II A. Ownership

Question 1

Ownership (definition)
GTK

Answer 1

Ownership is the juridical relation of a person over a
thing by virtue of which said person has the
exclusive power or authority to receive all the
benefits and advantages arising from said thing,
save those restricted by law or the recognized rights
of others. (Pineda, 2009)

Question 2

Kinds of Ownership (F-N-S-C)

Answer 2

Kinds of Ownership (F-N-S-C)

1. Full ownership – Includes all the rights of an owner;
   NOTE: Naked ownership + Usufruct
2. Naked ownership – Ownership where the rights to the use and to the fruits have been denied; NOTE: Full ownership – Usufruct
3. Sole ownership – Ownership is vested in only one person; and
4. Co-ownership– Ownership is vested in two or more persons. There is Unity of the property, and plurality of the subjects

Question 3

ATTRIBUTES OF OWNERSHIP

Answer 3

ATTRIBUTES OF OWNERSHIP

1. Right to enjoy (jus utendi) (Art.428, NCC);
2. Right to the fruits (jusfruendi);
3. Right to abuse (jus abutendi);
4. Right to dispose (jus dispodendi); (Ibid.)
5. Right to recover (jus vindicandi); (Ibid.)
6. Right to accessories (jus accessiones);
7. Right to possess (jus possidendi);
8. Right to exclude (Art.429, NCC); and
9. Right to enclose (Art.430, NCC).

Question 4

PRINCIPLE OF SELF-HELP (L1)

Requisites

Answer 4

The owner of lawful possessor of a thing has the right to exclude any person from the enjoyment and disposal thereof. For this purpose, he may use such force as may be reasonably necessary to repel or prevent an actual or threatened unlawful physical invasion of usurpation of his property. (Art. 429, NCC)

Requisites of the Principle of Self-Help (R-O-A-D)

1. Reasonable force used;
2. Such force is used by the Owner or lawful possessor;
3. There is no Delay; and
4. Actual or threatened physical invasion or usurpation of the property. (De Leon, 2006)

Question 5

DOCTRINE OF STATE OF NECESSITY (Codal)

Answer 5

The owner of a thing has no right to prohibit the
interference of another with the same, if the
interference is necessary to avert an imminent
danger and the threatened damage, compared to
the damage arising to the owner from the
interference, is much greater. The owner may
demand from the person benefited indemnity for
the damage to him. (Art. 432, NCC)