Accretion: the battle for soil deposits that form along the riverbanks and seashores

By Atty. Eduardo T. Reyes III

The recent crumbling of a decades-old condominium building just outside of Miami, Florida, USA, baffles structural engineers investigating the incident.  The structure used to sit nestled among other buildings facing the Atlantic Ocean; but when viewed from atop, the narrow strip of land where the fallen building used to stand looks like an outstretched arm from the mainland that gingerly ushers it to the open sea.

Archipelagic states like the Philippines are married to the waters that surround and intersperse their islands. With more than 7,000 islands and islets comprising the Philippine territory, its inhabitants are rarely aquaphobic.

Water, it has been said, is a source of life. Yet, too, it is also a source of property.

The movement of the tide and the ebb and flow of the water carries soil from the bed that in time may accumulate and even calcify along the banks. Interestingly, it is worth asking: who owns the new territory that is formed out of this?

The answer lies in the stark distinction between a “river” and a “sea” and their respective owners.

First, the Riparian owner. He/ she is “One who owns land on bank of river, or one who is owner of land along, bordering upon, bounded by, fronting upon, abutting or adjacent and contiguous to and in contact with river”. (p. 690, Black’s Law Dictionary, Abridged Fifth edition). 

            On the other hand, the owner of a piece of land that adjoins the sea is known as the  Littoral (littus) owner. “Littoral” means “Belonging to shore; as of sea and great lakes. Webst. Corresponding to riparian proprietors on a stream or small pond are littoral proprietors on a sea or lake. But riparian is also used co-extensively with littoral”. (p. 2037,Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, Third Revision).  

            The fundamental principle in Property law is that the owner of the principal also owns the accessory. And when this principle is applied to land, anything that is attached to land becomes its accessory. Necessarily, the owner of the land becomes entitled to all its accessories to include the soil deposits.

The phenomenon whereby sand or soil from the waters is carried to the banks or shores is known in law as “accretion”. It naturally increases the area of a tract of land that is adjacent to it.

In the case of Republic of the Philippines v. Ramon G. Asuncion, et al. (G.R. No. 200772) which recently came down on February 17, 2021, the requisites for accretion had been laid down as follows:

“Based on Article 457 of the Civil Code and as explained by jurisprudence, alluvial accretion has three requisites: first, the accretion must be gradual and imperceptible; second, the accretion must be made through the effects of the current of the water; and third, the land where accretion takes place must be adjacent to a riverbank.”   

But it must be emphasized that accretion under Article 457 only applies to rivers or creeks, not to the sea or ocean. Thus, the one entitled to the accreted portion is the riparian owner and not the littoral owner.

On this account, Republic v. Asuncion continues, to wit: 

         “From the principle of automatic ownership of alluvial accretion, it also follows that if the riparian owner applies for registration of the accretion, they need not prove the alienable and disposable status of the land, for it was never part of the public domain in the first place, being private, albeit unregistered, land.  However, in order to qualify under paragraph (3), the riparian owner must prove the fact of alluvial accretion. On the other hand, littoral accretions are considered inalienable lands of the public domain.  Moreover, since they are formed on seashores, they are considered foreshore lands, which may only be disposed of by lease.  

X x x 

         Consequently, the Asuncions can only claim the rights under Article 457 with respect to Psu-115369 and to Psu-115615, since these are the only lots which are adjacent to the north bank of the Wawang Dapdap River as shown on the 1999 Broad Map and the survey plans. Being located along the riverbank, these are the only areas which can be safely presumed to have been formed through the accretion received by the banks of the mother property. Likewise, the other parcels which are not located along the riverbank, or bordering the shoreline of Manila Bay, cannot be registered, since the source of the accretion from these areas cannot be established with certainty; and in accordance with Article 4 of the 1866 Law on Waters, 113 the Constitution, and our earlier findings, these must be presumed to be part of the public domain, either as foreshore lands or unclassified lands.” 

In sum therefore, a landowner whose property abuts a body of water needs to know the nature of the water which is his/ her neighbor. If it is sea water, then the soil deposits are owned by the State because the sea is public domain. All foreshores are owned by the State and although they may be leased, they cannot be sold to private persons. By contrast, owners of lands that are proximate to a river, may enjoy the accretion that will work in their favor for as long as it happens “naturally”.

The condominium building that collapsed in Florida, USA may have been erected too close to the sea. But experts are unsure if its proximity to the Atlantic Ocean is the reason why it had to succumb to the law of gravity.

On the opposite side of the spectrum, nature has its own way of rewarding those who allow it to take its course. When accretion occurs whereby the riparian owner does not perform any artificial acts to further his/ her benefit, nature hands out to him/ her the accreted portion like a bounty, not from the sea- but from the river.

(The author is the senior partner of ET Reyes III & Associates– a law firm based in Iloilo City. He is a litigation attorney, a law professor and a book author. His website is etriiilaw.com).