1) Why right-of-way disputes happen after a sale

Many conflicts arise after a buyer has already acquired a lot because access issues are often:

Not fully checked during due diligence (no relocation survey; no inspection of actual access route).
Not properly documented (access was “by tolerance” of neighbors, not a real easement).
Not reflected on the title (no annotation of an agreed servitude; or the “road” is not a public road).
Changed on the ground (new fences/gates; re-blocking of informal paths; subdivision development; boundary encroachments).

A key point in Philippine property law: ownership of land does not automatically include a right to pass through someone else’s land, unless there is a recognized legal basis (e.g., an easement by law, by title/contract, or by prescription in limited cases).

2) Core concepts: easements and right of way

Easement (servitude)

An easement is a real right constituted over another’s property (the servient estate) for the benefit of another property or person (the dominant estate). It is generally governed by the Civil Code provisions on easements/servitudes.

Easements can be:

Voluntary (created by contract/title—e.g., deed granting a 3-meter passageway)
Legal/compulsory (imposed by law—e.g., right of way for landlocked property under specific conditions)
By prescription (only for certain types of easements; not all can be acquired this way)

Right of way as a legal/compulsory easement

In common usage, “right of way” often means the compulsory easement of right of way—a legal mechanism that allows an owner of an enclosed/landlocked property to demand access to a public road through neighboring property, subject to strict requirements and payment of proper indemnity.

3) The governing legal framework (practical map)

A) Civil Code rules on easements (main framework)

Philippine easements—especially right of way, drainage, light and view, party walls, and related neighbor relations—are principally regulated by the Civil Code. For right of way disputes, the most-used provisions are those on:

Compulsory easement of right of way
Rules on location/width
Indemnity
Extinguishment
Classification of easements (continuous/discontinuous; apparent/non-apparent) and prescription

B) Title registration and annotations (Torrens system)

Many lots are covered by Torrens titles. Practical implications:

Rights and burdens that are registered/annotated are easier to enforce against successors.
However, some burdens arise by law (certain legal easements), and some situations can create notice based on visible conditions on the ground (more on this below).
A buyer must assume that what is on paper and what exists physically may differ—hence the importance of survey and ground validation.

C) Subdivision/condominium contexts (common special case)

If the property is within a subdivision:

“Road lots,” “open spaces,” easements, and access routes are often governed by approved plans, restrictive covenants, and turnover arrangements.
Disputes may involve whether a route is a public road, private road, or an easement reserved on the plan.

D) Barangay conciliation (often mandatory before court)

Many neighbor disputes over access and easements require prior barangay conciliation under the Katarungang Pambarangay system, unless an exception applies (e.g., urgency for injunctive relief, parties from different cities/municipalities in some cases, etc.). Practically, courts often look for proof of compliance when required.

4) The compulsory easement of right of way: requirements and limits

Who can demand it?

Typically, an owner of land that is:

Enclosed/without adequate outlet to a public road, and
Needs passage to reach a public road.

“Enclosed” is not just literal fencing—it means no adequate access. If there is access but it is highly impractical (e.g., dangerously steep, seasonal, or not legally usable), courts examine whether the outlet is truly “adequate.”

The essential conditions (as applied in practice)

To compel a neighbor to provide a right of way, the claimant generally must show:

Real necessity The dominant estate has no sufficient access to a public road.
Payment of proper indemnity Right of way is not free. Indemnity depends on whether the easement is continuous/permanent and on the extent of burden.
Least prejudicial route The route must be located where it will cause the least damage and inconvenience to the servient estate.
Shortest distance to a public road (as a guiding rule) Often balanced with “least prejudicial.” The shortest route is not always chosen if it is significantly more damaging.
The claimant must not be disqualified by self-created enclosure (a frequent battleground) If the land became landlocked because the owner (or predecessor) voluntarily disposed of the only access or partitioned property in a way that created enclosure without reserving an easement, courts scrutinize the claim closely. Many disputes turn on whether the buyer’s situation is a consequence of:
- The seller’s subdivision/partition without reserving access, or
- The buyer purchasing a landlocked lot with knowledge/assumption of risk, or
- Changes in neighboring properties after the sale.

Important practical nuance: Even if the buyer innocently purchases a landlocked lot, the legal system may still allow a compulsory right of way if statutory conditions are met—but the facts about how enclosure occurred strongly affect location, indemnity, and equitable considerations.

5) Width, use, and scope: how “big” and “for what purpose”?

Width is not automatic

The easement’s width is typically limited to what is reasonably necessary for the dominant estate’s needs (e.g., footpath vs. vehicle access; residential vs. agricultural use), considering:

customary use in the locality,
intended and actual use of the dominant property,
feasibility of alternative routes,
safety and practicality.

A common dispute: a claimant wants a driveway for vehicles, while the neighbor argues only a footpath is needed. Evidence (usage, plans, zoning, topography, intended development) becomes decisive.

Scope of permitted acts

Unless the easement/title expressly allows more, the dominant owner generally may do acts necessary for use and preservation of the easement (e.g., basic maintenance), but:

cannot unreasonably widen or convert it,
cannot impose a heavier burden than agreed/ordered (e.g., turning a residential pathway into a commercial truck route without legal basis).

Gates and obstructions

Whether a servient owner may install a gate depends on:

the source of the easement (contract vs. compulsory),
whether it materially impairs passage,
security considerations,
specific court orders/terms.

In practice, even when gates are allowed, keys/access must be provided and the arrangement must not defeat the easement.

6) Voluntary easements (by title/contract): the cleanest way—if done right

What “by title” means

A right of way can be created by:

deed of sale reserving an easement,
separate deed of easement,
subdivision plan notes and technical descriptions,
easements annotated on title.

The registration/annotation advantage

A voluntary easement is far easier to enforce against later buyers of the servient land when it is:

properly described (metes and bounds; sketch plan),
properly documented (not just oral permission),
registered/annotated where applicable.

Common pitfall: “permission” mistaken as “right”

Neighbors may allow passage out of goodwill. That is usually mere tolerance, which can be revoked and does not automatically ripen into a legal easement.

7) Easements by prescription: limited and frequently misunderstood

The Civil Code classifies easements as:

Continuous (usable without human intervention; e.g., drainage through a fixed channel) vs. Discontinuous (requires human act; e.g., passage/road)
Apparent (visible signs; e.g., path, canal, posts) vs. Non-apparent (no external signs)

As a rule in Philippine civil law:

Only continuous and apparent easements are generally acquired by prescription.
A right of way (passage) is typically a discontinuous easement; therefore, it is generally not acquired by prescription in the ordinary sense.

This is why many “we’ve been using it for 20 years” arguments fail when what they really have is a passage used intermittently—often treated as tolerance unless supported by title or a legal easement basis.

8) After you buy: due diligence that prevents disputes (and evidence if already in one)

A) Paper checks (before or after purchase)

Title review: check annotations for easements, road right of way, liens, restrictions.
Mother title/subdivision plan (if subdivided): verify road lots and easement reservations.
Deed of sale wording: look for reserved access, warranties, or disclosure of encumbrances.
Tax declarations (secondary but useful for possession narratives).

B) Ground checks (often decisive)

Relocation survey by a geodetic engineer: confirms boundaries, encroachments, and whether the “access” is inside or outside your property.
Identify the “public road”: is it an actual public road, barangay road, national road, or merely a private driveway used by many?
Photographs and video showing long-standing paths, fences, gates, and changes over time.
Witnesses: previous owners, longtime residents, barangay officials.

C) The mismatch problem: titled boundary vs. “used boundary”

A frequent cause of dispute is when a “road” people use is actually inside a private title. Once the titled owner fences, conflict erupts. Courts then focus on:

whether there is a valid easement,
whether the claimant is landlocked,
whether there was a reserved easement in previous conveyances,
and the best equitable route with indemnity.

9) Typical dispute patterns and how the law tends to analyze them

Scenario 1: You bought a landlocked lot; seller said “there’s access”

Key issues:

Was access legally secured (annotated easement, deed of easement, reserved right of way)?
If not, do you qualify for compulsory right of way?
Can you pursue the seller for breach of warranty / misrepresentation depending on contract terms and facts?

Scenario 2: You have an old pathway across neighbor’s land; they blocked it

Key issues:

Is it a true easement or mere tolerance?
Is it supported by title/contract?
Is there necessity (landlocked) to compel a right of way elsewhere?
Was the blocked path the least prejudicial or just the most convenient?

Scenario 3: The “right of way” is on the subdivision plan, but someone occupies it

Key issues:

Road lot status and approved plans.
Whether the route is intended as public or private.
Enforcement through appropriate civil action and administrative coordination (depending on context).

Scenario 4: Your neighbor claims your land is the only feasible access

Key issues:

Courts balance shortest route vs. least prejudice.
You may argue alternative routes exist, or propose a different alignment.
Indemnity and conditions (surfacing, drainage, maintenance responsibilities) become crucial.

10) Enforcement tools: from negotiation to court orders

Step 1: Non-judicial resolution (often fastest)

Formal discussion with a proposed surveyed alignment.
Written agreement (deed of easement) with technical description.
Clear rules: width, permitted vehicles, hours, maintenance, gate/security terms, cost-sharing.

Step 2: Barangay conciliation (when required)

File a complaint at the barangay where the property is located.
If settlement fails, obtain the proper certification to proceed.

Step 3: Court actions (common causes of action)

Depending on facts, a party may file civil actions such as:

Action to establish/recognize an easement of right of way For landlocked property seeking judicial establishment of a compulsory easement (with indemnity and defined route).
Injunction (temporary restraining order / preliminary injunction / permanent injunction) To stop obstruction, prevent construction blocking a claimed access, or maintain status quo while the merits are tried. Courts require proof of a clear and unmistakable right (or at least a right needing protection) and urgency.
Damages If obstruction caused quantifiable loss (construction delay, inability to harvest crops, loss of business), subject to proof.
Quieting of title / declaratory relief-type issues (fact-dependent) When conflicting claims over the existence/extent of an easement create a cloud that needs judicial determination.
Accion publiciana / accion reivindicatoria (possession/ownership actions) Where the dispute is really about who owns the strip used as a “road,” not just a right to pass.
Nuisance-related remedies Obstruction of a lawful easement can be framed as a private nuisance in some fact patterns, supporting injunctive relief.

Evidence that wins or loses cases

Certified true copies of titles (dominant and servient).
Deeds, subdivision plans, technical descriptions.
Relocation survey results and geodetic reports.
Photographs/videos before and after obstruction.
Barangay/blotter records and conciliation documents.
Proof of necessity (topographic constraints; lack of alternative access; map-based route analysis).
Proof of indemnity readiness (deposit offers, valuation basis).

11) Indemnity: what you pay, and why it matters

For compulsory right of way, indemnity is central. Practical points:

It is not just token payment; it is meant to compensate for the burden.
The amount may consider the value of the area affected, the damage caused, and whether the burden is permanent and how it impacts use.
Courts may require payment or deposit as a condition to use the easement, depending on circumstances.

Indemnity fights often become valuation battles: appraisals, BIR zonal values, comparable sales, and the degree of impairment.

12) Changing the route: can the easement be relocated?

Relocation disputes happen when:

the servient owner wants to move the path to reduce inconvenience,
the dominant owner wants to widen or shift it for development.

General approach:

If the easement was fixed by title or judgment, changes typically require agreement or court approval.
Courts weigh whether relocation preserves the dominant owner’s utility without increasing burden or unfairly reducing access.

13) Extinguishment and termination: when a right of way ends

A right of way easement may end when:

The dominant estate acquires adequate access to a public road by other means (e.g., buys an adjoining strip).
There is merger (dominant and servient estates come under one owner).
There is renunciation by the dominant owner (usually in writing, and ideally registered).
The easement’s purpose ceases (especially for compulsory easements).
Other Civil Code-recognized modes of extinguishment apply (context-dependent).

For compulsory right of way specifically: if the property is no longer enclosed, the legal basis for compelling the easement generally disappears.

14) Common “myths” that fuel escalation

“If I used it for decades, it’s mine.” Long use of a passage is not automatically an easement; passage is typically discontinuous and often treated as tolerance unless founded on title or legal necessity.
“No annotation means no easement exists.” Not always. Some easements arise by law, and some visible burdens can affect good-faith claims; but lack of annotation absolutely makes enforcement harder against successors.
“Right of way is free because it’s necessary.” Compulsory easement generally requires indemnity.
“The shortest route is always the rule.” It is a guiding consideration, but balanced with least prejudice.

15) Practical drafting points for deeds of easement (to prevent repeat disputes)

A robust deed of easement usually includes:

Exact technical description (tie points, bearings, distances; lot and block references).
Width and permitted uses (foot, motorcycle, car, truck).
Maintenance obligations and cost-sharing.
Drainage and utilities rules (if lines will pass through).
Gate/security terms and access protocols.
Restrictions on intensification (e.g., conversion from residential to heavy commercial use without consent).
Clear statement that it is a real right binding successors, plus registration/annotation steps.

16) Red flags for buyers: when to pause before purchasing

“Access is through my neighbor, but it’s okay; we’re friends.”
“The road is there, but it’s not on the plan/title.”
“We’ll execute an easement later.”
Lot is behind other lots with no clear frontage and no annotated easement.
Seller cannot produce the subdivision plan or proof of road lot dedication.
Boundaries on the ground do not match the technical description.

17) What courts try to accomplish in right-of-way cases

When adjudicating compulsory right of way and easement enforcement, courts generally aim to:

prevent land from being rendered useless due to lack of access,
protect the servient owner from excessive or arbitrary burden,
define a clear route and rules to minimize future conflict,
ensure fair compensation through indemnity,
discourage self-inflicted enclosure and bad-faith maneuvering.

18) Bottom line

In the Philippine setting, post-purchase right-of-way conflicts usually turn on a small set of decisive questions: Is there a valid easement by title or law? Is the property truly landlocked without adequate access? What route is shortest yet least prejudicial? What indemnity is proper? The strongest outcomes come from aligning the physical reality on the ground with formal documentation—especially technical descriptions and registration—because easements are meant to be stable, inhering in the land and governing neighbors long after owners change.