Article 457 – onwards October 20, 2020

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

Forms of Accession Natural:

 Alluvium
 Avulsion
 Change of course of rivers
 Formation of islands

Alluvium – is the soil deposited or added to the lands adjoining the banks of rivers, and gradually
received as an effect of the current of the waters. Prescriptive period is 50 years.

Essential requisites of alluvium:

 The deposit should be gradual and imperceptible

 Cause is the current of the river
 Current must be that of a river
 The river must continue to exist
 The increase must be comparatively little, and not, for example, such as would increase the area
of the riparian owner by over 150%

Why is alluvium granted to the riparian owner?

 To compensate him for the loss he may suffer due to erosion or the destructive force of the water
and danger from floods;
 To compensate him because the property is subject to encumbrances and legal easements;
 The interests of agriculture require that the soil be given to the person who is in the best position
to cultivate the same;
 Since after all, it cannot be said with certainty from whom the soil came from, it may just as well
be logically given to him who can best utilize the property.

 Accretion on a bank of a lake, belong to the owners of the estate to which they have been added.
 Accretion on a bank of an island formed in a non-navigable river belongs to the owner of the
island.
 Accretion on a sea bank still belongs to the public domain, and this article cannot apply.

Effects of Public Service Constructions or Easements on River Banks:

 Public service construction, like a railroad or a road, is made on a river bank; it is evident that
the owner of the accretion is the government or the railroad company.

Property Reviewer Page 1

  Easement for the benefit of navigation, floatage, fishing and salvage, the right of the riparian
owner to the accretion subsists, because in easements, the owner of the servient estate does not
lose his ownership over the portion occupied.

Art. 458. The owners of estates adjoining ponds or lagoons do not acquire the land left dry by the
natural decrease of the waters, or lose that inundated by them in extraordinary floods.

 This article applies when the estate adjoins a pond or a lagoon. It does not apply when the estate
adjoins a lake, a river, a creek, or other streams.

Definition:

Pond – a body of stagnant water without an outlet, larger than a puddle and smaller than a lake, or a like
body of water with a small outlet.

Lagoon – a small lake, ordinarily of fresh water, and not very deep, fed by floods, the hollow bed of
which is bounded by elevations of the land.

Lake – a body of water formed in depressions of the earth; ordinarily fresh water, coming from rivers,
brooks, or springs and connected with the sea by them.

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

Avulsion

- The process whereby the current of a river, creek, or torrent segregates from an estate on its bank
a known portion of land and transfers it to another estate.
- The removal of a considerable quantity of earth upon or annexation to the land of another,
suddenly and by the perceptible action of the water.

Definition:

River – a natural stream of water, of greater volume than a creek or rivulet flowing, in a more or less
permanent bed or channel, between defined banks or walls, with a current which may either be
continuous in one direction or affected by the ebb and flow of the tide.

Creek – a small stream less than a river; a recess or inlet in the shore of a river, and not a separate or
independent stream, though it is sometimes used in the latter meaning.

Torrent – a violent. Rushing, or turbulent stream

Distinctions between Alluvium and Avulsion:

Property Reviewer Page 2

 Alluvium Avulsion
(1) The deposit of the soil here is gradual. (1) sudden or abrupt process may be seen
(2) Soil cannot be identified. (2) identifiable or verifiable
(3) Belongs to the owner of the property to (3) belongs to the owner from whose property it
which it is attached. was detached

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

 If instead of being uprooted, the trees still remain attached to the land that has been carried
away, it is Article 459 that shall govern.
 If the owner of the land which the uprooted trees have been cast incurred expenses for preserving
or when he transplants them, only for preservation purposes, he is doubtless entitled to
indemnification.

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

Requisites for Article 461 to apply:

 The change must be sudden in order that the old river bed may be identified.
 The changing of the course must be more or less permanent, and not temporary overflooding of
another’s land.
 The change of the river bed must be a natural one, caused by natural forces, and not by artificial
means such as those used by private individuals authorized by the government.
 There must be a definite abandonment by the government.
 The river must continue to exist, that is, it must not completely dry up or disappear.

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

 All rivers, whether navigable or not, as well as their natural beds are of public dominion.

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

Property Reviewer Page 3

 Article 463 applies whether the river is navigable or not, for in both cases, the owner should not
be deprived of his dominion over the segregated or isolated property.

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

Ownership of islands formed by unidentifiable accumulated deposits:

 If formed on the sea –

a. Within the territorial waters or maritime zone or jurisdiction of the Philippines – State
b. Outside of our territorial jurisdiction – the first country to effectively occupy the same
 If formed on lakes, or navigable or floatable rivers – the State
 If formed on non-navigable or non-floatable rivers –
a. If nearer in margin to one bank, owner of nearer margin is sole owner.
b. If equidistant, the island shall be divided longitudinally in halves, each bank getting
halves.

Definition:

Navigable or floatable river – If useful for floatage and commerce, whether the tides affect the water or
not; should benefit trade and commerce.

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

SECTION 3 - Right of Accession with Respect to Movable Property

Types of Accession with respect to movable property:

 Adjunction
 Mixture
 Specification

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

Property Reviewer Page 4

Adjunction – it is the process by virtue of which two movable things belonging to different owners are
united in such a way that they form a single object.

 Adjunction may be done in good faith or in bad faith. Another name is conjunction.

Kinds of adjunction:

 Inclusion
 Soldering
 Escritura
 Pintura
 Weaving

Art. 467. The principal thing, as between two things incorporated, is deemed to be that to which the
other has been united as an ornament, or for its use or perfection.

Art. 468. If it cannot be determined by the rule given in the preceding article which of the two
things incorporated is the principal one, the thing of the greater value shall be so considered, and as
between two things of equal value, that of the greater volume.

In painting and sculpture, writings, printed matter, engraving and lithographs, the board, metal,
stone, canvas, paper or parchment shall be deemed the accessory thing.

Test to determine which is the principal and which is the accessory:

The principal is:

 That to which the other had been united as an ornament, or for its use, or perfection;
 That of greater value;
 That of greater volume;
 Finally that which has greater merits.

Art. 469. Whenever the things united can be separated without injury, their respective owners may
demand their separation.

Nevertheless, in case the thing united for the use, embellishment or perfection of the other, is much
more precious than the principal thing, the owner of the former may demand its separation, even
though the thing to which it has been incorporated may suffer some injury.

Art. 470. Whenever the owner of the accessory thing has made the incorporation in bad faith, he
shall lose the thing incorporated and shall have the obligation to indemnify the owner of the
principal thing for the damages he may have suffered.

Property Reviewer Page 5

If the one who has acted in bad faith is the owner of the principal thing, the owner of the accessory
thing shall have a right to choose between the former paying him its value or that the thing
belonging to him be separated, even though for this purpose it be necessary to destroy the principal
thing; and in both cases, furthermore, there shall be indemnity for damages.

If either one of the owners has made the incorporation with the knowledge and without the
objection of the other, their respective rights shall be determined as though both acted in good
faith.

Art. 471. Whenever the owner of the material employed without his consent has a right to an
indemnity, he may demand that this consist in the delivery of a thing equal in kind and value, and
in all other respects, to that employed, or else in the price thereof, according to expert appraisal.

 Indemnity is paid by delivery of a thing equal in kind and value or payment of price as
appraised by experts.
 The right to indemnity applies only if material was employed without the owner’s consent. The
material may have been the principal or the accessory.

Art. 472. If by the will of their owners two things of the same or different kinds are mixed, or if the
mixture occurs by chance, and in the latter case the things are not separable without injury, each
owner shall acquire a right proportional to the part belonging to him, bearing in mind the value of
the things mixed or confused.

This article deals with mixture.

Mixture – combination or union of materials where respective identities of the component elements are
lost.

Art. 473. If by the will of only one owner, but in good faith, two things of the same or different
kinds are mixed or confused, the rights of the owners shall be determined by the provisions of the
preceding article.

If the one who caused the mixture or confusion acted in bad faith, he shall lose the thing belonging
to him thus mixed or confused, besides being obliged to pay indemnity for the damages caused to
the owner of the other thing with which his own was mixed.

This article deals with mixture.

Mixture – combination or union of materials where respective identities of the component elements are
lost. There is greater inter-penetration of decomposition of objects that have been mixed.

Kinds of mixture:

 Commixtion – mixture of solids

 Confusion – liquids are mixed

Property Reviewer Page 6

Rules for mixture:

 Mixture is caused by one owner in good faith, by will of both owners, or by chance, or by a
common agent – co-ownership results, each owner acquiring an interest or right proportional to
the value of his material.
 Mixture is made by one owner in bad faith
- He loses his material
- and is liable to damages

In case mixture was caused by the negligence of one of the parties, he is liable for his culpa aquiliana
and should indemnify for damages. Good faith does not necessarily exclude negligence. (Art 456)

Art. 474. One who in good faith employs the material of another in whole or in part in order to
make a thing of a different kind, shall appropriate the thing thus transformed as his own,
indemnifying the owner of the material for its value.

If the material is more precious than the transformed thing or is of more value, its owner may, at
his option, appropriate the new thing to himself, after first paying indemnity for the value of the
work, or demand indemnity for the material.

If in the making of the thing bad faith intervened, the owner of the material shall have the right to
appropriate the work to himself without paying anything to the maker, or to demand of the latter
that he indemnify him for the value of the material and the damages he may have suffered.
However, the owner of the material cannot appropriate the work in case the value of the latter, for
artistic or scientific reasons, is considerably more than that of the material.

Specification – is the giving of new form to another’s material through the application of labor. The
material undergoes a transformation or change of identity. The rule of “accessory follows the principal”
applies here, with labor being considered the principal.

Rules to follow in specification:

 If the worker (principal) is in good faith

- He appropriates the new thing
- but He must indemnify for materials

Exception: if the material is more precious than the new thing or is more valuable, the owner of
the materials has an option
- to get the new thing but he pays for the work
- or to demand indemnity for the material

 If the worker is in bad faith, the owner of materials has an option;

- He can appropriate the work without paying the labor
- or he can demand indemnity for the material plus damages

Property Reviewer Page 7

Specification distinguished from Mixture and Adjunction:

Adjunction Mixture Specification

1. Involves at least two Involves at least two things May involve only one thing but
things form is changed
2. As a rule, accessory As a rule, co-ownership results As a rule, accessory follows
follows principal principal
3. The things joined retain The things mixed or confused The new object retains or
their nature may either retain or lose their preserves the nature of the
respective natures original object

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

CHAPTER 3

QUIETING OF TITLE

Art. 476. Whenever there is a cloud on title to real property or any interest therein, by reason of
any instrument, record, claim, encumbrance or proceeding which is apparently valid or effective
but is in truth and in fact invalid, ineffective, voidable, or unenforceable, and may be prejudicial to
said title, an action may be brought to remove such cloud or to quiet the title.

An action may also be brought to prevent a cloud from being cast upon title to real property or any
interest therein.

Quieting of title – is a common-law remedy for the removal of any cloud upon or doubt or uncertainty
with respect to the title to real property. Its purpose is to secure “an adjudication that a claim of title to or
an interest in property, adverse to that the complainant and those claiming under him may be forever
afterward free from any danger of hostile claim.”

Reasons for the existence of the “cloud”:

 An instrument or record or claim or encumbrance or proceeding

 Which is apparently valid or effective
 But is, in truth and in fact, invalid, ineffective, voidable, or unenforceable, or extinguished or
barred by extinctive prescription
 And may be prejudicial to the title.

Action to Quiet Title – a remedy or proceeding which has for its purpose an adjudication that a claim of
title to realty adverse to the plaintiff, is invalid, inoperative or defective and hence, plaintiff may forever
be free of any hostile claim. The only issue is whether there is a cloud on a title to real property because
of any instrument, etc. that has a prima facie appearance of validity.

Requisites:

1. Plaintiff has a legal or at least an equitable title to in the real property subject of the action

Property Reviewer Page 8

2. Defendant claims an interest therein adverse to the plaintiff arising from an instrument, etc.

3. The instrument, etc. claimed to casting loud on plaintiff’s title must be shown to be in fact invalid
despite its prima facie appearance of validity

Difference between an action “to quiet title” from a suit “to remove cloud”

A. To quiet title – An action for the purpose of putting an end to vexatious litigation in respect to the
property involved; remedial action involving a present adverse claim.

B. To remove cloud – To procure cancellation, delivery of, release of an instrument, encumbrance, or

claim constituting a claim on plaintiff’s title; preventive action to prevent a future cloud on the title.

Kind of action referred to:

 Remedial – action to remove the cloud or to quiet title

 Preventive – action to prevent a future cloud or doubt

Application:

1. Applies only in the case of real property

2. The matter complained of must have prima facie appearance of validity, therefore, when invalid or
inefficacious on its face, an action to remove cloud on title does not exist

Rights of a property owner to have clouds eliminated:

 That their respective rights be determined,

 Not only to place things in their proper place, to make the one who has no rights to said
immovable respect and not disturb the other,
 But also for the benefit of both,
 So that he who has the right would see every cloud of doubt over the property dissipated,
 And he could afterwards without fear introduce the improvements he may desire, to use, and even
to abuse the property as he deems best.

Reasons for allowing the action:

 Prevention of litigation
 Protection of the true title and possession
 Real interest of both parties, and of right and justice, which require that the precise state of the
title be known

Prescriptive period to file an action to quiet title:

A. If plaintiff is in possession the action does not prescribe.

Property Reviewer Page 9

B. If plaintiff is not in possession, the action may prescribe

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

Differences in effect when plaintiff may be in possession or not in possession:

Plaintiff is in possession Plaintiff is out of possession

a. Period does not prescribe Period prescribes
b. Only right is to remove or prevent cloud Aside from giving the right to remove or prevent
cloud, he may also bring the ordinary actions of
ejectment, publiciana or reivindicatoria within the
proper prescriptive periods

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

Two instances where the action may be used:

 When the contract, instrument, or other obligation has ended

 When the action is barred by extinctive prescription

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

Whenever the plaintiff is shown to be legally or morally bound to restore or reimburse, he must do so.
This is because the precise purpose of the action is to quiet title and not to obtain some pecuniary
benefits.

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

In case of conflict between the Civil Code and the principles of the general law on the quieting of title, the
former shall prevail.

Principles of General Law – are the general principles developed on the subject on Anglo-American
jurisprudence, where this remedy is well-known.

Principles:

 Regarding Defenses
- The plaintiff does not have legal or equitable title.
- The defendant has acquired the ownership by, for example, adverse possession.
- The case has already been previously decided between the parties on the same issue – res
judicata.

Property Reviewer Page 10

 - The defendant became the owner after the action had been filed, but before he filed hi answer.
- The action has prescribed, the plaintiff being outside of possession.

 Regarding the Reliefs Given

- Unauthorized mortgages may be cancelled.
- In an ordinary case, defendant may in his counter-claim ask for quieting of title as against the
plaintiff.
- Injunction may be availed of such as a prohibition to destroy certain properties or to gather
fruits from the land in question

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

Rules of procedure as enunciated by American Courts:

 The venue of the action is determined by the situation or location of the premises, and not by the
residence of the party.
 The process or notice should accurately describe the property and state in general terms the nature
and extent of the plaintiff’s claim.
 The suit cannot be brought in the name of one party for the use and benefit of another.
 In a suit for quieting of title, the actual possessor at the time of the filing of the action must be
respected in his possession until after there is an adjudication on the merits.

When the action to quiet title will not prosper:

 If it is merely an action to settle a dispute concerning boundaries.

 If the case merely involves the proper interpretation and meaning if a contract or document.
 If the plaintiff has no title, either legal or equitable.
 If the action has prescribed and the plaintiff is not in possession of the property.
 If the contract, instrument, etc. is void on its face.
 If it is a mere claim or assertion unless such claim has been made in a court action or the claim
asserts that an instrument or entry in behalf of the plaintiff is not really what it appears to be.

CHAPTER 4

RUINOUS BUILDINGS AND TREES IN DANGER OF FALLING

Art. 482. If a building, wall, column, or any other construction is in danger of falling, the owner
shall be obliged to demolish it or to execute the necessary work in order to prevent it from falling.

If the proprietor does not comply with this obligation, the administrative authorities may order the
demolition of the structure at the expense of the owner, or take measures to insure public safety.

Property Reviewer Page 11

The complainant who brings the case must either have his property adjacent to the dangerous
construction, or must have to pass by necessity in the immediate vicinity. If the construction falls, the
owner would be liable for damages, as a general rule.

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

Failure on the owner’s part to act accordingly will be met with expenses shouldered by him.

Title III. - CO-OWNERSHIP

Art. 484. There is co-ownership whenever the ownership of an undivided thing or right belongs to
different persons.

In default of contracts, or of special provisions, co-ownership shall be governed by the provisions of

this Title.

Co-ownership

– is that state where an undivided thing or right belongs to two or more persons.

- the right of common dominion which two or more persons have in a spiritual part of a thing which is not
physically divided. (Sanchez Roman)

- manifestation of the private right of ownership, which instead of being exercised by the owner in an
exclusive manner over the things subject to it, is exercised by two or more owners and the undivided
thing or right to which it refers to one and the same. (Manresa)

What governs co-ownership:

1) Contracts
2) Special legal provisions
3) Provisions of the Title on Co-ownership

Sources of Co-ownership: (Causes that give rise to co-ownership)

1) By law - e.g. commixtion, Art. 147 of the Family Code

2) By contract
3) By chance - commixtion
4) By occupation or occupancy - catch a wild beast or hidden treasure
5) By succession or will - e.g. property left by a decedent to several heirs
6) Donation inter vivos – donor prohibits partition for a certain period

Kinds of Co-ownership:

Property Reviewer Page 12

 1) Subject matter
a) Co-ownership of an undivided thing
b) Co-ownership of an undivided right
2) Source
a) Contractual ownership
b) Non-contractual ownership
3) Rights of co-owners
a) Tenancy in common
b) Joint Tenancy

Tenancy in Common distinguished from Joint Tenancy:

Tenancy in Common Joint Tenancy

1. This involves a physical whole. But there is This also involves a physical whole. but there is no
an ideal division; each co-owner being the ideal division; each and all of them own the whole
owner of his own ideal share. thing.
2. Each co-owner may dispose of his ideal or Each co-owner may not dispose of his own share
undivided share without the other’s without the consent of all the rest, because he really
consent. has no ideal share.
3. If a co-owner dies, his share goes to his If a joint-tenant dies, his share goes by accretion to
own heirs. the other joint-tenants by virtue of their
survivorship or jus accrecendi.
4. If a co-owner is a minor, this does not If a joint-tenant is under a legal disability, this
benefit the others for the purpose of benefits the other against whom prescription will
prescription therefore runs against them. not run.

Characteristics:

1) Plurality of subjects (there must be two or more co-owners)

2) Unity of object (material and physical indivision) and recognition of the ideal or intellectual
shares of co-owners
3) There is no mutual representation by the co-owners
4) It exists for the common enjoyment of the co-owners
5) It has no distinct legal personality
6) It is, governed first of all by the contract of the parties otherwise, by the special legal
provisions, and in default, by the provisions of Title III on co-ownership.

Note: Relationship of co-owner to his other co-owners is fiduciary in character.

Co-ownership distinguished from Ordinary Partnership:

Co-ownership Conjugal Partnership

a. No legal personality Has legal or juridical personality
b. Created by contract or by other things Created by contract only

Property Reviewer Page 13

 c. Purpose – collective enjoyment Purpose is profit
d. Agreement for it to exist for 10 years – There is no term limit set by law
valid
e. As a rule, no mutual representation As a rule, there is mutual representation
f. Not dissolved by death or incapacity of Is dissolved by the death or incapacity of partner
co-owner
g. Can dispose of his share without the Cannot substitute another as partner in his place
consent of others without consent of the others
h. Profits must always depend on Profits may be stipulated upon
proportionate shares

Art. 485. The share of the co-owners, in the benefits as well as in the charges, shall be proportional
to their respective interests. Any stipulation in a contract to the contrary shall be void.

The portions belonging to the co-owners in the co-ownership shall be presumed equal, unless the
contrary is proved.

General rule: Any stipulation making the share in the benefits and charges disproportional to their
respective interests of the co-owners is void.

Exception: If the co-ownership is created other than by a contract (e.g. by will, donation) – the share of
the co-owners need not be proportionate to their respective interests.

Art. 486. Each co-owner may use the thing owned in common, provided he does so in accordance
with the purpose for which it is intended and in such a way as not to injure the interest of the co-
ownership or prevent the other co-owners from using it according to their rights. The purpose of
the co-ownership may be changed by agreement, express or implied.

LIMITATIONS - A co-owner may use the thing owned in common, provided he does so:

1. In accordance with the purpose for which it is intended

2. In such a way as not to injure the interests of the co-ownership

3. Without preventing others from making use thereof according to their own rights.

Meaning of “purpose for which it is intended”

Agreement of the parties should govern. If there is none, that use for which it is ordinarily adapted
according to its nature (e.g. house only for living and not to be used as a factory) or use to which is has
been previously devoted.

Note: The co-owners are free to change the purpose of the co-ownership by agreement.

Principles:

Property Reviewer Page 14

1. Mere tolerance on the part of the co-owners cannot legalize the change in the use of a thing from that
intended by the parties.

2. No prejudice to co-ownership-co-owners agreed to lease, co-owner cannot use without paying rent.

The dual nature of ownership in co-ownership:

1. Ownership over the ideal share

2. Joint ownership over the whole

Art. 487. Any one of the co-owners may bring an action in ejectment.

Any co-owner may bring, in behalf of himself and others, an action for ejectment affecting the co-
ownership.

Notes:

A. The suit may proceed without impleading the other co-owners.

B. A favorable judgment shall benefit the other co-owners, but if adverse, the same cannot prejudice the
rights of the co-owners who were not impleaded.

Actions covered by the term “ejectment”:

1) Forcible entry 4) Accion reivindicatoria

2) Unlawful detainer 5) Quieting of title
3) Accion publiciana 6) Replevin

Main issue in an ejectment suit is possession de facto, not possession de jure.

Any co-owner may file an action under Article 487 not only against a third person, but also against
another co-owner who takes exclusive possession and asserts exclusive ownership of the property.

Acts of preservation or Acts of administration or Acts of alteration,

necessary repairs management encumbrance, or alienation
1. Any co-owner may decide on This is to be decided by the Unanimous consent of all the co-
an act of preservation (Art. majority of the co-owners owners is needed
489) (Arts. 489 and 492)
2. If practicable, first notify his By majority is meant the Run to the courts for appropriate
co-owner of the necessity of controlling interest (financial relief, if withholding of consent
repairs majority) not numerical majority of one or some of the co-owners
is clearly prejudicial to the
common interest (Art. 491)
3. Appointment of an administrator
if there is no majority.

Art. 488. Each co-owner shall have a right to compel the other co-owners to contribute to the
expenses of preservation of the thing or right owned in common and to the taxes. Any one of the
latter may exempt himself from this obligation by renouncing so much of his undivided interest as

Property Reviewer Page 15

may be equivalent to his share of the expenses and taxes. No such waiver shall be made if it is
prejudicial to the co-ownership.

General Rule: The expenses of preservation of the thing owned in common and the amount of taxes
should be borne by all.

Exception: If co-owner renounces so much of his undivided interest as may be equivalent to his share of
the expenses – exempt from payment.

Old rule: Co-owner may renounce his whole interest, and pertains to exemption in being required to
contribute to future expenses.

New rule: Renunciation of a portion of interest in co-ownership.

Criticism to the new rule (Tolentino):

1. This is dacion en pago etc.

2. Since this renunciation pertains to a debt already incurred, consent of the other co-owners is required
such as on the following matters: valuation of the share

3. Effect on creditors (third party) – Can the co-owner exempt himself to pay his share of the expenses to
the creditor simply by renouncing an equivalent portion of his share in the co-ownership? No, because
this constitutes novation by change of debtor and requires consent of creditor.

Reimbursement

– covers only necessary expenses like those for the preservation of a house in a ruinous condition and not
for useful improvements, even if the value of the property is thereby increased, the purpose of
co=ownership not being for profit.

- can be had from the estate of a deceased co-owner, provided no renunciation has been made.

Renunciation

- cannot be implied by mere refusal to pay the proportionate share. If there is refusal to pay, but no
renunciation, the creditors can still collect from the delinquent co-owner.

Art. 489. Repairs for preservation may be made at the will of one of the co-owners, but he must, if
practicable, first notify his co-owners of the necessity for such repairs. Expenses to improve or
embellish the thing shall be decided upon by a majority as determined in Article 492.

Number of co-owners who must consent:

1) Repairs, ejectment action – one

2) Alterations or acts of ownership – all
3) Useful improvements, luxurious embellishments, administration and better enjoyment – financial
majority

Property Reviewer Page 16

Art. 490. Whenever the different stories of a house belong to different owners, if the titles of
ownership do not specify the terms under which they should contribute to the necessary expenses
and there exists no agreement on the subject, the following rules shall be observed:

(1) The main and party walls, the roof and the other things used in common, shall be preserved at
the expense of all the owners in proportion to the value of the story belonging to each;

(2) Each owner shall bear the cost of maintaining the floor of his story; the floor of the entrance,
front door, common yard and sanitary works common to all, shall be maintained at the expense of
all the owners pro rata;

(3) The stairs from the entrance to the first story shall be maintained at the expense of all the
owners pro rata, with the exception of the owner of the ground floor; the stairs from the first to the
second story shall be preserved at the expense of all, except the owner of the ground floor and the
owner of the first story; and so on successively.

Perpendicular co-ownership – where different stories belong to different persons.

The Rules:

1) Proportionate contribution is required for the preservation of –

a) The main walls;
b) The party walls;
c) The roof; and
d) The other things used in common.
2) Each floor owner must bear the expenses of his floor.
3) Stairs are to be maintained from story to story, by the users.

Under this article, ground floor, if there is any, is distinguished from the first story.

Art. 491. None of the co-owners shall, without the consent of the others, make alterations in the
thing owned in common, even though benefits for all would result therefrom. However, if the
withholding of the consent by one or more of the co-owners is clearly prejudicial to the common
interest, the courts may afford adequate relief.

Alterations – is a change which is more or less permanent which changes the use of the thing and which
prejudices the condition of the thing or its enjoyment by the others.

A change made by a co-owner in the thing owned in common, which involves:

1. Change of the thing from the state or essence in which the others believe it should remain

2. Withdrawal of the thing from the use to which they wish it to be intended

3. Any other transformation which prejudices the condition or substance of the thing or its enjoyment by
the others

Property Reviewer Page 17

Examples of “acts of alteration”:

1) Sale, donation, or mortgage of the entire property

2) Sale, donation or mortgage of a part of the property but with definite boundaries
3) A voluntary easement
4) Lease of real property
5) Construction of a house on a lot owned in common
6) Any other act of strict dominion or ownership
7) Contracts of long duration

Unanimous consent of all the co-owners (not just majority) is necessary even if alteration would prove
beneficial, because alteration is an act of ownership and not of mere administration.

Form of consent:

1) Express
2) Implied

Important: If the withholding of the consent by one or more of the co-owners is clearly prejudicial to the
common interest, the courts may afford adequate relief.

EFFECTS OF AN ILLEGAL ALTERATION:

A co-owner who makes such alteration without the express or implied consent of the others acts in bad
faith and as punishment, he should:

1) Lose what he has spent

2) Be obliged to demolish the improvements done
3) Be liable for losses and damages
4) Whatever benefits the co-ownership derives will belong to it
5) In case a house is constructed on common lot, all the co-owners will be entitled to a proportionate
share of the rent.

Art. 492. For the administration and better enjoyment of the thing owned in common, the
resolutions of the majority of the co-owners shall be binding.

There shall be no majority unless the resolution is approved by the co-owners who represent the
controlling interest in the object of the co-ownership.

Should there be no majority, or should the resolution of the majority be seriously prejudicial to
those interested in the property owned in common, the court, at the instance of an interested party,
shall order such measures as it may deem proper, including the appointment of an administrator.

Whenever a part of the thing belongs exclusively to one of the co-owners, and the remainder is
owned in common, the preceding provision shall apply only to the part owned in common.

They contemplate acts or decisions for the common benefit of all the co-owners and not for the benefit of
only one or some of them.

Property Reviewer Page 18

Acts of Administration or Management:

1) Those that do not involve an alteration;

2) Those that may be renewed from time to time;
3) Those that have transitory effect, that is, do not bind the co-ownership for a long time in the
future;
4) Those that do not give rise to a real right over the thing owned in common;
5) Those, which even if called an alteration, do not affect the substance or nature of the thing; and
6) Those for the common benefit of all the co-owners and not for only one or some of them.

Art. 493. Each co-owner shall have the full ownership of his part and of the fruits and benefits
pertaining thereto, and he may therefore alienate, assign or mortgage it, and even substitute
another person in its enjoyment, except when personal rights are involved. But the effect of the
alienation or the mortgage, with respect to the co-owners, shall be limited to the portion which may
be alloted to him in the division upon the termination of the co-ownership.

This article deals with the right to the ideal or metaphysical share of each co-owner.

Rules regarding the ideal share:

1) Each co-owner has full ownership of his part, and of his share of the fruits and benefits.
2) He may alienate, assign, or mortgage his share.
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.

Art. 494. No co-owner shall be obliged to remain in the co-ownership. Each co-owner may demand
at any time the partition of the thing owned in common, insofar as his share is concerned.

Nevertheless, an agreement to keep the thing undivided for a certain period of time, not exceeding
ten years, shall be valid. This term may be extended by a new agreement.

A donor or testator may prohibit partition for a period which shall not exceed twenty years.

Neither shall there be any partition when it is prohibited by law.

No prescription shall run in favor of a co-owner or co-heir against his co-owners or co-heirs so long
as he expressly or impliedly recognizes the co-ownership.

Art. 495. Notwithstanding the provisions of the preceding article, the co-owners cannot demand a
physical division of the thing owned in common, when to do so would render it unserviceable for the use
for which it is intended. But the co-ownership may be terminated in accordance with Article 498. (401a)

Property Reviewer Page 19

Art. 496. Partition may be made by agreement between the parties or by judicial proceedings. Partition
shall be governed by the Rules of Court insofar as they are consistent with this Code. (402)

Art. 497. The creditors or assignees of the co-owners 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 any partition
already executed, unless there has been fraud, or in case it was made notwithstanding a formal opposition
presented to prevent it, without prejudice to the right of the debtor or assignor to maintain its validity.
(403)

Art. 498. Whenever the thing is essentially indivisible and the co-owners cannot agree that it be allotted to
one of them who shall indemnify the others, it shall be sold and its proceeds distributed. (404)

Art. 499. The partition of a thing owned in common shall not prejudice third persons, who shall retain the
rights of mortgage, servitude or any other real rights belonging to them before the division was made.
Personal rights pertaining to third persons against the co-ownership shall also remain in force,
notwithstanding the partition. (405)

Art. 500. Upon partition, there shall be a mutual accounting for benefits received and reimbursements for
expenses made. Likewise, each co-owner shall pay for damages caused by reason of his negligence or
fraud. (n)

Art. 501. Every co-owner shall, after partition, be liable for defects of title and quality of the portion
assigned to each of the other co-owners.

Property Reviewer Page 20