Short answer. No. A tenant being ejected on a legal ground does not get the statutory lease period. Article 1675 grants the lessee the periods fixed in Articles 1682 and 1687 except in cases stated in article 1673 — the grounds for judicial ejectment.
What the law says
Except in cases stated in article 1673, the lessee shall have a right to make use of the periods established in articles 1682 and 1687.
Civil Code, Article 1675 — Lessee's Right to the Statutory Periods. Read the full provision →
The statutory periods, and their exception
When a lease has no fixed term, the Civil Code supplies one — measured by how the rent is paid or, for rural land, by the harvest. Article 1675 gives the lessee the right to make use of those statutory periods set in Articles 1682 and 1687. But it opens with a crucial condition: except in cases stated in article 1673. Article 1673 lists the grounds on which a lessor may judicially eject a tenant. Where the tenant is being removed for one of those grounds, Article 1675 withholds the benefit of the statutory period. The tenant in default cannot invoke the very period he would otherwise enjoy.
What counts as a ground for ejectment
Article 1673 allows judicial ejectment when the agreed or statutory period has expired, when the tenant fails to pay the stipulated rent, when he violates any condition of the contract, or when he devotes the property to an unstipulated use that causes its deterioration. A tenant who falls into any of these is in the position the exception targets. He is not being turned out arbitrarily but for a recognised cause, and the law sees no reason to reward that breach by extending to him the grace of a statutory lease period he would have had in the absence of a ground.
Why the exception makes sense
The statutory periods exist to give an implied, indefinite lease a workable length and to spare a blameless tenant an abrupt eviction. That protection is a fairness measure, not a shield for a defaulting occupant. If a tenant who stopped paying or broke the contract could still claim the full statutory period, the lessor's right to eject for cause would be hollow. Article 1675 keeps the two ideas in balance: honour the implied period for the ordinary tenant, but deny it to one whose own conduct supplies a legal ground for ejectment under Article 1673.
The courts' power over the term
Even where the statutory period applies, Article 1687 lets the courts fix a longer term in some situations — for instance, after a monthly tenant has occupied the premises for over a year. That judicial discretion, too, operates within the ordinary, non-default setting. A tenant being ejected for a ground under Article 1673 should not expect the court to extend his stay under these provisions. Understanding which situation you are in — an implied lease running its statutory course, or an ejectment for cause — determines whether the period is available at all.
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.
- Leonardo S. Umale (deceased), represented by Clarissa Victoria, et al. all surnamed Umale vs. ASB Realty Corp, G.R. No. 181126, June 15, 2011 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- LL and Company Development and Agro-Industrial Corporation vs. Huang Chao Chun and Yang Tung Fa, G.R. No. 142378, March 7, 2002 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- La Jolla, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, et al, G.R. No. 115851, June 20, 2001 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Jose L. Chua, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al, G.R. No. 109840, January 21, 1999 — read the decision on LawPhil →
Related provisions
- Civil Code, Article 1675 — Lessee's Right to the Statutory Periods
- Civil Code, Article 1673 — Grounds for Judicial Ejectment
- Civil Code, Article 1687 — Term of a Lease With No Fixed Period