Short answer. Have it undone at the tenant's expense. Article 1168 provides that when the obligation consists in not doing and the obligor does what has been forbidden him, it shall also be undone at his expense. Violating a lease condition is also a ground for judicial ejectment.
What the law says
When the obligation consists in not doing, and the obligor does what has been forbidden him, it shall also be undone at his expense.
Civil Code, Article 1168 — Obligations Not to Do. Read the full provision →
Undoing at the tenant's expense
Article 1168 is the negative counterpart of an obligation to do: When the obligation consists in not doing, and the obligor does what has been forbidden him, it shall also be undone at his expense. A clause forbidding structures, partitions or extensions is exactly such an obligation, and the remedy is removal charged to the tenant, not merely damages measured in money. Note the practical restraint in that: it is a remedy the law gives, obtained through the courts, and a lessor who demolishes the structure himself over the tenant's objection turns a strong position into a disputed one.
Or end the lease instead
Article 1673 lets the lessor judicially eject the lessee for, among other causes, violation of any of the conditions agreed upon in the contract, and where the lessee devotes the thing leased to a use not stipulated which causes its deterioration. A prohibited structure sits squarely within the third ground. Article 1659 offers the alternative: where a party does not comply with his obligations, the aggrieved party may ask for rescission of the contract and indemnification for damages, or only damages, allowing the contract to remain in force. So you may keep the tenant and charge him, or end the lease — but choose, and say which in your demand.
Do not let it become an improvement claim
Delay is what costs landlords here. Article 1678 provides that where a lessee makes useful improvements in good faith, suitable to the use intended and without altering the form or substance of the property, the lessor at the end of the lease must pay half their value or let the lessee remove them. A structure built against an express prohibition is not made in good faith, and a landlord who objects promptly and in writing keeps it that way. Silence while the work goes up — or worse, acceptance of an increased rent for it — is what turns a breach into a claim against you.
The letter to write today
Photograph the structure with dates, then send a written demand quoting the clause that forbids it, requiring removal and restoration within a stated reasonable period, and reserving your right to have it undone at his expense and to claim damages. Say expressly that you do not consent to the works and are not treating them as improvements. Keep the lease, the turnover condition report or inventory, and every reply. If the tenant refuses, the same file supports either an action to have the structure removed or one for ejectment.
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.
- Equatorial Realty, et al. vs. Mayfair Theater, G.R. No. 106063, November 21, 1996 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Camarines Sur Teachers and Employees Association, Inc., represented by its President, Dr. Antonio A, G.R. No. 199666, October 7, 2019 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Eliseo Fajardo, Jr. and Marissa Fajardo vs. Freedom To Build, Inc, G.R. No. 134692, August 1, 2000 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Juan Perez, et al. vs. Court of Appeals & Luis Crisostomo, et al, G.R. No. 107737, October 1, 1999 — read the decision on LawPhil →
Related provisions
- Civil Code, Article 1168 — Obligations Not to Do
- Civil Code, Article 1659 — Remedies for Breach of Lease
- Civil Code, Article 1673 — Grounds for Judicial Ejectment
- Civil Code, Article 1678 — Useful Improvements by the Lessee