Case Digest: Francisco vs. IAC 177 SCRA 527 I September 15, 1989

FACTS:

Ramos acquired by sale from the Eugenio sisters a parcel of land which is isolated from the Parada Road. In March 1972, after having set up a piggery on his newly acquired property, Ramos had his lawyer write to Eusebio Francisco — owner, to ask for a right of way through the latter's land. Negotiations thereafter had however failed to bring about a satisfactory arrangement. Francisco's proposal for an exchange of land at the rate of one (1) square meter from him to three (3) square meters from Ramos, as was supposedly the custom in the locality, was unacceptable to Ramos.

Later that year, Ramos succeeded, through the intercession of Councilor Tongco of Valenzuela, in obtaining a three-meter wide passageway through the lot of Epifania Dila. Yet in August, 1973, he inexplicably put up a ten-foot high concrete wall on his lot and thereby closed the very right of way granted to him across Dila's lot. It seems that what he wished was to have a right of passage precisely through Francisco's land, considering this to be more convenient to him.

Francisco learned of Ramos' intention and reacted by replacing the barbed-wire fence on his lot along Parada Road with a stone wall. Ramos then insituted a case where the court issued a writ of preliminary mandatory injunction directing Francisco to remove his stone fence and keep his lot open for Ramos' use.

ISSUE:

Whether or not Ramos is entitled to an easement of right of way over the property of Francisco considering that another 3-meter passage was made available to him through the lot of Epifania Dila.

DECISION:

Ramos is without right of to the easement. Since another passage to the highway wide enough to be traversable by a truck is available to Ramos through the lot of Epifania Dila, and considering that Ramos himself constructed a ten-foot concrete wall on his lot thereby isolating himself from such passage, the requisites for the legal easement of right of way have not been met. The third requisite specifically requires that the isolation must not be due to the acts of the proprietor of the dominant estate. This not being the case since it was Ramos himself who built a wall thereby closing the passage through the lot of Dila, there is no right over a compulsory easement.