Short answer. Possibly yes. Article 1664 excuses the lessor only for a 'mere act of trespass,' which exists when the third person claims no right whatever. Once the intruder asserts some claim of right, such as ownership, a prior lease, or a lien, the disturbance is no longer mere trespass, and the lessor's warranty to maintain peaceful enjoyment can come into play.
What the law says
There is a mere act of trespass when the third person claims no right whatever.
Civil Code, Article 1664 — Trespass by a Third Person. Read the full provision →
What the law says
The lessor is not obliged to answer for a mere act of trespass which a third person may cause on the use of the thing leased; but the lessee shall have a direct action against the intruder.
Civil Code, Article 1664 — Trespass by a Third Person. Read the full provision →
Two Very Different Situations
Article 1664 draws a sharp line between an intruder who claims no right at all and one who asserts some legal claim to the property. Only the first situation is a "mere act of trespass," and only there is the lessor excused from responding; the lessee's remedy in that case is a direct action against the intruder himself, filed by the tenant in his own name without needing the landlord to join the suit or first give his authorization, since the disturbance never touched the lessor's own title or obligations under the contract.
When a Claim of Right Changes the Picture
If the third person instead claims ownership, an adverse lease, an easement, or some other legal interest, the disturbance is a legal disturbance rather than a mere act of trespass. That kind of interference implicates the lessor's obligation under Article 1654 to maintain the lessee in peaceful and adequate enjoyment of the property for the whole term of the lease, an obligation the lessor cannot escape simply by pointing to a stranger's involvement, since the source of the disturbance does not change what the lessor promised when the lease was signed.
What the Tenant Can Do
A tenant facing a claimant with an asserted right should notify the landlord promptly, consistent with the duty to report usurpations under Article 1663, and may look to the landlord to defend the peaceful enjoyment the lease promised, rather than relying solely on his own direct action against the intruder as he would for ordinary trespass. Keeping records of the claimant's assertions and the dates of any disturbance also helps establish later whether the case truly falls outside the mere-trespass exception.
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.
- G.Q. Garments, Inc. vs. Angel Miranda, et al, G.R. No. 161722, July 20, 2006 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Chua Tee Dee, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al, G.R. No. 135721, May 27, 2004 — read the decision on LawPhil →
Related provisions
- Civil Code, Article 1664 — Trespass by a Third Person
- Civil Code, Article 1654 — Obligations of the Lessor
- Civil Code, Article 1663 — Lessee's Duty to Notify