WHAT IS CO-OWNERSHIP? the state
3) the roof (this is really used by ALL); and
where an undivided thing or right belongs to different
persons. (484)
- there is no co-ownership when the different
portions owned by different people are already
concretely determined and identifiable, even if not
yet technically described (Dela Cruz v. Cruz)
Issue: May a co-owner validly lease his undivided
interest to a third party?
Held: Yes, independently of the other co-owners.
*Any co-owner may file an ejectment not only against
third person but also against another co-owner who
takes exclusive possession and asserts exclusive
ownership of the property.
CHARACTERISTICS OF CO-OWNERSHIP:
1. There must be more than 1 subject or owner;
2. there must be 1 physical whole divided into
ideal (undivided shares);
3. each ideal share is definite in amount, but is
not physically segregated from the rest;
4. each co-owner must respect each other in the
common use, enjoyment or preservation of the
physical whole (486);
5. regarding the IDEAL share, each co-owner
holds almost absolute control over the same
(493);
6. has no juridical personality;
7. a co-owner is a trustee of the other co-owners
CO-OWNERSHIP V. PARTNERSHIP
- 1) the main walls; 332
no legal personality v. has legal personality
- the projects which render a material part thereof unfit
Created by contract or by other things v. created
by contract only
- Purpose: collective enjoyment v. ProfiT
- not dissolved by death or incapacity of the co-
owner v. is dissolved by the death or incapacity
of the partner
- disposal of shares without consent of co-owners
is proper v. Cannot substitute another as partner
in his place without the consent of others
- as may be equivalent to his share of the expenses
Profit depends on proportionate shares (485) v.
may be stipulated upon
Q: If a co-owner has paid the taxes to prevent
forfeiture of the common property for tax delinquency,
can he compel contribution?
A: YES (Jalandoni v. Guanzon, 1958)
ART. 486: EACH CO-OWNER HAS THE RIGHT TO
USE THE PROPERTY FOR THE PURPOSE
INTENDED; but:
1. the interest of the co-ownership must not be
injured or prejudiced;
2. and the other co-owners must not be prevented
from using it.
ART. 487 EJECTMENT
- Q: Can a co-owner go ahead with necessary repairs
487 now allows a co-owner to bring an action for
ejectment which covers all kinds of action for the
recovery of possession; including F.E. and U.D.,
without the necessity of joining all the other co-
owners as plaintiffs, because the said action is
deemed to be instituted for the benefit of all.
ART 488; 489
Preservation Expenses Co-owner can compel
contribution even if
without prior notification,
but he must notify the
others, if practicable
Expenses to improve or shall be decided by a
embellish the thing majority
Q: How can a co-owner exempt himself from
contribution?
A: A co-owner may exempt himself from this duty to
reimburse by RENOUNCING (abandoning for the
benefit of the others) so much of his undivided share
and taxes. Provided that the co-ownership will not be
prejudiced.
WHAT RENOUNCING REQUIRES:
(a) If the renouncing is in favor of the creditor, said
creditor must give his consent (for this would be a
case of adjudicacion en pago or datio in solutum,
where a debtor gives something else in payment of
his debt).
(b) If the renouncing is in favor of the other co-
owners, a no- vation (in the form of substitution of
debtor) would result — necessitating the consent of
said other co-owners AND of the creditor.
[NOTE: The creditor’s consent would of course be
needed only if the expenses have already been
incurred, otherwise, there would as yet be no
creditors.].
even against the opposition of all the rest?
A: YES, because the negligence of the others should
not prejudice him.
ART. 490 - PERPENDICULAR CO-OWNERSHIP -
where different stories belong to different persons.
(a) Proportionate contribution is required for the
preservation of —
. 2) the party walls;
.
. 4) the other things used in common.
(b) Each floor owner must bear the expenses of his
floor.
(c) Stairs are to be maintained from story to story, by
the users.
RA 4726 - condominium act
Section 5. Any transfer or conveyance of a unit or an
apartment, office or store or other space therein, shall
include the transfer or conveyance of the undivided
interest in the common areas or, in a property case,
the membership or shareholdings in the
condominium corporation; PROVIDED, However, that
where the common areas in the condominium project
are held by the owners of separate units as co-
owners thereof, no condominium unit therein shall be
conveyed or transferred to persons other than Filipino
citizens or corporations at least 60% of the capital
stock of which belong to Filipino citizens, except in
cases of hereditary succession. Where the common
areas in a condominium project are held by a
corporation, no transfer or conveyance of a unit shall
be valid if the concomitant transfer of the appurtenant
membership or stockholding in the corporation will
cause the alien interest in such corporation to exceed
the limits imposed by existing laws.
Section 7. Except as provided in the following
section, the common areas shall remain undivided,
and there shall be no judicial partition thereof.
Section 8. Where several persons own
condominiums in a condominium project, an action
may be brought by one or more such persons for
partition thereof by sale of the entire project, as if the
owners of all the condominiums in such project were
co-owners of the entire project in the same proportion
as their interests in the common areas: PROVIDED,
however, That a partition shall be made only upon a
showing:
(a) That three years after damage or destruction to
for its use prior thereto, the project has not been
rebuilt or repaired substantially to its state prior to its
damage or destruction; or
(b) That damage or destruction to the project has
rendered one-half or more of the units therein
untenant- able and that condominium owners holding
in aggregate more than 30 per cent interest in the
common areas are opposed to repair or restoration of
the projects; or
(c) That the project has been in existence in excess
of 50 years, that it is obsolete and uneconomic, and
that condominium owners holding in aggregate more
than 50 per cent interest in the common areas are
opposed to repair or restoration or modelling or
modernizing of the project; or
(d) That the project or a material part thereof has
been condemned or expropriated and that the project
is no longer viable, or that the condominium owners
holding in aggregate more than 70 per cent interest in
the common areas are opposed to continuation of the
condominium regime after expropriation or
condemnation of a material portion thereof; or
(e) That the conditions for such partition by sale set
forth in the declaration of restrictions duly registered
in accordance with the terms of this Act, have been
met.
ART 491 = ALTERATIONS
Basic rule: must be with the consent of other co-
owners even though it would benefit them all
- a change which is more or less permanent; or
changes the use of the thing which might prejudice
the condition of the thing or its enjoyment by the
others (an act of ownership)
Examples: sale, donation or mortgage of the whole
property; sale or donation of a definite part of the
property with boundaries; a voluntary easement
Q: R, S and T are co-owners of a ten-hectare
agricultural land in Quezon City. R is the
administrator. S and T are in Spain. May R convert
that land to a memorial park without the knowledge
and consent of S and T? Explain.
ANS.: No, for clearly this conversion constitutes an
AL- TERATION which by law requires UNANIMITY
on the part of all the co-owners unless a judicial order
to the contrary is obtained. (See Art. 491).
* Consent for alteration may be given IMPLIEDLY.
However, implied or tacit consent is not enough to
make the other co-owners liable for the expenses
of the construction of the house. To recover a share
of the expenses, and express consent is needed
(Javier v. Javier)
EFFECTS OF ILLEGAL ALTERATION (an alteration
done without the consent of other co-owners):
(a) The co-owner responsible may lose what he has
spent;
(b) Demolition can be compelled;
(c) He would be liable for losses and damages;
(d) BUT whatever benefits the co-ownership derives
will belong to it (3 Manresa 468, 471-472);
(e) In case a house is constructed on common lot, all
the co-owners will be entitled to a proportionate share
of the rent. (It is wrong to give all to the person who
made the alteration and just let her pay rent on the
land). (Singson, et al. v. Ch. Veloso, et al., [CA] 52
O.G. 370).
ART 492* administration and better enjoyment, the
resolutions of the (financial) majority is sufficient and
binding.
Acts of Administration or Management
They are those:
. (a) that do not involve an alteration;
. (b) those that may be renewed from time
to time;
. (c) those that have transitory effects, that
is, do not bind the co-ownership for a long
time in the future;
. (d) those that do not give rise to a real
right over the thing owned in common;
. (e) those, which even if called an
alteration, do not affect the substance or
nature of the thing (2 Castan 200-203);
. (f) those for the common benefit of all the
co-owners and not for only one or some of
them. (Singson v. Veloso, supra).
[NOTE: All the requisites mentioned must
CONCUR.].
Limitations on the Right of the Financial Majority
(a) Although they can approve resolutions for
administration and better enjoyment, still before a
decision is made, there should first be a notice to the
minority so that they can be heard. (3 Manresa 488;
Singson, et al. v. Veloso, et al., [CA] 52 O.G. 870).
(b) The majority would be justified in proceeding only
when the urgency of the case and the difficulty of
meeting with them render impracticable the giving of
such notice. (Singson v. Veloso, supra).
(c) The minority may APPEAL to the court against the
deci- sion of the majority when, for example —
1) there is no real majority (Art. 492);
2) the resolution is seriously prejudicial to the
rights
of an individual co-owner (Art. 492);
3) when the majority refuses to correct abuse of
administration or maladministration;
4) when the minority is made the victim of fraud;
5) when an alteration (instead of mere act of
administration) is agreed upon.
[NOTE: The court may even appoint an
administrator. (Art. 492).].
ART. 493 - THE RIGHT OF THE CO-OWNER TO
HIS IDEAL SHARE
RULES:
1. Each co-owner has FULL ownership of his part,
and of his share of the fruits and
benefits;
2. and therefore, he may ALIENATE, ASSIGN OR
MORTGAGE his ideal share (without
prejudice to the exercise by the others
of their right of LEGAL REDEMPTION)
3. he may even SUBSTITUTE another person in its
enjoyment, except when personal
rights are involved;
4. he may exempt himself from necessary expenses
and taxes by renouncing part of his
interest in the co-ownership (488)
*in case of alienation or mortgage, the transferee
does not get any specific portion till after
partition.
Q: what happens if one of the co-owners success in
selling the entire property without the
consent of the others?
A: The sale is valid only insofar as his spiritual share
is concerned (Punzalan v Liat) The
transferee now will be the one to
participate in the partition, and not the
original owner, since the vendor has
ceased to have an interest in the co-
ownership (Lopez v Ilustre)
Q: Can a co-owner sell his share to a stranger who
desires to change the use of the common
property (from a residential unit to a
factory)?
A: No, the interests of the other co-owners will
jeopardized.
ART. 494 - PARTITION
General Rule #1: PARTITION IS ALLOWED AT ANY
TIME.
Exemption:
1. when there is an agreement to keep the things
undivided for a certain period of time (a
period not exceeding 10 years, though
subject to renewal after the expiration
of the period);
2. when the donor or testator prohibits partition for a
period which shall not exceed 20 years;
3. when there is a prohibition by law (e.g.
easements);
4. When a physical partition would render the
property unserviceable (495// e.g. an
automobile), but in this case, the
property may be ALLOTED to one of
the co-owners, who shall indemnify the
others or it will be sold and the
proceeds distributed (498- LEGAL
DISSOLUTION);
5. when the legal nature of the common property
does not allow partition (like the case of
party walls)
General Rule #2: PRESCRIPTION SHALL NOT RUN
IN FAVOR OF CO-OWNERS AS LONG
AS CO-OWNERSHIP EXISTS
Exemption: When a co-owner repudiates (does not
recognize) the co-ownership - prescription
begins to run
Q: how can a co-owner become the exclusive owners
of the other’s share by prescription?
1) He must make known to the other co-
owners that he is definitely repudiating the
co-ownership and that he is claiming
complete ownership over the entire
property.
2) The evidence of repudiation and
knowledge on the part of the others must
be clear and convincing.
3) The other requirements of prescription
— continuous, open, peaceful, public,
adverse possession for the period of time
required under the law must be present.
(See Santos v. Heirs of Crisostomo).
4) The period of prescription (Statute of
Limitations) shall start to run only from
such repudiation of co- ownership. (Castillo
v. Court of Appeals,1964).
Q: A and B were co-owners of the land. There was
partition but A happened to be given more
than her share. Many years later, B asked
to be given the extra part but A claimed
prescription in her favor. Is A correct?
A: Yes, True, there can generally be no prescription
among co-owners while they remain co-
owners, but here, there has already been a
partition and the co-ownership has
therefore ceased. (Ynot v. Initan)
*the action to declare the nullity of a VOID
extrajudicial partition does not prescribe
(1409)
ART. 497
GENERAL RULE: the creditors and assignees of the
co-onwers may take part in the division of
the thing owned in common and object to
its being effected without their
concurrence; but THEY CANNOT IMPUGN
A PARTITION ALREADY EXECUTED
Exn: 1. if there was fraud;
2. if the debtor has presented a formal
opposition to prevent the partition
Who are the “creditors”? those creditors during the
existence of the co-ownership
A, B, and C are co-owners. A sold his share to X.
Who is entitled to participate in the partition, A or X?
ANS.: It depends.
(a) If A had sold his WHOLE share, and has
delivered same (such as when X has been put in
possession of the land in place of A, with the
result that X now has a REAL right over the
property), then it is NOT A who should participate
but X. (But in this case, X is participating not as
assignee but in his own right, as CO-OWNER,
with B and C.)
(b) If A had sold only part of his share, or even if he
sold his entire share, he has not yet delivered
same to X (such that X does not have yet a real
right, but only a personal right against A), then
both A and X are allowed to participate in the
partition, together with B and C. A will participate
as co-owner, and X as “assignee,” as the term is
used in this article. (See Lopez v. Martinez, 5
Phil. 567).
ART. 500 EFFECTS OF PARTITION:
(a) mutual accounting for benefits received. (Art.
500).
(b) mutual reimbursement for expenses. (Art. 500).
(c) indemnity for damages in case of negligence or
fraud. (Art. 500)
(d) reciprocal warranty for
1) defects of title (or eviction);
2) quality (or hidden defects). (Art.
501).
[NOTE: No warranty if there is a
contrary stipu- lation or if the
eviction is due to fault of co-
owner evicted. (See Arts. 1092-
1093).]
(e) each former co-owner is deemed to have had
exclusive possession of the part allotted to
him for the entire period during which the
co-possession lasted. (Art. 543).
(f) partition confers upon each, the exclusive title over
his respective share. (See Art. 1091).
ART. 501 RECIPROCAL WARRANTY
Example: A and B, co-owners, partitioned their land.
Later, C, a stranger was able to prove that he really
owned the lot belonging to B. Should B alone bear
the loss? ANS.: No. Both A and
B must bear the loss in that A must give half of his
portion to B because there is a reciprocal or mutual
warranty against eviction.
How Co-ownership Is Extinguished
(a) judicial partition
(b) extrajudicial partition
(c) when by prescription, one co-owner has acquired
the whole property by adverse
possession as against all the others,
and repudiating unequivocally the co-
ownership of the other
(d) when a stranger acquires by prescription the
thing owned in common
(e) merger in one co-owner
(f) loss or destruction
(g) expropriation (here the indemnity will be
distributed accordingly).
__________________________________________
SOME SPECIAL PROPERTIES
ART 502 WATERS
Public Dominion: RiC CoLRain SubOLeWas
Name: RIC - Rivers; Continuous or intermittent
waters of springs and brooks running in
their natural beds;
Middle Name: COLRAIN - Waters rising continuously
or intermittently on land of public dominion;
Lakes and lagoons formed by nature on
public lands and their beds; Rain waters
running through ravines or sand beds
Surname: SUBOLEWAS- Subterranean waters on
public lands; waters found within the zone
of Operation of public works; waters rising
continuously or intermittently on lands
belonging to private persons, or to the
State, or to a province, or to a city or a
municipality from the moment they LEave
 such lands; the WAste waters of fountains,
sewers and public establishments
*UNDER THE NEW WATER CODE, there are no
private waters.
ART 504 HOW IS THE USE OF PUBLIC WATER
ACQUIRED?
1. By administrative concession;
Order of Preference in Obtaining a Concession
In obtaining a concession, the order of preference is
as follows:
. (a) The first to appropriate is given a better
right to ask for a concession
. (b) When the claimants appropriated at the
same time, preference is given in
accordance with the use intended, in this
order: (DAInFiM)
. 1) domestic use (like drinking,
cooking)
. 2) agricultural use or power
development for agricultural
purposes
. 3) industrial uses
. 4) fishponds
5) mining uses or milling
connected with mining purposes. (See
Sec. 3, Act 2152).
[NOTE: As a rule, property of
public dominion may not be acquired by prescription.
This article on public waters gives an exception,
insofar as their use is concerned.]
note: “every concession for the use of waters is
understood to be without prejudice to third persons”
(505)
*how is a concession extinguished?
a. by the lapse of the concession; g. Industrial;
b. by non-user for 5 years h. Recreational; and
non-use is total or partial abandonment.
i. Other purposes.
Fortuitous event excuses non-users.
* Use of water for recreational purposes is the
2. by prescription for 10 years utilization of water for swimming pools, bath houses,
boating, water skiing, golf courses and other similar
facilities in resorts and other places of recreation.
(note: if the water source of a swimming pool came
from a natural source such as spring, there is a need
ART 507 - CONVERSION OF WATERS FROM
PRIVATE TO PUBLIC WATERS to secure a permit; however, if the source is nawasa
which is already of private ownership, there is no
need to secure a permit.)
Riparian Ownership - Riparian rights flow out of
riparian ownership (56 Am. Jur. 727). To
be riparian, land must have actual contact Art. 20. The measure and limit of appropriation of
with the water, not be merely proximate to water shall be beneficial use.
it. (56 Am. Jur. 731).
Beneficial use of water is the utilization of water in the
Riparian Rights right amount during the period that the water is
needed for producing the benefits for which the water
is appropriated.
. (a) right to the natural flow of the waters
__________________________________________
. (b) right of access to and use of the waters
. (c) right of accretion. (See 56 Am. Jur. POSSESSION
726).
is the holding of a thing and enjoyment of a right
(523)
PD 1067 - WATER CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES Q: IS POSSESSION A FACT OR A RIGHT?
Art. 10. Water may be appropriated for the following A: it is a fact (since it exists); but from the moment it
purposes: exists, certain consequences follow, thus making
possession also a RIGHT.
a. Domestic (no need of permit);
VIEWPOINTS OF POSSESSION:
b. Municipal;
1. Right TO possession - a right incident to
ownership (e.g. I own the house, and I have the
c. Irrigation; right to possess it)
d. Power generation; 2. Right OF possession - right itself, independent of
ownership (e.g. a lessee, by virtue of the lease, is
e. Fisheries; entitled to possess the house for the period of
lease)
f. Livestock raising;
DEGREES OF POSSESSION:
1. grammatical degree - mere holding of a thing,
without any right whatsoever;
2. possession with juridical title - e.g. that of a
lessee, pledgee or depositary;
3. possession with just title or real possessory right -
not from the true owner;
4. Possession with a title of dominium, with a just
title from the owner (possession which springs
out from ownership)
REQUISITES OF POSSESSION:
. (a) There must be a holding or control
(occupancy, or taking or apprehension) of
a thing or a right. (This holding may be
actual or constructive.)
. (b) There must be a deliberate intention to
possess (animus possidendi). This is a
state of the mind.
. (c) The possession must be by virtue of
one’s own right. (This may be because he
is an owner or because of a right de- rived
from the owner such as that of a tenant.)
*CONSTRUCTIVE POSSESSION - possession in the
eyes of the law does not mean that a man
has to have his feet on every square meter
of ground before it can be said that he is in
possession (Ramos v. Director of Lands)
CLASSES OF POSSESSION:
(a) In one’s own name or in that of another. (Art.
524).
(b) In the concept of owner (en concepto de dueno)
and in the
concept of holder. (Art. 525).
(c) In good faith (bona fide) or in bad faith. (mala
fide).
Spouses Medina and Bernal v. Hon. Nelly Romero
Valdellon L-38510, Mar. 25, 1975
FACTS: A married couple sued for recovery of
possession of a parcel of land. The defendants
presented a motion to dismiss on the ground that a
land registration case was pending between the
parties in another CFI branch of the same court.
ISSUE: should the recovery of possession case be
dismissed?
HELD: No, because the issues in the two cases are
differ- ent. The first deals with possession, the
second, with owner- ship. Thus, the eventual decision
in one will not constitute res judicata for the other.
FIRST CLASS OF POSSESSION: IN ONE’S OWN
NAME OR IN THAT OF ANOTHER (ART 524)
Who is in Actual Possession of a Rented Parcel
of Land?
The lessor, thru the tenant, is in actual possession of
the land (in the concept of owner, that is, if the lessor
is NOT the owner; if he is the owner, he is called the
possessor-owner) . The tenant, by himself, is in
actual possession in the concept of holder.
Possession in Another’s Name
. (a) Voluntary — as when an agent
possesses for the principal (by virtue of
agreement).
. (b) Necessary — as when a mother
possesses for a child still in the maternal
womb.
[NOTE: Here the mother does not possess
the child; she possesses FOR him.].
. (c) Unauthorized — (This will become the
principal’s pos- session only after there has
been a ratification without prejudice to the
effects of negotiorum gestio.)
*** Well-established is the rule in ejectment cases
that the only issue to be resolved therein is who is
entitled to the physical or material possession of
the premises, or possession de facto, independent
of any claim of ownership that either party may set
forth in their pleadings. If petitioner can prove prior
possession in himself, he may recover such
possession even from the owner himself. Whatever
may be the character of his prior possession, if he
has in is favor priority of time, he has the security that
entitles him to stay on the property until he is lawfully
ejected by a person having a better right by either
accion publiciana or accion reivindicatoria. (Jose De
Luna v. CA, 1992)
SECOND CLASS OF POSSESSION: IN THE
CONCEPT OF AN OWNER OR IN THE CONCEPT
OF HOLDER (ART 525)
1. In the concept of owner - one who, whether in
good or in bad faith, CLAIMS to be, and ACTS as
if he is, the owner. He thus recognizes no title of
ownership in another, with respect to the property
involved. Whether he is in good faith or bad faith
is immaterial. (this is the possession that may
ripen to ownership.) —- also known as “concepto
de dueno"
2. in the concept of holder - recognizes another to be
the owner (eg. Tenant, usufructuary, depositary,
bailee in a commodatum - they only have the right to
use the thing)
THIRD CLASS OF POSSESSION: BAD FAITH OR
GOOD FAITH
Definitions ( ART 526) - *this article does not apply if
there is no flaw at all
1. Possessor in Good faith - one who is spy aware
that there exists in his title or mode of acquisition
any flaw which invalidates it; (Mistake upon a
doubtful or difficult question of law may be the
basis of good faith)
- what matters is the BELIEF that you are the owner.
- The purchaser has a right to rely on the certificate
of title (mirror doctrine).
Presumption No. 1: Presumption of good faith: “Good
faith is always presumed, and upon him who alleges
bad faith on the part of a possessor rests the burden
of proof” (ART 527)
WHEN can possession in good faith be converted to
bad faith? - from the moment facts exist showing the
possessor’s knowledge of the the flaw ( ART 528)
Case: when a contract of sale is void, the possessor
is entitled to keep the fruits during the period for
which it held the property in good faith… (DBP v. CA,
1999)
2. Possessor in Bad Faith - who possesses in any
case contrary to the stated above (Hence, if
circumstances exist that require a prudent man to
investigate, he will be in bad faith if he does not
investigate)
- A purchaser cannot close his eyes to facts which
should put a reasonable man upon his guard, and
then claim that he acted in good faith under the
belief that there was no defect in the title of the
vendor (Lee v. Strong)
- a lessee who continues to stay on the premises
after the expiration of the lease contract is a
usurper having no more right to the use and
enjoyment of the premises. He has become a
possessor in bad faith (Republic v. Diaz, 1979)
- while one who buys from the registered owner
does not need to look behind the certificate of title,
one who buys from one who is not the registered
owner is expected to examine not only the
certificate of title but all factual circumstances
necessary for his to determine if there are any
flaws in the title of the transferor, or in his capacity
to transfer the land (Revilla v. Galindez, 1960)
OTHER PRESUMPTIONS:
1. CONTINUITY OF CHARACTER OF
POSSESSION (whether in good faith or bad faith
— “It is presumed that possession continues to
be enjoyed in the same character in which it was
acquired, until the contrary is proved.’’ (Art. 529).
2. NON-INTERRUPTION OF POSSESSION —
“The pos- session 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.”
(Art. 533).
3. PRESUMPTION OF JUST TITLE — “A
possessor in the concept of owner has in his
favor the legal presumption that he possesses
with just title, and he cannot be obliged to show
or prove it.’’ (Art. 541).
4. NON-INTERRUPTION OF POSSESSION OF
PROP- ERTY UNJUSTLY LOST BUT LEGALLY
RECOVERED — “One who recovers, according
to law, possession un- justly lost, shall be
deemed for all purposes which may redound to
his benefit, to have enjoyed it without
interruption.” (Art. 561).
5. POSSESSION DURING INTERVENING PERIOD
— “It is presumed, that the present possessor
who was also the possessor at previous time, has
continued to be in possession during the
intervening time, unless there is proof to the
contrary.” (Art. 1138[2]).
6. POSSESSION OF MOVABLES WITH REAL
PROPERTY — “The possession of real property
presumes that of the movables therein, so long
as it is not shown or proved that they should be
excluded.” (Art. 542).
7. EXCLUSIVE POSSESSION OF COMMON
PROPERTY — “Each one of the participants of a
thing possessed in common shall be deemed to
have exclusively possessed the part which may
be allotted to him upon the division thereof, for
the entire period during which the co-posses- sion
lasted.” (Art. 543).
ART 530 WHAT CAN BE OBJECTS OF
POSSESSION? only things and rights which are
susceptible of being appropriated
so what are the things and rights that cannot be
possessed?
1. Property of public dominion;
2. res communes;
3. Easements;
4. res nullius (abandoned or ownerless property) -
can be possessed but cannot be acquired by
prescription
HOW IS POSSESSION ACQUIRED?
ART. 531 How?
(a) By material occupation (detention) of a thing or
the ex- ercise of a right (quasi-possession). (This also
includes constitutum possessorium or traditio brevi
manu.)
(b) By subjection to our will (this includes traditio
longa manu — by mere agreement; or by the delivery
of keys — traditio simbolica) (clearly, this does not
require actual physical detention or seizure).
(c) By constructive possession or proper acts and
legal formalities (such as succession, donation,
execution of public instruments; or thru the
possession by a sheriff by virtue of a court order.)
(See Muyco v. Montilla, 7 Phil. 498). - e.g. deed of
sale
* Note: in the absence of stipulation of the parties that
the ownership of a thing sold shall not pass to the
purchaser until he has fully paid the stipulated price,
the execution of the sale through a public instrument
shall be equivalent to the delivery of the thing (Tan
(1) Constitutum possessorium exists when a
person who possessed property as an owner,
now possesses it in some other capacity, as
that of lessee or depositary.
(2) Traditio brevi manu — (the opposite of
constitutum possessorium) — this exists when
a person who possessed property not as an
owner (like a lessee), now possesses it as
owner.
(3) Traditio longa manu (delivery by the long
hand) — delivery by consent or mere pointing.
book diok v. Aparri Farmer’s Cooperative
Association, Inc.)
Requirements for Possession
(a) the corpus (or the thing physically detained).
(b) the animus or intent to possess (whether
evidenced expressly or impliedly).
ART 532. POSSESSION CAN BE ACQUIRED BY
WHO?
1. Personal - must be with (a) intent to possess; (b)
capacity to possess; (c) object - capable of being
possessed
2. Through authorized person - must be with (a)
intent to possess for principal; (b) authority or
capacity to possess; (c) principal has intent and
capacity to possess
3. through unauthorized person - must be with (a)
intent to possess for another; (b) capacity of
principal to possess; (c) ratification of principal
Art. 2144. Whoever voluntarily takes charge of
the agency or management of the business or
property of another without any power from the
latter, is obliged to continue the same until the
termination of the affair and its incidents, or to
require the person concerned to substitute him,
if the owner is in a position to do so. This
juridical relation does not arise in either of these
instances: (a) When the property or business is
not neglected or abandoned; (b) If in fact the
manager has been tacitly authorized by the
owner.
<ratification should be regarded as having
retroactive effect> = NEGOTIORUM GESTIO
ART 533 PRESUMPTION OF TACKING OF
POSSESSION “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 (exn).” —
applicable only if the decedent is in good faith.
Rules:
1. if heir accepts - the possession of the deceased
should be added to the possession of the heir
(Example: Father died on June 1, 2003. Son
accepted the inheritance on June 25, 2003.
Possession is deemed transmitted not on June
25 but on June 1, 2003.)
Case: A died. B immediately occupied and
possessed the property left by A. C now alleges that
he is the heir of A, and that he (C) therefore, is
entitled to get pos- session of the property. What
should C do?
HELD: C must prove the ownership over the property
by A, his alleged predecessor-in-interest; otherwise
B, the present possessor, has in his favor the legal
presumption that he (B) holds possession by reason
of a sufficient title, and he cannot be forced to show
it. If C can prove A’s right, he will be considered
owner and possessor from the time of A’s death.
(See Bondad v. Bondad, 34 Phil. 232; Cruz v. Cruz,
37 O.G. 209).
2. if her refused - he is deemed never to have
possessed the same
PROBLEM: A, B, and C inherited in equal parts a
piece of land from their father. Before partition A sold
his share to X. The next day, B repudiated the
inheritance. Upon partition, what share of the land is
X entitled to, 1/3 or 1/2?
ANS.: Note that A has sold HIS share to X. Now then,
at the time of sale, A’s share was apparently 1/3 only,
but because B had repudiated, it is as if B never
inherited, hence there were really only two heirs (A
and C). Therefore, A’s share was really one half 1/2)
since the repudiation by B has a retroactive effect.
Therefore X is entitled to 1/2 (which was REALLY A’s
share), at the moment of the father’s death.
Q: CAN AN HEIR DISPOSE DECEDENT’S
PROPERTY EVEN IF THE SAME IS UNDER
ADMINISTRATION?
A:Yes. 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. Where there are
however, two or more heirs, the whole estate of the
decedent is, before its partition, owned in common by
such heirs. The Civil Code (Art. 493) under the
provision on co-owner- ship, further qualifies this
right. Although it is mandated that each co-owner
shall have the full ownership of his part and of the
fruits and benefits pertaining thereto, and thus may
alien- ate, assign or mortgage it, and even substitute
another person in its enjoyment, the effect of the
alienation or the mortgage, with respect to the co-
owners, shall be limited to the portion which may be
allotted to him in the division upon the termination of
the co-ownership. In other words, the law does not
prohibit a co-owner from selling, alienating or
mortgaging his ideal share in the property held in
common. (Acebedo v. Hon. Abesamis, 1993)
Caveat: Art. 534. One who succeeds by hereditary
title shall not suffer the consequences of the
wrongful possession of the decedent (if decedent
is in bad faith)…
if it is not shown that he was aware of the flaws
affecting it; but the effects of possession in good faith
shall not benefit him except from the date of death of
the decedent.
Example: Father possessed in bad faith, X’s land for
3 years, after which the property was presumably
inherited by M, the father’s son. M was in good faith.
For how many years more, from the father’s death,
should M possess the land in order to become its
owner?
ANS.: For 9 years, since the effects of his possession
in good faith should begin only from the decedent’s
death. [NOTE: Because extraordinary prescription
requires 30 years, and ordinary prescription requires
10 years, it follows that 3 years possession in BAD
FAITH should be equivalent to 1 year pos- session in
GOOD FAITH. Hence, applying Art. 1138(1), 1 year
plus 9 years equals 10 years.].
Follow-up question: In the example given above, if X
within 4 years brings an action to recover the
property and its fruits, should X’s action prosper?
ANS.: Regarding the land — yes, because M has not
yet become the owner. Regarding the fruits —
(a) M does not have to reimburse the value of
the fruits for the 4-year period he was in
possession, since he is a pos- sessor in good
faith.
(b) But, if M obtained any cash or benefit from the
fruits harvested by his father, said value must be
returned (mi- nus necessary expenses for
cultivation, gathering, and harvesting) because
the father was in bad faith, and the effects of M’s
good faith, it must be remembered, should only
commence from the father’s death.
ARE MINORS and INCAPACITATED PERSONS
ALLOWED TO ACQUIRE POSSESSION OF
THINGS? Yes, “Minors and incapacitated persons
may acquire the possession of things; but they need
the assistance of their legal representatives in order
to exercise the rights which from the possession arise
in their favor.” (ART 535)
POSSESSION CANNOT BE ACQUIRED THROUGH
THE FOLLOWING:
1. thru FORCE or INTIMIDATION (as long as there
is a possessor who objects thereto). (Impliedly, if
at first there was objection but later on such
objection ceases, the pos- session begun by
force or intimidation may be acquired. Objection
may be made by suit of forcible entry within a
year from the dispossession, otherwise, the
possession de facto is lost.) (ART 536)
2. thru mere TOLERANCE (permission). (Example: If
I willingly permit X to occupy my land, that is not
really his possession, for the possession continues to
be mine.) Mere inaction or mere failure to bring an
action is NOT the tolerance referred to in the law.)
(ART 537)
CASE: A owned a parcel of land, which was occupied
by B and C. A tolerated their presence, and did not
compel them to pay rentals. In 1901, a land tax was
imposed, and A asked them to pay rentals. They
promised to do so, and recognized A’s ownership
over the land, but did not really pay said rent- als.
After a period of years, B and C now claim that they
have acquired said land by prescription. Are they
right?
HELD: No, since their stay was merely by tolerance,
and having recognized ownership in another, they
cannot now claim that their possession was adverse.
(de Roxas v. Maglonso, 8 Phil 745)
*A squatter’s possession, when there is no violence,
is by mere tolerance. The one-year period for filing an
unlawful de- tainer case against him should be
counted not from the begin- ning of the possession,
but from the time the latest demand to vacate is
made, unless in the meantime an accion publiciana is
instituted. (Calubayan v. Pascual, L-22645, Sep. 18,
1967).
3. thru clandestine, secret possession (or possession
without knowledge — for this would be possession by
stealth, and not open or public. (See Art. 537).
*If it is secret to many, but known to the owner, his
possession is affected.
Meaning of “Acts ... do not affect possession”
(Art. 537)
(a) The intruder does not acquire any right to
possession (NO LEGAL POSSESSION).
(b) The legal possessor, even if physically ousted, is
still the possessor and therefore —
1) still entitled to the benefits of
prescription;
2) still entitled to the fruits;
3) still entitled as possessor for all
purposes favorable to his
possession. (See Ayala de
Roxas v. Maglonso, 8 Phil. 745;
4 Manresa 201-202).
(c) The intruder cannot acquire the property by
prescrip- tion. (See Ayala de Roxas v.
Maglonso, supra; Cuaycong v. Benedicto,
37 Phil. 781).
ART. 538 (note: Art. 1544 on Double Sales)
General Rule Regarding Possession as a Fact
Possession as a fact cannot be recognized at the
same time in two different personalities. (only one will
be recognized…)
Exceptions to General Rule:
(a) co-possessors (since here, there is no conflict of
interest, both of them acting as co-owners,
as in the case of property owned or
possessed in common)
(b) possession in different concepts or different
degrees
(Example: Both owner and tenant are
possessors as a fact at the same time; the
first, in the concept of owner; the second,
in the concept of holder; other examples:
principal and agent; depositor and
depositary; owner and administrator.)
Rules or Criteria to be Used in Case of Conflict or
Dispute Regarding Possession (Preference
of Possession)
(a) present possessor shall be preferred
(b) if both are present, the one longer in possession
(c) if both began to possess at the same time, the
one who present (or has) a title
(d) if both present a title, the Court will
determine.(Mean- time, the thing shall be
judicially deposited.) >> “In case of two
certificates of title, the earlier shall be
preferred” (Legarda v. Saleeby)
Preference of Ownership:
Art. 1544 applies to preference of OWNERSHIP in
case of DOUBLE SALE (Art. 1544) or a DOUBLE
DONATION. (Art. 744).
(a) MOVABLE property —
Preference in ownership is given to the person who
first possessed it in good faith. (Art. 1544, par. 1).
(b) IMMOVABLE property —
Preference in ownership is given… 1) to the first who
registered his right in good faith in the Registry of
Property; 2) if there was no registration, to the
person who first possessed in good faith;
3) if there was no possession, to the person who
presents the oldest title, provided that the title had
been acquired in good faith.
EFFECTS OF POSSESSION
ART. 540 What kind of possession can serve as a
title for acquiring dominion? POSSESSION IN THE
CONCEPT OF OWNER :)
Q: are real tax declarations conclusive evidences of
possession?
A: Although payment of land taxes is not evidence of
own- ership and although a mere tax declaration or a
tax assessment does not by itself give the title, and is
of little value in proving one’s ownership, STILL
payment of the land tax is one of the most persuasive
and positive indicia, which shows the will of a person
to possess in concepto de dueno or with claim of
ownership. And therefore, prescription may
eventually be had, provided that the other requisites
for prescription are present. (Tupaz v. Ricamora, 37
O.G. 58). Otherwise put, while tax declarations and
receipts are NOT conclusive evidence of ownership,
yet, when coupled with proof of actual possession,
tax declarations and receipts are strong evidence of
ownership. (Gesmundo v. CA)
ART. 541 another presumption: A possessor in the
concept of owner has in his favor the legal
presumption that he possesses with a just title
and he cannot be obliged to show or prove it.
(one must be in possession, whether actual or
constructive)
- the just title referred in this article is that of a true
and valid title where there was a mode of
transferring ownership and the grantor was the
owner; a title which by itself is sufficient to transfer
ownership without the necessity of letting the
prescriptive period elapse. (Doliendo v. Biarnesa)
ART. 542 - another presumption: The possession of
real property presumes that of the movables
therein, so long as it is not shown or proved that
they should be excluded.
ART 543. Each one of the participants of a thing
possessed in common shall be deemed to have
exclusively possessed the part which may be
allotted to him upon the division thereof, for the
entire period during which the co-possession
lasted.
Example: A and B have been co-possessors of a
piece of land in Greenhills since 2002. If in 2006,
there is a partition, A is deemed to have possessed
exclusively the portion given him, not since 2002, but
since 2006. (This is useful in case of acquisition by
prescription.)
ART 544. A possessor in good faith is entitled to
the fruits received BEFORE the possession is
legally interrupted. (General Rule)
“Although because of the interruption, his good faith
ceases, the possessor can still retain the property
(ART 546) until he has been fully reimbursed for all
the necessary and useful expenses made by him on
the property.” (Ortiz v. Kayanan, 1979)
Natural and industrial fruits are considered
received from the time they are gathered or
severed.
. If at the time of legal interruption, the crops
are still growing, the rule on pending crops,
not that on gathered crops, should apply. (
Art. 545).
. If at the time of legal interruption, the crops
have already been gathered, but are sold
only after such interruption, the sale is
immaterial, for the law requires only a
gathering or severance, so Art. 544
applies.
Civil fruits are deemed to accrue daily and belong
to the possessor in good faith in that proportion.
ART 545. only applies to pending fruits
Example: A possessed in good faith a parcel of land.
At the time he received judicial summons to answer a
complaint filed by B, the crops still growing had been
there for 2 months. Harvest was made only after 4
more months (For his crop needed a total of 6
months from planting to harvesting). How should said
crops be divided between A and B?
ANS.: In the proportion of 2 to 4 (or 1 to 2), 2 for A
and 4 for B. This is what the law means when it says
that the net harvest shall be divided in proportion to
the time of possession.
In the example given, B (the owner), if he so desires
has an option —
. 1) to get the right already
discussed. (Art. 545, par. 1), or
. 2) to allow A (the possessor in
good faith) to FINISH the
cultivation and gathering of the
growing crops, as an
INDEMNITY for his part of the
expenses of cultivation and the
net proceeds. (If A refuses for
ANY REASON to accept this
concession, A loses the right to
be indemnified IN ANY OTHER
MAN- NER). (B is given this
option because he may not be
interested in the pending fruits at
all, or because he realizes that to
continue the cultivation might
result in a financial LOSS for
him.) (The refusal causes LOSS
of indemnity even if the fruits be
LESS than the expenses.)
*Note that Art. 545 applies only to a possessor in
GOOD faith for a possessor in bad faith has no right
whatsoever to fruits already gathered nor to fruits still
pending, except that in the former case (gathered
fruits), he gets back the necessary expenses for
production, gathering, and preservation of fruits. (Art.
443)
ART. 546 WHAT SHALL BE REFUNDED?
1. necessary expenses - those without which the
thing would physically deteriorate or be lost;
hence, those made for the preservation of the
thing;
- cf: 592 - such as those required by the wear and
tear due to the natural use of the thing, and are
indispensable for its preservation
Respective rights to Necessary Expenses:
. (a) If in good faith — entitled to:
. 1) refund
. 2) retain premises till paid
Note: If the owner sues the possessor
for the recovery of the property,
the possessor in good faith - also
applies to possessor in bad faith
(who is thus entitled to a refund)
must file a counterclaim for the
refund of necessary and useful
expenses, otherwise the
judgment in the case for
possession will be a BAR to a
subsequent suit brought solely
for the recovery of such
expenses. (Beltran v. Valbuena)
. (b) If in bad faith — entitled ONLY to a
refund (no right of RETENTION, as
penalty). (Dir. of Lands v. Abagat, 53 Phil.
147).
2. Useful expenses - those that add value to the
property or increase the object’s productivity or
useful for the satisfaction of spiritual and religious
yearnings.
Respective rights to useful expenses:
1. If in GOOD FAITH:
1) right to REIMBURSEMENT (of either the
amount spent or the increase in value — “plus value”
— at OWNER’S OPTION). (Art. 546).
2) right of RETENTION (till paid). (Art. 546).
3) right of REMOVAL (provided no substantial
damage or injury is caused to the principal,
reducing its VALUE) — UNLESS the
winner (owner or lawful possessor)
exercises the option in (1). (Art. 547).
“Damage” - 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.
*Note: Right of Removal is always subordinate to
the exercise of the option of the real owner
wanting to reimburse the useful expenses.
2. If in BAD FAITH - not entitled to any right re:
useful expenses (he is only entitled to
reimbursement re: luxurious expenses
<ART 549>)
CASE: X possessed in bad faith Y’s land. Y then
brought an action to eject X. Although X had incurred
some necessary and useful expenses on the land, X
did not set up these as a counterclaim in the
ejectment proceedings. Y won the case. Later X
sought to recover in another action said necessary
and useful expenses. Will the recovery prosper?
HELD: The recovery cannot prosper:
. 1) since, regarding, the useful expenses, X
is a posses- sor in bad faith, and is
therefore not entitled to any refund;
. 2) and since, regarding the necessary
expenses, the failure to present a
counterclaim therefor in the ejectment
proceedings, now constitutes a bar to their
recovery. (Beltran v. Valbuena)
ART. 548 WHAT SHALL NOT BE
REFUNDED?Expenses for pure luxury or
mere pleasure
Respective Rights:
(a) If in GOOD faith: In general, no right of refund or
retention but can remove if no substantial injury is
caused. However, owner has OPTION to allow:
1) possessor to remove
2) or retain for himself (the owner) the ornament
by REFUNDING the AMOUNT SPENT.
(Art. 548).
(b) In BAD faith: In general, no right of refund or
retention but can remove if no substantial injury is
caused. However, owner has OPTION to allow:
1) possessor to remove
2) or retain for himself (the owner) the ornament
by REFUNDING the VALUE it has at the
TIME owner ENTERS INTO
POSSESSION. (Art. 549).
Example: I possessed land in good faith, and
introduced thereon ornamental expenses
which cannot be removed without sub-
stantial injury. The owner does not want to
refund me any amount for said ornaments.
May I remove them?
ANS.: No, because in here, there would be
substantial injury.
REQUISITES OF ABANDONMENT:
1. the abandoner must have been a
possessor in the concept of an owner;
2. must have the capacity to renounce or
alienate;
3. Must be a physical relinquishment of the
thing;
4. Must have no more expectation to recover
(spes recuperandi) or intent to return or get
back (animus revertendi)
ART 549. WHAT ARE THE RIGHTS OF THE
POSSESSOR IN BAD FAITH?
Right of the Possessor (in the Concept of Owner)
Regard- ing FRUITS
(a) If in GOOD faith:
1) Gathered or severed or harvested
fruits are his own. (Art. 544; see
also Nacoco v. Geronimo, L-
2899, Apr. 29, 1949).
2) pending or ungathered fruits — (pro-
rating between possessor and
owner of expenses, net harvest,
and charges). (See Art. 545).
(b) If in BAD faith:
1) gathered fruits — must return value of
fruits already received as well as value of fruits which
the owner or legitimate possessor (not the possessor
in bad faith) could HAVE received with due care or
diligence, MINUS necessary expenses for cultivation,
gather- ing, and harvesting, to prevent the owner
from being unjustly enriched. (See Arts. 549, 443;
Dir. of Lands v. Abagat, 53 Phil. 147).
2) pending or ungathered fruits — no rights
at all, not even to expenses for cultivation because by
accession, all should belong to the owner, without
indemnity. (See Art. 449).
ART. 552 WHO IS LIABLE FOR LOSS OR
DETERIORATION OF A THING?
1. Possessor in good faith if he has acted with
fraudulent intent or negligence, after the judicial
summons;
2. Possessor in bad faith - in all cases including
fortuitous events
ART. 555 WHEN CAN A POSSESSOR LOSE HIS
POSSESSION?
(a) Thru the Possessor’s Voluntary Will and Intent
1) Abandonment. (Art. 555) - is the voluntary
renunciation of the thing.
2) Assignment (onerous or gratuitous conveyance).
(Art. 555). - complete transmission of ownership
rights to another person
(b) Against the Possessor’s Will
1) possession of another for more than one year.
(Art. 555). - loses possession de facto; hence, he can
no longer bring an action for forcible entry nor
unlawful detainer, since the prescriptive period for
such actions is one year.
2) final judgment in favor of another (with a better
right).
3) expropriation
4) prescription in favor of another.
5) recovery or reivindication by the legitimate owner
or possessor. (See 2 Castan 48).
(c) Because of the Object
1) destruction or total loss of the thing. (Art. 555).
2) going out of commerce. (Art. 555).
3) escaping from possessor’s control of wild animals.
(Art. 560).
ART 559. POSSESSION OF MOVABLES:
Possession of movable property acquired
. (a) in BAD FAITH — is never equivalent to
title
. (b) in GOOD FAITH —
. 1) D is equivalent to a title — as
a general rule. (Hence, the
owner, if he wants to get it back,
must REIMBURSE).
2) is NOT equivalent to title (as the
exception to the rule) when the
owner had LOST it or had been
UN- LAWFULLY DEPRIVED of it
(as when it has been stolen),
UNLESS the possessor had
acquired it in good faith at a
“public sale” (an auction sale,
where the public had properly
been notified). (See U.S. v.
Soriano) = hence, the owner
must reimburse the possessor
who acquired the thing in good
faith at a public sale.
Summary of Recovery or Non-Recovery Principle
(a) Owner MAY RECOVER WITHOUT
REIMBURSEMENT:
1) from possessor in bad faith.
2) from possessor in good faith (if owner had LOST
the property or been unlawfully
deprived of it) (the ac- quisition
being from a private person).
(Art. 559).
(b) Owner MAY RECOVER but should
REIMBURSE:
1) if possessor acquired the object in good faith at a
PUBLIC SALE or AUCTION. (Art. 559). [Because the
publicity attendant to a public sale should have been
sufficient warning for the owner to come for- ward
and claim the property. (Manresa).].
(c) Owner CANNOT RECOVER, even if he offers to
REMBURSE (whether or not the owner had lost or
been unlawfully deprived):
1) if possessor had acquired it in good faith by
purchase from a merchant’s store, or in
fairs, or markets in accordance with the
Code of Commerce and special laws. (Art.
1505, Civil Code, see also Arts. 85, 86,
Code of Commerce).
2) if owner “is by his conduct precluded from
denying the seller’s authority to sell.”
(ESTOPPEL). (Art. 1505).
3) if possessor had obtained the goods because
he was an innocent purchaser for value
and holder of a NEGOTIABLE document of
title to the goods. (See Art. 1518).
CASE: A asked B to sell jewelry. B instead of sell-
ing, borrowed money from a pawnshop,
and as security, pledged the jewelry. After
B was convicted of ESTAFA, A asked the
pawnshop for the jewels, but the pawnshop
refused to give them up unless A first pay
the amount lent by the pawnshop to B.
HELD: A can get the jewels without giving to the
pawnshop the money borrowed by B
because in the first place, the pledge was
not valid (not having been done by the
owner or his duly authorized agent); in the
second place, there is no contractual
relation between A and the pawnshop; in
the third place, A had been illegally
deprived of the jewels; and finally it would
be unjust and unfair to the owner (A)
considering the fact that ordinarily, most
pawnshops do not require their customers
to first prove their ownership of the objects
being pledged. (Arenas v. Raymundo, 19
Phil 47).
———————————————————————
USUFRUCT - is the right to enjoy the property
of another with the obligation of preserving
its form and substance (562)
Fundamental rights:
1. right to dispose (naked ownership);
2. right to use;
3. right to the fruits (the combination of #2 and #3
is called the usufruct)
Characteristics of a usufruct:
I. Essential characteristics:
1. real right;
2. Temporary nature;
3. purpose is to enjoy the benefits as a
consequence of normal use or exploitation
II. Natural Characteristics - ordinarily present but a
contrary stipulation may eliminate it
1. The obligation of conserving or preserving the
form and substance of the thing
RIGHTS available to the Usufructuary: . 2) no necessity of refunding owner for consideration of his person; acquired
expenses in- curred, (for the owner gave through caution juratoria (587)
1. action to protect the usufruct itself; the usufruct evidently without any thought
of being reimbursed for the pending fruits, ART. 583
or because the value of said fruits must
2. Action to protect the exercise of the usufruct already have been taken into consideration
in fixing the terms and conditions of the When Security Is Not Required:
basis usufruct Lease usufruct, if for instance, the usufruct came
about because of a contract); 1) When no one will be injured thereby (NO
PREJU- DICE). (See Art. 585). Example: in
as to extent covers all covers a the usufruct over a periodical income or life
. 3) BUT without prejudice to the right of
fruits and particular annuity. Provided naked owner consents
third persons. (Thus, if the fruits had been
uses use
planted by a possessor in good faith, the for the law says “may.” (Art. 585).
pending crop expenses and charges shall
as to nature real right real right be pro-rated between said possessor and 2) When there is waiver by the naked owner (See
of the right only if the the usufructuary). (See Art. 545). (See also 4 Manresa 464-465), or there is a
least covers 4 Manresa 392). stipulation either in a will or by contract.
a real
property
3) When the usufructuary is the donor of the
and
(b) Fruits pending at the TERMINATION of usufruct: property (who has reserved the usufruct).
registered
(The naked owner should be grateful
or the term
. 1) Belong to the OWNER; enough not to require the secu- rity). (Art.
is more
584).
than 1 year
. 2) BUT the owner must reimburse the
usufructuary for ordinary cultivation 4) When there is a parental usufruct (that is, in
creation by the the lessor the case of parents who are usufructuaries
expenses and for the seeds and similar
owner or may be or of their chil- dren’s property, except when
expenses, from the proceeds of the fruits.
his agent may not be the parents contract a second or
(Hence, the excess of expenses over the
the owner subsequent marriage, PROVIDED that
proceeds need not be reimbursed.)
(in cases of each child’s property does not exceed
sublease) P50,000 in which case, the parents have to
. 3) Also, rights of innocent third parties file a bond (See Art. 225, the Family Code)
should not be prejudiced. (See No. [3] of not as usufructuary, but as guardian or
as to duty to no duty at [a], supra; also Arts. 545 and 567).
repairs make all administrator.
ordinary
repairs 5) When there is a caucion juratoria, which takes
CAN A USUFRUCTUARY ALIENATE HIS RIGHT? the place of a bond, and is made by taking
3. YES. (art. 572) an oath to fulfill properly the duties of a
usufructuary, BUT this is available only
* dividends - are income or civil fruits and should However… under the conditions prescribed in Art. 587
belong to the usufructuary and not to the (promise under oath).
remainder man (naked owner) - Orozco 1. all the contracts he may enter into as such
v. Araneta usufructuary shall terminate upon the ART. 586 WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF FAILURE TO
expiration of the usufruct, saving leases GIVE SECURITY?
ART. 567 WHO OWNS THE FRUITS? of rural lands, which shall be
considered as subsisting during the
On the Rights of the Naked Owner:
agricultural year. (572)
(a) Fruits pending at the BEGINNING of usufruct:
. 1) He may deliver the property to the
2. except legal usufruct - the usufruct which parents usufructuary (since the article gives the
. 1) belong to the usufructuary;
had over the properties of their owner a right, and not a duty) (but even if
unemancipated children; usfruct delivery is made, the naked owner may still
granted a usufructuary in favor in
 later on demand the needed security). (TS, Requisites Before the Caucion Juratoria Is . (6) By the termination of the right of the
Mar. 12, 1903). Allowed person con-

. 2) OR the naked owner may choose . (a) proper court petition

RETENTION of the property as
ADMINISTRATOR (here the usuf- ructuary
gets the net proceeds, minus
administration expenses, the amount of
which is fixed by mutual agreement or by
the courts).
. 3) OR the naked owner may demand
RECEIVERSHIP or ADMINISTRATION (by
another) of the REAL PROPERTY, sale of
movable, conversion or deposit of credit
instruments, or investment of cash or
profits.
(b) On the Rights of the Usufructuary:
. 1) The usufructuary cannot possess the
property till he
gives the security.
. 2) The usufructuary cannot administer the
property, hence, he cannot execute a lease
thereon. (4 Manresa 471-472).
stituting the usufruct;
. (b) necessity for delivery of furniture,
implements or house included in the (7) By prescription.
usufruct
. (c) approval of the court
. (d) sworn promise.
WHAT IS THE DUTY OF THE USUFRUCTUARY?
1. required to make ordinary repairs (592)
2. inform the owner of the need to make
extraordinary repairs (594)
3. replace, as the case may be, with young the
animals subject to the usufruct (591)
4. Pay the annual charges and taxes - lien on the
fruits (596)

. 3) The usufructuary cannot collect credits

that have matured, nor invest them unless
the Court or the naked owner consents.
HOW IS USUFRUCT EXTINGUISHED? (603)
(Art. 599).
[NOTE: This No. (3) applies also even if
the usufructuary is EXEMPTED from giving Usufruct is extinguished:
security. (Art. 599).].
(1) By the death of the usufructuary, unless a
. 4) But the usufructuary can alienate his contrary intention clearly appears;
right to the usufruct (since failure to give
the security did not extinguish the (2) By the expiration of the period for which it was
usufruct). The grantee may of course constituted, or by the fulfillment of any resolutory
possess, the moment he gives security. condition provided in the title creating the usufruct;
(See 4 Man- resa 471-472; see also Art.
603). (3) By merger of the usufruct and ownership in the
same person;
(587) WHAT IS A CAUCION JURATORIA? -a sworn
duty to take good care of the property and . (4) By renunciation of the usufructuary;
return same at the end of the usufruct. It
takes the place of the bond or security and
is based on necessity and humanity
. (5) By the total loss of the thing in usufruct;