RIGHT OF ACCESSION WITH RESPECT TO IMMOVABLE PROPERTY

ACCESSION CONTINUA BY NATURAL ACCESSION (Arts. 457 – 465)

i. Alluvium or Accretion
ii. Avulsion
iii. Change of river course
iv. Formation of Island

I. ALLUVIUM OR ACCRETION :

Q. Who owns the alluvium or accretion which is gradually received from the effects of the
current of the waters?

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.

ALLUVIUM (or Alluvio) – is the soil deposited or added to (accretion) the lands adjoining
the banks of rivers, and gradually received as an effect of the current of the waters.

 By law, the accretion is automatically owned by the owner of the estate fronting the
river bank (called - riparian owner).

Q. What are the Technical Differences between Alluvium and Accretion?

1. Acrretion is the process whereby the soil is deposited;
Alluvium is the soil deposited on the estate fronting the river bank;

2. Accretion is broader as it can apply to deposits gradually made upon lands beside
creeks, streams, lakes and rivers. Alluvium applies only to the soil deposited on
river banks.

Q. What are the Essential Requisites of Alluvium?

1.) The deposit is gradual & imperceptible as a process.
2.) Cause is current of river, not human intervention
3.) Current must be that of a river
4.) River must continue to exist (otherwise Art. 461 applies and not Art. 457)
5.) Increase is comparatively smaller and not more than twice than the riparian area.

NOTA BENE :
o It is not necessary that the riparian owner should make an express act of possession of
the alluvium that attached to his land; By direct provision of law, it is automatically his
by accession from the moment of accretion. (Art. 457)

o Accession - is the right of property owner to everything which is produced thereby or

incorporated or attached thereto, naturally or artificially. (see - Art. 440)

1
o It is not necessary that the riparian owner has completely paid for the value of the
riparian estate (e.g. contract to sell of land) as long as he has equitable or beneficial
title, he will be deemed owner of the alluvium. (Read: Director of Lands v. Rizal, L-
2925, Dec. 29, 1950)

o Alluvium by artificial means is prohibited and penalized unless authorized by govt.

o If alluvium is caused by fish traps, it will be deemed an alluvium if there is no deliberate
means to cause alluvium.

REQUISITES for Accretion to benefit a Riparian Owner: (Reynante v. CA 207 SCRA 794,
1992)
1. That the deposit is gradual and imperceptible
2. That it resulted from the current of the water
3. That the land where accretion takes place is adjacent to the bank of river

Q. WHY is Alluvium granted to the Riparian Owner?

1. To compensate the Riparian Owner (RO) for the loss suffered from erosion caused
by the water/floods
2. To compensate the Riparian Owner because his property is subject to
encumbrance or legal easements (e.g. right of way)
3. The interest of agriculture requires that the soil be given to the person who is in the
best position to cultivate the same
4. Since certain identification of source of soil is impossible, it´s logical to give it to the
person who can best use the property.

Q. While the alluvium is automatically owned by the riparian owner, can this be lost thru
acquisitive prescription by another?

1. While accretion or alluvium automatically becomes property of the riparian owner, the
same does not automatically become registered land unless actually so registered.
(Grande v. CA, L-17652, June 30, 1962).

Note: The alluvium, while automatically owned by the riparian owner, may be subject
to acquisitive prescription by another, if not registered and covered by a certificate of
title under the Torrens system.

2. There must be judicial application for registration of the land to make the ownership of
the alluvium or dried up river bed come under the Torrens system. (Republic v. Heirs of
Luisa Villa Abrille, L-39248, May 7, 1976). This will entitle the riparian owner the
protection of imprescriptibility of registered land.

3. Failure to register the acquired alluvium for a period of 50 years opens it to acquisition
thru prescription by third persons. (Reynante v. CA 207 SCRA 794, 1992).
2
4. Torrens Certificate of Title will not protect the riparian owner against diminution or loss
of area of his land thru gradual erosion or natural changes in the adjoining river. (Payatas
Estate Improvement Co. v. Tuason, 53 Phil. 55)

Q. Who owns the following accretions coming from different bodies of water?

5. Accretions on a sea bank belongs to the public domain and is not available for private
ownership until officially declared by the government as no longer needed for public use,
or lawfully converted into patrimonial property. (RP v. Lat Vda. de Castillo, GR 69002,
June 30, 1988)

6. Accretions on the bank of a Lake, (like Laguna de Bay) belong to the owners of the
estate to which they have been added. (supra)

7. Accretions on the bank of an island formed in non-navigable river belongs to the owner
of the island. (Banatao v. Dabbay, 38 Phil. 612)

Q. What are the Effects of Public Service Constructions or Easements on River Banks?
1. The government or public service entity will own the accretion if the road or railroad
is made on a river bank for in this case, this strip of land is no longer owned by the
former riparian owner.

2. If instead of public service construction, there is only easement for the benefit of
navigation, floatage, fishing, and salvage, the right of the riparian owner to the
accretion subsists, because in easements, the owner of the servient estate does
not lose his ownership over the portion occupied. (Ayala de Roxas v. City of Manila, 9
Phil. 215)

Q. Who owns the accretion if it attaches to the land subject of installment, in a contract to
sell between buyer and landowner?

A. The buyer - because upon execution of the contract to sell, buyer is now deemed as
having the beneficial and equitable title over the principal property. (Director of Lands v.
Rizal, L-2925, Dec, 29, 1950)

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

 This article does not deal with alluvium.

 It applies to ponds or lagoons only – not to lakes, rivers, creeks or streams.
 Portion of land covered by water in extraordinary floods is not lost by the owner
 This may however be lost by prescription

3
 Q. If the land of an adjoining estate is covered by water, who owns the land once the
flood subsides?

A. If a portion of land is flooded, this land does not become public domain if the flood
subsides; it’s not lost, it remains with the owner. But this may be lost by prescription.

See: Govt. v. Colegio de San Jose, 53 Phil. 423; Govt. v. Cabangis, 53 Phil. 112

II. 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 the ownership of it,
provided that he removes the same within two years.

Define AVULSION:

o The process whereby the current of a river, creek or torrent segregates from an estate
on its bank a known portion of land and transfers it to another estate.
o The removal of a considerable quantity of earth annexing this to the land of another,
suddenly and by perceptible action of the water
o A violent tearing or breaking away of land by the force of the river and transferring it to
another estate

o It is also referred to as “delayed accession” in the sense that if the owner abandons
the soil torn, or fails to remove it from the other estate within 2 years, the estate to
which it has attached acquires ownership by law.

Distinguish Alluvium from Avulsion:

ALLUVIUM
- deposit of soil is gradual
- soil cannot be identified
- belongs to owner of property
to which it has attached
AVULSION
- sudden/abrupt process seen
- may be identified or verified
- belongs to owner of property
from which it has detached

Nota Bene : JURISPRUDENCE RE ALLUVIUM, AVULSION

1.) In the absence of evidence that the change in the course of river was sudden or
that it occurred thru alluvium, the presumption is that the change was gradual and
was caused by alluvium and erosion. (Payatas Estate Improvement Co. v. Tuason,
53 Phil. 55; Hodges v. Garcia, L-12730, Aug. 22, 1960)

4
  What is the period given to the the owner of the land detached, to claim and
REMOVE the land from the other estate to which it attached?

 If the owner of the land detached thru avulsion claims within two (2) years, but
removed it only after 2 1/2 years, can the other estate owner to which the land has
been transferred now refuse to return?

2.) In avulsion, the owner of the land detached must not only claim and but also
remove the land from the other estate within 2 years. Otherwise, he may lose it
after two years as he is deemed by law to have abandoned his right.

o Is it essential that the detached land be known or identifiable for the law of avulsion
to apply?
o If identification is no longer possible, what rule will be applied?

3.) In avulsion it is essential that the detached land is known and identifiable. If
identification is no longer possible, then Art. 459 does not apply. The principle of
commixtion or confusion may be applied if possible.

o If the detached land of a landowner is moved in the middle of a river, who will own
this now – the State or the original landowner?

4.) If the detached portion is not attached to another´s land but is placed in the middle
of the river, ownership will remain with the original owner from whose land it was
detached.

Uprooted Trees & Cast on another land

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

Q. When must the tree owner claim his tree/s cast upon another’s land?
o Claim must be made by original tree owner within six months. Otherwise the owner of
the land where the tree is cast, acquires its ownership.

o If claim is made within six months but the tree is not immediately recovered, the
original owner has 4 years within which to file the action to recover it.

5
Q. What about if what is cast is a tree that is attached to a sizable piece of land, what will
govern this situation?

o If the tree is attached to the land that is detached, and cast on another´s estate, then
Art. 459 applies. Landowner with tree must remove it within 2 years.

o Owner of the estate on whose land the tree is cast, may be indemnified for expenses
incurred in gathering and preserving it.

III. CHANGE OF RIVER COURSE:

Art. 461. River beds which are abandoned through the natural change in the course
of the waters ipso facto belong to the owners whose lands are occupied by the new
course in proportion to the area lost.

However, the owners of the lands adjoining the old bed shall have the right to
acquire the same by paying the value thereof, which value shall not exceed the
value of the area occupied by the new bed.

Q. What are the Requisites for Art. 461 to Apply?

1.) The change must be sudden for the old river bed to be identified
2.) The change of course must be permanent and not a temporaty overflooding.
3.) The change of river bed is by natural force and not artificial
4.) There is definite abandonment by the govt.
5.) The river must continue to exist and not completely dry up or disappear.

Q. What is the rule in Art. 461 if the landowner lost land due to the change of course of the
waters?

 If only one landowner lost land due to the change of course of the waters, then he
gets the entire abandoned river bed.

 If two or more lost areas of their land due to the change of the course of waters, then
they shall divide ownership of the abandoned river bed in proportion to their loss.

Q. What is the purpose of the above rules in Art. 461?

o This is to compensate the owner for the loss of his land now occupied by the new
river bed.

o He who suffers loss of land thru the change of the course of the water shall own the
abandoned river bed whether it be private persons or the government. Thus, if the
waters now occupy land of public domain, then the owner of the abandoned river
bed is now the State.

6
 RULE: “Article 461 provides for compensation for the loss of the land occupied by the
new bed since it is believed more equitable to compensate the actual losers
than to add land to those who have lost nothing. Thus, the abandoned river bed
is given to the owner(s) of the land(s) unto which the river changed its course
instead of the riparian owner(s).” (Celestial v. Cachopero, 413 SCRA 469,
2003).

 Art. 461 - was modified by Article 58 of Presidential Decree 1067, the Water Code
of the Philippines, which took effect on December 31, 1976 –

“ART. 58. When a river or stream suddenly changes its course to traverse private
lands, the owner of the affected lands may not compel the government to restore
the river to its former bed; nor can they restrain the government from taking steps
to revert the river or stream to its former course. The owners of the lands thus
affected are not entitled to compensation for any damage sustained thereby.
However, the former owners of the new bed shall be the owners of the
abandoned bed in proportion to the area lost by each.

The owners of the affected lands may undertake to return the river or stream to
its old bed at their own expense; Provided, That a permit therefor is secured from
the Secretary of Public Works, Transportation and Communications and work
pertaining thereto are commenced within two years from the change in the course
of the river or stream.”

Q. If a new river bed traverses a private property, who owns it – the private landowner, or
State?

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

 Even if the new river bed is on private property, this new river bed becomes property
of public dominion. The new river bank shall also be deemed of public dominion.
(Hilario v. City of Manila, L-19570, Apr. 27, 1967)

Q. If the current of a river causes a piece of land to divide and a part thereof is isolated,
who will now own the land?

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

o The rule in Art. 463 applies whether or not the river is navigable.
o Why? Here, there is actually NO accession. The river simply DIVIDES INTO
BRANCHES, isolating or separating a portion of the land from the original estate

o The estate owner remains owner of the land which has been isolated or has become
an island, separated from the rest.
7
IV. FORMATION OF ISLANDS:

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

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

OWNERSHIP OF ISLANDS: Who owns the island formed by unidentifiable accumulated

deposits?

1.) IF ISLAND IS FORMED ON THE SEA –

o If Island formed is Within territorial waters of the Phils. – Patrimonial property of

State (Art.464);
o If Outside Phil. Territory – First country to effectively occupy it per International
Law: “discovery/occupation is considered as a mode of acquiring territory.”

2.) IF ISLAND IS FORMED ON LAKES, OR NAVIGABLE OR FLOATABLE RIVERS –

o The STATE will own the island as patrimonial property.

3.) IF ISLAND IS FORMED ON NON-NAVIGABLE OR NON-FLOATABLE RIVERS –

o If there are several islands formed, they will belong to the owners of the banks
nearest to each of the islands.

o If a single island is formed, it will belong to the owner of the bank or margin that
is nearest to it. (Art. 465)

Reason: The owner of the nearer margin has a better chance of developing
the island for agricultural or other economic purpose.

o If the island is located in the middle of the river in equidistance, the island shall
be divided longitudinally in halves, with each bank getting half of the island.
(Art. 465)

Q. What is the rule if a new island is formed between the older island and the river bank?
A. The owner of the older island is deemed a riparian owner, and if the new island is
nearer in margin to the older island, the owner of the latter becomes also the owner of
the newly formed island.