I. Overview

Evicting a live-in partner in the Philippines is not as simple as telling them to leave or changing the locks. Even if you own or lease the property in your name alone, you generally cannot lawfully expel someone by force or intimidation. Doing so can expose you to civil liability (damages) and even criminal charges (e.g., grave coercion).

Eviction of a live-in partner sits at the intersection of:

Property law (ownership, lease, co-ownership)
Family law (live-in relationships, children, support)
Procedural law (ejectment cases under the Rules of Court)
Special laws such as the Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act (RA 9262)

This article explains the general legal framework and process, with emphasis on live-in partners who are not legally married to each other.

Important: This is general legal information, not a substitute for advice from a lawyer who can review your specific facts and documents.

II. Legal Status of Live-In Relationships

1. “Live-in” or common-law partner

In Philippine law, a “live-in” or “common-law” partner usually refers to unmarried couples living together as husband and wife, either:

Both are free to marry (no existing marriage), or
One or both are not free to marry (e.g., still legally married to someone else, or other legal impediment).

The law mainly addresses these relationships through property rules, not through a full “common-law marriage” status:

Article 147 of the Family Code: applies when both parties are not disqualified to marry. Properties acquired during union are generally co-owned in proportion to contributions, presumed equal in the absence of proof.
Article 148 of the Family Code: applies to unions where one or both are disqualified to marry (e.g., an existing valid marriage). Co-ownership rules are stricter; only properties acquired through actual joint contributions are co-owned.

These rules affect who owns the house, or who has a share in it, which is crucial for eviction disputes.

III. Who Has the Right to Possess the Home?

Before even thinking about “eviction,” you have to determine who legally controls the premises. The legal remedies differ depending on the situation.

1. Property solely owned by one partner

Scenario: The house, condo, or lot is titled to one partner only (e.g. TCT/CCT under one name), or was inherited, or acquired before the relationship.

As a general principle, the owner has the right to possess and exclude others.
However, if the non-owner partner has been staying there with the owner’s consent, you must treat them as an intruder no longer welcome only after a clear demand to vacate and after they refuse.
Even then, you cannot use physical force or harassment; the remedy is through an ejectment case (unlawful detainer) in court.

If the other partner invested money in improvements (e.g., renovations, new room, major repairs), this can give rise to:

A claim for reimbursement or
A claim that the property (or a portion of it) is co-owned, depending on circumstances and evidence.

That doesn’t automatically bar eviction, but it complicates the case and may require a separate co-ownership or partition case.

2. Co-owned or conjugal-style property

Scenario: The property is arguably co-owned because:

It was bought during the live-in relationship with contributions from both partners (Art. 147 or 148), or
Both are literally named as buyers in the Deed of Sale/Title, or
One is titled owner but the other can prove substantial contribution.

If the property is truly co-owned, then:

Each co-owner has a right to possess the entire property, subject to equal rights of the other co-owner.
One co-owner cannot simply evict the other through ejectment based purely on co-ownership.
The usual remedy is partition or liquidation of co-ownership in court, where the court may order sale and division of proceeds, or physical partition if feasible.

In practice, some still try ejectment; courts then examine whether there is co-ownership. If co-ownership exists, a pure possession case may be dismissed or converted, and the matter becomes more complex and lengthy.

3. Leased property (rented apartment/condo/house)

Scenario: Only one partner is the lessee/tenant under a contract of lease.

The lessee has the right to control who can occupy the unit; the live-in partner is, in effect, an occupant by permission.
If the relationship ends, the lessee is usually the one who decides whether the ex-partner may stay.
However, if the other partner has also been paying rent, or is recognized by the landlord, they may claim some rights or at least equitable considerations.

Typically:

The lessee (or landlord, at lessee’s request) may initiate an unlawful detainer case to remove the ex-partner who refuses to vacate after demand.
The landlord might also opt to terminate the lease and file ejectment against everyone in the unit (including both partners) if the situation violates house rules or the lease.

4. Living in the house of parents or relatives

Scenario: The couple lives in the house of one partner’s parents or relatives.

The parents/relatives as owners are the ones with the legal right to demand that a live-in partner move out.
The child or relative who brought the partner in may also be authorized by the owner to ask the partner to leave; but strictly speaking, the case is stronger when the actual owner(s) are involved as parties.

In disputes like this, it is usually the parents/owners who file the barangay complaint and/or ejectment case.

IV. Why You Should Not “Self-Evict” a Live-In Partner

Common “DIY eviction” tactics include:

Changing the locks while the partner is away
Throwing their belongings out of the house
Blocking their entry physically
Threatening or harassing them until they leave
Cutting utilities to force them out

These can expose you to:

Criminal liability, such as:
- Grave coercion – forcing someone to do something (e.g., to leave) without authority of law, with violence or intimidation.
- Physical injuries, threats, or other crimes if violence or intimidation is used.
Civil liability for damages, including:
- Loss or destruction of their property
- Moral and exemplary damages for humiliation and harassment

The lawful way is to use legal processes, starting with demand and conciliation, and ultimately an ejectment case if needed.

V. Barangay Conciliation (Katarungang Pambarangay)

For many neighbor and family disputes, including disputes involving residents of the same barangay, the law requires going through the Lupong Tagapamayapa (Barangay Justice System) before filing a case in court, except for certain exceptions (e.g., urgent legal actions, parties not in the same city/municipality, government as party).

1. When is barangay conciliation required?

Generally required if:

The dispute is civil in nature (e.g., recovery of possession, ejectment)
Parties are natural persons (not corporations)
The parties reside in the same city/municipality

Not required when:

There’s an urgent need for legal action, such as imminent violence or serious threats
The case involves certain serious criminal offenses
One party is the government
Parties live in different cities/municipalities and no agreement to submit to a common barangay.

Ejectment cases often do pass through barangay conciliation.

2. How barangay conciliation works

Filing of complaint at the barangay hall (usually where the property is located or where the parties reside).
Mediation by the Punong Barangay.
If mediation fails, the matter is referred to a Pangkat ng Tagapagkasundo (conciliation panel) for further mediation/conciliation.
Possible outcomes:
- Amicable settlement – written agreement, binding as a contract and enforceable.
- Arbitration – parties agree to be bound by the Pangkat’s decision.
- Certification to file action – if no settlement is reached, the barangay issues this certificate, which you will need to file a case in court.

Settlements can include:

Clear deadline for the partner to vacate
Agreement on retrieval of belongings
Agreements on financial assistance, transportation money, etc.
Arrangements concerning children (temporary custody/visitation/support), though formal custody/support cases are still separate.

VI. Unlawful Detainer: The Basic Eviction Case

If the live-in partner refuses to leave after the relationship ends and after demand, and barangay conciliation fails (or is not required due to exceptions), the most common legal action is an unlawful detainer case.

This is governed by Rule 70 of the Rules of Court on forcible entry and unlawful detainer and usually covered by the Rules on Summary Procedure.

1. Nature of unlawful detainer

Applies when the person initially had lawful possession (e.g., allowed to stay as partner or guest) but continues to occupy after the right has expired or been terminated, and refuses to vacate after demand.
The focus is on material or physical possession, not ownership (although ownership may be examined only to resolve possession).

2. Essential elements

Typical elements (in plain terms):

Plaintiff (you/owner/lessee) allowed the defendant (live-in partner) to occupy the property.
This right of occupation was terminated or has expired (e.g., relationship ended).
Plaintiff made a demand to vacate (usually in writing).
Defendant refused to comply and continues possession.
The case is filed within one year from the date of last demand to vacate.

If filed beyond the 1-year period, the case may need to be a different type of action (accion publiciana), which is more complex and handled by the Regional Trial Court.

3. Demand to vacate

Although demands can be oral, it is strongly advisable to make a written demand, often through a lawyer’s letter. A good demand letter typically:

Identifies the property (address, description)
States the basis of your right (ownership, lease, etc.)
States that the partner’s right to stay is terminated (e.g., relationship ended, permission withdrawn)
Gives a reasonable period to vacate (e.g., 10–15 days)
Warns that failure to vacate will result in legal action (ejectment)

Retain:

Proof of sending (registered mail, courier, personal service with witnesses/signature).
Any acknowledgment or refusal by the other party.

4. Where to file

Venue: The Municipal Trial Court / Metropolitan Trial Court / Municipal Circuit Trial Court (MTC, MeTC, MTCC) where the property is located.
Check local court names (e.g., MeTC in cities like QC, Makati; MTC in municipalities).

5. What to include in the Complaint

Typical contents:

Parties’ names and addresses
Description of the property (address, boundaries, area, sometimes tax dec/TCT number)
Concise statement of facts:
- How you acquired rights (owner or lessee)
- How and why the partner was allowed to stay
- How their right has ended (breakup, revocation of permission)
- Details of demand to vacate (date, method of service)
- Fact of refusal to leave
Prayer/relief:
- Recovery of possession (order to vacate)
- Payment of reasonable compensation for use (often called “rent” or reasonable value of use and occupation)
- Attorney’s fees and costs, if any
- Sometimes, damages (moral/exemplary) if circumstances justify.

6. Evidence typically needed

Proof of your right to possess:
- Land title, tax declaration, deed of sale, lease contract, or other documents.
Proof of cohabitation and permission:
- Photos, messages, statements, testimonies, barangay certs.
Demand letter and proof of service:
- Copies of the letter, registry receipts, affidavits of service.
Barangay records:
- Barangay complaint, minutes, and Certification to File Action.
Any evidence of refusal to vacate and possibly disturbances.

7. Summary procedure

Ejectment cases are generally governed by Summary Procedure, which:

Limits pleadings (e.g., Complaint, Answer, Position Papers)
Generally prohibits motions that can delay (e.g., motion to dismiss, except on certain grounds)
Usually depends largely on affidavits and documents, though hearings for clarifying issues may occur.

After submission of position papers and evidence, the court renders a decision. If it orders eviction, execution can follow—including sheriff-supervised removal of the partner from the premises if they still do not leave.

VII. Special Case: Violence, Threats, and RA 9262

If the live-in partner is violent, abusive, or threatening, the problem is not just civil. It may trigger criminal liability and special remedies under:

Republic Act No. 9262 – Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act of 2004.

1. Who is protected

RA 9262 protects:

Women, and
Their children (legitimate or illegitimate, minors, or certain dependent adult children)

against acts of violence by:

Husband or ex-husband
Live-in partner or ex-live-in partner
Dating partner or ex-dating partner
Someone with whom the woman has or had a sexual/romantic relationship, etc.

2. Protection orders and residence

Under RA 9262, a woman victim (or her child) can seek Protection Orders:

Barangay Protection Order (BPO) – issued by the Punong Barangay, effective for a limited period, but can immediately prohibit the abuser from harming or threatening her.
Temporary Protection Order (TPO) – issued by the court, usually ex parte, effective for a limited period.
Permanent Protection Order (PPO) – issued after notice and hearing.

A protection order may include, among others:

Granting the woman and children exclusive use of the residence, even if the house is owned or rented by the male abuser, as long as they have been living there together.
Ordering the respondent (abuser) to stay away from the home, workplace, or school.
Requiring the respondent to provide support for the woman and children.

In effect:

If the live-in partner has been abusive, the victim can often legally “evict” the abuser through a protection order, sometimes much faster than through a standard ejectment case.
Violating a protection order is a crime, and the police can enforce removal.

This is especially relevant where the woman or children are the ones needing protection from the partner who refuses to leave.

VIII. Children, Custody, and Eviction

When there are children involved, eviction raises sensitive issues.

1. Custody

Young children (especially under 7) are generally preferred to be with the mother, unless there are strong reasons otherwise.
Evicting one parent usually implies that children will stay with the parent who remains in the home, but custody is legally a separate issue from the ejectment case.

Family courts can handle:

Custody petitions
Support
Protection orders etc.

Even if you lawfully evict your live-in partner, you may still be liable for child support if you are the parent.

2. Best interests of the child

Courts and barangays will often encourage arrangements that consider:

Where the children will live
Continuity of schooling
Access to both parents (if safe)
Emotional stability

Eviction processes should be handled, as much as possible, in a way that minimizes trauma to the children, even outside the formal legal requirements.

IX. Defenses Your Live-In Partner Might Raise

If you file an ejectment case or seek to remove your partner through legal means, expect that they may defend themselves by claiming:

Co-ownership or contribution
- They invested significant money into the house or lot.
- They co-signed documents or provided funds for amortizations, construction, or renovations.
Defective or no demand
- No proper demand to vacate was made.
- The case was filed more than one year from the last demand, making it improper as unlawful detainer.
Wrong party
- The real owner or lessee is someone else (e.g., your parents or landlord), and you lack standing to sue.
Pending related cases
- There may be ongoing cases (e.g., co-ownership, RA 9262, custody) that affect possession.
Humanitarian and equity considerations
- Illness, lack of alternative housing, care for minor children, though these are more moral than technical defenses. Still, courts sometimes factor them in when shaping relief, timelines, or conditional orders.

Being aware of potential defenses helps in structuring your evidence and legal theory if you decide to proceed.

X. Criminal Implications if You Mishandle Eviction

Apart from grave coercion and other crimes already mentioned, mishandling eviction may intersect with:

Theft or malicious mischief – if you throw out, destroy, or unlawfully keep your partner’s belongings.
Serious or slight physical injuries – if there is physical confrontation.
Threats or harassment – if you intimidate them into leaving.
RA 9262 – if your conduct qualifies as psychological, economic, or physical violence against a woman or child (e.g., cutting support or housing as a form of abuse).

Even if you believe you are the rightful owner or tenant, you are not above criminal law; the safe approach is always legal process, not force.

XI. Practical Steps: A Step-by-Step Roadmap

Here is a general, practical sequence of steps (adapt as needed to your situation):

Clarify your legal position
- Gather documents: title, lease, receipts, tax dec, proof of purchase, proof of contributions.
- Try to determine: Are you sole owner? Co-owner? Lessee? Just a guest with your parents?
Consider safety first
- If there is abuse or threats, prioritize protection orders and police assistance, especially if you are a woman or there are children at risk.
- Document threats or incidents (photos, medical records, messages, witnesses).
Attempt a calm, voluntary arrangement
- If safe, talk about separation: who leaves, when, and how belongings will be retrieved.
- Put agreements in writing; consider witnesses or barangay assistance.
Barangay conciliation (if applicable)
- File a complaint at the barangay.
- Attend mediation and conciliation sessions.
- Try to reach a written settlement with clear deadlines for vacating.
- If no settlement: obtain Certification to File Action.
Send a formal demand letter
- Have a written demand to vacate sent, ideally with a lawyer’s guidance.
- Give a clear, reasonable deadline.
- Keep proof of service.
Prepare and file an ejectment case (unlawful detainer)
- File in the proper court with required documents and certification from the barangay (if required).
- Follow the court’s instructions, attend hearings, and submit position papers and evidence.
Obtain judgment and execution
- If the court rules in your favor, and your partner still refuses to leave, request execution.
- The sheriff, with possible police assistance, will implement the writ—this is the lawful “forced eviction.”
Address related issues
- Children: handle custody and support through the proper family court if needed.
- Property contributions: if your partner genuinely has a stake, be prepared for co-ownership or reimbursement claims.

XII. Final Notes

A live-in partner does not have an automatic, permanent right to stay in your home just because you lived together, especially if you are the sole owner or lessee.
At the same time, you cannot lawfully evict them by yourself using force or intimidation.
The usual legal path involves:
- Barangay conciliation,
- A clear demand to vacate, and
- An unlawful detainer case (or other appropriate court action) if they refuse to leave.

Because every situation is fact-specific—who owns what, presence of children, existence of violence, prior agreements—it is always wise to consult a Philippine lawyer (preferably one familiar with family and property law) before taking major steps.