Right of Accession with

Respect to Immovable
Property
Presented by Rafael O. Domingo 2B
Accession Continua
Right of the owner to anything which is incorporated or attached to his property,
whether the attachment is by reason of natural or artificial causes (Art. 445 of the
nCC)

Q: Classifications of Accession Continua with respect to immovable property?

1. Industrial Accession
2. Natural Accession

Presupposes Absence of Agreement

Accession Continua
Basic Principles
 They cannot be separated from each other or from one another without causing a
substantial physical or juridical injury to anyone, or to all of the things involved

 “accessio cedit principali” or accessory follows the principal

No one shall unjustly enrich himself at the expense of another

Good faith exonerates a person from punitive liability and damages

Accession Continua
Basic Principles
Bad faith subjects persons to damages and consequences

Parties both acting in bad faith is considered as both parties acting in good faith
Industrial Accession

Q: What are the forms of Industrial Accessions

1. Building
2. Planting
3. Sowing

Building, Planting or Sowing on One’s Own Land

Presumption: All works, sowing, and planting are made by
the owner and at his expense, unless the contrary is proved
(Art. 446)
Industrial Accession
Controversial Cases
Persons involved:
1. Landowner
2. Builder, planter, or sower
3. Owner of materials

Controversial Situations:
1. When the landowner builds on his land using materials belonging to another
2. When a person builds, using his materials, on another’s land
3. When a person builds on another’s land using materials belonging to another
Art. 447
Determining Legal Consequences
Legal effects shall depend on good faith or bad faith of the landowner in making use of
the materials belonging to third persons.

Presumption: Owner of materials acted in good faith

 Situation
1. Both in good faith;
2. Both in bad faith;
3. Owner of the material acted in good faith while landowner acted In bad faith; and
4. Vice versa
Legal Effects
Both in Good Faith
I. Land owner is exonerated from punitive liability and damages
II. Principle of accession cedit principali: land owner is given the right to appropriate what has been built, planted,
or sown but with the obligation to indemnify the owner for the value of the materials. No person should unjustly
enrich himself at the expense of the other.

Both in Bad Faith

Legal Effects
Land Owner in Bad Faith
I. Liable for damages
II. Law grants the owner of materials two options:
a. Demanding the value of material with right to be indemnified for damages
b. Demanding for the removal of the materials “in any event” with a right to be indemnified for damages
III. The foregoing is without prejudice to the criminal liability of the land owner for the the unlawful taking
and use of materials of another without the latter’s knowledge and consent

Owner of Materials in Bad Faith

III. Owner of materials loses his material without any right whatsoever and is furthermore liable for
damages (Arts. 455 and 449)
Rights of Accession
Industrial Accession (Articles 448 – 450, Civil Code)
Erese, Marco C.
Article 448, Civil Code
Landowner and the builder, planter or sower (owner of the materials) acted in
GOOD FAITH
Landowner and the builder, planter or sower (owner of the
materials) acted in GOOD FAITH

 Provision: 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 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.
Landowner and the builder, planter or sower (owner of the
materials) acted in GOOD FAITH

 APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 448:

 Both the landowner and the builder, planter or sower acted in good faith.
 The builder, planter or sower believes he had the right so to build plant or
sow.
Landowner and the builder, planter or sower (owner of the
materials) acted in GOOD FAITH

 What is a builder, planter or sower who acted in good faith?

 A person asserts title to the land on which he builds
Landowner and the builder, planter or sower (owner of the
materials) acted in GOOD FAITH

 Can a lessee of a property be a builder in good faith?

 NO. A Lessee Is Not A Builder In Good Faith. possessor in good faith
refers only to a party who occupies or possess property in the belief
that he is the owner.
Landowner and the builder, planter or sower (owner of the
materials) acted in GOOD FAITH

 Can a co-owner of a property be a builder in good faith?

 NO. co-owner is not a third person under the circumstances, and the situation
is governed by the rules of co-ownership.
Landowner and the builder, planter or sower (owner of the
materials) acted in GOOD FAITH

 Good Faith of the Landowner

 Not aware that something was being built, planted or sown on his land
Landowner and the builder, planter or sower (owner of the
materials) acted in GOOD FAITH

 Legal Effects
 (1) Appropriation as his own the works, sowing or planting after
payment to the builder, planter or sower of the necessary and useful
expenses
 (2) Builder or planter to pay the price of the land, if the value of the
land is not considerably more than that of the building or trees, and
the one who sowed, the proper rent.
Landowner and the builder, planter or sower (owner of the
materials) acted in GOOD FAITH

 Rights of the builder in good faith

 right to reimbursement for the improvements
 NOTE: builder cannot compel the owner of the land to sell such
land
Landowner and the builder, planter or sower (owner of the
materials) acted in GOOD FAITH

 Can the landowner refuse to exercise both options?

 NO. The landowner cannot refuse to exercise either option and compel
instead the owner of the building or improvement to remove it from the land.
The builder in good faith can compel the land owner to make a choice.
Landowner and the builder, planter or sower (owner of the
materials) acted in GOOD FAITH

 SAMPLE CASE:
 On the land of someone, a person planted certain crops. Does the landowner
automatically or ipso facto become the owner of said planted crops?
 NO. Were the planter in good faith, the landowner, should he desire to get the
crops, must fi rst give the proper indemnifi cation to the planter.
Landowner and the builder, planter or sower (owner of the
materials) acted in GOOD FAITH

 Is the builder’s failure to pay the value of the land, were the land owner to choose to
sell the land, automatically make the owner of what the builder has built on his land?
 NO. No such right is given by Art. 448 of the Civil Code.
Article 449 & Article 450, Civil Code
Builder, planter or sower (owner of the materials) acted in BAD FAITH
Builder, planter or sower (owner of the materials) acted in
BAD FAITH

 449 Provision: 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.
 450 Provision: The 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.
Builder, planter or sower (owner of the materials) acted in
BAD FAITH

 When is a builder in bad Faith?

 If he knows that the land is not his, or if he has knowledge of any fl aw or
defect in his title or mode of acquisition of the land.
Builder, planter or sower (owner of the materials)
acted in BAD FAITH

 REMEDIES FOR THE LANDOWNER

 APPROPRIATION
 In the case of growing crops
 Growing or standing crops NOT gathered crops

 REMOTION
 Demand that what has been built, planted or sown on his land be removed or demolished and that
the land be restored to its original condition
 AT THE EXPENSE OF THE BUILDER IN BAD FAITH

 COMPEL PAYMENT OF THE PRICE OF THE LAND

 available against the builder and planter only.
 sower, the landowner may only compel him to pay the proper rent.
Builder, planter or sower (owner of the materials)
acted in BAD FAITH
 Rights of Builder, Planter or Sower in Bad Faith
 A builder in bad faith has no right to be indemnified for useful improvements but has the right to
be indemnified for the necessary expenses of preservation of the land. Neither has he any right
to remove them.
 Articles 451-453
Presented by: Immanuel Christian V. Fontanilla
Article 451

”Inthe case of the two proceeding articles, the

landowner is entitled to damages from the builder,
planter or sower”
Alternative rights
• Appropriate what has been built, planted or sown in bad faith
WITHOUT any obligation to pay any indemnity
• XPN: Necessary expenses for the preservation of the land and damages

• Ask or Demand for Removal or Demolition of what has been built

• At the expense of the builder’s expense plus damages
Alternative rights
• Compel the builder or planter to pay the price or value of the
land
• Compel the sower to pay the proper rent plus damages

• If the buyer introduces improvements AFTER the filing of the suit

against him, he is a buyer in bad faith
• Mindanao Academy vs Yap

• NOTE: These rights of the landowner are alternative

Example

• A purchased from B a house. A knew that C owned the

land and that B had built the house in bad faith. Can C
file an ejectment case against A?
• Yes. Because A can be considered as a possessor in bad faith
• De Guzman vs. Rivera
Example

• A was leasing a building owned by B. During the war

however, the building was burned down completely. A
then asked B to lease the land to him but B refused.
Without B’s consent, A built a small house on the land.
Can A be ejected from the land?
• Yes. But A cannot ask for indemnification since he was a
builder in bad faith
• Ysrael vs Madrid
Amount of damages to which landowner is
entitled

• Even though Article 451 does not provide a basis for

damages, the amount should reasonably correspond with
the value of the properties lost or destroyed as a result
of the occupation in bad faith
• Includes fruits from the properties that the owner of the land
reasonably expected to obtain
Liabilities of the builder etc. in bad faith

• He loses what is built,planted or sown without right to indemnity

• XPN: Necessary expenses

• Required to remove or demolish the work, etc to replace things in their

former condition AT HIS EXPENSE

• Can be compelled to pay the price of the land

• If sower: pay rent

• Damages
Alternative rights
• If a person plants and/or grows crops on the property of another
knowing it belongs to another. The rights of the planter/sower
depends if:
• Crops are already gathered: Planter/Sower must return the value of the
crops or the crops themselves
• Except the expenses essential for their production, cultivation, preservation
• Crops have not yet been gathered: Completely forfeit them in favor of the
landowner
• Without indemnity
Article 452

“The Builder, Planter or Sower in bad faith is entitled

to reimbursement for the necessary expenses of the
preservation of the land”
Right to Reimbursement
• In the same way that necessary expenses for cultivation, etc must be
paid by the person who receives the fruits regardless of good or bad
faith of the third person who incurred said expenses

• The Builder etc, whether he either in good or bad faith is entitled to

reimbursement for the necessary expenses spent to preserve the land
• Builder however, loses the improvements made without right for indemnity
Right to Reimbursement: Necessary Expenses

• Necessary expenses- Used for Preservation of Land

• Defense work to prevent erosion om part of the land
• Litigation in defenses-Claims against usurpers

NOTE: Real property taxes can be considered as necessary expense

Article 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
Article 453
• Bad Faith on the part of the landowner: Whenever an act was done with the
landowner’s knowledge and without opposition on his part
• Bad Faith on the part of the Builder, etc.: if the building, planting, sowing
made knowingly by one on land not belonging to him and without authority
Article 453

• If both are in bad faith, their rights are determined as if they had both acted in
good faith
• The bad faith of one extinguishes and neutralizes in reciprocity of the other
(Accession continua)
• “He who knowingly allows himself to be deceived may not complain as a deceived
person”
• Article 448 will govern
Example

• On the land of A, B built a house in bad faith without A making any kind of
objection despite his knowledge of the construction
• Since they both acted in bad faith, A has the right to obtain the house upon
payment of the proper indemnity; he may also compel B to buy the land
ARTICLES 454-456
PROPERTY LAW

Cellen Joy Jardiel

ARTICLE 454
• Landowner acted in bad faith
• Builder/planter/sower proceeded in good faith
• Article 447 applies – the owner of the materials (who at the same
time is the builder or planter) acquires these alternative rights:
• To demand the value of his materials + damages
• To demand the return of his materials in any event + damages
ARTICLE 455
• Materials, plants, or seeds belong to a third person (third person must
not be in bad faith)
• Landowner shall answer subsidiarily for the value of the materials
• Only when the one who used them has no property with which to pay
• Shall not apply if the owner makes use of Article 450
• If the owner of the materials, plants, or seeds has been paid by the
builder/planter/sower
• Builder/Planter/Sower may demand from the landowner the value of the
materials and labor
ARTICLE 455
• Owner of the materials acted in bad faith: he loses his materials
without indemnity
• It would be as if he was the one who built/planted/sowed with his materials
in bad faith on the land of another
• Owner of the materials even liable for damages
• XPN: All parties acted in bad faith = their rights would be governed as if they
acted in good faith
ARTICLE 455
• Owner of the materials acted in bad faith
• Landowner can claim what has been built/planted/sown without obligation to
indemnify owner of the materials
• In pursuance to the principles in Articles 449 and 445
ARTICLE 455
• Owner of the materials acted in bad faith
• Builder/Planter/Sower acted in good faith
• May claim from landowner a reasonable compensation for labor
• Principle: unjust enrichment
• Builder/Planter/Sower acted in bad faith
• Not entitled to anything
• May be made to pay damages to landowner
ARTICLE 455
• Owner of the materials acted in good faith
• Must be reimbursed for the value of his materials
• Builder/Planter/Sower is primarily liable when it comes to payment to
the owner of the materials
• Without damages if acted in good faith; with damages if in bad faith
• Rules applicable to determine rights and obligations
• Article 448: Both acted in good faith
• Articles 449, 450, & 451: Landowner in good faith but B/P/S acted in bad faith
• Article 448 in relation to 453: Both acted in bad faith
• Article 447 in relation to 454: Landowner in bad faith but B/P/S in good faith
ARTICLE 455
• Landowner subsidiarily liable for the payment of the value of the
materials
• Conditions:
• B/P/S is insolvent; and
• Landowner appropriates the building/planting/sowing
• Landowner not liable to the owner of the materials if landowner
chooses to order demolition/removal
• Landowner’s right to demand if B/P/S in bad faith
• If landowner pays for the value of the materials = landowner becomes
owner of the materials
ARTICLE 456
• Cases regulated in the preceding articles
• Good faith does not necessarily exclude negligence
• Gives right to damages under Article 2176
NATURAL
ACCESSION
Seth Irving Macasa
FORMS OF NATURAL
ACCESSION
 Alluvion
 Avulsion
 Natural change of course of river
 Formation of island
ALLUVION (OR 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
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

Relate with: Spanish Law of Waters

Art. 84. Accretions deposited gradually upon land contiguous to creeks, streams, rivers, and
lakes, by accessions or sediments from the water thereof, belong to the owners of such lands
RIPARIAN OWNERS
VS LITTORAL OWNERS
RULES
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

 Provided, (requisites)

1. Gradual and imperceptible

2. Result of the action of the waters of the river
3. Adjacent to the banks of the river

Art. 84. Accretions deposited gradually upon land contiguous to creeks, streams, rivers, and lakes, by
accessions or sediments from the water thereof, belong to the owners of such lands
REQUISITE # 1
The accumulation of soil or sediment be gradual and imperceptible
REQUISITE # 2
That it be the result of the action of the waters of the river
Art. 84. Accretions deposited gradually upon land contiguous to creeks, streams, rivers, and lakes, by accessions or
sediments from the water thereof, belong to the owners of such lands

Exclusive work of nature

REQUISITE # 3
That the land where the accretion takes place is adjacent to the banks of river
Art. 84. Accretions deposited gradually upon land contiguous to creeks, streams, rivers, and lakes, by accessions or
sediments from the water thereof, belong to the owners of such lands
SUPPOSE THAT THERE WAS THE GRADUAL AND IMPERCEPTIBLE ACCUMULATION OF SOIL TO
THE LAND OWNED BY THE RIPARIAN OWNER THROUGH THE EXCLUSIVE WORK OF NATURE…
SUPPOSE THAT THERE WAS THE GRADUAL AND IMPERCEPTIBLE ACCUMULATION OF SOIL TO
THE LAND OWNED BY THE RIPARIAN OWNER THROUGH THE EXCLUSIVE WORK OF NATURE…

Right of Riparian Owner is Ipso Jure (by operation of law)

However, he must register such addition
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.

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.

Relate with: Spanish Law of Waters

Art. 84. Accretions deposited gradually upon land contiguous to
creeks, streams, rivers, and lakes, by accessions or sediments
from the water thereof, belong to the owners of such lands.
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.

- refers only to Ponds and Lagoons

*pond or lagoon- a small body of fresh water

- not very deep
- fed by floods
- its bed is bounded by elevations of land
FORMS OF NATURAL
ACCESSION
 Alluvion
 Avulsion
 Natural change of course of river
 Formation of island
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 (2) years.

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 (6) months. If such owners claim them, they shall pay
the expenses incurred in gathering them or putting them in a safe place.

“segregates”
Caused by violent and sudden action of rivers, creeks, streams, and lakes
Independent of the act of man
 Alluvion Avulsion
Soil deposit is gradual Soildeposit is sudden and abrupt

Deposited soil belongs to the owner of the property Deposited soil does not belong to the owner of the
(riparian owner) property

Accession takes place immediately upon the deposit of Accession takes place only after two (2) years
the soil

The deposited soil and to which it incorporated cannot Can be identified

be identified
ARTICLE 460-462
PROP
MARTIN, MICHAEL ALEXEY D.R.
 AVULSION WITH RESPECT TO UPROOTED
TREES

• 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.
 EXTENSION OF OWNERSHIP IPSO JURE

• 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.
 APPLICATION OF ART. 461 ON ARTIFICIAL
MEANS
• RONQUILLO V CA- ART. 461 DID NOT APPLY
• BAES V CA- ART. 461 APPLIES
DIFFERENCE?
IN RONQUILLO, THE ARTIFICIAL CHANGE DID NOT PREJUDICE THE OWNERS AND
WAS DONE BY THROWING TRASH. IN BAES, THE ARTIFICIAL CHANGE WAS MADE BY
THE GOVERNMENT CREATING A MAN-MADE CANAL AND IT PREJUDICED THE
OWNERS.
 MODIFICATIONS TO ART. 461.

• ENACTMENT OF PD. 1067 OR THE WATER CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES.

• ARTICLE 58 OF THE WATER CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES
 ARTICLE 58 OF THE WATER CODE OF THE
PHILIPPINES

• OWNERS OF THE AFFECTED LANDS (REFERRING TO THE OWNERS OF THE LAND

WHERE THE NEW RIVER BED PASSES) CANNOT “RESTRAIN THE GOVERNMENT
FROM TAKING STEPS TO REVERT THE RIVER OR STREAM TO ITS FORMER
COURSE” BUT THEY “MAY NOT COMPEL THE GOVERNMENT TO RESTORE THE
RIVER TO ITS FORMER BED.” AND IF THE GOVERNMENT DECIDES TO REVERT
BACK 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.”
 ARTICLE 58 OF THE WATER CODE OF THE
PHILIPPINES

• AFFECTED LANDOWNERS MAY THEMSELVES UNDERTAKE THE RETURN OF THE

RIVER TO ITS OLD BED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: (1) THEY
SHALL SECURE A PERMIT FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS AND
HIGHWAYS; (2) THE UNDERTAKING SHALL BE AT THEIR EXPENSES; AND (3) THE
WORK PERTAINING THERETO MUST BE COMMENCED WITHIN TWO YEARS FROM
THE CHANGE IN THE COURSE OF THE RIVER OR STREAM.
 WHEN THE RIVER DRIES UP

• IF THE RIVER SIMPLY DRIES UP AND DID NOT CHANGE ITS COURSE OR WITHOUT
OPENING A NEW BED, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 461 WILL
NOT APPLY.
• SINCE RIVERS AND THEIR NATURAL BEDS ARE PROPERTY OF PUBLIC DOMINION,
IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY PROVISION VESTING THE OWNERSHIP OF THE DRIED UP
RIVER BED IN SOME OTHER PERSON, IT MUST CONTINUE TO BELONG TO THE
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.
FORMATION OF ISLANDS
PRESENTED BY:
REYZEN PAUL U. MENDIOLA
 ISLAND FORMED UNDER ARTICLE 463

RULE IF RIVER DIVIDES ITSELF INTO BRANCHES

A’S ESTATE ADJOINS A RIVER, BUT THE RIVER DIVIDES ITSELF INTO BRANCHES,
THUS AFFECTING HIS PROPERTY. A, HOWEVER, REMAINS THE OWNER OF THE
PORTION WHICH:

a. MAY BE ISOLATED FROM THE REST; OR

b. MAY BE SEPARATED FROM THE REST.
 SINCE THE LAND, BE IT ISOLATED OR SEPARATED, HAS
NOT BEEN PERMANENTLY INVADED BY THE WATERS OF
THE RIVER, NO NATURAL EXPROPRIATION WILL OCCUR.
THE ISLAND THUS FORMED REMAINS TO BE THE
PROPERTY OF THE OWNER OF THE LAND WHERE SUCH
ISLAND HAS BEEN FOUND.
NO ACCESSION TAKES PLACE BECAUSE NO NEW
PROPERTY HAS BEEN ADDED OR ATTACHED TO THE
PROPERTY OF ANY PERSON.
APPLICATION OF RULE WHETHER RIVER IS NAVIGABLE OR
NOT

a. NAVIGABLE OR FLOATABLE RIVER – IF USEFUL FOR

FLOATAGE AND COMMERCE, WHETHER THE TIDES AFFECT
THE WATER OR NOT SHOULD BENEFIT TRADE AND
COMMERCE.
b. NON-NAVIGABLE RIVER – OPPOSITE OF (A)
ISLAND FORMED UNDER ARTICLE 464

AN ISLAND IS FORMED ON A SEA,

LAKE, OR NAVIGABLE OR
FLOATABLE RIVER THROUGH
WHATEVER CAUSE.
 ISLAND FORMED UNDER ARTICLE 465

AN ISLAND IS FORMED IN NON-NAVIGABLE OR

NON-FLOATABLE RIVER THROUGH SUCCESSIVE
ACCUMULATION OF DEPOSIT IN THE SAME
MANNER AS ALLUVION.

NO SPECIFIC ACT OF POSSESSION OVER THE

ACCRETION IS REQUIRED.
OWNERSHIP OF LAND IF FORMED ON NON-NAVIGABLE OR NON-
FLOATABLE RIVER:
a. IT BELONGS TO THE NEAREST RIPARIAN OWNER OR OWNER OF THE
MARGIN OR BANK NEAREST TO IT;
b. IF EQUIDISTANT, THE ISLAND SHALL BE DIVIDED LONGITUDINALLY IN
HALVES, EACH BANK GETTING HALF;
c. IF A NEW ISLAND IS FORMED BETWEEN AN EXISTING ISLAND AND AN
OPPOSITE BANK, THE OWNER OF THE OLDER ISLAND IS CONSIDERED A
RIPARIAN OWNER TOGETHER WITH THE OWNER OF THE LAND
ADJOINING THE BANK.
 RULE FOR THE RIPARIAN OWNER
HE MUST ASSERT HIS CLAIM OVER THE ISLAND
FORMED. IF HE FAILS TO ASSERT HIS CLAIM
THEREOF, THE SAME MAY YIELD TO THE ADVERSE
POSSESSION OF THIRD PARTIES, AS INDEED EVEN
ACCRETION TO LAND TITLE UNDER THE TORRENS
SYSTEM MUST ITSELF BE REGISTERED.