232 SCRA 192, MAY 5, 1994

FACTS:
Petitioners Atty. Jose Allado and Atty. Roberto L. Mendoza, partners of the Law Firm Salonga, Hernandez and Allado were accused by the PACC to mastermind a heinous crime of kidnapping with murder of certain Eugen Alexander Van Twest, a German national, who is reportedly an international fugitive from justice.

FACTS cont.:
Other accused of the crime were Security Guard Escolastico Umbal, a discharge of the Philippine Constabulary; Ex-policeman Rolando Gamatero; AFPCIG Agent Roberto Santiago; SPO2 Sergio Antonino; and SPO2 Roger Bato.

FACTS cont.:
Other incidental crimes charged to the petitioners were illegal possession of firearms and ammunition, carnapping, and usurpation of authority. The investigation was triggered by the extrajudicial confession of Escolastico Umbal, implicating them as the brains of the alleged crime.

FACTS cont.:
A day after Umbal executed his extrajudicial confession, Judge Roberto A. Barrios of the RTC of Manila, Branch 11 issued search warrant. The operatives of PACC, armed with the warrant raided two (2) dwellings of AFPCIG agent Roberto Santiago, one of the accused, and recovered the victims blue Nissan Pathfinder and assorted arms and ammunition.

FACTS cont.:
Later on that same day, SPO2 Bato and SPO2 Antonino were also arrested and were found to have in their possession several firearms and the victims Cartier sunglasses. After evaluating the pieces of evidence , the PACC referred the case to the DOJ for the institution of criminal proceeding against all of the accused.

FACTS cont.:
Thereafter, Senior State Prosecutor issued a subpoena to the petitioners informing them of the complaint filed by PACC TF-Habagat, directing them to appear at the Multipurpose Hall of DOJ and to submit their counter affidavits. The petitioner not satisfied with the attached affidavits executed by Umbal and members of the team who raided the house of Santiago requested for the other documents but the PACC failed to provide.

FACTS cont.:
Petitioners likewise sought for the inhibition of the members of the prosecution panel on the ground that they are legal staff assigned to PACC, thus, cannot act with impartiality.

The new panel granted the prayer of the petitioners for the issuance of the additional documents used or intended to be used against them. The Task Force complied with the order but failed to provide the proper documents requested by the petitioners.

FACTS cont.:
Petitioners likewise sought for the inhibition of the members of the prosecution panel on the ground that they are legal staff assigned to PACC, thus, cannot act with impartiality.

The new panel granted the prayer of the petitioners for the issuance of the additional documents used or intended to be used against them. The Task Force complied with the order but failed to provide the proper documents requested by the petitioners.

EASEMENT OF VIEW SERVIDUMBRE PROSPECTUS

The right to prevent someone from blocking the view of the easement owner, or permits the owner to cut the blocking vegetation on the land of another.

Incidental inclusions to this right: a) Easement of Light b) Easement of Altius non tollendi not to build higher for the purpose of obstruction

ARTICLE 667 No part-owner may , without the consent of the others, open through the party wall any window or aperture of any kind.
PROVISION PERTAINS TO PROHIBITION TO MAKE AN OPENING THROUGH THE PARTY WALL

Implications if a co-owner allowed to make an opening on the party wall:

a) If co-owner A is allowed to make the opening without the consent of co-owner B
1) There would be a distinct possibility that A will later claim as his view of the exterior sign

2) It can be construed as if A was allowed to use the whole thickness of the wall

b) If with consent of co-owner B

1) Can be subjected to prescription of 10 year from the opening of such window on the wall.

ARTICLE 668 The period of prescription for the acquisition of an easement of light and view shall be counted: 1) From the time of the opening of the window, if it is through a party wall; or 2) From the time of the formal prohibition upon the proprietor of the adjoining land or tenement, if the window is through a wall on the dominant estate.

PROVISION FOR PRESCRIPTION EASEMENT OF LIGHT AND VIEW

OF

WHEN AN EASEMENT OF LIGHT AND VIEW POSITIVE

If the window is through a party wall. Therefore the period of prescription commences from the time the window is opened.
a. The mere opening of the window doesnt create the easement; it is only when after a sufficient lapse of time the window still remains open, the easement of light and view is created.

Note: Even if the window is on ones own wall, still the easement will be positive if the window of the balcony or projection extending into the adjoining land.

Example
A and B owned a party wall without Bs consent, made an opening in the party wall on December 9, 2002. In 2003, may B still can demand to close the said opening? On 2012, is the right of B to order closure subsist?
a. Yes, for no easement has been acquired yet by A because the period of 10-year prescription has yet elapsed. b. No, for more than 10 years have elapsed, thus, A has already acquired easement.

WHEN AN EASEMENT OF LIGHT AND VIEW NEGATIVE

If the window is through ones own wall, that is, through a wall of the dominant estate.
a. The time for the period of prescription should begin from the time of notarial prohibition upon the adjoining owner.

Example
A and B are adjoining owners. In 2002, A made an opening in his own wall. In 2007, A makes a notarial demand on B, prohibiting the latter to obstruct the view. In 2013, may B still set up an obstruction?
a. Yes, because period of 10-year prescription will reckon on the notarial date not on the date of opening in his wall.
Note : There is no true servitude or easement so long as the right to prevent its use exist.

ARTICLE 669 When the distances in Article 670 are not observed, the owner of a wall which is not party wall, adjoining a tenement or piece of land belonging to another, can make in it openings to admit light at the height of the ceiling joints or immediately under the ceiling, and of the size of thirty centimeters square, and, in every case, with an iron grating imbedded in the wall and with a wire screen. Nevertheless, the owner of the tenement or property adjoining the wall in which the openings are made can close them should he acquire part-ownership referred are forstipulation to Windows thereof, if there be no LIGHT, the contrary.

RESTRICTED WINDOWS

and NOT for View

He can also obstruct them by constructing a building on his land or by raising a wall thereon contiguous to that having such openings, unless an easement of light has been acquired.

The windows restriction:

Maximum size 30 cm sq
There must be an iron grating

The opening must be at the height of a ceiling joist or immediately under the joist

Sanction in case of violation

1) The adjoining lot owner can obstruct the light:
a) By constructing a higher building on his own land b) By raising a blocking wall, unless the easement of light has been acquired by the other party

2) If the wall becomes a party wall, he can close the window, unless there is a stipulation to the contrary.

ARTICLE 670
No windows, apertures, balconies, or other similar projections which afford a direct view upon or towards an adjoining land or tenement can be made, without leaving a distance of two meters between the wall in which they are made and such contiguous property. Neither can side or oblique views upon or towards such conterminous property be had, unless there be a distance of sixty centimeters. The nonobservance of these distances does not give rise to prescription

DISTANCE OF FULL OR REGULAR WINDOWS FROM ADJOINING TENEMENT

WHAT IS MEANT BY THE NONOBSERVANCE OF THESE DISTANCES DOESNT GIVE RISE TO PRESCRIPTION?
The mere non-observance of these distances doesnt give rise to prescription because this being a negative easement, a notarial prohibition is still required before the period of prescription will commence to run.

ARTICLE 671
The distance referred to in the preceding article shall be measured in cases of direct views from the outer line of the wall when the openings do not project, from the outer line of the latter when they do, and in cases of oblique view from the dividing line between the two properties.

PROVISION FOR

Rules for Regular Windows

1) Articles 670 and 671 deals with regular windows 2) Regular windows can be opened provided that the proper distances are followed.

Proper Distances
1) For windows having direct views, observe at least 2 meters distance between the wall having the windows and the boundary line.

2) For windows having side or oblique views, observe a distance of at least 60 centimeters between the boundary line and nearest edge of the window.

Building Right on Boundary Line

It is permissible to build even up to the boundary line provided that no regular windows are opened

Rule as to Terraces
Article 670 also applies to terraces if there are railings, but not if there are no railings.

ARTICLE 672
The provisions of Article 670 are not applicable to buildings separated by a public way or alley, which is not less than three meters wide, subject to special regulations and local ordinances.

PROVISION FOR BUILDINGS SEPARATED BY A PUBLIC WAY OR AN ALLEY

Minimum Distance between Building separated by a Public Way or Alley

Minimum of distance of THREE (3) meters

ARTICLE 672
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.

PROVISION WHEN A RIGHT HAS BEEN ACQUIRED TO HAVE DIRECT VIEWS

This article speaks of a TRUE servitude (restraint or abstention) Title means agreement, will, donation or prescription