1 ABC Center, Liwanag St.

, Quezon City
Telephone No. (02) 87000

July 2, 2022

MS. PAULITA IBARRA

Barrio Madiskarte, Davao City

Re: Right of way

Dear Ma’am:

This refers to your request for advice with regard to the notice you received from Natura Village
Homeowners Association informing you that you cannot use anymore their village gate to enter
Barrio Madiskarte. In my opinion, you cannot compel Natura Village to grant you a right of way
on their properties.

According to the facts you sent me, Natura Village is an exclusive subdivision. On the other
hand, Barrio Madiskarte is an undeveloped portion of the said village which informal settlers
occupy. Further, residents of both neighborhood used the same entrance/exit gate of Natura
Village. However, numerous cases of robbery were reported and Natura Village Homeowners
suspected that the culprits are from Barrio Madiskarte. Thus, residents of Barrio Madiskarte
were prohibited to access the said gate. Nonetheless, alternative roads are available to access
the national highway without passing the village gate: one by crossing a river and another is a
30-minute walk road.

The Supreme Court held in the case of Helen Calimoso et. al vs. Axel D. Roullo, GR 198594
dated January 25, 2016, that for the establishment of a legal or compulsory easement of right
of way the following requisites must concur: first, that the subject lot is indeed surrounded by
estates owned by different individuals and the respondent has no access to any existing public
road; second, that the respondent has offered to compensate the petitioners for the
establishment of the right of way through the latter’s property; third, that the isolation of the
subject lot was not caused by the respondent as he purchased the lot without any adequate
ingress or egress to a public highway; and, fourth and last, given the available options for the
right of way, the route that passes through the petitioners’ lot requires the shortest distance
to a public road and can be established at a point least prejudicial to the petitioners’
property. In addition, the Court stated that mere convenience is not what is required by law as
the basis of setting up a compulsory easement or that a longer way may be adopted to avoid
injury.

Applying the said jurisprudence mentioned in your situation, compelling Natura Village to grant
you a right of way was is not possible. Although this right of way has the shortest distance to a
public road, it is not the least prejudicial considering the safety and privacy of the village
residents. Moreover, you have an option to traverse to two alternative roads. The passage may
be longer but it is the best way to settle the matter. Hence, you cannot oblige the Natura Village
Homeowners to grant you a right of way on their properties.

I hope this clarifies your query. May I inform you, however, that this opinion is based solely on
the facts you have narrated and my appreciation of them. This may vary when other facts are
changed or new facts will surface.

Thank you very much.

Very truly yours,