Fausto R. Preysler, Jr. v. Court of Appeals

Summary

This case involves a property owner's right to access his landlocked parcels through a private subdivision. Petitioner Preysler owned lots within Tali Beach Subdivision and two adjacent parcels that could only be accessed through the subdivision roads. When respondent Far East Enterprises barricaded access after refusing a P10,000 easement offer, Preysler sought judicial relief. The Supreme Court balanced the competing interests by maintaining the original preliminary injunction allowing basic access while requiring payment of indemnity for expanded use including construction activities. The Court distinguished between maintaining status quo (original access) and granting new rights (construction access), remanding the case for indemnity determination. The decision clarifies the scope of temporary easements under Article 656 of the Civil Code while protecting both property owners' rights.