Short answer. Yes. Even though you contracted with the sublessor rather than the owner, Article 1651 makes you, as subtenant, directly answerable to the main landlord for how you use and preserve the property. That direct liability is limited to acts touching use and preservation, and only within the terms the head lease set between owner and tenant.
What the law says
the sublessee is bound to the lessor for all acts which refer to the use and preservation of the thing leased in the manner stipulated between the lessor and the lessee
Civil Code, Article 1651 — Sublessee's Liability to the Lessor. Read the full provision →
A direct link to the owner, despite no direct contract
Normally a subtenant's contract is with the tenant who sublet to him — the sublessor — not with the property owner. Article 1651 nonetheless creates a direct line of responsibility to the owner. Without prejudice to his obligation toward the sublessor, the sublessee is bound to the lessor for all acts which refer to the use and preservation of the thing leased. So the owner does not have to act only through the middle tenant; for matters of use and care of the property, he can look straight to the subtenant. The subtenant's separate duties to the sublessor remain fully in force at the same time.
The liability is limited to use and preservation
This direct answerability is not unlimited. It covers acts which refer to the use and preservation of the thing leased — how the property is used and whether it is kept in proper condition — rather than every term of the sublease. Matters like the rent the subtenant agreed to pay the sublessor stay between those two parties. So the owner can hold the subtenant accountable for misuse, damage, or neglect of the property, but not for purely internal terms of the sublease that do not touch how the property itself is used or preserved.
Bounded by the head lease terms
There is a second limit built into the article: the subtenant answers to the owner in the manner stipulated between the lessor and the lessee — that is, according to the terms of the original lease between owner and tenant. The subtenant effectively steps into the use-and-care obligations the head lease imposed. A practical takeaway for subtenants is to read the main lease, not just the sublease, because its restrictions on use and upkeep can be enforced directly against you by the owner, even though you never signed it.
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.
- Agustin P. Dela Torre vs. The Hon. Court of Appeals, et al./Philippine Trigon Shipyard Corporation, et al. vs. Crisostomo G. Concepcion, et al, G.R. No. 160088 / G.R. No. 160565, July 13, 2011 — read the decision on LawPhil →