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 another’s 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 another’s land with materials owned by 3 rd 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 DEV’T 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 Action to Remove a Cloud

Substantially an action for the purpose of putting Procure the cancellation, delivery of, release of an
an end to vexatious litigation in respect to the instrument, encumbrance or claim constituting a
property involved claim on the plaintiff’s title and which may be used
to injure or vex him in the enjoyment of his title
Plaintiff asserts his own estate and declares Plaintiff not only declares his own title but also
generally that defendant claims some estate in the avers the source and nature of the defendant’s
land, without defining it and avers that the claim is claim, points out its defect, and prays that it be
without foundation and calls on the defendant declared void
to set forth the nature of his claim so that it
may be determined by decree

Action to Quiet Title 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. What’s 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, that’s already accession. You cannot
remove them without injury or damage. Proper case of accession continua because cannot be repaired by
minor repair.

I don’t 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 don’t
know? Ask the goat herd. Because reputedly it was a goat herd that discovered the coffee bean in the
highlands of Ethiopia, it’s 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, there’s a bird who’s supposed to scatter oaks, acorn. American bird. Wood
pecker! Bores a hole then places acorn there in the dead trunk of the tree. That’s 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 it’s a fig, white, broad leaf and thick, that’s supposed to be Adam and Eve used fig leafs to cover their
private parts. Prolly the one that’s 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. It’s 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 it’s
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 that’s why
you’ll see there, it’s 1860’s 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. Doesn’t look aesthetic.
Does it look nice? Of course not. What’s better is cuboidal glass, glass wafer, accept light but not see
through it. That’s 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. It’s not the friars,
it’s the sailors. If it’s not the local head of guardia civil, it’ll 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 stallion’s manure. You want free horse manure, just go to Sta. Ana, where they keep
stall of horses. You’ll 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. It’s
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 I’m 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 it’s nice if you can get the fibers because decompose pulpy part in water. Let’s end
that peroration.

Furs and hides are not natural fruits. It’s 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? You’ll find out. There’s a provision. It’s 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 you’re 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, it’s 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 bush’s 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. Isn’t it? There is provision? Consider as alive even in their mother’s 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, there’s 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. That’s the maxim. We were asked, that’s 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 who’s 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. That’s 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. It’s already
owned, but should be born alive. Corned calf or calf stew. Newly born. It’s not even lechon de leche
When do industrial fruits accrue? That’s 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, there’s no legal problem.
Presumption is now (what’s 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. That’s the reason why we will take up possession right after the end of accession. Get it?
BECAUSE there’s 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? it’s 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 don’t 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 _______________________________ something. Then apply rules in usufruct, no reimbursement.

In BPS, what kind of property is involved? Certainly should be immovable. Most likely it’s 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. It’s 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.

He’s 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, I’m sure the word is beggar.
Discussion of the case, couldn’t keep track because digesting Rada for labor1.

On Tuesday you’re 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 let’s say .1. It’s in the civil code. Good for you you’re not required to
decipher and translate Manresa. In succession we were required to read Manresa, lost track of
Tolentino. Now you don’t read both.
 If I remember that, I’ll ask you. Two questions already and don’t fault me for it because that’s
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 won’t leave them as they are ( in pari delicto) because if you do, there’ll 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 it’s 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 attorney’s fees) that’s
my advice, it’s free, but cannot report it to IBP requirement of 60 hours of free legal aid, anyway I’m
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, that’s 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, it’s not a normal
situation, it’s 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. That’s 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 that’s why it’s used for cancer. Extract chemical there called legtrile used for
cancer cure but doesn’t do much. Tauted it lectrine because of cyanide in chemotherapy of sorts. That’s
why never eat boiled manoc or cassava that’s 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.

Nessa’s example: bad seeds did not yield good crops, didn’t 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 didn’t even tell
me. Hey you’re 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 60’s. 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. There’s life
after college.

Actual and compensatory must be proved. Lawyers love moral damages and exemplary because they
don’t 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 can’t 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, that’s 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 Daway’s 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. They’re 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… you’ll 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. That’s 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 you’re 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, that’s a necessary expense if you can prove it. It’s better to
categorize as necessary than useful so there’ll be reimbursement even if you are BF. But you’ll have to
account for the fruits. Don’t think that BPS is always a useful expense, it can be necessary or ornamental.

Most of the time it’s 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, you’ll have trouble evicting
squatters. Informal settlers. There’s 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 he’s 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.
Nessa’s 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

I’ll acquire bokaboka, it’s 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 (it’s 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, it’s 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 didn’t 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 it’s 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 didn’t believe that’s why
he had to file action, prove ownership, categorized when BPSowed, notice that felices eriole, not
possession of awareness of fatal defect in title. That’s 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 

6 August 2009

448 - 454 OL  BPS (OM)

GF - GF
BF – BF

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. It’s antichresis
because removal. To ensure that BPS will be paid, it’s 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 doesn’t 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, that’s 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? It’s not 10.
- I’ve been telling you, sometimes your case will hinge on extinctive prescription. Acquisitive
prescription aside from denial. It’s 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, that’s 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.
- Doesn’t 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. I’ll 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. It’s 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 that’s why there is the Depra v Dumlao ruling, there’s 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 doesn’t choose one or the other? Is the right still there? Supposing LO refuses to
choose. He’s foolish because it’s 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 doesn’t 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. There’s a song by Frank Sinatra, that silly old ram that punch the dam. He’s 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 doesn’t 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 it’s clear.
That’s 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) it’s returning. But It’s going to Taiwan, let it go there because it’s now
150kph. The cost of producing the fruits might be more than the value of the fruits. It’s not surefire that
fruits that it will repay for interest plus the principal. You think there will be interest there? Yes. Because
it’s 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 there’s 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.
He’s a poor farmer. He only has hoe and his industry. No money, no means to hire labor. It’s 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 won’t 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, it’s 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. It’s not really forced but they
are required to agree terms and conditions of law. Lease mandated by law (because you can’t force
anyone to enter into a contract). If they don’t 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 won’t 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, there’s no problem. These are guidelines for the
courts.

Art 448’s penultimate sentence. You can go to the first one. Go to the first one. That was what I was
saying earlier! That’s what I wanted you to look at this. But you just mechanically copied. Copying from
tradition. You don’t 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? That’s the problem, isn’t 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. It’s 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 ½. 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 don’t really choose. I’ll choose for you. I’ll choose that you acquire.” In other
words, what I’m 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 there’s 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 there’s 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 it’s 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 don’t
need this, ask him to remove. You will have to hire labors remove materials you don’t 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 doesn’t oppose it. Why? The other one is
good faith because he didn’t know it was somebody else’s land. The LO knows another person
was BPS his land and he doesn’t 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 else’s
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. That’s 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: we’ll take up cases plus prolly now, natural.

11 August 2009
Usually it’s 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 you’ll 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, it’s 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. It’s 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 don’t apply rules on BPS, you apply. Sold the land
but did not sell the bldg, you better remove it. That’s the obvious option. When your turn comes to write
ponencia, think you children and grandchildren who’ll be reading the cases. Attending law school, facts,
issue ruling, ignorance is bliss. Filipinas Foundation, removed from this list of cases in BPS. You wouldn’t
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) that’s 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 don’t 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, he’s 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 I’m safe. Former dean. Considering I’m only a retentional myself. You think I don’t 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. Don’t apply BPS by analogy. Do not use 448. Collonco vs regalado there’s 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, you’ll 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 don’t 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 don’t 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, he’ll 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, 3 rd option open to
the owner of the land. SC court hasn’t 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. There’s no indication which value.

MESSAGE: Clarify this when you have the chance. In your briefs or memoranda. Don’t 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. Accretion
2. Avulsion
3. Change of course of river
4. 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! It’s there in St. Pual’s 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.
there’s 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 it’s 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 it’s 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. That’s 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. Isn’t 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 there’s 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 that’s 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 it’s gonna follow the contour then finally it will return to the channel. The portion of
riverbed has been left dry. That’s 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 there’s 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. That’s 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. Don’t 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, that’s
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 there’ll 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” you’ll 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