2013 PROPERTY (CIVIL LAW REVIEWER) | ARELLANO UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW

Primary Reference: (2) Trees, plants, and growing fruits,

PROPERTY (2008), by Elmer T. Rabuya while they are attached to the land or
form an integral part of an
Secondary Reference: immovable;
AUSL Bar Operations Commission 2013 (3) Everything attached to an immovable
in a fixed manner, in such a way that
Title I it cannot be separated therefrom
CLASSIFICATION OF PROPERTY without breaking the material or
Preliminary Provisions deterioration of the object;
(4) Statues, reliefs, paintings or other
objects for use or ornamentation,
Art. 414. All things which are or may be the
placed in buildings or on lands by the
object of appropriation are considered
owner of the immovable in such a
either:
manner that it reveals the intention to
(1) Immovable or real property; or
attach them permanently to the
(2) Movable or personal property.
tenements;
(5) Machinery, receptacles, instruments
PROPERTY is derived from the Latin word
or implements intended by the owner
proprius, meaning belonging to one or ones
of the tenement for an industry or
own.
works which may be carried on in a
building or on a piece of land, and

Traditionally, therefore, the concept of
which tend directly to meet the needs
property extends only to those things which are
of the said industry or works;
already possessed and found in the possession
(6) Animal houses, pigeon-houses,
of man.
beehives, fish ponds or breeding
places of similar nature, in case their

The Civil Code does not define the term
owner has placed them or preserves
property but simply implies that the concept
them with the intention to have them
refers to things which are susceptible of
permanently attached to the land,
appropriation.
and forming a permanent part of it;
the animals in these places are

Things which cannot, therefore, be subjected
included;
to human control by reason of sheer physical
(7) Fertilizer actually used on a piece of
impossibility are NOT considered as property.
land;
Examples: stars, moon, ocean
(8) Mines, quarries and slug dumps,
while the matter thereof forms part of
In Article 414, most authors in the subject
the bed, and waters either running or
provide for two additional requisites before
stagnant;
considering a thing as property, aside from the
(9) Docks and structures which, though
more general susceptibility to appropriation:
floating, are intended by their nature
and object to remain at a fixed place
(1) utility, or that it can serve as a means
on a river, lake, or coast;
to satisfy human needs; and
(10)Contracts for public works, and
servitudes and other real rights over
(2) substantivity or individuality, or that
immovable property.
the thing must have an autonomous and
separate existence.
Classification of Immovable Properties
1. Immovable by nature par.1 of Article
Chapter 1 415, par. 8 of Article 415;
IMMOVABLE PROPERTY 2. Immovable by incorporation par. 1
of Article 415; par. 2 of Article 415 par. 3
Art. 415. The following are immovable of Article 415;
property: 3. Immovable by destination pars. 4,
(1) Land, buildings, roads and 5, 6, 7 and 9 of Article 415; and
constructions of all kinds adhered to 4. Immovable by analogy or by law
the soil; par. 10 of Article 415.

Notes By: ENGR. JESSIE A. SALVADOR,MPICE http://twitter.com/engrjhez Page 1

 2013 PROPERTY (CIVIL LAW REVIEWER) | ARELLANO UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW

Requisites of Property b. Specific

(1) Appropriability - It is capable of being -Referring to single, unique object
obtained even if not yet actually 10. As to custody of the court
appropriated. a. In custodia legis
(2) Utility - Ability to serve as a means to b. free
satisfy human needs
(3) Substantivity or Individuality - It has a Importance of Classification
separate and autonomous existence - Based on the nature of the thing itself
and is the most important in point of law
Classification of THINGS because of the various legal
1. As to nature consequences following therefrom:
a. Res nullius (1) Applying the rules of acquisitive
Belonging to no one prescription
-wild animals (2) Determining the propriety of the
b. Res communes object of the contracts of
Belonging to everyone pledge, chattel mortgage and
-wind, sunlight, air real estate mortgage
c. Res alicujus (3) For purposes of determining the
Belonging to someone formalities of a donation
- shares of stock (4) In extrajudicial deposit
2. As to mobility (5) In crimes of theft, robbery and
a. Movable/ personal usurpation
-television set (6) For purposes of determining the
b. Immovable/ real venue in remedial law
-land
3. As to ownership Building Is Immovable By Incorporation
a. Public A house (or a building) is immovable by
-sea incorporation. A house (or a building) is
b. Private classified as immovable property by reason of its
-car adherence to the soil on which it is built. Thus, a
4. As to alienability building which is merely superimposed on the
a. Within the commerce of men soil is not a real property.
-residential building
b. Outside the commerce of men N.B.
-public plaza  The Supreme Court explained: A house is
5. As to existence classified as immovable property by reason of
its adherence to the soil on which it is built
a. present (Art. 415, par. 1, Civil Code). This classification
b. future holds true regardless of the fact that the house
6. As to materiality may be situated on land belonging to a
a. Tangible/ corporeal different owner. But once the house is
demolished, as in this case, it ceases to exist
-Paper as such and hence its character as an
b. Intangible/ incorporeal immovable likewise ceases. It should be noted
-Rights or credit that the complaint here is for recovery of
7. As to dependence damages. Biscerra v. Teneza, 6 SCRA 649
(1962)
a. Principal  buildings are always immovable under the
b. Accessory Code. The Court further ruled that the
8. As to substitution prevalent doctrine is that an action for the
a. Fungible annulment or rescission of a sale of real
property does not operate to efface the
-Capable of substitution of same fundamental and prime objective and nature of
kind and quantity the case, which is to recover said real
b. Non-fungible property. It is a real action. Punzalan, Jr. v.
-Incapable of substitution; Identical Vda. De Lacsamana, 121 SCRA 331 (1983)
thing must be given or returned
9. As to nature or definiteness Building treated separately from land
a. Generic A building treated separately from the land on
-Referring to a group or class which it stood is immovable property and the

Notes By: ENGR. JESSIE A. SALVADOR,MPICE http://twitter.com/engrjhez Page 2

 2013 PROPERTY (CIVIL LAW REVIEWER) | ARELLANO UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW

mere fact that the parties to a contract seem to - New Civil Code does NOT define
have dealt with it separate and apart from the immovable or real property but
land on which it stood in no wise changed its enumerates what are considered as
character as immovable property such
- Best example is LAND
N.B. - Must be adhered to soil (Ex. shovelful of
 Possessory rights over said property before land considered personal property)
title is vested on the grantee, may be validly - As explained in Biscerra v. Teneza, a
transmitted or conveyed as in a deed of
mortgage. Prudential Bank v. Panis, 153 SCRA house (or a building) is classified as
390 (1987) immovable property by reason of its
 Publication in a newspaper of general adherence to the soil on which it is built.
circulation was indispensable (to the subject Thus, a building which is merely
building as realproperty). Being admitted that
no such publication was ever made, the superimposed on the soil is not a real
execution sale was void. Ladera v. C.N. Hodges, property.
et al. (CA), 48 Off. Gaz. 5374 (1952) - In BUILDINGS, considered immovable
 Non-acquisition of a preferential lien through provided they are more or less of a
the preliminary writ of attachment is futile. The
Court of Appeals erred when it opined that the permanent structure, adhered to the soil
house should have been levied pursuant to the - Rule is not affected by the fact that the
rules governing the levy of personal property building is erected on a land owned by
In reversing the decision of the CA, the another person
Supreme Court reiterated the ruling in Ladera
v. Hodges. Evangelista v. Alto Surety & Ins. Co., - If the parties so agreed that the building
Inc., 103 Phil. 401 (1958) (or house) is a personal property and a
proper subject of the contract of chattel
Instances Where Building Is Treated As mortgage, they are estopped from
Personal Property: Doctrine of Estoppel; denying the existence of the chattel
mortgage which, as between them, must
N.B. be upheld.
 The trial court upheld the validity of the chattel
mortgage. In sustaining the decision of the N.B.
trial court, the Supreme Court applied the  The duties of a register of deeds in respect to
principle of estoppel because the house in the registration of chattel mortgage are of a
question was treated as personal or movable purely ministerial character; and no provision
property by the parties to the contract of law can be cited which confers upon him
themselves. Navarro v. Pineda, 9 SCRA 631 any judicial or quasi-judicial power to
(1963) determine the nature of any document of
 The Supreme Court, the said Court again which registration is sought as a chattel
applied the principle of estoppel since the mortgage. Standard Oil Co. of New York v.
parties treated the subject house as Jaramillo, G.R. No. L-20329, March 16, 1923
personalty. The Court explained that although
there is no specific statement referring to the
subject house as personal property, yet by
ceding, selling or transferring a property by (2) Trees, plants, and growing fruits, while
way of chattel mortgage (Vicencio and Simeon) they are attached to the land or form an
could only have meant to convey the house as
chattel, or at least, intended to treat the same integral part of an immovable;
as such, so that they should not now be
allowed to make an inconsistent stand by By nature
claiming otherwise. Tumalad v. Vicencio, 41 - Spontaneous products of the soil
SCRA 143 (1971)

By incorporation
-Planted through labor
IMMOVABLE PROPERTY
Growing fruits may exceptionally be treated as
Art. 415. The following are immovable personal property pursuant to the provisions of
property: Article 416(2) of the New Civil Code
(1) Land, buildings, roads and constructions
of all kinds adhered to the soil; GENERAL RULE: Growing crops are
considered REAL PROPERTY

Notes By: ENGR. JESSIE A. SALVADOR,MPICE http://twitter.com/engrjhez Page 3

 2013 PROPERTY (CIVIL LAW REVIEWER) | ARELLANO UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW

EXCEPTION: The moment they are detached or Requisites:

uprooted from the land, they become (1) They must be machinery, receptacles,
PERSONAL PROPERTY. instruments or implements;
(2) They must be placed by the owner of
EXCEPTION TO THE EXCEPTION: In case of the tenement or by his agent;
(3) There must be an industry or work
UPROOTED TIMBER, although no longer
carried in such building or on the piece
attached, still forms an integral part of the of land; and
timber land thus IMMOVABLE. (4) They must tend directly to meet the
needs of said industry or work.
(3) Everything attached to an immovable in a
fixed manner, in such a way that it cannot be N.B.
separated therefrom without breaking the
material or deterioration of the object;  Transportation business is not carried on in a
building or in the compound.
 Machines, etc., must tend directly to meet
N.B. needs of said industry or works. Machines
 Civil Code nowhere requires that the must be ESSENTIAL and PRINCIPAL elements
attachment or incorporation be made by the in the industry. Ex. Machineries of breweries in
owner of the land or immovable himself. liquor factory
 If the parties treat the machinery as chattels,  Paragraph 5 refers to real property by
they are bound by their agreement under the DESTINATION or PURPOSE. If the machinery,
principle of estoppel notwithstanding the fact receptacles, instrument or implements are not
that the machinery may have been attached to placed by the owner of the tenement or by his
an immovable in a fixed manner and may not agent, these properties remain as movables
be separated therefrom without breaking the and are not converted into real properties.
material or deterioration of the object to which  Before movables may be deemed immobilized
it is attached. in contemplation of paragraph 5 of Article 415,
it is necessary that they must be essential
(4) Statues, reliefs, paintings or other objects and principal elements of the industry or
works without which such industry or works
for use or ornamentation, placed in buildings
would be unable to function or carry on the
or on lands by the owner of the immovable in industrial purpose for which it was
such a manner that it reveals the intention to established.
attach them permanently to the tenements;  [M]achinery which is movable in its nature only
becomes immobilized when placed in a plant
by the owner of the property or plant, but not
REQUISITES when so placed by a tenant, a usufructuary, or
They must be placed in buildings or on lands by any person having only a temporary right,
the owner of the immovable or by his agent; and unless such person acted as the agent of the
owner. (Davao Sawmill v. Castillo, G.R. No. L-
The attachment must be intended to be
40411, August 7, 1935)
permanent
Effect of separation when no longer used:
Paragraph 3 Paragraph 4
reverts to condition of chattel
CANNOT be separated from CAN BE SEPARATED
immovable without breaking from immovable without
or deterioration breaking or deterioration When separated temporarily but will still
Need not be placed by the Must be placed by the serve industry:
owner (Ladera vs Hodges, owner, or by his agent,
Continues to be immovable
CA, 48 O.G 5374) express of implied

Real property by Real property by (6) Animal houses, pigeon-houses, beehives,

incorporation incorporation and fish ponds or breeding places of similar
destination nature, in case their owner has placed them
or preserves them with the intention to have
them permanently attached to the land, and
(5) Machinery, receptacles, instruments or forming a permanent part of it; the animals in
implements intended by the owner of the these places are included;
tenement for an industry or works which may
be carried on in a building or on a piece of N.B.
land, and which tend directly to meet the  For animals temporarily outside, still
needs of the said industry or works; considered REAL PROPERTY as long as
the INTENT TO RETURN is present
Ex. Homing pigeon

Notes By: ENGR. JESSIE A. SALVADOR,MPICE http://twitter.com/engrjhez Page 4

 2013 PROPERTY (CIVIL LAW REVIEWER) | ARELLANO UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW

(7) Fertilizer actually used on a piece of land; 2. BY INCORPORATION

-attached to an immovable in a fixed
N.B. manner to be an integral part thereof
 Fertilizers still in the barn but wrapped are
still considered PERSONAL PROPERTY,
since not yet actually used.
3. BY DESTINATION
-placed in an immovable for the utility it
(8) Mines, quarries, and slag dumps, while gives
the matter thereof forms part of the bed, and
waters either running or stagnant; 4. BY ANALOGY
- regarded as united to the immovable
- Extracted minerals are already chattels. property by express provision of law
- Slag Dump is the dirt and soil taken
from a mine and piled upon the surface Chapter 2
of the ground MOVABLE PROPERTY
- Water itself as distinguished from
waters is clearly personal property Art. 416. The following things are deemed to
be personal property:
(9) Docks and structures which, though
floating, are intended by their nature and (1) Those movables susceptible of
object to remain at a fixed place on a river, appropriation which are not included in the
lake, or coast; preceding article:
-Ex. cell phone
N.B.
 Floating houses are considered REAL (2) Real property which by any special
PROPERTY is used as residence, provision of law is considered as personal
considering that the waters are
considered immovables
property:
-Ex. Growing crops for purposes of
(10) Contracts for public works, and Chattel Mortgage Law (Sibal vs. Valdez,
servitudes and other real rights over 50 Phil 512)
immovable property.
(3) Forces of nature which are brought under
N.B. control by science; and
 The piece of paper on which the contract -Ex. Electricty, gas, light
for public has been written is necessarily
PERSONAL PROPERTY, but the contract
itself / right of the contract is REAL
(4) In general, all things which can be
PROPERTY. transported from place to place without
impairment of the real property to which they
REAL RIGHT PERSONAL RIGHT are fixed.
Definite active subject who Definite active subject and -Ex. Machineries not attached to land
has a right against all a definite passive subject
persons generally as an
indefinite passive subject
Object is generally a Object always an Tests of Movable Character
corporeal thing incorporeal thing
Created by mode and title Created by title
Extinguished by the loss or Personal right survives the
1. Test by Exclusion
destruction of the thing subject matter -Whether the property was not
which it is exercised enumerated in Art. 415 (expressio unius
Directed against the whole Directed against a est exclusio alterius)
world (actio in rem, against particular person (actio in
3rd persons) personam)
2. Test by Description
Classes of Immovable or real property -Whether the property can be
(NIDA) transported or carried from place to
place; Whether such change of location
1. BY NATURE can be made without injuring the
-cannot be carried from place to place immovable to which the object may be

Notes By: ENGR. JESSIE A. SALVADOR,MPICE http://twitter.com/engrjhez Page 5

 2013 PROPERTY (CIVIL LAW REVIEWER) | ARELLANO UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW

attached; unless expressly included in certain juridical prerogatives over such property.
Art. 415 The ownership of such properties is in the social
group, whether national, provincial or municipal.
N.B.
 Test by Exclusion is superior. N.B.
 Since the ownership of public dominion
Art. 417. The following are also considered belong to the public in general and not to
the state, the latter may not make them
as personal property:
object of commerce unless they are
properly converted into patrimonial
(1) Obligations and actions which have for property.
their object movables or demandable sums;
and Kinds of Public Dominion
(2) Shares of stock of agricultural, (1) For public use (Art. 420[1])
commercial and industrial entities, although (2) For public service (Art. 420[2]), NCC)
they may have real estate. (3) For the development of national wealth.
(Art. 424[1], NCC)(420)(2), NCC)
N.B.
 Even if the sole property of a corporation N.B.
consists only of real property, a share of  Property is presumed to be State property
stock in said corporation is considered in the absence of any showing to the
personal property (Cedman vs Winslow, 10 contrary. (Regalian Doctrine)
Mass 145)
Art. 420. The following things are property of
Is money considered merchandise? public dominion:
No. In domestic circulation, money is a LEGAL
TENDER, and NOT MERCHANDISE. Those intended for public use, such as
Exception: When attempted to be exported or roads, canals, rivers, torrents, ports and
smuggled, money is considered as merchandise bridges constructed by the State, banks,
or commodity subject to forfeiture. shores, roadsteads, and others of similar
character;
Art. 418. Movable property is either
consumable or non-consumable. To the first Examples:
class belong those movables which cannot Public streams, natural beds of rivers,
be used in a manner appropriate to their river channels, waters of rivers, creeks
nature without their being consumed; to the
second class belong all the others. (2) Those which belong to the State, without
being for public use, and are intended for
CONSUMABLE NON-CONSUMABLE some public service or for the development
This cannot be used Any other kind of movable
according to its nature property
of the national wealth.
without being consumed
As to the intention of parties Art. 421. All other property of the State,
FUNGIBLE NON-FUNGIBLE which is not of the character stated in the
Capable of substitution of Incapable of substitution; preceding article, is patrimonial property.
same kind and quantity Identical thing must be
given or returned
PATRIMONIAL PROPERTY OF THE STATE
- Are those owned by the state NOT
devoted to public use, public service or
Chapter 3
the development of national wealth.
PROPERTY IN RELATION TO WHOM IT
- It is the property owned by the state in
BELONGS
its private or proprietary capacity
- May be acquired by private individuals
Art. 419. Property is either of public or corporations thru prescription
dominion or of private ownership. - May be an object of ordinary contract
PROPERTY OF PUBLIC DOMINION, defined: N.B.
It is not owned by the state but pertains to the  Patrimonial properties may be acquired by
state, which, as territorial sovereign, exercises private individuals or corporations

Notes By: ENGR. JESSIE A. SALVADOR,MPICE http://twitter.com/engrjhez Page 6

 2013 PROPERTY (CIVIL LAW REVIEWER) | ARELLANO UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW

THROUGH PRESCRIPTION (Art. 1113, Art. 425. Property of private ownership,

NCC)
besides the patrimonial property of the State,
provinces, cities, and municipalities,
Art. 422. Property of public dominion, when consists of all property belonging to private
no longer intended for public use or for persons, either individually or collectively.
public service, shall form part of the
patrimonial property of the State.
N.B.
N.B.  Article XII Secs. 7 and 8 of the 1987
 [U]ntil a formal declaration on the part of Constitution explicitly prohibits non-
the Government, through the executive Filipinos from acquiring or holding title to
department or the Legislature, to the private lands or to lands of the public
effect that the land in question is no domain except only by way of legal
longer needed for coast guard service, for succession or if the acquisition was made
public use or for special industries, they by a former natural-born citizen. (Ancheta
continue to be part of the public domain, vs. Guersey-Dalaygon, G.R. No. 139868,
not available for private appropriation or June 8, 2006)
ownership. (Faustino Ignacio v. Director of
Lands, G.R. No. L-12958, May 30, 1960)
 It is not necessary, therefore, that a plaza
Art. 426. Whenever by provision of the law,
be already constructed of- laid out as a or an individual declaration, the expression
plaza in order that it be considered "immovable things or property," or "movable
property for public use. It is sufficient that things or property," is used, it shall be
it be intended to be such. (Manila Lodge
deemed to include, respectively, the things
No. 761 v. CA, G.R. No. L-41012, September
30, 1976) enumerated in Chapter 1 and Chapter 2.

Art. 423. The property of provinces, cities, Whenever the word "muebles," or
and municipalities is divided into property "furniture," is used alone, it shall not be
for public use and patrimonial property. deemed to include money, credits,
commercial securities, stocks and bonds,
Art. 424. Property for public use, in the jewelry, scientific or artistic collections,
provinces, cities, and municipalities, consist books, medals, arms, clothing, horses or
of the provincial roads, city streets, carriages and their accessories, grains,
municipal streets, the squares, fountains, liquids and merchandise, or other things
public waters, promenades, and public which do not have as their principal object
works for public service paid for by said the furnishing or ornamenting of a building,
provinces, cities, or municipalities. except where from the context of the law, or
the individual declaration, the contrary
All other property possessed by any of them clearly appears.
is patrimonial and shall be governed by this
Code, without prejudice to the provisions of Title II
special laws. OWNERSHIP
Chapter 1
N.B. OWNERSHIP IN GENERAL
 It is evident that the movable and
immovable property of a municipality,
necessary for governmental purpose, may OWNERSHIP Independent and general right
not be attached and sold for the payment of a person to control a thing particularly in his
of a judgment against the municipality. possession, enjoyment, disposition, and
The supreme reason for this rule is the
character of the public use to which such
recovery. Subject to no restriction except those
kind of property is devoted. (Vda. de Tan imposed by the state of private persons, without
Toco v. Municipal Council of Iloilo (GR. No. L- prejudice.
24950, March 25, 1926)
 In administering the patrimonial property
of municipalities, the municipal council
TITLE that which constitutes a just cause of
occupies, for most purposes, the position exclusive possession or which is the foundation
of a board of directors of a private of ownership of property.
corporation. (Mendoza v. De Leon, G.R.
No. L-9596, February 11, 1916)
Kinds of Ownership
1. Full - includes all rights of owner

Notes By: ENGR. JESSIE A. SALVADOR,MPICE http://twitter.com/engrjhez Page 7

 2013 PROPERTY (CIVIL LAW REVIEWER) | ARELLANO UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW

2. Naked right to use and fruits has been

denied Jus fruendi
3. Sole vested in only one person the right to enjoy the fruits;
4. Co-Ownership vested in two or more
owners; concept of co-ownership is Jus abutendi
unity of the property and plurality of the the right to consume the thing by its use; and
subjects
Jus possidendi
Art. 427. Ownership may be exercised over the right to posses.
things or rights.
Jus disponendi
Art. 428. The owner has the right to enjoy the right to dispose (D-A-T-E)
and dispose of a thing, without other Destroy, Alienate, Transform, Encumber
limitations than those established by law.
Jus vindicandi
The owner has also a right of action against the right to vindicate
the holder and possessor of the thing in (pursuit and recovery)
order to recover it.
Actions to Recover Ownership and
Possession: REAL PROPERTY

The Civil Code does NOT define ownership.
Instead, the Code simply enumerates the rights 1. Accion Interdictal
which are included therein, as follows: Summary action to recover physical
possession, and not juridical possession
1. Right to enjoy the property (Art. 428, nor ownership.
par. 1, NCC); Right to construct any
works or make any plantations and a. Forcible Entry (detentacion)
excavations on the surface or Action for recovery of material/physical
subsurface of the land (Art. 437, NCC); possession was deprived thereof by
Right to hidden treasure found in the force, intimidation, strategy, threat or
owners property (Art. 438, NCC); Right stealth (F-I-S-T-S).
to accessions. (Art. 440, NCC)
b. Unlawful Detainer (desahuico)
2. Right to exclude any person from Possession by a landlord, vendor,
enjoyment and disposal of the property vendee or other person of any land or
(Art. 429, NCC); Right to enclose or building is being unlawfully withheld
fence the land or tenement (Art. 430, after the expiration or termination of the
NCC); (MOST IMPORTANT) right to hold possession, by virtue of any
contract.

3. Right to dispose the property (Art. 428, FORCIBLE ENTRY UNLAWFUL ENTRY
par. 1, NCC); Right to recover the When unlawful
Possession was unlawful Possession was lawful
property from any holder or possessor from the beginning (ab initio) from beginning but became
(Art. 428, par. 2, NCC); Right to demand because of F-I-S-T-S unlawful afterwards
indemnity for damages suffered due to As to filing of complaint
lawful interference by a third person to Plaintiff must allege and Plaintiff need not been in
prove that he was in prior prior physical possession
avert an imminent danger (Art. 432,
physical possession
NCC); the right to just compensation in As to reckoning date of 1-year prescription
case of eminent domain (Art. 435, Date of actual entry Date of last demand
NCC);
2. Accion publiciana
Rights of Person Over His Property Plenary action to recover the better right
The right to enjoy, which includes: of possession or plenaria de posesion.

Jus utendi Prescriptive period to bring an action for

the right to use; better right of possession except in

Notes By: ENGR. JESSIE A. SALVADOR,MPICE http://twitter.com/engrjhez Page 8

 2013 PROPERTY (CIVIL LAW REVIEWER) | ARELLANO UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW

cases of forcible entry and unlawful subject to the same characteristics,

detainer: 10 years powers, burdens, etc, as when held
by the previous owner. Ex. tradition.
Accion Interdictal Accion Publiciana
Possession de facto Possession de jure
Mode Cause
3. Accion Reivindicatoria Original Modes
Action to recover ownership over real Occupation Condition of being without
known owner
property.
Work which includes Creation, discovery or
intellectual creation invention
Prescriptive period: Derivative Modes
10 years (ordinary prescription) Law Existence of required
requires good faith and just title. conditions
Tradition Contract of the parties
Donation Contract of the parties
30 years (extraordinary prescription) Prescription Possession in the concept
does not require good faith and just title of the owner.
Succession Death
Requisites:
o Identity of the property Limitations
o Plaintiffs title to the property Imposed by the State (e.g. police power, power
of taxation, power of eminent domain)
Actions to Recover Ownership and
Possession: PERSONAL PROPERTY Police Power inherent power of the state
that may limit property rights. It is based on
REPLEVIN recovery of personal property two legal maxims:
(Rule 60, RoC)
Sic utere tuo et alienum non laedas (which
REAL RIGHT autonomous power to derive means so as to use your property without
directly from an appropriate thing certain injuring others)
economic advantages, independently of
Salus populi est suprema lex (which means
whoever should be the possessor of the thing. the welfare of the people is the supreme law).
Its fundamental purpose is securing the general
PERSONAL RIGHT power to demand of welfare, comfort and convenience of the people.
another as definite passive subject the fulfillment
of a prestation to give, to do or not to do. N.B.
 NOT POLICE POWER BUT EMINENT
Modes of Acquiring Ownership DOMAIN: There is no reasonable relation
between the setting aside of at least six
All rights are acquired by virtue of certain facts. (6) percent of the total area of an private
They are called Modes of Acquiring Ownership, cemeteries for charity burial grounds of
in a general sense, those juridical facts deceased paupers and the promotion of
recognized by law as capable of giving rise to health, morals, good order, safety, or the
general welfare of the people. The
the right of ownership in a person. ordinance is actually a taking without
compensation of a certain area from a
The Modes of Acquiring Ownership May Be private cemetery to benefit paupers who
Classified Into: are charges of the municipal corporation.
Instead of building or maintaining a public
1. Original Modes those which produce cemetery for this purpose, the city passes
the acquisition of ownership the burden to private cemeteries. City
independent of any pre-existing right Government of Quezon v. Judge Ericta, G.R.
of another person and, therefore, No. L-34915, June 24, 1983.
necessarily free from any burdens
or encumbrances. Ex. occupation.
DOCTRINE OF SELF-HELP
2. Derivative modes those which
produce the acquisition of property Art. 429. The right of the owner or lawful
based on right previously held by possessor to exclude any person from the
another person and, therefore, enjoyment and disposal of the property by

Notes By: ENGR. JESSIE A. SALVADOR,MPICE http://twitter.com/engrjhez Page 9

 2013 PROPERTY (CIVIL LAW REVIEWER) | ARELLANO UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW

the use of such force as may be necessary to injured, because the inconvenience arising from said
use can be considered as a mere consequence of
repel or prevent actual or threatened
community life. (Spouses Custodio v. CA, G.R. No.116100,
unlawful physical invasion or usurpation of February 9, 1996)
his property.

Requisites: DOCTRINE OF STATE OF NECESSITY

1. Person defending must be the owner or Doctrine of Incomplete Privilege
the lawful possessor.
2. Force used is reasonably necessary to Art. 432. The owner of a thing has no right to
repel, prevent an invasion or usurpation prohibit the interference of another with the
of his property; otherwise he shall be same, if the interference is necessary to
liable for damages; avert an imminent danger and the threatened
3. No delay; and damage, compared to the damage arising to
4. Actual or threatened physical invasion the owner from the interference, is much
or usurpation greater. The owner may demand from the
person benefited indemnity for the damage
N.B. to him.
 This can only be exercised at the time of actual
or threatened dispossession; unavailing when
possession has already been lost. Thus, Requisites:
possessor is entitled to remain on the property 1. Interference is necessary; and
until the owner or a person having a better 2. Damage to another is much greater than
right ejects the former thru a judicial process.
damage to property
German Management Services v. CA, G.R. No.
76217, September 14, 1989 3. Imposed by the owner (e. g. lease)
4. Imposed by the grantor (e.g. prohibition
Art. 430. Every owner may enclose or fence to the donees from partitioning the
his land or tenements by means of walls, property not exceeding 20 years.
ditches, live or dead hedges, or by any other
means without detriment to servitudes N.B.
 The right to enclose or fence in Article 430 is
constituted thereon. also subject to the limitation that it should not
work detriment to the servitudes constituted
Art. 431. The owner of a thing cannot make therein.
use thereof in such a manner as to injure the  Must be legitimately exercised and must not be
attended with bad faith. Thus, if the lot owner
rights of a third person.
fenced his property for the purpose of evicting
its occupant whose lease contract had already
N.B. expired, the lot owner is liable to said
 [T]he continued occupation by petitioners of occupant for damage.
the two lots belonging to private  The existence of this kind of servitude works
respondents, despite the expiration of the as a limitation upon the right of the owner of
lease contracts over the same, petitioners the lower tenement to enclose his property
had become undesirable
with walls or other means if the same will
lessees. However, it was improper for
private respondents to resort to fencing their
prevent the passage of the water which
properties in order to remove petitioners naturally falls from the higher tenement.
from the premises in the light of the clear
provision of Article 536 of the Civil Code on Art. 433. Actual possession under claim of
the matter. Villafuerte v. Court of Appeals, G.R.
No. 134239, May 26, 2005
ownership raises disputable presumption of
ownership. The true owner must resort to judicial
process for the recovery of the property.
EXCEPTION:
State of Necessity Article 432 Art. 434. In an action to recover, the property
As a general rule, therefore, there is no cause of action must be identified, and the plaintiff must rely on
for acts done by one person upon his own property in a the strength of his title and not on the weakness
lawful and proper manner, although such acts of the defendant's claim.
incidentally cause damage or an unavoidable loss to
another, as such damage or loss is damnum absque
injuria. When the owner of property makes use thereof Art. 435. No person shall be deprived of his
in the general and ordinary manner in which the property except by competent authority and for
property is used, such as fencing or enclosing the same public use and always upon payment of just
as in this case, nobody can complain of having been
compensation.

Notes By: ENGR. JESSIE A. SALVADOR,MPICE http://twitter.com/engrjhez Page 10

 2013 PROPERTY (CIVIL LAW REVIEWER) | ARELLANO UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW

Art. 438. Hidden treasure belongs to the

Should this requirement be not first complied owner of the land, building, or other property
with, the courts shall protect and, in a proper on which it is found.
case, restore the owner in his possession.
Nevertheless, when the discovery is made on
Art. 436. When any property is condemned or the property of another, or of the State or any
seized by competent authority in the interest of its subdivisions, and by chance, one-half
of health, safety or security, the owner thereof shall be allowed to the finder. If the
thereof shall not be entitled to finder is a trespasser, he shall not be entitled
compensation, unless he can show that such to any share of the treasure.
condemnation or seizure is unjustified.
If the things found be of interest to science
Eminent Domain of the arts, the State may acquire them at
The superior right of the State to own certain their just price, which shall be divided in
properties under certain conditions, and is a conformity with the rule stated.
limitation on the right of ownership, with
payment of just compensation. Art. 439. By treasure is understood, for legal
purposes, any hidden and unknown deposit
Requisites of eminent domain: of money, jewelry, or other precious objects,
1. Taking must be done by competent the lawful ownership of which does not
authority appear.
2. Private property for public use
3. Payment of just compensation
4. Observance of due process of law. HIDDEN TREASURE
Imposed by law (e. g. easements,
state of necessity) GENERAL RULE: Hidden treasure belongs to
the owner of the land, buildings or other property
SURFACE RIGHT on which it is found.

Art. 437. The owner of a parcel of land is the EXCEPTION: If finder is not the owner of the
owner of its surface and of everything under land, finder is entitled to of the treasure if:
it, and he can construct thereon any works 1. Made in the property of another, or of
or make any plantations and excavations the state or any of its subdivisions;
which he may deem proper. 2. Made by chance;
3. Finder is not a trespasser/agent of the
Limitations: landowner;
1. Servitudes; 4. Finder is not a co-owner of the property
2. Special laws and ordinances; where it is found; and
3. Reasonable requirements of aerial 5. Finder is not married under the absolute
navigation; and community or the conjugal partnership
4. Rights of third persons (Art. 431, NCC) system (otherwise his share belongs to
the community).
Restriction includes principles on human
relations and the prevention of injury to the EXCEPTION TO THE EXCEPTION: If the finder
rights of third persons (Art. 19, 431). is a trespasser, he shall not be entitled of any
share.
Rights over the land are indivisible, and the land N.B.
itself cannot be half agricultural and half mineral.  If the ownership of the treasure is known,
but the owner is already dead, the same
The owner of the land is the owner of its surface will not be considered hidden treasure
and subsurface. Thus a party cannot claim and must therefore go to the owners
ownership by acquisitive prescription of mineral rightful heirs.
land by showing he was in possession of the
land or the surface thereof in the concept of
agricultural land. (Republic v. CA) (Chapter 2: RIGHT OF ACCESSION, skipped)

Notes By: ENGR. JESSIE A. SALVADOR,MPICE http://twitter.com/engrjhez Page 11

 2013 PROPERTY (CIVIL LAW REVIEWER) | ARELLANO UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW

Chapter 3 facie appearance of validity or legal

QUIETING OF TITLE efficacy.

Art. 476. Whenever there is a cloud on title to

N.B.
 In an action to quiet title, the plaintiff need
real property or any interest therein, by reason not be in possession of the property.
of any instrument, record, claim, encumbrance  If the plaintiff in an action for quieting of
or proceeding which is apparently valid or title, however, is in possession of the
effective but is in truth and in fact invalid, property being litigated, the action is
ineffective, voidable, or unenforceable, and imprescriptible.
 The rule that the Statute of Limitations is
may be prejudicial to said title, an action may not available as a defense to an action to
be brought to remove such cloud or to quiet remove a cloud from title can only be
the title. invoked by a complainant when he is in
possession.
An action may also be brought to prevent a
cloud from being cast upon title to real Chapter 3
property or any interest therein. RUINOUS BUILDINGS AND TREES IN
DANGER OF FALLING
Art. 477. The plaintiff must have legal or
equitable title to, or interest in the real property Art. 482. If a building, wall, column, or any other
which is the subject matter of the action. He construction is in danger of falling, the owner
need not be in possession of said property. shall be obliged to demolish it or to execute the
necessary work in order to prevent it from
Art. 478. There may also be an action to quiet falling.
title or remove a cloud therefrom when the
contract, instrument or other obligation has If the proprietor does not comply with this
been extinguished or has terminated, or has obligation, the administrative authorities may
been barred by extinctive prescription. order the demolition of the structure at the
expense of the owner, or take measures to
Art. 479. The plaintiff must return to the insure public safety.
defendant all benefits he may have received
from the latter, or reimburse him for expenses Art. 483. Whenever a large tree threatens to fall
that may have redounded to the plaintiffs in such a way as to cause damage to the land
benefit. or tenement of another or to travellers over a
public or private road, the owner of the tree
Art. 480. The principles of the general law on shall be obliged to fell and remove it; and
the quieting of title are hereby adopted insofar should he not do so, it shall be done at his
as they are not in conflict with this Code. expense by order of the administrative
authorities.
Art. 481. The procedure for the quieting of title
or the removal of a cloud therefrom shall be N.B.
governed by such rules of court as the  MERELY ASSIGNING TASK TO REMOVE
Supreme Court shall promulgate. RUINOUS TREES NOT EXCULPATORY:
As school principal, petitioner is expected
to oversee the safety of the schools
CLOUD (ON TITLE) - is a semblance of title premises. The fact that she failed to see
which appears in some legal form but which is in the immediate danger posed by the dead
fact unfounded. and rotting tree shows she failed to
exercise the responsibility demanded by
her position. Capili v. Spouses Cardaa,
Requisites of Action to Quiet Title G.R. No. 157906, November 02, 2006.
(1) The plaintiff or complainant has a legal
or an equitable title to or interest in the Title III
real property subject of the action; CO-OWNERSHIP
(2) There is a cloud on title to real property
or any interest therein; and Art. 484. There is co-ownership whenever the
(3) The deed, claim, encumbrance or ownership of an undivided thing or right
proceeding claimed to be casting cloud belongs to different persons.
on his title must be shown to be in fact
invalid or inoperative despite its prima

Notes By: ENGR. JESSIE A. SALVADOR,MPICE http://twitter.com/engrjhez Page 12

 2013 PROPERTY (CIVIL LAW REVIEWER) | ARELLANO UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW

In default of contracts, or of special the thing owned in common upon by all partners
provisions, co-ownership shall be governed As to 3rd persons
A co-owner does not A partner usually
by the provisions of this Title. represent the co-ownership represents the partnership
and binds the same
Requisites of Co-Ownership SOURCES OF CO-OWNERSHIP
1. Plurality of subjects 1. law
2. Unity of object 2. contract
3. Recognition of ideal share 3. succession
4. fortuitous event or chance
Dual Nature of Co-Ownership 5. occupancy
1. Ownership over ideal share
2. Joint ownership as a whole Art. 485. The share of the co-owners, in the
N.B. benefits as well as in the charges, shall be
 Once partition or division is effected or proportional to their respective interests.
once the property is subdivided and
distributed among co-owners, the co- Any stipulation in a contract to the contrary
ownership is terminated. shall be void.
 A co-owner cannot claim a definite portion
of a property owned in common. The portions belonging to the co-owners in
 [W]here the transferees of an undivided
portion of the land allowed a co-owner of the co-ownership shall be presumed equal,
the property to occupy a definite portion unless the contrary is proved.
thereof and has not disturbed the same,
for a period too long to be ignored--the N.B.
possessor is in a better condition or right  If A, B, C and D contribute to a property in
(Potior est conditio possidentis). Clearly, the respective manner: 45%, 30% 15%
the plaintiff in this instance is barred from 10%. They cannot agree later that they will
asserting her alleged right over the contribute equally to payment of its taxes
portion subject matter in the instant case nor would they agree to get equal shares
on the ground that their right has been from the fruits thereof. Such stipulation is
lost by laches. Vda. de Cabrera v. Court of void under Art. 485 of Civil Code.
Appeals, G.R. No. 108547, February 3, 1997
Art. 486. Each co-owner may use the thing
LACHES has been defined as the failure or owned in common, provided he does so in
neglect, for an unreasonable and unexplained accordance with the purpose for which it is
length of time, to do that which by exercising intended and in such a way as not to injure
due diligence could or should have been done the interest of the co-ownership or prevent
earlier; it is negligence or omission to assert a the other co-owners from using it according
right within a reasonable time, warranting a to their rights. The purpose of the co-
presumption that the party entitled to assert it ownership may be changed by agreement,
either has abandoned it or declined to assert it. express or implied.
CO-OWNERSHIP PARTNERSHIP N.B.
As to creation  The defendant, therefore, in occupying
May exist without the Created only by reason of with her husband the upper floor of the
necessity of a contract contract said house, did not injure the interests of
As to personality her co-owner, her sister, nor did she
Does not possess a juridical Has the juridical personality prevent the latter from living therein, but
personality distinct from the distinct from each of the merely exercised a legitimate right
co-owners partners pertaining to her as co-owner of the
As to purpose property. Pardell v. Bartolome, G.R. No. L-
Common enjoyment of the Profit from the things or 4656, November 18, 1912.
thing owned in common services contributed
As to duration
Limitations on the Right to Use
Agreement not to divide the No limit as to the time of
property exceeding 10 years existence (1) such use must be in accordance with
is invalid; the purpose for which the thing is
As to effect of death intended;
Death of a co-owner does Death of a partner brings (2) such use must be without prejudice to
not dissolve the co- about the dissolution of
ownership partnership the rights of the other co-owners; and
As to disposal of share
A co-owner may freely A partner has no power of
dispose of his ideal share of disposal unless agreed

Notes By: ENGR. JESSIE A. SALVADOR,MPICE http://twitter.com/engrjhez Page 13

 2013 PROPERTY (CIVIL LAW REVIEWER) | ARELLANO UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW

(3) such use must not be in a manner as to right owned in common and to the taxes.
prevent the other co-owners from using Any one of the latter may exempt himself
the thing according to their own right. from this obligation by renouncing so much
of his undivided interest as may be
N.B. equivalent to his share of the expenses and
 Each co-owner of property held pro
indiviso exercises his rights over the
taxes. No such waiver shall be made if it is
whole property and may use and enjoy the prejudicial to the co-ownership.
same with no other limitation than that he
shall not injure the interests of his co- Art. 489. Repairs for preservation may be
owners, the reason being that until a
division is made, the respective share of
made at the will of one of the co-owners, but
each cannot be determined and every co- he must, if practicable, first notify his co-
owner exercises, together with his co- owners of the necessity for such repairs.
participants joint ownership over the pro Expenses to improve or embellish the thing
indiviso property, in addition to his use
shall be decided upon by a majority as
and enjoyment of the same. Aguilar v. CA,
G.R. No. 76351, October 29, 1993. determined in Article 492.
 The right of enjoyment by each co-owner is
limited by a similar right of the other co- - Right to demand contribution from co-
owners. A co-owner cannot devote common
property to his exclusive use to the prejudice owners inherent for preservation
of the co-ownership. Hence, if the subject is expenses
a residential house, all the co-owners may - Prior notice is required prior to execution
live there with their respective families to the
extent possible. However, if one co-owner of repairs or embellishment
alone occupies the entire house without - Failure of prior notice for repairs may
opposition from the other co-owners, and still be effective,
there is no lease agreement, the other co-
owners cannot demand the payment of - But absence of prior notice for
rent. Conversely, if there is an agreement to embellishment may lose the right to
lease the house, the co-owners can demand recover proportionate share
rent from the co-owner who dwells in the
house. De Guia v. CA, G.R. No. 120864, - A compelled co-owner to contribute
October 8, 2003 proportionally may opt to exercise
renunciation
Art. 487. Any one of the co-owners may bring Art. 490. Whenever the different stories of a
an action in ejectment. house belong to different owners, if the titles
of ownership do not specify the terms under
The term, action in ejectment, not only includes which they should contribute to the
a suit of forcible entry (detentacion) or unlawful necessary expenses and there exists no
detainer (desahucio), but all kinds of actions for agreement on the subject, the following rules
the recovery of possession, including an accion shall be observed:
publiciana and a reinvindicatory action. (1) The main and party walls, the roof and
the other things used in common, shall
- Action must be instituted for all co- be preserved at the expense of all the
owners in proportion to the value of the
owners
story belonging to each;
- This action is also available even (2) Each owner shall bear the cost of
against a co-owner maintaining the floor of his story; the
- While a co-owner may bring an action in floor of the entrance, front door, common
ejectment under Article 487 without the yard and sanitary works common to all,
necessity of joining all the other co- shall be maintained at the expense of all
owners as co- plaintiffs because the suit the owners pro rata;
is deemed to be instituted for the benefit (3) The stairs from the entrance to the first
of all, any adverse judgment cannot story shall be maintained at the expense
of all the owners pro rata, with the
prejudice the rights of the unimpleaded
exception of the owner of the ground
co-owners. However, any judgment of floor; the stairs from the first to the
the court in favor of the co-owner will second story shall be preserved at the
benefit the others. expense of all, except the owner of the
ground floor and the owner of the first
story; and so on successively.
Art. 488. Each co-owner shall have a right to
compel the other co-owners to contribute to
the expenses of preservation of the thing or

Notes By: ENGR. JESSIE A. SALVADOR,MPICE http://twitter.com/engrjhez Page 14

 2013 PROPERTY (CIVIL LAW REVIEWER) | ARELLANO UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW

- The provisions are not applicable to The following acts of the majority are
Republic Act No. 4276 (The considered prejudicial to the co-ownership:
Condominium Act) (1) when the resolution calls for a
substantial change or alteration of the
CONDOMINIUM is an interest in real property common property or of the use to which
consisting of a separate interest in a unit in a it has been dedicated by agreement or
residential, industrial or commercial building and by its nature;
an undivided interest in common directly or (2) when the resolution goes beyond the
indirectly, in the land on which it is located and limit of mere administration or invades
in other common areas of the building. proprietary rights of the co-owners in
violation of Article 491;
Art. 491. None of the co-owners shall, (3) when the majority authorizes lease,
without the consent of the others, make loans or other contracts without security,
alterations in the thing owned in common, exposing the thing to serious danger to
even though benefits for all would result the prejudice of the other co-owners;
therefrom. However, if the withholding of the and
consent by one or more of the co-owners is (4) when the majority refuses to dismiss an
clearly prejudicial to the common interest, administrator who is guilty of fraud or
the courts may afford adequate relief. negligence in his management, or he
does not have the respectability,
Art. 492. For the administration and better aptitude, and solvency required of
enjoyment of the thing owned in common, persons holding such positions.
the resolutions of the majority of the co-
owners shall be binding. Art. 493. Each co-owner shall have the full
ownership of his part and of the fruits and
There shall be no majority unless the benefits pertaining thereto, and he may
resolution is approved by the co-owners who therefore alienate, assign or mortgage it, and
represent the controlling interest in the even substitute another person in its
object of the co-ownership. enjoyment, except when personal rights are
Should there be no majority, or should the involved. But the effect of the alienation or
resolution of the majority be seriously the mortgage, with respect to the co-owners,
prejudicial to those interested in the property shall be limited to the portion which may be
owned in common, the court, at the instance allotted to him in the division upon the
of an interested party, shall order such termination of the co-ownership.
measures as it may deem proper, including
the appointment of an administrator. - Right to alienate a co-owners pro
indiviso share is inherent
Whenever a part of the thing belongs - Alienation or mortgage shall be limited
exclusively to one of the co-owners, and the to the portion as may be allotted to a
remainder is owned in common, the
co-owner
preceding provisions shall apply only to the
- The binding force of a contract must be
part owned in common.
recognized as far as it is legally possible
to do so quando res non valet ut ago,
- The law prohibits the making of
valeat quantum valere potest (when a
alterations in the thing owned in
thing is of no effect as I do it, it shall
common without the consent of all the
have effect as far as [or in whatever
other co-owners
way] it can)
- The law does not clarify the kind of
- no one can give what he does not have
consent necessary for the making of
nemo dat quod non habet.
alterations
- Doctrine of buyer in good faith applies
- The other co-owners can compel the
erring co-owner to undo what has been
N.B.
done at the latters expense (Art. 1168,  [The Court is] not unaware of the principle
NCC) that a co-owner cannot rightfully dispose
of a particular portion of a co-owned
property prior to partition among all the
co-owners. However, this should not

Notes By: ENGR. JESSIE A. SALVADOR,MPICE http://twitter.com/engrjhez Page 15

 2013 PROPERTY (CIVIL LAW REVIEWER) | ARELLANO UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW

signify that the vendee does not acquire

anything at all in case a physically Nevertheless, an agreement to keep the thing
segregated area of the co-owned lot is in
fact sold to him. Since the co-
undivided for a certain period of time, not
owner/vendors undivided interest could exceeding ten years, shall be valid. This term
properly be the object of the contract of may be extended by a new agreement.
sale between the parties, what the vendee
obtains by virtue of such a sale are the A donor or testator may prohibit partition for a
same rights as the vendor had as co-
period which shall not exceed twenty years.
owner, in an ideal share equivalent to the
consideration given under their Neither shall there be any partition when it is
transaction. In other words, the vendee prohibited by law.
steps into the shoes of the vendor as co-
owner and acquires a proportionate No prescription shall run in favor of a co-owner
abstract share in the property held in or co-heir against his co-owners or co-heirs so
common. Spouses Del Campo v. CA, G.R.
No. 108228, February 1, 2001 long as he expressly or impliedly recognizes
 SALE OF CONJUGAL PROPERTY the co-ownership.
WITHOUT CONSENT OF SPOUSE IS VOID:
By express provision of Article 124 of the Causes of Extinguishment of Co-Ownership
Family Code, in the absence of (court) (1) By the merger in one person of all the
authority or written consent of the other
spouse, any disposition or encumbrance
interest of the co-ownership;
of the conjugal property shall be void. (2) By prescription of the thing or right in
 Rules co-ownership under Art.147 of favor of third persons or a co-owner;
Family Code prohibits any of the parties (3) By destruction of the thing or loss of the
to dispose by acts inter vivos their share
in the co-owned property without the
right which is owned in common; and
consent of the other prior to termination (4) By partition of the property owned in
of cohabitation. common.

RIGHT OF LEGAL REDEMPTION GENERAL RULE: No prescription shall lie in

In the nature of a privilege created by law partly favor of co-owner or co-heirs as long as he
for reasons of public policy and partly for the expressly or impliedly recognizes the co-
benefit and convenience of the redemptioner, to ownership.
afford him a way out of what might be a
disagreeable or inconvenient association into EXCEPTION: When co-ownership is
which he has been trust. It is intended to repudiated.
minimize co-ownership by reducing the number
of the participants until the community is done In order that a title may prescribe in favor of
away with. co-owner:
(1) The co-owner has performed unequivocal
Requisites for Exercise of Legal Redemption acts of repudiation amounting to an ouster
(1) There must be a co-ownership; of the other co-owners.
(2) One of the co-owners sold his right to a (2) Such positive acts of repudiation have
stranger; been made known to the other co-owner.
(3) The sale was made before the partition (3) The evidence thereof is clear and
of the co-owned property; convincing
(4) The right of redemption must be
N.B.
exercised by one or more co-owners  Prescription, as a mode of terminating a
within a period of 30 days to be counted relation of co-ownership, must have been
from the time that he or they were preceded by repudiation (of the co-
notified in writing by the vendee or by ownership). The act of repudiation, in turn
is subject to certain conditions: (1) a co-
the co-owner vendor; and owner repudiates the co-ownership; (2)
(5) The vendee must be reimbursed for the such an act of repudiation is clearly made
price of the sale. known to the other co-owners; (3) the
evidence thereon is clear and conclusive;
and (4) he has been in possession
Art. 494. No co-owner shall be obliged to through open, continuous, exclusive; and
remain in the co-ownership. Each co-owner notorious possession of the property for
may demand at any time the partition of the the period required by law. Adille v. Court
thing owned in common, insofar as his share is of Appeals, G.R. No. L-44546, January 29,
concerned. 1988

Notes By: ENGR. JESSIE A. SALVADOR,MPICE http://twitter.com/engrjhez Page 16

 2013 PROPERTY (CIVIL LAW REVIEWER) | ARELLANO UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW

ACQUISITIVE PRESCRIPTION Personal rights pertaining to third persons

Ordinary acquisitive prescription requires against the co-ownership shall also remain
possession of things in good faith and with just in force, notwithstanding the partition.
title for a period of ten (10) years. Without good
faith and just title, acquisitive prescription can Art. 500. Upon partition, there shall be a
only be extraordinary in character which requires mutual accounting for benefits received and
uninterrupted adverse possession for thirty (30) reimbursements for expenses made.
years. Likewise, each co-owner shall pay for
damages caused by reason of his negligence
EXTINCTIVE PRESCRIPTION or fraud.
From the moment one of the co-owners claims
that he is the absolute and exclusive owner of Art. 501. Every co-owner shall, after partition,
the properties and denies the others any share be liable for defects of title and quality of the
therein, the question involved is no longer one of portion assigned to each of the other co-
partition but of ownership and the prescriptive owners.
period will begin to run and may eventually
operate to divest the real owners of their right to - Action for partition is imprescriptible
the property after the lapse of the applicable and cannot be barred by laches
statutory period.
Legal Effects of Partition
Art. 495. Notwithstanding the provisions of (1) The co-ownership is terminated and
the preceding article, the co-owners cannot each co-owner becomes the absolute
demand a physical division of the thing and exclusive owner of the share
owned in common, when to do so would allotted to him. And he shall be deemed
render it unserviceable for the use for which to be in exclusive possession of that
it is intended. But the co-ownership may be portion which has been allotted to him
terminated in accordance with Article 498. even during the entire period that the
co-ownership lasted.
Art. 496. Partition may be made by (2) It shall not prejudice the rights of third
agreement between the parties or by judicial persons, who shall retain the rights of
proceedings. Partition shall be governed by mortgage, servitude, or any other real
the Rules of Court insofar as they are rights belonging to them before the
consistent with this Code. division was made.
(3) Personal rights pertaining to third
Art. 497. The creditors or assignees of the persons against the ownership shall
co-owners may take part in the division of also remain in force.
the thing owned in common and object to its (4) Mutual accounting shall be rendered by
being effected without their concurrence. But the co-owners to each other with regard
they cannot impugn any partition already to benefits and expenses and each co-
executed, unless there has been fraud, or in owner shall pay for damages caused by
case it was made notwithstanding a formal reason of his negligence or fraud. In the
opposition presented to prevent it, without partition among co-heirs, they shall
prejudice to the right of the debtor or reimburse one another for the income
assignor to maintain its validity. and fruits which each one of them may
have received from any property of the
Art. 498. Whenever the thing is essentially estate, for any useful and necessary
indivisible and the co-owners cannot agree expenses made upon such property,
that it be allotted to one of them who shall and for any damage thereto through
indemnify the others, it shall be sold and its malice or neglect.
proceeds distributed. (5) Every co-owner shall be liable for
defects of title and quality of the portion
Art. 499. The partition of a thing owned in assigned to each of the other co-
common shall not prejudice third persons, owners.
who shall retain the rights of mortgage,
servitude, or any other real rights belonging End of Topic for Midterm Purposes
to them before the division was made.

Notes By: ENGR. JESSIE A. SALVADOR,MPICE http://twitter.com/engrjhez Page 17