!"#$%&' $%)%' &$*%+, -%.#!* /0123401256 &**78 9+:.

# ;#'+


:&$<#''# &,,# -8 .=*%#::#>
G.k. No. L-4334S Iu|y 29, 1976

DL LAUkLANC v. ADIL

CNLN1L: AUINC, !"

8ACkGkCUND
!oseflna S. de Laureano ls Lhe reglsLered owner of Lwo loLs ln
llollo ClLy whlch Cng Cu leased for a 13-year perlod whlch
allegedly explred on AugusL 31, 1974.
CcLober 1974 ! ln vlew of Cng Cu's fallure Lo vacaLe Lhe loLs
and remove hls lmprovemenLs Lhereon. Mrs. Laureano flled
agalnsL hlm an e[ecLmenL sulL ln Lhe clLy courL of llollo.
September 23, 197S ! 1he clLy courL rendered a [udgmenL ln
favor of Laureano and ordered Cng Cu Lo (1) vacaLe Lhe loLs and
resLore Lhelr possesslon Lo Laureano, (2) Lo remove hls bulldlngs
and oLher lmprovemenLs Lhereon, (3) Lo pay 12,428 monLhly
as compensaLlon for Lhe use and occupaLlon of Lhe loLs from
SepLember 1, 1974 up Lo Lhe Llme he vacaLes Lhem,and (4)
10,000 damages.
Cng Cu appealed Lo Lhe CourL of llrsL lnsLance of llollo.
PCWLvL8, lnsLead of flllng a supersedeas bond based on Lhe
flndlngs of Lhe clLy courL ln lLs declslon, Cng Cu asked Lhe clLy
courL ex parLe Lo approve hls supersedeas bond ln Lhe sum of
22,000 and Lo flx Lhe renLal value of Lhe Lwo loLs aL 1,200 a
monLh (!"#$% #'() *+) #'$ +,"-!# )#(.-/+#$0 (! #'$ /$+)$
1"!#2+1# 3$#*$$! 4!5 6- +!0 7+-2$+!"8 94: #'$ "!$ (! #'$
"20$2 "; #'$ 1"-2#). 1he clLy courL granLed Lhls ln an order daLed
Cctober 8, 197S.
november 13, 1973 ! Laureano recelved noLlce LhaL Cng Cu's
appeal had been dockeLed on november 4, so she flled a
moLlon ln Lhe lower courL (1) for a prellmlnary mandaLory
ln[uncLlon Lo resLore her Lo Lhe possesslon of Lhe sald loLs,
alleglng LhaL Cng Cu's appeal was frlvolous and dllaLory, and (2)
for lmmedlaLe execuLlon of Lhe clLy courL's [udgmenL on Lhe
ground LhaL Cng Cu's supersedeas bond was lnadequaLe and
LhaL he had falled Lo deposlL Lhe sum of 12,428 monLhly as
reasonable value of Lhe use and occupaLlon of Lhe loLs.
o As Lo (2) ! 1he ClLy CourL upheld lLs order allowlng Cng
Cu's supersedeas bond.
o As Lo (1) ! 1he ClLy CourL held LhaL Lhe wrlL could noL
be granLed because lL had already sancLloned Cng Cu's
supersedeas bond, Lhe purpose of whlch was Lo sLay
execuLlon pendlng appeal. 1he lower courL reasoned
ouL LhaL lL would be absurd Lo sLay execuLlon and aL Lhe
same Llme resLore possesslon Lo Lhe plalnLlff by
granLlng Lhe mandaLory ln[uncLlon.
March 23, 1976 ! Laureano flled a peLlLlon for cerLlorarl
alleglng LhaL Lhe lower courL acLed wlLh grave abuse of
dlscreLlon ln denylng Mrs. Laureano's moLlons for execuLlon and
a mandaLory ln[uncLlon.

ISSULS 1C 8L kLSCLVLD
1. WheLher or noL Lhe lower courL acLed wlLh grave abuse of
dlscreLlon ln denylng Mrs. Laureano's moLlon for execuLlon.
2. WheLher or noL lower courL gravely abused lLs dlscreLlon ln noL
granLlng Lhe wrlL of mandaLory ln[uncLlon Lo resLore Laureano
of possesslon of Lhe 2 loLs.

kLSCLU1ICNS AND AkGUMLN1S
ISSUL 1 ! Whether or not the |ower court acted w|th grave abuse of
d|scret|on |n deny|ng Mrs. Laureano's mot|on for execut|on. ! LS.
1he c|ty court erred |n |ssu|ng ex parte an order grant|ng Cng Cu's
mot|on f|x|ng the supersedeas bond at 22,000 and the month|y
depos|t at 1,200 wh|ch was the renta| st|pu|ated |n the |ease contract
that had a|ready exp|red. 1he c|ty court shou|d not have a||owed Cng
Cu to d|ctate the amount of the supersedeas bond and the amount of
the month|y payments to be depos|ted |n court. 1he reasonab|e va|ue
of the use and occupat|on of the two |ots was a|ready f|xed |n |ts
[udgment. 1hat va|ue |s the va|ue to be depos|ted |n court. Cng Cu's
!"#$%&' $%)%' &$*%+, -%.#!* /0123401256 &**78 9+:.# ;#'+


:&$<#''# &,,# -8 .=*%#::#>
mot|on that |t be f|xed at 1,200 was unca||ed for and was |n
contravent|on of the mandatory prov|s|ons of sect|on 8 of ku|e 70.

MAICk CIN1 1: Sect|on 8, ku|e 70 ($%&'( &)*+ *+ $%, -'.&*%$ /0)
prov|des an except|on to the ru|e that [udgments are |mmed|ate|y
executory.
1he defendanL may sLay execuLlon by:
a. erfecLlng an appeal Anu
b. llllng a supersedeas bond Anu
c. aylng from Llme Lo Llme elLher Lo Lhe plalnLlff or Lo Lhe
CourL of llrsL lnsLance durlng Lhe pendency of Lhe
appeal Lhe renLals or Lhe reasonable value of Lhe use
and occupaLlon of Lhe properLy as flxed by Lhe lnferlor
courL ln lLs [udgmenL.
" 1he reasonable value of Lhe use and occupaLlon
of Lhe premlses ls LhaL flxed by Lhe lnferlor
courL ln lLs [udgmenL because Lhe renLal
sLlpulaLed ln Lhe lease conLracL LhaL had explred
mlghL no longer be Lhe reasonable value for Lhe
use and occupaLlon of Lhe premlses by Lhe
reason of Lhe change or rlse ln value.
ln Lhe lnsLanL case, Lhe clLy courL found LhaL Cng Cu's lease
explred on AugusL 31, 1974 and LhaL Lhe reasonable value of Lhe
use and occupaLlon of Lhe Lwo loLs ls 4/sqm or 12,428
monLhly.
o 1o sLay execuLlon, Cng Cu should have flled, and Lhe
clLy courL should have requlred, a supersedeas bond ln
Lhe LoLal amounL of Lhe reasonable value of Lhe use and
occupaLlon of Lhe loLs for Lhe perlod from SepLember 1,
1974 Lo SepLember, 1973, or for 13 monLhs, aL Lhe raLe
flxed ln Lhe clLy courL's [udgmenL whlch ls 12,428.
o 1he supersedeas bond should be ln Lhe LoLal sum of
161,364.00. And Lhe amounL Lo be deposlLed monLhly
beglnnlng CcLober, 1973 ls LhaL same amounL of
12,428.

MAICk CIN1 2: 1he |ower court's act of grant|ng Cng Cu's |nsuff|c|ent
supersedeas bond does not serve as an amendment of |ts or|g|na|
order (September 23 [udgment) as Cng Cu d|dn't even move for an
amendment of the dec|s|on. 1h|s be|ng the case, Cng Cu - by fo||ow|ng
the Cctober 8 order - fo||owed an erroneous dec|s|on so the Court of
I|rst Instance has d|scret|on to order the execut|on of a new
supersedeas bond to rep|ace a defect|ve one.
1he lower courL argued LhaL Lhe approval of Cng Cu's
supersedeas bond (based on Lhe lease conLracL and noL on Lhe
[udgmenL) was a valld amendmenL of Lhe clLy courL's declslon of
SepLember 23. ! unACCL1A8LL!
o lL dlsLorLs Lhe meanlng of an amendmenL. Cng Cu dld
noL move LhaL Lhe declslon be amended. 1he order
accordlng Lo lLs leLLer and Lenor can ln no sense be
lnLerpreLed as amendmenL of Lhe clLy courL's declslon.
lL makes no reference Lo Lhe declslon.
o Cng Cu's supersedeas bond was lnadequaLe and LhaL he
dld noL deposlL Lhe compensaLlon for Lhe use and
occupaLlon of Lhe 2 loLs whlch was flxed ln Lhe clLy
courL's [udgmenL. Pls supersedeas bond and hls
deposlLs were noL sufflclenL Lo sLay execuLlon.
Where a defendanL falls Lo flle any supersedes bond or dld noL
make a monLhly deposlL, execuLlon of Lhe [udgmenL ls
mandaLory. 1he only excepLlons are Lhe exlsLence of fraud,
accldenL, mlsLake or execusable negllgence whlch prevenLed Lhe
defendanL from posLlng Lhe supersedeas bond or maklng Lhe
monLhly deposlL, or Lhe occurrence of supervenlng evenLs
whlch broughL abouL a maLerlal change ln Lhe slLuaLlon of Lhe
parLles and whlch would make Lhe execuLlon lnequlLable
o PCWLvL8, ln Lhls case, a supersedeas bond and
monLhly deposlLs were made buL Lhe bond and Lhe
deposlL were lnadequaLe or were noL ln conformlLy wlLh
Lhe clLy courL's [udgmenL.
!"#$%&' $%)%' &$*%+, -%.#!* /0123401256 &**78 9+:.# ;#'+


:&$<#''# &,,# -8 .=*%#::#>
Cng Cu commlLLed a mlsLake by followlng an erroneous order of
Lhe clLy courL whlch flxed Lhe supersedeas bond and Lhe
monLhly deposlL ln conLravenLlon of lLs own declslon and,
consequenLly, ln vlolaLlon of SecLlon 8, 8ule 70. 8ecause of LhaL
mlsLake, lmmedlaLe execuLlon under 8ule 70 would noL be
warranLed. (<$)8 $=$! (; (# *+) 4!5 6->) ,"#("! #'+# +1#-+//?
32"-5'# +3"-# #'$ ,()#+@$8 (,,$0(+#$ $A$1-#("! *"-/0 )#(// !"#
3$ *+22+!#$0).
o Cng Cu should be glven a 30-day perlod from noLlce
wlLhln whlch Lo flle a new supersedeas bond ln Lhe sum
of 161,364 and Lo deposlL Lhe value of Lhe use and
occupaLlon of Lhe Lwo loLs aL Lhe raLe of 12,428
beglnnlng CcLober, 1973 less Lhe amounLs already
deposlLed by hlm. LxecuLlon should lssue lf he falls Lo
flle a new supersedeas bond and Lo make up for Lhe
deflclency ln hls monLhly deposlLs.

ISSUL 2 ! Whether or not |ower court grave|y abused |ts d|scret|on |n
not grant|ng the wr|t of mandatory |n[unct|on to restore Laureano of
possess|on of the 2 |ots. ! LS. Laureano, as owner, |s ent|t|ed to the
property, and Cu's defense of bu||der |n good fa|th cannot stand
because he |s [ust a |essee. 8y overstay|ng, Cu |s a possessor |n bad
fa|th.

under ArLlcle 1673 of Lhe Clvll Code, a lessor may e[ecL a lessee
when Lhe perlod agreed upon has explred. 1hereafLer, ArLlcle
1671 sLaLes LhaL a lessees Lo who conLlnuous Lo en[oy Lhe Lhlng
afLer Lhe explraLlon of Lhe conLracL over Lhe lessor's ob[ecLlon,
Lhe former shall be sub[ecL Lo Lhe responslblllLles of a possessor
ln bad falLh.
o 1he explraLlon of Lhe lease and Mrs. Laureano's refusal
Lo renew lL made Cng Cu a deforclanL or an unlawful
wlLhholder of Lhe possesslon of Lhe loLs. Pe has become
a possessor ln bad falLh.
As a lessee, who consLrucLed a bulldlng on Lhe leased land, Cng
Cu cannoL be characLerlzed as a bullder ln good falLh. under
arLlcle 448 of Lhe Clvll Code Lhe owner of Lhe land on whlch
anyLhlng has been bullL ln good falLh may approprlaLe Lhe
bulldlng afLer paymenL of Lhe lndemnlLy provlded ln arLlcles 346
and 348 of Lhe Clvll Code.
o ArLlcle 448 applles Lo a case where one bullds on land of
whlch he honesLly clalms Lo be Lhe owner and noL Lo
lands whereln one's only lnLeresL ls LhaL of a lessee
under a renLal conLracL.
Cng Cu's rlghLs wlLh respecL Lo Lhe lmprovemenLs made by hlm
are sub[ecL Lo ArLlcle 1678 of Lhe Clvll Code whlch sLaLes LhaL lL
ls Lhe lessor who has Lhe opLlon Lo pay for one-half of Lhe value
of Lhe lmprovemenLs whlch Lhe lessee has made ln good falLh,
whlch are sulLable for Lhe use for whlch Lhe lease ls lnLended
and whlch have noL alLered Lhe form and subsLance of Lhe land.
o 1he lessee has noL rlghL Lo reLenLlon durlng Lhe perlod
where he ls awalLlng paymenL for hls lmprovemenLs
because only Lhe possessor ln good falLh has a rlghL of
reLenLlon under ArLlcle 346.
o As already noLed, ArLlcle 1671 regards an oversLaylng
lessee as a possessor ln bad falLh.
ln flllng Lhe e[ecLmenL sulL Mrs. Laureano opLed noL Lo
relmburse Cng Cu for hls lmprovemenLs. WhaL perlod should be
glven Lo Cng Cu for Lhe removal of hls lmprovemenLs ls a maLLer
LhaL should be [udlclously resolved by Lhe lower courL.