PROPERTY LAW

 Branch of civil law which classifies

and defines the different kinds of
appropriable objects, their acquisition
and loss, and in general, treats of the
nature and consequences of real
rights.
 (Paras)
 Property

Article 414. All things which are or

may be the object of appropriation
are considered either:
(1) Immovable or real property; or
(2) Movable or personal property.
 Property is a thing which is or may
be the object of appropriation.

What is APPROPRIATION?
The act of setting apart; prescribing
the destination of a thing;
designating the use or application of
a fund.
- Black's Law Dictionary
 Thing vs Property
 Thing – any object which exists and is capable
of satisfying human needs. (including things
physically or legally impossible to possess)
 Property – Anything already appropriated or can
be appropriated.
 (De Leon)
 *Strictly speaking “thing” is not synonymous
with “property.” However, the Civil Code uses
these terms interchangeably.
 Classification of Things
 1. Res Nullius - “belonging to no one”
 Res Derelictae – Abandoned by owner.
 Ferae Naturae – Free in their natural habitat.
 2. Res Communes - “belonging to everyone”
 Use and enjoyment are given to all mankind.
 Generally not capable of appropriation, except in
certain situations in a limited way
 Res Alicujus - “belonging to someone”
 Owned privately, either in a collective or individual
capacity.
 Requisites of Property (USA)
 Utility – capacity to satisfy some human wants.
 Usefullness, generally economic, gives the property
its value capable of pecuniary estimation.
 Substantivity or Individuality – quality of having
existence apart from any other thing. (ex:
human body parts)
 Appropriability – capable of being possessed or
appropriated.
 CLASSIFICATION - Kinds of Properties:
Immovable or Real (415)
 Moveable or Personal (416 & 417)
 Mixed or Semi-movables
 Movables rendered immovable by destination
(attachment/incorporation)
 Immovables treated as movables because they can
be dismatled and moved to another place without
impairing their substance
 Animals in their houses/breeding places treated as
immovables. Though can be transferred or move on
their own. (414,p6)
 Other Classifications:
 Ownership – Public or Private Dominion.
 Alienability – Outside or Within commerce of man.
 Existence – Present/Existing or Future Property.
 Materiality or Immateriality – Tangible/Corporeal
vs Intangible/Incorporeal.
 Dependence or Importance – Principal or
Accessory.
 Capability of Substitution – Fungible or Non-
fungible.
 Definiteness or Nature – Generic/Indeterminate or
Specific/Determinate. (Uniqueness)
 *Under the law on Sales, a thing is determinate or
specific when it is particularly designated or
physically segregated from all others of the same
class.
 Divisibility – Divisible or Indivisible.
 Consumability – Consumable or Non-
consumable.
 Whether in Custody of the Court or Free -
 In Custodia Legis or Free Property.
 Importance of Classification:
 Determines which provision of law will govern the
 Acquisition
 Possession
 Disposition
 Loss
 Registration

Of the Property
 *In private international law, the general rule is
that immovables are governed by the law of the
country in which they are located, whereas
moveables are governed by the personal law of
the owner.
 *Under the Law on Donation, in order to for
donation of an immovable to be valid, it must be
made in a public document. (749)
 In Criminal Law, usurpation of property can only
be with respect to real property, while robbery and
theft can only be with respect to personal
property.
 *In Civil Procedure, actions concerning real
property are brought in the RTC where the
property or any part of it lies, whereas actions
concerning personal property are brought in the
court where the defendant or any of its
defendants reside or may be found, or where the
plaintiff or any of the plaintiffs reside.
 *In Contracts, only real property can be the
subject matter of real mortgage and antichresis
while only personal property can be the sublect
matter of simple loan or mutuum, voluntary
deposit, pledge, and chattel mortgage.
 Under the law on Prescription, ownership of real
property may be acquired by prescription,
although there is bad faith, in 30 years (1137),
whereas for moveables the period is only 4 years
in good faith or 8 years in any other condition.
(1132)
 In order to affect third persons, generally,
transactions involving real property must be
recorded in the Registry of Property; however,
said registration requirement is not necessary
with respect to personal property, except in the
case of chattel mortgage. (2140)
 *Parties to a contract may treat as personal
property that which by nature is real property.
However, the true reason why the agreement
would be valid between the parties is the
application of estoppel and it is a familiar
phenomenon to see things classed as real
property for purposes of taxation which on
general principle might be considered personal
property. (Standard Oil Co. v. Jaramillo, GR
20329, 1923)
 The human body, whether alive, or dead, is
neither real nor personal property, for it is not
even property at all, in that generally, it cannot be
appropriated although there is a right of
possession over it for burial purposes.Under
certain conditions, the body of a person or parts
thereof may be the subject matter of a
transaction.(Paras)
 *** RA 349 An act to legalize permissions to use
human organs or any portion or portions of the
Human body for medical, surgical, or scientific
purposes, under certain conditions. (1949)
 Right as Property:
- A real right or jus in re is the right or interest
belonging to a person over a specific thing
without a definite passive subject against whom
such right may be personally enforced.

- A personal right or jus in personam or jus ad

rem is the right or power of a person to demand
from another as a definite passive subject, the
fulfillment of the latter’s obligation.

- De Leon
Classification of Real Rights based on
Dominion:
1. Domino pleno – power to enjoy and dispose
(Dominion, civil possession, and hereditary right).

2. Domino menos pleno – power to enjoy and

dispose are separated (surface right and usufruct).

3. Domino limitado – the powers to enjoy and to

dispose, though united, are limited by a charge
(easement, tax, etc.); by a guaranty (mortgage,
pledge); by a privilege (pre-emption, redemption,
lease record).
 REAL RIGHTS PERSONAL RIGHTS

AS TO NUMBER OF PERSONS WHO TAKE PART IN THE LEGAL RELATION

There is a definite active subject who has a There is a definite active subject (creditor)
right against all persons generally as an and a definite passive subject (debtor)
indefinite passive subject
AS TO SUBJECT MATTER
The object is generally a corporeal thing It is always an incorporeal thing

AS TO THE MANNER IN WHICH THE WILL OF THE ACTIVE SUBJECT ACTS

He generally acts directly. He acts indirectly through the promise of
the obligor.
AS TO THE CAUSES OF THEIR CREATION
Created by “mode” and “title.” Created merely by “title.”
AS TO THE MODES OF THEIR EXTINCTION

Generally, it is extinguished by the loss or Personal right survives the subject matter.
destruction of the thing over which it is
exercised.
AS TO THE NATURE OF THE ACTIONS ARISING FROM THE JURIDICAL
RELATION
 IMMOVABLE PROPERTIES
1) Real by Nature – cannot be carried from place to
place (415,p1,2,8)

2) Real by Incorporation – attached to an immovable

in a fixed manner to be an integral part thereof.
(415,p1-4)
3) Real by Destination – placed in an immovable for
the utility it gives to the activity carried thereon.
(415,p4-7)
4) Real by Analogy – it is so classified by express
provision of law.
(415,p10)
 Types of Immovable Properties (415)
1. Land, buildings, roads and constructions of all
kinds adhered to the soil

a) Land is an immovable property: However, a

shovelful of land is a personal property but when it is
used to cover a land, it becomes immovable again.

b) Buildings are immovables by incorporation. Their

adherence to the land must be permanent and
substantial. A generally permanent structure,
substantially adhered to the land, not mere
superimpositions on the land, provided there is intent
of permanent annexation.
*Portable Structures are not immovables. A house and/or
materials of such house should be regarded as personal
properties. (Biscerra v. Teneza, GR L-16218, 1962)

Basis: Principle of Accession – the building is immovable

property whether it is erected by the owner, usufructuary, or
lesee of the land (Ladera v. Hodges, CA GR 8027-R, 1952)

The building and the land on which it is erected are separate

immovable properties (Lopez v. Orosa GR L-10817-18, 1958)

**A house may be the object of a chattel mortgage contract,

provided that:
a. The parties to the contract so agree
b. No innocent third parties will be prejudiced
- Basis: Principle of Estoppel. However, this is only so far as the
contracting parties are concerned. It is not applicable to strangers to
said contracts (Evangelista v Alto Surety, GR L-11658, 1958)
***Where a building is sold to be demolished immediately, it is
to be regarded as movable because the subject matter of the
contract is really the materials thereof (Bautista v. Supnad,
CA 59 O.G. 1575)

c) Roads, whether public or private, are immovable. They are

considered integral parts of the land.

“Constructions of all Kinds” – the attachment must be

more or less permanent (intent to attach permanently is
important) Examples of constructions are railroads. A wall or
fence is to be regarded as a construction by incorporation as
long as there is intent to attach it permanently although it is
merely made to rest on the land.
2. Trees, plants and growing fruits - they are immovable
property on the theory that they derive their existence or
sustenance from the soil. However, when trees are cut or
uprooted, incorporation ceases and they become movables
except in the case of uprooted timber. It is still an integral part
of immovable property when it constitutes the natural product
of the said immovable property.

Since the law makes no distinction, growing crops whether on

one’s land or on another’s as in the case of usufructuary, a
possessor or tenant, should be considered as real property.
But once they have been severed they become personal
property.

**Sale of growing crops is sale of personal property because

when the crops are sold it is understood that they are to be
gathered.
3. Everything attached to an immovable in a fixed manner

The attachment need not be made by the owner. It must be

such that it cannot be separated from the immovable. The
breakage or injury, in case of separation, must be substantial.

“The fact that the machineries were bolted or cemented on

real property mortgaged does not make them ipso facto
immovable under Article 415 (3) and (5) as the party’s intent
has to be looked into. Even if the properties appear to be
immovable by nature, nothing prohibits the parties from
treating them as chattels to secure an obligation under the
principle of estoppel. (Tsai v. CA, GR 120098, 2001)

“Where the property like a water pump and its accessories can be
separated from the immovable without being broken or suffering
deterioration as when such removal involved nothing more than
loosening bolts or dismantling fasteners, said property is not immovable
under par 3” (Yap v. Tanada, GR L-32917, 1988)
4. Statues, reliefs, paintings, or other objects for use or
ornamentation

Requisites:
a) It is an object of ornamentation or object of use;
b) The property is placed on a building or land;
c) It must be placed by the owner of the immovable – the owner may
act through his agent or duly appointed guardian;
d) There is an intention of permanent annexation or attachment,
even if adherence will not involve breakage or injury – this is the
main consideration.
 DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN PARAGRAPHS 3 AND 4 OF
ARTICLE 415
PARAGRAPH 3 PARAGRAPH 4
Cannot be separated from Can be separated from
immovable without immovable without
breaking or deterioration breaking or deterioration
Need not be placed by the Must be place by the
owner owner or his agent
Real property by Real property by
incorporation incorporation or
destination
5. Machinery, receptacles, instruments, or implements
for an industry or works

Machinery is a collective term for machines and

appliacnes used in the industrial arts.

Equipment covers physical facilities available for

production, including buildings, machineries and tools.

Implements pertain to whatever may supply a want

especially an instrument, tool or utensil.
Machinery, receptacles, instruments, or implements for an
industry or works AS IMMOVABLES:

Requisites:
a) It must be placed by the owner of the tenement or his
agent;
b) The industry or works must be carried on in a building or
on a piece of land;
c) The machinery, etc. must tend directly to meet the needs
of the said industry or works; and
d) Machineries must be an essential and principal element of
an industry or works, without which such industry or works
would be unable to function or carry on the industrial
purpose for which it was established and not merely
incidental (Mindanao Bus Co. vs City Assessor and
Treasurer, GR L-17870, September 29, 1962)
*** The equipment and living quarters of the crew, being
permanently attached to the platform which is also an
immovable, are immovables. This is especially so that they
are intended to meet the needs of the business and industry
of the corporation (Fels Energy, Inc. vs Province of Batangas,
GR 168557, Feb 16, 2007).

***Machinery, movable in nature, becomes immobilized when

placed on a plant by the owner of the property but not so
when placed by a tenant, usufructuary or a person having
only a temporary right, unless:
(a) Such person acted as agent of the owner of the land; or
(b) when the tenant had promised to leave the machinery on
the tenement at the end of the lease (Davao Sawmill Co. vs
Castillo, GR L-40411, August 7, 1935)
***According to the Principle of Estoppel, where a chattel
mortgage is constituted on a machinery permanently attached
to the ground, the machinery is to be regarded as personal
property as long as the parties to the contract so agrees and
no innocent third party will be prejudiced thereby.
(Makati Leasing and Financial Corporation vs Wearever
Textile Miss, Inc., GR L-58469, May 16, 1983)

The special civil action of replevin is applicable only to

personal property. It cannot be filed when the subject
machinery and equipment had become an immovable
property.
(Machinery & Engineering Supplies, Inc. vs CA, GR _-7057,
October 29, 1954)
***Poles and steel supports or towers of an electric company
are not real property for the purpose of the real property tax,
since they are merely attached to a square metal frame by
means of bolts which could easily be dismantled and moved
from place to place. (Board of Assessment Appeals vs
MERALCO, GR L-15334, January 31, 1964)
Conflicting Views on the Effect of the Temporary Separation
of Movables from Immovables to which they are Attached:
1) They continue to be regarded as immovables as long as they are
utilized or still needed in the industry (De Leon)
2) Fact of separation determines the condition of the object (Paras and
Tolentino)
3) Things temporarily separated from the immovables shall continue to
be regarded as immovables if there is intent to put them back
(Partidas)
4) The Material fact of incorporation or separation is what determines
the condition of these objects; so that as soon as they are
seeparated from the tenement, they recover their condition as
movables irrespective of the intention of the owner (Navarro
Amandi)
5) If the machine is still in the building, but is no longer used in the
industry, the machine reverts to the condition of a chattel. On the
other hand, if still needed for the industry, but separated from the
tenement temporarily, the property continues to be an immovable.
(Paras)
6. Animal houses, pigeon houses, beehives, fish ponds of
breeding places of similar nature

Requisites:
a) Placed by the owner, or by a tenant as agent of the owner,
with the intention of permanent attachment; and
b) Forms a permanent part of the immovable.

***In cases of alienation, if the building or tenement in which

the animals are placed is also alienated, they are to be
regarded as immovable. However, when the animals inside
the permanent animal houses are alienated onerously or
gratuitously, it is believed that the transaction is an alienation
of personal property.

***Also, animals are to be regarded as personal property for

purposes of criminal law.
***Animals which are temporarily outside may still be
considered real property, as long as the intent to return is
present, as in the case of homing pigeon.
7. Fertilizer – Immovable by destination.

***the term “actually used” means that it has been spread

over the land.

Fertilizers kept in a barn or still in their containers should be

regarded as movables.
8. Mines, quarries and slag dumps
- They are considered as really only if the matter remains
unsevered from the soil. Once severed, they become
personally.

Mines – mineral lands where excavations are done to extract

minerals (includes minerals when still attached thereto).

Quarries – lands where stones are chipped of or where sand is

being extracted; once extracted they become movables.

Slag dumps – dirt and soil taken from a mine and piled upon the
surface of the ground.

Waters – those still attached to or running thru the soil or

ground.
*** Waters which are immovable, such as sea, river or lake must not be
confused with “water” itself which is plainly movable property
9. Docks and structures
- Since “waters either running or stagnant” are considered
immovables, it is logical that constructions united to them
in a fixed and permanent manner are also immovable.

- Vessels are considered personal property, they partake to

a certain extent of the nature and conditions of real
property because of their value and importance in the
world of commerce. (Rubiso vs Rivera, GR L-15260,
August 18, 1920)

- Power barges are categorized as immovable property by

destination, being the nature of machinery and other
implements intended by the owner for an industry or work
which may be carried on in a building or on a piece of land
and which tend directly to meet the needs of said industry
or work (Fels Energy, Inc vs Province of Batangas)
10. Contracts for Public works, and servitudes and other real
rights

Properties referred to in paragraph 10 are not material things

but rights, which are necessarily intangible. (Manressa)

Where the res of a real right is real property, the right itself is
real property; but where it is personal property, the right itself
is personal property. Hence, ownership is real property if the
thing owned is immovable and personal property if movable.
(De Leon)

A personal right is always regarded as personal property. The

exception is in the case of contracts for public works which
are considered as real property.
MOVABLE PROPERTIES
 MOVABLE PROPERTIES
Tests:

1) By description
a) Whether the property can be transported or carried from
place to place; and
b) Whether such change of location can be made without
injuring the immovable to which the object may be attached.

2) By exclusion – whether the oject does not fall within any of

the ten (10) cases enumerated in Article 415 (PARAS)
 KINDS OF MOVABLE PROPERTIES
1) Those movables susceptible of Appropriation which are
not included in “415.”
2) Real property which by any Special provision of law is
considered personal property. (416-417)
3) Forces of nature which are brought under control by
science. Electricity, gas, rays, heat, light, oxygen, atomic
energy, water power, etc.
4) In general, all things which can be transported from place
to place without impairment of the real property to which
they are fixed.
5) Obligations and actions which have for their object
movables or demandable sums.(417) Demandable sums
are amounts liquidated and determined.
6) Shares of stocks (417,p2)
“Although Art. 415(2) considers growing crops as immovable,
they are however, recognized as personal property by the
Chattel Mortgage Law (Act 1508) for purposes of chattel
mortgage contracts.” (Sibal v. Valdez, GR L-26278, 1927)

“The true test of what is a proper subject of theft is not

whether the subject is corporeal or incorporeal but whether it
is capable of appropriation by another than the owner.” (US v.
Carlos, GR 6295, 1911)

***An action to recover personal property like a car is a

personal property by itself. But the right to recover possession
of a piece of land is real property.

***Participation or interest in a business is a personal property

but interest in the real property of a business entity is a real
property.
 Classification of Movables:

By nature: consumable or non-consumable

- Consumable: cannot be used according to its nature

without it being consumed. (418)
- Non-Consumable: any other kind of movable property.

By Intention: Fungible or Non-fungible

-Fungible – replaceable by an equal quality and quantity,

either by nature of things or agreement; if it is agreed that
the equivalent thing be returned, it is fungible.

-Non-Fungible – Irreplaceable because identical objects

must be returned; if it is agreed that the identical thing be
returned it is non-fungible.
Rice is by nature consumable but if the parties intended it for
display, it is non-fungible because the identical rice needs to
be returned. If it is loaned for consumption, it is both
consumable and fungible.

Note: The Civil Code in many instances uses the terms

consumable and fungible interchangeably.
PROPERTY IN RELATION TO WHOM IT BELONGS
Property is either of : (419)

Public dominion – owned by the state in its public or

sovereign capacity and intended for public use and not for the
use of the state as a juridical person.

Private ownership
a) Property owned by the State and its political subdivision in
their private capacity and is known as patrimonial property.
(421-424)
b)Property belonging to private persons, either individually or
collectively (425)
*** Property is presumed to be owned by the State in the
absence of any showing to the contrary (Salas vs Jarencio,
GR L-29788, August 30, 1972) All lands not appearing to be
clearly private dominion is presumed to belong to the State
(GR 154953, 2008)

Churches and other consecrated objects have been

considered outside the commerce of man. They are neither
public nor private property.
BAR Q
Manila Petroleum Co. owned and operated a petroleum
operation facility off the coast of Manila. The facility was
located on a floating platform made of wood and metal,
upon which was permanently attached the heavy
equipment for the petroleum operations and living
quarters of the crew. The floating platform likewise
contained a garden area, where trees, plants and
flowers were planted. The platform was tethered to a
ship, the MV 101, which was anchored to the seabed.
Please briefly give the reason for your answers. (10%)

(A).Is the platform movable or immovable property?

(B). Are the equipment and living quarters movable or
immovable property?
(C). Are the trees, plants and flowers immovable or
movable property?
SUGGESTED ANSWER TO (A):

The platform is an immovable property under Art. 415 (9) NCC,

which provides that "docks and structures which, though
floating, are intended by their nature and object to remain at a
fixed place on a river, lake or coast." Since the floating platform
is a petroleum operation facility, it is intended to remain
permanently where it is situated, even if it is tethered to a ship
which is anchored to the seabed.

ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: The platform is a movable property

because it is attached to a movable property, i.e. the vessel
which was merely anchored to the seabed. The fact that the
vessel is merely anchored to the sea bed only shows that it is
not intended to remain at a fixed place; hence, it remains a
movable property. If the intention was to make the platform stay
permanent where it was moored, it would not have been simply
tethered to a vessel but itself anchored to the seabed.
SUGGESTED ANSWER TO (B):

The thing and living quarters of the crew are immovable

property under Art. 415 (3) NCC, classifies as an immovable
"everything attached to an immovable in a fixed manner, in
such a way that it cannot be separated therefrom without
breaking the material or deterioration of the object." Both the
equipment and the living quarters are permanently attached to
the platform which is also an immovable. The equipment can
also be classified as an immovable property under Art. 415 (5)
NCC because such equipment are "machinery, receptacles,
instruments or implements intended by the owner of the
tenement for an industry or works which may be carried on in a
building or on a piece of land and which tend directly to meet
the needs of the industry or works." It is logically assumed that
the petroleum industry may be carried on in a building or on a
piece of land and the platform is analogous to a building.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER TO (B):

The equipment and living quarters of the crew are movable

properties since they are attached to a platform which is
also a movable property, because it is simply attached to a
vessel is likewise a movable property since it was merely
anchored on the seabed only shows that it is not intended
to remain at a fixed place; hence, it remains a movable
property.
SUGGESTED ANSWER TO (C):

The trees, plants and flowers planted in the garden area

of the platform are immovable property under Art. 415 (2)
NCC which classifies as an immovable property "trees,
plants and growing fruits, while they are attached to the
land or form an integral part of an immovable, the
petroleum operation facility.

ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: The trees, plants and flowers

planted in the garden area of the platform are movable
property because they are not permanently attached t the
land and do not form an integral part of an immovable.
The platform is not an immovable property for the same
reason already given in the Alternative Answer to Item (A)
above.
1) Property of Public Dominion

Concept: It does not import the idea of ownership. It is not

owned by the state but simply under its jurisdiction and
administration for the collective enjoyment of people. The
ownership of such properties is in the social group, whether
national, provincial or municipal. (De Leon)

Purpose: to serve the citizens for the common and public

welfare and not the state as a juridical person.
Property of Public Dominion

Characteristics:

- Outside the commerce of man except insofar as they may be

the object of repair or improvement or other similar things.
- Inalienable, however, when it is no longer needed for public
use or service, it may be declared as patrimonial property.
- It cannot be acquired by Prescription.
- It cannot be burdened with Easements.
- It is not subject to Attachment or execution.
- It cannot be Registered under the Property Registration
Decree or P.D. 1529, and it cannot be the subject of a
Torrens Title.
***If erroneously included in Torrens Title, the land involved
remains property of public dominion. The character of public
property is not affected by possession or even a Torrens Title in
favor of private persons (Palanca v. Commonwealth, GR
46373, Jan. 29, 1940)
Palanca v. Commonwealth - G.R. No. 46373
FACTS: On the 17th of July 1919 Carlos Palanca obtained a decision from the Court of
First Instance of Bulacan for the registration of 4 parcels of land, each adjacent to the
others and separated only among them by some waterways called “esteros”. Before the
decision is read, the government through the fiscal general presented a petition for
reopening of the case to check on the existence of “esteros” and rivers that are navigable
in the terrain, with the intention of setting/including the said circumstance in the map and
so that it be excluded from the registration. The Court denied this petition because they
consider it unnecessary. Despite its presence in the terrain, the registration of these will
not affect the rights of propriety of the Insular Government or the public use of the said
waterways, which will always remain safe with article 39 of the Law Register of Propriety.

Over 30 years later the Government of the Islands of the Philippines presented the
current action against Carlos Palanca claiming that he is illegally occupying portions of
the Viray River and Sapang Sedaria “estero’, which are navigable and was asked that he
be obliged to open it, and leave it in its primitive state. The court discontinues this action;
but elevated it to the Court of Appeals.

The Court of Appeals declared that the said River Viray and Sapang Sedaria “estero’ are
of the possession and use of the public and that the right acquired by Carlos Palanca
over the land in which the waterways are located does not affect the right of the State
over them, as goods destined for public use. Carlos Palanca in his turn elevated an
appeal through “certiorari” to this decision of the Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court.
ISSUE:
What is the status of the river and estero?

HELD:
The river and the “estero” being navigable, useful for
commerce, the navigation and fishing, have the character of
public possession and its legal condition in this sense has not
been affected by the possession of Carlos Palance, whenever
has been the time of this possession, because it does not admit
any prescription against the State over goods of public use.

DOCTRINE: A private person may not acquire ownership of a

property of public dominion (such as navigable waters) through
prescription or even by virtue of a Torrens title.
***As property of public dominion, the Roppongi lot is outside
the commerce of man. The fact that it has not been used for a
long time does not automatically convert it to patrimonial
property. The conversion happens only if the abandonment is
definite and upon a formal declaration on the part of the
government to withdraw it from public use. (Laurel v. Garcia,
GR 92013, 1990)

The executive and possibly the Legislative Departments have

the authority and the power to make the declaration. (Natividad
v. Director of Lands, 37 O.G. 2905)
Property of Public Dominion
Kinds:
- For Public Use – may be used by anybody, and not limited to
privileged individuals. It includes roads, canals, rivers, torrents,
ports and bridges constructed by the State, banks, shores,
roadsteads and others of similar character.

Canals – artificial waterways designed for navigation or for

irrigating or draining land.

Shores – portion of the land bordering the sea and which is

subject to the ebb and flow of the waters.

Roadstead – a place less sheltered or enclosed than a harbor.

Torrent – amount of water which in case of heavy rain gathers

in deep places or canals where it is supposed to flow afterwards
(420, Civil Code)
***The term “ports” includes seaports and airports. The MIAA
Airport Lands and Buildings constitute a “port” constructed by
the State. Under Article 420 of the Civil Code, the same are
properties of public dominion and thus owned by the State.
(MIAA v. CA, GR 155650)

Examples of “and others of similar character” are:

a. Public streams; natural beds of rivers; river channels and
water of rivers; creeks and “esteros”;
b. Accretions to the shores of the sea by action of the water;
c. Submerged lands and reclaimed lands;
d. Lands that disappeared into the sea by natural erosion due
to the ebb and flow of the tide;
e. Foreshore lands; when the sea moved towards an estate
and the tide invaded it, the invaded property becomes
foreshore land and passes to the realm of the public domain
and cannot be subject to free patent (Rep. v. CA, GR
100709, August 15, 2007)
***The mere reclamation of certain foreshore land and
submerged areas by a government agency like the Public
Estate Authority does not convert these inalienable natural
resources of the State into alienable or disposable lands of the
public domain. In the hands of the government agency tasked
and authorized to dispose of alienable and disposable lands of
public domain, these lands are still public, not private lands.
There must be a law or presidential proclamation officially
classifying these reclaimed lands as alienable or disposable
and open to disposition or concession. (Chavez v. Public
Estates Authority, GR 133250, May 6, 2003)
Foreshore Land - a strip of land that lies between the high and
low water marks and that is alternatively wet and dry according
to the flow of the tide.

De Facto Case of Eminent Domain or Natural Expropriation

- It is the expropriation resulting from the actions of nature as in
a case where land becomes part of the sea. The owner loses
his property in favor of the State without any compensation
(Republic v. CA, Morato, GR 100709, Nov. 1997)

If a river is capable in its natural state of being used for

commerce, it is navigable in fact, and therefore, becomes a
public river. (Taleon v. Secretary of Public Works, GR L-24281)
2) Property for Public Service

- May be used only by authorized persons.

- All public buildings constructed by the State for its offices
and functionaries belong to this class (Baguio Citizen’s
Action v. City Council, GR L-27247, April 20, 1983)

3) Property for the development of National Wealth

General Rule: All natural resources belong to the state and

are not subject to alienation (CONST, ART. XII, Sec. 2)

Exception: Public Agricultural Land

Note: Before public agricultural land is made available for

disposition they are property of public domain for the
development of national wealth.
***The charging of fees to the public does not determine the
character of the property, whether it is of public dominion or not.
Article 420 defines property of public dominion as one “intended
for public use”. Even if the government collects toll fees, the
road is still “intended for public use” if anyone can use it under
the same terms and conditions as the rest of the public. (MIAA
v. CA, GR 155650, July 20, 2006).

Distinction between Government Lands and Public Lands

The term “government lands” is broader in scope. It includes
lands devoted to public use or service, ass well as public lands
before and after they are made available for private
appropriation and also patrimonial lands. While “public land” is
merely a part of government lands and used to describe
national domain (De Leon).
PROPERTY OF PRIVATE OWNERSHIP

Kinds:

1) Property owned by the State and its political subdivisions in

their private capacity and is known as patrimonial property
(421-424); and

2) Property belonging to private persons, either individually or

collectively (425)
Patrimonial Property of the State

1. Property of the State owned in a private or proprietary

capacity; and
2. Property of public dominion, when no longer intended for
public use or public service, shall form part of the patrimonial
property. (422)

Note: Art. 422 is not self-executing and cannot be inferred from

non-use alone. There must be a formal declaration by the
executive or possibly the legislative department that the
property of the State is no longer needed for public use or for
pulic service before the same can be classified as patrimonial
or private property of the State (Manila Lodge v. CA, GR L-
41001, September 30, 1976).

The State has the same rights over this kind of property as a
private individual in relation to his own private property.
Patrimonial Properties
Characteristics

- Patrimonial Properties may be acquired by private

individuals or corporations through prescription. (1113)
- May be Disposed by the State
- It exists for the State to support the attainment of economic
needs.
- It can be the object of ordinary Contract.
Property of Political Subdivisions

1. Property for public use – roads, streets, squares, fountains,

public waters, promenades and public works for public
service paid for by the LGUs; they cannot be alienated or
acquired by prescription. (enumeration in 424 is not
exclusive)

2. Patrimonial Property – All other properties possessed by

LGUs including property for public service without prejudice
to provisions of special laws; they may be alienated and
acquired by others through prescription.

***When a property is owned by a political subdivision in its

public and governmental capacity, the Congress has absolute
control. But if the property is owned in its private or proprietary
capacity, it is patrimonial and Congress has no absolute control.
The municipality cannot be deprived of it without due process
and payment of just compensation. (Rabuco v. Villegas, 1974)
Articles 423 and 424 speak of property for public use, indicating
that property for public service is patrimonial. However, the
Supreme Court, in one case categorically stated that “the court
is not inclined to hold that municipal property held and devoted
to public service is in the same category as ordinary private
property. The classification of municipal property devoted for
distinctly governmental purposes as public, under the Law of
Municipal Corporations was considered as a special law in the
context of Art. 424 of the Civil Code (Province of Zamboanga
Del Norte v. City of Zamboanga, GR L-24440, March 28, 1963)

Properties of public dominion devoted to public use are outisde

the commerce of men and cannot be disposed of or leased by
the LGU to private persons. LGUs have no authority to control
or regulate the use of public properties, unless specific authority
is vested upon them by Congress. (Macasiano v. Diokno, GR
97764, August 10, 1992)
PROPERTY OF PRIVATE OWNERSHIP

Collective ownership includes co-ownership and ownership by

corporations, partnerships, and other juridical entities which are
allowed under the law to acquire and possess property of all
kinds.

A possessory information inscribed in the Registry of Property

showing possession by private persons and their predecessors
since time immemorial demonstrates prima facie that the
possessors of the land to which it refers are the owners thereof.
(Querubin v. Alconcel, GR L-23050, September 18, 1975)
OWNERSHIP
 Ownership

It is the independent and general right of a person to control a

thing particularly in his possession, enjoyment, disposition, and
recovery, subject to no restrictions, except those imposed by
the State or private persons, without prejudice to the provisions
of the law.

Note: Ownership and possession are two distinct legal

concepts.
Kinds of Ownership:

- Full onwership (dominium or jus in re propia) – includes all

the rights of an owner.
- Naked ownership (nuda proprietas) – the bare title to
property; where the right to the use and fruits has been
denied.
- Beneficial ownership/Usufruct – right to enjoy the use and
fruits of a property. Beneficial use, ownership or interest in
property or the right to its enjoyment in one person, while
legal title is in another. (Naked+Beneficial = Full Ownership)
- Sole Ownership – one where the ownership is vested in only
one person
- Co-ownership – when the ownership is vested in two or
more persons.
 OWNERSHIP
Subject Matter

1. Thing – usually refers to corporeal property.

2. Right – whether real or personal, is classified as incorporeal
property.

Rights of an Owner under Article 428:

1. Right to enjoy
2. Right to dispose
3. Right to recover or vindicate
7 attributes of ownership

1. Jus Possidendi – possession.

2. Jus Utendi – use and enjoy, to exclude others from enjoying.
3. Jus Fruendi – Fruits. 544 – possessor in good faith, 566 -
usufructuary,1676 – lessee of agricultural land, 432 –
antichretic creditor.
4. Jus Accessiones – accessories. General rule: all accessions
and accessories are included in the oblication to deliver a
determinate thing although not mentioned (1166)
5. Jus Abutendi – right to abuse or even destroy/consume a
thing by its use, subject to provisions of law.
6. Jus Dispodendi – Destoy, Alienate, Transform, Encumber,
Not to dispose.
7. Jus Vindicandi – right of action against the holder and
possesor of the thing or right in order to recover it
 OWNERSHIP
Characteristics:
1. Elastic – powers may be reduced, and later recovered.
2. General – right to make use of all possibilities of utility.
3. Perpetuity – ownership lasts as long as the thing exists.
Cannot be extinguished by non-use but only by adverse
possession.
4. Independence – it exists without necessity of any other right.
5. Exclusive – there can only be one ownership (even if there
are many owners, there is still only one ownership)
Limitations
1. General by State (police power, taxation, eminent domain)
2. By the Owner.
3. Specific limitations imposed by law.
4. Inherent limitations arising from conflict with other rights
.such as those which take place in accession continua.
5. Limitations imposed by the Party Transmitting the property
either by contract or by will.
What is the right to accession?
The ownership of property gives the right by accession to
everything which is produced thereby, or which is incorporate or
attached thereto whether naturally or artificially.

With respect to the produce of the property, to the owner

belongs the natural fruits (spontaneous products of the soil),
industrial fruits (those produced by land by cultivation or labor)
and civil fruits (the rental income of buildings and lands)

With respect to immovable properties, the owners of lands

adjoining the banks of rivers belongs the accretion that they
gradually receive from the effects of the current of the water.
The owners of estates adjoining ponds, lagoons do not acquire
the land left fry by the natural decrease of the waters or those
lost in extraordinary floods. Whenever a river, changing its
course by natural causes, opens a new bed through a private
estate, this bed shall become of public dominion.
What are the kinds of accession?

ACCESSION DISCRETA or the rights pertaining to the owner of a thing

over everything which is produced thereby such as natural, industrial and
civil fruits

ACCESSION CONTINUA or the right pertaining to the owner of a thing

over everything which is incorporated or attached thereto either naturally
or artificially

ACCESSION INDUSTRIAL or which takes place in case of building,

planting or sowing

ACCESSION NATURAL which may be through:

ALLUVION or the ACCRETION which lands adjoining the banks of rivers
gradually receive from the effects of the current of the river

AVULSION or the accretion which takes place whenever the current of a

river, creek or torrent segregates from an estate on its bank a known
portion of a land and transfers it to another estate
AVULSION
the sudden separation of land from one property and its
attachment to another, especially by flooding or a change in the
course of a river.

ACCRETION
By law, accretion - the gradual and imperceptible deposit made
through the effects of the current of the water- belongs to the
owner of the land adjacent to the banks of rivers where it forms.
The drying up of the river is not accretion. Hence, the dried-up
river bed belongs to the State as property of public dominion,
not to the riparian owner, unless a law vests the ownership in
some other person. (G.R. No. 160453, November 12, 2012)
(434)REQUISITES IN AN ACTION TO RECOVER PROPERTY

Article 434 is based upon jurisprudence that in an action to

recover, the person who claims that he has better right to
property must satisfactorily prove both ownership and identity
(Pang-oden v. Leonen, GR 138939, 2006)

1. Proof of Identity of the Property – He must fix the identity

of the land claimed by describing the location, area, and
boundaries thereof. Failure to prove the boundaries of the
land – the action to recover will necessarily fail (Santiago v.
Santos, GR L-20241, November 22, 1974)

2. Proof of Title – In an action to recover, the plaintiff must

rely on the strength of his title and not on the weakness of
the defendant’s claim (CIVIL CODE, ART 434)
Reasons:

a) There is a possibility that neither the plaintiff nor the

defendant is the true owner of the property.
b) The one in possession is presumed to be the owner, and he
cannot be obliged to show or prove a better title.
c) The possessor in the concept of an owner is presumed to be
in good faith. He who relies on the existence of a fact should
prove that fact. (PARAS)

Note: If claims of both plaintiff and defendant are weak,

judgment must be for the defendant, for the latter, being in
possession, is presumed to be the owner, and cannot be
obliged to show or prove a better title (Santos v. Espinosa, GR
8574, Dec. 27, 1913)
 Principle of Self-Help

The owner has the right to exclude any person from the
enjoyment and disposal of the property by the use of such force
as may be reasonably necessary to repel or prevent actual or
threatened unlawful physical invasion or usurpation of his
property (429)

Requisites:
-Reasonable Force;
-Owner or lawful possessor is the person who will exercise;
-Actual or threatened physical invasion or usurpation; and
-No Delay in one’s exercise
At the time of an actual or threatened dispossession, or
immediately after the dispossession. Once delay has taken
place, even if excusable, the owner or lawful possessor must
resort to judicial process for the recovery of the property.
(433,536) (DE LEON)
Doctrine of Incomplete Privilege or State of Necessity (432)

It authorizes the destruction of a property which is lesser in

value to avert the danger poised to another property, the value
of which is much greater. (Paras)

Basis: There is no unlawful aggression when a person or group

of persons act pursuant to the right given in a state of necessity.

Article 342 is based on what is known as the state of necessity,

a justifying circumstance recognized in the Revised Penal Code
(RPC,Art. 11) but which does not also exempt the offender from
civil liability. It likewise embodies the principle of “the least
evil”rule, i.e., that as between two evils, one is justified in
choosing the lesser evil. (De Leon)

Note: It is also for the purpose of protecting the actor himself or

another person at the expense of the owner of the property who
has no part in the state of necessity.
Doctrine of Incomplete Privilege or State of Necessity (432)

The owner of the sacrificial property is obliged to tolerate the

act of destruction but is entitled to reimbursement by all those
who benefitted through the act or event. (432)

Basis of Reimbursement: The benefit derived

Requisites: (ID)
1. Interference necessary to avert an imminent and threatened
danger to the actor or a third person
2. Damage to another is much greater than damage to
property (De Leon)

EXAMPLES: The attacking animal, belonging to another, may

be killed by the victim; a house in the path of a fire may be
demolished; and a dike may be destroyed at one point to
prevent a flood over other places. (TOLENTINO)
General Rule: A person cannot interfere with the right of
ownership of another (DE LEON)

Exception: Doctrine of Incomplete Privilege or State of

Necessity (432)

Note: A third person who is not the possessor may repel the
unlawful aggression on a property owned by another. In such
event, he is acting as negotiorum gestor. The owner or
possessor must indemnify him for injuries sustained while
exercising such right (429)

Negotiorum gestio (Latin for "management of business") is a

form of spontaneous voluntary agency in which an intervenor or
intermeddler, the gestor, acts on behalf and for the benefit of a
principal, but without the latter's prior consent.
Correlation:

Art. 11 of the RPC on self-defense include not only defense to a

man’s person, but also that of his rights to property. Thus, the
doctrine of self-help can be applied in criminal law.

Acts in a state of necessity are different from defense against

unlawful aggression or defense against dangerous objects.
If the danger comes from another person’s property, and the
force is employed against it, the case is one of defense against
danger. But if another’s property is used to avert danger not
arising from it, the act is essentially one in a state of necessity;
in other words, it is for the purpose of protecting the actor
himself or another person at the expense of the owner of the
property who has no part in the state of necessity.
 Rule on the Deprivation of Property

If the deprivation is in the exercise of the power of eminent

domain, no person shall be deprived of his property except by
competent authority and for public use and always upon
payment of just compensation (CIVIL CODE, Art. 435)

The ownership of the property is transferred upon payment. If

conditional, ownership reverts to the original owner when the
property is no longer needed for the purpose for which it was
expropriated. (De Leon)

If condemnation or seizure of property is in the exercise of

police power in the interest of health, safety or security, the
owner thereof shall not be entitled to compensation, unless he
can show that such condemnation or seizure is unjustified (436)
Nuisance

NUISANCE
Art. 694. A nuisance is any act, omission, establishment,
business, condition of property, or anything else which:
(1) Injures or endangers the health or safety of others; or
(2) Annoys or offends the senses; or
(3) Shocks, defies or disregards decency or morality; or
(4) Obstructs or interferes with the free passage of any
public highway or street, or any body of water; or
(5) Hinders or impairs the use of property.

Art. 695. Nuisance is either public or private. A public

nuisance affects a community or neighborhood or any
considerable number of persons, although the extent of the
annoyance, danger or damage upon individuals may be
unequal. A private nuisance is one that is not included in
the foregoing definition.
NUISANCE PER SE
Always a nuisance

NUISANCE PER ACCIDENS

A nuisance only because of the location or other circumstances

PUBLIC NUISANCE
Affects a community or neighborhood or any considerable
number of persons

PRIVATE NUISANCE
That which is not public
ATTRACTIVE NUISANCE DOCTRINE
An attractive nuisance is a dangerous instrumentality or
appliance which is likely to attract children at play

Doctrine: One who maintains on his estate or premises an

attractive nuisance without exercising due care to prevent
children from playing therewith or resorting thereto, is liable to a
child of tender years who is injured thereby even if the child is
technically a trespasser in the premises.

Basis of liability: the attractiveness is an invitation to children

***A swimming pool or water tank isn’t an attractive nuisance for

while it is attractive, it cannot be a nuisance being merely an
imitation of a work of nature. Hence, if small children are
drowned in an attractive water tank of another, the owner is not
liable even if there be no guards in the premises.
(Hidalgo Enterprises Inc. v. Guillermo Balandan)
Hidalgo Enterprises v. Balandan 91 Phil. 488

FACTS: Petitioner Hidalgo Enterprises, Inc. was the owner of

an ice-plant in San Pablo, Laguna. Installed therein were two 9-
feet-deep tanks full of water, with edges barely a foot high from
the surface of the ground. While the compound was fenced, the
tanks themselves were without any kind of fence or top cover.
The plant had a wide gate entrance, usually left open for motor
vehicles, customers, and anyone else to pass and enter the
premises. There was no guard assigned on the gate. At about
noon of April 16, 1948, plaintiff's son, Mario Balandan, an 8-
year old boy, while playing with and in company of other boys of
his age, entered the plant through the gate to take a bath in one
of said tanks. While bathing, Mario sank to the bottom of the
tank, only to be fished out later, already a cadaver, having died
of "asphyxia secondary to drowning."
Both the CFI of Laguna and the CA ruled in favor of Spouses
Balandan. They both took the view that the petitioner
maintained an attractive nuisance (the tanks), and neglected to
adopt the necessary precautions to avoid accidents to persons
entering its premises. It applied the doctrine of attractive
nuisance, of American origin, recognized in this jurisdiction in
Taylor vs. Manila Electric. The principle reason for the doctrine
is that the condition or appliance in question, although its
danger is apparent to those of age, is so enticing or alluring to
children of tender years as to induce them to approach, get on
or use it, and this attractiveness is an implied invitation to such
children.

ISSUE: W/N a water tank is an instrumentality or appliance

considered as an attractive nuisance.
HELD:
The reason why a reservoir of water is not considered an attractive
nuisance was lucidly explained by the Indiana Appellate Court as follows:

“Nature has created streams, lakes and pools which attract children.
Lurking in their waters is always the danger of drowning. Against this
danger children are early instructed so that they are sufficiently presumed
to know the danger; and if the owner of private property creates an
artificial pool on his own property, merely duplicating the work of nature
without adding any new danger… (he) is not liable because of having
created an "attractive nuisance." Anderson vs. Reith-Riley Const. Co.

Therefore, as petitioner's tanks are not classified as attractive nuisance,

the question whether the petitioner had taken reasonable precautions
becomes immaterial. And the other issue submitted by petitioner — that
the parents of the boy were guilty of contributory negligence precluding
recovery, because they left for Manila on that unlucky day leaving their
son under the care of no responsible individual — needs no further
discussion.