Short answer. Under Article 423 of the Civil Code, the property of provinces, cities, and municipalities divides into two categories: property for public use — open to the public and generally outside commerce — and patrimonial property, which is held by the local government like a private owner and can be sold, leased, or litigated over.
What the law says
The property of provinces, cities, and municipalities is divided into property for public use and patrimonial property.
Civil Code, Article 423 — Property of Local Governments. Read the full provision →
The two categories of local government property
Article 423 of the Civil Code sets up the foundational classification. Property for public use refers to assets dedicated to the public's benefit — roads, plazas, public markets, waterways, and similar infrastructure that citizens generally have the right to use. These properties are outside ordinary commerce: they cannot ordinarily be sold, mortgaged, or transferred while they retain their public character. Patrimonial property, by contrast, is property the local government owns in the same manner as a private individual, not dedicated to public use, and subject to the ordinary rules governing private property.
Why the distinction matters for lawsuits and transactions
The classification has real consequences. A person injured on a public-use property like a municipal road may have different remedies than one injured on a patrimonial asset. Patrimonial property can be sold, leased, or encumbered — public-use property generally cannot without conversion. If a local government fails to pay for services or damages, enforcing a judgment against it becomes complicated when the property you want to go after is public-use property. Courts treat these two categories very differently in enforcement proceedings.
How property shifts from one category to the other
A municipal plaza dedicated to public use does not become patrimonial property just because the city fences it off or lets it fall into disuse. Formal acts — legislative or executive — are typically required to reclassify property from public use to patrimonial. Conversely, when a local government purchases land for commercial or income-generating purposes without dedicating it to public use, it holds that property as patrimonial from the start. The character of the property depends on its designation and use, not merely on who holds title.
Practical implications for residents and claimants
If you are dealing with a dispute involving a local government's property — a lease, a right of way, a damage claim, or an encroachment — the first question to ask is whether the property is public-use or patrimonial. That classification will shape what remedies are available and how the local government can be held accountable. Determining the category is not always obvious from looking at the land; it requires checking the property's official classification, how it has been used, and whether any formal reclassification has occurred. A lawyer familiar with local government property law can assess the specific situation.
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.
- Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Bataan vs. Congressman Enrique T. Garcia, Jr., et al, G.R. No. 174964, October 5, 2016 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Republic of the Philippines vs. Pedro O. Enciso, G.R. No. 160145, November 11, 2005 — read the decision on LawPhil →