Let there be light and view
Spouses Cia and spouses Cruz are owners of land and a one-storey house which has been occupied by them for 11 years.
At the time of the purchase of the subject property from the Sps. Cruz, the one-storey house was already constructed. Also, at the time of the acquisition of the subject property, the adjoining lot, Lot 1, which is owned by the Sps. Cruz, was an idle land without any improvements. Lot 1 remained empty until the Sps. Cruz started the construction of a two-storey residential house in 2009.
The building constructed on Lot 1 is taller than the Sps. Cia’s one-storey residential house. As such, the Sps. Cruz’s building allegedly obstructed the Sps. Cia’s right to light, air, and view. The Sps. Cia bemoaned how, prior to the construction on Lot 1, they received enough bright and natural light from their windows.
The construction rendered the Sps. Cia’s house dark such that they are unable to do their normal undertakings in the bedroom, living room and other areas of the house without switching on their lights. The Cias likewise alleged that the said structure constructed on Lot 1 is at a distance of less than three meters away from the boundary line, in alleged violation of their easement. Furthermore, the Sps. Cruz allegedly made excavations on Lot 1 without providing sufficient lateral support to the concrete perimeter fence of the Sps. Cia.
The Cruz couple countered that Sps. Cia failed to show how they acquired the easement of light and view either by prescription or title. The Cruz couple maintained that the mere presence of windows on the one-storey house of the Sps. Cia in itself does not give rise to an easement by title, stressing that there was no tenement standing on Lot 1 at the time of the construction of the one-storey house standing on the subject property. They also argued that Sps. Cia also failed to acquire an easement by prescription because they never alleged that they made a formal prohibition of the construction of a taller structure on Lot 1.
With respect to the Sps. Cia’s claims on easement of lateral and subjacent support, the Sps. Cruz maintained that such claims are baseless because the excavation works were all made within Lot 1 and were not deep enough to deprive the Sps. Cia subjacent and lateral support. Moreover, these excavations were already finished without causing any damage to the Sps. Cia’s house.
Q: What is an easement?
A: An easement is “a real right on another’s property, corporeal and immovable, whereby the owner of the latter must refrain from doing or allowing somebody else to do or something to be done on his property, for the benefit of another person or tenement.
Q: How are easements established?
A: Easements are established either by law or by the will of the owner. The former are called legal, and the latter, voluntary easements. Legal easements are ones imposed by law, and which have, for their object, either public use or interest of private persons, as opposed to voluntary easements that are established by the agreements of the parties. The different legal easements are: (a) easement relating to waters; (b) right of way; (c) party wall; (d) light and view; (e) drainage; (f) intermediate distances; (g) easement against nuisance; and (h) lateral and subjacent support.
Q: What is an easement of light and view?
A: The legal easement called easement of light and view refers to an easement whereby the dominant estate enjoys the right to have free access to light, a little air, and a view overlooking the adjoining estate, i.e., the servient estate. The easement of light is the right to make openings under certain conditions in order to receive light from another’s tenement while the easement of view is the right to make openings or windows, to enjoy the view through the estate of another and the power to prevent all constructions or works which would obstruct such view or make the same difficult.
Q: Did Spouses Cia acquire an easement of light and view, imposing a burden on Lot 1 not to obstruct the subject property’s free access to light and view?
A: Yes. According to Article 624 of the Civil Code, there arises a title to an easement of light and view, even in the absence of any formal act undertaken by the owner of the dominant estate, if this apparent visible sign, such as the existence of a door and windows, continues to remain and subsist, unless, at the time the ownership of the two estates is divided, (1) the contrary should be provided in the title of conveyance of either of them, or (2) the sign aforesaid should be removed before the execution of the deed.
In a situation wherein Article 624 of the Civil Code applies, there arises an easement if an apparent sign of the existence of an easement, i.e., the existence of windows and openings on the dominant estate, continues to remain even after the transfer of the property to the new owner, unless such apparent sign is removed or if there is an agreement to the contrary.
This is exactly the situation attendant in the instant case. Lot 1 and the subject property were once owned by one owner, i.e., the Sps. Cruz. On the subject property, a one-storey house with windows and other openings that accept light and view from Lot 1, which was idle at that time, was built. Subsequently, in 1998, the subject property was alienated in favor of the Sps. Cia. It is undisputed that the windows and other openings on the one-storey house subsisted and remained open. It is also not disputed that there was no agreement made by the parties whatsoever to the effect that the windows and openings of the Sps. Cia’s house should be closed or removed.
Hence, in accordance with Article 624 of the Civil Code, from the time the Sps. Cruz transferred the subject property to the Sps. Cia, there arose by title an easement of light and view, placing a burden on the servient estate, i.e., Lot 1, to allow the Sps. Cia’s residence unobstructed access to light and view, subject to certain limitations. (Source: Sps. Garcia vs. Santos, G.R. No. 228334, June 17, 2019)
Ma. Soledad Deriquito-Mawis
Dean, Lyceum of the Philippines University; Board of Trustee, Philippine Association of Law Schools; and founder of Mawis Law Office
