Soccoro owns and leases an apartment building where Rami is one of the tenants under a two-year lease. The first year went by with no issue as Rami paid his rent on time, if not earlier. However, when he lost his job after the pandemic, Rami failed to pay his rent beginning the third month of the second year of the lease. Soccoro repeatedly demanded payment from him but to no avail. Thus, she filed a case for ejectment against Rami. When Rami received the summons, he locked himself in the apartment unit. This infuriated Soccoro so much so that she padlocked the apartment unit and cut off its utilities when Rami momentarily left to go to the supermarket. What crime, if any, did Soccoro commit? Discuss.
Suggested answer only. Not an official answer and not legal advice.
Soccoro committed the crime of Unjust Vexation under Article 287 of the Revised Penal Code. Under Article 287, paragraph 2 of the Revised Penal Code, unjust vexation includes any human conduct that, without violence or intimidation,
Unlock the full Criminal Law answers365 days of full access. GCash, Maya and card accepted.
This is not an official scoring system and carries no weight with the Supreme Court or any bar review provider. It measures how much of the suggested answer's wording your response covers, not whether your reasoning is correct. For practice only.
Quick check
What crime is committed by a landlord who padlocks a tenant's apartment unit and cuts off utilities without judicial authority?
Unlawfully cutting utilities and padlocking a unit to distress a tenant constitutes unjust vexation under Article 287.
Under Article 287, paragraph 2 of the Revised Penal Code, what is the main element of unjust vexation?
Unjust vexation requires conduct that unjustifiably causes annoyance, irritation, or distress to an innocent person.
May a landlord padlock a defaulting tenant's room while an ejectment case is pending in court?
Landlords cannot resort to self-help and must await judicial execution in ejectment cases.
What is the proper legal remedy for a landlord seeking to recover possession from a non-paying tenant?
Choices available with full access.
How does unjust vexation differ from grave coercion under the Revised Penal Code?
Choices available with full access.
Learn more about these topics
1. Unjust Vexation
Under Article 287, paragraph 2 of the Revised Penal Code, unjust vexation is a broad felony that penalizes any human conduct that, without physical violence or intimidation, unjustifiably annoys, irritates, vexes, or causes mental distress to an innocent person. The main element of unjust vexation is whether the offender's act caused annoyance, irritation, torment, or distress to the mind of the victim. Padlocking a tenant's rented premises and disconnecting utility services without legal authority directly inflicts severe mental distress and irritation, thereby constituting unjust vexation under Philippine criminal law.
2. Prohibition on Self-Help
Under Philippine law, a landlord cannot take the law into her own hands to evict a defaulting tenant or compel payment of delinquent rent. Even if the landlord has already filed a judicial action for ejectment in court, she must wait for a final judgment and a lawful writ of execution issued by the tribunal. Resorting to extrajudicial self-help measures, such as locking out the lessee or cutting off electricity and water supply, is illegal and subjects the property owner to criminal liability for unjust vexation.
3. Ejectment and Remedies
Ejectment suits, such as unlawful detainer under Rule 70 of the Rules of Court, provide the exclusive judicial remedy for a lessor seeking to recover physical possession of leased property from a defaulting tenant. While non-payment of rent entitles the lessor to demand vacate and file an ejectment case, it does not grant the landlord any right to forcibly exclude the tenant from the premises. Arbitrary self-eviction tactics bypass due process and constitute punishable acts of harassment and unjust vexation under the Revised Penal Code.