OBLICON

ART 1117. Acquisitive Prescription; ordinary & extraordinary

(1) Ordinary Prescription requires the possession of things in GOOD FAITH and with
a JUST TITLE.
JUST TITLE (there was a mode of acquiring ownership but the grantor was not
the owner; hence, the just title here is titulo colorado or colorable title).
(2) Extraordinary Prescription

COMMON REQUISITES:
- capacity of acquirer to acquire by prescription
- capacity of loser to lose by prescription
- object must be susceptible of prescription
- lapse of time provided by law
- the possession must be under certain conditions: (a) PUBLIC, (b) in
concept of an owner, (c) peaceful, (d) continuous or uninterrupted

CONVERSION OF POSSSESSION (From GOOD FAITH to BAD FAITH)

If the possession begins with good faith but later converted into bad faith, how
long should the prescription be, ordinary or extraordinary? THERE ARE THREE (3)
POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS
(1) The supervening bad faith erases the former possession in good faith, and
extraordinary prescription will run from the date of possession in bad faith
This is unacceptable because it places a possessor who began in
good faith in a worse position than one who began in bad faith.
(2) The prescription will be extraordinary, but the possession will be counted
from the time the possession began. This is inadmissible because
possession in good faith and in bad faith are given identical effects.

(3) The prescription will be extraordinary but the possession in good faith shall
be computed in the proportion that the period of extraordinary prescription
bear to that of ordinary prescription.
Ex. A possessor possessed a property for three years in good faith, before his
possession was converted into bad faith. The three years possession in good
faith will be considered as a double, hence, equal to six years. In ordinary
prescription of movables, the period is 4years but in extraordinary
prescription, it takes 8 years. Thus, the possessor only needs 2 more years to
complete extraordinary prescription.
- The last solution is deemed to be more acceptable since it gives
proper value to possession in good faith.
ART 1118. Possession has to be in the concept of an owner, public, peaceful and
uninterrupted.
A possessor in the concept of holder cannot acquire property by prescription
because his possession is not adverse. Thus, the possession of land in the capacity
of administrator (mere holder) cannot ripen into ownership.
Owner-Administrator - The mere fact that the person who claims ownership of
the property also administers the same does not militate against its acquisition of
the property by prescription. The fact that he stated that he administered the
properties in question does not necessarily imply that he is not the owner thereof
for certainly an owner of a property can be its own administrator.
ART 1119. POSSESSION BY LICENSE OR MERE TOLERANCE OF THE OWNER
CASES: Ayala de Roxas v. Maglonso, 8 Phil. 745 ; Cuaycong v.
Benedicto, 37 Phil. 781
In possession by license or tolerance, there is implied recognition of ownership
residing in ANOTHER. Acts that are possessory in character which ARE
MERELY TOLERATED by the possessor or which are due to HIS LICENSE, do
not constitute possession.
LICENSE positive act of the owner in favor of the thing
TOLERANCE passive acquiescence of the owner to acts being performed by
another which appear to be contrary to the rights of the owner.
IN BOTH TOLERANCE AND LICENSE the possessor acts IN RECOGNITION
OF THE RIGHTS OF THE OWNER.
FROM THE MOMENT THE POSSESSOR DISREGARDS THE OWNER, and exercises
rights in opposition to the rights of the latter, the possession is converted into one
in the concept of an owner.
CONCEPT OF AN OWNER When property was in adverse, continuous, uninterrupted
and notorious possession for over more than a year, the claim has already
prescribed. For a claim of acquisitive prescription to prosper, possession of
the property must be in the concept of an owner for a certain period of
time.
Ayala de Roxas v. Maglonso, 8 Phil. 745 ;
Facts: The plaintiff presented a petition to the land registration court asking that
she be inscribed as the owner of a certain tract of land. She showed her title to the
land that was inscribed in the Spanish registry. The court granted the petition.
Some occupants of the property opposed the granting of the petition and claimed
that they have been in possession of the land of the petitioner for more than 30
years and that they have become owners by extraordinary prescription. It was
established however that in 1901, the petitioner notified the occupants that if they
would not recognize her ownership, she would order the removal of their houses.
Issue: Whether or not the property was acquired through prescription by the
possessors
Ruling: There was no sufficient evidence to show that the title in the oppositors
had vested by prescription. Evidence shows that the petitioner was the real owner
of the land. She merely tolerated the presence of the oppositors on the small parcel
of land that they occupied. The most persuasive evidence that the oppositors were
there only by tolerance was in 1901, when a demand was made upon them by the
petitioner to pay rent, they did so, thus, they recognized the ownership of the
petitioner.

Cuaycong v. Benedicto, 37 Phil. 781

Facts: Complainant, for more than twenty years, have made use of a road that
passed through the hacienda of the defendants since it was the only road that
connected the hacienda of the complainants to the public road. The defendants
closed the said road and refused to permit the complainants to use the said road
unless they pay a toll. The complainants claim that they have already acquired the
right of way through the road by prescription.
Issue: Whether or not the complainants acquired the right of way through
prescription
Ruling: No, If the owner of the tract of land accommodates his neighbors or the
public in general by permitting them to cross his property, it does not constitute
divesting his rights as owner of the said property. The privilege of use of property
should be regarded as nothing more than a mere tolerance of the owner. Thus,
prescription cannot be claimed. It is the fundamental principle of law that the
possession of real property is not affected by acts of possessory character which
are merely tolerated by the owner are not possession in concept of an owner, thus,
no matter how long such acts continue, it will not start the running of the
prescriptive period.
ELEMENTS OF POSSESSION
(1) PUBLIC this means that possession is manifest or visible to all or it must be
known by the owner.
(2) PEACEFUL possession must be peaceful when acquired and maintained
without any violence, physical or moral. Even if possessor use force to
prevent or repel an actual or threatened invasion.
(3) UNINTERRUPTED The possession must be continuous. There is continuity
when the acts of enjoyment never ceased to be exercised.
ART 1120. How Possession Is Interrupted for Purposes of Prescription
(1) NATURALLY (NATURAL INTERRUPTION) Possession ceases for any
cause for more than one year. (Art 1121)
Possession de facto is lost if the property be in the possession of another for
more than one year. Hence, if the possession of another has been for one
year or less, it is as if there was no interruption.
- If prescription is interrupted, the old possession will generally not be
counted; the period must begin all over again. It is for the reason
that possession must be continuous and uninterrupted.
 IF PRESCRIPTION IS MERELY SUSPENDED (as distinguished from
interruption), the old possession will be ADDED. This may happen when
during war, the civil courts are NOT open (Arts. 1136, Civil Code); or when
there is a moratorium on the payment of debts.

(2) CIVILLY (CIVIL INTERRUPTION) produced by judicial summons to the

possessor. (Art 1123)
- Judicial summons shall be deemed not to have been issued and shall not
give rise to interruption: (ART 1124)
o If it should be void for lack of legal solemnities;
o If the plaintiff should desist from the complaint or should allow the
proceedings to lapse;
o If the possessor should be absolved from the complaint.
In all these cases, the period of the interruption shall be counted
for the prescription.
EFFECT OF INTERRUPTION When prescription is interrupted, all the benefits
acquired so far from the possession cease; when prescription runs again, it will be
an entirely new one.

Lacuesta v. Guerrero, 8 Phil. 719

Facts: The defendants and their ancestors possessed the property since 1833, it
was a continuous and actual possession of the tracts of land. The plaintiffs claim
that the defendants were only tenants of the tracts of land. It was however not
proven that the property in question was rented by the plaintiffs ancestors to the
ancestors of the defendant.
Issue: Whether or not the action suspended prescription.
Held: Plaintiffs claim that possession of the defendants was interrupted by the suit
cannot be sustained. According to Art 1124, the effect of a suit brought and
abandoned or decided against the plaintiff is considered as never having
commenced. Thus, it is as if there was no interruption at all. The lapsed time is
counted in favor of the prescription. The possession is deemed continuous.

ART 1120, 1123, 1124 of the New Civil Code refers to interruption of
possession in relation to ACQUISITIVE PRESCRIPTION and not extinctive
prescription.

ART 1125. RECOGNITION OF THE OWNERS RIGHTS BY THE POSSESSOR

- Prescription is interrupted by the possessors recognition of the
owners right. This recognition implies that the possession is no longer
an adverse one.
 - The declaration of a third person that the property does not belong to the
possessor, when such declaration has not been authorized or ratified by
the possessor, does not interrupt the possession for prescription.
- The act of a government official, duly authorized to so act, in
recognizing ownership of land in a private person, interrupts
possession by the municipality concerned. (Seminary of San
Carlos v. Municipality of Cebut)
ART 1126. PRESCRIPTION OF TITLES RECORDED IN THE REGISTRY OF
PROPERTY
- Prescription of ownership or real rights shall not take place to the
prejudice of a third person
- It is clear that Art. 1126 does NOT refer to land registered under
the Land Registration Law (with a Torrens Title)
- Refers to all other lands

The owner at the beginning of the prescriptive period is not considered as

the third person. But those who acquire their right subsequently,
relying on the registration of ownership in the Registry are
considered the third persons.
CONDITIONS FOR THE ACQUISITION OF THIRD PERSONS
(1) The acquisition is by onerous title
(2) The acquisition is from one who, according to the registry, can
transmit title.
(3) The acquisition is registered.
(4) The third person has no knowledge of prescription.
EXAMPLE:
- If A, a stranger, takes possession of the land in good faith (from a seller-
forger), is there a chance for him to become, after 10 years, the owner of
the land, as against B? YES. A becomes the owner after 10 years.
- After 12 years of A possession of the property, B, the registered
owner, sell it to C, an innocent purchaser for value (who
investigated that B is indeed the owner of the property because it
is registered under his name). Will C become the owner? Yes.
Insofar as the world is concerned, B is still the owner of the
property at the time It was sold to C. Thus, he can validly transfer
ownership to C and As prescriptive right should not prejudice C.
- If A had registered the property, the prescriptive period will run, and after
the prescriptive period he becomes the owner as far as the entire world
is concerned.

- LANDS REGISTERED UNDER THE TORRENS SYSTEM CANNOT BE

ACCQUIRED BY PRESCRIPTION but this rule can be invoked only by one
under whose name (or under whose predecessors name) it was
registered.
ART 1127. GOOD FAITH OF THE POSSESSOR
- Consists of the reasonable belief that the person whom he received the
property is the owner thereof and could transmit his ownership. Belief
that the grantor is the real owner.
- If the defect results to an absolute invalidity of title, there is no title. And
there is no ordinary prescription if there is no just title.
- GOOD FAITH one must believe that the title for the acquisition is
sufficient. It must exist throughout the entire period of prescription.

ART 1128. REQUISITES OF GOOD FAITH

- Art. 526. He is deemed a possessor in good faith who is not aware
that there exists in his title or mode of acquisition any flaw which
invalidates it.
- Art. 527. Good faith is always presumed, and upon him who alleges
bad faith on the part of a possessor rests the burden of proof.
- Art. 528. Possession acquired in good faith does not lose this character
except in the case and from the moment facts exist which show that
the possessor is not unaware that he possesses the thing improperly
or wrongfully.
- Art. 529. It is presumed that possession continues to be enjoyed in
the same character in which it was acquired, until the contrary is
proved.
Good Faith to Bad Faith
- For Real Property three years of possession in bad faith is equivalent to
one year of possession in good fath.
- For Personal Property two years of possession in bad faith is equivalent
to one year possession in good faith

ART 1129. ART 1130.ART 1131.

JUST TITLE must be proved and never assumed.
TITLE FOR PRESCRIPTION for purpose of prescription, the title of the possessor
must be just, true, valid and proved.
JUST TITLE is an act which has the purpose of transmission of ownership, which
would have actually transferred the ownership if the grantor was the owner. Ex. Sale
with delivery, exchange, donation
TRUE TITLE to be true, it must exist actually and not mere on the mind of the
possessor. A legally non-existent title is without value. A simulated title which
conceals a prohibited act cannot serve as a basis for prescription.
VALID TITLE it means that it should be sufficient to transmit the right if the
grantor was the owner.
ART 1132-1133. : Ordinary and Extraordinary PRESCRIPTION PERIOD for
MOVABLE or PERSONAL PROPERTY; Legal requisites; Period fixed by law
MOVABLES
ORDINARY 4YEARS
EXTRAORDINARY 8 YEARS
The possession of movable property acquired in good faith is equivalent
to a title. Nevertheless, one who has lost any movable or has been unlawfully
deprived thereof, may recover it from the person in possession of the same.
If the possessor of a movable lost or of which the owner has been unlawfully
deprived, has acquired it in good faith at a public sale, the owner cannot
obtain its return without reimbursing the price paid therefor.
ART 1133. MOVABLES ACQUIRED THROUGH CRIME
Prescription will NEVER RUN in their favor. Provision is applicable only to the
offender, but the subsequent acquirer may acquire through prescription.
For IMMOVABLES - possession by force or violence does not give rise to
prescription.

ART 1134. ORDINARY & EXTRAORDINARY PRESCRIPTION PERIOD for

IMMOVABLE or REAL PROPERTY; Legal requisites; Period fixed by law
IMMOVABLES
ORDINARY 10YEARS
EXTRAORDINARY 30 YEARS
ART 1135. : Doctrine of CONSTRUCTIVE POSSESSION; Basis of
PRESCRIPTION
The term possesses here refers to both actual and constructive
possession, since possession in the eyes of the law does not mean that a man has
to have his feet on every square meter of land.
CONSTRUCTIVE POSSESSION covers the area over which the possession is
asserted.
Notice that possession here prevails over the title. Necessarily, if there
is NO title, the Article cannot apply.
The possession here must be by mistake.
DOCTRINE OF CONSTRUCTIVE POSSESSION applies when the possession is
under the title calling for the whole. The actual possession is deemed to extend to
the whole. But it does not apply when the possession is without title.

ART 1136. Possession in wartime, when the civil courts are not open, shall
not be counted in favor of the adverse claimant. - Relate to Art. 1154
-Possession in War Time (where civil courts are close) during the Japanese
Occupation there were places where no civil courts could function.
ART 1154. The period during which the obligee was prevented by a fortuitous
event from enforcing his right is not reckoned against him.
ART 1137. PRESCRIPTION OF IMMOVABLES
When the title is void even when the title of the possessor is void such as an oral
donation, he may acquire ownership by prescription under the provisions of this
article.
ART 1138. COMPUTATION & TACKING OF POSSESSION
Tacking of Possession
This means ADDING the period of possession of the predecessor. Reason:
The true owner of the property was after all NOT in possession, during the
possession of said predecessor.
Tacking is allowed only if there be privity of relationship between the
predecessor and the successor, as in the case of succession, donation, sale,
barter, etc. Thus, a mere intruder or usurper cannot tack.
Tacking by a subsequent possessor of his predecessors possession can be
allowed if the predecessors possession can satisfy the requisites for prescription
(such as the fact that the possession must be in the concept of owner, peaceful,
etc.).
If the predecessor was in good faith but the successor was in bad faith, the latter
can assert only extraordinary prescription.
If the predecessor was in bad faith but the successor was in good faith, the latter
can claim for ordinary prescription but the period of bad faith possession
cannot be availed for ordinary prescription.
One who succeeds by hereditary title shall not suffer the consequences of wrongful
possession of the decedent if it is proven that he was unaware of the said flaws, but
the effects will benefit him only at the death of the decedent.
-EXCLUDE THE FIRST AND INCLUDE THE LAST