Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Remman vs. CA
Remman vs. CA
FACTS:
Remman and Lat are adjoining landowners in Brgy. Bugtong na Pulo, Lipa City.
Lat owns 1.8 hectares of agricultural land, planted mostly with fruit trees. While
Remman occupied 15 hectares of land devoted for his piggery business.
Remmans land is meters higher in elevation than that of Lat.
July 1984- Lat noticed that Remmans waste disposal lagoon was overflowing
and flooding of his land. Lat made several representations with Remman but
fell on deaf ears.
May 15, 1985- Almost 1 hectare of Lats plantation was already flooded with
water containing pig manure and as a result, trees growing on the flooded portion
started to wither and die.
Lat then filed a complaint for damages with preliminary mandatory injunction
alleging that the acidity of the soil in his plantation increased beacause of the
overflow of water heavy with pig manure from Remmans farm.
RTC conducted ocular inspection evaluating evidences of both parties. It found
out that:
o Waste water lagoon is overflowing flooding 1 hectares of Lats plantation
o Water was ankle-deep causing the death of
1 jackfruit tree
15 coconut trees
122 coffee trees and
Unspecified number of mango trees, bananas and vegetables
RTC ordered Remman to indemnify Lat P186,975 for lost profits for 3 crop years
and P30,000 attorneys fee.
CA affirmed in toto.
Lower estates are obliged to receive the waters which naturally and
without the intervention of man descend from the higher estates, as well
as the stones or earth which they carry with them.
The owner of the lower estate cannot construct works which will impede
this easement; neither can the owner of the higher estate make works
which will increase the burden.
Similar provision is found in the Water Code of the Philippines (P.D. No.1067), which
provides:
Art. 50. Lower estates are obliged to receive the water which naturally and
without the intervention of man flow from the higher estates, as well as the
stone or earth which they carry with them.
The owner of the lower estate cannot construct works which will impede
this natural flow, unless he provides an alternative method of drainage;
neither can the owner of the higher estate make works which will increase
this natural flow.
As worded, the two (2) aforecited provisions impose a natural easement upon the lower
estate to receive the waters which naturally and without the intervention of man
descend from higher states. However, where the waters which flow from a higher state
are those which are artificially collected in manmade lagoons, any damage occasioned
thereby entitles the owner of the lower or servient estate to compensation.