- Statute
- Civil Code
- Article
- Art. 1664
- Topic
- Lease of Rural and Urban Lands
- Status
- In force
- Book
- BOOK IV Obligations and Contracts
- Title
- TITLE VIII LEASE
- Chapter
- CHAPTER 2 Lease of Rural and Urban Lands
- Formerly
- Art. 1560a of the old Civil Code
- Year
- 1949
- Cited by
- Multiple Supreme Court decisions
The provision
The lessor is not obliged to answer for a mere act of trespass which a third person may cause on the use of the thing leased; but the lessee shall have a direct action against the intruder. There is a mere act of trespass when the third person claims no right whatever. (1560a)
Intellegal Wiki · In plain terms
A landlord is not responsible for compensating the tenant when an outsider merely disturbs the tenant's use of the leased property without claiming any legal right to it, which is a mere act of trespass. Instead, the tenant may sue the intruder directly.
An editorially maintained plain-language explanation of this provision — not legal advice.
Intellegal Wiki · How the courts apply it
In G.Q. Garments v. Angel Miranda, the Supreme Court held: Affirmed the CA and denied the petition: the P10,000,000 actual-damages claim was unproven and speculative, and the lessor is not liable under Articles 1654 and 1664 for a third party's mere trespass in fact.
One leading Supreme Court case applying this provision.
Cases applying this article
- Ensons Commercial Corporation v. Philippine National Railways G.R. No. 227648
- G.Q. Garments v. Angel Miranda G.R. No. 161722