Title
Floro vs. Llenado
Case
G.R. No. 75723
Decision Date
Jun 2, 1995
Floro allowed Llenado temporary use of his subdivision roads; barricade led to legal dispute over easement rights. Courts ruled no valid easement contract, denied compulsory easement, awarded Floro damages for property use.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 191545)

Facts:

  • Background of Properties and Parties
    • Simeon Floro owned Floro Park Subdivision in Barangay Saluysoy, Meycauayan, Bulacan, with existing ingress/egress via Road Lots 4 and 5 to MacArthur Highway.
    • Orlando A. Llenado (later substituted by his administratrix-wife Wenifreda T. Llenado) owned Llenado Homes Subdivision (formerly Emmanuel Homes Subdivision) of 34,573 sq. m., bounded by Palanas Creek and adjacent ricelands, lacking actual road access but with a proposed access road over Marcial Ipapo’s riceland in the duly approved subdivision plan.
  • Verbal Permission and Barricade
    • February 1983: Floro verbally permitted the Llenados to use Road Lots 4 and 5 for passage, without agreed compensation and pending formal easement papers.
    • April 7, 1983: Floro barricaded Road Lot 5 with rocks and posts, prompting the Llenados to seek reopening.
  • Judicial Proceedings
    • April 13, 1983: Civil Case No. 6834-M filed by Llenado for easement of right of way with prayer for preliminary mandatory injunction; RTC Branch XIX granted injunction on July 15, 1983, upon P100,000 bond. Floro’s motions for reconsideration denied; he filed and withdrew a CA petition, which closed the case on March 30, 1984.
    • October 16, 1984: On merits, the RTC dismissed Llenado’s complaint for lack of merit, lifted the injunction, and ordered Llenado to pay Floro P30,000 actual damages, P77,500 compensation for use, P15,000 attorney’s fees, and costs.
    • February 11, 1986: CA reversed, granting compulsory easement over Road Lots 4 and 5, ordering removal of obstructions, awarding Llenado P60,000 temperate damages, P100,000 moral damages, P30,000 attorney’s fees, and indemnity of P60,000 to Floro; costs.
    • August 14, 1986: CA denied Floro’s motions for reconsideration, granted Llenado’s partial execution pending appeal to remove barricades upon P100,000 bond.
    • October 29, 1986: SC issued restraining order enjoining enforcement of the CA’s writ of partial execution; petition for certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court ensued.

Issues:

  • Whether the verbal permission granted by Floro in February 1983, without agreed compensation and pending formal papers, constituted a valid voluntary contract of easement of right of way.
  • Whether the owner/developer of Llenado Homes Subdivision could compel a compulsory easement of right of way over an adjacent subdivision’s existing roads instead of developing its own approved access road.

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.