Article by: Angelica S. Garcia

In Sps. Agullo, et al. vs. Victa-Espinosa, (G.R. No. 269921, April 22, 2025), the Supreme Court clarified that accion publiciana was the correct remedy to recover possession of property. The Court emphasized that while this action is generally filed after one year from dispossession, it may still be filed earlier if the possession was not taken through force, intimidation, threat, strategy, or stealth.

The Supreme Court ruled that accion publiciana is proper when the issue is who has the better right to possess the property, regardless of ownership. On the other hand, accion reinvindicatoria is filed to recover both ownership and possession based on ownership.

The Court further clarified that the action was not premature since Espinosa merely sought possession and did not allege that the Agullo spouses contested her ownership. It also stressed that an accion publiciana may be filed within a year from dispossession if no force or similar means was used.

The ruling reiterated the distinctions between the remedies available to recover property and stressed that the correct action depends on the nature of the claim. Courts must carefully determine whether the case involves possession, ownership, or both before resolving the matter.

The SC concluded that Espinosa’s complaint was properly filed as an accion publiciana and thus ordered the Regional Trial Court to proceed with trial and decide the case on its merits.