Classification of Accession ACCESSION

right of the owner of a thing to the products

a) Accession Discreta (To the Fruits)
of said thing as well as to whatever is
1) Natural Fruits
inseparably attached thereto as an
2) Industrial Fruits
accessory
3) Civil Fruits
that by which property is given to a person
b) Accession Continua (Attachment or
in addition to what said person already
Incorporation
possesses, said additional property being
1) With reference to REAL property
the result of a natural increase, like land, by
a) Accession Industrial
deposit of a river; or houses, when built on
Building
one’s own land; or the young animals
Planting
Sowing
right which ownership of property gives over
everything which the same produces, or
b) Accession Natural
which is attached or incorporated thereto,
Alluvium
naturally or artificially.
Avulsion
Change of course of rivers
Formation of islands RIGHT TO ACCESSION Generally Automatic
right to accession is automatic, requiring no
2) With reference to PERSONAL property
prior act on the part of the owner of the
a) Adjunction or conjunction
principal.
Inclusion (engraftment)
e.g.
Soldadura (attachment)
land over which river now flows
Tejido (weaving)
land owner is now the owner of the
Pintura (painting)
abandoned river bed in proportion to the
Escritura (writing)
area he has lost
b) Mixture (confusion – liquids;
commixtion- solids)

c) specification Section 1. – RIGHT of ACCESSION with respect

to what is produced by property (ACCESSION
DISCRETA)
Art. 440. The ownership of property gives the Art. 441. To the owner belongs:
right by accession to everything which is
produced thereby, or which is incorporated or 1) the natural fruits
attached thereto, either naturally or artificially. 2) industrial fruits
3) civil fruits

Accession – the right of a property owner to

everything which is: Accession Discreta ( Right to the Fruits)

a) produced thereby (accession discreta) right to the ownership of fruits produced by

b) or which is incorporated or attached thereto,
either naturally or artificially (accession
continua or accession non-interrumpida)
which in turn is divided into:
1) Natural accession (accession natural)
2) Artificial accession (accession artificial
or accession industrial)
our property
Instances when OWNER OF LAND does NOT
OWN the fruits
a) possessor in good faith of the land (he owns
the fruits already received)
b) usufructuary
c) lessee gets the fruits of the land
d) antichresis – antichretic creditor gets the
fruits, although said fruits should be applied first
to the interest, if any is owing and then to the
principal amount of the loan
Art. 442 Natural fruits are spontaneous
products of the soil and the young and other
products of animals.
Industrial fruits are those produced by lands of
any kind through cultivation or labor.
Civil fruits are the rents of building, the prices
of leases of lands and other property and the
amount of perpetual or life annuities or other
similar income.
 To whom does the offspring of animals belong
when the male and female belong to different
owners?
Ans.:
The owner of the female was considered also
the owner of the young, unless there is a
contrary custom or speculation.
The legal presumption in the absence of proof
to the contrary, is that the calf as well as its
mother belong to the owner of the latter, by the
right of accretion.
The offspring follows the dam or mother. This is
based on 2 good reasons:
1) Oftentimes, it is not known who the male is
2) During the pregnancy of the female, its
OWNER is greatly burdened by the
consequential expenses and virtual
uselessness of the animal and it is only fair
that when the young is born, the owner
should gain or at least recover his loss
*A leases the female animal from B. During the
lease period, the animal produced a sibling.
- A owns the young, lease contract is onerous. By
virtue of the contract of lease, the owner of the
female is also the owner of the young MUST
GIVE WAY.
- if the contract entered into is COMMODATUM, the
owner of the young shall be the owner of the
female animal, because such is a gratuitous
contract.
CIVIL FRUITS
1) Rent of buildings
2) Price of leases
3) Amount of perpetual or life annuities or
other similar income (but not a BONUS
granted as a reward or as a compensation
to a person who mortgaged and thus risks
his land to secure another’s indebtedness)
Bachrach Motor Co. v. Talisay-Silay Milling Co.
Milling company, to obtain loan from a bank,
used one of its sugar planter’s land as security.
The company gave the sugar planter,
mortgagor, a bonus as a reward.
To whom should the reward be given: creditor
of
the mortgagor or the bank?
Creditor of the mortgagor is entitled to the
reward. Mortgagee is not entitled to the fruits of
the mortgaged land.
Bonus is NOT CIVIL FRUITS. It is not one of
those meant by the law when it says “other
similar income “since this phrase only refers to
things analogous to rents, leases, and
annuities.
Assuming that it is income, still it is not income
obtained or derived from the land itself, but
income obtained as compensation for the risk
assumed by the owner.
Bonus was not based upon the value or
importance of the land but upon the total value
of the debt secured.
Art. 443. He who receives the FRUITS has the
obligation to pay the expenses made by a third
person in their PRODUCTION, GATHERING and
PRESERVATION.
Characteristics of the Expenses:
a) Must have been used for PRODUCTION,
GATHERING and PRESERVATION, not
for the IMPROVEMENT of the property
b) Must have been NECESSARY and not
luxurious or excessive
EXPENSES > VALUE of the FRUITS
e.g. when typhoon have damaged the crops
There may still be reimbursement for the expenses
if the owner insists on being entitled to the fruits.
Reasons:
1) law makes no exception or distinction
2) same thing would have happened had the
owner been also the planter
3) he who gets expected advantages must be
prepared to shoulder the losses
Land owner (A) ≠ Person (B) who grew,
raised, harvested and
GATHERED the fruits in
BAD FAITH
 Landowner considered as the owner of the
fruits but must reimburse B for the
EXPENSES for production, gathering, and
preservation.
Reason: No one may enrich himself unjustly at
another’s expense
Even if B is in bad faith, he must still be reimbursed
for such expenses, for were it not for the said
necessary expenses for production, gathering
and preservation, there would not be any fruits
grown at all, or left or preserved.
If the CROPS have NOT YET been GATHERED,
the landowner gets the fruits without indemnity by
the principle of accession continua) – ART. 449
If the crops have already been gathered
(accession continua cannot apply).
In short:
If CROPS have already been GATHERED –
landowner must reimburse the expenses for
production, gathering and harvesting.
If CROPS have NOT YET been GATHERED –
landowner gets the fruits WITHOUT INDEMNITY
PLANTER IS IN GOOD FAITH
Article 443 does not apply
PLANTER is entitled to the fruits already
received, hence, there is NO NECESSITY
of REIMBURSING him.
Art. 444. Only such as are manifest or born are
considered as NATURAL or INDUSTRIAL fruits.
With respect to animals, it is sufficient that they
are in the womb of the mother, although
unborn.
Sec. 2 – RIGHT OF ACCESSION WITH RESPECT
TO IMMOVABLE PROPERTY
Art. 445. Whatever is built, planted or sown on
the land of another and the improvements or
repairs made thereon, belong to the owner of
the land, subject to the provisions of the
following articles.
ACCESSION CONTINUA – Accession Industrial
Accession Industrial (Building, Planting,
Sowing)
Planting vs Sowing
Sowing – each deposit of seed gives rise merely to
a single crop or harvest
Planting – more or less permanent trunks or
trees are produced, which in turn produce fruits,
themselves. Without a replanting, crops will
continue to grow every season.
*Art. 445 can be APPLIED only if the owner of
the land is KNOWN. If he be UNKNOWN, no
decision on the ownership of the things planted,
built or sown can be made.
Basic Principles:
To the owner of the principal (e.g. landowner)
must belong the ACCESSIONS, in accordance
with the principle that the accessory follows
the principal.
The UNION or INCORPORATION must, with
certain exceptions, be effected in such a
manner that to separate the principal from
the accessory would result in substantial
injury to either
He who is in good faith may be held
responsible but he should not be penalized
He who is in bad faith may be penalized
No one should enrich himself unjustly at the
expense of another
 Bad faith of one party neutralizes the bad
faith of the other so both should be considered
in good faith
Exception to the Gen. Rule that Landowner also
owns whatever is built, planted or sown thereon:
Art. 120 FC
Ownership of Improvements, whether for utility or
adornment, made on the separate property of the
spouses at the expense of the partnership or
through the acts or efforts of either or both spouses
shall pertain to the CONJUGAL PARTNERSHIP,
or to the original owner-spouse, subject to the ff
rules:
When the costs of the improvement made
by the conjugal partnership and any
resulting increase in value are MORE than
the VALUE of the PROPERTY at the time
of the improvement; otherwise, the said
property shall be retained in ownership by
the owner-spouse, likewise, the subject to
reimbursement of the cost of the
improvement.
Ownership shall be vested upon
reimbursement, which shall be made at the
time of the liquidation of the conjugal
partnership
a) If VALUE of the Property BEFORE the
improvement was made
b) Value AFTER the improvement including
the cost
If (a) is greater, the whole thing belongs to the
owner-spouse, without prejudice to
reimbursement of the conjugal partnership
If (b) is greater, the whole thing belongs to the
conjugal partnership but the owner-spouse must
be reimbursed
Caltex Inc. vs Felias
Lot is owned by Wife’s parents. Conjugal fund were
spent to construct building on the lot. Then, lot was
donated by parents to the wife.
Who owns the land?
The lot is the separate property of the wife
NOT CONJUGAL, because when the
building was constructed the land was still
owned by the parents. Accessory follows
the principal. The donation to the wife
transmitted to her the rights of a land owner
over a building constructed on it.
If the building is constructed at the time
the LOT WAS ALREADY OWNED BY THE
WIFE, Art. 120, FC will apply, that is, it shall
consider the value of the property Before
and After the improvements.
Building – “whatever is built” refers to all kinds of
constructions with a roof and used as residence, for
office, or social meetings, etc.
Art. 446. All works, sowing, and planting are
presumed made by the owner and at his
expense, unless the contrary is proved.
2 DISPUTABLE PRESUMPTIONS:
1) The WORKS, SOWING, and PLANTING
were made by the owner
2) They were made at the owner’s expense.
 Even if another actually undertook the
task, for he might have been acting only
as the agent
 If not the agent, then, it may still be
presumed that the undertaking was
made with the landowner’s consent
 If the building is LARGE, EXPENSIVE,
or IMPORTANT, common sense may
direct us to believe that the owner of
the building is also the owner of the
land.
Art. 447. The owner of the land who makes
thereon, personally or through another,
plantings, constructions or work 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 damages. The owner of the
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,
constructions or works being destroyed.
However, if the landowner acted in bad faith,
the owner of the materials may remove them in
any event, with a right to be indemnified for he is entitled to reimbursement and
damages. damages (in case he chooses not to
remove)

Measure of Damages
Rules when Landowner constructs or plants on
his land with the materials of another: Indemnification for damages shall comprehend not
only the value of the LOSS suffered but also that
of the profits which the OBLIGEE failed to
Rights and Obligations of the owner of the Land realize.
who uses the materials of another:
1) If the LANDOWNER acted in good faith
If the landowner wanted to return the materials
 Landowner becomes the OWNER of the
instead of reimbursing them, may he does so
MATERIALS but he must PAY for their
even without the CONSENT of the owner of the
value
materials?
 EXCEPTION: when they can be
removed without destruction to the ANS.: It depends.
work made or to the plants
1) If no damage has been made to the materials,
or they have not been transformed – as a
2) If the LANDOWNER is in bad faith
result of the construction – they may be
 he becomes the owner of the materials
returned at the landowner’s expense
but he must pay:
their VALUE
2) If damage has been made or there has been a
plus DAMAGES
transformation, they cannot be returned
anymore.
 EXCEPTION: when the owner of the
materials decides to remove them
whether or not destruction would be Owner of the materials shall have the right to
caused remove.
materials shall still belong to
the Owner of said materials,  If the landowner has already demolished or
who in addition will still be removed the paintings, constructions, or works,
entitled to damages is the owner of the materials still entitled to
claim them?
Ans. :
Rights and Obligations of the Owner of the
Materials Owner of the materials is still entitled to get
them since the law makes no distinction.
1) If the landowner acted in GOOD FAITH
Landowner may insist on returning said materials
Owner of the materials is still entitled to
for evidently there is no accession.
reimbursement (provided he does not
remove them)
He is entitled to removal (provided NO
 A builds a house on his land using the materials
of B. Then, A sold the house and lot to C.
substantial injury is caused)
Against whom may C have a right of action?
2) If the landowner acted in BAD FAITH
The right of action should be directed
Owner of the materials is entitled to the
against C, since it was he who benefited
ABSOLUTE right of REMOVAL and
from the accession.
DAMAGES (whether or not substantial
injury is caused)
Bad Faith and Good Faith in connection with
Art. 447
Builder, Planter or Sower is in BAD FAITH
If he makes use of the land or materials which he
knows belong to another
 Purchaser is not a builder in good faith
where he has a presumptive knowledge of an
existing Torrens title in favor of another
 One who is aware of a notis of lis pendens is
a PURCHASER in bad faith
He is in GOOD FAITH if he did not know that
he had no right to such land or materials
 If a landowner with a Torrens Title builds
beyond the boundaries of his property
stated in the Certificate of Title, and thus
constructs partly on his NEIGHBOR’S
land, is he necessarily in BAD FAITH?
 NO, he may still be in good faith. No
one, even a surveyor, can determine
the precise location of his land by
simply examining his title.
Owner of the materials is in BAD FAITH if he
allows another to use the materials without
INFORMING him of the ownership thereof
Owner of the materials is in GOOD FAITH if
he:
 did NOT KNOW that another was using
his materials; or
 granting that he DID KNOW, if he
informed the user of the ownership
thereof and made the necessary
prohibition
When BOTH PARTIES are in BAD FAITH:
consider both in good faith
Landowner (GF) vs. Owner of materials (BF)
Landowner shall be:
 exempted from reimbursement and
 entitled to consequential damages
(e.g. materials are of an inferior
quality)
Owner of the materials would LOSE ALL
RIGTHS to them, such as:
 Right of removal, regardless of
whether or not substantial injury would
be caused.
Good faith is always presumed, and upon him
who alleges bad faith rests the burden of proof.
Art. 448. The owner of the land on which
anything has been built, sown, or planted in
GOOD FAITH, shall have the right to
appropriate as his own the works, sowing or
planting, after the payment of the indemnity
provided for in articles 546 and 548, or to oblige
the one who built or planted to pay the price of
the land, and the one who sowed, 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
trees. 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 parties shall agree upon the
terms of the lease and in case of disagreement,
the COURT SHALL FIX the TERMS thereof.
Rule when on the Land of a Person in Good Faith,
Another Builds, Sows, or Plants in Bad Faith.
*Art. 448 applicable only when the builder, planter
or sower is in GOOD FAITH, i.e., when he
believes that he has the right to so build, plant or
sow because, he thinks he owns the land or
believes himself to have a claim of title.
Landowner (GF) vs. BPS (BF)
 On O’s land, B built in good faith a house. O is
in good faith. What are O’s rights?
O is entitled to an option, either to:
a) To appropriate for himself the house upon
payment of the proper indemnity, or
b) To compel the builder B to buy the land upon
which the house has been built, unless the value
of the land be considerably MORE THAN the
value of the house. In the latter case, rent
should be paid.
*he has NO right of REMOVAL or DEMOLITION,
unless after the having selected a compulsory sale,
the builder fails to pay the land.
 If the builder CANNOT PAY for the land,
he should not be allowed to continue using
it to the owner’s detriment.
 Builder must remove the construction
Parties may adjust their rights in some other
ways. The article is NOT MANDATORY.
Owner of the land has the option, not the
builder. Builder cannot compel the owner of the
land to sell such land to him.
The RIGHT of the builder in good faith is the right
to reimbursement for the improvements, if said
improvements are appropriated by the owner.
 A builder in good faith built a portion of his house
on another’s lot.
it would be impractical to exercise the first
alternative to appropriate that portion built on
the land, as it might render the whole building
useless.
2nd alternative would be workable. If builder
is unwilling to buy, he must VACATE the
land, and PAY RENTALS until he does so.
 PRIOR to this exercise of choice, he will
not be required to pay rents because
of his good faith and consequent right
of retention
Inter-Regional Development Corporation vs. CA
On the land of another, a person planted crops.
Does the land owner automatically become the
owner of said planted crops?
Ans.: Owner of the land does not ipso facto
become the owner of what was planted
on his land by another.
Determine whether the planter was in good faith
or bad faith
Assuming he is IN GOOD FAITH, the
landowner should he desire to get the crops,
must first give the proper indemnification to the
planter.
Tan Queto vs. CA, et al.
Net result of mutual bad faith between the owner
and the builder entitles the builder to the rights of a
builder in good faith. Reimbursement should be
given to the builder if the owner decides to
appropriate the builder for herself.
Fernandez Del Campo vs. Abeisa
Plaintiffs (2/3) and Defendants (1/3) co-owners pro-
indiviso
The house built by the defendants happened to
be in the portion given to plaintiffs.
Defendant is not entitled to reimbursement of
the cost of the house built because as a co-
owner, he is not a third person in
contemplation of Art. 448 defining a builder in
good faith.
Provisions of Art. 448 is applicable
X purchase subdivision Lot 6. Instead of
building on Lot 6, X in good faith built an
apartment house worth P8M on Lot 7, which
is valued at P8.5M belonging to Z and without
Z’s knowledge.
Z has preferential right for he has the option
referred to in Art. 448
Z cannot compel the removal or
demolition, for such alternative is not granted
him under the Article.
Z can compel X to buy the land, since its
value is not considerably more than the value
of the apartment, the difference being only
P.5 million
If X agrees to pay, Z may demand the
removal of the apartment
Ignacio vs. Hilario – since Z chose to sell the
land, the builder must pay. If he fails to pay,
he should not be allowed to use the land to
the landowner’s detriment. HE MUST
REMOVE THE BUILDING.
Before settlement is reached between X and
Z, Z may not legally demand rental for his
land, for after all X is a builder in good faith, and
is entitled to retain in the meantime. This right
of retention would be nugatory if he were to be
made to pay.
Sps. Benitez vs. CA
The advantage in Art. 448 is accorded the
LANDOWNER because:
 his right is OLDER, and
 by the principle of accession, he is
entitled to the ownership of the
accessory thing.
INDEMNITY in case of APPROPRIATION of the
thing BUILT or SOWN or PLANTED by the
landowner:
indemnity found in Arts. 546 and 548, NCC
ownership over the thing does not pass to
the landowner, UNTIL PAYMENT is made
either on the DATE fixed by
AGREEMENT or fixed by the COURT
After the owner of the land has given to the builder
or possessor in good faith the proper indemnities,
the builder or possessor may be ordered to
VACATE the land.
 A builder constructed in good faith a house on
Fernandez vs. Abeisa
Concepcion (2/3) and Bernarda (1/3) are co-
owners. After the houses were surveyed, it was
found that the house of Bernarda occupied the
portion of 5 sqm of the lot allotted to Concepcion.
Held:
Concepcion has the right to
 appropriate the said portion of the house
of Bernarda upon payment of indemnity to
the latter OR
 Concepcion may oblige Bernarda to pay
the price of the land occupied by their
house, but if the PRICE asked for is MUCH
MORE than the VALUE of the portion of
Bernarda’s house built thereon, then she
CANNOT be obliged to BUY THE LAND.
 Bernarda shall then pay the reasonable
rent to Concepcion upon such terms
and conditions that they may AGREE
 If they DISAGREE, the TRIAL COURT
shall fix the terms thereof
 Bernada may demolish or remove the
portion of her house at her own
expense is she so decides
Indemnities to be given:
a) Necessary Expenses – those made for the
preservation of the thing or those without
which the thing would deteriorate or be lost
 Those incurred for cultivation,
production and upkeep
 Include necessary repairs
b) Useful Expenses
 Those that augment the INCOME of
the thing upon which they are spent
 Add value to the property
 Do NOT include the value of farming
implements or work animals which do
not remain on the land
c) Luxurious Expenses – if he so desires to
appropriate them for himself
the land of X. X elected to appropriate the
house and bound himself to pay the proper
indemnities. Before the indemnities are
given:
a) Builder may retain the house UNTIL he is
PAID the full indemnities since he is a
builder in good faith
 Such right of retention may be
recorded on the certificate of title and
thus, constitute a LIEN on the
property
b) In case the building is LEASED to
another, builder is NOT ENTITLED to the
RENTS that accrue in the meantime,
since his possession is no longer that of a
possessor in good faith.
 If builder receives the rents, he must
deduct them from whatever indemnity
is due him
c) Is the builder entitled to the fruits that will
accrue during the time he retains the
premises?
 No, because during the said
RETENTION, he is not considered a
possessor in good faith
 d) Owner of the land is NOT ENTITLED to
collect RENT from the builder while the
latter retains the house, otherwise the
right of retention till indemnity is given
would be rendered nugatory
Pecson vs CA
It is the current market value of the improvements
which should be made the basis of reimbursement
to the builder in good faith
Ballatan vs. CA
In the event the owner selects to sell to the builder,
planter, or sower the land or which the
improvement stands, the price must be FIXED at
the prevailing MARKET VALUE at the time of
payment
 A constructed a house on land belonging to B in
the belief that the land was his own. Upon
discovering the fact, B demanded that A should
pay him the value of the land, but A failed to do
so.
A’s failure to pay did NOT automatically
make B the OWNER of the HOUSE by the
Right of Accession.
 it merely gives the landowner the option
to either appropriate the house or to
compel the builder to pay the land upon
which the house has been built, unless
the price of the land is much more than
the value of the house built thereon – in
which case, rent should be paid
 ownership over the accessory
(house) passes only AFTER payment
of the indemnity
Remedies of the parties:
1) They may assume the relation of lessor
and lessee; RENT may be fixed by the
court in case of disagreement
2) Landowner may have the house
removed. If he chose to sell the land and
the builder failed to pay.
3) Landowner may consider the price of the
land as an ordinary money debt of the
builder.
 If the landowner elects to COMPEL the
builder TO BUY the land, the BUILDER is
NOT entitled to the right of retention.
EXCEPTION:
Unless the VALUE of the LAND is
considerably more than the VALUE of the
BUILDING.
 Art. 448 does NOT APPLY to the following:
BPS does not claim ownership over the land,
but possesses it as mere holder, agent,
usufructuary or tenant
 BPS knows that the land is not his
EXCEPTION: If a tenant (agricultural tenant)
whose lease is about to EXPIRE, nevertheless
still sows, not knowing that the crops will no
longer belong to him, Art. 448 can be applied.
BPS is not a Stranger but a CO-OWNER,
even if later on, during the partition, the portion
of the land used is awarded to another co-
owner
Person constructs building on HIS OWN
LAND and then sells the land but not the
building to another, there can be no question
of good faith or bad faith on the part of the
builder.
 he can be compelled to remove the
building
 NEW OWNER of the land will not be
required to pay any indemnity for the
building
When the builder is a belligerent occupant,
such as Japanese Imperial Armed Forces, the
constructions made by it during the war are
owned not by the owner of the land but the
Philippines
Southwestern University vs. Salvador
A lessee who builds a house on the land may
remove the same, but CANNOT COMPEL the
lessor to sell to him the land.
Pecson vs CA
Art. 448 does not apply where the landowner is
the BPS who then later loses ownership of the land
by sale or donation
Art. 448 also applies:
Land used is of public dominion. The State shall
exercise the option. Law makes no distinction,
whether public or private land.
Rule in Case the Landowner Sells or in any
other way alienates the land
Landowner sells or in any other manner
alienate the land in favor of a stranger, against
whom will the BUILDER have a right of
action?
 Action should primarily be DIRECTED
against the NEW OWNER, because he
benefited from the accession.
If the new owner, in buying the land, did not
pay for the construction, he alone is
responsible, because it was he who profited by
the accession
If the new owner paid for the construction,
the action may still be directed against him, but
this time, he can file a 3rd party complaint
against the original owner, who ultimately will
have to pay, since it is unfair to compel the new
owner to pay twice
Atkins, Kroll & Co. v. Domingo
A built on B’s land with the latter’s consent. Then, A
sold the land to C. Can C be entitled to the building
without giving the proper indemnities?
C must give the proper indemnity, for it is he who
would profit by the accession.
If the land has a Torrens title, which indicates B as
the owner of both the building and the lot, C is to be
considered a purchaser in good faith and should
not be required to pay A.
Exception: when the buyer has actual knowledge
of the TRUE OWNERSHIP of the Building
*if the original owner HAD NOT YET made HIS
CHOICE at the time he sold the land to the NEW
OWNER, the latter is given the right to exercise the
option.
When Art. 448 may be applied in EJECTMENT
cases:
If as a result of a defective donation of land,
the DONEE constructs in good faith a building
thereon, and if there is no dispute as to
ownership of the building, the courts may
apply – even in EJECTMENT cases- the
provisions of Art. 448 in order to avoid
MULTIPLICITY of ACTIONS and to
ADMINISTER Practical and Speedy Justice
Irrevocability of Choice
Once a choice is made by the landowner, it is
generally irrevocable.
 if the landowner has elected to get the
building, but is finally unable to pay for the
indemnity or value of the building, she cannot
afterwards elect to sell the land.
 Her monetary obligation to indemnify can
indeed be satisfied by a levy of execution
on her properties
Art. 449 He who builds, plants, or sows in bad
faith on the land of another, loses what is built,
planted or sown without right to indemnity.
- Applies to GROWING or STANDING
CROPS
- Gathered crops are governed by Art. 443
Felices vs. Iriola
S sold his land to B. Having been informed that
such a sale was void, S sued B for the recovery of
the land. During the pendency of the case, B
introduced improvements on the land. Should B be
considered a possessor and builder in bad faith?
YES. B should be considered a possessor and
builder in bad faith. Since the Sale is VOID, both
seller and buyer are considered in bad faith. Law
would regard both as if they were in good faith.
 Improvements were introduced AFTER
the pendency of the case for recovert
  B must be regarded as a possessor in
bad faith
Leonardo Santos v. Angel Mojica
The son, being a successor-in-interest, was
BOUND by the judgment against his parents. His
RECONSTRUCTION of the house into a BIGGER
one is deemed to have been made in BAD
FAITH and therefore he loses the improvement
made by him to the owners of the land without
right to indemnity, pursuant to Art. 449 of the
Civil Code.
Landowners can select instead a DEMOLITION
of said improvement
De Leon vs. Caluag
RTC of Quezon City found certain persons to be
builders in bad faith, and ordered them to deliver
the improvements to the owner.
Builders appealed alleging that they had built in
good faith and should be entitled to retention
until reimbursed. Pending appeal, are they
entitled to retain?
No they are not entitled to retain, for the RTC
findings are presumed correct until reversed by
the higher court
Art. 450 Owner of the land on which anything
has been built, planted or sown in BAD FAITH
may demand the DEMOLITION of the work, or
that 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 or planter to PAY the PRICE of the
LAND, and the SOWER the proper RENT.
 B builds in bad faith a house on O’s land (O in
GF) what are the 3 alternative rights of O?
 Landowner (GF) vs. Builder (BF)
Landowner is allowed to:
a) Get the house without paying indemnity for
its value or expenses but with the obligation
to pay under Art. 452 Necessary
Expenses (for the preservation not of the
house, but of the land) plus DAMAGES
b) Demand the DEMOLITION of the house, at
the builder’s expense, plus DAMAGES
c) Compel the builder to BUY the land,
whether or not the value of the land is
considerably more than the value of the
house plus DAMAGES.
De Guzman vs. Rivera
A purchased a house from B. A knew that the land
was owned by C and that B had built the house in
bad faith. Can A be eject from the land without first
being given indemnity?
Ans.: Yes, because A can be considered a
possessor in BAD FAITH of the land. He did not
acquire more rights than what the seller had.
Mindanao Academy, Inc., et al. vs Ildefonso Yap
If a buyer introduces improvements on the
property after the filing of a suit against him for
the annulment of the sale, he becomes a builder
in bad faith without any right of reimbursement.
Gathered Crops vs. Growing Crops
Landowner (GF) and Planter (BF)
Planter’s right with reference to the Crops:
a) If the crops have been GATHERED
 Return the value of the crops or the crops
themselves minus the expenses essential for
their PRODUCTION, GATHERING, and
PRESERVATION
b) If the crops have NOT YET been GATHERED
 Planter completely forfeit them in favor
of the owner of the land, without any
right to indemnity (except for the
NECESSARY expenses for the
preservation of the land not of the
crops)
 Forfeiture works because of the
principle of accession
Art. 452. The builder, planter or sower in bad
faith is entitled to REIMBURSEMENT for the
NECESSARY expenses of the preservation of
the LAND.
 A Builder in bad faith can lose the building
without indemnity for the NECESSARY
expenses for the BUILDING, but he must be
indemnified the NECESSARY EXPENSES for
the PRESERVATION of the LAND. After all,
the true owner would have borne such
expenses anyway, even if nothing had been
built on the land.
Including LAND TAXES
Art. 453. If there was BAD FAITH, 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 good faith.
There is bad faith on the part of the
LANDOWNER, whenever the act was done
WITH HIS KNOWLEDGE and WITHOUT
OPPOSITION on his part.
Bad faith of one neutralizes the bad faith of the
other, hence, both will be considered in good faith.
 Applicable to SALES in VIOLATION of the
Homestead Law
Buyer buys a homestead within the
period when it cannot yet be bought,
both he and the seller are in BAD FAITH.
BAD FAITH
1) LANDOWNER
 When such act was done with his
knowledge and without opposition on his
part.
 Person who buys land knowing that a
construction had been made thereon by
a person other than the owner and who
pays only for the land
2) BPS
 When BPS was made knowingly by one
on land NOT BELONGIONG to him and
without authority
Art. 454. When the landowner acted in bad faith
and the BPS proceeded in good faith, the
provisions of Art. 447 shall apply.
 In good faith, a builder X build a house on the
land of O who was in bad faith.
Apply Art. 447
As if landowner built on his land a house in
bad faith with the materials of the X.
O must pay for the VALUE of the House
plus DAMAGES
If X prefers to remove or destroy the house,
O would still be liable for DAMAGES
Art. 455 if the MATERIALS, PLANTS, or SEEDS
belong to a THIRD PERSON who has NOT
ACTED IN BAD FAITH, 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 by Art. 450. If the
owner of the materials, plants or seeds has
been paid by the builder, planter, sower, the
latter may demand from the landowner the
value of the materials and labor.
 Pedro in bad faith constructs a house with the
materials of Jose who is also in bad faith on the
land of Tomas who is in good faith.
Builder – BF
Owner of the Materials – BF
Landowner – GF
Rights and obligations of the parties
 Parties in BF, i.e., Builder and owner of the
Materials, as between them, good faith must
govern. Builder, therefore, must reimburse
Owner of the materials, but in case the builder
cannot pay, Landowner cannot be held
subsidiarily because he was in good faith, and
as to him owner of the materials was also in
bad faith.
 Landowner can ask DAMAGES from both:
 he may appropriate the house for his
own, WITHOUT PAYMENT of any
indemnity for USEFUL or
NECESSARY expenses for the
preservation of the land; OR
  demand the DEMOLITION of the
house at builder’s expense

 compel builder to pay the PRICE of

the LAND whether the land is
considerably more valuable than the
house or not

Builder may demand reimbursement from

landowner
- if the owner of the materials, plants or seeds
has been paid by the BPS, the latter may
demand from the landowner the VALUE
of the MATERIALS and LABOR
- reimbursement may only be had if the
LANDOWNER PROFITS by the accession
not when he does not choose to appropriate
the construction or planting for himself.
Art. 456. Good faith may co-exist with
negligence