ELS: Property

Finals

Rae Gammad 1

CO-OWNERSHIP
Define Co-ownership
There is co-ownership whenever the ownership of an undivided thing
or right belongs to different persons (Art. 484 NCC).
What are the requisites of co-ownership?
The requisites are:
(1) Plurality of subjects - manifestation of the private right of dominion,
where in lieu of its being exercised by the owner in an inclusive
manner over things or rights, there are two or more owners.
(2) Unity of object (material indivision) - there is a single object which is
not materially divided, and which is the element which binds the
subjects.
- until division is made, the respective share of each cannot be
determined and every co-owner exercises, together with his coparticipants, joint ownership over the pro indiviso property, in addition
to his use and enjoyment of the same.
- there is no co-ownership when the different portions owned by
different people are already concretely determined and separately
identifiable, even if not yet technically described.
(3) Recognition of Ideal Share or Intellectual shares of the co-owners
which determine their rights and obligations
Dual nature of Co-ownership
Ownership Over the Ideal Share

Joint Ownership Over the Whole

There exists in favor of each coowner a portion which is definite in

amount but not physically and
actually identified, the same being
merely ideal.

Each co-owner is also considered as

the owner of the whole and over the
whole he exercises the right of
dominion.
Until a division is made, the
respective share of each cannot be
determined.

With respect to this ideal or abstract

share, a co-owner exercises absolute
ownership and he may, therefore,
dispose of it in any manner he
pleases. (Art. 493)

With respect to the whole or the pro

indiviso property, every co-owner
exercises joint ownership together
with his co-participants.
Mutual respect is observed by the coowners in regard to the use,
enjoyment and preservation of the
thing as a whole. (Art. 486)

Effect of Division or Partition

Once partition is effected or once the property is subdivided and
distributed among the co-owners, the co-ownership is terminated.
Where the property had already been partitioned judicially or

ELS: Property

Finals

Rae Gammad 2

extrajudicially or where the portion belonging to the parties has been

identified and localized, the right of legal redemption cannot be invoked.
A Co-Owner Cannot Claim A Definite Portion
A co-owner cannot point to specific portion of the property owned in
common as his own because his share therein remains intangible.
All that the co-owner has is an ideal or abstract quota or proportional
share in the entire land or thing.

Co-ownership vs. Partnership

Co-ownership

Partnership

Creation

May exist even in the absence Requires the existence of a

of a contract
contract

Purpose

Common enjoyment of the Earn profits (for business)

property

Personality No juridical personality

Duration

There is juridical personality

Term not to exceed 10 years Unlimited as to term

(may be extended by a new
agreement)

Power to
A
co-owner
does
not A partner usually represents
act with 3rd represent the co-ownership
the partnership and may bind
persons
the partnership
Disposal of May freely dispose of his A partner has no power of
share
share
disposal so as to make the
buyer a partner unless agreed
upon by all the other partners
Division of Division of benefits
Profits
charges is fixed by law
Effect of
Death

and Division of profits and losses

may be subject to the
agreement of the partners

Does not dissolve the co- Brings about the dissolution of

ownership
the partnership

ELS: Property

Finals

Rae Gammad 3

Sources of Co-ownership
1. Law
will arise if by the will of their owners two things of the same kind or
different kinds are mixed
if by the will of only one owner, but in good faith, two things of the
same or different kinds are mixed or confused.
When a man and woman who are capacitated to marry each other, live
exclusively with each other as husband and wife without the benefit of
marriage or under a void marriage
cohabitation not falling under Article 147 of the Family Code
Example: You own a condominium unit. You own the perimeter
within your home. Can you drill a hole on your wall to see what your
neighbors are doing? No. Party walls and the roof of the
condominium are owned in common
2. Contract
An agreement to keep the thing undivided for a certain period, not
exceeding ten years, shall be valid. This term may be extended by a
new agreement
Example: 3 buyers bought a property contributing equally. They may
become co-owners of that property to the extent of 1/3. Its by
agreement
3. Succession
Where there are two or more heirs, the whole estate of the decedent
is, before its partition, owned in common by such heirs, subject to the
payment of debts of the deceased
Example: Accidental, occasioned by death of a person. 5 children
(heirs) are co-owners of property left by decedent
4. Fortuitous event or chance
two things of the same kind or different kinds are mixed by chance and
the things are not separable without injury
5. Occupancy
two or more persons catch a wild pig or get forest products or when a
hidden treasure is accidentally discovered by a stranger, who is not a
trespasser, on the land of another
Rules Governing Co-Ownership
Contract: co-ownership is to be governed primarily by the contract
between the parties and, in default thereof, by the provisions of
Articles 484 to 501 of the New Civil Code.
Special Provisions of Law: such provisions shall primarily govern the
co-ownership while the provisions of Articles 484 to 501 shall be
applied only in a suppletory character.
Absolute community in marriage
- If the regime of absolute community applies to the spouses by
default pursuant to the provisions of Article 75 of the Family Code,
then the provisions of the Family Code on absolute community shall

ELS: Property

Finals

Rae Gammad 4

primarily govern and the provisions of the Civil Code on coownership shall apply in a suppletory manner
How do you determine the share of the co-owners in the benefits and
charges arising from the co-ownership?
According to the Civil Code, the share of the co-owners in the benefits
and charges arising from the co-ownership shall be proportional to their
respective interests and any stipulation in a contract to the contrary shall be
void (Art. 485 par. 1). Consequently, in order to determine the share of the
co-owners in the benefits and charges, we must first determine their
respective interests in the co-ownership. Under the law, such interests are
presumed equal, unless the contrary is proved (Art. 485, par. 2).

What are the limitations upon the right of a co-owner to use the thing
owned in common?
The thing should only be used (1) in accordance with the purpose for
which it is intended; (2) in such a way as not to injure the interest of the coownership; and (3) in such a way as not to prevent the other co-owners from
using it according to their rights (Art. 486).

ELS: Property

Finals

Rae Gammad 5

Determining the Purpose

To determine the purpose for which the property held in common is
intended the agreement, express or implied, of the parties will first
govern.
In default of such an agreement, it is understood that the thing is
intended for that use for which it is ordinarily adapted according to its
nature.

Action must be instituted for all

if the action is for the benefit of the plaintiff alone who claims to be
the sole owner and entitled to the possession thereof, the action will
not prosper unless he impleads the other co-owners who are
indispensable parties
if the co-owner expressly states that he is bringing the case only for
himself, the action should not be allowed to prosper.

ELS: Property

Finals

Rae Gammad 6

Baloloy vs. Hular: It has been held that the absence of an indispensable party
in a case renders ineffective all the proceedings subsequent to the filing of
the complaint including the judgment. The absence of the respondents
siblings, as parties, rendered all proceedings subsequent to the filing thereof,
including the judgment of the court, ineffective for want of authority to act,
not only as to the absent parties but even as to those present.
Adlawan v. Adlawan: the Court likewise sustained the dismissal of the
complaint for ejectment on the ground that the suit was brought in the name
of the plaintiff alone and for his own benefit to the exclusion of the other coowners. In fact, the plaintiff therein did not recognize the co-ownership and,
in fact, vigorously asserted absolute and sole ownership of the questioned
lot.
Exn:
Resuena v. Court of Appeals and Sering v. Plazo: the co-owners who fi
led the ejectment case did not represent themselves as the exclusive
owner of the property.
Celino v. Heirs of Alejo and Teresa Santiago: the complaint for quieting
of title was brought in behalf of the co-owners precisely to recover
lots owned in common.
Vencilao v. Camarenta: the amended complaint specified that the
plaintiff is one of the heirs who co-owns the controverted properties.

In all these cases, the plaintiff never disputed the existence of a coownership nor claimed to be the sole or exclusive owner of the
litigated lot. Thus, a favorable decision therein would of course inure to
the benefit not only of the plaintiff but to his co-owners as well.
Action Available Even Against A Co-Owner
Any co-owner may file an action under Article 487 not only against a
third person, but also against another co-owner who takes exclusive
possession and asserts exclusive ownership of the property
the plaintiff cannot recover any material or determinate part of the
property.
based on the principle that a co-owner has no right to demand a
concrete, specific or determinate part of the thing owned in common
because until division is effected his right over the thing is represented
only by an ideal portion
Judicial or extra-judicial partition is still necessary to effect such
physical division
Effect of Judgment Upon the Other Co-Owners
While a co-owner may bring an action in ejectment under Article 487
without the necessity of joining all the other co-owners as co-plaintiffs
because the suit is deemed to be instituted for the benefit of all, any

ELS: Property

Finals

Rae Gammad 7

adverse judgment cannot prejudice the rights of the unimpleaded coowners. However, any judgment of the court in favor of the co-owner
will benefit the others.

Art. 488. Each co-owner shall have a right to compel the other coowners to contribute to the expenses of preservation of the thing or
right owned in common and to the taxes. Any one of the latter may
exempt himself from this obligation by renouncing so much of his
undivided interest as may be equivalent to his share of the expenses
and taxes. No such waiver shall be made if it is prejudicial to the coownership. (395a)
Art. 489. Repairs for preservation may be made at the will of one of the
co-owners, but he must, if practicable, first notify his co-owners of the
necessity for such repairs. Expenses to improve or embellish the thing
shall be decided upon by a majority as determined in Article 492.
Expenses for Preservation
a. Right To Demand Contribution
The law grants each co-owner the right to demand contribution from
the other co-owners for any and all expenses he incurred for the
purpose of preserving the thing or right owned in common, even if the
repairs for preservation were made without the consent of the other
co-owners
a co-owner who desires to make the necessary repairs is not required
to secure the consent of all the co-owners
the law requires is that he must, if practicable, notify the other coowners of the necessity of such repair prior to undertaking the same.
any opposition on the part of the other co-owners for the making of
such necessary repairs does not deprive the co-owner who made the
advances from demanding contributions from the other co-owners
repairs for preservation may be made at the will of only one of the coowners
b. When Notice Required
see above (notify the necessity of the repair only)
if the repairs are urgent and any delay will be detrimental to the
interest of the co-ownership, prior notification is no longer necessary
and a co-owner may already undertake such repairs without need of
giving prior notice to the other co-owners
c. Effect of Failure to Comply With the Notice Requirement
failure does not deprive the co-owner who incurred the expenses of
the right to recover the proportionate shares of the other co-owners in
the expenses

ELS: Property

Finals

Rae Gammad 8

only effect of such failure is to place upon the co-owner who incurred
the expenses the burden of proving the necessity of the repairs and
the reasonableness of the expenses.

d. Renunciation By A Co-Owner
While the other co-owners can be compelled to contribute
proportionately to the expenses incurred for the purpose of
preserving the thing or right owned in common, they are given by law
an option of renouncing so much of (their) undivided interest as may
be equivalent to (their) share of the expenses and taxes, in lieu of
paying their proportionate contribution to such expenses.

e. Requirement of Consent in Renunciation

Article 488, it appears that the consent of the co-owner who made the
advances is not required when a co-owner opts to renounce, in lieu of
paying his share in the expenses
the law gives such option only to the co-owner who may be compelled
to contribute to such expenses without requiring the consent of the
co-owner who made the advances
since the renunciation is intended as payment for expenses already
made, it is in the nature of dation in payment and should, therefore,
require the consent of the creditor, i.e., the co-owner who made the
advances.
f. Limitation on the Exercise of the Option of Renunciation
Article 488 prohibits the exercise of the option of renunciation if it is
prejudicial to the interest of the co-ownership
g. Includes Payment of Taxes
Ordinarily, a real estate tax is not considered as a necessary expense
Under Article 488 (in contrast with Article 546), however, the expenses
for the preservation of the thing also include taxes.

ELS: Property

Finals

Rae Gammad 9

Article 490: Different Stories Belonging to Different Owners

no application to a condominium project, the latter being governed by

Republic Act No. 4276, otherwise known as The Condominium Act.

Rules Governing Necessary Expenses:

(1)if the manner of contribution is specified in the title of ownership, the
same shall govern;
(2) in the absence of such provision in the title of ownership, the
agreement of the parties shall control; or
(3) in the absence of such agreement, the following rules shall be
observed:
(a) The main and party walls, the roof and the other things used in
common, shall be preserved at the expense of all the owners in
proportion to the value of the story belonging to each.
(b) The floor of the entrance, front door, common yard and sanitary
works common to all, shall be maintained at the expense of all the
owners pro rata.
(c) Each owner shall bear the cost of maintaining the floor of his story.
(d) The stairs from the entrance to the first story shall be maintained at
the expense of all the owners pro rata, with the exception of the
owners of the ground floor, the stairs from the first to the second
story shall be preserved at the expense of all, except the owner of the
ground floor and the owner of the first story; and so on successively.
Condominium
an interest in real property consisting of a separate interest in a unit in
a residential, industrial or commercial building and an undivided
interest in common directly or indirectly, in the land on which it is
located and in other common areas of the building.

Common areas
refer to the entire project excepting all units separately granted or held
or reserved
Unit
means a part of the condominium project intended for any type of
independent use or ownership, including one or more rooms or spaces
located in one or more floors (or part or parts of floors) in a building
or buildings and such accessories as may be appended thereto.
Nature of Ownership in Condominium Projects

Condominium unit - owned separately and individually by the unit

owner

ELS: Property

Finals

Rae Gammad 10

Land and to the common areas in the condominium project:

Section 2: the land and other common areas in the condominium
project are held by the owners of separate units as co-owners thereof
there is co-ownership among the unit owners, with respect to the
undivided interest in the land and common areas.
Section 5: the land and other common areas are to be held by the
condominium corporation
the owners of the individual units are automatically considered
members or shareholders of the corporation
the undivided interest in the common areas or the shareholding in
the common areas is inseparable from the unit to which it is only an
appurtenant

Rules Governing Expenses on the Common Areas

The owner of the project is required by law, prior to the conveyance
of any condominium, to register a declaration of restrictions relating
to such project (constitute a lien upon each condominium in the
project, and shall inure to and bind all condominium owners in the
projects).
Declaration of restrictions:
(a) For maintenance of insurance policies
(b) Provisions for maintenance, utility, gardening and other services
benefiting the common areas
(c) For purchase of materials, supplies and the like needed by the
common areas
(d) For payment of taxes and special assessments
(e) For reconstruction of any portion or portions of any damage to or
destruction of the project
Restrictions:
With regard to ownership
for individuals as a general rule there is NONE
Exception: where the common areas in the condo project are
owned by the owners of separate units as co-owners thereof, no
condo unit therein shall be conveyed or transferred to persons
other than FILIPINO CITIZENS or CORPS. at least 60% of the
capital stock belongs to Filipino Citizens
exception to the exception : in cases of hereditary succession
With Regard to Corporations :
Where the common areas in a condo project are held by a
corporation, no transfer or conveyance of a unit shall be valid if the
concomittant transfer of the appurtenant membership or stock
holding in the corporation will cause the alien interest in such
corporation to exceed the limits imposed by existing laws.

ELS: Property

Finals

Rae Gammad 11

Article 491: Acts of Alteration

The law prohibits the making of alterations in the thing owned in
common without the consent of the other co-owners.
the law requires the consent of all co-owners to the making of the
alteration on the thing owned in common
apply even though benefits for all would result from such act of
alteration
however, if any of the co-owners should unreasonably withholds his
consent and the same is clearly prejudicial to the common interest, the
other co-owners may go to court for appropriate relief

Acts of Alteration - one that affects the substance of the thing and changes
its essence and nature
Form of Consent
law does not clarify the kind of consent necessary for the making of
alterations.
Required: that the act of alteration must be authorized by all the coowners, whether such authorization be given prior to or after the
commission of the act
the consent of all co-owners may be given expressly or tacitly,
previous to the act or even after its commission
Effect of Unauthorized Alterations
act is illegal and invalid, being an act executed against the provision of
a mandatory law
the other co-owners can compel the erring co-owner to undo what has
been done, at the latters expense. (Article 1168)
the erring co-owner shall likewise be liable for any losses or damages
which the co-ownership may have suffered
Article 492: Acts of Administration

Rule as to Acts of Administration

the resolution of the majority of the co-owners shall be sufficient.
majority of the co-owners - do not refer to numerical majority but to
majority of interest

Meaning of Acts of Administration

refer to the improvement or embellishment of the thing owned in
common for the purpose of better enjoyment
refer to the enjoyment of the thing and are of a transitory character.
In determining whether an act is that of administration or alteration:
the nature of the thing itself must be considered.

ELS: Property

Finals

Rae Gammad 12

When the enjoyment of the thing does not require its modification,
whatever modification or change that is done: ALTERATION
when the thing in its nature requires changes in its exploitation,
such modifications and variations should be considered as falling
under the acts of simple ADMINISTRATION

Article 493: Right Over Ideal Share

Nature of Co-Owners Right Over His Pro Indiviso Share

a co-owner has absolute ownership of his undivided share in the
common property
a co-owner shall have full ownership of his part and of the fruits and
benefits pertaining thereto
has the right to:
alienate,
assign or
mortgage it, and
substitute another person in its enjoyment, except when personal
rights are involved
consequence: right to alienate his pro indiviso share in the co-owned
property even without the consent of the other co-owners and his coowners cannot enjoin him if he intends to alienate his share to a third
party

ELS: Property

Finals

Rae Gammad 13

may also validly lease his undivided interest to a third party

independently of the other co-owners

Effect of Alienation or Mortgage of Undivided Share

effect shall be limited to the portion which may be allotted to him in
the division upon the termination of the co-ownership.
what the transferee obtains by virtue of such alienation or mortgage
are the same rights as the transferor had as a co-owner, in an ideal
share equivalent to the consideration given under their transaction
the transferee merely steps into the shoes of the transferor as coowner and acquires a proportionate share in the property held in
common, thereby making the transferee a co-owner of the property.
Alienation of Definite or Concrete Portion
SC: before the partition of a land or thing held in common, no
individual or co-owner can claim title to any definite portion.
Co-owner only has is an ideal or abstract quota or proportionate
share in the entire land or thing.
has no right to sell or alienate a concrete, specific or determinate part
of the thing owned in common
If the co-owner sells a concrete portion: does not render the sale void.
affects only his own share, subject to the results of the partition but
not those of the other co-owners who did not consent to the sale.

ELS: Property

Finals

Rae Gammad 14

Alienation of Entire Co-owned Property

a mere part owner, a co-owner cannot alienate the shares of the other
co-owners
nemo dat quod non habet - no one can give what he does not have
a person can sell only what he owns or is authorized to sell, the
buyer can as a consequence acquire no more than what the seller
can legally transfer
quando res non valet ut ago, valeat quantum valere potest - when a
thing is of no effect as I do it, it shall have effect as far as [or in
whatever way] it can
the binding force of a contract must be recognized as far as it is
legally possible to do so
even if a co-owner sells the whole property as his, the sale will
affect only his own share but not those of the other co-owners who
did not consent to the sale
not null and void; only the rights of the co-owner-seller are transferred,
thereby making theBbuyer a co-owner of the property.
Remedy: action for partition under Rule 69 of the Revised Rules of
Court
partition should result in segregating the portion belonging to the
seller and its delivery to the buyer.
Neither recovery of possession nor restitution can be granted since
the buyer is a legitimate proprietor and possessor in joint ownership
of the common property claimed
Applicability of Doctrine of Buyer in Good Faith
Cruz vs. Leis: while, as a rule, a co-owner could only dispose of her
share in the property owned in common pursuant to Article 493, the
purchaser acquires a valid title to the entire property even as against
the heirs based on the principle that a person dealing with registered
land is not required to go behind the register to determine the
condition of the property. The Court explained that (the purchaser) is
only charged with notice of the burdens on the property which are
noted on the face of the register or the certificate of title and to
require him to do more is to defeat one of the primary objects of the
Torrens system.
Segura v. Segura: SC applied the general rule. Even if it is to be
assumed that the purchaser bought the land in good faith from the
selling co-owners (who were the registered owners of the property as
appearing on the title), only so much of the share of the selling coowners could be validly acquired by the purchaser, with the rest of the
property remaining under the ownership of the excluded co-heirs or
co-owners. It was further held that the portion pertaining to the
excluded co-owners should be deemed held by the purchaser under an
implied trust for their benefit.
when the purchaser knew of, could have known, the existence of the

ELS: Property

Finals

Rae Gammad 15

co-ownership and yet did not seek the consent or authorization of the
other co-owners in the sale of the entire property, he may not be
considered a purchaser in good faith.
General rule applies: he only acquires what the selling co-owner
could validly transfer following the rule that no one can give what
he does not have nemo dat quod non habet.
the rule that persons dealing with registered lands can rely solely on
the certificate of title does not apply to banks.

Right of Legal Redemption

Legal Redemption in Co-Ownership

is in the nature of a privilege created by law partly for reasons of
publicBpolicy and partly for the benefit and convenience of the
redemptioner, to afford him a way out of what might be a disagreeable
or inconvenient association into which he has been trust
intended to minimize co-ownership by reducing the number of the
participants until the community is done away with.
Requisites For the Exercise of Legal Redemption
(1) There must be a co-ownership;
(2) one of the co-owners sold his right to a stranger;
(3) the sale was made before the partition of the co-owned property;
(4) the right of redemption must be exercised by one or more coowners within a period of thirty days to be counted from the time that
he or they were notified in writing by the vendee or by the co-owner
vendor; and
(5) the vendee must be reimbursed for the price of the sale.
a co-owners right to redeem is invoked only after the shares of the
other co-owners are sold to a third party or stranger to the coownership, not before.
Period of Redemption
within thirty (30) days from the notice in writing by the vendor
if no claim or offer is made within said period, no action will be
allowed to enforce the right of redemption.
It is necessary to determine first if and when the written notice of sale
was duly served by the vendors to their co-owner
Written Notice Not Necessary If There Is Actual Notice
Old rule: a written notice of the sale by the vendor to his co-owners is
indispensable for the latter to exercise their retracto legal de
comuneros
Recently: in a case where the co-owner was actually present and was
even an active intermediary in the consummation of the sale of the
property, he is considered to have had actual notice of the sale and a
written notice is no longer necessary.