TITLE II – OWNERSHIP

CHAPTER ONE: OWNERSHIP IN GENERAL

Art 427 Ownership may be exercise over things or rights

Ownership is the…
 Independent right of a person to the exclusive enjoyment and control of a thing
 Including its disposition and recovery subject only to the restrictions or limitations established by law
and the rights of others
• J. Reyes: an independent right of exclusive enjoyment and control of the thing for the purpose of deriving therefrom
all advantages required by the reasonable needs of the owner (holder of the right) and the promotion of the general
welfare but subject to the restrictions imposed by law and the right of others.
• in roman law (dominium): mastery or the absolute control over a thing except as may be restrained by law
• Property vs. Ownership, as to Castan, no difference in extent or contents but simply a difference of viewpoint
- Ownership: power over a thing which belongs to the owner (subjective meaning)
- Property: relation between the thing and the owner to whom it belongs (objective)
• As to civil code
- Ownership: refers to the mass or bundle of rights that may be exercised over a property
- Property: susceptible of appropriation; object of the exercise of such rights
• Ownership, likewise with the property, does not define ownership. Instead, the Code simply enumerates the rights
which are included:
(1) the right to enjoy the property (Art. 428, par. 1, NCC);
(2) the right to dispose the property (Art. 428, par. 1, NCC);
(3) the right to recover the property from any holder or possessor (Art. 428, par. 2, NCC);
(4) the right to exclude any person from enjoyment and disposal of the property (Art. 429, NCC);
(5) the right to enclose or fence the land or tenement (Art. 430, NCC);
(6) the right to demand indemnity for damages suffered due to lawful interference by a third person to avert an immi-
nent danger (Art. 432, NCC);
(7) the right to just compensation in case of eminent domain (Art. 435, NCC);
(8) the right to construct any works or make any plantations and excavations on the surface or subsurface of the land
(Art. 437, NCC);
(9) the right to hidden treasure found in the owner’s property (Art. 438, NCC); and
(10) the right to accessions. (Art. 440, NCC)

Ownership as a real right

• because real right creates a direct relation between the specific thing and its holder in such a way that it permits
the holder to exclude others from the enjoyment of the thing
• creates an obligation on the part of third persons not to interfere in such enjoyment (present both to ownership)
Beneficial Ownership
 Ownership recognized by law and capable of being enforced in court
 Right to enjoyment in one person, legal title is in another

Naked Ownership
 Enjoyment of all the benefits and privileges of ownership

Subject Matter of ownership may either be things or rights

1. Thing – usually refers to corporeal property (both material objects and rights)
2. Rights – whether real or personal, res of rights may be corporeal or incorporeal

Other Real Rights Aside From Ownership

- Ownership: most complete because it provides the owner the most ample power of dominion over the property.
- Other real rights: possession, usufruct, easement, pledge and mortgage, etc
>limited since they merely serve as restrictions on one’s exercise of ownership
>cannot exist independently; dependent because they presuppose the existence of ownership

2 general categories of Real rights

1. Real rights over one’s own property (jus in re propria)
2. Real rights over the property of another (jus in re aliena)

Art 428 The owner has the right to enjoy and dispose of a thing, without other limitations than those estab-
lished by law.
The owner has also a right of action against the holder and possessor of a thing in order to recover it.

The seven jus-es

1. Possidendi - right to possess
2. Utendi - right to use
3. Fruendi - right to the fruits
4. Accessionis - right of accession
5. Abutendi - right to abuse or to consume the thing by its use
6. Disponendi - right to dispose or alienate
7. Vindicandi - right to recover

A. Right to possess or jus possidendi

 right to hold a thing or enjoy a right (Art 523)
 may be exercised in one’s own name or in that of another
 RIGHT TO POSSESSION: Possession is essential to both free enjoyment and disposal; different from right of
possession
 owner entitled to exclusive possession
 in the event that the owner or possessor is unlawfully deprived of possession, he is not justified to take law into
his own hands (despite owner, no authority to use force and violence to eject alleged usurpers.)
 RESORT TO THE PROPER LEGAL PROCESSES FOR THE PURPOSE OF OBTAINING RECOVERY OF
POSSESSION
1. Right to use not necessarily included
 May be in the concept of an owner or a mere holder with the ownership pertaining to another
 Right to possess does not always include the right to use
2. Judgment of ownership may not include possession
 Person may be declared owner but he may not be entitled to possession which may be in the hands of an-
other such as a tenant
 But! This doctrine may be invoked only where the actual possessor has some rights which must be re-
spected
3. Where claim to possession based on claim of ownership
 Where the ownership of a property was decided in a judgment, the delivery of possession should be consid-
ered included in the decision where the defeated party’s claim to the possession is based on his claim of
ownership
4. Duty of vendor to deliver possession of thing sold
 Contract of sale, vendor bound not only to transfer ownership, but also deliver
 Considered delivered only when vendee has control and possession
5. A person claims to be the owner of a property possessed by another
• bring appropriate judicial action for its physical recovery
• judicial action means ejectment suit or reinvindicatory action
B. Right to use and enjoy or jus utendi
 essence: right of the owner to freely enjoy the property itself
 use it for the purpose it is fit, without destroying it, and which employment can therefore be repeated
 necessarily includes the right to transform and the right to exclude any person from the enjoyment and disposal
thereof
 he may use such force as may be reasonably necessary to repel or prevent an actual or threatened unlawful
physical invasion or usurpation (Art 429)
 he may enclose or fence his property (Art 430)
 limited because he cannot make use of such property in a manner to injure the rights of a third person

Right to receive the fruits and accessories or jus fruendi and accessionis
 ownership gives the right by accession to everything which is produced thereby (see art 440)

Right to consume or abuse or jus abutendi

 right of the owner to consume a thing by its use – the use that extinguishes
 not be understood as the right of the owner to exercise absolute and unlimited power over the thing to the point
of destroying it by any means, however inconvenient and prejudicial to the public interest or to the right of others
 consumption of the thing by its use

Right to dispose or alienate or jus disponendi

 DISPOSE: power of the owner to dispose of his property includes the power to alienate, to encumber, to limit, to
transform, to destroy and to merge.
 includes right not to dispose
 ALIENATE: right of the owner to transmit either by onerous or gratuitous title his right to another by any act inter
vivos or mortis causa.
 Principle: no one can give what he does not have
 LIMIT OR ENCUMBER: deprive himself of several of the rights included in ownership and transfer them to an-
other
 TRANSFORM: power to change the nature of the thing, or its form or destination and the power to destroy is the
power to render useless or to abandon or annihilate the thing
 either totally (sale or donation) or partially (pledge, mortgage, etc)
 duty of vendor to transfer ownership
o vendor must be the owner or authorized to sell thing
o sufficient that he be the owner at the time of the delivery of the thing sold
 only the absolute owner can pledge or mortgage one’s property

Right to recover possession and/or ownership or jus vindicandi

 true owner must resort to judicial process for the recovery of the property
 he cannot take the law into his own hands

Actions available to recover possession and/or ownership

1. Recovery of personal property: Remedy of Replevin or manual delivery of personal property
Requisites (Rule 60, Rules of Court):
Applicant must show by his own affidavit or that of some other person who personally knows the facts:
i. That the applicant is the owner of the property claimed, particularly describing it, OR is entitled
to the possession thereof
ii. That the property is wrongfully detained by the adverse party, alleging the cause of detention
thereof according to the best of his knowledge, information and belief
 Applicant has burden of proving his ownership or right of possession over the property in question
 Both a principal remedy (regain possession) and a provisional remedy (allow the plaintiff to retain the
thing wrongfully detained by another pendente lite)
2. Recovery of real property:
A. Forcible entry and unlawful detainer (accion interdictal)
 Forcible entry (detentacion) - summary action to recover material or physical possession of real property when the
person who originally held it was deprived of possession by “force, intimidation, threat, strategy, or stealth
Requisites:
i. Instituted by person deprived of possession
ii. Unlawful deprivation of the possession of any land or building, by force, intimidation, threat,
strategy or stealth
iii. Filed within 1 year from date of actual entry (but for cases of stealth and strategy, from date of
knowledge of actual knowledge)
iv. At the MTC where property is located

 Unlawful detainer (desahuico) - may be filed when possession by “a lessor, vendor, vendee, or other person against
whom the possession of any land or building is unlawfully withheld after the expiration or termination of the right
to hold possession, by virtue of any contract, express or implied.
Requisites:
i. Instituted by landlord, vendor, vendee or other person against who the possession of any land
or building is unlawfully withheld
ii. Unlawful possession after the expiration or termination of the right to hold possession (by vir-
tue of contract, etc)
iii. Filed within 1 year from date of last demand to vacate
iv. at the MTC where property is located
 Forcible entry and unlawful detainer, which deal with physical or de facto possession, may be distinguished as
follows:
1. Difference lies in the time when possession became unlawful:
 in forcible entry, the possession by the defendant is unlawful ab initio because he acquires possession by
force, intimidation, threat, strategy, or stealth;
while in unlawful detainer, possession is originally lawful but becomes illegal by reason of the termination of
his right of possession under his contract with the plaintiff
2. In an action for forcible entry, the plaintiff must allege and prove that he was in prior physical possession
of the premises until deprived thereof, while in illegal detainer, the plaintiff need not have been in prior physi-
cal possession.33 A complaint for unlawful detainer should be distinguished from that of forcible entry. In forci-
ble entry, the plaintiff has prior possession of the property and he is deprived thereof by the defendant through
force, intimidation, threat, strategy or stealth. In an unlawful detainer, the defendant unlawfully withholds pos-
session of the property after the expiration or termination of his right thereto under any contract, express or
implied; hence, prior physical possession is not required. This is especially so where a vendee seeks to obtain
possession of the thing sold.

xxIn an action for forcible entry, the plaintiff must allege and prove that he was in prior physical possession of
the premises until deprived thereof, while in illegal detainer, the plaintiff need not have been in prior physical
possession.33 A complaint for unlawful detainer should be distinguished from that of forcible entry. In forcible
entry, the plaintiff has prior possession of the property and he is deprived thereof by the defendant through
force, intimidation, threat, strategy or stealth. In an unlawful detainer, the defendant unlawfully withholds pos-
session of the property after the expiration or termination of his right thereto under any contract, express or
implied; hence, prior physical possession is not required. This is especially so where a vendee seeks to obtain
possession of the thing sold.34
(3) The one year period within which to bring an action for forcible entry is generally counted from the date of
actual entry on the land, except that when entry was made through stealth, the one year period is counted
from the time the plaintiff learned thereof.35 In unlawful detainer, however, the one year prescriptive period is
counted from the date of the last demand.36 Hence, in the latter type of action, the plaintiff must first make
such demand, which is jurisdictional in nature.37

 For unlawful detainer, it is essential that the plaintiff’s supposed acts of tolerance must have been present right
from the start of the possession which is later sought to be recovered (Valdez, jr v CA)
 Both actions are within the exclusive and original jurisdiction of the Metropolitan or Municipal Trial Courts which
are required to be brought within one year from…
 the date of actual entry, in case of forcible entry,
 the date of the last demand, in case of unlawful detainer.
 1 year prescription period for filing of ejectment case
 Forcible entry and unlawful detainer are quieting processes and the one-year time bar to the suit is in pursuance
of the summary nature of the action
 use of summary procedure in ejectment cases - intended to provide an expeditious means of protecting actual
possession or right to possession of the property. They are not processes to determine the actual title to an es-
tate.30

B. Accion publician
C. Accion reivindicatoria

 Only issue involved in both is mere physical or material possession (possession de facto), not juridical or civil
possession (possession de jure)
 Plaintiff need only to allege and prove prior possession de facto and undue deprivation thereof
 It’s a quieting process
 Summary in nature (to solve the problem quickly and to protect the rights of the possessor)
 Difference between the two is the time when possession became unlawful – forcible entry: time of entry; unlawful
detainer: possession at first was legal, then became illegal
 If complaint fails to aver facts constitutive of forcible entry or unlawful detainer as when it does not state how en-
try was effected or how and when the dispossession started, the remedy should either be accion publiciana or an
accion reinvindicatoria (Valdez, jr v CA)
o Must be apparent in the face of the complaint (Sarmiento v CA)
 Jurisdictional facts – what does a plaintiff have to allege?
o For unlawful detainer
i. Plaintiff’s right over property (describing the property)
ii. Prior lawful possession
i. If by tolerance, acts of tolerance must have been present right from the start of the possession
 ii. If by lease, contractual agreement must be shown
iii. Became unlawful (by termination of lease contract or non-payment of rents)
iv. Extrajudicial demand to vacate
i. If by non-payment, demand letter to PAY RENTS and VACATE premises (bar question)
v. Within one year from last demand

 Can the MTC rule on the issue of ownership in an ejectment case? Yes! But only provisionally.
 The primal rule is that the principal issue must be that of possession, and that ownership is merely ancillary,
in which case the issue of ownership may be resolved but only for the purpose of determining the issue of
possession.
 It must sufficiently appear from the allegations in the complaint that what the plaintiff really and primarily
seeks is the restoration of possession.
 Inferior court cannot adjudicate on the nature of ownership where the relationship of lessor and lessee has
been sufficiently established in the ejectment case, unless it is sufficiently established that there has been a
subsequent change in or termination of the relationship between the parties.
 The rule in forcible entry cases, but not in those for unlawful detainer, is that a party who can prove prior
possession can recover such possession even against the owner himself. He has the security that entitles
him to remain on the property until he is lawfully ejected by a person having a better right through an accion
publiciana or accion reinvindicatoria
 Where the question of how has prior possession hinges on the question of who the real owner of the dis-
puted portion is, the inferior court may resolve the issue of ownership and make a declaration as to the
owner. But, it is merely provisional, and does not bar nor prejudice an action between the same parties in-
volving the title to the land. (Asis v Asis Vda de Guevarra, 2008)

Plenary action to recover possession (accion publiciana)

Requisites:
i. Must be within a period of ten years otherwise the real right of possession is lost
ii. One who claims to have a better right must prove not only his right but also the identity of the prop-
erty claimed
iii. Filed in the RTC where the property is located
 Issue involved is possession de jure of realty independently of title (as compared to interdictal, possession de
facto)
 Judgment rendered here is conclusive only on the question of possession, not that of ownership
 Jurisdictional facts?
1. Right of plaintiff over property
2. Period to bring interdictal has expired
3. Don’t know na. ☹

Action to recover possession based on ownership (accion reivindicatoria)

Requisites:
i. Right of plaintiff over property
ii. Filed at the RTC where the property is located

 Seeks recovery of possession based on ownership, with claim of title

 Issue involved is ownership which ordinarily includes possession, although a person may be declared owner but
he may not be entitled to possession because the possessor has some rights which must be respected
 Action for reconveyance – prescribes in 10 years from the point of the registration of the deed or the date of issu-
ance of the certificate of title (check book!); 4 years in cases of fraud counted therefrom on date of issuance of
the certificate of title over the property
o Action for reconveyance based on fraud and where plaintiff is in possession of the property subject of
the acts does not prescribe. (Leyson v Bontuyan)
o NB: Should not have passed to a third person.

All three actions are actions in personam.

Injunction as a remedy for recovery of possession

 Injunction is a judicial process whereby a person is required to do or refrain from doing a particular thing.
 General rule: Court should not by means of a preliminary injunction transfer property in litigation from the pos-
session of one party to another.
 In order that a preliminary injunction may be granted at any time after the commencement of the action and be-
fore judgment:
 Requisites:
i. there must exist a clear and positive right over the property in question which should be judicially
protected through the writ; and
ii. the acts against which the injunction is to be directed are violative of such right
 What if there is someone actually possessing the property sought to recover?
o Person not ordinarily allowed to avail of remedy of preliminary preventive or mandatory injunction but
must bring the necessary action for the recovery of possession.
 Injunctive relief will not be granted to take property out of the possession or control of one party and place it in
that of another whose title…
o Has not been clearly established, or
o Who did not have such possession or control at the inception of the case
 Proper function is to maintain the status quo
 Injunction cannot be a substitute for other suits for recovery of possession, hence, its denial will not bar the insti-
tution of the more appropriate remedy
 Why? Well, a writ of injunction is an equitable relief; determination of title is a legal remedy – that’s why

When can injunction be allowed?

 In actions for forcible entry, the dispossessed plaintiff may file, within ten days from filing of the complaint, a mo-
tion for a writ of preliminary mandatory injunction to restore him in possession.
o The court MAY grant In order to prevent the defendant from committing further acts of dispossession
during the pendency of the case
o Issue of ownership may not be put in issue
 Ejectment cases where the appeal is taken, the lessor is given the same remedy granted above.
 Where the actual possessor of the property who is admittedly the owner, seeks protection from repeated or fur-
ther intrusions into his property.
o Even if it turns out that he isn’t the owner, he may still avail of the equitable remedy of injunction to pro-
tect his possession.
 When there is a clear finding of right of ownership and possession of a land in favor of the party who claims the
subject property in possession of another is the undisputed owner as where the property is covered by a Torrens
title pointing to the party as the owner. (Of course, check the issuance of the title if it was in bad faith)
 When urgency, expediency and necessity require immediate possession as where material and irreparable injury
will be done which cannot be compensated by damages.

Writ of possession as a remedy

 Writ of possession is an order whereby a sheriff is commanded to place a person in possession of a real or per-
sonal property, such as when a property is extrajudicially foreclosed.
 Improper to eject another from possession, unless sought in connection with a:
1. Land registration proceeding
2. Foreclosure of mortgage, provided, that no third person has intervened (PNB v CA – in this case, a third
person was occupying the lot subject to the writ. The SC held that the an ex-parte petition for issuance of
a possessory writ is not the judicial process referred to in Art 433);
3. Execution sales

Limitations on the right of ownership

Limited by
1. by the State’s power to tax, police power, and eminent domain
2. those imposed by law such as legal easement
3. those imposed by the owner himself, such as voluntary easement
4. those imposed by the grantor of the property on the grantee
5. those arising from conflicts of private rights which take place in accession continua
6. prohibition against the acquisition of private lands by aliens

Art 429 The owner or lawful possessor of a thing has the right to exclude any person from the enjoyment and
disposal thereof. For this purpose, he may use such force as ay be reasonably necessary to repel or prevent
an actual or threatened unlawful physical invasion or usurpation of his property.

Principle of self-help
Requisites:
i. Person defending must be the owner or lawful possessor
ii. Use of reasonable force
iii. Only be exercised at the time of an actual or threatened dispossession (no delay)
iv. Actual or threatened physical invasion or usurpation which is unlawful

Read with Art 19 of the Civil Code.

Art 430 Every owner may enclose or fence his land or tenements by means of walls, ditches, live or dead
hedges, or by any other means without detriment to servitudes constituted thereon.

Right to enclose or fence

 Limited by existing servitudes imposed on the land or tenement

Art 431 The owner of a thing cannot make use thereof in such manner as to injure the rights of a third per-
son.

Art 432 The owner of a thing has no right to prohibit the interference of another with the same, if the interfer-
ence is necessary to avert an imminent danger and the threatened damage, compared to the damage arising
to the owner from the from the interference, is much greater. The owner may demand from the person bene-
fited indemnity for the damage to him.

State of necessity
General rule: a person cannot interfere with the right of ownership of another
Exception: State of necessity, but of course, civil indemnification can be asked for

Requisites:
i. interference is necessary to avert an imminent danger and the threatened damage to actor or a third
person (but the damage must be proportionate and reasonable)
ii. imminent danger or threatening damage must be much greater than the damage arising to the owner of
the property

Art 433 Actual possession under claim of ownership raises a disputable presumption of ownership. The true
owner must resort to judicial process for the recovery of the property.

 Applies to both immovable and movable property

Requisites to raise the disputable presumption of ownership:
i. Actual (physical or material) possession of the property
ii. Possession must be under claim of ownership

Judicial process contemplated

 Means ejectment suit or reinvidicatory action
 Ex-parte petition for issuance of a possessory writ is not a judicial process, as it is non-litigious (PNB v CA)

Art 434 In an action to recover, the property must be identified, and the plaintiff must rely on the strength of
his title and not on the weakness of the defendant’s claim.

Requisites:
i. Person who claims that he has a better right to the property must satisfactorily prove both ownership and
identity
ii. Burden of proof lies on the party who substantially asserts the affirmative of an issue
iii. Reliance on strength of evidence and not upon the weakness of the opposing party

 Party who desires to recover must fix the identity of the land claimed by describing the location, area and bound-
aries thereof
o If a party fails to identify sufficiently and satisfactorily the land which he claims as his own, his action
must necessarily fail
o While the identity of the property must be established, it is not necessary for the plaintiff to establish the
precise location and extent of the lands claimed or occupied by the defendant
 General rule: where there is a conflict between the area and boundaries of a land, the latter prevails.
o An area delimited by boundaries properly identifies a parcel of land
Exception: where the boundaries relied upon do not identify the land beyond doubt
o In such cases where there appears to be an overlapping of boundaries, the actual size of the property
gains importance.

Equiponderance of evidence? Rule for defendant.

Evidence to prove ownership
1. A Torrens title
2. Title from the Spanish government
3. Patent duly registered in the Registry of Property
4. Deed of sale
5. Operating a business for nine years in defendant’s own name, without protest of plaintiff
6. Occupation of a building for a long time without payment of rent
7. Letter in which defendant recognized the ownership of the property by the plaintiff (estoppel)
8. Open, continuous, exclusive, adverse and notorious actual possession and occupation of parcels of land

Indicia of claim of ownership

1. Tax declarations and tax receipts – only prima facie evidence of ownership or possession; but they are good indi-
cia of possession in the concept of owner

Conclusiveness of certificates of title

 Indicates true and legal ownership of a private land and should be accorded great weight as against tax declara-
tions
o but is not conclusive if the land had already been previously registered

Art 435 No person shall be deprived of the property except by competent authority and for public use and
always upon payment of just compensation.
Should this requirement be not first complied with, the courts shall protect, and in a proper case, restore the
owner in his possession.

Power of eminent domain

Requisites:
i. Taking must be done by competent authority
ii. Must be for public use
iii. Owner paid just compensation
iv. Requirement of due process of law must be observed

Should the requirements be not first complied with, restore the property to his possession.
 But can be lost by estoppel or acquiescence

Art 436 When any property is condemned or seized by competent authority in the interest of health, safety or
security, the owner thereof shall not be entitled to compensation, unless he can show that such condemna-
tion or seizure is unjustified.

Condemnation or seizure of property in exercise of police power

 Relates to use and enjoyment not ownership of property
 No taking of property involved
 Persons affected not entitled to financial compensation

Art 437 The owner of a parcel of land is the owner of its surface and of everything under it, and he can con-
struct thereon any works or make any plantations and excavations which he may deem proper, without detri-
ment to servitudes and subject to special laws and ordinances. He cannot complain of the reasonable re-
quirements of aerial navigation.

Surface rights of a landowner

Right of the owner of a parcel of land to construct any works or make any plantations and excavations on his land is
subject to: (SLERRt)
1. Special laws
2. Local ordinances
3. Existing servitudes or easements
4. Reasonable requirements of aerial navigation
5. Rights of third persons

Limitations imposed by special laws

 Includes the regalian doctrine
 Ownership of said land does not give him the right to extract or utilize the said minerals without the permission of
the State to which said minerals belong
 o For the loss sustained by such owner, he is entitled to just compensation under mining laws or expropri-
ation proceedings

Art 438 Hidden treasure belongs to the owner of the land, building, or other property on which it is found.
Nevertheless, when the discovery is made on the property of another, or of the state or any of its
sub-divisions, and by chance, one-half thereof shall be allowed to the finder. If the finder is a trespasser, eh
shall not be entitled to any share of the treasure.
If the things found be of interest to science or the arts, the State may acquire them at their just price,
which shall be divided in conformity with the rule stated.

Art 439 By treasure is understood, for legal purposes, any hidden and unknown deposit of money, jewelry, or
other precious objects, the lawful ownership of which does not appear.

Requisites:
i. Deposit of money, jewelry or other precious objects
ii. Hidden and unknown
iii. Lawful ownership of which does not appear

CHAPTER TWO: RIGHT OF ACCESSION

GENERAL PROVISIONS
SECTION I – RIGHT OF ACCESSION WITH RESPECT TO WHAT IS PRODUCED BY PROP-
ERTY
Art 440 The ownership of property gives the right by accession to everything which is produced thereby, or
which is incorporated or attached thereto, either naturally or artificially.

Accession defined
Accession is the right of the owner of a thing, real or personal, to become the owner of everything which is:
1. produced thereby,
2. incorporated
3. attached thereto,
either naturally or artificially.

Accession Accessory

 fruits of, additions to, improve-
ments upon a thing
 includes building, planting and
sowing
 alluvion, avulsion, change of
course of rivers, formation of is-
lands
 not necessary to the principal
thing
 things joined to, included with
the principal for the latter’s em-
bellishment, better use or com-
pletion
 necessary to principal thing
example: key of a house, bow of a vi-
olin

Accession, not a mode of acquiring ownership

 Merely a consequence of ownership
 Exercise of the right of ownership
 Since the law itself gives the right, accession may, IN A SENSE, be considered as a mode of acquiring property
under the law

Kinds of accession
1. Accession discreta
 Extension of the right of ownership of a person to the products of a thing which belongs to such a person
  Includes natural, industrial, and civil fruits (Art 441)
2. Accession continua
 Extension of the right of ownership to that which is incorporated or attached to a thing which belongs to such
person
 May take place:
 With respect to real property
 Accession industrial (building, planting, sowing); or
 Accession natural (alluvion, avulsion, change of river course, and formation of islands)
 With respect to personal property
 Conjunction (attachment, engraftment)
 Commixtion or confusion
 Specification

Art 441 To the owner belongs:

o The natural fruits;
o The industrial fruits;
o The civil fruits.

Art 441 refers to accession discreta

Right of owner to the fruits

General rule: All fruits belong to the owner of a thing.
Exception: A person, other than the owner of a property, owns the fruits thereof:
1. possession in good faith by another (possessor entitled to the fruits received before possession is legally inter-
rupted)
2. usufruct (usufructuary entitled to all the fruits of the property on usufruct)
3. lease of rural lands (lessee gets fruits, lessor gets rents)
4. pledge (pledgee gets fruits, etc but with the obligation to compensate what he receives with those which are ow-
ing him)
5. antichresis (creditor acquires the fruits of his debtor’s immovable, but with the obligation to apply them first to the
interest and then to the principal amount of the credit)

Art 442 Natural fruits are the spontaneous products of the soil, and the young and other products of animals.
Industrial fruits are those produced by lands of any kind through cultivation or labor.
Civil fruits are the rents of buildings, the price of leases of lands and other property and the amount
of perpetual or life annuities or other similar income.

Natural fruits
Two kinds:
1. Spontaneous products of the soil (not through human cultivation or labor), and
2. Young and other products of animals (chicks, eggs, wool, milk)

 The second kind is considered as natural fruits whatever care or management, scientific or otherwise, may have
been given by man since the law makes no distinction.
 Puppies, while cute, bred by a professional breeder are still natural fruits

Industrial fruits
 Those products which are borne through the cultivation or labor of humans
 Usually cultivated for a purpose

Civil fruits
1. Rents of buildings
2. Prices of leases (rents) of lands and other property (including movables)
3. Amount of perpetual or life annuities or other similar income

Art 443 He who receives the fruits has the obligation to pay the expenses made by a third person in their pro-
duction, gathering, and preservation.

Art 443 applies when:

1. Owner of property recovers the property from a possessor and the possessor has not yet received the fruits
although they may have already been gathered or harvested; or
 2. The possessor has already received the fruits but is ordered to return the same to the owner

In both cases, the owner is obliged to reimburse the previous possessor for the expenses incurred by the latter.

What if the possessor is in bad faith?

 The owner cannot excuse himself from his obligation by alleging bad faith on the part of the possessor because
the law makes no distinction

When does good faith/bad faith come into play?

 When the goods have yet to be gathered.
 Under 449, a BPS in bad faith has no right of reimbursement for expenses, nor to the fruits. Only for the neces-
sary expenses of preservation of land.

What if the expenses exceed the fruits?

 The owner must pay the expenses just the same because the law makes no distinction
 But keep in mind that the owner only pays for the expenses for production, gathering and preservation – not im-
provement.

Art 444 Only such as are manifest or born are considered as natural or industrial fruits.
With respect to animals, it is sufficient that they are in the womb of the mother, although unborn.

When natural fruits and industrial fruits deemed to exist

1. Plants which produce only one crop and then perish (rice, corn, sugar): from the time the seedlings appear from
the ground
2. Plants and trees which live for years and give periodic fruits (mangoes, oranges, epols): deemed existing until
they actually appear on the plants or trees
3. Animals: beginning of the maximum ordinary period of gestation (when there can be no doubt that they are al-
ready in the womb of the mum)
4. Fowls: the fact of appearance of chicks should retroact to the beginning of incubation

SECTION II – RIGHT OF ACCESSION WITH RESPECT TO IMMOVABLE PROPERTY

Section 2 deals with one kind of accession continua, that of immovables. It comprehends accession industrial (445-
456) and accession natural (457-465).
Certain basic principles must be kept in mind:
1. Accession follows the principal
 Owner of the principal acquires the ownership of the accession
2. Incorporation or union must be intimate
 Removal or separation cannot be effected without substantial injury to either or both
3. Effect of good faith and bad faith
 Good faith exonerates a person from punitive liability but bad faith may give rise to dire consequences
 General rule: person who acts in bad faith has no rights
 Exception: person who is in good faith or bad faith is entitled to reimbursement for necessary expenses or
preservation (452) as well as expenses for cultivation, gathering and preservation (443)
4. Effect of both parties in bad faith
 Bad faith of one neutralizes bad faith of the other
 Neither party may demand as a matter of right the removal of the improvements against the will of the other
for such right is available only to a party in good faith where the other is in bad faith
5. Unjust enrichment

General rule on accession industrial

Art 445 and 446 give the general rule that the accessory follows the principal.
Exception: Art 120 of the Family Code

Definitions:
1. Building – generic term for all architectural work with roof built for the purpose of being used as man’s dwelling,
or for offices, clubs, theaters, etc.
2. Repairs – putting of something back into the condition in which it was originally in (not an improvement)
Art 445 Whatever is built, planted or sown on the land of another and the improvements or repairs made
thereon, belong to the owner of the land, subject to the provisions of the following articles.

 Owner of land must be known for this article to apply

Art 446 All works, sowing, and planting are presumed made by the owner and at his expense, unless the con-
trary is proved.

Disputable presumptions as to improvements:

1. The works, sowing, and planting were made by the owner. and
2. They were made at the owner’s expense.

He who alleges the contrary of these presumptions has the burden of proof.

Art 447 The owner of the land who makes thereon, personally or through another, paintings, constructions or
works with the materials of another, shall pay their value; and if he acted in bad faith, he shall also be obliged
to the reparation of damages. The owner of the materials shall have the right to remove them only incase he
can do so without injury to the work constructed, or without the plantings, constructions or works being de-
stroyed. However, if the landowner acted in bad faith, the owner of the materials may remove them in any
event, with a right to be indemnified for damages.

Applies when the owner of the property uses the materials of another.

Landowner-Builder/Planter/Sower Owner of Materials

Good faith Good faith

LO-BPS can acquire the materials Entitled to full payment for value of
provided there is full payment materials, or
May remove materials provided there
is no substantial injury to work done

Bad faith Good faith

Acquire the materials provided he Entitled to full payment for value of

pays full payment plus damages materials plus damages, or
Remove materials even if there will
be substantial injury to work done
plus damages

Good faith Bad faith

Acquire materials without paying for Loses materials without indemnity

the value thereof and entitled to dam- and will be liable for damages due to
ages due to defects or inferior quality defects or inferior quality of materials
of materials

Bad faith Bad faith

Same as when both are in good faith.

Art 448 The owner of the land on which anything has been built, sown or planted in good faith, shall have the
right to appropriate as his own the works, sowing or planting, after payment of the indemnity provided for in
articles 546 and 548, or to oblige the one who built or planted to pay the price of the land, and the one who
sowed, the proper rent. However, the builder or planter cannot be obliged to buy the land if its value is con-
siderably more than that that of the building or trees. In such case, he shall pay reasonable rent, if the owner
of the land does not choose to appropriate the building or trees after proper indemnity. The parties shall
agree upon the terms of the lease and in case of disagreement, the court shall fix the terms thereof.
Art 449 He who builds, plants or sows in bad faith on the land of another, loses what is built, planted or sown
without right to indemnity.

Art 450 The owner of the land on which anything has been built, planted or sown in bad faith may demand
the demolition of the work, or that the planting or sowing be removed, in order to replace things in their for-
mer condition at the expense of the person who built, planted or sowed; or he may compel the builder or
planter to pay the price of the land, and the sower the proper rent.

Art 451 In case of the two preceding articles, the landowner is entitled to damages from the builder, planter
or sower.

Art 452 The builder, planter or sower in bad faith is entitled to reimbursement for the necessary expenses of
preservation of the land.

Art 453 If there was bad faith, not only on the part of the person who built, planted or sowed on the land of
another, but also on the part of the owner of such land, the rights of one and the other shall be the same as
though both had acted in bad faith.
It is understood that there is bad faith on the part of the landowner whenever the act was done with
his knowledge and without opposition on his part.

Art 454 When the landowner acted in bad faith and the builder, planter or sower proceeded in good faith, the
provisions of article 447 shall apply.

What’s good faith?

Consists in the:
1. Honest belief that the land he is building, planting, sowing on is his or that by some title, he has a right to build,
plant, sow on it; and
2. Ignorance of any defect or flaw in his title

Abrenica definition: State of mind at the time he built the improvements (Pleasantville case)

Usually, it applies to building, planting, sowing in the concept of ownership.

But the Supreme Court has expanded its coverage to
1. Cases wherein a builder had constructed improvements with the consent of the owner
2. Builders in good faith who relied on the consent of another whom they have mistakenly believed to be the owner
of the land
3. To children who built improvement on a land belonging to their parents with their parents consent (Macasaet
case)

Landowner Builder/planter/sower

Good faith Good faith

Option 1: Purchase whatever has
been built, planted, or sown after
paying indemnity which includes nec-
essary, useful and luxurious ex-
penses (if he wishes to appropriate
the luxurious expenses)
Prohibited from offsetting or compen-
sating the necessary and useful ex-
pense with the fruits received by the
BP in good faith (Nuguid case)
Option 2: To oblige the BP to buy the
land or the S to pay the proper rent
unless the value of the land is consid-
erably more than that of the building
or trees
Good faith
Receive indemnity for necessary,
useful and luxurious expenses (de-
pends on landowner) with right of re-
tention over the land without obliga-
tion to pay rent until full payment of
indemnity
Remove useful improvement pro-
vided it does not cause any injury
(part of right of retention)
If LO does not appropriate luxurious
improvements, BPS can remove the
same provided there is no injury to
the principal thing (land or building)
Right of retention only applies when
LO chooses to appropriate (but does
not apply if property of public domin-
ion)
To purchase land at fair market value
at time of payment when value is not
considerably more than that of the
building or trees
To pay rent until the purchase has
been made (Technogas case)
If BPS cannot pay purchase price of
the land, LO can require BPS to re-
move whatever has been built,
planted, or sown.
If the value of the land is considera-
bly more than that of the building or
trees, BPS cannot be compelled to
buy the land. In such case, BPS will
pay reasonable rent if LO does not
choose option 1.
If BPS cannot pay the rent, LO can
eject BPS from the land.
Bad Faith
 Option 1: To acquire whatever has
been built, planted or sown without
paying indemnity except necessary
expenses for preservation of land
and luxurious expenses (should LO
want to acquire luxurious improve-
ment) plus damages
Option 2: To oblige BP to buy land or
S to pay proper rent plus damages
Option 3: To compel BPS to remove
or demolish work done plus damages
Bad Faith
Acquire whatever has been built,
planted or sown by paying indemnity
plus damages
Bad Faith
Both in good faith
Necessary expenses
 Made for the preservation of the thing, or
 Those which seek to prevent the waste, deterioration, or loss of the thing
Useful expenses
 Expenses which add value to a thing or
 Augment is income
Loses whatever has been built,
planted or sown without indemnity
and liable to pay damages
Entitled to reimbursement for neces-
sary expenses for preservation of
land but no right to retention
Entitled to reimbursement for useful
expenses but cannot remove useful
improvements even if removal will not
cause injury
Not entitled to luxurious expenses ex-
cept when LO wants to acquire
(value of which will be the one at the
time LO enters into possession)
Entitled to remove luxurious improve-
ments if it will not cause injury and
LO does not want to acquire them
Obliged to pay for land or proper rent
and pay damages
Obliged to remove or demolish work
done at his expense and pay dam-
ages
Good Faith
If LO acquires whatever has been
built, planted or sown, BPS must be
indemnified the value thereof plus
damages
If LO does not acquire, BPS cannot
insist on purchasing land
BPS can remove whatever has been
built, planted or sown regardless of
whether or not it will cause injury and
will be entitled to damages
Bad Faith
When does good faith cease?
 From the moment defects in the title are made known to the possessor by extraneous evidence or by suit for re-
covery of the property by the true owner

What happens if good faith ceases? (Rosales case)

 LO can acquire improvements built PRIOR to the notice to BPS (when good faith ceased), and indemnify BPS of
current market value at time of payment
 LO entitled to rent from the time BPS good faith ceased

When will these rules not apply?

1. When other provisions of law govern (agency, co-ownership, lease, usufruct)
2. Improvement constructed on one’s own land subsequently sold (person constructs a house on his own land and
later sold land to another)
▪ But, the provision on indemnity in 448 may be applied by analogy where the owner-builder later lost owner-
ship of the land by virtue of a court judgment, considering that the primary intent of 448 is to avoid a state of
forced co-ownership especially where the parties in the main agree that 448 and 546 are applicable and in-
demnity for the improvements may be paid although they differ as to basis of the indemnity - whut?! (Pec-
son v CA)
3. Builder is a belligerent occupant
4. Constructions not in the nature of buildings
5. Property of public domain

Art 455 If the materials, plants or seeds belong to a third person who has not acted in bad faith, the owner of
the land shall answer subsidiarily for their value and only in the event that the one who made use of them
has no property with which to pay.
This provision shall not apply if the owner makes use of the right granted by Article 450. If the owner
of the materials, plants or seeds has been paid by the builder, planter or sower, the latter may demand from
the land-owner the value of the materials and labor.

Landowner Builder/Planter/Sower Owner of the Materials

Good Faith Good Faith Good Faith

Option 1: To acquire To receive indemnity To receive indemnity

whatever has been built, from LO with right of re- from BPS who is primar-
planted or sown pro- tention over land until ily liable for materials; if
vided there is payment full payment BPS is insolvent, to pro-
of indemnity (which in- ceed against LO who is
cludes value of what subsidiarily liable with
has been built, planter no right of retention
or sown plus value of
materials used)

Option 2: To oblige BP To buy land or to pay To receive indemnity

to buy land or S to pay proper rent from BPS only (LO is
rent unless value of land not subsidiarily liable)
is considerably more with right of retention
than that of building or until full payment; or
trees
To remove materials if
there will be no injury on
building or trees and will
have material lien
against BPS for pay-
ment of materials

Good Faith Good Faith Bad Faith

Same Whatever is the choice
of LO, the OM:
1. loses the materials in
favor of the BPS and
2. will have no right to
receive indemnity from
BPS nor LO

Good Faith Bad Faith Bad Faith

Option 1: To acquire BPS loses what has (Since both BPS and
whatever has been built, been built, planted or OM are in bad faith,
planted or sown without sown plus liable for treat them both as if
paying indemnity except damages but is entitled they are in good faith.)
for necessary expenses to be indemnified for
for preservation of land necessary expenses Whatever is the choice
and luxurious expenses and luxurious expenses of the LO, OM has right
(should LO want to ac- (should LO want to ac- to receive indemnity for
quire luxurious improve- quire luxurious improve- value of materials from
ments) plus damages ments) and has no right BPS only (LO has no
of removal even if re- subsidiary liability for
moval will not cause value of materials be-
damage cause OM is considered
in good faith only insofar
as BPS is concerned)

OM has no right to re-

move materials even if
there will be no injury or
damage

Option 2: To oblige BP To buy the land or pay OM has right of removal

to buy the land or S to proper rent and liable to provided there will be no
pay proper rent plus pay damages to LO injury or damage
damages

Option 3: To oblige BP To demolish or remove Liable to pay damages

to demolish or remove what has been built, due to defects or inferior
what has been built, planted or sown and lia- quality of materials
planted or sown plus ble for damages
damages

Bad Faith Good Faith Good Faith

To acquire what has To receive indemnity TO receive indemnity of

been built, planted or from LO plus damages materials principally
sown by paying indem- from BPS and in case
nity plus liable to pay BPS is insolvent, sub-
damages sidiarily from LO

Bad Faith Good Faith Bad Faith

Same Same No right to receive in-

demnity for value of ma-
terials from BPS nor LO
(who ends up owning
buildings or trees)
Art 456 In the cases regulated in the preceding articles, good faith does not necessarily exclude negligence,
which gives right to damages under article 2176.

Art 457 To the owners of the lands adjoining the banks of rivers belong the accretion which they gradually
receive from the effects of the current of the waters.

Article treats of alluvion, a form of accession natural.

Alluvion is…
 Accretion which the banks of rivers gradually receive from the effects of the current of the waters and
 Which belong to the owners of lands adjoining the said banks

 Riparian owners are owners of lands adjoining the banks of rivers.

 Littoral owners are the owners of lands bordering the shore of the sea or lake or other tidal waters

Distinguished from accretion

 Alluvion is applied to the deposit of soil or to the soil itself
 Accretion is the act or process by which a riparian land gradually and imperceptively receives addition made by
the water to which the land is contiguous

Requisites
i. Deposit or accumulation of soil or sediment must be gradual and imperceptive
ii. Accretion results from the effects or action of the current of waters of the river (exclusive work of nature)
iii. Land where accretion takes place must be adjacent to the bank of a river

Instances when alluvion DOES NOT take place

1. Accretion because of sudden and forceful action like that of flooding
2. Accretion caused by human intervention (would still be part of public domain – Vda de Nazerno v CA)
3. Accretion caused by action of Manila Bay (since Manila Bay is not a river, it’s part of the sea)
4. Accretion on the bank of a lake (like Laguna de Bay) have been held to belong to the owners of the lands to
which they are added

Elements of river and their ownership

A river is a compound concept consisting of three elements:
1. Running waters
2. The bed
3. The banks

 Since a river is a compound concept, it should have only one nature – it should either be totally public or com-
pletely private. And since rivers, whether navigable or not, are of public dominion (Art 420), it is implicit that all
the three component elements be the same nature also.

Reasons for alluvion

1. Compensate the riparian owner for the danger of loss that he suffers because of the location of his land
2. Compensate him for the encumbrances and various kinds of easements to which his property is subject
3. Promote the interests of agriculture for the riparian owner it in the best position to utilize the accretion

Accretions affecting lands registered under the Torrens system

In case of diminution of area
 Registration does not protect the riparian owner against diminution of the area of his land through gradual
changes in the course of the adjoining stream
 Accretions which the banks of rivers may gradually receive from the effect of the current become the property of
the owners of the banks
In case of increase of area
 Although alluvion is automatically owned by the riparian owner, it does not automatically become registered land,
just because the lot which receives such accretion is covered by a Torrens title
 So, alluvial deposit acquired by a riparian owner of registered land by accretion may be subjected to acquisition
through prescription by a third person, by failure of such owner to register such accretion within the prescribed
period
Art 458 The owners of estates adjoining ponds or lagoons do not acquire the land left dry by the natural de-
crease of the waters, or lost that inundated by them in extraordinary floods.
 Refers only to ponds and lagoons
o No application when the estate adjoins a creek, stream, river or lake
o For purposes of alluvion, lakes are of the same category of creeks, streams and rivers
 Pond
o a body of stagnant water without an outlet
o larger than a puddle and smaller than a lake
 Lagoon
o small lake, ordinarily of fresh water,
o and not very deep, fed by floods
o the hollow bed of which is bounded by elevations of land
 Lake
o Body of water formed in depressions of the earth
o Ordinarily fresh water
o Coming from rivers, brooks or springs
o Connected with the sea by them
o Hence, Laguna de Bay is a lake

Art 459 Whenever the current of a river, creek or torrent segregates from an estate on its bank a known por-
tion of land and transfers it to another estate, the owner of the land to which the segregated portion be-
longed retains the ownership of it, provided that he removes the same within two years.

Avulsion is…
 Also known as force of river
 Defined as the accretion which takes place when the current of a river, creek or torrent segregates from an es-
tate on its bank a known portion and transfers it to another estate
 In which case, the owner of the estate to which the segregated portion belonged, retains the ownership thereof
 Also refers to the segregation or transfer itself of a known portion of land to another by the force of the current

Alluvion Avulsion

 Deposit of soil is gradual  Deposit is sudden or abrupt

 Deposit of soil belongs to the
owner of the property where the
same was deposited
 The soil cannot be identified
 The owner of the property from
which a part was detached re-
tains the ownership thereof
 Detached portion can be identi-
fied

 Where there had been accretions to the land adjacent to the bank of a river, the riparian owner does not lose the
ownership of such accretions even if they are separated by avulsion from the land by the sudden change of the
course of the river

Requisites
i. Segregation and transfer must be caused by the current of a river, creek or torrent
ii. Segregation and transfer must be sudden or abrupt
iii. Portion of land transported must be known or identifiable

 Even if the detached portion be placed on top of another land instead of being adjoined to it, Art 459 still applies
as long as it can be identified as coming form the estate from which it was detached
 If only soil is removed by water and spread over another’s land such that no known portion can be said to exist
which can be removed, there is no avulsion
 Current
o Continuous movement of a body of water, often horizontal, in a certain direction
 River
o Natural surface stream of water of considerable volume
 o Permanent or seasonal flow
o Emptying into an ocean, lake or other body of water
 Creek
o Small islet extending further into land
o Natural stream of water normally smaller than and ofter tributary to a river
 Torrent
o Violent stream of water
o A flooded river or one suddenly raised by a heavy rain and descending a steep incline
o Raging flood or rushing stream of water

What if a portion of land is transferred, but not by a current of water, but by a landslide?
 You can apply Art 459, by analogy.

Remove it within two years

 The former owner preservers his ownership of the segregated portion provided he removes (not merely claims)
the same within the period of 2 years
 It would seem that his failure to do so would have the effect of automatically transferring ownership over it to the
owner of the other estate
 Law doesn’t make a distinction between private land and land of the public domain
 Why two years?
o Segregated portion is usually very small and it is thus useless to the original owner
o Similar to uprooted trees (but there, 6 months)
o If the owner of the separated portion retains his ownership without any qualification, he would have a
right to enter the other estate at any time, which wouldn’t be convenient to the other estate
o After a long period, the detached potion may become permanently attached to the new land so it’ll be
hard to remove

Art 460 Trees uprooted and carried away by the current of the waters belong to the owner of the land upon
which they may be cast, if the owners do not claim them within 6 months. If such owners claim them, they
shall pay the expenses incurred in gathering them or putting them in a safe place.

 Applies only to uprooted trees

 If a known portion of land with trees standing thereon is carried away by the current to another land, Art 459 gov-
erns
 The original owner claiming the trees is liable to pay the expenses incurred by the owner of the land upon which
they have been cast in gathering them or putting them in a safe place
 Claim must be done in 6 months
o If not, the trees will belong to the owner of the land where the trees have been cast to
o Six months is a condition precedent and not a prescription period
o After a claim is made within 6 months an action may be brought within the period provided by law for
prescription of movables

NB: For trees, you need only CLAIM within the period. For land (Art 459), you have to REMOVE them within 2 years

Art 461 River beds which are abandoned through the natural change in the course of the waters ipso facto
belong to the owners whose lands are occupied by the new course in proportion to the area lost. However,
the owners of the lands adjoining the old bed shall have the right to acquire the same by paying the value
thereof, which value shall not exceed the value of the area occupied by the new bed.

River beds abandoned through natural change in the course of waters

 They belong to owners occupied by the new course of the river
o In proportion to the area lost (if only one owner lost a portion of his land, the entire old bed should be-
long to him. If more than two, then in proportion to the area lost)
 Abandoned? The words may be construed to mean that where there is abandonment by the government over
the old bed, the owner of the invaded land automatically acquires ownership of the same without any formal act
on his part. (Remember that rivers are property of public dominion)
o The change in the course of the river does not ipso facto result in the abandonment of the river but must
be the reason for its abandonment, in other words, the river is abandoned because of or through the
natural change of the water
 The owners of land adjoining the old bed are given the preferential right to acquire the old bed by paying the
value thereof
o The indemnification shall not exceed the value of the area occupied by the new bed (in case of disa-
greement, bring the case to court.)

Requisites
i. There must be a natural change in the course of the waters of the river
ii. Change must be abrupt or sudden

NB: Law speaks of change of river course. If a river simply dries up or disappears, the bed left dry will belong to pub-
lic dominion (Art 502)

Art 462 Whenever a river, changing its course by natural causes, opens a new bed through a private estate,
this bed shall become of public dominion.

NB: This article talks of the new riverbed. Art 461 talked about the old riverbed.

 The bed of a public river or stream is of public ownership (Art 502)

 If the river changes its course and opens a new bed, this bed becomes of public dominion even if its on private
property
 Just as the old had bed had been of public dominion before the abandonment, the new riverbed shall likewise be
of public dominion
 No distinction whether a river is navigable or floatable or not

Art 463 Whenever a current of a river divides itself into branches, leaving a piece of land or part thereof iso-
lated, the owner of the land retains his ownership. He also retains it if a portion of land is separated from the
estate by the current.

NB: This article does not refer to the formation of islands through accretion (that’s in Art 464 and 465).

This article refers to the formation of an island caused by a river dividing itself into branches resulting in:
1. The isolation of a piece of land or part thereof, or
2. The separation of a portion of land from an estate by the current (see Art 459)

 The owner preserves his ownership of the isolated or separated property

Art 464 Islands which may be formed on the seas within the jurisdiction of the Philippines, on lakes, and on
navigable or floatable rivers belong to the State.

Art 465 Islands which through successive accumulation of alluvial deposits are formed in non-navigable and
non-floatable rivers, belong to the owners of the margins or banks nearest to each of them, or to the owners
of both margins if the island is in the middle of the river, in which case it shall be divided longitudinally in
halves. If a single island thus formed be more distant from one margin than from the other, the owner of the
nearer margin shall be the sole owner thereof.

Rules of ownership of islands form through alluvion

1. An island belongs to the State as part of its patrimonial property if it is formed:

a. On the seas within the jurisdiction of the Philippines
b. On lakes
c. On navigable or floatable rivers

2. If it is formed in non-navigable and non-floatable rivers:

a. It belongs to the nearest riparian owner or owner of the margin or bank nearest to it as he is considered
in the best position to cultivate and develop the island (in other words, sa pinakamalapit na may ari ng
lupa)
b. If it is in the middle of the river, the island is divided longtitudinally in halves
c. If the island formed is longer than the property of the riparian owner, the latter is deemed ipso jure to be
the owner of that portion which corresponds to the length of that portion of his property along the margin
of the river
 d. If a new island is formed between an existing island and an opposite bank, the owner of the older island
is considered a riparian owner together with the owner of the land adjoining the bank for the purpose of
determining ownership of the island

o He must of course register the land, else it be subject to adverse possession of another

 Navigable river
o One which forms in its ordinary condition by itself or by uniting with other waters a continuous highway
over which commerce is or may be carried on
o Test: whether it is navigable in fact, if it is used or susceptible of being used as a highway of commerce,
for trade and travel in the usual and ordinary modes
o A navigable river is one that is “floatable”, that is, a river admitting floats
i. Hence, a floatable stream is a navigable stream (Macatangay v Secretary of Public Works – in
this case, natangay si Macatangay. Hehehe!)

SECTION THREE – RIGHT OF ACCESSION WITH RESPECT TO MOVABLE PROPERTY

Art 466 Whenever two movable things belonging to different owners are, without bad faith, united in such a
way that they form a single object, the owner of the principal thing acquires the accessory, indemnifying the
former owner thereof for its value.

Adjunction is…
 The union of two movable things belonging to different owners
 In such a way that they form a single object
 But one of the component things preserves its value

Characteristics of adjunction
In order that adjunction may take place, it is necessary that:
1. There are two movables belonging to different owners
2. They are united in such a way that they form a single object; and
3. They are so inseparable that their separation would impair their nature or result in substantial injury to either

 In determining the right of the parties in adjunction, regard is had only to the things joined and not to the persons.
 But where there is a mere change of form or value which does not destroy the identity of the component parts,
the original owners may demand their separation (Art 469)

Kinds of adjunction
1. inclusion or engraftment (such as when a diamond is set on a gold ring)
2. soldering or soldadura (when led is united or fused to an object made of lead)
a. ferrumincaion (if both the accessory and principal are of the same metal)
b. plumbatura (if they are of different metals)
3. writing or escritua (when a person writes on paper belonging to another)
4. painting or pintura (when a person pains on canvas of another)
5. weaving or tejido (when threads belonging to different owners are used in making textile)
Art 467 The principal thing, as between two things incorporated, is deemed to be that to which the other has
been united as an ornament, or for its use or perfection.

Art 468 If it cannot be determined by the rule given in the preceding article which of the two things incorpo-
rated is the principal one, the thing of the greater value shall be so considered, and as between two things of
equal value, that of greater volume.
In painting and sculpture, writings, printed matter, engraving and lithographs, the board, metal,
stone, canvas, paper or parchment shall be deemed the accessory thing.

Tests to determine the principal in adjunction

In the order of application, the principal is that:
1. To which the other (accessory) has been united as an ornament or for its use or perfection. (rule of im-
portance and purpose)
2. Of greater value, if they are of unequal values;
3. Of greater volume, if they are of an equal value;
4. That of greater merits taking into consideration all the pertinent legal provisions (see Art 475) applicable as
well as the comparative merits, utility and volume of their respective things
  The special rule regarding paintings, etc is based on the consideration that what is painted is of greater
value that the board or canvas inasmuch as the exceptions mentioned are specified, its provision can not be
applied by analogy to cases of adjunction of similar nature which are deemed excluded. (See Art 467 and
468)

Art 469 Whenever the things united can be separated without injury, their respective owners may demand
their separation.
Nevertheless, in case the thing united for the use, embellishment or perfect of the other, is much
more precious than the principal thing, the owner of the former may demand its separation, even though the
thing to which is has been incorporated may suffer some injury.

When separation of things united are allowed

1. Whenever the separation can be done without injury
2. When the accessory much more precious, the owner of the accessory may demand its separation even though
the principal thing may suffer some injury
 Owner who made or caused the union or incorporation shall bear the expenses for separation
3. When principal acted in bad faith, owner of accessory may separate even if the principal thing be destroyed

Art 470 Whenever the owner of the accessory thing has made the incorporation in bad faith, he shall lose the
thing incorporated and shall have the obligation to indemnify the owner of the principal thing for the dam-
ages he may have suffered.
If the one who has acted in bad faith is the owner of the principal thing, the owner of the accessory
thing shall have a right to choose between the former paying him its value or that the thing belonging to him
be separated, even though for this purpose it be necessary to destroy the principal thing; and in both cases,
furthermore, there shall be indemnity for damages.
If either one of the owners has made the incorporation with the knowledge and without the objection
of the other, their respective rights shall be determined as though both acted in good faith.

ADJUNCTION (accessory follows principal)

Rights of Owner of Principal Rights of Owner of Accessory

Good Faith Good Faith

Acquires the accessory, indemnifying
the owner of the value thereof
Except: When value of accessory is
much more precious than the princi-
pal thing (469)
Except: When still separable, may
demand separation (no adjunction
anyway)
Loses the accessory but has a right
to indemnity for the value of the ac-
cessory
Has a right to demand separation
even if it causes injury to the principal
thing (469)
May demand separation (469(

Good faith Bad faith

Acquires the accessory and has a Loses the thing and has liability for
right to indemnity for damages he damages
may have suffered

Bad faith Good faith

Pays for the accessory plus damages Option 1: Demand the owner of the
principal to pay for the value of the
accessory plus damages
Separate thing even if it is destroyed
plus pay damages Option 2: Demand separation even if
it causes the destruction of the princi-
pal thing plus damages

Bad Faith Bad Faith

 As if both are in good faith

Art 471 Whenever the owner of the material employed without his consent has a right to indemnity, he may
demand that this consist in the delivery of a thing equal in kind and value, and in all other respects, to that
employed, or else in the price thereof, according to expert appraisal.
Art 472 if by the will of their owners two things of the same or different kinds are mixed, or if the mixture oc-
curs by chance, and in the latter case the things are not separable without injury, each owner shall acquire a
right proportional to the part belonging to him, bearing in mind the value of things mixed or confused.
Art 473 if by the will of only one owner, but in good faith, two things of the same or different kinds are mixed
or confused, the rights of the owners shall be determined by the provisions of the preceding article.
If by the one who caused the mixture or confusion acted in bad faith, he shall lose the thing belong-
ing to him thus mixed or confused, besides being obliged to pay indemnity for the damages caused to the
owner of the thing with which his own was mixed

Definition of mixture
 Takes place when two or more things belonging to different owners are mixed or combined
 With the respective identities of the component parts destroyed or lost
 Two kinds
o Commixtion (for solids)
o Confusion (for liquids)

Rules governing mixture (co-ownership)

1. If the mixture by will of owners, their rights shall be governed by their stipulations. In the absence of any stipula-
tion, each owner acquires a right or interest in the mixture in proportion to the value of his materials as in co-own-
ership.
MIXTURE
Owner who caused mixture Owner of the thing mixed into

Good faith or by chance Good faith or by chance

Each owner acquires a right propor- Each owner acquires a right propor-
tional to the part belonging to him, tional to the part belonging to him,
bearing in mind the value of the bearing in mind the value of the
things mixed or confused things mixed or confused

Bad faith Good faith

Loses the thing mixed or confused Acquires the thing mixed plus entitled
plus liable to pay damages to damages

Art 474 One who in good faith employs the material of another in whole or in part in order to make thing of a
different kind, shall appropriate the thing thus transformed as his own, indemnifying the owner of the mate-
rial for its value.
If the material is more precious than the transformed thing or is of more value, its owner, may, at his
option, appropriate the new thing to himself, after first paying indemnity for the value of the thing, or demand
indemnity for the material.
If in the making of the thing bad faith intervened, the owner of the material shall have the right to ap-
propriate the work to himself without paying anything to the maker, or to demand of the latter that he indem-
nify him for the value of the material and the damages he may have suffered. However, the owner of the ma-
terial cannot appropriate the work in case the value of the latter, for artistic or scientific reasons, is consider-
ably more than that of the material.
Definition of specification
 Takes place whenever the work of a person is done on the material of another
 Such material, in a consequence of the work itself, undergoing a transformation.
 Imparting of a new form to the material belong to another, or making of the material of another into a different
kind
o Flour made into bread, grapes into wine, clay into bricks, love into hate (joke. Putek, ang boring ng
Property. If you’ve made it this far, good for you!)

SPECIFICATION (accessory follows principal)

Owner of material Builder

Good faith Good faith

Right to indemnification for the value Shall appropriate the thing thus trans-
of the material. formed as his own, indemnifying the
owner of the material for its value.

Except: Material more precious than

transformed thing.
To be indemnified.
Option 1: Appropriate the new thing
to himself, indemnifying the builder
for his work.
Appropriate the same after indemnity
Option 2: Demand indemnity for the for material.
material.

Good faith Bad faith

Option 1: Appropriate the work to Loses his work. No right to indemnity.

himself without paying indemnity.
(Damages also?)
Pay for the materials and damages.
Except: When for artistic or scientific
reasons, the thing has a value con-
siderably higher than the material.
The owner of the material cannot ap-
propriate the work.
Must pay indemnity and damages.
Option 2: Demand indemnity for ma-
terial plus damages.

Art 475 In the preceding articles, sentimental value shall be duly

appreciated.

Adjunction, mixture and specification distinguished

Adjunction Mixture Specification

At least two things At least two things May be only one ting
whose form is changed
 Component parts retain Things mixed may or Component parts retain
or preserve their nature may not retain their re- or preserve their nature
spective original nature

Accessory follows prin- Co-ownership results Accessory follows prin-

cipal cipal

CHAPTER THREE: QUIETING OF TITLE

ART 476 Whenever there is a cloud on title to real property or any interest therein, by reason of any instru-
ment, record, claim, encumbrance or proceeding which is apparently valid or effective but it is in truth and in
fact invalid, ineffective, voidable or unenforceable, and may be prejudicial to said title, an action may be
brought to remove such clod or to quiet the title.
An action may also be brought to prevent a cloud from being cast upon title to real property or any
interest therein.

Title to real property refers to that upon which ownership is based.

Plaintiff in action for quiet title dies, should it be dismissed? No. It’s a quasi in rem suit.
Defendant’s defenses: prescription, lack of jurisdiction of court

Cloud on title
 Semblance of title, either legal or equitable, or a claim or a right in real property, appearing in some legal from,
but which is in fact, invalid or which would be inequitable to enforce
 Requisites
i. Instrument, record, claim, encumbrance or proceeding which is apparently valid or effective,
ii. Such instrument is in truth and in fact, invalid, ineffective, voidable or unenforceable, or has been extin-
guished or terminated, or has been barred by extinctive prescription
iii. Such instrument may be prejudicial to said title

Action to quiet title

 Requisites:
i. Plaintiff or complainant has a legal or an equitable title to, or interest in the real property subject of the
action
ii. The deed, claim or proceeding claimed to be casting cloud on his title must be shown to be, in fact, in-
valid or inoperative despite its prima facie appearance of validity or legal efficacy

Action to quiet title Action to remove a cloud on title

 Purpose to put an end to trouble-  Removal of a possible founda-

some litigation in respect to the
property involved
 Remedial action involving a pre-
sent adverse claim
 1st paragraph of Art 476
tion for a future hostile claim
 Preventive action to prevent a fu-
ture cloud on the title
 2nd paragraph of Art 476

 An action to quiet title includes an action to remove a cloud of title.

Nature of action
 Quasi in rem
 Judgment is conclusive only between the parties
 The res, the subject-matter of the controversy, is within the court’s jurisdiction, and it is because of that circum-
stance that the court is able to adjudicate
 Not essential that the court acquire jurisdiction of the person of the defendant

Benefits from allowing actions

 Task of court is to determine the respective rights of the parties so that the complainant and those claiming under
him may forever free from any danger of hostile claim (Rumarate case)
 Affords prompt and adequate method to remove cloud on title
 Promotes improvement of property

To what kind of property does this action apply?

 Real property, which may refer to either the title or only an interest therein (usufruct, servitude, lease record, etc)
 Not to personal property
o But, they may be applied to personalty under exceptional circumstances with respect to certain types of
property which
▪ partake of the nature of real property (vessels, motor vehicles, certificates of stocks), or
▪ treated to some extent as realty because of registration requirements for ownership or transac-
tions affecting them (chattel mortgage)

Prescriptibility of action
1. If plaintiff in possession, it does not prescribe. An action to quiet title brought by a person who is in possession of
the property is imprescriptible.
2. If plaintiff not in possession, he must invoke his remedy within the proper prescriptive period. Ten years if in good
faith, 30 years if in bad faith.

Art 477 The plaintiff must have legal or equitable title to, or interest in the real property which is the subject
matter of the action. He need not be in possession of said property.

Title and possession of the plaintiff

 Plaintiff must have a legal or equitable title or an interest in the real property which is the subject matter of the
action
o Legal title may consist in full ownership or in naked ownership
o If plaintiff has beneficial interest in the property (such as a beneficiary in a trust), he has beneficial title
o Interest in property is any interest short of ownership, like the interest of a mortgagee or a usufructuary
 If plaintiff is not in possession, he may also bring one of the three actions mentioned in addition to the action to
quiet title
 In order to afford complete relief to the parties in action to quiet title, the court, without thereby converting the ac-
tion from quieting of title into accion publiciana, may determine,:
o Incidentally the ownership,
o The stats of the legal title to the property
o Right to the possession thereof

Art 478 There may also be an action to quiet title or remove a cloud therefrom when the contract, instrument
or other obligation has been extinguished or has terminated, or has been barred by extinctive prescription.

Two cases when action allowed

An action to quiet title may be maintained:
1. When the contract, instrument, or other obligation has been extinguished or terminated (right of the defendant
has been extinguished by the happening of a condition subsequent)
2. When the contract, instrument or other obligation has been barred by extinctive prescription (as where plaintiff
has possess in bad faith the property publicly, adversely and uninterruptedly for 30 years)

Art 479 The plaintiff must return to the defendant all benefits he may have received from the latter, or reim-
burse him for expenses that may have redounded to the plaintiff’s benefit.

Obligation of plaintiff to return or reimburse

 The purpose of the action to quiet title is solely
o to remove the cloud on the plaintiff’s title or
o to prevent a cloud from being cast upon his title, and not to obtain any other benefit
 Plaintiff is bound to return to the defendant all the benefits he may have received form the latter or reimburse him
for the expenses incurred on the property which has redounded to the plaintiff’s benefit (less of course, any dam-
age which he suffered by reason of the defendant)

Art 480 The principles of the general law on the quieting of title are hereby adopted insofar as they are not in
conflict with this Code.

Art 481 The procedure for quieting of title or the removal of a cloud therefrom shall be governed by such
rules of court as the Supreme Court shall promulgate.

CHAPTER FOUR: RUINOUS BUILDINGS AN TREES IN DANGER OF FALLING

Art 482 If a building, wall, column or any other construction is in danger of falling, the owner shall be obliged
to demolish it or to execute the necessary work in order to prevent it from falling.
If the proprietor does not comply with this obligation, the administrative authorities may order the
demolition of the structure at the expense of the owner, or take measures to insure public safety.

 If a building, wall, column or other construction is in danger of falling, the owner has the duty to either:
o Demolish it, or
o Repair it.
 In case he doesn’t, the administrative authorities, in the exercise of police power, may order the demolition of the
structure, or take measures to insure public safety
 Recognition of the limitation of the owner’s rights in the use and enjoyment of his property
o Sic utere tuo ut alienum non laedas. – Use your property as not to injure others

Art 483 Whenever a large tree threatens to fall in such a way as to cause damage to the land or tenement of
another or to travelers over a public or private road, the owner of the tree shall be obliged to fell and remove
it; and should he not do so, it shall be done at his expense by order of the administrative authorities.

 Owner of the tree may be compelled to fell and remove a threatening tree, and should he fail to do so, the work
shall be ordered done at his expenses by the administrative authorities