Definition of 'Register Of Deeds'

A record of real estate deeds or other land titles that is maintained by a local government
official. The register of deeds will be used in conjunction with a grantor-grantee index
that lists the owner of record and any transfers of property.

OFFICE OF THE REGISTER OF DEEDS

> There shall be at least one Register of Deeds for each province and one for each city
> Secretary of Justice: defines the official station and territorial jurisdiction of each
Registry upon the recommendation of the LRA administrator, with the end in view of
making every Registry easily accessible to the people of the neighboring municipalities
> Register of Deeds: appointed by the President upon recommendation of Secretary of
Justice
> Deputy Registers and all subordinate personel of Register of Deeds shall be appointed
by the Secretary of Justice upon the recommendation of the LRA Administrator
> Both the Register and his deputies must be members of the Bar

DUTY OF REGISTER OF DEEDS TO REGISTER DOCUMENT PRESENTED FOR REGISTRATION

IS MINISTERIAL

MATTERS SHOULD BE LEFT TO THE COURTS FOR DETERMINATION

> The powers of the RD are generally regarded as ministerial only and said officer has no
power to pass upon the legality of an order issued by a court of justice

> Whether the document presented for registration is invalid, frivolous or intended to
harass, is not the duty of the RD to decide but a court of competent jurisdiction

> The question of whether or not a conveyance was made to defraud creditors of the
transferor should better be left for determination of the proper court

DUTY OF REGISTER OF DEEDS TO REGISTER, MINISTERIAL

> Registration is merely a ministerial act by which a deed, contract, or instrument is
sought to be inscribed in the records of the office of the Register of Deeds and annotated
at the back of the certificate of title covering the land subject of the deed, contract, or
instrument
> Section 10: It shall be the duty of the Register of Deeds to immediately register an
instrument presented for registration dealing with real and personal property which
complies with all the requisites for registration.
> Register may not validly refuse to register a deed of sale presented to him for
registration
> Whether a document is valid or not is not for the Register to determine, this function
belongs properly to a court of competent jurisdiction
> If the purpose of registration is merely to give notice, then the questions regarding the
effect or invalidity of instruments are expected to be decided after, not before
registration
> Registration must first be allowed and the validity or effect thereof litigated afterwards
Discretionary function is an action that involves room for policy judgment or the
responsibility for deciding the adaptation of means to an end, and discretion in
determining how or whether the act shall be done or the course pursued. . . . Insofar as
an official action involves both the determination of facts and simple cause-and-effect
relationships and also the assessment of costs and benefits, the evaluation of relative
effectiveness and risks, and a choice among competing goals and priorities, an official
has discretion to the extent that he has been delegated responsibility for the latter kind
of value judgment. Thornton v. City of St. Helens, 425 F.3d 1158,

LAND REGISTRATION AUTHORITY

> To have a more efficient execution of the laws relative to the registration of lands,
geared to the massive and accelerated land reform and social justice program of the
government
> Headed by an Administrator, who shall be assisted by 2 Deputy Administrators
> All of whom shall be appointed by the President through the recommendation of the
Secretary of Justice
> All other officials except the Register of Deeds shall be appointed by the Secretary of
Justice upon recommendation of the Administrator
FUNCTIONS OF THE AUTHORITY
1. Extend speedy and effective assistance to the Department of Agrarian Reform, the
Land Bank, and other agencies in the implementation of the land reform program of the
government
2. Extend assistance to courts in ordinary or cadastral land registration proceedings
3. Be the central repository of records relative to original registration of lands titled under
the Torrens system, including subdivision and consolidation plans of titled lands
FUNCTIONS OF THE ADMINISTRATOR
1. Issue decrees of registration pursuant to final judgments of the courts in land
registration proceedings and cause the issuance by the Register of Deeds of the
corresponding certificates of title
2. Exercise supervision and control over all Registers of Deeds and other personnel of the
Commission
3. Resolve cases elevated en consulta by, or on appeal from a decision of a Register of
Deeds
4. Exercise executive supervision over all clerks of courts and personnel of the CFI
throughout the Philippines with respect to the discharge of duties and functions in
relation to the registration of lands
5. Implements all orders, decision, and decrees promulgated related to the registration of
lands and issue, subject to the approval of the Secretary of Justice, all needful rules and
regulations therefor
6. Verify and approve subdivision, consolidation, and consolidationsubdivision survey
plans of properties titled under Act 496 except those covered by PD 957
7. Discretionary functions
LRA ADMINISTRATOR, AN EXECUTIVE OFFICER WITH JUDICIAL RANK
> Functions are plainly executive and subject to the Presidents power of supervision and
control
> He can be investigated and removed only by the President
> If the legislature really intended to include the grant of privileges or rank or privileges
of Judges of CFI the right to be investigated by the SC, and to be suspended or removed
only upon recommendation of that court, then such grant of privileges would be
unconstitutional as it would violate then fundamental doctrine of separation of powers
> W/N the resolution en consulta is a judicial function, as contrasted with an
administrative process?
> Resolution consultas are only binding to all Registers of Deeds and not to other parties
and assuming that it is quasi-judicial in nature, it is merely incidental or minimal to the
overall functions of the Administrator
DUTY OF LRA TO ISSUE DECREE NOT COMPELLABLE BY MANDAMUS
> It is ministerial in the sense that they act under the orders of the ccourt and the decree
must be in conformity with the decision of the court and with the data found in the
record, as to which they have no discretion on the matter
> If they are in doubt upon any point in relation to the preparation and issuances of such
decree, it is their duty to refer the matter to court
> In the above respect, then they act as officials of the court but their acts are the acts of
the court itself
> The issuance of a decree of registration is part of the judicial function and is not
compellable by mandamus because it involves the exercise of discretion
> The duty to render reports is not limited to the period before a decision becomes final,
but may extend ever after its finality but not beyond the scope of one year from the
entry of the decree

REQUISITE STEPS IN BRINGING THE LAND UNDER THE TORRENS SYSTEM

1. Survey of land by the Lands Management Bureau or a duly licensed surveyor
2. Filing an application for registration by the applicant
3. Setting the date of initial hearing of the application by the court
4. Transmittal of the application and the date of initial hearing together will all the
documents or other evidence attached thereto by the Clerk of Court to the LRA
5. Publication of the notice of the filing of the application, date and place of hearing in
the OF and in a newspaper of general circulation
6. Service of notice upon contiguous owners, occupants, and those known to have
interests in the property by the sheriff
7. Filing of answer to the application by any person whether named in the notice or not
8. Hearing of the case by the court
9. Promulgation of judgment by the court
10. Issuance of the order for the issuance of a decree declaring the decision final and
instructing the LRA to issue the decree of confirmation and registration
11. Entry of the decree of registration in the LRA
12. Sending of copy of the decree of registration to the corresponding Register of Deeds
13. Transcription of the decree of registration in the registration book and the issuance of
the owners duplicate original certificate of title to the applicant by the Register of Deeds,
upon payment of the prescribed fees

Steps in Chronological Order for the Registration of Title to Land Under Act 496
1. Survey of the land by the Bureau of Lands (now Land Management Services) or a duly
licensed surveyor;
2. Preparation and filing of the application for registration by the applicant;
3. Setting of the date of the hearing of the application by the court;
4. Trnasmittal of the duplicate of the application and the date of initial hearing together
with all documents attahced thereto by the Clerk of Court to the Land Registration
Authority;
5. Publication of notice of the filing of the application and date and place of the hearing
once in newspaper of general circulation and once inthe Official Gazette;
6. Service of notice upon contiguous owners, occupants, and those hnown to have
interest in the property by the Sheriff;
7.Filing of the answer to the application by any person whether named in the notice or
not;
8. Hearing of the cause by the court and the presentation of evidence;
9. Promulgation of the judgment by the court;
10. Issuance of an order by the court declaring the judgment final and instructing the
Land Registration Authority to issue the decree of registration in accordance with Sec. 39
of P.D. 1529
11. Entry of Decree of registration in the Land Registration Authority;
12. Sending copy of the decree of registration to the corresponding Registrar of Deeds by
the Land Registration Authority;
13. Transription of the decree of registrationin the registration book and the issuance of
the owner's duplicate certificate of the original certificate of title to the applicant by the
Registrar of Deeds upon payment of the prescribed fees.

Land Ownership by Filipinos Overseas

Article XII Section 8 of the Philippine Constitution provides that a natural-born citizen
of the Philippines who has lost his/her Philippine citizenship may be a transferee of
private lands subject to limitations provided by law.
The laws on land ownership by Filipinos overseas are contained in Batas Pambansa
Blg. 185 and Republic Act 8179, which amended the Foreign Investment Act of 1991. BP
185 stipulates guidelines on land ownership by former Filipinos for purposes of
establishing residence, while Section 10 of RA 8179 specifies entitlements and conditions
for land acquisition for investment purposes.
Transferee
The acquisition or transfer of private land refers to either voluntary or involuntary sale,
devise or donation. Involuntary sale includes sales on tax delinquency, foreclosures, and
executions of judgment.
Qualifications of Former Filipinos
Both laws define former Filipinos as citizens of the Philippines from birth without
having to perform any act to acquire or perfect their Philippine citizenship, who lost said
Philippine citizenship, and who have the legal capacity to enter into a contract under
Philippine laws.
Provisions on Land Ownership
The following are the provisions of BP 185 and RA 7042, as amended, pertinent to land
ownership by Filipinos overseas:

Particulars Provision under BP 185 Provisions under RA 7042 as

(for establishing residence) amended by RA 8179
(for investment)

Size/Area of maximum of 1,000 sq. meters maximum of 5,000 sq. meters

Coverage for urban land for urban land
maximum of one (1) hectare maximum of three (3) hectares
for rural land for rural land

Land either of the spouses may avail either of the spouses may avail
Acquisition for of the privilege of the privilege
Both Spouses in case both spouses wish to
acquire lands for this purpose,
the total area acquired should
not exceed the maximum
allowed
Additional Land In case he/she already owns
Acquisition urban or rural lands for
residential purposes, he/she may
acquire additional urban or rural
lands, which when added to
those he/she presently owns shall
not exceed the authorized
maximum area.
Limits to A person may acquire not more
Acquisition of than two (2) lots which should be
Land situated in different
municipalities or cities anywhere
in the Philippines, provided that
the total area of these lots do not
exceed 1,000 sq. meters for
urban land or one (1) hectare for
rural land for use as residence.
An individual who has already
acquired urban land shall be
disqualified from acquiring rural
land and vice versa.
Use of Land The acquired land should not be
used for any purpose other than
for residence.
in case both spouses wish to
acquire lands for this purpose, the
total area acquired should not
exceed the maximum allowed
In case he/she already owns urban
or rural lands for business
purposes, he/she may acquire
additional urban or rural lands,
which when added to those he/she
presently owns shall not exceed
the authorized maximum area.
A person may acquire not more
than two (2) lots which should be
situated in different municipalities
or cities anywhere in the
Philippines, provided that the total
area of these lots do not exceed
5,000 sq. meters for urban land or
three (3) hectares for rural land
for business purposes.
Under Section 4 of Rule XII of the
Implementing Rules and
Regulations of RA 7042 as
amended by RA 8179, a
transferee who has already
acquired urban land shall be
disqualified from acquiring rural
land and vice versa. However, if
the transferee has disposed of
his/her urban land, he/she may
still acquire rural land and vice
versa, provided that this will be
used for business.
A transferee of residential land
acquired under Batas Pambansa
Blg. 185 may still avail of the
privilege granted under this law.
Section 5 of Rule XII specifically
states that the land should be
primarily, directly, and actually
used in the performance or
conduct of the owners business
or commercial activities in the

Special In addition to the requirements
Requirements provided for in other laws for
the registration of titles to lands,
the transferee should submit to
the Register of Deeds of the
province or city where the
property is located a sworn
statement stating the following:
date and place of birth
names and addresses of
his/her parents, spouse, and
children, if any
area, location, and mode of
acquisition of landholdings in the sworn statement stating
Philippines, if any
his/her intention to reside
permanently in the Philippines
date he/she lost his/her Philippine property is situated that the
citizenship and the country of
which he/she is presently a
citizen
Violations and
Penalties Violations through:
misrepresentation in the sworn
statement
acquisition of land through
fraudulent means
failure to reside permanently in
the land acquired within two (2)
years from its acquisition, except
when such failure is caused by
force majeure shall be penalized
broad areas of agriculture,
industry and services including
the lease of land, but excluding
the buying and selling thereof.
In addition to the usual
registration requirements
pertinent to the conveyance of
real estate, the transfer
contemplated shall not be
recorded unless the transferee
submits to the Registry of Deeds
of the province or city where the
land is situated, the following:
certification of business
registration issued by the Bureau
of Trade Regulation and Consumer
Protection of the DTI
information required under Batas
Pambansa 185
certification from assessor of
municipality or province where the
subject land for transfer is an
urban or rural area
if an agricultural land is
acquired, a certification from the
Department of Agrarian Reform
that the land is a retained area of
the transferor and an affidavit of
the transferee attesting that
his/her total landholding inclusive
of the land to be acquired does
not exceed the 5-hectare limit
provided under R.A. 6657, is
required
 by the following:
- liability to prosecution under
the applicable provisions of the
Revised Penal Code and subject
to deportation in appropriate
cases
- forfeiture of such lands and
their improvements to the
National Government through
escheat proceedings by the
representative of the Solicitor
General
- permanent disqualification from
availment of the privilege under
this Act

Requirements for Land Registration or Original Certificate of Title (Judicial

Titling)
The application for land registration should be filed in triplicate with the Clerk of the
Regional Trial Court of the province/city where the property is located. The following
documents should be attached to the application:
1. Original plan on tracing cloth duly approved by the Director of Lands or Regional
Land Director, or in lieu thereof, a true copy of the same on a tracing cloth properly
attested and certified by said Office or the official authorized to make such
certification, together with two (2) print copies thereof
2. Three (3) copies of technical description
3. Three (3) copies of surveyors certificate
4. Certificate of the assessed value of the property issued by the provincial
treasurer, in quadruplicate
Requirements for Land Transfer or Transfer Certificate of Title
The following documents are required for the filing of land transfer:
1. Copies of the Deed of Absolute Sale
2. Latest real estate tax payments
3. Latest tax declaration of the property
4. Certificate from the Bureau of Internal Revenue that the capital gains tax and
documentary stamps have been paid
5. Transfer tax
6. Receipt of payment of the transfer and registration fees

Owning Property by Foreigners:

No foreigner is allowed to won property in the Philippines, as already mentioned in the
top section. But there are exceptions:
Foreigners are allowed to won property, especially land, by hereditary succession. This
simply means, when your Filipina wife dies, you as the natural heir will become the legal
owner of her property.
The same is true for the children, every natural child (legitimate or illegitimate) can
inherit the property for his/her Filipina mother, even when the child does not have the
Philippine citizenship.
There on other exception, this are condominium units and apartments. These can be
owned by any foreigner, provided that the alien participation in the complete complex
does not exceed 40% of value.
Owning of houses or buildings is possible as well, as long as the foreigner dooes not own
the land on which the house is build. The land though can be leased by the foreigner on a
long term contract, and the house can be legally his property.

Erstwhile Filipino Citizens' Reacquisition of Rights and Privileges of 2001

An act allowing natural-born citizen as the Philippines who have lost their Filipino
citizenship to retail certain rights and privileges, subject to certain constitutional
limitations and for other purposes.
This act is a proposal for the Philippine government, so it is not a valid law yet. Actually 7
similar acts have been proposed in 2001.
(HB00081,HB00330,HB01238,HB01771,HB02531,HB03369,HB03370). The idea in most
of these proposals is either the possibility to retain the Philippine citizenship, or to make
certain privileges available to former natural born Filipinos. The above mentioned
proposal would allow for former Filipinos to:
Operation of Rural Banks
Engaging in retail business
operation of overseas shipping
Engaging in the rice and corn industry
private employment without need of any government permit
Engaging in the tax-free industries
Contracts for supply for the government
Engaging in the brokerage business
Practice of certain profession

Republic of the Philippines

SUPREME COURT
Manila
EN BANC
G.R. No. L-4773 July 13, 1909
THE MANILA BUILDING AND LOAN ASSOCIATION AND GREGORIO PEALOSA, petitioners-appellants.
Gibbs and Gale for appellants.
ARELLANO, C.J.:
On the 14th of January, 1908, the Manila Guilding and Loan Association applied to the Court of Land Registration for the registration of a building
of strong materials erected on ground belonging to another.
On the 3d of March, 1908, the application was denied by this court for the following reason:
Inasmuch as the petitioners are not he owners of the ground on which is erected the building of strong materials that they are seeking
to register separately therefrom, their application can not entertained by the court. However, if the owner of the land, Benito Legarda,
should cause the same to be registered, the lease to which it is subject for the period of time agreed upon may be made to appear as
an incumbrance, and the existence of the building erected on the leased portion of the ground may be set forth in the proper place in
the certificate.
On the 7th day of said month and year, the petitioners excepted to the above decision and move for the amendment of the same.
After hearing the motion on the 6th of April, 1908, the Court of Land Registration entered the following decree:
If the sense of section 2 of Act No. 496 were such as is interpreted by the petitioners, an anomalous situation would arise whereby a
building said become registered without the registration of the land upon which it is erected. And in view of the facility with which a
building may disappear either by its removal to another place, or by reason of a fire or other causes, the result would be that the title
issued by the court would be lacking the stability assured by the law. Not even under the Spanish Mortgage Law can a building
erected on ground belonging to another be registered, unless the owner of the former had registered the right of lease of the latter.
The decision above referred to is sustained.
On the 9th day of said month and year, the petitioner amended his request so as to include therein the following facts: that the land belonged to
Benito Legarda; that it was leased to Gregorio Pealosa, and by the latter sublet with the express consent of the owner to the Manila Building and
Loan Association; that, by a decree of the Court of Land Registration issued on August 9, 1907, in case No. 2724, the land was registered in the
name of Benito Legarda, subject to the incumbrance of the lease contract in favor of the Manila Building and Loan Association, which
incumbrance was entered and indorsed on the title deed issued in favor of Benito Legarda in conformity with the said decree, and that in
consequence thereof, the right of lease of the said Manila Building and Loan Association became registered.
On the 14th of April, 1908, the last decision of the Court of Land Registration was rendered as follows:
 In view of the fact that the building is an accessory, and that, as sworn to in the amended petition at the end of paragraph 1 thereof,
the lease of the land on which the building is erected has been entered in the title deed issued to the owner, Benito Legarda, the note
that the registrar shall enter in the proper place at the back of the certificate, to effect that the building erected on the leased portion of
the land is the property of the lessee, is sufficient. The findings contained in the judgment of March 3, and in that rendered on the 6th
instant are hereby sustained.
The petitioner excepted in due course and form to the foregoing judgment and submitted to this court his bill of exceptions, wherein two causes of
error are alleged:
1. That the trial court erred in determining that a building of strong materials, situated on land leased from owned by a person other than the
applicant, such land being duly registered subject to applicant's lease, could not be registered under the provisions of the Land Registration Act.
2. In dismissing the application.
In order to support the first assignment of error, the applicant maintains that section 2 of Act No. 496, the Land Registration Act, deals with the
entry or registration of land, buildings, interests; according to the applicant the law unites these three words by the conjunction or, as meaning that
any one of the three things may be registered independently of the others; and, although in a following clause is mentioned "the land, and the
buildings andimprovements," the use of the article the in order to distinguish and separate "land" from "buildings and improvements" confirms said
interpretation; that section 19 deals with the application for the registration of title without restricting itself to land; that in Act No. 627, dealing with
military reservations, mention is made of "lands or buildings, or any interest therein;" that, while it is true that the word "buildings" has been
suppressed in Act No. 806, nevertheless, in Act No. 1138, respecting naval reservations "lands of private ownership, buildings, and interests
therein," are again mentioned; that the author of the Land Registration Act was well aware that the word "land" comprises everything contained
thereon, and probably used it for the sake of brevity so as not to repeat the phrase "land or buildings or an interest therein;" that, if the Mortgage
Law admits the registration of buildings erected on land belonging to another, independently of the land (art. 107, par. 1), Act No. 496, which has
not the same object and was intended to amplify rather than to restrict the said law, should be understood in the same sense; that Act No. 496
should be interpreted in its literal sense; that said law is a literal copy of the law of Massachussetts on the subject, the language of section 1 of the
latter being identical with section 2 of our law, with the very significant exception that while, in the law of Massachussetts, the term "title to land" is
employed, our law uses the more extensive term "title to land or buildings or an interest therein;" that it might be considered that "the owner of the
land has a contingent right at the expiration of the lease, but by reason of the conjunctive provisions of articles 1573 and 487 of the Civil Code,
the owner has no contingent interest or other right to the voluntary improvements of he lessee."
The use that the law makes of the phrase "land or building or an interest therein," instead of the single word "land," is no reason for construing the
law as authorizing the registration of buildings erected on land belonging to another, separately and independently from the registration of the
land. From the fact that, besides "land," "buildings" was added, it must not be inferred that it was the intent of the law to allude to buildings
belonging to an owner other than the owner of the land. The natural and more logical inference is that since the buildings are and accessory to
the land, in first employing the word "land" and subsequently the other word "buildings," it was intended to express what was principal and what
was accessory, all pertaining to the same owner; this is shown by section 21, the latter part of which contains a form of application reading as
follows:
And I (or we) declare: (1) That I am (or we) the owner (or owners) in fee simple of a certain parcel of land with the buildings (if any; if
not, strike out the words "with the buildings"), . . . (2) That said land at the last assessment for taxation was assessed at _______
dollars; and the buildings (if any) at ________ dollars.
Section 127 contains several forms of "deeds, conveyances, mortgages, leases, releases, and discharges affecting lands, whether registered or
unregistered."
Form No. 2, "deed of land registered under this Act," includes the following statement:
__________ do hereby sell and convey to said __________ and his heirs and assigns that parcel of land, together with all the
buildings and improvements thereon, etc.
Forms Nos. 3 and 4, "deeds of land not registered, without or with covenants of warranty," read:
_________ do hereby sell and convey to the said _________, his heirs and assigns, that parcel of land, together with all
the buildings and improvements thereon, etc.
And the same formula, "parcel of land with all the buildings and improvements thereon" is found in the form of deed for the mortgage and lease of
land. It may thus be seen that the language of the forms clearly expresses what was the intent of he law in the identical language of section 2
thereof; the natural and logical interpretation of such language of the Land Registration Act of the Philippine Islands being that it authorizes the
owner of the land to register together with the land, all the buildings, improvements, or interests that he has therein, but that under no
circumstances can registration be applied for separately and independently by the owner of the land and by the owner of the buildings; that is to
say, that the land of one person and the building of another erected there can have no separate legal existence in the registry as property
independent in themselves. Such a theory can not be set up, nor can this court sustain such a doctrine.
It is not true that "under the system of registration of property established by the Mortgage Law, buildings erected on land belonging to another
may be registered separately from the land. (See par. 1, art. 107, Mortgage Law.)" (Brief. 8.)
ART. 107. The following are mortgageable, but with such restrictions as are hereinafter expressed:
1. A building erected on ground belonging to another, which, if mortgaged by the person who construed it, shall be without prejudice to
the right of the owner of the ground, this incumbrance being only secured by the interest which the person who constructed the
building has therein.
The article above quoted does not state that the buildings erected on ground belonging to another person may be registered independently of the
land; it only says that they may be mortgaged. Because they are mortgageable it is not be inferred that they can be registered separately from the
land of another person whereon they are erected.
And even though there has been no question formally presented nor argument advanced as to the registration of a mortgage on a building
erected on land owned by another person, title to which land has not been previously registered, it is not considered out of place to state herein
the doctrine of certain commentators on the aforesaid Mortgage Law as follows:
Remarks in connection with the mortgage of a building constructed on a parcel of land belonging to another person. The right to
erect a building on a parcel of land is inherent in the title thereto; and inasmuch as it subsists per se, whereas the building can not
subsist without the land, the latter is considered as principal, and that which is constructed thereon as accessory.
According to article 359 of the Civil Code, all works on a piece of property are presumed to be made by the owner and at his expense
unless the contrary is proven.
Even in case it were proven, he is entitled to appropriate the works upon indemnification, if there was good faith on the part of the
person who carried out the work, or to compel the latter to pay him the value of the land. (Art. 361, Civil Code.)
He who builds in bad faith shall lose his right to indemnity. (Art. 362.)
 With such precepts, which have in no manner modified the old law, we are positive that No. 1 of article 107 refers only and exclusively
to a building constructed after a contract made with the owner of the land wherein the title of person at whose expense it was build is
recognized; said contract must be registered, as otherwise it could not be recorded.
Inasmuch as on the registration of the contract its condition shall be stated, and the extent of the right of he who built shall become
known, there will be no difficulty in applying the said No. 1 of article 107. (Galindo y Escosura, 3 Legislacion Hipotecaria, 162.)
Lastly, as a reason for the appeal, it is alleged that he who builds on land belonging to another need not fear any contingent right on the part of
the owner of the land at the expiration of the lease, because the provisions of articles 1573 and 487 of the Civil Code do not grant to the owner of
the land "any contingent interest" or other right to the voluntary improvements of the lessee.
Article 1573 only says that "a lessee shall have, with regard to the useful and voluntary improvements, the same rights which are granted a
usufructuary," and article 487 provides that "the usufructuary may make on the property which is the object of the usufruct any improvements,
useful or for recreation, which he may deem proper, provided he does not change its form or substance; but he shall have no right to be
indemnified therefor. He may, however, remove said improvements, should it be possible to do so without injury to the property."
At the expiration of the lease the owner of the land has the right, not merely a contingent one but a definite right under the law, to cause the
building erected on his estate to be taken down without incurring any obligation whatever, enforcing against the lessee the obligation imposed by
article 1561, to return the estate in the same condition in which he received it (unless an agreement was executed prior to the construction of the
building.)
If the object leased were a house, it is evident that the lessee might effect such improvements for use, recreation or comfort as would not change
its form or substance a he deemed fit; he could build a bower or luxurious pavilion more expensive than the house itself, to which, at the
expiration of the lease, the owner of the house would have no right whatever, unless the lessee could not remove the same without injury to the
house to which it was attached as an improvement, excepting of course the right to cause the same to be demolished so that the house might be
returned to him in the same condition that the lessee received it; but not because the lessee could make such improvement, and because the
owner of the house did not have any right thereto, could the said bower or pavilion be registered independently of the house, when, without the
house to which it was accessory, it could have no juridical status nor any real existence as a piece of property independent from the
other property, to wit, the house to which it was attached.
There can be no doubt, with respect to either the usufructuary or the lessee, that they are dealing with something that belongs to
another; that the juridical relation maintained by them has a natural term, and that, therefore, when the time comes, they will have no
right to allege such absolute and unlimited title to such improvements, as if the same had been made on their own property. (Manresa,
10 Civil Code, 595.)
In one word, they have no independent possession of the thing that the improvement represents.
The importance of superficies, compared to freehold, is in many countries great and constantly increasing, and enormous sums of money are
raised and collected for the purpose of speculating in the first of these rights; but a leasehold is by no means a superficies, and the Philippine Civil
Code supplies various forms of contract which provide security for capital so employed or for concerns engaged in the investment of funds.
For the reasons above set forth the order appealed from is hereby affirmed with costs.
Torres, Mapa, and Carson, JJ., concur.