accession

III. RIGHTS OF ACCESSION

A. ConceptArt 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. 2 nd 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 faithii. In usufructiii. 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 interveneb. 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 faithArt 448 The

BPS in bad faithArt 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 faithArt 452 The Art 443 The

Landowner in bad faith but BPS in good faithArt 454Art 447 Reason for adverting to rule in Art 447

c. BPS builds, plants or sows on another’s land with materials owned by 3rd personsArt 455 The

N.B.: Good faith does not exclude negligenceArt 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. AlluviumArt 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 RiverArt 461 TheArt 462 TheArt 463 The

BAES v CA ( )BINALAY v MANALO

d. Formation of IslandsArt 461 TheArt 462 TheArt 463 TheArt 464 TheArt 465 TheSee PD 1067

3. Reverse Accession Art 120, FC TheArt 321, CC The

Over Movables

1. Conjunction and Adjunction

a. Inclusion or Engraftment

b. Soldadura or Solderingi. Plumbatura – different metalsii. 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 CloudSubstantially an action for the purpose of putting an end to vexatious litigation in respect to the property involved

Procure the cancellation, delivery of, release of an instrument, encumbrance or claim constituting a 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 generally that defendant claims some estate in the land, without defining it and avers that the claim is without foundation and calls on the defendant to set forth the nature of his claim so that it may be determined by decree

Plaintiff not only declares his own title but also avers the source and nature of the defendant’s claim, points out its defect, and prays that it be declared void

Action to Quiet Title Action to Prevent a CloudRelief 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 wasNot 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 fruitsThey 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 – dailyNatural 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 lecheWhen do industrial fruits accrue? That’s your assignmentFruits 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 fruits2 kinds of leaseCivil lease - Leasehold – agrarian lawBut there can be civil lease of agricultural landAntichresisWhat is produced by and goes to antichretic creditor who was given possession of real property.

ACCESSION CONTINUA2nd part of 440Get the classification right, especially the Spanish names445 not 368 its wrong

2nd sentence of art 447Underneath all of this good faith is rewarded, bad faith is penalized by 1 liability of damages2 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 2009Pending 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 builderOn 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 2nd 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 builder2. GF landowner – BF builder3. BF landowner – GF builder4. 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 productivityIrrigation 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/ornamentalI’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 - GFBF – 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 KayananWhy 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 paying2. Choose removal at the expense of BPS so that the land will be returned to its original

state3. 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 GFApply 447BPS has absolute right of removalOption 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 2009Usually 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 reimbursementCannot 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, 3rd 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 river4. 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.

Belongs to riparian owners

Riverbank

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:

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 ISLANDSSee 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