Helen Calimoso et al. Vs. Axel Roullo G.R. No.

198594; January 25, 2016

Petition for review on certiorari assailing the decision and resolution of the Court of Appeals, Cebu
City, which affirmed the decision of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 29, Iloilo City, that ordered the
establishment of an “easement of right of way” in favor of respondent Axel D. Roullo.

FACTS:

The respondent alleged that he is the owner of a lot situated in Brgy. Sambag, Jaro Iloilo City,
isolated by surrounding estates including the lot owned by petitioners. He claimed that he needs a right
of way in order to have access to a public road and that the shortest and most convenient access to the
nearest public road passes through the petitioners’ lot. Petitioners objected because it would cause
substantial damage to the two houses already standing on their property and they alleged that there
was an alternative route for the respondent.

The RTC granted the respondent’s complaint and ordered the petitioners to provide the respondent
an easement of right-of-way. Respondent was also ordered to pay the petitioners proper indemnity for
the portion of the lot subject of the easement.

The CA, affirmed in toto the RTC’s decision and held that all the requisites for the establishment of
a legal or compulsory easement of right-of-way were present in the respondent’s case.

ISSUE: Whether the right-of-way passing through the petitioners’ lot satisfies the fourth requirement of
being established at the point least prejudicial to the servient estate.

RULING:

We disagree with the CA finding that all the requisites for the valid establishment of an easement of
right-of-way are present in this case.

Article 650 of the Civil Code provides that the easement of right-of-way shall be established at the
point least prejudicial to the servient estate, and insofar as consistent with this rule, where the distance
from the dominant estate to a public highway may be the shortest.

The immovable in whose favor the easement is established is called dominant estate (respondent’s lot)
and the property subject to the easement is called the servient estate (petitioner’s lot). Whenever there
are several tenements surrounding the dominant estate, the right-of-way must be established on the
tenement where the distance to the public road or highway is shortest and where the least damage
would be caused. If these two criteria (shortest distance and least damage) do not concur in a single
tenement, we have held in the past that the least prejudice criterion must prevail over the
shortest distance criterion.

In this case, the establishment of a right-of-way through the petitioner’s lot would cause the
destruction of the wire fence and a house on the petitioners’ property. Although this right-of-way has the
shortest distance to a public road, it is not the least prejudicial considering the destruction pointed out,
and that an option to traverse two vacant lots without causing any damage, albeit longer, is available.

WHEREFORE, we hereby GRANT the present petition for review on certiorari and REVERSE and SET
ASIDE the decision and resolution of the Court of Appeals. The complaint for the easement of right-of-
way is DISMISSED without prejudice to another complaint that the respondent may file against the
proper party or parties based on the terms of this Decision.

Cost against respondent.

SO ORDERED.