Republic of the Philippines

Region IV
Regional Trial Court
Tagaytay, Branch ______

Mr. Charles M. Santos, Civil case Number

Plaintiff, For: Easement of View

-versus-

Mr. Roberto D. Guzman,

Defendant.
x--------------------------------------x

COMPLAINT

Plaintiff, through counsel, respectfully states:

1. Mr. Chris M. Santos (“Plaintiff”) is a Filipino, of legal age, and a resident of Lot 14 Maharlika
St. Tagaytay City, Cavite. He may be served with the orders and processes of this Court at the
address of his counsels indicated below.

2. Mr. Roberto D. Guzman (“Defendant”) is a Filipino, of legal age, and a resident of Lot 15
Maharlika St. Tagaytay City, Cavite.

3. Plaintiff is the registered owner of a land situated at 14 Legarda St., San Miguel, Manila,
covered by Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) No. 130622. TCT No. 130622 was issued on
August 30, 1996 covering an area of 100 square meters.

A copy of Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) No. 130622 is hereto attached as Annex “A”.

4. The subject property, which has been occupied by the Plaintiff for about eighteen (18) years,
has a two-storey residential house erected thereon. There are terraces on both floors. There are
also six (6) windows on the house: three (3) on the ground floor and another three (3) on the
second floor.

5. It was purchased by the Plaintiff from the Defendant on 14 May 2003. The subject property
provides a picturesque view of Taal Volcano.

The Deed of Absolute Sale evidencing the purchase, a photo of the house, a sketch map are
attached herein as "Annex B", "Annex C", and 'Annex D", respectively; 

6. At the time of the purchase of the subject property, the two-storey house was already
constructed. On the other hand, the adjoining lot, Lot 15, owned by the Defendant, was an idle
land.

7. On 12 September 2015, the defendant started the construction of a three-storey commercial

building on Lot 15, adjacent to the plaintiff’s two-storey residential house. The building
constructed is also taller than the plaintiff’s house.
 A photograph of the building is attached herein as Annex “F”.

8. The construction of the building deprived the plaintiff of the light and view which he had
previously enjoyed.

9. The Plaintiff received enough natural light from his windows and enjoyed a scene of Taal
Volcano before the construction of the Defendant’s building. The construction rendered the
plaintiff's house dark such that he is unable to do his normal undertakings in the bedroom,
living room and other areas of the house without switching on his lights.

10. The building constructed on Lot 15 is at a distance of less than two (2) to three (3) meters
away from the boundary line, in violation of the easement: 

A copy of the judicial affidavit of Patrick Evangelista, the engineer who supervised the
construction of the building of the Defendant, testifying to this claim, is attached herein as
"Annex G"; 

11. Due to Defendant's acts, the Plaintiff was constrained to contract the services of a lawyer, and
incurred expenses to protect his interests.

12. As provided in Article 624 of the Civil Code, he existence of an apparent sign of easement
between two estates, established or maintained by the owner of both, shall be considered,
should either of them be alienated, as a title in order that the easement may continue actively
and passively, unless, at the time the ownership of the two estates is divided, the contrary
should be provided in the title of conveyance of either of them, or the sign aforesaid should be
removed before the execution of the deed. This provision shall also apply in case of the
division of a thing owned in common by two or more persons.

13. According to jurisprudence laid down in the case of Spouses. Tedy and Pilar Garcia v.
Spouses. Loreta and Winston Santos (G.R. No. 278334, 17 June 2010) in a situation wherein
Article 624 of the Civil Code applies, an easement arises if an apparent sign of the existence
of an easement, the existence of windows and openings on the dominant estate, continues to
remain even after the transfer of the property to the new owner, unless such apparent sign is
removed or if there is an agreement to the contrary. What the law merely states is that there
must be two estates that were once owned by one owner, regardless of existence of
improvements in the future) servient state. What law requires is that, at the time the ownership
of the estates is divided, there must be an apparent sign of easement that exists, such as a
window, door, or other opening, in the dominant estate. Lastly, the existence of an easement
of light and view under Article 624 is established as long as (1) there exists an apparent sign
of servitude between two estates; (2) the sign of the easement must be established by the
owner of both tenements ; (3) either or both of the estates are alienated by the owners and (4)
at the time of the alienation nothing is stated in the document of alienation contrary to the
easement nor is the sign of the easement removed before the execution of the documents.

14. Article 673 of the same law provided the rule as to the two (2) to three (3) meter distance. The
provision stated that Whenever by any title a right has been acquired to have direct views,
balconies or belvederes overlooking an adjoining property, the owner of the servient estate
cannot build thereon at less than a distance of three meters to be measured in the manner
provided in Article 671. Any stipulation permitting distances less than those prescribed in
Article 670 is void.
 15. Article 2208 (2) of the same Code provides that attomey's fees and expenses for litigation,
other than judicial costs, cannot be recovered, except when the defendant's act or omission
has compelled the plaintiff to litigate with third persons or to incur expenses to protect his
interests. 

PRAYER
Plaintiff respectfully prays that:
1. The Plaintiff be declared as having acquired the easement of view against Lot 15;
2. The Defendant be ordered to pay damages, attorney's fees and expenses for litigation.

Other equitable reliefs are likewise prayed for.

General Trias City, Cavite for Tagaytay City, Cavite, 24 March 2021

OVDRS LAW OFFICE

Unit 33, ABC Bldg., Manggahan, General Trias City, Cavite
Tel. No.: (046) 8462-7266
Email: ovdrslawoffice@gmail.com

by:

(signed) Roll of Attorneys No. 5657

Jevilyn Mary C. Ruiz PTR No. 8747428; 01-14-2021
Counsel for Plaintiff MCLE No. VI-322432; 02-21-2022
Roll of Attorneys No. 5657
PTR No. 8747428; 01-14-2021
MCLE No. VI-322432; 02-21-2022 signed)

(signed) Counsel for Plaintiff

Roll of Attorneys No. 5657
Counsel for Plaintiff PTR No. 8747428; 01-14-2021
Roll of Attorneys No. 5657 MCLE No. VI-322432; 02-21-2022
PTR No. 8747428; 01-14-2021
MCLE No. VI-322432; 02-21-2022 signed)

signed) Counsel for Plaintiff

Roll of Attorneys No. 5657
Counsel for Plaintiff PTR No. 8747428; 01-14-2021
Roll of Attorneys No. 5657 MCLE No. VI-322432; 02-21-2022
PTR No. 8747428; 01-14-2021
MCLE No. VI-322432; 02-21-2022 signed)

signed) Counsel for Plaintiff

Roll of Attorneys No. 5657
Counsel for Plaintiff PTR No. 8747428; 01-14-2021
 MCLE No. VI-322432; 02-21-2022 Roll of Attorneys No. 5657
PTR No. 8747428; 01-14-2021
signed) MCLE No. VI-322432; 02-21-2022

Counsel for Plaintiff

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES)

City of Manila) S.S.

VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION

OF NON-FORUM SHOPPING

I, Mr. Charles M. Santos, Filipino, of legal age, and a resident of Lot 14 Maharlika St. Tagaytay City,
Cavite, on oath, state:

1. That, I,as the Plaintiff in the above-entitled case have caused this complaint to be prepared;

2. That I read and understood its contents which are true and correct of my own personal
knowledge and/or based on true records;

3. That I have not commenced any action or proceeding involving the same issue and
specifically the same check/s in the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals or any other
tribunal or agency; that to the best of my knowledge, no such action or proceeding is pending
in the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals or any other tribunal or agency, and

4. That if I should learn thereafter that a similar action or proceeding has been filed or is
pending before these courts or tribunal or agency, I undertake to report that fact to the Court
within five (5) days therefrom.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 24th day of March, 2021 in the
City of General Trias, Cavite.

(signed)
CHARLES M. SANTOS
Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this this 24th day of March, 2021 in the City of
General Trias, Cavite, Affiant exhibited to me his Passport with Passport No. K-22222 issued
by DFA NCR EAST on 3 July 2017.

(signed)
ATTY. MENDOZA
Notary Public
Commission Serial No. 12233
Until December 2, 2023
 Roll of Attorney No. 35353
IBP No. 2333/01-14-2021
PTR No. 8747428; 01-14-2021

Unit 33, ABC Bldg.,

Manggahan, General Trias
City, Cavite
Tel. No.: (046) 8462-7266
Email:ovdrslawoffice@gmail.com

Doc No. 12
Page No. 22
Book No. 44
Series of 2021