CIVIL LAW REVIEW 1 FINALS REVIEWER:

I.CIVIL CODE
II. FAMILY CODE
III. SUCCESSION
IV.PROPERTY
A. Basic Concepts:
a. Property vs. Thing:
Property refers only to those which are or
may be the object of appropriation;
Thing refers to those which are not or may
not be the object of appropriation.
b. Characteristics of Property:
1. According to its nature
-Immovable/real or movable/personal
2. According to its ownership
-Of public dominion or of private ownership
B. Classification:
1. Immovable Property: (Art. 415)
1. Lands,
buildings,
roads
and
constructions of all kinds adhered to
the soil;
2. Trees, plants, and growing fruits, while
they are attached to the land or form
an integral part of an immovable;
3. Everything attached to an immovable
in a fixed manner in such a way that it
cannot
be
separated
therefrom
without breaking the material or
deterioration of the object;
4. Statues, reliefs, paintings, or other
objects for use or ornamentation,
placed in buildings or on lands by the
owner of the immovable in such a
manner that it reveals the intention to
attach them permanently to the
tenements;

5. Machinery, receptacles, instruments,

or implements intended by the owner
of the tenement for an industry or
works which may be carried on in a
building or on a piece of land, and
which tend directly to meet the needs
of the said industry or works;
6. Animal
houses,
pigeon
houses,
beehives, fishponds, or breeding
places of similar nature, in case their
owner has placed them or preserves
them with the intention to have them
permanently attached to the land and
forming a permanent part of it; the
animals in these places are included;
7. Fertilizer actually used on a piece of
land;
8. Mines, quarries, and slag dumps, while
the matter thereof forms part of the
bed, and waters either running or
stagnant;
9. Docks and structures which, although
floating, are intended by their nature
and object to remain at a fixed place
on the river, lake or coast;
10.Contracts for public works, and
servitudes and other real rights over
immovable property.
-Different classes of immovable:

Immovables
Immovables
Immovables
Immovables

by
by
by
by

nature
incorporation
destination
analogy

2. Movable Property: (Art.416-417)

1. Those
movables
susceptible
of
appropriation which are not included
in Art.215;
2. Real property which by any special
provision of law is considered as
personalty;
3. Forces of nature which are brought
under control by science;
4. In general, all things which can be
transferred from place to place
without impairment of the real
property to which they are fixed.

5. Obligations and actions which have for

their object movables or demandable
sums;
6. Shares of stock of agricultural,
commercial, and industrial entities,
although they may have real estate.

Test to determine WON object is movable or

not:
a. Whether object can be transported
from place to place;
b. Whether the change of location can
take place without injury to the
immovable to which it may be
attached; and
c. Whether it is not included in the
enumeration found in Art.415 of the
NCC.
Classification of Movable according to its
nature:
a. Consumables- those which cannot be
used in a manner appropriate to their
nature without their being consumed;
b. Non-consumables- those which can
be used in a manner appropriate to
their nature without their being
consumed.
c. Fungibles-those
which
can
be
substituted by others of the same kind
or quality
d. Non-fungibles- cannot be substituted
by others of the same kind and quality
CASES:
When
do
immovables?

machineries

become

Machinery which is movable in its nature

only becomes immobilized when placed in a
plant by the owner of the property or plant,
but not when so placed by a tenant, a
usufructuary, or any person having only a

temporary right, unless such person acted as

the agent of the owner. [Davao Saw Mill
Co. vs. Castillo, 61 Phil., 709(1935)]
Movable equipment, to be immobilized in
contemplation of Article 415 of the Civil
Code, must be the essential and principal
elements of an industry or works which are
carried on in a building or on a piece of land.
Thus, where the business is one of
transportation, which is carried on without a
repair or service shop, and its rolling
equipment is repaired or serviced in a shop
belonging to another, the tools and
equipment in its repair shop which appear
movable are merely incidentals and may not
be considered immovables, and, hence, not
subject to assessment as real estate for
purposes of the real estate tax. [Mindanao
Bus Co. vs. City Assessor and Treasurer,
6 SCRA 197(1962)]
Property by PUBLIC DOMINION:
1. Those intended for public use, such as
roads, canals, torrents, ports, and
bridges constructed by the State;
banks shores, roadsteads, and others
of similar character; ( Art.420[1])
2. Those which belong to the State,
without being for public use, and are
intended for some public service or
for the development of the national
wealth; ( Art.420 [2])
3. Property for public use, in the
provinces, cities and municipalities,
such as provincial roads, city streets,
municipal streets, squares, fountains,
public waters, promenades, and public
works for public service paid for by
said provinces, cities or municipalities.
( Art.424 [1])
Characteristics of property of public
dominion:
1. Cannot be appropriated;

2. Cannot be subject matter of contracts;

so it cannot be alienated or
encumbered;
3. Cannot be acquired by prescription;
4. Cannot be subject of attachment or
execution;
5. Cannot be burdened by any voluntary
easement.
Public Lands/public domain:
Refer only to govt. lands which are opened
to private appropriation and settlement by
homestead & other similar acts as provided
by law.
Classes:
1.
2.
3.
4.

Agricultural
Forest/timber
Mineral lands
National parks

CASES:
Property of public dominion withdrawn from
public use becomes patrimonial property.
Article 422 of the Civil Code expressly
provides that Property of public dominion,
when no longer intended for public use or for
public service, shall form part of the
patrimonial property of the State. Besides,
the Revised Charter of the City of Cebu
heretofore quoted, in very clear and
unequivocal terms, states that: Property
thus withdrawn from public servitude may be
used or conveyed for any purpose for which
other real property belonging to the City may
be lawfully used or conveyed. [Cebu
Oxygen & Acetylene Co., Inc. vs.
Bercilles, 66 SCRA 481(1975)]
Government owned lands, as long they are
patrimonial property, can be sold to private
parties, whether Filipino citizens or qualified
private corporations. Thus, the so-called Friar
Lands acquired by the government under Act
No. 1120 are patrimonial property which
even private corporations can acquire by
purchase.
[Chavez vs. Public Estates
Authority, 403 SCRA 1(2003)]

Since then and until now, the only way the

government can sell to private parties,
government
reclaimed
and
marshy
disposable lands of the public domain is for
the legislature to pass a law authorizing such
sale. CA No. 141 does not authorize the
President to reclassify government reclaimed
and marshy lands into other non-agricultural
lands under Section 59 (d). Lands classified
under Section 59 (d) are the only alienable or
disposable
lands
for
non-agricultural
purposes that the government could sell to
private parties. [Chavez vs. Public Estates
Authority, 384 SCRA 152(2002)]
A mechanism whereby the foreign-owned
contractor,
disqualified
to
own
land,
identifies to the government the specific
surface areas within the FTAA contract area
to be acquired for the mine infrastructure
does not call for the exercise of the power of
eminent domainand determination of just
compensation is not an issueas much as it
calls for a qualified party to acquire the
surface rights on behalf of a foreign-owned
contractor.
[La
Bugal-BLaan
Tribal
Association, Inc. vs. Ramos, 445 SCRA
1(2004)]
Property is either of public dominion or of
private ownership. Concomitantly, Article
420 of the Civil Code provides: ART. 420. The
following things are property of public
dominion: (1) Those intended for public use,
such as roads, canals, rivers, torrents, ports
and bridges constructed by the State, banks,
shores, roadsteads, and others of similar
character. [Usero vs. Court of Appeals,
449 SCRA 352(2005)]
The phrase others of similar character
includes a creek which is a recess or an arm
of a river. It is property belonging to the
public domain which is not susceptible to
private ownership. Being public water, a
creek cannot be registered under the Torrens
System in the name of any individual.

[Usero vs. Court of Appeals, 449 SCRA

352(2005)]
The Regalian Doctrine dictates that all lands
of the public domain belong to the State,
that the State is the source of any asserted
right to ownership of land and charged with
the conservation of such patrimony, a
doctrine consistently adopted under the
1935, 1973, and 1987 Constitutions; Prior to
Proclamation No. 1064 of May 22, 2006,
Boracay Island had never been expressly and
administratively classified under any of the
grand divisions of land. Boracay was an
unclassified land of the public domain.
[Secretary
of
the
Department
of
Environment and Natural Resources vs.
Yap, 568 SCRA 164(2008)]
III. OWNERSHIP:
The
independent
right
of
exclusive
enjoyment and control of a thing for the
purpose of deriving therefrom all advantages
required by the reasonable needs of the
owner and the promotion of the general
welfare BUT subject to the restrictions
imposed by law and the rights of others.
Traditional Attributes/Elements of Ownership:
1. Right to enjoy
Jus utendi ( right to use)
Jus fruendi ( right to enjoy the
fruits)
Jus abutendi ( right to consume the
thing by its use
2. Right to dispose- alienate, destroy,
encumber, transform property
3. Right to vindicate
Limitations upon the right of ownership:
1. General limitations imposed by State
for its benefit ( 3 powers)

2. Specific limitations imposed by law,

such as legal servitudes;
3. Limitations
imposed
by
party
transmitting the property either by
contract or by will;
4. Limitations imposed by the owner
himself, such voluntary servitudes,
mortgages, pledges and lease rights;
5. Inherent limitations arising from
conflict with other rights, such as
those caused by contiguity of property.
CASES:
In keeping with the presumption of State
ownership, there must be a positive act of
the government, such as an official
proclamation, declassifying inalienable public
land into disposable land for agricultural or
other purposes; The burden of proof in
overcoming the presumption of State
ownership of the lands of the public domain
is on the person applying for registration (or
claiming ownership), who must prove that
the land subject of the application is
alienable or disposable.A positive act
declaring land as alienable and disposable is
required.
Since 1919, courts were no longer free to
determine the classification of lands from the
facts of each case, except those that have
already became private landsAct No. 2874,
promulgated in 1919 and reproduced in
Section 6 of CA No. 141, gave the Executive
Department, through the President, the
exclusive prerogative to classify or reclassify
public lands into alienable or disposable,
mineral or forest

Applying PD No. 705, all unclassified lands,

including those in Boracay Island, are ipso
facto considered public forests. [Secretary
of the Department of Environment and
Natural Resources vs. Yap, 568 SCRA
164(2008)]

Rights of a Person over his Property:

1. to enjoy the property;
2. to dispose of it;
3. to recover the property from any
holder or possessor;
4. to exclude any person from the
enjoyment and disposal of the
property;
5. to enclose or fence his land or
tenement;
6. to just compensation in case of
eminent domain;
7. to construct any works, or make any
plantation or excavation on the its
surface or sub-surface;
8. to the ownership of all accessions to
his property.
CASES:
Under existing law and jurisprudence, there
are three kinds of actions available to
recover possession of real property: (a)
accion interdictal; (b) accion publiciana; and
(c) accion reivindicatoria. Accion interdictal
comprises two distinct causes of action,
namely, forcible entry (detentacion) and
unlawful detainer (desahuico). In forcible
entry one is deprived of physical possession
of real property by means of force,
intimidation, strategy, threats, or stealth
whereas in unlawful detainer, one illegally
withholds possession after the expiration or
termination of his right to hold possession
under any contract, express or implied. The
two are distinguished from each other in that

in forcible entry, the possession of the

defendant is illegal from the beginning, and
that the issue is which party has prior de
facto possession while in unlawful detainer,
possession of the defendant is originally
legal but became illegal due to the expiration
or termination of the right to possess. The
jurisdiction of these two actions, which are
summary in nature, lies in the proper
municipal trial court or metropolitan trial
court. Both actions must be brought within
one year from the date of actual entry on the
land, in case of forcible entry, and from the
date of last demand, in case of unlawful
detainer.The issue in said cases is the right
to physical possession.

Accion publiciana is the plenary action to

recover the right of possession which should
be brought in the proper regional trial court
when dispossession has lasted for more than
one year. [Valdez, Jr. vs. Court of
Appeals, 489 SCRA 369(2006
The issue involved in accion reivindicatoria is
the recovery of ownership of real property.
This differs from accion publiciana where the
issue is the better right of possession or
possession de jure, and accion interdictal
where the issue is material possession or
possession de facto. In an action for unlawful
detainer, the question of possession is
primordial while the issue of ownership is
generally unessential. [Ross Rica Sales
Center, Inc.
vs. Ong,
467 SCRA
35(2005)]
On this point, the Court held in Bongato v.
Malvar that: It is wise to be reminded that
forcible entry is a quieting process, and that
the restrictive time bar is prescribed to
complement the summary nature of such

process. Indeed, the one-year period within

which to bring an action for forcible entry is
generally counted from the date of actual
entry to the land. However, when entry is
made through stealth, then the one-year
period is counted from the time the plaintiff
learned about it. After the lapse of the oneyear period, the party dispossessed of a
parcel of land may file either an accion
publiciana, which is a plenary action to
recover the right of possession; or an accion
reivindicatoria, which is an action to recover
ownership as well as possession. [PeraltaLabrador
vs.
Bugarin,
468
SCRA
308(2005)]
Adjoining landowners have mutual and
reciprocal duties which require that each
must use his own land in a reasonable
manner so as not to infringe upon the rights
and interests of others.It must be stressed
that the use of ones property is not without
limitations. Article 431 of the Civil Code
provides that the owner of a thing cannot
make use thereof in such a manner as to
injure the rights of a third person. SIC
UTERE TUO UT ALIENUM NON LAEDAS.
[Andamo vs. Intermediate Appellate
Court, 191 SCRA 195(1990)]
Force of Defense ( doctrine of self-help): Art.
429
Justified if:

Force must be employed by the

owner or the lawful possessor of
the property;
There must be an actual or
threatened physical invasion or
usurpation of the property;
Invasion or usurpation must be
unlawful;

Force employed must be reasonably

necessary to repel the invasion or
usurpation.

Hidden Treasure:
Ownership of hidden Treasure: Art. 438
Hidden treasure belongs to the owner of the
land, building or property on which it is
found;
Nevertheless,, when the discovery is made
on the property of ANOTHER or the State or
any of its subdivisions, AND by chance,
thereof shall be allowed to the finder. IF the
finder is a trespasser, he shall not be entitled
to any share of the treasure.
If the things found be of interest to SCIENCE
or the ARTS, the State may acquire them at a
just price, which shall be divided with the
rule stated.

Requisites if finder is STRANGER on anothers

property:
1.
The treasure must consist of money,
jewelry, or other precious objects;
2.

It must be hidden or unknown;

3.

Its lawful ownership does not appear;

4.

Its discovery must be by chance;

5.
Discoverer must be a stranger and not
a trespasser.
ACCESSION
The right pertaining to the owner of a thing
over everything which is produced thereby,
or which is incorporated or attached thereto,
either naturally or artificially. (Art.440)
Different Kinds of Accession:
1. Accession Discreta- Right to ownership
over a thing and everything which is
produced thereby.
a. Natural fruits , spontaneous
products of the soil, young and
other products of animals;
b. Industrial fruits, those produced
by cultivation or labor;
c. Civil fruits, rent, leases, amount
of perpetual annuities or other
similar income.
2. Accession Continua- Right pertaining
to ownership of a thing over
everything which is incorporated or
attached thereto, either naturally or
artificially.
a. Immovable prop:
i. Accession
industrialbuilding,
planting
or
sowing
ii. Accession natural
1. Alluvion- accretion
which the lands

adjoining
rivers,
lakes, creeks, or
torrents
GRADUALLY
RECEIVE from the
effects
of
the
currents
of
the
waters.
2. Avulsion- Accretion
which takes place
whenever
the
current of a river,
lake,
creek
or
torrent
SEGREGATES from
an estate on its
bank
a
known
portion of land and
TRANSFERS it to
another estate.
3. Change of river
beds
4. Formation
of
islands either on
the seas within the
jurisdiction of the
Phils, on lakes, and
on
navigable/floatable
rivers
or
nonnavi/non-floatable
rivers.
b. Movable prop:
i. Adjunction
or
conjunctiondifferent
objects
belonging
to
different
owners
are
united and cant be
separated without injury
ii. Commixtion/ ConfusionDifferent
owners
too.
Mixture
of
solids:
Commixtion; Mixture of
liquids: Confusion

iii. Specification- takes place

whenever
a
person
imparts a new form to
materials belonging to
another person
Animal OffspringDifferent Owners:
a) Offspring belongs to owner of female.
XPNs to Rule of Accession Discreta:
1. If thing is with possessor in GF,
possessor is entitled to the fruits;
2. If subject to usufruct, usufructuary is
entitled to the fruits;
3. If thing is leased, lessee is entitled to
fruits of thing, but he must pay
rentals;
4. If in possession of antichretic creditor,
creditor is entitled to fruits with the
obligation of applying them to interest
and principal.
Basic Prinicples in Accession Continua:
1.

To the owner of the thing belongs the

extension or increase of the thing;
2. General rule is Accession follows the
Principal;
3. This takes effect only when the two
things are so united that they cannot
be separated without injuring or
destroying the juridical nature of one
of them;
4. As a general rule, punitive liability
attaches to the party who acts in BF,
but not to party who acts in GF.
GOOD/BAD FAITH:
b) As applied to Builder, Planter or
Sower:
GF consists in IGNORANCE of the
ownership of another; BAD FAITH is
when knowledge of such ownership
exists.

c) Owner of land/ materials:

Ignorance of acts of B,P, S; or if aware,
there was opposition on his part; BF if
he had knowledge and no opposition
on his part.
Outline of ACCESSION INDUSTRIAL:
d) Art.447:
The owner of the land who makes
thereon,
personally
of
through
another, plantings, constructions, or
works WITH THE MATERIALS OF
ANOTHER, shall pay their value; and if
he acted in BF, he shall also be obliged
to the reparation of damages.
The OWNER OF MATERIALS shall have
the right to remove them only in case
he can do so without injury to the work
constructed, or without the plantings,
construction or works being destroyed.
However, if the LANDOWNER acted in
BF, the owner of materials may
remove them in any event, with a
right to be indemnified for damages.
a) Owner/Builder- GF; OMat-GF:
o OB has right of appropriation
o OMAT
has
right
of
reimbursement for materials
o OMAT has limited right of
removal
b) OB-BF; OMAT-GF:
OB has no right; obligated
pay damages
OMAT
has
right
reimbursement for materials
damages
OMAT has absolute right
removal + damages

to
of
+
of

Art.448:
The owner of the land on which anything has
been built, sown or planted in GF, shall have

the right to appropriate as his own the work,

sowing, or planting, after payment of the
indemnity
provided
for
in
Arts.
546(necessary expenses) and 548 (luxury
expenses not covered but may remove
ornaments), or to OBLIGE the one who built
or planted to pay the price of the land, and
the one who sowed, the proper rent.

the planting or sowing be removed, in order

to replace things in their former condition AT
THE EXPENSE of the person who built,
planted or sowed; OR he may COMPEL the
builder to PAY the price of the land, and the
sower the proper RENT.

However, the BUILDER or PLANTER cannot

be obliged to buy the land IF its value is
CONSIDERABLY MORE than that of the
building or the trees.

In the cases of the two preceding articles,

the LANDOWNER is ENTITLED to DAMAGES
from the builder, planter or sower.

In such case, he shall pay reasonable rent, if

the OWNER OF THE LAND does not choose to
appropriate the building or trees after proper
indemnity.

The BUILDER, PLANTER, or SOWER in BF is

entitled to NECESSARY EXPENSES of
preservation of the land.

The parties shall agree upon the terms of the

lease and in case of disagreement, the court
shall fix the terms thereof.
a) OL-GF; Builder and OMAT-GF:
OL has right of appropriation
and right to demand price of
land or rent;
B and OMAT has right to
reimbursement of necessary
expenses if OL elects right to
appropriate;
B and OMAT has right of
retention
if
OL
elects
appropriation.

Art. 451:

Art. 452:

Art. 453: (Both parties in BF)

If there was BF, not only on the part of the
person who BUILT, PLANTED or SOWED on
the land of another, but also on the part of
the owner of such land, the rights of one and
the other shall be the same as though both
had acted in GF.
It is understood that there is BF on the part
of the LANDOWNER whenever the act was
done with knowledge and without opposition
on his part.
Art. 454:

Art. 449:

When the LANDOWNER acted in BF, and the

Builder, Planter, or Sower acted in GF, the
provisions of Article 447 shall apply.

He who builds, plants or sows in BF on the

land of another, LOSES what is built, planted
or sown WITHOUT right to indemnity.

Art. 455:

Art. 450:
The OWNER OF THE LAND on which anything
has been built, planted or sown in BF may
demand the demolition of the work, or that

If the materials, plants or seeds belong to a

THIRD PERSON, who has not acted in BF, the
OWNER of the LAND shall answer subsidiarily
for their value and only in the event that the
one who made use of them has no property
with which to pay.

This provision shall not apply if the owner

makes use of the right granted in Article 450
(demand demolition or compel payment of
land or rent.
If the OWNER of the MATERIALS has been
paid by the Builder, sower or planter, the
latter may demand from the landowner the
value of the materials or labor.
Art. 456:
In the case regulated in the preceding
articles, GF does not necessarily exclude
negligence, which gives right to damages
under Article 2716.
CASES:
Where, as in the present case, the builder in
good faith fails to pay the value of the land
when such is demanded by the landowner,
the parties may resort to the following
remedies: (1) The parties may decide to
leave things as they are and assume the
relation of lessor and lessee, and should they
disagree as to the amount of rental, then
they can go to the court to fix that amount
(Miranda vs. Fadullon, -et al., 51 Off. Gaz.,
6226); (2) Should the parties not agree to
assume the relation of lessor and lessee, the
owner of the land is entitled to have the
improvement removed (Ignacio vs. Hilario,
76 Phil., 605); and (3) The land and the

improvement may be sold at public auction,

applying the proceeds thereof first to the
payment of the value of the land and the
excess, if any, to be delivered to the owner
of the improvement in payment thereof
(Bernardo vs. Bataclan, 66 Phil., 590).
[Filipinas Colleges, Inc. vs. Garcia
Timbang, et al., 106 Phil. 247(1959)]
Violation of the Contract of Sale on
Installment may not be the basis to negate
the presumption that Kee was a builder in
good faith.Such violations have no bearing
whatsoever on whether Kee was a builder in
good faith, that is, on his state of mind at the
time he built the improvements on Lot 9.
[Pleasantville Development Corporation
vs. Court of Appeals, 253 SCRA
10(1996)]
The essence of good faith lies in an honest
belief in the validity of ones right, ignorance
of a superior claim, and absence of intension
to overreach another. Applied to possession,
one is considered in good faith if he is not
aware that there exists in his title or mode of
acquisition any flaw which invalidates it.
[Heirs of the Late Joaquin Limense vs.
Vda. De Ramos, 604 SCRA 599(2009)]