Pre Trial Brief
Pre Trial Brief
Pre Trial Brief
SPOUSES A,
-versus-
MR. B,
Defendant.
x----------------------------x
PRE-TRIAL BRIEF
Plaintiffs are willing to submit the case to any alternative mode of settlement
for the speedy disposition of the case.
On March 20, 2019, Defendant purchased from the Plaintiffs a piece of land
located in Lot 1, Block 2, 3rd Street, New Manila, Quezon City as evidenced
by Deed of Sale, dated March 20, 2019. On January 1, 2020, Defendant
started the construction of a two-storey house which was taller than the one-
storey house of the Plaintiff which obstructed the right to light, air, and view of
the latter. Moreover, the structure erected by the Defendant on Lot 1, Block 2
is at a distance less than three (3) meters away from the boundary line.
3. The two-storey house was taller than the one-storey house of the
plaintiffs
4. The two-storey house was erected at a distance less than three (3)
meters away from the boundary line.
1. Mr. A
2. Mrs. A
Purpose: To prove that she is in fact the owner of the parcel of land, as
she is the spouse of Mr. A; to authenticate the letter of request addressed
to the defendant made by plaintiffs; and to attest that he had suffered
fear, anxiety, emotional distress, and several sleepless nights due to the
construction by the defendant.
4. Mr. B
Purpose: To prove that the subject land was purchased from Mr. A; to
prove that there exist an apparent sign of easement between the two
estates and that at the time of the division of the property, nothing is
stated in the document of alienation which is contrary to the easement nor
is the sign of easement removed before the execution of the document.
5. Mr. C
Purpose: To prove that Ms. C was the prior owner of the subject land and
that he sold the land in controversy to Mr. A.
Purpose: To attest that the house was erected at a distance less than
three (3) meters away from the boundary line.
1. Article 624 of the New Civil Code which states that the existence of an
apparent sign of easement between two estates, established or
maintained by the owners of both, shall be considered, should either of
them be alienated, as a title in order that the easement may continue
actively and passively, unless, at the time of the ownership of the two
estates is divided, the contrary should be provided in the title of
conveyance of either of them, or the sign aforesaid should be removed
before the execution of the deed.
2. Spouses Garcia vs. Santos, G.R. No. 228334, June 17, 2019, where it
was held that it is evident that the prior existence of another structure or
building in the other estate, in addition to the apparent sign of easement
existing on the dominant estate, is not a requirement for the application of
Article 624. What is clear is that the hallmark of an easement of light and
view established by an apparent sign of easement under Article 624 is the
existence of an apparent sign of servitude between two estates, such as
a window, door, or any other opening, that was established by the
common owner of both estates prior to the division of ownership of these
estates.
PRAYER
Plaintiff respectfully prays that this Court issue an Order taking
note of the submission of this Pre-Trial Brief.
Quezon City, April 5, 2020
[email protected]
(02) 8877-6655
By:
(signed)
Atty. Rajeen Jillian Del Valle Biasca
(signed)
Atty. Roanna Cathrice B. Cabalonga
(signed)
Atty. Jeanne Pauline J. Dumaual
(signed)
Atty. Mary Kate C. Marcelo
Copy furnished:
Atty. Z
EXPLANATION
A copy of this motion was filed and served via registered mail due to lack of personnel to effect
personal service.
(signed)
Atty. Rajeen Jillian Del Valle Biasca
(signed)
(signed)
Atty. Jeselle Ann V. Dayrit
(signed)
Atty. Jeanne Pauline E. de la Pena
(signed)
Atty. Jeanne Pauline J. Dumaual
(signed)