Short answer. Yes, in most cases. A co-owner has a right of legal redemption when another co-owner sells his share to a stranger, letting you step into the buyer's shoes on the same terms. But the right is short-lived: it must be exercised within thirty days of written notice from the seller.

What the law says

A co-owner of a thing may exercise the right of redemption in case the shares of all the other co-owners or of any of them, are sold to a third person.

Civil Code, Article 1620 — Co-Owner's Right of Legal Redemption. Read the full provision →

What the law says

The right of legal pre-emption or redemption shall not be exercised except within thirty days from the notice in writing by the prospective vendor, or by the vendor, as the case may be.

Civil Code, Article 1623 — Thirty-Day Period; Written Notice. Read the full provision →

The right exists because you did not choose your co-owner

Co-ownership is an involuntary intimacy. You share a thing with people you may not have picked, and every decision about it needs their cooperation. The law's answer, when one of them sells out to a stranger, is to let the remaining co-owners buy the stranger out rather than be forced into a relationship with him. Article 1620 puts it plainly: A co-owner of a thing may exercise the right of redemption in case the shares of all the other co-owners or of any of them, are sold to a third person. You are not asking the buyer's permission and you are not making an offer he may refuse. You are substituting yourself for him on the terms he already agreed to.

What you pay, and what happens if several of you want in

You pay what the buyer paid — the same price, the same terms. The article adds one protection against a seller and buyer who inflate the figure to price the co-owners out: if the price of the alienation is grossly excessive, the redemptioner pays only a reasonable one. That is a question of proof, not something you can simply assert. Where two or more co-owners want to redeem, they do so in proportion to the shares they already hold, so redemption preserves the existing balance between them instead of letting the quickest co-owner enlarge his position.

The thirty-day clock is the part people lose on

This is where the right is most often lost. Article 1623 allows redemption only within thirty days from the notice in writing by the prospective vendor, or by the vendor. Two points follow, and both cut in the co-owner's favour more often than people assume. The notice must be in writing, and it must come from the seller — learning about the sale through gossip, or even seeing the buyer move in, is not the notice the article means, so the clock may not have started at all. The same article also bars registration of the deed unless it carries the seller's affidavit that written notice was given. But once proper notice arrives, thirty days is thirty days, and it is not a period a court can extend for you.

What this right is not

It is not a power to undo the sale. The transaction between your co-owner and the buyer is valid; you are stepping into it, not cancelling it. It does not apply where the share was donated or inherited rather than sold, because redemption follows a transfer by onerous title. It does not give you a veto over a co-owner who simply wants out. And it is a different thing from the right of a seller who reserved a repurchase option in his own contract — that is conventional redemption, agreed between the parties, while this one is given by law whether the buyer likes it or not.

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.

Related provisions

Note. Statute text quoted on this page is reproduced from the official enactment and is linked to the full provision. The explanation around it is general legal information from Vivas & Nobles Law Office, not legal advice. Whether it applies to your situation depends on facts only a lawyer reviewing them can assess.