Article 538 OCC now Article 621 NCC and the doctrine in the Yu Tibo case are

Article 538 occ now article 621 ncc and the doctrine

This preview shows page 203 - 204 out of 272 pages.

Article 538, OCC (now Article 621, NCC) and the doctrine in the Yu-Tibo case are not applicable herein because the two estates, the one owned by petitioner, and the other owned by respondent, were formerly owned by just one person, Francisco Sanz. It was Sanz who introduced improvements on both properties. On that portion presently belonging to respondent, he constructed a house in such a way that the northeastern side thereof extends to the wall of the camarin on the portion now belonging to petitioner. On said northeastern side of the house, there are windows and doors which serve as passages for light and view. These windows and doors were in existence when respondent purchased the house and lot from Sanz. The deed sale did not provide that the easement of light and view would not be established. This is precisely the case covered by Article 541, OCC (now Article 624, NCC) which provides that the existence of an apparent sign of easement between two estates, established by the proprietor of both, shall be considered, if one of them is alienated, as a title so that the easement will continue actively and passively, unless at the time the ownership of the two estate is divided, the contrary is stated in the deed of alienation of either of them, or the sign is made to disappear before the instrument is executed. The existence of the doors and windows on the northeastern side of the aforementioned house, is equivalent to a title, for the visible and permanent sign of an easement is the title that characterizes its existence. However, while the law declares that the easement is to "continue", the easement actually arises for the first time only upon alienation of either estate, inasmuch as before that time there is no easement to speak of, there being but one owner of both estates (Article 530, OCC, now Article 613, NCC). 67. G.R. No. L-10619, February 28, 1958 LEOGARIO RONQUILLO vs. JOSE ROCO, as Administrator of VICENTE, ROCO Y. DOMINGUEZ Facts: Ronquillos have been in the continuous and uninterrupted use of a road or passage way which traversed the land of the Rocos in going to Igualdad Street and the market place of Naga City for more than 20 years; that the Rocos and the tenants of Vicente Roco have long recognized and respected the private legal easement of road right of way of said Ronquillos. On May 12, 1953, the Rocos Jose Roco thru his co-Rocos, Raymundo Martinez and their men started constructing a chapel in the middle of the said right of way. On July 10, 1954 the new Rocos Natividad Roco and Gregorio Miras, Jr. with the approval of the Roco, Jose Roco and with the help of their men and laborers, by means of force, intimidation, and threats, illegally and violently planted wooden posts, fenced UNIVERSITY OF CEBU – COLLEGE OF LAW Page 203 LLB – 4 (S.Y. 2015-2016) Abing, Patrick Jacinto, Jamero Jr. Tan, Steffanieh Gail Caputol, Danica Patricia Magdoza, Bregette Tirado, Adrianne Cortes, Angeli Victoria Maglasang, Laarni Tomonglay, Noel Garcia, Felicito Jr. Niere, Sherlyn Ursal, April Lynn Gulbin, Lou Ann Rebato, Mar Francis Ysulan, Aura Bern Semblante, Sarah Jane
Image of page 203
Image of page 204

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture