Skip to main content

Right of Way and Property Disputes: The Case of Spouses Bernabe Mercader Jr. vs. Spouses Bardilas









Sps. Bernabe Mercader, Jr., et al. v. Sps. Jesus and Letecia Bardillas, G.R. No. 163157, June 27, 2016

Property disputes often center on easements and rights of way, especially when conflicting land claims arise. The Supreme Court case of Spouses Bernabe Mercader Jr. vs. Spouses Jesus and Letecia Bardilas clarifies the legal framework of easements, reinforcing ownership rights and property boundaries under the Civil Code and Torrens land registration system.

Background of the Case

The dispute involved three parcels of land in Clarita Village, with a right of way benefiting Lot No. 5808-F-2-B, owned by the Spouses Bardilas.

  • The Clarita Village Association erected a fence, blocking the right of way’s exit point, prompting a confrontation.

  • An engineer’s investigation found that the fence and part of the Spouses Mercader’s house encroached on the easement.

  • The Spouses Bardilas demanded compensation, while the Spouses Mercader claimed entitlement to the right of way as owners of Lot No. 5808-F-2-A.

  • Both parties filed lawsuits, with the RTC ruling in favor of the Mercaders and the CA reversing parts of the ruling, declaring Bardilas the easement owners.

The Supreme Court upheld the CA decision, affirming the Spouses Bardilas’ ownership of the right of way and setting legal guidelines for easement disputes.

Key Legal Doctrines from the Case

1️⃣ Easements Do Not Transfer Ownership

  • The SC emphasized that an easement grants an incorporeal interest but does not confer title over the property.

  • The ruling stated: > “An acknowledgment of the easement is an admission that the property belongs to another.”

2️⃣ Road Right of Way Requires a Legal Title

  • Easements can only be acquired by law, contract, donation, or testamentary provisions—not simply by existing annotations on land titles.

  • The phrase ‘with existing Right of Way’ in a title does not automatically grant ownership.

3️⃣ Encroachment Violates Ownership Rights

  • Since the right of way belonged to Spouses Bardilas, the Spouses Mercader had no right to occupy a portion of it.

  • Under Article 630 of the Civil Code, the servient estate owner retains full ownership of the easement land.

4️⃣ Attorney’s Fees Require Legal Justification

  • The SC ruled that the CA failed to justify attorney’s fees, stating that such awards must be grounded in factual, legal, or equitable reasoning.

  • The ruling reminded courts that litigation costs should not be punitive, unless clear cause exists.

Legal Takeaways for Property Owners and Easement Holders

✅ Easements grant usage rights, not ownership – The dominant estate can use the easement, but ownership remains with the servient estate.

✅ Encroachments must be resolved legally – Any occupation of easement land can be legally challenged by the rightful property owner.

✅ Property owners retain full rights over easements – The owner of burdened land can still exercise control and demand compensation if their land is used improperly.

✅ Attorney’s fees require justification – Courts cannot arbitrarily award legal costs unless specific reasons support the decision.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s ruling in Spouses Bardilas’ favor reinforces property laws governing easements, ensuring rightful landowners maintain their full legal rights. This decision serves as an important precedent for future right of way and encroachment disputes.

📌 For the full Supreme Court decision, check

Popular posts from this blog

Mandamus and its Application in Judicial Proceedings

Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy compelling a tribunal, corporation, board, or person to perform a duty expressly required by law . It applies when: 1️⃣ An entity unlawfully neglects the performance of a legal duty arising from an office or trust. 2️⃣ An entity unlawfully excludes another from a right or office to which they are entitled. 3️⃣ There is no other adequate or speedy legal remedy available. 📌 Relevant Case: De Leon v. Duterte (G.R. No. 252118, 2020) Essential Elements of a Mandamus Petition 📌 To successfully invoke mandamus, the petitioner must prove: ✔ Legal Right – The petitioner must demonstrate a clear legal right to compel the action. ✔ Correlative Obligation – The respondent must have a duty to respect that right . ✔ Violation by the Respondent – There must be an act or omission violating the petitioner’s right . ✔ Refusal to Comply – A failure to perform the duty , whether explicit or implied, triggers a cause of action. 📌 Relevant Case: Phi...
Read more

People vs. Jugueta, 788 SCRA 331, G.R. No. 202124 April 5, 2016

G.R. No. 202124. April 5, 2016. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. IRENEO JUGUETA, accused-appellant. PONENTE:  PERALTA, J.:  Synopsis: In Criminal Case No. 7702-G, Irenneo Jugueta was charged with Multiple Attempted Murder along with Gilbert Estores and Roger San Miguel. However, Roger San Miguel moved for reinvestigation of the case and was eventually dismissed, leaving Irenneo as the only defendant. The prosecution's witness, Norberto, testified that Irenneo and the two other men entered his family's nipa hut and fired shots, causing the death of one daughter and injury to another. Irenneo offered a defense of denial and alibi, but this was found to be weak by the trial court, which ruled that Irenneo conspired with the two other men to shoot the family of Norberto. The trial court's judgment was affirmed by the Court of Appeals. The main issue raised in the appeal was the inconsistencies in Norberto's testimony, but these were deemed to be trivial an...
Read more

Mendoza v. de Los Santos G.R. No. 176422 |March 20, 2013

Case Digest: Mendoza v. de Los Santos G.R. No. 176422 | March 20, 2013 Ponente: 📌 Topic: Applicability of Reserva Troncal – First cousins of the descendant/prepositus are fourth-degree relatives and cannot be considered reservees/reservatarios. Facts The disputed parcel of land was originally owned by Exequiel Mendoza, who inherited it from Placido and Dominga Mendoza through an oral partition. Upon Exequiel’s death, ownership was transferred to his spouse Leonor and their only daughter, Gregoria. After Leonor’s passing, Gregoria became the sole owner. Gregoria died intestate, and her aunt Victoria Pantaleon, Leonor’s sister, adjudicated the property to herself as the sole surviving heir. Petitioners (grandchildren of Placido and Dominga) argued that the property should have been reserved for them under Article 891 of the Civil Code on Reserva Troncal. They filed an action for Recovery of Possession, Cancellation of TCT, and Reconveyance, which the RTC granted. However, the Court of A...
Read more