Neighbor disputes are common in the Philippines, with many stemming from issues related to easements. These conflicts often revolve around questions of overuse, misuse, or the responsibility for maintenance and repairs. While the concept of easements, such as a right of way, may seem straightforward, reality is much more complex and complicated due to the various types and legal nuances involved.
This article defines easement and explores the various types, modes of acquisition and extinguishment, common disputes, and key legal principles.
What is an Easement?
Literally, easement means “having a right of way over another’s property or land.” It is derived from the Old French term aisement, which means “comfort” or “convenience.”
In property law, an easement is a legal right that allows an individual or entity to use another person’s land for certain purposes — such as passage, utility access, or drainage — without owning the land itself. It may also mean a prohibition or restriction (encumbrance) on a landowner’s use of their property, especially in relation to neighboring lands.
Given the definition above, an easement typically involves two (2) parties — the dominant estate owner and the servient estate owner. As defined in Section 613 of the Civil Code, “the immovable in favor of which the easement is established is called a dominant estate; that which is subject thereto, the servient estate.” Equally worth mentioning, servitudes may also be established for the benefit of a community, or of one or more persons to whom the encumbered estate does not belong” (Article 614).
In the Civil Code of the Philippines (R.A. 386), easements are particularly addressed in Book II, Title VII, which covers Easements or Servitudes. The relevant provisions can be found from Article 613 to Article 693.
General Types of Easements
Easements can be categorized based on their purpose, the manner in which they are exercised, indication of their existence, the beneficiaries, and their origins. Below are the general types or categories of easements:
[1] Positive and Negative Easements
According to its purpose, use, or nature of limitation, an easement can be classified as either positive or negative (Article 616). A positive or affirmative easement grants the holder of the right to perform a specific activity on another’s property, like in the case of a telecom company installing a cell tower. In contrast, a negative easement restricts a property owner from certain actions to protect neighboring properties or the public, such as preventing the construction of a building that blocks a landmark view.
[2] Continuous and Discontinuous Easements
Easements can be continuous or discontinuous based on how they are exercised. Continuous easements are used incessantly without human intervention, such as a water facility serving a subdivision. Discontinuous easements are used intermittently and require human action for enjoyment, like a right of way or the right to draw water from another property’s well.
[3] Apparent and Non-Apparent Easements
Easements can also be apparent or non-apparent based on their indication of existence. Apparent easements are visible and continuously indicated by external signs, such as a water tank or a concrete pavement. Non-apparent easements lack visible signs, like those that prohibit building or planting trees beyond a specified limit.
[4] Real and Personal Easements
Depending on their beneficiaries, easements can be real or personal. Personal easements benefit a specific person or community, while real easements are typically attached to the dominant estate and pass on to subsequent owners. Allowing an individual to cross private property for personal use is a personal easement, whereas an easement of light and view benefiting a parcel of land is a real easement.
[5] Voluntary, Legal, and Natural Easements
As to their origins, easements may also be identified as voluntary or conventional, legal, or natural. Voluntary easements are created by the mutual consent of the property owners, often formalized through a contract or will, such as granting access to a shared driveway. Legal easements are imposed by law, often for necessity or public policy, e.g., providing access to a landlocked property or allowing utility companies to install infrastructure. Natural easements arise from the land’s natural features, such as implied access across adjacent property when surrounded by a river or cliff.
Specific Types of Easements Recognized Under the Civil Code
Apart from the general types discussed above, there are specific types of easements particularly recognized and covered under the Civil Code:
[1] Waters and Aqueducts
According to the Civil Code, lower estates are obliged to receive waters, as well as the stones or earth, which naturally descend from the higher estates. Thus, the owner of the lower estate cannot build structures that impede this natural flow. Similarly, the owner of the higher estate cannot construct works that worsen the burden on the lower estate (Article 637).
[2] Right of Way
The law grants the owner of a property, surrounded by other estates and lacking access to a public highway, the right to demand a right of way through neighboring properties after payment of indemnity. For a permanent easement, the indemnity covers the land’s value and any damage to the servient estate. For temporary use, such as for cultivation, the indemnity only covers the damage caused. The easement is not mandatory if the property’s isolation results from the owner’s actions (Article 649).
[3] Party Walls
The easement of a party wall is governed by the Civil Code, local ordinances, customs, and rules of co-ownership. Such easement is presumed, unless there is a title or exterior sign, and applies to dividing walls of adjoining buildings, gardens or yards, and fences and hedges of rural lands whose ownership belongs to the property or tenement which has in its favor the presumption based on the signs indeed by the law (Article 658 – 660).
[4] Light and View
The law prohibits the construction of windows, apertures, balconies, or other similar projections that provide a direct view onto adjoining property unless there is a minimum distance of two (2) meters. For side or oblique views, a minimum distance of sixty (60) centimeters is required. However, these provisions do not apply to buildings separated by a public way or alley, which is not less than three (3) meters wide, subject to special regulations and local ordinances. (Article 670 – 673).
[5] Drainage of Buildings
The Civil Code requires building owners to direct rainwater from their roofs onto their own land, street, or public place to ensure it does not damage any neighboring properties. If the yard or court of a house is surrounded by other buildings and does not have an outlet for rainwater, the establishment of an easement of drainage can be demanded after payment of the proper indemnity (Article 674 – 676).
[6] Easements Against Nuisance
To address the issue of nuisance, the law provides that all buildings and land are subject to an easement preventing owners from causing disturbances, such as noise, jarring, offensive odor, smoke, heat, dust, and other harmful effects. Factories and shops, however, are allowed to operate, provided that they adhere to zoning, health, police, and other relevant regulations and cause minimal disruption to the neighborhood (Article 682 -683).
[7] Distances and Works for Certain Constructions and Plantings
The law prohibits building of potentially dangerous or noxious structures, such as aqueducts, depository of corrosive substances, machinery, or factories, without adhering to local regulations and necessary protective measures, which cannot be waived by agreement between adjacent property owners. It also restricts tree planting at the dividing line of the estates, requiring at least two (2) meters for tall trees and fifty (50) centimeters for smaller trees unless specified by local ordinances (Article 678 – 679).
[8] Lateral and Subadjacent Support
The Civil Code also prohibits landowners from excavating their property in a way that deprives adjacent land or buildings of sufficient lateral or subadjacent support. Thus, any stipulation or testamentary provision allowing such excavations is deemed void. Landowners planning excavations must notify the owner of the adjacent property beforehand (Article 684-687).
Modes of Acquiring Easements
In the Philippines, easements can be acquired in several ways, as provided under Articles 620 – 626, Section 2, Chapter 1, and Title VII of the Civil Code. The primary modes of acquiring easements are:
[1] By Title
Any easement, whether continuous or discontinuous, apparent or non-apparent, may be acquired through a title, which denotes a juridical act, lawful agreement, or legal provision sufficient to create an encumbrance. Continuous non-apparent easements and discontinuous ones, whether apparent or not, however, may be acquired only by virtue of title (Article 622).
[2] By Prescription
While the primary mode of acquisition is generally and ordinarily through a title, easements may also be acquired through prescription according to Article 620, which provides that, “continuous and apparent easements are acquired either by virtue of a title or by prescription of ten years.” However, the time of possession in order for easements under the preceeding article to be acquired by prescription shall follow the stipulations in Article 621 thereto, i.e. positive and negative easements. Negative easements, e.g., prohibiting construction above a certain height limit, however, cannot be acquired by prescription unless explicitly recognized under law.
[3] By Deed of Recognition
According to Article 623, “the absence of a document or proof showing the origin of an easement which cannot be acquired by prescription may be cured by a deed of recognition by the owner of the servient estate or by a final judgment.”
[4] By Final Judgment
Technically, the court does not create the easement but merely declares its existence. Before any final judgment, evidence of assessment, such as an oral contract, must be presented. If the existence of a voluntary easement can be proven in court, it is not necessary to have a written document to support it.
[5] By Apparent Signs
An apparent sign of easement does not refer to a literal sign but to any visible indication of the easement’s existence, such as a road showing a right of way or windows indicating a right to light and view.
[6] By Expropriation
The government or a public legal entity may also impose easements or use immovable objects owned by natural persons or private entities for the public benefit or the interest of private persons (Article 634). While these legal easements are typically mandatory based on laws and regulations, they often involve just compensation to the servient state owners. In Spouses Buot vs. National Transmission Corp., G.R. No. 240720 (2021), the Supreme Court confirmed that power lines constitute a legal easement and granted the rights by expropriation, however with a reduced compensation for the affected land.
Modes of Extinguishing Easements
Easements can also be extinguished through various modes, as provided under Articles 631 – 633, Section 4, Chapter 1, Title VII of the Civil Code. The primary modes of extinguishing easements are:
[1] By Merger
Easements are extinguished when the dominant and servient estates are merged under the same ownership of one person or entity. For example, if the owner of a property with a right of way over an adjacent property purchases that adjacent property, the easement is extinguished.
[2] By Prescription
Easements that are not used for ten (10) years or more can already be extinguished. With respect to discontinuous easements, the period is computed from when they ceased to be used. For continuous easements, it starts from the day an act contrary to the easement occurs. For example, a right of way easement that is not used by the dominant estate owner for 10 years is extinguished.
[3] By Permanent Impossibility of Use
Easements are extinguished if they can no longer be used by either estate due to natural or man-made causes, such as a pathway being blocked by a landslide. However, they may be revived if conditions change and allow for their use again, unless the use remains impossible or the time for prescription has passed.
[4] By Renunciation
An easement is extinguished when the owner of the dominant estate renounces it expressly or impliedly. For instance, if the dominant estate owner builds an alternative route and stops using the right of way, the easement may be considered renounced.
[5] By Expiration of the Term or Fulfillment of the Condition
If the easement is established for a limited period or condition, its expiration or fulfillment extinguishes it. For example, a right of way granted for ten years automatically expires after the lapse of said period.
[6] By Redemption
Easements can also be extinguished through redemption, which happens when both the owners of the dominant and servient estates agree to terminate the easement.
Common Disputes Involving Easements
Easements can lead to several types of disputes between property owners, often arising due to misunderstandings, misuse, or unclear boundaries. Here are the most common types of easement-related disputes:
[1] Encroachment or Violation of Easement Boundaries
This normally happens when one property owner builds or places structures that interfere with an easement, either obstructing a right of way or exceeding the set boundaries, such as in the case of a landowner building a fence that blocks the easement for access or drainage.
[2] Easement Use Beyond the Agreed Purpose
Generally, easements are granted for specific purposes, such as a right of way, drainage, etc. Disputes, however, arise when the dominant estate owner (the one benefiting from the easement) uses the easement for purposes beyond what has been agreed, e.g., using a right of way for commercial purposes.
[3] Maintenance and Repair Responsibilities
In some easement agreements, both parties involved have obligations to maintain the easement area, such as maintaining a right of way or drainage system. Disputes occur when one party fails to maintain the easement, causing damage or inconvenience to the other.
[4] Easement Termination or Modification
Easement holders may dispute the termination or modification of an easement. For instance, a servient estate owner (the one burdened by the easement) may want to terminate or reduce the scope of an easement due to changing circumstances, e.g., no longer needing the easement or the burden being too heavy.
[5] Disputes Over Compensation
When an easement is created, especially for rights of way or drainage, disputes arise over the compensation or indemnity owed to the servient estate owner. For example, when a right of way easement is granted, the dominant estate may need to pay the servient estate for the use of the land.
[6] Easement by Necessity or Prescription
Easements that are established by necessity or prescription can also lead to disputes over whether the legal requirements have been met. For example, easements by prescription result in disputes if one party asserts continuous use over a period, while the other challenges whether the usage was uninterrupted or public.
[7] Neighboring Property Conflicts
Neighbors may sometimes disagree on how easements should be used, particularly when they involve access or actual land usage. A neighbor may object to the increased traffic on a shared right of way or argue that an easement for drainage has caused flooding or damage to their property.
[8] Adverse Possession
In some cases, one party may attempt to claim an easement through adverse possession, arguing they have used the land in a certain way (e.g., a right of way) for a specific period, thereby establishing a legal right. The other party may dispute this claim, especially if they were unaware of the use or did not consent to it.
Relevant Jurisprudence
The following cases and court decisions have been compiled and summarized to provide additional context on the easement rights in the Philippines.
Spouses Williams vs. Zerda, G.R., No. 207146 (2017-03-15)
Zerda filed for an easement of right of way against the Spouses Williams, claiming his property in Surigao City was isolated and lacked access to a public highway. The Regional Trial Court ruled against Zerda, stating the isolation was self-inflicted, but the Court of Appeals reversed, finding Zerda entitled to the easement as his property was truly isolated and the right of way was the least prejudicial to the Williams. The Supreme Court affirmed the ruling of the CA and denied the petition of Spouses Williams.
Spouses Ferdez vs. Spouses Delfin, G.R., No. 227917 (2021-03-17)
The case involves a dispute between the Spouses Fernandez (petitioners) and Spouses Delfin (respondents) over an easement of right of way. After the petitioners’ properties were foreclosed and sold to the Delfins, the respondents blocked the access, claiming the easement was invalid. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the petitioners, clarifying that the easement was valid under Article 624 of the Civil Code, as the Fernandez Spouses created an apparent sign of an easement by using a portion of the front properties to access the national highway and annotating the easement on the titles. When the front properties were transferred to PNB, the bank did not stipulate against the easement, and the annotations remained on the titles. The Delfin Spouses, as successors-in-interest, were bound by the easement because they were aware of the annotations on the titles and did not object to the easement at the time of purchase.
Spouses Buot vs. National Transmission Corp., G.R. No. 240720 (2021-11-17)
Spouses Buot filed a Petition for Review to challenge the Court of Appeals’ decision, which remanded their expropriation case to determine just compensation. The National Transmission Corporation (TransCo) sought to expropriate part of their land for a power project. The Supreme Court upheld that power lines fall under a legal easement, reducing compensation, but ruled the Buots were entitled to compensation for property rendered unusable by the transmission lines.
Villanueva vs. Velasco, G.R. No. 130845 (2000-11-27)
Bryan Villanueva, who acquired property with an encroaching house, challenged the enforcement of an easement granted to the Espinolas, arguing it should be annotated on the title to be enforceable. The Court of Appeals upheld the easement, stating it was valid as both a voluntary and legal easement, even without annotation on the title, and bound Villanueva despite him not being a party to the original case. The Supreme Court affirmed the assailed decision and resolution of the CA.
Final Notes
Easements acquired through title must be clear, explicit, and specific. When easements are established by agreement, they must comply with legal formalities, especially for immovable property. These agreements generally require a public instrument and registration with the Registry of Property to be enforceable against third parties. Both parties must act in good faith when entering into such agreements.
Easements registered under the Torrens System remain listed on titles unless formally removed, even if they have been effectively extinguished. To reflect the extinguishment, parties must file the appropriate documents with the Registry of Deeds.
In some cases, courts may be involved to determine whether extinguishment has occurred. If the servient estate’s actions (such as permanent obstruction) improperly or unlawfully extinguish an easement, the dominant estate may seek for damages.
Need further information and assistance regarding Easement Rights in the Philippines? Talk to our team at Duran & Duran-Schulze Law to know more about the requirements and process. Call us today at (+632) 8478 5826 or +63 917 194 0482, or send an email to info@duranschulze.com for more information.