GR 149023; (September 2007) (Digest)
G.R. No. 149023; September 27, 2007
LEO WINSTON BRIN LEE, Petitioner, vs. SPOUSES AMADEO and ADELAIDA CARREON, Respondents.
FACTS
Respondents, Spouses Carreon, owned a house and lots in Cebu City with no adequate outlet to a public highway. They initially filed a complaint for an easement of right of way against the owner of a neighboring lot, Anita Linda Rodriguez. During pre-trial, the Regional Trial Court (RTC) identified another potential servient estate owned by Spouses Jardin. Respondents amended their complaint to include the Jardins. Pending litigation, the Jardins sold their lots to petitioner Leo Winston Brin Lee. Consequently, respondents filed a second amended complaint to implead Lee as an additional defendant.
The RTC ruled in favor of respondents, granting a one-meter wide right of way over a portion of Lee’s property and ordering respondents to pay corresponding indemnity. Lee appealed, arguing respondents had an existing alternative passage. The Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC decision, finding all legal requisites for a compulsory easement were satisfied. Lee’s motion for reconsideration was denied, prompting this petition.
ISSUE
Whether the Court of Appeals erred in ruling that respondents are entitled to an easement of right of way over petitioner’s property.
RULING
The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the appellate court’s decision. The legal logic centered on the four requisites for a compulsory easement of right of way under Articles 649 and 650 of the Civil Code. First, the dominant estate (respondents’ property) was isolated without adequate outlet to a public highway. The Court upheld the finding that any existing passage through several small, unobstructed lots was not the “adequate outlet” contemplated by law, as it was informal and insufficient for respondents’ needs. Second, respondents expressed willingness to pay proper indemnity, which the trial court fixed. Third, the isolation was not due to respondents’ own acts. Fourth, the granted right of way was established at the point least prejudicial to the servient estate, being only one meter wide and affecting a minimal portion of Lee’s 249-square meter lot, with respondents also agreeing to pay for the fence to be demolished. The Court found no reason to disturb the factual conclusions of the lower courts, which are generally binding in a Rule 45 petition. All requisites were conclusively met, justifying the imposition of the easement.