Property Law Notes
Property Law Notes
Property Law Notes
Definition
The holding of a thing or the enjoyment of a right, whether by material occupation
or by the fact that the thing or right is subjected to the action of our will.
Degrees of Possession
• Grammatical degree– mere holding or having, without any right whatsoever;
• Juridical degree– possession with a juridical title, but not that of an owner;
• Real possessory right – possession with a just title, but not from the true owner;
• Possession with a title of dominium– possession with a just title from the owner.
51
Carlos vs. Republic of the Philippines (G.R. No. 164823, August31, 2005, [468 SCRA
709)
The Court held in Republic vs. Alconaba that the applicant must show that he is in
actual possession of the property at the time of the application, thus:
The law speaks of possession and occupation. Since these words are separated by
the conjunction ["]and["], the clear intention of the law is not to make one synonymous
with the other. Possession is broader than occupation because it includes constructive
possession. When, therefore, the law adds the word occupation, it seeks to delimit the all-
encompassing effect of constructive possession. Taken together with the words open,
continuous, exclusive and notorious, the word occupation serves to highlight the fact that
for an applicant to qualify, his possession must not be a mere fiction. Actual possession of
a land consists in the manifestation of acts of dominion over it of such a nature as a party
would naturally exercise over his own property.
It is clear in the case at bar that the applicant, Maria Carlos, no longer had
possession of the property at the time of the application for the issuance of a certificate of
title. The application was filed in court on December 19, 2001. Teresita Carlos Victoria, the
daughter of Maria Carlos, admitted during the hearing that her mother had sold the
property to Ususan Development Corporation in 1996. They also presented as evidence
the deed of absolute sale executed by and between Maria Carlos and Ususan
Development Corporation on October 16, 1996.
Nonetheless, even if it were true that it was petitioner who had actual possession
of the land at that time, such possession was no longer in the concept of an owner.
Possession may be had in one of two ways: possession in the concept of an owner and
possession of a holder. A possessor in the concept of an owner may be the owner himself
or one who claims to be so. On the other hand, one who possesses as a mere holder
acknowledges in another a superior right which he believes to be ownership, whether his
belief be right or wrong. Petitioner herein acknowledges the sale of the property to
Ususan Development Corporation in 1996 and in fact promised to deliver the certificate of
title to the corporation upon its obtention.
Hence, it cannot be said that her possession since 1996 was under a bona fide
claim of ownership. Under the law, only he who possesses the property under a bona fide
claim of ownership is entitled to confirmation of title.
Ownership is different from possession. A person may be declared the owner, but
he may not be entitled to possession. The possession (in the concept of holder ) may be in
the hands of another, such as a lessee or a tenant.
52
National Power Corporation vs. Campos Jr.(G.R. No. 143643, June 27, 2003)
Possession, under the Civil Code, to constitute the foundation of a prescriptive right,
must be possession under claim of title (enconcepto de dueño), or to use the common law
equivalent of the term, it must be adverse. Acts of possessory character performed by one
who holds by mere tolerance of the owner is clearly not enconcepto de dueño, and such
possessory acts, no matter how long so continued, do not start the running of the period
of prescription.
While a possessor in good faith is one who BELIEVES he is owner, the possessor in
the concept of an owner is one who ACTS as if he is the owner.
OBJECT OF POSSESSION:
Only things and rights susceptible of being appropriated may be the object of
possession.
ART. 527. Good Faith is always presumed, and upon him who alleges bad
faith on the part of a possessor rests the burden of proof.
The character of good faith remains until the possessor is shown to have been aware that
he possesses the thing improperly or wrongfully (presumption of continuity). Possession
in good faith ceases from the moment defects in the possessor’s title are made known to
him, by extraneous evidence or when a complaint for recover is filed.
A possessor may start his possession in good faith but may end up in bad faith.
Constitutom possessorium
- Exists when a person who possesses property as an owner, now possesses it is some
other capacity, as that of a lessee or depositary.
Possession in good faith ceases from the moment defects in the title are made known
to the possessors, by extraneous evidence or by suit for recovery of the property by the
true owner. Whatever may be the cause or the fact from which it can be deduced that the
possessor has knowledge of the defects of his title or mode of acquisition, it must be
considered sufficient to show bad faith. (Tolentino, Civil Code of the Philippines, Vol. II, p.
226). Such interruption takes place upon service of summons (Manotok Realty vs. Judge
Tecson, 164 SCRA 587 [1988] citing Mindanao Academy, Inc. v. Yap (13 SCRA 190 [1965]).
Art. 533. The possession of hereditary property is deemed transmitted to the heir
without interruption and from the moment of the death of the decedent, in case the
inheritance is accepted. One who validly renounces an inheritance is deemed never
to have possessed the same.
Rules on “Tacking”
The possession of hereditary property is deemed transmitted to the heir without
interruption and from the moment of the death of the decedent, in case the inheritance is
accepted.
One who validly renounces an inheritance is deemed never to have possessed the
same.
The effects of possession in good faith shall not benefit the successor except from
the date of death of the decedent.
If the father is in bad faith, it does not necessarily mean that the son is also in bad
faith. Since the father was however in bad faith, the consequences of good faith of
the son should be counted from the death of the father.
55
If the father had been in good faith, the possession of the father will be added to
the possession of the son, and the possession in good faith commences from the
time the father possessed in good faith.
A squatter has no possessory rights of any kind against the owner of the land into
which he has intruded. His occupancy of the land is merely tolerated by the owner. Thus,
there is an implied promise on his part to vacate upon demand. (Banez vs. CA, L-30351,
Sept. 11, 1974)
56
Heirs of Cipriano Trazona vs. Heirs of Dionisio Canada[G.R. No. 175874, December
11, 2013, (712 SCRA 300)]
The actual possession of Lot No. 5053-H by petitioners has been properly ruled on by
the RTC. Much has been made by the CA of the fact that respondents' house was standing
on the property. However, petitioners have explained that the house was erected only
after Cipriano permitted it.
Dionisio was then well aware that this temporary arrangement may be terminated at
any time. Respondents cannot now refuse to vacate the property or eventually demand
reimbursement of necessary and useful expenses under Articles 448 and 546 of the New
Civil Code, because the provisions apply only to a possessor in good faith, i.e., one who
builds on land with the belief that he is the owner thereof. Persons who occupy land by
virtue of tolerance of the owners are not possessors in good faith. Thus, the directive of
the RTC for respondents to demolish their residential house on Lot No. 5053-H was also
proper.
Thus,
a)The owner should go to court, and not eject the unlawful possessor by force;
b)A tenant illegally forced out by the owner-landlord may institute an action for forcible
entry even if he had not been paying rent regularly;
c)The proper action are forcible entry or unlawful detainer, accionpubliciana,
accionreivindicatoria, replevin; and injunction;
Only the possession acquired and enjoyed in the concept of owner can serve as a title
for acquiring dominion (Art. 540)
- Thus, a possessor merely in the concept of holder cannot acquire property by acquisitive
prescription.
57
LEGAL POSSESSOR IN POSSESSOR IN
OWNER/POSSESSOR GOOD FAITH BAD FAITH
58
Expenses
Necessary (Gastos Necesarios)
Those without which the thing would physically deteriorate or be lost., hence those
made for the preservation of the thing.
DAMAGE
Means substantial one that reduces the value of the property, thus a slight injury
curable by an ordinary repair does not defeat the right of removal, but the repairs should
be chargeable to the possessor, for it is he who benefits by the removal and the object
removed.
59
GOOD FAITH BAD FAITH
No right to refund/retention
Neither the possessor in good faith nor in bad faith is entitled to:
60
Deterioration or Loss
POSSESSOR IN GOOD FAITH BAD FAITH
Not liable before receipt of judicial Liable – whether before or after receipt
summons. of judicial summons or whether due to
fortuitous event or not.
After summons
• Not liable for fortuitous events
• Liable if he acted with
negligence or fraudulent intent
Article 559
o Possession of movable acquired in Bad Faith – not equivalent to title
o Possession of movable acquired in Good Faith:
▪ Equivalent to title
▪ Owner may recover:
• if he lost the same or
• he has been unlawfully deprived
o Exception:Possessor acquired the movable in Good
Faith at a public sale, hence, owner must reimburse
the price paid.
61
Summary of Recovery or Non-Recovery Principle (Movable property)
Owner may recover w/o Owner may recover but Owner CANNOT recover
reimbursement should reimburse even if he offers
reimbursement
Loss of Possession
1. Abandonment of the thing;
2. Assignment (onerous or gratuitous);
3. Destruction or total loss of the thing or thing goes out of commerce; or
4. Possession of another for more than one year.
1. ABANDONMENT
- voluntary renunciation of the thing.
62
Requisites:
1. The abandoner must have been a possessor in the concept of an owner;
2. The abandoner must have the capacity to renounce or toalienate;
3. There must be a physical relinquishment of the thing or object;
4. There must be no more expectation to recover (spesrecuperandi) and no more
intent to return or get back (animus revertendi).
2. ASSIGNMENT
- means complete (not merely limited) transmission of ownership rights to another
person, onerously (as when the thing is sold and delivered) or gratuitously (as in the case
of a donation).
Both possession de facto and de jure are lost and no action will allow recovery
USUFRUCT
The right to enjoy the property of another with the obligation of preserving its form
and substance, unless the title constituting it or the law otherwise provides.
It is a real right, of a temporary nature, which authorizes its holder to enjoy all the
benefits which result from the normal enjoyment (or exploitation) of another’s property,
with the obligation to return, at the designated time, either the same thing or in special
cases its equivalent.
Objects of Usufruct
1. Real property
2. Personal property
3. Flock or herd of animals
4. Transmissible rights which have capability of independent existence
5. Unproductive things
Elements/Characteristics of Usufruct
1. ESSENTIAL (those without which it cannot be considered as usufruct)
a. It is a real right (whether registered in the Registry of Property or not) of use
and enjoyment;
b. It is of a temporary nature or duration; (not perpetual)
c. Its purpose is to enjoy the benefits and derive all advantages from the object
as a consequence of normal use or exploitation.
2. NATURAL (that which ordinarily is present but contrary stipulation can eliminate it
because it is not essential)
a. Obligation to preserve or conserve the form and substance of the thing.
63
3. ACCIDENTAL (those which may be present or absent depending upon the
stipulation of the parties
a. Period
b. Pure or conditional
c. Simple or multiple
OWNERSHIP USUFRUCT
Attributes: Attributes:
1. The right to enjoy; 1. Limited merely to the enjoyment of the
2. The right to dispose; property (jus utendi& jus fruendi)
3. The right to vindicate or recover
property.
USUFRUCT EASEMENT
2. What can be enjoyed are all uses and 2. Limited to a particular use. (like the
fruits of the property; (jus possidendi, right of way);
utendiandfruendi)
64
BASIS USUFRUCT LEASE
65
8. As to other things. 8. A usufructuary may 8. The lessee cannot
lease the property itself to constitute a usufruct on
another. the property leased.
General Rule
The usufructuary is bound to preserve the form and substance of the thing in
usufruct.
Exception
Abnormal usufruct whereby the law or the will of the parties may allow the
modification of the substance of the thing.
Rights of a Usufructuary
1. To personally enjoy the thing in usufruct;
a. The right to possess, right to the fruits, right to use accessions, the right to
lease; & right to introduce useful improvements;
2. To retain the thing until he is reimbursed for advances for extraordinary expenses
and taxes on the capital;
a. To alienate his right of usufruct, even by a gratuitous title.
66
The USUFRUCTUARY has the right to the enjoyment (use and not ownership);
(a) Accessions (whether artificial or natural);
(b) servitudes and easements;
(c) all benefits inherent in the property (like the right to hunt and fish therein)
The usufructuary may personally enjoy the thing in usufruct, lease it to another, or
alienate his right of usufruct, even by a gratuitous title; but all the contracts he may enter
into as such usufructuary shall terminate upon the expiration of the usufruct, saving leases
or rural lands, which shall be considered as subsisting during the agricultural years. (Art.
572)
QUASI-USUFRUCT
Refers to a type of an abnormal usufruct which includes things which cannot be used
without being consumed, hence, its form and substance are not really preserved.
67
Rules on Useful and Luxurious Improvements:
The usufructuary has the RIGHT to make;
(a) useful improvements;
(b) luxurious improvements;
BUT
(a) He must not alter the form or substance of the property in usufruct;
(b) He is not entitled to a refund but he may;
b.1.either remove the improvements if no substantial damage to the property in
usufruct is caused;
b.2.Or set-off the improvements against damages for which he may be liable.
Obligations of a Usufructuary
Before entering upon the enjoyment of the property
1. To make, after notice to the owner or his legitimate representative an inventory of
all the property, which shall contain an appraisal of the movables and a description
of the condition of the immovables;
2. To give security, binding himself to fulfill the obligations imposed upon him in
accordance with the Civil Code.
Caucion Juratoria
A promise under oath, given by a usufructuary who has not given security, to
take good care of the property and return the same at the end of the usufruct. (See
Article 587 of the Civil Code)
- It is case whereby the usufructuary, being unable to file the required bond or
security, files a verified petition in the proper court asking for the delivery of the house
and furniture necessary for himself and his family without any bond or security. The same
rule applies to instruments or tools necessary for an industry or vocation in which the
usufructuary is engaged.
69
b. to remove removable improvements or set them off against damages he has
caused.
Rules on Repairs/Expenses
Ordinary repairs
Those required by wear and tear due to the natural use of the thing and are
indispensable for its preservation.
- USUFRUCTUARY is obliged to make repairs
- Failure by usufructuary to make repairs – OWNER may make at the
USUFRUCTUARY’S EXPENSE
Extraordinary repairs
• Those caused by natural use but not needed for preservation – NAKED OWNER.
• Those due to abnormal or exceptional circumstances and needed for preservation
– NAKED OWNER.
• Those due to abnormal or exceptional circumstances but not needed for
preservation– NAKED OWNER.
• If URGENT, USUFRUCTUARY may make the repairs at the OWNER’S EXPENSE but
must first notify the latter.
• Annual charges and taxes and those considered as a lien on the fruits –
USUFRUCTUARY.
• Taxes imposed directly on the capital – OWNER.
• If owner has paid them – usufructuary must pay interest on the sums;
• If the usufructuary advanced taxes at the beginning of the usufruct – recover at the
end of the usufruct.
Extinguishment of Usufruct
1. Death of the usufructuary, unless a contrary intention clearly appears;
2. Expiration of the period for which it was constituted, or by the fulfillment of any
resolutory condition provided in the title creating the usufruct;
3. Merger of the usufruct and ownership in the same person;
4. Renunciation of the usufructuary;
5. Total loss of the thing in usufruct;
6. Termination of the right of the person constituting the usufruct; and
7. Prescription.
Duration of Usufruct
• Town, corporation, association – not more than 50 years;
• Granted for the time that may lapse before a third person attains a certain age –
number of years specified, even if the third person should die before the period
expires, unless such usufruct has been granted only in consideration of the
existence of such person.
PARTIAL LOSS
If the property is partially lost, the usufruct continues on the remaining part.
EASEMENTS OR SERVITUDES
70
Definition (Art. 613)
It is an encumbrance imposed upon an immovable for the benefit of a community
or one or more persons or for the benefit of another immovable belonging to a different
owner.
LIWAG vs. HAPPY GLEN LOOP HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION INC. (675 SCRA 744,
[2012])
Easements or servitudes are encumbrances imposed upon an immovable for the
benefits of another immovable belonging to a different owner, for the benefit of a
community, or for the benefit of one or more persons to whom the encumbered estate
does not belong.
Characteristics of Easement:
(a) A Real Right – therefore an action in rem is possible against the possessor of the
servient estate (it must be registered in order to affect third persons);
(b) Imposable only on another’s property;
(c) It is a jus in re aliena (a real right that may be alienated although naked ownership
is maintained);
(d) It is a limitation or encumbrance on the servient estate for another’s benefit; (it is
an encumbrance on the servient estate but confers benefit on the dominant estate.);
(e) There is Inherence (or inseparability from the estate to which it belongs);
(f) It is Indivisible (Even if the tenement be divided)
(g) It is Intransmissible;
(h) It is perpetual (As long as the dominant and / or the servient estate exists unless
sooner extinguished by the causes enumerated by law).
Classifications of EASEMENTS
1. According to party given benefit
a. Real – for the benefit of another immovable belonging to a different owner;
b. Personal – for the benefit of one or more persons or of a community.
2. According to manner of exercise
a. Continuous – their use is incessant, or may be incessant, without the
intervention of any act of man;
b. Discontinuous – they are used at intervals and depend upon the acts of man.
3. According to whether or not existence is indicated
a. Apparent – those made known and continually kept in view by external signs
that reveal the use and enjoyment of the same;
Requisites of Prescription:
Possession for purpose of prescription has to be in the concept of an owner,
public, peaceful and uninterrupted. It should also be remembered that acts of possessory
character executed by virtue of a license or by mere tolerance of the owner shall not be
available for purposes of prescription.
National Power Corporation vs. Campos Jr.(G.R. No. 143643, June 27, 2003)
Possession, under the Civil Code, to constitute the foundation of a prescriptive
right, must be possession under claim of title (enconcepto de dueño), or to use the
common law equivalent of the term, it must be adverse. Acts of possessory character
performed by one who holds by mere tolerance of the owner are clearly not enconcepto
de dueño, and such possessory acts, no matter how long so continued, do not start the
running of the period of prescription.
The petitioner’s claim that it had acquired the easement of right-of-way by
prescription must perforce fail. As intimated above, possession is the fundamental basis of
prescription, whether ordinary or extraordinary. The petitioner never acquired the requisite
possession in this case. Its use of that portion of the subject property where it erected the
wooden poles and transmission lines was due merely to the tacit license and tolerance of
the respondents. As such, it cannot be made the basis of the acquisition of an easement of
right-of-way by prescription.
Legal Easements
These are easements imposed by law, and which have for their object either:
(a) public use;
74
(b) or the interest of private persons.
Right of Way
The easement or privilege by which one person or a particular class of persons is
allowed to pass over another’s land, usually through one particular path or line.
The owner, or any person who by virtue of a real right may cultivate or use any
immovable, which is surrounded by other immovables pertaining to other persons and
without adequate outlet to a public highway, is entitled to demand a right of way through
neighboring estates, after payment of the proper indemnity.
Requisites:
1. The property is surrounded by estates of others;
2. There is no adequate outlet to a public highway;
3. There must be payment of the proper indemnity;
4. It must be established at the point least prejudicial to the servient estate;
75
5. The isolation must not be due to the proprietor’s own acts; and
6. Demandable only by the owner or one with a real right like a usufructuary.
The easement of right of way shall be established at the point least prejudicial to
the servient estate, and insofar as consistent with this rule, where the distance from the
dominant estate to a public highway may be the shortest. If both do not concur the
former shall be preferred.
Spouses Mejorada vs. Vertudazo et. al. (G.R. No. 151797, October 11, 2007)
A legal or compulsory easement is that which is constituted by law for public use
or for private interest. Pursuant to the above provisions, the owner of an estate may claim
a legal or compulsory right of way only after he has established the existence of these four
(4) requisites: (a) the estate is surrounded by other immovables and is without adequate
outlet to a public highway; (b) after payment of the proper indemnity; (c) the isolation was
not due to the proprietor’s own acts; and (d) the right of way claimed is at a point least
prejudicial to the servient estate.
Modes of Acquiring Real Property.– The government may acquire real property
needed as right-of-way site or location for any national government infrastructure project
through donation, negotiated sale, expropriation, or any other mode of acquisition as
provided by law.
Secretary of the DPWH et al. vs. Spouses Tecson(G.R. No. 179334, July 1, 2013)
Both equity and the law direct that a property owner should be compensated if his
property is taken for public use.Neither shall prescription bar respondents’ claim following
the long-standing rule "that where private property is taken by the Government for public
use without first acquiring title thereto either through expropriation or negotiated sale,
the owner’s action to recover the land or the value thereof does not prescribe.”
NAPOCOR vs. Heirs of Macabangkit, et al. (G.R. No. 165828,August 24, 2011)
We rule that the reckoning value is the value at the time of the filing of the
complaint, as the RTC provided in its decision. Compensation that is reckoned on the
market value prevailing at the time either when NPC entered or when it completed the
tunnel, as NPC submits, would not be just, for it would compound the gross unfairness
already caused to the owners by NPC’s entering without the intention of formally
expropriating the land, and without the prior knowledge and consent of the Heirs of
Macabangkit. NPC’s entry denied elementary due process of law to the owners since then
until the owners commenced the inverse condemnation proceedings. The Court is more
concerned with the necessity to prevent NPC from unjustly profiting from its deliberate
acts of denying due process of law to the owners. As a measure of simple justice and
ordinary fairness to them, therefore, reckoning just compensation on the value at the time
the owners commenced these inverse condemnation proceedings is entirely warranted.
Republic vs. Spouses Libunao (G.R. No. 166553, July 30, 2009)
The nature and effect of the installation of power lines and the limitations on the
use of land for an indefinite period should be considered , as the owners of the properties
would be deprived of the normal use of their properties. For this reason, the property
77
owners are entitled to the payment of just compensation based on the full market value of
the affected properties. The acquisition of such an easement falls within the purview of the
power of eminent domain. This conclusion finds support in similar cases in which the
Supreme Court sustained the award of just compensation for private property condemned
for public use. Normally of course, the power of eminent domain results in the taking and
appropriation of title to, and possession of, the expropriated property ; but no cogent
reason appears why the said power may not be availed of to impose only a burden upon
the owner of condemned property, without loss of title or possession.It is unquestionable
that real property may, through expropriation , be subjected to an easement of right of
way.
NAPOCOR vs. Purefoods Corp. et. al. (G.R. No. 160725, September 12, 2008)
Expropriation is not limited to the acquisition of real property with a corresponding
transfer of title or possession. The right-of-way easement resulting in a restriction or
limitation on property rights over the land traversed by transmission lines, as in the
present case, also falls within the ambit of the term "expropriation." In eminent domain or
expropriation proceedings, the general rule is that the just compensation to which the
owner of the condemned property is entitled is the market value. Market value is "that
sum of money which a person desirous but not compelled to buy, and an owner willing
but not compelled to sell, would agree on as a price to be given and received therefor.
The aforementioned rule, however, is modified where only a part of a certain property is
expropriated. In such a case the owner is not restricted to compensation for the portion
actually taken. In addition to the market value of the portion taken, he is also entitled to
recover the consequential damage, if any, to the remaining part of the property. At the
same time, from the total compensation must be deducted the value of the consequential
benefits.".
PARTY WALL
This is a wall at the dividing line of estate. Co-ownership governs the wall, hence
the party wall is necessarily a common wall.
78
The presumption of being a party wall is rebutted by a title, exterior sign or proof
to the contrary:
1. In dividing walls of adjoining buildings up to the point of common elevation;
2. In dividing walls of gardens or yards situated in cities, towns, or in rural
communities; and
3. In fences, walls and live hedges dividing rural lands.
In case of conflict between a TITLE and an EXTERIOR SIGN, the TITLE PREVAILS!!
The cost of repairs and construction of party walls and maintenance of fences, live
hedges, ditches, and drains owned in common, shall be borne by all the owners of the
lands or tenements having the party wall in their favor, in proportion to the right of each.
Nevertheless, any owner may exempt himself from contributing to this charge by
renouncing his part-ownership, except when the party wall supports a building belonging
to him. (Art. 662)
79
as the easement of altius non tollendi(not to build higher for the purpose
of obstruction)
Rules as to fruits:
(a) if the fruits still hang on to the tree, they are still owned by the tree owner;
(b) It is only after they have naturally fallen (not taken down by poles or
shaken) that they belong to the owner of the invaded land.
Extinguishment of Easements
1. By merger in the same person of the ownership of the dominant and servient
estates;
2. By non-user for ten years;
3. When either or both of the estates fall into such condition that the easement
cannot be used;
4. By the expiration of the term or the fulfillment of the condition, if the easement
is temporary or conditional;
5. By the renunciation of the owner of the dominant estate; and
6. By the redemption agreed upon between the owners of the dominant and
servient estates.
1. MERGER
Must be absolute, complete and not temporary.
2) If a continuous easement (like aqueduct) from the day on which an act contrary
to the same took place.
81
3. BAD CONDITION OF THE TENEMENT OR IMPOSSIBILITY OF USE
This merely suspends the easement since possibility of use revives the easement.
NUISANCE
Definition
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.
82
Ex. House constructed on public streets; market stalls and residences
constructed on a public plaza; squatter shanties and houses in creeks and very near
the seashore.
(5) HINDERS OR IMPAIRS THE USE OF PROPERTY.
Ex. Illegal constructions on another’s land.
CLASSIFICATIONS
Old Classification
1. Nuisance per se – always a nuisance;
2. Nuisance per accidens – a nuisance only because of the location or other
circumstances.
According to Relief
1. Actionable
2. Non-actionable
PRIVATE NUISANCE
Any person injured by a private nuisance may abate it by removing, or if necessary
by destroying the thing which constitutes the nuisance, without committing a breach of
the peace or doing unnecessary injury. However, it is indispensable that the procedure for
extrajudicial abatement of a public nuisance by a private person be followed.
Land Registration
Vda. de Agatep vs. Rodriguez (G.R. No. 170540, October 28, 2009)
It is settled that registration in the public registry is notice to the whole world.
Every conveyance, mortgage, lease, lien, attachment, order, judgment, instrument or entry
affecting registered land shall, if registered, filed or entered in the Office of the Register of
Deeds of the province or city where the land to which it relates lies, be constructive notice
to all persons from the time of such registering, filing or entering. Under the rule of notice
, it is presumed that the purchaser has examined every instrument of record affecting the
title. Such presumption may not be rebutted . he is charged with notice of every fact
shown by the record and is presumed to know every fact shown by the record and to
know every fact which an examination of the record would have disclosed. This
presumption cannot not be overcome by any claim of innocence or good faith. Otherwise,
the very purpose and object of the law requiring a record would be destroyed. Such
presumption cannot be defeated by proof of want of knowledge of what the record
contains any more than one may be permitted to show that he was ignorant of the
provision of the law. The rules that all persons must take notice of the facts which the
public record contains is a rule of law. The rule must be absolute; any variation would lead
to endless confusion and useless litigation.
OCCUPATION
It is a mode of acquiring ownership through seizure of appropriable corporeal
personal property without an owner.
The personal property that may be seized includes res nullus such as animals that are
the object of fishing and hunting, hidden treasure and abandoned movables.
Requisites of OCCUPATION:
1. The thing must be seized;
2. The thing seized must be appropriable corporeal personal property;
3. The thing must be without an owner – either res nullus or abandoned;
4. There must be animus – intent to appropriate; and
5. Compliance with legal requirements for the specific property seize must be
complied with.
TRADITION OR DELIVERY
Ownership is acquired if the object is placed in the control and possession of the
transferee by virtue of a contract. The delivery may be actual of constructive.
DONATION
Definition
An act of liberality whereby a person disposes gratuitously of a thing or right in favor
of another, who accepts it. It also includes:
(1) giving to another a thing or right on account of the latter’s merits or of the services
rendered by him to the donor, provided they do not constitute a demandable debt
(2) giving to another a thing or right and imposes upon the donee a burden which is
less than the value of the thing given.
Requisites
(1) Donor must have the capacity to make the donation;
(2) He must have donative intent (animus donandi);
87
(3) There must be delivery; and
(4) Donee must accept or consent to the donation (must be made during the lifetime
of the donor and the donee).
Perfection takes place not from the time of acceptance by the donee but
from the time acceptance is made known actually or constructively, to the
donor.
Republic vs. Spouses Llamas (G.R. No. 194190, January 25, 2015)
To be considered a donation, an act of conveyance must necessarily proceed freely
from the donor's own, unrestrained volition. A donation cannot be forced: it cannot arise
from compulsion, be borne by a requirement, or otherwise be impelled by a mandate
imposed upon the donor by forces that are external to him or her. Article 726 of the Civil
Code reflects this common sensical wisdom when it specifically states that conveyances
made in view of a "demandable debt" cannot be considered true or valid donations.
In jurisprudence, animus donandi (that is, the intent to do an act of liberality) is an
indispensable element of a valid donation, along with the reduction of the donor's
patrimony and the corresponding increase in the donee’s patrimony.
Section 31 of PD 957's compulsion to donate (and concomitant compulsion to
accept) cannot be sustained as valid. Not only does it run afoul of basic legal concepts; it
also fails to withstand the more elementary test of logic and common sense. As opposed
to this, the position that not only is more reasonable and logical, but also maintains
harmony between our laws, is that which maintains the subdivision owner's or developer's
freedom to donate or not to donate. This is the position of the 1998 White Plains Decision.
Moreover, as this 1998 Decision has emphasized, to force this donation and to preclude
any compensation-is to suffer an illegal taking. (Republic vs. Spouses Llamas)
88
takes effect independently of the donor’s takes effect upon the death of the donor
death
title conveyed to the donee before the title conveyed upon donor’s death
donor’s death
must comply with the formalities must comply with the formalities required by law
required by Articles 748 and 749 of the for the execution of wills
CC
Void Donations
(1) Those made between persons who are guilty of adultery or concubinage at the
time of the donation;
(2) Those made between persons found guilty of the same criminal offense, in
consideration thereof; and
(3) Those made to a public officer or his wife, descendants and ascendants, by reason
of his office.
(4) Those between spouses during their marriage, or that made to the person of
whom the other spouse is a presumptive heir, except moderate gifts (Art. 87 of FC).
Forms of Donations
1. Donations of Movable Property
a. With simultaneous delivery of property donated
- Value is P5,000 or less – oral or written;
- Value exceeds P5,000 – written in public or private document.
b. Without simultaneous delivery – the donation and acceptance must be
written in a public or private instrument, regardless of value.
Effects of Donations
1. Donee may demand the delivery of the thing donated;
2. Donee is subrogated to the rights of the donor in the property;
3. In donations propter nuptias, the donor must release the property from
encumbrances, except servitudes;
89
4. Donor’s warranty exists if:
a. expressed;
b. donation is propter nuptias;
c. donation is onerous;
d. donor is in bad faith.
5. When the donation is made to several donees jointly, they are entitled to equal
portions, without accretion, unless the contrary is stipulated.
Acts of Ingratitude
1. Commission by the donee of some offense against the person, honor or property
of the donor, or of his wife or children under his parental authority;
2. Imputation by the donee to the donor any criminal offense, or any act involving
moral turpitude, even though he should prove it, unless the crime or act has been
committed against the donee himself, his wife or children under his authority.
3. Refusal to support the donor.
Revocation of Donation
91