LAW ON PROPERTY | ROBLES VS COURT OF APPEALS 328 SCRA 97, G.R. No. 123509, March 14, 2000

ROBLES VS COURT OF APPEALS

328 SCRA 97, G.R. No. 123509, March 14, 2000

 

TOPIC/DOCTRINE

It is a fundamental principle that a co-owner cannot acquire by prescription the share of other co-owners, absent any clear repudiation of ownership.

 

FACTS

Hilario, a co-owner of land who has been the sole payor of the real estate taxes for more than 20 years.

 

ISSUE

Whether Hilario has acquired through prescription the share of other co-owners who are his siblings.

 

RULING

No.

The court ruled that it is a fundamental principle that a co-owner cannot acquire by prescription the share of other co-owners, absent any clear repudiation of ownership. In order that the title may prescribe in favor of a co-owner, the following requisites must concur: (1) the co-owner has performed unequivocal acts of repudiation amounting to an ouster of the other co-owners; (2) such positive acts of repudiation have been made known to the other co-owners; and (3) the evidence thereof is clear and convincing. The agreement of the siblings that Hilario will solely pay the taxes is not a clear repudiation of ownership

Here, the court ruled that Hilario effected no clear and evident repudiation of the co-ownership. Hence, he has not acquired through prescription the share of other co-owners who are his siblings.

Lawyal (@lawyalstudent)