Short answer. Yes. Civil Code Article 451 entitles you, as landowner, to damages from a builder, planter or sower who acted in bad faith. That right stands on top of whatever the two preceding articles already give you over the improvement itself — the damages claim does not replace or substitute for that separate remedy.
What the law says
In the cases of the two preceding articles, the landowner is entitled to damages from the builder, planter or sower.
Civil Code, Article 451 — Landowner's Right to Damages. Read the full provision →
What Article 451 actually adds
Article 451 is short and does one specific job: in the cases of the two preceding articles, the landowner is entitled to damages from the builder, planter or sower. Those two preceding articles fix what happens to the improvement itself when someone builds, plants or sows on your land in bad faith. This article does not repeat that; it adds a further, separate entitlement to damages from the person who acted in bad faith, on top of whatever those other provisions already give you.
Why "in the cases of" matters
The damages right in Article 451 is tied specifically to the situations the two preceding articles cover — it is not a freestanding damages rule for every building dispute. What this article settles, on its own wording, is only that damages are owed in that particular scenario; it is not the place to look for what becomes of the structure, planting or crop itself, since that outcome is fixed by the provisions this article expressly refers back to rather than restates here.
A right that runs alongside, not instead of
Because the article frames this as the landowner being "entitled to damages" rather than as a choice between remedies, nothing in the text suggests you must give up whatever you are owed regarding the improvement itself in order to also claim damages. The two run together: whatever happens to the structure, planting or crop under the preceding articles, this article layers a distinct damages claim on top of it, compensating you for the harm the bad-faith conduct caused you specifically.
What a damages claim like this needs
A court awarding damages needs to see what the bad-faith building, planting or sowing actually cost you — lost use of the land while it was occupied, deterioration to the property, expenses the situation forced on you, or income you can show you missed. Keep whatever record you have from before construction began, note when you first learned of it and what you did in response, and bring that timeline, together with your title, to a lawyer alongside the question of what becomes of the improvement itself.
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.
- Florencia H. Duenas And Daphne Duenas-Montefalcon vs. Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company and Elvira Ong Chan; Af Realty Development, Inc. and Zenaida R. Ranullo; Adelaida T. Bernal; and Inocencio Domingo and Penelope Ison of the Register of Deeds of Makati City, G.R. No. 209463, November 29,2022 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- The City of Valenzuela, represented herein by its duly elected mayor, Hon. Rexlon T, G.R. No. 236900, April 28, 2021 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Princess Rachel Development Corporation and Boracay Enclave Corporation vs. Hillview Marketing Corporation, Stefanie Dornau, G.R. No. 222482, June 2, 2020 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Pen Development Corporation and Las Brisas Resort Corporation vs. Martinez Leyba, Inc, G.R. No. 211845, August 9, 2017 — read the decision on LawPhil →