Short answer. As a rule, yes. The Code says the thing itself shall be restored even though it is found with a third person who acquired it lawfully, leaving that buyer to pursue whoever sold it to him. There is a narrow exception where the law bars recovery.
What the law says
The thing itself shall be restored, even though it be found in the possession of a third person who has acquired it by lawful means, saving to the latter his action against the proper person who may be liable to him.
Revised Penal Code, Article 105 — Restitution Of The Thing. Read the full provision →
What the law says
This provision is not applicable in cases in which the thing has been acquired by the third person in the manner and under the requirements which, by law, bar an action for its recovery.
Revised Penal Code, Article 105 — Restitution Of The Thing. Read the full provision →
An honest buyer is still holding your thing
The rule is set out without hedging: the thing itself shall be restored, even though it be found in the possession of a third person who has acquired it by lawful means, saving to the latter his action against the proper person who may be liable to him. So the buyer's innocence does not defeat the owner's claim to the thing. What it gives him instead is a claim of his own, against the person who sold it to him. The law chooses which of two blameless people bears the loss of the seller's dishonesty, and it does not choose the owner.
The exception, and why it is not a small one
The article carries its own limit: this provision is not applicable in cases in which the thing has been acquired by the third person in the manner and under the requirements which, by law, bar an action for its recovery. That sends you outside the Code, to the rules that in defined circumstances protect a purchaser — among them the effect of long possession, and the special position of certain purchases made publicly or in the ordinary course of trade. Whether the buyer's situation falls inside one of those rules is often the entire dispute, and it depends on exactly how and where he bought.
Recovery is ordered in the case, not by self-help
Restitution under this article is something a court orders as part of the civil liability arising from the felony. It is not a licence to take the thing back yourself, and doing so can create a fresh problem for the person who does it. Nor does it depend on the buyer being charged with anything; he is not accused of an offence by being ordered to give up the item. If the thing has been seized as evidence, its release has its own process, and asking the court through counsel is the route.
What decides it in your case
Two sets of facts matter, and they are usually in different hands. Yours: proof the thing is the one taken from you — serial numbers, receipts, registration papers, photographs with identifying marks. His: where, when and from whom he bought it, at what price, and what documents he was given. That second set is what the exception turns on, so a buyer who cannot account for his purchase is in a weaker position than one who can. Take both, together with the criminal case number, to a lawyer before making demands directly.
Related provisions
- Revised Penal Code, Article 104 — What Civil Liability Includes
- Revised Penal Code, Article 105 — Restitution Of The Thing