The Philippine Civil Code does not recognize

acquisition of possession through force or

intimidation. He who believes that he has a right to
deprive another of the holding of the thing must
invoke the aid of a competent court if the holder
refuses to deliver it (Article 536).

Barron’s Law Dictionary defines ejectment as a legal

action brought about by one claiming the right to
possess real property against another who
possesses the premises adversely or who is a
holdover tenant who remains beyond the
termination of the lease. However, under the Rules
of Civil Procedure, ejectment is a legal remedy for
forcible entry or unlawful detainer. Forcible entry is
when a person is deprived of the possession of any
land or building by force, intimidation, threat,
strategy, or stealth. Unlawful detainer, however,
happens when the possession of any land or
building is unlawfully withheld from the owner or
lessor after the expiration of the contract or the
termination of the vendee’s right to hold possession
(Section 1, Rule 70 of the Rules of Civil Procedure).

An example of forcible entry is when someone

enters your land without your permission and builds
a structure inside the property. On the other hand,
an example of unlawful detainer is when a contract
of lease expires or is terminated without the
lessee/renter surrendering the possession of the
premises to the owner. In any of these instances,
ejectment becomes the legal option for the owner to
regain possession.

The requirements may vary depending on the basis

of the action for ejectment. If the ejectment is rooted
on forcible entry, the complaint must allege prior
physical possession and that the deprivation of
possession is by reason of force, intimidation, threat,
strategy or stealth. If the action for ejectment springs
from unlawful detainer, the lessor or owner shall
push through with the action only after a demand to
pay or comply with the conditions of the lease and
to vacate has been made upon the lessee or renter
(Section 2, Rule 70). Regardless of the basis of the
action for ejectment, it must always be verified. In
fact, all pleadings filed in ejectment cases must be
verified (Section 4, Rule 70).

The actions for ejectment shall only be instituted

and tried in the Metropolitan Trial Court or Municipal
Trial Court where the real property involved or a
portion thereof, is situated. The action shall be
commenced against the person or persons
unlawfully withholding or depriving another of
possession, or any person or persons claiming
under them. Ejectment action must be filed within 1
year from deprivation or withholding of possession
(Section 1, Rule 70).

While ejectment cases are intended to be swift and

speedy, some have abused the legal remedy. There
are plaintiffs who unreasonably amend the contract
to shorten the life of the lease. There are also
defendants who prolong the litigation by dragging
the mediation for months, or sometimes creatively
file pleadings that are not prohibited by the Rules.
Worse, even after judgment by the Municipal Trial
Court, some defendants refuse to surrender
possession despite clear declarations from the court
requiring them to vacate.

The complaint for ejectment has to be responded to

or answered by the defendant within a period of 10
days (Section 6, Rule 70). This period was not
affected by the amendment of the Rules of Court
extending the period to file an answer to 30 days
since ejectment is a special civil action covered by
special rules. In case no answer was filed, the court
can render a judgment based on the allegations of
the complaint. A motion to declare the defendant in
default and motion to dismiss are prohibited
pleadings in ejectment cases.

The preliminary conference shall be scheduled no

later than 30 days after the answer is filed. This
conference is the equivalent of a pre-trial in ordinary
cases. The failure of the plaintiff to appear in the
conference shall result in the dismissal of his
complaint and the defendant shall be entitled to a
judgment on his counterclaim. On the other hand, if
the defendant shall fail to appear, the plaintiff shall
be entitled to judgment. While postponement is
disallowed, it may be granted for highly meritorious
grounds and without prejudice to the sanctions that
the court may impose on the movant (Section 8,
Rule 70).

There is no trial in ejectment cases, and only

submission by the parties of the affidavits of their
witnesses and position papers within 10 days from
receipt of the order is required. Thereafter, the court
will have to render judgment within 30 days after
receipt of the affidavits and position papers, or after
the expiration of the period for filing the same
(Sections 10 and 11, Rule 70).

The judgment in ejectment cases is executory

unless the defendant perfects the appeal and files a
supersedeas bond in favor of the plaintiff, and if
during the pendency of the appeal, the defendant
deposits with the Regional Trial Court the amount of
rent due from time to time under the contract. If the
defendant fails to make the rental payments to the
RTC, the court shall order the execution of the
judgment by restoring the possession of the real
property to the plaintiff, but the execution of such
shall not bar the appeal (Section 19, Rule 70).
The judgment rendered in an action for forcible
entry or unlawful detainer shall be conclusive with
respect to the possession only and shall in no wise
bind the title or affect the ownership of the land or
building. Such a judgment shall not bar an action
between the same parties respecting the title to the
land or building (Section 18, Rule 70).

To avoid ejectment cases, landowners should check

the background of the lessee or renter, require
advanced payments and deposits, and agree on the
periodic increase of rental payments with the lessee.
Lessees must, in turn, pay monthly rentals on time,
lease only those properties that they can afford,
refrain from sub-leasing unless expressly stipulated
in the contract of lease, and review the contract of
lease before signing to be aware of their obligations
under the contract.

https://manilastandard.net/mobile/article/330709#:~:text=Unlawful
%20detainer%2C%20however%2C%20happens%20when,the%20Rules
%20of%20Civil%20Procedure).