“A BAD neighbor is as great a calamity as a good one is a great advantage,” said Greek poet Hesiod.
For most Filipinos, it may be an all-too familiar tale to live in a house beset by a neighbor’s loud, off-key singing during a karaoke session, noisy pets, or encroachment of the perimeters of that house by dumping soil or trash.
They may also encounter traffic-hazard billboards and signs that unduly obstruct their view or confuse or otherwise offend Filipino traditions and values.
These circumstances may have the effect of a calamity, but that is no reason to get used to living with them.
Remedies
In fact, insofar as billboards and signs are concerned, former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo issued Administrative Order No. 160-A, series of 2006, providing remedies against billboards and signs classified as public nuisances.
Said billboards and signs were declared as public nuisances because they:
are erected in a manner as to confuse or obstruct the view or interpretation of any official traffic sign, signal, or device; or
unduly obstruct the natural view of the landscape, distract or obstruct the view of the public as to constitute a traffic hazard, or otherwise defile, debase, or offend the aesthetic and cultural values and traditions of the Filipino people.
Defining nuisance
Likewise, the Civil Code provides remedies against nuisances, which are broadly defined to include any act, omission, establishment, business, condition of property, or anything else which: (a) injures or endangers the health or safety of others; (b) annoys or offends the senses; (c) shocks, defies, or disregards decency or morality; (d) obstructs or interferes with the free passage of any public highway or street, or any body of water; or (e) hinders or impairs the use of property.
In Smart Communications, Inc. v. Aldecoa, the Supreme Court held that the term “nuisance” is so comprehensive that it has been applied to almost all ways which have interfered with the rights of the citizens, either in person, property, the enjoyment of his property, or his comfort.
Thus, a neighbor’s loud, off-key singing, noisy pets, or dumping of debris on one’s property may be classified as nuisances if they would interfere with another’s enjoyment of said property.
A nuisance is either per se or per accidens. A nuisance per se is recognized as a nuisance under any and all circumstances because it constitutes a direct menace to public health or safety. Nuisances per se
include prohibited gambling houses and brothels.
Meanwhile, a nuisance per accidens must be proven as a nuisance in a hearing conducted for a purpose. Thus, a dam or fishpond may constitute a nuisance per accidens.
A nuisance may also be classified as public or private.
A public nuisance affects a community or neighborhood or any considerable number of persons, although the extent of the annoyance, danger, or damage upon individuals may be unequal. A private nuisance violates only private rights and produces damages to but one or a few persons.
The lapse of time cannot legalize any nuisance, whether public or private.
A private person aggrieved by a public nuisance has the following remedies: (a) prosecution under the Penal Code or any local ordinance; (b) civil action; or (c) abatement of the public nuisance, without judicial proceedings.
Said person may file an action on account of a public nuisance if it is specially injurious to himself. He may abate a public nuisance specially injurious to him by removing, or if necessary, destroying the thing which constitutes the same, without committing a breach of the peace, or doing unnecessary injury.
Abating public nuisance
Before he may summarily abate the public nuisance, it is necessary, however, that: (a) demand was first made upon the owner or possessor of the property to abate the nuisance; (b) the owner or possessor refused to comply with such demand; (c) abatement was approved by the district health officer and executed with the assistance of the local police; and (d) the value of the destruction does not exceed P3,000.
Meanwhile, a person aggrieved by a private nuisance may file a civil action or cause the summary abatement thereof. The same rules for the summary abatement of a public nuisance are applicable to the abatement of a private nuisance.
The abatement of a public or private nuisance does not prevent the aggrieved party from recovering damages for its past existence.
A private person or public official extrajudicially abating a nuisance shall be liable for damages, however, if: (a) he causes unnecessary injury; or (b) an alleged nuisance is later declared by the courts to be not a real nuisance.
Sara Mae D. Mawis is an Associate at Esguerra & Blanco Law, and a Lecturer at the College of Law, Adamson University