Title
Andres vs. Sta. Lucia Realty and Development, Inc.
Case
G.R. No. 201405
Decision Date
Aug 24, 2015
Petitioners claimed ownership of unregistered land, sought easement for access; SC denied, citing lack of proof of ownership or real right.
A

Case Digest (G.R. No. 201405)

Facts:

Liwayway Andres, Ronnie Andres, and Pablo B. Francisco, together with co-plaintiff Liza Andres, filed a Complaint for Easement of Right-of-Way on November 28, 2000 in the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Binangonan, Rizal, alleging co-ownership and continuous possession for more than fifty years of three parcels of unregistered agricultural land in Pag-asa, Binangonan (the subject property) aggregating about 10,500 square meters; they alleged that Sta. Lucia Realty & Development, Incorporated (respondent) acquired adjoining lands, developed the Binangonan Metropolis East subdivision and erected a perimeter fence that denied them access from the subject property to the nearest public road and prayed for a fifty-square meter right-of-way through respondent’s subdivision to reach Col. Guido Street via a subdivision they co-own, Victoria Village. At trial Pablo testified that he bought four thousand square meters from Carlos Andres, that petitioners’ possession was evidenced by a Barangay certification dated April 13, 1998, and that the right-of-way sought would traverse respondent’s subdivision for some fifty meters; petitioners also presented Carlos’s *Sinumpaang Salaysay* recounting family possession since before 1939 and documentary attempts to obtain a tax declaration, while respondent’s witness, Municipal Assessor Virgilio Flordeliza, testified that the subject property had been declared for taxation under the name of Juan Diaz and later the Blancos, causing the Provincial Assessor to deny Carlos’s application. The RTC, in a Decision dated May 22, 2006, found that petitioners had been in possession for more than fifty years, declared them owners by virtue of Article 1137 of the Civil Code, and ordered respondent to grant a fifty-square meter right-of-way upon payment of indemnity under Article 649; respondent appealed, and the Court of Appeals (CA) reversed and set aside the RTC Decision in a November 17, 2011 Decision and denied reconsideration in a March 27, 2012 Resolution; the present Petition for Review on Certiorari to the Supreme Court was resolved by a decision dated August 24, 2015.

Issues:

Whether petitioners are entitled to demand an easement of right-of-way from respondent under Article 649 of the Civil Code? Whether petitioners acquired ownership of the subject property by ordinary acquisitive prescription or extraordinary acquisitive prescription so as to have the legal personality to demand such easement?

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.