Can a Co-Owner Sell Property Without the Other Owners’ Consent?
Yes and no, and the distinction decides the case. Under Article 493 of the Civil Code, a co-owner has full ownership of his undivided share and may sell, assign or mortgage it without asking anybody. What he cannot do is bind the other co-owners. If he sells the whole property, the sale is not void – it simply transfers only his own share, and the buyer steps into his shoes as a co-owner. If he sells a specific, marked-out portion before any partition, the ground becomes far shakier, and the Supreme Court has taken more than one view of it.
Last materially reviewed: 11 September 2026.
Decision snapshot
| What the co-owner sold | Legal effect | What the others can do |
|---|---|---|
| His own undivided share | Valid. The buyer becomes a co-owner in his place | Exercise legal redemption within the period; or demand partition |
| The entire property, without the others’ consent | Not void. It transfers only the seller’s undivided share | Redeem, demand partition, and resist any attempt to deliver the whole |
| A specific portion, described by metes and bounds, before partition | Contested. One line of cases treats such a sale as void; another upholds it as to the seller’s aliquot share | Seek partition, and take legal advice before signing anything |
| Property still titled to a deceased parent | The heirs are co-owners of the estate; a selling heir conveys only his hereditary share | Settle the estate first, then partition |
| A share that is community or conjugal property of the seller and spouse | The Family Code adds a separate consent requirement | Raise the absence of spousal consent |
Key takeaways
- Co-ownership is ownership by ideal shares. Until partition, no co-owner owns any identified square metre – each owns a fraction of the whole.
- Article 493 lets a co-owner alienate his part freely, but “the effect of the alienation or mortgage, with respect to the co-owners, shall be limited to the portion which may be allotted to him in the division upon the termination of the co-ownership.”
- A sale of the whole by one co-owner is not a nullity. It is simply ineffective beyond the seller’s share.
- The other co-owners have a right of legal redemption when a share is sold to a stranger, exercisable within thirty days from written notice by the seller.
- No co-owner is obliged to stay in the co-ownership. Partition is available at any time and does not prescribe while the co-ownership is still recognised.
The governing rule
Article 493 of the Civil Code is the whole foundation. As the Supreme Court quoted it in Bailon-Casilao v. Court of Appeals: “Each co-owner shall have the full ownership of his part and of the [fruits] and benefits pertaining thereto, and he may therefore alienate assign or mortgage it … But the effect of the alienation or mortgage, with respect to the co-owners, shall be limited to the portion which may be allotted to him in the division upon the termination of the co-ownership.”
Two consequences follow, and both surprise people.
The seller needs nobody’s permission. A co-owner who wants out can sell his fraction to a stranger tomorrow. The others cannot veto it. They can only redeem it or, eventually, divide the property.
The buyer gets less than the deed says. In Bailon-Casilao the Court held that “a sale of the entire property by one co-owner without the consent of the other co-owners is not null and void. However, only the rights of the co-owner-seller are transferred, thereby making the buyer a co-owner of the property.” A deed that describes the whole lot therefore delivers a fraction, and the buyer joins the co-ownership rather than replacing it.
The harder case: selling a specific portion
Selling “the front 200 square metres along the road” is different from selling “my one-fourth share”. Before partition, no co-owner can point to a particular part of the land and call it his.
In Cabrera v. Ysaac (G.R. No. 166790, 19 November 2014), the Court held that “[u]nless all the co-owners have agreed to partition their property, none of them may sell a definite portion of the land,” and that “[a] contract of sale which purports to sell a specific or definite portion of unpartitioned land is null and void ab initio.”
One week later, in Torres v. Lapinid (G.R. No. 187987, 26 November 2014), a different Division wrote that “[e]ven assuming that the petitioners are correct in their allegation that the disposition in favor of Lapinid before partition was a concrete or definite portion, the validity of sale still prevails” – the buyer taking the seller’s aliquot share.
Both decisions are real and both are quoted above accurately. The honest statement of the law is therefore this: a sale of a definite portion before partition is legally exposed, it may be attacked as void, and at best it operates only on the seller’s undivided share. Anyone buying or selling in that posture should get the co-owners to agree to a partition first, or take specific legal advice rather than relying on a single quotable line.
What the other co-owners can do
1. Legal redemption
When a co-owner sells his share to a person who is not a co-owner, the remaining co-owners may redeem it – that is, buy it back at the price of the sale. Article 1623 sets the deadline and the trigger: “The right of legal pre-emption or redemption shall not be exercised except within thirty days from the notice in writing by the prospective vendor, or by the vendor, as the case may be. The deed of sale shall not be recorded in the Registry of Property, unless accompanied by an affidavit of the vendor that he has given written notice thereof to all possible redemptioners.”
The clock starts on written notice from the seller. Hearing about the sale from a neighbor, or even seeing the annotation on the title, is not the notice the article describes. Article 1623 also provides that “[t]he right of redemption of co-owners excludes that of adjoining owners.”
2. Partition
Article 494 provides that no co-owner shall be obliged to remain in the co-ownership and that each may demand partition at any time. The Supreme Court put the corollary plainly in Heirs of Feliciano Yambao v. Heirs of Hermogenes Yambao: “An action to demand partition among co-owners is imprescriptible, and each co-owner may demand at any time the partition of the common property.”
Partition ends the uncertainty for everybody, including the buyer, because it converts fractions into identified parcels. It can be done by agreement in a notarised deed of partition, or by court action where the parties cannot agree or where the property cannot be conveniently divided.
3. Resist delivery of more than the share
A buyer who paid for “the whole lot” sometimes arrives expecting to take over the whole lot. He cannot. He holds an undivided share, and his physical possession is subject to the same Article 486 limits that bind every co-owner. If he fences off the property or excludes the others, the remaining co-owners have their own remedies – see Can one co-owner exclusively occupy or rent out shared property?
When prescription can run against a co-owner
Co-owners are not usually at risk of losing their shares through the passage of time, because possession by one co-owner is presumed to be for the benefit of all. That protection ends only on a valid repudiation. In Heirs of Yambao the Court listed the requisites: “(1) that he has performed unequivocal acts of repudiation amounting to an ouster of the cestui que trust or other co-owners; (2) that such positive acts of repudiation have been made known to the cestui que trust or other co-owners; and (3) that the evidence thereon must be clear and convincing.”
Quiet exclusive occupation, paying the taxes alone, or even declaring the property for tax purposes in one name, will not by itself satisfy that test. Securing a title in one’s own name and refusing the others openly is a different matter, which is why heirs should check the current state of the title rather than assume nothing has changed.
Inherited property: the usual version of this problem
Most co-ownership in the Philippines is created by death rather than by contract. From the moment a parent dies, the heirs own the estate in common. Until the estate is settled and partitioned, each heir holds an undivided hereditary share – and an heir who sells conveys exactly that, no matter what the deed says about the land.
The orderly sequence is: settle the estate, pay the estate tax and secure the BIR electronic Certificate Authorizing Registration, register the settlement, then partition or sell. Selling first and settling later is how families end up with a buyer, an unpaid estate tax, a title still in a grandparent’s name, and a case.
Where the seller is married and the share forms part of the absolute community or the conjugal partnership, the Family Code imposes a separate requirement of spousal consent. That question belongs to our sister site – see FamilyCode.ph, which covers property relations between spouses.
Documents to gather
| Document | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| Certified true copy of the title | Shows who is registered, and whether the sale or an adverse claim has been annotated |
| The deed of sale in question | Shows what was actually sold – a fraction, the whole, or a described portion |
| Extrajudicial settlement or court order in the estate | Establishes who the co-owners are and in what shares |
| Death certificate of the registered owner | Fixes the date the co-ownership among heirs began |
| Written notice of the sale, if any | Starts the thirty-day redemption period under Article 1623 |
| Tax declaration and real property tax receipts | Show who has been possessing and paying, which matters in a partition accounting |
Step by step: what to do next
- Get the certified true copy of the title today. The annotations tell you whether a sale has been registered and when.
- Read the deed carefully. Whether it sold a share, the whole, or a described portion changes the entire analysis.
- Check whether you ever received written notice from the selling co-owner. If not, the redemption period may not have started.
- Decide between redemption and partition. Redemption keeps the stranger out but requires paying the price. Partition ends the co-ownership for everyone.
- Consider an adverse claim or notice of lis pendens with the Registry of Deeds where a case is coming, so later buyers cannot claim good faith.
- Go through the barangay where required before filing, and keep the certification.
- Take the documents to a lawyer or the Public Attorney’s Office before the thirty-day window or any other deadline closes.
Frequently asked questions
My brother sold our inherited land without telling us. Is the sale void?
Not void, in the usual case. Following Bailon-Casilao, the sale transfers his undivided share and the buyer becomes your co-owner. Your practical options are redemption within the period, and partition.
Can the buyer take possession of the whole property?
No. He acquired a fraction and is bound by Article 486 like any other co-owner: he may use the common property according to its purpose, but not in a way that injures the co-ownership or prevents the others from using it.
We were never given written notice. Have we lost the right to redeem?
Article 1623 counts the thirty days from written notice given by the seller. Where no such notice was given, the position is that the period has not begun to run – but do not treat that as a reason to wait. Act as soon as you learn of the sale, and preserve evidence of when and how you learned of it.
Can a co-owner mortgage his share?
Yes. Article 493 covers mortgage in the same breath as sale, with the same limitation: the mortgage attaches to whatever the mortgagor is eventually allotted on partition. Banks are usually unwilling to accept such collateral for precisely that reason.
Can we stop a co-owner from selling at all?
No. There is no veto over another co-owner’s share. What you can do is buy the share yourself before a stranger does, redeem it after the sale, or bring the co-ownership to an end by partition.
Related guides
- Can one co-owner exclusively occupy or rent out shared property?
- How to verify a land title before buying property
- Land title vs tax declaration: what proves ownership?
- All guides on property and ownership
Sources
- Civil Code of the Philippines (Republic Act No. 386), Articles 486, 493, 494, 1620 and 1623
- Bailon-Casilao v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-78178 (15 April 1988)
- Cabrera v. Ysaac, G.R. No. 166790 (19 November 2014)
- Torres v. Lapinid, G.R. No. 187987 (26 November 2014)
- Heirs of Feliciano Yambao v. Heirs of Hermogenes Yambao, G.R. No. 194260 (13 April 2016)
- Baltazar v. Miguel, G.R. No. 239859 (28 June 2021), quoting Article 1623
This guide is general legal information, not legal advice. Co-ownership disputes turn on the deeds, the settlement of the estate, the shares involved and the dates. CivilLaw.PH is an independent publication and is not a government agency, a court, a registry or a law firm. For advice on your own situation, consult a Philippine lawyer or the Public Attorney’s Office.
