { "doc_id": "norm-11950", "norm_num": "276", "norm_name": "Ley de Aguas", "tipo_norma": "Ley", "norm_fecha": "27/08/1942" }, { "doc_id": "norm-18579", "norm_num": "7841", "norm_name": "Reglamento a la Ley sobre la Zona Marítimo Terrestre", "tipo_norma": "Decreto Ejecutivo", "norm_fecha": "16/12/1977" }, { "doc_id": "norm-32006", "norm_num": "6043", "norm_name": "Ley sobre la Zona Marítimo Terrestre", "tipo_norma": "Ley", "norm_fecha": "02/03/1977" }, { "doc_id": "norm-32840", "norm_num": "2825", "norm_name": "Ley de Tierras y Colonización", "tipo_norma": "Ley", "norm_fecha": "14/10/1961" }, { "doc_id": "norm-41661", "norm_num": "7575", "norm_name": "Ley Forestal", "tipo_norma": "Ley", "norm_fecha": "13/02/1996" } ], "sentencias_relacionadas": [], "temas_y_subtemas": [], "cascade_only": false, "amendment_count": 0, "body_es_text": "*071000810423CI*\n\n \n\n*071000810423CI*\n\n \n\nEXPEDIENTE:\n\nEXPN1\n\nPROCESO:\n\nINFORMACIÓN POSESORIA\n\nACTOR/A:\n\nASOCIACION AGRICOLA CANAAN\n\nDEMANDADO/A:\n\n \n\n \n\n \n\nVOTO N° 477-F-14 \n\n \n\nTRIBUNAL AGRARIO. SEGUNDO CIRCUITO JUDICIAL DE SAN JOSÉ.- A las catorce horas y doce minutos del trece de junio de dos mil catorce.-\n\nPROCESO DE INFORMACIÓN POSESORIA, promovida por ASOCIACIÓN AGRÍCOLA CANAAN, cédula jurídica CED1 - - , representada por su presidente con facultades de apoderado generalísimo sin límite de suma [Nombre1] , mayor, casado dos veces, Ministro evangélico, vecino de San Francisco de Santo Domingo de Heredia, cédula de identidad CED2 - - . Intervienen en el proceso , la PROCURADURÍA GENERAL DE LA REPÚBLICA, representada por Susana Fallas Cubero , mayor, abogada, cédula de identidad CED3 - - , en su condición de procuradora adjunta ; y e l INSTITUTO DE DESARROLLO RURAL, cédula jurídica número CED4 - - - , representado Carmelina Vargas Hidalgo, mayor, divorciada una vez , abogada, vecina de Guachipelín, Escazú, cédula de identidad CED5 - - , colegiada cinco mil trescientos setenta y dos , en su condición de apoderada general judicial . Actúa como abogado director del promovente el licenciado Asdrubal Alfaro Miranda, colegiado número ocho mil trescientos noventa y cuatro. Tramitad o ante el Juzgado Agrario del Segundo Circuito Judicial de la Zona Sur, Corredores.-\n\nR ESULTANDO:\n\n 1.- El promovente interpuso proceso de información posesoria con el fin que se inscriba n a su nombre en el Registro Público de la Propiedad la finca que se describe así: \"... terreno sin inscribir, dedicado a la agricultura, situado en el [Dirección1] , de la Provincia de Puntarenas, mide doscientos noventa y cuatro hectáreas ocho mil doscientos cuarenta y seis metros con treinta y dos metros cuadrados, representado mediante el plano catastrado P mil doscientos setenta y cuatro cuarenta y nueve-dos mil siete, linda al norte con Rio Sierpe y Agropecuaria Venecia Sociedad Anónima, Sur: Carlos Quesada Alvarez y Laguna Porvenir, Este Carlos Quesada Alvarez y al oeste con Quebrada y laguna El Porvenir...\".( folios 9, 320 vuelto ).\n\n2.- La Procuraduría General de la República se apersonó al proceso en los términos que corren a folio 60 a 65; a su vez e l Instituto de Desarrollo Rural se apersono al proceso a folio 66 . -\n\n3.- La jueza Marisel Zamora Arias, del J uzgado Agrario del Segundo Circuito Judicial de la Zona Sur, Corredores, mediante sentencia número 21-2014, de las ocho horas del seis de marzo del año dos mil trece , resolvió: “ POR TANTO: De conformidad con lo expuesto se IMPRUEBAN las diligencias de Información Posesoria establecidas por Asociación Agrícola Canaan.\" (folio 322 vuelto).-\n\n4.- El señor [Nombre1] , en su condición de apoderado generalísimo sin limite de la Asociación Agrícola Canaán, formuló recurso de apelación con indicación expresa de las razones por las cuales refuta la tesis del Juzgado de instancia, (folio 334 a 341) .\n\n5. En la substanciación del proceso se ha observado las prescripciones legales, y no se notan la existencia de errores u omisiones en el fallo capaces de producir su nulidad.\n\nRedacta la jueza Darcia Carranza; y,\n\nCONSIDERANDO:\n\n I. El Tribunal comparte los hechos tenidos por demostrados al ser fiel reflejo de lo acaecido en autos.\n\n II. La apelación es interpuesta por la gestionante contra la sentencia que rechazó las diligencias de información posesoria. Indica que el hecho probado numerado uno indica que la finca se encuentra dentro de la Reserva Forestal Golfo Dulce, y dentro del Humedal Térraba Sierpe. En el considerando tercero la a quo hace referencia a que otro motivo para el rechazo de las diligencias es porque se encuentra dentro de la Reserva Forestal Golfo Dulce y se debía demostrar una posesión decenal diez años antes de la creación de la misma y que los testigos señalan conocen el terreno desde el 2008, no cumpliendo con la demostración de la posesión desde 1968 al haber sido creada el 28 de abril de 1978. Objeta lo dicho por cuanto aduce los terrenos han estado en posesión particular de los anteriores trasmitentes por un periodo que excede los diez años antes de la creación de la Reserva Forestal Golfo Dulce. Por otro lado señala que el 83% de los terrenos están dentro del Humedal Nacional Térraba Sierpe que fue creado por Decreto Ejecutivo N° 22993 emitido el 21 de febrero de 1994, por lo que procede la aprobación de las presentes diligencias. 2) En cuanto al motivo del rechazo basado en que traslapa su plano con el de una propiedad inscrita, aduce el terreno es propiedad de la gestrionante y así está dispuesto a declararlo el señor [Nombre2] quien representa a Agropecuaria Venecia Sociedad Anónima, a quien ofrece de testigo, junto a [Nombre3] representante de Renaciendo en el Cerro Paraguas Muriseca S.A., quienes declararan que el terreno que se tiene por traslapado pertenece a la solicitante (ver folio 334 a 341).\n\n III.- En el presente asunto conforme a la prueba documental existente en el expediente se tiene claro que la mayor parte de los terrenos a titular se encuentran ubicados dentro del Humedal Nacional Terraba Sierpe (83%) y una pequeña parte dentro de la Reserva Forestal Golfo Dulce (17%),ver certificación del Sistema Nacional de Áreas de Conservación a folio 34, Informe Pericial a folios 253 a 269. De conformidad con el Informe rendido por el Departamento de Geodesia y Topografía del Instituto Geográfico Nacional mediante Oficio N° DGT - 532 - 08, el área descrita en el plano P-1207449-2007, que grafica el área a inscribir, dichos terrenos colindan con áreas de manglar, abarca áreas de manglar y los 200 metros contiguos a la ría del Río Sierpe, definida en el artículo 2 del Reglamento a la Ley sobre la Zona Marítimo Terrestre (parte del río próxima a su entrada al mar y hasta donde llegan las mareas) y se trata de tierras bajas de humedales compuestos por yolillales (ver folio 100). Lo anterior también fue corroborado por la jueza a quo, quien en el acta del reconocimiento judicial practicado al efecto en fecha 16 de setiembre de 2008, logró determinar que los terrenos de la finca pretendida inscribir estaban totalmente inundados, indicó además que parece un manglar, ya que se observa el agua verde y lechuguilla. \"En general se pudo observar que la finca está llena de agua, hay mucho tagual...\" (ver reconocimiento a folio 115 y 116). Logró determinarse que en la orilla del río Sesenta no existen árboles en el área de protección lo que demuestra no ha existido protección del recurso forestal respecto de las áreas de protección del río regulados en los artículos 33 y 34 de la Ley Forestal 7575 vigente y máxime encontrándose los terrenos sometidos a diferentes categorías de manejo como lo son los Humedales y la Reserva Forestal Golfo Dulce. Existe en autos un informe pericial visible a folios 253 a 274, del cual se pueden extraer una serie de conclusiones fundamentales sobre los terrenos sobre los cuales se pretende su titulación. Es importante hacer ver que de acuerdo a la hoja cartográfica Rincón del Instituto Geográfico Nacional el plano P-1207449-2007, abarca áreas de manglares y humedales, por lo que abarca áreas de la \"zona marítimo terrestre\". Dicho informe pericial es claro también en señalar que un 56.963 % del terreno es de humedales y manglares, es decir un área de 167 hectáreas. Lo anterior llama mucho la atención de esta Cámara por cuanto la jueza de instancia no hace una valoración integral de la prueba contante en autos para resolver este asunto, ni siquiera toma en consideración el reconocimiento judicial practicado por ella misma, ni los diferentes informes técnicos traídos al proceso. Es importante sobre lo dicho hacer ver que Nuestra Jurisprudencia ha definido claramente, siguiendo la legislación, el régimen legal aplicable a la zona marítimo terrestre.- Ratifica su carácter de dominio público que consagra el artículo 1 ° de la Ley No. 6043 del 2 de marzo de 1977: \" Artículo 1 °.‑ La zona marítimo terrestre constituye parte del patrimonio nacional, pertenece al Estado y es inalienable e imprescriptible. Su protección, así como la de sus recursos naturales, es obligación del Estado, de sus instituciones y de todos los habitantes del país. Su uso y aprovechamiento están sujetos a las disposiciones de esta ley. \". Al respecto nuestra Sala Constitucional ha establecido lo siguiente: \" La Sala acoge la tesis de que en efecto, la zona marítimo terrestre es un bien de dominio público, en los términos del artículo 261 del Código Civil,... El carácter demanial de la zona marítimo terrestre ( o ribera marina como se le denominó antiguamente ) se reconoce desde tiempo inmemorial y el Derecho Romano mismo recoge ese status, como \" res communes \" y \" extra comercium \". En nuestro medio, con toda claridad desde el siglo pasado se ha reconocido el carácter público de esa franja, como una prolongación de la propiedad del Estado en la zona marina adyacente al territorio nacional, en la que ejerce su soberanía.\" ( Voto No. 447‑91 de 15 horas 30 minutos de 21 de febrero de 1991 ). Este régimen jurídico especial, cuyo destino primario es el de servir al uso y aprovechamiento común, le asigna a estos terrenos varios atributos consagrados también en la Ley de comentario.- La inalienabilidad hace alusión a su no pertenencia al comercio de los hombres.- No son susceptibles de enajenación por ningún medio de derecho público o privado.- Tampoco pueden ser reducibles al dominio particular bajo ninguna forma.- Véase en este sentido, el Voto No. 7‑93 de la Sala Primera de la Corte Suprema de Justicia, de 15 horas 5 minutos del 20 de enero de 1993.- Derivación del anterior es la imprescriptibilidad de estos bienes.- Al no ser susceptibles de apropiación privada, nadie puede alegar válidamente prescripción positiva sobre los mismos a su favor, no importa el tiempo que se hubieren ocupado.- Ningún tipo de posesión es válida para reclamar derechos de propiedad en ellos.- Además del artículo 1 °, el numeral 7 ° de la Ley No. 6043 desarrolla este principio: \" Los terrenos situados en la zona marítimo terrestre no pueden ser objeto de informaciones posesorias y los particulares no podrán apropiarse de ellos ni legalizarlos a su nombre, por éste u otro medio \". \" Resulta claro, en consecuencia, que siendo los terrenos y demás formaciones comprendidas en la zona marítimo terrestre de dominio público, se debe descartar la posibilidad legal de su reducción a dominio privado bajo forma alguna; la única manera en que los sujetos privados pueden usar y gozar de dichos terrenos ‑sin que ello implique su apropiación privada‑ es mediante la concesión que las municipalidades hagan, pero sólo en los [Dirección2] de la zona restringida o bien los inscritos ‑ entre 1970 y 1974 ‑ de conformidad con el Transitorio III de la Ley No. 4559 de 1970 \" ( Voto No. 7‑93 de la Sala Primera de Casación dictado a las 15 horas y 05 minutos del 20 de enero de 1993 ).-II.- Desde la Ley No. 162 de 28 de junio de 1828 se estableció la reserva de una [Dirección3] marítima en las costas de ambos mares, recogiendo así un precepto anterior de la época colonial (Real Cédula de 15 de octubre de 1754).- Esta disposición se mantuvo a lo largo de toda la legislación emitida en el siglo anterior.- Vale rescatar alguna normativa que distinguió expresamente su carácter de dominio público: El Código General de Carrillo de 1841 consideraba el flujo y reflujo del mar y sus riberas de dominio público; la Ley No. 7 de 31 de agosto de 1868 ratificó la indenunciabilidad de los terrenos de la milla marítima; la Ley de Aguas No. 8 de 26 de mayo de 1884 calificó expresamente a la zona marítimo terrestre ( utilizando específicamente este término ) como de dominio público; y el Código Fiscal de 1885 disponía la prohibición de enajenar los terrenos comprendidos en una [Dirección3] de latitud a lo largo de la costa de ambos mares.- En este siglo la Ley No. 75 de 30 de agosto de 1924 - la primera normativa en que se hizo referencia a la zona marítimo terrestre - reafirmó el carácter demanial de estos terrenos y la imposibilidad de explotar y usufructuar de ellos.- La Ley No. 11 de 22 de octubre de 1922 vino a precisar, por primera vez, su extensión en 1672 metros a partir de la pleamar ordinaria y de 500 metros a lo largo de ambas márgenes de los ríos.- Esta medida se mantuvo hasta 1942, cuando las Leyes No. 19 de 12 de noviembre de 1942 y No. 201 de 26 de enero de 1943 redujeron su extensión a doscientos metros para la costa atlántica y pacífica.- De esa manera se desafectaron todos aquellos terrenos más allá de los doscientos metros y su consecuente apropiación particular.- La franja de doscientos metros inalienables se mantuvo en subsiguientes normativas (artículo 7 de la ley de Tierras y Colonización No. 2825 de 14 de octubre de 1961 y Ley Forestal No. 4465 de 25 de noviembre de 1969).- Por Ley No. 4558 de 22 de abril de 1970, en su Transitorio III, se desafectaron ciento cincuenta metros de los doscientos.- Se autorizó a los particulares que hubieren poseído lotes o fincas en ese sector, por más de treinta años, en forma quieta, pública, pacífica y sin interrupción, para inscribirlos mediante información posesoria.- Esta disposición, no sin antes haber producido muchos abusos, fue derogada por Ley No. 5602 de 4 de noviembre de 1974.- III.- La zona marítimo terrestre o zona costera es actualmente regulada por la Ley No. 6043 de 2 de marzo de 1977 y por su Reglamento, Decreto No. 7841‑P de 16 de diciembre del mismo año.- Esta es la primera normativa específica sobre el tema.- El artículo 9 ° de la citada Ley No. 6043 define la zona marítimo terrestre como la franja de doscientos metros de ancho a todo lo largo de los litorales Atlántico y Pacífico de la República, cualquiera que sea su naturaleza, medidos horizontalmente a partir de la línea de la pleamar ordinaria.- Esta línea es para el litoral Pacífico el contorno o curva de nivel que marca la altura de 115 centímetros sobre el nivel medio del mar.- Para el litoral Atlántico es el contorno que marca la altura de 20 centímetros sobre ese mismo nivel ( artículo 2 ° del Reglamento a la Ley No. 6043, inciso ch ).- El artículo 10, por su lado, divide la zona marítimo terrestre en dos secciones: la zona pública o faja de cincuenta metros de ancho a contar de la pleamar ordinaria, y la zona restringida constituida por la franja de ciento cincuenta metros restantes.- Este podríamos decir es el concepto normal de zona marítimo terrestre y generalmente está referido a las áreas de playa.- Pero existen otras categorías de terrenos a las que se les aplica igualmente las regulaciones de la Ley No. 6043 y que conviene detallar aquí.- El artículo 2 °, inciso h), del Reglamento a la Ley No. 6043 define como litoral la orilla o costa del mar, que se extiende por las rías y esteros permanentes hasta donde éstas sean sensiblemente afectadas por las mareas y presenten características marinas definidas.- Por su parte, el inciso f) define como ría la parte del río próxima a su entrada en el mar y hasta donde llegan las mareas.- Uniendo los anteriores conceptos con el enunciado en el artículo 9 de la Ley, tenemos que es también zona marítimo terrestre la franja de doscientos metros contigua a las rías, es decir, a las partes de ríos próximas al mar y que son sensiblemente afectadas por las mareas y presentan características marinas definidas.- IV.- Igualmente, el artículo 11 de la Ley define como zona pública, sea cual fuere su extensión, la ocupada por todos los manglares de los litorales continentales e insulares y esteros del territorio nacional, y el artículo 4 ° del Reglamento estatuye que la zona restringida en estos casos, parte de la línea de vegetación a la orilla de los esteros y del límite de las manglares o bosques salados cuando éstos se extiendan por más de 50 metros de la pleamar ordinaria.- Esta definición es muy importante ya que hace extender el concepto de zona marítimo terrestre a porciones del territorio nacional que pueden encontrarse a kilómetros de las líneas de costa ( caso, por ejemplo, de los manglares contiguos al Río Sierpe ).- Podría creerse erróneamente que los terrenos próximos a los manglares ( zona restringida ) pueden ser objeto de posesión legítima.- También es zona marítimo terrestre las islas, islotes, peñascos marítimos y los terrenos y rocas que deje el mar en descubierto en la marea baja ( artítculo 9 °, párrafo segundo ).- En los últimos casos se aplica el concepto de zona pública a toda la formación natural, y en el caso de las islas a los cincuenta metros contiguos a la línea [Dirección4] , considerándose zona restringida los demás terrenos ( artículo 10 ), salvo que exista área de manglar, en cuya hipótesis, se estará a lo dicho arriba.-(...) VI.- La Ley de Aguas N ° 276 del 27 de agosto de 1942 y sus reformas, establece en su artículo primero lo siguiente: \" ARTICULO 1.- Son aguas de dominio público: II. Las de las lagunas y esteros de las playas que se comuniquen permanentemente o intermitentemente con el mar. \". Dichas aguas son de propiedad nacional y el dominio sobre ellas no se pierde ni se ha perdido cuando por ejecución de obras artificiales o aprovechamientos anteriores se alteren o hayan alterado las características naturales ( artículo 2 ).- Estas disposiciones normativas guardan una vinculación estrecha con lo establecido en los artículos 11 de la Ley N ° 6043 y el artículo 4 de su reglamento, antes citados, los cuales establecen la obligación de dejar una franja de ciento cincuenta metros ( como zona restringida ) a partir de la línea de vegetación de los manglares.- Es decir son de dominio público pues se encuentran del concepto de la zona marítimo terrestre.- Aparte de lo anterior, la Ley forestal declaró como zonas protectoras, conforme al artículo 68, inciso 2), \" Una zona mínima de diez metros, o ambos lados, en la ribera de todos los ríos, quebradas o arroyos, permanentes o no, si el terreno fuere plano, y de cincuenta metros horizontales si el terreno fuere quebrado \".- Como tal, están sometidos al régimen forestal y es prohibido realizar labores agropecuarias o eliminar la vegetación.\" (ver voto de este Tribunal N| 523 delas 14:50 del 24 de julio de 1995). \n\n IV. La finca objeto de las presentes diligencia se encuentra ubicada en el [Dirección5] , del cantón de Osa, provincia de Puntarenas, el cual mide doscientos noventa y ocho hectáreas ocho mil doscientos cuarenta y seis metros con treinta y dos decímetros cuadrados, graficada en el plano catastrado número P- 1207449-2007. Dicho terreno colinda al norte con el río Sierpe y al oeste con la [Dirección6] el Porvenir y con el río Sesenta según el plano a folio 1. Si bien la jueza a quo rechaza las presentes diligencias, lo hace con fundamento en que existe un traslape por un lado con una finca inscrita el cual es un traslape mínimo comparado con la cantidad de terreno pretendido titular y el otro fundamento es en cuanto a que traslapa con la Reserva Forestal Golfo Dulce, aplicando que no se demuestra la posesión decenal previo a la creación de dicha Reserva. Si bien ello es cierto, la mayor parte del terreno no forma parte de dicha reserva dado un 83% está fuera de ella, lo que hace lleve razón el apelante en cuanto a este punto que se le aplica como si todo el terreno (298 hectáreas) estuviese dentro cuando el porcentaje es de un 17 %. No duda este Tribunal dichos elementos citados por la juzgadora sean importantes, pero en este caso existen una gran cantidad de elementos probatorios que debieron tomarse en cuenta para hacer el rechazo, dado en el plano que grafica los terrenos a titular se estarían incluyendo hasta bienes que son del demanio público según se ha analizado, dado se incluyen áreas que contemplan las rías del Río Sierpe, áreas de manglar y áreas contiguas a los manglares que también forman parte de la zona marítimo terrestre, los cuales no pueden ser objeto de denuncio o posesión, pues se trata de terrenos demaniales. Respecto a la demanialidad de la zona marítimo terreste la Sala Constitucional de la Corte Suprema de Justicia se ha pronunciado de la siguiente manera: \"... La demanialidad de la zona marítimo-terrestre no se estableció en la Ley número 6043 –como pareciera que considera el accionante–, sino que la misma tiene un origen anterior, que se remonta, inclusive, a los orígenes de la conformación de nuestro Estado costarricense. Así, a lo largo de la historia de la humanidad, se ha denotado la gran importancia económica, comercial y también de seguridad –para la defensa del territorio nacional– que tiene la costa para cualquier país u organización estatal. Así, en lo que respecta a nuestro país, desde la época colonial, el litoral ha permanecido destinado al uso público. En un principio, el área reservada era de una [Dirección3] de ancho, por lo que se le conocía -y aún en nuestra época en algunos medios- como la \" milla marítima \"; según lo dispuso el precepto de la Real Cédula, del quince de octubre de mil setecientos cincuenta y cuatro, que se mantuvo vigente a lo largo de toda la legislación emitida en el siglo XIX. Así, la normativa de mayor relevancia en la regulación de la zona litoral costarricense inicia con la Ley número 162, de veintiocho de junio de mil ochocientos veintiocho , recién declarada la independencia de la Corona Española, y en la etapa de formación del Estado costarricense. En esta ley se estableció la reserva de una milla marítima en las costas de ambos mares, con lo que se recogió el precepto anterior de la época colonial ­­–supra señalado–. Posteriormente, en el Código General de 1841 (promulgado en la época de [Nombre4] ), además de la distancia de la zona que se regula, se resalta el carácter demanial del flujo y reflujo del mar y sus riberas. Asimismo, en la Ley número 7, de treinta y uno de agosto de mil ochocientos sesenta y ocho , se ratifica la \"idenunciabilidad \" de los terrenos de la milla marítima, esto es, la imposibilidad de titular las tierras de esta zona. Por su parte, en la Ley de Aguas, número 8, de veintiséis de mayo de mil ochocientos ochenta y cuatro , por primera vez se califica esta franja de tierra con la denominación de \"zona marítimo terrestre\" , la que expresamente se afecta como bien demanial, esto es, como bien de dominio público, y en consecuencia, se incorpora al patrimonio nacional. El Código Fiscal de mil ochocientos ochenta y cinco, dispuso la prohibición de enajenar los terrenos comprendidos en una milla de latitud a lo largo de la costa de ambos mares. Ya en el siglo XX., la primera normativa a que hizo referencia la zona marítimo terrestre fue la Ley número 75, de treinta de agosto de mil novecientos veinticuatro , que reafirmó el carácter demanial de estas tierras, así como la imposibilidad de explotar y usufructuar de ellos. Por su parte, la Ley número 11, de veintidós de octubre de mil novecientos veintidós, precisó, con exactitud, su extensión, al delimitarla en mil setecientos sesenta y dos metros (medida que corresponde a una milla exacta), a partir de la pleamar ordinaria, y de quinientos metros a lo largo de ambos márgenes de los ríos. Esta medida se mantuvo hasta mil novecientos cuarenta y dos, en que a partir de las Leyes número 19, de doce de noviembre , y la Ley número 201, de veintiséis de enero de mil novecientos cuarenta y tres , se redujo su extensión, a doscientos metros para ambas costas; provocando así, las primeras desafectaciones de este bien, en relación a todos aquellos terrenos más allá de la determinación hecha, y su consecuente apropiación particular. Es decir, a partir de estas dos disposiciones y a excepción de los doscientos metros contados a partir de la pleamar ordinaria, el resto de los mil seiscientos setenta y dos metros dejaron de ser de dominio público desde el momento en que pudieron se reducidos a dominio privado. Sin embargo, los terrenos contenidos en los doscientos metros exceptuados por las dos leyes precitados, continuaron siendo bienes de dominio público, no reducibles a dominio privado por ser inalienables, imprescriptibles e inembargables . De manera que a partir de las leyes mencionadas, la zona marítimo-terrestre quedó demarcada con una extensión de doscientos metros contados a partir de la pleamar, que es la que actualmente tiene, manteniendo su carácter de bien demanial. Esta medida (de doscientos metros) junto con el carácter demanial de los terrenos allí comprendidos, se reafirmó en el entonces vigente artículo 7 de la Ley de Tierras y Colonización número 2825, de catorce de octubre de mil novecientos sesenta y uno , y se repitió en la Leyes Forestal, número 4465, de veinticinco de noviembre de mil novecientos sesenta y nueve y de Urbanización Turística de la Zona Marítimo Terrestre, número 4558, de veintidós de abril de mil novecientos setenta . Especial mención debe hacerse de la Ley número 4558, de veintidós de abril de mil novecientos setenta , por cuanto al tenor de lo dispuesto en su Transitorio III., se desafectaron ciento cincuenta metros de los doscientos metros, después de los primeros cincuenta metros contados a partir de la pleamar, al autorizarse a los particulares que hubiesen poseído por más de treinta años, en forma quieta, pública, pacífica y sin interrupción, lotes o fincas en ese sector, a inscribirlos por medio del trámite de informaciones posesorias ante las autoridades jurisdiccionales (no administrativas) . Esta ley tuvo una vigencia de diecisiete meses y dos días, por cuanto ante la gran cantidad de abusos que se cometieron al tenor de la vigencia de esta disposición, sea, del doce de mayo de mil novecientos setenta, es que se derogó mediante Ley número 5602, de cuatro de noviembre de mil novecientos setenta y cuatro , la cual entró en vigencia a partir de su publicación en La Gaceta número 206, del catorce de octubre de mil novecientos setenta y uno. En la actualidad, la zona marítimo-terrestre o zona costera es regulada mediante la Ley número 6043, de dos de marzo de mil novecientos setenta y siete y su Reglamento, Decreto Ejecutivo, número 7841-P, de dieciséis de diciembre del mismo año , y es la primera que lo hace en forma específica, manteniendo su condición de bien demanial de la nación\" (SALA CONSTITUCIONAL DE LA CORTE SUPREMA DE JUSTICIA Nº 454-06, de las 14 horas 55 minutos del 25 de enero del 2006). \n\n V. Ese voto citado en el considerando anterior hace alusión al concepto de la zona marítimo terrestre: \"... en el artículo 1° de la Ley de la Zona marítimo terrestre, en tanto dispone textualmente: \"La zona marítimo terrestre constituye parte del patrimonio nacional, pertenece al Estado y es inalienable e imprescriptible.\" De suerte que debe tenerse a la zona marítimo terrestre como un bien demanial de la Nación, tanto por disposición constitucional, con sustento en el artículo 6; como por mandato legal, de conformidad con las normas transcritas. En cuanto a la definición de este bien, debemos recurrir a la misma ley de referencia, que en el artículo 9 de la Ley de la Zona Marítimo Terrestre la determina de la siguiente manera: \"[...] la franja de los doscientos metros de ancho a todo lo largo de los litorales Atlántico y Pacífico de la República, cualquiera que sea su naturaleza, medidos horizontalmente a partir de la línea de la pleamar ordinaria y los terrenos y rocas que deje el mar al descubierto en la marea baja. Para los efectos legales, la zona marítimo-terrestre comprende las islas, islotes y peñascos marítimos, así como toda tierra o formación natural que sobresalga del nivel del océano dentro del mar territorial de la República. Se exceptúa la Isla del Coco que estará bajo dominio y posesión directos del Estado y aquellas otras islas cuyo dominio o administración se determinen en la presente ley o leyes especiales.\" De tal suerte, que para el litoral Pacífico, la línea de pleamar es el contorno o curva de nivel que marca la altura de ciento quince centímetros sobre el nivel medio del mar; y para el litoral Atlántico, es el contorno que marca la altura de veinte centímetros sobre ese mismo nivel, según lo dispone el inciso ch) del artículo 2 del Reglamento de la Ley de la Zona Marítimo Terrestre. A su vez, debe tenerse en claro que la zona marítimo-terrestre está divida en dos zonas (al tenor de lo dispuesto en el artículo 10 de la ley de referencia): la primera, denominada como zona pública, que comprende la faja de cincuenta metros de ancho, contados de la pleamar ordinaria; y la segunda, llamada zona restringida, constituida por los restantes ciento cincuenta metros, que es en la que legítimamente pueden otorgarse concesiones, según los requerimientos que el ordenamiento establece al efecto. En cuanto a la primera –zona pública–, el inciso h) del artículo 2 del Reglamento de la Ley de la zona marítimo-terrestre la define como el litoral, sea, la orilla o costa del mar que se extiende por las rías y esteros permanentes, hasta donde éstas sean sensiblemente afectadas por las mareas, y presenten características marinas definidas; de manera que comprende las siguientes zonas: la ría, definida en los artículos 9 de la Ley y 2 inciso f del Reglamento de la Ley de la zona marítimo-terrestre como la parte del río próxima a su entrada en el mar, y hasta donde llegan las mareas; de manera, que comprende la franja de los doscientos metros contigua a las rías; los islotes, peñascos y demás áreas pequeñas y formaciones naturales que sobresalgan del mar (artículo 10 de la Ley de la zona marítimo-terrestre); los manglares, (artículo 11 de la citada Ley), cuya incorporación al demanio público data de mil novecientos cuarenta y dos, con la Ley de Aguas. Asimismo, el artículo 4 del Reglamento de la Ley de la zona marítimo-terrestre estatuye que éstos son bienes que se incorporan al patrimonio forestal del Estado, por lo que se sujetan al régimen de afectación de la Ley Forestal. Asimismo, se dispone como zona restringida a partir de la línea de vegetación a la orilla de los esteros y del límite de los manglares o bosques salados, cuando éstos se extiendan por más de cincuenta metros de pleamar ordinaria; lo cual es de gran importancia, por cuanto extiende el concepto de zona marítimo terrestre a porciones del territorio nacional que puede encontrarse a kilómetros de la costa; lo cual también lleva a confusión, por estimarse que los terrenos aledaños al manglar pueden ser objeto de posesión legítima, por cuanto, precisamente por esta condición de demanialidad, los manglares no pueden ser objeto de titulación por particulares; las islas, islotes y peñascos marítimos y los terrenos y rocas que el mar deje al descubierto en la marea baja (párrafo segundo del artículo 9 de la Ley de referencia); y, los doscientos metros contiguos, y a ambos lados del sistema de los canales principales que unen los puertos de Moín y Barra del Colorado, al tenor de lo dispuesto en el artículo 75 de la Ley que rige esta materia....\" (SALA CONSTITUCIONAL DE LA CORTE SUPREMA DE JUSTICIA Nº 454-06, de las 14 horas 55 minutos del 25 de enero del 2006). \n\n VI. De lo anteriormente expuesto por la Sala Constitucional se desprende que hay una serie de terrenos que se encuentran comprendidos dentro de la zona marítima terrestre, y que no son susceptibles de ser objeto de información posesoria, dada su naturaleza de demanialidad (artículo 7 de la ley en cita). De lo anterior se desprende los primeros 50 metros son zona pública y se encuentran graficados en el plano de cita, y es denominada \"zona inalienable\". Sin embargo, el oficio citado señala, que hay otra porción que está incluida en el levantamiento catastral que es parte de la zona restringida, y ello debido al fenómeno de las mareas que afecta al Río Sierpe. es decir,ubicado en la colindancia este del bien, tiene influencia de mareas y en consecuencia el fundo o parte de este se encuentra dentro de los 200 metros dada esa particularidad, además de que abarca zonas de manglar y sus áreas contiguas. Al tenor del ordinal 7 de la Ley sobre a Zona Marítima Terrestre y las razones dadas se ha de confirmar el rechazo de las presentes diligencias tomando en consideración todo lo aquí expuesto.\n\nPOR TANTO:\n\n En lo apelado se confirma el fallo dictado.\n\nW0RTODSXP4W61\n\n[Nombre5] - JUEZ/A\n\nDECISOR/A\n\n \n\n \n\n8ALP47YNI4BI61\n\n[Nombre6] -\n\nJUEZ/A DECISOR/A\n\nAQ1LDWAXYTY61\n\n[Nombre7] -\n\nJUEZ/A DECISOR/A\n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\nEXP: EXPN1\n\nII Circuito Judicial San José, [Dirección7] , , [Dirección8] de Goicoechea frente al parqueo del Hospital Hotel La Católica Teléfonos: [Telf1]. Fax: [Telf2] ó [Telf3]. Correo electrónico: [...]", "body_en_text": "*071000810423CI*\n\n*071000810423CI*\n\nEXPEDIENT:\n\nEXPN1\n\nPROCEEDING:\n\nPOSSESSORY INFORMATION\n\nPLAINTIFF:\n\nASOCIACION AGRICOLA CANAAN\n\nDEFENDANT:\n\nVOTE No. 477-F-14\n\nAGRARIAN TRIBUNAL. SECOND JUDICIAL CIRCUIT OF SAN JOSÉ.- At fourteen hours and twelve minutes on the thirteenth of June of two thousand fourteen.-\n\nPOSSESSORY INFORMATION PROCEEDING, brought by ASOCIACIÓN AGRÍCOLA CANAAN, legal identification number CED1 - - , represented by its president with powers of general unlimited attorney-in-fact [Name1] , of legal age, married twice, Evangelical minister, resident of San Francisco de Santo Domingo de Heredia, identity card number CED2 - - . Appearing in the proceeding are the PROCURADURÍA GENERAL DE LA REPÚBLICA, represented by Susana Fallas Cubero , of legal age, attorney, identity card number CED3 - - , in her capacity as deputy procurator ; and the INSTITUTO DE DESARROLLO RURAL, legal identification number CED4 - - - , represented by Carmelina Vargas Hidalgo, of legal age, divorced once , attorney, resident of Guachipelín, Escazú, identity card number CED5 - - , bar association number five thousand three hundred seventy-two , in her capacity as general judicial attorney-in-fact . Acting as directing attorney for the petitioner is licensed attorney Asdrubal Alfaro Miranda, bar association number eight thousand three hundred ninety-four. Processed before the Agrarian Court of the Second Judicial Circuit of the Zona Sur, Corredores.-\n\nWHEREAS:\n\n1.- The petitioner filed a possessory information proceeding for the purpose of registering in its name in the Public Property Registry the property described as follows: \"... unregistered land, dedicated to agriculture, located in the [Address1] , of the Province of Puntarenas, measuring two hundred ninety-four hectares eight thousand two hundred forty-six meters and thirty-two square meters, represented by cadastral map P one thousand two hundred seventy-four forty-nine-two thousand seven, bounded on the north by Rio Sierpe and Agropecuaria Venecia Sociedad Anónima, South: Carlos Quesada Alvarez and Laguna Porvenir, East Carlos Quesada Alvarez and on the west by Quebrada and Laguna El Porvenir...\".( pages 9, 320 verso ).\n\n2.- The Procuraduría General de la República appeared in the proceeding under the terms set forth on pages 60 to 65; in turn, the Instituto de Desarrollo Rural appeared in the proceeding on page 66 . -\n\n3.- Judge Marisel Zamora Arias, of the Agrarian Court of the Second Judicial Circuit of the Zona Sur, Corredores, by judgment number 21-2014, at eight hours on the sixth of March of the year two thousand thirteen , resolved: \" THEREFORE: In accordance with the foregoing, the Possessory Information proceedings established by Asociación Agrícola Canaan are DISAPPROVED.\" (page 322 verso).-\n\n4.- Mr. [Name1] , in his capacity as general unlimited attorney-in-fact of Asociación Agrícola Canaán, filed an appeal with express indication of the reasons refuting the thesis of the trial court, (pages 334 to 341) .\n\n5.- In the processing of the proceeding, the legal requirements have been observed, and no errors or omissions capable of producing its nullity are noted in the judgment.\n\nJudge Darcia Carranza writes; and,\n\nCONSIDERING:\n\nI. The Tribunal shares the facts held as proven, as they are a faithful reflection of what occurred in the case file.\n\nII. The appeal is filed by the petitioner against the judgment that dismissed the possessory information proceedings. It indicates that proven fact number one indicates that the property is located within the Golfo Dulce Forest Reserve (Reserva Forestal Golfo Dulce), and within the Térraba Sierpe Wetland (Humedal Térraba Sierpe). In the third whereas clause, the lower court judge refers to another reason for the dismissal of the proceedings being that it is located within the Golfo Dulce Forest Reserve and it was necessary to demonstrate ten-year possession ten years prior to its creation and that the witnesses state they have known the land since 2008, failing to demonstrate possession since 1968 when it was created on April 28, 1978. It objects to this by arguing the lands have been in private possession of the previous transferors for a period exceeding ten years before the creation of the Golfo Dulce Forest Reserve. On the other hand, it points out that 83% of the lands are within the Térraba Sierpe National Wetland (Humedal Nacional Térraba Sierpe) which was created by Executive Decree No. 22993 issued on February 21, 1994, therefore the approval of these proceedings is appropriate. 2) Regarding the reason for dismissal based on its map overlapping with that of a registered property, it argues the land is the property of the petitioner and Mr. [Name2] , who represents Agropecuaria Venecia Sociedad Anónima, is willing to declare as much, whom it offers as a witness, along with [Name3] , representative of Renaciendo en el Cerro Paraguas Muriseca S.A., who will declare that the land considered overlapping belongs to the applicant (see pages 334 to 341).\n\nIII.- In the present matter, according to the documentary evidence in the case file, it is clear that the majority of the lands to be titled are located within the Terraba Sierpe National Wetland (83%) and a small part within the Golfo Dulce Forest Reserve (17%), see certification from the National System of Conservation Areas (Sistema Nacional de Áreas de Conservación) on page 34, Expert Report on pages 253 to 269. In accordance with the Report issued by the Department of Geodesy and Topography of the National Geographic Institute (IGN) via Official Letter No. DGT - 532 - 08, the area described in map P-1207449-2007, which depicts the area to be registered, these lands border mangrove areas, include mangrove areas and the 200 meters adjacent to the estuary (ría) of the Río Sierpe, defined in Article 2 of the Regulation to the Law on the Maritime-Terrestrial Zone (Reglamento a la Ley sobre la Zona Marítimo Terrestre) (the part of the river near its entrance to the sea and up to where the tides reach) and are low-lying wetland lands composed of yolillales (see page 100). The foregoing was also corroborated by the lower court judge, who, in the record of the judicial inspection conducted for this purpose on September 16, 2008, was able to determine that the lands of the property intended to be registered were completely flooded, and further indicated that it looks like a mangrove swamp (manglar), since green water and lechuguilla are observed. \"In general, it was observed that the farm is full of water, there is a lot of tagual...\" (see inspection on pages 115 and 116). It was determined that on the bank of the Río Sesenta there are no trees in the protection area, which demonstrates there has been no protection of the forest resource regarding the river protection areas regulated in Articles 33 and 34 of the Forestry Law (Ley Forestal) 7575 in force and especially since the lands are subject to different management categories such as Wetlands and the Golfo Dulce Forest Reserve. There is an expert report in the case file visible on pages 253 to 274, from which a series of fundamental conclusions can be drawn about the lands over which title is sought. It is important to note that according to the Rincón cartographic sheet of the National Geographic Institute, map P-1207449-2007 includes areas of mangroves and wetlands, and therefore includes areas of the \"maritime-terrestrial zone (zona marítimo terrestre)\". Said expert report is also clear in pointing out that 56.963% of the land is wetlands and mangroves, that is, an area of 167 hectares. The foregoing greatly draws the attention of this Chamber because the trial judge does not make a comprehensive assessment of the evidence in the case file to resolve this matter, nor does she even take into consideration the judicial inspection conducted by herself, nor the different technical reports brought into the proceeding. Regarding what has been said, it is important to note that Our Jurisprudence has clearly defined, following legislation, the legal regime applicable to the maritime-terrestrial zone.- It ratifies its public domain character enshrined in Article 1 of Law No. 6043 of March 2, 1977: \"Article 1.- The maritime-terrestrial zone constitutes part of the national patrimony, belongs to the State and is inalienable and imprescriptible. Its protection, as well as that of its natural resources, is an obligation of the State, its institutions, and all the inhabitants of the country. Its use and exploitation are subject to the provisions of this law.\" In this regard, our Constitutional Chamber has established the following: \"The Chamber accepts the thesis that, in effect, the maritime-terrestrial zone is a public domain asset, under the terms of Article 261 of the Civil Code,... The demanial character of the maritime-terrestrial zone (or marine shore as it was formerly called) has been recognized since immemorial time and Roman Law itself records that status, as 'res communes' and 'extra commercium'. In our environment, since the last century, the public character of that strip has been recognized with complete clarity, as an extension of State property in the marine zone adjacent to the national territory, over which it exercises its sovereignty.\" (Vote No. 447-91 of 15 hours 30 minutes of February 21, 1991). This special legal regime, whose primary purpose is to serve common use and exploitation, assigns to these lands several attributes also enshrined in the Law under comment.- Inalienability refers to their non-belonging to the commerce of men.- They are not susceptible to alienation by any means of public or private law.- Neither can they be reducible to private ownership under any form.- See in this regard, Vote No. 7-93 of the First Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice, of 15 hours 5 minutes of January 20, 1993.- A derivation of the foregoing is the imprescriptibility of these assets.- Not being susceptible to private appropriation, no one can validly claim adverse possession (prescripción positiva) over them in their favor, regardless of the time they have been occupied.- No type of possession is valid to claim property rights in them.- In addition to Article 1, numeral 7 of Law No. 6043 develops this principle: \"Lands located in the maritime-terrestrial zone cannot be the subject of possessory informations (informaciones posesorias), and private parties may not appropriate them nor legalize them in their name, by this or any other means.\" \"It is clear, consequently, that since the lands and other formations included in the maritime-terrestrial zone are public domain, the legal possibility of their reduction to private ownership under any form must be discarded; the only way private subjects can use and enjoy said lands -without this implying their private appropriation- is through the concession that the municipalities grant, but only in the [Address2] of the restricted zone or those registered - between 1970 and 1974 - in accordance with Transitory III of Law No. 4559 of 1970\" (Vote No. 7-93 of the First Chamber of Cassation issued at 15 hours and 05 minutes of January 20, 1993).-II.- Since Law No. 162 of June 28, 1828, the reservation of a [Address3] maritime was established on the coasts of both seas, thus enshrining a prior precept from the colonial era (Royal Decree of October 15, 1754).- This provision was maintained throughout all legislation issued in the previous century.- It is worth rescuing some regulations that expressly distinguished its public domain character: The General Code of Carrillo of 1841 considered the flow and ebb of the sea and its shores as public domain; Law No. 7 of August 31, 1868 ratified the non-denounceability of lands of the maritime mile (milla marítima); the Water Law No. 8 of May 26, 1884 expressly qualified the maritime-terrestrial zone (specifically using this term) as public domain; and the Fiscal Code of 1885 provided for the prohibition of alienating lands comprised within a [Address3] of latitude along the coast of both seas.- In this century, Law No. 75 of August 30, 1924 - the first regulation that referred to the maritime-terrestrial zone - reaffirmed the demanial character of these lands and the impossibility of exploiting and usufructing them.- Law No. 11 of October 22, 1922 came to specify, for the first time, its extension at 1672 meters from the ordinary high tide line (pleamar ordinaria) and 500 meters along both banks of rivers.- This measure was maintained until 1942, when Laws No. 19 of November 12, 1942 and No. 201 of January 26, 1943 reduced its extension to two hundred meters for the Atlantic and Pacific coasts.- In this way, all those lands beyond two hundred meters were declassified (desafectados) and their consequent private appropriation occurred.- The inalienable two-hundred-meter strip was maintained in subsequent regulations (Article 7 of the Land and Colonization Law No. 2825 of October 14, 1961 and Forestry Law No. 4465 of November 25, 1969).- By Law No. 4558 of April 22, 1970, in its Transitory III, one hundred fifty meters of the two hundred were declassified.- Private parties who had possessed lots or properties in that sector, for more than thirty years, in a quiet, public, peaceful, and uninterrupted manner, were authorized to register them through possessory information.- This provision, not without first having produced many abuses, was repealed by Law No. 5602 of November 4, 1974.- III.- The maritime-terrestrial zone or coastal zone is currently regulated by Law No. 6043 of March 2, 1977 and by its Regulation, Decree No. 7841-P of December 16 of the same year.- This is the first specific regulation on the subject.- Article 9 of the cited Law No. 6043 defines the maritime-terrestrial zone as the strip of two hundred meters wide along the entire length of the Atlantic and Pacific littorals of the Republic, whatever its nature, measured horizontally from the ordinary high tide line.- This line is for the Pacific littoral the contour or level curve marking a height of 115 centimeters above the mean sea level.- For the Atlantic littoral, it is the contour marking a height of 20 centimeters above that same level (Article 2 of the Regulation to Law No. 6043, subsection ch).- Article 10, for its part, divides the maritime-terrestrial zone into two sections: the public zone or strip of fifty meters wide counting from the ordinary high tide line, and the restricted zone consisting of the remaining one hundred fifty meters.- We could say this is the normal concept of the maritime-terrestrial zone and it is generally referred to beach areas.- But there are other categories of lands to which the regulations of Law No. 6043 are equally applied and which it is convenient to detail here.- Article 2, subsection h), of the Regulation to Law No. 6043 defines littoral as the shore or coast of the sea, which extends through the estuaries (rías) and permanent inlets (esteros) to the point where they are sensibly affected by tides and present defined marine characteristics.- For its part, subsection f) defines estuary (ría) as the part of the river near its entrance to the sea and up to where the tides reach.- Joining the previous concepts with the one stated in Article 9 of the Law, we have that the strip of two hundred meters adjacent to the estuaries, that is, to the parts of rivers near the sea that are sensibly affected by tides and present defined marine characteristics, is also a maritime-terrestrial zone.- IV.- Equally, Article 11 of the Law defines as a public zone, whatever its extension, the area occupied by all the mangroves of the continental and insular littorals and inlets (esteros) of the national territory, and Article 4 of the Regulation establishes that the restricted zone in these cases starts from the vegetation line at the shore of the inlets and the limit of the mangroves or salt forests when these extend more than 50 meters from the ordinary high tide line.- This definition is very important as it extends the concept of the maritime-terrestrial zone to portions of the national territory that may be located kilometers from the coastlines (case, for example, of the mangroves adjacent to the Río Sierpe).- One could erroneously believe that lands near mangroves (restricted zone) can be the object of legitimate possession.- Islands, islets, maritime rocks, and the lands and rocks left uncovered by the sea at low tide are also maritime-terrestrial zone (Article 9, second paragraph).- In the latter cases, the concept of public zone applies to the entire natural formation, and in the case of islands, to the fifty meters adjacent to the [Address4] line, considering the remaining lands as a restricted zone (Article 10), unless there is a mangrove area, in which case, the above applies.-(...) VI.- The Water Law No. 276 of August 27, 1942 and its reforms, establishes in its first article the following: \"ARTICLE 1.- The following are public domain waters: II. Those of the coastal lagoons and inlets that communicate permanently or intermittently with the sea.\" Said waters are national property and ownership over them is not lost nor has been lost when, due to the execution of artificial works or previous exploitations, the natural characteristics are or have been altered (Article 2).- These regulatory provisions are closely linked to what is established in Articles 11 of Law No. 6043 and Article 4 of its regulation, cited above, which establish the obligation to leave a strip of one hundred fifty meters (as a restricted zone) from the vegetation line of the mangroves.- That is, they are public domain since they fall under the concept of the maritime-terrestrial zone.- Apart from the above, the Forestry Law declared as protective zones, in accordance with Article 68, subsection 2), \"A minimum zone of ten meters, on both sides, on the banks of all rivers, streams, or brooks, permanent or not, if the land is flat, and of fifty horizontal meters if the land is broken.\"- As such, they are subject to the forestry regime and it is forbidden to carry out agricultural activities or eliminate vegetation.\" (see vote of this Tribunal N| 523 of 14:50 of July 24, 1995).\n\nIV. The property object of these proceedings is located in the [Address5], of the canton of Osa, province of Puntarenas, which measures two hundred ninety-eight hectares eight thousand two hundred forty-six meters and thirty-two square decimeters, depicted in cadastral map number P- 1207449-2007. Said land is bounded on the north by the río Sierpe and on the west by the [Address6] el Porvenir and by the río Sesenta according to the map on page 1. While the lower court judge dismisses these proceedings, she does so on the grounds that there is an overlap on one side with a registered property, which is a minimal overlap compared to the amount of land intended to be titled, and the other ground is regarding the overlap with the Golfo Dulce Forest Reserve, applying the fact that ten-year possession prior to the creation of said Reserve is not demonstrated. While this is true, the majority of the land is not part of said reserve since 83% is outside it, meaning the appellant is right on this point that it is applied as if all the land (298 hectares) were inside when the percentage is 17%. This Tribunal does not doubt that the cited elements by the judge are important, but in this case, there is a large amount of probative elements that should have been considered to make the dismissal, given that the map depicting the lands to be titled would include even assets that are of the public domain as analyzed, since areas that contemplate the estuaries (rías) of the Río Sierpe, mangrove areas, and areas adjacent to the mangroves that also form part of the maritime-terrestrial zone are included, which cannot be the object of claim or possession, as they are demanial lands. Regarding the demaniality of the maritime-terrestrial zone, the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice has ruled as follows: \"... The demaniality of the maritime-terrestrial zone was not established in Law number 6043 – as it seems the plaintiff considers –, rather it has an earlier origin, which goes back, even, to the origins of the formation of our Costa Rican State. Thus, throughout the history of humanity, the great economic, commercial, and also security importance – for the defense of the national territory – that the coast has for any country or state organization has been denoted. Thus, with respect to our country, since the colonial era, the littoral has remained destined for public use. Initially, the reserved area was one [Address3] wide, for which it was known -and even in our time in some circles- as the 'maritime mile'; according to the provision of the precept of the Royal Decree, of October fifteenth, one thousand seven hundred fifty-four, which remained in force throughout all legislation issued in the 19th century. Thus, the regulations of greatest relevance in the regulation of the Costa Rican coastal zone begin with Law number 162, of June twenty-eighth, one thousand eight hundred twenty-eight, just declared independence from the Spanish Crown, and in the formation stage of the Costa Rican State. This law established the reservation of a maritime mile on the coasts of both seas, thereby enshrining the prior precept from the colonial era ­­–indicated above–. Subsequently, in the General Code of 1841 (enacted in the era of [Name4]), in addition to the distance of the zone being regulated, the demanial character of the flow and ebb of the sea and its shores is highlighted. Likewise, in Law number 7, of August thirty-first, one thousand eight hundred sixty-eight, the 'indenounceability (idenunciabilidad)' of the lands of the maritime mile is ratified, that is, the impossibility of titling the lands of this zone. For its part, in the Water Law, number 8, of May twenty-sixth, one thousand eight hundred eighty-four, for the first time, this strip of land is qualified with the denomination of 'maritime-terrestrial zone', which is expressly affected as a demanial asset, that is, as a public domain asset, and consequently, is incorporated into the national patrimony. The Fiscal Code of one thousand eight hundred eighty-five, provided for the prohibition of alienating lands comprised within one mile of latitude along the coast of both seas. Already in the 20th century, the first regulation that referred to the maritime-terrestrial zone was Law number 75, of August thirtieth, one thousand nine hundred twenty-four, which reaffirmed the demanial character of these lands, as well as the impossibility of exploiting and usufructing them. For its part, Law number 11, of October twenty-second, one thousand nine hundred twenty-two, precisely specified its extension, by delimiting it at one thousand seven hundred sixty-two meters (a measure that corresponds to one exact mile), from the ordinary high tide line, and five hundred meters along both banks of the rivers. This measure was maintained until one thousand nine hundred forty-two, when as of Laws number 19, of November twelfth, and Law number 201, of January twenty-sixth, one thousand nine hundred forty-three, its extension was reduced, to two hundred meters for both coasts; thus causing the first declassifications (desafectaciones) of this asset, in relation to all those lands beyond the determination made, and their consequent private appropriation. That is to say, as of these two provisions and with the exception of the two hundred meters counted from the ordinary high tide line, the remaining one thousand six hundred seventy-two meters ceased to be public domain from the moment they could be reduced to private ownership. However, the lands contained within the two hundred meters excepted by the two aforementioned laws continued to be public domain assets, not reducible to private ownership for being inalienable, imprescriptible, and unseizable . Therefore, as of the mentioned laws, the maritime-terrestrial zone was demarcated with an extension of two hundred meters counted from the high tide line, which is the one it currently has, maintaining its character as a demanial asset. This measure (of two hundred meters) together with the demanial character of the lands comprised there, was reaffirmed in the then-current Article 7 of the Land and Colonization Law number 2825, of October fourteenth, one thousand nine hundred sixty-one, and was repeated in the Forestry Law, number 4465, of November twenty-fifth, one thousand nine hundred sixty-nine and the Law of Touristic Urbanization of the Maritime-Terrestrial Zone, number 4558, of April twenty-second, one thousand nine hundred seventy. Special mention must be made of Law number 4558, of April twenty-second, one thousand nine hundred seventy, because under the terms of its Transitory III., one hundred fifty meters of the two hundred meters were declassified, after the first fifty meters counted from the high tide line, by authorizing private parties who had possessed for more than thirty years, in a quiet, public, peaceful, and uninterrupted manner, lots or properties in that sector, to register them through the process of possessory informations before jurisdictional (not administrative) authorities. This law was in force for seventeen months and two days, because given the large number of abuses committed under the validity of this provision, that is, from May twelfth, one thousand nine hundred seventy, it was repealed by Law number 5602, of November fourth, one thousand nine hundred seventy-four, which entered into force upon its publication in La Gaceta number 206, of October fourteenth, one thousand nine hundred seventy-one. Currently, the maritime-terrestrial zone or coastal zone is regulated by Law number 6043, of March second, one thousand nine hundred seventy-seven and its Regulation, Executive Decree, number 7841-P, of December sixteenth of the same year, and it is the first to do so specifically, maintaining its condition as a demanial asset of the nation\" (CONSTITUTIONAL CHAMBER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF JUSTICE No. 454-06, of 14 hours 55 minutes of January 25, 2006).\n\nV. That vote cited in the previous whereas clause refers to the concept of the maritime-terrestrial zone: \"... in Article 1 of the Law of the Maritime-terrestrial Zone, insofar as it textually provides: 'The maritime-terrestrial zone constitutes part of the national patrimony, belongs to the State and is inalienable and imprescriptible.' It follows that the maritime-terrestrial zone must be considered a demanial asset of the Nation, both by constitutional provision, based on Article 6; and by legal mandate, in accordance with the transcribed norms. Regarding the definition of this asset, we must resort to the same referenced law, which in Article 9 of the Law of the Maritime-Terrestrial Zone determines it as follows: '[...] the strip of two hundred meters wide along the entire length of the Atlantic and Pacific littorals of the Republic, whatever its nature, measured horizontally from the ordinary high tide line and the lands and rocks left uncovered by the sea at low tide. For legal effects, the maritime-terrestrial zone comprises the islands, islets, and maritime rocks, as well as all land or natural formation that protrudes above the ocean level within the territorial sea of the Republic. Except for Cocos Island, which shall be under the direct domain and possession of the State, and those other islands whose domain or administration are determined in this law or special laws.' In such a way, that for the Pacific littoral, the high tide line is the contour or level curve marking a height of one hundred fifteen centimeters above the mean sea level; and for the Atlantic littoral, it is the contour marking a height of twenty centimeters above that same level, according to subsection ch) of Article 2 of the Regulation of the Law of the Maritime-Terrestrial Zone. In turn, it must be clear that the maritime-terrestrial zone is divided into two zones (according to the terms of Article 10 of the reference law): the first, called the public zone, which comprises the strip of fifty meters wide, counted from the ordinary high tide line; and the second, called the restricted zone, constituted by the remaining one hundred fifty meters, which is where concessions may legitimately be granted, according to the requirements that the legal system establishes for this purpose.\"\n\nRegarding the first –public zone–, subsection h) of Article 2 of the Regulation to the Law on the Maritime-Terrestrial Zone defines it as the littoral, that is, the shore or coast of the sea that extends along the permanent rias and estuaries, up to where they are sensibly affected by the tides and present defined marine characteristics; so that it comprises the following zones: the ria, defined in Articles 9 of the Law and 2 subsection f of the Regulation to the Law on the Maritime-Terrestrial Zone as the part of the river near its entrance to the sea and up to where the tides reach; so that it comprises the two-hundred-meter strip contiguous to the rias; the islets, crags, and other small areas and natural formations that protrude from the sea (Article 10 of the Law on the Maritime-Terrestrial Zone); the mangroves (Article 11 of the cited Law), whose incorporation into the public domain dates back to nineteen forty-two, with the Water Law. Likewise, Article 4 of the Regulation to the Law on the Maritime-Terrestrial Zone establishes that these are assets that are incorporated into the forest heritage of the State, and are therefore subject to the regime of affectation of the Forest Law. Likewise, it is provided as a restricted zone starting from the vegetation line on the shore of the estuaries and the limit of the mangroves or salt forests, when these extend for more than fifty meters from the ordinary high tide; which is of great importance, since it extends the concept of the maritime-terrestrial zone to portions of the national territory that may be located kilometers from the coast; which also leads to confusion, since it is considered that the lands adjacent to the mangrove may be the subject of legitimate possession, because, precisely due to this status of public domain, mangroves cannot be titled by private individuals; the maritime islands, islets, and crags and the lands and rocks left exposed by the sea at low tide (second paragraph of Article 9 of the referenced Law); and, the two hundred meters contiguous to and on both sides of the system of main canals that connect the ports of Moín and Barra del Colorado, pursuant to the provisions of Article 75 of the Law governing this matter....\" (CONSTITUTIONAL CHAMBER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF JUSTICE Nº 454-06, of 14 hours 55 minutes of January 25, 2006).\n\nVI. From the foregoing stated by the Constitutional Chamber, it follows that there is a series of lands that are included within the maritime-terrestrial zone, and that are not susceptible to being the subject of possessory information, given their nature of public domain (Article 7 of the law cited). From the foregoing, it follows that the first 50 meters are a public zone and are plotted on the cited map, and are denominated \"inalienable zone\". However, the cited official communication indicates that there is another portion that is included in the cadastral survey that is part of the restricted zone, and this is due to the phenomenon of the tides that affects the Sierpe River. That is to say, located on the eastern boundary of the property, it has tidal influence and consequently the tract of land or part thereof is located within the 200 meters due to that particularity, in addition to the fact that it encompasses mangrove zones and their contiguous areas. Pursuant to Article 7 of the Law on the Maritime-Terrestrial Zone and the reasons given, the rejection of these proceedings must be confirmed, taking into consideration everything set forth herein.\n\nTHEREFORE:\n\nIn the appealed matter, the judgment issued is confirmed.\n\nW0RTODSXP4W61\n\n[Nombre5] - JUDGE\n\nDECISION-MAKER\n\n\n\n8ALP47YNI4BI61\n\n[Nombre6] -\n\nJUDGE DECISION-MAKER\n\nAQ1LDWAXYTY61\n\n[Nombre7] -\n\nJUDGE DECISION-MAKER\n\n\n\n\n\n\nEXP: EXPN1\n\nII Circuito Judicial San José, [Dirección7] , , [Dirección8] de Goicoechea frente al parqueo del Hospital Hotel La Católica Teléfonos: [Telf1]. Fax: [Telf2] ó [Telf3]. Correo electrónico: [...]\n\nIn this regard, our Constitutional Chamber has established the following: **\"** The Chamber accepts the thesis that, in effect, the maritime-terrestrial zone (zona marítimo terrestre) is a public domain asset, under the terms of Article 261 of the Civil Code,... The public domain character of the maritime-terrestrial zone (or marine shore as it was formerly called) has been recognized since time immemorial and Roman Law itself reflects that status, as \"res communes\" and \"extra comercium\". In our context, with complete clarity since the last century, the public character of that strip has been recognized, as an extension of State property in the marine zone adjacent to the national territory, over which it exercises its sovereignty. **\"** (Voto No. 447-91 of 15 hours 30 minutes of 21 February 1991). This special legal regime, whose primary purpose is to serve for common use and enjoyment, assigns to these lands several attributes also enshrined in the Law being discussed here **.- Inalienability (inalienabilidad)** refers to their not belonging to the commerce of men **.-** They are not susceptible to alienation by any means of public or private law **.-** Nor can they be reducible to private ownership under any form **.-** See in this sense, Voto No. 7-93 of the First Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice, of 15 hours 5 minutes of 20 January 1993 **.-** Deriving from the foregoing is the **imprescriptibility (imprescriptibilidad)** of these assets **.-** As they are not susceptible to private appropriation, no one can validly claim adverse possession over them in their favor, regardless of the time they may have been occupied **.-** No type of possession is valid for claiming ownership rights over them **.-** In addition to Article 1, Article 7 of Law No. 6043 develops this principle: \"Lands situated in the maritime-terrestrial zone cannot be the subject of possessory information proceedings (informaciones posesorias) and private individuals may not appropriate them or legalize them in their name, by this or any other means\". **\"** It is clear, consequently, that since the lands and other formations comprised within the maritime-terrestrial zone are public domain, the legal possibility of their reduction to private ownership under any form must be discarded; the only way in which private subjects can use and enjoy said lands -without that implying their private appropriation- is through the concession that municipalities grant, but only in the [Dirección2] of the restricted zone (zona restringida) or those registered - between 1970 and 1974 - in accordance with Transitorio III of Law No. 4559 of 1970 **\"** (Voto No. 7-93 of the First Chamber of Cassation issued at 15 hours and 05 minutes of 20 January 1993) **.-II.-** From Law No. 162 of 28 June 1828, the reservation of a maritime [Dirección3] on the coasts of both seas was established, thus incorporating an earlier precept from the colonial era (Real Cédula of 15 October 1754) **.-** This provision was maintained throughout all the legislation issued in the previous century **.-** It is worth recalling some regulations that expressly distinguished its public domain character: The General Code of Carrillo of 1841 considered the flow and ebb of the sea and its shores as public domain; Law No. 7 of 31 August 1868 ratified the non-denounceability (indenunciabilidad) of the lands of the maritime mile; the Water Law (Ley de Aguas) No. 8 of 26 May 1884 expressly qualified the maritime-terrestrial zone (specifically using this term) as public domain; and the Fiscal Code of 1885 provided for the prohibition of alienating the lands comprised within a [Dirección3] in latitude along the coast of both seas **.-** In this century, Law No. 75 of 30 August 1924 - the first regulation in which reference was made to the maritime-terrestrial zone - reaffirmed the public domain character of these lands and the impossibility of exploiting and profiting from them **.-** Law No. 11 of 22 October 1922 came to specify, for the first time, its extension as 1672 meters from the ordinary high tide line (pleamar ordinaria) and 500 meters along both banks of rivers **.-** This measurement was maintained until 1942, when Laws No. 19 of 12 November 1942 and No. 201 of 26 January 1943 reduced its extension to two hundred meters for the Atlantic and Pacific coasts **.-** In that way, all those lands beyond the two hundred meters were declassified (desafectaron) and their consequent private appropriation occurred **.-** The inalienable two-hundred-meter strip was maintained in subsequent regulations (Article 7 of the Lands and Colonization Law No. 2825 of 14 October 1961 and the Forest Law (Ley Forestal) No. 4465 of 25 November 1969) **.-** By Law No. 4558 of 22 April 1970, in its Transitorio III, one hundred fifty meters of the two hundred were declassified **.-** Private individuals who had possessed lots or properties in that sector for more than thirty years, in a quiet, public, peaceful, and uninterrupted manner, were authorized to register them through possessory information proceedings **.-** This provision, not without having first produced many abuses, was repealed by Law No. 5602 of 4 November 1974 **.- III.-** The maritime-terrestrial zone or coastal zone is currently regulated by Law No. 6043 of 2 March 1977 and by its Regulation (Reglamento), Decree No. 7841-P of 16 December of the same year **.-** This is the first specific regulation on the matter **.-** Article 9 of the cited Law No. 6043 defines the **maritime-terrestrial zone (zona marítimo terrestre)** as the strip of two hundred meters wide along the entire length of the Atlantic and Pacific littorals of the Republic, whatever its nature, measured horizontally from the ordinary high tide line **.-** This line is, for the Pacific littoral, the contour or level curve marking the height of 115 centimeters above the mean sea level **.-** For the Atlantic littoral, it is the contour marking the height of 20 centimeters above that same level (Article 2 of the Regulation to Law No. 6043, subsection ch) **.-** Article 10, for its part, divides the maritime-terrestrial zone into two sections: the **public zone (zona pública)** or strip of fifty meters wide counting from the ordinary high tide line, and the **restricted zone (zona restringida)** constituted by the remaining one hundred fifty meters **.-** This, we could say, is the normal concept of the maritime-terrestrial zone and is generally referred to beach areas **.-** But there are other categories of lands to which the regulations of Law No. 6043 equally apply and which it is convenient to detail here **.-** Article 2, subsection h), of the Regulation to Law No. 6043 defines littoral as the edge or coast of the sea, which extends through the permanent rías and estuaries (esteros) to where they are appreciably affected by the tides and present defined marine characteristics **.-** For its part, subsection f) defines ría as the part of the river near its entrance to the sea and up to where the tides reach **.-** Joining the previous concepts with the one stated in Article 9 of the Law, we have that the strip of two hundred meters contiguous to the rías is also maritime-terrestrial zone, that is, the parts of rivers near the sea that are appreciably affected by the tides and present defined marine characteristics **.- IV.-** Likewise, Article 11 of the **Law defines as public zone, whatever its extension, that occupied by all the mangroves of the continental and insular littorals and estuaries of the national territory**, and Article 4 of the Regulation establishes that the restricted zone in these cases starts from **the vegetation line at the edge of the estuaries and from the limit of the mangroves or salt forests when these extend more than 50 meters from the ordinary high tide line.-** This definition is very important since it extends the concept of maritime-terrestrial zone to portions of the national territory that can be found kilometers from the coastlines (case, for example, of the mangroves contiguous to the Río Sierpe) **.-** One might wrongly believe that the lands near the mangroves (restricted zone) can be the object of legitimate possession **.-** Also maritime-terrestrial zone are islands, islets, maritime rocky peaks (peñascos marítimos), and the lands and rocks that the sea leaves uncovered at low tide (Article 9, second paragraph) **.-** In the latter cases, the concept of public zone applies to the entire natural formation, and in the case of islands, to the fifty meters contiguous to the [Dirección4] line, considering the remaining lands as restricted zone (Article 10), unless there is a mangrove area, in which case, the foregoing applies **.-(...) VI.-** The Water Law No. 276 of 27 August 1942 and its amendments, establishes in its first article the following: **\"** ARTICULO 1.- The following are waters of public domain: II. Those of the lagoons and estuaries of the beaches that are permanently or intermittently communicated with the sea. **\".** Said waters are national property and the domain over them is not lost nor has it been lost when natural characteristics are altered or have been altered by the execution of artificial works or prior uses (Article 2) **.-** These normative provisions are closely linked to what is established in Articles 11 of Law No. 6043 and Article 4 of its regulation, cited above, which establish the obligation to leave a strip of one hundred fifty meters (as a restricted zone) from the vegetation line of the mangroves **.-** That is to say, they are public domain as they fall within the concept of the maritime-terrestrial zone **.-** Apart from the foregoing, the Forest Law declared as protected zones (zonas protectoras), in accordance with Article 68, subsection 2), **\"** A minimum zone of ten meters, on both sides, on the bank of all rivers, streams (quebradas), or brooks (arroyos), whether permanent or not, if the land is flat, and of fifty horizontal meters if the land is steep **\".-** As such, they are subject to the forestry regime and it is prohibited to carry out agricultural activities or eliminate vegetation **.\" (see vote of this Court N| 523 of 14:50 of 24 July 1995).**\n\n**IV.** The property subject to the present proceedings is located in the [Dirección5], of the canton of Osa, province of Puntarenas, which measures two hundred ninety-eight hectares, eight thousand two hundred forty-six meters, and thirty-two square decimeters, depicted on cadastral map number P- 1207449-2007. Said land borders to the north with the Río Sierpe and to the west with the [Dirección6] el Porvenir and with the Río Sesenta according to the map on folio 1. While the trial judge rejects these proceedings, she does so based on the fact that there is an overlap on one side with a registered property which is a minimal overlap compared to the amount of land sought to be titled, and the other basis is regarding the overlap with the Golfo Dulce Forest Reserve (Reserva Forestal Golfo Dulce), applying the criterion that possession for ten years prior to the creation of said Reserve is not demonstrated. Although this is true, the majority of the land is not part of said reserve given 83% is outside of it, which means the appellant is correct regarding this point that it is applied as if all the land (298 hectares) were within when the percentage is 17%. This Court does not doubt the cited elements by the judge are important, but in this case there are a great number of evidentiary elements that should have been taken into account to make the rejection, given that the map depicting the lands to be titled would be including even assets that are public domain as has been analyzed, given areas are included that contemplate the rías of the Río Sierpe, mangrove areas, and areas contiguous to the mangroves that also form part of the maritime-terrestrial zone, which cannot be the object of denouncement (denuncio) or possession, as they are public domain lands. Regarding the public domain nature of the maritime-terrestrial zone, the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice has ruled as follows: \"... The public domain nature of the maritime-terrestrial zone was not established in Law number 6043 –as the plaintiff seems to believe–, but rather it has an earlier origin, dating back, even, to the origins of the formation of our Costa Rican State. Thus, throughout the history of humanity, the great economic, commercial, and also security importance –for the defense of the national territory– that the coast has for any country or state organization has been noted. So, with respect to our country, since the colonial era, the littoral has remained destined for public use. Initially, the reserved area was one [Dirección3] wide, for which it was known -and even in our time in some circles- as the \"maritime mile\"; according to the precept of the Real Cédula, of October fifteenth, seventeen fifty-four, which remained in force throughout all the legislation issued in the 19th century. Thus, the most important regulation of the Costa Rican littoral zone begins with Law number 162, of June twenty-eighth, eighteen twenty-eight, just declared independence from the Spanish Crown, and in the stage of formation of the Costa Rican State. This law established the reservation of one maritime mile on the coasts of both seas, thereby incorporating the earlier precept from the colonial era –mentioned above–. Subsequently, in the General Code of 1841 (enacted in the era of [Nombre4]), in addition to the distance of the zone being regulated, the public domain character of the flow and ebb of the sea and its shores is highlighted. Also, in Law number 7, of August thirty-first, eighteen sixty-eight, the \"non-denounceability\" of the lands of the maritime mile is ratified, that is, the impossibility of titling the lands of this zone. For its part, in the Water Law, number 8, of May twenty-sixth, eighteen eighty-four, for the first time, this strip of land is qualified with the denomination of \"maritime-terrestrial zone\", which is expressly designated as a public domain asset, that is, as a public domain asset, and consequently, incorporated into the national heritage. The Fiscal Code of eighteen eighty-five provided for the prohibition of alienating the lands comprised within one mile in latitude along the coast of both seas. Already in the 20th century, the first regulation that referred to the maritime-terrestrial zone was Law number 75, of August thirtieth, nineteen twenty-four, which reaffirmed the public domain character of these lands, as well as the impossibility of exploiting and profiting from them. For its part, Law number 11, of October twenty-second, nineteen twenty-two, precisely specified, with exactness, its extension, delimiting it at one thousand seven hundred sixty-two meters (a measurement corresponding to one exact mile), from the ordinary high tide line, and five hundred meters along both banks of rivers. This measurement was maintained until nineteen forty-two, when as of Laws number 19, of November twelfth, and Law number 201, of January twenty-sixth, nineteen forty-three, its extension was reduced to two hundred meters for both coasts; thus provoking the first declassifications of this asset, in relation to all those lands beyond that determination, and their consequent private appropriation. That is to say, from these two provisions and with the exception of the two hundred meters counted from the ordinary high tide line, the remaining one thousand six hundred seventy-two meters ceased to be public domain from the moment they could be reduced to private ownership. However, the lands contained within the two hundred meters excepted by the two aforementioned laws continued to be public domain assets, not reducible to private ownership as they are inalienable, imprescriptible, and unattachable (inembargables). So, as of the mentioned laws, the maritime-terrestrial zone was demarcated with an extension of two hundred meters counted from the high tide line, which is what it currently has, maintaining its character as a public domain asset. This measurement (of two hundred meters) along with the public domain character of the lands comprised therein was reaffirmed in the then-current Article 7 of the Lands and Colonization Law number 2825, of October fourteenth, nineteen sixty-one, and was repeated in the Forest Law, number 4465, of November twenty-fifth, nineteen sixty-nine, and the Law for the Tourist Development of the Maritime-Terrestrial Zone, number 4558, of April twenty-second, nineteen seventy. Special mention must be made of Law number 4558, of April twenty-second, nineteen seventy, in that under the terms of its Transitorio III, one hundred fifty meters of the two hundred meters were declassified, after the first fifty meters counted from the high tide line, by authorizing private individuals who had possessed for more than thirty years, in a quiet, public, peaceful, and uninterrupted manner, lots or properties in that sector, to register them through the possessory information proceedings before the jurisdictional (not administrative) authorities. This law had a validity of seventeen months and two days, since due to the great quantity of abuses committed under the validity of this provision, that is, from May twelfth, nineteen seventy, it was repealed by Law number 5602, of November fourth, nineteen seventy-four, which entered into force as of its publication in La Gaceta number 206, of October fourteenth, nineteen seventy-one. At present, the maritime-terrestrial zone or coastal zone is regulated by Law number 6043, of March second, nineteen seventy-seven, and its Regulation, Decreto Ejecutivo, number 7841-P, of December sixteenth of the same year, and it is the first that does so specifically, maintaining its condition as a public domain asset of the nation\" (CONSTITUTIONAL CHAMBER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF JUSTICE Nº 454-06, of 14 hours 55 minutes of 25 January 2006).\n\n**V.** That vote cited in the previous recital (considerando) refers to the concept of the maritime-terrestrial zone: \"... in Article 1 of the Law of the Maritime-Terrestrial Zone, as it textually provides: 'The maritime-terrestrial zone constitutes part of the national heritage, belongs to the State, and is inalienable and imprescriptible.' So that the maritime-terrestrial zone must be considered a public domain asset of the Nation, both by constitutional provision, based on Article 6; and by legal mandate, in accordance with the transcribed norms. Regarding the definition of this asset, we must resort to the same reference law, which in Article 9 of the Law of the Maritime-Terrestrial Zone determines it in the following manner: '[...] the strip of two hundred meters wide along the entire length of the Atlantic and Pacific littorals of the Republic, whatever its nature, measured horizontally from the ordinary high tide line and the lands and rocks that the sea leaves uncovered at low tide. For legal effects, the maritime-terrestrial zone comprises the islands, islets, and maritime rocky peaks, as well as all land or natural formation that protrudes from the ocean level within the territorial sea of the Republic. Excepted is Isla del Coco which shall be under the direct domain and possession of the State and those other islands whose domain or administration is determined in this law or special laws.' In such a way, that for the Pacific littoral, the high tide line is the contour or level curve marking the height of one hundred fifteen centimeters above the mean sea level; and for the Atlantic littoral, it is the contour marking the height of twenty centimeters above that same level, as provided in subsection ch) of Article 2 of the Regulation of the Law of the Maritime-Terrestrial Zone. In turn, it must be clearly understood that the maritime-terrestrial zone is divided into two zones (under the terms of Article 10 of the reference law): the first, called public zone, which comprises the strip of fifty meters wide, counted from the ordinary high tide line; and the second, called restricted zone, constituted by the remaining one hundred fifty meters, in which concessions can legitimately be granted, according to the requirements that the legal system establishes for that purpose. Regarding the first –public zone–, subsection h) of Article 2 of the Regulation of the Law of the Maritime-Terrestrial Zone defines it as the littoral, that is, the edge or coast of the sea that extends through the permanent rías and estuaries, up to where they are appreciably affected by the tides, and present defined marine characteristics; so that it comprises the following zones: the ría, defined in Articles 9 of the Law and 2, subsection f of the Regulation of the Law of the Maritime-Terrestrial Zone as the part of the river near its entrance to the sea, and up to where the tides reach; in such a way that it comprises the strip of two hundred meters contiguous to the rías; the islets, rocky peaks, and other small areas and natural formations that protrude from the sea (Article 10 of the Law of the Maritime-Terrestrial Zone); the mangroves (Article 11 of the cited Law), whose incorporation into the public domain dates from nineteen forty-two, with the Ley de Aguas. Likewise, Article 4 of the Regulation of the Law of the Maritime-Terrestrial Zone establishes that these are assets that are incorporated into the forest heritage of the State, for which they are subject to the regime of designation (régimen de afectación) of the Forest Law.\"**\n\nLikewise, it is established as a restricted zone from the vegetation line at the edge of the estuaries and the limit of the mangroves or salt forests, when these extend more than fifty meters from the ordinary high tide line; which is of great importance, as it extends the concept of the maritime-terrestrial zone to portions of the national territory that may be found kilometers from the coast; which also leads to confusion, as it is considered that the lands adjacent to the mangrove may be subject to legitimate possession, since, precisely due to this public domain condition, mangroves cannot be titled by private individuals; maritime islands, islets, and rocks and the lands and rocks that the sea leaves exposed at low tide (second paragraph of Article 9 of the referenced Law); and, the two hundred contiguous meters on both sides of the system of main canals that connect the ports of Moín and Barra del Colorado, pursuant to the provisions of Article 75 of the Law governing this matter....\" (SALA CONSTITUCIONAL DE LA CORTE SUPREMA DE JUSTICIA Nº 454-06, at 2:55 p.m. on January 25, 2006).\n\n**VI.** From the foregoing exposition by the Sala Constitucional, it is inferred that there are a series of lands that are included within the maritime-terrestrial zone, and that are not susceptible to being the subject of possessory information (información posesoria), given their nature of public domain (Article 7 of the law cited). From the above, it follows that the first 50 meters are public zone and are plotted on the cited map, and are called \"inalienable zone (zona inalienable)\". However, the cited official communication indicates that there is another portion included in the cadastral survey that is part of the restricted zone, and this is due to the tidal phenomenon affecting the Río Sierpe. That is, located on the eastern boundary of the property, it has tidal influence and consequently the estate or part of it is within the 200 meters given this particularity, in addition to encompassing mangrove areas and their contiguous areas. By virtue of Article 7 of the Ley sobre la Zona Marítima Terrestre and the reasons given, the rejection of these proceedings must be confirmed, taking into consideration everything set forth herein.\n\n**POR TANTO:**\n\nIn the appealed matter, the ruling issued is confirmed.\n\n| W0RTODSXP4W61 |\n| :--- |\n| [Nombre5] - JUEZ/A |\n| DECISOR/A |\n\n| 8ALP47YNI4BI61 | AQ1LDWAXYTY61 |\n| :--- | :--- |\n| [Nombre6] - | [Nombre7] - |\n| JUEZ/A DECISOR/A | JUEZ/A DECISOR/A |\n\nEXP: EXPN1\n\nII Circuito Judicial San José, [Dirección7] , , [Dirección8] de Goicoechea frente al parqueo del Hospital Hotel La Católica Teléfonos: [Telf1]. Fax: [Telf2] ó [Telf3]. Correo electrónico: [...]\n\n7-93 of the First Chamber of Cassation issued at 15:05 on January 20, 1993).-II.- Since Law No. 162 of June 28, 1828, a reserve of one maritime [Dirección3] was established on the coasts of both seas, thus adopting an earlier precept from the colonial era (Royal Decree of October 15, 1754).- This provision was maintained throughout all legislation issued in the previous century.- It is worth rescuing some regulations that expressly distinguished its public domain character: The General Code of Carrillo of 1841 considered the ebb and flow of the sea and its banks as public domain; Law No. 7 of August 31, 1868 ratified the unclaimability (indenunciabilidad) of the lands of the maritime mile; the Water Law No. 8 of May 26, 1884 expressly qualified the maritime-terrestrial zone (zona marítimo terrestre) (specifically using this term) as public domain; and the Fiscal Code of 1885 provided for the prohibition of alienating lands comprised within one [Dirección3] of latitude along the coast of both seas.- In this century, Law No. 75 of August 30, 1924 - the first regulation in which reference was made to the maritime-terrestrial zone (zona marítimo terrestre) - reaffirmed the public domain character of these lands and the impossibility of exploiting and usufructuing them.- Law No. 11 of October 22, 1922 came to specify, for the first time, its extension at 1672 meters from the ordinary high tide and 500 meters along both banks of rivers.- This measure was maintained until 1942, when Laws No. 19 of November 12, 1942 and No. 201 of January 26, 1943 reduced its extension to two hundred meters for the Atlantic and Pacific coasts.- In this way, all those lands beyond the two hundred meters were declassified (desafectaron) and consequently appropriated by private parties.- The strip of two hundred inalienable meters was maintained in subsequent regulations (article 7 of the Land and Colonization Law No. 2825 of October 14, 1961 and Forestry Law (Ley Forestal) No. 4465 of November 25, 1969).- By Law No. 4558 of April 22, 1970, in its Transitory Provision III, one hundred and fifty meters of the two hundred were declassified (desafectaron).- Private parties who had possessed lots or properties in that sector for more than thirty years, in a quiet, public, peaceful, and uninterrupted manner, were authorized to register them through possessory information (información posesoria).- This provision, not without first having produced many abuses, was repealed by Law No. 5602 of November 4, 1974.- III.- The maritime-terrestrial zone (zona marítimo terrestre) or coastal zone is currently regulated by Law No. 6043 of March 2, 1977 and its Regulations, Decree No. 7841-P of December 16 of the same year.- This is the first specific regulation on the subject.- Article 9 of the cited Law No. 6043 defines the maritime-terrestrial zone (zona marítimo terrestre) as the strip of two hundred meters wide along the entire Atlantic and Pacific coastlines of the Republic, whatever its nature may be, measured horizontally from the line of the ordinary high tide.- This line is, for the Pacific coastline, the contour or level curve that marks the height of 115 centimeters above the mean sea level.- For the Atlantic coastline, it is the contour that marks the height of 20 centimeters above that same level (article 2 of the Regulations to Law No. 6043, subsection ch).- Article 10, for its part, divides the maritime-terrestrial zone (zona marítimo terrestre) into two sections: the public zone (zona pública) or strip of fifty meters wide counting from the ordinary high tide, and the restricted zone (zona restringida) constituted by the remaining strip of one hundred and fifty meters.- This, we could say, is the normal concept of the maritime-terrestrial zone (zona marítimo terrestre) and is generally referred to beach areas.- But there are other categories of lands to which the regulations of Law No. 6043 are equally applied and which it is appropriate to detail here.- Article 2, subsection h), of the Regulations to Law No. 6043 defines the coastline (litoral) as the shore or coast of the sea, which extends through the permanent rias and estuaries (esteros) up to where these are noticeably affected by the tides and present defined marine characteristics.- For its part, subsection f) defines a ria (ría) as the part of the river close to its entrance into the sea and up to where the tides reach.- Joining the previous concepts with the one stated in article 9 of the Law, we have that the strip of two hundred meters contiguous to the rias (rías) is also maritime-terrestrial zone (zona marítimo terrestre), that is, to the parts of rivers close to the sea and which are noticeably affected by the tides and present defined marine characteristics.- IV.- Equally, article 11 of the Law defines as public zone (zona pública), whatever its extension may be, that occupied by all the mangroves of the continental and insular coastlines and estuaries (esteros) of the national territory, and article 4 of the Regulations establishes that the restricted zone (zona restringida) in these cases starts from the line of vegetation at the edge of the estuaries (esteros) and from the limit of the mangroves or salt forests when these extend for more than 50 meters from the ordinary high tide.- This definition is very important since it extends the concept of the maritime-terrestrial zone (zona marítimo terrestre) to portions of the national territory that may be found kilometers from the coastlines (case, for example, of the mangroves contiguous to the Sierpe River).- One could erroneously believe that the lands close to the mangroves (restricted zone (zona restringida)) may be the object of legitimate possession.- Also constituting the maritime-terrestrial zone (zona marítimo terrestre) are islands, islets, maritime crags and the lands and rocks that the sea leaves uncovered at low tide (article 9, second paragraph).- In the latter cases, the concept of public zone (zona pública) is applied to the entire natural formation, and in the case of islands to the fifty meters contiguous to the [Dirección4] line, the remaining lands being considered restricted zone (zona restringida) (article 10), unless there is a mangrove area, in which case, the above shall apply.-(...) VI.- The Water Law No. 276 of August 27, 1942 and its amendments, establishes in its first article the following: \"ARTICLE 1.- The following are waters of public domain: II. Those of the lagoons and estuaries (esteros) of the beaches that communicate permanently or intermittently with the sea.\" Said waters are national property and the domain over them is not lost nor has been lost when natural characteristics are altered or have been altered by the execution of artificial works or previous exploitations (article 2).- These normative provisions are closely linked with what is established in articles 11 of Law No. 6043 and article 4 of its regulations, cited above, which establish the obligation to leave a strip of one hundred and fifty meters (as restricted zone (zona restringida)) from the line of vegetation of the mangroves.- That is to say, they are of public domain since they fall within the concept of the maritime-terrestrial zone (zona marítimo terrestre).- Apart from the above, the Forestry Law (Ley Forestal) declared as protection zones (zonas protectoras), pursuant to article 68, subsection 2), \"A minimum zone of ten meters, on both sides, on the banks of all rivers, streams or creeks, permanent or not, if the land is flat, and of fifty horizontal meters if the land is broken.\"- As such, they are subject to the forestry regime and it is forbidden to carry out agricultural activities or eliminate the vegetation.\" (see ruling of this Court No. 523 at 14:50 on July 24, 1995).\n\nIV. The property that is the subject of these proceedings is located in the [Dirección5], of the canton of Osa, province of Puntarenas, which measures two hundred ninety-eight hectares eight thousand two hundred forty-six meters and thirty-two square decimeters, plotted on cadastral plan number P- 1207449-2007. Said land borders to the north with the Sierpe River and to the west with the [Dirección6] el Porvenir and with the Sesenta River according to the plan on folio 1. Although the trial judge rejects these proceedings, she does so based on the fact that there is an overlap on one side with a registered property, which is a minimal overlap compared to the amount of land sought to be titled, and the other basis is regarding its overlap with the Golfo Dulce Forest Reserve (Reserva Forestal Golfo Dulce), applying that ten-year possession prior to the creation of said Reserve is not demonstrated. While this is true, the greater part of the land does not form part of said reserve, given that 83% is outside of it, which means the appellant is correct regarding this point that it is applied as if all the land (298 hectares) were inside when the percentage is 17%. This Court does not doubt that the cited elements mentioned by the judge are important, but in this case there are a great number of evidentiary elements that should have been taken into account to issue the rejection, given that in the plan that plots the lands to be titled, properties that are of the public domain (demanio público) would be included as has been analyzed, given that areas contemplating the rias (rías) of the Sierpe River, mangrove areas, and areas contiguous to the mangroves that also form part of the maritime-terrestrial zone (zona marítimo terrestre) are included, which cannot be the object of claim (denuncio) or possession, as they are public domain (demaniales) lands. Regarding the public domain nature (demanialidad) of the maritime-terrestrial zone (zona marítimo terrestre), the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice has pronounced as follows: \"... The public domain nature (demanialidad) of the maritime-terrestrial zone (zona marítimo-terrestre) was not established in Law number 6043 –as the plaintiff seems to consider–, but rather it has an earlier origin, which goes back, even, to the origins of the formation of our Costa Rican State. Thus, throughout the history of humanity, the great economic, commercial, and also security importance –for the defense of the national territory– that the coast has for any country or state organization has been noted. Thus, with respect to our country, since the colonial era, the coastline (litoral) has remained destined for public use. Initially, the reserved area was one [Dirección3] wide, for which it was known -and still in our era in some circles- as the \"maritime mile\"; as provided by the precept of the Royal Decree, of October fifteenth, one thousand seven hundred fifty-four, which remained in force throughout all the legislation issued in the 19th century. Thus, the regulations of greatest relevance in the regulation of the Costa Rican coastal zone begin with Law number 162, of June twenty-eighth, one thousand eight hundred twenty-eight, recently declared independence from the Spanish Crown, and in the stage of formation of the Costa Rican State. In this law, the reserve of a maritime mile on the coasts of both seas was established, thereby adopting the earlier precept of the colonial era –indicated above–. Subsequently, in the General Code of 1841 (promulgated in the era of [Nombre1]), in addition to the distance of the zone that is regulated, the public domain (demanial) character of the ebb and flow of the sea and its banks is highlighted. Likewise, in Law number 7, of August thirty-first, one thousand eight hundred sixty-eight, the \"unclaimability\" of the lands of the maritime mile is ratified, that is, the impossibility of titling the lands of this zone. For its part, in the Water Law, number 8, of May twenty-sixth, one thousand eight hundred eighty-four, for the first time this strip of land is qualified with the denomination of \"maritime-terrestrial zone\" (zona marítimo terrestre), which is expressly affected as a public domain (demanial) asset, that is, as a public domain asset, and consequently, is incorporated into the national patrimony. The Fiscal Code of one thousand eight hundred eighty-five, provided for the prohibition of alienating the lands comprised within one mile of latitude along the coast of both seas. Already in the 20th century, the first regulation that made reference to the maritime-terrestrial zone (zona marítimo terrestre) was Law number 75, of August thirtieth, one thousand nine hundred twenty-four, which reaffirmed the public domain (demanial) character of these lands, as well as the impossibility of exploiting and usufructuing them. For its part, Law number 11, of October twenty-second, one thousand nine hundred twenty-two, specified, with exactness, its extension, by delimiting it at one thousand seven hundred sixty-two meters (a measure that corresponds to one exact mile), from the ordinary high tide, and five hundred meters along both banks of the rivers. This measure was maintained until one thousand nine hundred forty-two, when based on Laws number 19, of November twelfth, and Law number 201, of January twenty-sixth, one thousand nine hundred forty-three, its extension was reduced to two hundred meters for both coasts; thus provoking the first declassifications (desafectaciones) of this asset, in relation to all those lands beyond the determination made, and their consequent private appropriation. That is to say, as of these two provisions and except for the two hundred meters counted from the ordinary high tide, the rest of the one thousand six hundred seventy-two meters ceased to be public domain from the moment they could be reduced to private domain. However, the lands contained in the two hundred meters exempted by the two aforementioned laws continued to be public domain assets, not reducible to private domain as they are inalienable, imprescriptible, and unseizable. So that, as of the mentioned laws, the maritime-terrestrial zone (zona marítimo-terrestre) was demarcated with an extension of two hundred meters counted from the high tide, which is the one it currently has, maintaining its character as a public domain (demanial) asset. This measure (of two hundred meters) along with the public domain (demanial) character of the lands comprised therein, was reaffirmed in the then current article 7 of the Land and Colonization Law number 2825, of October fourteenth, one thousand nine hundred sixty-one, and was repeated in the Forestry Laws (Leyes Forestal), number 4465, of November twenty-fifth, one thousand nine hundred sixty-nine and of Tourism Urbanization of the Maritime-Terrestrial Zone (Urbanización Turística de la Zona Marítimo Terrestre), number 4558, of April twenty-second, one thousand nine hundred seventy. Special mention must be made of Law number 4558, of April twenty-second, one thousand nine hundred seventy, since under the terms of its Transitory Provision III, one hundred and fifty meters of the two hundred meters were declassified (desafectaron), after the first fifty meters counted from the high tide, by authorizing private parties who had possessed for more than thirty years, in a quiet, public, peaceful, and uninterrupted manner, lots or properties in that sector, to register them through the procedure of possessory information (informaciones posesorias) before the jurisdictional (not administrative) authorities. This law was in force for seventeen months and two days, since given the great number of abuses committed under the validity of this provision, that is, from May twelfth, one thousand nine hundred seventy, it was repealed by Law number 5602, of November fourth, one thousand nine hundred seventy-four, which came into force upon its publication in La Gaceta number 206, of October fourteenth, one thousand nine hundred seventy-one. Currently, the maritime-terrestrial zone (zona marítimo-terrestre) or coastal zone is regulated by Law number 6043, of March second, one thousand nine hundred seventy-seven and its Regulations, Executive Decree, number 7841-P, of December sixteenth of the same year, and it is the first one that does so specifically, maintaining its condition as a public domain (demanial) asset of the nation\" (CONSTITUTIONAL CHAMBER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF JUSTICE No. 454-06, at 14 hours 55 minutes of January 25, 2006).\n\nV. That ruling cited in the preceding whereas clause (considerando) refers to the concept of the maritime-terrestrial zone (zona marítimo terrestre): \"... in article 1 of the Law of the Maritime-Terrestrial Zone (Ley de la Zona marítimo terrestre), insofar as it textually provides: 'The maritime-terrestrial zone (zona marítimo terrestre) constitutes part of the national patrimony, belongs to the State and is inalienable and imprescriptible.' So that the maritime-terrestrial zone (zona marítimo terrestre) must be considered a public domain (demanial) asset of the Nation, both by constitutional provision, with support in article 6; and by legal mandate, in accordance with the transcribed norms. Regarding the definition of this asset, we must resort to the same reference law, which in article 9 of the Law of the Maritime-Terrestrial Zone (Ley de la Zona Marítimo Terrestre) determines it in the following manner: '[...] the strip of two hundred meters wide along the entire Atlantic and Pacific coastlines of the Republic, whatever its nature may be, measured horizontally from the line of the ordinary high tide and the lands and rocks that the sea leaves uncovered at low tide. For legal effects, the maritime-terrestrial zone (zona marítimo-terrestre) comprises the maritime islands, islets and crags, as well as all land or natural formation that protrudes above the ocean level within the territorial sea of the Republic. Cocos Island is excepted, which shall be under the direct domain and possession of the State, and those other islands whose domain or administration is determined in this law or special laws.' In such a way, that for the Pacific coastline, the high tide line is the contour or level curve that marks the height of one hundred fifteen centimeters above the mean sea level; and for the Atlantic coastline, it is the contour that marks the height of twenty centimeters above that same level, as provided by subsection ch) of article 2 of the Regulations of the Law of the Maritime-Terrestrial Zone (Ley de la Zona Marítimo Terrestre). In turn, it must be kept clear that the maritime-terrestrial zone (zona marítimo-terrestre) is divided into two zones (under the terms of the provisions of article 10 of the reference law): the first, denominated as public zone (zona pública), which comprises the strip of fifty meters wide, counted from the ordinary high tide; and the second, called restricted zone (zona restringida), constituted by the remaining one hundred and fifty meters, which is the one in which concessions can legitimately be granted, according to the requirements that the legal system establishes for that purpose. Regarding the first –public zone (zona pública)–, subsection h) of article 2 of the Regulations of the Law of the maritime-terrestrial zone (Ley de la zona marítimo-terrestre) defines it as the coastline (litoral), that is, the shore or coast of the sea that extends through the permanent rias (rías) and estuaries (esteros), up to where these are noticeably affected by the tides, and present defined marine characteristics; so that it comprises the following zones: the ria (ría), defined in articles 9 of the Law and 2, subsection f of the Regulations of the Law of the maritime-terrestrial zone (Ley de la zona marítimo-terrestre) as the part of the river close to its entrance into the sea, and up to where the tides reach; so, it comprises the strip of two hundred meters contiguous to the rias (rías); the islets, crags and other small areas and natural formations that protrude from the sea (article 10 of the Law of the maritime-terrestrial zone (Ley de la zona marítimo-terrestre)); the mangroves (article 11 of the cited Law), whose incorporation into the public domain (demanio público) dates from one thousand nine hundred forty-two, with the Water Law. Likewise, article 4 of the Regulations of the Law of the maritime-terrestrial zone (Ley de la zona marítimo-terrestre) establishes that these are assets that are incorporated into the forest patrimony of the State, therefore they are subject to the land-use designation regime of the Forestry Law (Ley Forestal). Likewise, it is provided as restricted zone (zona restringida) from the line of vegetation at the edge of the estuaries (esteros) and from the limit of the mangroves or salt forests, when these extend for more than fifty meters from the ordinary high tide; which is of great importance, since it extends the concept of maritime-terrestrial zone (zona marítimo terrestre) to portions of the national territory that can be found kilometers from the coast; which also leads to confusion, as it is estimated that the lands surrounding the mangrove can be the object of legitimate possession, because, precisely due to this condition of public domain nature (demanialidad), mangroves cannot be the object of titling by private parties; the maritime islands, islets and crags and the lands and rocks that the sea leaves uncovered at low tide (second paragraph of article 9 of the Law of reference); and, the two hundred meters contiguous, and on both sides of the system of the main channels that connect the ports of Moín and Barra del Colorado, under the terms of the provisions of article 75 of the Law that governs this matter....\" (CONSTITUTIONAL CHAMBER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF JUSTICE No. 454-06, at 14 hours 55 minutes of January 25, 2006).\n\nVI. From the foregoing exposition by the Constitutional Chamber, it is evident that there is a series of lands that are comprised within the maritime-terrestrial zone (zona marítima terrestre), and that are not susceptible to being the object of possessory information (información posesoria), given their public domain nature (demanialidad) (article 7 of the law cited). From the foregoing, it follows that the first 50 meters are public zone (zona pública) and are plotted on the cited plan, and it is denominated \"inalienable zone\". However, the cited official communication indicates that there is another portion that is included in the cadastral survey that is part of the restricted zone (zona restringida), and this is due to the tidal phenomenon that affects the Sierpe River.\n\nthat is to say, located on the eastern boundary of the property, it is influenced by tides and consequently the property or part thereof is within the 200 meters due to that particularity, in addition to encompassing mangrove areas and their adjacent areas. Pursuant to ordinal 7 of the Ley sobre la Zona Marítimo Terrestre and the reasons given, the rejection of these proceedings must be confirmed taking into consideration everything set forth herein.”\n\n| EXPEDIENTE: | EXPN1 |\n| PROCESO: | INFORMACIÓN POSESORIA |\n| ACTOR/A: | ASOCIACION AGRICOLA CANAAN |\n| DEMANDADO/A: | |\n\nVOTO N° 477-F-14\n\n**TRIBUNAL AGRARIO. SEGUNDO CIRCUITO JUDICIAL DE SAN JOSÉ.- At fourteen hours and twelve minutes on the thirteenth of June of two thousand fourteen.-**\n\n**PROCESS OF POSSESSORY INFORMATION (INFORMACIÓN POSESORIA)**, promoted by **ASOCIACIÓN AGRÍCOLA CANAAN**, legal ID number CED1 - , represented by its president with powers of a general unlimited attorney-in-fact **[Nombre1]** , of legal age, married twice, Evangelical minister, resident of San Francisco de Santo Domingo de Heredia, identity card CED2 - - . Participating in the process are the **PROCURADURÍA GENERAL DE LA REPÚBLICA**, represented by **Susana Fallas Cubero** , of legal age, attorney, identity card CED3 - - , in her capacity as assistant prosecutor; and the **INSTITUTO DE DESARROLLO RURAL,** legal ID number CED4 - - , represented by **Carmelina Vargas Hidalgo**, of legal age, divorced once, attorney, resident of Guachipelín, Escazú, identity card CED5 - - , bar association number five thousand three hundred seventy-two, in her capacity as general judicial attorney. Acting as directing attorney for the petitioner is the licensed attorney **Asdrubal Alfaro Miranda,** bar association number eight thousand three hundred ninety-four. Processed before the Juzgado Agrario of the Segundo Circuito Judicial de la Zona Sur, Corredores.-\n\n**RESULTANDO:**\n\n**1.-** The petitioner filed a process of possessory information (información posesoria) with the aim of having the property described as follows registered in their name in the Public Property Registry (Registro Público de la Propiedad): *\"...* unregistered land, dedicated to agriculture, situated in [Dirección1] , of the Province of Puntarenas, measuring two hundred ninety-four hectares eight thousand two hundred forty-six meters with thirty-two square meters, represented by survey plan P mil doscientos setenta y cuatro cuarenta y nueve-dos mil siete, bordering on the north with Rio Sierpe and Agropecuaria Venecia Sociedad Anónima, South: Carlos Quesada Alvarez and Laguna Porvenir, East Carlos Quesada Alvarez and on the west with Quebrada and laguna El Porvenir... *\"* (folios 9, 320 vuelto).\n\n**2.-** The Procuraduría General de la República appeared in the process under the terms found at folios 60 to 65; in turn, the Instituto de Desarrollo Rural appeared in the process at folio 66.-\n\n**3.-** Judge Marisel Zamora Arias, of the Juzgado Agrario of the Segundo Circuito Judicial de la Zona Sur, Corredores, by judgment number 21-2014, at eight hours on the sixth of March of the year two thousand thirteen, resolved: “ **POR TANTO** **:** In accordance with the foregoing, the possessory information proceedings (diligencias de Información Posesoria) filed by Asociación Agrícola Canaan are **DISAPPROVED**.” (folio 322 vuelto).-\n\n**4.-** Mr. [Nombre1] , in his capacity as general unlimited attorney-in-fact of the Asociación Agrícola Canaán, filed an appeal expressly indicating the reasons for which he refutes the thesis of the lower Court, (folio 334 to 341).\n\n**5.** In the substantiation of the process, the legal prescriptions have been observed, and the existence of errors or omissions in the judgment capable of producing its nullity is not noted.\n\nDrafted by Judge **Darcia Carranza**; and,\n\n**CONSIDERANDO:**\n\n**I.** The Tribunal shares the facts held as proven as they are a faithful reflection of what occurred in the case file.\n\n**II.** The appeal is filed by the petitioner against the judgment that rejected the possessory information proceedings (diligencias de información posesoria). It indicates that proven fact number one indicates that the property is located within the Reserva Forestal Golfo Dulce, and within the Humedal Térraba Sierpe. In the third considerando, the lower court (a quo) refers to another reason for rejecting the proceedings being that it is located within the Reserva Forestal Golfo Dulce and that a ten-year possession (posesión decenal) had to be demonstrated ten years before its creation, and that the witnesses state they have known the land since 2008, failing to demonstrate possession since 1968 as it was created on April 28, 1978. It objects to the foregoing, arguing that the lands have been in private possession of the previous transferors for a period exceeding ten years before the creation of the Reserva Forestal Golfo Dulce. On the other hand, it points out that 83% of the lands are within the Humedal Nacional Térraba Sierpe, which was created by Decreto Ejecutivo N° 22993 issued on February 21, 1994, so the approval of these proceedings is appropriate. 2) Regarding the reason for rejection based on the fact that its survey plan overlaps with that of a registered property, it argues the land is the property of the petitioner and that Mr. [Nombre2] who represents Agropecuaria Venecia Sociedad Anónima is willing to declare so, whom it offers as a witness, along with [Nombre3] representative of Renaciendo en el Cerro Paraguas Muriseca S.A., who will declare that the land considered overlapped belongs to the applicant (see folio 334 to 341).\n\n**III.-** In the present matter, according to the documentary evidence existing in the case file, it is clear that the greater part of the lands to be titled are located within the Humedal Nacional Terraba Sierpe (83%) and a small part within the Reserva Forestal Golfo Dulce (17%), see certification from the Sistema Nacional de Áreas de Conservación at folio 34, Expert Report (Informe Pericial) at folios 253 to 269. In accordance with the Report rendered by the Department of Geodesy and Topography of the Instituto Geográfico Nacional (IGN) through Official Letter N° DGT - 532 - 08, the area described in survey plan P-1207449-2007, which depicts the area to be registered, said lands border mangrove areas, encompass mangrove areas and the 200 meters adjacent to the estuary (ría) of the Río Sierpe, defined in Article 2 of the Reglamento to the Ley sobre la Zona Marítimo Terrestre (part of the river close to its entrance to the sea and up to where the tides reach) and consist of low-lying wetland lands composed of yolillales (see folio 100). The foregoing was also corroborated by the lower court judge, who, in the minutes of the judicial inspection (reconocimiento judicial) carried out for this purpose on September 16, 2008, was able to determine that the lands of the property intended to be registered were completely flooded; she further indicated that it seems like a mangrove swamp (manglar), as green water and water lettuce are observed. \"In general, it could be observed that the property is full of water, there is a lot of tagual...\" (see inspection at folio 115 and 116). It was determined that on the bank of the Río Sesenta there are no trees in the protection area, which demonstrates that there has been no protection of the forest resource regarding the river protection areas regulated in Articles 33 and 34 of the Ley Forestal 7575 in force, and especially since the lands are subject to different management categories such as Wetlands and the Reserva Forestal Golfo Dulce. There exists in the case file an expert report (informe pericial) visible at folios 253 to 274, from which a series of fundamental conclusions can be drawn about the lands whose titling is sought. It is important to note that according to the Rincón cartographic sheet of the Instituto Geográfico Nacional (IGN), survey plan P-1207449-2007 encompasses mangrove and wetland areas, therefore it encompasses areas of the \"maritime-terrestrial zone (zona marítimo terrestre)\". Said expert report is also clear in pointing out that 56.963% of the land is wetlands and mangroves, that is, an area of 167 hectares. The foregoing greatly draws the attention of this Chamber because the lower court judge does not make a comprehensive assessment of the evidence existing in the case file to resolve this matter, nor does she even take into consideration the judicial inspection carried out by herself, nor the different technical reports brought to the process. Regarding the foregoing, it is important to note that Our Case Law has clearly defined, following the legislation, the legal regime applicable to the maritime-terrestrial zone (zona marítimo terrestre).- It ratifies its character as **public domain (dominio público)** enshrined in Article 1 of Ley No. 6043 of March 2, 1977: **\"** Article 1.- The maritime-terrestrial zone constitutes part of the national patrimony, belongs to the State and is inalienable and imprescriptible. Its protection, as well as that of its natural resources, is an obligation of the State, its institutions and all the inhabitants of the country. Its use and exploitation are subject to the provisions of this law. **\".** In this regard, the Constitutional Chamber (Sala Constitucional) has established the following: **\"** The Chamber accepts the thesis that indeed, the maritime-terrestrial zone is a public domain asset, under the terms of Article 261 of the Civil Code,... The demanial character of the maritime-terrestrial zone (or marine shore as it was formerly called) has been recognized since time immemorial and Roman Law itself includes that status, as 'res communes' and 'extra comercium'. In our environment, with all clarity since the last century the public character of that strip has been recognized, as an extension of the State's property in the marine area adjacent to the national territory, over which it exercises its sovereignty. **\"** (Voto No. 447-91 of 15 hours 30 minutes of February 21, 1991). This special legal regime, whose primary purpose is to serve common use and enjoyment, assigns to these lands several attributes also enshrined in the Law under commentary.- **Inalienability (Inalienabilidad)** alludes to their not belonging to commerce among men.- They are not subject to alienation by any means of public or private law.- Nor can they be reducible to private ownership (dominio particular) under any form.- See in this regard, Voto No. 7-93 of the Sala Primera of the Corte Suprema de Justicia, of 15 hours 5 minutes of January 20, 1993.- A derivation of the foregoing is the **imprescriptibility (imprescriptibilidad)** of these assets.- Not being subject to private appropriation, no one can validly claim positive prescription over them in their favor, regardless of the time they may have been occupied.- No type of possession is valid to claim property rights in them.- Furthermore, in addition to Article 1, numeral 7 of Ley No.\n\n6043 develops this principle: \"Lands situated in the maritime-terrestrial zone (zona marítimo terrestre) cannot be the subject of possessory information proceedings (informaciones posesorias) and private individuals may not appropriate them or legalize them in their name, by this or any other means\". \" It is clear, consequently, that since the lands and other formations comprised within the maritime-terrestrial zone are public domain, the legal possibility of their reduction to private domain under any form must be dismissed; the only way in which private subjects can use and enjoy said lands -without this implying their private appropriation- is through the concession that the municipalities grant, but only in the [Dirección2] of the restricted zone (zona restringida) or those registered - between 1970 and 1974 - in accordance with Transitorio III of Ley No. 4559 of 1970 \" ( Voto No. 7-93 of the First Chamber of Cassation issued at 15:05 on January 20, 1993 ).-II.- From Ley No. 162 of June 28, 1828, the reservation of a maritime [Dirección3] on the coasts of both seas was established, thus incorporating an earlier precept from the colonial era (Royal Decree of October 15, 1754).- This provision was maintained throughout all legislation issued in the previous century.- It is worth rescuing some regulations that expressly distinguished its public domain character: The General Code of Carrillo of 1841 considered the ebb and flow of the sea and its banks as public domain; Ley No. 7 of August 31, 1868 ratified the unclaimability (indenunciabilidad) of the lands of the maritime mile; the Water Law (Ley de Aguas) No. 8 of May 26, 1884 expressly qualified the maritime-terrestrial zone (using this term specifically) as public domain; and the Fiscal Code of 1885 provided for the prohibition of alienating the lands comprised within a [Dirección3] of latitude along the coast of both seas.- In this century, Ley No. 75 of August 30, 1924 - the first regulation in which reference was made to the maritime-terrestrial zone - reaffirmed the public domain character of these lands and the impossibility of exploiting and usufructing them.- Ley No. 11 of October 22, 1922 came to specify, for the first time, its extension at 1672 meters from the ordinary high tide line and 500 meters along both banks of rivers.- This measurement was maintained until 1942, when Leyes No. 19 of November 12, 1942 and No. 201 of January 26, 1943 reduced its extension to two hundred meters for the Atlantic and Pacific coasts.- In that way, all those lands beyond the two hundred meters were declassified (desafectados) and their consequent private appropriation occurred.- The strip of two hundred unalienable meters was maintained in subsequent regulations (article 7 of the Land and Colonization Law (ley de Tierras y Colonización) No. 2825 of October 14, 1961 and Forestry Law (Ley Forestal) No. 4465 of November 25, 1969).- By Ley No. 4558 of April 22, 1970, in its Transitorio III, one hundred fifty meters of the two hundred were declassified.- Private individuals who had possessed lots or farms in that sector for more than thirty years, in a quiet, public, peaceful, and uninterrupted manner, were authorized to register them through possessory information proceedings.- This provision, not without first having produced many abuses, was repealed by Ley No. 5602 of November 4, 1974.- III.- The maritime-terrestrial zone or coastal zone is currently regulated by Ley No. 6043 of March 2, 1977 and by its Regulations, Decreto No. 7841-P of December 16 of the same year.- This is the first specific regulation on the subject.- Article 9 of the cited Ley No. 6043 defines the maritime-terrestrial zone (zona marítimo terrestre) as the strip of two hundred meters wide along the entire length of the Atlantic and Pacific coasts of the Republic, whatever their nature, measured horizontally from the ordinary high tide line.- This line is, for the Pacific coast, the contour or level curve that marks the height of 115 centimeters above the mean sea level.- For the Atlantic coast, it is the contour that marks the height of 20 centimeters above that same level (article 2 of the Regulations to Ley No. 6043, subsection ch).- Article 10, for its part, divides the maritime-terrestrial zone into two sections: the public zone (zona pública) or strip of fifty meters wide counted from the ordinary high tide line, and the restricted zone (zona restringida) constituted by the strip of the remaining one hundred fifty meters.- This, we could say, is the normal concept of maritime-terrestrial zone and is generally referred to beach areas.- But there are other categories of lands to which the regulations of Ley No. 6043 are equally applied and which it is convenient to detail here.- Article 2, subsection h), of the Regulations to Ley No. 6043 defines the coastline (litoral) as the edge or coast of the sea, which extends through the permanent rías and esteros up to where these are sensibly affected by the tides and present defined marine characteristics.- For its part, subsection f) defines a ría as the part of the river near its entrance into the sea and up to where the tides reach.- Joining the previous concepts with the one enunciated in article 9 of the Law, we have that the strip of two hundred meters contiguous to the rías is also maritime-terrestrial zone, that is, the parts of rivers near the sea that are sensibly affected by the tides and present defined marine characteristics.- IV.- Equally, article 11 of the Law defines as public zone, whatever its extension, the area occupied by all the mangroves of the continental and insular coasts and esteros of the national territory, and article 4 of the Regulations stipulates that the restricted zone in these cases, starts from the vegetation line at the edge of the esteros and from the limit of the mangroves or salt forests when these extend for more than 50 meters from the ordinary high tide line.- This definition is very important since it extends the concept of maritime-terrestrial zone to portions of the national territory that can be found kilometers from the coast lines (case, for example, of the mangroves contiguous to the Río Sierpe).- One could erroneously believe that the lands next to the mangroves (restricted zone) can be the object of legitimate possession.- Also maritime-terrestrial zone are the islands, islets, maritime rocks and the lands and rocks left uncovered by the sea at low tide (article 9, second paragraph).- In the latter cases, the concept of public zone applies to the entire natural formation, and in the case of islands to the fifty meters contiguous to the [Dirección4] line, the remaining lands being considered restricted zone (article 10), unless there is a mangrove area, in which case, the above shall apply.-(...) VI.- The Water Law No. 276 of August 27, 1942 and its amendments, establishes in its first article the following: \" ARTICULO 1.- The following are waters of public domain: II. Those of the lagoons and esteros of the beaches that communicate permanently or intermittently with the sea. \". Said waters are national property and the domain over them is not lost nor has been lost when, due to the execution of artificial works or previous exploitations, the natural characteristics are altered or have been altered (article 2).- These normative provisions are closely linked with what is established in articles 11 of Ley No. 6043 and article 4 of its regulations, cited above, which establish the obligation to leave a strip of one hundred fifty meters (as restricted zone) starting from the vegetation line of the mangroves.- That is, they are of public domain since they fall within the concept of the maritime-terrestrial zone.- Apart from the above, the Forestry Law declared as protective zones, pursuant to article 68, subsection 2), \" A minimum zone of ten meters, on both sides, on the bank of all rivers, streams or creeks, permanent or not, if the land is flat, and of fifty horizontal meters if the land is broken \".- As such, they are subject to the forestry regime and it is prohibited to carry out agricultural activities or eliminate the vegetation.\" (see ruling of this Tribunal No. 523 of 14:50 on July 24, 1995).\n\nIV. The property subject to these proceedings is located in [Dirección5], of the canton of Osa, province of Puntarenas, which measures two hundred ninety-eight hectares, eight thousand two hundred forty-six meters, and thirty-two square decimeters, plotted on cadastral map number P-1207449-2007. Said land borders to the north with the Río Sierpe and to the west with [Dirección6] El Porvenir and with the Río Sesenta according to the map on folio 1. Although the judge a quo rejects these proceedings, she does so based on the fact that there is an overlap on one hand with a registered property, which is a minimal overlap compared to the amount of land intended to be titled, and the other basis is that it overlaps with the Reserva Forestal Golfo Dulce, applying that decennial possession prior to the creation of said Reserve is not demonstrated. Although this is true, the majority of the land is not part of said reserve, given 83% is outside of it, which means the appellant is correct regarding this point that it is applied as if all the land (298 hectares) were inside when the percentage is 17%. This Tribunal does not doubt that the cited elements by the judge are important, but in this case, there is a large amount of evidentiary elements that should have been taken into account for the rejection, given the map that plots the lands to be titled would be including even assets that are of the public domain (demanio público) as has been analyzed, given that areas contemplating the rías of the Río Sierpe, mangrove areas, and areas contiguous to the mangroves that also form part of the maritime-terrestrial zone are included, which cannot be the object of claim or possession, as they are public domain lands. Regarding the public domain character (demanialidad) of the maritime-terrestrial zone, the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice has pronounced as follows: \"... The public domain character of the maritime-terrestrial zone was not established in Law number 6043 –as the plaintiff seems to consider–, but rather it has an earlier origin, which dates back, even, to the origins of the conformation of our Costa Rican State. Thus, throughout the history of humanity, the great economic, commercial, and also security importance –for the defense of the national territory– that the coast has for any country or state organization has been noted. Thus, with respect to our country, since the colonial era, the coastline (litoral) has remained destined for public use. Initially, the reserved area was a [Dirección3] wide, for which it was known -and even in our era in some circles- as the \" maritime mile \"; as stipulated by the precept of the Royal Decree, of October fifteenth, seventeen hundred and fifty-four, which remained in force throughout all the legislation issued in the 19th century. Thus, the regulation of greatest relevance in the regulation of the Costa Rican coastal zone begins with Law number 162, of June twenty-eighth, eighteen hundred and twenty-eight, recently declared independence from the Spanish Crown, and in the stage of formation of the Costa Rican State. This law established the reservation of a maritime mile on the coasts of both seas, thereby incorporating the earlier precept from the colonial era –indicated above–. Subsequently, in the General Code of 1841 (promulgated in the era of [Nombre4]), in addition to the distance of the zone being regulated, the public domain character of the ebb and flow of the sea and its banks is highlighted. Likewise, in Law number 7, of August thirty-first, eighteen hundred and sixty-eight, the \"unclaimability (idenunciabilidad)\" of the lands of the maritime mile is ratified, that is, the impossibility of titling the lands of this zone. For its part, in the Water Law, number 8, of May twenty-sixth, eighteen hundred and eighty-four, for the first time this strip of land is qualified with the denomination of \"maritime-terrestrial zone (zona marítimo terrestre)\", which is expressly designated as a public domain asset (bien demanial), that is, as an asset of public domain, and consequently, is incorporated into the national patrimony. The Fiscal Code of eighteen hundred and eighty-five ordered the prohibition of alienating the lands comprised in a mile of latitude along the coast of both seas. Already in the 20th century, the first regulation that referred to the maritime-terrestrial zone was Law number 75, of August thirtieth, nineteen hundred and twenty-four, which reaffirmed the public domain character of these lands, as well as the impossibility of exploiting and usufructing them. For its part, Law number 11, of October twenty-second, nineteen hundred and twenty-two, specified, with exactitude, its extension, by delimiting it at one thousand seven hundred sixty-two meters (measurement that corresponds to an exact mile), from the ordinary high tide line, and five hundred meters along both banks of the rivers. This measurement was maintained until nineteen hundred and forty-two, when as of Laws number 19, of November twelfth, and Law number 201, of January twenty-sixth, nineteen hundred and forty-three, its extension was reduced to two hundred meters for both coasts; thus provoking the first declassifications (desafectaciones) of this asset, in relation to all those lands beyond the determination made, and their consequent private appropriation. That is, as of these two provisions and with the exception of the two hundred meters counted from the ordinary high tide line, the rest of the one thousand six hundred seventy-two meters ceased to be of public domain from the moment they could be reduced to private domain. However, the lands contained in the two hundred meters excepted by the two aforementioned laws continued to be assets of public domain, not reducible to private domain as they are unalienable, imprescriptible, and unattachable. So, as of the mentioned laws, the maritime-terrestrial zone was demarcated with an extension of two hundred meters counted from the high tide line, which is what it currently has, maintaining its character as a public domain asset. This measurement (of two hundred meters) together with the public domain character of the lands comprised therein, was reaffirmed in the then-current article 7 of the Land and Colonization Law number 2825, of October fourteenth, nineteen hundred and sixty-one, and was repeated in the Forestry Law, number 4465, of November twenty-fifth, nineteen hundred and sixty-nine, and the Law for Tourist Urbanization of the Maritime-Terrestrial Zone, number 4558, of April twenty-second, nineteen hundred and seventy. Special mention must be made of Law number 4558, of April twenty-second, nineteen hundred and seventy, since according to the tenor of what is provided in its Transitorio III., one hundred fifty meters of the two hundred meters were declassified, after the first fifty meters counted from the high tide line, by authorizing private individuals who had possessed for more than thirty years, in a quiet, public, peaceful, and uninterrupted manner, lots or farms in that sector, to register them through the process of possessory information proceedings (informaciones posesorias) before jurisdictional (not administrative) authorities. This law was in force for seventeen months and two days, since given the large number of abuses that were committed under the validity of this provision, that is, from May twelfth, nineteen hundred and seventy, it was repealed through Law number 5602, of November fourth, nineteen hundred and seventy-four, which came into effect from its publication in La Gaceta number 206, of October fourteenth, nineteen hundred and seventy-one. Currently, the maritime-terrestrial zone or coastal zone is regulated through Law number 6043, of March second, nineteen hundred and seventy-seven and its Regulations, Decreto Ejecutivo, number 7841-P, of December sixteenth of the same year, and it is the first one that does so specifically, maintaining its condition as a public domain asset of the nation\" (CONSTITUTIONAL CHAMBER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF JUSTICE No. 454-06, at 14:55 on January 25, 2006).\n\nV. That ruling cited in the preceding recital alludes to the concept of the maritime-terrestrial zone: \"... in article 1 of the Ley de la Zona marítimo terrestre, as it textually provides: 'The maritime-terrestrial zone (zona marítimo terrestre) constitutes part of the national patrimony, belongs to the State and is unalienable and imprescriptible.' Thus, the maritime-terrestrial zone must be considered a public domain asset (bien demanial) of the Nation, both by constitutional provision, based on article 6; and by legal mandate, in accordance with the transcribed norms. Regarding the definition of this asset, we must resort to the same referenced law, which in article 9 of the Ley de la Zona Marítimo Terrestre determines it in the following manner: '[...] the strip of two hundred meters wide along the entire length of the Atlantic and Pacific coasts of the Republic, whatever their nature, measured horizontally from the ordinary high tide line and the lands and rocks left uncovered by the sea at low tide. For legal effects, the maritime-terrestrial zone comprises the islands, islets and maritime rocks, as well as all land or natural formation that projects above the ocean level within the territorial sea of the Republic. The Cocos Island is excepted, which will be under the direct domain and possession of the State, and those other islands whose domain or administration are determined in this law or special laws.' In such a way, for the Pacific coast, the high tide line is the contour or level curve that marks the height of one hundred fifteen centimeters above the mean sea level; and for the Atlantic coast, it is the contour that marks the height of twenty centimeters above that same level, as provided by subsection ch) of article 2 of the Regulations of the Ley de la Zona Marítimo Terrestre. In turn, it must be clear that the maritime-terrestrial zone is divided into two zones (according to the tenor of what is provided in article 10 of the referenced law): the first, called public zone (zona pública), which comprises the strip of fifty meters wide, counted from the ordinary high tide line; and the second, called restricted zone (zona restringida), constituted by the remaining one hundred fifty meters, which is where concessions can legitimately be granted, according to the requirements that the ordinance establishes for this purpose. Regarding the first –public zone–, subsection h) of article 2 of the Regulations of the Law of the maritime-terrestrial zone defines it as the coastline (litoral), that is, the edge or coast of the sea that extends through the permanent rías and esteros, up to where these are sensibly affected by the tides, and present defined marine characteristics; so it comprises the following zones: the ría, defined in articles 9 of the Law and 2 subsection f of the Regulations of the Law of the maritime-terrestrial zone as the part of the river near its entrance into the sea, and up to where the tides reach; so it comprises the strip of two hundred meters contiguous to the rías; the islets, rocks and other small areas and natural formations that project from the sea (article 10 of the Law of the maritime-terrestrial zone); the mangroves, (article 11 of the cited Law), whose incorporation into the public domain (demanio público) dates from nineteen hundred and forty-two, with the Water Law. Likewise, article 4 of the Regulations of the Law of the maritime-terrestrial zone stipulates that these are assets that are incorporated into the forestry patrimony of the State, for which they are subject to the regime of designation of the Forestry Law. Likewise, it is provided as restricted zone starting from the vegetation line at the edge of the esteros and from the limit of the mangroves or salt forests, when these extend for more than fifty meters from the ordinary high tide line; which is of great importance, as it extends the concept of maritime-terrestrial zone to portions of the national territory that can be found kilometers from the coast; which also leads to confusion, because it is estimated that the lands adjacent to the mangrove can be the object of legitimate possession, since, precisely because of this condition of public domain character (demanialidad), mangroves cannot be the object of titling by private individuals; the islands, islets and maritime rocks and the lands and rocks left uncovered by the sea at low tide (second paragraph of article 9 of the referenced Law); and, the two hundred meters contiguous to, and on both sides of, the system of main channels that join the ports of Moín and Barra del Colorado, according to the tenor of what is provided in article 75 of the Law governing this matter....\" (CONSTITUTIONAL CHAMBER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF JUSTICE No. 454-06, at 14:55 on January 25, 2006).\n\nVI. From the foregoing exposition by the Constitutional Chamber, it is inferred that there is a series of lands that are comprised within the maritime-terrestrial zone, and that are not susceptible to being the object of possessory information proceedings (información posesoria), given their public domain nature (naturaleza de demanialidad) (article 7 of the law in citation). From the foregoing, it follows that the first 50 meters are public zone and are plotted on the cited map, and are called the \"unalienable zone\". However, the cited official communication notes that there is another portion that is included in the cadastral survey that is part of the restricted zone, and this is due to the tidal phenomenon that affects the Río Sierpe.\n\nthat is, located along the eastern boundary of the property, it is subject to tidal influence and, consequently, the tract of land or part thereof lies within the 200-meter zone due to this particularity, and also encompasses mangrove areas and their adjacent zones. In accordance with Article 7 of the Ley sobre la Zona Marítima Terrestre and the reasons given, the rejection of the present proceedings must be upheld, taking into consideration all that has been set forth herein.\n\nPOR TANTO:\n\nOn appeal, the ruling is confirmed.\n\n| W0RTODSXP4W61 |\n| --- |\n| [Nombre5] - JUEZ/A |\n| DECISOR/A |\n\n| 8ALP47YNI4BI61 | AQ1LDWAXYTY61 |\n| --- | --- |\n| [Nombre6] - | [Nombre7] - |\n| JUEZ/A DECISOR/A | JUEZ/A DECISOR/A |\n\nEXP: EXPN1\n\nII Circuito Judicial San José, [Dirección7] , , [Dirección8] de Goicoechea frente al parqueo del Hospital Hotel La Católica Teléfonos: [Telf1]. Fax: [Telf2] ó [Telf3]. Correo electrónico: [...]" }