final property reviewer
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/3/2019 Final Property Reviewer
1/58
PROPERTY
Requisites: (USA)
(a) Utitlity(b) Substantivity
(c) Appropriability or susceptibility toappropriation
Classification: According to Mobility
(1) Immovables or real (Art. 415)
a) immovables by nature (pars 1 and 8) those which cannot be moved from place to
placei. Land, buildings, roads and
constructions of all kinds adhered tothe soil
ii. Mines, quarries, and slag dumps, whilethe matter thereof forms part of thebed, and waters either running or
stagnant
b) immovables by incorporation (pars 2,3, 7) those which are essentially
movables but are attached to an immovablei. Trees, plants, and growing fruits, while
they are attached to the land or forman integral part of an immovable
ii. Everything attached to an immovable ina fixed manner, in such a way that it
cannot be separated therefrom withoutbreaking the material or deterioration
of the objectiii. Fertilizer actually used on a piece of
land
c) immovables by destination (pars 4, 5,6, 9) those which are essentially movablesbut by the purpose for which they have
been placed in an immovablei. Statues, reliefs, paintings or other
objects for use or ornamentation,placed in buildings or on lands by the
owner of the immovable in such amanner that it reveals the intention to
attach them permanently to thetenements
ii. Machinery, receptacles, instruments or
implements intended by the owner ofthe tenement for an industry or workswhich may be carried on in a building
or on a piece of land, and which tenddirectly to meet the needs of the said
industry or worksiii. Animal houses, pigeon-houses,
beehives, fish ponds or breeding placesof similar nature, in case their owner
has placed them or preserves themwith the intention to have them
permanently attached to the land, andforming a permanent part of it; the
animals in these places are included
iv. Docks and structures which, thoughfloating, are intended by their nature
and object to remain at a fixed place ona river, lake, or coast
d) immovables by analogy or by law(par.10)
i. Contracts for public works, and
servitudes and other real rights overimmovable property
(2) Movables (Art. 416 to 417)a) Those movables susceptible to
appropriation which are not included in thepreceding article
b) Real property which by any specialprovision of law is considered as personal
propertyc) Forces of nature which brought under
control by science; and in general, allthings which can be transported from place
to place without impairment of the realproperty to which they are fixed
d) Obligations and actions which have for theirobject movables of demandable sums and
e) Shares of stock of agricultural, commercialand industrial entities although they may
have real estate.
Notes:
Separate treatment by the parties of a
building from the land on which it standsdoes not change the immovable character.
The fact that parties seem to have dealtwith it separate and apart from the land in
no wise changed its character as realproperty. (Leung Yee v. Strong
Machinery) Buildings being immovable by nature,
the ownership of the land on which they areerected cannot change their nature as
immovable property
When trees and plants are cut or
uprooted, they become movables
When ungathered fruits are sold, there
is a sale of movables.
Immovable condition of machineries
depends upon their being destined for usein the industry or work in the tenement.
Where chattel mortgage is constituted
on machinery permanently attached to the
ground, machinery is personal property andmortgage is not null and void, regardless of
who owns the land. (Makati Leasing andFinance Corp v. Wearever Textile Mills)
Intellectual property or the right of theauthor, artist or inventor over his work ispersonal property.
Obligations under Article 418 refer to
credits such as bonds.
Half-interest in a business is personal
property capable of appropriation and maybe subject to mortgage (Strochercker v.
Ramirez)
CasesMachinery which is movable in its nature only
becomes immobilized when placed in a plant by
-
8/3/2019 Final Property Reviewer
2/58
-
8/3/2019 Final Property Reviewer
3/58
Classification According to Ownership
a) Public Dominion
i. intended for public useii. intended for public service of state,
provinces, cities & municipalities
Characteristics:i. outside the commerce of men cannotbe alienated or leasedii. cannot be acquired by private individualthrough prescriptioniii. not subject to attachment &executioniv.cannot be burdened by voluntary
easement
b) Private Ownership
i. patrimonial property of state, provinces,cities, municipalities
-exist for attaining economic ends of
state-property of public dominion when nolonger intended for public use/service
declared patrimonial
ii. property belonging to private persons individually or collectively
CasesReclaimed land is public property. In case of
gradual erosion by the ebb and flow of the tide,private property may become property of the
public domain, where it appears that the ownerabandoned it or permitted it to be destroyed.When they stay in that condition until reclaimedby filling in done by the government, they
continue to be government property afterreclaiming.Immediate possession by the former
owner does not confer on him ownership of thelots, because, as they were converted into
property of the public domain, no privateperson could acquire title except in the form
and manner established by law.(Government of the Philippine Islands v.
Cabangis)
The sale to private parties of a public roadwhich has been validly closed by the city
government is valid. Art 422 of the Civil Codeexpressly provides that property of public
dominion, when no longer intended for publicuse of for public service, shall form part of the
patrimonial property of the State.(Cebu Oxygen and Acetylene v. Bercilles)
The attachment of the municipal trucks, policecars, police station and market stalls is voidbecause the properties levied upon are exempt
from execution. It is generally held thatproperty owned by a municipality, where NOT
used for a public purpose but for quasi-privatepurposes, is subject to execution on a judgment
against a municipality, and may be sold.However, property for public use of the
municipality is not within the commerce of man
so long as it is used by the public and,consequently, said property is also inalienable.
Property, real and personal, held bymunicipalities in trust for the benefit of their
inhabitants, and used for public purposes, isexempt from execution. (Vda. De Tantoco v.
Municipal Council of Iloilo)
In the absence of a deed or title to any landclaimed by the City as its own, showing that it
was acquired with its private or corporatefunds, the presumption is that such land came
from the State upon the creation of themunicipality. Such property is held in trust forthe benefit of its inhabitants, whether it be for
governmental or proprietary purpose. (Salas v.Jarencio)
Public funds are held in trust for the people,intended and used for the accomplishment of
the purposes for which municipal corporations
are created, and that to subject said propertiesand public funds to executions would materiallyimpede, even defeat, and in some instances,
destroy such purpose. (Municipality of SanMiguel v. Fernandez)
There are 2 norms of classification of property.
Art. 423 and 424 CC provide that except forproperty for public use and public works for
public service paid for by provinces, cities ormunicipalities, All other property possessed by
any of them is patrimonial and shall begoverned by this Code, without prejudice to the
provisions of special laws. Under this, all but 2of the properties would be patrimonialproperties of the former province. Under thelaw on Municipal Corporations, however, to be
considered public property, it is enough thatproperty be held and devoted for governmental
purposes. Using this, 26 of the lots arepatrimonial. (Province of Zamboanga del
Norte v. City of Zamboanga)
The 157.84 hectares of reclaimed lands
comprising the Freedom Islands, now coveredby the certificates of title in the name of PEA,
are alienable lands of the public domain. PEAmay lease these lands to private corporations
but may not sell or transfer ownership of theselands to private corporations. PEA may only sell
these lands to Philippine citizens, subject to theownership limitations in the 1987 Constitution
and existing laws.
The 592.15 hectares of submerged areas of
Manila Bay remain inalienable natural resourcesof the public domain until classified as alienableor disposable land open to disposition and
declared no longer needed for public service.The government can make such classification
and declaration only after PEA has reclaimedthese submerged areas. Only then can these
lands qualify as agricultural lands of the publicdomain, which are the only natural resources
the government can alienate. In their present
-
8/3/2019 Final Property Reviewer
4/58
state, the 592.15 hectares of submerged areasare inalienable and outside the commerce of
man. (Chavez v. PEA)
OWNERSHIP
Independent and general right of a person tocontrol a thing particularly in his possession,
enjoyment, disposition, and recovery, subjectto no restrictions except those imposed bythe state or private persons, without
prejudice to the provisions of the law.
Power of a person over a thing for purposes
recognized by law & within the limitsestablished by law
Attributes of Ownership
(1)Jus possidendi- right to possess
(2)Jus Utendi(right to use)right to enjoy
by receiving the thing that it produces.(3)Jus abutendiright to enjoy byconsuming the thing by its use
(4)Jus Disponendithe right to dispose orthe power of the owner to alienate,encumber, transform, and even destroy the
thing owned.- Includes right no to dispose
- This right is reserved exclusively to theowner
- This right can be partial if it can bedivided. It can also be temporary as in thecase of lease or pledge.
(4) Jus Fruendi right to receive fruits
(5) Jus Vindicandiright to exclude fromthe possession of the thing owned by anyother person to whom the ownership has
not transmitted such thing, by the properaction for restitution, with the fruits,
accessions, and indemnification fordamages.
Actions for possession:
1. movable replevin (return of a movable)2. immovable
a) forcible entry used by persondeprived of possession through Force,
Intimidation, Strategy, Threat orStealth (FISTS)
b) unlawful detainer used by
lessor/person having legal right overproperty when lessee/person
withholding property refuses tosurrender possession of property after
expiration of lease/right to holdproperty (physical possession, 1 year
from the last date of demand to vacatethe premises)
c) accion publiciana plenary action torecover possession when owner is
dispossessed by any other means than
the grounds for instituting a ForcibleEntry and Unlawful Detainer case.
d) accion reinvindicatoria recovery ofdominion of property as owner; main
issue is ownership not merelypossession.
e) Writ of Possession -- the original
registered owner in the Torrens
System, is entitled to a writ ofpossession not only against the partieswho appear and answer in the land
registration proceedings, but alsoagainst all those who, having been
served with process, do not appear oranswer.
f) Writ of injunction
Not a proper remedy for therecovery of possession UNLESS plaintiff
is admittedly the owner of the propertyand is in possession of it.
May be used to prevent or restrain
acts of trespass or illegal interferenceby others of his possession of theproperty.
In actions of FE, the plaintiff within10 days from the filing of the
complaint, may file a motion for a Writof Preliminary Mandatory Injunction to
restore him in possession (mandatory)and prevent further acts of
dispossession (injunction).
(6) Right to Exclude: Doctrine of Self-HelpDoctrine of self-help authorizes the lawful
possessor to use reasonable force to prevent a
threatened unlawful invasion or usurpation ofthe property.Elements:
a) Person exercising rights isowner or lawful possessor
b) There is actual or threatenedunlawful physical invasion of hisproperty (not available to squatters)
c) Use force as may bereasonably necessary to repel or
prevent it-Available only when possession has
not yet been lost, if already lost resort to judicial process
-May be exercised by 3rd
person negotiorum gestio
(7) Right to Enclose or Fence without detriment
to servitudes constituted thereon.
A person cannot enclose his tenement
and construct a fish pond that will obstructthe natural flow of waters from the upper
tenements to the injury of the owners ofsuch tenements. (Lunod v. Meneses)
(8) Right to Receive Just Compensation in case
of Expropriation
(9) Right to Space and Subsoil The right of the owner extends to the space
and subsoil as far as necessary for his
-
8/3/2019 Final Property Reviewer
5/58
practical interests or to the point where it ispossible to assert his dominion and there is
the possibility of obtaining some enjoymentor benefit. Beyond these limits, he would
have no legal interests.
(10) Right to Hidden Treasure (if found on his
property)a) hidden and unknown movables consist
of money or precious objects
b) owner is unknownc) If treasure is found by a stranger by
chance belongs to finder; the findermust not be trespasserbe entitled to a share.
Discovery by chance
When there is no purpose or intent to lookfor the treasure.
(12) Right to accession
Notes Requisites in an action to recover(a) Identity of the property
(b) Strength of plaintiffs title/ Better Title
Plaintiff must depend on the strength ofhis own title and not on the weakness
of the title of the other.
One year after a decree of registrationunder the Torrens System, the title
becomes perfect and indefeasible.
Ownership and title to land duly
recorded cannot be overcome bygratuitous titles such as inheritance or
donation or mere tax declarations.
Tax declarations are strong evidence ofownership where accompanied bypossession for period sufficient forprescription.
Titles from the Spanish government
have been held sufficient basis to proveownership.
Composition titlesproof of exclusive
ownershipPossessory information titleonly
prima facie evidence andrebuttable.
Cases
Art. 433 of the NCC provides: Actualpossession under claim of ownership raises a
disputable presumption of ownership. The trueowner must resort to judicial process for
recovery of the property. Under Art. 538 NCC,the present possessor is to be preferred in
cases where there are conflicting claims. Sincedefendants are presently in possession of the
property, they enjoy the presumption ofownership in their favor which has not been
successfully rebutted by evidence. (Perez v.Mendoza)
Ownership, which had been judicially confirmed
by the CFI in a proceeding in rem could not bedefeated by the claim of the adverse party
based on a mere unnotarized affidavit. The
Original Certificate of Titles has becomeindefeasible and incontrovertible. As to the
unnotarized affidavit, it failed to identify theproperties involved; it is not a sufficient basis or
support for the alleged partition. (Dizon v. CA)
Limitation of Real Right of Ownership
(1) For the benefit of the state and for publicinterest (Police power, eminent domain,taxation)
(i) Expropriation
for public use(ii) Military
requisitions(iii) Zonification
laws(iv) Public or
government monopolies(v) Law on water
and mines(vi) Public health
and safety(vii) Public
easements
(2) Legal servitudes and Voluntary Servitudes
(3) Limitations imposed by party transmittingproperty
(i) Either by contract or last will ordonations
(ii) Stipulation on inalienability
(4) True Owner Must Resort to Judicial Process(5) Sic Utere Tuo Ut Alienum Non Laedasit is
unlawful to exercise the right of ownership in
such a manner as to have no other effectthan to injure a third person without benefitto the owner.
(a) Act in State of Necessity
The law permits the injury ordestruction of things belonging to
others provided this is necessary toavert a greater danger or dangers.
Different from concept of self-help; thepurpose is to protect the actor himself
or another person at the expense of theowner of the property who has no partin the state of necessity.
(b) Liability of Proprietors under Article2191, NCC
(c) Fortified places or Fortresses- mustcomply with conditions under special
laws and regulations(d) Easement of Aqueduct- must observe
proper distances and prevent damageto neighboring tenements
(e) Planting of Trees(f) Easement of light and view
(g) Easement of right of way(h) Easement of Passage of Water from
Upper to Lower Tenements(i) Easement of Drainage
(j) Easement of aqueduct(k) Lateral and Sub-adjacent Support
-
8/3/2019 Final Property Reviewer
6/58
ACCESSION
The right by virtue of which the owner of athing becomes the owner of everything that
it may produce or which may beinseparably united or incorporated thereto,
either naturally or artificially. Based on principles of justice, necessity and
utility
General Principles of Accession
(1) Accessory follows the principal (accesiocedit principal)
(2) No unjust enrichment (Art. 443)(3) All works, sowing, and planting are
presumed made by the owner and at hisexpense, unless the contrary is proved (Art.
446)(4) Accessory incorporated to principal
such that it cannot be separated
without injury to work constructed ordestruction to plantings orconstruction of works.
(5) Bad faith involves liability for damages andother dire consequences
(6) Bad faith of one party neutralizes bad faithof the other (Art. 453).
(7) Ownership of fruits belong to the principalthing; Exceptions:(i) possession in good faith possessor is
entitled to fruits(ii) in usufruct usufructuary is entitled to
fruits(iii) in lease lessee is entitled to fruits(iv) in antichresis antichretic creditor is
entitled to fruits
Kinds of Accession
(1) Accession discreta the right pertainingto the owner of a thing over everything
produced thereby:
(a) Natural fruits, or spontaneous products
of the soil, and the young and otherproducts of animals (Art. 442)
(b) Industrial fruits, or those produced bylands of any kinds through cultivation
or labor (Art. 442)(c) Civil fruits, or rents of buildings, the
price of leases of and other propertyand the amount of perpetual or life
annuities or other similar income (Art.442)
A dividend, whether in the form of cashor stock, is income or fruit andconsequently should go to the
usufructuary, rather than the owner ofthe shares of stock in usufruct.
Dividend is declared only out of the
profits of a corporation and not out ofits capital. (Bachrach vs. Seifert).
A bonus paid by the mortgage-debtorto another who had mortgaged his land
to secure the payment of the debtorsobligation to a bank is not a civil fruit ofthe mortgaged property. It is not
income delivered from the property buta compensation granted for the risk
assumed by the owner of the property.(Bachrach vs. Talisay-Silay)
(2)Accession Continua the right pertainingto the owner of a thing over everything that
is incorporated or attached thereto, eithernaturally or artificially.
(a) With regard to immovable property(a.1) Accession industrial (BPS)
(i) Building,
(ii) Planting, or
(iii) Sowing (Arts. 445-455)
(a.2) Accession natural (FACA)
(i) Alluvium
(ii) Avulsion(iii) Change in the course of river(iv) Formation of islands
(b) With regard to movable property (ACS)(b.1) Adjunction or conjunction
(i) inclusio or engraftment
(ii) soldadura or attachment
(a) ferruminatio objects are ofthe same metal
(b)plumbatura objects arediff. metals
(iii) tejido or weaving
(iv)pintura or painting
(v) escritura or writing
(b.2) Commixtion or confusion
(b.3) Specification
Notes:
Accession Industrial
Art. 446 establishes 2 disputablepresumptions regarding BPS:
(a) The works etc. were made by the
owner(b) They were made at the owners
expenseException: When contrary is proven
Right of owner of materials (OM)
1. Right to be indemnified or paid
of value of property by owner of land2. Right to remove materials if he
can do so w/o injury to workconstructed if owner has not paid
-
8/3/2019 Final Property Reviewer
7/58
3. Right to damages anddemolition even if with injury to work if
owner of land is in bad faith
1st Case:
Landowner (LO) is BPS using materials of
another
Good Faith
OMlies in ignorance of BPS acts
BPS/LObelief that the materials belong to
him and who is not aware that thereexists in his title or mode of acquisition
any flaw which invalidates it
Note: his negligence may subject himto liability for damages
Bad Faith
OMallowing the use of the materialswithout protest
BPS/LOknowledge of lack of title and theabsence of permission of the owner of
the material to pay their value
Landowner andBPS
Owner of Material
Good faith
1. Right to acquirethe improvements
after paying thevalue of materials
Bad faith
1. Acquire BPS afterpaying its value and
paying indemnity fordamages (Art. 447)
but subject to OMsright to remove
Good faith
1. Right to acquire
the improvementswithout payingindemnity
Good faith
1. Limited right ofremoval if there would
be no injury to workconstructed, or without
plantings orconstructions being
destroyed (Art. 447)
2. Right to receivepayment for value ofmaterials
Good faith
1. Right to receivepayment for value ofmaterials
2. Absolute right of
removal of the workconstructed in any
event
Right to be indemnified
for damages
Bad faith
1. Lose materialswithout right toindemnity
2. Right to acquireindemnity for
damages if there arehidden defects
known to OM
Bad faith
(Same as though
acted in good faithunder Art. 453)
Bad faith
(Same as though acted
in good faith underArt. 453)
2ND Case:
BPS builds, plants, or sows on anothersland using his own materials
Good faithOM/BPSlies in belief that the land belongs
to him, and his ignorance of any defect orflaw in his title.
LOignorance of the BPS acts, or beliefthat the BPS has the right to construct,
plant or sow
Bad faithOM/BPSlies in his knowledge of his lack of
title and absence of permission of the LO
LOknowledge of BPS lack of right to
construct, plant or sow
(1) Option is given to Landowner
(2) Right of LO to remove or demolish
improvement
LO cannot refuse to exercise his right of
choice and compel the BPS to remove ordemolish the improvement. He is entitled to
such removal only when after havingchosen to sell his land, the other party fails
to pay for the same.
(3) Right of LO to require payment for value ofthe land
The purpose of the exception (if the valueof land is considerably more than that of
the building or trees) is to preventinjustice. It is considered inequitable in
such case to compel the BP to pay for theprice of the land.
A forced lease is created b/w the partiesif the LO does not choose to appropriate
the improvement after the properindemnity.
As to when the lands value is considerably
more than that of the improvement willhave to be determined by the court taking
-
8/3/2019 Final Property Reviewer
8/58
into consideration the circumstances ofeach particular case.
(5) Cases not covered
Art. 448 does not apply which are governed
by other provisions of law:
(a) co-ownership(b) usufruct
(c) agency(d) lease
Where there is a contractual relationexisting between the LO and the BPS, their
stipulations govern.
Landowner BPS and Owner of
Material
Good faith
LO has option to:
a)Acquire the
improvement afterpaying indemnity
which may be the:- original cost
ofimprovement
or- increase in
value of thewhole brought
about by the
improvementb)Sell the land to theBP pr collect rentfrom sower unless:
- value of landis more thanthe thing
built, plantedor sown
- BP shall payrent fixed by
parties or bythe court in
case ofdisagreement
Note: LO can be forcedto choose under pain
of direct contempt orcourt can choose for
him
Good faith
1. LO has right tocollect damages in any
case and option to:
a) Acquireimprovements withoutpaying indemnity if the
Good faith
BPS has right to retainthe land until the
payment of indemnity(right of retention)
Note: During thisperiod BPS is not
required to pay rent
improvements are stillstanding on the land
b) Sell the land to BPor collect rent from
the sower unless thevalue of the
improvements inwhich case there will
be a forced lease
c) Order demolition ofimprovements or
restoration of land toits former condition atthe BPS expense.
2. LO must pay fornecessary expenses
for preservation.
Bad faith
1. LO must indemnifyBPS for the
improvements and paydamages as if he
himself did the BPS
2. LO has no option to
sell the land andcaanot compel BPS tobuy the land unlessBPS agrees to
Bad faith
(Same as though
acted in good faithunder Art. 453)
Bad faith
1. Pay damages to LO
2. BPS lose materials
without right to
indemnity
3. No right to refuseto buy the land
4. Recover necessary
expenses forpreservation of land.
Good faith
BPS has right to:
a) be indemnified fordamages
b) remove allimprovements in any
event
Bad faith
(Same as though
acted in good faithunder Art. 453)
3rd Case:
BPS builds. Plants, or sows on anothers
land with materials owned by third person
-
8/3/2019 Final Property Reviewer
9/58
(1) Liability of LO
He shall be subsidiarily liable for the valueof the materials if the following requisitesare present:
(a) The OM has not acted in bad faith(b) The BPS has no property with which to
pay; and(c) LO appropriates the accession to
himself
(2) Right of BPS who pays OM
If BPS pays the OM, the former may seekreimbursement from the LO for the value ofthe materials and labor to prevent unjust
enrichment of the LO at the expense of theBPS. This is true if:
(a) The BPS acted in good faith; and(b) The LO appropriates the improvement
Landowner BPS OM
Good faith
1. Right to
acquireimprovementsand pay
indemnity toBPS;subsidiarily
liable to OM
2. Has option
to:
a) Sell land toBP except ifthe value of
the land isconsiderably
more
b) Rent to
sower
Good faith
1. Right toacquire
improvementsand payindemnity to
BPS
2. Has option
to:
a) Sell land to
BP except ifthe value of
the land isconsiderably
more
b) Rent tosower
Good faith
1. Right of
retention untilnecessaryand useful
expenses arepaid
2. Pay value
of materialsto OM
Good faith
1. Right ofretention until
necessaryand useful
expenses arepaid
2. Keep BPSwithoutindemnity toOM and
collectdamages
from him.
Good faith
1. Collect
value ofmaterialsprimarily from
BPS andsubsidiarilyliable for LO if
BPS insolvent
2. Limited
right of
removal
Bad faith
1. Lose the
materialswithout right
to indemnity
2. Must pay
for damages toBPS
3. Withoutsubsidiary
liability forcost of
materials
Good faith
1. LO has
right tocollect
damages inany case and
option to:
a) Acquire
improvementsw/o paying
for indemnity;or
b) Demolitionorrestoration;or
c) Sell to BP,or to rent to
sower
2. Pay
necessaryexpense to
BPS
Bad faith(Same as
when allacted in good
faith underArt. 453)
Bad faith
1. Acquireimprovement
after payingindemnity and
damages toBPS unless
latter decidesto remove
improvements
2. Subsidiarily
liable to OMfor value of
materials
Bad faith
1. Acquire
improvementsafterindemnity;
Bad faith
1. Recover
necessaryexpenses for
preservation
of land fromLO unless LO
sells land
Bad faith
(Same aswhen allacted in good
faith under
Art. 453)
Good faith
1. Mayremoveimprovements
2. Be
indemnifiedfor damages
in any event
Bad faith
1. Recovervalue from
BPS (as if bothare in good
faith)
2. If BPS
acquiresimprovement,
removematerials if
feasible w/oinjury
3. No action
against LO butliable to LO for
damages
Bad faith
(Same as
when all actedin good faith
under Art 453)
Good faith
1. Remove
materials ifpossible w/o
injury
2. Collect
value ofmaterials from
BPS;subsidiarily
from LO
-
8/3/2019 Final Property Reviewer
10/58
subsidirailyliable to OM
for value ofmaterials
2. Has optionto:
a) Sell theland to BP
except if thevalue of theland is
considerablymore
b) Rent to
sower
Good faith
1. Acquire
improvementafter paying
indemnity;subsidiarily
liable to OM
2. LO has
option to:
a) Sell land to
BP except ifvalue of landisconsiderably
more
b) Rent to
sower
Bad faith
1. Acquire
improvementsand pay
indemnity anddamages to
BPS unlesslatter decides
to remove
materials
Bad faith
1. Right ofretention untilnecessary
expenses arepaid
2. Pay value
of materialsto OM and
pay himdamages
Bad faith
1. Right ofretention until
necessaryexpenses are
paid
2. Pay value
of materialsto OM
3. Paydamages to
OM
Good faith
1. Receiveindemnity for
damages
2. Absoluteright ofremoval of
Good faith
1. Collectvalue of
materialsprimarily fromBPS and
subsidiarilyfrom LO
2. Collect
damages fromBPS
3. If BPSacquires
improvements,remove
materials inany event
Good faith
1. Collectvalue of
materialsprimarily from
BPS and
subsidiarilyfrom LO
2. Collect
damages fromBPS
3. If BPSacquiresimprovements,
absolute rightof removal inany event
Bad faith
1. No right toindemnity
2. Loses rightto material
improvementsin any event
Cases:
When, in the face of a conflict between the
rights of an owner and a builder, sower, planterin good faith, the owner opts to sell the land tothe BPS who is subsequently unable to pay, the
BPS loses his right of retention. A forced co-ownership occurs when the BPS has acted in
good faith . It is the owner of the land who isallowed to exercise the option because his right
is older and because, by the principle ofaccession, he is entitled to the ownership of the
accessory thing. When the BPS failed to pay forthe land, he lost his right of retention.(Bernardo vs. Baticlan)
Since the option to remove or demolish
improvement is given to the LO and it is limited
to paying for the improvement or selling hisland to the BPS, he cannot refuse to exercisehis right of choice and compel the builder to
remove or demolish the improvement. He isentitled to such removal only when afterchoosing to sell his land, the other party fails to
pay for the same. (Ignacio vs Hilario)
The owner of a building erected in good faith ona land owned by another is entitled to retain
possession of the land until he is paid the valueof the building. An order by a court compelling a
builder in good faith to remove is building fromland belonging to another who chooses neither
to pay for such building nor sell the land is nulland void for being offensive to Art. 448.(Sarmiento v. Agana)
In Depra vs Dumlao, the SC laid down the
guidelines for enforcement of rights under Art.448 and 546
1. TC must determine the fair price of the land,expenses for improvement and increase in
value of land due to improvements.
2. TC must grant period where:
a) landowner must exercise option
b) parties must pay in accord with the option
chosen
c) builder can refuse to offer to sell if value of
land is greater than the value of improvements
d) if the situation is that of (c), the parties can
agree upon the terms of the lease. If there areno agreements, the TC must fix the terms.
While a possessor in good faith may retain the
property until he is reimbursed for necessaryand useful expenses, all the fruits he receives
from the moment his good faith ceases must bedeferred or paid by him to the LO. He may,
however, secure the reimbursement of hisexpenses by using the fruits to pay it off
(deduct the value of the fruits he receives from
-
8/3/2019 Final Property Reviewer
11/58
the time his good faith ceases from thereimbursement due him). (Ortiz vs Kayanan)
A BPS in good faith does not lose its rights
under Art. 448 merely because of the fact thatsome years after acquiring the property in good
faith, it learned about and aptly recognized theright of the LO to a portion of the land occupied
by the building. The supervening awarenessdoes not prejudice its right to claim the status
of a builder in good faith. (Tecnogas Phil.Manufacturing Corp. vs CA)
The BPS in good faith should not pay rentals to
the LO spouses. The spouses, having opted toappropriate the improvement on the lot, have
to reimburse the BPS of the cost of constructionof the building (in accordance with Art 546).
The BPS has the right to retain theimprovements until he is reimbursed. An
implied tenancy or possession in fact is createdpending the payment of the corresponding
indemnity. (Pecson v CA)
Good faith consists in the belief of the builderthat the land he is building on is his and he is
ignorant of any defect or flaw in his title. Andas good faith is presumed, the LO has the
burden of proving bad faith on the part of theBPS. (Pleasantville Devt. Corp. v CA)
Art 448 applies only in cases where a person
constructs a building on the land of anotherin
good or bad faith, as the case may be. It doesnot apply to a case where a person constructs a
building on his own land (like in this case), forthen there can be no question as to good or badfaith of the builder. (Coleongco v Regalado)
The rule of Art. 453 of the Civil Code invoked bythe BPS can not be applied to the instant case
for the reason that the improvements inquestion were made on the premises only after
the LO had tried to recover the land in questionfrom him, and even during the pendency of this
action in the court below. After the BPS hadrefused to restore the land to the LO, to the
extent that the latter even had to resort to thepresent action to recover his property, the BPS
could no longer be regarded as having impliedlyassented or conformed to the improvements
thereafter made by appellant on the premises.(Felices v. Iriola)
ACCESSION NATURAL
(2) Accession natural may be in theform of either:
(i) Alluvium the accretion which landsadjoining the banks or rivers, lakes, creeks
or torrents gradually receive from the
Requisites of alluvium:
(a) The accretion must be gradual
(b) The cause of the accretion must be thecurrent of the water
(c) The land where the accretion takes
place must be adjacent to the banks ofthe rivers
(d) Alluvium must be natural
*riparian owner owner of the land frontingsuch riverbanks
The alluvium, by mandate of Art. 457, isautomatically owned by the riparian owner from
the moment the soil deposit can be seen but isnot automatically registered property, hence,
subject to acquisition through prescription by 3rd
persons. (Grande vs CA)
(ii) Avulsion the accretion which takesplace whenever the current of a river,lake, creek or torrent segregates froman estate on its bank a known portion
of land and transfers it to anotherestate (Art. 459)
Distinguished from Alluvium
Alluvium Avulsion
1. Deposit of soil is
gradual
2. Deposit of the soil
belongs to the ownerof the property where
the same wasdeposited
3. The soil cannot be
identified
1. Deposit of soil is
sudden or abrupt
2. The owner of the
property from which apart was detached
retains the ownershipthereof (2 yrs)
3. The detachedportion can be
identified
Requisites of Avulsion
(a) The segregation and transfer must be
caused by the current of a river, creekor torrent.
(b) The segregation and transfermust be sudden or abrupt
(c) The portion of land transported mustbe known and identifiable
Rights of the riparian owner
Removal within 2 years The former owner preserves his ownership
of the segregated portion provided he
-
8/3/2019 Final Property Reviewer
12/58
removes (not merely claims) the samewithin the period of 2 yrs.
Art. 460 applies only to uprooted trees. If aknown portion of land with trees standingthereon is carried away by the current to
another land, Art. 459 governs.
(iii) Change of river beds
that which takes place when a river bedis abandoned through the natural
change in the course of the waters (Art.461)
Requisites for the application of Art. 461:
(a) There must be a change in the naturalcourse of the waters of the river.
(b) The change must be abrupt or sudden.
Right of owner of land occupied by newriver course
1. Right to old bed ipso facto inproportion to area lost
2. Owner of adjoining land to old bedshall have right to acquire the same by
paying its value value not to exceedthe value of area occupied by new bed
3. Formation of island in non-navigable river
a) owner of margin nearest toislands formed if nearest to it
b) owner of both margins if island is in the middle (divided into
halves longitudinally)
(iv)Formation of islands either on theseas within the jurisdiction of the
Philippines.
On lakes, and on navigable or floatable
rivers (Art. 464) or non-navigable and non-floatable rivers (Art. 465).
(1) Ownership of islands formed through
alluvion
(a) If formed:
(a.1) on the seas within Phil. jurisdiction
(a.2) on lakes, and
(a.3) on navigable or floatable waters, theisland belongs to the State
(b) If formed in non-navigable and non-floatable rivers:
(b.1) it belongs to the nearest riparian
owner or owner of the margin or banknearest to it as he is considered in the
best position to cultivate and developthe island
(b.2) it is divided longitudinally in halves, ifit is in the middle of the river
(c) Concept of navigable river
A navigable river is one which forms inits ordinary condition by itself or by
uniting with other waters a continuoushighway over with other waters a
continuous highway over whichcommerce is or may be carried on.
Test: A river is navigable if it is used orsusceptible of being used, in its ordinary
condition, as a highway of commerce, that is,for trade and travel in the usual and ordinary
modes.
Accession Continua-Movable property:
(1) Adjunction or Conjunction that whichtakes place whenever movable thingsbelonging to different owners are united in
such a way that they cannot be separatedwithout injury, thereby forming a singleobject (Art. 466)
Kinds of adjunction:
(a) inclusio or engraftment
(b) soldadura or attachment
ferruminatio objects are of the same
metal
plumbatura objects are diff. metals
(c) tejido or weaving
(d) pintura or painting
(e) escritura or writing
Ownership of new object formed byadjunction
(a) If the union took place without bad
faith, the owner of the principal thingacquires the accessory, with theobligation to indemnify the former
owner of the accessory for its value inits uncontroverted state.
(b) If the union took place in bad faith, Art.470 applies.
TEST to determine principal in adjunction:
In order of application, the principal is that:(a) To which the other (accessory) has
seen united as an ornament or for its
use or perfection (Art. 467)- INTENT
-
8/3/2019 Final Property Reviewer
13/58
(b) Of greater value, if they are unequalvalues-VALUE
(c) Of greater volume, if they are of anequal value (Art. 468)-VOLUME
(d)That of greater merits taking intoconsideration all the pertinent legal
provision applicable as well as thecomparative, merits, utility and volume
of their respective things.
Where adjunction involves 3 or morethings
Art. 466 should be applied in an equitable
manner. The principal should bedetermined and distinguished from theothers which would be considered the
accessories.
Rights:
1. If both are in good faith owner of principal acquired the
accessory with indemnification
2. If both are in good faith mayseparate them if no injury will be
caused;if value of accessory is greater than
principal, owner of accessory maydemand separation even if damageswill be caused to the principal
(expenses to be borne by one whocaused the conjunction)
3. If owner of accessory is in badfaith owner of accessory withdamages to principal
4. If owner of principal is inbad faith owner of accessory shallhave option of principal paying value of
accessory or removal of accessorydespite destruction of principal
5. Owner of accessory orprincipal has right to indemnity whenthing adjuncts w/o his consent may
demand that a thing equal is kind,value and price
(2) Specification that which takes place
whenever a person imparts a new form tomaterials belonging to another person (Art.
474).
Rights
1. If person who made thetransformation is in good faith - he
shall appropriate the thing transformedas his own with indemnity to owner of
material for its value
2. If material is more preciousthan transformed thing owner ofmaterial may appropriate the new thing
to himself after indemnity paid to laboror demand indemnity for materials
3. If person who made thetransformation is in bad faith, owner ofmaterial shall appropriate the work to
himself w/o paying maker or demandindemnity for value of materials &damages
4. If transformed thing is morevaluable than material, owner of
material cannot appropriate
(3) Commixtion or confusion that which takesplace whenever there is a mixture of things
solid or liquid belonging to different owners, themixture of solids being called commixtion, while
that of liquids, confusion (Art. 472).
Rights
1. If both owners are in good faith Eachowner shall acquire a right proportional
to the part belonging to him (vis-a-visthe value of the things mixed orconfused)
2. If one owner is in bad faith he shalllose the thing belonging to him plus
indemnity for damages caused toowner of other thing mixed with his
thing3. If both in bad faith no cause of action
against each other
QUIETING OF TITLE
An action to quiet title to property or toremove a cloud thereon is a remedy orform of proceeding originating in equity
jurisprudence, which has for its purpose anadjudication that a claim of title or an
interest in property, adverse to that ofcomplainant, is invalid, so that the
complainant and those claiming under himmay be forever free from any danger of the
hostile claim.
Requisites(1) There is a cloud on title to real property or
any interest to real property (Art. 476)(2) Plaintiff has legal or equitable title to or
interest in the subject/real property.(3) Instrument, record, claim,
encumbrance or proceeding must be valid andbinding on its face but in truth and in factinvalid, ineffective, voidable or unenforceable;
contract upon which defendant relies has beenextinguished or terminated, or has prescribed(4) Plaintiff must return benefits received
from the defendant.
Differences between action to quiet title,action to remove a cloud, and action to
prevent a cloud
-
8/3/2019 Final Property Reviewer
14/58
An action to quiet title, strictly considered,is substantially an action to put an end to
vexatious litigation in respect to theproperty involved.
An action to remove a cloud is intended toprocure the cancellation, delivery of,
release of an instrument, encumbrance, or
claim constituting a claim on plaintiffs title,and which may be used to injure or vexhim in the enjoyment of his title.
In an action to quiet title, the plaintiff
asserts his own estate and declares
generally that the defendant claims someestate in the land, without defining it,
and avers that the claim is withoutfoundation.
In a suit to remove a cloud, plaintiff not
only declares his own title, but also avers
the source and nature of defendantsclaim, points out its defect, and prays that
it be declared void. In an action to prevent a cloud, relief is
granted if the threatened or anticipatedcloud is one which if it existed, would be
removed by suit to quiet title.
Prescription of actionImprescriptible ifplaintiff is in possession; if not, prescribes
within period for filing accion publiciana,accion reivindicatoria.
Notes:
An action for reconveyance:a) Prescribes in 10 years if the plaintiff is
NOT in possession of the property andif the action for reconveyance is based
on an implied or constructive trust. Thepoint of reference is the date of
registration of the deed or the date ofthe issuance of the certificate of title
over the property.
b) Is IMPRESCRIPTIBLE if the personclaiming to be an owner is in actual
possession of the property. Here, theright to seek reconveyance in effect
seeks to quiet title. (Olviga v. CA)
It is not necessary that the vendee has anabsolute title. An equitable title is
sufficient to clothe him with personalityto bring an action to quiet title.(Pingol v. CA)
What plaintiff imagined as clouds cast on histitle were PRs alleged acts of physical
intrusion and not. an instrument, record,claim, encumbrance or proceeding which
constitutes or casts a cloud, doubt,question or shadow upon the owners
title or interest in real property. Clearly,
the acts alleged may be consideredgrounds for an action for forcible entrybut definitely not one for quieting of title.
(Titong v. CA)
RUINOUS BUILDINGS AND TREES INDANGER OF FALLING
Liability for damages:
1. collapse engineer, architector contractor2. collapse resulting from total or
partial damage; no repair made owner; state may compel him to
demolish or make necessary work toprevent if from falling3. if no action done by
government at expense of owner
CO-OWNERSHIP
CO-OWNERSHIPright to common dominion
which two or more persons have in a spiritualpart (or ideal portion) or a thing which is not
materially or physically divided.
Characteristics of Co-ownership
(1) plurality of owners, but only one real rightof ownership
(2) unity of material of the object of ownership
(3) recognition of ideal shares or aliquot(4) absolute control of each co-owner over his
ideal share, not over specific portions of theproperty
(5) There is a mutual respect among co-owners
in regard to the use, enjoyment, andpreservation of the property owned incommon.
Differences between co-ownership and
joint tenancy
Co-ownership Joint Ownership
Tenancy in Common,
Ownership inCommon, Co-dominium
Joint tenancy, Tenancy
in common, Notion ofall-for one, one-for-all
Civil law origin Common Law/ Anglo-
American origin
Each co-owner owner
of his ideal share
Each joint owner, the
surviving joint ownersare subrogated in his
rights by accretion
Each co-owner maydispose of hisundivided share
without the othersconsent.
Joint owner mustobtain the consent ofall the rest to dispose
of his share.
-
8/3/2019 Final Property Reviewer
15/58
In case there is a co-owner who is a minor,
minority as a defenseagainst prescription is
exclusive to him.
The defense of onejoint owner can be
used as a defense byall joint owners.
Differences between partnership and co-ownership
OrdinaryPartnership
Co-ownership
With legal/juridical
personality distinctfrom its members
No legal personality
distinct from itsmembers
Created only by
agreement or contractto that effect
created by LAW
FOCUS [Law,Fortuitous Event,
Occupancy, Contract,Succession]
Purpose is to obtainprofit
Purpose is collectiveenjoyment and to
maintain the unity andpreservation of thethings owned in
common.
No term set limit setby law
As a rule, anagreement to keep the
ownership for morethan 10 years is void.
Creditors of individualpartners cannot attach
and sell on executionthe shares of partners
in the partnership
Creditors of a co-owner can attach his
shares in the co-owners and sold on
execution
Can be extinguished
by the death orincapacity of one
party
Death or incapacity of
a co-owner does notaffect existence of a
co-ownership
There is mutual
representation of theparties
A special authority is
needed for suchrepresentation.
A partner cannottransfer his rights to a3rd person without theconsent of the others
A co-owner can freelydispose of his sharewithout need to askthe consent of the
other co-owners.
Distribution of profits
can be stipulated upon(profit-sharing)
Profits of a co-owner
depend on hisproportionate share;
profit-sharing isinvariable (Art. 485)
not subject tostipulation
Sources of co-ownership
(1) Law(a) Cohabitation
(i) Between man and womancapacitated to marry each other.
(Art 147, FC)(ii) Between man and woman not
capacitated to marry each other
(Art. 148, FC)
(b) Absolute community property (Art. 90,FC)
(c) two or more persons purchase propertyand by common consent legal title is
taken in the name of one of them forthe benefit of all, an implied trust is
created in favor of the others in
proportion to each to interest of each.(Art. 1452)
(d) Succession
(i) Intestate successionw here thereare two or more heirs, the whole
estate of the decedent is, before itspartition, owned in common by
such heirs, subject to the paymentof debt of the deceased (1078)
(ii) Testateif property is given to twoor more heirs by the testator
An instance is when a person Adies intestate and the properties are
left undivided to several heirs, suchheirs are co-owners of the inheritance.If one of the heirs dies, his heirs will in
turn be co-owners of the surviving heirsof A.
Redemption done by one of the co-owners/heirs will benefit his other co-
owner heirs despite the fact that theydid not contribute to the redemption
money.
(e) Donation
donation to several persons jointly, it is
understood to be in equal shares
no rights of accretion unless the donorotherwise provides
but if donation is made to husband and
wife jointly, there shall be a right ofaccretion, unless contrary so provide.
(f) Chance commixtion in good faith (Art.
472, NCC)(g) Hidden treasure co-ownership
between finder and owner(h) Easement of a party wall
(i) Occupation Harvesting and fishing
The ambergris caught by the hunters
was undivided common property of theplaintiffs and one of the defendants.This common ownership was acquired
by occupancy. The action for recoverypertaining to each co-owner, derived
from the right of ownership inherent inthe co-ownership can be exercised not
only against strangers, but against theco-owners themselves when the latter
performs with respect to the thing heldin common acts for their exclusivebenefit, or for exclusive ownership, or
which are prejudicial to, and in violationof the right of the community.
(Punsalan et al. v. Boon Liat et al.)
-
8/3/2019 Final Property Reviewer
16/58
(j) Condominium lawSec. 6(c) of RA 4726 unless otherwise
provided, common areas are held incommon by the holders of the units in equal
shares, one for each unit.
(2) Contract
(a) Two or more persons agree to create aco-ownershipmaximum of ten years(494, 2nd par), extendable by a new
agreement.Example: When two parties agree to
purchase a piece of land, each onepaying a part of the purchase price, onthe condition that they are to divide the
land equally between them. Partiesmay also become co-owners of aparticular business when no partnership
having a distinct juridical existence isformed between them.
(b) Universal Partnership(i) Of all present properties (Art.
1778-1779, NCC)
(ii) Of profits (Art. 1780, NCC)
(c) Associations and Societies, whosearticles are kept secret wherein anyone
of the members may contact in his ownname with third persons (no juridical
personality)
Rights of each co-owner as to the thingowned in common.
USE the COPs LP(1)Use thing;(2) Share benefits(3)Ejectment suit
(4)Compel to contribute(5)Object to alteration;
(6)Protect against prejudice(7)Exercise legal redemption;
(8)ask for partition]
(1) To use the thing according to itspurpose intended (may be altered by
agreement, express or implied; provided:(a) without injury or
prejudice to interest of co-ownership;and
(b) without preventingthe use of other co-owners (Art. 486)
Any act against the collective interest san act against ownership and the remedies
available to owners in general may by usedby the co-owners.
Each co-owner of realty held pro-indiviso
exercises his rights over the whole propertymay use and enjoy the same with no other
limitation than that he shall not injure theinterests of his co-owners, for the reason that,
until a division be made, the respective part ofeach holder can not be determined and every
one of the co-owners exercises together withhis other co-participants, joint ownership over
the pro- indiviso property, in addition to his use
and enjoyment of the same. (Pardell v.Bartolome)
(2) To share in the benefits in proportionto his interest, provided the charges
are borne by each in the same
proportion (Art. 485)
A contrary stipulation is void. Portions are
presumed equal unless contrary is proved.Accretion added to any portion of land co-
owned becomes part of the property in co-ownership and should be divided according toeach co-owners proportionate share.
(3) Any one of the co-owner may bring anaction in ejectment (Art. 487)
A co-owner ma bring such actionwithout necessity of bringin all the other co-
owners as co-plaintiffs because the suit is
deemed to be for the benefit of all. Action will not prosper if the action isfor the benefit of himself only and not for
the co-ownership.
When the action is brought by one co-owner for the benefit of all, a favorable
decision will benefit everyone but anadverse decision will not affect them if theyare not parties in the case or they did not
give their consent to the action.
(4) To compel other co-owner tocontribute to expenses for preservation
of the thing or right owned in commonand to taxes (Art. 488)
Co-owners option not to contribute bywaiving his undivided interest equal toamount of contribution (except if waiver is
prejudicial to co-ownership)
Necessary expenses
taxes and expenses for the
preservation of the thing which is not madewould endanger the existence of the thing
or reduce its value or productivity
Does not include those that merely
produce benefits for the owner, or merelyfor luxury, embellishment or pleasure.
Useful expenses
they increase the income of the thingowned in common for the benefit of all the
co-owners.
not covered as one of them cannot
incur such expenses without the consent ofthe others and then charge them to paytheir shares later.
(a) Remedy against defaulting co-owneraction to compel him to contribute such
share. He cannot be compelled torenounce his share as such option is at
his own discretion.
-
8/3/2019 Final Property Reviewer
17/58
Co-owner has option not to contributeby waiving his undivided interest equal to
amount of contribution (unless waiver isprejudicial to co-ownership)
Requisites before repairs forpreservation, embellishment, or
improvements may be made
a) if practicable, notice to co-ownersb) majority decision, as provided under
Article 492
A co-owner alone can advanceexpenses for preservation of the property
even without prior consent of others; he isentitled to be reimbursed for the amount he
spent for necessary expenses.
Will of one of the co-owners is sufficientauthority to undertake expenses for
preservation. He can proceed with therepairs for preservation despite oppositionof the others.
Consent of majority required only in
case where the expenses are for theimprovement or embellishment of the thingor for administration and better enjoyment
of the thing.
Consent of all is needed only in acts of
ownership.
Effect of failure to notify co-owners:(a) Failure to give notice even if it
was practicable to do so does not
deprive the co-owner his right to bereimbursed the proportionate share of
the other in the expenses.(b) The effect of such omission is
that he is given the burden of proving
the necessity of such repairs and thereasonableness of the expense.(c) He will not be fully reimbursed
if the others can prove that had he
notified them, they could have hiredthe services of another contractor whowould charge less than the people
whom he contracted or that they knowof a store that sells the needed material
at a cheaper price. The difference willbe borne by him.
(5) To oppose any act or alteration;
remedy of other co-owner in case ofalteration.
Alteration
The act by virtue of which a co-owner- changes the thing from the
state in which the others believe itshould remain or
- Withdraws it form the use to whichthey are desired to be intended in
opposition to the common agreement,if there is any, or in absence of acommon agreement, to the tacit
agreement of all the co-owners, andviolating their will
Acts of alteration requires the consentof ALL the co-owners if it changes the
essence or nature of the thing (present
article refers to this) because it is an act ofownership.
Consent of all is needed in order toimpose a voluntary easement on theproperty they co-own.
Acts of alteration that does not change
the essence or nature of the thing requires
only the agreement of the majority becauseit is merely an act of administration.- but if withholding of consent by any
one of the co-owners is clearlyprejudicial to the common interest,
courts may afford adequate relief (Art.491, CC)
Administration and better enjoyment
acts or decisions for the common benefit ofall and not for the benefit of only one or
some of them.
Characteristics:
(a) they refer to the enjoyment and
preservation of the thing(b) they have transitory effects
Acts ofAlteration/Acts of
Ownership
Acts ofAdministration
Relates to the
use, substance orform of the thing
Have a morepermanent result
Consent of allis necessary
Contrary to
the co-ownershipagreement
Also for the better
enjoyment of theproperty
Effects are oftransitory character
Consent of thefinancial majority
will be binding
Does not give riseto a real right overthe thing owned in
common.
Effects of acts of alteration and remedies
of non-consenting co-owner :(a) Co-owner who made alterations may
lose whatever he has spent as he willnot be reimbursed
(b) He may be ordered to demolish orremove the alteration at his expense
(c) He will be liable for damages and otherlosses
(d) Co-ownership will benefit from thealteration if other co-owners decide to
contribute to the expenses byreimbursing him (ratification)
(e) If a house is built in a common lot, theco-owners are entitled to the
proportionate share of the rent.
Q: Can a mere majority of the co-owners leasereal property for any length of time?
A: Old Civil Code rule:
Lease for not more than 6 years is just
an act of administration.
Lease for more than 6 years is an act of
ownership.New Civil Code rule:
-
8/3/2019 Final Property Reviewer
18/58
Lease becomes an act of ownershipand ceases to be an act of
administration if:(1) It is recorded in the Registry oProperty; and
(2) It is for more than 1 year
Registration makes the leasebinding on third persons (Art. 1648, NCC)Special powers is the criterion for
determining whether the act is legally oneof strict ownership.
(6) To protect against acts of majority
which are prejudicial to minority (Art.492, Par. 3)
Who may manage property?a) The co-owners themselves
Court cannot appoint an administrator tomanage a property co-owned when the co-
owners want to handle the management.
In this management, the majority of the ofinterest control and their decisions arebinding upon the minority. Majority may
only proceed to act without notice to theminority if the circumstances warranturgency.
b) An administrator who may or may not be aco-owner delegated by the co-owners
An administrator cannot, without theunanimous consent of all the co-owners,
compromise on, donate, cede, alienate,mortgage, or encumber in any manner the
common property.
The majority is not the majority in
number but rather pertains to the majority
in interest or the financial majority. Themajority required should be construed to be
an absolute majority or more than one-halfof the value of the thing.
When are acts seriously prejudicial?
So serious and affects the interestof the co-owners in the community
Such that willcause injuries enough to justify the
intervention of the court
Example:(1) When the resolution calls for a
substantial change or alteration
of the common property
or of the use to which it has
been dedicated by agreement or byits nature.
(2) When the resolution
goes beyond the limits of mereadministration, or
invades the proprietary rights of the co-
owners, in violation of Art. 491(prohibiting against acts of alteration)
(3) When the majority leases, loans, or othercontracts without security, exposing the
thing to serious danger to the prejudice ofthe other co-owners.
(4) When the majority refuse to dismiss anadministrator who is guilty of fraud or
negligence in his management, or does nothave the respectability, aptitude, and
solvency required of persons holding suchposition.
(5) When resolution, if carried out, would cause
serious injury to the thing itself, such as anagreement not to borrow money underreasonable terms when it is necessary for
urgent repairs for preservation, or for thepayment of taxes.
Remedies of the minorityIf the acts of the majority prejudice the
minority, the latter may ask for injunction or atworse, a partition.
(7) To exercise legal redemption (Art.
1620, 1623)
The right of redemption of co-ownersexcludes that of adjoining owners.
The period of redemption starts to runfrom the WRITTEN notification. However,
there is an exceptional case- when there isactual knowledge (Alonzo v. IAC)
Q: Can redemption money be made equal or
less than what was paid by third persons?A: Yes, it can be lower if the price of sale is
grossly excessive, such as when the co-owner didnt want other co-owners to
redeem. However, generally it is of theequal amount.
Cases:Redemption of the property by a co-owner doesnot vest in him sole ownership over said
property but will inure to the benefit of all co-owners. Redemption is not a mode of
termination of relationship. (Mariano v CA)
By the very nature of the right of "legalredemption", a co-owner's right to redeem is
invoked only after the shares of the other co-owners are sold to a third party or stranger to
the co-ownership. But in the case at bar, at thetime petitioners filed their complaint for
injunction and damages against privaterespondents, no sale of the latter's pro-indiviso
shares to a third party had yet been made.
The law does not prohibit a co-owner fromselling, alienating or mortgaging his ideal sharein the property held in common. The law merely
provides that the alienation or mortgage shallbe limited only to the portion of the propertywhich may be allotted to him upon termination
of the co-ownership and, as earlier discussed,that the remaining co-owners have the right to
redeem, within a specified period, the shareswhich may have been sold to the third party.
[Articles 1620 and 1623](Reyes vs. JudgeConcepcion)
-
8/3/2019 Final Property Reviewer
19/58
Halili has no right to invoke legal redemptionunder Art 1621 since such article presupposes
that the land sought to be redeemed is rural.Under Art. 1621, both landsthat sought to be
redeemed and the adjacent lot belonging to theperson exercising the right of redemptionmust
be rural. If one or both are urban, the right
cannot be invoked. (Halili v. CA)
Art. 1623 requires that the written notification
should come from the vendor or prospectivevendor, not from any other person. It is the
notification from the seller, which can removeall doubts as to the fact of the sale, itsperfection, and its validity, for in a contract of
sale, the seller is in the best position to confirmwhether consent to the essential obligation ofselling the property and transferring ownership
thereof to the vendee has been given.(Francisco v. Boiser)
The written notice of sale is mandatory for the
tolling of the 30-day redemption period.Notwithstanding actual knowledge of a co-owner, the latter is still entitled to a written
notice from the selling co-owner in order toremove all uncertainties about the sale, its
terms and conditions, as well as its efficacy andstatus. (Verdad v CA)
The validity of a title depends on the buyers
knowledge, actual or constructive, of a priorsale. While there is no direct proof that the
second vendees actually knew of the sale to thefirst vendees, they are deemed to have
constructive knowledge thereof by virtue oftheir relationship to the vendors.
A third person, within the meaning of Art. 1620
of the Civil Code (on the right of legalredemption of a co-owner) is anyone who is not
a co-owner. Art. 1623, requiring the vendor ofthe property to give a written notice of sale to
the other co-owners, had been rendered inutileby the fact that the first vendees took
possession of the property immediately afterthe execution of the deed of sale in their favor
and continue to possess the same. Since thefact of possession by the first vendees had not
been questioned by any of the co-owners, thelatter may be deemed to have knowledge of the
sale. (Pilapil v CA)
(8) Toask for partition (Art. 494)
A co-owner can always ask for a
partition. There is no prescriptive period.Exceptions:
(i) when there is a stipulation against it(not beyond 10 years)
(ii) when condition of indivision is imposed
by transferor (donor or testator) notexceed 20 years (Art. 494)
(iii) when legal nature of community
prevents partition (e.g. party wall)
(iv) when partition is generally prohibitedby law
(v) when partition would render the thingunserviceable, or the thing in common
is essentially indivisible- no physical partition but thing
maybe sold and co-owners shalldivide the proceeds (495, 498)
(vi) acquisitive prescription has set in facor
of a stranger to co-ownership or infavor of co-owner.
Either co-owner may demand the sale of thehouse and lot at any time and the other cannot
object to such demand. Thereafter the proceedsof the sale shall be divided equally according totheir respective interests. S, being a co-owner,
has the right use the house and lot withoutpaying any compensation to petitioner, as hemay use the property owned in common as long
as it is in accordance with the purpose for whichit is intended and in a manner not injurious to
the interest of the co-owners. (Aguilar v. CA)
Implications of co-owners right over his
ideal share
No individual or co-owner can claimtitle to any definite part or portion of
the thing co-owned.
All the co-owner has is an ideal
abstract, quota or proportionate sharein the entire land or thing.
All that he can sell or freely dispose ishis undivided interest but he cannot sell
or alienate a concrete, specific ordefinite part of the thing owned in
common because his right over thething is represented by a quota or ideal
portion without any physicaladjudication.
(1) Co-owner has the right
(a) To share in the fruits and benefits(b) To alienate, mortgage, or encumber
and dispose off his ideal share subjectto other co-owner right of legalredemption.
(c) To substitute another person in theenjoyment of the thing. (Art. 493)
(d) To renounce part of his interest to
reimburse necessary expenses incurredby another co-owner (Art. 488)
(2) Effect of transaction by each co-owner
(a) Limited to his share in the partition(b) Transferee does not acquire any
specific portion of the whole propertyuntil partition
(c) Creditors of co-owners may intervenein the partition to attack the same if
prejudicial (Art. 499), except thatcreditors cannot ask for rescission even
if not notified in the absence of fraud(Art. 497) ask for rescission even if
notified.
Cases:
-
8/3/2019 Final Property Reviewer
20/58
Unless the partition is effected, each heir cannotclaim ownership over the definite portion and
cannot dispose. Upon death of a person, eachof his heirs becomes the undivided owner of the
whole estate. He cannot alienate a specific partof the thing in common to the exclusion of other
co-owners because his right over the thing is
represented by an ideal portion. Co-ownercannot adjudicate to himself a definite portionowned in common until partition by agreement
or by judicial decree. Before partition, co-heircan only sell his successional rights. (Carvajal
v CA)
After his wifes death, the husband became
entitled to of the entire property, with only belonging to the heirs. They hold the propertyas co-owners. (Pamplona v Moreto)
Art 493 of the NCC allows the alienation of the
co-owner of his part in the co-ownership. The
effect of such alienation or mortgage shall belimited to the portion which may be allotted tohim in the division upon the termination of the
co-ownership In short, a co-owner can enterinto a contract of lease insofar as to his
interest. Therefore, he can also cancel suchlease without the consent from the other co-
owner. (Castro v. Atienza)
Difference of Co-ownership vs. ConjugalPartnership
Co-ownership ConjugalPartnership
May be
created by anordinary contract
Sex of co-
owners isimmaterial (kaya
kahit bading)
There may be
2 or more co-owners
Profits areproportional to
respectiveinterests
Death of a co-owner does not
dissolve the co-ownership
Generally co-owners administer
Co-ownershipis discouraged by
law
Created only by
reason of marriage Parties thereto are
on male and one
female
There are only 2conjugal owners
Profits are divided
equally, unlessthere is a contrary
stipulation in amarriage
settlement
Death of a spouse
dissolves the CPG
Encourage by law
for familysolidarity.
Special Rules on ownership of different
stories of a house as differentiatedfrom the provisions in the
Condominium Law (Act No. 4726)
Concept of condominium
Exclusive interest in units plusundivided interest in common areas.
Partly co-ownership, partly underindividual separate ownership
Each unit belongs separately to one ormore persons
The land and the common areas are of
common use by the different owners andare under co-ownership either ascontemplated by the Civil Code or through
a corporation.
Not governed by co-ownership as
provided for in the Civil Code.
External surfaces are common areas
Beams and posts are common areas
Easement, unless the master deed says
otherwise, is an exclusive easement.
Interest in the common areas will
depend on interest in the condo
Important documents in buying a condounit
(i) deed of sale(ii) enabling ormaster deed
(iii) declaration of restrictions
Sec. 9 The owner of a project shall, prior to theconveyance of any condominium therein,register a declaration of restrictions relating to
such project, which restrictions shall constitutea lien upon each condominium in the project
and shall insure to and bind all condominiumowners in the project. Such liens, unless
otherwise provided, may be enforced by any
condominium owner in the project or by themanagement body of such project. TheRegister of Deeds shall enter and annotate the
declaration of restrictions upon the certificate oftitle covering the land included within the
project, if the land is patented or register underthe land included within the project, if the land
is patented or registered under the LandRegistration or Cadastral Acts.
Method of taxation
Sec. 25. Whenever real property has been
divided into condominiums, each condominium
separately owned shall be separately assessed,for purposes of real property taxation and othertax purposes to the owners thereof and the taxon each such condominium shall constitute alien solely thereon.
Pzrtition of Common Areas
Sec.7. Except as provided in the following
section, the common areas shall remainundivided, and there shall be no judicialpartition thereof.
(a) Who manages the condominium?(i) condominium corporation
(preferred by law) co-terminouswith the existence of thecondominium
-
8/3/2019 Final Property Reviewer
21/58
(ii) co-ownership
(iii) association of owners
Rights and Obligations of Condominium
ownerWhat are the incidents of a condominium
grant?
(a) The boundary of the unit grant(i) the interior surfaces of the
perimeter walls, floors, ceilings,
windows, and doors(ii) those which are not part of the unit
bearing walls, columns, floors,roofs, foundations, and other
common structural elements of thebuilding; lobbies, stairways,hallways, and other areas ofcommon use, elevator equipment
and shafts, central heating, centralrefrigeration, and central air-
conditioning equipment, reservoirs,
tanks, pumps, and other centralservices and faicilities, pipes, ducts,flues, chutes, conduits, wires and
other utility installations, whereverlocated, except the outlets thereof
when located within the unit.(b) Exclusive easement for the use of the
air space encompassed by theboundaries of th unit
(i) as it exists at any particular time(ii) as the unit may lawfully be altered
or reconstructed from time to time(iii) such easement shall be
automatically terminated in any airspace upon destruction of the unitsto render it untenable
(c) Unless otherwise provided, the commonareas are held in common by theholders of units, in equal shares, one
for each unit(d) a non-exclusive easement for ingress,
egress, and support through thecommon areas are subject to such
easements(e) Each condominium unit owner shall
have the exclusive right to paint,repaint, tile, wax, paper, or otherwise
refinish and decorate the inner surfacesof the walls, ceilings, floors, windows,
and doors, bounding his own unit(f) Each condominium owner shall have
the exclusive right to mortgage,pledge, encumber his condominium and
to have the same appraisedindependently of the othercondominiums but any obligation
incurred by such condominium owner ispersonal to him.
(g) Each condominium owner has also the
absolute right to sell or dispose of hiscondominium unless the master deed
contains a requirement that theproperty be first offered to the
condominium owners within areasonable period of time before the
same is offered to outside parties.
Case
Section 5 of the Condominium Act expressly
provides that the shareholding in theCondominium Corporation will be conveyed only
in a proper case. Not every purchaser of a
condominium unit is a shareholder of thecondominium corporation. The CondominiumAct leaves to the Master Deed the
determination of when the shareholding will betransferred to the purchaser of a unit, as clearly
provided in the deed in this case. Ownership ofa unit, therefore, is a condition sine qua non tobeing a shareholder in the condominium
corporation By necessary implication, the"separate interest" in a condominium, whichentitles the holder to become automatically a
share holder in the condominium corporation,as provided in Section 2 of the Condominium
Act, can be no other than ownership of a unit.
The private respondents, consequently, whohave not fully paid the purchase price of theirunits and are not owners of their units nor
members or shareholders of the petitionercondominium corporation. (Sunset View
Condominium v Judge Campos)
Extinguishment of Co-Ownership
(1) Total destruction of the thing
(2) Merger of all the interest in one person(3) Acquisitive prescription
(a) By a third person(b) By one co-owner against the other co-
ownersRequisites:
(i) Unequivocal acts of repudiation ofthe rights of the other co-owners
(acts amounting to ouster of otherco-owners)
(ii) Open and adverse possession, notmere silent possession for the
required period of extraordinaryacquisitive prescription.
(iii) Presumption is that possession of aco-owner is not adverse.
(4) Partition or division
A division between two or morepersons of real or personal property which
they own as co-partners, joins tenants ortenants in common, effected by the setting
apart of such interests so that they mayenjoy and possess it in severallity.
(a) Right to ask for partition at any timeexcept:
(i) When there is a stipulation
against it. (must not be over 10 years)(ii) When condition of indivision is
imposed by transferor (donor or
testator) must not exceed 20 years
Art. 494
-
8/3/2019 Final Property Reviewer
22/58
(iii) When the legal nature of
community prevents partition. (e.g.,
party wall)(iv) When partition is generally
prohibited by law e.g. ACP(v) When partition would render
the thing unserviceable but the thing
may be sold and the co-owners dividethe proceeds (Art. 494)
Action for partitionwill fail if acquisitive prescription has set in.
(b) Effect of partition
Partition shall notprejudice third persons
who do not intervene in the partition
After partition, there should be mutualaccounting of benefits,reimbursements, payment of damages
due to negligence or fraud, liability for
defects of title and quality of portionassigned to each
Part allotted to a co-owner at partition
will be deemed to be possessed by suchco-owner from the time the co-
ownership commenced.
Heir is exclusive owner of property
adjudicated to him.
Co-owners reciprocally bound to eachother for warranty of title and quality ofpart given to each (hidden defect) after
partition.
Under Art. 1093, obligation of warranty
is proportionate to respective
hereditary shares; insolvency of onemakes the others liable subject toreimbursement (joint liability).
(c) Right of Creditors of individual Co-owners
Art. 497
All creditors, whether secured orprivileged, and those of any category
under title of alienation, exchange,donation, assignment, or otherobligation of a real or personal nature,
must be considered to intervene in thepartition of the common property.
They must have become creditorsduring the co-ownership
Co-owner debtors have the duty to
notify the creditors of the partition
Absence of notice makes partition not
binding on them.
They can contest such partition if they
formulate a formal opposition thereto.Assignee a transferee of a part of the
interest of the co-owner because if asale or assignment is total, the
assignee or the buyer should have beensubrogated in the place of the vendor
or assignor, who should be excludedfrom the co-ownership, and the
assignee or the buyer will intervene inhis own right in partition.
(d) Procedure for Partition (Rule 69, Rules
of Court)(1) Partition may be made:
(a) Orally
Valid and enforceableamong the parties.
Statute of frauds doesnot operate for partition is nota conveyance of property but
merely a segregation anddesignation of that part of the
property which belongs to theco-owners.
(b) In writing
Court will just confirm such
written agreement.
(2) Rules of Court does not precludeamicable settlement between
parties.
(3) Two principal issues in an actionfor partition:
(a) plaintiff is indeed a co-ownerof the property
(b) how the property is to bedivided between plaintiff and
defendants.
If property is found to be incapable
of being divided without greatprejudice to the interest of each
party, the court may order suchproperty be assigned to one co-
owner subject to the condition thathe will pay the other co-owners ofthe value of their interests as
deemed by the commissioners.
The sale may be made privately orpublicly and third persons may
become purchasers.
POSSESSION
Definition and Concept
(1) Possession is the holding of a thing ofthe enjoyment (exercise) of a right,
whether by material occupation (de factopossession) or by the fact that the thing orthe right is subjected to the action of our
will.(2) It is a real right independent of and
apart from ownership.
Essential requisites of possession
(1) Holding or control of a thing or right(corpus) consists of either:(a) the material or physical possession(b) subject action of our will- exercise of a
right(c) constructive possession
-
8/3/2019 Final Property Reviewer
23/58
doctrine of constructive possession
applies when the possession is under titlecalling for the whole, i.e., possession of apart is possession of the whole.
Constructive possessiona) tradicion brevi manu (one who possess
a thing short of title of owner lease );b) tradicion constitutum possesorium
(owner alienates thing but continues topossess depositary, pledgee, tenant)
(2) Intention to possess (animus possidendi)
it is a state of mind whereby thepossessor intends to exercise and does
exercise a right of possession, whether ornot such right is legal
intention may be inferred from the factthat the thing in question is under the
power and control of the possessor
may be rebutted by contrary evidence,
e.g., stolen property is placed in a mans
house without his knowledge.
Cases:The occupancy of apartof the land with aninstrument giving color of title is sufficient to
give title to the entire tract of land. Thegeneral rule is that the possession and
cultivation of a portion of a tract of land under aclaim of ownership of all is a constructive
possession of all, IF the remainder is not in theadverse possession of another. Possession in
the eyes of the law does not mean that a manhas to have his feet on every square meter of
ground before it can be said that he is in
possession. (Ramos v. Director of Lands)
The rule on constructive possession does not
apply when the major portion of the disputedproperty has been in the adverse possession of
homesteaders and their heirs. It is still part ofthe public domain until the patents are issued.
(Director v. CA)
Degrees of holding of possession
(1) Mere holding or possession wi