VDA. DE BALTAZAR V. COURT OF APPEALS- Easement of Right of Way

For someone to be entitled of an easement of right of way, 4 requisites must be present: (1) the estate must be surrounded by other immovables and is without adequate outlet to a public highway (2) after payment of the proper indemnity (3) the isolation is not due to the propietor’s own acts and (4) the right of way claimed is at a point least prejudicial to the servient estate and in so far as consistent with this rule, where the distance from the dominant estate to a public highway may be the shortest.

FACTS:

Daniel Panganiban is the owner of Lot No. 1027. It is bounded on the north by Sta. Ana River, on the south by the land of vda. de Baltazar and on the west by lot 1028 and on the east by Lot 1025. Directly in front of 1026, 1028, and 1025 is the Braulio St.

Panganiban filed a complaint against the Baltazars for the establishment of a permanent and perpetual easement of right of way for him to have access to the provincial road. The RTC dismissed the complaint for it found 2 other passageways. The CA reversed the decision for it found that there was a strip of land used by Panganiban and his grandfather as a right of way for 30 years until it was closed and that the 2 other passageways were only temporary and was granted to Panganiban when the right of way was closed. Thus the case at bar.

ISSUE:

Whether or not Panganiban is entitled to an easement of right of way

RULING: YES

It has been held that for someone to be entitled of an easement of right of way, 4 requisites must be present. (1) the estate must be surrounded by other immovables and is without adequate outlet to a public highway (2) after payment of the proper indemnity (3) the isolation is not due to the propietor’s own acts and (4) the right of way claimed is at a point least prejudicial to the servient estate and in so far as consistent with this rule, where the distance from the dominant estate to a public highway may be the shortest.

Panganiban has all 4 requisites. With regard to the 1st requisite, his land is bounded on all sides by immovables, the lands of Baltazar, Legaspi and Calimon and by the river. The 2nd requisite is settled by a remand to the lower court for the determination of the proper indemnity. As regards the 3rd requisite, it was found that Panganiban bought the land from the Baltazars therefore its isolation was not due to his own acts. And with regard to the 4th requisite, the passage claimed is the shortest distance from his lot to Braulio Street. Panganiban was established all 4 requisites therefore is entitled to the easement.