The Supreme Court (SC) has reiterated that individuals must prove that they have prior possession of a property, and not ownership, in forcible entry cases.
In a 14-page decision, the SC First Division ordered the respondents to vacate a parcel of land in Davao City after finding that they had forcibly entered the property.
“The only issue in forcible entry cases is whether the claimant has proved, by preponderance of evidence, prior physical possession of the contested property,” the SC said.
“The question of ownership may only be provisionally resolved if it is raised by the parties and its resolution is essential to determine which party has the better right of possession,” it added.
According to the Court, for a forcible entry suit to prosper, the plaintiff must prove that they had prior physical possession of the property, they were deprived of possession either by force, intimidation, threat, strategy, or stealth, and that the action was filed within one year from the time the owners learned of the deprivation of the physical possession of the property.
The SC said the case stemmed from the complaint filed by an individual who said that the respondents illegally entered his property by destroying a steel gate and demolishing structures in October 2005.
The Municipal Trial Court in Cities (MTCC) and the Regional Trial Court (RTC) ruled in favor of the petitioner.
However, the Court of Appeals reversed the ruling, citing a previous unlawful detainer case where the petitioner had been ordered to vacate the property.
For its part, the SC reversed the appellate court’s decision and reinstated the ruling of the MTCC and RTC.
The decision, penned by Associate Justice Midas Marquez, was promulgated in July 2024 and made public in March 2025. —VAL, GMA Integrated News
