(Philippine legal context; general information, not legal advice. Laws and rules change, and local practice can vary by court.)

1) What “eviction” means in Philippine law

In the Philippines, “eviction” is usually a court-driven process to recover physical possession of property. For typical landlord–tenant situations, the main remedies are:

Ejectment cases (summary procedure) under Rule 70 of the Rules of Court:
- Unlawful Detainer (legal at first, later becomes illegal)
- Forcible Entry (illegal from the start because entry was by force/intimidation/threat/strategy/stealth)
If the dispute is no longer within the strict ejectment scope (especially due to time), possession may be sought via:
- Accion Publiciana (recovery of possession when dispossession lasted more than 1 year)
- Accion Reivindicatoria (recovery of ownership with possession as a consequence)

For Manila, the case is generally filed in the Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) of the city where the property is located.

2) Core laws and rules you’ll keep seeing

A. Rules and statutes commonly involved

Rules of Court, Rule 70 – Forcible entry and unlawful detainer
Revised Rules on Summary Procedure – Governs many ejectment cases (faster timelines; limited pleadings)
Civil Code of the Philippines – Lease and obligations (e.g., rights and duties of lessor/lessee, rescission for breach)
Local Government Code (Katarungang Pambarangay) – Barangay conciliation requirements in many disputes between residents
Rent control law (popularly known as the Rent Control Act, historically R.A. 9653, with periodic extensions/amendments) – Can restrict rent increases and limit grounds for ejectment for covered units
R.A. 7279 (Urban Development and Housing Act / UDHA) – Special safeguards for eviction/demolition involving underprivileged/homeless or informal settler families in certain contexts

B. Why “Rent Control” and “UDHA” matter

They can change:

what grounds are allowed (especially for low-rent residential units),
what notices and safeguards are required, and
whether relocation/consultation rules apply (more common in informal-settler/demolition scenarios).

3) Identify your situation first (this dictates the correct case)

A. Unlawful Detainer (most landlord–tenant evictions)

You use Unlawful Detainer when the tenant’s possession started lawfully, then became unlawful because of, for example:

Nonpayment of rent
Expiration of lease term
Violation of lease terms (e.g., illegal sublease, prohibited use, unauthorized occupants, damage, nuisance)
Refusal to vacate after a valid termination notice
Other grounds recognized by the contract and applicable law, subject to rent control limits (if covered)

Key feature: there is typically a prior demand to pay/comply and vacate.

B. Forcible Entry

You use Forcible Entry when the occupant took possession from the beginning by:

force, intimidation, threat, strategy, or stealth.

Key feature: the 1-year clock generally runs from dispossession (or from discovery, in “stealth” cases, as argued in many disputes).

C. When you can’t use ejectment (Rule 70) anymore

If the dispossession or unlawful withholding has lasted more than 1 year (as the law interprets under the facts), courts may require:

Accion Publiciana (still about possession, but not summary ejectment), usually filed in the RTC depending on circumstances.

4) The “1-year rule” (crucial)

Ejectment is designed to be quick and depends on filing within strict time frames:

Forcible Entry: generally within 1 year from dispossession (with nuance in stealth cases).
Unlawful Detainer: generally within 1 year from the last demand to vacate (or from the date possession became unlawful, depending on how the case is pleaded and the facts).

Because courts look closely at dates (lease end date, demand letter date, last payment date, date of refusal), documenting and choosing the correct date anchor is one of the most important parts of a lawful eviction.

5) Barangay conciliation (Katarungang Pambarangay): when it’s required

Before filing in court, many disputes must go through barangay conciliation (lupon) and obtain a Certificate to File Action.

Generally required when:

parties are individuals and are residents of the same city/municipality, often within coverage rules of the barangay justice system, and
the case is not within recognized exceptions.

Often not required / may be excepted when:

a party is not a resident of the same city/municipality,
a party is a juridical entity (e.g., a corporation) or other circumstances where barangay conciliation is not applicable under rules and jurisprudence,
urgent legal action is necessary under exceptions,
the dispute falls within other excluded categories.

Practical point: If conciliation is required and skipped, the case can be dismissed or delayed for being premature.

6) Step-by-step eviction process (typical Manila landlord–tenant case)

Below is the common path for Unlawful Detainer based on nonpayment/expiration/violation.

Step 1: Review the lease and rent regime

Collect and check:

Written lease contract (or proof of oral lease and terms)
Proof of ownership/authority to lease (title, tax declaration, SPA if agent)
Rent ledger and receipts
Utility bills (sometimes relevant to possession/use)
Photos/inspection reports (if damage/violation claimed)

Also determine whether rent control potentially applies (usually based on monthly rent threshold and residential classification, which have varied by legislative extension/amendment).

Step 2: Serve a proper written demand

For unlawful detainer, the landlord typically serves a demand letter:

Demand to pay unpaid rent and/or comply with lease terms, AND
Demand to vacate if not cured within the demanded period

Common delivery methods:

personal service with receiving copy signed,
registered mail with proof, and/or
other provable service methods.

Why it matters: Demand is often treated as a jurisdictional or essential element in unlawful detainer.

Step 3: Barangay conciliation (if applicable)

File a complaint at the barangay. If settlement fails, secure the Certificate to File Action.

Step 4: File the ejectment case in the proper court

In Manila, ejectment cases are typically filed with the MeTC with jurisdiction over the property’s location.

The complaint usually includes:

allegations establishing unlawful withholding (or forcible entry facts),
dates showing the case is within the 1-year period,
the demand and refusal,
prayer for:
- restitution of premises,
- unpaid rent/arrears,
- reasonable compensation for use/occupation,
- damages (as provable),
- attorney’s fees and costs (when justified).

Step 5: Summons and Answer (fast timelines)

Ejectment is summary in nature. Common features:

The defendant (tenant) is served summons.
The tenant must file an Answer within the period required by the applicable procedure (often shorter than ordinary civil actions).

Late or missing answer can risk judgment based on the plaintiff’s evidence.

Step 6: Preliminary conference / mediation-type setting

Courts typically set:

preliminary conference to mark issues, attempt settlement, and streamline evidence.

In summary procedure, courts often require:

submission of position papers/affidavits and documentary evidence instead of lengthy trials.

Step 7: Decision

The court issues a decision either:

ordering the tenant to vacate and pay amounts due, or
dismissing/denying the eviction if the landlord fails to prove required elements (or if defenses apply).

Step 8: Execution (this is where many evictions actually happen)

A key feature of ejectment judgments: they are often immediately executory, even if appealed—unless the tenant takes steps recognized by rules to stay execution.

Common stay mechanism (tenant side):

file a timely appeal, and
post a supersedeas bond, and
make periodic deposits of rent or reasonable compensation during appeal as required.

If the tenant does not comply with the requirements to stay execution, the landlord can seek a writ of execution, enforced by the sheriff, potentially with police assistance for peacekeeping.

Step 9: Appeal path (general)

Typical ladder:

MeTC decision → appeal to RTC (as appellate court) within the period allowed by rules. Further review may be possible in higher courts depending on issues and procedures, but ejectment is designed to be expeditious and increasingly constrained as it goes up.

7) What landlords must not do (self-help eviction risks)

Even if a tenant is clearly in arrears, landlords generally should not:

change locks without due process,
remove tenant belongings without lawful authority,
shut off utilities as coercion,
harass or threaten the tenant.

These acts can trigger:

civil liability for damages,
potential criminal exposure depending on conduct (e.g., threats, coercion, trespass, unjust vexation-type theories),
adverse court findings that undermine the eviction case.

The lawful route is to document, demand, file, and execute through court process.

8) Key legal elements the landlord must prove (unlawful detainer)

A landlord typically must show:

The tenant initially had lawful possession (lease or tolerance).
Possession became unlawful due to:
- nonpayment,
- lease expiration,
- violation of lease,
- valid termination.
A proper demand to pay/comply and vacate was made (commonly required).
The tenant refused/failed to comply.
The case was filed within the proper time limit (often the 1-year framework).

9) Common tenant defenses (and how they operate)

Tenants commonly raise:

No valid demand (improper service, defective content, or absent demand)
Rent was paid / incorrect accounting
Landlord breached obligations (e.g., failure to maintain premises, unlawful acts)
Wrong remedy (should be accion publiciana, not ejectment, due to time or nature)
Lack of authority (plaintiff not the owner or not authorized)
Rent control coverage (grounds for ejectment restricted; rent increases invalid)
Jurisdictional issues (wrong venue, missing barangay certificate when required)
Issues intertwined with ownership Note: In ejectment, courts focus on possession, but can provisionally examine ownership only to resolve possession—without finally deciding ownership.

10) Rent Control considerations (when residential rent is within covered thresholds)

When rent control applies (depending on the law in force and the rent amount), it commonly affects:

A. Limits on rent increases

Caps and allowable rates (which can vary by law/extension).

B. Restrictions on ejectment grounds

Under rent control regimes, eviction for covered units is often limited to enumerated grounds such as:

nonpayment of rent,
legitimate need of the owner/lessor to repossess for personal use (often with conditions),
need for major repairs requiring vacancy,
expiration of lease in certain regulated contexts,
other specific grounds provided by the controlling rent law.

C. Anti-harassment policy

Rent control laws commonly discourage landlord harassment designed to force the tenant out indirectly.

Practical effect: For covered units, landlords should be especially careful that the ground invoked is clearly allowed and well documented.

11) UDHA and “informal settler” situations (eviction/demolition safeguards)

Not all occupants are “tenants” under a lease. If the situation involves informal settler families or demolition-type evictions, R.A. 7279 (UDHA) can impose additional safeguards such as:

notice requirements,
consultation,
presence/coordination with local officials,
restrictions on eviction during certain periods or without proper relocation planning (in qualifying cases),
and requirements that eviction/demolition be done humanely and lawfully.

Important distinction: A standard lease-based eviction is usually a Rule 70 matter; a demolition/clearing involving informal settlers can trigger UDHA compliance issues on top of needing proper legal authority (often including a court order).

12) Money issues: arrears, deposits, and damages

A. Unpaid rent and “reasonable compensation”

In unlawful detainer, landlords often claim:

unpaid rent arrears,
reasonable compensation for use and occupation from the time rent became due until the tenant vacates,
interest (if justified),
attorney’s fees and costs (if allowed by contract or justified by circumstances).

B. Security deposit and advance rent

Common patterns:

leases provide for advance and deposit (often one or two months).
deposits are generally meant to secure performance and cover damage/unpaid obligations, subject to accounting and lease terms.

Disputes over deposits are often litigated alongside possession or separately, depending on pleading and proof.

13) Practical documentation checklist (what wins or loses many cases)

For landlords

Lease contract (and renewals/extensions)
Proof of rent obligations and arrears (ledger + receipts)
Copy of demand letter + proof of service
Barangay Certificate to File Action (if required)
Proof of ownership/authority to sue
Photos/inspection reports (if violation/damage)
Communications showing refusal to vacate

For tenants

Receipts, bank transfers, proof of payment
Messages/emails acknowledging payment arrangements
Proof of defects/repairs requested; photos and written notices
Proof of improper demand/service
Proof that rent control rules were violated (if applicable)
Proof of deposits/advance and agreed offsets (if any)

14) Typical timeline reality (high-level)

While the law aims for speed in ejectment, real-world timing can vary based on:

service of summons,
court calendars and resets,
party tactics (motions, postponements where allowed),
barangay conciliation delays,
appeal and stay of execution mechanics,
sheriff scheduling.

The key procedural “gates” are demand → (barangay, if required) → filing → judgment → execution (or appeal with conditions).

15) Summary: the lawful eviction roadmap in Manila

Classify the case correctly (unlawful detainer vs forcible entry vs other actions).
Check rent control/UDHA overlays if potentially applicable.
Serve a proper written demand (especially for unlawful detainer).
Undergo barangay conciliation if required and secure the certificate.
File in the MeTC with complete allegations and documents.
Litigate under summary procedure (position papers/affidavits).
Obtain judgment and pursue execution through the sheriff.
If appealed, understand immediate execution principles and the tenant’s bond/deposit requirements that may stay enforcement.