Daily Tribune‘We are watching you closely and we will take decisive action. The bureau remains committed to preserving the integrity of our borders and will continue working with other law enforcement agencies’
THE Supreme Court building in Manila.
PHOTOGRAPH COURTESY OF THE SUPREME COURT
Unauthorized structures on public land, including sari-sari stores, carinderias, billiard tables, videoke machines and other businesses on beaches, may be demolished for being public nuisances.
In a decision written by Associate Justice Amy C. Lazaro-Javier dated 14 January 2025, the Supreme Court’s (SC) Second Division upheld the order to demolish various illegal structures on Matabungkay Beach in Lian, Batangas.
The structures were put up without permits from the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR).
The owners of Villa Alexandra Beach Resort and Restaurant on Matabungkay Beach filed a case against Pablo Calimlim and Patnubay Isla Calimlim who had operated informal structures along the beach for over 50 years.
The resort owners said that the unpermitted structures disrupted their business, inconvenienced their guests, and resulted in significant financial losses.
The Calimlims, for their part, argued that they had been using the land long before the resort’s establishment and had no intention of disturbing anyone.
The Regional Trial Court ruled in favor of the Calimlims, stating that the resort owners failed to prove that the structures caused damage to their property or loss of income.
The Court of Appeals (CA), however, disagreed, declaring the illegal structures to be a public nuisance and ordering their demolition along with the payment of damages to the resort owners.
Under Article 694 of the Civil Code, a nuisance is any act, omission, establishment, business, or condition that: (1) harms people’s health or safety; (2) annoys or offends the senses; (3) shocks or violates decency or morality; (4) blocks public roads or waterways; or (5) interferes with the use of property.
A nuisance is considered public when it affects several persons or interferes with a public right by directly encroaching on public property or causing a common injury.
The SC agreed with the CA, finding that the structures were built on public foreshore land without the required lease agreement from the DENR.
Under DENR Administrative Order No. 2004-24, about the Public Land Act or Commonwealth Act No. 141, foreshore lands may be disposed of only through a lease agreement with the DENR.
The Calimlims’ lease application was denied by the DENR, making their occupation and use of the land unauthorized.
The DENR acknowledged the illegal occupancy and issued Notices to Vacate, which the Calimlims ignored.
The court ruled that their obstruction of and unauthorized occupation and use of the foreshore land equated to a public nuisance.
It also found the structures harmful to the resort and its guests who reported unclean water coming from the structures’ toilets. Their open-fire kitchen posed a fire risk to the resort and its guests, with one incident resulting in a fire.
The court also pointed out that without a building permit, there were serious concerns about the structure’s safety, potentially putting everyone in and around the building at risk.
