Short answer. Yes. Each co-owner has a right to compel the others to contribute to the taxes and to the expenses of preserving the property. The one who will not pay has one way out, and it is expensive: renouncing enough of his undivided share to cover what he owes.
What the law says
Each co-owner shall have a right to compel the other co-owners to contribute to the expenses of preservation of the thing or right owned in common and to the taxes.
Civil Code, Article 488 — Contribution to Expenses and Taxes. Read the full provision →
What the law says
Any one of the latter may exempt himself from this obligation by renouncing so much of his undivided interest as may be equivalent to his share of the expenses and taxes.
Civil Code, Article 488 — Contribution to Expenses and Taxes. Read the full provision →
The right to compel is in the text
Article 488 gives every co-owner a right to compel the other co-owners to contribute to the expenses of preservation of the thing or right owned in common and to the taxes. So the sibling who has been paying the assessments alone for years is not a volunteer, and the ones who did not pay are not merely ungrateful — they are under an obligation the Code recognises. The share each owes follows his interest in the property, so a person with a quarter share owes a quarter, whether or not he lives there and whether or not he wanted the expense incurred.
Preservation, not improvement
The article covers what keeps the property in being: the taxes, a roof repair that stops the rain coming in, a retaining wall that stops the soil moving, the fees needed to keep a title clean. It does not cover what one co-owner decided would be nice. A new kitchen, a second storey or a landscaped garden is an improvement, and the person who spends on those without the others' agreement cannot present the bill afterwards as though it were a tax. Before spending, the sensible course is to say in writing what the work is and why it cannot wait.
The escape hatch, and why it rarely helps
A co-owner may exempt himself from this obligation by renouncing so much of his undivided interest as may be equivalent to his share of the expenses and taxes. It is a real option, but it is a sale of part of his ownership at the price of a debt he did not want to pay, and his interest shrinks each time he uses it. The Code adds that no such waiver may be made if it is prejudicial to the co-ownership, so it cannot be used to dump a ruinous property on the others and walk away clean.
Build the record before you make the demand
Claims of this kind are won on receipts. Keep the tax declarations and official receipts in your own name, the contractor's quotations and invoices, and photographs of what the repair was for. Then make the demand in writing, with the figures broken down by share, and keep proof it was sent — a co-owner who has never been asked can plausibly say so. If the arrears are large or the co-owners are scattered, this is usually the moment to consider partition as well, since a property nobody will pay for is rarely one the family can keep sharing.
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.
- Heirs of Jose Reyes, jr. namely; Magdalena C. reyes, et al. vs. Amanda S. Reyes, et al, G.R. No. 158377, August 13, 2010 — read the decision on LawPhil →