VELASCO V. MANILA ELECTRIC

40 SCRA 342

FACTS:

Velasco was the owner of 3 adjoining lots. He then sold two of these to Meralco who later constructed a substation. It was only separated from the house of petitioner by a wire fence.

HELD:

General rule is that everyone is bound to bear the habitual or customary inconveniences that result from the proximity of others, and so long as this level is not surpassed, he may not complain against them. But if the prejudice exceeds the inconveniences that such proximity habitually brings, the neighbor who causes such disturbance is held responsible for the resulting damage, being guilty of causing nuisance.

The test is whether the rights of property, of health or of comfort are so injuriously affected by the noise in question that the sufferer is subjected to a loss which goes beyond the reasonable limit imposed upon him by the condition of living, or of holding property, in a particular locality in fact devoted to uses which involve the emission of noise although ordinary care is taken to confine it within reasonable bounds.