Dear Atty. Gab,

Musta Atty! My name is Mario Rivera, and I’m writing to you because my family is in a very stressful situation regarding the land we’ve lived on for almost 40 years here in Silang, Cavite. My late father was allowed to build our small house here by his cousin, Mang Teban, back in the early 1980s. It was a verbal agreement, just based on trust since they were relatives. Mang Teban owned a larger piece of land, and this small portion wasn’t being used. He told my father, “You can stay there for now, just take care of it.”

Mang Teban passed away about 15 years ago, and my father passed away 5 years ago. We continued living peacefully on the land. Recently, however, Mang Teban’s children, who we barely know, came to us. They showed us old tax declarations under Mang Teban’s name for the entire property, including the portion where our house stands. They gave us a letter demanding that we vacate the premises within 30 days.

We were shocked. We’ve lived here practically our whole lives. We admit we never paid property taxes on the land itself (only on the house improvement), as we always understood it wasn’t technically ours, but we believed we had the right to stay because of the long time we’ve been here and the initial permission. The heirs are insisting the tax declarations prove their ownership and right to kick us out. We have nowhere else to go on such short notice.

Are these old tax declarations enough for them to evict us? Doesn’t our family’s decades-long stay count for anything? We feel lost and worried about becoming homeless. Any advice you can provide would be greatly appreciated. Salamat po.

Sincerely,
Mario Rivera

Dear Mario,

Thank you for reaching out and sharing your family’s situation. It’s understandable that you feel distressed facing a demand to vacate the home you’ve known for decades, especially under these circumstances. Dealing with inherited property disputes and questions of possession based on past agreements can indeed be very complex and emotionally taxing.

The core issue here revolves around the nature of your family’s possession of the land and what evidence holds weight in determining the right to physical possession. In situations like yours, where occupancy began based on the permission or tolerance of the owner, the legal framework for unlawful detainer often applies. While tax declarations are not absolute proof of ownership, Philippine jurisprudence views them as strong indicators of an ownership claim, particularly when the opposing party relies mainly on long-term occupation that started with permission and lacks documentation supporting their own claim of ownership.

Understanding Possession by Tolerance and Proof in Ejectment Cases

Your situation appears to fall under the concept of possession by tolerance. This means your family’s initial entry and stay on the property were permitted by the owner (Mang Teban). This permission is considered temporary, and the law implies an understanding that the occupants will vacate the property upon demand by the owner or their successors-in-interest (like Mang Teban’s children). When that demand is made and refused, the continued possession becomes unlawful, potentially giving rise to an unlawful detainer case.

In ejectment cases such as unlawful detainer, the primary question is not ultimate ownership but rather the right to physical possession (possession de facto). However, when the defendant raises the question of ownership to justify their possession, courts are allowed to make a provisional determination of ownership solely to resolve the issue of who has the better right to possess the property at that moment. This provisional ruling does not settle the ownership issue definitively and does not prevent a separate, more appropriate legal action (like an accion reivindicatoria) to be filed later to determine true ownership.

You mentioned that the heirs presented tax declarations in Mang Teban’s name. While not conclusive, these documents are considered significant evidence. Jurisprudence holds that:

“While it is true that tax declarations are not conclusive evidence of ownership, they, nevertheless, constitute at least proof that the holder has a claim of title over the property. It strengthens one’s bona fide claim of acquisition of ownership.”

This means the tax declarations bolster the heirs’ claim that their father owned the land and, consequently, that they inherited the right to demand possession. Conversely, your family’s long-term occupation, while a factor, might carry less weight if it’s established that it began purely out of tolerance or permission from the owner. Mere occupation, especially if not under a claim of ownership adverse to the actual owner, generally does not ripen into ownership or an indefinite right to possess.

“Well established is the rule that ownership over the land cannot be acquired by mere occupation.”

The fact that your family’s stay originated from Mang Teban’s permission is crucial. This distinguishes your situation from one where someone occupies land openly, continuously, exclusively, and notoriously under a claim of ownership (adverse possession), which might, under specific legal conditions (like acquisitive prescription), lead to ownership. Possession that begins with tolerance is not considered adverse possession.

Regarding the heirs bringing the action, the law allows any co-owner (assuming Mang Teban’s children are co-heirs) to file an ejectment suit on behalf of all co-owners.

“In sum, in suits to recover properties, all co-owners are real parties in interest. However, pursuant to Article 487 of the Civil Code and the relevant jurisprudence, any one of them may bring an action, any kind of action for the recovery of co-owned properties… since the suit is presumed to have been filed for the benefit of all co-owners.”

Therefore, even if only one or some of the heirs initiated the demand, it can be legally valid if done for the benefit of the co-ownership. Your defense would need to challenge the basis of their claim to possession, perhaps by providing evidence that contradicts the nature of tolerance (e.g., proof of a different agreement, or evidence casting doubt on the heirs’ rights or the validity of their documents), rather than solely relying on the length of your stay.

Essentially, the heirs are using the tax declarations as evidence supporting their inherited claim of ownership and the withdrawal of the tolerance previously granted by their father. Your family’s defense would likely need stronger evidence than just long-term permissive stay to overcome this in an ejectment proceeding, where the focus is the immediate right to possess.

Practical Advice for Your Situation

• Gather Evidence of the Initial Agreement: Try to find any witnesses (neighbors, other relatives) who knew about the arrangement between your father and Mang Teban. While verbal, corroborating testimony might help establish the context, though it confirms the permissive nature of your stay.
• Document Your Occupancy: Collect proof of your family’s long-term residence (photos, utility bills under your name addressed to the property, barangay certifications of residency, proof of house construction/repairs). While not proving ownership of the land, it establishes the duration and nature of your stay.
• Review the Demand Letter: Check if the demand letter meets legal requirements, such as clearly stating the grounds for eviction (withdrawal of tolerance) and providing a reasonable period to vacate (though 30 days is common).
• Consult a Lawyer Immediately: Given the demand to vacate, it is crucial to seek formal legal counsel. A lawyer can review the heirs’ documents, assess the strength of your position, advise on potential defenses, and represent you in any legal proceedings or negotiations.
• Explore Negotiation/Settlement: Through your lawyer, you might explore possibilities with the heirs, such as requesting more time to relocate, negotiating compensation for the house improvement (though rights depend on being a builder in good faith, which might be contested if possession was by tolerance), or even exploring a potential purchase or lease agreement, if feasible.
• Understand Barangay Conciliation: If an ejectment case is filed, it usually must first go through barangay conciliation (unless exceptions apply). This could be another venue for potential settlement.
• Prepare for Possible Relocation: While pursuing legal remedies, it’s practical to start exploring alternative housing options, given the potential outcome of an unlawful detainer case based on tolerance.
• Do Not Rely Solely on Length of Stay: Understand that in cases of tolerance, the length of stay does not automatically defeat the owner’s right to recover possession upon proper demand.

Mario, your situation requires careful legal assessment. While your family’s long history on the land evokes sympathy, the legal principles surrounding possession by tolerance and the evidence presented (like tax declarations) weigh significantly in ejectment cases. Seeking professional legal help is your most important next step.

Hope this helps!

Sincerely,
Atty. Gabriel Ablola

For more specific legal assistance related to your situation, please contact me through gaboogle.com or via email at connect@gaboogle.com.

Disclaimer: This correspondence is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For specific legal guidance tailored to your situation, please schedule a formal consultation.