Apedia

Boboy Improvements Property Anselmo Good Builder Lessee Vacate

Front
IV.
Anselmo is the registered owner of a land and a house that his friend Boboy occupied for a nominal rental and on the condition that Boboy would vacate the property on demand. With Anselmo's knowledge, Boboy introduced renovations consisting of an additional bedroom, a covered veranda, and a concrete block fence, at his own expense. 
Subsequently, Anselmo needed the property as his residence and thus asked Boboy to vacate and tum it over to him. Boboy, despite an extension, failed to vacate the property, forcing Anselmo to send him a written demand to vacate.
In his own written reply, Boboy signified that he was ready to leave but Anselmo must first reimburse him the value of the improvements he introduced on the property as he is a builder in good faith. Anselmo refused, insisting that Boboy cannot ask for reimbursement as he is a mere lessee. 
Boboy responded by removing the improvements and leaving the building in its original state.
(A) should be  (4%) Resolve Boboy's claim that as a builder in good faith, he reimbursed the value of the improvements he introduced.
(B) Can Boboy be held liable for damages for removmg the improvements over Anselmo's objection? (4%)
Back
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Boboy's claim that he is a builder in good faith has no legal basis.  A builder in good faith is someone who occupies the property in  the concept of an owner.  The provisions on builder-planter-sower believe themselves to be owners of the land, or at least, to have a claim of title thereto.  
As Boboy is a lessee of the property, even if he was paying nominal rental, Article 1678 Civil Code, is applicable.  Under this provision, if the lessee makes, in good faith, useful improvements which are suitable to the use for which the lease is intended, without altering the form or substance of the property leased, the lessor upon the termination of the lease shall pay the lessee one-half of the value of the improvements at that time.  Should the lessor refuse to reimburse said amount,  the lessee may remove the improvements, even though the principal thing may suffer damage thereby.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No.  Bobby cannot be held liable for damages.
The lessor, Anselmo, refused to reimburse one-half of the value of the improvements, so the lessee, Boboy, may remove the same, even though the principal thing may suffer damage thereby.  If in removing the useful improvements Boboy cause more impairment on the property leased than is necessary he will be liable for damages. (Art. 1678 Civil Code).

Tags: 2013, bar

Learn with these flashcards. Click next, previous, or up to navigate to more flashcards for this subject.

Next card: Donation deed inter mortis jennifer effect causa donor

Previous card: Sergio sale agreement contract june price marcelo option

Up to card list: CIVIL LAW