Land disputes are, perhaps, the most common legal problem not only in our province, but in the entire Philippines. It ranges from unwritten contracts and agreements to unsettled and undivided estates, to boundary disputes, and the list can go on and on. More often than not, these problems or disputes are eventually brought to the appropriate court for the proper resolution of the issue at hand and final settlement of the matter.
With that, in this week’s edition, I will discuss the remedies available to a land owner in case he or she was unlawfully deprived of its possession and/or ownership.
Jurisprudence is replete of cases discussing the three (3) different types of action to recover possession of a real property unlawfully occupied by another – (1) Accion interdictal; (2) Accion publiciana and; (3) Accion reivindicatoria. The case of Spouses Tobias vs Gonzales[1] lengthily discussed the distinction and difference of the three (3) actions, to wit:
Accion interdictal comprises of two (2) distinct causes of action, namely, forcible entry (detentacion) and unlawful detainer (desahuico). In forcible entry, one is deprived of physical possession of real property by means of force, intimidation, strategy, threats, or stealth whereas in unlawful detainer, one illegally withholds possession after the expiration or termination of his right to hold possession under any contract, expressed or implied. The two are distinguished from each other that in forcible entry, the possession of the defendant is illegal from the beginning, and that the issue is which party has prior de facto possession while in unlawful detainer, possession of the defendant is originally legal but became illegal due to the expiration or termination of the right to possess. The jurisdiction of these two (2) actions, which are summary in nature, lies in the proper municipal trial court or metropolitan trial court. Both actions must be brought within one (1) year from the date of actual entry on the land, in case of forcible entry, and from the date of last demand, in case of unlawful detainer. The issue in said cases is the right to physical possession. Accion publiciana is the plenary action to recover the right of possession which should be brought in the proper regional trial court when dispossession has lasted for more than one (1) year. It is an ordinary civil proceeding to determine the better right of possession of realty independently of title. In other words, if at the time of the filing of the complaint more than one year had elapsed since defendant had turned plaintiff out of possession or defendant’s possession had become illegal, the action will be, not one of the forcible entry or illegal detainer, but an accion publiciana. On the other hand, accion reivindicatoria is an action to recover ownership also brought in the proper regional trial court in an ordinary civil proceeding.
In an ejectment suit (action interdictal), the sole issue is the right of physical or material possession over the subject real property independent of any claim of ownership by the parties involved. Ownership over the property is immaterial and is only passed upon provisionally for the limited purpose of determining which party has the better right to possession.
On the other hand, accion reivindicatoria or action de reivindicacion is an action whereby plaintiff claims ownership over a parcel of land and seeks recovery of its full possession. It is a suit to recover possession of a parcel of land as an element of ownership. In Amoroso v. Alegre, Jr., the Court held that an accion reivindicatoria is an action instituted to recover possession of a parcel of land as an element of ownership. “It is an action whereby the plaintiff alleges ownership over a parcel of land and seeks recovery of its full possession. The judgment in such a case determines the ownership of the property and awards the possession of the property to the lawful owner.”
Moreover, the evidentiary requirement for unlawful detainer and accion reivindicatoria is distinct from each other. In unlawful detainer, it is required that the aggrieved party allege lawful possession that turned to be unlawful by the party withholding possession under any contract, express or implied. However, in an action reivindicatoria, no such evidence is required since it is an accion based on ownership over a parcel of land, seeking recovery of its full possession. Simply put, evidence of prior physical possession and of the subsequent unlawfulness of possession is irrelevant.
Worthy to state, that in accion publiciana and accion reivindicatoria, the assessed value of the subject property determines whether the action shall be instituted in the Municipal Trial Court/Metropolitan Trial Court/Municipal Circuit Trial Court or the proper Regional Trial Court. Under Republic Act No. 11576, if the assessed value exceeds Four Hundred Thousand Pesos (Php 400,000.00), the RTC shall have jurisdiction, otherwise, the appropriate MTC/MeTC/MCTC.
[1] G.R. No. 232176, February 17, 2021