Short answer. Yes. Article 2172 sends a good-faith possessor of a mistakenly paid thing to Article 546, which entitles every possessor to reimbursement for necessary expenses, with a good-faith possessor also entitled to retain the thing until reimbursed and to a refund of useful expenses as well.
What the law says
The right of every possessor in good faith to reimbursement for necessary and useful expenses is governed by article 546.
Civil Code, Article 2172 — Reimbursement to a Possessor in Good Faith. Read the full provision →
What the law says
Necessary expenses shall be refunded to every possessor; but only the possessor in good faith may retain the thing until he has been reimbursed therefor.
Civil Code, Article 546 — Necessary and Useful Expenses. Read the full provision →
Article 2172 borrows the general possessor's rules
Article 2172 does not create a new, separate reimbursement rule for someone who received a mistaken payment; it plugs the situation into the Civil Code's general rules on possession. It states that the right of every possessor in good faith to reimbursement for necessary and useful expenses is governed by article 546. Because you held the thing in good faith after receiving it by mistake, your right to be reimbursed for the repairs you made is measured by the same standard that applies to any good-faith possessor of property belonging to someone else.
Necessary expenses are refunded, and you can hold the thing until paid
Article 546 sets out that standard directly: Necessary expenses shall be refunded to every possessor; but only the possessor in good faith may retain the thing until he has been reimbursed therefor. If the repairs you made were necessary, meaning they were needed to preserve the thing or keep it from being lost or damaged, you are entitled to be refunded for them. Being a good-faith possessor also gives you the right to keep possession of the thing until that reimbursement is actually paid, rather than being forced to return it first and chase payment afterward.
Useful expenses are treated a bit differently
Article 546 also addresses expenses that improved the thing without being strictly necessary to preserve it, refunding those only to a possessor in good faith, again with the same right of retention. For useful expenses specifically, the person who recovers the thing from you gets to choose between refunding the amount you actually spent, or instead paying you the increase in value the thing gained because of those improvements, whichever that person prefers rather than whichever is larger.
What this means for the repairs you made
If the repairs were necessary to keep the thing from deteriorating or being lost, you are entitled to a straightforward refund and can hold onto the thing until you are paid. If the repairs went further and simply improved or added value to the thing, you are still entitled to something, but the person reclaiming it can choose to pay either your actual cost or the resulting increase in value, whichever they decide.
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.
- Onesimo Agapito vs. Marilyn F. Agapito, G.R. No. 255157, July 4, 2022 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Henry L. Sia vs. Court of Appeals, et al, G.R. No. 108222, May 5, 1997 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Sulo sa Nayon, Inc. and/or Philippine Village Hotel, Inc. et al. vs. Nayong Filipino Foundation, G.R. No. 170923, January 20, 2009 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Republic of the Philippines vs. Heirs of Eriberto Ontiveros, G.R. No. 241507, December 7,2022 — read the decision on LawPhil →
Related provisions
- Civil Code, Article 2172 — Reimbursement to a Possessor in Good Faith
- Civil Code, Article 546 — Necessary and Useful Expenses