Short answer. Trees, plants, and growing crops are classified as immovable (real) property under Article 415(2) of the Civil Code — but only while they are attached to the land or form an integral part of an immovable. Once harvested or separated from the land, they become personal property.
What the law says
Trees, plants, and growing fruits, while they are attached to the land or form an integral part of an immovable
Civil Code, Article 415 — What Is Immovable Property. Read the full provision →
Attachment to the land is the key condition
Article 415(2) classifies trees, plants, and growing fruits as immovable property specifically while they remain attached to the land. The moment of separation is the dividing line. A mango tree rooted in the ground is real property. The mangoes hanging on its branches are real property. The moment those mangoes are picked from the tree, or the tree is uprooted, they become movable personal property. This distinction is not academic: it determines how these things can be sold, mortgaged, taxed, and inherited.
Practical implications for sales of standing crops
When crops are sold while still in the ground — a common arrangement in agriculture — the sale is technically a transaction involving immovable property at the moment of contracting. However, once the agreed date of harvest passes and the crops are separated from the soil, they convert to movables. Parties to a standing-crop sale should be clear about the point of transfer of ownership and risk: does it pass when the contract is signed (while the crops are still immovable), or upon harvest (when they become movable)? The answer affects what formalities apply and who bears the risk of damage before harvest.
Trees and plants planted by the landowner versus a third party
The classification under Article 415(2) does not depend on who planted the trees or crops — it depends on attachment to the land. A tenant farmer's crops growing on the landowner's lot are still immovable while in the ground, even though the tenant owns the crops. The Civil Code's provisions on builders, planters, and sowers in good faith address the ownership question separately; the immovable-versus-movable classification under Article 415 is about the nature of the thing, not about who owns it or how it got there.
Fertilizer in actual use is also treated as immovable
Article 415 treats fertilizer that is actually in use on a piece of land as immovable property under item (7). This follows the same logic as crops: while the fertilizer is genuinely incorporated into the agricultural use of the land, the law treats it as part of the immovable. Fertilizer stored in a warehouse waiting to be applied is simply movable personal property — the "actually used" requirement is specific to fertilizer currently applied to or on the land. These details matter when a piece of agricultural land is sold, mortgaged, or subjected to execution: what passes with the land depends on which items qualify as immovables under Article 415 at the relevant moment.
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.
- Manila Electric Company vs. The City Assessor and City Treasurer of Lucena City, G.R. No. 166102, August 5, 2015 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- J.G. Summit Holdings, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, et al, G.R. No. 124293, January 31, 2005 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Serg's Products, Inc. and Sergio T. Goquiolay vs. PCI Leasing & Finance, Inc, G.R. No. 137705, August 22, 2000 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Spouses Quirino Roni T. Baterna and Marites M. Baterna vs. National Transmission Corporation, G.R. No. 276920, January 21, 2026 — read the decision on LawPhil →