Masongsong v. Flores
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Alejandro Masongsong owned a lot in the City of Manila, while Felipe Cruz, husband of Victoria Flores, owned an adjoining lot. A house was constructed on Victoria Flores' lot with windows overlooking Masongsong's property, with a distance of less than two meters between the two houses. An alley separated the houses, which was denominated as a public alley in official sketches and was also referred to as an approved private alley to be opened to the public in the permit application for Masongsong's house construction. Masongsong's Torrens title extended over this alley. Procedural History: Legal action was commenced by Masongsong on September 16, 1929, to enforce his rights concerning the windows overlooking the alley, despite the house construction having begun on July 3, 1925, and completed by November 10, 1926. The Petition: The core issue was whether an alley, constructed in accordance with the Revised Ordinances of the City of Manila and open to the public, falls under Article 584 of the Civil Code, making Article 582 inapplicable.
Issue(s)
Whether an alley constructed in accordance with the Revised Ordinances of the City of Manila and open to the public falls within the provisions of Article 584 of the Civil Code. Whether Article 582 of the Civil Code concerning easements of light and view is inapplicable to buildings separated by a public thoroughfare.
Ruling
The Supreme Court ruled that a private alley open to the public, under the circumstances of the case, falls within the exception provided by Article 584 of the Civil Code to Article 582 thereof, and that accordingly, the plaintiff has no legal cause of action. The judgment was reversed, without special pronouncement as to costs.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of whether an alley constructed in accordance with the Revised Ordinances of the City of Manila and open to the public falls within the provisions of Article 584 of the Civil Code: The Court held that such an alley, even if initially constructed with private funds, becomes public in nature when it is officially approved and opened to the public, as stipulated in the building permit conditions. The Revised Ordinances of the City of Manila define an alley as any public thoroughfare less than seven meters and fifty centimeters in width between established lines. The sketch from the city's department of engineering and public works denominated the opening as a public alley, and Masongsong's application to construct his house included an agreement that the approved private alley would be opened to the public. This signifies that the alley, for all practical purposes of use, is as public as one constructed with public funds. When an applicant agrees to have a private alley opened to the public, they accept both the burdens and benefits associated with it. The Court noted that the tolerance shown by Masongsong in commencing legal action so long after the house construction could have created an estoppel. On the issue of whether Article 582 of the Civil Code concerning easements of light and view is inapplicable to buildings separated by a public thoroughfare: The Court affirmed that Article 584 of the Civil Code makes the provisions of Article 582 inapplicable to buildings separated by a public thoroughfare (una via publica). The Court reconciled this codal provision with municipal ordinances, specifically Section 103 of the Revised Ordinances of the City of Manila, which governs the issuance of building permits and requires private streets or alleys intended for access to interior lots to be open to the general public. Therefore, a private alley that is open to the public and maintained as such, in accordance with the city's ordinances and the permit conditions, is considered a public thoroughfare for the purposes of Article 584. Consequently, the restrictions imposed by Article 582, requiring a distance of not less than two meters between buildings for windows overlooking adjoining property, do not apply in this situation.
Main Doctrine
A private alley, which is open to the public and maintained as such under municipal ordinances, falls within the exception provided by Article 584 of the Civil Code, rendering Article 582 (concerning easements of light and view) inapplicable to buildings separated by such an alley.