How to Evict a Tenant Who Will Not Leave

The Civil Code speaks of eviction through the court. Article 1673 begins: "The lessor may judicially eject the lessee for any of the following causes". "Judicially" means through a court case. This page does not cover what happens when a landlord padlocks the unit, removes belongings or cuts utilities, which are separate questions.

Article 1673 of the Civil Code lists four causes:

The fourth is when the tenant uses the property for a use or service not agreed that causes it to deteriorate.

Units covered by the Rent Control Act. For residential units covered by Republic Act No. 9653, Section 9 of that law lists the grounds for judicial ejectment, including:

• subleasing or taking in boarders or bedspacers without the written consent of the owner;
• arrears in rent for a total of three months;
• the owner's legitimate need to use the unit for himself or herself or an immediate family member, only after a lease for a definite period has expired, with formal notice three months in advance, and without leasing it to someone else for at least one year;
• necessary repairs of a unit under an existing order of condemnation; and
• expiration of the lease period.

Section 10 adds that a covered tenant cannot be ejected just because the unit was sold or mortgaged. Whether a unit is covered depends on its rent and location under the law and later government rules, which this page does not cover.

A demand to pay or comply, and to vacate. Rule 70, Section 2 of the Rules of Court says that, unless otherwise agreed, the landlord can file the case only after a demand "to pay or comply with the conditions of the lease and to vacate" is made on the tenant, and the tenant fails to comply:

• after 15 days in the case of land, or
• after 5 days in the case of buildings.

The demand can be made on the tenant, served as a written notice on the person found on the premises, or posted on the premises if no one is there.

Usually yes. Under Sections 408 and 412 of the Local Government Code, disputes between individuals who actually live in the same city or municipality generally go through barangay conciliation before a court case, with some exceptions. Rule 70, Section 12 says a case that required conciliation but shows no compliance "shall be dismissed without prejudice", and can be revived only after conciliation. See Do I need to go to the barangay first?

In the Municipal Trial Court, within one year. Rule 70, Section 1 allows a landlord against whom possession is unlawfully withheld after the right to possess has ended to file "at any time within one (1) year". Article 1147 of the Civil Code also sets one year for forcible entry and detainer.

In Spouses Valdez v. Court of Appeals (2006), the Supreme Court said unlawful detainer must be brought within one year "from the date of last demand". If more than one year has passed, Valdez says the case is no longer unlawful detainer but a different, ordinary civil action called accion publiciana.

It depends on how the occupant got in. Valdez explained that in forcible entry, the occupant's possession is illegal from the beginning, while in unlawful detainer, the possession was legal at first but became illegal when the right to possess expired or ended. A tenant who stops paying or stays after the lease ends is the classic unlawful detainer case.

Valdez also warned that a case based on tolerance must show that the tolerance was there "right from the start" of the possession. There, the complaint did not say how the occupants entered the land, and the case was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. See Forcible entry vs unlawful detainer and Unlawful detainer: meaning.

Rule 70, Section 19 says that if judgment is against the tenant, "execution shall issue immediately upon motion". The tenant can stop it only by perfecting an appeal, filing a sufficient supersedeas bond to cover rents, damages and costs up to the judgment, and depositing the rent due with the appellate court during the appeal.

Under Section 18, the judgment is conclusive only on possession. It does not decide who owns the land or building.

These are made-up examples to show how the rules work. They are not advice for any real case.

Tony rents an apartment to Mae month to month. Mae stops paying. Tony sends her a written demand to pay and vacate. An apartment is a building, so if Mae does not comply within five days, Tony may file an unlawful detainer case in the Municipal Trial Court (Rule 70, Section 2). Both live in the same city, so they go to the barangay first (Local Government Code, Section 412; Rule 70, Section 12). Tony files within one year from his last demand (Valdez). If the unit is under rent control, non-payment becomes a ground once arrears reach a total of three months (RA 9653, Section 9).

Lola Nena let a relative live in her house for free. Years later, she asks him in writing to leave, and he refuses. His stay was tolerated from the start, so this is unlawful detainer, and the one year runs from her last demand (Valdez).

The Reyes family is abroad. A stranger fences their lot and builds a shack without permission. That is not unlawful detainer, because the entry was illegal from the beginning. It is a question of forcible entry.

Talk to a lawyer before filing an ejectment case or when you receive one. The demand, the dates and how the occupant entered the property decide which case is correct, and a mistake can lead to dismissal. Court rules on the procedure for these cases are updated from time to time, and a lawyer can explain the current steps. If you cannot afford a lawyer, see Free legal help in the Philippines.