III.

RIGHTS OF ACCESSION
A. Concept
Art 440 The ownership of property gives the right by accession to everything which is
produced thereby, or which is incorporated or attached thereto, either naturally or
artificially.
DEFINITIONS OF ACCESSION
Tolentino: Right by virtue of which the owner of a thing becomes the owner of
everything that the thing may produce or which may be inseparably united or
incorporated thereto, either naturally or principally.
J. B. L. Reyes: Extension of ownership over a thing to whatever is incorporated
thereto naturally or artificially (without or with labor of man)
- Incorporation means a stable union or adherence, not mere juxtaposition
- Accession is one of the bundle of rights of ownership and is not a mode of
acquiring property
- It does not depend upon a new title
B. General Principles of Accession
1. Applicable to BOTH accession discreta and accession continua
a. Accessory follows the principal (Accessor siquitur principale)
b. No one shall be unjustly enriched at the expense of another
2. Applicable to ACCESSION CONTINUA alone
a. Whatever is built, planted or sown on the land of another and the
improvements or repairs made thereon, belongs to the owner of the land,
subject to the provisions of the following articles. Art 445
b. All works, sowing and planting are presumed made by owner and at his
expense, unless the contrary is proved. Art 446
c. Accessory is incorporated to principal only when cannot be separated
without injury to the work constructed or destruction to plantings,
construction or works. 2nd phrase, Art 447
d. Bad faith involves liability for damages and other dire consequences.
e. Bad faith of one party neutralizes bad faith of the other. Art 453
3. Applicable to ACCESSION DISCRETA alone
a. Ownership of fruits To owner of principal thing belongs the NATURAL,
INDUSTRIAL and CIVIL fruits Art 441
EXCEPTIONS:
i. Possession in good faith
ii. In usufruct
iii. In lease (although civil fruits go to the owner)
iv. In antichresis
C. Obligations of Receiver of Fruits to Pay Expenses by 3rd person in production,
gathering and preservation

Art 443 He who receives the fruit has the obligation to pay the expenses made by a third
person in their production, gathering and preservation.
BASIS: no one may unjustly enrich himself at the expense of another
Characteristics of expenses covered:
o Dedicated to the annual production and not for the improvement of the
property
o They must not be unnecessary, excessive or for pure luxury, but must be of
such an amount naturally required by the condition of the work cultivation
made
Even if expenses exceed the value of fruits, owner must pay expenses just the same,
because the law makes no distinction. He who is entitled to the benefits must bear
the rishk and losses.
WHAT MAY JUSTIFY NON-PAYMENT OF FRUITS: Owner may permit possessor to
complete the harvesting of fruits
Fruits not yet gathered and possessor is in bad faith: owner need not pay (Art 449)
Fruits already gathered: owner has to pay, accession continua does not apply
because fruits have already been separated from the immovable. This provision
makes no distinction as to good faith and baith faith.
D. Kinds of Accession
1. Accession Discreta (Fruits)
Art 440 The ownership of property gives the right by accession to:
o everything which is produced (accession discreta)
o incorporated or attached thereto, either naturally or artificially (accession
continua)
a. Natural products of the soil in whose generation human labor does not intervene
b. Industrial if it implies some kind of cultivation or labor
c. Civil rents of lands and buildings, and certain kinds of incomes obtained from the land
or building itself
BACHRACH v SEIFERT ( )
BACHRACH v TALISAY ( )
2. Accession Continua
Over Immovables
1. Artificial or Industrial Building, Planting, Sowing
a. Owner is BPS using material of another (LO-BPS and OM)
Art 447 The LO who makes thereon, personally or through another, plantings
constructions, or works with the materials of another, shall pay their value and if he
acted in bad faith, he shall also be obliged to the reparation of the damages. The OM
shall have the right to remove them only in case he can do so without injury to the work
constructed, or without the plantings, constructions or work being destroyed. However, if
the LO acted in bad faith, the OM may remove them in any event, with a right to be
indemnified for damages.

LO in good faith
Acquire BPS by paying the value of materials

LO in bad faith

b. BPS builds, plants or sows on anothers land using his own material (LO and BPS-MM)
Art 448 The
Art 449 The
Art 450 The
Art 451 The
Art 452 The
Art 453 The
Art 454 The

BPS in good faith

Art 448 The

BPS in bad faith

Art 449 The
Art 450 The
Art 451 The

i.

Options open to owner of the land

1) To acquire building, planting and sowing
BP has right of retention
- Retains possession without paying rental
- Not entitled to fruits; his rights are the same as an antichretic
creditor
2) To sell land to BP OR to lease land to S
BP may refuse if value of land considerably more than BP; then forced
lease by LO and BP
BPS in bad faith

ii.

Rights of BPS in bad faith

Art 452 The
Art 443 The
Landowner in bad faith but BPS in good faith
Art 454
Art 447
Reason for adverting to rule in Art 447

c. BPS builds, plants or sows on anothers land with materials owned by 3rd persons
Art 455 The
N.B.: Good faith does not exclude negligence
Art 456 The
BERNARDO v BATACLAN ( )
IGNACIO v HILARIO ( )
SARMIENTO v AGANA ( )
DEPRA v DUMLAO ( )
TECHNOGAS PHIL v CA ( )
ORTIZ v KAYANAN ( )
GEMINIANO v CA ( )
PLEASANTVILLE DEVT CORP v CA ( )

FELICES v IRIOLA ( )
SPOUSES NUGUID v CA (1993)
SPOUSES NUGUID v CA (2005)
2. Natural (Accession Continua Natural)
a. Alluvium
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.
REQUISITES FOR LAND ACCRETION TO TAKE PLACE FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE
RIPARIAN OWNER
(1) Deposit be gradual and imperceptible - exclusive work of nature
(2) Made through the effects of the current of the water
(3) The land where accretion takes place is adjacent to the banks of the river
Banks of a river lateral strips or zones of its bend which are washed by the stream
only during such high floods as do not cause inundations or to the point reached by
the river at high tide
When is alluvion formed? When the deposit of sediment has reached a level higher
than the highest level of water during the year.
Alluvion belongs to riparian owner from the time that the deposit created by the
current of the water becomes manifest
REPUBLIC v CA ( )
GRANDE v CA ( )
MENESES ( )
b. Avulsion
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 ownership of it, provided that he removes
the same within 2 years.
NAVARRO ( )
c. Change of Course of River
Art 461 The
Art 462 The
Art 463 The
BAES v CA ( )
BINALAY v MANALO
d. Formation of Islands
Art 461 The
Art 462 The
Art 463 The
Art 464 The
Art 465 The
See PD 1067
3. Reverse Accession
Art 120, FC The
Art 321, CC The

Over Movables
1. Conjunction and Adjunction
a. Inclusion or Engraftment
b. Soldadura or Soldering
i.
Plumbatura different metals
ii.
Ferruminatio same metal
c. Tejido or Weaving
d. Escritura or Writing
e. Pintura or Painting
2. Commixtion and Confusion
SIARI VALLEY ESTATES v LUCASAN (1955)
SANTOS v BERNABE ()
3. Specification

IV. QUIETING OF TITLE

A. Differences between Action to Quiet Title and Action:
Action to Quiet Title
Substantially an action for the purpose of
putting an end to vexatious litigation in respect
to the property involved

Plaintiff asserts his own estate and declares

generally that defendant claims some estate in
the land, without defining it and avers that the
claim is without foundation and calls on the
defendant to set forth the nature of his claim
so that it may be determined by decree
Action to Quiet Title

Action to Remove a Cloud

Procure the cancellation, delivery of, release of
an instrument, encumbrance or claim
constituting a claim on the plaintiffs title and
which may be used to injure or vex him in the
enjoyment of his title
Plaintiff not only declares his own title but also
avers the source and nature of the defendants
claim, points out its defect, and prays that it be
declared void

Action to Prevent a Cloud

Relief is granted if the threatened or anticipated
cloud is one which if it existed, would be
removed by suit to quit title

Cloud on a title an outstanding instrument, record, claim, incumbrance or

proceeding which is actually invalid or inoperative, but which may nevertheless
impair or affect injuriously the title to the property.
It must have a prima facie appearance of validity or legal efficacy.
Cloud on a title must have a semblance of validity which appears in some legal form
but which is in fact unfounded.
Invalidity or inoperativeness must be proven by an extrinsic evidence.
B. Prescription of Action to Quiet Title

If plaintiff is in possession: imprescriptible

If plaintiff is not in possession: prescribes within period of filing accion publiciana,
accion reivindicatoria

OLVIGA v CA (1993)
PINGOL v CA (1993)
C. Who are Entitled to Bring Action?
Rule 64, Sec. 1, Par 2, Rules of Court The
D. Notes
1. There is a cloud on title to real property or any interest to real property.
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.
2. Plaintiff has legal or equitable title to or interest in the subject/real property.
3. Instrument record claim, etc must be valid and binding on its face, but in truth and in
fact, invalid, ineffective, voidable or unenforceable.
4. Plaintiff must return benefits received from defendant.
TITONG v CA (1998)
5. Actions to quiet title are proceedings quasi in rem.
SPS. PORTIC v CRISTOBAL (2005)

Scaffolding tied together. Whats left is the hole.

If the putty congeals, the hole is gone. Except when you plane it, there will be something left
there, looks like a peg, where the nail mark was
Not so if you cut the pieces of lumber and you attach them there, thats already accession.
You cannot remove them without injury or damage. Proper case of accession continua
because cannot be repaired by minor repair.
I dont want to go up, my knees will buckle down. Case of wobbling knees.
Accessor siquitur principale.
Whether discrete or continua: no one shall be unjustly enriched.
Take note if the fruits apply to both immovables and movables. Remember the classification
that I told you is important. Number 1 is whether legal principle contract applies to both
immovables and movables. Corporeal or incorporeal.
The other framework I told you to apply is the bundle of rights in ownership. Those real
rights, those special contracts, what kind of, which of the bundle of rights in ownership. The
fullest of all the real rights is ownership, everything below is lesser than that. But which of
the bundle of rights is present in this real rights. Example in a lease, which of the bundle of
rights are given. Also in special contracts, you should keep this in mind always.
Natural fruits
They apply to movables and immovables? Yes
Eunuch/neutered carabao, does it have ex-male bovine.
Most likely the birds and the bats and the civet cat (the expensive ones, immersed in water
for fermentation) did it. Anything that undergoes fermentation is expensive rather than
sundried. You dont know? Ask the goat herd. Because reputedly it was a goat herd that
discovered the coffee bean in the highlands of Ethiopia, its a goat herd not a shepherd. One
day his goats went into the thicket, when they came back, they became sprightly jumping
up and down. Also ate the berries and he had a caffeine fix. Arabs discovered roasting coffee
and named one after them. The famous is robustus which has full body. Barako variety
coffee is named after a West African state. Anyway, if the fruits are produced naturally
growing, man did not intervene, not the labor of man. Unintended consequence of the
strategy of plants how they should be spread and scattered around the world. The seed is
impervious to digestion so when the outer covering/coating/pulp is usually sweet or sweet
sour then the animals love it. Everything, monkey squirrels and in fact, theres a bird whos
supposed to scatter oaks, acorn. American bird. Wood pecker! Bores a hole then places
acorn there in the dead trunk of the tree. Thats also true of the Balete. The fruit of a balete,
well the nicer one, the one there outside, has very small fruits, birds specially bats and

monkeys eat the berries of the fig tree. Not the biblical one. Have you seen a so-called
rubber plant but its a fig, white, broad leaf and thick, thats supposed to be Adam and Eve
used fig leafs to cover their private parts. Prolly the one thats eaten which has purple fruit.
Not even in tv. Those are natural fruits because they are spread not by man, but planted
unintentionally by animals or spontaneously sprout from the ground like what, like wild
mushroom. Its the spores fo the mature mushroom is it a fungus, yes. The spores of this are
scattered by the wind. If they happen to fall on ground full of humus, then its covered by
leaves, the temp is right, they sprout then they grow. Parasitic fungi which grow on trunk of
trees like tengang daga. Cc is a legislation which governs agrarian community. Pre-industrial
thats why youll see there, its 1860s predates industrial revolution. Why is electropLating
not there? Why is mixture of gas not there. They are not there because not discovered yet or
lawyers are slow or code commission is not well-versed. Easement on light and windows.
Iron grille with wire netting. Doesnt look aesthetic. Does it look nice? Of course not. Whats
better is cuboidal glass, glass wafer, accept light but not see through it. Thats such nicer to
admit light. Later. I tend to jump here and there.
Spontaneous products of the soil and the young and other products of animals.
Can be wild guavas, the original of which comes from Mexico btw. The friars not only brought
the cross, they also brought seeds from Mexicans. They also seeded native women. OMG the
look on his face.
The mariners and sailors, they only do that if shipwrecked and marooned in the island. Its
not the friars, its the sailors. If its not the local head of guardia civil, itll be the kura paroko
and kantora.
Special names for young of animals. Sometimes, you join in a contest when they ask this. All
the products of animals, what is produced by animal itself especially the female, milk eggs.
Ingredients for organic fertilizer esp stallions manure. You want free horse manure, just go
to Sta. Ana, where they keep stall of horses. Youll have plenty of organic things which you
can when you buy seedlings from nurseries and they use rice bran and soil, you can be sure,
mixed there is horse manure if not chicken manure. Its also big business now. Other
products of poultry, esp to veggie planters in benguet.
What about furs and hides?
Wool is a natural fruit. Mohair is a natural fruit. All hairs of long-haired animals. Of course,
comes only from angara (of course Im joking) goats in the foothills of himalayas. The hair of
yaks, oxen like animal there that has long mane.
Curdling of wool is backbreaking. Only old woman to that. They do it during winter when
they have nothing to do. Even in the weaving industry. Women pina or abaca bag. Do you
know how much labor is spended there by women?! Tie it together ESPECIALLY pina cloth.
Comes from pinyapol. Native variety, the one with seeds. The crown are long. The ones in
supermarket because leaves are short. This one is about 2 feet long so its nice if you can
get the fibers because decompose pulpy part in water. Lets end that peroration.
Furs and hides are not natural fruits. Its part of the animal already. You have to kill the
principal.
Industrial fruits
Only applies to movable
Civil fruits yes applies to both (rents and annuities)
When do civil fruits accrue? Youll find out. Theres a provision. Its somewhere in possession.
Get it? It accrue daily, never mind if the rental is 25 years. Especially if payment for rentals

is paid monthly, you pay rentals for house youre occupying. Lest say 9000 a month.
Because covered by house rental law, before I forget, look at this house rental law and study
the amendment now. Whether what was extended BP 25. Find whether grounds for
ejectment has been extended also or the CC provision 1673 are the ones applicable. Get
that? One of the first cases law firm will handle, ejectment case of physical injury where you
will do least damage. If you do ejectment case, it might be covered by HRental law.
Jurisdiction of lower courts has been increased to include RI and AP to recover real property
P50K in metro manila. Exclusive original jurisdiction. Not even concurrent, if concurrent good
no problem, some of the cases now is about that. As witness by one of the cases you read,
there was a question who has jurisdiction, its a matter of law that can be raised at any point
except for estoppel principle enunciated in Sibung hanoy case in CivPro. Apply estoppel to
jurisdiction. Civil fruits accrue daily, if you are pensioner. The benefits accorded to us
veterans where only given to Filipino soldier given in their 60s or 70s all the better to bring
their minor children to the US. Apply children who can be disqualified or undergo usual
procedure. Pensions only given during bushs time. Dubia (?). anyway.
Find out when natural and industrial fruits accrue. Also a provision as to natural fruits. How
about natural fruits? For animals, young. Isnt it? There is provision? Consider as alive even
in their mothers womb. Of course there can be, remember judgment of Solomon about two
mothers and only baby. Not quartered because not four mothers. Way of execution. Four
horses carry one fourth of your body in different direction, flag and scampered. Head will go.
Pregnanted cows about same time, same full moon. 2 cubs same sex. One day, theres this
torrential raid, flooding in Turkey. One cub was swept away and disappeared, only one was
left. Both owners claiming same cow. Do we apply solomonic judgment. We cannot apply
because both owners would want half roasted calf. How would you do it? DNA tests. Proof
about the maxim somewhere there. Partus sequitur ventre. Thats the maxim. We were
asked, thats a strike in Dean Abad Santos record book. What does it mean? Solomonic way.
Partus (young or baby) ventrem (womb) siquitur (follow) hail mary full of grace in Latin
whos ex-seminarian here? In the womb. Have you been reading? Vientre is Spanish. Vientre
jesus, thy womb jesus. Young follows the womb. The two cows. Bonding of the calf to the
mothers. Remove the placenta and then leak it dry. They can smell each other. There will be
bonding esp if it suckles. Thats the meaning of the partus sequitur ventre.
Question?
When do industrial fruits accrue?
Civil daily
Natural fruits when they are gathered, arise, except when the animal is still in the womb.
Its already owned, but should be born alive. Corned calf or calf stew. Newly born. Its not
even lechon de leche
When do industrial fruits accrue? Thats your assignment
Fruits belong to owner (art 441) not this fruits except when there is possession in good faith
Except
Lease goes to owner by way of civil fruits
2 kinds of lease
Civil lease Leasehold agrarian law
But there can be civil lease of agricultural land
Antichresis
What is produced by and goes to antichretic creditor who was given possession of real
property.
ACCESSION CONTINUA
2nd part of 440

Get the classification right, especially the Spanish names

445 not 368 its wrong
2nd sentence of art 447
Underneath all of this good faith is rewarded, bad faith is penalized by
1 liability of damages
2 dire consequences like losing whatever he BPS
Bad faith of one neutralizes/cancels out the bad faith of other so good faith rules will apply.
Usually 2 parties to an accession continua industrial/artificial. Industrial is better because he
spends money and labors. The neutralization there the characterization in bps is where?
Good faith builder, planter or sower, categorization is the same as a possessor in good faith
correct? Article 526 of the cc right GOOD FAITH BPS? How about bad faith builder
EXACTLY WHO IS A BPS ? he is not an owner of the land. If he is the owner, theres no legal
problem. Presumption is now (whats the opposite?) never mind. Our lack of knowledge
cancels each other. Juris et de jure (conclusive). Reserving tantrums for his self. Throw that
preumption. Presumption Juris et tantrum. Prima facie. Rebuttable.
Who is builder planter or sower? Possessor in the concept of owner. If possessor in concept
of mere holder, not apply bps. If civil law lease of agri land, bps whatever he sows is
usually his. They will become categorization of bps, either a result of necessary expense,
useful expense or ornamental expense. Thats the reason why we will take up possession
right after the end of accession. Get it? BECAUSE theres a connection between bps. And the
connection is right there, telling in your eyes, 546 and 548. Look where these articles are.
What chapter are they in? its in possession. You will see that if a lessee builds on the land
he is leasing, or house and he enlarges house and adds new structure. Adds one more room
it should be as nice as the original one or if reduce the property h e may be charge with
damages. But if increases value, useful, under the law you dont apply bps rules in lease,
you apply 1678 that means lessor can acquire. Who has option is it the owner or the lessee.
Can he be required?
If refuses to pay, can remove improvement even if suffer damage. May require more than
minor repair. Damage not destruction of the principal one (house leased)
If _______________________________
reimbursement.

something.

Then

apply

rules

in

usufruct,

no

In BPS, what kind of property is involved? Certainly should be immovable. Most likely its
land. Can you build on a building? Usually land. In fact movable involved here both bps is
natural accession continua. 4 types. They are the land that is involved there. Its also land.
But specifically, it is what kind of alnd. Do you know? Find out. Specifically what kind of land?
For natural, what kind of land. Odd thing is formation of island, broader.
Look at art 443. That rule applies not only to BPS but applies generally to anybody who is
entitled to the fruits.
Hes so bad luck he might just be a stevedore or pajak pajak pajak.
That Bachrach vs. Seifert case. Look at this because you will come across this still in
corporation law.
Remainder man.
Underpinning: one word: beggar. Look for it, Im sure the word is beggar.
Discussion of the case, couldnt keep track because digesting Rada for labor1.
On Tuesday youre going to the board and tell me the options.

4 August 2009
Pending question: Is hidden treasure a civil fruit?
447

OL-BPS

OM
Owner is tanga or magulang or another situation to characterize the OL look for it. If
you miss it, oh well, .25 is gone. Or lets say .1. Its in the civil code. Good for you
youre not required to decipher and translate Manresa. In succession we were
required to read Manresa, lost track of Tolentino. Now you dont read both.
If I remember that, Ill ask you. Two questions already and dont fault me for it
because thats supposed to be a Eureka type of question. You may be illuminated
when the cold shower hits your face in the morning.

BF BF
Why is it that when both parties have acted in bad faith, you apply the rule as if they are
both in good faith? Art 453 you wont leave them as they are (in pari delicto) because if you
do, therell be breach of peace (quarrelling already). All these rules are actually guidelines
for the court and the legal profession. The court will decide on it but you should know this
because you will counsel your clients.
GF GF
The choices there are what kind of obligation? Alternative! Oh its the other section pa.
Any other solutions BPS are open to the parties, that will be the contract between them if
they agree. It can be a lease (OK you can use pcs of lumber but you pay me rental for that
even if there is nailhole in there) it does not prevent the parties to agree on some other
solution. These rules are only guidelines, unless he can cajole the parties to enter into
compromise agreement. Of course when you are confronted by this as a lawyer, you tell
them their rights but if you are reasonable, advise them to compromise agreement or go to
the lupon tagapamayapa (because you cannot get your usual attorneys fees) thats my
advice, its free, but cannot report it to IBP requirement of 60 hours of free legal aid, anyway
Im exempted.
If the other party does not agree, they go to court and spend more. Amor propio, you can
spend millions to prove a point, thats a Pyrrhic victory as far as your pocketbook.
Sometimes people are not reasonable, not businesslike. If you are businesslike, to frightful
people, no way. Anyway, if the materials can be removed without damage or injury that will
not require major repair (minor damage only).
GF owner BF builder
On top of losing materials, BF OM he still has to pay damages: in what part does BF of the
OM consist? Knowledge
In what good faith/bad faith of Landowner by analogy with 448. 447 does not have its own
rule (about standard of good faith and bad faith) so you have use rules on 448 and 454 by
analogy, its not a normal situation, its unnatural for owner of the land not seeing to it that
he is not the owner of the materials. Beg, buy, or borrow for materials. To the end that he
uses material that already belong to him or contracted for under some other contract, prolly
like
In 448 the one who is active is the BPS who is presumed to own the materials. Then what.
Passive by analogy is the owner of land.
Owner of land in 447 is owner of land. Passive owner of materials is passive. Since the owner
of the materials is passive, you apply the rules of gf/bf of the owner of the land. Did the
owner of land, that 453 par1, you apply it to owner of materials. Therefore, the owner of

materials acts in bf if he knows that the owner of land is making us e of the material and he
does not oppose it.
The gfbf of BPS is not in Art 450 but in Art 526 (if he is aware or unaware that he does not
own the materials he is good faith, if he is aware, then he is bad faith). Supposing if suspects
that he does not own? See that goes to the second question I posed to you. Fatal defect,
does he know that he does not own the materials. If he knows that he does not own and yet
he uses it, BF. Then in case of BF OM the OL BPS can acquire materials including he built
already. Materials he also owns in addition he can ask for damages but he still has to prove.
Thats why I was asking you, on top of losing his materials, he will also be liable for damages
in addition? Will that be unjust enrichment. These rules are guidelines. Actual and
compensatory damages. E.g. the bamboo was bukbukin. Prolly you apply it to planting, not
to building.
In response to Ixara: you will charge damages for loss of fertility?
Cassava is kamoteng kahoy which actually comes from Brazil. Manoc. It depletes a certain
element from the soil and has cyanides thats why its used for cancer. Extract chemical
there called legtrile used for cancer cure but doesnt do much. Tauted it lectrine because of
cyanide in chemotherapy of sorts. Thats why never eat boiled manoc or cassava thats been
exposed to sunlight or sundried because cyanate will be transformed to something else and
poisonous. Sometimes you eat it and feel nauseated. Depletes nitrogen and some other
trace elements so that after so many times you plant cassava, nitrogen content of soil will
become depleted or three major elements nitrogen, potassium and phosphorus.
Nessas example: bad seeds did not yield good crops, didnt care because they were bad (sir
says with virus), had tumbro or blasts (diseases of rice, slowly dies out, nothing will be
harvested) anyway. The owner of land could prove, you were there when I was sowing the
seeds! How come? Because you had common place where you keep rice seedlings, saw me
take those sack of palay but you didnt even tell me. Hey youre already using my seeds.
Reason did not tell him because they were defective seeds, already not tungro (?) resistant
main diseases of rice. Old ones: minimal harvest but resistant to diseases. Never mind prone
to blast. Rice planted in hillsides. Some of them are aromatic and tastes good. New variety
especially the first one (miracle rice) you were not yet born when it was invented in the 60s.
IRA amilous content was high or low. Very starchy. Not the fancy rice variety you eat.
But you might become national hero. Ninoy Aquino studied here up to 2 nd year law like you.
Theres life after college.
Actual and compensatory must be proved. Lawyers love moral damages and exemplary
because they dont have to prove this. They just have to persuade the judge to grant it. The
judge is also hamstrung by the rules, for breach of contract, you cant just act exemplary or
moral damages.
BF landowner GF materialsman
448-454
OL

BPS (OM) possession in the concept of an owner

Main one
1. GF landowner GF builder
2. GF landowner BF builder
3. BF landowner GF builder
4. BF landowner BF builder
GF GF / BF BF
Why is the landowner given right to choose?

What does the 3 kinds of expenses (necessary, expenses, ornamental) imply? Whne LO
chooses to acquire, he must pay indemnity in 546 and 548. Determine first if the
improvement is a necessary, useful and ornamental.
Most BPS are the result of BPS. Some are mere ornaments, some are necessary. Most are
useful.
What is the definition of a necessary expenses? According to Tolentino, expense needed for
the preservation (what subject property of BPS? Land is the subject matter) E.g cemented
embankment or riprap sides of the river or planted balete trees on along the banks so that
the soil will hold on to the banks prevent river from eating up your land or build a seawall.
Like that in Cabangis case, thats a necessary expense.
Most expenses are useful. Every other person who succeeds in ownership or possession of
land, or makes the land capable of producing more fruits. Therefore, planting of fruit trees
will be a useful expense.
Next itme you have homecoming, the jackfruit trees planted under Prof Daways
administration, they will be bearing fruits, and we can all employees will be able to earmark
all of those fruits. One prof said, that langka will be mine unless the secu and utilitymen get
it first. Get it? That will increase, make land produce more fruits.
Does it include payment of real property taxes? No because they will not preserve the land.
They preserve the ownership, you may lose it but the land stays.
What is the definition of a useful expenses? Augment the income or increase the
productivity
Irrigation system built on the land? Useful.
What is the definition of a ornamental expenses? Merely needed for the preservation of the
land, not make the land produce more fruit or increase the value of the land because the
one who will succeed may not like ornament. To whom those may be kitsch or worse
eyesore. Theyre actually baduy. Cemented lions and egrets or swan. Right? He might not
like it? Presumption is he likes it. Mere caprice or they are done for pomp and austentation
(capricho). Romans knew about it already, categorized this as youll meet this somewhere
in special contracts ad pompam et austentacionen.
Categorize the BPS as whether they are necessary, useful or ornamental expenses. After
that you can apply whichever paragraph that applies to it.
Coconuts grow more fruits along the seashore. Thats where they first thrived anyway. The
one that transplanted them were the waves. The south pacific when the coconuts near the
shore rolls to the sea, there will be carried by the tide transported elsewhere, they will also
grow by the seashore.
Necessary expenses: both GF and BF possessors entitled BUT only GF possessor entitled to
retention.
Nessa: What if an improvement is both necessary and useful? Cannot be both, depends on
the use the owner of the land applies to it. A planting and a sowing can also be a necessary
expense OR a useful expense. Usually it is useful. But if youre planting certain plants there,
the prupose of which is to retire erosion from the action of water or wind, you carpet the
entire hillside sloping area with creeping vines like crops or that false peanut (yellow flowers
there) Plant ipil ipil trees on hillside or even south American mahogany trees to prevent soil
erosion, thats a necessary expense if you can prove it. Its better to categorize as necessary
than useful so therell be reimbursement even if you are BF. But youll have to account for
the fruits. Dont think that BPS is always a useful expense, it can be necessary or
ornamental.

Most of the time its useful, but the thing is to be reimbursable?

1. Even if BF improver still can recover necessary
2. Something that has to do with existence - useful expenses must still exist at the time
of turnover to owner of the land, if it does not exist anymore, is it still useful? If you
plant a mango tree was destroyed by the typhoon, it will no longer produce more fruit
or increase the value
How about a chapel built on a land? If you build a shanty in a Dasma. lot, youll have trouble
evicting squatters. Informal settlers. Theres a newer euphemism for them. You ask Prof. Leo
Battad. At least he wast baptized that way. She was evelyn when studying property under
me. Professors remember you by the way you were when you were here not the way you are
now. To me hes still evelyn.
How about a chapel built on a land? What if the successor is like Prof. Florin Hilbay. You might
believe the existence of something higher than you. Not necessary (not for preservation).
Not ornamental (because not out of caprice). Not decrease value, even if Hilbay succeeds,
he can remove the cross and use it as stable or barn. Land produces more fruits, lay more
eggs. Make a cowshed.
Nessas side comment: Barn? Stable? Kung sha ang magsasucceed.
The problem of dairy cows, you need aircon for them since foreigner. Now crossbreeding
dairy breeds to Indian breeds, milk. Sahiwal and Red Cindy.
Pay value whether necessary/useful/ornamental
Ill acquire bokaboka, its intention. Put up your money. If in the meantime, the owner of land
chosen to acquire does not yet pay for the value of BPS, then the improver in good faith has
right of retention.
No right to the fruits, bad faith already. cannot prove when notified by owner of land? When
will BPS be in BF?
Not yet aware of fatal defect in title and mode of acquiring property. Turn into bad faith
possession when the owner of the land (its there in the commentary) when does the BPS
become a bad faith possessor. Once he becomes aware, he will be a BPS ion bad faith. When
should that be? Notice only without proof of ownership. If cannot prove earlier notice, its
the service of summon (filing in court does not notify the BPS automatically) in that case for
Accion Reivindicatoria. That is when his possession becomes in bad faith because he lost the
case, if he wins the case, then ok! You didnt identify your land therefore case dismissed, the
BPS remains possessor, that one he has to await the genuine true owner when he will
become bad faith possessor. Cannot prove early point of awareness (because its subjective)
he was already notified, presented the proof birth certificate of my father who inherited,
death certificate of grandfather proof of transfer of ownership through succession, yet
possessor didnt believe thats why he had to file action, prove ownership, categorized when
BPSowed, notice that felices eriole, not possession of awareness of fatal defect in title.
Thats a short case. Get it? Here there is a right of retention granted to BPS both for
necessary and useful. But for ornament, no mention of right of retention.
For ornaments, is there a right to reimbursement on part of BPS no there is none. Only if the
owner or the plaintiff likes the ornament also. And he can acquire the owner by paying for
the value of the ornament. The amount of expenses or the increase in value of land because
of ornament. Refer to previous article (Art 548)
Much better position than GF ornamenter.
Limited right of removal. Unless owner chooses ornament.
The key here: these are guidelines for the courts as you have seen in the case of Depra vs.
Dumlao.

455

OL

BPS

BPS (OM)

6 August 2009
448 - 454
GF - GF
BF BF

OL

1. Acquire bps
2. Sell L to BP / Lease to S
Why does the law give right of retention to the BPS pending payment of indemnity from LO?
Similar to a pledge (but not a pledge), to insure that rightful owner pays the necessary
expenses. Its antichresis because removal. To ensure that BPS will be paid, its a security.
Meaning what, he retains the right to remain in possession (or retain possession) of what? Of
the land and the improvements. BPS is so incorporated that you cannot remove it without
injury.
He does not need to pay the rent.
Can he gather the fruits? Yes but he must account for it. Why account?
Why is the BPS no longer legally entitled to the fruits during period of retention? In Ortiz v
Kayanan
Why is he no longer legally entitled to the fruits at the time of the period of retention?
Possession in good faith ceases when he receives summon. He knew or ought to have known
that plaintiff is the owner, there is already a decision at the time of period of retention in the
accion reividicatoria. Court has already said plaintiff identified ownership and proved real
right of ownership therefore he is entitled to possession and ownership but in the meantime
possessor has proved that he is industrious by BPS. Therefore it will be unjust for him if LO
doesnt choose whether acquire or rent/sell to sower.
Focus on right of retention
- Given to the BPS possessor as a security for the reimbursement. As long as he retains
possession he has the security. Gives up the possession, thats the end of his credit,
he leaves the land. What happens to his credit for useful improvement and necessary
expenses? It still exists but what becomes of his credit? What is the prescriptive
period for this? Its not 10.
- Ive been telling you, sometimes your case will hinge on extinctive prescription.
Acquisitive prescription aside from denial. Its an affirmative defense. You go on the
offensive. The defendant goes on offensive (I have become the owner of this
through acquisitive prescription.) Or the action has prescribed, thats the end of the
case. But be sure that you already get your acceptance fee. Thank you attorney,
when your funeral cortege I will join even if it is stormy. Your 2 wives are quarreling
over who has custody of your body. Hahahaha it happens. Then they will quarrel next
over his SSS or GSIS. When you still have work.
- Doesnt need to pay rental because holding on to it is security. Like an antichretic
creditor but if gives up possession, it becomes UNSECURED CREDIT. Right of retention
is security.
- But legally, BPS although he can
- Why antichretic? Find the parallelism in there. Ill leave it to you. He must account for
the fruits.
- Therefore in right of retention and continuous gathering of fruits, some 5 years later,
the fruits shall have paid for his BPS. For a layman, Why should the fruits of trees that
I planted, pay for the reimbursement of itself. To him, it is not understandable. I was
the one who planted the tree, why should I legally account for this? When the case
was filed, served with summons, already became a possessor in bad faith, no longer

legally entitled to the fruits. Only possessor in good faith is entitled to the fruits. Is
that clear?
Somewhere in the CC (somewhere in credit transaction most likely pledge) in order to
obviate or fast track the payment for reimbursement , BPS can file an action for
specific performance of payment? When the owner chose to acquire, he became a
debtor for reimbursement. Find out the prescriptive period, (3 months?) and he is not
yet paid.

These options are alternative prestations that are created by law. Its there in the CC, an
obligation created by law but in the alternative. The moment that there is declared a GF
BPS, then the court declares, the performance of obligation might be an indefinite period
to obviate. Owner of the land might dilly dally thats why there is the Depra v Dumlao
ruling, theres a guideline, obviate having to file multiplicity of suits, the SC said there
ought to be periods for exercising these options. What happens if he doesnt choose one
or the other? Is the right still there? Supposing LO refuses to choose. Hes foolish
because its a special right if the LO refuses. The BPS sits pretty and stay put.
- Except for second option, if the BPS cannot buy the land in those cases where the
value of land is considerably more, the owner of land can go back to first option.
If BPS doesnt want suspended animation, he can ask the court to force LO to choose under
pain of contempt. What if really ramheaded, not pigheaded, more stubborn than a pig. In
fact he has high hopes. Theres a song by Frank Sinatra, that silly old ram that punch the
dam. Hes even afraid of water. Why he will do that? Where will butt the dam. Outside. There
will probably be the base. High hopes is the name of the song.
Defendant is bps in gf, the LO must choose. If not choose, he may be cited for contempt.
Refusal to obey the order of the court or he can be, this is a prestation to do (to choose)
under the law on obligation, the court can what his motto in life is you can take the horse to
the water but you cannot force it to drink the BPS cannot choose because the law doesnt
give him that option. What happens now? Substituted performance, Authorize someone else
to do the choice. Maybe the clerk of the court and the judge. It can be done! The court
chooses whatever.
When you read that case of Ignacio v Hilario. Ruling became part of the option. Read
carefully and look at the basis there. What the owner of land there did, refused to choose.
Obiter became Sometime SC justice want to impress you not only with Latin maxims but
with erudition. Writing too much instead of talking too much. What may not be necessary,
they still want to impress you or clarify. In the process the entirety.
Look at Ignacio v Hilario.
Any questions about the first option. Presumption is its clear.
Thats Art 443 (production, gathering and preservation) it might be the expenses for
producing the fruits might be more than the value of the fruits. What if the harvest is
meager. You bought hybrid seeds at cost of 1.5k per sack of 20 kg. look at that, fertilizers,
labor, insecticides, pesticides except suicide. Then here comes Kiko (typhoon) its returning.
But Its going to Taiwan, let it go there because its now 150kph. The cost of producing the
fruits might be more than the value of the fruits. Its not surefire that fruits that it will repay
for interest plus the principal. You think there will be interest there? Yes. Because its a
money judgment. There is an amount already indicated in the guidelines. So he is obligated.
If he chooses, he must choose within certain number of days.
Huge rice field, use these machines and theres a charge, that can be deducted from gross
fruits. Preservation of fruits, storage in a storage facility, rental fee charged. Fruits happen to
be onion, you have to preserve it in cold storage after drying them. Then some such bodega
where they are kept. Prolly aired and away from mildew and fungus. The cost is deductible
from gross fruits. It might not be that much if the BPS retention keeps tabs of expenses and
harvest. Otherwise he will be charged with records there in coprada or buyer of the
agrigoods, saying you got so much. We just assume.

2nd OPTION: can sell land to BP and lease to S

Why is the sower not required to buy the land? Sowing is essentially temporary. Sells the
land to BP.
An obligation, the source of which is law.
BPS already obligated to pay the value of land, obligation created by law. Guidelines in
Depra Dumlao, court should already indicate how much. Guidelines, the court should
determine at the hearing, already submit evidence as to the value of the land and the value
of the BPS. In fact it was reiterated in, generally no, choice goes to owner. He chooses to sell
the land.
Hes a poor farmer. He only has hoe and his industry. No money, no means to hire labor. Its
his labor expended there. Prolly gathered seeds and nurtured them into seedlings and then
planted them. Empty cans of milk. If the value of land is considerable much much more
than BPS, you cannot require him to buy land. He can refuse legally to buy the land. If he
legally refuses, he wont lose his BPS. In which case now, they have to agree to a lease
contract meaning there are terms and conditions of a lease. The ball bounces back to owner.
First the owner, its a pingpong game. The owner bats the ball on the other side of the net,
requires legally buy but legally refuse, ball goes back to owner. Its not really forced but they
are required to agree terms and conditions of law. Lease mandated by law (because you
cant force anyone to enter into a contract). If they dont agree, court fixes its. Unless the
owner now has another option, (you cannot remove because done in GF, and through
accession. Limited right of removal only if without damage or injury requiring more than
minor repairs). Under the law, it will not prevent parties from agree. Remove your mango
tree. Anyway, I have a big shovel mechanical shovel, we can uproot it if you want. If they
agree, no problem, they wont go to court. Definitely afraid of legal fees. And docket fees. If
you are afraid paying lawyers and docket fees that have been increased. How many folds?
More than 3 folds. You might as well agree. If they do agree, theres no problem. These are
guidelines for the courts.
Art 448s penultimate sentence. You can go to the first one. Go to the first one. That was
what I was saying earlier! Thats what I wanted you to look at this. But you just mechanically
copied. Copying from tradition. You dont want to buy my land?
What if not considerably more (just a little bit more)? BPS cannot legally refuse. What
happens now? Will he lose reimbursement for his BPS? Thats the problem, isnt it. If he
refuses to choose the owner already asked him to buy the land. He cannot buy the land.
Why is there a public auction (Bernardo Bataclan) correct one. Other subsequent cases says
there can be removal. If you read that Ignacio v Hilario. No reasoning but accepted.
Unexplained obiter dictum that became part of the option. The correct one is Bernardo v
Batalan. Its a foolish owner of the land who chose to sell to someone who cannot afford to
buy his land. What resulted in Bernardo, both of them lost in the end. He lost the land.
There are only a few cases where the ponente takes pains to explain. When the ponente is
also a law teacher like JBL Reyes. He explains it but if not, they just decide. They conclude
first and then find the premises for their conclusion to suit their premises to their conclusion.
If it seems that legal provision is contrary to their conclusions, they will use certain other
legal rules by analogy or implications. The liberal tools for interpretations.
Prosperous BPS not like Bataclan who had no other property. Supposing there are other
properties, can there be deficiency judgment. The proceeds of the auction sale is not even
. All the proceeds go to the owner of land. How about the balance of 50k. legally speaking,
if you explain to the court, based on obli created by law for value of land, since there are
other properties, he should have bought this. Since he did not buy, he is obligated to pay
100k. there can be deficiency judgment, you may levy upon it.
What if LO refuses to choose as in Hilario? The court can substituted performance, meaning
the court can authorize another person to make a choice or the court itself chooses. Within

15 days you better choose, 2nd order will be if you dont really choose. Ill choose for you. Ill
choose that you acquire. In other words, what Im saying to you, the option of removal
has no legal basis. You can undo it when you become justices when you have the power to
determine what the law is. You may be the ponente. Get it? Is there?
During the 60s theres when Philippine Herald was still alive, they had radio station DZHP,
joy lardizabal jo candaba, blurb when blurt out, you heard it first on DZHP. Remember where
you heard it first. Then when you remember, light a candle. Morbid noh. If not, say a prayer.
Or better yet, when theres a defendant there is a criminal case, whose middle name is my
name, find out first, how are you related to Prof Labitag, maybe my grandson. Then what, go
easy on him. Go easy on litigants whose family name is mine. Just middle names or prolly
not even that. 3 of my children are female, they have lost. Their family name now sounds a
little better. More sonorous. Anubayan parang huling habilin
If the 2nd scenario is where the owner of the land actsin good faith, the BPS is in bf. Then
there will be how many options. Just three main options. In all of these there will be
damages. In all three options.
1. Owner can acquire without paying
2. Choose removal at the expense of BPS so that the land will be returned to its original
state
3. Choose to sell the land to BP, sower rental.
Acquire damages prove first. If he chooses the third land, is there a right of refusal, no
right of refusal. But you might add, why is it if the LO chose to acquire bps for free, why did
he choose removal? He does not want it because its an eyesore! Does not want to dirty
hands with acquiring and removing. What if shanty is built on Forbes Park home. If it ever
happens, it does not happen. The sikyu there are very strict because they are paid well.
Assuming that in a valuable piece of real estate, shanties does need the materials, develop
the land unless what you place cement, you need lumber to keep cement from overflowing,
yes you can acquire and use this as materioals for pouring concrete. Otherwise, you dont
need this, ask him to remove. You will have to hire labors remove materials you dont need.
No right of retention because bad faith BPS.
If you reverse this OL BF BPS GF
Apply 447
BPS has absolute right of removal
Option goes to BPS (requires LO to acquire OR remove then charge for the value)
Why is apply 447? Assumes that they are analogous situation.
Situation in 447 (LO is BPS) OM
What is the bad faith of LO: sees someone BPS and doesnt oppose it. Why? The other
one is good faith because he didnt know it was somebody elses land. The LO knows
another person was BPS his land and he doesnt oppose it overreaching. Building on
my side of the boundary. You are already inside my land. Why did he not do so. He
was thinking about the presumption: whatever BPS on my land belongs to me and I
spent for them. He was looking that other fellow, go ahead BPS, that will all be mine.
The BPS did not know he was overreaching somebody elses land, then good faith. If
proved in court, the LO is declared in bad fiath. BPS is in GF
The key there is at the time that BPS was BPSing in effect he was unbeknownst to
him he was doing it for the LO. So what? Doing it for the LO, you transpose the BPS
there, it will be the same, analogous. The same as Art 447.
Pumayat ba si Sir Labitag?
Actually the 445 is easy: your problem here is only about OM there are 3 parties there. You
solve it first vai 448-454. Then the owner of materials will be entitled to reimbursement if he
acted in GF. Entitled to reimbursement from who, BPS. Liable for the value of materials

principally. Subsidiarily liable LO in case he does not choose option in 450 (removal). If he
choose to remove, he is not subsidiarily liable. No need to go to the 8 permutaiton. That will
just confuse you some more. Thats the way to solve it. Solve it via 449-454, Om if acted in
Gf, will be entitled to reimbursement from the one who used his materials (BPS principally),
LO will only be subsidiarily liable in case BPS cannot pay OM. Not applicable if LO chooses
removal
How about LO chooses to sell the land to BPS and BPS is able to buy? He will not be
subsidiarily liable, it only applies if BPS is insolvent, he was even able to buy the land.
Tuesday: well take up cases plus prolly now, natural.
11 August 2009
Usually its useful, but if necessary, there must be reimbursement even if the BPS is in BF.
Prevented further loss or further accretion or higher incidence of accretion or avulsion.
Usually useful expense, measure of indemnity is in Art 546 two-fold either the amount that
expended or increase in value of land because of useful improvement. If the BPS is the result
of an ornament, no reimbursement, generally proper case of accession, can be remove
without damage or injury, ornamenter can remove unless improver wants to acquire.
Possessor in BF may remove without damage or injury. Owner can opt to acquire them
because their rights are similar, both (((.
BF possessor of useful improvement not entitled to reimbursement (if cannot be removed)
Both ornamental and useful, BF possessor loses his improvement that cannot be removed. If
can be removed, only GF entitled to reimbursement if the owner wants to acquire
improvement introduced in good faith. Master that bec youll have to spit it out again
Art 455 BPS does not own materials solve it via 454. Principal actors/cast of characters here
are LO and BPS. Usually LO has nothing to do with materials, peripheral participation.
LO will only be subsidiarily liable who did not act in BF. significance of this phrasing!
Owner of land not subsidiarily liable if he opts for removal. If the LO chooses to sell to BPS,
not insolvent BPS so not subsidiarily liable si LO. Obvious option, so much confusion, bec SC
does not apply 448 to 454 strictly. Two options, no option of removal in good faith. SC
manufactured it in jurisprudence, no legal basis. Ignacio vs. Hilario, its an obiter dictum.
Like that in Standard Oil v Jaranillo. Another ground of controversy over machineries that are
immobilized by the owner. Makati Leasing, look at that Pecson case, all _, no occasion,
compromise agreement. SC does not understand the nature of right of retention in the
Nuguid case. Justice Davide did not his property law. Just memorize the facts under the same
professor. Its not even the ruling. In other words, miseducation shows. But at least we
studied. If you are strict about it, really, if you say, if BPS is LO, you dont apply rules on BPS,
you apply. Sold the land but did not sell the bldg, you better remove it. Thats the obvious
option. When your turn comes to write ponencia, think you children and grandchildren wholl
be reading the cases. Attending law school, facts, issue ruling, ignorance is bliss. Filipinas
Foundation, removed from this list of cases in BPS. You wouldnt understand the facts of the
case.
Essentially, BPS not the Owner. He is the one primarily liable to owner of material, LO only
subsidiarily in case of insolvency of BPS.
Sarmiento: value at the time. But the law says only 2 values: at what moment in time? At
the moment it was introduced (original cost) thats why there was a problem here in Tecson.
Muddled up from the start. If you read that Nuguid case, the mistake in original Tecson,
caused all the problem. Art 448 not applicable to a case where the LO is the BPS> if you
dont use it, nothing wrong indemnity provision of Art t448 of which part. He must be
indemnified for BPS that includes right of retention. If reimbursed for it at the time of right

now or else remove it. In fact, you say that Pecson case has lasted for more than 20 years.
1989
2005 was it already fully decided? Yes but how long did it take? 53 (?) years.
In the meantime, Nuguid who was the purchaser of the lot from buyer in the auction sale,
hes a transferee who succeeded in sheriff served the writ of execution placed in possession
collected rentals quarrelling over the rentals. Pecson says you pay rentals up to amount of
1.3m, originally agreed to compromise it. Already paid. Writ of execution on the 100K is the
writ. Why go back ot he BPS. SC Pecson implying right of retentioner. Retain possessor thus
entitled to the SC. Took property under that dean. Which is the idol of one former dean. His
stance is that. Way of doing things. Does not include the present one so Im safe. Former
dean. Considering Im only a retentional myself. You think I dont know my politics. Acdg to
Disini, you are the one who knows how to play politics. Of all of the oldies. Graduate of
survivor school. Dont apply BPS by analogy. Do not use 448. Collonco vs regalado theres
also something wrong there. (Read: apply 448 all or nothing, not piecemeal)
When you draft deed of sale, include the sacramental phrase including all improvement,
accessions and accessories just to be sure. Otherwise, youll come up with Collonco (?) v
Regalado. He only sold to you the land not the bldg, that building ought to be removed, not
included. No matter how valuable it is, it is included. Accessory goes with the principal. You
dont even choose that ruling in Ignacio v Hilario, should not have been perpetuated, ruling
there is really, the owner of the land did not want to choose either of the two options. The
bldgs and granaries built in gf, owner of land choose between acquiring or selling ht eland.
Owner of land: no I dont want to choose. He can only choose remotion if he has already
chosen the land and BPS did not buy or failed to pay. Provision has not been changed by the
Spanish changed in 448 is actually the option given to the BPS in case value of land is
considerably more from the old CC. option are the same except for that counter-option open
to the BPS if the value of land is considerably more than BPS. Last clause: unless owner
chooses to go back to the first option. Two alternatives. It becomes a simple obligation. If
bps has option to buy the land, there will be lease arrangement, the owner of land can now
choose to go back to the first option, to acquire the BPS.
Owner of land can go to the first option again, the same as rule in alternatives given to
creditor, ask for specific performance or rescission, once chooses specific performance but
failed to perform, may ask for rescission. Any question about the cases. Felices vs. Iriola. At
least here, it is intimated to you when do you consider a BPS as being done in GF or BF.
When do you categorize BPS, it should not be whenjudge makesdecision or case is filed.
Usually categorize it as being done in GF dependent upon whether at the time industrious
BPS washe in good faith or bad faith at the time of his planting or was he no lnger unaware.
If unaware,no longer in Gf. Lawyer was charged with ought to have known because he said
it is bordering on negligence, even if you use that negligence portion, hell still be in good
faith. If awareness and unawareness at the moemtn of BPS. There are two kinds of
possessor.
1. Start in gf. The transferor (donor or vendor) was the owner, not know that he was the
owner, ownership could not be transferred to him because if transferor not owner of
property and given and delivered, transferee, not owner unless transferor unless
owner. Nemo dat quod non habet. Silent h like kapampangan, more Spanish than
anyone else. Macabebe battalion. GF in BPS at the time that possessor bps still in
good faith, there are only 2 options. Depends on whether the BPS result to necessary
expense, it will be reimbursed. Not the increase in value of land. Even if proved
unsuccessful, even if washed away.
2. Two options owner of land chooses to acquire, pay:
a. the amount of useful expenses OR
b. the increase in value of land at the moment of reimbursement

Cannot be removal unless useful improvement unless can be removed in minor

damage or injury, separated by minor repair. Not proper case. Removal is in BF
BPF, 3rd option open to the owner of the land. SC court hasnt realized that these
are merely guidelines. Further guidelines, CC does not tell you which to choose,
higher or lower. Objective is unjust enrichment. On the part of possessor, BPS
higher value, LO lower one. When these two are determined, two will not quarrel,
file an appeal, you average the two. Get the middle amount of two values. Theres
no indication which value.
MESSAGE: Clarify this when you have the chance. In your briefs or memoranda.
Dont be very brief about it. Educate the court of appeals or supreme court. You
indicate that the provision of the law is this. Why are they bent on concocting
their own rules.
NUGUID: SC misunderstood that possessor no long entitled to the fruits during
period of retention. LO now entitled to fruits, subject to accounting. Possessor in
bad faith already long time ago when served with summons.
Wrap mangoes in telephone directory to prevent having freckles. Seat cover of
airplanes. Mango orchard owners buy the seat covers. How many planes are
there? How many passengers in there?
DEPRA No time frame for exercising option, LO can take his own time. But if in GF,
good for possessor retentioner. Can be equal to or more than value of fruits
depending if you are a creative BPS and creative accountant. Cost of insecticide,
actually he has a client who uses lot of insecticides, receipts are there. How is the
LO going to prove otherwise. But of course, that is not ethical.
I told you already why Bataclan is better one. Deficiency theory of why is there is a public
auction.
PRESUMPTION IS YOU KNOW, UNTIL THE CONTRARY IS PROVED.
ACCESSION CONTINUA NATURAL OVER IMMOVABLES
1.
2.
3.
4.

Accretion
Avulsion
Change of course of river
Formation of islands

What is the common element in all these four? Happen by the action of waters of the river.
Good place for analogy because there are accretion not only in riparian lands but also on
hillside lands on a steep slope. Away from the river. There will be a waterfall. But there can
be rain water or wind which can erode a slope. Some sort of avulsion, whole side of hillside
slides down. There was your corn crop now buried by landslide. Who owns the parcel of land
sits atop your land, land on lower slope. Is that not avulsion of sorts, by analogy. This
happens to riparian land by definition. Action of water of a river. There can be accretion,
avulsion, islands can be formed. Also they can be formed in the middle of sea or lake from
what arise because of action of waves, sands and silt deposits. Who produces the land?
Stonefishes there are fish that have beaks. Like the Parrot fish or dalagang bukid. They eat
corals. They cannot digest. White sand. Pink sand! Its there in St. Puals river. You have to
take the Monkey Trail. Underground river in Palawan the beach there is not white but pinkish.
Secluded beaches after the monkey trial. Poultries that have become solid from rocks.

ALLUVIUM or ACCRETION these two words seem to be synonymous. They are not. If you read
REPUBLIC v CA requirements before one becomes owner of an avulsion. Technical distinction
between Alluvium and Accretion.
Accretion the process of depositing. Alluvium is the particle of soil and silt that gets
deposited by accretion. Avulsion is the sudden detachment of a known portion of land
deposited to the riparian land of another owner. There must be 2 owners. The deposition
must be more or less, complete attachment. There is no water that separates the land that
was detached. There must be no water that separates them. The detached land would
become an island. You have to imagine this because this is all about rural land living and
agricultural land. The owner must be known portion of land. The owner of detached land
must be able to identify. How? South American, Australia, part of Pangaea and
Gondwanaland. theres a landmark. What better landmark than a tree with your initial on it.
On a heart with arrow. Sentimental value. As part of your morning exercise, you shovel it.
Use shovel and wheel barrow. After 2 years, you will have muscles. No more __________. Do it
within a period. If its a large tree, 6 months, but pay expenses. Accretion is the process of
depositing alluvion. In order for the riparian owner to be entitled to the accretion, you read
that Grande v CA useful for something else about whether the land is registered and there
is accretion. Does the accretion also included in the ordinary acquisitive prescription. What is
the effect of the ruling here in Grande. Btw this Grande was given in the bar. If its not BPS,
usually they take up accretion or change in course of the river. Meneses case land that
borders Laguna de Bay. 246 SCRA 162 accretion of nature. Laguna de Bay Laguna Lake Devt
Authority. There are lots of applicants of land that have risen from Laguna land, lakeshore
land. Lots of application for registration. Land is no longer part of the lake bed. Lake bed is
inalienable property. What are the parts of the river? River bank, river bed and water.
Riverbed is also inalienable public domain. Up to what extent is the river bank. Bank has
been eroded like Cagayan and Marikina River. Vegetative trees have been cut. What is the
highest extent of the river bank? If one side of riverbank is higher than the other. Higher
bank which is owned by the riparian owners.
What part of land is owned by riparian owner:
Belongs to riparian owners
Riverbank

Navarro: Emiliano. Thats the idol of Dean Carale. Who was his boss in the ____. Who was a
full professor here. Room of Dean Pangalangan now. The middle room. The edge there. That
used to be his room. Because one floor higher. Valedictorian of Class 40. Class of Dean Abad
Santos. Gonzaga statcon book. Died while campaigning for congress.
How do you characterize Lahar flow? Not avulsion because no portion of land that was
detached. Not perceptible. May classified it as heightened or increased accretion or what
speeded up accretion. It not only deposits itself on the riverbanks/bed, but also first few
moments, it covered Bacolor. Isnt it? Two storey now became 1 storey. Even the church was
buried.
Changes in the course of the river. What happens is that river changed its course, leave dry
part of the old river bed. If there are now two channels, taking by nature of your land. New
channel is carved out. If the river somehow, changed its course because theres an
obstruction, trees stones and other debris are piled up on the river bed up to the riverbanks
prevents water from flowing. The flood water will carve out a new channel. Place where the
river changed its course downstream part became dry, then thats the exact situation that is

contemplated by Art 461 and 463. Change of the river course and leaves dry a certain
portion of the river bed downstream, after which two channel will return to old channel
downstream because its gonna follow the contour then finally it will return to the channel.
The portion of riverbed has been left dry. Thats the changing course of river. Note the
options there is already here an automatic reclassification by law as alienable and
disposable, ownership is automatically granted to the riparian owners who lost part of land
to new channel. Except theres a counter-option given to riparian owners.
Case of co-ownership of sorts created by law. They have to automatically become the
owners of the dry, in proportion to the areas that they loss. Is it the entire portion, owners of
the new channel, lost more than what is given to them automatically by law, they lost one
hectare, all the riparian owners will become owner of the bed in proportion. If one lost 1/3,
1/6 and 5/6 left and right. Look at Baes SC view s changing course of river by analogy. Thats
why commentary of Tolentino, use continua natural by analogy. You can apply this in Baes
case. Specifically ruled upon. Does not prevent accretion and avulsion from being applied to
lands that are not riparian land. Hillside lands. Dont tell me that particles of soil that gets
carried away by rainwater flow down the hillside and gets deposited below. The land of
another he does not own it, he will own it because they cannot identify particles of soil and
silt. Anyway, thats very fertile soil, these accretion.
FORMATION OF ISLANDS
See Water Code find out who determines whether water is navigable or not, floatable or not
floatable. Pasig river is navigable in parts and non navigable in upstream portion nearest the
sea is navigable but upstream might be non navigable who determines which river or part of
it is navigable. Easier for navigable belongs to state. Middle of sea (Phil juridisdiction) and
middle of lake, belong to state, usually classified as forest lands, therefore inalienable.
Islands formed in non-navigable rivers, according to CC, riparian land nearest to it where is
the island. Nearest margin of river bank if in the middle, the trouble is supposing island is
midline. Mention how many meters from each other. The midline is where is the island?
Exactly there or 100 m more to the right or the left? If middle of the river, most likely therell
be problems if more owners want the island and no island is in exactly in the middle. Right
side, riparian owner on the right side. A little bit in the middle but not exactly, you can still
divide it longitudinally. Boundary of the two is at the midstream. Middle of the two banks
How about in navigable river esp if it serves a boundary between two states like the Rhine,
Danube? Boundaries of the two estates in Europe. Where is the north of Rhine, Switzerland
and then ends in Polterdam, Netherlands. The boundary between 2 countries, look at the
midline but at the deepest part of the river. Usually the navigable part. The deepest channel,
divide it between two. Not the exact midline. The word used for the deepest part of the river
is Thalweg youll come across this in Public International Law.
Reverse accession there in the FC. Land becomes the accessory. Problems that are brought
about by the way Art 321 has been phrased. Any questions.
Thursday. Accession continual over immovables. Possession first before quieting of title.
Read Siari Valley v Lucasan