Short answer. Yes. Article 451 of the Civil Code states that in the cases covered by the two preceding articles — which address the landowner's options when someone builds, plants, or sows in bad faith — the landowner is entitled to damages from the builder, planter, or sower. Keeping the structure does not waive the right to damages.
What the law says
In the cases of the two preceding articles, the landowner is entitled to damages from the builder, planter or sower.
Civil Code, Article 451 — Landowner's Right to Damages. Read the full provision →
The damage right runs alongside the landowner's choices
Article 451 is a companion to Articles 449 and 450, which set out what the landowner may do when someone builds, plants, or sows on their land in bad faith. Those articles give the landowner several options: keep the improvements without paying the builder anything, demand demolition at the builder's expense, or require the builder to pay the price of the land. Article 451 adds that whatever option the landowner chooses, "the landowner is entitled to damages from the builder, planter or sower." The choice of remedy and the claim for damages are cumulative, not alternative.
Why the bad-faith builder receives no reimbursement
A builder in good faith who builds on someone else's land occupies a different position — they may be entitled to reimbursement for necessary and useful expenses, or at minimum to indemnity before being required to vacate. A bad-faith builder receives none of this protection. The law takes the position that someone who knowingly builds on another's land without right has no equitable claim to be compensated for the improvements. The landowner may appropriate the structure without paying for it, and may also claim damages for the inconvenience, disruption, and loss caused by the intrusion.
What damages can cover
The damages available to the landowner under Article 451 are not confined to a single category. They can include compensation for the use of the land during the period the builder occupied it without permission, loss caused by the disruption to the landowner's plans for the property, and any diminution in the value or usability of the land resulting from how the structure was built. What is actually proven and awarded will depend on the evidence — the landowner cannot simply name a number without supporting it with facts.
Establishing bad faith
Article 451 applies only where bad faith on the part of the builder is established. Bad faith generally means the builder knew the land belonged to someone else and proceeded anyway — without the owner's permission and without a colorable claim of right. If the builder had an honest belief, even a mistaken one, that they were building on their own land or with the owner's consent, they may be treated as a good-faith builder and the Article 451 damage right would not apply. The factual circumstances of how the construction started, and what the builder knew at the time, are what determine the applicable rules.
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.
- Florencia H. Duenas And Daphne Duenas-Montefalcon vs. Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company and Elvira Ong Chan; Af Realty Development, Inc. and Zenaida R. Ranullo; Adelaida T. Bernal; and Inocencio Domingo and Penelope Ison of the Register of Deeds of Makati City, G.R. No. 209463, November 29,2022 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- The City of Valenzuela, represented herein by its duly elected mayor, Hon. Rexlon T, G.R. No. 236900, April 28, 2021 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Princess Rachel Development Corporation and Boracay Enclave Corporation vs. Hillview Marketing Corporation, Stefanie Dornau, G.R. No. 222482, June 2, 2020 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Pen Development Corporation and Las Brisas Resort Corporation vs. Martinez Leyba, Inc, G.R. No. 211845, August 9, 2017 — read the decision on LawPhil →