Short answer. Yes. The Civil Code gives every property owner the right of accession: ownership automatically extends to everything the property produces — crops, offspring of animals, and anything that is naturally or artificially incorporated into or attached to it. No separate act of acquisition is needed.
What the law says
The ownership of property gives the right by accession to everything which is produced thereby, or which is incorporated or attached thereto, either naturally or artificially.
Civil Code, Article 440 — Right of Accession. Read the full provision →
What accession means in Philippine law
Article 440 of the Civil Code defines the right of accession: ownership of a thing extends, by operation of law, to everything which is produced thereby, or which is incorporated or attached thereto, either naturally or artificially. This is not a separate right you must claim or assert — it flows automatically from owning the principal property. You do not need a separate agreement or additional title document to own the offspring of cattle you own, the rice harvested from your paddy, or the trees that grew naturally on your lot.
Three categories of accession
The Civil Code organizes accession into distinct forms. The first — and the one most directly relevant to animals and crops — is accession discreta, or accession to fruits: the natural fruits (crops, animal offspring), industrial fruits (things produced by cultivation or labor), and civil fruits (income like rent). The second is accession continua in relation to immovable property, covering things attached to land by natural forces (alluvion, avulsion) or by human construction (buildings, plantings). The third covers movable property joined to other movables. All three trace back to the single principle in Article 440: ownership of the principal carries ownership of what belongs to it.
When another person's rights can override accession
The right of accession is not absolute. If someone else planted crops on your land in good faith, or a builder constructed on your property believing the land was theirs, the Civil Code provides specific rules that may require you to pay for those improvements or allow the other party to remove them — rather than simply letting you take everything through accession. Similarly, if you grant someone a usufruct over your land, they get to keep the fruits during the usufruct period. The right of accession operates as the default rule in the absence of a specific contract, law, or other arrangement that displaces it.
Practical implications for disputes
The principle in Article 440 matters in several real situations: when a tenant claims the crops they planted belong to them; when a lessee argues that the improvements they built are theirs to remove; or when heirs dispute who owns the offspring of livestock that formed part of a decedent's estate. In all these cases, the starting point is Article 440 — the owner of the principal thing owns what it produces or what is attached to it. The question then becomes whether a contract, a lease, a usufruct, or a specific provision of law moves that default in a different direction. That is where the facts of your situation will determine the outcome.
Cases citing this provision
These Supreme Court decisions cite the provision above. We list them so you can read them yourself; the summaries of what each decided are not ours to give.
- Spouses Pelagio Gulla, et al. vs. Heirs of Alejandro Labrador, G.R. No. 149418, July 27, 2006 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Provicial Assesor of the Agusan Del Sur vs. Filipinas Palm Plantation, Inc, G.R. No. 183416, October 5, 2016 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Sps. Reynaldo Alcaraz and Esmeralda Alcaraz vs. Pedro M. Tangga-an, et al, G.R. No. 128568, April 9, 2003 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Lorenzo Willy, substituted by his heirs, namely: Felicidad D. Willy, Betty Willy Cadangen, Tony, G.R. No. 207051, December 1, 2021 — read the decision on LawPhil →