- Statute
- Civil Code
- Article
- Art. 546
- Topic
- Effects of Possession
- Status
- In force
- Book
- BOOK II PROPERTY, OWNERSHIP, AND ITS MODIFICATIONS
- Title
- TITLE V POSSESSION
- Chapter
- CHAPTER 3 Effects of Possession
- Formerly
- Art. 453a of the old Civil Code
- Year
- 1949
- Cited by
- Multiple Supreme Court decisions
The provision
Necessary expenses shall be refunded to every possessor; but only the possessor in good faith may retain the thing until he has been reimbursed therefor. Useful expenses shall be refunded only to the possessor in good faith with the same right of retention, the person who has defeated him in the possession having the option of refunding the amount of the expenses or of paying the increase in value which the thing may have acquired by reason thereof. (453a)
Intellegal Wiki · In plain terms
Governs reimbursement of expenses to a possessor. Necessary expenses (to preserve the thing) are refunded to every possessor, but only a good-faith possessor may retain the thing until repaid. Useful expenses (improvements) are refunded only to a good-faith possessor, who has the same right of retention; the person recovering the property may choose to repay the expense or instead pay the increase in value.
An editorially maintained plain-language explanation of this provision — not legal advice.
Intellegal Wiki · How the courts apply it
In Sulo Sa Nayon v. Nayong Pilipino Foundation, the Supreme Court held: The rights of a lessee who builds on the leased property are governed by Article 1678, not by the builder-in-good-faith rules (Articles 448 and 546), since a lessee has only a possessory, not an ownership, claim.
One leading Supreme Court case applying this provision.
Cases applying this article
- Desiderio Ranara, Jr. v. Zacarias de Los Angeles, Jr. G.R. No. 200765
- Onesimo Agapito v. Marilyn F. Agapito G.R. No. 255157
- Mr. v. Mr. G.R. No. 222530
- Heirs of the Late Joaquin Limense v. Rita Vda. de Ramos G.R. No. 152319
- Sulo Sa Nayon v. Nayong Pilipino Foundation G.R. No. 170923
- Republic of the Philippines v. Hon. Normelito J. Ballocanag G.R. No. 163794
- Erminda F. Florentino v. Supervalue G.R. No. 172384
- Samuel Parilla v. Dr. Prospero Pilar G.R. No. 167680
Other Supreme Court decisions also apply this article.